The apostolic office of feeding the Lord's flock, conferred by the Lord

Christ on the most blessed apostle Peter and his successor the Roman

pontiff, no state of time or place, no regard of human affairs, in short,

no consideration whatever, can so circumscribe or suspend as that the same

Roman pontiff may not direct his care to all the duties of the said office,

without exception or omission, and provide for all the wants which may

occur in the church. Among those duties it is not the least to {341} give

protection to the regular orders approved by the apostolic see, and to

those worthy and pious men, who have, by a solemn vow, devoted themselves

to the regular orders, strenuously labouring for the defence and increase

of the catholic religion, and in cultivating the Lord's vineyard, to

invigorate and encourage, to animate and confirm the languid and weak, to

console the downcast and afflicted, but chiefly to remove from the church,

entrusted to his faith and custody, all scandals, which from time to time

spring up to the destruction of souls.

The institute of the society of Jesus, composed by a man held in honour by

the universal church, which sanctifies holy men, has, by our predecessors

of happy memory Paul III and Julius III, Paul IV, Gregory XIII and Gregory

XIV, and Paul V, been diligently examined, approved, and often confirmed,

and by them and nineteen others of our predecessors honoured with peculiar

favours; has been publicly extolled by bishops, not only of this age but

former ones, as extremely efficient in promoting the worship, honour, and

glory of God, and eminently adapted to the salvation of souls; and has been

patronised by the most powerful and pious kings, and most celebrated

princes in the Christian republic: from its discipline nine persons have

been numbered among the saints, three of whom obtained the glory of

martyrdom; it has received the united praises of many men renowned for

sanctity, now enjoying eternal glory in heaven; the church has cherished it

in her bosom for the long space of two centuries, and has ever committed

the chief part of the sacred ministry to its professors, with great gain of

souls; finally, it was pronounced pious by the catholic church herself in

the council of Trent: yet there have lately {342} appeared some, who, by

wicked interpretations, have dared, not only in conversation but in

writings and publications, to call this very institute irreligious and

impious, to revile it, and represent it as wicked and shameful; and have

gone such lengths, that, not content with their own private thoughts, they

have endeavoured, using every art, to convey the like poison from country

to country, and to pour it out everywhere; nor have they yet ceased,

where-ever they can find any of the faithful off their guard, to instil

craftily their own notions into their minds; than which there can be

nothing more injurious, nothing more offensive to the church of God, as if

she had so shamefully erred, as solemnly to deem what is impious and

irreligious devout and acceptable to God, and had been the more

scandalously imposed upon for having so long, namely, for more than two

hundred years, with the greatest loss of souls, suffered such a stain to

remain in her bosom. Neither justice, which commands that all should

receive what belongs to them and be protected in their rights, nor my

pastoral solicitude for the church, can suffer any farther delay in putting

a stop to this so great evil, which shoots its roots the deeper the longer

it remains unnoticed.

In order, therefore, that we may remove so serious an injury from the

espoused church divinely committed to our charge, and also from this

apostolic see; and that, by our apostolic authority, we may check such

unjust and impious assertions, spread far and wide to the seduction and

ruin of souls, and entirely regardless of equity and reason; that the

constitution of the regular clerks of the society of Jesus may remain

undisturbed, according to their appeal to us for justice, and be more

firmly established by the same our authority, and that we may afford {343}

them consolation in the present grievous state of their affairs; and,

lastly, that we may comply with the just desires of our venerable brothers

the bishops, who, from every part of the catholic world, have written to us

letters greatly extolling the said society, all declaring that they were of

the greatest use to them in their respective dioceses; of our own accord

and certain knowledge, and by the plenitude of the apostolic power,

following the footsteps of all our predecessors, in this our constitution

to be in perpetual force, in the same mode and form in which they have

proclaimed and declared we also proclaim and declare, that the institute of

the society of Jesus is replete with piety and holiness, as well on account

of the chief end it has in view, namely, the defence and propagation of the

catholic religion, as on account of the means which it directs to be used

for that end, hitherto confirmed to us by experience itself; for we know

that, even down to these times, its discipline has produced many defenders

of the orthodox faith, and pious preachers, who, with unshaken constancy of

mind, have encountered dangers by sea and by land to bear the light of the

gospel to barbarous nations; and, indeed, those who profess the said

laudable institute are always earnestly employed, some in educating youth

in the practice of religion and the learned sciences, others in the

direction of spiritual exercises, others again in the assiduous

administration of the sacraments, especially those of penance and the

eucharist, in exciting the faithful to a frequent use of them; likewise in

refreshing the inhabitants of country places with the divine food of the

word of God: and as it evidently appears, that the said institute of the

society of Jesus has been established by the Divine Providence {344} for

these great ends, we also approve it, and, in virtue of our apostolical

authority, we confirm the approbation of our predecessors bestowed on the

said institute: we declare, that the vows by which the said regular clerks

of the society of Jesus devote themselves, according to the said institute,

to God, are acceptable and pleasing to him: we approve in the highest

degree of the spiritual exercises, which the regulars of this society

recommend to the use of the faithful, who occasionally retire from the

noise of the world to meditate in serious solitude on the means of

obtaining eternal salvation, as being highly conducive to the reformation

of manners, and to the establishing and nourishing of Christian piety: we

likewise approve of their congregations or associations; and not only of

those for the use of youth, who attend the schools of the society of Jesus,

but also of all other congregations, whether established for scholars only,

or for others of the faithful in Christ, of either or both at once,

dedicated to the blessed Mary, under whatever title they are formed, in

which pious works are fervently practised, especially that particular

devotion towards the blessed Virgin, which these institutions nourish and

promote; and we, in virtue of our apostolical authority, confirm the

constitutions of our predecessors of happy memory, Gregory XIII, Sextus V,

Gregory XV, and Benedict XIV, by which they approved of these associations,

together with all other constitutions enacted by our predecessors the Roman

pontiffs, in approbation of the offices of the said institute, each one of

which we wish to be considered as here inserted and confirmed by the

strength of our apostolic authority transmitted to us by God, as well as

effectually protected by this our constitution; and, if it be necessary,

{345} we desire and order, that they may be considered as fresh

constitutions, enacted and promulged by us in due form.

It is not, therefore, allowable for any person to infringe, upon any

account, this decree of our approbation and confirmation, or rashly to

attempt to oppose its authority: and, if any one should be so presumptuous

as to attempt it, be it known to him, that he will incur the indignation of

Almighty God, and of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul.

Given at Rome, at St. Mary the Greater, &c. &c.

* * * * *

{346}

No. II.

_The Judgment of the Bishops of France, concerning the Doctrine, the

Government, the Conduct, and Usefulness of the French Jesuits._

MOST GRACIOUS SOVEREIGN,

The noble sentiments of faith and religion, which have ever distinguished

our kings, have induced your majesty, after the example of your august

predecessors, to suspend the decision of an affair so closely connected

with the doctrine and discipline of the church, till you had taken the

advice of the bishops of your realm.

As the time your majesty was pleased to allow us for examining the points

in question was very short, we applied ourselves to the task with more than

ordinary diligence and assiduity; it being one of our chief duties to

concur with your majesty's pious views in whatever it may please you to

propose for the good of religion, or for the maintaining of good order and

tranquillity in the kingdom. We have therefore examined, with all the care

which the importance of the subject required, the different articles,

concerning which your majesty has done us the honour to consult us, and we

think it our duty to communicate our sentiments in the following manner:--

{347}

ARTICLE I. "Of what use the Jesuits may be in France: the advantages or

inconveniences that may attend the various functions, which they exercise

under our authority."

The end for which the Jesuits' order was first instituted being the

education of youth; the ministerial labours, catechising, preaching, and

administring the sacraments; the propagation of the Gospel; the conversion

of infidel nations; and the gratuitous exercise of all manner of works of

charity towards their neighbour; it is evident this institution is

calculated both for the good of religion and the advantage of the state.

This consideration induced pope Paul III to approve the new order by the

bull _Regimini_, 1540; and the popes, his successors, by long experience,

being sensible of the great advancement of religion, owing chiefly to the

labours of the Jesuits, favoured them with the most distinguishing marks of

their good-will and protection. The fathers of the council of Trent call it

a holy institution, and, by an extraordinary privilege, dispense with the

religious of this society in the general law they had made for other orders

concerning their vows. The great promoter of piety and church discipline,

St. Charles Borromoeus, took care to inform the fathers of that council how

much he esteemed this order, and how desirous the pope was to favour those

religious, on account of the visible advantages arising to the church from

their zealous endeavours. The ambassadors sent by other princes to

represent them in that council had the same favourable opinion of the

Jesuits, as plainly appears from their proposing the establishment of these

religious in Germany, as the most efficacious means to restore religion and

piety in the empire. {348}

However, it cannot be denied, but the novelty and singularity of this

order, the many privileges granted them by the popes, and the great extent

and generality of the exercises in which they are conversant, according to

their calling, exposed them to the jealousy and opposition of other

religious orders. The universities, the mendicant orders, and others, tried

all means to hinder their establishment in France: your majesty's

parliaments, in their remonstrances, laid open the many inconveniences,

that might attend their being admitted into this kingdom: Eustace de

Bellay, the then bishop of Paris, opposed them, and even the clergy of

France, in their assembly at Poissy, anno 1561, expressed a diffidence and

apprehension, that the Jesuits might encroach upon their rights; for,

though they consented to their admission, they did it with such

restrictions and limitations as then seemed proper to secure the rights and

jurisdiction of the bishops.

