The Popish Plot: A study in the history of the reign of Charles II — John Shaqi
The Popish Plot: A study in the history of the reign of Charles IIPollock, John
History
The Popish Plot: A study in the history of the reign of Charles II
Pollock, John
Popish Plot, 1678
They must work, fight, intrigue against the heretic and the
heretic state, or leave their mission unfulfilled. And Coleman was in
the same position. He was a pupil of the Jesuits, and under the guise
of secretary to the Duchess of York maintained an active correspondence
with agents abroad in the interest of their chief hope, the duke.
Intrigue was his business, and his conduct of it was made more eager
by the keenness of a convert. No one in the least acquainted with the
history of the Jesuits and with the writings of their apologists can
believe that their method of procedure was by conversion of individuals
alone. The society has always been in its essence political, and in
the troubled times of the seventeenth century political action of the
exiled, the feared, the reputed traitor was seldom calculated to avoid
the retribution of the laws by which those against whom it was directed
were fenced. The penal laws were harsh, but harshness was of necessity;
and the very necessity of their harshness begot retaliation; while
retaliation completed the circle by driving into conflict with the law
many who would have been glad to obey in peace and nurse conscience in
quiet.
The class of Catholics whom Ruvigny found opposed to the Jesuit
policy was large. At the close of the seventeenth century it probably
comprised a majority of Roman Catholics in England. These were they
who would take the oath of allegiance to their sovereign, holding it
no bar to their faith, the followers of Blackloe, of Peter Walsh, of
John Sergeant, the men who thought it no shame to liberalise belief
by divorcing it from statecraft, the adherents of the church but not
of the court of Rome.[94] The Jesuits had already once in the reign
of Charles II interposed to prevent Roman Catholics in England from
bettering their position, and when persecution fell on these in the
evil days of Oates’ grandeur, they showed to the astonishment of the
society that it had earned small gratitude from them.[95] On the
question of the oath of allegiance the English Catholic body was
divided throughout the century. Catholics were willing to prove their
loyalty by taking the oath, but this proof they were not allowed
to give. The fruitless concessions offered by Charles I showed
conclusively that despite all protestations the papal party would not
abandon the deposing power. Whenever the movement in favour of the
oath seemed to be gaining strength, the whole weight of the papal
court and of the Society of Jesus was thrown into the scale against
it. It was probably the only point upon which the two were at this
time in agreement. The Earls of Bristol, Berkshire, Cardigan, Lord
Stafford, and Lord Petre actually took the oath, and of these, horrid
thought to the Jesuits, two had for their confessors Benedictines; Lord
Arundel, and for a time the Duke of York, stood firm in refusal.[96]
The division between the Catholics was purely political; it marked
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account