¹ DNB, s.v.; CSPD 1601–3, 287–8; Strype, John, Life and ads of John Whitgift, Oxford 1822, ii. 507Google Scholar; iii. 409; Spain and the Jacobean Catholics, ed. Loomie, A. J. (CRS lxiv, lxviii, '973. 1978), ii. 14Google Scholar.

² CCAL, Acta Capituli 1608–28, p. 111; BL, MS Burney 363, fo. 198r (I am grateful to Kenneth Fincham for these references); PRO, SO3/5, Mar. 1613. Spa was a noted resort for English Catholics: PRO, SP 14/88/64, fo. 107r–v; AAW, Series A [paginated], xiii. 323, 325, 355; Beaulieu, reported to Trumbull that Carier died in du Perron's house: HMC Downshirc MSS iv. 417Google Scholar; Dodd, C., The church history of England, Brussels [imprint false, printed at Wolverhampton] 1737–1742, ii. 508–9Google Scholar.

³ AAW, A xiii. 141, 355; Dodd, , Church history, ii. 514Google Scholar.

⁴ Benjamin, Carier, A treatise written by Mr. Doctour Carier, Brussels 1614Google Scholar; two other editions were printed clandestinely in England. It is difficult to determine when this tract was first published. The date of the ‘open letter’ which is its substance is 12 Dec. 1613, and Carier told du Perron that it was sent for the king's eyes alone: Les ambassades el negotiations de l'illustrissime & reverendissime Cardinal du Perron, ed. Ligny, C., Paris 1623, 703Google Scholar. It should be distinguished from the first Latin letter of Aug. 1613 which Carier sent to James via Isaac Casaubon: Dodd, , Church history, ii. 508Google Scholar; Strype, , Life, ii. 512Google Scholar. Carier wanted to delay its publication: Dodd, , Church history, ii. 511Google Scholar. There were evidently manuscript copies of it around by late January at least: ibid. ii. 514, but it was not more generally known even in mid Apr. 1614:HMC Downshire MSS, iv. 311, 376. It is possible that it did not appear in print until after his death: AAW, A xiii. 355. Cf. BL, MS Burney 363, fo. 1908r, for Carier's initial desire to keep his journey abroad a secret.

⁵ Hakewill, George, An answere to a treatise written by Dr. Carier, London 1616Google Scholar, sig. b3r.

⁶ At Canterbury, though, he had been a friend of the crypto-papist John Langworth: AAW, OB i. pt i, no. 39. I owe this reference to Patrick Collinson.

⁷ Gee, John, The foot out of the snare, 4th edn, London 1624Google Scholar, sig. 14r–v; Owen, Lewis, The running register, London 1626, 4Google Scholar; Questier, Michael, ‘The phenomenon of conversion: change of religion to and from Catholicism in England, 1580–1625’, unpubl. DPhil diss. Sussex 1991, 97–8Google Scholar; Allen, William, An apologie and true declaration of the institution and endevours of the two English colleges, Hainault [imprint false, printed at Rheims] 1581, fos 67v–8r, 22Google Scholarv; AAW, A xii. 357.

⁸ SirHoby, Edward, A letter to Mr. T.H., London 1609, 10Google Scholar; cf. Morton, Thomas, A direct answer unto the scandalous exceptions, which Theophilus Higgons hath lately objected against D. Morton, London 1609, 3Google Scholar. Higgons had undoubtedly experienced considerable career and financial problems: The apology of Theophilus Higgons, Rouen 1609, 12, 19Google Scholar. See also Meredyth, John, The sinne of blasphemie, London 1622, 46Google Scholar; cf. Dillingham, Francis, A disswasive from poperie, Cambridge 1599Google Scholar, sig. A3r; Malcolm, N., De Dominis, London 1984Google Scholar, passim; Memorials of affairs of state, ed. Sawyer, E., London 1725, ii. 136Google Scholar. Similar rumours circulated about Andrew Downes, Regius Professor of Greek at Cambridge, one of the translators of the King James Bible: The life and letters of Sir Henry Wotton, ed. Smith, L. Pearsall, Oxford 1907, ii. 169–70Google Scholar, cf. PRO, SP 14/40/1; Cambridge University Library, MS Mm 1. 44, p. 215. Catholics thought that converts should be tempted materially as far as budgets allowed: AAW, A xi. 122, xii. 421; Milton, Anthony, “The Laudians and the Church of Rome c. 1625–1640’, unpubl. PhD diss. Cambridge 1988, 147Google Scholar.

