M. LOUIS RENE DE CARADUC DE LA CHALOTAIS,

PROCVRErR-GENERAI. OF THE KING TO THE PARLIAMENT OF BRETAONE,
On the 1st, 3/-rf, \th, and Hth of Dfffitibfi; 1761, IN OBEDIENCE TO THF. OUDFR OF THE COVKT or THE I'TH or AVOUST PUPCETHNO.
TRANSLATED FROM THE FRENCH EDITION OF 1762.
TO THE PARLIAMENT OF BBETAGNE.
MESSIEURS,
You have commissioned me to make a report to you on the constitutions of the Jesuits. I will endeavour to carry out your designs, as Henry IV. directed all his Parliaments to prosecute a similar enquiry in 1-394 : — " impartially, without animosity or favour towards any person whatever," said he, " so that in the conscientious discharge of my duty, God may be praised and honoured by my good and holy intentions ; and in the faithful execution of your functions, He may be honoured by your acts and just decisions."
In making the intentions of so great a king the rule of my proceedings, I shall doubtless fulfil the desires of the successor to his throne and to his virtues, and act in conformity with your wishes. He who executes a public function is bound by what the laws direct : arid while he has a regard for the rights of pri- vate individuals, his chief concern is for the public good.
My impression has been that you did not simply require me to give the rules of a monastic order — which, if it were confined to a cloister, would attract little attention from the public — but that you wanted to know the regulations which are binding on a cele- brated order, spread throughout the world, and filling many offices of importance equally to Church and State. I have sup- posed that you wished to be informed of the relation in which members of this society stand with regard to both ; of the spirit in which its rules have been constructed, and the principles on which they rest ; and to know what effect they may have on civil and religious society, and on the education of the young.
In order to examine the constitutions of the Jesuits in these points of view, it is necessary for us to begin by laying down principles and establishing facts.
First, a religious order, whatever it may be, ought not to in- troduce anything into a country in contravention of its laws. This would be contrary to the spirit of Christianity, which enjoins the principle of peaceable submission to the ruling powers of the State.
But this is not enough ; that which may be bearable only because it is not mischievous, is not good in the eyes of the law, and consequently ought not to be introduced. All associations, more especially those claiming to be religious establishments, ought to have as their object the good of mankind, and the pro- motion of religion. Any association seeking only its own aggrandisement, its own glory and interests, is essentially hurtful and vicious.
In this way we ought to look at the constitution, statutes, and laws of religious orders, associations, or congregations of any deno- mination. First, consider them in relation to the principles of natural law (the real model of all positive laws, civil or religious), and to the particular laws of France. Everything injurious to those laws should be proscribed. Nothing should be even per- mitted which, though it may not be expressly prohibited by those laws, is yet at variance with their spirit.
Many religious orders had established themselves throughout Christendom before the Jesuits. Had they been actuated by the noblest views of public utility ? On that subject politicians will not easily agree ; but policy almost always yields before the torrent of reigning opinions, whenever an appearance of piety furnishes a pretext either to seduce or to attack it.
People, almost without exception, allow themselves to be attracted by outward appearances. Few men are struck with the simple virtue which fulfils its duties in the shade, and is content to do good without ostentation ; they admire and esteem singu- larity of conduct, and brilliant outward show of mortifications — practices often undertaken through pride, and subject to illusion, even in the minds of those who perform them. These perfor- mances are quite independent of true religion and virtue, since we see them, in certain countries, surpassed by idolaters.
Appearances of this kind, whether true or false, have always imposed on great, as well as on small, communities. To shew this, let us pause for a moment to consider how those new estab- lishments were formed in France.
It seems strange to prove their birth by the pains and penalties which were imposed to prevent their formation. " But it is a fact, that in 1215, the Lateran Council published an order against inventing new religions/' by which was meant, new orders or congregations ; " lest," said the canon, " their too great diversity should create confusion in the Church." Accordingly this council ordered, that whoever wished to profess a religious life should enter into one of the orders already authorised. This prohibition was wise, and accordant with the spirit of the purest antiquity." We are quoting the words of the judicious Abbe do Fleury.
" It is also a fact," he observes further, " that this decree was so ill observed, that many more were established after its pro- mulgation than before that time."
Bishops and priests are established by God to instruct the people, and preach religion both to believers and infidels. There have been times indeed in the history of the Church when unfor- tunately priests and clergy were themselves almost in want of instruction. Great ignorance prevailed, and means of obtaining knowledge were found with difficulty.
As a reason for the institution of most religious orders, of those at least which were authorised to perform the offices of the Church, it has been supposed that the ordinary pastors neglected their duties, and that the masses were left without instruction, and buried in ignorance ; and it must be allowed that this supposition is not without foundation.
In 1216, that is to say, one year after the prohibition issued by the Council of Lateran, Saint Dominic, a Spaniard, instituted an order, whose object was to preach to the people, and to defend the faith against heretics.
Saint Francis D'Assise, in Umbria, had lately instituted another, whose object was rather to edify, than to instruct. Nevertheless, he also preached, although he was only a deacon ; and his dis- ciples preached also.
0
About the end of the fifteenth century, Saint Gactano, a Venetian, founded the order of tile Theatins, to reform the clergy, and defend the faith against heretics.
Matthew Bushy, an Italian, in the commencement of the sixteenth century, reformed the Brothers Minor, and devoted himself to preaching the Wprd of God with his companions, who were called Capuchins.
The Eecolets, another branch of the disciples of Saint Francis, were established in 1531.
The establishment of the Barnabites was nearly coeval with that of the Theatins, and professed the same object.
Lastly, Saint Ignatius proposed to catechise children, to con- vert unbelievers, and to defend the faith against heretics ; his institution was approved by Paul III. in 1540.
I shall not speak of the order of St. Benedict, who proposed, according to the true principles of monastic life, to live in solitude, simply as good Christians, who wish to work out their own salvation. Some centuries afterwards they were found to be living in a manner far different from exact obedience to rule. Cluny and Citeaux were reformers, who soon in their turn also needed reformation.
Neither shall I speak of an infinite number of religious orders which had other objects — nor of various communities of men and of women, instituted at different times.
But I cannot refrain from observing that the object of the institution of the Jesuits, and that of most of the orders, of which I have spoken, is exactly the same, namely, the conversion of sinners, and in general, the instruction of the faithful, of infidels, and heretics.
AVith respect to the education of youth, there were universities, which had been founded in very ancient times ; above all that of Paris, which was celebrated in the tenth century. In those iiniversities, all sciences were taught, according to the enlighten- ment of the age.
I say, then, that those orders, having been established under the supposition that pastors, not being learned, did not give as much instruction to the faithful as was necessary ; it would have been more natural and more conformable to the spirit of the
Church, to begin by reforming and instructing the clergy, in order to enable them to teach the people ; than to go and seek foreign monies, in Spain and Italy, who, themselves, very soon needed reforming. The founders of those orders and their first disciples were virtuous persons. But sensible men have observed, that the first fervour soon evaporates, that it seldom outlives a century in any order, after which it becomes necessary to recall them to their first principles.
Instead of protecting and assisting the ordinary pastors, who are the proper ministers of the Church, they placed over them a body of monks, who have oppressed them ; thus trusting to a mercenary and auxiliary host, and neglecting the national forces. The new Orders were crowned with favours and privileges. Their exemptions were multiplied to the detriment of the jurisdiction of the bishops, who, with too little foresight, abandoned the interests of their clergy. While the court of Rome restricted their powers, to increase its own, the bishops sought the alliance of Rome ; and .now, though the clergy have learnt to see the evil of this policy more clearly, yet many of them persist in adhering to it with less pardonable want of consideration.
The professorial chairs in schools, and churches, seminaries, and missions, were confided to the monks ; aud the parochial clergy have become accustomed to consider these monks as their masters and instructors. The parochial clergy are left in poverty and dependence, and consequently without the means of learning ; and if learning had not been encouraged in the universities of the Sorbonne, respect for these clergymen would have been entirely lost.
So, on the pretence that the ecclesiastics did not preach, the Mendicant Friars were employed ; and their preaching not being in accordance with the preaching of the Pastors, or these Mendi- cants choosing to preach without their leave (for in 1516 it had been found necessary to forbid the preaching of the Mendicants without the leave of the ordinary), the Theatins were ordered to perform those functions. The Barnabites were afterwards sub- stituted for the Theatins. Next followed the Jesuits, professing the same objects, endowed with the same exemptions, and with far more extensive pretensions.
8
The Brothers of Christian Doctrine were afterwards substituted for the Jesuits, who no longer catechised, excepting in their own classes ; whereas Saint Ignatius catechised everywhere, — in houses, and even in the streets. There have since arisen monks of various sorts and under various denominations.
The Fathers of Christian Doctrine, were instituted to remedy the want of learning of the other religious persons. Seminaries for foreign missions were established to supplement the Jesuit missions ; but instead of combining for the same objects, these various orders of missionaries differed, to the scandal both of believers and infidels. Congregations of Endists, Lazarists, and Fathers of the Oratory, were formed to remedy the negligence or the incapacity of others, whether in colleges or in the direction of seminaries.
From these establishments numbers of monks have issued, of communities and orders distinguished by their dress, divided by interest, principles, and party.
The government has been overwhelmed by beggars, by idle men, forgetful of the purposes of their institutions ; a multiplicity of small colleges has attracted scholars without end, and has pro- duced indifferent or faulty instruction ; and every order of monks has usually produced an order of nuns of the same rule.
Ever good work, that was to be done, every abuse, that re- quired reformation, has produced a new order in the Church. Acts of devotion have caused the establishment of new houses ; and by the superabundance of pious establishments the State is impoverished and depopulated.
