Skip to main content

Full text of "Governance in the Society of Jesus, 1540-1773 : its methods, critics, and legacy today"

See other formats

Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2013 

BX3701 .S88 

Current Periodicals 

Governance in the Society or jesus 

Its Methods, Critics, and Legacy Today 

Markus Friedrich 


SPRING 2009 


The Seminar is composed of a number of Jesuits appointed from their provinces in the United 

It concerns itself with topics pertaining to the spiritual doctrine and practice of Jesuits, 
especially United States Jesuits, and communicates the results to the members of the provinces 
through its publication, Studies in the Spirituality of Jesuits. This is done in the spirit of 
Vatican lis recommendation that religious institutes recapture the original inspiration of their 
founders and adapt it to the circumstances of modern times. The Seminar welcomes reactions or 
comments in regard to the material that it publishes. 

The Seminar focuses its direct attention on the life and work of the Jesuits of the Unit- 
ed States. The issues treated may be common also to Jesuits of other regions, to other priests, re- 
ligious, and laity, to both men and women. Hence, the journal, while meant especially for Ameri- 
can Jesuits, is not exclusively for them. Others who may find it helpful are cordially welcome to 
make use of it. 


R. Bentley Anderson, S.J., teaches history at St. Louis University, St. Louis, Mo. (2008) 
Richard A. Blake, S. J., is chairman of the Seminar and editor of STUDIES; he teaches film studies 

at Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Mass. (2002) 
James T. Bretzke, S.J., teaches theology at Boston College School of Theology and Ministry, 

Boston, Mass. (2006) 
Gerald T. Cobb, S.J., teaches English at Seattle University, Seattle, Wash. (2007) 
Patrick J. Howell, S.J., is rector of the Jesuit Community and Vice-President for Mission and 

Ministry at at Seattle University, Seattle, Wash. (2006) 
Mark S. Massa, S. J., teaches theology and is director of the American Catholic Studies Program 

at Fordham University, Bronx, N. Y. (2006) 
Thomas Massaro, S.J., teaches theology at Boston College School of Theology and Ministry, Bos- 
ton, Mass. (2006) 
Michael C. McCarthy, S.J, teaches theology and classics at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, 

Cal. (2008) 
Thomas J. Scirghi, S.J., teaches liturgy at the Jesuit School of Theology at Berkeley, Berkeley, 

Cal. (2007) 
Thomas Worcester, S.J., teaches history at the College of the Holy Cross, Worcester, Mass. 

Michael A. Zampelli, S.J., teaches theater and dance at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Cal.. 


The opinions expressed in Studies are those of the individual authors thereof. Parentheses des- 
ignate year of entry as a Seminar member. 

Copyright © 2009 and published by the Seminar on Jesuit Spirituality 

Business Office 

Studies in the Spirituality of Jesuits 

3601 Lindell Blvd., 

St. Louis, MO 63108 

Tel. 314-633-4622 ;Fax 314-633-4623 


Editorial Office 

Faber House 

102 College Road 

Chestnut Hill, MA 02467-3841 

Tel. 617-552-0860; Fax 617-552-0925 


Governance in the 
Society of Jesus 


Its Methods, Critics, and Legacy Today 

Markus Friedrich 


41/1 • SPRING 2009 

the first word . . . 

1 he report was matter of fact: the Brooklyn Diocese has targeted fourteen 
parochial schools for closing. This is an important event for any city, and The 
New York Times acknowledged its importance with a major story that covered 
the better part of a full page: two reporters, on-site interviews, several photo- 
graphs. About midway through the article, "Our Lady of Angels" jumped off 
the page at me. Yes, my home parish may very well close its school, as might 
the adjacent parish, Our Lady of Perpetual Help. Amazing. When I gradu- 
ated, early in the Eisenhower administration, the school served nearly two 
thousand children. The community of Sisters of Charity of Halifax occupied a 
huge convent that housed upwards of forty sisters. Some years later, as I re- 
call, the number of students reached closer to 2,500, and a small community of 
Franciscan brothers arrived to teach seventh- and eighth-grade boys. The par- 
ish also bought some residential property on the block, took down the hous- 
es, and put in an additional schoolyard equipped with basketball courts that 
served as a neighborhood playground after school hours. Sundays it became a 
lot for the posh folk who drove the five blocks up from Shore Road. 

As one of the parishioners in the Times article said so well, the school 
really served as an anchor in the neighborhood. It was a social hub. Not only 
did people gather for the relentless sequence of Masses in the school audito- 
rium as well as in the huge church on Sunday mornings — there were no Sat- 
urday vigil Masses; Saturday was for confession — but dozens of organizations 
used the school building, from cub scouts and brownies to what we would 
now call "senior citizen" activities. The gym was home court to a full com- 
plement of CYO basketball teams, and every age bracket held regular dances 
amid the folding bleachers. The auditorium hosted annual St. Patrick's Day 
musicals: all performances sold out. Naturally, the interviewed parishioners 
were hurt or angry or disappointed or simply puzzled. 

What puzzled me most was my own reaction. Here was the school that 
I recalled as one of the great educational experiences of my life, one that laid 
a wonderfully solid foundation for every level of schooling to follow, and I 
was coolly distant from the news that it may soon pass from the scene. The 
old parish, which a half-century ago had an auxiliary bishop as pastor and six 
or seven associate pastors, centered around the church building where I was 
confirmed, said my first Mass as a one-weekend celebrity, and from which 
I buried my mother, could no longer support a school. The news came as a 
surprise, but not a shock. In fact, there was no perceptible emotional reac- 
tion. Td been through this too many times before. I thought of Hopkins: "Ah! 


as the heart grows older, it will come to such sights colder'': Brooklyn Prep, St. 
Andrew on Hudson, the house for post-juniorate studies gouged into the roll- 
ing hills outside Peekskill, N.Y., Woodstock, the retreat house in Monroe, N.Y., 
where I made my tertian retreat. A clean sweep. Every single Catholic institu- 
tion that tried to educate or form me was gone. There is but one exception. I did 
a National Guard masters at Fordham before regency. Let this be a warning to 
the Fathers of Rose Hill that they should not get too comfortable in their pres- 
ent location. 

Restructuring may be the gentlest word used to describe developments 
in the Catholic Church these days. Announcements of the closing or merger 
of parishes and schools come with such regularity that they are scarcely news 
anymore. We seem in the midst of a perfect storm of factors that doesn't seem 
likely to abate in the immediate future. The number of active priests continues 
to drop. Old men hang on, serving several ministries as best they can at a time 
when their lay counterparts are enjoying the rewards of retirement with their 
grandchildren. They are the true heroes of the contemporary Church. Young 
Catholic men have many other career options besides the traditional three: 
cops, crooks, or clerics. In addition, fewer families seem to look upon priest- 
hood as a choice they would encourage for their sons, especially after invest- 
ing in a college education for them. In discerning one's call to priesthood or 
religious life, the support of cohesive parish life, beginning with the parochial 
school and the altar boys and continuing with a range of youth activities, may 
not be as powerful as it once was. Catholic culture, once sharply defined and in 
some respects admittedly insular, has shifted toward the mainstream. Sociolo- 
gists can analyze the many factors and come up with many explanations, but 
the bottom line is that dioceses and religious orders simply can no longer con- 
tinue all their previous commitments. In many instances, there are no alterna- 
tives: schools and churches must merge or close altogether. We take it for grant- 
ed, at least when it happens somewhere else. 

Finances enter into the picture, as well. With distressing regularity we 
read of some diocese or religious order paying out millions to settle sex abuse 
cases. Many Catholic church and school buildings have reached an age when 
they are in desperate need of major repair, possibly at a cost that is simply pro- 
hibitive for the dwindling numbers of parishioners. Prudence demands closing, 
them down before they fall down. With fewer priests and religious working for 
a minimal diocesan stipend, payroll costs have soared. The most obvious ex- 
ample is the salary scale for lay faculty in parochial schools and Catholic high 
schools. We want to attract and hold competent teachers, and justice demands 
paying them a wage commensurate with their services. Even if there were no 
school attached to the parish, congregations may still have to provide compen- 
sation for lay directors of religious education, music ministers, office staff, so- 
cial workers, hospital chaplains, custodians and financial managers. Not all of 
these positions can be rilled by volunteers. Many Jesuits can remember the days 
when we had ten or fifteen scholastics on a high-school faculty. Now in the 
same schools there may be only one or two Jesuits on the entire staff. As Jesu- 


its, we've gotten through the transition by raising tuition exponentially. Parish- 
es and most parochial schools don't have that option. 

A third element has been attributed to demographic shifts. Catholic 
populations have drifted away from urban centers, leaving the huge parishes in 
the central city empty and underutilized. Available resources must be directed 
to the suburbs to accommodate the influx of newcomers. Building a church is 
a high priority. Adding a parochial school and planning to staff it is a commit- 
ment few dioceses or parishes can afford to make in every instance. 

The story in the Times stirred recollections (of dubious accuracy, to be 
sure) of my own experience of Our Lady of Angels. I remember the parish as 
a middle-class enclave of Irish Americans at the point where Brooklyn bulg- 
es out into the Harbor toward Staten Island. It was bordered by the Italians 
of Bensonhurst, the Scandinavians of Sunset Park, and the military enclave of 
Fort Hamilton. The streets teemed with children from large Catholic families: 
the side streets were a constant round of srickball and street hockey; the play- 
grounds hosted endless basketball games. Memory stands in the way of truth. 
That neighborhood ceased to exist years ago. Even in the 1970s, when I made 
a weekly trip to the old neighborhood to visit my mother, I noticed how quiet 
the streets had become. One rarely saw a game of stoopball or noticed a baby 
carriage outside the shops on Third Avenue. Elderly people stayed on in rent- 
controlled apartments, while their children moved out to Long Island or New 
Jersey. As apartment buildings and brownstones emptied out, they were con- 
verted into higher priced condominiums for DINKs (dual income, no kids), 
who work on Wall Street or Madison Avenue. The neighborhood shopping 
area, home to familiar drug stores, bars, delis, and the like, began to include 
specialty boutiques. I recall passing by a shop window featuring designer leath- 
er jeans for $800. A Syrian and a Greek restaurant elbowed their way in among 
the family diners, pizzerias, and soda fountains. Imagine: falafel or hummus 
available on Third Avenue! 

Change was in the air, but I wasn't particularly adept at sniffing it out. 
The sturdy buildings from the 1920s and 1930s were still in place. Emerging 
from the subway station at Sixty-ninth Street, meant entering a time warp, and 
maintaining a delusion. The ornate Protestant churches, with spacious well- 
manicured lawns, still decorated the avenues, but I never thought to won- 
der what their congregations looked like on Sundays. From talking to the one 
cousin who still remains in the old neighborhood, I gather Our Lady of Angels 
still draws large numbers on the weekends, but the Mass schedule has been cut 
back considerably from the days of the revolving door liturgies of fifty years 
ago. The parish school, I'm told, now serves about 180 children, and some sec- 
tions of the building have been rented out to outside organizations. 

Naturally, according to the Times story, the people of the old neighbor- 
hood were upset at the prospect of a school closing, as they are in every oth- 
er part of the country. Reading about these events elsewhere, one could easily 
have predicted the reactions. The parishes and their schools serve as a living 

repository for the Catholic memory. Removing either constitutes removing part 
of a person's Catholic identity. Some are angry and vow to hold protests and 
sit-ins to force decision makers to change their mind. Some want to roll up their I 
sleeves, raise more money and attract enough new students and church mem- 
bers to keep going for a few more years. Some are bitter at what strikes them 
as the cold, unfeeling way the decision was made purely for financial consider- J 
ations: they don't understand what this means to us. Bitterness can enter in be- 
cause of the apparent injustice of it all, after their years of loyal support: "I've 
had it with an institution that treats people in this way." It's all understand- 
able, all reasonable and yet all misleading. 

People who are deeply committed to a school or a church may be the 
least capable of weighing options and making hard decisions. At the same time 
there is always the suspicion that those at the top really don't really appreciate 
the situation here, in this parish, with this history. It seems that bureaucrats in 
some remote central office just look at the ledgers and determine our fate. This 
is the tension that exists in any large organization, from a corporation with local 
branches to a church with individual dioceses and parishes. Local administra- 
tion often sees things differently from the home office. 

Surely the Society of Jesus, even in its early formative years, was not ex- 
empt from these conflicts. Almost from its founding, the Society began send- 
ing its members along trade routes to the farthest reaches of the known world. 
The Fathers General and their Curias held full responsibility for the works to 
be undertaken, yet how could they evaluate the ministries on the ground half- 
way across the world? How could they possibly make decisions about those 
that should be supported by additional commitment of men and financial aid, 
and those that should be discontinued in favor of other more promising aposto- 
lates? The Jesuits in distant regions, in Europe as well as Asia and the Americas, 
surely knew the situation on the ground and were invested in the work they 
were doing, but how could they grasp the political and economic complexities 
of the universal Church and the evolving kingdoms of Europe? The local Jesuits 
were ingenious in adaptation, but how could their innovations be tested against 
fidelity to the Institute, the charism of the Society, and the mission entrusted to 
them by the Pope and Superior General? 

These questions were not easily resolved, especially in an age without • 
teleconferencing, e-mail, and one-day national meetings in airport hotels. For 
the past several years, Dr. Markus Friedrich has burrowed into the archives 
at Rome and ransacked the literature to try to discover how the early Jesuits 
struggled to balance central authority in Rome with local autonomy. The ear- 
ly generals borrowed from the traditions of medieval orders, yet innovated in 
order to meet the particular needs of the young Society. They struggled, often 
amid dissent, to devise organizational structures and networks of communi- 
cation to help the Society grow through its years of worldwide expansion. He 
concludes that the early Jesuits were not organizational geniuses, since their 
solutions did not achieve their intended purposes in many cases, but that they 
were clever enough to borrow from secular political culture to work toward a 


workable accommodation with astonishing complexities. Not surprisingly for 
anyone who knows Jesuits past and present, he discovers that personalities of- 
ten shaped policies. 

Both stories converge. Whether this issue is closing a parish school in 
Brooklyn in the twenty-first century or establishing a global religious order in 
the early-modern period of European history those involved in decision mak- 
ing both need effective organizational structures and networks of communi- 
cation to bind various sectors together. It's amazing how each situation sheds 
light on the other. I'm confident readers will find Dr. Friedrich' s essay fascinat- 
ing and illuminating. 

As a final prenote to this issue, the Seminar is grateful to our former col- 
league and current friend, John O'Malley, for initially putting us in contact with 
Dr. Friedrich, and we are grateful to the Jesuit Institute at Boston College for 
providing him with the resources to complete this study for us. Finally, we are 
grateful to Dr. Friedrich himself for spending a weekend with us, listening to 
our often contradictory comments with good humor, and creating a splendid is- 
sue of Studies for our readers. 

Richard A. Blake, S.J. 



I. The Historical Context 3 

II. Governing the Society 8 

Communications and the Central Curia 8 

Structures and Issues of Ordinary Jesuit Government 14 

The Society as Forest or Trees 17 

Decision Making in Rome 19 

The Role of the Provincial 22 

III. Critical Voices: Juan de Mariana 24 

The Man and His Ideas 25 

The Discurso 29 

Jesuit Administrative Counter Discourse 35 

IV. Administration Past and Present 38 


I wish to express my gratitude for the invitation to meet with the Seminar on 
Jesuit Spirituality to discuss the ideas in this paper in person. The members en- 
couraged me to address the recent developments and helped generally with 
many important ideas. The Jesuit Institute at Boston College was an ideal envi- 
ronment to work on this paper. 


Dr. Markus Friedrich grew up outside Munich and earned his M.A. in 
Modern History /Medieval History /Philosophy and his Dr. Phil, from 
Ludwig-Maximilians University in Munich. He spent a year as a vis- 
iting scholar at Duke University, in Durham, N.C. He currently holds 
the position of assistant professor at the Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe Uni- 
versity in Frankfurt. During the current year he is a visiting fellow of 
the Jesuit Institute at Boston College. He has published several articles 
on early Jesuit history and is currently working on a book-length study 
of organizational structures and communications networks within the 
early Society of Jesus. 


