Mary Tudor - Anna Whitelock [93]
YET WHILE MARY publicly temporized, she made secret steps toward restoring Catholicism. In August, she addressed a private letter to Pope Julius III, petitioning him to remit all the ecclesiastical censures against England that had been imposed when Henry broke with Rome. As she wrote to Henry Penning, the pope’s chamberlain, she had “always been most obedient and most affectionate towards the Apostolic See and his Holiness had no more loving daughter than herself.” She declared that within a few days she “hoped to be able to show it openly to the whole world” and would first need to “repeal and annul by Act of Parliament many perverse laws made by those who ruled before her.”17
On learning of Mary’s accession, the pope had appointed as cardinal and papal legate Reginald Pole, the son of Mary’s former governess Margaret Pole, in order to arrange the reconciliation of England to the Catholic Church. Pole began petitioning for an immediate and unconditional return to Roman obedience, for “The Queen, or at least England, was assuredly [ship]wrecked when she threw herself overboard … into the sea of this century.” As he had “drawn a picture of the danger; her Majesty will judge whether it is time to deliberate, or rather to act as ordained and prescribed by divine and human counsel.”18 With Parliament summoned for the beginning of October, Pole demanded that the issue of papal supremacy and monastic property be quickly resolved and on August 10 launched a series of exhortations to the queen, begging her to end the schism without delay.
Yet Mary had come to realize the scale of her task. On September 11, she wrote to the cardinal of Imola, informing him that no legatine mission should be sent until the time was more propitious. She was aware of the dangers of introducing religious changes before they could be sanctioned by Parliament. For now she dissembled, maintaining that she did not want to coerce people into going to Mass. As Mary declared to Renard, “she had so far found no better expedient than to leave each free as to the religion he would follow…. If some held to the old, and others to the new, they should not be interfered with or constrained to follow any other course until the coming Parliament should decide by law.”19 There was, however, one notable exception.
WITHIN TWO WEEKS of Mary’s entry into London, Renard reported that he had raised with the queen the presence at court of the Lady Elizabeth, who might, out of “ambition or being persuaded thereunto, conceive some dangerous design and put it to execution, by means which it would be difficult to prevent, as she was clever and sly.”20 Writing to Mary in late August, the imperial ambassadors, M. de Courrières, M. de Thoulouse, and Renard, advised her “not to be too ready to trust the Lady Elizabeth” and urged her
to reflect that she now sees no hope of coming to the throne, and has been unwilling to yield about religion…. Moreover, it will appear that she is only clinging to the new religion out of policy, in order to win over and make use of its adepts in case she decided to plot. A mistake may perhaps be made in attributing this intention to her, but at this stage it [is] safer to forestall than to be forestalled and to consider all possible results; for there are clear enough indications.21
Aware of such suspicions against her and “perceiving that the Queen did not show her as kindly a countenance as she could wish,” Elizabeth asked Mary for a private audience. They met at the beginning of September at Richmond, in one of the galleries of the palace; Mary was accompanied by one of her ladies, Elizabeth by one of her maids. Falling on her knees before the queen, Elizabeth wept, saying she knew the queen was “not well disposed towards her, and she knew no other cause except religion.” She begged for understanding. She acted out of ignorance, not obstinacy: she had never been taught the doctrine of the ancient religion. She asked