Henrietta Maria Part 19

As early as 1645 it was believed that the Queen was inclined towards the Independents through the influence of Henry Percy and of Father Philip, who were suspected of communication with the leaders of that party;[350] in matters of religion they were less rigid than the Presbyterians; they possessed some glimmering of the idea of toleration, and they even showed some disposition to favour the Catholics. When in 1647 they gained the upper hand, Henrietta believed that the moment had come at last when the Catholics would be able to hold the balance between the King, the Presbyterians, and the Independents, and with the favour of the latter to win the long-hoped-for liberty of conscience, carrying with it the repeal of the penal laws. Never, it was thought, had the Catholics had such a chance since the days of Mary. Charles, characteristically, wished to keep out of sight in the negotiations. "You must know," wrote an English Catholic to Sir Kenelm Digby in August, 1647, "at last not only the Independents, but the King himself do give us solid hopes of a liberty of conscience for Catholics in England in case we can but gain security that our subjection to the Pope shall bring no prejudice to our allegiance towards his Majesty or that state; it is true the King will not appear in it, but would have the army make it their request unto him; and so I understand he hath advised the Catholics to treat with the army about it, and the business will be to frame an oath of allegiance."[351]

The Catholics carried on negotiations with Sir Thomas Fairfax;[352] the rationale of the penal laws had always been the suspicion that the recusants held opinions subversive of the State and indeed of all social life, and it was to overcome this difficulty that Three Propositions were drawn up by the Catholics "importing that the Pope and Church had no power to absolve from obedience to civil government or dispense with word or oath made to heretics or authorize to injure other men upon pretence of them being excommunicated."[353] It was intimated that if the Catholics, by subscribing these opinions, could "vindicate these principles from inconsistency with civil government,"[354] the penal laws would be repealed and liberty of conscience granted.[355]

It is no wonder that the English Catholics were in high spirits. The more moderate of them who were weary of being considered bad subjects for principles which they did not hold were glad to testify their loyalty not only to the Independents, but to the King, who had always been suspicious of it; a large number of Catholics came forward to sign the negative of the Three Propositions,[356] among whom were members of the religious Orders, even of the Society of Jesus, and well-known laymen, such as the Marquis of Winchester, whose defence of Basing House had won the admiration of the whole Royalist party, and Walter Montagu, who, though he was still in prison, was allowed to intermix in the negotiation.

Out in Paris the Queen, who had spent her life trying to persuade her husband of the unimpeachable loyalty of her co-religionists, was doing her part. In July, even before the Three Propositions were drawn up, she put further pressure upon Rome for aid; there were men, there were munitions, all that was needed was money; surely in such a crisis to gain all that was at stake the Holy Father would supply it. She sent her instructions to Digby and waited in hope.

Sir Kenelm pressed with all his eloquence the needs of the Catholics and their great opportunity. Perhaps the Pope was a little overwhelmed by his flow of words, for he requested him to put his arguments on paper; Digby, nothing loath, drew up memorials, of which the burden was always the need of money to enable the Catholics to take an influential part in the settlement which was believed to be pending. He descanted upon the hopes raised by the unexpected revolt of the Independents, who wished to destroy the Presbyterians and to favour the Catholics. The latter were exhausted by years of war and persecution, but if the Holy Father would only show a timely liberality they could so intervene as to bring about not only their own salvation, but that of their co-religionists in Ireland, thus saving the Pope the great expenses he was incurring on behalf of the Confederate Catholics. Moreover, by such conduct he would give proof that by sending Rinuccini to Ireland he had had no desire but the good of religion; if he refused the Queen's request, added Digby impressively, it would mean the ruin of religion, both in England and Ireland.

Innocent may have given some attention to Digby's arguments, but probably at no time did he think of acting upon them. The reputation of the envoy, which was not improved by his disrespectful, if just, criticisms of the methods of the Papal Court, told heavily against his requests. Moreover, the Queen herself was little trusted, particularly in Irish affairs, for she was believed to put the interests of her husband above those of religion, and to favour unduly Lord Ormonde, to whom (in the vain hope of bringing about an accommodation between him and the Confederates) she had recently sent an agent, by name George Leybourn,[357] who, though a Catholic priest, belonged to a very different school of thought from that of the fierce Rinuccini. Besides, the recent events in England were prejudicial to Henrietta's interests in Rome.