Governance in the Society of Jesus: 1540-1773 

Its Methods, Critics, and Legacy Today 

Shortly after its founding, the Society of Jesus rapidly grew 
in numbers and dispersed across the world. These develop- 
ments challenged the concept of centralized authority, so 
important to Ignatius. In trying to preserve unity in the 
diaspora, the early Jesuits adopted the practice of mandat- 
ed correspondence with Rome. They also struggled to find 
the organizational structures that would balance the Igna- 
tian value of a clearly hierarchical administration in the Cu- 
ria with the need for flexibility and adaptation on the local 
scene. Outspoken critics among the Jesuits themselves ar- 
gued for alternative forms of government. Some of these is- 
sues remain unresolved today. 

In its Decree 5, "Governance at the Service of the Universal Mission/' 
the recent Thirty-fifth General Congregation treated the topic of Je- 
suit government. The ideas expressed in this text try to cautiously 
adapt traditional structures to the changing realities of the twenty-first 
century The more important topics of Decree 5 include the relationship 
of central and local power, the procedures of decision making, the pro- 
fessionalization of administrative performance, and the role of internal 
communications. While a "reorganization" of the central government 
is envisioned (D 5, 7-14, also la), the very existence and necessity of 
a strong and powerful central government is in itself simply taken for 
granted. Echoing ideas of Ignatius and especially Polanco, extensive ad- 
ministrative structures are thought to be particularly beneficial for the 
strategic "planning" of activities, especially of ministries and missions 
(D 5, 28d; D 3, 37). Undergirding this commitment to planning is the or- 
der's attachment to "effectiveness," which harks back to Ignatius' s con- 

% Markus Friedrich 

stant concern with "magis" and constitutes in Decree 5 a major admin- 
istrative objective. 1 

Most of these concerns have accompanied the Jesuits' thought 
about their order's administration for a very long time. While some of 
the solutions and approaches of GC 35 are new and innovative, the is- 
sues themselves have a long historical pedigree. The following essay 
does not attempt a historical commentary on Decree 5. Yet in highlight- 
ing several important dimensions and features of Jesuit administrative 
history since 1540, I hope to provide some historical depth to many of 
the issues discussed at the recent general congregation. This will be 
done in parts 1 and 2. 

Decree 5 especially attempts to strengthen local and regional au- 
thorities, possibly at the expense of the provinces, which are subjected 
to a general "process of reflection" (D 5, 24-26). Such adjustments seem 
particularly timely, given the recent experiences of a rapidly globaliz- 
ing world. Yet the issue had already been forcefully discussed in the 
early years of the order. There were Jesuit voices in the sixteenth and 
seventeenth centuries that also argued in favor of a more localized and 

regionalized organization and 
- protested against what they 

There seems to be a consensus that viewed as unwarranted cen- 
Ignatius both borrowed heavily tralization and bureaucratic 

from earlier orders but also overload. A prominent exam- 

departed from their traditions in pie was the Spaniard Juan de 

many ways. Mariana (1535-1624). His criti- 

^^^^_^^_^^^^^^^^^^^^^ cal Discurso de los grandes defec- 

tos que hay en la forma del gobier- 
no de los Jesuitas will be discussed more fully in section 3. Certainly, there 
is no direct link between Mariana and contemporary Jesuit thought. In 
no way is it suggested here that Mariana could or should be seen as a 
direct precursor or role-model for contemporary discussions. Still his 
criticism of Jesuit governance merits attention because it helps us to un- 
derstand that the administrative culture that ultimately came to shape 
the Society of Jesus (and still shapes it today in many ways) was not 
without alternatives and certainly was not evident per se. While many 

1 "Effective" in its various grammatical forms occurs no less than thirty-six times 
in the six Decrees of GC 35. There are two additional occurrences for "efficient" and "ef- 
ficiency." I use a computerized word-counting function to determine these numbers. 
The "magis" is mentioned in D 2, 22. 

Governance in the Society of Jesus * 

structures of Jesuit government now might seem natural or quintessen- 
tially Jesuit, they in fact came into being only after much opposition and 
through highly contested choices. Mariana questioned many of these 
early-modern choices and can thus be helpful in understanding better 
how Jesuit administrative culture was forged through preference for 
certain options at the expense of other possible alternatives. While tra- 
ditional Jesuit historiography has seen Mariana mostly as the "disobe- 
dient" trouble maker, his opposition should rather be taken seriously as 
an early-modern attempt to rethink many aspects of Jesuit administra- 
tion in a creative way. 

I. The Historical Context 

Jesuit government was not created without context. For instance, 
Jesuit administration needs to be placed in the long tradition of 
Western religious life. There seems to be a consensus that Igna- 
tius both borrowed heavily from earlier orders but also departed from 
their traditions in many ways. That the Institutum broke with many old- 
er traditions was an obvious but very ambivalent fact for many Jesuits. 2 
Yet many aspects of Jesuit institutional organization also had well estab- 
lished precedents. For instance, the tendency to concentrate government 
in a curia, preferably in Rome, predates the Jesuits. The very idea of a 
general superior also started to take shape in the Middle Ages, as did 
the institution of general congregations or chapters. 3 But to these well- 
known features, Ignatius, Polanco, and other early Jesuits added new 
details. And perhaps even more importantly, they refashioned much of 
the existing tradition and interpreted established institutions in a new 
way. Perhaps their most outstanding addition to established tradition 
was the creation of an unrivaled network of administrative correspon- 
dence. Where did this new mental framework come from? 

2 For critical views see the section on Mariana below. A more positive approach 
is found, for example, in Sforza Pallavicino, Vindicationes Societatis lesu (Rome, 1649), 2, 
although the author does acknowledge that the novelty is a major point stirring hatred 
against the Jesuits. Pallavicino actually engages directly with Mariana's more pessimis- 
tic approach; see ibid., 93-101. 

3 See the relevant entries in the Dizionario degli Istituti di Perfezione, 10 vols. (Rome: 
San Paolo, 2003). 

Markus Friedrich 

Polanco explicitly mentioned two models. 4 An obvious point of 
reference was the mercantile world. The big Italian, German, and Span- 
ish firms were international enterprises, and a constant flow of letters 
was necessary to coordinate their activities. While these exchanges were 
creating particularly dense networks through Europe in the sixteenth 
century, they were also extremely specialized, dealing mostly with the 
transfer of money and economic details like prices and the availability 
of goods. Only one area of Jesuit communication, although an extreme- 
ly important one, is strictly comparable to these merchant letters: the 
correspondence of Jesuit procurators. The second point of reference for 
Polanco when talking about administrative correspondence was the 
Protestants communities. He remarked that the new churches had es- 
tablished a well-developed culture of communication in order to unite 
their diaspora. Obviously, and not entirely without reason, Polanco saw 
a parallel between the Jesuits' and the Protestants 7 dispersal through- 
out the world and thought the 
~"^^^^~—^^~^^^^^^^~ ,— ^ Protestants' communication 
A new understanding of politics strategies exemplary. 

emerged that was meant not only j n ^j s p a p er j SU g_ 

to guarantee justice, but also to zest a third context for Igna- 

guide and steer the social body to tius ' s and p lanco's organiza- 

proper and effective functioning. tional thought: early modern 

• political culture in the widest 

sense. Ignatius had grown up 
with connections to the emerging Spanish state and would have known 
about major political developments there. John Futrell, for instance, has 
made connections to Spanish political theory. 5 Though to my knowl- 
edge neither Ignatius nor Polanco ever cited the Italian city-states as 
models, they should be included as an important source of possible in- 
spiration. Ignatius and his early companions had spent significant time 
in Venice, perhaps the most important hub for the exchange of political 
and other information in early-modern Europe. 6 Also, the diplomatic 

*Sancti Ignatii de Loyola Epistolx et Instructiones, 12 vols., Monumenta Historica 
Societatis Iesu (reprint, Rome, 1964-58), 1:536-41 (Polanco to the Society of Jesus, July 
17, 1547). Hereafter this source will be abbreviated to Epist. 

5 John Carroll Futrell, S.J., Making an Apostolic Community of Love: The Role of the 
Superior according to St. Ignatius Loyola (St. Louis: Institute of Jesuit Sources, 1970), 61 f. 

6 Filippo de Vivo, Information and Communication in Venice: Rethinking Early Mod- 
ern Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007). 

Governance in the Society of Jesus % 5 

revolution that had been occurring in Italy since the mid-1400s is a like- 
ly point of reference. The developing modern diplomacy was, among 
other things, founded on an ever-increasing amount of correspondence 
connecting the city-states to their ambassadors abroad. 7 The resulting 
exchange of letters is one of the closest parallels to the Jesuit system of 
communication. An even more obvious context for administrative de- 
velopments were the Papal States, one of the most prominent and effec- 
tive prototypes of modern state building. 8 But also the developments 
in the government of the universal Church provide significant paral- 
lels. Recently, the popes' growing reliance on briefs instead of bulls has 
been mentioned as a possible precedent for Jesuit letter writing, espe- 
cially since Polanco had worked in the papal bureaucracy before he en- 
tered the Society. 9 In addition, the emerging system of papal nuncios, 
the Church's equivalent to diplomats and ambassadors, was using a 
system of correspondence that shared several features with the Jesuits'. 

Although I would not argue that any one of these groups, states, 
enterprises, or institutions should be seen as the direct and /or predomi- 
nant source of inspiration for Jesuit government, I would claim that they 
took part in broader historical developments that were enthusiastically 
shared by the Society of Jesus. Two of them seem particularly relevant 
here. First, the idea that the performance and shape of social bodies could 
be manipulated and molded by governmental planning and activity was 
becoming more and more widespread. A new understanding of politics 
emerged that was meant not only to guarantee justice, but also to guide 
and steer the social body to proper and effective functioning. Early mod- 
ern politics, in Marc Raeff 's words, were implementing the 

realization that the social and political structuring of human activities was to 
take place hie et nunc, within the broader framework of a conception of the 
universe which asserted that nature could be understood and acted upon 
through discovery of laws or patterns that could be expected to apply not 
only in the present but also in the future. 

7 See Francesco Senatore, \Jn mundo de carta: Forme e strutture della diplomazia sforz- 
sca, Mezzogiorno medievale e moderno, no 2 (Naples: 1998). 

8 Paolo Prodi, II sovrano pontefice, un corpo de due anime: La monarchia papale nella 
prima eta moderna (Bologna: Saggi, 1982). 

9 1 owe this point to an extremely stimulating talk delivered by Paul Nelles from 
Ottawa at the Sixteenth-century Studies Conference, 2007, held in Minneapolis, and to 
ongoing personal communication with him. 

Markus Friedrich 

Raeff in fact does associate this new idea of "social engineering" with 
the Jesuits, but only through a highly speculative allusion to the Para- 
guay Reductions. More pertinent, from my point of view, is the internal 
governmental activity of the order. 10 We will see very shortly how the 
central Jesuit government in Rome was considered to be such an agent 
for setting directions. As Joseph Cortesone said already in 1570, "Three 
things are necessary for preserving the Society of Jesus: learning, spirit, 
and government (le letter e, il spirito, et il governo). The last one is the most 
important." 11 

A second, but connected, mental shift occurred with the growing 
appreciation of up-to-date information for governance and decision 
making. At least to a certain degree, as research has argued for a long 
time, only in the Early Modern period did political and social decision 
making become empirical in the way that has become familiar to later 
centuries. Associated with names like Machiavelli or Bodin, politics be- 
came the realistic "art of what is possible," based on a thorough assess- 
ment of the current status quo. Once again, the Jesuits were no strang- 
ers to these broader trends. It seems fair to call the Spiritual Exercises, 
among many other things, a routine for decision making, in which the 
thorough, open, and realistic assessment of the current status quo was 
a key aspect. After all, one of the most crucial concepts of the Exercises 
is discernment or discretio. When Ignatius started using the concept of 
discretio, however, it already had a long tradition which inevitably also 

10 See Marc Raeff, The Well Ordered Police State (New Haven: Yale University Press, 
1983), 39 f . The Jesuits come into play on p. 30 f . His statement regarding the Reductions 
has at least equal truth for Jesuit internal administration: "It is hard, though, to escape 
the impression of a basic similarity of attitude toward administrative leadership on the 
part of Jesuit fathers and contemporary secular officials in Europe." Apart from the in- 
terest in the Jesuits, Raeff 's important insights have been taken up by an extraordinarily 
wide range of research, especially in Germany (Policey-Forschung); see, Andre Holen- 
stein, "Gute Policey" und lokale Gesellschaft im Staat des Ancien Regime: Das Fallbeispiel der 
Markgrafschaft Baden(-Durlach), 2 Bande, Fruhneuzeit-Forschungen no. 9, vols. 1 and 2 
(Epfendorf 2003), or Thomas Simon, "Gute Policey": Ordnungsleitbilder und Zielvorstellun- 
gen politischen Handelns in der Friihen Neuzeit, Studien zur europaischen Rechtsgeschich- 
te, Bd. 170 (Frankfurt am Main, 2004). 

"Ladislaus Lukacs, ed., Monumenta Psedagogica Societatis Iesu, 7 vols. (Rome, 
1965-92), 2:869. In a well-known article, Gian-Mario Anselmi has convincingly inter- 
preted this piece in a Foucaultian way as evidence for a Jesuit "gouvernmentalite." 
See his "Per un'archeologia della Ratio: Dalla 'pedagogia' al 'governo/ " in Gian Paolo 
Brizzi, ed., La Ratio studiorum: Modelli culturali e pratiche educative dei Gesuiti in Italia tra 
Cinque e Seicento (Rome, 1981), 11-42. 

Governance in the Society of Jesus * 

shaped the Jesuits' understanding of the term. Over the centuries, the 
term had acquired many different connotations. While never losing its 
relation to the biblical discernment of spirits, the term had been also 
closely associated with prudence and, hence, had developed many politi- 
cal connotations. As a moral category, discretio meant the evaluation of 
individual acts based on their circumstances, both retrospectively (con- 
fession) and regarding the planning of future activities. This could at 
times become a highly rational or natural act, based on exact investiga- 
tion of individual contexts. 

For the Jesuits, it seems, the multi-dimensional concept of discretio 
served as an umbrella term to integrate both spiritual and administra- 
tive decision making. Certainly, the rational routines of the third time of 
election (SpEx 178-83) could be and were easily applied also to admin- 
istrative routines. Just exactly 
how rational and how spiritu- 
al the Jesuits understood each Interaction between the center of 
single act of discretio, is hard to power and its local representatives 
tell. But perhaps the point was also become more regular, 
precisely to bridge this gap. By steady, and predictable, a major 
using one concept that could consequence and impetus to 
at the same time be highly ra- increase the volume 
tional or highly spiritual, po- of correspondence. 
litical or religious, many kinds ^^^^_^^^^__^_^_^^^__ 
of reasoning could be positive- 
ly acknowledged. Decision making, if labeled discretio, could be either 
strongly empirical and rational or spiritual and religious without dis- 
crediting the other option. In any case, spiritual or not, the concept pro- 
vided the order with a methodical and strongly empirically grounded 
routine for decision making in which also the systematic gathering of 
information played a crucial role. 

In early-modern Europe, this trend towards information-based 
policy making was combined with a preference for monarchical struc- 
tures and centralization. Kings and popes should no longer exert their 
power by touring their realms constantly and governing on the spot. 
Their power should rather be flowing through a series of institutions 
from one centralized location, be it El Escorial, Versailles, or Rome. Fur- 
thermore, governance, here understood as the act of governing, was re- 
lying more and more on written transactions. This process started in the 
Middle Ages and accelerated in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries 
in Northern Italy. Interaction between the center of power and its lo- 

8 * Markus Friedrich 

cal representatives also become more regular, steady, and predictable, 
a major consequence and impetus to increase the volume of correspon- 
dence. Moreover, the letters written for administrative purposes were 
more and more expected to convey standardized information on local 
circumstances, so that faraway decision making could rely on adequate 
descriptions of the local situation in an authoritative form. This, in turn, 
implied the development of new forms of safeguarding the quality of 
the information conveyed, for example, through questionnaires, forms, 
and clear rules for writing and describing. 

