Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 15.djvu/208

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

contains an elaborate argument against the monarchy in the church claimed by Rome, and in favour of the rights of national churches. In 1619 De Dominis published Father Paul's famous ‘History of the Council of Trent.’ He is accused of having considerably altered the author's words, and he added side notes, which form the sharpest part of the statements against Rome, and prefixed a title not in the original. For these reasons Father Paul never altogether acknowledged the work. De Dominis lived in England in constant dread of the inquisition, and when the negotiations as to the Spanish marriage began, and Spaniards were in high favour, he was very uneasy. Just at this period also (1620) Paul V died, and was succeeded by Gregory XV, who was a relative and fellow-countryman of De Dominis. The archbishop was probably by this time tired of England, and found the climate unhealthy. He accordingly applied secretly to some of the ambassadors, requesting them to let it be known at Rome that if he were invited by the pope he would not object to return to the bosom of the church. Negotiations were commenced, carefully kept secret from King James, and a promise of pardon and a handsome salary was made to him if he would return and recant. He was warned again and again by his friends not to trust himself within reach of the inquisition, but he had confidence in his own dexterity. Having made up his mind to quit England, he at length wrote to King James (16 Jan. 1622) telling him of the invitation he had received from Pope Gregory, ‘who did seek nothing therein but God's glory, and to use my poor help to work the inward peace and tranquillity of your majesty's kingdom,’ and desiring leave to depart. The king was naturally very much angered that one who had professed such violent antagonism to Rome should thus without reason return thither. He sent the bishops of London and Durham and the dean of Winchester to question the archbishop and to find out his real views and intentions. De Dominis skilfully parried their inquiries, declaring still his regard for the church of England, but expressing his belief that both churches were right in fundamentals, and that there might be a union between them. He was treading very difficult ground, for if he now spoke against Rome there was manifest danger, and if he angered the English king there was the danger of the Star-chamber for the offence of having corresponded with the pope. When it was at length ascertained that he was resolutely bent to leave England, De Dominis was summoned before the ecclesiastical commissioners at Lambeth. And first having been made formally to acknowledge all that he had written against Rome, he was ordered to quit the country within twenty days. It was well known that he had been hoarding up a large sum of money, and the king had determined to seize upon this. But the crafty prelate had lodged his trunks with an ambassador who was just about to leave the kingdom, and they could not be touched. He himself went to Brussels, where he was to wait for the pope's formal permission to go to Rome. Soon afterwards his trunks, which were being conveyed away among the ambassador's goods, were actually seized at Gravesend. Upon this the archbishop wrote piteously to the king, and the trunks were restored to him. They contained 1,600l. or 1,700l., which he had scraped together in England (Goodman). While waiting at Brussels De Dominis wrote another very remarkable tract. It is called ‘Consilium Reditûs,’ and is a complete palinodia of his former tract, ‘Consilium Profectionis.’ He now declares that he had deliberately lied in every statement which he had made about Rome; that in the Roman church there was nothing but truth and excellence, whereas the Anglican (so called) church was a schismatical and degraded body. This tract afterwards gave occasion to the composition of one of the most powerful controversial treatises of English divinity, Crakanthorpe's ‘Defensio Ecclesiæ Anglicanæ.’ De Dominis, thinking that he had made ample amends to Rome by this unmeasured laudation and grovelling abuse of himself, went onwards to Rome. He was soon destined to find that Rome never forgives. He was quickly entrapped into defending some of the positions which he had taken up in his anti-Roman treatises, and thereupon was seized by the inquisition and put in close confinement. He was now fifty-eight and his health was shattered, and he soon succumbed (1624). In a curious tract giving an account of his treatment, he is said to have been allowed the last sacraments, but to have died impenitent. It is also said that among his papers was found an unorthodox treatise on the doctrine of the Trinity. After his death a conclave of cardinals sat to consider his case. He was judged to have been a heretic, and was handed over to the secular arm; whereupon his body and his books were publicly burned. Besides his theological and controversial works which have been mentioned, De Dominis wrote a treatise, ‘De Radiis Visûs et Lucis in Vitris Perspectivis et Iride’ (Venice, 1611). His intellectual and literary powers were very considerable. His Latin style is somewhat involved. As to his honesty, all his contemporaries, both Anglican and Roman, seem to be agreed that he had none.