Chapter XVII: A Catalogue Of The Laws Against Catholics Made By Queen (9)

“Right Honourable,—Your lordship may think me slack in performing
that which I so freely made promise of, but the death of my father
hath so much appalled me as I am not fit to do as I would. I did
hear Mr. Gerard was taken, which something stayed me. Moreover,
your lordship hath Mr. Ha. Hurlston in hold, who may direct you
the best concerning him of any I know, as also I take it Sir
Everard Digby came for Mr. Walley” [Father Garnett]; “but thus it
is I cannot learn where Mrs. Vaux is, neither if I knew durst I
visit her. And this is most strange to me, neither of those which
were my servants comes to me, which makes me think they remove
with Mr. Gerard, or are imprisoned, but I rather think they are
shifted out of the way, because their attendance will make their
master more acceptable, one of them being an exquisite painter and
the other a perfect good embroiderer. The painter is a black man,
and taller than the embroiderer, whose hair is yellowish, and was
called Christopher Parker by his true name. The painter was called
Brian Hunston. I am bold to inform you thus largely of them
because I verily suppose they attend their wandering friend and
master, but where, till I either see them or hear some directions,
I cannot imagine; but I protest to your lordship, if I could learn
I am resolved he should speak with you, if by any means I could
procure it, for I fear this most vile and hateful Plot hath taken
deep and dangerous root, because I meet with many that will as
easily be persuaded there was no gunpowder laid as that holy good
man was an actor in the Plot; and surely the generality did ever
so much admire him, that they were happy or blessed in hearing
him, and their roof sanctified by his appearance in their house. I
am to go shortly into the country. If it would please your
lordship to give me leave to send a man to my husband I should be
much bound to you, for I cannot tell till I hear from him how to
determine of those businesses occasioned by my father’s death. I
humbly beseech you commiserate my affliction and grant me this
poor request, if it stand with your liking, and I shall ever pray
for your increase of honour and happiness. So I humbly take my
leave this 18th of November, 1605.

“Your lordship’s most humble to command,
“ANNE MARKHAM.”

_Endorsed_—“The Lady Markham to my Lord.”

“Right Honourable,—Afore I came out of London I sent to know your
lordship’s pleasure, but mine uncle could not meet with Mr.
Lewnus, and indeed I did think my credit was so decayed with the
Padre that I could not do as I would, employ my best endeavours to
perform thereby to express my great desire of your lordship’s good
opinion. Now I find either necessity of their part or my two
servants’ credits hath given me so much power as I shall shortly
see Mr. Gerard, but for the day or certain time they are too
crafty to appoint, but whensoever I will do my best to keep him
within my kenning till I hear from your lordship, and then, my
credit preserved, which is dearer to me than life, your command
shall be as truly obeyed as if your most trusty servant were
commanded. I do perceive there are great business in hand, and
your lordship is, next to His Majesty, most shot at, but what the
project is I dare not be very inquisitive of, because it is not
ripe, as by circumstance I perceive; and I labour to make myself
in good estimation with them, which would not be if I covet to
know more than they like. This, I protest to God, is only to do
service to your lordship. There had been some of them with me ere
this, but great occasion hath drawn them to haste into other
places, whither I know not. If the watch had continued but two
days longer, Mr. Gerard had been pined out at Harrowden. I hear
Ric. the butler is close in the Gatehouse, yet your lordship knows
that prisons are places of such corruption as money will help
letters to their friends to tell what they have been examined of,
so they will guess shrewdly how to shift. I have none that I do
trust about me with my resolution to do my best endeavours to
preserve your lordship, therefore I am enforced to be brief. I
beseech you pardon it in me, that writes in fear, but if it please
your honour to send your note or directions to mine Uncle Harvey,
I will expect till that he send them, and ever pray God to protect
you from these most dangerous conspirators. For the true trial of
my devotion in that prayer I will most sincerely labour your
preservation, so I humbly take my leave this 3rd of January.

“Your lordship’s at command,
“ANNE MARKHAM.”

“To the Right Honourable my very good lord the Earl of Salisbury.
Haste this.”

_Endorsed_—“3rd January, 1605[-6]. Lady Markham to my Lord.”

The following is Cecil’s answer.(140)

“Madam,—Although I do confess my great mislike of the daily resort
and residence of the Priests, and especially the Jesuits, whose
end can be no other than of pernicious consequence to this estate,
yet, being in hope that warnings would make them retire from
further tempting of law, I have used no extraordinary course for
their apprehension, being, I confess, full of tenderness in
matters of blood. But having now discovered, by many confessions
of the late conspirators, that some of these Jesuits have passed
so far as to be persuaders and actors in this barbarous
conspiracy, which excludeth almost all offices of humanity from
men that have softest hearts, I have thought good to take your
offer for His Majesty’s service, to deliver the person of Gerard
(who is one of those) into the hands of the State. For which
purpose, although your letter doth not well express what you would
have done, whereby both the service may be effected and your name
covered; yet I have procured a warrant, here inclosed, which will
be sufficient to authorize and command any man to whom you shall
direct it, which I have left to your own choice to put in, because
I know not who they are which dwell thereabouts in whom you dare
repose trust. And unless you have the warrant presently, and in
the instant to execute, I know the inconvenience of the
protraction. You shall therefore do very well to observe how the
warrant is made, and thereby shall you perceive that the party to
whomsoever you shall direct it is authorized sufficiently, and
will receive this warrant from anybody’s hands whom you shall
send; so as if you will choose any of your own to carry it to any
such gentleman as you shall like, that third party need not say he
comes from you, but from some other, and yet he may bring the
gentleman that you shall name upon the back of the warrant to
execute all things according to your direction. Lastly, madam,
this I say unto you, that either your religion is very foul, or
you will make no difficulty to discover such a pernicious
creature, as differs so far from the rest of the society (as I am
persuaded); wherein I will add thus much further, that you shall
be an instrument of reflecting His Majesty’s good opinion to your
husband, and confirm the conceit I have of you, that you would not
trouble yourself and me in this kind unless you meant sincerely.
And so I commit you to God. From the Court at Whitehall, this 15th
of January, 1605[-6].