Anno 1574, the clergy of your kingdom, having been apprised of the credit

and the approbation this institution had gained in the council of Trent, in

conformity to the judgment of that general assembly, declare by their

deputies, upon the article concerning the profession of novices after one

year's probation, that, by _this rule, their intention was not any way to

derogate from or to make any change in the good constitutions of the clerks

of the society of Jesus, approved by the holy apostolic see_.

It appears even, that the Jesuits, by their behaviour, had got the better

of those prejudices, which had formerly been conceived against their order,

seeing that, in the year 1610, when so great a storm was raised against

them, Henry de Gondy, bishop of Paris, gives their {349} character in words

very different from those of his predecessor, Eustace de Bellay, _viz._

that _the order of the Jesuits was greatly serviceable both to church and

state, on account of their learning, piety, and exemplary behaviour_.

Hence it was, that, in the general assembly of the states, anno 1614 and

1615, both the clergy and the nobility so pressingly desired the

re-establishment of the Jesuits, for the instruction of youth, in the city

of Paris, and the erection of other colleges in the different towns of the

kingdom: this they recommended to their deputies as a matter of the

greatest concernment, desiring they would most earnestly address his

majesty, in order to obtain a favourable and speedy answer; _the assembly

being sensible how greatly the order of the Jesuits, by their learning and

industry, had contributed, and, with God's assistance, would again

contribute towards the maintaining of faith and religion, the extirpation

of heresies, the restoration of piety and morality_, &c. Again, in the

assembly of the clergy, anno 1617, we find the Jesuits' schools proposed as

the most proper means to revive and imprint piety and religion in the minds

of the people.

Nothing, perhaps, is better calculated to convince us how high an idea your

majesty's royal predecessors had of the usefulness of this body of men,

than the patents, which they were pleased to grant, for the erecting many

of their colleges in your dominions: this was particularly remarkable in

the letters patent, granted by your majesty's great grandfather Louis XIV,

of glorious memory, for their establishment in the college of Clermont,

wherein he says, _that in this he had no other view than to_ {350}

_support, countenance, and encourage those religious in their laborious

employments for the education of youth in all useful sciences, and

particularly in the knowledge of whatever may concern their duty towards

God, and towards those who are placed over them for the government of the

people_. But this he afterwards expressed in a more emphatic manner, when

he was pleased to give his own august name to that college.

The Jesuits are also of great service in our dioceses, by enforcing and

giving new life and vigour to piety and religion, by their sermons, their

spiritual instructions, their missionary excursions, their congregations,

spiritual retreats, &c., performed with our approbation and authority.

For these reasons we are persuaded, that to deprive the people of their

instruction would be extremely prejudicial to our dioceses. And, in

particular with regard to the education and instruction of youth, it would

be a very difficult task to find persons capable of serving the public to

equal advantage, especially in the country towns, where there are no

universities.

The religious of other orders, who, by their vows and state of life, are

not devoted to this kind of labour, as they are little conversant in the

method of teaching, and strangers to that disagreeable confinement and

subjection, which is inseparable from that employment, are too much taken

up with the other necessary observances of their order to give that

constant and due attendance, which is requisite for the education of youth.

As to other clerks regular and priests living in community, they have not a

sufficient number of persons to supply the place of the Jesuits. The

secular clergy, {351} indeed, with the allowance of the bishop, may

undertake this employment: but, not having been brought up to it from their

youth, they would not much relish this kind of life, nor have they equal

experience or skill in the business. Add to this, that, as most of our

dioceses have not near a sufficient number of priests to answer all the

duties of the ministry, it would not be possible for us to fill up the

places that would become vacant by the removal of the Jesuits.

Shall we then have recourse to the laity? alas! few of these are to be

found of that turn of mind as willingly to embrace so laborious and

disagreeable an employment as is that of teaching; fewer still, whose

talents and qualifications are equal to it.

The Jesuits in France are possessed of a hundred colleges: if these were

removed, where could we find a sufficient number of schoolmasters and

professors of equal parts to fill up the vacancies in all these colleges?

As the Jesuits make up one community and incorporated body of men, they

have this peculiar advantage, that, amongst all the religious, whom they

train up to this exercise, they can make choice of such as are most likely

to succeed and to answer the expectation of the public; and, if any one

should misbehave, in a moment's warning they can provide another in his

room; an advantage not to be expected in religious orders that are not so

strictly addicted to this employment; nor amongst persons, who, though

otherwise duly qualified, still want numbers for the business; much less

amongst laymen, who, by their state of life, are free to choose for

themselves, and no way concerned about their successors.

Adhering, therefore, to the judgment of the vicars of {352} Christ and of

the council of Trent concerning the society of Jesus, and in conformity to

the testimony, which the clergy of your majesty's kingdom, the kings your

august predecessors, and your whole kingdom, have given of the usefulness

of the Jesuits in France, we are persuaded, that, if due care be taken to

prevent any abuse, that may insinuate itself in the exercise of their

functions, this religious body cannot but be of very great service both to

church and state.

In our examination of the third article, we shall have the honour to

present your majesty with some regulations, which we conceive to be the

best adapted for preventing all such abuses.

ARTICLE II. "How the Jesuits behave in their instructions and in their own

conduct, with regard to certain opinions which strike at the safety of the

king's person; as likewise with regard to the received doctrine of the

clergy of France, contained in the declaration of the year 1682; and in

general with regard to their opinions on the other side of the Alps."

Our history informs us, that, in the infancy of the society in France, the

Calvinists used their utmost endeavour to hinder the growth of a body of

men raised on purpose to oppose their errors, and to stop the spreading

contagion: to this end they dispersed into all parts a multitude of

pamphlets, in which the Jesuits were arraigned, as professing a doctrine

inconsistent with the safety of his majesty's sacred person; being well

assured, that the imputation of so atrocious a crime was the shortest and

securest way to bring about their ruin. These libels soon raised a

prejudice against the Jesuits in {353} the minds of all those, who had any

interest in opposing their establishment in France, and some communities

even joined in the impeachment. The crimes, which are now laid to their

charge, in the numberless writings, that swarm in all parts of your

majesty's dominions, are no other than those which were maliciously forged

and published above one hundred and fifty years ago. It is not from such

libels as these, that we are to form a just idea or rational judgment of

the Jesuits' doctrine or behaviour: such wild and groundless accusations

did not deserve our attention, and the little notice we took of them may be

a convincing proof to your majesty of the Jesuits' innocence.

And, indeed, the inviolable fidelity of the bishops of your kingdom, and

their sincere attachment to the crown, is too well known to leave any room

for suspecting, that they could be either so blinded as not to discover

that, which, as is pretended, is visible to the whole world; or, if they

had perceived it, that they should so far have forgot their duty to God, to

religion, to your majesty, as to encourage such treasonable doctrine by a

criminal silence, and trust the most sacred functions of the ministry to

persons convicted of publicly professing the same.

We will not here pretend to refute or to give an exact account of a

doctrine, which will not bear the light, and can no way be exposed to the

public without danger of infection; of which we may truly say, what St.

Paul said of a certain vice, "that its very name should never be heard

amongst Christians." And it is with the greatest grief we see all the

particulars of this damnable doctrine publicly explained in the French

tongue, and purposely {354} dispersed in all parts of your kingdom in an

infinity of libels, the reading of which has done more prejudice to your

majesty's subjects than could possibly have been caused by reading the

fanatic authors themselves, who have treated of that subject. We shall only

observe, that, in order to render the Jesuits more odious to the public,

care has been taken to hold them forth as the first broachers of a

doctrine, that was published long before they had a being. Their enemies

have spared no pains to confound and perplex all our ideas concerning this

doctrine, jumbling together, at all events, right or wrong, truth and

falsehood, in order to bring the Jesuits in guilty: they are ever urging

against them a certain period of our history, which, as it equally involves

all states and conditions[121], ought to be blotted out of our annals, and

never more be mentioned amongst us.

Whatever may be objected against the foreign Jesuits Mariana, Santarel,

Suarez, and Busembaum, this is most certain, that the decree of their

general, Acquaviva, appeared so satisfactory to your parliament of Paris,

that, in the year 1614, they desired to have the same renewed; and it is

well known, that, when those books first appeared in France, the Jesuits,

in their declarations to the parliaments, disowned them in so clear,

precise, and express terms, as did honour to their body, and gained them

the applause of the whole nation. Lastly, their behaviour in the year 1682,

and the declarations, which they have lately made to us, and which they

desire to have registered at the respective offices in our spiritual

courts, as a lasting and authentic testimony of their loyalty and fidelity,

leave no room to doubt of their abhorrence and detestation of {355} any

doctrine or opinion that may in any wise intrench upon the safety of the

sacred person of sovereigns; or of their entire acquiescence to the maxims

established by the clergy of your kingdom, in the four articles of 1682.

We must likewise observe to your majesty, that the instructions of the

Jesuits in our dioceses are all performed in public; innumerable persons,

of all conditions, are witnesses of what they teach; and we have the honour

to assure your majesty, that they never were accused at our tribunals of

teaching any such doctrine as is now imputed to them. Let us inquire of

those, who have been brought up in their colleges, who have frequented

their missions, their congregations, their retreats, we are persuaded there

is not a man in the nation, who can attest, that he ever heard them teach a

doctrine contrary to the safety of your majesty's person, or to the

received maxims of the kingdom. On the contrary, in justice to their

character, we must all confess, that the constant theme and subject of

their school exercises is to celebrate the memorable deeds and heroic

actions of our monarchs, and their whole study to impress in their hearers

the most dutiful sentiments of loyalty and respect towards your majesty.

