THE SEQUEL TO THE SUPPRESSION
Failure of the Papal Brief to give peace to the Church--
Liguori and Tanucci--Joseph II destroying the Church in
Austria--Voltaireanism in Portugal--Illness of Clement XIV
--Death--Accusations of poisoning--Election of Pius VI--
The Synod of Pistoia--Febronianism in Austria--Visit of Pius
VI to Joseph II--The Punctation of Ems--Spain, Sardinia,
Venice, Sicily in opposition to the Pope--Political collapse
in Spain--Fall of Pombal--Liberation of his Victims--
Protest of de Guzman--Death of Joseph II--Occupations of the
dispersed Jesuits--The _Theologia Wiceburgensis_--Feller--
Beauregard's Prophecy--Zaccaria--Tiraboschi--Boscovich--
Missionaries--Denunciation of the Suppression in the French
Assembly--Slain in the French Revolution--Destitute Jesuits
in Poland--Shelter in Russia.
Clement XIV did not give peace to the Church as he had hoped. On the
contrary, distressing scandals were continually occurring in the Holy
City itself under his very eyes. Infamous books and pamphlets directed
against the Church were hawked about the streets, and actors and
buffoons parodied the most sacred ceremonies in the public squares.
Elsewhere the same conditions obtained. Tanucci who had governed Naples
for over forty years was continuing his ruthless persecution of every
thing holy, and enriching himself by the spoliation of ecclesiastical
property. Even St. Alphonsus Liguori could not obtain from the Pope the
recognition of the Redemptorists as a congregation because Tanucci
opposed it. Doctrinal views leading to schism in the Church were openly
advocated in the schools and universities of Austria, in spite of the
entreaties and threats of the Sovereign Pontiff. Maria Theresa had
proved feeble or false, and her son Joseph II was in league with the
Bourbon princes in their work of destruction. In Portugal, Pombal was
still raging like a wild beast; filling the schools with the disciples
of Voltaire, flouting the papal nuncio, and keeping in dark and filthy
dungeons the members of the detested Order which he had exterminated.
The Philosophers and Jansenists were rejoicing in their triumph, and
were suppressing all religious communities and seizing their property;
the morality and orthodoxy of Poland were being rapidly corrupted;
Catherine of Russia was creating bishops and establishing sees as the
fancy prompted her, and Freemason lodges were multiplying all over
Europe. Worst of all, the Pope's own household with but few exceptions
kept aloof from him and were silent about what he had done, while many
bishops of various countries of Europe and the entire episcopacy of
France endorsed the sentiments expressed in the terrible letter of the
Archbishop of Paris, denouncing the Suppression.
Ineffably shocked by all this, the Pope began to show signs of
depression, and everyone was in consternation. St. Alphonsus Liguori,
especially, was anxious about him and kept continually repeating: "Pray
for the Pope; he is distressed; for there is nowhere the slightest
glimmer of peace for the Church. He is praying for death, so crushed is
he by the sorrows that are overwhelming the Church; he remains
continually in seclusion; gives audience to no one; and attends to no
business. I have heard things about him from those who are at Rome that
would bring tears to your eyes." His mind was unbalanced, and one of his
successors, Pius VII, related later what he had been told by a prelate
who was present at the signing of the fatal Brief: "As soon as he had
affixed his signature to the paper he threw the pen to one side and the
paper to the other. He had lost his mind." Before that, Pius had said
the same thing to Cardinal Pacca at Fontainebleau, when in an agony of
remorse for having signed the Concordat with Napoleon: "I cannot get the
cruel thought out of my mind. I cannot sleep at night and I am haunted
by the fear of going mad and ending like Clement XIV." Another writer
who received his information from Gregory XVI tells the same sad story
(de Ravignan, Clément XIII et Clément XIV, I, 452). St. Alphonsus
Liguori was with the Pope when he died, but according to a Redemptorist
writer, it was "in spirit," and not by bodily bilocation. The end came
in September 22, 1774, thirteen months after the unfortunate Brief was
issued.
Of course, when he died, the report went abroad that the Jesuits had
poisoned him, by administering a dose of _aqua toffana_, but although no
one has ever found out what _aqua toffana_ is or was, and as there were
no Jesuits in Rome at the time, the story was nevertheless believed by
many and was adduced as a proof of the wisdom of the Pope in suppressing
the iniquitous organization. The Jansenists even made a saint of the
dead Pontiff and circulated marvellous romances about the incorruption
of his body and the miracles that were wrought at his tomb.
Cantù in his "Storia dei cent' anni" says that "the Pope whose health
and mind were grievously affected, died in delirium, haunted by
phantoms, and begging for pardon. It was claimed that he had been
poisoned by the Jesuits, but the truth is that the physicians found no
trace of poison in the body. Had the Jesuits possessed the power or the
will to do so, one might ask why they did not do it before and not after
Clement had struck them. But passion often makes light of common sense."
The post-mortem which was made in the presence of a great many people
showed that the sickness to which he had succumbed arose from scorbutic
and hemorrhoidal conditions from which he had been suffering for many
years, and which were aggravated by excessive work and the system he had
followed of producing artificial perspiration even in the heats of
summer."
The poor Pope had exclaimed before he signed the Brief: "Questa
soppressione mi darà la morte" (this suppression will kill me.) "After
it," says Saint-Priest in his 'Chute des Jésuites,' "he would pace his
apartments in agony, crying: 'Mercy! Mercy! They forced me to do it.
_Compulsus feci._' However, at the last moment his reason returned. He
showed his indignation at a proposal made to him even then, to raise
some of the enemies of the Society to the cardinalate and drove them
from his bedside with loathing.
