whole, in 1564, Campion was the most popular man in Oxford, where no man envied his triumphs. He did not reside long enough to take his doctor's degree; but he was made proctor and public orator, the highest posts compatible with his standing.

All these successes, says F. Parsons, put Campion into exceeding danger, by enticing him to follow a course of which his conscience disapproved; "for he was always a sound Catholic in his heart, and utterly condemned all the form and substance of the queen and council's new religion; and yet the sugared words of the great folks, especially of the queen, joined with pregnant hopes of speedy and great preferments, so enticed him that he knew not which way to turn." His youth, ambition, desire to satisfy the expectations of his friends, and emulation at the advance of his equals and inferiors pulled him back; while remorse of conscience, fear of hell, and an invincible persuasion of the truth of the Catholic doctrine and the falsehood of the Protestant opinion, pushed him onwards. He determined to compromise matters by temporising; his internal combat was long and dangerous, for he lacked the aid of the Sacraments and of spiritual direction; and though he prayed earnestly for light, yet he still hearkened to both sides inwardly, to see whether he could find sufficient reasons to allow his conscience to follow in peace the course to which his worldly interests so strongly inclined him.

This was the case also with Parsons for some years, and with many others, especially at the universities;—there were many young men, well accommodated in fellowships or otherwise, and provoked by infinite inducements to seek the preferments which the place and the country yielded, or at least to keep what they had, who yet felt that the religion on which these preferments depended was doubt

ful and therefore dangerous: hence they lived in great toil and torment of mind, loth to lose the hope of salvation, glad to hold their commodities without molestation of conscience, if it might be, ever in suspense, ever ready to listen to any reason that promised to remove their scruples.

The only safe anchor in this troubled water was, in Parson's opinion, the study of the Fathers. "Whatever we had heard or conceived in the whole day for pulling out this thorn of conscience, and for smoothing the way to be Protestant, either by good fellowship and conversation with Protestants themselves, or by hearing their sermons or reading their books, all this was dashed by one hour's reading of some work of the old holy doctors, and the wound of conscience was made green again, and as grievous as ever, by every page which spake of virtue and austerity, or of questions of controversy, which were settled there as clearly as if the Fathers had distinctly foreseen the tumults of these days."

It was in 1567 that Campion, having exhausted Aristotle and natural theology, had to turn to these authentic reporters of the Christian tradition; and for three whole years he was distracted with the various arguments for and against the open profession of his Catholic belief. He had begun with a conscientious examination of the controverted doctrines one by one; the unhistorical and illogical character of the new tenets was soon discovered; and as truth begets truth, and as a mind once cheated ever suspects fraud, he examined the points which he had been used to take for granted; here too the ground failed beneath him. But the consequences of his step were too fatal to his worldly interests to allow of any hurry. He consulted his friends. He went to any one, no matter what his views, who professed to be able to tell him some

thing; but every conference pushed him on a step further.*

An extract from his Decem Rationes will illustrate this: "When I was young," he says, "John Jewell, the Calvinist leader in England, was impudent enough to challenge the Catholics to a proof of their respective tenets from the works of the Fathers of the first six centuries. The challenge was accepted by some well-known men then in exile and poverty at Louvain. I venture to say that Jewell's craft, ignorance, roguery, and impudence, as exposed by those writers, did more good to the Catholic cause than anything within my remembrance. A proclamation was immediately posted on the doors that none of the answers should be read or kept, though they had been squeezed out by a direct challenge. Every thinking man could see plainly that the Fathers were Catholic.

"Once also I familiarly questioned Tobie Mathew, now your greatest preacher, whose learning and good disposition endeared him to me, and asked him to tell me sincerely how a man who was such an assiduous student of the Fathers could take the side which he defended as true. He answered, 'If I believed them as well as read them, you would have good reason to ask me.' This is perfectly true; and I think he must still be of the same mind."

This challenge naturally called up Tobie, who answered in a concio apologetica, which Wood quotes, and which Parsons describes as rather vehement and rhetorical than with any show of sincerity. Of course he denied the charge. "Who affirmed it? Edmund Campion the Jesuit. And who denies it? Tobie Mathew the Christian. I avouch that neither sleeping or waking, standing or sitting, by day or by night, at home or abroad, in jest or in earnest, did I ever say it." However, Campion who had asserted it

See Note S.

was dead for his faith, and Mathew was enjoying benefices and prospects which might be risked by the story being believed. And according to Parsons, Campion's friend, Stanihurst, declared that he had heard it from Campion at the very time of its occurrence.

Another of Campion's Christ-Church friends was reputed to be as cunning in the Scriptures as Mathew in the Fathers; this was Tarleton, the governor of the young Sir Philip Sidney. He professed to prove his religion from the Bible alone, without the Fathers. Campion and he had an argument, in which "each party was to allege bare Scripture, only allowing the aid of tongues, comparison of text with text, and prayer." When Campion had produced many strong passages on the Catholic side, and had shown that they could not be evaded in Greek or Hebrew, and perceived that Tarleton could not bring any so clear for his side, and could only oppose wrangling interpretations out of his own head, Campion, says Parsons, resolved fully that, seeing both Scriptures and Fathers were wholly against the Protestant side, he would never follow it for temporal respects.

Campion had access to Leicester's ante-room whenever he pleased; here perhaps he met with Richard Cheney, the Bishop of Gloucester, a man of congenial nature, tastes, and studies. Cheney was a mild, persuasive, old man, very different from the rest of the Elizabethan Bishops, from whom he held aloof, as if he had been of a different communion. In the Convocation of 1553 he had tried to commit the Anglican body to the Lutheran doctrine of consubstantiation, but he was so far from being either Lutheran or Calvinist in other respects that in 1568 his flock complained of the "very strange, perilous, and corrupt doctrine, contrary to the Gospel,"* which he

See Note T.

preached in his cathedral of Bristol, where his own fanatical clergy withstood him to the face. He warned his hearers that the new writers differed from each other, and were therefore not safe guides, but that the old fathers and doctors alone were to be followed; that any heretic might avouch Scripture, and that controversy would be endless without the appeal to the Fathers; that Luther wrote a very ill book against free will, which Erasmus answered well; and that the consent of the Fathers was the only test by which he would be tried.

There was one more statement with which Cheney's Puritanical accusers were scandalised, though it was addressed, not so much to the Puritans, as to those numerous loose Catholics who would not give up the old faith, but were unwilling to submit to the penalties for not going to church. There was always a large party of this sort in England; and in 1562 some of their chief men had consulted the Fathers of the Council of Trent upon the matter, and had asked whether they might not with a safe conscience attend the common prayer and preaching. A committee was appointed to reply, who pronounced it quite inadmissible for any Catholic to assist at the "new service, the offspring of schism, and the badge of hatred to the Church."* But one proclamation was quite insufficient to remove the deep-rooted prejudice. The decision was confirmed by St. Pius V. in 1566; and Dr. Harding and Dr. Sanders were sent over to publish it afresh; it was solemnly recognised in a council of priests, convened by Parsons and Campion in July, 1580, again promulgated by Cardinal Toletus, June 14, 1581; enforced in a circular of Dr. Allen, written by the Pope's direction, in 1592, and finally confirmed by Paul V. in a Brief addressed to the English Catholics in September, 1606. Besides all

See Note U.

† See Note V.

See Note W.