LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
" AUTHORIZED " MURDERS IN IRELAND— AND ELSEWHERE.
[To the Editor of the SrEc-rwroa.1 Sni,—You had some very trenchant remarks in the Spectator a couple of weeks ago on the distinction drawn by a high ecclesiastical personage in Ireland between " authorized " and " unauthorized " murder. The distinction is a nice one, but it is by no means new in clerical casuistry. In the last issue of the Publications of the Scottish History Society (Third Series, Vol. III., 1922) Father Pollen, S.J., with the archives of his society at his disposal, and with that candour and thoroughness which we have learnt to look for in his work, throws much light on similar questions that arose in the course of the duel to death between Queen Elizabeth and Mary Queen of Scots, and on the attitude of the Roman Church and its agents in the matter.
The most interesting document, from this point of view, in the whole most interesting and important collection is the report which Father William Crichton, S.J., drew up for the information of his Order dealing with his personal activities at the time. In it he recounts at some length the case of one Dr. Parry, who, after the manner of the age, appears to have been in the pay of both sidei and a traitor to both. Parry, " won over by money," as Crichton says, finally undertook in 1582 the murder of Queen Elizabeth, and, being a pious man, he came to Lyons, where he " asked counsel of Fr. Crichton whether he could do this with a safe conscience." An interesting colloquy followed, which Fr. Crichton gives at length. He pointed out that to kill anyone two things were necessary—" eausa " and " potestas "—just cause and legiti- mate authority. Parry inquired who could give him this " potestas," and Crichton answered " the Pope, who can separate an infected sheep from the flock." (Papa, qui potest infectam pecudem a gregc separare.) Parry took the hint and proceeded to Paris, where he saw the Bishop of Bergamo, the Papal Nuncio, and in due course obtained the necessary " licence " signed and sealed by the Cardinal Secretary of State, which he took with him when he went to England. (frit igitur Parisios et mediante Nuntio Apostolico Reverendissim9 Episcopo Bergamotensi obtinuit licentiam, signalam manu et sigillo Illustrissimi Cardinals Comensis Secretarii Gregorii XIII. quota swum tulit in Angliam.)
Father Pollen is naturally somewhat scandalized at the plainspoken language of Fr. Crichton, and points out that the document was not a " licence to kill," but merely " an indulgence for performing some good work not specified." Precisely ; it was obviously not necessary to specify the " good work " that was so clearly in the minds of both parties.
Another question arises. No point was more hotly disputed in Reformation times, and after, than that of the meaning of an indulgence. Catholic writers to this day complain bitterly of the " Lutheran calumny " that an indulgence is a con- donation of sin, if not an actual licence to commit sin. Yet here we have a high-placed sixteenth-century Jesuit speaking, as a matter of course, in common with a Papal Legate and a Cardinal Secretary of State, of a Papal indulgence as a " licence " to murder the Queen of England. Little wonder that Father Pollen mildly remarks that, about this time, "public morality, not only in Catholic but even in Papal circles, took a distinct step downwards on the subject of assassination."—I am, Sir, &c., Reform Club. J. R. FISHER.
Previous page
