Home
  By Author [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Title [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Language
all Classics books content using ISYS

Download this book: [ ASCII ]

Look for this book on Amazon


We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month
fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

Title: History of the Jesuits - Their origin, progress, doctrines, and designs
Author: Nicolini, Giovanni Battista
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
Copyright Status: Not copyrighted in the United States. If you live elsewhere check the laws of your country before downloading this ebook. See comments about copyright issues at end of book.

*** Start of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "History of the Jesuits - Their origin, progress, doctrines, and designs" ***

This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.



images generously made available by The Internet
Archive/American Libraries.)



[Illustration: _Loyola_

_Rubens._ _Hinchliff._]



                         HISTORY OF THE JESUITS:
                              THEIR ORIGIN,
                    PROGRESS, DOCTRINES, AND DESIGNS.

                                   BY
                             G. B. NICOLINI,
                                OF ROME,
         AUTHOR OF “THE HISTORY OF THE PONTIFICATE OF PIUS IX.,”
                   “THE LIFE OF FATHER GAVAZZI,” ETC.

                                 LONDON:
               HENRY G. BOHN, YORK STREET, COVENT GARDEN.
                                  1854.

                      PRINTED BY HARRISON AND SONS:
                LONDON GAZETTE OFFICE. ST. MARTIN’S LANE.



PREFACE.


I trust that in the following pages I have succeeded in the task I
proposed to myself, of conveying to my readers a just and correct idea
of the character and aims of the brotherhood of Loyola. At least I have
spared no pains to accomplish this end. I honestly believe that the book
was wanted; for liberal institutions and civil and religious freedom have
no greater enemies than that cunning fraternity; while it is equally
true, that although the Jesuits are dreaded and detested on all sides as
the worst species of knaves, there are few who are thoroughly acquainted
with their eventful history, and with all those arts by which the fathers
have earned for themselves a disgraceful celebrity. The fault does not
altogether lie with the public; for, strange to say, there is no serious
and complete history of this wonderful Society. I have done my best to
supply the deficiency; and I indulge the hope that, if the book is
fortunate enough to challenge public attention, it may be productive of
some good. In no other epoch of history, certainly, have the Jesuits
been more dangerous and threatening for England than in the present. I
am no alarmist. I refuse to believe that England will relapse under the
Papal yoke, and return to the darkness and ignorance of the middle ages,
because some score of citizens pass over to the Romish communion; but at
the same time I do believe that many bold and less reflective persons
make too light of the matter, and are wrong in refusing to countenance
vigorous measures, not for religious persecution, but to check the
insolence and countermine the plots of these audacious monks. It is
true that there exists a great difficulty in deciding what measures are
to be adopted for accomplishing this end. It is repugnant, doubtless,
to a liberal and generous mind, and it is unworthy of a free and great
nation, to persecute any sect, and to make different castes in the same
body of citizens. But, it may fairly be asked, are monks, and especially
Jesuits, really English citizens, in the strictest sense of the word? Do
they recognise Queen Victoria as their legitimate sovereign? Are they
prepared to yield a loyal obedience to the laws of the land? To all
these questions I answer, No! Even when born in England, they do not
consider themselves Englishmen. They claim the privileges which the name
confers, but will not accept the obligations it imposes. Their country
is Rome; their sovereign the Pope; their laws the commands of their
General. England they consider an accursed land; Englishmen heretics,
whom they are under an obligation to combat. The perusal of this work
will, I imagine, prove beyond the possibility of contradiction that, from
their origin, the Jesuits have constantly and energetically laboured
towards this object. I cannot too much impress upon the minds of my
readers that the Jesuits, by their very calling, by the very essence of
their institution, are bound to seek, by every means, right or wrong, the
destruction of Protestantism. This is the condition of their existence,
the duty they must fulfil, or cease to be Jesuits. Accordingly, we find
them in this evil dilemma. Either the Jesuits fulfil the duties of their
calling, or not. In the first instance, they must be considered as the
bitterest enemies of the Protestant faith; in the second, as bad and
unworthy priests; and in both cases, therefore, to be equally regarded
with aversion and distrust.

Can no measure, then be taken against these aliens, who reside in
England purposely to trouble her peace? Cannot a nation do something
to protect itself, without incurring the reproach of being intolerant?
What! When some English writers and newspapers insist that measures
should be taken against certain other foreigners, who trouble not the
peace of Great Britain, though they may disturb the imperial dreams of
a neighbouring tyrant; and when the local authorities in Jersey have,
to a certain extent, resorted to such measures, shall England be denied
the right to take steps against the enemies of her faith, her glory, and
her prosperity? The important point of the question which I submit to
the consideration of those who, indifferent in matters of religion, care
very little whether Jesuits convert a half of the nation to Romanism, is
this: In England, the religious question involves also the question of
national peace, greatness, and prosperity. If one-half of England were
Papists, Queen Victoria, in given circumstances, could not depend upon
the allegiance of her subjects, nor the Parliament on the execution of
the laws. It may be that the priests (to be liberal in my hypothesis)
will teach the ignorant and bigoted Popish population to respect and
obey the Queen—but most assuredly they will also command them, and,
moreover, under penalty of eternal damnation, to obey, in preference,
the orders of the Pope, if they are in contradiction to those of the
Sovereign. Their cry will be:—the Pope before the Queen; the canon laws
before the civil code! Now, I ask, if the Pope were sure of being obeyed
by half the English population, would England long enjoy her liberties,
would she prosper in her enterprises, and continue to be, without
contradiction, the first and most powerful nation of Europe? Can it be
imagined that that admirable combination of rights and duties embodied
in the constitution, that respect of the Sovereign for the rights of the
citizens, and that unaffected love of the people for the Sovereign, which
form the real strength and power of Britain, could long be preserved? I
need not insist further on this point. I believe, however, I have said
enough to shew that, whether any other measures can be taken against this
insidious Order or not, the clause in the Emancipation Act concerning the
religious communities should be rigorously executed.

I am sensible that the above remarks would perhaps have been more
appropriate to the Conclusion of the work; but, as they have not a
general character, but are considerations more particularly submitted
to an English public, I have thought it better to consign them to the
Preface, which may be modified, according to place and circumstances,
without altering the general features of the work to which it belongs.

In the compilation of this work, I have studiously kept my promise not
to advance a single fact for which I could not produce unquestionable
authority; and, while I expect that my deductions will be impugned, I can
safely defy any one to contradict the facts upon which they are based.
When I have quoted original authors, on the authority of others, I have
never done so without ascertaining, by my own inspection, or by that of
friends—when the works were not to be had here—that the quotations were
correct. I have entered somewhat minutely into details in the first part
of the History, partly, perhaps, a little influenced by the interminable
prolixity of the Jesuit authors I consulted, and partly because I deemed
it necessary, in order that my readers might form a correct idea of the
mechanism, the principles, and the proceedings of the Society. Once
persuaded that the reader was acquainted with the acts and ways of the
fraternity, I have abandoned detail, and given such broad features of the
principal events as might afford instructive lessons. I have endeavoured
to reject from the narrative all that is extraneous to the subject. I
have overlooked embellishments. I do not claim the merit of being an
elegant or eloquent writer, still less in a language which is not my
own, and in which I was often at a loss to express my ideas. But I must
confess that I have some hope that in the eyes of an indulgent reader the
consequences I have deduced from the facts will be found to be logical,
the language intelligible, and the work not altogether wanting in order.

In the course of the publication, I have received many letters—some
friendly, others insulting; but, as they were all anonymous, I could
answer neither. In any case, I should only have answered my friends,
and thanked them for their advice; while, in regard to the second
class of my correspondents, even although the “modest authors” had not
deemed it prudent “to conceal their names,” I should assuredly not have
condescended to furnish a reply, contenting myself with the simple
reflection that it is naturally unpalatable to the culprit to have his
crimes dragged into the light of day.

I cannot conclude this Preface without expressing my warmest gratitude
to the librarians of the different public establishments in Edinburgh,
and especially to the librarian of the Advocates’ Library, and his
assistants, for the liberal manner in which they have put at my disposal
the books contained in their collections.

Finally, as I am sensible (from a conviction of my own insufficiency)
that the work cannot be productive to me of either renown or
consideration, my chief hope is, that it may prove useful and beneficial
to some portion at least of the English community, otherwise I should
indeed have cause immensely to regret my pains and my labour.

    EDINBURGH, _December 4, 1852_.



CONTENTS.


                                                                      PAGE

    PREFACE,                                                           iii


                              INTRODUCTION.

    The Author dissuaded from writing the History of the
    Jesuits—Reasons for undertaking the Work—Difficulty of well
    delineating the Character of a Jesuit—The Author pledges
    himself to be Impartial,                                             1

                               CHAPTER I.

                                1500-40.

                          ORIGIN OF THE ORDER.

    State of Europe in the Sixteenth Century—Italy the Centre
    of Civilisation—Alexander VI.—Julius II.—Leo X.—His
    Indifference in matters of Religion—Obliged by the Court to
    Excommunicate Luther—Reformation in Germany, England, and
    Switzerland—Ignatius of Loyola—His Birth and Education—Wounded
    at Pampeluna—He decides upon becoming a Saint—The _Spiritual
    Exercises_—Origin of the Book—Crétineau—Joly—Analysis of the
    _Spiritual Exercises_ by Cardinal Wiseman—Some Quotations from
    it—Pilgrimage of Loyola to Palestine—His Return—His Attempts
    at Proselytism in Barcelona—In Alcada—In Paris—The First
    Ten Companions of Loyola—They take the Vow of Obedience at
    Montmartre in 1534—They depart for Italy—Projected Missions in
    the Holy Land—Pierre Caraffa, afterwards Paul IV.—Loyola and
    his Companions in Rome—They conquer all Opposition, and the
    intended Society is approved of by a Bull of Paul III., 1540,        5

                               CHAPTER II.

                                1540-52.

                      CONSTITUTIONS OF THE SOCIETY.

    State of the Roman Church at the Epoch of the Establishment
    of the Society—Adrian VI.’s extraordinary Avowal—Loyola’s
    remarkable Cleverness in framing the Constitutions—Analysis of
    this Work—Passive Obedience—Poverty—Instruction given gratis,
    and why—Ways by which the Jesuits get at Wealth,                    30

                              CHAPTER III.

                                1540-53.

                               HIERARCHY.

    The Members of this Society are divided into Four
    Classes—Gioberti and Pellico upon a Fifth Secret Class—The
    Novices—Their Trials—Their Vows—Scholars—Qualities they must
    possess—Coadjutors Temporal and Spiritual—Their several
    Duties—Their Vows—Professed Members—The First Class in the
    Society—They take a Fourth Vow of implicit Obedience to the
    Holy See—Ceremony in taking the Vows—They as well as the
    Coadjutors are bound to live by Alms—The General of the
    Order—How Elected—His Attributions—His Powers—The Provincial
    and other inferior Officials of the Order—Their Attributions,       45

                               CHAPTER IV.

                                1541-48.

              PROGRESS OF THE ORDER, AND ITS FIRST GENERAL.

    Ignatius elected General, at first refuses the
    office—Afterwards accepts of it—His Zeal and Activity in
    promoting the Interests of the Order—Charitable Institutions
    in Rome—He co-operates in re-establishing the Inquisition—The
    Albigenses—Rules of the Tribunal—Terror which it spread through
    Italy—The Jesuits in Missions in various parts of Europe—The
    first Jesuits in Great Britain—Instructions given them by
    Loyola—Their Proceedings,                                           57

                               CHAPTER V.

                               1547-1631.

                           THE FEMALE JESUITS.

    Their origin—Donna Isabella—Rosello—Trouble which they gave
    to Ignatius—He refuses to take charge of them—Attempts of
    some Women to establish the Order of Female Jesuits—They are
    Suppressed in 1631—They Revive as the Sisters of the Holy
    Heart,                                                              71

                               CHAPTER VI.

                                1548-56.

         THE FIRST OPPOSITION TO THE ORDER, AND DEATH OF LOYOLA.

    Charles V.—His Interim—He banishes Bobadilla, who opposes
    it—Cano, a Dominican Friar—His Opposition to the Jesuits—He
    is made Bishop of the Canaries—He renounces his Bishopric to
    return to Europe—His Prediction concerning the Society—The
    Archbishop of Toledo lays an Interdict on the College of
    the Jesuits—Disturbance in Saragossa to prevent the Jesuits
    from opening their Chapel—The Jesuits in Portugal—Their
    Idleness and Debauchery—Recall of the Provincial Rodriguez—New
    Superiors—Stratagem to reduce the Members to their Duty—The
    Jesuits in France—Du Prat, Bishop of Clermont, their
    Protector—Henry II., at the recommendation of Cardinal Guise,
    wants to Establish the Jesuits in France—The Parliament refuses
    to Register the Ordinances—Their Establishment opposed by
    the Sorbonne—Also by De Bellay, Archbishop of Paris—Reasons
    adduced by them for their Opposition—The Jesuits obliged to
    leave Paris—Accused at Rome of Heresy—Remarkable unanimity of
    the different Nations in opposing the Establishment of the
    Order—The Jesuits conquer all Opposition—The Order Established
    in direct Opposition to the Reformed Religion—Character of
    Loyola—His Correspondence with the different Sovereigns—His
    Illness and Death, 1556—Partiality of Macaulay, Taylor,
    Stephen, and others, for Loyola and the Jesuits—Reason of this
    Partiality,                                                         75

                              CHAPTER VII.

                               1541-1774.

                                MISSIONS.

    Jesuit Authors who write about them—Mission of East
    India—Francis Xavier—Zeal and Devotedness of the First
    Missionaries—Sketch of the Life and Character of Xavier—He
    Arrives at Goa—Moral State of the Town—Efforts of Xavier to
    Reform it—He Succeeds but Partially—Xavier on the Coast of
    Malabar—His Conduct there—He goes to Malacca—To Japan—His
    intended Mission to China—Opposition of Don Alvarez, Captain
    General of Malacca—Xavier lands at Sancian—His Illness and
    Death, 1552—Appreciation of Xavier’s Merits—Prevarication of
    the Missionaries after Xavier’s Death—Father Nobili introduces
    Idolatry into the Christian form of Worship—He gives himself
    out as a Brahmin—The Jesuits maintain the Distinction of Castes
    among the Converts—Their way of making Christians—They greatly
    exaggerate the number of Converts—Scandalous Idolatry—The
    Court of Rome condemns it—Cardinal de Tournon, Pope’s Legate
    in India—He solemnly condemns the Malabar Rites—Incredible
    Impudence and Audacity of the Jesuits, to elude the Ordinance
    of the Legate—The Pope and the Inquisition confirm the Decree
    of De Tournon—He proceeds to China—His Conduct there—He is
    Expelled from Pekin—His Imprisonment—Cruel Treatment to which
    he is subjected—His Death, 1710—The Jesuits the Authors of his
    Misfortunes—The Pope’s Eulogium on De Tournon—Repeated Decrees
    of the Holy See against the Jesuits—Decline of their Influence
    in India—Principal Feature of Missions—Why the Pope Condemned
    the Malabar Rites—Popish Idolatry—Procession of Good-Friday,        96

                              CHAPTER VIII.

                               1556-1581.

                       THE GENERALS OF THE ORDER.

    Lainez is chosen Vicar-General—Difficulties of holding
    a General Congregation—Paul IV.—His Hatred against the
    Spaniards—Revolt of Bobadilla—How subdued—War between
    Paul IV. and Philip II.—The Duke of Alva in Rome—General
    Congregation—Interference of the Pope—Lainez chosen General—The
    Pope orders that the General should only stay in Office for
    Three Years—Death of Paul IV.—Election of Pius IV.—The Nephew
    of the late Pope Executed—The Jesuits suspected of having
    Participated in that Act of Revenge—The Jesuits accused of
    various Misdemeanours—Lainez in France at the Congress of
    Poissy—He goes to Trent—The Council of Trent—Its Opening and
    Close—Its Results—Influence of the Jesuits—Lainez returns
    to Rome—He Dies, 1565—His Character—Borgia, ex-Duke of
    Candia, elected Third General—His History—Pius V. Cruel and
    Sanguinary—He subjects the Jesuits to Monastic Duties—Borgia
    in Spain and France—Battle of Lepanto, 1571—Defeat of the
    Turks—Eve of St Bartholomew—Death of Borgia, 1572—Mercurianus
    Fourth General—The Jesuits Inherit the Wealth of the Bishop of
    Clermont,                                                          133

                               CHAPTER IX.

                               1560-1600.

    PROCEEDINGS OF THE JESUITS IN THE DIFFERENT COUNTRIES OF EUROPE.

    Jesuits in England under Elizabeth—William Allen establishes
    Colleges at Douay and in Rome for Englishmen—The Jesuits direct
    them—Bull of Pius V. Excommunicating Elizabeth—Character
    given of her by the Jesuits—Campion and Parson at the
    Head of a Jesuit Mission in England—Their Biography—They
    arrive in England—Encourage the Roman Catholics to Disobey
    the Queen—Proclamation against the Jesuits—Their Answer
    to it—Enmity of Gregory XIII. to England—His Character—He
    Encourages all the Insurrections against the Queen—Parson
    and Campion eagerly sought by the Government—Elude the
    Search—Capture of Campion—Divers Opinions concerning his
    Trial—Execution of three Jesuits, Campion, Sherwin, and
    Briant—Parry’s Project for Assassinating the Queen—Encouraged
    by the Jesuits and the Pope’s Nuncio, Ragazzoni—The Jesuits
    attempt to justify Parry—Absurdity of their Vindication—Severe
    Laws against the Jesuits—The most of them leave England—Hume
    on Babington’s Conspiracy—The Jesuits along with the
    Great Armada—The Jesuits actually Troubling the Peace of
    England—Duplicity of their Conduct—A Jesuit, pretending to be
    an ardent Republican in Rome in the last Revolution—Is thrown
    into the Tiber,                                                    151

    Conduct of the Jesuits in Portugal—They prevent Don Sebastian
    from Marrying—Pasquier accuses them of having aspired to
    become Kings of Portugal—The Accusation repeated throughout
    all Europe—They suggest to Don Sebastian the Expedition to
    Morocco—Death of the King—The Jesuits place the Crown on the
    Head of Philip II. of Spain,                                       171

    The Jesuits at last admitted into France—Under what
    Restrictions—Principal Doctrines of the Gallican
    Church—The League—Henry III. of France—His Indolence—His
    Tolerance—Ambition of the Duke of Guise—He is declared Chief
    of the League—Makes a Treaty with the King of Spain—Day of the
    Barricades—The King causes Guise to be Murdered—The Jesuits
    Preach against the King—Clement, a Dominican Friar, stabs
    him, 1589—The Council of Seize order the Preachers to praise
    Clement’s Deed—Henry of Bourbon, King of Navarre, assumes the
    Title of King of France—Opposed by Cardinal de Bourbon—Civil
    War—Henry IV. abjures Calvinism—Siege of Paris—Conduct of
    the Jesuits—Henry Acknowledged as King—Part taken by the
    Jesuits in the League—Barrière attempts to Assassinate the
    King—The Jesuits are his Accomplices—John Chastel—Stabs the
    King—Instigated by the Jesuits—The Jesuits expelled from
    France—Execution of Chastel, and of the Jesuit Guinard—The
    House of Chastel is pulled down—A Pyramid erected to perpetuate
    the Memory of his Crime—Inscription on the Pyramid concerning
    the part the Jesuits had in it—Horrible Doctrines of the
    Jesuits—Reflections upon them,                                     175

    Immense Influence exercised by the Jesuits in Germany—What
    Requisites they had for success—Their Schools and
    Colleges—Their Method of giving Instruction—Even Protestants
    send their Children to their Schools—The Sovereigns of
    Germany support the Jesuits—Albert V. of Bavaria obliges
    his Subjects to subscribe the _Professio Fidei_—Rodolph II.
    Emperor of Germany—Is directed by Father Maggio—Persecutes the
    Protestants, and re-establishes the Roman Catholic Worship,        194

    The Jesuits in Poland—Sigismond the King of the Jesuits—The
    Jesuits’ Paramount Influence employed in re-establishing
    Popery,                                                            202

    Attempt of the Jesuits to convert to Romanism John III. of
    Sweden—The Jesuit Possevin in Stockholm in Disguise—John
    promises to become a Roman Catholic—Haughty Conduct of
    Gregory XIII.—John remains a Protestant, and expels the
    Jesuits—Sigismond succeeds John—War between Sweden and
    Poland—The Jesuits are the Authors of it,                          203

    The Jesuits in Switzerland and Piedmont—Canisius founds
    the College of Friburg—The Waldenses—Their Simplicity and
    Innocence—Persecution and Cruelties exercised against them
    by Possevin—He hunts them as Wild Beasts—Pretends that many
    abjure Protestantism—Reflexions on the Influence and Conduct
    of the Jesuits throughout Europe,                                  205

                               CHAPTER X.

                               1581-1608.

                      COMMOTION AMONG THE JESUITS.

    Acquaviva chosen General—His Character—The Spanish Jesuits
    refuse to obey him—Philip II. takes part with them—Sixtus V.
    supports Acquaviva—Prudence of the latter—His Letter—_Ratio
    Studiorum_—Admirable Plan of Education—Influence which
    it gave them—Origin of the Congregations, 1569—Its rapid
    Increase—Directed by the Jesuits—Who derive immense Power
    from it—Its various Denominations—Internal Life of the
    Jesuit Colleges—Their Studies—The Instruction more Specious
    than Solid—Distinctive Character of Jesuit Writers—They are
    Affected—Exceptions—Bartoli—Segneri—Bourdaloue—Great Change in
    the Policy of the Society—They become Attached to the French
    Interest—Henry IV. re-establishes them in France, 1603—Reasons
    which he adduces to his Minister Sully—He writes to the General
    Congregation in favour of Acquaviva—Affair of Venice—The
    Jesuits leave the Territory of the Republic—Henry IV. sues
    for their Return—Spain opposes it—The Jesuits not allowed to
    re-enter Venice till 1657—Acquaviva’s Success in mastering the
    revolted Province of Spain—Proves ultimately the Ruin of the
    Order,                                                             209

                               CHAPTER XI.

                               1600-1700.

                DOCTRINES AND MORAL CODE OF THE JESUITS.

    Acquaviva’s opinion of St Thomas’s Theology—Molina’s Doctrine
    on Free-will—The Dominicans oppose Molinism—The two parties
    hold thirty-seven Disputations in presence of the Pope—Clement
    VIII. adverse to the Doctrine of the Jesuits—Why he did not
    condemn it—He imposes silence on the two parties—Origin
    of Jansenism—Jansenius—Du Verger de Hauranne, Abbot of St
    Cyran—Jansenius composes the “_Augustinus_” and dies—St Cyran
    Chief of the School—The Nuns of Port-Royal and the D’Arnauld
    family—St Cyran Prisoner at Vincennes—The Jesuits embody the
    essential Doctrines of the _Augustinus_ in five Propositions,
    and oblige the Pope to condemn them—The Jansenists deny
    that such Propositions are contained in the Book—Alexander
    VII. declares by a Bull that they are contained in it—The
    Pope’s Infallibility in Matters of Fact—Why the Jansenists
    took such pains to persuade people that they were good
    Roman Catholics—How the Jesuits had become such a powerful
    Brotherhood—They are no more needed as Theologians—Many Kings
    and Nobles have each his own Confessor—Contrivances of the
    Jesuits to be chosen to this Office—Their very accommodating
    Doctrines—Escobar and his Moral Doctrines of the Jesuits on
    Sin—Invincible Ignorance—Pascal the Provincial—Probable
    Opinion—Mental Reservation—Impiety—Easy way to go to
    Paradise—The Book of Father Barry—Extracts from it—The Month
    of Mary—Ridiculous Ceremonies in honour of the Virgin during
    the Month of May—_Secreta Monita_—How originated—Why we believe
    them to be Apocryphal,                                             230

                              CHAPTER XII.

                               1608-1700.

                  OVERGROWING INFLUENCE OF THE SOCIETY.

    New Phase of the History of the Order—The Jesuits contend
    for Supremacy wherever they are established—Their Influence
    in various Courts—They become Confessors of the Kings of
    France—Assassination of Henry IV.—The Jesuits accused by the
    Parliament of being the Accomplices of Ravaillac—Apologetic
    Letters of Father Cotton, the late King’s Confessor—The
    _Anti-Cotton_, a Pamphlet against the Jesuits—Cotton, Confessor
    of Louis XIII.—Death of Acquaviva, 1615—His Acts—With him
    ends the _prestige_ exercised by the Generals—Election
    of Vitelleschi—His Character—Canonisation of Loyola and
    Xavier—Rules to be observed in making Saints—Quantity of
    Saints found in the Cemetery of St Lorenzo fuor delle
    mura—They are at last discovered to have been dug up from a
    Pagan Burial-place—Feasts on the Canonisation of Loyola and
    Xavier—Impious Panegyrics in their Honour—Solemnisation of
    the Secular Year of the Establishment of the Society—_Imago
    Primi Sæculi_—Some Extracts from it—How Crétineau excuses
    the Extravagancies of the _Imago_—The Book expresses the
    real Feelings of the Jesuits—The greatest Houses have one
    of their Members a Jesuit—The Jesuits under Richelieu—Under
    Mazzarini—Louis XIV. assumes the Government—Beginning of the
    extraordinary Influence of the Order—Louis XIV. and Philip II.
    both bigoted Papists—Both wage War against the Pope—Servility
    of the Jesuits towards Louis XIV.—They are allowed to persecute
    the Protestants—De la Marca’s Formula to be subscribed by the
    Jansenists—They refuse to do so—Persecution raised against
    them—Edict of Nantes—Father Lachaise—His Character—He becomes
    the King’s Confessor—His Ascendancy over the King—Revocation
    of the Edict of Nantes—Massacre of the Huguenots—Their Bodies
    exhumed from the Tombs—Numberless Families obliged to leave
    France—Lachaise becomes an important Personage—His Residence—He
    disposes of _Lettres de Cachet_—What these were—He unites in
    Secret Marriage the King and Madame de Maintenon. The Right
    of disposing of all the Livings and Bishoprics attached to
    the Office of the King’s Confessor—Immense Power which it
    confers upon the Order—Letellier succeeds Lachaise as King’s
    Confessor—His Character—His Persecuting Spirit—By his orders,
    Port-Royal Destroyed from the Foundation, the Tombs Violated,
    and the Bodies of the Deceased given to be Devoured by the
    Dogs,                                                              253

    The Jesuits in Spain—Their Influence under Philip III. and
    IV.—Olivarez leaves them little share of Authority—They
    resolved to be Revenged—Their Conspiracy in Portugal—Father
    Corea and the Duke of Braganza—Crétineau confesses the part
    they took in the Revolution—The House of Braganza ascend the
    Throne of Portugal—Paramount Influence of the Jesuits—Lisbon
    the Centre of their Commerce—Decrees of the General
    Congregations forbidding the Jesuits to mix in Political or
    Commercial Matters—Whether observed or not—Why enacted,            274

    The Jesuits in Germany—They are the most able Auxiliaries of
    Ferdinand in destroying the Protestants—Tilly, Wallenstein, and
    Piccolomini, their Pupils—Conduct of the Jesuits in the Thirty
    Years’ War—Advantages which they derived from it,                  278

    Influence of the Jesuits in Poland—They used it against
    the Protestants—Letter of the University of Cracow to
    that of Louvain on the Jesuit Cruelties—Cassimir, King of
    Poland, formerly a Jesuit—He is on the point of losing his
    Kingdom—Commits it to the care of the Virgin Mary,                 280

    The Jesuits and Christina of Sweden—Father Macedo converts her
    to Romanism—She Abdicates the Crown and goes to Rome,              282

    The Jesuits in England under James I.—Gunpowder Plot—What part
    the Jesuits had in it—Difficulty of arriving at the Truth—The
    Jesuits from first to last the Contrivers of all the Plots
    against Elizabeth and James—Parson disposes of the Crown of
    England—He obtains from the Pope a Bull which forbids the Roman
    Catholics to take the Oath of Allegiance—Percy reveals to
    Father Gerald the Gunpowder Plot—Garnet pretends not to have
    known the Conspiracy but under the Seal of Confession—This Plea
    cannot exculpate the Jesuits from being Accomplices in the
    Plot—Reasons why—Imprisonment of Garnet—The Government violates
    all the Laws of Justice and Humanity—Punishment of Garnet—Moral
    Torture he is made to endure on the Scaffold—Execution
    of Father Oldcorne—The Jesuits are not discouraged from
    Plotting—Struggle of Charles I. with his Parliament—The Jesuits
    accused of fighting in both Camps—Absurdity of the Recital of
    Jurieu to prove the Accusation—The Author’s opinion upon the
    Fact—The Jesuits’ Discouragement under Cromwell—They re-appear
    under Charles II.—Crétineau on a Treaty to Re-establish
    the Roman Religion—Popish Plot—Oates and Bedloe—Their
    infamous Character —Their absurd Inventions—Credit they
    obtain—Persecution of Papists—Father Ireland executed—Reign of
    James II.—Influence of the Jesuits—Father Peter, Member of the
    Privy Council—Revolution of 1688,                                  283

                              CHAPTER XIII.

                               1600-1753.

                           AMERICAN MISSIONS.

    Our Opinion of the Missions—Praises awarded to the
    Fathers—Difference between the Indian and American
    Missions—State of the two Countries—Cruelties exercised by
    the Spaniards against the Indians—Humane and Christian-like
    Conduct of the Jesuits—They Differ from other Monks—The
    Indians receive the Jesuits as their Protectors—Wandering of
    the Jesuits in making Proselytes—Acquaviva Traces to them a
    Plan of Proceeding—They Establish themselves in Paraguay—The
    Reductions—Conduct of the Jesuits—The Indians Idolise them—Form
    of Government of Reductions—Communism—Mode of Life in the
    Reductions—The Indians forbidden to leave the Reductions, and
    Strangers to enter them—The Indians drilled to Arms—The Jesuits
    accompany and direct them in their Expeditions—Criticism of the
    Jesuits’ System in the Reductions—Opinion of Quinet—Our Opinion
    differs from that of this celebrated Professor—Well-founded
    Reproaches addressed to the Jesuits on account of the
    Superstitious Practices Introduced by them into Religion—They
    are reproved even by Roman Catholics—Palafox, Bishop of
    Angelopolis—He attempts to exercise his Authority over the
    Fathers—Privileges of the Jesuits—Letter of Palafox to the
    Pope, asking for a Reform of the Society—Persecution raised
    against him by the Jesuits continued after his Death—They
    Oppose his Canonisation—What are the Causes of Discord between
    the Jesuits and the other Orders—Opinion of Gioberti—The
    Jesuits want to Domineer over Bishops and Legates—Their
    Conduct towards them—Divers Bulls of different Popes on the
    Disobedience and Revolt of the Order against the Holy See,         295

                              CHAPTER XIV.

                               1617-1700.

                       INTERNAL CAUSES OF DECLINE.

    A Spirit of Independence pervades the Order—The
    Aristocratic Class of the Professed refuse Obedience to the
    Generals—Incapacity of the latter—Under Vitelleschi, the Spirit
    of the Constitution is quite Changed—Letters of Vitelleschi
    and Caraffa to deprecate the Ruin of the Order—Piccolomini
    and Gottifredi, Generals—Nickel, the elected General,
    attempts a Reform—General Congregation depriving him of all
    Authority—Oliva Vicar-General—He becomes General after the
    Death of Nickel—His Character—His Epicurean Habits—Relaxation
    of Discipline—Political Influence which the Society acquired at
    such an Epoch—Its Causes—The Jesuits, blinded by Prosperity,
    become less Cautious—Noyelle, Gonzales, and Tambourini,
    Generals—The Company follow a Road which leads to Ruin—They
    excite the Jealousy of all the other Monastic Orders—They sell
    a Passport against the Evil Spirit—Mastrilli sends a Message
    every day by an Angel to Xavier, and receives Answers,             315

                               CHAPTER XV.

                               1700-1772.

                        DOWNFALL OF THE JESUITS.

    Gradual March of the Order—It attains the Height of its
    Power—Causes of Decay—The Instruction no more Gratuitous—The
    Princes of Germany limit their Unrestricted Authority—Rome
    begins to frown upon them—Benedict XIV.’s injurious Description
    of them—Hatred which they incur in France—Its Causes—After the
    Death of Louis XIV., they are attacked from every Quarter—The
    Jesuits have Identified themselves with all the Absurd and
    Idolatrous Practices of the Roman Church—They are attacked
    by the Encyclopædists—Offer no Efficient Resistance—Philip
    of Orleans, Regent of France—He refuses to protect them—They
    attempt in vain to regain their Influence under Louis
    XV.—The Ministers of various Sovereigns of Europe undertake
    Reform—Choiseul—Tanucci—Squillace—Carvalho—The Fall of the
    Jesuits ought not to be attributed to Private Causes—Epitome
    of the History of the Jesuits in Portugal—Carvalho, Marquis
    of Pombal—His Character—His Hatred of the Jesuits and the
    Aristocracy—Portugal and Spain exchange their Possessions
    in America—The Indians of the Reduction refuse to Obey—They
    take up Arms—Are Defeated—The Jesuits Accused by Pombal of
    having Excited the Revolt—Denial of the Fathers—Earthquake
    of Lisbon—Intrepid and Heroic Conduct of Pombal—He becomes
    All-powerful—He Removes from the Court the three Jesuit
    Confessors—Manifesto against them—Benedict XIV. subjects them
    to a Visitation—Commerce of the Company in Europe—In both
    Indies—The Visitor, Cardinal Saldanha, Censures the Commercial
    Pursuits of the Order—Death of Benedict XIV.—Clement XIII.—His
    Character—His Partiality for the Fathers—Cardinal Torrigiani,
    the Pope’s first Minister, is bribed by the Jesuits—Joseph
    I. of Portugal—Attempt to Assassinate, while returning from
    his Nocturnal Visit to a Lady—Measures taken by Pombal—The
    Duke d’Averio, the Marquis of Tavora’s Family, and some of
    their Relations, are thrown into Prison—They are accused of
    being Accomplices in the Attempt—Illegal and Inquisitorial
    Proceedings—The Prisoners are Condemned and Executed—Horrible
    Mode of Execution—It tarnishes Pombal’s Fame—The Jesuits are
    Imprisoned as Accomplices—New Manifesto of Pombal against
    them—Decree Expelling all the Jesuits from the Portuguese
    Dominions, 1559—France strikes the second Blow against the
    Order—Affair of Lavallette—The Order is held by the Tribunals
    as answerable for all his Debts—Unaccountable Blindness of
    the Jesuits, in appealing to the Parliament against this
    decision—Cardinal de Luynes and the Assembly of Bishops—They
    declare the Obedience due by the Jesuits to their General to
    be Incompatible with the Duties of a Subject—Louis XV.—His
    Character—Pressed by Choiseul and Madame de Pompadour, demands
    a Reform of the Order—Character of Choiseul—There was no
    Agreement between him, the Philosophers, and Pombal, to Destroy
    the Jesuits—Answer of Ricci, the General, to the Demand for
    Reform—The Parliament Abolish the Society, 1762—Its Members
    Expelled from France, 1764,                                        326

    The Jesuits meet with a Greater Calamity in Spain—Charles III.,
    his Character—Uncertainty as to the Motives which induced him
    to abolish the Order—_Emeute des Chapeaux_—Royal Proclamation
    Abolishing the Order of the Jesuits, 1767—Motives adduced by
    Charles for this Measure—Motives ascribed to him by the Jesuits
    and Ranke—Our own Conjectures on this matter—The way in which
    the Decree was executed—Clement XIII.’s Useless Protection
    of the Jesuits—His Praises of the Order—Ricci’s Desperate
    Efforts to Save the Society—His Character—By his orders,
    the Jesuits, expelled from Spain, are refused Admittance
    into the Papal Dominions—They are repulsed from Leghorn and
    Genoa—After Six Months’ Wandering on the Sea, they are received
    in Corsica—Naples and Parma Expel the Jesuits from their
    States—The Pope Excommunicates the Duke of Parma—Indignation
    of Charles III. at the Boldness of the Pope—Louis XV. unites
    with him in Remonstrating against the Act—The Pope refuses to
    receive the Remonstrance—The French Troops take Possession of
    Avignon—The Neapolitans of Benevento—The Pope has no Friend
    left to whom he can apply for Aid—The Courts of France, Spain,
    and Naples, demand the Suppression of the Order—Death of
    Clement XIII.—His Monument by Canova,                              349

                              CHAPTER XVI.

                                  1773.

                         ABOLITION OF THE ORDER.

    The Court of Rome is divided into Zelanti and
    Regalisti—Intrigues of the two Parties to Insure the Tiara
    to one of their own Adherents—Cardinal de Bernis—His
    Character—His Insinuations to the Conclave—Answer of the
    Opposite Faction—Charles III. Refuses to give his Support but
    to a Candidate who would promise to Abolish the Order—Joseph
    II., Emperor of Germany, and Leopold, Grand Duke of Tuscany,
    in Rome—Veneration of the Romans for the names of Republic
    and Emperor—Joseph is courted by both Parties—His Visit
    to the Gesù—His Words to the General—Consternation which
    they produce—He affects an Indifference as to the Election
    of the Pope—He Visits the Conclave—His Haughty Behaviour
    there—The Spanish Cardinals enter the Conclave—They succeed
    in bringing it to a close—Lorenzo Ganganelli—His Birth—First
    Education—Character—Habits before and after being elected
    Pope—Ranke and others exaggerate the Virtues of Ganganelli—His
    Ambition—His Equivocal Conduct in order to gratify it—How
    he was chosen to the Throne—Written Opinion concerning
    the Abolition of the Jesuits, given by him to the Spanish
    Cardinals—Whether this constitutes the Sin of Simony—Specious
    part played by De Bernis in the Intrigues for the Election—Joy
    of Ganganelli at being elected Pope—His Liberal and Tolerant
    Policy—The Affair of the Jesuits Poisons all his Joy—His
    Perplexities on the Measure of Abolishing them—He flatters
    De Bernis, in order to obtain some delay in coming to a
    Decision—He obtains some Respite—He goes to Castel-Gandolfo
    to enjoy this short Triumph—Charles III. and Choiseul press De
    Bernis to bring the Pope to a Speedy Decision—Bernis’ Urgency
    with the Pope—Letter of Ganganelli to the King of Spain to
    obtain some Respite—The Jesuits assert that Ganganelli was
    Forced by the Sovereigns to Abolish the Order—How far this
    Assertion is true—Very Plausible Reasons why he Hesitated so
    long to Abolish the Order—Some of them less honourable—The Pope
    is afraid of being Poisoned by the Jesuits—Menacing Attitude
    of the Sovereigns of the House of Bourbon toward the Court of
    Rome—Florida Blanca, Spanish Ambassador—Clement resists all
    Importunities till he is persuaded that the Abolition is an
    Act of Supreme Justice—His Foreboding in Signing the Bull of
    Suppression—A Short Analysis of the Bull—Gioberti’s Opinion of
    it—The Bull _Dominus et Redemptor_,                                362

    Proceedings against the Jesuits immediately after the
    Publication of the Bull—A Retrospective Glance at the Progress
    of the Order—Its Humble Origin—Its Increase—Its Considerable
    Power—Number of Houses, Colleges, and Fathers at the Epoch of
    the Suppression—Approximate Estimate of their Wealth—Different
    Sources of it—Ricci’s Denial that the Order possesses any
    Money—Reasons for believing otherwise—Ricci and some other
    Jesuits sent Prisoners to the Castel St Angelo—Slanders of the
    Jesuits on Ganganelli’s Conduct,                                   407

                              CHAPTER XVII.

                                  1774.

                          DEATH OF CLEMENT XIV.

    After the Issuing of the Bull, Clement re-assumes his gay
    humour—His Health is perfect—Unanimity of the Authors on this
    point—The Jesuits have his Death Predicted—The Pythoness
    of Valentano—Sudden Illness of the Pope—Symptoms—His
    Delirium—_Compulsus feci_—He resumes some Composure—His Death,
    1774—The Romans had expected his Death—Indecent Joy of the
    Jesuits—What was the Nature of Clement’s Illness—The Jesuits
    assert that he died of Remorse—Untruth of the Assertion—Reason
    for it—Decomposition of Ganganelli’s Body after his
    Death—Salicetti, the Apostolic Physician, declares the Rumour
    False that the Pope Died by Poison—The Romans had no doubt
    that he perished by the _Acqua Tofana_—Gioberti’s Authorities
    for believing the Pope Poisoned—Irrefragable Testimony of
    De Bernis—His Letter to the Court of France—Character of
    Ganganelli,                                                        412

                             CHAPTER XVIII.

                               1773-1814.

                   THE JESUITS DURING THE SUPPRESSION.

    Conduct of the Jesuits after the Suppression—Few obey the
    Bull—They seek an Asylum with Protestant Princes—Strange
    conduct of Frederick of Prussia—He Protects the Jesuits—Is
    Ridiculed by his friend D’Alembert—The Jesuits in
    Silesia—Braschi (Pius VI.) succeeds Ganganelli in the Papal
    Chair—The Sovereigns of the House of Bourbon press him to see
    the Bull of his Predecessor executed—Character of Braschi—He
    fears rather than loves the Jesuits—He writes to Frederick—The
    Answer of the King—St Priest explains the Conduct of
    Frederick—The Author differs with him in Opinion,                  422

    Catherine of Russia protects the Jesuits—Her Motives—The
    Jesuits Establish themselves in Russia in Opposition to the
    Pope’s Command—Death of Ricci—The Jesuits in Russia name a
    Vicar-General—Siestrencewiecz, Bishop of Mohilow—He permits
    the Jesuits to receive Novices—Remonstrances of the Court
    of Rome—The Jesuits name a General and act as if the Bull
    of Suppression had not been Issued—How Crétineau Exculpates
    them—Chiaramonti (Pius VII.) succeeds Braschi—He Re-establishes
    the Society in White Russia—Its Progress there—Grouber elected
    General—His Talents and Prudence—The Jesuits Re-established
    in Sicily—Grouber Dies in a Conflagration—Imprudent Conduct
    of the Jesuits after his Death—Alexander Expels them from St
    Petersburg—The Jesuits persisting in their Criminal Practices,
    are Expelled from Russia, 1820,                                    430

                              CHAPTER XIX.

                                  1814.

                            RE-ESTABLISHMENT.

    Fall of Napoleon—Restoration of different Princes—The Jesuits
    pretend that all the Evils of the last Revolution were the
    Consequences of their Suppression—The Princes Believe or
    feign to Believe it—The Jesuits are the natural Enemies
    of the Liberals—Restoration of Pius VII.—His Character—He
    Re-establishes the Order—Why—The Bull of Re-establishment
    weakens but little that of Suppression—Short Analysis of the
    Former—Bull of Re-establishment, 1814—The Jesuits flock to
    Rome from every part—Eagerness of many to become Members of
    the Society—The King of Sardinia a Jesuit—Italy covered with
    Jesuits—Their perfect Understanding with the Pope—Hatred of
    the Italians against the Order—They Invade the principal
    Countries of Europe—They are Befriended by Ferdinand VII.
    in Spain—They side with Don Carlos—Are Abolished by the
    Cortes, 1835—They re-enter, and are soon after Expelled
    from Portugal—Metternich refuses to admit the Jesuits into
    Austria—They are permitted to Establish themselves in
    Galicia—Their Influence there, and its Effects—The Jesuits
    Excluded from every other part of Germany—The Jesuits in
    Holland—Ungrateful to King William—Their undutiful Conduct
    there—They Prepare the Revolution of 1830—Their flourishing
    state in Belgium—Vicissitudes of the Jesuits in France
    after 1764—They never quitted the Country—Different Names
    under which they Concealed themselves—The Sisters of the
    Sacred Heart—The Congregation of the Sacred Family of the
    Virgin—Their Object—The Fathers of the Faith Suppressed by
    Napoleon—Also the Congregation of the Virgin—Intrigues and
    Conduct of the Jesuits after the Restoration—They court
    the Favour of the Clergy—Their Mission—They Monopolise the
    Education—Decree against them in 1828—They disappear from
    France after the Revolution of 1830—They are again found
    numerous in 1836—Affairs of Affnaër—Thiers invokes against them
    the Laws of the Land—Rossi’s Mission to Rome—Its Results—The
    Jesuits constrained to Abandon their Establishments—Their
    Colleges of Brugellette and Friburg—Little is known of them for
    some years—Their Re-appearance in 1849—Their Influence in the
    present Day—Affairs of Lucerne—The Jesuits guilty of Fomenting
    the Civil War—Crétineau’s Account of the Jesuits’ Conduct in
    England—Mr Weld presents the Jesuits with his Property in
    Stoneyhurst—Their rapid Progress there—Prodigious Increase
    of the Papists after their Establishment there—Part of the
    Colony pass over to Ireland—Father Kenny, Vice-President of
    Maynooth—The Jesuits Disregard the Clause of the Emancipation
    Act on the Religious Corporations—The Fifth, Secret Class of
    the Jesuits the most Dangerous of all—Perfidious Arts of the
    Jesuits in making Converts—The Puseyites—The Papists rely upon
    them—Their Eulogium by Crétineau—Rome desires the Ruin of
    England—Has intrusted to the Jesuits the Mission of bringing
    it about—The Jesuits more Dangerous to Protestantism than all
    other Monks—Every Roman Catholic Priest is by his Calling
    obliged to Labour for the Extirpation of Protestants—England
    ought to awake to a Sense of her Danger,                           436

                               CHAPTER XX.

                               1848-1852.

                     THE JESUITS IN AND AFTER 1848.

    Italy the Seat of Jesuitical Power after the Re-establishment
    of the Order—State of the Peninsula before the Pontificate of
    Pius IX.—Auspicious Beginning of his Reign—The Jesuits Oppose
    his Acts of Benevolence—The Romans decide upon Depriving the
    Priests of all Civil Authority—Resistance of the Pope—Death of
    Grazioli, the Pope’s Confessor—Pius falls back to the Errors of
    former Popes—Hatred of the Romans to the Jesuits—_Il Gesuita
    Moderno_—Gioberti in Rome—The Pope’s Menaces against the
    Enemies of the Order—The Jesuits forced to leave Rome—Mortal
    Hatred vowed by the Pope against the Liberals—Flight of
    the Pope to Gaeta—Moderation of the Romans—Plots of the
    Jesuits and Cardinal Antonelli—Crusade to Replace the Pope
    on the Throne—Louis Napoleon, who fought in 1831 against the
    Pope, sends an Army against the Roman Republic—Why—General
    Oudinot—His Jesuitical Conduct—Gallantry of the Romans in
    Defending their Country—They are obliged to yield—Reproaches
    against England for having Abandoned the Cause of Civil and
    Religious Freedom—Serious Consequences which followed—Whether
    England could with justice have Interfered in the Affairs of
    Italy—The French enter Rome—Oudinot goes to Gaeta—Receives
    the Pope’s Blessing—Acts of Revenge of the Clerical Party
    after their Restoration—Miserable Condition of the Roman
    States—The Executions at Sinigallia and Ancona—Political
    Assassinations in those Towns—The Jesuits suspected of being
    the Instigators—How State Trials are Conducted in the Papal
    Dominions—a Note upon Simoncelli—The Pope grants £40,000 to
    his native Town for erecting a Jesuit College—Reception of the
    Jesuits on their Re-entering Naples—Ridiculous Addresses—The
    Jesuits All-powerful in the Two Sicilies—Abominable Conduct
    of the Neapolitan Government—Jesuitism invades Tuscany—Its
    Effects—Religious Persecution—Jesuits Introduced into
    Lombardy—The Jesuits Excluded from Piedmont—The Clergy refuse
    to submit to Equality of Rights—The Priest considers himself
    a Superior Being—Why—Intrigues and Hatred of the Piedmontese
    Clergy against the Government—Ominous Influence possessed
    by the Jesuits in France at the present moment—The Laws of
    Providence—Popery can never again be the Religion of the
    Italians—Abject Flattery of the Jesuits to Louis Napoleon—His
    Character—The Priests help him to grasp the Imperial Crown—His
    Marriage—Why we do not speak of the Actual State of the Jesuits
    in England,                                                        469

    CONCLUSION,                                                        493

    INDEX                                                              497



ILLUSTRATIONS.


    1. PORTRAIT OF LOYOLA (_Frontispiece_).

                                       PAGE

    2.      ”      XAVIER                98

    3.      ”      LAINEZ               133

    4.      ”      BORGIA               145

    5.      ”      ACQUAVIVA            210

    6.      ”      LACHAISE             270

    7.      ”      RICCI                357

    8.      ”      GANGANELLI           413



INTRODUCTION.


When I first intimated to some of my friends my intention of writing the
History of the Jesuits, most of them dissuaded me from the enterprise,
as from a task too difficult. I am fully aware of all the difficulties
I have to encounter in my undertaking. I am sensible that to write a
complete and detailed history of the Jesuits would require more time
and learning than I have to bestow: neither could such a history be
brought within the compass of six or seven hundred pages. It will be my
endeavour, however, to give as faithful an account of the Society as I
can, to furnish an accurate narrative of facts, and an outline of the
principal members of the order. Thus much, at least, with the aid of
time, patience, and study, may be achieved by any one.

I confess, too, that I am encouraged by a sense of the intrinsic interest
of the subject itself, which may well do much to cast a veil over my
own imperfect treatment of it: for, amidst the general wreck and decay
of all human things, amidst the rise and fall of dynasties, nay, of
empires themselves and whole nations of men, the inquiry may indeed
give us pause—_Wherein lay the seeds of that vitality in the original
constitution of the Jesuits, which has served during three centuries to
maintain the ranks of the Society, under many shocks, still unbroken?_ A
sufficient answer to this inquiry will, I trust, be developed during the
course of my narrative.

The main difficulty of my subject, as will be readily understood, lies
in discovering and delineating the true character of the Jesuits: for,
take the Jesuit for what he ought or appears to be, and you commit the
greatest of blunders. Draw the character after what the Jesuit seems to
be in London, and you will not recognise your portrait in the Jesuit
of Rome. The Jesuit is the man of circumstances. Despotic in Spain,
constitutional in England, republican in Paraguay, bigot in Rome,
idolater in India, he shall assume and act out in his own person, with
admirable flexibility, all those different features by which men are
usually to be distinguished from each other. He will accompany the gay
woman of the world to the theatre, and will share in the excesses of the
debauchee. With solemn countenance, he will take his place by the side
of the religious man at church, and he will revel in the tavern with the
glutton and the sot. He dresses in all garbs, speaks all languages, knows
all customs, is present everywhere though nowhere recognised—and all
this, it should seem (O monstrous blasphemy!), for the greater glory of
God—_ad majorem Dei gloriam_.

According to my opinion, in order to form a correct estimate of the
Jesuits, we must, first, study their code, and, disregarding its
_letter_, endeavour to discover the spirit in and by which it was
dictated; secondly, we must be ever on our guard against the deception
of judging them simply by their deeds, without constant reference to the
results flowing from them—for we may rest assured that, in their case,
it will be too often found that the fruit which externally may be fair
and tempting to the eye, yields nothing at its core but vileness and
corruption.

It is under the guidance of such principles of criticism as these that I
shall write my history.

My readers, however, must not look to find my book thick-sown throughout
with nothing but vehement and indiscriminate abuse against the order.
Such is not the vehicle through which, in the judgment of the impartial,
I shall be expected to manifest my disapproval, whenever the occasion
for such disapproval shall present itself. It will be my endeavour not
to be led astray by any feeling whatsoever, but to give every one his
due. Whatever I shall advance against the Jesuits, I shall prove upon
their own authority, or by notorious, incontestable facts. Alas! these
will prove to be too numerous, and of too dark a character, to require
the addition of anything that is untrue; and the Society numbers among
its members too many rogues to prevent its historian (if, indeed, one
so unjust could be found) from making creditable mention, for poor
humanity’s sake, of the few honest, if misguided, ones he may chance to
meet on his way.

I hope my readers will be indulgent to me, if I promise that I will spare
neither trouble nor exertion to surmount all the difficulties that lie
in my path, and to present in as true a light as possible the crafty
disciples of the brotherhood of Loyola.



HISTORY OF THE JESUITS.



CHAPTER I.

1500-40.

ORIGIN OF THE ORDER.


The sixteenth century presents itself pregnant with grave and
all-important events. The old world disappears—a new order of things
commences. The royal power, adorned with the seignorial prerogatives
snatched from the subjugated barons, establishes itself amidst their
ruined castles, beneath which lies buried the feudal system. Mercenary
armies, now constantly maintained by the sovereign, render him
independent of the military services of his subjects, and formidable
alike to foreign foes and to turbulent nobles. The monarchs advance
rapidly towards despotism—the people subside into apathetic submission,
Europe has become the appanage of a few masters. Henry VIII. of England,
Francis I. of France, and Charles V. of Spain, share it among them;
but, not content with their respective dominions, they fight among
themselves for the empire of the whole, or at least for supremacy of
power. Henry having retired from the contest after the Electoral Congress
of Frankfort, the other two continue the strife with varying success.
The gold of the recently discovered western world, and his immense
possessions, give to Charles an enormous power. The bravery of a warlike
nation makes formidable the chivalrous spirit of the indomitable Francis.
Their wars redden Europe with blood, yet produce no decided result.

Meanwhile, as a compensation for these evils, the human mind, casting off
the prejudices and ignorance of the Middle Ages, marches to regeneration.
Italy becomes, for the second time, the centre from whence the light
of genius and learning shines forth over Europe. Leonardo da Vinci,
Tiziano, Michael Angelo, are the sublime, the almost divine interpreters
of art. Pulci, Ariosto, Poliziano, give a new and creative impulse to
literature, and are the worthy descendants of Dante. Scholasticism, with
its subtle argumentations, vague reasonings, and illogical deductions, is
superseded by the practical philosophy of Lorenzo and Machiavelli, and
by the irresistible and eloquent logic of the virtuous but unfortunate
Savonarola. Men who for the last three centuries had been satisfied with
what had been taught and said by Aristotle and his followers—who, as the
last and incontrovertible argument, had been accustomed to exclaim, _Ipse
dixit_—now begin to think for themselves, and dare to doubt and discuss
what had hitherto been considered sacred and unassailable truths. The
newly-awakened human intellect eagerly enters upon the new path, and
becomes argumentative and inquiring, to the great dismay of those who
deprecated diversity of faith; and the Court of Rome, depending on the
blind obedience of the credulous, anathematising every disputer of the
Papal infallibility, views with especial concern this rising spirit of
inquiry, and has to tremble for its usurped power.

Fortunately, the three last Popes had bestowed little or no attention on
the spiritual affairs of the world, and made no effort to combat the new
ideas. Borgia, amid his incestuous debaucheries, had been solely intent
upon suppressing by poniard and poison the refractory spirit of the Roman
barons, and upon acquiring new territories for his cherished Cæsar—a son
worthy of such a father. Julius, in his noble enterprise of ridding Italy
from foreign domination, was a great deal fonder of casque and cuirass
than of the _Somma_ of St Thomas or any other theological book. Leo, son
of that Lorenzo rightly called “Magnifico,” had inherited his father’s
love of art and literature, and of every noble pursuit. Magnificent,
generous, affable yet dignified in his manners, living amidst every
luxury, the centre of the most splendid court in the world, he exhibited
the characteristics of a temporal prince rather than those of the supreme
pontiff. He took a greater interest in a stanza of Ariosto or a statue
by Michael Angelo than in all the writings of the scholastics, of which,
in fact, he knew very little. The impartial and accurate Sarpi says of
him—“He would have been a perfect pontiff, if to so many excellencies
he had united _some knowledge in the matter of religion, and a little
more inclination to piety_, two things about which he seemed to care but
little.”[1] He laughed heartily when some of his more bigoted prelates
pointed out to him the imminent perils to religion and the Church from
the rapid spread of the new and dangerous doctrines. He viewed the
quarrels between the Dominican and Augustine Friars much in the same
light in which Homer is supposed to have regarded the battle of the frogs
and mice, and was at last roused from his indifference only when Luther
attacked—not any article of faith, but his pretended right of selling
indulgences to replenish his coffers and provide his sister’s dowry. Yet
even then he would have preferred a compromise to a religious war. Had
his fanatical courtiers participated in his prudent scruples, the Roman
Church might have long retained Germany and many other European countries
under her yoke. But God in his wisdom had ordained otherwise.

To a very submissive letter which the Reformer addressed to the Pope,
appealing to him as to a judge, the Court of Rome replied by a bull of
excommunication. Upon this Luther renewed his anxious investigation of
the Holy Scriptures with increased ardour; and, becoming more and more
powerfully convinced that he had been propounding nothing but the Word
of God, fearlessly cast aside all idea of a reconciliation, and stood
firm in support of his doctrines. Previously he might have been inclined
to keep in abeyance some of his private opinions, but now he had come to
consider it a deadly sin not to preach the truth as expressed by God in
his Holy Word.

The German princes, partly persuaded of the truth of Luther’s
doctrines, partly desirous to escape the exacting tyranny of Rome
which drained their subjects’ pockets, supported the Reformer. They
protested at Spires, and at Smalkaden made preparations to maintain
their protest by arms. In a few years, without armed violence, but
simply by the persuasive force of truth, the greater part of Germany
became converted to the Reformed faith. The honest indignation of
Zuinglius in Switzerland, and, conspiring with the diffusion of the
truth, the unbridled passions of Henry VIII. in England, alike rescued
a considerable portion of their respective countries from the Romish
yoke. In France and in Navarre the new doctrines found many warm
adherents; whilst in Italy itself, at Brescia, Pisa, Florence, nay, even
at Rome and at Faenza, there were many who more or less openly embraced
the principles of the Reformation. Thus, in a short time, the Roman
religion—founded in ancient and deep-rooted prejudices—supported by the
two greatest powers in the world, the Pope and the Emperor—defended by
all the bishops and priests, who lived luxuriously by it—was overturned
throughout a great part of Europe.

And let us here admire the hand of Divine Providence! As if with the
special view of facilitating the rapid diffusion of the Reformed
religion, there was given to the world but a few years before, and
in that same Germany where it took its rise, the most wonderful and
efficient instrument for the purpose—the Art of Printing. Without the
press, Luther’s doctrines would never have spread so widely in so very
few months. As at that time this beneficent invention was a powerful
agent in advancing religious reformation, so has it since become an
effective means of political as well as religious enfranchisement. Hence
the hatred of the Popes and their brother despots towards this staunch
supporter of liberty.

But while the Word of God was thus rescuing such multitudes from
idolatry, the Spirit of Evil, furious at the escape of so many victims
whom he had already counted his own, made a desperate effort to retrieve
his past, and prevent future losses. He saw, with dismay, Divine truth,
like a vast and ever-extending inundation, rapidly undermining and
throwing down, one by one, his many strongholds of superstition and
ignorance; and, with the despairing energy of baffled malignity, he set
about rearing up a bulwark which should check the tide ere its work
of destruction was completed. For this bulwark he devised the since
famous order of the Jesuits, which arose almost simultaneously with the
establishment of the Reformation. So _we_ may say. The Roman Catholic
writers, however, ascribe the origin of the Jesuits to a far different
influence. _They_ declare, “that, as from time to time new heresies have
afflicted the Church of God, so He has raised up holy men to combat
them; and as He had raised up St Dominic against the Albigenses and
Vaudois, so _He_ sent Loyola and his disciples against the Lutherans and
Calvinists.”[2]

It is of this renowned and dreaded Society that I purpose to write the
history. As a matter of course, the first few pages will contain a
biographical sketch of its bold and sagacious founder, to whom altars
have been consecrated, and who is still regarded as the type and soul of
the order.

Iñigo, or, as commonly called, Ignatius Loyola, the youngest of eleven
children of a noble and ancient family, was born in the year 1491, in
his father’s castle of Loyola at Guipuscoa in Spain. He was of middle
stature, and rather dark complexion; had deep-set piercing eyes, and a
handsome and noble countenance. While yet young he had become bald, which
gave him an expression of dignity, that was not impaired by a lameness
arising from a severe wound. His father, a worldly man, as his biographer
says, instead of sending him to some holy community to be instructed in
religion and piety, placed him as a page at the court of Ferdinand V. But
Ignatius, naturally of a bold and aspiring disposition, soon found that
no glory was to be reaped in the antechambers of the Catholic king; and,
delighting in military exercises, he became a soldier—and a brave one he
proved. His historians, to make his subsequent conversion appear more
wonderful and miraculous, have represented him as a perfect monster of
iniquity; but, in truth, he was merely a gay soldier, fond of pleasure
no doubt, yet not more debauched than the generality of his brother
officers. His profligacy, whatever it was, did not prevent him from
being a man of strict honour, never backward in time of danger.

At the defence of Pampeluna against the French, in 1521, Ignatius,
while bravely performing his duty on the walls, was struck down by a
ball, which disabled both his legs. With him fell the courage of the
besieged. They yielded, and the victors entering the town, found the
wounded officer, and kindly sent him to his father’s castle, which was
not far distant. Here he endured all the agonies which generally attend
gunshot wounds, and an inflammatory fever which supervened brought him
to the verge of the grave—when, “Oh, miracle!” exclaims his biographer,
“it being the eve of the feast of the glorious saints Peter and Paul,
the prince of the apostles appeared to him in a vision, and touched him,
whereby he was, if not immediately restored to health, at least put in a
fair way of recovery.” Now the fact is, that the patient uttered not a
syllable regarding his vision _at the time_; nevertheless we are gravely
assured that the miracle was not the less a fact. Be this, however,
as it may, Ignatius undoubtedly recovered, though slowly. During his
long convalescence, he sought to beguile the tedious hours of irksome
inactivity passed in the sick chamber by reading all the books of
knight-errantry which could be procured. The chivalrous exploits of the
Rolands and Amadises made a deep impression upon his imagination, which,
rendered morbidly sensitive by a long illness, may well be supposed to
have been by no means improved by such a course of study. When these
books were exhausted, some pious friend brought him the _Lives of the
Saints_. This work, however, not suiting his taste, Ignatius at first
flung it aside in disgust, but afterwards, from sheer lack of better
amusement, he began to read it. It presented to him a new phase of
the romantic and marvellous, in which he so much delighted. He soon
became deeply interested, and read it over and over again. The strange
adventures of these saints—the praise, the adoration, the glorious
renown which they acquired—so fired his mind, that he almost forgot his
favourite paladins. His ardent ambition saw here a new career opened up
to it. He longed to become a saint.

Yet the military life had not lost its attractions for him. It did not
require the painful preparation necessary to earn a saintly reputation,
and was, moreover, more in accordance with his education and tastes. He
long hesitated which course to adopt—whether he should win the laurels
of a hero, or earn the crown of a saint. Had he perfectly recovered from
the effects of his wound, there is little doubt but that he would have
chosen the laurels. But this was not to be. Although he was restored
to health, his leg remained hopelessly deformed—he was a cripple for
life. It appeared that his restorer, St Peter, although upon the whole a
tolerably good physician, was by no means an expert surgeon. The broken
bone of his leg had not been properly set; part of it protruded through
the skin below the knee, and the limb was short. Sorely, but vainly, did
Ignatius strive to remove these impediments to a military career, which
his unskilful though saintly surgeon had permitted to remain. He had
the projecting piece of bone sawn off, and his shortened leg painfully
extended by mechanical appliances, in the hope of restoring it to its
original fine proportions. The attempt failed; so he found himself, at
the age of thirty-two, with a shrunken limb, with little or no renown,
and, by his incurable lameness, rendered but slightly capable of
acquiring military glory. Nothing then remained for him but to become a
saint.

Saintship being thus, as it were, forced upon him, he at once set about
the task of achieving it, with all that ardour which he brought to bear
upon every pursuit. He became daily absorbed in the most profound
meditations, and made a full confession of all his past sins, which was
so often interrupted by his passionate outbursts of penitent weeping,
that it lasted three days.[3] To stimulate his devotion, he lacerated
his flesh with the scourge, and abjuring his past life, he hung up
his sword beside the altar in the church of the convent of Monserrat.
Meeting a beggar on the public road, he exchanged clothes with him,
and, habited in the loathsome rags of the mendicant, retired to a cave
near Manreze, where he nearly starved himself. When he next re-appeared
in public, he found his hopes almost realised. His fame had spread far
and wide; the people flocked from all quarters to see him—visited his
cave with feelings of reverent curiosity—and, in short, nothing was
talked of but the holy man and his severe penances. But now the Evil
Spirit began to assail him. The tender conscience of Ignatius began
to torment him with the fear that all this public notice had made him
proud; that, while he had almost begun to consider himself a saint, he
was, in reality, by reason of that very belief itself, the most heinous
of sinners. So embittered did his life become in consequence of these
thoughts, that he went wellnigh distracted. “But God supported him; and
the Tempter, baffled in his attempts, fled. Ignatius fasted for seven
days, neither eating nor drinking; went again to the confessional;
and, receiving absolution, was not only delivered from the stings of
his own conscience, but _obtained the gift of healing the troubled
consciences of others_.”[4] This miraculous gift Ignatius is believed
to have transmitted to his successors, and it is in a great measure to
this belief that the enormous influence of the Company of Jesus is to be
attributed, as we shall see hereafter.

Now that Ignatius could endure his saintship without being overwhelmed
by a feeling of sinfulness, he pursued his course with renewed alacrity.
Yet it was in itself by no means an attractive one. In order to be a
perfect Catholic saint, a man must become a sort of misanthrope—cast
aside wholesome and cleanly apparel, go about clothed in filthy
rags, wearing haircloth next his skin—and, renouncing the world and
its inhabitants, must retire to some noisome den, there to live in
solitary meditation, with wild roots and water for food, daily applying
the scourge to expiate his sins—of which, according to one of the
disheartening doctrines of the Catholic Church, _even_ the just commit
at least _seven a day_. The saint must enter into open rebellion against
the laws and instincts of human nature, and consequently against the
will of the Creator. And although it cannot be denied that some of the
founders of monastic orders conscientiously believed that their rules
were conducive to holiness and eternal beatitude, nevertheless, we
may with justice charge them with overlooking the fact, that as the
transgression of the laws of nature invariably brings along with it its
own punishment—a certain evidence of the Divine displeasure—true holiness
cannot consist in disregarding and opposing them.

Ignatius, however, continued his life of penance, made to the Virgin
Mary a solemn vow of perpetual chastity, begged for his bread, often
scourged himself, and spent many hours a day in prayer and meditation.
What he meditated upon, God only knows. After a few months of this
ascetic life, he published a little book which much increased his fame
for sanctity. It is a small octavo volume, and bears the title of
_Spiritual Exercises_.[5] As this work, the only one he has left, is the
acknowledged standard of the Jesuits’ religious practice, and is by them
extolled to the skies, we must say some few words about it.

First of all, we shall relate the supernatural origin assigned to it by
the disciples and panegyrists of its author.

“He” (Ignatius) “had already done much for God’s sake, and God now
rendered it back to him with usury. A courtier, a man of pleasure, and a
soldier, he had neither the time nor the will to gather knowledge from
books. But the knowledge of man, the most difficult of all, was divinely
revealed to him. The master who was to form so many masters, was himself
formed by Divine illumination. He composed the _Spiritual Exercises_,
a work which had a most important place in his life, and is powerfully
reflected in the history of his disciples.”

This quotation is from Crétineau Joly (vol i. p. 18), an author who
_professes_ not to belong to the Society, but whose book was published
under the patronage of the Jesuits, who, he says, opened to him all the
depositories of unpublished letters and manuscripts in their principal
convent, the Gesù, at Rome; he wrote also a virulent pamphlet against
the great Pontiff Clement XIV., the suppressor of the Jesuits. Hence we
consider ourselves fairly entitled to rank the few quotations we shall
make from him as among those emanating from the writers that belong
to the order; and we are confident that no Jesuit would ever think of
repudiating Crétineau Joly. This author proceeds to state, that in the
manuscript in which Father Jouvency narrates in elegant Latin those
strange events, it is said—‘This light shed by the Divine will upon
Ignatius shewed him openly and without veil the mystery of the adorable
Trinity and other arcana of religion. He remained for eight days as if
deprived of life. What he witnessed during this ecstatic trance, as
well as in many other visions which he had during life, no one knows.
He had indeed committed these celestial visions to paper, but shortly
before his death he burned the book containing them, lest it should fall
into unworthy hands. A few pages, however, escaped his precautions, and
from them one can easily conjecture that he must have been from day to
day loaded with still greater favours. Chiefly was he sweetly ravished
in contemplating the dignity of Christ the Lord, and his inconceivable
charity towards the human race. As the mind of Ignatius was filled with
military ideas, he figured to himself Christ as a general fighting for
the Divine glory, and calling on all men to gather under his standard.
Hence sprang his desire to form an army of which Jesus should be the
chief and commander, the standard inscribed—‘_Ad majorem Dei gloriam_.’

With deference to M. Joly, we think that a more mundane origin may be
found for the “Exercises” in the feverish dreams of a heated imagination.
Be this as it may, however, we shall proceed to lay before our readers a
short analysis of it, extracted from Cardinal Wiseman’s preface to the
last edition. He says—“This is a practical, not a theoretical work. It
is not a treatise on sin or on virtue; it is not a method of Christian
perfection, but it contains the entire practice of perfection, by making
us at once conquer sin and acquire the highest virtue. The person who
goes through the Exercises is not instructed, but is made to act; and
this book will not be intelligible apart from this view.”

“The reader will observe that it is divided into Four Weeks; and each
of these has a specific object, to advance the exercitant an additional
step towards perfect virtue. If the work of each week be thoroughly done,
_this is actually accomplished_.[6]

“The first week has for its aim the cleansing of the conscience from
past sin, and of the affections from their future dangers. For this
purpose, the soul is made to convince itself deeply of the true end of
its being—to serve God and be saved, and of the real worth of all else.
This consideration has been justly called by St Ignatius the _principle_
or _foundation_ of the entire system.” The Cardinal assures us that the
certain result of this first week’s exercises is, that “sin is abandoned,
hated, loathed....

“In the second, the life of Christ is made our model; by a series of
contemplations of it we become familiar with his virtues, enamoured of
his perfections; we learn, by copying him, to be obedient to God and
man, meek, humble, affectionate; zealous, charitable, and forgiving;
men of only one wish and one thought—that of doing ever God’s holy will
alone; discreet, devout, observant of every law, scrupulous performers
of every duty. Every meditation on these subjects shews us _how_ to do
all this; in fact, _makes us really do it_.[7] ... The third week brings
us to this. Having desired and tried to be like Christ in action, we
are brought to wish and endeavour to be like unto him in suffering.
For this purpose his sacred passion becomes the engrossing subject
of the Exercises.... But she (the soul) must be convinced and feel,
that if she suffers, she also shall be glorified with him; and hence
the fourth and concluding week raises the soul to the consideration
of those glories which crowned the humiliations and sufferings of our
Lord.” Then, after a highly figurative eulogium upon the efficacy of the
Exercises “duly performed,” the reverend prelate proceeds to shew that
the one “essential element of a spiritual retreat” (for so the Exercises
reduced to action are popularly called) “is _direction_. In the Catholic
Church no one is ever allowed to trust himself in spiritual matters.
The sovereign pontiff is obliged to submit himself to the direction of
another, in whatever concerns his own soul. The life of a good retreat
is a good director of it.” This director modifies (according to certain
written rules) the order of the Exercises, to adapt them to the peculiar
character of the exercitant; regulates the time employed in them, watches
their effects, and, like a physician prescribing for a patient, varies
the treatment according to the symptoms exhibited, encouraging those
which seem favourable, and suppressing those which are detrimental,
to the desired result. “Let no one,” says the Cardinal, “think of
undertaking these holy Exercises without the guidance of a prudent and
experienced director.”

“It will be seen that the weeks of the Exercises do not mean necessarily
a period of seven days. The original period of their performance was
certainly a month; but even so, more or less time was allotted to each
week’s work according to the discretion of the director. Now, except in
very particular circumstances, the entire period is abridged to ten days;
sometimes it is still further reduced.”

It will be observed from the above extracts, that the Cardinal, ignoring
the fact that the sinner’s conversion must be effected entirely by the
operation of the Holy Spirit, seems to regard the unregenerate human
soul merely as a piece of raw material, which the “director” may, as it
were, _manufacture_ into a saint, simply by subjecting it to the process
prescribed in the Exercises.

In regard to the merits of the book, I cannot agree either with
Wiseman or a very brilliant Protestant writer,[8] who, speaking of the
approbation bestowed on it by Pope Paul III., says—“Yet on this subject
the chair of Knox, if now filled by himself, would not be very widely
at variance with the throne of St Peter.” The book certainly does not
deserve this high eulogium. However, it cannot be denied that, amidst
many recommendations of many absurd and superstitious practices proper to
the Popish religion, the little volume does contain some very good maxims
and precepts. For instance, here are two passages to which I am sure that
not even the most anti-Catholic Protestant could reasonably object. At
page 16 it is said—

“Man was created for this end, that he might praise and reverence the
Lord his God, and, serving him, at length be saved.[9] But the other
things which are placed on the earth were created for man’s sake, that
they might assist him in pursuing the end of creation; whence it follows,
that they are to be used or abstained from in proportion as they benefit
or hinder him in pursuing that end. Wherefore we ought to be indifferent
towards all created things (in so far as they are subject to the liberty
of our will, and not prohibited), so that (to the best of our power)
we seek not health more than sickness, nor prefer riches to poverty,
honour to contempt, a long life to a short one. But it is fitting, out of
all, to choose and desire those things only which lead to the end.” And
again, at page 33—“The third” (article for meditation) “is, to consider
myself; who, or of what kind I am, adding comparisons which may bring me
to a greater contempt of myself; as, if I reflect how little I am when
compared with all men; then, what the whole multitude of mortals is,
as compared with the angels and all the blessed: after these things I
must consider what, in fact, all the creation is in comparison with God
the Creator himself; what now can I, one mere human being, be? Lastly,
let me look at the corruption of my whole self, the wickedness of my
soul, and the pollution of my body, and account myself to be a kind of
ulcer or boil, from which so great and foul a flood of sins, so great a
pestilence of vices, has flowed down.

“The fourth is, to consider what God is, whom I have thus offended,
collecting the perfections which are God’s peculiar attributes, and
comparing them with my opposite vices and defects; comparing, that is to
say, his supreme power, wisdom, goodness, and justice, with my extreme
weakness, ignorance, wickedness, and iniquity.”

But then the above “Exercises” are followed by certain “Additions,”
which are recommended as conducing to their “better performance.” Some
of these are very strange; for instance—“The fourth is, to set about the
contemplation itself, now kneeling on the ground, now lying on my face
or on my back; now sitting or standing, and composing myself, in the way
in which I may hope the more easily to attain what I desire. In which
matter, these two things must be attended to: the first, that if, on
my knees or in any other posture, I obtain what I wish, I seek nothing
further. The second, that on the point in which I shall have attained the
devotion I seek, I ought to rest, without being anxious about pressing
on until I shall have satisfied myself.” “The sixth, that I avoid those
thoughts which bring joy, as that of the glorious resurrection of
Christ; since any such thought hinders the tears and grief for my sins,
which must then be sought by calling in mind rather death or judgment.”
“The seventh, that, for the same reason, I deprive myself of all the
brightness of the light, shutting the doors and windows so long as I
remain there” (in my chamber), “except while I have to read or take my
food.” At page 55 we find, in the Second Week—“_The Fifth Contemplation_
is the application of the senses to those” (contemplations) “mentioned
above. After the preparatory prayer, with the three already mentioned
preludes, it is eminently useful to exercise the five imaginary senses
concerning the first and second contemplations in the following way,
according as the subject shall bear.

“The first point will be, to see in imagination all the persons, and,
noting the circumstances which shall occur concerning them, to draw out
what may be profitable to ourselves.

“The second, by hearing, as it were, what they are saying, or what it may
be natural for them to say, to turn all to our own advantage.

“The third, to perceive, by a certain inward taste and smell, how great
is the sweetness and delightfulness of the soul imbued with Divine gifts
and virtues, according to the nature of the person we are considering,
adapting to ourselves those things which may bring us some fruit.

“The fourth, by an inward touch, to handle and kiss the garments, places,
footsteps, and other things connected with such persons; whence we may
derive a greater increase of devotion, or of any spiritual good.

“This contemplation will be terminated, like the former ones, by adding,
in like manner, _Pater noster_.”

At page 52, among things “to be noted” is—

“The second, that the first exercise concerning the Incarnation of Christ
is performed at midnight; the next at dawn; the third about the hour of
mass; the fourth about the time of vespers; the fifth a little before
supper; and on each of them will be spent the space of one hour; which
same thing has to be observed henceforward everywhere.”

Loyola’s next step towards holiness was a pilgrimage to Palestine to
convert the infidels. What he did in the Holy Land we do not know; his
biographer tells us only that he was sent back by the Franciscan friar
who exercised there the Papal authority.[10]

On his homeward voyage, Ignatius conceived that a little learning would
perhaps help him in the task of converting heretics, and thus furnish
him with an additional chance of rendering himself famous; so after
his return he attended a school at Barcelona for two years, where, a
full-grown man of thirty-four, he learned the rudiments of the Latin
language, sitting upon the same bench with little boys.

Having failed to make any proselytes to his extravagances at Barcelona,
he went to Alcala, and studied in the university newly erected there
by Cardinal Ximenes. Here he attracted much public notice by the
eccentricities of his fanatical piety. He wore a peculiar dress of coarse
material, and by his fervid discourse contrived to win over to his mode
of life four or five young men, whom he called his disciples. But he was
regarded with suspicion by the authorities, who twice imprisoned him. He
and his converts were ordered to resume the common garb, and to cease to
expound to the people the mysteries of religion.[11] Indignant at this,
Ignatius immediately set out for Paris, where, in the beginning of 1528,
he arrived alone, his companions having deserted him.

His persecutions at Alcala had taught him prudence; so that, although
his attempts at notoriety in Paris, in the way of dress, manners, and
language, brought him before the tribunal of the Inquisition,[12]
he nevertheless had managed matters so cautiously as to escape all
punishment. Here, while contending with the difficulties of the Latin
grammar,[13] he was ever revolving in his vast and capacious mind some
new scheme for fulfilling his desires and gratifying his passion for
renown. But as yet he knew not what he was destined to accomplish. There
seems no ground for supposing that he could already have formed the
gigantic and comprehensive project of establishing, on the basis on which
it now stands, his wonderful and powerful Society. No; he only contrived,
as he had done in Spain, to enlist some followers, over whom he could
exercise an absolute control, for the furtherance of any future project.
In this his success had far exceeded his expectations. The magnanimous
and heroic Xavier, the intelligent and interesting Le Fevre, the learned
Lainez, the noble and daring Rodriguez, and some three or four others,
acknowledged him as their chief and master.

It may at first sight appear strange that such privileged intelligences
should have submitted themselves to a comparatively ignorant ex-officer.
But when it is borne in mind that Ignatius had a definite end, towards
which he advanced with steady and unhesitating steps, whilst his
companions had no fixed plan—that he was endowed with an iron will, which
neither poverty, nor imprisonment, nor even the world’s contempt, could
overcome—that, above all, he had the art to flatter their respective
passions, and to win their affections by using all his influence to
promote their interests—it is less surprising that he should have gained
an immense influence over those inexperienced and ingenuous young men,
on whose generous natures the idea of devoting their lives to the
welfare of mankind had already made a deep impression. Loyola’s courage
and ambition were strongly stimulated by the acquisition of disciples
so willing and devoted—so efficient for his purpose—so attached to his
person; and he began to consider how he might turn their devotion to the
best account.

After some conferences with his companions, he assembled them all on the
day of the Assumption, 16th August 1534, in the church of the Abbey of
Montmartre, where, after Peter Le Fevre had celebrated mass, they each
took a solemn vow to go to the Holy Land and preach the gospel to the
infidels. Ignatius, satisfied for the present with these pledges, left
Paris, in order, as he asserted, to recruit his health by breathing his
native air at Loyola before setting out on his arduous mission, and
doubtless also to find solitude and leisure in which to meditate and
devise means for realising his ambitious hopes. His disciples remained
in Paris to terminate their theological studies, and he commanded them
to meet him again at Venice in the beginning of 1537, enjoining them,
meanwhile, if any one should ask them what religion they professed,
to answer that they belonged to the Society of Jesus—since they were
Christ’s soldiers.[14]

Our saint preceded them to Venice, where he again encountered some
difficulties and a little persecution; but he endured all with
unflinching patience. Here he became acquainted with Pierre Caraffa
(afterwards Pope Paul IV.) This harsh and remarkable man had renounced
the bishopric of Theate, to become the companion of the meek and
gentle Saint Gajetan of Tyenne, and with his assistance had founded
the religious order of the Theatines. The members of this fraternity
endeavoured, by exemplary living, devotion to their clerical duties
of preaching and administering the sacraments, and ministering to the
sick, to correct the evils produced throughout all Christendom by the
scandalous and immoral conduct of the regular and secular clergy. To
Caraffa, who had already acquired great influence, Ignatius attached
himself, became an inmate of the convent he had founded, served patiently
and devotedly in the hospital which he directed, and shortly became
Caraffa’s intimate friend. This fixed at once the hitherto aimless
ambition of Loyola. He conceived the idea of achieving power and fame,
if not as the founder of a new order, at least as the remodeller of one
already existing. With this design, he submitted to Caraffa a plan of
reform for his order, and strongly urged its adoption. But Caraffa, who
perhaps suspected his motive, rejected his proposal, and offered to admit
him as a brother of the order as it stood. This, however, did not suit
Ignatius, whose proud nature could never have submitted to play even the
second part, much less that of an insignificant member in a society over
which another had all power and authority. He therefore declined the
honour, and at once determined to found a new religious community of his
own. Aware, however, of the difficulties he might have to overcome, he
resolved to proceed with the utmost caution.

Being under a vow to go to convert the infidels in the Holy Land, he gave
out that to this work alone were the lives of himself and his companions
to be devoted. Accordingly, as soon as they arrived in Venice, he sent
them to Rome to beg the Pope’s blessing on their enterprise, as he said;
and also, no doubt, to exhibit them to the Roman court as the embryo of a
new religious order. The reason assigned by his historians for his not
going to Rome along with them, is, that he feared that his presence there
might be prejudicial to them.[15] It is just as likely that he was afraid
lest, beneath his cloak of ostentatious humility, the discerning eye of
Pope Paul might detect his unbounded ambition.

At Rome his disciples were favourably received;—the Pontiff bestowed the
desired benediction, and they returned to Venice, whence they were to
sail for Palestine.

Here Ignatius prevailed upon them to take vows of perpetual chastity
and poverty, and then, under pretext of the war which was raging at the
time between the emperor and the Turks, they abandoned their mission
altogether. So ended their pious pilgrimage.

Taking with him Lainez and Le Fevre, Loyola then proceeded to Rome, and
craved audience of the Pope.

The chair of St Peter was at this time occupied by Paul Farnese—that
same Pope who opened, and in part conducted, the Council of Trent; who
instigated the emperor to the war against the Protestants; who sent,
under his grandson’s command, 12,000 of his own troops into Germany
to assist in that war; and who lifted up his sacrilegious hand to
bless whoever would shed Protestant blood. He had been scandalously
incontinent; and if he did not, like Alexander VI., entirely sacrifice
the interests of the Church and of humanity to the aggrandisement of his
own family, nevertheless, his son received the dukedom of Placentia, and
his grandsons were created cardinals _at the age of fourteen_, and one of
them was intended to be Duke of Milan. However, Paul had some grandeur in
his nature. He was generous, and therefore popular, and his activity was
indefatigable. But Sarpi says of him, that of all his own qualities, he
_did not appreciate any nearly so much as his dissimulation_.[16]

By this amiable pontiff, Ignatius and his companions were kindly
received. He praised their exemplary and religious life, questioned them
concerning their projects, but took no notice of the plan they hinted at,
of originating a new religious order.

But Loyola was not to be thus discouraged. He summoned to Rome all
his followers (who had remained in Lombardy, preaching with a bigoted
fanaticism and calling the citizens to repentance), and gave them a
clearer outline than he had hitherto done of the society he proposed to
establish. This they entirely approved of, and took another vow (the most
essential for Loyola’s purpose) of _implicit and unquestioning obedience
to their superior_. Admire here the cautious and consummate art by which
Ignatius, step by step, brought his associates to the desired point.

Notwithstanding the repeated refusals of the Court of Rome to accede to
his wishes, neither the courage nor the perseverance of Ignatius failed
him. After much reflection, he at last thought he had discovered a way
to overcome the Pope’s unwillingness. Consulting with his companions, he
persuaded them to take a fourth vow, viz., one of obedience to the Holy
See and to the Pope _pro tempore_, with the express obligation of going,
without remuneration, to whatever part of the world it should please the
Pope to send them. He then drew up a petition, in which were stated some
of the principles and rules of the order he desired to establish, and
sent it to the Pope by Cardinal Contarini.

This fourth vow made a great impression on the wily pontiff; yet so great
was his aversion to religious communities, some of which were just then
the objects of popular hatred and the plague of the Roman court, that
he refused to approve of this new one until he had the advice of three
cardinals, to whom he referred the matter. Guidiccioni, the most talented
of the three, strenuously opposed it; but Paul, who perhaps had by this
time penetrated the designs of Loyola, and perceived that the proposed
Society could not prosper unless by contending for and maintaining
the supremacy of the Holy See, thought it would be his best policy to
accept the services of these volunteers, especially as it was a time
when he much needed them. Consequently, on the 27th of September 1540,
he issued the famous bull, _regimini militantis Ecclesiæ_, approving of
the new order under the name of “The Society of Jesus.” We consider it
indispensable to give some extracts from this bull.

“Paul, Bishop, Servant of the Servants of God, for a perpetual record.
Presiding by God’s will over the Government of the Church, &c....
Whereas we have lately learned that our beloved son Ignatius de Loyola,
and Peter Le Fevre, and James Lainez; and also Claudius Le Jay, and
Paschasius Brouet, and Francis Xavier; and also Alphonso Salmeron and
Simon Rodriguez, and John Coduri, and Nicolas de Bobadilla; priests of
the Cities, &c.... inspired, as is piously believed, by the Holy Ghost;
coming from various regions of the globe; are met together, and become
associates; and, renouncing the seductions of this world, have dedicated
their lives to the perpetual service of our Lord Jesus Christ, _and of
us, and of other our successors, Roman Pontiffs_; and expressly for _the
instruction of boys_ and other ignorant people in Christianity; and,
above all, for the spiritual consolation of the faithful in Christ, by
HEARING CONFESSIONS; ... We receive the associates under our protection
and that of the Apostolic See; conceding to them, moreover, that some
among them may freely and lawfully draw up such _Constitutions_ as
they shall judge to be conformable to, &c.... We will, moreover, that
into this Society there be admitted to the number of sixty persons
only, desirous of embracing this rule of living, and no more, and to be
incorporated into the Society aforesaid.”

The above-named ten persons were the first companions of Loyola, and,
with him, the founders of the Society. But the merit of framing the
Constitution which was to govern it belongs solely to Ignatius himself.
He alone among them all was capable of such a conception. He alone could
have devised a scheme by which one free rational being is converted
into a mere automaton—acting, speaking, even thinking, according to the
expressed will of another. There is no record in history, of any man, be
he king, emperor, or pope, exercising such absolute and irresponsible
power over his fellow-men as does the General of the Jesuits over his
disciples. In the _Spiritual Exercises_ Loyola appears to be merely an
ascetic enthusiast; in the _Constitution_ he shews himself a high genius,
with a perfect and profound knowledge of human nature and of the natural
sequence of events. Never was there put together a plan so admirably
harmonious in all its parts, so wonderfully suited to its ends, or which
has ever met with such prodigious success.

Prompt, unhesitating obedience to the commands of the General, and
(for the benefit of the Society, and _ad majorem Dei gloriam_) great
elasticity in all other rules, according to the General’s goodwill, are
the chief features of this famous Constitution, which, as it constitutes
the Jesuits’ code of morality, we shall now proceed to examine, doing our
best to shew the spirit in which it was dictated.



CHAPTER II.

1540-52.

CONSTITUTIONS OF THE SOCIETY.[17]


The times in which Ignatius wrote the Constitutions were, for the Court
of Rome and the Catholic religion, times of anxiety and danger. The
Reformation was making rapid progress, and all Christendom, Catholic[18]
as well as Protestant, resounded with the “Hundred Complaints” (_Centum
gravamina_) brought forward at the Diet of Nuremberg against the Roman
court—complaints and accusations which the wonderfully candid Adrian
VI. acknowledged to be too well founded. This pontiff, by his nuncio,
frankly declared to the Diet, “that all this confusion was originated by
men’s sins, and, above all, by those of the clergymen and prelates—that
for many years past the _Holy See had committed many abominations_—that
numerous abuses had crept into the administration of spiritual affairs,
and many _superfluities into the laws_—that all had been perverted—and
that the corruption, descending from the head to the body, from the
Sovereign Pontiff to the prelates, was so great, that there could
hardly be found one who did good.”[19] When a pope confessed so much to
Protestant ears, it may well be imagined to what a degree of rottenness
the moral leprosy must have arrived.

But, besides this corruption, great confusion reigned throughout the
Roman Catholic world. The different monastic orders were at war with one
another. The bishops accused the Pope of tyranny; the Pope denounced the
bishops as disobedient. The mass of the people were deplorably ignorant,
and general disorder prevailed.

Now, mark with what admirable art, what profound sagacity, Ignatius
modelled a society, which, by displaying the virtues directly opposed to
the then prevailing vices, should captivate the affections and secure the
support of the good and the pious, whilst, by underhand practices, and,
above all, by shewing unusual indulgence in the confessional, it should
obtain an influence over the minds of the more worldly believers.

In order that diversity of opinion and the free exercise of individual
will should not produce division and confusion within this new Christian
community, Loyola enacted that, in the whole Society, there should be no
will, no opinion, but the General’s. But, in order that the General might
be enabled profitably to employ each individual member, as well as the
collective energy and intelligence of the whole Society, it was necessary
that he should be thoroughly acquainted with his character, even to its
smallest peculiarities. To insure this, Ignatius established special
rules. Thus, regarding the admission of postulants, he says—

“Because it greatly concerns God’s service to make a good selection,
diligence must be used to ascertain the particulars of their person
and calling; and if the superior, who is to admit him into probation,
cannot make the inquiry, let him employ from among those who are
constantly about his person some one whose assistance he may use, to
become acquainted with the probationer—to live with him and examine
him;—some one endowed with _prudence_, and _not unskilled_ in the manner
which should be observed with so many various kinds and conditions of
persons.”[20] In other words, set a skilful and prudent spy over him, to
surprise him into the betrayal of his most secret thoughts. Yet, even
when this spy has given a tolerably favourable report, the candidate is
not yet admitted—he is sent to live in another house, “in order that he
may be more thoroughly _scrutinised_, to know whether he is fitted to be
admitted to _probation_.”[21] When he is thought suited for the Society,
he is received into the “house of first probation;” and after a day or
two, “he must open his conscience to the superior, and afterwards make
a general confession to the _confessor who shall be designed_ by the
superior.”[22] But this is not all, for—“in every house of probation
there will be a _skilful man_ to whom the candidate shall disclose all
his concerns with confidence; and let him be admonished _to hide no
temptation_, but to disclose it to him, or to his confessor, or to the
superior; nay, to take a pleasure in thoroughly manifesting his whole
soul to them, not only disclosing his defects, but even his penances,
mortifications, and _virtues_.”[23] When the candidate is admitted into
any of their colleges, he must again “open his conscience to the rector
of the college, whom he should greatly revere and venerate, as one who
_holds the place of Christ our Lord_; keeping nothing concealed from
him, not even his conscience, which he should disclose to him (as it is
set forth in the _Examen_) at the appointed season, and oftener, if
any cause require it; not opposing, not contradicting, nor shewing an
opinion, in any case, opposed to his opinion.”[24]

The information thus collected, regarding the tastes, habits, and
inclinations of every member, is communicated to the General, who notes
it down in a book, alphabetically arranged, and kept for the purpose,
in which also, as he receives twice a year a detailed report upon every
member of the Society, he from time to time adds whatever seems necessary
to complete each delineation of character, or to indicate the slightest
change. Thus, the General knowing the past and present life, the
thoughts, the desires of every one belonging to the Society, it is easy
to understand how he is enabled always to select the fittest person for
every special service.

But this perfect knowledge of his subordinates’ inmost natures would
be of but little use to the General, had he not also an absolute and
uncontrolled authority over them. The Constitution has a provision for
insuring this likewise. It declares that the candidate “_must regard
the superior as_ CHRIST THE LORD, and must strive to acquire perfect
resignation and denial of his own will and judgment, in all things
conforming his will and judgment to that which the superior wills
and judges.”[25] To the same purpose is the following: “As for holy
obedience, this virtue must be perfect in every point—in execution,
in will, in intellect; doing what is enjoined with all celerity,
spiritual joy, and perseverance; persuading ourself that everything is
just; suppressing every repugnant thought and judgment of one’s own,
in a certain obedience; ... and let every one persuade himself that he
who lives under obedience should be moved and directed, under Divine
Providence, by his superior, just as if he were a CORPSE (_perinde ac
si cadaver esset_), which allows itself to be moved and led in any
direction.”[26] And so absolutely is this rule of submissive obedience
enforced, that the Jesuit, in order to obey his General, must not scruple
to disobey God. The warnings of conscience are to be suppressed as
culpable weaknesses; the fears of eternal punishment banished from the
thoughts as superstitious fancies; and the most heinous crimes, when
committed by command of the General, are to be regarded as promoting the
glory and praise of God.

Read and consider the following blasphemy:—“No constitution, declaration,
or any order of living, can involve an obligation to commit sin, mortal
or venial, _unless the superior command it_ IN THE NAME OF OUR LORD
JESUS CHRIST, _or in virtue of holy obedience_; which shall be done in
those cases or persons wherein it shall be judged that it will greatly
conduce to the particular good of each, or to the general advantage;
and, _instead of the fear of offence, let the love and desire of all
perfection succeed, that the greater glory and praise of Christ, our
Creator and Lord, may follow_!”[27]

I shudder at the thought of all the atrocities which have been
perpetrated at the order of this other “old man of the mountain,” who
presents to his agents the prospects of eternal bliss as the reward of
their obedience.

But this is not enough. Not content with having thus transferred the
allegiance of the Jesuit from his God to his General, the Constitution
proceeds to secure that allegiance from all conflict with the natural
affections or worldly interests. The Jesuit must concentrate all his
desires and affections upon the Society. He must renounce all that is
dear to him in this life. The ties of family, the bonds of friendship,
must be broken. His property must, within a year after his entrance into
the Society, be disposed of at the bidding of the General; “and he will
accomplish a work of greater perfection if he dispose of it in _benefit
of the Society_. And that his better example may shine before men, he
must _put away all strong affection for his parents_, and refrain from
the unsuitable desire of a _bountiful distribution_, arising from such
_disadvantageous affection_.”[28]

He must, besides, forego all intercourse with his fellow-men, either
by word of mouth or by writing,[29] except such as his superior shall
permit. “He shall not leave the house except at such times and with
such companions as the superior shall allow. Nor within the house shall
he converse, without restraint, with any one at his own pleasure, but
with such only as shall be appointed by the superior.”[30] Such was the
strictness with which these rules were enforced, that Francis Borgia,
Duke of Candia, afterwards one of the saints of the Society, was at
first refused admittance into it, because he delayed the settlement of
the affairs of his dukedom, and refused to renounce all intercourse with
his family; and although, by a special rescript from the Pope, he was
enrolled as a member, Ignatius for three years sternly denied him access
to the house of the community, where he was not admitted till he had
renounced all intercourse with the external world.

But not only is all friendly communication forbidden to the Jesuit, but
he is also placed under constant espionage. He is never permitted to
walk about alone, but, whether in the house or out of doors, is always
accompanied by _two_ of his brethren.[31] Each one of this party of
three acts, in fact, as a spy upon his two companions. Not, indeed, that
he has special instructions from his superior to do so, but, knowing
that they, as well as himself, have been taught that it is their duty to
inform the General of every suspicious or peculiar expression uttered in
their hearing, he is under constant fear of punishment, should either
of them report anything regarding the other which he omits to report
likewise. Hence it is very seldom that a Jesuit refrains from denouncing
his companion. If he does not do so at once, his _sinful neglect_ becomes
revealed in the confessional, to the _special_ confessor appointed by the
superior.

Then, in order that these members, so submissive in action to their
General, should not differ in opinion among themselves and so occasion
scandal in the Catholic world, and to oppose an uniformity of doctrine
to that of the free examen of the Protestants, the Constitution decrees
as follows:—“Let all think, let all speak, as far as possible, the
same thing, according to the apostle. Let no contradictory doctrines,
therefore, be allowed, either by word of mouth, or public sermons, or in
written books, which last shall not be published without the approbation
and the consent of the General; and, indeed, all difference of opinion
regarding practical matters should be avoided.”[32] Thus, no one but the
General can exercise the right of uttering a single original thought or
opinion. It is almost impossible to conceive the power, especially in
former times, of a General having at his absolute disposal such an amount
of intelligences, wills, and energies.

Now, it must not be imagined that all, willing implicitly to obey the
behests of the superior, are indiscriminately admitted into the Society.
Such, indeed, is the case with all other monastic orders (I speak more
particularly of Italy and Spain). Vagabonds, thieves, and ruffians, often
became members of those communities, in whose convents they had found an
asylum against the police and the hangman. Ignatius wisely guarded his
Society from this abuse. Its members must be chosen, if possible, from
among the best. The wealthy and the noble are the fittest for admission;
although these qualifications are not essential, and the want of them may
be supplied by some extraordinary natural gift or acquired talent.[33]
Besides this, the candidate must possess a _comely presence_, youth,
health, strength, facility of speech, and steadiness of purpose. To
have ever been a heretic or schismatic, to have been guilty of homicide
or any heinous crime, to have belonged to another order, to be under
the bond of matrimony, or not to have a strong and sound mind, are
insurmountable obstacles to admission. Ungovernable passions, habit of
sinning, unsteadiness and fickleness of mind, lukewarm devotion, _want of
learning_ and of ability to acquire it, a dull memory, bodily defects,
debility and disease, and advanced age—any of these imperfections render
the postulant less acceptable;[34] and, to gain admission, he must
exhibit some very useful compensating qualities. It is evident that
persons so carefully selected are never likely to disgrace the Society
by any gross misbehaviour, and will perform with prudence and success
any temporal or worldly service they may be put to by the General. I say
_worldly_ service, because I should suppose that it must matter very
little for the service of God should the servant be _lame_ or of an
“_uncomely presence_.”

But in no part of the Constitution do Loyola’s genius and penetration
shine so conspicuously as in the rules regarding the vow of poverty,
and the gratuitous performance of the duties of the sacred ministry.
The discredit and hatred which weighed upon the clergy and the monastic
orders was in great part due to the ostentatious display of their
accumulated wealth, and to the venality of their sacred ministry. To
guard against this evil, Ignatius ordained that “_poverty_ should
be loved and maintained as the _firmest bulwark of religion_.” The
Jesuit was forbidden to possess any property, either by inheritance or
otherwise. He was required to live in an inexpensive house, to dress
plainly, and avoid all appearance of being wealthy. The churches and
religious houses of the order were to be without endowments. The colleges
alone were permitted to accept legacies or donations for the maintenance
of students and professors. No limit was assigned to these gifts, the
management of which was intrusted entirely to the General, with power
to appoint rectors and administrators under him. These functionaries,
generally chosen from among the coadjutors and very rarely from the
professed Society, although debarred by their vow of perpetual poverty
from the possession of the smallest amount of property, are yet, by this
ingenious trick, enabled to hold and administer the entire wealth of the
Society. We shall afterwards see, and especially in the famous process of
Lavallette, in what a large sense they understand the word _administer._
So much for the display of wealth. With respect to the venality of the
sacred ministry, they declared that “no Jesuit shall demand or receive
pay, or alms, or remuneration, for mass, confessions, sermons, lessons,
visitations, or any other duty which the Society is obliged to render;
and, to avoid even the appearance of covetousness, especially in offices
of piety which the Society discharges for the succour of souls, let
there be _no box_ in the church, into which alms are generally put by
those who go thither to mass, sermon, confession,” &c.[35] Thus the
Jesuit refuses to accept a few paltry sixpences for performing mass, or
a fee of some shillings per quarter for teaching boys. He disdains to
appear mercenary. He would much rather be _poor_. He looks for no reward.
Yet, those little boys whom he instructs gratuitously, and with such
affectionate tenderness that he cannot bring himself to chastise them,
but must have the painful though necessary duty performed by some one not
belonging to the Society;[36]—these boys, I say, will become men, many
of them religious bigots, strongly attached to their kind preceptors, to
whom they will then pay the debt of gratitude incurred in their youth.

Alas for such gratitude! How many families have had cause to deplore it!
How many children have been reduced to beggary by it! How many ancient
and noble houses has it precipitated from the height of affluence and
splendour into the depth of poverty and wretchedness! Who can number
the crimes committed in the madness of despair occasioned by the loss
of the family inheritance? That the parent may suffer a few years less
of purgatory, the child has been too often condemned to misery in this
life, and perhaps to eternal punishment in the next. But all this is of
no consequence. The man who has been led thus to disregard one of his
most sacred parental duties, in order to found a Jesuits’ college or
endow a professorship, will be saved, because they promise him—“In every
college of our Society, let masses be celebrated once a week _for ever_,
for its founder and benefactor, whether dead or alive. At the beginning
of every month, all the priests who are in the college ought to offer the
same sacrifice for them; and a solemn mass, with a commemorative feast,
shall be celebrated on the anniversary of the donation, and a wax candle
offered to the donor or his descendants.” Besides this, “the donor shall
have three masses while alive, and three masses after his death, by all
the priests of the Society, with the prayers of all its members; so that
he is made partaker of all the good works which are done, by the grace
of God, not only in the college which he has endowed, but in the whole
Society.”[37]

By such allurements do these crafty priests, with diabolical cunning,
snatch princely fortunes from the credulous and superstitious believers.
And so assiduous and successful were they even at the very beginning,
that, only thirteen years after the establishment of the order, during
Loyola’s lifetime, they already possessed upwards of a hundred colleges
very largely and richly endowed.

Now, let not my Protestant readers wonder how sensible men can be
induced, by such ephemeral and ill-founded hopes, to disinherit their
families in order to enrich these hypocritical monks. They must remember
that the Romish believer views these matters in quite a different light
from that in which they see them. Masses and prayers are, in his belief,
not only useful, but indispensable. For lack of them he would writhe for
centuries amid the tormenting fires of purgatory, the purifying pains of
which are described by his priest, with appalling eloquence, as being
far more excruciating than those of hell. According to the doctrine
of his Church, every soul (one in a million only excepted) who is not
eternally damned, must, ere it enter heaven, pass a certain time in this
abode of torture for the expiation of its sins. And let him not take
comfort from the fact that his conscience does not reproach him with
the commission of any heinous crime. The catalogue of sins by which he
may be shut out from eternal blessedness is made artfully long, and
detailed with great minuteness. The most upright and pious of men must
condemn himself as a presumptuous sinner if he for an instant harbours
the hope of escaping the purifying fire. So he becomes quite resigned to
his fate, and all his care in this life is, how to appease the Divine
anger, and shorten the period of his exclusion from heaven. This he
is taught to do—not by trusting to the righteousness of Jesus Christ,
with the true repentance which manifests itself through a holy life,
but by accumulating on his head hundreds of masses and millions of days
of indulgence. Hence the innumerable masses and prayers which he sends
before him during his life, as if to forestall his future punishment,
and bribe the Divine justice. And when the terrible moment arrives—that
moment in which he is about to appear before the awful Judge, beneath
whose searching eye his most secret thoughts lie bare—when, trembling
at the strict account that is about to be demanded of him, his fears
represent to his excited imagination the most trifling shortcomings as
mortal sins—when, with the decline of bodily strength, his enfeebled
mind becomes more easily worked upon—then does his Jesuit confessor,
his generous master, his kind, disinterested friend, come to give him
the last proof of his ever-growing affection. He seats himself at his
bedside, and, serpent-like, under pretence of inducing him to repent of
his sins, he draws him a fearful and impressive picture of the torments
which await the damned. He descants to him with oily sanctity upon the
enormity of offending the Divine Saviour, who shed his precious blood to
redeem us. He terrifies him with the Almighty’s implacable vengeance; and
when his victim, choked with heart-rending agony, distracted, despairing
of his ultimate salvation, is ready to curse God, and set his power and
anger at defiance—then, and not till then, does the Jesuit relent. Now he
raises in the sufferer’s heart the faintest hope that the Divine justice
may possibly be disarmed, and mercy obtained by means of masses and
indulgences. The exhausted man, who feels as if he were already plunged
amid the boiling sulphur and devouring flames, grasps with frantic
eagerness at this anchor of salvation; and, did he possess tenfold more
wealth than he does, he would willingly give it all up to save his soul.
It may be that his heart, yearning with paternal affection, shrinks at
the thought of condemning his helpless ones to beggary; but nevertheless,
as if the welfare of his family were necessarily connected with his own
perdition, and that of the Jesuits with eternal beatitude, the family is
invariably sacrificed to the Jesuits.

