THE JESUITS.
As I am treating of religious institutions, I must not pass over
in silence that celebrated order, which, from the first years of
its existence, assumed the stature of a colossus, and employed all
a giant's strength; that order which perished without having felt
decay; which did not follow the common course of others, either in its
foundation, in its development, or even in its fall; that order of
which it is truly and correctly said, that it had neither infancy nor
old age. It is clear that I speak of the society of Jesus, the Jesuits.
The name alone will be enough to alarm a certain class of readers; and,
therefore, in order to tranquillize them, I will say that I do not
here undertake to write an apology for the Jesuits; this task does not
belong to the character of my work; moreover, others have undertaken
it, and it is not necessary for me to repeat what is well known. But
it is impossible to call to mind the religious institutions, the
religious, political, and literary history of Europe, during the last
three centuries, without meeting the Jesuits at every step: we cannot
travel in the most distant countries, traverse unknown seas, visit the
most remote lands, or penetrate the most frightful deserts, without
finding everywhere under our feet some memorials of the Jesuits. On
the other hand, we cannot look at our libraries without immediately
remarking the writings of some Jesuits. Since this is the case, even
those among our readers who have the greatest horror of them, ought
to pardon us for fixing our attention for a moment on this institute
which has filled the world with its name. Even if we were to attach
no importance to their modern revival, and to regard their present
existence and their probable future as unworthy of examination, it
would still be altogether inexcusable not to speak of them, at least as
a historical fact. To pass them over in silence, would be to imitate
those ignorant and heartless travellers, who, with stupid indifference,
tread under foot the most interesting ruins and the most valuable
remains.
When we study the history of the Jesuits, this very extraordinary
circumstance is apparent: they have existed only for a few years, if
compared with the duration of other religious bodies, and yet there is
no religious order which has been the object of such keen animosity.
From their origin, they have had numerous enemies; never have they been
free from them, either in their prosperity and greatness, or in their
fall, or even after it; never has their persecution ceased; we should
rather say, never has the animosity with which they have been pursued
ceased. Since their reappearance, men have constantly fixed their eyes
upon them; they tremble lest they should resume their ancient power;
the splendor which is reflected on them by the recollections of their
brilliant history renders them visible everywhere, and augments the
fears of their enemies. How many men among us are more alarmed at the
foundation of a Jesuits' college than at an irruption of Cossacks!
There is, therefore, something very singular and extraordinary in this
institute, since it excites the public attention in so high a degree,
and its mere name disconcerts its enemies. Men do not despise the
Jesuits, but they fear them; sometimes they attempt to throw ridicule
on them; but when that weapon is employed against them, it is felt
that he who wields it is not sufficiently calm to use it with success.
In vain does he attempt to affect contempt; through the affectation
every one can perceive disquietude and anxiety. It is immediately seen
that he who attacks does not believe himself opposed to insignificant
adversaries. His bile is excited, his sallies become checked, his
words, steeped in a fearful bitterness, fall from his mouth like drops
from a poisoned cup; it is clear that he takes the affair to heart,
and does not look upon it as a mere joke. We fancy we hear him say to
himself, "Every thing affecting the Jesuits is extremely grave; there
is no playing with these men--no regard, no indulgence, no moderation
of any kind; it is necessary always to treat them with rigor,
harshness, and detestation; with them, the least negligence may become
fatal."
Unless I am much deceived, this is the best demonstration that can be
given of the eminent merit of the Jesuits. It must be the same with
classes and corporations as with individuals--very extraordinary merit
necessarily excites numerous enemies, for the simple reason that such
merit is always envied, and very often dreaded. In order to know the
real cause of this implacable hatred against them, it is enough to
consider who are their principal enemies. We know that Protestants and
infidels figure there in the first rank; in the second, we remark the
men who, with more or less clearness and resolution, show themselves
but little attached to the authority of the Roman Church. Both, in
their hatred against the Jesuits, are guided by a very rare instinct,
for truly they have never met with a more redoubtable adversary. This
reflection is worthy of the attention of sincere Catholics, who, for
one cause or another, entertain unjust prejudices. When we have to form
a judgment on the merit and conduct of a man, it is very often a sure
means of deciding between contrary opinions to inquire who are his
enemies.
