Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T09:30:49.887Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Richard Smith’s Gallican Backers and Jesuit Opponents. Part III: The Continuation of the Controversy 1631–c. 1643

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2015

Antony F. Allison
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

When he arrived in France in the summer of 1631 Smith began to give all the help he could to the French writers who had taken up his cause. In doing so he put himself in a very delicate position as a member of Richelieu’s household for he was exacerbating the dissensions in the French Church that the Cardinal was intent upon healing because they posed a threat to national unity. Moreover, the writer to whom Smith chiefly looked for support, the Abbé de Saint-Cyran, was soon to become, for reasons partly political and partly doctrinal, the object of Richelieu’s implacable hostility. Smith had to proceed with great caution if he were not to lose the extraordinary advantages that the Cardinal’s patronage brought him. I propose now to follow the controversy as it developed in France during the 1630s, illustrating Smith’s rôle in it mainly from his private correspondence preserved among the papers of the English secular clergy in the archives of the Archdiocese of Westminster. The dossier is far from complete but enough has survived to allow us to trace with reasonable clarity moves that would otherwise have been totally obscure. The greater part of it consists of letters from Smith to the clergy’s Agent at Rome, Peter Fitton, between 1631 and 1634 (after which there is a gap in this series), and from Smith to the Secretary of the clergy in London, John Southcote, from 1631 until the latter’s death in 1637. There are also a number of letters from Southcote to Smith and to Fitton between 1631 and 1637, and a few to Smith from other members of the clergy, in particular Anthony Champney, formerly Vice-President of the English College at Douai and now chaplain to the English Benedictine nuns at Brussels. After 1637 the correspondence still extant becomes very sparse.

Type
Other
Information
British Catholic History , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , October 1990 , pp. 164 - 206
Copyright
Copyright © Catholic Record Society 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1 The letters cited in this article are mainly in AAW A27–28, B27, B47.

2 See Pt. II, p. 235.

3 AAW B27 no. 134. He mentions that he has brought to France with him several works in his defence which he will publish if the Pope allows him to. The only one he specifies is ‘that by my Lord Montacute which cleareth me from invalidating confessions and other false assertions’. The reference is probably to An apologeticall answere of the Viscount Montague vnto sundrie important aspersions which recounts the circumstances giving rise to the controversy between Smith and the Jesuits over approbation for hearing confessions. Montague’s holograph MS is preserved in the Gillow Library of the Catholic Record Society. The work was never printed.

4 ARCR I 499.

5 ARCR I 498.

6 ARCR I 496.

7 ARCR I 500.

8 All earlier studies of Hallier are superseded by the monograph by Ceyssens. See Abbreviations.

9 See Pt. II, pp. 254, et seq.

10 In the Defensio, p. 241, he says that, when he went to England, he learned from certain sources that some Regulars were administering the sacraments without authority and committing other abuses. Some of the abuses, he adds, he saw for himself.

11 Ceyssens, p. 262.

12 See Pt. I, pp. 336, et seq.

13 Ceyssens, p. 168.

14 AAW B27 no. 107.

15 All earlier studies of Saint-Cyran are superseded by those of Orcibal. See Abbreviations.

16 For Duvergier and Richelieu at Coussay, see Orcibal, pp. 477, et seq.

17 AAW A12–15. Various letters.

18 He wrote to More from Paris on 28 November 1616 (AAW A15 no. 176). On 10 January 1617 he was at Arras College where he signed, with William Bishop, Antony Champney, William Rayner, William Wright and Richard Ireland, an instrument appointing More Procurator at Rome for the English clergy (AAW B24 no. 103).

19 The earliest reference I have found to his being back at Paris after Richelieu’s restoration is a letter he wrote from there to John Bennet at Rome on 20 October 1622 (AAW A16 no. 163). He visited England briefly after the death of William Bishop in April 1624 to vote in the Chapter on Bishop’s successor. See Recusant History, Jan. 1964, pp. 169–70.