Bernis, the French ambassador at Rome, wrote to Louis XV that "the Vicar
of Christ prayed like the Redeemer for his implacable enemies," and
insinuated that he was poisoned. Knowing this d'Alembert warned
Frederick II to be on his guard against a similar fate, but the king
replied: "There is nothing more false than the story of the poisoning;
the truth is that he was profoundly hurt by the coldness manifested by
the cardinals and he often reproached himself, for having sacrificed an
Order like that of the Jesuits, to satisfy the whim of his rebellious
children." Becantini (Storia di Pio VI, i, 31) says: "Nowadays no one
believes the story of the poisoning of Clement XIV. Even Bernis who
first stood for it, afterwards disavowed it." Cancelleri one of the most
distinguished savants of Italy denies the fact; so does Gavani, a bitter
enemy of the Church and the Society. Finally, Salcetto the physician of
the Apostolic palace, and Adinolfi the Pope's own doctor, in their
official report to the majordomo, Archinto, declare it to have been an
absolutely natural death and they explain that the corruption which set
in was due to the excessive heat that prevailed at the time.
It was even said that the Pope had expressed to the General of the
Conventuals, Marzoni, a fear that he had been poisoned. Whereupon
Marzoni caused the following statement to be published:
"I, the undersigned Minister General of the Order of the
Conventuals of St. Francis, fully aware that by my oath I call
the sovereign and true God to witness what I say; and being
certain of what I say, I now without any constraint and in the
presence of God who knows that I do not lie, do by these words,
which are absolutely true, and which I write and trace with my
own hand, swear and attest to the whole universe, that never in
any circumstance whatever did Clement XIV ever say to me either
that he had been poisoned or that he felt the slightest symptom
of poison. I swear also that I never said to any one soever that
the same Clement XIV assured me in confidence that he had been
poisoned or had felt the effects of poison. So help me God.
"Given in the Convent of the Twelve Apostles at Rome July 27,
1775.
"I, Bro. Louis-Maria Marzoni
"Minister General of the Order."
Thus Clement XIV, far from giving peace to the Church, left a heritage
of woe to his successor, Angelo Braschi, who was elected Pope on
February 15, 1775, and took the name of Pius VI. The new Pope was
painfully conscious that an error had been committed by suppressing an
Order without trial and without even condemnation, and that a reflection
had been cast upon a great number of Pontiffs who had been unstinted in
their praise of it, no one more so than Clement's immediate predecessor.
The act had also given to the Jansenists a terrific instrument in the
implied approval of them by the Sovereign Pontiff. They became more
aggressive than ever and organized their forces to introduce their
doctrines into Italy itself.
By a curious coincidence the leader of the movement was of the same
family as the General of the suppressed Jesuits: Scipio Ricci, the
Bishop of Pistoia. Supporting him in the civic world was the Grand Duke
of Tuscany who was the brother of Joseph II of Austria. Ricci convened
the famous Synod of Pistoia, on July 31, 1786. No doubt July 31 was
chosen purposely; it was the feast of St. Ignatius. There were 247
members in attendance, all exclusively Jansenists and regalists. The
four Gallican Articles were endorsed and among the measures was that of
conferring the right on the civil authority to create matrimonial
impediments. It advocated the reduction of all religious orders to one;
the abolition of perpetual vows; a vernacular liturgy; the removal of
all altars but one from the church; etc. The Acts of the synod were
promulgated with the royal imprimatur. Indeed Pius VI found himself
compelled to condemn eighty-five of the synod's propositions.
Worse than this was the Febronianism of Austria, which went far beyond
the Gallicanism of France or Italy in its rebellious aggressiveness. It
maintained that the primacy of Rome had no basis in the authority of
Christ; that the papacy was not restricted to Rome, but could be placed
anywhere; that Rome was merely a centre with which the individual
churches could be united; that the papal power was simply administrative
and unifying and not jurisdictional; that the papal power of condemning
heresies, confirming episcopal elections, naming coadjutors,
transferring and removing bishops, erecting primatial sees, etc., all
rested on the False Decretals. It was maintained that the Pope could
issue no decrees for the Universal Church, and that even the decrees of
general councils were not binding until approved of by the individual
churches.
In vain Clement XIV had begged Maria Theresa to check the movement. She
was absolutely in the power of her son Joseph II, whose very first
ordinances forbade the reception of papal decrees without the
government's sanction. The bishops, he ruled, were not to apply to the
Pope for faculties; they could not even issue instructions to their own
flocks without permission of the civil authority. He established
parishes, assigned fast days, determined the number of Masses to be
said, and sermons to be preached. He even decided how many candles were
to be lighted on the altar; he made marriage a civil contract and
abolished ecclesiastical ceremonies.
In the hope that a personal appeal might avail, the Pope determined to
make a journey to Vienna to entreat the emperor to desist. He arrived
there on March 22, 1782, and was courteously received by Joseph himself,
but brutally by his minister, Kaunitz, who forbade any ecclesiastic to
present himself in the city while the Pope was there. Pius remained a
month in the capital and succeeded only in extracting a promise that
nothing would be done against the Faith or the respect due the Holy See.
How far the royal word was kept may be inferred from the fact that after
accompanying the Pope as far as the Monastery of Marianbrunn Joseph
suppressed that establishment an hour after the Pope had resumed his
journey to Rome.
In Germany the three ecclesiastical Electors of Mayence, Treves and
Cologne with the Archbishop of Salzburg met in a convention at Ems in
1786, and attempted to curtail the powers of the Pope in dealing with
bishops. That assembly was also strongly Jansenistic. Thirty-one of its
articles were directed against the Pope. Pacca, the papal nuncio, was
not even received by the Archbishop of Cologne, and three of the Elector
bishops refused to honor his credentials. The famous "Punctation of
Ems," which consisted of twenty-three articles, declared that German
archbishops were independent of Rome, because of the "False Decretals."
They pronounced for an abolition of all direct communication with Rome;
all monasteries were to be subject to the bishops; religious orders were
to have no superior generals residing outside of Germany; Rome's
exclusive power of granting faculties was denied; Papal Bulls were
binding only after the bishop of the diocese had given his _placet_; all
Apostolic nunciatures were to be abolished, etc. In brief, the synod, or
"Congress" as it was called, aimed at establishing a schismatical
church. But the Pope's remarkable letter to the dissidents and the
progress of the French Revolution, which was then raging furiously,
prevented the application anywhere of the doctrines put forth at the
meeting.
Spain, Sardinia, Venice and Sicily were all in this movement against the
Church, and Ferdinand IV of Sicily claimed the right of appointment to
all ecclesiastical benefices, as well as the power to nullify all Papal
Briefs which had not received his approval.