“Your ladyship’s loving friend,
“SALISBURY.”

“There are only three of your churchmen in this wicked
predicament, Gerard, Father Walley, and Father Greeneway, so as it
is indifferent to the State which of these be come by. This letter
is sent according to your direction to Mr. Stringer, who shall
receive it from the next post to him, and the packet to the post
is signed by the postmaster’s hand, and not by mine, who knoweth
not the contents nor anything of you, and yet his hand will make
the less suspicion. I desire you to keep safe both this mine own
letter and the warrant, because I may have both delivered again
hereafter, if there be no cause continuing to use them hereafter,
and I will do the like with your letter, which I reserve for you.”

_Endorsed_—“To the Lady Markham.”

The “certain high personages” with whom he crossed the Channel were the Ambassadors of Spain and Flanders.(141) The former was the Conde de Villa Mediana, the latter Don Pedro de Zuniga. It is remarkable that, though Topcliffe had said that Father Gerard intended “to pass over rather after than with the Lord Ambassador,” his conspicuous person should have been allowed to pass.

On reaching the Continent in safety, he went, as he tells us, straight to Rome, whence, we learn from Father More,(142) he was sent to Tivoli for awhile, for rest of mind and body. He was then appointed English Penitentiary in the Basilica of St. Peter,(143) and this was his field of work till the spring of 1611.(144)

We have a letter,(145) dated “this Simon and Jude’s daie, 1606,” from Father Andrew Whyte, afterwards the Apostle of Maryland, addressed, “To his especial good friende Mr. Garret geue these att Roome.” It was to ask him to speak to Father Persons to get Richard Green received into the Society, who had been sent to College by Father Gerard, and had been imprisoned “about the time of this late commotion.” Green “was received very kindly” by Father Walley [Garnett] “and provided for very charitably in a manner as one of the Society, with a promise that the year following he should be received without fail;” but now, as “few or none of Father Walley’s writings or determinations were found, and Richard Fulwood gone which should have given particular testimony,” Father Whyte begs that “he may either be sent to the Novitiates of other countries with the license of the General, or else may have a promise to be next that is received at Louvain.”

XXVIII.

To this Novitiate at Louvain we now turn, as it was thither that Father Gerard was next sent. It was the foundation of Donna Luisa de Carvajal, who by her will(146) dated Valladolid, Dec. 22, 1604, left 12,000 ducats for the establishment of an English Novitiate. The document is an admirable specimen of true Spanish devotion and humility. After commending her soul to God by the intercession of our Blessed Lady, she proceeds—“For the love of God I humbly pray the Superiors of the Society of Jesus and the Præpositus of the Professed House, as a favour, to grant me some little place in their church where my body may be buried, in consideration of the devotion I have ever entertained for their holy Religious Order: to which Order, in the manner that I have thought would be most to the glory of God, I offer, with the greatest affection, a gift which, though but small, is all that I have. And if a burial-place be refused me in that church, my executors will obtain for me a resting-place in some other church of the Society: and if they are unable to obtain this, let me be buried in some monastery in which, for the love of God, they may be willing to give burial to a poor person like myself; and let my funeral be conducted in accordance with this my poverty. As executors I name Father Richard Walpole, the Vice-Prefect of the English Mission, and the Confessor of the English College in this city, or their successors. After them (and I have named them first from respect to their priestly dignity) I name the Condessa de Miranda, Donna Maria de Zuniga, Donna Maria Gasca, Don Frances de Contreras, Melchior de Molina, and Don Luis de Carrillo e Toledo, Conde de Caracena. First of all I declare that many years ago, when I was with my uncle, I made a vow to God to dedicate all my goods to His glory and greatest service. Then His Divine Majesty gave me large desires and vehement attraction to spend myself above all things for the preservation and advancement of the English Fathers of the Society of Jesus, who sustain that kingdom like strong columns, defend it from an otherwise inevitable ruin, and supply efficacious means of salvation for thousands and thousands of souls. Wherefore I offer them to the most holy Virgin our Lady, I place them under her protection, and I name and leave her universal heir of all my goods.... And I give possession of them henceforward to the most glorious Virgin, and in her name and place to Father Robert Persons, or failing him, to the Father who shall succeed him as Superior of the Mission: but with this condition and obligation, that such goods shall be applied to the founding of a Novitiate of English Religious of the Society of Jesus, in whatever kingdom or part of the world shall seem to Father Persons to be to the greater glory of God. But in the case that England shall be brought back to the faith and obedience of the Roman Church, my will is that the said revenue be transferred into that kingdom, for the foundation of a Novitiate of the Society there, unless it shall seem better to Father Persons, for reasons concerning the Catholic religion, to leave the Novitiate beyond the kingdom.”