States benefit less than individuals by finding out their mistakes.
V (— '
The experiences of past ages is utterly lost on the succeeding age ; and whenever zeal proposes any apparently desirable object, pious persons, inexperienced and uninstructed, and therefore without the means of foresight and consideration, are found, Avho seize on what they imagine to be new ideas, and eagerly favour new establishments.
I am far from denying that much temporary good was effected by the founders, and by some monks of the various orders. But we cannot conceal from ourselves the great practical and permanent evil which results from them, in preventing incumbents and
9
curates, who endure the labour and the heat of the day, from the attainment of learning, and a sufficient means of livelihood ; an evil which now seems irremediable, and which the Church formerly considered, and endeavoured to prevent, by forbidding the multi- plication of religious orders.
I only speak according to the decisions of councils, and am repeating the opinions of the most learned and pious bishops, who have ever enlightened the Church. It has been said that the multiplication of orders produced a healthy emulation. I appeal to experience. It has produced wars and theological hatreds, with which the State has sometimes been so kind as to embarrass itself, as if these were affairs of State ; instead of despising or silencing them. It has created cabals, parties, and factions ; and when one of these becomes dominant, it crushes the others. The competition of individuals may create healthy emulation, but that of Orders engenders furious, widely spread, and lasting jealousies.
Evils, which arise in states are not immediately perceptible. Wise men foresee them, because they consider principles; but most men have no principles. Zeal inflames vacant imaginations on the subject of some projected establishment ; enthusiasm seizes upon it ; the ambition is found, which is allied to the glory of governing, adds to it the zeal which seems to justify all. If serious persons oppose themselves to these projectors, from superior views of preserving order, their attachment to religion is suspected ; and that is an injustice of the gravest kind, and a doubt most easily raised.
Persons who are indifferent, and they are the majority, look on in silence. Wise men grow weary of constant resistance ; they give way to importunity or to authority, and the mischief is per- petrated under pretence of peace.
Finally, gentlemen, since the Government commands me through you to deliver my opinion on religious constitutions, I think that, if needful, the parochial clergy should have been reformed, and instructed, and endowed ; and that the orders of monks professing to have the same objects in view should have been incorporated and regulated by law. At all events, those who need reform, should be reformed, before new orders are created.
10
That is, I think, what religion demands, and the State should desire. Without this, religious establishments must increase ad in fin it if n> throughout all Christendom; "since the pretext of instructing the ignorant, and converting heretics and infidels will never he wanting ; there will always be good works to effect and abuses to reform.
I now return to the order of the Jesuits. Their founder, although brought up to the professions of arms, and full of the ideas of chivalry, then prevalent in his country, was struck with the ignorance of the people, and with the very small amount of instruction they received. He became inflamed with an ardent desire for the conversion of souls.* He devoted himself to the service of our Lord Jesus Christ and of the holy Virgin, as their knight, and after having practised frightful austeries and morti- fications, he began to preach penitence and good works. Soon after, he founded congregations, colleges, etc., and dedicated himself to the education of youth.
Pope Paul III. at first refused to authorize this new order. A congregation of cardinals decided, that it was not necessary to introduce it into the Church. The Cardinal Cajetano pressed Saint Ignatius to enter into the order of the Theatins ; but the wish to be a founder, and the desire to obey no one but the Pope in all things, and in all places, for the salvation of souls and the propagation of the faith, prevailed. The desire which all Popes have always had, to establish in all Christian states a standing army under their orders, and subjects submitting to no authority but theirs, caused this order to be authorised in 1540, by Pope- Paul III.
The Bull of confirmation runs : — " Ignatius De Loyola, with nine priests, his companions, having vowed their services to Jesus Christ and to the Pope, has requested our approbation of a society, whose form is a spiritual army under the standard of the cross ; obeying none but Jesus Christ, and the Pope His Vicar on the earth ; making a vow of poverty, chastity, and obedi- ence to a General, in whom they would see Jesus Christ, as if He was present, and a special vow to the Pope and his successors, to execute everything, that they should command for the glory of
* See the life of Saint Ignatius, by Boiihours, p. 31, et inffn.
11
God, the salvation of souls, and the propagation of the faith in any place whatever, to which he may please to send them ; with power to make general constitutions by the voice of the majority ; submitting particular constitutions to the General, who would have the right to command them."
Since that time, they have obtained an infinite number of Bulls and Briefs in their favour, designated in the Institutions under the general name of Apostolic Letters. There are ninety-two of these Bulls and Briefs, beginning with the first Bull, given on the 27th of September, 1540, of which I have been speaking, down to the Brief of the 6th of May, 1753. This collection fills the first 260 pages of the first volume.
Next follows the summary of the privileges obtained by the Jesuits. They are arranged in alphabetical order. From p. 261 to p. 336 the}- recount, in general terms, the exemptions, which have been granted to them directly by Popes, and those belonging to other orders, in which they have a right to participate.
In the third place, the preliminary examination for the recep- tion of members (sujets} comprehends all the pages between p. 337 and 357.
In the fourth place, we find the constitutions of the Order divided into ten parts: each of which, excepting the last, is divided into several chapters, and followed by declarations in the form of explanations and elucidations. These additions have as much authority as the text, as much even as the constitutions (according to the notice at the head of each).*
These constitutions, including the examination, which precedes them, occupy from p. 357 to p. 448.
In the fifth place appear in this volume the decrees of general congregations. It is said, eighteen of these were held before the publication of the edition of Prague in 1757, and that there has been another since that time, in 1758, at the time of the election of the present General; and that three among these eighteen congregations were held during the lifetime of generals, that is to say, the fifth congregation in 1593, the sixth in 1608, and
•'.• These volumes were those of the fkmons, but too often forgotten " Constitutions of the Jesuits," which were produced during the trial of Father Lavalette. (Editor.)
12
the fourteenth in 1696. This collection is found between p. 449 and p. 696.
Lastly, between p. 697 and p. 731, is a collection of canons of general congregations ; but there are only the canons of the first eleven congregations ; those of the seven last congregations have not been printed.
The above are the contents of the first volume which was sent to me.
The second volume contains ten bodies of collections besides an index.
The first body is a collection of censures and precepts, divided into five chapters, from the first page to the seventh.
The second contains the formularies of congregations from p. 7 to p. 69.
The third is a summary of the constitutions, with common rules and particulars of the various offices in the Society. There is also the letter of Saint Ignatius to the Jesuits of Portugal on obedience ; and it ends with the different formularies for vows, p. 169.
The fourth is the plan laid down for studies, known under the name of "Ratio Studiormn" from p. 169, to p. 238 ; afterwards follow ordinances of generals, from p. 238 to p. 286.
The sixth collection, from p. 286, is an instruction for superiors, given by Claude Aquaviva, divided into six chapters, up to p. 303.
The seventhj which contains instructions for provincials, is a kind of summary in twenty- one articles drawn from various writings of generals, up to p. 346.
The eighth body of collections, under the title of " Industries," is also by Aquaviva, on the means to obtain the government of minds, up to p. 384.
The ninth collection contains the spiritual exercises of Saint Ignatius, in forty-six pages.
Finally, the tenth is a directory for spiritual exercises, from p. 431 to the last, p. 472. This volume concludes with a general index.
I shall begin what I have to say on the subject of the Jesuits by an observation on the institution of their society. It was not copied from any model, and it is not probable that it will ever
13
serve as a model for others. It is the fate of extrordinary men to excite too much admiration, and exaggerated censure. Judg- ments must vary according to the different points of view from which we take our observation, or how could it "be that some men revere that as the chef d'ceitrre of wisdom and Christian perfec- tion, which other men consider as an overthrow of reason and social order ? And here, as on all other occasions, we must throw off the prejudices of party ; ecclesiastics must be judged like other men on principles of law and custom ; we should in other respects have a right to judge them more severely than other men. It has been asked, whether the society of Jesuits direct their cares and their labours with an intention to be useful to the Church and to the State.
No body of men, 110 company that ever existed, could be entirely justified in a discussion of that kind ; it would be unjust to examine that particular society in such a way; it would be unjust to question the conduct and intentions of individuals, for motives and intentions are beyond the reach of human judgment. But with respect to this Institution and its con- stitutions, they should be examined judicially, with a view to their tendencies, — whether their aim and intention is to promote public good — whether it employs its members in a manner, that is profitable to the State and to the Church; or rather for the private interest of the Society in preference to the public weal.
It is clear that both morality and policy demand, that the Jesuits should either be acquitted or found guilty of the accusa- tions brought against them ; for the State ought not to abandon the education of youth to persons suspected on reasonable grounds ; and it would be criminal to allow a whole society to lie perpe- tually under unjust imputations,
Thus, the interests of the State, and the interests of the Jesuits, equally require a stringent inquiry into the truth of these accusa- tions ; and that justice should be done before the whole world. Priests and monks cannot be so insensible to their reputation as to refuse to clear themselves of strong suspicions, which, if not disproved, would become acknowledged opprobriums. They ought to answer them openly, not by oblique means, not like intriguers;
14
by delays extracted from the kindness of the sovereign ; by com- mands that either obstruct or suspend their justification, which by delay would hourly become more difficult. They ought to answer publicly and judicial!}-. The General ought to join himself with the rest of the Society and demand justice. They should declare their doctrine, which if it is Christian, should be proclaimed from the house-tops. Let them produce their constitutions and all their rules. They owe it to the State : they owe it to the Church ; they owe it to themselves. It is thus that oppressed innocence conducts itself; it shows itself in the light of day. Innocence does not fear the light. But do not allow them to offer promises and oaths in the place of justifications ; promises and vows, which they have not power to fulfil ; or denials, which they know in their consciences are untrue. Let them abandon the dark manoeuvres of a policy, which would furnish new grounds of accusation against them.
