Jesuits and Regicide

The abundance of the teaching of the Jesuits on regicide perhaps has its root in the teaching of their founder, 'Saint' Ignatius of Loyola. He wrote:

It would be greatly advantageous, too, not to permit anyone infected with heresy to continue in the government, particularly the supreme government, of any province or town, or in any judicial or honorary position. Finally, if it could be set forth, and made manifest to all, that the moment a man is convicted or held in grave suspicion of heresy he must not be favored with honors or wealth but put down from these benefits. And if a few examples could be made, punishing a few with the penalty of their lives, or with the loss of property and exile, so there could be no mistake about her seriousness of the business of religion, this remedy would be so much more effective…
Obras Completas de San Ignacio de Loyola, Translated by Dwight Cristoanos; Madrid; 1952, p. 880

Such a doctrine is entirely inconsistent with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, who said to Pilate, "My kingdom is not of this world". The "business of religion" spoken of by Loyola is not the faith that follows Christ, but the 'religion' which exalts the papacy, and demands that all submit to it. Those who do not are 'heretics' and, by Loyola's Jesuit doctrine, the fitting objects of the wrath and vengeance of those who do.

But Loyola was not the first papist to teach this doctrine. The most exalted of 'catholic' theologians, the 'angelic doctor' 'Saint' Thomas Aquinas, taught almost three hundred years prior to Loyola that it is proper to execute 'heretics' (Summa Theologica, ii. Q. xi, Article III, ¶¶ 5,6). And Aquinas defined a 'heretic' as one who differs from the pope in doctrine (Summa Theologica, ii. Q. xi, Article II, Reply 3).

These references are not brought up here with any thought of inquiring into the orthodoxy of Lincoln's beliefs, but for the purpose of showing some of the foundation upon which papists have in the past justified and, theoretically, can justify murder.

So, when the Jesuits teach the doctrine of regicide, it's only a shade of an already well-established tradition. Following are some quotes of Jesuit scholars on the topic:

In the Opuscula Theologica of Martin Bécan, at p. 130, the following passage occurs:—
"Every subject may kill his prince when the latter has taken possession of the throne as a usurper, and history teaches, in fact, that in all nations those who kill such tyrants are treated with the greatest honour. But even when the ruler is not a usurper, but a prince who has by right come to the throne, he may be killed as soon as he oppresses his subjects with improper taxation, sells the judicial offices, and issues ordinances in a tyrannical manner for his own peculiar benefit."
The Jesuits, A Complete History of Their Open and Secret Proceedings From the Foundation of the Order to the Present Time, by Theodor Griesinger, p. 508

In a similar way writes Paul Comitolo, an Italian Jesuit, in his Decisiones Morales, book iv. p. 458:—
"It is allowable to kill an illegal aggressor, even be he general, prince, or king, as innocence has more value than the life of a fellow-creature, and a ruler who maltreats the citizens ought to be annihilated as a wild, cruel beast."
Griesinger, p. 508

Father Commolet, of Paris, went still further when, in preaching, on a Sunday in 1594, in the Jesuit church there, he took for the text of his sermon that portion of the Book of Judges where it is related that Ehud killed the King of the Moabites. So the pious Father exclaimed with evident allusion to King Henry IV, "We require an Ehud, we require another Ehud, be he monk, soldier, or shepherd." In the further course of his sermon he spoke of the King above-mentioned as a Nero, Moabite, Holofernes, and Herod, and loaded his hearers with the most bitter reproaches for allowing such a false, newly-converted person to remain on the throne; and, lastly, he hinted that "the crown might be conferred, by election, upon another family."
Griesinger, pp. 508-509

With such principles Father Hermann Buchenbaum entirely agreed, and, in the Medulla Theología Moralis, permission to murder all offenders of mankind and the true faith, as well as enemies of the Society of Jesus, is distinctly laid down. This Moral Theology of Father Buchenbaum is held by all the Society as an unsurpassed and unsurpassable pattern-book, and was on that account introduced, with the approval of their General, into all their colleges.
Griesinger, p. 509

Immanuel Sâ says, in his aphorisms, under the word "Clericus":"The rebellion of an ecclesiastic against a king of the country in which he lives, is no high treason, because an ecclesiastic is not the subject of any king." "Equally right, he adds further, "is the principle that anyone among the people may kill an illegitimate prince; to murder a tyrant, however, is considered, indeed, to be a duty."
Griesinger, p. 509

