The Educational Work of the Jesuits in the Nineteenth Century.
It cannot be denied that the Jesuits have not had the same brilliant
success as educators in the nineteenth century, as during the centuries
preceding the suppression of the Order. How is this to be explained?
The opponents of the Order are ready with an answer: “It is because
the Jesuits have not kept up with the progress of the age. Their whole
system is not suited to modern times.” Even such as are not hostile to
the Society, have said that the Old Society took with it into its grave
the secret of its educational success. However, a short reflection will
give us the true explanation.
The time of the suppression, a period of forty years, forms a gap in
the educational history of the Society. These blank pages, as Father
Hughes says, signify the total loss of property and position, with a
severance in many places of the educational traditions for almost sixty
years, and the entire destruction of them in many other parts.[405]
Restored, the Society had to struggle into existence under altered and
unfavorable conditions. The schools in about seven hundred cities and
towns, which the Order had possessed before its suppression, were now
largely in the hands of State authorities. And besides, the nineteenth
century was not a time of undisturbed peace for the Jesuits. There was
a persecution going on against them nearly all the time in one country
or other. They were expelled from Spain in 1821, re-admitted, but
driven out again in 1835 and 1868; expelled from Belgium 1818, from
Russia 1820, from Naples 1820, from France 1830 and 1880, from Portugal
1834, from the Argentine Republic 1848, from Switzerland 1847, from
Austria 1848, from Italy 1848 and 1859, from New Granada 1850 and 1859,
from Guatemala 1871, from Germany 1872, from Nicaragua 1881, from Costa
Rica 1884, harassed in Spain and Portugal during the last years, and
driven out of France owing to the “Laws of Associations.”
All these persecutions seriously hampered the educational work of
the Jesuits. They frequently lost a number of flourishing colleges
forever, others had to be commenced anew, when they were allowed to
return. Besides, in many cases, expulsion meant the loss of libraries,
observatories, and laboratories. Still, in spite of these difficulties,
at the end of the nineteenth century, they possess a respectable number
of colleges, scattered all over the world, from Zi-ka-wei in China to
Beirut in Syria, from Australia to England and Ireland, from Argentina
and Chili to Canada.
The development of the colleges of the Society in the United States
deserves a brief sketch. The first Jesuit school in this country was
opened in New York. A Jesuit was the first priest, so far as records
go, who ever visited (1644) the island of Manhattan, now a part of
the city of New York.[406] He was the saintly French missionary,
Father Isaac Jogues, who was put to death in 1646 by the Mohawks at
Auriesville. Forty years after the martyrdom of Father Jogues, three
other Jesuits, Thomas Harvey, Henry Harrison, and Charles Gage, were
invited to New York by Governor Dongan. These Fathers, true to the
spirit of the Society, soon established a classical school in New
York. It was situated apparently in what then was called “King’s
Farm;” the site was subsequently leased to Trinity Church. Governor
Dongan, himself an Irish Catholic, heartily patronized this school,
which was frequented by the sons of the best families on Manhattan
Island; the bell of the Dutch church in the fort was rung to summon the
pupils.[407] But the clergy and the people of the Church of England,
not as friendly to the Jesuits as the Dutch Protestants, attacked the
school, and penal laws were passed expelling the Jesuits and other
Catholic priests from the island. It was enacted that priests “be
deemed and accounted incendiaries, disturbers of the peace and safety,
and enemies to the true Christian religion, and shall be adjudged to
suffer perpetual imprisonment.”[408] This law put an end to the Latin
school of the Jesuits. The second attempt made by the Jesuits to found
a classical school in New York occurred about the year 1808. The
learned Father Kohlmann opened a little school in Mulberry Street, but
in 1817 the Jesuits were recalled from New York to Washington, and it
was only in 1847, that the College of St. Francis Xavier in New York
was founded.
It is, however, not New York, but Maryland where the first Jesuit
school in the colonies and the first Jesuit college in the United
States was founded. In 1634 two Jesuit Fathers landed in the province
which George Calvert, Lord Baltimore, had obtained from the English
crown. It was this province, Maryland, “the asylum of the Papists,” as
Bancroft says, “where Protestants were sheltered against Protestant
intolerance.”[409] But not long after, ungrateful men who had fled
from other colonies, and who had been welcomed in this province,
turned on those who showed hospitality to them, and a relentless war
of persecution was waged against the Catholic settlers of Maryland.
This hampered the development of Catholic education greatly. Still,
zeal for higher studies was never lacking. In 1638, Father Poulton had
been sent from England as Superior of the Maryland Mission. One of
his first acts was the project of a seat of learning in the colony.
This was about the same time when the initial movement was made to
establish Harvard College. But how different were the circumstances in
which Harvard and the Jesuit school developed! The one protected by
the government, the other persecuted. And yet, amidst all the trials
and annoyances, the Jesuits never ceased to labor for the intellectual
training of the Catholics as well as for the religious. In 1651 we find
their academy near Calvert Manor, in 1677 in or about Newtown Manor;
for the trials of the times did not permit the school to be stationary.
In 1746 the Jesuits were driven out of Southern Maryland; they crossed
the Chesapeake Bay and immediately opened their academy on the Eastern
shore, at Bohemia Manor.
In this school two men studied who became famous in the history
of America: Charles Carroll of Carrollton, one of the signers of
the Declaration of Independence, and his cousin John Carroll, the
first Archbishop of Baltimore. As the institutions of learning in
the colonies and the great universities of England were in those
days closed to Catholic pupils, those who could afford it, went to
the European Continent. Thus John and Charles Carroll went to the
famous Jesuit college at St. Omer in Flanders, where they won a high
reputation for their brilliant scholarship. After six years study in
that school, John entered the Society of Jesus. Later on he spent a
series of years as professor in the colleges of St. Omer, Liège and
Bruges. The suppression of the Society filled his heart with the
deepest grief. He went to England, where he was received most heartily
by Lord Arundell and other English noblemen. But when he saw that
measures were adopted by the English government, which more and more
alienated the American colonies from the sovereign and parliament of
Great Britain, Father Carroll patriotically resolved to return to his
native country and share its trials and fortunes. The services which
he rendered to the nascent republic during the war of the Revolution,
especially his mission to Canada with Benjamin Franklin, Samuel Chase
and Charles Carroll, need not be dwelled on here.[410]
In 1784 Carroll was appointed Prefect Apostolic for the Catholics
in the United States. He immediately planned the establishment of an
academy for higher studies. The outcome of this plan was the foundation
of the College of Georgetown, near Washington, in 1789. In 1791 the
doors of the college were opened to students. The first pupil to enter
was William Gaston of North Carolina, who became a profound scholar
and a great orator. He entered the House of Representatives in 1813,
was a distinguished member of the Federal party, and for many years
adorned the judicial bench of his native state.[411] Among others of
the pioneer pupils of Georgetown were Philemon Charles Wederstrandt
(later on commandant of the “Argus”), Robert Walsh, an eminent writer
who ably defended American affairs against the misrepresentations of
English writers, and founder of the first American Quarterly: _The
American Review of History and Politics_.[412] When Washington honored
Georgetown College by a formal visit, Robert Walsh was chosen to
address him.
