There were two ways in which the Pope and Spain could attack England, the one by making a descent upon the coast, the other by undermining the loyalty of the queen's subjects by the aid of missionaries. A descent upon the English coast was, for the present at least, out of the question, but it was possible to wound England by fostering insurrection in Ireland. Accordingly, in 1579, a large force landed at Limerick under the authority of the Pope. It was, however, overpowered and destroyed by Lord Grey, the lord deputy.[1618]
Then followed the rebellion under the Earl of Desmond, who six years before had regained his liberty on a promise to use his influence to destroy the Catholic religion in Ireland.[1619] Throughout the[pg 524] Desmond rebellion the Londoners were constantly being called upon to furnish men and munition of war. The trouble was protracted by the landing of a force of 800 men from Spain, with the connivance, if not with the authority, of Philip. When the rebellion was suppressed distress drove many Irish to England, and the city became their chief refuge.[1620] A special day was appointed for apprehending "all suche rogishe and begging Ireishe people as well men weomen as children" as should be found wandering abroad in the city,[1621] and steps were taken subsequently to convey all Irish beggars to Bristol with the view of sending them back to their native land.[1622]
The Jesuits in the city, 1580-1581.
Whilst appealing to force to accomplish their object in Ireland, the Catholics resorted to intrigue to gain the same object in England and Scotland. For some years past there had been a steady flow from the continent of seminary priests, who worked silently and secretly making converts to the old religion. Every precaution was taken to prevent their inculcating their dangerous opinions into the minds of the inhabitants of the city and drawing them off from their allegiance to the queen and to the established Church. The aldermen were instructed to make return of those in their ward who refused to attend[pg 525] church. This was in 1568.[1623] In 1574 all strangers who had crept into the city under colour of religion and were found to be of no church were ordered to leave.[1624] In the following year (9 June, 1575) every stranger was called upon to subscribe the Articles of religion before he was allowed to take up his residence within the city, and those who refused to subscribe or to attend church were to give bond for their appearance before her Majesty's Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes to answer such matters as should be objected against them.[1625] The aldermen were instructed to make diligent search in their several wards for such as held conventicles under colour of religion and inter-meddled with matters of State and civil governance.[1626] In 1580 a regular Jesuit mission, under two priests, Campion and Parsons, was despatched to England as part of an organised Catholic scheme. Campion had at one time been a fellow of St. John's College, Oxford. Their first step was to remove a difficulty under which devout Catholics had laboured ever since the issue of the Bull of excommunication against Elizabeth in 1571. That Bull had reduced them to the necessity of choosing between disobedience to the Church and treason to the queen. The new missionaries helped them out of the dilemma by explaining that the censures of the Church only applied to heretics; Catholics might feign allegiance and the Church would say nothing.
The Recusancy Laws, 1581.
Under these circumstances it can scarcely be wondered at that the government proceeded to strong[pg 526] measures—A proclamation was issued requiring English parents to remove their children from foreign seminaries, and declaring that to harbour Jesuit priests was to harbour rebels;[1627] whilst parliament imposed fines upon all who refused to attend the service of the established Church, in addition to the penalties imposed in 1571 upon those who claimed to absolve subjects from their allegiance and to receive them into the Church of Rome. In the city a strict watch was again ordered to be kept on all those who failed to attend regularly their parish church.[1628] It was further proposed to appoint special preachers to counteract the baneful influence of the Jesuit priest, and the Bishop of London was ordered to make a list of the best preachers and to appoint them districts.[1629]
Special preachers appointed for the city, 1581-1582.
These instructions Bishop Aylmer forwarded to the lord mayor with a request for a contribution to enable him and his associates, the dean of St. Paul's and the dean of Windsor, to carry them into effect. The mayor replied (6 Sept., 1581) that, as for himself, his office was already so burdensome, both in work and expense, that it would go hard with him if he was called upon to pay more than any other parishioner in a Church matter. Both he and his brethren the aldermen were no less desirous than others to promote the knowledge of true religion and to inculcate obedience to the queen by lectures in the city, but the commons would have to be consulted first. He enclosed a list of lectures already established in the several parishes, and drew attention to the great yearly charge incurred by the companies and private[pg 527] persons in the city in maintaining students at the universities to serve the Church in the office of preaching and reading.[1630] This expense, the mayor said, warranted the City and the Companies asking to be no further burdened. The writer concluded by intimating that, however willing the corporation might be to assist in the good work, its ability to do so had been much diminished by the indiscreet demeanour of the bishop's own chaplain, Mr. Dyos, who had recently defamed the citizens in a public sermon at Paul's Cross, "as favorers of userers, of the familye of love and puritanes," saying "that if the appointing of preachers were committed to us we wold appointe preachers such as should defend usirie, the familie of love and puritanisme as they call it." The City was liable to make mistakes, just as the bishop himself had made a mistake in appointing so indiscreet a person for his chaplain, but in other respects they had no cause to reproach themselves in the matter of appointments. In conclusion they desired his lordship to take order for the reparation of their good fame.
Hitherto the City had received no direct communications from the Privy Council on the subject, but three days after the date of the lord mayor's letter to the Bishop of London the lords of the council made a direct appeal to the mayor and aldermen suggesting that a collection should be made among the clergy and other inhabitants of the city in order to "oppose the supersticion of[pg 528] popery wch by the coming over of divers Jesuits and seminarie preistes hath ben of late much increased."[1631] Little appears to have been done in the matter by the civic authorities until the beginning of the next year, when the first step was taken by the appointment of a committee (25 Jan., 1582).[1632]
Arrest and execution of Campion.