The Parliament of Paris has condemned them on account of their books, which are their first accusers and their judges. The General is pointed out in the Appeal, as connected with abuses, which public opinion has taken note of in their constitutions. Let the Jesuits join us if they are innocent. The Ministry wish to find none in the State but citizens ; and none in the Church but virtuous ecclesiastics. Their functions are not confined to the punishment of criminals ; they have the more important duty of protecting the innocent. Such being the case, the first thing that I ask is, that the Jesuits should communicate all their constitu- tions to me — their rules or statutes — in short, everything be- longing to them which has the force of law in their society.
They have brought to the Register Office of the Court of Paris, the constitutions of the edition of Prague, which they had been asked for ; but it is certain that they have many other laws or rules in force among them.
I find among the books, which the Companion of the Provincial ought to have in his archives (Vol. ii. p. 121) about twenty volumes, among which arc some that quote books and writings in manuscript,
Although some of these have been printed since the time when the rules for the Companion of the Provincial were laid down, and
15
sonic of these are in the edition of Prague, we cannot be sure, that all of these have heen printed ; or rather, I should say, it is perfectly certain that they have not.
It is stated in the preface to the Decrees of the Congregation, that all of them are not comprehended in the collection ; but that it is a selection, and that those only are omitted which bear upon isolated facts.
I see in the preface to the Abridgment of Privileges, that besides the concessions, which arc recorded there, there are other privileges which may be granted by the General of the Order.
The ordinances of the Generals are selected or abridged, as is shown by the preface placed at the head of the ordinances, page 208.
Besides tbe Apostolic Letters granted to the Jesuits, they pos- sess all the Bulls from which they derive their privileges. This is shown in the preface and in the abridgment of these privileges. These are immense collections and enormous volumes ; the Roman collection of Bulls consists of several volumes in folio.
But this is not all. They have rights and privileges granted by what they call spoken ornc/cs, rh-a? rods omcula. These oracles are titles of a kind the most singular of any by which credulity may be abused.
A Pope is supposed in common conversation, or otherwise, to have said to a credible person, that he granted him a favour ; or that he verbally forbade (something or other). That is a verbal oracle ; and that oracle has the same power, the same authority as if the privilege was bestowed by a Brief, or by a Bull (for these are the very terms of the abridgment of the constitution). These verbal oracles are attested by the credible person who heard them. His authority alone is sufficient to cause them to be inserted in these collections, in order that they may be made use of whenever they arc wanted. I shall presently quote one of these manu- scripts in the Collections, Vol. i. in the edition of Prague, p. 282. I should add that this Abridgment of Privileges, in which they arc only named, consists of 72 pages in folio, with tAvo columns in each page, making 144 columns in folio of simple titles of privileges. One cannot, therefore, be surprised at M. Scrvin's
16
saying that this order is founded on privileges rather than on rules.
I ask whether such a code of laws can have hcen framed to he presented for the inspection of nations ¥ It is, however, the code of an order, which has existed 220 years ; and it is a code, which must augment daily ; it would require the labour of many years to read it and examine it.
What can we think of an order of any kind, whose justification depends on the examination and collation of fifty volumes in folio, while it was enough to examine two of those volumes to condemn it?
It must also be stated, that the declarations (which are only commentaries on the constitutions,) and the statutes already made, and those, which may be made hereafter, whatever they may be, are declared to be of equal authority with the constitu- tions emanating from the Pope and from the founder. These are writings Deutero- Canonical, a name which theologians give to those books of Holy Writ which were last declared to be authentic. I should add that it was their General, Laynez, who assembled a congregation to obtain from that congregation the singular power to confer on these writings that authority and authenticity.
How can we judge of a code of laws when we are not certain that we possess the whole of it ; in which the ordinances of the legislator are confounded with the commentaries made upon them, the glosses and interpretation of persons interested in them, and petitioners ; and in which both one and the other are of equal weight and authority ; and where they are selected, abridged, and mutilated at will ? AVhat, I say, can one think of a legislation in which parties may make laws for themselves by alterations or interpretations so as to create rights and exemptions, as they may want them, and which enables them to fabricate privileges by supposing statements made in familiar conversations ?
What a source of misconceptions, to find maxims laid down by plaintiffs regarded as of equal weight with the decisions of the judge, and that too a judge invested with such enormous powers ; to place on an equality the laws of the legislator and the glosses of the commentator ; and to represent a man as legislating in a familiar conversation when he docs not intend it !
17
In the two volumes in folio of the constitutions of the Jesuits, no more mention is made of the laws of the country, in which they intend to abide, than if that country had never had any laws, and than if no church had ever existed in that state ; ex- cepting in one instance, in respect to iimsions, and in two others, where the Society concedes some privileges in favour of the Spanish Inquisition. (See the 5th Congregation Decrct. 21, p. 549, and Compendium Verbo Absolutio, p. 267.)
It must be allowed in favour of the Institution, that it has been approved of, confirmed, and favoured by several Popes ; and even by the Church in the Council of Trent ; that its constitutions have been confirmed by name by all Popes ; that the establish- ments of this Order have been protected and favoured by kings ; and the Jesuits have lived in France on the faith of a possession authorised by the two powers ; a possession which, according to civil laws, would create an unassailable prescriptive right, secure from every objection. But prescription cannot be alleged con- trary to public right, and abuse (if there is abuse) cannot be covered by the lapse of time, nor by the weight of authority.
In the second place, it is contrary to public order, that associa- tions, societies, or orders should be formed in a state, without the authorisation of the state ; for if it were otherwise, we must say that states have no right to maintain themselves.
The constitutions of a religious order arc conditions, to the observance of which it is bound by its allegiance to the Church ; and as no one but the Pope can represent the Church, it is to the Pope, that the approbation of all religious orders must be referred, and to whom they present themselves to be established through- out the Christian world.
But the Pope is not the absolute master of the Church, and the Church herself has no power over temporal interests. The Church exists and subsists in the State ; and the State may decide whether it will admit, or refuse to admit, any order or institution within its dominions.
Such reception necessarily supposes the examination of the conditions on which an order proposes to attach itself to the State, and according to which the State receives and promises to protect it. The State must be informed of the intentions of the
c
18
ecclesiastics who ask to be received, what is their peculiar charac- teristic, and in what respects they are to be distinguished from others ; under what laws they intend to live, and what rules they promise to observe. In short, the State must understand the form of their constitution and government, in order that it may find in their superiors responsible guarantees for the fidelity of their members.
The State must consider also whether such a new order is not injurious to the public or to the rights of bodies already established. All such as might be injured by them have a right to remonstrate and legally represent their cases, and to oppose encroachments on their rights by the proposed new establishment.
It is unheard of that a State should be obliged to admit men they do not know ; and they cannot know them until they present their constitutions, institutions, and laws. It is therefore contrary to the rights of all men, and contrary to public order, that the constitutions of any order, from whomsoever they may emanate, should not be presented ; it is contrary to reason and good sense, that they should not be made public, or at least sufficiently well known.
The laws of the kingdom require an authorization by letters patent from his Majesty, registered in the supreme courts; and there is no Catholic state where the sovereign does not take the same or equal precautions.
I cannot discover that the constitutions of the Jesuits have ever been seen or examined by any tribunal whatsoever, secular or ecclesiastic ; by any sovereign ; not even by the Court of Chancery of Prague, when permission was asked to print them : for it is very remarkable that in that edition, which is the most complete and authentic edition that has been made, there is no "Privilege of the Emperor," a formality required in the Empire, as it is in France. There is no " privilege " to the edition of Antwerp. I do not know whether for the editions of Lyons and of Home privileges were granted by sovereigns.
In France, Jesuits have never obtained letters patent, approving of their institution and constitutions.
And now I must remind you, in the first place, that all this has passed under the veil of religion. The most important laws of
19
Franco are set at nought ; or authority has been taken by surprise and passed over these men. Formalities which the laws prescribe have been omitted ; now, some ages after, the oversight is per- ceived. Meantime establishments have been made ; and it seems that abuses and vices acquire by impunity a sort of prescription, and a right to be unreformable.
The situation of the Jesuits in France is not very distinctly ascertained. A religious order is not merely a set of men distin- guished by a peculiar dress ; it is an ecclesiastical society attached to the State by laws and constitutions.
If neither the Government nor the Councils have ever seen or examined their laws and constitutions, who can say whether they have ever really received the orders, which they profess ?
There were conditions laid down at Poissy for their reception, and, in 1603, for their re-establishment. It follows, that they have never been received in France unconditionally ; which leaves the question open to examination — whether the conditions so imposed have been observed and fulfilled by them.
After all, it is easier to learn whether they are fit to be re- ceived, than whether they are authoritatively received. This last question has become a subject of dispute. When they have been asked what they are, they have answered, " Talcs Qttales" One must answer a wise man according to his understanding, and one who is not wise according to his intention. One might return to them the answer they give, and answer here and everywhere else by telling them that they are received " Talitcr Qnalitcr" They have supposed that they were received. Their reception is only founded on supposition. They were only tolerated at first ; since 1603 they have had a less precarious existence.
But the character of mystery is sufficient by itself to doom and condemn their constitutions. They have taken all sorts of pre- cautions to keep them a secret. Their rule forbids them to communicate them to strangers ; and, moreover, they may not communicate the whole of them to their own members. They took care to print them themselves, in their own college, in Rome ; in their college at Prague ; or to secure the whole edition, when they had them printed elsewhere.
