when he or fellow Resisters were attacked he had the right to strike against traitors. 'Thou shalt not kill' was an imperative normally to be obeyed, but since France was still at war with Germany, to strike one's enemy down in a just war was defensible, because the end, the destruction of nazism, was laudable. On the other hand--and the encyclical Nova et Vetera ( 1943) was cited--reprisals were never justified. As for appropriation of property, the 'requisitioning' of provisions and materials--a sore point with many Frenchmen--this was permissible only in cases of absolute necessity.
There the matter rested. The invasion changed everything: what some had regarded as dubious means of carrying on the struggle became legitimised in the eyes of most Frenchmen. However, the repeated interventions of the Hierarchy, well-meaning as they may have been, betray a certain ineptness; they were singularly mistimed, and gave the appearance of giving succour to the Germans, which the overwhelming majority of the bishops in no way sought to do. Once again their clinging to the Vichy regime, and particularly to Pétain, had led them astray.
Unless otherwise stated the place of publication is Paris.