//' {>

'

A GLIMPSE

OF THE

GREAT SECRET SOCIETY,

: CERTE NON APERTI, NON SIMPLICES, NON INGENUI .... VERSUTI POTIUS, ASTUTI, FALLACES, MALITIOSI, CALLIDI, VETEEATORES, VAFRI."

Cicero.

" BY WHOSE AID ASPIRING

TO SET HIMSELF IN GLORY 'BOVE HIS PEERS, HE TRUSTED TO HAVE EQUALLED THE MOST HIGH."

MILTON, PcvraMse Lost, I. 38 — 40.

THIRD EDITION, WITH ADDITIONS AND NOTES.

LONDON:

WILLIAM MACINTOSH,

24, PATERNOSTER Row.

1872.

TABLE OF CONTENTS,

WITH A

LIST OF AUTHORITIES

FOB THE

STATEMENTS MADE IN THE INTRODUCTION.

PAGE

Preface to the Third Edition

Jesuit Influence and the Franco-German War ; the Dogma . xiii

Quirinus ; Father Beckx ; the power behind the Papal Throne . xiv

The Empress Eugenie — " Ma guerre." Confessors . . xv

The Article in the Monde. Results of the War xv

The Oiieanists. Louis Philippe. The Church and the Parisians xvii

An undying hatred. Spain and Amadeus . . . xviii

German distrust of the Papal party. Education . . . xix

Prussia curbs Ultramontanism. The Cultus xx

Dollinger, the champion of religious freedom in South Germany . xxi

Romanism in the United States. New York. Scripture teaching

paralyzed ... .... xxii

New York Roman Catholic Schools. Religious equality. Riband- men. Fruits ....... xxiii

Manning's remarks relative to the Roman Catholic conquest of

England. His justification of Anselm, a Becket, Jesuit

morality, of the Gunpowder Plot, and of treason, etc.

Popish designs upon England .... xxiv

Jesuitism and Papal Infallibility. The Curia. Antonelli . xxvii

Despotic nature of the Jesuit and Papal systems. Archbishop

Darboy's speech hostile to the Dogma . . xxviii

Fate of the three last Archbishops of Paris, (note) . . xxix

Infallibility and Canon Law. Bishop Strossmeyer. Montalem-

bert's letter. Archbishop Sibour on the double idolatry . xxx Rome, the Church and the People. The Four Articles of the

Gallican Church ...... xxxiii

Dr. Dollinger's celebrated Letter upon the incompatibility of the

Dogma with freedom . , . . xxxiv

The Order and the Papacy, Infallible, not immortal. " Janus."

Forgeries — the Isidorian Decretals. Canon of Sardica.

Donations . . . xxxvi

IV

PAGE.

Father Oratry. Pope Honorius a heretic. Gratry's letter to Archbishop of Malins. Frauds. Duplicity. Father Reguon on the Forgeries • • XXXV111

Dominus ac Redemptor, or Brief of Clement XIV. for the effec- tual Suppression of the Jesuit Order, 17?;3. Premature death of Scxtus V. ... ^

Restoration of the Order, under Gregory XIV. xli

Internal scandals. Expulsion of the Jesuits from France, Spain,

and from other coiuitries. Suspicious death of Clement XIII. xliii Grounds for the suppression of the Jesuits. Property confiscated,

offices annulled. The extinction of the Order xliv

Clerics to join other Orders. The Brief to be strictly enforced ; to

all eternity valid . .

Jesuit statistics. Condemnation of the Order by the Dogma xlvi

Pope Ganganelli calumniated, Real character of Clement XIV. xlvii

Infallibility exemplified, or the Bulls of 1773 and 1814. Pius VH.

and Ids "exper ienced rowers" .... xlviii

His Holiness' salutary fear of the Jesuits. Voltaire. Sudden

death . ... xlix

Cardinal Bellarmine. Sudden death of Clement XIII. The

death warrant . . . 1

Pope Gaugauelli poisoned: the post-mortem. The nuns' Acqua

Tofana ..... . li

To whom the poisoning of Clement XIV. is due. Motives

of Pius VII. . . lii

Brief of Pius IX. for the restoration of the Order. Reciprocal aid liii

" Quirinus." Excitement in the camp. The Redemptionists . Iv

The Gesu. Relation of the Jesuits to the other Orders . Ivi

The Urini and Thummini. Mutual exaltation. Immunity . Ivii

Under the cloak of infallibility. An awakening . . . Iviii

Training of O'Farrell, the assassin. Henry IV. of France. Attempted murder of the French and Russian Emperors. H.R.H. the Duke of Edinburgh lix

The Secret Society and Fenianism. Hatred of England. Joly, the Jesuit historian. College at Stony hurst. Fathers Callaghan and Betah . . . Ix

College training of Irish students. Clongowes . . Ixii

Carlow Magazine. Incitements to crime . . Ixiii

Irish abuse of British statesmen. The Society's teaching. Mass and blessing for O'Farrell, the dupe of the Jesuits Ixiv

Connection of the present with the past Ixvii

Charles Sauvestre upon the Jesuit policy. Vitality and hatred. When to strike. Progress. Suppression, 1792. Rapid de- velopment, 1872. Leibnitz, or influence acquired by the guides of education. Questions to guardians . • . Ixviii

M. de Chalotais' speech and Report to the Parliament of Bretagne upon the Constitution, etc., of the Society of Jesus referred to. C. Habeneck upon the modus operandi. M. Gamier Pages. Doctrines of the "Community." Moral code. Intention. Unchangeableness. " Sint ut sunt aut non sint." Influence over the parochial clergy . . . Ixx

" Secret Instructions " . . . Ixxiii

Political intrigue in Poland, Switzerland, France, and S. America Ixxiv

Revival of the Society, how effected, in 1814. The Propaganda.

Gaeta ... ... Ixxv

Father Chauvel and Ambrose Guys, 1701 : the sick man and the

good Fathers ....... Ixxvi

Berenger's petition to the Judges, 1715. His assassination threat- ened. Chauvel's confession. The king's judgment. Consti- tution of the eleven Parliaments of France. Burial of the dead refused. The Archbishop of Paris banished . . Ixxvii

The Jesuits and trading. Father Lavalette, Procureur of the Jesuit establishment at St. Pierre, in Martinique. Privateers fitted out. Sacy. Masses and Money. The Prime Minister of Louis XV. Five days too late. Condemnation of the Jesuits. Appeal and special pleading. Pros and cons. Revelation of their Constitutions. The Abbe Chauvelin. Extinction of the Order in France .... Ixxix

Extracts from the " Secret Constitutions." Moral Code. A judge ; a monk ; servants and thieving ; adultery ; assassination ; murder ; luxury. Expulsion of the enemy from France . Ixxxii

The Jesuit system extending among us. The Oratorians at Brompton. Their system supported by the Dogma of Supremacy ....... Ixxxiii

The great means of effective opposition publicity, and a Scriptural

liturgy ........ Ixxxiv

Tyranny of the Papal system, as evidenced in the Pope's letter to

the Archbishop of Paris in 1865 .... Ixxxiv

Turning-points in the histories of France and England . . Ixxxv

Jesuit attacks. Henry IV. Charles I. Elizabeth. Her life

attempted. Safety. Detractors .... Ixxxvi

Date of England's rising greatness. Perilous position of France. Misgivings as to Ireland and England. The greatest caution needful. England's only safety .... Ixxxviii

Report on the Constitution of the Jesuits, delivered by M. Louis Rene de Caraduc de la Chalotais, Procureur- General of the

VI

PAGE.

King, to the Parliament of Bretagne, on the 1st, 3rd, 4th, and 5th of December, 1701 ; translated from the 1st Edition of 1762, printed at liennes

Decree of the Parliament of Bretagne on the 23rd December, 1761 107

Persecution of M. de la Chalotais by the Jesuit party . 124

APPENDIX.

Cardinal Wiseman on the Abbe de la Mennais . 128

The Abbe de la Mennais on the Order of Jesuits . 130

Galilean opinions . . 134

Frederick the Great of Prussia and the Jesuits . 137

How the Jesuit leaven works in the United States . 142

How the Jesuits crept into England and Ireland. Mr. O'Connell's

connection with them ...... 145

Several historical facts connected with the Order of Jesuits, and

comments thereon ...... 147

An Ecclesiastical History by J. L. Moslieim . . 159

A translation of the Letter from the Pope to the Archbishop of

Paris, 1865 . 163

Relations between Russia and Rome. Gortchakoff . 179

Annex to the above ... . 181

Letter of the late Count Montalembert on Ultramontanism and

Papal Infallibility . 207

Dr. Dollinger and Papal Infallibility . . . 211

The Tablet on Montalembert' s Letter of Feb. 28, 1870 221

The Encyclical and Syllabus, of 1864 . 224

Remarkable letter from Pere la Chaise to Father Peters . 226

Translation of the Encyclical Letter of December 8, 1864 . 233

Syllabus . 243

Spain . . . 252

Interdiction of the Jesuits in Switzerland . 252

Cardinal Cullen on the Council 253

LIST OF AUTHORITIES QUOTED.

" Letters from Rome on the Council," by " Quirinus " London :

Rivington. 1870. ... . xiv

Dr. Manning's Sermons. Paternoster Row : Duffy. . xxiv

" The Papal Garrison." London : Hunt & Co. 1872. . . xxvii

" The Knee of the Church." London : Macintosh. 1869. . xxxiii

"Letter from the Bavarian Minister of Public Worship to the

Archbishop of Munich. 27th August, 1871" . . xxxviii

Vll

PAOE.

•' The Pope and the Council," b'y "Janus." London : Rivington.

1869. . . xxxvii

" Etudes Religieuses," by " P. Gratry." November, 18G6. Paris. xl

" History of the Popes," by " Ranke." xlvii

"Vita BeUarminis," by " Cardinal a Monte." Antwerp. 1631.. xlix " Scipio de Ricci," by " Roscoe," . lii

" Iniago Societatis Jesu," by '' Bolland." Ivii

" The Poor Gentlemen of Liege," London : Shaw & Co. . . Ixii

" Introductions aux Instructions Secretes des Jesuites," par

"Charles Sauvestre." Paris. Chez Dentu, Palais Royal. 1863. Ixvii "Les Congregations Religieuses." Enquete par Ch. Sauvestre.

Achille Fatire a Paris, Rue Dauphine 18, 1807. . Ixviii

" Les Jesuites en 1861." Par Chas. Habeneck. Chez Dentu a Paris Ixix " Moral Works." R. P. Sauchez. . . Ixx

" Les bons Messieurs de St. Vincent de Paul." J. M. Cayla.

Dentu, Paris. 1863. . . . Ixxii

" Essay on Pubh'c Theology," By Father Tabema. 1736 . Ixxx

" Praxis ex Soc. Jes. Schola." Ixxx

" Somme de P. Bauny." . Ixxx

" Treatise on Penitence," by Father Kaleze Reginald. . Ixxx

" Moral Theology." P. Henri quez. . Ixxx

" Moral Theology." P. A. Escobar. . . . Ixxxi

" Rome's Tactics." By the Dean of Ripon. Hatchards, London.

1867. . . , . . Ixxxiv

" Historical Sketch of the Reformation in Poland," by Count

Valerian Krasinski. Murray and Ridgway. London. 1838. Ixxxv Vie de Louis Quinze, in 4 vols. — vol. iv., p. 38 ; a Londres, J. P. Lyon, 1781. Translation of the same, by J. O. Justamond, F.R.S., printed by Charles Dilly in the Poultry, 1781 — vol. iv., p. 43 ; also by R. Marchbank, Dublin, 17H1 — vol. iv., p. 43. See also Foreign Articles in the Annual Register, then written by Edmund Burke, — May 1761, vol. iv., pp. 107, 113; September 1761, p. 157 ; December 1761 ; also an article in the Annual Register for 1759, a memorial from the Lieutenants of Martinique to the Governor of the French Islands, p. 208; also vol. xiii., pp. 47 and 53 ; and vol. xiv., pp. 89 and 93. The Comte de Beauliarnais, the husband of the Empress Josepliine, was that Governor, anno 1759. See Vie Privee, vol. 3, p. 164; translation by Justamond, vol. 3, p. 207.

For general confirmation of statements contained in this work, vide " The Jesuits, an Historical Sketch," by E. W. Grinfield, M.A., Seeleys, London. " History of the Jesuits," by G. B. Nicolim, Bohn, London, 1«54. A compilation of authorities, entitled, " Indications of the Action of the Jesuits," Macintosh, London.

Vlll

PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION.

CIRCUMSTANCES have somewhat hurried the production of this Edition ; otherwise the policy of the Ultramontane Roman Catholics — which is, in fact, the policy of the Jesuits — with respect to education, might have been illustrated hy some brief notices ; while the development of the lay affiliations of the Order, including persons of both sexes — married and unmarried — the more remote constituents of the Great Secret Society might have been further traced for the guidance of the many, who are unfor- tunately ignorant of the symptoms — for so they may justly be described — of this potent clement of disorder. Our reason for avoiding further delay is, that some of the scattered indications of the tendency of Ultramontane action, now added to our former record, would lose freshness in elucidating things, as they are, if long withheld.

The Ultramontanes are wont to assure all those, who are attached to Constitutional Government in this country, and to the cause of law and order elsewhere, that they can have no such firm allies, as the adherents of the Papacy, the devoted sons of the great central authority of the Roman Catholic Church. But in giving these assurances the Ultramontanes either ignore, or are themselves not aware of the fact, that this central autho- rity, to which they are blindly obedient, claims more or less the right to supersede, and is therefore sure, in matters, more or less important, to become antagonistic to any authority that is not absolutely its own, or practically obedient to its behests.

IX

Nothing is more astonishing to the uninitiated than the rapidity, with which the Ultramontanes transfer their alle- giance from one extreme of political opinion to the other.

The form of national government, the Jesuits prefer, is un- doubtedly despotic, so long as this, the most centralized of all forms of government, is really under their command ; as were the late dynasties of Naples and of Spain. Yet notwithstanding the wonderful and unscrupulous skill of Jesuit direction, such is the intensity of the tyranny, they invariably promote or exercise, that whenever and wherever it has been felt long enough to be understood, their instruments break in their hands. The progress of civilisation and increased rapidity of communication have tended to shorten the periods of their success in the main- tenance of avowed despotisms. Still, being perfectly indifferent to the amount of human and national suffering they occasion, in their warfare against freedom, a brief enjoyment of the control over the depositories of absolute power has attractions for them, which they either cannot or will not resist.

An absolutism, the product and exponent of intense national feeling and pride, such as the autocracy of Russia, may defeat the Great Secret Society and the Papacy ; but it can only do so by constant watchfulness, and measures of retaliation, almost as severe, although not necessarily as treacherous, as the attacks, to which, it is exposed. Of this the circular of Prince Gortchakoff (which will be found in the Appendix) affords, when read toge- ther with the accounts of the Polish insurrection, conclusive evidence.

Perhaps the most curious aspect of Ultramontane action is pre- sented when Ultramontanes, with a versatility of conduct, which none others with satisfaction to their own consciences can prac- tise, declare their devotion to the extreme doctrines of universal liberty, and the most advanced notions of social and political equality. This phase of Jesuit action may at first sight appear the most incongruous of all. A little reflection will, however, convince the intelligent reader, that there is a powerful element in the organization of the Jesuit Order, which is akin to the most advanced, as they are called, but, in truth, the most barbarously retrograde, doctrines of equality. The government of the Jesuit

order is monarchical, under their General even to the full extent of constituting an Ultra Despotism ; and in this the constitution of Jesuits differs from the primitive organization of several of the older Monastic Orders of the Church of Home, which were rather ecclesiastical in their character than military. The General of the Jesuits is an autocrat, until he is deposed, or dies ; and the more despotically an autocrat, hecause he reigns over that, which a French writer aptly describes as "a Communism of Celihates." Celibacy is necessary to the complete and absolute abnegation of personal rights, which is equally the characteristic of Communism and of the Jesuit Order. Since marriage and its consequence — the Family — generate patriarchal government, which is alien to genuine Communism. The Com- munism of the Jesuit Order would be complete, but for the absolutism of their General. It is not difficult, therefore, to understand the facility, with which they adapt their action either to the support of Despotism in National Government, or to the propagation of Ultra Democracy.

From motives of prudence the Jesuits disguise their dislike of Constitutional Government. The Gunpowder Plot was a failure fraught with to them disastrous consequences. But their dislike of Constitutional freedom is scarcely less than their hatred of the liberties of the Gallican Church, or their detestation of Christian Protestantism. — Protestantism, that is not Christian, they often flatter, but always despise, knowing that inasmuch as it lacks a genuine appeal to the higher motives of mankind, they can mould it to their purpose, or dispose of it at their discretion.

All Europe has respected the character of the late talented Count Montalembert. And in the Appendix to this work will be found the last letter, written by him shortly before his death, in which he touched upon political subjects ; his last views upon which contrast strangely enough with his previous adhesion to the doctrines of Ultramontanism. Yet no one doubted Monta- lembert' sr sincerity ; he rived to see the Ultramontanes conspire to overthrow the constitutional government of Louis Philippe, in favour of the democratic Republic of 1848, with the purpose, as we believe, of subverting the Republic through exaggeration of its democratic tendencies, and thus supplanting it by the Third

XI

French Empire. The Count Montalembert lived long enough to discover, that, although Ultramontanism is always consistent with itself— that is, with implicit obedience to the power, which reigns supreme in the person of the Pontiff, — it is incapable of genuine amalgamation with anything else. "We leave it to theologians to decide whether its religion, if fanaticism may be called religion, consists in anything dogmatically permanent beyond the last de- cree of the reigning Pontiff, provided always, that such decree be agreeable to the interests of the Society.

However little such mental subjugation may consist with the sense of duty, which inspires those, who hold a different faith, no mistake can be greater than to suppose, that this blind obedience in the least incapacitates the individuals, subject to it, from the most effective action. On the contrary, the intensity of their com- bination, and the secresy, with which it is enforced, enables the Great Secret Society to grapple with the most powerful Governments of the world. It was at first amicably allied with the Third Empire of France. Then came a period of coldness between the allies, approaching to hostility. At last, the Great Secret Society triumphed over the failing energies of the Emperor, and forced him to a final effort in the interests of the Papacy, which ended in his downfall. Scarcely eighteen months have elapsed, before we find the Government of the Empire, which overthrew that of Napoleon, entering upon a struggle with the agents of the Papacy upon the matter of education in Germany.

Is, then, the conclusion at which we invite our readers to arrive, that the Great Secret Society, the director and right hand of the Papacy, a power, with which, as invincible, it is useless to contend ? Such a conclusion is condemned by the history of this country, whose freedom, whose prosperity and whose greatness have advanced exactly in proportion to the triumph of her true religion — that of the Bible — over the corruptions of the Christian faith, of which the Papacy and its Great Secret Society are the expon- ents. While the periods of her comparative weakness have al- ways ensued upon the periodical departures of her Government from the Christian principles, which found their exposition, first in the Church, and then in the Common Law of England.

This world is a world of conflict ; and although the variations

Xll

in the prosperity of nations are not sudden as the intermittent phases of a fever-patient's illness, still the changes, from growing strength to weakness are patent to the perception of even the irregular student, and his studies must be limited, if he arrive at any conclusion other than that the periods of national growth and national vigour, whether original or renewed, have always been those at which the nation adhered most closely to the dictates of the morality, which is perfectly developed only by means of an open Bible, — the antagonist which even the Great Secret Society has never yet been able finally to overcome.

rm

THE INFLUENCE OF THE GREAT SECRET SOCIETY

IN PRODUCING THE

FRANCO - GERMAN WAR.

THERE was a remarkable coincidence in the time of the " Declaration " of Papal Infallibility with the commencement of the late war which has resulted in such disaster to France. On the 18th of July, 1870, amidst a scene that was designed by the Papal Curia to be one of peculiar and significant splen- dour, but which Heaven turned into unwonted and ominous gloom, the prophecy of St. Paul (2 Thess. ii. 4) was literally fulfilled by the Pope, seated on his throne in the Church of St. Peter's. " He as God sitteth in the temple of. God, showing The Dogma & himself that he is God." On that very same day, the war, which the War- had been declared three days before by France against Prussia, was commenced by the march of the French forces. "Was this an accidental coincidence, or was it design ? There is every reason to believe, that the war, which began on the very day of the Papal consummation, had been planned for the purpose of using the sword of France in a new crusade, whereby Ultramontane influence should obtain an enormous expansion, forcing nations to receive the favoured heresy of Papal infallibility now being pressed upon the recreant Bishops by an ultimatum from the Vatican, with all its inseparable tyranny.

This war, wbich has ended in the unprecedented and deserved overthrow of those who appealed to the sword, was expected to achieve far different results. The date of its commencement was chosen so as to excite the idea that Providence had inter- posed in favour of the new dogma. Jesuits intended, in this way,

c

xiv Jesuit Influence in the late War.

to answer and silence their opponents, to distract the minds of men from a critical consideration of their proceedings, and to

Quirinus. overpower the noble freedom of German thought. " Quirinus " wrote from Rome, in December, 1869, in these remarkable words,* which pointed out accurately the programme of those constant plotters, the members of the Society of Jesus : —

" Their Order is now really, and in the fullest sense, the Urini and Thummim and breastplate of the high-priest — the Pope — who can only then issue an oracular utterance when he has con- sulted his breastplate, the Jesuit Order. Only one thing was still wanting for the salvation of a world redeemed and regene- rated once again : the Jesuits must again become the confessors of monarchs restored to absolute power.

" It is one of the notes of an age so rich in contradictious, that

Beckx. the present General of the Order, Father Beckx, is not in harmony with the proceedings of his spiritual militia. Here, in Rome, he is reported to have said, 'In order to recover two fractions of the States of the Church, they are pricking on to a war against the world : but they "will lose all.' But for that reason, as is known, he possesses only the outward semblance of government, while it is really in the hands of a Conference."

The sword of France was the instrument which was to open the way to absolutism in Church and in State throughout the world. Jesuits were thus to " become the confessors of monarchs, restored to absolute power," holding the same relation to them that Father La Chaise did to Louis XIY. in his dotage.f The present head of the Romish Church is content to be the puppet of this power— crafty, secret, active, persistent,— a power behind the Papal throne overawing its possessor. Intoxicated with their success, ignoring the former reverses of their Order, and entirely

* See " Letters from Rome on the Council," by "Quirinus." London: Rivingtons, 1870. Page 79.

t If the reader would gain an insight into what dreadful lengths of crime such " confessors of absolute monarchs " will go in order to achieve their evil purposes, let him read the most important and characteristic letter from Father La Chaise, the confessor of Louis XIV., to Father Peters, confessor of James II., written in 1688, which will be found at page 221 of the present work.

Jesuit Influence in the late War. xv

callous to the demands urged for their expulsion in July and September last from Rome, and also virtually from Germany, by the adoption of the sixth resolution in the programme of the Old Catholic Congress, held at Munich in October, they are following in the steps of the most ambitious and unscrupulous of their former chiefs. To arrive at the summit, not merely of spiritual power, but of political and worldly authority, through spiritual pretensions, — this is, and ever has been, the object kept in view. To attain this end, they bend all their energies and use every means that promises to secure any degree of success and additional influence to their Society.

They acted upon the Emperor of the French through his Empress, Jesuits & the who was devoted to them and obedient to their suggestions, and Eugenie! proved herself their partisan at every risk, by the well-known exclamation : " Better the Prussians at Paris than the Italians at Rome." And, indeed, we find on referring to an entry made by Professor Friedrich in his diary, dated May 2nd, 1870, and kept by him whilst at the (Ecumenical Council, that he speaks of a distinct understanding having been arrived at, between the Jesuit party and the Tuilleries, in view of a Franco-Prussian war. The Professor observes, that it was well known in Berlin that such an understanding existed. He adds : " It was no secret, but a notorious fact, that the Empress Eugenie was entirely under the influence of the Jesuits, and in constant communication with Rome, and that she was eager in urging on the war, which she repeatedly spoke of as ' ma guerre,' because she regarded it as a sort of crusade. The Empress and her clerical advisers represented the party, then dominant at the Vatican. And the Jesuits hoped to promote, by war, the policy they had inaugurated by the (Ecumenical Council and the Syllabus which had preceded it. The agent employed to conduct the negotiations between the Confessors. Empress (who, after the departure of the Emperor to the army, assumed the supreme power as Regent) and the directors of the Papal policy, was her Majesty's confessor. The participation of other Court confessors, such as those at Vienna and elsewhere, in this affair, was also reckoned upon. Evenltaly would, it was thought, be thus brought over to the cause ; and if the victories of Wissem- burg, Woerth, and Spicheren had not so rapidly succeeded each

c 2

XVI

Jesuit Influence in the late War.

The Monde.

Results

Failure.

other, perhaps, the calculations made at theVatican and the Tuilleries for bringing about a coalition of the Catholic Powers against Germany would not have proved fallacious." The Jesuit power is founded on the Papal. All objection to Papal tyranny must be stifled; all claim to spiritual freedom on the part of Roman Catho- lics must be put down as infidelity, which was equal in their eyes to the enormity of Protestantism itself. In tlaeMonde* two days after the breaking out of the Franco-German war, there appeared an article in which the writer declared, that " the war is not only destined to decide the preponderance of one of the two Powers, but will have a most important influence upon the prospects of Catholicism. The triumph of France is necessary, in order to stay the progress of Protestantism and infidel German philosophy represented by Prussia." The disfavour in which everything German was regarded at Rome is well put in a sentence of the eighteenth letter of " Quirinus :" " German, and, of ill repute for orthodoxy, are synonymous terms here" — i.e., in Rome. Upon the German nation, therefore, was to be enforced a submission to everything Papal, renunciation of all manliness of soul and free- dom of mind, by the power of the sword. The Emperor of the French, the quondam eldest son of the Church — now no longer looked on as legitimate, since his power to serve the Papacy had failed — was then supposed to be in possession of force sufficient to achieve this desired object. But even the most astute are some- times deceived ; and fortunate is it for the human race, that these subtle plans against freedom have been turned to the discomfiture of their originators. The recent onset against Germany has resulted not only in the prostration of the aggressor, but also in the downfall of the Papacy itself, as a temporal power.

The Jesuits, with characteristic selfishness, look with apathy on the misfortunes of their instruments, who have committed the unpardonable crime of failure in attaining their leading object — the supremacy of the Order. Constitutional forms of government are everywhere more or less opposed by the Jesuits. Democracy as the parent of despotism, and despotism itself, alone receive their constant fealty.

The Monde, July 20, 1870.

Despotic tendency of their views. xvii

The Weekly Register* tells us : —

"Of the Orleanists it is enough to say that they are a mere TheOrleanists faction in France. They have neither the Church, nor the army, nor the people on their side. The clergy do not love them, and have no reason to like them. During Louis Philippe's reign the Church in France was in absolute bondage. The Bishops were constantly snubbed ; the cathedrals and churches were suffered to go to decay ; and the utmost indulgence was given, and the warmest friendship was shown to the violent literary revilers of the Church and enemies of religion" [i.e., to Gallican Catholics, and such Protestants as M. Guizot]. " One of the earliest acts of the barricade monarchy was to invade the Pontifical States, and seize Ancona, because the Austrian s crossed the frontier at the Pope's desire, to aid in the suppression of a Carbonaro

insurrection The shopkeepers in Paris and in the

large towns were attached to the citizen King, and it is probable that their sympathies still flow in a great measure towards Orleanism ; but they constitute only a fraction of the nation, and at best but a poor prop for an illegitimate Bourbon throne."

This was an attempt to throw dust in the eyes of observers, and to hide Ultramontane discomfiture beneath the show of bravery. The sufferings of Paris, in their most striking phases, especially during the Commune, were openly attributed in France to Ultramontane schemes ; and it is a fact worthy of notice, that, of the murderers of Generals Clement Thomas and Lecomte, eight Generals were sentenced to death, whilst in the case of those charged at Thomas and

O T i

Versailles, with the murder of the Gallican Archbishop and others, but one was condemned to capital punishment. \Yhether Jesuit interests may or may not have demanded this sacrifice, must for the present be left somewhat to conjecture, but will be noticed hereafter. To the Great Secret Society, the downfall of France and the desolate homes of millions are as nothing. Men and governments, in its estimation, are merely the counters with which it plays. Sorrows, tears and blood, it cares for, ouly as far as these favour or thwart its own schemes.

At the present time, throughout Continental Europe, the more

* Jr.ne 17th, 1871.

XV111

Defeat and its consequences.

Spain and Amadeus.

Italy and France.

audacious and overt of these schemes have apparently collapsed. As their General, Beckx, foretold the Jesuits would be the case, they have overreached themselves ; but have already recommenced their subtle labours. Unchanged in temper and aim, they are looking forward to a terrible revenge for their recent defeats. An undying hatred against those who have checkmated them, in Spain, in Italy and elsewhere, is expressed in the following extract from one of their organs.*

" The Olive of Spain is about to bud forth anew. The sub- alpine plant, Amadeus, cannot be induced to take root in the land of Ferdinand and Columbus, Ximenes and Balmez. The Catholic breeze, which comes from the Pyrenees, bears on its wings a tale of a coming crusade, which must effectually destroy the prospects of the son of Victor Emmanuel. Another King — the son of the injured Queen of Spain — is about to take his place. Montpensier — unnatural, treacherous Prince though he be — is beginning to repent of the work of his hands, and blushes at his own dastard conduct in co-operating with the wretched Prim for the overthrow of the virtuous Isabella, and in the establish- ment of a withered branch of the tottering House of Savoy." . . . . "But, Spain is about to become resurgent. True, she may — and no doubt she shall — suffer for the Amadean crime. But her sufferings shall be like those of France, purifying, salutary, rehabilitating. Her punishment — like that of Italy and France — will be a blessing, which shall result in the assertion of those Catholic Eternal Principles of Right, which are deposited in the hearts of the masses, and which no en- croachment of heresy — no glittering tinsel of false philosophy — could ever tarnish. The Savoyard must go home, and we wish it were in peace. But there is no peace for the wicked Victor Emmanuel nor for his wretched son. He may go — he shall go — but the dark cloud of his evil genius may long obscure the bright- ness of sunny Spain, and leave behind him in the land of the olive and the vine a long train of miseries, which all right-minded men would prefer to see him carry with him."

The continual distrust now fostered between Amadeus and hissup-

* Daily Examiner^ Belfast, of June 21, 1871.

German distrust of Uttrqmontdnism.

xix

porters, and the perpetual disturbance under 'the premiership of Sagasta and subsequent ministers afford convincing evidence of the development of this spirit of vengeance.

The German Governments have had abundant cause to Germany, estimate, at their true value, the professions and the practices of the Ultramontane combination. Now that the effort to sub- jugate Germany by force has so signally failed, her answer is given in no undecided terms.

We are indebted to the Standard* for a valuable and accurate summary (confirmed in substance by the Tablet) of the measures taken by the Government of the German Empire, showing their distrust of the Ultramontane party. These measures are of greater significance than the other important characteristics of internal policy, that have distinguished Germany since the conclusion of peace. In Prussia, though the Royal family are Protestant, the Roman Catholic Church received recognition as an organisation, responsible to the State with regard to the religion of a certain portion of the people. There was a ministerial department for matters connected with that Church. This department controlled the extensive powers, which the national system of education in Prussia accorded to Roman Prussian ecclesiastics. The Prussian Government has had reason to Education, complain, for many years past, that the position accorded to the Roman Church was used to cover many abuses of power in the Ultramontane interest. Some years since, an eminent scientific professor in the University of Bonn was removed by order of the Government, because the Archbishop of Cologne dis- approved of the nature of his scientific teaching. The Prussian Government then seemed anxious to conciliate the Roman authorities in the hope of receiving their support. The internal policy of Prussia was apparently more Ultramontane than that of the more thoroughly Catholic portions of Germany. This party, although utterly crushed in Wurtemburg, and in a minority in Bavaria, yet exercised a stronger influence in Bavaria, the Rhenish Provinces of Prussia than in any other part of the German Empire. The Catholics of these Provinces

* Standard of July 28th, 1871.

XX

Prussia curbs Ultramontanism.

seemed to vie witH their co-religionists throughout Belgium and Ireland in their devotion to the Roman See. The relations between the State and the Roman Catholics of these provinces, until recent years, were regulated by Concordat, as in Austria, and the ecclesiastics there held extensive power and patronage, whilst, in the other portions of Prussia, the appointments of bishops and even of parish priests were controlled by the Crown. Whatever were the political objects which at that time induced the Prussian Court to favour this growth of the Ultramontane power, the chief authority of the State has shown that a most effective blow might be struck whenever it thought fit. By an Order in Council, the separate department for Roman Catholic affairs has

Muhler. been abolished, and the machinery, with its director, v. Muhler (rather the delegate of the Pope than of the King in the Rhenish Provinces), has been removed. The Concordat is not yet abro- gated, but the special Government department charged to carry it out is abolished. These measures have been followed by others of a still more decisive character. One of the priests recently excommunicated for refusing to accept the new doctrine of

fuiminski. Infallibility, Herr Kuminski, has been authorised by the Government to continue to celebrate mass ; and the Ministry have ordered special reports to be made to them of the intrigues throughout the kingdom, which the Infallibilists are now carrying on. These and others, are only measures of defence following upon the abolition of the official department, which was only a

The Cultus. portion of the Ministry, lately controlled by Herr v. Muhler, under the German title of Cultus, regulating all matters relating to education and religion. The Augsburg Gazette points out, that this "department has existed for thirty years, and no one ever thought of regarding it as of a temporary nature, or looked forward to its approaching abolition. The subsequent acts of the Minister, however, clear up all doubt upon the subject. The attitude of the Imperial Government has completely changed towards this party, who unhappily are still a power in Europe and in the world. Events in Southern Germany have cast a great deal of light upon the subject. . When the Bel- linger movement first commenced, the Berlin press expressed the most supercilious indifference to it, just as our Liberal party

Dollinger, and the " Old Catholic " Movement. xxi

here affected to believe that Ultramontanism had no terrors for them. They opposed it, in common with all others who professed a respect for freedom and constitutional right, but pretended that such was the superiority of their weapons, and the fulness of their light, that they had nothing to fear from its machinations. The Berlin press represented the struggle in Bavaria, as some- Bavaria, thing belonging to an earlier period of humanity than that in which it was their privilege to live. This movement has become too important to be thus treated. The Catholics of South Germany have pronounced for it emphatically, and the Imperial Government hastens to assume the leadership of the movement. All the astute diplomatising, which the Court of Rome has employed since the commencement of the war, has failed. The Pope's letter to the Emperor, the correspondence carried on through the Archbishop of Posen at Versailles, the parade of the relations between Cardinal Antonelli and Baron Yon Arnim, the German envoy at Rome — the bright hopes founded on intrigue are gone. The new German Empire feels the necessity of casting off its alliance with the Papacy — a feeling which has been for some time reflected by the Roman Catholic Government of Austria. In Bavaria, a Roman Catholic country, where certain prerogatives are granted to the Church of Rome, a difficulty presents itself that does not exist in Prussia, where the knot has been cut by abolishing the quasi recognition of the Prussia cuts independance of the Church by the State. This proves the tlie knot- strength of the Dolliuger movement in Germany, the genuine- ness and power of feeling, as distinct from Obscurantism, with which the anti-papal name of the great theologian was once associated. Yet it would be a great mistake to think that all this will render Ultramontanism harmless. All these calamities will effect little else than to define more distinctly the sphere of this party. It no longer controls the State in Italy. It is more ostracised in Prussia than in Belgium, or in Ireland ; but it would be a mistake to suppose it im- potent for evil. Its power over the uneducated masses will always be great, and all the greater because its chief appeal will now be to them alone. The State, in Germany and elsewhere, has failed to come to a settlement with Ultramon- tanism ; but the State cannot simply ignore it.

XX11

Romanism in the United States.

Papists in New York.

New York.

Scripture teaching paralysed.

In this country, and in the United States, the design of Jesuitism is, in the main, the same as in Germany, though attempted hy somewhat different means. An instance of the consequences which result when a democratic government courts this treacherous power, is shewn in the following extract :* — " We have been for some time reliably informed, that the inhabitants and municipal government of the city of New York had petted the Papal Church into a position of such superiority over other sects, that the civil authorities began to feel an uncomfortable pressure from the favoured denomination. Under date, October 30th, 1869, the New York correspondent of the Morning Post wrote : — 'The politicians of New York have long paid court to the prelates of the Catholic Church, and the latter have not scrupled to use them. . . . The great bulk of the Catholics are Irishmen, and all the Irish are democrats, not because they are Catholics, but because they are Irish. The democratic politicians have perhaps imagined that by liberal endowments and donations for Catholic purposes they might induce the priesthood to use their influence in behalf of the democratic ticket. . . . New York has long been ruled by Irish politicians ; they are not very good Catholics, but they at least were sufficiently well inclined towards their traditional faith to make for its benefit the most liberal donations." And then follows a catalogue of endowments and donations given by the municipality to Roman Catholic churches, conventual and monastic institutions, hospitals, schools, &c., which testifies to the dexterity of the late Archbishop Plughes, and might well gladden the heart of Sir George Bowyer. Reliable information, received in December last (1871), confirms a previous statement, that Rome, to some extent, has succeeded in paralysing Scriptural teaching throughout most of the common schools in the United States, f Her educational institutions in New York alone, enjoy public endowments amounting to 412,062 dollars per annum ; while 116,677 dollars, or less than one-third, is the sum-total

* TJie Press and St. James's Chronicle, July 15th, 1871.

^ t May not the same subtle cause have produced a parallel effect in England, under the specious pretence of sectarian teaching ?

Romanism in the United States.

xxin

paid towards the support of all the other schools, of whatever NewYorkE.C. denomination. The disproportion of these benefactions thus given to the Papal Church, when compared with the aggregate allow- ance made to other denominations, affords indeed a curious com- mentary upon the notion of religious equality for which the nonconformists in this country clamour, and with which Mr. Bright and his pupils have so carefully imbued the present government and the majority of the House of Commons.

The occasion of the revival of the cry for religious equality Keligious in England — one which, as subjects of a foreign power, Romanists e(luality- have no right to raise, but which has been marked by such eminent success in Papal aggression of late years — ought well to be re- membered. It originated sixteen years ago with the late Count de Montalembert, who then published his " Political Future of England," and in that remarkable book recommended the Eoman Catholics to adopt this cry as a lever, by the dexterous use of which they might effect almost anything in this country. Just before his death, two years ago, the Count de Montalembert avowed, that when he published his "Political Future of England," he was under Ultramontane influence*

Quirinus informs us in his fifth letter, f that the Roman Catholic Bishops from the United States were very uneasy at the temper manifested by his Holiness the Pope, at the prospect of The Pope, having to conform to the decrees of the Council, on their return to their trans-Atlantic dioceses. One of them exclaimed, "Nobody should be elected Pope who has not lived three years in the United States, and thus learnt to comprehend what is possible at this day in a freely-governed commonwealth."

The Times New York correspondent informs usj — "In New York the Orangemen recently determined to celebrate to-day, the 12th of July, by a procession. The Ribandmen deter- Kibandmen. mined by force to prevent them from carrying out their purpose. Both sides armed, fears of a disturbance were excited. The authorities hesitated, but ultimately decided to

* Substance of an extract from The Press and St. James's Chronicle, Feb, 24, 1872, t Dated— Rome, Dec, 23, 1869 ; p. 108. t Under date, July 12, 1871.

XXIV

The Power and Will of England.

The Fruits.

Manning's Sermon.

Pandering to protect the Orange procession, since the Roman Catholics Popery. ^ Oftetlj undisturbed, marched in procession through the city. The Ribandmen, however, were not to be deterred from violence, even by the presence of three regiments. They fired upon both the procession and the military, encouraged, perhaps, by their recollections of the more than exemplary forbearance of English troops under similar provocation. They were, however, mistaken in expecting forbearance from the American army. The 84th regiment, which was in advance of the procession, fired without orders. The result reported is that thirty- one persons were killed and seventy-five were wounded. Among the killed are two policemen and three soldiers. One hundred and sixty-five rioters have been committed for trial." Such is the result of American political pandering to Popery and Ribandism.

The power of England is coveted especially by the Society. Dr. Manning, their patron and apologist, has declared this in no indistinct terms. The Tablet states,* that in a sermon preached to a Roman Catholic synod, under Cardinal Wise- man's presidency, by the present Archbishop Manning, then Prothonotary, he made the following remarks : —

" If ever there was a land in which work was to be done, and perhaps much to suffer, it is here. I shall not say too much if I say, that we have to subjugate and subdue, to conquer and rule, an imperial race. We have to do with a will, which reigns throughout the world, as the will of old Rome reigned once. We have to bend or to break that will, which nations and kingdoms have found invincible and inflexible." .,.''•" Were If conquered ? it (heresy) conquered in England it would be conquered through- out the world. All its lines meet here ; and therefore, in England, the Church of God must be gathered in all its strength."

These expressions, slightly varied, though the same in purport, are found in a volume of sermons on ecclesiastical subjects, by Dr. Manning. f It is a significant fact, that the next sermon in this book, is one devoted to the praise of Ignatius Loyola and the

* Of August 6, 1859. t Published by Duffy, Paternoster Row. Page Ififi.

Rebellion and attempted murder justified. xxv

Jesuit Order. At page 179 he thus justifies the rebellion of Thomas a Becket : —

" Will it be said, as mere men of the world say, drawing their pens fine to write the history of saints, Anselm was an arrogant Anselm. and stubborn prelate — Becket proud and ambitious ? It was not Becket. for Christ's sake they suffered, but for their own evil passions ; for turbulence, obstinacy, and rebellion ; for their own faults they were justly punished. Well, are saints faultless ? Yes, when crowned ; not when in warfare. . . . Be it so. Saints are men, and men are frail. . . . Let us not be told, then, that they who stand for the name of Jesus suffer for their own sins. No doubt they had them, but they suffered not for these. There is a deeper and a diviner reason — a reason unchangeably true. They had the Divine presence with them ; and they were visibly stamped with the name they bore. They crossed the will of the world in its pride of place and set a bound to its pretensions. They were the shadow of a superior, and the ministers of a higher, law. This was their true offence."

Is not this preaching a crusade ? No doubt can remain of Dr. Manning's approval and commendation of Anselm's obstinacy and Becket's rebellion. Again, at page 188, Dr. Manning writes : — " St. Augustine, St. Bonaventure, and St. Thomas (Becket), will forgive me if I say that Ignatius well repaid to them the price of his nurture, when he gave to the Church, Bellarmine and Petavius, Jesuit doctors Vasquez, Suarez, and De Lugo, besides newer but memorable names." So Dr. Manning approves of the morality of the Jesuit doctors, and exalts the founder of their order almost, if not quite, to an equality with his admired Becket. And then, at page 187, he writes of the Jesuit Order, that it embodies the character of its founder, " the same energy, perseverance and endurance. It is his own presence still prolonged, the same perpetuated order, even in the spirit and manner of its working, fixed, uniform, and changeless." We may agree with those his- Changeiesa- torians, who assert that the Order of Jesuits bears the stamp rather of Laynez, the successor of Ignatius, than of himself ; but that the purpose, spirit, and working of the Order are unchanged, we fully admit.

At page 191 Dr. Manning writes, that the Jesuits, who were

xxvi Forewarned, is to be Forearmed.

Manning on executed, like Garnet, for his participation in the Gunpowder

d&Pi t -Pl°^» an(^ *or °^Der scarcely minor offences, by what he sneeringly calls " the execution of justice," are in Heaven, enrolled as martyrs. "On earth," he writes, "they wore the garb of felons ; in Heaven they stand arrayed in white, and crowned. Here they were arraigned in the dock, as malefactors : there they sit by the throne of the Son of God." *

Justification. Little doubt can remain that Dr. Manning has deliberately justified, in these sermons, rebellion, treason, and attempted wholesale murder, as means for effecting the subjugation of England. And how does Dr. Manning appear to justify the course he has thus adopted ? In these sermons, he shews that the prosperity of England is no proof of the Divine favour ; and at page 140, because England is Protestant and free, with a loathsome affectation of charity, he writes : — "And all this is true of our own land, dear to us by so many charities ; for England now, like Rome, pagan of old, has become Sentina gentium — the pool into which the evils of all the earth find a way."

It cannot be said, that Dr. Manning has abandoned these opinions, or his purpose, for they reappear in his more recently published works ; and especially in a volume of essays, of which he is the editor.

Romish de- We are not left in ignorance, then, of the opinions, the principles, and the designs of the Romish Church, and of the Jesuits in particular, with regard to our own country. As we have said, the lessons which late events have produced, and those which are actually uttered by the emissaries of this spiritual tyranny, should not be lost on Englishmen. Wars, stratagems, and proclamations of future onsets, all bespeak the necessity for caution and vigorous self-defence in every people that will be free.

* After this quasi canonization, might it not be asked, how far the nation is indebted to Jesuit influence, for the discontinuation of the service for the 5th of November attached to the Book of Common Prayer ?

XXV11

JESUITISM IN KELATION TO PAPAL INFALLIBILITY.

The increase of Jesuit influence runs like an electric shock through the whole Romish communion. Perhaps it would he more accurate to say that it is the very life of Romanism. Jesuitism is the genius of Popery skilfully reduced to a system. As Popery is the masterpiece of priestcraft, so Jesuitism is itself the very masterpiece of Popery. It is priestcraft so artfully regulated as to hide its work ; caring for nothing but success.

Though its aim is alien to the spirit of true Christianity, yet it contains nothing essentially foreign to the spirit of the Papacy. The true character of this phase has been ably portrayed by the learned authors of " The Pope and the Council," who write under the name of " Janus." It is there clearly shown, that the ruling influence has been for ages exerted, not by the Pope, as a Bishop, but by the Curia, the really governing body at Rome.

It may be well to mention that the modern Roman Curia The Curia, forms the Pope's privy council, and is composed of an assembly of cardinals, prelates, and clerical State ministers, nominally the servants, in reality the masters of the Pope.

How skilfully and unscrupulously Jacobo Antonelli, as Cardinal Secretary, (the son and grandson of a brigand,)* has wielded the power of the Curia, temporal and spiritual, under the direction of the Jesuits, is well known. Now that the latter have acquired the supreme influence in the Roman Curia itself, the two may be considered for all practical purposes as one, since Ultramon- tanism is but another name for Jesuitism.

It is curious to look back on Papal transactions in bygone years,

* We quote the following from tlie recent very interesting work, " The Papal Garrison" (London : Hunt & Co. 1872), dedicated to the Marquis of Salisbury ; p. iii. Speaking of Antonelli, "himself (as no one in Italy ventured to deny) the son and grandson of a brigand, he had, as Governor of Viterbo, enlisted Papal confidence by one of the most perfidious acts in the records of executive infamy, by which parents — men of high birth and character — were inveigled into the unsuspected betrayal of their own sons ; who were, one and all, con- signed, at the dead of night, to the fort of Civita Castellana."

xx vm

Absolutism apparently consummated.

Laynez.

Despotism.

Archbishop Darboy.

and observe how welcome and powerful in the Komish Commu- nion, even long before the days of Loyola, was the spirit which his successor, Laynez, methodised. The design of the Curia and the Jesuits in the late pseudo- (Ecumenical Council, assembled at Rome to proclaim the personal infallibility of the Pope, was but the logical consummation of their efforts continued through centuries. Bitterly hostile to all freedom, the Papacy regards with peculiar hatred all unfettered, true Church Councils, re- sembling those political assemblies by which the temporal freedom of nations is guaranteed and strengthened. So a Council still more deficient than that of Trent, in elements really (ecumenical, has been convened, and induced to give its authority to the coveted dogma ; and Jesuits hope that Councils will become things of the past. Large as the authority of the Pope was, yet, according to former ideas, even in the Romish Church there was a limit to it. So long as the authority of an assembly of the universal Church, consisting not merely of the representatives of the clerical portion, but of the whole Church, was recognised as a tribunal to which appeal could be made from Papal decisions, the Pope's monarchy though supreme, was limited ; and for his rule he was responsible, theoretically at all events, to the parliament of the Church. But absolute power appears to have worked so well for Jesuitism, that hence- forth it is to be the rule of the entire Romish Church.

These remarks are borne out by high Roman Catholic authority, no less than that of Monseigneur Darboy, Archbishop of Paris. In his speech on the Constitutio Dogmatica de Eccksid* the following words occur : —

" Not only will the independent infallibility of the Pope not destroy these prejudices and objections which draw away so many from the faith, but it will increase and intensify them. There are many who in heart are not alienated from the Catholic Church, but who yet think of what they term a separation of Church and State. It is certain that several of the leaders of public opinion are on this side, and will take occasion from the proposed definition to effect their object. The example of France

fc Vide, " Letters from Rome on the Council, by Quirinus," (published by Rivingtons, 1870,) Appendix I., pp. 831, 832.

Speech of Archbishop Darboy.

xxix

will soon be copied more or less all over Europe, and to the greatest injury of the clergy and the Church herself.

" The compilers of the Schema, whether they desire it or not, The Schema, are introducing a new era of mischief, if the suhject-matter of Papal infallibility is not accurately denned, or if it can be supposed that under the head of morals the Pope will give decisions on the civil and political acts of sovereigns and nations, laws and rights, to which a public authority will be attributed.*

" Every one of any political cultivation knows what seeds of discord are contained in our Schema, and to what perils it exposes Perils, even the temporal power of the Holy See."t

' This is emphatically asserted in a sermon preached last year it Kensington by Archbishop Manning, where he says, speaking in the Pope's name, ' I claim to be the supreme judge and director of the jonsciences of men ; of the peasant that tills the field and the prince that jits on the throne ; of the household that lives in the shade of privacy and l,he legislature that makes laws for kingdoms — I am the sole last supreme udge of what is right and wrong.' " (Note appended, from " Quirinus.")

f Yet in spite of the fact that Dr. Manning heard this speech and actually •eplied to it in the Council, he has lately had the hardihood to write to the Tliiies to deny that Monseigneur Darboy held the very opinions which he sourageously advanced before the assembled Council at the Vatican and vhich Dr. Manning then impugned ! Monseigneur Darboy has since been •emoved from the scene of his labours. It is a remarkable fact that three iiccessive Archbishops of Paris have been murdered ; they were all lallicans in religious opinion, and opposed to the Jesuits. Monseigneur Murders of sibour was murdered by a fanatical priest. Monseigneur Affre was shot MM. Sibour, ipon one of the barricades of the Parisian Revolution of 1848 ; he had been, ^"re> ,s M. Cayla relates, induced to go to the barricade on a mission of peace >y Frederick Ozanan and his allies, all Ultramontanes of the Society of 5t. Vincent de Paul, who accompanied him. M. Louis Blanc affirms, and xlduces evidence to prove, that Monseigneur Affre was then and there shot hrough the back. The circumstances of the murder of Archbishop Darboy 7e need not detail ; but the fact, that the name Cluseret was merely an lias, adopted by the Fenian McAuliff, is significant.

With regard to the late Archbishop, it can never be forgotten that in a 3tter to him, which will be found at the end of this volume, the Pope iolently upbraided him, and actually threatened him with punishment, for imply doing his duty as a Gallican Bishop, and for carrying out in ractice the principles which he afterwards so forcibly enunciated before he Council.

d

xxx Infallibility and the Canon Lair.

Opinions of The opinions of Bishop Strossmeyer, as given in the same book , Strosi!" are to the like effect. His conclusions are ably summed up in the

following extract from a recently published letter : —

"The canon law, however objectionable, arbitrary, and even revolutionary some of its provisions may be, was a laic, and a law binding upon the Pope, to a certain extent, which could not be fundamentally altered, except by a Council called (Ecumenical. National, local, episcopal, and certain other official and personal rights, exemptions, privileges, and other properties, were recog- nised by, or had grown up, whether by custom or otherwise, under the canon law which protected them. Since the declaration of the Infallibility it appears to me that the canon law itself, and the rights and properties thereon dependent, can be, all or any of them, annulled or altered by a dictum of the Pope, when such dictum is pronounced ex cathedra, and that to such pronounce- ment no Council such as that of last year is henceforth to be necessary, but that such pronouncement of its Infallibility as conferring universal authority upon such dictum is to be uttered by some conclave of persons immediately attached to, or resident in, the immediate vicinity of the Pope. It follows that the Roman Catholic bishops must henceforth be the mere organs and agents of the Pope for the enforcement, pro posse, of such dicta."

Montaiembert ^e following extracts from a letter* of the late Count Monta- lembert are also strongly confirmatory of the opinions which we have expressed.

" Never, thank Heaven, have I thought, said, or written any- thing favourable to the personal and separate infallibility of the Pope, such as it is sought to impose upon us ; nor to the theo- cracy, the dictatorship of the Church, which I did my best to reprobate in that history of the ' Monks of the West ' of which you are pleased to appreciate the laborious fabric ; nor to that 'Absolutism of Rome ' of which the speech, that you quote, disputed the existence, even in the middle ages, but which to-day forms the symbol and the programme of the faction dominant among us. At the same time I willingly admit, that, if I have nothing to cancel, I should have a great deal to add. I sinned

* Dated, Paris, Feb. 28th, 1870. Vide page 208 of the present work.

Letter of Count Montalembert. xxxi

by omission, or rather by want of foresight. I said, ' Gallicanism is dead, because it made itself the servant of the State ; you have now only to inter it.' I think I then spoke the truth. It was Gallicanism dead, and completely dead. How, then, has it risen again ? I do not hesitate to reply, that it is in consequence of the lavish encouragement given, under the Pontificate of Pius IX., to ex- aggerated doctrines, outraging the good sense, as well as the honour of the human race — doctrines, of which not even the coming shadow was perceptible under the Parliamentary monarchy. There are wanting, then, to that speech, as to the one I made in the National Assembly on the Roman expedition, essential reser- vations against spiritual despotism, and against absolute monarchy, which I have detested in the State, and which does not inspire me with less repugnance in the Church. But, in 1847, what could give rise to a suspicion that the liberal Pontificate of Pius IX., acclaimed by all the Liberals of the two worlds, would become the Pontificate represented and personified by the Univers and the Ciwlta ? In the midst of the unanimous cries then uttered by the clergy in favour of liberty as in Belgium, of liberty in everything and for all, how could we foresee, as possible, the incredible wheelabout of almost all that same clergy in 1852 — the enthusiasm of most of the Ultramontane doctors for the revival of Caesarisrn ? The harangues of Monseigneur Parisis, MM- Parisia the charges of Monseigneur de Salinis, and especially the permanent triumph of those lay theologians of absolutism, who began by squandering all our liberties, all our principles, all our former ideas, before Napoleon III., and afterwards immolated justice and truth, reason and history, in one great holocaust to the idol they raised up for themselves at the Vatican ? If that word, idol, seems to you too strong, please to lay the blame on what Mouseigneur Sibour, Archbishop of Paris, wrote to me on the 10th of September, 1853 : — •' The new Ultramontane Sibour on school leads us to a double idolatry — the idolatry of the temporal power, and of the spiritual power. When you formerly, like ourselves, M. le Comte, made loud professions of Ultramon- tanism, you did not understand things thus. We defended the independence of the spiritual power against the pretensions and encroachments of the temporal power, but we respected the con-

d 2

XXX11

Count Montalemberfs Letter continued.

Power and Power.

Bishop of Orleans.

stitution of the State, and the constitution of the Church. "We did not do away with all intermediate power, all hierarchy, all reasonable discussion, all legitimate resistance, all individuality, all spontaneity. The Pope and the Emperor >vere not, one the whole Church, and the other the whole State. Doubtless there are times when the Pope may set himself above all the rules which are only for ordinary times, and when his power is as extensive as the necessities of the Church. The old Ultramontanes kept this in mind, but they did not make a rule of the exception. The new Ultramontanes have pushed everything to extremes, and have abounded in hostile arguments against all liberties — those of the State as well as those of the Church — against the serious religious interests at the present time, and especially at a future day. One might be content with despising them, but when one has a presentiment of the evils, they are preparing for us, it is difficult to be silent and resigned. You have therefore done well, M. le Comte, to stigmatise them.' Thus, sir, did the pastor of the largest diocese in Christendom express himself seventeen years ago, congratulating me upon one of my first protests against the spirit, which, since then, I have never ceased to combat. For it is not to-day, but in 1852, that I began to struggle against the detestable political and religious aberrations which make up con- temporary Ultrarnontanism. Here, then, traced by the pen of an Archbishop of Paris, is the explanation of the mystery that preoccupies you, and of the contrast you point out between my Ultramontanism of 1847 and my Gallicauism of 1870. There- fore, without having either the will or the power to discuss the question, now debated in the Council, I hail with the most grateful admiration, first, the great and generous Bishop of Orleans, then the eloquent and intrepid priests, who have had the courage to stem the torrent of adulation, imposture, and servility, by which we run the risk of being swallowed up. Thanks to them, Catholic France will not have remained too much below Germany, Hungary, and America."

In a note* below will be seen what the French Church has held

* For the sake of those who do not know what Gallicauism means, we give the following text of the celebrated declaration of the Clergy of 1682, which asserts the freedom of the Galliran Church, and is known as " The Four Articles" :—

Rome, the Church, and the People, xxxiii

as to the limits of Papal authority. Henceforth of course these Grallicau opinions are utterly untenable, since the Pope has been declared sole, infallible, judge of his own rights. But the result proves that even the limited freedom claimed by the French National Church is an impossibility, so long as the Pope's authority is acknowledged in any degree whatever. There is no medium between absolute slavery to the spiritual despot and total renunciation of his authority. Union with Eome is abso- lutely incompatible with the freedom of a Church and People. Incompatible Of this fact there is no question, even in the mind of the Minister of a Roman Catholic country like Bavaria. In his letter to the Archbishop of Munich, the Minister states, that the Dogma mainly claims to draw, and has drawn, within the jurisdiction of the Pope, such matters as belong to the sphere of the State, so that all citizens would for the future have to take laws from the hand of the Pope, which might possibly be in antagonism to the ruling principles of modern States.* But it is not only that the freedom, the very existence of a Church, as such, is ipso facto impossible, so long as one decree of her infallible Pope can at any moment change or annul her canons, her acts, and her constitu-

" Article 1. St. Peter and Ms successors, and the Church itself, received from Gallican Almighty God power over spiritual things only, not over political matters, Christ Articles, having said : ' My kingdom is not of this world.' Consequently kings and princes cannot be deposed either directly or indirectly, nor can subjects be liberated from their oaths of allegiance, by the authority of the heads of the Church. And this doctrine must be inviolably received as conformable to the word of God, to the traditions of the Fathers, and to the example of the saints.

"Article 2. The full power of the Apostolic See and of the successors of Peter is such that the decrees of the Holy (Ecumenical Council of Constance, approved of by the Apostolic See, (and which declared that general councils were superior to the Pope in matters of faith,) subsist in all their force and virtue.

"Article 3. Thence it results that the action of Apostolic power must be regulated according to the canons ; that the rules, the manners, and the constitutions, received in this kingdom and by the Gallican Church must ever remain hi vigour, and the limits appointed by our fathers must remain unchanged.

1 ' Article 4. The Sovereign Pontiff has the principal power in questions of faith, and his decree extends over all Churches ; his decision, however, is not irrevocable until the consent of the Church has confirmed it." — See " On the Knee of the Church," 2nd Edition. London : Macintosh, 1869. Chapter IV., pp. 73, 74.

* Letter from the Bavarian Minister of Public Worship to the Archbishop of Munich, Aug. 27, 1871.

xxxiv Celebrated Letter of Dr. Dollinyer.

Freedom im- tion, and even the articles of her faith. Roman Catholics, in all countries, are now beginning to find that Papal supremacy, how- ever long kept in bounds, really means in the eyes of the usurper, the possession of uncontrolled dominion.

This absolute power is now assumed, in spite of the natural resistance of mankind, and has carried the absurd pretensions, by which the Popes have obtained their present usurped authority, one step further. Popes have succeeded in inducing nations " to believe a lie," and to submit to their rule as spiritual chiefs, by clever devices and a continuous succession of ingenious forgeries, dating from the middle of the ninth century ; so now the last advance of all is made, and the Roman Pontiff is proclaimed, absolutely and without appeal, Lord over all. In order to fulfil this, he must be supposed infallible ; for his claim is spiritual, and he must be endowed with highest spiritual attributes. The celebrated letter of Dr. Dollinger, which is given in full at the end of the present volume,* puts the subject in a remarkably strong light ; more especially in the following forcible sentences, with which it concludes : —

" He who wishes to measure the immense range of these reso- lutions [of the Council] may be urgently recommended to com- pare thoroughly the third chapter of the decrees in Council with the fourth ; and to realise for himself what a system of universal

Plenary power, g0yernment and spiritual dictation stands here before us. It is lity.rejected. the plenary power over the whole Church, as over each separate member, such as the Popes have claimed for themselves since Gregory VII., such as is pronounced in the numerous Bulls since the Bull Unam Sanctum, which is henceforth to be believed and acknowledged in his life by every Catholic. This power is boundless, incalculable ; it can, as Innocent III. said, ' strike at sin everywhere ' ; can punish every man, allows of no

Supremacy, appeal, is sovereign and arbitrary, for, according to Bonafacius VIII., ' the Pope carries all rights in the shrine of his bosom.' " That is, the Pope is made supreme over all Canon law and univer- sally absolute. " As he has now become infallible, he can in one moment, with the one little word orU, (that is, that he addresses

I ""A-1,

Celebrated Letter of Dr. Dollinger. xxxv

himself to the whole Church) make every thesis, every doctrine, Infallibility every demand an unerring and irrefragable article of faith. Against him there can be maintained no right, no personal or corporate freedom ; or, as the Canonists say, the tribunal of God and that of the Pope are one and the same. This system bears its Hoinish origin on its forehead, and will never be able to penetrate in Germanic countries. As a Christian, as a Theologian, as a His- torian, as a Citizen, I cannot accept this doctrine. Not as a A Christian, for it is irreconcilable with the spirit of the Gospel, Christian, and with the plain words of Christ and the Apostles ; it purposes just that establishment of the kingdom of this world, which Christ rejected ; it claims that rule over all communions which Peter forbids to all and to himself. Not as a theologian, for the As a theolo- whole true tradition of the Church is in irreconcilable opposition gian' to it. Not as a historian can I accept it, for as such I know that As a historian, the persistent endeavour to realise the theory of a kingdom of the world has cost Europe rivers of blood, has confounded and de- graded whole countries, has shaken the beautiful organic archi- tecture of the elder Church, and has begotten, fed, and sustained the worst abuses in the Church. Finally, as a citizen, I must As a citizen, reject this dogma, because by its claims on the submission of states and monarchs, and of the whole political order, under the Papal power, and by the exceptional position which it claims for the clergy, it lays the foundation of endless, ruinous disputes between State and Church, between clergy and laity ; for I cannot conceal from myself, that this doctrine, the results of which were the ruin of the old German kingdom, would, if governing the Catholic part of the German nation, at once lay the seed of incurable decay in the new kingdom which has just been built up."

Jesuits obey their General because they have voluntarily Jesuits bound sworn to do so. But the Homish Church is to be subjected to the Pope's absolute sway in spite of itself, by the advance of his pretensions to godlike qualifications. The Pope being now above criticism and beyond control, the office of General of the Jesuits might become merged in the Popedom ; and thus Jesuitism reign supreme. Or if the two offices be kept distinct, still a Pope can be managed more easily than an assembly : because if restive,

XXXVI

The Pope and the Order.

he may learn that, though infallible, he is not immortal.

Clement xiv. Ganganclli found out to his cost, when as Clement XIV., he boldly suppressed the Jesuit Order.

Had not the wonderful organisation, discipline, and unscrupu- lous skill in deception, so perfectly developed in the Jesuit Order, been united to the Papal system, the Order could never have so successfully wielded its baneful influence in enslaving the human mind. Happily there is some hope of an awakening. The claims of the Papacy have become so exaggerated, that, even among the most submissive disciples of the Romish Church, a spirit of enquiry has been gradually developed ; and most zealous and learned and honest endeavours have been made to arrive at an understanding of the foundation on which the Pope's authority rests. The more this has been enquired into, the more impressed have ingenuous minds become, with the evidences of unfairness and craftiness that have met them in the progress of their researches.

Janus. Nothing can be more interesting or valuable in this direc-

tion than the work to which we have already referred, " The Pope and the Council.'' The earlier chapters treating of the influence of Jesuitism, the Roman Syllabus, and the new dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary, are well worthy of notice. Nor are the succeeding remarks, on the position of the Bishops of Rome in the ancient Church, and the teaching of the Fathers on the Primacy, in any way less remarkable and valuable. But, what

Forgeries. is most striking is the record of the various forgeries, by which the Popes have arrived at their assumed position of spiritual lords over the whole of mankind.

Space will not allow of more than a few extracts on this point. The reader is earnestly advised to study this remarkable work in its entirety, and he will derive abundant profit from the

Isidorisn De- perusal. Speaking of the forgeries known as the " Isidorian Decretals," which were concocted about A.D. 845, for the purpose of giving some show of authority for the papal usurpation, the writer observes : —

" It would be difficult to find in all history a second instance of so successful and yet so clumsy a forgery. For three centuries past it has been exposed, yet the principles which it introduced

cretals.

"Janus," or "The Pope ami the Council." xxxvii

and brought into practice have taken such deep root in the soil Forgeries. 'of the Church, and have so grown into her life, that the exposure of the fraud has produced no result in shaking the dominant system.

"About a hundred pretended decrees of the earliest Popes, together with certain spurious writings of other churcb digni- Decrees, taries and acts of Synods, were then fabricated in the west of Gaul and eagerly seized upon by Pope Nicholas I. at Rome, to be used as genuine documents in support of the new claims put forward by himself and his successors."*

Pope Nicholas I., by carrying out this same system of forgery and deceit, extended his tyranny over a great extent of territory. Nicholas I. Foisting on the ignorant nations spurious documents, and altering true ones, he tried to impose his yoke universally. " By a bold but non-natural torturing of a single word against the sense of a whole code of laws, he managed to give a twist to a canon of a general council which actually excluded all appeals to Rome, so as to make it appear to give to the whole clergy, in the East and "West, a right of appeal to Rome, and he made the Pope the supreme judge of all bishops and clergy of the whole world. He wrote this to the Eastern Emperor, to Charles, King of the Franks, and to all the Frankish Bishops. And he referred the Orientals, and so sharp-sighted a man as Photius, to those fabrications fathered on Popes Silvester and Sixtus, which were thenceforth used for ° centuries, and gained the Roman Church the oft-repeated reproach from the Greeks of .being the native home of inventions and falsi- fications of documents." f

Truly were the Easterns right in their reproach, Jesuitism is but the outcome of the essence and spirit of the papacy. This spirit of deceit and fraud was further manifested by other forgeries subsequent to those of the pseudo-Isidore, which will be found noticed and exposed in "Janus."* The authors show how plentifully such work was done in the Hildebrandine Era, and how, when the Pope wished to steal his neighbours' land, spurious deeds of gift, called the Donations of Constantino, of Donations. Pepin, and of Charlemagne, were fabricated, as they were wanted.

* The Pope and the Council ; by " Janus." London : Rivingtons, 1869 ; p. 95.

t Ibid., p. 98.

x. \xviii Protest against Papal Pretensions and Fraud*.

Canon of Sardica.

Prance.

Gratiy.

Honorius.

" If we look at the whole papal system of universal monarchy as it has been gradually built up during seven centuries, and is- now being energetically pushed on to its final completion, we can clearly distinguish the separate stones the building is composed of. For a long time all that was done was to interpret the canon of Sardica," (in a sense exactly opposite to its plain meaning) " so as to extend the appellant jurisdiction of the Pupe to what- ever could be brought under the general and elastic term of 'greater causes.' But from the end of the fifth century the papal pretensions had advanced to a point beyond this, in conse- quence of the attitude assumed by Leo and Gelasius ; and from that time began a course of systematic fabrications, sometimes manufactured in Ptome, sometimes originating elsewhere, but adopted and utilized there."*

The same spirit of protest against such iniquitous proceedings is also gaining ground and manifesting itself in other Roman Catholic countries besides Germany, and notably in France. The eloquent and convincing letters of " Father " Gratiy were evidence of this, and the very extensive sale which those letters have had, is an additional proof of the great sympathy of the French people with the sentiments contained in them. Father Gratry is no more.f The Ultramontane journals assert that he recanted be- fore his death ; but add, that before he died, he was for some days speechless. Remembering, as we do, the precipitate haste with which these same authorities proclaimed that the murdered Arch- bishop of Paris, M. Darboy, had, at the last, been likewise faithless to his convictions against the dogmas of the Council, including that of the Infallibility ; and that now the Abbe Michaud, the Cure of the Madelene, has refuted this pretence, we a're not disposed to place any reliance upon the reports of Father Gratry's recantation. But whether, in the last struggle of nature, he may or may not have uttered some incoherent words, or have made some sign, which the Ultramontanes use for their own purposes, still, the facts which he deliberately recorded in his first letter, such as the condemnation of Pope Honorius, by the sixth (Ecumenical CDuncil, as a heretic, the statement of this fact in all the ancient Roman Breviaries for the 28th day of June, together with the disappearance in late

* The Pope and the Council, p. 122. t He died, after a short illness, at the age of 67, in Switzerland, early last Feb.

Father Gratry's Letter to Archbishop of Malms. xxxix

editions of this record of a Pope's condemnation for heresy ; these A Pope a facts remain, and can be proved by other evidence. Thus P. Gratry remarks, " F. Gamier in the preface to his edition of the Liber Din mm (1680) with simple irony says that this has been done for the sake of brevity : 'mine aliter ista, bremusque leguntur.' ''

" Thus the ancient breviary, from which I have just quoted, enumerates the names of the heretics condemned in the sixth Council, and it defines the heresy for which they were condemned. Honorius is one of the number. The correcting hand, which has edited the breviary (since the edition of 1520) suppresses, for the Suppression. sake of brevity, this ' little " incident of the condemnation of a Pope by an (Ecumenical Council. Are such falsifications to be tolerated ?

" Here, Monseigneur, is one of the frauds by which you have Frauds. been deceived. I will point out others of the same sort, all of them perpetrated in the same sense and in order to arrive at the same end, UNIVERSAL AND IRRESPONSIBLE SOVEREIGNTY.

" Yes, you have been deceived by a complete and plausible collection of false assertions, the result of great ignorance and want of regard for truth, which, for a long time, have prevailed about this subject. It is a method of treatment, apologetic in character and breathing a polemical spirit, which doubtless is not of recent birth, and which the sacred Scriptures of old condemned in those divine and terrible words, very necessary to be meditated upon — ' Doth God require your lies ; that you should utter Lies, deceits to promote His glory ? Numquid indiget Deus mendacio vestro, lit pro eo loquamini dolos ?'

" This sharp reproof is addressed by Job to his friends, who set themselves to vindicate Providence by false reasoning. Are these friends of Job such wretches, then; so false; such shameless liars? No ; they belong to a class of men, including nearly the whole of those who, all of them, or nearly all, when they believe that they are defending a good cause, uphold it by all means, accumulate false reasons, of which they themselves perceive the worthless- ness, conceal the facts that cause them embarrassment, and bring forward uncertain facts, respecting which they are in doubt, even while they state them. Now it is this duplicity of the Duplicity, highest degree, which the Holy Spirit disapproves of, or, to speak more correctly, denounces by the reproach, ' Doth God require your frauds and your lies ?'

xl Infallibility; Suppression Brief oj Clem. XIV.

Treating further on (p. 70) in the same letter, of the forgeries contained in the Isidorian Decretals, so ably exposed by Janus in Germany, Father Gratry protests against them and against the arguments alleged by unscrupulous advocates in their favour. He adopts, as the expression of his own conviction, the declaration of another French Roman Catholic priest respecting these frauds. "I prefer," says he, "the noble judgment of Father de Regnon.

