been more flourishing or more vigorous than of late years. Warned by
the successive secularization of its temporalities in one country
after another, the church has learned to give to the monastic system
the direction in which its evils are least sensibly felt, its benefits
to humanity are greatest, and the influence which it is capable
of exerting is most serviceable to the hierarchy. Though at times
mistaken in the spirit of the age; though often misled by pride,
by ambition, and by avarice, the Roman church has missed its aim
and mistaken its vocation, yet, upon the whole, it has manifested
that adaptation to the wants of successive generations which is the
real secret of its power and the condition of its success. Clearly
recognizing the scant toleration which our hard-working nineteenth
century has for holy idleness and unproductive sanctity, it moulds
its institutions to meet the necessities of the age. It no longer
glories in new and fantastic forms of worship or insane feats of
asceticism—not the pillar of Stylites, the poverty of Francis, or the
thong of the Flagellants[1593]—but it seeks to organize systems by
which the beneficence of the many may be efficiently administered by
the trained labor of the few. It endeavors no longer to agglomerate
around idle communities the wealth which could only pander to their
vices, but rather to render useful by associated action the benevolent
self-abnegation which in other communions is apt to be lost or
frittered away for lack of judicious organization and direction. When
thus the vow of celibacy is uttered, not in the hope of a life of ease
and sensual indulgence, not in the pride of Pharisaical holiness, not
in the lust of exaggerated maceration, not in the hope of purchasing
by solitude and mortification the favor of an all-merciful Creator,
but for the single-minded purpose of devoting a life to elevating
fellow-creatures from degradation or to relieving their physical and
mental miseries, no one can deny that institutions which in their
wantonness of prosperity accomplished so much of evil possess fruitful
germs of good to be developed through adversity and tribulation.
The results of this wise policy have shown themselves especially
in France and Belgium. When, in 1625, St. Vincent de Paul founded
the Order of the Sisters of Charity, he accomplished a work which
was destined to prove as useful to the church as the mendicant and
preaching orders which resuscitated it in the thirteenth century, or
the Company of Jesus, which enabled it to set bounds to the Protestant
Reformation. It was a return to the primal and vital principles of
Christianity, which bound anew the peoples to the hierarchy and bridged
over the all but impassable gulf between them.
This tie, so delicate and yet so firm, proved lasting. Even amid the
horrors of the Revolution, when conventual vows were forbidden, and
the monastic orders were scattered ruthlessly abroad, the gentle
virtues and the tireless ministrations of the Sisters of Charity won
for them respect and toleration from the cruel fanatics who respected
and tolerated nothing else. When, even under the Concordat of 1801,
the reëstablishment of monastic orders was strictly forbidden, and
those which endeavored timidly to organize themselves under the names
of _Pères de la Foi_, _Victimes de l’Amour de Dieu_, _Cœur de Jésus_,
etc., were broken up in 1804 without ceremony,[1594] exceptions were
made in favor of the charitable associations of females, the missionary
societies of Saint-Esprit and the Lazaristes, and the brotherhood of
the _Écoles Chrétiennes_. The missionary societies proved to be a
focus of reactionary intrigue, which the First Empire was powerful
enough to crush. They were accordingly suppressed in 1809, but at the
same time an imperial decree placed under the fostering care of Madame
Lætitia the women who devoted themselves to works of charity and mercy.
Annual appropriations for their support were regularly made, and, thus
favored, they prospered amazingly. The religious activity of the people
seemed to flow in this channel with redoubled force from its long
retention, and in the eight years from 1807 to 1815 there were no less
than 1261 congregations authorized—an average of 157 per annum. At the
same time the state refused to recognize the right of any person to
abstract himself irrevocably from society. The law wisely prohibited
engagements for life in any service, and this was held applicable to
the religious congregations, in which, by the decree of 1809, the
period of engagement was limited to five years.[1595]
In spite of the favor shown to the charitable associations, the
prejudice against the monastic system was still so strong that the
Restoration, with all its reactionary tendencies, did not dare to run
counter to the convictions of the people. The law of 1809 forbidding
male congregations was never repealed, and the most that the Bourbons
ventured openly to do was to authorize a few by special decree, such
as the Lazaristes, the Missions Etrangères, &c. Meanwhile the female
congregations continued to increase; a general law was enacted in May,
1825, providing for their authorization under definite provisions,
and between 1815 and 1830, 643 new ones were officially recognized.