The college had been founded by Ex-Jesuits. Many of the professors had
joined the Society of Jesus, which had been revived in Russia, and,
at last, in 1814, Archbishop Carroll and the Fathers in Georgetown
received with joy and exultation the news of the complete restoration
of the Society. After this event, Jesuit colleges began to multiply. In
the year 1900 the Jesuits conducted twenty-six colleges, the principal
ones, besides Georgetown, being in Baltimore, Boston, Buffalo, Chicago,
Cincinnati, Cleveland, Denver, Detroit, Fordham (New York), New
Orleans, New York, Omaha, St Louis, St Mary’s (Kansas), San Francisco,
Santa Clara (California), Spokane, Spring Hill (Mobile), Washington,
Worcester (Massachusetts). In that same year over fifty-two thousand
boys were educated in Jesuit high schools and colleges all over the
world, that is nearly twice as many as in Harvard, Yale, Princeton,
Columbia, Cornell, the Universities of Chicago, Michigan, Pennsylvania,
Wisconsin, combined.
Some of the Jesuit institutions rank very high, both for the number of
pupils and for the excellent results which they exhibit. The German
Jesuits, expelled from the “land of science and _Lehrfreiheit_,”
impart a higher education to more than five thousand students in
foreign countries. Their Francis-Xavier College at Bombay, in 1897,
numbered fifteen hundred and twenty-six students; ten hundred and two
Christians; two hundred and ninety Parsis; one hundred and seventy-one
Hindoos; fifty-four Mahometans; nine Jews. French Jesuits have two
colleges in Trichinopoli, East India. The one is frequented by eighteen
hundred students, among them five hundred and fifty of the Brahmin
caste. The English government in India shows the Jesuits many favors
for their educational work. Not unfrequently the Viceroy, or the
Governor, visits the colleges and praises the work of the teachers, and
not a few Jesuits have been appointed University examiners.
In Syria, the Jesuits conduct St. Joseph’s University, Beirut. They
have a printing establishment there which probably holds the first rank
among those of the Orient. A French admiral calls it “a creation which
is the symbol of the union of the two greatest forces in the world,
religion and science; an establishment which is the pride of France, as
well as of the Catholic Church.”[413] A Protestant Review in Germany
writes: “The progress which, owing to this establishment, the Arabic
literature has made, cannot be ignored.”[414] The latest catalogue has
four hundred and four numbers, of all sorts of Arabic and Syriac works,
grammars, dictionaries, etc. Some of the works edited by these Jesuits,
are at present used in the lectures in the University of Berlin.[415]
Another great Jesuit school in the East is Zi-ka-wei, near Shanghai,
China. The educational labors of the Jesuits in this institution have
been acknowledged by distinguished Protestant visitors. In 1898 Prince
Henry of Prussia, on his first landing in Shanghai, paid a visit to
this establishment. He spent nearly a whole day with the Fathers, and
frankly expressed his admiration at the splendid work they were doing.
In fact, he was so impressed by what he had seen, that again and again
after his visit, he would return to the subject and talk about the work
of “those excellent French Jesuits.” It soured a few German fanatics
somewhat against him, when reports began to be printed in the German
papers, to the effect that Prince Henry had spoken kindly of the hated
Jesuits. But this bigotry did not influence Prince Henry. Princess
Irene, his wife, having the next year rejoined her husband in China,
they paid a second visit to Zi-ka-wei, which is briefly related in the
following terms: “On the 12th of March, 1899, Prince Henry of Prussia,
and the Princess, his wife, arrived at Shanghai; the next morning
they hastened to pay a visit to Zi-ka-wei. The Prince told us that he
had said such nice things to the Princess about the establishments at
Zi-ka-wei that she wished to visit them at once.”[416]
The following comparison, made by an English Protestant, Laurence
Oliphant, speaks well for the educational labors of the Jesuits: “I was
struck with the intelligent expression of the youths’ countenances in
the Jesuit school at Shanghai, and at the evident affection they had
for their teachers. Instead of cramming nothing but texts down their
throats, they teach them the Chinese classics, Confucius, etc., so as
to enable them to compete in the public examinations. The result is,
that even if these native youths do not all become Christians, they
have always gratitude enough to protect and love those to whom they
owed their education, and perhaps consequent rise in life. A few days
later I went over the school of the Protestant Bishop. The contrast
was most striking. The small boys gabbled over the Creed in what was
supposed to be English, but which Lord Elgin, who was with me, was
firmly persuaded was Chinese. They understood probably about as clearly
as they pronounced. Then instead of the missionaries living among them,
and really identifying themselves with the lads, as the Jesuits do,
they have gorgeous houses, wives and families. A Protestant missionary
here, with a wife and four children, gets a house as big as Spring
Grove, rent free, and £500 a year. And that is what they call ‘giving
up all for the sake of the heathen’.”[417]
This is clearly another proof for what was said in a previous
chapter,[418] that the religious state affords many advantages for
educational work, at least in missionary countries. Here we must add
that the educational labors of the Jesuits in those countries are not
confined to higher instruction. Many lay-brothers give elementary
instructions in the schools,[419] and the priests give catechetical
instruction in hundreds of such schools, which in many other ways
are directed by them. In February 1901, fifteen scholars of Paris,
Professors in the University or members of the _Institut de France_,
among them the celebrated Paul Sabatier, Dean of the Protestant
Theological Faculty, issued a declaration in favor of the religious
associations. A list is added about the educational work in foreign
countries under the direction of French Jesuits. The total given there
is 3,923 schools, or orphan asylums, with 156,256 children, and all
this is done by the French Jesuits alone. Of their 193 schools in
Syria in particular, the Protestant _Literarische Centralblatt_ of
Leipsic says, “that they are now the best in Syria.”[420] Therefore,
that the Order is doing very great work for civilization, is evident.
Of the 15,160 members of the Order (in 1900) about 4000 were laboring
in foreign missions; and this work, in most cases, means also work
directed toward the education of the native people.
In this connection we may quote the striking tribute, paid by an
American politician to the educational work of the Jesuits among
the Indians. On April 7, 1900, Senator Vest of Missouri, during the
discussion of the Indian Appropriation Bill before the United States
Senate, made the following remarkable statements: “I was raised a
Protestant; I expect to die one; I was never in a Catholic church
in my life, and I have not the slightest sympathy with many of its
dogmas; but, above all, I have no respect for this insane fear that
the Catholic church is about to overturn this Government. I should be
ashamed to call myself an American, if I indulged in any such ignorant
belief. I said that I was a Protestant. I was reared in the old Scotch
Presbyterian Church; my father was an elder in it, and my earliest
impressions were that the Jesuits had horns and hoofs and tails, and
that there was a faint tinge of sulphur in the circumambient air
whenever one crossed your path. Some years ago I was assigned by the
Senate to examine the Indian schools in Wyoming and Montana. I visited
every one of them. I wish to say now what I have said before in the
Senate, and it is not the popular side of the question by any means,
that _I did not see in all my journey a single school that was doing
any educational work worthy the name of educational work, unless it was
under the control of the Jesuits_. I did not see a single Government
school, especially these day schools, where there was any work done at
all.... The Jesuits have elevated the Indian wherever they have been
allowed to do so without interference of bigotry, and fanaticism, and
the cowardice of insectivorous politicians who are afraid of the A. P.
A. and the votes that can be cast against them in their district and
States. They have made him a Christian and, above even that, have made
him a workman able to support himself and those dependent upon him.
