Part 3 : The Black Pope...The Jesuit as an Educator...An English Jesuit College

 THE BLACK POPE 

A HISTORY OF THE JESUITS. 

By M. F. CUSACK 

(Formerly the Nun of Kenmare)

CHAPTER V . 

THE JESUIT AS AN EDUCATOR . 

THE, JESUIT AS AN EDUCATOR.—Great importance of this subject.—Jesuit education fashionable ; important revelations on this subject by a distinguished R. C. priest, and two R. C. gentlemen of position.—The Rev. Lord Petre, M. Gleize, and Count Paul Von Hoensbroech, remarkable similarity between their statements and experience.—M. Gleizes description of a Retreat for boys in preparation for their first Communion; use of spiritual terror; stories told to frighten the boys by the Director; story of the Freemason.—Story of a lad who went to a theatre and appeared to the priest to say he was damned ; the cries, shouts and gesticulations of the father intensify the effect.—After such sermons M. Gleize obtains extra supplies of holy water before going to bed ; the effect of this teaching wears off in after life, and indifference to all religion is the result; hence many of the present evils of French society. — Contemptuous remarks about women in the Spiritual Exercises ; the Jesuit not having wife or lawful offspring cannot be fit to educate those who, in the future, will probably have the duty of caring for a wife and bring up a family ; how the boys practise receiving the wafer before their first Communion.—The boys treated like criminals at their time for recreation; watched at every moment, not allowed even a passing word of private conversation with each other; forced to play rough games to prevent free intercourse; system of humiliating and harassing espionage; all personal friendship carefully prevented; the education of boys carried out on the same Jesuit Education. 123 principle as the novitiate ; the Jesuits do not educate in the highest sense of the word, they merely impart information, which their pupils must receive without discussion and without explanation.—A Jesuit college is the grave of thought.—All the class books written by the fathers.—All are spiritually peptonised. —M. Gleize gives some notable examples of this method of teaching history.

THERE are few subjects which command so much attention at the present day, as that of the education of the rising generation, and this is as it should be. The future of the nation depends on the education of the present, hence, any contribution towards the better understanding of methods of training for the young cannot fail to interest—-we had almost said the parents of to-day, but the march of intellect has advanced so far that we might say the children of today. The Jesuits are the educators of the Roman Catholic Church par excellence. To have been educated by the Jesuits is to have a hall mark, which passes in all catholic circles as one of no ordinary value. And since so many of our politicians, and especially of our Press men, are educated by Jesuits, it is desirable to ascertain the nature and the value of the education which they impart, and what have been the results intellectually and morally of their method of education. 

Before proceeding further with this important subject, it may be well to correct an erroneous impression which prevails extensively. Some  persons suppose that the Jesuits are, somehow, different from other Roman Catholics, and if they are offered evidence of teaching which even the most indifferent cannot approve, they suppose that this teaching is something quite different from the authorised teaching of the Church of Rome. This misapprehension is serious in its consequences. The Jesuits are as much under the control of the Roman Catholic Church, as any other Roman Catholics, and they dare not, and do not, teach any theology, moral or dogmatic, which is not fully approved by their Church. 

The Roman Catholic Church, therefore, and the Pope, especially since the definition of his personal infallibility, is responsible for all that they teach, and for all that they do collectively. Any work published by a Jesuit must first obtain the approbation of his immediate superiors, it must then have the approbation of the General of the Order after it has been examined by the theologians of his immediate entourage, appointed for the purpose. 

Lastly, such a work must have the approbation of the Pope, which is given, directly or indirectly, through the Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition, which if it has not power to burn heretics at the present day, can, and does forbid the circulation of books which are not orthodox according to Rome. It is important that this point should be clearly understood, so that there can be no mistake as to the authority when quotations are made from the works which the Jesuits use in their schools and colleges. 

There are three ways by which we can ascertain the kind of instruction which the Jesuits give to their pupils, and what kind of moral and intellectual training they receive. First, we can ascertain this from their published and authorised writings. However secret the Jesuits may have been in regard to their private affairs, it has not been possible for them to conceal their books of moral theology. As this chapter is concerned with the training of youth, we do not touch the question of dogmatic theology here.