When we fix our attention on the institute of the Jesuits, on the time
of its foundation, on the rapidity and greatness of its progress, we
find the important truth which I have before pointed out more and more
confirmed, viz., that the Catholic Church, with wonderful fruitfulness,
always furnishes an idea worthy of her to meet all the necessities
which arise. Protestantism opposed the Catholic doctrines with the pomp
and parade of knowledge and learning; the _éclat_ of human literature,
the knowledge of languages, the taste for the models of antiquity, were
all employed against religion with a constancy and ardour worthy of a
better cause. Incredible efforts were made to destroy the pontifical
authority; when they could not destroy it, they attempted at least to
weaken and discredit it. The evil spread with fearful rapidity; the
mortal poison already circulated in the veins of a considerable portion
of the European nations: the contagion began to be propagated even in
countries which had remained faithful to the truth. To complete the
misfortune, schism and heresy, traversing the seas, corrupted the faith
of the simple neophytes of the New World. What was to be done in such
a crisis? Could such great evils be remedied by ordinary means? Was
it possible to make head against such great and imminent perils by
employing common arms? Was it not proper to make some on purpose for
such a struggle, to temper the cuirass and shield, to fit them for this
new kind of warfare, in order that the cause of truth might not appear
in the new arena under fatal disadvantages? Who can doubt that the
appearance of the Jesuits was the answer to these questions, that their
institute was the solution of the problem?
The spirit of the coming ages was essentially one of scientific and
literary progress. The Jesuits were aware of this truth; they perfectly
understood it.
It was necessary to advance with rapidity and never to remain behind:
this the new institute does; it takes the lead in all sciences; it
allows none to anticipate it. Men study the oriental languages;
they produce great works on the Bible; they search the books of the
ancient Fathers, the monuments of tradition and of ecclesiastical
decisions: in the midst of this great activity, the Jesuits are at
their posts; many supereminent works issue from their colleges. The
taste for dogmatical controversy is spread over all Europe: many
schools preserve and love the scholastic discussions: immortal works
of controversy come from the hands of the Jesuits, at the same time
that they yield to none in skill and penetration in the schools. The
mathematics, astronomy, all the natural sciences, make great progress;
learned societies are formed in the capitals of Europe to cultivate
and encourage them: in these societies the Jesuits figure in the first
rank. The spirit of time is naturally dissolvent: the institute of
the Jesuits is interiorly armed against dissolution; in spite of the
rapidity of its course, it advances in a compact order, like the mass
of a powerful army. The errors, the eternal disputes, the multitude of
the new opinions, even the progress of the sciences, by exciting men's
minds, give a fatal inconstancy to the human intellect--an impetuous
whirlwind, agitating and stirring up all things, carries them away.
The order of the Jesuits appears in the midst of this whirlwind, but
it partakes neither of its inconstancy nor of its variability; it
pursues its career without losing itself; and while only irregularity
and vacillation are seen among its adversaries, it advances with a
sure step, tending towards its object, like a planet which performs
its orbit according to fixed laws. The authority of the Pope, assailed
with animosity by Protestants, was indirectly attacked by others with
stratagem and dissimulation; the Jesuits showed themselves faithfully
attached to that authority; they defend it wherever it is threatened;
like vigilant sentinels, they constantly watch over the preservation
of Catholic unity. Their knowledge, influence, and riches never affect
their profound submission to the authority of the Popes--a submission
which was ever their distinctive characteristic. In consequence of
the discovery of the new countries in the east and west, a taste for
travelling, for observing distant countries, for the knowledge of the
language, manners, and customs of the recently discovered nations, was
developed in Europe. The Jesuits, spread over the face of the globe,
while preaching the Gospel to the nations, do not forget the study of
the thousand things which may interest cultivated Europe; and at their
return from their gigantic expeditions, they are seen adding their
valuable treasures to the common fund of modern science.
How, then, can we be surprised that Protestants have been so violent
against an institute in which they found so terrible an enemy; and, on
the other hand, was there any thing more natural than to see all the
other enemies of religion, enemies some of whom were wholly unmasked
and some partially disguised, make common cause with Protestants on
this point? The Jesuits were a wall of brass against the assaults
upon the Catholic faith; it was resolved to undermine and overturn
this rampart; which in the end was accomplished. Very few years had
elapsed since the suppression of the Jesuits, and already the memory
of the great crimes which were imputed to them was effaced by the
ravages of an unexampled revolution. Men of good faith, whose excessive
confidence had believed perfidious calumnies, could convince themselves
that the riches, knowledge, influence, and the pretended ambition of
the Jesuits, would never have been as fatal as the triumph of their
enemies; these religious men would never have upset a throne or cut off
the head of a king on the scaffold.