Father Keg- M. (Je Regnon makes the following plain statement : ' Never, it foTgerie?6 must be acknowledged, never was there seen a forgery so auda- cious, so extensive, so solemn, so persevering.' And, let us add, never was there a forgery which has been for ages so successful. Yes ; the forger has atttained his end. He has changed the regulation of ecclesiastical affairs according to his desire ; but he has not arrested the general decay. The ' false Decretals ' have produced nothing but evil."*

Evil fruit. If Father Regnon declares the product evil, the tree, root and

branch, must also be evil; and a corrupt tree cannot "bring forth good fruit." f The applicability of this remark to the Dogma, as the product of a massive body of false decretals, forgeries, and untruth, time will shew.

But Papal Infallibility embraces all time— the past, as well as the present and the future ; therefore the Pope having always been infallible, according to his own declarations, in how sad a plight are the Jesuits ! For this infallible authority has proclaimed the Society of Jesus to be infamous. From the " Brief for the Effec- Re tual Suppression of the Order of the Jesuits" % drawn up and Tmptor. 6" signed by Clement XIV., in 1773, the following extracts will prove in what a light the Pope regarded the "Company." After declaring the purpose for which it was instituted and the various privileges granted by Paul III. and subsequent Popes, the Brief of Suppression goes on to say :—

Brief of Sup- „ Notwithstanding so many and so great favours, it appears

pression,1773. . .,

from the Apostolical Constitutions that almost at the very moment

* Etudes Religeuses, Novembre, 1866. (Voir, egalement, Novembre, 1804.)

i Matt. vii. 18.

t This Brief begins with, and is known by, the words Dominus fir Redemptnr.

Brief for Suppression of the Jesuits, 1773. xli

of its institution there arose in the bosom of this Society divers

seeds of discord and dissension, not only among the companions internal dis-

themselves, but with other regular orders, the secular clergy, cord-

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 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 about matters relating to the good government and discipline of the Order; sometimes concerning different points of doctrine, concerning their schools, or concerning such of their exemptions and privi- leges as the ordinaries and other ecclesiastical or civil officers declared to be contrary to their rights and jurisdiction. In short, accusations of the gravest nature and very detrimental to Protests the peace and tranquillity of the Christian commonwealth, have a»amst them- been continually brought against the said Order. Hence arose 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."

The Brief goes on to state, that in consequence of these and a further appeal, Sixtus V., convinced that tbe complaints against the excessive privileges of the Society, and their form of govern- ment, and the various accusations laid against the Order, "were just and well-founded, did, without hesitation, comply therewith." He appointed a visitor and a congregation of cardinals to investigate.

"But this Pontiff having been carried off by a premature death, Sixtus V. dies, this wise undertaking remained without effect." The succeeding Pope, Gregory XI Y., not liking the idea, as we may well suppose, of being " carried off by a premature death " if he could help it, " approved of the institution of the Society in its utmost extent." Restoration He confirmed all their privileges. "He ordained, and that*1 xiv!§ 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, constitu-

xlii Clem. XIV.'s Brief to Suppress the Jesuits, 1773.

t lay ^

for

tions or decrees of the said Society, or attempt in any way what- ever to make changes therein." He gave leave, however, to any one of the Jesuits to appeal to himself.

The Brief of Suppression goes on to say that these fresh evidences of papal goodwill were in vain ; disorders and dissen- sions continued ; accusations were multiplied ; the Society was continually convicted of " insatiable avidity of temporal posses-

Under Paul v. sions," although avowing poverty, as its rule. The result was, £ un(jer pau} v. the Society were compelled, by the force of circumstances, to humble themselves and sue for papal favour, by reason of their misdeeds and consequent difficulties.

The Brief declares further, that evils continued to multiply. The names of eleven popes are given who tried in vain to find a remedy, or in any degree to mitigate the evils. " Certain idolatrous ceremonies were adopted in certain places in contempt of the Catholic Church ; " and complaint was made of " the use and explanation of various maxims which the Holy See has with reason proscribed as scandalous, and plainly contrary to good morals;" as also of "the revolts and intestine troubles in some

Restrictions. Of the Catholic States," caused by Jesuits. Restrictions were put on the Society by Innocent XI. and XIII., by Benedict XIV. ; and they were restricted to their present members, and forbidden to admit new ones.

The Brief continues in the following words : — "The late apostolic letter of Clement XIII., of blessed memory, our immediate predecessor, by which the institute of the Society of Jesus was again approved and recommended, was far from bringing any comfort to the Holy See, or any advantage to the Christian Commonwealth. Indeed, this letter was rather extorted than granted, to use the expression of Gregory X. in the 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 full of difficulty and storm; complaints and quarrels were multiplied on every side ; in some places dangerous seditions arose, tumults, discords,

Scandal. scandals, which, weakening or entirely breaking the bonds of

Clement's Brief of Suppression, 1773 — continued. xliii

Christian charity, excited the faithful to all the rage of party hatred and enmities. Desolation and danger grew to such a height, that Expelled from the very sovereigns whose piety and liberality towards the Society Franc^Spam, 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 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 was not sufficient for recon- ciling the whole Christian world, unless the said Society was absolutely abolished and suppressed, made known their demands and wishes 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

Susuicious

the Catholic Church in general. But the unexpected death of the Death Of aforesaid pontiff rendered this project abortive. Clement XIIL

" 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 a matter of so much moment, we determined not to be precipitate, but to take due time ; not only to examine attentively, weigh carefully and take counsel wisely, but also by unceasing prayers to ask of the Father of lights, His particular assistance under these circumstances ; exhorting the faithful to co-operate with us by their prayers and good works in obtaining this needful succour."

After remarking on what the Council of Trent had decided with respect to the clergy who were members of this Society, the Brief proceeds : —

" Actuated by so many and important considerations, and, as

xliv Clement's Brief of Suppression, 1773 — continued.

Grounds for wo hope, aided by the presence and inspiration of the Holy suppression. gpirit . compelled also by the necessity of our office, which strictly obliges us to conciliate, maintain and confirm the peace and tranquillity of the Christian Commonwealth, and remove every obstacle which may tend to trouble it ; having further considered that the said Society 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 difficult, not to say impossible, that the Church could recover a firm and lasting peace so long as the said Society subsisted : in consequence hereof, and determined by the particular reasons we have alleged, and forced by other motives which prudence and the good government of the Church have dictated, the knowledge of which we keep to ourselves, con- forming ourselves to the example 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 constitution and privileges ; after a mature deliberation, we do, out of our certain knowledge and the fulness of our apostoli- cal power, SUPPRESS AND ABOLISH THE SAID SOCIETY : we deprive Their pro- it of all power of action whatever, of its houses, schools, colleges, Sited confis" hospitals, lands, and in short, every other place whatever, in whatever kingdom or province they may be situated ; we abrogate and annul its statutes, rules, customs, decrees and con- stitutions, even though confirmed by oath and approved by the Holy See, or otherwise ; in like manner we annul all and every its privileges, favours general or particular, the tenor whereof is, and is taken to be as fully and as amply expressed in this 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 every authority of all kinds, the General, the Provincials, the Visitors Offices and other Superiors of the said Society, to be for ever annulled annulled. an(j extinguished, of what nature soever the said authority may be, whether relating to things spiritual or temporal."*

* For proof of a direct conflict of authority between two Popes, see the letter to the Archbishop of Paris by the present Pope, at the end of this work.

Clement's Brief of Suppression, 1773 — continued. xlv

The Brief goes on to transfer all the authority to the Ordi- Clerics to join naries ; and orders, that all Jesuits who had not as yet received ' holy orders, might dispose of themselves as they pleased; all clerics were to join other regular orders, or become secular priests. If any Jesuits were allowed to become teachers of youth "in any college or school, care " was to " be taken that they should have no part in the government or direction of the same."

After other directions the Brief proceeds : — " 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 sovereign Pontiffs, and by which they were per- mitted to read heretical and impious books, proscribed by the Holy See ; likewise the power which 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 Brief to letter, no person do presume to suspend the execution thereof, forc 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."

The Brief was not to be a temporary measure ; the express words of the latter part being: — "Our will and pleasure is that these our letters shall be for ever and to all eternity valid, Valid for ever. permanent, and efficacious, have and obtain their full force and •effect ; and be inviolably observed by all and every person whom they may concern, now or hereafter, in any manner whatever."

xlvi Clement's Brief of Suppression, 1773 — concluded.

"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."

Jesuit statis- It is worthy of remark, that at the time of the suppression of the Order, now nearly a century ago, the Society numbered 39 houses of professed members, 669 colleges, 61 noviciates, 196 seminaries, 335 residences, 223 missions, and 22,782 members, dispersed everywhere. Among its members were 24 cardinals, 6 electors of the empire, 19 princes ; and, though the consti- tutions forbid Jesuits to be bishops, there were 21 Jesuit arch- bishops, and 121 bishops. And according to the accounts of their historians they may be reckoned as possessing property in various kingdoms worth forty millions sterling, though they vowed poverty !

Jesuits con- Never was a more scathing denunciation of any society penned / ^an ig ^is crushing exposure of the evils of Jesuitism ; and if ever a Pope spoke "ex cathedra," Pope Clement XIV. did, when he thus powerfully and judicially condemned the constitution and malignant tendency of the Great Secret Society. It is a marvel, to those who peruse this document and look on the present progress of papal affairs from the outside, to see with what fiery and unscrupulous zeal, the very Society, thus denounced and crushed, has been seeking to establish the infallibility of the same authority that condemned it, and covered it with everlasting ignominy. If the Pope be infallible, then nothing can be more certain than that the Society .of Jesus is a curse upon the Christian religion and the human race. It would be vain to try to blacken the Order more completely, or to give it more crushing censure, than does the infallible head of the Romish communion, in his singularly calm and well- reasoned Brief of Suppression. To ordinary observers, there seems no way of escape from the dilemma. It is impossible for Protest- ants to add, or even to wish to add, to its completeness and force.

Cardinal Lorenzo Ganyamlli. xlvii

To give undue weight to the personal character of any Pope Calumny. in defence or support of any of his acts, is neither consistent with our ideas of what is due to the subject matter of this work, nor with a just appreciation of the facts upon which such Pope may have acted judicially, but inasmuch as it has been the policy of the Ultramontanes to vilify the memory of Clement the XIV., we quote the description of his character and disposition given in Ranke's History of the Popes.*

" Of all the Cardinals, Lorenzo Ganganelli was without Character of question the mildest and most moderate. In his youth his tutor said to him, ' that it was no wonder he loved music, for that all was harmony within him.' He grew up in innocent intercourse with a small circle of friends, combined with retirement from the world and solitary study, which led him deeper and deeper into the sublime mysteries of true theology. In lie manner as he turned from Aristotle to Plato, in whom he found more full satisfaction of soul, so he quitted the Schoolmen for the Fathers, and them again for the Holy Scriptures, which he studied with all the devout fervour of a mind convinced of the revelation of the Word. From this well-spring he drank in that pure and calm enthusiasm which sees God in everything, and devotes itself to the service of man. His religion was not zeal, persecution, lust of dominion, polemical vehemence ; but peace, charity, lowliness of mind and inward harmony. The incessant bickerings of the Holy See with the Catholic States, which shook the foundations of the Church, were utterly odious to him. His moderation was not weakness or a mere bending to necessity, but spontaneous bene- volence and native graciousness of temper."

The advocates of the Society may urge that what one Pope destroyed another re-established : but this does not mend the matter. This double-dealing on the part of the Roman Double deal. Pontiffs may indeed suggest the thought that it is a very odd in£- sort of infallibility that the Roman bishop is possessed of; which says one thing at one time and another thing at another ; which makes one Pope unsay what another has most solemnly recorded as being the decision of the Holy Spirit. It is not for us to

* Raiike's " History of the Popes," vol. iii., pp. 212—214.

xlviii

, or the Bulk of 1773 8f 1814.

1814. Pius VII.

The Jesuits restored.

reconcile this shuffling with the candour and openness which should characterize the minister of truth. In fact there is herein Janus. furnished another of those proofs, of which " Janus "* brings forward so many, to show that this pretention to infallibility is an utter fallacy and absurdity, revolting to common sense, and in- sulting to the Most High.

Yet we cannot ignore the fact, nor can Jesuits themselves deny, that, to a certain extent, Pius VII. , in his Bull re-establishing the Society of Jesus in 1814, by his silence on the very points which led Clement XIV. to suppress the same order, allowed and endorsed the truth and validity of the accusations adduced by Clement. The " infallible " king of human souls, Pius VII., when, for political purposes, he promulgated his Bull giving a new life to the Company, does not utter a word that implies condemnation of the Brief of his predecessor. The terrible accusations brought against them are allowed to pass as terrible truths. The Brief of Suppression is spoken of as an act that was perfectly in order and necessary. And though he annuls that part which suppresses the order, he in fact gives fresh force to all the other parts, which hold up to the world the infamy of the institution. But Pius VII., monkish in all his ideas, was inclined to try all means, worthy or questionable, to hurl back the tide of liberal ideas; and though he was convinced of the fact that he was about to employ spiritual pirates, yet he said 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"

The question still remains, why Jesuits should be so eager to establish the infallibility of the power which they have felt in time past to press so disastrously on their Order. The answer seems Dominion. to be, that the only thing they crave after is dominion for them- selves; and they see their way to it more easily through an absolute spiritual sovereignty than through a limited one ; they can manage one man more easily than a multitude of indepen- dent and troublesome prelates. Nero wished that all the iuhabi-

" The Pope and the Council " ; by " Janus." Rivingtons, 1870.

The Pope's salutary fear of the Jesuits. xlix

tants of Rome had but one head and one neck that he might end

them all at one blow. The Jesuits have a similar aspiration with The Jesuits

regard to the Church, over which they want to lord it without

control ; and they are blest with more than Nero's fortune, being

endowed with more than his cunning. They think they can

manage to get their own way by acting on the Pope's weakness

and fears. They have a remarkably efficacious and disagreeable

method of getting rid of those who stand in their way ; and they

know that the Popes are aware of their peculiar skill in this

respect. They flatter themselves that the lesson which they gave

to the infallible Pontiffs in times gone by — proving that they

were liable to die, though they were not liable to err, — will not

be lost on those with whom they may have to deal in time to

come. The future attribute of the Popes is to be INFALLIBILITY,

but it must be infallibility with a leaning to the interests of

Jesuitism, for fear of consequences. "What Voltaire said of the Voltaire.

government of Russia — that it was " absolutism tempered by

regicide " — will hold good in future of the supreme rule in the

Romish Church. The Pope is to be possessed of INFALLIBILITY,

TEMPERED BY FEAR OF SUDDEN DEATH. Sudden death.

Nor is it to be wondered at if the Pope should take a lesson from the past, and notice how every one who has been obnoxious to these men has been stricken down. Roman Catholic writers have remarked over and over again on the remorse! essuess of the Jesuit faction in their treatment of their opposers. Even the probability of opposition on the part of anyone has been enough to cause his removal out of the way. A remarkable instance of this is given in the death of Pope Clement VIII. when about to Death of Pope give his decision in the quarrel between the Jesuits and Domini- Clement VIII. cans. It was strongly suspected that the decision would be against the former, but the Pope was never permitted to give it. The Cardinal a Monte has informed us in his life of Bellannine,* that the Jesuit Cardinal said, while Clement was in robust health, that he would die before giving his decision. The exact words of

* See Vita Bellar minis, auctore Francisco Maria Cardinal! a Monte, Antwerp, 1031, p. 507.

1 Beilarmine's suspicious prediction.

the author, in Latin, are in a note below.* " Cardinal Bellarmme said, ' The Pontiff never will give that definition.' ' The Pontiff can and will give it,' answered his companion. Bellarmine rejoined, ' I don't deny that the Pope has the power and the will to do so ; yet I say, that he will never give this definition ; for indeed, if he will hasten this on, his life will first fail him.' " The author who heard this reply and was astonished at it, adds " Ita est pro veritate." Certain it is that Beilarmine's predic- tion was fulfilled.

cfementxm Clement XIII., from whom as the Brief of Suppression states, a letter of commendation " was extorted " by the Company of Jesus, when he was afterwards about to make an inquiry into the terrible accusations brought against the Order, passed away suddenly before any decision could be arrived at.

The remembrance of the fate of those of their own pre- decessors who have felt the force of Jesuit hate and cunning, will leave a deep impression on the minds of Roman Pontiffs, Especially will the Popes, in time of doubt and fear of their masters and tormentors, call to mind the unfortunate Ganganelli. Indeed that Pope was himself so well aware of the men with whom he was dealing, that when he signed the celebrated Brief — Dominus ac Redcmptor — which was to put an end to the Jesuit Society for ever, he told those around him that he knew he was signing his own death-warrant — "Sotto- scriviamo la nostra morte," Caraccioli says the words of the Pope were "This suppression will cause my death."f But,

Death War. ^0^ this was his conviction, Clement XIV., with all the

rant of * . . .

Clem. XIV. gravity of his position before him,, signed the Brief on July 23, 1773. All writers at that time represent him as possessing robust health. The Jesuit Georgel even says, " Ganganelli's strong constitution seemed to promise him a long career." Bernis wrote on the 3rd November of the same year, " His health is

* " Cardinalis Bellarmiiius inquit ; Pontifex nunquam hoc definiet. Posse et velle, excepit alter. Bellarminus rursus ; Pontificem posse et velle, non inficior ; aio tamen nunquam futurum, ut hoc definiet : iino id moliri si voluerit, vita prius eum deficiet."

t " Questa suppressione mi dara la morte."

The Justice of Clement's Bull vindicated, li

perfect and his gaiety more remarkable than usual." In the Pope Gangan.

month of April of the following year he was observed to grow liP°isoiied

rapidly ill and visibly to decline, without any apparent cause. His

physicians could not make out his complaint, and no medicine

could reach the seat of it, or control it. He lingered in great

torture for months, and died September 22, 1774. Every

symptom of poisoning was present when his body was opened.

The following dreadful description of his state is from the pen

of Caraccioli. " Several days before his death his bones were

exfoliated and withered, like a tree which, attacked at its root,

withers away and throws off 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 diminished ; and Post-morter.i.

all the muscles were shrunk up, and the spine was decomposed.

They filled the body with perfumed and aromatic substances :

but nothing would dispel the rnephitic effluvia. 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. All the hair of his head remained on the

velvet pillows upon which it rested, and on the slightest friction

his nails fell off." In fact the dead body retained no trace of

the living form, and every one was confirmed in the belief that he

had met foul play. The state of the poor disfigured, shattered

frame that Ganganelli left behind him, was convincing proof of

the unutterable tortures to which he had been subjected by the

Holy Society of Jesus : and induced the belief that those tortures

had been caused by the administration of the acqiia tofana of The Nun's

Perugia. We are told that some persons there, and the nuns in ^qua T°fana

particular, were notorious for the manufacture of this water,

which when drunk produced certain decay and death, though life

was more or less prolonged according to the strength of the poison

and the doses in which it was given. If every other of the

thousand proofs of Jesuit iniquity were wanting, this fearful

vengeance wreaked on Ganganelli and his dreadful end afford

ample vindication of the justice of the great act of his

life.

Grinfield, in his history of the Jesuits,* has the follow- G l's "History of the Jesuits.' ]>. -U\ri.

Hi To ic/iom the poisoning of Clement XIV. is due.

ing apt observations relating to this event. Speaking of the poisoning of Clement XIV. by those whom he had put down, and of the Pope's belief in this during his long agony, he says : — " Of this (their being his murderers) he felt the fullest conviction. Nor is it to be wondered at that he should have felt such gloomy forebodings. The approach of his death had been predicted by some peasants belonging to the ex- Jesuits. Insulting images and hideous pictures announced the impending catastrophe. Bicci, Evidence. the ex-General, encouraged these daring insults. His own rela- tive has minutely recorded them.f There cannot be stronger circumstantial evidence that Ganganelli fell a victim to the rage and detestation of the Order he had suppressed. The farce of subjection to Papal authority, which had been violated by so many acts of insubordination to Papal bishops, could not be more strikingly signalized and consummated, than by the tragedy of poisoning the Head of the Romish Church, and by their indecent triumph and inhuman satires after his decease."

Triumph. We have already referred to the motives which induced

Infallibility pius yjj to rest0re the Jesuit Order. He thought the Papacy

ortnesociety •>

dissolved and greatly in need 01 those rigorous and experienced rowers, as he described them in the brief of restoration ; but doubtless the leading motive which urged him was his knowledge of the sinister power of the Order, of which, with reckless ambition, he deter- mined to possess himself. This was believed to have been his primary motive, but it may have been quickened by apprehen- sions for his own personal safety. The long possession of the Papal chair by the present Pope, and his exemption from many of the misfortunes peculiar to those of his predecessors who had ventured to interfere with the operations or the safety of the Jesuits, thus seem to justify, in a Papal sense, the policy upon which Pius VII. acted in the restoration of the Order. But the tyranny over the Roman Catholic section of the Church, which the Jesuits have induced the Pope solemnly to inaugurate, is such, as to have cost him already the local temporalities of the Holy See in and about Rome, with the almost certain secession of the most intelligent portion of the Roman Catholic

t Roscoe's Memoirs of Scipio tleRicci, vol. i.. chap. 1. London. IH^H.

Brief of Pius IX. in favour of the Jesuits. liii

Church from communion with the Holy See, and a consequent diminution of the temporal power of the Papacy throughout the world. However, let the motives, and even the results, be what they may, the two opposing decisions'of Clement XIY. and Pius IX. still remain the same stubborn facts; and effectually to reconcile them, so as to save the appearance of Papal Infallibi- lity, will puzzle even Jesuit ingenuity.

The part of the Brief of Pius IX., that restores the Order which Clement had suppressed for ever, runs as follows : —

" To Our Venerable Brother Constantine Patrizi, Cardinal of the grief for the Holy Roman Church, Bishop of Ostia and Vdletri, Deacon Jesuits.Mar. of the Sacred College of Cardinals, and Our Vicar-General in spiritual matters of Rome and of the district.

"Venerable Brother, — Health and Apostolic Benediction. The Church of God, like a queen clothed in varied apparel, since she has been adorned as with noble ornaments with different Regular Orders, has always sedulously availed herself of them to propa- gate the glory of the Divine Name, to expedite the business of the Christian Kingdom, and to introduce and spread among nations, by means of sound doctrine and charity, the polish of civilised life. The enemies of the Church, therefore, have per- secuted these religious Orders most of all, and from among them have singled out the Society of Jesus as the object of their special hatred, inasmuch as it is the most difficult to deal with, and, therefore, the most dangerous enemy of their designs. To Our grief we see that this is again taking place, while the in- vaders of Our temporal dominions, eager for their prey (which is always death-fraught to those who seize upon it) seem to long Death.fraushfc to begin the suppression of all Religious Societies, along with that of the Company of Jesus. To pave the way for this crime they strive to raise against it the ill-will of the people, and accuse its members of opposing the present Government, whilst, what is most to be noticed, they pretend that the power and the favour which they enjoy with Us, renders Us more hostile to the said Government, and exercises such an influence over Us that We do nothing without their advice. Now this foolish calumny,

liv Brief of Pius IX. favouring the Jesuits — concluded.

implying as it does the greatest contempt of Us, as being weak

and unfit to do anything of Ourselves, is plainly proved to be

absurd, since all know that the Roman Pontiff, when he has

implored divine light and aid, acts and orders as he judges right

and useful for the Church, but that in graver matters he has

been accustomed to employ the services of those, whatever be

their rank or condition, or whatever the Regular Order to which

they belong, whom he deems the most versed in the matter in

hand, and the most able to enunciate a wise and prudent opinion.

Of a truth We do often make use of the Fathers of the Society

of Jesus, and trust many things to their supervision, and more

especially matters concerning the Sacred Ministry. They on

their part, in performing these duties, show Us more and more

that affection and zeal, for which they have earned frequent and

high praises from Our predecessors. But this Our most just love

and esteem for the Society, which has always deserved well of

the Church of Christ, of this Holy See, and of Christendom, is a

very different thing from that slavish obsequiousness which Our

Calumny re- detractors lay to Our charge, and We indignantly repudiate this

pudiatec caiumny as regards Ourselves and the humble devotion of the

Fathers. We have thought that these things ought to be made

known to you, Venerable Brother, that the snares laid for the

Society might be made manifest, and that our sentiments, which

have been so shamefully and foolishly distorted and misrepresented,

might be put in a clear light, and thus prove a fresh testimony of

Our good will towards that noble Society.

******

" Given in Rome at St. Peter's on the 2nd day of March, in the year 1871, the 25th year of Our Pontificate."

The Jesuits, since their re-establishment, have showed them- selves worthy successors of those whose evil deeds brought on them the well-merited condemnation of the infallible head of the Reciprocal aid Roman communion. Like the ancient Praetorian guards, to whose office they have in fact succeeded, they are willing to raise their nominal Ruler to the highest dignity, in order to raise them- selves. They mean to rule the world by tyrannizing over the tyrant.

Excitement in the Jesuit Camp. Iv

In confirmation of this, the testimony of "Quirinus"* is of " Quirinus." remarkable importance.

" We may readily conceive the excitement in the Jesuit camp. After the patient, indefatigable toil of years of seed-time, the harvest-time seems to them to come at last. Up to 1773, their Order, from its numbers, the cultivation of its members, the influence of its schools and educational establishments, and its compact organisation, was unquestionably the most powerful Jesuits above religious corporation, but at the same time was limited and held Orders in check by the influence and powerful position of the other Orders. Augustinians, Carmelites, Minorites, and, above all, Dominicans, were likewise strong, and, moreover, leagued to- gether for harmonius action through their common hatred of the Jesuits, or through the natural desire to escape being mastered by them. Dominicans and Augustinians possessed by long pre- scription the most influential offices in Rome, so much so indeed that the two congregations of the Index and the Holy Oifice were entirely in the hands of the Order of Preachers, to the exclusion of the Jesuits. Since the restoration of the Jesuits this is completely changed, and entirely in their interest. All the ancient Orders are now in decline, above all, in theological importance and influence ; they do but vegetate now. More- over, the Dominicans have been saddled with a General thoroughly devoted to the Jesuits, Jandel, a Frenchman, who is exerting himself to root out in his Order the Thomist doctrines, so unpalatable to the Jesuits. The youngest of the great Orders, the Redemptionists or Signorians, act — sometimes willingly, some- Redempti times unwillingly — as the serving brothers, road-makers, and labourers for the Jesuits. And hence, now that they enjoy the special favour of the Pope, they have come to acquire a power in Rome which may be called quite unexampled. They have, in fact, become already the legislators and trusted counsellors of the Pope, who sees with their eyes and hears with their ears. To those familiar with the state of things at Rome, it is enough to name Piccirillo. For years past they have implanted and fos-

* "Letters from Rome on the Council." By Quirinus. Rivingtons, London. 1*71; pp. 76—79.

turn-

Guidi.

Ivi "Letter* from Rome on the Council." By Quirinus.

tered in the mind of Pius IX. the views he now wants to have consecrated into dogmas; and have managed to set aside, and at last reduce to impotence, the influence of wise men, who take a sober view of the condition of the times. When the Dominican Cardinal Guidi, who was then the most distinguished theologian in Rome, freely expressed to the Pope his views about the pro- jected Council and the measures to be brought before it, from that hour he was not only allowed no audience of Pius IX., but was excluded from all share in the preparatory labours of the Council, so that he remained in entire ignorance of the matters to be laid before it. But the Jesuits are also the oracles of many Cardinals, whose votes and opinions are very often ready-made The Gesu. for them in the Gesu. The congregation of the Index, which they used formerly so often to attack, blame, and accuse of partiality, when their own works were censured by it, is now becoming more and more their own domain, though the chief places are still in the hands of the Dominicans ; and this may gradually take place with most of the congregations in whose hands is centralised the guidance and administration of church affairs in all countries.

"And thus, if Papal Infallibility becomes a dogma, what inevitably awaits us is, that this Infallibility will not merely be worked in certain cases by the counsel and direction of the Jesuits ; much more than that. The Jesuits will for the future be the regular stewards of this treasure, and architects of the new dogmas we have to expect. They will stamp the dogmatic coinage and put it into circulation. It is enough to know the earlier history of the Society to know what this means, and what an immense capital of power and influence it will place at their Jesuits over command. ' Rulers and subjects ' — that will henceforth be the otherOrders. relation between the Jesuits and the theologians of other Orders. Worst of all will be the position of theologians and teachers who belong to no Order. At the mercy of the most contradictory judgments, as is already, e.g., the case in France, constantly exposed to the displeasure of the Jesuits, of the Curia, and of their Bishop or his adviser, and daily threatened in their very existence, how are they to get spirit, perseverance, or zeal for earnest studies, deep researches, and literary activity ? Everv

* »• * ,7

"Letters from Rome on the Council." By Quirinus. Ivii

Jesuit, looking down from the impregnable height of his privi- leged position, will be able to cry out to the theologians of the secular clergy, ' Tu longe sequere et vestigia prorsus adora ; ' for now is that fulfilled which the Belgian Jesuits demanded 230 years ago in their Imago Societatis Jesu. Their Order" is now really, and in the fullest sense, the Urim and Thummim and The Urim and breastplate of the High Priest — the Pope — who can only then issue an oracular utterance when he has consulted his breastplate, the Jesuit Order."*

Accurately measuring the weakness of human nature, they feel that their nominal Lord and Master will not readily forget their consummate skill, especially in the art of concocting poisons, and also of organizing conspiracies against the safety of states or of individuals. They are quite aware that his Holiness doubts neither their power nor their ability in applying these peculiar talents, when necessary. Therefore, with perfect safety to them- selves, did they force the exaltation of the Pope in every direc- tion. And is not the influence of the Jesuits continually met Safety- with ? Are they not ever assiduously insinuating themselves into high positions, and insidiously securing funds, as the sinews of power ? Do Jesuits not fill every civil office at the disposal of the Pope, and almost every Romish Bishopric ? Hence, nothing can be more evident, than the fact, that thus connected, they will rise in proportion as the office and attributes ot the Pope are exalted, but nothing is also more certain, than the sequel, that with the papacy they must fall, and the head corner-stone, crush- ing both, will be the infallibility of the Word of God.

But, in addition to the power of carrying out their schemes ; the Jesuits have attained, through the Dogma, another important result, viz., immunity from evil consequences. Papal Infallibility immunity, will be used to cloak every crime however flagrant. The Pope must bear the blame, but they will reap the advantage; or rather, the Pope being infallible, villainy will escape censure, provided that certain profit accrue to the Company. In vain need men cry out against whatever bears the stamp of Infallibility ; yet the Great Infallible may be a poor old man at the Vatican.

* " Obligatam hserentemque sanction Pontifici velut in pectore Socie- tatem." Bolland, Imayo, p. 622.

Iviii Under the cloak of Papal Infallibility.

Alas for the credulity of the dupes of this nefarious scheme ! What profound blindness must obscure the perception of all those abettors, who are thus willingly affording fresh licence to the deadliest foes of their own freedom, and of human progress ! Why not cast oif such slavery, and manfully resist claims alike blasphemous and usurping, which are purposely framed, so as the more securely to rivet the spiritual fetters, with which they are bound ?

But an awakening must come before long ; and, in the mean time, it is satisfactory for us to know, that, by endeavouring to Eockingof the screen themselves behind the Pope, the Jesuits are preparing in' a stupendous downfall for the whole Papal system. Were Roman Catholics to reflect, that Infallibility is now attributed to an old man, perhaps infirm, and trembling beneath the weight of years, who although Pope, yet is a mere puppet in the hands of men avowedly unscrupulous and designing, whom he feels to be the arbiters of his own life or death, —were this calmly considered, the sin and folly of submitting to a system so degrading, would be insupportable ; a system which destroys all spiritual life, and strives for worldly advantage, by ministering to a credulity, at once despicable, ridiculous, and debasing.

lix

THE TRAINING OF O'FARRELL, THE ASSASSIN.

Reference has been made to attempts at assassination, Assassination attributed to the Jesuits, as well as to those historically known to have been perpetrated by them. None seem too elevated for the malevolent designs of these conspirators. Henry IV. of France had attacks made on him by Jesuits again and Henry IV. again ; and at last perished by the hands of the Jesuit Ravaillac. Elizabeth of England shared in these attacks, but escaped the malice of these deadly foes. On the third of September 1758, an attempt was made at Lisbon to assassinate the King of Portugal, which he fortunately escaped, though not without being wounded. Several Jesuits were proved at the trial to have been active conspirators against the king's life. In later days, the same kind of attempts appear to have proceeded from the same source. The attempted assassination of the Emperors of Russia and France The Emperors in Paris, a few years ago, was perpetrated by one, who appeared to have received his inspiration from reading the writings of the Jesuit, Mariana. Similar suspicions attach to the education of O'Farrell, who attempted the murder of H.R.H. the Duke of Edinburgh in Australia, on March 12th, 1868.

It appears from the Papers laid before the Australian Parlia- ment, that O'Farrell had been educated with the intention of his entering the Roman Catholic Priesthood ; and by the Papal Brief directed to Cardinal Zurla in October, 1836, the direction of the education of that Priesthood was committed to the Jesuits.

The information supplied in the Australian Parliamentary Papers, especially the portion directly furnished by Mr. Parkes, who was then Colonial Secretary at Sydney, and by Mr. McLerie, the Inspector General of the Sydney Police, leave no reasonable doubt, that O'Farrell was connected with the Fenian conspiracy, which was at that time very mischievously active.

We have not . direct evidence of the connection of the Great Secret Society with the Fenian conspiracy, but there is presump-

Ix The Secret Society and Fenianism.

tive evidence of co-operation between the two organizations ; and to the indications of this we shall refer.

Hatred of the No. one can read the Ultramontane organs in Ireland without discovering how bitterly and skilfully the antipathy of the Irish is directed against everything English and Pro- testant. The article in the Dublin Review on " The case of Ireland before Parliament," indicates the intense sympathy of the Great Secret Society, whose sentiments it utters, with the objects which the Fenians had in view, while professedly finding fault with that organization. The subject is so cleverly dealt with, that, though no part can be detached from the rest as proof

Feuianism. of approval of Fenianism, yet every sentence adds fresh convic- tion to the mind of the reader, that the writer heartily wishes well to what he professes to discourage. Other periodicals, notably those emanating from Jesuit Colleges, breathed the same spirit of burning hate to everything, that Englishmen most value.

Joly the- His- Cretineau Joly, the Jesuit historian, informs us, that even during the time when the Order was suppressed by the Pope, the members, keeping up their organization in England, settled at Stonyhurst to " await more favourable times." With respect to the Jesuit Colleges in Ireland he writes : —

" The Jesuits have only been able to realise in that country good without renown ; good, without any of those social advan- tages with which the world believe them to be so much occupied; nevertheless they have never given up a country where all seems

Dominus ac condemned to despair. The Brief Dominus ac Redemptor having Redemptor. annihilated the Company of Jesus, the children of Loyola would not be discouraged like a flock of sheep because their shepherd had abandoned them. Rome had disbanded her best soldiers, on the very eve of the day when the Holy See was to be attacked on all sides at once. The Jesuits, while obeying the Pontifical Brief, did not believe it to be their duty to desert the post com- mitted to their charge. They, like the Irish, were poor ; but this destitution, which had its source in charity, did not disquiet them. They united themselves in indigence, and laboured together for the harvest which God had reserved f >r their zeal. They waited for happier days. Father Richard Callaghan, an old missionary from the Philippines, whose hand and tongue bore

Deaths of Callayhan and Betah. Ixi

traces of the martyrdom he had endured for the faith, directed

the secularized Jesuits. They could not found an Establishment

in Ireland to receive the young men, whom they hoped soon to

gather into their Order, whenever it should again arise from its

ruins. The College of Stonyhurst opened its bosom to receive stonyhurst.

some of them ; others went to Palermo, where they completed

their studies. In 1807, Richard Callaghan died, burdened with

years and good works. In 1811, the death of Thomas Betah

broke the last link which in Ireland attached the new scholars to

the ancient company. Betah, whose name is still popular in

Dublin and in Ireland, found in his heart that species of eloquence

which excites the natural instincts of this people in so lively a

manner. Father Kenny succeeded him in the month of

November. With a patience which nothing could overcome, the

Jesuits set themselves to work exactly as if the Sovereign Pontiff

had restored them to life.

" They felt the great disadvantages of that sort of cosmopolite education which, by displacing children from their country in their youth, gives them less of patriotic feeling. Ireland, accord- ing to them, had a right to see her children reared upon her own proscribed soil, in order that, nourished in her misfortunes, they might on some future day claim her emancipation with more energy. It was this thought that inspired Father Kenny* with the Prof. Kenny, project of forming a national college, and he did create one at

Clongowes, not far from Dublin It was necessary to ciongowea

raise the Irish from the state of moral debasement in which it College, was the policy of England to keep them. To this people the great voice of Daniel O'Connell, a pupil of the Jesuits, first taught the meaning of liberty." f

By teaching the young to look back on the rebels of past ages, as on men worthy of all praise and imitation, an attempt is made, and only too successfully, to keep alive an undying antagonism

* Father Kenny was one of the earliest professors after the foundation of Maynooth.

f " Poor Gentlemen of Liege :" being the History of the Jesuits in England and Ireland for the last sixty years, translated from their own historian, Cretineau Joly. London, J. F. Shaw & Co., 43, Paternoster Row, pp. 91—93.

Ixii College Training of Irish Student*.

between the different portions of the United Kingdom. This is done, that the cause, which the Jesuits have in view may always find instruments, and an opportunity for achieving their ends. Little do they care if these instruments, which they provide for the furtherance of their own plans, sometimes work useless mis- chief to the commonwealth in which they may happen to live, hut of which they really form no part. Take for an example of student the training constantly applied to the excitable Irish student, Training. ^^ language as that used respecting Irish rebels :*-

"Nothing in the natural order tends so much to exalt the CariowCollege young of a nation, or more effectually helps to lift them above Magazine. pursuits either simply ' of the earth earthy/ or else vile and degrading, and to preserve them on the road to true and honour- able independence of spirit, as the examples of the heroes of history, — 'above all, of the good and brave of Fatherland. As the young heir of a noble house, while he scans with beaming eye the records of ancestral fame, is stimulated to a rivalry in worthy deeds, so the young men of a Nation, while perusing the sacred pages that are blurred by the sorrows, and illumined by the glory of their countrymen, are wooed by their charms ; and incited to go and do like those whose names are treasured up in the story and the songs of their Native Land.

Incitements " Now to what page of Irish history can the writer refer his to crime. C0untrymen for brighter examples of every virtue that goes to form the true patriot and the pure Christian hero, than to that which chronicles the events that have made Wexford a household word in a million homes, not only in Ireland, but on so many foreign shores ?

" Entranced by the native grace and dignity of the heroic characters which stand out on that page, enveloped in glory's sheeniest light ; and struck by the unfavourable circumstances which preceded and accompanied their unexpected development, we do not fear ' to speak of '98 ;' and, without a blush at the mention of her name, we would ask our readers to turn their tearful eyes on conquered Wexford with the executioner's hand tightly grasping her throat."

* Vide " Carlow College Magazine" for December, 1862 ; p. 37f>.

Irish abuse of British Statesmen. Ixiii

Again, at page 379, we read : —

" He must therefore be a bold, if not an unscrupulous, writer, Abuse, who can dare in periodical, or daily literature, to lecture, or censure, Irishmen for recalling to mind the perfidy and cruelty of British statesmen — the Pitts and Castlereaghs of infamous memory — or for giving thankful expression to the feelings necessarily evoked by such recollections ; for declaring that the injustice of the past must be repaired, and the traces of a bygone savagery be wiped out ; that the last chains, in which the heartless exterminators of the Celtic race, bound our manhood, must be broken in pieces, and this holy island be inhabited once again — free from social, political, and religious outrage — free from the immoral, absolute dominion of eight thousand feudal lordlings — a dominion obtained by crime or purchase, under the sanction of British law, and maintained by more than forty thousand British bayonets."

Praise is awarded by this organ of education to every writer who recalls the worthy deeds of former rebels and assassins, per- formed out of love to their "Faith," and " Country," and "People." "In so doing," we are informed, " he but portrays the valorous deeds of Irish martyrs ; and casts, in much gratitude, a lover's wreath on the tomb, wherein worth and honour lie sleeping, whilst he tries by such endearments to improve and to elevate the young Irishmen, who have succeeded as well to the heritage of their woes as of their fame."

While the youth of the Irish people are thus trained by the Irish moral active and skilful agents of the Great Secret Society, is it any wonder that Ireland has been what she is : that her sons neglect useful labour, or, to use the high-sounding language, we have just quoted, " are effectually lifted above pursuits either simply ' of the earth earthy,' or else vile and degrading" ? Thus are men's minds warped from their youth. The Jesuits have laboured to destroy in their too apt scholars all moral sense, and to inculcate blind obedience to the wishes of those, who may for the time assume the mastery over them.

The real criminals, who are responsible in the sight of God and man for such crimes as that of O'Farrell, are those secret underminecs of true morality, who train men for their own

Ixiv The Society's teaching.

purposes, and send them forth ready instruments for any desperate deed.

The attempt Though direct evidence of Jesuit participation in the attempt to assassin- f.0 assassinate the Duke of Edinburgh be wanting, yet that they

ate Duke of ° o> J ^ J

Edinburgh, were in some way connected with the dastardly deed is suggested by the following letter, which was intercepted by the Australian police, and read in the Legislative Assembly of New South Wales, April 18th, 1868. The writer is Father Shiel, Spiritual Director to the appointed assassin :—

"FRANCISCAN CONVENT,

" WEXFORD, IRELAND.

" July 31, 1867.

" MY DEAR HENRY, — It was only yesterday I received yours, April 26. Go at once to Adelaide and present yourself to the Vicar- General, to whom I have written ; your best place will be with the Jesuits, who will treat you with every kindness and attention suitable to your position. I am delighted to find that you have yielded to the promptings of Divine Grace. May Mass & bless- God grant you perseverance. I will offer the Holy Sacrifice for err f01'u y°u' ^^ y°urse^ under the protection of the B. Virgin, who will obtain for you a renewal of the spirit of your vocation. I presume that you are in a position to pay something for your maintenance ; in any case go at once to Adelaide. May God bless you, my dear Henry, and believe me yours very sincerely in Christ, " L. B. SHIEL.

" Show this letter to the Vicar-General of Adelaide. " H. J. O'FARRELL, Emerald Hill."

The assassin Taking this letter in connexion with the assertion of O'Farrell, the dupe of faat he was personally an unwilling actor in the wretched tragedy, which has rendered his memory infamous — we refer to O'FarrelPs repeated assertion, that he was a member of a conspiracy (we are aware that a document appeared after O'Farrell's execution, with his signature, as a sort of dying confession, to a contrary

The Jesuits as instigators to crime. Ixv

effect ; but this document we disbelieve, as did the cbief of the Sydney Police), — taking, then, this assertion of O'Farrell's in connection with Father Shell's aspiration for his perseverance, and the fact that O'Farrell was directed by him to " be with the Jesuits" in Australia; we cannot avoid the conclusion, that there was some connection between this notorious Fenian criminal and the Jesuits.

Ixvii

CONNECTION

OF THE

PRESENT WITH THE PAST.

The French have a saying, " Commengons par le commence- ment," and such is undoubtedly the natural course for the student of history, but ordinary readers and politicians have not in these hurried days time to trace the history of the Jesuits, scattered as their agency and operations have been throughout the world, down from the formal institution of the Order 300 years ago. Our object is merely to furnish our readers with a " Glimpse " of the Great Secret Society, as at present in operation. In order to explain the manifestations of this conspiracy and its policy, we are compelled to reverse the ordinary course of study, and to trace its history chronologically backwards. The part of this Work which follows was published in 1868. We have seen no reason to believe, that the glimpse that it affords of the operations of the Great Secret Society, up to that period, conveys anything incon- sistent with an accurate perception of the subject ; and in this belief we are confirmed by the prudent abstinence from all comment upon this work, which the Ultramontane journals and periodicals of this country have observed.

Ixviii

A GLIMPSE OF THE GREAT SECRET SOCIETY

UP TO 1868.

Charles Sauvestre.

policy.

IN a recent work by M. Charles Sauvestre, an eminent French the attention of the world has been called to the action of the Great Secret Society, at the present time. He introduces the subject in the following forcible language : —

" Imagine an association, whose members have snapped all the ties of family and country that bound them to their fellow-men ; and whose united efforts have been directed to the one only and formidable object — that of developing its own power, and estab- lishing its domination by every possible means over all the nations of the world.

Real Jesuit "Imagine further that this immense conspiracy had ended by substituting its rules and its policy in the place of even the pre- cepts of religion ; that it had thus succeeded in obtaining the mastery over the princes of the Church, and in holding them in real, though not avowed, slavery — in such a way that those who bear official titles, and incur responsibility, are only docile instruments of a power which is concealed and silent.

" Such are the Jesuits.

" Banished unceasingly, they unceasingly find their way back : and little by little, secretly, they establish themselves, strongly root- ing themselves in darkness. Their property may be confiscated ; before long their losses are repaired. They attend, at the same time, to the wheedling of the people out of their inheritances, and to a widely extended system of commerce. Confessors, merchants, usurers, traffickers in pious toys, they invent new devotions in order to create for themselves new sources of revenue. Mean- while they mix themselves up with politics, disturb kingdoms, and make princes tremble on their thrones. Hatred. " For their hate is terrible. Woe to him who becomes their

Vitality.

Religions Associations suppressed in France, in 1792. Ixix

enemy ! By a strange coincidence, which they impiously call the

favour of heaven, specially shown on their hehalf, whoever

has placed obstacles in their way, though he has been at the

very height of greatness, has fallen suddenly as though struck

down. Henry IV., ' the only king whose memory the people Henry IV.

have revered,' meets with three assassins, one after the other, and

dies by the knife of a fanatic, at the very moment when he when to

is going to attack Austria, the government favoured by the stnke-

Jesuits. Clement XIV., a Pope! suppresses the Jesuits and dies

soon after in agony.

" At this moment the Jesuits are again established among us in spite of edicts and laws. As of old, they have re-opened their colleges, and endeavour to fashion our youth after their own mind.

" Their Society grows in riches and in influence by all sorts of methods ; and nothing is able to stay its progress ; for everywhere it finds men disposed to serve it in order to obtain by its means some advantage of place or rank." *

"Religious associations and communities were suppressed in Suppression, France absolutely by a decree of the Assemblee Nationale, passed on the 13th February, 1790 ; confirmed by another decree of 18th August, 1792. The property which had been given to them was restored at that time to the nation, and was sold. The monks and nuns returned to ordinary life ; a great number were married, and embraced civil professions. Indeed, monasteries and convents disappeared completely from the face of the country.

" Now, according to the last statistical report, these congregations are more numerous at the present day, than before the Revolution, and it was only in 1808 that their reconstitution was begun to be authorised. They have, therefore, in the space of sixty years, reconquered the lost ground, and more than that.

" These communities form at this moment in France a force of one hundred and eight thousand persons.

"Public opinion is excited by so rapid a development. There is Kapid deve- in this a great fact, of which it behoves us to seek the causes and foresee the consequences. The monasteries and convents, not

* " Introduction aux Instructions Secretes des Jesuites," Par Charles Sauvestre. E. Dentu, Palais Royal, Paris, 1803.

Ixx Influence of the Jesuits on Education,

only draw into them the youth of the country, they lay hold also of the inheritance ; and the property which enters these houses never leaves them any more.

" Moreover, we cannot pass over in silence the usurpation of education by these religious corporations. It is enough to recall Leibnitz, the profound assertion of Leibnitz : ' He who is master of the education is able to change the face of the world.' *

" The least clear-sighted will perceive, that we treat here of a matter of public interest of the highest importance.

"The 'Ancien Regime/ though it was entirely devoted to reli- gion, did not think fit to leave the monks without some check. Taught by experience, the monarchy had established severe laws to restrain and direct the rising tide of monkery. Important " Is modern society defenceless ? Has it no laws which can

questions to protec£ ft against this communism of celibates ? Or, shall we say guardians. r

that every law of that kind is to be rejected as a restraint on individual liberty ?

" These are questions well worthy of examination. There is no need for us to remark here, that our only purpose is to address ourselves to those who are the supreme judges, the public ; we have no title to make laws or regulations. . . . We address ourselves particularly to those, who have any guardianship or authority ; to fathers of families ; to the magistrates, who administer the laws ; to the lawgivers who make them, and who represent the living reason of the country." f

^ 1761. The following pages contain the Speech and Report, made in the

year 1761, to the Parliament of Bretagne, by the Attorney- General, M. de la Chalotais, who had been ordered to investigate the constitution of the Society of Jesus, and report the result of his investigations. Some persons may think it unnecessary to re- produce these documents at the present day, and to publish them in the English language ; but if any one is of opinion, that the

* The description of the education, received and imparted by the Jesuits, given from page vi to xii of the supplemental commentary, which, forms part of the work, entitled " The Poor Gentlemen of Liege," to which wo elsewhere refer, is well worth attention. — " The Poor Gentlemen of Liege." John Shaw & Co., London. 1863.

t Preface to " Les Congregations Religieuses." Enquete par Charles Sauvestre. Achille Faure, 18, Rue Dauphine, Paris. 1867.

Their influence on Justice, fyc. Ixxi

great conspiracy against truth and human freedom, laid bare to the eyes of mankind in this able work, is a thing of the past, we cannot undeceive him more effectually than by referring him to the words, which we have just quoted ; and begging also his calm consideration of the force and meaning of the following extract, from a " brochure " of M. Charles Habeneck :—

" This party is everywhere to be found, not indeed with official Habeneck's power, but with a power that assumes an appearance of kindness." the°mocZ«s

" It does not strike ; it shows its smooth side.

"It does not assassinate; it stifles, it causes those who stand in its way to disappear mysteriously ; it never pardons its enemies, but it keeps following them with its implacable hate.

" These congregations have found their way into all departments, whether public or private ; they are everywhere, at your very side, and they entwine themselves around you without your knowing it.

" They do not occupy the places of highest importance, but they purchase the greatest part of the inferior offices, and in a bureaucracy like France, it is the holder of the inferior offices who hinders, or expedites matters, and ties the hands of superiors, who are often accomplices.

"One can understand, therefore, that this association, using for one purpose, magistrates and officials, is the origin at least of acts of partiality and injustice, and may hinder the action of the tribunals of justice.

" This Society is, besides, a political engine. Since 1859, all the electoral difficulties have arisen from this organisation, little felt in Paris, terrible in the Provinces. Only ask the prefects." *

Are the Jesuits, then, friends to freedom ? Let M. Gamier Pages M. Gamier answer : — " In every Italian town, as in every European nation, there was, during 1848, a general rising against the Company of Jesus ; whose interference in the domain of politics has never ceased to be of the most active kind. In the eyes of the people they exist whenever despotism exists, and disappear whenever liberty appears. , Auxiliaries of absolute kings, they are the adversaries of all pro- y gress. They maintain ignorance and oppose light. Devoted to

* Charles Habeneck, (Les Jesuites en 1861, brochure.) Chez Dentu a Paris.

Ixxii

Doctrines of t lit; "Community."

the past, they are the enemies of the future ; so much so, that were it possible, they would even prevent time from advancing. They know but one law, one faith, and one morality. That law, faith, and morality, they call authority. To a superior they sub- mit life and conscience. To their order they sacrifice individuality. They are neither Frenchmen, Italians, Germans, nor Spaniards.

Jesuits only. They are not citizens of any country. They are Jesuits only. They have but one family, one fortune, and one end ; and all these are included in the word Community."*

The friends of the Secret Society, depicted in the following pages, will no doubt assert that the report made to the Parliament of Bretagne and to the king of France is inapplicable at the present time. But this denial will not serve their purpose. M. Charles Sauvestre, in the work already quoted, ably observes : —

Moral Code. " Every bad case may be denied, as these good fathers say. But can we in truth put any trust in the words of men, who teach that lying is permitted, provided it be useful ?

Intention. " A person may swear that he has not done a thing, although

he has done it really, if he means inwardly, that he did not do it on a certain day ; or before he was born ; or if he partly means some other like circumstance, without the words, which he uses, having any sense, that might be able to make it known. And this is very convenient under many circumstances, and is always very right, when it is necessary or useful for health, or honour, or well-being, "f

Unchangeable. We know, that the Jesuits are unchangeable in their doc- trines as in their system of existence. " Sint ut sunt aut non sint," was the reply of their General in answer to a proposal sent by the Great Council of France, in the year 1761, that the " Society of Jesus " might be modified in that kingdom. This proposal was made in a friendly spirit, at the recommendation of twelve French prelates, who had been commissioned to consider the Jesuit doctrines, after the Parliament of Paris had decreed the dissolution of the Order, in consequence of the disclosures during the trial of Lavalette's bankruptcy, which we shall presently notice.

* Quoted by the Morniny Star, April 19, 1861. f "Moral Works" of R. P. Sanchez, p. 2, b. iii., c. 6, No. 13.

Influence over the Parochial Clergy. Ixxiii

The king thought the Parliament too severe. A proposal 1761. was, therefore, made to the Pope and the General, that the Society should be modified, in order that it might not be dissolved. The haughty reply was, " They must remain as they are, or cease to Immutability, exist." This persevering adherence to their original Constitutions, since they were remodelled by Laynez, who succeeded Loyola, as Laynez. General of the Order, is the great peculiarity of the Jesuits. In this sense a Congregation of the Order, held on the 18th of October, 1820, at Rome, by its sixth decree confirmed in all essentials the ancient Constitutions, rules, and formularies of the Society. We derive this information from a most valuable commentary upon the sixth volume of Cretineau Joly's " History of the Jesuits," entitled " The Poor Gentlemen of Liege."*

To give any weight to the assertion, that Jesuitism is not what it was, or what it is here represented to be, it should be shown by their acts, that the Jesuits are changed. So far from there being any such change, however, Sauvestre points out their influence in France at the present time, in these words: "It is remarkable, that in proportion as their influence is extended over the parochial clergy, the manners of these clergymen have been seen to exhibit Jesuitism. The proofs of this are too numerous and too public for us to have any need to insist upon the fact ; we refer our readers to the law reports of recent date."

" It is sufficient to read their ' Secret Instructions/ in order to gecret In recognise the Jesuit spirit which has dictated them. Run through structions. the chapters : ' How to deal with widows and dispose of the pro- perty they possess.' 'How to provide that the children shall enter the convent or the cloister.' 'What ought to be recommended to the preachers and confessors of the great.' ' Of the method of making a pretence of despising riches.' Glance through them all — for they are all of importance — and then say, whether these rules are a dead letter ; whether they have ceased to look after old women; to lay their hands on inheritances; to rob children of their rights and freedom ; to intrigue with the great ; to cast their intrigue, weight into the political scale ; to labour, in short, for one only object, which is not the triumph of religion, but the triumph of

* "The Poor Gentlemen of Liege," page 60. John Shaw and Co., 48, Paternoster Row, London, 1863.

Ixxiv

Operations at home and abroad.

Political movements.

Poland.

La Suisse.

the Company of Jesus, and the establishment of its mastery over the world. ": The intrigues of the Jesuits and their attacks upon the form of government, which has existed in Great Britain since the Revolution of 1688, have been continuous. Ireland has always, according to their own historian, M. Cretineau Joly, been, the chief base of their operations against England.

The whole history of their operations, for the destruction of the constitutional form of government in Poland, before that unhappy country was partitioned, manifests the same irrecon- cilable hatred of national independence and freedom. Their attack upon the Republic of Switzerland, in 1847-8, is related in the diplomatic documents laid before the British parliament, and was attested by the declarations of Lord Palmerston in the House of Commons, and by the despatches of Lord Clarendon.

M. Cayla, in his able sketch of the most important of the lay affiliations of the order, the Society of St. Vincent de Paul,f shews, that the Jesuits availed themselves of the French revolution in 1848, in order to break up the constitutional monarchy, of Louis Philippe ; and that after manipulating the Republic, they were engaged in preparations for the coup d'etat of 1852; whereby they promoted the establishment of a despotic form of government, —the form of government, which, if it be Roman Catholic, they always favour, as most amenable to their intrigues. How they assail an autocratic government, if not submissive to their dicta- tion, is illustrated in the case of Russia, by Prince Gortchakoff's remarkable Circular Despatch.^

In every country, and under every form of government, the

efforts of the Jesuits, however varied in their phase, have been,

and are, the same in their tendency. Wherever the influence or

Eevoiution. power of their order is not supreme, the Jesuits are revolutionists.

They work against the State through the disorganisation of

France.

Kussia.

* " Instructions Secretes des Jesuites." Par Charles Sauvestre. Paris, 1863.

f "Les Bons Messieurs de St. Vincent de Paul." J. M. Cayla. Dentu, Paris, 18G3.

I This remarkable document was laid before the House of Commons, and printed in the Session of 1867.

Revival of Jesuitism. Ixxv

society. The effect of their supremacy, wherever established, has Eesuits of always been the same ; the establishment of a retrograde and suPrema(T- debasing tyranny ; and then, as the result, frequent attempts at revolution on the part of the oppressed peoples. This is abund- antly attested by the former condition of Italy; by the remarkable series of events that have taken place in Spain and France ; to say nothing of the convulsions and crimes against Grod and man, of which they were the instigators, in South America. S. America.

No person, who has taken the trouble to inform himself on this subject can, with truth, assert, that in affording our readers this " Glimpse of the operations of the great Secret Society" we are inviting them to accompany us, while we rummage among the dusty records of a danger that is past.

It may naturally be asked " How has this revival of Jesuitism The Keviva] : occurred? The public know little or nothing about it." The how effected, answer to this question is very simple. In 1814, just before his 1814. restoration to the sovereignty of the Pontifical States and of Rome, in effecting which Protestant England bore so large a part, the Pope re-established the Order of Jesuits ; an act, from which the Papacy had abstained, since the suppression of the order by Pope Clement XIV., in 1773. In October, 1836, the late Pope, as M. Cretineau Joly the Jesuit historian tells us, held a Function at the Gresu in Rome, and by a Papal brief, bearing that date, placed the whole of the missions of all the regular Orders of the Church of Rome under the direction of the Jesuits. This memorable act was little known, and attracted little attention at the time, but its consequences have been of the widest and deepest importance. The Pope, as the head of the Church of Rome, then virtually resigned himself and his Church to the domination of

fTM

this Praetorian order. The Propaganda, the central office of the Propaganda, regular missions of the Church of Rome, became merely a depart- ment of the Order of Jesuits ; and it is remarkable, that by the Brief of 1850, justly described as the act of Papal aggression i850. upon England, the whole authority of the Papacy, as regards the Church of Rome and her adherents in this country, was permanently delegated to the Propaganda. The present Pope was on his accession inclined to be liberal, but the events, which led to his early flight from Rome to Gaeta, terrified

Ixxvi Plotting for possession of property.

him into subjection to the Jesuits ; he appears to have returned from Gaeta quite changed. His subsequent arrogant and aggres- sive conduct plainly shows that he had then become identified

Ultramon- with what is commonly called the " Ultramontane, " but that which really is the Jesuit faction or sect, in the Church of Rome. They have thus for more than twenty years been dominant over the Papacy and the Church of Rome, and have reproduced in France, and other countries, a state of things in politics, morals, and religion, analogous to that described by M. de la Chalotais, as having been the result of their influence during the last century.

The speech or report of M. de la Chalotais, to the Parlia- ment of Bretagne, in 1761, was the consequence of u great stir in the minds of the French people, caused by the out- rageous conduct of the Jesuits. Anger was justly excited against this anti-social association by such acts as the following, the account of which is extracted from "Histoire Abregee des Jesuites,"*

Father Chau- Tome II., page 26 : "A certain Ambrose Guys, originally from Ambros ^P^' disembarked at Brest in 1701, with a considerable fortune,

Gays. which he brought from Brazil. His packages contained one mil- 1701

lion nine hundred thousand livres in gold, a considerable sum in

silver, a great quantity of precious stones, and other objects of value. Being ill, he was taken, with all his effects, to the house of one named Guimar, an inkeeper on the quay 'De la Recouvrance.' Feeling uneasy in his mind, he sent for a Jesuit confessor, and committed to his care some letters, with which he had been entrusted by the Jesuits of the country, from which he had come. Judging by these letters of the importance of the chance that this man afforded them, these gentlemen (the Jesuits) committed the execution of their plan to Father Chauvel, the proctor of their establishment. He engaged Guys to leave that inn, where he was badly entertained, and to come into the house of the Society, where he would be taken the greatest care of. The sick man. The sick man consented to this ; but he expressed his desire first to make his will. The Father Chauvel approved of this proposal, and

* Quoted by M. Charles Sauvestre in the Introduction to his work on the " Constitution of the Jesuits."

Judgment delivered by the King. Ixxvii

the same evening the unhappy Guys signed his will before a notary, assisted by four witnesses. Now this pretended notary was in fact simply the gardener of the Jesuits ; and the four witnesses were certain Fathers of the Society of Jesus, disguised as citizens. The sick man was carried to the house of the good Fathers, where he The g°ocl died three days after.

" Frances Jourdan, niece of the deceased, and wife of a man named Esprit Beranger, of Marseilles, having learnt by public report, what had happened to her uncle, presented on the llth April 1715, a petition to the Judges of Brest to be allowed full 1715. information on the subject. The Jesuits, foreseeing the rising Pej^°gneg°tlie storm, caused Beranger to be threatened with assassination, if he Assassination did not give up the proceedings he was instituting. Tbat poor fellow,'frightened and ruined by two years of litigation in Bretagne, found himself obliged to listen to these threats. The Chancellor, M. d'Aguesseau, informed of this affair, instructed the Attorney- General of the Parliament of Bretagne to continue the prosecution. The lawsuit, at every turn hindered by means of the money of the Jesuits, dragged on till the year 1736 (21 years). At that period, Father Chauvel, the actual principal in the robbery, having become old and infirm, felt smitten with remorse. He wrote from Chauvel's La Fleche, where he was gone to end his days, all that had passed confession. at Brest, and sent this declaration to Marshal d'Estrees. The King having thus acquired certain knowledge of the robbery, delivered a judgment proprio motu, which condemned the Jesuits to restore to the heirs of Guys eight millions. The Fathers were sufficiently cunning and sufficiently powerful to hinder the execu- tion of the judgment. The money was never paid."

Such deeds as these led the King and the Parliaments of France* to be watchful and anxious observers of a conspiracy, which in its

* There were eleven Parliaments in France, besides the Parliament of Paris. These provincial Courts assembled at the various provincial capitals of Languedoc, Guienne, Burgundy, Normandy, Provence, Bretagne, and of five other provinces. Their power was very extensive, and generally used on the side of liberty and justice. They were not so much legislatures as courts of justice. The Parliament of Paris seems to have had more exten- sive authority than the others. We find from the wording of its decrees that it was composed of princes, nobles, and eminent judges and others. The Decree of 1st December, 17(34 (respecting the Jesuits), begins: " This

9

Ixxviii

The Jesuits and Trading.

burial refused.

Paris banished.

recklessness and confidence had scorned all the dictates of true religion and morality.

About the year 1753, all France was in a tumult, because the

;Unigenitus" Ultramontane clergy, under the influence of the Jesuits, refused to bury those persons whose friends could not produce certificates from their confessor, that they had died acknowledging their belief in the dogmas proclaimed by the Bull " Unigenitus." The matter had been brought before the Parliament ; and the members of Parliament, who complained of this tyranny and bigotry, were accused, and imprisoned, or banished. The struggle continued

Archbishop of with varied success, till the Parliament sent the Archbishop of Paris into banishment at his brother's estate in Perigord. There was, then, a lull in the storm.

All these wrongs remained unredressed till the frauds of the Jesuits stirred up the mercantile community. Men often bear with a deal of tyranny and robbery ; but their endurance will not stretch beyond a certain point. This point was reached in France, when her commerce received a heavy blow through the frauds committed by the Society in connexion with the bankruptcy of Lavalette, a member of the Company of Jesus.

Father Lavalette, Procureur of the Jesuit establishment at St. Pierre, in Martinique, traded very extensively and in a very speculative manner; and it is remarkable, that both M. Sauvestre and M. Cayla shew in the works, from which we have quoted, that the Jesuits in Paris are still largely, though secretly, connected with trading operations. By his daring and ingenious speculations, Lavalette had increased his trade to such a decree as to excite the jealousy of the merchants and inhabitants of the colony ; who saw an ecclesiastic accumulating merchandise and produce, and pouring into his treasury gold and coin of all kinds ; intercepting

day, the Court in full assembly, the princes and peers sitting here, and all the Chambers," etc. These words point out in some measure the con- stitution of the Parliament. There were also in France " assemblies " called " States-General," which comprised clergy, nobles, and the " tiers etat," or bourgeois. The "nobles" comprised ail who were of noble extraction, " whether of robe or sword," that is, whether lawyers or knights ; provided they were not magistrates elected by the people. The "tiers etat" were deputies of the people. Those who held high legal offices assisted at the meeting of the States as commissioners of the king, and were distinguished above the ordinary nobility.

Lavalette 1756.

con-

The Jesuits and Trading. Ixxix

the circulation of money, in order to make himself the exclusive dispenser of it in the island. Complaints of his proceedings were sent to the French Government, and it was thought necessary to recall him to Paris.

Lavalette was not long in France, before the Jesuit Society, who thought him worthy of reward instead of censure, sent him back with the title of General Superior of the Windward Islands. Title The credit and influence of the Society calmed the alarm of ferred- the Government ; the royal authorities consented to his return, and, moreover, invested him with the rank of Visitor-General and Apostolic Prefect of the missions in that part of the world. He renewed his speculations. Establishments were formed in all the neighbouring islands. He organised offices in St. Domingo, Granada, St. Lucia, St. Yincent, etc., and drew bills of exchange on Paris, London, Bordeaux, Nantes, Lyons, Cadiz, Leghorn, and Amsterdam. His vessels, loaded with riches, crossed the sea continually. The Jesuits traded on their credit, Jesuit trading, pretending that the property of their whole body was answerable as security. They disregarded treaties which other merchants obeyed. Neutrality laws were nothing to them. They hired ships which transported merchandise ; which were used as privateers privateers. when it suited them, and sailed under any flag that was convenient. The Government of France took no notice of all this, till at last, the English Admirals, Hawke, Boscawen, Howe, and Anson, settled the matter by taking these privateers. The credit of these Jesuit traders was injured, and the French Provincial refused to pay their creditors on pretence that the Society was not liable as a whole, though they had acted together.

The Brothers Lioncy and Gouffre, very extensive merchants of Marseilles, were the agents and correspondents of Father Lavalette. They had accepted bills to the extent of a million and a half of livres ; to cover these, two vessels had been despatched from Martinique with merchandise to the value of two millions. These vessels were captured at sea by the English.

The house of Lioncy and Gouffre, pressed by want of money, asked the Superior of the Jesuits at Marseilles, for four hundred thousand livres, out of their million and a half, in order to avoid bankruptcy. A Jesuit Superior, named Sacy, who had, till then, Sacy.

Ixxx

Dtath of the General, and results.

Masses and Money.

Louis XV.

Lioncy and Gouffre.

1760.

Cause

been the direct and recognised agent of Lavalette, declared that the Society was not answerable as a whole ; but that they offered the aid of their prayers to the Brothers Lioncy and Gouffre, and were about to say masses for them. The masses and prayers of the Jesuits did not fill the chests of the merchants which their commercial speculations had served to empty. Messieurs Lioncy wrere obliged to lay a statement of their case before the tribunals, and appeal to Parliament for a decree that their debt might be paid.

The Jesuits wished to stifle the matter. But the Duke de Choiseul, Prime Minister of that period, persuaded the king, Louis XV., to allow the appeal, and the Jesuits were condemned to honour the bills drawn by their agent. The house of Lioncy was the most distinguished in the great city of Marseilles. Their yearly returns were thirty millions of livres. They saw themselves sud- denly reduced from opulence to danger of bankruptcy by Jesuit dishonesty, and they had the additional sorrow of enveloping in their misfortune their connexions in all parts of France.

Fortunately for mankind, unfortunately for the Great Secret Society, their General died at this critical period. Delay was inevitable, and this was fatal to the Jesuits. The new General saw the necessity of keeping the matter as quiet as he could, and gave orders to send all the funds that could be raised to Messieurs Lioncy and Gouffre. The courier reached them on the 22nd Feb., 1756, five days too late. The bankruptcy had taken place on the 17th.

From that day the proceedings of the Jesuits were reckless. Finding that publicity was inevitable, they withdrew their help from those whom they had ruined. They had the impru- dence to allege that they were protected from the claims of their creditors by their Constitutions. This plea was a most disastrous one for them. They were condemned by the Parlia- ment of Paris.

Yet so late as on the 17th August, 1760, they had influence enough to obtain letters patent, to carry their cause to the Great Chamber, on appeal from the Parliament of Paris. This was their last effort at that time. A decree was passed that the cause should be publicly heard.

Extinction of the Order in France, 1762. Ixxxi

At first they only pleaded that the creditors of Lavalette had Special no claim, except on the house of business at Martinique. They Pleadm£- then had recourse to a singular subterfuge. They said that Jesuits were forbidden to trade, by their Constitutions ; that having trading transactions was a dereliction of duty on the part of Lavalette ; and the fault of an individual could not be visited on the Order. The crime was personal, they said, and the Society had given no guarantee. They wished the payment of a just claim to be considered in the light of a punishment ; thus endeavouring so to confound two distinct matters, as to escape from their dilemma.

The judges were too acute to be led away from the straight course. Their creditors urged, that as their government was Pros. & cons, despotic, their General could dispose of their whole property as he thought best ; that no individual could do anything but as the agent of this chief; that it was contrary to reason for the Order to profit by the good luck of their agent, and escape all participation, in his misfortune.

The Jesuits replied to this, that their Society had no common property ; but that each house was a separate corporation. They referred, in proof of their plea of exemption, to the Constitutions Constitutions of their Order.

The Parliament naturally demanded the production of these Revelations documents. They were produced on the 16th April, 1761 ; and 1^61- this disclosure not only lost the Jesuits their cause, but brought upon them a greater condemnation than they at all looked for. Till then their Constitutions had remained secret. The publication of them shewed the alarming pretensions, the organi- sation, and the power for evil, of an order bound together for the sole purpose of their own aggrandisement. The Abbe The Abbe Chauvelin, Counsel to the Great Chamber, denounced these Chauvelin. rules before the Parliament, and the Constitutions became one of the principal foundations of the accusation, which ended in the decrees for the extinction of the Order in France, in 1762.

The Parliament of Paris appended numerous extracts from these Constitutions to their decree, in justification of their rigorous action against the Order. These extracts, verified and collated by the Commissioners of the Parliament, in compliance with a requi-

Ixxxii The Parliament of Paris, and Jesuitical teaching.

A Judge.

A Mouk.

Servants.

Theft.

Theft.

Adultery.

sition dated the 31st August, 1761, fill not less than four volumes. These authentic documents exist in the public libraries, and in Extracts from many private ones. From these extracts we present one or two examples of the Jesuit teaching, which, so alarmed and disgusted the Parliaments and people of France.

"In his 'Essay on Public Theology,' published in 1736, Father Taberna maintains that :*

"If a judge has received money to give an unjust judgment, it is probable that he ought to keep the money ; for this is the judgment of fifty-eight Jesuit doctors.''

In answer to the question,

" On what occasions may a monk leave off his monk's dress without incurring excommunication?"

The reply is,

" He may leave it off if it is for a purpose that would cause shame, as that he may go on a swindling excursion : or in order to go incognito into places of debauchery. Si habitum dimittat ut furetur occutte vel fornicetur."-\-

Another question :

" May servants who complain of their wages, increase them by laying hands on something that belongs to their masters, so as to make them amount to what they think they deserve?"

Is thus answered :

"They may in certain circumstances: as when they are so poor when applying for the place, that they are obliged to accept the offer made to them, and provided other servants of their sort are receiving more elsewhere. "J

According to the " Treatise on Penitence " of Father Kaleze Reginald,

" Domestic servants may take secretly the goods of their masters by way of compensation, under the plea that their wages are too small ; and they are not to be compelled to restore them."