20 Orcibal,2 pp. 148, et seq.

21 Rapin’s Histoire du jansénisme remained in MS until it was published at Paris by the Abbé Domenech in [1862]. The holograph MS, with corrections by the author, is in the Bibliothèque Nationale, MSS, Fonds Français, 10574. The details about the Aurelius books occur in liv. 6, p. 47 of the MS and on pp. 281–2 of Domenech’s edition.

22 See especially Janssen Letters, pp. 447–566 (Letters of 1630–1633).

23 Not certainly identified. Possibly Jean Courtot who entered the Paris Oratory c. 1632 and was later dismissed for indiscipline. Courtot published several violently anti-Jesuit tracts under the pseudonym Cordier. His history before he became an Oratorian, however, has not so far been established. I am grateful to Père Robert Brunet, librarian of the Jesuit centre of studies, Les Fontaines, at Chantilly, for referring me to the notice of Courtot in Dictionnaire de Biographie Française, tom. 9, col. 1049–50.

24 Janssen Letters, p. 511, Letter no. 161, 28 March 1631.

25 See the present article, pp. 168–9.

26 For Mailland’s activities in trying to end the controversy, see Chesneau, I, ch. 5; also C. Duplessis-d’Argentré, Collectio judiciorum, 1728–36, II, pp. 360–63.

27 Orcibal,3 p. 182, & Janssen Letters, p. 541, Letter 176, 16 January 1632.

28 AAW B27 no. 107.

29 Janssen Letters, p. 543, Letter 178, and Orcibal’s note 2 on p. 544.

30 9 November 1635. Extracts from proceedings of the General Assembly of the French clergy, printed in ‘Illustria de Petro Aurelio testimonia’ prefaced to Petri Aurelii.. . opera, 1642.

31 Rapin, MS liv. 6, p. 47. Ce docteur [Filesac] les portait [the MSS] à l’imprimeur, et prenait soin de l’impression. C’est d’Antoine Vitré, qui estait mon ami, qui fit l’édition in folio ordonnée par le clergé et qui avait part à tout ce secret dont j’ai sceu ce détail.

32 AAW B27 no. 128.

33 Bichi to Barberini, 20 Dec. 1632 and 1 Feb. 1633. AV Nunz. Fran. 77, f. 216; and BV Barb. Lat. 8091, f. 3. See Chesneau I, p. 118.

34 Anaereticus, pp. 14–15. Num Illustrissimi Galliae antistites… ut ad exteras usque regiones, fremente necquicquam sodalitio permanaret, effecerunt? Num Sacra Theologiae Facultas quae ing-ruente factione vestra eam in splendidissima Sorbonae teeta velut in asylum excepit, & Amplissimi Decani sui manu spargi publice ac distrahi vidit, proposita palam theca in quam debitum typographo pretium coniiceretur?

35 AAW B27 no. 115.

36 AAW B27 no. 116.

37 There is a short notice of Le Maistre in Pierre Feret, La Faculté de Théologie de Paris et ses docteurs les plus célèbres. Epoque moderne. 7 tom. Paris, 1900–10. Tom. 5, pp. viii–x.

38 Illustratio sacri patrimonii, seu de bonis et possessionibus ecclesiarum, 1636.

39 AAW B27 no. 107.

40 See Pt. I, pp. 336, et seq. The parts of the Defensio on which the present summary is based are the ‘Admonitio ad Lectorem’, and books 1–3, dealing respectively with the idea of a perfect church, the effects of Confirmation, and the divine law concerning episcopal government.

41 A brief inquisition, pp. 38–41.

42 Defensio, pp. 24–26.

43 Spongia, p. 42.

44 Defensio, pp. 9–11.

45 Floyd’s Defensio decreti, 1634, is ARCR I 485. The passage in question occurs on pp. 75–76.

46 Defensio, pp. 3–7.

47 A brief inquisition, pp. 11–14.

48 See Ceyssens, p. 213.

49 See Pt. I of this article, pp. 340–41.

50 ‘Admonitio ad Lectorem’, p. 4: ‘… eiusdem consentiebant, qui inter regulares modestiores, & disciplinae ecclesiasticae studiosiores erant: Iesuitae ipsi Angli… id sibi eo tempore gratissimum fore testati sunt… At qui inter ipsos Regulares acrioris & ardentioris ingenii essent… Episcopi creationi resistebant. Visa proinde prioribus Pontificibus res aleae ac discriminis plena, si nondum compositis Catholicorum animis, aut non plane consentientibus, Episcopus mitteretur: ideo dilatum eo usque, donee tandem prudenter, ae sapienter visum summis Pontifieibus… eo Episcopum delegare cum facultate episcopalia munia obeundi, eaque omnia exercendi, quae solent ac possunt locorum ordinarii.