⁹ Hakewill, Answere, sigs b2r, E2v; Strype, , Life, ii. 512Google Scholar.

¹⁰ CSPD 1601–3, 287–8.

¹¹ HMC Salisbury MSS, xvi. 348–9.

¹² PRO, SP 46/63/11. I am grateful to Kenneth Fincham for this reference. Mark Pattison has suggested that Carier tried to use his friendship with Casaubon, Isaac to obtain the deanery of Rochester: Isaac Casaubon 1559–1614, London 1875, 311Google Scholar.

¹³ Anstruther, G., The seminary priests, Ware-Great Wakering 1968–1977, i. 186Google Scholar; Garnet, Henry, An apology against the defence of schism, n.p. 1593, 12Google Scholar. Ithell and Fisher were unable to align themselves satisfactorily with any of the competing Romanist clerical factions: The Wisbech stirs (1595–1598), ed. Renold, P. (CRS li, 1958), 205–6, 281Google Scholar.

¹⁴ Spain and the Jacobean Catholics, ii. 14; Hakewill, Answere, sig. Av.

¹⁵ Sir Thomas Lake made no efforts on his behalf: Dodd, , Church history, ii. 512Google Scholar. One of Carier's benefices, Paddlesworth in Kent, was in the gift of the Wotton family (though Carier resigned it in 1599), as was his chapelry at Allington: Loomie, A. J., ‘A Jacobean crypto-Catholic: Lord Wotton’, Catholic Historical Review liii (1967), 328–45 at p. 339Google Scholar. There is, however, little evidence of an active connection between him and Lord Wotton (though his friend Casaubon came over in Lord Wotton's suite in 161 o: Pattison, , Casaubon, 307)Google Scholar.

¹⁶ AAW, OB i. pt i, no. 41. Hakewill, who abominated the idea of a dynastic match with any Catholic, does not accuse Carier of having an interest in promoting the French marriage project of 1613–14: PRO, SP 14/122/46; Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Rawlinson D853, fo. mr; cf. Hakewill, Answere, sig. a3v.

¹⁷ For Ireland see Anstruther, , Seminary priests, ii. 167–8Google Scholar, 132–3; AAW, A xiv. 696. For Constable see Wickes, G., ‘Henry Constable, poet and courtier, 1562–1613’, Biographical Studies ii (1953–1954), 272–300Google Scholar. For Leonard Rountree see Anstruther, , Seminary priests, ii. 273Google Scholar; PRO, SP 14/88/534; Foley, Henry, Records of the English province of the Society of Jesus, London 1875–1983, vii. 1055Google Scholar; AAW, A xii. 425. For Thomas Wright's Carier-like detachment from political realities see Stroud, T. A., ‘Father Thomas Wright: a test case for toleration’, Biographical Studies i (1951–1952), 189–219Google Scholar, and for his eccentric views on recusancy which made him almost as unpopular as Thomas Bell see Foley, , Records, iv. 284Google Scholar; Aveling, J. C. H., Catholic recusancy in the city of York 1558–1791, London 1970, 72Google Scholar; Lambeth Palace Library, MS 2007, fo. 30r; Memoirs of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, ed. Birch, T., London 1754, i. 307Google Scholar; BL, MS Lansdowne 79, fo. 120r, cf.CSPD 1598–1601, 216–17. For Nugent see Martin, F. X., Friar Nugent, London 1962, 127, 138–59Google Scholar.