It is notorious that the most diabolical tricks have been resorted to in
the case of dying men whose better judgment and natural sense of duty
have withstood such perfidious wiles.

Alas! the punishment of such criminal obstinacy was always near at hand;
the sick-chamber has been suddenly filled with flames and sulphureous
vapour as a warning to the impenitent sinner. And if he still resisted,
the Evil Spirit himself, in his most frightful shape, has appeared to
the dying man, as if waiting for his soul. Ah!—one’s hair stands on end
while listening to such sacrilegious manœuvres. The immense wealth of the
Jesuits has been bequeathed to them by wills made at the last hour!

In order that all classes of Jesuits may better attend to their peculiar
occupations, Ignatius relieved them from the obligation, incumbent on
all other religious communities, of performing the Church service at the
canonical hours.

Jesuits of every class may be expelled from the order, either by the
general congregation or by the all-powerful General. In such cases,
however, it is enacted, that great care be taken to keep secret the
deeds or crimes which necessitate the dismissal, in order that the
ex-Jesuit may suffer the least possible disgrace; also, that he shall be
assisted by the prayers of the community, together with something more
substantial, to the end that he may harbour no resentment against the
order.[38]

No Jesuit, without the consent of the General, is allowed to accept any
ecclesiastical dignity or benefice; and the General is required to refuse
such consent, unless the Pope command him in the name of holy obedience
to grant it. By this rule Ignatius designed to avoid exciting the
animosity and jealousy of the other monastic orders, and of the clergy
in general. Besides, Ignatius knew well that any ecclesiastical dignity
would confer lustre and power on the individual, but be detrimental to
the order. A bishop or a cardinal would be less disposed than a poor
priest, to obey the General, and to work for the Society. He himself
most rigidly enforced it, and would permit neither Lainez nor Borgia to
receive the cardinal’s hat, which the Pope offered them. Since his time,
the Jesuits have very seldom broken this rule, and that most often only
to undertake some bishopric in far distant countries where no one else
would desire to go.

The dress of the Jesuits consists of a long black vest and cloak, and
of a low-crowned broad-brimmed hat, all of the greatest simplicity, and
of good but common material. In their houses and colleges there reigns
the most perfect order, the most exemplary propriety. The banqueting,
revelling, and licence which so disgrace the establishments of the other
monastic orders, are strictly prohibited.[39] They are very frugal in
their habits, and prudently avoid all display of wealth. It is said that
the General occasionally relaxes the rules in favour of some of the most
trusty of the _professed_ and _coadjutors_, in order that, disguised as
laymen, they may enjoy a few holidays as they please, in some distant
place where they are not known.

We shall now proceed to examine that part of the Constitutions which
concerns the hierarchy. Our readers must always bear in mind what
we have already said, that the Constitutions were not finished till
the year 1552, and it may perhaps be that some rules were added even
after. The Society at first consisted only of professed members, and of
scholastics or scholars, a sort of Jesuit aspirants who were trained up
for the Society, into which they were admitted or not, according to the
proofs which they had given of their fitness. In the year 1546, Paul
III. approved of the introduction of the class of the Coadjutors, and
in the year 1552 was erected at Lisbon the first house for the novices.
We may further observe that, under the first three Generals, those
Constitutions were scrupulously observed. And those were the heroic
times of the Society. But from that moment, internal discord at first,
and afterwards the more worldly and political character assumed by the
Society, were its ruin, and the cause of its suppression as well as of
its re-establishment. But let us not anticipate events.



CHAPTER III.

1540-53.

HIERARCHY.


The government of the Company of Jesus is purely monarchical, and the
General is its absolute and uncontrollable king.

The members of the Society are divided into four classes,—the Professed,
Coadjutors, Scholars, and Novices. There is also a secret fifth class,
known only to the General and a few faithful Jesuits, which, perhaps more
than any other, contributes to the dreaded and mysterious power of the
order. It is composed of laymen of all ranks, from the minister to the
humble shoe-boy. Among the individuals composing this class are to be
found many ladies, who, unknown and unsuspected, are more dangerous in
themselves, and more accurate spies to the Company. These are affiliated
to the Society, but not bound by any vows. The Society, as a noble and
avowed reward, promises to them forgiveness for all their sins, and
eternal blessedness, and, as a more palpable mark of gratitude, protects
them, patronises them, and, in countries where the Jesuits are powerful,
procures for them comfortable and lucrative places under government, or
elsewhere. If this is not sufficient, they are paid for their services
in hard cash, according to an article of the Constitution, which
empowers the General to spend money on _persons who will make themselves
useful_. In return for these favours, they act as the spies of the
order, the reporters of what goes on in those classes of society with
which the Jesuit cannot mix, and serve, often unwittingly, as the tools
and accomplices in dark and mysterious crimes. Father Francis Pellico,
brother to the famous Silvio, in his recent quarrel with the celebrated
Gioberti, to prove that the order is not so very deficient of supporters
as his opponent asserts, candidly confesses that “the many illustrious
friends of the Society, prelates, orators, learned and distinguished men
of every description, the supporters of the Society, remain _occult,
and obliged to be silent_.”[40] This avowal, coming from the mouth of a
Jesuit, must be specially noted. Now, reversing the order of the classes,
we shall begin by describing


I. THE NOVICES.

We have already seen the process a candidate must go through before being
admitted into the House of First Probation. After undergoing a still
more searching scrutiny there, he passes to the House of Noviciate. The
noviciate lasts two years, and may be shortened or prolonged at the
General’s pleasure. There are six principal exercises by which the Novice
is tried; they are as follows:—

“1. The Novices are to devote a month to the spiritual exercises,
self-examination, confession of sins, and meditation, and to a
contemplation of the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ.

“2. They are to serve for another month in one or more of the hospitals,
by ministering to the sick, in proof of increasing humility and entire
renunciation of the pomps and vanities of the world.

“3. They must wander during a third month without money, begging from
door to door, that they may be accustomed to inconvenience in eating and
sleeping, or else they may serve in an hospital for another month, at the
discretion of the Superior.

“4. They must submit to be employed in the most servile offices of the
house into which they have entered, for the sake of shewing a good
example in all things.

“5. They are to give instruction in Christian learning to boys, or to
their untaught elders, either publicly, privately, or as occasion may be
offered.

“6. When sufficient proof has been given of improvement in probation, the
Novice may proceed to preach, to hear confessions, or to any exercise in
which circumstances may direct him to engage.”[41]

“While a Jesuit is thus fulfilling the several trials of his fitness, he
may not presume to say that he is one of the Society.[42] He must only
describe himself as wishing to be admitted into it; _indifferent_ to the
station which may be assigned to him, and waiting in patient expectation
until it be determined how his services may be most advantageously
employed.”

At the expiry of the _biennium_, if he has gone through all his trials
satisfactorily, he takes the vows, of which the following is the formula:—

“Almighty, everlasting God, I, N., albeit every way most unworthy in
Thy holy sight, yet relying on Thine infinite pity and compassion, and
impelled by the desire of serving Thee, in the presence of the most
holy Virgin Mary, and before all Thine heavenly host, vow to Thy divine
Majesty perpetual poverty, chastity, and obedience in the Society of
Jesus, and promise that I will enter the same Society, to live in it
perpetually, _understanding all things according to the Constitutions of
the Society_. Of Thy boundless goodness and mercy, through the blood of
Jesus Christ, I humbly pray that Thou wilt deign to accept this sacrifice
in the odour of sweetness, and, as Thou hast granted Thine abundant grace
to desire and offer, so Thou wilt enable me to fulfil the same. At Rome,
or elsewhere, in such a place, day, month, and year.”

“Then shall they take, as the others, the most holy body of Christ, and
the rest of the ceremony shall proceed as before.”[43]

After the Novice has taken the vows, he must remain in an undeterminate
state until the General has decided in what capacity he can best serve
the Society. To this he must be wholly indifferent, and on no account
endeavour to obtain, either directly or indirectly, any particular
employment, but must await in silence the General’s decision.

Those are the written precepts; but the sly and abominable acts to
which the Jesuits resort in order to model the man to the standard of
the Society, are numerous, and differ according to circumstances and to
the character of the Novice. But, in all cases, before the _biennium_
is elapsed, either the man is dismissed, or he has lost all ideas, all
hopes, all desires of a personal nature; he is a man without will,
submitting blindly to obey any order, and devoting soul and body to the
aggrandizement of the Society.


II. THE SCHOLARS.

To promote the objects of their Society, the Jesuits rely in a great
measure upon the talent and learning of its members. Hence their decided
preference for candidates with superior mental endowments, and their
assiduous attention to the prosperity and good management of their
colleges and universities, which were at one time the best regulated and
most efficient in Europe. Their judicious arrangement of the studies,
their admirable superintendence, their exemplary discipline, their many
inducements to application, rendered the Jesuit colleges the resort of
all those who aspired to eminence in the literary or learned world.
The greatest men in all the Catholic countries of Europe during the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were educated by the Jesuits.

All the property bequeathed or given to the Society is made over to
the colleges and universities, which, however, have not the power of
administering it. In these colleges are trained the _Scholars_, of
whom there are two sorts—the _Received_ and the APPROVED. The former
are candidates for membership, who are being tried for their skill in
learning previous to entering upon the noviciate; the latter are those
who have completed their noviciate, and taken the vows. Every Novice and
Scholar aspires to enter the class of the Coadjutors, or that of the
Professed, in which two classes reside all the power and authority of the
order. The vows of the Scholars are the same as those of the Novices.


III. COADJUTORS.

The third class of Jesuits consists of Temporal and Spiritual Coadjutors.
The Temporal Coadjutors, however learned they may be, are never admitted
to holy orders. They are the porters, cooks, stewards, and agents of
the Society. The Spiritual Coadjutors are priests, and must be men of
considerable learning, in order that they may be qualified to hear
confessions, to teach, preach, &c. The rectors of the colleges, and the
superiors of the religious houses, are appointed from this class. They
are sometimes permitted to assist in the deliberations of the general
congregation, but have no voice in the election of the General.

Besides undergoing the first probation, and the noviciate, the Coadjutors
must submit to a third year of trial, in order to afford a stronger
proof of their aptitude. It is here worthy of remark, that in the case
of a porter or a cook, there is required a year of trial more than is
thought necessary to qualify the scholar who is to preach, and teach
the Catechism. The porters and cooks must know something of worldly
business, and, consequently, there is the greater need that they should
be faithful and trustworthy. Here is the formula of the vow taken by the
Coadjutors:—“I, N., promise Almighty God, before His Virgin Mother, and
before all the heavenly host, and you, reverend father, General of the
Society of Jesus, _holding the place of God_, and of your successors;
or you, reverend father, Vice-General of the Society of Jesus, and of
his successors, _holding the place of God_, perpetual poverty, chastity,
and obedience, and therein, _peculiar care in the education of boys_,
according to the manner expressed in the Apostolical Letters, and in
the Constitutions of the said Society. At Rome, or elsewhere, in such a
place, day, month, and year.

“Then let him take the most holy body of Christ; and let the rest of the
ceremony be the same as in the case of the Professed.”[44] The clause,
“_peculiar care in the education of boys_,” is omitted in the vow when
taken by the Temporal Coadjutors.


IV. THE PROFESSED.

This fourth class, the first in order of power and dignity, may be said
to constitute, alone, the Society. The probation required for it is
longer and more rigorous than that of any of the other classes. _Two_
additional years of trial must be endured, in order to gain admission
into it. This is partly to prevent the class becoming too numerous.
The Professed must, in terms of the Constitutions, be priests, above
twenty-five years of age, eminent in learning and virtue. In addition
to their acquirements in literature and philosophy, they must devote
four years specially to the study of theology. Their admission is the
immediate act of the General, who seldom delegates his power for that
purpose, as he generally does for admitting to the other classes.
_Solemn_ vows are taken by this class only; those of the other classes
are designated merely as _simple_ vows. Besides the three ordinary vows
of poverty, chastity, and obedience, the Professed take a fourth—to obey
the Holy See, and to go, as missionaries, into whatever part of the world
the Pope _pro tempore_ chooses to send them. My readers will remember,
that it was this fourth vow which overcame the crafty Pope Paul’s
objections to sanction the order. But this pontiff, with all his cunning,
was no match for Loyola, who quite nullified this vow by the formula in
which he embodied it. According to this formula, the vow is made only in
accordance with the spirit of the Constitution. Now, the Constitution
enacts, “that the General shall have all power over every individual of
the Society, to send any one on a mission, to recall missionaries, and to
proceed in all things as he thinks will be best for the greater glory of
God.”[45] Thus, obedience to the Pope depends entirely on the will and
pleasure of the General. Hence the General’s preponderating influence
with the Court of Rome.

The ceremony of taking the vows of the Professed is more solemn than that
of the others. It must take place in the church, which with the others
is not imperative. “First of all, the General, or some one empowered by
him to admit to Profession, when he has offered the sacrifice of the
public Mass in the church, before inmates and others there present, shall
turn to the person who is about to make profession with the most holy
sacrament of the Eucharist; and he, after the general confession and the
words which are used before the communion, shall, with a loud voice,
pronounce his written vow (which it is meet that he should have meditated
on for several days), whereof this is the form:—

“I, N., make profession, and promise Almighty God, before His Virgin
Mother, and before all the heavenly host, and before all bystanders, and
you, reverend father, General of the Society of Jesus, _holding the place
of God_, and your successors; or you, reverend father, Vice-General of
the Society of Jesus, and of his successors, _holding the place of God_,
perpetual poverty, chastity, and obedience, and therein _peculiar care
in the education of boys_, according to the form of living contained in
the Apostolic Letters of the Society of Jesus, and in its Constitutions.
Moreover, I promise special obedience to the Pope in missions, as is
contained in the same Apostolic Letters and Constitutions. At Rome or
elsewhere, on such a day, month, and year, and in such a church.

“After this, let him take the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist.
Which being done, the name of him who makes profession shall be written
in a book which the Society shall keep for that purpose; the name of
the person to whom he made it—the day, month, and year, being also set
down; and his written vows shall be preserved, that an account of all the
particulars may appear for ever, to the glory of God.”[46]

It is this class, and that of the Coadjutors, who are wont to live by
alms, and who, for appearance’ sake, sometimes go begging from door to
door—(this is the case in Italy, at least). But, either from pride or
roguery, they never ask, in our day, anything in their own name, but
always in the name of the poor, the hospitals, and the prisoners, and
thus they win for their order the veneration of the credulous and the
ignorant.

To the Professed alone are confided the missions, and the management of
the more important affairs of the order, into the secrets of which they
are admitted farther than any other class. Hence they were never, except
in urgent cases, to be appointed rectors of colleges, or superiors of the
House of Probation. It was the strict observance of this rule which,
perhaps more than anything else, contributed to the ruin of the order.

The General, as we have already said, is at the head of the hierarchy,
the absolute master of persons and things. He is elected for life, by a
General Congregation of the Society, the decision requiring a majority
of votes, and the observance of certain rules. But sometimes, when
“elected by _general inspiration_, those rules may be dispensed with,”
for the HOLY GHOST, who inspires such an election, supplies the want of
every form of election.[47] To this Congregation there are convened two
Jesuits of the Professed class residing in Rome, all the Provincials,
and also two Professed members chosen in every province by a Provincial
Congregation. The formalities of the election are very much the same as
those observed in the election of the Pope.[48] After attending mass, the
electors are confined in an apartment, where they cannot communicate with
any one from without; and, to compel them to decide within a reasonable
time, they are allowed no better aliment than bread and water until a
General is chosen. When this fortunate occurrence takes place, and the
new General is proclaimed, every one present must come forward to do him
reverence, and, _kneeling on both knees_, kiss his hand.[49] The same
Congregation which elects the General appoints also four assistants,
to reside near him in Rome. At the period when the Constitution was
ultimately defined, toward 1552, the Jesuits had divided the world into
four provinces, viz. India, Spain and Portugal, Germany and France, and
Italy and Sicily. Each of the four assistants attend separately to the
affairs of one of these four provinces, and all of them together, when
required, assist the General in the general business of the Society. At
the same Congregation there is also appointed a pious man as _admonitor_
to the General, whose duty is to be near the General, to watch him, and,
“should he perceive him swerving from the right path, with all possible
humility to advise him, after earnest and devout prayer to God, what he
considers to be the best course to follow.”

In the event of the death or prolonged absence of any of these officials,
the General may appoint some one to the vacant post, provided his choice
be approved by the majority of the Provincials. All these officials are
given to the General by the Constitution, partly to assist him in the
fulfilment of his duties, and partly to be constant and keen surveyors of
his conduct. “And should the General sin in _copula carnalis_, wounding
any one, applying to his own use or giving away any of the revenues of
the colleges, or holding depraved doctrines, as soon as the charge is
proved by adequate evidence, the four assistants immediately call forth
the General Congregation.”[50] However, with the exception of alienating
any real property of the colleges, the General has full and unlimited
power, even to the granting of a dispensation for any of the rules of the
Constitution. He appoints and disposes of all the subaltern officials
of the Society, and receives into it, or dismisses from it, any person
whom he pleases, and that at any time he may choose. He buys or exchanges
property for the order by his own authority, and has the superintendence
of its whole administration.

The Provincials send him, once a year, an elaborate and detailed account
of every member of the order, the correctness of which is ascertained by
private investigation through different and opposite sources, because
(as is thought) he does not place implicit confidence even in them.
The Constitutions say—“The General scrutinises as far as possible the
character of those who are under his control, and especially Provincials,
and others to whom he intrusts matters of importance.”[51]


V. THE PROVINCIALS.

The Provincials are elected by the General from the class of the
Professed. They are appointed for three years, but may be confirmed or
dismissed at the General’s will. The importance of the province over
which he is set depends upon the number of houses or colleges established
within its bounds. The Rectors, Administrators, or local Superiors,
write to the Provincials monthly a full and correct account of the
inclinations, opinions, defects, propensities, and characters of every
individual under their charge. Confidential persons, and especially
Confessors, are of great assistance to them in the drawing up of their
reports, from which the Provincials extract theirs, which are yearly sent
to the General.


VI. RECTORS, SUPERIORS, AND ADMINISTRATORS.

The Rectors are intrusted with the superintendence of the colleges. The
General chooses them from the class of the Spiritual Coadjutors, but
appoints them for no determinate period, which leaves him at liberty to
dismiss them whenever he pleases.

The Superiors, elected from the same class and by the same authority,
have the oversight of the Houses of the First and Second Probation.
Each of these officials, Superior, Rector, and Provincial, has in his
respective sphere as absolute a power over his subordinates as the
General has over any member of the Society.

The Administrators are chosen by the General from the Temporal
Coadjutors under his control. They have the entire management of the
temporal concerns both of houses and colleges.

The Rectors and Superiors are forbidden to have anything to do with
any temporal matter whatever; because it forms a conspicuous part of
the admirable Jesuitical system, to have prescribed for every class of
Jesuits its particular duties, from which it is not to be diverted by any
occupation whatever. This has largely contributed to the aggrandisement
and success of the Society, as long as the rules were observed.

All these functionaries have subaltern officers, who assist them in the
discharge of their duties. Provincials, Rectors, Superiors, and some of
the Professed, compose the Provincial Congregations, where the affairs of
the district are discussed, and whence the delegates which are to be sent
to the General Congregation are chosen.

Having thus given a general outline of the origin and constitutions of
the Society, and the limits of this work forbidding me to enlarge to any
great extent upon this part of my subject, I shall now proceed to examine
its progress.



CHAPTER IV.

1541-48.

THE PROGRESS OF THE ORDER, AND ITS FIRST GENERAL.


Ignatius had no sooner obtained a bull from the Pope approving of
the Society, than he thought it expedient to give it a chief, or, to
speak more correctly, to be himself formally elected as such, being
_de facto_ its master already. In order, therefore, to proceed to the
election of the General, he summoned to Rome his companions, who were
scattered through different parts of Europe. Six came. Bobadilla,
Xavier, and Rodriguez sent their votes written. Both absent and present
were unanimous in their choice, which (as one may well imagine) fell
upon Ignatius. He, however, had the modesty (so we are told) to refuse
the honour, and insisted that they should proceed to a new election.
The second trial had the same result, but Ignatius still declined to
accept of the office. At last, however, on being much importuned to do
so, he exclaimed—“Since you persist in choosing me, who know well my
infirmities, I cannot in conscience subscribe to your judgment. It only
remains, then, that we refer the contested point to my confessor, whom,
as you know, I consider the interpreter of the Divine will.”[52] The good
fathers consented to this arrangement the more willingly, as they had no
doubt whatever (I should think not) that Father Theodose would approve
of their selection. Nor were they deceived.[53]

On Easter-day, therefore, in the year 1541, he assumed the government of
the Society, and on the following Friday he and his disciples, in the
magnificent Basilica of St Paul’s at Rome, renewed the four vows to which
they had bound themselves, with extraordinary pomp and ceremony.

We candidly admit, however, that Ignatius, after reaching the height
of his ambition, relaxed nothing in the strictness of his conduct, nor
allowed that zeal which he had manifested in order to attain it, to
cool down. On the contrary, he seemed to redouble his energy, and gain
additional strength in his new dignity. The days in which he lived were
days of battle, and Ignatius, not forgetting his first vocation, was
impatient to enter the _melée_. Protestantism, a giant in its infancy,
standing in a menacing attitude, with the Bible in one hand and the
sword in the other, bid defiance to the impugners of the Sacred Volume.
Catholicism, old in the debauch of power, discredited by the vices of its
ministers, could only oppose his formidable antagonist with a scattered
and undisciplined army of monks and priests, rendered effete by a life of
effeminacy and debauchery. At this critical moment, Ignatius rushed to
the rescue with an army, small indeed in number, but composed of brave
and resolute souls, learned, eloquent, passionate, trained to fight,
fully persuaded, as almost every soldier is, that theirs was the just
cause, and that to them the victory ought to belong. The disciples of
Ignatius took the field high in spirits, and prepared, if need be, to
sacrifice their liberty, their blood, their lives, their all, for the
cause they had embraced, which was in their eyes the cause of God. They
dispersed to every part of Europe. Lefevre, from the Congress of Worms,
proceeded to Spain; Lainez and Lejay succeeded him in Germany. Bobadilla
went to Naples, Brouet and Salmeron to Ireland, Rodriguez and Xavier to
Portugal. Everywhere these rigid and fanatic monks were, on the one hand,
engaged in theological discussion, while, on the other, they preached
repentance to the people and reform to the clergy, and paid no regard to
the hatred evinced towards them both by Protestants and Catholics. It
seems as if they courted persecution, and wished to wear the martyr’s
crown. When the infuriated populace of Vienna threatened to throw Lejay
into the Danube, he smiled scornfully, and calmly answered—“What do I
care whether I enter heaven by water or land!”

From Rome, Ignatius, as an able general, directed the movements of all
those soldiers of Christ, as they styled themselves. He praised one,
admonished another, inspired all with his zeal and fanaticism. Nor was
this enough for his ardent and indefatigable spirit. He turned his
attention to less unquestionable acts of religion and charity. Many of
the hospitals erected in the middle of Rome, were the fruits of his
zealous exertions. The Convent of Santa Martha was opened for abandoned
women, who wished to repent, and pass an upright and easy life. In
that of Santa Catherine, poor and honest young girls found an asylum
against temptation and seduction; fatherless children of both sexes were
received, and carefully educated, in two hospitals which yet exist in
Rome; and the inmates of which, on the 31st of July of every year, go in
procession to the Church of Gesù, to pray to the shrine of the saint, and
to give thanks to their benefactor.

However, the gratitude which we owe to Loyola for those charitable
institutions cannot restrain our indignation and abhorrence towards the
man who had so great a share in reviving the infamous tribunal of the
Inquisition. The Jesuits reckon it among the glories of their order, that
Loyola supported, by a special memorial to the Pope, a petition for the
reorganising of that cruel and abhorred tribunal.

In the 13th century, the Inquisition had been diabolically active. 25,000
Albigenses perished for bearing testimony to the Word of God. Dominique,
that wholesale butcher of these unfortunate Christians, by his barbarous
inhumanities, struck horror throughout Europe, and gained for himself a
place among the Roman saints. But, as is always the case, its very excess
prepared a reaction. The tribunal, as if satiated with human suffering,
gradually relented, and, in the epoch of which we are speaking, had
almost fallen into decay. Besides, the inquisitors, chosen from among the
monastic orders, were little inclined to enforce strict and severe laws
against practices or opinions with which they themselves were in many
cases chargeable.[54] Above all, the See of Rome, under the Alexanders,
the Juliuses, the Leos, plunged in political affairs, and, extremely
lax in matters of religion and morality, had little or no inclination
to enforce the almost forgotten edicts of the Inquisition. But the
new doctrines spread in Germany with amazing rapidity; and the outcry
raised against the morals of the Catholic clergy produced two immediate
effects—the partial reform of the more flagrant abuses of which the
clergy were guilty, and the revival of a tribunal, which should destroy
by fire and sword whoever dared to impugn the doctrines of the Popes,
and the canonical laws. Caraffa, whom we have already mentioned, was the
principal author of this dreadful tribunal. Through his exertions, and
those of Loyola, an edict appeared on the 21st of July 1542, appointing
six cardinals commissioners of the Holy See and general inquisitors, with
power to delegate their authority to any person they pleased. All ranks
of citizens, without exception, were subjected to these inquisitors.
Suspected persons were immediately imprisoned, the guilty punished with
death, and their property confiscated. No book could be printed or sold
(and such is still the case through nearly the whole of Italy) without
the authority of the inquisitor. Hence a catalogue of prohibited books,
the first issue of which, containing seventy works, appeared at Venice.

In order that the tribunal might be made more efficient, Caraffa drew up,
himself, the following stringent rules:—

_First_, When faith is in question, there must be no delay; but, on the
_slightest suspicion_, rigorous measures must be resorted to with all
speed.

“_Secondly_, No consideration is to be shewn to either prince or prelate,
however high his station.

“_Thirdly_, Extreme severity is to be exercised against all those who
attempt to shield themselves under the protection of any potentate; and
those only are to be treated with gentleness and fatherly compassion, who
make a full and frank confession of the charges laid against them.

“_Fourthly_, No man must _debase himself by shewing toleration_ towards
heretics of any kind, and above all to Calvinists.”[55]

This terrible tribunal, in the hands of the relentless and unforgiving
Caraffa, spread desolation and dismay throughout Italy, from its very
commencement. Thousands were arraigned before it, whose only crime
consisted in becoming the unhappy victims of such as were actuated by the
fell rage of revenge, or the thirst for power or wealth—in a word, by
any or all of those foul passions which degrade and brutalise humanity.
As sacerdotal ferocity then called to its aid the might of the secular
arm, and thus became all-powerful, death assumed a new and more terrible
aspect. And he who should invent new instruments of torture to dislocate
the limbs of the victims with the most exquisite and excruciating pains
possible would be rewarded!!! Throughout Italy, and in various parts
of Europe, you might have seen, whilst the infernal flames of the pile
were ascending, the sinister and diabolical smile of the Jesuits, who
were aiming at the increase of their order, under the shade of this
all-mastering power!

But we must resume our history. The first college of the order was
founded in Coimbra, in 1542, by John III. of Portugal. The same
year twenty-five of his subjects were admitted into it under the
superintendence of Rodriguez.

Lainez, aided by the Lipomana family, erected another at the same time
in Venice. A third was built in Padua. After that Italy became studded
with them. Those youth whom Loyola, in the beginning of 1540, had sent to
Paris to study, and receive a degree in its university, being expelled
from France, went to Louvain, and there, under the direction of Lefevre,
became the inmates of a college afterwards famous. The Jesuits had
already many colleges established in Germany, one of which was nursing in
its bosom Peter Canisius, who became most notorious for his cruelties.
In Spain, also, the new order met with prodigious success. Besides being
the birthplace of Ignatius and six of the founders of the order, it
succeeded, at its very commencement, in making a conquest of no less a
person than Francis Borgia, Duke of Candia, and vice-king of Barcelona.
The authority of his name, his exertions, and the eloquence of Father
Araoz, soon covered Spain with houses and colleges. Since the year 1543,
the order already counting nine houses, and more than eighty Professed
members, Paul III., who at first had limited the number of the Jesuits to
sixty, being highly satisfied with these new champions of the Roman See,
issued another bull on the 15th of March 1543, by which he empowered the
order to receive an unlimited number of members.

In speaking of the different countries into which the Jesuits had
intruded themselves, we have purposely passed over England; and that
for two reasons:—_First_, Because, writing in England, and for English
readers, we consider it but fair to expatiate all the more on what
particularly concerns their own country. _Secondly_, Because the two
first Jesuits who entered England were intrusted with a special political
mission—the first one of the kind, and which we are going to relate:—

The severe and somewhat capricious edicts of Henry VIII., even after
Moore and Fisher had perished by the hands of the executioner, while but
partially obeyed in England, were totally disregarded in Ireland. True
it is, that a great part of the aristocracy, for fear of proscription
and confiscation, had yielded to Henry’s orders, and even supported
him in his despotic policy; but the bulk of the nation, more perhaps
out of hatred to their oppressors than from real attachment to their
religion, refused to subscribe to a creed violently enforced by a hated
and despotic power. Not content with opposing Henry in his religious
ordinances, they, under the very pretence of religion, caused partial
insurrections, with the view of shaking off the yoke of their masters.
But the power of Henry bore down all opposition; and, as Dr Lingard says,
“the English domination over Ireland never appeared to be more firmly
established.” In such a state of things, the Archbishop of Armagh, a
Scotchman by birth, abandoning the flock confided to his care, fled to
Rome to implore the assistance of his master the Pope. Paul had already
evinced great anger against Henry for his apostacy. His anger was
increased by the fact, that not only was he unable to prevail on either
Francis I. or Charles V. to invade England, but, that these monarchs
had, in the face of his express commands, made, successively, a treaty
with the excommunicated king. Accordingly his resentment knew no bounds.
However, the means which Paul had at command to contend with Henry
were inadequate to gratify the hate which rankled in his bosom towards
him. Determined, nevertheless, not to remain inactive, he thought of
despatching some emissaries into Ireland, in order that, by working upon
the ignorant and bigoted minds of its fanatic inhabitants, he might
excite them to a civil war. With this pious end in view, he turned his
eyes to this newly established society, and asked from the General two
of its members, to be sent thither. From that day, down to the recent
mission of Cardinal Wiseman, the Court of Rome has striven, more or less
openly, more or less eagerly, to exasperate the Irish Catholics against
the English Protestants, and has made Ireland a sore thorn to the sister
island. Many a time did Pius V. exclaim, that he would willingly shed
his blood in a war against England; and Gregory XIII. was seriously
meditating to march in person, and head the insurrection which broke out
in Ireland during the reign of Elizabeth!

The two Jesuits whom Ignatius gave to the Pope for this mission were
Salmeron and Brouet, who received _secret instructions_ from the Pope,
and were honoured with the name of Papal Nuncios. “They accepted with joy
the perils of the embassy, but were in no way ambitious of the lustre and
honour which the title conferred.”[56] So modest they were, according to
Mr Crétineau.

The fact is, that they could not and would not have dared to assume in
public the title of the Pope’s Legates, or Nuncios, and were obliged to
content themselves to be simple and secret emissaries. Ignatius also
gave them private instructions, and we may thank Orlandini for having
sent down this document, which, if well examined, clearly shews that
the crafty and mysterious policy for which the Society has earned such
merited notoriety and execration, is as old as the order. Here is the
precious document, which, however, shews a remarkable knowledge of human
nature:—

“I recommend you to be, in your intercourse with all the world in
general—but particularly with your equals and inferiors—modest and
circumspect in your words, always disposed and patient to listen, lending
an attentive ear till the persons who speak to you have unveiled the
depth of their sentiments. Then you will give them a clear and brief
answer which may anticipate all discussion.

“In order to conciliate to yourselves the goodwill of men in the desire
of extending the kingdom of God, you will make yourselves all things
to all men, after the example of the apostle, in order to gain them to
Jesus Christ. Nothing, in effect, is more adapted than the resemblance of
tastes and habits to conciliate affection, to gain hearts.

“Thus, after having studied the character and manners of each person,
you will endeavour to conform yourselves to them as much as duty
will permit,—so that, if you have to do with an excitable and ardent
character, you should shake off all tedious prolixity.

“You must, on the contrary, become somewhat slow and measuring in speech,
if the person to whom you speak is more circumspect and deliberate in his
speech.

“For the rest, if he who has to do with a man of irascible temperament
has himself that defect, and if they do not agree thoroughly in their
opinion, it is greatly to be feared lest they permit themselves to be
hurried into passion. Therefore, he who recognises in himself that
propensity ought to watch himself with the most vigilant care, and
fortify his heart with a supply of strength, in order that anger should
not surprise him; but rather that he may endure with equanimity all that
he shall suffer from the other, even should the latter be his inferior.
Discussions and quarrels are much less to be apprehended from quiet and
slow tempers than from the excitable and ardent.

“In order to attract men to virtue, and fight the enemy of salvation, you
shall employ the arms he uses to destroy them—such is the advice of St
Basil.

“When the devil attacks a just man, he does not let him see his snares;
on the contrary, he hides them, and attacks him only indirectly, without
resisting his pious inclinations, feigning even to conform to them;—but
by degrees he entices him, and surprises him in his snares. Thus it is
proper to follow a similar track to extricate men from sin.

“Begin with praising what is good in them, without at first attacking
their vices; when you shall have gained their confidence, apply the
remedy proper for their cure.

“With regard to melancholy or unsettled persons, exhibit whilst
addressing them, as much as you can, a gay and serene countenance—give
the greatest sweetness to your words, in order to restore them to a state
of mental tranquillity—combating one extreme by another extreme.

“Not only in your sermons, but also in your private conversation,
particularly when you reconcile people at variance, do not lose sight of
the fact that all your words may be published—what you say in darkness
may be manifested in the light of day.

“In affairs anticipate the time, rather than defer or adjourn it; if you
promise anything for to-morrow, do it to-day. As to money, do not touch
even that which shall be fixed for the expenses which you shall pay. Let
it be distributed to the poor by other hands, or employ it in good works,
in order that you may be able, in case of need, to affirm on oath that in
the course of your legation you have not received a penny. When you have
to speak to the great, let Pasquier Bruet have the charge. Deliberate
with yourselves in all the points touching which your sentiments might
be at variance. Do what two persons out of three would have approved, if
called upon to decide.

“Write often to Rome during your journey—as soon as you shall have
reached Scotland, and also when you shall have got over to Ireland. Then
give an account of your legation monthly.”[57]

Now, examine well these instructions, and you will find that the true
Jesuit must be crafty, insinuating, deceitful, even whilst pretending to
be a most sincere Christian, and as if raised by God to defend his holy
religion. Their sacrilegious maxim, “that no means can be bad when the
end is good,” sanctifies in their eyes the most atrocious crimes.

At first sight, these precepts which Ignatius gave to the two emissaries
of Paul, although not very honest, appear in themselves prudent
instructions for proceeding in what they considered a most holy cause—the
maintenance of the Catholic religion. But apply them to political
purposes—and Ignatius knew that this was the case—and you will at once
perceive the extent of the Jesuit immorality, and the artful way in
which, in the name of the most sacred of all things—religion, they
accomplish the most heinous offences.

But listen to the ingenious Mr Crétineau:—“In these instructions,” says
he, “Loyola takes care to be silent about those which the Pope had given
them; he keeps aloof from politics. Salmeron and Brouet are the Pope’s
legates, and have his confidence. Ignatius endeavours to make them worthy
of it, but he does not go beyond.”[58] Good! You confess, then, that
Paul—Christ’s vicegerent—is plotting revenge under the garb of religion,
and that he has sent the Jesuits on a political mission. Ignatius,
confident in Paul’s abilities, confined himself to the prescribing of
rules calculated to insure success in their undertaking; you prize him
for that, and boast that he keeps aloof from politics? Good!

Salmeron and Brouet set out on their mission, and, as they were ordered,
visited Holyrood on their way to Ireland. James V. was then on the
throne of Scotland, who, “there is reason to believe,” says the author
of the _Tales of a Grandfather_, “was somewhat inclined to the Reformed
doctrines—at least he encouraged the poet Lindsay to compose bitter
satires against the corruptions of the Roman Catholic clergy.” His uncle,
Henry VIII., encouraged him in this disposition, strongly advised him
to take possession of the immense wealth of the religious orders; and
desired an interview with him at York in the beginning of the year 1542.
Henry went there, and waited six days for his nephew, but he never made
his appearance. There can be little doubt that the Jesuits, who had
arrived in Scotland some time before with the Pope’s letter for the king,
to whom they were introduced by Beaton, of cruel and tragic memory, who
had known Loyola at Rome, used their utmost influence to prevent this
meeting. Nor do I think it presumption to assert that the two Jesuits,
and the letter which they brought from Paul, who exhorted the king to
remain faithful to the religion of his fathers, were the chief cause that
detained him at home. The war which followed soon after, with disastrous
consequences to both nations, and especially to Scotland, as well as
the torrents of blood shed during a long course of religious struggles,
would, in all likelihood, have been avoided had James resisted the
influence of the Jesuits.

Meanwhile Paul’s two emissaries arrived in Ireland about the month of
February 1542. There, according to Jesuitical historians, they wrought
prodigies, reforming and stirring up the people, and confirming them in
the tenets of the true religion; celebrating masses, hearing confessions,
and especially granting many indulgences;[59] exacting from the people
a very _moderate tax_, which, according to the instructions of Ignatius,
was not gathered by themselves, but by a stranger.[60] The people
flocked around them, and poured out benedictions upon their head. Their
adversaries, on the other hand, assert that they plotted to stir up
one class of citizens against another, and drained the pockets of the
credulous Irishmen so forcibly, that at last they became so odious in the
eyes of the people, that they threatened to deliver them into the hands
of Henry’s officers.[61] We ourselves believe that both of these versions
are in part true. No doubt they, to keep up appearance, said masses,
heard many confessions, granted millions of indulgences, but there is as
little doubt that they excited the people against their excommunicated
sovereign, whom, to be faithful to their religion, they must execrate,
and use all their efforts to dethrone. That they collected money from the
people, either party confess; but whether that money was employed for
the repairing of the churches and the supporting of widows and orphans,
as the one pretends, or as an aliment to foment civil war, as the other
asserts, is not sufficiently ascertained. We leave our readers to judge
for themselves. Certain it is, however, they only continued in Ireland
for thirty-four days, and during that time they wandered about from
place to place in disguise, never sleeping two successive nights under
the same roof, afraid every moment of being seized. Upon leaving, they
formed the _noble complot_ (says Mr Crétineau, illustrating Orlandini)
of going to London, and finding means of being admitted into Henry’s
presence, when, by their eloquence and tenderness, they would disarm the
anger of the king, in pleading the cause of the Catholic religion at the
tribunal of his conscience.[62] It was as well for Henry, and England
too, that their plan was found to be “_impracticable_.” We must not
forget that they were the emissaries of that Paul who thought the sword
and the stake, for the conversion of heretics, to be the most effectual
and conclusive arguments. Neither must we forget, that some years after,
James Clement and Ravaillac adopted a more expeditious way than eloquence
for the converting of Henrys III. and IV. Salmeron and Brouet thought it
advisable, in the circumstances, to retire into France, and being ordered
by Paul to return again into Scotland, they refused to obey, and went
direct to Rome.

Thus ended the first mission into England. Would to God it had been the
last!



CHAPTER V.

1547-1631.

THE FEMALE JESUITS.


Before proceeding further, we think it proper to make a few observations
on the Female Jesuitical Institution which was established at this
period, especially as the order still exists, though under a different
name.

When Ignatius was living at Barcelona, he received many kindnesses and
favours at the hand of a lady called Rosello. But after he had left this
place, his mind was so absorbed in devising so many and lofty projects,
that he entirely forgot her. She did not, however, forget Ignatius.
Hearing of his increasing sanctity, of his having become the founder
and general of a new order, and “being then a widow, she resolved to
abandon the world, and live in accordance with his evangelical councils,
and under the authority of the Society. With this pious resolution, and
being joined in her holy enterprise by two virtuous and noble Roman
ladies, she asked and received from Paul permission to embrace this
kind of life.”[63] Ignatius had the perception to see that these ladies
would be an incumbrance to him and his order, “yet the gratitude which
he owed to his kind benefactress weighed so much upon his heart, that
he consented to receive them under his protection.” But he soon had
reason to repent of this act of condescension; the annoyance was so
great, that he confessed himself that they gave him more trouble than
the whole community, because he could never get done with them. At every
moment he was obliged to resolve their strange questions, to allay their
scruples, to hear their complaints, or settle their differences;[64] and
as, notwithstanding all his sagacity, Ignatius did not foresee of what
advantage women could one day be to the order, he applied to the Pope
to be relieved of this charge, writing, at the same time, the following
letter to Rosello:—

“VENERABLE DAME ISABELLA ROSELLO—my Mother and my Sister in Jesus
Christ,—In truth I would wish, for the greater glory of God, to satisfy
your good desires, and procure your spiritual progress by keeping
you under my obedience, as you have been for some time past; but the
continual ailments to which I am subject, and all my occupations which
concern the service of our Lord, or his vicar on earth, permit me to do
so no longer. Moreover, being persuaded, according to the light of my
conscience, that this little Society ought not to take upon itself, in
particular, the direction of any woman who may be engaged to us by vows
of obedience, as I have fully declared to our Holy Father the Pope, it
has seemed to me for the greater glory of God, that I ought no longer to
look upon you as my spiritual daughter, and only as my godmother, as you
have been for many years, to the greater glory of God. Consequently, for
the greater service, and the greater honour of the everlasting Goodness,
I give you as much as I can into the hands of the sovereign Pontiff, in
order that, taking his judgment and will as a rule, you may find rest and
consolation for the greater glory of the Divine Majesty.—At Rome, the
first of October 1549.”

The Pope complied with the request, and exempted the order from the
superintendence of women; and Ignatius enacted in the Constitutions,
“that no member of the Society should undertake the care of souls,
nor of Religious, or of any other women whatever” [Loyola’s disciples
thought proper to differ from him], “so as frequently to hear their
confessions, or give them directions, although there is no objection to
their receiving the confession of a monastery once, and for a special
reason.”[65]

Dame Rosello and her two companions, being deprived of their spiritual
father, not wishing to change him for another—so faithful were
they—desisted at once from their pious undertaking, and for a time
nothing more was heard of female Jesuits; but, about the year 1622, some
females, more meddling than devoted, took upon themselves the task of
reviving the institution, although they were not authorised to do so.
Nevertheless, they united into different communities, established houses
for noviciates and colleges, chose a general under the name of Proposta,
and made vows into her hands of perpetual chastity, poverty, and
obedience. Not being restrained by any law of seclusion, they went from
place to place, bustling with gossip, and causing confusion and scandal
throughout the Catholic camp. The community soon spread over a great part
of lower Germany, France, Spain, and was especially numerous in Italy,
where it originated.

Urban VIII., after vainly endeavouring to impose upon them some rules of
discipline, by a brief of the 21st May 1631, suppressed them.[66]

Thus ended the Society of Female Jesuits under this name and form. But
another afterwards sprung up in its place, under the appellation of
_Religieuse du Sacre Cœur_, having special rules very like those of the
Jesuits, under whose absolute directions they now are.

In Catholic countries—above all, in France, and, we are sorry to say,
in Piedmont also—very many of the highest rank in society send their
daughters to be educated in these monasteries. Had Ignatius known
what powerful auxiliaries these _worthy_ nuns were likely to prove to
his order, he would, in all likelihood, have borne with those petty
annoyances caused to him by good Dame Rosello. Ladies educated by these
nuns bring into their homes all those dissensions and cause all those
evils which are so ably described by the French professor, Michelet, who
lost his chair the other day for daring to attack these all-powerful
auxiliaries of Napoleon—the Jesuits.



CHAPTER VI.

1548-56.

THE FIRST OPPOSITION TO THE ORDER, AND DEATH OF LOYOLA.


The order of Jesuits, which had hitherto progressed so favourably, was
now surrounded with difficulties and enemies. While the rapid increase
of the Society, the influence it had acquired, and the wealth which it
had already accumulated, combined to render the Jesuits less cautious and
more authoritative, they caused also a great deal of envy, especially
among those classes menaced by the company in some of their privileges.
At the first opportunity an attempt was made to crush the order in the
bud.

This opportunity was offered by the emperor, Charles V., who had at
no time been very favourable to the institution, and who, no matter
how bigoted a Catholic he may have become in his latter days, was then
just as much Catholic as was necessary to extend his dominions and to
consolidate his despotic power.

In 1548, Charles, indignant at the cunning policy of Paul III., who
set the emperor to war with the Reformers, and who deserted him when
he feared that, being master of the Protestant league, he would also
become his dictator—Charles, we say, when the Pope recalled his troops,
not wishing to drive the Protestant princes to extremities, published
the famous _Interim_, a sort of compromise between the two creeds,
and a tacit acquiescence in the more commonly received doctrines of
the Reformers, leaving, besides, in their hands, the confiscated
ecclesiastical properties. Paul became furious at the audacity of a
layman mingling in matters of faith, and loudly exclaimed against the
prince. Cardinal Farnese, the Pope’s legate and nephew, told the emperor
that his book contained at least ten propositions which were heretical,
and for which he might be called to account. Besides his legate, the
Pope had in Germany a staunch and faithful partisan in the person of
Bobadilla. Bobadilla was a bold and thorough Jesuit. He went to the
war, and attached himself as a sort of commissary to the troops which
the Pope’s grandson had led into Germany. At the battle of Mulberg he
received a wound, but this gave him little concern. Some days afterwards,
he was to be seen at Passau, a Protestant town, preaching the Catholic
tenets, and announcing a day of thanksgiving for the victory that the
Catholics had gained over the Protestants.

You may well believe that such a man would not hesitate to attack the
_Interim_. In fact, by writing, by preaching publicly and privately,
Bobadilla boldly denounced the book, and that even in the presence of the
emperor himself, as a sacrilegious composition. The emperor, frustrating
the Jesuit’s desire to gain renown by means of persecution, simply
expelled him from all his estates.

Bobadilla hastened to Rome to receive, he hoped, the deserved ovation.
But, alas! how bitterly was he deceived! Ignatius, “fearing that
Bobadilla in impugning the _Interim_ may have gone beyond due bounds,
thought it better at first not to receive him into the house.”[67] So
Orlandini. Our Mr Crétineau, who generally transcribes literally, here,
with more zeal than prudence, thus reports the passage of the Jesuit
writer:—“Loyola seized hold of this circumstance to revenge the majesty
of kings, which, even in the height of the dispute, one ought never to
attain.”[68] We understand you well, Mr Crétineau! you have lost much of
your influence over the people, too well educated to repose much faith,
either in your sanctity or your miracles, and you intend to preserve some
of your domineering influence, by clinging to these same kings against
whom, when they were adverse to you, you directed the poniard of the
assassin!

Bobadilla’s expulsion seemed to have been the signal for the outburst of
a violent war against the order, especially in Spain. The fight began at
Salamanca. Three Jesuits, Sanci, Capella, and Turrian, arrived there in
1548, for the purpose of establishing their Society. They entered the
town in the most pitiable condition, and were so poor, that, “having
no image to adorn the altar of their private chapel with, they in its
stead put a piece of paper, upon which was delineated, I do not know
what figure—‘Impressam nescio,’ says Orlandini, ‘quam in papyro figuram,
pro scite picta tabula collocarent.’”[69] And Crétineau thus translates
it:—“In consequence” (of having no picture), “one of them simply sketched
on a piece of paper an image of the Virgin, and this paper, stuck on the
wall, was the only ornament of the high altar.”[70]

I must say I feel surprised at their candour! You confess, then, that
you worship a dirty scrap of paper, upon which you do not know what sort
of figure was represented, or you scratch four lines and make it the
object of your cultus—the indispensable ornament of your altar, upon
which you are going to renew the sacrifice of the Cross! Ah! we already
knew that your religion only consisted in externalities—in blind and
absurd superstitions. Yet we register this other example to prove your
own idolatry, and your constant practice, to represent Christ the Lord
in the background, while adoring images and statues which you have made
according to your hearts’ wishes, as our great poet says, of gold and
silver—

    “Fatto v’avete Dio d’oro e, d’argento.”—_Dante_, _Inferno_, cant. xix.

However, there lived at that time at Salamanca a Dominican friar, famous
for his eloquence, his learning, and particularly for his uprightness of
purpose—Melchior Cano. He had known Loyola, and formed a bad opinion of
him, because he never ceased speaking of his revelations, his visions,
his virtues, his undeserved persecutions.

After his disciples came to Salamanca, equipped only with their bigoted
fanaticism, and of doubtful morality, he resolved to oppose them, and
poured forth against them, from his chair and pulpit, torrents of
eloquent invectives. He represented them as crafty, insinuating; living
in palaces, deceiving the kings and the great; declaring them to be
soiled by every species of crime; capable of all kinds of excesses; and
dangerous both to religion and society.

We may perhaps say that the picture which he, in his passionate
eloquence, drew of the members of the order, which he also called the
pioneers of Antichrist, was then somewhat exaggerated. The Jesuits at
that time were not so perverse as he represented them to be, for they
had as yet only existed for a few years. But it would seem that Cano
had spoken in the spirit of prophecy, of the character which it assumed
in after generations, the germ of which he may have seen beginning to
develop itself.

If the letter which we are about to transcribe, written by him in 1560,
two days before his death, is not to be numbered among the prophecies, it
is nevertheless an extraordinary prediction, which came to be fulfilled
in every point. Here is this remarkable letter:—“God grant that it may
not happen to me as is fabled of Cassandra, whose predictions were not
believed till Troy was captured and burned. If the members of the Society
continue as they have begun, God grant that the time may not come when
kings will wish to resist them, but will not have the means of doing
so.”[71]

But we have anticipated.—The hideous colours in which he pourtrayed
the disciples of Loyola made such an impression in Salamanca, that the
Jesuits were not allowed to establish themselves in it. In vain did the
Pope, taking up the cause of the Jesuits, by a bull reprove the conduct
of Cano. In vain did the General of the Dominicans issue a circular to
all his subordinates, in which, after a long eulogium on the Society,
he says that “it ought to be praised and imitated, and not assailed
with calumnies.”[72] Cano, disregarding both the Papal brief and his
general’s circular, and being supported, at least secretly, by the
civil authorities, boldly held out against the order. What could his
adversaries do? Persecution and revenge were impossible against a subject
of the emperor, who was then at war with the Pope, and yet Cano must
be got rid of. Well, one fine morning he was strangely and agreeably
surprised with the news, that that same Pope who had threatened and
censured him had now conferred upon him the bishopric of the Canaries.
Dazzled and flattered, the friar yielded at first to the temptation,
and left Salamanca for his bishopric. But soon, very soon, he perceived
why he had been sent so far away. Resolved, therefore, to baffle his
enemies’ cunning, he resigned the Episcopal dignity, and returned to
Salamanca, the undoubted and indefatigable adversary of the order. He
died Provincial of his order, and much respected.

About the same epoch, 1548, the University of Alcala also declared
against the order. The contest lasted for a considerable time; and even
after many of the doctors were, by the usual mysterious arts, gained
over to the cause of the company, Dr Scala persisted in his opposition,
and did not refrain from attacking them till he was called before the
Inquisition, and threatened with an _auto-da-fé_.[73]

The opposition which the Jesuits encountered in Toledo, where they had
already established themselves, was a more serious affair. They had
found here the population docile, and easy to be imposed upon. They had
introduced sundry abuses, and many superstitious practices. Nay, their
devotees—horrid to say!—went to the communion table twice a day! In
the year 1550, these scandalous enormities forced themselves upon the
attention of the authorities. Don Siliceo, Cardinal Archbishop of Toledo,
once tutor to Philip of Spain, wishing to repress them, published an
ordinance, reproving and condemning them, and in which, after bitterly
reproaching the Jesuits for their many usurpations, he forbids the
people, under pain of excommunication, to confess to any Jesuit, and
empowers all curates to exclude them from the administration of all
sacraments; furthermore, laying an interdict upon the Jesuit College of
Alcala.

This ordinance produced a great excitement among the Jesuits and their
partisans, and nothing was left untried to make the archbishop relent.
But neither the influence that the Society already possessed, nor the
intercession of the Papal nuncio, and of the Archbishop of Burgos, nor
even the Pope’s own authority, could vanquish the archbishop’s hostility.
Then the bold Loyola had the impudence to institute a process against
the archbishop, before the Royal Council of Spain. Paul III. was dead,
and was succeeded by Julius III., who, as Ignatius well knew, was on the
best terms with Charles. The Royal Council condemned the prelate, who
thereupon recalled the interdict[74]—not that his opinions were changed,
but to avoid, perhaps, the fate which encountered his successor, the
learned but unfortunate Carranza—twelve years of torture in the dungeons
of the Inquisition.

A still fiercer tempest was gathering over the heads of the Jesuits at
Saragossa. Instructive is the cause of the quarrel. The town of Saragossa
was so full of convents and monasteries, that, to observe the rule which
forbade any religious house to be built within a certain distance of
another, it was impossible for the Jesuits to find a spot unforbidden.
However, after thoroughly surveying the town, they imagined they had
found a spot at the requisite distance. They there erect a house and
a chapel, which is to be consecrated on Easter Tuesday 1555. Great
preparations are made to make the pageant pompous and attractive, when,
alas! Lopez Marcos, Vicar-general of Saragossa, on the complaint of the
Augustine Friars, who pretend that the chapel was built on their grounds,
intimated to Father Brama, the superior of the house, that the ceremony
might be deferred. Brama refused to obey. Lopez, at the very moment
the Jesuits were performing the solemn ceremony, issued a proclamation
forbidding the chapel to be entered under pain of excommunication.
Anathemas were poured upon the fathers, and the clergy, accompanied by a
great crowd of people, march through the town, singing the 109th Psalm,
the people repeating—“As he clothed himself with cursing like as with his
garment, so let it come into his bowels like water, and like oil into his
bones;” and, to unite the ludicrous with the terrible, they carry along
images with hideous faces, representing the Jesuits dragged to hell by a
legion of demons still more hideous. A funeral procession, with the image
of Christ covered with a black veil, singing lugubrious songs, march
towards the house of the Jesuits. From time to time, the cry, “Mercy!
Mercy!” burst from the crowd, as they wished to avert the curse of God
from an interdicted city. The poor Jesuits, shut up in their own house,
patiently wait for a fortnight, until the tempest should pass away.
But this ignoble goblin representation, worthy only of Jesuits and of
their opponents, not yet ending, Loyola’s disciples, as usual, gave way,
feeling assured that, if actual force would be of no avail in making good
their claim, intrigues and cunning would in the end win the day. Nor were
they deceived.[75]

In Portugal, dangers of another kind menaced the Society. It seemed as
if Portugal were to be the theatre where the Jesuits were to perform the
principal act of their ignoble drama.

The protection of John III., united with the zeal of Rodriguez, had made
this country one of the most flourishing provinces of the Society. But
its very prosperity nearly caused its ruin. Having possessed themselves
of immense wealth, the Jesuits, yielding to the common law, relaxed
in the strictness of their conduct, pursued a life of pleasure and
debauchery; above all, their principal college (Coimbra) resembled more
a garden of academics than a cloister.[76] Scandal became so great,
that the court began to frown upon them, and the people were losing
that respect and veneration with which they had before regarded them.
Ignatius, of course, was soon informed of the state of things, and took
at once the most energetic measures for repressing the evil (in 1552).
Rodriguez was recalled and sent to Spain, and a new provincial and rector
were sent to Coimbra.

Miron, the provincial, attempted a reform, but the Jesuits—spoiled
children—refused to submit to it. Some he dismissed from the college—a
greater number abandoned it. Insubordination and disorder were at their
height. Fortunately, Ignatius had in the rector Godin a man according
to his heart. Godin proved a worthy disciple of the author of the
_Spiritual Exercises_. Stripping his shoulders of their garments, arming
himself with a scourge, he rushed, demoniac-like, out into the streets
of Coimbra, and flagellated himself, crying for mercy. Breathless,
covered with dust and blood, running and screaming, he returned to the
college church, where the brethren were assembled, and here he again
lashed himself. Strange and uncommon examples fire the imagination and
prejudices of imitators. The Jesuits were at first surprised; then, all
on a sudden, they beg to be allowed to undergo the same public penance.
Godin feigns to refuse; he speaks of the scandal given—he paints in
strong colours the enormities of their sins, and dwells at length upon
the sufferings and passion of Christ. When he had wrought their feelings
to the highest pitch, he granted them the permission solicited, and, like
a crowd of Bacchanti, when their deity rages within them, they all rush
out of the church, and with lamentable cries run through the streets,
scourging themselves in a most merciless manner. When they reached the
Church of the Misericordia, they knelt down, whilst the rector begged
pardon of the multitude for the scandal they had given them. Some of the
people are moved—others laugh loudly—but the intent of the rector is
obtained. The disciples become more tractable; the college submits to the
necessary reform, and the Jesuits regain their influence.[77]

The Society met with a more serious and durable opposition in France.
After their first banishment they had returned to Paris, but there they
had no house of their own, neither could they find any. They therefore
took up their abode in the College des Lombards, till Du Prat, Bishop
of Clermond, offered them his own hotel, to which they immediately
repaired. As yet, however, this establishment was neither a house for
professed members, since there were none of them, nor a noviciate, since
the rules for the noviciate were not established till six or seven
years afterwards. The members who repaired to Clermond hotel were only
students, or priests aspiring to become members of the Society; but we
are told that they were so conspicuous for their learning and piety,
that three of them were chosen by Ignatius to establish a new college
in Sicily, while Viole, the chief of those aspirants, was named by the
university, Procurator of the College des Lombards. This nomination,
however, appeared to Ignatius to be of a rather doubtful character,
since it proceeded from the university, which had been adverse to the
order from the first. It seems as if he feared that these students,
seduced by the allurements of honour and emoluments, would renounce
their pious determination to become Jesuits; he therefore ordered Viole
to give up the appointment, and to take the vows of the order before
Du Prat, enjoining at the same time, that all students who may receive
any pension from the College des Lombards should instantly renounce it.
Although these orders were absolute, they were promptly obeyed. The great
secret of Loyola’s influence and power lay in the inflexibility of his
character, and in his military education, which rendered him absolute and
imperative, and excluded the possibility of others disputing his orders.

Meanwhile the Society in France—we should say in Paris—the only place
where it had tried to establish itself, lived in a most precarious
state, until the year 1550, when Henry II., stimulated by the too famous
cardinal of Guise, thought of establishing the Jesuits in his kingdom,
and issued patent letters authorising them to do so.

The ordinances of the French king were not at this time considered
binding, until they were registered by the parliament.[78] When those
concerning the Jesuits were brought before them, the parliament, after
hearing the conclusions of their Advocate-General, refused to register
them, on the ground “that the new institute would be prejudicial to the
monarchy, the state, and the ecclesiastical hierarchy.”

The contest lasted for two years, when the king, in 1552, sent an order
to the parliament to register the patent letters of 1550, authorising
the establishment of the Jesuits. The order was formal and imperative,
yet the parliament refused to comply with it, although, out of deference
to the sovereign will, they advised that further inquiries be made
concerning the Society.

After other two years of serious consideration and strict inquiry, the
parliament, in 1554, enacted that “the bull establishing the Society,
and the king’s patent letters, shall be communicated both to the
Archbishop of Paris, and to the Faculty of Theology there, in order that,
their opinion heard, the court may come to a sentence.” The archbishop
and the faculty were thus called to decide upon a question of their
exclusive competence, since the one was the ecclesiastical superior,
and the other the natural judge in matters of faith. Both took the
case in hand, and after due consideration, they respectively decided
against the establishment of the Society. The archbishop, Eustache
de Bellay, belonging to one of the most illustrious parliamentary
families of France, after mature deliberation, gave out all the reasons
why he thought it his duty to oppose the introduction of the order,
and concluded in this remarkable and logical way:—“Since the order
pretends to be established for the purpose of preaching to the Turks
and infidels, to bring them to the knowledge of God; they ought to
establish their houses and societies in places near the said infidels,
as in the times of old had been done by the Knights of Rhodes, who were
placed on the frontiers of Christendom, not in the midst thereof.” But
the severe and bitter censure of the Doctors of the Sorbonne was a more
explicit condemnation of the order. Here is the document of their famous
“conclusion:”—

“As all the faithful, and principally the theologians, ought to be
ready to render an account to those who demand the same, respecting
matters of faith, morals, and the edification of the Church; the faculty
has thought, that it ought to satisfy the desire, the demand, and the
intention of the court.

“Wherefore, having perused, and many times re-perused, and well
comprehended all the articles of the two bulls, and after having
discussed and gone to the depths of them, during several months, at
different times and hours, according to custom, due regard being had
to the subject, _the Faculty_ has, with unanimous consent, given this
judgment, which it has submitted with all manner of respect to that of
the Holy See.

“This new Society, which arrogates to itself in particular the unusual
title of the name of Jesus—which receives with so much freedom, and
without any choice, all sorts of persons, however criminal, lawless, and
infamous they may be—which differs in nowise from the secular priests
in outward dress, in the tonsure, in the manner of saying the canonical
hours in private, or in chaunting in public, in the engagement to remain
in the cloister and observe silence, in the choice of food and days, in
fasting, and the variety of rules, laws, and ceremonies which serve to
distinguish the different institutes of monks;—this Society, to which
have been granted and given so many privileges and licences, chiefly in
what concerns the administration of the sacraments of penance and the
eucharist, and this without any regard or distinction being had of places
or persons; as also in the function of preaching, reading, and teaching,
to the prejudice of the ordinaries and the hierarchical order, as well as
of the other religious orders, and even to the prejudices of princes and
lords temporal, against the privileges of the universities,—in fine, to
the great cost of the people;—this Society seems to blemish the honour
of the monastic state; it weakens entirely the painful, pious, and very
necessary exercises of the virtues of abstinences, ceremonies, and
austerity. It even gives occasion very freely to desert the religious
orders; it withdraws from the obedience and submission due to the
ordinaries; it unjustly deprives lords, both temporal and ecclesiastical,
of their rights, carries trouble into the government of both, causes
many subjects of complaint amongst the people, many lawsuits, strifes,
contentions, jealousies, and divers schisms and divisions.

“Wherefore, after having examined all these matters, and several
others, with much attention and care, this Society appears dangerous
as to matters of faith, capable of disturbing the peace of the Church,
overturning the monastic order, and more adapted to break down than to
build up.”[79]

Here, as in the denunciations of Cano, the faculty seem to have got a
glimpse of the future history of the Jesuits, since, at that epoch at
least, the accusation of receiving into the Society indiscriminately was
not well founded.

The apologists of the Jesuits have said—and we are partly inclined
to admit the truth of their assertion—that as the Jesuits were then
in possession of the education of youth in many parts of Europe, the
university, jealous of its privileges, condemned the order of the
Jesuits, not as an infamous and sacrilegious community, but as a
dangerous rival. They have also affirmed, that the expulsion of the
famous Postel[80] had irritated the Sorbonne, of which he was a doctor.
But this we believe to be a gratuitous supposition.

However, the decisions of the parliament, archbishop, and university,
were hailed throughout France with a shout of jubilee. The Jesuits were
obliged to leave Paris, and as all the parliaments of France had echoed
the resolution of that of the capital, they would be nowhere received,
and, as a last and momentary refuge, they went and hid themselves in the
Abbey of St Germain des Près.

The more warlike and inconsiderate members of the order would have
replied to the terrible sentence of the Sorbonne, but Ignatius was too
consummate a politician to yield to their imprudent desires. For open
wars, the Jesuits had no predilection. When their opponents were too
strong for them, their practice was, and still is, to give way, as if in
submission; but then they begin a hidden and mysterious war of intrigues
and machinations, that in the end they are always the victors. So acted
Ignatius in this affair in France. The Jesuits contented themselves
with living for some time in obscurity and complete seclusion from all
society, and preparing the way for future triumph. Nor had they long to
wait. Soon were they called into France to help and cheer that atrocious
and cruel hecatomb, that bloody debauch of priests and kings—the Saint
Bartholomew.

But what is worthy of more serious reflection, is the fact, that
in Rome—the centre of their power and glory—the Jesuits were also
publicly accused as a set of heretics, dangerous and immoral persons;
and the famous book of _The Spiritual Exercises_ was submitted to the
Inquisition. It is indeed true that this little manual got a certificate
for orthodoxy, and that the priest who had traduced them before the
tribunal, having to struggle alone against the Society, was condemned (we
don’t wonder at it) as a calumniator; but how can you, you subtle sons
of Ignatius, explain this concurrence; this accumulation of accusations
and hostilities? How is it that nations, separated from one another by
diversities of interest, custom, opinion—that citizens of different
classes, characters, principles, interests—that all men and nations,
widely separated in every thing else, united only by a common tie—the
Catholic religion—should exactly agree in this one thing—hatred to
and abhorrence of the avowed champion of Catholicism? And remember we
don’t speak of Protestant countries, or Protestant opponents. All your
adversaries were bigoted Catholics. There is but one way to explain this
strange coincidence. We fear that from the very beginning, the Jesuits,
notwithstanding all their prudence, could not conceal from the eye of the
observer those subtle arts, that duplicity of character, that skill in
accomplishing dark and mysterious exploits, for which they were in later
times opposed, and at length abolished.

What is still more remarkable, is the fact that the greatest part of
those persons who were foremost in opposing the Jesuits, knew Loyola,
and, if not as intimately as Caraffa and Cano, at least well enough to
be able to appreciate him. We shall adduce as the last, though not the
least fact, militating against the order—that Caraffa, a man of the most
rigid Catholicism, nay, bigotry—who had nothing so near his heart as the
furtherance of the Roman religion—the former friend of Loyola, both as
cardinal and as Pope, was constantly and firmly adverse to the order. I
should like if some of the reverend fathers would explain this almost
inexplicable fact.

However, all these oppositions were sooner or later got rid of by
Jesuitical craft; and the Society, in 1556, only sixteen years after its
commencement, counted as many as twelve provinces, a hundred houses, and
upwards of a thousand members, dispersed over the whole known world.
Their two most conspicuous and important establishments were the Collegio
Romano and the German College. They already were in possession of many
chairs, and soon monopolised the right of teaching, which gave them a
most overwhelming influence. We shall speak of the colleges, and of
their method of study, after it had received from Acquaviva, the fifth
General, a farther development, and nearly the same form in which it is
at the present day. The Jesuits also derived great importance from their
missions, to the consideration of which we shall devote the next chapter.
The reason of the immense success of the Jesuits is the fact, that their
order was established in direct opposition to the rising Protestantism,
and that both the court of Rome, and those princes whose interest it
was to maintain the Catholic religion, and oppose that of the Reformed,
were very eager to introduce and uphold the Society of Jesuits into
their states. Yet even with this preponderant favourable circumstance,
the Society would have either succumbed under the many obstacles it
encountered in its beginning, or at least would not have progressed so
rapidly, had it not been for Ignatius Loyola. This extraordinary man
seems to have united in his own person all the qualities indispensable
for succeeding in any undertaking;—unbounded ambition—inflexibility of
character—unwearied activity, and a thorough and profound knowledge of
the human heart. With such qualities, he could hardly fail to succeed in
the accomplishment of any project. Almost every writer of Loyola’s life
(I do not speak either of the miracle-tellers or of the pamphleteers)
has represented him as most sincere, fervidly devout, and pious. On this
point, however, we must observe, that all the historians, not excluding
even the Protestant, copied from his two first biographers, Maffei and
Rybadaneira.

We also beg to be permitted to give the humble opinion which we have
formed of him, after having carefully perused what has been said
regarding him—and much more, after a dispassionate examination of
the facts connected with his life. Without doubt, Ignatius, during
his illness, felt disposed to change his dissipated course of life,
and, as happens in every sudden reaction, he, from being a profligate
freethinking officer, went to the other extreme, and became a rigid and
bigoted anchorite. No penances were too severe to expiate his numerous
sins, and no devotion was too fervent to atone for his past irreligion.
So he thought at the moment, and, we think, conscientiously. But after
the first burst of his devotion—after the deep contemplation into which
he was plunged had given place to the felt necessity of acting in one
way or another, we are led to believe, and have already expressed that
belief, that his natural ambition rose, and that all his thoughts were
turned upon the surest method of accomplishing some great and uncommon
exploit, by which he might render himself famous. As devotion was the
principal requisite for success in the path which he had chosen, Ignatius
was a fervent devotee, first by calculation, and then by habit—but not
the less zealous for all that. Had his whole thoughts been absorbed
with that one object—the salvation of his soul—his devotion would have
been less ostentatious, and, without wavering between one project and
another, he would have been contented with an humble and retired life,
or would have spent it in unquestionable works of charity—in ministering
to the sick, as he had begun in the Hospital of the Theatines. It cannot
be denied, however, that Ignatius, after his conversion, was very
humane, compassionate, and charitable, and that his private conduct,
in the later part of his life, was moral and unimpeached. He treated
his disciples with much kindness, and never denied them what he could
grant without inconvenience. On the other hand, he was imperious to the
last degree, and could not endure the slightest contradiction. An old
Jesuit priest, who had been once guilty of disobedience, was scourged
in his own presence. One instance will perhaps serve to depict Loyola
more effectively than words can. He had sent Lainez as provincial to
Padua. Lainez, who had had an immense success at the Council of Trent,
and who was in fact superior to any one then belonging to the Society,
at first refused this secondary post, but at last obeyed. Hardly had
he, however, entered upon his functions, before Ignatius drained his
province of all the best professors, whom he summoned to Rome. The
provincial remonstrated. It was the Lainez, Ignatius’ bosom friend—his
right hand—the glory of the company—the man who had been chosen to be a
cardinal. But Ignatius disregarded all these considerations, and without
even entering into any discussion, simply wrote to him, thus: “Reflect
on your proceedings; tell me if you are persuaded of having erred, and
if so, indicate to me what punishment you are ready to undergo for the
expiation of your fault.”[81] This letter pourtrays the man!

We are also assured, that the general was so humble, that you might have
seen him carrying wood on his shoulders—lighting the common fire—or going
to the well with a pitcher in his hand. We should be inclined to call
such humility ostentation, or, if you prefer it, good policy. Ignatius
was, above all, anxious to curb the spirit of his disciples. In his eyes,
they could not be humble and submissive enough. The Jesuit ought to value
himself, individually, as nothing—the Society as everything. Now, which
of his disciples would have dared refuse any undertaking, however humble,
after he had seen his general engaged in the meanest services?

But while Ignatius affected these acts of humility, he was seriously
giving his attention to the state affairs of different nations. He was
holding correspondence with John III. of Portugal, the cardinal his son,
Albert of Bavaria, Ferdinand of Austria, Philip of Spain, Ercole of
Est, and many other princes. He was the spiritual director of Margaret
of Austria. He went to Tivoli, purposely to allay the quarrels of two
neighbouring towns, and to Naples to make peace between an angry husband
and his wife of rather doubtful morals. All these things tend to prove
what we have said regarding his devotion, viz. that it was of a rather
meddlesome and ambitious character.

But his career was now drawing to an end. These different occupations—the
direction of both the spiritual and temporal matters of the order, which
was already widely spread—the anxiety caused by the many conflicts in
which the Society was engaged—the fear of defeat—the joy arising from
success—his unrelenting activity—his uneasiness at seeing the pontifical
chair occupied by Caraffa, always adverse to the order—all these things
contributed to shorten his days. His constitution, which had been
impaired in his youth, and in the cavern of Manreze, now gradually gave
way; and although no symptom of his approaching end was yet visible, “no
paleness of countenance, not a sign in all his body,”[82] nevertheless he
felt the vital principle fading away within him, and that his last hour
was rapidly drawing near. He tried the country air, and for this purpose
went to a villa lately given by some friends for the use of the Roman
college,[83] but he found no relief. His strength was fast failing him;
an unconquerable lassitude crept over his whole frame, and his intellect
only remained clear and unchanged. He spoke of his illness, nay, of his
approaching end, to nobody. He returned to Rome, and threw himself upon
a bed. A doctor was sent for by the alarmed fathers, but he bade them
be of good cheer, “for there was nothing the matter with the general.”
Ignatius smiled; and when the physician was gone, he gave orders to
his secretary, Polancus, to proceed to the holy father straightway to
recommend the Society to his care, and to obtain a blessing for himself
(Ignatius), and indulgences for his sins.[84] Perhaps he made this last
attempt to disarm, by his humility, the inflexible Paul IV. (Caraffa),
and so render him favourable to the Society. He was mistaken. Paul
sent the requested benison, but he did not change his mind toward the
Society. However, Polancus, reassured by the doctor, and not seeing any
danger himself, disregarded the order, postponing the fulfilment of his
mission till next day. Meanwhile, after Ignatius had attended till very
late to some affairs concerning the Roman college, he was left alone to
rest. But what was the surprise and consternation of the fathers, on
entering his room next morning, to find him breathing his last! The noise
and confusion caused by such an unexpected event were great. Cordials,
doctor, confessor, were immediately sent for; but, before any of them
came—before Polancus, who only now ran to the Pope, returned—Loyola had
expired. His demise took place at five o’clock on the morning of the 31st
of July 1556, in his sixty-fifth year. So ended a man who is extolled by
the one party as a saint, execrated by the other as a monster. He was
neither. Most assuredly, in the Protestant point of view, and by all
those who advocate the cause of freedom of conscience, and of a return
to the purity of the primitive religion of Christ, Ignatius ought to be
detested above any other individual. To him and to his order belongs the
mournful glory of having checked the progress of the Reformation, and of
having kept a great part of Europe under the yoke of superstition and
tyranny.

And here we are led to mention a fact which we think has hitherto been
unnoticed—the indulgence, we should say the partiality, evinced by
Protestant writers for these last ten years towards the Jesuits, and
especially the founders of the order. The fact must be explained. The
Jesuits, from 1830 to the end of ’48, seemed to have lost all public
favour, all influence and authority. Persecuted and hooted in France,
Switzerland, Russia, hated in their own dominion, Italy, they were
considered as a vanquished enemy, deserving rather commiseration than
hatred. A reaction ensued in their favour among their most decided
opponents. Generous souls rose up to defend these persecuted men, and
stretched out a friendly hand to them, thus trodden upon by all. Carried
away with such chivalrous sentiments, they have embellished, with the
colours of their fervid imaginations and the graces of their copious
style, whatever the Jesuit writers have related of their chiefs, and have
represented Loyola and his companions as heroes of romance rather than
real historical characters. We leave these writers to reflect whether the
Jesuits are a vanquished enemy, or whether they are not still redoubtable
and menacing foes. But, with deference to such distinguished writers as
Macaulay, Taylor, Stephen, and others, we dare to assert that in writing
about the Jesuits they were led astray by the above romantic sentiments;
and we should moreover warn them that their words are quoted by the
Jesuit writers, Crétineau, Pellico, &c., as irrefragable testimony of the
sanctity of their members.



CHAPTER VII.

1541-1774.

MISSIONS.


Before we proceed any further, we feel obliged to say a few words
regarding the missions which were undertaken by the Jesuits soon after
the establishment of their order. To write a complete history would be
almost interminable. To analyse Orlandini, Sacchini, Bartoli, Jouvency,
the _Litteræ Annuæ_, and _Les Lettres Edifiantes_, not to speak of a
hundred others, would take up a great many volumes.[85] We think we may
fill our pages with more instructive matter.

We shall now confine ourselves to a short chapter on the missions of
India. We shall next speak of those of America, and finally, in what
condition the missions are at the present day. In speaking of the
missions of India, we fear we shall incur the reproach we have addressed
to others, because we frankly confess that we are partial to Francis
Xavier; but our Protestant readers, to be impartial, must not judge
those missions by too rigid a standard, or by too constant a reference
to the doctrinal errors of those who undertook them, furthermore, by
the consideration of what those missions subsequently became. All human
institutions emanating from imperfect beginnings, are necessarily
imperfect, and the further they recede from their origin, the more they
lose of their primitive character, and the less are they calculated to
answer the end for which they were established. The idle and immoral
monk—this gangrene of Catholic countries—was at one time the most
industrious of men; and Europe owes much to the monastic orders, not
only for the preservation of the greatest part of the works of genius
of our forefathers, but also for the tillage of its barren wastes. If
the monks and priests now bring disorder, confusion, and often civil
war into the countries where they are sent under pretence of missions,
such was not the case at the discovery of the Western World, and at
the conquest of India by the Portuguese. The first zealous and devoted
missionaries attempted to civilise and Christianise savage and barbarous
populations. And if you object that in their missions they preached the
Popish creed, and destroyed one idolatry by introducing another, at least
you ought to give them credit for their good intentions. Nor are you
to suppose that they undertook the task of civilising these nations in
order to acquire dominion over them. No. Such, indeed, has been the case
in later times, but in the beginning they were actuated by worthier and
more disinterested motives. In going thither they had before their eyes
martyrdom rather than worldly establishments. They carried with them
no theological books. Having no antagonist to dispute with, they had
left behind the acrimony and hatred inherent in almost all theological
controversies. They brought with them the essence of the Christian
religion—the most consoling and sublime part of it—gratitude to the
Creator, with charity and love to their fellow-creatures. Undoubtedly,
when we speak of their missions, we must not blindly believe all that
the Jesuitical historians, who are often the only chroniclers of these
events, relate to us. We shall not give them credit for the prodigies
and miracles said to be performed by their missionaries, even though
that missionary be Xavier himself. We shall not believe that he raised
from the tomb another Lazarus, or that at his bidding the salt waves of
the ocean were changed into sweet and palatable water. Yet there are
irrefragable proofs of the good done by their exertions, and of their
success in introducing Christianity, or at least civilisation, into India
and America. The man who first engaged in that glorious work was Francis
Xavier—Xavier, whom, if Rome had not dishonoured the name by conferring
it upon assassins and hypocrites, we would gladly call a saint.

[Illustration: _Francis Xavier_

_Hinchliff._]

He was the offspring of an ancient and illustrious Spanish family, and
was born in 1506, at his father’s castle in the Pyrenees. He was about
the middle size, had a lofty forehead, large, blue, soft eyes, with
an exquisitely fine complexion, and with the manners and demeanour of
a prince. He was gay, satirical, of an ardent spirit, and, above all,
ambitious of literary renown. All his faculties, all his thoughts, were
directed to this noble pursuit, and so efficiently, that at the age of
twenty-two he was elected a professor of philosophy in the capital of
France. There he lived on terms of intimacy with Peter Lefevre, a young
Savoyard, of very humble extraction, of a modest and simple character,
but of uncommon intelligence and industry. It was with Lefevre that
Xavier first met Ignatius. Francis was shocked at his appearance, his
affected humility, his loathsome dress; and when he spake of spiritual
exercises, Xavier looked at his own fair, white arms, shuddered at the
idea of lacerating them with the scourge—this principal ingredient of
the spiritual exercises—and laughed outright in his face. But Ignatius,
having cast his eyes upon such a noble being, was not to be discouraged
by a first or second repulse in his endeavours to become intimate with
him. He spared no exertions to ingratiate himself with Xavier; and at
last, as Bartoli says, “he resolved to gain him over by firing his
ambition, just as Judith did with feigned love to Holofernes, that she
might triumph over him at the last.”[86] As we have already stated,
Xavier was ambitious, and eager for literary renown. Ignatius made
himself the eulogist of his countryman. He gathered around his chair a
benevolent and an attentive audience, and gratified the young professor
in his most ardent wishes. The generous heart of Xavier was touched by
this act of kindness, and he began to look upon this loathsome man with
other eyes. Ignatius redoubled his efforts. The improvident Xavier was
often surrounded with pecuniary difficulties. Ignatius went begging, to
replenish his purse. It was not wonderful that Xavier, having fallen
under the influence of such a persevering assailant, who was admonitor at
once and friend—who flattered and exhorted, rebuked and assisted, with
such matchless tact—should gradually have yielded to the fascination. He
went through the _Spiritual Exercises_, and from that moment became a
mere tool in the hands of Loyola. This was the first missionary sent to
India.

The order had not yet been approved by the Pope, when John III. of
Portugal, by means of his ambassador D. Pedro de Mascaregnas, asked
of him six missionaries to be sent to the East Indies. The Pope, who
was undecided whether he should consent to the establishment of this
new order or not, thought this a plausible pretext to get rid of them
altogether, and asked Loyola for six of his companions. But Ignatius
was not the man to consent to the suicide of the intended Society,
and offered the Pope only two members for the undertaking. The choice
fell upon Rodriguez and Bobadilla. The first set out immediately, but
Bobadilla falling ill, Ignatius called Xavier, and said to him, “Xavier,
I had named Bobadilla for India, but Heaven this day names you, and I
announce it to you in the name of the Vicar of Jesus Christ. Receive
the appointment which his Holiness lays upon you by my mouth, just as
if _Jesus Christ_ presented it himself. Go, brother, whither the voice
of God calls you, and inflame all with the divine fire within you—_Id
y accendedlo todo y embrasadlo en fuego divino_.” Ignatius often used
these words, and in his mouth they were a talisman which fanned the
flame of enthusiasm. It is impossible to describe the exultation of
Xavier at the thought of the boundless regions which would open before
him there, to exercise his unbounded charity and love of mankind. Xavier
went to receive the Pope’s blessing, and the very next morning he left
Rome—alone—penniless—clothed in a ragged cloak, but with a light heart
and joyful countenance. He crossed the Pyrenees without even visiting his
father’s castle, and hastened to Lisbon, where he joined his companion
Rodriguez. Portugal at this epoch was experiencing the influence of
the wealth brought from the recently conquered provinces of India.
Eagerness for pleasure, effeminacy of manners, relaxation from every
duty, had completely changed the aspect of the nation. These two Jesuits,
by exhortation and preaching, endeavoured to stem the onward march of
that fast spreading corruption. Their panegyrists assure us that they
succeeded in their efforts, but the subsequent history of Portugal gives
them the lie. To no man is given the power to stop the propensities
or the vices of a nation, when they are in the ascendancy. Xavier may
perhaps have made the Portuguese nobility for a moment ashamed of their
luxurious and profligate life; but if so, a more complete abandonment to
a life of idleness and pleasure succeeded a fugitive shame.

However, the King of Portugal, changing his mind, wished to retain in the
capital the two Jesuits whom he had intended for India, but he could only
prevail on Rodriguez to remain. Xavier was impatient to be sent on his
mission. At length, on the 7th of April 1541, the fleet, having on board
a thousand men to reinforce the garrison of Goa, left the Tagus, and
spread her sails to the wind. It was under the command of Don Alphonso of
Sousa, the vice-king of India. As the fleet sailed on, the eyes of the
soldiers were bedimmed with tears; even the bravest of the host could not
see without emotion and dismay the shores of their native land receding
from their view. Xavier alone was serene, and his countenance beamed with
delight. On sailed the fleet, and after five long and weary months, they
reached the coast of Mozambique. Under a burning African sun, they found
little relief from the fatigues of their tedious voyage, and an epidemic
fever spread consternation and death among these European adventurers.
Xavier was indefatigable among them, nursing the sick, consoling the
dying, and cheering all with his joyful and placid countenance.

After six months’ stay, they left this inhospitable land, and arrived at
Goa, the capital of the Portuguese dominions in India, thirteen months
after their departure from Lisbon.

There Xavier was horror-struck at the indescribable degradation in which
he found, not the Indian idolaters, but the Portuguese Catholics, their
own priests foremost in the path of vice. The contempt that these proud
conquerors had for a feeble and despised race, the charm of the East, the
wealth they found, the climate inspiring voluptuousness—all combined to
banish from their breasts every sentiment of justice, shame, and honesty.
The history of their debauches and immoralities is really revolting.
Thirst for gold and voluptuousness were their two predominant passions;
and the gold, acquired by infamous and cruel means, was dissipated in
revolting and degrading deeds. Bartoli gives us a fearful picture of
the demoralised condition of the Portuguese in India.[87] But, without
trusting implicitly to all this historian represents regarding their
corruptions and licentiousness, we know by other sources that the
corruption was extreme, and that it was their dissolute life that induced
the Indians who had been converted to our religion, feeling ashamed of
the name of Christian, to return to their idols. Xavier thought it would
be useless to attempt converting the idolater before he had reformed the
morals of the Christian; but he considered it neither prudent nor useful
to attack so great an evil directly and openly. He rightly judged that
the children would be most easily worked upon, and he resolved to reach
this by exciting their love of novelties and unwonted sights. He arms
himself with a hand-bell, which he swings with a powerful hand, throws
away his hat, and calls in a loud and impressive tone on the fathers to
send their children to be catechised. The novelty of the fact, the noble
and dignified countenance of a man dressed in rags, could not fail to
excite curiosity at least. Men, women, and children rush out to see this
strange man, who draws along with him a crowd to the church, and there,
with passionate and impressive eloquence, endeavours to inspire them with
shame for their conduct, and lectures to them on the most essential rules
of morality. Then he begins to teach the children the rudiments of the
Christian religion, and these innocent creatures love to listen to a man
who shews himself the kindest and gentlest companion, joyfully mixing
in all their pastimes. A number of children soon became his constant
auditors, and to say he did not work any good among them would be an
untruth. Nor did he confine his apostolic ministry to the instruction of
children. He was, on the contrary, indefatigable in his exertions to be
of use to every one. He took up his abode in the hospital, visited the
prisoner, assisted the dying. With a flexibility characteristic of the
system, and often employed for the worst ends, he mixed with all classes,
and spoke and acted in the most suitable manner to please them all.
Often might you have seen him at the same table with the gamester—often
did he by his gay humour rejoice the banquet table—often might he have
been seen in the haunts of debauchees; and in all those places exquisite
good taste, combined with jest or bitter sarcasm, _à-propos_ to time
and place, rendered the vice either ridiculous or loathsome. Many, to
enjoy Xavier’s friendship, renounced their profligate habits, and fell
back to the paths of virtue. But it is a gratuitous assertion, and
contradicted by Xavier himself, that the aspect of the town was changed
by his predications and catechisings. We repeat it again—no man has
the power to work such miracles. After Xavier had spent twelve months
in Goa, he heard that the pearl fishermen on the coast of Malabar were
poor and oppressed. Thither Xavier went without delay. He took with
him two Malabarese whom he had converted, as his interpreters. But
finding this mode of communication slow and ineffectual, he committed to
memory the creed, the decalogue, and the Lord’s Prayer in the Malabar
language, and repeated them to the natives with passionate and eloquent
eagerness. By degrees he began to be able to communicate with them; and
here, as elsewhere, Xavier not only acted the indefatigable apostle,
but also shewed himself the best friend, the kindest consoler of these
poor people, and shared in their fatigues and privations. Many were the
favours which he obtained for them from the vice-king, and these grateful
fishermen willingly embraced the religion preached by their benefactor.
He lived among them for thirteen months, and we are assured that at his
departure he had planted no less than forty-five churches on the coast.
From Cape Comorin he passed to Travancore, thence to Meliapore, to the
Moluccas, to Malacca; and, in short, he visited a great part of India,
always vigilant, zealous, and indefatigable in his endeavours to make
these idolaters partake of the benefits of the Christian religion.

In 1547 he returned to Goa. Ignatius had sent him in the year 1545 three
Jesuits. Xavier had directed two of them to go to Cape Comorin, and
named the third, Lancillotti, Professor of the College of Saint Foi.
Soon after, nine other Jesuits were sent to assist him. Xavier assigned
a place and an occupation to each of them, and he himself returned to
Malacca. Here he learned something about Japan. He was informed that the
Japanese were moral, industrious, and very eager to acquire knowledge of
every kind. Xavier at once determined that neither the distance nor the
difficulties of the way should deter him from visiting Japan. Listening
to no remonstrance which would have dissuaded him from this undertaking,
he named the Jesuit, Paul of Camarino, Superior in his place, and with
two companions set out for Japan.

Before leaving Malacca he wrote to Ignatius thus:—“I want words to
express to you with what joy I undertake this long voyage, full of the
greatest dangers. Although these dangers are greater than all I have yet
encountered, I am far from giving up my undertaking, our Lord telling
me internally that the cross once planted here will yield an abundant
harvest.”

We shall not relate the various extraordinary incidents or miracles
which we are told he performed whilst on the way, and we shall conduct
him at once to that cluster of islands, with mountains barren of fruits
and grain, but rich in mines of all sorts, which we call Japan, where he
arrived in the summer of 1549. The Japanese of those days were partly
atheists, partly idolaters. Xavier endeavoured to ingratiate himself with
the Bonzes, those crafty priests of Japan. He succeeded in converting
some of them, and by their influence a great many more of the idolaters,
and prepared the ground which should afterwards have produced an
abundant harvest, if this father’s successors had possessed a little more
of his uprightness and charity.

But Xavier’s vivid imagination and restless activity made him soon desert
Japan for a more ample and splendid theatre. He formed the project of
penetrating into the Celestial Empire. Leaving his two companions in
Japan, he returned to Goa to settle the affairs of the Society, which had
increased in numbers, influence, and authority; and this duty performed,
he returned to Malacca, to embark from thence for China.

Better to succeed in his undertaking, he had obtained for a Portuguese
merchant, Pereyra, the title of ambassador to the emperor. Pereyra,
according to custom, had purchased many presents, in order to obtain a
more cordial reception for himself and his friend Xavier. The vessel in
which the two friends were to take a passage was on the point of sailing,
when Don Alvarez, Captain-General of Malacca, opposed their departure,
and, effectually to prevent it, laid an embargo on the Saint Croix, the
only vessel which was bent thither. Xavier remonstrated in vain. The
captain persisted in opposing the embassy of Pereyra. Xavier shewed him
the commission of John III., which conferred upon him great and almost
unlimited power, and also his commission as the Pope’s legate. Alvarez
still refused to consent to their departure, and Xavier fulminated
against him the anathemas, but without any effect.

Pereyra was thus obliged to remain, and Xavier, after having lost much
time, took a passage in this same vessel, which was now ordered for the
island of Sancian. There they at length landed, to the inexpressible joy
of Xavier, who saw himself within a few leagues of this promised land
of his own. But, alas! his hopes were frustrated. It was ordained that
his praiseworthy ambition should not be gratified, and that he should
not see the vast empire he aspired to conquer to Christianity, but at a
distance. Others might attempt this difficult mission; Xavier, a victim
to fatigue and fever, lay powerless on the inhospitable shore of Sancian.
In a very few days his illness made fearful progress, and on the 2d of
December 1552, Xavier, in the forty-sixth year of his age, breathed his
last. Thus ended the adventurous life of this noble and extraordinary
man, which we have merely sketched.

We pass over the absurd and miraculous facts which the panegyrists of
the saint have coupled with his name. We think they have injudiciously
smothered, in ridiculous and supernatural legends, the many noble
exploits and the great qualities of Xavier. In respect for his memory,
we shall therefore make no mention of his miracles. Besides, Xavier’s
miracles are as nearly as possible the same as those performed by other
saints. We really believe that the biographers of any saint might do
like that gentleman who, after having written a long letter without
either comma, colon, period, or point of interrogation, put down a
great quantity of these at the close of the epistle, and enjoined his
correspondent to insert them in their requisite places. Our biographers
should, in like manner, place at the end of their panegyrics some
hundreds of miracles performed on the sick, or the blind, or those
possessed with devils, and let the judicious reader insert them in those
parts of the narrative they may think proper.[88]

No one, however, will deny to Xavier uprightness of purpose, sincerity
of conviction, mildness and intrepidity of character, self-denial,
and a fervid zeal for the propagation of the Christian religion. But
while we gladly give him praise for his excellent qualities, we cannot
overlook some of his defects. Thus, for example, we cannot approve of his
continual wandering, and we think, that in undertaking his voyages, he
was actuated, perhaps, as much by the love of novelty as by the desire
of propagating Christianity. His way of making Christians was also in
the highest degree inconsiderate and hasty; for, most assuredly, the
10,000 idolaters whom he christened in a single month, had no more of the
Christian than the baptism.

But we must impute to him a still greater fault, and one which seems to
be inherent in the character of the Romish priests—the absolute authority
which they claim over all men, and their unscrupulous proceedings against
any one who is bold enough to resist their orders—nay, their very wishes.
Observe. Don Alphonso de Sonza, vice-king of India, although an exemplary
Roman Catholic, because he does not yield to all Xavier’s wishes, the
Jesuit writes to the king and procures his recall! Alvarez opposes the
embassy of Pereyra, which Xavier had contemplated, and for this the
Jesuit priest excommunicates him! These two acts are characteristic of
the Romish priests, and we quote them to shew that even the mildest does
not hesitate at anything, in order to carry his point.

However, in the time of Xavier, and for some fifty years afterwards,
the missions, if they were far from what they ought to have been, as
instrumental for propagating the gospel, were nevertheless conducted in
a manner not altogether unpraiseworthy. The missionaries were laborious,
energetic, indefatigable. They submitted to every kind of privation,
persecution, even death itself, with a courageous and sometimes joyful
and willing heart. Had they simply preached the gospel, and not mingled
with it the diffusion of the superstitious practices of the Church of
Rome, no praise would be adequate to their deserts. But, alas! the noble
qualities which they brought to work were soon perverted, and directed to
interested and impure motives, so that we fear the good which they did at
first can hardly compensate for the evil which they at length produced.

The man who after Xavier had the greatest success in India, but who
also perverted the character of the mission, and introduced the most
abominable idolatry, was Father Francis Nobili. He arrived at Madura in
1606, and was surprised that Christianity had made so little progress
in so long a time, which he attributed to the strong aversion which the
Indian had for the European, and to the fact, that the Jesuits, having
addressed themselves more especially to the Pariahs, had caused Christ
to be considered as the Pariahs’ God.[89] He therefore resolved to play
the part of a Hindoo and a Brahmin. After having learned with wonderful
facility their rites, their manners, and their language,[90] he gave
himself out as a Saniassi, a Brahmin of the fourth and most perfect
class; and, with imperturbable impudence, he asserted that he had come
to restore to them the fourth road to truth, which was supposed to have
been lost many thousands of years before. He submitted to their penances
and observances, which were very painful; abstained from everything that
had life, such as fish, flesh, eggs;[91] respected their prejudices,
and, above all, the maintenance of the distinction of classes. It was
forbidden the catechumen Pariah to enter the same church with the
Sudra or Brahmin converts. All this was the beginning of those heathen
ceremonies and superstitions with which the Christian religion was
contaminated.

Great care was taken by these Roman _Saniassi_ that they might not
be taken for _Feringees_,[92] and still greater care not to hurt the
prejudices of the Hindoos. We might multiply quotations _ad infinitum_
to prove our assertions, but we shall content ourselves with two. “Our
whole attention,” writes Father de Bourges, “is taken up in our endeavour
to conceal from the people that we are what they call _Feringees_; the
slightest suspicion of this would prove an insurmountable obstacle to our
success.”[93] And Father Mauduit writes,—“The catechist of a low caste
can never be employed to teach Hindoos of a caste more elevated. The
_Brahmins_ and the _Sudras_, who form the principal and most numerous
castes, have a far greater contempt for the Pariahs, who are beneath
them, than princes in Europe can feel for the scum of the people. They
would be dishonoured in their own country, and deprived of the privileges
of their caste, if they ever listened to the instructions of one whom
they look upon as infamous. We must, therefore, have Pariah Catechists
for the Pariahs, and Brahminical catechists for the Brahmins, which
causes us a great deal of difficulty.” “Some time ago, a catechist from
the Madura mission begged me to go to Pouleour, there to baptize some
Pariah catechumens, and to confess certain neophytes of that caste. The
fear that the Brahmins and Sudras might come to learn the step I had
taken, and thence look upon me as infamous and unworthy ever of holding
any intercourse with them, _hindered me from going_! The words of the
holy apostle Paul, which I had read that morning at mass, determined
me to take this resolution,—‘Giving no offence to any one, that your
ministry might not be blamed’ (2 Cor. vi. 3). I therefore made these
poor people go to a retired place, about three leagues from here, where
I myself joined them _during the night, and with the most careful
precautions_, and there I baptized nine!”[94]

We appeal to every impartial man, if these were apostles and teachers of
the gospel. But it seems by all their proceedings, that they considered
the conversion of these idolaters to consist in the mere fact of their
being baptized. To administer baptism to a man _volens nolens_, was the
Jesuits’ utmost ambition, and this ambition they satisfied _per fas et
nefas_. Let them relate the facts themselves:—

“When these children,” says Father de Bourges, “are in danger of death,
our practice is to baptize them without asking the permission of their
parents, which would certainly be refused. The catechists and the private
Christians are well acquainted with the formula of baptism, and they
confer it on these dying children, _under the pretext of giving them
medicines_.”[95]

Women were also found very useful in the case of newly born infants,
when none other could obtain access. Father Bouchet mentions one woman
in particular, “whose knowledge of the pulse and of the symptoms of
approaching death was so unerring, that of more than ten thousand
children whom she had herself baptized, not more than two escaped
death.”[96] In like manner, during a famine in the Carnatic, about
A.D. 1737, Father Trembloy writes, that according to the report of the
catechists and missionaries, the number of deserted and dying children
baptized during the two years of death, amounted to upwards of twelve
thousand. He adds, that, as every convert knew the formula of baptism, it
was rare, in any place where there were neophytes, _for a single heathen
child to die unbaptized_.[97]

The logical consequence of this mode of making Christians was, that at
the first opportunity these converts repudiated the name of Christian
with as much facility as they assumed it. This was seen on many
occasions, and more particularly, perhaps, in 1784:—

“When Tippoo ordered all the native Christians in Mysore to be seized,
and gathered together in Seringapatam, that he might convert them to
Mahometanism, amidst that vast multitude, amounting to more than 60,000
souls,” says the Abbé Dubois, “not _one_—not a single individual among
so many thousands—had courage to confess his faith under this trying
circumstance, and become a martyr to his religion. The whole apostatised
_en masse_, and without resistance or protestation.”[98]

But even when these converts retained the name of Christian, we are much
at a loss to distinguish them from the pagans, either in their manner of
worship, or in their moral conduct. And what is still more disheartening,
is to see that the Jesuits, who nourished them in those idolatrous and
diabolical superstitions make light of them—nay, even seem to approve of
them.

Listen to M. Crétineau:—

“The Malabar rites consist in omitting some ceremonies in the
administration of baptism, respecting, however, the essence of the
sacrament; in disguising the name of the Cross, and of the objects of the
Catholic religion, under a more common and vernacular appellation; _to
give them heathen names_; to marry children before the age of puberty,
_seven years_; to allow the women to wear the Taly (bijou),[99] which
they receive the day of their nuptials, and upon which is engraved an
idol, _the Greek god Priapus_; to avoid assisting the Pariahs in their
illness, and to refuse them certain spiritual succours—_the sacraments
of confession and communion_.”[100] He might have added that these rites
consisted also in the use of burned cows’ dung applied to the body,[101]
in a joyous feast, at an occasion which decency forbids us to name, in
dancing and playing instruments of different kinds, in idol processions,
in ablutions according to the Brahminical rites, and in sundry other
pagan superstitions. Now, listen to what Crétineau and the Jesuits think
about these abominable acts of idolatry:—

“The Jesuits of Madura, Mysore, and the Carnatic found themselves
surrounded by so many superstitious practices, that they thought best
to tolerate those _who in their eyes did not cause any prejudice to the
Christian religion_.”[102] Now, these practices which in their eyes “did
not cause any prejudice to the Christian religion,” were exactly those
which we have named; which the Jesuits pertinaciously maintained even
after they were condemned by three successive Popes, and which they still
considered “innocent ones.” Really, we don’t know whether we ought most
to execrate their wickedness, or to lament their blindness. We could
almost regret that they do not _deny_ these facts. A lie more or less
would not matter much in the sum total, and would, at least, shew that
they are still alive to some sense of shame. Mycio, seeing Eschinus blush
at his remonstrances, looks complacently aside, and says, “_Erubuit,
salva res est!_” Terentius was right. Eschinus was capable of feeling
shame, and amended; but the Jesuits blush not. Either they have lost all
shame, and you would not find—

    “Chi di mal far si vergogni”—

“any one blush at doing wrong,” or they consider as innocent the most
abominable profanation of our holy religion. In both cases, I fear, we
must renounce all idea of seeing them change till their impenitent heads
be visited by the wrath of God. May their conversion avert it!

Complaints of these scandalous profanations were sent to Rome, even
in the lifetime of Nobili. Paul V. delegated the Archbishop of Goa to
inquire into the nature of these practices, which the prelate utterly
condemned. The Jesuits stirred themselves up in their own defence, and
represented to Gregory XIII., Paul’s successor, that those rites were
merely civic ceremonies, and not at all religious ones. Gregory, either
little scrupulous or persuaded by their misrepresentations, by a brief,
dated 1623, approved conditionally of some of those practices, such as
absolution, painting with sandal-wood, and some others, which, as we
said, were represented by the Jesuits to be merely civic ceremonies.
This success confirmed the Jesuits in pursuing the same line of policy;
and as they were also at that time at war with other monks to acquire,
each for his order, paramount influence over the Indians, they thought
that nothing could be more efficient to accomplish their ends than
to flatter the prejudices of their neophytes, to be liberal in their
concessions, and, in fact, to tolerate almost all the pagan usages. They
acted in India, in all respects, as they did in Europe, where, to be the
confessors of kings and of the powerful, they invented the doctrines of
probableism, of mental reservation, and others of a character as immoral,
which we shall examine by and by. For eighty years, therefore, they went
from one abomination to another, till the scandal became so great and so
universal, that the Roman See was again moved to interfere. Accordingly,
Clement XI. delegated Charles Maillard de Tournon, Patriarch of Antioch,
with unlimited authority to investigate into and settle the matter.
The patriarch is described by Clement XI. as “a man whose well-known
integrity, prudence, charity, learning, piety, and zeal for the Catholic
religion made him worthy of the highest trust;” and, according to
Crétineau, “a man who possessed the highest virtues and best intentions,
which, however, should have been directed by a less intemperate
zeal.”[103]

He landed at Pondicherry on November 6, 1703, and immediately commenced
a thorough and minute investigation of the whole affair. After eight
months, he, on June 23, 1704, published the famous decree condemning and
prohibiting all these idolatrous practices; although the noble prelate, a
good Roman Catholic as he was, is not altogether free from superstition,
as may be seen in the decree itself. Here are some extracts from it:—

“Charles Thomas Maillard de Tournon, by the grace of God ... Legate _a
latere_, &c.... having maturely examined all things, ... having heard the
above mentioned fathers (the Jesuits), having by public prayers implored
divine aid; we, ... in our capacity of Legate _a latere_, have enacted
the present decree:—

“And to begin by the administration of the sacrament. We expressly forbid
that, in administering baptism, any of the Christian rites are to be
omitted.... We command, moreover, that a name of the Roman martyrology be
given to the catechumen, and not an idolatrous one.... We order that no
one, under any pretext whatever, shall change the signification of the
names of the cross, of the saints, or of any other sacred thing....

“Further, as it is the custom of this country that children, six or seven
years old, and sometimes even younger, contract, with the consent of
their parents, an indissoluble marriage, by the hanging of the _Taly_,
or golden nuptial emblem, on the neck of the bride, we command the
missionaries never to permit such invalid marriages among Christians.