Father Henriquez thus expresses himself : §

" If an adulterer, even though he be an ecclesiastic thoroughly aware of the danger, goes to the house of an adulteress, and if

* Father Taberna's " Essay on Public Theology." 1736.

t " Praxis ex Soc. Jes. Schola," Fr. 7, ex 6, nolo 3.

I " Soinrne de P. Bauny," p. 213, 6th edit,

$ " Moral Theology." P. Henriquez. vol. i., bk. iv., ch. 10, No. 3. p.

The Jesuit system still extending among us. Ixxxiii

being surprised by the husband, he kills him, in defending his life or limbs, the fault does not seem to be on his side."

According to the Moral Theology of Father Anthony Escobar,* " It is allowable to kill by treachery one who is proscribed." " It is equally allowable to put to death those who injure us Assassination in the estimation of princes, and persons of distinction."! Murder.

The doctrines of the Jesuits on the subject of luxury and loose living, as contained in these " extracts," are too vile to place before decent people. Luxury.

It was no wonder, therefore, that the Parliament of Paris drove the enemy from the country, as far as they had the power. Nor is it wonderful that the example was followed by the other Parlia- Expulsion, ments of France. But before passing on to the consideration of this Report, we wish to direct the reader's attention to the curious fact that the Oratorians, the Order of St. Philip Neri, who took the place of the Jesuits when they were expelled, urged the same plea of a non-community of goods among the members of their order, as the Jesuits did in the case of Father Lavalette. And it is remarkable, that this plea of a non-community of goods was advanced only five years ago, by the Oratorians before the Par- liament and Courts of Italy, who decided that it was an evasion, and suppressed the Order. The same plea has been still more Oratorians recently advanced by the Oratorians of Brompton and of Syden- ham before the Courts and Parliament of England. This fact, with many others, proves that the system of the Jesuits has been, up to the present time, and still is, extending its ramifications

among us.

Nothing can be more instructive, than the account given by M. de la Chalotais of the operations of the Jesuits upon the Gallican Church. It shows an exact analogy with the less developed operations of the Ritualists upon the Church of England. The Jesuits first led the bishops to disregard the Canon and the Common Law, and then, by audacity and intrigue, reduced the bishops into subjection to themselves.

By the providence of God and by the sound Protestantism of English Sovereigns, Parliaments, and people, we have been

* " Moral Theology." P. A. Escobar. Vol. iv., p. 278. f I hi ft., p. ^NI.

Ixxxiv

Jesuitism supported by Papal Supremacy.

opposition.

Attempts to shake off Jesuitism.

long spared the outward manifestation, in this country, of the power and evil influence of this conspiracy against all that men value ; yet the perusal of this Report will, we trust, awaken our fellow-countrymen to be zealous in the guardianship of their rights and freedom, against the secret machinations of foes, who are "effective ' working in our midst. The Jesuits are too able, too earnest, to be ios^ sight of, or despised. The great means of opposition to their evil influence is publicity. " They love darkness rather than light." Many noble efforts have been made by the French people to shake off the grasp of the Jesuitism, which holds them so tena- ciously. Even now they bear this incubus uneasily. The question naturally arises, Why have they never succeeded in getting rid of what they have felt to be so galling and so disastrous ? Why have all their efforts been in vain ? Why have their partial successes against their baleful secret foe always been turned into defeats? The answer is, that they have never nationally attacked their enemy by the only means that can be fatal to his power. They have never shaken off the yoke of the See of Rome ; have never had in their own language a scriptural liturgy for their churches. They have aimed only at relieving violent symptoms of the disease, by which they are infected ; whereas they ought to have attacked the root of the disease; and had they been successful in this, the symptoms would have disappeared. Papal supremacy is the strength of Jesuitism. Because France has always acknowledged the one, she has been, and is, the prey of the other.

An evidence of the tyranny of the Papal system, and its Papal system, arrogant repression of the freedom of action of national Churches, is famished by the Pope's letter to the Archbishop of Paris in 1865. This document is given in full at the end of this work. The following extracts from it will exemplify the truth of what we have been stating.

" Thus, for example, by asserting that the power of the Roman Pontiff over each diocese in particular is not ordinary but extraordinary, you enunciate a proposition entirely contrary to the definition of the 4th Council of Lateran, in which we read these very clear and decisive words, ' The Church of Rome, by the will of God, has over all others the supremacy of ordinary

Remedies.

Tyranny of

Leterfrom Pius IX. to the Archbishop of Paris. Ixxxv

power, and that as the mother and mistress of all the faithful,' 1865. that is to say, over all who belong to the flock of Christ." "tochbish

****** of Paris.

" We are afflicted, Venerable Brother, that you should have fallen into any ambiguities concerning the affairs of the Regulars. But in the first place we would wish you to consider, with your usual sagacity, that we are now treating of the Episcopal visit, made, whether to the Society of Jesus, or to the Franciscans of the Order of Capuchins, who have resided in the City of Paris under several bishops, your predecessors, enjoying the peaceable possession of their exemption ; and, in consequence, the Holy Apostolic See itself was in the enjoyment of its peculiar and separate right of jurisdiction over these same Regulars. Thus it became a question of spoliation, accomplished by an act destructive of the privileges of the Holy See and the Regulars. Such is the real state of the question ; whence you will easily perceive that the Apostolic See would act with justice, even if it was pleased to convert into a judgment or a sentence, the terms in which we have thought proper to make it known to you."

There was hope of escape from the secret enemy, while Henry IY. remained in some measure a Protestant. Before M. de la Chalotais made his speech or report to the Parliament at Rennes, this turning point in the history of Frdnce had been reached and passed. Yet the French nation still had a form of government France, which was constitutional, according to the times in which it existed. It contained many of the elements of that freedom, which the British nation has since established. In this respect, France still had a great element of success in her struggle against Jesuitism, The records of this and similar national struggles, illustrate cardinal principles, which, as they are strongly or weakly upheld, decide the course and fortunes of nations. The critical period is often reached and passed, before men are alive to the importance of the epoch.

The turning point of English history occurred at about the same England, period as that of the French: but, in England, right principles pre- vailed, while in France there was hesitation and relapse into error. Henry IY. of France possessed the many high and noble qualities which M. de la Chalotais justly ascribes to him. As a Protestant

Ixxxvi

Death of Henry IV- of France.

Death of Charles I.

Henry iv. he was a great national leader, and contended successfully against the Ultramontane spirit of despotism, and against the anarchi- cal aggressions of the Jesuits. Yet, the life of this great Sovereign was marked by that laxity of morals, which evil counsellors palliate in Princes ; and in his day and country, such self-indulgence was considered almost an attribute of royalty. But this laxity of morals undermines the real greatness, invali- dates the sterling power of the man, corrupts those about him, and weakens the respect of the nation for their Sovereign. Henry IV., great and beloved as he was, hesitated in renewing the contest, in which his early success had raised him in the estimation of the nation which he governed ; he, ostensibly at all events, changed his religion, and was reconciled to Home. This compliance did not save him ; he died by the hand of a Jesuit assassin, so soon as his plans again interfered with the schemes of the Society. The hesitation of Henry IV., and his death, have a parallel in the hesitation and death of Charles I. of England, whose fall and whose death were compassed by the same conspiracy. This is shown by the late Dean Goode in his able work entitled " Rome's Tactics."*

In comparing the conduct of Henry IV. of France with that of his contemporary, Elizabeth, it must be admitted, that the difficulties of Henry IV. were in some respects greater than those of the Queen of England ; for the religion and Church of France, though Gallican, and therefore national in their organisation, as M. de la Chalotais describes them, were only Augustinian in their spirit and doctrine (Jan- senist, as they were called at the time), not Protestant in the sense of the reformed religion and Church of England. They always acknowledged the spiritual primacy of the Pope. Neither the religion of the majority of the French people, nor their Church, ever possessed the fundamental element of national independence which an uninterrupted dependence upon God and His revealed will, as written, can alone establish.

The religion and Church of England had been gradually but effectually reformed by the nation during the reigns of the father,

Elizabeth.

* " Kome's Tactics." By the Dean of Eipon. Hatchards, London, 1867.

Attempts on the Life of the Queen. Ixxxvii

of the brother, and even of the sister, who preceded Elizabeth on Elizabeth. the throne of England. This circumstance, in addition to her own matured and abiding conviction of religious truth, gave Elizabeth an enormous advantage as compared with Henry IV. of France ; and fundamentally affected the respective positions of the two nations. It is, however, difficult to over-estimate the value to the English nation of the firmness of Elizabeth, aided by her enlightened Protestant counsellors. In other nations, Poland, for instance,* the reformation of religion and of the National Church has been hopefully inaugurated, and patronised by sovereigns ; but its fruits have been lost or destroyed by the same agency, to whose attacks, Henry IV. and Elizabeth were exposed. Elizabeth was the firm friend and ally of Henry IV. so long as he was a Protestant by profession. Her letter to him, on his change of religion, breathes a spirit of kindly, though of hopeless friendship, and of compassionate regret.

The life of Elizabeth was repeatedly attempted by the Jesuits ; Her life she was beset by the same agency as was Henry IV. up to the attemPted- last and too successful attack of Ravaillac. The murder of both these sovereigns was continually and craftily planned. Such was the treatment, that sovereigns, who in those days not only reigned but ruled, always received at the hands of the Jesuits, when opposed to their ambition. Nor is their spirit and purpose changed — as the attempt upon the lives of the Emperors of France and Russia in Paris, by a miscreant, who had been studying the works of the Jesuit Mariana, has recently proved.

The Protestant spirit of the majority of the English nation, of men of all grades in society, contributed largely to the safety of Safety. Elizabeth. They not only guarded her life, but they would have avenged her death effectually, had she been murdered : and this was known. Such was the result of an unbroken religious confi- dence between the nation and their sovereign.

The memory of Elizabeth has, of course, many detractors Detractors, among the Ultramontanes and their allies — as the late Mr. Turnbull, whom Lord Palmerston turned out of the State Paper

* " Historical Sketch of the Reformation in Poland." By Count Valerian Krasinski. Murray and Ridgway, London. 1838.

Ixxxviii The Reformation in France and England.

Office ; but her life was incomparably more pure than that of Henry IV.

England's There can be no doubt, that the rising greatness of England

dates from the turning point of her history in the reign of Elizabeth. England has suffered in her subsequent contests with the great conspiracy ; she has needed and has had to submit to the inter- vention of Cromwell, and was compelled to effect for herself the Revolution of 1688, owing to the weakness, the hesitation, the vices, the bigotry, and the tyranny of the half-hearted Stuarts. But the English nation has not suffered in vain ; by the power of the Reformation they have hitherto been victorious in their pro- tracted and still continuing contest. While the French nation, among whom the Reformation never was complete or successful, have suffered much more from persecution, through revolutions and by war, than the English ; and without attaining the pros- perity, either moral or material, which Providence has allotted to England.

Perilous posi- The national character, the objects, the tastes of the French 6 people may be, and are, different from those of the English. But, when we remember the convulsive history of modern France — when we see her now, notwithstanding a certain degree of com- mercial activity, made the willing tool of ambitious and design- ing men, weighed down by heavy taxation, with a dwindling population, and her Church ruled by an Ultramontane and therefore anti-national Hierarchy — we turn to the able summary of the incidents, in her previous history, which, as condensed by M. de la Chalotais, is given in the following pages ; and then, not without serious misgivings, we turn to what is occurring among ourselves in Ireland, and in England.

England's ^e vas* major% uf the British nation are, we believe, as yet,

truth and true at heart ; and so long as they are true, and actively true, to their religion and to themselves, there is no case for despond- ency. In times past they have not spared any sacrifice to preserve their religion and their freedom ; they have not, for centuries, allowed any, even the highest, to stand between them and the light of truth, which conies from heaven. Hence they have hitherto made themselves and kept themselves free ; they have defied and defeated the secret foes, who have made such

Danger and Means of Safety. Ixxxix

repeated wrecks of the freedom of the French people. Our Caution, fellow-countrymen must, nevertheless, beware ; for they are heset by the intrigues of Jesuits, who are now making this kingdom their headquarters. Yet though there is abundant reason to be watchful, there is none whatever to despair, so long as we are on the watch. Danger will come, if we are careless ; if either from ignorance, or from a mistaken feeling of charity, or from cowardice, we indulge in a false con- fidence. "While England continues faithfully to protest against Romish error, the power that has preserved her hitherto will be hers still. While her people have an open Bible they have a shield against all Jesuitism. The way of safety for our nation, and for the Church of the nation, is to have no desire for any connexion with that apostate system, that needs and leans upon the Society, the aim and organisation of which are here unfolded Only safety. to the reader. We are safe and sure of eventual success, so long as we hold Christ to be the only head of His Church, and value His written Word, as the rule of our faith and of our life.

Report

ON THE CONSTITUTIONS

JESUITS,

TlFTJVKUEn BY

M. LOUIS RENE DE CARADUC DE LA CHALOTAIS,

PROCVRErR-GENERAI. OF THE KING TO THE PARLIAMENT OF BRETAONE,

On the 1st, 3/-rf, \th, and Hth of Dfffitibfi; 1761, IN OBEDIENCE TO THF. OUDFR OF THE COVKT or THE I'TH or AVOUST PUPCETHNO.

TRANSLATED FROM THE FRENCH EDITION OF 1762.

TO THE PARLIAMENT OF BBETAGNE.

MESSIEURS,

You have commissioned me to make a report to you on the constitutions of the Jesuits. I will endeavour to carry out your designs, as Henry IV. directed all his Parliaments to prosecute a similar enquiry in 1-394 : — " impartially, without animosity or favour towards any person whatever," said he, " so that in the conscientious discharge of my duty, God may be praised and honoured by my good and holy intentions ; and in the faithful execution of your functions, He may be honoured by your acts and just decisions."

In making the intentions of so great a king the rule of my proceedings, I shall doubtless fulfil the desires of the successor to his throne and to his virtues, and act in conformity with your wishes. He who executes a public function is bound by what the laws direct : arid while he has a regard for the rights of pri- vate individuals, his chief concern is for the public good.

My impression has been that you did not simply require me to give the rules of a monastic order — which, if it were confined to a cloister, would attract little attention from the public — but that you wanted to know the regulations which are binding on a cele- brated order, spread throughout the world, and filling many offices of importance equally to Church and State. I have sup- posed that you wished to be informed of the relation in which members of this society stand with regard to both ; of the spirit in which its rules have been constructed, and the principles on which they rest ; and to know what effect they may have on civil and religious society, and on the education of the young.

In order to examine the constitutions of the Jesuits in these points of view, it is necessary for us to begin by laying down principles and establishing facts.

First, a religious order, whatever it may be, ought not to in- troduce anything into a country in contravention of its laws. This would be contrary to the spirit of Christianity, which enjoins the principle of peaceable submission to the ruling powers of the State.

But this is not enough ; that which may be bearable only because it is not mischievous, is not good in the eyes of the law, and consequently ought not to be introduced. All associations, more especially those claiming to be religious establishments, ought to have as their object the good of mankind, and the pro- motion of religion. Any association seeking only its own aggrandisement, its own glory and interests, is essentially hurtful and vicious.

In this way we ought to look at the constitution, statutes, and laws of religious orders, associations, or congregations of any deno- mination. First, consider them in relation to the principles of natural law (the real model of all positive laws, civil or religious), and to the particular laws of France. Everything injurious to those laws should be proscribed. Nothing should be even per- mitted which, though it may not be expressly prohibited by those laws, is yet at variance with their spirit.

Many religious orders had established themselves throughout Christendom before the Jesuits. Had they been actuated by the noblest views of public utility ? On that subject politicians will not easily agree ; but policy almost always yields before the torrent of reigning opinions, whenever an appearance of piety furnishes a pretext either to seduce or to attack it.

People, almost without exception, allow themselves to be attracted by outward appearances. Few men are struck with the simple virtue which fulfils its duties in the shade, and is content to do good without ostentation ; they admire and esteem singu- larity of conduct, and brilliant outward show of mortifications — practices often undertaken through pride, and subject to illusion, even in the minds of those who perform them. These perfor- mances are quite independent of true religion and virtue, since we see them, in certain countries, surpassed by idolaters.

Appearances of this kind, whether true or false, have always imposed on great, as well as on small, communities. To shew this, let us pause for a moment to consider how those new estab- lishments were formed in France.

It seems strange to prove their birth by the pains and penalties which were imposed to prevent their formation. " But it is a fact, that in 1215, the Lateran Council published an order against inventing new religions/' by which was meant, new orders or congregations ; " lest," said the canon, " their too great diversity should create confusion in the Church." Accordingly this council ordered, that whoever wished to profess a religious life should enter into one of the orders already authorised. This prohibition was wise, and accordant with the spirit of the purest antiquity." We are quoting the words of the judicious Abbe do Fleury.

" It is also a fact," he observes further, " that this decree was so ill observed, that many more were established after its pro- mulgation than before that time."

Bishops and priests are established by God to instruct the people, and preach religion both to believers and infidels. There have been times indeed in the history of the Church when unfor- tunately priests and clergy were themselves almost in want of instruction. Great ignorance prevailed, and means of obtaining knowledge were found with difficulty.

As a reason for the institution of most religious orders, of those at least which were authorised to perform the offices of the Church, it has been supposed that the ordinary pastors neglected their duties, and that the masses were left without instruction, and buried in ignorance ; and it must be allowed that this supposition is not without foundation.

In 1216, that is to say, one year after the prohibition issued by the Council of Lateran, Saint Dominic, a Spaniard, instituted an order, whose object was to preach to the people, and to defend the faith against heretics.

Saint Francis D'Assise, in Umbria, had lately instituted another, whose object was rather to edify, than to instruct. Nevertheless, he also preached, although he was only a deacon ; and his dis- ciples preached also.

0

About the end of the fifteenth century, Saint Gactano, a Venetian, founded the order of tile Theatins, to reform the clergy, and defend the faith against heretics.

Matthew Bushy, an Italian, in the commencement of the sixteenth century, reformed the Brothers Minor, and devoted himself to preaching the Wprd of God with his companions, who were called Capuchins.

The Eecolets, another branch of the disciples of Saint Francis, were established in 1531.

The establishment of the Barnabites was nearly coeval with that of the Theatins, and professed the same object.

Lastly, Saint Ignatius proposed to catechise children, to con- vert unbelievers, and to defend the faith against heretics ; his institution was approved by Paul III. in 1540.

I shall not speak of the order of St. Benedict, who proposed, according to the true principles of monastic life, to live in solitude, simply as good Christians, who wish to work out their own salvation. Some centuries afterwards they were found to be living in a manner far different from exact obedience to rule. Cluny and Citeaux were reformers, who soon in their turn also needed reformation.

Neither shall I speak of an infinite number of religious orders which had other objects — nor of various communities of men and of women, instituted at different times.

But I cannot refrain from observing that the object of the institution of the Jesuits, and that of most of the orders, of which I have spoken, is exactly the same, namely, the conversion of sinners, and in general, the instruction of the faithful, of infidels, and heretics.

AVith respect to the education of youth, there were universities, which had been founded in very ancient times ; above all that of Paris, which was celebrated in the tenth century. In those iiniversities, all sciences were taught, according to the enlighten- ment of the age.

I say, then, that those orders, having been established under the supposition that pastors, not being learned, did not give as much instruction to the faithful as was necessary ; it would have been more natural and more conformable to the spirit of the

Church, to begin by reforming and instructing the clergy, in order to enable them to teach the people ; than to go and seek foreign monies, in Spain and Italy, who, themselves, very soon needed reforming. The founders of those orders and their first disciples were virtuous persons. But sensible men have observed, that the first fervour soon evaporates, that it seldom outlives a century in any order, after which it becomes necessary to recall them to their first principles.

Instead of protecting and assisting the ordinary pastors, who are the proper ministers of the Church, they placed over them a body of monks, who have oppressed them ; thus trusting to a mercenary and auxiliary host, and neglecting the national forces. The new Orders were crowned with favours and privileges. Their exemptions were multiplied to the detriment of the jurisdiction of the bishops, who, with too little foresight, abandoned the interests of their clergy. While the court of Rome restricted their powers, to increase its own, the bishops sought the alliance of Rome ; and .now, though the clergy have learnt to see the evil of this policy more clearly, yet many of them persist in adhering to it with less pardonable want of consideration.

The professorial chairs in schools, and churches, seminaries, and missions, were confided to the monks ; aud the parochial clergy have become accustomed to consider these monks as their masters and instructors. The parochial clergy are left in poverty and dependence, and consequently without the means of learning ; and if learning had not been encouraged in the universities of the Sorbonne, respect for these clergymen would have been entirely lost.

So, on the pretence that the ecclesiastics did not preach, the Mendicant Friars were employed ; and their preaching not being in accordance with the preaching of the Pastors, or these Mendi- cants choosing to preach without their leave (for in 1516 it had been found necessary to forbid the preaching of the Mendicants without the leave of the ordinary), the Theatins were ordered to perform those functions. The Barnabites were afterwards sub- stituted for the Theatins. Next followed the Jesuits, professing the same objects, endowed with the same exemptions, and with far more extensive pretensions.

8

The Brothers of Christian Doctrine were afterwards substituted for the Jesuits, who no longer catechised, excepting in their own classes ; whereas Saint Ignatius catechised everywhere, — in houses, and even in the streets. There have since arisen monks of various sorts and under various denominations.

The Fathers of Christian Doctrine, were instituted to remedy the want of learning of the other religious persons. Seminaries for foreign missions were established to supplement the Jesuit missions ; but instead of combining for the same objects, these various orders of missionaries differed, to the scandal both of believers and infidels. Congregations of Endists, Lazarists, and Fathers of the Oratory, were formed to remedy the negligence or the incapacity of others, whether in colleges or in the direction of seminaries.

From these establishments numbers of monks have issued, of communities and orders distinguished by their dress, divided by interest, principles, and party.

The government has been overwhelmed by beggars, by idle men, forgetful of the purposes of their institutions ; a multiplicity of small colleges has attracted scholars without end, and has pro- duced indifferent or faulty instruction ; and every order of monks has usually produced an order of nuns of the same rule.

Ever good work, that was to be done, every abuse, that re- quired reformation, has produced a new order in the Church. Acts of devotion have caused the establishment of new houses ; and by the superabundance of pious establishments the State is impoverished and depopulated.

States benefit less than individuals by finding out their mistakes.

V (— '

The experiences of past ages is utterly lost on the succeeding age ; and whenever zeal proposes any apparently desirable object, pious persons, inexperienced and uninstructed, and therefore without the means of foresight and consideration, are found, Avho seize on what they imagine to be new ideas, and eagerly favour new establishments.

I am far from denying that much temporary good was effected by the founders, and by some monks of the various orders. But we cannot conceal from ourselves the great practical and permanent evil which results from them, in preventing incumbents and

9

curates, who endure the labour and the heat of the day, from the attainment of learning, and a sufficient means of livelihood ; an evil which now seems irremediable, and which the Church formerly considered, and endeavoured to prevent, by forbidding the multi- plication of religious orders.

I only speak according to the decisions of councils, and am repeating the opinions of the most learned and pious bishops, who have ever enlightened the Church. It has been said that the multiplication of orders produced a healthy emulation. I appeal to experience. It has produced wars and theological hatreds, with which the State has sometimes been so kind as to embarrass itself, as if these were affairs of State ; instead of despising or silencing them. It has created cabals, parties, and factions ; and when one of these becomes dominant, it crushes the others. The competition of individuals may create healthy emulation, but that of Orders engenders furious, widely spread, and lasting jealousies.

Evils, which arise in states are not immediately perceptible. Wise men foresee them, because they consider principles; but most men have no principles. Zeal inflames vacant imaginations on the subject of some projected establishment ; enthusiasm seizes upon it ; the ambition is found, which is allied to the glory of governing, adds to it the zeal which seems to justify all. If serious persons oppose themselves to these projectors, from superior views of preserving order, their attachment to religion is suspected ; and that is an injustice of the gravest kind, and a doubt most easily raised.

Persons who are indifferent, and they are the majority, look on in silence. Wise men grow weary of constant resistance ; they give way to importunity or to authority, and the mischief is per- petrated under pretence of peace.

Finally, gentlemen, since the Government commands me through you to deliver my opinion on religious constitutions, I think that, if needful, the parochial clergy should have been reformed, and instructed, and endowed ; and that the orders of monks professing to have the same objects in view should have been incorporated and regulated by law. At all events, those who need reform, should be reformed, before new orders are created.

10

That is, I think, what religion demands, and the State should desire. Without this, religious establishments must increase ad in fin it if n> throughout all Christendom; "since the pretext of instructing the ignorant, and converting heretics and infidels will never he wanting ; there will always be good works to effect and abuses to reform.

I now return to the order of the Jesuits. Their founder, although brought up to the professions of arms, and full of the ideas of chivalry, then prevalent in his country, was struck with the ignorance of the people, and with the very small amount of instruction they received. He became inflamed with an ardent desire for the conversion of souls.* He devoted himself to the service of our Lord Jesus Christ and of the holy Virgin, as their knight, and after having practised frightful austeries and morti- fications, he began to preach penitence and good works. Soon after, he founded congregations, colleges, etc., and dedicated himself to the education of youth.

Pope Paul III. at first refused to authorize this new order. A congregation of cardinals decided, that it was not necessary to introduce it into the Church. The Cardinal Cajetano pressed Saint Ignatius to enter into the order of the Theatins ; but the wish to be a founder, and the desire to obey no one but the Pope in all things, and in all places, for the salvation of souls and the propagation of the faith, prevailed. The desire which all Popes have always had, to establish in all Christian states a standing army under their orders, and subjects submitting to no authority but theirs, caused this order to be authorised in 1540, by Pope- Paul III.

The Bull of confirmation runs : — " Ignatius De Loyola, with nine priests, his companions, having vowed their services to Jesus Christ and to the Pope, has requested our approbation of a society, whose form is a spiritual army under the standard of the cross ; obeying none but Jesus Christ, and the Pope His Vicar on the earth ; making a vow of poverty, chastity, and obedi- ence to a General, in whom they would see Jesus Christ, as if He was present, and a special vow to the Pope and his successors, to execute everything, that they should command for the glory of

* See the life of Saint Ignatius, by Boiihours, p. 31, et inffn.

11

God, the salvation of souls, and the propagation of the faith in any place whatever, to which he may please to send them ; with power to make general constitutions by the voice of the majority ; submitting particular constitutions to the General, who would have the right to command them."

Since that time, they have obtained an infinite number of Bulls and Briefs in their favour, designated in the Institutions under the general name of Apostolic Letters. There are ninety-two of these Bulls and Briefs, beginning with the first Bull, given on the 27th of September, 1540, of which I have been speaking, down to the Brief of the 6th of May, 1753. This collection fills the first 260 pages of the first volume.

Next follows the summary of the privileges obtained by the Jesuits. They are arranged in alphabetical order. From p. 261 to p. 336 the}- recount, in general terms, the exemptions, which have been granted to them directly by Popes, and those belonging to other orders, in which they have a right to participate.

In the third place, the preliminary examination for the recep- tion of members (sujets} comprehends all the pages between p. 337 and 357.

In the fourth place, we find the constitutions of the Order divided into ten parts: each of which, excepting the last, is divided into several chapters, and followed by declarations in the form of explanations and elucidations. These additions have as much authority as the text, as much even as the constitutions (according to the notice at the head of each).*

These constitutions, including the examination, which precedes them, occupy from p. 357 to p. 448.

In the fifth place appear in this volume the decrees of general congregations. It is said, eighteen of these were held before the publication of the edition of Prague in 1757, and that there has been another since that time, in 1758, at the time of the election of the present General; and that three among these eighteen congregations were held during the lifetime of generals, that is to say, the fifth congregation in 1593, the sixth in 1608, and

•'.• These volumes were those of the fkmons, but too often forgotten " Constitutions of the Jesuits," which were produced during the trial of Father Lavalette. (Editor.)

12

the fourteenth in 1696. This collection is found between p. 449 and p. 696.

Lastly, between p. 697 and p. 731, is a collection of canons of general congregations ; but there are only the canons of the first eleven congregations ; those of the seven last congregations have not been printed.

The above are the contents of the first volume which was sent to me.

The second volume contains ten bodies of collections besides an index.

The first body is a collection of censures and precepts, divided into five chapters, from the first page to the seventh.

The second contains the formularies of congregations from p. 7 to p. 69.

The third is a summary of the constitutions, with common rules and particulars of the various offices in the Society. There is also the letter of Saint Ignatius to the Jesuits of Portugal on obedience ; and it ends with the different formularies for vows, p. 169.

The fourth is the plan laid down for studies, known under the name of "Ratio Studiormn" from p. 169, to p. 238 ; afterwards follow ordinances of generals, from p. 238 to p. 286.

The sixth collection, from p. 286, is an instruction for superiors, given by Claude Aquaviva, divided into six chapters, up to p. 303.

The seventhj which contains instructions for provincials, is a kind of summary in twenty- one articles drawn from various writings of generals, up to p. 346.

The eighth body of collections, under the title of " Industries," is also by Aquaviva, on the means to obtain the government of minds, up to p. 384.

The ninth collection contains the spiritual exercises of Saint Ignatius, in forty-six pages.

Finally, the tenth is a directory for spiritual exercises, from p. 431 to the last, p. 472. This volume concludes with a general index.

I shall begin what I have to say on the subject of the Jesuits by an observation on the institution of their society. It was not copied from any model, and it is not probable that it will ever

13

serve as a model for others. It is the fate of extrordinary men to excite too much admiration, and exaggerated censure. Judg- ments must vary according to the different points of view from which we take our observation, or how could it "be that some men revere that as the chef d'ceitrre of wisdom and Christian perfec- tion, which other men consider as an overthrow of reason and social order ? And here, as on all other occasions, we must throw off the prejudices of party ; ecclesiastics must be judged like other men on principles of law and custom ; we should in other respects have a right to judge them more severely than other men. It has been asked, whether the society of Jesuits direct their cares and their labours with an intention to be useful to the Church and to the State.

No body of men, 110 company that ever existed, could be entirely justified in a discussion of that kind ; it would be unjust to examine that particular society in such a way; it would be unjust to question the conduct and intentions of individuals, for motives and intentions are beyond the reach of human judgment. But with respect to this Institution and its con- stitutions, they should be examined judicially, with a view to their tendencies, — whether their aim and intention is to promote public good — whether it employs its members in a manner, that is profitable to the State and to the Church; or rather for the private interest of the Society in preference to the public weal.

It is clear that both morality and policy demand, that the Jesuits should either be acquitted or found guilty of the accusa- tions brought against them ; for the State ought not to abandon the education of youth to persons suspected on reasonable grounds ; and it would be criminal to allow a whole society to lie perpe- tually under unjust imputations,

Thus, the interests of the State, and the interests of the Jesuits, equally require a stringent inquiry into the truth of these accusa- tions ; and that justice should be done before the whole world. Priests and monks cannot be so insensible to their reputation as to refuse to clear themselves of strong suspicions, which, if not disproved, would become acknowledged opprobriums. They ought to answer them openly, not by oblique means, not like intriguers;

14

by delays extracted from the kindness of the sovereign ; by com- mands that either obstruct or suspend their justification, which by delay would hourly become more difficult. They ought to answer publicly and judicial!}-. The General ought to join himself with the rest of the Society and demand justice. They should declare their doctrine, which if it is Christian, should be proclaimed from the house-tops. Let them produce their constitutions and all their rules. They owe it to the State : they owe it to the Church ; they owe it to themselves. It is thus that oppressed innocence conducts itself; it shows itself in the light of day. Innocence does not fear the light. But do not allow them to offer promises and oaths in the place of justifications ; promises and vows, which they have not power to fulfil ; or denials, which they know in their consciences are untrue. Let them abandon the dark manoeuvres of a policy, which would furnish new grounds of accusation against them.

The Parliament of Paris has condemned them on account of their books, which are their first accusers and their judges. The General is pointed out in the Appeal, as connected with abuses, which public opinion has taken note of in their constitutions. Let the Jesuits join us if they are innocent. The Ministry wish to find none in the State but citizens ; and none in the Church but virtuous ecclesiastics. Their functions are not confined to the punishment of criminals ; they have the more important duty of protecting the innocent. Such being the case, the first thing that I ask is, that the Jesuits should communicate all their constitu- tions to me — their rules or statutes — in short, everything be- longing to them which has the force of law in their society.

They have brought to the Register Office of the Court of Paris, the constitutions of the edition of Prague, which they had been asked for ; but it is certain that they have many other laws or rules in force among them.

I find among the books, which the Companion of the Provincial ought to have in his archives (Vol. ii. p. 121) about twenty volumes, among which arc some that quote books and writings in manuscript,

Although some of these have been printed since the time when the rules for the Companion of the Provincial were laid down, and

15

sonic of these are in the edition of Prague, we cannot be sure, that all of these have heen printed ; or rather, I should say, it is perfectly certain that they have not.

It is stated in the preface to the Decrees of the Congregation, that all of them are not comprehended in the collection ; but that it is a selection, and that those only are omitted which bear upon isolated facts.

I see in the preface to the Abridgment of Privileges, that besides the concessions, which arc recorded there, there are other privileges which may be granted by the General of the Order.

The ordinances of the Generals are selected or abridged, as is shown by the preface placed at the head of the ordinances, page 208.

Besides tbe Apostolic Letters granted to the Jesuits, they pos- sess all the Bulls from which they derive their privileges. This is shown in the preface and in the abridgment of these privileges. These are immense collections and enormous volumes ; the Roman collection of Bulls consists of several volumes in folio.

But this is not all. They have rights and privileges granted by what they call spoken ornc/cs, rh-a? rods omcula. These oracles are titles of a kind the most singular of any by which credulity may be abused.

A Pope is supposed in common conversation, or otherwise, to have said to a credible person, that he granted him a favour ; or that he verbally forbade (something or other). That is a verbal oracle ; and that oracle has the same power, the same authority as if the privilege was bestowed by a Brief, or by a Bull (for these are the very terms of the abridgment of the constitution). These verbal oracles are attested by the credible person who heard them. His authority alone is sufficient to cause them to be inserted in these collections, in order that they may be made use of whenever they arc wanted. I shall presently quote one of these manu- scripts in the Collections, Vol. i. in the edition of Prague, p. 282. I should add that this Abridgment of Privileges, in which they arc only named, consists of 72 pages in folio, with tAvo columns in each page, making 144 columns in folio of simple titles of privileges. One cannot, therefore, be surprised at M. Scrvin's

16

saying that this order is founded on privileges rather than on rules.

I ask whether such a code of laws can have hcen framed to he presented for the inspection of nations ¥ It is, however, the code of an order, which has existed 220 years ; and it is a code, which must augment daily ; it would require the labour of many years to read it and examine it.

What can we think of an order of any kind, whose justification depends on the examination and collation of fifty volumes in folio, while it was enough to examine two of those volumes to condemn it?

It must also be stated, that the declarations (which are only commentaries on the constitutions,) and the statutes already made, and those, which may be made hereafter, whatever they may be, are declared to be of equal authority with the constitu- tions emanating from the Pope and from the founder. These are writings Deutero- Canonical, a name which theologians give to those books of Holy Writ which were last declared to be authentic. I should add that it was their General, Laynez, who assembled a congregation to obtain from that congregation the singular power to confer on these writings that authority and authenticity.

How can we judge of a code of laws when we are not certain that we possess the whole of it ; in which the ordinances of the legislator are confounded with the commentaries made upon them, the glosses and interpretation of persons interested in them, and petitioners ; and in which both one and the other are of equal weight and authority ; and where they are selected, abridged, and mutilated at will ? AVhat, I say, can one think of a legislation in which parties may make laws for themselves by alterations or interpretations so as to create rights and exemptions, as they may want them, and which enables them to fabricate privileges by supposing statements made in familiar conversations ?

What a source of misconceptions, to find maxims laid down by plaintiffs regarded as of equal weight with the decisions of the judge, and that too a judge invested with such enormous powers ; to place on an equality the laws of the legislator and the glosses of the commentator ; and to represent a man as legislating in a familiar conversation when he docs not intend it !

17

In the two volumes in folio of the constitutions of the Jesuits, no more mention is made of the laws of the country, in which they intend to abide, than if that country had never had any laws, and than if no church had ever existed in that state ; ex- cepting in one instance, in respect to iimsions, and in two others, where the Society concedes some privileges in favour of the Spanish Inquisition. (See the 5th Congregation Decrct. 21, p. 549, and Compendium Verbo Absolutio, p. 267.)

It must be allowed in favour of the Institution, that it has been approved of, confirmed, and favoured by several Popes ; and even by the Church in the Council of Trent ; that its constitutions have been confirmed by name by all Popes ; that the establish- ments of this Order have been protected and favoured by kings ; and the Jesuits have lived in France on the faith of a possession authorised by the two powers ; a possession which, according to civil laws, would create an unassailable prescriptive right, secure from every objection. But prescription cannot be alleged con- trary to public right, and abuse (if there is abuse) cannot be covered by the lapse of time, nor by the weight of authority.

In the second place, it is contrary to public order, that associa- tions, societies, or orders should be formed in a state, without the authorisation of the state ; for if it were otherwise, we must say that states have no right to maintain themselves.

The constitutions of a religious order arc conditions, to the observance of which it is bound by its allegiance to the Church ; and as no one but the Pope can represent the Church, it is to the Pope, that the approbation of all religious orders must be referred, and to whom they present themselves to be established through- out the Christian world.

But the Pope is not the absolute master of the Church, and the Church herself has no power over temporal interests. The Church exists and subsists in the State ; and the State may decide whether it will admit, or refuse to admit, any order or institution within its dominions.

Such reception necessarily supposes the examination of the conditions on which an order proposes to attach itself to the State, and according to which the State receives and promises to protect it. The State must be informed of the intentions of the

c

18

ecclesiastics who ask to be received, what is their peculiar charac- teristic, and in what respects they are to be distinguished from others ; under what laws they intend to live, and what rules they promise to observe. In short, the State must understand the form of their constitution and government, in order that it may find in their superiors responsible guarantees for the fidelity of their members.

The State must consider also whether such a new order is not injurious to the public or to the rights of bodies already established. All such as might be injured by them have a right to remonstrate and legally represent their cases, and to oppose encroachments on their rights by the proposed new establishment.

It is unheard of that a State should be obliged to admit men they do not know ; and they cannot know them until they present their constitutions, institutions, and laws. It is therefore contrary to the rights of all men, and contrary to public order, that the constitutions of any order, from whomsoever they may emanate, should not be presented ; it is contrary to reason and good sense, that they should not be made public, or at least sufficiently well known.

The laws of the kingdom require an authorization by letters patent from his Majesty, registered in the supreme courts; and there is no Catholic state where the sovereign does not take the same or equal precautions.

I cannot discover that the constitutions of the Jesuits have ever been seen or examined by any tribunal whatsoever, secular or ecclesiastic ; by any sovereign ; not even by the Court of Chancery of Prague, when permission was asked to print them : for it is very remarkable that in that edition, which is the most complete and authentic edition that has been made, there is no "Privilege of the Emperor," a formality required in the Empire, as it is in France. There is no " privilege " to the edition of Antwerp. I do not know whether for the editions of Lyons and of Home privileges were granted by sovereigns.

In France, Jesuits have never obtained letters patent, approving of their institution and constitutions.

And now I must remind you, in the first place, that all this has passed under the veil of religion. The most important laws of

19

Franco are set at nought ; or authority has been taken by surprise and passed over these men. Formalities which the laws prescribe have been omitted ; now, some ages after, the oversight is per- ceived. Meantime establishments have been made ; and it seems that abuses and vices acquire by impunity a sort of prescription, and a right to be unreformable.

The situation of the Jesuits in France is not very distinctly ascertained. A religious order is not merely a set of men distin- guished by a peculiar dress ; it is an ecclesiastical society attached to the State by laws and constitutions.

If neither the Government nor the Councils have ever seen or examined their laws and constitutions, who can say whether they have ever really received the orders, which they profess ?

There were conditions laid down at Poissy for their reception, and, in 1603, for their re-establishment. It follows, that they have never been received in France unconditionally ; which leaves the question open to examination — whether the conditions so imposed have been observed and fulfilled by them.

After all, it is easier to learn whether they are fit to be re- ceived, than whether they are authoritatively received. This last question has become a subject of dispute. When they have been asked what they are, they have answered, " Talcs Qttales" One must answer a wise man according to his understanding, and one who is not wise according to his intention. One might return to them the answer they give, and answer here and everywhere else by telling them that they are received " Talitcr Qnalitcr" They have supposed that they were received. Their reception is only founded on supposition. They were only tolerated at first ; since 1603 they have had a less precarious existence.

But the character of mystery is sufficient by itself to doom and condemn their constitutions. They have taken all sorts of pre- cautions to keep them a secret. Their rule forbids them to communicate them to strangers ; and, moreover, they may not communicate the whole of them to their own members. They took care to print them themselves, in their own college, in Rome ; in their college at Prague ; or to secure the whole edition, when they had them printed elsewhere.

In 1621 the Jesuits refused to communicate their constitutions

c2

20

to the Procurcur- General of the Parliament of Aix, when ho wanted to sec, whether there was anything in them repugnant to the liberties of the Gallican Church ; and it is very astonishing that they obtained by subtlety a lettre dc cachet, though it was a time of trouble, to dispense them from showing them. But it is quite as remarkable that the constitutions of a religious order should be secrets of State or religious mysteries. No secrets of State last through a whole age, and religion does not teach dis- simulation. Pagan emperors had a right to demand the laws of the Christian religion, in order that they might see, whether they contained anything dangerous to public order ; and this demand was never contested. Even without their asking for it, the Christians described their rules to them in certain apologetic writings. A healthy policy cannot allow states to be ignorant of principles of action, which may affect their governments. The refusal to give such information, or to supply any statement, must proceed from a guilty intention, or a supposition that nations are not capable of appreciating public good.

Before I proceed to discuss the details of the constitutions, I must examine the general constitution of the order ; in whom its government is placed ; and how a constitution was formed, which has so long bewildered the courts and depositories of national law, and almost overpowered the Church herself. In what respects did the early Generals add to, or alter, the plan and intentions of the founder 't I must show the spirit and the letter of the con- stitutions ; their objects and their basis ; whether they are vicious in themselves, or whether their aim has been perverted ; how they have been extended, and, above all, how they have been made use of.

The constitution of the Society is not so easily to be defined as it may appear to be. Its government is monarchical, and depends solely on the will of one superior, who is always subordinate to the Pope : " Monarchia cst in definitionibus Unites Superioris arbitrio contcnta " —so runs the Bull of Gregory XIV., 1561.

Saint Ignatius intended to establish a mixed monarchy.

The right to make constitutions and particular rules, and also to alter them, was given to the General and his companions ; that is to say, to the general congregation which represented them.

21

By the Bulls of Paul III., 1540 and 1543, the General had the right to confer all offices as he pleased, and to command all the members of the Society.

The legislative power thus rested in the hands of the General and the Society, or in the general congregation, which represented them.

Laynez, in the first congregation that assembled after the

death of Ignatius, caused it to be decided, that the General only

K had the right to make rules, " Sotus pr&positits Generalis autori-

tatem habct Regular condendi." (Can. 3rd, Congreg. 1, p. 698,

Tom. 1.)

The Generals then having the right to nominate to all offices and employments, and convoking no general congregation, the legislative power necessarily rested entirely in their hands. When the congregation is assembled it represents the whole Society ; but it is very seldom assembled, excepting when it meets to elect a general. The supreme power rests essentially with the whole Society. It is superior to the General, and, in certain cases, has the right to depose him. But it cannot exercise its power, unless it is assembled, and the General alone can assemble the congrega- tion. The general congregation must always be composed of the creatures of the General, infatuated respecting the privileges which belong to his office. At all other times the General is the only representative of the Society and of the general congregation. In fact, the whole order, with all its authority, is comprised in him.

The prerogative of the General being thus the constructive form . of the Society, let us see in what that prerogative consists.

The General has the right to command and regulate everything in the Society.

His right of administration is unlimited ; he can exercise over every individual member the supreme power of the whole Society.

All the authority of the provincials and other superiors is derived from the General as commander-in-chief, and he bestows on every one of them such powers as he thinks fit.

His duty is to see that the constitutions are observed, but he may dispense with any observances as he pleases.

No member of the Society may accept of any proffered dignity out of the Society without his permission.

22

He has all power and authority to make rules, ordinances, and declarations with respect to the constitutions ; the other superiors have no authority in that respect, excepting such as he may choose to confer on them.

By the Bulls of 1540, 1543, and 1571, the Society and the General may make any special constitutions, they may think proper for the advantage of the Society ; and they may alter them, abrogate them, and make new ones, and date them at any time they please ; and from that time, these must be considered as con- firmed by apostolic authority.

For the advantage of the Society, he may command any mem- ber without exception, in virtue of obedience ; and though he may have conferred powers on inferior superiors, he may nevertheless approve or annul anything, they may have done, and regulate everything as he thinks best. He must always be respected and obeyed, as he is held to be the representative of Jesus Christ.

He alone has the power to make contracts of all kinds ; except- ing that he may not dissolve colleges or houses (unless they are very small colleges or residences) without sharing that power with the superiors of them.

Contracts are not to be made by general assemblies, but according to the constitutions, and by the act of the General.

He cannot divert the revenues of any college; and if he should give any part of them to his relatives, that would be a cause for his deposition ; but the declarations do not forbid him to give alms to any amount, that he may deem conducive to the glory of God.

He ought to consult on important affairs with his fellow mem- bers, but the decision of them rests with him alone.

The General alone has the right to nominate provincials and rectors, unless he chooses to do it by commission ; he alone has the right to admit members into the Society, unless he communi- cates that faculty ; he alone may dismiss professed members and coadjutors ; he has in that respect all the power, that is vested in the whole Society.

He has the right to appoint guards and officers ; he may create professed members and coadjutors, both spiritual and temporal ; and he must carefully retain all the powers, which are given to him by the constitutions, to change the members of the Society.

2-3

He has the entire government and regulation of the colleges.

The constitution does not command under the penalty of sin, but the General commanding in the name of Jesus Christ, and in virtue of obedience, may command under the penalty of mortal sin and of venial sin.

He has the right to declare, to augment, or to restrain reserved cases in the Society.

He may institute missions in all parts of the world ; he may change the missionaries, and in certain cases recall established missions.

He may send members of the Society wherever he chooses, even among infidels.

He alone has the power to commute the legacies which have been left to the Society.

He has the right to revise and correct all the books belonging to the Society.

He may distribute by his own power, and enable others in the like manner to distribute the favours granted by Popes to the Society.

He may grant indulgences to the congregations of scholars, whom he has affiliated to the congregation at Rome ; to congregations, who are not scholars, both of men and women, who are directed by the Society in all parts of the world ; and to several congregations in the same place.

He may (in virtue of the supreme authority which he has over the order) make affectionate protectors and benefactors to the Society participants of the merits of good works, and of the prayers and suffrages of the Society.

He must thoroughly examine into the consciences of his subjects, and particularly into those of the elder superiors.

Everything, which he has granted and ordered, remains granted and ordered until it may be revoked by his successor, even the precepts which he has enjoined.

Nevertheless he is subordinate to the whole body of the Society, and in certain cases he may be deposed.

In order that all matters may be centralized in the General by universal and consecutive correspondence, the provincials of all the provinces of Europe must write to the General every month,

24

and the superior rectors of houses and the masters of provinces once every three months.

When provincials write to the General, the}- must take care to detail exactly the state of their houses, of their colleges, and of the whole province, in order that the General may as perfectly under- stand the individuals and the affairs of all the provinces, as if all those circumstances had passed under his own eyes.

Every provincial and every rector has an adviser, a sort of con- troller, who must also correspond with the General occasionally.

Every superior must send two catalogues every year to the General : in the first catalogue, he must inscribe the names of all the persons in his house, their age, their country, at what period they entered the society, what they have studied, wrhat exercises they have kept, their degrees in sciences, etc.

In the second catalogue, he must describe the qualities and the talents of every individual, the inclination of his mind, and his powers of judgment ; whether he is prudent, versed in business, his temper, and for what employment in the Society he is adapted.

These privileges place in the hands of the General the whole legislative power of the Society ; they cede its exercise to him, and by this means, make him absolutely independent.

When it is necessary to write of matters which require secresy, they are ordered to write in cypher, so that if the letter was sent open it could not be understood ; it is set down that the General shall prescribe the cypher, " Modnm prcescribel generalis."

In respect to the authority of the Pope, the Jesuits were obliged by the Bulls of Paul III. of 1540 and 1543, according to the general and special vow of St. Ignatius and his companions, to execute everything that the Pope should command, both for the purpose of saving souls, and for the propagation of their faith, even if he should send them to Turks or infidels. " Etiamsi ad qnascamque Provincias mittere velkt — sire ad Turcas — sive ad qnoscumque alios Infideks" So runs the Bull of 1543.

But the authority of the Pope in this respect has been limited to missions, and even to missions to foreign countries. The General may order missions or missionaries to remain where they have been sent, as long as he pleases, and recall them at his pleasure,

25

even those, who have been sent by the Pope himself, unless the period of their mission has been distinctly fixed by the Pope.

If any doubt should arise about the Institution, its constitutions, or its privileges, the Pope or the General must be appealed to.

The intention of the constitutions (according to the Declaration on Ch. 2, vol. i. p. 418, although it only relates to missions) is that in things which may be done either by the Pope or by the General ; the General should be addressed rather than the Pope ; and they add that the latter course is better as a matter of con- science, considering the vow of obedience.

A Jesuit cannot appeal to the Pope from the orders of the General, unless the Pope should give him a particular permission to do so.

It is not necessary to have a dispensation from the Pope to be released from vows ; the authority of the General is sufficient.

It follows from this review of the authority and powers of the General, together with the preceding one, that the General may reinstate the Society in any privileges, which may have been encroached upon, without having recourse to the Pope, and independently of him.

The General alone has power to make constitutions and rules ; but as it may be said, that, according to the constitutions, he only has power to make particular rules and constitutions, and that everything essential and of substantial importance to the institu- tion is immutable, it becomes necessary to discover what is the essence of the institution, " Substantialia Instituti" and what are the fundamental points.

Great difficulties have always arisen when attempts have been made to obtain a solution of this question ; the provinces have often insisted on the importance of its being decided, and generals have as often opposed it, because a decision would of course define the limits of their powers.

In the 5th congregation in 1593, on most of the provinces demanding, that it should be decided what were the essential points of the institution, " Substantialialnstituti" the congregation, on the recommendation of commissioners named for the purpose, and after long study and exact research, declared, that the points contained in the formulary of the institution proposed to Pope

26

Julius III., and confirmed by him and his successors, and those which in that formulary relate to those constitutions in the form of a declaration, " Vel quce in cadem referuntur ad. constitutiones declarationis gratia'' should be declared the essence of the insti- tution, and that although there were other essential points, it was better not to speak of them.

Some persons, ascertaining that the meaning of this decree was obscure, — and indeed, it is not intelligible, — demanded at a subsequent sitting, that it should be more clearly explained ; they proposed to add some examples to it, and to end the decree with " and such like."

On this demand, and by the advice of a commission, the con- gregation made the decree which is Article 58. It states that the essential articles of the institution, " Substantial/a Instituti" are above all, those presented to Pope III., confirmed by him and by his successors ; and next, those things, without which these articles could not be carried out, or could scarcely exist ; as for example : — First, That there are objections, which may prevent admission into the Society ; — Secondly, That no judicial form shall take place in order to expel members from the Society ;— Thirdly, That the communication of matters of conscience to the superior is absolutely necessary ; — Fourthly, That it was equally necessary, that every one should consent to reveal to the superior everything they had observed in him ; — Fifthly, That all the members should be ready to denounce each other mutually and charitably.

At the end of this decree is subjoined " and such /ike," which the congregation thinks it had better not define, leaving the definition to be made by the General. Aquaviva presided at this general congregation, which was the fifth.

In the seventh, which took place in 1615, under Witeleschi, there was another attempt to agitate the question of the essential articles of the institution, and it was insisted, that they should be specified, and determined. Witeleschi obtained a decision, that all doubts should be referred to the General ; and they repeated what already had been decided more than once, that provincial congre- gations are forbidden to agitate this question.

Thus, the fundamental articles of the Institution " SubstantiaKa"

27

their determination, and their declaration were left to the arbitra- tion of the General, which is the greatest prerogative.

These laws (if they can be called laws) and these rules on the fundamental constitutions of the Society — on the power of the Society and the power of the General, and on the powers of the general congregation, are drawn from the Bulls of Popes, from the decrees of congregations, and from declarations. A strange code ; increased or diminished by the caprices or by the ambition of generals, and by the interests of the Society ; in which there is no one fixed principle but the power of the Society, or rather the power of the General (for the power of the Pope is modified) ; and in which there are no certain laws about what is essential, except- ing five or six maxims of monastic policy ; iii which everything is subject to explanation, to arbitrary interpretation and distinctions ; from which anything may be drawn, for or against; and from which one may conclude with the help of discordant passages, or passages purposely rendered obscure, that the Pope has all au- thority over the Society, and that he has not ; that the General may make laws and constitutions, and that he may not ; that he may alter them, and that he cannot alter them ; that he may dis- pense from them, and that he cannot dispense from them ; that the Society (or the general congregation) has the legislative power, and that it has not ; finally, that the General is all powerful, and that he is not; and that the essence of the constitution is immutable, and that it is not immutable.

There are provincial congregations, which count for nothing. After all, the Society consists of the General and his assistants, and some provincials under his orders.

The constitutions speak of four kinds of members — the pro- fessed (some under four, and some under three vows), coadjutors, scholars, and novices. They say that they have nothing to do with indifferents : who are members under examination, that it may be decided, whether they are to be placed in the rank of priests or lay members.

But it should not be said, that there are only four kinds of Jesuits, for I find a fifth kind in the declarations on the first chapter of examinations, vol. i., p. 342. There are some persons, who are admitted to the solemn profession of three vows accord-

28

ing to tlio Bull of Pope Julius III. Those are neither professed members, nor coadjutors, nor scholars, nor novices.

There arc also, according to the Bull of Paul III., persons, living under obedience to the General, who enjoy exemptions, powers, and faculties, which would seem to withdraw them from his authority, but over whom Pope Paul declares, that the General shall retain jurisdiction implicitly and entirely.

Who arc these people ? Are they the unknown Jesuits, living with their families, without any religious dress, but dressed decently according to the custom of the place of tlieir residence ; who have no repugnance, according to the letter of the constitu- tions, to the profession of poverty ? Are these the invisible Jesuits so often talked of during two hundred years ?

Grotius, who was allied in friendship with some learned men belonging to the Society, mentions such men in his history of the Low Countries; and says of them " Dant Nnmiua Conjuges."

It is difficult to discern or unravel facts in so mysterious an order as the Jesuits.

We find persons (men and women) affiliated, of which fact we cannot doubt; these are aggregations or affiliations, which the generals of the order have a right to grant to persons well affected towards their order.

St. Ignatius (we must allow) formed his projects with a species of enthusiasm proceeding from a warm imagination, which heightened his zeal. Conceiving that it was possible to preach and teach religion without study, and to convert Jews, Greeks, and infidels of all nations, knowing no language but Spanish, he thought learning unnecessary ; although the greatest luminaries of the Church thought otherwise, and that to teach required preparation and capacity. These groundless convictions form the character of enthusiasm. And we may perceive an indication of this opinion in the injunction of Melchior Canus, the learned Bishop of the Canary Islands, to Ignatius, forbidding him to dogmatise or preach until he had studied theology four years ; from which we must conclude that the bishop thought that his mind was not in a tranquil state. But we ought to do him the justice to allow (setting aside his sanctity which has been recog-

29

nized by tho Church), that if the study of legends, which it has heen considered necessary to rectify since those days, had given him. some inexact ideas, nothing had ever tainted the sincerity of his heart, and that he had no object but the salvation of souls. His views were always pure and disinterested ; he carried into his institution the ideas, which were universally dominant in those days, of the absolute power of the Pope ; but he did not draw from them the frightful consequences, which they have occasioned. He remained faithful to the ancient doctrines of the Church, and did not wish to introduce any new ideas. His morality was admir- able, and rather inclines to rigidity than to relaxation. He never supposed that any inconvenience could arise from an institution, in which it was only proposed to catechise the ignorant and convert sinners. If he was ill prepared to teach, he left his followers the best of all instructions — his bright example, and the memory of his virtues ; he had no worldly views, and thought only of the spiritual welfare of his Society.

It is very likely, that if the blessed St. Francis Borgia had been the immediate successor of St. Ignatius, he might have pro- longed the first fervour of the institution, and the disinterested views of the founder. Laynez, who succeeded St. Ignatius, and Aquaviva, who, after Everard, succeeded Francis de Borgia, almost entirely altered, or rather corrupted the institutions of the founder of the Jesuits; and these are the two generals whom we must consider as the real founders of the existing Society, — such as it has long existed in the world.

Laynez, an ecclesiastical courtier, chosen General by intrigue, and almost a Pelagian in principle ; and Aquaviva, an illustrious Neapolitan, educated in the pomp and grandeur of Rome, who was disgusted by the simple disinterested views of St. Ignatius : these two Generals established the temporal empire of the Society, on the model of that at Rome, which they had before them. They there beheld an empire half political, half ecclesiastical ; a court, and courtiers, and a treasury ; the union of two species of authority in the person of one, whom they considered as the sovereign lord of the whole world, exercising spiritual authority personally and by his priests — to whom he committed this one kind

30

of power — and exercising the temporal power through laymen,* to whom he entrusted his authority, when he found its weight fatiguing ; while he possessed the power of transferring or sup- pressing empires and kingdoms, and of establishing, correcting, and deposing sovereigns.

St. Ignatius having been nourished and educated in the most absurd opinions of the sovereign and absolute light of the Pope, both in spiritual and temporal matters, thought that he ought to make his Society a monarchy. He did not reason systema- tically, but his successors did.

They said that the form of the primitive Church was only intended for the first ages of Christianity, which of course was not what Jesus Christ had principally in view. They formed systems, which the flatterers of the Court of Rome (men like the Jesuit Palavicini), endeavoured to justify by sophisms — systems which the Abbe de Fleury has shown in his fourth dis- course on the Gospels, to be directly contradictory to Holy Writ.

But it was in that system of the temporal sovereignty of the Church that Laynez and Aquaviva directed the Institution of the Jesuits. They thought, that they ought to make their monarchy splendid also, in order to make it respected ; to increase its authority, both spiritual and temporal, its consideration and its riches.

They did not see that it is impossible to compare a predominant religious power like that of Rome, with a monastic order, nor the Pope as a temporal prince with the General of a religious society.

And thus, instead of the honesty and simplicity of heart of St. Ignatius, they substituted a worldly policy according to which the Society has ever since governed its establishments, its missions, its colleges, its seminaries, and its whole direction.

Borgia, who succeeded Laynez, and was a more religious man, whose mind more resembled that of the founder, observed this inclination as early as in 1569, that is thirteen years after the death of St. Ignatius. He blamed the ambition, the pride, the love of riches, which even in those early days broke out in the company, and he feared its sad effects : this is seen in his letters to the brothers in Aquitaine, which were printed in 1611 at Ypres,

* Many of the Cardinals were laymen, others only deacons.

31

and were altered afterwards in 1635 in the edition of Antwerp. I omit some other similar testimonies about the same time.

But I cannot omit to notice that of Mariana, a celebrated Jesuit, who had entered into the Society in 1554 under the generalship of St. Ignatius himself, and who had lived under five generals up to 1624, at which time he died, aged eighty-seven years.

In his book on the faults of the Society, he says that St. Ignatius did not govern in the despotic manner that Aquaviva did, and that it was not surprising that his despotism alienated men's minds.

In the 19th chapter he asserts, that the laws of the Society, and still more the rules, had often been altered, and that the constitution of the Society was entirely opposed to the plans of the founders.

St. Ignatius, having established a monarchy, particularly enjoined obedience as a fundamental law. His letter to the Jesuits of Portugal is full of quotations from Scripture mis- understood, and examples misapplied, or apocryphal histories ; but it never occurred to him, that too much power could be conceded, because he did not intend to abuse it. He did not think that it was necessary to impose limits to virtue. His suc- cessors, in order to maintain and perpetuate their temporal power, stretched their authority, which was already exorbitant.

Saint Ignatius intended to found a religious order, in which passive obedience does not seem dangerous, having no object but spirituality. His successors transformed it into a political body of monks taking monastic vows, yet living in the world: or, if you please so to describe it, a monkish order of secular priests taking monastic vows, — a kind of society of which the Jesuits themselves have never been able to give an exact account.

Laynez, in order to secure to himself the office of General after the death of Ignatius, began by inspiring a species of fanaticism ; ' declaring, before the scrutiny, that if it should be proved by the votes that all the members were of one mind, their perfect agreement must be considered as evident manifestation of the will of God.

Pope Paul IV. intimated, that he thought the perpetuity of

32

the office of General was a dangerous idea ; but Laynez obtained a decision of the general congregation, that they chose to adhere to their constitutions ; and in consequence the office of General was declared perpetual. The letter that they wrote to the Pope to give him this information had been signed on the 13th of August, 1558, but it bears the date of the 30th of August. Laynex was ordered to deliver it, but he did not give it to the Pope, "for good reasons," so says the decree," " Honestas ab causas;" and the assembly was dissolved on the 10th of September.

In this congregation Laynez contrived to obtain a decision, that Generals had a right to authorize all contracts, without any common deliberation. "In praposito Generali cst iota auctoritas celebramU quosvis contradus emptionnm ucnditionnm cl cessionum" etc. He also obtained the right to give authority and authenticity to the commentaries and declarations on the constitutions, and the power to make rules and directories for the exercises of confession, preaching, catechisms, and prayer; and the right to have dungeons. In short, almost every power was conferred on the General in this congregation, the first that had been held since the death of St. Ignatius.

At the Council of Trent, Laynex (though he was the new General of the most recently established order in the Church), even while affecting to take the last place among the Heads of Orders, intimated that he might with reason claim a higher seat. He signalized himself by speeches detracting from Episcopal authority, which scandalised the Cardinal de Lorriane and the bishops, and embarrassed the Legates. He conducted himself more as if he had been an officer of the Court of Rome than as a theologian of the Church. These are ascertained facts, attested both by Fra Paulo and by the Cardinal Pallavicini, who palliates them. He had passed before that time an apprenticeship in politics. He had penetrated into the court of Charles the Fifth, and had intrigued to negociate the marriage of the daughter of the king of Portugal with Philip the Second. He had accompanied the new queen to Spain. He had refused to establish colleges in Savoy without endowments, that being a poor country, and not well cultivated ; but he established colleges in Portugal.

33

It was Aquaviva who refused to sign the conditions which it had been proposed to impose on the Jesuits, before they obtained permission to return to France, although the Pope had approved of them ; and it was for this reason, that they have never been enforced. He prepared a rule of studies, with the assistance of six doctors of the company, which was censured by the Inquisition of Spain, who complained of the novelties he introduced into theology. His despotic government occasioned murmurs in the Society itself. The principal Jesuits of Spain complained of him, and carried their complaints to Home. Aquaviva got the better of them by his credit and dexterity. He it was who obtained by subtlety from Gregory XIII. the permission to trade in the Indies, under the pretext that it was advantageous to missions. That Pope also granted to him an exclusive permission to send missions to Japan. It was in his generalship that politico- religious missions were sent to Paraguay. These are, perhaps, the sources of the ideas of temporal grandeur in the Society and of the , corruption of the spiritual views of the founder, already weakened by Laynez. I therefore repeat that it is Laynez and Aquaviva, who should be considered as the real founders of the Society, and that it is their spirit which is substituted for the spirit of Ignatius, and which has always governed the Jesuits.

This order, like most other religious orders, took its rise in southern countries, and was formed by melancholy and excited minds, and in the time of religious wars, which are either the cause or the effect of enthusiasm or of fanaticism. It was esta- blished with the most extravagant ultramontane views, and in the barbarous spirit of the Inquisition. It was at first principally composed of members born among the enemies of France ; Spain fomented the League, and Popes favoured and fostered it.

The Jesuits owed their existence and their consideration to the Pope, and they vowed to obey him. They were protected by the Guises ; they were Leaguers by their principles and by their vows. All the other orders were carried away by the torrent.

Morality at that time was much corrupted in the Church ; that fact must be confessed. It is made evident, by the reproaches cast on the Jesuits, that they established immorality, and by proofs,

D

34

which they collected to show that they only adopted what they found already existing.

Their public studies were not admirable ; there reigned in their schools the wildest casuistry ; they studied nothing but the logic of Aristotle ; and they learnt nothing but mechanics.

It would be unjust to reproach men with the errors of their nation and of their times ; it would be equally unjust if we im- puted to children all the errors of their parents and of their pre- cursors. We have no right to reproach the Jesuits of our own time, if they have given up the principles of the Jesuits of the time of the League. Have they abandoned those corrupt systems of morals ? Do they now maintain and teach principles of loyalty and submission to temporal sovereigns, and the inviolability of their sacred persons? We shall presently examine these im- portant points.

I am bound to tell you, Messieurs, what I think of the system of the Jesuits, and of the foundation of their constitutions, of which you have commanded me to give you an account. I think I ought to declare, because I think I can prove it, that the constitution of the Jesuits is fanaticism reduced to rules and principles.

I must say that the foundation of the system, the means it employs, the basis of its government, exterior and interior, can only be regarded as fanaticism.

Mon. du Bellay, the Bishop of Paris, has said, that the Bulls of the institution contain some things, which seem very strange and contrary to reason, and which ought not to be tolerated in any Christian system. *

It is a very great cause of prejudice against these constitutions that they are extraordinary and without parallel in the world.

Another cause of mistrust is, as I have observed before, the mystery that is made of the matter, and which is enjoined on persons employed to execute their plans. But I must not limit myself to mere statements. The more serious this accusation of

* Opinions of Mon. Eustaclie clu Bellay, Bishop of Paris in 1554, on the Bulls obtained by the Jesuits.

35

fanaticism, the more it is incumbent on me to make it clear, the more I am bound to prove it by facts.

And, in the first place, I declare that, so far from accusing the whole order of Jesuits (that is to say, the members personally) of fanaticism, I acquit them almost all, especially the French Jesuits.

It would be altogether unjust to accuse individuals, and make them responsible for vices in laws, which they do not enact; laws to which they have submitted themselves without knowing that those laws existed, and of which they are not to be informed until it is almost impossible to throw off their yoke.

God defend me from accusing the members of a Christian society, who personally profess Christianity, of having formed a conspiracy to overthrow evangelical morality. I do not even accuse the members individually of really believing the maxims, which the books of the Society teach.

I do not believe that ecclesiastics, attached to Holy "Writ by profession, attached to their country by ties of birth, can suddenly forget those sentiments of Christianity, virtue, and humanity, which are incompatible with fanaticism ; nor that, living in a nation whose character is gentle, they can cast away the love, Avhich is so natural in a Frenchman, of his country and his king. All around them inspires other feelings.

It is not the Society of Jesuits, who have invented the prin- ciples, from which fanaticism is derived in Europe. It arises from false logic. Passive obedience to Popes, a contagion, which, toward the end of the sixth century, infected this great country, and still more, perhaps, the ambitious views of Aquaviva, and the despotism and perpetuity of the generalship have caused these ideas to be adopted.

I would willingly clear them, if I could, of holding principles of false morality ; which indeed they have only adopted as prin- ciples, and which they seem to deny by the regularity of their conduct.

I impugn that spirit of part)-, which is as often hurtful as use- ful ; that violence laid on liberty of consciences and minds, which forces all, who wear the same uniform, to embrace the same sentiments ; that out-and-out preference for the teachers of their

D 2

36

own order, which will not allow the members to differ from any of their opinions.

I impugn superstition and ignorance ; an ambitious and despotic system ; fanaticism, in short, which has caused, and still causes, so many grievances in states, and from which we cannot boast of being relieved.

Enthusiasm and fanaticism are the consequences of superstition /and ignorance. Enthusiasm arises from a strong belief, heated by a false zeal, and without any ground of conviction.

Imagination vividly excited and strongly attached to its object, leaves no opening for examination or for discussion.

The enthusiast does not reason ; he sees all that he imagines ; he has eager feelings and no clear ideas ; feeling serves him instead of demonstration. On the subject of religion, from enthu- siasm to fanaticism is but one step. The nature of fanaticism is to attribute our own imaginations to Divine inspiration. To look up to some man as to God ; to believe that his ordinances are the expression of the will of Jesus Christ ; and thus to abandon our own consciences and obey his orders blindly ; that is fanaticism. Those illusions do not produce fatal effects every day ; but there is no age and no country, in which this species of idolatry has not occasioned trouble and desolation.

Nations cannot be too much aware of, and they are not suffi- ciently on their guard against this delusive idea; it is always ready to arise and give birth to the most tremendous evils.

In reading the annals of empires and of the Church during 500 years we may observe the introduction and growth of two princi- ples, that have been either the cause or the consequence of the fanaticism which has occasioned so much affliction in Europe.

These principles have arisen from a confusion in men's minds (from ignorance or prejudice) as to the rights of two powers.

The immoderate ambition of Gregory VII. gave birth to the revolting maxim of the power of the Church over temporal interest. In order to support an authority so contrary to that which Jesus Christ has given to the" Apostles and the Church, it became necessary to imagine a quality inherent in the Popes, and unheard of until that time — the prerogative of infallibility. And as canonists had boldly asserted, that excommunication by Popes

37

deprived both individuals and kings of all temporal rights, there is no extravagance to which that doctrine has not extended.

Thence have proceeded excommunications and interdicts on kingdoms, unheard of sentences to deprive kings of their dominions, which released subjects from their oaths of fidelity, and excited those miserable fanatics, who have attempted the lives of kings.

If fanaticism did not introduce these "principles, it was the active agent, which ambition, either ecclesiastical or secular, em- ployed to compass its ends by seducing ignorant and superstitious persons. Ambition has been fanatical, and fanaticism has been ambitious. The constitution of the Jesuits, and their system, is derived from two sources, from which emanate their laws, privi- leges, declarations, and statutes, — in a word, all that has with them the force of law. The first is the absolute and sovereign power of the Pope, both spiritual and temporal. And the second principle is the communication by the Pope to the Society of the Jesuits, in the person of their General, of absolute power for the preservation and extension of the spiritual and temporal advantage of their order.

These two principles are the basis and foundation of the whole edifice of their Society. If the Pope does really possess temporal power — well ; but if the Pope has no right to temporal power, and therefore cannot give it — in that case they have no rights or institution, or constitutions or privileges, nor has their General ; for they have no laws but those given them by the Popes, or those which the Popes have allowed the Generals to make for them. Part of these principles are chimerical. If they are contrary to reason, to religion, and to the rights of nations, if they are only the offspring of fanaticism, then it must be allowed that the con- stitutions of the Jesuits are inadmissible.

When I speak of constitutions, I include the Bulls which authorised them, and also those of other rules, which they have adopted, and which apply to both, as also the declarations and ordinances of their Generals and the decrees of their general congregations.

The first principle, (that of the absolute power of the Pope, both in spiritual and temporal concerns) is innate in the Society of

38

the Jesuits. You have seen in the Bull, which authorised the institution, the decision of the founder and of his companions, to obey no one but the Pope, and to obey him without reserve. The kind of obedience is explained in the constitutions, " Like that ichich -is due to Jcsits Christ, giving up the whole understanding, and persuading ourselves, that all that he orders is right." " Ad fjus rocetit pcrinde ac si a Christo Domino egrederetur." (p. 407.) And here I must observe, that it is this vow of absolute obedience to the Pope, and the zeal that the Jesuits have shown to maintain the ambitious views of Eome, which at that time, and in succeed- ing ages, has made the fortune of the Society. They have con- stantly declared at Rome their devotion to him only, and have exag- gerated the disobedience of all those who attacked his infallibility. All the first Jesuits embraced that opinion implicitly, and this universal empire was the reigning opinion throughout the Church.