ARTICLE III. "The conduct of the Jesuits with regard to their subordination

to bishops; and whether, in the exercise of their functions, they do not

encroach on the pastoral rights and privileges."

It cannot be denied but that, if the Jesuits were to avail themselves of

the many and great privileges which, at different times, have been granted

to them by the see apostolic, they could not be said to live subordinate,

either to bishops or to their ecclesiastical superiors. But {356} we are to

observe, that these privileges were granted them by a communication and

participation of such as had been granted to the mendicant orders, and to

the other religious, long before they came into the world; and, with regard

to these, we find a decree in the _explanation of their rule_ (art. xii, p.

447), that they are to make use of their privileges with the greatest

caution and moderation, and with no other view than for the spiritual

advantage of their neighbour; for, being bound by their fourth vow,

immediately upon the first notice of his holiness's command, to embark, in

order to preach the Gospel to the most remote and barbarous nations, these

privileges become absolutely necessary in places where neither bishops nor

other pastors are to be found. We may also take notice, both with regard to

the bull of Paul III, and those of his successors, that there is a wide

difference between their approbation of the first plan of the institute, or

of the additions that were afterwards made for the perfecting of the same,

and the _privileges_ granted to that society, which are merely accessory to

the institute; for these bulls, being written in the ordinary style of the

court of Rome, the dispositions made by them cannot be brought into

precedent, or have any other force than that which is allowed them by the

pope's decretals and the laws of the kingdom, both which have long since

declared, that privileges granted by the court of Rome, contrary to the

jurisdiction of bishops, or derogatory to the due subordination of the

faithful to their pastors, are of no effect without their consent, and, if

they any way concern the state, without the approbation of the sovereign.

However, we find, even to the year 1670, that the Jesuits, as well as the

other mendicant orders, used their {357} best endeavours to maintain these

privileges, against the common law and the jurisdiction of bishops, on

pretence, that the discipline of the council of Trent, which had abolished

them, was not received in France. We read in the acts of our bishopricks,

that attempts to this purpose were made by the Jesuits at Quimper, at Agen,

at Sens, and at Rhodez, where, in conjunction with the mendicant orders,

they carried on their suits at law for a long time against the bishops of

those dioceses.

But since that time the Jesuits are not known to have formed any such

pretensions; on the contrary, they have renounced all those privileges,

which may any way seem to intrench, either on the established maxims of the

kingdom, or on the liberties of the Gallican church; and, as they still

persist in that renunciation, and have expressed the same, in the clearest

terms, in the declaration, which they lately presented to us, nothing more

can reasonably be demanded of them with regard to this article.

But to prevent any abuse, that possibly may hereafter arise, and to keep

religious orders in due subjection and subordination to their ordinaries,

after having examined, with all diligence, the complaints that at different

times have been made by the bishops, concerning the attempts of the

Jesuits, and of other religious, contrary to the rights of pastors and the

episcopal jurisdiction, we have agreed on the following regulations,

grounded on the canon law and the discipline of the Gallican church.

1. That the Jesuits and all other religious, who pretend to be exempted

from the jurisdiction of their bishops, and to hold an immediate dependence

on the see apostolic, shall not be allowed to preach or confess in our

dioceses, {358} without having been examined by the bishop, or his vicars,

or others, whom he may appoint for that purpose, and without being approved

by him; which approbation he may limit or revoke, as he shall think fit.

2. That they shall not be permitted to receive children to their first

communion, though they be their own scholars, without the consent of the

curate or bishop of the diocese; and, during the fifteen days of Easter,

they shall not hear any annual confessions without their permission.

3. That they shall send all their penitents, even their own scholars and

pensioners, to receive the paschal communion in the parish church, unless

they have a dispensation from the curate or bishop.

4. That they shall not confess any person that is in danger of death

without advertising the curate thereof.

5. That in the missionary excursions, which they make with our consent,

they shall take care that the curates be not defrauded of their dues.

6. That they shall not admit any priest, whether secular or regular, though

otherwise approved, to assist them in the labour of their missions, without

the express consent of the bishop.

7. In their lessons of divinity, whether public or private, they shall

teach the four propositions of the French clergy, assembled 1682; and, as

often as the bishop of the diocese or the archbishop shall require it, they

shall be bound to let them see their books or lectures of philosophy, or of

moral or scholastic divinity, which they make use of in their seminaries or

other houses where they teach, either in public or private.

8. They shall not publicly defend any theses, {359} without having them

first examined and approved by the bishop.

9. Whenever it shall seem good to the bishop, he shall be allowed to see

and examine the books they make use of for the instruction of their own

colleges or other houses.

10. In teaching the rudiments of the Christian religion, they shall use the

catechism of the diocese where they live. In one word, the bishops shall

have full inspection and superintendence over all their instructions,

whether public or private.

11. They shall not gather any congregation, or set on foot any

confraternity or retreat, without the consent of the bishop, who is to

judge whether the faithful may not thereby be hindered from duly

frequenting their parish churches, a thing so earnestly recommended by the

sacred canons.

12. These congregations shall never be allowed to meet at the hours when

the office or divine service is performed in the parish church; and the

bishop shall regulate these meetings as he shall judge most expedient for

the advancement of piety and religion in his diocese; and, when he shall

think fit, may repeal any such licence before granted.

13. They shall not be allowed to publish any indulgence without having it

first examined and approved by the bishop. By all which we do not intend

any way to derogate from any other rights, which the French clergy may have

over the Jesuits or other regulars.

14. In the exercise of the different duties of their calling they shall not

encroach upon the rights of chapters, curates, universities, or any body of

men, who are permitted to teach in this kingdom. {360}

We are sensible of the great advantages that must attend the due execution

of these regulations, for the maintaining of true faith and morality, for

preserving the liberties of the Gallican church, and securing to bishops,

chapters, universities, and to all orders of men, the invaluable possession

of their rights and privileges; for which reason we humbly implore your

majesty's authority and protection, which alone can give them due sanction

and stability, to the end that all your subjects may teach one and the same

doctrine, and, by a due subordination of all the parts, may contribute to

the good order, peace, and well being both of church and state.

ARTICLE IV. "Whether it may not be convenient to moderate and set bounds to

the authority which the general of the Jesuits exercises in France."

We have examined the Jesuits' institute with the greatest care and

attention, as to what concerns the authority of the general, or the

obligation of obedience in the subjects; and have the honour to assure your

majesty, that we have found these as much limited and restrained by the

Jesuits' rule as by that of any other order. For instance; parte vi,

Declarat Constitut. tom. i, p. 408, it is said, _Let our obedience be

always most perfect, as well in the execution as in our will and judgment,

performing all that is commanded with the greatest alacrity, spiritual joy,

and perseverance; persuading ourselves, that all is right which is

commanded; denying and rejecting, by_ a kind of blind obedience, _any

private judgment or opinion of our own to the contrary. And thus we are to

behave with regard to whatever our superior may command, when_ {361} _it

does not appear to be any way sinful, as has been elsewhere observed by

us._

Hence it plainly appears, that the Jesuits are never bound to obey their

general's orders, when, by obeying him, they would be found guilty of the

least sin at God's tribunal. We find, that most other religious orders,

according to the stile of their rule, profess obedience to all their

superiors' commands, which are not repugnant to faith or morality. But what

danger can be apprehended, either to the church or state, from that

obedience, which is not sinful on any account, which is neither prejudicial

to religion nor hurtful to the rights or properties of any of your

majesty's subjects? We may add, that this rule of obedience doth not

particularly concern the general, but equally regards all other subordinate

superiors, who, by virtue of their subjects' vow, have equal claim to their

obedience: whence it also appears, that St. Ignatius did not think fit to

vest the general with any other authority over the whole society than that

which the superior of every religious community ought to have over his

subjects.

Those expressions, _that they are to abandon themselves to the disposition

of their superior, as if they were a dead body_, &c. cannot give offence to

any but such as are strangers to the language of the ascetick writers, and

who are not able to form an idea of any perfection or Christian

accomplishment, that doth not suit with their own state and condition. We

should never end were we to lay before your majesty what we find in the

fathers and masters of a spiritual life, or in the rules of other religious

orders, concerning this article of obedience; it may suffice to observe,

that they all make use of the {362} like or even harder expressions; all

propose the same examples and comparisons, or others to the same purpose.

But, after all, it is evident, by the fundamental law and constitution of

the society, that a general congregation has a far greater power and

authority over the general than he can pretend to over the society. The

same general assembly, or representative body of the order, which creates

him general, names also and appoints his assistants, who have a watchful

eye upon his behaviour, and, when they observe any great fault in his

conduct, or defect in his administration, are bound by oath to inform

against him, and to denounce him to the society; and if the case be

notorious and scandalous, or if there be danger in delay, the provincials

or superiors of provinces may convene themselves without waiting for the

summons or writs[122] from the assistants, and immediately proceed to the

arraignment, trial, and deposition of the general[123], {363} whom also, if

they judge it necessary, they may dismiss and eject out of the society.