Time was not lost in carrying out the intentions of this pious benefactress.(147) In 1606, Father Persons obtained possession of a large house in Louvain, which had been inhabited by the Knights of Malta, and thus came to be called St. John’s, though the church attached to it was dedicated to St. Gregory the Apostle of England and other Saints. Father More, who lived there with Father Gerard, tells us that it was on high ground commanding the whole city; below was a walled garden, and on the slope of the hill pleasant walks amongst the vines which were ranged in terraces, and the whole, though within the city walls, as quiet and calm as befitted a house of prayer.

We do not know exactly the date of Father Gerard’s arrival at Louvain, or the office to which he was first appointed there. The letter of the 17th August, 1612, to the General, from which we have already given a large extract concerning Mrs. Vaux, is dated from Louvain. It proceeds with an account of a miraculous cure at the intercession of Father Thomas Garnett, the nephew of the Provincial, who was martyred at Tyburn on the 3rd of June, 1608. This father was the first Novice of St. John’s, Louvain. That Noviceship commenced in February, 1607, with six Priests, two Scholastics, and five Lay-brothers, Novices, under Father Thomas Talbot as their Novice Master. In 1614, St. John’s received students in philosophy and theology, as well as Novices, when a house in the garden was fitted up for the Novitiate and Father Henry Silisdon was installed in St. John’s as Rector of the new College. This arrangement did not last long, for at the end of the year the Novitiate was transferred to Liége. No less than fifteen letters have come down to us written by Father Gerard in the year 1614, addressed to the Prefect of the English Mission, Father Thomas Owen, Rector of the English College at Rome. They treat chiefly of the purchase of the new house at Liége, and the transfer of the Novitiate to that city. Some extracts relating to Father Gerard himself will be found interesting. Some of them are signed John Nelson and others John Tomson. In later years he seems to have been known only by the name of Tomson.

The choice of Liége as a residence seems to have been mainly owing to the disquiet caused to the Catholics in the Low Countries by the remonstrances of the English Government. We have some specimens of it in the following extracts, in which we find Father Gerard true to the natural fearlessness of his character. “Concerning(148) my wariness in avoiding the eyes of spies, I have been all this year more sparing in that kind than divers friends here did think needful, although some one or two did think it dangerous to go any journey, as doubting I might be killed by the way, but this was but according to their accustomed fears with which I have been long acquainted. But, indeed, Father, I am so far from desire to go many journeys, that it is a pain to me to think of going anywhither, and the reason why I never went to any of those places your Reverence mentioneth in this year past (but only the last Lent to Maclin for Mr. Rouse) was not that I thought it dangerous (being known so well to live here public that it cannot be unknown to any spies), nor for that I wanted leave, for I had the other Provincial’s particular and willing grant, without my own asking, to go to any place of these countries; but it was because I had rather be at home: and in the town of Lovaine itself, I go not abroad half so much as I think were needful for the contentment of others. I was not at the Teresians, where the Mother of the House (to whom I gave the Exercise four years ago) and Father Scott’s(149) sister do much desire my often coming, any more than once since the last Lent. At the Monastery of St. Monica’s, my cousin Shurley hath requested my coming thither for these three or four months, to bestow one afternoon upon her and some younger Nuns whom she hath charge of, that they may altogether ask me what spiritual questions they may like best, and I have never yet found a fit time for it; and, indeed, I doubt I am to blame for it. The gentlemen in the town(150) I doubt I visit not once in a quarter of a year, and I have some reason to think that either they think me careless of them, or afraid to be seen abroad, as though my case were very dangerous, which would also make them or any other that should come to town more fearful to come into my company, and consequently hinder the little good that I might do with them. But I hope I shall be as wary as your Reverence wisheth, and if this course go forwards of being Rector without the name of Rector, there will be less inconvenience, whosoever see me seeing me still as a private man.” In this he alludes to a plan of his own, that Father Blackfan should have the title of Rector, although he himself had been appointed to the Rectorship of the Novitiate.

The next letter is dated April 6, 1614.(151) “I have yours of the 15th March, and see in that, as in all of yours, your fatherly care of me, which, by the grace of God, I will labour to deserve. I am well satisfied with Father General’s order, and shall endeavour to get this building finished for the Novitiate as soon as I can, and then will settle to my book as much as my health and letters will permit.... Having writ thus far, I was called to go to Bruxels with Father Rector (by Father Blacfan’s and Father Percy his advice) to speak with the Duke’s(152) Secretary, who telling Father Percy the last week that the Agent did solicit against me, and that he could not well answer him, unless he delivered him some reasons in writing for my innocency, this writing was promised him by Father Percy; but I being loath to have any such writing sent, as thinking it the likeliest means to raise a new persecution against me, though for the Secretary’s satisfaction we drew and delivered him a brief note of four or five effectual proofs, yet both to the Secretary first, and afterwards to the Nuncio, I told this day that if any such writing were sent it would do me great harm, for Canterbury having such a writing would doubtless show it at the Council table, and then those lords who secretly do know me to be innocent, and wish me well, will be, as it were, forced to speak against me, lest they should seem to favour me, and so the King should be more incensed. The Nuncio did promise Father Rector and me that he would seriously deal both with the Secretary and the Prince himself in the cause.”

