Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T10:16:29.919Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rebus Sic Stantibus and English Catholicism, 1606–1610

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2015

Michael L. Carrafiello
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Just prior to their departure for England in the spring of 1580, Robert Persons and Edmund Campion received an explanatio from Pope Gregory XIII suspending the sentence of excommunication against Queen Elizabeth in the bull Regnans in Excelsis. The explanatio decreed that English Catholics were not bound to implement the sentence of deposition against Elizabeth rebus sic stantibus, that is, under the present circumstances. The two priests hoped that this faculty would allay the English government's fear that they had come to foment rebellion in England. But the explanatio produced the opposite result. Lord Burghley and the government seized upon the conditional nature of the decree to argue that any future profession of Catholic loyalty must be disregarded out of hand. Rome's strategy, therefore, had backfired. The rebus sic stantibus declaration had given the Persons/Campion mission a fatal taint of treachery and treason.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Catholic History , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , May 1994 , pp. 29 - 40
Copyright
Copyright © Catholic Record Society 1994

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

The author is grateful to the staff of Emmanuel College Library for their kind assistance in making the Sutcliffe papers available to him.

1 A more literal translation would be ‘things thus standing’ or ‘matters being as they are now.’

2 Meyer, A. O., England and the Catholic Church under Queen Elizabeth. Translated by McKee, J. R.. Reprint with Introduction by Bossy, John. (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1967), p. 138.Google Scholar

3 An earlier example of the English government's preoccupation with the ‘religious issue’ in the context of politics is discussed at length in Francis Edwards, The Marvellous Chance (London: Rupert Hart-Davis, 1968), especially pp. 341, 353. The English government's tendency to view English Catholics as ‘inclined to sedition from their youth up’ prevented any meaningful consideration of toleration for English Catholics in the early 1570s. This politicized view of religious differences, fostering the corresponding worst possible expectations of the opposition, is very ably described by Edwards on p. 16. Ongoing references to rebus sic stantibus by English Protestants over the course of more than a quarter century are another, longer-term manifestation of these tendencies.

4 Thomas Morton (1564–1659) was in the midst of a distinguished political and clerical career. He later served as Bishop of Chester (1615–18), Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield (1618–32), and Bishop of Durham (1632–46). He combined a strong Calvinist theology with ardent support of absolutist government. Matthew Sutcliffe (15507–1629) was Dean of Exeter for over forty years and one of the most impassioned opponents of ‘popery’.

5 Morton, Thomas, An Exact Discoverie of Romish Doctrine in the Case of Conspiracie and Rebellion (F. Kynston, 1605), p. 31.Google Scholar Spelling, punctuation, and capitalization are modernized; original italicization has been retained.

6 Ibidem, p. 35. Of course, rebus sic stantibus could also have meant that English Catholics were to await the opportunity to pursue cooperation with English Protesants. But English Protestants like Morton would never have conceded this point.

7 Morton, Full Satisfaction, p. 80.

8 Sutcliffe, ‘Justification,’ p. 38.

9 Sutcliffe, ‘Sober Reply,’ p. 20.

10 Sutcliffe, ‘Justification,’ p. 41b.

11 Morton, Full Satisfaction, p. 24; Preamble, p. 42.

12 Morton, Preamble, p. 42.

13 Sutcliffe, ‘Sober Reply,’ p. 19.

14 Morton, Preamble, p. 41.

15 Morton, Encounter, 2: p. 67.

16 Ibidem, 2: p. 108.

17 Sutcliffe, ‘Sober Reply,’ p. 20. Sutcliffe is referring to Allen's A True, Sincere, and Modest Defense of English Catholics (15 84).

18 Morton, Encounter, 2: p. 108.

19 Ibidem, 2: p. 188.

20 Morton, Preamble, p. 20.

21 Ibidem, p. 21.

22 Morton, Full Satisfaction, p. 54.

23 Ibidem, p. 52. This papal commandment is discussed in Foley, vol. 6, pp. 61–68.

24 Sutcliffe, ‘Sober Reply,’ p. 12.

25 Ibidem, preface.

26 There is of course some doubt as to whether the Gunpowder Plot was truly a ‘Catholic’ plot at all. See Edwards, Francis, Guy Fawkes: The Real Story of the Gunpowder Plot? (London: Rupert Hart-Davis, 1969).Google Scholar The recent publication of Nicholls, Mark Investigating Gunpowder Plot (Manchester University Press, 1991)Google Scholar has not as yet settled the matter.