¹⁸ Strype, , Life, ii. 507Google Scholar; Fincham, K. C., ‘Prelacy and politics: Archbishop Abbot's defence of Protestant orthodoxy’, Historical Research lxi (1988), 36–64 at p. 54Google Scholar.

¹⁹ ‘John Howson's answers to Archbishop Abbot's accusations’, ed. Cranfield, N. and Fincham, K. C., Camden Miscellany xxix (Camden 4th ser. xxxiv, 1987), 319–41 at pp. 335–6Google Scholar. Howson's first brush with Abbot, in Oxford, occurred after he had launched an attack on Calvinists which would have done justice to Carier. Howson reportedly said that Calvinists were ‘Jewes, Arians, and rebelles’: AAW, A xiii. 701.

²⁰ CSPD 1601–3, 292; BL, MS Harley 7047, fos 85r–6r; HMC Salisbury MSS, xv. 349–51. One of his opponents, John Robinson, was subsequently deprived in 1604 and had left for a separatist congregation in the Netherlands by 1608: Venn, J. and Venn, J. A., Alumni Cantabrigienses, Cambridge 1922–1927, iii. 470Google Scholar; Acheson, R.J., Radical Puritans in England 1550–1660, London 1990, 20Google Scholar. John Grosse MA, of Corpus, secretly Catholic since 1602, made no mention, in his statement to the authorities at the seminary in Rome in Oct. 1603, that Carier's election had been blocked because he held Catholic sympathies: Anstruther, , Seminary priests, ii. 139–40Google Scholar; The responsa scholarum of the English College, Rome, ed. Kenny, A. (CRS liv–v, 1962–1963), i. 129–32Google Scholar.

²¹ Carier, Benjamin, A sermon preached before the prince, at Richmond, London 1606Google Scholar; Carier, , Treatise, 17Google Scholar; Hakewill, Answere, sig. E2V.

²² Spain and the Jacobean Catholics, ii. 14. One of them may have been Richard Butler, who had been attacked in 1610 for preaching opinions at court which were similar to Carier's: AAVV, A ix. 93. Butler, like Carier, had connections with Neile and Buckeridge: PRO, SP 14/70/66, fo. 138r (his will). I am grateful to Anthony Milton for this latter reference.

²³ AAW, A xii. 395, 400, 425, 459, 502, xiii. 58.

²⁴ HMC Downshire MSS, iv. 194; AAW, OB i. pt i, no. 31.

²⁵ HMC Downshire MSS, iv. 331–3.

²⁶ Dodd, , Church history, ii. 511Google Scholar, cf. AAW, A xii. 421, 467; Foley, , Records, vii. 1054Google Scholar; Fincham, Kenneth, Prelate as pastor, Oxford 1990, 29–30Google Scholar. The sequestration of his goods took immediate effect, and proceedings against him for non-residence at his canonry and his livings of Old Romney and Thornham began on 7 Nov. 1613, concluding on 15 June 1614: AAW, A xii. 460; HMC Downshire MSS, iv. 428; CCAL, X.9.12, fos 50V–70V. I am grateful to Kenneth Fincham for this last reference.

²⁷ I owe this point to Andrew Foster.

²⁸ Tyacke, , Anti-Calvinists, 5–6Google Scholar.

²⁹ Hakewill, Answere, sigs Nn3r–Oor; Carier, Benjamin, A missive, Paris 1649, 4Google Scholar.

³⁰ Oxford, Balliol College, MS 270, pp. 153–63. This treatise, written after the Gunpowder Plot but before Carier had decided to forsake the Church of England, is addressed to an unnamed secular peer. This could be taken to mean that Carier had already decided that renovation of the English Church would not come about through its clergy but only as a result of political change. (I am grateful to Anthony Milton for this point.) For a definitive discussion of the issue of reunion see Milton, Anthony, Catholic and Reformed, Cambridge 1995CrossRefGoogle Scholar, ch. vii.