51 A&R 613.

52 ARCR I 1087. The summary of Persons is on pp. 11–13.

52A On p. 8 of Apologia Iesuitarum. The published Latin version of Persons’s work is ARCR I 872; the English original is A&R 613.

53 He succeeded in May 1605 after the four week reign of Clement’s immediate successor, Leo XI.

54 AAW B27 no. 128.

55 Vindiciae, p. 751: Macte tamen Iesuita Floyde; factus es voti compos; perfecisti quod optasti, tametsi aliter quam te id optasse credendum est. Penetravit intime Spongia non in mentem, vel in famam Parisiensis Facultatis, quae a tua foece & ab universis Molinisticae amarulentiae venenis non tam invicta est, quam intacta; sed in Ecclesiae virorumque gravium animos, & in orbis famam, e qua nullis unquam tuis tuorumque artibus expungi poterit.

56 See pp. 198–9 of this article.

57 Vindiciae, p. 121: Quod tamdiu non sublevaverint, non penes ipsos culpa est, sed penes eos qui temporum, locorum, rerum, statum talem perpetuo adumbrarunt, eamque opinionem ita solicite, partim solitis artibus, partim diffusa illa suorum factione aluerunt, ut Summi Pontifices Ecclesiam Anglicanam tanto sacramento & Episcopo non iniuria cogerentur orbare. His ergo succenseant Pontifices, succenseant fideles Angli, quorum versutiis & cupiditatibus, illi tamdiu elusi sunt, hi tantis divinae gratiae praesidiis caruerunt. Iis gratiam habeant qui salutis ipsorum cupidiores, dispulsis figmentis & nebulis, quibus isti sedem Apostolicam circumfuderant, & rerum veritate ac magnitudine fideliter exposita, divinissima illa munera, Anglis potissimum necessaria, in Angliam, ut in caeteras Christiani orbis oras, sine mora destinari a Summis Pontificibus impetraverunt.

58 Vindiciae, pp. 17–18: Non est moris catholicis censoribus respicere quid ex doctrinis quas probant vel reprobant, humana ratio argumentando inferre queat. Quam enim proxime possunt, ad lumen fidei se applicant, quam non discursivam, sed intuitivam esse sciunt… Atque hoc differunt a Philosophie qui in ratiocinando toti haerent. In hoc ipso discrepant ab haereticis, qui consecutionibus istiusmodi speciosis, & plausibilibus fidem semper arrodere, & ridiculam exhibere conantur… quae profecto quamvis refellere non possemus, non ideo discedendum esset a doctrina, traditione, & consensione perpetua Ecclesiae fundatissima… Nam difficultates, & quasi nebulae istae humano sensu concitatae, sunt velut tentamenta quaedam, quibus fidem & humilitatem nostram probari vult Deus.

59 Spongia, p. 40.

60 Vindiciae, pp. 5–9.

61 Spongia, pp. 20–21.

62 ARCR I 684.

63 Instauratio, p. 88.

64 Asserito, p. 184 in Petri Aurelii… opera, 1642. Quae enim unquam in tantae Facultatis consessu. censura de rebus tantis unico suffragio periata est aut perferri potuit?

65 Letter of 24 November, cited in note 3 above.

66 Bichi to Barberini, 28 October 1631. AV Nunz. Fran. 74A, ff. 159v–160.

67 ARCR I 34.1.

68 ARCR I 491.

69 The documents in the case were printed in Arrest du Parlement de Rouen donné en la Chambre des Vaccations le septiesme iour d’Octobre 1632, Paris, 1632. ARCR I 501.