Go to the Flathead Reservation in Montana ... and look at the work of
the Jesuits, and what is seen? You find comfortable dwellings, herds
of cattle and horses, intelligent, self-respecting Indians.... I am
not afraid to say this, because I speak from personal observation,
and no man ever went among these Indians with more intense prejudice
against the Jesuits than I had when I left the city of Washington to
perform that duty.... Every dollar you give to these [Government] day
schools might as well be thrown into the Potomac River under a ton of
lead.”[421]
When men who have been able to achieve the almost impossible, the
education and civilization of the Indian, undertake the task of
secondary education among civilized nations with the same zeal and
energy, must we not expect that they will perform this successfully?
If we add that, owing to their studies, special training and natural
inclinations, they are even better fitted for the work of higher
education, than for that of civilizing the Indian, is it then likely
that they are so inefficient as some represent them?
Let us, then, see the results of a number of Jesuit colleges. I wish
to remark, however, that the account in no respect can be called
complete, or even satisfactory. What is given on the next pages, was
found, sometimes accidentally, in various publications. More material
was available about the schools of the British Empire, where the
relative efficiency of a school can be fairly tested by the University
Examinations.[422]
The _Tablet_ (London), April 26, 1902, prints the following:
“The following Catholic names appear on the Classical Honours list
issued in April by the Moderators at Oxford. The names appear in
alphabetical order.
“CLASS I.--J. W. Glasson, Corpus Christi; C. C. Lattey, Pope’s Hall;
I. C. Scoles, Pope’s Hall.
“CLASS II.--H. E. Tulford, Balliol; E. J. Kylie, Balliol; C. D.
Plater, Pope’s Hall.
“From this it will be seen that the Jesuit students from Pope’s
Hall, formerly Clarke’s Hall, achieved a success which, considering
the size of the Hall, is probably a record in the history of the
University. The Hall which has room for only a dozen students,
distributed over the whole four years’ course, was represented by
three candidates at the recent examination, and all these were
successful. Indeed, the Hall, which was opened by the late Father
Richard Clarke, S. J., only six years ago, has had a history during
that time of which very large colleges in the University might be
justly proud. Starting with four students in 1896, of whom two broke
down in health, the first examination at which the Hall presented
candidates was Moderations in 1898, when one of the two obtained 1st
class honours, and the other 2nd class honours in Classics. In 1899
the Hall secured one 1st class honours in Mathematical Moderations,
one 2nd class honours and one 3rd class honours in Classics. In 1900
the score was one 1st class and one 2nd class honours in Classical
‘Greats’--the final degree examination; one 1st class in Mathematical
Moderations, and one 2nd class in Classical Moderations. In 1901,
one 1st in Mathematical Greats, and one 1st and one 2nd in Classical
Moderations. As nearly all these young Jesuits have been educated
either at Stonyhurst, at Beaumont, or at Mount St. Mary’s, such
excellent results, as soon as they are brought into open competition
with the picked students of all the leading public schools, who are
the holders of the innumerable scholarships in the University, go
to show that after all our Catholic colleges are, to say the least,
not so very far behind the best Protestant schools in the country,
either in the soundness of their general education, or in the special
culture of the classics.”
In Ireland there are several richly endowed Protestant foundations:
the Queen’s Colleges of Cork, Galway, and Belfast, the last, one of
the best equipped institutions of learning in the British Empire; the
three Colleges draw an annual revenue of about $125,000 to support a
score of distinguished Professors in each. The Jesuits conduct the
University College of Stephens Green, Dublin. For many years University
College routed from the field the Queen’s Colleges of Cork and Galway,
and was surpassing gradually that of Belfast, although this one made a
noble fight. In the two examinations of the Royal University of 1895,
the Jesuit college won 67 distinctions, while the Queen’s College of
Belfast gained a total of 57. University College bore off all the first
places in mathematics, the first two places in English, and the first
honors in mathematical physics and chemistry, in classics the first
place in First Arts, and the first and second places in Second Arts. Of
the sixteen medical honors awarded, University College secured nine,
the remaining seven were divided between her Majesty’s privileged
institutions. This despite the many disadvantages of University College
through the lack of laboratories and museums, which the Government at
lavish expense has provided for the Protestant rivals.[423] The success
of the following year was equally brilliant. In the first and second
Arts Examination of 1897 University College gained 51 distinctions,
Belfast 46, Galway 18, Cork 6. Of the 51 distinctions 32 are in the
first class (only 16 of Belfast’s), and among them first place in
no fewer than 9 subjects. In the M. A. Examination three out of the
four studentships awarded, five out of the six first class honors
awarded, the only two special prizes awarded, two out of the three gold
medals, all went to University College. It bore away 13 out of the 18
distinctions conferred.
_In the B. A. Examinations_:
1st Honors. 2nd Honors. Total.
University College 4 13 17
Queen’s College, Belfast 3 13 16
” ” Cork nil. nil. nil.
” ” Galway nil. 4 4
Taking the whole of the arts examination for the Academic year, we find
University College first on the list with 82 distinctions, as compared
with 63 for Belfast, 25 for Galway, and 7 for Cork. And University
College has a comparatively small number of students, many of whom can
attend only the night classes.
In Autumn 1898 once again the little unendowed University College
of the Jesuits outdistanced the endowed rivals, and this time more
than ever. But it is not merely in the number of distinctions, though
that exceeds the combined results of all its three rivals, but in
their quality that University College stands pre-eminent. The College
got first and second places over all competitors in classics and
mathematics, first place in history and political economy, and in
modern literature. This last distinction is enhanced by the fact that
the standard has been growing higher year after year, and this year the
papers exceeded in difficulty any hitherto set.
The following list tells best the result:
AUTUMN:
Scholarships.
| Studentships.
Honors and Exhibitions. | | Fellowships.
1st Class. 2nd Class. | | | Total.
-----------------------------------------------------------
University
College 13 4 3 1 1 22
Queen’s Coll.,
Belfast 4 6 1 1 1 13
Queen’s Coll.,
Galway 0 3 0 1 0 4
Queen’s Coll.,
Cork 0 2 1 0 0 3
-----------------------------------------------------------
JUNE AND AUTUMN COMBINED:
Scholarships.
| Studentships.
Honors and Exhibitions. | | Fellowships.
1st Class. 2nd Class. | | | Total.
-----------------------------------------------------------
University
College 35 37 3 1 1 77
Queen’s Coll.,
Belfast 25 37 1 1 1 65
Queen’s Coll.,
Galway 4 9 0 1 0 14
Queen’s Coll.,
Cork 0 23 1 0 0 24
-----------------------------------------------------------
In 1896 the Jesuit college of Clongowes, in the Intermediate
Examination, where 8877 students presented themselves, held the
foremost place of all the schools and colleges of Ireland with a total
of 45 distinctions. Also in 1897 it outdistanced all competitors in
the highest grade, winning the “Blue Ribbon” of the examination, the
highest honor in the senior grade.
From India similar results are reported from various Jesuit colleges,
for instance from St. Xavier’s College, Calcutta, the College of
Darjeeling, St. Francis Xavier’s College, Bombay. Last year (1901),
the number of candidates for “matriculation examination” in the whole
Presidency of Bombay was 3806; of these only 1217 passed (32 per
ct.). The Jesuits of St. Francis Xavier’s, Bombay, had sent for the
examination 43; of these 34 passed (79 per ct.). In 1899 St. Joseph’s
College, North Point, Darjeeling, secured the only vacancy, at the
“Opium Examination,” and the first place at the “Accounts Examination,”
with these two ten first places at the Public Examinations, which is
all the more creditable as the College is but seven or eight years old.