Writing under date April 18, 1614,(153) he shows that he thinks that too much importance had been given to the Agent’s interference. “I think your Reverence was made to believe by letters sent about Easter, that there was some new troubles against me here, out of England, and consequently that there was need of such information to the Nuncio and Father Provincial as had been given. But when I heard of it, I said it was nothing but Trumbol his own device, in hope to work upon the weakness of the Prince; and so now it proves, for I am going to the Secretary himself with our Father Rector, as I wrote from Bruxells, and giving him a paper of some few points for my innocency, with the request he would not deliver it, but show it if he would to the Agent. The Secretary answered he would advertise me if it were needful; but since the note was showed unto Trumbol, and he showed to be satisfied with it, and afterwards meeting the Secretary told him that he took it to be only matter of religion; but that being now made matter of State, he, being a servant employed in matter of State, could not but seek to concur with them that employed him, as it were granting that himself was satisfied, and yielding a reason why he had moved the matter. And this being understood both by the Prince and the Nuncio, they were very glad of it.... I write this from Maclin, whither Sir William [Stanley] was desirous to have me come for his comfort now and after the death and funeral of his lady.”

But such a man as Father Gerard was not likely to be left in peace in those intriguing times. In the August following, Father Silisdon writes to Father Owen.(154) “Even now I have advice that His Majesty of England hath made two complaints to the Prince, and that the first is against Father Gerard’s being in his dominions.” The consequence was that a transfer to another territory became desirable, and Father Gerard set his heart on migrating with his Novices to Liége. He writes from that city, under the signature of John Nelson, Sept. 19, 1614.(155) “There be many causes to be alleged why here, rather than in any place; as the commodity of dealing with our English in the summer, the opportunity of keeping our Novices unknown, the excellent seat far beyond Lovaine, and that bestowed on us, the present helps sent for this beginning, with great likelihood of much more; the great favour which is to be expected from this Prince and his family, and is to be strengthened by my two cousins, Sir William and Mr. Morton, and Sir William hath written to him that he doth much joy in his cousin who is there to be Rector.” The two cousins of whom Father Gerard here speaks were two very powerful friends. The one was Sir William Stanley, who showed himself a kind friend to Father Gerard and his charge by negotiating the purchase of the property at Liége in his own name, and advancing the purchase money—at least, that portion of it which had to be paid down(156)—probably (as Father Gerard speaks of the “seat being bestowed upon us”) regarding it as a gift. Whatever else was requisite for the purchase was provided by Brother William Browne, who, though(157) grandson, brother, and uncle of Viscounts Montague,—his grandfather was Queen Mary’s Ambassador to the Holy See—was himself content to spend his life in the humble duties of a Jesuit Lay-brother.

The “Mr. Morton” was Sir George Talbot of Grafton, afterwards ninth Earl of Shrewsbury. He was a scholar of some repute,(158) and an intimate friend of Maximilian, Duke of Bavaria. As Ferdinand, the Prince-Bishop of Liége, was Maximilian’s brother, it was no little help to Father Gerard to be on “cousinly” terms with George Talbot. The Duke became a generous benefactor to the new House at Liége. In 1618 he sent Father Gerard, through Sir George Talbot, 5,000 florins for the Noviceship.(159) In a letter dated Jan. 25, 1620, the Duke writes to Father Gerard, who had promised to pray that he might have a son: “I bound myself once by vow to your Blessed Ignatius, that if he would obtain this favour for me, I would give my son the name of Ignatius, and would build and endow a College of the Society wherever Father General might judge it most useful. What if God should purpose thus to provide for you?”(160) In July of the same year he wrote: “We have sent you a contribution of 1,300 German florins by Father Mayer for a tabernacle for the Blessed Sacrament, and for a niche for an image of the Blessed Virgin.” Even after Father Gerard’s departure from the House, Duke Maximilian’s liberality to it did not fail. Father Silisdon, Father Gerard’s successor as Master of Novices, removed the Novitiate to Watten,(161) and not long after the Duke settled a permanent endowment upon the College of Liége, which was begun in the House that Father Gerard had established.