M. Guizot, in glancing at European civilization, necessarily
encountered the Jesuits; and it must be acknowledged that he has not
done them the justice to which they are entitled. After having lamented
the inconsistency of the Protestant Reformation, and the narrow spirit
which guided it, after having confessed that Catholics knew very well
what they did and what they wished, and that they acted up to the
principles of their conduct and avowed all their consequences, M.
Guizot declares that there never was a more consistent government than
that of Rome, and that the court of Rome, always having a fixed idea,
has known how to pursue a consistent and regular line of conduct; he
extols the strength which results from a full knowledge of what one
does and what one wishes; he shows the advantage of a settled design,
and of the complete and absolute adoption of a principle and system;
that is to say, he makes a brilliant panegyric on, and a powerful
apology for, the Catholic Church. Nevertheless, M. Guizot finds the
Jesuits in his way, and unworthy as it is of such a mind as his, which,
in order to require just renown, has no need of burning incense before
vulgar prejudices or mean passions, he attempts, in passing, to throw
a reproach upon them. "Every one knows," says M. Guizot, "that the
principal power instituted to contend against the religious revolution,
was the order of the Jesuits. Throw a glance over their history; they
have failed everywhere; wherever they have interfered to any extent,
they have brought misfortune to the cause in which they have engaged.
In England they have destroyed kings, in Spain nations." M. Guizot had
just told us of the superiority which is obtained over an adversary by
regular and consistent conduct, by the complete and absolute adoption
of a system, and by a fixed idea; as a proof of all this he showed us
the Jesuits, he exhibited to us in them the expression of the system
of the Church; and behold, without any explanation, if not without a
motive, the writer suddenly changes his course; the advantages of the
system which he has just praised disappear from his eyes; for those who
follow this system, that is the Jesuits themselves, fail everywhere,
and everywhere bring misfortunes on the cause which they embrace. How
can such assertions be reconciled? The credit, influence, and sagacity
of the Jesuits have passed into a proverb. The reproach against them
was, of having extended their views too far, of having conceived
ambitious plans, and obtained by their skill a decided ascendency in
all the places where they succeeded in gaining entrance; Protestants
themselves have openly confessed that the Jesuits were their most
redoubtable adversaries; it was always thought that the foundation of
the order had an immense result, and now we learn from M. Guizot, that
the Jesuits have everywhere failed; that their support, far from being
a great succour, always brought fatality and misfortune to the cause
of which they declared themselves the advocates. If they were such
fatal servants, why were their services sought with so much eagerness?
If they always conducted affairs so ill, why have the most important
ones in the end fallen into their hands? Adversaries so foolish or so
unfortunate certainly ought not to have excited in the enemies' camp so
much clamor as was raised at their approach.
"In England the Jesuits have destroyed kings, in Spain nations."
Nothing is easier than these bold strokes of the pen; the whole of a
great history is traced in a single line, and an infinity of facts,
grouped and confounded, are made to pass under the eye of the reader
with the rapidity of lightning; the eye has not even time to look at
them, still less to analyze them as would be necessary. M. Guizot
should have devoted some sentences to prove his assertion; he should
have stated the facts and pointed out the reasons on which he builds,
when he affirms that the influence of the Jesuits has had so fatal an
effect. With respect to the kings of England here so boldly sacrificed,
I cannot enter into an examination of the religious and political
revolutions which agitated and desolated the three kingdoms for two
centuries after the schism of Henry VIII. These revolutions, in their
immense circle, have presented very different phases; disfigured and
perverted by the Protestants, who have success in their favor, that
decisive, if not convincing argument, they have made some men of
little reflection believe that the disasters of England were in great
part due to the imprudence of the Catholics, and, as an indispensable
corollary, to the pretended intrigues of the Jesuits. In spite of this,
the Catholic movement which England has witnessed for half a century,
and the great works which every day carry on the restoration of
Catholicity, will at last disperse the calumnies by which our faith has
been stigmatized. Before long, the history of the last three centuries
will be restored as it ought, and the truth will appear in its proper
light. This observation relieves me from the necessity of entering into
details on the subject of the first assertion of M. Guizot; but I must
not leave without reply what he so gratuitously affirms on the subject
of Spain.