In 1621 the Jesuits refused to communicate their constitutions
c2
20
to the Procurcur- General of the Parliament of Aix, when ho wanted to sec, whether there was anything in them repugnant to the liberties of the Gallican Church ; and it is very astonishing that they obtained by subtlety a lettre dc cachet, though it was a time of trouble, to dispense them from showing them. But it is quite as remarkable that the constitutions of a religious order should be secrets of State or religious mysteries. No secrets of State last through a whole age, and religion does not teach dis- simulation. Pagan emperors had a right to demand the laws of the Christian religion, in order that they might see, whether they contained anything dangerous to public order ; and this demand was never contested. Even without their asking for it, the Christians described their rules to them in certain apologetic writings. A healthy policy cannot allow states to be ignorant of principles of action, which may affect their governments. The refusal to give such information, or to supply any statement, must proceed from a guilty intention, or a supposition that nations are not capable of appreciating public good.
Before I proceed to discuss the details of the constitutions, I must examine the general constitution of the order ; in whom its government is placed ; and how a constitution was formed, which has so long bewildered the courts and depositories of national law, and almost overpowered the Church herself. In what respects did the early Generals add to, or alter, the plan and intentions of the founder 't I must show the spirit and the letter of the con- stitutions ; their objects and their basis ; whether they are vicious in themselves, or whether their aim has been perverted ; how they have been extended, and, above all, how they have been made use of.
The constitution of the Society is not so easily to be defined as it may appear to be. Its government is monarchical, and depends solely on the will of one superior, who is always subordinate to the Pope : " Monarchia cst in definitionibus Unites Superioris arbitrio contcnta " —so runs the Bull of Gregory XIV., 1561.
Saint Ignatius intended to establish a mixed monarchy.
The right to make constitutions and particular rules, and also to alter them, was given to the General and his companions ; that is to say, to the general congregation which represented them.
21
By the Bulls of Paul III., 1540 and 1543, the General had the right to confer all offices as he pleased, and to command all the members of the Society.
The legislative power thus rested in the hands of the General and the Society, or in the general congregation, which represented them.
Laynez, in the first congregation that assembled after the
death of Ignatius, caused it to be decided, that the General only
K had the right to make rules, " Sotus pr&positits Generalis autori-
tatem habct Regular condendi." (Can. 3rd, Congreg. 1, p. 698,
Tom. 1.)
The Generals then having the right to nominate to all offices and employments, and convoking no general congregation, the legislative power necessarily rested entirely in their hands. When the congregation is assembled it represents the whole Society ; but it is very seldom assembled, excepting when it meets to elect a general. The supreme power rests essentially with the whole Society. It is superior to the General, and, in certain cases, has the right to depose him. But it cannot exercise its power, unless it is assembled, and the General alone can assemble the congrega- tion. The general congregation must always be composed of the creatures of the General, infatuated respecting the privileges which belong to his office. At all other times the General is the only representative of the Society and of the general congregation. In fact, the whole order, with all its authority, is comprised in him.
The prerogative of the General being thus the constructive form . of the Society, let us see in what that prerogative consists.
The General has the right to command and regulate everything in the Society.
His right of administration is unlimited ; he can exercise over every individual member the supreme power of the whole Society.
All the authority of the provincials and other superiors is derived from the General as commander-in-chief, and he bestows on every one of them such powers as he thinks fit.
His duty is to see that the constitutions are observed, but he may dispense with any observances as he pleases.
No member of the Society may accept of any proffered dignity out of the Society without his permission.
22
He has all power and authority to make rules, ordinances, and declarations with respect to the constitutions ; the other superiors have no authority in that respect, excepting such as he may choose to confer on them.
By the Bulls of 1540, 1543, and 1571, the Society and the General may make any special constitutions, they may think proper for the advantage of the Society ; and they may alter them, abrogate them, and make new ones, and date them at any time they please ; and from that time, these must be considered as con- firmed by apostolic authority.
For the advantage of the Society, he may command any mem- ber without exception, in virtue of obedience ; and though he may have conferred powers on inferior superiors, he may nevertheless approve or annul anything, they may have done, and regulate everything as he thinks best. He must always be respected and obeyed, as he is held to be the representative of Jesus Christ.
He alone has the power to make contracts of all kinds ; except- ing that he may not dissolve colleges or houses (unless they are very small colleges or residences) without sharing that power with the superiors of them.
Contracts are not to be made by general assemblies, but according to the constitutions, and by the act of the General.
He cannot divert the revenues of any college; and if he should give any part of them to his relatives, that would be a cause for his deposition ; but the declarations do not forbid him to give alms to any amount, that he may deem conducive to the glory of God.
He ought to consult on important affairs with his fellow mem- bers, but the decision of them rests with him alone.
The General alone has the right to nominate provincials and rectors, unless he chooses to do it by commission ; he alone has the right to admit members into the Society, unless he communi- cates that faculty ; he alone may dismiss professed members and coadjutors ; he has in that respect all the power, that is vested in the whole Society.
He has the right to appoint guards and officers ; he may create professed members and coadjutors, both spiritual and temporal ; and he must carefully retain all the powers, which are given to him by the constitutions, to change the members of the Society.
2-3
He has the entire government and regulation of the colleges.
The constitution does not command under the penalty of sin, but the General commanding in the name of Jesus Christ, and in virtue of obedience, may command under the penalty of mortal sin and of venial sin.
He has the right to declare, to augment, or to restrain reserved cases in the Society.
He may institute missions in all parts of the world ; he may change the missionaries, and in certain cases recall established missions.
He may send members of the Society wherever he chooses, even among infidels.
He alone has the power to commute the legacies which have been left to the Society.
He has the right to revise and correct all the books belonging to the Society.
He may distribute by his own power, and enable others in the like manner to distribute the favours granted by Popes to the Society.
He may grant indulgences to the congregations of scholars, whom he has affiliated to the congregation at Rome ; to congregations, who are not scholars, both of men and women, who are directed by the Society in all parts of the world ; and to several congregations in the same place.
He may (in virtue of the supreme authority which he has over the order) make affectionate protectors and benefactors to the Society participants of the merits of good works, and of the prayers and suffrages of the Society.
He must thoroughly examine into the consciences of his subjects, and particularly into those of the elder superiors.
Everything, which he has granted and ordered, remains granted and ordered until it may be revoked by his successor, even the precepts which he has enjoined.
Nevertheless he is subordinate to the whole body of the Society, and in certain cases he may be deposed.
In order that all matters may be centralized in the General by universal and consecutive correspondence, the provincials of all the provinces of Europe must write to the General every month,
24
and the superior rectors of houses and the masters of provinces once every three months.
When provincials write to the General, the}- must take care to detail exactly the state of their houses, of their colleges, and of the whole province, in order that the General may as perfectly under- stand the individuals and the affairs of all the provinces, as if all those circumstances had passed under his own eyes.
Every provincial and every rector has an adviser, a sort of con- troller, who must also correspond with the General occasionally.
Every superior must send two catalogues every year to the General : in the first catalogue, he must inscribe the names of all the persons in his house, their age, their country, at what period they entered the society, what they have studied, wrhat exercises they have kept, their degrees in sciences, etc.
In the second catalogue, he must describe the qualities and the talents of every individual, the inclination of his mind, and his powers of judgment ; whether he is prudent, versed in business, his temper, and for what employment in the Society he is adapted.
These privileges place in the hands of the General the whole legislative power of the Society ; they cede its exercise to him, and by this means, make him absolutely independent.
When it is necessary to write of matters which require secresy, they are ordered to write in cypher, so that if the letter was sent open it could not be understood ; it is set down that the General shall prescribe the cypher, " Modnm prcescribel generalis."
In respect to the authority of the Pope, the Jesuits were obliged by the Bulls of Paul III. of 1540 and 1543, according to the general and special vow of St. Ignatius and his companions, to execute everything that the Pope should command, both for the purpose of saving souls, and for the propagation of their faith, even if he should send them to Turks or infidels. " Etiamsi ad qnascamque Provincias mittere velkt — sire ad Turcas — sive ad qnoscumque alios Infideks" So runs the Bull of 1543.
But the authority of the Pope in this respect has been limited to missions, and even to missions to foreign countries. The General may order missions or missionaries to remain where they have been sent, as long as he pleases, and recall them at his pleasure,
25
even those, who have been sent by the Pope himself, unless the period of their mission has been distinctly fixed by the Pope.
If any doubt should arise about the Institution, its constitutions, or its privileges, the Pope or the General must be appealed to.
The intention of the constitutions (according to the Declaration on Ch. 2, vol. i. p. 418, although it only relates to missions) is that in things which may be done either by the Pope or by the General ; the General should be addressed rather than the Pope ; and they add that the latter course is better as a matter of con- science, considering the vow of obedience.
A Jesuit cannot appeal to the Pope from the orders of the General, unless the Pope should give him a particular permission to do so.
It is not necessary to have a dispensation from the Pope to be released from vows ; the authority of the General is sufficient.
It follows from this review of the authority and powers of the General, together with the preceding one, that the General may reinstate the Society in any privileges, which may have been encroached upon, without having recourse to the Pope, and independently of him.
The General alone has power to make constitutions and rules ; but as it may be said, that, according to the constitutions, he only has power to make particular rules and constitutions, and that everything essential and of substantial importance to the institu- tion is immutable, it becomes necessary to discover what is the essence of the institution, " Substantialia Instituti" and what are the fundamental points.