The negotiation of the Three Propositions was considered a private matter, but it came to the ears of the Pope. Innocent probably was aware that it was to a great extent managed by a section of the secular clergy, who, perhaps from their close connection with the intellectual society of Paris, held Gallican views of so extreme a type that they would gladly have settled the matter without reference to Rome, and who saw in the whole affair a nice opportunity of getting rid of their enemies the Jesuits, whom they thoughtfully suggested should be excluded from the general toleration; indeed, one of the chief supporters of the scheme was a priest named Holden, who was a great friend of Sir Kenelm Digby and Thomas White, and who had long been noted for the extravagance of his opinions.[358] This gentleman, now resident in Paris, wrote encouraging letters to his co-religionists in England, a.s.suring them that their att.i.tude on the questions raised by the Three Propositions was that of all the learned and judicious men of France. It is true that some of the more timid English Catholics, notwithstanding such encouragement, became alarmed, and wrote an exculpatory letter to the Holy Father, in which they informed him that the denial they had given to the Three Propositions was "in, the negative to theyr affirmative who presented them unto us, not absolutely in theyr negative, for that had indeed intruded further upon the Pope's authority than the subscribers were willing to doe."[359] But even such refinements could not save the conduct of the English Catholics from condemnation at Rome, where the deposing power was not so lightly to be parted with. Thus it is not surprising that Henrietta waited for a reply from the Pope with the heart-sickness of hope deferred. She did not know, what had long been confessed among the initiated, that the Holy Father's chief object was the success of the Confederate Catholics,[360] to whom in the spring of that same year he had sent, together with his paternal benediction, the sum of 50,000 crowns. In September she took up her ever-ready pen and wrote herself to Innocent, a sad letter, in which she speaks of her devotion to the Catholic faith, and of the good intentions which had not been seconded as they should have been. It is not known whether the Pope replied to these reproaches, but a month later he received Sir Kenelm Digby once again, though he was probably aware of the fact that that gentleman was hand-in-glove with those whom he had censured in England.

That gentleman's temper had not been improved by his long trials; the last memorial[361] which he drew up, which was to a great length, is extremely acrid in tone. It dwells with justice upon the services which the Queen had rendered to the Catholic Church, upon the fair hopes which had been blighted by the war. It speaks of the ill reception accorded to her friends--among whom are mentioned Richard Crashaw and Patrick Cary, the brother of Lord Falkland--at the Papal Court. Finally, it dwells with particular and not unmerited bitterness upon the conduct of Rinuccini, who, it was believed, had a secret commission to separate Ireland from England.

It happened that just about the time of the presentation of this memorial the hopes of toleration for the Catholics in England disappeared as suddenly as they had arisen, for the two Houses of Parliament voted that religious liberty should not extend to the toleration of Papists;[362] but even had this untoward incident not occurred, Digby can hardly have expected much from the Pope. The answer came at last in March, 1648, and it was cold and decisive. The Holy Father would have liked to help the Queen of England, but seeing no hope of the success of the Catholics, he felt that he could not indulge his inclination.[363] Sir Kenelm shook the dust of Rome off his feet and left it more convinced than ever of what he had written a year previously, that no one could succeed at the Papal Court without money and influence, and that "piety, honour, generosity, devotion, zeal for the Catholic faith and for the service of G.o.d, with all other vertues, heroic and theological,"[364] were banished thence. Henrietta would perhaps hardly have endorsed this comprehensive indictment; but she was bitterly disappointed, and she was incapable of perceiving that from his own point of view Innocent was right in refusing money, of which such Catholics as Sir Kenelm Digby[365] and his friends would have had the spending. On larger principles also the papal policy was justified. The idea of founding a solid toleration for Catholics upon the basis of a union of the King and the Independents was chimerical, for those among the Puritans who favoured the scheme were but a small minority of advanced views, and even they, it seems, soon repented of their liberality. Even had Charles been trustworthy (and in this, as in other cases, he paid the penalty of his incurable shiftiness), the anti-Catholic feeling of the nation, which had been one of the chief causes of the war, would never have permitted the antedating by more than a century of the repeal of the penal laws, and had the guarantees been given they would a.s.suredly have been broken. With regard to Ireland, the Queen is perhaps less to be blamed. She knew that the Confederate Catholics hoped much from her, and she could not know that Rinuccini, the envoy of the Holy Father, was using all his influence against her, or fathom the depth of the malice which led him to write that "from the Queen of England we must hope nothing except propositions hurtful to religion, since she is entirely in the hands of Jermyn, Digby, and other heretics."[366]