This broad context of early modern political culture provides the 
most useful context to analyze developments in administration and 
communication. The following sections seek to sketch out what this 
meant for the Society of Jesus. 

II. Governing the Society of Jesus 

Communications and the Central Curia 

Ignatius and Polanco not only implemented a certain scheme of 
government, but they also were highly explicit about why they were 
choosing this particular institutional framework. They not only sketched 
a blueprint for administration (the Constitutions), but also developed an 
administrative theory. Most of these reflections on the best structures for 
effective governance were expressed in a language that was not distinc- 
tively religious or exclusively ecclesiastical. Rather, the Jesuits thought 
in very pragmatic ways about their own social body, which, they felt, 
was following the same principles of social life that applied to any so- 
cial organization. Polanco nicely explained why such a perspective was 

If we observe constantly what is happening in different regions of the world, 
we will be able to focus on the crucial problems and attend to them in a spe- 
cial way. Although we can achieve something in a certain region, the same 
means could achieve much more somewhere else. This, however, escapes us 
if we are not constantly informed about all events in all regions where Je- 
suits are active. Otherwise, we are in the dark like the blind. Of course I do 
know that God through his omniscience knows our affairs much better than 
we do and orders them better than we would ever be able to. Nonetheless, 

Governance in the Society of Jesus * 

God also wishes for us to contribute all that we can, although without ever 
losing faith in His eternal support. 12 

For Polanco, the human perspective on administration and gov- 
ernance obviously had a very positive connotation. He is echoing the 
traditional Thomistic idea that grace does not contradict nature, but 
perfects it. Put the other way around, one has to build an advanced 
organizational infrastructure because this will contribute positively to 
achieving the ultimate goal. Thinking about bureaucracy and adminis- 
trative minutiae, then, is not contrary to a religious calling but part of 
the attempt to be most efficient in working for God's glory. Not all the 
early Jesuits were equally eager to follow this line of thought: when Ni- 
colas Bobadilla openly displayed a disinterest in Ignatius' s letters, he 
was reacting against the order's growing institutionalization. As John 
O'Malley has pointed out, Bobadilla preferred a more itinerant and less 
regulated form of activity. 13 

The first half of Polanco' s quotation described two of his most im- 
portant ideas for the central government. He was, first of all, concerned 
about an overview of all Jesuit activities and their current situation. This 
idea of total overview powerfully connected governance to information 
management. As was customary at the time, the Jesuits metaphorically 
associated such a perfect overview with an elevated position above the 
ground. 14 It was thus not only for the sake of rhetorical flourish when 
Claudio Acquaviva claimed that the "Roman Curia is sitting on a high 
tower and is thus able to take in the status of the entire Order with one 
single glance/' 15 The General was using a well-known metaphor that 
was widely employed in early-modern Europe to articulate this key as- 

12 Once again, I cite Epist, 4:536-41 (Polanco to the Society of Jesus, July 17, 

13 John W. O'Malley, The First Jesuits (Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University 
Press, 1993), 332-40. 

14 See Denis Cosgrove, Apollo's Eye: A Cartographic Genealogy of the Earth in the 
Western Imagination (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press: 2001) for context, but 
without reference to the history of administration. 

15 Letter of General Claudio Acquaviva to the entire Society of Jesus (July 3, 1602). 
The Italian version speaks of Rome where "quasi da un'alta torre potiamo in un occhi- 
ata perveder lo stato della Religione" (Archivum Romanum Societatis Iesu (henceforth: 
arsi), Inst 122, fol. 50 r ) whereas the Latin reads "Nos sane, qui ex hoc loco, tamquam ex 
specula, totius Ordinis nostri statum uno aspectu contemplari possumus," in Epistolx 
praepositorum generalium ad patres etfratres Societatis lesu (Ghent, 1847), 1:283. 

10 r& Markus Friedrich 

pect of governance. Such panoptism was considered a basic condition 
for good and effective governance. 

The second important aspect of Polanco' s quotation is this inti- 
mate link between a government's being well informed and its effec- 
tiveness. He wants the Jesuits not just to do some good but to be as ef- 
ficient as possible. Ignatius himself was often concerned with efficiency. 

He was thinking in terms of 
"more," and magis was a high- 
Ifwe understand that process as ly important, spiritual concept 

a tendency to organize decision for him. But as Polanco insist- 

making into regularized routines ed, striving for efficiency also 

following in a prescribed had an administrative dimen- 

sequence and relying largely on sion. It implies a thorough 

standardized writing, then the planning of activities, a care- 

Jesuits clearly participated ful balancing of options, the 

in this trend. imagination of alternative out- 

-— _^^^_^^^^^^^^^^_ comes, and a total overview of 

what was going on not only 
here and there, but everywhere. Polanco's quotation forcefully asserts 
that a great deal of the Society's effectiveness is caused by God alone. 
But Polanco also held that effectiveness is a function of information and 
administrative acumen. Being well informed became a conditio sine qua 
non for good (that is, effective) governance. 

This preoccupation with efficiency resulted in a culture of regular 
counting and documentation of achievements. 16 Counting was a favor- 
ite tool when the Jesuits came to review a year's successes. The litterae 
annuae, for instance, are full of numbers and tables displaying the exact 
numbers of confessions, conversions, or sermons by a single mission- 
ary or a Jesuit institution. 17 It is unlikely that these tables were used as 
tools for policy making as one would expect today. Nonetheless, they 
were proud representations of what had been achieved over the previ- 

16 Key research includes Tore Frangsmayer, J. L. Heilbron, and Robin Rider, eds, 
The Quantifying Spirit in Eighteenth Century (Berkeley: University of California Press, 
1990); Andrea Alice Rusnock, Vital Accounts: Quantifying Health and Population in Eigh- 
teenth-Century England and Trance (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 2002); Da- 
vid Glimp and Michelle Warren, eds., Arts of Calculation: Quantifying Thought in Early 
Modern Europe (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004). 

17 See Markus Friedrich, "Circulating and Compiling the Litterae Annuse: Towards 
a History of the Jesuit System of Communication," in Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu 
(2008): 1-39, esp. pp. 29-35. 

Governance in the Society of Jesus * 11 

ous twelve months and clearly indicated where each province or estab- 
lishment stood at the moment. Whether it was the numbers' spiritual 
value for edification or the usefulness for propaganda, documenting ef- 
ficiency clearly was a major concern for the Jesuits. 

As did most of their contemporaries, Polanco and Ignatius associ- 
ated informed and effective governance with a centralized institutional 
framework. Information and power should both be concentrated in one 
central point. To use modern language, the Jesuits clearly attempted to 
correlate the flow of information within a social organism with this or- 
ganism's institutional structure. In fact, they conceptualized both in tan- 
dem. When the Constitutions, for instance, strongly recommended that 
the general reside in Rome, they did so out of bureaucratic convenience: 
this was the location most " favorable for communication between the 
head and his members/ 718 More importantly, the idea of overview di- 
rectly translated into hierarchy. 

Most early-modern Jesuits called the Society's constitution " mo- 
narchical/' even as the assistants and the several congregations were in- 
troducing an element of "aristocracy." 19 Harro Hopfl, in an important 
recent monograph, has shown just how strongly hierarchical thought 
permeated most of Jesuit political theory. 20 He attributes this preference 
for hierarchical organization exclusively to the idea of obedience. By 
doing so, however, he unnecessarily diminishes the role of administra- 
tive convenience. The relevance of information management for Jesuit 
administrative thought thus escapes him; yet this was a major issue at 
stake here. While the virtue of obedientia did play a crucial role in the Je- 
suits' preference for social hierarchies, it was not the only reason behind 
it. Obedience was also the result and not only the condition of Jesuit hi- 
erarchical thought. In fact, the informational dimension of hierarchy ex- 
tended even beyond the Society of Jesus. Even submission to the pope 
in the special Fourth Vow was at least partially grounded in the supe- 
riority of the pope's information base. As early as 1536 Ignatius wrote, 
"Our reason for thus placing ourselves at his [the pope's] disposal is 

18 John W. Padberg, e<±, The Constitutions of the Society of Jesus and Their Comple- 
mentary Norms: A Complete English Translation of the Official Latin Text (St. Louis: The In- 
stitute of Jesuit Sources, 1996), §668 (p. 324). 

19 See, for instance, Gregory XIV s bull Ecclesix Christians, in Institutum Societatis 
Iesu, 3 vols. (Florence, 1892), 1:120. See also arsi, Inst 94, fol. 2T> and many other pieces. 

20 Harro Hopfl, Jesuit Political Thought: The Society of Jesus and the State, c. 1540- 
1630, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), passim. 

12 % Markus Friedrich 

that we know that he has a better knowledge of what will be profitable for the 
universal Church" (my italics). 21 

None of these ideas was particularly original, for they may be 
found in many other reflections on administration and governance. 22 
Yet, in spite of the popularity of these ideas, we need to appreciate that 
such a concept of government, obvious as it might be to us, in sixteenth- 
century Europe broke with 
several established traditions. 
Basing governance on a locally Bureaucracies developed only 

stable center of power and on a slowly. If we understand that 

constant stream of written reports process as a tendency to orga- 
conveying information that was nrze decision making into reg- 

not gathered personally by the ularized routines following in 

decision makers must thus be seen a prescribed sequence and re- 
as a conscious decision which was lying largely on standardized 
far from self-evident at the time. writing, then the Jesuits clear- 

^^^^_^^^^^_^^^^^^^^^^_ ly participated in this trend. A 

major implication of this de- 
velopment was the constant physical separation of decision makers 
from the local scene. More clearly than any other order before them, the 
Jesuits had given up the idea that the general should at least attempt 
to know all members and regions through personal contact. 23 Yet at the 
same time, the general's powers should be felt on the ground in a more 
thorough way than ever before. Polanco explained how this could be 

21 Ignatius of Loyola to James de Gouveia, Rome, November 23, 1538, quoted 
from William J. Young, S.J., ed. and trans., Letters of St. Ignatius of Loyola (Chicago: Loy- 
ola University Press, 1959), 35. For more on this letter and the issue in general, see John 
O'Malley, The Fourth Vow in Its Ignatian Context: A Historical Study, in Studies in the Spiri- 
tuality of Jesuits 15, no. 1 (Jan. 1983), 1-59, esp. p. 26. 

22 A growing volume of literature discusses the origins of the "information state," 
e.g., Edward Higgs, The Information State in England: The Central Collection of Informa- 
tion on Citizens since 1500 (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004). For an excellent but 
much more critical account that relates this kind of knowledge to modernist ideas of 
power, see James C. Scott, Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human 
Condition Have Failed (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1998). 

23 In fact, early generals, especially Lamez and Borja, traveled extensively, the for- 
mer to Trent and France, the latter to Spain, Portugal, France, and Italy. Yet, their travels 
were taking place on behalf of the pope and were not undertaken in order to govern the 
Society. Given the fact that the superiors of many other orders did in fact travel and visit 
different provinces and establishments more or less often, Mariana's alternative ideas 
on this point (see below) were not per se totally unrealistic or without context. 

Governance in the Society of Jesus % 13 

possible. It was the numerous reports and letters exchanged within the 
order that were meant to bridge the distance between Rome and the in- 
dividual Jesuits in the held. 24 Such an idea, however, was far from evi- 
dent in early modern Europe and thus constantly needed to be empha- 
sized and explained. Another famous Jesuit, more than a hundred years 
later, undertook once again to solve the conceptual riddles involved 
here. Father General Gianpaolo Oliva wrote thus in 1666: 

The General, like the highest mover [supremum agens], must keep moving 
the huge body of our order which is extended over the whole world. And 
if he is unable to somehow close the gap between himself and the faraway 
lands he is useless to this task. [Closing the gap is necessary] because all phi- 
losophers deny that action through distance is possible [actiones in distans 
dari abnuant]. Yet, how to achieve this indispensable closeness, without hav- 
ing Christ's ubiquity? Infinite extension, which would provide ubiquitous 
presence, is an exclusively divine property. [Our only resource is] the loyal 
and sincere diligence of our administrators which, through the means of ink 
and paper, is able to connect Orient and Occident and moves both Indies 
closer to Rome. This [administrative] diligence covers geographical distance 
to the degree that it depicts our faraway brothers in real likeness and makes 
them better known to our administrators here as if they were present. 25 

Although Oliva uses scholastic language to illustrate his point, his 
concern is administration and social organization. Once again quill, pa- 
per, and ink are the only means to overcome the handicap of physical 
separation. Such a trust in the powers of writing, however, was contro- 
versial. For many contemporaries, direct inspection and personal testi- 
mony were still considered more reliable and trustworthy than reports 
written by absent (and often unknown, therefore potentially untrust- 
worthy) people. Travel writing, for instance, was often seen as inferior 
to personal eye witnessing. And also in legal contexts, the truth of writ- 
ten testimony did not easily replace the more traditional criteria of so- 
cial standing. Basing governance on a locally stable center of power and 
on a constant stream of written reports conveying information that was 
not gathered personally by the decision makers must thus be seen as a 

24 This idea appears several times in the 1547 Officio del Secretario, ed. in Mario 
Scaduto, "Uno scritto ignaziano inedito: II "Del officio del secretario" del 1547, in Archi- 
vum Historicum Societatis Iesu 29 (1960): 305-28. 

25 Epistolde prsepositorum generalium ad patres (Prague 1711), 757f. My translation 
softens the technical detail a bit in order to render the passage more readily compre- 

14 % Markus Friedrich 

conscious decision which was far from self-evident at the time. The So- 
ciety of Jesus openly embraced these new technologies and ideas of gov- 
ernment, but not without major internal conflict, as we will see shortly 

Structures and Issues of Ordinary Jesuit Government 

As has become obvious in the previous section, communication 
did play a crucial role for Jesuit governance. Perhaps the most basic fea- 
ture of much of Jesuit correspondence is its overwhelmingly adminis- 
trative character. Even in the correspondence of Ignatius himself, only 
a tiny fraction of letters were spiritual. 26 The correspondence of later 
generals as well as the hundreds of thousands of letters exchanged on 
the regional or even local level are more or less totally devoid of spiri- 
tual content. They are matter-of-fact discussions of money, people, and 
local circumstances sprinkled with an occasional piece of international 
news. The spiritual processes that might have stood behind the deci- 
sions conveyed by the letters were only rarely put into writing and are 
thus mostly unknown today. Manifestations of conscience or discern- 
ment of spirits might have taken place, yet the strictly administrative 
nature of the extant sources makes it hard to assess the role of these pro- 
cedures. Whatever spirituality lay behind individual administrative de- 
cisions and deliberations, it was only rarely articulated in the correspon- 
dence and is as such often very hard to document. The extant sources 
mostly show the administrative face of the Society of Jesus. 

From this it follows that the bulk of Jesuit correspondence was 
not personal, spontaneous, or unsolicited. If the Jesuits understood let- 
ter writing also as "ministry, " they nonetheless did so mostly in a rou- 
tine way that was highly regulated by administrative norms. Most of 
the extant letters were written to satisfy administrative protocol. The 
amount of energy that went into regulating correspondence is breath- 
taking. Norms eventually governed all kinds of exchanges in great de- 
tail and a constant stream of admonitions urged implementation. 27 Of- 
ten, writing was hardly more than an obligation or a bureaucratic duty. 
Jesuits complained about the need and the volume of communication 

26 See Dominique Bertrand, S.J., La Politique de Saint Ignace de Loyola: L' Analyse so- 
cial (Paris: Cerf, 1985). On a smaller scale see also Thomas M. Lucas, Landmarking: City, 
Church & Jesuit Urban Strategy (Chicago: Loyola Press, 1997). 