Nor did the Brief of Suppression contribute to the political stability
of the nations. In Naples, for example, Tanucci was flung from power
when the young king married an archduchess of Austria; so that he
disappeared from the scene three years after the suppression of the
Society. In 1798 the Bourbons fled from Naples; the city was given over
to a mob directed by an innkeeper called Michael the Madman; the Duke
della Torre and his brother were burned alive in the public square; the
Senate was dissolved; the palaces were pillaged; a republic was
proclaimed and the whole Peninsula of Italy fell into the hands of the
French.
Charles III of Spain died in 1788, and was succeeded by Charles IV, whom
Arnado describes as more deficient in character and ability than his
father. The rude Florida Blanca, who was so conspicuous for his
brutality in terrorizing Clement XIV, was thrown out of office by the
inept Godoy, who allied Spain with France against England, and brought
on the disaster of Trafalgar. The king was driven from his throne and
country by his rebellious son, Ferdinand, and then laid his royal crown
at the feet of Napoleon Bonaparte. Since that time, the country has been
in a ferment because its politics are filled with the ideas of the
French Revolution and of English Liberalism.
In Portugal, retribution came at a rapid pace. Pombal fell from power in
1777 on the death of the king. He had been detected in a plot to have
the young Prince of Beira succeed to the throne to the exclusion of
Queen Maria. It was possibly with the same end in view that he had
endeavored to start a war with Spain. He had seized Spanish posts in
America, mobilized troops and fortified Lisbon, but hostilities were
never declared. Queen Maria's first act at her accession was to open
Pombal's dungeons. Eight hundred men of all classes issued from these
sepulchres in which some of them had been for eighteen years without a
trial. They were like ghosts; emaciated; hollow-eyed and ghastly; some
were sightless, many were half-naked. Among them were sixty Jesuits. The
populace were so infuriated at the horrible spectacle that Pombal feared
to venture into the street. He might have been torn to pieces, and he
was conducted under guard to his country estates. Father Oliviera, the
confessor of the queen, was installed in court, and the venerable Father
de Guzman issued the following statement to the public:
"At the age of eighty-one and at the point of appearing before the
tribunal of Divine Justice, John de Guzman, the last assistant of the
Society of Jesus, for the provinces and dominions of Portugal, would
believe himself guilty of an unpardonable sin of omission, if, in
neglecting to have recourse to the throne of Your Majesty where clemency
and justice reign, he did not place at your feet, this humble petition
in the name of six hundred subjects of Your Majesty, the unfortunate
remnants of a wrong inflicted on them.
"He entreats Your Majesty by the Sacred Heart of Jesus Christ, by that
tender love which Your Majesty bears to the August Queen, His mother,
and to the illustrious King Don Pedro, to the princes and princesses of
the royal family, that you would deign and even command that the trial
of so many of the faithful subjects of Your Majesty, who have been
branded with infamy in the eyes of the world, be now reviewed. They are
groaning under the accusation of having committed outrages and crimes
which the very savages would shrink from even imagining, and which no
human heart could ever conceive. They lament and moan that they were
condemned without even having been brought to trial, without being heard
and without being allowed to make any defense. Those who have now issued
from prison are all in accord in this matter, and unanimously attest,
that during all the time of their imprisonment, they have not even seen
the face of any judge.
"On his part, your suppliant, who is now making this appeal, and who for
many years occupied a position where he could acquire an intimate
knowledge of what was going on, is ready to swear in the most solemn
manner, that the superiors and members of the Spanish assistancy of the
Society of Jesus were without reproach. He and all the other exiles are
ready to undergo sufferings more rigorous than any to which they have
hitherto been subjected, if a single individual has ever been guilty of
the least crime against the State.
"Moreover, your suppliant and his brethren, the chief superiors of the
Society, have been examined in Rome, again and again, in the most
searching manner, and have been declared innocent. Pope Pius VI, now
gloriously reigning, has seen the minutes of those investigations, and
Your Majesty will find in that great Pontiff an enlightened witness
whose integrity nothing on earth can equal; and at the same time you
will find a judge who could not commit a wrong without rendering himself
guilty of an unparalleled iniquity.
"Deign, then, Your Majesty, to extend to us that clemency which belongs
to you as does your throne; deign to hearken to the prayers of so many
unfortunates, whose innocence has been proven, and who have never ceased
in the midst of their sufferings to be the faithful subjects of Your
Majesty; and who could never falter or fail an instant, in the love that
they have from childhood entertained for the royal family."
This appeal had its effect. An enquiry was ordered, and in October 1780
a revision of the trial of the alleged conspirators of 1758 was begun.
On April 3, 1781, the court announced that "all those, either living or
dead, who had been imprisoned or executed in virtue of the sentence of
January 12, 1759, were absolutely innocent." Pombal himself was put on
trial, found guilty, and condemned to receive "an exemplary punishment."
He escaped imprisonment on account of his age, but he died of leprosy
on May 8, 1782. His corpse lay unburied until the Society which he had
crushed was restored thirty-one years later to its former place in
Portugal. One of its first duties was to sing a Requiem Mass over his
remains. The details of the trial were suppressed at the request of the
Pope, for the reason that too many prominent personages in the Church
were implicated. There was another reason. The spirit of Pombal had so
thoroughly impregnated the ruling classes that the report was withheld
out of fear of a revolution. Indeed, the queen was so terrified by the
danger that she lost her mind. Finally, in 1807 a French army occupied
Lisbon and the royal family fled to Brazil. Since then Portugal which
was once so great counts for very little in the political world.
It is unnecessary to refer to France, except to note that it was
Choiseul who purchased Corsica and thus gave his country which he had
helped to ruin an alien ruler: Napoleon Bonaparte, who put an end to the
orgies of the Revolution by deluging Europe with French blood; who
imprisoned the Pope; demolished the Bourbon dynasties wherever he could
find them, and bound France in fetters which, in spite of its multiplied
changes of government, it has never shaken off.