Adam Tanner, a very well known and highly-esteemed Jesuit professor in Germany, uses almost the identical words, and the not less distinguished Father Johannes Mariana, who taught in Rome, Palermo, and Paris, advances this doctrine in his book De Rege (lib. i. p. 54), published with the approbation of the General Aquaviva and of the whole Society, when he says: "It is a wholesome thought, brought home to all princes, that as soon as they begin to oppress their subjects, and, by their excessive vices, and, more especially, by the unworthiness of their conduct, make themselves unbearable to the latter, in such a case they should be convinced that one has not only a perfect right to kill them, but that to accomplish such a deed is glorious and heroic."
Griesinger, p. 509

Father Nicolaus Serrarius, also, an Italian Jesuit, expresses himself in a similar way in his Commentary on the Bible, and, especially in his explanation of the murder perpetrated by Ehud on King Eglon, he makes use of the following words:—
"Many learned men think that Ehud had done well, and, on this ground, indeed, that he had been impelled thereto by God; I say, however, that not only was this so, but there is yet another point of view, namely, that such a proceeding against a tyrant is perfectly justifiable. When a ruler proves, by his mode of governing, that he is a tyrant, he may, in such case, be slain by any of his vassals or subjects, irrespective of any oath rendered to him, or of waiting for any sentence or decree from any judge whatever."
Griesinger, pp. 509-510

The well-known and justly celebrated Bellarmin expresses himself almost still more plainly—the same Bellarmin who, by the demand of the Jesuits, was translated by the Pope among the saints—when, in his work, De summa Pontificis Autoritate (tom. iv. p. 180), he thus writes: "It is not the affair of ecclesiastics, or even of monks, to kill kings through artifice, and even sovereign pontiffs are not accustomed to crush princes in this manner. But, when they have warned the same in a fatherly way, excluded them from communion and the sacrament, absolved subjects, when it becomes necessary, from their oath of allegiance, and lastly, deprived monarchs of their royal authority and dignity, it belongs to other than ecclesiastics to proceed to execution."
Griesinger, p. 510

But most precise are the words of the work, so highly prized above all others by the Roman Curie, Defensio Fidei Catholicœ et Apostolicœ (Defence of the Catholic and Apostolic Faith) of the Jesuit Suarez, which appeared in Lisbon in the year 1614, as therein is stated (lib. vi. cap. iv., Nos. 18 and 14): "It is an article of faith that the Pope has the right to depose heretical and rebellious kings, and a monarch dethroned by the Pope is no longer a king or legitimate prince. When such an one hesitates to obey the Pope after he is deposed, he becomes a tyrant, and may be killed by the first comer. Especially when the public weal is assured by the death of the tyrant, it is allowable for anyone to kill the latter."
Griesinger, p 510

Truly regicide could not be taught by clearer words, and the Parliament of Paris was so horrified thereat, that it caused the book to be at once burned by the hand of the executioner, on the 16th of June 1614. The sons of Loyola, on the other hand, declared that a more learned, or God-fearing book, had never appeared, and that, therefore, whoever assailed it would be attacked by the Church. Indeed, from this time forth no Jesuit professor whatever wrote on Moral Theology, or any similar subject, without adopting the teaching of Suarez; and many, as for instance, the Fathers Ribadeneira, Commolet, Salmeron, Jacob Keller, Antony Jantarell, Baptist Bauny, James Herreau, John Dicastille, M. Escobar, Jacob Gretser, and others, ventured to go beyond him in their dcotrines. But how, indeed, could this be otherwise? One need only go into the Church of Holy Ignatius, in Rome, and look at the pictures there which adorn the four sides of the cupola, to gather the sentiments of the Order of Jesus in relation to murder, especially as concerns regicide. On one side is to be seen Jael as she destroyed her guest Sisera by striking a nail through his skull; on the second side Judith, as, impelled by the spirit of God, she cuts off the head of Holofernes; on the third side, Samson slaying the Philistines; while on the fourth appears David after he has killed Goliath. Lastly, in the middle of the cupola is to be seen the Holy Ignatius, surrounded by a halo of glory, and launching great pillars of fire on all the four quarters of the globe, as if desirous of putting all lands of the earth in flames. And now, I ask, can the spirit of Jesuitism be more plainly expressed than it is thus indicated; or, in other words, is there not a proof in these emblems that the Jesuits would be in contradiction to themselves if they had put forward any other teaching than this, that it is allowable to remove out of the world, in one way or other, anyone, let him even be a king, who stands in their way?
Griesinger, pp. 110-111

Following are some passages from The Jesuits Unveiled, by former Roman priest John Claudius Pitrat, section XIV, Regicide, pp. 132-137.