“And since, according to the best informed adherents of that impious
superstition, the Taly bears the image, though unshapely, of Pullear,
or Pillear, the idol supposed to preside over nuptial ceremonies; and
since it is a disgrace for Christian women to wear such an image round
their necks, as a mark that they are married, we henceforth strictly
prohibit them from daring to have the Taly with this image suspended from
their necks. _But, lest wives should seem not to be married, they may
use another Taly, with the image of the holy cross, or of our Lord Jesus
Christ, or of the most blessed Virgin, marked on it!_

“The nuptial ceremonies also, according to the custom of the country, are
so many, and defiled by so much superstition, that no safer remedy could
be devised than to interdict them altogether; for they overflow with the
pollutions of heathenism, and it would be extremely difficult to expurge
them from that which is superstitious....

“In like manner, we cannot suffer that these offices of charity which
Gentile physicians, even of a noble race or caste, do not consider
unworthy (for the health of the body) to be given to those poor people,
the Pariahs, although in the most abject and lowest condition, be
denied, for the sake of souls, by spiritual physicians. Wherefore, we
strictly enjoin the missionaries, as far as they can, to see that no
opportunity for confession be awanting to any sick Christian, although
he be a Pariah, or even of a more despised race, if there were. And lest
they should be compelled to consult for their eternal welfare, when the
disease is increasing, and their temporal life is in evident danger, we
charge the missionaries not to wait till those in this weak condition
are brought to church, but, as far as they are able, to seek for them
at home, to visit them, and to comfort them with pious discourses and
prayers, and with sacramental bread; and, in short, to administer extreme
unction to them, if they are about to die, without making any distinction
in persons or sexes, expressly condemning every practice contrary to the
duty of Christian piety....

“We have learned with the greatest sorrow, also, that Christians who
can beat the drum, or play on a flute, or other musical instruments,
are invited to perform during the festivals and sacrifices in honour
of idols, and sometimes even compelled to attend, on account of some
species of obligation supposed to be contracted towards the public by
the exercise of such a profession, and that it is by no means easy for
the missionaries to turn them from this detestable abuse; wherefore,
considering how heavy an account we should have to render to God did we
not strive, with all our power, to recall such Christians as these from
the honouring and worshipping of devils, we forbid them,” &c.

“The missionaries also shall be held bound, not only to acquaint them
with the aforesaid prohibition, but also to insist on its entire
execution, and to expel from the Church all who disobey, until they
repent from the heart, and by public marks of penitence expiate the
scandal they have caused.”

In like manner, the legate expressly prohibits the heathen ablutions
and superstitious bathings, at set times, and with certain ceremonies,
to all, and more especially to the preachers of the gospel, whatever
pretence they allege, were it even to pass themselves off as _Saniassi_,
who were distinguished by their manifold and multiplied washings—‘ut
existementur Sanias seu Brachmanes, præ ceteris dediti hujusmodi
ablutionibus.’

“We, in like manner, prohibit that the ashes of cow-dung, a false and
impious heathen penance instituted by Rudren, should be blessed and
applied to the foreheads of those who have received the sacred unction
of Chrism; we also proscribe all the signs of a red and white colour, of
which the Indians are very superstitious, from being used for painting
their face, breast, and other parts of the body. We command that the
sacred practice of the Church, and the pious usage of blessing the
ashes, and of putting them upon the head of the faithful, with the sign
of the cross, in order to recall their own unworthiness, be religiously
observed, at the time and after the manner prescribed by the Church, on
Ash-Wednesday, and at no other time.

“And, lest from those things which have been expressly prohibited in
this decree, any one may infer or believe that we tacitly approve of or
permit other usages which were wont to be practised in these missions,
we absolutely reject this false interpretation, and we explicitly
declare the contrary to be our intention. We will, also, _for just
causes known to us_, that the present decree should have full force, and
should be considered as published, after it has been delivered up by our
Chancellor to Father Guy Tachard, Vice-provincial of the French Fathers
of the Society of Jesus in India; and we command him, by virtue of holy
obedience, to transmit four similar copies to the Father-provincial of
the province of Malabar, to the Superiors of the Mission at Madura and
Mysore, and of the Carnatic, who after two months, and all the other
missionaries after three months, from the day in which this decree shall
be notified to Father Tachard, shall be bound to consider it as having
been made public, and notified to every one.

                         “Given at Pondicherry, this day, 23d June 1704.”

Nothing can more effectually prove the culpability of the Jesuits, and
their sacrilegious crime, in encouraging such abominable idolatry, than
this decree, emanating from so high a Roman Catholic authority, and from
a man who reproaches himself for being too lenient towards the fathers.
This document is a terrible and overwhelming proof against the order’s
orthodoxy, and M. Crétineau himself can find no fault with it. His only
complaint is, that the different historians who have quoted the prelate’s
decree, have omitted to speak of the preamble, in which the patriarch
declares that he had been assisted in the investigation by two of the
Jesuits, from which fact he (M. Crétineau) seems anxious that we should
infer that the Jesuits themselves have condemned these practices. This,
besides being contradictory to what M. Crétineau has just said, is by no
means true in the sense in which he wishes us to receive it. According
to Father Norbert’s version,[104] it seems that the patriarch arrived
at the truth of the whole matter by making use of a little Jesuitical
cunning. He called two of the fathers to a private conference, received
them with great kindness and urbanity, praised their zeal, pitied them
in their difficult position, and so overcame them, that they frankly
confessed every thing to him. Now, their confession was written down by
two secretaries, who were concealed in a closet for the purpose. The
superior, to whom the Jesuits related what had taken place, was indignant
and alarmed at their wonderful ingenuousness, and sent them back to the
prelate to retract what they had said.[105] But it was too late. The
legate, to give more weight to the decree, begins somewhat maliciously
by saying, that he had been helped in his investigation by Fathers
Venant Bouchet and Charles Bartolde, “learned and zealous men, who had
resided long in the country, were perfectly acquainted with its manners,
language, and religion, and that from their lips he had got a right
understanding regarding the real state of matters, which rendered the
vine and branches feeble and barren, from adhering, as they did, rather
to the vanities of the heathen than to the real vine, Christ Jesus.”

What makes us believe in the veracity of Father Norbert in this case is,
that the Jesuits never submitted to the decree, that they still continued
to persist in their old practices, and that neither Father Bouchet nor
Bartolde was punished or dismissed, one or other of which would most
certainly have taken place had they deliberately and openly denounced
these diabolical practices. On the contrary, Father Bouchet was one of
the two Jesuits who were sent to Rome to get the decree abrogated.

The Jesuits, however, did their utmost to parry the blow. Faithful to an
essential rule of Jesuitical cunning, they at first feigned to submit,
only entreating the patriarch to suspend for a time the censures attached
to the non-execution of the decree, which the good prelate granted for
three years, hoping that they would obey, and abolish these abominations
gradually. But they were far from intending to do such a thing. On the
contrary, they, as we have already said, immediately despatched two
Jesuits to Rome, for the purpose of getting the patriarch’s decree
abrogated by the Holy See. Father Tachard, the vice-provincial of the
India missions, thought that it would perhaps make a great impression
in Rome if, to the opinion of the legate De Tournon they could oppose
the opinion, not only of all the Jesuits residing in India, but also of
the other priests along the Malabar coast. With this end in view, he
sent many emissaries round with a sort of circular containing a number
of questions, to which he solicited answers, and these, as might be
imagined, were all found to be according to his wishes. This strange
circular is to be found in the eighth and tenth pages of the third volume
of the _Mémoires Historiques_. Did not subsequent facts and the whole
conduct of the Jesuits render it credible, we should have hesitated to
insert it as an historical truth, so strange does the document appear to
us. Here it is:—

“I. Is the frequent use of ashes (burnt cow’s dung) necessary for the
Christians of these missions? _They answered in the affirmative._

“II. As the Pariahs are looked upon in a civil light as so despicable
that it is almost impossible to describe how far the prejudice is carried
against them, ought they to assemble in the same place, or in the same
church, with other Christians of a higher caste? _They answered in the
negative._

“III. Are the missionaries obliged to enter into the houses of the
Pariahs to give them spiritual succour, while there are other means of
arriving at the same end, as is remarked elsewhere? _They answered in the
negative._

“IV. Ought we, in the said missions, to employ spittle in conferring the
sacrament of baptism? _They answered in the negative._

“V. Ought we to forbid the Christians to celebrate those brilliant and
joyous _fêtes_ which are given by parents when their young daughters
‘ont pour la première fois la maladie des mois?’ _They answered in the
negative._

“VI. Ought we to forbid the custom observed at marriages of breaking the
cocoa-nut? _They answered in the negative._

“VII. Ought the wives of the Christians to be obliged to change their
_Taly_ or nuptial cord? _They answered in the negative._”

And he, Father Tachard, was not content with the mere signature; he
wanted, also, a solemn oath—

“I, John Venant Bouchet, priest of the Society of Jesus, and Superior
of the Carnatic Mission, do testify and _swear, on my faith as priest_,
that the observance of the rites, as set forth in the preceding answers,
is of the greatest necessity to these missions, as well for their
preservation as for the conversion of the heathen. Further, it appears to
me, that the introduction of _any other_ usage contrary to these, WOULD
BE ATTENDED WITH EVIDENT DANGER TO THE SALVATION OF THE SOULS OF THE
NEOPHYTES. Thus I answer the reverend father superior general, who orders
me to send him my opinion as to these rites, and to confirm it by an
oath, for assurance and faith of which I here sign my name. Signed, Nov.
3, 1704, in the Mission of the Carnatic. JEAN VENANT BOUCHET.”

Fathers Peter Mauduit, Philip de la Fontaine, Peter de la Lane, and
Gilbert le Petit took the same oath, and attested it by their signatures,
and after like fashion swore all the Portuguese Jesuits in Madura and
Mysore.

Whilst two Jesuits were dispatched to Rome with this document, F. Tachard
set another battery at work. The Bishops of Goa and of St Thomas were
creatures of the Jesuits, and altogether devoted to their interest.
At the instigation of the fathers, they, respectively, published an
ordinance, by which, on their own authority, they annulled the decree
of the legate, under the specious pretext that they were not satisfied
that this prelate’s power and authority were sufficient to enact
it. The Bishop of Goa, to whom the Pope had sent De Tournon as his
representative, to whom he had granted full and unlimited power, went
still further, and had the impudence to write to the Pope, telling him
that he, the bishop, had annulled the decree of the patriarch, not
knowing that he had power to publish it.

The Pope was highly incensed, both against the bishops and Jesuits,
and on the 4th January 1707 he fulminated a brief against the bishop’s
declaration regarding De Tournon’s decree, giving his full sanction to
the legate’s decision in all its parts. At the same time he wrote a
terrible letter of admonition to the Bishop of Goa, reproaching him for
his impudence, and threatening to depose him.

One would now, perhaps, imagine that the Jesuits are going to acquiesce
in these ordinances, which, in fact, are merely directed to abolish
Pagan superstition, too abominable even in the eyes of a Popish prelate.
Doubtless, these champions of Rome, these devout servants of the Holy
See, to which they are bound by a special vow, are going to yield
implicit obedience to the supreme head of their Church. Far from it. On
the contrary, the Jesuits added perjury to disobedience, and uttered
falsehoods so bold and so barefaced, as Jesuits alone are capable of.
Fathers Bouchet and Lainez were unsuccessful in their mission to Rome.
Before they had even reached the capital, the decree of the legate
had been confirmed by a decree from the General Inquisition, dated
6th January 1706. The Pope received them very coldly; and while they
were in Rome, he published his brief against the Bishops of Goa and St
Thomas, and confirmed the ordinances of the patriarch. Well! can it be
believed—would it be credited, that there could be found two men, even
among these Jesuits, so lost to all sentiments of probity and honour,
as to declare on their return that the Pope had received them with the
greatest kindness, and that the decree of the legate De Tournon had
been abrogated! Great was the astonishment of the missionaries of the
other orders, and of some few Christians who viewed with abhorrence so
much idolatry as was introduced into the religion of Christ. But after
the first moment of surprise was over, they began to doubt the veracity
of the Jesuits’ report, and sent a memorial to Rome to ascertain the
whole truth. The Jesuits attempted to intercept this; but the messenger
with great difficulty escaped an ambush that had been laid for him near
Milan, and at length arrived at Rome. We shall say nothing regarding the
indignation of Pope Clement XI. on hearing this. We shall only report
part of his brief, which removes all doubt regarding the guilt of the
Jesuits:—

    “_To the Bishop of St Thomas of Meliapar, Pope Clement XI.
    wisheth health, &c._

    “We have learned with the greatest sorrow, that it has been
    divulged in your country (India) that we have nullified
    and abrogated the ordinances contained in a decree of our
    venerable brother, Cardinal de Tournon, dated 23d June 1704,
    Pondicherry, whither he had gone on his way to China; and
    that we have, moreover, permitted and approved of those rites
    and ceremonies which in the aforesaid decree are declared to
    be infected with superstition. Ardently wishing, that in a
    matter of such importance, not only you, but by your care all
    the other bishops and missionaries, should know the truth, we
    have thought proper to send to you the joint documents,[106]
    authenticated by an apostolical notary, and by the seal of the
    General Inquisition; and we beg of the princes of the apostles,
    &c.

    “_Rome, Sept. 17, 1712._”

Before we proceed further in our narrative, we must go back some few
years, and resume the history of the Patriarch de Tournon, who, after
having published his decree at Pondicherry, proceeded to China, where he
arrived in 1705. The Jesuits were already there. Before attempting to
penetrate into this vast empire, they had carefully studied the habits of
that (comparatively) scientific and learned people; and, to succeed in
their enterprise, they resolved upon flattering the national prejudices,
as well as instructing the natives in the sciences and arts. Towards
the end of the sixteenth century, Father Ricci made his first entrance
into China, and received a very friendly welcome, because he was an able
mathematician, and could repeat from memory the most important passages
of Confucius. The emperor esteemed him much for a clock which struck
the hours, and which had been made purposely for him by the Jesuit; and
still more for a map, far superior to anything the Chinese had attempted
in that department of knowledge.[107] But from their too great desire
to please the Chinese, the Jesuits did here as they had already done
in Madura—they allowed the Christian religion to be contaminated with
idolatrous practices, and adapted themselves to all the manners of the
Chinese. Ranke says that Ricci died in 1610, not by excess of labour
merely, but more especially by the many visits, the long fastings, and
all the other duties of Chinese society and etiquette.[108]

The first step of the Patriarch de Tournon, on entering the Chinese
Empire, was to summon all the missionaries and priests he was able, to
Canton, and to declare to them that he was determined to tolerate no
idolatrous superstition whatever. In consequence, he commanded them to
remove all idolatrous emblems from their churches. The Chinese Jesuits
seem to have shewn more of the hypocrite than those of Madura had done.
They manifested no opposition whatever to the commands of the patriarch,
and obtained for him a very kind reception from the Emperor Thang-hi. But
he enjoyed the imperial favour for a very short time indeed. The Jesuits
secretly stirred up the emperor against him, by representing to him that
the legate despised the Chinese, their sovereign, and their religion, and
that he was the instigator and adviser of the Bishop of Conon, who was
apostolic-vicar in the province of Foukin, and who had prohibited some
of the heathen superstitions, in compliance with the patriarch’s desire.
The emperor, indignant at this, by a decree in August 1706, banished
the legate from his dominions, and by a subsequent one, the Bishop of
Conon.[109] The Jesuits, these diabolical sons of hypocrisy, exulting
in their hearts at the defeat of their enemies, had the impudence—we
should say, the cruelty—to insult their grief by a letter full of false
condolences and tears, which they sent to De Tournon, while still in
Nankin. However, it does not seem that the prelate was the dupe of their
arts, as may be perceived from the following noble and pathetic answer to
the fathers of the Society residing at Pekin:—

    “We have received, reverend fathers, in a letter of your
    reverences, full of grief, the decree of the 16th December
    1706, against the most illustrious Bishop of Conon and
    others.... You say that this event causes you grief and
    affliction. Would to God that your affliction would lead you
    to repentance! I should rejoice at it, because it would be
    acceptable to God, and might be the means of your salvation.

    “Night and day I shed tears before God, not less for the
    distressed state of the mission, than on account of _those who
    are the causes of its affliction; for, if I knew not the cause
    of the evil, and the authors of it_, I might endure all more
    cheerfully. The Holy See has condemned your practices; but much
    more to be detested is _that unrestrained licence with which
    you try to bury your shame under the ruins of the mission_.
    You have not lent your ears to salutary counsel; _and now you
    betake yourselves to means that cause horror_ (modo ad horrenda
    confugitis).

    “What shall I say? Wo is me! The cause has been determined,
    but the error continues; the mission will be destroyed sooner
    than it can be reformed.

    “However, your reverences are not in earnest, but merely
    jesting (_ludunt non dolent reverentiæ vestræ_), when you
    represent the emperor as being angry with you—the emperor who
    does not act but according to your wishes. He would assuredly
    be angry if he knew (God forbid!) what injuries you have
    caused to his glory.... What faith can I place upon those
    who in all their intercourse with me have used nothing but
    insidious devices?... I pray of Him who has reserved revenge
    for Himself, not to give you the recompence you deserve, nor
    to measure to you with the same measure ye have meted to your
    neighbour.... If you knew the emperor so well as to make you
    think he deserves the name of Herod, why had you recourse to
    him?... Why have you malignantly excited his hatred against an
    apostolic legate?... Would to God that you would repent from
    your hearts!—Yours, &c.

    “_Nankin, 17th January 1708._”

But if the prelate was well acquainted with all the Jesuitical cunning,
he did not know the extent of their wickedness. Soon after De Tournon
had sent this letter, he was arrested by order of the emperor (we may
well suppose at whose instigation), sent to Macao, and delivered up to
the Portuguese. The Bishop of Macao, who was another creature of the
Jesuits, loaded him with chains, and threw him into prison. It is highly
instructive to read the bull of excommunication which Pope Clement XI.
fulminated against the Bishop of Macao for this deed. He complained
that a Papal legate had been arrested, “not by pagans, but by Christian
magistrates and officers, who, forgetful of his sacred character, of his
dignity, &c., had dared to lay their hands upon him, and to make him
endure such indignities and tortures that the heathen themselves were
horror-struck—_ipsis exhorrescentibus ethnicis_.”

In the same bull the Pope lets us know that De Tournon, for certain
causes, had been subjected to the ecclesiastical censures of the Church,
the College, and Seminary of the Jesuits, which leaves no doubt as to
the authors of the capture and ill treatment of the prelate, who was
used like the worst of criminals, all to gratify the revenge of the
Jesuits. To console De Tournon for all these hardships, Clemens bestowed
upon him the cardinal’s hat; but, alas! the prisoner did not rejoice
long in this high honour. His life was near a close. The ill treatment,
and, as many say, the fastings, which he endured, brought his troubles
to an end. He died in 1710, at the age of forty-two. Oh! one is almost
tempted to implore the vengeance of God upon such sacrilegious men, who,
calling themselves Christians—nay, most perfect Christians—condemned to
exquisite tortures, and to a most miserable and protracted death, this
noble-hearted man, for attempting to purify the religion of Christ from
pagan superstition. So perished De Tournon, a man certainly one of the
best prelates of the Romish Church. Clement XI. eulogised him in a public
consistory, and, as we have said, excommunicated the Bishop of Macao.
We shall not add a word of observation; the facts speak clearly for
themselves.

We shall now resume our narrative about the Malabar rites, and endeavour
to bring it to a speedy conclusion; the facts which we have already
reported being more than sufficient to give a very clear idea of the
religious teaching of the Jesuits in India, and of their deportment
there. Clement XI., in 1719; Benedict XIII., in 1727; Clement XII., in
1734 and 1739, published briefs upon briefs to oblige the Jesuits to
submit to the decree of Cardinal de Tournon, but in vain. The Jesuits
either refused or eluded obedience to them. And when Clement XII., in
1739, forced them to take a very stringent oath[110] to obey the decree,
every Jesuit took it, but no one observed it; finding a specious excuse
for not doing so in that doctrine of theirs, then in full force, which
declares that “the man who makes an oath with his mouth, without the
consent of his mind, is not obliged to keep the oath, because he had not
sworn, but only jested.”

At last Benedict XIV. resolved to put an end to the contest, by
publishing, in 1741, a terrible bull, in which he calls the Jesuits
disobedient, contumacious, crafty, and reprobate men (_inobedientes,
contumaces, captiosi, et perditi homines_), and in which he made such
stringent and undoubted provisions, that it was a difficult matter to
evade obeying it; and especially after the Pope, by another brief in
the following year, commanded that the brief of 1741 be read every
Sabbath-day in all the houses, churches, and colleges of the Society.

The influence of the Jesuits in India now began to decline rapidly.
Their Saniassi were discovered to be impostors. The war that began
shortly after between France and England caused still greater damage;
and when their order was abolished in 1773, the Jesuits had little or
no influence in India.—These are the principal features of the missions
in India, properly so called. In Japan, that turbulent and warlike
country, the Jesuits adopted a different and more appropriate method
to acquire influence among the people. Throwing away somewhat of their
cunning and pretended sanctity, they espoused the cause of one or other
of the various parties who were disputing for power, were cherished,
respected, and permitted to preach their religion, if the party they
sided with were triumphant; persecuted, exiled, and put to death if
it were vanquished. The hundreds of Jesuits who are represented to us
as having perished martyrs for their faith were oftener executed as
unsuccessful conspirators. The Japanese were not so bigoted a race as
the Indians, and the Bonzes, their priests, were not all-powerful like
the Brahmins. The persecutions they exercised against their dangerous
rivals, the Jesuits, could not be successful but when the people and
the sovereign were offended against them, not as missionaries, but as
defeated malcontents and conspirators. The Jesuits maintained their
ground in Japan with various vicissitudes, till they were suppressed.
In China, also, they maintained their ground by the same means which
opened it for their reception—they conformed themselves to the manners
and customs of the people as far as they could, and it appears that they
partly succeeded in conquering some of their national prejudices; they
were at least supported by the higher classes, who held them in much
esteem for their learning, and so much respected that some were made
mandarins; and even when the Christians were persecuted as dangerous
conspirators, the Jesuits were left unmolested. However, we possess few
documents, excepting those of the Jesuit historians relating their own
deeds, whereby to ascertain the real truth regarding their condition in
that country.

The Jesuits assure us that millions of idolaters were converted by them
in all these countries, but their fabulous narrations are contradicted
by facts. For, when a statistical account was made in 1760, of all the
Christians residing in India and Japan, the number was found to be less
than a half of what Xavier alone is said to have converted, and more than
one hundred times less than had been accomplished by the united labours
of all the Jesuit missionaries. This reminds us of the computation made
by a witty person of all the Arabians killed by the French bulletins from
1831 to 1841, which three or four times outnumbered the whole Arabian
population.

In all these countries the Jesuits derived from their converts great
contributions; but of their traffic more anon.

We have thus given an outline of these celebrated missions, and we
are sorry that we cannot extend the recital of them any further. A
characteristic fact ascertained from an accurate study of their missions
is, that the Jesuit missionaries, with the view of domineering over
these countries, altogether regardless of the interests of the Christian
religion, slandered and persecuted all other missionaries, even although
they were Roman Catholics. And so they do still.

We must further observe, that the Jesuits, these so-called fervent and
unexceptionable Roman Catholics, lived for more than fifty years in open
rebellion against the chief of their Church—God on earth—the infallible
vicegerent of Christ—and committed during that same period as many
sacrileges as were the sacerdotal functions they performed; for, since
by the non-observance of the Cardinal de Tournon’s decree, they incurred
a suspension _a divinis_, which means, suspension from the exercise of
their ministry—whatever sacerdotal act they performed, they committed a
sacrilege.

But methinks I hear some one say, do you believe that the court of
Rome persisted in such a contest because she abhorred such idolatrous
practices? By no means. The Popes fought for their authority, for the
infallibility of their oracles, and not to uphold the purity of the
Christian religion. Superstition—idolatry—they like, they encourage, they
live by it. Under their eyes such acts of idolatrous abominations are
daily committed, that those of India become insignificant when compared
with them. I beg permission to relate only one, which, if the fact could
not be ascertained by any one every year in many of the Italian towns,
I fear would not be credited, so very sacrilegious is it. In the little
town of San Lorenzo in Campo,[111] forty miles distant from Ancona, the
following procession takes place on the Good Friday of every year. The
line of procession extends from the town, through an almost open country,
for about a mile and a half, the whole way having been previously
prepared for the purpose. On platforms, erected at certain distances,
the different stages of our Saviour’s passion are represented. On one of
them you see the judgment-seat, and Pilate condemning Christ to death;
on another, Christ crowned with thorns; on a third, Christ falling under
the load of the cross on his way to Calvary, and so on. Next comes the
crucifixion, represented in four different acts. The first exhibits
Christ with one of his hands nailed to the cross; the second, with both
his hands nailed; the third, with both hands and feet; and in the fourth,
our holy Redeemer is exhibited as expiring, and with his breast pierced
by a spear. At the foot of the cross may be seen the three Maries. All
these personages chosen to represent our Lord’s passion, are picked out
from the very dregs of the people, and are paid more or less, according
to the uneasiness of the posture which they are made to assume. He who
personates our Saviour receives the greatest pay, a crown; while the
respective representatives of Pilate and Mary obtain the smallest named,
eighteenpence. All these sacrilegious pantomimers are at their post
half an hour before the procession begins, and dressed suitably to the
character impersonated by each. The miscreant who hangs upon the cross
(we shudder to relate such abominations) has only a belt around his
middle, the cross being so constructed as to lessen the difficulty of his
posture. About an hour and a half after sunset, the priests, in their
pontifical robes, issue from the church, accompanied by all the civil
authorities, and by a great concourse of citizens dressed in mourning,
and carrying lighted torches in their hands. On their way they kneel down
before every platform, offer up a prayer, and sing a part of some sacred
hymn! This impious ceremony is performed with becoming gravity so soon as
the priests and the bulk of the procession draw nigh to the respective
platforms; but before their arrival, and after their departure, the scene
presents a most revolting and disgusting spectacle. Many of the lazzaroni
go round, laughing and shouting, and address those who impersonate our
Saviour and the Virgin, in the most insulting and profane language. You
may hear many saying, “Ha, ha! thou art here, Theresa! Thou art the
Virgin, art thou not? Ah, ah! you”—(modesty forbids us to repeat the
remainder of the sentence). “Ah! Frances, thou art the Magdalen! By my
troth, it is not long since thou repentedst”—or, “Oh, Paul! Paul! there
is some mistake. Thou oughtest to represent the impenitent robber, and
not the Christ, thou arrant thief!” But we must draw a veil over the rest
of that infernal scene.

So abhorrent is idolatry to the Court of Rome!

[Illustration: _Jacques Lainès._

_Hinchliff._]



CHAPTER VIII.

1556-1581.

THE SECOND, THIRD, AND FOURTH GENERALS OF THE ORDER.


Many were the trials the Jesuits had to encounter after the death of
Loyola. The moment he expired, the professed members who were at Rome
appointed Lainez Vicar-General, although he was at the time dangerously
ill, fixing, at the same time, the month of November for the election
of the new General. No objection could be raised against the nomination
of Lainez, he being without contradiction the most prominent living
member of the Society. The difficulties only began when the Vicar-General
adjourned the General Congregation _sine die_. Lainez was constrained
to take this step because Philip II. of Spain had forbidden any of his
subjects to leave his dominions, as he was then at war with the Pope.

Since that fatal epoch in which Clement VII., for the benefit of his
family (the Medici), had betrayed the glory and destinies of Italy
into the hands of the house of Austria, the unfortunate peninsula (if
we except Venice) became an imperial fief, and the subsequent popes
the Emperor’s chief vassals. Paul IV., although worn out with years,
conceived the bold idea of freeing Italy from the Austrian yoke. “He
would sit,” says Ranke, quoting Navagero, “for long hours over the black,
thick, fiery wine of Naples, his usual drink, and pour forth torrents
of stormy eloquence against these schismatics and heretics—accursed of
God—that evil generation of Jew and Moor—that scum of the world, and
other titles equally complimentary, which he bestowed with unsparing
liberality on everything Spanish.”[112] And so intense was his hatred
against the house of Austria, that he made a strict alliance with the
Protestant leader, Albert of Brandenburg, and formed his regiments almost
entirely of Protestants, to fight against a Roman Catholic king. And, as
if this were not enough, the Pope, the so-called chief of Christianity,
made proposals to Soliman I., the great enemy of the Christian name, to
enter into an alliance with him, in order to destroy the ultra-Roman
Catholic and bigoted Philip II.

The Spanish Jesuits thus prevented from going to Rome, the General
Congregation, as we have said, was postponed. This began the strife.
Private ambition broke forth, and threw the community into great
confusion. The revolt was headed by the violent Bobadilla. He prevailed
upon Rodriguez, Brouet, and two or three others, to join him in
reproaching the tyranny and despotism of Lainez. They pretended that he
had no right to possess, alone, the supreme authority, which ought to
reside in all the surviving founders of the order till a General was
elected. Pamphlets were addressed to the Pope, accusing the Vicar-General
of entertaining the design to repair to Spain for the purpose of holding
the Congregation, and of establishing the seat of the order in that
country. The Pope, upon this announcement, became furious; he thundered
imprecations against the Society; and when Lainez presented himself to
have an audience, he refused to see him, and ordered him to give up,
within three days, all the constitutions and ordinances of the Society,
with the name of every professed member resident at Rome, and forbade any
one of the latter to leave the capital. The storm, it is evident, was
gaining strength, but Lainez was an expert and skilful pilot. Inferior
to Loyola in natural gifts, in firmness of character, in boldness and
energy, he was his superior in cunning, in reflection, in patience.
Ignatius, the imperious ex-officer, in the same circumstances, would have
scourged Bobadilla, dismissed some rioters from the Society, and obliged
the others to fall at his feet and ask forgiveness. The politician
Lainez avoided combat in an open field, hoping to gain the battle by
stratagem. He quietly and stealthily got possession of all Bobadilla’s
writings on the subject,[113] learned from them what were his enemies’
projects, prepared his means of defence accordingly, detached Rodriguez
and Brouet from Bobadilla’s interest by caresses and promises, sent the
latter to reform a convent of Franciscan friars at Foligno, and condemned
Gorgodanuz, the most pertinacious of the rebels, to say one pater noster
and one ave Maria! When a cardinal related this fact to the Pope, Paul
crossed himself as at something strange and prodigious.[114] Sacchini
pretends that the Pope made the sign of the cross, being filled with
wonder at the blindness of the rebels; but assuredly Paul was struck at
the supremely cunning policy of the Vicar-General.[115]

The revolt was, however, subdued, the Pope appeased, and soon after the
war was also brought to an end. The Duke of Alva, that sanguinary and
ferocious butcher of the Belgians, conqueror of the Papal troops and of
the allied armies, entered vanquished Rome, craved for an audience of
the Pontiff, threw himself at his feet, and implored his forgiveness for
having dared to fight against him. What a strange piece of contradiction
is man!

The peace established between King Philip and the Pope made a free
passage between Italy and Spain. The fathers arrived in Rome, and the
General Congregation met on the 19th of June 1558.

On the 2d of July, while the fathers were on the point of proceeding to
the election of the General, Cardinal Pacheco presented himself to the
conclave in the Pope’s name, and after some trifling compliments, said he
was ready to act as secretary and teller of the ballot. We cannot imagine
the reason Paul had for taking such a precaution, unless he was afraid
lest Borgia should be elected General—Borgia, the companion, the friend
of Charles V. and of his son. The Cardinal, however, took his place among
the fathers, and prepared to act as secretary. The schedules, which had
been put into an urn by each elector, having been withdrawn and examined,
the Cardinal announced that Lainez was elected by a majority of 13 to 7.
He was in consequence proclaimed General, and the Jesuits went in one
after another to pay him homage, and to kiss his hands on their bended
knees.

The Congregation then proceeded to dispose of other business. There was
first of all a discussion as to whether or not the Constitutions should
be modified. This was answered in the negative. It must be observed,
however, that Lainez, in the margin of the 16th chapter of the fourth
part of the Constitutions, where it is prescribed that in the School of
Theology the scholastic doctrine of St Thomas shall be explained, had
inserted a declaration, “that if any book of theology could be found more
adapted to the times, it shall be taught.” An historian very judiciously
remarks, that Lainez appears already to have formed the project of
establishing a new doctrine, which was propounded by Molina soon after.
The original manuscripts, which were written by Ignatius in Spanish,
were next confronted with the Latin version by Polancus. The latter was
approved of, and ordered to be printed by the press of the Roman College,
and this was immediately executed—the first edition of the Constitutions
bearing the date of 1558.

But whilst in the middle of their legislative labours, they were startled
by the arrival of Cardinal Trani, who announced to them that it was
the Pope’s pleasure that they should perform the choral office, like
all the other monastic orders, and that the office of General should
only last for three years. The Jesuits remonstrated, and spoke of their
Constitutions, and of the papal bull that had been issued in their
favour. The cardinal answered that the commands of his holiness must be
obeyed. The Jesuits got up a memorial, and Lainez and Salmeron went to
present it to the Pope. Paul received them freezingly; and at the first
observation of Lainez, exclaimed, “You are contumacious persons. In this
matter you act like heretics, and I fear lest some sectarian should be
seen issuing from your company. But we are firmly resolved to tolerate
such disorders no longer.”[116] This was the second time that Lainez had
been abruptly and arrogantly apostrophised by Paul. When he visited him
after he had been chosen Vicar-General, he received the volleys of insult
which the Pope poured upon him with the greatest submission. But it seems
that his patience at this time gave way, and he boldly answered, that he
had not sought of his own accord to be made General, that he was ready to
give up the office at that very moment, but that his holiness knew well
that the fathers, in proceeding to the election, had intended to name a
General for life, according to the rules of their Constitutions; for
the remainder, “we teach,” added he, “we preach against the heretics; on
that account they hate us, and call us Papists. Wherefore your holiness
ought to give us your protection, and evince toward us the yearnings of
a father, rather than find fault with us.”[117] This was the substance
of Lainez’s answer, shaped by the Jesuit historians into a more humble
and respectful form. But the irascible and obstinate Paul was unmoved by
his appeal. He told Lainez that he would not accept of his resignation,
that his orders must be executed, and then dismissed him and his brother
envoy. Paul was fierce and vindictive, and not to be trifled with. He
had accused his own nephews in a full consistory, and banished them and
their families from Rome. His greatest desire was to see the Inquisition
at work. Ranke says that he seldom interfered in other matters, but was
never so much as once absent from presiding every Thursday over the
Congregation of the Inquisition. Having such a man to deal with, the
Jesuits were forced to submit to perform the choral office, consoling
themselves with the hope that the next Pope would be more lenient toward
them; nor were they disappointed. Medici, the successor of Paul, who
took the name of Pius IV., shewed himself more favourable to the Company
of Jesus; not for love of them, but out of hatred to his predecessor,
who had been his enemy.[118] Although he was of a mild and cheerful
disposition, he made a fearful example of the nephews of the deceased
pontiff. Their crimes assuredly deserved punishment; but as it was not
in the disposition of Pius to be cruel or revengeful, he was doubtless
instigated to act in this case with unwonted rigour. But who his
instigators were, or whence he derived the malignant and retributory
inspiration on which he acted, it would be difficult to determine. We
only know that the Jesuits had been persecuted by the Caraffas from the
beginning, and that “Pius IV.,” as Crétineau affirms, “shewed himself
from first to last to be more favourable to the Jesuits than even Paul
III. had been.”[119] The Jesuits, it is certain, had then great influence
at the Court of Rome. Cardinal Caraffa and the Duke of Palliano, nephews
to the late Pope, along with two of their relatives, were condemned to
death. They were denied their own confessors, and Jesuits were called in
as their spiritual comforters. Crétineau says, that the Duke of Palliano
asked Lainez to send him a Jesuit confessor, while the detractors of
the order think that they intruded themselves, to witness the agony
and death of their enemies. We let our readers judge for themselves.
The unfortunate culprits were executed during the night of the 6th and
7th August 1561. The cardinal never for a moment suspected that they
would execute the sentence upon him. He tried to delay his execution
by lingering with his confessor. “Make an end, my lord, we have other
business on hand,” exclaimed an officer of police. A few minutes longer,
and the cardinal was a corpse.

The Society now seemed upon the whole to be in a prosperous condition,
and increased rapidly. Lainez did not exercise his authority with an
iron hand, like Loyola, but he had great tact, and knew how to govern a
community by cunning policy. Some mishaps, however, befel the Society.
In Grenada, a Jesuit confessor refused to give absolution to a woman
till she had revealed the name of her accomplice in the sin which she
had confessed. This made a great noise. But the Jesuits, supported by
the archbishop and the Inquisition, braved the opinion of the public
so far, that one of them, John Raminius, declared from the pulpit,
as an established doctrine, “that although in general no sin of the
most holy confession ought to be revealed, there may, nevertheless, be
circumstances in which the confessor may oblige the penitent to discover
the accomplice of the sin, or to give up the names of the persons
infected with heresy, permitting him (the confessor) to denounce the
person or persons to the competent tribunal.”[120]

This of itself shews clearly enough the _inviolability of the secret
of confession_, yet we must say that these gentlemen have made great
progress since, for now, without asking the penitent’s permission, they
betake themselves at once to the officers of police.[121] However, it is
only the sins committed against religion or politics which never fail to
be disclosed; the ruffian and assassin need not apprehend that _their_
crimes will be brought to light.

The next disaster the order encountered was the displeasure evinced by
Philip II. against Francis Borgia, the ex-Duke of Candia, one of his
father’s testamentary executors, and who had a very great influence
over the other sons of Charles V.[122] The Inquisition, that faithful
satellite of the Spanish crown, to please the king, condemned two ascetic
books by that same Borgia, who, a few years afterwards, was numbered
among the saints who were worshipped; he himself narrowly escaped being
captured as a heretic. Borgia bore all this with true Christian humility,
as well as some opposition shewn him by his own subordinates, and was
consoled by the Pope, who called him to Rome, and received him with the
utmost kindness.

Again, in Montepulciano, a town fifteen miles distant from Sienna, the
Jesuits were accused of immorality. One was charged with having pressed
a woman to go home with him; another, of having issued from a brothel;
a third, of having offered violence to a female; and Father Gombar, the
Superior himself, of having illicit intercourse with several ladies, and
particularly with one whose love-letters were found in his possession.
All these were incontestible facts, proved by sworn witnesses. Now
listen to the imperturbable impudence of the historian Sacchini upon
this matter. The reason he assigns for all these calumnies is, that
“the Jesuits confessed almost all the women in Montepulciano; that they
induced many young ladies to consecrate themselves to God in monasteries,
and married females to be chaste and faithful wives. Hence arose the
grief and fury (_dolor et furor_) of those whose passions could no longer
find aliment. They, therefore, plotted the expulsion of the fathers.”
What a set of monsters were these citizens of Montepulciano!

But let us proceed. “The man accused of having solicited a woman to go
with him, was a simpleton, who, meeting a female on the road, was asked
where he was going, and had the imprudence to answer. It was an enemy
of the order, dressed as a Jesuit, who was seen to leave the brothel.
Gombar, the Rector, did indeed entertain himself rather long in the
confessional, but then he was engaged in spiritual conversation with the
ladies. Among other penitents, he had two sisters belonging to a very
high family; and the father, not being able to undertake the charge of
both, was forced to abandon one of them. The one that was dismissed, out
of spite and jealousy, accused the other to her brother, who forbade her
to confess any longer to Gombar. The letters were falsified, and every
other accusation was mere calumny.”[123] After such justifications as
these, few will doubt that the Jesuits were guilty. Gombar, at any rate,
frightened by the public rumour, fled, and Lainez dismissed him from
the Society, in spite of all his entreaties. The town-council stopped
paying the Jesuit teacher the allowed salary. The College was deserted—no
alms!—no friends! Poor Jesuits! they were starving. And Lainez, after
trying in vain to regain for the College its former good name, by sending
thither some of the best and most conspicuous of the Jesuits, suppressed
it altogether in 1563. Let them after this proclaim their innocence!

Accusations of a like nature were brought against the Jesuits in Venice,
and were corroborated by the Patriarch. Some of the senators proposed to
expel the Jesuits from the states of the republic, or to make them submit
to the Patriarch’s authority; but the authority and interference of the
Pope brought matters again to an accommodation.

Further, all the Jesuits in the College of Milan were accused of
unnatural crimes. Here, also, the facts were pretty well established.
Crétineau himself is forced to admit the occurrence of individual crimes;
but, although a certain bishop brought forth many young men as witnesses
against the Jesuits, yet the cardinal, chosen by the Pope to examine into
the case, absolved them.

Meanwhile, at the end of three years, Lainez thought it would be politic
on his part to appear anxious to resign the office. Having consulted
his brethren on the subject, they declared that the office should be
perpetual. We shall here give Bobadilla’s answer, on account of its
originality. The formerly fierce opponent of Lainez writes to him
thus from Ragusa:—“My opinion is that the office of General should be
perpetual, according to the letter of our Constitutions. Let, then, your
reverence keep a firm hold of it for a hundred years, and if after your
death you should return to life, my advice is that the office be again
conferred upon you, that you may keep it to the day of judgment. And I
beg of you, for the love of Christ, to keep it, and be of good cheer,” &c.

Lainez being now assured of the perpetuity of his office, leaving
Salmeron to manage the affairs of Italy, set out for France, in order
that he might take part in the famous colloquy or conferences of Poissy,
of which more hereafter. From France he passed into Belgium, visited the
Rhenish provinces, a part of Germany, and crossed the Tyrol on his way to
Trent.

In all these places Lainez made good use of both his name and authority,
endeavoured to acquire new protectors for his order, to increase its
revenues, to establish new houses, never forgetting, either in his
sermons or controversies, to throw out slanders, and vehemently to attack
the Protestant cause. He at last arrived in Trent for the re-opening
of the Council. This famous assembly, which so solemnly consecrated
some of the greatest errors that had ever been given to the world—which
interposed an impassable barrier between Christian and Christian, but
which, nevertheless, the Court of Rome calls most holy, re-opened on
the 18th January 1562. This last Council had been called for by Luther,
by the Protestants, and all those princes who were desirous to check
the despotism of the Court of Rome, and to give peace to the Church by
mutual concessions between the opposing parties. Different successive
Popes refused this as long as possible, dreading the total ruin of their
authority. Yet this assembly, as Fra Paolo, its historian, judiciously
remarks, had a result quite opposite from that which was expected. The
Protestants took no part in the Council’s proceedings, the authority of
the Popes was further extended and more firmly established than ever, and
the hope of healing the schism in the Church was altogether blasted.

The Council commenced its sittings in Trent on the 13th December 1545,
was thence transferred to Bologna in March 1547, against the will of the
German and Spanish prelates, who continued at Trent, was interrupted
on the 2d of June of the same year, re-opened in May 1551, was again
suspended in April 1552, re-opened in Trent, as we have said, in January
1562, and finally closed on the 3d of December 1563. The Jesuits boast
of having had the greatest share in drawing up the decrees and fixing
the dogmas as they now stand. Salmeron, Brouet, and especially Lainez,
exercised great influence; and, if there were any glory in upholding
erroneous doctrines and the tyrannical authority of the Pope, it most
undoubtedly belonged to them, nor are we disposed to envy them the
distinction they thus gained.[124]

Lainez left Trent for Rome, and his whole journey through Italy was one
continued triumph. But, alas! poor Lainez had not long to taste the
sweetness of adulation. His health, which had always been delicate,
became worse and worse. He fell seriously ill, lingered in his bed for
two or three months, and breathed his last on the 19th of January 1565,
at the age of 53.

Lainez was under the middle size, had a fair complexion and cheerful
countenance, with large bright eyes, but his appearance was very
unprepossessing. He was gifted with a great facility of elocution, and
a prodigious memory. He left many manuscripts behind him; some were
unfinished, and almost all are unintelligible, as his handwriting was
execrable.

[Illustration: _Francois de Borgia._

_Hinchliff._]

The day after Lainez expired, the Jesuits in Rome named Francis Borgia
Vicar-General, until a new election should take place. Borgia is one of
the saints and glories of the order, and his history is really a most
extraordinary one. He was descended from that Alexander VI. who united in
his person all the crimes of past and future Popes, and was a stain to
humanity itself. Our Borgia was, however, a man of the strictest honesty,
and of unblemished honour. He was handsome, brave, the companion in arms
and friend of Charles V., was Duke of Candia and Vice-king of Barcelona.
In 1546, when he was only 36 years of age, his duchess died. The sight of
her beautiful face, altered and disfigured by death, made such a powerful
impression upon his mind, that he from that moment resolved to give up
all worldly thoughts, and consecrate himself (as the phrase goes) to God.
He chose the Society of the Jesuits as the safest retreat, and wrote to
Loyola for the purpose. Ignatius’ answer begins thus:—“The resolution
you have taken, most illustrious lord, gives me much joy. Let the angels
and saints in heaven give thanks to God, for we on this earth cannot be
sufficiently grateful to God for the great honour He bestows upon His
little Society in calling you to join it.”[125]

This man had nine children, some in infancy, and all under age, whom he
left in the wide world unprotected, to enter the Society. And the angels
and saints ought to praise God for this! Alas for the moral blindness
of perverted human nature! Loyola again wrote to him, saying that he
accepted him as his brother, but that, before he could be admitted into
the noviciate, he must settle all his temporal affairs, and have nothing
more to do with the world; meanwhile, until he was ready to enter the
Society, to _keep his intention a secret_. Borgia was admitted into the
house of probation in 1548, and from that moment he became a bigoted
fanatic, whose greatest happiness consisted in lacerating his body.
Macaulay says, in an article in the _Edinburgh Review_, “that it is
making penitence with him to listen to the recital of his flagellations
and his self-inflicted punishments of all kinds.” He had so destroyed his
constitution by this absurd way of trying to please God, that he never
had a single day of good health, and was even once threatened with a
gangrene over his whole body. Such was the man appointed Vicar-General,
and afterwards chief of the order. He had no wish for the honour,
considered the office a _burden_, and we believe he was sincere in his
humility. The first battle he had to fight was against the Holy See
itself. Almost contemporaneously with his nomination, a Dominican friar
ascended the Papal throne, under the name of Pius V. A more bigoted,
fanatical, cruel, and sanguinary man never existed. Brought up under
the wing of the Inquisition, he contracted a sort of blind passion for
that bloody tribunal, and never felt so happy as when he heard of some
barbarous cruelties inflicted upon the heretics, or when some hecatombs
of these accursed enemies of Popery were sacrificed at the altar of his
revenge, or when some new instrument of torture was invented against
them. Suffice it to say, that when he sent his general, Santafiore,
to fight against the French Protestants, he commanded him in the most
peremptory manner to take no Huguenot prisoner, but to put them one and
all to the sword; and because Santafiore had not rigorously executed his
commands, he reproached him in the most bitter manner. And when that
monster of cruelty, the Duke of Alva, had spread death and desolation
over the entire of the Netherlands, 18,000 of the inhabitants of which
he boasted of having delivered up into the hands of the executioners, so
pleased was Pius with his deeds, that he sent him the consecrated hat and
sword, as marks of his approval.[126] Can this, then, be the religion
of Christ? Is it for a moment possible that this should be the true
religion, this which erects upon its altars the statues of such monsters
of iniquity, and impiously calls them saints, to be worshipped in place
of God the Lord? And among the greatest of these modern saintships
stands forth the name of Pius V.! This Pope, a most rigorous observer
of all the monastic and superstitious ceremonies, gave the Jesuits to
understand that they should undertake the choral hours as prescribed by
Pius IV., and that no Jesuit should be ordained a priest before he had
pronounced the four vows. We shall not repeat the conversation which took
place between the Holy Father and the saint Borgia, as given by Sacchini
and other historians; we shall only give some extracts of the bold and
eloquent memorials which the Jesuits presented to the Pope on this
occasion.

After reminding his holiness, in a gentle yet admonitory manner, that
their Constitutions had been approved of by three popes, and that they
could not be altered without good reasons for so doing, they proceed to
state, “that their Society had been established to repel the impious
efforts of the heretics, to oppose the infernal tricks which had been had
recourse to to extinguish the light of the Catholic truth, and to resist
the barbarous enemies of Christ, who were besieging the holy edifice of
the Church, undermining it insensibly; that, in order that they might
be able to resist this invasion effectually, their holy father Ignatius
thought that it would be better for them to leave singing to others....
And did not the same causes still exist, they inquired, for the exercise
of their activity, as the signs of the times unmistakably demonstrated?
They submitted that a vast conflagration was devouring France; that
Germany was in a great measure consumed; that England was one heap of
ashes; that Belgium was falling into ruins; that Poland smoked in every
quarter; that the flames were already blazing around the confines of
Italy.... And they should lose their time in undertaking the choral
hours.”[127] On this point the Pope yielded; but, on the other, he was
inflexible, saying, that it was requisite that at least as much learning
and virtue should be in a priest as in a Jesuit, even of the class of
the Professed. This Sacchini denies, affirming that it is more difficult
to make one good Jesuit than a thousand priests. The Jesuits, who stood
in need of priests, but would not enlarge the aristocratic class of
the Professed members, who alone take the four vows, obtained as usual
their end by exercising a little cunning. They presented themselves for
ordination, not as Jesuits, but as secular ecclesiastics.

We pass over a number of interesting incidents which happened under the
generalship of Borgia down to the year 1571, when we find the General,
though in very ill health, leaving Rome for Spain and France, for the
purpose of soliciting assistance from the respective monarchs of these
countries to aid the Venetians in a war against the Turks, who were then
threatening to pour their savage hordes over Europe. Philip II. joined
the league, and his vessels gained some of the laurels which were won at
that ever memorable battle fought at Lepanto on the 7th October 1571,
when the descendants of the Prophet suffered a defeat from which they
have never recovered. Before Borgia entered Spain, the Inquisition,
aware that Philip was on the best terms both with him and the Pope,
published, with the highest eulogium, those same works which she had
proscribed nine years before when the king frowned upon Father Borgia—a
most striking example of the servility of the Spanish Inquisition to
the crown. From Spain, Borgia proceeded to Portugal, thence to France,
at the very time when Catherine and Charles were plunged in continual
feasts and pleasures, the forerunner of what they expected to enjoy on
Saint Bartholomew’s eve. But we have no reason to believe that he was
at all privy to the plot. It is not at all likely that the cunning
and circumspect Catherine of Medicis would be so foolish as to confide
so important a secret to such a weak-brained man. Borgia witnessed the
massacre in the southern provinces of France, when on his return to Rome,
where he arrived on the 28th of September 1572, and where he expired
three days after. So ended this extraordinary man, whom the Church of
Rome has enrolled among the saints. Would to God that none of them were
worse than he!

At the opening of the fourth General Congregation the Pope inquired of
the Jesuit deputies, who had gone up according to custom to ask his
benison, “How many votes each nation had?” The answer was that “Spain
had more votes than all the rest put together.” “And from what nation
or nations has the General been hitherto chosen?” “From Spain,” was
the reply. “Well,” resumed Gregory XIII., “it would be but just, then,
that you should, for this once, elect one from some other nation.” The
deputies remonstrated; “but,” said the Pope, “Father Mercurianus is a
very good man,” and dismissed them. To another deputation, sent purposely
to assert their independence in the choice of their own General, the Pope
answered, that he did not impugn their right, that he only requested of
them to inform him if their choice should fall upon a Spaniard, before he
was officially proclaimed. The reason of all this was national jealousy,
united to the aversion evinced by Spain and Portugal to all Christianised
Jews and Moors. This aversion was shared in by the Court of Rome, and
was now aroused by the fear of seeing Polancus, a Christianised Jew,
on the point of being elected General of the order, “and it was not
thought desirable that the supreme authority in a body so powerful and so
monarchically constituted should be confided to such hands.”[128]

Father Mercurianus was chosen. He was a simple and weak old man, a native
of Belgium. He delivered up the government of the Society first to Father
Palmio, then to Father Manara. This produced internal troubles and the
formation of two parties, which caused great commotion in the days of his
successor. Mercurianus exercised very little influence on the destinies
of the order, and was the first General whose authority was held in
little account. He died on the 1st of August 1580, at which time the
Society numbered 5750 members, 110 houses, and 21 provinces. The wealth
they had acquired was immense; it did not matter how it was got, as the
end with them sanctified the means. For example, when the troops of the
ferocious Alva sacked Malines, Father Trigosus freighted a vessel with
victuals and sailed to Malines to buy a great part of the booty, under
the pretext of giving it back to the proprietors. Doubtless, to deceive
the fools, he restored some of it to the proper owners, but then this
was only to a trifling amount; the remainder and most valuable portion
was employed to adorn the College of Antwerp with regal magnificence. In
France the Jesuits were left heirs to the immense fortune of the Bishop
of Clermont. In Spain they allured into their Society the representatives
of two of the wealthiest families in that country, for which they were
brought before the tribunal and condemned. Moreover, Gregory XIII.
presented them with enormous sums, and founded no fewer than thirteen of
their colleges, every one of which was richly endowed; while in Portugal
they were almost masters of the entire kingdom. We shall by and by
examine the causes of this unparalleled prosperity.



CHAPTER IX.

1560-1600.

PROCEEDINGS OF THE JESUITS IN THE DIFFERENT COUNTRIES OF EUROPE.


ENGLAND.

Many have pronounced it impossible to write an adequate history of the
Jesuits, because, being more or less connected with the history of the
world, it is no easy matter to pass from one event, and from one country,
to another, and yet follow the chronological order, that the reader may
have a clear and consecutive narrative. To obviate this difficulty as far
as possible, we have, in the preceding chapter, which embraces a period
of twenty-five years, related only the facts connected with the internal
history of the order; we shall now proceed to those which during nearly
the same space of time more or less exercised an influence upon the
history of the different countries in Europe.

Let us begin with England. After the first expedition of Brouet and
Salmeron in 1541, which we have already noticed, Great Britain was no
longer troubled with Jesuitical missions till the “good Queen Mary had
expired, to the inestimable damage of the Catholic religion.”[129] In
1550, however, the Pope despatched to Ireland the Irish Jesuit, Davis
Wolfe, and after three years more, a bishop, accompanied with other two
Jesuits; “while,” as Sacchini says, “Father Chimage, an Englishman,
returned home, for the purpose of having his health restored by his own
native air.”[130] These satellites of the Pope entered the country under
fictitious names, and as stealthily as nocturnal robbers, mendacious in
every word they uttered, and exciting the people to rebellion against the
“impious” queen. However, the vigilance of Elizabeth’s police prevented
them for the time being from doing any material injury. Wolfe, guilty of
a thousand immoralities, was dismissed the Society, and the others were
obliged to return to Rome.

About this time (1562), Father Gandon was sent into Scotland to exhort
and encourage Queen Mary to be faithful to her religion. This was,
perhaps, the avowed motive, but, doubtless, he had received similar
instructions to those given by Paul III. to Brouet and Salmeron. Mary
admitted him by a postern door into her palace, and had three secret
conferences with him; but his steps were traced, he was pursued, and a
price set upon his head. The Jesuit, who, it seems, had no taste for
martyrdom, left Scotland, but not before he had done some mischief. He
departed, along with several young noblemen, whom he had seduced, and
who accompanied him to be educated in Flanders. “They were hostages
to the Church, and were afterwards to return home, carrying thither
the faith with them.”[131] About the same period, William Allen, “to
perpetuate,” as Butler says, “the Catholic ministry in England,” resolved
upon establishing colleges abroad, in which English priests should be
educated, preparatory to exercising their calling at home. His exertions
were crowned with success. A college, which he consigned into the hands
of the Jesuits, was established in Douay in 1568, and Pope Gregory XIII.
endowed it with £1500 yearly. When the Jesuits were expelled from
Douay, and their college sacked by the people, the Cardinal of Lorraine
called them to Rheims. This happened in 1576. The same Pope Gregory
established another college in Rome for the education of English youth,
and for the purpose of imbuing their minds with hatred to their sovereign
and country. The Jesuits had the superintendence of this also. Hence
proceeded those priests and Jesuits, who, with brands of discord in their
hands, departed to set their country on fire. Many Jesuits were sent to
Great Britain between the years 1562 and 1580, and they all received
the same instructions, and acted in the same manner. Elizabeth, who at
the beginning of her reign had exercised a spirit of toleration towards
her Catholic subjects, was now greatly incensed against them, driven,
as she was, to extremities by the continual torrent of abuse which was
poured upon her head by the sectarians of Rome. The holy Pius V., on
the 5th of February 1570, fulminated a bull of excommunication against
“Elizabeth, the so-called queen of England, who, after having usurped the
throne, has dared to assume the title of supreme chief of the Church,
and, moreover” ... [here the bull enumerates all Elizabeth’s crimes].
“We, therefore,” the bull continues, “by the authority which is given to
us, declare that the aforesaid Elizabeth, and all her adherents, have
incurred excommunication; that she has forfeited her pretended right to
the crown of England; and we deprive her of it, and of all other rights,
domains, privileges, and dignities. We absolve the Lords and the Commons
of the realm, and all others her subjects, from the oath of allegiance
which they may have tendered to her, prohibiting them from obeying her
commands, ordinances, and proclamations, under the penalty of being
excommunicated in like manner.”[132]

The abuses poured upon her by priests and Jesuits were most revolting
and insulting. Without referring to ancient writers, we shall quote a
passage from Crétineau, a writer of the present civilised and tolerant
age, that our readers may have an idea of what must have been the
scurrility of those times of fanaticism and intestine commotions. “The
Holy See,” says the French historian, “had frequently cursed the heiress
and daughter of Henry VIII. The Catholics, on the other hand, having
penetrated, along with all England, into her licentious and voluptuous
private life, refused to salute the mistress of Leicester with the name
of maiden queen, to worship her caprices, or to applaud her hypocritical
passions.”[133]

Nor were the Roman Catholics merely contented with attacking Elizabeth
by words—their deeds were yet more criminal. Long before this, Allen
solicited the General of the Jesuits to establish a house in England.
But it seems that the General and the Pope were waiting their own time,
and that they did not resolve till the year 1579 to grace Great Britain
with a permanent Jesuitical establishment. When this resolution was
made known, the most distinguished members of the Society implored, on
their knees (as it is reported), to be sent to England to brave the
persecutions of Elizabeth; Mercurianus told them, however, that English
Jesuits should be preferred for this mission. In consequence of this
declaration, Fathers Campion and Parson were chosen to head the mission,
which was composed of thirteen members.[134] It arrived at the sea-coast
of France, about the month of June 1580. Campion and Parson were both
fellows of Oxford University, and not the least among its professors and
tutors. It seems that both of them were Catholics at heart, though they
pretended to be Protestants. The Jesuits affirm that Parson was dismissed
the University because of his Catholic sentiments, while the other party
assigns his immoral conduct as the reason. Both took the oath; both, we
are assured, repented it all their lives. Both left the university, and
after various vicissitudes, and the necessary probation, were received
among the sons of Loyola. As we may believe, Cecil’s police knew almost
all the movements of these self-invited visitors. Their intended landing
in England was announced to all the authorities, their persons were
carefully described, and orders were given for arresting them the moment
they put foot on shore. But all was to no purpose. The Jesuits eluded
every vigilance, and Father Parson, upon arriving at Dover, played to
the officer who had the charge of examining the passengers, a trick that
would shame any modern Robert Macaire. He gave out that he was a captain
returning from Flanders; and being dressed suitably to the character
assumed, so well did he perform his part, that the inspecting officer
received him with every species of civility and courtesy, shook hands
with him, and promised, moreover, to shew every attention to one of the
captain’s merchant friends, who, as that impostor intimated, was expected
every day from the Continent, and who proved to be no other than Father
Campion. When the latter arrived in London, Parson was on the banks of
the Thames to receive him, and saluted and cheered him with the air of
one meeting a long absent friend, so that no one could have suspected
that all was an artifice and a trick.[135]

The Jesuits, once in England, lost no time in commencing operations.
A meeting of all the missionaries and secular priests was summoned.
Parson presided. He was too cunning to declare publicly the end of their
mission, as he did not wish to frighten the timid with the announcement
of some dangerous enterprise. He disclaimed all political objects, and
said that he only aimed at the conversion of England in co-operation with
the secular priests; and swore that this was his only intention.[136]
But then appealing to a decree of the Council of Trent, he forbade
the Catholics to attend divine service in Protestant churches, and
recommended strict nonconformity. In the company of the more faithful, he
inveighed most bitterly against the queen, and pointed out with what ease
she might be dethroned, by the assistance of the King of Spain and the
Pope. Such exhortations as this caused a great ferment among the Roman
Catholics.

“Swarms of Jesuits and Papists (from the seminaries of Rome and Rheims),
impelled by religious enthusiasm, sedulously cultivated for that very
purpose, and desirous of returning to their own country, were constantly
pouring into the kingdom.”[137] Parson, who was the Provincial, guided
all their movements, and himself went from place to place to excite the
worst passions of man’s nature in the breasts of those who sought him,
as their spiritual father, to confer peace and consolation. A great stir
soon became visible among the Roman Catholics. People talked of nothing
else than conspiracy and revolt. Sinister rumours were afloat, and
acquired new strength from day to day, as is always the case in times
of excitement, when some strange idea always pervades the minds of the
multitude. It was now the general belief throughout England that every
Roman Catholic was a traitor, and at the bidding of the priests was
ready to become an assassin. A general massacre of the Protestants by
the Papists, assisted by the invasion of a foreign power, was talked of
as a matter of more than probable occurrence. Above all, Elizabeth—the
beloved queen—the idol of the people—was in danger every moment of being
murdered. Books were daily printed denouncing more or less particularly
their abominable machinations. These gave consistency to the popular
belief. This belief extended from the lowest to the highest ranks of
society, and put the nation into an indescribable state of excitement.
The government, satisfied that the Jesuits were the cause of all these
troubles, and with the view of quieting the popular commotions, issued
a proclamation, which may have been considered just in those days, but
which we, who live in a more tolerant age, must unconditionally condemn.
Among its other enactments were the following:—“That whosoever had any
children, wards, kinsmen, or other relations in parts beyond the seas,
should after ten days give in their names to the ordinary, and within
four months call them home again, and when they had returned, should
forthwith give notice of the same to the said ordinary. That they should
not, directly or indirectly, supply such as refused to return with any
money. That no man should entertain in his house or harbour any priests
sent forth from the aforesaid seminaries, or Jesuits, or cherish and
relieve them. And that whosoever did to the contrary, should be accounted
a favourer of rebels and seditious persons, and be proceeded against
according to the laws of the land.”[138]

The proclamation was boldly answered by pamphlets from each of the
Jesuits. Parson’s was full of virulence towards the Protestants, and
Campion’s, although written in a more moderate tone, was no less
offensive. This last was entitled _Ten Reasons_. It was a defence of the
Church of Rome and its supremacy, and made no little noise.[139] In both
of these writings, it was protested that the Jesuits were in England
solely for the purpose of exercising their holy ministry, and not for any
political end whatever; that, on the contrary, they had come to modify
the Bull of Pius V. Crétineau says, that “Parson and Campion would not
leave Rome until they obtained from the Holy See this concession (the
modification of the Bull), which would greatly facilitate their apostolic
mission; even the Protestants themselves mention this in their annals as
a fact.”[140] And in a note he cites “Camden.” We shall quote for him the
passage of the English annalist.

“Robert Parson and Edmund Campion were authorised by Gregory XIII.
in these words:—An explication of the bull issued by Pius V. against
Elizabeth and her adherents is sought for from our supreme lord, since
the Catholics desire that it be thus understood, that it should always
bind her and the heretics, but by no means the Catholics, as matters now
stand, but only when the execution of the same bull be publicly ordered.
The supreme Pontiff granted the aforesaid grace to Father Robert Parson
and Edmund Campion when about to set out to England, on the 13th April
1580, in the presence of Father Oliver Manara assistant.”[141]

We might perhaps say that this pretended concession is rather an
aggravation of the bull than anything else; but we shall be generous, and
give it the best interpretation possible. But then, if we prove that all
this was a wily cunning contrivance, that the Jesuits might have greater
chance of success in their treacherous projects, their crime will be
still more execrable. Let us examine. The facts, it is true, are far from
us, and the actors have long ago departed to their accounts: True; but
then the deductions of logic from well-authenticated facts still remain
to us, and are equally convincing. The Jesuits assert that the Pope, out
of leniency and benignancy towards England and its queen, had ordered
them not to force upon the Roman Catholic believers the clause of his
predecessor’s bull which forbade them, under pain of excommunication, to
consider Elizabeth as their legitimate sovereign. Well, if the rest of
the Pope’s conduct leads us to believe in the sincerity of this mandate,
we shall absolve them of every crime, and say that the Jesuits proceeded
to England with the best intentions, and were martyrs to their faith.
But who was this pacific and tolerant Pope? It was Gregory XIII.; that
same Gregory who, at the news of Saint Bartholomew’s infernal feast, went
in procession to the French Church in Rome, offered up thanksgivings
to the Almighty for the blood of 50,000 of His creatures barbarously
butchered, and had medals struck to commemorate this glorious event! It
was this same Gregory who had on the previous year supplied the ruffian
Stukely with money, arms, and troops for the invasion of England, whilst
the Catholics in the interior were ordered to rise in rebellion in his
favour.[142] It was this identical Gregory who at the same time sent
into Ireland the famous Dr. Sanders, as the Pope’s legate, with a bull
declaring the invasion a regular crusade with all its privileges! It was
that same Gregory who, says Ranke, “excited and encouraged all those
insurrections which Elizabeth had to contend with in Ireland.”[143] All
these facts, proving Gregory’s inexorable hatred towards the Protestants,
and his determined desire to dethrone Elizabeth, happened shortly before
and after the mission of the Jesuits. And yet it is pretended that this
same man forbade the Jesuits from mixing in political affairs, and that,
on the contrary, he charged them to preach obedience to the queen!
We believe that few will give the Jesuits credit on that score, but
rather will be satisfied they were sent for the purpose of stirring up a
rebellion, if possible to find an assassin, and that the injunction was
nothing else than a _ruse_—an act of duplicity wherewith the better to
succeed in their treasonable designs.

The government was, however, highly incensed at their audacity, and
attached the utmost importance to their capture. Another proclamation was
issued, forbidding any one to harbour, protect, or assist the Jesuits
to escape, and that he who did so would be considered guilty of high
treason. This produced an effect quite contrary to what was intended.
Hundreds of persons who, before the proclamation, shewed no liking for
the Jesuits, now risked their fortunes, their lives, to protect them. So
interesting does persecution render a man—so generous are the instincts
of the people. All the activity, all the vigilance of the most energetic
and vigilant of governments was for thirteen months baffled by the
dexterity and resources of the Jesuits. The history of their escapes,
and the daring methods in which they executed them, is both curious and
amusing. Space will not permit us to indulge in the recital of more
than one of those marvellous escapes. One evening the house in which
Parson had sought a retreat was suddenly surrounded by a band who were
in pursuit of him. Resistance or concealment was impossible. Parson
at once determined on what he would do. He went to the door, opened
it, and calmly asked what they wanted. “The Jesuit,” was the reply.
“Walk in,” said he, “and search for him quietly;” and as they entered,
he went out, and made his escape.[144] The escapes of Campion were no
less wonderful. He himself wrote, “My dresses are most numerous, my
fashions are various, and as for names, I have an abundance.”[145] The
government, enraged at being so often baffled, had recourse, we are sorry
to say, to persecution. Thousands of citizens were thrown into prison
for nonconformity, or on mere suspicion. Domiciliary visits frequently
disturbed even the inoffensive and peaceful Papists, whilst the Jesuit
authors of all these disturbances and miseries laughed at the abortive
attempts of their enemies to capture them. At last, in July 1581, Elliot,
a Papist, betrayed Campion. He was arrested along with two other priests,
in a secret closet in a wall of the castle of Yates. They mounted him on
the largest horse that could be got, tied his legs under it, pinioned
his hands behind his back, and fixed a placard on his hat with this
inscription, in great capitals, “Campion, the seditious Jesuit.” He
was brought to London, surrounded by a great multitude, vociferating
imprecations and curses upon his head. The shouts of jubilee among the
Protestants throughout England were deafening, and many a sincere person
rejoiced at it, as if by this capture the kingdom was rescued from
imminent danger and certain destruction.

The contradiction which exists between the Protestant and Catholic
writers, regarding the treatment, trial, and execution of the Jesuits,
renders it almost impossible for us to arrive at the exact truth. The
one party calls them innocent martyrs, the other infernal traitors. The
one complains that they were most unmercifully treated, the other, that
they had too much lenity shewn them. It is, however, an incontestible
fact that they were put to the torture, and Crétineau is right when he
exclaims against the Protestants, who, while professing to abhor the
Papal Inquisition so much, now adopted all its barbarous proceedings.
It may be also true, that a jury sitting now at Westminster would
not find sufficient material from which to condemn them. But we must
remind the Catholics, that to judge of these events with impartiality,
we must transport ourselves to those times, when Ireland was in an
almost continual state of rebellion; when England was daily menaced
with invasion; when the Roman Catholics of all Europe spoke of another
Saint Bartholomew; when torrents of imprecations were poured out against
Elizabeth, her ministers, and all her Protestant subjects. We must go
back to those times when the Jesuits persuaded the Roman Catholics that
it was a mortal sin for them to acknowledge Elizabeth’s right to the
throne; to those times in which the Jesuitical doctrine, that it was
lawful, nay meritorious, to kill an excommunicated king, had already
been proclaimed; finally, to those times when the contest had come to
this,—“Whether England should be Protestant under the sway of Elizabeth,
or Catholic under Mary of Scotland, or Philip of Spain.” That the
Jesuits and the Pope caused all this agitation, there can be no doubt
whatever. Hume, quoting a passage from Camden, and Walsingham’s letter
in Burnet, appears to me to assign the most plausible reason for it in
the following words:—“And though the exercise of every religion but the
established one was prohibited by the statute, the violation of this law,
by saying mass, and receiving the sacrament in private houses, was, in
many instances, connived at; while, on the other hand, the Catholics,
at the beginning of her reign, shewed little reluctance against going
to church, or frequenting the ordinary duties of public worship. The
Pope, sensible that this practice would by degrees reconcile all his
partisans to the Reformed religion, hastened the publication of the bull,
which excommunicated the queen, and freed her subjects from their oath
of allegiance; and great pains were taken by the emissaries of Rome to
render the breach between the two religions as wide as possible, and to
make the frequenting of Protestant churches appear highly criminal in the
Catholics. These practices, with the rebellion which ensued, increased
the vigilance and severity of the government; but the Romanists, if
their condition were compared with that of the nonconformists in other
countries, and with their own maxims where they domineered, could not
justly complain of violence or persecution.”[146]

The truth of this assertion is rendered still more evident by a petition
of the English Catholic priests themselves, addressed to the Pope,
in which they say, “That those fathers (the Jesuits) were the sole
authors of all the troubles which agitated the English Church; that,
previous to the Jesuits’ COMING TO ENGLAND, NO CATHOLIC HAD BEEN ACCUSED
OF HIGH TREASON; that they no sooner made their appearance in Great
Britain, than the aspect of things began to undergo a change; that their
political ambition was manifest; and that they had set a price on the
crown, and put the kingdom to auction.”[147] These were the times and
the circumstances in which, on the 20th of November 1581, Campion and
fifteen other priests were brought to trial at Westminster. They were all
condemned, and three Jesuits, Campion, Sherwin, and Briant, were publicly
executed. Crétineau and the other Jesuit historians give them the name of
martyrs. Hume, on the contrary, following the historians of the epoch,
says, that “Campion was detected in treasonable practices, and being put
to the rack, confessed his guilt, and was publicly executed.”[148] It
is repeatedly affirmed in the _Justitia Britannica_, and partly proved,
that they were convicted of treason and conspiracy against the life of
the queen. One strong proof against Campion, was the production of a
letter which he had found means to forward to Father Pond, another Jesuit
prisoner in the Tower, and in which he writes:—“I feel in myself courage
enough, and I hope I shall have the strength, not to let drop from my
mouth one single word which may be prejudicial to the Church of God,
no matter what may be the torments.”[149] But we repeat, even though
proofs had been deficient for a strictly legal condemnation, there is,
nevertheless, a strong moral certitude of their having been conspirators,
purposely sent into England to cause a revolt, and, if possible, to
procure the assassination of the queen. Thus, whatever may be the
objection raised against the legality of the form, no one will deny the
substantial justice by which they were punished.

After the capture of Campion, Parson, like a prudent general, not wishing
to risk his own person, on which so much depended, left England for
France, where, feeling himself secure, he gave vent to his hatred, poured
out curses and maledictions on the whole English nation, and set on foot
new plots and new conspiracies. In conjunction with Dr Allen, the Guises,
and the Bishop of Glasgow (Mary’s Resident at the court of France), he
sent over to Scotland Father Creighton, for the purpose of converting
James VI. to Romanism, and of exciting him to join the Pope and the King
of Spain in war against England, promising him money and all sorts of
favours from both these monarchs. Creighton frequently crossed over from
France to Scotland to effect this league; and once, when on his way, the
vessel in which he was conveyed being seized, he tore some papers, with
the design of throwing them into the sea, but the wind blowing them back
upon the deck, the pieces were arranged together, and brought to light
some dangerous secrets.[150]

The famous William Parry was detected about the same time. This man, who
had received the queen’s pardon for a crime deserving capital punishment,
went to travel. He repaired to Venice, where he was persuaded by Father
Palmio, the Provincial of the Jesuits in that locality, that he could not
do a more meritorious action than kill his sovereign and benefactress.
Campeggio, the Pope’s nuncio, approved of this; and Ragazzoni, the Pope’s
legate in Paris, to confirm him in this criminal enterprise, promised
him from the Holy See, not only absolution, but also the Pope’s paternal
benediction, and a plenary indulgence for all his sins. Morgan, a
Catholic gentleman residing in Paris, gave him additional encouragement.
Parry returned to England, where, after some delay, he disclosed his
design to Nevil, who resolved to have a share in the merit of its
execution. Both determined to sacrifice their lives in the fulfilment
of a duty which they were taught was agreeable to the will of God, and
for the interests of the true religion. But while they were watching
for a fit opportunity to put this execrable parricide into execution,
the Earl of Westmoreland died in exile; and as Nevil was the next heir
to the family possessions, he, in the hope of being put into the family
estates and honours, betrayed the whole conspiracy. Parry was arrested,
and confessed his guilt both to the ministry and to the jury who tried
him. The letter of the Cardinal of Como, in which he announced to Parry
that the Holy Father sent him absolution, his blessing, and plenary
indulgence, was produced before the court, and put Parry’s declaration
beyond all doubt.[151] He was condemned, and received the punishment
due to his treason. Parry, among other revelations, said that he had
informed Father Creighton of his purpose; and as this Jesuit was in
prison at the time, he was examined concerning Parry. At first he denied
all acquaintance with him, but he subsequently wrote to Walsingham,
confessing that Parry had indeed declared to him his intention of taking
the queen’s life, and had also asked his opinion on the matter; that
he (Creighton) answered that it was not lawful to do so, _omnino non
liceret_; that, on being pressed by Parry, whether, to save the bodies
and souls of many, it was not lawful to take away a single life, he,
the Jesuit, answered, that even in this case one ought not to attempt
such a deed without, at least, _feeling an inspiration from above_.[152]
This answer, in my opinion, was more apt to inflame the fanaticism
of the man than to check him in his parricidal projects. And yet this
was all that Creighton could say in his own justification. Now it is
astonishing with what impudence Crétineau tries to pervert the truth of
this affair. Listen to his narrative. He pretends that Walsingham had
sent Parry to the Continent in order to test the fidelity of the Jesuits;
that he revealed to many of them his design to murder Elizabeth, and was
dissuaded by all from the committal of such an abominable crime; that,
being introduced by an English gentleman (Morgan, no doubt) to the Pope’s
legate, Ragazzoni, he, Parry, presented to him a petition, craving the
holy father’s blessing, and absolution of his sins; that, having returned
to England, he was introduced to the queen, to whom he related that the
Jesuits, and the partisans of Mary Stewart, had excited him to take away
her life; that he was not credited by the queen; that he had subsequently
fallen into indigence; that misery and despair had inspired him with the
thought of executing in reality the imaginary crime which he pretended
to have meditated with the Jesuits.[153] And to explain Cardinal Como’s
letter, he adds—“As to the Pope’s indulgences and absolution, no matter
how great these favours may appear to the eyes of the pious and the
faithful, _aux yeux de la pieté, et de la foi_, it must, nevertheless,
be confessed, that every one may obtain them without being obliged to
assassinate a heretic princess.”[154] Although the absurdity of these
justifications be already quite manifest, we shall suggest one or two
observations. What interest could Walsingham have had in sending Parry to
know the opinion of the Jesuits upon the projected murder of the queen?
These Jesuits were safe from the minister’s anger, since they were in
foreign countries. Parry did not set plots on foot which should involve
many persons, whose names it might have been useful to know; he did
not ask to be made privy to any secret, or to be sent back to England
directed to some Popish partisan to discover and betray him. No—he was
only sent for the pleasure of knowing what answer the Jesuits would give
to his question—“May I, or may I not, kill the queen?” But Walsingham was
not only a stupid, he was also an ungrateful, minister. He employed a
man in a most serious and delicate affair, he disclosed to that same man
dangerous and rather disgraceful secrets, and that man, immediately after
he had accomplished his mission, was driven to extremities for want of
food! Alas! Monsieur Crétineau, your attempted justification proves the
culpability of your Jesuits more forcibly than any other proof could.

A severe law was now passed by parliament against the Jesuits. The law
enacted that they should depart the kingdom within forty days; that
those who should remain beyond that time, or should afterwards return,
should be guilty of treason; that those who harboured or relieved them
should be guilty of felony; that those who were educated in seminaries,
if they did not return in six months after notice given, and did not
submit themselves to the queen, before a bishop, or two justices, should
be guilty of treason; and that, if any so submitting themselves, should
within ten years approach the court, or come within ten miles of it,
their submission should be void.[155]

Of fifty or sixty Jesuits, a part being frightened, left England of their
own accord, while the rest were discovered and sent away, but only to
become still more dangerous enemies. We beg to quote a passage from Hume
regarding the too famous conspiracy of Babington, which passage exactly
expresses our ideas upon the subject:—

“The English seminary at Rheims had wrought themselves up to a high
pitch of rage and animosity against the queen. The recent persecutions
from which they had escaped; the new rigours which they knew awaited
them in the course of their missions; the liberty which at present they
enjoyed, of declaiming against that princess; and the contagion of that
religious fury which everywhere surrounded them in France;—all these
causes had obliterated within them every maxim of common sense, and
every principle of morals or humanity. Intoxicated with admiration of
the Divine power and infallibility of the Pope, they revered his bull,
by which he excommunicated and deposed the queen; and some of them had
gone to that height of extravagance as to assert, that the performance
had been immediately dictated by the Holy Ghost. The assassination of
heretical sovereigns, and of that princess in particular, was represented
as the most meritorious of all enterprises; and they taught, that whoever
perished in such attempts, enjoyed without dispute the glorious and
never-fading crown of martyrdom. By such doctrines they instigated a man
of desperate courage, who had served some years in the low countries
under the Prince of Parma, to attempt the life of Elizabeth; and this
assassin having made a vow to persevere in his design, was sent over
to England, and recommended to the confidence of the more zealous
Catholics.”[156]

It would be too tedious to follow the Jesuits in all their machinations
against both the queen and the state, neither would it afford any
additional instruction. We shall pass in silence the efforts of Father
Garnet to raise a revolt when the Invincible Armada was approaching.
We shall not even quote a passage from Crétineau, where he confesses
without the least hesitation that Philip II. had sent a host of Jesuits
along with the Armada, while Father Solarez by his order went on a
pilgrimage to Jerusalem to implore Divine aid for its success. We shall
not further demonstrate, that if they were not the prime movers of
every plot, they were at least implicated less or more in them all. Nor
shall we detain our readers with details of the deeds they performed in
Scotland, where their influence depended in great part, as the Jesuits
assert, upon the state of friendship between James and Elizabeth. We
shall merely translate a single passage from their historian:—“After the
death of Mary Stuart,” says Crétineau, “James seemed disposed to break
up all intercourse with England; and, that this rupture might be the
better publicly attested, James not only granted to the Jesuits a free
access into his dominions, but also himself invited them to come.”[157]
We give this quotation as we find it, without being responsible for its
veracity; but it will be sufficient to prove that the Jesuits, even from
the confession of their own party, were the most perfidious and dangerous
enemies that England ever had to contend with. And as they were then, so
they are still. If they hated England and Queen Elizabeth in the 16th
century, they bear no less hate to England and Queen Victoria in the
19th. Let an opportunity present itself, and you shall see them again
heading the rebellion, and preaching murder as the most meritorious
of all actions. Nor do they remain inactive while waiting for the
opportunity. Their evil genius is constantly present and active. Many
are the parents whose last days are saddened with the thought that their
children have forsaken the green pastures and the untainted waters of
pure gospel truth, for the turbid waters of adulterous Babylon,—these
children, once the worshippers of God, now the idolaters of man, whom
some disguised son of Loyola, skilfully insinuating himself into their
young minds and unsuspecting hearts, has seduced from the right path.
These riots, that blood spilt at Stockport, Dublin, Belfast, and
elsewhere—the attempted beginning of a civil war—believe me, is due to
the Jesuits, some of whom, while in the confessional or in the midst of
private circles they speak with feigned devotion of the infallibility
and supremacy of their Church, always find means, at the same time, of
exciting, indirectly it may be, the ignorant and the bigoted against the
Protestants; while the hypocritical occupation of others in the public
streets will be to pour out torrents of bitter invectives against the
abominations of the Court of Rome, and stir up the worst passions of
the Protestants against their fellow-citizens the Papists! What, it may
naturally be asked, could prompt the latter to such infernal wickedness?
The accomplishment, I answer, of their mysterious designs, though this
should be at the cost of the blood of thousands of their unoffending
fellow-beings. Such demoniacal perfidy might well, to the honour of
mankind, be scarcely credited; but listen to what I am going to relate.
The fact is unfortunately too notorious to be contradicted, and will
go far to afford an insight into the character of the Jesuits. In our
last struggle, in that mortal combat which we, poor and inexperienced as
we were, fought single-handed against the Pope and all his supporters,
for civil and religious liberty, when Rome was besieged and the trumpet
sounded daily for battle, a man of prepossessing appearance, wearing a
beard and moustache, was seen going about from place to place, praising
the soldiers for their valour, encouraging the citizens not to desert
their walls, inflaming the minds of the youth with the glory of dying
for one’s country, and cursing the French, the Pope, and especially the
Jesuits. No one knew who he was, but many a one admired him, and gave
him credit for being an ardent patriot. One day, however, some of the
National Guards perceived a sort of telegraph on a house behind the
Quirinal, almost over the wall of the city, and which belonged to the
Jesuits. They forced an entrance into the premises, and there found three
persons making signals to the enemy. These three were Jesuits, and one of
them was recognised as the very incognito who, a few hours previously,
was encouraging the people to fight. They were arrested, and when on
their way to the state prison, the Jesuit wearing the moustache being
recognised by some women, they tore him from the hands of the escort,
stabbed him, and threw both him and his companions into the Tiber. Five
persons were afterwards taken and executed _under suspicion_ of being
accomplices in this criminal action. I beg to be excused for having
indulged in these remarks. They are wrung from a man who has witnessed
many of their iniquities, and experienced much of their perfidy. I may,
however, assure the reader that the narrator will not be influenced by
these recollections.


PORTUGAL.

If the conduct of the Jesuits in Portugal was not of so criminal a nature
as in England, it was certainly far more bold, and productive of more
disastrous consequences to the Portuguese nation. We have already seen
that the Jesuits had, from the very first, acquired great influence in
that country, an influence which, after the death of John III., became
paramount. During and after the minority of Don Sebastian, the Jesuits
were the confessors of all the royal family. Consalves de Camera was
first the tutor and afterwards the confessor of the young king, and
possessed such an ascendancy over his mind, that nothing important
was done without his consent or that of his brother Martin, Count of
Calhette. Catherine of Austria, sister of Charles V., and grandmother to
the king, a wise and clear-sighted princess, dismissed her confessor,
and complained to General Borgia of the domineering spirit of the
Jesuits. For this she was deprived of the regency, which devolved on
Cardinal Henry, devoted both soul and body to the order. Meanwhile Don
Sebastian had reached manhood, and the nation was impatient to see him
married, that the line of royal descent might be unbroken. A French
princess, and a daughter of the emperor Maximilian, were considered fit
matches, but were both rejected. The Jesuits were accused of preventing
Don Sebastian from marrying, with the design of making a Jesuit of him,
and then becoming heirs to his throne. Strange as this accusation may
appear, yet it is true in its principal part. Let us first listen to what
Pasquier, a contemporary historian, and a celebrated advocate of the
Parliament of Paris, says on the point:—“The Jesuits, shrewd and well
advised as they were, saw that this territory (Portugal) was a proper
soil to make their vine-tree fruitful, and, in order that they might
the better succeed in their projects, on their very entrance into the
kingdom they caused themselves to be called not Jesuits, but apostles,
comparing themselves with those who followed our Lord, and they are
there still designated by the same name. The sovereignty having fallen
into the hands of Don Sebastian, these good apostles thought that the
kingdom of Portugal would soon become the property of their community;
and they frequently solicited him that no one should in future be King
of Portugal except a Jesuit, and chosen by their own order, in the same
way that the Popes at Rome are elected by the College of Cardinals. And
because the king, although superstitious as superstition itself, could
not, or, to speak more correctly, dared not, subscribe to their wishes,
they persuaded him that it had been so ordered by God, as he himself
would hear by a voice from heaven near the sea-shore. This poor prince
was so misled as to go there two or three times, but they could not act
their part so well as to make him hear the voice. They had not as yet
in their company an impostor to rival Justinian, who in Rome was able
to counterfeit the leprous. These gentlemen, perceiving that they could
not gain their ends by this way, did not, however, give up the pursuit.
This king, Jesuit from his soul, would not marry. In order to render
themselves still more important, they advised him to march against the
kingdom of Fez, where he was killed in a pitched battle. This was the
fruit which Don Sebastian reaped for having believed the Jesuits. What
I have just related I learned from the deceased Marquis of Pisani, an
excellent Roman Catholic, and the French ambassador at the Spanish
court.”[158] For our own part, while we are convinced of the truth of
the selfish plot, we do not entirely agree with Pasquier in regard to
the end which he attributes to them. Bold and daring as they are, they
would not have braved popular opinion with such impudence. They were too
clear-sighted not to be aware that the European courts would not permit
them to have the possession of the throne. Yet Pasquier did not invent
this piece of romance himself. The same, or nearly the same, story was
repeated throughout all Europe. And this is so true, that Father Maggio,
Provincial of Austria, wrote to Borgia from Prague, in the year 1571, in
the following manner:—“Here the people talk of nothing else than of the
Portuguese affairs. Despatches come from Spain, announcing that the king
often acts so as to alarm the whole nation. They add, that our brethren
(_les nôtres_) are the instigators of such conduct; that they wish to
make a Jesuit of the king; and there are not wanting those who assert,
that they (_les nôtres_) have alone prohibited him from marrying the
French king’s sister.”[159]

This letter evidently shews that all Europe believed that the Jesuits
were masters of Portugal, and that they had the disposal of the crown
almost entirely at their will. Moreover, as we have seen, the Jesuits
were accused of having instigated the impetuous king to undertake the
conquest of Morocco, in which attempt he lost both his life and his
kingdom.

Let us, however, to be impartial, listen to their justification.
Crétineau asserts that these accusations were calumnies, and gives us
the following as proof:—On the marriage question, he produces part of a
letter written by the accused Father Consalves himself, in which, after
having contradicted most of the calumniations which had been heaped upon
him, he adds—“So, if I have anything to reproach myself with, it is for
insisting too much that the marriage might take place. Those who told the
Pope that the heart of the king was in my hands, and that I can direct
his affections as I please, think of Sebastian what they would believe
of any other young man of his age.... But he is obstinate, and in this
matter he remains immovable to all my advices.”[160] We shall scarcely be
blamed, however, if we confess ourselves sceptical regarding the truth of
these justifications.

To exculpate the fathers for having induced the king to undertake the
expedition against Morocco, Crétineau quotes a passage from Mendoza, a
man entirely devoted to the Jesuits, in which he simply asserts, “That
all the Jesuits were opposed to the expedition to Africa.” These two
lines, written long after the event, and by a partisan of the order,
constitute the only proof of their innocence which the Jesuits can adduce.

After such attempted justifications, there can remain no doubt that the
Jesuits wrested the crown from the head of Don Sebastian, to place it
upon that of Philip II. Philip was at that time the friend and the most
powerful supporter of the Jesuits. He was the chief of the Roman Catholic
party—the hope of the Papists—the dread of the Protestants. These
reasons, I believe, induced the Jesuits to accomplish this abominable
treachery. At the death of Don Sebastian, Cardinal Henry assumed the
name of king, and asked from the estates of Portugal that Philip should
be declared his successor. They refused. Philip invaded Portugal. The
Jesuits used all their influence in his favour, excommunicated Don
Antonio de Crato, the legitimate heir of the crown, and placed Philip on
the throne of their benefactors. We must observe, that we believe that
neither the honest and conscientious Borgia nor the old and insignificant
Mercurianus were privy to this treacherous transaction. They were persons
in no way to be trusted with such secrets. It thus happened that the
Portuguese monarchs, who first nursed these sons of Loyola in their
bosoms, found that they had been giving life to a serpent, which now
stung them to the heart. But unfortunately the example was lost; the
Portuguese monarchs continued to submit to the Jesuits, and one of them,
Joseph I., barely escaped falling under the poniard of the assassin hired
by the fathers.


FRANCE.

We have seen the Jesuits executed in England as traitors. We beheld
them in Portugal, as successful conspirators, dispose of a sceptre
wrested from the hands of their benefactors. We shall now see them in
France acting the part of traitors, conspirators, and regicides, and
the principal cause of an indescribable evil. We have already mentioned
the famous _arrêt_ (decision) of 1554, by which the parliament of Paris
refused to admit the Jesuits into the kingdom. From this time, down to
the year 1562, the disciples of Loyola had repeatedly obtained from the
French sovereign letters patent authorising their establishment; but
the parliament by repeated _arrêts_ refusing to register them, rendered
these letters nugatory, and the contest went on, with no prospect of
decision. The king, the Guises, and a party of the nobles, sided with
the Jesuits. The parliament, the university, the Bishop of Paris and
his clergy, were against them. The principal objection to the admission
of the Jesuits which was advanced by their adversaries was, that they
had obtained from the Court of Rome privileges[161] which made them
independent of the ordinary and of every other ecclesiastical authority.
To obviate this objection, the Jesuits, in 1560, determined to carry
their point, presented a petition to the king, in which they renounced
their privileges, and solemnly engaged to respect the laws of the realm
and those of the Gallican Church, and to submit to the jurisdiction of
the ordinaries.[162] The court now imperatively commanded the parliament
to admit the Jesuits. The Archbishop de Belley, vanquished by “the
urgency of the court, from which he expected the Cardinal’s hat,”[163]
partly withdrew his opposition, and gave his consent, but under so many
restrictions, that, as Crétineau says, it was rather a protest against
them than anything else. The parliament, which till now had withheld
its consent, leaning on the archbishop’s opposition, now registered the
king’s letters patent, but under the same restrictions; adding, that
the Jesuits might appeal to the next national council or assembly. At
this very time a national council was convened at Poissy, to put an
end, if possible, to religious dissension, and heal the wounds of the
Church. Catherine de Medici, whose favourite maxim was, _divide et
imperia_, shewed herself impartial in this contest, thinking to retain
the obedience of one party by the fear it had of the other. She herself,
therefore, along with the king and the whole court, assisted at the
Council of Poissy. We shall not enter into the theological discussions
of this assembly. We shall only say, that although a Roman Catholic
cardinal presided over and directed it, and although the Roman Catholics
had a large majority, yet the eloquence of the Calvinistic divines, and
especially that of Beza, was so overpowering, that Lainez, after having
had a thrust or two at the redoubted champion, declared it to be almost a
mortal sin to admit Protestants to a discussion; and by his advice, the
Council broke up without any result.

The assembly, before it broke up, after a great deal of debating, decided
that the Jesuits should be admitted on the condition that they submitted
to the laws of the nation and of the Gallican Church, that the ordinary
bishops should have all authority over them, and that they should
renounce all their privileges, and take another name than “The Society of
Jesus,” or “Jesuits.” By this decision, the Jesuit question was at last
settled. Now, to shew with what facility these wily monks can renounce
their most approved doctrines, and invent a new principle for every
contingency, that they may succeed in any of their undertakings, we shall
set forth the principal points of doctrine of the Gallican Church, which
were already received in France, and which were more solemnly sanctioned
in 1662.

“The Pope is the chief of the Roman Catholic religion, but he can neither
excommunicate the king, nor lay an interdict upon the kingdom; nor has he
any jurisdiction over temporal matters; nor can he dismiss the bishops
from their office, who hold their power from Christ as his successors,
and who, when he ascended up into heaven, bade them go and preach the
gospel to every creature. The Pope’s legate cannot exercise any authority
in France, unless empowered by the king. An appeal from the sentence of
the Pope is permitted to be made to a general council, which possesses a
power superior to that of the Pope; but even the decrees of council are
not received in France, when they attack the rights of the king, or those
of the Gallican Church; for which reason the Council of Trent itself was
received in France regarding articles of faith, but not regarding matters
of discipline.”[164]

These were the principal points to which the Jesuits swore conformity.
How despicable must be the man who is ready to take a special oath for
every occasion, and to invoke the God of truth to witness his perjury and
infamy!

The Jesuits had no sooner set their foot in France than they began to
spread rapidly over the country, and soon after aspired to enter the
university and monopolise the whole of the education of the youth.
With part of the immense fortune bequeathed to them by the Bishop
of Clermont, of which they at last got possession, notwithstanding
the opposition of the parliament, they built a college in the Rue St
Jacques, near the Sorbonne, and, pretending to obey the orders of the
parliament, which enjoined them to renounce the name of the Society of
Jesus, they inscribed on the front of it, “College of the Society of
the _Name_ of Jesus.” But the university would not admit them into its
bosom, notwithstanding all the intrigues of the fathers and the orders
of the Court. Of this protracted contest, which terminated in favour
of the Jesuits in 1616, we shall only transcribe part of an apology
addressed by the university to Pope Gregory XIII.—“We do not,” wrote the
university, “vex either churches or private persons; we do not trouble
the order of succession; we do not solicit testaments in prejudice of the
heirs, or appropriate the profits to our own interest; we do not plot
devices to seize upon the benefices of the monasteries, or of any other
ecclesiastical establishment, to enrich ourselves with their property,
without being subject to the conditions imposed by the founders; we do
not make use of the name of Jesus to deceive the consciences of princes,
affirming that no one remains longer than ten years in purgatory.”[165]

Our history is becoming too pregnant with grave events to allow us to
relate matters of secondary importance. We shall therefore bring down our
readers to the year 1577, when was formed the celebrated league which
gave occasion to the bloody and protracted civil wars of France, and of
which the Jesuits were the chief instigators.

Remorse for the massacre of St Bartholomew had deprived Charles IX. of
his reason, and brought him to an early grave. His brother, Henry III.,
who succeeded him, either awed by the fate of Charles, or occupied
only with his pleasures, allowed those same Protestants whom, as Duke
of Anjou, he had defeated at Moncontour and other places, to live in
peace. Henry’s indolence favoured the ambitious views of the Duke of
Guise, who aspired at nothing less than the throne of France. He and his
partisans, particularly the Jesuits, stirred up the fanaticism of the
more bigoted of the citizens against the king, who, although a scrupulous
observer of all those external practices in which the Popish religion
chiefly consists, was considered by the Church party a bad Catholic. A
remedy was to be found, lest France should become a Protestant country.
An association was accordingly set on foot, which took the name of
the League, or “Holy Union.” The vulgar saw in it the bulwark of the
faith—Philip of Spain, indirectly the sovereignty of France—and Henry of
Guise, the throne. The members of this association took the following
oath:—“I swear to God, the Creator, and under penalty of anathema and
eternal damnation, that I have entered into this Catholic Association,
according to the form of the treaty which has just been read to me,
loyally and sincerely either to command, or to obey and serve; and I
promise with my life and my honour, to continue therein to the last drop
of my blood, without resisting it or withdrawing from it, at any command,
or any pretext, excuse, or occasion whatsoever.”[166] In 1577, Guise
was declared chief of the League; and in 1584, he, a subject, had the
audacity to enter publicly into a confederacy with Philip II. of Spain.
The Articles of Alliance purported, “that a confederacy, offensive and
defensive, was entered into betwixt the king and the Catholic princes in
behalf of themselves and their descendants, for the maintenance of the
Roman Catholic religion in France as well as the Low Countries: and, on
the death of Henry III., to take measures that Cardinal de Bourbon should
be appointed his successor; the heretic and relapsed princes being for
ever excluded from the right of succession.”[167]

Henry III.’s position became very precarious. The Guises were in
possession of many of the chief towns, and Duke Henry was the idol of the
people. The king, to avoid the impending danger, feigned to adhere to
the League—declared himself its chief—waged war with the Protestants—and
consented to give more towns and places of security into the hands
of his enemies. Nevertheless the king’s opponents remitted nothing
of their hostility, and filled the nation with hatred of his person,
venting itself in curses and imprecations. In Paris, the stronghold of
the League, the question was publicly discussed whether Henry should be
deposed. The king advanced towards the capital with some troops. Guise
hastened to it against the king’s express command. The people took up
arms—barricades were erected—the royal army was defeated—and the king
obliged to fly.[168] Maffei and Crétineau reproach the Duke of Guise for
allowing him to escape uninjured. Henry, concealing his hatred, feigned
again to submit, summoned a parliament to meet at Blois, and conferred
upon Guise almost unlimited power over the kingdom. But in the very
moment in which he saw within his grasp the prize which he so eagerly
sought, he fell, along with his brother the cardinal, in the royal
palace, a victim of the king’s revenge. Thus Guise perished, not, as he
deserved, by the sword of justice, but by the poniard of an assassin.
The deed cannot be excused. The League thundered anathemas against the
king; the University of Paris excommunicated him; and the parliament
declared that “the aforesaid Henry of Valois should be condemned to make
honourable amends, dressed only in his shirt, with a rope about his neck,
assisted by the executioner, and holding in his hand a lighted torch
weighing thirty pounds; that from that moment he should be deposed,
and declared unworthy of the crown of France; and that, renouncing all
right to it, he should be afterwards banished and placed in a convent
of the Hieromites, there to fast on bread and water for the rest of his
days.”[169]

Priests and Jesuits from every pulpit poured out volleys of curses upon
that tyrant, who deserved to be swept from the face of the earth. And
while the king, now in league with Henry of Navarre, was marching towards
Paris, Clement, a Dominican friar, stabbed him at St Cloud, on the first
of August 1589.

Great was the consternation of the royalists, and greater the rejoicing
of the adverse party, at this tragic event. The Council of Seize[170] met
on the 6th of September, and addressed a letter to all the preachers,
in which, among other things, was the following exhortation:—“You must
justify Jacques Clement’s deed, because it is the same as that of Judith,
which is so much commended in Holy Writ.”[171] Henry of Bourbon, king
of Navarre, the legitimate heir, after the death of Henry III., assumed
the title of king of France, and was supported by the less bigoted of
the Roman Catholics and by all the Calvinists. The Cardinal de Bourbon,
on the other hand, also took the title of king, and was supported by the
fanatic Papists, headed by all the priests and monks in the kingdom.
Philip of Spain, the life and guardian of the League, sent an army to
its aid; and the Pope despatched Cardinal Cajetan, accompanied by two
Jesuits, with large sums of money, to foment and maintain the revolt
against the excommunicated Henry IV.

Sixtus V. at first shewed great zeal in opposing the right of the heretic
Henry of Navarre.[172] He promised to send 18,000 infantry and 700 horse
into France. He threatened the Venetians with excommunication for having
acknowledged Henry IV. as king, and for once relaxed the reins of his
well-known parsimony, by sending his legate a sum of money to continue
the war in France. But, when he perceived what were the projects of
Philip; when he learned that that monarch proposed to marry his daughter
the Infanta to the young Duke of Guise, who was to assume the title of
king; and when Les Seize, instigated by the Jesuits, renouncing every
national feeling, went so far as to proclaim Philip king of France,
Sixtus, afraid of the domineering spirit of Philip, and the absolute
power he would acquire if successful in his design, relaxed in his
enmity towards Henry—expressed regret for having excommunicated him—and
gave other tokens of the change his opinion had undergone. The legate,
however, disregarding the Pope’s intentions, carried out his first
instructions with unremitting zeal.[173]

The civil war, with all its horrors, lasted for five years. To shorten
it, Henry descended to an act which has tarnished his glory, and the
fame of his virtue. He abjured the doctrines of Calvinism to enter into
communion with the Church of Rome, which he despised, and excused himself
by saying, “Paris vaut bien une messe”—Paris is well worth a mass.[174]

But his apostasy availed him little. The Parisians continued firm
against him. The monks, and especially the Jesuits, encouraged them in
their resistance. Priests and soldiers simultaneously, they passed from
the pulpit to the besieged walls, replacing the sacerdotal robes by a
coat of mail, the crucifix by a spear. Solemn processions crossed the
town and called upon the people to be firm in defence of their faith,
trusting in God to protect them and to bless their impious enterprise.
The Pope’s legate, dressed in his pontifical robes, was foremost in these
processions, and supported the fanaticism of the multitude, to whom he
dispensed a thousand benisons. On the other hand, Mendoza, the Spanish
ambassador, the same who, after the assassination of Henry, wrote to his
master, “We must ascribe this happy event to the Almighty alone”—Mendoza,
to divert the hunger of the deluded Parisians, distributed, in the name
of his Most Catholic Majesty Philip, some Spanish coin to the populace,
who, thus encouraged, raised the shout, “Long life to our king Philip!”
It is painful to think of all the horrors which this misguided people
endured while they listened to the persuasions of the priests to persist
in their rebellion. At last hunger, all-powerful hunger, proved stronger
than the king’s army. Famished Paris yielded, and Henry ascended the
throne of his ancestors.

Thus ended the League. Let us now see what share the Jesuits had in it.
Mezarai, speaking of the League, says, “The zealous Catholics were the
chief instruments in it; the new monks (the Jesuits) the paranymphs and
trumpeters; and the nobles of the kingdom the authors and chiefs.”[176]
From its very beginning, the Jesuits were the most ardent promoters of
the League. They ran from place to place, from country to country, to
enlist new supporters, and to strengthen the tie of the holy union.
Claude Matthieu, the Provincial, went several times from Paris to Rome,
to obtain the Pope’s approval of the holy union.[177] He was called
the messenger of the League; and Pasquier, in his old, quaint style, in
speaking of another Jesuit, says, “As the Company of the Jesuits was
composed of all sorts of people, _les uns pour la plume, les autres pour
le poil_, so they had among them one Father Henry Sammier, a man inclined
and adapted to all kinds of daring.[178] He was sent by the League in
1581 to various Catholic princes _pour sonder le gué_, to sound the ford;
and, to speak the truth, they could not have chosen a fitter man, for he
changed himself into as many different forms as the different affairs he
had to undertake—sometimes dressed as a trooper, sometimes as a priest,
sometimes as a simple beggar. He was acquainted with cards, dice, ...
as well as with his canonical hours; and in doing this, he said that he
could not sin, since it was to arrive at a good end.”[179] But, without
referring to ancient authors, two lines from Crétineau will say more
than we could. “It was at this epoch” (1584), says he, “that the League
acquired all its consistency, and it is at the same epoch that you may
see the Jesuits in Paris, Lyons, Toulouse, _joining the insurrection and
organising it_.”[180] And of this insurrection, or civil war, Pasquier,
an eye-witness, says,—“It was less a civil war than a _coupe-gorge_—a
cut-throat. The colleges of the Jesuits were, as was notorious, the
general rendezvous of persons hostile to the king. There were fabricated
their gospels in cipher—_se forgoient leurs Evangiles en chiffre_—which
they sent into foreign countries. There their apostles were distributed
among the different provinces, some, to keep the troubles alive by their
preaching, as did Father Commolet in Paris, and Father Rouillet at
Bourges; others, to preach murder and assassination, as did Father Varade
and the same Father Commolet.”[181] But we need not multiply quotations
to prove that they had a great share in exciting these troubles. They
themselves confess it with pride. In their _Litteræ Annuæ_ of 1589, they
represent the murder of the king as a miracle which happened the very
day they were expelled from Bordeaux. When Clement’s mother came to
Paris, the Jesuits called upon the people to worship her; the portrait of
the assassin, now called a martyr, was exposed on the altars to public
veneration, and they even proposed to erect a statue to him in the
cathedral of Notre Dame.

