1561-2. because it would be thought to be a declaration that that King AN. REG. 4, had rebels. Of Germany none would doubt, because it had been formerly granted unto them; and if it were granted to that nation alone, it would seem that the others were abandoned. But at the last, all difficulties were resolved into this conclusion, that the safe conduct should be given unto those of Germany in the same words wherein it formerly had passed, anno 1552; and that the like conduct, in the selfsame words wherein it was given to the Germans, should be given to all of every nation, province, city and place, where anything was preached, taught, and believed, contrary to that which was believed in the Church of Rome1. Jewel's Letter 3. But the Legates might have spared themselves the trouble of these considerations, the Protestant Bishops of England not being so forward to venture themselves into that Council on such weak assurance,-considering how ill the safe conduct had been formerly kept to John Hus and Jerom of Prague at the Council of Constance; and as for those of the papal party, though they might have a good will to be gadding thither, yet the Queen kept them safe enough from going abroad: so that there was no hopes for any English Bishops of either party to attend that service. The Queen had absolutely refused to admit the Nuncio, when he was sent on purpose to invite them to it. And some of the most learned of that sacred order had shewn sufficient reasons in their printed Manifest, why no such service or attendance could be looked for from them. One Scipio, a gentle- Bishop man of Venice, who formerly had some acquaintance with to Scipio. Bishop Jewel when he was a student in Padua, had heard of Martiningo's ill success in his negociation; which notwithstanding, he resolved to spend some eloquence in labouring to obtain that point by his private letters which the Nuncio could not gain as a public minister and to this end he writes his letters of expostulation to his old friend Mr Jewel, preferred not long before to the See of Salisbury,-in which he seemed to admire exceedingly that England should send no embassador, nor message, or letter, to excuse their nation's absence from the general appearance of Christianity in that sacred Council. In the next place, he highly extolled the antiquity and use of general Councils, as the only means to decide Sarpi, 482-3. 1562. AN. REG. 4, controversies in religion, and compose the distractions in the Church,― concluding it a superlative sin for any to decline the authority of it. But this letter did not long remain unanswered. That learned Prelate was not so unstudied in the nature of councils as not to know how little of a general council could be found at Trent; and therefore he returns an answer to the proposition, so eloquently penned and so elaborately digested, that neither Scipio himself nor any other of that party durst reply upon him; the answer to be found at large in the end of the History of this Council, translated into English by Nathaniel Brent, late warden of Merton College in Oxon, &c.2: which, though it were no other than the answer of one single prelate, and writ on a particular occasion to a private friend, yet since it speaks the sense of all the rest of the Bishops, and to justify the result of the Council-table on the debate about accepting or refusing the Pope's invitation, it will not be amiss to present the sum and substance of it in a short epitome. These topics are gathered from Jewel's letter. 2 This was the first publication of the letter, A.D. 1629, fifty-eight years after the death of Jewel; and no explanation is given as to the source from which it was derived. It appears, however, to be, as Dr Jelf says, "a genuine, though perhaps an unfinished, work of Bp Jewel," (n. in Jewel, viii. 73),-agreeing with his acknowledged writings in style and in sentiment, and closely resembling the "Apology" both in the choice and in the treatment of topics. Dr Wordsworth suggests that "Seignor Scipio" may have been "probably Scipione Biondi, the son of Michelangiolo Biondi" (Eccl. Biog. iii. 309); and Dr Jelf adopts the suggestion (viii. 73). But why should we suppose him a real person at all, and, by so doing, encumber the argument for the genuineness of the Epistle with the very questionable position that Jewel once resided at Padua? a circumstance for which no evidence has yet been produced (Jelf, i. Pref. xxviii.), while the cause of his exile from England renders it extremely unlikely that he should have ventured into a country of the Roman obedience. The only passage in Jewel's Works which bears on the subject is in a Letter to P. Martyr, of date Feb. 7, 1562; where, after mentioning the publication of his Apologia, he writes-" nos nune cogitamus publicare causas quibus inducti ad concilium non veniamus." (Zur. Lett. i. 60. Lat.) Perhaps he may have thought of executing this design in the form of a letter to an imaginary friend,—to be published (probably) under a fictitious name; and after having drawn up the tract in question, he may have suppressed it-preferring to rest the defence of the Church in the eyes of foreign nations wholly on the "Apology." Dr Jelf supposes the date to have been July 1562. 1562. 4. In the first place1, he signifies to the said Scipio, that AN. REG.4, a great part of the world professing the name of Christ (as Greeks, Armenians, Abyssines, &c. with all the Eastern Church) were neither sent to nor summoned to this Council. Secondly, that England's absence was not so great a wonder, seeing many other kingdoms and free states (as Denmark, Sweden, Scotland, Princes of Germany, and Hanse-Towns) were not represented in this Council by any of their Embassadors. Thirdly, that this pretended Council was not called according to the ancient custom of the Church, by the imperial authority, but by the papal usurpation. Fourthly, that Trent was a petty place, not of sufficient receipt for such multitudes as necessarily should repair to a General Council. Fifthly, that Pope Pius the Fourth, by whose command the Council 8 was re-assembled, purchased his place by the unjust practices 0 of simony and bribery, and managed it with murder and cruelty. Sixthly, that repairing to Councils was a free act, and none ought to be condemned of contumacy, if it stood more with their conveniency to stay at home. Seventhly, that anciently it was accepted as a reasonable excuse of holy Bishops absenting or withdrawing themselves from any Council, if they vehemently suspected ought would be acted therein prejudicial to the truth, lest their (though not actual) included concurrence might be interpreted a countenancing thereof. Eighthly, That our Bishops were employed in feeding their flocks and governing their Churches, and could not be spared from their charge without prejudice to their consciences. Ninthly, that the members of that Council of Trent, both Bishops and Abbots, were by oath pregaged to the Pope, "to defend and maintain his authority against all the world"." And lastly, he desired to know in what capacity the English Clergy should appear in this Council?