divinity, prior of the monastery in Douay, and, on two occasions, president of the English benedictine congregation of Mount Cassino. To this, and to the general cause of the English catholics, he was sincerely attached; he appears to have been conciliating in his manners, and to have possessed wise and liberal principles. Lord Clarendon's State Papers contain several letters from him to the pope, to cardinal Bentivoglio, cardinal Barberini, and secretary Windebank, and several other epistolary documents of importance, respecting the English catholics. His correspondence with the pope and cardinals is in the Latin language; the style of it is remarkably clear and elegant.

He arrived in London † in the spring of the year 1634, and passed by the name of Jones, which was that of his family, or by that of Scudamore or Skidmore. Some time after his arrival, he wrote a letter to cardinal Bentivoglio §, in which he mentions, that two subjects, at that time, engaged the attention of the catholics, and split them into parties; the oath of allegiance proposed by James the first, and the appointment of one or more prelates

"State Papers collected by Edward earl of Clarendon, "commencing from the year 1621, containing the materials,

from which his history of the great rebellion was composed, "and the authorities on which the truth of his relation is "founded. 3 vols. fol. Oxford, at the Clarendon printing "house, 1767."

+ Cla. State Papers, vol. i. p. 106.

Under this name an account is given of him by Dodd, vol. iii. p. 112.

$ Cla. State Papers, vol. i. p. 129.

fór

over them. He notices two publications, one for the oath, and the other against it; he says they were written by two roman-catholic gentlemen of distinction, and that the former was much approved, and the latter as much condemned by the king t. He observes that the latter contains some

*

*The title of the work is, "A Pattern of Christian Loyal"tie: whereby any prudent man may clearly perceive in what "manner the new oath of allegiance, and every clause thereof,

66

may, in a true and catholike sense, without danger of perjurie, be taken by the roman-catholikes: and all the chief objections, which are usually made against the said oath, "either in particular or in general, may according to the "grounds of the catholike religion bee easily answered. Col"lected out of authours, who have handled the whole matter "more largely. By William Howard, an English catholike, 4to. London, 1634.”

+ The writer has not been able to ascertain the title of this publication, or its author,-but, suspects it was the work of father Courtenay, which Leander notices in the following "Remarks upon terms. (Cla. State Papers, vol. i. p. 258.) "some passages of Mr. Courtenay's book against the oath of allegiance.

"In his fourth argument:

I. "That it is a matter of faith believed by all catholics, "that the pope, by his spiritual authority, can authorize "princes to make war, invade, and depose for spiritual ends.' "In his last argument:

"That the pope hath an undoubted power to depose both "spiritual and temporal.

"That, whatsoever power the pope hath to deprive princes "of their kingdoms and titles, or by authorizing of war for "cause of religion;' (for he supposeth the only cause of re'ligion to be a sufficient title of war;) he hath much more "to deprive them of their subjects' allegiance.

"From whence it clearly followeth, that, if the pope,' (by

reprehensible passages, particularly on the power of the people to dethrone the sovereign, and to

"whom he saith all catholics are to be governed in matters of "conscience and religion,)" should depose the king, authorize "princes to invade him, absolve his subjects from their alle"giance, for cause of religion, and command them not to obey, but to take part with those princes, if he will not "desist to put in execution the penal laws made against "catholics, they are bound, or at leastwise may lawfully rebel "against him.'

"Which to say, is, in my judgment, high treason; and to "persuade others, by public writings, to believe the same, is "plain sedition.

"In his ninth argument:

II. "That the temporal commonwealth, in some cases of "extremity, can deprive princes of their royal dignity for temporal causes; and, that it hath the same power to take "it away, which it had to give it, and to make it elective or successive, as it shall appear best, in case of extremity.' "Which assertion is, in my judgment, very dangerous.

"In his third argument:

III. "That no person, (nor the king himself, because he " is not the law-maker, but the king and parliament,) can add any exception against the general prohibition of the law :“Which is not, at least, well expressed in the law by suffi❝cient words, to declare the intention thereof in that behalf; "and, that the king alone was not the law-maker, but the "king and parliament.'

"Which quite overthroweth the king's supreme judicial authority to interpret laws, and his sovereign prerogative power "to make them.

"In his second, eleventh, and seventh arguments :

IV. "That whosoever taketh the oath, incurreth formal "heresy, idolatry, and high treason.'

"Whereby he also taxeth the king of incurring formal heresy "and idolatry, and commanding high treason.

66

alter the established succession, and, on this account, had indisposed the king against the catholics. To appease him, the friends of the catholics recommended that the pope should open a conciliating correspondence with his majesty: "Some "attention," they observed, "was due from the pope to the English catholics, who had suffered more for the authority of the Roman see, than "all the other faithful of the church; some atten"tion also was due to the king, on account of the " veneration which he professed for the pope. His "holiness writes to the pagan monarchs in India, "to the schismatic sovereigns of Abyssinia; why "should not his holiness address letters of equal "kindness to his Britannic majesty? His holiness "tolerates the rejection of his deposing power by "the faithful in France; why should he not tolerate "equally the rejection of it by the catholics of England?

Why should he not write to his majesty a letter to the following effect?—That his holiness by it "should return him thanks for the favour, which "he had shown to the catholics, and urge its con"tinuance: that he should acknowledge his majesty "to be the true and lawful sovereign of his king"doms; he might observe that the known alle

-

V. "That his arguments have satisfied his majesty:' and "it is a common bruit among catholics, and divers say that "they are unanswerable.'

"In Mr. Preston's hand; and endorsed by Windebanck.”

"No person can be surprised at the king's indignation at "this work, or at his displeasure with the pope for not having "condemned it."

66

giance of the catholics to his majesty rendered "their taking of the particular oath in question altogether unnecessary; he might lament the in"discreet publications, to which it had given rise,— and, as a further indication of his own wishes for conciliation, he might suspend his own decree, "and the decrees of his predecessor, respecting the oath, leaving it and all that regarded it to stand, 66 as if there had been no such decree."

66

"Such," says father Leander, " are the sugges"tions of some of our best and most intelligent "men: and, with all due respect, I beg leave to suggest the propriety of a compliance with them. "It is not unworthy of his holiness, to conciliate "and make advances to gain his son to him, in "imitation of his predecessor St. Gregory the great,

66

who, by kind letters and paternal soothings, in"duced king Ethelbert to attend to the preaching "of St. Augustine. Neither is our king unworthy "of this; nor is he an heretic, though he be not "hitherto fully instructed in some doctrines; nor "did he ever quit the bosom of the church; but, “having yet had none but protestant teachers, he " remains in that belief, in which he was educated, a devout worshipper of God, according to his "measure of knowledge."

on

Father Leander proceeds to mention the appointment of a bishop: "From those," he says, "whom I can depend, I find that Dr. Smith, the "bishop of Chalcedon, is personally obnoxious "to the king and the state, on account of his ex"cessive officiousness, while he was in England;