There is not, perhaps, to be found a general of any other religious body,

who has so absolute and perpetual a dependence on his order; it being well

known, that the general of the Jesuits has not power to dispose of the

least thing in his own behalf or to his private advantage, nor can so much

as command any other diet or apparel, than that which is assigned him by

the society[124].

It is true, indeed, that the general alone can dispose of all the places

and employments of the order, but this he cannot do without taking the

advice of his counsel[125]; and nothing, perhaps, discovers the wisdom of

St. Ignatius more than his having left all places of trust in his order to

the free disposal of the general, by which means he has secured the

subjects from that partiality and injustice which might be apprehended from

their immediate and subaltern superiors, who, by the intercession and

solicitation of friends, relations, or benefactors, are too often prevailed

upon to prefer persons of little merit to others more deserving. He has

effectually banished from his order all intrigues and cabals for the

gaining of preferment, evils which are not easily guarded against, and are

{364} often the cause of fatal divisions in communities, of scandalous

law-suits, of jealousies, hatred, and the entire subversion of union,

charity, and the primitive spirit of the order. St. Ignatius has, with

great judgment, provided against this disorder, and secured the peace and

regularity of the whole body, by stripping all the places of preferment in

this society of those temporal advantages, which are commonly annexed to

them in other orders, whence the most ambitious person amongst them will

hardly think it worth his while to make interest for a place, which carries

with it no natural allurement of ease or convenience, and has little else

but the empty name of superiority to recommend it.

In an order, that was to be wholly devoted to the service of the public, it

was necessary, that such a plan of government should be established as

should leave no room for subjects to doubt, but that all the places and

employments were given to persons the most deserving, and, according to the

best rules of human prudence, the most capable of filling them to

advantage. This assurance frees them from all anxiety and solicitude

concerning the dispositions of superiors, either with regard to themselves

or others, and they have no other concern but to comply faithfully with the

duties of their institute, to perfect themselves and benefit their

neighbour in that employment, which is assigned them by their superior,

whose orders and appointment they respectfully embrace as the disposition

of Divine Providence.

With regard to the authority of the general over the temporalities of the

order, we find[126], that he has power {365} to make all kinds of contracts

in behalf of the colleges and houses of the society, though he is not

allowed to convert any thing to his own private use or advantage[127]. He

cannot transfer the revenues of one college to another, nor assign any part

of them for the maintenance of _Profest Houses_[128], which are not to have

any rents, but are entirely to subsist upon charity. The donations, which

are made to the body, without being assigned to any determinate use, are at

the general's disposal[129], who may sell them, and annex them to any

house, as he shall judge most expedient for promoting God' honour and the

good {366} of religion; but with this caution, that, when such donations

are made by persons who enter into the society, they be not alienated from

the province[130], unless, perhaps, the great distress of some house in

another province should call for immediate relief. And, with regard to

places that are subject to the dominion of different princes, the general

is not allowed to make any such translation of property from one territory

to another, without their consent[131], but he can never appropriate to his

own use, or make over to his relations, any part of that which is given to

the society, without incurring certain danger of being deposed from his

office[132]. Hence it is plain, that the {367} general is no more than a

kind of steward and administrator of the goods and possessions belonging to

the society, the property whereof is wholly vested in the colleges and

other houses.

It doth not appear to us, that this manner of administration can be any way

prejudical to the colleges of the order; neither can it with reason give

umbrage to the state, or cause any distrust in the government, their

general having no power to dispose of the possessions belonging to the

colleges in your majesty's dominions, contrary to the laws and established

customs of your kingdom; nor can it be supposed, that such an attempt would

ever escape the vigilance of our magistrates, the faithful depositaries of

your majesty's authority.

But it may appear dangerous to some, that so many thousands of your

majesty's subjects should have a dependence upon one man, and be engaged to

a foreigner by motives of conscience and inclination; and it may seem,

that, in times of trouble and intestine divisions, the danger is still more

to be apprehended. In answer to this objection we beg leave to observe,

that, in your majesty's dominions, there are other religious orders far

more numerous than the Jesuits, and who, by their vow of obedience, have no

less dependence on their foreign generals; whence it is highly

unreasonable, that the Jesuits should be marked out as the only object of

our fears and jealousies on that account: to say the truth, there is no

society or body of men in the nation, who may not give trouble to the

state, and some cause of fear, {368} should they deviate from their duty,

or forget the obedience due to their lawful superiors. Are we then

immediately to suppress all these most serviceable corporations, and

deprive ourselves of that which is a real good and advantage to the whole

kingdom, for the apprehension of a remote and imaginary evil? The Jesuits

certainly are not less bound by your majesty's laws than the rest of your

subjects; and, if from things past we may be allowed to form a judgment of

their future behaviour, we have little or no reason to fear any disturbance

from that quarter. It is well known, that, in the year 1681, during our

disputes with Rome concerning benefices, the pope's briefs were conveyed

into the hands of the Jesuits in France, with express orders, both from his

holiness and from their general, to disperse them immediately about the

kingdom; but they, without much deliberation, on the 20th of June, produced

the packet in open court, and, by their candid behaviour in that critical

conjuncture, deserved that remarkable compliment from the first president,

M. de Novion, _that it was lucky those papers had fallen into the hands of

persons of their prudence and discretion: that they had too good heads to

be imposed upon, and hearts too loyal to be corrupted_[133]. We are also

assured by the general advocate, Talon, _that no one could reasonably tax

the Jesuits, whose behaviour on that occasion was fully justified by the

bitter reproach and severe reprimand they afterwards underwent, both from

the pope and their own general_[134]. This one short passage of our history

may convince us, {369} more effectually than all the reasonings in the

world, that the Jesuits, according to their rules, do not profess any other

obedience to their general than is consistent with their duty towards their

king and country.

We are moreover convinced, that this obedience of the Jesuits to their

general, as prescribed by their rule, and their fourth vow, by which they

cannot be fully bound to the order till they have attained the age of

thirty-three, are the two essential principles, and, as it were, the

foundation stones, on which the whole edifice of their constitution is

raised: these cannot be changed without overthrowing the whole building;

neither can any alteration be made in them without forming a new

constitution, very different from that to which the Jesuits have bound

themselves by vow. These two fundamental articles discover to us the

extraordinary wisdom of their founder, who, with great judgment and

forecast, has thus provided against the growth of any dangerous

irregularity in the order, and secured such a constant tenor of government,

as was necessary to qualify the religious subjects for the great duties of

their calling.

It was, doubtless, for these reasons, that the council of Trent so highly

commended and approved of this institute: that the late pope, Benedict XIV,

in the bull _Devotum_, anno 1746, called them most wise laws and

institutions, _ex praescripto sapientissimarum legum et constitutionum_,

&c.: that the clergy of France, anno 1574, stiled them _good and sound

regulations_: lastly, that the great Bossuet assures us, that in this _rule

he discovered numberless strokes of consummate wisdom_[135]. Which {370}

testimonies are greatly confirmed by the example of those other religious

orders, which have sprung up in the church since the first establishment of

the Jesuits, whose founders have framed good part of their rule after the

model of this institute.

All which things considered, we are of opinion, that no alteration can be

made in the Jesuits' rule, with regard to the power and authority of the

general. And your majesty will give us leave to observe, that, if it were

expedient to make such a reform, it would neither be agreeable to the

ecclesiastical law, nor to the avowed practice of all ages, nor in

particular to the discipline of the church of France and the established

maxims of your courts of parliament, to undertake an affair of this nature

without the concurrence and joint consent of his holiness the supreme

pastor of the church, of the bishops of France, and of a general

congregation of the Jesuits: we might add, without the consent of all the

professed Jesuits, as such an alteration in their dependence on their

general would affect the very vitals of the order, and change the whole

constitution.

For these one hundred and fifty years, our history affords one only

instance (of 1681) in which this authority of their general might have been

any way prejudicial to the state; and if, on that occasion, the loyalty of

the French Jesuits underwent a very severe trial, it had no other effect

than to convince the whole kingdom how well they deserved that honourable

testimony of your parliament, that their prudence guarded them against all

surprise, and their loyalty against corruption.

But nothing, perhaps, can be of greater weight in this matter than the

judgment of your majesty's royal {371} predecessor Henry IV, of glorious

memory[136], who, in the midst of all his troubles, when the kingdom was in

the greatest ferment, and he beset by persons, who spared no pains to

instil into his mind the greatest distrust of the Jesuits, desired no other

security for their good behaviour than this alone, that he might have one

of that body ever near his person in quality of preacher to his majesty,

and that a French assistant should be established with the general at Rome.

Your majesty is still possessed of the same security; and, since we are

taught by the experience of a hundred and fifty years, that this is

abundantly sufficient for the purpose, there can be no need of any farther

caution or new regulation; especially as the Jesuits, in the late

declaration, which they had the honour to present your majesty, have

assured us in the most express terms, that, if their general was to require

any thing of them contrary to the laws of your kingdom or to the obedience

and respect due to your majesty, they neither could nor would pay any

regard to such commands; and that their vow of obedience, as it is

explained in their rule, doth no way bind them to such a compliance. This

so peremptory declaration of the Jesuits, and the wise dispositions of the

edict in 1603, leave no room to apprehend any danger from the general's

abusing his authority to the prejudice of your majesty's kingdom. We are,

&c.

The cardinal DE LUYNES.

------------ DE GESVRES.