We are allowed to kill an unjust aggressor, though he might be General, Prince, or King—innocence is always more useful than injustice—and a prince who persecutes his subjects is a wild, cruel, and noxious beast, which ought to be killed.
The R. F. Jesuit Paul Comitolo, Moral Decisions, Book 4, p. 458

Jesuits, explain at least in what circumstances a king will be a tyrant. If you term "tyrant" a King who does not favor you and the Pope, he certainly is not a tyrant; witness Henry VI., King of France, whom you have poignarded, and so many others whom you have immolated with iron or poison.

Every subject may kill his Prince in the case of usurpation. It is so right that the murderers of such tyrants have been in all nations highly honored. However, it is to be supposed that he is a usurper, for if he has a probable right it is sinful to kill him.
The R. F. Jesuit Martin Becan, Opusculee Theologiques, p. 130

According to you, Jesuits, a usurper is that one who is not King or Emperor by Divine right. But he is King or Emperor by Divine right who has been crowned and anointed with the holy chrism, or he who favors your Order and the Pope: your history strongly induces us to believe so. Then all the other Princes are reputed usurpers and ought to be killed. Kings, Emperors, chiefly Presidents of Republics, who govern by the free will and election of the people, and not by pretended Divine right, study this lesson and keep carefully in your mind that every one of your subjects or fellow-citizens may kill you, not only without sin, but even in the name of God, whom the Jesuits represent (at least they say so) in this world and in his church.

A tyrant may be killed by open force and arms. However, the best way is to use fraud and stratagem, in order to preserve the country from private and public dangers.
The R. F. Jesuit Mariana, Reg. Institut., Liber. 6. 1.

Jesuits, what kind of owls you are! You show never your sharp nails except in darkness. You never sharpen and handle your poignards except in the night.

A tyrant is not a lawful king. Then any one of the people may kill him—Unusquisque de populo potest inum uidere.
The R. F. Jesuit Emmanuel Sa

And the constitution? And the laws? Have not the people legal means to get rid of a tyrant? May a single individual manage the interests of the citizens without their consent? And do you believe that a nation will be low and infamous so far as to murder its chief? O! no, you alone Jesuits and your disciples, are capable of such criminal meanness and cruelty.

Any one may kill a tyrant who is such really—tyrannus quoad substantiam. It is glorious to exterminate him—illum exterminare gloriosum est.
The R. F. Jesuit Adam Tanner

The Catholics honored Garnet as a martyr. Every body has heard of the ear of wheat, upon which a drop of blood had fallen: the face of father Garnet was painted on it with the most striking likeness.
The R. F. Jesuit Feller. Dictionnaire Historique

However, who was this strange martyr? The principal leader of the conspiracy termed "Gunpowder Plot;" a cruel fanatic who prayed publicly in the following manner: "God destroy a perfidious nation (England); exterminate her from the land of the living, that we may joyfully pay to Jesus Christ the praises which we owe to him."

Who was this Reverend Father Jesuit? A monster who, asked if it was lawful to cause the death of several innocent in killing many culpable, answered cruelly and without hesitation: "If it is useful to the Roman Catholic faith, and if the culpable are more numerous than the innocent, it is right to cause their death."

The conspirators Catesby, Greenwell, Tesmond, Garnet, and Oldercorn, had spent one year in digging a mine below the Parliament (England). They intended to blow up the Halls of the Commons and Lords, and thus kill all their members, the King and his Ministers. Moreover, the Reverend Father Jesuit Garnet made many clear and important confessions, which lie in the archives of England, signed by the hands of this regicide.

