Let us suppose that he asked himself this question. Even if he answered
it in the affirmative, he might have refrained from acting, through fear
that, in his vehemence in warning Sir Everard, there might be a danger
of his breaking the seal of the confessional; or that in vaguely putting
Sir Everard on his guard, he might raise the suspicion that knowledge
obtained in the confessional was the occasion, or the impelling cause of
that warning. Or he might reflect that, if cross-questioned by Sir
Everard, it would be difficult to remember, at a moment's notice,
exactly how much of his knowledge of Catesby's schemes was sealed by
confession, and how much unsealed.
Yet when he looked at his young host, and at his charming and excellent
wife, still a mere girl, but with two little children beside her, in
their beautiful and happy home, the model of what a Christian home ought
to be, and a centre of Catholic society; and when he considered that
hitherto Sir Everard Digby had been as upright in character as in
stature, and as distinguished in virtue as in appearance, might he not
have told himself that any effort was worth making to try to save him
from a terrible crime and its terrible consequences?
He was the only man who could do so! He alone had "a general knowledge
of Mr Catesby's intention,"[187] untrammelled by the secresy of either
oath or confessional, and he[188] "noticed the new intimacy that had
sprung up between Catesby and Digby," and surmised truly enough that
Digby had been "drawn in." Yet it is evident from Sir Everard's letters
from the Tower, that Father Garnet never lifted a finger nor uttered a
word to hinder his host from joining, or proceeding in, the conspiracy
which was to work his ruin. This is the more remarkable because Father
Garnet might have been expected not only to wish to save Sir Everard
from the guilt and the dangers of the Plot, but also to prevent a
conspiracy which he so much dreaded from being strengthened by the
support of a man of considerable wealth. The most probable origin of his
inaction in this matter was the same weakness of character which had
exhibited itself in his speech to Sir Everard about the Pope and the
"stirrs," and in his failure to reveal his "general knowledge, had of Mr
Catesby out of confession," whereby he said he offended God and the
King. His silence and inaction were certainly not owing to any temporary
revival of confidence in his mind. On the contrary, he wrote:--[189] "I
remained in the greatest perplexity that ever I was in my life, and
could not sleep a' nights." He added, "I did offer up all my devotions
and masses that God of his mercy and infinite Providence would dispose
of all for the best, and find means which were pleasing unto Him, to
prevent so great a mischief" [as the Gunpowder Plot]. "I knew that this
would be infinitely displeasing to my Superiors in Rome, in so much as
at my second conference with Mr Greenway, I said, 'Good Lord, if this
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account