------------ DE ROHAN.

The archbp. of CAMBRAY.

-------------- REIMS.

-------------- NARBONNE.

{372}

-------------- EMBRUN.

-------------- AUSCH.

-------------- BOURDEAUX.

-------------- *.

-------------- ARLES.

-------------- TOULOUSE.

The bishop of LANGRES.

------------ MANS.

------------ VALENCE.

------------ MACON.

------------ BAYEUX.

------------ AMIENS.

------------ NOYON.

------------ S. PAPOUL.

------------ COMMINGES.

------------ S. MALO.

------------ DIE.

------------ APOLLONIE.

------------ S. PAUL-DE-LEON.

------------ CHARTRES.

------------ RHODEZ.

------------ SARLAT.

------------ ORLEANS.

------------ MEAUX.

------------ ARRAS.

------------ BLOIS.

------------ METZ.

------------ ANGOULEME.

------------ VERDUN.

------------ SENLIS.

------------ ANGERS.

------------ DIGNE.

------------ AUTUN.

------------ VENCE.

------------ EVREUX.

The coadjutor of STRASBOURG.

The bishop of LEICTOURE.

------------ TROYES.

------------ NANTES.

_General Agents for the Clergy._

M. l'abbe DE BROGLIE.

M. l'abbe DE JUIGNE.

* * * * *

{373}

_A Copy of the Letter of the Archbishop of Paris, dated January 1, 1762._

MOST GRACIOUS SOVEREIGN,

If, in company of the other prelates, I did not add my name to the answer

which they had the honour to present your majesty, it was not that I

differed in the least from their judgment as to the four articles, which

your majesty was pleased to propose to their examination, concerning the

usefulness, the doctrine, the conduct, and the government of the Jesuits. I

am very sensible that, in point of virtue and learning, there is no bishop

in the nation to whom I ought not to give the precedency; and, in this

view, would willingly have subscribed after all my brother bishops: but

there is a regard due to the dignity of the see, to which your majesty has

graciously been pleased to call me, and I must not take a step, that may

interfere with those prerogatives, which, after the example of your august

predecessors, you think it your duty to maintain. No other consideration

could have prevented my setting my hand to a testimony so much to the

advantage of the Jesuits of your kingdom: and, whilst I have the honour to

assure your majesty of my entire adherency to that solemn act, I once more

beg leave to implore your justice and supreme authority in behalf of a

religious body, {374} eminent for learning and piety, and well deserving

your royal protection, for the great services, which, during the two last

ages, they have rendered both to church and state.

(Signed) CHRISTOPHER,

Archbishop of PARIS.

THE END.

* * * * *

C. WOOD, Printer,

Poppin's Court, Fleet Street.

* * * * *

NOTES

[1] See Substance of a Speech of Sir John Coxe Hippisley, Bart. published

by Murray, 1815.

[2] Robertson's Charles V, vol. iii, p. 225.--To supply the malicious

omission of the pamphlet writer, I will here insert the historian's report

of the Jesuits in South America. "But it is in the new world that the

Jesuits have exhibited the most wonderful display of their abilities, and

have contributed most effectually to the benefit of the human species. The

conquerors of that unfortunate quarter of the globe had nothing in view but

to plunder, to enslave, and to exterminate its inhabitants. The Jesuits

alone have made humanity the object of their settling there. About the

beginning of the last century they obtained admission into the fertile

province of Paraguay, which stretches across the southern continent of

America, from the bottom of the mountains of Potosi to the confines of the

Spanish and Portuguese settlements on the banks of the river de la Plata.

They found the inhabitants in a state little different from that which

takes place among men when they first begin to unite together: strangers to

the arts; subsisting precariously by hunting or fishing; and hardly

acquainted with the first principles of subordination and government. The

Jesuits set themselves to instruct and to civilize these savages. They

taught them to cultivate the ground, to rear tame animals, and to build

houses. They brought them to live together in villages. They trained them

to arts and manufactures. They made them taste the sweets of society, and

accustomed them to the blessings of security and order. These people became

the subjects of their benefactors, who have governed them with a tender

attention, resembling that with which a father directs his children.

Respected and beloved almost to adoration, a few Jesuits presided over some

hundred thousand Indians. They maintained a perfect equality among all the

members of the community. Each of them was obliged to labour, not for

himself alone, but for the public. The produce of their fields, together

with the fruits of their industry of every species, were deposited in

common store houses, from which each individual received every thing

necessary for the supply of his wants. By this institution, almost all the

passions, which disturb the peace of society, and render the members of it

unhappy, were extinguished. A few magistrates, chosen by the Indians

themselves, watched over the public tranquillity, and secured obedience to

the laws. The sanguinary punishments, frequent under other governments,

were unknown: an admonition from a Jesuit; a slight mark of infamy; or, on

some singular occasion, a few lashes with a whip, were sufficient to

maintain good order among these innocent and happy people."--Charles V, p.

219.

[3] The author of the following Letters, who owed the publication of them

to the liberality of the editor of the PILOT, complained of the refusal of

the editor of the TIMES to admit into that paper a vindication of

character, though he had opened his pages to the blaster of it. As

newspapers in modern times have erected themselves into a kind of tribunal

of the dernier resort, the editors should not forget the indispensable

maxim of all courts of justice, and _concede alteri parti occasionem

audiri_ should be a standing rule with them, or they must submit to pass

for the star-chambers of jacobinism, or of some other party.

[4] D'Alembert said to one of his intimates, with whom he had been to hear

the celebrated sermon preached by P. Beauregard against the apostles of

infidelity, "These men die hard."

[5] The passage above cited, though not published with his name, is well

known to have proceeded from the pen of M. de Lally Tolendal.

[6] It is well known, that the Dutch, at this time, did every thing in

their power to undermine the Portuguese in Japan, and that they fabricated

tales of the Jesuits to alarm the government, which, they said, was to be

subverted, the emperor to be dethroned, and the people made slaves to the

pope. In consequence of these slanders, no Christian was suffered in the

empire; when, to preserve their commerce, the Dutch abjured Christianity,

and, in proof of their sincerity, consented to tread publicly upon the

cross at certain times.

[7] Encyclopedia Britannica.

[8] Spirit of Laws, book v, chap. 14.

[9] Robertson's Charles V, vol. iii, page 224.

[10] See Sully's Memoirs.

[11] This passage is also from the pen of M. Lally Tolendal.--When I was at

Paris, in the autumn of 1814, he was engaged on the Life of Charles I, of

England. After the return of Bonaparte, Louis XVIII appointed him one of

his ministers.

[12] See Letter IV.

[13] This, if well executed, would be a very interesting work, and it is

not impossible, that it may be attempted.

[14] See Letter III.

[15] Lord Clarendon, vol. i, page 73.

[16] Hume's History of England, vol. vi, page 297, &c.

[17] Hume's History of England, vol. vi, page 378.

[18] On the subject of the popish plots, see Dr. Milner's Letters to a

Prebendary.

[19] As to the judges of those times, see what a picture is drawn of a

chief justice by the most celebrated of our historians:--"To be a Jesuit,

or even a catholic, was of itself a sufficient proof of guilt. The chief

justice (sir William Scroggs), in particular, gave sanction to all the

narrow prejudices and bigoted fury of the populace. Instead of being

counsel for the prisoners, as his office required, he pleaded the cause

against them, browbeat their witnesses, and on every occasion represented

their guilt as certain and uncontroverted. He even went so far as publicly

to affirm, that the papists had not the same principles which protestants

have, and therefore were not entitled to that common _credence_, which the

principles and practices of the latter call for. And, when the jury brought

in their verdict against the prisoners, he said, 'You have done, gentlemen,

like very good subjects, and very good Christians, that is to say, like

very good protestants.'"--Hume's History of England, vol. viii, ch. 67, p.

91. See also what the same author says in his third appendix: "Timid

juries, and judges, who held their offices during pleasure, never failed to

second all the views of the crown. And, as the practice was anciently

common, of fining, imprisoning, or otherwise punishing the jurors, merely

at the discretion of the court, for finding a verdict contrary to the

direction of these dependent judges, it is obvious, that juries were then

no manner of security to the liberty of the subject."--Vol. v, p. 458. And,

if these be not enough, take conviction from the pen of one of the most

penetrating geniuses of the age: "The proceedings on the popish plot," says

Mr. Fox, in his History of James II, "must always be considered as an

indelible disgrace upon the English nation, in which king, parliament,

judges, juries, witnesses, prosecutors, have all their respective, though

certainly not equal shares. Witnesses, of such a character as not to

deserve credit in the most trifling cause, upon the most immaterial facts,

gave evidence so incredible, or, to speak more properly, so impossible to

be true, that it ought not to have been believed if it had come from the

mouth of Cato: and, upon such evidence, from such witnesses, were innocent

men condemned to death and executed. Prosecutors, whether attornies and

solicitors-general, or managers of impeachment, acted with the fury which,

in such circumstances, might be expected; juries partook, naturally enough,

of the national ferment; and judges, whose duty it was to guard them

against such impressions, were scandalously active in confirming them in

their prejudices, and inflaming their passions. The king, who is supposed

to have disbelieved the whole plot, never once exercised his glorious

prerogative of mercy. It is said he dared not. His throne, perhaps his

life, was at stake."--History of James II, by the right honourable Charles

James Fox, page 33.

[20] Fox's History of James II, page 40.