Most gratifying successes are reported also from the Jesuit colleges in
Australia.
Coming nearer home, we have to speak of little St. Boniface College,
Manitoba. In 1897 it could insert the following advertisement in the
“_North-West Review_,” which is carefully read by the Protestants of
Winnipeg, who could not challenge the advertisement:
“_St. Boniface College._ The only Catholic College in America
that competes annually with half a dozen Protestant Colleges and
Collegiate Institutions. In proportion to the number of its pupils,
_St. Boniface College has won more scholarships_ than any of its
Protestant competitors.”
The Governor’s Bronze Medal has been awarded twenty-two times from
1879 to 1900. Seven out of these twenty-two times it has been won by a
student from St. Boniface College. Considering that, during all these
years, the candidates from St. Boniface College were in an extremely
small minority--about one in twenty-two, or four and one-half per
cent on an average,--this proportion of seven out of twenty-two,
almost a third, struck every one, especially the opponent, as very
extraordinary. Had St. Boniface won that medal, the most highly valued
of all the University distinctions, once in twenty-two years, the
Catholic college would have been doing well, would have had its fair
share of success. Manitoba College (Presbyterian), the largest of all
the colleges, which sometimes boasts of as many students as all the
other colleges put together, has won the medal only three times. Then
the proportionate value of Latin and Greek was lowered; the classics
were a strong point at St. Boniface. But St. Boniface nevertheless
secured the medal two years in succession. Then Greek, hitherto
obligatory on all, was made optional after a long fight, in which
St. John’s College (Anglican) sided with St. Boniface against this
innovation. The result of this move, coupled with the preponderance
of mathematics and chemistry over Latin alone, prevented St. Boniface
from winning the medal for seven years, although its students often
headed the list in special subjects. But 1899 and 1900 the St. Boniface
students forged ahead again, and won the medal two years running.
During the vacation of 1900, a change has occurred in the statute
that concerns the University scholarships. Hitherto the winners of
scholarships had been listed in the order of merit, with the mention
of the college or school to which they belonged. Now all the winners
were to be arranged alphabetically, with no mention of the institutions
to which they belong. Several reasons were given for this change, but
the suspicion has been expressed that the real motive was to prevent
the Jesuit college from occupying so large a place in the public
eye.[424] It may appear unfair to make such a charge; however, such
suspicions have been expressed by men who are not Jesuits, nor biased
towards the Society. Thus, about twenty years ago, Albert Duruy said
of the movement against religious orders in France and the Jesuits
in particular: “Without proofs, without thorough inspection, they
slander and accuse the congregations.... _They do not try to compete
with them, they find it simpler to suppress them._”[425] In fact, the
recent movement in France against religious orders has been ascribed,
undoubtedly with good reasons, to the same motive.
A few years ago there was an attempt made in France to introduce
a Bill to suppress the religious schools, which (at the expense of
the State schools) were gaining more and more in public favor. A
Parliamentary commission was then appointed which was presided over
by M. Ribot, and which took a quantity of very valuable evidence
from various witnesses. Nothing, however, as may be seen from M.
Ribot’s report,[426] was established against the Jesuits or any other
religious schools; on the contrary, they were in several respects
held up as an example to the State schools, even by distinguished
adherents of the latter. Such results were naturally deemed highly
unsatisfactory by the anti-religious party, and accordingly for
the time being the contemplated legislation was shelved. When M.
Waldeck-Rousseau undertook it and enlarged it, he was careful to
avoid anything so dangerous to his designs as another judicial
inquiry into the facts.[427] Now, if any proofs could have been found
showing the inefficiency of the Jesuit schools, it is certain that M.
Waldeck-Rousseau would have made the best of such evidence.
The fact that he says nothing of it, is a sure sign that no such proofs
are procurable even by the minutest examinations. Hence it follows that
the Jesuit schools were, at the very least, as efficient as the State
schools.
Instead of proofs, such hollow and absurd declarations were made:
“Religious possess an independence which gradually will lead to the
usurpation of all authority. They dare even the dignitaries of the
Church. The education which they give separates a part of youth from
the rest, and thus the moral unity of the country is rent.”[428] The
question ought to have been: “Are the youths, educated by religious,
by Jesuits, less instructed, less moral, less patriotic?” To this
question the answer has been given decidedly in the negative. We shall
have occasion to speak of the patriotism of French Jesuit pupils; their
morality has been most favorably compared to that of pupils of other
schools--whereas in M. Ribot’s report a distinguished adherent of the
State school system declares that in these State schools the pupils are
“_moralement abandonnés_”. As regards the intellectual ability shown
by Jesuit pupils, it will suffice to see the lists of the successes
obtained by them in the _École Centrale_, the _Polytechnique_, the
_Military Academy of Saint-Cyr_, and the _École Navale_.[429]
The following statement will illustrate how the anti-clerical press
fabricated proofs of the inefficiency of Jesuit colleges; it shows
also that Jesuit pupils are not behind others in branches other than
classics, mathematics and sciences. In 1875 a student in the law school
at Poitiers published these facts: “A short time ago the journal of
M. Gambetta, the _République française_, had taken the trouble to
occupy itself with the Law Faculty at Poitiers and its students.
According to M. Gambetta the said school comprises two clearly distinct
classes of students: those from the _Lycées_, and those from the
Jesuit colleges. The latter are good for nothing and obtain no prizes,
whereas the former carry off all the laurels. Now in point of fact,
at the distribution of prizes in the law school for 1874-75, which
took place last Thursday, the reports show the following results:
In the 3rd year, the 2nd prize for French Law and the 2nd prize for
Roman Law were awarded to a Jesuit pupil. In the 2nd year, of the four
distinctions two were given to Jesuit pupils. In the 1st year, all five
distinctions, two medals and three honorable mentions, were awarded to
Jesuit pupils.”[430]
Within the last two or three decades, neither the Jesuit colleges
nor the schools of the other Congregations in France were inferior to
the State schools. The very contrary is true, as may be seen from the
remarkable testimony of an anti-clerical writer in the _Contemporary
Review_.[431] The article, “Monastic Orders up to Date,” is filled with
virulence against the religious orders, the Roman Congregations, and
the Catholic Church in general. Yet the superiority of the schools of
the religious over the State schools is candidly admitted. Speaking
of the charges brought against the religious orders in France, the
writer says: “The members of these communities have, it is said, taken
elementary, intermediate, and technical education into their own
hands, are successfully preparing youths for schools, professions, and
university degrees, and supply both army and navy with officers. The
official report on the Budget of Instruction for 1899, querulously
affirms that they and their schools act as a sort of drain upon the
natural clients of the University. But why should they not? They are
more successful than their lay competitors, and more deserving of
success. If the education which they give be very imperfect, and it
is sometimes this and more, it is on the whole the best that is to be
had in the country. Lay instruction in France is purely mechanical,
that given by the Congregations is living and human. Both aim at
cramming, but the religious teachers do their work efficiently and
successfully, their rivals with a degree of slovenliness which is
incredible.... Under such conditions one is not surprised to learn that
the Congregations supply one-fourth of the pupils of the famous _École
Polytechnique_, one-third of the students of Saint-Cyr, and one-half
of the graduates of the Naval School. The religious communities have
fairly won these triumphs by dint of hard work under conditions laid
down by their enemies and applied by their opponents.”