Yet that pretension to temporal power was too distasteful, and too dangerous, to risk its declaration openly. Some, more prudent, — I think, but I am not sure, that it was Salmeron, — endeavoured to disguise it, and render it less odious, to facilitate its reception, by stating that this power was •indirect ; but even if it should be considered, that the right of the Pope and of the Church in temporal concerns is indirect, it is no less likely to be pernicious both to the State and to the Church, and to occasion troubles and seditions than the chimera of direct power over kings.

However that may be, since that time there has not existed anywhere (excepting in France) one single Jesuit, who has aban- doned voluntarily in writing the absurd system of the infallibility of the Pope. And they have also added another error, as a necessary consequence of this, that excommunication properly deprives men of all their temporal rights. Let this be allowed, and we have the key to the policy of the Jesuits, and the purpose of their constitutions. To prove that they do make these claims, it is only necessary to read their works.

We will begin with Salmeron, who was a companion of Saint Ignatius, and one of the nine, who presented themselves with him to Pope Paul III. in 1540.

Salmeron writes : — " A king, on receiving Baptism, and in re- " nouncing Satan and all his works, promises tacitly never to abuse

39

"his royal power by acting against the Church ; he is understood " to consent to be deprived of his kingdom, if he acts otherwise ; " and in fact does not a king render himself unworthy of Baptism " and the Holy Eucharist, if he refuses to use his power for the " good of the Church and the destruction of heretics ?" (p. 251.)

" It is a divine law, that Christians cannot elect a king, who is f not a Christian. How ? Can the spiritual power be less in the " Church than it was in the synagogue, so that the Church cannot " make a king as she thinks fit, and as she chooses ?" (p. 251, 253.)

" All the power, that priests possessed figuratively in the old " law, priests possess more amply in the reality of the New Testa- ment, over the persons of kings and over their possessions. At " the present time the Bishop of Rome, the successor of Saint "Peter, may, for the good of his flock, when he cannot use any " other remedy, ly a word take away corporeal life, provided, that " he does it by word of mouth, and not by the outward action of " his hand. He may even make war on heretics and 011 schis- " matics, and cause their death by the means of Catholic princes : " for Jesus Christ in commanding him to feed his sheep, gave him "power to drive away the wolves and to kill them, if they hurt his " flock ; and moreover, if the leader of his flock should injure his " other sheep, by communicating a contagious disease to them, or " by striking them with his horns, the shepherd may depose him " and take from him his principality, and the government of his "flock. In. temporal things God has only given to St. Peter and " his successors an indirect dominion over temporal kingdoms and " over all the empires in the world. In virtue of that dominion " he might (if the glory of Jesus Christ and the advantage of the " Church demanded it) change them, transfer them, and make them "pass into other hands."

Bellarmine says : — " We maintain that the Pope for the sake of " spiritual good, has a sovereign power to dispose of temporal " o-ood to all Christians. Spiritual power does not interfere " in temporal affairs, and lets them follow their course, provided " that they do not interfere with spiritual intentions or spiritual " ends ; or that they do not become necessary for their achieve- " ment ; but if that should happen, the spiritual power can and

40

" ought fo constrain the temporal poiccr by all the mean* which it " may think necessary. The Pope tlien may change empire*, take " the crown, from one to gice it to another, an being the sovereign, " spiritual prince, if he judges that necessary for the salvation of " souls.

" If Christians in other days did not depose Nero, and Dioclc- " sian, and Julian the Apostate, and Valens, who was an Arian, " it was only because they were unable to do so ; for they had " the right.

" When the temporal obedience, which you pay to a king," (it is the Pope whom Bellarmine supposes to speak in these terms) " endangers your eternal salvation, then I am completely superior " to //our king, even in temporal things ; you arc the sheep of my " flock, and your kings are its leaders; and as your kings remain "sheep I permit them to govern you and lead you ; but if they "become wolves instead of sheep, am I to allow my Master's " flock to be ruled by wolves ? You must not acknowledge as " kings, those who lead you away from the path of life, either by " menaces or by caresses, or any other means — those, wrhoni I "have condemned to be banished from the company of just men, " and to be deprived of their sovereignty ; but you must render " to their successors, whom I have chosen, the obedience due to " kings. Take care not to be deceived and to acknowledge as " your prince, him who, in fact, is no longer cither a prince or " your king."

Molina writes : — " The spiritual power of the Pope for super- " natural purposes, comprehends, dependent on those causes, the "most ample and extensive powers of temporal jurisdiction over all "princes, and over all the faithful in the Church, precisely as " often as this is requisite for the supernatural purposes, for " which the spiritual power is established ; for this reason, if the " supernatural object requires it, the Pope may depose kings and " deprice them of their kingdoms. He may also decide the differ- "ences, that arise between princes concerning temporal matters : " he may reverse their laws, and supersede their edicts. And it " is not only by censures, that he may oblige compliance with his " commands ; but by pains and penalties, and by force of arms, " like secular princes ; though in general it is found more suitable,

41

" that the Pope should not make war himself; but that ho should " use outward force by means of secular princes, (p. 67.)

•'For these reasons the Pope is recognized as the possessor of " two swords — one spiritual, and the other temporal. Most cer- " tainly Jesus Christ would not have sufficiently provided for the " maintenance of His church, if He had not made all Christian " secular princes subject to the Pope, and given the sovereign " pontiff ample power to oblige and constrain them to do what- " ever, he deemed necessary, for supernatural objects.

" The Pope may depose kings if the preservation of the faith " of tlie Church, or the spiritual good of the public requires it," etc.

" If a prince should become a heretic or a schismatic, ' the " Pope may -use the temporal stcord against him ;' and further- " more, 'he may depose him, and drive him from his kingdom ;' "moreover, ' If Christian kings are disputing for any sovereignty,' " or any other temporal interest whatsoever, and making war on " that account, and there seems reason to fear, that the dispute " may do injury to the Church or spiritual power, either because " the enemies of the faith may make such war a pretence to rob " the Church, or that it may occasion spiritual crimes and other " evils, which a war among Christians generally produces, ' then the "Pope,' to prevent those evils, 'may decide the difference and pro- " nouncc sentence without their consent ; and they, whether with their "consent or against it, must submit to his decision.' If the Pope " tloes not interfere, it is not because he has not the divine right " to do so ; but because he dares not use it, lest they should act " against the Holy See, and occasion still greater inconveniences."

Suarez says : — " ' The Pope has a power coactice and coercive " over kings, even to the extent of depriving them of their thrones,' " if there is cause for it.

" We have shown in the third book, Chap. 23rd., No. 10, that "the power of the Pope may extend itself to coerce kings, even " by temporal penalties and the privation of their kingdoms, ' if "it is necessary.' 'This power is more essentially necessary in " the Church -with respect to kings, in order to govern them, than in " respect to subjects.'

" A shepherd has not only the power to punish his erring flock,

42

" to recall them to his fold ; but to drive away the wolves, and dc- " fend his fold lest his sheep should be forced out of it and killed.

" Then the Pope, as sovereign shepherd, nun/ depricc any prince " of his dominions, and banish him for fear that he should injure " his subjects. He may release their subjects from their oath of "fidelity, or declare that they need not take such oath ; for this " condition is always supposed in such oaths.

" For that purpose he may make use of the swords of other " princes ; thus the secular sword is subjected to the spiritual " sword, that they may assist each other to protect and defend the " Church.

"It is permitted to an individual to kill a tyrant in virtue of the "right of self-defence ; for though the community docs not command " it, it is always to be understood, that it wishes to be defended by "every one of its citizens individually, and even by a stranger. "Then, if no defence can be found excepting the death of the " tyrant, it is permitted to every man to kill him.

" Wlicncver a king has been legitimately deposed, he ceases to be a " king or a legitimate, prince, and that can no longer be affirmed of "him, which may be said for a legitimate king: he thenceforth "should be called a tyrant. Thus, after he has been declared to be "deprived of his kingdom, it becomes legal to treat him as a real " tyrant ; and consequently any man has a right to hill him.

Mariana writes: — "He (Jaques Clement,) suffered joyfully " blows and mortal wounds, because by the loss of life he gave " liberty to his country and the nation. Murder was e.rpiated by " murder, and the manes of the Due dc Guise, unjustly killed, were "avenged by the effusion of royal blood.

" He (Jacques Clement) did a really noble, admirable, memorable

"action by which he taught earthly princes that their

" impious enterprises never remain unpunished. Ecery individual "has the same power (i.e., that of declaring the sovereign a public "enemy, and consequently of killing him by the sword), 'if he " has the courage,' (i.e., to undertake to assist the republic at " the risk of his own life without hope of escaping from capital " punishment).

"It would be very advantageous" (for men) "if many men could "be found, who by the sacrifice of their own lives, would undertake

43

"so courageous an action for the liberty of their country ; but most " men are deterred by a disordered care for their own preservation, " u-hich renders him incapable of great enterprises ; tlience it is " so few of the tyrants we read of in former ages, have suffered " violent deaths by the hands of their subjects. Nevertheless, it is " well that princes should know, that, if the)' oppress their people, " and render themselves insupportable by their vices and mis- " doings, they live on the condition, that not only they may bo " killed righteously and justly ; but that it is a 'praiseworthy and "glorious action to kill them.'

" No one doubts that a ' tyrant may be killed overtly by force " of arms,' either by attacking him in his palace, in giving battle " to him, or even by deceit and ambush.

" It is true, it is more magnanimous and generous to declare " your hatred, and to assail the enemy of the state openly ; " but it is no less laudable to seize some favourable occasion, and " to use deceit and ambuscades in order to perform the act with- " out occasioning much agitation, and with less peril, both to the " public and to individuals."

I am sure that you are as much wearied and disgusted by listening to these recitals, as I am in making them. Can it be true that such things have issued from the minds of men, who ought to have been upholders of knowledge and of the law ?

If there is any incontestable maxim on the rights of nations, it is that laid down by the illustrious Bossuet, in his defence of the declaration of the clergy of France in 1682, thai-all sovereign power is sufficient to itself ! and is provided by God with all the power that is necessary for its own preservation ; and that no other power on earth ought to intrude itself into its administration, otherwise than by good offices, or according to treaties and con- ventions.

It is also an incontrovertible maxim, that neither the Pope nor the Church itself has any right in temporal matters. To con- tradict either of these principles is degrading to sovereignty ; and delivering kings into the hands of furious enthusiasm and fana- ticism.

What disorders the idea of the temporal power of the Church

44

has occasioned ! It has cruised the death ofpisabably ten millions of men in 400 years.

Let us see what the Abbe de Fleury has said on this subject, in his fifth discourse. I will quote the whole of the passage ; it may serve as a counterpoise to what I have just related to you: —

" The most pernicious use of allegories is, to lay them down as " principles, and then to draw consequences from them contrary " to the sense of Scripture, and to establish new dogmas upon " them. Such is the celebrated allegory of the two swords.

" Jesus Christ after His Passion told His disciples they must " have swords (to fulfil the prophecy, which said that He would "be numbered with the wicked.) They said, 'Here are two " swords," and He answered, ' It is enough.' The literal sense is " evident. But the lovers of allegories have chosen to say, that "these two swords (which were both of them real material " swords) signified two powers, by which the world is governed, " the spiritual and the temporal sword ; that Jesus Christ said, " ' It is enough — not too much.' This, say they, shows that these " were sufficient, but that both are necessary ; that those two " powers belong to the Church, because both those swords were " in the hands of the apostles ; but that the Church should only "use the spiritual sword herself, and that the temporal sword " should be used only by those princes to whom the Church shall " grant its exercise ; that this is the reason why Jesus Christ said " to St. Peter, ' Put up thy sword into its sheath,' as if He meant " to say, " That sword is yours, but you must not use it with your " own hand. Princes must use it under your order, and under " your direction.'

" Now I ask any sensible man, if this explanation is anything "more than a,jeu d' esprit, and whether any serious principle can " be founded upon it ?

" I say the same of the two luminaries, which they have also " applied to these two powers ; saying that the great luminary is " the Church, which, like the sun, enlightens by its own light ; and " empire or sovereignty is the lesser light, which, like the moon, " has only a reflected or borrowed light.

" If people will rely on fanciful applications of the words of " Scripture, and draw important consequences from them, one may

45

" reply by simply denying those consequences, and say that those " passages are historical, and that we cannot derive any mysterious " meaning from them beyond their natural import ; and that the " two luminaries are. the sun and the moon, and we know no "more than that. Nevertheless these two allegorical conclusions " are the main arguments used by all, who since the days of "Gregory VII. have attributed to the Church authority over "sovereigns in temporal affairs, in direct contradiction to plain " texts of Scripture, which are supported by tradition ; for Jesus " Christ said simply, without figure of speech or parable, ' My " kingdom is not of this world ; ' and in another place He said " speaking to His apostles, ' Ye know that the princes of the " Gentiles exercise dominion over them ; and they that are "great exercise authority upon them; but it shall not be so " among you.'

" There is no wit or reasoning, that can elude so distinct a corn- " inand. Moreover, during the first seven or eight centuries it was " understood literally, without the supposition of any mysterious " interpretation. You have seen how all the ancients, St. Gelatius " among them, distinguished clearly two separate powers ; and " what is more important, you have seen, that in practice they " acted on that doctrine, and that bishops, and even Popes, sub- " mitted in worldly matters to kings and emperors, even when " they were pagans and heretics.

" The first author, in whose work I can find the allegory of the " two swords, is Geoffrey do Yendome, in the beginning of the 12th "century. John of Salisbury went so far as to say, that the "prince having received the sword from the hand of the Church, " the Church has of course the power to take it again away from " him ! and he teaches elsewhere, that it is not only permitted, " but laudable to kill tyrants. The object of his teaching is "obvious. Most of the doctors, however, of that age, asserted " the doctrine of the allegory of the swords ; and what is more " surprising, the princes themselves, and those who defended them " against the Popes, did not reject the doctrine. They contented " themselves by limiting the consequences. This was occasioned " by the total ignorance of the laity, which rendered them slaves " to the clergy in everything concerning letters and doctrine.

46

" Now these clergy had all studied together in the same schools, " and had imbibed the same doctrines, and from the same books ; " and in consequence we find, that the defenders of Henry IV. " against Pope Gregory VII. all agreed in saying, that he must " not run the risk of being excommunicated, for if he was, he " would lose the right to reign. Frederick II. submitted himself " to the judgment of the Universal Council, and confessed, that if " he was proved guilty of the crimes, imputed to him, particularly " of heresy, he deserved to be deposed.

" The Council of St. Louis knew no better than those men, and " resolved to abandon Frederick, if he was found guilty ; so " powerful is the effect of teaching.

" From one false principle widely diffused, a thousand disas- " trqus consequences ensue, when it comes to be put in practice ! " as in the instance of the supposed temporal rights of the Church. " Since that principle was admitted, the internal inspiration of the "Church has changed."

It is generally allowed that the principles of the Jesuit authors, whom I have quoted, are fanatical, and that they have produced bad effects. But, it is said, these books have long lain unattended to in the libraries, from which they have lately been taken. It is said that Rome has forgotten these maxims, and that the Church is far from wishing to put them in practice. Careless and timid men now assert, that to speak of them is to revive alarms, which are past, to renew extinguished quarrels, and to interrupt the good understanding, that exists between Rome and all the Christian princes. That is exactly what the Jesuit Richomc said in 1C03, in his apologetic complaint to Henry IV.

I am far from seeking to find errors, much less crimes, where they do not exist, or from wishing to disturb concord between Rome and princes. That concord must be the first wish of every Frenchman, and every child of the Church; but I must ask, from whence it is concluded that Rome has abandoned the doc- trines of Sixtus V. and Gregory XIV ? Is it from the decisions of Paul V., of Innocent X., and Alexander VII., against the oath of England; or from the condemnation by Alexander VIII. of the four articles of the Assembly of the Clergy (of France) in 1682 ? Is it from the affirmation of the Legend of

47

Gregory VII., coined in our own days by Clement XI. and Benedict XIII ?

The books we have cited arc those of the most learned and most talented theologians of the Society of Jesuits — those, that the Jesuit Beatrix, rector of the College of Rouen, in his Chrono- logical Tables, printed 1644, placed in the rank of fathers of the Church. They drew all their theology from those sources ; they write 110 new books, but they make new editions of those old ones.

Where can we find any abjuration of those opinions recorded by the Society ? Is it in the theses, which Jesuits have held in several schools of this kingdom ? Is it in the multiplied editions of Busembaum,* and above all, in the edition, which was printed in France in 1729, with the Commentaries of La Croix, a Jesuit ? Is it in the Journal de Trevoux of that same year, which lavishes~vX on that book the highest praises ? or is it in the reprint, in 1757, of that detestable book, published under what circumstances ? Is it in the apologies, made for it during the mission to Nantes by the Jesuit Dessulpont, who only a few months afterwards bad to disavow it before this tribunal ? Is it in the works of the Jesuit Zacharias, who wrote in 1758, in support of that execrable work, and to attack the decisions, which had proscribed it?

Here is a question of facts. Will any one undertake to efface from the memory of men facts which are stereotyped in history, arid make us forget these recent facts, which have passed under our own eyes ?

I think that Popes of this day have neither the wish, nor any occasion to assert ambitious pretensions in opposition to any king, but this is rather a pious presumption on my part, than a demon- strated fact ; and one can hardly expect princes to be satisfied with felicitous presumptions, and make no better provision for their own safety.

If this species of fanaticism, derived from the system of the infallibility of the Pope, and his right to rule temporalities, is diminished in France, we owe it to our parliaments, who have

* The work of Liguori, which has been recently approved by the Pope, and which was authoritatively recommended by Cardinal Wiseman, is a paraphrase of Busemltatuu's work. — Editor.

48

preserved their sacred charge of the liberties of the nation, and to the Sorbonnc, to the body of French clergy, who made the cele- brated declaration of 1682, and to the edict which Louis XIV. issued in consequence.

The second fundamental principle of the constitution of the Jesuits is, that the Pope, as the rightful sovereign over all things, both spiritual and temporal, has communicated his absolute power to the Society of Jesuits in the person of their General, for the preservation and propagation of the spiritual and temporal good of the Society.

This fanatical principle is as absurd as that from which they attempt to deduce it.

They say, a sovereign who may do anything he pleases, has given to the General all the power he had for the advancement of the Society. When he has given away his power, the gift is complete and irrevocable. If the giver should repent, it is too late ; his power is gone, and the general has only to keep it without the help of the Pope, and in spite of him.

But now, if one could believe, that Christ had given sovereign power to the Pope, does it follow, that such power is transferable, or that any Pope having it, could give it away and deprive his successors of it ?

Men accept gifts generally without questioning the authority and competence of the donor. Perhaps the Jesuits have never considered, whether the Popes could confer on a religious order the power to create rights for themselves, prerogatives and privileges above, and adverse to, all other, and even to the injury of the Pope himself; for all that is given away from others is valid, according to their constitutions ; and nothing, which is granted to others, is valid against them.

I have said that the constitutions of the Jesuits are founded on

; two principles ; the absolute power of the Pope, and his comniu-

i nication of an absolute power to the Society. You will see, that

the system of the Society and its government, both interior and

exterior, and the particular regulations of the constitutions, flow

naturally from those two principles, i.e., that the Pope has

absolute power, and that he has communicated it to the Society.

All that concerns kings and princes, their persons, their autho-

49

rity, the episcopate, curates, universities, companies, both secular and regular, are derived from the first.

The second compi-ehends the authority of the General, both interior and exterior, the means that he has a right to employ, the institution and the education of members of the Society, that of youths confided to its care, the laws and rules of morality of dis- cipline, and of police, of which the Society makes use.

Generally these two principles are united, and seek the same object; sometimes one of these powers is sufficient to provide for the preservation and the extension of the Society. Sometimes these two sovereign authorities find themselves at variance. We have seen what may happen by the shock of these two powers.

I do not attempt to report the laws of the institution in detail. In attempting it I could only repeat what has already been said more than once. I show the principles, and consider the spirit of the institution ; and it will be seen that particular facts unite themselves with these naturally.

I will show, when I come to discuss the murderous doctrines respecting kings, how that depends on the first principle. I will now proceed to that which affects the authority of govern- ments. We need not ask the Jesuits, why they did not present their constitutions, their laws, and the Bulls confirming the consti- tutions and their privileges, to the sovereigns, in whose dominions they establish themselves. It was because the Pope had authorized them, and they believed that, as the Pope had a power direct or indirect over princes, all Catholic sovereigns were obliged ! to receive them in their dominions, and that it was their duty to ' give them the full enjoyment of all the privileges and prerogatives that they had obtained ; that princes could not do otherwise, without failing in the respect they owed to the visible head of the Church, and without incurring the anger of God and the Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul. So run the Bulls.

The following is not a conjecture. Gregory XI V., in a Bull confirmative of the institution of the Jesuits given in 1591, on the petition of their General, Aquaviva says, that no one, excepting the sovereign Pontiff, shall meddle with the religious Orders, approved of by the Holy See, and forbids any person, whatever his authority, whether regular or secular, to attempt it. Paul III.

E

50

had granted to the Jesuits leave to build and acquire property in every part of the Avorld without the consent of any power, either ecclesiastical or secular. (Privileg. p. 17.) It is on the same principle of the sovereignty of Popes over the temporal concerns of all Christian kings, that the Society, its members and its pos- sessions, are declared to have passed into the possession of St. Peter, and to belong to the Holy Apostolic See.

Their persons and their possessions are exempted from all taxes, tithes, impositions, gabels (the excise on salt), taillas (succession duties), dons, (forced gifts), collections (levies), subsidies, even for the most commendable purposes, as for the defence of the country. No kings, princes, dukes, marquises, barons, soldiers, nobles, laymen, corporations, magistrates, commanders of towns or fortresses, shall dare to impose these.

It was not enough that the persons and the possessions of the Society should be freed from all jurisdiction ; they thought fit to create judges to preserve their privileges, and to endow these with the necessary power to prevent any encroachment upon them.

Popes have given them these " Conservators " in all countries; or rather, they have enabled the Jesuits to appoint and choose them for themselves.

That privilege is the acme of madness of fanaticism.

A Conservator, provided that he has any ecclesiastical dignity, or a canonry, may act as an ordinary judge for the Jesuits, " Judex Ordinarim" He may judge without any judicial formality : it is forbidden to any one to give a contradictory judgment, and if given, it is null and void.

The Bulls grant to this Conservator all power, even over tem- poral affairs and secular persons. He may inflict pecuniary penalties, and even lay interdicts on places to which enemies of the Society retire. He may repress all constituted authorities, whether secular or ecclesiastical, whatever they may be, even pontiffs or kings, who may molest the Society and disturb them in their possessions, their privileges, or their reputation openly, or privately, directly or indirectly, secretly or otherwise, on any pretence whatsoever.

The Jesuits may summon before their Judge-conservators all sorts of persons, either ecclesiastics or laymen, when it is a

51

question of manifest injury or violence against the properties, privileges, or members of the Society personally. It is sufficient for this, that the injury should be manifest by the evidence of fact, or it may be taken as proved, so there is no need of judicial investigation.

The Jesuits, to complete their wild pretensions, were not satisfied, that the Conservators should be chosen by themselves ; they insisted over and above this, that they should be able to change them at their pleasure ; and their privilege is recorded, that the Society may have a cause decided by one Conservator, which has been commenced by another, even when there is nothing to prevent the first judge from going on with it.

I must observe in regard to these pretended Judge-conser- vators, and the power given to them to punish by legal means, and by violent measures, that in the first Bulls obtained by the Jesuits for the establishment of these judges, legal means only were mentioned ; and that it was in a Bull issued in 1571, that the permission to use violence was added ; an addition which is by no means in accordance with the usual style of those writings ; it is added on purpose. And, I ask, for what purpose could such a clause be added? I see no proofs of the actual existence of such Judge-conservators in France, nor of any judg- ments passed by them. Their formal establishment would have been a direct attack on the sovereignty and laws of the State, and it would be almost impossible to obtain proofs of judgments given without any of the formalities of justice, by certain pretended and unknown judges, who have never taken legal oaths before any judicial tribunal, who are nowhere publicly registered, and who act in secret.

We find, however, in the reports on the affair of the Bishop of Pamiers, the Ordinance which that bishop issued against the Jesuits, forbidding them to hear confessions, and the Act in which they signified on the 24th of December, 1667, to his promoter, that if he persisted in such attempts, vexations, and molesta- tions against the Society, they would carry their complaints to the Pope for justice, or to the Judge-conservators, as was customary and reasonable.

The Popes, acting on their pretended right of sovereignty over

E 2

temporal affairs, have allowed the Society to create notaries for all their affairs, and have given the General the right to elevate the Jesuits into public officers, that they may be placed in a position to inform all persons, both secular and ecclesiastical, all and every one, of the privileges of the Society. And the acts of these Jesuit notaries must have full credence even in courts of justice. Some Bulls have made a civil law for the Jesuits with regard to statutes of limitation, which these Bulls prolong to sixty years ; even with regard to possessions, which would otherwise be limited to a shorter perid of time.

They have established special forms of procedure for the affairs of the Society, and subjected secular judges to those forms. They have exempted the Jesuits from the laws with regard to damages altogether, when they commit injury, even when it is the fault of their superiors ; an arrangement, which tends to render their obli- gations illusory whenever their interest makes them think, that they are injured.

I add one important point concerning the General only, which interests civil society, — that of contracts and legacies.

The General only, as has been already stated, has the power of making contracts. "Penes generalem omnisfacultas agendi quosvis contractus." " Lcs contrah ne peuvent etre faits que suivant la coutume et les privileges de la Societe." Contracts can only be made according to the custom and privileges of the Society. And declarations exist, which prevent these engagements from binding the Society, although the other contracting party is bound by them.

One of these articles enacts, that, though the General may have conceded powers to the superiors of religious houses and also to inferiors, he may yet confirm or negative their agreements as he pleases, and order anything he thinks fit.

He may alter the destination of legacies, left to colleges or houses, and apply them to any other purpose, provided that it can be done without creating scandal to persons interested.

The laws and constitutions of the society having overridden the rights of sovereigns, we need not ask, why they pay no regard either to episcopal jurisdiction or to rights of incumbents, nor to the rights of universities, nor to those of other religious orders ; on the ground, that the Pope having sovereign spiritual power,

53

could of .course rule, as he chose, and order everything he thought useful or necessary, without troubling himself about the rights of bishops, who are only his delegates, and have no jurisdiction, but that which he gives them ; because the Pope may despise the rights of incumbents, and of universities and of all religious orders ; and because, being above law and canons, he may dispense with, all canons, and being superior to the General Council, he may negative their regulations. By the Bull of Paul III. 1549, the Society and its members are declared exempt and free from all superiority, jurisdiction, and correction of the ordinaries. No bishop can excommunicate a Jesuit, or suspend him or interdict him. This privilege extends to all their out-of-door servants and workmen.

Any Jesuit chosen by the General has the right to preach everywhere, to hear the confessions of all the faithful, to absolve them from all sins, even in the cases reserved for the Holy See, and from censures. It is enjoined on all ordinaries to facilitate their full exercise of these privileges. By a Bull cited among their privileges, bishops cannot prevent Jesuits from administering the sacrament of penance, from Palm Sunday to the first Sunday after Whitsuntide. And they must allow Jesuits, who are priests, to perform this function throughout their dioceses generally, and without distinction or limitation of time, place, or persons.

Bishops cannot interdict an establishment of Jesuits without consulting the Holy See, nor even any individual Jesuit, (to whom they had previously given permission, without limiting the period of that permission) nor oblige him to be subjected to a fresh ex- amination, unless some new cause has occurred belonging to the confession itself. Bishops cannot prevent Jesuits from preaching in churches which belong to their Society. Every believer, who goes to mass, to a sermon, or to vespers in the churches, belonging to the Society, is understood to have fulfilled all his parish duties and all the offices of the Church.

The General has a right to summon congregations of all sorts and kinds in his houses, to distribute and create indulgences for those congregations, to make any statutes he pleases, and to change them at his will in such sort, that it is to be understood, that all is done with the approbation of the Holy See. Bishops have

54

no right, according to the Bulls, to visit their houses, nor to in- terfere in their administration, unless in exceptional cases.

Several of the Bulls diminish the authority of councils, whether General or Provincial Councils. There is noted in the Compen- dium, p. 285, that privileges granted since the Council of Trent, are valid, although they are contradictory to that council.

It is forhidden to appeal from the ordinances of this society, and to all judges to receive such appeals.

Every college of Jesuits is erected into a university, and the superior or prefect is authorised to confer degrees on strangers as well as on Jesuits, with all the privileges of graduates in the universities. All universities and persons opposing this rule, are \ to lose their own privileges, and rights, and are to be cited hefore the Conservator, and excommunicated. Jesuit pupils must not graduate in the universities on account of the oaths taken there.

Magistrates must execute the will of the rector, and protect the persons he recommends.

The Jesuits, fearing that the privileges, of which I have made a short enumeration, would not be enough, obtained in one single Bull from Pope Pius V., all the privileges, past, present, or future, which all the Mendicants of all habits, and both sexes, have ever obtained, or that ever hereafter they may obtain ; all the prerogatives, which may have been granted to them, how many soever they may be, even those especially notified. All the immunities, exemptions, faculties, concessions, privileges, spiritual and temporal graces, that may be given in future to their congregations, convents, chapters, to their monks or nuns, to their monasteries, houses, hospitals, and other places, are granted to the Jesuits, ipso facto, without further particular con- cession.

By this Bull the Pope ties his own hands, and the hands of all his successors, by forbidding, that any of these privileges should ever be retracted. For if they were, the General of the Society might restore those rights to himself, or to the Society, as they existed at any date he may choose for such restitution.

What a mass of abuses heaped one over the other ! or rather, what extravagant nonsense !

55

Violations of the right of all nations and of all civil society, attempts on the jurisdictions of all the sovereigns of the whole world, and pains pronounced on their sacred persons — what an abuse of ecclesiastical authority ! A spiritual ruler, who has received only spiritual authority from Jesus Christ, takes the command in all temporal concerns over all Christendom, as if it was his territory !

Can one hear those things without shuddering at such a source of fanaticism ? or rather, is it not fanaticism itself ? Was I wrong when I stated to you that the constitutions of the Jesuits, their systems and laws, declarations and decrees, are fanaticism reduced to rule and principle ?

I will not give any further details of the abuses which result from these privileges ; it is but too evident that they directly attack common law, the laws of the kingdom, the liberties of the Gallican Church, the canons of the universal Church, the rights of bishops, and those of incumbents ; the prerogatives of universities, and of all other religious orders ; in one word, all societies, both political and religious. You see that all these evils are derived from the fatal maxim of the absolute power of the Pope in all things both spiritual and temporal.

The Society of the Jesuits will say, perhaps, that other religious orders have obtained exorbitant power ; and that, moreover, the Jesuits have never used (in France) the greater part of those powers which seem so odious.

I wish it was possible to judge of the constitutions of the Jesuits as leniently as of other collections of monastic laws ; and I own, that was my first idea when I began this examination. There are vices and abuses in several of the laws of other religious orders ; I learnt that in the compendium of the privileges, which the Jesuit Society only cites in order to adopt them.

But I have been obliged to abandon a comparison, which at first sight seemed equitable, but which cannot be sustained. It is plain, that having concentrated in their order all the preroga- tives of all the other orders, they have adopted all the vices with them, that can be found in all the other constitutions ; so that the fruit of their ambition has been to find themselves burdened

56

in relation to the State, with all the abuses incident to all the other orders together.

Besides, if the laws of other orders are vicious, those vices are abuses which should be reformed; not examples to be imitated.

They say that they do not intend to make use of most of their privileges in France. They are men who wish to enjoy the rights of citizens, without being citizens ; who ask and obtain exorbitant privileges from a power, which they hold to be superior to all other powers, and then choose among those privileges which of them they like to make use of, and which to lay by. And is the State to wait patiently to see what these men are going to be pleased to do, while they think themselves very moderate in not vigorously using all these rights which they ostentatiously display ? Mean- time, in the editions they publish of their rights and powers for the edification of all the houses of their Society, without deigning to make mention of any respect due to the laws of the sovereign of their country, they graciously consent not to make use of these privileges where they find obstacles ; but never have they re- nounced the principle, from which their pretensions are derived ; and that is the direct or indirect power of the Pope over the temporal power of kings.

One fact will answer all the protestations of submission which the Jesuits made to the conditions, imposed on their recall to France, and to all their pretended renunciations of the privileges with which they were reproached.

In 1593 and 1594, the Jesuits of Spain and Portugal com- plained of the government of Aquaviva, and demanded a reforma- tion of the Society. They were backed by the courts of Spain and Portugal, and had carried their complaints to the Pope.

It was against them that Aquaviva called the Fifth Congrega- tion. There they were treated as prevaricating children, seducers, disturbers of peace ; who under the cloak of zeal and public good, dared to prefer their own views to the opinions of the whole Society. It was ordered that they should be punished and banished, and that all others, who were suspected of similar machinations should be obliged to swear humbly to all the constitutions and decrees of the general congregations, and all the Bulls of sovereign pontiffs which confirm or explain the constitution, expressly those

57

of Julius III., Gregory XIII., and Gregory XIV., that they would never act in any way contrary to them under any pretence whatsoever ; and that they would never allow any alteration to be made in the constitution of the Society, but would at all times be ready to defend them at the price of their blood.

In 1603, they were recalled to France. Every one knows the conditions on which they were allowed to return. It is on those conditions, that they now boast of their voluntary resignation of all the exorbitant contents of the Bulls of Julius III., and Gregory XIY.

The conditions of their recall were not ratified by Aquaviva, although the Pope had approved of them. An essential formality according to their constitution, to render the renunciations valid was withheld; and therefore the General might enforce the observance of those Bulls on any occasion and at any time he pleased.

But what put an end to all doubt on that point was, that three years after their recall to France in 1606, Aquaviva presented a supplication to the Pope (Paul V.), and obtained another Bull from him, authorising the decree of the Fifth General Congrega- tion, of which I have already spoken, in which they declared, that they would never allow of any alteration of the institutions on any pretext whatsoever, nor of any derogation from the privileges granted to the Society by the Bulls of Pope Julius III., Pope Gregory XIII., and Pope Gregory XIV.

Aquaviva, in the general congregation, which was held on the 21st of February, 1608, that is to say, five years after their recall to France (a congregation at which the deputies of France assisted), then caused the decree of the Fifth Congregation, which had been confirmed by the Bull of Paul V., to be renewed ; and he induced them to declare, secondly, that the decree of that Fifth Congregation ought to be so extended as to include all the members of the Society.

What conclusions could the Jesuits draw from renunciations which, according to their maxims, must be void : not only because they had never been ratified by their General, but against which he had appealed, and which he had persuaded the Pope to annul by his supplication to Paul V., and by the Bull issued in con-

58

sequence three years after their recall on conditions, against which he formally protested, in the Sixth General Congregation held in 1608, five years after their recall ?

Will they say, that notwithstanding the obstinacy of their General and the Bull of Paul V., they still think themselves bound to fulfil the conditions? And will they dare to pretend that they have fulfilled them in regard to bishops? And will they dare to give the lie formally to the memorials of the clergy of France ? (See the circular letter of the assembly of clergy in 1650, and the Proces Verbaux, vol v. of Memorials.)

We know, moreover, that one of the principles of their con- stitutions is, That if anything has been effected by any person whomsoever, of whatever rank or condition, prejudicial to the rights and privileges of the Society, the act is nil in itself, and it is not necessary to obtain any formal withdrawal.

I see in many parts of the Compendium, that they make a dis- tinction between the public and the private use of their privileges. They are warned not to use their privilege, which is good for the interior, excepting when they find no impediment, out of doors. (Passim.)

When men think their rights and privileges are legitimate, in their inward conscience; when they are persuaded that notwith- standing contrary usages, they are still in full force — " in suo vigor e " et plena roborc firmitatis permanent," — they resolve to use them when they meet no hindrance ; and if they find any, they only try to remove or surmount the obstacle.

Thus, it is not because Jesuits ought not to use all their privi- leges that they do not make use of them, but simply because they cannot. What inference can we draw then from a renunciation which is rather negative than positive, and which, so far from being a formal abdication, is only a reclamation against the superior force of authority ?

Another fact, which completes 'the destruction of all the pre- tences of renunciations made by the Jesuits, is the way in which the Jesuits renounced, in 1587, three of their privileges in favour of the Inquisition of the king of Spain.

General Aquaviva obtained a brief from the Pope to revoke the two first, and had himself given letters patent to forbid the

59

use of the third. They were asked in the name of the king, that the Fifth General Congregation should promulgate decrees on that subject ; and the congregation ordered that it would not make any use of those three privileges in Spain. (Decret. v., Yol. i., p. 548. Compendium, p. 267.)

If the Jesuits have similar act, briefs of the Pope, letters patent 'of their General, and decrees of general congregations, which revoke privileges that are contrary to the laws of the king- dom of France, they ought to produce them ; or they ought to offer them now. But so long as they continue to produce none, and make no offer to resign those privileges, they cannot say, with any shadow of truth, that they have renounced them, and all their professions of submission and obedience are vain and illusory, even if facts did not evidence against them.

Who could fail to wonder at the mass of censure and excommu- nications, issued in such profusion at the will and pleasure of the Society, for the preservation of these very privileges? These, common, worthless, and abusive as they are, alarm the minds of timid persons, and disturb the consciences of the weak, the stupid, or the bigoted.

I present you with an abridged catalogue of these excommuni- cations, and a very imperfect one of the persons, who are to be excommunicated : —

All kings, princes, or administrators, who would impose any tax or charge on the Society, on their persons or properties.

All those who cause any damage to the Society.

All those who oblige the Society to lend their churches or houses for the performance of Mass, for ordination, or for pro- cessions, assemblies, or ecclesiastical synods, or any other kind of assemblies, or who place garrisons in them.

All who should dare to gainsay any of the concessions made to the Jesuits.

All who refuse the office of Conservator to the Jesuits, or who having accepted, shall exercise the office negligently.

All who should attack their houses with violence.

These excommunications comprehend, in short, all and every person whether priest or monk, of whatever order, in whatever position of rank or pre-eminence they may be placed, bishops,

60

archbishops, patriarchs, cardinals, — all who have any secular dignity or authority whatsoever, who may attack the institution, the constitutions, the decrees, or any of the articles of the Society, or anything concerning them, even under the pretext of con- troversy, or of zealously desiring the truth, directly or indirectly, publicly or secretly ; or who may wish to alter or change the above, or to give them another form.

All who may attempt to injure the reputation of the Jesuits.* Heads of universities, and all others who may molest the rectors and professors of their colleges.

All who oppose themselves to the privileges of the colleges of the Jesuits' universities, degrees, etc.

All who may lodge or give refuge to Jesuits, who may have left their houses without permission of the general.

All who may dare to retain anything belonging to members of the Society, their houses or their colleges, even money, unless on receiving notice from this Society, he should return it in three

days

All who should violate the sanctuary of their houses. All fathers who choose to use their parental authority to pre- vent their children from entering into the Society.

^//members of the Society, who may appeal from the ordinances of the superior without the special permission of the Pope are excommunicated.

There is an infinite number of other excommunications, too long to report. (See Cent, and Prsecept. Compend. Bull, passim.}

As the privileges claimed by the Society are very extensive, and as they may be imparted by the General without limit, excommu- nications may also be multipled infinitely.

They have also privileges shielding them from excommunica- tions. In places which are under interdict, Jesuits have the privilege of immunity from excommunication or interdict.

All sentences of excommunication, suspension, and interdict, which ordinaries or others may pass upon them, their houses, or any persons belonging to them, are null, ipso facto, with respect to

* This article is ordered to be read once every year at table, in all the houses of the Society. Vol. i., p. 1.

61

themselves ; and with respect to others, on their account, they may be annulled.

What a mass of censures ! Is there any one in Europe, above all, in France, who must not now be in danger of excommunica- tion ? It is quite useless to ask, whether any government can co-exist with this institution.

No government can ally itself with any establishment, the laws of which are in contradiction to the laws of the State. I know no country or nation, either monarchical, aristocratic, or demo- cratic, with which the laws and the constitutions of the Jesuits permit their being allied.

A king holds a very precarious sovereignty, when he has a multitude of men in his dominions, who do not depend upon him for the security of their lives and fortunes. He is not independent, when a great number of men, exempted from his jurisdiction, conscientiously believe, that they have a right to bring him and the magistrates, his adherents, who exercise justice in his name, before other judges chosen by themselves, and to reprehend and punish by legal means, or by violent means, as they think best.

Jesuits, however, have always maintained themselves more effectually in monarchies than in other governments. Rome in past ages had most influence in great monarchies. It is easier to flatter one man than many. Monarchies are the residence of great men and courtiers. But even in those states Jesuits have always been engaged in contests with all other bodies of men whether of ecclesiastics or of layman ; and most of all with those, who were the guardians of the laws of the State. Therefore they always seek to ally themselves with the sovereign authority, which allows itself to be entrapped ; for being naturally benevolent, and seeing no meditated mischief in the favour which the Jesuits solicit, it is almost always ready to grant it. Whereas the ordinary tribunals of justice set themselves to consider and discuss what is fit to be granted or refused according to the law.

The action of absolute authority is always convenient for intrigue, inasmuch as it is silent and concealed. Its traces are not perceived by the public or by posterity, so that it is easy to disavow boldly the means of attack and defence, that are employed.

62

Jesuits are less secure in republican states. It is almost impos- sible, that their constitutions and manners should agree with the laws of such governments, or with republican customs.

There are few countries, where they have been more frequently attacked than in Venice ; from thence they have actually been banished.

The only temporal power, with which the constitutions of the Jesuits can agree is Rome. The institution has one common principle with that court, the sovereign power of the Pope, both in temporal and spiritual affairs ; but you have seen, that the Society has found means to limit even that power, and to make itself an independent power. The Pope, as a temporal prince, has few complicated interests, either of finance or of commerce, and the Society is more able to forward his spiritual interests by residing away from Rome, than if it confined itself to _his dominions.

The second principle of the constitutions of the Jesuits is the communication of the power of the Pope to their Society in the person of their General.

I have already said that in order to extend and maintain his spiritual and temporal power, the Pope has increased and pro- tected religious orders. You have seen that the special vow of obedience to the Pope, made by St. Ignatius and his companions, induced Pope Paul III. to confirm their institution.

The despotism of the General of the Jesuits was one of the means, which Popes made use of to extend and maintain their own.

This, Messieurs, is not a matter of conjecture ; it is to be found in the formal text of the Bull, issued by Pope Gregory XIV., and granted to General Aquaviva at his request in 1591.

This Pope, who during his short pontificate, did his utmost to favour the enterprises of the Leaguers in France, after having explained and confirmed the immense prerogatives of the General of the Jesuits, said that " Among other advantages and conveni- ences which ivould result from it, is the fact, that the whole order, being disciplined to monarchical government, its members being always perfectly united in sentiment, and however dispersed in all parts of the world, remaining bound to their chief by the rule of

63

implicit obedience, would be more easily led and directed by the sovereign head, the vicar of Christ on earth, to perform the different functions, that he may assign to each of them according to the special voiv, which they have made" Qnoniam ratio ipsa docet. That is to say, reason teaches that the government of the Jesuits must be monarchical, and that of the other orders aristocratic.*

This declaration is clear, simple, and without equivocation, and we have not to seek in probabilities the designs and intentions of the court of Rome ; nor is there any need, that we should repre- sent to you the consequences, which followed in Christian states from the action of Popes and of this Society. Experience has taught it to us, too well.

As some may maintain, that the authority of the General of the Jesuits is only monarchical, and that I falsely consider it as despotic, I ought to propound what I mean by despotism.

Despotism and slavery are relative terms, which explain each other ; when one knows what a slave is, then one knows what a despot is.

Not to have power over one's own possessions, that is slavery. Not to have personal liberty is the greatest slavery known to .. civil law. That degree of human degradation supposes the highest degree of despotism. Not to have liberty of mind, of one's own judgment, of one's own will, is a state of servitude, which approaches to moral death. Civil laws do not recognise it ; or rather they cannot know it. It was reserved to monastic constitutions to furnish examples of that excess of despotism.

Civil despotism is a bad thing ; it is naturally repugnant to reason. Spiritual despotism is impious ; it is an attempt against the gift of God.

A spiritual despot can only establish his power by imposing his own imaginations as divine inspirations. He is then really a fanatic. He has the true character of fanaticism, and his fanaticism

* This inference is partly based upon facts which M. de la Chalotais has not stated. But it must be remembered, that both he and the Parliament, he was addressing, were intimately acquainted with the constitution of the Ecclesiastical Orders, other than the Jesuits, at that time publicly existing in France ; he did not therefore describe them in detail. — Editor.

64

is the more incurable in that he entertains it in his own person, and feeds upon it himself.

For a purely spiritual authority pretending to have sovereign temporal power, to communicate to monks a sovereign power, independent, and in its very nature incommunicable, because it pretends to be divine, is, let us not fear to say it, utter madness. It is the last excess of fanaticism.

Let us see, whether that is the character which the Con- stitutions give to the authority of the General.

The kind of despotism that he exercises is to be ascertained by the nature of the obedience which is required. The Constitutions throughout put the General in the place of God and of Jesus Christ. This assumption is so marked in this respect, that I think there are in the Constitutions more than 500 places, in which expressions are used similar to the following: —

"We must always see Jesus Christ in the General; be obedient "to him in all his behests, as if they came directly from God "himself. That obedience must be complete in action, in the " will, in the understanding ; you must feel convinced, that every- " thing which the superior commands, is the precept and the will " of God ; you must always see God himself and Jesus Christ in "the superior, whoever he may be."

This sort of obedience is not possible for men, and this kind of despotism ought not to be allowed ; because absolute submission of heart and mind is due to God alone.

I should nevertheless observe, that in the Constitutions them- selves, even where the most blind obedience is demanded, there are some corrections and restrictions noted, that should not be passed over.

In the Epistle of St. Ignatius on Obedience, where its obser- vance is so exaggerated, he cites a passage of St. Bernard in these terms, " Ubi tamen Deo eontraria non preecipit homo." I find in the Constitutions, P. Art. III. c. i., where obedience is spoken of, " Ubipeccatum non cerneretur in omnibus rebus ad quas potest cum " charitate se obedientia extendere."

The Declarations on these Constitutions intimate — " Ubi nuttum manifestum est peccatum ; " and in the same place, " Ubi dcftnlri non possit aliquod peccati genus intercedere."

65

These expressions doubtless express some limit to the stupid obedience, which results from the comparison of the stick and the corpse, and the example of Abraham, cited by St. Ignatius. I should add, that in some of the rules of other monastic orders, the same expressions are used.

I ought also to say, that ascetic books, or books of devotion, should not be understood literally. They should rather be inter- preted favourably ; we should not expect to find in them the precision and exactitude, which is never required in them, and which is not compatible with the ardour of zeal.

"Why, then, you will ask, are the constitutions of the Jesuits not to be judged with the same leniency ?

It is because the obedience, which those constitutions require, is not obedience to some law that is at all times binding and powerful ; but it is obedience to the varying caprice and arbitrary will of a superior, whoever he may be. He must not only be obeyed immediately, quickly, without answer or remonstrance, but his subject is required to believe inwardly, and to believe firmly, that this superior, who may be fanciful or .capricious or unjust, is entirely right, and that it is Almighty God, who speaks by his mouth ; that what he orders is a precept of the Almighty, and his holy will. All the members of the Society are bound to execute everything that the General shall prescribe, with the same full consent and submission, as the dogmas of the Catholic faith. When he orders anything, it is not allowable to consider whether the act prescribed is sinful or not.

If that is not complete fanaticism, I should like to hear a better definition of it. It is evidently either fanaticism or madness.

If the constitutions of some other orders contain similar expres- sions; if it is said, for instance, in the rule. of St. Benedict, that there must be obedience even in things that are impossible ; if it is said in the rules of the Chartreux, that the members must immolate their will, as a sheep is sacrificed ; if the monastic constitutions of St. Basil decide, that monks must be in the hands of their superiors like the axe in the hands of the woodcutter ; if it is said in the rules of the unshod Carmelites, that they must execute the commands of their superior, as though the omission to do so, or repugnance to do it, was mortal sin ; if St. Bernard

66

assures us that obedience is a blessed blindness, which causes the soul to see the road to salvation ; if St. John Climacus says, that obedience is the tomb of will — that under obedience we discern nothing and make no resistance ; lastly, if we find in St. Buenaventura that a really obedient man is like a corpse, which allows itself to be touched, moved, and removed without making any resistance : — these are strong expressions made use of in monastic writings which are unauthorized by the Church. But they are all collected in the constitutions of the Jesuits, more strong, more frequent, and multiplied ; and consequences, even the most absurd, are formally deduced from them. And, after all, one abuse, whatever it may be, does not legalise another, which nothing can justify. Its being brought into observation should only cause all such abuses to be reformed.

This proves what I stated at first — that everything done under the cloak of religion passes current ; imaginations^gradually become heated ; and, as has been said by the Abbe de Fleury in his 8th Discourse, this heat has gone on increasing in intensify, and by means of examples and similitudes, the most absurd and strange ideas have become consecrated ; even from one form of abuse to another. Governments are on the point of being obliged either to tolerate every species of disorder, or to unsettle everything.

If passive obedience is always dangerous, it is most essentially so in the hands of a political order, governed by a permanent General, who has means of knowing the most intimate thoughts >of all its members from the time of their infancy.

The few correctives and restrictions that I have noticed would form very weak defences against so absolute a power as that of the General.

To secure and ensure a despotism it must be durable in the same person. An empire liable to change its despot must be a weak one. The General of the Jesuits preserves his power as long as he lives. Pope Paul IV. wished to make the command of the General triennial. I have spoken of the manoeuvres of Laynez to render it perpetual, and that the complaints against that perpetuity burst forth under Pius V. Their effect was escaped through his death : his death rendered them useless. These efforts were re- newed under Sixtus V., whe died before he had achieved what he

67

had begun. At last Aquaviva consummated the work of despotism, and the perpetuity of the generalship, under the pontificate of Gregory XIV. One of the reasons alleged for it by Aquaviva was that papacy and royalty are also perpetual.

In other Orders, assemblies and chapters exist, that are barriers against the authority of a perpetual superior ; but among the Jesuits there is no chapter nor assemblies, nor any fixed time for deliberations.

General congregations alone are above the General, in the same manner that an oecumenical council only is superior to the Pope.

They say, that the General is not absolute, because he may be deposed by a general council. It is true, that he might be deposed if he became mad or imbecile, and in five other cases, which hardly can happen, because the acts must be openly proved.

1. Copula carnalis. 2. Wounding some one. 3. Taking some part of the revenues of the college for his own defence. 4. Making gifts to any one, not belonging to the Society ; and this last case may be modified, as we have seen in the constitutions. 5. Maintaining bad doctrines.

It is said that General Gonzales was on the point of being deposed, but that proves nothing. A cabal nearly deposed that General because he attacked probableism, one of the favourite doc- trines of the Society, which he wished to proscribe. But fanaticism claimed its rights, I mean uniformity of opinion in the order ; so that one kind of fanaticism was on the point of destroying another.

Despotism refuses all connections ! it does not attach itself to persons, but it binds persons to itself. The contracts of despotism are never reciprocal, and engagements are absolute or conditional according to its interest.

A Jesuit pronounces his first vows to the Church, thereby placing himself in the hands of a superior, or some one appointed to receive them. Those vows are not made, they say, in the hands of any person — in nullis manibns fieri dicuntur — because they are only made to God. The intention is, they say, that these should not be solemn vows, although they are made in a solemn manner. They cease to be binding to the contractors whenever the General pleases. He

r2

68

dispenses with them at his will, and when he liberates a subject he declares him free from any engagement. But (the answer is, that) the individual is strictly bound to the Society by that vow, and if he endeavoured to retract it himself he might be treated as an apostate, and excommunicated. He might be prosecuted as such, if he obtained his liberation by any false statement ; never- theless, the Society is not bound to him, because that vow having been made in the intention of the constitutions, " Omnia inteUi- genda juxtd ipsius societatis const itutiones, the Society has only received him under the tacit condition, as far as it thought good, Si societas eos tenere volet. He can never leave the Society after his first vows without the permission of the General, but the General may dismiss him at any time, even after he has made the last vows, to whatever grade or dignity he may have attained ; and that dismissal may be made without consulting any one, for secret reasons — l'0b secretas causas," — for reasons which do not suppose any sinfulness ; and even without providing him with any means of subsistence.

One sees the spirit, which has dictated laws such as these ; and though the case may very rarely occur, that last rule nevertheless characterizes the most terrible despotism, as much as all the stringent precepts of passive and absolute obedience. The first want of man is to live, and his strongest fear is to die of hunger. Civil slavery is nothing to that.

Spiritual despotism, or fanaticism, has no object but a selfish one ; it would be contrary to its nature to have any other.

Thus, although we read in their Constitutions, that the object of the Society, is the glory of God ; it is evident from its history, that the first object and the last end of the system, has long been the advancement of the Society, its glory, and its extension.

This despotism is necessarily ambitious, but the pride of occu- pying high offices does not satisfy it. It endeavours to dominate over minds — a much higher ambition; and if it avoids the ordinary paths of ambition it is only to seek for more distinguished conquests.

St. Ignatius had shut the door to prelacies. Laynez opened another road to ambition. In the first council he held, he ordered, that is any of his Society should be elevated to the dignity of a

69

prelate, he should promise always to follow the advice of the General, or of such Jesuits as he should appoint to represent him. It is true, he added this saving clause to that promise : " If I feel, that, what he may advise is preferable to my own opinion, adding to this all being understood according to the con- stitutions and declarations of the Society "

One sees by this, that the Jesuits did not seek to become pre- lates, because St. Ignatius had forbidden it ; but if such prefer- ment should be conferred, the prelate must remain subject to the Society or to the General, and must obey his suggestions, as if he was still a Jesuit.

If ordinary ambition is odious, when it embraces everything spiritual or religious, ambition is still more odious, when it unites the appearance of good with the injustice of usurpation, and wishes, with its usual greediness, to enjoy the consideration, which is due to virtue alone.

Temporal despotism does not necessarily imply moral corrup- tion ; but then all despotism corrupts those who exercise it, if that despotism is both spiritual and temporal ; this requires a plastic morality, which will satisfy everybody. A rigid morality would be unsuitable. It cannot combine with anything.

One would have supposed, that principles would govern every- thing ; but here on the contrary, the will of man reigns supreme.

What suits spiritual despotism is a versatile morality (if I may so express myself), severe or relaxed, according to circumstances, admitting of interpretations, the limits of which are elastic.

We must, however, allow that the morality of the Constitutions is pure and wise. St. Ignatius contemplated the attainment of evangelical perfection ; the crowd of accommodating casuists arose later in the annals of the Society; they corrupted the pure morality of the founder by subtleties, and policy took advantage of their logic.

Despotism acts by inquisition and denunciation ; all its views are concealed ; thence the necessity for spies and informers.

The despot needs to know the characters of his subjects, their talents, and the qualities of their hearts and heads, even their tempers, in order that he may employ them where they will be most useful.

70

Their inmost consciences ought, if possible, to be laid open to him.

He must keep his subjects in perpetual distrust of each other, in order that tbey may confide in him only, and that his power alone may be felt.

In a state of slavery everything is vile and low ; it does not allow of elevation of mind, or of liberty of thought ; under the influence of spiritual despotism and of fanaticism, everything is actuated by the dominant impressions of a stranger.

No laudable project can be conceived in the mind of a slave ; it is not possible, that minds degraded by servitude, and espionage, and denunciation, by an inquisition menacing incessantly, can conceive great ideas ; if nature had made them magnanimous, education and their position would stultify their natural courage.

Slaves have no country ; they have been obliged to forget the homes of their fathers and the place of their birth. They see nothing but the greatness of the despot, whom they serve, of the empire, he has created ; their eyes are always fixed on the hands of their masters, and they have no more (independent) activity than an inanimate instrument.

It is written in Articles 9 and 10 of the Common Rules, Yol. ii., p. 70, that each Jesuit ought to be glad that all his failings and his faults, and generally everything that has been observed in him, should be noticed by the first comer, who may know it, and not by his own confession.*

That they must take it well to be so corrected, and must in the same way correct others, and be ready to report concerning each other ; because, moreover, that is commanded by the superior, for the greater glory of God. These are three articles out of the five which are declared to be necessary to the institute. Sub- stantia imtituti.

In the ordinances of the Generals on those rules, Vol. ii. p. 266, it is set down, that the meaning of this rule is, that it is permitted to everyone to reveal to his superior as he might reveal to his own father, the faults of his neighbour, whether light or important.

In the 4th chapter of the examination of persons, who wish to

* This rule manifestly applies only to the Jesuits, as between them- selves.— Editor.

71

enter into the Society, they are questioned on the 9th and 10th rules, of which I have been speaking ; and they are warned, that by that they abandon all right, whatever it may be, to their own reputation, and that they yield it to the superiors, for the good of their souls and the glory of God.

They are warned in the same ordinance, p. 266, that the same is to be understood of all faults, all sins, all errors, and all inadvertencies.

Article the 5th imports, that the rule respecting revelations is imperative, and that it is not permitted to wait for an order from the superior ; above all (Article 7th states), if the matter is detrimental to the common interests of religion or of the institution, and particularly of the General. These ordinances were made by Aquaviva.

I shall limit myself to some observations, on what you have just heard. I beg to ask, whether a man can cede his right to his own reputation to another man ? and whether his reputa- tion is more transferable than his life ? and moreover, whether such an abandonment is consistent with good manners and with reason, and with religion ?

I ask, moreover, whether it is right to lay ecclesiastics under the obligation to be spies upon each other ? to prepare tender and impressible souls for dissimulation and falsehood ? It is corrupt- ing the heart, degrading the mind, depriving men of every senti- ment of honour, and all motive for praiseworthy emulation ; it is degrading to human nature, under the false pretence of bringing it to perfection. What use might not an ambitious and wicked superior make of such instruments ?

Constantly occupied in self-concealment, while they are engaged in watching others ; they are taught to think that they must betray their neighbour for his good. This indeed is fanaticism.

Is it astonishing, that uniformity of doctrine, which is so hurtful

to the natural liberty of mind, should have become a fundamental

•>

maxim of the order ? Since the Constitutions deny freedom of will ' to Jesuits, they cease to be Frenchmen, or Spaniards, or Germans; * they are Jesuits.

What means are not employed to extinguish in their minds the / spirit of enquiry ?

72

Simply, Aquaviva relates in his preface to the Directory for their spiritual exercises, that God Himself had communicated to St. Ignatius, as head and founder of the Society, the whole plan for its government, exterior and interior.

The connection of the institution with the glory of God, and the advantage of the Church, and of religion, is continually urged on the members.

They are questioned on temptations against the institution, Tentatio contra institutum, which are represented as the most dangerous of all temptations. Aquaviva makes this the 13th chapter of his instructions. In them there is a special charge to give an exact account of all scruples felt on this subject, and of all those, which members perceive in others ; this exactitude is pre- scribed as one of the most essential points.

To feel the smallest doubt on any of the smallest of their privi- leges would be a serious sin : it would show a doubt of the legitimacy of the vows, of the power of the Pope, and of that of the Society and its founders.

Finally these impressions are strengthened by exercises, to which indulgences and graces are attached. These are called in the Noviciate, spiritual exercises. A young man is shut up alone in a room, without books, and removed from all noise, lest his attention should be distracted, and he is ordered to meditate. I give you some examples : —

He is to represent to himself two standards and two chiefs; one is Jesus Christ, the other is Satan.

He must picture to himself Jesus Christ in an agreeable form, in a well situated camp, sending His disciples to assemble soldiers ; and Satan in a ^ hideous shape, also assembling soldiers from all parts of the world.

When he meditates on hell, he must imagine a flaming plain, with souls burning in the fire ; he must hear cries and blas- phemies, and imagine that he suffers, from smell and taste, the most repulsive sensations. Every novice is taught that he must make a meditation of that kind in the middle of the night and in the morning, and repeat it after mass ; that he ought to be struck with these objects, as if he saw them before him ; that he ought

73

to see with the eyes of his imagination, and taste by the taste of his imagination, etc.

There was formerly a chamber for meditations, where pictures were placed to assist the imagination ; this we see in the examina- tions of Chatel,* Guerret, and Guignard. These last confessed, that they had often taken Chatel into such a room, and he con- fessed that he had been in such a one.

To present such exercises to young people with strong and vivid imaginations, as ordinary helps to perfection, and to propose them to men habitually in common life, and to women, as they are proposed and boasted of in the Constitutions, is an endeavour to inspire enthusiasm and fanaticism.

These exercises, so often repeated, can only be considered as arts to .procure ecstasies reduced to system ; the strongest heads might be affected by this institution. To convince ourselves of this, we have only to read what the most sensible of writers have observed of the force of imagination, the power of habit, the con- tagion of example, and authority, and the inclination of many men to superstition, of the manner, in which the most unreason- able opinions have been established, and the difficulty of restoring minds, that have once been disordered by them.

I think that it is wise, and even a duty, to suppress institutions that have this tendency to produce excitement.

That is one of the reasons for the objection I feel to retreats and congregations.

It is said that exercises of that kind are practised in some re- treats. It is a notorious fact, that in some towns in the provinces persons struck with those terrible images, have come away from those exercises with derangement of mind, and an alienation of judgment marked by fatal effects ; the fact is proved by inquests. There are moreover legal reasons for objecting to congregations. They are only, as we have seen, emanations from the general congregation at Rome, held in the professed house, or if you please so to state it, they are congregations that the General establishes by his plenary authority. He can give them statutes, and grant them indulgences, cum facultate visitandi, statuta con- dendi, mutandi ac indulgentias communicandi. He may also abro-

* Chatel attempted to murder Henry IV. in 1694.

74

gate them when he chooses. There are parishes created over other parishes, in favour of which Christians are dispensed by Bulls from attending the offices of their churches, as they are bound to do by the canons.

In France the power of a Papal nuncio is limited ; he is not allowed to exercise any act of spiritual jurisdiction ; yet notwithstanding this, a foreign ecclesiastic is allowed to exer- cise jurisdiction in most of the towns in the kingdom. What a contradiction !

The public education, which the Jesuits give to their pupils in their classes, fosters the ultramontane spirit, that predominates in themselves, and the spirit of party, which agitates them, in con- sequence of old prejudices and the ignorance of the sixteenth century.

Their plan of study may have been fit for times, when it was necessary to bring people out of the state of profound ignorance, in which they were plunged when that plan was laid down; but then the instructors, who substituted themselves for the teaching of the universities ought to have done better than they ; instead of that they did worse.

The instructions which we find in the Constitutions of Aqua- viva, under the title of "Ratio Studiorum;" prepared by six Jesuits, Bunder the orders of Aquaviva, for lower and upper classes, are a tissue of pedantry and absurdities on the subjects of literature and philosophy, and with respect to theology, they excited the murmurs and complaints of the Spanish theologians, and even of some Jesuits.

I know that it is not fair to compare them with those modern writers, who have profited by the ^observations and successive discoveries, which the human mind has made ; but there were then in the works of Erasmus and Scaliger and several others, much more profound ideas. In the university, Turnebe, Bude, Vatable, and Ramus had been distinguished, Dorat Lambin, the Eteinns, Passerat, Calepin, and many others who have been eulogised by the learned De Thou, and were far more capable of executing such a work than these teachers.

Nevertheless it is this book, or rather these instructions, pre- pared by six Jesuits, under the inspection of Aquaviva (Ratio

75

Studiorum], which still forms the rule of study pursued by the Jesuits, and which for the sake of the uniformity of their doc- trines, they will continue to follow in their colleges as long as the Society subsists.

When men begin to know that they are ignorant, they also begin to feel the necessity of learning and education. These Jesuits passed from one extreme to the other ; and from being scarcely able to read and write, they thought it would be a very fine thing to learn to speak the languages of Athens and of ancient Rome. They turned the whole attention of nations to the acquirement of languages, which, after all, they did not learn well. That bad habit remained : abuses are very apt to last, though good methods degenerate. I will recall to the Jesuits an authority which they dare not controvert, that of a man who had been a Jesuit ten years, the Abbe Gredouin. He says in a very good work on edu- cation, printed in his CEuvrcs Diverses, " I wish public schools " would make themselves more useful in altering an old system, " which limits the education of children to a very narrow sphere, " and which produces very narrow-minded men ; for when these " young people have passed ten years at college — and what valu- " able years ! — the most precious years of their lives — what have "they learnt?" What can we think of a literary institution established near the end of the sixteenth century, that nobody has thought of improving since ? Why it is two hundred years j behind hand. One single treatise of one professor of the univer- ! sity has spread more light on learning than all the literature, which has occupied the Societ}^ since its establishment. The spirit , _.of party forbids all foreign books, and all other learning. That spirit of party had decided the choice even of classic works for 200 years. The Jesuits have even kept the grammars, which they had adopted, and the absurd method of giving in unintelligible technical verses the rules of a language which they wish to teach.

What can we think of a literary institution, which requires an ordinance from its General, or from a general congregation, to change its grammar, or to adopt a system of physics or astronomy ; ; an institution in which you have about fifty thousand professors of philosophy, and not one philosopher of acknowledged reputa- tion ; and about the same number of professors of literature, and so

76

few good literary works ; and perhaps about two thousand pro- fessors of mathematics, and so few mathematicians : two or three orators, who value the public, perhaps, more than the public value them.

Some learned men there are, who are already grown old, who had taught themselves, notwithstanding the bad system of studies, such at Petau, Sermond, and some others.

No historian of any note has appeared, excepting Mariana, so celebrated for his beautiful latinity and his execrable principles ; and who speaks with such contempt of their methods of in- struction. They have produced a very few partial histories. I wish however, to make honourable mention of the author of " Negotiations in Westphalia." There are many books of con- troversy and commentaries on the Holy Scriptures, which have been forgotten, excepting Bellarmine, and Maldonato ; as well as other controversial works, of unknown date : a multitude of books of devotion : no Catechism worthy of the name.

I do not blame any individuals. I reproach the institution. Choosing men, as they do, in their colleges, they must have many good men in their Society ; but an ill chosen system of study, worse methods, a circle of sciences too rapidly pursued. Two precious years ill spent in the noviciate, nine or ten years as tutors de regence, during which they scarcely learn themselves what they have to teach to others, makes it impossible for them to lay a foundation for exact knowledge and solid erudition before they have reached the age of thirty-two or thirty-three years. Every one acquainted with science knows, that its success de- pends on its commencement, and afterwards on method.

I leave to more competent persons to judge of their theological studies ; but I have shown that the Ratio Stndiorum on that subject, at first excited murmurs. In was censured by the Inqui- sitors of Spain, and the king of Spain carried their complaints to the Pope.

I find in Vol. ii., p. 429, an instruction on theology, which strikes me as being very singular, and which is the more worthy of the attention of bishops, because it is one of the rules laid down to learn religion.

It is there remarked, that the works of the ancients, as St. Jerome,

77

St. Augustine, St. Gregory, and others " Aim Consimilibus," are Books of Devotion, and that the books of St. Thomas, of St. Buenaventura, of the master of the sentences, and the new theologians, teach more exactly the dogmas necessary to salva- tion, and have explained them better for their times, and for future times.

The Jesuits are moreover accused of having since that time excluded St. Thomas from that catalogue. They have been reproached for not having sufficiently respected the authority of the Church, in an article of the General Examination, chap. III. and XI., which imports that anyone entering into the Society, shall be questioned, whether he has, or has ever had, any thoughts or opinions different from those, which are commonly held by the Church, and by the doctors, who are approved by the Church ; and whether, if such opinions have made any impression on his mind, he is ready to submit his judgment and his sentiments to those of the Society.

This article certainly is couched in those irreverent terms ; and if by the word opinions they mean sentiments, which is nearly included in the meaning of the term, the article would be more than ill sounding (mal sonnant), to make use of a scholastic term. They have endeavoured in their congregations to bring some kind of mitigation to the severity of the term, by resting on the signi- fication of the word opinio, and on the signification of the word communius in Spanish.

Before I leave the subject of the Constitutions, I ought to elucidate some political paradoxes produced by them.

How can such singular constitutions be the work of a body of men ? Were they intended to form ecclesiastics, or to create an independent body ? Can a whole body of men be corrupted, and adopt principles, manifestly bad, in order to obtain credit ? How is it possible, that sensible men should judge so differently ? or, rather say, how can they take such opposite views of the same work? I do not think that it is impossible to clear up these difficulties, if we set aside prejudices and predispositions.

It has never happened, that a whole body of men has fabricated a code of extravagances, nor a system of legislation that was vicious in itself. It is quite impossible that the union of religious

78

individuals should produce irreligion. Young people brought up to goodness, and virtue, do not become corrupt and wicked old men.

The Constitutions are not the work of any body of men, or of any assembly, and he, moreover, who laid the foundation was far from criminal or vicious.

The Constitutions have two faces, because they were formed with two intentions ; on the one side, for the glory of God and the salvation of souls, and on the other side, for the glory of the Society and its future extension. This causes the difference of opinion concerning them. Their admirers look only at the first aspect, and their detractors see only the second.

The zeal of St. Ignatius for the former object might not, perhaps, entirely prevent him from flattering himself with the second idea, since he established means to serve both purposes ; but most of his successors have been occupied with the second object only. In the petitions, which they presented to Popes, they were actuated by the sole wish of promoting the greatness and extension of their Society ; and they extorted from them exorbitant and countless privileges, which now form a part of their Constitutions. Their successors again extended, amplified, and interpreted them ; they looked only to one object, and neg- lected the first intention. Those means, which were already far greater than the religious object required, such as passive obedi- ence, inquisition of conscience, accusations, uniformity of doctrine; : these means have become odious and intolerable, since ambi- tion has used them for political purposes. Spiritual advantage confounded with temporal advantage ; human authority with Divine authority; is good stretched to evil — ill-understood, ill- advised, ill-applied, and ill-executed. Such a system might be treated with contempt, if it was confined to a cloister, from the derangement of intellect, which it seems to involve, and if it only concerned a monastic order ; but it becomes too dangerous, when it is presented to the outward world, and interferes with public order, which it overthrows. The system of the Jesuits is necessarily ultramontane ; it is based on ultramontane doctrine, which is inherent in the Society. Scholastics draw from that principle murderous doctrines, which St. Ignatius never held, and that he

79

never would have adopted, however attached he might be to the belief of the absolute power of the Pope.

Bad morals or corrupt principles of morality form no part of the Constitutions ; these have been introduced since, by the metaphysics of their casuists, who found it elsewhere. These were rather the offspring of false logic than of corruption of heart. Nevertheless morality is absorbed in the doctrinal code of the Society by the fatal principle of unity of sentiments, and by want of liberty of niind. Thus the Society finds itself with a corrupt code of morality almost without knowing it, and perhaps without believing it.

Nevertheless it is scarcely conceivable, that, after the frequent and public reproaches that have been addressed to the Jesuits, after the censures of their propositions by Popes, and by the clergy of France, their rulers should have obstinately persisted in refusing to make the reformation and corrections in their code of morality, which is so needful, so pressing.

Religion, and even their own interest, should have induced them to undertake the task ; but no ; they would not infringe on the principle of uniformity of sentiment ; they would not turn round and retract what had been done. There is, as the consequence, that dangerous spirit of party and servitude of mind, which estab- lishes a much more degrading slavery than that of the person.

If the Jesuits had taught nothing but corrupt maxims of morality and relaxation, they would very shortly have been turned out of all the kingdoms in the world ; but they united science and regularity of manners ; and thus both good and evil were found amongst them.

I think this is sufficient to explain the paradoxes of which I have spoken.

