THE STRUGGLE FOR FRANCE.
The facts stated in the last chapter prove incontestably that the
persistent efforts of the Jesuits to procure the establishment of
their society in France as a recognized religious order were insidious
and stealthy, if not incendiary, from the beginning. The Bishop of
Clermont--influenced, probably, by the Cardinal of Lorraine--was
favorable to them; and being the owner of a house in Paris, he offered
it to them, that they might inaugurate the Jesuit method of education.
But neither the French Parliament, nor the universities, nor the
Gallican Church could be prevailed upon to withdraw their opposition.
Consequently, in order to accomplish by indirection what was forbidden
by law and the public sentiment, the Jesuits opened a college at
Clermont, within the diocese and under the patronage of the bishop, and
beyond the limits of the city of Paris.[53]
By the time of the death of Henry II the growth of Protestantism
in France had become conspicuously marked. The Jesuit historian,
Daurignac, represents this as a "calamity"--as a "deplorable state of
things"--which it became necessary to counteract by the most active
and efficient means. But as nothing could shake the stability of the
people of Paris, it was deemed necessary to reach the population
of that city by gradual approaches, after the manner of military
commanders. Accordingly the Bishop of Pamiers was induced to solicit
the assistance of the Jesuits in his diocese, and had no difficulty
in finding enough of them to engage in that mission, for they were
held in constant readiness to obey the orders of their superior. These
Jesuit missionaries are represented as having caused many who had
professed Protestantism to renounce their "heretical errors," and as
having commenced their educational plan of operations by establishing
a college at Pamiers. Whatsoever else they did, they obeyed implicitly
the teachings of their society, for it is boastingly said that they
caused the Protestants to be treated as possessing no rights of
citizenship worthy of regard; for "their books were destroyed and
their preachers compelled to flee."[54] But the Jesuits were still
unable, by these violent means, to obtain entrance into Paris, the
combined opposition of the Gallican Christians and the Protestants--who
had, by this time, become sufficiently numerous to take part in the
controversy--being sufficiently formidable to keep them out.
While there is no evidence of a direct and positive alliance between
the Gallican Christians and the Protestants, yet it is apparent that
their united opposition to the Jesuits had created between them such
common sentiments as materially softened the asperities which had
previously separated them. This is seen in the fact that large and
influential numbers of the former--notably many in Parliament and
attached to the universities--became disposed to grant to the latter
"entire freedom in the propagation of their doctrines and control of
their clergy."[55] Even the king, bigot as he was, was constrained,
in consequence of their rapidly increasing influence, to grant some
concessions to the Protestants which it would have been far more
agreeable to him to have withheld. They had rendered such essential
service to the State as soldiers in the army of Francis I--who
rewarded their patriotism by persecution--and had shown such marked
courage in battle, that he was obliged, manifestly against his will,
to recognize them as a power neither to be despised nor trifled with,
unless a force could be employed to crush them out entirely. This was
especially the case after the Prince of Condé became the acknowledged
leader of the Huguenots. Fear, therefore, far more than the spirit
of toleration, influenced the king in conceding to the Protestants
the rights of citizenship, which he so grudgingly granted that his
concession was almost a denial. That which was considered the most
valuable was the allowance to the Protestants of the right to assemble
in open conference at Poissy, and to consider and discuss such matters
as pertained to their own interests and religious opinions. The
sincerity and honesty of their religious convictions inspired them with
the belief that if they could ever be submitted to the arbitrament
of reason, they would, if not fully justified, be found entitled to
legal protection in the open profession of them. On this account they
considered the conference at Poissy as a favorable omen, and hailed its
assembling with satisfaction. Their flattering anticipations, however,
were not realized. It was not intended that reason and argument should
avail anything in the presence of the only "legitimate authority"--that
of Church and State; and the Jesuits were standing ready and filled
with the most anxious solicitude to demonstrate that the highest duty
of life consisted of "uninquiring obedience"--the closing of every
avenue through which the light could reach the minds and consciences
of the multitude. Evidences of this are found in what transpired at
Poissy, where, for the first time in the history of France, the general
of the Jesuits was allowed to appear in a public assemblage as the
representative of the order, and to suppress any inquiry whatsoever
into the matters which the conference was especially appointed
to consider, except by ecclesiastics. From that time forward the
Protestants were reminded at every step they took that the sleepless
eyes of the Jesuits were constantly upon them, ready to drive them to
their hiding-places, turn them over to the Inquisition, or hunt them,
with tireless vigilance, to the point of entire extermination.
