King James VI and I and the Reunion of Christendom.

W. B. Patterson, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. xiii + 409 pp. $59.95. ISBN: 0-521-41805-4

This new study of the reign of James I of England (1603-1625) deals with two themes that have been neglected in earlier accounts. They are James's attempt to bring about a reunification of the Christian churches by summoning a General Council and his efforts to to establish stability and peace in Europe.

The first of these topics is the more important. It displays the king's intellectual abilities and his grasp of church history as well as theology. It also enables us to view some familiar episodes in a new light. The Hampton Court Conference of 1604 is seen here as an attempt to foster religious unity in England, not merely as a goal in itself but as a first step in securing an ecumenical conference involving all Christendom. The king's belief in conciliarism was evidently influenced by his reading of Richard Hooker's Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity. James wrote to the pope urging him to convene a General Conference which might sort out differences between Catholics, Lutherans, and Calvinists. Not surprisingly, the papacy was slow to respond, and when the pope did reply he merely assured James of his friendship and said he would pray for James's conversion.

The famous Gunpowder Plot of 1605 inevitably interfered with James's project, for his subjects turned even more against Catholics and saw Rome even more as a national enemy. An oath of allegiance to the king, denying support of the papacy, was established by Parliament; James attempted to defend it, thus arousing the ire of Cardinal Bellarmine and opening an extended war of words. But James was unwilling to abandon the cause. In 1609 he published a Premonition, possibly written for him by the famous preacher Lancelot Andrewes, calling again for an ecumenical council. This was translated into several European languages, ignored by the pope, and again attacked by Bellarmine.

The later years of James's reign saw the king promoting ecumenical councils of Protestant churches, with the hope that the Catholics might be involved at a later stage. Several reformed groups met in the Synod of Tonneins (1614). The better-known Synod of Dort (1618-1619) was attended only by churchmen from the Netherlands and England, and its accomplishments were limited by disagreements between the Dutch leaders.

Thwarted in these endeavors, James sought a rapprochement with the orthodox church and supported several Greek scholars who came to study at Oxford. These efforts too bore no significant fruit.

Even in his own time James was known as a peacemaker, and his attempts to foster peace in Europe are better known than his ecumenical projects. But here again Patterson presents new materials and views familiar episodes in a' fresh light. He makes a good deal of James's attempts to end the Thirty Years' War, especially a letter sent to Pope Gregory in 1622 urging the papacy to use its influence in bringing about a pacification. Predictably, this was ignored. The disastrous attempts to negotiate a Spanish marriage for Prince Charles are viewed in the context of a desire to obtain Spanish support for a peace settlement; he had earlier tried to secure Spain's endorsement of an ecumenical gathering. Patterson argues that the king was still actively seeking peace in his last Parliament, which is generally viewed as promoting English entry into the war at the prompting of Charles and his friend the Duke of Buckingham.

Subsidiary sections of the book deal with James's relations with such prominent European intellectuals as Isaac Casaubon, Georg Calixtus, Hugo Grotius, and Marco Antonio De Dominis. They respected his intellectual abilities and welcomed his patronage but were ineffectual in securing better relations with the European churches.

Patterson's study is meticulously documented and well written. It fills a significant void in the re-evaluation of James's reign which is now taking place on several fronts. Other scholars have shown that the king's attempts to manage government finance were not as incompetent as has been thought and that his grasp of religious realities within England and Scotland was impressive. Clearly the king was well-informed and thoughtful, and clearly he had wise views and far-reaching goals. As Patterson says, he was a model of the philosopher-king. His problem was that he lacked the political skills to go with his scholarly convictions. He did not find avenues - perhaps he did not even seek them - for persuading the papacy to enter into discussion of religious differences or convincing his subjects that peace was better than intervention in religious wars. However much we may respect James for conceiving idealistic projects, we must still judge him ineffectual in achieving them.

STANFORD LEHMBERG University of Minnesota