27 For an overview see Markus Friedrich, "Communication and Bureaucracy in 
the Early Modern Society of Jesus," in Zeitschrift fur Schweizerische Religions und Kirch- 
engeschichte, 101 (2007): 49-75. 

Governance in the Society of Jesus * 15 

that they were forced to write. Communication was labor; it was "a don- 
key's job," as the Jesuit Andreas Jodoci complained about the produc- 
tion of the litterx annu3e. 2S Large parts of Jesuit communication did not 
originate in noble ideas about letter writing as personal exchange or 
bond of friendship. 

Recent research has rightly pointed out the many shortcomings of 
Jesuit correspondence and administration. 29 But one needs to appreci- 
ate also that at times the system did function quite well. Huge amounts 
of documentation were produced and did follow the official rules often 
painstakingly. To a certain degree, the Jesuits were successful in form- 
ing a bureaucratic mind-set in many of their leading administrators. 
The general idea behind administrative legislation, namely, that deci- 
sion making and government 
should function according to 

prescribed norms and work in For many a Jesuit, incoming letters 
a standardized way, became were one of the very few occasions 
self-evident to many members to really experience the fact 

of the order. Often enough, that the Society of Jesus 

Jesuits in the field asked for existed elsewhere. 

more detailed rules, norms, 

and role-model documents. A 

lack of legislation was said to cause " anxiety" and "problems for the 
conscience/' 30 If this can be seen as evidence of a growing bureaucrat- 
ic mentality in the provinces, the Roman Curia also contributed to this 
development. Acquaviva, for instance, extended the crucial practice of 
daily examen to government, a spiritual technology gone administra- 
tive. Each superior should meditate each day about his administrative 
performance. 31 If Ignatius had thought that this practice might change 
the person in a spiritual way, then Acquaviva, placing himself knowing- 
ly in this Ignatian tradition, must have hoped for a change of the supe- 
rior's administrative persona. 

28 See Markus Friedrich, "Compiling and Circulating the Literx Annux: Towards 
a History of the Jesuit System of Communication," in Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu 
77 (2008): 3-39; the quotation is found on p. 24. 

29 The latest statement of this kind is to be found in the extremely stimulating 
book of Luke Clossey: Salvation and Globalization in the Early Jesuit Mission (Cambridge: 
Cambridge University Press, 2008). 

30 So wrote the Provincial Congregation of Rhenana Superior in 1651; see arsi, 
Congr73,fol. r 214. 

3l Ordinationes Praepositorum Generalium Communes toti Societati (Rome 1595), 18 f. 

16 * Markus Friedrich 

Polanco's reference to the Protestant diaspora suggests that com- 
munication was seen also as contributing to more profound goals such as 
social unity. 32 Not only modern historians but also early-modern Jesuits 
themselves recognized that unity was often very much in danger. Much 
more than being simply a fact, unity remained a project for the Society; 
it was not simply "there" but had to be constantly defended or even cre- 
ated. Letter writing helped to achieve this goal. Especially the communi- 
cation of edifying news was supposed to incite mutual affection. While 
the effectiveness of the litterde annux and similar genres in achieving this 
should probably not be overestimated, they did have an impact. We do 
know, for instance, that circular letters helped recruit missionaries. We 
also know that some of the edifying stories were quickly transformed into 
theatrical performances in order to foster Jesuit identity. 33 

But there is yet another, more basic link between unity (social co- 
herence) and correspondence. For many a Jesuit, incoming letters were 
one of the very few occasions to really experience the fact that the So- 
ciety of Jesus existed elsewhere. There were only a limited number of 
ways to transform the Society's global pretension into a tangible expe- 
rience in daily life. In fact, the sheer existence of bureaucratic routines 
acted as a significant counterforce against the strong centrifugal, local- 
izing trends that plagued the Society from early on. Grudgingly as the 
Jesuits in the field might have borne it, the inescapable presence of ad- 
ministrative tasks was a major reminder that there was more to the Soci- 
ety of Jesus than just the local context. By writing and receiving admin- 
istrative letters regularly from the distant Roman Curia, the associated 
idea of a global institution and network became less abstract. Put the 
other way around: each act of administrative letter writing helped to 
turn the Society's global outlook into a living reality and kept it from be- 
ing merely a nebulous concept. Compliance with administrative proto- 
col invested the associated institutions and pretensions with life and re- 
ality. Each act of administrative writing, no matter what it said, was an 
acknowledgment that the order's central institutions did and should ex- 
ist. Even more than the content of communication, the pure act and the 
regularity of exchange helped to balance atomizing, centrifugal tenden- 
cies. Through administration, the Society's unified and universal mis- 

32 Letter writing is discussed in part 8 of the Constitutions, which is titled "Means 
to Achieve Unity and Mutual Love." 

33 See Adrian Hsia, ed v Mission und Theater: japan und China aufden Buhnen der Ge- 
sellschaft Jesu (Regensburg: Schnell und Steiner, 2005). 

Governance in the Society of Jesus % 17 

sion did not have to be only imagined but could be experienced on a 
regular basis. 

The Society as Forest or Trees 

One of the more obvious contributions of the Jesuits to the tradi- 
tions of religious organization was the office of Assistant. 34 At the First 
General Congregation in 1558, four assistants were appointed, one each 
for Germany, Italy, Spain, and Portugal. Before 1773 two more were cre- 
ated, one for France in 1608 and another for Poland in 1755. Attempts 
at adding further assistancies, especially for extra-European provinces, 
were made several times in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, 
but to no avail. The creation of assistancies suggests that the Jesuits im- 
mediately perceived the need for an intermediary entity between the 
universal (or global) dimension of the order and the regional one, as 
represented by the provinces. Especially the boundaries of the Italian, 
French, Spanish, and Portuguese Assistancies acknowledged existing 
political and even national identities. In sixteenth-century Europe, the 
Jesuits could not but accept the reality of growing nation-states and cir- 
cumscribed political spheres. The coalition between political (or nation- 
al) perspectives and Jesuit activity could play both ways. Missionary 
enterprises, for example, profited as much from strong alliances with in- 
dividual kings as they were hampered by them. The Jesuits, from early 
on, were wary and cautious about the negative effects of a nationaliza- 
tion of individual enterprises. The growing nationalism among Jesuits 
was a constant concern for the Roman Curia. The fact that the Society 
of Jesus was a multinational entity is fairly obvious, and perhaps not all 
that remarkable for a Catholic religious order. More to the point is its 
ability, restricted as it was in very many cases, to forge truly multina- 
tional operations. 

Geography remained a major criterion for the division of admin- 
istrative labor within the Roman Curia. On the local level, things looked 
different. The colleges, for instance, had specialized administrative per- 
sonnel responsible for spiritual affairs, for domestic discipline, for su- 
pervising the schools, and so forth. The administrative work was di- 
vided along different tasks and functions. Nothing like that occurred in 


*E. P. Burki, "Une institution original de droit constitutionnel religieux: Le col- 
lege des assistants generaux de l'ordre des Jesuits," in Revue de droit canonique 35 (1985): 

18 * Markus Friedrich 

the Roman Curia or on the provincial level. 35 No bureau of missions or 
a specialist for spiritual issues, not even a committee on schools, exist- 
ed. At most, specialized teams were assembled ad hoc and dismissed af- 
ter their mission was accomplished. 36 In a more institutionalized form, 
there was nothing but the assistants, and they were intentionally select- 
ed to bring in expertise that was first and foremost defined geograph- 
ically. If we consider functional differentiation a major ingredient of 
large-scale organization, this unwillingness to go beyond a simple geo- 
graphical structuring of work might be seen as a decisively pre-mod- 
-__________^_ ern feature of the Society that 

While the secretaries usually remained unchanged at least 

acted as loyal supporters of the untl1 1773 - With growing op- 

generals, the assistants were erations, it became more and 

harder to control. Their role more naive to assume that six 

was only vaguely defined in the people (the general plus five 

Constitutions and at several times assistants) together with the 
they launched bold attacks on the secretary and an occasional se- 
generals f powers, nior Jesuit could adequately 

^_^^^__^^^^^^^^^^^_^^_ cover the whole range of issues 

from spirituality, ecclesiastical 
politics, missions, and education, to internal affairs. Yet, until 1773 the 
Jesuit Roman Curia remained a body of "jacks of all trades/' generalists 
who made decisions in all areas, yet were experts in none. The Jesuits 
would not have been hard pressed to find inspiration for restructuring; 
just a look at the Church's administration would have helped. With his 
reform of the Papal Curia in 1585, Pope Sixtus V installed a system of 
congregations, bodies of cardinals, each of which was committed rath- 
er precisely to a certain range of topics: Congregations for Missions, for 
Justice, for Taxes and so on. Surprisingly, no Jesuit ever so much as talk- 
ed about a similar rearrangement of Jesuit government before 1773. 

Geographical breakdown generally played a major role in think- 
ing about the order. Attempts to represent the entire Society of Jesus 
usually did not go beyond an enumeration of individual provinces. The 

35 The one exception being the procurator general and other procurators. 

36 For instance, in the process of designing the Ratio studiorum, see, for example, 
V. J. Duminuco, ed., The Jesuit Ratio Studiorum: 400th Anniversary Perspectives (New 
York: Fordham University Press, 2000). 

Governance in the Society of Jesus %? 19 

same holds true for the provinces themselves. 37 Perhaps the fine arts 
did create a distinctive language for depicting the Society of Jesus in its 
entirety, 38 but administration never achieved anything like that. As ex- 
amples, one might cite the printed series of litterae annuae or the printed 
catalogues or even the central Roman Archive. 39 All of these were cer- 
tainly meant to represent the Jesuit Order in its entirety, yet the litterx 
annux, catalogues and even the archive function mostly as composites, 
simply enumerating provinces and individual establishments. The lit- 
terde contain local report after local report, with hardly any attempt at 
synthesizing a status quo for the provinces or the assistancies, not to 
mention for the total Society. 40 The same holds true for the catalogues. 
Also the volumes of congregational documents present the universal So- 
ciety only through an anthology of unconnected provincial documents. 
Even the archive, to a large degree, falls into geographically defined 
units. Only very rarely, did unifying visions collected from the input 
of the provinces coalesce into a synthesis. Most of the time, the Society 
was the sum total of individual provinces that were, in turn, the sum to- 
tal of their houses, nothing more. Polanco, however, had envisioned a 
perspective that would be more than a mere anthology of provinces. In 
seems unlikely, however, that such a synthesized perspective on Jesuit 
operations materialized very often in administrative contexts. Judging 
from administration and administrative documentation, we must say 
that the Society of Jesus was rarely more than just the sum total of its lo- 
cal and regional bodies. 

Decision Making in Rome 

The rarity of general congregations is another signature feature 
of the Society of Jesus. Unlike, for instance, the Cluniacs or Cistercians, 
daily politics was not made by such a representative body. Instead, this 
was what the general was for. He was invested with almost unrestrict- 


interestingly, there is no early-modern parallel to part I, section 2, II. A, §§25 f. 
of the Practica quxdam (Rome, 1997; henceforth Pq), p. 6, discussing the provincials' "Re- 
port on the Province/' 

38 A point suggested by Clossey, Salvation and Globalization, passim. 

39 On Jesuit Archives now see Markus Friedrich, "Archive und Verwaltung im 
fruhneuzeitlichen Europa: Das Beispiel der Gesellschaft Jesu," in Zeitschrift fur Histo- 
rische Forschung 35 (2008): 369-403. 

40 Only for a very short but important period was the pure geographical structure 
abandoned for a topical reorganization at least on the provincial level. For more on this 
see Friedrich, "Compiling and Circulating." 

20 * Markus Friedrich 

ed powers in most fields of Jesuit activity. It would, however, be wrong 
to assume that the generals were isolated decision makers who gov- 
erned single-handedly. The Roman Curia in fact was a highly complex 
social cosmos, and many Jesuits played a role in decision making. Of- 
ten enough this was an amicable cooperation with open discussions. 
Equally often, however, Roman decisions were the result of strife, lob- 
bying, and power games. While the secretaries usually acted as loyal 
supporters of the generals, the assistants were harder to control. Their 
role was only vaguely defined in the Constitutions and at several times 
they launched bold attacks on the generals' powers. 41 Even when they 
yielded to the generals' superior authority, they had considerable in- 
fluence. We know about regular consultations (consultationes) among 
the general, secretary, and the assistants in which decisions were taken 
collectively. Many letters and norms were drafted collectively in these 
meetings. This complicated issue of authorship (and authority) must 
thus be raised not only for Polanco and Ignatius, but even more so for 
all other Jesuit generals. 

From the minutes of these consultations, we know not only about 
the quarrelling and cooperation; we also learn about the processing of 
the incoming correspondence. It is safe to say that the heaps of papers 
were actually read and decision making was really based on the incom- 
ing information. The quality and content of the letters determined the 
deliberations. If information was insufficient, a decision would be de- 
layed and the local official reprimanded. At times we can also see how 
incoming news stirred discussions, and on rare occasions it is even pos- 
sible to "hear" several Jesuits in Rome argue about what to do. Deci- 
sion making was a process of hard work and often done collectively. At 
times the general took the initiative, but on other occasions other offi- 
cials were asked to make propositions or decide a case. Unfortunately, 
we do not know very much about the additional correspondence that 
the assistants received. 42 But from what little we know, it is clear that 
they were linked to their regions by independent networks and it is 
likely that these enabled them to bring in extra information on specific 

41 For an example see Burkhart Schneider, S.J., "Der Konflikt zwischen Claudius 
Aquaviva und Paul Hoffaeus," in Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu 26/27 (1957/1958): 
3-56, 279-306. 

42 A rare example of such correspondence is now available in Bernard Joassart, 
"Jean-Paul Oliva, Charles de Noyelle et les Bollandistes d'apres les archive bollandi- 
ennes," in Analecta Bollandiana 125 (2007): 139-97. 

Governance in the Society of Jesus * 21 

topics. The assistants clearly were also a major contact point if local Je- 
suits wanted to strategically place an issue in Rome. Occasionally we 
can see the assistants at the forefront of regional networks lobbying for 
a particular person or decision. Strong evidence seems to indicate that 
the role of the assistants grew significantly from the mid-seventeenth 
century onwards. Practically this meant that the Curia's geographical 
organization grew stronger over the decades. The eighteenth century, 
finally, saw complaints about such national networks taking over the 
Roman Curia entirely. Particularly the " German Generalate" of Francis- 
cus Retz, who was actually from Bohemia, was said to be controlled by 
such a German network. 43 

Very often, Roman decisions seem to have been more the result 
of a muddling-through than of clearly defined strategies. The above- 
mentioned lack of synthesis corresponds to a lack of explicit strategic 
planning and proactive goal setting. Or, rather, if it occurred, it did not 
leave any traces, such as the internal position papers produced by other 
early modern administrations (discorsi, consulta). Given the extraordi- 
nary amount of information that reached Rome every day and given the 
elaborate rhetoric of Polanco, Acquaviva, and others cited above, this 
rareness of explicit strategic 
planning is actually astonish- 
ing. But governmental consid- The lack of strategic planning 
erations about what to do only might thus be a tribute to the 
occasionally reached beyond perennial and circumstantially 
the local contexts or the im- flexible adaptability that was so 
minent future. There was only important to Ignatius. 
little medium-range planning «_^^^_^^^^___^^^^_^^^_ 
of Jesuit activity in Rome. Cri- 
teria for decision making did not usually come from explicit develop- 
ment plans. The general and necessarily abstract goals, such as "helping 
souls," and similar expressions, were mostly applied directly to daily 
operations without a level of assessment that would evaluate the con- 
sequences in the longer run and for larger areas. Explicit projecting of 
where a region should and could be standing within the next five or ten 
years rarely occurred. Incoming information was not generally evalu- 
ated against a precise road map to the future. 

43 "Accurata expositio detrimentorum, qua? nunc patitur Societas nostra: Ad Pa- 
tres Congregationis Generalis XVII," in Archivio Segreto Vaticano (henceforth: asv), 
Fondo Gesuiti, 51. This document, obviously, is highly polemical. 