In 1594, the Reverend Father Jesuit Commolet chose for the text of a sermon the passage of the book of Judges, in which it is related that Ehud killed the King of the Moabites. He exclaimed, in pointing out Henry IV., King of France: "We want an Ehud whoever he may be, whether monk, or soldier, or shepherd!" This Reverend Father Jesuit termed Henry IV. a "Nero," a "Moab," a "Holofernes," a "Herod." On a certain day, be summoned his auditory, because, said he, they endured on the throne a false convert.
History of Paris, by Dulaure

The Reverend Father Jesuit Nicolas Serrarius praised the murder of the King Eglon by Ehud. In writing about this fact he said: "Many learned think that Ehud. was right, because he was inspired by God, and for many other considerations, chiefly because such a deed is an ordinary right against Tyrants.
Commentaries of the Bible by this Reverend Father Jesuit

To kill an heretical King is an action meritorious before God. Neither Henry III., nor Henry IV., nor the Elector of Saxony, nor Queen Elizabeth, are true sovereigns. The action of James Clement killing Henry III. was an heroical one. If it is possible to war against the Bearnais (Henry IV.), let us war; but, if we cannot war, let us kill him.
The R. F. Jesuit Guignard—who was hung—Fragment of the Suit

Rome sees this driver (Henry IV.) ruling France—this Anthropophagi—this monster bathing in blood. Will not one rise to take arms against this wild beast? Will we not have a Pope using his axe for the salvation of France?
The R. F. Jesuit Charles Scribanius

The Reverend Father Jesuit Gabriel Malagrida plotted, during the ministry of Pombal, against the life of Joseph I., King of Portugal. He had assured the conspirators that the murderer of the King should not be guilty even of a venial sin, because Joseph did not like the Jesuits. This Reverend Father was hung and burnt with his colleagues Mathos and Alexander.
History—Fragments of the Suit

The world witnessed lately a magnificent and great deed for the instruction of the impious princes. Clement acquired, by killing the King, an illustrious name—ingens sibi nomen fecit. He died, Clement, the eternal honor of France—aeternum Gallice decus—according to the opinion of a great many; he was a youth with a candid spirit and delicate body, but a superior strength fortified his arm and his mind.
The R. F. Jesuit Mariana—De Rege, Liber 1, p. 14

This book, De Rege, was dedicated to Philip III., King of Spain. Such a deed characterizes the Jesuits, who live but supported by poignards, and by applying the most odious principles. "To corrupt in order to get power and to govern," has been always one of their devices.

When a Prince governs tyrannically, he may lawfully be killed by his vassals or subjects, even with aguettes and poison, in spite of the oath of faithfulness taken in his hands; this is lawful even without previous sentence or order of any judge.…Any one may kill a usurper if there is no other way to get rid of him.
The R. F. Jesuit Emmanuel Sa

"Certainly," exclaims the Reverend Father Jesuit Andrew Delio—"any one is allowed to kill a usurper if he can not be dethroned by other means!"

"Is it not strange that men professing to be monks, to whom I have never been and will never be noxious, daily attempt my life?"
Words of Henry IV., King of France. Memoires de Sully Ministre de Henry IV.—Tome 1, Lettre de Henry IV

The same Henry IV. told Sully and others of his friends: "You do not approve of my calling again the Jesuits; but can you guaranty my life? I know by my own experience that they have designs against me; for I already carry the cicatrices of their wounds. We must neither irritate them longer nor push them to extremities. I consent, then, to their repeal, but quite involuntarily and merely by necessity."
Memoires de Sully

Monks and other clergymen are not allowed to kill the kings with ambushes—and the Popes are not accustomed to this proceeding. When the Sovereign Pontiffs have corrected them paternally, they retrench them by censures from sacraments. They afterwards, if it is necessary, release their subjects from their oath of allegiance; deprive them of their royal dignity and authority; and then, it is the right of others besides the clergymen to act—Executio ad alios pertinet.
The R. F. Jesuit Bellarmine, De Sumni Pontificis auctoritate, Tome 4, p. 180

This Reverend Father Jesuit was such a fanatical worshipper of the Pope, that we read in the Historical Dictionary, by the Reverend Father Jesuit Feller (word Bellarmine), that whilst dying, when the Pope entered his room, he exclaimed: "Lord, trouble not thyself, for I am not worthy that thou shouldst enter under my roof; wherefore neither thought I myself worthy to come to thee: but say in a word, and thy servant shall be healed." Luke vii. 6, 7.

Seventy-two of the Theologians of the Jesuits have taught regicide. Americans, does not your hair stand up whilst reading such details? whilst hearing such language? What fanaticism! What cruelty! Could we find words to term, to stigmatize so odious teaching, teaching so horrible!
The Jesuits Unveiled, by John Claudius Pitrat, section XIV, Regicide, pp. 132-137

The Jesuits have always been known as masters of political intrigue, in which regicide is but a useful means to accomplish their ends.

