author of it. It remained not long without replies, containing such things as highly his former writings; and that his authorities from the fathers were insufficient. This is the substance of this apology, in which, though there is nothing in it of great merit, we may justly say James came off conqueror. However, we may remark, that though his favours to the catholics might manifest them guilty of ingratitude towards him, yet could they be no great recommendation of him to his protestant subjects, They shewed an indifferency with respect to the two religions, which, I suppose, was not so well digested by them. But James was not one of those who foresaw consequences. What made for his present purpose he catched hold of, without reflecting that one day or other it might be made to serve against himself. An imprudence which controvertists frequently are guilty of. The least shadow of an argument they make use of; weaken, or endeavour to invalidate the most important doctrines which at any time stand in their way; and blab out those things which it is most their interest to conceal, and which hereafter they, bitterly repent of, when they find the uses made of them by able or artful opponents. 43 It remained not long without replies, containing such things as highly displeased him.] Though James's name was not prefixed to the first edition of his apology, yet he made presents of it to the foreign ambassadors in his own name, and his arms were put in the frontispiece thereof, as himself tells us. This was sufficient to put the author out of doubt. But notwithstanding his adversaries treated him without ceremony. displeased him. Whereupon he writ his The famous Robert Parsons began the attack, in a book called the Judgment of a Catholic gentleman, concerning king James's apology for the oath of allegiance. Qu. S. Omers, 16082.--Bellarmine continued it, under the feigned name of Mattheus Tortus, and gave his majesty the lie in express terms, and seven times charged him with falsehood, which was thought by him equivalent to a lie. The king is here told, that pope Clement thought him to be inclined to their religion; that he was a puritan in Scotland, and a persecutor of the protestants; that he was a heretic and no christian. His majesty was also let know, “that some of his officers of estate put the pope and cardinals in hope that he would profess himself a catholic, when he came to the crown of England; yea, that he himself had written letters full of courtesie to the two cardinals Aldo-brandino and Bellarmine, wherein he craved, that one of the Scottish nation might be created cardinal; that by him, as an agent, he might the more easily and safely do his business with the pope.' This must have vexed James pretty much, I suppose, as the reader, by comparing what is contained in notes 8 and 13, will be apt to think there was some truth in it. A third answerer of this apology was Francis Suarez, well known in the learned world. Sir Henry Saville, whose edition of St. Chrysostom has perpetuated his fame, being prevailed on, I know not by what motive, to help translate James's book into Latin; it soon got to Rome; from thence Suarez was com с a 99 b Wood's Athene Oxonienses, vol. I.c.362. King James's Works,p.294. Calderwood, p. 600. See the letter itself in the same writer, p. 427. It is addressed to the pope; but there are instructions afterwards added, for applying to the cardinals. See also Rushworth, vol. I. p. 162. premonition to all most mighty monarchs, manded to answer it, who performing his task, it was published, and as soon as the copies came into England, one of them was burnt a.- -Nicolaus Coffeteau, bishop of Dardanie, preacher to Henry IV. of France, answered James, as he said, very moderately and modestly. "But the king was nothing pleased with his fawning, nor took it in better part than if (as he said) he should have bid a t-d in his teeth, and then cry Sir reverence ".". Let us observe here by the way, a mistake of Mr. Perrault, in speaking of Coeffeteau, says he, "the king (Henry the Great) committed to him, at the solicitation of Perron, the answering of the king of England's book on the eucharist, which he did with a great deal of cogency." Now James never 'writ on the eucharist. The book Coffeteau answered, was his apology; consequently Perrault is mistaken. Nor can 1 persuade myself he speaks truly, when he says, the then French king committed to him the answering James's book. The doctrine contained in it could not be displeasing to Henry, and I believe he would have been sorry it should have been subverted. I know of no more answers to James's apology; and whether I am as exact as I should be in my account of these, I cannot well determine; being far removed from libraries, from which help might be expected "Whereupon he writ his premonition to all most mighty monarchs, &c.] "After the apology was out, says Dr. Mountague, his majesty divers times would be pleased to utter a resolution of his, that if the pope and cardinal would not rest in his answer, and sit down C Characters * Wood, vol. I. c. 468. b Winwood, vol. III. p. 117. Historical and Panegyrical, vol. II. p. 11, 8vo. Lond. 1705. Appendix. • Vid. kings, free princes, and states of Christen by it, take the oath as it was intended for a point of allegiance and civil obedience, he would publish the apology in his own name, with a preface to all the princes in Christendom; wherein he would publish such a confession of his faith, persuade the princes so to vindicate their own power, discover so much of the mystery of iniquity unto them, as the pope's bulls. should pull in their horns, and himself wish he had never meddled with this matter. The cardinal contending against the apology, his majesty confirmed his resolution, and with the like celerity in the compass of one week, wrote his monitory preface; and being so written, published it and the apology in his own name, and made good his word, sent it to the emperor, and all the kings and free princes in Christendom "." Great dispatch this! but as we have a bishop's word. for it, we cannot refuse to subscribe to the truth of it. In his dedication to the emperor Rodolph II. and the princes and states of Christendom, he stiles himself professor, maintainer, and defender of the true, christian, catholic, and apostolic faith, professed by the antient and primitive church, and sealed with the blood of so many holy bishops, and other faithful crowned with the glory of martyrdom .He then in a particular manner addresses himself unto them, and tells them, "that the cause in which he is engaged is general, and concerneth the authority and privilege of kings in general, and all super-eminent temporal powers." He proceeds to give reasons for printing the apology without his name; shews why he thought now proper to avow it, and goes on to shew the occasion of it. He Preface to James's Works. b dom, published it, and the apology in his lets them know, that the publishing his book had brought such two answerers, or rather railers, upon him, as all the world might wonder at. He then falls foulon Parsons, for whom he says a rope is the fittest answer; and proceeds to Mattheus Tortus, who called himself Bellarmine's chaplain. "An obscure author, says he, utterly unknown to me, being yet little known. to the world for any other of his works; and therefore must be a very desperate fellow in beginning his apprentisage, not only to refute, but to rail upon a king." One would think by this James knew not that in the republic of letters no man holds any other rank than what he can procure by his own industry and abilities. For which reason if the greatest prince commences a member of it, he is to expect, in justice, no other regard than what his fellow-members shall judge he really merits. If he would not be treated like an author, he should not commence author. The moment he acts publicly in that character, he is liable to be refuted, ridiculed, or exposed; nor has he any body but himself to thank for it. -But let us go on with our subject. James, from some passages, concludes that Bellarmine was his real answerer, under the feigned name of Tortus, and as such he speaks of him. After mentioning the epithets bestowed on himself by his answerer, he asks the princes whether this be mannerly dealing with a king? and he doubts not but that they will resent such indignities done to one of their quality. He then shews the insufficiency of the cardinal's reply to his apology, aggravates the power he gives to the popes, shews that they formerly were in subjection James's Works, p. 293. |