Prove fanaticism in the leaders, and fanatical institutions, as I think I have done, and the difficulty is explained ; and one no longer wonders at the contrariety of opinions respecting the Society ; and individuals will recover their reputation.

But whatever views they may adopt, it is evident that the constitutions, and the rules are very dangerous ; on the one hand, means of religion, on the other hand, instruments of fanaticism.

To judge of the effect of those means, it seems necessary to

80

examine in detail the doctrines of the Society, and the facts, which relate to it.

Suppose that a man has a dangerous instrument in his hands — an offensive weapon ; will he use it for attack, or defence ? to help, or to injure ? That is the question ?

To decide that question, it is natural to ask, what he is? on what side his interest lies ? what are his opinions ? and how he has hitherto made use of that weapon ?

But if we begin to weigh facts, and to pass judgment on persons and doctrines, it would open the door to inconvenient and interminable discussions, and all the absurdities of party.

Let us, then, place an impartial judgment between extravagant admirers and bitter critics ; let public opinion, which infallibly appreciates men at their real worth, decide between them.

By the public, I mean in matters of judgment not that living public, which is agitated by love or hatred, which judges on slight appearances, which may be either true or false, which does not wait to examine anything, and easily allows itself to be won by flattery, or deceived by seduction : not partizan theologians, whose judgment is formed before the case is stated : but well- informed private persons, who have already deserved the respect of mankind, and whose name is a recommendation in the society of men of all nations, all classes, all professions ; who form and transmit to posterity the voice of the public; statesmen and legislators, who have no predilections but respect for established laws, and the good of the State.

That is the public, which makes no mistakes, and cannot be deceived, and from whose judgment no one can escapes.

Individuals may conceal their character all their lives, but it is impossible, that aggregated bodies should not be understood after they have existed two hundred years ; and above all, celebrated bodies, which have been attacked and defended so often.

The public often deceives itself with respect to Living persons who hold office ; but they retract in the end.

Ministers have been known to die oppressed with public hatred, but they have received from the succeeding generation the

81

honour and esteem, which their merits and their services de- served.

I would ask of the Jesuits themselves, what is the public opinion concerning themselves (and the public bears no ill will to them), Is it not, that the public has seen no harm in them; that the individuals they are acquainted with are honest men, estimable men, but that the body is bad ? And in proof of this, allow me to quote a common saying, when a person wishes to give a favour- able idea of any persons with whom they are connected, they say, " They are not Jesuits (or Jesuitical)." That is an old saying, and very universal among good people, who have no preposses- sions. And does it not show in substance the truth of what I have stated.

I would ask then, moreover, what the public thinks of ecclesi- astics, who confine themselves to the performance of their proper functions. Do they not give praise to such men, as Bourdaloue, Cbeminais, Petau, Sermond, etc ?

Why is it, that the public, which is so just to the merits of individuals, thinks so differently of the body, and its institutions? ; — that very public, which principally owes its education to them ? Let that public tell us the cause of the prejudice against them all over Europe. What would they reply to the judgments, which have been passed upon them in all ages by great men in the Church, and by statesmen ; by Melchior Canus, the learned Bishop of the Canary Islands ; by Eustache de Bellay, Bishop of Paris ; by an Archbishop of Toledo ; by an Archbishop of Dublin ; by the judicious De Thou, whose name alone is an eulogium ; by Mon. De Canaye, Ambassador of the King at Venice ; by le Premier President De Harlay ; by all the king's officers in the Parliament of Paris, who have spoken or given opinions on their affairs ; MM. Seguier, Dumesnil, Marion, Servin, and by those, who now occupy their places with so much distinction ; by learned and pious bishops ; by the University of Paris ; by the clergy of Rome; by the Cardinal d'Ossat; and by so many others, whom I will forbear to name.

If the opinions, in which both individuals and large bodies of men coincided respecting the Jesuits from the time of their first establishment, were not founded on common report in those days

82

they must have foreseen what would be said in future ; for they were stigmatised at those distant periods precisely as they are now. The public judges according to facts; that is a very reasonable manner of judging men. They see vicious doctrines taught in a religious society by the chief members, and they reproach the main body for its laws, whose duty it is to correct them. It sees in all kingdoms a society of ecclesiastics, who occasion dissension, quarrel- ling with bodies of men, and with individuals ; it sees, that it is that society, which excites troubles, and it thinks that it is impossible that the Jesuits can always be in the right against the reason of the whole world ; the public sees that these ecclesi- astics employ violence to establish their sentiments ; it is indig- nant to see men whom it esteems, persecuted for their opinions.

It sees ecclesiastics invade commerce, and carry its profits into foreign countries ; the public knows, that trade is forbidden to ecclesiastics, and that the national commerce is injured by their practice of it, and the public considers, that conduct unbecoming and odious.

I say no more ; the public will add only too many more articles to this enumeration.

There are still in the system and the institution some political contradictions to be examined. For instance, nothing but the delirium of fanaticism can conceive the hope of leading men, in an enlightened age, as they were led in the sixteenth century, by abusive privileges, and the five or six Bulls, which contain them; that nations can remain for ever the dupes of appearances ; that kings will never make the enquiry, whether there really exists within their dominions a body of men, who imagine themselves permitted to commit murder even on their sacred persons ; that they can trade in the four quarters of the globe, and persuade nations, they do not trade.

It is an inconceivable effort of policy to have attempted to re- concile the most striking anomalies — To have captivated the confidence of kings while maintaining, that in certain cases, they have a right over their lives — To have succeeded in calming suc- cessive storms by making promises without ever keeping them — To be hated as a body and loved individually — To have secured the protection of the Pope by a vow of servile obedience, while

83

they disobey him perpetually, and only obey another man — To craftily obtain the confidence of bishops while maintaining, whenever it serves their purpose, that they do not owe them any obedience — To acquire great riches by saying they have none, and making vows of poverty — To escape always by making divisions, exciting disputes, and supposing differences, where there are none. The most moderate statement, that can be made of the consequences of these constitutions, and these moral and political contradictions is, that these constitutions are a very dangerous implement in the hands of a system, foreign to the State : a system, prepossessed by sentiments contrary to the peace and security of all kingdoms ; necessarily ultramontane ; fanatical by duty, by profession, and by habit.

I think, that all I have said is confirmed by two irreproachable witnesses, who cannot deceive us, experience and public opinion :— experience, the teacher of men and kings, which conquers pre- judices, partialities, and theories ; and public opinion, the just and unbiassed judge of men.

I must pass to a more important point. You have not com- missioned me to make any report to you on a subject, which has been discussed in the Parliament of Paris. I mean the doctrine of regicide ; but being obliged, by the office I hold, to watch over all that concerns the rights of the king and his sacred person, must I not be alarmed at every thing, which may place him in peril? Should I hesitate to denounce it? Can one hear without shuddering, that certain Christians have taught the cases, in which it is allowable to murder kings ; that there exists a religious society, in which that doctrine is received ; that the books in which it is taught are existing ; that they are publicly praised ; and that these books have been written by the best accredited writers of their order ?

Does the Society maintain a murderous doctrine ? Can it be imputed to the body of the Society ? This is a mere question of fact.

The fact is neither long nor difficult of discussion. There are acknowledged rules, by which to establish facts; and to learn, whether one ought or ought not to attribute a sentiment to a

84

body, it is enough to produce their books, and authentic passages in them.

The question is, whether Jesuits believe, or do not believe murderous doctrines. Do they believe, that there is any case, in which it is right to attempt the life of a king ? That is the ques- tion. If they do not believe it, let them say so. They can, and they ought. Ecclesiastics, who print so many books, need not be called to answer accusations in writing, which may be proved by their printed books, if they teach clearly, precisely, and with- out any double meaning, what their doctrine is : that in no case murder can be permitted, and that all this may be read in their theses, in their writings, and in their books. Then no man can impute that execrable doctrine to them without exposing himself to an easy and formal confutation.

But so long as we find them eulogising works, in which doc- trines are taught that inculcate murder, and endeavouring to justify themselves by declarations which they confess were only made to those who threatened to make forcible use of the power that they hold in their hands, as it was said by the Jesuit Zacharias in 1758, and which declarations are clearly open to disavowal by their Constitutions ; so long they may justly be suspected of holding this abominable doctrine.

They have lain under this accusation a hundred and fifty years, and during that hundred and fifty years they have held the same line of conduct.

What should we think of any man accused of a capital crime, who always said he had means of proving his innocence, but who never produced them ? I speak of a capital crime, for I say, that to teach crime is even worse than to commit it, for the assassin arms his own hand only : fanatics arm men of all nations.

The opinions of the power of the Pope over things temporal, and of his infallibility, are two parallel opinions, created by ambition to support each other ; for, as it was said by Mon. Talon in 1665, is any author of that sect to be found, who, after having asserted the false principle of the infallibility of the Pope, does not draw from it the dangerous consequence, that he may in certain cases take cognizance of matters concerning the govern- ment of states, and the conduct of sovereigns? Both opinions

85

are founded on the same basis, which is also the foundation of all other ultramontane pretensions.

It is impossible, adds Mon Talon, to use too much care and severity in order to arrest the progress and dry the source of so much evil.

If, in fact, men were really capable of believing, that the head of an ecclesiastical society, which is established in all the known regions of the earth, can never be mistaken, he must of course be the sovereign of the world ; for the opinion of the populace (infatuated by this vain doctrine so inconsistent with the con- dition of humanity) will surely not be restrained by the absurd distinction of judgments given ex cathedra, and those which are not so given. The people do not reason, and the world cannot be regulated by scholastic distinctions ; thus it becomes impossible to dispute any right with one, who is deemed infallible, and who is believed to be invested with divine power ; and accordingly all the authors, who have asserted the infallibility of the Pope and his power, direct or indirect, over the temporal power of kings, have maintained, that he might in certain cases depose kings, absolve subjects from their oaths of fidelity ; and in consequence, that kings might he killed.

This is the chain of their reasoning : " The sovereign power of " the Pope can and ought to restrain the temporal power by all "the means, which it sees to be necessary for the salvation of " souls ; without that power God would have left the Church " without the means of providing for its own security and preser- "vation." These are the formal expressions of Bellarmine, Molina, and Suarez, and all the authors of the Society from whose works I have already quoted some passages to you. If the prince does not obey the commands of the Pope, the Pope may excommunicate him.

A man, who is excommunicated, is deprived, ipso facto, of all temporal rights ; in such a case a prince is deprived of royalty, and cannot do any royal act without rebellion against his legitimate superior, the Pope. The Pope may therefore deprive him of his. crown, absolve his subjects from their oath of fidelity, and transfer his empire to another. If the prince persists in dis- obedience, he may be treated as a tyrant, in which case anybody

86

may kill him. A quocumque private protest interfici, so says Suarez. (I. 6, ch. iv.)

Such is the course of reasoning, established by all authors of the Society, who have written ex professo, on these subjects — Bellarrnine, Suarez, Molina, Mariana, Santarel, all of the ultra- montaues, without exception, since the establishment of the Society.*

On this point, said Suarez, we are all of one mind, et in liac causa union sumus. Zacharias said in 1758 that it is a doctrine commonly taught by Catholic theologians. In fact there is no difference between them, excepting that some say that the murder of kings should be preceded by a judicial sentence, and others have thought with Mariana that, in certain cases that formality was not necessary.

It then is proved that the doctrine of murder may be attributed to the body of the Society, and that the Jesuits are convicted of having taught it ; but how can one prove that a doctrine is that of a whole body, and that it is fair to attribute it to the whole body universally ?

If the members of the body have freedom of opinion ; if there is a diversity of opinion among the authors and the writers of this order ; it would be difficult to give any judgment, and to ascertain whether such or such an opinion is less or more commonly held, and whether it may fairly be attributed to the whole order or not.

But if it is a body, the opinions of whose members must be uniform ; if we find that a doctrine is taught by its most celebrated authors, by those who are the most accredited in the order, and with the permission and approbation of the superiors ; if we see that it is taught, without exception, by those who have written, ex professo, on that subject, and that the contrary doctrine is not asserted by any member of the body, we have complete demon-

* There are nearly twenty thousand Jesuits in the world, and fifteen hundred, or perhaps two thousand in the kingdom. There are, therefore, according to Zaccarius, about eighteen or nineteen thousand Jesuits imbued with ultramontane doctrines and the doctrine of murder, even if we should except all the French Jesuits.

87

Oration that such is the doctrine of the body, and there is no injustice in attributing it to them. ^

I now proceed to the degree of the General Aquaviva on tyran- nicide.* What does it say ? That it is not permitted, in any case, to assassinate kings? No, Messieurs. He says it is for- bidden, in virtue of holy obedience, to dare to affirm that (all people) everybody is permitted to kill kings ; for the word, cuique cannot be understood in any other sense. That phrase " Defendre d'oser affirmer qu'il est permis a toute personnel — " to forbid that any one should dare assert that all persons are permitted," — is so extraordinary in a matter so serious as regicide. It is so con- strained (if I may use the expression) into a more agreeable sense than the natural one, that the affectation betrays itself. They never expressed themselves in that manner, when they have endeavoured to explain their sentiments dogmatically ; above all, not when they were to explain good and orthodox opinions.

To say that any action may not be performed by everybody, • implies, that it may be done by somebody.

But they will say Aquaviva issued this decree, because some of his fraternity maintained that, in certain cases, it was permitted to all people to kill kings, and the General wished to prohibit that detestable doctrine.

I am not unwilling to suppose that such was his intention, although I find no indication of it in the decree, given in the edition of Prague. But in that case it was easy to say, that regicide was not allowable under any circumstances. f

* We are not certain, that we have the decree of Aquaviva, as it was given originally. It is cut short in the edition of Prague. The Jesuits had never inserted it in the collection of the ordinances of their Generals, and it has two dates. Either that of the first of August, 1614, of the edition of Prague, or that which is given now of the (5th of July, 1610, is false. That confusion has not been made undesignedly. They wished to make it appear, that the Parliament of Paris had approved of the decree of Aquaviva, because it had ordered the superiors at Paris, in his decree of censure of Suarez in 1614, to warn the General to renew his decree of 1610. It was therefore supposed that the Parliament was contented with it, arid had approved of it ; but both the fact and the supposition are false.

f There is in the collection of Prague another ordinance, or decree of Aquaviva, dated the 2nd of August, 1614, the day after the first decree. It seems that this date, of 1614, must be false, like that of the first ordinance

88

You are shocked at the revolting expressions of Aquaviva, when he intends to forbid th^ detestable doctrine to his order, that it is permitted, in some cases, to anybody to kill kings. He is afraid of going too far, if he saySj it is never allowed to any person. He confines himself to saying, that he forbids any one to dare to assert that it is permitted to every man, etc. I ask whether any man convinced (as all men should be), that the murder of a king is never permitted to any man, in any case, would have expressed himself in that manner.

The assumed precision of the language of Aquaviva is horrible ; it is unworthy of a man, of a Christian, and of a theologian accused of religious error ; it serves, as a ground of condemnation of the system of the Society, and never can serve as an excuse. Nothing but fanaticism can hope to impose upon the world by such decrees, by interpretations, distinctions, and discussions, when it is a question of simple fact. Do they believe or disbelieve, that it is forbidden to commit a crime ?

Scholastic delirium has contrived to invent means to justify such horrors ; they say the opposite of a false proposition is true. Therefore, it is true, that it is not permitted to all the world to kill kings, because it is untrue, that such an attempt is permitted to all the world. What logic ! and what morality ! - I ask, what can faithful subjects think of equivocal declarations on such a matter ; of these insidious precautions, of these proble- matic phrases, as if it was a frivolous schoolboy question ?

and that the true date of both of them is 1610. The latest of these ordi- nances forbids provincials to allow any books to be printed in their provinces on the subject of tyrannicide, unless it had been reviewed and approved at Home. The book by Suarez had been printed at Coiinbra, without the permission, or the expressed permission, of the General. The decree of 1614 (of Parliament) , in condemning the book of Suarez, enjoined the superiors to use all diligence towards the General to induce him to renew the decree of 1610, and also to take care "That no books containing such damnable and detestable propositions should be brought to light." It must therefore have been this last decree, that the Parliament of Paris was content to have renewed, and not the first decree, in which no mention is made of printing books. At the end of these decrees (2nd Vol. chap. v. p. 6) is an ordinance of the 13th of August, 1626, given by Witteleschi, General of the Jesuits, in which he calls to mind the ordinance of Aquaviva forbidding the printing of books of that kind without the permission of Rome.

89

I admit, that this detestable doctrine was not invented by the Jesuits. They found it in the scholastic theologians. It was known in the thirteenth century, from the time of John of Salisbury. Jean le Petit had broached it before the Council of Constance ; but the Jesuits are inexcusable for not having abjured it, and for attempting at this day to make men believe, by dis- cussions, and distinctions, and interpretations, that it is not the doctrine of their society at this hour.

I must do the French Jesuits the justice that is due to them by stating, that they have been more just and more moderate than any others.

I consent to pass in silence over the memory of the Jesuit Richeome, Provincial of Bordeaux, who died in 1615 ; of the Jesuit Hereau, Professor in Paris in 1642, who taught very nearly this evil doctrine, and the Jesuit Vallee, who spread it in Mans.

I have sought carefully, in making this distinct accusation, for everything that might tend to their justification.

I have found, and have pleasure in communicating it to you, two theses of theological decisions of the Jesuits of the College of Rennes — one of the 9th of June, 1758, and the other of the 17th of June, 1760, in which two or three propositions of the assembly of the clergy in 1682 are announced and affirmed. I wish I had such theses from all the colleges of this division.

Another confusion is caused by the ordinance of Aquaviva, which bears first the date of the 2nd of August, 1614. Witteleschi, in the next page, dates it 5th of January, 1613 ; but its date is the day after the first— which is now said to be 1610. The Jesuits alone can explain these discrepancies.

The ordinance of Witteleschi contains a singular motive for forbidding the members of the Society to write, without revision at Rome, concerning the power of the Pope over princes, the power to depose them, etc. (Here the ordinance is cut oft ; it is impossible to know what followed.) "It is," continues this general, the worthy successor of Aquaviva, "in order to avoid occasions of giving offence to any one." " Ut occasioned omnes offensionis et querelarum preecindantur."

So then it is forbidden for this Society to write or teach that kings are sovereigns and independent in temporal concerns ; that they cannot be deposed by the Pope ; perhaps that it is not permitted to assassinate them for fear of offending somebody ; and, if I may be allowed so to express my- self, for fear of factious complaints and quarrels, for querelantm after the word nffensionis can hardly be expressed otherwise.

90

I have not seen the writings in which this wise doctrine is asserted ; but I suppose, that it is stated and explained as it ought to be.

But I lament that, when it is question of the sacred persons of kings, and of principles which tend to the subversion of states, to find theologians, who are accused of holding murderous doc- trines, sending us, not to their own works, but to the equivocal declarations made by their Generals more than a century ago, and to the declarations made by their brethren sent to the Par- liaments in 1611, 1626, 1667, and 1710.* And moreover, what are those declarations? In 1611 Mon. Serviii, proposing to the Jesuit Fronto, one of the principals of the Society, to acknowledge, among other things, that no one, either a stranger or a natural subject of the king, ought to attempt the lives and persons of kings, for any cause whatsoever-; not even on account of their moral conduct or their religion. Fronto replied (and Mon. Servin attests it in his plea,) " That he should not be unwilling to make such a declaration ; not, however, because he thought the prin- ciple right and indisputable, but because it was necessary to

* On the 14th of March, 1626, the Jesuits were called into the great chamher. Messieurs asked them, " Do yon approve of this bad book ? " Coton, who is the Provincial of the province of Paris, accompanied by three others, answered, " Far from it, Messieurs ; we are ready to write against it, and to disapprove of all it states. In proof of this, ten copies of it have been sent to our house, all of which we have suppressed."

The Parliament— Suppressed : is it your duty to do so ?

The Jesuits — "NVe thought we could not do otherwise.

The Parliament — Why did you not take them to the Chancellor or to the first President ?

The Jesuits — Messieurs, we are obliged and constrained to do many acts of obedience, to wliich other ecclesiastics are not bound.

The Parliament — Do you not know, that this bad doctrine has been approved of by your General at Rome ?

The Jesuits — Yes; Messieurs, but we, who are here do not commit that imprudence, and we blame it with all our power.

The Parliament — Come now, and answer two questions. Do you believe, that the king is all powerful in his own dominions ? and do you think, that a foreign power can, or ought to interfere in them, or that, in the person of the king, they have a right to trouble the Gallican Church ?

The Jesuits — No, Messieurs, we believe the king to be all-powerful in his own dominions in temporal concerns.

91

accommodate declarations to the times and places in which we live."

What kind of justification can the French Jesuits found on such a declaration ? or on the declaration made by the superiors in Paris in 1710, at the time of the condemnation of the insolent history of Frere Jouvenci, in which he attacked the decrees made against the Jesuits Guignard and Gueret, and the magistrates, who pronounced them.

It is long since the French Jesuits have ceased to teach in France the doctrine of murder, but they belong to a body, who maintain it — to a body, in which the doctrine is common to all.

The Parliament — In temporal concerns ; speak frankly. Do you think the Pope can excommunicate the king ; absolve liis subjects from their oath of fidelity, and give his kingdom as a prey.

The Jesuits — Oh, Messieurs ! excommunicate the long ! ! ! he Avho is the eldest son of the Church ; he will take good care not to do anything, which will oblige the Pope to do that.

\?:The Parliament — But your General, who has approved of this book, thinks all that it contains is infallible. Do you believe otherwise ?

The Jesuits — Messieurs, he who is at Rome cannot do otherwise than approve of what the court of Rome approves.

The Parliament — But your belief?

The Jesuits — Is quite contrary.

The Parliament — And if you were at Rome, what would you do ?

The Jesuits — We should do like those, who are there.

The Parliament — Come now; do answer the questions you are asked.

The Jesuits — Messieurs, we beg you to allow us to consult together.

The Parliament — Retire into that room.

[They remained in that room for about half an hour, and then returned to the Parliament.]

The Jesuits — We are of the same opinion as the Sorbonne, and we will subscribe like the rest of the clergy.

The Parliament — Make your declaration accordingly.

The Jesuits — Messieurs, we very humbly entreat you to grant us some days to communicate among ourselves.

The Parliament — Go, then ; the court grants you three days.

[During those days the court watched their conduct. It proved that in the afternoon of the same day they went to the nuncio and remained with him from two o'clock till seven in the evening in private with the Flemish ambassador. — (Register.* of the Parliament.}

/

92

But they arc necessarily in unity and community of sentiment with all the body. But they have never taught a contrary doc- trine in their books or writings. They have disavowed it. But >< that was, when they were summoned before Parliament. But they knew, that their disavowal was not valid without the leave of their General. They have said, that they were willing to maintain the contrary doctrine. But then they added that they did not hold it as certain. But they said it was, because it was necessary to accommodate themselves to times and places. But they said, if they were at Rome they would equally maintain the contrary doctrine to that of France. But they treat the doctrine like those scholastic opinions, which may be defended either way. But they have not abandoned the principles, on which that detestable doc- trine is founded. But tbey have several times caused Buseinbaum to be printed. They have praised it in their "Journal de Trevoux," in 1729. But even those, who have disavowed Busernbaum and his doctrine have been the very first to exalt it under your own eyes in this province.

All that can be concluded from the conduct of the French Jesuits is, that they have executed a little more exactly than other Jesuits, the decree of Witteleschi of the 13th of August, 1626 : — " Ut occasioncs ojffensionum, et querelarum prcecindantur."

I return to the General of the Jesuits. You have seen, that the Provincials are obliged to reveal to him the condition of their provinces, of everything that passes in them, not only among the members of the Society, but of everything that is done by their own ministration. You have seen, that the Provincials are to enter into such details, that the General may know as completely the affairs, the persons, and the provinces, as if he had been present himself.

Now, why is it necessary, that the General should have all this knowledge ? Why is this report to be renewed every month by thirty-seven provincials ; every three months and every six months by 1244 superiors of colleges, residentiary houses, noviciates, missions, professed houses, without including so many councillors, or consulters of Provincials and superiors ?* The Constitutions

* Number of Reports which the General of the Jesuits receives every year on the spiritual and temporal condition of kingdoms :—

93

require, that the Provincials and the superiors should make their report to the General in cyphers, in unknown and disguised characters. They must have very strong reasons to keep the subject of their correspondence secret and undiscovered. It is inconceivable, that religious objects should need to be carried on in cyphers unintelligible to all, but those who have the key to them. Such precautions are taken against enemies. Is the system of the Jesuits inimical to all governments ?

If such were the case, governments would be protecting and nourishing in the heart of their dominions, a set of men prying into the concerns of their state and of their religion, in order to report them to a stranger, who renders no account to any one.

I should like to know, what object can be alleged (I do not say what honourable object, for there is none), but what excusable object can be suggested, for all this manoeuvring, this odious intrigue of espionage and revelation.

Why, for instance, is it necessary that the General of the Jesuits residing at Rome, should have an exact account of the number and the qualities of the Congregations at Rennes, or elsewhere ?

Aquaviva said, that these revelations and reports were neces- sary for the support and extension of the Society. Is it very

37 Provincials, who must all of them write letters every

month ......... 444 letters.

612 Superiors of Colleges, who must write every three

months ......... 2448 ,,

340 Superiors of Houses of Residence, must write every

three months 1360 „

59 Masters of Novices of 59 Houses of Noviciates, who

must write every three months 236 ,,

1048 Consultors, who must write at least twice a year . 2096 „

Total of Letters of Obligation, without counting private letters and those of 200 missions and 24 professed houses ... . 6584 „

6584 divided by 37, which is the number of the provinces, make 177 reports of each kingdom, and of each province as to the spiritual and temporal condition signed and verified, which the General must receive each year.

difficult to find out, that such means arc needless to do good, but very necessary to do harm ; to keep up the spirit of party factions ? If there was one powerful family in the kingdom, which made use of only a portion of such means for its own aggrandizement, the government would soon take offence, and most justly repress it with severity.

I will suppose the General to be an honest fanatic ; I mean to say I will suppose him to be a man, imbued really with ultramon- tane persuasions, like Bellarmine, Saurez, Vasquez, Molina, etc. ; convinced of the legitimacy of the privileges of the Society, and of the rights of his own generalship ; penetrated with the greatness of the institution, and of the divine protection accorded to it. This is not a supposition that I am making, but a fact which I relate, and an inevitable fact, because the circumstances must produce it. But I also suppose (and that supposition is not unexampled, as can be proved), that in the course of one or two centuries, either from family interests, the force of circumstances, or owing to troubles, which possibly may occur, a Pope may hereafter wish to excommunicate the sovereign of some state in Europe, and to absolve his subjects from their oath of fidelity. In such a case, what would be the conduct of the eighteen or nineteen thousand Jesuits scattered over all Christian countries ?

I think the answer will be, that infallibly they will do as they always have done at all times and in all places ; that which they have taught in their books that they can do, and ought to do. I will add, that they will do what French Jesuits cannot fail to do without disobeying the Pope and their General, and without con- travening their laws and their actions.

The surest way, or rather the only way, to judge men is to weigh their interest, their opinions, and their constitutions.

Can pi'otestations of attachment and duty, the ties of country (if they have one), can these be sustained against the power of vows of oaths ? Can presumptions reassure us in the presence of facts : of facts, alas, too true ? On what grounds can we depend, that they will observe the laws of the kingdom ? Shall the State be contented, as its only guarantee, with a word, which they cannot give, and a promise which they cannot keep ?

I propose to themselves to solve this political problem in any

'95

other manner. In such a case under such circumstances, what would such and such persons do ?

I have supposed the General to be sincere ; but let me now suppose for a moment that he is not so. Such a thing is not impossible, and the supposition cannot injure an imaginary person ; it is only necessary to admit, that at some supposed time, among ten persons, who occupy a certain position, one may be a I dishonest man ; if he is ambitious he will be dishonest ; and enthusiasm often merges in party spirit as men grow older.

Is there any reasonable man, acquainted with the Con- stitutions of the Jesuits, their institutions for the young, and the doctrines of the Society, which I have laid before you, who does not feel alarmed at the facilities, which a General of Jesuits possesses to intrigue and cabal, and, let us say freely, to conspire ?

A man who has twenty thousand subjects devoted to his orders by profession and by religious principle, who ought, according to their constitutions and their vows, to be ready to shed their blood for the Society; whose consciences, whose genius, whose characters, and whose tempers are intimately known to him from their childhood : who are accustomed to the yoke of absolute obedience, and to regard their General as they regard God, or as Jesus Christ ; men of whose secresy he is certain ; men, who judge themselves by the direction of other men, their interests and their passions ; a despot whose slightest sign is law to them ; whose written wish is a decree, an ordinance ; who holds in his hands all the treasures of the commerce of the Society, and who is in- formed 177 times a year of the condition of all kingdoms, — what enterprise will such a man not undertake ?

Let us read the histories of all the conspiracies, which have ever been formed in the world. Consider the qualities, which are necessary for success in such perilous enterprises, in the chiefs, who dare to undertake them ; the dangers they have to brave ; the treasures they must expend ; the pains, the care, they must take to captivate the minds of the people, and to excite them, and the springs they have to set in motion, both public and con- cealed, to effect their purposes. Consider how these dangerous conspiracies have been formed or failed. You will not find one, the chief of which, after years of care, has been able to organize

96

his forces with so little danger, with as great advantages, as a General of the Jesuits can command within twenty-four hours. And what is quite singular, the least dexterous, the most in- capable, the most timid of men may execute the work. How have conspiracies failed to attain their object ? It has been either from the remorse of some conspirator, or from indiscreet communications, or a bad choice of accomplices (some wanting courage, others resolution or activity) ; from the necessity of employing certain people, who were felt to be not altogether fit for such undertakings, but whom it was necessary to employ ; or by too great a number of accomplices.

No one of these inconveniences can overthrow a project formed by a General of the Jesuits, since out of 20,000 men he can pick out ten fanatics, honest fanatics, whose capacity is known to him, and whose hand is sure.

If there are persons affiliated, associated Jesuits, unknown as such in their own families, or the families in which they are domesticated, (a fact of which it is scarcely possible to doubt, although it is very difficult to prove it), of what deep importance these associations must be !

I avoid all applications ; but what would Cromwell have given for such advantages ! I do not mean Cromwell after he had con- ceived his odious design, but Cromwell after the battles of Dunbar and Worcester.

Now I shall be told, that I am calumniating the General of the Jesuits ; that such a man cannot be found in the Society. Very well, I hope not ; but I have said, and I ask again, who can guarantee that there never will be a man, who wishes to conspire ?

*- From one fanaticism to another is but one step, I repeat ; and who can say that in the course of years there may not be a bad man in any given place ?

And suppose that no General will ever conspire ; in saying that you allow, that he might if he chose it ; and is it not unwise and imprudent to allow in any State a power so exorbitant and so dangerous to exist in the hands of one man ?

I think I have proved the fact which I advanced, that the con- stitutions and the system of the Jesuits are, when fairly analyzed,

97

enthusiasm and fanaticism established by rule, and on principle; and that they are based on two false principles, that is, the sovereign power of the Pope over both spiritual and temporal concerns ; and on the communication by several Popes of absolute power to the Society, and through them to the General, their representative.

I have shown, that from the first principle, the constitutions of the Society are derived, which arc injurious to the sovereign majesty of kings, and dangerous to their sacred persons and to their authority, by engendering a spirit of sedition, and an entire subversion of public order by pretended Conservators chosen arbitrarily, and changed in the same way ; a co-active power, and a jurisdiction over citizens, and even over sovereign powers, together with the monstrous power of maintaining by deed and by word everything that is called their privilege, though injurious to the Church, to councils, popes, and bishops, to the second order of the Church, and to all the authorities of the State.

I have proved that from the second principle have emanated constitutions, injurious to the Divine Majesty, transferring to a man the honour that is due to Almighty God alone, by equalis- ing the orders of a Superior with the precepts of God and of Jesus Christ ; affecting, by emphatic expressions, repeated with affectation, to place on the same level the obedience, due to either, and exacting the aforesaid sacrifice of understanding and reason. Destructive of natural liberty of mind and conscience, they allow no more freedom than is possessed by a stick in the hand of an old man, or of a corpse, which is turned and moved as you please. They are opposed to the rights of nature, to divine right, to the rights of man, and to the rights of all nations, to the well-being of all nations, and to the security of contracts, and agreements of private persons. From all this, result rash vows made in ignorance ; engagements contracted, which shock reason and arc injurious to religion; vows made to a foreign sovereign to leave the kingdom at his behest, and which are con- sequently contrary to the laws of the State.

I have shown, that the institution of members of the Society is enthusiastic, and leads to fanaticism; and that the education

H

98

which the Society gives to youth in their colleges is insufficient and bad.

I have proved, that regicide is the ancient and received doctrine of the Society, and how dangerous it is to states to leave sovereign and independent power in the hands of any single man.

I desire, in consequence, that the Look written by Busembaum, better known in this province than elsewhere, from the missions of Frerc Sulpont at Nantes, should be torn and burnt with the \ " Journal dc Trevoux," which has eulogised it. If I had all the other books, named in the decree of the Parliament of Paris of the 6th of August, 1761, I should make the same request. I content myself with requiring, that all persons, who have copies of those works should bring them to the office of the registrar to be disposed of according to law.

I conclude, by declaring, that in all I have said, I have not intended to injure any one. "Woe be to him, who, as a public servant, abuses his influence to the detriment of any indi- vidual or any body of men. I am bound to speak the whole truth to you. You have required it, and you expect it from me. I make no objections to the Society, but those which concern public order. I attack the system. I pity the individuals. I have brought no doubtful accusations before you, but the griefs of human society. I have defended the common cause of the king and of the State, or rather of all kings and states.

I wish, that the Society should be reformed, because it appears to me quite impossible, in good morality or in good policy, to allow its government to remain as it is.

Many councils have sat in deliberation on the subject of reformations in the Church. The Council of Pisa, those of Con- stance and Basle, were assembled to reform the heads and their members. De reformanda cccksid in capite et in mcmbris.

All the world knows what was said by Barthelemi des Martirs, Archbishop of Prague, at the Council of Trent, " Illus- trissimi Cat'dinales illusbrissima indigent reformatione." The greater part of those reforms have been effected. When it is said, that the Society cannot be reformed, is that an attack or a defence of it?

If the Society believes, that it has acquired a right to be unre-

99

formable, and that no government has power or strength enough to resist it, because it has made itself too formidable, that it has dared the most courageous of Frenchmen, Henry IV., or caused him to feel fear, let them suffer the punishment, due to men, who inspire fear, that of ostracism. Let the Society be banished or dissolved !

But that would be going too far, Messieurs. A whole body can only be banished for some crime, which is shared by every individual. The Jesuits are the children of our own towns, our fellow- citizens, our countrymen. Some of them are of the class of noblemen, or united by the ties of blood to that distinguished portion of the State. But if the Society declares itself to be un- reformable, it should bo dissolved.

Restored to the direction of their own consciences and to the exercise of their own sense of honour, they will really become citizens when they cease to be Jesuits. They will rejoice to find themselves under the dominion of the protective laws of France. They will bless the hands that have broken their chains. I do not think, that they are generally so infected with the contagion of their fanatical institution as not to re-enter joyfully into the exercise of the liberty, which is authorised by law and by religion.

In order to determine, whether the existence of the Society will be useful or detrimental to the Church and State, in future, we must consider, whether on the whole it has hitherto done most good or harm, and whether it is fair to ascribe all the good which has been done by individual members of the Society, to the credit of the whole body ; as if they would not have done any good, if they had not belonged to it, and had remained parish priests or laymen. We must consider, also, whether it would be just to dispute with the order the honour of having had illustrious personages belonging to it, who have owed the culti-' vation of their merits and capacities to their care. That is too1'' wide a question to undertake now.

It seems, that when the question to be considered is, Shall an order in the Church be suppressed, or shall it be dissolved ? it is very like talking of the dissolution of the human body ; if the

H2

100

members of the body arc separated, they will certainly be anni- hilated.

The question might be simplified by asking, Is it most advanta- geous to the State to destroy or to preserve an order, which forms a kind of sect in the Church, and a party in the State, which may become a faction ? Or the question may be reduced to a still smaller compass by asking, whether, in the present state of things, all the duties, which are performed by the Society might not be executed by parochial clergymen with as much success and less danger.

It is for you, gentlemen, to take such measures on these sub- jects, as your wisdom will suggest. The good and sincere inten- tions of the king, whose only wish is, that the laws may be observed, will rule your determinations, and be considered by me as absolute commands.

You will represent to his majesty on this occasion, the great importance of the education of youth in all parts of the kingdom, and you will know better than I, how to exhort him to reform it. But in fact his sovereign majesty is never absent from your courts. He presides at your decrees, and in this august tribunal, I venture, therefore, to address the following words to his maj esty, in addressing those who represent him here in the administration of justice.

Sire, — You know, that your authority is derived from God, and as the eldest son of the Church, you will respect him who is its visible head on earth ; but you will not allow the royal dignity, with which the Almighty has invested you, to be degraded, and you will maintain with the same firmness as your fathers, the in- dependence of your crown, which recognises no superior in the whole world.

You will cause religion to be respected ; you will banish from your kingdom both the impiety, which assails, and the fanaticism which dishonours it ; you will oppose ignorance and superstition ; you will arrest their progress and prevent their fatal effects.

Kings, Sire, have a more immediate interest than any of their subjects in the suppression of that fanaticism, which respects nothing, and attacks the most illustrious persons : they are its peculiar victims.

101

Nothing but a knowledge of past events and a careful study of them in all their bearings, can rend the veil of excited ignorance and superstition, which are the real causes of fanaticism. Nothing but light can dispel darkness.

Your Majesty should reform the education of youth in all the colleges of your kingdom. It is vicious and barbarous, especially in the colleges of the Societv. All well-informed and sensible

f-j >>

men are aware of it, and arc agreed on that point. I do not fear contradiction on this subject from any of those, who en- lighten literature. Let your Majesty add to the happiness of the most well-disposed people in the world the advantage of possessing the best institutions. Protect learning and sciences ; they make the happiness and prosperity of kingdoms, and shed honour on the reigns of their sovereigns.

Protect men of learning, Sire, but do not expect solid useful- ness from any, who do not appreciate the principles of your State and your Church ; those principles ought to predominate in every State and every Church in the world, for they are founded on reason, on natural rights, the rights of man, on Scripture and tradition. Will you give your kingdom, as rulers and precep- tors, men whose principles and interests are not those of your nation, and who by their profession are disabled from taking an oath of fidelity to your Majesty ? How can they educate youth to pay to you the obedience which is due to you, so long as they themselves believe that you owe obedience to another, in the temporal government of your kingdom. How can they teach our maxims, who without openly combating them, yet regard them as scholastic differences, which may be maintained in France, but which they must not hold in Italy ?

Give, Sire, to the flower of your nobility, who serve you so gloriously and so faithfully in your armies and in your Parlia- ments, to the precious hopes of the nation, who will also serve you on some future day — you and your children, and your grand- children— give to them tutors, who are attached to your Majesty and to the State by duty, by principle, and by religion.

Your Majesty has in your universities and your academies men of great worth and distinguished capacity. They are French by

102

birth and by inclination ; they arc so by principle ; they arc learned, and they hold the maxims of your State.

Order them to prepare a system of education for all ages and all professions, and elementary books to fulfil their plan ; you will protect the edition, and place such teachers in the colleges, as you may think worthy to perform their functions, and who are worthy of your choice.

You will add, Sire, to the glory of your august ancestor, who caused science and learning to flourish, that of establishing them permanently in your kingdom.

The well-beloved of the nation will become the benefactor of succeeding generations, and the revival of science will hereafter be, dated from the reign of Louis XV. as, after an age of barbarism, it was formerly counted from Francis I.

Cause that in all the countries, lands, and signiories, under your dominion the Edict of 1682, given under the declaration of the clergy of your kingdom, shall be carefully executed.

Order that no ecclesiastic, either secular or regular, particu- larly no member of the Society, called of Jesus, be admitted to orders without having signed that declaration, an eternal monu- ment of the fidelity of your clergy, and which will perhaps con-« tribute as effectively as arms to the safety of the State.

In conclusion, Messieurs, I would refer in support of what I have said to the epitome made by his Majesty's Ministers for the Parliament of Paris, of the Constitutions of the Jesuits, and to the denunciations, uttered by those Magistrates, carefully verified by Commissioners, and supported by full proofs of the facts alleged.

I require on the part of the king (and making use of the same expressions as Mon. Servin on a similar occasion.) I require " for the safety of the sacred person of the king, and for the good of the Church and of the State, for the sake of public tranquillity, ; and for the honour and maintenance of learning and science," the concession of a power of appeal as against abuses ; understanding as such abuses, the introduction of all Bulls, Briefs, and Letters Apostolic, concerning the Society calling itself the Society of Jesus, the constitutions of the same, declarations on those con- stitutions, formulas of vows; decrees of Generals ; or of general

103

congregations of the said society, and generally all other rules or regulations and similar acts ; also vows and oaths made by the members of the same, to submit and conform to the rules of the said Society. And I ask permission to intimate to the General and the Society, on the said appeal, as against abuses, the judg- ment which shall be reported to the court, on all pretended rules, especially those, which are called verbal oracles, and on every- thing else, which bears the force of law in that said Society.

I move as the judgment of this Parliament that the book

entitled, Hermanni Busembaum Societatis Jesu, Sacrce Theologies

Liccnciati, Theoloyia Mo mi-is, mine pluribus partibus aucta, d It.

P. Claudio Lacroix, Societati* Jesu, Theologies in Uniccrsitate

Coloniensi Doctorc et Profcssore publtco, cditio norissima diligenter

recognita et emendata ab uno cjusdem Societatis Jesu Sacerdote

Theologo ; Colonize, 1757 ; teaching murderous and abominable

doctrines, dangerous, not only to the safety of the lives of citizens,

but even to that of the sacred persons of Icings ; and the "Journal

•'of Trevoux " of August, 1729, which eulogises that work ; be torn

and burnt at the foot of the great staircase of the palace by the

executioner of justice.

That it be ordered that every one, who has copies of books teaching that detestable doctrine, composed by members of the Society of Jesus, and by others, if such should be found ; and, namely, by Emmanuel Sa, Jesuit, in his Aphorisms ; by Martin Antoine Dclaio, Jesuit, in his Commentary written in 1689 ; and others to the numbers of thirty -tic o ; he brought to the Registrar of the Court to be dealt with also according to law. That all booksellers be strictly prohibited from selling and publishing the said books under pain of extraordinary prosecution, and punish- ment with all severity by the law. Meantime, provisionally, until judgment shall be given on this appeal, as against abuses, that all the king's subjects be forbidden (whatever their rank or quality may be), under the usual penalties, to associate them- selves with the said priests and other members of the said Society, in their houses or elsewhere, on the pretence of congregations, or associations, or retreats ; that it be ordered, that his Majesty's Edict of 1G82, be well and duly executed in this jurisdiction; that his Majesty be humbly petitioned to make a declaration

104

commanding that no one he admitted to sacred orders, (and especially no member of the Society of Jesus), nor he appointed to any benefice whatsoever, either as parish priest or monk, ex- empt or not exempt from the jurisdiction of the ordinary, nor on the plea of any degrees, obtained by him, unless he shall pre- viously have signed the declaration of the clergy of 1682, in the presence of his archbishop or his bishop, or their great vicars ; of which signature mention shall be made in the act of requisition, and also in the act of taking possession of each benefice ; — all under the penalty of nullity of the said acts, in respect of those, who shall be found to have performed the acts without having previously signed the said declaration ; and in case any of the archbishops or bishops neglect to require this signature, that they be obliged to do so under the penalty of seizure of the temporali- ties of their archbishopric or bishopric. That it should, moreover, be ordered that those ecclesiastics who may not have signed the said declaration, and who may refuse to do so on the occasion of the visa, or of institution to benefices to which they may demand to be inducted, be declared incapable to hold them, and that all benefices which have hitherto been held by such ecclesiastics, shall be declared vacant or lapsed, and may be presented again in full right without the need of any formal judgment, or of any judicial declaration to that effect.

That it be represented to his Majesty how great is the importance of reforming the colleges of the kingdom and the education which is given in them. That his Majesty be petitioned to order his academies and universities to prepare a plan of education for all ages and all professions ; and to compile elementary books to carry out their plan, which shall be taught in all colleges by such masters as may be deemed fit.

That it be ordered that the Decree which will be issued in consequence of my conclusions be read, published, and announced in all needful places, v Given in the Parliament of Eennes, December 7th, 1761.

DE CARADTJC BE LA CHALOTAIS.

I have seen since my conclusions of the 7th of December last, the books of Bellarmine, Beccan, Pirol, Escobard, Horace

105

Turcelin (all of the Society called of Jesus), deposited in the Registry Office of the Court, which were communicated to me by a decree of the 18th of December current.

I demand on the part of the king, that the books entitled : — Disputationum Roberti Bellarmini Societatis Jesu de Con- trorersiis Christ iance fidei adi'ersus h-ujm temporis Hereticos ; Tractatus depotestate Pa-pee in rebus temporalibus ; Libri de Romano Pontifice ; De translations Imperil Romani, Mediolani, 1721, su- perior urn permmu ; Martini Beccani, Societatis, de Jure ct Justitia, Parish's, 1658 ; Apologie pom- les Casuistes, attribute a Edmont Pii-ot, Paris, 1657 ; Joannis Mariana Societatis Jesu de Rege et Regis institutione, Moguntice, 1605 ; Liber Theologice Mora /is i-iginti quatuor Societatis Jesu Doctoribus resereatus quern It. P. Antonius de Escobard et Mcndoza Vallisoletanus in cxamen Confessa- liorum digessit, addidit, illustravit, Lugduni, 1659 ; Historic Sacrce et Prop/tana?, epitome ab Horatio Turcellino, Rothomayi, 1714, et Rhedonis, 1732 ; together with Fmncisci Tokti, Societatis Jesu Instruct io Sacerdotum, Rothomagi, 1628 ; and with the books of Herman Busembaum, and the Journal de Trerou.r of the month of August, 1729, mentioned in my preceding conclusions : — be torn, and burnt in the court of the palace at the foot of the great staircase, by the public executioner ; as being seditious ; destructive of Christian morality ; teaching a doctrine that is murderous and abominable ; dangerous, not only to the safety of citizens, but to the sacred persons of sovereigns. That all persons who possess copies of them be commanded to bring them to the Register Office to be suppressed. That it be forbidden to all librarians to reprint or sell, or to distribute the said books, or any of them, and to all colporteurs, distributors, or other such persons to carry them about or to distribute them under pain of prosecution and punishment according to the rigour of the law. That it be enacted that, 011 my requisition, informations be taken before Mon. Le Rapporteur of such witnesses as may be found in this town ; and before the justices of the peace, of all the officers of justice, and the royal authorities within this jurisdiction, and by the care of my substitutes in the said courts, evidence be taken against all those, who may have contributed to the approval or printing of the said books, or who may retain them

IOC

in their hands ; and also against the printers and distributors of the said books. And in order to legislate definitively on the result of the investigation of the said books, and the teachings contained in them, and of the report, made by myself to this Court on the 1st, 3rd, 4th, and 5th of December, current, I request, that an account of the deliberation may be joined with the appeal against abuses introduced by me, against the Bulls, Briefs, Constitutions, and all the succeeding acts concerning the said Society ; on the understanding, that they may be separated, if the case should fail.

For the rest I can only refer to my preceding conclusions of the 7th of December current.

Done at the Bar this 22nd of December, 1761.

DE CAEADUC DE LA CHALOTAIS.

107

DECREE OF THE PARLIAMENT OF BRETAGNE,

23rd of December, 1761. Extracted from the Registers of the Parliament.

The following Decrees and Reports were first read and con- sidered by this Parliament, assembled in their Chambers, viz. : —

The Decree of the 14th of August, 1761, in which this Court ordered that the superior of the self-called Jesuits of the College of Rennes, should within three days present at the Register Office of this Court a copy of the Constitutions of the Order styling itself the Society of Jesus ; and that the said Decree should be notified to him on the requisition of the Attorney- General of the King: — The Notice that was given to him of the said Decree by Bouchard, Bailiff of the Court : — The Act of Deposit of the Books made at the Register Office of the Court by the Frere du Pays, Rector of the said College of Rennes, on the 15th of August, 1761 : — Another Decree of the 17th of the same month and year, which ordered that the two volumes in small in folio, entitled, " Institution Societati* Jesu," printed at Prague, anno 1757, should be remitted to the Attorney -General of the King, who should be ordered to report thereon to the Court on Tuesday the 1st of December : — The Report, which was delivered on the 1st, 3rd, 4th, and 5th of December, by the King's Attorney- General, both of the contents of the said books, and of the moral doctrine of the self-called Jesuits : — Another Decree, which was passed on the 7th of December, by which this Court (after having read the con-

108

elusions of the Attorney- General of the King, left by him on the Bureau, of the date of the said 7th day of December) determined to continue the Assembly of the Chambers until the 10th day of the said month : — The several Decrees of Adjournment, on the 10th, llth, 12th, 14th, 15th, 16tb, and 18th of December, on the last of which this Court (having suspended its sittings for several days during the examina- tion of the institution, and in order to read the propositions and assertions contained in the works of different and several authors, belonging to the Society, calling themselves the Society of Jesus), ordered that the said books should be delivered to the King's Attorney-General, in order that (if he should so decide) they might be dealt with according to law : — Tbe conclusions of the said Attorney-General of the King, bearing date the 22nd of Ibis month : —The report of Mon. Claude Guerry, senior counsel of the Court : — These having all been considered.

This Court in full assembly admits, as far as the occasion requires, the demands of the King's Attorney- General (appealing as against abuse) against the Bull beginning with the word Regunim, given on the 5th of the Calends of October, 1540, by Paul III., entitled Prima Instituti Societatis Jem dpprobatio ; another Bull beginning with these words, " Injunctum Nobis," given on the eve of the Ides of March, 1543, entitled, " Faculta* quosris idoncos ad Societatem Jem sine rcstrictione niimeri admit- tendi et Const it ntiones Condendi; " another Bull beginning with these words, " E.rposcit debit urn" given on the 12th of the Calends of August, 1550, entitled, " ConfirmaMo alii Instituti, cum iiif/jori, turn iflius, turn alionun Societatis Induttorum decla- ratione;'' another Bull beginning with jthese words, " Sacrce Religioni*" given on the 31st of December, 1552, entitled " Confirmatio privileyiorum Societatis concessorum et aliontm nora cnncessio;" and generally against Bulls, Briefs, and Apostolic- Letters concerning the priests and scholars of the Society calling itself of Jesus ; the constitutions of the same ; declarations on the same constitutions; forms of vows, even of the vows and oaths made on th$ day of taking the vows ; decrees of Generals,

109

or of general congregations of the said Society ; verbal oracles ; and generally all other regulations -and similar acts.

This Court thus decrees, especially because the institution of the said Society is a violation of the authority of the Church, and of general councils and other councils ; of that of the Holy See, and of all superior ecclesiastics, and of that of sovereigns ; inas- much as, on the one hand, by the said constitutions, the General has absolute power in the said Society, in contravention of decisions of the said councils, of Bulls issued by the Holy Sec, of regulations prescribed by ecclesiastical superiors, and of laws emanating from temporal princes : and, on the other hand, no power, either spiritual or temporal, has any efficacy in this Society. To it is attributed the faculty of altering, abrogating, and revoking its own constitutions, and of giving itself new ones, according to the exigencies of the times, of places, and of objects, without being amenable in this respect to any inspection, not even on the part of the Holy See ; whose authorisation is nevertheless considered to be invariably attached by right to all the changes which may be useful to the said Society. This concession having been granted irrevocably, remains in force even if any act of revo- cation or reformation should bo made by the Church, or by the Holy See, or by any other power whatsoever. In such a case the Society may of its own authority replace itself in its former state, or as it was at any preceding date, according to the will of the General, or of its own superiors, without any need to obtain any authorisa- tion, or consent, or confirmation,* even of the Holy See. Because

* The following extracts from the Bull will prove this :—

"Notwithstanding all Apostolic Constitutions — all Ordinances general or special, emanating from General Councils or from Provincial or Synodal Assemblies/'

" And desiring that at no time anything may be revoked, or limited, or abrogated from the said constitutions by ourselves or by the Holy See : and that every time it may happen that any article should be revoked, altered, limited, or restricted in any degree, the superior or General may re-establish the same to its original state, evon under an anterior date — any date that the General may please to choose — and that any articles so re-established shall be considered as granted anew by the Holy See."

'• By our apostolic authority we grant to them, by special favour, the power and the faculty to c-lwngn, niter, or even to abrogate entirely, according to

110

under the name of the said Society, one single man may exercise monarchical power over the whole Society* spread over all states, over all its own members universally, and over all persons living under its obedience, even over those who might be exempt, or those who may be invested with any faculty whatsoever ; that

the quality and variety of places, of times, and circumstance, both the con- stitutions already established and any others which may be made in future, and to make new ones. And when they shall have been thus changed, altered, or new ones shall have been made, we will that the whole shall be considered immediately to have been continued by the same apostolic authority."

" That no member of the Society should be so daring as to ask any privi- lege contrary to the statutes common to the whole Society, or to retain them if they have obtained them. . . . That if such kind of privileges should ever be granted by the Apostolic See, we declare them beforehand to be null and valueless . . . unless . . . such derogation of the statutes was done with the consent of the Society."

" And every time that the Holy See shall issue any letters revoking or limiting these statutes, we will that as many times they 11133- be re-established and fully reintegrated to the original state in which they we-ie formerly placed by the Society, by its General, and its other superiors as if they had been granted afresh, and confirmed to be as they were at any date that these superiors please to choose each time, without needing to obtain any new act of re-establishment, invalidation, confirmation, or concession."

* The founder, St. Ignatius, ruled that the general system of government i in the Society) should be monarchical, confined to the arbitrary orders of the superior only.

" The superior shall exercise full jurisdiction over all the members of the said Society, and over all persons subject to obey him, in whatever place they may live, even when they are exempted, and whatsoever rights or faculties they may possess."

" All power of making contracts, purchases, and sales is vested in the General : and although this General should communicate his power to make contracts to superior subalterns, or visitors, or to commissioners, he shall, nevertheless, have liberty to approve or annul any agreement they may have made."

" Every one of the subjects shoiild not only be obliged always to obey the General in all things which are regulated by the statutes of the Society, but they must consider Jesus Christ as present at all times in his person, and they must have that same veneration for him which is due to Christ."

"The right to command is vested solely in the General. The General may in all circumstances, make any statutes he thinks fit, and he must receive the reverence, obedience, and respect due to him who holds the place of Jesus Christ. '

Ill

power extends itself over the administration of their properties and the right to make contracts, and to annul those already made, even under their own sanction. It is so complete and entire, that while even' member of the Society is obliged to obey the General as implicitly and blindly as if he were Jesus Christ,

• You must convince yourself that all that is ordered by the superior is the commandment and the will of God Himself : and. as you believe without hesitation, with all your heart and all your mind, all that tlie Catholic Church declares to you. you must also act with the blind impetuosity of a will eager to obey and perform, without question or examination, all the commands of the superior, considering that such was the obedience of Abraham, when he received the command to sacrifice his sun Isaac.

•• Let every one be persuaded that those who live under obedience ought to allow themselves to be ruled and governed by Divine Providence, that is to say, by their superiors, with as little resistance a.s a corpse, which allows itself to be carried where you will, and to be passive in every sense : or like a rod in the hand of an old man. who uses it in all places and for even" pur- pose for which he may choose to employ it. '

•• That in us the Jesuits) obedience should always be perfect and com- plete in all respects. As in will, so in execution, so in mind, accomplishing all that is required of us with celerity, with spiritual joy. and with perse- verance, persuading ourselves that all we are commanded to do is rijdit. and renouncing, with blind obedience, every sentiment and every contrary opinion which arises in our mil.

•• We declare that the said Society is not bound or obliged to supply food or suitable entertainment, under whatever name, or for whatever reason, to those whom the superiors drive from their bosoms, after the three years of probation, and after the taking of simple vows : even when, during their sojourn in the said Society, they may have received holy orders, even that of priesthood, without any ecclesiastical benefice, without patrimony, with- out any other title than that of religious poverty.'

••"We order all ordinary judges and delegates who may have to pronounce on this subject to judge so. and not otherwise, depriving them, all and even- one of them, of all power and authority to give a different judgment, or a different interpretation, declaring null and valueless any declaration to 1 . late contrariwise, either with knowledge of the case or i^norantly. whoever the judges may be. and with whatever authority they may be invested."

'• The Gentral with the advice of his assistants, shall have a right to make constitutions ha an assembly, preserving always the ri^ht to enact according to the majority «,f v<>-

• When it is a question of mat- : .Teat importance and perpetuity, the

: number of persons shall be assembled that the General can conveni- ently convoke : but if it is only a question of small and transitory con-:equ>..-

112

in all things whatsoever, without reserve, without exception, with- out question or examination, or even mental hesitation ; to carry into execution anything that he may prescribe, with the same fulness of consent and submission that they feel in the belief of the dogmas of the Catholic faith itself ; to be in his hands as

it will be sufficient to assemble those who are present in the place where the General resides. (Bull Begimini.) The assembly that it shall be indispen- sably necessary to convoke in order to alter the constitutions or to make new ones, or for other grave objects, such as that of alienating or destroying houses or colleges already established, shall be composed, according to the declaration of our constitutions, of the greatest number of the professed members of the Society that the General can convoke without very great inconvenience; but in things that are of less importance the General, assisted by the advice of his brethren, as far as he thinks fit, has all right to com- mand by himself alone."

As to their dress, three things must be observed. " 1st. It must be respect- able, '^nd. Conformable to the usage of the country in which they live. 3rd. It must be concordant with the profession that we make of poverty; that is, it would be contrary to that profession to wear silks or costly stuffs : we should therefore abstain from such, and preserve an exterior of humility and lowliness, wliich generally tends to the glory of God." (Constitutions, 6th part.) This observance applies to tunes when the establishment is ex- pected to supply new dresses ; for there is nothing to prevent men when they enter the Society, from wearing the dress which they have brought with them, although it may be of the most expensive kind ; nor is there any objection to give to some members more expensive clothes, if such are necessary on especial occasions ; but they must not wear such kinds of dress habitually. "It is also to be considered that all men are not equally btrong ; their health is not the same, and many are old and weak. The welfare of such persons must be considered, and the necessities of the multitude, in the quality of the dress to be given to them ; but all must be ordered, as far as possible, for the glory of God."

" It must be well understood that everything that bears the appearance of secular commerce is forbidden to members of our society, whether in the culture of our fields, in the sale of produce in the markets, or other such things (Decree <>/ the Second Congregation^). As it has been asked what is meant by things having the appearance of commerce, from wliich our mem- bers are commanded to abstain by the twenty-fifth canon of the Second Congregation, the congregation decided that there were so many things that it was impossible to specify them. Bitt among others the following might be named : — 1st. To lure lands, to cultivate for others, for profit or gain ; which, nevertheless, shall not be observed if the hiring of such lands is necessary to make our own lands profitable, or to feed our cattle. 2nd.

113

passive as a corpse, or as a stick iu the hands of an old man, or as Abraham, when, under the command of God, he was ordered to sacrifice his son, he must persuade himself, on principle, that all that he is ordered to do is right, and abjure all personal feeling and volition. And although this absolute authority is extended

To buy produce ill order to sell it again at a profit. They did not think, however, that it had the appearance of a commercial undertaking to buy cattle to feed on our pastures, and to sell them afterwards ; nor to buy necessaries for our own subsistence and to sell afterwards that which we still had left nnconsumed. 3rd. To pay the expense of printing the works of our members, and keep the whole edition ; to sell single copies of it at our own risk of loss or gain although it is not a commerce absolutely inter- dicted to clerks, it has been thought to be forbidden to our clerks. It has appeared, therefore, that the General will only allow of it for grave reasons. -4th. It is forbidden to have printing presses in our colleges ; to sell to the world generally the books which maybe printed in them. However, the congregation has left to the General the power to decide whether we may not have printing presses in the two Indias and in the northern North America, for books of piety and religion, and for the use of our schools, con- sidering that in those countries there are neither printers nor Catholics." — - (Decree of the Seventh Congregation).

" The procureur of the province should carefully avoid every appear- ance of commerce or of seeking for gain by the purchase or sale of the mer- chandise that he may import or export by exchange of money or otherwise. If it should happen that, in conducting his affairs, he made some con- siderable profit by any means which presented itself to him accidentally he may dispose of it according to the decision of the provincial, and carry it to account like all other receipts and expenses."

" In order that our members may not fall into the bonds of sin, it seems to us proper to declare that none of the constitutions, declarations, nor rules of life can be so obligatory as to render their violation a mortal sin, or even a venial ski, unless the superior shall command its observance in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, or in virtue of obedience, which he may do either in respect of circumstances or in respect of persons, when he may consider this precept suitable for the good of individuals, or for general good."

" The Society, all its members, and all persons belonging to them, and all their possessions are exempt and free from all superiority, jurisdiction, and correction of the ordinaries in such sort, that none of those prelates, nor any other person, can exercise any jurisdiction over them, in any manner whatsoever, for any offence, either of contract or of any matter at issue, in whatever place the offence was committed, or the contract was made, or whatever may be the nature of the question." (Constitutions.)

" "NYe grant to the General the power to sell the properties of the Society

I

114

over all the natural engagements, which in binding its members to the Society, ought to bind the Society to its members reciprocally, on the contrary, the Society does not hold itself bound in anywise to its members, while its members are bound (by their vows) irre- vocably to the Society. The General may at any time discharge

freely and legally, of abstaining from all prosecutions on that account : and, even from any cause which he may have against the non-possessor, of citing the delinquent, of ascertaining simply and without any judicial form, the utility, the necessity, or any other reason which might make him determine to sell or alienate these properties, and to decide and execute entirely (all affairs of that kind) ; and we declare everything null and ineffective, that any other person, whoever he may be, shall attempt to do against the decision of the General, whether with knowledge or without knowledge of the fact." (Bull.)

" We exempt the Society for all perpetuity, all and each of its properties, in whatever country they be situated, from all tithes, even Papal, real personal, whether they be quarters, or halves, or any other share of fruits, from all other subsidies, even for the poor, from all other ordinary charges

imposed even for a limited time for the defence of the country;

or for any other cause whatsoever demanded by emperors, longs, dukes, or other princes." (Bull.)

"It is ordered that no king princes dukes shall have the

audacity, or the presumption to impose, exact, publish, or even to occasion on any of our properties, or on our persons, either excise (gabelle) taxes, collections, or any other imposts, not even for the repair of bridges or reparation of roads ; and this under pain of excommunication and eternal malediction, which they incur ipso facto if they do not immediately desist as soon as they shall become aware of this present privilege. " (Constitutions?)

" It is not allowed to any prelate to pronounce sentence of excommuni- cation, suspension, or interdict against any member, whoever he may be, of this Society, nor even against any other persons on their account. If they should doit their sentence is null."

" Bishops cannot prevent us from administering the sacrament of peni- tence from Palm Sunday, till the first Sunday after Whitsuntide."

" We may administer the Eucharist and the other Sacraments of the Church to the faithful, (provided nevertheless that we do no prejudice to any one), without the permission of the ordinaries, of incumbents, or of the superiors of other churches."

" Bishops cannot forbid us generally to preach in the churches of the Society. All those of whatever condition they may be, who assist at the preachings of the brothers of the Society, or who may go into the churches where they preach — may freely and legally on those days hear the Mass,

115

any of them without making any provision for their sustenance, however urgent their wants may be ; whereas all this is done in order to secure to themselves the more certain means of exercis- ing absolute power. The general spirit of their Institution, followed up in their constitutions, is apparently to establish rules,

the Divine Office, and receive the Sacraments in those churches, and need not be obliged to go to their parish church for that purpose."

" The Society and each of its members, and even its servants, have the right in all their causes, whether civil, criminal, or mixed, to choose between the archbishops, bishops, canons of cathedrals, and judge-con- servators and ordinaries None of these judges, nor any one of

them thus chosen will permit the Society to be unjustly molested in any

manner whatsoever, by any persons, whomsoever ; whatever their authority

or their dignity may be the judge will reprimand the intruder, the

author of the injury, all opposers and rebels, however otherwise qualified, by condemnation, by censures, ecclesiastical punishments, and other, suit- able means by law or by force, which will be without appeal."

" They will not permit that members of the Society shall be molested or disturbed, either openly or in secret, directly or indirectly, tacitly or ex- pressly, under any colour or pretext, by any persons whatsoever, whether they are invested with pontifical authority, royal authority, or any other," (Constitutions.)

" It is forbidden in virtue of holy obedience, and under pain of excom- munication, of incapacity to hold office, of suspension from sacraments, a divinis, and under all other pains and penalties that the General may please to inflict, to all persons of our Society, to dare to assert, whether in public or in private, whether in lessons or in consultations, still less in the books that they may write, that it is permitted to ALL persons under any pretext of tyranny whatsoever, to kill kings or princes, or to conspire against their lives." The General Claude Aquaviva willed that the same penalties should be incurred, even that of deprivation of their office, by provincials who should CONFESS that such doctrine had ever been taught by any of those means without reprehension, and without preventing the inconvenient con- sequences that must result from it, by taking care that this decree should be religiously observed. " It is recommended, in virtue of holy obedience, to provincials not to permit that any of our members should publish in their respective provinces, or on any occasion, or in any language, books or other writings in which the power of the sovereign poiitiff over kings and princes is agitated, or which treat on the subject of tyrannicide, unless the work has been examined and approved at Rome."

"We forbid, moreover, that any one in future shall treat of this matter, either in printed books or other writings ; that any one shall dispute on the subject in public, or teach it in the schools, in order to cut short all occa- sions of complaint and offence."

l2

116

and yet to have the power, at the same time, to render them entirely futile, either by other rules of a contrary nature, which may be found in other parts of the same constitutions, or by dis- tinctions, and exceptions of all kinds ; and by adding that, in practice, the members of the said Society are not obliged to fulfil any of the points, contained in the said constitutions, even under the head of venial sin, unless they have been especially prescribed to them in virtue of holy obedience by the superior, who knows what is suitable to all occasions, and to all persons. So that it finally rests with the General alone to decide every point that concerns the Society. By these constitutions, there are granted to the said Institution all kinds of privileges, even such as would be absolutely contrary to the rights of temporal and spiritual powers, to the powers of ordinaries, of pastors of the second order, of universities and other bodies, both secular and regular. And if it should happen, that such privileges should be disturbed, either tacitly infringed, or openly disputed, it is permitted to the Institution to name Conservators, with the power of employing, for their defence, all applicable resources of law and force with- out paying any respect to royal authority.

" If any one of our members should hold different opinions from those which are taught by the Church and its doctors, he ought to submit his opinion to the definition of the Society."

" In the opinions in which men differ, and even when there is opposition of sentiment among Catholic doctors, unanimity must exist in the company."

There must be no difference of sentiment in the Society, whether in speaking, in preaching, or in public teaching, whether in writing or in the books which will be published in future, and which cannot be given to the public without the approbation of the General, who will entrust the exami- nation of it to three members of the Society at least, conspicuous for their healthy doctrine, and capable of judging on such a subject."

" No diversity of judgment can be allowed in respect of conduct nor

anything which can in any degree interrupt perfect uniformity and union."

" If any new summary, or book of scholastic theology, more applicable to the present time, should be written, it may be taught, if approved by the General."

" Let all follow generally the doctrine that the Society has chosen as the best and most suitable for us. When each has completed his course of study, let care be taken that no diversity of opinion should infringe on the union of charity ; let each one conform, as much as possible, to the doctrine which is most common in the Society." (Constitutions.)

117

Each of the above-named regulations, namely the obligation imposed on all the members of the said Society of blind obedi- ence in executing, and perfect acquiescence in, the will of the ^ General, without questioning or examining the justice of any order emanating from him ; the extent of the prohibitions contained in the said constitutions ; the nature of the powers attributed to the self-styled Conservators ; tend to comprise the safety of the persons even of kings. Other articles more precisely worded in the same said constitutions also concur to endanger that safety. Moreover, every one of the members of the said Society, being obliged to surrender his own judgment to the definitions of the same, even on those subjects of doctrine on which they may hold opinions differing from those held by the Church ; only one form of belief and one uniform system of morality can exist in the Society ; that is to say, that, which it will deem most appropriate to the times and most advantageous to itself.

Because by the said vows and oaths the said self- called Jesuits submit themselves to the rules and institutes of the said Society : —

Permission is hereby given the King's Attorney-General to intimate to the General and the Society of the said self-called Jesuits that in the appeal as against abuses, the parties will be heard at the next sitting. That in course of the procedure all edicts, declarations, or letters patent concerning the Society will be reported to the court, having been duly verified in the same ; that all may be conjointly tried, and judgement given, so that they may be dealt with according to law.

It is ordered that the book entitled " Disputationes Roberti Bellarmini e Societate Jesu," printed at Ingolstadt in 1596 :

That entitled " Francisci Toleti, Societatis Jesu, Instruct io Sacer- dotum," Paris 1619 :

That entitled " Opuscula Thcologica Martini Becani, Socictatis Jesu," Paris, 1633:

That entitled " Joannis Mariance, Societatis Jesu de Rcgc et Regis Institutionc" in 1605 :

That entitled " dpologie pour ks Casuistes" attributed to Edmund Pirot, Jesuit, Paris, 1657 :

That entitled "Liber Theoloyite Moralis rir/inti quatuor Societatis

118

JCKU Doctoribna reseralii* qucm 7?. P. Antonius <le Escobar, ft Mendosa Vallisoletanus, & Societafe Jcxii, Theologus in examen con- feasariornm digessit, addididit illustramt, Lyon," 1659 :

Those entitled " Hcrmanni Busembaum Tlicologia Moralis micta a R. P. Claudio Laeroix, Societatis Jem, Lyon c/iez les Freres de Tournes, 1729, et a Colonge," 1757 :

And that entitled " Historic mcrcz et Prophancp. epitome ab Horatio TnrceUno Societatis Jesu, Rennes," 1732 :

And that entitled the " Journal de Trevoux" of the month of August, 1729, because it contains the announcement and the eulogy of the said Busembaum :

Each and all the said books shall be torn and burnt at the foot of the staircase, opposite to the great door of the palace, by the public executioner of justice, as being seditious and destructive of all the principles of Christian morality ; teaching the abominable doctrine of murder ; not only adverse to the safety of the lives of citizens, but even to that of the sacred persons of sovereigns.

It is expressly prohibited and forbidden to all booksellers to reprint, or sell, or distribute, the said books, or any of them ; and to all colporteurs, hawkers, or distributors, or others, to hawk them or distribute them, under pain of prosecution and punishment, such as the law directs.

It is ordered, at the requisition of the said King's Attorney- General, that information shall be sought, and witnesses brought before M. Le Conseillier Rapporteur against any persons in this town who may infringe this law ; and before the judges of senechaussees, royal justices, and other royal authorities within the jurisdiction of this Court ; by the care and diligence of the official agents of M. the King's Attorney- General, in those places ; against all, who may have assisted in the composition, editing, or printing of any of the said books, or who may retain them in their houses ; and against all printers and distributors of the said books. This information is sought in order that a definitive law may be enacted to prevent the consequences derived from these books, from the continual and uninterrupted teaching of this doctrine, in the said Society of the said self-styled Jesuits, and from the futility of their disavowals, declarations, and retractions, made on this subject. It is ordered that the con-

119

stitutions of the said priest, scholars, and others of the said Society ; together with the report rendered by the said King's Attorney-General on the 1st, 3rd, 4th, and 5th of the present month ; be taken together with the deliberation on the appeal (as against abuse) introduced by the said Attorney- General of the King, on the Bulls, Briefs, Constitutions, and all other Acts which have followed concerning the said Society ; it being under- stood that they may be separated if the case fails.