Father Gerard’s Socius or “Compagnion,” as he calls him, was Father Henry More, subsequently the historian of the Province. When discussing, before his appointment, those Fathers who were fitted for that office, after mentioning others, he says: “Father Nicholson is far short of either of them for my turn, for he is no good Latinist, I think little better than myself, though he be much better scholar; neither hath he any other language but Spanish, of which I shall have small use. Father Henry More hath French well, Dutch prettily, and Italian sufficiently, besides Spanish very well, and Latin as I would wish him.”(162)

As to his first Novices, he had twelve, which made what he styled “a pretty beginning.”(163) They were “the two that expect at Liége, the two that are come from Rome, and four out of Spain, with Mr. Lewkner and Mr. Whitmore, besides Grafton, when he comes, and a tailor now servant in this house, who by all judgments here is as fit to be received as Brother Silvester, the young tailor now in the Noviceship, is fit to be dismissed.”(164)

Of the two that “expected at Liége,” a previous letter had said, “Here be also Mr. Mansel and Mr. Owen Shelley, by the names of Mr. Griffin and Mr. Titchborn: both expect, the first with some loathness to stay long, the second is wholly resigned. The first is a pious man, and to those that know his fashion will be profitable for some uses in the Society, but the second will be practical and fit for anything, and in truth I think he will do very well.”(165) This Father Owen Shelley was afterwards Rector of the College of Liége, and justified Father Gerard’s judgment of his character.

Amongst the “four which are come out of Spain” were two that must have constantly served to remind their Rector at Liége of the Gunpowder Plot, as the remonstrances of King James’ Agent had managed to do at Louvain. “One of them,” he says, “is akin to Father Garnett, and of his name, though we call him Gilford, as he was called at St. Omers. William Ellis, but we call him John Williams, for he was page(166) to Sir Everard Digby, and taken with him, though he might have escaped, for his master offered him horse and money to shift for himself, but the youth said he would live and die with him; and so, being taken, was condemned at Stafford, and should have been executed. He was offered to have his life if he would go to their church, which he refused. In the end they saved him and some others. He never [yielded] in the least point. He hath good friends near Sir Everard Digby’s whom I know, and he is heir to 80_l._ a year, if his father do him right.”(167)

At the close of this short notice of Father Gerard’s Rectorship it will be but right to record an unfavourable judgment passed upon him, as it will help us to form a true appreciation of his character. It is the only instance that has come down to us of blame on the part of one of his own brethren. “I see a general fear in all ours, those of best judgment, of the success of Father Nelson’s government, and unless he hath a companion that may moderate him, his zeal will, I fear, carry him too far; and I fear it so much the more because I see him loath to have anybody with him who is likely to propose anything to him contrary to his own zealous desires.” This is in a confidential letter(168) from Father Silisdon to Father Owen, dated Oct. 31, 1614, so that, as it was written before the transfer to Liége, it was a misgiving lest he should be indiscreet as a Rector, rather than a judgment on his actual conduct as a Superior.

XXIX.

During his residence at Liége, amongst Father Gerard’s correspondents were two venerable servants of God, Robert Cardinal Bellarmine, and Father Luis de la Puente, better known by the Latinized form of his name, de Ponte. As by a man’s friends we can obtain an insight into his character, we have thought it desirable to give the few letters from these two holy men to Father Gerard that have come down to us. Cardinal Bellarmine’s autograph is preserved at Stonyhurst.(169) We translate the letter from the original Latin.

“Very Rev. and beloved Father in Christ,—I have received your
Reverence’s letter dated from Liége the 23rd November, with the
little presents inclosed in it, an English knife, a little case
(either bone or ivory, I do not know which), and three small
toothpicks. I do not know whether these were sent me for use, or
as having some special meaning. Whichever it be they were welcome,
as a proof of friendship and brotherhood.

“The memory of that excellent Mr. Oliver,(170) whose acquaintance
I made very late, has brought me no little sadness, or rather
grief, not on his account, who is translated from this world to
the joys of Paradise, but for the sake of many whom without doubt
he would have converted to a good life if Divine Providence had
permitted him to live awhile longer. But the good pleasure of God
must ever be fulfilled, and the very same, in order that it may be
fulfilled, must ever be pleasing to us under all circumstances.

“I was pleased to read what your Reverence relates in your letter
of your journeys; of your office of Master of Novices; of the
building which you have bought at Liége; of the visitation of His
Serene Highness Ferdinand, the Prince-Bishop of Liége, and of the
promise that the Priory, at its next vacancy, shall be applied to
the College. If my assistance in carrying this out can be of any
use to you with the Pope, it shall not be wanting.

“Of Dr. Singleton I have heard much, and have defended him to the
best of my power, as long as I could, but the party opposed to him
has prevailed. Nor do I see how I can help him at so great a
distance, and especially as I should be suspected, because I am a
Jesuit. The devil is envious of the harmony between the English at
Douay and the Fathers of the Society, for which the good Cardinal
Allen cared so much; but all means must be tried to re-establish a
true and sincere friendship, and agreement in teaching; otherwise
a kingdom divided against itself shall be brought to desolation.
For many reasons I say freely that nothing can be done by me in
his behalf; first, as I was just saying, because I should be under
suspicion, being a Jesuit. Then because I am an old man of
seven-and-seventy years of age, and I daily expect the dissolution
of my tabernacle. Thirdly, because I cannot think of any manner in
which I could help him. The common way of helping men of this sort
is to give them ecclesiastical benefices, but here in Rome the
multitude of those who aspire to and seek after such benefits is
so great that their number is almost infinite. Nor are they only
Italians, but Spaniards also, Frenchmen, Germans, who look for
nothing but benefices at Rome. I myself, who was thought to have
some influence with the Pope, have laboured for more than ten
years for a Spaniard, an excellent man and a great friend of mine,
to obtain for him a good benefice falling vacant in his own
country. I could say the same of Flemish and German friends of
mine. What then would be the case with English people, in whose
country there are no ecclesiastical benefices for Catholics? But,
since these temporal things are nothing when compared to eternal
benefices, our friend Dr. Singleton must not be cast down if our
Lord treats him now, as of old He treated His Apostles, who He
willed should enter into the Kingdom of Heaven through many
tribulations. But I must not be too lengthy, for I know that both
he and your Reverence stand in no need of my exhortations. I know
that your Reverence will have hard work to read my bad writing,
but Father Coffin(171) would have it that I should write to you
with my own hand.