Great difficulties have always arisen when attempts have been made to obtain a solution of this question ; the provinces have often insisted on the importance of its being decided, and generals have as often opposed it, because a decision would of course define the limits of their powers.
In the 5th congregation in 1593, on most of the provinces demanding, that it should be decided what were the essential points of the institution, " Substantialialnstituti" the congregation, on the recommendation of commissioners named for the purpose, and after long study and exact research, declared, that the points contained in the formulary of the institution proposed to Pope
26
Julius III., and confirmed by him and his successors, and those which in that formulary relate to those constitutions in the form of a declaration, " Vel quce in cadem referuntur ad. constitutiones declarationis gratia'' should be declared the essence of the insti- tution, and that although there were other essential points, it was better not to speak of them.
Some persons, ascertaining that the meaning of this decree was obscure, — and indeed, it is not intelligible, — demanded at a subsequent sitting, that it should be more clearly explained ; they proposed to add some examples to it, and to end the decree with " and such like."
On this demand, and by the advice of a commission, the con- gregation made the decree which is Article 58. It states that the essential articles of the institution, " Substantial/a Instituti" are above all, those presented to Pope III., confirmed by him and by his successors ; and next, those things, without which these articles could not be carried out, or could scarcely exist ; as for example : — First, That there are objections, which may prevent admission into the Society ; — Secondly, That no judicial form shall take place in order to expel members from the Society ;— Thirdly, That the communication of matters of conscience to the superior is absolutely necessary ; — Fourthly, That it was equally necessary, that every one should consent to reveal to the superior everything they had observed in him ; — Fifthly, That all the members should be ready to denounce each other mutually and charitably.
At the end of this decree is subjoined " and such /ike," which the congregation thinks it had better not define, leaving the definition to be made by the General. Aquaviva presided at this general congregation, which was the fifth.
In the seventh, which took place in 1615, under Witeleschi, there was another attempt to agitate the question of the essential articles of the institution, and it was insisted, that they should be specified, and determined. Witeleschi obtained a decision, that all doubts should be referred to the General ; and they repeated what already had been decided more than once, that provincial congre- gations are forbidden to agitate this question.
Thus, the fundamental articles of the Institution " SubstantiaKa"
27
their determination, and their declaration were left to the arbitra- tion of the General, which is the greatest prerogative.
These laws (if they can be called laws) and these rules on the fundamental constitutions of the Society — on the power of the Society and the power of the General, and on the powers of the general congregation, are drawn from the Bulls of Popes, from the decrees of congregations, and from declarations. A strange code ; increased or diminished by the caprices or by the ambition of generals, and by the interests of the Society ; in which there is no one fixed principle but the power of the Society, or rather the power of the General (for the power of the Pope is modified) ; and in which there are no certain laws about what is essential, except- ing five or six maxims of monastic policy ; iii which everything is subject to explanation, to arbitrary interpretation and distinctions ; from which anything may be drawn, for or against; and from which one may conclude with the help of discordant passages, or passages purposely rendered obscure, that the Pope has all au- thority over the Society, and that he has not ; that the General may make laws and constitutions, and that he may not ; that he may alter them, and that he cannot alter them ; that he may dis- pense from them, and that he cannot dispense from them ; that the Society (or the general congregation) has the legislative power, and that it has not ; finally, that the General is all powerful, and that he is not; and that the essence of the constitution is immutable, and that it is not immutable.
There are provincial congregations, which count for nothing. After all, the Society consists of the General and his assistants, and some provincials under his orders.
The constitutions speak of four kinds of members — the pro- fessed (some under four, and some under three vows), coadjutors, scholars, and novices. They say that they have nothing to do with indifferents : who are members under examination, that it may be decided, whether they are to be placed in the rank of priests or lay members.
But it should not be said, that there are only four kinds of Jesuits, for I find a fifth kind in the declarations on the first chapter of examinations, vol. i., p. 342. There are some persons, who are admitted to the solemn profession of three vows accord-
28
ing to tlio Bull of Pope Julius III. Those are neither professed members, nor coadjutors, nor scholars, nor novices.
There arc also, according to the Bull of Paul III., persons, living under obedience to the General, who enjoy exemptions, powers, and faculties, which would seem to withdraw them from his authority, but over whom Pope Paul declares, that the General shall retain jurisdiction implicitly and entirely.
Who arc these people ? Are they the unknown Jesuits, living with their families, without any religious dress, but dressed decently according to the custom of the place of tlieir residence ; who have no repugnance, according to the letter of the constitu- tions, to the profession of poverty ? Are these the invisible Jesuits so often talked of during two hundred years ?
Grotius, who was allied in friendship with some learned men belonging to the Society, mentions such men in his history of the Low Countries; and says of them " Dant Nnmiua Conjuges."
It is difficult to discern or unravel facts in so mysterious an order as the Jesuits.
We find persons (men and women) affiliated, of which fact we cannot doubt; these are aggregations or affiliations, which the generals of the order have a right to grant to persons well affected towards their order.
St. Ignatius (we must allow) formed his projects with a species of enthusiasm proceeding from a warm imagination, which heightened his zeal. Conceiving that it was possible to preach and teach religion without study, and to convert Jews, Greeks, and infidels of all nations, knowing no language but Spanish, he thought learning unnecessary ; although the greatest luminaries of the Church thought otherwise, and that to teach required preparation and capacity. These groundless convictions form the character of enthusiasm. And we may perceive an indication of this opinion in the injunction of Melchior Canus, the learned Bishop of the Canary Islands, to Ignatius, forbidding him to dogmatise or preach until he had studied theology four years ; from which we must conclude that the bishop thought that his mind was not in a tranquil state. But we ought to do him the justice to allow (setting aside his sanctity which has been recog-
29
nized by tho Church), that if the study of legends, which it has heen considered necessary to rectify since those days, had given him. some inexact ideas, nothing had ever tainted the sincerity of his heart, and that he had no object but the salvation of souls. His views were always pure and disinterested ; he carried into his institution the ideas, which were universally dominant in those days, of the absolute power of the Pope ; but he did not draw from them the frightful consequences, which they have occasioned. He remained faithful to the ancient doctrines of the Church, and did not wish to introduce any new ideas. His morality was admir- able, and rather inclines to rigidity than to relaxation. He never supposed that any inconvenience could arise from an institution, in which it was only proposed to catechise the ignorant and convert sinners. If he was ill prepared to teach, he left his followers the best of all instructions — his bright example, and the memory of his virtues ; he had no worldly views, and thought only of the spiritual welfare of his Society.
It is very likely, that if the blessed St. Francis Borgia had been the immediate successor of St. Ignatius, he might have pro- longed the first fervour of the institution, and the disinterested views of the founder. Laynez, who succeeded St. Ignatius, and Aquaviva, who, after Everard, succeeded Francis de Borgia, almost entirely altered, or rather corrupted the institutions of the founder of the Jesuits; and these are the two generals whom we must consider as the real founders of the existing Society, — such as it has long existed in the world.
Laynez, an ecclesiastical courtier, chosen General by intrigue, and almost a Pelagian in principle ; and Aquaviva, an illustrious Neapolitan, educated in the pomp and grandeur of Rome, who was disgusted by the simple disinterested views of St. Ignatius : these two Generals established the temporal empire of the Society, on the model of that at Rome, which they had before them. They there beheld an empire half political, half ecclesiastical ; a court, and courtiers, and a treasury ; the union of two species of authority in the person of one, whom they considered as the sovereign lord of the whole world, exercising spiritual authority personally and by his priests — to whom he committed this one kind
30
of power — and exercising the temporal power through laymen,* to whom he entrusted his authority, when he found its weight fatiguing ; while he possessed the power of transferring or sup- pressing empires and kingdoms, and of establishing, correcting, and deposing sovereigns.
St. Ignatius having been nourished and educated in the most absurd opinions of the sovereign and absolute light of the Pope, both in spiritual and temporal matters, thought that he ought to make his Society a monarchy. He did not reason systema- tically, but his successors did.
They said that the form of the primitive Church was only intended for the first ages of Christianity, which of course was not what Jesus Christ had principally in view. They formed systems, which the flatterers of the Court of Rome (men like the Jesuit Palavicini), endeavoured to justify by sophisms — systems which the Abbe de Fleury has shown in his fourth dis- course on the Gospels, to be directly contradictory to Holy Writ.
But it was in that system of the temporal sovereignty of the Church that Laynez and Aquaviva directed the Institution of the Jesuits. They thought, that they ought to make their monarchy splendid also, in order to make it respected ; to increase its authority, both spiritual and temporal, its consideration and its riches.
They did not see that it is impossible to compare a predominant religious power like that of Rome, with a monastic order, nor the Pope as a temporal prince with the General of a religious society.
And thus, instead of the honesty and simplicity of heart of St. Ignatius, they substituted a worldly policy according to which the Society has ever since governed its establishments, its missions, its colleges, its seminaries, and its whole direction.
Borgia, who succeeded Laynez, and was a more religious man, whose mind more resembled that of the founder, observed this inclination as early as in 1569, that is thirteen years after the death of St. Ignatius. He blamed the ambition, the pride, the love of riches, which even in those early days broke out in the company, and he feared its sad effects : this is seen in his letters to the brothers in Aquitaine, which were printed in 1611 at Ypres,
* Many of the Cardinals were laymen, others only deacons.
31
and were altered afterwards in 1635 in the edition of Antwerp. I omit some other similar testimonies about the same time.
But I cannot omit to notice that of Mariana, a celebrated Jesuit, who had entered into the Society in 1554 under the generalship of St. Ignatius himself, and who had lived under five generals up to 1624, at which time he died, aged eighty-seven years.