"He perished for lack of knowing the truth," said Henrietta once of her husband, with a flash of insight not often given to her. That which was true of Charles was true of her also; she was her father's daughter, and she desired to know the truth, and she was accustomed to say that the chief need of princes was faithful counsellors who would declare it to them; but to such knowledge she could not reach. Her schemes, with all their ingenuity, failed one after another because she was unable to grasp the conditions in which she worked, or to read the motives and characters of the people with whom she had to deal. She lived in a world of unreality built up of the love which she bore to her husband, which made her as unable to understand that the restoration of Charles Stuart to the throne he had lost was not the main object of the diplomacy of Europe, as she was to appreciate the fact that such negotiations as those which she, the Queen of a Protestant country, carried on with the Pope and the Catholics of Europe were more fatal to him than the swords or the malice of his enemies.

[Footnote 308: Loret: _La Muse Historique_ (1859), t. II, p. 393.]

[Footnote 309: One of them was Rene Chartier, an elderly man, who had attended several members of the royal family; he was the translator of Galen and Hippocrates. G. Patin: _Lettres._]

[Footnote 310: Green: _Letters of Queen Henrietta Maria_, p. 253.]

[Footnote 311: Birchley: _Christian Moderator_ (1652), p. 20.]

[Footnote 312: In 1642 the Queen accepted the dedication of _The Flaming Heart, or the Life of the Glorious S. Teresa_, published at Antwerp; it is a translation of the saint's autobiography.]

[Footnote 313: A. a Wood: _Fasti Oxonienses_ (1691), II, p. 688.]

[Footnote 314: See Appendix VII.]

[Footnote 315: Green: _Letters of Queen Henrietta Maria_, p. 264.]

[Footnote 316: Sabran Negotiations, Add. MS., 5460.]

[Footnote 317: This letter is found _in extenso_. MS. Dupuy, 642.]

[Footnote 318: The Earl of Bristol and George, Lord Digby.]

[Footnote 319: The relations between Henrietta and Goring, on the one hand, and the discontented French on the other, are mentioned in the _Carnets de Mazarin_, published in V. Cousin: _Mme de Chevreuse._]

[Footnote 320: Mazarin, in a letter of 1651, speaks of "plus de trois mille livres prestees a la reyne d'Angleterre des occasions ou elle etoit reduite en grandes necessitez."--Cheruel: _Lettres de Mazarin_, IV, p. 221.]

[Footnote 321: 1,500,000 francs is the sum named in the letter from Paris read in the English Parliament in January, 1646 (Tanner MS., LX); this present is not mentioned in the official account of the a.s.sembly of clergy, and it is possible that the writer of the above letter listened to a baseless rumour and that no such gift was made at the time.]

[Footnote 322: The official report of this speech is in the "Proces Verbal de l'a.s.semblee du clerge, 1645"; the only copy which the present writer has seen is in the _Bibliotheque Magasin_ in Paris. The Roundheads printed a translation of the speech (with comments) in pamphlet form, ent.i.tled: "A warning to the Parliament of England. A discovery of the ends and designs of the Popish party both abroad and at home in the raising and fomenting our late war and still continuing troubles. In an oration made to the general a.s.sembly of the French clergy in Paris by Mons. Jacques du Perron, Bishop of Angoulesme and Grand Almoner to the Queen of England. Translated out of an MS. copy obtained from a good hand in France. 1647."]

[Footnote 323: This was denied by the Roundheads. See "A warning to the Parliament of England," etc.; but it was apparently generally believed in France. See Sabran Neg., Add. MS., 5460.]

[Footnote 324: Doc.u.ment VI in the Appendix seems to refer to the negotiations between the King and the Catholics at this time.]

[Footnote 325: The King's letter to the Queen was one of those taken at Naseby and published in _The King's Cabinet Opened_. The pa.s.sage runs thus: "I have thought of one means more to furnish thee with for my a.s.sistance than hitherto thou hast had. It is that I give thee power to promise in my name to whom thou thinkest most fit that I will take away all the penal laws against the Roman Catholics in England as soon as G.o.d shall enable me to do it, so as by their means, or in their favours, I may have so powerful a.s.sistance as may deserve so great a favour and enable me to do it." Du Perron's reference to this letter proves that it was not a forgery of the Puritans.