Referring to the conference at Poissy, and the liberality indicated
toward the Protestants by the king when he consented that they should
attend it, Daurignac instructs his readers that the pope "beheld with
pain and regret" this tendency toward liberalism and free religious
thought; and that, in order to check the progress of events in that
direction, he commanded Laynez--the immediate successor of Loyola
as general of the Jesuits--to attend the conference at Poissy, with
the view of preventing any adjustment of the existing religious
differences, and deferring the final determination of them until
they could be decided by the Council of Trent. Nobody can doubt that
the object of the pope was to bring matters into such a condition as
should require universal obedience to the decrees of that Council, by
persuasion if possible, but by coercion if necessary. With the same
end in view, the court of France continued its efforts to establish
the Jesuits in Paris, well understanding what efficient aid they would
willingly render in the work of suppressing every tendency toward
liberalism and freedom of religious belief. The hostility of the
Parliament toward the Jesuits, however, was so decided and violent
that it still refused to yield obedience to the royal command; and
affairs remained in this condition until the death of Henry II led to
the introduction of other influences. It was then deemed necessary
to invoke the aid of Catharine de Medicis, mother of the new king,
Francis II, "to show a bold front against the incursions of heresy by
at once _compelling_ the Parliament to acknowledge and receive the
Jesuits."[56] It was not difficult to enlist the aid of Catharine,
who was always ready to promise anything either to mislead or destroy
the Protestants, greatly preferring the latter. By her influence
and authority royal orders were issued commanding the Parliament to
ratify and register the letters-patent to the Jesuits which had been
prepared by Henry II before his death. It should not be overlooked
that this was an effort to _force_ the Jesuits into Paris against the
repeated remonstrances of Parliament, the universities, the leading
ecclesiastical authorities of the Gallican Church, the whole body of
the Gallican and Protestant Christians; and, in fact, against the
existing laws and the public sentiment of the people. A fact like this
not only tends to show, but is convincing proof, that the Jesuits were
ready to defy all these influences, and to disregard every existing law
or custom that imposed the least restraint upon them, their controlling
object being not only to aid the king and the pope in destroying the
"liberties" of the Gallican Church and Christians, and thus subjecting
France to the temporal domination of the papacy, but to destroy forever
the free religious thought which Protestantism had introduced. "But,"
says the Jesuit Daurignac, evidently with regret, "the Parliament was
as intractable as ever," still refusing to obey the mandate of the
king, or to allow the Jesuits to enter Paris. If all this opposition
to the wishes of the Parisian people had been the result of impulse,
arising suddenly out of rapidly passing events, it might be passed
over as a sudden outbreak and forgotten. But it was the result of a
fixed, settled, and determinate papal policy, which had already had
several centuries of growth, and which it was deliberately resolved to
persist in until the heresy of Protestantism should be exterminated,
and free religious thought made impossible. Such a contest as that was
most congenial to the Jesuits, because they saw, in the achievement of
these results, the fulfillment of the highest objects of their society.