When Joseph II of Austria ended his lonely and unhappy existence in
1790, he saw in France the beginning of the wreck which his friend
Voltaire had helped to effect; he did not live to see the execution of
his own sister, Marie Antoinette, but enough had occurred to fill him
with terror especially as the existence of his own monarchy was
threatened; Belgium was lost; Hungary was in wild disorder, and other
parts of the empire were about to rebel. Before he died he wrote his own
epitaph. It was: "Here lies Joseph II, who never succeeded in any of
his undertakings."
What became of the scattered Jesuits? The scholastics and lay-brothers,
of course, went back to the world, but, in France, by a refinement of
cruelty they were declared by the courts to be incapable of inheriting
even from their own parents, because of the vows they had pronounced on
entering the Society. That the vows no longer existed made no difference
to the lawmakers. As for the priests they were secularized, and in many
places were welcomed by the bishops as rectors or professors in colleges
and seminaries. They were in demand, also, as directors of religious
communities and not a few became bishops. Thus, in America, the first
two members of the hierarchy, Carroll and Neale, were old Jesuits, as
was Lawrence Graessel who had been named as Carroll's successor but who
died before the Bulls arrived. Crétineau-Joly has a list of twenty-one
bishops in Europe alone. Others were called to episcopal sees, but in
hopes of the restoration of the Society they had declined the honor.
Father Walcher was appointed imperial director of navigation and
mathematics by Maria Theresa; Cabral, Lecci, and Riccati, were engaged
by various governments in engineering works; Zeplichal was employed by
Frederick II in exploiting mines. The Theresian College of Vienna became
one of the best schools in the world under their direction; and Breslau
felt the effects of their assistance, as did other colleges such as the
Oriental in Vienna, the University of Buda, and the schools of Mayence,
and of various cities in Italy.
They must have been often amused at some of the situations in which they
found themselves. Thus, for instance in 1784 the Parliament of
Languedoc, which had been one of the bitterest enemies of the Society,
met to arrange for the solemn obsequies of the Jesuit Father Sesane "the
friend of the poor," and the ecclesiastical authorities were busy taking
juridical information for his canonization. Again, although not
permitted to exist in Switzerland the Council of Soleuse erected a
statue in honor of the Jesuit Father Crollanza, who all his life had
shunned honor and was conspicuous for his humility. On the pedestal was
the very delightful inscription: "Pauperum patrem, ægrorum matrem,
omnium fratrem, virum doctum et humillimum, in vita, in morte, in
feretro suavitate sibi similem amabat, admirabatur, lugebat Solodurum."
In the same way, Maria Theresa in an official document dated 1776
declared that "moved by the consideration of the brilliant virtues, the
science, the erudition and the regular and exemplary life of
Jean-Theophile Delpini; and reflecting moreover on his apostolic labors
in Hungary and the Principality of Transylvania where to our great
consolation, he led a vast throng of Anabaptists back to the true Faith,
we have chosen and we hereby appoint the said Theophile Delpini who has
merited much from the Church and the State, and who is therefore very
acceptable to us personally, to the post of Abbot of Our Lady of
Kolos-Monostros."
Parhamer obtained a similar distinction in Austria and Carinthia. He was
an advanced advocate of what is now called social service, and he made
use of his position as confessor and friend of the Emperor Francis I to
establish useful popular institutions; among which was an orphanage for
the children of soldiers who had died for their country. It was a sort
of child's Hôtel des Invalides. The discipline was exclusively military,
with drills, camp life, etc. Joseph II wanted to make him a bishop but
Parhamer asked for two months to think it over and before the two
months had expired he was dead. That was as late as 1786. Meantime,
Marie Leczinska, the Queen of France, would only have these prescribed
Jesuits hear her confession, and two Poles, Radomiviski and Buganski
were chosen for that office. On account of their nationality they could
not be exiled from France. In Austria, Father Walcher was kept busy
building dykes to prevent inundations. Father Cabral, a Portuguese, had
to harness the cataract of Velino, which had so long wrought havoc in
the city of Terni, and then he did the same thing for his own country by
confining the Tagus to its bed. In doing so he did not remember that his
country had kept him in exile for eighteen years. Ximenes made roads and
bridges in Tuscany and Rome. Riccati saved Venice from inundations by
controlling the Po, the Adige and Brenta, and by order of Frederick II
of Prussia Father Zeplichal had to locate the metal mines of Glatz, and
so on. All this was over and above their ecclesiastical work for which
they were called on by every one, even by the Pope who had suppressed
them.
The famous astronomer, Maximilian Hell, was another of the homeless
Jesuits of that period; and as it happened that from the beginning,
astronomy had always been in honor in the Society, there was a great
number of such men adrift in the world when their own observatories were
taken away from them. The enthusiastic historian of the Society,
Crétineau-Joly has an extended list of their names as well as those who
were remarkable in other branches of science.
The "Theologia Wiceburgensis," which is so popular in the modern
Society, was composed by dispersed Jesuits, and, according to Cardinal
Pacca, "in the difficulties that arose between the Papal nuncios and the
ecclesiastical Electors of Germany it was the former Jesuits who
appeared in the lists as the champions of the Holy See, to illumine and
strengthen the minds of the faithful by their solid and victorious
writings." François Xavier de Feller belonged to this period, and in the
opinion of Gerlache, the historian of the Netherlands, "he exerted a
great influence on the Belgian Congress of 1790." It was he who led the
assault on Josephinism and Febronianism. With him in this fight was
Francesco Antonio Zaccaria who compelled the author of the "Febronius"
to acknowledge his errors. Guillaume Bertier revived the famous "Journal
de Trévoux," and Fréron made a reputation for the "Journal des Débats."
Girolamo Tiraboschi wrote his "History of Italian Literature," Juan
Andrés, his "Origin of All Literature," Francisco Clavigero continued
his "History of Mexico" and Antoine de Berault-Bercastel, François De
Ligny, Jean Grou, Giulio Cordara, wrote their various well-known works.
Besides writing his still popular "Bible History" Reeve translated into
Latin verses much of the poetry of Pope, Dryden and Young. The list is
endless. A French-Canadian, Xavier du Plessis, was famous in the pulpits
of France in those days, as was Nicholas de Beauregard, who in 1775
startled all France by an utterance he made when preaching at
Notre-Dame.