Meantime be it enacted provisonally, until judgment shall have been passed on this appeal (as against abuse), and the other subjects which are joined with it, or until the court shall order otherwise : — That all the king's subjects, of whatever quality, pro- fession, and condition, be forbidden, and they are hereby forbidden to enter into this Society, whether under the pretence of probation, or novitiate, or for the taking of vows, either solemn or not solemn. And all priests, scholars, and others of the said Society, are for- bidden to receive them into it; to assist in their reception, or in taking of vows ; to write or to sign such acts ; under such penalties as shall be legal. The same priests, scholars, and others of the said Society, are likewise prohibited from receiving under any pretext whatever, into their houses, any members of the said Society born in foreign countries, and even from re- ceiving any members of the Society, though Frenchmen born, who may in future make any vows, either solemn or not solemn, beyond this kingdom, all under pain of being con- sidered as offenders against the laws, who will be rigorously punished, according to the same, as disturbers of the public peace. Similar prohibitions are also ordered provisionally to the said priests, scholars, and others of the said Society, from continuing any lessons, public or private, on theology, philosophy, or the humanities, in the school, colleges, and seminaries, within the jurisdiction of this Court, under pain of seizure of their tempo- ralities, and under such other pains as may be due.

This decree is to come in force on the 2nd day of August next.

Nevertheless if it should happen that the said priests, scholars,

or others, of the said Society, should assert that they have

obtained any letters patent, verified in this Court, to enable them

' to perform such acts of teaching, the said priests, scholars, and

120

others, of the said Society are permitted to present them to this Court, when in session, within the above named period, in order that the Court on the sight of the same, and according to the opinions of the Attorney-General of the King, may order what is fit to be done. Very express prohibitions are given hereby to all the King's subjects, from frequenting the schools and missions of the said self-called Jesuits, after the expiration of the said period. And it is enjoined on all pupils to leave the colleges of the said Society, at or before the above named period ; and on all fathers, mothers, tutors, guardians, or others, entrusted with the educa- tion of the said scholars, to withdraw them, or cause them to be withdrawn from the said Society, and to concur with respect to each of them in the execution of this decree, as good and faithful subjects of the King, and anxious for his preservation. The same are forbidden in a similar manner to send the said pupils into any of the colleges of the said Society, held beyond the juriscUction of this Court or out of the kingdom. The whole is ordered under pain to the offenders of being considered abetters of the said doc- trine, impious, sacrilegious, homicidal, and tending to endanger the authority and security of the persons of kings. Moreover, offenders will be prosecuted according to the rigour of the law. As to the pupils, the Court declares all, who may continue after the expiration of the said period, to frequent the schools, pensions, colleges, seminaries, novitiates, and lectures of the said self-styled Jesuits in any place whatsoever, incapable of receiving any degrees in the university, and of exercising any municipal or civil offices, or any public function. This Court postpones till Monday, the 9th of August next, the consideration of the precautions, which it may think necessary on the subject of any persons (if such there be), who may offend against this law.

This Court, wishing to provide effectually for the education of youth, orders that within three months without further delay, the mayor and alderman of all the towns within the jurisdiction of this Court, and all the officials of senechaussees, marshals of courts, all royal authorities and members of universities, shall, each separately, send to the King's Attorney- General any pro- posals or memorials, they think fit, to supply the deficiencies which must ensue in this matter, and if they should neglect to do so, this

121

Court, all the Chambers being assembled, will call upon them to answer for the same on the complaint of the said Attorney- General of the King, on Monday, the 5th of July next.

It is ordered by the Court, that within a month and without further delay, counting from this present day, the superiors of the houses of the said Society within the jurisdiction of this court, shall present letters patent, duly registered in the same, authorizing the creation or formation of these congregations, associations, affiliations, retreats, confraternities, or assemblies in the houses of the said Society, in order that on the sight of the same, and on the conclusion of the King's Attorney-General, the Court (the Chambers being assembled) may decree what is found to be due to them. But if they neglect to do this, and the said time has expired without any decree being necessary, the said congregations, associations, affiliations, retreats, confraternities, or assemblies under any denomination, or on any pretext whatso- ever, will remain suppressed and abolished. Nevertheless, be it understood, that from the present time, and by our express inhibitions and prohibitions, all the King's subjects, of whatever quality or rank they may be, are forbidden to associate or affiliate themselves with the said Society, whether by a vow of obedience to the General of the same, or by any other way. Priests, scholars, or others of the said Society are equally forbidden, either to promote or to receive the said associations or congregations ; all under the penalty of legal and extraordinary prosecutions, according to the exigence of the case.

The said priests, scholars, and all others of the said Society are forbidden to endeavour or undertake to withdraw themselves either directly or indirectly, under any pretence whatever, from the complete inspection, superintendence, and jurisdiction of the ordinaries ; and the Edict of 1682 shall be well and duly enforced and executed, according to its form and tenor. It is enjoined on all those, who have copies of the books, teaching the said doc- trines, written by members of the Society, self-styled, of Jesus, and by others, if such are to be found, namely, —

By Emanuel Sa, Jesuit, in his Aphorisms:

By Martin Antoine del Rio, Jesuit, in his Commentary written in 1586 :

122

By Robert Person, otherwise called Andre Philopater, Jesuit : By John Aqua Pontanus, or Bridgewater, Jesuit : By Louis Molina, Jesuit, in his Book De Justitia et Jure : By Alphonse Salmeron, Jesuit, in his fourth volume : By Gregoire de Valence, Jesuit, in his Theological Com- mentary :

By the same Alphonse Salmeron, Jesuit, in his thirteenth volume.

By Charles Scribami, Jesuit, in his Amphitheatre of Honour : By Jean Azor, Jesuit, in his Moral Institutions : By Jaques Gretzer, Jesuit, in his book entitled Vespertilio Hcereticus :

By Jacques Keller, Jesuit, in his book entitled Tyrann'icidium : By Gabriel Yasquez, Jesuit, in his Commentary : By Francois Saurez, Jesuit :

By Jean Lorin, Jesuit, in his Commentary on the Psalms : By Leonard Lessius, Jesuit, in his Treatise T)e Justitia et Jure : By Adam Tanner, Jesuit, in his Scholastic Theology : By Jaques Tyrin, Jesuit, in his Commentary on the Holy Scripture :

By Joseph Jouvenci, Jesuit, in his History of the said Society : Also another edition of the work of Gretzer, Jesuit, entitled Vespcrtilio Hcereticus :

By the Montauzan, Jesuit ; by Colonia, Jesuit ; and by other Jesuits :

To bring them all to the Registrar's Office of this Court, that they may be dealt with according to law.

It is enjoined on all persons having copies of these works, to bring them to the Registry Office of the said Court.

It is ordered that the Attorney- General of the King shall immediately take care to give notice of this Decree to the house of the said Society, which is in the city of Rennes, and within fifteen days (at the latest) to all the other houses, occupied by the said Society within the jurisdiction of this Court, enjoining them to conform themselves to it under the penalties adjudged.

It is ordered that exact copies of this Decree shall be sent to the senechaussees and royal courts of this jurisdiction, to be read there, published, and registered.

123

It is enjoined on the agents of the Attorney-General of the King to perform the same, and to certify the Court of its execu- tion within the month.

It is enjoined on the officials of the said courts to attend, each in his proper office, to the full and entire execution of this present Decree, which must he printed, read, and published, and hung up to view in all necessary places.

Done in Parliament, all the Chambers being assembled, at Rennes, 23rd of December, 1761.

Signed, L. C. PICQUET.

On the 29th of December, 1761, on the rising of the Court, the books, named in the Decree of the 23rd of this month, were (in execution of the said Decree) torn and burnt at the foot of the staircase of the palace, opposite to the great door of entrance, by the public executioner, in the presence of us, Jean Marie le Clavier, Esquire, Civil Registrar-in-chief of the Parliament, accompanied by two bailiffs of the court.

Signed, LE CLAVIER.

124

PERSECUTION OF M. DE LA CHALOTAIS BY THE JESUIT PARTY.

The following history of the persecution of the M. de la Chalotais by the Jesuit party is principally derived from the life of Louis XV.* It will be an interesting and instructive commen- tary on the previous report ; and will prove how bitterly the Jesuits felt the justice of what the Attorney-General of the King of France states as to the lawlessness and implacable cruelty of the great secret society, which he had unmasked.

When the decrees of all the Parliaments of France authorized the suppression of the Jesuits' Society throughout the land, the members of the Order managed to produce great ferments in the kingdom. Bretagne was greatly agitated by the decision of the Parliament and by the Report of M. de la Chalotais against the Jesuits. These regarded him as their most formidable enemy. Not being able to save themselves from the effect of their conduct, they endeavoured, by means of the powerful party they had in Bretagne, to excite trouble, and to organize their factions so as to effect their re- establishment, or at least to revenge them- selves. The meeting at Rennes, in the next year, of the States- General gave them the opportunity. On this occasion the bishops, under the leadership of the Bishop of Rennes, and almost all the orders of monks, were in the Jesuit interest, as well as some members of the nobility. The whole composed a considerable party, supported and protected by the governor of the province, who presided at the meetings of the States-General, and who could dispose of the third estate according to his own wishes.

The object was to invalidate the Decrees which had dissolved

* " Vie Privee de Louis XV,: " a Londres, J. P. Lyon. 1781.

125

the Society in Bretagne, as being an intrusion on the authority of the General Assembly of the three states. A feeling of jealousy was skilfully excited against the Parliament of Bretagne, and thus was brought about a collision of one part of the nation against the other. The partizans were very much excited. Nobles and gentlemen proceeded to menace each other in the theatre (as their hall of assembly is called). The Duke of Aiguillon, the governor, who ought to have interposed to silence these excesses, sat silent, conducting himself in a manner that encouraged them. They came three times to the charge. They read clandestinely letters, true or forged, said to have been written by the late Dauphin, to move their minds in favour of the Jesuits ; and if the course of these disputes had not been interrupted, they would probably have excited a civil war, which might have spread all over the kingdom. Mon. de la Chalotais, stirred up by patriotism, and unwilling to see a work undone of which he had been justly proud, stemmed the torrent of these troubles which the governor (alternately protecting and protected by the Jesuits) was exciting in their favour, by apprizing the Duke de Choiseul* of the object of their combined manoeuvres, which once understood became powerless. But tbe Jesuits thought they had gained a great advantage by making the quarrel personal between the Dukes of Aiguillon and Choiseul.

There were complaints all over the country about the high roads ; the magistrates took them into consideration. Unfor- tunately the same parties combined themselves who coincided in the question of the Jesuits. The Controller- General took a part. Magistrates were accused and dismissed, and calumniated, and the Jesuit party prevailed. Mon. de la Chalotais had opposed their plans, and they, being masters of the field, resolved to ruin him. In the middle of the night, 10th and llth November, 1765, De la Chalotais and his son, and three magistrates, who had been deprived of their offices, were carried away by an armed force in a most scandalous manner, and the king himself was stated to be his accuser. M. de la Chalotais and the others had been repre- sented as enemies to the royal authority and public tranquillity. It was said that they had formed illicit associations, and enter- * At that time, Prime Minister of Louis XV.

126

taincd suspicious correspondences; and that, not satisfied with libelling persons, attached to royalty and the service of the king, they had published writings composed in a domocratic spirit, and held seditious discourses in public, and had sent anonymous letters to the Court, injurious to the person of his majesty, and dangerous to his safety.

On these vague accusations, groundless and monstrous, pro- ceedings were commenced against them. We cannot follow that account fully; but it was suddenly resolved to reconstruct the Parliament, and to obtain letters patent to establish a Royal Commission at St. Malo. We are not informed respecting all their proceedings; but under a new court and a new code of laws, M. de la Chalotais was tried for treason, and was con- demned, and all was arranged at Versailles for the departure of the Commissioners. An executioner actually departed for St. Malo to execute him in the citadel, when the vigorous remonstrances of the Parliament of Paris occasioned a salutary remorse in the mind of the king. Choiseul came in when the king was doubtful and agitated, and succeeded in persuading him to revoke the sentence for the execution. The Parliament of Paris desired to take cognizance of the cause of the troubles in Bretagne, and the prisoner was sent to the Bastile in 1766. They declared him innocent ; but he was still in prison in 1770. Then the king held a Court of Justice. At that time the Parliament of Bretagne had accused the Duke d'Aiguillon* of great malversations and offences. The king now made a speech, and said that the Parlia- ments of Paris and Bretagne had accused the Duke d'Aiguillon of malversations ; that he had resolved to examine the case him- self; that having been shocked and offended on rinding that his own royal mandates had been discussed like other Acts in so disrespectful a manner by the Parliament, he had laid the matter aside, and desired that the affairs of Bretagne should be spoken of no more. He annulled all that had been done against the Duke d'Aiguillon, on account of his lawless conduct in order to support the Jesuits ; and he quashed all the proceedings against

* The Duke d'Aiguillon was the heir of Cardinal Richelieu, and Governor of Bretagne.

127

the Sieurs de la Chalotais and Caraduc. He ordered that the whole affair should be treated as if it had never taken place ; and that no one was to speak of it, or revive it in any way whatever. He commanded every one to keep absolute silence on that subject for ever.

M. de la Chalotais's son succeeded him in his office, and he died at an advanced age, at Rennes, on the 14th July, 1785. The patience with which he had borne his imprisonment, and his courage in upholding freedom of speech and of religion, rendered him worthy of grateful remembrance by his countrymen and by all who value the privileges for which he strove. Ho wrote -'memoirs of his life, and an essay on national education.

128

APPENDIX.

CARDINAL WISEMAN ON THE ABBE DE LA

MENNAIS.

[Extracted from " The Recollections of the four last four Popes," by H. E. Cardinal WISEMAN. Hurst and Blackett, 1858.]

(!N describing the examination of a candidate for theological honours in Rome in 1825, Cardinal Wiseman writes, p. 302) : " I remember well the particular instance before my eyes, that a "monk clothed in white glided in and sat down in the inner " circle ; but, though a special messenger was despatched to him " by the Professors, he shook his head, and declined to become " an assailant. This monk was Cappellari, who, in less than six "years after, was Pope Gregory 16th. He had been sent to " listen and report. Not far from him was seated the Abbe de "La Mennais, whose works he so justly and so witheringly " condemned. Probably it was the only time they were ever " seated together, listening to an English youth vindicating the " faith of which one became the oracle, the other the bitter foe." After referring to the probability, that if Dr. Baines, Bishop of Siga, and coadjutor of the English western district, would have been made a Cardinal in 1826-27, if he had not died, and that Pope Leo 12th was believed to have thought of Dr. Lingard for that honour, the Cardinal writes (p. 335) : " But beyond this "circle, where Dr. Lingard was known and appreciated, it " certainly was not so (thought) ; but a very different person was " then and ever afterwards, and is still, considered to have been " the subject of the Pope's reservation.". . . .

129

" Tliis was the celebrated Abbe de La Mennais. As has been " said, he had been to Rome in 1824, and had been received " with the most marked distinction by the Pope. He was then " in the splendour of his genius, arrayed not only on the side of "faith, but of the highest Roman principles. The boldness of " his declarations on doctrine, the independence of his tone in " politics, the brilliancy of his style, and the depth of thought " which it clothed, put him at the head of religious champions " in France. He had undoubtedly assaulted the flying rear of "the great Revolution, the indifference which lingered behind "it by his splendid ' Traite sur 1' Indifference en Matiere de "Religion;' he had next endeavoured to beat back from occupy- " ing its place, what he considered had led to that fatal epoch " and its desolating results, a kingly Gallicanism. This he had " done by a treatise less popular indeed, but full of historical " research and clearness of reasoning, ' La Doctrine de 1'Eglise " sur 1'Institution des Eveques.'

" It was to this work that the Pope was considered to allude. " The text of the allocution is not accessible, but it was thought " to allude to this book with sufficient point. So matter-of-fact " was the book, so completely the fruit of reading and study, "rather than of genius and intellectual prowess, that it has been " attributed to a worthy brother, who survives the more brilliant "meteor now passed away, in a steady and useful light, &c

" Be this as it may, the more celebrated brother has his " name on the title-page, and had well-nigh won its honours ; " and then he was gathering round him an earnest band, not " only of admirers, but followers, so long as he cleaved to the " truth. Never had the head of a religious school possessed so " much fascinating power to draw the genius, energy, devoted- " ness, and sincerity of ardent youths about him ; never did any " one so well indoctrinate them with his own principles, as to " make them invincible even by his own powers. He was in this " like Tertullian, who, when sound of mind, prescribed medicines "too potent for the subtle poisons which he dealt out in his " heterodox insanity : both laid them too deep, and made them " too strong to be blasted even by their own mines, &c.* * This appears applicable to the Comte Montalembeit.

K

130

" But in him there was long a canker deeply sunk. There " was a maggot in the very core of that beautiful fruit. When, " in 1837, he finished his ecclesiastical career by his ' Affaires " de Rome/ the worm had only fully writhed itself out, and "wound itself, like the serpent of Eden, round the rind. But it " had been there all along, &c. Often has one heard good men " say in Rome, what a happy escape the church had experienced " from one, who turned out so worthless !"

THE ABBE DE LA MENNAIS ON THE ORDER

OF JESUITS.

[Extract from "Les Affaires de Rome," by M. L'Abbe de La MENNAIS.

1837.]

[THE first part of this Extract is a repetition of what was published in the " L'Avenir," a journal of which the editors were (see p. 83,) the Abbe La Mennais, the Abbe Gerbot, the Abbe Robacher, the Abbe Lacordaire, P. de Poux, Ad. Bartels, The Comte Montalembert, Daguerre, and d'Ault Dumenil. The Pope disapproved, and the Church and the French Government seized and suppressed its publications. On the accession of Gregory the 16th to the Pontificate (he had been a Jesuit) in February 1821, three of the editors went to Rome to present a memorial to the Pope, to declare their opinions, and ask his approbation. These three were (see p. 115) the Comte Montalembert, Lacordaire, and La Mennais. (Page 22.) "But the animosity of the Jesuits was of older "date. They never forgave the following passage in one of " our publications : ' This is neither the time nor the place in ' which we ought to judge the company of Jesus, and to seek 'for truth, pure but severe, amidst the calumnies invented by 'hatred, or panegyrics inspired by enthusiasm. Nothing can cbe more absurd, more iniquitous, or more revolting than the

131

'greatest part of the accusations of which they have been the ' objects. No part of society can be found, whose members ' are more worthy to be admired for their zeal and respected ' for their virtues : still we are not of opinion that this institu- ' tion, so holy in itself, is at present exempt from defects and 'inconveniences, of a very serious nature, and that it is ' sufficiently in accordance with the actual state of the world, ' its feelings and its wants : but we repeat, this is neither the ' place nor the time to argue this great question ; and we should 'feel the deepest sorrow if any word should fall from us, which ' could afflict these venerable men at the moment, when 'fanaticism and impiety are persecuting the whole Church ' through their name.' : When they shall have left this trans- itory scene, Jesuits will become nothing but a subject for history, and its impartial judgment will be obliged to treat them with more severity than we will exercise towards them. If we should endeavour to define the peculiar charac- teristic which has distinguished this society from its first formation, and which has rendered it constantly the object of so much praise and so much blame, we believe it will be found in its original principle of the abnegation of individuality on the part of each of its members, in order to augment the strength and the unity of the body. Among the Jesuits, action, and even thought, is subjected to obedience, and absolute obedience. One chief, called their General, and a few assistants, compose the whole government of the Company. They are its reasons and its will. The rest follow passively, blindly, the impulse that is given to them : nothing is more forcibly inculcated by the precepts of the founder than is this entire abnegation of self ! Such is the sacrifice required from each candidate for admission ; and what is the consequence ? Man may try as he will, it is impossible for him to abjure himself to that degree : his most sincere endeavour for this purpose ends merely in a transfer: he can only displace that, which he endeavours in vain to destroy ; his whole being is only transported into the complicated existence of the society of which he is a member, with which he united, and into which he has fused himself. In it he lives ; he loves himself in it

K 2

132

uloiie ; and that self-love becomes his first duty, and it becomes more ardent and more active, because it is the only vent, which his conscience allows him for the gratification of his own satisfaction ; and because this being now wholly under the direction of the commands, which have become his only law, unless they should be in direct violation of the laws of Grod, he has become divested of moral responsibility. Thus, the passions restrained by severe laws, inasmuch as they concern himself, are to him hallowed, but not destroyed or corrected. They pass after a fashion into the service of the body, which directs and employs them to gain its own ends : if its objects are good and honourable, such will also be the aim of each member. But the motive which impels them all is the aggrandizement of the society in reputation, power, wealth, or glory. There is no personal, but great collective ambition ; no personal desire for wealth, but a cupidity and a collective pride that knows no bounds. This renders the society somewhat anti-social. One man, so concentrated in self, would be .a model of egotism, and whatever might be his object, he would be a unit separated from the human race ; and such is the Society of the Jesuits : they have an existence apart. Meddling with every thing, they belong to nothing. They raise an undefined but insurmountable barrier between themselves and humanity. They may be touched at all points, but they never unite ; and this is one of the causes of the feeling of vague suspicion, with which they have, always been regarded.

The effect of this innate ceaseless desire to obtain influence has been to render them often unscrupulous as to the means of obtaining it, and has rendered them liable to the imputation of seeking universal dominion. We believe that the dominion they desire to establish is Catholicism, but that this dominion shall be exclusively of their creation ; and whoever should in- terfere in the mission, they have allotted to themselves, and does not humbly range himself under their direction, excites their jealousy, becomes obnoxious to them, and they subject him to a thousand tracasseries and accusations, which they will remorsely sustain against him.

As these men cannot reign in their own society, or exercise

133

upon it the influence they may desire, either by science or by intellect, they endeavour to act out of it ; they endeavour to circumvent men in power ; they steal about kings, and their ministers and favourites, and try to reign through them. To gain them, they intrigue, and fawn, and flatter, and learn to creep rather under the earth than upon the earth, and wind and double in every sense, in order to govern the world by using the sceptre of the masters, &c.

Between the despotism they live under, and the despotism which they exercise wherever they can, there is a secret attrac- tion, a natural interchange of sympathy, &c.

Never did any one arriving at Rome on important business meet with a less favourable reception.* The Court of Rome does not generally act thus by accident, by caprice, or from mere im- pulse. Let us explain what occasioned this.

For twenty years consecutively we employed ourselves to defend the spiritual power of the Pope, and, to speak frankly, we do not think the cause suffered in our hands. Witness the decay of Gallican principles among the Catholics of France now,f compared with the opinions which existed forty years ago. So long as we confined ourselves to the defence of the spiritual power of Home, without committing herself to an open approbation, she encouraged our efforts and applauded their success ; and in vain did diplomacy, when our work " On the progress of the Revolution " appeared, solicit some words that might be construed into disapproval or disavowal ; they were refused.

But so soon as we declared wishes which might militate against the system, with which the temporal interests of Rome are connected, and that action had given weight to our wishes, the former benevolence with which we had been regarded, was succeeded by lively irritation.

* See p. 115. t In 1837.

134 GALLICAN OPINIONS.

Extracted from the Publications of the Protestant Alliance.

[The book from which the extracts now published have been made are in the Office of the Protestant Alliance, 7, Serjeants' Inn, Fleet Street, London, and will be produced to any one who desires to verify them.]

" Ext raits des Assertions Dangereuses et Pernicieuses, fyc.," published by the command of the Parliament of France, and presented to the King, March 5, 1762. This collection of ex- tracts, from 147 Jesuit authors of celebrity, was collated and verified by Commissioners appointed by the French Parliament, consisting of five Princes of the blood, four peers of France, seven presidents of the court, thirteen councillors of the grand chamber, and fourteen other functionaries. The decree states that the object of the extracts was " to prove to the king the " perversity of the doctrine, constantly maintained, and without "interruption, by the priests, scholars, and others, styling " themselves of the Society of Jesuits, in a multitude of works "reprinted a great number of times, in public theses, and in " lesson books (cahiers) for the young, from the origin of the "said Society to this very moment, with the approbation of " theologians, the permission of superiors and generals, and the " eulogy of other members of the said Society : a doctrine, the "consequence of which would be to destroy the natural law, " that rule of life which God himself has written in the heart " of man ; and, as a natural result, to break all the bonds of " civil society, in authorising theft, lying, perjury, impurity the " most criminal, and, generally, every passion and every crime, " by teaching secret compensation, equivocation, mental re- " servation, probability, and philosophical sin ; to destroy every " feeling of humanity among men, by favouring homicide and " parricide ; to annihilate the royal authority and the principles " of subjection and obedience, by degrading the origin of this " sacred authority, which came from God himself, and by

135

" altering its nature, which chiefly consists in the entire in- " dependence of every power upon earth ; to excite by the " abominable doctrine of regicide in the heart of faithful subjects, " and, above all, of those, who compose the French nation, most " lively and well-founded alarms for the safety even of the sacred " person of the kings, under which they have the happiness to " live ; in fact, to overturn the principles and practice of religion, " and to substitute in its stead all kinds of superstition by favour- " ing magic, blasphemy, irreligion, and idolatry."

(Extracted from the Publications of the Protestant Alliance.)

M. Gfarnier Pages thus describes the Jesuits : — " In every Italian town, as in every European nation, there was, during 1848, a general rising against the Company of Jesus, whose interference in the domain of politics has never ceased to be of the most active kind. In the eyes of the people they exist wherever despotism exists, and disappear wherever liberty appears. Auxiliaries of absolute kings, they are the adversaries of all pro- gress. They maintain ignorance, and oppose light. Devoted to the past, they are the enemies of the future ; so much so, that were it possible, they would even prevent time from advancing. They know but one law, one faith, and one morality ; and that law, faith, and morality, they call authority. To a superior they submit life and conscience. To their Order they sacrifice individuality. They are neither French, Italians, Germans, nor Spaniards. They are not citizens of any country. They are Jesuits only. They have but one family, one fortune, and one end, and all three are included in the word Com- munity."*

In England,, and other countries, the Jesuits exist under differ- ent names, such as the " Adorers of Jesus," " Redemptorists"

* Quoted in the Moriiiinj St«r. April la, 1861.

136

"Brothers of the Christian Doctrine," "Brothers of the Congrega- tion of the Holy Virgin,"* " Fathers of the Faith" " St. Vincent de Pmd,"-f etc. The Jesuit has adapted himself to the customs, habits, and even religion of the people of a country in order to promote the object of his society. " In a Protestant country he is a Protestant ; in a Catholic country he is a Catholic ; and in a Mussulman country he is a Mussulman."^:

One of the most powerful and dangerous of these affiliated Jesuitical Societies is that of St. Vincent de Paul ; it has its branches in all parts of the world, and is computed to comprise 700,000 members.^ Its object is ostensibly to benefit the poor ; but it is, in fact, a religio -political organization. It has its local, central, and general councils ; quarterly meetings, conferences, fetes, and pilgrimages ; it has passports and circular letters for its members. [| It adapts itself to all classes and conditions — addresses itself to the scholar, the soldier, the mechanic, the apprentice, the labourer, to the mother and the daughter, for all of whom it issues a suitable publication.^

This body, which has proved to be dangerous to the well-being of every State in Europe, is putting forth prodigious efforts in this country, and, notwithstanding the law forbids the residence of Jesuits in England,** numerous affiliated societies, together with a provincial of the order, exist here in defiance of the law.

* Startling Facts, p. 5, published at the " Express Office," Galway.

f Lea Jesidtes, by Charles Habeiieck, Paris, 1860, p. 22. J Ibid, p. 7. § Ibid, p. 30. || Ibid, p. 28.

^ Ibid, p. 27. ** 9 Geo. iv. c. 7.

137

FREDERICK THE GREAT OF PRUSSIA AND THE

JESUITS.

[Extracted from the History of the Jesuits, by Gr. B. NICOLINI.— H. G. Bohn, London, 1854.]

CHAPTER XVIII. 1773 — 1814. — THK JESUITS DURING THEIR SUPPRESSION. (Page 422.)

THE Brief of Suppression, as our readers may have seen, made a provision by which the Jesuits might, as secular priests and indi- viduals, 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 con- ceal the Ignatian device under the new title of Fathers of the Faith, Fathers of the Cross, etc., but the greatest part, the most daring and restless, would not submit to the Brief of Suppression, impugning 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 a part of the still existing company of Jesus, regardless, as we have shown they always were, of the injuries they may cause to the faith, they declared war against Rome, against the Church, and surpassed even the school of Voltaire in audacity, in mocking, and insulting a virtuous Pope.* 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 regard 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

* St. 1'hebt, p. Of.

138

of the Lutheran, 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 comhat 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 on defending it. ...

We have already seen that Ricci (General of the Jesuits) 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 of June, 1769, to his royal friend, " that the Cordelier, Ganganelli, does not promise sweetmeats (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 by special 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

139

might prove more faithful than they had been in the last war in 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 XI V., 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 that 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 on your dominions."* 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 pro- claimed that the Fathers were under his protection. Then all throughout Silesia sprung up a great number of houses and colleges, and the Jesuits assembled here from all quarters ; it was on this occasion that the old Voltaire, laughing at his quondam disciples' 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. "f

Pages 427, 428. The accurate and impartial historian of the fall of the Jesuits, in an admirable chapter, explains the conduct of Frederick, in supporting the Jesuits, by the fact that the Prussian monarch had got angry with the Philosophers, when

* D'Alembert to Frederick, April 24, 1774. f St. Priest, p. 144.

140

the latter, uot 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 to protect it, while attacking religion and priestcraft ; but when they (the Philo- sophers) leaving the churches and cloisters, penetrated into the antechambers and state-rooms, and their attacks became personal, then the great world, who had treated Christ and His 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 " Systeme de la Nature," Frederick's indignation knew no bound. 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 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." * All this is admirably well said ; and by the answer, which the King of Prussia made to the " Systeme 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.

CHAPTER XIX., page 436. — RE -ESTABLISHMENT.

[The Author, after describing the indiscreet haste of the restored Sovereigns of Europe in 1814 to obliterate all traces of the Revolution, thus continues : — ]

. . . . " The Jesuits, skilful in profiting by every circumstance, then stepped forward and offered to those sovereigns their uncon- ditional services. Already after their suppression, and during the

* St. Priest, p. 155.

141

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 over- throw, 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 extin- guished every sense of morality and religion, all were to be attributed to the suppression of the Order. They asserted that the Encyclopedists, 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 further, give the answer Gioberti makes to their assertions. He grants that the Encyclopaedists 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 bases of all states and govern- ments, in fact, by substituting for religion their own sect, had shaken all principles of morality, religion, and good government, and had, indeed, brought the Encyclopaedists 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."*

* Vol. III., p. 30.

HOW THE JESUIT LEAVEN WORKS IN THE UNITED STATES.

[Extracted from " The Tablet " of January 21st, I860.]

RELIGION IN AMERICA — COSMOPOLITAN ALMANACK, 1860. Baltimore : John Murphy and Co.

THERE is nothing in the history of the world like the progress of the United States, and there is nothing in the progress of the United States like the progress of the Roman Catholic Church. Built on a profoundly Protestant basis, our foundation-stones were not laid without difficulty in the polity of the Pilgrim Fathers. At the time of the Revolution, Maryland was the only State in which it could be said that a Roman Catholic was really and truly on the same legal level with his fellow-citizens. Even in the neighbouring State of Virginia, whose planters to this day retain the marks of the Cavalier, as New England reproduces the type of the Roundhead, the Declaration of Independence found

the Irish Penal Code To the Quakers of Philadelphia

William Penn wrote it as a reproach, that they even suffered " the scandal of the Mass to be publicly celebrated." .... One relic of those laws does even subsist. In New Hampshire there is a Protestant Test Act by which no Catholic can hold

office

But — There were only 24 priests in the United States when King George the Third recognised their independence ; and in this 84th year of their independence, there are 2235. Perhaps there were a dozen churches, and twice as many stations and chapels of occasional call. There are now 2385 Catholic churches built throughout the Union, equal in dimensions and decorations to the parochial churches of the Old World ; while some of the new cathedrals exhibit the gigantesque character of the country with a solemnity and grace which do not belong to it : but there are besides, 1128 stations and chapels, at which wayfaring priests

143

attend, as often as they can, small and scattered congregations. At the commencement of the century there was one ecclesiastical Province, one Diocese, and one Bishop, in the whole Union. . . . There are now, between Baltimore and San Francisco, seven Archbishops, presiding over seven provinces, which contain 43 suffragan Dioceses, as well as 3 Vicariats Apostolic. Fifty years ago, a few Jesuists and Franciscans appeared upon the edge of the backwoods, like videttes of the great religious orders. . . . There are now in the United States 55 religious houses — 24 of men, 31 of women : they represent nearly all the orders, ancient and modern; the Benedictine, the Augustinian, the Franciscan, the Dominican, the Jesuit, the Redemptorist, the Passionist, the Oblate — The Sister of the Sacre Cceur to teach, the Sister of Charity and Mercy to visit the Sick ; the Sister of the Good Shepherd to reclaim the abandoned ; and, latest type of the original and everlasting energy of the Church, the black Oblate Sisters of Providence and Sisters of the Precious Blood, sitting amid their

coloured schools A Protestant authority estimates our

present numbers at 3,177,140 : but there is good reason to believe that they amount to at least three millions and a half. At the same time, all the intermediary institutions of the Church — the Confraternities, the Associations, the Conferences into which so much (Roman) Catholic vitality is thrown in an age, whose chief characteristic is its power of organization and combination,

are everywhere ramified and gratifying themselves There

are 89 colleges and academies of males, some of them Catholic universities with State sanction, and almost all of them worked by the religious orders. There are 202 female academies also, mainly in connection with conventual institutions .... But the Christian Brothers are in the United States also. The last return states that there are 472 parochial schools, which impart instruction to

upwards of 86,000 pupils The Conferences of St.

Vincent de Paul are busy on the wharves and in the rugged defiles of embryo icestern cities. The Catholic Young Men's Society gathers its gradual nucleus to discuss the opinions of Orestes

Brownson, or the future of Catholic interests in America

We note with particular interest the spread of Confraternities of Intercessory Prayer, such as in France, Germany, and England

144

have given the Catholic revival of the century the practical faith and the miraculous force of the early Christians. For example, the Bishop of Alton, a new diocese cut out of the south of Illinois, proclaims the establishment of the Arch- Confraternity of the Most Holy and Immaculate Heart of Mary, for the con- version of sinners throughout the see Applications for

faculties may be made to the Bishop, who obtained lately from Paris all the necessary privileges from the venerable founder of

the Confraternity But to no son of the Universal Church

(than to the American Roman Catholic) is St. Ignatius Loyola's advice to the Society of Jesus more applicable — " Pray as if everything depended upon prayer, and act as if everything depended upon action." We cannot say there is great gain of souls in the United States, for as yet there are only reddish streaks of the dawn of a Catholic movement amid the masses of its heretical and infidel population. We know, unhappily, that there has been a great loss of souls born to the Catholic birth- right of the Seven Sacraments (In alluding to the Irish

emigrants, the author writes of them) " Those who go, go to join

friends, who have a happier homestead The Church, which

has such a laity — and its Bishops and Priests, are worthy to lead such a part n — need not fear for the future, though the soundings are strange and the landmarks dim in that tumultuous tide of fierce democracy. It stands erect amidst the ' debris ' of the Protestant heresy, which, loosed from the prop of European State Establishment, crash against each other like the pack-ice in a Polar sea. The native American mind goes beyond Protestantism. There is Mormonism at the Great Salt Lake, or the Free Iron Church in the City for the Pagan of the sty. The more philosophic and spiritual Pagan summons the Devil to turn tables and carry messages to the dead. PROTESTANTISM proper seems to be con- stantly galvanized into a sort of unnatural life by the art of hysterical revival. HERESY DOES NOT DECAY THERE AS IN THE OLD WORLD. IT is IN A STATE OF WHOLESALE DISENTEGRATION,

LEADING TOWARDS A CHAOS, OF WHICH IT WILL BE THE CHURCH'S WORK IN THE COURSE OF THE NEXT CENTURY TO MAKE A COSMOS.

145

HOW THE JESUITS CREPT INTO ENGLAND AND

IRELAND ; MR. O'CONNELL'S CONNECTION

WITH THEM.

f Extracted from " The Jesuits," an Historical Sketch by E.W. GRINFIELD, M.A. — -Seeley, Fleet Street, and Hanover Street, London. 1853.]

CHAPTER XII., p. 296.

" NOTHING can be more instructive at the present moment than to hear the Jesuit historian (M. Cretineau Joly) describing the reappearance of the Society in England after their long exclusion. He tells us (vol. vi., p. 80) that the English, after having passed through a sea of blood, established that liberty of conscience, which could enable them to re-admit the Jesuits to their shores. He recounts the origin of their missions at Liverpool, Bristol, Preston, and Norwich, and where they were received, he says without a murmur. Thomas Weld received them, as the Gentle- men of Liege, at Lulworth, and afterwards settled them at Stonyhurst. All this took place, be it remembered, long before the Jesuits were recalled to Rome. In May, 1803, they prevailed on Pius VII. to sanction their college at Stonyhurst, and appoint Father Marmaduke Stone the Provincial Rector. On their restoration in 1814, Stonyhurst was formally confided to the Order. ' Pitt,' says the historian, ' had neither time nor will to oppose the re-establishment of the Institute.' No sooner were they established at Stonyhurst than they began to quarrel with the Vicars Apostolic. But Milner, the Ultramontane of Win- chester, took part with the Society. This bickering between the Vicars- General and the Jesuits had long been carried on, and will explain the origin of the late revolution by changing the Vicars- General into territorial Bishops. Their admiring historian pro-

L

146

ceeds to relate, with a Jesuit smile, the good nature and liberality of the English Parliament in gradually removing their restrictions till everything was consummated by Catholic emancipation. Nor is his account of Ireland less instructive. It was some time before the Society was welcomed in Ireland with the same kindness which it had experienced in Britain. Amidst all her disturbances and miseries the Jesuits, however, according to Cretineau Joly, were her comforters and apostles ; they wiped away her tears and rendered her as happy as O'Connell himself could desire or express. At length Father Kenney, in 1819, was inspired with the idea of establishing at Clengowes, near Dublin, a National College. It was then that the voice of their favourite pupil, Daniel O'Connell, was first heard in ecstasy. Clengowes was opened in 1822 amidst an applauding multitude. The Society and O'Connell were in perfect harmony. ' The Jesuits,' says Cretineau, ' undertook the cause of education, and O'Connell that of freedom.' (Vol. vi., p. 95.)

"In 1829 their numbers and influence had so increased, it was judged expedient to form Ireland into a separate Province, under the charge of a district Provincial. Father St. Leger was elected, and they now became the right hand of ultramontane bishops. In 1840 the Jesuits, according to Cretineau Joly, on their third centenary, celebrated their own triumphs with those of Father Matthew. In the following year they opened their college of Francis Xavier in Dublin. Their historian cannot refrain from expressing his admiration and surprise that the Order should have been thus graciously received and welcomed by Protestants, while it had been so roughly treated by Papists."

147

SEVERAL HISTORICAL FACTS CONNECTED WITH THE ORDER OF JESUITS, AND COMMENTS

THEREON.

[Extracted from the Publications of the Protestant Alliance ; and from a Pamphlet entitled " Startling Facts." — Bulwark, April 1, 1863.]

THERE is every reason to apprehend that the subject of Jesuitism, which is at this moment engaging the attention and awakening the alarm of almost all the principal countries in Europe, is but little understood, if not altogether unknown, by the great majority of the people of this country. We would therefore beg attention to the subjoined paper, containing a chronological table, with historical notes, compiled from various sources, and showing at once the countries from which the Jesuits have been banished, and the cause of their expulsion.

The annexed statistics will shew how inimical Jesuitism is to every form of government which is not based on its principles. If it was found necessary to expel the Jesuits from Roman Catholic countries on account of their " dangerous seditions, tumults, dis- cords, scandals, dissensions, entirely breaking up the bonds of Christian charity," (Bull of Suppression, Clement XIV.) — if Jesuitism was so antagonistic to the system which engendered it — what are we to look for as the fruits of that system in a Pro- testant country, the laws and institutions of which are diametrically opposed to the spirit of Jesuitism ?

The Jesuits have been expelled —

From Saragossa, in ...... 1555

From La Palintine, in . . . . . 1558

From Vienna, in . . . . . 1566

From Avignon, in ...... 1570

From Antwerp, from Portugal and Segovia, in 1578

L 2

148

From England, in

From England again, in

From England again, in 1586

From Japan, in .

From Hungary and Transylvania, in . . 1588

From Bordeaux, in

From the whole of France,* in . 1594

From Holland, in

From the city of Touron and Berne, in . 1597

From England,f in 1602

* The following are the words of the decree, dated 29th December, 1594, for the banishment of the Jesuits from France :— They were declared to be

" CORRUPTORS OF YOUTHS, DISTURBERS OF THE PUBLIC REPOSE, AND ENEMIES OF THE KlNG AND STATE."

The following is the account given us of the attempted murder of Henry IV. of France, December, 1594, by Ms Prime Minister :— " I was present," says the Duke de SuUy, " and approached in agony of grief, seeing the King

all covered with blood The King removed our apprehensions,

and we perceived immediately that his lip only was wounded. The parricide was discovered : he was a scholar named John Chatel, and readily answered when he was interrogated, THAT HK CAME FROM THE COLLEGE OF THE JESUITS,

ACCUSING THOSE FATHERS WITH BEING THE AUTHORS OF HIS CRIME." — See Vol.

ii., page 37.

The Parliament of Paris ordered the erection of a column in commemo- ration of this plot, which they declared to have " sprung from the pestilent heresy of that pernicious sect, the Jesuits, who, concealing the most abomi- nable crimes under the guise of piety, had publicly taught the assassination of kings, and attempted the life of Henry the Fourth."

See this famous inscription in De Argintre's History, and many other French histories.

f Extract from the decree issued 15th November, 1602, by order of Elizabeth of England, for the banishment of the Jesuits from her do- minions : —

She declared that the Jesuits had been " the advisers of the new con- spiracies formed against her person, had sought to instigate her subjects to insurrection, had carried on monopolies in order to aid such revolt, had stirred up foreign Princes to associate for her destruction, had engaged in all the affairs of her kingdom, and had undertaken by their discourses and in their writings to dispose of her crown."

The following is an extract from the celebrated memorial addressed to the Pope by the Roman Catholics of England, in reference to the above

149

From England again, in .... 1604

From Denmark, Thorn, and Venice,* in . 1606

From Venice again, in . . . . 1612

From the kingdom of Amura, in Japan in . 1613

From Bohemia, in . . . . . 1618

From Moravia, in . . . . . 1619

From Naples and the Netherlands, in • . 1622

From China and India, f in . . . . 1623

decree, found in 1602, in which they complained that " these Fathers were the sole authors of the troubles ichinh agitate the English Church; that before their arrival no Catholic had been accused of high treason, but as soon as they appeared everything was changed ; that since their political ambition had burst forth they had set a price upon kingdoms, and set i;p crowns for sale." See this memorial more at length in Les Jesuites Criminals de Le'nje Majesti.

* The Jesuits were expelled from Venice in 1606, in consequence of " the Senate having discovered that THE JESUITS HAVING AVAILED THEMSELVES OF

THE OFFICE OF CONFESSION TO DISCOVER THE SECRETS OF FAMILIES and the TALENTS AND DISPOSITIONS OF INDIVIDUALS, BY THE same PROCESS KNEW THE STRENGTH, RESOURCES, AND SECRETS OF THE STATE, AN ACCOUNT OF WHICH THEY SENT EVERY SIX MONTHS TO THEIK GENERAL BY A PROVINCIAL

OR VISITOR." — See these facts stated at length in De Thou's History ; vol. xii.

M. De Canaze, the French Ambassador at Venice, in stating to Henry IV. and his ministers the injuries done by the Jesuits to the Republic, confirms the above facts, as stated by the French Historian De Thou. He says that at Padau and Brescia, where they had not time to burn their papers, "Me- moirs were found relating rather to the monarchy of the world than to the Kingdom of Heaven," and concludes thus : — "/ read of no other religious order which has pursued this course : IT is FOR PRINCES AND TRUE PATRIOTS TO OPEN THEIR EYES." — See vol. iii. of Ms Letters and Memoirs.

f The following explains why the Jesuits were expelled from Cbina and India : —

The Secretary to the Congregation de iiropacjanda fide expresses himself thus, in a memorial presented to the congregation, on the 6th December, 1677, respecting the cruel treatment which the Vicars Apostolic had received from the Jesuits :—

" Your Excellencies will have learnt from statements and letters trans- mitted by confidential hands, and from the last accounts on the subject of which you have already received a copy, that the Jesuits' persecutions of the Vicars Apostolic and their Missionaries have always continued from the commencement to this hour ; that the Jesuits have never ceased to thwart

150

From Malta, in . . . 1634

From Russia, in . . . . 1723

From Savoy, in . . . 1729

From Paraguay,* in . . 1733

From Portugal,! in . . . 1759

and obstruct the Mission in the kingdoms of Torquin, Cochin China, Cam- brya, and Syam ; in a word, in every place where these Fathers resided."

The Jesuits have not contented themselves with persecuting the Mission- aries of the Holy See in the East ; they have done the same in Europe, at the Court of France and that of Spain, at the Court of Portugal, in Flanders, and even at Rome, so that this persecution is NOT the work of individuals alone, BUT OF THE WHOLE SOCIETY, AND THERE is LITTLE DOUBT THAT THE GENERAL of the SOCIETY had HIS SHARE IN IT."

See this memorial at the beginning of the 7th vol. of Anecdotes sur les Affaires de la Chine.

* From a statistical table of the Missionary towns of the Jesuits in Para- guay, drawn up at the time of their expulsion in 1733, it appears that the items of their temporalities in man and beast were as follows : —

FAMILIES ••• 21,036

SOULS 88,864

Farm Cattle 724,093

Oxen 46,936

Horses 34_,725

Mares 64,353

Mules 13,905

Asses 7,505

Sheep 230,384

Goats 592

See Robertson's Letters on Paraguay, ii., 50, Appendix.

f Extract from the manifesto of the King of Portugal, addressed to the bishops of his kingdom, in 1759,, page 41 : —

" It cannot be but the licentiousness introduced by the Jesuits, in which the three grand features are, falsehood, murder, and perjury, should not give a new character to the morals of the EXTERNI, as the Jesuits call those who are not of their order, as well as the internal government of the Nostri, or their own body. In fact, since these Religions have introduced into Christian and Civil Society those perverted doctrines which render murder innocent — which sanctify falsehood — authorise perjury — deprive the laws of their power — destroy the submission of subjects — allow individuals the liberty of calum- niating, killing, lying, and forswearing, as their consciences may dictate, which remove the fear of human and divine laws, and permit a man to redress

151

From France again, in .... 1764

From Spain and the Two Sicilies, in . . 1767 From the Duchy of Parma and Malta, in . 1768 From all Christendom by the bull of Clement xiv.,*in 1773

his own grievances without applying to the magistrate, it is easy to see, with- out much penetration, that Christian and Civil Society could not subsist without a miracle. It was to be expected that such pernicious maxims would most effectually dissolve the strongest bonds which could be found for pre- serving the commerce and union of mankind."

1 Extract from the Bull of Suppression of Clement the 14th :— " I have omitted 110 care, no pains, in order to arrive at a thorough know- ledge of the origin, the progress, and the actual state of that regular Order, commonly called the ' Company of Jesus.'

" 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 under the necessity of EXPELLING AND DRIVING

FROM THEIR STATES, KINGDOMS, AND PROVINCES THOSE VERY COMPANIONS

OF JESUS, persuaded that there remained no other remedy to so great evils and this step was necessary, in order to prevent the Christians from rising one against another, and massacring each other in the very bosom of our common mother the Holy Church."

(Again, he speaks of the following Popes as having censured the order) : —

Urban vii., Clement ix. x. xi. and xii., Alexander vii. and viii., Innocent ix. xii. and xiii, and Benedict xiv.

He also charges the society with " adopting certain idolatrous ceremonies in certain places, in contempt of those justly approved by the Catholic Church."

And he then proceeds : — " After a mature deliberation, we do of our cer- tain knowledge, and the fulness of our apostolic power, SUPPRESS AND ABOLISH THE SAID COMPANY. We deprive it of aU activity what- ever—of its houses, schools, colleges, hospitals, lands, and in short of every 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 Sec or otherwise.

152

During the period of their suppression (from 1773 till 1814) the Jesuits assumed various names and characters — such as "Adorers of Jesus," "Redemptorists," "Brothers of the Christian Doctrine;" " Brothers of the Congregation of the Holy Virgin," " Fathers of Faith," etc. etc.

They were expelled : —

From Russia, in . . . . 1776

From France in . . . . . 1804

From one of the Swiss Cantons (Grisson), about

the year ..... 1804

From Naples in . . . . . . 1810

From France again, in .... 1806

On the 7th of August, 1814, Pius VII. ordered the publicreading of the bull in which he restored the " Order of Jesus." He asserts in it that he restores the order at the warmest request of the whole Catholic world ; while, in truth, France, Germany, and Holland only learnt for the first time, from the Papal bull itself, that they had ever evinced an anxiety for their restoration. It is even a notorious fact that the Emperor Francis I. shewed great reluctance to comply with the Papal bull, and that also the Prince Regent of Portugal and Brazil (afterwards King John VI.) had formally protested (1815) against the restoration of the order, and openly declared that he would never tolerate the Jesuits in his dominions, nor even enter into negotiations with the Holy See on the subject.

It was, in fact, only Spain, Italy, and a few of the cantons of Switzerland that rejoiced at the restoration of the order, and for some years afterwards it was indeed only in these countries legally acknowledged by the State, while in the rest of Europe the govern- ments were extremely slow in complying with the Holy Father's will. For further particulars the reader is referred to Dr. Michelsen's work on " Modern Jesuitism."

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 authority may be, as well in tilings spiritual as temporal."

See the entire Bull, translated in the " Advocate' for 1815, vol iii. page 153, &c. &c.

153

The following table shows the countries from which the Jesuits

have been expelled from the time of their restoration in 1814 to the present moment : —

From Moscow, St. Petersburg, and the Canton

of Soleure, in . . . . . 1816

From Belgium, in .... 1818

From Brest by its inhabitants, in October . 1819

From Russia for ever, 20th March* . . 1820

From Spain in 1820

From the Cathedral at Rouen, by the people,

in March 1825

From all the public and private schools in

Belgium, in September .... 1826

From Eight Colleges in France, Ifith Junef . 1828

From Great Britain and Ireland, April 13thJ 1829

From France, ...... 1831

From entering Saxony, by a law passed in

September . . . . . . 1831

From Portugal, 24th of May . . . 1834

From Spain, in July ..... 1835

From Rheims, by its inhabitants, December . 1838

From entering Lucerne .... 1842

* Extract from the celebrated ukase issued by the Emperor Alexander of Russia, dated 13th of March 1820, ordering the banishment of the Jesuits for ever from his dominions : —

" They, the Jesuits, plant a stern intolerance in the minds of their votaries . . . They destroy social happiness by dividing families. Their efforts are directed solely to their own interest and promotion ; and their statutes furnish their consciences with a justification of eveiy refractory and illegal action."

f From eight Colleges — namely, Aix, Billon, Dole, Forcalquier, Montmo- rillon, St. Acheul, and St. Ann. To this decree, for expelling the Jesuits from the above-named Colleges, Pope Leo XII. declares that " he saw in those decrees no violation of the episcopal rights ; and that he did not there- fore think himself justified in forcing upon France ecclesiastical societies which had been expelled by the law of the land."

I Extract from the "Relief Bill" of 1829, 10 Geo. 4, cap. 7-29— "And be it further enacted, that if any JESUIT or member of any such religious order, community, or society as aforesaid, shall, after the commencement of this Act, come into this realm, he shall be deemed and taken to be guilty of

154

From Lucerne for ever, 13th of February 1845

From France again, . . . 1845

From the whole of Switzerland, 6th September 1847 From Bavaria, 17th February From their establishments in Sardinia, 2nd

March ... .

From Naples, llth of March From the Papal States, on the 29th of March From Linz, 10th April .... From Vienna, on the 16th April . . . From Styria and the Arch-Duchy of Austria

May 8th

From the Austrian Empire, 8th May .

From Galicia in the month of July

From Sardinia on the 19th of July, and

From Sicily, on the 21st of July . . . j

From Paraguay, on the 28th of June* . . 1858

From several Italian States .... 1859

And from Sicily, in Junef . . . . 1860

The following important extract is taken from the Quarterly Review, No. 134, p. 586 :-

" No country could ever yet tolerate Jesuits in its bosom without certain destruction. Even Romanism itself, again and again, by the mouth of Romish bishops, and Romish sovereigns, and the

misdemeanour, and being thereof lawfully convicted, SHALL BE SENTENCED

AND ORDERED TO BE BANISHED FROM THE UNITED KINGDOM FOR THE TERM OF HIS NATURAL LIFE."

* The following are the words of the decree for the banishment of the Jesuits from Paraguay, in 1858 :—

"Article 1. The decree of the 28th of June, 1858, is abrogated. 2. The Fathers of the Company of the Jesuits shah1 leave the territory of the Re- public within the shortest space possible, and not retiirn without special permission of the Government."

f The following decree was published at Palermo, in June 1860, for the banishment of the Jesuits from the Island of Sicily : —

"Considering the Jesuits and Leguorians have, during the said period of Bourbon domination, been the most energetic abettors of despotism, in virtue of the powers conferred upon me, it is decreed the corporation of regulars existing in Sicily under the different names of societv and houses of Jesuits

155

wisest and best of Romish philosophers and Romish universities, and Popes themselves, has warned us of the fact."

REMARKS.

The list of expulsions, as here given, was published in some of our metropolitan papers. It is simply a statement of facts which have not, and cannot, be contradicted. One of the first questions which these expulsions would naturally suggest is, Why have the Jesuits been expelled these Roman-Catholic countries ? and why have we not heard of the expulsion or suppression of other orders? The answer to this question is furnished by the extract from Pope Clement's Bull, namely, that Jesuitism is productive of seditions, tumults, discords, dissensions, scandals ,•" that it is calculated to cause Roman Catholics to "massacre each other in the very bosom of their common, mother the Church;" that it introduces idolatrous maxims into the Church. But it may be said — follow the Jesuit in his daily life ; you see a man energetic in preaching the tenets of the Catholic faith, making himself conspicuous only in the chapel, taking no part in social or political life, and, apparently, only living ad major em dci gloriam (to the greater glory of God), and for the good of immortal souls. Now the difficulty connected with this objection is, How can their expulsion from Roman-Catholic coun- tries, the dark and hideous picture drawn by Clement the 14th, twelve other Popes, the King of Portugal, the Universities and Parliaments of Europe, and other distinguished Roman Catholics, be reconciled with the apparent character of the Jesuits ? Shall we say that Clement and the other Popes were odious monsters, deserving eternal execration for fabricating this huge calumny ? that his most Catholic Majesty was most mendacious and vindictive ? Shall we say that other eminent Roman Catholics who are generally considered to have been ornaments of their church, were only engaged in continual warfare with virtue and piety ? aye, that even whole nations rose up against their spiritual guides — against men who willingly gave up every earthly tie, all

and of the Redemption, are dissolved, the individuals composing them are expelled from the Island, and their estates annexed to the dominions of the State."

156

the pleasures and enjoyments of life solely for their benefit, and that merely because the morality of these teachers shone out with superior lustre ? Or shall we say that the Jesuits are the secret and sworn enemies of all law and order ; that in proportion to the magnitude of their designs is the religious hypocrisy with which they deceive their votaries; that they value neither doctrines, persons, nor things, further than these tend to the interest of their order ; and that they set before themselves a design of no less importance than to enslave the soul and body of every human being ? Any person who is even partially acquainted with the real history of the company will not hesitate to adopt the latter view of the question. He will have ample testimony to bear him out from their history in Suuth America, where they endeavoured to establish a government entirely under their own authority, and ranked human beings among their various kinds of property. " In 1848 the Geneose Jesuits declared to government that they were willing to send to the field 700 bayonets at their own cost." In 1832 they raised a force of 100,000 men on the Spanish frontier for the ostensible purpose of protecting the territory from the yellow fever, but in reality to commence operations, on the first opportu- nity, against Spain. The yellow fever pretext was accepted by the Spanish ministers as a sufficient apology (so much for the influence of Jesuitism upon the national mind), but when the time for action arrived, the Jesuits declared their real object, and imme- diately established an absolute monarchy. We are also credibly informed, that some of their first apostles in India professed to le ancient Brahmins.

We have then, from the writings of the Jesuits themselves, ample proof of what Clement 14th, the King of Portugal, and others asserted respecting them. These things being so, it becomes a question of vital importance whether Roman Catholics or Protes- tants should encourage these secret disturbers of the peace and order of society.

A Jesuit mission was, not long since, established in Galway. Doubtless many Roman Catholics who had an opportunity of being acquainted with the history of the order, and who, therefore, with their Protestant brethren, regarded the advent of some of its members with no small share of suspicion, are, from a personal

157

acquaintance with these crafty and insinuating men, beginning to change their opinion, and to look up to them with feelings of admi- ration and reverence. "We entreat such of our Roman-Catholic fellow-countymen as may be disposed to repose unwavering confi- dence in the Jesuits, to suspend their judgment till they shall have obtained a knowledge of the doctrines which these men intend to disseminate in this country. Immediately on the Jesuits having transgressed our national law, which forbids their existence in this country, the peace and harmony which existed among Roman Catholics and Protestants is broken up. Agrarian outrages, elec- tioneering disturbances, a fierce persecution against Protestants, and Phoenix conspiracies are multiplied. They have not ceased to work their secret machinery, till they have outraged not only the feelings of Protestants, by an unheard-of systematic kidnapping which they effect through their misguided and fanatic votaries, but also have endeavoured to wrest from the hands of Roman Catholics parental authority, by prescribing for them a system of secular education, and endeavouring to coerce them to give up that of the National Board and Queen's University, against which there has been, hitherto, no objection ; and all this because Protestants and Roman Catholics study in tbe same halls. Jesuitism is, then, not merely an enemy to Protestants and free institutions, but to every Roman Catholic who dares to think for himself in matters either sacred or secular, and the only restraints that are laid upon them in this country, and which prevent them from running into excesses of temporal and spiritual despotism similar to those in which they indulged in Italy, are those, that are laid on by a constitutional government, which tolerates them when they are expelled Roman Catholic countries — and the freedom, action, and opinion of such distinguished men as the Peters and Barrys, who appreciate too highly the freedom they enjoy as British subjects to bow their neck to the yoke which the Italians lately cast off. ]N"or is this opposition which Jesuitism or Ultramontanic tyranny encounters confined to individuals. We find Roman-Catholic papers — organs of the opinions of, at least, an important and influential section of the Romish Church, boldly and independently opposing this daring aggression upon their liberties. We copy from the Gahcay Vindi- cator of the 9th of May the following very pointed remarks : " We

speak with the most perfect respect for the opinions, and most willingly grant the purity of motives hy which they are actuated ; hut the question of the education of our children, of the collegiate training of our sons and relatives, is one of too much vital impor- tance to all concerned for fathers of families to sacrifice their own notions of right, and of what should constitute intellectual superiority, to t/ti' ri-fisoniitys of other men." In reference to the foreign enlistment now going on in Ireland by the Ultramontane party, in order to compel hy force of arms their co-religionists in Italy to submit to a government which they have found by bitter experience to be utterly intolerable, the Cork Reporter, a Roman-Catholic paper, says :—

' What right, in such circumstances, has any foreigner to join it (the Pope's army), and to assist in imposing on the subjects of the Pope a system of rule to which they object ? If it be alleged that they do not object to it, then surely he can have no difficulty in recuiting his ranks at home. If the government be satisfactory, why do not the Romans fight for it ? If it be unsatisfactory, on what pretence can Irishmen force it on a reluctant people ? "

These are the arguments of Roman Catholics. They are unan- swerable arguments ; arguments of men who will not be swayed or intimidated by the presence of a strong Jesuit faction, or the fulrniuations of an ultramontane press : men who are willing to extend the same rights and privileges to others which they them- selves enjoy : and, surely, to such enlightened individuals, whatever their religious convictions in other matters may be, their Protestant fellow-countrymen can extend the right hand of fellowship, and live with them in social harmony. But we solemnly warn both Roman Catholic and Protestant, if they would not have society disorganised — if they value the first principles of morality, but, above all, if they would be zealous for the glory of God, let them demand the enforcement of that statute, the " Relief Bill," against these men who falsely call themselves the Society of Jesus, but whose mission is to subvert the plainest commands of God's blessed Word, &c.

159

AN ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY BY JOHN LAWRENCE MOSHEIM, D.D.,

CHANCELLOR OF THE UNIVERSITY OF GOTTIGEN.

Translated by the Rev. ARCHIBALD MACLURE, M.A., Minister of the English Church at the Hague. London: A. Millar, 1765.

Vol. II. p. 94. Their (the Jesuits) whole order is divided into three classes, the first comprehends the professed members, who live in what are called professed houses ; the second contains the scholars, who instruct the youth in the colleges ; and to the third belong the novices, who live in the houses of probation. The professed members besides the three ordinary vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience, that are common to all monastic tribes, and obliged to take a fourth, by which they bind themselves to go without deliberation or delay wherever the Pope shall think Jit to send them : they are also a kind of Mendicants, being without any fixed subsistence, and living upon the liberality of pious and well disposed people. The other Jesuits, and more particularly the scholars, are possessed of large revenues, and are obliged, in case of urgent necessity to contribute to the support of the professed members. These latter who are few in number considering the multitudes that belong to the other classes, are, generally speaking, men of prudence and learning, deeply skilled in the affairs of the world, and dexterous in transacting all kinds of business from long experience. In a word, they are the true and perfect Jesuits. The rest have, indeed, the title, but are rather the companions and assistants of the Jesuits than real members of that mysterious Order, and it is only in a very vague and general sense that the denomination of Jesuits can be applied to them. What is still more remarkable, the secrets of the society are not

100

revealed even to all the professed members. It is only a small number of this class, whom old age has enriched with thorough experience, and long trial declared worthy of such an important trust, that are instructed in the mysteries of the Order.*

(Note to Page 96.) " The character and spirit of the Jesuits were admirably described, and their transactions and fate foretold, with a sagacity almost prophetic, so early as the year 1551, in a sermon preached in Christ Church, Dublin, by Doctor George Brown, Bishop of that See, a copy of which was given to Sir James "Ware, and may be found in the Harleian Miscellany, (Vol. V. p. 566.) The remarkable pas- sage that relates to the Jesuits is as follows : " But there are a " new fraternity of late sprung up who call themselves Jesuits, " which will deceive many, who are much after the Scribes "and Pharisees' manner. Amongst the Jews they shall strive "to abolish the truth, and shall come very near to do it. " For these sorts will turn themselves into several forms . " with the Heathen a Heathenist, with the Atheists an Atheist', "with the Jews a Jew, with the Reformers a Refonnade, pur- posely to know your intentions, your minds, your hearts, and "your inclinations, and thereby bring you at last to be like "the fool that 'said in his heart there teas no God' These "shall spread over the whole world, 'shall be admitted into "the councils of princes, and the// never the iciser,' charming "of them; yea, making your princes reveal their hearts, and " the secrets therein, and yet they not perceive it ; which "will happen from falling from the law of God, by neglect " of fulfilling the law of God, and by winking at their sins. "Yet in the end, God, to justify His law, shall suddenly cut " off this Society even by the hands of those, who have most " succoured them, and made them that they shall become " odious to all nations : so that at the end they shall be " worse than Jews, having no resting-place upon earth ;

* Other writers add a 4th class, consisting of the spiritual and temporal coadjutors, who also assist the professed members, and perform the same functions, without being bound by any more than the three simple vows ; though after a long and approved exercise of their employment, the spiritual coadjutors are admitted to the 4th vow, and thus become professed members.

161

"and then shall a Jew have more favour than a Jesuit." This singular passage — I had almost said prediction — seems to he accomplished in part by the present suppression of the Jesuits in France. I write this note in the year 1762 ; and by the universal indignation which the perfidious stratagems, iniqui- tous avarice, and ambitious views of that society have excited among all the orders of the French nations from the throne to the cottage.

WATCH!!!

A I

A TEANSLATION OF THE

LETTER EHOM: THE

TO THE ARCHBISHOP OF PARIS,

Dated Rome, October 26th, 1865,

And published in the Appendix to a Eeport to the Electors of the 3rd Circle of the Seine,

BY EMILE OLLIVIER.

PARIS, 1869— LIBRAIRIE INTERNATIONAL, No. 15, BOULEVARD MONTMARTRE. APPENDIX.

APPENDIX.*

Pope Pius IX. to the Venerable Brother Georges, Archbishop of Parts : — at Paris.

Venerable Brother, Apostolic Blessing and Benediction.

By a letter written with our own hand, addressed to you on the 24th of November last year, you might easily have been convinced of our paternal benevolence towards you. Certainly we entertained the sure hope, that, touched by our heartfelt love for you, you would have heartily responded to our affectionate

* In my first edition I suppressed the letter of the Pope to the Archbishop of Paris, not from any feeling of indecision, but from the fear of committing what might be considered as an indelicacy. I am now better instructed, and know that this document is not a private letter but an official na>, :in act of the Chancery of Rome, and therefore liable and open to discussion. I give the Geneva translation, which I have collated with the Latin text, and find to be perfectly exact. It contains only two or three omissions, which I have supplied; and to show the parts which are mi/ translation, I have had them printed in italics.

M 2

164

feelings, and that you would have willingly fulfilled our wishes, and given manifest proofs of your respect and devotion to our person and to the See of Peter, as is so becoming in a Catholic Prelate. We had hoped this the more, because you had taken care, when you were designated for the Archiepiscopal See of Paris, to address a letter to us, in which you professed the highest attachment to our person and to the Apostolic See, and also the most entire respect for ourselves personally and for the said See. Filled with this hope, we thought fit in a letter, which we wrote to you, and which we now recall to your recollection, not to say one word of the letter which you had your- self addressed to us in the same year in the calends of September, in answer to that of ours of the 26th of the preceding April, upon the subject of some circumstances connected with your diocese. Such a letter written by you has been a subject of no slight astonishment and disappointment to us; for, contrary to our hopes, it has made us understand that you entertain opinions which are entirely opposed to the divine supremacy of the Roman Pontiff over the Universal Church.

You do not hesitate to maintain that the power of the Roman Pontiff over the episcopal dioceses is neither ordinary nor direct. It is your opinion that the Roman Pontiff cannot impose his authority over any diocese, excepting only when that diocese shall be found in such disorder and difficulty, that this intervention becomes the only means for the salvation of souls, and for remedying the negligence of its pastors.

You think that the divine right, in virtue of which the bishop is the sole judge in his own diocese, is completely set aside as soon as the Sovereign Pontiff (except in the case of evident necessity already described) interferes in the affairs of that diocese.

It is your opinion that a canonically constituted diocese, in which the hierarchy is regularly appointed, is converted into a missionary country from the moment that the Roman Pontiff — unless it is in the position already described — exercises his authority over it. Besides, and especially, in your speech in the Senate you attacked, as abuses, appeals to the Apostolic See. You contest the right, which all the faithful enjoy, of appealing to the Roman Pontiff, and you say that tbis right impedes the

165

administration of a diocese and renders it almost impossible. Moreover, while not hesitating to broach such a doctrine, you openly and distinctly declare the means which you intend to employ to maintain it. For you intimate that you are resolved to resist to the utmost of your power, and to take measures to prevent, unless in the case of absolute necessity before stated and often. repeated, the direct intervention of the Sovereign Pontiff from ever taking place. You pretend that the conduct of the Regulars of the Nunciature and of the Roman congregation has had no other intention than to bring the direct intervention of the Sovereign Pontiff into all dioceses ; and you say, moreover, that you will either excite your venerable brethren, the Heads of the priesthood of France, to join in the same opinions ; or else appeal to the public by means of an instruction addressed to them for that purpose.

You have even dared in your speech before the Senate, to propose several measures contrary to the supreme authority of the Sovereign Pontiff and of the Holy See, namely those which consist in withholding the apostolic letters, and submitting them to the approval and consent of the civil authority, and in having recourse to the power of the laity.

In the same speech, which was immediately printed, treating of the organic articles,* you acknowledged the obligation of allowing them some measure of authority and some respect, because they relate to a pre-existent necessity and a grave con- dition of society ! You are not, however, ignorant that the Apostolic See has never failed to protest against these articles published by lay power and contrary to the doctrine of the Church, to its rights, and to its liberties. No, Venerable Brother, we never could have supposed that you would be animated by such opinions, if, to our deep grief, your letter of September, and the speech already mentioned, had not proved it. We cannot but be deeply afflicted and greatly agitated, when we find you so unexpectedly

* The ''organic- articles" here objected to by the Pope are those of the Declaration of the French clergy ; which is in fact their " Bill of Rights, '' and forms an essential part of the Concordat entered into with France by the Roman Pontiff.— TRANSLATOR.

166

favouring the false and erroneous doctrines of Febronius, which, as you well know, have been reprobated and condemned by the Holy See ; and which have been refuted and overthrown by various Catholic writers, in the most learned works. You, Venerable Brother, can easily understand the astonishment with which we were overwhelmed when fully assured that you had enunciated such opinions, so contrary to Roman Catholic doetrine, and which for that cause alone, as a Catholic bishop, you ought to have rejected with horror. Thus, for example, by asserting that the power of the Roman Pontiff over each diocese in par- ticular is not ordi)iar//l)ut extraordinary, you enunciate a proposition entirely contrary to the definition of the 4th Council of Lateran, in which we read these very clear and decisive words : — " The Church of Rome, by the will of God, has over all others the supremacy of ordinary power, and that as the mother and mistress of all the faithful,"* — that is to say, over all who belong to the flock of Christ. You ought, Venerable Brother, to have well known and carefully examined these decisive words pronounced by the Council.

You cannot but know that your proposition above cited is contrary to the common usage of the Catholic Church, to the doctrine received and transmitted from age to age by the Church and all the bishops even until this day, a doctrine which the Church has always held and taught, and which it teaches and holds. She asserts that those inspired words — " Feed my sheep, feed my lambs," were said by our Lord Jesus Christ to the blessed prince of the Apostles in the sense, that by virtue of these words all the faithful, each and every one, remain in immediate subjection to Peter and to his successor as the Supreme Head and Ordinary over the whole Church and over all religion, even as they are all and every one submitted to our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom the Roman Pontiff is the veritable Vicar on earth, the head of the whole Church, father and teacher of all Christians.

We are not less astonished — but perhaps it escaped your observation — that you adopt the opinions of Febronius, in

* St. Thomas, Question 26, Art. 3.

167

maintaining that by the above-mentioned doctrine, the dioceses would find themselves transformed into missionary countries, and their bishops into vicars apostolic. But all know the contrary, and Catholics will rightly answer that this assertion is as false as if you were to affirm that in the civil state ordinary governors of provinces could no longer call themselves ordinary magistrates, because kings and emperors reserve to themselves the plenitude of their power, either immediate or ordinary, over all and each of their subjects ; and it is in fact this very logical comparison which is made use of by the Angelic Doctor, when he says, " The Pope holds the plenitude of Pontifical power as a king in his kingdom. But the bishops, as the judges set over each city, assume a portion of those cares which devolve upon him. ! " *

We are astonished also, Venerable Brother, at your complaints that petitions and appeals should be addressed to the Sovereign Pontiff of Rome, and that he should receive them ; for being a Catholic bishop you ought to know perfectly well that the right of appe'al to the Apostolic throne, as was said by Benedict the 14th, our predecessor of immortal memory, "is so necessarily tied up with the judicial supremacy of the Roman Pontiff over the Universal Church, that it can never be questioned, unless it is pretended to deny absolutely all supremacy, "f The right is so well known by all the faithful, that St. Gelasius, also our predecessor, has written, " There is no Church on earth which does not acknowledge that the See of the blessed Peter has the power to loose that which has been bound by the sentence of any bishop whatsoever, because to it alone belongs the right of judging all the Church, nor is any one permitted to pronounce a judgment against its decision. To that See the Canons have decided that we must appeal from all the countries of the globe, and no one has any right to appeal from its judgment to any other."J

Thus you have thrown us into astonishment when you assert that the custom practised by the Apostolic See, of receiving the

* St. Thomas, Question 26, Art. 3.

f Benedict XIV. Diocesan Synod, Book iv. chap. v. to viii. I Seventh Letter to Bishop Darden.