Next, we can judge of their educational methods from the narratives of reliable historians, and, indeed, from historians of there own Order. Lastly, we can avail ourselves of the published criticisms of Roman Catholics who have been educated by Jesuits, without even referring to such Roman Catholics, or Jesuit students, as have left the Roman Catholic Church. Our statements will be taken principally from the published works of the late Rev. Lord Petre, who lived and died a devoted Catholic, and from the remarkable narrative of M. Lucien Gleize, "Chez les Jesuites," recently published in Paris, and from the narratives on this subject recently published in Germany by Count Paul von Hoensbroech. As these gentlemen are persons of well known social position, and of unquestionable integrity, the exact correspondence of their testimony gives it considerable weight. 

M. Gleize tells us that he spent twelve years with the Jesuits, and was educated by them, hence, he had every opportunity of studying the system. In commencing his preface he says: " Déjà bien de livres furent écrit pour on contre les Jesuites, surtout contre. C'est livre n'est écrit ni pour, ni contre ; il est écrit sur les Jésuites." 

The youth who is trained in the Jesuit college must necessarily be trained in the principles of his masters. He will learn what they can teach, and no more. He will believe what they say with the confiding innocence of youth, and with the additional confidence of the Roman Catholic in his appointed teachers. We have spoken in the preceding chapter of the spiritual exercises used as a means of forming character and deciding vocations. These exercises are intended for all conditions of men and women, and are used even for children in a modified form. 

But while the youth, who is so far advanced as to be allowed or invited to consider his vocation to the Order, may be given the exercises in private, the youth who is not destined for the religious state is not expected to meditate alone. Retreats are organised several times in the year for the students in general, and the exercises are preached to them with more or less eloquence by one of the fathers. 

M. Gleize has given us very full information on this important subject. Before we give extracts from his work, it may be well, however, to note some apparently trifling, but nevertheless very important differences between the spiritual exercises as published in this country, and the spiritual exercises as published in France. There are no trifles in Jesuit programmes. In the English edition additional exercises are added in honour of the " Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God; " and in these new doctrines, such as that of the immaculate conception, unheard of in the time of Ignatius Loyola,  are introduced. Surely there could not be a greater evidence of the changeable creed of Rome, if indeed the suppression of the Jesuits by one infallible Pope and their restoration by another is not sufficient to prove it. Another curious and significant alteration in the exercises is made in the edition used in England. 

At page 267 of the latest English edition we find the following: "Satan with his weak, but obstinate character, may be compared, when he attacks us, to a woman daring to contend with her husband. Let her husband oppose her firmly" (in the French edition, which professes to be an exact translation of the original Spanish, the word used is " man,") " she soon lays aside her war-like mood, and quickly leaves the field to him. On the contrary, let her see in him any timidity or inclination to fly or give way, she becomes audacious, insolent, cruel as a fury." 

In the original there is not a word about a husband, the words used being " un homme," but in either case it is a gratuitous insult to the female sex, and how can those who thus hold a wife up to scorn, and compare her to the devil, be fitted to form the characters of the future husbands of this or any country? And, indeed, it is in the formation of character that the Jesuit so specially fails. His pupils become a weak replica of himself. If they are not bound to the abject obedience of the Jesuit, they are taught that this abject obedience is the highest perfection, and they are compelled to an obedience which is degrading to their coming manhood. But on this and kindred subjects we give the evidence of those who speak from personal experience. 

Another important authority on the subject of Jesuit training of the youth confided to their charge, is that of the late Rev. Lord Petre. He published four pamphlets in the years 1877 and 1878. The value and importance of these documents cannot be overestimated, first, because of Lord Petre's social position, next, because of the value of any information he gives, as he has made a speciality of the subject, and lastly, because of his well known loyalty to the Church to which he and his noble family have belonged for centuries.

We shall first deal with the statements of the French writer, also a devoted Romanist; the singular agreement of the two authorities cannot fail to strike the least observant reader. 

In commencing his narrative of personal experiences, M. Gleize says: " Ce gue Jesuite veut, Dieu le veut" But it does not necessarily follow that what succeeds is Divine. The Jesuit does not act without foresight or consideration, nor does he abandon his designs at the first discouragement. He commands success, but he leaves nothing undone to secure it. 