"These philosophers," he exclaimed, "are striking at the king and at
religion. The axe and the hammer are in their hands. They are only
waiting for the moment to overturn the altar and the throne. Yes Lord,
Thy temples will be plundered and destroyed, Thy feasts abolished, Thy
name proscribed. But what do I hear? Great God! what do I see. Instead
of the holy canticles which resounded beneath these consecrated vaults
till now, I hear lascivious and blasphemous songs. And thou, the
infamous divinity of paganism, lascivious Venus, thou darest to come to
take the place of the living God, to sit upon the throne of the Holy of
Holies and receive the guilty incense of thy worshippers." The vision
was realized eighteen years later.
The sermon caused a tumult in the church. The preacher was denounced as
seditious, and as a calumniator of light and reason. Even Condorcet
wrote him down as a _ligueur_ and a fanatic. He continued preaching,
nevertheless, and his old associates followed his example. During one
Lent, out of twenty of the great preachers, sixteen were Jesuits.
Three of these former Jesuits especially attracted attention at this
time in the domain of letters and science: Zaccaria, Tiraboschi, and
Boscovich.
Francesco Antonio Zaccaria, whose name is sometimes written Zaccheria,
was a Venetian who had entered the Austrian novitiate in 1731, when he
was a boy of seventeen. He taught literature at Goritz, but was
subsequently sent to Rome where he became very distinguished both for
his eloquence and his marvellous encyclopedic knowledge. In 1751 he was
appointed to succeed Muratori as the ducal librarian at Modena, though
Cardinal Quirini had asked for him and the celebrated Count Crustiani
subsequently tried to bring him to Mantua. His fame was so great that
the most illustrious academies of Italy claimed his name for their
registers. In Rome he became the literary historiographer of the
Society, and had been so excellent an aid for Clement XIII in the fight
against Gallicanism that the Pope assigned him a pension. That was just
before the Suppression of the Society; when that event occurred he was
deprived of his pension, and after frequently running the risk of being
imprisoned in the Castle Sant' Angelo, he was ordered not to attempt to
leave Rome. When Pius VI became Pope, Zaccaria's life became a little
happier. His pension was restored and even increased; he was made Rector
of the College of Clerical Nobles, and regained his old chair of
ecclesiastical history in the Sapienza. He died in 1795 at the age of
eighty-two. The "Biographie Universelle" says that, besides innumerable
manuscripts, Zaccaria left one hundred and six printed books, the most
important of which is the "Literary History of Italy" in 14 octavo
volumes with supplements to volumes IV and V. His method of leading his
readers through the literary labyrinth deserves no less praise than the
penetration of his views, and the good taste of his criticism. Besides
this literary work, he wrote on moral theology, scripture, canon law,
history, numismatics, etc.
Girolamo Tiraboschi, who was born in Bergamo on December 28, 1731, went
to the Jesuit school at Monza, and from there entered the Society. His
first characteristic work, while teaching literature in Bergamo, was to
re-edit the Latin-Italian dictionary of Mandosio. He made so many
corrections that it was substantially a new work. When occupied as
librarian in Milan, he discovered a set of valuable manuscripts about
the suppressed Order of Humiliati. The publication of these MSS. filled
up a gap in the annals of the Church, and made Tiraboschi's reputation
in the world of letters. The Duke of Modena made him his librarian, the
post formerly held by Zaccaria. Thanks to the munificence of the princes
of Este, the library was a literary treasure house, and Tiraboschi
conceived the idea of gathering up the riches around him and writing a
good history of Italian literature; a task that seemed to be too much
for one mind. The difficulty was increased by the jealousy of the
various Italian states, so that an unbiased judgment about the merits of
this army of writers called for a man with courage enough to shut his
ears to the clamors of local prejudice. It supposed also a profound
knowledge of ancient and modern literature, a sufficient acquaintance
with the arts and sciences, and skill enough not to be overwhelmed by
the mass of material he had to handle. It took him eleven years to
complete the work.
The Spaniards were irritated by the "History" for they were blamed for
having corrupted the literary taste of Italy, and three Spanish Jesuits
attacked him fiercely on that score. Nevertheless, the Academy accepted
a copy of the work in the most flattering terms. The Italians regarded
it as a most complete history of their literature and a monument erected
to the glory of their country. He was made a knight by the Duke and
appointed counsellor of the principality. While he was engaged in this
work, the Society was suppressed, and like Boscovich and Zaccaria, he
did not live to see its resurrection. He died in Modena on June 3, 1794.
Ruggiero Giuseppe Boscovich was a Dalmatian from Ragusa, where he was
born on May 18, 1711. He was a boy at the Jesuit college of that town
and entered the Society at the early age of fourteen. He was sent to the
Roman College, where his unusual literary and philosophical as well as
mathematical abilities immediately attracted attention. He was able to
take the place of his professor in mathematics while he was yet in his
theological studies, and subsequently occupied the chair of mathematics
with great distinction for a generation. His bent, however, was chiefly
for astronomy, and every year he issued a treatise on one or another
subject of that science. Among them may be mentioned: the "Sun spots"
(1736); "The Transit of Mercury" (1737); "The Aurora Borealis" (1738);
"Application of the Telescope in Astronomical Studies" (1739); "The
Figure of the Earth" (1739); "The Motion of the Heavenly Bodies in an
unresisting Medium" (1740); "Various effects of Gravity" (1741); "The
Aberration of the Fixed Stars" (1742); and numberless others. Foreign
and Italian academies, among them Bologna, Paris and London admitted him
to membership. It was he who first suggested the massive pillars of the
college church of St. Ignatius as the foundation of the Observatory in
Rome; but the Suppression of the Society prevented him from carrying out
the plan. When the great dome of St. Peter's began to crack, he allayed
the general alarm by placing iron bands around it. His advice was sought
for the draining of the Pontine Marshes; he surveyed the Papal States by
order of Benedict XIV and induced the Pope to withdraw the obsolete
decree in the Index against the Copernican system.