In his book on the faults of the Society, he says that St. Ignatius did not govern in the despotic manner that Aquaviva did, and that it was not surprising that his despotism alienated men's minds.
In the 19th chapter he asserts, that the laws of the Society, and still more the rules, had often been altered, and that the constitution of the Society was entirely opposed to the plans of the founders.
St. Ignatius, having established a monarchy, particularly enjoined obedience as a fundamental law. His letter to the Jesuits of Portugal is full of quotations from Scripture mis- understood, and examples misapplied, or apocryphal histories ; but it never occurred to him, that too much power could be conceded, because he did not intend to abuse it. He did not think that it was necessary to impose limits to virtue. His suc- cessors, in order to maintain and perpetuate their temporal power, stretched their authority, which was already exorbitant.
Saint Ignatius intended to found a religious order, in which passive obedience does not seem dangerous, having no object but spirituality. His successors transformed it into a political body of monks taking monastic vows, yet living in the world: or, if you please so to describe it, a monkish order of secular priests taking monastic vows, — a kind of society of which the Jesuits themselves have never been able to give an exact account.
Laynez, in order to secure to himself the office of General after the death of Ignatius, began by inspiring a species of fanaticism ; ' declaring, before the scrutiny, that if it should be proved by the votes that all the members were of one mind, their perfect agreement must be considered as evident manifestation of the will of God.
Pope Paul IV. intimated, that he thought the perpetuity of
32
the office of General was a dangerous idea ; but Laynez obtained a decision of the general congregation, that they chose to adhere to their constitutions ; and in consequence the office of General was declared perpetual. The letter that they wrote to the Pope to give him this information had been signed on the 13th of August, 1558, but it bears the date of the 30th of August. Laynex was ordered to deliver it, but he did not give it to the Pope, "for good reasons," so says the decree," " Honestas ab causas;" and the assembly was dissolved on the 10th of September.
In this congregation Laynez contrived to obtain a decision, that Generals had a right to authorize all contracts, without any common deliberation. "In praposito Generali cst iota auctoritas celebramU quosvis contradus emptionnm ucnditionnm cl cessionum" etc. He also obtained the right to give authority and authenticity to the commentaries and declarations on the constitutions, and the power to make rules and directories for the exercises of confession, preaching, catechisms, and prayer; and the right to have dungeons. In short, almost every power was conferred on the General in this congregation, the first that had been held since the death of St. Ignatius.
At the Council of Trent, Laynex (though he was the new General of the most recently established order in the Church), even while affecting to take the last place among the Heads of Orders, intimated that he might with reason claim a higher seat. He signalized himself by speeches detracting from Episcopal authority, which scandalised the Cardinal de Lorriane and the bishops, and embarrassed the Legates. He conducted himself more as if he had been an officer of the Court of Rome than as a theologian of the Church. These are ascertained facts, attested both by Fra Paulo and by the Cardinal Pallavicini, who palliates them. He had passed before that time an apprenticeship in politics. He had penetrated into the court of Charles the Fifth, and had intrigued to negociate the marriage of the daughter of the king of Portugal with Philip the Second. He had accompanied the new queen to Spain. He had refused to establish colleges in Savoy without endowments, that being a poor country, and not well cultivated ; but he established colleges in Portugal.
33
It was Aquaviva who refused to sign the conditions which it had been proposed to impose on the Jesuits, before they obtained permission to return to France, although the Pope had approved of them ; and it was for this reason, that they have never been enforced. He prepared a rule of studies, with the assistance of six doctors of the company, which was censured by the Inquisition of Spain, who complained of the novelties he introduced into theology. His despotic government occasioned murmurs in the Society itself. The principal Jesuits of Spain complained of him, and carried their complaints to Home. Aquaviva got the better of them by his credit and dexterity. He it was who obtained by subtlety from Gregory XIII. the permission to trade in the Indies, under the pretext that it was advantageous to missions. That Pope also granted to him an exclusive permission to send missions to Japan. It was in his generalship that politico- religious missions were sent to Paraguay. These are, perhaps, the sources of the ideas of temporal grandeur in the Society and of the , corruption of the spiritual views of the founder, already weakened by Laynez. I therefore repeat that it is Laynez and Aquaviva, who should be considered as the real founders of the Society, and that it is their spirit which is substituted for the spirit of Ignatius, and which has always governed the Jesuits.
This order, like most other religious orders, took its rise in southern countries, and was formed by melancholy and excited minds, and in the time of religious wars, which are either the cause or the effect of enthusiasm or of fanaticism. It was esta- blished with the most extravagant ultramontane views, and in the barbarous spirit of the Inquisition. It was at first principally composed of members born among the enemies of France ; Spain fomented the League, and Popes favoured and fostered it.
The Jesuits owed their existence and their consideration to the Pope, and they vowed to obey him. They were protected by the Guises ; they were Leaguers by their principles and by their vows. All the other orders were carried away by the torrent.
Morality at that time was much corrupted in the Church ; that fact must be confessed. It is made evident, by the reproaches cast on the Jesuits, that they established immorality, and by proofs,
D
34
which they collected to show that they only adopted what they found already existing.
Their public studies were not admirable ; there reigned in their schools the wildest casuistry ; they studied nothing but the logic of Aristotle ; and they learnt nothing but mechanics.
It would be unjust to reproach men with the errors of their nation and of their times ; it would be equally unjust if we im- puted to children all the errors of their parents and of their pre- cursors. We have no right to reproach the Jesuits of our own time, if they have given up the principles of the Jesuits of the time of the League. Have they abandoned those corrupt systems of morals ? Do they now maintain and teach principles of loyalty and submission to temporal sovereigns, and the inviolability of their sacred persons? We shall presently examine these im- portant points.
I am bound to tell you, Messieurs, what I think of the system of the Jesuits, and of the foundation of their constitutions, of which you have commanded me to give you an account. I think I ought to declare, because I think I can prove it, that the constitution of the Jesuits is fanaticism reduced to rules and principles.
I must say that the foundation of the system, the means it employs, the basis of its government, exterior and interior, can only be regarded as fanaticism.
Mon. du Bellay, the Bishop of Paris, has said, that the Bulls of the institution contain some things, which seem very strange and contrary to reason, and which ought not to be tolerated in any Christian system. *
It is a very great cause of prejudice against these constitutions that they are extraordinary and without parallel in the world.
Another cause of mistrust is, as I have observed before, the mystery that is made of the matter, and which is enjoined on persons employed to execute their plans. But I must not limit myself to mere statements. The more serious this accusation of
* Opinions of Mon. Eustaclie clu Bellay, Bishop of Paris in 1554, on the Bulls obtained by the Jesuits.
35
fanaticism, the more it is incumbent on me to make it clear, the more I am bound to prove it by facts.
And, in the first place, I declare that, so far from accusing the whole order of Jesuits (that is to say, the members personally) of fanaticism, I acquit them almost all, especially the French Jesuits.
It would be altogether unjust to accuse individuals, and make them responsible for vices in laws, which they do not enact; laws to which they have submitted themselves without knowing that those laws existed, and of which they are not to be informed until it is almost impossible to throw off their yoke.
God defend me from accusing the members of a Christian society, who personally profess Christianity, of having formed a conspiracy to overthrow evangelical morality. I do not even accuse the members individually of really believing the maxims, which the books of the Society teach.
I do not believe that ecclesiastics, attached to Holy "Writ by profession, attached to their country by ties of birth, can suddenly forget those sentiments of Christianity, virtue, and humanity, which are incompatible with fanaticism ; nor that, living in a nation whose character is gentle, they can cast away the love, Avhich is so natural in a Frenchman, of his country and his king. All around them inspires other feelings.
It is not the Society of Jesuits, who have invented the prin- ciples, from which fanaticism is derived in Europe. It arises from false logic. Passive obedience to Popes, a contagion, which, toward the end of the sixth century, infected this great country, and still more, perhaps, the ambitious views of Aquaviva, and the despotism and perpetuity of the generalship have caused these ideas to be adopted.
I would willingly clear them, if I could, of holding principles of false morality ; which indeed they have only adopted as prin- ciples, and which they seem to deny by the regularity of their conduct.
I impugn that spirit of part)-, which is as often hurtful as use- ful ; that violence laid on liberty of consciences and minds, which forces all, who wear the same uniform, to embrace the same sentiments ; that out-and-out preference for the teachers of their
D 2
36
own order, which will not allow the members to differ from any of their opinions.
I impugn superstition and ignorance ; an ambitious and despotic system ; fanaticism, in short, which has caused, and still causes, so many grievances in states, and from which we cannot boast of being relieved.
Enthusiasm and fanaticism are the consequences of superstition /and ignorance. Enthusiasm arises from a strong belief, heated by a false zeal, and without any ground of conviction.
Imagination vividly excited and strongly attached to its object, leaves no opening for examination or for discussion.
The enthusiast does not reason ; he sees all that he imagines ; he has eager feelings and no clear ideas ; feeling serves him instead of demonstration. On the subject of religion, from enthu- siasm to fanaticism is but one step. The nature of fanaticism is to attribute our own imaginations to Divine inspiration. To look up to some man as to God ; to believe that his ordinances are the expression of the will of Jesus Christ ; and thus to abandon our own consciences and obey his orders blindly ; that is fanaticism. Those illusions do not produce fatal effects every day ; but there is no age and no country, in which this species of idolatry has not occasioned trouble and desolation.
Nations cannot be too much aware of, and they are not suffi- ciently on their guard against this delusive idea; it is always ready to arise and give birth to the most tremendous evils.