27 Morton, Full Satisfaction, p. 9.

28 Ibidem, p. 71.

29 Sutcliffe, Matthew, The Subversion of Robert Persons His Confused and Worthlesse Worke (Field, R., 1606), p. 120.Google Scholar

30 Sutcliffe, Matthew, ‘A Rounde Rejoinder to Kellison's rude reply in defense of his survey of the new Religion,’ (n.d.) Emmanuel College MS 137 (vol. 11), p. 71.Google Scholar

31 Ibidem, p. 97.

32 Sutcliffe, ‘Sober Reply,’ p. 23.

33 Sutcliffe, ‘Justification,’ p. 28.

34 Ibidem, p. 41.

35 Sutcliffe, ‘Sober Reply,’ p. 16.

36 Morton, Preamble, p. 38.

37 In fact no formal sentence had been pronounced over James. See below, note 62.

38 Morton, Encounter, 1: p. 193. Once again, James did not stand excommunicate; Elizabeth had been excommunicated as a formal apostate.

39 Ibidem, 1: p. 250.

40 Sutcliffe, ‘Rounde Rejoinder,’ p. 204.

41 Morton, Full Satisfaction, p. 60. The name in Coena Domini’ dates from 1299, and is taken from the day of the Bull's promulgation, Holy Thursday, or the day of the Lord's Supper. The Bull was given its final form in 1593 by Clement VIII and was last pronounced in 1759.

42 Sutcliffe, ‘Sober Reply,’ p. 19.

43 Morton, Preamble, p. 40.

44 Morton, Full Satisfaction, p. 25.

45 Morton, Preamble, A-2.

46 Morton, Encounter, 2: p. 253. Persons in fact had died in Rome before the publication of this book.

47 Morton, Preamble, p. 35.

48 Ibidem, pp. 32, 39.

49 Ibidem, p. 41.

50 Morton, Full Satisfaction, p. 52.

51 Morton, Preamble, p. 40.

52 Morton, Full Satisfaction, p. 98.

53 Sutcliffe, ‘Sober Reply,’ p. 3.

54 Morton, Encounter, 1: p. 34.

55 It is clear that Morton and Sutcliffe wanted a complete repudiation of papal power as the basis of ‘due subjection’. While such a repudiation was not possible for English Catholics, Persons and others nevertheless stressed that English Catholics were obliged to obey their temporal masters, thereby offering ‘due subjection’ to them.

56 I hope to consider Morton and Persons’ exchanges on the subjects of the Oath and equivocation more completely in future articles.

57 Morton, Full Satisfaction, p. 87. This is simply how Morton interpreted Catholic equivocation before judges.

58 Ibidem, p. 99.

59 Morton, Encounter, 1: p. 33.

60 Richard Broughton (d. 1635) was born in Huntingdonshire and attended the English College at Rheims. He was ordained a priest in 1593. Soon thereafter he was sent to England and he later served as secretary to the Duchess of Buckingham.

61 Persons, Quiet and Sober Reckoning, p. 81.

62 Persons, Treatise, p. 63.

63 Persons, Quiet and Sober Reckoning, pp. 63–4.

64 Broughton, Just and Moderate Answer, B1.

65 Ibidem, F-2, H. He also reminded his readers that many Catholics had disliked Pius V's bull against Elizabeth.

66 Ibidem, H.

67 Persons, Treatise, pp. 128, 254; Quiet and Sober Reckoning, p. 479.

68 Persons, Quiet and Sober Reckoning, pp. 240, 479.

69 Broughton, Just and Moderate Answer, D-2

70 Persons, Treatise, p. 94; Quiet and Sober Reckoning, p. 83.

71 Broughton, Just and Moderate Answer, N.

72 One recent treatment of Persons’ opposition to the Oath in the context of early modern political thought is found in Sommerville, J. P., Politics and Ideology in England 1603–1640 (New York, 1986), pp. 118, 197.Google Scholar

73 Persons, Quiet and Sober Reckoning, p. 85.

74 Ibidem, p. 82.

75 Persons, Quiet and Sober Reckoning, p. 481.

76 Persons, Treatise, pp. 547–48.

77 Persons, Quiet and Sober Reckoning, p. 87.

78 Ibidem, pp. 89–90.