69a An Irish College was founded at Rouen in 1612. See Archivium Hibernieum XXIII, 1960, pp. 44, 70; and Walsh, T. J., The Irish Continental College Movement, 1973; p. 72 Google Scholar. I am indebted to Fr. Benignus Millet O.F.M. for these references.

70 A&R 109; 210; 215; 302; 441; 490; 721; 824.

71 OBA I no. 129. There are several references in the correspondence of this period to Peter Minder who appears to have been an agent of the clergy in England.

72 Janssen Letters, p. 505. Letter 67. 27 February 1631.

73 CRS 29, p. 153.

74 ARCR I 34.1.

75 ARCRI 1409.

76 See Janssen Letters, pp. 541–43, Letter 177, 7 April 1632, and Orcibal’s note on p. 542.

77 AAW B27 no. 127.

78 ARCR I 497.

79 Orcibal, p. 363.

80 Letter cited in note 71.

81 ARSI Francia, 5, I, ff. 340v–341. 30 April 1631. De libro Anglicano scribunt etiam alii, quem qui legerunt et intellexerunt confirmant nullam videri iustam causam cur damnetur. Ipse pariter Summus Pontifex cum totum cognovisset minime damnandum iudicavit. [I am greatly indebted to Fr. Francis Edwards S.J. for transcribing this letter for me.]

82 ARCR I 485.

83 Chesneau, I, p. 117, citing BV Barb. Lat. 8096, f. 41. On p. 246 Chesneau cites the same document as being on f. 48.

84 ARSI Anglia Epist. Gen. I, pt. 3, f. 374v.

85 Ibid. f. 375.

86 AAW B27 no. 123.

87 ARSI Anglia Epist. Gen. I, pt. 3, f. 377.

88 BV Barb. Lat. 8100,f. 40.

89 Vitelleschi to Floyd, 21 October, referring to Floyd’s of 2 October. ARSI Anglia Epist. Gen. I, pt. 3, f. 383v. Neither Floyd’s letter to which Vitelleschi refers, nor the ‘Reasons’ which Floyd had sent with it, has been found.

90 AAW A26 no. 20.

91 AAW B47 no. 8.

92 AAW A26 nos. 174, 175.

93 ARSI Anglia 33 II ff. 193, 195.

94 PRO 31/9 141, f. 74 (from BV Barb. Lat. 8115).

95 AV Nunz. Fran. 77, f. 20r & f. 30v.

96 AV Nunz. Fran. 77, ff. 35r–37v.

97 BV Barb. Lat. 8117, f. 96.

98 BV Barb. Lat. 8094, ff. 36–38.

99 BV Barb. Lat. 8118, f. 99–99v.

100 ARCR I 1103.

101 AAW B47 no. 9.

102 ARCR I 484.

103 ARCR I 1102.

104 Janssen Letters, p. 568, Orcibal’s note 1 to Letter 189.

105 Janssen Letters, p. 567, Letter 189.

106 BV Barb. Lat. 6097, f. 117.

107 BV Barb. Lat. 6097,f. 174v.

108 Disquisitio, as reprinted in ARCR I 486, pp. 8–16.

109 ARCRI 485–6.

110 Alegamber, p. 242.

111 AAW B27 no. 124.

112 ARSI Anglia Epist. Gen. I, pt. 3, f. 400v.

113 18 August 1635. Ibid. f. 413v.

114 ARCR I 408.

115 Chesneau, I, p. 121, quoting BN Ld5 168, Lettre des évêques commissaires généraux du clergé.

116 Chesneau, I, pp. 128–29.

117 AAW A27 no. 35.

118 AAW A27 no. 36.

119 Vindiciae, pp. 90–93, referring to Spongia, p. 53, where Floyd says: Confirmatio episcopalis post institutam presbyteralem chrismationem baptismi non est tam necessaria, quam fuit antea, citing the first (sic for second) canon of the first Council of Orange.

120 For Sirmond, see the article by P. Galtier, S.J., in Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, tom. 14 (1941), col. 2186–93.

