Audi alteram partem is too excellent and equitable a rule, not to find ample scope given for its exercise in "NOTES AND QUERIES," especially where the memory of a foreigner is concerned, who, after dwelling awhile among us under the protection of our hospitality, and in the communion of our Church, was content eventually to sacrifice his life, rather than forsake the truth, or repudiate the Church of England.
I am led to this remark by observing the tone of depreciation in which Chalmers speaks of Antonius de Dominis, Archbishop of Spalatro, in the extract produced at p. 257. out of the Biographical Dictionary, for the satisfaction of MR. W. FRAZER.
The words of Chalmers, which I conceive to be objectionable, alike ungenerous and inaccurate—such as Fuller might rejoice in (conf. Church History, book x.)—are:
"He returned to Rome in 1622, where he abjured his errors; but on the discovery of a correspondence which he held with some Protestants, he was thrown into prison, where he died in 1625. He was a man of great abilities and learning, although remarkable for a fickleness in religious matters."
This reproach against the good archbishop, of having renounced the English communion (for that is doubtless what is meant), is clearly an unjust accusation, and appears to be based upon no better authority than a spurious book, published in the Low Countries under Spalatro's name, but without his knowledge or sanction, and bearing the following title: Marc. Ant. de Dominis sui reditus ex Angliâ concilium exponit, 4to. Dilingæ, 1623. This book at the time of its publication deceived Bishop Hall, and gave occasion to the Alter Ecebolius M. Ant. de Dominis, pluribus dominis inservire doctus: 4to. Lond. 1624.
It is only fair, certainly, to Spalatro's memory, that the calumnies thus raised against him in his lifetime should not now be perpetuated by the inadvertency of modern writers, for so far at least the means are at hand to refute them. Now there is one writer especially who has done much to vindicate the name of Ant. de Dominis from this charge of "fickleness in religious matters." That writer is Bishop Cosin, whose testimony herein is of the more value from the fact of his having been present (as Bishop Overall's secretary) at the "Conference between Spalato and Overall," which "Conference" the following particulars were collected by Mr. Gutch, e Schedis MSS. Cosini, and are preserved in the Collectanea Curiosa, vol. ii. p. 18.:
"A. Spalato came into England in 1616, being desirous to live under the protection of King James, having before been recommended by Padre Paolo. By King James's bounty and care he was safely conveyed through Germany into England, and lodged in Lambeth Palace: Abbot thinking fit to retire to Croydon, till either Bishop Andrewes or Bishop Overall had conferred with him. The king sent Bishop Overall to him, who took in his company his secretary, and commanded him to be near him the same morning Spalato arrived, to hear what passed between them. After dinner, some other being present, the discourse began about the state of the Church of England; of which Overall having given a large account, Spalato received great satisfaction, and made his protestation that he came into England then to live with us in the union and profession of that Catholic religion which was so much obstructed in his own country, that he could not with safety and peace of conscience live there any longer. Then he added what satisfaction he had received from the monitory preface of King James [Vid. Apol. for the Oath of Allegiance, ed. 4to. Lond. 1609] to all the estates and churches of Christendom; wherein the true ancient faith and religion of the Catholic Church is set forth, and no heterodoxies or novelties maintained: to the defence of which faith, and service of which Church, as he had already a long time applied his studies, and wrote ten books, De Republicâ Ecclesiasticâ, so, by the favour of God, and King James, he was now come into England to review and publish them, together with the History of the Council of Trent, which he had brought with him from Padre Paolo of Venice, who delivered it into his hands; by whom he was chiefly persuaded and encouraged to have recourse to the king and the Church of England, being the best founded for the profession of true Catholic doctrine, and the freest from error and novelties, of any Church in all places besides. Then they descended to the particular points of doctrine," &c.
It is, however, not with the doctrinal question which would, of course, be inadmissible in "NOTES AND QUERIES," but with the historical fact, that we have to do; the question being, whether Antonius Spalateasis was "fickle" in respect of the Church of England.
There is an interesting sketch of Spalatro's after history in Cosin's Treatise against Transubstantiation, chap. ii. § 7.; from Luke de Beaulieu's translation of which (Cosin's Collected Works, vol. iv. p. 160., Oxford, 1851) I quote the following:
"Antonio de Dominis, Archbishop of Spalato, (was) a man well versed in the Sacred Writings, and the records of antiquity; who, having left Italy (when he could no longer remain in it, either with quiet or safety) by the advice of his intimate friend, Paulus Venetus, took sanctuary under the protection of King James of blessed memory, in the bosom of the Church of England, which he did faithfully follow in all points and articles of religion. But, being daily vexed with many affronts and injuries, and wearied by the unjust persecutions of some sour and over-rigid men, who bitterly declaimed everywhere against his life and actions, he at last resolved to return into Italy with a safe conduct. Before he departed he was, by order from the king, questioned by some commissionated bishops, what he thought of the religion and church of England, which for so many years he had owned and obeyed, and what he would say of it in the Roman court. To this query he gave in writing this memorable answer, 'I am resolved, even with the danger of my life, in profess before the Pope himself, that the Church of England is a true and orthodox Church of Christ.' This he not only promised, but faithfully performed; for though, soon after his departure, there came a book out of the Low Countries, falsely bearing his name, by whose title many were deceived, even among the English, and thereby moved to tax him with apostacy, and of being another Ecebolius; yet, when he came to Rome (where he was most kindly entertained in the palace of Pope Gregory XV., who formerly had been his fellow-student), he could never be persuaded by the Jesuits and others, who daily thronged upon him, neither to subscribe the new-devised tenets of the Council of Trent, or to retract those orthodox books which he had printed in England and Germany, or to renounce the communion of the Church of England, in whose defence he constantly persisted to the very last. But, presently after the decease of Pope Gregory, he was imprisoned by the Jesuits and Inquisitors in Castle St. Angelo, where, by being barbarously used, and almost starved, he soon got a mortal sickness, and died in a few days, though not without suspicion of being poisoned. The day following, his corpse was by the sentence of the Inquisition tied to an infamous stake, and there burnt to ashes, for no other reason but that he refused to make abjuration of the religion of the Church of England, and subscribe some of the lately-made decrees of Trent, which were pressed upon him as canons of the Catholic faith. I have taken occasion (Cosin adds) to insert this narration, perhaps not known to many, to make it appear that this reverend prelate, who did great service to the Church of God, may justly (as I said before) be reckoned among the writers of the Church of England."