English Catholic Historians and the English Reformation, 1585-1954 (review)

The title could be "Some English Catholic Catholic Historians. . ." since this is largely history seen through the eyes of those in opposition to the "forward"or militant protagonists of Rome and pope. After a summarizing chapter on "History and Religion,""Exiles and Appellants"(pp. 10-22) features the Catholics in England who never criticized the popes but appealed against the baneful influence of Jesuits and Catholic exiles who, safe from Protestant persecution, could afford militancy. William Watson's rollicking prose against the hated Company gets quotation. Was it worth noting that, as he awaited execution in 1603, he retracted everything he wrote against the Society?

Two subjects recur like the themes in an operatic overture: the excommunication of Queen Elizabeth in 1570 and the insistence on an oath of loyalty or supremacy which reopened the war on papal claims in 1559. Earlier rigidity petered out in the 1770's when the government needed men to serve in the forces, even Catholics. Vidmar reminds us that Paul III drew up a bull of excommunication against Henry VIII in 1538. It was never "published" and so no one ever remembers it. Who published the excommunication of 1570?Cui bono?"It is likely that the government even welcomed the pope's bull . . . and sought to exploit the resulting confusion"(p. 16). The remaining evidence suggests that the dark trio Roberto Ridolfi, Francis Walsingham, and William Cecil, who organized the Ridolfi plot, also saw to the excommunication reaching the public at the right time: see The Dangerous Queen (1964) and The Marvellous Chance (1968). "The Quest for Catholic Emancipation"(chap. 2) pursues the subject further.

These themes evolve in the remaining chapters, with a discerning recognition of the differences of emphasis affecting all shades of opinion. With the Cisalpine movement at the close of the eighteenth century, the demurring of the Appellants had become a positive murmuring against papal claims. "To the Cisalpines"—Joseph Berington, Alexander Geddes, Sir John Throckmorton, and even John Lingard—"all that stood between English Catholics and emancipation was papal claims"(p. 29). Berington wrote to John Kirk predicting "the imminent extinction of the papacy" and added, "the sooner this happens the better"(p. 39). Vidmar substantially endorses the case made by Edwin Jones for John Lingard and his history (chap. 3). "The Jesuits and Mark Tierney"(chap. 4) almost achieves light relief but there was nothing to amuse obliging archivists in his cavalier disregard for returning borrowed manuscripts. With the final achievement of emancipation, Catholic writers became outspoken in their defense of past issues—notably Gasquet and his revision of the monastic reputation and the more aggressive Belloc who reintroduced emotionalism in his defense of everything together with a nonchalant disregard for recording documentary evidence. The last two chapters largely round off and recapitulate.

Jesuit and other pro-papal writers have their mention: Robert Persons, Charles Plowden, and J. H. Pollen, notably, but with little mention of well-known writers before the cut-off line, 1954. Vidmar's brief is altogether legitimate but needed clearer statement. The anti-Jesuits are allowed generous quotation, but Vidmar, while not dismissing all they say, deals with them critically. The frequent presence of prejudice and ignorance in their flaying the victim is recognized. The book abounds with interesting facts and cogent short summaries. It is the work of a scholar and a judicious student.