121 See this article, p. 169.

122 AAW B27 no. 122.

123 AAW A27 no. 91.

124 Chesneau (I 155) gives references to MS collections in France for both these decrees but does not say that they were printed. There is a printed copy of the first at AAW A27 no. 107.

125 See ‘Argumentum operum Petri Aurelii’, Petri Aurelii… opera, 1642, sig. i3v.

126 The letter has not survived but Champney speaks of its contents in his reply dated 18 March (AAW A27 no. 136).

127 AAW B27 no. 113.

128 Chesneau I 155, citing Paris, Archives des Affaires Etrangères, ‘Rome’, 54,f. 10.

129 Bibliothèque des Amis de Port-Royal, MS 18, ff. 301–04. The MS is a 17th century copy bearing the following note by the transcriber: ‘Cette lettre fut trouvée au logis de Mr. Joly chanoine de Nre. Dame ou auoit demeuré M. L’abbé de St. Cyran, escrite de la main dudt Sr. Abbé, et comme il repond souz le nom de PetrusAurelius en se plaignant à Mr. L’Archeuesque de Bordeaux (qui estoit alors M. de Sourdis) de ce que Mrs. du Clergé auoient fait contre Iuy, quoyquil se trouua que la chose n’estoit pas comme il l’auoit creue. Cette piece est une preuue certaine que Mr. de St. Cyran est Petrus Aurelius.’ The original letter has not survived. This copy, beginning simply ‘Monseigneur…’, bears no date, signature or address. I am most grateful to the Société des Amis de Port-Royal for allowing me to have a photocopy of it, and to Dr. Jacques Grès-Gayer of the Catholic University of America for his good offices in obtaining it for me.

130 The proof that this is Smith is contained in the words quoted in note 131.

131 J’ay veu en cela combien de graces Dieu m’a faite de ne m’attendre point à la reconnoissance des hommes laquelle me pouvoit arriver quelque caché que je sois par las mesme voye par laquelle j’ay receu vostre lettre, et par laquelle tout le clergé d’Angleterre en corps m’a fait l’honneur de me remercier de tout ce que j’ay fait pour l’Eglise, auec des éloges que je ne mérite point, et qui toutefois m’ont seruy de consolation dans ma douleur.

132 La procedure extraordinaire dont on use maintenant contre mon dernier livret en faueur d’un homme qui n’est pas seulement partisan des premieres erreurs de ses Compagnons, mais inuenteur de beaucoup plus grandes.

133 Extracts from the proceedings of the General Assembly, 8–9 November 1635, printed in ‘Illustria de Petro Aurelio testimonia’ in Petri Aurelii… opera, sig. i4r–4.

134 AAW A28 no. 81.

135 AAW A27 no. 152.

136 Janssen Letters, p. 583, Letter no. 198.

137 AAW A28 no. 159.

138 Presumably the revised edition of Anaereticus.

139 AAW A28 no. 161.

140 See Smith to Southcote, 26 September 1636. AAW A28 no. 163. For Henry Mailer, see pt. I of this article, pp. 361–62.

141 AAW A28 no. 168.

142 AAW A28 no. 171.

143 AAW A29 no. 11.

144 The only copy I know is in the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris (D 88305 (1)). There is a typed entry for it in the card catalogue of additions to the general catalogue of printed books.

145 AAW A28 no. 175.

146 AAW A28 no. 181.

147 AAW A28 no. 200.

148 ARCRI 1101.

149 ‘Un point d’histoire janséniste’, in Revue d’histoire de l’Eglise de France, tom. 35 (1949), pp. 41–45.

150 No date is given and the letter has not been found.

151 ARCR I 861.

152 See Pt. I of this article, p. 398, n. 110.

153 ARCR I 861.

154 See Pt. I of this article, p. 399,n. 138.

155 Rapin MS, liv. 8, p. 110; Domenech’s edition, pp. 381–82. See note 21.

156 See Pt. II of this article, pp. 245–54.

157 AAW A28no. 106.

158 AAW A28no. 111.