Robert-François Damiens, the son of a gatekeeper, held a succession of jobs as a household servant and was dismissed from several of them for stealing from his employers. On Jan. 5, 1757, he stabbed Louis as the king was about to enter his carriage at Versailles. Louis was only slightly wounded, but the incident might have had severe political repercussions involving the Society of Jesus and the Jansenists, two rival factions within the French Roman Catholic church. Many charged that Damiens was part of a Jesuit plot against the crown, while others suspected that he was an agent for the Parlements (high courts of justice), which had come into conflict with the king by supporting the Jansenists. Nevertheless, the government was unable to prove that the obviously deranged Damiens had been involved in a conspiracy.
Copyright © 1994-2000 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., Damiens, Robert-François

He [Henry IV] was assassinated in Paris on May 14, 1610, by a fanatical Roman Catholic named François Ravaillac.
Copyright © 1994-2000 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., Henry IV

The society of the Jesuits, which began in the year 1534 with seven members, had now come to number not less than 7000, and it was everywhere recognized as one of the most powerful agencies of the counter-reformation. In many directions its influence was beneficial, but there can be no doubt as to its disastrous results in France. The dagger of Ravaillac pointed the way to the discontinuance of the States-General, the expatriation of the Huguenots, the wasting warfare of the last days of Louis XIV., the degrading, despotism of the next reign, and the ruthless surgery of the guillotine. Such were the cumulative results of the abandonment of the broad and noble policy inaugurated by Henry in 1598. At the time of his death they were of course too remote to be foreseen, but it was clear to everybody that the power of the Jesuits was rapidly growing, and it was dreaded by many people for its ultramontane and Spanish tendencies.
New France and New England, by John Fiske, Boston and New York: Houghton, Mifflin, and Company, 1902, pp. 73-74

On the 16th of May, 1610, on the eve of his campaign against Austria, he [Henry IV] was murdered by Ravaillac who confessed having been inspired by the writing of [Jesuit] Fathers Mariana and Suarez. These two sanctioned the murders of heretic "tyrants" or those insufficiently devoted to the Papacy's interests. The duke of Epemon, who made the king read a letter while the assassin was lying in wait, was a notorious friend of the Jesuits, and Michelet proved that they knew of this attempt. In fact, Ravaillac had confessed to the Jesuit Father d'Aubigny just before and, when the judges interrogated the priest, he merely replied that God had given him the gift to forget immediately what he heard in the confessional.
The Secret History of the Jesuits, by Edmund Paris, The Protestant Truth Society, London, 1975, p. 49

"The whole school of theologians and ecclesiastical lawyers," says Parsons, "maintain—and it is a thing both certain and matter of faith—that every Christian prince, if he has manifestly departed from the Catholic religion and has wished to turn others from it, is immediately divested of all power and dignity, whether of divine or human right, and that, too, even before the sentence pronounced against him by the supreme pastor and judge; and that all his subjects are free from every obligation of the oath of allegiance which they had sworn to him as their lawful prince; and that they may and must (if they have the power) drive such a man from the sovereignty of Christian men, as an apostate, a heretic, and a deserter of Christ the Lord, and as an alien and an enemy to his country, lest he corrupt others, and turn them from the faith by his example or his command. This true, determined, and undoubted opinion of very learned men, is perfectly comformable and agreeable to the apostolic doctrine.”
History of the Jesuits, by Andrew Steinetz, Vol II, p. 446, citing Responsio ad Edict. Reginæ: Augliæ, sect. ii. n. 157; Ed. Romæ, 1593

I need not inform the reader that the maintenance of those regicidal opinions forms one of the great charges against the Jesuits. They are conscious of the stigma: but instead of at once admitting the evil tendency of these doctrines, and instead of tracing the doctrines themselves to the peculiar exigencies of the times when two parties were striving for victory, the apologists for the Jesuit-regicides strive to mystify the minds of their readers with theological distinctions, and what is perhaps still worse, by enlisting the whole body of Catholic teachers, from the earliest times, into the lawless ranks of king-killers or king-deposers.
Steinmetz, Vol II, pp. 454-55

Home | Modern Day Papal Crimes | Lincoln Assassination | Email