In reading the annals of empires and of the Church during 500 years we may observe the introduction and growth of two princi- ples, that have been either the cause or the consequence of the fanaticism which has occasioned so much affliction in Europe.
These principles have arisen from a confusion in men's minds (from ignorance or prejudice) as to the rights of two powers.
The immoderate ambition of Gregory VII. gave birth to the revolting maxim of the power of the Church over temporal interest. In order to support an authority so contrary to that which Jesus Christ has given to the" Apostles and the Church, it became necessary to imagine a quality inherent in the Popes, and unheard of until that time — the prerogative of infallibility. And as canonists had boldly asserted, that excommunication by Popes
37
deprived both individuals and kings of all temporal rights, there is no extravagance to which that doctrine has not extended.
Thence have proceeded excommunications and interdicts on kingdoms, unheard of sentences to deprive kings of their dominions, which released subjects from their oaths of fidelity, and excited those miserable fanatics, who have attempted the lives of kings.
If fanaticism did not introduce these "principles, it was the active agent, which ambition, either ecclesiastical or secular, em- ployed to compass its ends by seducing ignorant and superstitious persons. Ambition has been fanatical, and fanaticism has been ambitious. The constitution of the Jesuits, and their system, is derived from two sources, from which emanate their laws, privi- leges, declarations, and statutes, — in a word, all that has with them the force of law. The first is the absolute and sovereign power of the Pope, both spiritual and temporal. And the second principle is the communication by the Pope to the Society of the Jesuits, in the person of their General, of absolute power for the preservation and extension of the spiritual and temporal advantage of their order.
These two principles are the basis and foundation of the whole edifice of their Society. If the Pope does really possess temporal power — well ; but if the Pope has no right to temporal power, and therefore cannot give it — in that case they have no rights or institution, or constitutions or privileges, nor has their General ; for they have no laws but those given them by the Popes, or those which the Popes have allowed the Generals to make for them. Part of these principles are chimerical. If they are contrary to reason, to religion, and to the rights of nations, if they are only the offspring of fanaticism, then it must be allowed that the con- stitutions of the Jesuits are inadmissible.
When I speak of constitutions, I include the Bulls which authorised them, and also those of other rules, which they have adopted, and which apply to both, as also the declarations and ordinances of their Generals and the decrees of their general congregations.
The first principle, (that of the absolute power of the Pope, both in spiritual and temporal concerns) is innate in the Society of
38
the Jesuits. You have seen in the Bull, which authorised the institution, the decision of the founder and of his companions, to obey no one but the Pope, and to obey him without reserve. The kind of obedience is explained in the constitutions, " Like that ichich -is due to Jcsits Christ, giving up the whole understanding, and persuading ourselves, that all that he orders is right." " Ad fjus rocetit pcrinde ac si a Christo Domino egrederetur." (p. 407.) And here I must observe, that it is this vow of absolute obedience to the Pope, and the zeal that the Jesuits have shown to maintain the ambitious views of Eome, which at that time, and in succeed- ing ages, has made the fortune of the Society. They have con- stantly declared at Rome their devotion to him only, and have exag- gerated the disobedience of all those who attacked his infallibility. All the first Jesuits embraced that opinion implicitly, and this universal empire was the reigning opinion throughout the Church.
Yet that pretension to temporal power was too distasteful, and too dangerous, to risk its declaration openly. Some, more prudent, — I think, but I am not sure, that it was Salmeron, — endeavoured to disguise it, and render it less odious, to facilitate its reception, by stating that this power was •indirect ; but even if it should be considered, that the right of the Pope and of the Church in temporal concerns is indirect, it is no less likely to be pernicious both to the State and to the Church, and to occasion troubles and seditions than the chimera of direct power over kings.
However that may be, since that time there has not existed anywhere (excepting in France) one single Jesuit, who has aban- doned voluntarily in writing the absurd system of the infallibility of the Pope. And they have also added another error, as a necessary consequence of this, that excommunication properly deprives men of all their temporal rights. Let this be allowed, and we have the key to the policy of the Jesuits, and the purpose of their constitutions. To prove that they do make these claims, it is only necessary to read their works.
We will begin with Salmeron, who was a companion of Saint Ignatius, and one of the nine, who presented themselves with him to Pope Paul III. in 1540.
Salmeron writes : — " A king, on receiving Baptism, and in re- " nouncing Satan and all his works, promises tacitly never to abuse
39
"his royal power by acting against the Church ; he is understood " to consent to be deprived of his kingdom, if he acts otherwise ; " and in fact does not a king render himself unworthy of Baptism " and the Holy Eucharist, if he refuses to use his power for the " good of the Church and the destruction of heretics ?" (p. 251.)
" It is a divine law, that Christians cannot elect a king, who is f not a Christian. How ? Can the spiritual power be less in the " Church than it was in the synagogue, so that the Church cannot " make a king as she thinks fit, and as she chooses ?" (p. 251, 253.)
" All the power, that priests possessed figuratively in the old " law, priests possess more amply in the reality of the New Testa- ment, over the persons of kings and over their possessions. At " the present time the Bishop of Rome, the successor of Saint "Peter, may, for the good of his flock, when he cannot use any " other remedy, ly a word take away corporeal life, provided, that " he does it by word of mouth, and not by the outward action of " his hand. He may even make war on heretics and 011 schis- " matics, and cause their death by the means of Catholic princes : " for Jesus Christ in commanding him to feed his sheep, gave him "power to drive away the wolves and to kill them, if they hurt his " flock ; and moreover, if the leader of his flock should injure his " other sheep, by communicating a contagious disease to them, or " by striking them with his horns, the shepherd may depose him " and take from him his principality, and the government of his "flock. In. temporal things God has only given to St. Peter and " his successors an indirect dominion over temporal kingdoms and " over all the empires in the world. In virtue of that dominion " he might (if the glory of Jesus Christ and the advantage of the " Church demanded it) change them, transfer them, and make them "pass into other hands."
Bellarmine says : — " We maintain that the Pope for the sake of " spiritual good, has a sovereign power to dispose of temporal " o-ood to all Christians. Spiritual power does not interfere " in temporal affairs, and lets them follow their course, provided " that they do not interfere with spiritual intentions or spiritual " ends ; or that they do not become necessary for their achieve- " ment ; but if that should happen, the spiritual power can and
40
" ought fo constrain the temporal poiccr by all the mean* which it " may think necessary. The Pope tlien may change empire*, take " the crown, from one to gice it to another, an being the sovereign, " spiritual prince, if he judges that necessary for the salvation of " souls.
" If Christians in other days did not depose Nero, and Dioclc- " sian, and Julian the Apostate, and Valens, who was an Arian, " it was only because they were unable to do so ; for they had " the right.
" When the temporal obedience, which you pay to a king," (it is the Pope whom Bellarmine supposes to speak in these terms) " endangers your eternal salvation, then I am completely superior " to //our king, even in temporal things ; you arc the sheep of my " flock, and your kings are its leaders; and as your kings remain "sheep I permit them to govern you and lead you ; but if they "become wolves instead of sheep, am I to allow my Master's " flock to be ruled by wolves ? You must not acknowledge as " kings, those who lead you away from the path of life, either by " menaces or by caresses, or any other means — those, wrhoni I "have condemned to be banished from the company of just men, " and to be deprived of their sovereignty ; but you must render " to their successors, whom I have chosen, the obedience due to " kings. Take care not to be deceived and to acknowledge as " your prince, him who, in fact, is no longer cither a prince or " your king."
Molina writes : — " The spiritual power of the Pope for super- " natural purposes, comprehends, dependent on those causes, the "most ample and extensive powers of temporal jurisdiction over all "princes, and over all the faithful in the Church, precisely as " often as this is requisite for the supernatural purposes, for " which the spiritual power is established ; for this reason, if the " supernatural object requires it, the Pope may depose kings and " deprice them of their kingdoms. He may also decide the differ- "ences, that arise between princes concerning temporal matters : " he may reverse their laws, and supersede their edicts. And it " is not only by censures, that he may oblige compliance with his " commands ; but by pains and penalties, and by force of arms, " like secular princes ; though in general it is found more suitable,
41
" that the Pope should not make war himself; but that ho should " use outward force by means of secular princes, (p. 67.)
•'For these reasons the Pope is recognized as the possessor of " two swords — one spiritual, and the other temporal. Most cer- " tainly Jesus Christ would not have sufficiently provided for the " maintenance of His church, if He had not made all Christian " secular princes subject to the Pope, and given the sovereign " pontiff ample power to oblige and constrain them to do what- " ever, he deemed necessary, for supernatural objects.
" The Pope may depose kings if the preservation of the faith " of tlie Church, or the spiritual good of the public requires it," etc.
" If a prince should become a heretic or a schismatic, ' the " Pope may -use the temporal stcord against him ;' and further- " more, 'he may depose him, and drive him from his kingdom ;' "moreover, ' If Christian kings are disputing for any sovereignty,' " or any other temporal interest whatsoever, and making war on " that account, and there seems reason to fear, that the dispute " may do injury to the Church or spiritual power, either because " the enemies of the faith may make such war a pretence to rob " the Church, or that it may occasion spiritual crimes and other " evils, which a war among Christians generally produces, ' then the "Pope,' to prevent those evils, 'may decide the difference and pro- " nouncc sentence without their consent ; and they, whether with their "consent or against it, must submit to his decision.' If the Pope " tloes not interfere, it is not because he has not the divine right " to do so ; but because he dares not use it, lest they should act " against the Holy See, and occasion still greater inconveniences."