22 %? Markus Friedrich 

The long and explicit discussions about missionary procedure 
may be an exception. After all, the decisions for accommodation or in 
favor of native languages were substantially influencing and determin- 
ing Jesuit progress. Yet, while these were certainly basic decisions, they 
still only provided a very general framework of activity. Furthermore, 
they are first of all methodological principles and not blueprints for fu- 
ture daily operations. A grand strategy that would have explicitly deter- 
mined a midterm goal and projected a way to achieve it after evaluating 
several options was generally not well developed in the Roman Curia — 
or at least it did not leave any traces in the extant documentation. Per- 
haps this was a consequence of the lack of specialization in the Curia. 
Also, Ignatius himself had always insisted that the formula of "helping 
souls" was generally open to every situation and should thus not be 
translated into a fixed agenda. The lack of strategic planning might thus 
be a tribute to the perennial and circumstantially flexible adaptability 
that was so important to Ignatius. Whatever the reason was, in retro- 
spect Jesuit decision making in general only rarely looks like a careful 
step by step implementation of medium-level strategic plans. 

The Role of the Provincial 

A quick look at the role of the Provincial is important in order to bal- 
ance the focus on centralization thus far. Central governance was strong- 
ly dependent on local and provincial cooperation. The center's informa- 
tional dominance was made possible almost exclusively by local and 
regional input. We have just discovered the inability to articulate a dis- 
tinctive universal perspective that would have looked upon the Society 
from the elevated position of Rome. In many respects, Rome was hardly 
more than a hub for regional and local information. Polanco's ideas not- 
withstanding, the Jesuits 7 central government often reproduced the local 
and regional perspectives to a surprisingly large degree. Rome knew of 
this dependence and tried at least to control the local production of infor- 
mation as much as possible by applying standardizing media technolo- 
gies like forms and questionnaires and by producing a closely knit nor- 
mative framework for correspondence. Ultimately, however, Rome had 
no other means than asking for compliance with the requirements. If the 
provinces boycotted or manipulated letter-writing or if wars prohibited 
information from reaching Rome, the central Curia quickly became para- 
lyzed and the danger of disintegration grew rapidly. 

Yet it would be too simplistic to assume that Rome could only 
know what individual authors wanted it to know. A major feature of 

Governance in the Society of Jesus * 23 

Jesuit information management was a systematic production of mul- 
tiple sources of information on the same topic. The general received re- 
ports not only from the provincials and from other officials like the con- 
sultores, but from local superiors as well. This could and did produce 
redundancy, but redundancy was a highly efficient means to control 
information. Differences in these reports were carefully acknowledged 
in Rome and turned into a powerful tool to direct and influence local 
activity. Especially crucial for the implementation of this multi-paper- 
trails strategy were the provincials. This office was reinvented as a ma- 
jor intermediary information hub. Most importantly, the provincial was 
to provide the general with an additional view on local affairs. 

While sometimes the provincial was described as a mini-general on a 
regional scale, this description overlooks a key difference. While the gen- 
eral was stable in location, the provincial's office was explicitly designed 
to be itinerant. Provincials were constantly on the move and, as far as we 
can reconstruct, their itinerar- 
ies were astonishing. Even in 

the tiny region of Flandro-Belgi- The provincials were thus 

ca, which loosely approximates gathering information on a 

modern-day Belgium, we see regional level, and this also 

the provincials bouncing back included explicitly a commission 

and forth from house to house to control and evaluate local input 
with often no more than a cou- from other sources. 

pie of days of rest. Even more _^ 
dramatic was the challenge in 

Upper Germany, where the trek from Tyrol to Switzerland, for instance, 
was often more than challenging. The Province of Austria, by early mod- 
ern standards, was too big to be toured every year, yet the provincials 
tried their best. In contrast to the general's absolute dependence on writ- 
ten reports, the provincial was a perpetual eyewitness. 

There was a danger that the pace of movement might actual- 
ly isolate or disconnect the traveling provincials not only from Rome 
but even from their own province. More correspondence attempted to 
counter this danger. When the provincial bureaucracy functioned well, 
the provincials were not isolated but came to resemble moving centers 
connected to the rest of their province by a highly flexible network of 
letters. Even in tiny Belgium, for instance, it was often difficult enough 
to know where the provincial actually was and when or how to contact 
him. Papers had to be forwarded constantly and often enough did not 
reach the provincial even though he was only a few miles away. Also, 

24 % Markus Friedrich 

without their archives at hand, the provincials were often blind and in- 
quiries had to be sent to provincial headquarters first before a situation 
could be adequately assessed. 

The advantage was, however, that the provincial was very well 
informed by firsthand impressions. This made his letters a real alter- 
native to the rectors 7 reports and perhaps the most important pillar of 
Rome's multi-perspective panoptism. But the provincials had differ- 
ent tasks, too. In other areas, they were less creators of alternative in- 
formation than producers of authoritative reports. For the littexe annuse, 
the catalogues, or the informationes ad gradum or ad gubernandum, they 
were charged with compiling, controlling and, if necessary, correcting 
or amending local documents. The provincials were thus gathering in- 
formation on a regional level, and this also included explicitly a com- 
mission to control and evaluate local input from other sources. 

But no matter how information reached Rome, directly or indirectly, 
without local cooperation the general would have been operating blind. 
Not his powers, but the occasion to exert these powers depended largely 
on local support. Seen this way, the general's real potential to shape and 
guide the Society was therefore fragile by definition. If the system of in- 
formation-management malfunctioned, his was hardly more than a huge 
range of powers without any clear object to act upon. 

III. Critical Voices: Juan de Mariana 

So far, the historical reconstruction has unveiled the origins and 
early developments of Jesuit administrative culture, a culture that 
strongly influenced much of the Jesuit Order's history ever since. 
By turning to Juan de Mariana and some of his fellow critics, we hope 
to demonstrate that the Jesuit way of government did not come about 
without the possibility of alternatives. Mariana's Discurso de los gran- 
des defectos que hay en la forma del gobierno de los Jesuitas articulated dis- 
agreement with the general trend of Jesuit administrative development; 
and, while not providing direct inspiration for contemporary thought, it 
may still be helpful today to highlight the crucial choices that once were 
made regarding government. Acknowledging the perceptive voices of 
Mariana and others (instead of simply dismissing them as "disobedi- 
ent") helps to uncover the fact that the Jesuit Order hosted a thin but 
articulate tradition of alternative thought for most of its early history. 
Once again: there is no way to connect Mariana's thought directly to 

Governance in the Society of Jesus % 25 

contemporary issues, yet the attempts of recent general congregations 
to renegotiate Jesuit governance thus acquires a longer historical pedi- 
gree than might have been expected. 

Far from being an odd voice, then, Mariana must rather be seen 
as a prominent exponent of a lively tradition of Jesuit administrative 
counter discourse. As was the case in most other early-modern social 
bodies, the Jesuits also featured a rich tradition of critical self-reflection 
that should be appreciated as a controversial, yet committed and cre- 
ative contribution to Jesuit administrative thought. Over the years, this 
discourse matured into a veritable tradition and later texts could and 
did cite earlier critiques frequently. Critical voices could draw on a wide 
variety of arguments, reaching from personalized polemics to detailed 
investigation of individual administrative routines to overall assess- 
ments of the order's administrative framework. From a historical point 
of view, the existence of such a counter discourse is hardly surprising. 
Rather, it seems to be the natural expression of the fact that alterna- 
tive perspectives are constantly created in social organizations. In early- 
modern Europe, critical counter discourses were crucial components of 
political culture and the Jesuits were no exception. 

The Man and His Ideas 

Juan de Mariana is considered one of the major sixteenth-century 
Spanish Jesuit philosophers and historians. Today he is known especial- 
ly as a political theorist, a historian of Spain, and as an early economic 
theorist. Born in 1535, he became a Jesuit in 1554 and quickly began an 
international career as teacher and professor. Way stations were the Ro- 
man College, Loreto, Sicily, and Paris. From early on he cooperated and 
competed with the most famous Jesuit professors, among them Fran- 
cisco, later Cardinal, Toledo, Emanuel de Sa, and Juan de Maldonado. 44 
Mariana was highly esteemed by Generals Lainez and Borja. The sourc- 
es often mention his melancholic temper, a term often used to indicate 
psychological issues, depression perhaps. 45 Because of this melancholy, 
he was sent back to Toledo in Spain where he remained from 1574 until 
the end of his life in 1624. 46 In this long period of quiet he started writ- 

44 Details can be found in Felix Asensio, "El profesorado de Juan de Mariana y su 
influjo en la vida del escritor," in Hispania 13 (1953): 581-639. 

45 See ibid., passim. 

46 Ferraro, Mariana, 13 f., n. 13, takes "melancholy" to be a code word for "dissidi 
con le gerarchie deU'ordine." His claim is much substantiated by a reference to the Dis- 

26 ?r Markus Friedrich 

ing his many works. Late in his life he attacked the Duke of Lerma, the 
Spanish King's favorite, for his ill-fated monetary politics. As a result, 
legal procedures against Mariana were instigated, and in 1610 he spent 
several months in jail. 47 

Mariana was teaching and writing on the basis of a strong human- 
istic influence which favored a more exegetical or positive theology. 48 It 
was no wonder, then, that a colleague in Sicily complained that he "was 
no natural, moral and metaphysical philosopher and does not proceed 
^^_^^^^^^^__^^^^^^^^^ as one." He continued, "This 

good Father, in my opinion, 
Mariana's reputation as a does not ^^ pnilosopny or 

champion of the sinister doctrine, met aphysics and thus does 

whether deservedly or not, became not ^^ scholastic [ mea ning 

widespread and still figures dogmatic] theology" 49 Mari- 

prominently in much of twentieth- m a's strong interest in bib- 

century historical research. lical studies and i anguages 

^^^^^^^^^^— ^^^^^^^^^^— support this view. More gen- 
erally, Harald E. Braun, in a 
recent book on Mariana, has also called attention to a humanist style 
of argument that distinguished him from many of his great contempo- 
raries. 50 While he certainly never opposed Scholastic theology as such, 
he nevertheless allowed himself some freedom from slavish adherence 
to Thomas Aquinas, the bedrock of Jesuit Scholastic education. 51 

curso, 607, where Mariana accuses the Curia of exiling people because of "melancholy." 

47 An undated and anonymous letter in arsi, Fondo Gesuitico, 700, fol. 431 r ' men- 
tions that the Duke of Lerma was "disgusted" by Mariana, a sentiment that was pos- 
sibly shared also by the king. The author suggests a severe punishment for Mariana. 
Mariana was criticizing Lerma on several occasions, including his negative assessment 
of favorites in his De rege and his assault on Lerma' s monetary politics in his De monetae 
mutatione (1609). See Gonzalo Fernandez de la Mora, "El Proceso contra el P. Mariana," 
in Revista de Estudios Politicos 79 (1993): 49-99, for more on this affair. 

48 On "positive theology" in Paris, see Asensio, "Profesorado," 631 f . 

49 Ibid., 617, quoting Mariana's colleague Garcia: "[N]o es filosofo natural y mor- 
al y metafisico, y como tal procede; y este buen Padre, segiin creo, no sabe filosofia, ni 
metafisica y consiguiente no sabe teologia escolastica." 

50 Harald E. Braun, Juan de Mariana and Early Modern Spanish Political Thought (Al- 
dershot: Cambridge University Press, 2007), passim. See, in a much broader perspec- 
tive, also Domenico Ferraro, Tradizione e ragione in Juan de Mariana (Milan: Franco- Ange- 
li, 1989) esp. chap. 1, pp. 9-28. 

51 See his striking letter in Asensio, "Profesorado," 630 f. 

Governance in the Society of Jesus * 27 

His international reputation and career notwithstanding, Mariana 
seems to have cultivated a strong allegiance to Spain and the Spanish 
monarchy, a feature prominent also in his Discurso. Most clearly, this al- 
legiance can be seen from his Spanish History, published in 1592. 52 Be- 
sides cultivating a strong Spanish bias, Mariana was interested in his- 
torical development itself. This is also a major feature in his Discurso. 
An idea very dear to him was his understanding of ecclesiastical tradi- 
tion as real history, indicating not only a simple sequence of steps but 
addressing in some detail the developments connecting them. To him, 
this seemed an important approach, especially since the famous Prot- 
estant Magdeburg Centuries had applied it in their attack on the Catho- 
lic Church. Explicitly, he attempted to counter this extremely important 
work of historiography by applying the same method yet substituting a 
Catholic perspective. 53 

Most famous, perhaps, is Mariana's political theory. In 1599, he 
published De rege et regis institutione libri III, a book meant to guide the 
education of the Christian prince. It had been commissioned by a high- 
ranking Spanish official, the archbishop of Toledo, Garcia de Loaysa, 
who had been tutor to the future king of Spain, Philip III. Perhaps Maria- 
na himself had also been involved in educating him. The book became 
famous, or rather infamous, since it seemed to support the doctrine of 
tyrannicide. While not attempting to develop a legal theory of the right 
to resistance or tyrannicide, Mariana does describe rather pragmatically 
a situation where an imprudent king by illegal activities almost forces 
his subjects into resistance or even into killing him. Under these circum- 
stances, Mariana suggests, this could be an acceptable and even com- 
mendable move. 54 In the first edition of his work, he even praised the 
assassin of Henry III, king of France, in 1589. 55 Rightly or not, Mariana 
therefore became known as the Catholic champion of tyrannicide. From 
1610 (the year of Henry IV s assassination) on, Father General Acquavi- 
va prohibited any statements in favor of tyrannicide. Mariana's reputa- 

52 }uan de Mariana, Historic de rebus Hispanix libri XXV (Toledo, 1592). 

53 See Asensio, "Profesorado," 632 (to Nadal, September 27,1572): "El designio 
es de poner la tradition de la Iglesia por modo de historia, que fue el intento aunque 
con mala intention y por modo de los centuriadores." He proposes to treat the topoi de 

Ecclesia, de Scriptura, de Primatu Pontificis, de Innocentia sanctorum, de Cultu imaginum, de 
Sacrificio Missse. 

54 See Braun, Mariana, 85-87. 

55 Hopfl, Political Theory, 318-21, quotation in 29n (p. 320). 

28 % Markus Friedrich 

tion as a champion of the sinister doctrine, whether deservedly or not, 
became widespread and still figures prominently in much of twentieth- 
century historical research. 56 

While Mariana was certainly not a seasoned administrator, he 
nonetheless did have some experience. For a short period in his early 
years, he was rector of Loreto. 57 Later in his life and at a crossroad in 
the Society's early history (1588), he was explicitly mentioned as a valu- 
able counselor to the designated visitor of the Spanish provinces, Jose 
de Acosta. 58 Mariana also attempted to be elected a member of the Fifth 
General Congregation, albeit without success. 59 In 1593, in the after- 
math of this meeting, we see him entertaining already strongly critical 
thoughts about the Society's Institutum. Many of those were to surface 
again in his Discurso. 60 Even though Mariana started writing the Dis- 
curso only in 1605, he clearly had been cultivating a critical perspective 
on Jesuit government for several years. Mariana himself never intended 
this text for publication, and it was only after his death that anti-Jesuit 
circles saw it through the press (1625). 61 Father General Vitelleschi was 
infuriated and prohibited possession of the work for all Jesuits. In fact, 
all copies that were in Jesuit hands should either be burnt on the spot or 
delivered immediately to the next superior. 62 In dealing with this criti- 

56 By many modern authorities Mariana has also been understood to be a cham- 
pion of constitutionalism and popular sovereignty. Only very recently, Harald E. Braun 
offers a different account, see Braun, Mariana, passim. 

57 Asensio, "Profesorado," passim. 

58 See the instruction to Acosta from October 1588, arsi Hispania ,143, fol. 291 r . 

59 See Mora, Proceso, 60 f ., on the basis of Astrain. 

60 See his long letter to Jose de Acosta, September 4, 1593, in arsi, Congr 20b, fol. 
551™: He wanted regular general congregations and more power for provincial con- 
gregations. Congregations are not diminishing the superior's powers but increase his 
"strength and nerves." He was also critical of the way in which the Society provides 
grades to its members, another important topic of the Discurso. 