With a stake like that in view, backed by the king and the pope, they
persisted in their course with untiring vigilance, considering the
most serious difficulties they encountered as mere trifles compared
with the end they hoped to reach. That they might be assured of the
royal sympathy, the king, Francis II, was easily induced by Catharine
de Medicis to issue "new letters-patent, with _orders_ for their
immediate enrollment by Parliament, notwithstanding the remonstrances
of the assembly and of the Bishop of Paris."[57] But Parliament, still
unyielding, submitted them to the four Faculties of the university,
"thus indicating," says Daurignac, "a disposition 'not to submit
even to the authority of royalty,'" a most grievous offense, which,
in those days, was considered a flagrant sin. The conclusion of the
four Faculties was that the Jesuits were "inadmissible," based upon
satisfactory reasons which were fully assigned. This obstinacy was
unpardonable, and, inasmuch as it could not be overcome by direct
means, the Jesuits, at last, were driven to the necessity of resorting
to indirection, manifestly intending, if thereby successful, to regain
whatsoever ground they might be compelled to lose. Accordingly they
changed their tactics, and in order to remove the existing obstacles,
declared, in a petition to the king, that if admitted into Paris
they would conform to the laws of the country, and "to the Church of
France," a purpose they had never avowed before, and which subsequent
events proved they did not then intend to fulfill. But the Parliament
was not entrapped by this Jesuitical device, and, in response, proposed
to the king that they would withdraw their objection to the Jesuits
upon the condition that they should cease "to apply to the society the
name of Jesus; and that, moreover, they should not be considered as a
religious order in the diocese of Paris, but be designated simply as
members of a society,"[58] with civil rights exclusively. This probably
was a mere subterfuge, inasmuch as the Jesuits could not have consented
to the proposition without self-destruction. It shows, however, how
intense was the opposition to the society.
The whole Christian population of Paris, including both the Gallicans
and Protestants, were thrown into a condition of intense excitement
when Charles IX ascended the throne as the successor of Francis II.
The Protestants were in fear of total extermination; and the Gallican
Christians were convinced that the main object of the Jesuits, the
pope, and the monarchical rulers of the country, was to change the
destiny of France by bringing the country into humiliating obedience
to Rome, both in religious and temporal affairs, without any regard
whatsoever to their system of Church government, or to the integrity
of their ancient Christian faith. Charles IX was a mere child, only
nine years of age, and was, consequently, the mere creature of his
mother, Catharine de Medicis, whose familiarity with court intrigues
enabled her, as guardian of the king, to grasp all the powers of
queen regent, without reference to the sentiments or will of the
French people. She relied solely upon the possession of the powers
and prerogatives of royalty to maintain her authority; and, being an
Italian, her character resembled as nearly that of the prince portrayed
by Machiavelli, her countryman, as that of any other ruler who ever
governed. She was always profuse in her promises when she considered
them necessary to gain her objects; but never regarded herself bound
by them beyond her own pleasure. She violated them at will, whensoever
her royal or personal interests required it. In her dealings with the
French Huguenots she practiced treachery and perfidy to an extent which
would have brought a blush to the cheek of a Turkish sultan. She was,
therefore, a fit instrument in the hands of the papal authorities and
the Jesuits to bring France and the French Christians in subjugation
to Rome--an object which, as an Italian and foreigner, was especially
attractive to her. She caused the king to yield, or readily yielded
herself, as the king had no will of his own, to the entreaties of the
Jesuits by again requiring of Parliament that it should consent to
their establishment in Paris without further delay. But the Jesuits
were still so obnoxious that Parliament continued to hesitate, and
demanded an explanation of the reasons for a step of such doubtful
propriety, and so in conflict with public opinion. In explanation,
one of the leading Jesuits, with "much eloquence," it is said by
Daurignac, "clearly and energetically exposed the plans and projects of
the Calvinists," or Protestants, and "the machinations and collusions
existing between them and the university for the purpose of obtaining
their ends;" that is, their united efforts to establish in France the
freedom of religious belief--a form of heresy which the disciples of
Loyola had solemnly sworn to eradicate. This open avowal of the only
motive which influenced the Jesuits surrounded the controversy with so
much delicacy and importance, that it was referred by the Parliament
to the States General, as the representative of the whole nation, or
to the next National Council of the Church. Thus we find constantly
accumulating the most conclusive evidence to show the persistence of
the Jesuits, and how steadily and earnestly they were resisted by the
best and most enlightened part of the French people.