³¹ Carier, , Treatise, 13 (‘the Puritanes and Calvinists, and all the Creatures of schisme’ were his ‘utter enemies’), 32Google Scholar.

³² Ball. Coll., MS 270, p. 162.

³³ P. Lake, ‘The Laudian style: order, uniformity and the pursuit of the beauty of holiness in the 1630s’, and Milton, A., ‘The Church of England, Rome, and the true Church: the demise of a Jacobean consensus’, in Fincham, K. C. (ed.), The early Stuart Church 1603–1642, London 1993, 161–85Google Scholar ( at P. 180) 187–210.

³⁴ Hakewill, Answere, sig. dv. Abbot told Trumbull that Carier had been unsound (implying that he was likely to defect) for years: HMC Downshire MSS, iv. 194. The words which Hakewill reproduced from Carier's commonplace book (dated to early 1612) suggest that as late as this Carier thought it was possible to be in communion with the true Church through a right faith even if, technically, one was a member of a Church which was temporarily in a state of schism.

³⁵ Carier, , Treatise, 11–12Google Scholar.

³⁶ Questier, , ‘Phenomenon’, 64–9Google Scholar. Carier says that he consciously tried to get away from the prevailing trends in contemporary polemic: Treatise, 11.

³⁷ Hakewill, Answere, sig. D4V.

³⁸ Carier, , Treatise, 37Google Scholar; Hakewill, Answere, sig. Y3r; Milton, , ‘Laudians’, 151–2Google Scholar.

³⁹ Carier, , Treatise, 51Google Scholar; Ambassades, 704.

⁴⁰ Carier, , Treatise, 11, 14Google Scholar. Most Romanist polemic emphasised the absolute corruption of the Protestant English Church, fatally infected with heresy, and capable of renewal only through a total abandonment of its claims to independence. This would occur through an unconditional return to communion with Rome (rather than, as Carier implies, through a removal of a few Puritan excesses).

⁴¹ Dodd, , Church history, ii. 510, 513, cf. 514–15, 516, 517Google Scholar; Martin, , Friar Nugent, 127Google Scholar, cf. Carier, , Treatise, 17Google Scholar (at Spa he ‘avoided the company of Catholikes, abstained from the Church, and did both dispute and write against the Church of Rome as occasion was offred'); Cambridge UL, MS Mm 2. 23, p. 29, stating that on arrival at Cologne he was ‘as yet not fully cleared from the dregs of Heresy’.

⁴² Brandon, O., Christianity from within, London 1965, 24Google Scholar, cf. A Catholic dictionary of theology, London 1967, ii. 125–7Google Scholar; C. Cohen, L., God's caress, Oxford 1986, 75 n. 2, 104–5, 287Google Scholar; Dove, John, The conversion of Salomon, London 1613, 3Google Scholar.

⁴³ Denison, Stephen, The new creature, London 1619, 53Google Scholar; Sutcliffe, Matthew, The examination and confutation of a certaine scurrilous treatise, London 1606Google Scholar, sig. C4r; Morton, Thomas, A calholike appeale, London 1610, 209Google Scholar; Wallace, D. D., Puritans and predestination, Chapel Hill 1982, 49Google Scholar; Higgons, Theophilus, Mystical Babylon, London 1624Google Scholar, sig. S4V; Abernethie, Thomas, Abjuration ofpoperie, Edinburgh 1638, 21Google Scholar; Bod. Lib., MS Rawlinson D 399, fo. 203r.

⁴⁴ Jensen, P. F., ‘The life of faith in the teaching of Elizabethan Protestants’, unpubl. DPhil diss. Oxford 1979, 164Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ McGee, J. S., The godly man in Stuart England, London 1976, 55–64Google Scholar.

⁴⁶ Hambrick-Stowe, C. E., The practice of piety, Chapel Hill 1982, 200–2Google Scholar.