61 For more details on the early circulation and the first publication of the Dis- 
curso, see (on the basis of Astrain) Fernandez de la Mora, El Proceso, 60. Easily accessi- 
ble is also the French translation that appeared in the second volume of the famous Ge- 
neva-based anti-Jesuit compilation, the Second Tome Du Mercure Iesuite (Geneva: Pierre 
Aubert, 1630), 87-194. The Discurso found its way into many anti-Jesuit works and an- 
thologies. I have used the Spanish edition available in Obras del Padre Juan de Mariana 
II (Madrid, 1872; = Obras de autores espanolas desde laformacion del lenguaje hasta nuestros 
dias, vol. XXXI), 596-617. The paragraphs given in the text refer to this edition. 

62 Vitelleschi sent out a circular letter (July 25, 1626), Osterreichische Nationalbib- 
liothek cod. 11956, fol. 18 r . 

Governance in the Society of Jesus * 29 

cal text, the Curia mostly tried to present Mariana as unfit for analyz- 
ing government in the first place. The Roman Curia called attention to 
his bookish lifestyle and insinuated a certain form of intellectual iso- 
lation. While Mariana called practical experience a major condition of 
successful administration, the 
Curia suggested that he him- 
self was lacking this crucial Just as everywhere else, also 
qualification. 63 Marianna, it within the Jesuit Order inferior 
seemed, instead of address- ranks fight against their superiors: 
ing "real" issues on a basis of professed against rectors, 
detailed experience, had pro- coadjutors against 
duced nothing but lies and in- rectors and superiors. 

suits against the Society of Je- 

sus. 64 Yet, while he certainly 

did exaggerate in many ways, his criticism was clearly not as unfound- 
ed as Vitelleschi had suggested. Placed against our review of early Je- 
suit administrative history, it will become obvious that the Spaniard not 
only rather perceptively diagnosed and criticized many recent develop- 
ments in the Society but also articulated an alternative approach. 

The Discurso 

What did Mariana really say in his Discurso? The text consists of 
twenty chapters plus introduction and conclusion. The argument moves 
from general considerations to the details of Jesuit life. The first sections 
are of particular importance in order to understand the underpinning of 
Mariana's argument. Chapter 1 opens by discussing human fallibility. 
Mariana argues that mistakes and errors are simply part of human exis- 
tence. As in De rege, he starts from a pessimistic anthropology. Religious 
congregations are no exception to this rule: they need "time and expe- 
rience (tiempo y experiencia)" to correct initial shortcomings: "This is all 
the more the case in our laws, for (as will be shown shortly) they flowed 

63 See an anonymous report (written shortly after the death of Mariana) in arsi, 
Inst 94, fol. 2™. 

64 See also Sforza Pallavicino, 1649 #6797 / footcit, p. 93, who saw clearly that 
Mariana intended more to improve than to criticize the Society's Institutum. Yet, on p. 
94 follows a remark similar to Vitelleschi' s assessment that Mariana "quidem Magistra- 
tum vel extra Societatem, vel in Societatem nullum administravit, sine quo vix intime 
potest & Respublica civem, & civis Rempublicam nosse." Mariana was a virtuous man, 
yet that does not make him necessarily a good lawmaker (p. 95). I find Pallavicino's as- 
sessment, while still being strongly critical, somewhat more balanced than the general 
tone of discussion. 

30 * Markus Friedrich 

more from speculation than from practical experience and this is a ma- 
jor source of all errors'' (§6). Related to this is Mariana's diagnosis that 
Ignatius did not follow established organizational models but proposed 
a new scheme for his order (see also §§15, 18). This idea that Ignatius 
intentionally stepped outside the monastic tradition and experience oc- 
curs at several other points and always with a negative connotation in 
the Discurso. The newness and " speculative" character of the Jesuit In- 
stitution became a major battleground. 65 

Chapter II provides some general statements on governance. Mar- 
iana stresses that governance is far from being the rational enterprise 
that many think it is. Instead, politics is about power and compromise. 
Just as everywhere else, also within the Jesuit Order inferior ranks fight 
against their superiors: professed against rectors, coadjutors against rec- 
tors and superiors. Governance, the author insists, thus takes place in con- 
^— ^^^^^— ^^^^^^^-^^— stantly changing circumstanc- 
Contrary to Polanco's basic es. Experience and prudence 

conviction, Mariana did not re are needed to navigate this 

believe that the distance between environment. Yet in Mariana's 

the administrative center in perspective, the strong reliance 

Rome and the local theaters could on a monarchical structure is 
simply be bridged by writing not conducive to these virtues. 

letters. m general, the Society's insti- 

tutional framework is consid- 
ered ill equipped to meet the 
challenges. In chapter 3, he provides a long list of institutional and prac- 
tical faults. One of the major defects of the Constitutions is the general's 
absolute powers. Chapter 4 presents the reader with several examples 
of mismanagement and ensuing revolts in Spain. Among the many ep- 
isodes recited, Mariana's attack on the Ratio studiorum and his disap- 
proval of unconditional Roman support for Luis de Molina's doctrine 
of grace stand out (§§33-36). 

Starting with chapter 5, the Discurso turns to a more detailed in- 
vestigation of Jesuit governance on all levels. First, he criticizes the treat- 

65 For an alternative view, directly against Mariana, see Pallavicino, Vindicationes, 
98: Ignatius did not depart more from older models than the other founders did at their 
time (non magis carpit Ignatium quam primos illos pra?clarissimos religiosorum ordi- 
num duces). Pallavicino turns this into a praise for Ignatius (100): "Quocirca tanto con- 
sultius, ac modestius egisse videtur Ignatius, quanto latius ab aliorum Ordinum institu- 
tione discessit, tanquam novum condirurus, non veteres emendaturus." 

Governance in the Society of Jesus * 31 

ment of novices. Most of all, he attacks the creation of houses of novic- 
es, today especially associated with Father General Francisco de Borja. 
Mariana holds that the newcomers should not be educated in a special 
space but should immediately be thrown into the world as they are to 
encounter it later. In chapter 6 he discusses studies and the scholastics. 
Again, Mariana attacks the Ratio studiorum. Chapter 7 echoes broader 
critiques of the temporal coadjutors and their ever-growing numbers. 66 
Next, in chapters 9 and 10, he discusses financial issues and Jesuit real 
estate. The growing involvement of the order in large-scale land hold- 
ing and agriculture is seen as dangerous to virtues, but also leads to 
more organizational difficulties and extreme costs. 

For our purposes particularly important are chapters 10 ("On the 
Monarchy" ) and 11 ("On the Problems Resulting from That Form of Gov- 
ernment"). Applying biblical language to the generals, Mariana quotes 
Psalm 80:13: the "wild beast of the held doth devour it." If the monar- 
chy is not moderated, it will ruin the order. Ignatius himself is partly to 
blame for the enormous powers of the general (§92). Mariana goes on to 
ponder the pros and cons both of monarchical and aristocratic govern- 
ments. Here, he obviously follows contemporary political theory, which 
he knew so well. Among the major advantages of monarchies are their 
ability to provide peace and display power. Chief among the many vir- 
tues of aristocratic regimes is prudence. He therefore prefers a monar- 
chy strongly balanced by features of an aristocracy. Suggestions to alter 
Jesuit government according to this principle are made at several points 
in the Discurso. At least to a certain degree, Mariana's suggestions were 
inspired by more traditional monastic ideas of governance. 

Another point is even more important for our purposes. Mariana 
states: "Rome is far. The general doesn't know the persons and the facts, 
at least not in all circumstantial detail, which however is the precondi- 
tion of adequate decision making. People say he governs by prejudice, 
which is no wonder. Governance is mostly concerned with particu- 
lars. But how can he achieve such a government of particulars without 
knowledge of things?" (§96, also §118). Here, Mariana not only engages 
the institutional structure and / or personal shortcomings of individual 
administrators, but he also addresses the informational dimension of 
Jesuit administration. Contrary to Polanco's basic conviction, Mariana 
did not believe that the distance between the administrative center in 
Rome and the local theaters could simply be bridged by writing letters. 


E.g., arsi, Hist Soc 137, fol. 3 r . 

32 % Markus Friedrich 

Mariana backed his point by stressing historical change. As the 
size and focus of any institution evolve over time, so should its admin- 
istrative structure: "One cannot govern 10,000 men the way one governs 
600" (§96). The Society, he seems to suggest, had outgrown the frame- 
work created by Ignatius. Only the very tiny group of original members 
could be governed adequately by direct and personal rule of one supe- 
rior. Such a "domestic" type of government (as Mariana calls it, relying 
on Aristotelian political theory once more), however, was inadequate 
for larger bodies. The situation had even deteriorated further, according 
to Mariana, since not only the general but also regional and local supe- 
riors governed monarchically (§97). Again, we find a forceful statement 
of the advantages of collective decision making in terms of an increased 
information base. 67 

Chapter 12 is entitled "Justice." Most importantly, he sees great 
injustice in the selection of office holders. As a potential remedy, he ad- 
vocates a strict three-year tenure, such as also ordered recently by Pope 
Clement VIII (§109). In the following section (13), he criticizes a key 
component of paper-based administration, Jesuit style: the regular infor- 
mationes that were the bedrock of all personnel-related decision making. 
Once again, Mariana is highly skeptical of information that is acquired 
only secondhand and in written form: "Experience shows that the Supe- 
rior, especially if he is absent and does not know the people directly and 
through personal contact, [will discover that] this kind of information 
is not adequate unless it is certified and checked beforehand" (§114). In- 
formation provided in the informationes is called contradictory, fraudu- 
lent, and imaginary. Mariana declares that most secular regimes have 
been critical of such "denunciations" (§112). 68 Speaking about the de- 
structive power of the informationes, Mariana goes on to criticize yet an- 
other crucial aspect of paper-based bureaucratic governance: archiving. 
He is aware that Rome stored incoming documents for future usage. 
Contrary to what Polanco and others might have suggested, in Mari- 

67 [E]l que sabe menos, que es uno, prevalece contra toda la comunidad, que for- 
zosamente sabe mas" (§97). 

68 This is an interesting (and not entirely correct) point, since his language seems 
to connect the informationes to the widespread early-modern political practice of solic- 
iting anonymous denunciation; see, e.g., Paolo Preto, Persona per hora secreta: Accusa e 
delazione nella Repubblica di Venezia, in La cultura (Milan, 2003), 566. While the accuracy 
of this comparison should be questioned, the parallel is nonetheless revealing since it 
indicates the wide context of political culture against which Jesuit administration must 
be seen. 

Governance in the Society of Jesus % 33 

ana's view the Roman Archive is nothing but a pile of dangerous and 
untrue information. At one point, his criticism goes as far as to suggest 
that the Archive should be burned (§115). 

In chapter 14, Mariana declares praise and punishment the two 
central pillars of governance. The idea "that the respublica 'is held to- 
gether by reward and punishment, fear and hope'" recurs at several 
other points in Mariana's writings. 69 Once again, there is an anthropo- 
logical underpinning to his ^^^^_«^^^^_^^^^^^^_ 

ideas: fear and hope are the A1 . xj ,, . , , 

r . f Altogether, Mariana advocates a 

most important motives for , .% £ £ ., , 

, r . __. ■ . shift of powers from the general 

human action. His diagnosis . xT • • i x- 

r , _, . & , to the provincial congregations 

of the Society again reveals , i j* j.i • * u ' +• 

t .. . J . & //rTn1 awa ez?en asked for the installation 

only deficiencies. There is £ . ■. J .. ■. , 

7 , , of perpetual national or regional 

no other organization where • - x // • // ±i *. 

, ■ . , & , , visitors or commissars that 

there is less reward for virtue r 7 , , . . , , . 

i i „ /^™\ ^ should be semi-independent 

than here" (§120). Of course, , r „ 

, ill 1T from Rome. 

the author knows that the Je- y 

suits should seek nothing but ^^ — — ^ —■ - 
God's praise. Mariana, how- 
ever, is no stranger to a realistic perspective: "Our frailty needs to be tak- 
en into account, which means we have to use nature's means, too. Grace 
is not opposed to nature, but is often forced to rely on nature." Thus, re- 
wards and acknowledgment of achievements should have their place. 

Chapter 15, by far the longest of the Discurso, and chapter 16 deal 
with the general and provincial congregations. For the general congrega- 
tion, Mariana joins a widespread debate about whether these meetings 
should be held regularly. Not surprisingly, the Discurso argues in favor of 
periodic congregations. This is said to be a standard feature of both secu- 
lar and ecclesiastical organizations. Once again, he brings up his favorite 
idea that monarchical powers must not be unrestrained, which is why 
congregations should be held. Again, he elaborates on the benefits of 
collective and open discussion for decision making (§137). General con- 
gregations are also seen as less prone to personal favors (§140) and bet- 
ter suited to react to problems (since they could change the Constitutions 
if necessary, §142). Concerning the provincial congregations, Mariana is 
also highly critical. These assemblies, according to him, are almost use- 

69 See Braun, Mariana, 67, 91-94, with reference to De rege, 1:8, 1:9, and 3:4 (pp. 

34 * Markus Friedrich 

less since they have hardly any real powers. All they can do is elect the 
procurator for the next congregation of procurators (§150). Since the Ro- 
man Curia wants to promote its monarchical powers further, the claims 
brought forward by provincial congregations are mostly overlooked 
(§§151 f.). Altogether, Mariana advocates a shift of powers from the gen- 
eral to the provincial congregations and even asked for the installation 
of perpetual national or regional visitors or " commissar s" that should be 
semi-independent from Rome (§§153 ff., esp. 157). 

Next are two chapters that deal with Jesuit personnel, namely, 
with "the election of Superiors" (17) and with "profession" (18). Mari- 
ana is unhappy with how things proceed in both respects; more interest- 
ing here is his discussion of profession. In general, the complicated Jesu- 
it system of different grades from early on had produced considerable 
confusion and discontent, both within and outside the Society. There 
were numerous pleas for alteration. Once again, Mariana calls for al- 
teration of Ignatius' s original structures. Several problems are detailed, 
___ ^ ___ most importantly that there 

From a pessimistic moral is no fixed *"* schedule for 

perspective, all human things were Profession. This constant state 
prone to depravity, and the Society of waiting, from the perspec- 
of Jesus was no exception to this tlve of individual candidates, 

rule. Institutions that functioned causes a S on y and many as- 

well initially could be expected pirants ultimately turn away 

to fail once human depravity had from the order (§171). 
been brought to the fore by time. The penultimate 

^ — ^__ section 19 is "on the laws" and 

comes back to the more gen- 
eral discussion of the opening chapters. Mariana diagnoses a disturb- 
ing abundance of rules and norms, a fact that is made even worse since 
many rules have been changed all too often (§175). Also, many of the 
laws do not pass a critical assessment since they have been invented by 
speculation and are not the result of practical experience. The author 
here is clearly taking up the key distinction made earlier. Jesuit law- 
making, Mariana holds, also departs all too often from common law 
(§177f.). While the point of experience related to lawmaking seems a 
peculiar one, a negative or skeptical approach towards positive law also 
colors other works by Mariana. 70 

70 Braun, Mariana, 43-60. 

Governance in the Society of Jesus % 35 

Jesuit Administrative Counter Discourse 

From the wealth of topics discussed in the Discurso, four aspects 
deserve particular attention in the context of this paper. While all of 
them were particularly forcefully expressed by Mariana, none was en- 
tirely peculiar to him. Some were, to a certain degree, even shared by his 

1. All Jesuits had generally understood the Society with the tools 
of contemporary political philosophy. Also when Mariana and his fel- 
low critics turned to the Society of Jesus, they approached it first of all 
simply as a normal social body. In many ways, the order did not dif- 
fer from states or other communities. Therefore, the analytical tools of 
secular political theory could easily be applied also to the Society. Mari- 
ana quotes Aristotle and Homer, just as his fellow Jesuits and famous 
philosopher Francisco Suarez or any other author would do. His strong 
Augustinian stance notwithstanding, Mariana sees no contradiction be- 
tween nature and grace. 71 Man-made institutions and routines should 
and can be openly employed in a religious order. His critique of the Je- 
suit administration was certainly not simply anti-institutional or anti- 
bureaucratic per se. 