When King John V of Portugal asked for ten Jesuit Fathers to make an
elaborate survey of Brazil, Boscovich offered himself for the arduous
task, hoping thus to make a survey in Ecuador, so as to obtain data for
the final solution of the problem of the figure of the earth which was
then exciting much attention in England and France, but the Pope kept
him for the survey of Italy, which Boscovich did, and in 1755 he
published a large quarto volume describing the work. In 1748, he had
already revived Leibnitz's system of dynamism in the composition of
bodies, a view which his fellow-Jesuits generally rejected. When this
volume was issued, the publisher added a list of Boscovich's previous
works. They amounted to sixty-six and he soon added three more quartos
on "The Elements of Mathematics." He even wrote Latin poetry, mostly
eulogies of the Pope and distinguished men, and published five volumes
of verse on "The Defects of the Sun and the Moon."
Boscovich's advice was sought as an engineer for damming the Lakes which
were threatening the city of Lucca; and he acquitted himself so well,
that he was made an honorary citizen and his expenses were subsequently
paid for his scientific exploration in Italy, France and England. He
settled a dispute between his native town and the King of France. He
journeyed with the Venetian ambassador to Constantinople to complete his
archæological studies, but that journey seriously injured his health. He
then accepted the appointment of professor of mathematics at the
University of Pavia and helped to found the Observatory of Brera in
Milan which with that of the Collegio Romano is among the most prominent
in Italy. The London Academy wanted to send him to California in 1769 to
observe the transit of Venus, but the opposition to the Jesuits, which
was four years later to lead to their suppression, caused the invitation
to be withdrawn. Louis XV then called him to France where he was made
director of optics for the Navy with a salary of 8,000 francs. He
retained this position until 1783, that is ten years after the Society
of Jesus had gone out of existence. He then went to Italy to publish
five more books, and at the age of eighty-six retired to the monastery
of the monks of Vallombroso. On account of his great ability, or rather
on account of his being a Jesuit, he was bitterly assailed by Condorcet
and d'Alembert and other infidels of France.
Bolgeni, who died in 1811, was made penitentiary by Pius VI in
recognition of his services against Jansenism and Josephinism.
Unfortunately, however, he advocated the acceptance of some scheme of
Napoleon, for which Pope Pius VII deposed him from his office and called
Father Muzzarelli from Parma to take his place. In 1809 when Pius VII
was exiled, Muzzarelli went with him to Paris or at least followed soon
after. His work on the "Right Use of Reason in Religion" ran up to
eleven volumes, besides which he produced other books against Rousseau,
and several pious treatises, like the "Month of May," which has been
translated into many languages.
Possibly a certain number of missionaries remained with their neophytes
because they were too remote to be reached. Others, who owed no
allegiance to the king who ordered the expulsion, paid no attention to
it, as the Englishman King, for instance, who was martyred in Siam after
the Suppression; or the Irishman O'Reilly, who buried himself, in the
forests of Guiana with his savages; Poirot was kept at the court of
Pekin as the emperor's musician; and Benoit constructed fountains for
the imperial gardens, invented a famous waterclock, which spouted water
from the mouths of animals, two hours for each beast, thus running
through the twenty-four hours of the day; he made astronomical
observations, brought out copper-plate engravings of maps and so on, and
finally died of apoplexy in 1774, one year after Clement XIV had
suppressed the Society. Hallerstein, the imperial astronomer, was also
there waiting for news of the coming disaster.
B. N. in "The Jesuits; their history and foundation" (II, 274) and
Crétineau-Joly both declare that there were four of the proscribed
Jesuits in the Etats généraux which was convened in Paris at the opening
of the Revolution: Delfau, de Rozaven, San-Estavan and Allain. Of
course, the Rozaven in this instance was not the John Rozaven so famous
later on. In 1789 John was only eighteen years of age. In the session of
February 19, 1790, the famous Abbé Grégoire, who afterwards became the
Constitutional Bishop of Loir-et-Cher, startled the assembly by crying
out, "Among the hundred thousand vexations of the old government, whose
hand was so heavy on France, we must place the suppression of the
celebrated Order of the Jesuits." The Deputy Lavie had also asked for
justice in their behalf. The Protestant Barnave declared that "the first
act of our new liberty should be to repair the injustices of despotism;
and I, therefore, propose an amendment in favor of the Jesuits." "They
have," said the next speaker, the Abbé de Montesquiou, "a right to your
generosity. You will not refuse justice to that celebrated Society in
whose colleges some of you have studied; whose wrongs we cannot
understand, but whose sufferings were to be expected."
The sentiments of the speakers were enthusiastically applauded, but it
was all forgotten as the terrible Revolution proceeded on its course.
Jesuits like other priests were carried to the guillotine; but, as no
records could now be kept, it is impossible to find out how many were
put to death. We find out, however, from "Les martyrs" of Leclercq that
in Paris alone there were eleven: DuPerron, Benoit, Bonnand, Cayx,
Friteyre, du Rocher, Lanfant, Villecrohain, Le Gue, Rousseau, and
Seconds. Crétineau-Joly adds to this list the two Rochefoucaulds; Dulau,
who was Archbishop of Aries; Delfaux; Millou; Gagnière; Le Livec;
another Du Rocher; Vourlat; Du Roure; Rouchon; Thomas; Andrieux and
Verron; making in all twenty-five. In "Les crimes de la Révolution"
there are two volumes of the names of the condemned in all parts of
France, but as the ecclesiastical victims are merely described as
"priests" it is impossible to find out how many Jesuits there were among
them. The twenty-five, however, make a good showing for a single city.
Probably the proportion was the same elsewhere.
The old Jesuits appear again for a moment in Spain, when in 1800 Charles
IV recalled them. A pestilence was raging in Andalusia when they
arrived, and they immediately plunged into the work of caring for the
sick. Twenty-seven Jesuits died in the performance of this act of
charity; but the government soon forgot it and again drove into exile
the men whom they had appealed to for help. In Austria they remained in
the colleges as secular priests. At Fribourg, Lucerne and Soleure, the
people insisted on their retaining the colleges. In China, they clung to
their missions until the arrival of the Lazarists in 1783. In Portuguese
India, even before the Suppression, they had been forcibly expelled, and
the same thing occurred in South America wherever Portugal ruled. The
Spanish missions of both South and North America had likewise been
wrested from them. In Turkey the French ambassador, Saint-Priest,
insisted on their staying at their posts in Constantinople, because of
their success in dealing with the Moslems and schismatics. As we have
seen when missionaries were needed in the deadly forests of French
Guiana, the government was shameless enough to ask the Portuguese
Jesuits to devote themselves to the work; and the request was acceded
to. They were also entreated to remain in French India.