Twenty years ago the London _Times_ had made a statement to the same
effect, when Ferry tried to suppress the Jesuit schools in France. “We
should have liked to see a frank admission on the part of prominent
members of the Left, of the real causes of the success of the
ecclesiastical schools. It is no use of putting it down to wiles and
artifices of any kind. The perversity, or bad taste, or stupidity of
the multitude will not explain it. The simple truth seems to be that
the schools of the Jesuits and other religious bodies are better in
many respects than their competitors. They satisfy parents and boys
more than the _Lycées_ do. The traditional skill in teaching of the
Jesuits is not extinct. They are, as a rule, at more pains than lay
professors, with many interests to occupy them, to know and study the
nature of their pupils. It is their habit to pay attention to the
morals as well as the intellectual training of the lads committed
to their charge.”[432] Such admissions, coming from such sources,
speak volumes for the schools of the religious and of the Jesuits in
particular.
These are a few facts about the results obtained by Jesuit colleges in
recent years. As they concern colleges in various countries over the
globe, directed by Jesuits of different provinces of the Order, they
bespeak certainly no inefficiency of the Jesuits’ teaching. Can we not
conclude that, were there a similar system of public examination in
this country, the Jesuit colleges in the United States would exhibit
similar success?
On December 12, 1900, the Juniors of a Jesuit Institution, of
Holy Cross College, Worcester, Massachusetts, defeated in a debate
the Juniors of Harvard. The victory of Holy Cross was all the more
remarkable as Harvard a week before had won the debate from Yale on
the very same question, “On the permanent retention of the Philippine
Islands.” On April 8, 1901, the Freshmen and Sophomores of the same
College again came off victorious in a debate with a Freshman-Sophomore
team of Brown University.[433]--Although we do not want to draw
from such debates any conclusions for the superiority of the Jesuit
college, still they deserve to be recorded, because the Jesuit college
was victorious over Harvard, shortly after the President of Harvard
University had charged the Jesuit colleges with inefficiency.[434]
The _American Ecclesiastical Review_, August 1900, gave an account of
the controversy between President Eliot and the Jesuit colleges, in
which it was proved that the President’s charges were not based on any
facts which could justify his measures against the Jesuit institutions.
Professor Eliot had declared, “we have had experience at the Law School
of a considerable number of graduates of Holy Cross and Boston, and
these graduates have not, as a rule, made good records at the School.”
Now the truth is that in the ten years preceding the time of the final
decision of the Law School regarding Boston College (March, 1898),
there were only three graduates of Boston College in the Law School, of
whom one left after two years, one left with an excellent record after
one year on account of ill-health, and one completed the course and
received his diploma. In all the time before these ten years, only two
or three graduates of Boston College entered the Law School. The facts
in the case, therefore, do not bear out President Eliot’s statement
that “a considerable number of Boston College graduates have been at
the Law School and have made poor records.” President Eliot has at
several times given as his reason for the rejection of Boston College
and Holy Cross, that their students were inferior. This charge has been
answered by Father Brosnahan in his paper on _The Relative Merits of
Courses in Catholic and non-Catholic Colleges for the Baccalaureate_,
read before the conference of Catholic Colleges April 1901 at
Chicago.[435] From the preceding data we may certainly conclude that so
far the “inferiority” of Jesuit schools has not yet been proved, and
that the facts do not warrant the assertions about the “inefficiency of
the Jesuit system for modern times.”
In connection with the educational labors of the Jesuits in the
nineteenth century, we must not fail to mention briefly their literary
and scientific work during that period. There are several reasons for
treating of this in a work on Jesuit education. _First_, because the
Jesuit scholars are a product of the Jesuit system; _secondly_, because
some of them were teachers in colleges during the greater part of their
lives, and all for at least five or six years; _thirdly_, because their
case proves how highly the Society values, and how freely it cultivates
the various departments of science. It is easy to understand that the
frequent persecutions and expulsions from many countries are most
injurious and unfavorable to the cultivation of science, which requires
above all what the Romans called _otium_. Moreover, as the Jesuits lost
in several expulsions even their libraries, museums, and observatories,
v. g. the famous _Museo Kircheriano_ in Rome, and the observatory where
Secchi had served the cause of science for so many years, they were
greatly hampered in their researches. It is all the more remarkable to
see that the Jesuits achieved so much in the various fields of science,
in spite of these difficulties. It betokens almost a heroic enthusiasm
for science that these men patiently continue their investigations and
start new enterprises, even in countries where the hostile attitude of
legislative assemblies is like the sword of Damocles hanging over them.
In this brief sketch of Jesuit scholars we mention only such as were
distinguished for productive scholarship within the last twenty-five
or thirty years. Among the scientists of this period we mention
first Father Angelo Secchi, who was one of the foremost astronomical
observers of the nineteenth century. Educated and trained from early
youth by the Jesuits, he soon became known by his publications on
solar physics and meteorology.[436] He wrote several important works,
among them _Le Soleil_, a standard work on the sun, _Les Étoiles_,
_L’Unité des Forces physiques_, and more than eight hundred articles
in scientific periodicals of Italy, France, England and Germany.[437]
He has been called “the Father of Astro-physics”, on account of his
spectro-scopical observations of the sun and the fixed stars. The
ingenious meteorographic apparatus, a self-recording instrument for
meteorological observations, which Father Secchi constructed, caused a
sensation in the Paris exposition of 1867, and received the first prize
(100,000 francs). The interesting instrument is now in St. Ignatius
College, Cleveland, Ohio, where it is used by Father Odenbach, S.
J., for meteorological observations. When the Piedmontese took Rome
in 1870, the Roman College and its observatory were taken from the
Jesuits. The new government did all in its power to separate Father
Secchi from the cause of the Pope and from his Order. He was offered
the position of Director-General of all astronomical observatories in
Italy, the dignity of senator, etc. But all these flattering offers
could not estrange the noble priest from his benefactor Pius IX., and
his persecuted Order. He preferred to remain loyal to them, although he
had to suffer mean and paltry annoyances. For the rest, the indignation
roused in Italy and all over Europe, prevented the government from
expelling Father Secchi from his beloved observatory. During an earlier
expulsion of the Jesuits from Italy 1848-9, Father Secchi had been
Professor of physics and astronomy in Georgetown College, Washington,
D. C. This College possesses at present in Father Hagen a scholar who
is highly esteemed in mathematical and astronomical circles. His great
works, the _Atlas Stellarum Variabilium_ and his _Synopsis der höheren
Mathematik_, are most favorably spoken of by scientists.[438]
Another prominent astronomer was Father Perry, Professor of higher
mathematics and Director of the observatory of Stonyhurst College,
England. He is especially known, as was Father Secchi, for his labors
in the domain of solar physics. The English Government and learned
societies sent him frequently on scientific journeys, and at the time
of his death it was stated that he had been employed on more scientific
expeditions than any living astronomer. He was sent--as Father Hell in
1769--to observe the Transit of Venus (in 1874 and 1882), further, to
observe the total eclipses in 1870, 1886, 1887, and 1889. It was on
the expedition of 1889, on H. M. S. _Comus_, that Father Perry died, a
martyr for the cause of science. Scientific men spoke with admiration
of the painstaking preparations of his expeditions, his accuracy and
skill in observations, and his enthusiastic love for science.[439]
Among the living astronomers in England Fathers Sidegreaves and Cortie
deserve to be mentioned.