[21] I was unwilling to interrupt the reader at the last quotation from Mr.

Fox, but I beg leave here to say a few words relative to the insinuated

calumny on the catholic priests of Ireland, to which I then alluded. As I

have before observed, it is easy to see, that this attack, under cover of

assailing the Jesuits, is aimed at catholics in general. The priests in

Ireland are charged, in the pamphlet, with great venality and corruption of

morals, and this, the writer says, may be affirmed without the fear of

contradiction. To notice this slander is allowing myself to be led from my

particular subject into the general one; I will not, therefore, dwell upon

it, but, referring the reader to a volume of indisputable authority, though

written by a catholic (Dr. Milner's Inquiry into certain vulgar Opinions,

Letter xviii), for an interesting account of the Irish clergy and of the

Irish poor, I will content myself with extracting a note, or rather

reference, from page 182 of the book. "If, gentlemen, you are not under the

influence of very gross prejudice, you will, in receiving representations

of the necessitous state of Ireland, maturely weigh the allegations of men,

who have stigmatized, and still stigmatize as the last of mankind, some of

the most deserving and useful men in the community. There are among them

preachers and teachers of the first excellence: there are men of profound

erudition, men of nice classical taste, and men of the best critical

acumen. They are not formed, it is true, to shine in the drawing-room or at

the tea-table; nor are such qualifications very desirable in churchmen; for

you well know, that the refined manners of fashionable life are often as

incompatible with Christian morality, as the grosser vices of the vulgar

herd. Their manners are, in general, decent; but their exertions are great,

their zeal is indefatigable. See them in the most inclement seasons, at the

most unseasonable hours, in the most uncultivated parts, amidst the poorest

and most wretched of mankind! They are always ready at a call; nothing can

deter them; the sense of duty surmounts every obstacle! And there is no

reward for them in this world! The good effects of their zeal are visible

to every impartial and discerning mind; notwithstanding the many great

disadvantages under which it labours. For instance, you may often find a

parish so extensive and populous as to require two or three clergymen

properly to serve it, and yet the poverty of the parish is such as to be

scarcely able to maintain one in a tolerably decent manner. I could point

out many other disadvantages, but I forbear at present," &c.--"After all,

the good effects are so conspicuous, that, I repeat it, the lower orders of

Irishmen are better instructed in the doctrines of Christianity than the

lower orders of Englishmen."

I cannot speak of the catholic priests in Ireland from my own knowledge,

but the information I have received, from friends well acquainted with the

subject, fully corroborates this character of them. With such a character,

already drawn before the public with genuine marks of candour, is it

possible that any writer to the public should, in calumniating it, say,

that there was no fear of his being contradicted? Was he not contradicted,

if I may use the expression, by anticipation? But uncongenial records are

useless things, like _stern lights_.

[22] Rapin's History of England, vol. ii, page 344.

[23] Hume says, that Campion was put to the rack, and, confessing his

guilt, was publicly executed. The confession of guilt is not so clearly

proved as the putting to the rack. In the life of Campion the confession is

denied; and what Hume himself says immediately before is strong against the

imputed guilt, that he and Parsons were sent to explain the bull of Pius,

and to teach that the subjects of Elizabeth were not bound by it to rebel

against her.--See vol. v, chap. xli, page 238.

[24] Page 327, edition 1615.

[25] Hume's History of England, vol. viii, chap. lxvii, page 110.

[26] Hume's History of England, vol. v, chap. xxxviii, page 22, &c.

[27] Hume.

[28] Tom. ii, p. 375.

[29] Bayle, article Loyola.

[30] Dupleix's History of France.

[31] An assembly of the clergy was held at Poissy, in 1561, where James

Laynez, then general of the Jesuits, refuted the impieties of Beza, in the

presence of the French court.

[32] Filles Dieu.

[33] See the Substance of a Speech of Sir John Coxe Hippisley, Bart., &c.

[34] Sir John informs us (ibid. page 37), that "there is evidence fully on

record" to show, that Frederic III, of Prussia, acted, with respect to the

Jesuits, upon the "same principles which influenced the measures of the

empress Catherine." According to the principles I have thought myself bound

to ascribe to her, this concurrence is not unlikely; but, it is very

unlikely, that he preserved them in his dominions through the sad ambition

of showing a power of managing them. He had declared, that he retained

them, in order to furnish _the good seed_ to catholic princes, who might

one day wish to recover the plant.

[35] The fifth article of the _pacta conventa_, confirmed by the empress's

edict of September 5, 1772, runs in these words:--"Catholici utriusque

ritus in his provinciis inhabitantes, quae augustissimae Russiarum

imperatrici ex pacto convento cesserunt, ad civilem statum quod attinet,

omnibus possessionibus bonisquae suis fruentur. In iis vero quae ad

religionem spectant, _omnino_ conservabuntur _in statu quo_: videlicet, in

eodem libero exercitio cultus et disciplinae suae, cum omnibus templis et

bonis ecclesiasticis, _eodem modo_ quo possidebantur cum ii catholici sub

dominium majestatis suae imperialis venerunt. Nec majestas sua imperialis

nec ejus successores utentur unquam suprema potestate et auctoritate in

detrimentum _status quo_ catholicae Romanae ecclesiae in commemoratis

provinciis." This fifth article was afterwards formally accepted and agreed

to by the empress, the king of Poland, and the pope, in the diet of Poland,

September 18, 1773, five weeks after the suppression of the society at

Rome. The nuncio Garampi had laboured in vain to obtain the exclusion of

the Jesuits from the benefit of it.

[36] Additional note, page 36.

[37] Mr. Plowden, whose book, I am sorry to say, I have not read.

[38] "Popes," says the very pontiff on whom sir John relies, "are pilots,

steering almost always through boisterous seas, and, of course, must spread

or shorten sail according to the weather."--Ganganelli's Letters, Letter

cxii.

[39] Ganganelli's Letters, Letter cxii.

[40] Ibid.

[41] Letter cxii.

[42] St Luke, chap. xxiii. verse 24.

[43] Letter cxii.

[44] Appendix No. I.

[45] Urban VII is placed at the head of the roll of the pontiffs hostile to

the Jesuits. If sir John will take the trouble of looking into Sacchinus's

History, part v, book x, page 505, he will there read, that, as soon as

pope Urban VII was elected, he discharged from prison an innocent Jesuit,

whom his violent predecessor, Sixtus V, had confined, publicly declaring

him to be free from guilt, and suspicion of guilt. This, says the

historian, was the first, and it was also the last, act of government of

pope Urban VII, who presently was taken ill, and died on the twelfth day

after his election, September 27, 1590.

[46] After this, under the hand of Ganganelli, when pope, what can we think

of those, who attempt to mislead the public mind by asserting, that the

Jesuits were connected with the Inquisition?

[47] This is directly in contradiction to sir John Hippisley's remark of

the influence of the Jesuits being considered as so exceptionable, even by

prelates of their own community.

[48] Castera's History of Catherine II.

[49] Clement XIII's Letter of the 9th July, 1763, to the archbishops and

bishops of France.

[50] Acts of the Apostles chap. xxv, verse 16.

[51] See page 29.

[52] Spirit of Laws, Book IV, chap. vi.

[53] Dissertation on the Varieties of the Human Species.

[54] Tracts on several interesting Subjects in Politics and Morals.

[55] See the English edition of his work, called "A Relation of the

Missions of Paraguay," pages 113, 181, _et passim_.

[56] M. Lally Tolendal.

[57] See the Life prefixed to his Sermons.

[58] Bausset's Life of Fenelon, vol. i, page 21, &c.

[59] Appendix, No. II.

[60] See the Institute, vol. ii, p. 74.

[61] Juan and Ulloa, Vol. II. chap. xv, p. 179 and 180.

[62] Juan and Ulloa, Vol. II, chap. xv, p. 182 and 184.

[63] See Memoirs of the Ministry of Carvalho, Marquis de Pombal.

[64] Barruel's _Histoire du Clerge pendant la Revolution Francoise_, page

152.

[65] Infinite are the false reports, made by interested writers, of the

missions of South America. The solid refutation of them may be found in

many Spanish works, but more agreeably in the _Histoire du Paraguay_ of

Charlevoix, the voyage of Juan and Ulloa, and the _Cristianesimo Felice_ of

Muratori, already cited.

[66] See vol. i, page 58.

[67] In 1768, when the Jesuit missionaries from Spanish America arrived at

Cadiz, a number of them, natives of northern countries, were shipped off to

Ostend, to make their way to their respective homes. Their poor garments

were almost worn to rags. A new hat was given to each, with a very small

pittance in money, proportioned to the distance to which he was to travel.

Those, who came from California, reported, that, before they were brought

away from Mexico, the priests, who had been sent into California, to take

their abandoned stations, returned in the ship, in which they had been sent

out, refusing, one and all, to dwell in such a country.

[68] De dign. et aug. Scient. I. 7.

[69] It was a law of the society, with which the general could not

dispense, that no rewards or alms were to be demanded or accepted, whereby

the spiritual and literary duties of the institute might seem to be

recompensed. Even the usual honorary retributions, attached to spiritual

functions, and regulated by the canons, were excluded. Hence, when

clergymen of other descriptions had preached a course of sermons in royal

chapels, they were usually, and very justly, complimented with some

considerable benefice, frequently a mitre: when Jesuits had performed the

same duty with success, they were thanked in the king's name, and informed,

that his majesty would be glad to hear them another year. Perhaps this law

of the Jesuits, and their renunciation of church dignities by vow, were

among the motives, which engaged princes to employ them so much in

spiritual concerns.