Speaking of Brazil, Southey says (III): "Centuries will not repair the
evil done by their sudden expulsion. They had been the protectors of a
persecuted race; the advocates of mercy, the founders of civilization;
and their patience under their unmerited sufferings forms not the least
honorable part of their character." What Southey says of Brazil applies
to Paraguay, Chile and other missions.
Montucla in his "Histoire des mathématiques" tells us that Father
Hallerstein, the president of the tribunal of astronomy in China hearing
of the Suppression, died of the shock, as did his two distinguished
companions. The story related by the Protestant historian Christopher de
Mürr in his "Journal" is also illustrative of the general attitude of
mind in this trying conjuncture. Just before the Suppression, he informs
us, a French Government ship left Marseilles for Pekin with four Jesuits
on board. One was a painter, another a physician and the two others were
mathematicians. All of them were to be in the personal entourage of the
Emperor of China. They were Austrians from the Tyrol, but France, which
had expelled the French Jesuits a few years before, was sending these
foreign Jesuits to represent her, and to promote the interests of
science in the Chinese court. They set sail in the month of July, 1773,
and not a word was said to them about the general Suppression, which
Choiseul knew perfectly well would soon take place. The Archbishop of
Paris, de Beaumont, had warned them of what was in the air, but they
could not believe it possible and so they departed for the Far East.
After a weary journey of four months, they arrived at Macao. Meantime
the Brief had been published, and the Bishop of Macao, a creature of
Pombal's made haste to inform them of the fact. Had he held his peace
there would have been no difficulty about the continuance of the journey
to Pekin, and their subsequent standing at the court, for the Brief was
not effective until it was promulgated. But once they knew it, the poor
men were in a dilemma. Not to heed the invitation of the Chinese emperor
meant death, if he laid hold of them; but, on the other hand, to go to
China without the power of saying Mass or preaching, or hearing
confessions, namely as suspended priests, was unthinkable. For three
days, the unfortunate wanderers studied the problem with aching hearts,
and finally determined to run the risk of capture by the Chinese with
its subsequent punishment of death. They stowed themselves away on
separate ships and thus got back to Europe. Incidentally, it serves as a
proof that the Jesuits did not go out to China to be mandarins, as some
of their enemies alleged. They accepted what honors came to them, but
only to help them in their apostolic work.
It was found out subsequently that these poor men would have had better
luck had they continued on their journey to China instead of returning
to Europe. The promulgation of the Brief and the observance of all the
legal technicalities connected with its enforcement was next to
impossible in China, and hence we find a letter of Father Bourgeois from
Pekin to his friend Duprez in France, which bears the date May 15, 1775,
announcing that "the Brief is on its way." It had been issued two years
previously. Of course, Bourgeois is in tears over the prospective
calamity, and tells his friend: "I have nothing now but eternity and
that is not far off. Happy are those of Ours who are with Ignatius and
Xavier and Aloysius Gonzaga and the numberless throng of saints who
follow the Lamb under the glorious banner of the Name of Jesus."
Crétineau-Joly discovered another letter from an Italian lay-brother
named Panzi, who writes eighteen months later than Bourgeois. It is
dated November 11, 1776. In it he says "the missionaries had been
notified of the Bull of Suppression (he does not state how),
nevertheless they live together in the same house, under the same roof
and eat at the same table." Apparently there had been a flaw in the
promulgation of the "Bull" or Brief. The brother goes on to say, that
"the Fathers preach, confess, baptise, retain possession of their
property just as before. No one has been interdicted or suspended for
the reason that in a country like this it would have been impossible to
do otherwise. It is all done with the permission of the Bishop of
Nankin, to whom we are subject. If the same course had been pursued here
as in some parts of Europe, it would have put an end not only to the
missions but to all religion, besides being a great scandal to the
Chinese Christians who could not be provided for and who would have
abandoned the Faith.
"Thanks be to God, our holy Mission is going on well and at present
everything is very tranquil. The number of converts increases daily.
Father Dollières brought over an entire tribe which lives on the
mountains two days' journey from Pekin. The Emperor, so far, shows no
signs of embracing the Catholic Faith, but he protects it everywhere
throughout his vast dominions, and so do the other great men of the
Empire. I am still at my work of painting. I am glad I am doing it for
God; and I am determined to live in this holy mission until God wishes
to take me to himself."
About this time, the Fathers addressed a joint letter to Cardinal de
Bernis, the French ambassador at Rome, who had been so conspicuous in
wresting the Brief of Suppression from Clement XIV and had originated
the calumny about the poisoning of the Pope.
"Would your Eminence," says the document, "cast a glance at the inclosed
report on the present condition of the French missions of China and the
Indies which has been asked for by the Holy Congregation of the
Propagation of the Faith. To these missions as you know, his majesty has
sent great amounts of money and a large number of his subjects, knowing
as he did that the interests of France are bound up with those of
religion, and the advancement of the latter was what he had chiefly in
view. It will be gratifying to you to learn that the Chinese Emperor
takes great pleasure in having these French missionaries employed in his
palace; he frequently takes them with him on his journeys through the
empire, and makes use of them to draw up maps of the country, which are
of invaluable service to him. On the other hand, the missionaries, on
account of the esteem in which they are held, use all their influence to
prevent the persecution of Christians and have succeeded in obtaining
favors for Europeans and especially for the Frenchmen who arrive at
Canton, by protecting them from the annoyances to which they are
exposed. Over and above this, several of the Fathers are in
correspondence with the Paris Academy of Science, and also with the
ministers of State, and are sending them the results of their
astronomical observations, and of their discoveries in botany, natural
history, in brief, whatever can contribute to the advancement of science
and art.