In recent years the Society has extensively gone into the field of
meteorology. Seventeen stations are devoted exclusively to meteorology,
or at least making it a prominent feature. They are: Stonyhurst
(England), Jersey (Channel Islands), Rome, Kalocsa (Hungary), Malta,
Burgos, Manila, Zi-ka-wei (China), Calcutta, Ambohidempona (near
Tananarivo, Madagascar), Bulawayo, Boroma, La Granada, Havana,
Cleveland (Ohio), Saltillo, Puebla (Mexico). Some of them have a name.
A few details about the observatory of Manila will interest American
readers. It consists of four departments: astronomical, meteorological,
seismical, and magnetic. The scientific publications of this
observatory have been praised in scientific journals (v. g. _American
Meteorological Journal_, vol. X, June 1893, p. 100; _id._, vol. XII,
Febr. 1896, p. 326.--_Meteorologische Zeitschrift_, Nov. 1887, p.
366; Oct. 1898, p. 64, etc.). The commercial world in Eastern Asia
appreciates its typhoon warnings. During the Spanish-American War, Dr.
Doberck, Director of the Observatory at Hongkong, addressed the Weather
Bureau of the United States Government, saying that “the Observatory
of Manila is in the hands of men who possess very little scientific
education and cause scandal by communicating sensational typhoon
warnings to the newspapers in Hongkong.” The effect of this accusation
was that the Jesuits were forbidden to send out any such warnings.
When matters were investigated, it turned out that the Manila warnings
had indeed very often contradicted those of Mr. Doberck, but that the
events invariably proved the correctness of the Manila observations.
The Eastern newspapers: _The Hongkong Telegraph_, _China Mail_, _Manila
Times_, _Daily Press_, strongly denounced Dr. Doberck, and rendered
a brilliant testimony to the labors of the Jesuits, and especially
their invaluable typhoon warnings. On November 2, 1898, the Rev. Jos.
Algué, Director of the Observatory, received the following notice:
“Rear-Admiral Dewey desires me to thank you for your courtesy in giving
him such complete information concerning your typhoon predictions,
which he has found in every case to be correct. (Signed) Flag
Secretary.” On February 2, 1899, a letter was sent to the Director of
the Observatory, from the Flag-ship Olympia, which concludes: “I trust
that the United States Government will make the necessary provisions
for the continuance of the institution which you conduct in such an
able manner, and which has proved itself to be so great a benefit to
maritime interests in this part of the world. Very truly yours, George
Dewey, Rear-Admiral U. S. N.”[440]
The work done by the Jesuits at the Manila Observatory and all over
the islands, may be seen from two volumes with accompanying atlas of
thirty maps.[441] The work treats of the geography of the islands,
climatology, seismology, and terrestrial magnetism. Professor Henry S.
Pritchett, the Superintendent of the U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey,
tells us that “to the admirable work of the Jesuits is due practically
all of our present knowledge of the interior of Mindanao.” Father
Algué’s work on the cyclones of the Philippine Archipelago is the
standard work on that subject.[442]
In 1891 the French Academy of Sciences awarded prizes to the Jesuits
in Madagascar, in recognition of their great service rendered by their
astronomical and meteorological observations. Two years previous
another Jesuit had received a prize of ten thousand francs for his
geographical maps of the interior of the island; and last year, 1901,
the very year which witnessed the expulsion of the Jesuits from the
Republic, another Jesuit, Father Stanislaus Chevalier, by unanimous
vote of the commission of the French Academy, received the prize of
3000 francs for his meteorological and astronomical publications.[443]
In a recent work, “Kiautschou”, published with the co-operation of
the German Emperor, a high tribute is paid to the scientific labors,
_especially the astronomical and meteorological observations_, of the
Jesuits in Zi-ka-wei, and the German official who bestows this eulogy
on them, declares that he is not a friend of the Jesuits.
In other fields of natural sciences, the Jesuits are working most
diligently, and their labors are appreciated by the scientific world.
“The best book on mechanics is that of the Jesuit Jullien,” so says
a Protestant scholar.[444] Another writes of an Austrian Jesuit:
“Father Braun, the distinguished Director of the Observatory of Kalocsa
in Hungary, furnished some of the most ingenious experiments for
establishing the density of the earth. His works are a remarkable proof
for the scientific energy of the man, and the spirit of sacrifice for
the sake of science.”[445] In June 1900, Father Hillig of Canisius
College, Buffalo (New York), published a catalogue of the most
prominent Jesuit museums. He enumerates about sixty, scattered all over
the world.
Several Jesuits are distinguished biologists, among them the German
Father Erich Wasmann, one of the foremost entomologists of modern
times. His numerous publications on the beetles living commensally
with ants and termites, have been styled “classic” by the leading
English, German and French scientific reviews.[446] Of his work on
“Arthropoda” the _Canadian Entomologist_ says: “Dr. Wasmann has given
us the greatest contribution on this interesting subject ever made, and
one that must become a classic in Entomology.”[447] Other prominent
biologists are the French Father Panthel who received the _prix de
Thore_ from the _Institut de France_ for an anatomical work published
in 1898; the Dutch Father Bolsius, an authority in microscopic anatomy;
the Belgian Father Dierkx, whose important researches on morphology are
published in _La Celulle_ (Louvain, 1890-1900). These names suffice
to prove that the Jesuits are by no means “enemies of progress and
intolerant of everything new,” as M. Compayré represents them.
Other departments of modern science are successfully cultivated
by Jesuits. We mention only Father Strassmaier, who by experts is
called one of the first Assyriologists.[448] Recently Father Dahlmann
is becoming very prominent by publications on Indian and Chinese
philosophy. His works have been greatly praised by Professor Max Müller
of Oxford and other Orientalists. On the field of literature we call
attention to a recent production of the German Jesuit Baumgartner:
_History of Universal Literature_.[449] Seldom has a work been praised
so highly by men of the different creeds and nationalities. Protestant
reviews have been, we may say, as enthusiastic as those of Catholics,
on this “_opera gigantesca_”, as an Italian reviewer has styled it. One
Protestant Review (_Westermann’s Monatshefte_) says: “No similar work
can be compared to Baumgartner’s in thoroughness, variety, and above
all in directness.”[450] The same author has published some splendid
volumes on Goethe (3 vols.), Lessing, Calderon, Jost van den Vondel,
and Longfellow. Father Longhaye’s _Histoire de la littérature française
au XVIIe siècle_ (2 volumes) was awarded a prize by the French Academy
in 1901.