"The Jesuits have destroyed nations in Spain," says M. Guizot; I wish
that the publicist had explained to us to what great disaster he
alluded. To what period does he refer? I have examined our history,
and I do not find this destruction which was caused by the Jesuits; I
cannot imagine whereon the historian fixed his eyes when he pronounced
these words. Nevertheless, the antithesis between Spain and England,
between nations and kings, leads us to suspect that M. Guizot alluded
to the shipwreck of political liberty; we are not aware that there is
any other better-founded or more legitimate interpretation. But then a
new difficulty presents itself: how can we believe that a man so versed
in the knowledge of history, composing a course of lectures which is
particularly devoted to the general history of European civilization,
should fall into a palpable error,--should commit an unpardonable
anachronism? Indeed, whatever may be the judgments of publicists on
the causes which have produced the loss of liberty in Spain, and
on the important events of the days of the Catholic sovereigns, of
Philippe le Beau, of Jeanne-la-Folle, and the regency of Cisneros, all
are unanimous in saying that the war of the Commons was the critical
moment, decisive of the liberty of Spain; all are agreed that the two
parties played their last stake at that time, and that the battle of
Villalar and the punishment of Padilla, by confirming and increasing
the royal power, destroyed the last hopes of the partisans of the
ancient liberties. Well, the battle of Villalar was fought in 1521; at
that time the Jesuits did not exist, and St. Ignatius, their founder,
was still a brilliant knight, battling like a hero under the walls of
Pampeluna. To this there is no reply; all philosophy and eloquence are
unable to efface these dates.
During the sixteenth century, the Cortes met more or less often, and
with more or less influence, above all in the kingdom of Aragon; but
it is as clear as daylight that the royal power had every thing under
its domination, that nothing could resist it, and the unfortunate
attempt of the Aragonese, at the time of the affair of Don Antonio
Perez, sufficiently shows that there existed then no remains of ancient
liberty which could oppose the will of kings. Some years after the
war of the Commons, Charles V. gave the _coup de grace_ to the Cortes
of Castile, by excluding from it the clergy and the nobles, to leave
only the _Estamento de Procuradores_, a feeble rampart against the
exigencies, against the all-powerful attempts of a monarch on whose
dominions the sun never set. This exclusion took place in 1538, at the
time when St. Ignatius was still occupied with the foundation of his
order; the Jesuits, therefore, could have had no influence therein.
Still more, the Jesuits, after their establishment in Spain, never
employed their influence against the liberty of the people. From
their pulpits they did not teach doctrines favorable to despotism; if
they reminded the people of their duties, they also reminded kings
of theirs; if they wished the rights of monarchs to be respected,
they would not allow those of the people to be trodden under foot.
To prove the truth of this, I appeal to the testimony of those who
have read the writings of the Jesuits of that time on questions of
public law. "The Jesuits," says M. Guizot, "were called to contend
against the general course of events, against the development of modern
civilization, against the liberty of the human mind." If the general
course of events is nothing but the course of Protestantism, if the
development of Protestantism is the development of modern civilization,
if the liberty of the human mind consists only in the fatal pride, in
the mad independence which the pretended reformers communicated to
it, then nothing is more true than the assertion of the publicist;
but if the preservation of Catholicity is a fact of any weight in the
history of Europe, if her influence during the last three centuries has
amounted to any thing, if the reigns of Charles V., Philip II., Louis
XIV., do not deserve to be effaced from modern history, and if regard
ought to be had to that immense counterpoise to which was owing the
equilibrium of the two religions; in fine, if the faith of Descartes,
Malebranche, Bossuet, and Fénélon, can make a dignified appearance in
the picture of modern civilization, it is impossible to understand how
the Jesuits, when intrepidly defending Catholicity, could be struggling
against the general course of events, against the development of modern
civilization, and against the freedom of human thought.
After having made this first false step, M. Guizot continues to slip in
a deplorable manner. I particularly call the attention of my readers
to the following evident contradictions: "With the Jesuits, there is
no _éclat_, no grandeur. They have performed no brilliant exploits."