We will, however, admit that all the Jesuits were not fanatic Leaguers;
not because they disapproved of the League, but simply from good policy,
or from interested motives. Auger, the king’s confessor, and who wished
to be provincial, sided with his penitent; and the General Acquaviva,
the ablest and most profound politician of his time, disapproved of the
Society’s engaging so deeply with one party as to cause the ruin of the
order if the other triumphed. He forbade the Jesuits who were in France
to take part in the contest (which advice, however, they disregarded),
and begged permission of the Pope to command his subordinate Father
Matthieu to leave France, and betake himself to a distant country—which
clearly proves, that the Jesuits in France acted under the Pope’s own
authority. “But Sixtus V.,” says Crétineau, “was not so gentle as Gregory
XIII.; when he met an enemy, he fought with him; accordingly he answered
the General that the Leaguers acted very rightly, and only did their
duty.”[182] Acquaviva, however, was as jealous of his authority as the
imperious and terrible Sixtus. When Father Matthieu arrived at Loretto
on his return to France, the General ordered him not to leave the town
without his consent; and the poor messenger died a few months after, from
sheer inactivity. Auger, for reasons unknown to us, was recalled. Another
provincial, Father Pigenat, was sent to France—a man who, in the language
of De Thou, “was a furious Leaguer, and as fanatic as a Corybante,”
and who, according to Arnauld, “was the most cruel tiger that prowled
through Paris.” In fact, after his arrival, the Jesuits became still more
audacious, and engaged in more criminal proceedings.

After Henry IV. had abjured the Protestant faith, and when he was at
Melun, a man was arrested on suspicion of having come thither to make an
attempt upon his life. Barrière—such was the assassin’s name—to escape
the torture, acknowledged his guilt. He confessed that having consulted
with Aubrey, a curate of Paris, regarding his project, he was highly
commended, and sent to Varade, the rector of the Jesuits, who confirmed
him in his praiseworthy resolution, and gave him his benediction; that
next morning he confessed to another Jesuit, and received the communion.
Barrière repeated on the scaffold the declaration he had already made;
and Pasquier, who was at Melun at the time, declares that he had examined
the culprit, had read the informations and depositions, and even handled
the knife with which the crime was to have been perpetrated.[183] Mezarai
confirms the testimony of Pasquier in the most unequivocal manner.
“When the king,” says he, “had reduced Paris to submission, he gave a
safe-conduct to the Cardinal of Plaisance, who had acted with so much
energy against him, and granted him permission to take with him Aubrey,
curate of St André des Arcs, and the Jesuit Varade, although culpable of
participating in the horrible assassination of Barrière.”[184]

Barrière was executed, but his fate did not deter other fanatics from
making similar attempts, nor the Jesuits from giving them encouragement.
A few months after Henry had made his entrance into Paris, a youth of
nineteen, named John Chastel, raised an impious hand against the king.
The blow was aimed at his throat, but happening to bend his head at
the instant to salute one of his courtiers, it only wounded his lips.
Chastel was a student of philosophy in the Jesuits’ College under Father
Gueret. He confessed that “in the Jesuits’ house, he had been often
in the chamber of meditation, into which the Jesuits introduced the
greatest sinners, where they were shewn the pictures of devils and other
frightful figures to induce them to lead a better life, and, by working
upon their spirits, to induce them by these admonitions to perform some
extraordinary deed.” He further confessed that he had heard the Jesuits
say “that it was lawful to kill the king, since he was out of the
Church; and that no one ought to obey him, or acknowledge him as king,
till he should be approved of by the Pope.”[185] The murderer, on his
examination, boldly maintained this last proposition; and “this avowal,”
says Mezarai, “joined to the injurious libels against Henry III. and the
reigning king; joined to the ardour which the Jesuits had shewn for the
interests of Spain, and to the doctrines their preachers had propounded
against the security of the king, and against the ancient law of the
kingdom; joined also to the opinion held of them, that by means of their
colleges and auricular confession, they directed the minds of the youth
and timid consciences to whatever they pleased, gave an opportunity to
the parliament to involve the Society in his punishment.”[186] In fact,
the parliament, by the same _arrêt_ (29th Dec. 1594), by which Chastel
was condemned to the punishment of the parricide, enacted that “the
priests and scholars of Clermont College, and all others of the so-called
Society of Jesus, as corrupters of youth, disturbers of the public peace,
enemies to the king and the state, shall, three days after the present
intimation, be obliged to leave Paris and other towns and places where
they have colleges, and, within a fortnight after, the kingdom; under the
penalty, if found in France after that time, of being punished for high
treason. Their property, movable and immovable, shall be employed for
charitable purposes, and all the king’s subjects, under the same penalty,
are forbidden to send pupils to the colleges of the Society which are
beyond the territories of the kingdom.”[187]

All the Jesuits, except Fathers Gueret and Guinard, who were arrested,
were expelled from France. Gueret, against whom no substantial proofs
of being an accomplice with Chastel, could be produced, was soon after
liberated from prison and banished. This is a striking proof of the
justice and rectitude of the parliament. Guinard, in whose possession
were found most abominable writings, subversive of every principle of
justice and morality,[188] was condemned and executed; in conformity
with a proclamation issued some months before by the king, in which it
was ordered that all books and writings referring to the past troubles
should be burned, under pain of death. Crétineau confesses the fact, but
exculpates the man, by saying that these writings were composed in the
time of the League in the year 1589. But this assertion is contradicted
by the quotation we have given in the note, which shews that some of
them at least were composed after Henry’s abjuration, which occurred
four years later, in 1593. And again, if they _had_ been written at the
time specified, why did he not burn them, in obedience to the king’s
commandment?

Great horror was now felt throughout France at these repeated acts
of regicide, with an abhorrence of the Jesuits, as the well-known
instigators of such nefarious deeds. The parliament, the interpreter
here of the public opinion (Henry having gained over to him many of his
former opponents by his clemency and generosity), by another _arrêt_,
January 10, 1595, ordered that Chastel’s house should be destroyed,
and a pyramid be erected in its stead, to perpetuate the memory of his
infamy and that of his associates. In consequence, four inscriptions
were engraved on the four faces of this pyramid, in all of which, the
name of Chastel was coupled with that of the Jesuits. In the first
inscription, the assassin was described as impelled to the commission of
the crime “by the pestilential heresy of that new sect (the Jesuits),
which, concealing under the garb of piety the most atrocious crimes, had
of late taught that it was lawful to kill the king.” In the second was
the _arrêt_ of parliament, condemning Chastel and the Jesuits, part of
which we have already given. In the third, the senate and the people of
Paris congratulate the king on his having exterminated “that pestilential
sect” (the Jesuits). And the fourth inscription was, “A house once stood
here, which was destroyed for the guilt of one of its inhabitants, who
had been instructed in a school of impiety by perverse masters.”[189]
In 1605, the Jesuits were again powerful enough in France, to get the
pyramid demolished; and in 1606 a fountain was erected in its place.

And this seems to us to be the proper place to lay before our readers the
political creed of the Jesuits. Observe, the following extracts are taken
from none but their most approved authors, and such as are held in high
estimation among their brethren.

Emmanuel Sa. _Aphorismi Confessariorum._ (Venet. 1595. Coloniæ, 1616. Ed.
Coll. Sion).—“The rebellion of an ecclesiastic against the king is not a
crime of high treason, because he is not subject to the king.”

“He who tyrannically governs an empire, which he has justly obtained,
cannot be deprived of it without a public trial; but when sentence has
been passed, _every man may become an executor of it; and he may be
deposed by the people, even although perpetual obedience were sworn to
him, if, after admonition given, he will not be corrected_.”

John Bridgewater. _Concertatio Ecclesiæ Catholicæ in Anglia adversus
Calvino-Papistas._ (Augustæ Trevirorum, 1594.)—“If the kings be the first
to break their solemn league and oath, and violate the faith which they
have pledged to God, the people are not only permitted, but they are
required, and their duty demands, that, at the mandate of the Vicar of
Christ, who is the sovereign pastor of all the nations of the earth, the
fidelity which they previously owed or promised to such princes should
not be kept.”

Robert Bellarmine. _Disputationes de Controversiis Christianæ Fidei
adversus hujus temporis Hæreticos_, tom. I. (Ingolstadii, 1596. Parisiis,
1608. Ed. Mus. Brit.)—“The spiritual power, as a spiritual prince, may
change kingdoms, and transfer them from one sovereign to another, if it
should be necessary for the salvation of souls.”

“Christians may not tolerate an infidel or heretic king, if he endeavours
to draw his subjects to his heresy or infidelity. But it is the province
of the sovereign Pontiff, to whom the care of religion has been
intrusted, to decide whether the king draws them to heresy or not. It is
therefore for the Pontiff to determine whether the king is to be deposed
or not.”

John Mariana. _De Rege et Regis Institutione libri tres._ (Moguntiæ,
1605.... 1640. Ed. Mus. Brit.)—“It is necessary to consider attentively
what course should be pursued in deposing a prince, lest sin be added
to sin, and one crime be punished by the commission of another. This is
the shortest and the safest way;—_to deliberate, in a public meeting, if
it can be held_, upon what should be determined by the common consent,
and to consider as firmly fixed and established whatever may be resolved
by the general opinion. In which case, the following course must be
pursued. First of all, the prince must be admonished and brought back
to his senses. If he does not amend, begin by refusing to obey him;
... and, if necessary, destroy with the sword that prince who has been
declared a public enemy. But you will ask what is to be done if a public
meeting cannot be held, which may very frequently happen. In my opinion,
a similar judgment must be formed; for when the state is oppressed by the
tyranny of any of the princes, and the people are deprived of the power
of assembling, the _will_ to abolish the tyranny is not wanting, or to
avenge the manifest and intolerable crimes of the prince, and to restrain
his mischievous efforts: _I shall never consider that man to have done
wrong, who, favouring the public wishes, would attempt to kill him!_”

Gabriel Vasquez. _Comment. et Disput. in primam Partem, et primam
secundæ Summæ, S. Th. Aquinatis_, tom. II. (Ingolstadii, 1615. Antverpiæ,
1621. Ed. Coll. Sion.):—“If all the members of the royal family are
heretics, a new election to the throne devolves on the state. For all
his (the king’s) successors could be justly deprived of the kingdom by
the Pope; because the preservation of the faith, which is of greater
importance, requires that it should be so. But if the kingdom were thus
polluted, the Pope, as supreme judge in the matters of the faith, might
appoint a Catholic king for the good of the whole realm, and might place
him over it by force of arms if it were necessary. For, the good of the
faith and of religion, requires that the supreme head of the Church
should provide a king for the state.”

Busembaum and Lacroix. _Theologia Moralis, nunc pluribus partibus aucta
à R. P. Claudo Lacroix, Societatis Jesu._ (Coloniæ, 1757. Coloniæ
Agrippinæ, 1733. Ed. Mus. Brit.);—“A man who has been excommunicated
by the Pope may be killed anywhere, as Fillincius, Escobar, and Deaux
teach; because the Pope has at least an indirect jurisdiction over the
whole world, even in temporal things, as far as may be necessary for the
administration of spiritual affairs, as all the Catholics maintain, and
as Suarez proves against the King of England.”

Such were the principles and such the acts of the so-called soldiers
of Christ, and such the just punishment inflicted on their crimes. We
hardly find in history a sect, bearing the Christian name, convicted of
so many and such atrocious crimes—so publicly stigmatised and held up to
the just hatred of posterity. For if, in moments of feverish exaltation,
political or religious fanatics of every denomination have perpetrated
iniquitous and barbarous crimes, no other party has subsequently, in
calmer times, accepted the responsibility of these crimes, and praised
them as virtuous or meritorious actions. But there is no Jesuit, that I
know of, who has ever impugned or disclaimed the doctrines I have just
pointed out. My English readers ought seriously to meditate upon this
fact, and upon those doctrines, to which the Jesuits still firmly adhere.
Queen Victoria is in their eyes as much a heretic as Henry of Navarre,
and I have no doubt that they wish her to meet with the same fate. I am
an advocate for toleration, and abhor the very idea of persecution; but,
most assuredly, without persecuting those priests and Jesuits, the most
inveterate enemies of the Protestant religion, I would not countenance
them, or encourage and support them by grants of public money. Theirs is
not a religion of tolerance. They do not look upon other Christians as
brethren, holding different forms of belief, or as, at worst, persons
who have been misled by ignorance. No! in their view, every one who is
not a Roman Catholic is an accursed heretic, condemned already, and,
if he die in this condition, doomed to everlasting damnation. They are
not content to be received to the rights of citizenship on terms of
equality—they aspire to domination. What rights and privileges can they
reasonably claim from persons towards whom they cherish such sentiments?
Surely those Papists who would maintain their religion by persecution and
tyranny, ought to be thankful, if they are suffered to live at peace and
unmolested, in a Protestant country.


GERMANY.

While the Jesuits in France and in England, where the monarch was
adverse to them, not only propounded the doctrine of the sovereignty
of the people, but taught that every individual had a right to
murder the king if he were disliked by the nation or accursed by the
Pope—in Poland, Sweden, and Germany, where the population was adverse
and the sovereign friendly to them, they inculcated the contrary
doctrine, and did not scruple to enforce it by the most cruel and
violent proceedings. In France and in England, Henry and Elizabeth had
forfeited their thrones by holding the doctrines of the Reformation.
In Sweden, the Jesuits compelled the Roman Catholic Sigismond to swear
to maintain the Confession of Augsburg, that he might not be driven
from his kingdom.[190] But in those countries, the Jesuits, being in
close alliance with the civil power, were the cause of more mischief,
and greatly injured the cause of truth and religion. The introduction
of the Jesuits into the north of Europe was the signal for a powerful
reaction against Protestantism; and they not only checked its progress,
but, what is more strange, they succeeded in reviving an obsolete
doctrine—the temporal supremacy of the Roman Church, which, after having
for centuries governed almost the whole of Europe, had fallen into decay,
and ought not, according to the ordinary course of human institutions,
to exercise any further influence, since it had not undergone any
material change or acquired a new prestige. Yet such was the case. Many
were the requisites of success possessed by the Jesuits. Admirable
unity of purpose—versatility of character—unscrupulous pliability of
conscience—the confessional—the pulpit—the conviction that upon their
first success depended the duration of their order, and, it must be
added, their unexceptionable outward conduct, all rendered them in
the highest degree fit for their task. But, above all, it was by the
education of the youth, that they wrought such changes in Germany. It
was, in fact, for this purpose that they were first introduced into the
country. In one of the autograph letters that Ferdinand I. wrote to
Loyola, he declares it to be his opinion, that the only means by which
the declining tenets of Catholicism could be restored in Germany was,
to supply the youth with learned and pious Catholic teachers.[191] The
Jesuits entered into the king’s view with amazing activity and energy.
They established themselves in Vienna in 1551, and soon after had the
management of the university. Their second important establishment was
at Cologne; the third, at Ingolstadt; and from these three principal
points, they spread all over Germany. We think we cannot do better than
transcribe a passage from Ranke on the project:—

“The efforts of the Jesuits were above all directed towards the
universities. Their ambition was to rival the fame of those of the
Protestants. The education of that day was a learned one merely, and
was based exclusively on the study of the ancient languages. This the
Jesuits prosecuted with earnest zeal, and in certain of their schools,
they had very soon professors who might claim a place with the restorers
of classical learning. Nor did they neglect the cultivation of the exact
sciences. At Cologne, Franz Koster lectured on astronomy in a manner at
once agreeable and instructive. But their principal object was still
theological discipline, as will be readily comprehended. The Jesuits
lectured with the utmost diligence even during the holidays, reviving the
practice of disputations, without which they declared all instruction
to be dead. These disputations, which they held in public, were
conducted with dignity and decorum, were rich in matter, and altogether
the most brilliant that had ever been witnessed. In Ingolstadt, they
soon persuaded themselves that their progress in theology was such as
would enable the university to compete successfully with any other in
Germany. Ingolstadt now acquired an influence among Catholics similar
to that possessed among Protestants by Wittemberg and Geneva. They
next established schools for the poor—arranged modes of instruction
adapted to children—and enforced the practice of catechising. Canisius
prepared his catechism, which satisfied the wants of the learners by its
well-connected questions and apposite replies.

“This instruction was imparted entirely in the spirit of that fanciful
devotion, which had characterised the Jesuits from their earliest
establishment. The first rector in Vienna was a Spaniard named Juan
Victoria, a man who had signalised his entrance into the Society by
walking along the Corso of Rome, during the festivities of the carnival,
clothed in sackcloth, and scourging himself as he walked, till the blood
streamed from him on all sides. The children educated in the Jesuit
schools of Vienna were soon distinguished by their steadfast refusal of
such food as was forbidden on fast-days, while their parents ate without
scruple. In Cologne it was again become an honour to wear the rosary.
Relics were once more held up to public reverence in Treves, where for
many years no one had ventured to exhibit them. In the year 1560, the
youth of Ingolstadt belonging to the Jesuit school walked two and two
on a pilgrimage to Gichstadt, in order to be strengthened for their
confirmation ‘by the dew that dropped from the tomb of St Walpurgis.’
The modes of thought and feeling thus implanted in the schools, were
propagated by means of preaching and confession through the whole
population.”[192]

We add to all this, that their instructions were gratuitous, and that
the pupils made such rapid progress, that they were found to have learned
more in six months in a Jesuit school, than in two years anywhere else.
Many were the Protestants who sent their children to the Jesuit colleges:
and these children were kindly received by the masters, treated with
great indulgence, and premiums were freely bestowed upon them even in
preference to the Roman Catholic children. The Jesuits thus acquired an
immense influence, especially over the female part of the population,
who were proud of their children’s learning; while these imperceptibly
acquired a tinge of their masters’ doctrines and modes of thinking,
although in countries where the majority were Protestants, they were
expressly forbidden openly to propound them. Yet, notwithstanding all
these advantages, the Jesuits could not have hoped for such prodigious
success had it not been for the support they received from divers
sovereigns of the country. Perhaps we should be more correct in saying,
that these sovereigns called in the Jesuits to re-establish the ancient
religion.

At the commencement of the Reformation, even those German princes who
had not unreservedly embraced the new doctrines were exceedingly glad to
shake off the yoke of the Romish See; and, without separating themselves
from its communion, they made many concessions to their subjects, which
amounted in many places to toleration. Subsequently, however, the Popes
made them understand that by these concessions their sovereign authority
was greatly diminished, and that temporal princes and the head of the
Church were bound by a common interest to support each other. The princes
were easily persuaded to a policy which flattered their inclination to
despotism, and from that moment they not only resisted every new demand
for reform, but, to the utmost of their power, withdrew the concessions
they had formerly made. The first who entered upon this reactionary path
was Albert V. of Bavaria. Being in continual want of money to pay his
enormous debts, the estates would grant him no supplies without obtaining
in exchange some concessions, mostly of a religious kind. In this state
of things, Pius IV., through the medium of the Jesuits, and especially
of Canisius, persuaded him that any new concessions would diminish the
obedience of his subjects; and, in order to render him less dependent on
the estates, the Pope abandoned to him the tenth of the property of his
clergy.[193] The duke perceiving what advantage he might derive from a
closer alliance with the Court of Rome, decided at once to resist any
further demand, and firmly declared his intentions at the diet of 1563.
He found the prelates well disposed to second him; “and, whether it was
that the doctrines of a reviving Catholicism, and the activity of the
Jesuits, who insinuated themselves everywhere, had gained influence in
the cities, or that other considerations prevailed, the cities did not
insist as formerly upon religious concessions.”[194] The nobles only kept
up an opposition; but the duke, catching the opportunity of a sort of
conspiracy which he had discovered, deprived them of their right to seats
in the diet, and so became the almost absolute and uncontrolled master
of his people’s franchises. Then commenced the reaction. Encouraged
by the Jesuits, who had now acquired an unlimited influence over him,
Albert resolved not to leave a vestige of those new doctrines which for
the last forty years had been spreading so fast in his kingdom. All the
professors, all his household, all the civil officers—in a word, all
the public functionaries—were compelled to subscribe the _Professio
Fidei_ of the Council of Trent, and on their refusal, were immediately
dismissed. To obtain a recantation from the common people, he sent
through all his provinces swarms of Jesuits, accompanied by bands of
troopers, whose bayonets came to the aid of the preachers, when their
eloquence was unsuccessful in converting the heretics. The mildest
treatment the obstinate Protestants could expect, was to be expelled from
the duke’s estates without delay. Prohibited books were sought for in
the libraries, and burned in large numbers; those of a rigidly Catholic
character, on the contrary, were highly favoured. Relics were again held
in great veneration; and, in short, throughout the whole country were
revived all the ancient practices, all the absurd superstitions, of the
Popish religion. “Above all,” says Ranke, “the Jesuit institutions were
promoted; for by their agency it was, that the youth of Bavaria were to
be educated in a spirit of strict orthodoxy.”[195]

Duke Albert was now spoken of as the most bigoted Roman Catholic in
Germany, and became the protector of all those petty sovereigns who
wished to tread in his footsteps.

In Austria, although the reaction had long begun, coercive measures
against the Protestants were not resorted to till somewhat later. As we
have already said, Ferdinand invited the Jesuits to Vienna, and delivered
up to them the university as early as the year 1551. Soon after, he
established another Jesuit college at Prague, to which he sent his own
pages, and to which resorted all the nobility belonging to the Roman
communion. Colleges, and schools of less consequence, were established
throughout all the Austrian dominions, and great efforts were made to
win back the Protestants to the Romish faith. Yet, under the prudent and
conciliating Ferdinand I., and during the reign of the wise Maximilian,
the Jesuits could not obtain any severe persecuting measure against the
followers of the Reformed religion, but were more successful with Rodolph
II. Father Maggio, the Provincial of the Jesuits, was held by the emperor
in great estimation, and consulted in every matter of importance. He was
continually pressing the monarch to come to the resolution of completely
extirpating heresy from his dominions. The Pope’s legate and the Spanish
ambassador backed him in his intolerant demand. This bigoted prince at
last, under the pretence of a popular tumult, which took place on the
occasion of the procession of the Corpus Domini in 1578, banished from
his estates Opitz, a Protestant preacher, and all his assistants; and
this measure was the signal for a general persecution of the Lutherans.
The greatest atrocity and the utmost rigour were displayed in destroying
every trace of Protestantism.

In the first place, it was determined to extirpate Protestantism from the
imperial cities. The towns east of the Ens, which had separated from the
estates of the knights and nobles twenty years before, could offer no
resistance; the Reformed clergy were removed, and their places filled by
Catholic priests; private persons were subjected to a close examination.
A formula, according to which the suspected were interrogated, has come
into our possession. ‘Dost thou believe,’ inquires one of its articles,
‘that everything is true which the Church of Rome has laid down as the
rule of life and doctrine?’ ‘Dost thou believe,’ adds another, ‘that
the Pope is the head of the one Apostolic Church?’ No doubt was to
be endured. The Protestants were to be expelled from all offices of
state; none were admitted to the class of burghers who did not declare
themselves Catholics. In the universities, that of Vienna not excepted,
all who applied for a doctor’s degree were first required to subscribe
the _Professio Fidei_. A new regulation for schools was promulgated,
which prescribed Catholic formularies, fasts, worship, according to the
Catholic ritual, and the exclusive use of the Catechism of Canisius. In
Vienna, all Protestant books were taken away from the booksellers’ shops,
and were carried in heaps to the Episcopal court. Search was made at the
customhouses along the river; all packages were examined, and books or
pictures not considered purely Catholic were confiscated.[196]

All throughout Germany the same proceedings were resorted to, and
everywhere we find the Jesuits foremost in the reaction. There was no
bishop, no prince, who went to visit a province upon religious concerns,
who did not bring with him a troop of Jesuits, who, on his departure,
were often left there with almost unlimited powers.


POLAND.

If from Germany we pass to Poland, there also we meet the ominous
influence of the disciples of Loyola. “The Protestant cause,” says Count
Krasinski, in the fourth of his admirable _Lectures on Slavonia_, “was
endangered by the lamentable partiality which Stephen Batory had shewn to
the Jesuits; and the Romanist reaction, beginning under his reign, had
been chiefly promoted by the schools, which that order was everywhere
establishing.” Stephen, however, either too prudent to attack openly
the religion then professed, in Lithuania at least, by a great majority
of his subjects, or anxious to maintain, to a certain extent, religious
liberty, had recourse to no extraordinary measures for the furtherance of
this reaction, and contented himself with ordering that in future none
but strict Roman Catholics should be appointed to bishoprics. But under
the bigoted Sigismond—under that king, who, as the same learned Count
says, “gloried in the appellation of the king of the Jesuits, which was
given him by their antagonists, and who indeed became a mere tool in the
hands of the disciples of Loyola”—the reaction made fearful and continued
progress. Although Sigismond could attempt nothing by main force against
the liberties of his Protestant subjects, he had it in his power to
give, and he at last effectually gave, a mortal blow to the Reformed
religion. The chief prerogative of the Polish kings—we should perhaps
say, the only real power possessed by these nominal sovereigns—was the
right of conferring all dignities and official appointments. Twenty
thousand offices were at their disposal; and Sigismond declared that
none but strict Roman Catholics should be named to them. The favour of
the Jesuits was an essential condition of obtaining a situation under
the Government; and “the Starost Ludwig von Montager became Waivode of
Pomerellia, because he presented his house in Thorn to the Society of
Jesus.”[197] Many of the nobles who had professed the doctrines of the
Reformation, were induced to recant, depending exclusively as they did on
the king’s favour for the maintenance of their rank, and having no hope
for preferment while out of the pale of the Romish Church. The influence
of these examples, seconded by the rigorous measures subsequently taken
against the Lutherans, and, above all, by the diabolical cunning and
artifice of the Jesuits, in a short time brought back the great majority
of the Polish nation under the yoke of the Church of Rome.


SWEDEN.

In Sweden, the efforts of the Jesuits against Protestantism, although
no less active and vigorous, were less successful. John III., son of
the heroic Gustavus Vasa, on ascending the throne, published a ritual,
in which, to the great amazement and dismay of the Protestants, were
to be found not only ceremonies, but even doctrines of the Church of
Rome.[198] The Pope, apprised of this prince’s good disposition towards
his Church, despatched to Stockholm in all haste and secrecy, as his
legate, the famous Possevin, one of the cleverest and least scrupulous
among the Jesuits. To obviate the difficulty of obtaining admission
into the country and court of Sweden as Pope’s legate, Possevin, in
passing through Prague, induced the widow of the emperor Maximilian to
send him to Stockholm as her extraordinary ambassador. He assumed, in
consequence, another name, a splendid costume, and girded himself with
a sword, but, “to do penance in advance for these transient honours, he
went the greatest part of the way on foot.”[199] Acting publicly as the
envoy of the empress, he found means secretly to inform the king of his
real name and mission, and had several conferences with him. The result
was, that John was persuaded to make the _Professio Fidei_, according to
the formula of the Council of Trent, promising at the same time to take
measures, and to use all his endeavours, to induce the nation to follow
in the same path, provided the Pope would second him by making certain
concessions, the most essential of which were, that the sacramental cup
should be administered to the laity, and mass performed in the language
of the country. Possevin said that the Pope should be apprised of his
majesty’s will, and asked him whether he would submit to his decision
in this matter. John having answered in the affirmative, was absolved
of his sins, and received the sacrament according to the Roman Catholic
ritual.[200]

The Jesuit departed in high glee at his success, far surpassing his
most sanguine hopes. He hastened to Rome, and assuming a privilege in
use among ambassadors, he boasted of having achieved more than he had
really done, assuring Gregory XIII. that Sweden and its king were at
his Holiness’s mercy. He then laid before the Pope the conditions on
which John had insisted, but Gregory, either too intolerant to make any
concession, or considering it unnecessary to grant honourable terms to an
enemy who threw himself at his feet, refused to listen to such proposals,
and sent back the Jesuit to Stockholm, with letters to the king, in which
he required the monarch to declare himself a Catholic without restriction.

This imperious conduct saved Sweden from falling back under the Popish
rule. John, indignant at being held in so light account—indignant at the
assurance of Possevin, who unceremoniously entered Stockholm and the
court in the garb of his order as the Pope’s legate, and accompanied
by other Jesuits, as if Sweden had already become a Roman Catholic
country—moved by the remonstrances of the Protestant princes and divines,
who, in the interval of Possevin’s departure and return, had entreated
him to remain in their communion—dismissed the Pope’s ambassador, and
returned to the Reformed worship.

The attempts of the Jesuits to convert Sweden to the Roman faith were
revived with new vigour under John’s successor, Sigismond, the Polish
king. Fortunately, Charles of Sandermania, the king’s uncle, headed the
nation in its resistance to Sigismond’s Popish propensities; and although
the Jesuits had the sad glory of plunging Poland and Sweden into a bloody
war, the last-mentioned country remained Protestant.


SWITZERLAND AND PIEDMONT.

The Jesuits experienced some difficulty in entering Switzerland, and in
some parts of it they could not get footing; but towards the year 1574,
they established themselves in Friburg and Lucerne. They succeeded in
keeping back these two towns from the Alliance of Berne, and scattered
the flames of that religious discord between these cantons which was not
extinguished even by the blood that was shed at the instigation of the
Jesuits in 1845-47. The famous Canisius was the principal promoter and
founder of the College of Friburg, the resort, till lately, of a great
number of young men of the highest families, sent thither for education
from divers parts of Europe.

The cruelties exercised by Possevin against the inhabitants of the
Alps were most barbarous and revolting. Many Christians, driven out of
other countries by Popish persecution, had sought a refuge in these
almost inaccessible mountains, where the Waldenses still preserved the
religion of Christ in its primitive purity. They had hoped, in the
simplicity of their hearts, that there, far from the scene of conflict,
they would be permitted to worship God according to their consciences.
They were not dangerous persons—they were no chiefs of sects eager to
make proselytes—they were single-hearted people, seeking to please God
by living a pure and Christian life. It might have been expected that
their poverty, their innocence, their peaceful conduct, would have
sheltered them from any persecution; and, in fact, for a time they lived
unmolested. Unhappily for them, the Jesuits were watching them, and,
urged on by that persecuting spirit which led them to seek for victims
everywhere, were resolved to trouble them in their retreat, and, if
possible, to destroy them. Lainez, in 1560, despatched Possevin to Nice,
to Emmanuel Philebert, Duke of Savoy, to excite him to persecute those
heretic mountaineers. The Jesuit represented to the Duke that a Catholic
prince ought not, even though his own personal interest required it, to
tolerate that the heresy should establish itself in his dominions, and
that the mountains of Piedmont and the Alps, in particular, served for
a retreat to the sectaries of Luther and Calvin.[201] Possevin succeeded
in bringing the duke into his abominable views. Ferrier, the governor of
Pignerol, commenced a chase against these inoffensive people, who were
hunted from one retreat to another, and when taken, were mercilessly and
inhumanly consigned to the flames. Driven to despair they took up arms,
resolved hereafter to sell their lives at the dearest price. A body of
troops was sent against them. The General, the Sieur de la Trinité,
placed them at the disposal of Possevin, and the Pope’s nuncio conferred
upon him the powers with which he pretended to be invested.[202] The
Jesuit, forgetful of his sacerdotal calling, repressing every feeling of
humanity, put himself at the head of a chosen body of troops, and hunted
down these poor Christians as if they were wild beasts, putting every
one who fell into his hands to the sword. Then, when he was tired of the
work of slaughter, to procure for himself a sort of triumph, he brought
to Vercelli, in solemn procession, thirty-four of those unfortunates,
who, not having faith or strength enough to prefer martyrdom to apostasy,
publicly abjured their religion in the presence of the duke and the
Jesuit.[203] From that day till very lately, the house of Savoy has more
or less persecuted the Waldenses.

Our Protestant readers, we presume, have by this time learned what
malignant and unrelenting enemies of their religion the Jesuits have
always been. They must have learned that all the north of Europe, and
France itself, perhaps, would have become Protestant countries, had
it not been for the demoniacal arts and ill-employed activity of the
disciples of Loyola. They must, further, be aware that the Jesuits did
not obtain those results by honest means only, by force of argument,
or by active and earnest exertions, which would have at least entitled
them to the approbation and esteem of all Roman Catholics, but they had
recourse to perjury, to murder, to persecution, to cruelties of every
kind—to means, in short, involving the perversion of every principle of
morality, for which they at last came to be abhorred by every honest
person, even of their own persuasion. Lastly, it clearly appears, from
what we have related, that, while pretending to fight for the Roman
See, the Jesuits, in reality, fought for their own aggrandisement; that
they recognise no religion, but their interest; worship no God, but
their order. We must, finally, remind our readers that we have omitted
numberless other charges which are generally brought against them, which
we consider well founded, but which we cannot satisfactorily prove.
All that we have advanced we have proved, according to our promise,
by documents of unquestionable authenticity, and we shall continue to
observe this rule to the conclusion of our history.



CHAPTER X.

1581-1608.

COMMOTION AMONG THE JESUITS.


In relating the proceedings of the Jesuits in divers countries of Europe,
we have not mentioned Spain; first, because, though firmly established in
that country, they, under the absolute Philip II., exercised no influence
whatever over its general policy; and, secondly, because we had it in
reserve to speak of their proceedings in that country in the present
chapter.

In Spain the Jesuits had no heretics to contend with—no zeal or
fanaticism to excite. If now and then some Christianised Jew or Moor
relapsed into his former belief, the Inquisition was too jealous of her
privilege of roasting those accursed of God, in a solemn _auto da fè_,
to permit the Jesuits to meddle in the holy ceremony. Having thus no
external enemy to contend with, they, as usually happens, fell out among
themselves, and fought with one another.

The so-called Society of Jesus having been mostly established by
Spaniards, the Spanish Jesuits pretended that all the honours and
dignities of the order were exclusively due to them. A first blow was
dealt to these pretensions when, by the interference of the Pope, a
General was chosen who was not a Castilian. However, since Mercurianus,
the person elected, was old and weak, they submitted without much
reluctance to an authority they did not dread. But when the fifth
General Congregation chose for General a Neapolitan nobleman, young,
active, and enterprising, they broke out into open revolt. This General,
elected in 1581, was Claude Acquaviva, son of the Duke of Atri, only
thirty-seven years of age at the time of his election. Acquaviva was,
and has remained, the _beau idéal_ of Jesuitism. He had grown up in
the Court of Rome, where he was chamberlain, and where he acquired a
thorough knowledge of men, and of all political intrigues, in which
the Roman curia at that epoch excelled all the other courts of Europe.
He was crafty, insinuating, persevering. He never uttered a precise
command, but never suffered his exhortations to be disregarded. Gentle in
appearance, and renowned for the amenity of his manners, he was endowed
with an inflexible intrepidity of character. He spoke rarely, never gave
a decided opinion, and preserved in all circumstances a placid and calm
demeanour. His family had been from of old attached to the French party,
and he followed the same line of policy. As we have seen, he disapproved
of the League, and gave other tokens of his attachment to the French
interest, without, however, openly committing himself with the other
party. Such was Acquaviva.

[Illustration: _Claude Aquaviva._

_Hinchliff._]

At the news of Acquaviva’s election, the old Jesuits of Spain,
incensed in the highest degree, broke out in loud complaints first,
refused afterwards obedience to his orders, lastly rebelled openly,
and asked that the members residing in Spain should be governed by a
commissary-general independent of Rome. Philip, to cast a reproach upon
Acquaviva, whom he detested on account of his partiality to the French
king, sided with the malcontents. The General faced the storm in the best
manner he could. First of all, he contrived, by promises of advancement
and honours, to retain in his interest some of the less compromised among
the rioters; secondly, he sent into the Peninsula new provincials and
superiors, the most of whom were Neapolitans, young (a class of Jesuits
who worshipped him), and firmly attached to his fortunes, with strict
injunctions to enforce obedience to his orders. Some of the Jesuits, in
the hope of making their way to preferment, submitted; the most refused
obedience, and had recourse to the Inquisition and the king. Philip
ordered the Bishop of Carthagena to subject the order to a visitation,
and the Inquisition arrested the provincial Marcenius, and two or three
more members of Acquaviva’s party; the latter being accused by the other
party of absolving the members of their order from certain sins from
which the Inquisition only could absolve; and those sins, Sacchini tells
us, consisted in the attempt to corrupt the honesty of their penitents.
This was rather a serious matter, and menaced the Society in its very
existence. Nevertheless, Acquaviva was not appalled. He did not lose his
self-command, nor vent his anger in threats. Against such enemies he had
but one shield—the Pope. Sixtus V. filled the chair of St Peter; he bore
no goodwill to the order, but he was jealous to an extreme degree of his
own authority, and wished that that of others also should be respected.
Acquaviva persuaded Sixtus, or, to speak more correctly, insinuated to
him, that the blow was aimed not so much at him, the General, as at the
supremacy of Rome; at the same time skilfully making him understand,
that the Bishop of Carthagena was of illegitimate birth, a blemish which
he knew the Pope abhorred above all things. Sixtus at once recalled
the assent which he had given to the visitation, and commanded the
Inquisition to set at liberty the arrested Jesuits, and to remit the
whole case to Rome. When he was informed that the holy tribunal refused
to obey his orders, Sixtus became furious with anger, and directed a
letter to be written to Cardinal Quiroga, the Grand Inquisitor, to which
he added, in his own handwriting, “And if you do not obey, I, the Pope,
shall immediately depose you from your office of inquisitor, and tear
from your head your cardinal’s hat.” This decided language produced the
desired effect. Sixtus’s orders were obeyed, and Acquaviva, under the
shadow of the Pope’s authority, maintained himself unshaken in his high
office during Sixtus’s lifetime.

But the storm, which had been but momentarily quelled, broke out again
after the death of Sixtus, with increased violence. In 1592, while the
General was absent from Rome, Philip, who never forgave to Acquaviva his
partiality for the French interest, sent the Pope a petition from all
the Spanish Jesuits, praying for a general congregation of the order; he
himself, at the same time, strongly recommending the measure. Clement
VIII., the reigning Pope, granted their request, and before even the
General could be aware of his enemies’ manœuvres, the Pope issued orders
for the meeting of the congregation. Acquaviva, satisfied that the
measure was now irrevocable, submitted to it with the greatest possible
good grace, and having used his utmost endeavours that the election
should not prove too unfavourable to him, the moment the congregation
opened, he, without waiting to be accused, requested that his conduct
should be examined and judged. A commission was immediately appointed to
receive any accusation or complaint that might be brought against the
General. But Acquaviva was far too prudent to have violated any essential
rule, or to have given his enemies the right of consistently impeaching
his private conduct; so that, as no charge could be substantiated against
him, he was triumphantly acquitted. Philip, however, insisted that some
restraint should be put upon the General’s authority, and, although the
congregation refused to comply with the king’s wishes, the Pope, in the
plenitude of his apostolic power, ordained that the superiors and rectors
should be changed every third year, and that, at the expiration of every
sixth year, a general congregation should be assembled. Acquaviva shewed
a great readiness to acquiesce in the Pope’s decrees, but he rendered
them almost nugatory by other ordinances; and as a new generation of
Jesuits, all devoted to his interests, was now grown up, all questions
taken up both by the provincial and general congregations, were decided
in accordance with his wishes. By his letter on the happy increase of
the Society, Acquaviva prescribed new rules to render the superiors more
respected by their subordinates, and more submissive to the General.
A second letter, _ratio studiorum_, which contains a complete code of
school legislation, was of still greater importance, and productive of
more momentous results. As the education of the young has been one of
the principal and immediate causes of the Jesuits’ immense power and
influence, we feel obliged to devote some few pages to this important
matter.

Had the Jesuits devoted themselves to the work of education for the sole
and noble end of diffusing knowledge and intellectual culture among
the people, no praise would be adequate to their meritorious exertions
and unremitting activity. Such, however, was not exactly the case. The
Order—that idol which the Jesuit must have constantly before his eyes—was
in this, as in every other undertaking, the great object to which their
labours were consecrated; and for its honour and advantage they did
not hesitate to sacrifice, when necessary, every other consideration.
Nevertheless, in a literary point of view, we shall not refuse to them
some eulogy.

“The instruction of boys and of ignorant people in Christianity” was one
of the ends which they proposed to attain, and for which Loyola asked
Paul III. to approve his order. The example of John III. of Portugal,
and of the Duke of Candia, who first erected colleges for the fathers,
was eagerly imitated by many. Their colleges increased rapidly, and were
soon planted all over the world, so that there were no less than 669
of them at the epoch of the suppression of the order. We have already
seen (pp. 40, 41) by what allurements wealthy persons were induced by
the Jesuits to leave their property to Jesuit establishments. These were
of two kinds, seminaries and colleges, the members of the latter being
subdivided into gymnasium and faculty-students. In connexion with each
college there was a boarding-house, whither parents were happy to send
their children as under a safe shelter from the storms of passion, and
from the dangerous society of depraved companions. In their seminaries
were trained up the Scholars—those members of the order who were thought
to be possessed of such talents as to qualify them to fulfil afterwards
the office of professor. But the most numerous class, and perhaps the
most useful for their purpose, was the class of day scholars. It is well
known that all persons, of whatsoever rank, are admitted into the Jesuit
schools, and receive the same instructions. At school hours the prince’s
son, who is brought up in their boarding-houses, descends and takes his
seat on the same bench with the son of a cobbler. And this we consider
an admirable and most instructive plan. The only obligation imposed on
the day scholars is, that they must give in their names, and promise to
observe the rules of the college, which are everywhere uniform, and which
oblige the pupil to hear mass every day, and to go to the confessional
once every month. In former times, the Jesuits undertook a still more
watchful oversight of this class. They visited them at unwonted hours in
their abodes, they had them followed in their different movements, and
if they were found guilty of any misdemeanour they were reprimanded, and
their faults were made an obstacle to their advancement to academical
honours. It is, however, worthy of remark, that Loyola, the clear-sighted
Loyola, foreseeing that the obligation to follow the rules of the college
would deter Protestants from sending their children to it, and wishing
above all things to get hold of those children and to try what the
Jesuits could do to convert them, had taken care to leave an opening for
their admission. To the third paragraph of the thirteenth chapter of
the fourth part of the Constitution, in which is enacted that the day
scholars shall engage to observe the rules of the college, he added the
following note:—“If any of those who present themselves to our schools
will neither engage to observe the rules nor give in his name, he ought
not for that reason to be prevented from attending the classes, provided
he conduct himself with propriety, and do not cause either trouble or
scandal. Let them be made aware of this; adding, however, that they
shall not receive the peculiar care which is given to those whose names
are inscribed in the register of the university or of the class, and
who engage to follow its rules.”[204] This is a characteristic specimen
of Jesuitical policy. By absolutely refusing to admit the children of
Protestants, they would obtain no result; but by admitting them on such
terms, they obtain an opportunity of influencing their youthful minds,
and bending them to their purpose indirectly. On the one hand, such
pupils cannot but imbibe, in the ordinary course of instruction, the
principles and spirit of their masters; and on the other, their pride
is mortified at never being considered or mentioned at those public
exhibitions which form so important a part of the Jesuit system of
education. This artful policy is too frequently successful. Oftentimes
the parents, jealous of their children’s renown, and anxious to see them
surrounded by those affectionate and friendly cares which the Jesuits
unsparingly bestow upon the regular pupils, are induced to consent that
they shall follow the rules of the college, and go to mass and to the
confessional, and even change their own faith, the better to secure for
them these desired advantages: and if it should chance that the mother
alone is left as guardian, it commonly happens that both mother and son
become Roman Catholics.

In the Jesuit schools the greatest order reigned. The Jesuit masters were
men of polite and agreeable manners, in general of a _comely appearance_,
with a cheerful and smiling countenance. They descended with a winning
affability to the level of their pupils, and accommodated their language
and manners to the capacities and dispositions of the _class of persons_
they had to deal with. The parents, who were highly pleased with the
polished manners and the high attainments of their children, sounded
forth the praises of their kind instructors far and wide, and repaid
their gratuitous instructions sometimes by large donations, always by
a deference and devotion never withdrawn. It is an incontestable fact,
that even Protestants and philosophers, who had been educated in these
seminaries, and who afterwards became the most hostile to the Jesuits as
a religious community, continued to preserve a grateful recollection of
their Jesuit teachers. Voltaire himself dedicated his tragedy _Merope_
to his dear master Father Porée; and the different princes who were
brought up by the Jesuits never lost, when on the throne, that affection
and veneration which they had conceived for their kind instructors at
an age when generous minds are most susceptible of noble and generous
impressions.

Nor was this all. Another strong link, that of religion, was added to
the chain of sympathy by which they bound their pupils to the order, and
insured for themselves in the different nations of Europe an all-powerful
and irresistible influence. In 1569 the Jesuit Leon, a teacher, thought
of assembling during the interval of studies such of the boys as were
willing to sing the praises of the Virgin, and perform certain external
acts of devotion, contributing at the same time, monthly, small sums
of money, part of which was employed in works of charity, the merit
of the action being always attributed, not to the donors, but to the
Jesuits. These meetings took the form of associations, and increased
so rapidly, that fifteen years after, in 1584, Gregory XIII. erected
them into primary congregations, under the title of _Congregations of
the Holy Virgin_. “These congregations, of which the General of the
order was the supreme director, soon broke out from the walls of the
colleges with those young men who left them to embrace a career, and who
wished to remain in a communion of prayers and remembrances with their
masters and their fellow-scholars. They became a link of connexion and
friendship; they spread in Europe and in India; they united in the same
association the east and the west, the populations of the north and of
the south. They had statutes, rules, prayers, and duties in common. It
was a numerous brotherhood, extending from Paris to Goa, and descending
from Rome to the most insignificant hamlet. The congregations of Avignon,
of Antwerp, of Prague, of Friburg, were the most celebrated. There were
congregations composed of ecclesiastics, of military men, of magistrates,
of nobles, of burgesses, of merchants, of artisans, of servants, all
occupied in good and meritorious works.”[205] With the exception of this
last clause, this description is perfectly true. A Jesuit was at the head
of every congregation. At appointed times the members met together to
repeat the office of the Virgin, and to listen to whatever exhortation or
advice the Jesuit might think proper to give. His influence was greater
or less, according to the quality of persons composing the congregation.
Over the poor and the ignorant he had an almost absolute control, and
whatever he enjoined, they unscrupulously obeyed. If he exercised no such
absolute control over members of the higher classes, he still possessed a
great influence over them, and had free access to their families, where
he more leisurely practised those arts by which the Jesuit very seldom
fails to attain his ends. One is amazed when he considers what immense
power these congregations must have given the General of the society. His
orders, his curses or commendations of a book, of a man, or of a measure,
were repeated in the same tone throughout all the world by tens of
thousands, who considered it a sin to disbelieve his word, or to disobey
his commands. No wonder, then, that the Court of Rome itself was obliged
to submit to the ascendancy of the Jesuits, and that the suppression of
the order was with difficulty effected by the united efforts of almost
all the sovereigns of Europe.

After the order was suppressed, and during the political turmoil and the
unsettled state of Europe, the congregations, although kept up secretly
by some disguised Liguorist or Jesuit, were thinly attended, and had lost
all their importance. But after the restoration of the Pope and of the
Bourbons, missionaries of all kinds overran the whole of Italy, Spain,
and part of France, and, among other religious exploits, re-established
the congregations of the Virgin. Congregations both of men and women
are now very numerous, although they perhaps want that unity of purpose
and of direction, which in former times rendered them so dangerously
powerful. Their denominations are numberless; congregations of the
Rosary, congregations of the Assumption of the Virgin, congregations of
the Blood of Jesus (del Sangue di Gesù). In those places where there are
no Jesuits, they are directed by proxy, some other religious community,
as the Liguorist, the Lazarist, the Passionist, or such like idle and
corrupted crew, being appointed to that duty. In church affairs, the
members of these congregations have, so to speak, privileges above the
rest of the citizens. They go foremost in the processions and other
exhibitions; they wear a distinctive badge; they are entitled to a
greater number of days of indulgence, and so on. Besides these things,
which satisfy the devotional feeling, and flatter the vanity, especially
that of the common people in small towns, each individual member may
count upon receiving the protection and indirect assistance of the father
director.

The boarders in the Jesuit college are subjected to almost the same mode
of life as that of the Scholars (the second class of Jesuits), which,
however, is not strictly conformable to that of the other classes;
Loyola having given them a dispensation from some external practices,
acts of devotion and of mortification, that they may have more time for
study.[206] The boarders are placed in large rooms, called in Italian
_Camerate_, in French _Chambres_, each of which accommodates from
fifteen to twenty, who are under the superintendence of a _Prefetto_
and _Vice-prefetto_. At six in the morning a bell gives the signal for
rising. The prefect immediately chants some prayers, which are repeated
by some of the youths who are less asleep than the rest. Half an hour
is allowed for dressing; an hour is spent in the chapel, hearing mass,
and singing the praises of the Virgin and St Ignatius. Study follows,
and after breakfast, for which half an hour is allowed, they descend to
the public schoolroom, where they mix with the day-boarders, with whom,
however, they have no opportunities of secret converse. Two pupils, and
every day different ones, are secretly charged by the prefect to give
an account of the behaviour of all the others, and they are punished if
they are not accurate in their denunciations. At twelve they sit down to
dinner, during which ascetic books are read from a pulpit placed in the
refectory. After the evening school, they walk for an hour in winter, two
in summer, and almost double that time on holidays. Before supper, half
an hour is again spent in the chapel; and what remains of the evening
after supper is spent in study and recreation. At nine o’clock, being
warned by the ringing of the bell, they prepare for rest, accompanying
the prefect in chanting the Litany of the Virgin. No one is allowed to
go from one _camerata_ to another, without the express permission of the
prefect or vice-prefect, one of whom must accompany him. No one, not
even a parent, is allowed to visit a boarder without the consent of the
superior, who is almost always present at the interview. No letter can be
sent off or received by any boarder but it must pass through the hands of
the rector, who stops it if he thinks proper. The boarders never go home
except during the holidays in September, and some remain in the college
even during that period. The consequence is, that the influence of the
family is gradually destroyed, and the Jesuits mould these youthful
hearts and intellects according to their own Jesuitical pattern. Every
fortnight all the boarders must go to the confessional, and severe
punishment is inflicted on those who transgress this principal rule of
the college. But no one ever dares to brave the punishment, though many
do not scruple to evade the duty by practising a little ruse.[207]

In all the Jesuit colleges, as we have already observed, reigns the
greatest decency, and a sort of military order and discipline, which
is highly pleasing to the young. “Their colleges were open for all
the graceful arts. Even dancing and fencing were not excluded. The
annual distribution of prizes was preceded not only by tragedies full
of political allusions, but also by _ballets_ composed by the reverend
fathers, and executed by the most agile of their pupils.”[208]

No pains were spared by the Jesuits to advance their pupils in their
studies. But as the end which they taught them to have in view was not
_the truth_—as it was not their purpose to inspire their young minds
with those noble and generous sentiments which form great citizens,
but only to instruct them in their peculiar doctrines, and render them
subservient to their order, the whole course of instruction was directed
to the attainment of these ends, and the progress of their pupils was
more brilliant than solid—partook more of a theatrical character than
of a serious method of learning that would have developed the power of
reason and reflection. In the speculative sciences especially, their
instruction was most defective. The student was by no means taught to
penetrate the superficial crust of prejudices and appearances on which
the mass of mankind build their opinions, and to descend into the
deeper essence of philosophy; but his attention was chiefly directed
to the art of disputing in pitiable syllogism upon some of their
established principles. The most fantastical, and, at the same time,
attractive questions, were proposed for public disputation; and to that
incessant fencing of _nego_, _concedo_, _distinguo_, &c., the apprentice
philosopher was taught to give all his attention, and, in the display
of ability in this exercise, to place all his glory. The Jesuits, so
celebrated as casuists, cannot boast of any great philosopher. If some
of their pupils acquired a great name in science or in literature, they
owed it to their own creative power, which broke out from that sort of
magic circle which had been described around them. They became great, not
because they had had good masters, but, on the contrary, because they had
followed no other master than their own inventive genius. And this is
always the case—the Dantes, the Bacons, the Shakspeares, had no masters.
The Jesuits cultivated, with more success, archæology, numismatics, and
the study of languages. They have especially rendered important services
to the study of the classics, which they strongly recommended as the most
effectual requisite of a good education. But even to their labours in
this department of learning we cannot render unqualified praise.

Literature forms the principal part of the education of a people. Greece
and Rome owe their civilisation and grandeur to their poets and orators
more than to anything else. With the Eschyluses, the Demostheneses,
the Horaces, and the Ciceros, disappeared the glory, the liberty, the
civilisation, of the two nations. And if now and then some privileged
intelligences, such as Tacitus and Plutarch, appeared on the scene,
they could not give a tone to the age, both because they stood alone,
and because they were the reflection, not of their own, but of bygone
times, and that all the elements of the expiring civilisation were
concentrated, we may say, in themselves alone. For it is not to the
excellence of the form that literature is indebted for its power; it is
rather to its being a vivid representation of the thoughts and feelings,
the opinions and sentiments, the hopes and fears, which constitute the
life of a nation, and which the writers powerfully exhibit because they
themselves are powerfully moved by them. It was by their possessing
this excellence in the highest degree that the classical writers of
antiquity contributed to form the character of their countrymen; and
it is this which forms the chief attraction of their works to the
modern student, and which renders them so efficient an instrument for
developing the powers of the youthful mind. Now, how can a Jesuit, who
has no country, no family, no affection, no history, nothing in which
to glory but his order—how can such a man impart to young minds those
noble sentiments, those inspirations, which form the essential part of
classical literature? “How,” exclaims our Gioberti,[209] “how shall the
youth love and admire the heroes of Plutarch if they are made known
to him by a Jesuit?[210] because,” most judiciously adds the Italian
philosopher, “even if the pupils can repeat the half of Demosthenes or
of Cicero, the lesson cannot produce any good effect on their tender
minds, if it is not assisted by the voice, by the manners, by the
examples, of the interpreter; so that the soul and the life of the
master ought to be a mirror and image of that ideal world into which
he introduces the pupil.” In fact, the Jesuits gave all their attention
merely to the external form of their compositions. Purity of language,
elegance of style, correctness of expression, are, generally speaking,
the distinctive characteristics of the writings of the Jesuits and their
pupils. But their writings are devoid of invention, of bold and luxuriant
images, of earnest and passionate expressions, and the care they take to
publish their style renders them affected and often ridiculous. No doubt
there are honourable exceptions; and Bartoli, for example, Segneri, and
Bourdaloue, may be classed among the first Italian and French writers.
The Jesuits exercised rather the memory than the intelligence of the
pupil, who not seldom was able to recite volumes of which he hardly
understood a word. Their greatest merit consisted in rendering study
pleasing; and many of their pupils owe their fame and greatness, not to
the information, but to the love of learning, they had acquired in their
schools.

The _Ratio Studiorum_ regulated with great precision the method of
instruction in its most minute details, and has ever since been the code
followed by the Jesuits to our day.

Meanwhile a great change had taken place in the general policy of
the Society. Through Acquaviva’s influence, the order, at least as
represented by its officials in Rome, and by the young generation of
Jesuits who were devoted to the General, had passed from the Spanish into
the French camp; and ever after, the Jesuits were in a great measure
opposed by the Spanish and supported by the French court. Let us see how
it happened.

The Jesuits had only partially obeyed the _arrêt_ of the Parliament of
Paris which expelled them from France. They resided publicly in many
provinces: secretly and in disguise everywhere. Following the suggestions
of their General, they had changed their language and their conduct,
and, from being furious Leaguers, were become zealous partisans of Henry
IV. “Cardinal Tolet has done wonders, and has shewn himself a good
Frenchman,” wrote the French ambassador, Cardinal du Perron, to the
minister Villeroy.[211] In fact, he, more than any other person, had
contributed to obtain Henry’s absolution. Acquaviva refused to accept,
without Henry’s consent, two new colleges which were offered to the order
by some town of Languedoc, where the Jesuits had been maintained by the
local parliament. He, the General, and the Pope, the king’s best friends,
as they called themselves, pressed him hard to restore the Jesuits, who,
on their part, promised him the same obedience, the same devotion, they
had till then shewn to the King of Spain. Above all, they offered to
uphold his royal authority in all its extent, which was then impugned
by the Huguenots. Henry was in a very perplexing position. He stood in
need of the Pope’s support against the rival house of Austria. He felt
the necessity of shewing himself a zealous Catholic, and he wished to
secure, if possible, the support of such men as the Jesuits. On the other
hand, he knew what dangerous and perfidious guests they were; and the
parliament, the greatest part of the clergy, and all his ministers, were
adverse to the Society. Sully, the great minister and faithful friend
of Henry, has handed down to us the sentiments of his royal master on
this subject. “I do not doubt,” said the prince to Sully, “that you can
easily combat this first reason, but I do not think that you will even
attempt to refute the second, namely, that by necessity I am compelled
to do one of these two things—either simply to recall the Jesuits, free
them from the infamy and disgrace with which they are covered, and put
to the test the sincerity of their oaths and of their splendid promises;
or to expel them in a more absolute manner, using against them all the
rigour and severity that can be thought of to prevent them from ever
approaching either my person or my estates; on which supposition there is
no doubt but that we shall drive them to despair, and to the resolution
of attempting my life, which would render it so miserable to me, being
always under the apprehension of being poisoned or murdered (for those
people have correspondents everywhere, and are very dexterous in
disposing the minds of men to whatever they wish), that I think it would
be better to be already dead, being of Cæsar’s opinion, that the sweetest
death is that which is least expected and foreseen.”[212] In conformity
with this opinion, Henry, in 1603, issued letters-patent for the
re-establishment of the Jesuits, and _forced_ the reluctant parliament to
register them. To Acquaviva he wrote a warm letter, assuring him of his
friendship, and expressing to the then convened congregation his wishes
that the original Constitutions should not be altered, and this letter in
great part checked the influence of the Spanish party, who asked for a
reform, and were supported by the Spanish court.[213]

In the affair of Venice, the two courts shewed the same dispositions. It
does not enter into the plan of this work to narrate the particulars of
this famous contest, except in so far as the Jesuits were concerned in
it, and it belongs to their history; and this we proceed to do as shortly
as possible.

Long had the difference lasted between the Roman See and the Venetian
government, the first asserting many privileges of the Church over state
affairs, the latter denying them. The Jesuits upheld the exorbitant
pretensions of Rome with the utmost pertinacity. Now, it happened, while
both parties were exasperated against each other, two priests, accused of
infamous crimes, were, by order of the Venetian government, arrested, and
delivered up to the ordinary tribunals. The Pope was highly incensed at
this proceeding, and contended that the republic had no right to arrest
any ecclesiastic, who was subject to none but ecclesiastical authority.
The Jesuits were the most zealous of the clergy in maintaining this
principle. The famous Bellarmine asserted, that “the priesthood has its
princes who govern, not only in spiritual, but also in temporal matters.
It could not possibly acknowledge any particular temporal superior. No
man can serve two masters. It is for the priest to judge the emperor, not
the emperor the priest. It would be absurd for the sheep to pretend to
judge the shepherd.”[214] The republic, on the other hand, asserted her
sovereign rights. Paul V. was in the Papal chair, a man who considered
the canonical law as the word of God, and was ready to excommunicate
whosoever dared to disregard its authority. He laid Venice under an
interdict, which, as most of our readers are aware, would have shut
up all the churches, and prevented the performance of all religious
services within its bounds. The government, however, that the public
tranquillity might not be disturbed, summoned before them all the clergy,
both regular and secular, and offered them the alternative, either
to officiate, as in ordinary times, or to leave the territory of the
republic immediately. They did not hesitate for an instant; not a single
copy of the Papal brief was fixed up, and public worship was everywhere
conducted as before. The Jesuits, however, in obedience to the Pope’s
command, transmitted by their General, departed from the Venetian States,
ostentatiously carrying with them the consecrated host, as if they would
shew, says Gioberti, that God went into exile along with them. When the
dispute between Rome and the republic was afterwards settled, the senate
refused, though requested, to re-admit the Jesuits. In vain the Pope, and
above all, Henry IV., who sent the Cardinal Joyeuse to Venice on purpose,
used all their influence to procure the re-establishment of the fathers.
The republic, encouraged in her resolution by the court of Spain, would
in no way yield on this point, and it was only in 1657 that, in exchange
for pecuniary advantages and the support of the Pope in the war of
Candia, the Jesuits were allowed, under many restrictions, to re-enter
the Venetian states.[215]

By this time Acquaviva had established his authority more firmly than
ever. The congregations had supported him; the revolt had been quelled;
the rioters punished; and peace for the moment restored to the Society.
“Acquaviva, so to speak, had gone through the iron age of the company—his
successor was destined to govern in the golden age.... All, during a
century, bestowed smiles upon the Company of Jesus. She became the
favourite of the Popes and the kings—the confidant of their ministers—the
director of the public spirit. All took inspiration from her—all returned
to her as to its source.”[216] But, notwithstanding this flattering
and in part true picture, the order had received a shock, the effect
of which was soon to be made manifest. To govern the revolted province
of Spain, Acquaviva, violating the fundamental law of the order, had
appointed professed members as administrators of colleges, while, to meet
the necessity of the moment, coadjutors fulfilled the duties assigned
by the Constitution to the professed. This ultimately proved the ruin
of the order. Besides this, Mariana[217] and Henriquez, two influential
Spanish Jesuits, out of hatred to Acquaviva, had pointed out many abuses
which had crept into the community, and bitterly inveighed against the
tyranny of the General and a few of the higher functionaries. This had
an immediate result most injurious to the order. Under the successors of
Acquaviva, these seeds of revolt and disobedience spread so fast, that
when, towards the year 1560, the General, Goswin Nickel, attempted to
enforce obedience to the primitive rules, he was solemnly deprived by his
disciples of all authority.



CHAPTER XI.

1600-1700.

DOCTRINES AND MORAL CODE OF THE JESUITS.


Let not our readers imagine that we shall enter into a profound
theological discussion about the doctrines of the Jesuits. The thing has
been repeatedly done, and we confess ourselves too deficient scholars
in divinity, to throw any new light upon it. We shall briefly touch the
theological question, and shall rather enlarge on those principles and
maxims by which the Jesuits perverted the morals of their votaries, the
better to domineer over them.

Acquaviva, in the _Ratio Studiorum_, had introduced a clause which threw
the Roman Catholic world into confusion and alarm. Lainez, as we have
observed, had already inserted a note in the Constitution regarding
the study of scholastic learning, to this effect, that, “if any book
of theology could be found more adapted to the times, it should be
taught.” Acquaviva went a step further, and declared, “that St Thomas
was indeed an author deserving of the highest approbation, but that it
would be an insufferable yoke to be compelled to follow his footsteps
in all things, and on no point to be allowed a free opinion; that
many important doctrines had been more firmly established and better
elucidated by recent theologians than by the holy doctor himself.”[218]
This declaration produced a great commotion in the Roman Catholic world,
and the Inquisition declared that the “_Ratio Studiorum_ was the most
dangerous, rash, and arrogant book that had ever appeared, and calculated
to produce many disturbances in the Christian commonwealth.”[219] But
a greater scandal and more violent tempest was awakened by Molina, who
in 1588 published at Evora a work on grace and free-will,[220] which
inculcated a doctrine quite at variance with that taught by St Thomas
and received by the Church. He maintained that free-will, even without
the help of grace, can produce morally good works, that it can resist
temptation, and can elevate itself to various acts of hope, faith, love,
and repentance. When a man has advanced thus far, God _then_ bestows
grace upon him on account of Christ’s merits, by means of which grace he
experiences the supernatural effects of sanctification; yet, as before
this grace had been received, in like manner, free-will is continually
in action; and as everything depends on it, it rests with us to make the
help of God effectual or ineffectual. Molina, in consequence, rejected
the doctrine of Thomas and Augustine on predestination, and refused to
admit it, as too stern and cruel. This is the substance of Molina’s
doctrine.[221]

The Dominicans, a great part of the theologians, and some of the
Jesuits, loudly exclaimed against it, and the Inquisition was on the
point of condemning it, when, by the influence of Acquaviva, who sided
with Molina, the affair was called up to Rome. Sixty-five meetings and
thirty-seven disputations were held in presence of the Pope Clement
VIII., who took a lively interest in the subject, wrote much upon it
himself, and who was resolved to condemn the Jesuits’ doctrine. But
when it was reported to him that the fathers spoke of calling a general
council, and that in one of their public discussions the thesis to be
proved was to this effect, that “it is not an article of faith that such
and such a Pope (Clement VIII., for example) is really Pope;”[222] the
poor Pope exclaimed, “They dare everything, everything!” paused, and
died without having given any decision. The disputations were resumed
under Paul V., who also held the doctrine of the Thomists. The Jesuits,
however, had given him such proofs of their devotion in the affair of
Venice, and were so powerful in the Church, that he had neither the heart
nor the courage to condemn them. In consequence, in 1607 he imposed
silence on both parties till he should pronounce a decision which would
set the matter at rest.[223] As this decision never came, and as the
doctrine of the Jesuits was not condemned, they chanted victory, and lost
no time in having Molina’s book circulated and taught everywhere.

But a formidable antagonist arose a little later to oppose its progress.
This was the sect of the Jansenists, so celebrated for its labours
and sufferings, which form so interesting a chapter in the history
of the Romish Church. Jansenius, the founder, was born in 1585,
in Holland—studied at Louvain—was ordained a priest—and, in 1636,
consecrated Bishop of Ypres. Shocked at the doctrine of the Jesuits,
he and Du Verger de Hauranne (afterwards Abbot of St Cyran, by which
name he is better known) plunged themselves into the study of the
ancient fathers of the Church, and especially of Augustine; and, after
six years of labour, Jansenius composed a book, in which the ancient
doctrine of the Thomists was again propounded, advancing, however, a
step towards Luther’s doctrine on grace and justification. Being smitten
by the plague, Jansenius, on his death-bed, submitted his manuscript
to the judgment of the Roman See; but St Cyran, without waiting for
the oracle of the Vatican, published the _Augustinus_ (such was the
title of Jansenius’ work), which produced a great sensation. St Cyran
became the chief of a school, in which were grouped scores of young
ecclesiastics, and some of the most eminent men in France. The nuns of
Port-Royal, amongst whom were almost the whole of the Arnauld family,
under the guidance of the venerable Mère Angélique, the sister of the
famous Arnauld, followed the doctrine of St Cyran. Cardinal Richelieu,
jealous that any other person than himself should exercise influence
or power, sent St Cyran to the dungeon of Vincennes. On the death of
his persecutor, the noble sufferer being set at liberty, returned to
his duties, and was received, and almost worshipped as a saint, by
the increased number of his disciples. The Jesuits, alarmed at the
favour with which the doctrine of Jansenius was received, bestirred
themselves in every quarter to impugn it, and filled the world with
their clamours and imprecations against the book, as if the Bishop of
Ypres had denied the very existence of God. The Pope was applied to to
anathematise the impious work; and, when he hesitated, they directed
his attention to a passage, in which his infallibility was indirectly
called in question. Of course this was a heresy not to be overlooked.
Urban VIII. expressed his disapprobation of the book; but this had no
effect in checking its popularity. Such men as Arnauld, Le Maître, De
Sacy, Pascal, supported Jansenius’ doctrine, and their many followers
disregarded the denunciations of its opponents. The Jesuits became
furious. They embodied, in their own peculiar way, the essential
doctrines of Jansenius in five propositions, and asked Innocent X.
solemnly to condemn them. The Pope was a man who abhorred theological
controversy, and would not willingly have engaged in this; but it was no
longer in the power of the Court of Rome to resist the influence of the
Jesuits. The five propositions were condemned, as tainted with heresy.
The Jansenists indignantly denied that such propositions were to be
found in the _Augustinus_, and that they expressed the sense attributed
to them; but Alexander VII., who was now the reigning Pope, declared,
by a bull, that the propositions were really to be found in Jansenius’
book. Of all the extravagant pretensions of the Roman See, this was
assuredly the greatest. The Jansenists, in their defence, while they
declared themselves good and devout Catholics, asserted, nevertheless,
that the Pope’s infallibility did not extend to matters of fact. “Why
make such a noise?” they said to their opponents—“we acknowledge that
these propositions are heterodox. Shew us them in _Augustinus_, and we
will unite with you in condemning them.” “We need not take the trouble
to shew them to you,” was the answer; “the Pope has declared them to be
in the book—and the Pope is infallible.” So, if the Pope affirms that a
magnificent castle is to be found in the middle of the ocean, according
to a doctrine to which the Papist sticks even in the present day, one
must believe it, or be excommunicated! The Jansenists endured all sorts
of persecution rather than submit to so unjust a decree; and it is a
striking instance of human inconsistency, that men so noble and upright,
who had approached so near the Protestant doctrine, at least in its most
essential part, should continue within the pale of the Roman Church. The
fact, we believe, may be partly explained by that pertinacity which men
of all parties display in maintaining a position they have once taken
up in any controversy, that they may not incur the ignominy of defeat.
“The supporters of the _Augustinus_ are heretics,” the Jesuits had said
from the beginning; and the Jansenists, in order that the book might be
declared orthodox, had indignantly repelled the accusation, and declared
themselves good and devout Roman Catholics—and they maintained to the end
their first declaration. Alas! how many eloquent pages Arnauld, Nicole,
and Pascal have written, to prove themselves the votaries and slaves of
the idol of Rome!

Not to interrupt our narrative, we have brought the reader far beyond
the epoch we are considering. We must now look a little back, and see
how the Jesuits had become so powerful a brotherhood. We have already
seen what arts they used, and what doctrines they propounded, to get a
footing in different countries, acquire an influence over persons of
their own persuasion, and a preponderance in the Court of Rome. But as
the doctrines and practices by which they had obtained their ends were no
longer suited, or, at least, were not the most efficient, for the times,
they now changed both doctrines and practices with wonderful promptitude.

When the order was established, the Court of Rome had itself to struggle
for existence, and was on the verge of being stripped of its ill-gotten
and ill-used authority. The politic Charles V. lent it soldiers—the
Jesuits, theologians for the contest. Lainez, Salmeron, Lejay, and
Canisius, rendered it as good and unequivocal services as the imperial
armies. But such men as those were no longer needed. Not only had
the flood of the Reformation been stayed, but Rome was in the utmost
exultation at having reconquered many lost provinces; and, as theological
controversies were now raging in the camp of her adversary, the Papacy,
though emboldened to assert pretensions which, a century before, she
would never have dreamt of mentioning, relaxed that activity which she
had for a moment displayed, and returned to her former life of intrigues
and indolence. However, the great contest with the Protestants had left
among the Roman Catholics a tendency, a wish, we do not say to become
better Christians, but to make a greater display of their religion. All
the external practices of devotion which, in their eyes, constituted
the true believer, were more eagerly resorted to; and, above all, the
confessional was frequented with unprecedented assiduity. To have a
confessor exclusively for one’s self was the surest sign of orthodoxy,
and became as fashionable as it is now to have a box at the opera.
Sovereigns, ministers, courtiers, noblemen—every man, in short, who
had a certain position in society, had his own acknowledged confessor.
Even the mistresses of princes pretended to the privilege—and Madame
de Pompadour will prove to her spiritual guide that it is dangerous to
oppose the caprices of a favourite. The Jesuits saw at once the immense
advantage they would derive if they could enlarge the number of their
clients, especially among the higher classes. They were already, in this
particular, far advanced in the public favour; they were known to be very
indulgent; had long since obtained the privilege of absolving from those
sins which only the Pope himself could pardon; and Suarez, their great
theologian, had even attempted to introduce confession by letter, as a
more easy and expeditious way of reaching all penitents.[224]

But by this time they had made fearful progress in the art of flattering
the bad passions, and winking at the vices, of those who had recourse
to their ministry in order to make, as they believed, their peace with
God. Escobar collected in six large volumes the doctrines of different
Jesuit casuists, those preceptors of immorality and prevarication; and
his book was for a time the only code followed by the generality of the
Jesuits.[225] However, I will not assert that they taught downright
immorality, to corrupt mankind merely for the sake of corrupting them.
No; if this has sometimes been the case with individuals, it was never so
with a sect. They had another end in view. As we said, they aspired to be
the general confessors, for their own private purposes; concealing their
designs under the mask of piety, they gave out that it was essential
for the good of religion that they should have the direction of all
consciences; and, as an inducement to penitents to resort to them, they
offered doctrines in conformity to the wishes of persons of all sorts.
Hence all their casuists were not licentious and indulgent to vice. A
few of them were strict, severe, and indeed teachers of evangelical
precepts, and those they held out to the few penitents who were of a
more rigid morality, and quoted them when accused of teaching relaxed
doctrines; while for the multitude, who are generally more loose in their
morals, they had the bulk of their casuists. Father Petau calls this
“an obliging and accommodating conduct.” So, for example, if the Jesuit
confessor perceives that a penitent feels inclined to make restitution
of ill-gotten money, he will certainly encourage him to do so, praise
him for his holy resolution, insist to be himself the instrument of the
restitution, taking care, however, that it should be known again. But if
another person accuse himself of theft, but shew no disposition to make
restitution, be sure that the Jesuit confessor will find in some book
or other of his brother Jesuits some sophistry to set his conscience at
rest, and persuade him that he may safely retain what he has stolen from
his neighbour.

The existence of books to which those pernicious maxims have been
consigned, having put it out of the power of the Jesuits to impugn
their genuineness; in order to exculpate their Society, they have cast
a reproach upon the teachers of their own Church, and even blasphemed
Christianity. “The probabilism,” says their historian, “was not born with
the Jesuits; at the moment of their establishment probabilism reigned in
the schools.”[226] And again, “Ever since the origin of Christianity, the
world had complained of the austerity of certain precepts; the Jesuits
came to bring relief from these grievances.”[227]

But, that our readers may judge for themselves of the character of
Jesuitical morality, we shall lay before them some of their doctrines;
and in doing so (be it observed), we shall quote as our authorities
none but Jesuit authors, and such as have been approved and are held in
veneration by the Society.

It is evident that, in the confessional, everything depends upon the
conception formed of transgression and sin. Now, according to the
Jesuitical doctrines, we do not sin, unless we have a clear perception
and understanding of the sin as sin, and unless our will freely consent
to it.[228] The following are the consequences which the Jesuit casuists
have deduced from that principle:—

“A confessor perceives that his penitent is in invincible ignorance, or
at least in innocent ignorance, and he does not hope that any benefit
will be derived from his advice, but rather anxiety of mind, strife, or
scandal. Should he dissemble? _Suarez affirms that he ought; because,
since his admonition will be fruitless, ignorance will excuse his
penitent from sin._”[229]

“Although he who, through inveterate habit, inadvertently swears a
falsehood, may seem bound to confess the propensity, yet he is commonly
excused. The reason is, that no one commonly reflects upon the obligation
by which he is bound to extirpate the habit; ... and, therefore, since
he is excused from the sin, he will also be excused from confession.
Some maintain that the same may be said of blasphemy, heresy, and of
the aforesaid oath; ... and, consequently, that such things, committed
inadvertently, _are neither sins in themselves, nor the cause of sins,
and therefore need not necessarily be confessed_.”[230]

“Wherever there is no knowledge of wickedness, there is also of necessity
no sin. It is sufficient to have at least a confused notion of the
heinousness of a sin, without which knowledge there would never be a
flagrant crime. For instance, one man kills another, believing it indeed
to be wrong, but conceiving it to be nothing more than a trifling fault.
_Such a man does not greatly sin_, because it is knowledge only which
points out the wickedness or the grossness of it to the will. Therefore,
criminality is only imputed according to the measure of knowledge.”

“If a man commit adultery or suicide, reflecting indeed, but still very
imperfectly and superficially, upon the wickedness and great sinfulness
of those crimes; however heinous may be the matter, _he still sins
but slightly_. The reason is, that as a knowledge of the wickedness
is necessary to constitute the sin, so is a full clear knowledge and
reflection necessary to constitute a heinous sin. And thus I reason
with Vasquez: _In order that a man may freely sin, it is necessary to
deliberate whether he sins or not. But he fails to deliberate upon the
moral wickedness of it, if he does not reflect, at least by doubting,
upon it during the act. Therefore he does not sin, unless he reflects
upon the wickedness of it_. It is also certain that a full knowledge of
such wickedness is required to constitute a mortal sin. _For it would
be unworthy the goodness of God to exclude a man from glory, and to
reject him for ever, for a sin on which he had not fully deliberated;
but if reflection upon the wickedness_ of it has only been partial,
deliberation has not been complete; and therefore the sin is not a mortal
sin.”[231]

The practical consequences of this doctrine have been admirably
represented by Pascal in his happiest vein of irony. “Oh, my dear
sir,” says he to the Jesuit who had exposed to him the afore-mentioned
doctrine, “what a blessing this will be to some persons of my
acquaintance! I must positively introduce them to you. You have never,
perhaps, in all your life, met with people who had fewer sins to account
for! In the first place, they never think of God at all; their vices
have got the better of their reason; they have never known either their
weakness or the physician who can cure it; they have never thought of
‘desiring the health of their soul,’ and still less of ‘praying to God
to bestow it;’ so that, according to M. le Moine, they are still in the
state of baptismal innocence. They have ‘never had a thought of loving
God, or of being contrite for their sins;’ so that, according to Father
Annat, they have never committed sin through the want of charity and
penitence. Their life is spent in a perpetual round of all sorts of
pleasures, in the course of which they have not been interrupted by
the slightest remorse. These excesses had led me to imagine that their
perdition was inevitable; but you, father, inform me that these same
excesses secure their salvation. Blessings on you, my good father, for
this new way of justifying people! Others prescribe painful austerities
for healing the soul; but you shew that souls which may be thought
desperately diseased are in quite good health. What an excellent device
for being happy both in this world and in the next! I had always supposed
that the less a man thought of God, the more he sinned; but, from what I
see now, if one could only succeed in bringing himself not to think upon
God at all, everything would be pure with him in all time coming. Away
with your half-and-half sinners, who retain some sneaking affection for
virtue! They will be damned, every soul of them. But commend me to your
arrant sinners—hardened, unalloyed, out-and-out, thorough-bred sinners.
Hell is no place for them; they have cheated the devil, by sheer devotion
to his service.”[232]

But if you are not such an arrant hardened sinner but that your
conscience warns you of your guilt, then come to the doctrine of
probability, the A B C of the Jesuitical code of morality, which will set
your troublesome conscience at rest. Listen!

“The true opinion is, that it is not only lawful to follow the _more
probable_ but _less safe_ opinion ... but also that the _less safe_ may
be followed when there is an equality of probability.”

“I agree in the opinion of Henriquez, Vasquez, and Perez, who maintain
that it is sufficient for an inexperienced and unlearned man to follow
the opinion which he _thinks to be probable because it is maintained by
good men who are versed in the art; although that opinion may be neither
the more safe, nor the more common, nor the more probable_.

“Sotus thinks that it would be very troublesome to a penitent, if the
priest, after having heard his confession, should send him back without
absolution, to confess himself again to another priest, if he could
absolve him with a safe conscience _against his own (the priest’s)
opinion; especially when another priest might not perhaps be readily
found who would believe the opinion of the penitent to be probable_.

“It may be asked whether a confessor may give advice to a penitent _in
opposition to his own opinion_; or, if he should think in any case that
restitution ought to be made, whether he may advise that the opinion of
others may be followed, who maintain that it need not be made? _I answer,
that he lawfully may_, ... because he may follow the opinion of another
in his own practice, and therefore he may advise another person to follow
it. Still it is better, in giving advice, always to follow the more
probable opinion to which a man is ever accustomed to adhere, _especially
when the advice is given in writing, lest contradiction be discovered_.
It is also sometimes expedient to send the consulting person to another
doctor or confessor who is known to hold an opinion favourable to the
inquirer, provided it be probable.”[233]

“Without respect of persons may a judge, in order to favour his friend,
decide according to any probable opinion, while the question of right
remains undecided?

“If the judge should think each opinion equally probable, for the sake
of his friend he may _lawfully_ pronounce sentence according to the
opinion which is more favourable to the interests of that friend. He
may, moreover, with the intent to serve his friend, _at one time judge
according to one opinion, and at another time according to the contrary
opinion, provided only that no scandal result from the decision_.”[234]

“An unbeliever who is persuaded that his sect is probable, although the
opposite sect may be more probable, would certainly be obliged, _at
the point of death_, to embrace the true faith, which he thinks to be
the more probable.... _But, except under such circumstances, he would
not.... Add to this, that the mysteries of faith are so sublime, and the
Christian morals so repugnant to the laws of flesh and blood, that no
greater probability whatever may be accounted sufficient to enforce the
obligation of believing._[235]

“Indeed, while I perceive so many different opinions maintained upon
points connected with morality, I think that the Divine providence is
apparent; _for, in diversity of opinions, the yoke of Christ is easily
borne_.”[236]

“A confessor may absolve penitents, according to the probable opinion of
the penitent, in opposition to his own, and is even bound to do so.”[237]

“Again, it is probable that pecuniary compensation may be made for
defamation; it is also probable that it cannot be made. May I, the
defamed, exact to-day pecuniary compensation from my defamer, and
to-morrow, and even on the same day, may I, the defamer of another,
refuse to compensate with money for the reputation of which I have
deprived him?... _I affirm that it is lawful to do at pleasure sometimes
the one and sometimes the other._

“_Those ignorant confessors are to be blamed who always think that they
do well in obliging their penitents to make restitution, because it is at
all times more safe._”[238]

By this abominable doctrine the confessors were made to answer yes or no,
as might be most agreeable to their penitents; and these might oblige the
confessor to absolve them of their sins, if they only themselves believed
that they were not sins. Imagine what an arrant knave the person inclined
to do evil must have become, when, to the firm belief that the absolution
of the confessor cleanses from all crimes, was superadded the certainty
that this confessor must absolve him almost according to his own wishes.
We shudder to think of it!

The doctrine of equivocation came in aid of that of probabilism. By the
former, according to Sanchez, “it is permitted to use ambiguous terms,
leading people to understand them in a different sense from that in
which we understand them.”[239] “A man may swear,” according to the same
author, “that he never did such a thing (though he actually did it),
meaning within himself that he did not do so on such a day, or before he
was born, or understanding any other such circumstances, while the words
which he employs have no such sense as would discover his meaning.”[240]
And Filiutius proves that in so speaking one does not even lie, because,
says he, “it is the intention that determines the quality of the action;
and one may avoid falsehood if, after saying aloud _I swear that I have
not done that_, he add in a low voice, _to-day_; or after saying aloud,
_I swear_, he interpose in a whisper, _that I say_, and then continue
aloud, _that I have done that_, and this is telling the truth.”

With mental reservation and probabilism, they have sanctioned all sorts
of crimes. The varlet might help his master to commit rape or adultery,
provided he do not think _of the sin_, but _of the profit_ he may reap
from it—so says father Bauny. If a servant think his salary is not an
adequate compensation for services, he may help himself to some of his
master’s property to make it equal to his pretensions—so teaches the same
father. You may kill your enemy for a box on the ear, as Escobar asserts
in the following words:—“It is perfectly right to kill a person who has
given us a box on the ear, although he should run away, provided it is
not done through hatred or revenge, and there is no danger of giving
occasion thereby to murders of a gross kind and hurtful to society. And
the reason is, that it is as lawful to pursue the thief that has stolen
our honour, as him that has run away with our property. For, although
your honour cannot be said to be in the hands of your enemy in the same
sense as your goods and chattels are in the hands of the thief, still
it may be recovered in the same way—by shewing proofs of greatness and
authority, and thus acquiring the esteem of men. And, in point of fact,
is it not certain that the man who has received a buffet on the ear is
held to be under disgrace, until he has wiped off the insult with the
blood of his enemy?”

In short, you may be a fraudulent bankrupt, thief, assassin, profligate,
impious atheist even, with a safe conscience, provided always you confess
to a Jesuit confessor. It is doubtless in this that we are to see the
efficacy of that miraculous gift, which we read at page 13 Loyola had
received from heaven, and transmitted to his successors—the gift _of
healing troubled consciences_; and this is even boldly asserted by
themselves. In the _Imago primi Sæculi_, S. 3, ch. 8, are words to this
effect:—“With the aid of pious _finesse_ and holy artifice of devotion,
crimes may be expiated now-a-days _alacrius_, with more joy and alacrity,
than they were committed in former days; and a great many people may be
washed from their stains almost as cleverly as they contracted them.”
After this quotation, we need not trouble the reader with any more
regarding the doctrine of the Jesuits on social duties. We only beg of
him, in order that he may well understand all the enormity of these
doctrines, to look at them from the point of view of the Papists, who
consider the confessional as the only way of salvation, and who blindly
obey their spiritual fathers, especially if they flatter their passions,
and promise them paradise as the reward of their vices.

It is also of importance that our readers should be made acquainted with
the doctrine of the Jesuits regarding religious duties, and the love
which is due to God, that they may the better judge of the character of
those champions of Romanism, those monks who are labouring hard to make
proselytes to their religion—the only true one, as they pretend, out of
which there is no salvation.

Father Antony Sirmond, in his book on _The Defence of Virtue_, has the
following passage:—“St Thomas says that we are obliged to love God
as soon as we come to the use of reason; _that is rather too soon!_
Scotus says, every Sunday; _pray, for what reason?_ Others say, when
we are sorely tempted; _yes, if there be no other way of escaping the
temptation_. Sotus says, when we have received a benefit from God; good,
in the way of thanking him for it. Others say, at death—_rather late!
As little do I think it binding at the reception of any sacrament;
attrition, in such a case, is quite enough, along with confession—if
convenient._ Suarez says, that it is binding at some time or another;
_but at what time?_ He does not know; and what that doctor does not know,
I know not who should know.”[241]

And father Pinter can crown those execrable doctrines by the impious
assertion, that the dispensation from the _painful_ obligation to love
God is purchased for us through the merits of Christ’s blood. “It was
reasonable,” says that sacrilegious Jesuit, “that under the law of grace
in the New Testament, God should relieve us from that troublesome and
arduous obligation which existed under the law of bondage, to exercise
an act of perfect contrition, in order to be justified; and that the
place of this should be supplied by the sacraments instituted in aid of
an easier exercise; otherwise, indeed, Christians, who are the children,
would have no greater facility in gaining the good graces of their Father
than the Jews, who were the slaves, had in obtaining the mercy of their
Lord and Master.”[242]

And men guilty of all sorts of crimes—men who pretend that no love is
due to God, that not even attrition is necessary for the remission of
sins—such men shall be made worthy of the eternal blessedness through
some idolatrous practices! Such is the doctrine taught by Jesuits, and,
we must add, by most of the Roman Catholic clergy, some of whom we
are going to bring under our reader’s eye. We beg permission to quote
Pascal again. Our readers will certainly prefer the trenchant, sarcastic
style of the celebrated Jansenist to our imperfect manner of narration.
In a dialogue which he pretends to have had with a Jesuit, the father
addresses him in the following words:—

“‘Would you not be infinitely obliged to any one who should open to you
the gates of paradise? Would you not give millions of gold to have a key
by which you might gain admittance whenever you pleased? You need not be
at such expense; here is one—here are a hundred for much less money.’

“At first I was at a loss to know whether the good father was reading or
talking to me, but he soon put the matter beyond doubt by adding:—

“‘These, sir, are the opening words of a fine book, written by Father
Barry of our Society; for I never give you anything of my own.’

“‘What book is it?’ asked I.

“‘Here is its title,’ he replied—‘_Paradise Opened to Philagio, in a
Hundred Devotions to the Mother of God, easily practised_.’

“‘Indeed, father! and is each of these easy devotions a sufficient
passport to heaven?’

“‘It is,’ returned he, ‘Listen to what follows: “The devotions to the
mother of God, which you will find in this book, are so many celestial
keys, which will open wide to you the gates of paradise, provided you
practise them;” and accordingly, he says at the conclusion, “that he is
satisfied if you practise only one of them.”’

“‘Pray, then, father, do teach me one of the easiest of them.’

“‘They are all easy,’ he replied; ‘for example—”Saluting the Holy
Virgin when you happen to meet her image—saying the little chaplet
of the pleasures of the Virgin—fervently pronouncing the name of
Mary—commissioning the angels to bow to her for us—wishing to build her
as many churches as all the monarchs on earth have done—bidding her
good-morrow every morning, and good-night in the evening—saying the _Ave
Maria_ every day in honour of the heart of Mary“—which last devotion, he
says, possesses the additional virtue of securing us the heart of the
Virgin.’

“‘But, father,’ said I, ‘only provided we give her our own in return, I
presume?’

“‘That,’ he replied, ‘is not absolutely necessary, when a person is too
much attached to the world. Hear Father Barry: “Heart for heart would,
no doubt, be highly proper; but yours is rather too much attached to
the world, too much bound up in the creature, so that I dare not advise
you to offer, at present, that _poor little slave_ which you call your
heart.” And so he contents himself with the _Ave Maria_ which he had
prescribed.’[243]

“‘Why, this is extremely easy work,’ said I, ‘and I should really think
that nobody will be damned after that.’

“‘Alas!’ said the monk, ‘I see you have no idea of the hardness of
some people’s hearts. There are some, sir, who would never engage to
repeat, every day, even these simple words, _Good day, Good evening_,
just because such a practice would require some exertion of memory. And,
accordingly, it became necessary for Father Barry to furnish them with
expedients still easier, such as wearing a chaplet night and day on the
arm, in the form of a bracelet, or carrying about one’s person a rosary,
or an image of the Virgin. “And, tell me now,” as Father Barry says, “if
I have not provided you with easy devotions to obtain the good graces of
Mary?”’

“‘Extremely easy, indeed, father,’ I observed.

“‘Yes,’ he said, ‘it is as much as could possibly be done, and I think
should be quite satisfactory. For he must be a wretched creature indeed,
who would not spare a single moment in all his lifetime to put a chaplet
on his arm, or a rosary in his pocket, and thus secure his salvation;
and that, too, with so much certainty, that none who have tried the
experiment have ever found it to fail, in whatever way they may have
lived; though, let me add, we exhort people not to omit holy living. Let
me refer you to the example of this, given at page 34; it is that of a
female who, while she practised daily the devotion of saluting the images
of the Virgin, spent all her days in mortal sin, and yet was saved after
all, by the merit of that single devotion.’

“‘And how so?’ cried I.

“‘Our Saviour,’ he replied, ‘raised her up again, for the very purpose of
shewing it. So certain it is, that none can perish who practise any one
of these devotions.’”[244]

We may, perhaps, mention here also, the greatest of all the Jesuitical
devotions to Mary, the one which, according to them, is the sovereign
specific for obtaining salvation—namely, _the month of Mary_.

The month which they have chosen to consecrate to the Virgin is the
month of May. I dare not say for what reason. During its long thirty-one
days, nothing is to be heard but songs and hymns in honour of the
Virgin. Altars are dressed before every niche in which stands a Madonna.
Sundry other images are placed around it—as smaller divinities, we may
suppose—and, among images and burning lamps, a profusion of flowers
of all colours send up their fragrant perfume as an offering to the
Virgin. At different hours the devotees prostrate themselves before
these altars, and offer their vows and their prayers to the Madonna. The
most extravagant language is addressed to her, and she is represented as
possessing the most extraordinary attributes. “Any person performing the
month of Mary, should he die within the month, will be saved, even if he
had murdered his parents.” In the churches and schools of the Jesuits are
performed the same ceremonies as in the streets. God for this month is
still more forgotten than He generally is.

We could fill volumes with such extracts, but must be content with those
we have given, referring such of our readers as wish to know more of the
Jesuitical doctrines to Pascal, to the _Morale Pratique des Jésuites_ by
Arnauld, and to the _Principles of the Jesuits, developed in a Collection
of Extracts from their own Authors_ (London, 1839).

We have also shrunk from polluting these pages by extracts from Lacrois,
Sanchez, and such like, whose obscene and revolting lucubrations, the
inevitable fruits of the celibacy of the cloister, have left far behind
all that has been conceived by the most wanton and depraved imagination.
We have omitted, moreover, to extract from the _Secreta Monita_, and
for the following reason:—The _Secreta Monita_ are a collection of
precepts and instructions the most nefarious and diabolical, given,
it is supposed, by the General of the order to his subalterns, as if
to shew them the way how to proceed in all their perfidious plots for
the aggrandisement of the Company. The book in which those precepts
are collected, came out for the first time in Cracow in 1612, and was
reprinted in Paris in 1761. The Jesuits assert that it owes its origin
to an expelled Jesuit, Zaorowski, while their opponents contend that the
_Secreta Monita_ had been found by Christian of Brunswick in the Jesuit
college of Prague or elsewhere. The _Secreta Monita_ were condemned at
Rome. But, to confess the truth, our opinion is, that the book is at best
apocryphal. The Jesuits were too cunning foxes to expose their secrets
to the risk of being discovered, by leaving copies of such a book here
and there. They were not yet so firmly established as to risk the very
existence of their order, if one of those copies were discovered, or
if a member should be tempted to betray the Society. Besides, from the
knowledge we have of the Jesuitical character, we feel assured that
no superior would ever have inculcated with such barefaced impudence
such abominable and execrable rules of roguery. So much are the Jesuits
accustomed to dissemble and deceive, that even their conduct towards
each other is one continued act of deceit. For instance, if the superior
wishes to ruin the fair fame of a man adverse to the order, he will say
to his subalterns, “What a pity it is that Mr N. should be guilty of
such and such faults (and, generally speaking, he invents some calumny)!
it would be well that, for the greater glory of God, others should be
apprised that it is unbecoming a Christian to act so. Should you chance
to meet any of his or your acquaintance, you may warn them of that,
but take care not to slander your neighbour’s reputation.” Again, if a
Jesuit chief should covet the wealth of some family, he would say to
his subordinates, “It is a pity that so much wealth should pass into
the hands of his son or nephew, who will spend it in offending God and
gratifying their own evil passions. It would be a pious work if he could
be induced to leave it to us, that we might use it to the greater glory
of God.” And if a subaltern, less cunning than the rest, should openly
and frankly propose to slander the reputation of the honest man, or to
make an attempt to snatch the princely fortune of the wealthy, he would
be reprimanded, as guilty of an action unworthy of a son of the holy
Father Loyola. And, while the superior speaks in this manner, he not
only knows that he cants, but he is also perfectly convinced that his
hearers know it, and yet he will never speak otherwise. And it is to
us altogether inconceivable, that men who are thus mutually conscious
that they are playing a part—who, in their common intercourse, and even
when forming the basest designs, are careful always to speak in the
character of the pious devotee—should so far forget their cue as to give
a broad unvarnished statement of their whole system of roguery. For
these, and many other reasons which we might adduce, we believe that the
book is apocryphal; but, though apocryphal, it certainly gives a true
representation of the horrible arts and practices of the Jesuits; and
we are inclined to credit the Jesuits when they assert that the book is
the work of a discarded brother, so deeply does it initiate us in the
secret arts of the Society. However, as we have thousands of unimpugnable
testimonies to their impious and infernal doctrines, we shall not weaken
the authority of our narrative by adducing contested proofs.



CHAPTER XII.

1608-1700.

OVERGROWING INFLUENCE OF THE SOCIETY.


We now enter on a new phase of our history. Up to the period at which
we are arrived (the beginning of the seventeenth century), the Jesuits
have been obliged more or less to struggle for existence. Now they
contend for supremacy and a domineering power in those same countries
into which they had been at first refused admittance. Vagrant monks, who
had but an hospital for a place of refuge, they now possess all over the
surface of the earth hundreds of magnificent establishments, endowed with
princely revenues, and in the West Indies are laying the foundations of
a kingdom of their own. Cherished by the populace, in league with the
nobility, they are become so powerful, that great monarchs themselves
are obliged to put the fate of the Jesuits in the same balance in which
are weighed the destinies of nations. Two of Ignatius’ disciples have a
seat in the College of Cardinals, and the order, by the many exorbitant
privileges it has obtained, forms a sort of separate church within the
Church—the envy of other religious orders, the rival of bishops, and
the dread of the Court of Rome itself. They possess the supreme sway in
Portugal, Poland, Bavaria, have the utmost influence in Spain, Austria,
Italy, and are rapidly advancing towards that power which they at last
obtained in France, and which was productive of so many miseries to the
French nation. In fact, the principal seat of the Jesuits’ power will
henceforth be in France, as, of the many sovereigns whom the Jesuits
more or less govern, the French monarch is the most powerful of them
all. Henry IV., as a measure of precaution, in the letters-patent by
which he re-established the Jesuits, had enacted that a man of authority
in the order should always be near the king’s person, as preacher, and
as a warranty for the conduct of his brethren; and the Jesuits made of
this offensive clause the very pivot of their fortunes. The preacher
became the confessor of the kings, and France will but too soon feel the
persecuting power of Fathers Lachaise and Letellier. Before, however,
they had attained the height of their power, they had to endure a
passing storm. In 1610, Henry IV., while proceeding in his coach to
visit his faithful Sully, who was dangerously ill, was stabbed to the
heart. The Jesuits were accused by the parliament and the university,
and even by some curates from the pulpit, of being the accomplices and
the instigators of Ravaillac the assassin; but no proof whatever was
adduced in support of this accusation. Public opinion absolved them
from any participation in the crime, and to that judgment we ourselves
subscribe; unless, indeed, we charge them with being morally accessory
to the murder by their doctrines, and the abominable writings commending
the murder of Sovening, with which they had covered France at the time of
the League. The Jesuits had too great ascendancy over Henry’s mind, they
derived from him too many benefits, to render credible the supposition
of their connivance in the parricide. Some authors, too eager to find
the Jesuits guilty of every crime, and not reflecting that by asserting
controvertible facts they diminish the credit of their other assertions,
have suggested that, as Henry was preparing to send an army to succour
the German Protestants, the Jesuits contrived to have him murdered. But
those authors are quite ignorant of the true spirit of Jesuitism. The
great end which the Jesuits have ever in their view, the criterion by
which alone we are able to judge of the probability of their acting in
any particular way, is their own interest, and in no way the advantage of
religion or the glory of God; and, as in this instance the interest of
the Jesuits, and especially of those of France, was to preserve rather
than destroy Henry’s life, we repeat our assertion—we do not believe
them guilty. We do not think it necessary to fill our pages even with
an analysis of the writings poured forth by both parties on this tragic
event. The _Anti-Cotton_, a virulent pamphlet against the Jesuits, and,
above all, against some assertions of Father Cotton, the late king’s
confessor, who had addressed some apologetic letters to the queen on
the subject, and who had now gone, according to Henry’s testamentary
disposition, to deposit that prince’s heart in the Jesuits’ college of
La Flèche, was and has continued to be famous in France, more for the
sarcastic wit with which it is written than because it gives any proofs
of the Jesuits’ guilt; and, therefore, we need not give any account of it.

The Jesuits, protected by the Court and the Archbishop of Paris, after
the first commotion had passed away, reassumed their former position; and
Father Cotton was appointed to hear the juvenile sins of Louis XIII., as
he had formerly heard those of his gallant and profligate father.

But a real though inevitable calamity awaited the Society some few
years after. On the 31st January 1615, expired one of their greatest
men, Claude Acquaviva, the fifth General of the order. He had been in
office thirty-four years, and may be accounted the second founder of
the Society, as he has been, undoubtedly, its ablest legislator. During
his government, external tempests and internal discord had menaced the
very existence of the Society, but he had dissipated and appeased them
all with admirable courage and prudence. His death was to the Company
an irreparable loss. With him ended the _prestige_ through which the
Generals exercised such extraordinary authority over its members. For
the future they will still be entitled by the Constitutions to the same
blind obedience as before; but their mandates will be implicitly obeyed
by none but some simple-hearted Jesuits, or by those far away in distant
lands, who venerate their superior in proportion to the distance that
separates them from him. And this it may be said is the case with all
earthly powers. But the members who have some authority in the order, the
provincials, the confessors or favourites of princes, will, generally
speaking, act independently and according to their own views, without,
however, losing sight of the Society, whose aggrandisement and glory is
always the ultimate end which they all keep in view. The consequence
will be that their conduct will in many respects be less uniform, and
even their solemn assemblies will be wanting in that unanimity of
purpose which had marked their former operations. A striking proof of
this appeared in the election of Acquaviva’s successor itself. The old
Spanish party revived after the General’s death, and hoping to regain
the influence and power it had exercised under the first three Generals
of the order, made a great stir; and, foreseeing that Vitelleschi, a
Roman Jesuit, would be elected, they first intrigued with the French and
Spanish ambassadors, and afterwards accused Vitelleschi to the Pope of
being guilty of many vices and crimes, which was far from being true,
he being, on the contrary, a simple, inoffensive, unpretending man. The
contest for the election was very keen, and of seventy-five members
who composed the congregation, Vitelleschi obtained only thirty-nine
suffrages, being only one more than was necessary for the validity of
his election. He assumed the office, but exercised very little influence
in the affairs of the Company. It was, however, in the beginning
of Vitelleschi’s generalate that measures were taken to get Loyola
and Xavier enrolled in the Calendar of Saints. It is true that, even
under Acquaviva’s lifetime, Henry IV., to please his father confessor,
and render him still more indulgent to his immoralities, had, by an
autograph letter, asked the reigning Pope to find a place in heaven for
the two founders of the order; but Paul V., thinking, perhaps, that the
recommendation of the ex-Huguenot Henry would be rather a suspicious
passport for opening the gates of heaven, did not feel inclined to
comply. There were, however, other sovereigns, as those of Bavaria,
Poland, Spain, &c., who had Jesuits for their confessors; and now that
those monarchs united in begging from the Holy See the canonisation of
the two Jesuits, Gregory XV., who had been educated in the fathers’
schools, could no longer refuse to comply with their wishes. He
accordingly solemnly pronounced them to be saints, but being surprised by
death, the glory of having issued the bull for their apotheosis belongs
to his successor, Urban VIII.[245]

As the Jesuits, in the short space of less than a century, have furnished
eight or ten saints to the calendar, perhaps it will not be extraneous
to our work to devote a few pages to shew in what manner, mortals such
as we are, and who but yesterday were mere loathsome corpses, are, by
the pretended power of another mortal man, transformed into privileged
and divine beings, to whom is attributed a power almost equal to that of
the Almighty. A word of any Pope, even of an Alexander VI., will change
every fragment of those corrupted remains into sacred relics, possessing
such miraculous powers, that the worship of them is deemed sufficient to
insure eternal salvation.

The practice of investing certain persons with the honours of saintship
originated with the people. In the early ages of Christianity, when an
individual, whether a truly holy Christian or a consummate hypocrite,
had struck the impressible imaginations of the multitude by a pious and
extraordinary course of life, he was regarded by them as a supernatural
being, and was addressed and worshipped as such. A little later, persons
of this description began, with the help of the priests, to work
miracles; and when the renown of their holiness and of the prodigies they
had performed had spread far and wide, the Court of Rome interfered and
gave them a regular patent for saintship.