A very distinguished historian is Father Ehrle, Prefect of the
Vatican Library, author of the great _Historia Bibliothecae
Pontificum_ and co-editor of the _Archiv für mittelalterliche
Geschichte und Litteratur_. Father Grisar is a leading author on
Christian Archaeology. His latest work on the _History of Rome_ is a
worthy rival of Gregorovius’s famous work.[451] The Belgian Jesuits
continue the colossal work of the Old Society, the “Bollandists”, or
_Acta Sanctorum_, a work of prime importance for the history of the
whole Christian Era. Of the sixty-two folio volumes of this gigantic
collection, nine were published since 1845.[452]
As writers on Ethics we mention Father Castelein and Father
Cathrein[453]; on philosophy the English Jesuits Clarke, Rickaby, Maher
(Stonyhurst Series). Father Maher’s _Psychology_ recently received the
note “Special Excellence” by the University of London, and the author,
the degree of “Doctor of Literature”. And this in spite of the fact
that the book contains a very energetic criticism of the works most
favored by the University, including, indeed, the writings of both the
examiners themselves. We could add scores of distinguished writers
on theology, but we wish to confine ourselves to publications which
have favorably appealed to Protestants. In 1900 the Society conducted
more than one hundred periodicals. Although a great number of them
are chiefly religious magazines (as the ably written _Messenger_, New
York), there are also several scientific periodicals. Some reviews,
as the _Month_ in England, the _Études religieuses_ in France, the
_Civiltà Cattolica_ in Italy, the _Stimmen aus Maria-Laach_ (with
valuable scientific supplements), the _Theologische Zeitschrift_
(Innsbruck), the _Razón y Fe_ in Spain, the _Analecta Bollandiana_ in
Belgium, are representative literary and scientific periodicals.
A splendid tribute was paid, in January 1902, to the scientific
activity of the German Jesuits. Deputy Spahn, Judge of the Supreme
Court of the Empire, and a prominent member of the German Parliament,
pleaded in the _Reichstag_ for the re-admission of the Jesuits into
Germany. In the course of his brilliant speech he spoke thus of the
literary and scientific work of the German Jesuits: “In whatever branch
scientific progress has been made during the nineteenth century, the
German Jesuits are distinguished contributors. In history we have
Father Ehrle, Prefect of the Vatican Library, one of the editors of
the _Archives for Medieval History and Literature_, and author of the
great _Historia Bibliothecae Pontificum_; Father Braunsberger, whose
_Epistulae et Acta Canisii_ have been called by Protestant historians a
most valuable contribution to the history of the Reformation. Then we
have Father Beissel’s numerous publications on Christian art; Father
Baumgartner’s magnificent _History of Universal Literature_, and
many other literary productions by the same author. Father Kreiten’s
critical essays; the many volumes of the _Analecta Hymnica Medii Aevi_
by Fathers Dreves and Blume; the five volumes on Aesthetics by Fathers
Gietmann and Sörensen; the philological writings of Father Fox on
Demosthenes. Father Strassmaier, the Assyriologist, deciphered over
three thousand Babylonian cuneiform inscriptions, more than any German
Academy has ever done in that line. Father Epping found the key to the
astronomical computations and observations of the Babylonians, and his
work is successfully continued by Father Kugler. Father Dahlmann is one
of the very first authorities in the field of antiquities of India. In
natural sciences we have the famous Father Wasmann, the entomologist.
In physics Father Dressel is eminent, and in pure mathematics and
astronomy Father Hagen, director of the Georgetown Observatory,
author of the _Synopsis of Mathematics_ and of the _Atlas Stellarum
Variabilium_. We find among these Jesuits several prominent writers
on geography, and it is only a few months ago that Father Fischer,
Professor of geography at Feldkirch, discovered the map on which the
New World bears for the first time the title ‘America’. The well-known
moralist Father Lehmkuhl has written an excellent commentary on the new
code of Germany, and was one of the first to advocate this new code.
The various publications of the German Jesuits on the social question
are continually working for the maintenance of the existing social and
political order.”
Many other names deserve to be added to these mentioned by Deputy
Spahn. Father Meyer, by his German writings, has exerted a great
influence on Catholic writers in Ethics. Father Cathrein has published
various important works on the same subject, and one of the very best
works extant on the social question. On the latter subject we possess
several excellent works from the pen of Father Henry Pesch. Father
Stiglmayr’s critical studies of the writings of Pseudo-Dionysius
Areopagita (he assigns these works to the fifth century), have recently
been called “brilliant researches which have definitely settled this
long discussed question.”[454]
Between 1881 and 1900 the German Jesuits alone published six hundred
and seven books, some of which are, as we heard before, classics in
their respective fields. Three of these writers have, within the last
few years, been elected members by celebrated Academies of Science:
Father Wasmann by the Russian Imperial Academy of St. Petersburg;
Father Baumgartner by the Belgian Royal Academy of Ghent; and Father
Ehrle, in November 1901, by the Prussian Royal Academy of Göttingen.
The favorable criticisms on Jesuit publications, quoted on the
preceding pages, are almost exclusively by Protestant scholars of
highest repute. Are these facts unknown, or are they studiously
ignored, by certain writers who are so loud in belittling Jesuit
education and scholarship? We readily confess that Jesuit scholarship
has not yet regained that brilliant position which it enjoyed in the
first centuries of the existence of the Order; the reasons for this
have been mentioned. We also admit that the eulogies bestowed on the
literary and scientific success of the older Jesuit institutions are
not a sufficient guarantee that the Jesuit system is equally efficient
in modern times. But we think this last point is proved by what has
been said in this present chapter. It certainly proves that the Jesuits
do not rest satisfied with the laurels of their predecessors, but that
they strenuously struggle to keep abreast with the scientific progress
of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The testimonies adduced
are all the more remarkable, if we keep in mind the most discouraging
circumstances under which the Jesuits had to labor, and the coldness
and antipathy with which the works of the Jesuits are ordinarily
viewed by non-Catholic writers. This leads us to a rather sad chapter
in the history of Jesuit education, in which we have to speak of the
opposition which the educational work of the Society had to encounter
in all centuries.
FOOTNOTES:
[405] Hughes, _Loyola_, p. 266.
[406] Rev. Henry A. Brann, D. D., in _The College of St. Francis
Xavier_, p. 1 foll.
[407] Shea, _The Catholic Church in Colonial Days_, p. 91.
[408] Brann, _l. c._, p. 2.
[409] _History of the United States_, vol. I, pp. 244-248 (18th ed.,
Boston, 1864).--However, on the “toleration” in Maryland see Griffin,
_Historical Researches_, 1902, vol. XIX, No. 4.
[410] See Shea, _Life and Times of the Most Reverend John Carroll_, ch.
IV.
[411] Shea, _History of Georgetown College_, p. 15.
[412] Shea, _l. c._
[413] _A terre et à bord_, par l’amiral Aube, 1894, p. 45.
[414] _Literarisches Centralblatt_, 1890, No. 42.
[415] Braunsberger, S. J., _Rückblick auf das katholische Ordenswesen
im 19. Jahrhundert_, (Herder, 1901) p. 150.
[416] _The Messenger_, New York, March 1902, p. 335.
[417] _Memoir of the Life of Laurence Oliphant_ (New York, Harper,
1891), vol. I, p. 229.
[418] See chapter III, pp. 89-98.
[419] See above pp. 104-106.
[420] Braunsberger, _l. c._, p. 115.
[421] From the _Congressional Record_ for April 7, 1900, page 4120
(Italics ours).
[422] The data, unless stated otherwise, were communicated to the
_Woodstock Letters_.
[423] _Woodstock Letters_, 1895, p. 504.
[424] From the _North-West Review_, August 22, 1900.
[425] _Revue des Deux Mondes_, 1880, I.