“With this I bid your Reverence farewell. Commend me to the
prayers of Dr. Singleton, and of all your College; but your
Reverence’s self especially, for our old friendship and
brotherhood, must diligently commend me to the Lord our God.

“From Rome, on Christmas Day, December 25, 1618.(172)

“Your Reverence’s brother and servant in Christ,

“ROBERT CARD. BELLARMINE.”

“To the Very Rev. Father John Tomson, S.J.,
“Rector of the College of the English Novices at Liége.”

The two letters which have come down to us, addressed to Father Gerard by the venerable Father Luis de la Puente, were written just as his residence(173) at Liége was drawing to a close. We translate from Father Grene’s transcript of the originals.(174)

“I. H. S.

“P.C.

“When I received your Reverence’s letters, I was unable to answer
them at once, for I was suffering from extreme weakness, which
usually afflicts me every year all through the winter. Blessed be
our great God, from Whose providence come health and sickness,
life and death, and whatever prosperity and adversity there is in
this world. The height of felicity in this life is to be superior
to all these things, seeking only God’s good pleasure in all
things, for life in His will, and health, honour, happiness,
spiritual progress, and all sanctity consist in the fulfilment of
the will of God: and so every day I would that at every breath I
could say, May Thy most holy and most sweet will be done in me,
concerning me, and by me and about me, in all things and by all
things, now and always and for ever. Amen.(175) God always pours
His spirit of prayer into those who so submit their will to His;
wherefore the Psalmist says—‘Be subject unto the Lord and pray to
Him,’ for when any one with prompt obedience and entire
resignation humbly submits himself to God, God Himself, Who does
the will of those that fear Him, in a certain way is made subject
to him, so that He does whatever is asked, God becoming obedient
to the voice of a man—not of any man soever, but of the man who
obeys God. Oh, wonderful power of prayer and of obedience! Let us
pray, my Father, that we may be perfectly obedient, and let us
obey, that we may be able to pray, and to speak worthily with God.

“It will help wonderfully both one and the other, to meditate
profoundly on these two things: to wit, Who God is in Himself, and
what He is towards us, and then what we are of ourselves, and what
towards God. For whilst I think of God, His Trinity and Unity,
most beautiful, most wise, most holy, most full of love for me,
immense and everywhere present, the fountain of all good things
that are in me and beyond me, from Whom I myself depend, and all
that is mine, and everything that I use and enjoy, how can I do
otherwise than love Him with all my strength? How shall I not
praise Him and thank Him constantly? How shall I not give my whole
self to His service? And these affections become the more ardent
as I ponder that I have nothing of myself; that I am nothing, and
that I and all that is mine would be reduced to nothing unless I
were preserved by Him. Now whilst, within this immensity of God, I
consider what I have been and what I am towards Him, I am
horrified and tremble as I ponder on my malice, my ingratitude, my
slothfulness. Hence arise feelings of hatred of self, of
humiliation and self-denial, and various acts and exercises of
penance, which not only nourish humility by which a man, through a
truthful knowledge of himself, becomes vile to himself, but they
also arouse a most ardent charity by which he loves his Supreme
Benefactor, Who has conferred and still confers so many and such
great benefits on one who is ungrateful and unworthy. Thus the
mind is elevated to perfect contemplation and union with God
Himself, and, as it were forgetful of itself, is immersed in Him,
or rather God hides it in the concealment of His countenance from
all disturbance of men.

“Here is a short epitome of my mystical theology, which I have put
out at rather greater length in my book; but why should I teach
these things to a doctor of others and my own master? Surely I
have become foolish, but your letters compelled me. Would that you
would help me by your prayers, that what I write in my letters I
may perform in deed. Forgive my humble and poor style, for I know
not any more elegant; but I am sure that you do not care for
words, but for the sense that is in the words. I value very highly
the cross which you have sent me, and I will always bear it with
me. I hope, by the intercession of the Blessed Virgin, who
appeared in that tree,(176) and who confers such benefits on those
who are there and those who visit her, that I may be a partaker of
those benefits, for though I am absent in the body I am present in
spirit.

“I humbly commend myself to the Holy Sacrifices of your Reverence.

“Your Reverence’s unworthy servant in Christ,

“[Cross] LUDOVICUS DE PONTE. [Cross]

“Valladolid, March 23, 1621.