⁴⁷ Rohr, J. von, The covenant of grace in Puritan thought, Atlanta, Ga 1986, 73, 105Google Scholar; Morgan, J., Godly learning, Cambridge 1986, 31–2Google Scholar; Denison, , New creature, 55–68Google Scholar.

⁴⁸ Price, Daniel, The defence of truth, Oxford 1610, 169Google Scholar: ‘counsells tie no t all, bu t those only who are better enabled with guifts then others or tied by their vocation to some stricter courses’; cf. Rohr, von, Covenant, 185–6Google Scholar.

⁴⁹ Hakewill, Answere, sig. T4.V.

⁵⁰ Carier, , Treatise, 9Google Scholar; Hakewill, Answere, sig. Av.

⁵¹ Carier, , Treatise, 11Google Scholar; Persons, Robert, A review of ten publike disputations, St Omer 1604, 19–20Google Scholar. Walsingham, Francis, A Search made into matters of religion, St Omer 1609, 473, 481–2Google Scholar; Wadsworth, James, Sr, The contrition of a Protestant preacher, St Omer 1615Google Scholar, sigs Bv–3r; Persons, Robert, The first booke of the Christian exercise, appertayning to resolution, Rouen 1582, 2Google Scholar.

⁵² Carier, , Treatise, 7Google Scholar; Hakewill, Answere, sig. o”3v; Dodd, , Church history, ii. 510, 517Google Scholar.

⁵³ Birch, T., The court and times of Charles the first, London 1848, ii. 335Google Scholar; Vane, Thomas, A lost sheep returned home, Paris 1649Google Scholar; Prynne, William, The popish royall favourite, London 1643, 70Google Scholar; Albion, G., Charles I and the court of Rome, London 1935, 197Google Scholar; Munday, Anthony, A breefe aunswer, London 1582Google Scholar, sig. Cvr–v;Foley, , Records, ii. 625Google Scholar.

⁵⁴ BL, MS Lansdown e 776, fo. 12V, cf. fo. 47r–v; Oxford, Queen’ s College, MS 284, fo. 204V (Sir John Warner's experience of illness and grace).

⁵⁵ Carier, , Treatise, 34Google Scholar, cf. the manuscript treatise, Ball. Coll., MS 270, p. 160, where Carier says that nowadays the clergy ‘are well paied for preaching against the vowes of povertie and virginitie and obedience and all that austeritie of monasticall and canonicall conversacion which was anciently required in the clergie': Spain and the Jacobean Catholics, ii. 14.

⁵⁶ McGee, Godly man, ch. iii, cf. McGee, J. S., ‘Conversion and the imitation of Christ in Anglican and Puritan writing’, Journal of British Studies xv (1976), 21–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁷ Carier, , Treatise, 30Google Scholar; Hakewill, in reply, claimed that he could ‘find no such words in Sir Francis Bacons Essays printed the yere 1612’ though in the margin he says ‘I have since found words to that purpose in his Meditationes sacrae, but not as M. Doctor quoteth them.’ (He refers in fact to a similar citation in Bacon's Meditationes about schismatics and the two tables which is far more acceptable to him, for it is not anti-Puritan, and it incorporates an attack on the perverters of the second table, and the potential for corruption of Catholic monasticism: Hakewill, Answere, sigs P3r–4r; The works of Francis Bacon, ed. Spedding, J., Ellis, R. L. and Heath, D. D., London 1858–1874, viii. 90–1; vii. 249.)Google Scholar HakewilPs claim that he could not find Carier's citation of the ‘Advertisement’ is presumably because the ‘Advertisement’ did not appear in print until 1640.

⁵⁸ Leech, Humphrey, A triumph of truth, Douai 1609Google Scholar; Davidson, A., ‘Roman Catholicism in Oxfordshire from the late Elizabethan period to the Civil War, c. 1580–1640’, unpubl. PhDdiss. Bristol 1970, 482–90Google Scholar; Dent, C. M., ‘Protestants in Elizabethan Oxford’, unpubl. DPhil diss. Oxford 1980, 207–21Google Scholar; Tyacke, , Anti-Calvinists, 62–4Google Scholar; Questier, , ‘Phenomenon’, 119–24Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ Ibid. 121–3.