In a letter from Paris "presented by Mr. Speaker," January 29th, 164-5/6, is the following pa.s.sage: "For these causes and further help (iff need shall be) the queene has obliged herselff solemnlie that the King shall establishe frie liberty of conscience in all his three kingdomes, and shall abolishe utterlie all penal statutes made by Queene Elizabeth and King James of glorious memorie against Poperie and papists."--Tanner MS., LX.]

[Footnote 326: _Moderate Intelligencer_, July, 1646. "The clergy conveaned in favour of her Majesty of England's designs finding that there was little hopes to bring about at present either the recovery or increase of the Catholic religion and so to no end to advance monies unless to exasperate and bring ruin upon those of the Roman religion there, have agreed to give and directed to be presented unto her some few thousands of crowns, a somme fitter to buy hangings for a chamber than prosecute a war: are risen and have dismissed this a.s.sembly."]

[Footnote 327: The Confederate Catholics were a body formed after the Irish rebellion of 1641; there were at this time (1645) three parties in Ireland, the Confederate Catholics, the Protestants--whose army was commanded by Ormonde, the King's Viceroy--and the Puritans: the two former, though nominally enemies, had a common ground in their hatred of the latter.]

[Footnote 328: O'Hartegan records with great glee that while he was received in audience by Mazarin and even invited to dine in his palace, Jermyn, "His Holiness, His Nuntius," and other amba.s.sadors, were unable to obtain an audience even after many days' solicitation. Mazarin's real object was to prevent the Confederate Catholics from "casting themselves wholly into the armes of the King of Spain." Tanner MS., LX.]

[Footnote 329: As early as 1635 she said that she had not corresponded with Elizabeth for ten years, as the latter said she could not write freely.

Aff. Etran. Ang., t. 45.]

[Footnote 330: See Appendix V.]

[Footnote 331: It is said that Bishop Smith, who was still alive, was opposed to Sir Kenelm Digby's undertaking this mission, but was overborne.]

[Footnote 332: The same misfortune occurred a few months later when George Digby was defeated at Sherborne (October, 1645) and his correspondence, much of which concerned the intrigues of the King and Queen, fell into the hands of the enemy, and was afterwards read in Parliament; and again at Sligo (October, 1645), when the Glamorgan Treaty was found in the coach of the Archbishop of Tuam.]

[Footnote 333: In this letter the Queen thanks the Pope for "des armes et munitions de guerre qu'elle a fourni, de la promesse qu'elle m'a donne d'une nouvelle a.s.sistance d'argent et de la rest.i.tution des pensions a ceux de la nation ecossaise tant a Rome qu'a Avignon."--P.R.O. Roman Transcripts.]

[Footnote 334: Rinuccini: _Emba.s.sy in Ireland_, p. lviii.]

[Footnote 335: He was the founder of S. Isidore's College in Rome.]

[Footnote 336: Nevertheless in 1642 Urban sent an agent by name Scarampi to Ireland at the request of Cardinal Frances...o...b..rberini.]

[Footnote 337: _Il Cappuccino Scozzese_ (1644). Before the end of the seventeenth century it was translated into French, Spanish, and Portuguese, during the eighteenth century into English.]

[Footnote 338: Her husband warned her in January, 1645, not to give "much countenance to the Irish agents in Paris."--_King's Cabinet Opened_. She replied, "That troubles me much, for I fear that you have no intention of making a peace with them [the Irish] which is ruinous for you and for me."--Green: _Letters of Queen Henrietta Maria_, p. 290. February 28th, 164-4/5.]

[Footnote 339: _King's Cabinet Opened._]

[Footnote 340: "... D. Baro Germa.n.u.s qui in maxima apud Reginam Angliae gratia nec minore quam Cardinalis Mazarinus apud Reginam Galliae."--Grotius: _Epistolae ineditae_ (1806), p. 71.]

[Footnote 341: There is little doubt that Henrietta would have been willing to cede to France the Channel Islands, the last remains of the great heritage of the Conqueror, in return for help.]

[Footnote 342: See _Letters of Charles I to Henrietta Maria in 1646_, ed.

Bruce. Camden Society.]

[Footnote 343: This is Berkeley's own account taken from his memoirs.

Clarendon's is very different, and says that Berkeley was a vain man who was delighted to undertake the mission.]

[Footnote 344: Tanner MS., LX.]