In his attachment to the Tridentine decrees and his sympathy for the Jesuits Rozée showed ultramontanist leanings. Never, of course, disaffected from the papacy, he nonetheless felt free to judge His disappointment with Sixtus V issued not from his own but popes’ deeds. from the betrayal of principle. During the 1591 stand-off the historian found fault pope’s with the royalist parlements, not with Rome. Yet for all this, Rozée was not devoid of gallican sentiment. His interest in the suggests that he believed Supplication et advis Navarre needed only to convert to be eligible for the throne, and when Clément 1592 VIII’s bull requiring Sega to procure a Catholic king was rejected by the royalist parlements, Rozée reflected on grace que dieu a fait a gallicane, de du ‘la l’esglise l’avoir retirée precipice ou elle estoit’. Popes influenced the mood of the leadership, but it fell to local priests to win popular Ligue support. Of these, the foremost was, of course, the bishop of Paris, Pierre de Gondi, cardinal de Retz. Rozée considered Gondi a disappointment, principally because the bishop had remained loyal to Henri III after Blois. In 1590, when the besieged city knew intense suffering, it was Gondi who called on the Paris Parlement to launch peace talks. Rozée was suspicious; was the cardinal motivated la compassion avoit du peuple, ou pour ne ‘par qu’il laisser perdre une bonne occasion de servir le roy’? The Paris operated under the knew dépendance Ligue ‘[un] magistère clérical’; Ligue ‘[une] and was à une Descimon meant spirituelle’ ‘assimilée construction d’essence religieuse’. that the Catholic church was the very heart of the giving life to the movement Ligue, through a range of means prédication, la procession, sans compter le serment, le secret – ‘la et, naturellement, la The potential significance of preaching was well confession’.
In his attachment to the Tridentine decrees and his sympathy for the Jesuits Rozée showed ultramontanist leanings. Never, of course, disaffected from the papacy, he nonetheless felt free to judge popes’ deeds. His disappointment with Sixtus V issued not from his own but from the pope’s betrayal of principle. During the 1591 stand-off the historian found fault with the royalist parlements, not with Rome. Yet for all this, Rozée was not devoid of gallican sentiment. His interest in the Supplication et advis suggests that he believed Navarre needed only to convert to be eligible for the throne, and when Clément VIII’s 1592 bull requiring Sega to procure a Catholic king was rejected by the royalist parlements, Rozée reflected on ‘la grace que dieu a fait a l’esglise gallicane, de l’avoir retirée du precipice ou elle estoit’. Popes influenced the mood of the Ligue leadership, but it fell to local priests to win popular support. Of these, the foremost was, of course, the bishop of Paris, Pierre de Gondi, cardinal de Retz. Rozée considered Gondi a disappointment, principally because the bishop had remained loyal to Henri III after Blois. In 1590, when the besieged city knew intense suffering, it was Gondi who called on the Paris Parlement to launch peace talks. Rozée was suspicious; was the cardinal motivated ‘par la compassion qu’il avoit du peuple, ou pour ne laisser perdre une bonne occasion de servir le roy’? The Paris Ligue operated under ‘[un] magistère clérical’; the Ligue knew ‘[une] dépendance spirituelle’ and was ‘assimilée à une construction d’essence religieuse’. Descimon meant that the Catholic church was the very heart of the Ligue, giving life to the movement through a range of means – ‘la prédication, la procession, sans compter le serment, le secret et, naturellement, la confession’. The potential significance of preaching was well