If they had been extraordinary persons of their own class, their
canonisation took place almost immediately on their decease, as was the
case with St Francis, the founder of the ragged and beggarly order of
monks which bears his name, and St Antony, the great miracle worker,[246]
both of whom were ranked among the saints only a year after their death.
The trade of saint-making proving very lucrative, from the many offerings
presented at their shrines, the priests encouraged the multitude, always
ready to believe in the marvellous, to credit extraordinary legends and
to find saints everywhere. Above all, as we have said elsewhere, after
the Reformation, the priests were creating saints in such alarming
numbers, that Urban VIII. fearing, it would seem, that heaven would not
be large enough to admit the whole of them, by two bulls, of 1625 and
1634, put a check upon the mania of saint-making, and swept away from
churches, convents, and public places, the images of those poor blessed
ones who had been patiently waiting in their niches for the supreme
oracle of the Vatican to send them up to heaven; and who, doubtless,
were now much annoyed at being removed from their places of adoration
and worship. The bull ordained that no offering, no burning lamp, nor
any sort of worship whatever, should be rendered to any one, no matter
how great might have been the fame of his saintship, if he had not been
recognised as a saint, either from immemorial time, _immemorabilem
temporis cursum_, or by the unanimous consent of the Church, _per
communem Ecclesiæ consensum_, or by a sort of tolerance of the apostolic
see, _tolerantiâ sedis apostolicæ_. By immemorial time, the Pope says in
his bull of 1634 that he means more than a hundred years. In consequence,
all those persons who had been called saints, and worshipped as such for
only ninety-nine years and some months, were to be discarded, and their
images or statues removed from the place of worship;[247] unless, indeed,
some money were spent, and a privilege or dispensation obtained from the
all-powerful Pope. Alas! how many sinners, who had perhaps chosen those
very saints as mediators between them and an offended God, must have been
driven to despair by the unmerciful bull!

However, a regular canonisation may be obtained from Rome, and in two
different ways. The first is the more simple:—Whosoever is interested
in obtaining a canonisation must prove before the Congregation of the
Rites,[248] that, for more than a hundred years, the man who is proposed
as a candidate for saintship had been worshipped either by a burning
lamp before his image or his sepulchre, or by a person praying before
it, &c.; and that these signs of veneration had been repeated before
they had been prohibited at no greater distance of time than ten years.
If the congregation deliver their opinion in a dubious form, that the
immemorial worship seems to them to be proved, _videtur constare de
cultu immemorabili_; and, if the omniscient and infallible Pope affirm,
_constare_, “it has been proved,” then the man becomes a _beatifice_, and
mass, prayers, and offerings may be addressed to him with a perfectly
safe conscience. This was the mode of canonisation resorted to after the
famous bull of 1634.

More difficult is the other way, now generally followed, to obtain a
canonisation. The man must pass through many stages—as it were, serve an
apprenticeship before he become a saint; first, the name of _Servus Dei_,
servant of God, must be obtained for the candidate; and that is neither
difficult nor expensive. Then, if the Congregation of Rites find, on
examining his printed life, that his virtues seem to be proved, _videtur
constare de virtutibus_, and the Pope says, _constare_, the _Servus Dei_
is to be called _venerabilis Servus Dei_, venerable servant of God.
Again, if the authenticity of the life, and of the virtues and miracles,
is proved in another congregation, in the same way, then the _venerabilis
servus Dei_ assumes the title of blessed, _beatus_; a feast, mass,
prayers, &c., are voted to him, and the Pope goes to St Peter’s Church,
to be the first of all to worship that same man who, had he pronounced
only those two words, _non constare_, would have been a Pagan, or little
better. That the blessed (_beato_) should become a saint, nothing more is
necessary than that he should have worked three first-class miracles[249]
(such as those performed by St Anthony, I suppose), and that there should
be paid (not by the blessed—_beato_—for the offerings are only shewn to
him, but by whosoever would make a saint of him) twenty thousand pounds
sterling for the diploma. As may be perceived, the degree is somewhat
dearer than in any other university; but only consider the difference
betwixt a doctor and a saint![250] However, as the expenses are too
great, families or religious communities who wish for a saint, now
unite together, each proposing a candidate for saintship, and a single
proceeding serves to decide the fate of five or six saints, and the
expenses are paid in common. Under the last Pope, Rome witnessed two or
three of those wholesale canonisations.

We Italians call the proceeding, _fare una infornata di Santi_, making
an ovenful of saints. But under the reign of Leo XII., in 1826, a much
more scandalous profanation took place. Saints being wanted by some
town or other (almost every Italian borough has got one), and the
Congregation of Relics, who dispense those Beati, having none at hand,
one of the counsellors, we suppose, thought of a very expeditious way
of making saints, and supply what was wanted. A sort of catacomb having
been discovered at the church _S. Lorenzo fuor delle mura_, in which
some skulls were found, five of them were extracted, and declared to be
the skulls of martyrs. The Pope, with the advice of the Congregation of
Rites, by his apostolic authority and certain knowledge, _Apostolicâ
auctoritate ac certâ scientiâ_, declared that they were martyrs; and,
two or three months after, they were exposed to the public worship in
the _Apollinare_, the ancient Collegio Germanico, which had belonged to
the Jesuits, and where now met the Congregation of the Relics. I have
myself seen them thus exposed. Those having been disposed of, other
skulls were dug up, and other martyrs made; till, at last, a learned
antiquarian (I do not remember whether French or German) proved almost to
a certainty that the place where these skulls were found had been a Pagan
burial-place. The noise was great, and so great the scandal, that the
Pope ordered the catacomb to be shut, and no more martyrs to be made. One
may still see the excavation, and some bones may be seen through an iron
grating, but they are called martyrs no more. If these were not facts
which happened in our own days, and of which all Rome is witness, I would
hardly have dared to mention them, so incredible do they appear.

We hope we shall be excused for this digression. The canonisation of
Loyola and Xavier took place in 1623. We shall spare the recital of
all the feasts, all the gorgeous ceremonies, all the pagan pageantry
exhibited on the occasion. At Douay, above all, the whole of this
theatrical representation was on a great and magnificent scale. Two
galleries, supported by a hundred columns adorned with tapestry, and
with no less than four hundred and forty-five paintings, were erected in
the two streets leading to their college. The panegyrics in honour of
the saints were not only ridiculous, but impious in the highest degree.
In one of them it was said that “Ignatius,” by his name written upon
paper, “performed more miracles than Moses, and as many as the apostles!”
And again, “The life of Ignatius was so holy and exalted, even in the
opinion of heaven, that only Popes like St Peter, empresses like the
Mother of God, some other sovereign monarchs, as God the Father and his
holy Son, enjoyed the bliss of seeing him.” We do not comment on these
words; even the Sorbonne, now in league with the Jesuits, condemned them.

Some years after, another extraordinary and fantastic solemnity came to
rejoice the Jesuitic world. From the year 1636, Vitelleschi had ordered
that preparations should be made to solemnise, in 1640, the secular year
of the establishment of the Society. We shall not give any description
of it, but must mention a strange publication, which has given to
this feast an historical celebrity; we mean the _Imago Primi Sæculi
Societatis Jesu_. It is a huge folio of 952 pages, richly and superbly
printed, embellished by hundreds of fantastic and extravagant emblems,
and filled with absurd and ridiculous praises of the Society. Many were
the contributors to this work, which was printed at Antwerp. “Many young
Jesuits,” says Crétineau,[251] “found in the aspirations of their hearts
poetical inspiration, accents of love, and words of enthusiasm!” The
book is modestly dedicated to—God the Father; and among the poetical
inspirations, we read as follows:—“The Society of Jesus is not of man’s
invention, but it proceeded _from Him whose name it bears_, for Jesus
himself described that rule of life which the Society follows, first
by his example, and afterwards by his Word.”[252] And further on,—“The
Company is Israel’s chariot of fire, whose loss Elisha mourned, and
which now, by a special grace of God, both worlds rejoice to see brought
back from heaven to earth, in the desperate condition of the Church. In
this chariot, if you seek the armies and soldiers by which she daily
multiplies her triumphs with new victories, you will find—(and I hope you
will take it in good part)—you will find a chosen troop of angels who
exhibit under the form of animals all that the Supreme Ruler desires in
this chivalry.”[253]

“As the angels, enlightened by the splendours of God, purge our minds
of ignorance, suffuse them with light, and give them perfection,—thus
the companions of Jesus, copying the purity of angels, and all attached
to their origin which is God, from whom they derive those fiery and
flaming movements of virtue, with rays the most refulgent, putting off
the impurities of lust in that furnace of supreme and chastest love in
which they are cooked (_excoquuntur_), until being illuminated and made
perfect, they can impart to others their light mingled with ardour—being
not less illustrious for the splendour of their virtue than the fervour
of charity with which they are divinely inflamed.

“They are angels like Michael in their most eloquent battles with
heretics—like Gabriel in the conversion of the infidels in India,
Ethiopia, Japan, and the Chinese hedged in by terrible ramparts,—they
are like Raphael in the consolation of souls, and the conversion of
sinners by sermons and the confessional. _All_ rush with promptitude
and ardour to hear confessions, to catechise the poor and children, as
well as to govern the consciences of the great and princes; all are not
less illustrious for their doctrine and wisdom: so that we may say of
the Company what Seneca observes in his 33d epistle, namely, that there
is an inequality in which eminent things become remarkable, but that we
do not admire a tree when all the others of the same forest are equally
high. Truly, in whatever direction you cast your eyes, you will discover
some object that would be supereminent if the same were not surrounded by
equals in eminence.”[254]

These quotations may suffice to give the reader an idea of the book. It
will, however, be instructive to give the opinion of Crétineau upon
it. He calls the work, indeed, a dithyrambic, and admits that there
are some exaggerations in those academical exercises (he might as well
have said that even the Court of Rome condemned the book); “but,” adds
he, “the critics would not recollect the extravagances, the impieties
even, of the book entitled _Conformity of the Life of St Francis with
that of Christ_, by brother Bartholomew of Pisa, nor the _Origo Seraficæ
Familiæ Franciscanæ_ by the Capuchin Gonzalez;” and so on. Indeed we
know that other monks are as boastful, as impudent, as impious as the
Jesuits; yet it seems a very poor apology to exculpate one’s own faults
by proving that our neighbour has committed similar ones. But so it is,
we repeat it again, the Jesuits would inculpate God himself to justify
their order. All we can say of the book is, that it is a most ingenuous
and sincere exposition of the feelings of the Jesuits at such epochs,
and of the opinion they had of themselves. They were at the height of
their prosperity. The difficulties they had encountered—the battles they
had fought—the victories they had obtained—the consciousness of their
own strength and power, all combined to make them believe that their
ambition had to recognise no limits short of the absolute dominion of
the world. This idea is clearly expressed in every page of the _Imago_;
and they struggled hard to realise it. Had the Jesuits united to this
consciousness, and to the superlative force of will and perseverance
which is characteristic of their order, the conception of some great and
magnanimous object, which drew upon itself the interest and admiration
of the multitude; and had they by bold and unequivocal conduct contrived
to carry into execution the lofty design,—who knows what might have not
been accomplished by a society so strongly and so admirably constituted?
Such as they were, however, their influence became greater and greater
every day. As when of two royal pretenders to a noble kingdom, the
conqueror sees the crowd of his courtiers increased, not only by all
those prudent persons who had waited for the result of the contest, but
by a part of his former adversaries, now the most submissive and humble
of all his flatterers; so the Jesuits, after they had mastered all
opposition, and were in possession of power, saw themselves surrounded
by a multitude of adherents and courtiers, eager to obtain their
all-powerful influence. When to be a Jesuit became an honour, and the
shortest way to ecclesiastical and secular dignities, persons of every
sort, and especially such as were ambitious, resorted to the Society,
to find the means of satisfying their several aspirations. Before
Vitelleschi, the nobility had protected the Jesuits, but few of them had
embraced the institute; but afterwards, the highest families in Europe,
princely houses not excepted, had a representative in the Company,
who gave to the order a new prestige, and imparted to it the love and
veneration with which his name was regarded by the people. The houses of
Lorraine, Montmorency, those of Gonzaga and Orsini, Medina-Sidonia and
Abouquerque, Limberg, and Cassimir of Poland, and a thousand other great
and illustrious families, respectively contributed members to the order
of the Jesuits.

Our space will not allow us to enter into details, and to follow the
Jesuits step by step in their prosperous course. Let it suffice that we
have shewn how the Society developed itself by degrees, and by what means
it arrived at the pinnacle of power and greatness. We shall now proceed
to shew, in its principal facts, what use the Jesuits made of their
ill-gotten influence.

As we have already said, France was now the chief seat of their power,
and the field where they reaped their laurels. Under Louis XIII., or,
to speak more correctly, under Richelieu, they could not pretend to a
great share of authority. The despotic cardinal will only have them
as his tools. He will protect them; he will go with his royal slave
to lay the first stone of a Jesuit edifice in a faubourg of Paris (St
Antoine), but he will cause to be condemned and burnt by the hands of
the hangman, the books of Keller and Santarelli, that exalt the papal
above the royal authority, which Richelieu considered his own. Cardinal
Mazzarini was as little disposed as his predecessor to tolerate any rival
domineering influence; and during his administration, the Jesuits had no
considerable part in the public affairs. If Mazzarini shewed them some
kindness, and afforded them his protection, it was because he wanted
their support in opposition to the Jansenists, the partisans of the
Cardinal of Metz, Archbishop of Paris, and Mazzarini’s rival in power
and in gallant intrigues. But when Louis XIV., on reaching his twentieth
year, assumed the government of his kingdom, then really began the reign
of the Jesuits. Not that the man who entered the Parliament in his
hunting apparel, with his whip in his hand, and was accustomed to say,
_L’état c’est moi_, was much disposed to act by the advice and under the
influence of other persons; yet the Jesuits had a great share in all the
great events of his reign.

Louis had a Jesuit confessor from his childhood,[255] who, by insidious
and daily-repeated insinuations, had rendered him a fanatical bigot,
and made him believe that the greatest glory he could achieve would be
the upholding of the Popish religion. In this point, as indeed in many
others, Louis bears a resemblance to Philip II. of Spain. Both gloried
in the appellation of champions of Popery, both had its persecuting
spirit, both sacrificed the love of their people to the wish to appear
most zealous Romanists; yet both, despotic and jealous of their royal
prerogative, waged war against their god on earth when he attempted to
impugn it. Philip sent Alva, who, having conquered the Papal troops,
entered Rome, and obliged the Pope to subscribe his master’s conditions;
while Louis took possession of Avignon, threw the Papal nuncio into
prison, and obliged every member of the French clergy to subscribe the
four articles of the Gallican Church, expressly got up against the
pretensions of Rome. With such a man as Louis, the Jesuits could not
succeed in gaining their ends but by the most complete subjection to
his orders or caprices. So, accommodating themselves at once to the
prince’s character, there was no mark of devotion and servility which
they did not shew to him. They supported him in his schism against the
Pope, subscribed the articles of the Gallican Church, and refused to
publish the bull of excommunication the former had fulminated against
_the first-born of the Church of Rome_,[256] persuading him, however,
that he would always remain a good Roman Catholic while they confessed
and absolved him. They praised him for his military achievements, and
encouraged him in his profligacy, taking great care to abandon the former
mistress the moment they saw the inclination of the prince directed
towards a new one. For these criminal compliances, they obtained, in
exchange, full liberty to persecute the Jansenists and Protestants to
their hearts’ content.

The Jansenists were the first who experienced the vindictive hatred of
the progeny of Loyola; not because they were considered more dangerous
heretics than the Huguenots, but because they had dared to attack the
Order openly; because the _Provincial Letters_ had covered it with
shame and confusion, and because the most considerable among them were
related to that Arnauld who first opposed its establishment in France,
and declared its members to be the accomplices of the crime of Jacques
Clement. We insist upon that point, because it shews one of the most
prominent characteristics of Jesuitism, never to forgive an injury, and
to persecute the remotest descendants for the offences they may have
received from their ancestors.

It would require volumes to relate all the persecutions to which the
inhabitants of Port-Royal were subjected. Hardly had Louis assumed the
reins of government than, at the instigation of the Jesuits, he convened
an assembly of bishops, and declared his intention to extirpate the
Jansenists. The crafty and unscrupulous De Marca, Archbishop of Toulouse,
prepared a formula to the following effect:—

“I sincerely submit to the Constitution of Pope Innocent X., of May 31,
1653, according to its true sense, as defined by the Constitution of our
holy Father, Pope Alexander VII., of October 16, 1656.[257] I acknowledge
myself bound in conscience to obey this Constitution, and I condemn, from
my heart and with my mouth, the doctrine of the five propositions of
Cornelius Jansenius, which are contained in the book of Augustinus, which
both the popes and the bishops have condemned; and the doctrine of St
Augustine is not that which Jansenius has falsely set forth, and contrary
to the true sense of the holy doctor.” All the clergy, and all persons
who were in any way engaged in the tuition of youth, were required to
subscribe this formula, and the most severe persecution awaited those
who refused to do so. Neither the pure and uncontaminated life of those
nuns of whom Bossuet himself said that they were “as pure as angels,”
nor the learning, the piety, the austere and exemplary conduct of De
Lacy, Arnauld, Nicole, and a hundred others, were a sufficient protection
against the persecuting spirit of the Jesuits. Those noble and
magnanimous men were dragged from their peaceable retreat, and sent to
pine away their lives either in foreign lands or in the dungeons of the
Bastille, of which the very passages were crowded with prisoners. Yet the
noble resistance of the nuns could not be overcome, and the persecutors
could only have amends of Port-Royal by levelling it to the ground.

[Illustration: _Père La Chaise._

_Hinchliff._]

Fiercer and more sanguinary was the persecution exercised upon the
Huguenots, who were very numerous in France at this epoch. Henry IV.,
after his cowardly apostasy, in order to pacify and calm his Calvinist
subjects, had, in 1598, by an edict dated from Nantes, the principal
town of Brittany, insured to them the free exercise of their religion;
leaving in their hands some strong places as a warranty. This edict had
afterwards been disregarded by the French Government on many occasions,
and Richelieu almost hazarded the throne in reducing Rochelle, the
stronghold of the Calvinists; yet no sanguinary measures were resorted
to, from purely religious motives, and the Huguenots lived, we may
say, almost unmolested. But after 1660, numberless and incessant petty
persecutions, or _tracasseries_, must have made those Protestants aware
of their impending ruin. The Jesuit Lachaise was the principal instrument
of all the cruelties exercised afterwards upon them. This Lachaise was
a relation of the famous Father Cotton, and confessor to the king. He
was the very personification of Jesuitism—handsome, polite, courteous,
pleasing in his manners, it seemed as if his whole care were directed to
captivate the love of all sorts of persons; he was never heard to utter
a word of dissatisfaction against any one. S. Simon says of him, “Il
était _fort Jesuite_—but polite, and without rage;” and Duclos affirms
that “he knew how to irritate or calm the conscience of his penitents
always with a view to his own interests;” and that, “though he had been
a fierce persecutor of every party opposed to his own, he always spoke
of them with great moderation.” He became the king’s confessor in 1675,
and, by the most skilful and adroit flattery, acquired a great ascendancy
over him. But do not imagine that he forgot his Jesuitical cunning. The
profligacy and the continual state of adultery in which Louis lived was
too great a scandal to be overlooked by such a pious man as Lachaise
pretended to be. Sometimes he got angry with his royal penitent, and
denied him absolution. “The solemnity of Easter” (the time in which the
confession is obligatory), says S. Simon, “gave him the _political_ colic
during the king’s passion for Madame de Montespan;” and Crétineau says
that “he would not absolve the king, but sent him another Jesuit, who
bravely absolved him.” Such was the man who undertook to extirpate the
Huguenots.

In 1685 appeared the proclamation which recalled the Edict of Nantes, _La
révocation de l’édit de Nantes_, and from that moment the poor Calvinists
were consigned to the tender mercies of the ferocious Jesuits, who, with
the help of the dragoons and the lowest of the populace, renewed the
horrible scenes of St Bartholomew, carrying the rage of fanaticism and
revenge so far as to exhume the buried bodies of the murdered victims,
and throw them into the common sewers. How many thousand industrious
families were driven naked and penniless into foreign lands! how many
children were made orphans! how many decrepid old men were left without
a child or descendant to close their eyes! Alas! let us draw a veil over
the infernal saturnalia.

Lachaise became now a most important personage of the court of Louis. The
king had built for this monk—who, though he made a vow of poverty, never
travelled but in a coach and six—a magnificent house surrounded by a
garden,[258] where the humble disciple of Loyola received his courtiers
and flatterers, and where he freely distributed _lettres de cachet_.[259]
He was the arbiter between Fenelon and Bossuet, between Montespan and
Maintenon, between the sovereign and his clergy. It was Lachaise who
united by a secret marriage the _great_ king and the governess of his
illegitimate children; but Madame de Maintenon never forgave him that he
had not obliged his royal penitent to acknowledge her publicly as his
wedded queen. But all the influence he exercised was nothing compared
to the exorbitant and almost royal power which he possessed as king’s
confessor. _La feuille des bénéfices_, that is, the right of disposing of
all the livings of all the bishoprics in the kingdom, was attached to the
office.[260] One may well imagine that Lachaise, who, as St Simon says,
was _fort Jesuite_, was not very sparing in conferring rich benefices
upon his own order. But a still greater advantage resulted to the Society
from the subjection in which they held the French clergy, who, depending
exclusively on a Jesuit for favours and advancement, renounced the
opposition they had formerly shewn to the Company, and became the most
humble and flattering adherents of the fathers. Even the Sorbonne, that
fiery opponent, became the supporter of the Society.

To the pleasing and polite Lachaise, in 1709, succeeded as confessor the
gloomy Letellier. He was cruel, ardent, and inflexible in his enmities,
reserved, mysterious, and cunning in his dark projects,[261] concealing
always the violence of his passions under a cold and impassive exterior.
His predecessor had left him little to do in the way of wholesale
persecution and massacre. The Huguenots had been murdered by thousands,
and three hundred thousand Calvinist families had fled from their
unrelenting enemies. The Jansenists had been in part disbanded, and death
had removed from the contest the Pascals, the Nicoles, the De Lacys,
and the whole of the Arnauld family. Only a few nuns, who could no more
receive novices or pupils, and with whom, therefore, their order must
necessarily be extinguished, remained in the monastery of Port-Royal for
the ferocious Letellier. He sent thither a troop of rough and licentious
soldiers, who dragged those delicate and feeble women from their abode,
and conducted them prisoners as obstinate heretics, to be confined in
different monasteries. Yet the dwelling which those sainted nuns had
occupied, the church where they had worshipped the Lord, the tombs where
many of them lay, and which they had sought in the hope to be delivered
from their persecutors, and there to rest their wearied bodies in peace,
still remained untouched. Letellier, to glut his revenge, turned his
rage against their glorious monuments, had the monastery and church
pulled down; and, violating with Vandalic ferocity the asylum of the
dead, he caused the bodies to be exhumed and thrown together in a heap,
to be devoured by the dogs, and had the plough driven over the sacred
edifice.[262]

After such examples as these, it is unnecessary to add more to shew
the influence the Jesuits possessed in France, and the abominable use
they made of it. We have gone beyond the epoch we have prefixed to this
chapter, the facts we have last reported having occurred in 1709, 1711,
and 1713. And we have done so, because these events mark the time from
which the power of the Jesuits began in France to decline from its
ascendancy.

Let us now see what was the conduct and the influence of the Jesuits in
other countries.

In Spain, the affairs of the Order were in the most flourishing
condition. Their revenues amounted to a very considerable sum. The
authority they possessed was almost unlimited. Philip III., who had
loaded them with benefices, expired on the arm of a Jesuit; and hardly
had Philip IV. taken the government into his own hands than he showered
down upon the Society still greater favours than his predecessor.[263] He
encouraged his subjects to build colleges for them; and many bishops and
noblemen, to please the sovereign, vied with each other in endowing the
Society with richly provided establishments, and in investing them with
all power and influence. But it seems that when the haughty and imperious
Olivarez possessed himself of the supreme power, he ruled with such a
despotic hand both king and kingdom, that very little share of authority
or influence was left to the reverend fathers. _Inde iræ._ The affront
must be resented, and, although it was rather difficult to attack openly
in Spain either the premier or the monarch, surrounded as he was by the
devotion and the love of his subjects, yet the Jesuits were not the men
to suffer patiently what they considered an injury. They then thought
of snatching from the hands of Philip that same sceptre of Portugal
which they had placed in the hands of his grandfather. They accordingly
set themselves to work, and formed a conspiracy to transfer the crown
to the head of the Duke of Braganza. The pulpit, the confessional, the
congregations, were all made to subserve their designs; and the minds
of the people being sufficiently prepared, they caused the duke to
repair to Evora. He took up his abode in the Jesuit college; and when he
descended into the church, thronged with people, Corea, a Jesuit father,
addressing the duke from the pulpit, exclaimed, “I shall yet see upon
your head the crown——of glory, to which may the Lord call us all!”[264]
The church rung with plaudits at this well-managed _réticence_; and the
mysterious prediction passed from the church to the street, and from
thence throughout Portugal, to strengthen the hopes and inflame the
courage of the Portuguese, already impatient to shake off the Spanish
yoke. From that moment the conspiracy made rapid progress. The fathers
publicly preached the revolt, without, however, altogether forgetting
their Jesuitical duplicity. The provincial forbade all his subordinates
to mix in political matters, and even imprisoned one of them for having
from the pulpit too openly exhorted the citizens to rebel. But the
greatest part of the fathers disregarded the order of their superior,
who, nevertheless, except in the instance just mentioned, left them
unpunished, and in the evening sat down with them at the same table as
friendly as ever—a policy which, we must observe, was adopted by the
fathers in all doubtful emergencies, in order that, on whichever side
the scales declined, there might be a portion of the Jesuits claiming
the merit of fidelity, and screening the others from the conqueror’s
resentment.

Crétineau confesses frankly that the Jesuits had been the soul of the
revolution, and says, “The Duchess of Braganza hoped to make her duke
king, even against his own will; but it was necessary to obtain the
co-operation, or at least the neutrality, of the Jesuits.”[265] The
efforts of the Jesuits were crowned with success. In 1640 a revolution
broke out at Lisbon, and was successful. “The house of Braganza did not
forget what it owed to the Jesuits for the past and the present; and
wishing, through them, to make sure of the future, it awarded to them
unlimited influence. The Jesuits were the first ambassadors of John
IV.”[266] After those very explicit words, let the Jesuits assert that
they are a religious community, detached entirely from worldly interest,
and merely occupied in the salvation of souls. It has been asserted that
the Jesuits, besides being animated by hatred to Olivarez, were induced
to co-operate in the revolution by the instigation and perhaps by the
liberal promises of Richelieu, who, as everybody knows, was anxious by
every possible means to harass and enfeeble the rival house of Austria.
However this was, the Jesuits became the almost absolute masters of
Portugal. Nothing was done without their consent. No minister would take
any important step without first consulting the Jesuits and obtaining
their permission. Lisbon became the seat of their extensive commercial
operations, and the centre of their trade between Europe and the Indies;
and Ranke says that the Portuguese ambassadors were empowered to draw
upon the Jesuits of Portugal for considerable sums. And, strange to say,
they at the same time enjoyed some influence in Spain under Philip IV.;
and this appears to have increased to such an extent under Charles II.,
that the testament by which this monarch named a grandson of Louis XIV.
to the throne of Spain, was dictated, it is asserted, by the Jesuits.

Here we are led to make a remark which will serve to illustrate the
true spirit of Jesuitism. In the fifth general congregation was passed
a decree forbidding all Jesuits to mix in any way in political or
secular matters; and by the eighty-fourth decree of the sixth general
congregation, all operations which have any appearance of being
commercial are strictly forbidden to the members of the Society.
Notwithstanding these decrees, the Jesuits dispose of the destinies
of kingdoms almost at their pleasure, and are the earliest bankers
in Europe. The General, who is armed by the Constitution with almost
unlimited powers to punish the infraction of his orders, and who can
dismiss the delinquent at any time he chooses, not only remains silent
when such transgressions are committed, but connives at, and even
encourages them, by raising those members who are the most skilful in
political affairs to the most important offices in the Society, and by
himself using and disposing of that money which has been acquired by a
manifest breach of the Constitution.

For what purpose, then, those decrees, if they are not to be observed?
What was the purpose contemplated by their framers, we cannot say, but
the use the Society makes of them is a very simple one. When they are
accused of mixing in political matters or commercial speculations, they
answer: “This cannot be; the Constitutions or the decrees expressly
forbid such things.” Thus, for example, Crétineau, after mentioning the
decree which forbids any sort of operation of a commercial nature, adds,
“This is the answer to the partial criticisms and interested injustice of
those who will endeavour to attribute to the great work of the missions
a sordid cupidity of lucre.”[267] We admire the boldness, not to say the
impudence, of this panegyrist of the Order.

All throughout Germany the Jesuits spread desolation and misery whenever
the cause of truth and freedom was overcome by the superior material
force of despotism and bigotry. “They were the most able auxiliaries
of Ferdinand in destroying the Protestants; they were in the imperial
cabinet, in his armies, among the defeated sectarians, and they even
dared to penetrate into the camp of the Lutherans”[268] (as spies, no
doubt). The Jesuits had formed Tilly, Wallenstein, and Piccolomini, the
three champions of the Catholic cause in the Thirty Years’ War.

“They (the Jesuits) accompanied the armies in their march, they followed
them to the battle-field; and after the victory, they disputed with the
Croats the fate of the prisoners of the day.”[269] Such is the version
of their historian. How far from the truth! It is unquestionable that
they had formed the three champions, and worthy of their masters did they
prove by their spirit of revenge and persecution. But it is an impudent
falsehood that the Jesuits interposed (as their calling made it their
duty) betwixt the executioner and the victim, betwixt the sacred laws
of humanity and the barbarous laws of war. No. On the contrary, they
preached the extermination of the Protestants, and gave out that no work
was so meritorious in the eyes of God as to kill those accursed heretics.
They did not calm, but rather excited, the ferocious passions of their
pupils the generals, and, above all, of Tilly, over whom they possessed
a very great influence. Once, after the battle of Strato, in Munster, I
believe the voice of the Jesuits was added to that of the citizens in
imploring mercy for some hundreds of unfortunate prisoners on the point
of being mercilessly put to the sword; and this single and exceptional
instance, whether the act of some human and compassionate persons, or of
cunning rogues eager to win for the Order an unmerited reputation for
clemency, is reported by the Jesuits as a general practice: while the
many acts of brutal Vandalism and revenge perpetrated under their very
eyes, and at their instigation, when they cannot be denied, are laid to
the account of others. This is a historical truth.

Nor were they disinterested persecutors. They fought here, as elsewhere,
not for their faith or their Church, but for their idol—the Order. Let
them speak for themselves:—“Corvin Gosiewsky, Palatine of Smolensk,
met Gustavus Adolphus near the Dunamunde, defeated him, and, to
consecrate the remembrance of this day, he founded a Jesuit house in
the town he had delivered. Every victory of that Palatine was for the
Jesuits a new mission,”[270] which means the erection of a new house or
college. The greatest part of the properties of which the Protestants
were iniquitously divested went to enrich the covetous and insatiable
disciples of Loyola. The Pope, usurping the right of disposing of those
properties, only because they had once belonged to the clergy, by a
decree, ordered “that a part of the property which had been recovered
be employed in erecting seminaries, boarding-schools, and colleges, as
well for the Jesuits who have been the principal authors of the imperial
proclamation,[271] as for other religious orders;”[272] which last clause
was of course rendered illusory, the Jesuits possessing themselves of
whatever portion of those properties was set apart for the aforesaid
purpose of building houses and colleges.

We have already seen what influence the Jesuits had acquired in Poland,
under Sigismund III., in whose reign “a systematic war of popular
riots, excited by the Jesuits or their tools, was begun against the
Protestants.”[273] In fact, their temples were overthrown, their
burial-grounds profaned, their properties destroyed, their persons
injured, and no redress whatever was given or could be expected from
judges and magistrates appointed at the recommendation of the Jesuits.
Their pupils not unfrequently celebrated Ascension-day by assaulting
those of the evangelical persuasion, breaking into their houses,
plundering and destroying their property. Woe to the Protestant whom they
could seize in his house, or whom they even met on the streets on these
occasions!

The evangelical church of Cracow was attacked in the year 1606, and in
the following year the church was furiously stormed, the dead being torn
from their graves; in 1611, the church of the Protestants in Wilna shared
the same fate, and its ministers were maltreated or murdered. In 1615,
a book appeared in Posen, which maintained that the Protestants had no
right to dwell in that city. In the following year, the pupils of the
Jesuits destroyed the Bohemian church so completely, that they left no
stone remaining upon another, and the Lutheran church was burnt. The same
things occurred in other places; and in some instances the Protestants
were compelled by continual attacks to give up their churches. Nor
did they long confine their assaults to the towns; the students of
Cracow proceeded to burn the churches of the neighbouring districts. In
Podlachia, an aged evangelical minister named Barkow was walking before
his carriage, leaning on his staff, when a Polish nobleman approaching
from the opposite direction, commanded his coachman to drive directly
over him; before the old man could move out of the way, he was struck
down, and died from the injuries he received.[274]

The University of Cracow, writing to that of Louvain, and referring to
one of those expeditions against the Protestants, headed by Jesuits, in
1621, expresses itself as follows: “The Jesuits are very cunning, expert
in a thousand artifices, and clever at feigning simplicity; but they
were the cause of much innocent blood being shed. The town (Cracow) was
deluged with it. The fathers were never satiated with murders, only the
arms of those ruffians whom they employed for their crimes were tired;
they were moved with compassion, and refused at last to proceed in the
massacre.”[275] Indeed, the fiery spirit of intolerance and bigotry
which the Jesuits had diffused was so strong and universal, that even
Wladislau, Sigismund’s successor, notwithstanding all his efforts, could
not arrest the religious persecution and protect his Protestant subjects
from the sanguinary fury of the Papists. It is true that Sigismund, in
following the Jesuits’ directions, and in attempting to re-introduce
Romanism into all his dominions, had lost his hereditary kingdom of
Sweden and the magnificent province of Livonia; but that was nothing
to the fathers. Protestantism was broken, their opponents were despised
or sacrificed, their houses and colleges had received great additional
revenues—what did they care for the losses of others?

On the premature death of Wladislau, his brother Cassimir ascended the
throne of Poland. He had been a Jesuit, and had sat in the College of
Cardinals. The Pope, that he might assume the sceptre, had granted him a
dispensation from all his vows. This Jesuit king, by his bad conduct and
cowardice, very nigh lost his kingdom; and when his subjects recovered
it from the hand of the imperious Charles Gustavus, king of Sweden, he,
in gratitude for that fidelity and gallantry, “committed himself and
the kingdom to the care of the Virgin Mary, and vowed to convert the
heretics;” which meant, says Krasinski, to disperse and extirpate them.

The Jesuits triumphed. We shall not follow those pitiless and relentless
monks in all the iniquities they committed, in all the miseries they
inflicted on poor Poland, which owes in great part to them the loss of
her literature, of her glory, and, in part, of her national existence.

Much has been said and written about the conversion to Romanism, by the
Jesuits, of Christina, the daughter of the heroic Gustavus Adolphus,
king of Sweden. But as this event did not produce any material change
on that country, we shall be very brief in our account of it. No doubt,
the Jesuits had a great share in bringing that capricious and haughty
woman into the pale of the Roman Church. The sad glory belongs to Macedo,
confessor to the Portuguese ambassador at the court of Sweden. He
persuaded her to seek rest to her disquieted mind in the unchanged and
unchangeable doctrines of Rome. By her order, Macedo went to Rome to ask
the General of the Jesuits to send her some of the most trusted members
of the order.[276] Some time after, two very handsome and young Italian
noblemen, travelling, as they gave out, for their improvement, arrived
at the Swedish court, and were introduced to the queen, and admitted
to the royal table. In these two very pleasing young men were to be
recognised two Jesuits, sent by the General; and these, being admitted to
secret interviews with the princess, achieved the work begun by Macedo.
Christina, on her conversion, renounced the crown, and went to Rome to
worship on his own pedestal of pride the idol which the bigoted Papists
adore in the place of God the Lord.

We must now return to examine the conduct of the Jesuits in England, and
we could wish that we were spared the task; for, in connexion with their
plots and crimes, we shall have to speak of the shameful and unchristian
proceedings of their opponents, which were such as we cannot think of
without sadness, and which convey but a poor idea of the goodness of
human nature when acting under the influence of exciting passions. By
the one party, the conception of a most abominable and infernal crime is
extolled as a meritorious and heroic action; while the other, to punish
the intended crime, violates the most sacred laws of justice and humanity.

There is no event in the annals of any nation, the memory of which has
been so carefully perpetuated as has been in England the gunpowder plot.
It is the first page of the national history which is taught to children
by its annual commemoration every fifth of November. We therefore shall
relate of it only so much as is necessary to demonstrate the part in
it that may be attributed to the Jesuits. Here, as in the affair of
Campion, it is rather difficult, amidst the many contradictory versions
and documents, to arrive at a clear and satisfactory conclusion regarding
the degree of culpability of the accused. We shall neither credit the
apologists of the Jesuits, Eudemon and Bellarmine,[277] nor Abbott’s
_Antologia_, and the assertions of James VI. himself, who, forgetting
the dignity of a king, entered the lists to shew his pedantic learning
and love of controversy. Instead of filling hundreds of pages with
contradictory quotations, we shall frankly state the conclusions to which
we have come after a careful examination of what has been written on the
subject.[278]

That the Jesuits were from first to last the contrivers of all the
machinations against Elizabeth and James, is an incontestable fact, and
we have in part proved it. The notorious and unrelenting Parson, who,
after he fled from England, became rector of the English college in
Rome, and possessed very great influence at the Papal court, was the
chief instigator of these plots. During Elizabeth’s lifetime, he had had
the idea of unceremoniously disposing of the English crown in favour of
the Duke of Parma, or of Cardinal Farnese, his brother; a ridiculous
and absurd project of a fanatic conspirator, which was ridiculed at the
time, by Pasquino,[279] in these words: “If any man will buy the kingdom
of England, let him repair to a merchant with a black square cap, in
the city, and he shall have a very good pennyworth of it.”[280] It was
Parson, and his brethren the Jesuits, who obtained from Paul V., against
the representation of Henry IV. of France, the bull which forbade all
the Roman Catholics to take the oath of allegiance, and which produced
so many miseries. It was he, too, who constrained the Pope to disgrace
the arch-priest Blackwell for having taken it, and who compelled the
secular priests to become rebels and victims against their own will;
which circumstance elicited from them the memorial to the Pope which we
have reported at p. 163. But, that no doubt may remain about it, listen
to the ingenuous Crétineau, who, enumerating the benefits rendered by the
Jesuits to Romanism, says, “Have they not preserved in England the germ
(of Popery) which is now _developing itself with such vigour_, and which
in Ireland, after three hundred years of martyrdom, BECAME A LEGITIMATE
REVOLUTION?”[281] No words can prove better than these that the Jesuits
were constantly and actively employed in Great Britain in propagating
Romanism, a doctrine which, according to them, confers upon the Pope the
right of supremacy, of disposing of the crown at his pleasure, and of
releasing the subjects from their allegiance to a heretic sovereign, and
which, consequently, amounts to high treason. In this aspect alone can be
in part excused those sanguinary laws of persecution and tyranny enacted
in the reigns of Elizabeth and James against the Roman Catholics. We
insist upon this consideration.

Now, in the particular case which we are examining—the gunpowder plot—we
believe that Catesby and Percy, _at first_, contrived the plot without
the knowledge or participation of the Jesuits, as it is not denied
that afterwards Gerard, Tezmund _alias_ Greenwall, and Garnet, were
made acquainted with it in all its horrid details. The whole question
regarding Garnet, who alone suffered for the conspiracy, has hitherto
amounted to this—whether he knew of it in any other way than as it was
revealed to him by Father Gerard, under the seal of confession. And
the Jesuits and Papists insist upon this point, pretending that, in
such a case, Garnet could not reveal the conspiracy without committing
sacrilege. To speak the truth, we are inclined to believe that he,
literally speaking, did not know of it otherwise; and these are the
reasons why we believe so. Garnet was not, like Parson, a bold and daring
partisan, capable of braving any danger, of attempting any enterprise.
He was a very poor conspirator, in no way disposed to earn the palm of
martyrdom. Catesby, who had been his associate in the plots during the
reign of Elizabeth, must have known him well, so that he and the other
conspirators did not trust him at first even with their confession. It
was Greenway who, in our opinion, violated the seal of confession by
apprising his superior of what was going on. It is not improbable, then,
that when afterwards Catesby proposed to disclose to him the whole plan
of the plot, Garnet, who had nothing to learn, refused to listen to him,
in order that, in case of ill-success, he might not be accused of being
an accomplice. That all the Jesuits approved of the plot and wished it
success, there is very little doubt, and we even believe that, without
speaking openly to the point, Garnet must have indirectly, by cunning,
adroit insinuations, encouraged the conspirators to consummate the
horrible crime. It is a fact deponed by Bates, and indubitably proved,
that Garnet and the other two Jesuits had frequent interviews with
Catesby and the other conspirators some few days before that which had
been fixed upon for the execution of the plot; and we do not hesitate to
say, that had Garnet wished to deter the conspirators from their infernal
projects, he might have found a thousand ways of doing so without at all
betraying the secrets of the confessional. But suppose that, as we have
said, Garnet and Greenway did not know of the conspiracy except under
the seal of confession, and that they in no way encouraged and abetted
it, yet we cannot acquit them of the charge of being accomplices in the
crime.

We have related at p. 140 that at Grenada the Jesuits had propounded a
doctrine that there are circumstances in which the confessor may oblige
his penitent to discover his accomplices or permit him to inform the
competent authorities of the crime. It is true that the crime specified
was heresy, but we think that the same may be said of murder or any other
crime, and that that doctrine which is good at Grenada must be equally
good in England. But let that pass, and let us proceed. The conspirators,
at least five of them, declared to the confessor, that they were
meditating a horrible crime, that they were taking measures to accomplish
it, and that they were sure of success. The confessor granted them
absolution, and another Jesuit administered to them the communion. Now,
the indispensable condition of the validity of absolution from a sin,
is, that the penitent feel repentance or contrition for having committed
it. How then could Father Greenway absolve the conspirators from a crime
of which they not only did not repent, but which they were proceeding at
all hazards to perpetrate? The evil spirit himself expounds this doctrine
to the unfortunate Guido, to whom he proves that the absolution he had
received from the Pope from a sin he had not yet committed was null.

    “No power can the impenitent absolve,
    Nor to repent and will at once consist,
    By contradiction absolute forbid.”[282]

We conclude from this, that either your confession is merely a snare to
entrap fools, or that Greenway considered the conspiracy not a hellish
crime, but a meritorious deed!

But we have a still more stringent argument. Suppose that, following
some of their _probable opinions_, the Jesuits thought that they were
obliged to absolve the miscreants, and that their ministry obliged them
faithfully to keep the secret, had they not the Pope, the omnipotent
Pope to apply to, to absolve them from that obligation? Is there any
precept, any sacrament, any law human or divine, from the fulfilment of
which, according to their doctrine, the Pope cannot grant a dispensation?
If there is any, let it be pointed out, and we shall absolve them. But
if they cannot deny that the Pope could have released them from the
secrecy of confession, and if they cannot prove that they asked such
dispensation, it is evident that they did not wish to prevent the crime.
And if this was connivance, and if this connivance was a capital crime,
then their condemnation was undoubtedly a legal and just sentence, and
they met with nothing but deserved punishment. We wonder that James, who
was so well versed in theological controversies, did not find out any
of these arguments, which would certainly have furnished more plausible
grounds for a condemnation than the equivocal confession wrung from the
Jesuits by the contrivance of ignoble and disgraceful snares. For if we
unreservedly condemn the Jesuits, we exclaim with equal energy against
the proceedings of their adversaries. All the forms of justice, all
the laws of humanity, were scandalously violated. Garnet is confined
in a prison, repeatedly interrogated, and, in order that he may betray
himself, assured that his accomplice Father Greenway has been arrested,
and that he has confessed everything. Then, after he has been long in
a dungeon alone, a jailor, pretending to be touched with compassion,
tells the desolate man, that another Jesuit is close by, and that he
can converse with, and even see him; and opens a door through which
the two friends can see each other. The manner in which his secrets
were surprised; the misconstruction of his words; the interception of
letters, which he was assured he might in safety write to his bosom
friends; the strange imputation of roguery, because he did not consent to
accuse himself, in clear and precise words; the promises which were held
out to him and never kept; and, above all, the protracted, cruel, and
inhuman moral torture which was inflicted upon him on the scaffold;[283]
all deserve our severe and unconditional censure. Thank God! in England
at least we are now far from those cruel times of injustice and
fanaticism, and we sincerely hope we shall never see them back again.

The Jesuits were not appalled nor discouraged by the execution of
Garnet, nor by that of Oldcorne, who had suffered at Worcester some days
before.[284] We find them in almost all the conspiracies which were got
up to impede the regular march of the government, and we find from time
to time severe and inquisitorial laws enacted against them, some of which
forbade them to set foot in England, under penalty of death. It is an
incontestable fact, that the Jesuits, by their turbulent and treacherous
conduct, were the cause of most of the rigorous measures taken by the
government against the Roman Catholics, who ought therefore to consider
those crafty monks as their most bitter enemies. Another inference may
be drawn from what we have related, namely—that no danger, not even that
of death, can deter a Jesuit from following out his projects, when once
they are considered to be profitable to the Order, or necessary to avenge
it of its enemies. The moment they could return from exile, the instant
they were set free from dangers or untied from the rack, they returned
to their plots and intrigues with unabated ardour and most wonderful
obstinacy. A striking instance of this was furnished by the Jesuit
Fischer, who, the moment he was liberated from the tower, undertook to
convert to Catholicism the mother of the brilliant Buckingham, who did in
fact abjure Protestantism, and, in union with France and Spain, contrived
to render less cruel the laws of proscription against the Catholics.[285]

During the fatal struggle which Charles I. maintained against the
Parliament, the Jesuits publicly and openly took part with the cavaliers,
because Charles was evidently much better disposed towards them than
were the Puritans. It is evident that, by shewing their devotedness
to the king, if the contest had ended in his favour, they might not
only have hoped for the free exercise of their religion, but for a
considerable share of influence over him. But a very grave accusation
was brought against them, which, if true, would shew them guilty of the
most diabolical iniquity. We have no proofs to establish this accusation,
which was produced some years after the event; but, if we are to declare
our own conviction, we firmly believe them guilty; not because we credit
in all its parts the narrative of Jurieu, but for the reasons we are
about to give. Jurieu relates that the Jesuits, to re-establish the Roman
Catholic religion, thought that it would be necessary that Charles, then
prisoner, should fall, and the monarchy along with him. In consequence,
eighteen of them, headed by a lord of the realm, went to Rome to consult
the Pope. The matter was discussed in secret assemblies, and it was
decided _that it was lawful that Charles should die_. The deputies, on
their return from Rome, shewed to the Sorbonne the response of the
Pope, _of which many copies were distributed_. The Sorbonne approved. On
their return to England, the Jesuits set themselves to work, and sent
many of the most ardent Catholics among the Independents, dissembling
their religion, to inflame still more their passions, and push things to
extremities. Their scheme having failed, they wished to _have back the
copies of the consultation of the Pope and the Sorbonne_; but the priest
who before abjuring Protestantism had been Charles’s confessor, and who
was intimate with the Jesuits, would not give up his copy, and, after the
return of the Stuarts, shewed it to many persons who were still living,
and could afford actual evidence of the reality of what he narrated.[286]

This statement, literally taken, does not stand examination, and
Crétineau, who reports it, triumphantly exclaims, that this manner of
writing history renders all discussion impossible.[287] No, certainly
not; such infernal projects as to drive the king to extremities, and
make the king’s head fall for the fulfilment of their designs, if
formed, were neither publicly nor secretly discussed at the Court of
Rome in the presence of eighteen Jesuits and a lord, and much less was
the conclusion they came to, and their approval of the project, put in
writing and _freely distributed_: we readily acquit them of such foolish
contrivances. But, knowing as we do the arts of the Loyolan brotherhood,
we repeat that we firmly believe that it is more than probable that the
Jesuits did mix among the Roundheads and excite their fanaticism to
frenzy. I have recorded (page 171) an almost similar fact which appeared
under our own eyes in Rome. And I must further add, that all the more
virulent men who, in the beginning of Pius IX.’s reign, were proposing
the most daring and extravagant measures, were afterwards discovered to
be either in the pay of the fathers, or to be the unconscious tools of
their secret agency.

Discouraged a little under Cromwell, the Jesuits took heart again after
the restoration of Charles II., and resorted to their usual arts and
machinations. If we are to believe what they boast of, it seems that
they had plunged into a more dangerous and extensive conspiracy against
the Protestant religion and the English liberties than we are aware of.
“A secret treaty,” says Crétineau, “had been signed between Louis XIV.
and Charles II., to re-establish the Catholic religion in Great Britain.
Fathers Annat and Ferrier, successively confessors to the French king,
and the English Jesuits, had not been strangers to this negotiation;
Colman did not ignore those details, and he spoke of them in his letters
to Father Lachaise.”[288] We do not know how far we may credit this
assertion; we know that Charles debased himself by asking and receiving
money from the French monarch, to whom he betrayed the interests of his
allies and of his own kingdom; but, as to having stipulated for the
re-establishment of the Romish religion, we would not be bold enough to
assert that it was so. However it be, this statement is connected with
the famous Popish plot which, in 1678, threw Great Britain into such a
state of alarm and excitement, and which, although it was at first the
cause of many innocent victims beings sacrificed, ultimately produced an
immense and glorious result—the Habeas Corpus Act.

Oates and Bedloe are two names which have come down to posterity abhorred
and execrated by every honest man. These infamous and abandoned men
accused the Jesuits, the Pope, the Kings of France and Spain, many
English noblemen, and some scores of thousands of the English citizens,
of a plot so absurd, as to make, in our days, every one ashamed of
repeating it. And yet the generality of the common people, and the
greater part of the higher classes, at the time believed in its reality.
Nothing else was talked of, and all the cares of the government, the
activity of the parliament, and the energy of the citizens, were exerted
to protect the nation from an imaginary impending ruin. This ought to
teach us how the passions and spirit of party deprive us of our right
feeling and judgment, and how dangerous it is to give way to the impulse
of the moment in times of great commotion. Many noblemen and citizens
were arrested upon the deposition of these scoundrels. Many suffered the
extreme penalty of the law. Father Ireland, on the deposition of Oates,
for which the latter was afterwards condemned for perjury, was sentenced
to death and executed; and soon after, the provincial and four other
Jesuits met with the same fate upon the same absurd and unjust accusation.

We do not pretend to say, however, that the Jesuits at such an epoch had
quite renounced their intrigues and treacherous projects, and were not to
be looked after. No; their restless and enterprising spirit rendered, and
does still render, them very dangerous, and their conduct in Protestant
countries may be said, with justice, to be a permanent conspiracy
against the welfare and the interests of all other communities; and they
themselves, as we said, confess as much. But they were guiltless of the
crime of which they were accused, and for which they suffered. How much
more mischief they were the cause of in the reign of the despotic and
bigoted James II.! It was at their instigation that this bigoted monarch
annulled the test act, imprisoned many Protestant bishops, had as many as
four Roman Catholic priests consecrated bishops at a time, and had formed
a plan for converting England to the Popish idolatry. Yet all these
arbitrary and foolish acts resulted also at last in the great advantage
of the English nation. The Jesuits’ influence had grown so powerful under
James’s reign, that Father Peter was admitted into the privy council, and
we do not hesitate to say, that the favour James shewed to the members
of the Company and to the Catholics in general, and the authority they
exercised over him, was one of the most efficient causes of raising up
the people of England’s feelings of indignation, and to bring them to
resolve upon and achieve the glorious Revolution of 1688.



CHAPTER XIII.

1600-1753.

AMERICAN MISSIONS.


When we reflect that the Jesuits are our fellow-men, that their crimes
and iniquities which we are compelled to stigmatise, are in some measure
a stain upon the human species, we sincerely rejoice when we find some
noble action to record, and when we may write a page of praise and
eulogium. We think we have shewn this impartiality in our account of
the Indian missions, when, while condemning with all our might the
idolatrous practice of later times, we awarded to the first missionaries
the praise that was due to their pure and generous intentions, and to
their prodigious and unremitting activity. We are placed in much the
same predicament in speaking of the American missions, when we find
the evil inherent in the spirit of the sect, and in the religion they
profess, united with noble and generous endeavours to make the happiness
of a barbarous and savage population, by reducing it under benignant
and humane laws, and by imparting to it the benefit of Christianity, at
least in its effects upon the external conduct and mode of living. No
doubt, a Christian Protestant—a man deeply imbued with the true spirit
of the gospel, and who abhors any form of worship which consists in mere
bodily service—will find much to blame in these missions. No doubt the
Jesuits here, as in India, preached and taught superstitious practices
and external observances, rather than the sincere devotion of the
heart, and the faith to be reposed on the merits of Christ’s blood. No
doubt they converted the spiritual and mystic religion of Christ into a
sensual worship of material symbols. But, to be just, we think that these
reproaches are due to Popery, to the Roman Catholic religion in general,
and not to the Jesuits alone, and that we ought not to withhold from them
the praise they deserve for any good quality or merits they possess,
merely because they are Papists. This would be too invidious, and would
render us guilty of capital injustice towards those Romanists or Jesuits
who sincerely believe that theirs is the only true religion; and be
assured that in all religions, there are some who think thus of their
own. On the other hand, the Jesuits are accused of having undertaken
these missions solely with a view to their private ends, to aggrandise
and enrich the order, and not to advance the interests of religion and
the glory of God. This we freely admit, and we have repeatedly said that
_the Order_ has always been the ultimate end of their conduct; but to
refuse them the merit of having brought a savage population into the pale
of civilisation, because they did so for their own private interest,
would be the same as to apply the epithet of rogue to a landlord or
manufacturer, who treats his dependants with unwonted kindness and
humanity, because, by treating them in this manner, he himself receives
immense advantage.

Our readers must not infer from what we have just said, that we do not
find anything with which to reproach the Jesuits in their American
missions. We shall have many things to censure in them, but, on the
whole, their proceedings appear to us to be deserving of the greatest
praise, and we feel obliged to defend them from the gross abuse which has
been indiscriminately poured upon them on this score.

The character of the Western and Eastern missions differ widely, both in
the means employed and the results obtained. In East India and China,
the principal feature of the missions is the idolatry with which the
Jesuits polluted the Christian religion. Having to deal with populations
in possession already of more or less civilisation, and deeply imbued
with the prejudices of their religion, the Jesuits thought of humouring
them in their belief, and sometimes shewed themselves more inclined to
idolatry than the pagans they were labouring to convert. Besides, having
on one side to contend with the pagan priests, who wanted themselves to
work the ignorance and prejudices of the Indians to their own account,
and being harassed on the other by the chief of their own religion, who
would not admit of any other idolatry than that which was approved by
himself, the Jesuits could not obtain in the East Indies any great and
permanent result.

Of a quite different character are the missions of America. The Jesuits
found there a barbarous and savage population, zealous of their
vagabond independence, fierce in their enmities, without any positive
notion of a peculiar religion, and, consequently, easy to be subjected
to any superior intelligence who should undertake to inculcate upon
them no matter what new creed. The chief difficulty there lay in the
impossibility of having any intercourse with the persons whose conversion
was desired. The Indians, simple and kind when first discovered, had
now become ferocious and excessively cunning, having been driven to
extremities by the cruel and merciless treatment they had experienced
from the rapacious Spaniards, a treatment which had inspired them with
mortal hatred against all Christians, and against the very name of
Christ, which had been sacrilegiously employed in the massacre of their
kinsmen. Yet it was among the same savages, who avoided Europeans more
than a ferocious beast, that the Jesuits, without arms or any compulsory
means, simply by persuasion and kindness, succeeded in erecting an
empire, all the laws of which were based upon the first principles of
Christianity. Let us see how they performed such real prodigies.

The Spanish adventurers had brought into conquered America all the vices
and the ferocious passions of their Inquisition. It might be said that
South America had been transformed into a large inquisitorial tribunal,
and that every soldier was an inquisitor and an executioner at the same
time. The adventurers, to palliate their crimes, when they murdered the
poor, inoffensive Indians, gave out that they did so to honour Christ,
whom these obdurate pagans refused to worship. It is not our intention
to detail all the crimes of those most Christian assassins, and we shall
be contented with saying, that while they butchered tens of thousands of
inoffensive people, in endeavouring to convert them to their religion,
they succeeded with but very few; and those who, to avoid tortures and
death, submitted to be _baptized_, hated still more than their pagan
brethren the very name of Christians.

Ranke gives a very prosperous picture of the state of religion in
America, and says, “In the beginning of the sixteenth century we find
the proud fabric of the Catholic Church completely erected in South
America. It possessed five archbishoprics, twenty-seven bishoprics, four
hundred monasteries, and _doctrines_ innumerable.”[289] Now, with all
deference to so great a historian, we venture to say, that we admit the
veracity of the statement as to the number of monks and monasteries,
archbishoprics and bishoprics; but we believe that these establishments
were in proportion to the extent of the country, not to the number of
Christian inhabitants. Indeed, in every tract of land of which the
Europeans had taken possession, there was erected a church, if not for
the accommodation of these same Europeans, at least to furnish priests
and monks with a pretext to claim a share in the spoils and wealth of the
country; but we doubt much that many Indians frequented these churches.
The swarms of monks who had flocked to America, finding in the climate
a still greater stimulus to their usual propensity to indolence and
luxury, indulged in all their vices, and thought only of making converts
as far as was necessary to procure some subjects who might enrich
their patrons, the soldiers, as well as their monasteries.[290] Such,
however, was not the conduct of the Jesuits. There, as in Europe, they
wished to be distinguished from other brotherhoods, and affected a more
saintly and pious course of life. Concealing their ultimate purposes
under the cloak of religion and piety, they spoke of nothing else but of
converting infidels, and opposed, in the name of Christ, the sanguinary
measures adopted by the conquerors, and approved by other religious
communities. Perhaps we are not far from the truth when we assert that
the Jesuits adopted a more humane and Christian policy, as well for
their private purpose, as to set themselves in opposition to other
religious communities. Because, it is a remarkable fact in the history
of the Church of Rome, that while every other brotherhood has both
friends and foes in the other bodies, the Jesuits alone have none but
enemies. However it was, they set themselves to work; and, overlooking
for a moment the greater or less holiness of the end they proposed, we
repeat, that the means they made use of to acquire a standing among the
savages of South America are deserving of the highest encomium. The
conquerors of this unfortunate part of the globe, as Robertson remarks,
had no other object in view than to rob, to enslave, to exterminate,
while the Jesuits established themselves there in the view of humanity.
They overran the country to a great extent, and wherever they could find
an Indian, they overwhelmed him with so much kindness, shewed him so
much affection, spoke so indignantly of the cruelty and avarice of the
ferocious conquerors, with so much unction of the mercies of God, that
these injured men yielded by degrees to the fascination, and accustomed
themselves to look upon a Jesuit as a protector from the oppressions of
the other Europeans. And protectors they were, and proved to be. Father
Valdiva went purposely to Madrid to obtain from Philip III. orders
enjoining officers to treat the poor Indians with a little more humanity,
and brought back a decree, that those Indians who had settled within
certain precincts ruled by the Jesuits, should neither be reduced to
servitude, nor be _forced_ to embrace the Christian religion.[291] In
the Tucuman, in Paraguay, in Chili, the Jesuits in their wanderings were
making many and devout proselytes, but with no other material advantage
to the order except the envy of the other brotherhoods, and the hatred
of the Spaniards, whose interests they were damaging. The sagacious and
politic Acquaviva perceived at once that this state of things must be
mended; and, in consequence, he sent to America, in 1602, a commissioner,
who, re-uniting in Salta all the Jesuits dispersed in different
countries, apprised them that the General thought it expedient to trace
a plan to moderate the eccentricities (_écarts_) of zeal, and to direct
its impetuosity;[292] in other words, to turn such zeal to account. In
consequence, it was determined to concentrate all, or at least their
greatest efforts, upon a point, and fix there the seat of their power in
the New World. After having provided that a sufficient number of the
order should remain at the stations throughout all South America, to
keep up their schools and colleges, and their commercial establishments,
Acquaviva wished that his disciples should employ all their energies in
creating a new kingdom which they could call their own.

Paraguay, an immense and most fertile region, was chosen for a site on
which to erect this principality, far from any rivalry, and with the
view that the subject should know no other master, no other religion, no
other God, than those presented to them by the fathers. The undertaking
was difficult, and required a great deal of courage, patience, and
intrepidity; but the Jesuits proved equal to the task. By degrees, they
succeeded in bringing some tribes to listen to them. The Guaranis were
the first who had friendly intercourse with the Jesuits, and who were
persuaded by them to renounce their wandering and adventurous life,
and to taste the sweets of a well-regulated society. Some houses were
built under the direction of the fathers. The lay brothers, or temporal
coadjutors, were the artisans who supplied them with what was most
essential to render life pleasant and comfortable. Above all, the power
of music was brought to bear on the vivid mind of those savages, who were
charmed by the melody of the sacred songs repeated by the fathers.

The knowledge the Jesuits had of the art of healing wounds and bodily
diseases, contributed also in great measure to procure them friends and
admirers. Curiosity further favoured their efforts, while it brought the
Indians to view what appeared to them such strange things in the Jesuit
settlements, after they were sure that they should meet with nothing but
kindness and presents. Where at first stood a few isolated houses, soon
sprung up a village, which subsequently became a neat and regular little
town. The plan traced for these towns was uniform, and very simple. The
streets, of one breadth, extended in straight lines, and met in a central
square. The church was built in the most conspicuous situation of the
village, and was by far the most handsome and decorated building in the
town. Near the church were the house of the fathers, the arsenal, and the
storehouses. In every village there was also a workhouse, or a sort of
penitentiary for bad women.

These villages were known under the general appellation of _Reductions_,
but each of them was distinguished by a proper name. The first which
was established was dedicated to the Madonna of Loretto; the second, to
St Ignatius; and others to other saints and Madonnas. As early as the
year 1632, the Jesuits possessed twenty Reductions, each containing a
thousand families. Two Jesuits, the curate and the vicar, were appointed
to the management of each Reduction, which they governed with absolute
and unquestioned authority. They were the sovereigns, the friends, the
physicians, the gods, of those barbarians who consented to live in the
Reductions. They partook of their labours, of their amusements, of
their joys, of their sorrows. They visited daily every house in which
lay a sick person, whom they served as the kindest nurse, and to whom
they seemed to be ministering genii. By such conduct they brought this
primitive population to idolise them.

It must not be supposed, however, that the Jesuits obtained at once over
the ferocious adult Indians a general and absolute power. Even those
who had consented to receive baptism, and to live for some time in the
Reduction, often deserted it, and disdaining to live that peaceful and
comparatively effeminate life, returned to their forests, and to their
former life of constant warfare, in search of their enemies, in order
to gratify their cannibal appetites. Often they rebelled against the
Jesuits’ authority, and not seldom menaced them with utter destruction.
But the second generation—those children who were born within the
Reduction, and had been brought up by the fathers—shewed themselves the
most submissive and devoted of all subjects. Gratitude for the kindness
they had experienced, admiration for the superior intelligence and
acquirements of their masters, awe for the religion they were taught,
fear of punishment and disgrace—all combined to render them faithful and
submissive to the fathers.

When once the Jesuits had raised up a generation so devoted and obedient,
they then brought into operation their system of government, and made
a successful attempt to realise that republic preconceived of old by
Plato, and which, with perhaps more interested views, is held out to us
by the Socialists of our own day. In fact, their form of a republic was
nothing else than that Communism which the famous Cabet is now trying to
establish in nearly the same regions; the only difference being, that the
Jesuits substituted themselves for the state or community.

The most perfect equality reigned in the Reductions. No mark of
distinction, no difference of dress, of house accommodation, or of food,
rendered one envious of the lot of another. In every Reduction there
were workshops in which were exercised the most useful arts. The moment
the boys were able to work, they were sent there to learn the trade to
which they felt most strongly inclined, according to a principle to which
the Jesuits invariably adhered—“that the art must be guided by nature.”
The Jesuit lay brothers, or temporal coadjutors, were the artisans who
instructed the youth, and they and the professed members themselves put
their hand to the plough, to encourage the Indians in conquering their
repugnance to labour the soil. Every family was assigned a portion of
ground, which they were obliged to cultivate; and a severe vigilance
insured a good cultivation. The women had also their occupations. Every
Monday morning they received a certain quantity of wool or cotton, and
every Saturday they were required to bring it back ready for the loom.
All the produce, of whatever sort, was deposited in large storehouses,
and distributed, by the Jesuits, in equal portions to every individual.
Even meat was portioned from the public slaughter-houses in the same
manner. In the distribution, the greatest attention was paid to the
orphan, the helpless, and the superannuated. The surplus of the produce
was exported, and partly exchanged for European wares which were wanted
in the Reduction; and the remainder, after having paid a piastra (four
shillings) for each individual from eighteen to fifty years of age, as
a sort of tribute to the King of Spain, remained at the disposal of
the fathers. No coin of whatever sort was permitted or known at the
Reduction. A spot of ground attached to every house may be said to
have constituted the only property belonging to the individual; and
this was done to encourage and recompense industry: for, if he made it
productive, he reaped all the profits himself, without diminishing the
portion he received from the common store. The daily occupations were
minutely regulated. There were fixed hours for work, for amusement, for
prayers, and an hour was even fixed in the evening after which every
person was obliged to return within the wall of his own habitation. Any
transgression of any of the established rules met with public corporal
punishment; but, in general, the transgressor feared more the anger of
the father, than the castigation that awaited him. General suffrage
was exercised in its fullest extent; and it was the people who elected
their magistrates, and their civil and military officers. All these
public functionaries were invariably chosen from the Indians; but, to
flatter the pride, or lull the jealousy, of the Spanish king, they were
distinguished by the Spanish appellations, Corregidor, Alcalde, &c.
The choice of the people was submitted, _pro forma_ at least, to the
approval of the Spanish authorities, who, not knowing either electors or
candidates, could not but approve of it; but, in reality, the sanction of
the Jesuits was indispensable to the validity of the election.

To keep these people in such a state of dependence and submission, the
Jesuits had secluded them from the rest of the world. No individual could
leave the Reduction without permission, and no European was allowed to
visit these Reductions unaccompanied, or to have free intercourse with
the inhabitants. The knowledge of any other than the native language was
altogether banished, and aversion and prejudices against the Europeans as
carefully cherished as in ancient Egypt.

Nor were the Reductions left unprotected against the possible attacks of
foreign enemies. All able-bodied men were drilled to arms, and formed
into a militia, having its regulations, its officers, its arsenal, its
artillery, its ammunition. The officers were chosen by the soldiers; the
arms and ammunition, not excepting the cannon, were manufactured in the
Reduction, always by, and under the direction of, the Jesuits. On the
afternoon of every Sunday, and other holidays, the militia assembled and
executed military exercises and evolutions. When that militia was called
forth for the service of the Spanish king, “they had always at their head
and among their ranks, Jesuits, who prevented all contact with other
Indians or with Europeans, and who answered for their virtue before God,
as the Indians answered for their courage before men.”[293] Nor, indeed,
did they fail in their duty when an occasion presented itself. Tribes
of savages often attacked the Reductions, but were met with undoubted
courage, and, generally speaking, were repulsed after sustaining severe
loss.

But if, on the one hand, the Jesuits cherished among the people distrust
and aversion towards strangers, they, on the other hand, diligently
inculcated the exercise of hospitality and friendship among the different
Reductions. On the great festival days, and especially on the day of the
patron saint of any Reduction, the neighbouring ones went thither in
solemn procession, and were received with all possible marks of love and
friendship.

Such is a sketch of the civil government of the Reductions, and of the
kind of life led by the inhabitants. Objections and reproaches, and
perhaps not always unfounded, have been raised against such a system. It
has been said that the inhabitants of the Reductions were low and abject
slaves, led on by the scourge, deprived even of the faculty of thinking,
and confined in a perpetual imprisonment, though within a large space.
Quinet, with perhaps more eloquence than reason, exclaims, “Are we sure
that it (Paraguay) contains the germ of a great empire? Where is the
sign of life? Everywhere else, indeed, one hears at least the squalling
of the child in the cradle; here, I greatly fear, I confess, that so
much silence prevailing in the same place for three ages, is but a bad
sign, and that the regime which can so quietly enervate virgin nature,
cannot be any other than that which develops Guatmozen and Montezuma.”
All this is very well said, and may be in part true. Doubtless, these
people were kept in perpetual infancy. Doubtless, nothing great, nothing
of a creating stamp, must be expected from them. Doubtless, they did
not develop and expand the new element of life imparted to them, as
other nations have done who were more left to themselves; nor did they
exercise the noblest part of their nature—the intelligence—in that
pursuit for which we think man was created—the search after truth. But
surely there are nations who have been placed in worse circumstances,
and subjected to more disastrous influences, and more deserving our
pity and commiseration. Thus, if a nation, that has, through the free
exercise of all its faculties and activities, arrived at a high state
of civilisation and refinement, should be at once crushed, as France is
at the present moment, under the iron hand of despotism, that people
would be really miserable, and such doleful lamentations as those of the
eloquent ex-professor of the College of France would not in this case
be misplaced. But these Americans, who knew nothing of the pleasures of
moral and intellectual refinement but what was presented to them by their
instructors, and found therein contentment, we do not know how far they
deserve to be pitied. Were these people, we ask in our turn, less happy
or more miserable than those tens of thousands who wallow in vices of all
sorts in the free and civilised towns of Paris and London? Are, then,
squalid poverty, the groans of the oppressed, and reckless sensuality,
necessary elements of national happiness? These are questions which in
our opinion deserve some consideration; and although we think the human
race has been destined by the Creator to greater and nobler purposes
than the mere enjoyment of a material life; and although we know that
humanity must progress in its career, and that this progress cannot be
attained without great commotion and great evil, nevertheless, when we
contemplate all the miseries which surround our state of civilisation,
we freely forgive the Jesuits for having, in one part of the globe, let
civilisation and progress sleep a while, to render these poor Indians
happy.

Better founded are the charges brought by the pious and zealous against
the Jesuits, with respect to the kind of religion they taught to their
neophytes. In fact, though we cannot trace any such permanent system
of gross idolatry as was practised by the order in the East Indies,
nevertheless it is an undeniable fact, that what was taught by them
under the name of the pure religion of Christ, was little else than
a series of empty forms and superstitious observances, and that the
worship which was rendered to God was little better than a continual and
motley masquerade, if we may be allowed the expression. We shall not
enter into details, the following passage from Crétineau sufficiently
shewing what sort of Christians, if they can be called so at all, were
those converted by the Jesuits. “Those Indians had a very limited
intelligence; they only understood what fell under their senses; and
the missionaries were so alarmed at their stupidity, that they asked
themselves whether it was possible to admit them to the participation
of the sacraments. They consulted, upon this point, the bishops of Peru
assembled at Lima, who came to the decision _that, baptism excepted, no
act of Christian devotion should be imposed upon them, without infinite
precautions_.”[294] It is true that the panegyrist of the order adds,
that the patience of the Jesuits was not discouraged for all this, and
that they endeavoured to render them better Christians, and, we even
believe, if the man who fulfilled all the imposed external ceremonies may
be called a Christian, that they succeeded in their attempt.

However, it seems that the Jesuits had so completely perverted the true
spirit of the Christian religion, that even Roman Catholic bishops,
who, as every one knows, are not very scrupulous in these matters, were
shocked and indignant at their conduct, and made an attempt to put a
stop to it. Bernardin of Cardenas, Bishop of Paraguay, and John Palafox,
Bishop of Angelopolis, were the most prominent in their efforts to put a
stop to the Jesuitical superstitions; but both were unsuccessful; both
were worsted in the contest; both were obliged to wander as poor exiles
out of their dioceses; and both were at last compelled to give up their
bishoprics. The history of Palafox in particular deserves to be briefly
told.

Palafox was a man of the greatest piety, of a pure and uncontaminated
life, and, after his death, was even proposed for canonisation. He bore
no ill-will to the Jesuits; on the contrary, as a good Papist which
he was, he even overrated their merits. In his letter to the King of
Spain, he says of them, “The Company of the holy name of Jesus is an
admirable institution, learned, useful, sainted, worthy not only of the
protection of your majesty, but of all the Catholic prelates.”[295] A
man who thus speaks of the order cannot be suspected of enmity; and it
must be inferred that he would not have attacked the Society, unless
constrained by duty or necessity. He attempted at first to bring them to
reason by remonstrance.[296] He afterwards wrote a strong letter to Pope
Innocent X., and asked for a reform of the Society, indispensable, he
said, for the good of the Christian community. The result was, that the
Jesuits raised such a storm, and excited so many bad passions against
the virtuous prelate, that he, “not to be imprisoned or murdered, was
obliged to fly, and to wander,” as he wrote to the Pope, “through
inhospitable mountains and forests; to appease his hunger with the bread
of affliction; to quench his thirst with the water of his eyes; to have
no other house than caverns and the hard ground; and to pass his life
with serpents and scorpions.”[297] Such was the life to which the Jesuits
had reduced the poor bishop. But even this did not satisfy them. To
satiate their spirit of revenge, they did not scruple to profane the
episcopal dignity, and the most sacred mysteries of that religion which
they professed to uphold. In 1647, on the day of the festival of their
founder Loyola, the pupils of the college got up a procession, of which
the following were the principal features. One of the scholars had the
crozier hanging from the tail of his horse, and the mitre at the stirrup.
Another carried an image of the bishop in caricature; others carried
indecent images of highly respectable priests. This one gave a blessing
with the horns of a bullock, saying, “Such are the true armorial of the
Christians.” That others _held up with one hand the image of the Saviour,
and with the other an infamous thing which decency forbids us to name_.
All of them shouted out the Lord’s Prayer, at the end of which they
repeated with thundering shouts, “Libera nos a Palafox—Deliver us from
Palafox.”[298]

At last, the Court of Rome, in order to protect him, transferred him
to the see of Osma in Spain, where he gave such proofs of virtue and
piety, that he died in the odour of sanctity, received subsequently the
title of _Servus Dei_ and _Venerabilis_, and, about sixty years after,
was proposed for canonization.[299] But can it be believed—would any
one imagine—that Jesuits of the third generation would step forward
to renew their attack against the ancient opponent of the order, and
oppose his canonisation? And yet such was the case. The General of
the Company actually interfered, and by the mouth of the promoter of
the faith—_promotore della fede_,[300] calumniated his doctrines, his
conduct, his life; and succeeded in postponing the canonisation till the
storm which was gathering broke forth, and dispersed for a while the
hated Company of Jesus.[301] This example goes far to shew how deeply is
rooted in the heart of the Jesuit the spirit of hatred and revenge!

We have reported at some length the incidents connected with Palafox,
as peculiarly exemplifying both the character of that individual, and
the nature of the facts and the scandal they produced among the Papists
themselves, and which is not yet alleged. But this is merely one
example, amongst thousands, of the domineering and persecuting spirit
of Jesuitism. “The innumerable and continual proceedings that were
brought against you at the Court of Rome,” says Gioberti, addressing
the order, “bear witness of the kind of concord and good friendship
which the Company maintained with their companions in the priesthood
and apostolate. The first cause of the quarrel has always been, that
your missionaries wanted to be alone, and to exclude the other orders
from any participation in the missions; and for this they first of all
applied to the Holy See; and when they did not succeed there, they had
recourse to all sorts of tricks, insidious calumnies, persecutions, and
acts of violence.”[302] So speaks a man who glories in being a truly
good Roman Catholic, and who enumerates many bishops, vicar-generals,
popes, legates, &c., who had been sorely persecuted by the fathers. In
fact, here is the policy adopted by the Jesuits towards the superior
ecclesiastical authorities everywhere, and more especially in the East
and West Indies. We beg the especial attention of our readers to the
following statement, because it serves to explain the apparent anomaly
existing among Popish bishops and other functionaries, in respect to the
favour or hatred shewn by them to the Jesuits.

The bishop, or legate, or cardinal, or whoever possesses any authority,
must be either friendly or adverse to the Company, and this especially
in foreign and distant lands far from the control of Rome. In the former
case, the Jesuits will load him with praises, whether deserved or not.
They will pronounce him a saint, a luminary of the Church, a model of
Christian virtue; and leaving to him all the external pomp and ostensible
authority of his office, they will command and direct everything in his
name. To such men they give the utmost outward respect, and make the most
humble protestations of devotion, repeating at every word that they are
the most obedient servants of the Holy See, and of its representative.
And this same conduct of theirs, and the testimony which those same
persons are ready to give to their dutiful behaviour, is held out by the
fathers as an answer to those who reproach them with disobedience and
irreligion. But if these ecclesiastical dignitaries refuse to submit to
the guidance of the fathers, and pretend to exercise their own authority
independently, they become profligate heretics, monsters of iniquity;
and they may consider themselves fortunate if they escape with treatment
short of that bestowed upon Palafox and De Tournon. Indeed, even the very
Popes have been treated in nearly the same manner, and have been extolled
or slandered, according as they were favourable or adverse to the
Society. There are to be found in the _Bullarium_ a quantity of briefs
against the Jesuits for their disobedience to the representatives of the
Holy See, and for the persecutions these had suffered from them.[303]
Their disobedience, and spirit of revolt against the Court of Rome,
with respect to their conduct in the missions, in which they persisted,
had become so offensive and provoking, that first Innocent X., and then
Innocent XIII., had resolved to abolish the Society, not by a bold and
decisive measure, as did afterwards Clement XIV., but by forbidding the
reception of any more novices. Innocent XIII., after having ordered the
Inquisition to collect full evidence of the almost traitorous actions
of the Jesuits, in answer to an apologetic letter of the General,
who declared the Society to be innocent, or, at least, excused their
insubordination and rebellion, issued a bull by which it was expressly
forbidden to the General, and the Society, to give the habit to any
novice, or to admit any to take vows, whether simple or solemn.[304] But
while Innocent was determining to act with extreme vigour against the
Society, he died, and by a death which awakened no unnatural suspicion of
foul play.[305]

Such are the broad features of the American missions. We may as well
add, that the Jesuits thought it prudent to refuse admittance into the
Company to all the aborigines, in order that they might not lose the
prestige which they exercised over them. We must also warn our readers
not to imagine that the Jesuits had confined their establishment to the
Reductions of Paraguay. Paraguay was their own private kingdom, we may
say, but they had also magnificent establishments of all kinds throughout
all South America. Particular incidents, minute details, miracles,
wonders, as related by the Jesuits in their histories, and in their
letters, _annuæl_ or _edifiantes_, we shall not repeat; nor shall we
record some partial acts of cruelty and wickedness with which some of the
Jesuits have been reproached. We think we have given as fair an idea as
possible of the general character of the missions, and this is all that
can be done in a general history of the order. As we shall afterwards
have occasion to speak at some length of the commercial operations of the
Jesuits, and of the ultimate fate of the Reductions, we shall now bring
this chapter to an end.



CHAPTER XIV.

1617-1700.

INTERNAL CAUSES OF DECLINE.


We have seen in one of our former chapters, that during Acquaviva’s
_generalate_, there broke out several partial insurrections against the
exorbitant power of the General, and that, although they were quelled,
they had left in the community seeds of disobedience and a spirit of
independence, which it was to be feared would manifest itself again
at the first favourable moment. In fact, the instant it was no more
restrained by the iron hand of the inflexible Acquaviva, it pervaded all
the classes of the order, especially the highest, that of the professed,
and a turbulent and haughty aristocracy took, in the management of the
Society, the place reserved by Loyola for the all-powerful General. The
character of the immediate successors of Acquaviva greatly facilitated
such an innovation, which ultimately produced the ruin of the order.
Vitelleschi, Caraffa, Piccolomini, Gottifredi, were not the proper men
to govern this brotherhood, now ascended to the height of its power and
pride. They were neither saints nor rogues enough to succeed in the
undertaking. They did not inspire veneration enough by their pious and
saintly life as did Borgia, nor respect and admiration by their superior
genius in governing the community, as Lainez and Acquaviva had done, and
the consciousness of their own insufficiency rendered them still less
suited to the task.

Vitelleschi, Acquaviva’s immediate successor, was a well-intentioned
man, mild and conciliatory. He was called by his friends the _angel of
peace_, and on his death-bed he found consolation from the conviction
that he had never injured any one.[306] But it is evident that such
a kind and indulgent man could not oppose any effectual resistance
to the fast-spreading corruption of the order, nor to the demands of
determined ambition. What under Acquaviva had only been the expedient
of the moment, became under Vitelleschi a rule. The professed members
became, if not exclusively, at least simultaneously with the coadjutors,
the administrators of the temporal concerns of the Society; and the
control which the two classes had exercised, the one over the other,
according to the wise enactments of Ignatius, was for ever annihilated.
While the number of the coadjutors decreased, that of the professed
became out of all proportion numerous, but lost some of that veneration
which they had earned in former times by a life, in appearance at least,
wholly spiritual and ascetic. Besides, as we have said, persons of
the highest families, eager for ecclesiastical dignities or temporal
power, now sought admission into the order, and Vitelleschi had
neither the intention nor perhaps the power to refuse them, whether
they were qualified or not. The strict and searching scrutiny to
which the candidate ought to have submitted, and to which in fact he
had been subjected under Loyola and the two following Generals, had
become gradually less severe; but under Vitelleschi it was altogether
neglected, and the novices were absolved from many obligations to which
the Constitution rightfully subjected them. The abuses resulting from
the non-observance of the most essential rules increased so greatly,
that Vitelleschi himself was much affected by it, and poured forth his
affliction in a most eloquent and deprecatory letter, which he addressed
to the members of the order. From this letter we extract the following
passage:—“But whence can we suspect our disinclination to Divine
things—our feeling of laborious irksomeness in recollection—in checking
the wanderings of our vagrant imaginations, frequently tending in that
direction which is least to be desired, because we have not repressed
them when we could? What is that tenacious and entangling love of the
lowest objects—the world, honour, parents, and worldly comforts?—that
greater authority conceded to the rebellious flesh and blood rather
than to the spirit in action, for I care not for words;—that enervated
exhausted weakness in resisting the solicitations of the adversary in our
conflicts with the domestic enemy, perhaps not entirely yielding, but
still not evincing that alacrity and exaltation of mind to which only
victory is granted? These are the fruits of timidity and of a dissolute
spirit, which, unless it is raised betimes, and warmed anew, is clearly
approaching a fall and destruction.” And the letter concludes with these
remarkable words—“I eagerly call all to witness and proclaim to them,
that with Bernard I expect an answer to this epistle, but an answer of
_deeds_, not words.”[307] “So that,” says Gioberti, “during Vitelleschi’s
government, the spirit of the Constitution was quite changed: the
politicians prevailed over the saints, and a worldly spirit over that of
mysticism.”[308]

The evil increased under Caraffa, who succeeded Vitelleschi in 1646,
and who was still less able than his predecessor to govern the Society.
Caraffa was a simple and innocent bigot, not altogether unworthy of
commendation. He was remarkable for his humility: he would have no
carriage, no servant, no mark of distinction, as to food or raiment, from
the humblest of the brethren.[309] He repeatedly begged his disciples to
lay aside all political and temporal concerns, and to live a religious
and pious life. He was shocked and grieved at heart on account of the
pervading spirit of licentiousness and avarice, and predicted that it
would be the ruin of the order. In fact, the Society was continually
departing more and more from the principles on which Loyola had
established it. The rule, that all who entered the order should abandon
every temporal possession, had been strictly enforced in former times,
but now the act of renunciation was either delayed, or performed under
conditions, and that under different pretences, and especially on the
ground that any Jesuit was liable at any time to be expelled from the
Society. So when a novice now made the transfer of his property to the
order, he clearly specified that it was in favour of such and such a
college to which he was attached, and often with the reservation of
himself administering the property he bequeathed; so that, even when
the property remained in the order, it was no more unconditionally at
the disposal of the General representing the entire community, but of
an individual, who, in a certain measure, still considered it as his
own. Nay, many of the Jesuits, having more leisure and skill than their
relations, undertook the management of their affairs.

Against those evils Caraffa could do nothing but write letters filled
with complaints, and prescribing remedies which were never to be resorted
to. Thus, speaking of those Jesuits who wished to retain their property,
he says, “Having settled in their own minds in what houses or colleges
they are to fix their abode, ... they labour strenuously to obtain for
themselves the administration of what they have resigned to the Society.”
And again, “Our procurators should be more cautious, for, although they
seek what is just by lawful right, still they seem to seek it with
avarice and cupidity, and exhibit too much avidity, which smells of the
world.”[310] And as to profane conversation and licentiousness, Caraffa
says, “Nor can I possibly pass over in silence that these errors are in a
great measure the result of the error of the superiors.”[311]

What a poor idea these two generals give of the authority, the prestige
exercised by them over the Community! what a contrast with their
predecessors! How different would Loyola, Lainez, or even Acquaviva have
acted! When a General of the Order, aware of the evils which have invaded
the Society, can find no remedy but in complaints, the Society must
inevitably perish; and so it happened to the Jesuits.

Piccolomini, who succeeded Caraffa in 1649, and Gottifredi, who succeeded
this last in 1652, were men without any energy or capacity, perhaps less
jealous than the two former Generals of the purity and morality of the
order; and, in their short administrations, they could do nothing but
witness its increasing corruption.

Here it is to be remarked, that in the election of the General, the
choice of the congregation now invariably fell upon a person without
character or authority, that the fathers might have no master over them;
and when the next General, Goswin Nickel, attempted to assert, in part,
his authority, he was soon made aware that the times of Loyola and
Acquaviva were gone by.

Nickel, elected General in 1652, was a rude and obstinate man. He did
not, indeed, contemplate any very deep or searching reforms; he suffered
things to proceed, on the whole, as they had previously done; but it
was his habit to insist on the observance of his orders with peculiar
obstinacy, without having any regard to the feelings of others, and he
offended so grievously the self-love of the aristocratic part of the
Society, that the General Congregation of 1661 adopted measures against
him, such as, from the monarchical character of the institution, could
hardly have been supposed possible.[312] The Congregation, desirous
of setting Nickel aside, and yet unwilling to pronounce a deposition,
applied to the Pope for permission to elect a vicar-general, and Innocent
X. not only granted their request, but pointed out for the office his
friend Oliva, who was accordingly elected. Then the Congregation, having
decided that the vicar-general should possess a _primitive_ power,
independent of the General, the authority of the latter was wholly
superseded, and entirely transferred to the vicar; so that, when some
Jesuits went to pay their respects to Nickel, he, in a lamentable tone,
said to them, “I find myself here entirely abandoned, and have no longer
power to do anything.”[313]

It is curious, if not instructive (the veracity of the Jesuit historians
being very well known), to listen to Crétineau’s account of this
transaction. “Nickel,” says the French historian, “felt that he was
growing old, that his infirmities no longer permitted him to govern with
the required vigour; he begged of the Jesuits to discharge him from a
responsibility too great for him, by giving him an assistant; and they
acceded to his prayers.”[314] Nickel survived his disgrace three years,
and Oliva became General.

Oliva was descended from a noble family of Genoa, where his grandfather
and his uncle had respectively been Doge of the republic. In Oliva the
Jesuits found at last a chief according to their hearts. He worshipped a
repose interrupted only by political intrigues, and the pleasures of the
table.[315] He spent a great part of his time in the delicious villa near
Albano, where he occupied himself with the cultivation of the rarest
exotics. When in Rome, he retired to the noviciate of St Andrea, where
he seldom condescended to give audience. He never went out on foot. He
lived in a most sumptuously and elegantly adorned apartment, enjoying
the pleasures of a table furnished with the most select delicacies,
such as would have tempted the appetite of a Vitellius.[316] He was
only studious of enjoying the position he held, and the power he had
obtained. Reserving for his particular attention matters of political
importance, he left the affairs of the Society to the entire management
of subordinate officials; and from that moment it may be said that
every individual (we speak of persons of some consequence, for in every
society there are simpletons always ready for obedience) became, in a
great measure, his own master. Not that the interests of the Society were
neglected; on the contrary, they were never so prosperous.

The members of every religious community are individually great in
proportion to the greatness of the society to which they belong, and the
esteem in which it is held by the public. This of itself induces every
individual member to seek with all his powers the aggrandisement and the
splendour of his order; and if this is true of any other association,
it is pre-eminently so of the Society of Jesus. The Jesuits of the
seventeenth century worshipped the Order with as much idolatry as their
predecessors, and, to serve it, were always ready to act the part of
hypocrites, deceivers, perjurers, miscreants; but every one served
it (except in great general emergencies, in which they all acted in
union) according to his own views and his own affections, some of them
assuming even an absolute independence; as, for example, Annat, Lachaise,
Letellier, &c.

Under Oliva’s government, the Society acquired an immense political
importance. Some years before his death, Oliva published his
correspondence, which extended to almost all the monarchs of Europe,
in which, indeed, he shews himself a consummate politician, and deeply
engaged in most serious and important affairs. This already awakened
some interest, and made people look upon the Order as a good auxiliary
in political intrigues. Besides, the fact that the Jesuits were
confessors to all the Roman Catholic sovereigns, and that through them
the General had it in his power to become acquainted with the most secret
dispositions and plans of these sovereigns, rendered his friendship of
inestimable value, and an object to be eagerly sought for by the most
potent princes. Again, the confessor, having less or more, but always a
great influence over his royal penitent, became also a great personage
in the country where he exercised his functions. Annat was a mediator
between the _great king_ and the Pope; and Alexander VII. thanked him
for his good offices by a brief.[317] Lachaise and Letellier were
possessed of still more power than Annat. The Court of Rome itself, at
such an epoch, was obliged to succumb to the influence of the Order;
and if any Pope, in an unlucky moment, ventured to oppose them in any
of their contrivances, he was soon obliged to retract his orders, and
to confess implicitly that he had done wrong. The Jesuits call this
epoch the golden age of their Society; but we should rather call it the
iron one, since it was during this epoch of splendour and glory that
they departed furthest from the principles of their institution, and so
prepared their own ruin. Possessed of very great wealth, enjoying an
immense credit and influence with all classes of society, they yielded
to the temptations peculiar to such a situation; and, disregarding
every rule of prudence, and the restraints of public opinion, they gave
themselves up to the lust of power and riches—prosecuting their ambitious
projects by the most questionable means, and thinking of nothing else but
reaping the advantage of the position they had attained. As few dared
now to oppose them, and as the people were silent on their vices, they
thought that these vices were now overlooked; and this encouraged them
still more to persist in their reprehensible conduct. It was during the
seventeenth century that the Jesuits, lifting up for a while the thick
veil of hypocrisy under which they had perpetrated their crimes, allowed
the world to penetrate into the heart of their conduct, and to discover
what they really were. In vain, when they perceived they were known, did
they pull down the veil again. Their faces had been observed, and ever
after they were to be recognised, under whatever mask they attempted to
conceal themselves. It was during the seventeenth century that they gave
to their traffic a scandalous development, and that they set themselves
up as dangerous rivals to the largest establishments. It was during the
seventeenth century that they set all the other religious orders at
defiance, and awakened in them sentiments of hatred and jealousy, which
are not yet extinguished. It was during the seventeenth century that they
abused, more scandalously than ever, the credulity of their votaries. The
example which we are going to quote in this particular will serve for
many.

Among the manuscripts in the British Museum, there is a passport given by
the Jesuits in 1650, for the consideration of 200,000 florins (£10,000),
to Hippolite Braem of Ghent, promising to defend him against all infernal
powers that might make attempts upon his person, soul, or goods. Here is
a translation of this strange document:—

“The undersigned protest and promise, on the faith of priests and true
religious in the name of our Company, sufficiently authorised for that
effect, that our Company, takes Master Hippolite Braem, LL.D., under its
protection, and promises to defend him against all infernal powers which
may make attempts upon his person, his soul, his goods, or his means;
that we conjure and shall conjure for this effect (to prevent attempts
upon his person, &c.), the most serene Prince our Founder, making use in
this case of his authority and his credit, in order that the above-named
Braem may be presented by him to the blessed chief of Apostles with much
fidelity and carefulness, since our Company is infinitely obliged to him.
In faith of which we have signed the present, and authenticated it with
the seal of the Society. Given at Ghent, March 29, 1650, and signed by
the Rector, Seclin, and two Jesuit priests.”[318]

It seems that in India the Jesuits made a great traffic of such
passports. In those distant regions, the impudence of the fathers must
have been still greater than it was in Europe. The Father Marcello
Mastrilli, when in Japan, boasted that many times a-day he sent his
guardian angel to pay reverence and deliver messages to St Francis in
heaven, and that he received answers.[319] We are not surprised at the
ridiculous and barefaced impudence of Mastrilli, who is celebrated for
his ridiculous impostures; but we are surprised that Bartoli, such an
accomplished writer, and not altogether despicable historian, should
relate with imperturbable gravity such puerile absurdities.

In 1681, Noyelle, “who had not the same brilliant qualities as his
predecessors,”[320] succeeded Oliva, and was himself succeeded, in
1687, by Gonzales, a harsh theologian, who died in 1705, and had for
his successor Father Tambourini. Nothing remarkable happened during the
rule of these generals; at least nothing that presents us with any new
feature in the history we are writing. The Company followed the course
it had entered upon, and marched with steady step towards its proper
ruin. Not that there was any apparent sign of decay. The Society was,
on the contrary, more powerful, more courted than ever. But its power
did not lie any longer in its intrinsic merits, or its adaptation to the
wants of humanity; and the interest and respect by which it seemed to
be surrounded was ephemeral, and in some degree compulsory. With a few
sincere devotees there was a crowd of courtiers who flattered for their
own interest. The Company resembled an all-powerful minister, hated for
his personal qualities, but worshipped and extolled to the skies by the
crowd of those who fear his power or await his favour, impatient till the
sovereign frown upon him, that they may manifest their real sentiments.
Such was the state of the Society of Jesus during the seventeenth
century.



CHAPTER XV.

1700-1772.

DOWNFALL OF THE JESUITS.


We have brought down our history to the beginning of the eighteenth
century, an epoch in which the power and greatness of the Society of
Jesus had, by a gradual march, ascended to a point from which, following
the law inherent in all human things, it could not but decline; for
institutions, empires, and nations, have, as well as man himself, their
successive periods of infancy, youth, manhood, old age, and decrepitude;
and if institutions, doctrines, or nations, revive after their moral
death, they never regain the same degree of force and vitality which
they possessed when rising to the maturity of their power. According to
this constant rule, it was evident to any profound observer that the
Jesuits had attained that height from which they must inevitably descend;
but, as always happens, they never dreamed of their impending fate, and
scorned the sinister forebodings of some of their number who foresaw and
predicted it. Then, when these predictions proved true, they laid the
blame of their fall upon every one but its real authors—themselves; for
it is to them that must be attributed the ruin of their institution. To
the causes of decay which we have stated, we must add that which was
perhaps the principal one—namely, that the Jesuits, once in possession of
power, remitted their prodigious activity, for which they had been so
remarkable at the commencement of their institution, and even disregarded
those arts by which they had obtained that power. Even the Instruction,
that all-powerful engine which had so admirably served their purposes,
was neglected, and had lost its original character. It was no longer
either gratuitous or universal; children of families known to be adverse
to the Order, were, on one pretence or another, refused admittance, or
sorely annoyed if admitted. Twice a year, at Christmas, and on their
patron saint’s (Loyola’s) day, the pupils were obliged to bring presents
to the masters; and rewards and marks of distinction were given in
preference to the children of wealthy families, or to those who brought
the richest present. This naturally produced in these young persons a
consciousness of independence, so that they would no longer endure the
severity of the ancient discipline.[321] Some of them even went so far
as to stab their masters, and the revolts of the pupils of the Collegio
Romano became proverbial. Besides, the zeal which the fathers had shewn
at first to promote study, had not only cooled away, but was directed to
oppose any sort of progress.

To those primary and internal causes which accelerated the downfall of
the order, must be added also many external ones, all militating against
them.

In those countries in which the Jesuits had had the greatest influence,
as Spain, Portugal, and Poland, although they preserved, as yet, the
favour of the court, they had lost that of all the other classes of
society, who, at least in secret, accused them of being the cause of the
abasement and the ruin of their respective countries. On the other hand,
those sovereigns of Germany who had sought the Jesuits’ help to oppose
their Protestant subjects, after the peace of Westphalia, wishing to calm
rather than inflame religious quarrels, though they did not withdraw from
the Jesuits that protection they had granted them, at least refused to
give them that almost unlimited authority they had formerly enjoyed. But
the surest, perhaps, of all the symptoms of their approaching ruin was,
that the Court of Rome itself began to frown upon them, and to shew a
determination to lower their pride, and to bring them to some sense of
their duty. We have already seen (pp. 127, 128) many bulls condemnatory
of their conduct in China and India, and that Benedict XIV. had applied
to them the very harsh and offensive appellations of “disobedient,
contumacious, crafty, and reprobate men.” The same Pope, at this period
also accepted the dedication of Father Norbert’s _Mémoires Historiques_,
of which we have already spoken; and encouraged the publication of many
other books, all adverse to the Society. All this was ominous to the
Jesuits.

It was, however, in France, the former seat of their power and glory
during the seventeenth century, that the ruin of the order was most
effectually prepared. The overthrow of Port-Royal, the revocation of the
Edict of Nantes, the massacre of the Huguenots, and all the persecutions
exercised in that country in the name of religion, were justly attributed
to the Jesuits. Nor was this all; the exclusion from every office, civil
or ecclesiastical, of every person who was not entirely devoted to the
Order, had made their tyrannic yoke to be detested and abhorred in the
highest degree.

While the despotic Louis XIV. ruled France with an iron hand, and
Lachaise and Letellier had a full disposal of _lettres de cachet_, few
dared openly to give vent to the hatred they bore to the Society; but
hardly had the bigoted prince expired, when the long-restrained animosity
broke forth, and the Jesuits were assailed on every side. The Jansenists,
the other religious orders, the curates, the bishops, all now attacked
the monks, who, some months before, had kept them in such awe, and had
been masters of their fortunes. It has also been asserted—and the
Jesuits repeat it every day—that the abolition of their order was due
to the then fast spreading subversive doctrines of the Encyclopædists,
and that Ganganelli suppressed this bulwark of the Christian religion
to please the atheist Voltaire and his disciples. But this, in the
exclusive sense in which the Jesuit takes it, is by no means true.
The Encyclopædists were not the Jesuits’ particular enemies, nor the
auxiliaries of the Jansenists. They were, perhaps, more opposed to the
strict and ascetic character of the recluses of Port-Royal, than to the
worldly and accommodating morality of the progeny of Loyola. But the
Jesuits had identified themselves with the Roman Catholic religion, and
all its bigoted and superstitious practices, and the philosophers were
happy that they had introduced into it so many ridiculous superstitions
and ceremonies, upon which they could exercise their sarcastic and
trenchant wit. Voltaire and his school could not have awakened in
the hearts of their contemporaries such dislike, nay, contempt and
abhorrence, for the religion of Christ, had not the Jesuits furnished
them the means, by having introduced into it contemptible and idolatrous
superstitions. The Encyclopædists’ principal aim was to destroy the
Christian religion; and for this purpose, coupling with malignant
sagacity the sublime doctrines and pure morality of Christ with the
ridiculous practices and impure doctrines of the Papists, and especially
of the Jesuits, held up the whole to the derision and profanation of
a superficial public; who, unwilling to make any distinction, boldly
asserted that nothing was true, nothing was holy, nothing respectable,
in the Christian code. Again, the philosophers, in their praiseworthy
endeavours to introduce the principles of civil and religious liberty,
attacked the Jesuits, now become the unconditional supporters of all
despotism and tyranny. In this sense, and in this sense alone, it is
true that the Encyclopædists largely contributed to the overthrow of
the order. The pamphlets and books printed and widely circulated at that
time against the reverend fathers were mainly a mass of evidence exposing
their iniquity, and tending to effect their ruin in the opinion of Europe.

Nor did the Jesuits, blinded as they were by past success, oppose any
efficacious resistance to the torrent which threatened to sweep them
away. Without changing their conduct in the least, they had recourse
to expedients, and thought that a little patience and cunning would
suffice to shelter them from the passing hurricane. This was their
general practice. However, not to be altogether passive spectators in
the contest, they made an attempt to ingratiate themselves with the
sceptical and profligate Philip of Orleans, regent of France, not,
indeed, by granting him absolution, which he cared very little for, but
by negotiating for him with the Papal Court, by discovering to him the
secrets of Philip V. of Spain, who had intrusted to his confessor his
intention of abdicating, and by procuring for the libertine and ignoble
Dubois an episcopal seat and a cardinal’s hat. But if D’Orleans, for
political ends, seemed to be the Jesuits’ friend, he was not assuredly
the man to use his authority to defend them; and they were, from 1716 to
1729, deprived of the exercise of every ecclesiastical function, having
been interdicted by Cardinal de Noaille. Under the sensual and voluptuous
Louis XV., the Jesuits attempted again to regain their lost influence,
and, as far as the favourable hearing of the sovereign was concerned,
they in part succeeded. They contrived to insinuate to him that their
cause was the cause of religion and of the throne, both menaced by the
philosophers; and, to a certain extent, they persuaded many that such
was the case, and their enemies did not remain unmolested. But while
the parliament and the court, in their official capacities, condemned
the Encyclopædists to the Bastile, and their works to be burnt, they
individually read with avidity whatever epigram was aimed at the Jesuits
and the Christian religion, and Louis XV. was not the last to participate
in the sneer.

Meanwhile, the new doctrines of political reform and civil liberty had
spread so fast, and were so eagerly embraced by the populations of
different kingdoms, that their sovereigns thought proper to give some
satisfaction to public opinion, and call to their councils reforming
ministers. In France, Choiseul; in Spain, Wall and Squillace; in
Portugal, Carvalho; in Naples, Tanucci—were placed at the helm of the
state, and began to attack the most obnoxious abuses against which people
had set their minds. Now, in this disposition of the public opinion, it
was evident that, at the first favourable circumstance, the ruin of the
Jesuits, who had been so greatly damaged in popular favour, would be
actually consummated; because it was to be expected that in this case
would happen what generally takes place in political movements, that when
once the moral revolution is accomplished, the smallest pretext suffices
to achieve the triumph of the material one also.

Either the Jesuits furnished this pretext to Carvalho, prime minister
of the King of Portugal; or, at any rate, imagining that he had himself
discovered it, he attempted the overthrow of the Order. But the causes of
this overthrow were not, as is asserted by the able historian of the fall
of the Jesuits, wholly local, and of a private and personal nature.[322]
Any other occurrence would have served the purpose as well. It may be
that Carvalho accelerated their ruin; but even without him the Jesuits
must have fallen. We shall briefly trace the order of events which issued
in their expulsion from Portugal.

The Jesuits, from their first entrance into the kingdom, had exercised
a great influence over the destinies of Portugal. This influence, which
they had in part lost during the interval that Portugal was under the
sway of the Spanish monarch, became paramount under the new dynasty. The
Jesuits governed in the name of the two queens, the widow of John IV.
and the wife of Alphonso VI., who had married her brother-in-law during
the lifetime of her first husband, whom she dethroned, and chained to
a rock.[323] Under John V., their power reached its climax, and it was
while they ruled the nation that “Portugal fell exhausted under the
protecting power of England, never again to recover her position.”[324]
At the commencement of Joseph I.’s reign, which we are now considering,
they possessed an equal and again unlimited power; but at that juncture
a man arose to arrest their progress. This man was Carvalho. He was born
in 1699, of a family of the middle class, or at the most of the lowest
grade of the nobility. He was endowed with many rare qualities, with a
great aptitude for business and administration, with unequalled energy
and courage, and with a mind vast and capable of great designs; but he
was proud, vindictive, cruel, and not seldom unjust. To arrive at power,
Carvalho (subsequently Count of Oeyras, and Marquis of Pombal, under
which last name he is better known to history, and by which we shall
henceforth designate him) had courted the friendship of the Jesuits, and
was by them brought into favour. He soon became the favourite, and then
the master, of the weak and contemptible Joseph I. Pombal, in appearance,
shewed himself grateful to the Jesuits, and to the last moment assured
them of his friendship. But whether, in his capacity of statesman, he
thought them to be prejudicial to the welfare of the Portuguese nation,
or whether he began to hate them, because the fathers, perceiving that
they could in no way govern such a man as Pombal, had leagued with
the nobility, a class of citizens whom the vindictive minister wished
to annihilate, it is unquestionable that at a certain period Pombal
resolved, if possible, to rid Portugal of these dangerous monks. But,
prudent and crafty, he dissembled his sentiments till a pretext or a
favourable moment should arrive.