_Postscript_—“By God’s help I have finished a great work. Its
title is, _Expositio Moralis in Canticum Canticorum_, containing
exhortations on all the mysteries and virtues of the Christian
religion. It is divided into two volumes, and each volume into
five books. The arrangement is new and singular, but not without
foundation in the Sacred Text. The matter is grave in itself, and
very copious, taken out of Holy Scripture and the holy Fathers.
The style is humble, but clear and chaste, and not out of harmony
with matter that is spiritual and sacred, and therefore elevated.
It is printed at Paris, and will soon reach Germany and Belgium.
Would that it may be to the glory of God, the edification of the
Church, and of use to one’s neighbour.”

The other letter from the same Father was written in reply to one from Father Gerard announcing that he was about to leave Belgium.

“I. H. S.

“P.C.

“May the Almighty and most pitiful Lord accompany you in the
journey that you begin, for with such a Guide and Companion you
will be everywhere safe and cheerful, and making true progress.
Let Him ever dwell in your memory, understanding, and will, for
His most sweet providence especially protects those who make their
journeys from obedience to Superiors, as Jacob did, who at his
father’s bidding journeyed through the desert into Mesopotamia,
where he heard the voice of the Lord, which said to him, ‘I will
be thy Keeper whithersoever thou goest.’ Trusting to this hope,
and protected by this guardianship, you will happily fulfil what
you have begun.

“I commend myself to your Reverence’s Sacrifices and prayers, for
my weakness oppresses me much; but may the will of God be done in
me and about me in all things and by all things, to Whom
concerning all things be glory for ever. Amen.

“[Cross] LUDOVICUS DE LA PUENTE. [Cross]

“Valladolid, Feb. 2, 1622.”

With these saintly words our materials for writing the life of Father John Gerard abruptly fail us. Beyond what has been recorded we only know that he was sent first to Spain, and then to Rome, which he reached Jan. 15, 1623.(177) He was Confessor to the English College till his death, July 27, 1637, at the ripe age of seventy-three, and upwards.

XXX.

In this Autobiography Father Gerard has laid before us his life in all the freedom and unreserve of a confidential communication with his Religious brethren and Superiors. It is not possible, we are convinced, for any impartial person to rise from its perusal without a deep conviction that Father Gerard was a gentleman and a Christian, a man of honour and religious principle; and in many cases this sense of his integrity will be accompanied with some of that personal regard and affection with which he inspired those who lived in intimacy with him. He bore too much for principle, and made too great sacrifices, for us to think that he would deliberately and perseveringly commit sin to free himself from blame. Yet this is the supposition that is involved in an attack upon his veracity in the compilation of his Narrative of the Gunpowder Plot.

It is quite true that he, and many others, considered themselves justified, when their own lives or those of innocent persons were at stake, in the use of assertions that were simple falsehoods in the ordinary sense of the terms employed. These they called equivocations; and we find no trace in the period of which we are writing of the modern sense of the word, that is, of a true expression which is really beside the point, though it is so employed that it is very unlikely to be seen to be so by the person to whom it is addressed, who thus is said rather to be suffered to deceive himself than to be deceived. Practically the distinction is hard to draw, and it has the disadvantage of seeming to make the morality of the expression depend on the quickness and readiness of the person in danger, who may be able to think of phrases containing a real ambiguity but which yet would throw the hearers off the right scent.

According to modern feeling, Father Gerard would have been quite justified in examining the trees and hedges in search of a falcon(178) he had not lost, and inquiring of all he met whether they had heard the tinkling of the bird’s bells, although it was to make them think that he had lost a falcon, in other words, to deceive them; but by the same modern feeling he would be held to be guilty of a lie when he said that he was the servant of a lord in a neighbouring county, though he might, without guilt, have worn that lord’s livery as a disguise if he could have obtained it, which would have been a more effectual deception than any words.

Again, according to modern judgment, John Lilly would be held guilty of a lie when he said(179) of Gerard’s books and manuscripts, “They are mine;” but quite guiltless when, with the same intention of making the magistrates believe him to be a Priest when he was not, he said, “I do not say I am a Priest, that is for you to prove.” Yet the latter expression was far more likely to deceive than the former. It was more like what a Priest, under the circumstances, would have said. Present feeling would condemn him of a lie for saying simply, that the books were his, when it would acquit him if he had thought of using far more deceptive expressions, such as “I am not bound to compromise myself by saying whose they are.”

The only difference between modern morality and that on which Father Gerard acted was that now-a-days men say, “Have recourse to evasions.” Then men said, “Say what you like, it is their fault if they think it true.” It is evident that of the two courses of proceeding, the plain-spoken old way is the least open to abuse. No one certainly would have recourse to it excepting from a well-weighed plea of a sorrowful necessity. Whereas, on the other hand, evasions are not startling, and the conscience may lay but little stress on the presence or absence of justifying circumstances. For it is most necessary to bear seriously in mind that all Catholic divines then held, and now hold, that to make use of equivocation excepting under those peculiar circumstances that make it lawful, is in itself a sin, and thus no escape from the sin of lying. So Father Garnett plainly said when on his trial,(180) “As I say it is never lawful to equivocate in matters of faith, so also in matters of human conversation, it may not be used promiscually or at our pleasure, as in matters of contract, in matters of testimony, or before a competent judge, or to the prejudice of any third person: in which cases we judge it altogether unlawful.”