The efforts made from 1825 to 1827, under Charles X., to introduce
the Jesuits and other male orders gave rise to lively agitation,
and the elections of 1827 settled the question definitely in the
negative.[1596] The Revolution of 1830 put an end for the time to all
hope of reëstablishing the monastic system in France, and a law in
1834 specially affirmed the application of Art. 291 of the Penal Code,
directed against unauthorized associations, to those for religious
purposes. The constitutional government of Louis Philippe showed itself
persistently hostile to monachism. It is true that in 1840 Lacordaire
succeeded in obtaining sufferance for his order of Dominicans, but
this was exceptional; and even towards the female orders the policy
of the monarchy was repressive. During the eighteen years of its
existence, but fourteen authorizations for founding new congregations
were granted, while the Jesuits, who had ventured to enter the kingdom
without permission, were formally expelled in 1845 after a severe
parliamentary struggle. The Second Republic was more liberal, and
the Second Empire ostentatiously sought the alliance of the church.
The Loi Falloux, in 1850, seemed to recognize the existence of male
orders, and advantage was immediately taken of a vague phrase to assume
their legality. At length, in 1852, a law was passed regulating, by
a general form, the incorporation of all religious societies, and
under this their growth was amazingly rapid—none the less so, perhaps,
because they were not even required by the authorities to observe the
law and go through the formality of procuring authorizations. In 1827
there were but 20,943 female devotees, while the number of males under
conventual vows was too insignificant for computation,[1597] and under
the monarchy of July the growth was exceedingly small. In 1861 these
had increased to 17,776 males and 90,343 females, and in 1877 to 22,207
males and 127,000 females.
In Belgium the figures are equally startling. In 1856 that little
kingdom had 2383 monks and 12,247 nuns—a total of 14,630—an enormous
proportion in so small a population, enabling the clergy, as has more
than once been seen, almost to control the elections.
To comprehend the full significance of these figures, they may be
compared with the undisturbed monasticism of an old Catholic state such
as Austria. That empire, in 1859, had but 10,449 monks and 6463 nuns,
or 16,912 in all. For the Catholic population alone of Austria, this
gives one to every 1579 inhabitants, while, about the same period in
France the proportion was one to every 346 souls, and in Belgium, one
to every 308.
The Company of Jesus furnishes an equally instructive illustration of
the flourishing condition and rapid growth of monachism despite the
shackles apparently imposed on it by modern institutions. The Jesuits,
formally reëstablished in 1814 by Pius VII. and gradually working an
entrance into one kingdom after another, have increased with a rapidity
which is exceedingly significant.
Thus in 1834 the Company numbered but 2684,
” 1844 ” ” ” 4133,
” 1854 ” ” ” 5510,
” 1864 ” ” ” 7734,
and a still later computation gives them 7949 members, divided into
3389 priests, 2323 brother coadjutors, and 2237 novices—the large
proportion of the latter indicating how great is the prospective
increase. In France alone their number had grown from 200 in 1845 to
1085 in 1865, and to 1509 in 1877.
In this enormous spread of monachism, it is interesting to observe the
change which has occurred from mediæval sensual indulgence and mystic
asceticism to modern utilitarianism. Thus in France, by the census of
1861, there were, out of 17,776 men bound by vows,
Devoted to education, 12,845,
Distribution of charity and care of the sick, 389,
In charge of houses of refuge and farm schools, 496,
Devoted to religious contemplation, 4,046,
while of 90,343 women, there were
Devoted to education, 58,883,
Distribution of charity and care of the sick, 20,292,
In charge of houses of refuge and farm schools, 3,073,
Devoted to religious contemplation, 8,095.
The large proportion of almoners and hospital nurses among the women
is easily explicable by what has already been stated as to the favor
shown by successive governments to the Sisters of Charity, and the good
which is effected by these organizations cannot easily be overrated.
Who is there who can fail to do justice to these humble Christians,
when once he has had the good fortune to witness their self-devotion
and the benefits arising from their tireless ministrations, made
doubly valuable by system and special training? In our own land,
torn by sudden and gigantic civil war, when the sick and wounded had
accumulated almost beyond the possibility of care, who that then noted
the blessed agency of those angels of the hospital, would willingly
pause to coldly criticise the institutions of which they are the
most perfect development? In a Catholic country like France, the
opportunities for good works are of course vastly greater, for almost
every benevolent institution naturally seeks the aid of the church,
and that aid is willingly given, not only from charitable motives,
but also, we may assume, on account of the enormous influence thence
accruing among the masses of the population who are the beneficiaries,
and this is especially felt in the manufacturing centres and amid
the periodical crises attendant upon modern financial and industrial
development. The crèches where babies are kept while their mothers are
at the factory are presided over by nuns; the distribution of bread and
soup at the Bureaux de Bienfaisance is made by nuns; the neglected and
wretched little children who are sent to the infant schools are washed
and tended by nuns;[1598] and, in fact, whatever tender, or humane,
or charitable influence reaches the prolétaire in his grieving and
despairing wretchedness, almost necessarily comes to him through some
channel connected with a religious order.