A first unjust pretext he thought he had found in the conduct of the
Jesuits in 1753. At this epoch a treaty between the Kings of Spain and
Portugal effected a mutual exchange of provinces in America; and, in
order that the inhabitants might remain under their former sovereigns, it
was stipulated that they should respectively quit the ceded territories.
These people resisted such an unjust and tyrannical order; and the
population of the Reductions took up arms and fought bravely for their
own country, although in vain. The Jesuits were accused by the minister
of having excited them to revolt, which they have denied, even affirming
that the General wrote to his subordinate of Paraguay to prepare the
neophytes for such a change, and warning them that, if difficulties
should arise, he would transport himself to the place, to see that the
orders of the kings were obeyed.[325] But, from what we know of the power
exercised by the Jesuits in the Reductions, it is evident that these
submissive beings would never have dared to stir without the consent
and the encouragement of the fathers—encouragement which possibly they
may have given them underhand, while preaching, in public, obedience to
the sovereign’s orders. By resorting to this duplicity, they incurred
the blame of both parties, while, if they had boldly asserted their
interference in vindicating the inalienable right of men not to be
bartered as cattle at the caprice of every despot, they would have
earned the applause and the eulogy of every noble and generous soul.

However, Pombal had not as yet acquired that unlimited power which
he afterwards attained, and did not dare, or was not able, to strike
the blow he was meditating against the Society, and was obliged to be
contented to prepare the way for their ruin. But an event soon occurred
which rendered him absolute master of the destinies of Portugal, and left
him at liberty to deal with the Jesuits as he pleased.

On the 1st of November 1755, an earthquake destroyed three-fourths of
Lisbon. A conflagration added to the desolation, and, that nothing
might be wanting in this scene of horrors, an armed band of brigands
preyed in open day on the unfortunate victims of the direful calamity.
Discouragement and despair had seized on the boldest. The courtiers
insisted that the court should emigrate to Oporto, and the king and the
royal family ardently desired to leave the desolate Lisbon. Pombal alone
refused to let them depart. “The king’s place,” said he to Joseph, “is
in the midst of his people; let us bury the dead, and take thought for
the living.”[326] Under appalling and difficult circumstances, the power
belongs to the most energetic. Pombal seized on the helm of the state
as his right, declared himself prime minister, and, unaided and alone,
prepared to conquer all the difficulties with which Portugal was at
this moment threatened. There was something of antique greatness in the
courage which Pombal displayed that excited general astonishment.[327]
In fact, he was everywhere; he thought about everything; he provided for
every emergency; and soon, by his unequalled energy, a new town sprung up
on the ruins of the ancient capital.

And now Pombal, having attained a position which permitted him to attempt
everything, thought of putting in execution the two great projects he
had conceived—the subjection of the aristocracy, and the expulsion of
the Jesuits from Portugal. He had already published a number of edicts
to restrain the power and humiliate the pride of the nobility, against
whom he had conceived a great hatred, for the scorn they had offered him
in refusing to admit him among them. And now the turn of the Jesuits had
come. On the morning of the 19th September 1757, without any new motive
or circumstance having determined the proceeding, he removed from the
court the three Jesuit confessors, and assigned to the royal penitents
three ordinary priests. This first act of enmity was immediately followed
by manifestoes which soon inundated Europe, in which the premier brought
against the Jesuits several terrible accusations. Then, to countenance
his accusations, Pombal applied to the Pope, as ecclesiastical chief
of these monks, and in his complaint he gave especial prominence to
that which was most calculated to displease and provoke the censure
of the Court of Rome. He represented to the Holy See that the great
mercantile operations of the Society impeded the accomplishment of his
commercial plans and the promotion of the national prosperity, and asked
for a prompt and efficient measure to put a stop to it. The chair of St
Peter was at that time occupied by the amiable, learned, and upright
Lambertini. Benedict XIV. did not hesitate a moment to comply with
Pombal’s desires, and committed the visitation of the Order to Cardinal
Saldanha, a very intimate friend of the minister.

Before we proceed further, we think it necessary in this place to give
our readers some general idea of the commercial operations of the Society.

The large donations which, at the commencement of the institution,
had enriched the Society, having become less frequent, the Jesuits
thought of increasing their wealth by applying themselves to trade.
They pretended that there was no material difference between the
practice of agriculture, which had formed the principal occupation of
the first monastic orders, and the labour of commerce in which they
were engaged. The Collegio Romano possessed a manufactory of cloth
at Macerata, and though at first they produced it only for their own
use, yet they soon proceeded to supply all the other colleges in the
provinces, and ultimately the public in general, for which last purpose
they attended the fairs. From the close connexion existing between the
different colleges, there resulted a system of banking business; and the
Portuguese ambassador at Rome was empowered to draw on the Jesuits of
Portugal. Their commercial transactions were particularly prosperous in
the colonies. The trading connexion of the order extended, as it were, a
network over both continents, having Lisbon for its central point.[328]
Such is the account given by our contemporary historian. We shall now
quote the opinion of an eye-witness, a man high in power in India, and
who could certainly have had the best information regarding the facts. M.
Martin, general commander of Pondicherry, expresses himself thus:—

“It is certain that, after the Dutch, the Jesuits are the largest and
the richest traders in India, richer even than the English, than the
Portuguese themselves, who have brought them there.... Those disguised
Jesuits intrigue everywhere. The secret correspondence they keep up
amongst themselves, apprises them of the merchandises that ought to be
bought or sold, and to what nation, in order to make a more considerable
profit; so that those disguised Jesuits are of immense advantage to the
Society, and are only responsible to the Order represented by other
Jesuits, who overrun the world under the true habit of St Ignatius, and
who possess the confidence, the secrets, and the orders of their chiefs
in Europe. Those Jesuits, disguised and dispersed all over the earth,
know each other by signals, like the freemasons, and act all upon the
same plan. They send merchandise to other disguised Jesuits, who, having
the goods from first hand, realise considerable profits for the order.
However, this traffic is highly prejudicial to the interest of France.
I have often written about it to the Company (of India), but under
Louis XIV. I have received orders very precise, and often repeated, to
grant and advance to those fathers all that they may ask. And Father
Tashard alone owes at this moment more than 450,000 francs to the
Company (of India).”[329] We have reported this document, because it was
considered at the time, even in Rome, and by the Papal Court, as of great
importance, and as representing the real state of things.

In the West Indies, Jesuits were to be found in all the markets with
different kinds of produce; and this they do not even attempt to deny,
but excuse themselves by saying that “the ecclesiastical law has never
forbidden the sale of the produce of one’s own domains. The Jesuits were
the guardians of the Christians, whom they had re-united in society in
Paraguay; and in consideration of the inability of these savages to
manage their own affairs, many Spanish kings granted to the missionaries
the right of selling the produce of the ground cultivated by the
neophytes, as well as that of their own industry.”[330] The Jesuits had
so well used this liberty of trading, that the largest banking houses in
South America belonged to the Company, and one of them[331] alone became
bankrupt for more than two millions and a half of francs, an enormous sum
at the epoch.

Nor had they been less busy and active speculators in Europe. In
Malta, in the year 1639, during a famine, the Jesuits, who had five
thousand sacks of corn in their granaries, in order that they might
not be obliged to give it up to the government at a lower price than
they expected for it, applied to the Grand Master Lascaris for succour
to their actual necessities, and were relieved, on account of their
supposed poverty, from the public storehouse. But the trick was at last
discovered, and they were expelled from the island. But we could not
adduce stronger proofs of their eagerness to accumulate wealth than the
letters of Vitelleschi, Caraffa, and Nickel, some passages of which we
have reported, in which they bitterly complain of that spirit of avarice
and speculation which had pervaded all the classes of Jesuits, and which
they vainly deprecated.

To return to our narrative; Saldanha, either to satisfy the impatience of
Pombal, or because the proofs of the Jesuits’ guilt were too numerous and
too clear, soon published a decree severely reprobating the commercial
pursuits of the order, and empowering the royal authorities to confiscate
all merchandise belonging to those ecclesiastics.[332]

But, in the meanwhile, the man who had ordered the visitation, and to
whom belonged the ultimate decision, Lambertini (Benedict XIV.), had
departed from this world. Had God granted him a longer life, he would
probably have taken energetic and decisive measures against the order;
and any other pontiff than the one who succeeded him, would in all
likelihood, in one way or another, have given satisfaction to the public
opinion. But, unfortunately perhaps for the Jesuits, Benedict XIV. was
succeeded by a man wholly blinded in their favour, who declared that, to
the last, he would be the protector and the friend of “the holy Company
of Jesus.” This man was Raggonico, who assumed the name of Clement
XIII. He was pure in soul, and upright in purpose. He was constantly
engaged in fervent prayer, and his highest ambition was to obtain a
canonisation. But he was a bigoted fanatic—was convinced that the power
of the Papacy should be unlimited; and in the Jesuits he beheld the most
faithful defenders of the Papal See and of religion. But, besides the
disposition of the Pope in their favour, the Jesuits had, in the Court
of Rome, a still more efficient supporter in the person of Cardinal
Torrigiani, in whose hand actually resided all the power. “He had the
reputation,” says Ranke, “of taking a personal interest in the farming of
the papal revenues, and was said to be generally fond of power for its
own sake.”[333] It is, then, easy to be conceived that the Jesuits, in
order to preserve the bulk of their wealth, did not hesitate to sacrifice
a part to satiate the avidity of the cardinal; and that to this is to
be attributed the partiality, we should say the servility, evinced by
Torrigiani towards the order. But this partiality of the Pope and his
minister proved fatal to the Company. Had they consented to effect some
substantial reforms, the Society might yet have existed for some time
longer, or at least have only perished in the general shipwreck produced
by the French Revolution, and they would not have had pronounced upon
them the terrible and crushing sentence of Clement XIV.

Pombal perceived at once that no hope could be entertained that such
a Pope would co-operate in the suppression, or even in the reform and
abasement of the Jesuits, but did not, for that reason, renounce his
projects; he only waited for a more fitting moment to effect his purpose
by his own authority.

Circumstances served Pombal’s designs better than he could have expected.
Joseph I. had an intimacy with Dona Theresa, the young wife of the
Marquis of Tavora, one of the noblest families in Portugal, and one
which, having scorned Pombal’s alliance, was particularly hated by
him. Now it happened, on the night of the 3d of September 1758, that
the king, returning to the palace from a visit to Dona Theresa, was
wounded in the arm by a pistol-shot fired upon him. Next morning the
court presented an unusual aspect. The gates of the palace were shut;
the king did not make his appearance, and nobody knew exactly what was
the cause of these strange measures. It was indeed whispered that an
attempt had been made upon the king’s person; but nobody dared to speak
it aloud, or knew to what extent it was true. The courtiers were all
taciturn and in consternation. Pombal alone appeared calm and serene.
This state of things lasted for some days. At last this anxiety was by
degrees dispelled, and, a few weeks after, nobody thought any more about
the attempt, and many doubted whether it had ever occurred. But on the
12th of September, the Duke of Averio, of the family of Mascarenhas, who,
with Tavora, was at the head of the Portuguese aristocracy, the Marquis
of Tavora, Dona Eleanor, his mother, and many of their relations and
servants, were suddenly arrested and thrown into prison. Our limits will
not admit of our examining whether or not the prisoners were culpable,
or in what degree. It seems most probable that the young Marquis of
Tavora may have attempted to avenge his injured honour; and indeed there
is every reason to believe that some of the prisoners arrested were
really accomplices of the crime; but, as the trial was not public, as
it was conducted by an exceptional tribunal _la inconfidenza_, and as
Pombal has never substantiated, by valid proofs, the accusation brought
against them, it would be harsh to form any decided judgment. What is
incontestable is, that all forms of justice were violated in the trial,
and that the cruel and inhuman way in which the unfortunate prisoners
were tortured and executed, would induce us to believe that this
sacrifice of human life was offered rather to revenge than to justice.
In the night of 12th of January 1759, a scaffold, eighteen feet high,
was erected on the square of Belem, fronting the Tagus. At daybreak, this
open space was filled with soldiers and the populace, and even the river
was covered with spectators. The servants of the Duke of Averio appeared
first upon the platform, and were fastened to one of the corners to be
burned alive. The Marchioness of Tavora then ascended the scaffold with a
rope around her neck, and a crucifix in her hand. She was scantily clad
in some tattered clothes, but her whole figure and demeanour were stamped
with firmness and dignity. The executioner, in attempting to bind her
feet, accidentally raised the hem of her robe. “Stop!” cried she, “forget
not who I am; touch me only to kill me.” The executioner fell on his
knees before Dona Eleanor, and begged her to pardon him, whereupon she
drew a ring from her finger, and said, “Here; I have nothing but this in
the world; take it, and do your duty.” This courageous woman then laid
her head upon the block, and received her death-blow. Her husband, her
sons, the youngest of whom was not twenty years of age, her son-in-law,
and several servants, perished after her in frightful torments. The Duke
of Averio was led forward the last; he was fastened to the wheel, his
body covered with rags, and his arms and thighs naked. Thus was he broken
alive, not expiring till after he had endured protracted tortures, making
the square and the neighbourhood re-echo with frightful cries. At length
the machine was set on fire, and presently wheel, scaffold, bodies, all,
were burned and cast into the Tagus.[334] Even if the sentence had been
just, the merciless cruelty which Pombal shewed in accomplishing its
execution has greatly tarnished his fame, and diminished the admiration
due to his other eminent services rendered to Portugal.

Meanwhile, on the night which preceded the execution of the prisoners,
the house of the Jesuits was invested, their chiefs were cast into
prison, and three of them, Mattos, Alexander, and Malagrida, accused of
having fomented the conspiracy. With what degree of truth this accusation
was brought against them, it is also difficult to say. According to the
sentence passed upon them, the suspicions of their having participated
therein were confirmed by their arrogance previous to the attempt, and
their desponding after its failure; by their intimate connexion with
the chief of the accused (D’Averio), with whom they had formerly been
at variance; by a conversation reported of Father Conta, who, it seems,
had declared that a man who should murder the king would not be guilty
of even a venial sin. Their intercourse with the conspirators was indeed
unquestionable. They had been their friends and advisers, and had taken
a decided part in the discontent, murmurs, and open opposition of the
Fidalgoes.[335] But no other material proof was brought to confirm the
charge, and although the three accused were condemned to suffer the
highest punishment, the sentence was not executed. Malagrida, who some
time after was burned, suffered for the crime of heresy, not for that of
regicide. Whatever opinion our readers may form of the Jesuits’ guilt or
innocence, Pombal, in his manifestoes, represented them as guilty, and
called for the animadversion of Europe upon them, while he himself was
taking more decisive measures to destroy the order.

As in Portugal, up to that moment, to the nuncio alone belonged the
right of pronouncing judgment upon ecclesiastics, Pombal, although
he had already resolved to transfer that right to a commission named
by the sovereign, thought proper to solicit the Pope for a nominal
authorisation; and as Clement’s answer did not come quick enough for the
minister’s impatience, he, on 1st of September 1759, issued a decree for
the expulsion of the Jesuits from all the states of his most faithful
majesty. All the bishops of Portugal received a command to take the
office of instruction out of the hands of the Jesuits, and supersede them
instantly in the universities of Coimbra and elsewhere; and immediately
after, all the Jesuits residing in Portugal were put on board royal and
merchant vessels, and shipped over into Italy;[336] similar orders were
given to the governors of all the Portuguese colonies, and immediately
executed.

This was the first blow dealt to the Society of Jesus; and, as if it had
been a signal, it was followed by a succession, till Ganganelli dealt
it the last and mortal one. It seemed as if before no one had dared to
attack such a powerful colossus: but when once the people saw with what
facility it could be attacked, and even conquered, every one wished to
break a spear upon it. France, as was to be expected, struck the second
blow. When the minds of men were once bent upon it, any pretext would
have been sufficient to expel the Jesuits; and it requires no great
insight to perceive that the apparent causes which led to this step were
only secondary. It is true that Madame de Pompadour, the king’s mistress,
had resolved upon their destruction; but, although it is well known that
she harassed the king to obtain it, it is by no means certain that Louis
yielded to her influence alone, and we doubt much that she would have
been able to effect it at all, had she lived a hundred years before. It
seems that the Jesuit confessors of the marchioness and the king refused,
we do not know for what reasons, to absolve them, unless the lady should
quit the court. She herself has transmitted to us a long recital of her
negotiations with the confessor;[337] and when she could not bring him
to her wishes, she vowed a mortal hatred against the Society, which,
however, remained for some years without result.

But in 1761 a more decisive occasion was offered to the enemies of
the order to ask for their expulsion. Father Lavallette, the Superior
General of Martinique—a bold and unscrupulous speculator, a priest who,
by their own confession, began to operate not only on the produce of the
goods belonging to the house, but who purchased large properties, and
_bought two thousand slaves_ to work them—was the means of creating this
occasion.[338] He entered into vast and complicated speculations with
different maritime towns of Europe; and as some of these speculations
failed, he stopped payment—a measure which caused the ruin of several
houses, among which were one of Lyons and another of Marseilles.

The house of Marseilles, Leoncy, held the Society responsible for the
debt of its member, and applied to the General for payment. Ricci, the
then chief of the order,[339] committed the irreparable error of refusing
to recognise the debt. The Widow Grou & Son, of Nantez, then commenced
a process before the consular tribunal of Paris. Leoncy followed the
example. The Jesuits having been condemned, were blind enough to bring
the cause before the parliament. This supreme court of judicature, the
better to estimate the merit of the cause, ordered that the Constitutions
of the Society should be brought before the tribunal. The Jesuits
consented, and this decided their ruin. After prolonged examination, the
parliament gave its judgment, by which the Society was condemned to pay
all the engagements incurred by Lavallette, for which, according to the
tenor of their Constitution, the whole order was answerable.[340]

Many authors, speaking of this affair, have expressed their astonishment
that the Jesuits, who were accounted so cunning, could have committed
such blunders. We have nothing to answer to this, except that they may be
compared to those generals who, having lost their presence of mind in a
difficult and critical moment, have suffered defeat by committing errors
that a simple non-commissioned officer would never have been guilty of;
or they may be compared perhaps to those consummate criminals who, having
long eluded the vigilance of the police with extraordinary dexterity, at
last commit such blunders, that one could almost swear they conspired
for their own capture. Or it would be more correct to say that God had
numbered their days, and their hour was come. _Quem Deus vult perdere
prius dementat._

From the moment when the Constitutions of this mysterious and dread
Society were brought to light, Constitutions which had been kept
jealously secret, all minor questions disappeared. Father Lavallette,
the bankrupt, the bankers (who were never paid), all were forgotten in
the great question affecting the Society itself. “Dogmatic disputes,
which had so long been forgotten, now resumed all the force of present
interest, and all the attraction of novelty. There was a universal
eagerness to discover and apply those mysterious Constitutions. Women,
and even children, were animated with the ardour of old practised
lawyers. Pascal became the idol of the day, and La Chalatois its
hero.”[341] Innumerable writings were daily printed and read with the
greatest avidity by all classes of persons; and for a while nothing else
was spoken of but the Society of Jesuits.

In these circumstances, fifty-one French bishops, under the presidency
of the Cardinal of Luynes, assembled, and, after a prolonged examination
of the Constitutions, declared that the unlimited obedience that the
General residing in Rome was empowered to exact from every member, was
incompatible with the laws of the kingdom, and with the general duties
of the subject to his sovereign. Now the opponents of the Jesuits,
and Madame do Pompadour at their head, pressed upon the king to take
a decisive measure. Louis XV. was an indolent profligate, whose chief
characteristic was the love and veneration of himself. Provided royalty
did not perish in his own person, he cared little what should become of
it after his death. He had no liking for any person but those who could
amuse him—a thing in his old age by no means easy. He cared nothing for
the Jesuits, but he feared them. He was persuaded that they had been
accomplices in the assassination of Henry III. and Henry IV.; he had
always before his eyes the poniard of Damiens, and attributed to the
fathers both the will and the power to murder him. For this all-important
reason, he resisted long all solicitations to expel them from France,
but he consented to address a request to the Pope to grant a reform, but
to grant it immediately, and without hesitation or subterfuge. Choiseul
himself prepared a plan of reform, which, it may be said, centred in
this principal point, namely, to propose to the General the appointment
of a vicar-general for France, who was to fix his residence in that
country, and pledge himself to render obedience to its laws—a measure
which was in conformity with the statutes, since these authorised the
General, in case of a great emergency, to name a vicar-general.[342] The
fact of this most reasonable demand having been made, would of itself
be a sufficient answer to the Jesuits and their partisans, who pretend
that the destruction of the order was not the consequence of any of
these misdemeanours, but that it had been planned long before between
the Encyclopædists Choiseul and Pombal. Yet we shall adduce some further
proofs to shew how unfounded their assertions are.

Pombal, although he was executing some of the reforms called for by the
Encyclopædists, was no way connected with them, and he is perhaps the
only man of mark of this epoch whom Voltaire has not favoured with a word
of his inexhaustible correspondence. On the contrary, the Patriarch of
Ferney often blames the marquis for his affected deference to the Pope
and respect for religion, as well as for his cruelty, so displeasing to
the naturally humane heart of Voltaire. Choiseul was indeed for a time
the friend of Pombal, and acted in concert with him in affairs of general
policy. But Pombal was too haughty, he had too exaggerated an opinion of
his own capacity, to act under or by the direction of any man whatever.
Besides, the well-known character of Choiseul renders it altogether
incredible that he could have been long and deeply engaged in a plot
to expel the Jesuits from Europe. The duke was the type of the French
gentilhommes of the eighteenth century. He possessed the incredulity,
the grace, the vanity, the courage, and that levity which would have
sacrificed the dearest interests to the pleasure of an epigram, and
which was so characteristic of the French noblesse in the former part of
Louis XV.’s reign. He was too frivolous to be capable of nourishing in
his heart for years a deep scheme of malice; nor did he honour or value
the Jesuits enough to make them the object of a mortal enmity. On the
contrary, with the Count of Kaunitz, the Austrian minister, he ridiculed
the sort of passion with which the Marquis of Pombal persecuted the sons
of Loyola. “Ce, Monsieur,” they would say, “a donc toujours un Jesuite a
cheval sur le nez.”[343]

However, it is evident that Choiseul could not be the man to protect the
Jesuits: it is evident that, to please Madame de Pompadour, and to court
public opinion, he must have shewn himself unfavourable to the fathers,
and must have pursued them with his sarcasms. It is also certain that
afterwards he became their enemy, not out of hatred, but rather to comply
with Charles III.’s wishes, and in order to get rid of them, and that he
used all his influence to have them expelled from France, and ultimately
abolished. The duke renders our assertions incontestable, when, in a
memorial addressed to the king, after having reminded him that he had
not been the man who had commenced the great measure of the expulsion
of the Jesuits, he adds, “Your Majesty knows well that, although it has
been said that I have laboured at the expulsion of the Jesuits, ... I
have in no way, either at a distance or on the spot, either in public or
in private, taken any step with this intent.” And he finishes by saying,
that only at a later period, after he had known them, he had become
their enemy. When, then, the duke made application to Rome to obtain the
nomination of a vicar-general who should reside in France, with authority
independent of the General, he was personally indifferent in the question.

It is well known what answer the General, Ricci, made to this
application—“Sint ut sunt aut non sint,” Let them be as they are, or be
no longer.

The parliament first abolished and suppressed all the congregations,
those powerful engines of the order; then, on the 6th of August 1762, it
declared that the Institute of the Jesuits was opposed to all authority,
spiritual and temporal, ecclesiastical and civil, and was calculated to
render them entirely independent of such authority by all sort of means,
and even to favour their usurpation of the government; it therefore
declared that the order should be irrevocably and for ever expelled
from the kingdom.[344] In consequence of this decree, the eighty-four
colleges of the Jesuits were shut up. The fathers were expelled from all
their houses, their properties were confiscated;[345] each individual,
however, being allowed a small income from the public treasury, and
being permitted for the moment to reside in France, separately, and as
secular clergymen. This permission was withdrawn two years after, and in
1764, the repugnance of Louis XV. having been overcome, the Jesuits were
ordered to quit the French territories.

But a more serious and unexpected calamity befel the Company only three
years after. Till the present moment, the Jesuits and their partisans had
boasted of their defeats and persecution, and had haughtily proclaimed in
the face of the world that they were only persecuted by the philosophic
spirit which had pervaded Europe, and which, its principal aim being the
destruction of the Catholic religion, had begun by attacking its firmest
bulwark—the Society of Jesus. Pombal and Choiseul were but the emissaries
of Voltaire; Joseph and Louis, indolent and voluptuous monarchs, entirely
under the guidance and yoke of the two ministers. But what had they to
say, now that they were going to be expelled from the dominions of a king
not only adverse to the philosophers, not only a bigoted Roman Catholic,
but, till the present moment, the friend and the protector of the Order?
What had they to say against this exemplary Christian, Charles III. of
Spain, loyal, frank, virtuous, chaste, and irreproachable, as he was?
Narrow-minded, indeed, he may have been, but no less clear-sighted,
active, and considerate; self-willed rather than disposed to succumb to
the influence of any person; and if he can be reproached with anything,
it were with the fault of having been rather partial to that nursery of
monks and nuns which infested Spain, and for one or other of whom he was
continually petitioning Rome for a canonisation. Yet this man, more than
any other, contributed to the abolition of the order.

The motives which induced Charles to take such a decided part in the
destruction of the Society are not very well ascertained, and the two
parties attribute it to different causes. We will try to throw some new
light on this obscure affair. As every one, in the absence of proofs, has
been obliged to have recourse to conjectures, we beg leave to give our
own also. We begin by relating the facts.

The long and ample cloaks, and the low, large-brimmed hats, worn at this
epoch in Spain, served to facilitate the perpetration of many crimes,
and to conceal the criminals. Squillace, the king’s prime minister, by
Charles’s order, issued a proclamation prohibiting the use of them; but
the populace of Madrid broke out in insurrection, besieged the minister
in his house, pulled it down, repulsed the Walloon guards which had
marched against them, and obliged the king, whose exhortation they
despised, to retire for the moment from Madrid. The revolt lasted for
several days, when the Jesuits, mingling amongst the rioters, appeased
them in a moment with the greatest facility. This revolt, which happened
in 1766, is known in history as the _Emeute des Chapeaux_.

This outbreak, which had no result, was entirely forgotten, when, on the
2d of April 1767, appeared a royal proclamation abolishing the Society
of the Jesuits in the peninsula, and expelling them from the Spanish
monarchy. Let the reader imagine the astonishment which the proclamation
produced throughout Europe, and the consternation and despair into which
it threw the Jesuits. What had happened that could furnish a motive for
such a harsh and most severe measure? No sign of change had been the
precursor of the storm; no warning had been given to the Jesuits; no
signs of enmity had been shewn to them. The proclamation not only was
silent as to the motives which had elicited it, but forbade every man
to appreciate and discuss either the measure or its causes; and this
redoubled the astonishment and the curiosity. Let us try to penetrate
this mystery. First of all we shall give the reasons which, according
to the Marquis d’Ossun, French ambassador at the court of Madrid,
were adduced to him by Charles himself, as having induced him to the
suppression of the order.

“Charles pledged his honour to the Marquis d’Ossun that he had never
entertained any personal animosity against the Jesuits; that, before
the last conspiracy, he had even repeatedly refused to sanction any
measures inimical to them. Notwithstanding that he had been warned by
confidential advisers, on whose word he could rely, that, ever since
1759, the Jesuits had incessantly traduced his government, his character,
and even his faith; his reply to these ministers had uniformly been
that he believed them to be either prejudiced or ill-informed. But the
insurrection of 1766 had opened the king’s eyes; Charles was convinced
that several members of the Society had been arrested in the act of
distributing money among the populace. After they had prepared the way
by poisoning the minds of the citizens with insinuations against the
government, the Jesuits only awaited the signal to spring the mine. The
first opportunity was sufficient, and they were content with the most
frivolous pretexts;—in one instance, the form of a hat or cloak; in
another, the misconduct of an intendant, or the knavery of a corregidor.
The attempt (the _émeute_ of 1766) failed, as the tumult had broken out
on Palm Sunday. The time fixed upon had been Holy Thursday, during the
ceremonies of visiting the churches, when the king was to be surprised
and surrounded at the foot of the cross. Such is the substance of the
motives stated by the King of Spain to the Marquis d’Ossun, accompanied
by a reiterated protest of the truth of what he had said, and, in proof
of this, he appealed to judges and magistrates of the most incorruptible
integrity; he even reproached himself with having been too lenient to
such a dangerous body, and then drawing a deep sigh, added, ‘I have
learned to know them too well.’”[346]

These are the motives assigned for this conduct by the opponents of the
Jesuits, and they rest, as may be seen, on very high authority. On the
other hand, the Jesuits and their friends assert that the whole affair
was an abominable and dishonourable plot of Choiseul. They pretend that
the duke had managed to put into the hands of Charles an autograph letter
supposed to be written by the General of the order to a provincial
in Spain, in which it was asserted that Charles was an illegitimate
son of Cardinal Alberoni, and that the throne belonged to Don Louis,
the king’s younger brother, and that it was this letter that excited
the resentment of Charles. Crétineau affirms that such was the case.
“Charles, who remained a fervent Christian, would not have destroyed
the institute, but that they affixed upon his royal escutcheon the
stigma of illegitimacy.... This fact is certified by other contemporary
testimonies, and by the documents of the Company.”[347] Ranke, without
accusing either party, seems to incline to this supposition, and says,
“Charles III. became persuaded that it was one of the purposes of the
Jesuits to raise his brother Don Louis to the throne in his place.”[348]
Now, rejecting the absurd accusation of the forgery of this letter, which
many reasons render altogether impossible, and which is by no means
consistent with the character of Choiseul, and adopting the version of
Ranke or of Ossun, there still remains to be explained the enmity of the
Jesuits against such a good Roman Catholic as Charles; and this enmity,
no historian, as far as we know, has ever attempted to explain. Yet this
is the point most necessary to be examined; because, unless we suppose
that such a sagacious and clear-sighted man as Charles III., after a
year of strict and severe investigation, came to the serious decision
of condemning the Jesuits solely on the authority of a forged letter,
without any other proof of their ill-will to him, it remains certain
that the Jesuits were guilty, and adverse to his person and government.
Whence, we repeat, this enmity? By considering a little the well-known
character of the Jesuits, we may perhaps be able to answer the query.

Every one who directly, or indirectly even, opposes the wishes or the
designs of the Society, is regarded as its mortal enemy, and every enemy
must, by whatever means, be broken down. Charles, from the beginning of
his reign, had constantly insisted upon the canonisation of Palafox, the
abhorred opponent of the Society—first grief. Charles did not shew the
Jesuits any particular affection, and had protected and befriended them
only as he did all other monastic orders—second grief. Charles would not
submit as his predecessors had done to the influence of the fathers,
and his confessor was of the order of the Dominicans, the ancient and
implacable enemy of the Company—third and most serious grief. Now, if
once it is admitted that the Jesuits had reason to dislike Charles,
all is easily explained. Then no act of enmity on their part ought to
surprise us. They would not have hesitated a moment to spread the
report that Charles was a bastard, to raise a conspiracy, to excite the
people to revolt, and to endeavour to supplant the king by his younger
brother. Thus it becomes clear how Charles, after obtaining the proofs
of their machinations, became furious against them; and it may easily be
conceived that, from pride and delicacy, he did not mention to the French
ambassador, among the other causes of resentment against the Jesuits,
that of their having slandered him as a bastard liable to be dethroned.
This is the view we take of the matter, and we doubt if the conduct of
Charles can be explained in any other plausible way.

Such, in our opinion, were the motives which induced the pious King of
Spain to expel the Jesuits from all his estates. The way in which this
was accomplished was also most remarkable, and deserves to be mentioned.
Immediately after _l’émeute des chapeaux_, which seems to have awakened
Charles’s suspicions, the proceedings against the Jesuits commenced, and
were continued for a year with the greatest secrecy. D’Aranda, now the
principal minister, conducted them. He neglected no precautions to insure
the success of his plan. He took great care, above all, that the Court of
Rome should have no suspicion of his projects. The king and his ministers
admitted into their confidence only Don Manuel de Roda, an able jurist,
and previously an agent of Spain in Rome. D’Aranda conferred with Moniño
and Campomanes, two very influential magistrates, in a singular and
romantic manner. They repaired separately and unknown to one another, to
a kind of ruined house, worked alone, communicating afterwards only with
the prime minister, who either transcribed himself their informations
or intrusted them to his page, who was too young to be mistrusted.
Those informations the minister carried himself to the king.[349]
Notwithstanding these precautions, it seems the Jesuits were not
altogether ignorant that some strange measures were contemplated against
them. In fact, it would have been almost incredible that a judicial
investigation, although surrounded with mystery and secrecy, in which
many persons, no matter of what measure of discretion, were interrogated,
could have been so conducted that not a word should have come to the
ears of the fathers. They certainly were ignorant of the real state of
things, and were perhaps far from suspecting the calamity impending over
their heads. But what proves that they must have had some intimation of
what was going on, is, that some short time before their expulsion they
had requested of the king the confirmation of their privileges, and had
removed their papers and their money.[350]

When all measures were ready, despatches were sent from Madrid to all
the governors of all the Spanish possessions of Africa, Asia, America,
and throughout all the peninsula. These despatches, signed by the king,
and counter-signed by D’Aranda, were sealed with three seals. On the
second envelop was written, “Under pain of death, you shall not open this
despatch but on the 2d April 1767, towards the closing of the day.”[351]
The orders to be executed in the different places, on the 2d of April,
were all of the same tenor. The alcaldes were enjoined, on the severest
penalties (Crétineau says on pain of death), immediately to enter the
establishments of the Jesuits armed, to take possession of them, to expel
the Jesuits from their convents, and to transport them within twenty-four
hours as prisoners to such ports as were designated. The fathers were to
embark instantly, leaving their papers under seal, and carrying away with
them only a breviary, a purse, and some apparel.[352] The orders were
executed everywhere with the utmost rigour, and six thousand Jesuits were
very soon floating at the same time on the waste ocean on their way to
the coast of Italy.

Charles had not notified his intentions either to the French Court, the
indiscretion of whose minister he feared, or to the Court of Rome, which
he knew would thwart the measure with all its might. Neither of these
courts was informed of the fact till after it was accomplished. When
the news reached Rome, the old and infirm Clement XIII. shed a flood of
tears. His spirits were broken down by the misfortunes that had befallen
his Jesuits. Already, after their expulsion from France, he had declared
that the decree which banished them was null and void, adding, “We
repel the grave injury offered to the Church and to the Holy See, and
we declare in the plenitude of our certain knowledge, _certâ scientiâ_,
that the institution of the Jesuits is in the highest degree pious and
holy.”[353] In the present circumstances he again attempted to shelter
the children of his predilection under the mantle of his infallibility,
and addressed to the King of Spain a brief, in which we read as follows:
“Of all the misfortunes that have afflicted us during the nine years
of our unhappy pontificate, the most sensible to our paternal heart
has been that inflicted by the hand of your Majesty. So you, too, my
son, _tu quoque fili mi_, so the Catholic King Charles III., who is so
dear to our heart, fills up the chalice of our suffering, condemns our
old age to a torrent of tears, and precipitates us into the grave. The
pious Spanish king ... thinks of destroying an institution so useful, so
meritorious for the Church, and which owes its origin and its splendour
to those saints and heroes whom God chose in the Spanish nation for His
greater glory” (this rather savours of Jesuit composition).... “_We call
God and men to witness_, that the Society is not only innocent of all
crime, but that it is _pious, useful, holy, in its pursuits, in its laws,
in its maxims_.”[354] Charles answered that he alone knew the crimes of
the Society, and that he would keep them concealed in his own breast, to
spare Christendom a great scandal.[355] Clement returned to his tears,
and this was all that was left him to do in favour of his children.

[Illustration: _Lorenzo Ricci._

_Hinchliff._]

However, there was a man in Rome who would not witness the ruin of the
Company of Jesus without attempting a desperate effort to save it.
This man was Ricci, the General. Ricci was a morose, obstinate, and
narrow-minded bigot, extremely jealous of his authority, and altogether
incapable of appreciating either circumstances or persons. Unlike
Acquaviva, he placed all his glory in never yielding an inch of ground;
and to partial loss, he preferred an entire ruin. Acquaviva would have by
some timely concession deferred for a while the impending storm. Ricci
accelerated its march by his intractability. “Let them be as they are,
or not at all”—these words shew the man. And now that his disciples were
expelled from a part of Europe, he, to save the Society, if possible,
decided upon sacrificing some thousands of individuals. Either the
persecution, which he studied to render more cruel, and in some measure
effective, would bring the Pope, the other sovereigns, or the different
populations, to some acts of energy, to retrieve the affairs of the
order, or it must incur the last distressful consequences. He would
submit to every extremity rather than to humiliation. In consequence,
he obliged Torrigiani, whom he seems to have kept under a severe yoke
(if the Cardinal received, or had received money, we can understand it),
to write to the Spanish minister that his Holiness would not permit the
Jesuits to land on his estates. Charles paid little attention to the
letter, and gave orders to the commander of the fleet to land them, if
necessary, by force of arms.

Torrigiani obeyed Ricci’s injunction to the letter. When after some
days’ sailing the first vessels arrived before Civita Vecchia, they were
received by cannon shot. The poor Jesuits, who thought they were near
the end of their sufferings, and had smiled at the sight of the promised
land, were furious when they saw themselves rejected from a country in
which they knew that their General had the utmost influence, and loudly
accused him of being the author of all their miseries. The Spanish
commander, not wishing to employ violence, and to land by force of arms,
coasted away towards Leghorn and Genoa, but there too they were refused a
landing. A similar fate was reserved for them on their first approach to
Corsica; and only after having been for six long months at the mercy of
the winds and waves, were those unfortunate monks, decimated by illness,
fatigue, and old age, permitted to disembark in Corsica, lately ceded by
Genoa to France, and where Paoli at that same moment had begun to fight
for independence.

The King of Naples and the Duke of Parma, both of the house of Bourbon,
the former in the month of November 1767, the latter in the beginning of
1768, resorted to the same measures as France and Spain, and the Jesuits
were expelled from their estates.

At the news of these repeated outrages, as he considered them, the old
Pope, driven to extremities, and instigated by the Jesuits, resolved on
an act of vigour, to test what the Supreme Pontiff could do for the sons
of his predilection. It seems that he could not summon courage enough to
strike the blow against France, Spain, or Naples, but he thought he could
dare anything against the Duke of Parma. He did not view him in the light
of a grandson of France and infant of Spain, but as a Farnese, over whose
dukedom the Roman See had always, if not exercised, at least claimed,
the right of suzerainty. In this persuasion, he published a “monitorium,”
wherein he pronounced ecclesiastical censures against his vassal, and
declared that he had forfeited his estates. Charles and Louis were aghast
at the boldness of the old Pope, and although the indolent Louis shewed
no great resolution to resent the insult, Choiseul and Charles contrived
to stir up his indignation, representing to him the scorn which would
fall on the house of Bourbon, if a son of a Venetian merchant (Clement)
should insult with impunity a grandson of St Louis.[356] In consequence,
the ambassadors of the three courts, France, Spain, and Naples, had
orders to present to the Pope a memorial, asking him to revoke the
“monitorium,” or to expect to see some of his estates confiscated.
Torrigiani and the Jesuit partisans, who knew the demand that was going
to be addressed to the Pope, fearing lest the old man should yield,
represented to him how glorious it would be to uprear again the tiara,
humbled by Benedict XIV., before the secular powers, and made him even
descry in the distance the crown of martyrdom, an honour which the
enthusiastic and pious Pope would have wished above all things. Clement
accordingly, when the ambassadors presented themselves for the appointed
audience, would hardly deign to look at the memorial; and when they spoke
of _reprisals_, his whole frame trembled, and he exclaimed, in a broken
voice—“The Vicar of Jesus Christ is treated like the lowest of mankind.
True that he has neither armies nor cannon, and it is an easy matter to
despoil him of all his possessions; but it is beyond the power of man to
compel him to act against his conscience.”[357]

The moment this answer was made known to the monarchs, the troops of the
French king seized on Avignon, those of the King of Naples on Pontecorvo
and Benevento, all possessions belonging to the Roman states.

At such distressful news the poor Pope was overcome by grief, and
perceiving that he was unable to offer any material resistance, resolved
to endure patiently those injuries, but not to yield to threatening;
and he remained firm in his determination, although the Romans loudly
murmured against him, and menaced and offered insult to the Jesuit party
as the sole cause of the public calamities. The Pope’s position became
more and more desperate every day, and he did not know that he had a
single friend left. To whom could he now turn for aid? Genoa, Modena,
Venice, nay, all the Italian states, took part against him. Once more he
directed his eyes towards Austria. He wrote to the Empress Maria Theresa,
that she was his only consolation on earth; she would surely not permit
that his old age should be oppressed by acts of violence.[358] But the
empress answered him that the affair was one concerning not religion, but
state policy, and that she could not interfere without injustice.

Nor was this the greatest affliction reserved for the old pontiff.
While Clement was so overwhelmed by grief, in the beginning of 1769
the ambassadors of France, Spain, and Naples presented themselves, one
after the other, before him, and demanded the irrevocable suppression of
the whole Order of the Jesuits. The Pope, on hearing the proposal, was
stupified, and remained for some time speechless. When he had recovered
some composure, he answered, in a broken and faltering voice, that he
would soon make known his intentions, and called a consistory for the
3d of February. But on the evening preceding the day on which that
consistory was to assemble, he was seized with a convulsion, in which he
expired.[359] The Jesuits have extolled the virtues and the holiness of
this Pope to the skies, and consider him as the best friend the order
ever had; while the philosophers, in their speculations, have attributed
to him the ultimate ruin of the Society, on account of his obstinate
resistance to the demands of reform.

Canova has immortalised the memory of Rezzonico by the most beautiful of
all the monuments which have a place in St Peter’s. Strangers go there
to admire the chaste and pure figure of religion weeping over his tomb,
the majestic dignity of the vigilant lion, the imposing calmness of the
sleeping one, and the admirable execution of the whole group.

With Clement XIII. the Popes lost all independence as secular princes,
and, as such, have been ever after at the mercy of the strongest secular
power that has wished to domineer over them.



CHAPTER XVI.

1773.

ABOLITION OF THE ORDER.


After the death of Clement XIII., all the influence of the house of
Bourbon was employed to secure that the choice of the College of
Cardinals should fall on a man adverse to the Company of Jesus, as all
the efforts of the members of that body were directed to bring about
the contrary result. While D’Aubeterre, the French ambassador, speaking
also in the name of Spain and Naples, was reiterating that an election
contrary to the wishes of the house of Bourbon would lead to the ruin of
the Roman See, thus endeavouring to intimidate the more pusillanimous of
the cardinals, Ricci was hurrying about from place to place, imploring
the one, threatening the others with the wrath of God, and freely
distributing presents and money when necessary. At daybreak he was on
foot, traversing every quarter of the city, and mixing with all classes
of the people. He visited their eminences, their confessors, their
varlets, not omitting some of the fashionable ladies, the——spiritual
friends of the Eminentissimi! He and Torrigiani gave out, and repeated
with great indignation and affected dignity, that it would be to the
eternal shame and confusion of the Sacred College to renounce their
independence, and submit to the demands of the imperious sovereigns.

The Court of Rome was divided at the time into two parties;—the Zelanti,
who laboured to maintain all the privileges of the Church in their
integrity and full extent; and the Regalisti, or the adherents of the
crowns, who considered that the welfare of the Church must be sought in
wise conciliation. Thirteen days after Clement’s demise, the Conclave
assembled, and the Zelanti, notwithstanding D’Aubeterre’s insinuations
and menaces, attempted to elect a Pope before the arrival of the French
and Spanish cardinals. They nearly succeeded in their attempt. Cardinal
Ghigi, one of them, having missed his nomination only by two votes. Then
the struggle for the nomination began again more seriously. Choiseul, and
still more than he, Charles III., being determined on the abolition of
the Jesuits, were resolved not to give their assent to the election of
a Pope, unless they should have a good assurance that he would abolish
the Society. The French and Spanish ambassadors in Rome, and above all,
the French and Spanish cardinals, were ordered to endeavour to effect
this result. But the person to whom was assigned, by the Bourbons, the
most prominent part in the Conclave, was Cardinal de Bernis. Bernis
was a man endowed with many noble qualities, but vain, ostentatious,
and devoured above all with the desire of playing a conspicuous part.
He had been first minister of Louis XV., had been supplanted by his
protégé Choiseul, who sent him back to his Bishopric of Alby, and who
now intrusted to him the delicate mission of choosing a successor to St
Peter. We say _choosing_, because, to flatter his vanity, Choiseul told
him that such would certainly be his mission, and the cardinal entered
the Conclave fully convinced that on him alone rested the choice of the
future pontiff. He was confident that the authority of the monarchs of
the house of Bourbon, and his own pleasing and insinuating manner, would
be irresistible. “His affability,” says St Priest, “which was a little
theatrical, but always winning, seemed to transport the Court of Louis
XV. into the midst of the gloomy apartments of the Vatican.” On entering
the Conclave, Bernis, in the most courteous and modest manner, and
without shewing any pretension of a desire to exercise any empire over
the holy College, said to his colleagues, “France has only the desire of
seeing raised to the papal throne a wise and temperate prince, who may
entertain the respect due to the great powers. The choice of the Sacred
College can only rest upon virtue, since it shines forth in each one
of its members. But virtue alone is not sufficient. Who could surpass
Clement XIII. in religion and purity of doctrine? His intentions were
excellent; nevertheless, during his reign, the Church was disturbed and
shaken to its centre. Let your eminences restore concord between the Holy
See and the Catholic States, and bring back peace to Christendom, and
France will be content.”[360] As an inducement to the cardinals to comply
with the wishes of the sovereigns, Bernis had permission to promise in
their names the restitution of Avignon, Pontecorvo, and Benevento; and it
may be well supposed that he made the most of the permission. To this,
the Zelanti and the Jesuit party answered, that in the election of the
supreme chief of the Church, no considerations should be regarded but the
good of religion, and that the electors ought to listen to no advice, but
implore fervently the Holy Ghost, and follow his inspiration. De Bernis’
position became rather embarrassing. Charles III., it seems, proposed
to bind the future Pope by a _written promise_ to abolish the order of
the Jesuits. But when D’Aubeterre proposed to Bernis this arrangement,
the cardinal drew back; his conscience would not allow him to be an
accomplice in lowering so much the Tiara. He refused to make any such
proposals, adding, with justice, that nothing could secure the execution
of the contract, and that a cardinal who was capable of pledging himself
beforehand to such a contract, would dishonour his future pontificate,
as everything must ultimately come to light;[361] and although the
ambassadors insisted anew with more pressing instances, Bernis remained
firm in his opinion, that such conduct was disgraceful and illegal.
Aubeterre endeavoured to overcome his repugnance by all sorts of
arguments, and in a letter addressed to him on the 11th of April, we find
the following passage: “I know well that I am unable to be the _casuist_
of your eminence; but let your eminence consult Cardinal Ganganelli, one
of the most celebrated theologians of this country, and who has never
been accused of professing a lax morality.”[362]

While the cardinals were thus engaged in the supreme and all-important
affair of choosing the chief of their Church, they, the Jesuits, the
ambassadors, and all Rome, were on a sudden thrown into a state of
anxiety and expectation. Joseph II., Emperor of Germany, accompanied by
his brother Leopold, Grand Duke of Tuscany, arrived in Rome. Possessed of
real personal merit, Joseph disdained ostentation, and appeared among the
citizens of the eternal city with all the studied and striking contrast
of an incognito, of which he was the inventor, under the modest title of
Count of Falkestein. He mixed among the Romans without a suite, wearing
no decoration, and without any pomp. Yet his presence in Rome produced a
great sensation.

There are in almost every nation certain traditions, which are
transmitted from generation to generation, tacitly without any apparent
effort by any person to transmit them, which, however, pass to the
remotest posterity as if by intuition, and form part of the moral life
of a people. Such is in Rome the tradition, more or less correct, of
a republic, and of emperors, which is at the bottom of the heart of
every inhabitant of the metropolis of the world. Very few people are
recorded in history to have fought as we Romans lately did. But I doubt
much that we would have so fought even for the same prize—liberty and
independence—in the name of prince or king, or any title in Christendom,
or, indeed, in any name except that of the republic, and it may be that
of an emperor.[363] Joseph, although a Roman Catholic, and anxious to
respect the scruples of his mother, Maria Theresa, was a philosopher,
meditating already part of those reforms he shortly after effected; and
the moment he came within sight of Rome, he decided upon humbling her
pride, and putting some restraint upon her immoderate pretensions. When
in Rome, as may be imagined, he was courted by all parties, and his
support was eagerly sought by every one, and especially by the Zelanti
and the Jesuits. Every one waited with impatience to see the part he
would take in the contest. But the young prince was, or affected to
be, indifferent to the paltry question of the Jesuits, which was then
paramount; and in speaking of it, he often repeated that he wondered
that the fate of some thousand monks should cause so much uneasiness
to such powerful sovereigns. Although he spoke of the Jesuits with
the greatest contempt, nevertheless the fathers hoped that they might
claim him as their partisan; an opinion which Joseph took care soon
to dissipate. While visiting the different monuments of Rome, he went
also to the _Gesù_, the principal and most magnificent establishment of
the order. The fathers soon gathered round him in the most respectful
and humble attitude; and the General, approaching him, and prostrating
himself at the emperor’s feet with the most profound humility, was going
to address him, when Joseph, without allowing him to go on, abruptly
asked him when he was going to relinquish his habit. Ricci turned pale,
and muttered some inarticulate words; he confessed that the times were
very hard for him and for his brethren, but that they trusted in God
and in the future holy Father, whose infallibility would be for ever
compromised if he destroyed an order which had received the sanction
of so many of his predecessors. The emperor smiled; and being then in
the church, and chancing at the moment to fix his regards on a statue
of Ignatius of massive silver, and glittering with precious stones,
exclaimed against the prodigious sum it must have cost. “Sire,” stammered
the Father General, “this statue has been erected with the money of the
friends of the Society.” “Say rather,” replied Joseph, “with the profit
of the Indies,” and departed, leaving the fathers in the utmost grief
and dejection.[364] Joseph, assuming, on the other hand, a marked tone
of superiority over the sovereigns of the house of Bourbon, affected the
same indifference as to the election of a Pope, which he considered, as
he said, of little moment, and unworthy of occupying the attention of a
monarch of the eighteenth century; and, to prove by deeds the sincerity
of his words, he gave orders to the Cardinal Pozzo-Bonelli, his minister,
neither to support nor oppose any candidate.

The cardinals were distressed at this marked indifference of the only
Catholic sovereign of rank who was then on good terms with Rome; and
wishing to try whether they could not attract the young prince to the
Holy See, by shewing him some extraordinary mark of respect and devotion,
in general so flattering to the youthful mind, they, violating all
their rules and regulations, invited the emperor to do them the honour
of visiting the Conclave. Joseph went thither, and was met by all the
cardinals in a body, one of whom took him by the hand, and introduced
him within those precincts which no man can enter or leave from the
commencement of the meeting till a Pope has been elected. The emperor
received all those extraordinary advances with cold dignity. He addressed
Bernis with rather condescending affability, which much flattered the
vanity of the cardinal. But when Torrigiani was presented to him, he
merely observed, “I have heard much of you,” and inquired immediately
for the Cardinal of York. “Le voici,” answered the grandson of James
II. Joseph saluted the last of the Stuarts with a marked expression of
feature, and requested to be admitted to his cell. “It is very small for
your highness,” said the emperor, after having visited it.[365]

When the emperor was on the point of leaving the Conclave, the
demonstrations of the cardinals increased. “Sire,” cried they, “we trust
that your imperial majesty will protect the new Pope, that he may put
an end to the troubles of the Church.” The emperor replied, that the
power to accomplish this rested with their eminences, by choosing a Pope
who should imitate Benedict XIV., and not require too much; that the
spiritual authority of the Pope was incontestable, but that he ought to
be satisfied with this; and that, above all, in treating with sovereigns,
he ought never to forget himself so far as to violate the rules of policy
and good-breeding.[366] So saying, he left the Conclave, and even
abandoned Rome the same evening, and set out for Naples to avoid the
fêtes prepared for him.

The cardinals, when the agitation produced by the visit of the emperor
was a little subdued, returned to their party intrigues, and vainly
endeavoured, during three long months, to give a successor to St Peter.
At last the Spanish cardinals, who seem to have purposely delayed their
voyage till that moment, in order to decide by their votes and their
influence a contest which must have by this time tried both parties,
arrived in Rome, and entered the Conclave. La Ceda and De Solis, the
latter Archbishop of Seville, and possessing Charles III.’s confidence,
began at once to explore the ground, and to take all the necessary
measures to succeed in their purpose, Bernis still pretending to be the
negotiator of the Conclave. The Spaniards, leaving him to rejoice in this
opinion, set themselves quietly to work, and soon succeeded in bringing
the matter to a conclusion, by the choice of a candidate who was accepted
by both parties. This candidate was Cardinal Ganganelli, of whom we must
give some account before proceeding further.

Lorenzo Ganganelli was born in the town of St Arcangelo, on the 30th of
October 1705, of a plebeian family, his father being a labourer. Like his
predecessor, the goatherd of Montalto, Lorenzo entered at a very early
age the order of St Francis (the Cordeliers),[367] and distinguished
himself by a constant application, by the love of solitude, and by a
calm, equal, and placid conduct. His principal occupation was the study
of theology, in which he became a proficient and able professor. But
his long meditation upon this science did not inspire him with a spirit
of fanaticism and persecution, but, on the contrary, with a spirit of
tolerance and love for his fellow-men; and, what appears still more rare,
he did not in the least alter his jovial and agreeable manners. Nor did
he, plunged as he was in the study of divinity, become insensible to the
charms of nature, or to the attractions of the fine arts. He delighted
in natural history, and spent many of his leisure hours in dissecting
insects, or in collecting plants. He cultivated literature with some
success; and if he was not a judicious connoisseur, he certainly was a
warm protector of the fine arts, and was passionately fond of music.[368]
One of his masters had once said of him in this particular, “No wonder he
loves music, seeing that everything in his mind is in harmony.”[369] From
his earliest youth, Lorenzo conceived hopes of rising to an extraordinary
station in life; and his ambition, which was ardent and persevering,
persuaded him that he was destined by Providence to perform extraordinary
deeds; which persuasion gave to all his conduct the characteristic turn
of a mysterious reliance on the future. When his parents dissuaded him
from entering the cloister, Lorenzo, although he was then very young,
answered that a monk’s frock had often preceded the purple, and that the
two last Sistuses had issued from the convents of St Francis. Indeed,
he cherished the memory of Padre Felice, of that Sistus who, even in
our own day, is remembered by all the Italians, but, above all, by
the lowest classes, with a loving veneration. Like Sistus, Ganganelli
shewed little inclination for the aristocracy, and courted the favour
of the multitude. Ganganelli, even after he had ascended to the highest
dignity, remained an unpretending and popular monk. He was ambitious,
and extremely jealous of real authority, but disdained the shows and
appearance of it. “Notwithstanding his elevation, Ganganelli preserved
his former simple habits. Pomp and ceremony were less to his taste than
a frugal meal, long rides into the campagna of Rome, the friendship
of Francesco,[370] the visit of a few well-informed strangers, and,
above all, the conversation of the fathers of the convent of the Holy
Apostles.”[371]

These were, indeed, very amiable and noble qualities, and assuredly
Clement XIV. proved one of the most enlightened and well-intentioned
Popes that ever ascended the pontifical chair. But almost all the
historians, many of them influenced no doubt by the fact that he was the
suppressor of the order of the Jesuits, have exaggerated the virtues
and merits of Ganganelli, and made of him, either as monk or as Pope,
an irreproachable and unexceptionable personage, gifted with almost
supernatural qualities.[372] We are not quite so partial to him, and,
while we give him credit for his many superior good qualities, we cannot
overlook his faults, nor declare his conduct free from reproach. Thus,
for example, it is evident that Ganganelli, as a thorough good Franciscan
(an order from the first to the last inimical to the Company), and as
a tolerant and conciliating man, could not be the friend, or have any
regard for the Jesuits; and yet, perceiving how influential the fathers
were under Rezzonico, Padre Lorenzo courted their favour, obtained
the protection of Ricci, who presented him to the Pope’s nephew, and
by their joint interest the poor monk was made an eminentissimo. This
certainly does not prove much in favour of his straightforwardness; and
his whole conduct during the Conclave proves also that Ganganelli was not
over-scrupulous as to the means he adopted to satisfy his deeply-rooted
ambition. Gioberti, his warm apologist, seeing that it would be rather
difficult to exonerate him from the reproach of ambition, admits that
he was indeed an ambitious man, but he says, “If it is true, according
to St Paul, that the man who desires the office of a bishop desires a
good work,[373] why will it not be permitted in certain cases to wish
to obtain the Popedom, which is the supreme priesthood?”[374] And he
(Gioberti) proceeds to prove that such ambition is permitted when the
man seeks not his own but the public welfare, when he is sure that he is
qualified for the task, and when he does not make use of any unworthy
means to obtain the object of his ambition; and he pretends that
Ganganelli fulfilled all these conditions. We, too, give credit to the
poor cordelier for having fulfilled the two first, and we believe that,
in aspiring to the supreme See, he had in view the public advantage, the
welfare of the Church, and that, moreover, he thought himself perfectly
qualified to be a Pope; but we shall leave our readers to judge whether
all the means he resorted to were unexceptionable and honest.

During the Conclave of all the cardinals, Cardinal Ganganelli appeared
the most unconcerned and indifferent as to the supremely important matter
they were engaged in. He kept aloof from the intrigues of all parties,
so that each might have considered him as one of its adherents. He
ingratiated himself with the party of the sovereigns, by repeating often
in public, but with the utmost timidity, just as an observation to be
taken into consideration, “Their arms are very long, they reach beyond
the Alps and the Pyrenees;” while to the partisans of the Jesuits he
repeated, “We must no more think of destroying the Society of Jesus than
of pulling down the dome of St Peter’s.”[375] It has been insinuated, and
even asserted, by many historians, that while Ganganelli was speaking so
ambiguously in public, he had secretly assured the French minister of
his adverse disposition towards the Jesuits, and that France, from the
beginning, had chosen him as her candidate. St Priest positively denies
that this was the case, and affirms that Ganganelli was by no means the
man upon whom France rested her confidence. “The cardinal was indeed
mentioned in the list of _bons sujets_, that is to say, of persons who
would not be unacceptable to the Bourbons; but his name, as well as that
of many others, was accompanied with notes of reservation.”[376] And the
French historian proceeds to say that France, far from preferring him to
the rest of the candidates, suspected him of intrigues and duplicity;
and Ganganelli’s conduct might have well given cause for such suspicion.
He had been previously intimate with the French cardinals, and shewed
himself rather favourable to their interests, but during the sitting of
the Conclave had affected to shun them, evidently with the intention of
not giving offence to the other party. He lived alone, shut up in his
cell, and seemed as if what was going on did not concern him in the least.

How, then, did it happen that he was chosen to the vacant throne?
The Jesuits have accused him of _simony_, and have asserted that, in
exchange for a written promise to suppress their order, the Spanish
cardinals gave him all the votes that were at the disposal of the house
of Bourbon.[377] The admirers of Clement have, on the other hand,
indignantly denied the ignominious traffic, and affirm that he was chosen
as the most moderate, tolerant, and virtuous of all the cardinals, and
as one who could alone heal the wounds of the Church; and the fact is,
that neither party may be said to be altogether wrong in their assertion.
It rests on many good authorities; and in our eyes the fact admits of no
doubt, that Ganganelli, two or three days before the scrutiny for the
nomination of a Pope, gave a written note to De Solis, conceived in the
following terms:—“I admit that the Sovereign Pontiff may in conscience
abolish the Society of the Jesuits, without violating the canonical
regulations.”[378] Now, how far this proceeding may constitute the sin of
simony, we do not pretend to decide. Evidently, in the strictest sense
of the word, here is no specified contract constituting simony. In this
note Cardinal Ganganelli expresses his opinion, as a theologian, that
the Supreme Pontiff may, in perfect safety of conscience, abolish the
Order of Jesus; and this opinion is perfectly sound and orthodox. But,
as plain matter of fact, it may be asked, was this answer intended to
win for the adviser the support of Spain, who was firmly resolved not to
consent to any nomination without having obtained from the future Pope
a written promise to suppress the Society of Jesus? It seems that the
Spanish cardinals, with whatever intention Ganganelli may have given
the note, took it not as the opinion of the theologian, but as the
solemn engagement of the future Pope, so that, soon after the note was
written, as if the Holy Ghost had of a sudden decided on the choice, and
suggested to the electors the same name, Ganganelli was elected to the
chair of the apostles.

However, between the negotiation of the Spanish ministers with Ganganelli
and the scrutiny for the nomination, Bernis, who saw that all opinions
were growing warm in favour of the Franciscan, and perceived that he had
been played upon by his Castilian colleagues, since all had been done
without his participation, to save at least appearances, hastened to
the probable candidate, and boasted to him that his election would be
due to the influence of France. The Spaniards willingly allowed him to
play this specious part, so suited to his ostentatious character, and
Ganganelli, who perhaps felt embarrassed as to how he should express his
pretended gratitude, answered in these strange words, “I bear Louis XV.
in my heart, and the Cardinal de Bernis in my right hand.”[379] Bernis
then, with a sort of diplomatic importance, requested distinctly to know
Ganganelli’s opinions with respect to the Jesuits, and the affair of the
Infant of Parma. On the latter point the future Pope answered in the most
satisfactory manner, and promised not only to recall the _monitorium_,
but to consecrate himself, in the Basilica of St Peter, the duke’s
approaching marriage. But on the Jesuit question he was not so explicit;
he admitted that their suppression appeared to be necessary, and that
most likely the future Pope would not be satisfied with mere words; and,
“in short,” says St Priest, “Ganganelli promised De Bernis all that he
desired.”[380] This being so arranged, and the Austrian party, to which
also adhered that of the Jesuits, having accepted the candidature of
Ganganelli, he was, as we have said, elected Sovereign Pontiff, and
assumed the name of Clement XIV.

Ganganelli having at last attained the summit of his ambition, enjoyed
for a short moment with rapture his good fortune, and the immense
popularity which immediately surrounded him, and gave way to all the
naturally good impulses of his heart. On the day of his coronation,
upon entering the Basilica of the Vatican, his eye fell upon a stone on
which he had once stood when a simple monk, to see the cortege of Pope
Rezzonico pass by. “Look,” said he, pointing it out to one of his suite,
“from that stone I was driven ten years ago.”[381] The very commencement
of his pontificate gave great satisfaction to the sovereigns, and to all
the friends of a liberal and tolerant policy. He began by prohibiting
the reading of the Bull _in coena Domini_, so offensive to all monarchs;
he suspended the effect of the _monitorium_ against the Duke of Parma;
he declared that he would send a nuncio to Portugal; and he extended
some concessions made by Benedict XIV. to the King of Sardinia, and
which his predecessor had refused to recognise. Had not the question of
the Jesuits been at issue, there is no doubt that Ganganelli would have
given general satisfaction, and he himself have lived and died a happy
and honoured Pope. But this unfortunate affair poisoned all his joy
from the commencement of his reign. To whatever side he turned himself,
he saw nothing but almost insurmountable obstacles. On the one hand,
the sovereigns demanded imperatively the abolition of the order, and
Clement had to fear that his refusal to comply would divest Rome not
only of the valuable possessions of Avignon and Benevento, but also of
the filial obedience of Spain, France, and Portugal. On the other hand,
how could he, the supreme chief of the Roman Catholic Church, abolish an
order which had been considered the firmest bulwark of this same Church,
and, as such, recognised and approved by many of his predecessors?
What would be the judgment of posterity and of the followers of his
creed? Would they ratify his sentence, and ascribe to him the gift of
infallibility at the expense of the other mistaken pontiffs? or would he
be accounted peccable, and his predecessors infallible? In both cases
the Papal infallibility would be greatly damaged, and the authority it
gave to the decisions of the Holy See greatly diminished, which neither
Ganganelli nor any other Pope ever wished that it should be; because it
is a remarkable fact, that the Popes, elective sovereigns, and who alone
of such have no hope whatever of transmitting to their issue or their
relatives any portion of their power, have always been, and still are,
scrupulously careful not to diminish the splendour and glory of the Papal
chair, although they may sometimes foresee that after their death it
will be occupied by their bitterest enemy. What then could the poor Pope
do in these critical circumstances? Although he liked to be compared to
Sistus V., whose memory he dearly worshipped, he was far from possessing
the firmness of character and the indomitable energy of the _quondam_
goatherd of the Abruzzi. He did not act as Sistus would have done; like
all persons without energy, in perilous and difficult emergencies, he
took no decisive measure, but directed all his efforts and artifices
to gain time, incessantly promising to the sovereigns to come to a
determination, and always evading the fulfilment of his promises at the
decisive moment.

To obtain some delay from France, he thought that the best he could do
was to flatter the vanity of De Bernis, now the accredited ambassador
of the court of Versailles, and to render him an unwilling accomplice
in his dilatory system; and Bernis, although an intelligent and shrewd
man, was so blinded by his vanity, as to be easily duped by his arts. St
Priest has given, from Bernis’ letters to Choiseul, a relation of some
interviews which took place between the Pope and the cardinal. “When
the cardinal went to pay his respects to the Pope, the latter would
not accept the customary homage; he forbade his genuflexion, repeatedly
he offered him his snuff-box, and even compelled him to be seated in
his presence. Bernis retired with every mark of profound respect, but
Clement said, in a familiar tone, ‘We are alone, and no person sees
us; let us dispense with etiquette, and resume the old equality of the
cardinalate.’”[382] A few days afterwards, when Bernis presented a letter
from Louis XV., Clement seized and kissed it with transport, exclaiming,
“I owe all to France. Providence has chosen me among the people like St
Peter, and the house of Bourbon has, under Providence, been the means
of raising me to the chair of the prince of the Apostles. Providence,
too, has permitted,” he added, embracing Bernis, “that you should be the
minister of the king at the Papal court. I place unlimited confidence in
you, my dear cardinal; let there be no indirect intercourse, no mystery,
between us.”[383]

These assurances flattered the vanity of Bernis, who was continually
asking his court to sanction the delays which the dignity of the Pope
rendered necessary, and which he represented to be inevitable in matters
affecting ecclesiastical discipline. These representations had some
influence upon the mind of Louis XV., who in his profligacy was often
assailed by transitory fits of remorse; and he prevailed upon the King
of Spain, though with some difficulty, to be a little more patient, and
to grant to the Pope some reasonable delay for the settlement of the
question.

Clement’s joy at the good success of his policy was irrepressible. Not
only did he feel proud of his own cleverness, but he hoped to be able
to find fresh pretexts for an indefinite delay. This brief moment of
illusion was the happiest in all his pontificate; indeed it was the
only happy one. His countenance beamed with contentment, his manner
became still more amiable, and nothing could exceed his good-humour. To
wrap himself in his happiness, he went to the enchanting residence of
Castel-Gandolfo, and spent many happy hours on the charming shore of the
Lake of Albano, with no other witness or suite than the old friend of his
youth, the poor lay brother, Francesco.

But the felicity was of short duration. Scarcely had Ganganelli returned
to Rome, when all his illusion vanished. Ardent and restless in the
furtherance of his projects, Charles III. was impatient to see the
destruction of the Jesuits accomplished; and seeing that no progress
was made towards this end, he accused Bernis to Choiseul either of
incapacity, or of connivance with Clement. Choiseul, to whom Charles left
all liberty to act as he pleased in the general policy of Europe, was
very anxious to comply with his wishes in this affair. He had already,
some time before, written to Bernis a letter full of remonstrances, and
ending thus:—“And if I was ambassador at Rome, I should be ashamed to see
Father Ricci the antagonist of my master.”[384] But now he pressed the
cardinal more and more strongly to bring the Pope to a speedy decision.
The Spanish king, on his part, not content with stimulating Choiseul, was
pressing the Pope harder and harder. First he held out a menace against
the Court of Rome; then, when Clement represented that there was some
danger that the measure of suppression would cause an outbreak, or the
interference of other monarchs, or of the pious friends of the Jesuits,
he proposed to land at Civita Vecchia 6000 men to defend the Pope against
his enemies; and, to frighten Ganganelli still more, he publicly and
explicitly denounced Cardinal de Bernis to the Court of France, and asked
for his recall.

Bernis was stunned by the shock, and felt as if his embassy, the thing
of all things dearest to his heart, for the pomp and power which it
imparted, had already been torn from him. The sympathy which he had for
Clement, the desire to be agreeable to him, and to repay the Pope for
the confidence which he thought his Holiness placed in him, vanished
at once, and all his thoughts were directed to find out how he could
constrain the Sovereign Pontiff, his spiritual and immediate chief, to
obey his temporal masters, and thus maintain himself in his embassy.
Instead of his previous easy acquiescence, he now became stern and
exacting; and not seeing any more efficient step to take to calm Charles
III.’s impatience, he urged the Pope to write to the king, and to make
peace with him.[385] Ganganelli, overjoyed to escape the present evil,
consented inconsiderately to what was asked of him, without reflecting
that, by pledging himself in writing, he rendered his position still
more difficult and perilous for the future. In his letter to the Spanish
king, declining the assistance offered by his Catholic majesty, he
requested time to accomplish the suppression of the Jesuits, admitting,
at the same time, that this measure was indispensable, and announcing,
in plain terms, that “_the members of the Society had merited their
fall from the restlessness of their spirit, and the audacity of their
proceedings_.”[386] This letter, which was written in 1770, has been
denied by some, and by others confounded with the more vague note which,
as we have seen, it was asserted that Ganganelli had written previous
to his ascension to the pontificate. This is a grave error; and, to
dispel any doubt, we shall quote the words of Cardinal Bernis himself,
in his despatch of April 29, 1770. They are, as will be seen, of the
gravest importance:—“The question is not whether the Pope would wish
to suppress the Jesuits; but whether, after the formal promises he has
given in writing to the King of Spain, his Holiness can for a moment
hesitate to fulfil them? This letter, which I have induced him to write
to his Catholic majesty, binds him so firmly, that, unless the court of
Spain should alter its opinions, the Pope will be obliged to complete
the undertaking. By gaining him, it is true, he might effect something,
but the power of delay is limited. His Holiness is a man of too much
clear-sightedness not to perceive that, should the King of Spain cause
his letter to be printed, he would lose his character as a man of honour,
if he hesitated to fulfil his promise, and suppress the Society, a plan
for whose destruction he had promised to communicate, and whose members
he considered as dangerous, discontented, and turbulent.”[387]

On the existence of this letter, to which they wrongly assign, as we
have said, a date anterior to the election of Ganganelli, the Jesuits
have founded their system of defence. They have asserted that the Pope
was compelled to the act of abolishing their Society, which act Clement
personally did not consider either just or necessary; and it cannot be
denied that the sovereigns exercised a kind of constraint upon him. But
was, then, Ganganelli favourable to the order, and would he, if left to
himself, have let the Jesuits live in peace, and protected them against
a great part of Europe conspiring for their destruction? No! undoubtedly
no. We have already observed that Ganganelli could not be the friend of
the Jesuits. The man who took Sistus V. and Benedict XIV. for his models,
and with whom he had so many points of resemblance, could only have
wished what these his predecessors wished and attempted to do, namely, to
put a stop to the Jesuits’ pride and arrogance. But we say more. Had not
Clement been pressed too hard by the sovereigns, we are convinced that
he would have acted more energetically and with more decision. We must
remember that Ganganelli, though little exacting in regard to outward
shows of pomp and power, had the highest opinion of the dignity with
which he was invested, and was by no means disposed to see the tiara
lowered or dishonoured in his person. Once, when Florida Blanca, the
Spanish ambassador, in order to support his argument, suggested to the
Pope that immediately after the publication of the Brief of Suppression,
Avignon and Benevento would be restored to the Holy See, Clement answered
with majestic dignity, “Remember that a Pope governs the Church, but does
not traffic in his authority,”[388] and, breaking short the conference,
retired in indignation. Besides, Ganganelli, though wanting in energy,
and though he may be reproached with somewhat equivocal conduct in order
to satisfy his ambition, was a man too religious and too noble-hearted,
of too sound principles of morality and honesty, to subscribe to a
measure which he considered unjust. He would have preferred every
inconvenience, martyrdom itself, to such iniquitous and dishonourable
conduct. Why, then, did he hesitate so long to accomplish a measure which
he considered useful and just? Let Clement answer for himself first, and
we shall give our reasons afterwards. In the Brief of Suppression the
Pope says: “We have omitted no care, no pains, in order to arrive at a
thorough knowledge of the origin, the progress, and the actual state
of that regular order commonly called the Company of Jesus.”[389] And
Ranke, whom the Jesuits often quote as authority, and who seems to be
rather partial to them, says, “Clement applied himself with the utmost
attention to the affairs of the Jesuits. A commission of cardinals was
formed, the archives of the Propaganda were examined, and the arguments
of both sides were deliberately considered.”[390] It is evident, then,
that Clement wished to give a judgment with a perfect knowledge of the
affair. It must be remembered that there is a wide distance between the
opinion that Ganganelli might have entertained of the Jesuits, and the
fact of the Supreme Pontiff, the chief of the religion, condemning, by
a solemn irrevocable act, a religious order approved and protected by
thirteen former Popes. It must be remembered that Clement was himself a
monk, and that, at the very beginning of the Brief of Suppression, he
informs us what his sentiments were towards the monastic communities.
“It is beyond doubt,” says the Brief, “that among the things _which
contribute to the good and happiness of the Christian Republic, the
religious orders hold the first place_. It was for this reason that the
Apostolic See, _which owes its welfare and support to these orders_, has
not only approved, but endowed them with many exemptions, privileges, and
faculties.”[391] Besides these powerful and principal reasons, many other
secondary ones must have induced Clement to defer the all-important act.
It was repugnant to his mild, benevolent, and conciliating character to
have recourse to harsh and severe measures. The nobleness and generosity
of his heart, on another side, suggested to him, that to the Jesuits,
perhaps, he was indebted for the supreme dignity he had obtained,
since it was by their influence that he had been named cardinal; and
this leads us to believe that, had the measure been less urgent and
indispensable to the welfare of the Church and Christianity, he, in
memory of past benefits, would never have suppressed the order. As a
last, not least reason, for Ganganelli’s hesitation, it may be adduced
that the Roman Catholic world would have received it with astonishment,
and not without murmurs, if he had abolished a society for which his
benefactor, Rezzonico, whose ashes were yet warm, had nourished such a
particular affection, and which he had taken under the protection of his
infallibility—an infallibility which, though Clement never spoke, he no
doubt would not have liked that others should have called in question.
In one word, in judging of Ganganelli’s conduct, the different parties
have too often forgotten that he was a Pope and a monk.

All the motives we have adduced to explain and excuse Clement’s delay
in suppressing the order, were noble and praiseworthy; but it must be
confessed that with them was mingled one that was less noble, and not so
creditable to the Pope’s character. He was afraid lest the Jesuits should
assassinate or poison him; and his fears were not, as we shall see,
without foundation.

The Jesuits, it may be imagined, had spared no pains to influence
Clement’s mind, and to deprecate the scheme of their destruction. At
first they set at work all the influences they still possessed. In
Rome, above all, they were as yet all-powerful among the nobility.
They were the agents of the husbands, the confessors of the wives, the
tutors of the children; and by means of these nobles they endeavoured
to influence the Pope in their favour. But as Ganganelli received few
persons of that rank, and listened to none, this expedient of the
fathers proved abortive. They obtained afterwards from the sovereigns
of Austria, Bavaria, Poland, and Sardinia, letters of recommendation
to the Holy Father; and when they perceived that even these proved
ineffectual, they had recourse to threats, and, by many ingenious and
sly contrivances, conveyed to Clement’s mind the persuasion that they
would take away his life, whatever precautions he should take. To make
a still stronger impression upon his mind, they had his death predicted
by a set of impostors, whose predictions were, as is generally the
case, readily believed by the people; and the Jesuits took good care to
strengthen this belief. Bernardina Renzi, a peasant of Valentano, giving
herself out as a prophetess, predicted the vacancy of the Holy See by
the mysterious initials P. S. S. V. (presto sarà sede vacante). Another
Pythoness of Montefiascone also put forth similar strange and mysterious
predictions.[392] The Pope was too enlightened, too religious, to believe
in such impostures; but, just because he did not believe in them, he
feared them the more, knowing that those who had put them forth would
find the means to accomplish them. Two Jesuits, Fathers Coltraro and
Venizza, along with the confessor of Bernardina, were thrown into prison,
as having been suspected of being the advisers of the prophetess. In the
various circles of society, almost publicly and aloud, the Jesuits and
their partisans accused and cursed Clement, heaping reproaches on his
name, and even insinuating the possibility of a deposition. Insulting
images and hideous figures were put forth, announcing an approaching
catastrophe, under the form of vengeance of Providence. Father Ricci,
far from feeling any repugnance to the support of such shameless
deception, did not even shrink from an interview with the sorceress of
Valentino.[393]

Surrounded as he was by treachery, Ganganelli could not long resist the
impressions which such a state of things was calculated to make upon him.
His natural gaiety gave way; his health became impaired; and evident
signs of weariness were stamped on the whole of his countenance. He lived
more secluded than ever, and would not taste of any dishes but those
prepared by his faithful Francesco, or by his own hands.

On the other hand, the sovereigns became more and more urgent. To Anzpurù
succeeded, as Spanish ambassador, that same Muniño who, in his capacity
of magistrate, had assisted D’Aranda in the mysterious examination of
the Jesuits’ conduct, after the _émeute_ of 1766, and who was now the
Count of Florida Blanca. He was stern and inflexible, and pressed hard
the poor Pope to take the dangerous leap. The transitory, delusive hope
which the Jesuits had enjoyed, of escaping ruin, after the disgrace
of Choiseul, and the paramount influence which had been acquired over
the king by their friend Madame Dubarry, the successor of Madame de
Pompadour, soon vanished. D’Aiguillon, to deprecate the anger of Charles
III. for the fall of his friend Choiseul, seconded the Spanish king
vigorously in his cherished project of obtaining the Suppression; and,
as Austria had abandoned the cause of the order,[394] the ruin of the
Jesuits became inevitable. Yet Clement resisted all those importunities
and menaces, and held firm, till, after a long and protracted
investigation, his conscience was satisfied that the act he was called
upon to perform was an act of supreme justice and of immense advantage
to Christianity. Then, although he felt sure that he should forfeit his
life, he decided upon sacrificing it to the fulfilment of a duty, which
gives to the act a more imposing and solemn gravity. On the 23d July
1773, he affixed his signature to the Brief, saying, in the very act of
writing his name, “We sign our death”—Sottoscriviamo la nostra morte.[395]

We shall now lay before our readers a great part of this Brief, which we
should wish them to attentively read and consider, because, as a Roman
Catholic priest observes, “It is undoubtedly one of the most beautiful
and honourable of the Roman Church; and so much so, that I dare assert
that there is no ecclesiastical ordinance where shines more brightly the
wisdom, the holiness, the moderation, and the true philosophy of the
apostolic chair. The idea which is predominant in the Brief is, that of
the unity and peace which the Man-God brought to mortals, by establishing
his religion,” &c.[396] In fact, the Brief is extremely remarkable in all
its parts, and shews with what accuracy, with what patience, Clement had
examined the question. It begins by pronouncing a high eulogium on the
monastic orders, and on the good intentions of Loyola in founding that of
the Jesuits. It then points out many of these orders which were abolished
by different Popes. It recapitulates all the favours that the Holy See
had bestowed on the Jesuits. Then, in a rapid sketch of the history of
the order, it shews in it the principle of discord, of schism; of a
continual war waged by it against all other religious communities; the
dissensions it excited in various Catholic countries; the obstinacy of
the Jesuits in persisting in their reprehensible conduct, notwithstanding
a number of briefs and admonitions of the Supreme Pontiff; and, finally,
concludes by declaring it TO BE IMPOSSIBLE THAT THE CHURCH COULD RECOVER
A FIRM AND DURABLE PEACE, SO LONG AS THE SAID SOCIETY SUBSISTED. Here
follows this memorable document,[397] which we give at length, as the
most correct epitome of the history of the Company, written by the most
high and competent authority:—

    “_Brief for the effectual Suppression of the Order of Jesuits._

    “CLEMENT XIV., Pope, &c.

    “Jesus Christ, our Saviour and Redeemer, was foretold by the
    prophets as the _Prince of Peace_: the angels proclaimed him
    under the same title to the shepherds at his first appearance
    upon earth; he afterwards made himself known repeatedly as
    the _sovereign pacificator_; and he recommended peace to his
    disciples before his ascension to heaven.

    “Having reconciled all things to God his Father, having
    pacified by his blood and by his cross everything which is
    contained in heaven and in earth, he recommended to his
    apostles the ministry of reconciliation, and bestowed on them
    the gift of tongues, that they might publish it; that they
    might become ministers and envoys of Christ, who is not the God
    of discord, but of peace and love; that they might announce
    this peace to all the earth, and direct their efforts to this
    chief point, that all men, being regenerated in Christ, might
    preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace; might
    consider themselves as one body and one soul, as called to one
    and the same hope, to one and the same vocation, at which,
    according to St Gregory, we can never arrive, unless we run in
    concert with our brethren. The same word of reconciliation,
    this same ministry, is recommended to us by God in a particular
    manner. Ever since we were raised (without any personal merit)
    to the chair of St Peter, we have called these duties to mind
    day and night; we have had them without ceasing before our
    eyes; they are deeply engraven on our heart; and we labour to
    the utmost of our power to satisfy and to fulfil them. To this
    effect we implore without ceasing the protection and the aid of
    God, that he would inspire us and all his flock with counsels
    of peace, and open to us the road which leads to it. We know,
    besides, _that we are established by the Divine Providence over
    kingdoms and nations, in order to pluck up, destroy, disperse,
    dissipate, plant, or nourish_, as may best conduce to the right
    cultivation of the vineyard of Sabaoth, and to the preservation
    of the edifice of the Christian religion, of which Christ is
    the chief corner-stone. In consequence hereof, we have ever
    thought, and been constantly of opinion, that, as it is our
    duty carefully to plant and nourish whatever may conduce in
    any manner to the repose and tranquillity of the Christian
    republic, so the bond of mutual charity requires that we be
    equally ready and disposed to pluck up and destroy even the
    things which are most agreeable to us, and of which we cannot
    deprive ourselves without the highest regret and the most
    pungent sorrow.

    “It is beyond a doubt, that _among the things which contribute
    to the good and happiness of the Christian republic, the
    religious orders hold, as it were, the first place_. It was
    for this reason that the Apostolic See, which _owes its lustre
    and support to these orders_, has not only approved, but
    _endowed them with many exemptions, privileges, and faculties_,
    in order that they might be so much the more excited to the
    cultivation of piety and religion; to the direction of the
    manners of the people, both by their instructions and their
    examples; to the preservation and confirmation of the unity
    of the faith among the believers. But if, at any time, any of
    these religious orders did not cause these abundant fruits
    to prosper among the Christian people, did not produce those
    advantages which were hoped for at their institution; if at any
    time they seemed disposed rather to trouble than maintain the
    public tranquillity; the same Apostolic See, which had availed
    itself of its own authority to establish these orders, did not
    hesitate to reform them by new laws, to recall them to their
    primitive institution, or even totally to abolish them where it
    has seemed necessary.”

[Here follows a long list of religious orders suppressed by different
Popes, without giving them the opportunity of clearing themselves from
the accusations brought against them. It then proceeds as follows:—]

    “We, therefore, having these and other such examples before our
    eyes, examples of great weight and high authority—animated,
    besides, with a lively desire of walking with a safe conscience
    and a firm step in the deliberations of which we shall speak
    hereafter—_have omitted no care, no pains, in order to arrive
    at a thorough knowledge of the origin, the progress, and the
    actual state of that regular order commonly called ‘The Company
    of Jesus_.’ In the course of these investigations, we have seen
    that the holy founder of the order did institute it for the
    salvation of souls, the conversion of heretics and infidels,
    and, in short, for the greater advancement of piety and
    religion. And, in order to attain more surely and happily so
    laudable a design, he consecrated himself rigorously to God, by
    an absolute vow of evangelical poverty, with which to bind the
    Society in general, and each individual in particular, except
    only the colleges in which polite literature and other branches
    of knowledge were to be taught, and which were allowed to
    possess property, but so that no part of their revenues could
    ever be applied to the use of the said Society in general. It
    was under these and other holy restrictions that the Company
    of Jesus was approved by the Pope Paul III., our predecessor
    of blessed memory, by his letter _sub plumbo_, dated 27th
    September 1540.”

[Here Clement enumerates the other Popes who had either confirmed the
privileges already granted to the Society, or had explained and augmented
them.]

    “Notwithstanding so many and so great favours, it appears
    from the apostolical Constitutions, that, almost at the very
    moment of its institution, there arose in the bosom of this
    Society divers seeds of discord and dissension, not only among
    the companions themselves, but with other regular orders, the
    secular clergy, the academies, the universities, the public
    schools, and lastly, even with the princes of the states in
    which the Society was received.

    “These dissensions and disputes arose sometimes concerning
    the nature of their vows, the time of admission to them, the
    power of expulsion, the right of admission to holy orders
    without a sufficient title, and without having taken the solemn
    vows, contrary to the tenor of the decrees of the Council of
    Trent, and of Pius V., our predecessor; sometimes concerning
    _the absolute authority assumed by the General of the said
    order_, and on matters relating to the good government and
    discipline of the order; sometimes concerning different
    points of doctrine concerning their schools, or such of their
    exemptions and privileges as the ordinaries and other civil or
    ecclesiastical officers declared to be contrary to their rights
    and jurisdiction. In short, accusations of the greatest nature,
    _and very detrimental to the peace and tranquillity of the
    Christian republic, have been continually received against the
    said order_. Hence the origin of that infinity of appeals and
    protests against this Society, which so many sovereigns have
    laid at the foot of the throne of our predecessors Paul IV.,
    Pius V., and Sixtus V.

    “Among the princes who have thus appealed, is Philip II.,
    King of Spain, of glorious memory, who laid before Sixtus
    V. not only the reasons of complaint which he had, but also
    those alleged by the inquisitors of his kingdom, against
    the _excessive privileges_ of the Society, and the form of
    their government. He desired likewise that the Pope should
    be acquainted with the heads of accusation laid against the
    Society, and confirmed by some of its own members remarkable
    for their learning and piety, and demanded that the Society
    should undergo an apostolic visitation. Sixtus V., convinced
    that these demands and solicitations of Philip were _just and
    well founded, did, without hesitation, comply therewith_; and,
    in consequence, named a bishop of distinguished prudence,
    virtue, and learning, to be apostolical visitor, and at the
    same time deputed a congregation of cardinals to examine this
    matter.

    “But this pontiff having been carried off by a premature
    death, this wise undertaking remained without effect. Gregory
    XIV. being raised to the supreme apostolic chair, approved,
    in its utmost extent, the institution of the Society, by
    his letter, _sub plumbo_, dated the 28th of July 1591. He
    confirmed all the privileges which had been granted by any
    of his predecessors to the Society, and particularly the
    power of expelling and dismissing any of its members, without
    any previous form of process, information, act, or delay;
    upon the sole view of the truth of the fact, and the nature
    of the crime, from a sufficient motive, and a due regard
    of persons and circumstances. He ordained, and that under
    pain of excommunication, that all proceedings against the
    Society should be quashed, and that no person whatever should
    presume, directly or indirectly, to attack the institution,
    constitutions, or decrees of the said Society, or attempt in
    any manner whatever to make any changes therein. To each and
    every of the members only of the said Society, he permitted
    to expose and propose, either by themselves or by the legates
    and nuncios of the Holy See, to himself only, or the Popes his
    successors, whatever they should think proper to be added,
    modified, or changed in their institution.

    “Who would have thought that even these dispositions should
    prove ineffectual towards appeasing the cries and appeals
    against the Society? On the contrary, very violent disputes
    arose on all sides concerning the doctrine of the Society,
    which many represented as contrary to the orthodox faith and
    to sound morals. The dissensions among themselves, and with
    others, grew every day more animated; the accusations against
    the Society were multiplied without number, and especially with
    that _insatiable avidity of temporal possessions_ with which
    it was reproached. Hence the rise not only of those well-known
    troubles which brought so much care and solicitude upon the
    Holy See, but also of the resolutions which certain sovereigns
    took against the said order.

    “It resulted that, instead of obtaining from Paul V., of
    blessed memory, a fresh confirmation of its institute and
    privileges, the Society was reduced to ask of him that he
    would condescend to ratify and confirm, by his authority,
    certain decrees formed in the Fifth General Congregation of the
    Company, and transcribed word for word in the Brief of the said
    Pope, bearing date September 4, 1606. In these decrees, it is
    plainly acknowledged that the dissensions and internal revolts
    of the said companions, together with the demands and appeals
    of strangers, had obliged the said companions assembled in
    congregation to enact the following statute, namely:

    “‘The Divine Providence having raised up our Society for the
    propagation of the Faith, and the gaining of souls, the said
    Society can, by the rules of its own institute, which are its
    spiritual arms, arrive happily, under the standard of the
    Cross, at the end which it has proposed for the good of the
    Church and the edification of our neighbours. But the said
    Society would prevent the effect of these precious goods, and
    expose them to the most imminent dangers, _if it concerned
    itself with temporal matters, and which relate to political
    affairs and the administration of government_; in consequence
    whereof, it has been wisely ordained by our superiors and
    ancients, that, confining ourselves to combat for the glory of
    God, we should not concern ourselves with matters foreign to
    our profession: but whereas, in these times of difficulty and
    danger, it has happened, through the fault perhaps of certain
    individuals, through ambition and intemperate zeal, that our
    institute has been ill spoken of in divers places, and before
    divers sovereigns, whose affection and goodwill the Father
    Ignatius, of holy memory, thought we should preserve for the
    good of the service of God; and whereas a good reputation is
    indispensably necessary to make _the vineyard of Christ bring
    forth fruits_; in consequence hereof, our congregation has
    resolved that we shall abstain from all appearance of evil, and
    remedy, as far as in our power, the evils arisen from false
    suspicions. To this end, and by the authority of the present
    decree of the said congregation, it is severely and strictly
    forbidden to all the members of the Society _to interfere in
    any manner whatever in public affairs_, even though they be
    thereto invited, or to deviate from the institute, through
    entreaty, persuasion, or any other motive whatever. The
    congregation recommends to the fathers-coadjutors, that they
    do propose and determine, with all diligence and speed, such
    further means as they may think necessary for remedying this
    abuse.’

    “We have seen, in the grief of our heart, that neither these
    remedies, nor an infinity of others, since employed, have
    produced their due effect, or silenced the accusations and
    complaints against the said Society. Our other predecessors,
    Urban VII., Clement IX., X., XI., and XII., and Alexander
    VII. and VIII., Innocent X., XII., and XIII., and Benedict
    XIV., employed, without effect, all their efforts to the same
    purpose. In vain did they endeavour, by salutary constitutions,
    to restore peace to the Church; as well with respect to
    secular affairs, with which the Company ought not to have
    interfered, as with regard to the missions; which gave rise
    to great disputes and oppositions on the part of the Company
    with the ordinaries, with other religious orders, about the
    holy places, and communities of all sorts in Europe, Africa,
    and America, to the great loss of souls, and great scandal of
    the people; as likewise concerning the meaning and practice of
    _certain idolatrous ceremonies_, adopted in certain places,
    in contempt of those justly approved by the Catholic Church;
    and further, concerning the use and explanation of certain
    _maxims_, which the Holy See has with reason _proscribed as
    scandalous, and manifestly contrary to good morals_; and,
    lastly, concerning other matters of great importance and prime
    necessity, towards preserving the integrity and purity of the
    doctrines of the gospel; from which maxims have resulted very
    great inconveniences and great detriment both in our days and
    in past ages; such as _the revolts and intestine troubles in
    some of the Catholic states_, persecutions against the Church
    in some countries of Asia and Europe, not to mention the
    vexation and grating solicitude which these melancholy affairs
    brought on our predecessors, principally upon Innocent XI.,
    of blessed memory, who found himself reduced to the necessity
    of _forbidding the Company to receive any more novices_; and
    afterwards upon Innocent XIII., who was obliged to threaten the
    Company with the same punishment; and, lastly, upon Benedict
    XIV., who took the resolution of ordaining a general visitation
    of all the houses and colleges of the Company in the kingdom of
    our dearly beloved son in Jesus Christ, the most faithful King
    of Portugal.

    “The late apostolic letter of Clement XIII., of blessed memory,
    our immediate predecessor, by which the institute of the
    Company of Jesus was again approved and recommended, was _far
    from bringing any comfort to the Holy See, or any advantage
    to the Christian republic_. Indeed this letter was rather
    _extorted_ than _granted_, to use the expression of Gregory X.
    in the above-named General Council of Lyons.

    “After so many storms, troubles, and divisions, every good
    man looked forward with impatience to the happy day which
    was to restore peace and tranquillity. But under the reign
    of this same Clement XIII. the times became more difficult
    and tempestuous; _complaints and quarrels were multiplied on
    every side; in some places dangerous seditions arose, tumults,
    discords, dissensions, scandals, which, weakening or entirely
    breaking the bonds of Christian charity, excited the faithful
    to all the rage of party hatreds and enmities_. Desolation
    and danger grew to such a height, that the very sovereigns,
    whose piety and liberality towards the Company were so well
    known as to be looked upon as hereditary in their families—we
    mean our dearly-beloved sons in Christ, _the Kings of France,
    Spain, Portugal, and Sicily—found themselves reduced to the
    necessity of expelling and driving from their states, kingdoms,
    and provinces, these very Companions of Jesus_; persuaded that
    there remained _no other remedy_ to so great evils; and that
    this step was necessary in order to prevent the Christians from
    rising one against another, _and from massacring each other in
    the very bosom of our common mother the Holy Church_. The said
    our dear sons in Jesus Christ having since considered that even
    this remedy would not be sufficient towards reconciling the
    whole Christian world, unless the said Society was _absolutely
    abolished and suppressed_, made known their demands and wills
    in this matter to our said predecessor Clement XIII. They
    united their common prayers and authority to obtain that this
    last method might be put in practice, as the only one capable
    of assuring the constant repose of their subjects, and the good
    of the Catholic Church in general. But the unexpected death of
    the aforesaid pontiff rendered this project abortive.

    “As soon as by the divine mercy and providence we were
    raised to the chair of St Peter, the same prayers, demands,
    and wishes were laid before us, and strengthened by the
    pressing solicitations of many bishops, and other persons of
    distinguished rank, learning, and piety. But, that we might
    choose the wisest course in an affair of so much importance,
    we determined _not to be precipitate_, but to take due time;
    not only to examine attentively, weigh carefully, and wisely
    debate, but also, by unceasing prayers, to ask of the Father
    of Lights his particular assistance under these circumstances;
    exhorting at the same time the faithful to co-operate with
    us by their prayers and good works in obtaining this needful
    succour.

    “And first of all we proposed to examine upon what grounds
    rested the common opinion, that the institute of the Clerks
    of the Company of Jesus had been approved and confirmed in an
    especial manner by the Council of Trent. And we found that
    in the said Council nothing more was done with regard to the
    said Society, only to except it from the general decree,
    which ordained that in the other regular orders, those who
    had finished their novitiate, and were judged worthy of being
    admitted to the profession, should be admitted thereto; and
    that such as were not found worthy should be sent back from the
    monastery. The same Council declared, that it meant not to make
    any change or innovation in the government of the clerks of the
    Company of Jesus, that they might not be hindered from being
    useful to God and his Church, according to the intent of the
    pious institute approved by the Holy See.

    “Actuated by so many and important considerations, and, as
    we hope, aided by the presence and inspiration of the Holy
    Spirit; compelled, besides, by the necessity of our ministry,
    which strictly obliges us to conciliate, maintain, and confirm
    the peace and tranquillity of the Christian republic, and
    remove every obstacle which may tend to trouble it; having
    further considered that the said Company of Jesus can no longer
    produce those abundant fruits, and those great advantages,
    with a view to which it was instituted, approved by so many
    of our predecessors, and endowed with so many and extensive
    privileges; that, on the contrary, it was very difficult,
    not to say impossible, _that the Church could recover a firm
    and durable peace so long as the said Society subsisted_;
    in consequence hereof, and determined by the particular
    reasons we have here alleged, and forced by other motives
    which prudence and the good government of the Church have
    dictated, the knowledge of which we reserve to ourselves,
    conforming ourselves to the examples of our predecessors, and
    particularly to that of Gregory X. in the general Council of
    Lyons; the rather as, in the present case, we are determining
    upon the fate of a society _classed among the mendicant orders,
    both by its institute and by its privileges;—after a mature
    deliberation, we do, out of our certain knowledge, and the
    fulness of our apostolical power_, SUPPRESS AND ABOLISH THE
    SAID COMPANY: we deprive it of all activity whatever, of its
    houses, schools, colleges, hospitals, lands, and, in short,
    every other place whatsoever, in whatever kingdom or province
    they may be situated; we _abrogate_ and _annul_ its statutes,
    rules, customs, decrees, and constitutions, _even though
    confirmed by oath, and approved by the Holy See or otherwise_;
    in like manner we annul all and every its privileges, indults,
    general or particular, the tenor whereof is, and is taken to
    be, as fully and as amply expressed in the present Brief as
    if the same were inserted word for word, in whatever clauses,
    form, or decree, or under whatever sanction their privileges
    may have been conceived. We declare all, and all kind of
    authority, the General, the provincials, the visitors, and
    other superiors of the said Society to be FOR EVER ANNULLED
    AND EXTINGUISHED, of what nature soever the said authority may
    be, as well in things spiritual as temporal. We do likewise
    order that the said jurisdiction and authority be transferred
    to the respective ordinaries, fully and in the same manner as
    the said generals, &c. exercised it, according to the form,
    places, and circumstances with respect to the persons and under
    the conditions hereafter determined; forbidding, as we do
    hereby forbid, the reception of any person to the said Society,
    the novitiate or habit thereof. And with regard to those who
    have already been admitted, our will is, that they be not
    received to make profession of the simple, solemn, absolute
    vows, under penalty of nullity, and such other penalties as
    we shall ordain. Further, we do will, command, and ordain,
    that those who are now performing their novitiate be speedily,
    immediately, and actually sent back to their own homes; we
    do further forbid that those who have made profession of the
    first simple vows, but who are not yet admitted to either of
    the holy orders, be admitted thereto under any pretext or
    title whatever; whether on account of the profession they
    have already made in the said Society, or by virtue of any
    privileges the said Society has obtained, _contrary to the
    tenor of the decrees of the Council of Trent_.

    “And whereas all our endeavours are directed to the great
    end of procuring the good of the Church and the tranquillity
    of nations; and it being at the same time our intention to
    provide all necessary aid, consolation, and assistance to the
    individuals or companions of the said Society, every one of
    which, in his individual capacity, we love in the Lord with
    a truly parental affection; and to the end that they being
    delivered on their part from the persecutions, dissensions, and
    troubles with which they have for a long time been agitated,
    may be able to labour with more success in the vineyard of the
    Lord, and contribute to the salvation of souls; therefore,
    and for these motives, we do decree and determine that such
    of the companions as have yet made professions only of the
    first vows, and are not yet promoted to holy orders, being
    absolved, as in fact they are absolved, from the first simple
    vows, do, without fail, quit the houses and colleges of the
    said Society, and be at full liberty to choose such course of
    life as each shall judge most conformable to his vocation,
    strength, and conscience, and that within a space of time to
    be prescribed by the ordinary of the diocese; which time shall
    be sufficient for each to provide himself some employment or
    benefice, or at least some patron who will receive him into
    his house, always provided that the time thus allowed do not
    exceed the space of one year, to be counted from the day of
    the date hereof. And this the rather, as, according to the
    privileges of the said Company, those who have only taken
    these first vows may be expelled the order upon motives left
    entirely to the prudence of the superiors, as circumstances
    require, and without any previous form of process. As to such
    of the companions as are already promoted to holy orders, we
    grant them permission to quit the houses and colleges of the
    Company, and to _enter into any other regular order_ already
    approved by the Holy See. In which case, and supposing they
    have already professed the first vows, they are to perform
    the accustomed novitiate in the order into which they are to
    enter according to the prescription of the Council of Trent;
    but if they have taken all the vows, then they shall perform
    only a novitiate of six months, we graciously dispensing with
    the rest. Or otherwise, we do permit them to live at large
    _as secular priests and clerks_, always under a perfect and
    _absolute obedience to the jurisdiction of the ordinary of the
    diocese_ where they shall establish themselves. We do likewise
    ordain, that to such as shall embrace this last expedient, a
    convenient stipend be paid out of the revenues of the house or
    college where they reside; regard being paid, in assigning the
    same, to the expenses to which the said house shall be exposed,
    as well as to the revenues it enjoyed. With regard to those
    who have made the last vows, and are promoted to holy orders,
    and who, either through fear of not being able to subsist for
    want of a pension, or from the smallness thereof, or because
    they know not where to fix themselves, or, on account of age,
    infirmities, or other grave and lawful reasons, do not choose
    to quit the said colleges or houses, they shall be permitted to
    dwell therein, provided always that they _exercise no ministry
    whatsoever in the said houses or colleges, and be entirely
    subject to the ordinary of the diocese_; that they make no
    _acquisitions whatever_, according to the decree of the Council
    of Lyons, that they do not alienate the houses, possessions, or
    funds which they actually possess. It shall be lawful to unite
    in one or more houses the number of individuals that remain,
    nor shall others be substituted in the room of those who may
    die; so that the houses which become vacant may be converted to
    such pious uses as the circumstances of time and place shall
    require, in conformity to the holy canons, and the intention
    of the founders, so as may best promote the divine worship,
    the salvation of souls, and the public good. And to this end a
    member of the regular clergy, recommendable for his prudence
    and sound morals, shall be chosen to preside over and govern
    the said houses; _so that the name of the Company shall be, and
    is, for ever extinguished and suppressed_.

    “In like manner we declare, that in this general suppression of
    the Company shall be comprehended the individuals thereof in
    all the provinces from whence they have already been expelled;
    and to this effect our will is, that the said individuals,
    even though they have been promoted to holy orders, be _ipso
    facto_ reduced to the state of secular priests and clerks, and
    remain in absolute subjection to the ordinary of the diocese,
    supposing always that they are not entered into any other
    regular order.

    “If, among the subjects heretofore of the Company of Jesus,
    but who shall become secular priests or clerks, the ordinaries
    shall find any qualified by their virtues, learning, and
    purity of morals, they may, as they see fit, grant or refuse
    them power of confessing and preaching; but none of them
    shall exercise the said holy function without a permission
    in writing; nor shall the bishops or ordinaries grant such
    permission to such of the Society who shall remain in the
    colleges or houses heretofore belonging to the Society, to
    whom we expressly and for ever prohibit the administration
    of the sacrament of penance, and the function of preaching;
    as Gregory X. did prohibit it in the Council already cited.
    And we leave it to the consciences of the bishops to see that
    this last article be strictly observed; exhorting them to have
    before their eyes the severe account which they must render to
    God of the flock committed to their charge, and the tremendous
    judgment with which the great Judge of the living and the dead
    doth threaten those who are invested with so high a character.

    “Further, we will, that if any of those who have heretofore
    professed the institute of the Company, shall be desirous of
    dedicating themselves to the instruction of youth _in any
    college or school, care be taken that they have no part in the
    government or direction of the same_, and that the liberty of
    teaching be granted to such only whose labours promise a happy
    issue, _and who shall shew themselves averse to all spirit of
    dispute_, and untainted with any doctrines which may occasion
    or stir up frivolous and dangerous quarrels. In a word,
    the faculty of teaching youth shall neither be granted nor
    preserved _but to those who seem inclined to maintain peace in
    the schools and tranquillity in the world_.

    “Our intention and pleasure is, that the dispositions which
    we have thus made known for the suppression of this Society
    shall be extended to the members thereof employed in missions,
    reserving to ourselves the right of fixing upon such methods as
    to us shall appear most sure and convenient for the conversion
    of infidels and the conciliation of controverted points.