⁶⁰ Wickes, , ‘Henry Constable’, 275–6Google Scholar.

⁶¹ For Wright's contact with Carier see Dodd, , Church history, ii. 509Google Scholar; HMC Downshire MSS, iv. 194, 225 (though cf. AAW, A xii. 421). For his spirituality see Stroud, ‘Father Thomas Wright’, 200–1; , Caro, R. V., ‘William Alabaster: rhetor, meditator, devotional poet’, Recusant History xix (1988), 62–79, 155–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar. In Oct. 1613 William Trumbull still referred to Wright as ‘the Jesuitted priest’: HMC Downshire MSS, iv. 226.

⁶² Anstruther, , Seminary priests, ii. 273Google Scholar; AAW, A xii. 425, 461. His clerical links were with the SJ as muc h as with th e seculars: Foley, , Records, vii. 1055Google Scholar.

⁶³ Anstruther, , Seminary priests, ii. 167Google Scholar, 132; Dodd's Church history of England, ed. Tierney, M., London 1839–1843, iv. 137Google Scholar; Dodd, , Church history, ii. 510Google Scholar; Higgons, Theophilus, The fast motive of T.H., Douai 1609Google Scholar; Hoby, Letter, sig. Q3V, where a letter from Robert Higgons, printed by Hoby, relates that he tried, in the presence of Richard Ireland, to persuade Theophilus not to leave Christ Church to look for a benefice elsewhere. The Christ Church disbursement books show that Higgons collected Ireland's stipend for him when he was absent: Oxford, Christ Church, MS xii b. 48, Disbursement Book for 1604, fo. 15r, which suggests that Ireland retained his Oxford post in conjunction with his position at Westminster. Higgons, , Apology, 53Google Scholar, mentions Leech and himself as joint recipients of an unnamed patron's liberality. When Higgons returned to England and recanted at Paul's Cross, Francis Hore wrote from Venice to the clergy agent in Rome that ‘ Mr Higgins (our Oxford minister) you may please to tell Mr Leech is fallen back againe’: AAW, A x. 78.

⁶⁴ Ibid. A xiii. 141–2, 216.

⁶⁵ Dodd, , Church history, ii. 517Google Scholar.

⁶⁶ Ibid; Brodrick, J., The life and work ofBlessed Robert Bellarmine, London 1928, i. 185–6Google Scholar.

⁶⁷ Dodd, , Church history, ii. 514Google Scholar. Albergati, the nuncio, was the principal supporter of the Capuchins in Cologne and tried to protect them from attack by da Recanati, the commissary-general sent by their order from Rome. Albergati was probably opposed to the Society: Martin, , Friar Nugent, 136–7Google Scholar. The English seculars certainly thought well of him (not something they would generally have done if he had been a Jesuit sympathiser): AAW, A xi. 557.

⁶⁸ Dodd, , Church history, ii. 513, 514Google Scholar.

⁶⁹ Michael Questier, ‘“Like locusts over all the world”: conversion, indoctrination and the Society of Jesus in late Elizabethan and Jacobean England’, in T. McCoog and J. A. Munitiz (eds.), The reckoned expense: Edmund Campion and the early English Jesuits (forthcoming).

⁷⁰ Dodd, , Church history, ii. 511Google Scholar.

⁷¹ AAW, A xiii. 263.

⁷² Spain and the Jacobean Catholics, ii. 12–13. In 1613 du Perron had supervised the recantation of the previously fearsomely apocalyptic Protestant minister Jeremy Ferrier: Solé, J., Le débat entre Protestants et Catholiques français de 1598 à 1685, Lille 1985, i. 31Google Scholar.

⁷³ Price, , Defence, 39Google Scholar.