Read The Vatican Pimpernel for Free Online

headquarters) had him under observation. At the same time, the journey home to Ireland, presumably a fairly innocuous event, hardly seems to merit such strong condemnation. There is no evidence that there was any personal antagonism between the Monsignor and the diplomat. At the same time, MacWhite was a very acute and well-informed observer of the scene in Rome. Very little is known about O’Flaherty’s unofficial activities on behalf of prisoners of war at this stage. MacWhite’s report gives a strong reason to believe that the Monsignor had commenced this work as early as the autumn of 1942.
    There seems to have been some tension between MacWhite and his counterpart at the Holy See, Kiernan. In December 1943, in a report back to the Department, Kiernan notes:
    MacWhite got very huffy with me and said I have no jurisdiction in Rome outside the strict Vatican territory and so on. But I do everything to avoid hurting his sensitivity. He wants me to report to him every time an Irish priest or religious comes to me about some ‘protection’ difficulty. 15
    Kiernan was not the sort of man who would hand over any of his responsibilities to another. However, MacWhite may have had reason to be careful in his dealings with Kiernan. As early as December 1942 a clear divergence emerges as to how things ought to be handled. MacWhite drafted a letter to Kiernan which he dated 10 December. As he did not sign it, it is reasonable to presume it was never sent. At the same time it is a clear reflection of his concerns:
    I have your letters of the 22nd and 23rd referring to certain action taken by you in connection with the protection of Irish property in Italy without first consulting me and note your preference for Departmental lessons in official correctness. You have, of course, your own way of doing things.
    Five weeks ago I had a cable from the Department instructing me to remain in Rome at all costs for the protection of our citizens and in case I had to leave I was to ask the Holy See to arrange for their protection ‘through Kiernan or otherwise’. Instead of arranging to have this done through the Nuncio, as I might have done in conformity with official correctness, I called you in for consultation and asked you to undertake it. This is my way of doing things.
    When at your legation some weeks ago you were very insistent in urging me to fake a passport to permit a British prisoner of war to enter the Vatican, I suppose this is also a matter in regard to which you would prefer the Department to be the judge of your ‘official correctness’. 16
    Early 1943 saw the turning point in the War, with the Russian success at Stalingrad and the Allied victory in North Africa. The Italian Fascist authorities began to tighten their grip on Rome as a result. As part of this exercise, they began a process of searching out leading figures in the city who they considered might be a focus of dissent in the months ahead. Notable among these were Jews and prominent Italian anti-Fascists who might provide leadership to the Romans. By this stage also, O’Flaherty’s reputation as the person to approach if one needed assistance had become well established. Many people whose situation was now precarious had already got to know him at pre-war social events. As one of his closest colleagues described the situation some time later:
    He has been at the Vatican since 1922, and seems to know everyone in Rome. Everybody knows Monsignor O’Flaherty – and, what is more important, they all adore him. 17
    Initially the Monsignor’s role was merely to make suggestions to friends and acquaintances who felt that they might be in danger of arrest. He very quickly became a rallying point for those who were under threat, most particularly Jews and Anti-Fascists. He referred them to safe locations, usually monasteries or convents, where he felt they might find sanctuary. However, as fears grew and more and more raids