2. Early-modern Jesuits generally had a fairly relaxed relationship 
toward the fact that their order was subject to historical change. With 
Mariana and the other critics, however, historical development had be- 
come a key defensive strategy to cope with the disturbing fact that Ig- 
natius himself had favored a centralizing and monarchical approach for 
the Society of Jesus. Mariana almost developed a theory of organiza- 
tional evolution in order to support his point. All social bodies, he as- 
sumed, undergo a process of development that resembles the growth of 
a human being, starting as a toddler and reaching maturity only after 
many years and several fundamental changes. Around 1600, he implied, 
the order was still very young and behaving like a child. Characteris- 
tic of this early period of social organizations, according to Mariana, is 
a lack of wisdom. As is the case with childish convictions of toddlers, 
also the order needs to rethink many of its initial ideas. In more than one 
way, the Society has moved beyond Ignatius and his era. Mariana thus 
strongly takes into account the variability of times and circumstances 

71 Stressed by Braun, Mariana, passim. On Discurso' s pessimistic anthropology, 
see Ferraro, Mariana, 53-57. 

36 % Markus Friedrich 

and suggests that these changes should be reflected in the institutional 

While historicity, as Harald Braun has stressed, was particularly 
important for Mariana, 72 he was by no means the only one using this 
strategy to support his claims for alterations of the original scheme. An 
anonymous memorandum against Acquaviva, for instance, that also 
reached the Roman Inquisition, stressed in a similar vein the changing 
context for Jesuit activities and the need to adjust governmental pro- 
cedures. 73 Other texts talked more generally about historical changes. 
From a pessimistic moral perspective, all human things were prone to 
depravity, and the Society of Jesus was no exception to this rule. Insti- 
tutions that functioned well initially could be expected to fail once hu- 
man depravity had been brought to the fore by time. Such a pessimis- 
tic approach, which would not have been totally unfamiliar to Mariana, 
would see the call for additional institutional restrictions on the superi- 
or generals' powers as necessary means to counter the moral depravity 
of man. 74 This line of reasoning was one of the most promising ways to 
legitimize the attempts to alter the Institutum. 

3. It is obvious that this went straight against the conceptual foun- 
dations on which Ignatius, Polanco, and Acquaviva had based Jesuit 
governance. Distance had of course been an important issue also for 
Polanco. Yet he had insisted that good governance should and could be 
possible also from afar by relying on correspondence. Polanco was con- 
vinced that written reports had the power to overcome the distance be- 
tween the general and the Jesuits in the field. This belief, however, was 
strongly contradicted by Mariana and others. From their perspective, it 
was nothing but a naive idea. Not only was letter writing at times ineffi- 
cient in terms of speed, but the information contained in letters and re- 
ports was also intrinsically insufficient. It was tainted both by the local 
informants' prejudices and by the fact that it could never match the con- 
textual fullness of direct observation. Written information could never 

72 Braun, Mariana, 21 (see also ibid., 29n). 

73 Archiyio della Congregazione della Fede (henceforth: acdf) S.O. St.St. N 3 g, 
fol. 338 r -360 v (two copies = arsi FG 700, fol. 194 r -213 v ). 

74 See, for instance, a 1668 memorandum against General Oliva in asv Fondo Ge- 
suiti, 45, n.p. 

Governance in the Society of Jesus * 37 

be an adequate substitute for local knowledge gained on the spot. With 
this claim, Mariana dismissed much of the Jesuit system of correspon- 
dence as simply Utopian. 

4. Following from the diagnosis of change and the insistence on 
governance on the spot were several institutional suggestions that were 
meant to enhance local and regional autonomy. Several means were sug- 
gested, including regularity of general congregations, a strengthening of 
the assistants and /or the pro- ..^ _^ - 

vincial congregations, and the _, , , . , . , ., , 

.. ... a- i The skeptics complained that 

attempt to create a cardinal t r „ r , . 

. . r 4-u t •*- Ai the general s machinations 

protector for the Jesuits. Also d , 

fi c . i n £ / v circumvented most corrective 
the Spanish call for a (semi)in- _, , . , . 

, j . c • u n ~™- means. They complained, for 

dependent Spanish Commis- . u t \ ' _ /J t 

. . ui i j-f instance, that the General 

sanat, while also using dif- , , 1 ' . , 

c . .i i. maltreated the assistants or that 

ferent, national arguments, , .■'*■■** 

joined the general, antimonar- he manipulated the congregations. 

chical choir. While many of -^ — 
these ideas were seemingly 

taken from the monastic tradition, and are thus not per se innovative, 
they did provide an alternative institutional framework which the So- 
ciety of Jesus could have adopted. Besides the only vaguely defined as- 
sistancies, however, Rome did not allow for the creation of intermedi- 
ary bodies that would have granted at least a certain degree of local or 
regional autonomy. 

Besides promoting governance on the spot, these institutional al- 
terations were also meant to prevent the // tyranny ,/ of Acquaviva and, 
potentially, other future generals. Accusing Jesuit generals of absolut- 
ism, despotism or other similar things was widespread at the time. This 
line of argument generally tried to balance personal accusations against 
Acquaviva with a more general diagnosis of the Constitution's institu- 
tional failure to check and balance the general's powers. Most dissent- 
ing voices agreed that the generals could use the Constitutions at least to 
a certain degree in order to bolster their authority. If no further restric- 
tions were put into place, these powers were easy to exploit. While Ac- 
quaviva and his allies defended the existing structures and considered 
the whole structure of government well balanced, the skeptics com- 
plained that the general's machinations circumvented most corrective 
means. They complained, for instance, that the General maltreated the 
assistants or that he manipulated the congregations. While we should 
not simply trust the diagnosis of tyranny, the complaints are nonethe- 

38 * Markus Friedrich 

less revealing, since they do include acute observations about adminis- 
trative daily life. True or not, these voices articulate a certain experience 
of administration and, more importantly, present an altogether alterna- 
tive approach to Jesuit government. While non-Jesuit critics could easi- 
ly afford anti- Jesuit overtones, Mariana and other Jesuits found them- 
selves in a much more complex situation. They were at the same time 
enthusiastically pro-Jesuit and yet equally critical of contemporary Je- 
suit reality. This is what gives these texts their unique flavor. 

IV. Administration Past and Present 

Our look at Jesuit administrative history has shown just to what 
degree early modern Jesuit administrative culture was shaped 
by contemporary culture at large, and vice versa. The order 
participated, often enthusiastically, in broader historical developments. 
The Jesuits shared the global aspirations as well as the difficulties in 
realizing them with other early-modern organizations. Perhaps their at- 
tempts might have been more realistic since they had to govern only 
thousands of members not millions, as the emerging nation states did. 
This is not simply to say that the Jesuits were particularly efficient or 
successful administrators. Recent calls to " decentralize the Society'' are 
justified and much innovative research is highlighting the failures of 
obedience and centralization. 75 Still the order's bureaucratic achieve- 
ments must be appreciated. While failing many times, the Jesuits, on 
other occasions, successfully adapted their strategies to contemporary 
problems. The amount of paperwork produced by the Society surpasses 
that of many comparable institutions and thus illustrates just how seri- 
ously administration was taken on all levels. While the Roman Curia of- 
ten complained about the quality of governmental performance on the 
local level, equally often local superiors did work according to protocol. 
Thus the remaining documentation in the Roman and other archives is 
at times extremely homogenous, illustrating the high degree of stan- 
dardization and administrative routine. All in all, the Jesuits thus help 
us understand what early-modern European political culture could and 
did reasonably aspire to do, and they also help to grasp the degree to 
which this aspiration was simply illusionary or presumptuous. The Je- 
suits are a valuable case study to evaluate early modern administrative 
culture at large. 

75 Most recently see Clossey, Globalization. 

Governance in the Society of Jesus % 39 

The parallel question arises for GC 35: To what degree and in 
which ways is GC 35 influenced by twenty-first-century administrative 
culture in general and vice versa? This is not the place to address this is- 
sue. Two things, however, should have become clear at the end of this 
essay to any reader of the relevant decrees. On the one hand, we must 
acknowledge the enormous influence of early-modern administrative 
ideas on contemporary Jesuit government structures. On the other, it is 
equally important to note the major attempts to depart from this tradi- 
tion in GC 35. Let us focus on the latter. The Decree on Obedience, for ex- 
ample, while stressing the idea that obedience should directly connect 
the Jesuit to Christ, does not explicitly mention Ignatius' s claim that the 
superior should be seen as representing Christ. 76 Other departures are 
less subtle, as for example the attempts to professionalize government 
and administration. A vivid concern for training and apprenticeship is 
visible (D 5, 30-32), and the necessity of specialized expert committees 
on core issues has been recognized in the twentieth century and is en- 
dorsed also by GC 35. In addition to that, the congregation displays a 
strong commitment to "planning, implementation, and accountability" 
(D 3, 37). While the effectiveness of such attempts cannot be measured 
yet, the very commitment itself must be seen as an addition to earlier 
administrative culture. 77 In part, this reflects a growing familiarity with 
recent ideas of professionalized management. 

In other areas it needs to be seen in the future if GC 35 will initiate 
significant alterations. Decree 5, 15, calls for updating the Practica qux- 
dam, but without clearly specifying in which direction. Even in its most 
recent edition (1997) the Practica displays an astonishing continuity to the 
early modern formulx scribendi. Basically, the Jesuit system of adminis- 
trative communication of 1997 was neither in content nor style substan- 
tially different from that of the late 1500s. The adjustments to twentieth- 
century technology and administrative theory are very few. For instance, 

76 See Thomas H. O'Gorman, Jesuit Obedience from Life to Law: The Development of 
the Ignatian Idea of Obedience in the Jesuit Constitutions, 1539-1556, Logos, no. 6 (Manila, 
1971, and the broad elaboration by Hopfl, Political Theory. Decree 4 mentions the idea 
that the superiors should represent Christ neither in their theological reflections (D 4, 
9-17) nor in the section "Specific Aspects of the Practice of Obedience in the Society" 
(D 4, 23-29), where the idea of companionship between Jesuits and their superiors is 
stressed instead (D 4, 25). 

77 The increasing role of the conferences reflects this growing commitment, since 
they are described first of all as a planning facility without being a "new level of gov- 
ernment" (D 5, 18b). 

40 tt Markus Friedrich 

the Practica contains only a surprisingly short section on "new media": 
telephone, fax, or e-mail. More importantly, the Practica does not reflect 
the significant developments in management thought regarding intra-or- 
ganizational communications. 78 The obsession with standardization even 
of the smallest minutiae continues as does the general trend to create a 
different form of paperwork for every possible occasion. The relevance 
of the casual or the informal for information management as well as re- 
cent ideas about horizontal and non-hierarchical communication are not 
well reflected in Practica. Procedures like the informationes ad gradum or ad 
gubernandum are reiterated without substantial alterations, even though 
their ethical value has serious- 
ly been questioned. 79 The Prac- 
Ultimately, then, seen against the tica of 1997 is still dominated by 
developments since GC 31 as well early-modern ideas about how 
as against the backdrop of the hierarchy, institutional struc- 
earlier centuries, the recent Decree ture/ and m tra-institutional 
5 of GC 35 seems to mark yet communication should parallel 
another cautious step eac j 1 t ner 80 

towards accommodating the _ , , 

o • * r j - • + 4.- By far the biggest 

Society s administration f * _ . && 

. ,, ,77 /.., concern of Decree 5 is to rene- 

to the new challenges of the it, , i 

4. a. ri 4. x gotiate the balance of autnori- 
twenty -first century. & ., . , . TAT , ., , 

J J J ty withm the order. While the 

- ~"™ — -~ — "~"~^ — ^^^^~^^™ twenty-first century might 
have found its own peculiar solution to the problem, this essay shows 
that the issue itself has been plaguing the order ever since 1540. There is 
a basic conundrum of Jesuit governance, which is nicely expressed in D 

5, 7: "As governance in the Society is always measured in an appropriate 
balance of union and diversity, the office of General must be exercised 
in a manner which respects diversity while placing it at the service of 
our universal mission and identity." As Mariana's clash with Acquaviva 

78 For a popular and comprehensive guide to alternatives in organizational 
thought (with many references to communication), I relied on Gareth Morgan: Images of 
Organization (San Francisco: Sage, 1998, available in many editions). 

79 James F.Keenan, "Are 'Informationes' Ethical?" in Studies in the Spirituality of 
Jesuits 29, no. 4 (September 1997): 1-32. 

80 It should be added, at this point, that I am fairly skeptical concerning the pos- 
sibility of adapting early-modern ideas and practices of leadership and administration 
simply to our times, even though Chris Lowney, in his Heroic Leadership: Best Practices 
from a 450-year-old Company That Changed the World (Chicago: Loyola, 2003), seems to 
suggest otherwise in his comparison of J. P. Morgan and Ignatius of Loyola. 

Governance in the Society of Jesus * 41 

shows, of course, the question of what exactly should be an "appropri- 
ate" balance was open to different valid answers. GC 35, while insisting 
on the relevance both of the Roman Curia and the provinces, emphasiz- 
es the local superiors and the "regions" or "conferences" (D 5, 17). The 
creation of conferences can be seen as an attempt finally to find an ad- 
equate institution that helps overcome provincial isolationism without 
immediate recourse to the idea of Roman universal government. Calls 
for a more regionalized structure of government could be heard in earli- 
er times, yet contemporary Jesuit thought seems to be more comfortable 
in exploring these ideas. This is somewhat ironic, given the fact that re- 
cent innovations in technology and infrastructure would allow a degree 
of centralization unthinkable in the early-modern period. 

But the exact fitting of the conferences into the otherwise still very 
traditional organizational chart is not yet determined. On the one hand, 
Decree 5 clearly spells out the role of the conferences vis-a-vis the prov- 
inces and local superiors. This seems to be the major area of interest at 
this point. On the other hand, however, the conferences' relationship to 
the general and his claim to "authority . . . for universal mission" (D 5, 
17) is less well addressed. Regular, even yearly meetings between the 
general and the presidents of the conferences are envisioned (D 5, 23), 
but apart from that the general is only mentioned as troubleshooter or 
mediator in cases of disagreement within the conferences (D 5, 20a3). 
Totally unaddressed in GC 35, furthermore, is the relationship between 
conferences and assistancies. Are conferences seen as regional entities 
emerging from the provinces while the assistancies are regional depart- 
ments of the Society's central government? While this somewhat un- 
specific demarcation of the assistants' role is in line with administrative 
history, the lack of clarity here could nonetheless potentially become a 
source for conflicts over overlapping authorities and influence. 

Ultimately, then, seen against the developments since GC 31 as 
well as against the backdrop of the earlier centuries, the recent Decree 
5 of GC 35 seems to mark yet another cautious step towards accommo- 
dating the Society's administration to the new challenges of the twen- 
ty-first century. While it is far from being a radical break with either the 
recent or the far-distant past, it does show the order's attempt to adjust 
administrative structures. After a generation of testing, the conferenc- 
es clearly are accepted now as emerging bodies of governance. While 
the provinces are not totally refashioned yet, Decree 5 moves towards a 
rethinking and potential curtailing of their relevance. Given the early- 
modern fear of openly institutionalizing regional entities, this is a rema- 

42 * Markus Friedrich 

kable adjustment. It remains to be seen exactly to what degree the rise 
of the regions will be at the expense of the provinces. While the power 
between the local, regional, and universal level of government is thus 
in flux, in other areas more traditional notions of hierarchy still prevail. 
Perhaps a new edition of Practica will be able to move to new horizons 
regarding intra-organizational communication as well. 