    “All and singular the privileges and statutes of the said
    Company being thus annulled and entirely abrogated, we declare
    that as soon as the individuals thereof shall have quitted
    their houses and colleges, and taken the habit of secular
    clerks, they shall be qualified to obtain, in conformity to
    the decrees of the holy canons and apostolic constitutions,
    cures, benefices without cure, offices, charges, dignities,
    and all employments whatever, _which they could not obtain so
    long as they were members of the said Society_, according to
    the will of Gregory XIII., of blessed memory, expressed in his
    bull bearing date September 10th, 1548, which Brief begins
    with these words—_Satus superque_, &c. Likewise we grant them
    the power which they had not before, of receiving alms for the
    celebration of the mass, and the full enjoyment of all the
    graces and favours _from which they were heretofore precluded
    as regular clerks of the Company of Jesus_.

    “We likewise abrogate all the prerogatives which had been
    granted to them by their General and other superiors in virtue
    of the privileges obtained from the Sovereign Pontiffs, and by
    which they were permitted to read heretical and impious books
    proscribed by the Holy See; likewise the power they enjoyed of
    not observing the stated fasts, and of eating flesh on fast
    days; likewise the faculty of reciting the prayers called the
    _canonical hours_, and all other like privileges; our firm
    intention being, that they do conform themselves in all things
    to the manner of living of the secular priests, and to the
    general rules of the Church.

    “Further, we do ordain, that after the publication of this our
    letter, no person do presume to suspend the execution thereof,
    under colour, title, or pretence of any action, appeal, relief,
    explanation of doubts which may arise, or any other pretext
    whatever, foreseen or not foreseen. Our will and meaning is,
    that the suppression and destruction of the said Society, and
    of all its parts, shall have an immediate and instantaneous
    effect in the manner here above set forth; and that under pain
    of the greater excommunication, to be immediately incurred
    by whosoever shall presume to create the least impediment or
    obstacle, or delay in the execution of this our will: the said
    excommunication not to be taken off but by ourselves, or our
    successors, the Roman Pontiffs.

    “Further, we ordain and command, by virtue of the holy
    obedience to all and every ecclesiastical person, regular
    and secular, of whatever rank, dignity, and condition,
    and especially those who have been heretofore of the said
    Company, that no one of them do carry their audacity so far
    as to impugn, combat, or even write or speak about the said
    suppression, or the reasons and motives of it, or about the
    institute of the Company, its form of government, or other
    circumstance thereto relating, without an express permission
    from the Roman Pontiff, and that under the same pain of
    excommunication.

    “We forbid all and every one to offend any person whatever
    on account of the said suppression, and especially those who
    have been members of the said Society, or to make use of any
    injurious, malevolent, reproachful, or contemptuous language
    towards them, whether verbally or by writing.

    “We exhort all the Christian princes to exert all that force,
    authority, and power which God has given them for the defence
    of the holy Roman Church, so that, in consequence of the
    respect and veneration which they owe to the Apostolic See,
    things may be so ordered, that these our letters have their
    full effect, and that they attentively heeding all the articles
    therein contained, do publish such ordonnances and regulations
    as may prevent all excesses, disputes, and dissensions among
    the faithful, whilst they carry this our will into execution.

    “Finally, we exhort all Christians, and entreat them by the
    bowels of our Saviour Jesus Christ, to remember that we have
    one Master, who is in heaven, one Saviour, who has purchased
    us by his blood; that we have all been again born in the water
    of baptism, through the word of eternal life; that we have all
    been declared sons of God, and co-heirs with Jesus Christ;
    all fed with the same bread of the Catholic doctrine, and of
    the Divine Word; that we are all one body in Jesus Christ, of
    which we are members, consequently it is absolutely necessary
    that, united by the common bond of charity, they should live
    in peace with all men, and consider it as their first duty to
    love one another, remembering that he who loveth his neighbour
    fulfilleth the law, avoiding studiously all occasion of
    scandal, enmity, division, and such-like evils, which were
    invented and promoted by the ancient enemy of mankind, in order
    to disturb the Church of God, and prevent the eternal happiness
    of the faithful, under the false title of schools, opinions,
    and even of the perfection of Christianity. On the contrary,
    every one should exert his utmost endeavours to acquire that
    true and sincere wisdom of which St James speaks in his
    canonical epistle, ch. iii. v. 13.

    “Further, our will and pleasure is, that though the superiors
    and other members of the Society, and others interested
    therein, have not consented to this disposition, have not been
    cited or heard, still it shall not at any time be allowed them
    to make any observations on our present letter, to attack or
    invalidate it, to demand a further examination of it, to appeal
    from it, make it a matter of dispute, to reduce it to the terms
    of law, to proceed against it by the means of _restitutionis
    ad integrum_, to open their mouth against it, to reduce it _ad
    viam et terminos juris_, or, in short, to impugn it by any way
    whatever, of right or fact, favour or justice; and even though
    these means may be granted them, and though they should have
    obtained them, still they may not make use of them in court
    or out of court; nor shall they plead any flaw, subreption,
    obreption, nullity, or invalidity in this letter, or any other
    plea, how great, unforeseen, or substantial it may be, nor
    the neglect of any form in the above proceedings, or in any
    part thereof, nor the neglect of any point founded on any law
    or custom, and comprised in the body of laws, nor even the
    plea of _enormis enormissimæ et totalis læsionis_, nor, in
    short, any pretext or motive, however just, reasonable, or
    privileged, not even though the omission of such form or point
    should be of such nature as, without the same being expressly
    guarded against, would render every other act invalid. For all
    this notwithstanding, our will and pleasure is, that these
    our letters should _for ever and to all eternity be valid,
    permanent, and efficacious_, have and obtain their full force
    and effect, and be inviolably observed by all and every whom
    they do or may concern, _now or hereafter_, in any manner
    whatever.

    “In like manner, and not otherwise, we ordain that all the
    matters here above specified, and every of them, shall be
    carried into execution by the ordinary judge and delegate,
    whether by the auditor, cardinal, legate _à latere_, nuncio,
    or any other person who has, or ought to have, authority or
    jurisdiction in any matter or suits, taking from all and every
    of them all power of interpreting these our letters. And this
    to be executed, notwithstanding all constitutions, privileges,
    apostolic commands, &c. &c. &c. And though to render the
    abolition of these privileges legal they should have been cited
    word for word, and not comprised only in general clauses, yet
    for this time, and of our special motion, we do derogate from
    this usage and custom, declaring that all the tenor of the said
    privileges is, and is to be supposed, as fully expressed and
    abrogated as if they were cited word for word, and as if the
    usual form had been observed.

    “Lastly, our will and pleasure is, that to all copies of the
    present Brief, signed by a notary public, and sealed by some
    dignitary of the Church, the same force and credit shall be
    given as to this original.

                        “Given at Rome, at St Mary the Greater,
                           under the seal of the Fisherman, the
                           21st day of July 1773, in the fifth
                           year of our Pontificate.”

Immediately after the promulgation of this Brief, the prelates Macedonio
and Alfani, accompanied by the Corsican soldiers, presented themselves
at the Gesù, called together all the members of the Society, read to
them the Brief of Suppression, and dispersed them, for the moment,
in different ecclesiastical establishments; the General Ricci being
confined to the English College. The two prelates, who were members of
a commission appointed to examine and proceed in all this important
matter, then took possession of the building, put the seal on all papers
and other valuable things, and left the house in the keeping of the
soldiers. Other commissioners resorted to the same proceedings in the
thirty-one establishments which the Jesuits possessed in Rome; while in
the provinces, the bishops received and executed the same orders. Next
morning, the Collegio Romano, and all the other different schools of the
Jesuits, were taken possession of, and served by the Capuchins. But we
must here observe, that even before the Brief was published, the Jesuits
had been brought before divers tribunals in Rome, and in other parts of
the Papal States, accused and found guilty of various misdemeanours; that
several of their houses, as in Bologna Mecerata Frascati, had been, by
the bishops, subjected to visitation, and some of them shut up; and that
even the possessions, and all the valuable things of the Collegio Romano,
had been confiscated to pay creditors. So that it may be said that even
had Ganganelli wished to preserve the Jesuits, he would have found it
difficult to resist public opinion, which, even in his own dominions, was
so decidedly against the order.

It will be perhaps well to take here a retrospective glance, and rapidly
examine the progressive march of the famous Society.

As we have seen, ten homeless and penniless enthusiasts, under the
guidance of a remarkable and superior intelligence, had decided upon
establishing a new religious order in a country already so infested by
such leprosy, that the Holy See itself had forbidden the establishment
of any new brotherhood. They were without friends, without supporters;
they met with many obstacles, which nothing but the courage and
indomitable energy of their chief could enable them to overcome. They
were obliged to beg, from door to door, a hard piece of bread, and had
nothing to shelter their wearied heads but the roofs of hospitals. Yet
all difficulties were vanquished, the Society was established, and
sixteen years after, in 1556, when Ignatius died, the order numbered
more than a thousand members, was established in thirteen provinces,
and was in possession of many valuable establishments. A hundred years
afterwards, the members of the Society had increased to twelve thousand,
the provinces to thirty-four, their wealth and the number of their
establishments to a very considerable extent. Already, at this epoch,
they boasted of having three saints, eight or ten martyrs, and ten or
twelve of Loyola’s disciples had sat in the College of Cardinals. At
the time of the Suppression, the Society numbered _thirty-nine_ houses
of professed members, 669 colleges, 61 novitiates, 196 seminaries, 335
residences, 223 missions, and 22,782 members, dispersed all over the
surface of the earth. The order then reckoned, as its chief glory, in
the register of its members, 24 cardinals, 6 electors of the empire, 19
princes, 21 archbishops, 121 titular bishops (so much for the article in
the Constitutions which forbids the member to accept of any dignity), 11
martyrs, and 9 saints.

We wish we could give, with an equal degree of exactness, the amount
of their fortune, raised by some to a fabulous amount, and by others
represented as very insignificant. Nevertheless, we shall try to come
to a fair estimate of the whole, from what we know, from their own
confession, to have been a part of it.

Crétineau gives a very minute detail of the fortune possessed by the
Jesuits in France; and the total sum, according to his calculations,
amounted to 58 millions of francs.[398] In the same volume, at page
303, the same historian says that the fortune the fathers possessed in
Spain was much more considerable—_beaucoup plus considerable_—than that
they had in France; let us, then, say 80 millions; while that which
they possessed in Austria, according to the same authority, amounted
to 125 millions.[399] So that the total sum of their fortunes in those
three estates amounted, by their own account, to 263 millions of francs.
We, who know almost all the establishments they had in Italy, do not
hesitate to say that what they possessed there amounted to an equal sum,
263. Now, let us add to these 526 millions their other possessions in
Belgium, Poland, in the remainder of Germany, in Portugal, in other small
states, and in those rich mercantile establishments in both Indies, and
we think it may be boldly asserted that their fortune amounted, in the
whole, to a sum certainly not short of 40 millions sterling. So much
for the article of the Constitution recommending _holy poverty as the
bulwark of religion_. To this prodigious and almost incredible amount of
property—which, however, was not all productive, part of it consisting
in houses and colleges—the reverend fathers added the annual income
arising from pensions, or incomes assigned by princes, towns, or chapters
for the maintenance of divers colleges, some of which assignments were
so considerable as to amount to £3000 yearly. Besides this, they had
the annual revenues arising from the presents which twice a year they
received from two or three hundred thousand pupils; the emoluments
received by some of them as private tutors, agents, or stewards of
great families; and, lastly, the——alms!!! Is not that a wonderful and
astonishing fact, which proves forcibly the cunning and cleverness of
those monks, who, to appearance, had nothing at heart but the conversion
of souls and the gratuitous education of children, and who were able, in
the space of 230 years, to accumulate the immense sum of forty millions
sterling?

However, when Ricci was examined, he swore that he had no hidden
treasures nor money laid out at interest; and we suppose that the
good father, not to tell an untruth, must have added secretly after
the words, _we have no hidden treasures_, “in the places where you
have looked for them, or where you supposed them to exist.” We know,
however, that after the Jesuits had been driven from France, Spain,
Naples, and Parma, “they were so terrified, that Father Delci started
instantly for Leghorn, carrying off the treasures of the order, with the
intention of transporting them to England; but the General, who was less
pusillanimous, stopped him in his flight.”[400] What then became of all
the moneys and valuable things which the Jesuits possessed, since little
or nothing was found in their establishments? This is a mystery which
we are not able to explain. We can conceive, and every one may easily
imagine, that the Jesuits, who, during the last twelve years of their
existence, expected to be suppressed from day to day, were not so simple
as to leave their transportable wealth at the mercy of their enemies;
but we would not hesitate to affirm that the Society must have possessed
a large treasure at the time, though, what became of it, we cannot say.
Indeed they were so cautious, and so eager to accumulate specie, that
for many years the revenues of the Collegio Romano were not employed
for its maintenance, and the fathers preferred having their immovable
possessions confiscated to pay its debts, in lieu of disbursing money. We
know also, that when they were re-established in 1814, they at once got
up their establishments in the most splendid style, and soon after made
many acquisitions. How did they come by the means by which all this was
effected? Was it the ancient treasure? and who had it in charge during
all the forty years of their legal suppression? This rather resembles
a romance than pure historical truth, and we have no means whatever of
elucidating it.

Meanwhile a commission was named to commence proceedings against Ricci
and some others of his brethren. The old General, when interrogated,
answered with sufficient simplicity, and without any apparent resentment.
He enlarged on the innocence of the Society, and protested that he had
neither concealed nor lent out at interest any money; and of all the
accusations that were brought against him, he only admitted that he had a
correspondence with the King of Prussia; we shall see afterwards for what
purpose.

About two months after, Ricci, the assistants, the secretary of the
order, the Fathers Favre, Forrestier, Gautier, and some others, were
sent to the Castel St Angelo, the state prison. The crimes of which
they were accused and convicted were, that they had attempted, both by
insinuations, and by more open efforts, to stir up a revolt in their
own favour against the Apostolic See; that they had published and
circulated throughout all Europe libels against the Pope, one of which
had for its title, _De Simoniaca electione fratris Ganganellii in Summum
Pontificem_—Simoniacal election of brother Ganganelli to the office of
Chief Pontiff; while Favre, Forrestier, and Gautier were loudly repeating
everywhere that the Pope was the Antichrist, and that the five cardinals
of the commission were to be compared to the five propositions of
Jansenius.[401] And in the following chapter, we shall see that they did
not confine their anger to threatenings and imprecations.



CHAPTER XVII.

1774.

DEATH OF CLEMENT XIV.


During the struggle which Clement had to undergo before the suppression
of the order, his health, as we have seen, had been injured, and his gay,
placid humour much altered. But the moment he had affixed his signature
to the document, after pronouncing those foreboding prophetic words,
“This suppression will cause our death”—wrung from his heart by the
knowledge he had of the enemies he was going to offend, as if those words
were the last doleful thought he was going to give to the subject—he
became an altered man, or, to speak more correctly, he again became the
same good-humoured, mild, and affable monk he had ever been. The facility
with which his orders were executed filled him also with extraordinary
joy. “His health is perfect, and his gaiety more remarkable than usual,”
wrote Bernis on the 3d of November 1773. Whatever discontent the nobles
and the cardinals may have felt, they remained silent spectators of the
event; and the generality of the citizens of Rome, and, in particular,
the Trasteverini, hailed the Pope with loud acclamations. In vain did the
conquering party foment a revolt; Rome remained tranquil; Clement was
delighted; and, as if to compensate for the sad moments he had passed,
and the irascible humour he had shewn, his character became still more
joyful, and almost infantine. One day, followed by the Sacred College and
all the Roman prelates, he went on horseback to the Church La Minerva.
Suddenly a heavy rain came on; _Porporati Monsignori_ all vanished, and
the light horsemen themselves sought shelter. The Pope, left alone, and
laughing at the terrors of his escort, proceeded bravely on his way
amidst the storm, and the people were delighted at the sight, and loud in
their applause.[402]

[Illustration: _Clement XIV._ (_Ganganelli_)

_Hinchliff._]

All the authors are unanimous on this point, and agree in representing
Ganganelli as full of vigour, and enjoying the most perfect health.
“The Pope,” says Botta, “enjoyed rather good health, because he was of
a strong constitution, and his natural strength had not been wasted
by an intemperate and licentious life; for, on the contrary, he had
always lived with frugality and moderation, according to his own natural
inclination.”[403] And the ex-Jesuit Georgel, who certainly can be
accused of anything but partiality to the suppressor of his order, says
“that Ganganelli’s strong constitution seemed to promise him a long
career.”[404] Nevertheless, in spite of appearances, sinister rumours
were afloat not only in Rome, but throughout all Italy. At the very time
that the Pope was seen in the public ceremonies, in all the churches
and everywhere else, enjoying the most perfect health and strength, the
rumour of his death was widely circulated. The Pythoness of Valentano
announced it with a characteristic obstinacy; and a Jesuit, writing to
a brother of the order, and relating such impious predictions, says,
_Aplica ut fiat systema_.[405]

Nor was it long before the ominous predictions were realised. This
man, represented by everybody as strong and healthy, suddenly, on the
approach of the holy week of 1774, some eight months after the signature
of the Brief, was taken ill, confined to his palace, and unable to grant
any audience, even to the diplomatic body. What had happened to Clement,
who, when on the 17th of August the ambassadors of the great powers were
admitted into his presence, appeared a MERE SKELETON? Whence such strange
and fatal change? The answer to these questions will appear from the
following statement of facts.

One day, on rising from table, the Pope felt an internal shock,
followed by a great cold; and although he was for a moment alarmed, he
soon recovered from his fright, and attributed his indisposition to
indigestion. But soon after, the voice of the Pope, which had always been
full and sonorous, was lost in a singular hoarseness; an inflammation
in his throat compelled him to keep his mouth continually open. He had
repeated attacks of vomiting, and felt such feebleness in his limbs, that
he was obliged to discontinue his long habitual walks. His step became
interrupted by sharp pains, and at length he could not find any rest
at all. An entire prostration of strength suddenly succeeded a degree
of even youthful activity and vigour; and the sad conviction that his
fears were realised, and that his life had been attempted, seized upon
Clement, and rendered him strange even to his own eyes. His character
was changed as by magic. The equability of his temper gave place to
caprice, his gentleness to passion, and his natural easy confidence to
continual distrust and suspicion. He saw poison and poniards everywhere.
Sometimes, under the conviction that he had been poisoned, he increased
his malady by inefficacious antidotes; at other moments, in the hope
of escaping an evil which he imagined not yet accomplished, he would
feed upon dishes prepared by his own hands. His blood became corrupted,
and the close atmosphere of his apartments, which he would not quit,
aggravated the effects of an unwholesome diet. In this disorder of his
physical system his moral strength gave way; all trace of the former
Ganganelli disappeared; and even his reason became disordered. He was
haunted by phantoms in his short moments of rest; and, in the silence
of night, he started up continually, as if dreams of horror had struck
his imagination. Often he ran from one place to another as if he was
pursued, exclaiming, as in the act of asking mercy, “_Compulsus feci!
compulsus feci!_”—I have been compelled![406] Indeed, that his reason
had abandoned him, is generally believed; and Pius VII., when prisoner
at Fontainebleau in 1814, exclaimed that _he_ should die mad, as Clement
XIV. These words are reported by Cardinal Pacca, a fellow-prisoner of
Pius.[407] Ganganelli passed seven months in this dreadful state; at last
his reason resumed its sway. For a while he shewed himself superior to
his terrors and infirmities. “He resumed some tranquillity,” says Botta,
“as generally happens some moments before man arrives at the last moment
of his life, as a warning of God to mortals to think of their own affairs
in that last moment. Already the attendants were rejoicing as if their
master was returning to life; but the calm was the forerunner of death.
The fatal signs soon re-appeared, and on the 22d September Ganganelli
breathed his last—giving back his courageous soul to Him from whom he had
received it.”[408]

The Romans heard of the Pope’s demise with indifference, as of an event
daily expected; but the Jesuits and their partisans gave an indecent and
unblushing expression to their joy, conveyed in the most infamous and
sacrilegious satires, which they carried themselves from place to place;
and this circumstance, together with what was known of Ganganelli’s
illness, left no doubts whatever in the people’s minds that the
unfortunate Clement had died by poison. “The human mind,” says Gioberti,
“is reluctant to believe in certain atrocious crimes, and I confess that
I have hesitated to believe the sect guilty of the death of Ganganelli;
nor have I consented to believe it till forced by the evidence of the
facts.”[409] Although our opinion exactly coincides with that of our
illustrious countryman, yet we shall put the facts and documents under
the eyes of our readers, and let them form a judgment for themselves.

What was Clement’s illness? How did his strong and healthy constitution
undergo such an instantaneous and fatal change? And what complaint
brought him to his grave? The partisans of the Jesuits, and some not
very well informed historians, as Gorani, for example, Schoël, and
others, deny that Ganganelli met with foul play. Georgel pretends that
he died of remorse—that he made a full retractation; and, in proof of
this, he points to his habitual exclamation, “_Compulsus feci!_” Of his
retractation we shall not speak. It is contested by every historian; no
mention is made of it except in the writings of the ex-Jesuit Georgel
and his followers, who cannot produce a single proof or witness of their
assertion. But is it true, at least, that the remorse, which had rendered
him mad, as Crétineau affirms, brought him to the grave? We question
whether the Jesuits can make good this other assertion. How can it be
affirmed that Clement died of remorse, since, during eight long months
after he had signed the Brief, he enjoyed not only his ordinary health
and calmness, but was, on the contrary, more playful than ever? How came
the remorse at such a late hour? What new crime had he committed in the
interval? Does remorse admit of postponement? Does remorse produce all
the physical diseases with which Ganganelli was suddenly affected? The
extinction of voice, the inflammation of the throat, vomiting, complete
prostration of strength—are these the symptoms of remorse? It is true
that he often exclaimed “_Compulsus feci!_” and asked for mercy; but the
unfortunate man asked for mercy from his assassins, not from the Supreme
Judge. In his delirium, he supplicated his murderers to spare him; not
to repeat the dose; or to administer to him some antidote, that his
sufferings might cease. “Spare me! spare me!” he repeated; “I have been
forced to the act, not so much, indeed, by the sovereigns, as by your
own iniquities. Spare me, spare me these horrible sufferings!” he cried
to everybody, and called upon his cherished Madonna to entreat for him,
and to put an end to his tortures. Are delirium and insanity consequences
of remorse, or rather the effects of several poisons—the belladonna, for
example?

But let us see what other symptoms preceded and accompanied his death,
and we shall be better able to judge of the quality of the illness which
brought him to his grave.

“Several days before his death, his bones were exfoliated and withered—to
use the forcible expression of Caraccioli—like a tree which, struck at
the root, dies away, and sheds its bark. The scientific men who were
called in to embalm his body, found the features livid, the lips black,
the abdomen inflated, the limbs emaciated, and covered with violet spots;
the size of the heart was much diminished, and all the muscles detached
and decomposed in the spine. They filled the body with perfumes and
aromatic substances; but nothing would dispel the mephitic exhalations.
The entrails burst the vessels in which they were deposited; and when
his pontifical robes were taken from his body, a great portion of the
skin adhered to them. The hair of his head remained entire upon the
velvet pillows upon which he rested, and with the slightest friction
his nails fell off.”[410] The sight of Ganganelli’s dead body was quite
sufficient to satisfy every one as to the sort of death he had met
with. It did not even retain those lineaments which nature leaves to
our remains at the moment when death seizes upon them, and the funeral
obsequies convinced all Rome that Clement XIV. had perished by the _acqua
tofana_ of Perugia.[411]

However, Dr Salicetti, the apostolic physician, and Adinolfi, Clement’s
ordinary doctor, on the 11th of December, three months after Ganganelli’s
death, gave in a long _procès verbal_, declaring that it was false
that the Pope had been poisoned; but they adduced no proofs whatever,
and explained the fact of the body’s corruption by such strange and
suspicious reasons, as rather to strengthen than diminish the opinion
of those who thought differently. The fact is, that in Rome, after the
doctors’ statement was made public, even the few who had some doubts as
to the cause of this mysterious death, were now firmly of opinion that
the Jesuits had poisoned the poor Pope. Gioberti, among other proofs
which he adduces of the poisoning of Ganganelli, names a Dr Bonelli,
famous for learning and probity, almost an ocular witness of the facts,
who had often asserted to many persons still living that there was no
doubt that Ganganelli had been poisoned.

But there is a witness far more respectable and trustworthy, who puts
the question beyond doubt: that witness is Bernis; and no one that
knows anything of the loyalty and nobleness of his character, would ever
dare to impugn his testimony in an affair of such magnitude, when he, as
ambassador, gives an account to his court of facts of which he was an
eye-witness. Bernis, during the illness of the Pope, while every other
person believed that Clement had met with foul play, alone had doubts;
and his very hesitation, which proves his candour, leads him more surely
to the discovery of the truth, which he attains step by step.[412]

On the 28th of August, twenty-four days before Ganganelli’s death, he
wrote to the French minister: “Those who judge imprudently, or with
malice, see nothing natural in the condition of the Pope; reasonings and
suspicions are hazarded with the greater facility, as certain atrocities
are less rare in this country than in many others.” Six days after the
Pope’s demise, on the 28th of September, he wrote: “The nature of the
Pope’s malady, and, above all, the circumstances attending his death,
give rise to a common belief that it has not been from natural causes....
The physicians who assisted at the opening of the body are cautious in
their remarks, and the surgeons speak with less circumspection. It is
better to credit the account of the former than to pry into a truth of
too afflicting a nature, and which it would perhaps be distressing to
discover.” A month after, Bernis’ doubts are vanished, and on the 26th of
October he writes: “When others shall come to know as much as I do, from
certain documents which the late Pope communicated to me, the suppression
will be deemed very just and very necessary. The circumstances which
have preceded, accompanied, and followed the death of the late Pope,
excite equal horror and compassion.... I am now collecting together the
true circumstances attending the malady and death of Clement XIV.,[413]
who, the Vicar of Jesus Christ, prayed, like the Redeemer, for his most
implacable enemies; and who carried his conscientiousness so far, as
scarcely to let escape him the cruel suspicions which preyed upon his
mind since the close of the holy week, the period when his malady seized
him. The truth cannot be concealed from the king, sad as it may be, which
will be recorded in history.”

But there is another and a more imposing testimony to the fact—that of
Pope Pius VI., the successor of Clement XIV.; it is transmitted to us
also by Bernis, who speaks in the following cool and dispassionate terms,
more than three years after the death of Ganganelli. He wrote on the 26th
of October 1777, as follows:—“I know better than any one how far the
affection of Pius VI. for the ex-Jesuits extends; but he keeps on terms
with them rather than love them, because fear has greater influence on
his mind and heart than friendship.... The Pope has certain moments of
frankness, in which his true sentiments shew themselves. I shall never
forget three or four effusions of his heart which he betrayed when with
me, by which I can judge that he was well aware of the unhappy end of his
predecessor, and that he was anxious not to run the same risks.”[414]

Such was the end of a man born with the best possible dispositions, and
endowed with truly noble and amiable qualities. His spirit of tolerance,
above all, deserves the highest eulogium. He tolerated all sorts of
opinions, provided they were expressed in decorous language; and although
he condemned the doctrines of the philosophers, he kept on good terms
with them. He would not, as Benedict XIV. had done, write to Voltaire;
but, in answer to some sporting jests made upon his person, which were
reported to him, he intimated to the Patriarch of Ferney, through his
old friend De Bernis, that he “would willingly take him to his heart,
provided he would end by becoming a good Capuchin.”[415]

Ganganelli was, no doubt, a man incapable of governing under difficult
circumstances. He had neither energy nor skill enough in handling
difficulties, and he placed all his merits in evading them. But his
moderation, his genuine spirit of tolerance, the purity of his morals,
his modesty, his benevolence, deserve the sincerest respect, and his
deplorable death a lasting compassion.[416]



CHAPTER XVIII.

1773-1814.

THE JESUITS DURING THEIR SUPPRESSION.


The Brief of Suppression, as our readers may have seen, made a provision
by which the Jesuits might, as secular priests and individuals, exercise
sacerdotal functions, subject, of course, to the episcopal authority. In
consequence, some few of them had settled themselves quietly in different
capacities. Others thought to conceal the Ignatian device under the
new title of Fathers of the Faith, Fathers of the Cross, &c. But the
greater part, the most daring and restless, would not submit to the Brief
of Suppression, impugned its validity in a thousand writings, called
in question even the validity of Clement’s election, whom they called
_Parricide_, _Sacrilegious Simoniac_, and considered themselves as still
forming part of the still existing Company of Jesus. Regardless, as we
have shewn they always were, of the injuries they may cause to the faith,
they declared war against Rome, against religion, and surpassed even
the school of Voltaire in audacity in mocking and insulting a virtuous
Pope.[417] Although overwhelmed on every side, they were not daunted, and
their courage was still greater than their misfortunes. Driven from those
countries in which they had been nurtured and cherished, and which ought
to have been their natural abode, they turned their regards to the camp
of their former enemies. As Themistocles, seeking protection from his
ungrateful country, under the canopy of that Persian throne which he had
shaken and almost destroyed, so those fiery persecutors of all religious
sects which were out of the pale of Rome, and especially the Lutherans,
had recourse for protection to the Lutheran Frederick of Prussia, and to
the schismatic Catherine of Russia; and we do not hesitate to advance
that, had those monarchs, in exchange for some advantages and privileges,
asked of them to combat the Papal doctrines, they would not have imitated
the Athenian hero, but would have fought against the Roman Catholic
religion with the same ardour which they had employed in defending it.

But if it is easy to understand the versatile and interested behaviour
of the Jesuits, strange must appear the conduct of the sovereigns who
gave them protection and help. Above all, the anomalous proceeding of
Frederick, the Solomon of the North, as the philosophers called him,
ought to be explained.

We have already seen that Ricci, in his examination, confessed that he
was in correspondence with his Prussian majesty; and it is a fact that
Frederick, even before the suppression of the Society, proved himself
its friend and protector, notwithstanding the reproaches and sneers
of his friends and masters, the philosophers. D’Alembert, above all,
assailed the king in all his vulnerable points; but in vain: Frederick
remained firm in his purpose of supporting the Jesuits. “They say,”
wrote D’Alembert on the 16th June 1769 to his royal friend, “that the
cordelier Ganganelli does not promise sweet meats (_poires molles_) to
the Society of Jesus, and it may be that St Francis of Assisi may kill St
Ignatius. It appears to me that the holy father, cordelier as he is, will
commit a great blunder in thus disbanding his regiment of guards out of
complaisance to the Catholic princes. It seems to me that this treaty
resembles much that of the wolves with the sheep, which were obliged, as
a principal condition, to give up their dogs. Every one knows how they
fared for this. However, it will be singular, sire, that while their most
Christian, most Catholic, most Apostolic, and most Faithful majesties
endeavour to destroy the grenadiers of the most Holy See, your most
heretic majesty should be the only one who wishes to preserve them.”

This letter was written, as may be seen, before the suppression, and
many other missives were addressed to Berlin by D’Alembert after the
Brief was issued. When the Jesuits of Silesia, refusing to obey the
Papal orders, remained in their convents and houses as before, and acted
as if nothing had happened, D’Alembert, on the 10th of December 1773,
wrote to Frederick, telling him that he “wished that neither he nor his
successors might ever have cause to repent of granting an asylum to
intriguers, and that these men might prove more faithful than they had
been in the last war of Silesia.” Another time, sneering at Frederick’s
condescension, he says, that “he much doubted whether the Jesuits would
ever pay his majesty the honour of admitting him to their order, as they
did the great Louis XIV., though he could well have dispensed with it,
and the poor, miserable James II., who was much more fit to be a Jesuit
than a king.”—January 1774. And passing from personal arguments to more
general considerations, he says: “It is not on your majesty’s account
that I dread the re-establishment of these formerly self-styled Jesuits,
as the late Parliament of Paris called them. What harm, indeed, could
they do to a prince whom the Austrians, the Imperialists, the French, and
the Swedes united, have been unable to deprive of a single village? But
I am alarmed, sire, lest other princes, who have not the same power as
you have to make head against all Europe, and who have weeded out this
poisonous hemlock from their gardens, should one day take a fancy to
come to you and borrow seed to scatter their ground anew. I earnestly
hope your majesty will issue an edict to forbid for ever the exportation
of Jesuitic grain, which can thrive nowhere but in your dominions.”[418]

Frederick remained unmoved; and when the Roman Catholic Archbishop
of Breslau, thinking it was his duty to see the orders of the Holy
See obeyed, attempted to interdict the Jesuits, the king interfered,
confiscated the bishopric, and haughtily proclaimed that the fathers
were under his protection. Then all throughout Silesia sprung up a great
number of houses and colleges, and Jesuits assembled here from all
quarters. It was on this occasion that the old Voltaire, laughing at
his quondam disciple’s strange conduct, exclaimed that “it would divert
him beyond measure to think of Frederick as General of the Jesuits, and
that he hoped that this would inspire the Pope with the idea of becoming
mufti.”[419]

Meanwhile, the courts of France and Spain were pressing Ganganelli’s
successor to execute rigorously the Brief of Suppression, pointing out
all the different places, and especially Prussia, where the Jesuits were
still in existence and prospering, and asking, not without a certain
arrogance, the Pope to comply with their wishes. But the reigning Pontiff
was not a man to be easily frightened. To the humble, plain, unpretending
monk had succeeded, on the chair of St Peter, Ange Braschi, a prince
in the best acceptance of the word. In the Conclave, he, after a long
struggle between the two parties, had re-united the votes of both, as
a man really indifferent to all political intrigues, but possessing in
the highest degree qualities which commanded esteem and admiration, and
as one who could restore to the low-fallen tiara some of its ancient
splendour; and if any man could accomplish such a miracle, Braschi was
indeed the man. In all his personal qualities shone forth something
royal and great. Tall, handsome, with a slightly bald forehead, his
features were impressed with majesty, tempered by a sweet and serene
expression. His expenditure was royal, his magnificence such as Rome
had not witnessed since the time of Leo X. His ideas were lofty and
great, his love for the arts enlightened and persevering. Many are the
monuments which he has left to posterity of his love for the arts and for
useful enterprises. He formed and enriched the museum begun under his
directions in the Pontificate of Clement, which, as we said, bears the
name of Museo Pio-Clementino, and which is the greatest wonder of modern
times. He spent an immense sum of money to prevent the entire fall of the
Coliseum. He attempted, though with little success, to drain the Pontine
Marshes, and was a generous friend and protector of all literary persons.
In his capacity of Pope, Pius VI.—such was the name he assumed—was also
extraordinary. While he opposed every reform, even the most necessary and
urgent, and decided upon taking the singular step of going himself—the
Pope—to Vienna to dissuade Joseph II. from accomplishing them, in
Rome, the churches and his own chapel were filled with persons of all
religions, to whom Pius granted the same protection and favour as to his
own subjects.

In regard to the Jesuits, in which we are more particularly interested,
Braschi, according to Bernis, neither loved nor hated them. He was
persuaded that they had poisoned Ganganelli; and as he set an immense
value on his own life, he would not endanger it by following the example
of his predecessor. It seems that Pius, naturally of a benevolent
disposition, pitied them; and, if he had not feared to irritate the
Bourbons, would perhaps have bettered their condition. Under him the
Jesuits made Titanic efforts to regain the position they had lost. They
assembled in Rome, and set at work every engine which was still at their
disposal, to attain their desired object; but in vain. Florida Blanca
was implacable in his hatred toward the disciples of Loyola, and, as we
have said, made the strongest remonstrances against the favour which he
pretended was shewn to the Jesuits by the Court of Rome. Braschia, as
we say, was not so pusillanimous as Ganganelli, and those intrigues or
diplomatic negotiations were not able to affect him so much as to disturb
his constant placid serenity; yet he thought proper to do something
to appease the Bourbons, and live on good terms with everybody. He
accordingly sent a copy of the remonstrances he had received from Spain
and France to Frederick, asking him to withdraw his protection from those
monks whom the Holy See had condemned. Frederick’s satiric spirit must
have rejoiced to see the Pope implore him to disperse Roman Catholic
votaries; but he answered scornfully, as a great monarch aware of his
rights and dignity. The Pope insisted anew with infinite management, till
at last Frederick, while maintaining the Jesuits in all their revenues
and charges, consented that they should change their garb. The Pope,
satisfied perhaps with this solution, wrote to the King of Spain: “I
have done all in my power; but the King of Prussia is master in his own
dominions.”

The accurate and impartial historian of the fall of the Jesuits, in an
admirably well written chapter, explains the conduct of Frederick, in
supporting the Jesuits, by the fact, that the Prussian monarch had got
angry with the philosophers, when the latter, not content with attacking
the Christian religion, set to work to destroy monarchy, and ridicule
every noble sentiment which had till then been held sacred. He says that
not only Frederick, but almost all the ministers of other princes, if
not the princes themselves, and the aristocracy, far from restraining
the audacity of the philosophers, had, to follow the fashion, made it
a point of honour to encourage and protect it while attacking religion
and priestcraft; but when they, leaving the churches and cloisters,
penetrated into the antechambers and staterooms, and their attacks became
personal, then the great of the world, who had treated Christ and the
Apostles with irreverence, would not endure the like towards themselves.
He says, moreover, that when the school of D’Holbach produced the too
famous work, the _Système de la Nature_, Frederick’s indignation knew
no bounds. In this book, in fact, written by thirty clever, daring, and
excited individuals, nothing was left standing: “each of them found
something to take to pieces; one began upon the soul; another, the body;
one attacked paternal love, gratitude, conscience; all subjects were
examined, dissected, disputed, denied, condemned loudly without appeal.
It was a kind of Old Testament, which prefigured the new by types and
symbols.... Frederick read this hideous but prophetic book; a fatal light
gleamed across his mind, and made him dread the future.”[420] All this is
admirably well said; and by the answer which the King of Prussia made to
the _Système de la Nature_, it clearly appears that Frederick would not
go the length of the new school, and wished to have nothing more to do
with them.

But, with all deference to the noble writer, we cannot see what connexion
existed between the King of Prussia fearing the downfall of monarchical
government and the protection he granted to the Jesuits. Does the
French historian pretend to affirm that Frederick, the clear-sighted
and remarkably sensible Frederick, considered the Jesuits in the light
in which they themselves desired to be viewed, namely, as the foremost
defenders of the throne and the altar? We scarcely should have believed
St Priest capable of attributing to such a man as Frederick so erroneous
a notion, yet his words leave little doubt that this is the opinion he
attributed to his majesty. But, it may be asked, if this is not the case,
how, then, shall we account for the favour bestowed by the Prussian
monarch on those detested monks? We believe that, by assigning, as the
efficient and principal causes, those which St Priest, in a dubitable
tone, esteems only as secondary, we should be nearer the truth. The
first of those reasons is to be found in what the king wrote himself to
D’Alembert: “I did not offer,” said he, “my protection to the Jesuits
while they were powerful, but in their adversity: I consider them as
learned men, whom it would be extremely difficult to replace to educate
youth. This most important object renders them most valuable in my eyes;
for, among all the Catholic clergy in my kingdom, the Jesuits alone are
given to letters;” and this was true as regarded the newly-acquired
province of Silesia. The other all-powerful and efficient reason, which
the French writer little insists upon, is, that Frederick wished,
through the agency of the Jesuits, to gain the goodwill of those Poles
whom he had so shamefully betrayed. We have seen what immense influence
the Jesuits possessed over the Poles. It is known what authority they
exercised everywhere over ignorant and bigoted Papists. Frederick knew
this, and was very well aware that the Jesuits, who had no other asylum
but his estates, would, without being asked, of their own free-will, do
their utmost to persuade the unfortunate Poles who had been despoiled
of their nationality, and who had been set up in lots as the booty of
a conquered town, to endure patiently the yoke of the new master _for
their own personal interest and the greater glory of God_. This was
the all-powerful motive which induced Frederick to stand forth as the
protector of a brotherhood for which he could not have any sort of
esteem, but which he in no way feared.

The same motive induced Catherine II. to grant them a refuge and
protection in her estates, and especially in White Russia, formerly a
province of Poland, but which, in the partition, had fallen to the lot of
the Russian sovereign.

Nor was Catherine deceived in her expectation. The Jesuits at first
proved of immense service to her. Before the first partition of the
unfortunate Poland in 1772, the fathers resided at Polotsk, in a
magnificent college, surrounded by an immense tract of land, cultivated
for the fathers’ benefit by more than ten thousand serfs, partly on the
right and partly on the left bank of the river Dwina. After the Brief of
Suppression, the Jesuits found themselves either obliged to submit to the
sentence of the Holy See, and cease to exist as a body, or to accept the
offered protection of Catherine. They embraced the latter alternative,
abandoned the left bank of the Dwina, which was still Polish, for
the right bank, which was now Russian, and there not only preserved
their garb and their name, but obtained the favour that the Brief of
Suppression should not be published in all the Russian states. From that
moment, setting at defiance the Papal authority, those monks, who, as a
religious community, could have no existence without the consent of Rome,
established in Russia a sort of patriarchate, a supreme seat of the Roman
Catholic religion, represented by individuals who, by a solemn decision
of the supreme chief of this same religion, were excommunicated and out
of its pale.

Meanwhile, Ricci was dying in the state prison of Castel St Angelo. Pius
VI. had not dared to set him at liberty, but had rendered his captivity
as supportable as possible. Yet the old man expired in November 1775,
making an insignificant testament, exculpating the Society from every
charge which had been brought against it.[421]

The Jesuits in Russia, some time after they had heard of the death of
Ricci, convened a general congregation to elect a vicar-general, with
full authority over all those members who should consider themselves
as Jesuits. This being accomplished, they pitched upon a man worthy of
their protection, Siestrencewiecz, formerly a Calvinist, now a priest of
equivocal orthodoxy, as are all those converts who have left their former
religion from motives of personal interest or consideration; and through
his agency they trusted to revive the Society. This is the method they
adopted: They prevailed upon Catherine to nominate him Bishop of Mohilow,
and have one of their number, Benislawski, appointed his coadjutor. The
latter, supported by the authority of the empress, proceeded to Rome,
boldly presented himself at the Vatican, and required the Pope to grant
the Pallium to Siestrencewiecz, the man whom they had chosen as bishop;
and as he could not at first get admittance to the Pope’s presence, he
firmly declared, that, should he spend his whole life in the antechamber,
he would not quit it until he was satisfied on every point. And he
succeeded in his mission. Now, this Siestrencewiecz, who was afterwards
named Legate for White Russia, at once permitted the Jesuits to erect a
novitiate, and to receive candidates for the Society, regardless of any
other consideration but that of pleasing his protectors. The Nuncio of
Warsaw, and the Court of Rome, on hearing of such an abuse of authority,
reproached him with this violation of the Papal decrees, and menaced
him with interdiction; but Catherine took him under her protection,
and upheld him with all her power. And thus was presented the singular
spectacle of a Popish prelate denounced by the Holy See for upholding a
sect of priests accounted the most fervent Roman Catholics, while he was
defended by a princess for affording protection to these same priests,
who, as devotees of Rome, were the bitter enemies of her own faith. The
Jesuits, emboldened by the favour they obtained in Russia, acted entirely
at their own discretion, conferred upon the Vicar-General the title and
the absolute authority of General, named an assistant and an admonitor,
received novices and scholastics, and nothing seemed changed in the
Society excepting the residence of the General.

To exculpate them from these continued acts of rebellion against
the Papal authority, Crétineau, and after him Curci, a Neapolitan
Jesuit, assert, that although Pope Pius VI. had not, by any public
act, re-established the Society, yet that he had, in the presence of
_Benislawski_ (mark!), pronounced the words, “Approbo Societatem Jesu
in Alba Russia degentem; approbo, approbo,”—I approve of the Society of
Jesus residing in White Russia; I approve, I approve. We suppose we must
rely upon the veracity of Father Benislawski for this revelation of the
sentiments of the Holy Father.

Three or four obscure and insignificant names[422] succeeded one another
as Generals of the Order, while it still laboured under the anathema
launched by Clement. At last, Pius VII., who had succeeded Braschi in
1800, authorised the Society to establish itself in White Russia, and to
live according to the Constitution of Loyola. This brief bears the date
of 1801, and was the forerunner of their re-establishment.

Meanwhile, the Society made wonderful progress in Russia; and, as if all
conspired to favour them, there chanced to be among them at the epoch
a man whom they had the tact to choose for their General, and who was
little inferior to the Lainez and Acquavivas. This man was Grouber, a
learned and very able individual, who had long been at the court of St
Petersburg, a welcomed guest of Catherine, much esteemed by Paul, and
employed by Alexander on some delicate missions. Grouber was a man who
had an exact and just idea of the times in which he lived, and repressed
the immoderate zeal of proselytism displayed by his subordinates, who
already spoke of working miracles, and establishing new missions in the
East. Grouber received the congratulations of all the partisans of the
Jesuits, and, with admirable dexterity, he made use of the influence and
resources the Society still possessed, to obtain the re-establishment of
the order in various parts. They had already re-entered Parma, though
only on toleration, and in 1804, the Pope granted to the Jesuits of the
two Sicilies the same favours he had granted to those of White Russia.
He re-established them in Sicily, of course under the authority of the
General residing in Russia.

Unfortunately for the Society, Grouber perished in a conflagration in
1805. After his death, the Jesuits, renouncing the wise policy adopted by
their late General, and encouraged by partial success, returned to the
inveterate policy of the order, and attempted to domineer over a country
which had sheltered them during their days of trouble and misery.

No pages of ours could convey to our readers a more accurate idea of the
conduct of the Jesuits in Russia, than a passage of the imperial decree
by which Alexander expelled them from his capital. We consider this
expulsion, and the motives alleged by the sovereign as having impelled
him to adopt the measure, as most significant, and as stigmatising
more forcibly than any pamphlet or declamation the abominable arts and
practices of the incorrigible progeny of Loyola.

Alexander, after having recorded, that while the Jesuits were persecuted
in the rest of Europe, Russia alone, from a spirit of humanity and
tolerance, had protected them, had showered favours upon them, had put
no constraint on the free exercise of their religion, and had confided
to their care the education of youth; thus continued in the imperial
document: “It has been, however, proved that they have not relished the
duties imposed on them by gratitude, and that humility commanded by
the Christian religion. Instead of remaining peaceable inhabitants of
a foreign land, they have endeavoured to disturb the Greek religion,
which, from time immemorial, has been the predominant religion in this
country. They began by abusing the confidence they had obtained, and have
turned away from our religion young men who had been intrusted to them,
and some weak and ignorant women whom they have converted to their own
Church. To induce a man to abjure his faith, the faith of his ancestors,
to extinguish in him the love of those who profess the same belief, to
render him _a stranger to his country, to sow tares and animosity among
families, to tear the son from the father, the daughter from the mother_,
to stir up division among the children of the same Church,—is that the
voice and the will of God, and of his holy Son Jesus Christ?... After
such actions, we are no more surprised that these monks are expelled from
all countries and nowhere tolerated. _Where, in fact, is the state that
would tolerate in its bosom those who sow in it hatred and discord?_”
For all these reasons, the emperor, in 1815, expelled the Jesuits from
St Petersburg, and forbade them to re-enter either that capital or
Warsaw. And mark, that to prove that he did not expel them because they
were Catholic priests, the emperor, in the same decree, adds, that he
has already sent for monks of other orders for the benefit of his Roman
Catholic subjects!

But let no one imagine that this severe admonition from a sovereign to
whom and to whose ancestors the Jesuits were so deeply indebted, had the
effect of bringing them to some sense of their duty. On the contrary,
they redoubled their intrigues and their malignant practices; and as
their numbers increased, rapidly rising in 1820 to 674,[423] and they
might have become dangerous, Alexander, by another decree, of 13th March
1820, expelled them from all his dominions. In the statement of motives
which the Minister of Worship presented to Alexander in asking for the
expulsion, we read: “The expulsion of the Jesuits from St Petersburg has
not made them change their conduct;” and it then goes on to enumerate all
the mischiefs caused by the fathers in Russia and Poland. We can hardly
imagine what the Jesuits can have to answer to these accusations. It is
also to be remarked that their own creature, Siestrencewiecz, Archbishop
of Mohilow, was one of the most ardent in procuring their expulsion.

No Jesuits are now in Russia or Poland, except those who, in Galicia,
assist the Austrian sovereign to govern that province—every one knows
how.



CHAPTER XIX.

1814.

RE-ESTABLISHMENT.


The events which took place in Europe in 1814 are known to every one.
Napoleon, who represented abroad that same French Revolution which
his military despotism had smothered at home, fell under the united
efforts of Europe, favoured by the elements and by the treachery of his
former companions in arms, to whom he had given either the staff of the
field-marshal or the sceptre of the king. The restoration of all the
dethroned sovereigns followed, and on re-entering their dominions, these
monarchs directed all their cares to obliterate even the remembrance
(foolish and useless attempt!) of all that had been done, said, and
published, in the past time of hurricane and revolution, and hurried
back with inconsiderate earnestness to their old and primitive system
of governing. The Jesuits, skilful in profiting by every circumstance,
then stepped forward, and offered to those sovereigns their unconditional
services. Already, after their suppression, and during the ascendant
march of the French Revolution, they, with infinite address, had
persuaded the different sovereigns, either menaced on their thrones or
already hurled from them, that their overthrow—the crimes which, it is
unfortunately true, in a moment of delirium, had been committed in the
name of liberty—the impious and subversive doctrines which had invaded
Europe, and extinguished every sense of morality and religion—all were
to be attributed to the suppression of the order. They asserted that
the Encyclopædists, after the destruction of the Society, the surest
bulwark of the throne and the altar, finding no more opposition, and
passing from theory to practice, had caused the revolution, and set
the whole of Europe in a blazing conflagration; and this is even now
repeated by the fathers and their partisans. We must, before proceeding
any farther, give the answer Gioberti makes to their assertions. He
grants that the Encyclopædists did make the revolution. “But,” says he,
“the Society, by altering and disfiguring, in the opinion of many, the
Catholic faith, the morality of the gospel, the authority of princes,
and all those fundamental laws which form the basis of all states and
governments—in fact, by substituting for religion their own sect—had
shaken all principles of morality, religion, and good government, and had
indeed brought the Encyclopædists into existence; the most conspicuous of
whom, in fact, as Voltaire, Diderot, Helvetius, Marmontel, St Lambert,
Lametrie, and many others, had issued from Jesuitical colleges, or had
had Jesuits as their tutors.”[424]

However, these monks, who, as we have seen, had conspired against the
life and independence of almost all the sovereigns of Europe, now had the
art to persuade the reigning monarchs that they would be always insecure
on their thrones without the assistance and the support of the Company;
and, strange to say, some actually believed them, while others feigned
to do so. From that moment to our days, in the eyes of such bigoted
and short-sighted despots as the Ferdinands of Naples, the Leopolds
of Tuscany, the Francis Josephs of Austria, and all the supporters of
absolutism, the Jesuits have been considered as the best pillars and
supporters of despotism and tyranny. Nor is this belief destitute of
foundation so far as the intentions of the fathers are concerned. The
Liberals in our time are in their eyes what the Reformers were two
centuries back. Against them are now directed all their efforts; the
Liberals are now the accursed of God, the impious whom all the courage
and ability of the sons of Ignatius can hardly keep at bay. Nor is this
the first time that these mendacious and impudent monks have contrived to
impose themselves on different states, representing their interference
as indispensable to the welfare of society and to the repression of its
enemies. Thus they had imposed themselves as necessary to combat the
Reformers in the sixteenth century, the Jansenists and Calvinists in
the seventeenth, and again, in the eighteenth, the philosophers and the
approaching revolution; although it was not till very late, and when
the first persecutions had awakened them from their state of beatitude,
that they proclaimed themselves the opponents of the Encyclopædists.
In the nineteenth century, the adversaries with whom they are wont to
contend are, as we said, the Liberals; and the fathers must, indeed, be
skilful and powerful instruments for suppressing all ideas of liberty,
all free aspiration, all generous sentiments, all personal dignity, and
for keeping the people in servitude, since the supremely cunning Louis
Napoleon has chosen them as his most useful auxiliaries, and lavished on
them all sorts of favours.

Among the sovereigns who, in 1814, re-ascended the thrones from which a
daring and unscrupulous conqueror had hurled them, was the old Pontiff,
who, after his captivity at Fontainebleau, had, on the 24th of May,
re-entered Rome amidst unfeigned marks of love and veneration from
his people. Indeed, the man who at this epoch occupied the pontifical
chair was, for many reasons, worthy of the greatest admiration and
respect. This person was Barnaba Chiaramonti, a Benedictine monk, who
assumed the name of Pius VII. His life was pure and uncontaminated;
his intentions were good; his character was mild and benevolent; and
before his misfortunes, he had shewn some readiness to make concessions
required by the times and the circumstances; but after his captivity,
after the series of direct miseries which had befallen him and the Sacred
College, miseries which he attributed to the spirit of irreligion then
prevalent in Europe, Pius VII., now a feeble old man, gave way to all the
propensities of a fanatical, bigoted monk, which in his better days he
had subdued and restrained by reasoning. His first care, therefore, was
to re-establish all the monastic orders he could, and among the first
was that of the Jesuits, who had already flocked to Rome from every
part, with the certainty of soon re-acquiring their former position and
splendour. Nor were they disappointed in their expectations. On Sunday,
the 7th of August 1814, Pius VII. went in state to the church of the
Gesù, celebrated himself the mass before the altar consecrated to Loyola;
heard a second mass, immediately after which he caused to be read and
promulgated the bull by which the Society of Jesus was re-established
according to the ancient rules.

Party writers, too eager to find Popes in contradiction with each
other, and to hold up their pretended infallibility to the ridicule
of their readers, have taken up these two acts, and asked, “Who was
infallible—Clement XIV., who abolished the Society, or Pius VII., who
re-established it?” We do not aspire to so easy a triumph, and we shall
consider Chiaramonti’s bull in a somewhat more serious manner.

In our opinion, the bull of Pius VII. is less in contradiction than
may be supposed with the brief of Clement. Pius does not in the least
condemn either the brief or its author; nor does he say that it had been
extorted, as Ganganelli said of the bull of Rezzonico. On the contrary,
he speaks of it as of a legal and perfectly authoritative act by which
the Company had ceased to exist; and when he is obliged in some sort to
annul it, he does not annul it, except in that part which is contrary to
his own bull, namely, that which affects the existence of the Society.
In the whole bull there is not a word, not a syllable, to contradict or
to weaken the long list of terrible accusations brought against them
by Clement. If it was an injustice done to the Jesuits, which Pius
wished to repair, he ought at least to have mentioned that they had been
wronged, and that it was the duty of the Supreme Chief of the Church to
reinstate them in the good estimation of Europe. But the bull is silent
as to any such wrongs, and is very chary of its commendations of the
sons of Ignatius. Why, then, one may ask, did Pius VII. re-establish
the Company of Jesus? First, as I have stated, because he was a bigoted
monk, and thought that it might be in the power of the fanatical and
idle brotherhoods of all kinds to extinguish the light spread by the new
doctrines, and to bring humanity back to the blessed darkness of the
middle ages. In other words, he thought, and many of the sovereigns,
some of them not Roman Catholics, thought with him, that the priests and
monks would be able to arrest the progress of civilisation; for it must
be remembered that the horrors and acts of barbarity which were committed
during the last ten years of the eighteenth century, and which were the
consequences of a forced and exaggerated application of the new theories
on government and religion, could in no way be laid to the charge of
the doctrines themselves, which are calculated to promote the real and
beneficent progress of society. Besides Chiaramonti’s predilection for
all monks, to whose re-establishment, as he says in the bull, “_all his
care and all his solicitude are given_,” Pius was requested by all
the sovereigns to re-establish the Company; and he says that he should
consider himself as wanting in his duty if, while the bark of Peter was
tossed to and fro amidst dangerous rocks, he should disdain the help of
those _vigorous and experienced rowers_.

Such were the motives, of a purely political nature on the part of
the sovereigns, and of a mixed nature on the part of the Pope, which
induced the former to request, and the latter to grant, a new existence
to the Society of Jesus. But observe, that in the act itself, by which
he re-instated the order, Pius reserved to the Holy See the power of
modifying it if its provisions were abused. He subjects the members of
the Company, in the exercise of all their spiritual functions, to the
jurisdiction of the ordinaries, thus despoiling it of the most precious
of its privileges, the whole of which he expressly recalls. And the
bull is still more significant, when it conjures all the members of the
Society to return to the primitive rules of Ignatius, and to take him
as their model. The Pontiff does not say, return to your occupation, to
those exercises in which you were engaged before the Suppression. But he
tells them to return to the primitive spirit of their institution, from
which they had so far departed. The noble and virtuous Pontiff hoped
that their past misfortunes would have instructed those inconsiderate
and wicked monks, and warned them not to incur again the hatred of
Christendom. Vain hopes! useless admonitions! Before fifteen years shall
pass, the whole of Europe, except, perhaps, some despots and their
supporters, will look anxiously for the happy day when the troublesome
progeny of Ignatius shall be irrevocably banished from its bosom!

However, as the bull is very short, we shall submit it to the calm and
serious consideration of our readers, and we feel confident that they
will form the same opinion of it that we have done, namely, that in the
act itself, in which Pius re-establishes the Jesuits, he modifies their
institutions and condemns their past conduct.

    “_Bull for the Re-establishment of the Order of the
    Jesuits._[425]

    “PIUS, Bishop, Servant of the servants of God (ad perpetuam rei
    memoriam).

    “The care of all the Churches confided to our humility by the
    Divine will, notwithstanding the lowness of our deserts and
    abilities, makes it our duty to employ all the aids in our
    power, and which are furnished to us by the mercy of Divine
    Providence, in order that we may be able, as far as the changes
    of times and places will allow, to relieve the spiritual wants
    of the _Catholic world_, without any distinction of _people and
    nations_.

    “Wishing to fulfil this duty of our apostolic ministry, as
    soon as Francis Karew (then living) and other secular priests,
    resident for many years in the vast empire of Russia, and
    who had been members of the Company of Jesus, suppressed by
    Clement XIV., of happy memory, had supplicated our permission
    to unite in a body, for the purpose of being able to apply
    themselves more easily, in conformity with their institutions,
    to the instruction of youth in religion and good morals, to
    devote themselves to preaching, to confession, and to the
    administration of the other sacraments, we felt it our duty the
    more willingly to comply with their prayer, inasmuch as the
    reigning emperor, Paul I., had recommended the said priests, in
    his gracious despatch, dated 11th August 1800, in which, after
    setting forth his special regard for them, he declared to us
    that it would be agreeable to him to see the Company of Jesus
    established in his empire under our authority; and we, on our
    side, considering attentively the great advantage which these
    vast regions might thence derive, considering how useful those
    ecclesiastics, whose morals and learning were equally tried,
    would be to the Catholic religion, thought fit to second the
    wish of so great and beneficent a prince.

    “In consequence, by our brief, dated 7th March 1801, we granted
    to the said Francis Karew, and his colleagues, residing in
    Russia, or who should repair thither from other countries,
    power to form themselves into a body or congregation of the
    Company of Jesus; they are at liberty to unite in one or
    more houses, to be pointed out by their superior, provided
    these houses are situated within the Russian empire. We named
    the said Francis Karew General of the said congregation; we
    authorised them to resume and follow the rule of St Ignatius
    of Loyola, approved and confirmed by the Constitutions of
    Paul III., our predecessor, of happy memory, in order that
    the companions, in a religious union, might freely engage in
    the instruction of youth in religion and good letters, direct
    seminaries and colleges, and, with the consent of the ordinary,
    confess, preach the Word of God, and administer the sacraments.
    By the same brief, we received the congregation of the Company
    of Jesus under our immediate protection and dependence,
    reserving to ourselves and our successors the prescription of
    everything that might appear to us proper to consolidate, to
    defend it, and to purge it from the abuses and corruptions
    that might be therein introduced; and for this purpose we
    expressly abrogated such apostolical constitutions, statutes,
    privileges, and indulgences, granted in contradiction to these
    concessions, especially the apostolic letters of Clement
    XIV., our predecessor, which begun with the words _Dominus ac
    Redemptor Nostra_, only in so far as they are contrary to our
    brief, beginning _Catholicæ_, and which was given only for the
    Russian empire.

    “A short time after we had ordained the restoration of the
    order of Jesuits in Russia, we thought it our duty to grant the
    same favour to the kingdom of Sicily, on the warm request of
    our dear son in Jesus Christ, King Ferdinand, who begged that
    the Company of Jesus might be re-established in his kingdom and
    states as it was in Russia, from a conviction that, in these
    deplorable times, the Jesuits were instructors most capable of
    forming youth to Christian piety and the fear of God, which is
    the beginning of wisdom, and to instruct them in science and
    letters. The duty of our pastoral charge leading us to second
    the pious wishes of these illustrious monarchs, and having
    only in view the glory of God and the salvation of souls, we,
    by our brief, beginning _Per alias_, and dated the 30th July
    1804, extended to the kingdom of the two Sicilies the same
    concessions we had made for the Russian empire.

    “The _Catholic world_ demands with _unanimous_ voice the
    re-establishment of the Company of Jesus. We daily receive to
    this effect the most pressing petitions from our venerable
    brethren, the archbishops and bishops, and the most
    distinguished persons, especially since the abundant fruits
    which this Company has produced in the above countries have
    been generally known. The dispersion even of the stones of the
    sanctuary in these recent calamities (which it is better now to
    deplore than to repeat), the annihilation of the discipline of
    the regular orders (the glory and support of religion and the
    Catholic Church, to the restoration of which all our thoughts
    and cares are at present directed), require that we should
    accede to a wish so just and general.

    “We should deem ourselves guilty of a great crime towards
    God, if, amidst these dangers of the Christian republic, we
    neglected the aids which the special providence of God has put
    at our disposal, _and if, placed in the bark of Peter, tossed
    and assailed by continual storms, we refused to employ_ THE
    VIGOROUS AND EXPERIENCED POWERS _who Volunteer their services,
    in order to break the waves of a sea which threaten every
    moment shipwreck and death_. Decided by motives so numerous
    and powerful, we have resolved to do now what we could have
    wished to have done at the commencement of our pontificate.
    After having by fervent prayers implored the Divine assistance,
    after having taken the advice and counsel of a great number
    of our venerable brothers, the cardinals of the Holy Roman
    Church, we have decreed, with full knowledge, in virtue of the
    plenitude of apostolic power, and with perpetual validity,
    that all the concessions and powers granted by us solely to
    the Russian empire and the kingdom of the Two Sicilies, shall
    henceforth extend to all our ecclesiastical states, _and also
    to all other states_. We therefore concede and grant to our
    well-beloved son, Tadder Barzozowski, at this time General of
    the Company of Jesus, and to the other members of that Company
    lawfully delegated by him, all suitable and necessary powers
    in order that the said states may freely and lawfully receive
    all those who shall wish to be admitted into the regular
    order of the Company of Jesus, who, under the authority of
    the General, _ad interim_, shall be admitted and distributed,
    according to opportunity, in one or more houses, one or more
    colleges, and one or more provinces, where they shall conform
    their mode of life to the rules prescribed by St Ignatius of
    Loyola, approved and confirmed by the Constitutions of Paul
    III. We declare, besides, and grant power, that they may freely
    and lawfully apply to the education of youth in the principles
    of the Catholic faith, to form them to good morals, and to
    direct colleges and seminaries; we authorise them to hear
    confessions, to preach the Word of God, and to administer the
    sacraments in the places of their residence, with the consent
    and approbation of the ordinary. We take under our tutelage,
    under our immediate obedience, and that of the Holy See, all
    the colleges, houses, provinces, and members of this order, and
    all those who shall join it; always reserving to ourselves and
    the Roman Pontiffs, our successors, to prescribe and direct
    all that we may deem it our duty to prescribe and direct,
    to consolidate the said Company more and more, to render it
    stronger, and to purge it of abuses, should they ever creep in,
    which God avert. It now remains for us to exhort, with all our
    heart, and in the name of the Lord, all superiors, provincials,
    rectors, companies, and pupils of this re-established Society,
    to shew themselves at all times, and in all places, faithful
    imitators of their father; that they exactly observe the rule
    prescribed by their founder; that they obey with an always
    increasing zeal the useful advices and salutary counsels which
    he has left to his children.

    “In fine, we recommend strongly in the Lord, the Company
    and all its members to our dear sons in Jesus Christ, the
    illustrious and noble princes and lords temporal, as well as
    to our venerable brothers the archbishops and bishops, and to
    all those who are placed in authority; we exhort, we conjure
    them, not only not to suffer that these religions be in any
    way molested, but to watch that they be treated with all due
    kindness and charity.

    “We ordain, that the present letters be inviolably observed
    according to their form and tenor, in all time coming; that
    they enjoy their full and entire effect; that they shall never
    be submitted to the judgment or revision of any judge, with
    whatever power he may be clothed; declaring null and of no
    effect any encroachment on the present regulations, either
    knowingly or from ignorance; and this notwithstanding any
    apostolical constitutions and ordinances, especially the brief
    of Clement XIV. of happy memory, beginning with the words
    _Dominus ac Redemptor Noster_, issued under the seal of the
    fisherman, on the 22d day of July 1773, which we expressly
    abrogate as far as contrary to the present order.

    “It is also our will that the same credit be paid to copies,
    whether in manuscript or printed, of our present brief, as to
    the original itself, provided they have the signature of some
    notary public, and the seal of some ecclesiastical dignitary;
    that no one be permitted to infringe, _or by an audacious
    temerity to oppose, any part of this ordinance_; and that,
    should any one take upon him to attempt it, let him know that
    he will thereby incur the indignation of Almighty God, and of
    the holy apostles Peter and Paul.

                           “Given at Rome, at Sancta Maria Major,
                              on the 7th of August, in the year
                              of our Lord 1814, and the 15th of
                              our Pontificate.

                             (Signed)      “CARDINAL PRODATAIRE.
                                              “CARDINAL BRASCHI.”

The moment the bull of 1814 had given to the Society a new existence,
nearly two hundred fathers, who had survived the calamities of 1773,
re-assembled at the Gesù, and in the novitiate of St Andrea in Rome.
Along with the old remains of the Company, many young Jesuits, who
during the suppression had been received into the order in their houses
in Silesia, Russia, and Palermo, re-entered the abode of their past
glory and splendour, and opened their hearts to new and brilliant
prospects. Neither were they deceived in their expectations. In those
first moments of violent reaction in Italy, the priests and monks were
considered as almost saints, and Pius VII. was actually worshipped as
God. The overthrow of Napoleon’s empire was in Italy considered as due
to the hand of God, who had punished him for laying his impious hand on
the anointed of the Lord—the Vicar of Jesus Christ. Napoleon, who was
considered in France as the restorer of religion, was in Italy regarded
as the greatest heretic who had ever lived—worse than Luther, Calvin,
Zuingle. As the ignorant and bigoted people of the peninsula, at such
an epoch, made religion consist in monks, nuns, and processions, so the
man who had abolished these was in their eyes the greatest enemy of God
and religion; and those friars, though held in very little consideration
as individuals, were, when re-instated in their convents, cheered and
worshipped. Even those whose sentiments were anything but of a religious
character, thinking that the clerical party would now re-acquire the
supreme sway, and would exercise it in a more absolute and exclusive
manner, feigned to be devoted to the reigning power, either to avoid
persecution or to obtain favour as devout supporters of the Roman
Catholic faith. Thank God, this is no longer the case.

The Order of the Jesuits, above all, fixed the attention of every one,
and admission into it was sought with passionate eagerness, as the surest
way to fortune and consideration. Many younger brothers of good families
entered the novitiate of St Andrea, which had the rare honour to see as
a postulant for admission into the brotherhood, a once crowned head.
Charles Emanuel of Savoy, who had already renounced the crown of Sardinia
in favour of his brother Vittorio, entered the novitiate, fulfilled with
unfeigned humility all the duties of a novice, and died some three or
four years after, asking, as a last favour, to be buried in his garb of a
Jesuit.

Another fortuitous circumstance soon came to relieve the Jesuits from
great difficulties. In 1820, the death of General Barzozowski, whom
Alexander would never permit to leave Russia, and without whom nothing
definitive could be done, put an end to this anomalous state of things.
The new election restored the chief of the Company to the metropolis of
Christendom; and from the Gesù, where Loyola and Ricci had sat, Fortis,
the elected General, now watched over the interests and the prosperity of
the Society, which he hoped to see again in all its former glory.

In our peninsula their progress was rapid.

        ——Come di gramigna,
    Vivace terra,[426]

so Italy was soon covered with the noxious weed. Most of their former
establishments were given back to them, others they bought; and, in
perfect concord with the Court of Rome, as each stood in need of the
other, they set to work to reduce the unfortunate country to the lowest
possible degree of ignorance and degradation, to extinguish every noble
aspiration, to suppress every generous sentiment, and to force us into
that mould in which idle, debauched, and corrupt monks are cast. But
their united efforts, thank Heaven! proved ineffectual. The genius of
ancient Rome, though clad in sable, watched over us from the ruins of
the Coliseum, and from the summit of the Capitol, and pointed out to us
written on every stone of our cities, a page of glory, an inscription
of noble and heroic deeds! Yes! in the very names of our monuments,
even when they are not present to our eyes, there is something magical,
some mysterious power, which thrills all the fibres of the heart, and
makes one long to restore the glories of the past. And in this, we
believe, more than in anything else, is to be found the explanation
of that historical fact, that while in the middle ages the Popes were
almost supreme umpires of the different kingdoms of Europe, they could
never obtain a stable footing in Rome, but were often driven from it,
often besieged in their castles or made prisoners, while their court
and government were generally held in the greatest contempt. So now,
though the Jesuits were supported by all the petty Italian despots, and
by their master the Emperor of Austria, and though they almost had at
their disposal the thunderbolts of the Vatican and the dungeons of the
Inquisition, they could only persuade old women, and feeble and bigoted
men, but none of the thinking and active population of Italy. The
revolution of 1848 proved once more how deeply rooted was the hatred of
the Italians against the brotherhood of Loyola, the only religious order
among such an immense number which was forcibly expelled from the whole
peninsula.

However, the Jesuits, the moment they were re-established, lost no time
in invading other countries where they thought they could retrieve their
fallen fortunes. Immediately after the restoration, they re-entered
Spain, France, Belgium, Austria, Switzerland, and many countries in the
New World. We shall endeavour, in the little space left to us, to sketch
the history of the fathers in those different countries.

The Jesuits, to the number of about one hundred, mostly members of
the Society who had been expelled in 1767, re-entered Spain, and were
associated with Ferdinand VII. in all the acts of revenge which that
cruel and stupidly ferocious prince exercised upon the unfortunate
Spaniards. They increased so rapidly, that as early as 1820, they
numbered already 397 members.[427] But at that time the Castilians
revolted against the cruelty of the despotic king. Successful in their
revolution, they established the Constitution of 1812; and one of
the first acts of the Cortes was to enact a law which expelled the
Jesuits from all the Spanish dominions. But it was not long before
they re-entered in the rear of the French army, conducted by the Duke
of Angouleme, to replace Ferdinand on the throne, and became the most
efficient instruments of his bigoted and cowardly policy. In 1825, a
general military college was established at Segovia, and, strange to
say, the Jesuits were made the preceptors of those future officers in
all that was not strictly military. In 1827, another college for the
nobility and children of courtiers and chamberlains was established, and
also delivered to the Jesuits’ direction. But their prosperity was put
a stop to by the death of Ferdinand. The right of Isabella, the infant
daughter of the late king, was contested by her uncle Don Carlos, and
long and murderous civil war was the consequence of this contest. The
Jesuits took the part of the Carlists secretly at first, and acting only
as informers when they were able. In an _émeute_ in 1834, the people of
Madrid murdered some of them, and in 1835 they were legally abolished
by a decree of the legislature, sanctioned by the sovereign. But they
did not on that account quit Spain. They recovered their standing in
those provinces in which the armies of Don Carlos were predominant, and
were chosen as tutors to the pretender’s sons. They built a novitiate
in Quipuzoa, and seemed to set at defiance the government of the
country. After the convention of Vergara, Espartero caused them to be
expelled from their new colleges, and ordered them to leave the Spanish
territories; but although, since this epoch, they have no legal existence
in the land of Loyola and Xavier, according to the best information, in
1845, about 250 Jesuits were to be found there, apparently as single
individuals, but in reality forming part of the order, and being attached
either to the province of Belgium or to that of South America.

Their history in Portugal may be more summarily narrated. In 1829, some
French Jesuits, invited by the usurper Don Miguel, arrived in Portugal,
and were honourably received, as they pretend, by the grand-daughter
of Pombal, who offered to intrust to them four of her children to
be educated.[428] The authorities also contrived to get up a sort of
manifestation, given by the other monks on the Jesuits’ entrance into
Coimbra, where they stayed two or three years. But hardly was Don Pedro
master of Portugal, than, by a decree in 1834, he expelled the fathers
from all the dominions of his daughter Dona Maria. We are not aware that
there are many Jesuits now in Portugal.

In Germany, the fathers were far from regaining the position they had
formerly held. Austria itself refused to re-admit them. Metternich,
brought up in the school of Joseph II. and Kaunitz, was not disposed to
let the bad seed take root again in the German soil. However, when, in
1820, the Jesuits, expelled from Russia, passed through Vienna, they
found means to obtain permission to settle in Galicia, where they soon
opened schools and colleges, the principal of which were in Tournow and
Lemberg, and where they met with such success, that the latter college,
in 1823, counted 400 pupils. The number of Jesuits in the province went
on increasing, and their influence, especially over the rural population,
who are almost all Papists, is now all-powerful and irresistible. Now,
our readers, who remember the atrocious and inhuman acts which desolated
the unfortunate country in 1846, may form an estimate of the good which
their system of education has produced.

They also attempted to establish themselves in Styria, though with little
success. But in 1838, they were at last permitted to re-open their
former college at Innspruck, where they are now in the most prosperous
and flourishing state. In no other part of the German Confederation have
they a legal existence; and the late King of Prussia very wisely forbade
any of his subjects to pass into foreign countries to be educated by the
Jesuits.

In Holland, the Jesuits acted in very nearly the same way as they did in
Russia. It seems as if, at the time of the Suppression, the Protestant
countries, forgetful of all prudence, merely to shew their opposition
to the Papal Court, vied with each other in cheering and patronising
those monks whom Rome was persecuting. Even in England, Jesuits were
never so well treated, nor perhaps so prosperous, as during their legal
suppression. Some of the Jesuits recovered a standing in Holland, and
lived there unmolested and protected, till the French armies drove them
away, or obliged them to disguise themselves under another garb; but
they re-appeared in 1814, and with their wonted activity they began to
erect houses and novitiates. King William of Nassau tolerated them; but
it would appear that they were not contented with being tolerated—they
aspired to higher destinies. Spreading dissatisfaction among the Roman
Catholic population, they encouraged them not to accept of, or submit
quietly to, a constitution so unfavourable to their interests, and
were preparing materials for a revolution. De Broglio, the Archbishop
of Ghent, entirely devoted to the order, wrote in the same sense to
all his subordinates. Aware of their intrigues and machinations, the
government thought it necessary, by a decree of 1816, to banish them.
The audacious monks, instead of obeying, repaired to the archbishop’s
palace, as if to brave the laws. But the government maintained its
rights. A warrant was issued against De Broglio, who, however, took to
flight, and accompanied into France the Rector of the College of the
Jesuits. The fathers then left the country, but not all of them. “Some
sons of Loyola, nevertheless, remained on the spot directed by Father
Demeistre, and, enrolled under the standard of the Church, they fought as
volunteers.”[429] In other words, under different disguises, they kept up
their intrigues, and breathed the spirit of revolution into the Popish
population of Belgium. At the first opportunity, this spirit broke out.
“The revolution of 1830 was made in the name of the Catholics and of the
Jesuits.”[430] Very well! we like this bold and frank language; and the
Jesuits have our felicitation for having helped an oppressed people to
shake off a yoke which brutal force had imposed upon them. But then let
them never come again and assert they are a religious order, entirely
occupied in spiritual concerns, and quite indifferent to political
matters.

Since the revolution of 1830, the influence of the Jesuits has greatly
increased in Belgium, and this country is now one of the most flourishing
provinces of the order, numbering more than 400 members. The extreme
prudence and sagacity of Leopold has prevented them from doing much
mischief; but they have done their best to acquire a supreme sway in that
country, and to extinguish in it every civil and religious liberty. At
the very moment we are writing these pages, they are striving hard to
prostrate Belgium at the feet of their worthy protector, Louis Napoleon.

In France, the fathers have led a much more agitated and unsettled
existence since their expulsion in 1765. Portugal and Spain, in
expelling them, had resorted to such rigorous and universal measures,
that few or no Jesuits were to be found in the two countries for some
time after their banishment. But it was not so in France. No stringent
measures had been taken to see the decree of expulsion executed. The
Jesuits, it is true, had disappeared from their colleges and houses, and
dropped the long mantle and large-brimmed hat; but a great part of them
remained in the French territory, changing residences, and many of them
metamorphosing themselves into the Fathers of the Faith, or the Brethren
of the _Doctrine Chretienne_. Then, when the opportunity presented
itself, they re-appeared everywhere in their own garb, and nobody knew
whence they came, or where they had been. We find few traces of them
during the first years of the French Revolution of 1789; but the moment
Napoleon, for his own political ends, re-established the ancient form of
religion, and restored to the clergy some liberty to fulfil their duties,
the Jesuits, under the name of the Fathers of the Faith, re-appeared,
and set themselves at once to work, endeavouring, by new contrivances,
to re-acquire at least some of their lost influence and power. In 1800,
the sister of Father Barat, under the direction of her brother, founded
the Sisterhood of the Sacred Heart; while Father Baruffe established
the Congregation of the Sacred Family; the first to preside over the
education of the daughters of the aristocracy, the latter to instruct
governesses and servants, whom they distributed especially amongst
families whose secrets they were interested in knowing. Father Despuits
was still more audacious, and established the Congregation of the Holy
Virgin, in which he enrolled all sorts of persons, but particularly those
of the upper class of society, and military men as often as he could.
The two first institutions are at the present moment very flourishing
in France, and almost all the French nobility send their daughters
to be educated at the famous convent of _Les Oiseaux_, in Paris. The
Congregation of the Virgin decayed after the revolution of 1830.

However, Napoleon, alarmed at the progress and the intrigues of the
Fathers of the Faith, by a decree of Messidor, anno XII. (1804),
abolished the brotherhood, and, by another imperial decree of 1810, the
Congregation of the Virgin, and for some little time the Jesuits were
obliged to be more prudent and less meddling.

But, in 1814, those monks, who had for a moment disappeared from the
scene, came forth again more alive and more intriguing than ever.
They dropped the borrowed name of Fathers of the Faith, and reassumed
that of Jesuits. The congregations received a new impulse, and that
of the Virgin, above all, was eminently active in inducing military
men to join it. Rendered wise by past experience, they perceived that
they should never succeed in their designs without the concurrence, or
at least the neutrality, of the secular clergy. To disarm, then, its
animosity, which had been so ardent in former times, they spontaneously
renounced their privileges, and shewed the utmost deference to the
secular priests of all ranks. Father Simpson, the Provincial in 1819,
writing to his subordinate, says to him: “Let us remember that we are
only the auxiliaries of the secular priests, that we, in our quality of
monks, must look upon them as our superiors, and that St Ignatius has
given to our Society, as its distinctive title, _The Little Society of
Jesus_.”[431] We wonder whether Lachaise or Letellier would have written
so. Then, supported by a great part of the bishops, and encouraged by the
government, part of the Jesuits went over to France as missionaries, to
try what they could do to restore the reign of superstition and bigotry,
and to bring back France to the good old times of civil and religious
bondage; part again undertook to monopolise the education of youth;
and in both undertakings they were, with certain classes, prodigiously
successful.

But the sacrifices France had made to obtain liberty were of too fresh
date that it should quietly submit to a priestly domination, which had
become now too visible and threatening. Public opinion declared itself
so strongly and so irresistibly against all priests in general, and
against the Jesuits in particular, that the bigoted Charles X. himself
was forced, in 1828, to issue an ordinance which deprived the fathers
of the faculty of instructing youth, and providing, moreover, that no
person whatever should be admitted to teach without taking an oath that
he did not belong to any religious community not approved by law. The
Jesuits, however, secretly encouraged by the court, and supported by the
aristocracy, eluded these ordinances by a thousand different stratagems;
and, although not so openly, they never rested from their intrigues, and
from taking an active part in education.

The Revolution of 1830, due in a great measure to the aversion of the
French nation to the domination of the priests and Jesuits, again
dispersed them for a while. They left the scene; nobody knew when they
disappeared, whither they went, and when they returned, till, towards
1836, they came to be spoken of and pointed out as becoming numerous,
powerful, and dangerous; they, nevertheless, went quietly and prudently
on, continually progressing, till 1845, when an affair of money now, as
in 1761, again brought them into momentary trouble. A certain Affnaër—an
arch-Jesuit, it would seem, since he cheated his dupes by feigning to be
a converted sinner—became their confidential agent, and robbed them of
the immense sum of £10,000, of which embezzlement they remained ignorant
till he took to flight—(so poor they are!) The fathers had the imprudence
to apply to the tribunals. The swindler was indeed condemned, but at
the same time was brought to light the existence of the Jesuits, not
as private citizens, but as a religious community, already possessing
immense wealth and establishments of all kinds, till then almost ignored,
or at least overlooked—all this being contrary to the existing laws.
Thiers, courting popularity, called upon the government to advert to this
subject, and the parliament unanimously declared that it felt confident
that the ministry would see the laws of the land strictly executed. To
avoid an open rupture with Rome, Rossi was sent thither, to obtain from
the Pope and the General of the order a voluntary acquiescence in the
wishes of the nation. Roothaan, the then chief of the Society, more
prudent than Ricci, granted the request, and ordered his brethren to
quit their establishments. However, not to renounce all the advantages
they were deriving in educating the rising generation of Frenchmen, the
fathers established a college on the very limits of the French territory,
at Brugellette, and the French nobility sent their children either there
or to Fribourg, where a part of the French fathers had emigrated. Once
more the Jesuits were supposed to have left France. Little was seen of
them in the last two years of Louis Philippe’s reign, and during the
eventful year of 1848; but in ’49 they re-appeared, hesitatingly at
first, but more boldly afterwards; and now, in 1852, they possess such
an influence, that even the unscrupulous military usurper is obliged to
court their friendship. In 1845, the number of the Jesuits in France
amounted to 870.

In Switzerland, the bloody and inhuman acts by which the Jesuits sought
to enter Lucerne are of too recent and terrible recollection to require
to be related by us at length. The expedition of the Corps Franc, their
defeats, 112 dead, 300 wounded, 1500 prisoners, the Sonderbund, and
all the fraternal blood spilt in Switzerland in 1844, 45, and 46, must
be laid to the charge of the Jesuits, who insisted on entering Lucerne
against the will of half the population. Had they been true Christians,
and religious men, they would have renounced their projects of installing
themselves by force where they knew that the attempt would cost the lives
of so many of their Christian brethren, and an Iliad of miseries to the
unfortunate country.

Although we find few indications of the presence of the Jesuits in
England, after the accession of the house of Hanover to the throne, till
the last few years of the past century, Crétineau, who may be relied upon
as having written his apology of the Society upon the register of the
order, and under the dictation of the fathers, informs us that, “from
the day on which liberty was no more a deception, the Jesuits perceived
that they had no more to fear the extraordinary rigours of past times....
They then began to live in fixed abodes, at first in _secret_, then a
little more openly, and in community. Such were at first the missions
of Liverpool, Bristol, Preston, Norwich, and many other towns. A little
chapel was annexed to the house (which means, that an altar had been
constructed in a room); and without exciting the least suspicion, the
faithful could repair thither and pray.”[432] This, according to the
French historian, was the way in which they lived till 1795, when the
Jesuits of Liège, flying from the victorious republican armies of France,
sought a refuge in Great Britain which granted them that hospitality she
never refuses to the unfortunate. Then Mr Weld, a wealthy Roman Catholic,
with a liberality for which, whatever gratitude the Jesuits may owe to
his memory, England certainly owes him none, presented them with an old
manor and some property in Stoneyhurst, near Preston, in Lancashire.
Thither the worthy fathers instantly repaired, and at first conducted
themselves with all humility, avowing it to be their intention to earn
a subsistence solely by tuition. As we have said, the Protestants of
that epoch seem to have taken a sort of pleasure in protecting these
rebellious monks, and the more so, perhaps, because they persisted in
being monks against the will of Rome. Hence the Jesuits quietly settled
themselves in Stoneyhurst, _nemine contradicente_. By degrees, finding
all sorts of encouragement, they changed the manor into a college, where,
besides the boarders and pupils who paid them regular fees, they gave
gratuitous instructions to every one who would attend their classes.
Improvements to a great extent were made upon the house, by which it
was rendered capable of receiving at first 150, and subsequently, by
additional buildings, 300 pupils. Weld gave up to them a large tract of
land, and one of his sons entered the order. “All the ancient Jesuits
flocked to Stoneyhurst. Among the first were Fathers Stanley, O’Brien,
Lawson, Church, Jenkins, Plowden, Howard, and some others.”[433] All
together consecrated their cares “to make priests, and to form young men
equally devoted and learned, who should bring _into their families_ the
courage and the faith of which they gave and received the example in the
college.”[434] In a little while the college of Stoneyhurst was deemed
insufficient for the number of pupils who repaired thither from every
part; so that, within a quarter of a mile, at Greenhurst, was established
a seminary for boarding and educating boys preparatory to their entering
Stoneyhurst. The most striking characteristic of Jesuit education, as we
have already frequently remarked, was, and still is, that almost all the
persons educated in their colleges consider themselves in a certain way
attached to the order, and to the end of their lives work to their utmost
for its aggrandisement. And this art of binding to their Society all
their disciples, makes the Jesuits powerful and dangerous, especially in
those countries where they are adverse to the government or to a class of
citizens. We insist upon this consideration.

At Stoneyhurst, the ambition of the fathers rose with their prosperity,
and inspired their restless activity with bolder and more extensive
plans. The exertions of these same young men who were educated by them,
and some of whom had become priests, spread the seed of Jesuitism in
all parts of England, and, above all, in the surrounding neighbourhood
of Stoneyhurst, where their large properties and considerable annual
expenditure gave the fathers an additional influence, so that soon Roman
Catholic chapels were to be seen over all the country round; and a modern
author[435] affirms, that while, before the establishment of the Jesuits,
there were only five Papists near Stoneyhurst, they were now numbered by
thousands.

From England, part of the successful colony of Ignatius passed over into
Ireland in the beginning of the present century, and at once fixed their
regards upon the most important position for acquiring an extensive
influence. Father Kenney, one of the three first Jesuits who migrated
thither, found means to be appointed vice-president of Maynooth College,
of which he became the leading and influential member, and in which have
ever since been taught the Jesuitical doctrines both in the matter of
theology and of discipline; so that it is a notorious fact, that of all
the Roman Catholic clergy, the English are those who profess the most
absolute and unrestricted principles of ultramontanism. As to Father
Kenney, who was indefatigable in his vocation, and had already acquired
an immense authority, some scruples now arose in the morbid consciences
of strict Papists, whether he really was a legitimate Jesuit, since he
had only taken his vows at Stoneyhurst while the Society had no legal
existence. Sensible of the justness of these observations, Kenney
hastened to Palermo, where the Society was in some sort re-established.
He was there received and recognised as a genuine son of Loyola, and
returned to Ireland to resume his office. But, as Maynooth College was
established only for the education of priests, Kenney thought of creating
another college for laymen. Clongowes was chosen for the purpose. Kenney
was appointed president of it, and his exertions were so successful in
attracting pupils thither, that, from 1814, the epoch of its opening, to
1819, it already numbered 250 pupils; while, by the liberality of Mary
O’Brien, a Popish devotee, another college was erected in the district of
King’s County.[436]

The moment the bull of 1814 relieved them from the interdict under which
they laboured, the number of Jesuits increased so very rapidly, that,
according to a return printed by order of parliament in 1830, Ireland, at
that epoch, possessed 58 fathers, and 117 were to be found in England.
To what extent their number has increased up to the present moment is
rather difficult to ascertain. The clause in the Emancipation Bill, which
forbids any man to make vows or to receive vows in England, or to come
into it after having made them elsewhere, obliges the Jesuits to observe
some moderation and secrecy. Not, indeed, that they pay any attention,
or submit to the law, because, as Crétineau expressly says, “the Jesuits
felt that such a law (the schedule on the religious communities in the
Emancipation Act) was enacted against them; but they _made little account
of it_,”—_Ils en tinrent peu de compte_.[437] But they use some prudence,
to avoid trouble, if possible, and because it is their practice not to
oppose boldly any measure, but to find a certain pleasure in eluding
the law, and thus shew themselves more cunning than their neighbours.
Nevertheless, whoever should inspect the general register kept in the
Gesù in Rome, might get at the exact number of the four avowed classes
of the Jesuits—novices, scholastics, coadjutors, and professed; but who
could tell the number of persons belonging to the fifth secret class,
who, by the confession of Father Pellico, constitute the strength and the
power of the Society, and who, we may add, render it also very dangerous?
Who can count those innumerable agents who, partly intentionally,
partly in ignorance, are actively employed in furthering the success of
the well-contrived and deeply-laid plans of the fathers—those secret
conspirators against the civil and religious rights of mankind? Nobody
can; and in this, we repeat, lies the danger. A Jesuit, when known, is
as little dangerous as a robber who should give you intimation of his
intention to steal your property. Should they present themselves boldly
and frankly, and say: “Here we are—we, the Jesuits, the most determined
adversaries of the Protestant faith, the most strenuous supporters
of the Court of Rome. Renounce your religion, burn your Bible, tear
your Thirty-nine Articles, and embrace the doctrine of Rome, which is
the only true one; you may believe it on our word.” Should they speak
so, they would effect no mischief at all. But the manner in which the
Popish missionaries attempt to proselytise is a very different one,
and shews that their religion is not in itself forcible, and that it
does not possess such irresistible evidence of truth, that the simple
and unvarnished exposition of its principles is sufficient to persuade
one to embrace it. From the tiny images distributed by monks to little
boys, to the gorgeous pageant, to the theatrical representation of the
Vatican, all is intended to be the means of proselytising heretics, or
of retaining believers in the communion of their Church. Then comes the
confessional for those who wish to sin in all surety of conscience; then,
again, masses and indulgences for those whose sins could not be cleansed
by the absolution, but required the excruciating fires of Purgatory.
Formerly, in the good old times of Popery, they resorted to still more
persuasive arguments; witness the unfortunate Albigenses, Huguenots,
Indians, and many others, who were so blind as not to see in Popery a
revelation of Him who is at once the Father of Mercies and the Father of
Lights. Nor does the agent of Rome, and, above all, the Jesuit, expound
at once the whole system of his religion, such as it is; but, with
diabolical dexterity, he first insinuates himself into the confidence
of the man he has marked for a proselyte, captivates his benevolence by
all sorts of arts, and then, step by step, he leads him as a convert into
the fold of the modern Babylon. The same method is resorted to by those
individuals who aim at wholesale conversions. They bring one to apostasy
in the name, so to speak, of one’s own religion. See, for example, the
Puseyites; observe their progressive march from their first tracts, in
which loads of abuse were heaped upon Popery, to the recent attempt to
introduce auricular confession, and you will discover the same proceeding
as that by which the Roman agent—the Jesuit—endeavours to convert—we
should say seduce—a single individual. And who would take his oath that
Dr Pusey does not belong to that fifth secret class of the Order of
Jesus? or that my lord Bishop of Exeter is not one of its members? We
could not affirm the fact, of course, but no more would we deny it. What
we know, and what ought to be well considered and borne in mind by all
English Protestants, is, that the Jesuits are loud in their praises of
the Puseyites, and that they frankly confess that this Anglican sect will
be the means of bringing back England to the Roman communion. May God
avert the ill-omened prediction! Let our readers well ponder upon the
following extract from Crétineau, who, after having traced the history of
the Puseyites from its origin, and exalted to the skies their principal
leader, says:—“The Puseyites, carried away against their wills, by the
force of evidence, towards the Roman faith, pretended, it is true, that
they would never go over to Rome. Nevertheless they, in fact, embraced
one part of her dogmas and even her practices. A certain number of
their disciples went frankly back to Catholicism. From April 1841, the
publication of tracts had been suspended, it is true, but the party was
at no loss for means for propagating its doctrines. It reigned in many
seminaries and universities; it spread in America, and even in India.
_The British Critic_ went on with its quarterly labours; and renouncing
by degrees its attacks against Rome, it exercised its learned hostilities
against the Reformation of the sixteenth century.... This school
(Puseyism), in its pacific progress, shakes Anglicism _from its base_.
It exercises an immense influence for the extent of its reports and its
literature, and makes numberless proselytes. Many Puseyites, carried away
by the truth, were not long in renouncing their theories. They sought a
logical unity: the Church of Rome offered it to them, and they accepted
of it!”[438] We add no comment.

To return to our history, we say that the influence of the Jesuits in
the three kingdoms has increased since 1814, and its bad effects may
be daily traced. We would almost be bold to assert that every obstacle
which has come in the way to impede the progressive march of a free and
powerful nation, is, to a certain extent, due to the hidden hand of a
Jesuit. It must be borne in mind that Rome, of all things, desiderates
the ruin of heretic England, and endeavours, to the utmost of her power,
to create troubles and difficulties to that free country; and if this
be admitted, we shall remind our readers that all the arduous missions,
all the delicate and secret undertakings for that purpose, since the
times of Salmeron and Brouet, were always intrusted to the fathers. The
secular priest, especially in countries distant from Rome, looks upon
the Jesuit as his superior in knowledge of the affairs of religion, as
better informed of the intentions of Rome; and is always disposed to
shew all deference to his advice, and not seldom to execute his orders.
“Already, from 1829,” according to Crétineau, “the Jesuits were the
right arm of the bishops, the living models proposed by the prelates to
the clergy.”[439] And this renders the Jesuits more dangerous than any
other religious community. Indeed, I would rather see all the various
species of those parasite animals called monks transplanted into the
English soil, than let one Jesuit live in it a single day; and it is not
without good reason that we speak so in this Protestant country. The
order of the Jesuits was purposely instituted to combat, to extinguish
Protestantism; and we have shewn whether the fathers were scrupulous
about the means they employed to effect their object. The extirpation
of heresy is their principal occupation, the work which renders them
meritorious in the eyes of Rome. Deprive the Jesuits of the vocation of
annoying, persecuting, or converting heretics, and they become the most
insignificant of all corporations, having no end whatever. Every monastic
order is distinguished by a peculiar character. Plots and machinations
against Protestants, and against all civil and religious freedom, are the
characteristics of the Jesuits. A Benedictine monk will sit calmly in
his very comfortable room, sip his chocolate, take a hand at whist, and
not even dream of converting any one. A Franciscan, of any denomination,
will sit jocosely before a succulent dinner, which he has provided by
going from door to door, distributing, in return for provisions, snuff
and images, without uttering a word about his or your religion, and only
relating some pleasing anecdotes of the holy founder of his order, St
Francis. A Dominican will assuredly report your conduct to Rome, and
will try to convert your daughter to——his principles, but will care
very little about the conversion. The Auto-da-fè, in which he formerly
delighted, was regarded by him as a means not so much of converting
heretics, as of procuring for himself a barbarous pastime. He was
forbidden to assist at bull-fighting! The Jesuit, on the contrary, has,
as we have said, no other occupation or desire than to make converts;
and this we need not take the trouble to prove, since they themselves
confess it. They glory in it, and it forms their title to the gratitude
of the Holy See, and of all bigoted Papists. We will not say that other
Roman Catholic priests will not endeavour to make converts. Nay, they are
obliged by their calling to labour hard at it. In their orisons, in their
anthems, in all the solemn ceremonies of the Church of Rome, prayers are
addressed to the Almighty, not so much for the conversion, as for the
extirpation of heretics; and every bishop takes an oath to do his utmost
for this purpose; so that a Roman Catholic priest must either neglect
the principal duty of his ministry, or become the bitterest enemy of all
Protestant institutions, if not of every Protestant. Yet they are not as
the Jesuits, prepared to resort to the most criminal arts to bring about
conversion.

The conduct of the Jesuits in Holland, Prussia, Russia, clearly proves
that no benefits can ever make any impression on that fraternity, or
prevent them from conspiring your ruin; and if Protestant England do not
soon awake to a sense of her danger, we fear she will repent, too late,
of having fostered in her breast those poisonous vipers. Behold what
is going on! See whether Romanism has ever been so menacing! See the
arrogance of the Court of Rome! Behold the almost uninterrupted state
of rebellion in which the priests keep the fanatic Papists of Ireland,
and be sure that such would not be the case if you had not Jesuits
among them. All our life long we have fought for equality of rights,
for civil and religious liberty, and we would not preach intolerance
now. We should like to see no difference whatever in respect of civil
rights and privileges between Roman Catholic laymen and Protestants; but,
most assuredly, we would execute to the letter the clause against the
religious fraternities, and think long before we should grant money to
bring up a set of priests, who, from the very nature of their calling,
are strictly bound to sue for your destruction.

I beg to be excused for having indulged in these remarks. They are not
vain declamations; I trust to be believed. I have been born and brought
up among monks and Jesuits; and it is because I thoroughly know them,
that, grateful for the hospitality afforded me, I warn England to beware
of all monks, but especially of Jesuits. They are inauspicious birds,
which cannot but infect with their venomous breath the pure and free air
of Great Britain.

We shall now conclude our history with a chapter on the present condition
of the Company in Europe.



CHAPTER XX.

1848-1852.

THE JESUITS IN AND AFTER 1848.


Before the Suppression, the Jesuits, with alternate vicissitudes,
possessed less or more influence in all Roman Catholic countries, in some
of which, at different epochs, they were all-powerful and domineering.
But since their re-establishment, their real effective power, it may be
said, is confined to the Italian peninsula. It was my unfortunate country
that, from the beginning of their restoration, more than any other part
of Europe, experienced the pernicious effects of their revival. As from
the first they had stood up as the natural enemy of the liberal party,
the sovereigns of the peninsula, who wished to reign despotically,
without granting any concession required by the times, countenanced and
protected the Jesuits in the most decided manner. Charles Felix had
delivered up Piedmont to them, and they had taken possession of it,
and governed it, as if they were its absolute masters. Even Charles
Albert was unable or unwilling to counteract their influence. In Modena
and Parma they possessed an equal authority; while in Naples their
dominion was still more tyrannical, inasmuch as it rested not only on
the support of the court, but also on the superstition and fanaticism
of the populace, the most blindly bigoted of all Italy. But the supreme
seat of their power, as may be easily conceived, was Rome—Rome, now in
perfect friendship with the fathers. Odescalchi, a Jesuit, was Cardinal
Vicar of Rome, the highest ecclesiastical authority in the world after
the Pope. The whole of the public administration was filled with persons
either belonging to the Society, or protected by them. Public education
was entirely in their own hands, or of those protected by them. The
nomination of every teacher or professor was submitted to the approval
of the bishop. Recommendation from the fathers was listened to as if
it were the orders of a superior; and few, if any, of the established
authorities dared to oppose them in any of their undertakings. Poor
Italy was in a lamentable condition. The different governments of Italy,
encouraged by the fathers in their tyrannical and intolerant policy, had
spread such dissatisfaction among the higher classes of society,[440]
that every other year attempts were made at a revolution, some of which
were in part successful, as those of 1821 and 1831. They were, however,
always crushed by the overwhelming forces of Austria, and only served to
increase the number of victims, and the cruelties of the governments,
inflexible in their despotic policy. Yet the population, driven to
despair, and preferring death to ignominy, were ready to shed their blood
to mend the wretched condition of the country. In the latter part of
Gregory XVI.’s reign, matters were brought to such a state, that every
moment was expected a new general outbreak throughout all Italy; the
consequences of which, from the exasperated state of the popular mind,
would have been incalculable. In these circumstances, Gregory XVI. died,
and Giovanni Mastai was, after only two days’ conclave, raised to the
pontifical chair. It was thought that the meekness of his character, the
purity of his life, his decided aversion to every act of tyranny, might
in part calm the exasperated state of the population of the Roman states,
the most oppressed of all the states of Italy, as well as the readiest
for a revolution; and the beginning of Pius IX.’s reign promised to the
unfortunate peninsula a new era. Fugitive and deceitful hope! Alas! the
new era is now such as to make the future generation curse the day that
Mastai ascended the throne!

However, a month after his elevation, Pius IX. granted an amnesty,
reformed some gross abuses, discarded the most obnoxious agents of the
past tyrannical government, and promised to reign according to just and
paternal laws. We extolled his clemency to the sky, and saw in him the
palladium of freedom; we celebrated his virtues in a thousand different
ways. The world was soon filled with the eulogiums of Pius, and for a
brief period Europe prostrated herself at the feet of the idol raised up
by our gratitude.

But while we were loud in the praises of Pius IX., hoping that he would
prove a reformer and a benefactor to Italy, the Jesuits, united with the
old despotic party, which recognised Austria for its chief, contrived,
by all sorts of means, to oppose his acts of benevolence, slandered
his person, abused his ministers, and openly conspired against him.
The Romans feared that he would meet with the fate of Ganganelli; and
those fears were not only expressed in all writings and in all pieces
of poetry, but when the Pope passed through the streets of Rome, the
Trasteverini shouted out, “Holy Father, _beware of the Jesuits_!” A very
significant fact, which shews the opinion in which the fathers are held
where they are best known.

The good understanding, however, which existed for some eighteen months
between the liberal party and the Pope, began to be shaken when the
Romans, tired of benisons and insignificant concessions, asked for
liberal organic laws, and wished, above all, to snatch from the hand
of the priests and monks their ill-gotten and ill-used authority,
extending to all branches of the administration, even to those most
inconsistent with their calling. It is well known that no office of any
importance in the Roman states was filled by a layman—even the general
of the army was a _Monsignore_. We wished for a radical reform on this
point. Unfortunately, at this time, Grazioli—a high-minded and tolerant
priest, the Pope’s confessor—died, and Pius fell into the hands of a
confessor devoted to the Jesuits, and from that moment his conduct became
hypocritical and deceitful, and afterwards cruel and inhuman. To the
Jesuits is certainly to be attributed the change in the politics of the
Pope. From the beginning, Pius had been displeased when he heard abuse
poured upon the Company; but his desire of popularity and applause had
modified the propensities of the priest, nay, of the narrow-minded,
bigoted chief of the priests. But now, divesting himself of the
borrowed character of a tolerant and liberal man, Pius returned to the
former error of all Popes, and would not listen to a word about reform
touching the priesthood. It was this inflexible opposition to our just
and reasonable desires, and not our petulance, which brought things to
extremities, and the Jesuits were even the apparent cause of the rupture.

Although the Romans were resolved to be no longer the vassals of the
priesthood, and were determined not to leave a vestige of authority in
civil matters to any churchman except the Pope, nevertheless, no injury,
no abuse, was offered to any secular priest or monk, with the exception
of the Jesuits. But against them there was raised a great commotion.
Publications of all sorts were daily poured into the streets of Rome
against the fathers; and along with the shout for Italy, was mingled the
cry, “Down with the Jesuits!”