The Jesuits were unquestionably much discomfited and chagrined at this
continued resistance, and were constrained to seek assistance from
every available quarter. The nobility of Auvergne were consequently
persuaded to interpose in their behalf by soliciting the admission
of the society into all the towns of that province, evidently
supposing if that were done that the Jesuits would soon diffuse
themselves throughout the whole country. That the entire destruction
of Protestantism was the only and ultimate end they contemplated is
sufficiently proven by the fact that in their petition to the king,
wherein they asked for the introduction of the Jesuits, they said:
"Unless the king wishes the whole of Auvergne to fall into heresy,
it is necessary that the Society of Jesus should be admitted into
France."[59]
These proceedings were soon followed by the National Council of the
French Church at Poissy, to which, as we have seen, the Protestants
had looked forward with so much anxiety, anticipating it as an
occasion when they would be permitted to make known the reasons of
their religious belief. It was attended by the queen regent, the king,
and the entire royal court, representing monarchical power; by five
cardinals, forty archbishops and bishops, and numerous doctors, in
behalf of the Church; by several Calvinist ministers, representing that
form of faith; and by Henry, King of Navarre, and the Prince of Condé,
representing the Huguenots and the general Protestant sentiment in
favor of religious liberty. Such a body, under ordinary circumstances,
might have enabled the Protestants to realize their hopes, at least
to the extent of convincing the authorities of the Government that
they were loyal to it, and obedient to all its commands, except in
the single particular of desiring to be left free to follow their own
consciences in the worship of God. But Laynez, the Jesuit general, was
also there, to demand conformity to the requirements of the papacy
and of his society, that no discussion should be tolerated, and that
"uninquiring obedience" to authority should be exacted from all. To
him and to his society it was impossible to preserve the union of
Church and State without this; and if this were not done, its joint
monarchism would be endangered. Accordingly he took especial pains
to point out to the king and queen-mother "the indecency and danger"
of the free discussion of questions of religious faith, by those who
were disposed to defend Protestantism, in such an assembly. Daurignac
says that Laynez was "shocked and grieved by the fearful blasphemies
which had fallen from the lips of one Peter Martyr, an apostate monk,"
who had ventured to express his opinions freely. He considered it
improper for any but theologians--that is, those whose minds had been
already molded and fashioned to obedience--to be present upon such
occasions. This rebuke offended the queen-mother, who withdrew from
the Council. But this did not disconcert the Jesuit general, who was
not so easily turned from his purpose. He knew the character of her
majesty thoroughly, and said to the Prince of Condé, "She is a great
dissembler," believing, as he undoubtedly did, that whatsoever she
might then do or say, he would, in the end, bring her into obedience
to the Jesuit purposes. He soon had convincing proof of his power; for
the queen, the king, and the nobles never afterwards appeared in the
Council, and the Jesuit general had the matter in his own hands.[60]
Instead of bringing the conference to any practical results, favorable
in the least degree to freedom of conscience, Laynez succeeded in
causing it to contribute to measures having reference to the admission
of the Jesuits into all parts of France.[61] The Protestants were
dismayed, and the Jesuits were triumphant. Laynez then became the
leader of the orthodox party, and from that time commanded an influence
which Loyola himself did not acquire. We shall see hereafter how
far-reaching and controlling this influence was.
After Laynez left the Council at Poissy, flushed with triumph, he
repaired at once to the General Council of Trent, which was then in
session, as a special legate of the pope--Pius IV--who had discovered
in him such qualities as he supposed might become available in helping
the sinking fortunes of the papacy. This was the first appearance of
a Jesuit general in such a body, or in other general ecclesiastical
assemblages, and consequently dates the beginning of a new era in the
history of the Roman Church. Christianity had prevailed for more than
fifteen hundred years without the aid of such a society as the Jesuits;
but as that wonderful organization had been conceived by the restless
brain of Loyola for the sole purpose of suppressing the Reformation
and all its enlightening influences, it was readily accepted by the
papal authorities as a valuable help, after the pope had given it
his indorsement. Hence, Laynez was received by the Council of Trent
with unusual manifestations of joy and enthusiasm. The prelates of
the Council had undoubtedly been notified of his success at Poissy in
obtaining the mastery over Catharine de Medicis, and, through her,
over the king and court of France, as well as over the Protestants.