"The king and his ministers, have in the past few years, accorded free
transportation to the Fathers who are sent out here to the French
missions of India, and deservedly so, for these missionaries have
frequently rendered important service to France, and for that reason,
the Supreme Council of Pondicherry has taken up their defense against
the rulings of the Parliament of Paris, which sent officers out here to
seize the little property we possess. The Pondicherry authorities would
concede only that the Fathers might make a small change in their soutane
and be called the "Messieurs les missionnaires de Malabar." It is in
accordance with this arrangement that we continue to exercise our
functions under the jurisdiction of the bishop. We are the only ones who
understand the very difficult language of the country and there does not
seem to be any reason why we should not be left as we are. Besides
these two missions, there are two others in the Levant, one in Greece,
the other in Syria. They have always been and still are under the
protection of France. M. le Chevalier de Saint-Priest, who is ambassador
to Turkey, said, on his arrival at Constantinople, that the king had
explicitly recommended to him the French missions and ordered him to
assure the Fathers of the continuance of his protection."
Of the missions in Hindostan it may be of use to quote here the
utterance of M. Perrin of the Missions Etrangères, who went out to India
three years after the destruction of the Jesuit Missions in those parts.
"I cannot be suspected when I speak in praise of those Fathers. I was
never associated with them. Indeed, they were already extinct as a body
when Providence placed me in the happy necessity of having had to do
with some of the former members. I belonged to an association which had
protracted and sometimes very lively debates with the Jesuit Fathers,
who might have regarded us as their enemies, if Christians are capable
of entertaining that feeling; but I feel bound to say that,
notwithstanding these discussions, we always held each other in the
highest esteem, and I hereby defy the most audacious calumniator to
prove that the Society of Jesus had ever to blush for the conduct of any
of its Malabar missionaries either at Pondicherry or in the interior.
All were formed and fashioned by virtue's hand and they breathed virtue
back in their conduct and their sermons." (Voyage dans l'Indostan, II,
261.)
Among the French Jesuits in China, Father Amiot was conspicuous.
Langlès, the French Academian who was ambassador in China, dedicated to
him a translation of Holme's "Travels in China," in which the Jesuit is
described as "Apostolic Missionary at Pekin, Correspondent of the
Academy of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres; an indefatigable _savant_,
profoundly versed in the knowledge and the history of the sciences, the
arts and the language of China and an ardent promoter of the
Tatar-Manchou language and literature." With Amiot was Father Joseph
d'Espinha, who was president of the imperial tribunal of astronomy, and
simultaneously administrator of the Diocese of Pekin. Fathers de Rocha
and Rodrigues presided over the tribunal of mathematics, and Father
Schelbarth replaced Castiglione as the chief painter of the emperor;
there were other Jesuits also who evangelised the various provinces of
the country under the direction of the Ordinary.
This condition of things lasted for ten years and it was only then that
the question arose of handing over the work to the Lazarists. Thus in a
letter of Father Bourgeois, of whom we have already spoken, he says:
"they have given our mission to the Lazarist Fathers." The letter is
dated November 15, 1783, namely ten years after the suppression of the
Society. "They were to have come last year," continues the writer; "Will
they come this year? They are fine men and they can feel sure that I
shall do all in my power to help them and put them in good shape." It
was not until 1785 that a Lazarist, Father Raux, took over the Pekin
Mission, and in 1788, three years afterwards, Bourgeois was able to say
to Father Beauregard who had contrived to remain in Paris in spite of
the Revolution: "Our missionary successors are men of merit, remarkable
for virtue, talent and refinement. We live together like brothers, and
thus the Lord consoles us for the loss of our good mother, the Society,
whom we can never forget. Nothing can tear that love out of our hearts,
and hence every moment we have to make acts of resignation in the
calamity that has fallen upon us. Meanwhile it is hard to say in our
house whether the Lazarists live as Jesuits or the Jesuits like
Lazarists."
The old and infirm Jesuits who were homeless and could find no
ecclesiastical employment had much to suffer. They became pitiable
objects of charity. Zalenski in "Les Jésuites da la Russie Blanche" (I,
77) gives an instance of it, in an appeal made to the King of Poland by
one hundred and five of these outcasts, many of whom had been
distinguished professors in the splendid colleges of the country. They
had been granted a miserable pittance out of their own property in the
way of a pension, but even that was often not forthcoming. After
reminding His Majesty that this pension had been guaranteed them by the
Church, by their country, and by the Sovereign Pontiff, and that the
allowance was from their own property; and was due to them from the
natural law; and also that the amount needed was every day decreasing,
because of the great number among them who were dying, they asked him
imploringly: "Will Poland, so long known for its humanity, be cruel only
to us; will you permit us the Lord's anointed, the old teachers of the
youth of Poland, to go begging our bread on the streets, with our
garments in rags, and exposed to insults; will you permit that our tears
and our cries which are forced from us by the grief and abandonment to
which we are reduced should add to the affliction of our country; will
you permit that our country should be accused of inhumanity and insulted
because it withholds our pension? It is sad enough for us to have lost
the Society, the dearest and nearest thing to our heart in this life,
without adding this new suffering. Should you not have pity on our lot
and grant us a pension? Do not bring us down to the grave with this new
sorrow." Whether their prayers were answered or not we do not know.
However, as Cardinal Pallavicini denounces the king as "impious and
inert," it is very likely that the poor old men were left to starve.
Quite unexpectedly the Protestant Frederick the Great of Prussia and the
schismatical Catherine II of Russia insisted on having what Jesuits they
could get for educational work in their respective domains. As neither
sovereign would permit the Papal Brief to be read in the countries which
they governed, a number of the exiles in various parts of Europe flocked
thither. Efforts were made to have the Brief promulgated in both
countries, but without success; for Catherine as well as Frederick
denied any right of the Pope in their regard; nor would either of them
listen to any request of the Jesuits to have it published. They were
told to hold their peace. Of course, they were condemned by their
enemies for accepting this heterodox protection; but it has been blamed
for almost everything, so they went on with their work, thanking God for
the unexpected shelter, and knowing perfectly well that Clement XIV was
not averse to the preservation of some of the victims.