The publicist entirely forgets what he has just advanced, or rather
he directly retracts it, when he adds, a few lines further, "and yet,
nothing is more certain than that they have had grandeur; a grand idea
belongs to their names, to their influence, and to their history.
It is because they knew what they did, and what they wished; it is
because they had a clear and full knowledge of the principles on which
they acted, and of the end towards which they tended; that is to say,
because they have had grandeur of thought and of will." Is genius
in its vastest enterprises, in the realization of its most gigantic
projects, any thing more than a grand idea and a grand intention?
The mind conceives, the will executes; this fashions the model, that
makes the application; if there be grandeur in the model and in the
application, how can the whole work fail to be grand?
Pursuing the task of lowering the Jesuits, M. Guizot makes a parallel
between them and the Protestants; he confounds ideas in such a way, and
so far forgets the nature of things, that one would hardly believe it,
if the words themselves did not prove it beyond a doubt. Forgetting
that it is necessary for the terms of a comparison not to be of a
totally different kind, which renders all comparison impossible, M.
Guizot compares a religious institute with whole nations; he goes
so far as to reproach the Jesuits with not having raised the people
_en masse_, and with not having changed the form and condition of
states. Here is the passage: "They have acted in subterraneous, dark,
and inferior ways; in ways which were not at all apt to strike the
imagination, or to conciliate for them that public interest which
attaches itself to great things, whatever may be their principle and
end. The party against which they contended, on the contrary, not
only conquered, but conquered with _éclat_; it has done great things
and by great means; it has aroused nations; it has filled Europe with
great men; it has changed the form and the lot of nations in the face
of day. In a word, all has been against the Jesuits, both fortune and
appearances." Without intending to offend M. Guizot, let us avow,
that for the honor of his logic, one would desire to efface from his
writings such phrases as we have just read. What! ought the Jesuits
to have put the nations in motion, made them arise _en masse_, and
changed the form and condition of states? Would they not have been
extraordinary religious men, if they had been allowed to do such
things? It was said of the Jesuits that they had unbounded ambition,
and that they attempted to rule the world; and now they are compared
with their adversaries in order to throw it in their faces that the
latter have overturned the world; a distinguished merit, which must
have been a disgrace to the Jesuits themselves. Indeed, the Jesuits
have never attempted to imitate their adversaries on this point; with
respect to the spirit of confusion and perturbation, they joyfully
yield the palm to those to whom it rightly belongs.
As far as great men are concerned, if the question be with respect to
the greatness of the enterprises which are becoming in a minister of
the God of peace, then have the Jesuits had this kind of grandeur in
an eminent degree. Whether it be in the most arduous affairs, or in
the vastest projects in science and literature, whether it be in the
most distant missions, or in the most redoubtable perils, the Jesuits
have never remained behind; on the contrary, they have been seen to
display a spirit so bold and enterprising, that they have thereby
obtained the most distinguished renown. If the great men of whom M.
Guizot speaks are restless tribunes, who, putting themselves at the
head of an ungovernable people, violated the public peace, if they are
the Protestant warriors whose names have shone in the wars of Germany,
France, and England, the comparison is foolish, and has no meaning;
for priests and warriors, religious and tribunes, are so distinct, so
different in actions and character, that to compare them is impossible.
Justice required that in such a parallel, where the Jesuits are taken
as one of the terms of the comparison, Protestants should not be placed
on the other, unless by them the reformed ministers are meant. Even in
this later case the comparison would not have been absolutely exact,
since, in the midst of the great differences between the two religions,
the Jesuits are not found alone in defending Catholicity. The Church,
during the last three centuries, has had great prelates, holy priests,
eminent _savants_, and writers of the first order, who did not belong
to the company of Jesus; the Jesuits were reckoned among the principal
champions, but they were not the only ones. Had it been wished fairly
to compare Protestantism with Catholicity, it would have been requisite
to oppose Protestant to Catholic nations, to compare priests with
priests, _savants_ with savants, politicians with politicians, warriors
with warriors; to do otherwise is monstrously to confound names and
things, and to reckon too much on the limited understandings and
excessive simplicity of hearers and readers. It is certain that if
the method we have pointed out were adopted, Protestantism would not
appear so brilliant and superior as the publicist has exhibited it to
us. Catholics, as M. Guizot well knows, do not yield to Protestants in
letters, in war, or in political ability. History is there; let it be
consulted.