Preference was shown him over all the representatives of the ancient
religious orders of the Church, and when the latter complained of this,
upon the ground that the Jesuit society was only of recent origin, the
Council decided against them on account of the important services which
the Jesuits, by means of their compact organization, would be able
to render the cause of the papacy. And to manifest this preference of
the Jesuits over the other orders, so that it could not be mistaken, a
pulpit was prepared for Laynez in a conspicuous place in the Council
chamber, so that whatsoever he said should be distinctly heard.[62]
The monastic orders were not satisfied with the inferior position thus
assigned to them, and murmured, but could not help it.
Such a reception as this by so distinguished a body of prelates as the
Council of Trent, was well calculated to incite the pride and ambition
of the Jesuits--especially of Laynez--and to create in their minds the
belief that if they continued to pursue the cautious but aggressive
policy of Loyola, they would bring the pope and all the ecclesiastical
authorities of the Church into obedience to them. Manifestly, the
society considered this the ultimate end contemplated by Loyola;
and Laynez was sufficiently skilled in the methods of government to
understand the necessity of obtaining from the Council of Trent the
recognition of the superiority of the Jesuits over the monastic orders.
He had not yet succeeded in accomplishing the admission of the society
into France, and this he evidently regarded as an important step in
that direction. Flattering as was his reception by the Council, it
was not all he desired. He considered an additional step necessary
to obtain from the Council a full approval of the reasons assigned
by Loyola to justify the establishment of his society. Accordingly,
after the Council had passed upon the questions of faith and dogma,
it proceeded to investigate "the causes of the evils which afflicted
the Church." This opened an exceedingly broad field of inquiry, and
resulted, doubtless as Laynez desired, in the conclusion stated by
Daurignac, "that these causes were, principally, the ignorance and
immorality of a great portion of the clergy and the monastic orders,"
and that "the best remedy for this great evil was to prepare Christian
generations by a good system of education;"[63] that is to say, that
any effort to reform the existing clergy and ancient orders would
be unavailing, but that the remedy lay in educating other and future
generations. It is easy to see that this conclusion was unavoidable
under the doctrine established by the same Council, and affirmed also
by the Jesuits, that the clergy who lead virtuous and those who lead
vicious lives, possess the same power and authority in the Church.
This was a great triumph for Laynez and his society, inasmuch as it
was a specific approval by the Council of Trent of the grounds upon
which Loyola had justified the creation of the Jesuit society; that
is, the incompetency of the Church to reform itself without extraneous
aid, apart from the existing clergy and the monastic orders, and the
necessity for an educational organization, like that of the Jesuits,
to be maintained by authority and discipline for that purpose.[64]
And thus equipped by so important an indorsement, the Jesuits at once
assumed to have been constituted, with Divine approval, the exclusive
educators of the world, and to be endowed with authority to enter
every nation at will, and so to train and discipline the "Christian
generations" as to bring them down to a common level of obedience to
the united authority of Church and State.
Without the indorsement obtained by the Jesuits from the Council of
Trent, they might have been kept out of Paris entirely, or, at all
events, their entry into that city would have been greatly delayed.
As it was, the antipathy against them remained so great and universal
among the Gallican Christians, that their admission at last was
obtained only upon the condition that they should take a solemn oath to
do nothing to impair the liberties of the Gallican Church; that they
would submit to the laws of the nation, which recognized the pope as
the head of the Church, but denied to him the power to excommunicate
the king; or to lay an interdict upon the kingdom; or to exercise any
jurisdiction over temporal matters; or to dismiss bishops from their
office; or to exercise any authority by a legate, unless empowered by
the king; and that they would, moreover, maintain those provisions of
law which assigned to a General Council of the Church power superior
to that of a pope--in other words, that papal infallibility was not a
part of Christian faith.[65] There is abundant reason for believing,
in view of both preceding and subsequent events, that when the Jesuits
took this oath, they had not the least idea of being bound by it. No
Jesuit's conscience was ever bound by such an oath.
The authority of Laynez, under the circumstances related, became
potential enough to enable him to influence the decisions of the
queen-mother and the court of France, and finding himself thus
sustained, it was not long before the Jesuit policy began to bear
its legitimate fruits. Of course, his most heavily charged batteries
were immediately opened upon the Protestants, to whose heresies he
traced all the existing evils of the times. An occasion for this soon
occurred. The Protestants petitioned for "places of worship;" that
is, merely to be allowed to worship at designated places according to
their consciences. Laynez fully understood the meaning of this, and the
ends it would ultimately accomplish if the Protestant petition were
allowed. His keen sagacity enabled him to know that if the differences
between Protestantism and the papacy became the subject of intellectual
discussion, upon a forum where human reason had the right to assert
itself, the triumph of the former over the latter would be assured.