Gioberti’s book, _Il Gesuita Moderno_, was in everybody’s hands, and when
that courageous priest came to Rome, the people shouted his name as that
of a benefactor; a guard of honour was stationed at his hotel, and almost
royal honours were rendered to him for having so unreservedly laid bare
the iniquities of the fathers.[441] All this irritated the Pope in the
highest degree. From the balcony of the Quirinal he reproached the Romans
with _slandering venerable ecclesiastics_; and when the news arrived that
the Neapolitans had expelled the Jesuits from their city, he issued a
proclamation, in which he threatened us, if we were tempted to imitate
them, _with his anger, and with the curse of God’s indignation, who would
launch His holy vengeance against the assailants of His anointed_.[442]

But the Papal protection was no longer sufficient to shelter the Jesuits
from public hatred. Pius IX. lost a great part of his popularity,
but could not save them. They were expelled from the whole of the
peninsula—not as a general revolutionary measure, since all other
religious communities lived unmolested, but as a manifestation of the
public opinion against the hateful descendants of Ignatius. The Pope’s
indignation at this sacrilegious act knew no bounds, and from that
instant he vowed an implacable and intense hatred against the liberals
of whatever nation.[443]

Not only did Pius now refuse to grant any new concession, but he
attempted to recall those which he had been forced to grant; and when
he saw that he could not effect his purpose, he fled to Gaeta, in the
hope that Rome and Italy would soon fall into a state of anarchy and
confusion, so that the great powers of Europe would be obliged to
interfere, and restore him to the throne as an absolute master. The
wisdom and moderation of the people again disappointed his hopes. Never
was Rome more true to her duty than during the absence of the Pope. For
a while, even the government was carried on in the name of a sovereign
who had abandoned the state, and who refused even to listen to three
deputations sent to Gaeta to come to some understanding. This exasperated
Pius still more than anything else. From Gaeta he poured forth his
curses on his subjects. And while he was giving these manifestations of
his paternal heart, the Jesuits and Cardinal Antonelli were laying the
plan of that infernal compact between the Court of Rome and almost all
the despots of Europe, for crushing and annihilating all seeds of civil
and religious liberty, and for murdering, with merciless ferocity, all
those who had shouted for reform, in the name and under the auspices
of Pius IX.; a just retribution, it should seem, for having trusted in
a priest, and thought him capable of being an honest and liberal man.
Monsignor de Falloux, a Jesuit, brother of the then all-powerful minister
of Louis Napoleon, was notoriously the soul of the negotiation, and it
was he who decided the court of Rome to accept the succour of the French.
The crusade undertaken against Rome, by four nations so different in
character, and having such opposite interests, as Austria and France,
Spain and Naples, was the signal of that fiery reaction against the
liberty of all nations which still rages, and which, we fear, will not
cease till another general outbreak shall teach the tyrants that it is
not always safe to try too severely the patience of the people.

Distressful consequences for the people followed the league. The Roman
states were first made to feel the rage of the allies. Louis Napoleon,
who, in 1831, had fought along with us to overturn the Papal throne, now
sent an army in support of the Pope. He thought (I expressed this opinion
in my _History of the Pontificate_, written two years ago) that priests
and peasants would assist him to grasp the imperial sceptre, and that
he could not better ingratiate himself with them, than by replacing the
Pope on the throne; an act which would also be very acceptable to the
other despots. In consequence, he hastened to send his troops to crush
the new republic. The French army landed at Civita Vecchia. The general
chosen to command it was worthy of the end proposed. Oudinot is the
type of Jesuitism: and Louis Napoleon himself has, more recently, given
him his desert. Hardly had he landed on our shores, when many of the
fathers (we here relate facts of which we ourselves were witnesses)—as
an envenomed brood, sprung by magic from the soil—put themselves in
communication with him. The very proclamation by which he announced the
landing of the army was a masterpiece of Jesuitical craft. According to
its tenor, every party might have considered the French expedition as
coming to its own support. Oudinot informed the first deputation sent by
the republican government to inquire about the motives of this unwelcome
visit, that the French came as its friends; but, some hours after, when
pressed by a second deputation to be more explicit, he at last confessed
that they came to replace the Pope on the throne.[444] It would be to
our glory, but not to the purpose, to describe the prodigies of valour
performed by our inexperienced volunteers, in contending for three months
with forty-five thousand of the best troops of Europe. We fought as only
citizens combat for home and liberty. Men and women were in the _mêlée_.
Neither wife nor mother attempted by tears and entreaties to stay her
husband or son, but with a blessing and a kiss sent him forth against the
enemy. O Rome! O my noble country! when I remember thy noble deeds, the
readiness with which thou didst sacrifice the noblest of thy children
to achieve thy liberty, hope lends me patience to endure the longing
and miseries of my exile! Thou canst not be long under the yoke of the
priests!

But our valour availed us nothing. Left alone, we could stand no longer.
Four nations were leagued against us, and not a friendly hand was
stretched forth to succour us. England must reproach herself for having
left us to contend, unaided and alone, against four Catholic powers,
combined together to re-establish the Pope, who is as much her enemy as
ours. She must now feel the consequences of her culpable indifference.
The result was—and this is of great importance for England—that at last,
masters of our destinies, the Austrians have established a military
port at Leghorn, the French one at Civita Vecchia. Englishmen are cut
down in broad day in the streets of Florence,[445] condemned to death by
an Inquisitorial tribunal at Rome,[446] imprisoned at Verona,[447] and
insulted and ill-treated throughout all Italy. An English ambassador sues
in vain for the friendly interference of the Pope in English affairs;
he is not listened to, and the newspapers of the peninsula, and of the
powers adverse to England, laugh at his discomfiture. But there is in the
looming a still darker and more serious prospect, threatening to punish
England for having abandoned the cause of civil and religious freedom.
Eighteen millions of Englishmen live, we will not say in perpetual
fear—they are too brave for that—but not without apprehension of seeing
their shores invaded by the same army which conquered Rome, and which
would carry with it the blessing and the good wishes of Pius IX.—God
forbid that it should also have the support of the most fanatical and
ignorant portion of the Irish Papists, led by priests and Jesuits. We
hope that this will not be the case; yet we must remind our readers, that
every time the French speak of a war with England, they count on the
Irish as their natural allies.

We are not of those who, possessed by the fixed idea that impending
dangers threaten the Protestant religion, believe and affirm that
Louis Napoleon will be ready, at the bidding of the Jesuits, to send
an expedition against heretic England. On the contrary, we think that,
having once possessed himself of the imperial diadem, and having firmly
established himself on the throne, through the instrumentality of the
priests, and by the magic power which he seems to possess, of making the
electoral urn yield exactly the amount of votes asked from it, he will
soon put a stop to the insolence of the clergy, which, we are sure,
will increase in the direct ratio of the services they are rendering to
the usurper, and of the favours he has lavished upon them. But at the
same time, we firmly believe that, should Napoleon, in order to give
employment to his troops, and to gratify the national animosity, attempt
to invade Great Britain, or should he succeed in landing his adventurous
battalions on the British shore, then, though England may not have to
lament the treachery of the fanatic Papists of Ireland, she must expect
to find in her bosom as many spies and allies of her enemy as she has
Jesuits on her soil. All this is the result of the indifference shewn
by England to the affairs of the peninsula. Had she interfered when the
Romans were bravely struggling for their liberties, the Pope and Louis
Napoleon would not have cemented with our blood their anomalous alliance,
and the before-mentioned disastrous results would have been averted with
less difficulties and sacrifices than are now required to check the
insolence of that monstrous coalition. And let no one affirm that England
could not have justly interfered with the internal policy of other
nations. What! shall then intervention only be lawful and commendable
when employed to oppress a nation awakened to a sense of its rights, and
to extinguish every spark of freedom and patriotism? Shall it only be
permitted to outrage humanity, and never to benefit it? And to apply the
rule to the case now in question, we ask, shall the ferocious bands of
Croats, and the degraded soldiers of Louis Napoleon, trample upon our
unfortunate country, and dispose of its destinies at their pleasure, and
England remain an indifferent spectatress of their atrocious proceedings?
These are considerations which we beg leave to submit to the meditation
not only of the statesmen of Great Britain, but also of every free and
enlightened English citizen.

To return to our narrative: the French entered Rome (3d July 1849), and
with them priests and Jesuits, who had concealed themselves, or assumed
different disguises (not unfrequently that of patriots), re-appeared,
to enjoy their triumph, and the groans of the unfortunate country.
Oudinot, covered with the blood of the brave Romans, hastened to Gaeta
to receive the Pope’s blessing and acknowledgment, and was hailed there
as an angel of deliverance. The vindictive priests rejoiced at the
recital of the slaughter of the flock committed to their paternal care,
and made the General repeat the names and the numbers of the victims.
Then, when the hero of St Pancrace[448] returned to Rome, the priests,
to enjoy a barbarous pleasure, ordered a solemn _Te Deum_ to be sung in
all the churches of the state; and those of the unfortunate Italians
whose sustenance and liberty were in the power of their relentless enemy,
were obliged to assist at the ceremony, and with their lips, at least,
thank the Almighty for the slaughter of their best friends and nearest
relations.[449] Blasphemous profanation! Then began that ceaseless
persecution which is still continued; and the priests gratified their
thirst for revenge by crowding the dungeons with victims, and by driving
thousands into exile in foreign lands.

I will not prolong the painful history of our miseries. I will not speak
of ruined families—of forlorn and wandering children. I will not dwell
upon the fate of the ten thousand captives taken by Papal sbirri and
French gens-d’armes, and who fill the prisons of the state. I will not
implore the reader’s compassion for the many victims who have been again
immured in the dungeons of the Inquisition, some of whom, for the last
three years, have never seen a friendly face or heard a compassionate
word. I will not point out the inhuman and hypocritical conduct of the
so-called Vicar of Jesus Christ, who, while speaking with devout emotion
of his clemency, his paternal heart, and the mercies of the Christian
religion, has not granted a single pardon, dried a single tear, shortened
for a single day the torments to which he has condemned thousands of his
subjects. I shall only give an account of the wholesale execution which,
in the last month, took place at Sinigallia and Ancona, and which has
filled Italy and Europe with horror and amazement. As the Jesuits are
notoriously the soul and spirit of Popery, and are at the present moment
the recognised advisers and ministers of the Court at Rome, this short
narrative will not, we hope, be considered extraneous to our subject.

Those who, in times of calm and tranquillity, judge of events that
occur in epochs of commotion and revolution, when the passions of men
are excited to the highest paroxysm, and the voice of reason imposes
a feebler restraint upon their actions, leaving them little liberty
to judge of the character of their actions, are apt to commit serious
injustice; for they are too prone to brand as criminal, and deserving
the highest reprobation, deeds which, although culpable in themselves,
were yet committed under the impulse of heroism and devotedness. We do
not intend by this to approve or countenance crime, no matter under what
pretext it may have been committed. But assuredly there are circumstances
that ought to be taken into account which might render it, if not
excusable, at least less heinous and worthy of reprobation; and whoever
would form a just judgment in such cases, will never lose sight of these
considerations.

The first two years of Pius IX.’s pontificate are remarkably
characteristic of the nobleness and generosity of the liberal party.
Though the liberals had been, for the thirty years previous, so cruelly
and mercilessly treated, and though they were now the dominant party
in the state, they cannot be reproached with having offered an insult
to their late oppressors, nor with a single act of revenge. But it is,
unfortunately, true that, latterly, when the Pope had fled to Gaeta for
the very purpose of exciting civil war, when the priests were plotting
against the republic, calling in strangers to their aid, and menacing
us with foreign invasion, many political assassinations were committed
in Ancona and Sinigallia. This cannot be denied or palliated; only it
is to be remarked, that the crimes were confined to these two towns—the
latter the Pope’s birthplace; and both places being the residence of
his family, relations, and friends, a suspicion naturally arose in the
minds of many that these crimes were committed by persons misled by the
advice of some hidden Jesuits and partisans of the Pope, whose endeavour
it was to bring matters to the worst. The suspicion acquired strength
from the circumstance, that nobody belonging to the Mastai family was
injured. Although, as we have already reported, we were witness of the
fact that those who, during the late commotion in Rome, proposed the most
energetic and revolutionary measures, were, in the end, discovered to be
the agents or the tools of the Jesuits, nevertheless we would not like
to affirm that the political murders committed at Sinigallia were due to
the perfidious instigation of the priests. We do not like to believe in
the reality of such hellish perfidy; yet why had Sinigallia and Ancona
the sad preference of seeing their streets stained with fraternal blood?
Were there not exasperated minds also in other places? Had no other
populations of the state good grounds for calling to a strict and severe
account the agents and supporters of the past tyrannical government? Why,
we repeat, was the sad pre-eminence in guilt assigned to the native town
of the Pope?

However it were, after the Papal restoration, about 150 individuals were
thrown into prison, accused of being the accomplices or the abettors of
these crimes. Some of the accused, perhaps the guilty, were never taken,
having fled from the country. About eighty were condemned to the galleys
for life, the remainder to death.[450] Forty of the unfortunates have
already been executed, and the rest will meet the same fate when the Pope
shall find executioners as clement and humane as himself;—the garrison of
Ancona having to a man refused to be any longer the accomplices of the
Papal revenge.

What is of more importance than all this, is to place before the eyes of
our readers and civilised Europe the manner in which political trials
are conducted in the Roman states, in order that they may be aware of
the justice, charity, and humanity which characterise the acts of him
who blasphemously calls himself a god upon earth, the representative of
Christ.

Whoever has the misfortune to incur the displeasure or the hatred of
his Holiness, his ministers, a policeman, a sbirro, the bishop, the
curate, a monk, or any other of such rabble, which form an integral part
of the biform Papal government, is thrown into a dungeon, helpless,
comfortless, alone, and during several months hears and sees nothing
else than the grating sound of the rusty bolts, and the inauspicious
face of his guardian, who comes to bring his miserable pittance of
food, and to ascertain that the victim cannot make his escape. After a
longer or shorter space of time, but never shorter than three or four
months, according to the hatred or fear the prisoner has inspired, or
the interest possessed by his friends without, he is brought before
a _cancelliere o giudice processante_, a sort of scribe, by whom he
is interrogated.[451] In that examination all the care of the man
of police—we cannot call him a magistrate—is directed to elicit from
the victim a confession of his crime, or the name of his accomplices,
if he is supposed to have had any. Promises of liberty, favour, and
recompence, are held out to him as an inducement to dishonour or perjure
himself. These examinations are repeated every three or four months;
and when at last the man of the law has, after some years, obtained
what he wished, or despairs of obtaining it, the process is announced
to be closed, and the judgment is going to be delivered. Then, and
not till then, the accused may confer with a legal adviser, generally
assigned to him, _ex officio_, by the tribunal; and some little space
of time is granted to him to prepare his defence. But how can he defend
himself? He knows neither the names of his accusers nor of the witnesses
who have made the accusation good. He is not allowed to confront and
cross-examine them. Even his answers to the different questions put to
him by the _cancelliere_ are noted down, not as actually given by him,
but as it was desired that they should be given, in order that he may
appear a criminal, the only result which the judges wish to obtain.
When the advocate has delivered his defence, the secret tribunal pass
judgment without even seeing the face of the prisoner; and this judgment
is without appeal. Such is the general practice observed in political
trials. Robbers are a little better treated. In the peculiar case which
we are considering, we have to add, that, as far as has transpired,
all the witnesses who were called to give evidence against the accused
belonged to the adverse party—the party of the Jesuits, thirsting for
revenge, and eager to shew their devotion to the sect. It may be easily
understood that those witnesses were not very scrupulous as to the
charges they brought against the accused, being assured, as they were,
that their names would never be made public, and that they would not be
confronted with the prisoner, nor be cross-examined by anybody.

And nevertheless, it was upon such testimony that the tribunal of
the _Consulta_, composed of cardinals and prelates, condemned sixty
unfortunate young men to suffer the last punishment of the law. We must
further observe that, had those men who composed the tribunal, which
they call SACRED, been judges, and not persecutors, had they had any
sentiment of humanity in passing the sentence, even though the crime had
been proved, they would have borne in mind the time and the motives which
led the culprits to commit the murder, and would not have added another
red page to the annals of their Church, already overcharged with innocent
blood.[452]

Sinigallia, in which the executions were the most numerous, had not
yet recovered from the horror inspired by such a bloody tragedy, and
had not dried its tears for the cruel fate of its butchered citizens,
and especially for the innocent and unfortunate Simoncelli,[453] when,
to complete its miseries and insult its grief, there appeared a Papal
ordinance, granting to the Jesuits £40,000 sterling to erect a college in
the desolate city. Ah! so they reign in the Papal states!

When the Jesuits re-entered Naples in 1849, the superior held a sort
of levee, when the generals of the army, the first magistrates of the
kingdom, and all the civil and military authorities, went to pay their
respects to those very humble monks. The addresses which were delivered
on the occasion in praise of these men of Providence, these messengers of
God, these restorers of all moral and sainted institutions, were, from
their hyperbolical style, amusing in the extreme; and it is curious to
find that some of them were repeated almost literally (plagiarism seems
to become very fashionable now-a-days) by some bishops to Louis Napoleon,
the saviour of society, the man of Providence, the pearl of chastity and
virtue—just as was done to the fathers themselves.

If in Rome the Jesuits must shew deference to the chair of St Peter, in
Naples they are masters of the situation. St Ignatius has superseded
even St Januarius, and both have almost obliterated the name of Christ.
The superstition and bigotry of that part of the peninsula exclusively
under the sway of the Jesuits is almost incredible; and the government,
conducted on those principles, has reached the highest point of
immorality and corruption, and is held up by every honest person, no
matter of what party, to the execration and contempt of Europe; while, to
leave no doubt as to the influence which predominates there, the Pope,
the Jesuits, and the priests, their abettors, represent Ferdinand II. as
a model of Christian perfection, and the kingdom of the two Sicilies as
the best governed in the world; the Roman states being of course excepted.

Unfortunately, the wretched Neapolitans, and the noblest and best
amongst them, have to pay with their liberties and their lives for the
eulogium awarded by the Jesuits to the merciless Bourbon. The policy
of the Neapolitan governments is a disgrace to civilisation. A band of
ruffians, under the name of police or government, seize upon all persons
who have had the misfortune to displease them; their victims are thrown
into prison, and are accused of imaginary crimes; while the accusers,
changing themselves into witnesses, often into judges, in order to make
good the charge, keep them chained for three or four years in Ischia,
as in the case of Poerio and Dragonetti, and finally pass a sentence of
death upon them, in order to give the pious and clement Ferdinand and
his Jesuit confessor the merit of having commuted the infamous sentence
into a horrid and perpetual imprisonment; and to all this complication of
iniquities they give the name of a state trial. Such is the Neapolitan
government under the conduct of the sons of Loyola.

But the malignant spirit of the Jesuits, in breaking forth from Naples
and Rome, has lately made an inroad into a province which, till then, had
been spared its pernicious influence. Among all the other provinces of
Italy, Tuscany had been favoured with a comparatively just and tolerant
government; and this, it was openly asserted, was owing to the absence
of the Jesuits from the country. Now, whoever has followed the march of
events there, must have been struck by the wide difference that exists
between the former policy of the government and the new one introduced
after Leopold II. had been some time at Gaeta, under the influence
of Antonelli and the Jesuits. From that moment all things changed in
Tuscany. The priests re-acquired an influence which they had never
possessed since the time of Leopold I., and made it subservient to their
unworthy ends. Madonnas became again miraculous. Feasts and processions
were got up with the greatest pomp, and were numerously attended by all
those who had anything to hope or fear from the government. A furious
war was declared against all doctrines but those harmonising with the
strictest ultra-Popish principles. Books and newspapers were interdicted,
and no efforts were spared to bring the enlightened, lively, and
intellectual people of Tuscany to limit their literary pursuits to the
perfect knowledge of the Catechisms.

The influence of the too notorious Bocella, by his own confession a
Jesuit, was, above all, fatal to the country. While he was the chief
adviser of the Grand Duke, the Grand Duchess went in procession to
worship a miraculous Madonna at Rimini, and Leopold himself ordered
a sumptuous and extraordinary feast for another Madonna in Florence,
to whose church he repaired in state. But at the same time, the most
respectable citizens of Florence, Count Guicciardini and others, were
prosecuted and exiled for the heinous crime of reading the Bible;
and two unfortunate and inoffensive creatures—the Madiais—have been
condemned to the punishment of malefactors (hard labour), for having in
their possession the sacred volume, and for discussing and endeavouring
to prove its veracity. Later still, an ordinance of the Grand Duke
re-establishes capital punishment, which had long since been abolished;
while another ordinance of the minister of police expels from the
hospitable soil of Tuscany hundreds of unfortunate Italians, who had
sought there a refuge against the ferocious and relentless persecution of
the Roman Court. Such are the effects of the influence of the Jesuits.

What will become of Lombardy, already so wretched, now that Austria has
decided on re-establishing the Jesuits there on an extended scale, it is
disheartening to contemplate; while, on the other hand, it is cheering
in the extreme for an Italian, and for every true friend of civil and
religious liberty, to see the conduct of the Piedmontese government
towards the Jesuits and the priesthood.

The Jesuits, after their expulsion, were never permitted to re-enter
the kingdom, and the priests are now subjected, like other citizens,
to the laws of the land, and are obliged to submit to that equality
which they consider as a disgrace to their privileged caste. For it
must be borne in mind that the priest, and the conscientious one more
than others, considers himself a superior being, a man far above any
layman, even though he were a king. He imbibes this idea from childhood,
when he begins to dress in a peculiar garb, and is accosted by a
respectful appellation. According to the canonical law (and in Italy
that law is universally respected and strictly enforced, except, indeed,
in Piedmont), the moment an infant assumes the garb of a priest, and
receives the first order (tonsura), he is no more subject to the civil
authorities; he is henceforth only amenable to the ecclesiastical court,
and whoever strikes him, incurs _de facto_ excommunication. After he
has been consecrated priest, he pretends, or in reality believes, that
it is in his power to oblige the Almighty to descend from heaven into
his hands, and that at his bidding the flesh and blood of the Divine
Redeemer is transubstantiated into bread and wine, and in that form goes
to sanctify his breast. Again, he believes, or feigns to believe, that it
rests with him to open or shut the gates of heaven, and that he has the
power of bestowing everlasting beatitude or dooming to eternal damnation,
according as he absolves from sin or refuses absolution. In fact, he puts
himself in the place of God, of whom he calls himself the Anointed, and
whose name he often usurps. When we consider all this, we do not wonder
that the priests cannot endure equality of rights with other citizens. We
are rather astonished that serious and enlightened people of this country
can for a moment entertain the idea that the Irish Roman Catholic priests
are sincere when they ask for equality of rights. Look to Piedmont;
there the Romish priesthood enjoy this equality—nay, more than equality.
Their religion is acknowledged to be the religion of the state; and
many are the writers who have lately been condemned for disparaging
it. They possess, also, some other less considerable privileges over
the other citizens; and yet they are far from being satisfied. On the
contrary, they accuse the government of tyranny. The bishops are in open
rebellion against the sovereign; priests and curates oppose the laws of
the country. The pulpit, the confessional, are made subservient to their
hatred of the new state of things; and all this because the legislature
attempts, not to deprive them of any right, or subject them to any
incapacity, but to introduce equality, and to subject ecclesiastics
of all sorts to the common law. The rage of the priesthood at this
sacrilegious audacity on the part of the parliament, in seeking to
assimilate them to other men, is such, that they have launched a solemn
act of excommunication against all those who shall read the newspapers
advocating such infamous measures. The Jesuits are at the bottom of all
this, and their intrigues brought Piedmont but the other day to the brink
of ruin. Fortunately, public opinion declared itself so strongly, and the
king shewed such firmness, that their machinations proved abortive. It
must be remarked in all this, that when the liberal newspapers reproach
the clerical party with their acts or words, they always stigmatise them
with the name of Jesuits—so universally is the abhorred name coupled with
all that is bad, cunning, and criminal!

Appalling and ominous of incalculable consequences is the influence
which the Jesuits have acquired in France—in that country which has
prostrated all its past glory and its dignity as a nation, at the feet
of an unscrupulous, merciless tyrant; endeavouring, at the same time,
to forget its ignominy in the intoxication of feasts and champaigne.
The Jesuits and priests are the firmest supporters of Louis Napoleon;
and it is worthy of remark, that the bishops who are known for their
ultramontane principles and their adherence to the Jesuitical discipline
are those who lavish the highest eulogiums on the unprincipled usurper.
This affords us another instance of the worldly spirit of the Popish
clergy, and may be a salutary lesson for the future. For our own part,
indeed, we are inclined to recognise in it the hand of Providence
consummating the speedy downfall of the Popish religion. The conduct of
Pius IX. has already extinguished in Italy the last lingering sentiments
of respect and devotion towards the Papal religion. The Italians had
hopes for a moment that Pius would reconcile them to the religion of
their forefathers, by shewing that it is not a religion of blood and
persecution, but of love and brotherhood, eminently liberal and national.
They had hoped that Popery, to which Italy owes all its misfortunes,
would now change, and restore to it part of its former glory. And this
idea prevented them from renouncing altogether religion such as it is
preached to them. But now that no doubt remains as to the true spirit
of Popery, now that no one can reasonably entertain the least hope
that it will ever change from what it has been—an institution founded
on superstition, cemented with blood, and maintained by the axe of the
executioner—now that the last testing experiment has shewn to all the
world its utter helplessness against free physical force, it may be truly
said that Popery has been irrevocably doomed in Italy. It may linger
yet a while by the aid of despotic bayonets, but never again will the
Italians, of their own free will, repose their faith in the religion of
the Popes.

In precisely a similar manner are the priests and Jesuits now giving the
last blow to the Popish religion in France. Let the present transient
moment of delirium pass over, and the French nation will reconsider the
servile and ignominious part played by the clergy in the recent immoral
saturnalia. It will remember that the man who had perjured himself—who
had caused thousands of citizens to be butchered because they were
faithful to the laws—who had been a traitor to all governments from
his youth—who had never kept his word—who had been distinguished for
immorality and debauchery even among the unscrupulous _lions_ of London
and Paris—that this man was exalted by the surpliced emissaries of Rome
as the _man of Providence_, _the messenger of God_, _the restorer of
morality and religion_, _and the benefactor of humanity_. Who, need it
be asked, will once again believe them, when speaking of the things of
heaven, after they have lied so impudently and deliberately in speaking
of the things of this world? But till a reaction take place, the Jesuits
triumph in France.

As we have had occasion to speak incidentally, in various parts of this
work, of the arts and practices employed at the present moment by the
Jesuits against England, and as our readers have daily so many means
of ascertaining the manners of the fathers in the public prints, we do
not think it necessary to add anything more in this place. We have also
little to say about the actual missions of the Jesuits in both Indies.
They are neither prosperous nor important, and are only distinguished
by their intrigues and by the war which they keep up against all other
missionaries, whether Popish or Protestant. The actual wealth of the
Jesuits, though considerable, is far from approaching the fabulous amount
it possessed before the suppression. If our information and calculation
are correct, and we believe they are, the total number of the members _to
be found on the register of the Order_ amounts to nearly six thousand—an
enormous increase since 1814, and such, indeed, as to give to reflective
minds serious apprehensions. But we have nearly exhausted the space we
had allowed ourselves. We must pass to the conclusion.



CONCLUSION.


We are now at the end of our labours; but, before parting with our
readers, we would briefly call their attention to some of the chief
points in our History. If we mistake not, the perusal of our narrative,
imperfect as it may be, will convince even an indifferently attentive
reader that Loyola had but one end in view—one fixed idea—namely, to
establish an order which should domineer over society; and that his
successors have been arrested by no scruples as to the means to be
employed for obtaining this end. With the exception of this fixed rule,
to which the Jesuits have adhered with undeviating constancy, it may be
asserted that they have no principle whatever. The dogmas of their creed,
the precepts of their moral code, their political principles, all these
they have changed or modified according to places and circumstances. They
have been against or in favour of the Roman See, according as it served
or injured the interests of the order. They have proclaimed the unlimited
sovereignty of the people, and have been instrumental in bringing many
unfortunate persons to the scaffold, for resisting the tyrannical power
of absolute monarchs. To accomplish their ends, they have all along
thought that money would be the most efficient instrument; hence their
insatiable desire of wealth, to accumulate which, they violated all laws,
divine and human. The riches got by illicit means have been ever expended
for still more culpable purposes. A Jesuit does not desire or spend money
for his own personal self; he is frugal in his habits, and parsimonious
in expenditure as far as regards mere comforts; but he is no miser. He
does not hide his treasures in the bowels of the earth, but spends them
freely to increase the influence and power of his order. The secret agent
of the Society is handsomely rewarded; the spy liberally paid. Ministers
of different sovereigns are bought over by princely largesses; and even
the ruling beauties of courts are bribed to serve the order with costly
and suitable presents.

The fathers were also persuaded, from the beginning, that it would
greatly contribute to the grandeur and power of the order to insinuate
themselves into the susceptible minds of the young, and they left nothing
untried by which this might be effected. Other schemes—the conversion of
heretics, the missions, the outward exercise of many of the Christian
virtues—were all directed to the attainment of the same identical end—the
aggrandisement of the order.

Two other principal facts are deserving of attention. The first
is, that, from the beginning, the establishment of the Society was
everywhere opposed, and in all places where it was finally admitted,
it was subsequently, at different epochs, persecuted, and convicted of
iniquitous and abominable crimes. The second fact is, that the Society
of Jesus, though it may at times have disregarded its rules of internal
policy, has nevertheless maintained its general primitive character;
namely, its relentless domineering spirit, and the abnegation of every
personal feeling in favour of the community. The Jesuits of the present
day, unlike all other religious fraternities, which have invariably
undergone so many modifications, are exactly the same as they were
in Loyola’s lifetime. Founded by that bold, despotic, and ambitious
man, it seems as if his spirit had transmitted itself into the whole
Society, and presided over all its acts. The Company, so to speak, has
perpetuated the life of Loyola. If we would personify the order, we
might represent it, after his likeness, as an apparently humble and
sainted man, deeply absorbed in the contemplation of heavenly things,
while in reality revolving in his capacious and daring mind projects of
unbounded ambition. There is no record in history of an association whose
organisation has stood for three hundred years unchanged and unaltered by
all the assaults of men and time, and which has exercised such an immense
influence over the destinies of mankind.

This perseverance of the order in its principles and policy is comparable
to nothing except the corresponding constancy of the world in the
opinion which it formed of the Society at its commencement, and which
it still retains. “The moment,” says an author of the beginning of the
seventeenth century, “a great crime is committed, the public voice at
once and unanimously accuses the Jesuits of being its perpetrators.” And
the same sentiments with regard to them prevail to this day. In former
times, indeed, that opinion was so strongly and universally received,
that our forefathers, less scrupulous than we are in the administration
of justice, at the simple announcement of a misdeed, brought the Jesuit
before the tribunal, and sometimes unjustly condemned him for crimes
of which he was guiltless. Do, then, the Jesuits, from the habit of
committing crimes, bear on their countenances the indications of a
criminal and wicked disposition, as is commonly the case with ruffians by
procession? Or do they, by public and open misdemeanours, give the world
a right to form this judgment of them? By no means. We have already said
the reverse. They appear, on the contrary, to conduct themselves as the
most innocent, most inoffensive, and holy of men; and, indeed, unless
one has been present at the representation of Tartuffe, he would not
easily recognise the Jesuit from the undisguisedly honest man. However,
we would not be so illiberal as to say that all the Jesuits are knaves.
Our lamented friend Gioberti, when Father Pellico said to him, “Are we,
then, all assassins and robbers?” answered, “By no means. Individually,
I consider you very honest fellows, and had I treasure, I would
unhesitatingly intrust it to your keeping.” We would not perhaps go quite
so far; but we will freely admit that the Jesuit may be individually
honest, unless the interest of his order obliges him to be otherwise. For
there are no considerations of religion, honesty, or virtue, which he
does not feel himself bound peremptorily and at all times to sacrifice to
this one supreme consideration. “The end sanctifies the means,” is his
favourite maxim; and as his only end, as we have shewn, is the order, at
its bidding the Jesuit is ready to commit any crime whatsoever.

Such, then, is the history of a Society dreaded and relied upon,
worshipped and abhorred, which has produced little good, and infinite
mischief, and which, having been hurled down from the pinnacle of
splendour and glory, attempts now, with renewed vigour and unceasing
activity, to regain the summit of its ancient pre-eminence. An appalling
prospect, foreboding no good to the welfare of mankind! One cheering
idea, however, still remains to dissipate the evil apprehension. The
Jesuits, now more decidedly than ever, have identified themselves with
the cause of despotism, fanaticism, and ignorance; and the day on which
the tottering thrones of tyranny shall crumble under the mighty and
resistless arm of progressive civilisation, they will bury deep and for
ever under their ruins all traces of the influence once possessed by this
most formidable and pernicious Society.


THE END.



FOOTNOTES


[1] _History of the Council of Trent_, by Fra Paolo Sarpi, tome i. p. 9.

[2] Helyot, _Histoire des Ordres Monastiques, Religieux et Militaires_,
tome vii. p. 452. When we have modern Catholic authors who quote from
Sacchinus Orlandinus, &c., we shall quote them, as books more easily to
be had.

[3] Helyot, _Hist. des Ord. Mon., Rel. et Mil._, tome vii. p. 456.

[4] Ibid. p. 459.

[5] By the term “Spiritual Exercises,” Catholics understand that course
of solitary prayer and religious meditation, generally extending over
many days, which candidates for holy orders have to perform in the
seclusion of a convent previous to being consecrated. Again, when a
priest incurs the displeasure of his superior, he is sent as a sort of
prisoner to some convent, there to perform certain prescribed “spiritual
exercises,” which in this case may last from one to three weeks.

[6] The Italics here are our own.

[7] The Italics here are our own.

[8] Stephens.

[9] See the Shorter Catechism, Qu. 1.

[10] Hel. _Hist. des Ord. Mon., Rel. et Mil._ tome vii. p. 461.

[11] Hel. _Hist. des Ord. Mon., Rel. et Mil._ tome vii. p. 463.

[12] Ibid. tome vii. p. 464.

[13] Once for all, I promise my readers that I am not going to trouble
them with the narrative of all the miraculous legends related concerning
Loyola. They are in most instances so absurd as to be beneath the dignity
of history. Let the two following suffice as specimens. It is said that
the devil, determined to prevent his learning Latin, so confused his
intellect that he found it impossible to remember the conjugation of the
verb _amo_; whereupon he scourged himself unmercifully every day, until
by that means the evil spirit was overcome, after which the saint was
soon able to repeat _amo_ in all its tenses. Again, when Ignatius was in
Venice on his way to the Holy Land, it is said that a wealthy senator of
that city, Travisini by name, whilst luxuriously reclining on his bed of
down, was informed by an angel that the servant of God was lying upon
the hard stones under the portico of his palace. Whereupon the senator
immediately arose, and went to the door, where he found Ignatius.

[14] Negroni expounds the word _societas_ “quasi dicas cohortem aut
centuriam quæ ad pugnam cum hostibus spiritualibus conserendam conscripta
est.”

[15] Hel. _Hist. des Ord. Mon., Rel. et Mil._ tome vii. p. 469.

[16] Fra Paolo Sarpi, _History of the Council of Trent_, p. 118.

[17] These famous Constitutions were composed by Loyola in the Spanish
language. They were not at first the perfect system we now find them;
and it was not till about the year 1552 that, after many alterations and
improvements adapting them to the necessities of the times, they assumed
their ultimate form. They were translated into Latin by the Jesuit
Polancus, and printed in the college of the Society at Rome in 1558. They
were jealously kept secret, the greater part of the Jesuits themselves
knowing only extracts from them. They were never produced to the light
until 1761, when they were published by order of the French parliament,
in the famous process of Father Lavallette.

[18] We beg to explain the sense in which we use the word _Catholic_. We
don’t mean that the Christians of the Roman persuasion have an exclusive
right to it. We only maintain to them the current denomination, as all
other historians do, to prevent confusion.

[19] _History of the Council of Trent_, by Paolo Sarpi, tome i. p. 47.

[20] _Const. Socie. Jesu_, pars i. cap i. § 3.

[21] _Const._ pars i. cap. ii. § 1.

[22] _Const._ pars i. cap. iv. § 6.

[23] _Const._ pars iii. cap. i. § 12.

[24] _Const._ pars iv. cap. x. § 5.

[25] _Const._ pars iii. cap. i. § 23.

[26] _Const._ pars vi. cap. i. § 1.

[27] _Const._ pars vi. cap. v. § 1.

[28] _Examen_, iv. § 11; and _Const._ pars iii. cap. i. § 7-9.

[29] After his entrance into the house of first probation, the Jesuit is
not allowed either to receive or send away any letter which has not been
previously read by his superior.

[30] _Const._ pars iii. cap. i. § 2, 3.

[31] Let not any English reader accuse me of inaccuracy on this point,
upon the ground that Jesuits actually walk about the streets in this
country _singly_, or even in disguise. They must take notice that every
rule of the Constitution contains this clause—“Except the General order
otherwise, for the greater glory of God, and the benefit of the Society.”
Is it not “for the greater glory of God, and the benefit of the Society,”
that the Jesuit, to escape suspicion, should go alone?—that he should be
introduced into your family circle as a Protestant gentleman?—that he
should, to gain your unsuspecting confidence, enact the part of your gay
companion at theatres, concerts, and balls?—that he should converse with
you upon religious matters, beginning always by cursing the Pope, &c.?

[32] _Const._ pars iii. cap. i, § 18.

[33] _Const._ pars i. cap. ii. § 13.

[34] Ibid. pars i. cap. iii. § 3-16.

[35] _Const._ pars v. cap. ii. § 7, 8.

[36] Ibid. pars iv. cap. xvi. § 3.

[37] _Const._ pars iv. cap. i. § 1, 6.

[38] _Const._ pars ii. cap. iii. § 5, 6, 8.

[39] In most monasteries, and more particularly in those of the Capuchins
and Reformed (_Riformati_), there begins at Christmas a series of
feasts, which continues till Lent. All sorts of games are played, the
most splendid banquets are given, and in the small towns, above all, the
refectory of the convent is the best place of amusement for the greater
number of the inhabitants. At carnivals, two or three very magnificent
entertainments take place, the board so profusely spread that one might
imagine that Copia had here poured forth the whole contents of her horn.
It must be remembered that these two orders live by alms. The sombre
silence of the cloister is replaced by a confused sound of merrymaking,
and its gloomy vaults now echo with other songs than those of the
Psalmist. A ball enlivens and terminates the feast; and, to render it
still more animated, and perhaps to shew how completely their vow of
chastity has eradicated all their carnal appetite, some of the young
monks appear coquettishly dressed in the garb of the fair sex, and begin
the dance along with others transformed into gay cavaliers. To describe
the scandalous scene which ensues would be but to disgust my readers.
I will only say that I have myself often been a spectator at such
saturnalia.

[40] _A Vincenzo Gioberti Fra Pellico della Compagnia di Gesù_, pp. 35,
36.

[41] _Examen_, iv. § 10-15.

[42] _Examen_, iv. § 17.

[43] _Const._ Pars v. cap. iv. § 4.

[44] _Const._ Pars v. cap. iv. § 2.

[45] _Const._ Pars ix. cap. iii. § 9.

[46] _Const._ Pars v. cap. iii. § 2-4.

[47] _Const._ Pars ix. cap. v. § 5.

[48] See my _History of the Pontificate of Pius IX._, p. 3.

[49] _Const._ Pars viii. cap. vi. § 6.

[50] _Const._ Pars ix. cap. iv. § 7.

[51] _Const._ Pars ix. cap. iii. § 14-19.

[52] Maffei, _Vita Ign._ p. 90.

[53] Maffei, _Vita Ign._ p. 90.

[54] _Bromato Vita di Paolo IV._ lib. vii. § 3.

[55] Ranke’s _Hist. of the Popes_, vol. i. p. 189. English translation.

[56] _Crétineau_, vol. i. p. 134.

[57] _Orland._ lib. iii. 48; _Crét._ vol. i. p. 134.

[58] _Crét._ vol. i. p. 136.

[59] Cumulatam peccatorum indulgentiam tribuebant.—_Orland._ lib. iii.
sec. 59.

[60] Exceptiones immunitatesque, aut plane gratuitas aut ære permodico
tenuoribus indugebant, &c.—_Ibid._ and _Crét._ vol. i. p. 140.

[61] _Steinmetz_, vol. i. p. 308.

[62] _Orl._ lib. iii. 60; _Crét._ vol. i. p. 141.

[63] _Helyot_, vol. vii. p. 491.

[64] _Helyot_, vol. vii. p. 491.

[65] _Const._ pars vi. cap. iii. § 7. To be a nun’s confessor was, and
is still, deemed a high privilege. Before the Council of Trent, this
privilege belonged to the order of St Francis, under whose rules most of
the nuns also live. The conduct of these brothers and sisters was in the
highest degree improper and scandalous. Although the Franciscans are now
no longer the titular confessors of these nuns, nevertheless they are
on the most friendly terms with one another; upon which friendships the
Italians exercise their satirical and sarcastic wit. The confessors are
now chosen by the respective bishops, who confer the honour upon their
most faithful adherents, as a reward for their services. The rivalries of
those sainted women, and their ingenious contrivances to engage the smile
of their holy father, are notorious to every one who lives near a convent.

[66] _Helyot_, vol. iii. p. 492.

[67] _Orl._ lib. viii. § 6.

[68] _Crét._ vol. i. p. 284.

[69] _Orlan._ lib. viii. p. 43.

[70] _Crét._ vol. i. p. 285.

[71] _Crét._ vol. i. p. 290.

[72] _Orland._ lib. viii. 10.

[73] _Crét._ vol. i. p. 299.

[74] _Ibid._ p. 292. As this author generally quotes Orlandini and the
other Jesuitical writers _verbatim_, we shall refer our readers to him,
as it can much more easily be procured, and we shall only quote from the
original when the translation is inaccurate.

[75] _Crét._ vol. i. p. 305.

[76] _Ibid._ p. 299.

[77] _Crét._ vol. i. p. 290.

[78] Our readers must not take the word parliament in the same
signification it has in England. The parliament of France was composed
of a body of magistrates, and formed the Supreme Court of Judicature,
in which the princes of the blood had a seat; and which was sometimes
presided over by the king. Every province had its parliament, but none
exercised the same influence with that of Paris.

[79] _Crét._ vol. i. p. 320.

[80] This Postel was a rabbin converted to Catholicism. He was very
learned, a graduate of the university, and held in high estimation by
Francis I. and all his court. In 1545 he went to Rome to enter the
Society of Gesù. This acquisition gave great joy to the Jesuits. Postel
was very kindly received, and much flattered. He then went through the
_Spiritual Exercises_; but this strange course of devotion affected his
fervid imagination so much, that his faculties became impaired. He began
to propound strange doctrines—to propose new rules for the Society; and,
above all, would by no means obey the orders of Ignatius. Loyola having
no longer any hold upon him, dismissed him, for which act of firmness
Loyola’s panegyrist extols him to the skies.

[81] Crétineau, vol. i. p 334.

[82] Maffei, _Ignat. Vita_, p. 110.

[83] Idem, p. 109.

[84] Orland. lib. xiv. § 96, 97.

[85] The _Litteræ Annuæ Societatis Jesu_, from 1606 to 1614, fill eight
volumes in 8vo; the _Lettres Edifiantes_, twenty-one volumes in 8vo, and
so on.

[86] Bart. _Vita Ign._

[87] Bart. _Asia_, p. 31.

[88] For nearly two centuries, miracles and saints rarely occurred. It
seems as if they were in a state of embryo, slumbering until an opportune
season for their appearance should arrive. After the Reformation,
however, it was deemed expedient that some new miracles and saints should
come forth to prove the truth and the superiority of the Roman Catholic
religion over the Protestant, which cannot boast of such testimonials. It
was then that the images of the Virgin Mary again began to speak, laugh,
weep—that the hair of the images on the crucifix grew—that they shed
blood from their wooden sides—that the relics of saints acted as a charm
to keep away diseases and misfortunes—and that new saints sprang into
existence like mushrooms.

[89] Ranke’s _Hist. of the Popes_, vol. ii. p. 231. English translation.

[90] Juvencius’ _Hist. Soc. Jesu_, pars v. tom. ii. lib. xviii.

[91] _Lettres Edifiantes_, tom. x. p. 324.

[92] Feringee was the name given by the Hindoos to the Portuguese.

[93] _Lettres Edif._ tom. xxi. p. 77.

[94] Idem, tom. x. pp. 243-245.

[95] _Lettres Edifiantes_, tom. xii. p. 107.

[96] Tom. xiii. p. 54.

[97] Tom. xiv. pp. 185, 186.

[98] _Letters on the State of Christianity in India_, p. 74. London, 1823.

[99] The Taly bears the image of the god Pollyar, supposed to preside
over nuptial ceremonies. This most indecent idol was attached to a cord
of 108 threads, and worn round their necks by the women ever after their
marriage, as a wedding-ring.

[100] Crét. vol. v. p. 47. The italics are our own.

[101] The ashes of the cows’ dung are consecrated to the goddess
Lakshini, and are supposed to cleanse from sin anybody to whom they
are applied. The missionaries laid these ashes upon the altar near the
crucifix (horrid to relate!) or the image of the Virgin, then consecrated
and distributed them in the shape of little balls among their converts.
This strange sort of Christians invoked a pagan divinity as often as
they applied the dung to the body. Thus, when they rub it on the head
or forehead, they say, _Neruchigurm netchada Shiven_—that is, may the
god Shiva be within my head; when they rub it on the breast, they say,
_Manu Rudren_—that is, may the god Rudren be in my breast; and so on.—See
_Mémoires Historiques_, tom. iii. pp. 29, 30. Lucca, 1745.

[102] Crét. vol. v. p. 47.

[103] Crét. vol. v. p. 50.

[104] Father Norbert was a Capuchin missionary in India, who presented
to Pope Benedict XIV. a book entitled, _Mémoires Historiques sur
les Missions des Indes Orientales_. The work is illustrated with
authentic documents. It was published with the approbation of all the
ecclesiastical authorities, and never contradicted. Still, we will not
quote Father Norbert as a proper authority, unless what he relates can be
corroborated by other proofs.

[105] _Mém. Hist._ tom. prim. p. 142.

[106] The decree of the Inquisition of 1706, and his own of 1707,
approving and confirming De Tournon’s decree.

[107] Ranke’s _Hist. of the Popes_, vol. ii. p. 230. Eng. trans.

[108] _Ibid._

[109] Maigrot. We do not in the least wish to diminish the merit and
the good intention of these two prelates. We even believe that M. de
Tournon was an excellent man. We only wish to observe that both he and
Maigrot were Frenchmen; that very many of the French prelates always
evinced great enmity towards the Jesuits, and that this, perhaps, had
some influence in stimulating their zeal for the purity of the Christian
religion.

[110] “I, N., of the order N., or Society of Jesus, sent, designated as
a missionary, to the kingdom or province of N. in the East Indies, by
the Apostolic See, by my superiors, according to the powers granted to
them by the Apostolic See, obeying the precept of our Holy Lord Pope
Clement XII., in his Apostolic Letter, issued in the form of a brief,
on the 13th day of May 1739, enjoining all the missionaries in the said
missions to take an oath that they will faithfully observe the apostolic
determination concerning the Malabar rites, according to the tenor of the
Apostolic Letter in the form of a brief of the same our Holy Lord, dated
24th August 1734, and beginning _Compertum deploratumque_, well known to
me by my reading the whole of that brief, promise that I will obey fully
and faithfully, that I will observe it _exactly, entirely, absolutely,
and inviolably_, and that I will fulfil it _without any tergiversation_;
moreover, that I will instruct the Christians committed to my charge
according to the tenor of the said brief, as well in my preaching as in
my private ministrations, and especially the catechumens before they
shall be baptized; and unless they promise that they will observe the
said brief, with its determinations and prohibitions, that I will not
baptize them; further, that I shall take care, with all possible zeal and
diligence, that the ceremonies of the heathen be abolished, and these
rites practised and retained by the Christians which the Catholic Church
had piously decreed. But if at any time (which may God forbid!) I should
oppose (_that brief_), either in whole or in part, so often do I declare
and acknowledge myself subject to the penalties imposed by our Holy Lord,
whether in the decree or in the Apostolic Letter, as above, concerning
the taking of this oath, in like manner well known to me by reading the
whole thereof. Thus, touching the Holy Gospels, I promise, vow, and
swear, so may God help me, and these God’s Holy Gospels! Signed with my
own hand—N.”

[111] I choose to speak of the procession held in this town, because I
have there witnessed it myself.

[112] Ranke’s _Hist. of the Popes_, vol. i. p. 217. (Eng. trans.)

[113] The passage of Sacchini is most instructive upon this point.
“Lainez,” says he, “did not write a single word on the matter; on the
contrary, Bobadilla and Gorgodanuz did nothing else than issue pamphlet
upon pamphlet, but it always happened by the Divine will (_Divino tamen
consilio fiebat_), that their writings fell into the Vicar-General’s
hand. Sometimes they (Lainez’s enemies) imprudently dropped the writings
in the street, sometimes they negligently left them in their rooms
unlocked, at other times they were delivered up to Lainez by the very
persons to whom they were addressed.” In other words, Lainez, by the
most ignoble proceedings and abject espionage, made himself master of
his enemies’ writings; yet the Jesuit historian says “that it happened
_Divino consilio_.” I wonder he does not add, _ad majorem Dei gloriam_.

[114] Sacch. lib. i. § 86.

[115] The act of making the sign of the cross is very significant. It is
still the custom in Italy for the common people to do so on hearing of
some great and unwonted crime, or of some extraordinary event.

[116] Crét. vol. i. p. 369.

[117] Crét. vol. i. p. 369.

[118] Paul IV. had hardly expired, when the Romans, highly incensed at
the miseries caused by the war, and at the severities of the Inquisition,
rose in a body, and with execrations and curses pulled down the statue
which had been erected to him in the beginning of his Pontificate, broke
into the Inquisition, and destroyed every thing in it.

[119] Crét. vol. i. p. 386.

[120] Sacch. lib. ii. § 131.

[121] I may here repeat what I have already said in one or two of my
former publications. When we in 1848 took possession of the Convent of
La Minerva, the seat of the Inquisition in Rome, we found among other
things a packet of autograph letters, written by the priests of different
countries, revealing various confessions to the Inquisitor. And it was
a very curious thing that the first letter which fell into the hands of
Mr Montecchi, a secretary of State, was from the capuchin of the State
Prison, in which he was a prisoner a few years before. These letters,
which are now out of our reach, are, however, safe, and will, I hope, be
soon published.

[122] The Jesuits, in this circumstance, were again forbidden to leave
Spain, or to send any money out of the country.

[123] Sacch. lib. v. § 107-10.

[124] Lainez, among other exploits, attacked with great violence the
authority of the bishops, and would have had them to be mere tools in the
hands of the Pope. He maintained on another occasion that, “as the slave
possesses less authority than his master, in like manner the Council
could not undertake a reformation upon the matter, the _annates_ being
of Divine right.” Again, “as Jesus Christ has the power to dispense from
all sorts of laws, the Pope, his vicar, has the same authority, SINCE
THE JUDGE AND HIS LIEUTENANT HAVE THE SAME TRIBUNAL,” and other similar
blasphemies. See Fra Paolo Sarpi upon the Congregations, 20th October
1562, and 16th June 1563.

[125] See the whole letter in Crét. vol. i. p. 294.

[126] Ranke, _Hist. of the Popes_, vol. i. p. 286.

[127] See Crét. vol. ii. pp. 25 and following.

[128] Sacchini in Ranke’s _History of the Popes_, vol. ii. p. 80.

[129] Sacch. lib. ii. § 134.

[130] It is a remarkable fact that during the reign of the bigoted and
persecuting Mary, the Jesuits did not make their appearance in England.
Cardinal Pole, to whom they had made several applications to be permitted
to establish themselves in Great Britain, always refused his consent.
_Pole knew Loyola intimately._

[131] Crét. vol. i. p. 463.

[132] See the whole Bull in Crét. vol. ii. page 241.

[133] Crét. vol. ii. p. 269.

[134] Crét. vol. ii. p. 255.

[135] See Bartoli dell’ Ing. F. 101, 102, 104.

[136] Bartoli, _ibid._

[137] Ranke’s _Hist. of the Popes_, vol. i. p. 512. (Eng. trans.)

[138] Camden, A.D. 1580.

[139] It was secretly printed in Lady Stour’s house, and widely
circulated.—See Crét. vol. ii. p. 272.

[140] Crét. vol. ii. p. 266.

[141] “Robertus Parsonius et Edmundus Campionus facultatem impetrârunt,
a Gregorio XIII. in hæc verba. Petatur a summo Domino nostro explicatio
Bullæ Declaratoriæ per Pium V. contra Elizabetham et ei adhærentes,
quem Catholicis cupiunt intelligi hoc modo, ut obliget semper illam
et hæreticos, Catholicos vero nullo modo rebus sic stantibus, sed tum
demum quando publica ejusdem Bullæ executio fieri poterit. Has prædictas
gratias concessit summus Pontifex Padri Roberto Parsonio et Edmundo
Campionio, in Anglicam profecturis die 13 Aprilis 1580, præsente Padre
Oliverio Manarco assistente.”—Camden, p. 464.

[142] It is well known that this adventurer, whom the Pope had made his
chamberlain, when off the coast of Portugal with the fleet which had been
equipped for the invasion, was persuaded by king Sebastian to accompany
him in his enterprise against Morocco, where he perished along with the
imprudent monarch of Portugal.

[143] Ranke’s _Hist. of the Popes_, vol. i. p. 324. (Eng. trans.)

[144] _Ann. Litt._ 1583.

[145] Bart. dell. Ing. F. 117.

[146] Hume, chap. xl. (A.D. 1579).

[147] See De Thou, A.D. 1587.

[148] Hume, chap. xli. (A.D. 1580).

[149] Crét. vol. ii. p. 280.

[150] Camden in Hume, chap. xli. (A.D. 1584).

[151] _State Trials_, vol. i. pp. 103, 104.

[152] Camden and De Thou.

[153] “La misère et le désespoir lui inspirèrent la pensée d’exécuter
en réalité le crime imaginaire qu’il prétendait avoir médité avec les
Jésuites.”

[154] Crét. vol. ii. p. 302.

[155] 22 Eliz. c. ii.

[156] Hume’s _Hist. of Eng._ chap. xlii.

[157] Crét. vol. ii. p. 309.

[158] Pasquier, _Catéchisme des Jésuites_, lib. iii. ch. 16.

[159] See Crét. vol. ii. p. 79.

[160] Crét. vol. ii. p. 78.

[161] These are some of the numberless privileges that the Jesuits had
obtained from different Popes even within the first twenty-five years
of their establishment:—They had the privilege of having a private
chapel in every house or college, and to celebrate mass even in time of
interdict; of absolving from every censure even in cases reserved for the
Pope alone; of dispensing from religious vows, or from impediments to
marriage; of conferring academical degrees which entitled the graduate to
the honours and privileges conferred by the royal universities. They were
exempted from tithes and from all other ecclesiastical contributions;
and, above all, they were independent of the jurisdiction of the bishops.

[162] See Crét. vol. i. pp. 406, 407.

[163] Ibid.

[164] It is well known that in France the Roman Catholic clergymen are
divided into ultramontane and Gallican; that the latter, under Louis
Philippe, maintained their independence, and a sort of superiority; but
that, under the rule of the pantheist Louis Napoleon, the ultramontane
party, under the direction and patronage of the Jesuits, has obtained the
ascendancy, which they exercise with a domineering spirit, and which is
increasing every day.

[165] Father Maldonat propounded a doctrine, that no one remained in
purgatory longer than ten years; and this, in order to assure the princes
that, if the properties of monasteries or other benefices were given
to the Jesuits, there would be no fear of their ancestors, in general
the pious founders, roasting in purgatory—who knows how long?—if the
benefices were appropriated to other uses than those for which they were
intended.

[166] Crét. vol. ii. p. 388.

[167] Ibid. p. 392.

[168] This insurrection was called “the days of the barricades.”

[169] Crét. vol. ii, p. 414.

[170] This Council was so called because it was composed of sixteen
members, representing the sixteen quarters of Paris; and it possessed
the supreme authority _de facto_. In this council the Jesuits had the
greatest influence, and one of them was a member of it.

[171] Crét. vol. ii. p. 404.

[172] It is asserted in a memoir of the Seigneur de Schomberg, that
after the assassination of Guise, Sixtus, through his legate, suggested
to Henry III. to name one of the Pope’s nephews as his successor to the
throne of France. But we have too good an opinion of Sixtus’ sagacity to
believe him guilty of such an extravagant project.

[173] Ranke’s _Hist. of the Popes_, vol. ii. p. 25.

[174] How Elizabeth deplored this unprincipled act! “Ah, what grief,”
she wrote to him after his apostasy, “and what regrets and what groans I
have felt in my soul at the sound of such tidings as Morlaut has related!
My God! is it possible that any human respect should efface the terror
which Divine fear threateneth! Can we ever, by arguments of reason,
expect a good consequence of actions so iniquitous? He who has supported
and preserved you in mercy, can you imagine that He will permit you to
advance unaided from on high to the greatest predicament? But it is
dangerous to do evil in the hope that good will follow from it.—Your very
faithful sister, Sire, after the old fashion—I have nothing to do with
the new one—ELIZABETH.”[175]

[175] Bibl. du Roi MSS. de Colbert, apud Capefique, N. 251.

[176] Mezarai, _Abrégé Chronologique_ in the year 1576.

[177] Crétineau pretends that Gregory XIII., the father of all
Christians, wishing rather to pacify than excite their passions, refused
to comply with their request. But Ranke affirms that his approbation
was given, and refers, as proof thereof, to a letter of Father Matthieu
himself to the Duke of Nerves, reported in the fourth volume of
_Capefique Réformé_.

[178] Ranke’s _Hist. of the Popes_, vol. i. p. 505.

[179] See, for the first part, Crét. vol. ii. p. 392. As he does not
quote the latter part, see for it Pasquier, or _Histoire Générale de la
Naissance et du Progrès de la Compagnie de Jésus_, vol. i. p. 180.

[180] Crét. vol. ii. p. 391.

[181] _Catéchisme des Jésuites_, lib. iii. ch. 2.

[182] Crét. vol. ii. p. 396.

[183] _Catéchisme des Jésuites_, lib. iii. ch. 6.

[184] Mezarai, _Abrégé Chronologique pour l’année 1594_. Henry was
naturally generous, as all gallant men are. The only revenge he took upon
the corpulent Duke of Mayenne, the chief of the League, and his rival for
the throne after the death of Cardinal de Bourbon, was to take him by the
arm, and whilst engaged in friendly conversation, walking at a very smart
pace two or three times round the garden. Henry smiled when he had walked
Mayenne fairly out of breath, and all the Duke’s injuries were forgotten.

[185] See De Thou, L’Etoile, and all the historians of the time.

[186] Mezarai, _Ab. Chr._ at the end of 1594.

[187] See Acts of the Parliament, or _D’Argentré Collect. Jud._ tom. ii.
p. 524.

[188] In one of these writings, speaking of Henry IV., the Jesuit
says:—“Shall we call him a Nero, a Sardanapalus of France, a fox of
Bearn?” and further on, he declares, that “the crown of France could and
ought to be transferred to another family; that Henry, although converted
to the Catholic faith, would be treated too leniently, if a monk’s crown
(tonsure) were given him in some convent to do penance; that if he cannot
be deposed without war, then (said he) let us make war, and if we cannot
make war, let him be killed.”—Crét. vol. ii. p. 435.

[189] See the whole of the inscription in the authors of the epoch, in
the _Recueil des Pièces touchant l’Histoire de la Compagnie de Jésu_.
Liège, 1716. A very instructive work.

[190] Sigismond, on the death of his father John, having proceeded
from Poland to Upsala for the ceremony of his coronation, the estates
peremptorily refused to render him homage, till he had solemnly sworn
that the Augsburg Confession should be inculcated everywhere, alone
and purely, whether in churches or schools. In this strait, the prince
applied to Malaspina, the Pope’s nuncio, to know whether in conscience
he could give such promise. The nuncio denied that he could. The king
thereupon addressed himself to the Jesuits in his train, and what the
nuncio had not dared, they took upon themselves to do. They declared
that, in consideration of the necessity, and of the manifest danger in
which the sovereign found himself, he might grant the heretics their
demands without offence to God.—Ranke, _Hist. of the Popes_, vol. ii. pp.
147, 8.

[191] See Ranke’s _History of the Popes_, vol. i. p. 411.

[192] Ranke’s _Hist. of the Popes_, vol. i. pp. 415-417.

[193] Ranke’s _History of the Popes_, vol. i. p. 411.

[194] Ibid. p. 426.

[195] Ranke, vol. i. p. 422.

[196] Ranke, vol. i. p. 487.

[197] Ranke, _Hist. of the Popes_, vol. ii. p. 141.

[198] John, before his ascension to the throne, had been confined in
strict captivity by his brother Eric. His wife, a Polish princess, the
last descendant of the Jagellonica family, and an adherent of the Church
of Rome, shared his imprisonment; the sad and gloomy hours of which were
rendered less painful by the frequent visits of a Roman Catholic priest,
who shewed them the greatest sympathy. It seems that this made some
impression upon John, and rendered him favourable towards the Papists.

[199] Crét. vol. ii. p. 195.

[200] Ranke informs us that John, troubled by remorse for his brother’s
assassination, was very anxious to receive absolution;—as if the word of
a man could quiet the gnawings of conscience, that unsparing avenger of
crime!

[201] Crét. vol. i. p. 449.

[202] Ibid.

[203] This fact is reported by all the Jesuit historians. We, however,
have too good an opinion of the Waldenses not to suspect that the
Jesuits, in order to deceive and impose upon the populace, had mixed
among some few apostates a number of Roman Catholics who were willing to
appear converted heretics.

[204] See also Crét. vol. iv. pp. 200, 201.

[205] Crét. vol iv. pp. 221, 222.

[206] _Const._ pars iv. chap. vi. § iii.

[207] To ascertain whether every one goes to the confessional every
other Saturday, each boarder receives a card with his own name written
on it, which he must deliver to his confessor, who gives it back to the
rector. I may here mention that this method is also practised at Easter
in the whole of the States of the Church, with all the inhabitants. If
your card is not among those collected from the different confessors, it
is evident that you have not fulfilled the precept, and if you do not
give a satisfactory reason for it before the 26th of August, your name
is fixed on the door of the parish church as that of a sacrilegious and
infamous person. In the college of Senegallia, where I was educated,
we were about two hundred boarders. Eight confessors were appointed to
shrive. At sunset we descended to the chapel, whence we went in turn
into the different schoolrooms to confess. The rooms were darkened,
and the fathers were seated each in an arm chair, before a sort of
confessional, through a grating of which our sins had to find their
way to their pious ears. To such confessors as had been more severe on
former occasions we usually played some tricks, such as putting a piece
of raw garlic into our mouths, and pretending to be seized with a fit of
coughing or sneezing, so that the poor confessor, who, in order to hear
our confession well, was obliged to have his face close to the grating,
had his olfactory nerves assailed by a puff of breath which was anything
but agreeable. The penance, you may be sure, was double, but it never
deterred us from playing similar pranks again, though we religiously
fulfilled it. Sometimes we contrived to evade confession altogether in
the following manner:—One who was going in to the confessional took with
him the card of another along with his own. In kissing the hand of the
confessor, after having confessed, he put into it one card, and slipped
the other upon the table on which the father laid those he was receiving.
After all was over, the servant brought in a light, and the confessor
collected all the tickets he found on the table, and took them with him.
Meanwhile, the person whose card had thus passed through the confessional
without its owner was skulking in a closet or some other hiding-place,
till, after the lapse of a sufficient length of time, he returned, as
if he had religiously fulfilled the duty required. If you ask whether
we believed in the efficacy of confession, I answer that we all firmly
believed in it, and that in any illness or danger we would have earnestly
asked for a confessor; only we did not like to go to it so often.

[208] Crét. vol. iv. p. 226.

[209] Gioberti is a Roman Catholic priest, ex-Premier of the King of
Sardinia, and one of our greatest living philosophers. Though strictly
orthodox, and even partial to the Papal authority, he has contributed
more than any other man to give the last fatal blow to the Jesuits in
Italy. His _Gesuita Moderno_ (Modern Jesuit), in which he lays bare all
the iniquities of the fathers, has ruined their order for ever, in the
estimation of the Italians, and effectually prevented them from again
setting foot in Piedmont. I do not share his political or religious
creed, but Italy must preserve the memory of the benefit he has conferred
upon her on this point, and I, in particular, have to confess myself
grateful to him for the advice and encouragement he has kindly given me
in the compilation of this work.

[210] _Gesuita Moderno_, vol. iii. p. 226. Ed. di Losanna.

[211] Ranke, vol. ii. p. 92, in a note.

[212] _Mémoires de Sully_, tom. ii. ch. 3.

[213] See Ranke, vol. ii. p. 132.

[214] See Bellarmine in Ranke, vol. ii. pp. 116, 117.

[215] See l’Abbé Racine, _Abrégé de l’Histoire Ecclésiastique_, tom.
x. p. 40. See also Fra Paolo Sarpi, who has immortalised his name as
theologian of the Venetian Government, and historian of the contest.

[216] Crét. vol. iii. p. 180.

[217] Mariana was one of the most learned Spanish Jesuits, the personal
enemy and the most fiery opponent of Acquaviva. He opposed to his utmost
Molina’s doctrine on grace and free will, and propounded, as we have in
part seen, the principle of the sovereignty of the people. He was held in
great veneration among the Spaniards.

[218] See _Ratio Studiorum_. See also Ranke, vol. ii. p. 88.

[219] Serry, in Ranke, vol. ii. p. 88.

[220] _Arbitrii cum gratiæ donis concordia._

[221] See it exposed more at length in Ranke, vol. ii. p. 90.

[222] Serry.

[223] Ranke, vol. ii. p. 131.

[224] Crét. vol. ii. p. 176.

[225] Escobar compiled his work of _Moral Theology_ from twenty-four
Jesuit authors, and in his preface he finds an analogy betwixt his
book and “that in the Apocalypse which was sealed with seven seals,”
and states that “Jesus presented it thus sealed to the four living
creatures,” Suarez, Vasquez, Molina, and Valencia (four celebrated
casuists), in presence of the four-and-twenty Jesuits, who represent the
four-and-twenty elders.

[226] Crét. vol. iv. p. 58.

[227] Le monde s’était plaint depuis l’origine du Christianisme de
l’austérité de certains precepts; les Jésuites venaient au secour de ces
doléances, &c.—Crét. vol. iv. p. 50.

[228] Busembaum, apud Ranke, vol. ii. p. 394.

[229] Antony Escobar. _L. Theol. moralis vigenti-quatuor Societatis Jesu
Doctoribus reseratus._ Ex. de pænitentiâ, ch. vii. N. 155. (Lugduni,
1656. Ed. Mus. Brit.)

[230] Thomas Tambourin. _Methodus Expeditæ Confessionis_, L. ii. ch. iii.
§ 3, N. 23. (Lugduni, 1659. Antverpiæ, 1656. Ed. Coll. Sion.)

[231] George de Rhodes. _Disput. Theologiæ Scholasticæ_, tom. i. Dis. xi.
quæs. xi. sec. 1 and 2, and Dis. i. q. iii. sec. 2, § 3. (Lugduni, 1671.)

[232] In quoting Pascal, we make use of the translation of Dr M’Crie, to
render the author’s meaning better than we could do. P. 107.

[233] John of Salas. _Disputationum R. P. Joannis de Salas, e Soc.
Jesu, in primam secundæ D. Thomæ_, tom. i. tr. 8, sec. 7, 9, N. 74, 83.
(Barcinone, 1607. Ed. Bibl. Arch. Cant. Lamb.)

[234] Gregory of Valentia. _Commentariorum Theologicorum_, tom. iii. dis.
v. quæs. 7, punct. iv. (Lutetiæ Parisiorum, 1609. Ed. Coll. Sion).

[235] Thomas Sanchez. _Opus Morale in præcepta Decalogi_. L. ii. c. i. N.
6. (Venetiis, 1614. Antverpiæ, 1624. Ed. Coll. Sion.)

[236] Antony Escobar. _Universæ Theologiæ Moralis Receptiores absque lite
Sententiæ, necnon Problematicæ Disquisitiones_, tom. i. L. ii. sect. i.
de consc. c. 2. N. 18. (Lugduni, 1652. Ed. Bibl. Acad. Cant.)

[237] Simon de Lessau. _Propositions dictées dans le Collége des Jésuites
d’Amiens._ De præcept. Decal. c. i. art. 4.

[238] Thomas Tamburin. _Explicatio Decalogi._ L. i. c. iii. § 4. N. 15.
(Lugduni, 1659. Lugduni, 1665. Ed. Coll. Sion.)

[239] _Op. Mor._ p. 2.

[240] Ibid.

[241] Tr. 1. et. 2. n. 21.

[242] Pintereau in Pascal, pp. 205, 206.

[243] “These are the devotions presented at pp. 33, 59, 145, 156, 172,
258, 420 of the first edition.”

[244] Pascal, pp. 176-178.

[245] Gregory XV. and his nephew Cardinal Ludivisi, have two magnificent
monuments in the Church of St Ignatius of the Collegio Romano, which
church they had built and richly embellished for the Jesuits, and where
they are buried.

[246] This man is famous for working miracles. He is said to have
restored to life his dear companion, a pig, which had been stolen from
him, after it had been killed and eaten, and its bones thrown into a
furnace; just as Thor, the great Scandinavian god, restored to life his
ram. Another great miracle is recorded of him by his panegyrist. Having
been forbidden by his superior (St Antony was a monk) to work too many
miracles, he one day found himself in a great perplexity. As he was
passing through a street, he heard a poor mason, in the act of falling
from a lofty building, call upon him by name for a miracle. The poor
saint, not knowing what to do, had recourse to an expedient. “Stop a
moment,” said he, to the falling man, “till I go for the permission of
the Father Superior;” and the man waited suspended in the air till he
returned with permission to work the miracle!

[247] This was the case with many, and, to mention one, with Father
Zaccheria, the founder of the Barnabites, who had been a _beatifice_ for
eighty-four years, had mass and prayers offered to him, but is at present
merely Father Zaccheria.

[248] This congregation, as well as all the others, such as those of
indulgences, of inquisition, &c., is composed of cardinals, bishops,
prelates, and some few advocates. They form a sort of committee.
There is a prefect and secretary; the others are called _consultori_,
counsellors—the Pope is _de jure_ prefect of them all. Those of the
Congregation of Rites are very glad when there is a canonisation. They
are entitled, besides, to a portrait of the saint, which, if the saint
take, they sell very dear, and to I know not how many pounds of chocolate.

[249] For Loyola’s sake we should have liked that one of the three
first-class miracles, recorded in the bull of canonisation, should have
been a little more supernatural, and a little more decent, perhaps. It is
said in the bull, that a woman of Gandia, being dropsical, applied to the
part affected the image of the saint, and was cured, _imagine dicti beati
ventri admota_, &c.

[250] The saying of one of the descendants of Charles Borromeo has
remained famous in Italy. After having paid all the expenses of the
canonisation, he turned to his family and said, “Be always good
Christians, my dear children, but never saints; one other saint, and we
are ruined for ever.”

[251] Vol. iii. p. 471.

[252] S. i. c. iii. p. 64.

[253] S. iii. p. 401.

[254] Ibid. 402.

[255] Roman Catholics consider it their duty to send children to the
confessional at the early age of seven years; and nine out of ten hear
for the first time, from the confessor, words which awaken in their young
and innocent minds lascivious and till then unknown desires.

[256] Crét. vol. iv. p. 366.

[257] This is the bull by which the Pope declared that the five
propositions were to be found in Jansenius; and this gave rise to the
celebrated distinction of _fact_ and _right_.

[258] The place was called Mont Louis, but was afterwards converted
into a magnificent and beautiful cemetery, which now bears the name of
Lachaise.

[259] A _lettre de cachet_ was an order bearing the king’s signature,
generally requiring the arrest or exile of the person specified. Under
the reign of the despotic Louis, _lettres de cachet_ were issued
with scandalous profusion. The courtiers, the ministers, the king’s
mistresses, asked, in exchange for a flattery or a caress, a _lettre de
cachet_. Often the letter was blank, having only the king’s signature,
and left to the person who had obtained it to fill it up with any name
and any sort of punishment he pleased. Father Lachaise had always by him
a quantity of letters of this last sort.

[260] In the first years of Louis’s reign that right resided in a
commission composed of two prelates and a Jesuit; but Ferrier, Lachaise’s
predecessor, possessed himself of the exclusive right, which ever after
belonged to the king’s confessor.

[261] Letellier was accused of being the contriver of the following
shameful deception. In 1690, during a dispute, M. de Ligny, Professor
of Moral Philosophy at the Royal College of Douay, fell out with Father
Beckman, a Jesuit professor. Drawn to extremities in the argument, he
menaced his opponent with revenge, saying, _Ego te flagellabo_—“I will
give you a whipping.” Fifteen days after, Ligny received a letter under
the false signature of Antoine A——; that is, Antoine Arnauld, the famous
Jansenist, with an address for the expected answer. Now, the professor,
flattered by the honour of receiving a letter from so famous a man as
Arnauld, replied to the letter, and continued the correspondence—so
that at last the impostor, under the name of Arnauld, drew from Ligny
the names of those who opposed the Jesuits, all of them doctors and
professors in theology. The impostor thereupon began and continued a
correspondence with these doctors, who supposed they were writing to
the true Arnauld, the staunch opponent of Jesuit doctrine. Ligny even
begged the invisible Arnauld to be his spiritual director, and sent him
a general confession of the state of his conscience. Thereupon he was
induced to leave his chair, his benefice, and to send all his papers to
the impostor, whilst he set out by the same command to a place appointed,
which was Paris. He went to St Magloire, but found no Arnauld; proceeded
from place to place, until at last the simple Fleming found that he was
duped. Meanwhile, however, all the professors before alluded to were
denounced by the Jesuit Letellier, and exiled to various towns in France;
and Ligny himself was sent to Tours. Meanwhile, the Jesuit published a
letter directed to a doctor of Douay, under the title of _Secrets of the
party of M. Arnauld lately discovered_. Then Arnauld, in his place of
exile, discovering the cheat, published a first and second complaint,
and a third, concluding one in answer to the Jesuit who had replied to
his second. Every one was indignant, and even Louis XIV. himself. But
the Jesuits assured him that they were innocent of the plot; and having
obtained forgiveness for a supposed contriver, Tournelay, a doctor whom
the Jesuits had named professor in the place of the expelled Gilbert,
confessed that he had himself played the part of the false Arnauld, and
the Jesuits were by this imposture exculpated from this act of perfidy.
In the _Gazette_ of Rotterdam, 1692, it is said, “But little esteem
was felt for him (Tournelay) since it was discovered that he consented
to pass for the father of the false Arnauld, to exculpate the Jesuits,
and above all, author de Vaudripont, the man who had answered Arnauld’s
complaint, and who was supposed to act by Letellier’s inspiration.”

[262] See _Edinburgh Review_, vol. lxxiii. p. 361.

[263] Crét. vol. iii. p. 356.

[264] Ibid. p. 363.

[265] Crét. vol, iii. p. 362.

[266] Ibid. p. 363.

[267] Crét. vol. iii. p. 179.

[268] Ibid. p. 388.

[269] Ibid. pp. 371, 372.

[270] Crét. vol. iii. p. 375.

[271] This proclamation was the decree by which the bigoted Ferdinand
II., with revolting injustice, dispossessed legitimate holders of
property which had belonged to religious communities, but which in great
part had been allotted more than a hundred years before to those monks
and priests who had embraced Protestantism, and which, passing through
many hands to the persons then in possession, constituted the most
legitimate property.

[272] Crét. vol. iii. p. 390.

[273] Krasinski’s _Lectures on Slavonia_, p. 321.

[274] Ranke’s _History of the Popes_, vol. ii. p. 161.

[275] Literæ Academiæ Cracoviensis ad Academiam Lovaniensem, 2 July 1627.

[276] Ranke, vol. ii. p. 362.

[277] This Bellarmine, as is known to many of our readers, was a famous
Jesuit, a cardinal, and one of the most fanatic and bigoted in the order,
celebrated above all for exalting the Papal authority above every other
earthly power. He is the author of a catechism, which is still taught
over all Italy, under the name of _La Dottrina Cristiana de Bellarmino_.
He was very learned, and appears not to have been a bad man, as regards
his outward conduct.

[278] Jardine is, perhaps, the most impartial guide to follow in
inquiring into this tragical event.

[279] Pasquino and Marforio are, or at least were (only one of them being
now in existence), two statues placed at the corners of two contiguous
streets in Rome, on which the Romans affix those libels in which they,
generally speaking, express their hatred of the Roman court and its
abominable vices. The statues are supposed to address one another.

[280] Butler, _Mem._ ii. 51.

[281] “N’ont ils pas conservé en Angleterre le germe qui se développe
avec tant de vigueur, et qui en Irlande, après trois cents ans de
martyre, devient une révolution légitime?” Vol. iii. 510.

[282]

    “Ché assolver non si può chi non si pente,
    Nè pentere e volere insieme puossi
    Per la contradizion che nol consente.”—DANTE’S _Inferno_.

[283] The Recorder of London, the Dean of St Paul’s, and that of
Westminster, accompanied him to the fatal scaffold, and at that awful
moment, when the wretched man had need to prepare himself for the
presence of the supreme infallible Judge, they, for the space of an
hour, obliged him to discuss the lawfulness of equivocation, and the
criminality of the Plot, and thus subjected him to another trial!

[284] Oldcorne was executed on the 17th of April 1606, Garnet on the 3d
of May of the same year.

[285] Crét. vol. iii. p. 476.—He might have said that Fischer was the
author of many paltry contrivances, and that his endeavours were not so
much directed to alleviate the misery of the persons of his persuasion as
to resuscitate enemies to the established government, in conformity with
the wishes of Spain and France.

[286] Politique du clergé de France, ou entretiens curieux; deuxième
entretien: par Pierre Jurieu la Haye, 1682.

[287] Crét. vol. iii. p. 489.

[288] Crét. vol. iv. p. 197.

[289] Ranke, quoting Herrara, vol. ii. p. 228.

[290] We need hardly remind our readers, that when we speak of the idle,
luxurious, and selfish life of the monks, we speak of the generality, for
we are not so illiberal as to say, that among them was to be found no one
really animated by a true zeal, and by the desire of converting infidels
to that religion which they thought the true one.

[291] Crét. vol. iii. p. 292.

[292] Ibid. p. 289.

[293] Crét. vol. iii. p. 312.

[294] Crét. vol. iii. p. 502.

[295] See this and other letters of this prelate in Arnauld, tom. xxxii.
and xxxiii.

[296] Palafox, wishing to see the authorisation, which the fathers
pretended to have, to confess without the diocesan’s order, in opposition
to a decree of the Council of Trent, asked them to shew him such an
authorisation; they answered that they had the privilege not to shew it.
“Let me see that privilege,” said the bishop. “We have the privilege to
keep secret our privileges.” “Shew me at least this last privilege.”
“We are authorised to keep secret even this other privilege.” See the
letter in which the prelate relates the fact in Arnauld, tom. xxxiii. pp.
486-534.

[297] Letter to Innocent X., An. 1649, ss. 14-18.

[298] Letter of Palafox to Father Rada, Provincial of the Jesuits,
1649. See Arnauld, tom. xxxiii. p. 643. Some Jesuits have denied the
authenticity of this letter, others the truth of the accusation, and
have called the prelate a calumniator. As to the authenticity of the
letter, it cannot be denied, since the bishop himself published it in his
_Defensa Canonica_, dedicated to the King of Spain; and the well-known
character of Palafox puts his veracity beyond question; nor would he have
dared to bring before the royal throne a false accusation.

[299] I forgot to mention, in speaking of the canonisation of saints,
that, in general, many years are allowed to pass after obtaining a title
of Servus Dei, for example, before the other title, Venerabilis, is asked
for, and so on.

[300] The office of this personage in the canonisation is to raise, _pro
forma_, objections to its accomplishment, by questioning the virtue of
the man, the reality of his miracles, and so on. In Italy he is called
the advocate of the devil; and our Gioberti, with perhaps more wit than
Christian charity, says, “In the case of Palafox, the name (advocate
of the devil) may have well become him, as he was the advocate of the
fathers.”

[301] Owing to the French Revolution of seventeen hundred and
eighty-nine, the proceedings for the canonisation of Palafox, which had
lasted fifty-five years, were never resumed, till lately an attempt was
made to make a saint of him; but the Jesuits were again too powerful to
allow it, and the case is yet pending, so that it may be said that the
good Palafox is in a sort suspended between earth and heaven.

[302] Gioberti, _ut supra_, vol. iii. p. 151.

[303] For the persecutions to which all those ecclesiastics, regular or
secular, were subjected, because they would not submit to the domineering
spirit of the Jesuits, see the preface of tom. xxxii. of Arnauld’s work,
with documents.

[304] Inhibendum est Patri Grenerali, totique societate ne in posterum
recipiant novicios ad habitum societatis, neque admittant ad vota sive
simplicia sive solemnia.

[305] See the _Mémoires Historiques de Norbert_, already quoted. See also
_Anecdotes sur Le Chine_, t. vi. p. 408.

[306] Ranke, vol. ii. p. 388.

[307] _Epist. Meutii Vitelleschi_, &c. (Antwerp, 1665.)

[308] Gioberti _Il Gesuita Moderno_, vol. iii. p. 299.

[309] Diario Deone apud Ranke, vol. ii. p. 389.

[310] Vincentii Caraffæ _Epistole de Modis conservandi primævum spiritum
Societatis_. Part of it apud Ranke, in a note, vol. ii. p. 391.

[311] Ibid.

[312] Ranke, vol. ii. p. 389.

[313] Circumstantial narration in the contemporary _discorso_, apud
Ranke, vol. ii. p. 396.

[314] Crét. vol. iv. p. 96.

[315] Gioberti, vol. iii. p. 299.

[316] Gioberti, vol. iii. p. 299.

[317] The tone in which Annat wrote to his general deserves to be
remarked, and to be compared with the letters that Lainez and Borgia used
to write to Loyola—“I cannot omit to communicate,” he writes, “to your
paternity my grief on seeing that the hope which I had conceived of a
speedy conclusion of the peace between the sovereign pontiff and the most
Christian king has vanished.... I do not know what malignant coincidence
of events _destroys all my plans_,” &c.

[318] _MS. Bibl. Harl._ v. 895, f. 143.

[319] _Bartoli Giappone_, t. 22.

[320] Crét. vol. iv. p. 417.

[321] Ranke, vol. ii. p. 293.

[322] St Priest’s _History of the Fall of the Jesuits_, English Trans. p.
3.

[323] A Jesuit was the confessor of that faithful wife!

[324] St Priest’s _History of the Fall of the Jesuits_, English Trans. p.
4.

[325] Crét. vol. v. p. 158.

[326] St Priest, p. 9.

[327] Ibid.

[328] Ranke, vol. ii. p. 392.

[329] _Voyage de Duquesne Chef d’escadre_, tom. xxxv. p. 15.

[330] Crét. vol. v. p. 171.

[331] Lavallette.

[332] Ranke, vol. vii. p. 443.

[333] Ranke, vol. ii. p. 444.

[334] St Priest, p. 12.

[335] St Priest, p. 13.

[336] Fifteen hundred of these monks landed at Civita Vecchia. It was
a pitiful sight to behold some of those very old priests torn from
the place where they had spent their lives, and thrown upon a foreign
land. Even the Dominicans, their constant opponents, were touched with
compassion, and received them kindly; and they have perpetuated the
memory of this act of generosity by an inscription on stone.

[337] See it reported in St Priest, p. 21, and following.

[338] Crét. vol. v. p. 236.

[339] Three generals, Retz, Visconti, and Centurioni, had, after
Tambourini, governed the Society; and the 19th General Congregation,
named Lorenzo Ricci, who was the 18th General before the suppression.

[340] The debts of Lavallette amounted to 2,400,000 francs; but Crétineau
assures us that the houses and lands belonging to the Company were bought
by English capitalists for the sum of four millions of francs! Did not
the Jesuits well observe the vows of poverty, this _bulwark of religion_?

[341] St Priest, p. 27.

[342] Ranke, vol. ii. p 447; St Priest, p. 29.

[343] _State Papers and Manuscripts of the Duke of Choiseul._ See St
Priest, p. 18.

[344] See Ranke, vol. ii. p. 447; Crét. vol. v. p. 274.

[345] The property which the Jesuits possessed in France was estimated at
fifty-eight millions of francs; but in that sum, says Crétineau, must not
be included the alms which were given to the _Maisons Professes_. They
possess fifty-eight millions, and ask for _alms_! Oh! holy poverty!

[346] _Despatches of the Marquis d’Ossun to the Duke of Choiseul._ See St
Priest, p. 34.

[347] Crét. vol. v. p. 293.

[348] Ranke, vol. ii. p. 448.

[349] St Priest, p. 35.

[350] See in Ranke, vol. ii. p. 447, a note, where he quotes a passage of
a MS.

[351] Crét. vol. v. p. 296.

[352] St Priest, p. 36; Crét. vol. v. p. 297.

[353] Crét. vol. v. p. 284.

[354] See it in Crétineau, vol. v. p. 301.

[355] Ibid.

[356] St Priest, p. 43.

[357] See St Priest, p. 45; Crét. vol. v. p. 312.

[358] Ranke, vol. ii. p. 448.

[359] Ibid.

[360] Instructions to the Cardinals De Luynes and De Bernis, February 19,
1769. See St Priest, p. 54.

[361] St Priest, p. 58.

[362] Crét. vol. v. p. 326. He quotes the No. 14 of the _Lettres inédites
D’Aubeterre_. We have not an opportunity of verifying these letters, and
must rest on his authority. St Priest says that it was, on the contrary,
De Bernis who promised to the ambassadors to consult Ganganelli; but
however it is, what appears incontestable is, that Ganganelli was
consulted.

[363] In the time of our short republic, we were once moved to tears by
seeing some Trasteverini throw off their hats, and spontaneously, without
being told or taught, go and kiss these magical and once respected
letters, S.P.Q.R. Indeed I even feel moved in writing them.

[364] St Priest, p. 55.

[365] St Priest, p. 56.

[366] See St Priest, p. 57, who reports all these details, as given by
the emperor himself to D’Aubeterre. Joseph enlarged complacently on his
contemptuous policy toward the Holy See, and declared, in plain terms,
_that he knew the Court of Rome too well not to despise it_, and thought
very little of his admission to the Conclave. “Those people,” said he,
speaking of the cardinals, “tried to impress upon me the value of this
distinction, but I am not their dupe.”

[367] In Italy, the monasteries of the orders called mendicant are the
refuge of three peculiar classes of persons. The first class of those
who repair thither are idle, unthinking fellows, who disdain to do any
sort of work; the second are those who have but the convent to escape
the prison; and the third, those youth who, feeling within themselves
the power, the capacity, or the ambition of achieving some great deeds,
and seeing no possibility of emerging from the crowd, have recourse to
the cloister as the only way left them of arriving at eminence. Almost
all the men of mark among the Italian clergy have been monks, born of
poor and humble parentage; and many Popes were of the same. It is known
that not a penny is requisite to enter into those monasteries, while, to
become a secular priest, one requires to possess some little property.

[368] It was he who began that magnificent museum in the Vatican,
increased afterwards by Pius VI., which bears the name of Museo
Pio-Clementino, and which is the admiration of all Europe.

[369] See Ranke, vol. ii. p. 449, in a note quoting “Aneddoti riguardanti
la famiglia e le opere di Clemente.”

[370] Francesco was a lay brother, for whom Ganganelli preserved to the
last the most sincere friendship and affection.

[371] St Priest, p. 60. It was in this convent that Ganganelli resided
before his exaltation to the pontificate, and he often went thither
afterwards to spend some hours.

[372] Ranke (vol. iii. p. 449) exaggerates Ganganelli’s virtues, and
represents him as faultless and holy, which brings us to make a remark on
the celebrated German historian. His indefatigable industry in searching
archives and public and private libraries, and inspecting unpublished
manuscripts, has enabled him to throw light on many obscure questions;
but we think that often, on the simple authority of some ambassador’s
relation, or private letters, or of writings without name, which only
express the private opinion of the writer, he has established principles,
and deduced consequences, that are not in accordance with what is known
or may be ascertained by an accurate examination of the facts. We could
give many instances of what we assert.

[373] 1 Tim. iii. 1.

[374] Gioberti, vol. iii. p. 347.

[375] Crét. vol. v. p. 332.

[376] St Priest, p. 61.

[377] It is to be remarked, that now that the most perfect concord reigns
between the Court of Rome and the fathers, and that they support each
other, the latter have changed their language in regard to this affair,
and that same Crétineau assures us that he disbelieves this imputation.

[378] See St Priest, p. 63.

[379] St Priest, p. 63.

[380] Ibid. p. 64.

[381] St Priest, p. 65.

[382] St Priest, p. 66.

[383] Ibid.

[384] Letter of Choiseul to the Cardinal de Bernis, August 10, 1769. See
it, Crét. vol. v. p. 342, ff.

[385] St Priest, p. 73.

[386] Ibid.

[387] See it in St Priest, p. 73, in a note.

[388] St Priest, p. 86.

[389] _Brief Dominus ac Redemptor._

[390] Vol. ii. p. 450.

[391] St Priest, p. 86.

[392] St Priest, p. 28.

[393] St Priest, _ubi sup._ He has extracted all those details from a
letter of Florida Blanca, addressed to Pope Pius VI.

[394] It is differently reported by what means the consent of Austria
to the destruction of the Jesuits was obtained. The report most current
at the time was, that Charles III. obtained it from Maria Theresa, by
sending to the empress her own confession, which her Jesuit director had
sent to the General, and which the king had had the means of obtaining.
St Priest, in contradicting this opinion, says that Maria Theresa’s
resistance was conquered by her son Joseph, who, although he took little
interest in the affair as it affected the Jesuits, yet coveted their
possessions.

[395] These are the words attributed to the Pope by the popular
tradition. However, St Priest, following Caraccioli, makes the Pope
exclaim, after having signed the brief, “Questa suppressione mi dará la
morte”—This suppression will be my death.

[396] Gioberti, vol. iii. p. 374.

[397] It is here given as translated in the _Protestant Advocate_, 1815,
vol. iii. p. 153, &c.

[398] Crét. vol. v. p. 275.

[399] Ibid. p. 390.

[400] St Priest, p. 50.

[401] _Botta Storia d’Italia cont. da quella del Guic._ 48. See also
Gioberti, vol. iii. p. 391, and ff.

[402] St Priest, p. 89.

[403] Botta, _ubi supra_.

[404] Georgel, _Memoires_, vol. i. p. 160. Apud St Priest, p. 90.

[405] Gioberti, quoting Florida Blanca, vol. iii. p. 394.

[406] St Priest, p. 91, and following. All these details of the illness
and death of Ganganelli we have taken from St Priest, adding now and
then some particulars which we have found in other writers. But St
Priest is the best authority on the subject. He has drawn from original
sources—the Letters of Bernis, of Florida Blanca, the History of Botta
Gorani Caraccioli—and has condensed his materials into a most accurate
and impartial narrative. It would be useless, then, either to send back
our readers to those authors, or to endeavour to analyse them ourselves.
We shall, then, be contented with some reflections or deductions at the
proper place.

[407] Ibid.

[408] Botta, _ubi supra_.

[409] Gioberti, vol. iii. p. 392.

[410] St Priest, p. 92.

[411] It is a popular tradition, and, indeed, not at all unfounded, that
in Perugia some persons had the secret of composing a sort of water
which, when drunk, produced certain death, although life was prolonged
for more or less space of time, according to the quantity and strength
of the dose given. The nuns, in particular, had a sad celebrity for
composing this drug.

[412] St Priest, p. 93.

[413] St Priest could not find those documents anywhere.

[414] See all those letters in St Priest, p. 93, and following.

[415] St Priest, p. 78.

[416] It is commonly reported in Italy, and it is also believed in
France, that on the day commemorating Ganganelli’s death, every year,
the Jesuits, at least those who are deep in the secrets of the order,
assemble in a room, and, after one of them has addressed a volley of
curses and imprecations against Clement’s memory, every person present
pierces his image with a poniard. We repeat the popular belief, without,
however, warranting its correctness.

[417] St Priest, p. 97.

[418] D’Alembert to Frederick. April 24, 1774.

[419] St Priest, p. 144.

[420] St Priest, p. 155.

[421] See this Testament in Crétineau, vol. v. p. 401, and ff.

[422] Czerniwiecz, Lenkeawiecz, and Korell.

[423] Crét. vol. vi. p. 33.

[424] Vol. iii. p. 30.

[425] The translation here given is from the _Protestant Advocate_, vol.
iii. p. 13, &c.

[426] As lively turf with green herb.—DANTE.

[427] Crét. vol. vi. p. 323.

[428] Crét. vol. vi. p. 338.

[429] Crét. vol. vi. p. 105.

[430] Crét. vol. vi. p. 110.

[431] Crét. vol. vi. p. 110.

[432] Vol. vi. p. 81.

[433] Crét. vol. vi. p. 84.

[434] Ibid. p. 83.

[435] Overbury.

[436] Crétineau, vol. vi. p. 94.

[437] Vol. vi. p. 89.

[438] Vol. vi. pp. 91, 92, in a note.

[439] Vol. vi. p. 97.

[440] It is to be remembered that all the revolutions which have taken
place in Italy since 1814 were prepared and executed by the upper classes
of the nation.

[441] We have to lament the decease of this illustrious Italian, which
has happened while we were writing these pages. His country has not
forgotten that it is due to him, perhaps more than to anything else,
that Piedmont is without Jesuits. Monuments are to be erected to him,
and his mortal remains will be transported from Paris to Turin at the
public expense. But while all Italy is unanimous in regretting his loss,
a Jesuit newspaper, the _Armonia_, attributing his sudden death to the
judgment of God, exclaims, “See what it is to wage war against Heaven!
Gioberti died like Simon the magician, like Arius!” A Jesuit in Rome
asserted the same thing from the pulpit; while the Romans repeat that the
Jesuits have poisoned him. He was firm to the end in his hostility to the
fathers, and in the last letter he wrote to the author of this history,
encouraging him to proceed with the work, he adds, “You will render a
good service to our country.”

[442] See my _History of the Pontificate of Pius IX._, p. 29 and _ff._

[443] A month before the Pope fled from Rome to Gaeta, the author had
a conversation with Joseph Mastai, the Pope’s brother, who had been an
exile and a political prisoner during the last reign. He, to excuse
the change in his brother’s conduct, said, “I warned you not to attack
religion, or you would ruin the cause of liberty. You have not listened
to my advice, and you must abide the consequences.” When I asked him in
what respect we had shewn disrespect to religion, he answered, with great
earnestness, “You have driven the Jesuits from Rome, and attempted to
deprive the ecclesiastics of all authority.” These words speak volumes.
They express the true sentiments of the Pope, which were adopted, it
seems, by his brother, who had formerly been a Carbonaro.

[444] The author was a member of this second deputation. Oudinot was
at first indignant that we should think of offering opposition to his
troops. “How!” said he, “two armies, the Neapolitans and the Austrians,
are marching against Rome! We come to succour you, and you speak of
fighting us!” And half an hour after this, when we pressed him hard,
forgetting himself, he exclaimed, “Eh bien! nom de Dieu nous venous pour
remettre le Pape sur le trône.”

[445] Mather.

[446] Murray.

[447] Newton.

[448] Oudinot was named by the Pope Duke of St Pancrace, in commemoration
of his having destroyed a church dedicated to that saint, and also that
part of the wall by which the French entered, which bears the same name.

[449] Many public officers were dismissed or imprisoned for refusing to
be present at the _Te Deum_.

[450] Murray is of this number.

[451] When nothing can be invented which may at least have the appearance
of criminality, and the man is punished merely for his opinions, he
is not interrogated at all, but is kept a prisoner as long as his
persecutors please, and released after five, six, or more years, without
ever having been interrogated, or even seeing the face of a judge.

[452] English readers must be aware that in France, as well as in Italy,
murder does not necessarily and inevitably import capital punishment.
There are certain extenuating circumstances admitted. In the Roman
states, indeed, very seldom is the common assassin executed.

[453] The fate of this generous and unfortunate young man has excited,
and indeed deserves, the deepest commiseration. He was a merchant, and
in ’48 left his business to march with us into Lombardy; he became
lieutenant of the battalion commanded by the chevalier Geraldi, one
of the Pope’s nephews, and was intimate with Ercole Mastai, who was
an officer in the same battalion. On returning from the war, he was
raised, by the esteem of his fellow-citizens, to the rank of colonel in
the national guard. When the fatal acts of revenge above narrated were
perpetrated at Sinigallia, the author wrote to Simoncelli from Rome,
entreating him to use all his influence to repress these murders. He
answered in a tone which left no doubt that he entirely condemned them.
He said he had been able to save the lives of some, and would redouble
his exertions to put a stop to crimes, which he abhorred and detested. I
gave the letter to Mazzini. Yet this same man has been shot as an abettor
and accomplice. Such is the justice of the priests!



INDEX.


  A.

  Abbot of St. Cyran, writings of, 232;
    history of, 233

  Abolition of the Order, 362, 374-376, 411

  Absolution, origin of the doctrine, 13;
    consequences of the, 243-245

  Acquaviva, Fifth General of the Order, 90;
    character of, 186, 210;
    election of, ibid.;
    his success in Spain, 228;
    his opinions on the theology of St. Thomas, 230;
    on the doctrines of Grace and Free-Will, 231;
    death of, 255;
    consequences of, to the Order, 256;
    his successor, ibid.

  Administrators, appointment and duties of, 38, 55;
    pre-eminence of, 316

  Admonitors, 54-56

  Adrian VI, confessions of, 30

  Albert of Bavaria, supports the Jesuits, 199

  Albigenses, massacre of the, 60

  Alcala, introduction of Jesuitism, 22;
    oppositions to the Order in, 79

  Alexander VII, opposes the doctrines of the Augustinus, 234

  —— of Russia expels the Jesuits, 433

  Alva, Duke of, 135;
    his character, 146

  America, Jesuit missions of, 297;
    state of religion in 298;
    conduct of the Jesuits in, 300;
    features of the mission in, 302-313;
    exchange of possessions in, 333

  Analysis of the brief of suppression, 387

  —— of the bull of re-establishment, 442

  —— of the constitution, 31-33

  —— of the brief of re-establishment, 442

  Ancona, executions at, 480, 481

  Angouleme, Duke of, aids the Jesuits, 450

  Antonelli, Cardinal, plots the revolution in Rome, 474

  Antony, St., miracles of, 258 _n._

  Antwerp, Jesuit congregations of, 217

  Archbishops of the Society, 408

  Armada, Jesuits connected with the, 168

  Armagh, Archbishop of, seeks to suppress the Protestants in England, 63

  Arrêt, for the expulsion of the Jesuits from France, 224

  Alliance, purport of the, 180

  Assassination of Queen Elizabeth projected, 164;
    encouraged by the Jesuits, 165, 166, 168

  —— of Henry IV, 254

  Assembly of Bishops, 346

  Augustinus, publication of the, 233

  Austria, restoration of the Jesuits to, 200, 450;
    their influence in, 253;
    governed by Jesuits, 435;
    Jesuits refused admission to, 452;
    aids the Pope in the late revolution, 475;
    consequences to, 477

  Authors, Jesuit, 15, 96

  Averio, Duke of, executed, 340, 341

  Avignon, Jesuit congregation of, 217;
    is seized by the French, 359


  B.

  Babington, conspiracy of, 167

  Baptism, Jesuit administration of the ordinance, 110

  Barcelona, Vice-King of, aids the Jesuit influence in Spain, 62

  Barrière, attempts to assassinate Henry IV, 187;
    his confession, ibid.;
    is executed, 188

  Barry, Father, writings of, 247

  Bavaria, supremacy of the Jesuits in, 253

  Bedloe, character and plot of, 292, 293

  Belgium, flourishing state of the Jesuits in, 454;
    their designs on, ibid.

  Bellarmine, Robert, on the “Political Creed” of the Jesuits, 191

  Benedict XIV, opposes the Jesuits, 128, 328

  Bernis, Cardinal, 363;
    his answer to the Conclave, 365;
    intrigues for the election of Pope, 375;
    urges Clement to destroy the Jesuits, 378-380

  Bishops, 346;
    number of, 408

  Boarders in Jesuit colleges, 219, 220

  Boarding-houses, connected with the colleges, 214

  Bobadilla, one of the ten founders of the Order, 28;
    mission of, to Naples, 59;
    is expelled by Charles V, 76;
    banished, 77;
    heads a revolt against Lainez, 134;
    his letter to, 142

  Books, Protestant, confiscation of, at Vienna, 201

  Borgia, character of, 7;
    is admitted to the Society, 35;
    uses his influence to establish the Jesuits in Spain, 62;
    elected Vicar-General, 145;
    visits Spain and France, 148;
    his death, 149

  Bourbon, Cardinal de, assumes the title of King of France, 182

  Bourbon, influence of the House of, 378

  Braganza, Duke of, crowned King of Portugal, 275, 276

  Braschi, made Pope, under the title of Pius VI, 425;
    character of, 426;
    his conduct towards the Jesuits, ibid.

  Briant, execution of, 163

  Bridgewater, John, on the “Political Creed” of the Jesuits, 191

  Brief of suppression, 382, 383;
    analysis of the, 387-406;
    provisions of the, 422

  —— for the re-establishment of the Jesuits, 439;
    analysis of the, 440

  Brotherhood, Jesuit, 217;
    doctrines and practices of the, 235

  Brouet, his mission to Ireland, 64

  Brugellette, Jesuit college of, 458

  Bulls issued against Queen Elizabeth, 153, 162

  —— against the Jesuits, 127, 128, 313, 328

  —— for the suppression of the Order, 387

  —— for the re-establishment of the Order, 439, 442

  —— in favour of the Order, 28, 62

  Busembaum on the “Political Creed” of the Jesuits, 193


  C.

  Cæsar, Julius, character of, 7

  Calvinism, doctrines of, 183

  Calvinists, persecution of, 270, 273

  Campion, his mission to England, 154;
    arrest of, 161;
    trial of, 163

  Candia, Duke of, aids the Jesuits, 62

  Candidates for the Order, requirements of, 31-37, 448

  Canisius, Peter, 62

  —— founds the College of Friburg, 206

  Canonization, rules for, 258-262, 310 _n._

  —— of Loyola and Xavier, 262

  Cano, a Dominican friar, preaches against the Jesuits, 78;
    is made Bishop of the Canaries, 79

  Canova, statue of Clement XIII by, 361

  Caraffa, General, 317, 318, see “Paul IV”

  Cardinals, Jesuit, 408

  Carlos, Don, supported by the Jesuits, 451

  Carvalho, Minister of Portugal, 331;
    created Marquis of Pombal, 332;
    see “Pombal”

  Casimir, King of Poland, 282

  Castilians, revolt of the, 450

  Catechisms, Jesuit, 197

  Catesby, 286

  Catherine of Austria, deposed by the Jesuits, 171

  —— de Medicis, opposes the Jesuits, 176, 177

  —— of Russia, protects the Jesuits, 430, 431

  Catholicism, decline of, 58

  Catholics, Roman, first persecuted in England, 163

  Cave of Manreze, the place of Loyola’s retirement, 13

  Ceremonies, Catholic, 249, 250, 262

  Chiaramonti, 438;
    re-establishes the Jesuits, 439

  Charles I, of England, 290

  —— III, of Spain, 349;
    expels the Jesuits, 350;
    his motives for, 352-354;
    seeks to destroy the Jesuits, 379

  —— V, opposes the Order, 75

  —— IX, of France, 179

  Chastel, John, attempts to assassinate Henry IV, 188;
    his punishment, 189, 190

  China, Jesuit mission to, 105

  Choiseul, minister of France, 331;
    attempts to reform the Order, 346;
    character of, 347, 348

  Christina of Sweden and the Jesuits, 282, 283

  Church of England agitated by Catholic aggression, 163

  —— Evangelical, of Cracow, attacked by the Jesuits, 280

  —— of Rome, decline of the, 8, 9;
    doctrines of, 14, 15, 40;
    condition of, in the 16th century, 30, 31;
    supremacy of, 195;
    restoration of, in Austria, 201;
    in Sweden, 203;
    arrogance of, towards England, 467

  Churches of America, 299

  Civilization, progress of, 7

  Civita Vecchia, arrival of French troops at, 475;
    becomes a French port, 477

  Classes of Jesuits, 46, 462

  Clement VIII, Pope, 231, 232

  —— XIII, 338;
    his partiality for the Fathers, 339;
    protects the Jesuits, 357, 359;
    death of, 360;
    monument of, by