Europe were the ultramontane party, to a man, on Catherine’s side?  On the other hand, what object at such a time can be conceived for falsehood?  Can we suppose that he designed to dupe Henry into submission by a promise which he had predetermined to break?  It is hard to suppose even Clement capable of so elaborate an act of perfidy; and it is, perhaps, idle to waste conjectures on the motives of a weak, much-agitated man.  He was, probably, but giving a fresh example of his disposition to say at each moment whatever would be most agreeable to his hearers.  This was his unhappy habit, by which he earned for himself a character for dishonesty, I labour to think, but half deserved.

If, however, Clement meant to deceive, he succeeded, undoubtedly, in deceiving the French king.  Francis, in communicating to Henry the language which the pope had used, entreated him to reconsider his resolution.  The objection to pleading at Rome might be overcome; for the pope would meet him in a middle course.  Judges could be appointed, who should sit at Cambray, and pass a sentence in condemnation of the original marriage; with a definite promise that their sentence should not again be called in question.  To this arrangement there could be no reasonable objection; and Francis implored that a proposal so liberal should not be rejected.  Sufficient danger already threatened Christendom, from heretics within and from the Turks without; and although the English parliament were agreed to maintain the second marriage, it was unwise to provoke the displeasure of foreign princes.  To allow time for the preliminary arrangements, the execution of the censures had been further postponed; and if Henry would make up the quarrel, the French monarch was commissioned to offer a league, offensive and defensive, between England, France, and the Papacy.  He himself only desired to be faithful to his engagements to his good brother; and as a proof of his good faith, he said that he had been offered the Duchy of Milan, if he would look on while the emperor and the pope attacked England.[631]

This language bears all the character of sincerity; and when we remember that it followed immediately upon a close and intimate communication of three weeks with Clement, it is not easy to believe that he could have mistaken the extent of the pope’s promises.  We may suppose Clement for the moment to have been honest, or wavering between honesty and falsehood; we may suppose further that Francis trusted him because it was undesirable to be suspicious, in the belief that he was discharging the duty of a friend to Henry, and of a friend to the church, in offering to mediate upon these terms.

But Henry was far advanced beyond the point at which fair words could move him.  He had trusted many times, and had been many times deceived.  It was not easy to entangle him again.  It mattered little whether Clement was weak or false; the result was the same—­he could not be trusted.  To an open English understanding there was something monstrous in the position of a person professing to be a judge, who admitted that a cause which lay before him was so clear that he could bind himself to a sentence upon it, and could yet refuse to pronounce that sentence, except upon conditions.  It was scarcely for the interests of justice to leave the distribution of it in hands so questionable.