[70] Cardinal de Maury's "Eloge de M. l'Abbe Radonvilliers, prononce le 7

Mai, 1807."

[71] See cardinal de Maury's "Essai sur l'Eloquence, Panegyriques, Eloges,

&c." vol. ii, printed at Paris, 1810.

[72] They are found, principally, in the fourth part of their

"Constitutions," in the rules of provincials, rectors, prefects of schools,

masters, and scholastics, and in their _Ratio Studiorum_.

[73] See the chapter of part x, entitled "De modo quo conservari et augeri

totum corpus Societatis in suo bono statu possit," vol. i, p. 445, of the

Prague folio edition.

[74] Institute, vol. ii, p. 408, Prague folio edition.

[75] Institute, vol. ii, p. 408, Prague folio edition.

[76] Ibid. vol. i, p. 407.

[77] Ibid. vol. i, p. 408.

[78] Institute, vol. i, p. 373.

[79] Ibid, vol. i, p. 408.

[80] "Filiis suis, ut convenit, compati noverit."--Institutum Const., Pars

IX, vol. ii, c. i, p. 4.

"Conferet secum viros, qui consilio polleant, habere, quorum opera in iis

quae statuenda sunt . . . uti possit."--Ibid., vol. i, p. 425.

[81] "Vir sit (generalis) . . . in omni virtutum genere exemplum . . . ac

_praecipue_ in eo _splendor charitatis_ . . . sit conspicuus."--Institutum

Const., vol. i, p. 135.

"Advertendum quod primo in _charitate ac dulcedine_, qui peccant, sunt

admonendi."--Ibid. vol. i, p. 375.

[82] "Conferet etiam, circumspecte et ordinate precipaere . . . ita ut

subditi se potius ad _dilectionem_ majorem quam ad timorem suorum

superiorem possint componere."--Ibid., vol. i, p. 426.

"Ut in spiritu _amoris_ et non cum perturbatione timoris procedatur,

curandum est."--Ibid., vol. i, p. 407.

[83] "Juret unusquisque, priusquam det (_suffragium_) quod eum nominat,

quem sentit in Domino magis idoneum."--Ibid., vol. i, p. 431.

[84] "Si accidiret ut valde negligens vel remissus esset, &c. . . . tunc

enim coadjutor vel vicarius qui generalis officio fungatur, est

eligendus."--Institutum Const., vol. i, p. 439.

[85] "Habet ergo societas cum praeposito generali (et idem cum inferioribus

fieri possit) aliquem qui accedens ad Deum in oratione, postquam divinam

bonitatem consulerit et aequum esse id judicaverit, cum modestia debita ac

humilitate, quid sentiat in ipso praeposito requiri ad majus obsequium et

gloriam Dei, admonere teneatur."--Ibid., Pars IX, c. iv, n. 4, p. 439.

[86] See Part IX, chap. iv, of the Constitutions, entitled "De auctoritate

vel providentia quam Societas habere debet erga praepositum Generalem," vol.

i, p. 439.

[87] Ibid.

[88] "Erit etiam summi momenti, ut perpetuo felix societatis status

conservetur, diligentissime ambitionem, malorum omnium in quavis republica

vel congregatione matrem submovere."--Institutum Const., vol. i, p. 446.

"Qui autem de ambitione hujusmodi convictus esset, activo et passivo

suffragio privetur, ut inhabilis ad eligendum alium (generalem), et ut ipse

eligatur."--Ibid., vol. i, p. 430.

[89] Institutum Const., vol. i, p. 490.

[90] Institutum Const., vol. i, p. 422.

[91] When Dr. Priestley went to Paris, to enjoy personally the happy

improvement of human affairs, at the conclusion of the eighteenth century,

the glorious star of reason was culminating. He was known to be a

materialist, consequently very naturally taken for an atheist, or at least

a naturalist, if I may use the expression, and the arms of the fraternity

were open to receive a man so highly distinguished for his chemical

discoveries. They eagerly entered into discourse with one, who had denied

man a soul, and, after pouring forth their own sublime theories of eternal

sleep and energies of nature, they gave him a pause to utter _his_

sublimities; and presently the room echoed with laughter and information

that the doctor _believes: Le docteur croit, le docteur Priestley croit_.

Some, who had not heard the conversation, ran to inquire what he believed.

_Comment! croit-il l'immortalite de l'ame? Point de tout; il convient que

l'homme n'a point d'ame. Bien! que croit-il donc? Il croit, l'immortalite

du corp. Que diable! quelle bizarerie! Mais, chez docteur, expliquez nous

cela_. The doctor discoursed on matter, and necessity, and of Jesus Christ

as a mere man. Finding that he believed _something_ their astonishment was

great; and, for some time, _le docteur croit_ was a bye-word.

[92] Genie du Christianisme, tom. viii.

[93] By his edicts on this subject, the youth of France were to be brought

up at his schools throughout the empire; these schools, in every town and

village, were all dignified with the appellation of university, the masters

of which were appointed by the principal of the school at Paris, and to be

under his control. The mathematics and a military spirit were ordered to be

the chief things attended to: all boys, of whatever age, wore uniforms and

immense cornered hats.

[94] A writer in the Times, cited in the Quarterly Review of Oct. 1811, p.

302.

[95] The Jansenistical apostate monk, Le Courayer, alleges a powerful

motive to enforce this doctrine: it is this; "By destroying the credit and

reputation of the Jesuits, Rome must be subverted: and when this is once

effected, Religion will reform itself."--_Hist. du Conc. de Trente, ed.

d'Amsterdam_, 1751, p. 63.

[96] That the ministers Pombal, Choiseul, Aranda, Tanucci, &c. should have

adopted this summary mode of execution at Lisbon, Paris, Madrid, Naples,

&c. creates now little surprise, devoted as they were to the views of the

philosophers.

[97] It will be readily allowed, that the form of limited monarchy is best

calculated to insure the happiness of subjects. Besides this general

advantage, many other features of the Jesuits' institute strongly conspired

to produce union of minds and hearts among the members. One main cause of

it, however, was accidental, and extrinsic to their government and

statutes. This was the unceasing pressure of unmerited outward hostility,

which, of course, closed them into a more compact phalanx. In the last

persecution, a thousand stratagems were devised to create disunion among

them, and to engage them to solicit their own dissolution. Their enemies

were everywhere disappointed and enraged. They were reduced to assassinate

the body, which they could not decompose. In every country, they employed

merciless soldiers, and still more unfeeling lawyers, to tear off the

Jesuits' cassocks; and everywhere they found the country watered with the

Jesuits' tears. Jesuits were everywhere fond of their profession. Can this

be a crime?

[98] After some search I have discovered, that Jerom Zarowicz, or Zarowich,

was the name of the discharged Polish Jesuit, who forged and published the

_Monita Secreta_ in 1616. Subsequent editions, as might be expected, were

swelled with fresh matter. Henry a Sancto Ignatio, a Flemish Carmelite

friar, and an avowed partisan of the Jansenists Arnaud and Quesnel,

trumpeted forth the _Monita_ in his _Tuba Magna_, a violent invective

against the Jesuits, which he printed at Strasburg in 1713, and again in

1717, just at the period when Quesnel was condemned by the famous bull

_Unigenitus_.

While the minister Pombal was persecuting the Jesuits in Portugal, Almada,

his agent at Rome, filled that capital and all Italy with outrageous libels

against the suffering victims, composed and distributed chiefly by a knot

of friars of different orders, who were in his pay, and printed at the

press of Nicolas Pagliarini. Some of the former were banished, and the

latter was condemned to the galleys. His punishment was remitted by the

meek pontiff Clement XIII, and the culprit escaped to Lisbon, where he was

employed, honoured, and rewarded by Pombal. I have before me two of these

libels, printed in 1760, of which, one is an Italian translation of the

_Monita Secreta_, preceded by a preface of 137 pages, and followed by a

long appendix. The performance, like that of Laicus, is a wild, incoherent

assemblage of impostures and insults, all written, as the author

acknowledges, _con uno stile basso e andante_, because he professes to

write for the lower classes of readers, _per illuminare il minuto populo_.

In fact, his manner and language are almost as low and groveling as those

of that eminent adept in the _stile basso e andante_, Laicus of the Times.

[99] Not having elsewhere met with this monstrous calumny, I incautiously

ascribed the invention of it to Laicus. But in one of the Italian libels,

mentioned in the last note, the writer, having informed the _minuto populo_

of Italy, that the Jesuits are professed poisoners, gives the proof in

these words: "Perhaps pope Innocent XIII was snatched from us by Jesuitical

barbarity. There would be no doubt of it, if only the surgeon of that pope,

who is still alive (in 1760), would be pleased to declare, that the Jesuits

had infused poison through the sore in the old pontiff's leg. But he is

silent, through dread of the Jesuits' vengeance." This is called

_illuminating the minuto populo_. Laicus catches the ray, and reflects it,

with lustre improved, upon our _minuto populo_, when he assures them, that

Innocent XIII _was UNIVERSALLY UNDERSTOOD to have been murdered by the

Jesuits_. Such is the progress of genius.

[100] See Letter II.

[101] Ibid.

[102] See Letter II.

[103] See Letter II.