168

complaints of those who appeal to it from the judgments of bishops, renders the administration of a diocese impossible to you. Such an impossibility no Catholic bishop, either of the present or past time, has ever perceived. If this pretended impossibility could ever have existed, it is the Roman Pontiff who must have felt it ; he, who we may say is oppressed in every sense by the heavy charge of all the Churches, is obliged to receive the petitions from every diocese in the world, to examine them carefully, and decide everything. It could never have been felt by a simple bishop, who was only obliged to answer for the affairs of his own diocese, always a very small portion of the Universal Church. Your complaints against the right of appeal to the Roman Pontiff, and against the ordinary and direct jurisdiction of that same Pontiff over all dioceses, excites our astonishment the more, because every bishop possessing a generous mind draws from that right and jurisdiction, as you yourself can prove, for a great alleviation of his cares, a consola- tion and power before God, before the Church, and' before the enemies of the Church.

Before God :• — because, being relieved in great measure from his responsibility, and of the account which he has to render, illuminated by the blessed light of the Apostolic See, he feels himself day by day better directed to a happier administration of his diocese.

Before the Church : — for by that means he sees it daily fortified and rendered more flourishing, both by increasing union and by increased firmness and unity of government.

Before the enemies of the Church : — because the Bishop becomes more courageous and more constantly opposed to them. It is a matter of experience, and perfectly demonstrated, that the bishop not only loses his power, but becomes the plaything of his adversaries, as soon as he adheres less firmly to the immutable rock on which Christ our Lord has built His Church, and against which the doors of hell shall never prevail.

As to the declaration which you have made of your determina- tion to resist, and to excite other bishops to adopt your quarrel, and to appeal to public opinion, do you not see that by such means, most assuredly seditious, prepared by Febronius against

169

the Apostolic Sec, you deeply offend against the Divine Author of the constitution of his Church, and inflict the greatest injury on your colleagues and on the Catholic people of France ?

Now as to the question of Regulars : — know in the first place that these Regulars have given us no information ; that it is by another source that we have heard of the visit which you made to them. On that subject we amicably warned you in our before-mentioned letter, of the 26th of April, and that warning you are pleased to call a sentence passed without a hearing, and you add that it is contrary to the presumption of right which you think exists in favour of the superior, when there is a controversy between the superior and the inferior, which the Regulars are with respect to you. We can scarcely believe that it was you who spoke thus, Venerable Brother, considering that the Book of Decretals of our predecessors are so well known to you, and consequently you know that from the earliest times it has been the custom of the Roman Pontiffs, on hearing that a bishop had committed an action which had not a perfectly desirable appearance, to write to him fully upon the subject, and explain to him their sorrow on the occurrence. And there are in existence numberless canons which begin in the following terms — "It is related to us," "a complaint has been made to us," "at our audience," "to ourselves," etc., and the bishops have never considered that those letters from the Roman Pontiff were sentences passed without hearing the party implicated. They have never expressed any irritation in consequence, but have always received them in the sense in which they were written, — that is to say, as an invitation to justify their conduct, or to acknowledge themselves in error, or to disavow it entirely. Any other manner of acting would render the government of the Church too difficult for the vicar of Christ on earth, and would not be sufficiently conformable to episcopal gentleness.

We are afflicted, Venerable Brother, that you should have fallen into any ambiguities concerning the affairs of the Regulars. But in the first place we would wish you to consider, with your usual sagacity, that we are now treating of the episcopal visit, made whether to the Society of Jesus, or to the Franciscans of the Order of Capuchins, who have resided in the city of Paris

170

under several bishops, your predecessors, enjoying the peaceable possession of their exemption ; and, in consequence, the Holy Apostolic See itself was in the enjoyment of its peculiar and separate right of jurisdiction over these same Regulars. Thus it becomes a • question of spoliation, accomplished by an act destructive of the privileges of the Holy See and the Regulars. Such is the real state of the question : whence you will easily perceive that the Apostolic See would act with justice, even if it was pleased to convert into a judgment or a sentence, the terms in which we have thought proper to make it known to you. In truth, Venerable Brother, even if you were perfectly right as to the facts, you are nevertheless not ignorant, that according to the rules of either of these kinds of rights, no one can be violently deprived of a right of which he is in possession. For which reason, before proceeding to deprive either the Regulars or the Holy See of their status and of their rights, propriety as well as justice. requires that you should have informed the Holy See of the reasons, and you should have awaited its answer. You know very well the difference which exists between a judgment demanded, and a judgment obtained, and what either right enjoins, particularly in all that concerns judgments of either class. We earnestly desire, Yenerable Brother, you would in your great prudence examine these points with care, and weigh them in your mind.

You believe, moreover, that presumption ought always to exist in favour of the superior when it relates to a debate between persons of different stations ; and you therefore propose a rule very different to that proposed by St. Bernard in the following terms to our predecessor Innocent II. : — " In all that dis- tinguishes your sole supremacy, that which ennobles it most especially, and that which renders your apostolate most peculiarly illustrious, is that you can rescue the poor from out of the hands of those more powerful than themselves."*

But you say the religious communities who live at Paris cannot enjoy this exemption because, as it appears to you, they have not been canonically established, and that for three reasons — Firstly, because the law of the State allows the Regulars no legal

* St. Bernard, 198.

171

existence ; secondly, because the same law does not permit religious houses to hold property or possessions of any kind ; from which it follows that it is impossible to fulfil the orders of the Apostolic constitutions, — that is to say, that before the foun- dation of a religious house it must be proved that "they are in possession of a revenue sufficient for their decent support ; and lastly, because the Council of Trent and the constitutions of the Roman Pontiffs require, for the canonical existence of Regulars in any diocese, the consent of the bishop, which you affirm has never been given to the persons in question. You also affirm, that the fact of their previous existence cannot in any way render their position canonical under the pretext of implied approbation ; for, according to your opinion, the constitutions of the Pontifical See and the Council of Trent demand that the consent and authorisation should be formally expressed by a written license made before the establishment of the Regulars. Thus, according to you, the consent cannot be supposed to be given under the title of prescription, because this is a question of the laws of public order, which do not admit of prescription.

We have no doubt, Venerable Brother, that you will succeed in convincing yourself that these arguments are powerless and have no weight. In order to that, you have only to weigh seriously, and with your great intelligence, what we are about to say, which we wish you to consider carefully.

In all that relates to the laws of the State which refuse a legal or civil existence to the Regular Orders, which interdict their houses from possessing the full and complete enjoyment of any property, and which thus prevent them from fulfilling the conditions imposed by canonical rule on their foundation, that is, that they shall make known what revenues they possess to provide decently for themselves : what can be the value of civil laws as against ecclesiastical rights and government ? It cannot escape your notice that the civil laws, the laws of the State above all, in these troubled and unhappy times of frightful and per- nicious rebellion, may any day deny even to the bishops, and every other constituted power of the Church, a legal or civil existence, even unjustly denying them the possession and full proprietorship of any species of property. Is it possible that such

172

laws should be a sufficient reason to deny bishops and every constituted power of the Church a canonical existence and their ecclesiastical rights? You well know that it is in religious communities that it is most easy to observe and practise the exercises declared to be necessary by the Holy Councils to attain to Christian perfection. What then ? May civil laws interdict in any state the practice of Christian perfection, and can bishops attribute any canonical value to such laws ? All the world, and more especially the bishops, know what has always been the conduct of the Church, and more especially of the Apostolic See, in regard to those laws which are hostile to the religious orders. Is it possible that a bishop should separate himself on such a point from the tradition of the Church ; and by deserting the position which he holds in the Church, sanction such laws in the face of the whole Church, by attributing to them any power?

These considerations must shew you clearly how vain and useless any scheme of opposition, drawn from such a species of civil law, must ever be. As to what the laws prescribe, — that religious houses can possess nothing, as full and absolute owners ; and as to the conclusion at which you have arrived from this state of affairs, viz., that the condition of certain posses- sions, necessary for the decent maintenance of the members, imposed by the sacred canons on the foundation of houses of Regulars, can never be fulfilled, you have only, Venerable Brother, to study profoundly the letter and spirit of the canons cited by yourself, to prove that you are in error and deceive yourself. In fact, what is the aim of these canons when they prescribe a condition of that kind ? They seek for nothing, except the welfare of the members, taking into consideration the interest of each individual ; and, also, the good government and administration of the community.

Therefore, when it is quite impossible for them to fulfil that condition, would it be just to turn to their detriment that which had only been prescribed for their advantage ? On that subject you are perfectly well acquainted with the regulations, not only of the canons,* but also of the civil law.f It is an

* Cap. quod ob gratiam de regulis juris, t Legge nulla 25ff, de legit.

173

acknowledged maxim that, neither in law nor in equity, is it admissible that we should turn to the disadvantage of individuals, by either too strict or too hard an interpretation, any prescriptions which have only been introduced into the law with a view to their advantage. Now, if you examine the letter of the canons, do you find that only by an accident they prescribe, that the members, according to your view of the case, should feed themselves, and maintain themselves solely on the produce of properties belonging to themselves ? Certainly not. The canons relating to that are the constitution Cum Alias of our predecessor Gregory XV., published on the 25th of August, 1622 ; * that of Urban the VIII., also our predecessor, issued on the 21st of June, 1625 ; lastly, the constitution Nuper of Innocent the XII., dated the 23rd of December, 1697. We might have satisfied ourselves by alleging only the last, which is the most recent, and which contains both the others. This constitution expresses itself thus : " Tbat no monastery, convent, or house of Regulars, shall anywhere be received, unless there are in the establishment at least twelve members who can subsist and maintain themselves on the revenues of all kinds and the accustomed alms, making all necessary deductions." Thus the canons do not speak at all of the produce of property in possession. They merely mention " the revenues in general, and alms."

"We must now speak of another condition, that is to say, of the Licence, and the Episcopal consent which the Council of Trent and the constitutions require to constitute the canonical existence of houses of Regulars. No one certainly, Venerable Brother, can doubt about the necessity of the Episcopal consent ; but in this case we must see if the consent has not existed in a manner sufficiently satisfactory. Now, having carefully weighed all the circumstances, how can anyone ever deny that the Episcopal consent has really existed in this case ? Without citing other facts, all the world knows, Venerable Brother, that the "religious" in question, of the Order of St. Francis, and of the Society of Jesus, have really existed in Paris under several bishops, your pre- decessors, who very willingly accepted their assistance in providing for the salvation of souls, and in executing all the various offices

* 15th August, 1622.

174

of the holy ministry, and overwhelmed them with every possible mark of their goodwill and esteem. This conduct on the part of your predecessors towards the Regulars in question shows that Episcopal consent had been sufficiently expressed ; and that it is impossible to deny the fact without imputing grave blame to your predecessors. And this is a convenient opportunity of placing before you the words written by, Fagnan,* an author contem- porary with Urban the VIII., and other Roman Pontiffs, our predecessors, invoked by you, who possessed a fundamental knowledge of the canonical constitutions which you invoke. Fagnan remarks — and neither before nor since has any one con- tradicted the opinion — that in all that concerns the establishment of Regulars in a diocese : " It is sufficient that the consent of the bishop should be given after the election ; and that to con- firm it, ratification is sufficient," in which opinion, the Arch- deacon Hugo and others agree. f And, in truth, it could not be otherwise. Justice demands it, and the lawyers have agreed that facts and acts are more powerful than words. Thus in your wisdom you will understand, that your opinion, drawn from the Constitution of Urban VIII., namely, that the license of the Ordinary ought to be formally expressed in writing, and cannot be either implied or presumed, has no weight. Firstly, because that which is proved by facts, certain, evident, and continued during a long series of years, is not less formally expressed, than that which is made known by words or writings. But, also, because no canonical constitution imposes the condition of a written consent. You cannot allege here the argument drawn from the Council of Trent, that the consent of the Ordinary must precede the foundation ; in fact, it cannot escape you that it is the natural and judicial virtue of every ratification of later acts to excuse the absence of the consent, which, according to legal form, ought to have preceded them. As to what you say about pre- scription, that has nothing to do with the present question. No one pretends that a prescription can be taken instead of episcopal consent, and render it unnecessary. We say simply in this case, that the episcopal consent exists, without doubt, in a manner

* De Institutionibus, cap. Non amplius. t Fagnanus, glossa ultima in cap. cle Monachis quest. 2.

175

sufficiently satisfactory ; which is clearly and amply proved by a great number of facts, and during a very long series of years, so that, not only is it impossible to deny its existence, but we ought to consider it certain that it has been given in the best form.

This is what we consider necessary to answer to your letters, especially those of the calends of September ; and to this we think it necessary to draw your attention. But, besides, we cannot avoid making other observations which are also of great importance.

In fact, we cannot conceal from you, Venerable Brother, that our grief and astonishment were very great, when we heard that you had presided at the Obsequies of Marshal Magnau, Grand Master of the Order of Freemasons, and given the solemn absolution when the Masonic Insignia were placed on the. funeral canopy, and the members of that con- demned sect, decorated with the same insignia, were ranged around it.

In the letter which you addressed to us on the 1st of last August, you assure us that these insignia had not been seen by you, nor by your clergy ; that, in one word, they were unknown to you in any manner ; but you knew very well, Venerable Brother, that the dead man had during life had the misfortune to be at the head of that proscribed sect, vulgarly called by the name of the " Grand Orient," and consequently you might have easily foreseen that the members of that sect would assist at his funeral ; and that they would take care to make a parade of their insignia. You ought therefore in your religious position to have maturely weighed these considerations, and to have been on your guard on the occasion of this Funeral, in order not to have caused by your presence and co-operation the astonishment and profound grief which all true Catholics have felt on this occasion. You cannot be ignorant that Masonic societies, and all other associations of the same iniquitous character, have been condemned by the Roman Pontiffs,* our

* Clement XII., Constitution Imminenti. Benedict XIV., Constitution Providos- Pius VII., Constitution Ecclesiam. Leo XII., Constitution Duo t/n/viora, our Encyclical of the 9th of November, 1840. Et alibi.

176

predecessors, and by oursclf; that even severe penalties have been enacted against them. These impious sects, having different denominations, are, in fact, all linked together by their mutual complicity in the most criminal designs, all being inflamed with the most intense hatred of our holy religion and the Apostolic See, and are endeavouring by the dissemination of pestilential books, and in many other ways, by perverse manoeuvres and by every kind of devilish artifice, to corrupt all over the world both morality and belief, and to destroy all honest, true, and just opinion ; to spread throughout the universe these monstrous opinions ; to conceal and propagate the most detestable vices, and every conceivable rascality ; to shake the power of all legitimate authority, and to compass the overthrow, if it were possible, of the Catholic Church, and of civil society, and to drive God Himself out of heaven.

We cannot pass over in silence the accounts thajt have reached us, that an erroneous and pernicious opinion has been embraced, namely, that the acts of the Apostolic See do not beget any obligations, at least, not until they have been clothed by a warrant for their execution from the civil power.

Now all must see how injurious such an erroneous opinion must be to the authority of the Church and the Apostolic See, and how completely it is opposed to the spiritual welfare of all the faithful ; for the supreme authority of the Church and of the Apostolic See can never, in any way, be submitted to the power and the will of any civil power, in anything that is connected in any manner whatsoever with ecclesiastical affairs and the spiritual government of souls ; and all those persons who dignify themselves by the name of Catholic, are completely under obedience to that said Church, as well as to the Apostolic See, and are bound to testify the respect and devotion towards them which are their due.

And here again we wish that you should observe that in the above-mentioned speech in the senate, you bring forward a fact, which is entirely inexact, that Benedict XIV.,* of blessed memory, our predecessor, in a Concordat with the king of Sardinia, had conceded to that monarch the right of royal execution in relation to pontifical acts. And you assert that the Instruction

* Benedict XIII.

177

annexed to this convention, declares, " That the Papal constitutions relative to discipline, ought to be submitted to the cognisance of Parliament, and that they require the royal exequatur to have the force and obligation of law, with the exception of constitutions and apostolic letters relating to doctrine or morals." So very false an assertion could never have been uttered by you, Venerable Brother, if you had looked at, and carefully examined, the terms of this Instruction : and here we give the terms of the 3rd Article of that Instruction :

"lit the Concordat of the Pontiff Benedict the XIII., the execution of Briefs and Apostolic Bulls is treated of, as can be read in that Concordat, in which only a simple visa is allowed, without permitting any signature or requiring any decree for the execution of the said Briefs or Bulls ; and ive knoiv that all has been faithfully executed, though it is said with great assurance, and though it is believed, that neither the Senate nor any other tribunal has accepted, at the instance of any person, the cognisance of the justice, or of the pretended injustice, of Bulls and Briefs. Wishing nevertheless to preserve harmony, if by chance any objection to the execution of a Butt or Brief should occur, and it should be desirable to understand the reasons for it, His Majesty's ministers being sufficiently instructed on the subject, shall inform cither the minister of the Holy See residing at Turin, or else the Apostolic minister residing at Home, of the fact. Bulls of Jubilees and Indulgences are exceptedfrom the simple visa, also the Briefs of the Holy Penitentiary and letters of the Sacred Congregations of Rome, which are tvritten to Ordinaries or to other persons as informations." And those rules relative to their execution have never been modified in the later conventions between the Apostolic See and the king of Sardinia.

Gregory XVI., by a Convention made in 1842, with the laie Jang of Sardinia, Charles Albert, on his personal immunity, restored in all their vigour all the preceding conventions in all things which were not disannulled by that said Convention.

Be fully persuaded, Venerable Brother, that our charge as Sovereign Apostolic Minister, and our Pontifical affection for you, have made it our duty to communicate these matters to you ; and we have complete confidence, considering your scrupulous piety,

N

178

that you will accept all the admonitions and instructions which have heen dictated by our heart : that you will hasten to follow them ; and that you will attach yourself firmly to them, and vigour- ously defend the rights and the pure doctrines of the Church, and inculcate on all the devotion and obedience due to the Apostolic See, to the vicar of Christ on earth ; and daily fulfil more fully, and above all other things, in these iniquitous times, all the duties of a good pastor.

Be certain that we honour you, that we appreciate you, and that we love yon with an affectionate ardour, and ice hope that the principal testimony of our benevolence and a good augury of all the blessings of lieaven may be contained in this Apostolic benediction icltich we with all the affection of our heart, bestow upon yon, Vena-able Brother, and upon all the flock confided to your care.

Given at Rome, near St. Peter's, the 26th of October, 1865, the 20th year of our Pontificate.

BETWEEN

HTJSSIA AND HOME;

BEING A TRANSLATION OF A DESPATCH

FROM PRINCE GORTCHAKOFF TO RUSSIAN REPRESENTATIVES ABROAD.

Further Beturn respecting the Eelations between Eussia and Eome ; being Translation of a Despatch from Prince Grortchakoff to Eussian Eepresentatives abroad.

Extract from t/te "Journal de St. Peter sbourg" of January 21

and 22, 1867.

ST. PETERSBURG, January 9, 1867.

Despatch from his Excellency the Vice- Chancellor Prince Gortcha- kqff to the Russian Embassies and Legations, dated St. Peters- burg, January 7, 1867.

The acts of the Court of Rome having made it impossible for His Majesty the Emperor to continue diplomatic relations with the Papal Government, it was found necessary to abandon the Concordat of 1847, which regulated the relations between the Imperial Cabinet and the Holy See. *

The Emperor's Ukase confirming this decision is known to you. This document limits itself to recording the abandonment of tbo

N 2

180

Concordat. It was not accompanied by statements destined to explain and give reasons for this measure.

This reserve, dictated to the Imperial Cabinet by a regard for the Holy See, was not maintained by the Papal Government.

It has just published a collection of documents, the object of which is to free the Holy See from all responsibility, and to cause it to fall entirely on the Imperial Cabinet. With this aim the collection records the progress • of this deplorable quarrel with partiality and inaccuracy.

The Court of Rome thus unburdens us from the scruples which restrained us. She summons us to the field of discussion, and makes it our duty to follow her.

The acts of our august Master do not fear the light.

You will find annexed to this a strictly true account of the acts which ended in the rupture of diplomatic relations between the two Courts.

You are authorized to give this document the publicity it deserves.

You will, at the same time, be careful to make it known that, in following the Court of Rome into this painful discussion, the Imperial Cabinet is actuated by no hostile intention towards the Holy See. Their only aim is to establish the truth.

The principles of religious toleration, and the constant solicitude of the Emperor for all creeds professed in his dominions, do not the less on that account remain invariable maxims of his political conscience.

As far as lies in the power of his Imperial Majesty, his Roman Catholic subjects shall not suffer for the cessation of the friendly relations which our august Master had tried to maintain with the Holy See, with respect to their religious interests.

181

ANNEX TO THE DESPATCH.

Historical Sketch of the Acts of the Court of Rome ivhich have brought about the rupture of Relations between the Holy Sec and the Imperial Cabinet, and the Abrogation of the Concordat of 1847.

The principle of religious toleration exists in the Government traditions as well as in the social customs of Russia. The exercise of foreign worship was legally admitted in the Empire under the reign of Peter the Great, subject to certain measures more de- fensive than prohibitive, and analogous with those adopted by most of the Catholic States themselves. Since that time those measures were comprehended in the fundamental laws of the Empire, and did not impede in any way the principle of the greatest toleration. The Government had in view solely to place the dominant Church out of reach of the Propaganda, and to guarantee the Sovereign- authority against the encroachments of the Court of Rome, by forbidding Russian subjects professing the Roman Catholic religion from having direct relations with a Pontiff who is at the same time a foreign Sovereign.

This Propaganda and these encroachments had developed themselves with impunity in the provinces of the Empire, whicli had been, during more than two centuries, subjected to the domination of the Polish. Republic. Hundreds of thousands of orthodox people were voluntarily or compulsorily converted to the Latin Church. And yet a much larger number were compelled by violent means, recorded by history, to recognize the supremacy of the Pope, in giving their adhesion to the combination, much more political than religious, known under the name of the Union. When those Provinces were liberated from the Polish domination, and again became Russian, the great Sovereign who brought about this glorious restoration, far from having recourse to reprisals, proved her toleration by establishing Catholic dioceses suitable to local wants, by defraying the expenses of the worship, founding seminaries, and entrusting the chief administration of

182

the interests of the Roman Catholic Church to an ecclesiastical college presided over hy a prelate equally virtuous and enlightened. But, meanwhile, the Empress Catherine expressed herself with perfect frankness to Pope Pius VI. as follows : —

" If, following the example of my ancestors, I choose to tolerate in my vast dominions all worships without exception, and among their number the Roman Catholic religion, I will never allow the followers of that faith to depend at all on any foreign Power. This is why all the Bulls and Edicts of the Court of Rome can only be published in Russia with the Sovereign's consent."

Catherine's successors did not depart from these principles.

When the fate of arms rendered the Emperor Alexander I. the master of Poland, His Majesty acted towards the Roman Church with no less generosity and confidence than towards the Polish nation.

The Romish clergy preserved all the privileges, lands, and in- fluence which they had acquired.

The crying abuses of clerical power and religious fanaticism, which had contributed to the downfall of Poland, were scarcely put an end to. But the clergy having taken part in the insurrec- tion of 1830 — participation which was admitted and reprobated by the Holy See itself, by the encyclical letter of August, 1832 — it became necessary to limit the influence which the clergy had so wilfully abused.

The Emperor Nicholas saw himself compelled, in consequence, to place a check upon the material means of action at the disposal of the Latin clergy in Russia and Poland.

To attain that end, a part of the very large estates accumulated by the Latin clergy were secularised and appropriated to the real requirements of worship ; the convents which were not inhabited by the canonical number of monks or nuns were suppressed ; and direct relations with the Holy See and all Latin propaganda were stringently prohibited.

The Court of Rome, which had previously admitted the existence of the evil, raised obstacles against the execution of the measures the most proper to cure it.

It protested against some of these measures, and refused its concurrence or strict adherence to the remainder.

183

In 1845, the Emperor Nicholas happened to be at Rome, and Gregory XVI. embodied the pretended grievances of the Holy See in a memorandum which he handed himself to the Emperor.

Two days after the Emperor answered that note, and his letter concludes thus : —

" The Emperor begs the Sovereign Pontiff to be firmly con- vinced that no one desires more than His Majesty to maintain in Russia, as in Poland, the Roman Church, on a footing at once dignified and respectable. The prayers of the Emperor embrace with an equal solicitude, and without any distinction of worship, the spiritual interests of all the peoples whose destinies have been entrusted to him by Providence. All that can be done to realize the intentions of the Holy Father, without materially clashing with the organic laws of the Empire, or injuring the rights and canons of the dominant Church, shall be done. The Emperor's word guarantees it to His Holiness. But, as has been observed above, there are circumstances and necessities from which it does not depend upon the will of the Emperor to free himself."

The Emperor's word was loyally fulfilled by the conclusion of the Concordat of 1847 ; it granted to the Roman Church all it was possible to grant within those limits.

But in Russia the Holy See has pretended at all times to the faculty of going beyond those limits.

" The essence of the Catholic religion is to be intolerant," wrote in June, 1804, the Cardinal-Secretary of State, Consalvi, to Cardinal Caprara.*

It is specially in Poland and in Russia that the Court of Rome has practised that principle.

In their quality of guardians of the laws of the empire, and protectors of the rights of the orthodox Church, the Sovereigns of Russia could not comply with such demands.

And such is the original cause of the endless differences between the Imperial Court and the Holy See, which, in conse-

* Memoir of Cardinal Consalvi. Correspondence with Cardinal Caprara on the coronation of Napoleon I.

184

qucnce of acts, the initiative of which was taken by Pius IX., and for which he must be held responsible, brought on the cessation of political intercourse and the abrogation of the Concordat of 1847.

This is proved by the succinct analysis of the relations between the two Courts under the reigning Sovereign.

The personal sentiments of the Emperor Alexander II. and his intentions towards the Latin Church are faithfully set forth in the following letter, addressed by his Majesty's order to his Minister at the Papal Court, dated 13th May, 1863 : —

' The principle of tbe liberty of conscience is deeply engraved in the conviction of my august Master ; but he understands it in all its purity, and not in the sense which the Church of Rome has given to it in all times, in claiming for the Catholic faith a freedom without limit, to the detriment of the other religions.

The orthodox Church in its spirit is neither militant nor propagandist, but it has the right of not being handed over defenceless to a Church which is both militant and propagandist. We do not and shall not try to carry off the flock of another pastor, but it is our right and our duty to see that our co-religionists should not be diverted from tbeir own faith. In a word, our Church is not oppressive. It would be strange to contend that in a country where the immense majority professes the orthodox faith the national Church should be placed in an inferior situation.

The Envoy Extraordinary sent by His Holiness to Russia to be present at the ceremonies of the coronation had an opportunity of seeing, by the reception given him by the Emperor, the sincere goodwill with which he was animated towards the Holy See.

Monsieur Chigi, sent by the Pope to represent His Holiness at the coronation, had also the mission of addressing to tbe Russian Government certain claims relative to the interpretation of some stipulations of the Concordat of 1847. His Holiness's Ambassador had the opportunity of acquiring the proof of the goodwill and intentions of the Emperor, who appointed a special

185

committee of high functionaries to inquire into the Holy See's claims.

The report of that committee was communicated to the Court of Rome, which has published it with other documents in the publication entitled " An Exposition, with documents annexed, of the constant endeavours of the Sovereign Pontiff Pius IX. to remedy the evils from which the Catholic Church suffers in Russia and Poland."

It shows that all the claims of the Holy See were conscien- tiously considered, and that ample and immediate satisfaction was given to each of those claims that was justly grounded, and not irreconcilable with the organic laws of the Empire and the Church of the State.

Although those concessions did not fully satisfy the Holy See, it preserved till 1859 an attitude relatively moderate.

In a letter addressed on the 31st January, 1859, by Pius IX. to the Emperor Alexander, the Holy Father paid homage " to the eminent qualities of his Majesty, and offered his most sincere thanks for having been enabled by the Emperor to fill up some of the vacant episcopal sees and suffraganships." Then the Holy Father, among other demands, asked to be permanently repre- sented in Russia.

The Emperor answered by renewing to His Holiness his assurances of lively and constant solicitude for the religious interests of his Roman Catholic subjects. His Majesty at the same time informed His Holiness that he had instructed his Minister at Rome to give explanations to Cardinal Antonelli, as to the details mentioned in the Pope's letter with the mutual candour and goodwill which preside over the relations of the two governments.

Unhappily, the Holy See had already begun then to depart from that sincerity and that benevolence which it completely threw aside during the sad events which occurred in Poland from 1858 to 1864.

The Emperor Alexander had inaugurated his reign by opening the gates of their country to some 9,000 exiled Poles. The kingdom was governed with us much mildness and tolerance as

186

possible. Reforms conceived in a very liberal spirit and

susceptible of future development were adopted.

• Provincial institutions were granted ; the freedom of the

individual was carefully guaranteed ; public instruction, finance,

and judicial institutions obtained the desired encouragement and

improvements.

All these benefits were received with distrust, or with an ohstinate ill-will which the most patient forbearance failed to disarm. The upper classes of Polish society organized and supported an agitation which, thanks to foreign encouragement and instigation, soon grew to he an insurrection.

The motives which prompted them to this course may be explained by a simple reference to date.

The abolition of slavery in Russia, which, first of all, seemed, to offer insurmountable obstacles, was in 1859 on its way to completion. * So vast a social reform would naturally extend to Poland, and bring about, by some means or other, the emancipa- tion of the rural population of the kingdom from the actual, if not acknowledged, state of servitude in which they are held. The aristocracy resolved to oppose, at any hazard, a reform which must, as an inevitahle consequence, sweep away the feudal power and privileges which they enjoyed. Deserting their past princi- ples, they encouraged the cosmopolitan revolution, which was brewing in anticipation of such a reform. The emancipation ukase was promulgated on the 28th of February, 1861.

On the 24th of the same month the Agricultural Society of Warsaw assuming the character of a constituent assembly, adopted the programme ratified by Mieroslawsky, who eight days after wrote from Paris, that " these resolutions should serve as the basis of a national rising."

From the origin of these troubles a large portion of the Roman clergy took part in the revolutionary preparations.

In 1858 more than twenty priests of the diocese of Plock were legally found guilty of having preached disobedience to the authority and of having provoked religious agitation under the pretext of establishing temperance societies.

Other Latin clergymen belonging to the government of Witebesk were convicted of having, in violation of the organic

187

laws, administered the Holy Sacraments to persons of the orthodox faith.

These intrigues were known to the Holy See. Mention of them is made in the collection of Roman documents (pages 154 and 160). But far from heing disapproved, the statement of the Secretary of State (page 38) praises those in fault, and recriminates against the Russian authorities.

This attitude on the part of the Papal Court, and the encour- agements lavished on them by Rome, through secret and illegal channels, as we shall show later, soon incited a large number of the Latin clergy of the kingdom to take that course by which they have so seriously compromised the dignity of the Christian priesthood and the religious and material interests of the flock which was entrusted to them.

Profiting by their influence over the lower classes of society, particularly the women, and by making use of that powerful weapon, the confessional, the clergy arranged and propagated the revolutionary organization. Religious fanaticism and the habit of constantly, and without scruple, interfering in temporal matters, together with the laxity of discipline among the regular and secular clergy, cemented this sacrilegious union between the Church and Revolution. The history of the part taken by the Romish clergy in the last revolution in Poland has been faithfully related in a published onicial document.*

We must of necessity record here some of the data contained in that document, in order that the part may be appreciated which the Court of Rome thought fit to play during the sorrowful events of which Poland was the scene.

The first demonstration of importance took place on the llth June, 1860, on the occasion of a funeral. The Franciscan monk, Spleszynski, here preached an extremely violent revolutionary sermon.

Immediately afterwards seditious exhortations resounded from the pulpits ; first at Warsaw, then in the provinces. Printed collections of revolutionary songs, and portraits of the coryphei of

* Report of the Special Commission appointed at Warsaw by supreme order in 1864.

188

the revolution were openly sold in almost every church. In the capital and in several other towns, the monks placed statues of the Virgin and the Saints, with lamps and lighted candles, in front of the monasteries, and exhorted the idle crowd to sing seditious songs.

These excitements often provoked deplorable scenes, as, for instance, at the door of the Church of the Sainte Croix, near Radom, after a sermon from the monk Bernardin Casimir, one of the principal promoters of religious assemblies, the mob nearly tore to pieces a man and woman, whom for some reason they suspected.

In 1861 began a series of processions, which were confessedly political demonstrations. At the same time, as if with the intention of proving that these were not the acts of individuals, but a systematic organised insurrection among the clergy, numerous meetings of secular priests and monks took place throughout the kingdom. At one of them, convoked on the 14th of November, at Lysa Grora, more than 300 priests and monks assembled to give seditious lectures and make public prayers for the success of the revolution.

The most numerous and important of these assemblies was that of the clergy of Podlachia, in November, 1862. There a resolution was unanimously adopted ratifying "the intimate and solid unison established between the clergy and the revolutionary party."

The deputies of other dioceses adhered to a programme of action strictly revolutionary, which only made reservations in favour of the rights of the Roman Catholic Church, and which imposed, among others, this obligation on members of the clergy : " They must put upon their oath all people charged with any operations by the central committee."

It is not unknown that most of these operations had assassina- tion in view, and it is grievous to record that several priests not only administered the oath to the operators, but also were themselves their associates or substitutes.

Suffice it to say, in summing up these data, that more than 500 Roman Catholic priests were legally convicted of direct and active participation in the bloody acts of the Polish insurrection.

189

At the very beginning of these criminal attempts the Imperial Cabinet informed the Holy See of them, and claimed the interference of the Pope's supreme authority to bring back the Latin clergy to the peaceable fulfilment of their holy duties. The first appeal having failed, and the Diocesan Chapter of "Warsaw having wished to increase popular agitation by closing the Churches, the Vice-Chancellor of the Empire addressed the following letter, dated October 9, 1861, to his Majesty's Minister at Home : —

" I send you a copy of a report from Count Lambert (the Emperor's Lieutenant at Warsaw) on recent events. By that you will see the part played by the Roman Catholic clergy of the kingdom — a part which has not varied from the first moment of the troubles. If they have caused the churches of Warsaw to be closed because they believe them to have been profaned, I think that they have done themselves justice. The profanation dates from the day on which human passions penetrated into the sacred building, and seditious hymns took the place of sounds of Christian piety. In this respect, certainly, there was profana- tion, and if the clergy, after purifying the churches, reopened them, determined only to tolerate in them that which the com- mandments of the Lord prescribe, they will only have done their duty. Yet I doubt whether that is the feeling which animates them. On the contrary, it occurs to me that it is their intention to extend their measure of closing the churches throughout the whole kingdom, to place the country, so to speak, under ecclesi- astical interdict, and to deprive the faithful of the grace of the Divine Word, in order to minister to passions altogether worldly. I should like still to be able to doubt their daring to go to this extreme ; if, in spite of warnings which have been given them on that subject, they overstep it, I shall fulfil my duty by denouncing the act to justice and to the justice of His Holiness.

" For the present I will not charge you with any formal application to the Holy See — I do not wish to renew to-day an appeal which has not been listened to — but I authorize you to lay before Cardinal Antonelli Count Lambert's letter, and that which I am now writing to you.

190

" The entire confidence I place in the intelligence of his Eminence forbids me to doubt his comprehending, in the very interests of religion, the object of the attitude of the Roman Catholic clergy of the kingdom, and acknowledging, when informed of what is passing, the necessity of remedying it."

This communication, supported by such convincing documents, was only evasively received. His Eminence Cardinal Antonelli, after having received the Pope's orders, said to M. de Kisseleff, that " His Holiness had disapproved, confidentially, the behaviour of the Polish clergy." But when his Majesty's Minister de- manded that this disapprobation should be publicly expressed, the Cardinal Secretary of State answered " that His Holiness was the less at liberty to interfere openly in this question, because the Polish clergy complain of the hindrances they encounter in the exercise of their religious duties, because the Holy See has no free and direct communication with them, and because, as it has no representative in Russia, it is without any official source of information, or any direct means of interfering with a body of clergy with whom it has no free or direct relations.*

Appreciating the gravity of the circumstances, and wishing to avoid the least excuse for ill-feeling, the Imperial Cabinet resolved to make a most important concession to the Holy See by sanction- ing the despatch of a Roman Prelate to Russia.

Prince Gortchakoff consequently addressed a despatch to M. Kisseleff, by his Majesty's orders, in which the following words occurred : —

" In transmitting to you the august words of His Holiness, his Eminence the Cardinal Secretary of State detailed to you the complaints of the Polish clergy relative to the hindrances which they meet with in the exercise of their religious duties, and par- ticularly of the want of free and direct communication between the Holy See and their own clergy, which deprive the Court of Rome of all source of communication and all means of acting. His Eminence ended by letting you understand that His Holiness would have liked to have been able send some Prelate to Warsaw

* M. Kisseleff 's report, dated Eorae, 29th October (10th November), 1861.

191

to convey thither his advice and admonitions to the Roman Catholic clergy.

" If in the Russian Empire, as in many other countries, even those which profess the Roman Catholic religion, the relations between the clergy and an authority existing outside the State ought to be regulated by certain formalities, this is by virtue of a political principle generally allowed in Europe and a Concordat freely concluded with the Holy See. It could not, then, be derogatory to this rule, which in no way impedes the relations between the Catholic clergy and the Holy See, but limits itself to constituting its form and mode of proceeding.

" Our august Master considers it one of his most sacred duties to ensure the most complete liberty of conscience to all his sub- jects, and the fullest protection to all religious ministers, in the exercise of their spiritual mission, no matter what faith they belong to. In assigning to them as limits the laws prescribed by the general interests of the country, his Imperial Majesty only adopts a course in conformity with a necessity which exists for all sovereigns in every country. He does not think that, in enforcing on the clergy the condition of being forbidden to cause disorder, disunion, or scandal, these laws force on them obligations inconsistent with their mission of peace and charity, or which would not leave them the latitude necessary for its fulfilment. But, except in regard to these indispensable conditions, the Emperor has taken for his guidance, ever since his accession to the throne, the principles of the most extensive tolerance ; and you may reiterate, Sir, to his Eminence the Cardinal Secretary of State the assurance of the attention which his Majesty will always be ready to grant specially to the spiritual wants of his Roman Catholic subjects. It is with the object of giving a fresh proof of this that our august Master has taken into serious consideration the desire manifested by His Holiness to be able to send to Russia a prelate charged to convey his admonition and advice to the Polish clergy.

" The Emperor is disposed to consent to it as a proof of his affectionate deference for His Holiness.

" His Imperkl Majesty invokes the fullest light upon all his acts ; what he repels is calumny, which destroys confidence. A

192

delegate from His Holiness will be able to appreciate with his own eyes and to inform His Holiness faithfully of the true state of affairs. He will convince himself that the events which have actually occurred in the Kingdom of Poland are in no way caused by religion ; which has, on the contrary, been lowered, by dis- graceful profanation, into the arena of human passions." *

In making this communication, M. de Kisseleff let the Cardinal Secretary of State understand that the Imperial Cabinet would even be pleased to see the Prelate's provisionary mission changed to a permanent one. But whilst the Holy See "secretly" dis- approved of the behaviour of the Polish clergy, and profited by the state of affairs so as to ask for and obtain such important concessions, His Holiness wrote and caused to be conveyed to the Archbishop of "Warsaw, Monsignor Fialkowski, a brief containing nothing but encouragement to the Polish clergy, besides an ex- pression of his Pontifical sympathy for the wishes of the Polish people, which he termed legitimate, in spite of their violent and turbulent manifestations.

The existence of this brief had been revealed after the death of Archbishop Fialkowski by the publications of two organs devoted to the Court of Rome. It was scarcely possible to doubt its authenticity ; nevertheless, it was only in a doubtful manner that the Imperial Cabinet protested against the tenor of this brief, and against the illegality of its communication by any but the established channels.

The Cardinal Secretary of State, without exactly denying the existence of the brief, furnished M. de Kisseleff with the follow- ing explanations : —

' His Holiness," said he, " is obliged to defend himself against the accusations of not showing enough zeal in support of the interests of the Church.

"Besides, there was no brief, speaking strictly, but only a letter from the Pope, written in Latin, it is true, but not ' on parchment,' emanating from the Secretary of Latin Letters, and not from the Chancery of briefs. "f

'* Prince Gortchakoff's despatch to M. de Kisseleff, dated St. Petersburg, November 27, 1861.

t M. de Kisseleff's report, dated December 19 (31), 1861.

193

These subtleties did not at all diminish the weight of an Act emanating from the Sovereign Pontiff himself, the authenticity of which the Court of Rome to this day acknowledges, by inserting it (page 168, doc. 55) in the official collection which she has just published.

In the meanwhile, as the Archbishop of Warsaw, Monsignor Fialkowski, was deceased, the Court of Rome insisted 011 trie advisability of naming his successor promptly. The Imperial Cabinet immediately deferred to this wish by nominating the Abbe Feliiiski to the Archiepiscopal see.

His Holiness was pleased himself to tell M. de Kisseleff, during an audience granted to this minister on the 15 (27) December, 1861, how much this choice satisfied him, and "that he sincerely thanked the Emperor for his Majesty's sentiments and actions of good- will towards his own person, as well as with the intention of perfecting the friendly relations between the two Courts."

His Holiness, besides, expressed a wish that the Prelate whom he proposed to send on a temporary mission to Russia might remain there, with the title of permanent representative of the Holy See.

A short time afterwards (March, 1862), Cardinal Antonelli informed M. de Kisseleff, in confidence, that Monsignor Berardi had been nominated to discharge the functions of Nuncio at St. Petersburg.

But, at the same time, the Cardinal Secretary of State put a question to his Majesty's Minister which clearly denoted the intention of Rome only to accept so important a concession by redoubling its demands.

" Will the laws which forbid all direct communication between the Holy See and the Catholic clergy be applicable to the Legate?" asked his Eminence.

M. de Kisseleff having requested the Cardinal to put this question in writing, in order that he might refer it to his Court and receive a precise answer, his Eminence enumerated in a note-verbale all the laws of the Empire which he thought it would be desirable to do away with, and of whose existence the Court of Rome had more than once pretended to be ignorant.*

* Report of M. do Kisscleff, dated 27th February (llth March), 1802, and its iiiclosures.

o

— ~-

:

. _ .

toopean Cabinets, to

• ci'-i

pot

'--•: Home

%*

rae, more than any other, adopted this comse.

« to before that this was the chief ease for

that th<- origin and the responsibility o: tL Covrte and die repeal of the

. • :.-:

•et was - • -*»

-.'. i: ff^.KK«k^ 1 • • -• " - ••• a lette

of Wanav. in which His H"lim - of the Sovereign of thecoantry, and - • . absent himself from hv - prnwnee aBBTOr

.

litfe

kingdom to return to the foUUmen were nef^ecting more and mor

rM.de

• . -

i*h for the most frier thtk

naarat- "•

•eeds rrt-t, tatitt

at the road

- ' ••

Bone « '• as •

concession o

itr,»

^ ntf^ aar

'

.

. . .:•:,•]' .•-

;

^iHBaai

Ibi

' .'sfi1

•

.

•':

197

Scarcely had Monsignor Felin-ki r- th« Popo'a letter

than he thought he ought t<> release him- if tmi all ..hrdi.-nn- to the authorities of tin- realm; oay, he .ii-l na even m good terms with them.

The Government having been inf»' it tin- pror, -i..n

tabitually celebrated at Warsaw on 8t Mark l>a\ wu> je accompanied by disturban. ' • Archbishop "t

vVarsaw to allow the ceremony t«> take j. • - time m-idethe •liurch, and not in the sin it-.

The Archbishop entrenched him I jur-ti-.n ..f

)rinciple, and, in spite of the repeated pi the authoritii

a spite of prohibition published in the if :- and caniinuui-

ated to each priest, he ordnvd the rln. Irbratr tlii- pm-

ession with unusual pomp.

The disorders that bad bren foreseen if, bl 1 \\.i-

early spilt in tin- -tivrts ..f \\',n il \i«'ii th-- Km;

(ieutenant demanded explanation^ ,,f W or I-'rlin»ki, thix .rchbishop answered : —

"That the clergy had a«-!fd by hi- ord< ; that In- him-rlf ould place himself' at tin brad offutui' <ions, in -;

ay prohibition made by the Gh>Vi that h lately

isputed with the latter the ri^ht of t' 'religion; that if he found it neoeasary he ould :

ose the churches ; and lastly, that h. i seeii

en dead on the ground ' to yielding one .;irti< le ,if the right hich the canonical laws acknowledged t-> biiii-." This language was reported at R-nue, but .eurred n . canunieal sapprobation.

Moreover, at this period (April, 1863) thefoly So- \\a>..peidy sociated with the diplomatic coalition or-a Jed ag linsi I; isaia. Pius IX. on the 2'Jnd April, 186o, de-patied to Hi> M:.j. e Emperor a letter actuated by "the My iir uani-

ited on all sides both by nations and (i'.'niiuruts in favour Poland," in which letter after having enmerated at I.- 3 pretended impediments placed in the \\y of tl 3 Roman Catholic religion, His Holii; ,,nly .-laim.-d l'..r

3 Romish clergy prerogatives incompaUe with tlie ind.- ndence and the security of the State, ; well as uith th,

194

The answer of the Imperial Cabinet was not long waited for.

Whilst instructing M. de Kisseleff " to express the satisfaction of the Emperor at the choice of Mousignor Berardi, and the hope that the presence of this Prelate in Russia will enlighten His Holiness as to the spirit and tendencies of the acts of the Imperial Administration, and will dispel the prejudices which malice is attempting to raise up between the two Governments," the Vice- Chancellor of the Empire informed M. de Kisseleff by order of the Emperor, on 27th March, 1862—

" That the regulations in question did certainly extend to the Nuncios the principle which demands the mediation of the Imperial Government in all official communications of the Holy See with the clergy in the Empire and Kingdom ; that, in adopting that rule, which ought to be maintained, political considerations of a higher order were obeyed, and not any feeling of distrust or ill-will ; that the Sovereign, the only judge of the general interests of the State, amongst which those of religion have a title to all his attention, is himself alone able to appreciate the whole body of these interests, and to cause them to converge towards the final goal which lies before him —the welfare of the country.

" That if these principles apply to the official communications which the Pontifical Court is in a position to address to the clergy, there is all the more reason why they should apply to the communications of the Apostolic Nuncio, who is only the delegate and representative of the Holy See.

"And, lastly, that these principles, generally admitted, even in countries where the Catholic religion predominates, have not there been found irreconcileable with the presence of a permanent Nuncios."*

The Court of Home could not reasonably require the Sovereign of an empire in which the orthodox religion predominates to grant to the Apostolic Nuncios a wider prerogative than is enjoyed by the representatives of the Holy See in France, for instance, where the Roman Catholic religion is that of the State.

* Despatch of Prince Gortchakoff to M. de Kisseleff, dated the 27th March, 1862.

195

Now, the French legislation defines clearly the position of the Nuncio.

The first article of the organized constitutions, forming a continuation of the Concordat of 1801, and rigorously observed up to the present time, forbids all communication from the Court of Rome without the control of the Government.

The 2nd article of the same constitution is conceived as follows : "No individual calling himself Nuncio, Legate, Apostolic Vicar, or Commissioner, will be able, without being authorised by the Government, to exercise, either on French soil or else- where, any function relating to Church matters."

The 207th and 208th articles of the French penal code assign rigorous punishment (a fine of 500 francs, imprisonment from a month to two years' banishment) to any infringement of these laws.

A quite recent incident proves that the Sovereign Pontiff accepts these regulations of the French legislation, and orders his representatives to submit to them, and that the argument of "non possumus," laid down by the Court of Rome with regard to Russia, is not tenable in justice and logic.

When in 1865 the Apostolic Nuncio at Paris, Monsignor Chigi, addressed letters, by other than the legal channels to the Bishops of Orleans and Poitiers, which were published, the French Ambassador at Rome brought a complaint against this infringement of the existing laws. The Holy See hesitating about giving the required satisfaction, the French Government reiterated its demands. Monsignor Chigi was disavowed, and the Moniteur Unicersel of February 7 (19), 1865, stated that "the Nuncio expressed his regrets to his Majesty the Emperor at a private audience, and assured him that he never had intended to set aside the respect due to the rules of international law."

To explain the persistency with which the Court of Rome made demands which she knew well were inadmissible, to account for the delays, intentionally caused by her, in settling an affair which she had so much at heart a short time before, it will be sufficient to remember that at this very time the revived troubles in Poland had served as a starting-point and pretext for a course of diplomacy directed against Russia, the effects of which

o 2

196

will not be slow to manifest themselves in attempts, on the part of several of the European Cabinets, to meddle with the Home affairs of the Empire.

The Court of Rome, more than any other, adopted this course. There is every reason to believe that this was the chief cause for acts which it will be sufficient to enumerate to demonstrate with conclusive evidence that the origin and the responsibility of the existing rupture between the two Courts and the repeal of the Concordat of 1847, belong to the Pontifical Government.

At the very moment when the negotiations relating to the appointment of Nuncios were becoming complicated, and when the Imperial Cabinet was giving repeated proofs of its sincere intention of bringing them to an end, Pius IX., secretly and in opposition to the established laws of the Empire, wrote a letter to the new Archbishop of Warsaw, in which His Holiness took the place, so to speak, of the Sovereign of the country, and invited Monsignor Felinski to absent himself from his diocese to appear at Home at a moment when his presence scarcely sufficed to force the clergy of the kingdom to return to the fulfilment of their duties which they were neglecting more and more every day.

On informing M. de Kisseleff of this fresh infringement of in- ternational stipulations, the Yice- Chancellor again observed : —

" We sincerely wish for the most friendly relations with the Pontifical Government. We have given it proofs of this ; never- theless, I must needs tell you with profound regret, but with deep conviction, that the road which that Government seems desirous of taking is not that which leads to an understanding. If the Court of Rome chooses to take for granted, as a starting- point, that one concession ought to lead to others ad infinitum, she is giving herself up to an illusion which it is my duty, con- sidering the good understanding which we wish to bring about with her, to dispel at the onset."*

What is important to state is, that the clandestine commu- nications of the Holy See had the immediate effect of increasing the disturbances and encouraging the manifestations of the Polish clergy.

* Letter of Prince Gortchakoft' to M. de Kisseleff, llth April, 1862.

197

Scarcely had Monsignor Felinski received the Pope's letter than he thought he ought to release himself from all obedience to the authorities of the realm ; nay, he did not even care to keep on good terms with them.

The Government having been informed that the procession habitually celebrated at Warsaw on St. Mark's Day was going to be accompanied by disturbances, requested the Archbishop of Warsaw to allow the ceremony to take place this time inside the church, and not in the streets.

The Archbishop entrenched himself behind the question of principle, and, in spite of the repeated prayers of the authorities, in spite of prohibition published in the newspapers and communi- cated to each priest, he ordered the clergy to celebrate this pro- cession with unusual pomp.

The disorders that had been foreseen broke out, blood was nearly spilt in the streets of Warsaw, and when the Emperor's Lieutenant demanded explanations of Monsignor Felinski, this Archbishop answered : —

" That the clergy had acted by his orders ; that he himself would place himself at the head of future processions, in spite of any prohibition made by the Government ; that he absolutely disputed with the latter the right of forbidding the free exercise of religion ; that if he found it necessary he would go as far as to close the churches ; and lastly, that he ' preferred seeing 10,000 men dead on the ground ' to yielding one particle of the right which the canonical laws acknowledged to be his."

This language was reported at Home, but incurred no canonical disapprobation.

Moreover, at this period (April, 1863) the Holy See was openly associated with the diplomatic coalition organised against Russia.

Pius IX. on the 22nd April, 1863, despatched to His Majesty the Emperor a letter actuated by "the lively interest mani- fested on all sides both by nations and Governments in favour of Poland," in which letter after bavins: enumerated at length the pretended impediments placed in the way of the exercise of the Roman Catholic religion, His Holiness not only claimed for the Romish clergy prerogatives incompatible with the inde- pendence and the security of the State, as well as with the

198

exercise of the Sovereign's authority, but also the right of "direct- ing the people and exercising their influence on public instruction" (die il ckro ricuperi la sua influenza nel imegnamento e direzion

delpopolo.)

In a secret Consistory held at Rome on the 29th October, 1866, Pius IX. made the following assertion : —

" Neither the demands addressed to the Russian Government by our Cardinal- Secretary of State, nor the letters addressed by us to the Emperor, have had any result. Our letter of the 23rd of April, 1863, remains unanswered."

" Nihil autem valuernnt nosirce expostulationes per nostrum Cardinalem a publicis negotiis factfe apud ilium Gubernium, niliil nostrce Utter ce ad ipsum Serenissimum Principem scripts (22nd April, 1863) quibus nullum fuit datum responsirm" (" Roman Documents," Appendix C, p. 303.)

It is with deep regret that we are obliged to show the inaccu- racy of this assertion.

The Emperor received the letter in question April 29th, .1863. On the llth of May of the same year His Majesty despatched an answer to His Holiness which a special messenger conveyed to Rome, and which was placed in the hands of his Eminence Car- dinal Antonelli by M. de Kisseleff, on the 20 May (1 June,) 1863.

This letter of response was expressed in the following terms:

" Most Holy Father, — My Minister at Rome has transmitted to me the letter of your Holiness. I have read it with the attention that I always give to all communications which emanate from you, and whose subject is the important interests which you and I have to guard. Nevertheless, I regret that your Holiness speaks to me only of past acts. Your Holiness sees in certain unsatisfied claims of the Roman Catholic Church in the Kingdom of Poland the exclusive cause of the disorders which are actually afflicting that country. Yet there are few States in Europe which have been more cruelly tried by the attacks of revolution than those in which the Roman Catholic Church exercises unlimited authority. We must conclude from this that the evil has other causes. These I pai'tly laid before your Holiness when I drew your attention to the reprehensible behaviour, nay the crimes, of a large number of the Roman

199

Catholic clergy of the Kingdom of Poland. I did so, not to raise up grievances, but in the firm persuasion that it would suffice to enlighten your Holiness as to certain excesses sufficiently worthy of condemnation to cause you to find in your conscience the accents of indignation, and in your spiritual authority the influ- ence necessary to bring back to a sense of their duty those members of the clergy who had so seriously neglected it.

" This alliance of religious ministers with the abettors of dis- orders which threaten society is one of the most revolting acts of our age. Your Holiness ought to be as anxious as I am to bring it to an end.

" It was with the object of preventing so deplorable a situa- tion that I deferred to a constant wish of your Holiness and of your august predecessors, and expressed last year my approval of an Apostolic Nuncio. I regret the obstacles which, indepen- dent of my will, have put off up to the present time the realisa- tion of this project. I am still ready to receive an Envoy from your Holiness, and to welcome him with the cordial feelings which I desire to see presiding over our relations. I am convinced that a direct understanding, based on the Concordat concluded between my Government and that of your Holiness, would lead to the enlightnient which I desire, in order to dispel the misconceptions caused by erroneous or malicious reports, and would usefully serve the cause of political order and religious interests, which are inseparable at a period when both have to defend themselves from the attacks of revolution. Every act of my reign and my solici- tude for the spiritual wants of my subjects of every faith are a pledge for the sentiments which I shall infuse into it.

" I beg your Holiness to accept the repeated assurance of my high consideration, and sincere esteem.

(Signed) "ALEXANDER."

At the same time the Vice- Chancellor of the Empire instructed his Majesty's Minister at Rome to inform the Holy See that " as regards the position of the Nuncio at the Imperial Court, the Emperor is inclined to adopt as a rule the law in force in France, where the Roman Catholic religion is that of the country."

M. de Kisseleff was, besides, furnished with a circumstantial memorandum in which the grievances raised in the Pope's letter

200

were reduced to their just value by a series of acts and figures difficult to refute.

Lastly, in a confidential letter addressed to M. de Kisseleff, Prince Gortchakoff, foreseeing cases for which these concessions would still seem insufficient, made the following remarks : —

" I am not far from believing that the Court of Rome has still greater aspirations ; but it appears to me that it would be difficult for her to confess to them, as that would entail throwing off her mask before all Europe. If the Papal Government is not content to see her Envoy received on the same footing as one who resides in a country which is essentially Roman Catholic, the responsibility of a refusal will not fall on us, and you would then take care that the facilities offered by the Imperial Cabinet should not be ignored.*

It is worth noticing that, in the Roman Collection, the slightest allusion to documents of such importance, or to the negotiations which were their consequence, is carefully avoided.

Nevertheless, it is certain that M. de Kisseleff exchanged with the Cardinal Secretary of State long explanations on the subject of the Pope's correspondence with the Emperor. With regard to sending the Nuncio, his Eminence even asked the Russian Minister what was meant by " the position of the representative of the Holy See in Paris." He took pains to show a distinc- tion between the theory of the French legislation and their practice, in virtue of which the restrictive stipulations of the organic institutions would not be made use of in France. This perseverance, in making the sending of the Nuncio dependent on the concession of prerogatives which even France, though a Roman Catholic country, has always refused to the Holy See, as is proved by the incident which occurred in 1865, and is related above, revealed second thoughts which the Imperial Cabinet had a right to distrust, and which entailed, as a necessary conse- quence, the abandonment of that combination for the present as well as for the future. His Holiness, too, expressed himself very clearly in this respect. On the 6th of June, 1863, having granted M. de Kisseleff a private audience, His Holiness, after

* Despatch and confidential letter from Prince Gortchakoff to M. de Kisseleff, May llth, 1803.

201

conversing for some time about the Emperor's letter the exis- tence of which is now denied, added " That he thought the state of affairs was too critical for the presence of a Nuncio at St. Petersburg to be of any practical utility, and that under existing circumstances it would be embarrassing."*

The ill-will and hostility of the Court of Rome manifested themselves at this period in exact proportion to the difficulties, at home and abroad, which the Imperial Government had to fight against.

On August 31 the Cardinal Vicar of Rome published an edict, inviting the inhabitants of the capital to take part in a procession destined to disarm the Divine wrath which was excited by the growing want of faith and the iniquities which characterize the unhappy century in which we live.

After citing as a proof of this Divine wrath the cattle-plague now raging in the Papal States, the Cardinal Vicar ended his edict by saying : — " Besides, it is the will of His Holiness that under these circumstances special prayers be made for unfortunate Poland, which we see with grief become the scene of massacres and bloodshed. The Polish nation, always having been Catholic, has served as a bulwark against the invasion of error; certainly, therefore, she deserves to be prayed for, in order that she may be freed from the evils by which she is afflicted, may never lose her reputation, and may always show herself to be faithful to the charge which has been entrusted to her."

Meanwhile the Russian nation nocked round the Throne with a readiness almost unexampled in history. They declared to the whole world that they were prepared to spill the last drop of their blood to defend the dignity of their Sovereign and the integrity of their national territory.

An armed force quelled the insurrection. Foreign interference grew slack, and became exhausted for want of combination and elements of action. The painful but unavoidable work of putting down the insurrection once accomplished, the Emperor owed it to himself as well as to the evident interests of all his subjects, to prevent the recurrence of such calamitous disturbances, by

* Despatches of M. de Kisseleff, June 8th (20th), 1803. Nos. 41, 42, 43.

202

remedying one by one the organic vices which throve in Polish society. A series of reforms, prompted by the teaching of experience, as well as of political shrewdness, were studied, debated, and perfected ; and it is from the increased but undis- turbed application of these that will result, with God's help, the salutary and desirable work of the real regeneration of a nation of the same stock, the same race, and governed by the same sceptre as the Russian people, and whose destiny is consequently inseparable from that of Russia.

Of these reforms none were perhaps so urgent as those which were adopted with regard to the Roman Catholic clergy of the kingdom.

The number of monastic institutions had multiplied endlessly, and the facts set forth above showed the active part taken in the insurrection by the regular clergy.

In spite of the canonical laws, and the Bull of Benedict XIV., of May 2, 1744, there were in the kingdom seventy-five convents which existed contrary to the prescriptions of this Bull. These convents were suppressed ; their lands were secularized, and their* revenues devoted to the maintenance of the retained cloisters, as well as to charity and public instruction.

Like measures were taken with regard to the parochial clergy. The revenues of these latter were divided as injudiciously as they were unfairly. The large majority of the parish priests were left in want, whilst the higher clergy and a few favoured ones realized enormous sums.

An end was put to that sad state of things by a series of measures in conformity with those which were adopted in more than one Catholic State.

It was impossible to maintain in their episcopal sees the prelates who had rendered themselves conspicuous by their illegalities and animosities against the Government.

Archbishop Felinski was sent to Yaroslaw, but preserved his jurisdiction and his salary. However, having broken his word by sending to his vicar, Rzewuski, secret instructions ordering him to keep on the ecclesiastical mourning in the kingdom, he was ultimately deprived of the administration of his diocese.

The Government acted with 'even less severity towards

203

Monsignor Kalinski, the United Greek Bishop of Chelm, in spite of the active part he took in the insurrectionary movement, and the fanaticism with which he took pains to impose on his flock the rites and ceremonies of the Romish Church ; the authorities of the kingdom received orders not to consent to the consecration of this bishop.

On the 24th of April, 1864, the Pope delivered at the College of the Propaganda an allocution, the violence of which it was afterwards sought to weaken, and the terms of which were contested, but it is certain that his Majesty the Emperor was personally accused " of tormenting and oppressing the Church, of attacking the Catholic faith, and persecuting unfortunate people for having remained true to death to the religion of Christ."

The Pope repeated that accusation in his Encyclical Letter of July 30, 1864, to the Bishops of Poland, whom he exhorted to remain constant and persevering.

The Emperor could not, consistently with his own dignity, continue to be represented at the Court of a Sovereign thus acting towards His Majesty, and M. de KisselefT was recalled from Rome. The management of the Imperial Legation at Rome was left to the First Secretary, Baron Meyendorff, who was instructed to observe an absolute reserve and to refrain from any diplomatic initiative. Meantime, the Imperial Government, seeing it was useless to entertain regular relations with a Govern- ment the bad disposition of which was manifested by such acts, confined itself to acknowledge the communications from Rome without any commentary.

Baron Meyendorff, who had abstained from going to the Vatican for nearly a year, was unofficially told that his abstention was producing a painful impression, and that the Roman Government would be glad that it ceased.

He asked for instructions from his Government, and was authorized to offer his homage to the Holy Father on the occasion of the reception of the diplomatic body at Christmas.

On December 27, 1865, he had the honour of being received by the Pope.

The incidents, much to be regretted, of that interview have

204

been published and interpreted in the most inaccurate manner. No one having been present at that interview, it would have been necessary to oppose the assertions of a simple diplomatic functionary to those of the Sovereign Pontiff. The Imperial Cabinet abstained from doing so for reasons easy to appreciate.

But the Court of Rome thought fit to raise so delicate a question. In doing so it has published official documents, and backed them by assertions which it is impossible not to rectify now.

After enumerating the questions touched upon by His Holiness in this audience, the official narrator of the Holy See expresses himself as follows : —

" Yet the Charge d' Affaires did not hesitate to contest the authenticity of such notorious facts. After some allusions, unseemly in the presence of His Holiness, he presumed to say that nothing of this sort would have happened if the Catholics had behaved like the Protestants, for the latter having sup- ported the Government during the insurrection, had received many favours refused to the Catholics on account of their hostile attitude ; and he pushed his audacity to the conclusion that there was nothing surprising in the way the Catholics had acted, as Catholicism is identical with revolution. On this reply, the Pope, inflamed with just indignation, and feeling that the cause of the faithful (whose august chief he is) was generally insulted, dismissed him, answering — ' I esteem and respect his Majesty the Emperor, but I cannot say as much for his Charge d' Affaires, who, contrary to his Sovereign's orders, I am sure, has come and insulted me in my cabinet/ "*

Although we wish to spare the adherents of the Roman Catholic religion details which can only vex them, it is necessary to repel some of these assertions.

The Russian Charge d' Affaires did not allow himself to say that Catholicism and revolution were one and the same thing. What he said was, that in Poland, Catholicism had allied itself to revolution. That fact, profoundly to be regretted, had become

* Roman Documents, pages 53 and 54.

205

historical ; it had been reported to the Holy See more than once, on whom alone it depended to prevent it.

His Holiness having attributed to the Emperor the intention of persecuting the Church, his Majesty's Charge d' Affaires was able and bound to oppose to this most gratuitous assertion a truth, melancholy, no doubt, but incontrovertible. As the Russian Charge d'Affaires had been abruptly dismissed by the Pope, all diplomatic relations with the Court of Rome became impossible, and the Imperial Cabinet consequently sent Baron Meyendorff orders to acquaint Cardinal Anton elli that, after the reception he had had from His Holiness, his mission was ended, as the Emperor could not maintain at the Papal Court a representative whose dignity was not sheltered from all attack.

Baron Meyendorff obeyed his orders on the 9th February, 1866. Cardinal Anton elli, after expressing his regret, asked him if he was to consider this a recall of the Imperial Legation. Baron Meyendorff answered that he was awaiting fresh orders at Rome, and only acting as transactor of passing business, and that the mechanism of" the Legation would continue to discharge its functions.

This state of affairs lasted till the 13th of March. Cardinal Antonelli then told Baron Meyendorff officially, " That since he declared his political mission to be ended, the Court of Rome looked upon the Russian Legation as no longer existing ; that if the Pope had not sent him his passports, it was only because His Holiness knew that he must depart in a few weeks, and because, as he had said that he was staying at Rome till further commands, in order to transact current business, his Eminence had consented that the Legation should continue its functions in order that be- fore its departure it might have every facility for settling the same ; and lastly, that it was not the Pope's intention to allow a new Russian Legation to be formed at Rome after the departure of Baron Meyendorff ; and that, as for the interests of Russian subjects, Baron Meyendorff might entrust them to the Embassy of some other Power."

After that declaration the Second Secretary of Legation, left at Rome to keep the archives, received the order to take down the Russian arms from the hotel, and declare to Cardinal

206

Antonclli that "the Pope having taken the initiative of the breaking off of the relations, His Majesty declined the responsi- bilities that might ensue."

In one of the official communications of the Court of Rome the Cardinal Secretary of State wrote in 1865 : —

" That His Holiness hoped that the Emperor would not put his conscience to the unavoidable necessity of revealing to the whole world the series of prejudices from which the Roman Catholic Church is continually suffering in the Imperial and Royal territory."*

He received the following answer to his threat : —

" The conscience of our august Master absolves him from all intention of oppressing the Catholic religion. We shall look for- ward with perfect calmness to the execution of the threat which terminates the memorandum of Cardinal Antonelli."

The above facts bear witness that the Imperial Cabinet had very strong motives for not fearing this appeal to public opinion, and that in abrogating the Concordat of 1847, after having exhausted all attempts at reconciliation, it only accepted the consequences of a position, the origin and responsibility of which belong to the Holy See.

* Memorandum from the Cardinal Secretary of State, dated 30th Jan., 1865.

20:

LETTER OF THE LATE COUNT MONTALEMBERT, ON ULTRAMONTANISM AND PAPAL INFALLI- BILITY, WRITTEN NOT LONG BEFORE HIS DEATH.

Paris, the 28th of February, 1870.

"Sir, — Since you are good enough to interest yourself in my former speeches and in my present opinions, you probably are aware that for several years past I have suffered from an incurable malady which forbids my writing and walking, and only at long intervals leaves me sufficient leisure, and my mind sufficiently free, to busy myself with the labours or the questions to which my life has been devoted. Thus will be explained to you my very involuntary delay in replying to the letter you did me the honour to address to me on the 16th of this month, respecting the contradiction you think you discern between my speeches on the Chapter of St. Denys, in tbe Chamber of Peers in 1847, and my approbation of the recent letters addressed by Father Gratry to Monseigneur the Archbishop of Malines. I desire first to thank you, Sir, for having thus afforded me an opportunity of reverting to a period now so distant, at the same time that I •explain myself on the questions of the day.

"That said, I beg you to observe that the Gallicanism of which I was the resolute and victorious adversary twenty-five years ago had only the name in common with that with which you reproach the Rev. Father Gratry. The Gallicanism I then called a mummy was no other than that which my old colleague and friend, Count Daru, ridiculed the other day when he said, in replying to M. Rouland, ' You are mistaking the century.1" It was solely the oppressive or vexatious intervention of the temporal power in spiritual interests : an interference which a portion of our old and illustrious French clergy had sometimes too easily accepted. But I venture to say that you will not find, any more in my speech of 1847 than in my other speeches or writings, a single word in con- formity with the doctrines or pretensions of the Ultramontanes of the present day; and that for an excellent reason — which is, that

p

208

nobody had thought of advocating or raising them during the period between my entrance into public life and the advent of the Second Empire. Never thank Heaven, have I thought, said, or written anything favourable to the personal and separate infalli- bility of the Pope, such as it is sought to impose upon us ; nor to the theocracy, the dictatorship of the Church, which I did my best to reprobate in that history of the Monks of the West of which you are pleased to appreciate the laborious fabric ; nor to that Absolutism of Home of which the speech that you quote disputed the existence, even in the Middle Ages, but which to- day forms the symbol and the programme of the faction dominant among us.

" Assuredly, if any one would kindly point out to me anything to correct or to retract in what I may have spoken from the tribune of the Luxembourg, or from that of the Palais Bourbon, and if I felt convinced of my wrong, it would be in no way painful to me to confess him in the right, for where is the public man to whom twenty-three years of experience and of revolutions have not taught something ?

" But when I read again with you my words of 1847, I find nothing, or scarcely anything, to change in them. I feel that, did the occasion arise, I to-day should again oppose all against which I then contended, and that I should proclaim, now as then, the reciprocal incompetence of the Church and of the State outside the boundary of their proper domain, without desiring that their mutual independence should lead to their absolute separation.

"At the same time I willingly admit that, if I have nothing to cancel I should have a great deal to add. I sinned by omission, or rather by want of foresight. I said, ' Gallicanism is dead, because it made itself the servant of the State ; you have now only to inter it.' I think I then spoke the truth. It was dead, and completely dead. How, then, has it risen again ? I do not hesitate to reply that it is in consequence of the lavish encour- agement given, under the pontificate of Pius IX., to exaggerated doctrines, outraging the good sense as well as the honour of the human race, — doctrines of which not even the coming shadow was perceptible under the Parliamentary Monarchy.

209

" There are wanting, then, to that speech, as to the one I made in the National Assembly on the Roman expedition, essential reservations against spiritual despotism, and against absolute monarchy, which I have always detested in the State, and which does not inspire me with less repugnance in the Church.

" But, in 1847, what could give rise to a suspicion that the liberal pontificate of Pius IX., acclaimed by all the Liberals of the two worlds, would become the pontificate represented and personified by the Univers and the Civilta ? In the midst of the unanimous cries then uttered by the clergy in favour of liberty as in Belgium, of liberty in everything and/or all, how could we foresee, as possible, the incredible wheelabout of almost all that same clergy in 1852 — the enthusiasm of most of the Ultramontane Doctors for the revival of Csesarism ? The harangues of Monseigneur Parisis, the charges of Monseigneur de Salinis, and especially the permanent triumph of those lay theologians of absolutism who began by squandering all our liberties, all our principles, all our former ideas, before Napoleon III., and after- wards immolated justice and truth, reason and history, in one great holocaust to the idol they raised up for themselves at the Vatican ?