-not as free persons, to debate matters therein, in 1 The division into heads, and the order in which these are placed, are Fuller's. 2 Juramentum Episcopi, in Pontifical. Rom. p. 64. ed. Venet. 1836; Juram. Abbatis, ibid. p. 93. 3 They could not, as free persons,...they would not come as offenders, to hear the sentence pronounced against themselves, which they had heard of before." Fuller. The passage here intended is near the beginning of the letter: "Hoc mihi velim responderi, utrum id agat pontifex, ut nobiscum, quos habet pro hæreticis, in Concilio de religione [HEYLYN, II.] BB AN.REG.4, regard they had been pre-condemned as heretics by Pope Julius 1562. the Third; not as offenders, to receive the sentence of condemnation, to which they had no reason to submit themselves. 5. Of these refusals and the reasons of them, neither the Pope at Rome, nor the Cardinal-Legates in the Council could pretend to be ignorant: yet still the expectation of the coming of some English Bishops must be kept on foot, partly for the encouragement of such as were there already, and partly for the drawing on of others who came slowly forwards; and sometimes also it was used for an artifice to divert the Prelates when any business was in agitation which seemed dangerous to them. For so it happened, that, some of the Prelates being earnest in the point of residence, none of the Legates could devise a better expedient to put off that question, than to propose that some means should be used to set at liberty the English Bishops which were imprisoned by their Queen, that, coming to the Council, it might be said that that noble nation was present also, and not wholly alienated from the Church. This pleased all, but the common opinion was, that it might sooner be desired than hoped for. They concluded, that, the Queen having refused to receive a Nuncio expressly sent from the Pope, it could not be hoped that she would hearken to the Council; therefore all they could do was, to persuade the Catholic Princes to mediate for them1. And mediate though they did, as before was said, both for the admitting of the Nuncio, and the restoring of those Bishops to their former liberty, they were not able to prevail, especially as to the licensing of any of them to attend the Council; which if the Queen had yielded to, she must have armed so many of her enemies to disturb her peace, who questionless would have practised with the Embassadors of all Princes and with the Prelates of all nations whom they found there present, to work some notable alteration in the government and affairs of England. Of all the Bishops which were left in England at the end of the Parliament, I find none deliberet; an potius ut nos ex inferiori loco causam dicamus, et vel statim mutemus sententiam, vel iterum e vestigio condemnemur? Alterum novum est, et prorsus nostrarum partium hominibus jampridem a Julio papa tertio denegatum; alterum ridiculum est, si id putat, Anglos venturos esse ad Concilium, tantum ut accusentur, et causam dicant, apud illum præsertim qui jamdudum non tantum a nostris, sed etiam a suis, gravissimis criminibus accusetur." viii. 75. 1 Sarpi, 498. 1562. but Pates of Worcester and Goldwel1 of St Asaph who forsook AN.REG. 4, the kingdom2, though possibly many of the rest might have done so also, if they had not either been well watched, or trusted upon their parol to be forthcoming (as the phrase is) upon all occasions. And, though I find the name of Pates subscribed to some of the former sessions, yet it is not be found to this, the man being of a moderate and gentle spirit, and possibly not willing to engage himself in any counsels which might prove detrimental to his native country; and as for Goldwel, though his zeal to popery was strong enough to carry him beyond the seas, yet it did not carry him so far as Trent1, there being so many retiring places nearer home in which he might repose himself with more contentment. Troubles in 6. But leaving the Fathers in Trent to expect the coming Religious of the Holy Ghost in a cloak-bag from Rome, according to the France. common scorn which was put upon them, we must prepare ourselves for England,—first taking in our way the affairs of France, which now began to take up a great part of the thoughts of the 9 Queen and her Council. The reformed religion had made 1 some entrance in that kingdom during the reign of King Francis the First,-exceedingly dispersed and propagated in most parts thereof, notwithstanding the frequent martyrdoms of particular persons, the great and terrible massacres of whole townships, commonalities, and churches, even by hundreds and thousands, in divers places of the realm. To which increase, the fickle nature of the French, the diligence of their preachers, and the near neighhourhood of Geneva, were of great advantage; all which advantages were much improved by the authority of and reputation which Calvin carried in those churches, and the 'Edd. "Goldnel." 2 Fuller states that Scot, Bishop of Chester, went to Louvain. 3 It is said by Phillips, that Pates "assisted at the close of the Council of Trent." Life of Pole, ii. 39. Strype mentions that he was imprisoned in the Tower, A.D. 1563, “perhaps for presuming to sit in the Council of Trent." Ann. i. 144. His name, however, does not appear in the list. Goldwell went further-to Rome, where he lived six and twenty years. Rishton, in Sanders, 286. And he is named as the only English bishop who attended the later sessions of the Council. Concil. Trident. Canones, &c. ed. Lips. 1846. pp. 332–9. 5 "A blasphemous proverb was generally used,-That the Synod of Trent was guided by the Holy Ghost, sent thither from time to time in a cloak-bag from Rome." Sarpi, 497. Davila, 19-20. 6 |