[426] _La réforme de l’enseignement secondaire._ Armand Colin, Paris.
[427] _The Tablet_, Nov. 2, 1901, p. 698.
[428] Speech of M. Waldeck-Rousseau, quoted by du Lac, _Jésuites_, pp.
88 sq.
[429] Du Lac, _Jésuites_, p. 250 foll.
[430] _Univers_, Paris, December 2, 1875. For high praise bestowed on
Jesuit pupils by University Examiners in France, see _Figaro_, April 5
and June 2, 1879; De Badts de Cugnac, _Les Jésuites et l’éducation_,
pp. 17, 19 foll.
[431] March, 1900, p. 441.
[432] London _Times_, July 8, 1879, p. 9.
[433] The judges of the debate were G. Stanley Hall, President of Clark
University; Hon. John R. Thayer, member of Congress, and Professor
Charles P. Adams of the Massachusetts State Normal School. President
Abercombie of Worcester Academy presided. None of these gentlemen is a
Catholic.
[434] The unqualified slurs of President Eliot against the Jesuit
colleges were ably refuted by Rev. Timothy Brosnahan, S. J., Professor
of Ethics at Woodstock College, Maryland, in his pamphlet: _President
Eliot and Jesuit Colleges_, Messenger Press, New York, p. 36. The
reception given to this booklet was remarkable. We refer the reader to
a criticism in the _Bookman_, April 1900, by Professor Peck of Columbia
University, N. Y. We quote only one little passage from Prof. Peck’s
article: “Altogether we have not in a long time read anything which
compacts into so small a compass so much dialectic skill, so much crisp
and convincing argument, and so much educational good sense. We hope
that President Eliot has been reading this over very carefully himself.
He has been so long an autocrat in his own particular microcosm as
apparently to make him somewhat careless when he addresses a larger
public. In this case he has certainly been evolving argumentative
material out of his inner consciousness, in the spirit of the person
who first said _tant pis pour les faits_; and it is just as well that
for once in a way he should have been brought up with a good round
turn. As the information would probably never reach him from Harvard
sources, we may gently convey to him the information that throughout
the entire country professional educators, and men and women of
cultivation generally, are immensely amused at the cleverness with
which his alleged facts and his iridescent theories have been turned
into a joke.”
[435] This paper has been published separately with the title _The
Courses leading to the Baccalaureate in Harvard and Boston Colleges_.
[436] See _Nature_, London 1878, vol. XVII, p. 370.
[437] Bibliography in Sommervogel’s _Bibliothèque_, vol. VII, columns
993-1031. Biography and criticism of Secchi’s greater works, by Moigno,
_Vie de Père Secchi_, Paris, 1879.--Pohle, _P. Angelo Secchi_, Cologne,
1883.
[438] Father Hagen’s _Synopsis_ has been called a “splendid
contribution to the history and progress of mathematics,” _Nature_,
London, June 7, 1894; “a colossal enterprise,” _Revue Bibliographique
Belge_, Sept. 30, 1891; “a really grand work,” Professor Cantor, in
_Zeitschrift für Mathematik und Physik_ (_hist.-lit. Abth._), XXXVII,
4, p. 151. “One must be astonished how one man can master such an
amount of learning,” _Zeitschrift für math. und naturw. Unterricht_,
XXVII, p. 43. The _American Annals of Mathematics_ (1893, vol. VII,
No. 3) call it a “monumental work” and say: “A more useful labor
than this in the present condition of mathematical literature can
hardly be imagined; moreover, it calls for all but the very highest,
that is creative mathematical power; in particular, for immense
erudition; an unerring logical instinct ..., but above all for untiring
industry, etc.”--Father Hagen’s _Atlas Stellarum Variabilium_ was
also highly praised, v. g. in the _Bulletin Astronomique_, 1900;
in the _Vierteljahrsschrift_, XXXV; in the Leipzig _Litterarische
Centralblatt_, 1900, No. 4, and 1902, No. 26.
[439] See the encomiums bestowed on him by Protestant writers in the
_English Mechanic_ (Jan. 25, 1890); _Nature_, vol. XXXXI, pp. 279-280.
_The Observatory, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society_,
vol. L, n. 4.
[440] From a letter of Father Algué, _Woodstock Letters_, 1899, pp.
213-225.
[441] _A Collection of Geographical, Statistical, Chronological, and
Scientific Data relating to the Philippine Isles, either collected from
former works, or obtained by the personal observation and study of some
Fathers of the Society of Jesus_. Printed at the Government Press,
Washington, D. C., 1900.
[442] The best recommendation for this work is the fact that the French
Ministry of Marine had it immediately translated into French. In 1900
there appeared an English and a German work (Bremen and Shanghai) on
the same subject, “based on that of J. Algué,” as the preface has it.
But as the name of the author is given that of Professor Bergholz. Now
this work--it sounds almost incredible--is nothing but an abridged
translation of Father Algué’s work. This has quite recently been
pointed out by Professor Nippoldt of the Magnetical Observatory of
Potsdam, in _Petermann’s Mittheilungen_, September 1902. (_Kölnische
Volkszeitung_, Wochenausgabe, Oct. 23, 1902, p. 3.) This is evidently a
proof of what we said above, p. 154, note 307.
[443] _Kölnische Volkszeitung_ (Wochen-Ausgabe), January 2, 1902.
[444] Budde, _Allgemeine Mechanik_, vol. II, p. 496. (Berlin, 1892.)
[445] _Himmel und Erde_, Berlin, June 1898.
[446] See, v. g., _Nature_, London 1901, Dec. 12, p. 136; and Professor
Wheeler of Texas University in the _American Naturalist_, 1901, vol.
XXXV, 414-418.
[447] _Canadian Entomologist_, January 1895, p. 23.
[448] See Oppert in _Le Télégraphe_, Nov. 27, 1887.--Dr. Bezold in
_Wiener Zeitschrift für Kunde des Morgenlandes_, vol. II, p. 78.--Hugo
Winkler in the _Berliner philosophische Wochenschrift_, 1888, p. 851.
[449] _Geschichte der Weltliteratur_. Up to 1900 four volumes were
out: 1) _Literature of Western Asia and the Countries of the Nile_. 2)
_Literature of India and Eastern Asia_ (China and Japan). 3) _Greek
and Latin Literature of Classical Antiquity._ 4) _Latin and Greek
Literature of Christian Nations._ The coming volumes will treat of the
Literature of Italy, Spain, Portugal, France, Poland, Russia, Holland,
Sweden, Norway, Iceland, England, Germany.
[450] See some other criticisms of leading Protestant papers in _The
Review_, St. Louis, June 6, 1901: “Protestant Criticism of a Recent
Catholic Work.”
[451] _Geschichte Roms und der Päpste_, “a publication of the very
first rank, as indispensable as the work of Gregorovius.” (_Allgemeine
Zeitung_, Munich 1899, No. 45.)--_Neue Preussische Zeitung_, Berlin
1900, No. 608.
[452] See above p. 161.
[453] Cathrein, _Moralphilosophie_, 2 vols.--_Socialism_. The English
translation of the latter work is by Father James Conway, S. J.
Cathrein’s works are highly praised by Cossa-Dyer, _Political Economy_,
London, 1893, where it is said that “they cannot easily be valued too
highly.”
[454] Bardenhewer, _Patrologie_ (1901), p. 474.