Past Issues of Studies in the Spirituality of Jesuits 

Available for Sale 

(For prices, see inside back cover.) 

1/1 Sheets, Profile of the Contemporary Jesuit (Sept. 1969) 

1/2 Ganss, Authentic Spiritual Exercises: History and Terminology (Nov. 1969) 

2/1 Burke, Institution and Person (Feb. 1970) 

2/2 Futrell, Ignatian Discernment (Apr. 1970) 

2/3 Lonergan, Response of the Jesuit as Priest and Apostle (Sept. 1970) 

3/1 Wright, Grace of Our Founder and the Grace of Our Vocation (Feb. 1971) 

3/2 O'Flaherty, Some Reflections on Jesuit Commitment (Apr. 1971) 

3/4 Toner, A Method for Communal Discernment of God's Will (Sept. 1971) 

3/5 Sheets, Toward a Theology of the Religious Life (Nov. 1971) 

4/2 Two Discussions: I. Spiritual Direction, II. Leadership and Authority (Mar. 1972) 

4/3 Orsy, Some Questions about the Purpose and Scope of the General Congregation 

(June 1972) 
4/4 Ganss, Wright, O'Malley O'Donovan, Dulles, On Continuity and Change: A 
Symposium (Oct. 1972) 
5/1-2 O'Flaherty, Renewal: Call and Response (Jan.-Mar. 1973) 
5/3 Arrupe, McNaspy, The Place of Art in Jesuit Life (Apr. 1973) 
5/4 Haughey, The Pentecostal Thing and Jesuits (June 1973) 
5/5 Orsy, Toward a Theological Evaluation of Communal Discernment (Oct. 1973) 
6/3 Knight, Joy and Judgment in Religious Obedience (Apr. 1974) 
7/1 Wright, Ganss, Orsy, On Thinking with the Church Today (Jan. 1975) 
7/2 Ganss, Christian Life Communities from the Sodalities (Mar. 1975) 
7/3 Connolly, Contemporary Spiritual Direction: Scope and Principles (June 1975) 
7/5 Buckley, The Confirmation of a Promise; Padberg, Continuity and Change in Gen- 
eral Congregation XXXII (Nov. 1975) 
8/1 O'Neill, Acatamiento: Ignatian Reverence (Jan. 1976) 
8/2-3 De la Costa, Sheridan, and others, On Becoming Poor: A Symposium on Evan- 
gelical Poverty (Mar.-May 1976) 
8/4 Faricy, Jesuit Community: Community of Prayer (Oct. 1976) 
9/1-2 Becker, Changes in U.S. Jesuit Membership, 1958-75; Others, Reactions and Ex- 
planations (Jan.-Mar. 1977) 
9/4 Connolly, Land, Jesuit Spiritualities and the Struggle for Social Justice (Sept. 

9/5 Gill, A Jesuit's Account of Conscience (Nov. 1977) 

10/1 Karnmer, "Burn-Out" —Dilemma for the Jesuit Social Activist (Jan. 1978) 
10/4 Harvanek, Status of Obedience in the Society of Jesus; Others, Reactions to Con- 
nolly-Land (Sept. 1978) 
11/1 Clancy, Feeling Bad about Feeling Good (Jan. 1979) 

11/2 Maruca, Our Personal Witness as Power to Evangelize Culture (Mar. 1979) 
11/3 Klein, American Jesuits and the Liturgy (May 1979) 
11/5 Conwell, The Kamikaze Factor: Choosing Jesuit Ministries (Nov. 1979) 
12/2 Henriot, Appleyard, Klein, Living Together in Mission: A Symposium on Small 

Apostolic Communities (Mar. 1980) 
12/3 Conwell, Living and Dying in the Society of Jesus (May 1980) 

13/1 Peter, Alcoholism in Jesuit Life (Jan. 1981) 

13/3 Ganss, Towards Understanding the Jesuit Brothers' Vocation (May 1981) 
13/4 Reites, St. Ignatius of Loyola and the Jews (Sept. 1981) 
14/1 O'Malley, The Jesuits, St. Ignatius, and the Counter Reformation (Jan. 1982) 
14/2 Dulles, St. Ignatius and Jesuit Theological Tradition (Mar. 1982) 
14/4 Gray, An Experience in Ignatian Government (Sept. 1982) 
14/5 Ivern, The Future of Faith and Justice: Review of Decree Four (Nov. 1982) 
15/1 O'Malley, The Fourth Vow in Its Ignatian Context (Jan. 1983) 
15/2 Sullivan and Faricy, On Making the Spiritual Exercises for Renewal of Jesuit 
Char isms (Mar. 1983) 
15/3-4 Padberg, The Society True to Itself: A Brief History of the 32nd General Congrega- 
tion of the Society of Jesus (May-Sept. 1983) 
15/5-16/1 Tetlow, Jesuits' Mission in Higher Education (Nov. 1983-Jan. 1984) 

16/2 O'Malley, To Travel to Any Part of the World: Jeronimo Nadal and the Jesuit Voca- 
tion (Mar. 1984) 
16/3 O'Hanlon, Integration of Christian Practices: A Western Christian Looks East (May 

16/4 Carlson, "A Faith Lived Out of Doors": Ongoing Formation (Sept. 1984) 
17/ 1 Spohn, St. Paul on Apostolic Celibacy and the Body of Christ (Jan. 1985) 
17/2 Daley, "In Ten Thousand Places": Christian Universality and the Jesuit Mission 

(Mar. 1985) 
17/3 Tetlow, Dialogue on the Sexual Maturing of Celibates (May 1985) 
17/4 Spohn, Coleman, Clarke, Henriot, Jesuits and Peacemaking (Sept. 1985) 
17/5 Kinerk, When Jesuits Pray: A Perspective on the Prayer of Apostolic Persons (Nov. 

18/1 .Gelpi, The Converting Jesuit (Jan. 1986). 

18/2 Beirne, Compass and Catalyst: The Ministry of Administration (Mar. 1986) 
18/3 McCormick, Bishops as Teachers and Jesuits as Listeners (May 1986) 
18/5 Tetlow, The Transformation of Jesuit Poverty (Nov. 1986). 
19/1 Staudenmaier, United States Technology and Adult Commitment (Jan. 1987) 
19/2 Appleyard, Languages We Use: Talking about Religious Experience (Mar. 1987) 
19/5 Endean, Who Do You Say Ignatius Is? Jesuit Fundamentalism and Beyond (Nov. 

20/1 Brackley, Downward Mobility: Social Implications of St. Ignatius's Two Standards 

(Jan. 1988) 
20 / 2 Padberg, How We Live Where We Live (Mar. 1988) 

20/3 Hayes, Padberg, Staudenmaier, Symbols, Devotions, and Jesuits (May 1988) 
20/4 McGovern, Jesuit Education and Jesuit Spirituality (Sept. 1988) ■ I 

20/5 Barry, Jesuit Formation Today: An Invitation to Dialogue and Involvement (Nov. 

21/1 Wilson, Where Do We Belong? United States Jesuits and Their Memberships (Jan. 

21/2 Demoustier, Calvez, et al., The Disturbing Subject: The Option for the Poor (Mar. 

21/3 Soukup, Jesuit Response to the Communication Revolution (May 1989) 
22/1 Carroll, The Spiritual Exercises in Everyday Life (Jan. 1990) 
22/2 Bracken, Jesuit Spirituality from a Process Prospective (March 1990) 
22/3 , Shepherd, Fire for a Weekend: An Experience of the Exercises (May 1990) 
22 / 4 O'Sullivan, Trust Your Feelings, but Use Your Head (Sept. 1990) 
22/5 Coleman, A Company of Critics: Jesuits and the Intellectual Life (Nov. 1990) 

23/1 Houdek, The Road Too Often Traveled (Jan. 1991) 

23/3 Begheyn and Bogart, A Bibliography on St. Ignatius's Spiritual Exercises 

(May 1991) 

23/4 Shelton, Reflections on the Mental Health of Jesuits (Sept. 1991) 

23/5 Toolan, "Nature Is a Heraclitean Fire" (Nov. 1991) 

24/1 Houdek, Jesuit Prayer and Jesuit Ministry: Context and Possibilities (Jan. 1992) 

24/2 Smolich, Testing the Water: Jesuits Accompanying the Poor (March 1992) 

24/3 Hassel, Jesus Christ Changing Yesterday, Today, and Forever (May 1992) 

24/4 Shelton, Toward Healthy Jesuit Community Living (Sept. 1992) 

24/5 Cook, Jesus' Parables and the Faith That Does Justice (Nov. 1992) 

25/3 Padberg, Ignatius, the Popes, and Realistic Reverence (May 1993) 

25/4 Stahel, Toward General Congregation 34 (Sept. 1993) 

25/5 Baldovin, Christian Liturgy: An Annotated Bibliography (Nov. 1993) 

26/2 Murphy, The Many Ways of Justice (March 1994) 

26/3 Staudenmaier, To Fall in Love with the World (May 1994) 

26/5 Landy, Myths That Shape Us (Nov. 1994) 

27/ 1 Daley, "To Be More like Christ" (Jan. 1995) 

27/2 Schmidt, Portraits and Landscapes (March 1995) 

27/3 Stockhausen, I'd Love to, but I Don't Have the Time (May 1995) 

27/4 Anderson, Jesuits in Jail, Ignatius to the Present (Sept. 1995) 

27/5 Shelton, Friendship in Jesuit Life (Nov. 1995) 

28/1 Begheyn, Bibliography on the History of the Jesuits (Jan. 1996) 

28/3 Clooney In Ten Thousand Places, in Every Blade of Grass (May 1996) 

28/4 Starkloff, "As Different As Night and Day" (Sept. 1996) 

28/5 Beckett, Listening to Our History (Nov. 1996) 

29/1 Hamm, Preaching Biblical Justice (Jan. 1997) 

29/2 Padberg, The Three Forgotten Founders (March 1997) 

29/3 Byrne, Jesuits and Parish Ministry (May 1997) 

29/4 Keenan, Are Informationes Ethical? (Sept. 1997) 

29/5 Ferlita, The Road to Bethlehem -Is It Level or Winding? (Nov. 1997) 

30/1 Shore, The "Vita Christi" ofLudolph of Saxony and Its Influence on the "Spiritual 

Exercises of Ignatius of Loyola" (Jan. 1998) 

30/2 Starkloff, "I'm No Theologian, but . . . (or So . . . )?" (March 1998) 

| 30/3 Torrens, The Word That Clamors (May 1998) 

30 / 4 Petrik, "Being Sent" (Sept. 1998) 

30/5 Jackson, "One and the Same Vocation" (Nov. 1998) 

31/1 Clifford, Scripture and the Exercises (Jan. 1999) 

31/2 Toohig, Physics Research, a Search for God (March 1999) 

31/3 Fagin, Fidelity in the Church — Then and Now (May 1999) 

31/4 Schineller, Pilgrim Journey of Ignatius (Sept. 1999) 

31 /5 Fullam, Juana, S.J.: Status of Women in the Society (Nov. 1999) 
32/1 Langan, The Good of Obedience in a Culture of Autonomy (Jan. 2000) 

32 / 2 Blake, Listen with Your Eyes (March 2000) 
32/3 Shelton, When a Jesuit Counsels Others (May 2000) 
32/4 Barry, Past, Present, and Future (Sept. 2000) 
32/5 Starkloff, Pilgrimage Re-envisioned (Nov. 2000) 
33/1 Kolvenbach et al., Faith, Justice, and American Jesuit Higher Education (Jan. 


33/2 Keenan, Unexpected Consequences: Persons's Christian Directory (March 2001) 

33/3 Arrupe, Trinitarian Inspiration of the Ignatian Charism (May 2001) 

33/4 Veale, Saint Ignatius Asks, "Are You Sure You Know Who I Am?" (Sept. 2001) 

33/5 Barry and Keenan, How Multicultural Are We? (Nov. 2001) 

34 / 1 Blake, "City of the Living God " (Jan. 2002) 

34/2 Clooney, A Charism for Dialog (March 2002) 

34/3 Rehg, Christian Mindfulness (May 2002) 

34/4 Brackley Expanding the Shrunken Soul (Sept. 2002) 

34/5 Bireley The Jesuits and Politics in Time of War (Nov. 2002) 

35/1 Barry, Jesuit Spirituality for the Whole of Life (Jan. 2003) 

35/2 Madden /Janssens, The Training of Ours in the Sacred Liturgy (March 2003) 

35/4 Modras, A Jesuit in the Crucible (Sept. 2003) 

35/5 Lucas, Virtual Vessels, Mystical Signs (Nov. 2003) 

36/1 Rausch, Christian Life Communities for Jesuit University Students? (Spring 


36/2 Bernauer, The Holocaust and the Search for Forgiveness (Summer 2004) 

36/3 Nantais, "Whatever! " Is Not Ignatian Indifference (Fall 2004) 

36/4 Lukacs, The Incarnational Dynamic of the Constitutions (Winter 2004) 

37/1 Smolarski, Jesuits on the Moon (Spring 2005) 

37/2 McDonough, Clenched Fist or Open Hands? (Summer 2005) 

37/3 Torrens, Tuskegee Years (Fall 2005) 

37/4 O'Brien, Consolation in Action (Winter 2005) 

38/1 Schineller, In Their Own Words (Spring 2006) 

38/2 Jackson, "Something that happened to me at Manresa" (Summer 2006) 

38/3 Reiser, Locating the Grace of the Fourth Week (Fall 2006) 

38/4 O'Malley, Five Missions of the Jesuit Charism (Winter 2006) 

39/1 McKevitt, Italian Jesuits in Maryland (Spring 2007) 

39/2 Kelly, Loved into Freedom and Service (Summer 2007 

39/3 Kennedy, Music and the Jesuit Mission (Autumn 2007) 

39/4 Creed, Jesuits and the Homeless (Winter 2007) 

40 / 1 Giard, The Jesuit College (Spring 2008) 

40/2 Au, Ignatian Service (Summer 2008) 

40/3 Kaslyn, Jesuit Ministry of Publishing (Autumn 2008) 

40/4 Rehg, Value and Viability of the Jesuit Brothers' Vocation (Winter 2008) 

41/1 Friedrich, Governance in the Society of Jesus, 1540-1773 (Spring 2009) 



An annual subscription is provided by the ten United States provinces 
for U.S. Jesuits living in the United States and U.S. Jesuits who are still 
members of a U.S. province but living outside the United States. 


Subscriptions to STUDIES: 

U.S.: one-year, $18; two years, $35 

Canada and Mexico: one year, $26; two years, $50 

All other destinations: one year, $29; two years, $55 

▲ Gift Certificates Available A 
*** All payments must be in U.S. funds. *** 


w* Jesuit subscribers: Your province office should send us your change of 
address; you need not do so. 

w> Non-Jesuit subscribers: Subscriptions and change of address in- 
formation should be sent to the business office address given below. 
Please include former address label if possible. 


Seminar on Jesuit Spirituality 

Faber House 

102 College Road 

Chestnut Hill, MA 02467-3841 
Tel: 617-552-0860 
Fax: 617-552-0925 


Studies in the Spirituality of Jesuits 

3601 Lindell Boulevard 

St. Louis, MO 63108 
Tel: 314-633-4622 
Fax: 314-633-4623 

> SINGLE ISSUES (Current or Past): 

The price for single copies of current or past issues is $3.00, plus 
postage and handling charges. Double issues (for example, 5/1-2, 8/2-3, 9/1-2, 
etc.) are $6.00 each, plus postage and handling. 

The Institute of Jesuit Sources 

The Seminar on Jesuit Spirituality 

3601 Lindell Boulevard 

St. Louis, MO 63108-3393 

Non Profit Ore 

US Postage 


Kansas City M» 
Permit 6654 

Address Service Requested 

hc**h=*********************mixED ADC 66340 
Boston College Library 
Thomas O'Neill Serials 
Boston College 
Chestnut Hill MA 02467 




ragi -Ek 









3 9031 031 93846 7