It is but fair that, in reading the narrative of times when many lives hung on successful disguise and concealment, we should remember that the modern sense of equivocation was then unknown. Protestant moralists have spoken out their minds plainly enough on this subject.

“Great English authors, Jeremy Taylor, Milton, Paley, Johnson, men of very distinct schools of thought, distinctly say that under certain extreme circumstances it is allowable to tell a lie. Taylor says: ‘To tell a lie for charity, to save a man’s life, the life of a friend, of a husband, of a prince, of a useful and a public person, hath not only been done at all times, but commended by great and wise and good men. Who would not save his father’s life, at the charge of a harmless lie, from persecutors or tyrants?’ Again, Milton says: ‘What man in his senses would deny that there are those whom we have the best ground for considering that we ought to deceive, as boys, madmen, the sick, the intoxicated, enemies, men in error, thieves? I would ask, by which of the Commandments is lying forbidden? You will say, by the ninth. If then my lie does not injure my neighbour, certainly it is not forbidden by this Commandment.’ Paley says: ‘There are falsehoods which are not lies, that is, which are not criminal.’ Johnson: ‘The general rule is, that truth should never be violated; there must, however, be some exceptions. If, for instance, a murderer should ask you which way a man is gone.’ ”(181)

This _language_ would not have been used by Catholics. With them the word “lie” signified a simple falsehood; and an “equivocation” was a false expression used under such circumstances that if they to whom it was addressed were deceived by it, it was their own fault. They had then no right to the truth, and even in some cases it would have been a sin to tell them the truth.

In substance, however, though not in form, the doctrine of Gerard, Southwell, and Garnett, was the same as that of Taylor, Milton, and Johnson. But to confine ourselves to the practice of Father Gerard, this doctrine is not necessary for his defence, and if his conduct be fairly examined, he will be held, even from the modern point of view, to have done no wrong. Protestant moralists, as we have seen, permit men under certain circumstances to tell a lie with intent to deceive. And Catholic moralists permit under such circumstances assertions which would lead the hearers to deceive themselves by neglecting to advert to the limit of the speaker’s obligation to tell the truth. But with regard to Father Gerard’s legal interrogations, we may waive the question whether they are right or wrong in their morality, for we see clearly that he so expressed himself as to show that his words were not intended to be believed.

The real parallel to them, alleged by Gerard himself, as we shall shortly see, is the prisoner’s usual plea of “Not guilty.” This is the only form in which the _question_ is now put to a person accused. But in those days the question was put over and over again, and in every variety of form. To deny was really to plead “Not guilty,” and if this be lawful once, it was lawful whenever they were forced to repeat it. Not only was it a capital offence to be a Priest within the realm, but it was high treason to be reconciled to the Church, or absolved by a Priest, or to harbour or comfort one. Thus the interrogations addressed to prisoners were always intended to make them criminate themselves or others; that is, in the one case to cause them to plead guilty, so that they might be condemned to death on their own confessions; or, in the other case, to force them to become Queen’s evidence, and be accessory to the infliction upon others of the extremest penalties enacted by an unjust law.

The first instance that occurs in Father Gerard’s Life, is that when, after his apprehension, on being questioned he declared that he was quite unacquainted with the family of the Wisemans, and those who were examining him betrayed their informer by crying out, “What lies you tell! Did you not say so-and-so before such a lady as you read your servant’s letter?” Then he adds, “But I still denied it, _giving them good reasons however why, even if it had been true, I could and ought to have denied it_.”(182)

Another time(183) he was confronted with three servants of Lord Henry Seymour, who avouched that he had dined with their mistress and her sister, the Lady Mary Percy, that it was in Lent, and they told how their mistress ate meat, while Lady Mary and Father Gerard ate nothing but fish. “Young flung this charge in my teeth with an air of triumph, as though I could not help acknowledging it, and thereby disclosing some of my acquaintances. I answered that I did not know the men whom he had brought up.

“ ‘But we know you,’ said they, ‘to be the same that was at such a place on such a day.’

“ ‘You wrong your mistress,’ said I, ‘in saying so. I, however, will not so wrong her.’

“ ‘What a barefaced fellow you are!’ exclaimed Young.

“ ‘Doubtless,’ I answered, ‘were these men’s statements true. _As for me, I cannot in conscience speak positively in the matter, for reasons that I have often alleged; let them look to the truth and justice of what they say._’ ”

A third instance is the interview(184) between Father Gerard and the widow Wiseman, in the presence of the Dean of Westminster, Topcliffe, and others. “They wanted to see if she recognized me. So when I came into the room where they brought me, I found her already there. When she saw me coming in with the gaolers, she almost jumped for joy; but she controlled herself, and said to them: ‘Is that the person you spoke of? I do not know him; but he looks like a Priest.’

“Upon this she made me a very low reverence, and I bowed in return. Then they asked me if I did not recognize her?

“I answered: ‘I do not recognize her. _At the same time, you know this is my usual way of answering, and I will never mention any places, or give the names of any persons that are known to me_ (which this lady, however, is not); _because to do __ so, as I have told you before, would be contrary both to justice and charity_.’ ”