[104] Ibid.

[105] See Letter II.

[106] Ibid.

[107] See Letter II.

[108] See Letter III.

[109] Voltaire, in his History of Louis XIV, had the assurance to write,

that our king James II was a Jesuit. Abbe Millot, a pitiful imitator of

Voltaire, who had been dismissed from the society of the Jesuits, obtained

a seat in the French academy, and published _Elemens de l'Histoire de

France_. In this meagre work, not to be outdone by his master, he has the

impudence to advance, that St. Louis IX, king of France, was a Dominican

friar. All this passes for history with certain readers, who are not quite

among the _minuto populo_.

[110] See Letter III.

[111] Urban VIII was elected pope in 1625. I have before me an authentic

list of all the superiors of the Jesuits in England from 1623 downwards to

1773, in which no name like Stillington appears.

[112] See Letter III.

[113] Pope, indeed, has contradicted the calumny in his energetic verse,

_Where London's column, pointing at the skies,_

_Like a tall bully, lifts the head, and lies._

In spite of which, the column is still allowed to disgrace the first city

in the world, though it totters, and daily nods destruction around

it.--_Ed._

[114] It must be acknowledged, that this calumny has been too hastily

placed to the credit of Laicus. He has not the honour of the invention.

Calumny it certainly is. Whoever knows the angry temper of the parliament

of Paris, in 1757, when their opposition to the king, and their fury

against the archbishop De Beaumont and the Jesuits, were wound up to an

uncommon height, must allow, that they would have been delighted with the

detection of the slightest symptom, the most distant presumption of guilt,

in any Jesuit. The wretched culprit Damiens was frequently interrogated

with this view. He constantly denied that he had any accomplice, but owned,

that he had conceived the idea of his crime, from frequently hearing the

table talk of members of the parliament, on whom he waited; his design

being, as he pretended, only to make the king more attentive to the voice

and complaints of the people. Notwithstanding the certainty of this, one of

the above mentioned Italian libels, written _per il minuto populo_, informs

them roundly, that the Jesuits were accomplices of Damiens, and that two

Jesuits were _privately_ hanged for it in the _Bastille_. But why was not

Laicus equally trusted with the secrets of that state prison? Possibly he

has learned this lesson from his oracle Coudrette. He cannot however glory

in the invention.

[115] It may be suspected, that Coudrette is really the writer, to whom,

suppressing his name, Robertson so often refers his readers, in his account

of Jesuits, in the Life of Charles V. Perhaps he was ashamed to name such

an author. But he had already forfeited his title to historical

impartiality, by acknowledging, that his unfavourable account of the

Jesuits is derived from the _Comptes Rendus_ and _Requisitoires_ of La

Chalotais, attorney general of the parliament of Bretagne, who, not less

than Coudrette, was truly _un ennemi acharne des Jesuites_.

[116] "They," said Dr. Johnson, "who would cry out _Popery_ in the present

day, would have cried _Fire_ in the time of the deluge."

[117] See Letter V.

[118] See Letter V.

[119] See Letter V.

[120] The preservation of the society of Jesus in the Russian empire, in

spite of innumerable solicitations, schemes, and intrigues employed to

procure its suppression, would form a curious morsel of _particular_

history, highly honourable to the court of Petersburg and creditable to the

Jesuits.

[121] The French League.

[122] Si acciderit aliquod ex peccatis (avertas id Deus), quae sufficiunt ad

praepositum officio privandum, simul atque res per sufficientia testimonia,

vel ipsius affirmationem constaret, juramento adstringantur assistentes ad

id societati denuntiandum.--Cap. V. art. iv, p. 440.

[123] Et si res devulgata et communiter manifesta esset, non expectata

quatuor assistentium confirmatione, provinciales alii alios vocando

convenire debent, et ipso primo die quo in locum hujusmodi congregationis

ingredientur, ubi aderunt quatuor qui convocarunt, cum aliis congregatis,

rem is aggrediatur cui omnia notoria sunt, et accusatio dilucide

explicetur. Et postquam auditus fuerit praepositus, foras egredi debebit, et

antiquissimus ex provincialibus simul cum secretario aut alio assistente,

de lata re scrutinium faciat, et primo quidem an constet de peccato quod

objicitur, deinde an ejusmodi sit ut propter id officio privari debeat; et

idem suffragia promulget, quae ut sufficiant duas tertias partes excedent;

et tunc statim de alio eligendo agatur, et si fieri potest, non inde prius

egrediatur quam societas praepositum generalem habeat.--Ibid. p. 440.

[124] Prima ad res externas pertinet vestitus, victus et expensarum

quarumlibet, quae omnia vel augere, vel imminuere poterit societas prout

praepositum ipsum ac se decere et Deo gratius fore judicabit et tunc

societatis ordinationi acquiescere oportebit.--Cap. IV, art. ix, p. 439,

tom. i.

[125] Numero autem hujusmodi assistentium quidem quatuor......... et quidem

illi ipsi esse poterunt de quibus supradictum......... quamvis autem res

graviores ab iis tractandae sint, statuendi tamen facultas, postquam eos

audierit, penes praepositum generalem erit.--Cap. VI, art. i, p. 444, tom.

ii.

[126] Est item penes praepositum generalem omnis facultas agenda quosvis

contractus emptionum aut venditionum quorumlibet bonorum temporalium

mobilium tam domorum quam collegiorum societatis, et imponendi aut

redimendi quoslibet census super bonis stabilibus ipsorum collegiorum, in

eorumdem utilitatem et bonum, cum facultate sese liberandi, restituta

pecunia quae data fuerit. Alienare autem aut omnino dissolvere collegia vel

domos jam creatas societatis sine generali ejus congregatione praepositus

generalis non poterit.--Cap. III. col. ii, p. 336, tom. i.

[127] Cum autem quidquam privatae utilitatis ex redditibus quaerere vel in

suum usum convertere non possit, est valde probabile quod majori cum

puritate ac Spiritu constantius ac diuturnius procedat in iis quae ad bonum

regimen collegiorum ad majus Dei ac Domini nostri obsequium provideri

convenit.--Cap. I, tit. i, p. 392.

[128] Transferre vel differre domos vel collegia jam creata, aut in usum

societatis professae redditus eorum convertere praepositus generalis, ut in 4

part. dictum est, non poterit.--Cap. IV, art. xlviii, p. 438.

[129] De his vero quae societati ita relinquuntur ut ipsa pro suo arbitratu

et regat et disponat (sive illa bona stabilia sint; ut domus aliqua vel

proedium non alicui certo collegio ab eo qui disponit, relinquit

determinare applicatum vel annexum, sive mobilia cujusmodi sunt pecunia,

triticum et quoevis alia mobilia) idem generalis disponere poterit, aut

vendendo, aut retinendo, aut huic vel illi loco id quod videbitur

applicando, prout ad majorem Dei gloriam senserit expedire.--Cap. III, art.

vi, p. 437. col. ii, tit. 2.

[130] Declaratum est ut haec bona tantum in eadem provincia et non alibi

generalis debeat distribuere, pag. 493, item, pag. 702, ibid. eadem

provincia in qua, 1 cap. 30, partis constitutionum distribuenda esse

dicuntur bona nostrorum quae illi societati dare volunt, intelligenda est,

in qua sunt ipsa bona, non autem in qua quis societatem ingreditur, aut

versatur. Sumitur autem provinciae nomen more societatis, prout scilicet uni

praeposito provinciali subest.

[131] Quod si in eadem provincia plura sint dominia diversis principibus

subjecta, adjecit congregatio diligenter servandam esse eamdem

constitutionem ut scilicet in transferendis hujusmodi fratrum nostrorum

bonis ex uno Dominio in aliud ejusdem provinciae societatis, ratio haberetur

regum, principum et aliorum potestatum, ne in eis causa ulta offensionis

detur, sed ad majorem aedificationem omnium et spiritualem animarum

profectum et gloriam Dei omnia cedant.--Tom. i. p. 511.

[132] Sexta locum habet in quibusdam casibus (quos speramus per Dei

bonitatem, aspirante ipsius gratia, nunquam eventuros) cujusmodi essent

peccata mortalia in externum actum prodeuntia, ac nominatim, copula

carnalis: vulnerare quemdam: ex redditibus collegiorum aliquid ad proprios

sumptus assumere: vel pravam doctrinam habere. Si quid ergo horum

acciderit, potest ac debet societas (si de re sufficientissime constaret)

eum officio privare, ac si opus est, a societate removere. In omnibus prae

occulis habendo quod ad majorem Dei gloriam et universale bonum societatis

fore judicabitur.--Cap. XII, art. vii, p. 440, tom. i.

[133] Page 215, tome iv, des Memoires du Clerge.

[134] Page 451 du meme volume.

[135] Maximes et Reflections sur la Comedie, ed. de 1674, p. 138, 139.

[136] Henry IV finished the letter, which he deigned to the general

assembly, with these words: "Vos hortamur ad retinendam instituti vestri

integritatem et splendorem."

* * * * *

Corrections made to printed original.

Page 104. "It opens with a long narration": 'uarration' in original.

Page 107. "the addition of pressing solicitations": 'additition' in

original.

Page 320. "sounded in the present times": 'preset' in original.

Page 338. "et praedecessorum nostrorum": 'praedecessorm' in original.

Page 361. "profess obedience to all their superiors' commands": 'to to'

(over line break) in original.