Suarez says : — " ' The Pope has a power coactice and coercive " over kings, even to the extent of depriving them of their thrones,' " if there is cause for it.
" We have shown in the third book, Chap. 23rd., No. 10, that "the power of the Pope may extend itself to coerce kings, even " by temporal penalties and the privation of their kingdoms, ' if "it is necessary.' 'This power is more essentially necessary in " the Church -with respect to kings, in order to govern them, than in " respect to subjects.'
" A shepherd has not only the power to punish his erring flock,
42
" to recall them to his fold ; but to drive away the wolves, and dc- " fend his fold lest his sheep should be forced out of it and killed.
" Then the Pope, as sovereign shepherd, nun/ depricc any prince " of his dominions, and banish him for fear that he should injure " his subjects. He may release their subjects from their oath of "fidelity, or declare that they need not take such oath ; for this " condition is always supposed in such oaths.
" For that purpose he may make use of the swords of other " princes ; thus the secular sword is subjected to the spiritual " sword, that they may assist each other to protect and defend the " Church.
"It is permitted to an individual to kill a tyrant in virtue of the "right of self-defence ; for though the community docs not command " it, it is always to be understood, that it wishes to be defended by "every one of its citizens individually, and even by a stranger. "Then, if no defence can be found excepting the death of the " tyrant, it is permitted to every man to kill him.
" Wlicncver a king has been legitimately deposed, he ceases to be a " king or a legitimate, prince, and that can no longer be affirmed of "him, which may be said for a legitimate king: he thenceforth "should be called a tyrant. Thus, after he has been declared to be "deprived of his kingdom, it becomes legal to treat him as a real " tyrant ; and consequently any man has a right to hill him.
Mariana writes: — "He (Jaques Clement,) suffered joyfully " blows and mortal wounds, because by the loss of life he gave " liberty to his country and the nation. Murder was e.rpiated by " murder, and the manes of the Due dc Guise, unjustly killed, were "avenged by the effusion of royal blood.
" He (Jacques Clement) did a really noble, admirable, memorable
"action by which he taught earthly princes that their
" impious enterprises never remain unpunished. Ecery individual "has the same power (i.e., that of declaring the sovereign a public "enemy, and consequently of killing him by the sword), 'if he " has the courage,' (i.e., to undertake to assist the republic at " the risk of his own life without hope of escaping from capital " punishment).
"It would be very advantageous" (for men) "if many men could "be found, who by the sacrifice of their own lives, would undertake
43
"so courageous an action for the liberty of their country ; but most " men are deterred by a disordered care for their own preservation, " u-hich renders him incapable of great enterprises ; tlience it is " so few of the tyrants we read of in former ages, have suffered " violent deaths by the hands of their subjects. Nevertheless, it is " well that princes should know, that, if the)' oppress their people, " and render themselves insupportable by their vices and mis- " doings, they live on the condition, that not only they may bo " killed righteously and justly ; but that it is a 'praiseworthy and "glorious action to kill them.'
" No one doubts that a ' tyrant may be killed overtly by force " of arms,' either by attacking him in his palace, in giving battle " to him, or even by deceit and ambush.
" It is true, it is more magnanimous and generous to declare " your hatred, and to assail the enemy of the state openly ; " but it is no less laudable to seize some favourable occasion, and " to use deceit and ambuscades in order to perform the act with- " out occasioning much agitation, and with less peril, both to the " public and to individuals."
I am sure that you are as much wearied and disgusted by listening to these recitals, as I am in making them. Can it be true that such things have issued from the minds of men, who ought to have been upholders of knowledge and of the law ?
If there is any incontestable maxim on the rights of nations, it is that laid down by the illustrious Bossuet, in his defence of the declaration of the clergy of France in 1682, thai-all sovereign power is sufficient to itself ! and is provided by God with all the power that is necessary for its own preservation ; and that no other power on earth ought to intrude itself into its administration, otherwise than by good offices, or according to treaties and con- ventions.
It is also an incontrovertible maxim, that neither the Pope nor the Church itself has any right in temporal matters. To con- tradict either of these principles is degrading to sovereignty ; and delivering kings into the hands of furious enthusiasm and fana- ticism.
What disorders the idea of the temporal power of the Church
44
has occasioned ! It has cruised the death ofpisabably ten millions of men in 400 years.
Let us see what the Abbe de Fleury has said on this subject, in his fifth discourse. I will quote the whole of the passage ; it may serve as a counterpoise to what I have just related to you: —
" The most pernicious use of allegories is, to lay them down as " principles, and then to draw consequences from them contrary " to the sense of Scripture, and to establish new dogmas upon " them. Such is the celebrated allegory of the two swords.
" Jesus Christ after His Passion told His disciples they must " have swords (to fulfil the prophecy, which said that He would "be numbered with the wicked.) They said, 'Here are two " swords," and He answered, ' It is enough.' The literal sense is " evident. But the lovers of allegories have chosen to say, that "these two swords (which were both of them real material " swords) signified two powers, by which the world is governed, " the spiritual and the temporal sword ; that Jesus Christ said, " ' It is enough — not too much.' This, say they, shows that these " were sufficient, but that both are necessary ; that those two " powers belong to the Church, because both those swords were " in the hands of the apostles ; but that the Church should only "use the spiritual sword herself, and that the temporal sword " should be used only by those princes to whom the Church shall " grant its exercise ; that this is the reason why Jesus Christ said " to St. Peter, ' Put up thy sword into its sheath,' as if He meant " to say, " That sword is yours, but you must not use it with your " own hand. Princes must use it under your order, and under " your direction.'
" Now I ask any sensible man, if this explanation is anything "more than a,jeu d' esprit, and whether any serious principle can " be founded upon it ?
" I say the same of the two luminaries, which they have also " applied to these two powers ; saying that the great luminary is " the Church, which, like the sun, enlightens by its own light ; and " empire or sovereignty is the lesser light, which, like the moon, " has only a reflected or borrowed light.
" If people will rely on fanciful applications of the words of " Scripture, and draw important consequences from them, one may
45
" reply by simply denying those consequences, and say that those " passages are historical, and that we cannot derive any mysterious " meaning from them beyond their natural import ; and that the " two luminaries are. the sun and the moon, and we know no "more than that. Nevertheless these two allegorical conclusions " are the main arguments used by all, who since the days of "Gregory VII. have attributed to the Church authority over "sovereigns in temporal affairs, in direct contradiction to plain " texts of Scripture, which are supported by tradition ; for Jesus " Christ said simply, without figure of speech or parable, ' My " kingdom is not of this world ; ' and in another place He said " speaking to His apostles, ' Ye know that the princes of the " Gentiles exercise dominion over them ; and they that are "great exercise authority upon them; but it shall not be so " among you.'
" There is no wit or reasoning, that can elude so distinct a corn- " inand. Moreover, during the first seven or eight centuries it was " understood literally, without the supposition of any mysterious " interpretation. You have seen how all the ancients, St. Gelatius " among them, distinguished clearly two separate powers ; and " what is more important, you have seen, that in practice they " acted on that doctrine, and that bishops, and even Popes, sub- " mitted in worldly matters to kings and emperors, even when " they were pagans and heretics.
" The first author, in whose work I can find the allegory of the " two swords, is Geoffrey do Yendome, in the beginning of the 12th "century. John of Salisbury went so far as to say, that the "prince having received the sword from the hand of the Church, " the Church has of course the power to take it again away from " him ! and he teaches elsewhere, that it is not only permitted, " but laudable to kill tyrants. The object of his teaching is "obvious. Most of the doctors, however, of that age, asserted " the doctrine of the allegory of the swords ; and what is more " surprising, the princes themselves, and those who defended them " against the Popes, did not reject the doctrine. They contented " themselves by limiting the consequences. This was occasioned " by the total ignorance of the laity, which rendered them slaves " to the clergy in everything concerning letters and doctrine.
46
" Now these clergy had all studied together in the same schools, " and had imbibed the same doctrines, and from the same books ; " and in consequence we find, that the defenders of Henry IV. " against Pope Gregory VII. all agreed in saying, that he must " not run the risk of being excommunicated, for if he was, he " would lose the right to reign. Frederick II. submitted himself " to the judgment of the Universal Council, and confessed, that if " he was proved guilty of the crimes, imputed to him, particularly " of heresy, he deserved to be deposed.
" The Council of St. Louis knew no better than those men, and " resolved to abandon Frederick, if he was found guilty ; so " powerful is the effect of teaching.
" From one false principle widely diffused, a thousand disas- " trqus consequences ensue, when it comes to be put in practice ! " as in the instance of the supposed temporal rights of the Church. " Since that principle was admitted, the internal inspiration of the "Church has changed."
It is generally allowed that the principles of the Jesuit authors, whom I have quoted, are fanatical, and that they have produced bad effects. But, it is said, these books have long lain unattended to in the libraries, from which they have lately been taken. It is said that Rome has forgotten these maxims, and that the Church is far from wishing to put them in practice. Careless and timid men now assert, that to speak of them is to revive alarms, which are past, to renew extinguished quarrels, and to interrupt the good understanding, that exists between Rome and all the Christian princes. That is exactly what the Jesuit Richomc said in 1C03, in his apologetic complaint to Henry IV.
I am far from seeking to find errors, much less crimes, where they do not exist, or from wishing to disturb concord between Rome and princes. That concord must be the first wish of every Frenchman, and every child of the Church; but I must ask, from whence it is concluded that Rome has abandoned the doc- trines of Sixtus V. and Gregory XIV ? Is it from the decisions of Paul V., of Innocent X., and Alexander VII., against the oath of England; or from the condemnation by Alexander