A much more complex question, however, is presented by the numbers
and the activity of the orders devoted to education. While giving
due weight to the purely benevolent impulses which lead so many
to undertake the task of training the young, and while freely
acknowledging the vast amount of good arising from the education, in
so many cases gratuitous, of those who might otherwise remain in the
darkness of ignorance, the inquirer cannot shut his eyes to other
considerations. The eagerness with which the church seeks to acquire
for itself the direction of the docile mind of childhood shows how
fully it is alive to the importance of this most fruitful source
of influence. Previous to 1849, the educational system of France
was, nominally at least, in the hands of the State, though even then
the church had made large inroads upon its province. The leading
instrumentality in this was the congregation of the _Frères des
Écoles Chrétiennes_, founded in 1680 by the Abbé de la Salle, for the
gratuitous instruction of the poor, and Frère Philippe, the General of
the Order, testified in 1849 before a parliamentary committee that the
body then consisted of 3300 members with 200,000 children under their
care. The spread of communism among the people, as manifested in the
overthrow of the monarchy, alarmed the conservatives, and one of the
first acts of the Republic under Louis Napoleon was to encourage by the
_Loi Falloux_ the efforts of the church to extend its operations. How
successful was the attempt is shown by a comparison of the statistics
of twenty years.
1843. 1863.
Religious of both sexes engaged in primary teaching, 16,958 46,840
Number of primary schools under their direction, 7,590 17,206
Number of scholars in these schools, 706,917 1,610,674
Children in _salles d’asile_, under sisterhoods, 301,536
By 1861, in the next grade of schools, the religious orders had 55,151
male pupils, while those in the government institutions of similar
class numbered only 63,291. In 1865 the whole number of children
between the ages of 7 and 12 in France was 4,018,427; while, two years
previous, out of 2,265,576 boys attending school, 443,732 were in
institutions conducted by the religious orders, and of 2,070,612 girls,
no less than 1,166,942, or more than half, were under the care of
sisterhoods.
This enormous and rapidly increasing proportion shows how largely the
coming generation is trained under monkish influences, and justifies
the efforts made by the Ferry ministry, after the overthrow of the
reactionary government of MacMahon, to check the growth of these
schools. The religious orders are bound to a peculiar obedience to
the Holy See; all other bonds, whether of family or of country, are
as nothing in comparison. The monk who conscientiously regards his
vows cannot be a citizen, or be fitted to train future citizens. The
congregation, for instance, of the _Frères de la Saintè-Croix_ is
largely engaged in educating and furnishing teachers; and among the
secret statutes of the order is one forbidding its members to admit the
existence of any opinion, whether in politics, theology, or religion,
contrary to the opinion of Rome.[1599] What are the political opinions
of Rome may readily be found in the Syllabus of 1864, among its
anathemas directed against freedom of thought and of the press, against
any liberty which threatens to abridge the temporal power of the
hierarchy or to limit its absolute authority, and indeed against the
simplest toleration in the matter of religious belief. That these are
in fact the principles which govern education in clerical schools was
shown during the debates on the Ferry laws in 1879, by M. Ferry, who
had, after some difficulty, procured copies of text-books used in them,
and who quoted from them passages praising feudal rights and reviling
the Revolution, justifying the Inquisition and the revocation of the
Edict of Nantes, denouncing civil marriage as concubinage, alluding
to religious toleration as a temporary necessity, and inculcating
the doctrine of the submission of the state to the church. It needs
no argument to show that institutions which teach such principles as
these are not fit to be trusted with the training of those who are to
constitute a self-governing Republic.
Nor was this the only evil arising from the successful efforts made by
the church through its monastic legions to control the education of
France. The enormous demand for recruits to fill the rapidly growing
ranks of its army of teachers exceeded its capacity to provide suitable
material, whether as regards mental or moral training. In its desire
to favor the growth of clerical schools, the Second Empire waived in
favor of the religious orders the rigorous examinations required of
the laity as a condition precedent to employment as teachers. The
supervision of the state being thus withdrawn, discretion was left
with those whose unworldly duties can scarcely be supposed to render
them competent judges, and that discretion has been necessarily much
abused. It is related by Mdlle. Daubié, herself an instructress of high
reputation, that when she was eight years old she was applied to, by a
woman employed in tending cows, to teach her the catechism, and within
a year she was surprised to find her whilom pupil suddenly reappear
as a sister, duly authorized to teach. It is computed that, among the
male religious employed in teaching, not more than one in ten has the
_brevet_, which would be indispensable to them if they were laymen;
while, of the sisters engaged in instruction, out of 8000 superiors
of institutions, only about 1000 are _brevetées_, and, of their
assistants, not more than one per cent. are so qualified.
