"Here, again, it is impossible to suppose that the all-important
point was the one omitted. It is clear, however, that the mention
of a confession made to Greenway would _primâ facie_ afford a
presumption that this particular matter had been confessed, thus
furnishing a foundation whereon to build; and knowing, as we do,
how evidence was manipulated, it is quite conceivable that the copy
now extant incorporates the improved version thus suggested."
Father Gerard has quoted the sentence about Bates and Greenway
correctly,[280] but he has not observed that Coke, in his opening
speech, is stated on the same authority to have expressed himself as
follows:--
"In November following comes Bates to Greenway the Jesuit, and
tells him all his master's purpose; he hears his confession,
absolves him, and encourageth him to go on, saying it is for the
good of the Catholic cause, and therefore warrantable."[281]
I acknowledge that Coke's unsupported assertion is worth very little;
but I submit that so practised an advocate would hardly have produced a
confession which, if it contained no more than Father Gerard supposes,
would have directly refuted his own statement. Father Gerard, I fancy,
fails to take into account the difficulties of note-takers in days prior
to the invention of shorthand. The report-taker had followed the early
part of Bates's examination fairly well. Then come the words quoted by
Father Gerard at the very bottom of the page. May not the desire to get
all that he had to say into that page have been too strong for the
reporter, especially as, after what Coke had said earlier in the day,
the statement that Bates 'confessed' might reasonably be supposed to
cover the subject of confession? 'Catesby ... discovered the project
unto him, shortly after which discovery' he confessed. What can he be
supposed to have confessed except the project discovered? and, if so,
Greenway's absolution implies approval.
Father Gerard, moreover, though he quotes from another manuscript
Garnet's objection that 'Bates was a dead man,' thereby meaning that
Bates's testimony was now worthless, entirely omits to notice that the
preceding paragraph is destructive of his contention. A question had
arisen as to whether Greenway had shown contrition.
"Nay," replied Mr. Attorney, "I am sure that he had not, for to
Bates he approved the fact, and said he had no obligation to reveal
it to any other ghostly father, to which effect Bates his
confession was produced, which verified as much as Mr. Attorney
said, and then Mr. Attorney added that he had heard by men more
learned than he, that if for defect of contrition it was not a
sacrament, then it might lawfully be revealed.
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