" If that word idol seems to you too strong, please to lay the blame on what Monseigneur Sibour, Archbishop of Paris, wrote to me on the 10th of September, 1853 : — ' The new Ultramontane school leads us to a double idolatry — the idolatry of the temporal power and of the spiritual power. When you formerly, like ourselves, M. le Comte, made loud professions of Ultramontanism you did not understand things thus. We defended the independence of the spiritual power against the pretensions and encroachments of the temporal power, but we respected the constitution of the State and the constitution of the Church. We did not do away with all intermediate power, all hierarchy, all reasonable discussion, all legitimate resistance, all individuality, all spontaneity. The Pope and the Emperor were not, one the whole Church, and 'the other the whole State. Doubtless there are times when the Pope may set himself above all the rules which are only for ordinary times, and when his power is as extensive as the necessities of the Church. The old

210

Ultramontanes kept this in mind, but they did not make a rule of the exception. The new Ultramontanes have pushed every- thing to extremes, and have abounded in hostile arguments against all liberties — those of the State as well as those of the Church — and against the serious religious interests of the present time, and especially of a future day. One might be content with despising them, but when one has a presentiment of the evils they are preparing for us it is difficult to be silent and resigned. You have therefore done well, M. le Comte, to stigmatise them.'

"Thus, Sir, did the pastor of the largest diocese in Christendom express himself seventeen years ago, congratulating me upon one of my first protests against the spirit which, since then, I have never ceased to combat. For it is not to-day but in 1852 that I began to struggle against the detestable political and religious aberrations which make up contemporary Ultra- montanism.

" Here, then, traced by the pen of an Archbishop of Paris, is the explanation of the mystery that pre-occupies you, and of the contrast you point out between my Ultramontanism of 1847 and my Gallicanism of 1870.

"Therefore, without having either the will or the power to discuss the question now debating in the Council, I hail with the most grateful admiration, first, the great and generous Bishop of Orleans, then the eloquent and intrepid priests who have had the courage to stem the torrent of adulation, impos- ture, and servility, by which we run the risk of being swallowed up. Thanks to them, Catholic France will not have remained too much below Germany, Hungary, and America ; and I pub- licly pride myself, and more than I can express by words, upon having them for friends and for brother academicians. I have but one regret, that of being prevented by illness from descending into the arena with them, not, certainly, on the ground of theology, but on that of history and of the social and political consequences of the system they contend against. Thus should I deserve my share (and it is the only ambition remaining to me) in those litanies of abuse daily launched against my illustrious friends by a too numerous portion of that poor clergy which pre- pares1 for itself so sad a destiny, and which I formerly loved,

211

defended, and honoured as it had not hitherto been in modern France.

" I thank you once more, Sir, for having enabled me thus to say what I think, and I should be a great deal more obliged to you if I could hope that you would obtain the publication of this letter in one of the journals with which your opinions must put you in intercourse.

"Accept, &c.,

" CH. DE MONTALEMBERT."

We need only remind our readers that Archbishop Sibour, whose curious and really admirable letter Count Montalembert quotes, was appointed to the See of Paris by General Changarnier, after the death of Monseigneur Affre, in June, 1848, and was murdered, like his predecessor.

DR. DOLLINGER AND PAPAL INFALLIBILITY.

The Dusseldorf Gazette publishes a letter addressed by Dr. Dollinger to the Archbishop of Munich, in explanation of his refusal to submit to the decree of the Council concerning the Infallibility of the Pope. The following are important points of the letter : —

"Your excellency has asked me in two letters to explain my position with respect to the Roman Decrees of July 18, 1870, which have been published by you.

"It has transpired in the circle of your cathedral chapter that it is your intention to proceed against me with such penal measures as are used only against priests who have been guilty of gross moral crimes, and even but seldom against these, if I do not, within a certain period, submit myself to the two new articles of faith, as to the omnipotence and Infallibility of the Pope.

"I learn at the same time that a council meeting of German bishops is to take place shortly at Fulda.

" In the year 1848, when a meeting of all the German bishops was held at Wurzburg, the honour of an invitation

212

was extended to myself, and I took part in the proceedings. Your excellency might perhaps arrange that I should be allowed in the meeting which is ahout to take place, not this time to take part in the proceedings, but to have an audience for a few hours.

"For I am prepared to prove before this meeting the follow- ing theses, which are of decisive importance for the present situation of the German Church, as well as for my personal position.

" First, the new Articles of Faith are based upon the texts in the Holy Scriptures, St. Matt. xvi. 18,* and St. John xxi. 17, f and, as far as infallibilty is concerned, upon the text, St. Luke xxii. 32,J with which the same, Biblically considered, must stand or fall. But we are bound by a solemn oath, which I myself have twice sworn, to ' accept and to explain the Holy Scriptures, not otherwise than according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.' The Fathers of the Church have all, without exception, explained the texts in question as bearing a totally different meaning from the new decrees, and in the text St. Luke xxii. 32, especially, have found anything but an infallibility given to the Pope. There- fore, were I to accept this explanation with the decrees, with- out which every Biblical basis is wanting to them, I should commit a perjury. And, as I have said, I am prepared to prove this to the bishops in council.

" Secondly, in several episcopal pastorals and notices which have lately appeared, the assertion has been made, or the historical proof sought, that the new doctrine now proceeding from Rome as to the universal power of the Pope over every single Christian, and as to the Papal infallibility in decisions in the Church on matters of faith from the beginning, through

* Matt. xvi. 18. — " And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I -noil build my Church ; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

t St. John xxi. 17.—" He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me ? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me ? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all tilings ; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus said unto him, Feed my sheep."

I St. Luke xxii. 32. — "But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren,"

213

all time and for ever, has been generally, or, at least, nearly generally, believed and taught. I am prepared to shew that this assertion is based upon an entire misconception of the traditions of the Church for the first thousand years, and upon an entire distortion of her history. It is in direct contradiction to the plainest facts and testimonies.

" Thirdly, I am ready to prove that the bishops of the Latin countries, Spain, Italy, South America, and France, who formed the immense majority at Rome, were, with their clergy, already led astray by the class-books from which they took their ideas during their seminary education, the proofs given in these books being for the most part false, invented, or distorted. I shall prove this, first, with the two principal and favourite works of modern theological schools and seminaries, 'The Moral Philosophy of S. Alphonsus Liguori' (especially as regards the treatise contained therein concerning the Pope), and ' The Theology of the Jesuit Peroni ' ; further, with the writings of the Archbishop Cardoni, and of Bishop Ghilardi, which were distributed in Rome during the Council ; and finally, with ' The Theology of the Vienesse Theologian Schwetz.'

" Fourthly, I appeal to the fact, which I am prepared to prove in public, that two General Councils and several Popes have already decided in the fifteenth century, by solemn decrees, issued by the Councils, and repeatedly confirmed by the Popes, the question as to the extent of the Pope's power, and as to his infallibility, and that the decrees of the 18th of July, 1870, are in the most glaring contradiction to these resolutions, and, therefore, cannot possibly be considered as binding.

"Fifthly, I believe that I shall be able to demonstrate that the new decrees are simply incompatible with the constitutions of the States of Europe, and especially with that of Bavaria; and that I, who am bound by oath to this constitution, which I have lately sworn on my admission to the Chamber of the Councillors of State, find it impossible to accept the new decrees, and as their necessary consequence, the Bulls ' Unam Sanctam ' and ' Cum ex Apostolatus officio,' tbe Syllabus of Pius IX., with so many other Papal declarations and laws, which are now to be accepted as infallible decisions although

214

they are in irreconcileable antagonism to the laws of the country. I appeal on this subject to the opinion given by the Legal Faculty in Munich, and I am ready to abide by the arbitration of any German Legal Faculty which your excel- lency may be pleased to name.

" I only ask two conditions for the conference which I have proposed, or rather prayed for ; first, that my assertions, together with any counter- assertions, shall be recorded, with a view to their subsequent publication ; secondly, that a man of scientific culture, to be chosen by me, shall be allowed to be present at the conference.

"Should this be unattainable before the German bishops in Fulda, I venture most respectfully to make another request : that it may please your excellency to form, out of the members of your cathedral chapter, a committee, before which I may plead my cause in the way above mentioned. Several of these venerable gentlemen are Doctors, and were formerly Professors of Theology, and were once my scholars. I may assume that it would be more agreeable to them to treat with me in quiet argument, to confute me, if possible, with reasons and facts, than to draw up, upon the seat of judgment, criminal sentences against me, and to submit the same to your excellency, to be fulminated, as the saying is. If your excellency will consent to preside at this conference, and will condescend to correct any errors into which I may have fallen in the citation and explanation of testimonies and facts, I shall count it as a great honour, and the cause of truth must be profited thereby. And when you place before me the prospect of the exercise of your pastoral power, I may still hope that you will prefer to employ, in the first place, towards me, the finest, most noble, most benevolent, and most Christlike attribute of this power — namely, the teacher's office. Should I be convinced by testi- monies and facts, I engage myself to revoke publicly all that I have written in this matter, and so confute myself. In any case the results must be advantageous to the Church and the peace of souls. For it is not I alone who am concerned ; but thousands of the clergy, hundreds of thousands of the laity, who think as I do, and find it impossible to accept the new articles of faith.

215

" Up to this day not a single one, even of those who have signed a declaration of submission, has said to me that he is really convinced of the truth of these theses. All my friends and acquaintances confirm me in this experience ; ' not a single person believes in it/ is what I hear day by day from all lips. A conference such as I have proposed, and the publication of the proceedings, will in any case afford that deeper insight which so many long for.

" Your excellency may refer me to the pastoral letter which has recently appeared under the sanction of your name, as a source whence I might derive sufficient instruction and correction in respect to the opinions I hold : but I must avow that it has produced a totally contrary effect upon me, and I engage to show that this pastoral letter contains a long series of misunderstood, distorted, mutilated, or invented testimonies, which, together with the suppression of importants facts and opposite testimonies, present a picture totally dissimilar to the real tradition. Assuredly the person to whom your excellency confided this composition has not invented the falsifications, but has borrowed them in good faith from others (from Cardoni and others) ; but if he be willing to defend his elaboration at the proposed conference, he would find me ready, within a very few hours, either to prove my allegations or, if I should not succeed therein, publicly to apologise and to make an honourable amend. In consideration, however, of the import- ance of this matter, I conceive it to be my duty to make this offer, subject to one condition only, namely, that his Majesty's government be requested to appoint an official, well versed in the knowledge of historical and ecclesiastical law, to be present at the conference as a witness. As this matter is also one of the highest interest for all governments I presume it may be taken for granted that such a request will not be refused on the part of the government.

"In the past history of the Church, facts are not wanting to prove that my proposal is in perfect harmony both with the principles and practice of the Church. Thus, in the year 411, a conference, consisting of 286 Catholic and 279 Don atist bishops, was held under the presidency of the Imperial official Marcel-

216

linns : at this conference the disputed doctrine of the Church was discussed, and the President decided in favour of the Catholic bishops. In the year 1433 Bohemian Calixtines appeared at the council at Basle. A decree of the Synod of Constance, issued eighteen years before, concerning the communion in one form, was then submitted to a new discussion and examina- tion, from which those compacts resulted, which were recog- nised by the Holy See, in virtue whereof an important and far-penetrating concession, and derogating from the older resolution, was made to the Bohemians. A still greater parallel to the discussion I propose is to be found in the conference, so celebrated in French history, between Du Perron, the Bishop of Evreux, and the Protestant statesman and scholar, M. Du Plessis-Mornay, which took place at Fontainebleau in the year 1600, at the instigation of King Henry IV. The ques- tion under consideration was the charge preferred against Mornay, that in his book on the Eucharistics he had falsified a great many passages or quoted them incorrectly. The King himself pre- sided ; and the most notable men of both churches were present as witnesses. This conference was interrupted by Mornay's illness after the lapse of a few days, and after a number of passages quoted by him had been examined ; nevertheless, it produced an effect on the then greatly agitated state of the public mind extremely favourable to the Catholic cause.

" Most venerable Archbishop, I leave entirely to your own judgment which form you will give to a conference so much desired by myself, and certainly so welcome to multitudes of German Catholics, and what persons you will invite to attend or oppose to me. In your diocese there is certainly no want of professional theologians who will be glad to accept your invitation. The practice of the Church proves that a question of faith is just as much an affair o'f the laity as of the clergy, and that the former may take part in the scientific examination and establishment of the tradition — as both Popes and theologians have acknowledged. And in this case, which is a matter for historical proof, I am gladly ready to submit to the verdict of the most eminent historians of the German nation and of the Catholic faith. Such men as Ficker, Reumont, Hofler, Arneth, Kamps-

217

chulte, Cornelius, Lerenz, Wegele, Asehbach, may judge whether my proofs be critically and historically right or not.

" Your excellency was pleased formerly to honour my book on the First Ages of the Church Apostolical with your approval, and it was generally considered among German Catholics to be a true picture of the time of foundation : even the Jesuitic- Ultra- montane party let it pass without censure. But if the new decrees contain the truth, then I have laid myself open to the reproach of having entirely misrepresented the history of the Apostles. That entire section of my book which concerns the constitution of the earlier Church, my description of the relation in which Paul and the other Apostles stood to Peter — all is fundamentally wrong, and I ought to condemn my own book, and confess that I have neither understood Luke's Acts of the Apostles nor their own Epistles.

" The new Vatican doctrine confers upon the Pope the whole plenitude of power (totam plenitudinem potestatis) over the entire Church, as well as over every individual layman, priest and bishop ; and this power pretends to be at once the genuine episcopalian, and also the specific Papal authority, which is to comprise all things whatsoever, in relation to faith, morals, duties of life and discipline, and is to be entitled to lay hold upon the monarch as well as upon the day labourer, in order to inflict upon him punishment, commandment, or prohibition. The wording is so carefully put that no other position and authority is left to the bishops than such as pertain to Papal commissioners and pleni- potentiaries. Every person acquainted with history, and with the Fathers, must know that, by this means, the orthodox episcopacy is destroyed in its very essence, and that an apostolic institution which, in the opinion of the Fathers of the Church, is entitled to the highest consideration and authority, is thus reduced to an unsubstantial shadow. For no one will admit it to be possible that there shall be two bishops in the same diocese — the one being at the same time the Pope, and the other merely a bishop — because a Papal vicar or a diocesan commissioner is not exactly a bishop nor a successor of the apostles. In virtue of the powers conferred upon him by Rome, he may be a very mighty man as long as his employer chooses to maintain him in office, precisely as a

218

Jesuit or a Mendicant whom the Pope has endowed with an abundance of privileges might be. I am well aware that this prospect of an extension of their power has been held out to the bishops at Rome, and that it has often been said to them — ' The more irresistible the Pope the stronger you will be, for the plenitude of my power will cause rich rays to alight upon you.' The bishops of the minority have full well seen through the deceptive part of these promises ; by the official ' analytical- synopsis ' it is shown that they have- fully recognised that, when the universal episcopacy of the Pope is established, they may still continue to be dignitaries of the Church, but they will cease to be true bishops. Right reverend sir, you yourself took part in the deputation, which on the 15th July, made the most urgent counter-representations to the Pope — representations which M. de Ketteler essayed to render still more emphatic by his prostration at the feet of the Pontiff. These representations, it is well known, were made in vain. The only consolation offered to the prelates, mourning over the loss of their orthodox dignity, was limited to the wording of the decree, which provided that the power of the bishop is an ' ordinary' one (that is to say, in the language of the Roman canonists, a ' potestas ordinaria subdelegata'), and that the Pope considered it his duty to support the same was proved by a mutilated quotation from Gregorius the Great : but if this passage had been quoted com- pletely, together with others, it would have proved to the world that this Pope of the seventeenth century repelled from him with the profoundest aversion as a blasphemous usurpation the idea of such a universal episcopacy as is now intended to be established.

" And here I beg your excellency to consider that the doctrine which we are now to adopt forms by its own nature, and by the declaration of the Pope himself, by the confession of all infalli- bilists, a fundamental article of faith — that it is a question of the regula fidei, of the rule which must decide what is to be believed and what is not. In future every Catholic Christian can only answer the query why he believes this or that as follows : — ' I believe, or deny it, because the infallible Pope has commanded me to believe or to deny it.' This first principle of faith, as the Holy Scriptures necessarily should most clearly show, can never

219

have been doubtful in the Church — it must at every date and among every people have governed the whole Church like a brightly shining star — must have been placed in the front of all instruction ; and we all wait for an explanation of why it is that only after 1830 years the Church has started the idea of making an article of faith of a doctrine which the • Pope calls, in a letter addressed to your excellency on the 28th of October, ' ijmim fundamentale principimn Caiholicce fidei ac doctrines.' How can it have been possible that the Popes should, during centuries past have exempted whole countries, whole schools of theology, from belief in this ' fundamental article of faith?' And — may I add — how is it that your excellency yourself strove so long and so persistently against the enunciation of this dogma ? Because it was not opportune, you say. But can it ever have been ' inopportune ' to give to believers the key of the whole temple of faith, to announce to them the fundamental article on which all the rest depend? We stand all of us giddy before a chasm which opened before us on the 18th of July last.

"He who wishes to measure the immense range of these resolutions may be urgently recommended to compare thoroughly the third chapter of the decrees in Council with the fourth, and to realise for himself what a system of universal government and spiritual dictation stands here before us. It is the plenary power over the whole Church as over each separate member, such as the Popes have claimed for themselves since Gregory VII., such as is pronounced in the numerous bulls since the bull 'TJnam sanctam,' which is henceforth to be believed and acknow- ledged in his life by every Catholic. This power is boundless, incalculable ; it can, as Innocent III. said, strike at sin every- where ; can punish every man, allows of no appeal, is sovereign and arbitrary, for, according to Bonifacius VIII., the Pope ' carries all rights in the shrine of his bosom.' As he has now become infallible, he can in one moment, with the one little word 'orbi' (that is, that he addresses himself to the whole Church), make every thesis, every doctrine, every demand, an unerring and irrefragable article of faith. Against him there can be maintained no right, no personal or corporate freedom — or, as

220

the canonists say, the tribunal of God and that of the Pope are one and the same. This system bears its Romish origin on its forehead, and will never be able to penetrate in Germanic countries. As a Christian, as a theologian, as a historian, as a citizen, I cannot accept this doctrine. Not as a Christian, for it is irreconcileable with the spirit of the Gospel, and with the plain words of Christ and of the Apostles ; it purposes just that establishment of the kingdom of this world which Christ rejected; it claims that rule over all communions which Peter forbids to all and to himself. Not as a theologian — for the whole true tradition of the Church is in irreconcileable opposition to it. Not as a historian can I accept it, for as such I know that the persistent endeavour to realise this theory of a kingdom of the world has cost Europe rivers of blood, has confounded and degraded whole countries, has shaken the beautiful organic architecture of the elder Church, and has begotten, fed, and sustained the worst abuses in the Church.

" Finally as a citizen, I must put this dogma away from me, because by its claims on the submission of states and monarchs, and of the whole political order under the Papal power, and by the exceptional position which it claims for the clergy, it lays the foundation of endless ruinous dispute between State and Church, between clergy and laity. For I cannot conceal from myself that this doctrine, the results of which were the ruin of the old German Kingdom, would, if governing the Catholic part of the German nation, at once lay the seed of incurable decay in the new kingdom which has just been built up. —

" Accept, &c., (Signed) "I VON DOLLINGER."

"Munich, March 28, 1871."

Dr. Dollinger's most convincing letter could not be answered : and therefore, soon after writing it, he was excommunicated. Since his excommunication, he has not been left without sympathy on the part of his co-religionists. The King has even written him to express his condolence with him and admiration of his conduct

221

t

and character. Dr. Dollinger's election as Rector of the University of Munich is the latest evidence that Rome's thunders cease to frighten the German people, even when they cleave to their old religious convictions.

"THE TABLET' ON MONTALEMBERT'S LETTER

OF FEB. 28ra, 1870. "The Tablet" (Vatican Supplement}, Mar. 26, 1870.

The real founder of "Liberal Catholicism," considered as a project for reconciling the Church with what are called " modern ideas," was perhaps De Lamennais, though nothing was further from his original intention. He had all the gifts necessary to the master of a school, and among his disciples were such men as Lacordaire, Gerbet, De Salmis, and Montalembert, It is not without interest at this moment to enquire what were the princi- ples and professions with which this school, whose chief was to end so dismally, commenced its career. Their first act was an uncompromising profession of Ultramontane doctrines. In the Univers of the 19th, we find a copy of the Declaration in which the editors of the Avenir proclaimed to the .Church and the world their principles and intentions. "At this day, more than at any other period," they said, " Catholic writers must redouble their vigilance and precautions in order to assure themselves that they are not departing in any point from true doctrine. The tra- ditions and the history of the Church indicate to them the most certain means of securing this object : they have only to address themselves directly to the Holy See, the infallible guardian of the truth. When, therefore, we formed the resolution of combating, in a moment of difficulty, in the cause of Catholic faith and liberty, our first glance was turned towards that Chair from which light and wisdom descend upon the whole Christian world." After some further observations, they proceed to make a solemn profession of faith, which bears the signatures of the thirteen men connected with the Avcnir, including Lacordaire and Montalembert. " We profess the most complete submission to

222

the authority of the Vicar of Jesus Christ. "We neither have nor wish to have any other faith than his faith, any other doc- trine than his doctrine. We approve all that he approves, we condemn all that he condemns, without a shadow of restriction, and each one of us submits to the judgment of the Holy See all his writings, past or future, of whatever nature they may be. In accordance with these principles, deeply engraven on our souls, we reject Gallicanism with all our strength ; first, because the declaration of 1682, which is its formal expression, has been re- versed, annulled, and reproved many times by the Holy See, without distinction of the articles ; and secondly, because the doc- trine which it implies establishes at once anarchy in the spiritual order, and servitude in the political.

Even this did not satisfy the eminent men who were afterwards to exercise, in various positions, so powerful an influence upon their generation. They proceeded, therefore, to enumerate vari- ous propositions in order to pronounce condemnation upon them. The first which they named was this : "A General Council is superior to the Pope." The second, — that " the monarchical form in the Church was not instituted immediately by Christ," they reprove by quoting the very words of the Theological Faculty of Paris, in which this proposition, asserted by Mark Antony de Dominis, was condemned as " heretical, schismatical, subversive of hierarchical order, and destructive to the peace of the Church." The third, that " the judgment of the Roman Pontiff in matters of faith is only irreformable after the assent of the Church has been joined to it," Montalembert and his distinguished col- leagues rejected for these reasons : (1) " because the Popes have never permitted that any doubt should attach for a moment to their decisions addressed to the whole Church ; (2) because this proposi- tion is contrary to the profession of faith sanctioned by the Eighth General Council, which defined that they are separated from, the communion of the Catholic Church who do not IN ALL THINGS profess the same belief as the Apostolic See' ; and (3) because of certain conclusions inevitably resulting from this false proposi- tion ; — such as, either that the Pope might fall into error, and so lead the whole Church astray, contrary to the promise of Jesus Christ; or that the Episcopate could lead the Pope back to truth,

223

which implies that the centre of unity may exist outside the Roman Church ; " — suppositions, they add, " which we reject as directly contrary to the Catholic faith."

Without noticing all the details of this remarkable Declaration, it will suffice to quote its concluding sentences. " If in the principles which we profess there be anything contrary to the faith or to ' Catholic doctrine,' we supplicate the Vicar of Jesus Christ to deign to admonish us, renewing to Him the promise of our perfect docility. God forbid that we should ever substitute our personal opinions for the tradition of the Church, of which He is the Sovereign interpreter. The very phenomena by which we are surrounded, and the vast chaos of conflicting opinions, are only too plain a warning to us how much each individual should distrust his own weak and limited intelligence. For us, sub- mission is not only our first duty as Catholics, but is, so to speak, our very being as writers. One word of revolt from our mouths would be the suicide of all that we can utter. For it is our first principle, the vital principle of our writings, the very life of our understanding, that truth is not a treasure belonging to ourselves ; and from our doctrine on human reason to our faith in the Chair of eternal truth, we are, as it were, on every side enveloped in the atmosphere of obedience. We will finish, by the grace of God, as we have begun. After having passed through days full of trial and combat, when our last sigh shall have announced the close of our toils, we cherish the hope that men will be able, without being contradicted by a single incident of our lives, to engrave on our tombs these words of Fenelon : 0 HOLY CHURCH

OF JEROME, IF EVER I FORGET THEE, MAY I FORGET MYSELF ! "

Paris, 2nd February, 1831.

F. DE LAMENNAIS, Priest. P. GERBET, Priest. ROHRBACHER, Priest. H. LACORDAIRE, Priest.

C. DE COUX.

A. BARTELS.

D'AULB-DUMESNIL.

VlCOMTE CH. DE MONTALEM-

BERT.

J. D'ORTIGUE.

A. DE SALINIS.

DAGUERRE. [Editor.

HAREL DU TANCREL, Chief

WAILLE, Managing Editor.

224

THE ENCYCLICAL AND SYLLABUS OF 1864.

IT would be an. error to suppose that the decrees of the Council of 1869-70 stood by themselves in the history of the Papacy, as a sudden manifestation of Jesuit supremacy. On the contrary, iu the Encyclical, which contains the Syllabus of propositions condemned by the Papacy, the Pope declares, that the condem- nation of these propositions forms a summary of the policy of his Pontificate ; and this is true, as respects the conduct he has pursued since his flight to Gaeta from republican Rome in 1848, and his final subordination to Jesuit direction, which ap- pears to have been consummated at that period. The convening of the Council of 1869-70, its decrees, and the proclamation of the personal infallibility of the Pope, form the climax of this policy, superinduced probably by the discovery, that the condemna- tions of the Syllabus are so extravagant, that their enforcement upon the Roman Catholic Church could not be accomplished, without the leverage, -which a further development of an obedient superstition was expected to afford.

Perhaps our readers may wish to know at a glance what the Syllabus is. The Syllabus consists of some eighty propositions on Religion, Politics, and Morality ; every one of which is now to be held by devout Roman Catholics, as condemned by an infallible authority, which is as binding on their consciences, as are the doctrines of the Bible on the consciences of others. The Syllabus treats the Papal authority as supreme. It anathematizes all the decrees of Monarchs, Parliaments, and States, which are contrary to the Papal policy therein enunciated ; and declares them to be utterly void of rightful authority. Travelling beyond this, into the sphere of opinion, it anathematizes without scruple all phases of thought not squared with its own dogmas, which it treats as antecedent.

The Dublin Review — the eminent Roman Catholic organ

which gives the Latin original and the English translation of the Encyclical and Syllabus, says of this remarkable State Paper (Dublin Review, No. VIII., p. 443) :— " We have no hesitation in

225

maintaining, consistently with our article on the ' Mirari Vos,' that its (i.e., the Encyclical's) doctrinal declarations possess absolute infallibility, in virtue of the promises made by Christ to St. Peter's Chair. Indeed, to hold that the Church's infallibility is confined to her definitions of faith seems to us among the most fatal errors of the day ; nor do we see where its legitimate results can stop, short of that extreme form of Catholic unbelief which animated the late Home and Foreign Review."

This, then, is no musty document of past times. It is the latest expression of the Councils of the Church of Home, not made in haste or in heat, but calmly, after long thought, publicly, in the face of Europe.

Every Romish priest and prelate is bound by this decree, and swears to obey it, to take it as his creed, and the rule of his actions.

That no country may be deceived, that no sovereign be left ignorant, here, given in full detail, is the declared judgment of him who is the sovereign ruler of millions of minds.

1st. To his rule and laws all the nations of the world must bow.

2nd. All sovereigns hold their thrones, all people pay their allegiance, on condition that they believe the Creed of Rome, and practise its worship.

3rd. There is no religion but that of Rome, and no other faith is to be held or allowed. Liberty of conscience is prohibited. Toleration of other religions is a crime against society.

4th. All sovereigns, who are Protestants, are heretics ; and heresy is a crime for which they ought to be deposed.

5th. All free thought and free speech on religion are criminal. Liberty of the press and of worship are to be put down.

This is the Creed, and, where it has the power, the practice, of Rome.

It is impossible to conceive a document more deeply fraught with the essence of despotism.

226

REMARKABLE LETTER FROM PERE LA CHAISE,

ETC.

The following is a letter from Father La Chaise, confessor to Louis XIV., to Father Peters, confessor to James II. of England, in 1688. It is from the seventh volume 4to. of the collection of manuscript papers selected from the library of Edward Haiiey, Earl of Oxford :— *

"Father La Chaise's Project for the Extirpation of Heretics, in a Letter from him to Father Peters, 1688.

" ' WORTHY FRIEND, — I received yours on the 20th of June last, and am glad to hear of your good success, and that our party gains ground so fast in England ; but, concerning the question you have put to me, " What is the best course to he taken to root out all heretics?" — I answer, there are divers ways to do that, but we must consider which, is the best to make use of in England. I am sure you are not ignorant of how many thousand heretics we have converted in France, by the power of our dragoons, in the space of one year ; having by the doctrine of those booted apostles, turned more in one month than Christ and His apostles could in ten years. This is a most excellent method, and far excels those of the great preachers and teachers that have lived since Christ's time. But I have spoken with divers fathers of our Society, who think that your king is not strong enough to accomplish his design by such kind of force; so that we cannot expect to have our work done in that manner, for the heretics are too strong in the three kingdoms ; and there- fore we must seek to convert them by fair means, before we fall upon them with fire, sword, halters, gaols, and other such-like

* See " Popery, as opposed to the Knowledge, the Morals, the Wealth, and the Liberty of Mankind," by Al. Walker, Esq. 2nd Edition. London : W. Strange, 1851 ; pp. 364—370.

227

punishments ; and therefore I can give you no better advice than to begin with soft, easy means. Wheedle them by promises of profit and places of honour, till you have made them dip them- selves in treasonable actions against the laws established, and then they are bound to serve for fear. When they have done this, turn them out, and serve others so, by putting them in their places ; and by this means gain as many as you can. And for the heretics that are in places of profit and honour, turn them out, or suspend them on pretence of misbehaviour ; by which their places are forfeited, and they are subject to what judgment you please to give upon them. Then you must form a camp, that must consist of none but Catholics ; this will dishearten the heretics and cause them to conclude that all means of relief and recovery is gone. And lastly, take the short and the best way, which is, to surprise the heretics on a sudden ; and to encourage the zealous Catliolics, let them sacrifice them all, and wash their hands in their blood, which will be an acceptable offering to God. This was the method I took in France, which hath well, you see, succeeded ; but it cost me many threats and promises before I could bring it thus far ; our king being a long time very unwilling. But at last I got him on the hip ; for he had lain with his daughter-in-law, for which. I would by no means give him absolution till he had given me an instrument, under his own hand and seal, to sacrifice all the heretics in one day. Now, as soon as I had my desired commission, I appointed the day when this should be done ; and, in the meantime, made ready some thousands of letters, to be sent into all parts of France in one post-night. I was never better pleased than at that time, but the king was affected with some compassion for the Huguenots, because they had been a means to bring him to his crown and throne ; and the longer he was under it, the more sorrowful he was, often complaining, and desiring me to give him his com- mission again ; but that I would by no persuasion do ; advising him to repent of that heinous sin, and also telling him, that the trouble and horror of his spirit did not proceed from anything of evil in those things that were to be done, but from that wicked- ness that he had done ; and that he must resolve to undergo the severe burden of a troubled mind for one of them or the other ;

228

and that if he would remain satisfied as it was, his sin being forgiven, there would, in a few days, be a perfect atonement made for it, and he perfectly reconciled to God again. But all this would not pacify him ; for the longer it continued the more restless he became ; and I therefore ordered him to retire to his closet, and spend his time constantly in prayer, without permitting any one to interrupt him ; — this was early in the morning, and on the evening following I was to send away all my letters. I indeed, made the more haste, for fear he should disclose it to any body, although I had given him a strict charge to keep it to himself; and the very things that I most feared, to my great sorrow, came to pass ; for just in the nick of time, the devil, who hath at all times his instruments at work, sent the Prince of Conde to the court, who asked for the king. He was told that he was in his closet, and would speak with no man. He impudently answered, "that he must and would speak with him," and so went directly to his closet ; he being a great peer, no man durst hinder him. And being come to the king, he soon perceived by his countenance that he was under some great trouble of mind, for he looked as if he had been going into the other world immediately. " Sir," said he, " what is the matter with you ?" The king at the first refused to tell him, but he pressing harder upon him, the king at last, with a sorrowful complaint, burst out, and said — " I have given Father La Chaise a commission, under my hand, to murder all the Huguenots in one day ; and this evening will the letters be despatched to all parts, by the post, for the performing it : so that there is but small time left for my Huguenot subjects to live, who have never done me any harm." Whereupon this cursed rogue answered, " Let him give you your commission again." The king said, " How shall I get it out of his hand ? For if I send to him for it, he will refuse to send it." And this devil answered, "If your majesty will give me the order, I will quickly make him return it."

" 'The king was soon persuaded, being willing to give ease to his troubled spirit, and said, " Well, go then, and break his neck, if he will not give it you." Whereupon this son of the devil went to the post-house, and asked if I had not a great number

229

of letters there ? And they said, " Yes, more than I had sent in a whole year before." " Then," said the prince, " by order from the king, you must deliver them all to me;" which they durst not disobey, for they knew well enough who he was. And no sooner was he got into the post-house, and had asked these questions, than I came also in after him, to give order to the post-master to give notice to all those under him, in the several parts of the kingdom, that they should take care to deliver my letters with all speed imaginable. But I had no sooner entered the house than he gave his servants order to secure the door, and said confidently to me, " You must, by order from the king, give me the commission which you have forced from him." I told him I had it not about me, but would go and fetch it ; thinking to get from him, and so go out of town, and send the contents of those letters another time ; but he said, " You must give it up ; and if you have it not about you, send somebody to fetch it, or else never expect to go alive out of my hands ; for I have an order from the king either to bring it or break your neck, and am resolved either to carry that back to him in my hand, or else your heart's blood on the point of my sword." I would have made my escape, but he set his sword to my breast, and said, " You must give it me, or die ; therefore deliver it, or else this goes through your body."

" 'So, when I saw nothing else would do, I put my hand in my pocket and gave it him ; which he carried immediately to the king, and gave him that and all my letters, which they burned. And, all being done, the king said, now his heart was at ease. Now, how he should be eased by the devil, or so well satisfied with a false joy, I cannot tell ; but this I know, that it was a very wicked and ungodly action, as well in his majesty as in the Prince of Conde, and did not a little increase the burden and danger of his majesty's sins. I soon gave an account of this affair to several fathers of our Society, who promised to do their best to prevent the aforesaid prince's doing such another act, which was accordingly done ; for, within six days after the damned action, he was poisoned, and well he deserved it. The king also did suffer too, but in another fashion, for disclosing the design unto the prince, and hearkening unto his counsel. And

230

many a time since, when I have had him at confession, I have shook hell about his ears, and made him sigh, fear, and tremble, before I would give him absolution ; nay, more than that, I have made him beg for it on his knees, before I would consent to absolve him. By this I saw that he had still an inclination to me, and was willing to be under my government ; so I set the baseness of the action before him, by telling him the whole story, and how wicked it was, and that it could not be forgiven, till he had done some good action to balance that, and expiate the crime. Whereupon, he at last asked me, what he must do ? I told him that he must root out all heretics from his kingdom. So, when he saw there was no rest for him, without doing it, he did again give them all into my power and that of our clergy, under this condition, that we would not murder them, as he had before given orders, but that we should by fair means, or force, convert them to the Catholic religion. Now, when we had got the commission, we at once put it in force ; and what the issue hath been, you very well know. But in England the work cannot be done after this manner, as you may perceive by what I have said to you ; so that I cannot give you better counsel, than to take that course in hand wherein we were so unhappily prevented ; and I doubt not, but it may have better success with you than with us.

'"I would write to you of many other things, but I fear I have already detained you too long, wherefore I will write no more at present, but that I am

" ' Your friend and servant,

" ' LA CHAISE. '"Paris, July 8th, 1688.'"

Dr. Burnet* gives a curious account of meeting Penn at the Court of the Prince of Orange, afterwards William III., to which Penn came on a private mission from James II. Burnet evidently supected that Penn was connected with the Jesuits, at that time so powerful at the Court of England. He says :

* Bishop Bui-net's "History of His Own Time," vol. i., pp. 6»3,fi94. 1724.

231

" Complaints come daily over from England of all the things that the priests were everywhere throwing out. Penn, the Quaker, came over to Holland. He was a talking, vain man, who had been long in the King's favour, he being the Vice- Admiral's son. He had such an opinion of his own faculty of persuading, that he thought none could stand before it. Though he was singular in that opinion — for he had a tedious, luscious way, that was not apt to overcome a man's reason, though it might tire his patience — he undertook to persuade the Prince to come into the King's measures, and had two or three long audiences of him upon the subject. And he and I spent some hours together on it. The Prince readily consented to a toleration of Popery as well as of Dissenters, provided it were proposed and passed in Parliament ; and he promised his assistance, if there was need of it, to get it to pass. But for the Tests, he would enter into no treaty about them. He said it was a plain be- traying the security of the Protestant religion, to give them up. Nothing was left unsaid that might move him to agree to tbis in the way of interest. The King would enter into an entire confidence with him, and would put his best friends in the chief trusts. Penn undertook for this so positively, that he seemed to believe it himself, for he was a great proficient in the art of dissimulation. Many suspected that he was a concealed Papist. It is certain, he was much with Father Peter, and was particularly trusted by the Earl of Sunderland. So, though he did not pretend any commission for what he promised, yet we looked on him as a man employed. To all this the Prince answered, that no man was more for toleration in principle, than he was : he thought the conscience was only subject to God ; and as far as general toleration, even of Papists, would content the King, he would concur in it heartily. But he looked on the Tests, as such a real security, and indeed the only one, when the King was of another religion, that he would join in no counsels with those, that intended to repeal those laws, that enacted them. Penn said, the King would have all or nothing : but that, if this was once done, the King would secure the toleration by a solemn and unalterable law. To this the late repeal of the Edict of Nantes, that was declared perpetual and irrevocable, furnished

232

an answer, that admitted of no reply. So Penn's negotiation witli the Prince had no effect.

" lie pressed me to go over to England, since I was in principle for toleration ; and he assured me the King would prefer me highly. I told him, since the tests must go with this toleration, I could never be for it. Among other discourses he told me one thing, that was not accomplished in the way, he had a mind I should believe it would be, but had a more surprising accomplishment. He told me a long series of predictions, which, as he said, he had from a man that pretended a commerce with Angels, who had foretold many things that were passed very punctually. But he added, that in the year 1688 there would such a change happen in the face of affairs, as would amaze all the world. And after the Eevolution, which happened that year, I asked him before much company if that was the event that was predicted. He was uneasy at the question, but did not deny what he had told me, which he understood of the full settlement of the nation upon a toleration, by which he believed all men's minds would be perfectly quieted and united."

233

[TRANSLATION.] VIII. DECEMBER, MDCCCLXIV.

THE ENCYCLICAL LETTEK

OP

OTJR MOST HOLY FATHER THE POPE, PIUS IX.

To our Venerable Brethren, all Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, and Bishops having favour and communion of the Holy See.

PIUS PP. IX.

VENERABLE BRETHREN,

HEALTH AND APOSTOLIC BENEDICTION.

With how great care and pastoral vigilance the Roman Pontiffs, our predecessors, fulfilling the duty and office committed to them by the Lord Christ Himself in the person of Most Blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, of feeding the lambs and the sheep, have never ceased sedulously to nourish the Lord's own flock with words of faith and with salutary doctrine, and to guard it from poisoned pastures, — is thoroughly known to all, and especially to You, Venerable Brethren. And truly the same, Our Predeces- sors, asserters as they were and vindicators of the august Catholic religion, of truth, and of justice, being specially anxious for the salvation of souls, had nothing even more at heart than by their most wise Letters and Constitutions to unveil and condemn all those heresies and errors which, being adverse to our Divine Faith, to the doctrine of the Catholic Church, to purity of morals, and to the eternal salvation of men, have frequently excited violent tempests, and have miserably afflicted both Church and State. For which cause the same, Our Predecessors, have, with Apostolic fortitude, constantly resisted the nefarious enterprises

234

of wicked men, who, like raging waves of the sea foaming out their own confusion, and promising liberty whereas they are the slaves of corruption, have striven by their deceptive opinions and most pernicious writings to raze the foundations of the Catholic religion and of civil society, to remove from among men all virtue and justice, to deprave the mind and judgment of all, to turn away from true moral training unwary persons, and especially inexperienced youth, miserably to corrupt such youth, to lead it into the snares of errror, and at length to tear it from the bosom of the Catholic Church.

But now, as is well known to You, Venerable Brethren, already, scarcely had we been elevated to this Chair of Peter (by the hidden counsel of divine Providence, certainly by no merits of Our own), when, seeing with the greatest grief of Our soul a truly awful storm excited by so many evil opinions, and [seeing also] the most grievous calamities never sufficiently to be deplored which overspread the Christian people from so many errors, according to the duty of Our Apostolic Ministry, and following the illustrious example of Our Predecessors, We raised Our voice, and in many published Encyclical Letters, and Allocutions de- livered in Consistory, and other Apostolic letters, we condemned the chief errors of this our most unhappy age, and we excited your admirable Episcopal vigilance, and we again and again admonished and exhorted all sons of the Catholic Church, to Us most dear, that they should altogether abhor and flee from the contagion of so dire a pestilence. And especially in Our first Encyclical Letter written to You on Nov. 9, 1846, and in two Allocutions delivered by us in Consistory, the one on Dec. 9, 1854, and the other on June 9, 1862, we condemned the mon- strous portents of opinion which prevail especially in this age, bringing with them the greatest loss of souls and detriment of civil society itself ; which are grievously opposed also, not only to the Catholic Church and her salutary doctrine and venerable rights, but also to the eternal natural law engraven by God in all men's hearts, and to right reason ; and from which almost all other errors have their origin.

But, although we have not omitted often to proscribe and reprobate the chief errors of this kind, yet the cause of the

235

Catholic Church, and the salvation of souls entrusted to us by God, and the welfare of human society itself, altogether demand that we again stir up your pastoral solicitude to exterminate other evil opinions, which spring forth from the said errors as from a fountain. Which false and perverse opinions are on that ground the more to be detested, because they chiefly tend to this, that that salutary influence be impeded and [even] removed which the Catholic Church, according to the institution and command of her Divine Author, should freely exercise even to the end of the world — not only over private individuals, but over nations, peoples, and their sovereign princes ; and (tend also) to take away that mutual fellowship and concord of counsels between Church and State which has ever proved itself propitious and salutary, both for religious and civil interests. For You well know, Venerable Brethren, that at this time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious and absurd principle of naturalism, as they call it, dare to teach that " the best constitution of public society and [also] civil progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist ; or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and false ones." And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that " that is the best condition of society, in which no duty is recognised, as attached to the civil power, of restraining, by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require." From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVL, an insanity, viz., that " liberty of conscience and worships is each man's personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society ; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way."

236

But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching the liberty of perdition ; and that, " if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth., and to trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom ; whereas we know, from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling."

And, since where religion has been removed from civil society, and the doctrine and authority of Divine revelation repudiated, the genuine notion itself of justice and human right is darkened and lost, and the place of true justice and legitimate right is supplied by material force, thence it appears why it is that some, utterly neglecting and disregarding the surest principles of sound reason, dare to proclaim that " the people's will, manifested by what is called public opinion or in some other way, constitutes a supreme law, free from all Divine and human control ; and that in the political order accomplished facts, from the very circum- stance that they are accomplished, have the force of right." But who does not see and clearly perceive that human society, when set loose from the bonds of religion and true justice, can have, in truth, no other end than the purpose of obtaining and amassing wealth, and that [society under such circumstances] follows no other law in its actions, except the unchastened desire of minis- tering to its own pleasures and interests ? For this reason men of the kind pursue with bitter hatred the Religious Orders, although these have deserved extremely well of Christendom, civilization, and literature, and cry out that the same have no legitimate reason for being permitted to exist ; and thus [these evil men] applaud the calumnies of heretics. For, as Pius VI., Our Predecessor, taught most wisely, " the abolition of regulars is injurious to that state in which the Evangelical counsels are openly professed ; it is injurious to a method of life praised in the Church as agreeable to Apostolic doctrine ; it is injurious to the illustrious founders themselves, whom we venerate on our altars, who did not establish these societies but by God's inspi- ration." And [these wretches] also impiously declare that permission should be refused to citizens and to the Church,

237

" whereby they may openly give alms for the sake of Christian charity ; " and that the law should be abrogated " whereby on certain fixed days servile works are prohibited because of God's worship ; " on the most deceptive pretext that the said permission and law are opposed to the principles of the best public economy. Moreover, not content with removing religion from public society, they wish to banish it also from private families. For teaching and professing the most fatal error of Communism and Socialism, they assert that " domestic society or the family derives the whole principle of its existence from the civil law alone ; and, con- sequently, that from the civil law alone issue, and on it depend, all rights of parents over their children, and especially that of providing for education." By which impious opinions and machinations these most deceitful men chiefly aim at this result, viz., that the salutary teaching and influence of the Catholic Church may be entirely banished from the instruction and education of youth, and that the tender and flexible minds of young men may be infected and depraved by every most per- nicious error and vice. For all who have endeavoured to throw into confusion things both sacred and secular, and to subvert the right order of society, and to abolish all rights Divine and human, have always (as we above hinted) devoted all their nefarious schemes, devices, and efforts, to deceiving and depraving in- cautious youth and have placed all their hope in its corruption. For which reason they never cease by every wicked method to assail the clergy, both secular and regular, from whom (as the surest monuments of history conspicuously attest) so many great advantages have abundantly flowed to Christianity, civilization, and literature, and to proclaim that " the clergy, as being hostile to the true and beneficial advance of science and civilization, should be removed from the whole charge and duty of instructing and educating youth."

Others meanwhile, reviving the wicked and so often condemned inventions of innovators, dare with signal impudence to subject to the will of the civil authority the supreme authority of the Church and of this Apostolic See given to her by Christ Himself, and to deny all those rights of the same Church and See which concern matters of the external order. For they are

238

not ashamed of affirming " that the Church's laws do not bind in conscience unless when they are promulgated by the civil power ; that acts and decrees of the Roman Pontiffs, referring to religion and the Church, need the civil power's sanction and approbation, or at least its consent ; that the Apostolic Constitutions, whereby secret societies are condemned (whether an oath of secrecy be or be not required in such societies), and whereby their frequenters and favourers are smitten with anathema — have no force in those regions of the world wherein associations of the kind are tolerated by the civil government ; that the excommunication pronounced by the Council of Trent and by Roman Pontiffs against those who assail and usurp the Church's rights and possessions, rests on a confusion between the spiritual and temporal orders, and [is directed] to the pursuit of a purely secular good; that the Church can decree nothing which binds the consciences of the faithful in regard to their use of temporal things ; that the Church has no right of restraining by temporal punishments those who violate her laws ; that it is conformable to the principles of sacred theology and public law to assert and claim for the civil govern- ment a right of property in those goods which are possessed by the Church, by the Religious Orders, and by other pious esta- blishments." Nor do they blush openly and publicly to profess the maxim and principle of heretics from which arise so many perverse opinions and errors. For they repeat that " the ecclesiastical power is not by divine right distinct from, and independent of, the civil power, and that such distinction and independence cannot be preserved without the civil power's essential rights being assailed and usurped by the Church." Nor can we pass over in silence the audacity of those who, not enduring sound doctrine, contend that " without sin and without any sacrifice of the Catholic profession assent and obedience may be refused to those judgments and decrees of the Apostolic See, whose object is declared to concern the Church's general good and her rights and discipline, so only it do not touch the dogmata of faith and morals." But no one can be found not clearly and distinctly to see and understand how grievously this is opposed to the Catholic dogma of the full power given from God by Christ our

239

Lord Himself to the Roman Pontiff of feeding, ruling, and guid- ing the universal Church.

Amidst, therefore, such great perversity of depraved opinions, We, well remembering Our Apostolic Office, and very greatly solicitous for our most holy Religion, for sound doctrine and the salvation of souls which is intrusted to Us by God, and [solicitous also] for the welfare of human society itself, have thought it right again to raise up Our Apostolic voice. Therefore, by Our Apos- tolic Authority we reprobate, proscribe, and condemn all and singular the evil opinions and doctrines severally mentioned in this letter, and will and command that they be thoroughly held by all children of the Catholic Church as reprobated, proscribed, and condemned.

And besides these things, You know very well, Venerable Brethren, that in these times the haters of all truth and justice and most bitter enemies of our religion, deceiving the people and maliciously lying, disseminate sundry other impious doctrines by means of pestilential books, pamphlets, and newspapers dispersed over the whole world. Nor are You ignorant, also, that in this our age some men are found who, moved and excited by the spirit of Satan, have reached to that degree of impiety as not to shrink from denying Our Ruler and Lord Jesus Christ, and from impugning his Divinity with wicked pertinacity. Here, however, we cannot but extol You, Venerable Brethren, with great and deserved praise, for not having failed to raise with all zeal your episcopal voice against impiety so great.

Therefore, in this Our Letter, we again most lovingly address You, who, having been called unto a part of Our solicitude, are to us, among Our grievous distresses, the greatest solace, joy, and consolation, because of the admirable religion and piety wherein you excel, and because of that marvellous love, fidelity, and dutifulness, whereby, bound as you are to Us, and to this Apostolic See in most harmonious affection, you strive strenu- ously and sedulously to fulfil your most weighty episcopal ministry. For from your signal pastoral zeal we expect that, taking up the sword of the spirit which is the word of God, and strengthened in the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, you will, with redoubled care, each day more anxiously provide that the

K

240

faithful intrusted to your charge " abstain from noxious herbage, which Jesus Christ does not cultivate because it is not His Father's plantation." Never cease .also to inculcate on the said faithful that all true felicity flows abundantly upon man from our august Religion and its doctrine and practice ; and that happy is the people whose God is their Lord. Teach that "kingdoms rest on the foundation of the catholic Faith ; and that nothing is so deadly, so hastening to a fall, so exposed to all danger, [as that which exists] if, believing this alone to be sufficient for us that we received free will at our birth, we seek nothing further from the Lord ; that is, if forgetting our Creator we abjure his power that we may display our freedom." And again do not fail to teach " that the royal power was given not only for the govern- ance of the world, but most of all for the protection of the Church ; " and that there is nothing which can be of greater advantage and glory to Princes and Kings than if, as another most wise and courageous Predecessor of Ours, St. Felix, instructed the Emperor Zeno, they " permit the Catholic Church to practise her laws, and allow no one to oppose her liberty. For it is certain that this mode of conduct is beneficial to their interests, viz., that where there is question concerning the causes of God, they study, according to His appointment, to subject the royal will to Christ's Priests, not to raise it above theirs."

But if always, Venerable Brethren, now most of all amidst such great calamities both of the Church and of civil society, amidst so great a conspiracy against catholic interests and this Apostolic See, and so great a mass of errors, it is altogether necessary to approach with confidence the throne of grace, that We may obtain mercy and find grace in timely aid. Wherefore, We have thought it well to excite the piety of all the faithful in order that, together with Us and You, they may unceasingly pray and beseech the most merciful Father of light and pity with most fervent and humble prayers, and in the fulness of faith flee always to our Lord Jesus Christ, who redeemed us to God in His blood, and earnestly and constantly supplicate His most sweet Heart, the victim of most burning love towards us, that He would draw all things to Himself by the bonds of His love, and that all men inflamed by His most holy love may walk

241

worthily according to His Heart, pleasing God in all things, hearing fruit in every good work. But since without douht men's prayers are more pleasing to God if they reach Him from minds free of all stain, therefore we have determined to open to Christ's faithful, with Apostolic liberality, the Church's heavenly treasures committed to our charge, in order that the said faithful, being more earnestly enkindled to true piety, and cleansed through the Sacrament of Penance from the defilement of their sins, may with greater confidence pour forth their prayers to God, and obtain His mercy and grace.

By these letters therefore, in virtue of Our Apostolic authority, we concede to all and singular the faithful of the catholic world, a Plenary Indulgence in form of Jubilee, during the space of one month only for the whole coming year 1865, and not beyond ; to be fixed by You, Venerable Brethren, and other legitimate Ordinaries of places, in the very same manner and form in which we granted it at the beginning of Our supreme Pontificate by Our Apostolic Letters in the form of a Brief, dated November 20, 1846, and addressed to all your episcopal Order, beginning, " Arcano DivinaB Providentise consilio," and with all the same faculties which were given by Us in those Letters. We will, however that all things be observed which were prescribed in the aforesaid Letters, and those things be excepted which We there so declared. And We grant this, notwithstanding anything whatever to the contrary, even things which are worthy of indi- vidual mention and derogation. In order however that all doubt and difficulty be removed, we have commanded a copy of the said Letters to be sent you.

" Let us implore," Venerable Brethren, " God's mercy from our inmost heart and with our whole mind ; because He has Himself added ' I will not remove my mercy from them.' Let us ask and we shall receive ; and if there be delay and slowness in our receiving because we have gravely offended, let us knock, because to him that knocketh it shall be opened, if only the door be knocked by our prayers, groans, and tears, in which we must

persist and persevere, and if the prayer be unanimous :

let each man pray to God, not for himself alone, but for all his brethren, as the Lord hath taught us to pray." But in order

242

that God may the more readily assent to the prayers and desires of Ourselves, of You, and of all the faithful, let us with all con- fidence employ as our advocate with Him the Immaculate and most holy Virgin Mary, Mother of God, who has slain all heresies throughout the world, and who, the most loving Mother of us all,

" is all sweet and full of mercy shows herself to

all as easily entreated ; shows herself to all as most merciful ; pities the necessities of all with a most large affection ;" and standing as a Queen at the right hand of her only begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, in gilded clothing, surrounded with variety, can obtain from Him whatever she will. Let us also seek the suffrages of the Most Blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and of Paul his Fellow-apostle, and of all the Saints in heaven, who having now become God's friends, have arrived at the heavenly kingdom, and being crowned bear their palms, and being secure of their own immortality are anxious for our salvation.

Lastly, imploring from Our heart for You from God the abun- dance of all heavenly gifts, We most lovingly impart the Apos- tolic Benediction from Our inmost heart, a pledge of Our signal love towards You, to Yourselves, Venerable Brethren, and to all the clerics and lay faithful committed to your care.

Given at Rome, from St. Peter's, the 8th day of December, in the year 1864, the tenth from the Dogmatic Definition of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary, Mother of God.

In the nineteenth year of Our Pontificate.

243

SYLLABUS,

EMBRACING THE PRINCIPAL ERRORS OF OUR TIME WHICH ARE CENSURED IN CONSISTORIAL ALLOCUTIONS, ENCYCLICALS, AND OTHER APOSTOLIC LETTERS OF OUR MOST HOLY FATHER, POPE PIUS IX.

Pantheism, Naturalism, and absolute Rationalism.

I. There exists no supreme, all-wise, and most provident Divine Being distinct from this universe, and God is the same as the nature of things, and therefore liable to change ; and God is really made both in man and in the world, and all things are God and have the self-same substance of God ; and God is one and the same thing with the world, and therefore spirit is the same thing with matter, necessity with liberty, truth with falsehood, good with evil, and just with unjust.

II. All action of God on mankind and on the world is to be denied.

III. Human reason, without any regard whatever being had to God, is the one judge of truth and falsehood, of good and evil ; it is a law to itself, and suffices by its natural strength for provi- ding the good of men and peoples.

IV. All the trutbs of religion flow from the natural force of human reason ; hence reason is the chief rule whereby man can and should obtain the knowledge of all truths of every kind.

V. Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to a continuous and indefinite progress corresponding to the advance of human perfection.

VI. The faith of Christ is opposed to human reason ; and Divine revelation not only nothing profits, but is even injurious to man's reason.

VII- The prophecies and miracles recorded and narrated in Scripture are poetical fictions, and the mysteries of Christian faith a result of philosophical investigations ; and in the books of both Testaments are contained mythical inventions ; and Jesus Christ Himself is a mythical fiction.

244

§n.

Moderate Rationalism.

VIII. Since human reason is on a level with religion itself, therefore theological studies are to he handled in the same manner as philosophical.

IX. All the dogmas of the Christian religion are without dis- tinction the object of natural science or philosophy ; and human reason, with no other than an historical cultivation, is able from its own natural strength and principles to arrive at true knowledge of even the more abstruse dogmas, so only these dogmas have been proposed to the reason itself as its object.

X. Since the philosopher is one thing, philosophy another, the former has the right and duty of submitting himself to that authority which he may have approved as true ; but philosophy neither can nor should submit itself to any authority.

XI. The Church not only ought never to animadvert on philosophy, but ought to tolerate the errors of philosophy, and to leave it in her hands to correct itself.

XII. The decrees of the Apostolic See and of Roman Congre- gations interfere with the free progress of science.

XIII. The method and principles whereby the ancient scho- lastic Doctors cultivated theology are not suited to the necessities of our time and to the progress of the sciences.

XIV. Philosophy should be treated without regard had to supernatural revelation.

N.B. — To the system of Rationalism belong mostly the errors of Anthony Gunther, which are condemned in the epistle to the Cardinal- Archbishop of Cologne: "Eximiam tuam," June 15, 1857, and in that to the Bishop of Breslau, "Dolore haud mediocri," April 30, 1860.

§ HI- Indifferentism, Latitudinarianism.

XV. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, led by the light of reason, he may have thought true.

XVI. Men may in the practice of any religion whatever find the path of eternal salvation, and attain eternal salvation.

245

XVII. At least good hopes should be entertained concerning the salvation of all those who in no respect live in the true Church of Christ.

XVIII. Protestanisrn is nothing else than a different form of the same Christian religion, in which it is permitted to please Grod equally as in the true Catholic Church.

§ IV.

Socialism, Communism, Secret Societies, Bible Societies, Clerico-

Liberal Societies,

Pests of this kind are often reprobated, and in the most severe terms in the Encyclical " Qui pluribus," November 9, 1846 ; the Allocution " Quibus Quantisque," April 20, 1849 ; the Encycli- cal " Noscitis et Nobiscum," December 8, 1849 ; the Allocution " Singulaiii quadam," December 9, 1854; the Encyclical "Quan- to conficiamur," August 10, 1863.

Errors concerning the Church and her rights.

XIX. The Church is not a true and perfect society fully free, nor does she enjoy her own proper and permanent rights given to her by her Divine Founder, but it is the civil power's business to define what are the Church's rights, and the limits within which she may be enabled to exercise them.

XX. The ecclesiastical power should not exercise its authority without permission and assent of the civil government.

XXI. The Church has not the power of dogmatically denning that the religion of the Catholic Church is the only true religion.

XXII. The obligation by which Catholic teachers and writers are absolutely bound, is confined to those things alone which are propounded by the Church's infallible judgment, as dogmas of faith to be believed by all.

XXIII. Roman Pontiffs and ecumenical Councils have ex- ceeded the limits of their power, usurped the rights of princes, and erred even in defining matters of faith and morals.

XXIV. The Church has no power of employing force, nor has she any temporal power direct or indirect.

246

XXV. Besides the inherent power of the episcopate, another temporal power has heen granted expressly or tacitly by the civil government, which may therefore be abrogated by the civil government at its pleasure.

XXVI. The Church has no native and legitimate right of acquiring and possessing.

X XVII. The Church's sacred ministers and the Roman Pontiff should be entirely excluded from all charge and dominion of temporal things.

XXVIII. Bishops ought not, without the permission of the Government, to publish even letters apostolic.

XXIX. Graces granted by the Eoman. Pontiff should be accounted as void, unless they have been sought through the Government.

XXX. The immunity of the Church and of ecclesiastical persons had its origin from the civil law.

XXXI. The ecclesiastical lorum for the temporal causes of clerics, whether civil causes or criminal, should be altogether abolished, even without consulting, and against the protest of. the Apostolic See.

XXXII. Without any violation of natural right and equity, that personal immunity may be abrogated, whereby clerics are exempted from the burden of undertaking and performing military services ; and such abrogation is required by civil progress, especially in a society constituted on the model of a free rule.

XXXIII. It does not appertain exclusively to ecclesiastical jurisdiction by its own proper and native right to direct the teaching of theology.

XXXIV. The doctrine of those who compare the Eoman Pontiff to a Prince, free and acting in the Universal Church, is the doctrine which prevailed in the middle age.

XXXV. Nothing forbids that by the judgment of some General Council, or by the act of all peoples, the supreme Pontificate should be transferred from the Eoman Bishop and City to another Bishop and another State.

XXXVI. The definition of a national Council admits no

247

further dispute, and the civil administration may fix the matter on this footing.

XXXVII. National Churches separated and totally disjoined from the Roman Pontiff's authority may be instituted.

XXXVIII. The too arbitrary conduct of Roman Pontiffs con- tributed to the Church's division into East and West.

§VI.

Errors concerning civil society, considered both in itself and in its

relation to the Church.

XXXIX. The State, as being the origin and fountain of all rights, possesses a certain right of its own, circumscribed by no limits.

XL. The Doctrine of the Catholic Church is opposed to the good and benefit of human society.

XLI. The civil power, even when exercised by a non-Catholic ruler, has an indirect negative power over things sacred ; it has consequently not only the right which they call exequatur, but that right also which they call appelcomme d'abus.

XLII. In the case of a conflict between laws of the two powers, civil law prevails.

XLIII. The lay power has the authority of rescinding, of declaring null, and of voiding solemn conventions (commonly called Concordats) j concerning the exercise of rights appertaining to ecclesiastical immunity, which have been entered into with the Apostolic See, — without this See's consent, and even against its protest.

XLIV. The civil authority may mix itself up in matters which appertain to religion, morals, and spiritual rule. Hence it can exercise judgment concerning those instructions which the Church's pastors issue according to their office for the guidance of consciences ; nay, it may even decree concerning the adminis- tration of the holy sacraments, and concerning the dispositions necessary for their reception.

XLV. The whole governance of public schools wherein the youth of any Christian State is educated, episcopal seminaries only being in some degree excepted, may and should be given to

248

the civil power ; and in such sense he given, that no right be recognized in any other authority of mixing itself up in the management of the schools, the direction of studies, the confer- ring of degrees, the choice or approbation of teachers.

XL VI. Nay, in the very ecclesiastical seminaries, the method of study to be adopted is subject to the civil authority.

XL VII. The best constitution of civil society requires that popular schools which are open to children of every class, and that public institutions generally which are devoted to teaching literature and science and providing for the education of youth, be exempted from all authority of the Church, from all her moderating influence and interference, and subjected to the absolute will of the civil and political authority [so as to be conducted] in accordance with the tenets of civil rulers, and the standard of the common opinions of the age.

XL VIII. That method of instructing youth can be approved by Catholic men which is disjoined from the Catholic faith and the Church's power, and which regards exclusively, or at least principally, knowledge of the natural order alone, and the ends of social life on earth.

XLIX. The civil authority may prevent the Bishops and faithful from free and mutual communication with the Roman Pontiff.

L. The lay authority has of itself the right of presenting bishops, and may require of them that they enter on the man- agement of their dioceses before they receive from the Holy See canonical institution and apostolical letters.

LI. Nay, the lay government has the right of deposing bishops from exercise of their pastoral ministry ; nor is it bound to obey the Roman Pontiff in those things which regard the establishment of bishoprics and the appointment of bishops.

LII. The government may, in its own right, change the age prescribed by the Church for the religious profession of men and women, and may require religious orders to admit no one to solemn vows without its permission.

LIII. Those laws should be abrogated which relate to protect- ing the condition of religious orders and their rights and duties ; nay, the civil government may give assistance to all those who

249

may wish to quit the religious life which they have undertaken, and to break their solemn vows; and in like manner it may altogether abolish the said religious orders, and also collegiate churches and simple benefices, even those under the right of a patron, and subject and assign their goods and revenues to the administration and free disposal of the civil power.

LIV. Kings and Princes are not only exempted from the Church's jurisdiction, but also are superior to the Church in deciding questions of jurisdiction.

LV. The Church should be separated from the State, and the State from the Church.

§ VII.

Errors concerning natural and Christian Ethics.

LVI. The laws of morality need no Divine sanction, and there is no necessity that human laws be conformed to the law of nature, or receive from God their obligatory force.

LVII. The science of philosophy and morals, and also the laws of a state, may and should withdraw themselves from the jurisdiction of Divine and ecclesiastical authority.

LVIII. No other strength is to be recognized except material force ; and all moral discipline and virtue should be accounted to consist in accumulating and increasing wealth by every method, and in satiating the desire of pleasure.

LIX. Right consists in the mere material fact ; and all the duties of man are an empty name, and all human facts have the force of right.

LX. Authority is nothing else but numerical power and material force.

LXI. The successful injustice of a fact brings with it no detriment to the sanctity of right.

LXII. The principle of non-intervention (as it is called) should be proclaimed and observed.

LXIII. It is lawful to refuse obedience to legitimate princes, and even rebel against them.

LXIV. A violation of any most sacred oath, or any wicked and flagitious action whatever repugnant to the eternal law,

250

is not only not to be reprobated, but is even altogether lawful, and to be extolled with the highest praise when it is done for love of country.

§ VIII. Errors concerning Christian Matrimony.

LXV. It can in no way be tolerated that Christ raised matri- mony to the dignity of a sacrament.

LXVI. The sacrament of marriage is only an accessory to the . contract, and separable from it ; and the sacrament itself consists in the nuptial benediction alone.

LXVIL The bond of matrimony is not indissoluble by the law of nature ; and in various cases divorce, properly so called, may be sanctioned by the civil authority.

LXVIII. The Church has no power of enacting diriment impediments to marriage ; but that power is vested in the civil authority, by which the existing impediments may be removed.

LXIX. In later ages the Church began to enact diriment impediments, not in her own right, but through that right which she had borrowed from the civil power.

LXX. The Canons of Trent, which inflict the censure of anathema on those who dare to deny the Church's power of enacting diriment impediments, are either not dogmatical, or are to be understood of this borrowed power.

LXXI. The form ordained by the Council of Trent does not bind on pain of nullity wherever the civil law may prescribe another form, and may will that, by this new form, matrimony shall be made valid.

LXXII. Boniface VIII. was the first who asserted that the vow of chastity made at ordination annuls marriage.

LXXI II. By virtue of a purely civil contract there may exist among Christians marriage, truly so called ; and it is false that either the contract of marriage among Christians is always a sacrament, or that there is no contract if the sacrament be excluded.

LXXIV. Matrimonial causes and espousals belong by their own nature to the civil forum.

251

N.B. — To this head may be referred two other errors: on abolishing clerical celibacy, and on preferring the state . of marriage to that of virginity. They are condemned, the former in the Encyclical " Qui pluribus," Nov. 9, 1846 ; the latter in the Apostolic Letters "Multiplices inter," June 10, 1851.

§IX.

Errors concerning the Roman Pontiff" s civil princedom.

LXXV. Children of the Christian and Catholic Church dispute with each other on the compatibility of the temporal rule with the spiiitual.

LXXVL The abrogation of that civil power, which the Apos- tolic See possesses, would conduce in the highest degree to the Church's liberty and felicity.

N.B. — Besides these errors implicitly branded, many others are implicitly reprobated in the exposition and assertion of that doctrine which all Catholics ought most firmly to hold concerning the Roman Pontiff's civil princedom. This doctrine is clearly delivered in the Allocution, Quibus quantisque," April 20, 1849 ; in the Allocution, " Si semper antea," May 20, 1850 ; in the Apostolic Letters, " Cum Catholica Ecclesia," March 26, 1860 ; in the Allocution, " Novos," Sept. 28, 1861 ; in the Allocution, " Jamdudum," March 18, 1861 ; in the Allocution, " Maxima quidem," June 9, 1862.

Errors which have reference to the Liberalism of the day.

LXXVII. In this our age it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be treated as the only religion of the State, all other worships whatsoever being excluded.

LXXVIII. Hence it has been laudably provided by law in some Catholic countries, that men thither immigrating should be permitted the public exercise of their own several worships.

LXXIX. For truly it is false that the civil liberty of all worships, and the full power granted to all of openly and publicly declaring any opinions and thoughts whatever, conduces to more

252

easily corrupting the morals and minds of peoples, and propagat- ing the plague of indifferentism.

LXXX. The Roman Pontiff can and ought to reconcile and harmonize himself with progress, with liberalism, and with modern civilization.

SPAIN.

"The Queen fled from Spain Sep. 30, 1868, and arrived at Biarritz, where she met the Emperor Napoleon. Her conduct had alienated all feelings of loyalty, and the forms of the Constitution had heen abused and made the machinery of arbitrary and oppres- sive rule. The people were weary of a system which repressed all freedom of thought and rights of conscience, which placed the education of the young in the hands of Jesuits, and under which they had lost all respect for their ministers, and all attachment to the Crown. Nothing however occurred until April to give warning of the coming storm." — Extracted from " The Annual Register"

INTERDICTION OF THE JESUITS IN SWITZERLAND.

" The Council of the States has approved of the resolution on the part of the National Council, which interdicts the order of Jesuits, and forbids its members to engage in ecclesiastical and educational functions in Switzerland." — Extract from "Daily News," Berne, Feb. 9, 1872.

253

CARDINAL CULLEN ON THE COUNCIL.

The Tablet of the 30th of June, 1870, gives the following account of the presentation of an Address to Cardinal Cullen at Rome by the Irish Roman Catholic Bishops, there resident at the conclusion of the (Ecumenical Council. The subjoined extract of the Cardinal's reply to the Address, as given also in the Tablet, appears to convey his views as to the general objects of the Council, especially with respect to the Liberties of the Gallican Church : —

" On the evening of Monday, the 18th, after the public session of St. Peter's, an important reunion was held at the Irish College in Rome, through the kind invitation of the Very Rev. Mgr. Kirby, the venerable and respected president. Not only the Irish bishops at present in Rome, but the most distinguished prelates from France, Spain, the United States, Canada, and other countries enjoyed his hospitality on this occasion. Several bishops representing the children of St. Patrick, not only in Ireland, but throughout the British Colonies, availed themselves of the opportunity to present the following address to his Eminence the Cardinal Archbishop of Dublin : — ' To his Eminence Paul Cardinal Cullen, Archbishop of Dublin, Primate of Ireland, etc. May it please your eminence, on this most memorable day in the history of the Vatican Council, we the archbishops and bishops, representatives of the Irish race, respectfully approach your eminence, and offer our heartfelt congratulations on your most able and successful vindication in the Council Hall of the rights of the Holy See, and of the tradition of the Irish Church con- cerning them. Your eminence truly represented on the occasion the faith and feelings of the Irish people, and we are proud of the manner in which you have testified to both. — Signed by D. M'GETTIGAN, Archbishop of Armagh, Primate of All Ireland — followed by 29 other signatures.' '

254

Extract from Cardinal Cullen's reply to the address :— " In progress of time the decisions of such a body will be the " source of great blessings to the Church, condemning, as they " do, so many forms of modern error, upholding the cause of "justice and authority, denning the rights of religion, and above " all, banishing Grallicanism from the pale of the Church. This " form of teaching, notwithstanding the name it bears, was never " adopted by the great Church of France, but was violently forced " into a sort of official existence by an ambitious king. Its " tendencies always were to undermine the foundation of the " Church, to divide the faithful of different countries into hostile " camps, and to promote schisms and dissensions among those " who should live together like brethren. Having been now " solemnly condemned by a General Council, it is to be hoped " that itself and its offshoots will soon be forgotten."

LONDON : WILLIAM MACINTOSH, 24, PATERNOSTER Row.

\

to to

-p

<D •H O O

W

-p

CD

<D O -P (D

aj w

•H -P

c

£: <D

^

S bD

r.U Q) (D JS

cti VH J3 O o

Q)

•\ ca o P-, -P S • * -H H

<D

(I)

«N

to

o

University of Toronto Library

DO NOT

REMOVE

THE

CARD

FROM

THIS

POCKET

Acme Library Card Pocket LOWE-MARTIN CO. LIMITED

. - .

,

..

I

' .

- '

.

-

I