Therefore, true to his own instincts and the teachings of his society,
he remonstrated with Catharine de Medicis against granting the prayer
of the Protestants, and in his memorial upon the subject "pointed out
to her so forcibly the danger to the Church and State that such a
concession would entail, that, appreciating his arguments, she refused
to sanction the erection of Protestant places of worship."[66]
These facts--related upon Jesuit authority, and boasted of by their
historians--furnish the most palpable and incontestable proof of the
conspiracy of Catharine de Medicis and the Jesuits, after the latter
obtained admission into France, to suppress the freedom of religious
worship, and so to mold the policy of Church and State as to render
its existence impossible. It was an odious and revolting conspiracy;
but the objects to be accomplished justified it in the eyes of the
queen, of Laynez, and of all his followers. It was the cardinal
point of the professed Jesuit policy--the most prominent feature of
their organization. No imagination is fertile enough to picture the
condition into which the civilized world would have been plunged if
this conspiracy, besides its temporary and bloody triumph in France,
had become sufficiently powerful to dictate the Governments of modern
States. The Gallican Christians had for centuries successfully resisted
all attempts of the papacy to interfere with the temporal affairs of
France; and whilst they disagreed with Protestants upon questions
of religious faith, the two forces were united in opposition to the
Jesuits, because of the direct hostility of the latter to both. Each
could see that the entrance of the society into France, under the
control and dominion of an alien power, would be the introduction
of a disturbing and hostile element, which would put an end to the
concord and harmony then rapidly springing up between the two Christian
bodies. This the Jesuits intended to prevent by whatsoever means they
could manage to employ; for, from the beginning of their existence,
they have opposed everything they could not subjugate. Therefore they
realized the importance of having the monarchical power upon their
side--especially when they saw it wielded by such a queen as Catharine
de Medicis--so that by conspiracy with it against the Gallican
Christians and the Protestants, they could destroy the liberties of
the former, and entirely suppress the spirit of free inquiry asserted
by the latter. Keeping these objects always before them, the Jesuits
considered them of sufficient magnitude to justify any form of
intrigue; and they were sufficiently familiar with the qualities of
the queen to know that she possessed such love of power and capacity
for conspiracy that they could successfully play upon her ambition and
prejudices to accomplish their purposes.
There is no intelligent reader of French history who is not familiar
with the steps taken by this perfidious queen regent, after the
admission of the Jesuits into Paris, to bring about the terrible
Massacre of St. Bartholomew--an event so closely allied with others,
of which they were the undoubted authors, that one must close his eyes
not to see the evidences which point to their agency in that infamous
transaction. They needed such bloody work to give them the mastery
over France; and although they have since then been more than once
expelled in disgrace from French soil, they have returned again and
again to torment her people, who still continue to realize, under their
Republic, how unceasingly they labor for the entire overthrow of every
form of popular government.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 53: Daurignac, Vol. I, p. 36.]
[Footnote 54: Daurignac, Vol. I, pp. 103-104.]
[Footnote 55: _Ibid._, p. 104.]
[Footnote 56: Daurignac, Vol. I, p. 105.]
[Footnote 57: Daurignac, Vol. I, p. 105.]
[Footnote 58: Daurignac, Vol. I, p. 106.]
[Footnote 59: Daurignac, Vol. I, p. 107.]
[Footnote 60: Daurignac, Vol. I, pp. 108-109.]
[Footnote 61: Church in France. By Jervis. Vol. I, p. 146.]
[Footnote 62: Daurignac, Vol. I, pp. 111-112.]
[Footnote 63: _Ibid._, p. 114.]
[Footnote 64: Daurignac, Vol. I, pp. 177-178.]
[Footnote 65: Nicolini, pp. 177-178.]
[Footnote 66: Daurignac, Vol. I, p. 110.]