If the mental qualifications of these educators were thus disregarded,
their moral characters were equally relieved from proper scrutiny;
and this, combined with the temptations inseparable from the celibate
system, has not infrequently led to the most shocking results. The
enormous influence of the ecclesiastical establishment, working upon
the bureaus of the government, the officials of justice, and the
press, was usually sufficient to prevent much public scandal under
Louis Napoleon and Marshal MacMahon; but a list of the prosecutions
reported in the newspapers from 1861 to April, 1879, collected by Dr.
Wahu,[1600] shows about fifty cases in which the male teachers had
abused the children under their charge, many of these cases being of
appalling turpitude. As eleven of these occurred during the first
three months of 1879, it may reasonably be concluded that equal
freedom on the part of the public prosecutors and the press during the
previous eighteen years would have produced a vastly larger number of
convictions; and not the least deplorable feature of the matter is
that in more than one case the culprit had been previously transferred
several times from one institution to another, giving grounds for the
assumption that the authorities were cognizant of his wickedness,
and preferred to allow him to spread contagion throughout different
communities rather than incur the scandal of punishing him.
As illustrative of two phases of the subject, I may briefly refer to
two cases from among a number which were brought to light in 1861, as
the result of the efforts of a writer bold enough to brave the anger of
the church, and who found a journal with the hardihood to second his
efforts. One of these occurred at Saintes, in a school under the care
of the _Frères des Écoles Chrétiennes_. Out of 300 boys, one hundred
had been the victims of the monsters to whom they had been confided,
and who enjoyed with a Satanic zest the corruption which they spread
through so many households. The evil became rumored abroad, but no
one dared to attack the members of so powerful an order, until an old
soldier who held the post of gendarme found the evil in his family.
Unused to prudence, he complained. The local board of supervision,
afraid of compromising the “interests of religion,” endeavored to
hush up the affair, but the prefect, fortunately, was of different
temper, and took up the matter energetically. The guilty brethren
disappeared, and their superior professed to know nothing about them,
while the gendarme was soon afterwards dismissed from his post, and
the matter passed over, leaving nothing behind it but a hundred
ruined youths and corrupted families. The other case is that of Frère
Cléonique at Jonsac, whose offences were too fully proved for denial,
and whose counsel on his trial could only urge in palliation that the
responsibility rested, not on his client, but on the system which
employed such creatures and exposed them to temptations beyond their
strength—“Gentlemen,” said he, “look at my client. What is he, after
all? A clown, a _goîtreux_, almost a _crétin_; surely less than a man!
He was herding flocks, when they undertook to persuade him that he
had a call. A black gown was thrown on his shoulders, and, behold him
in charge of a school! Such a nature could only attempt that career
through pride and sloth. There he is, utterly untrained, ignorant of
everything in life, and yet charged with teaching our children how to
live!... Do you wonder that one day the beast awoke in that soul, into
which nothing lofty had been instilled?... There he is before you, but
who is really to blame; who is the criminal? Assuredly not this poor
wretch, involved in the blindest ignorance, whom they drew from his
obscurity, and to whom they taught nothing before confiding to him the
grave responsibility of training youth.” It is satisfactory to add that
this ingenious plea was unsuccessful, and that the brute was sentenced
to imprisonment at hard labor—but he had been seven years at Jonsac,
and his victims counted by the hundred.[1601]
It was during these prosecutions, in 1861, that Frère Philippe, the
General of the “_Frères des Écoles Chrétiennes_,” was stimulated to
issue a secret circular, in which, after alluding to two previous ones
of the same nature sent out in 1854 and 1860, he said that the time
had come to speak plainly about the “horrible disease which devours
the Order,” and which, under the investigations then in progress, was
leading one brother after another to prison, and was sowing scandal
broadcast. But the prosecutions died away, and matters soon resumed
their usual course. It is but two or three years since that the
_Bien-Public_, in comparing the morality of the lay schools with those
in charge of the church, was able to produce these statistics:—
In 10,000 lay schools, 5.44 crimes and 22.29 offences (_delits_).
In 10,000 church schools, 65.10 ” and 90.50 ” ”
Nor are these shocking cases confined to France. In 1873 a similar
scandal was suddenly brought to light in the great Barnabite college
at Monza, in Lombardy, where there were more than 300 students, many
of whom were found to have been debauched by their instructors. The
institution was promptly closed by the authorities, but the chief
criminals, Father Stanislas Cereza, the principal, and Father Villa,
one of his assistants, escaped, having prudently disappeared at the
first rumors of the development.