M. Gleize took the initiative himself at the early age of ten, in the affair of his education. He had been a pupil in an ecclesiastical seminary, but he ambitioned the distinction of being a pupil of this famous Order. It was " comme il faut," he tells us, and something of which the parents of the pupils could boast. The abbe who governed the seminary in which he had received his education so far, did not quite approve the change; but the boy had his way, with results which he has faithfully recorded. 

The Jesuits made two rules with regard to the admission of pupils, and kept them. No boy would be received who had been previously in any public school. No boy would be received of bourgeois origin, or whose parents were not people of wealth and good social position. Thus at the expense of the present they secured the future—the Jesuit can always afford to wait. In order to keep their pupils from contact with the common herd, they chose recreation days which would not allow their pupils to mix freely with the pupils of other institutions; they arranged' even for the conveyance of their pupils to and from their school in their own omnibus. 

Everything was done to separate the elect from the common herd, and to give distinction to their pupils. They understand human nature, even while they profess to despise it. M. Gleize enters into the most minute details of his personal experience, " Chez les Jesuites;" but we shall only quote what he has to say of the religious education which he received, and the literary course through which he passed. 

Spiritual terror was the one and marked feature of the spiritual instruction. " We heard of nothing but the hideousness of sin,- and the terrible penalties with which God punished those who offended Him. The great occasion for enforcing these lessons was the retreat, which was of absolute obligation for these, one might say babies, in preparation for their first communion. This day of days on which this event was to take place, was made to stand out in the memory by observances of piety and pleasure which it was expected would forever impress the mind." 

Yet with all Rome's precautions and efforts, the first communion is the last in the vast majority of cases. The youth, once freed from the imposing restraints of the college or seminary, rushes eagerly on the career of pleasure hitherto denied, even in its most innocent form, and though he may retain his fear of hell, and send for the priest when he is dying, he keeps as far from him as possible while he lives. 

" We were completely isolated from the other pupils during our retreat. We passed from mass to sermon, and from sermon to meditation, from meditation to spiritual reading." These men, however well intentioned had forgotten their own boyhood, with. its joys and its freedoms; they would make their pupils monks in miniature, and ecclesiastics in practice, when they should have been taught that the yoke of the Lord is easy, and His burden light. The service of benediction, litanies, the recital of the rosary, were, so to say, the only recreations allowed, and this for boys not yet in their teens, and scarcely out of the nursery. 

It is little wonder that religion became utterly distasteful to them, and that spiritual terror was needed to enforce the lessons which were given, with so little discretion. But the astute fathers looked rather to the future than to the present. They wished to leave such impressions of fear on the minds of their pupils as would prevent them in the future from even listening to any arguments, or reading any literature contrary to that which is permitted by the Church. In acting thus, they believed that they were consulting the highest interests of those who were confided to their charge.[Bulls*#t, they knew they were brainwashing people DC] 

The boys were duly impressed, but M. Gleize declares that when he attempted an apostleship in his own family, as the result of the retreat, he was considerably discouraged. His first attempt at mission work was made on the family chef, whom he suspected of not being as devout as he should be. He tried to impress this functionary with the fear of eternal torments, and the terrors of hell fire. But the chef assured him that God knew too well all he suffered from fire in this world to inflict further torment of a similar nature in the next. This repulse so discouraged the young missionary, that he abandoned the role of preacher for all time to come. Still, he remained impressed, or rather terrified. Narratives were introduced by the conductor of the retreat in order to further emphasise his exhortations. Of course these narratives were believed literally, as it was intended that they should be. 

These lads of ten or twelve were told of a youth who forgot all the good instructions which he had received, and went one evening to a theatre; swift indeed was the retribution which followed. The next day he was found dead in his bed. But  this was not the least part of the horror. He appeared to one of his companions the following night, damned, and in a state of the most horrible torments. "The father," says M. Gleize, " exhausted himself in describing the torment of the lost." Every narrative was commenced with the assurance that he had known the unhappy subject, personally. Who could disbelieve him ? 

Certainly not his youthful and terrified audience. To doubt would have been a sin of which they at least could not have been guilty, especially at such a time. The preacher even descended to cries and shouts and grimaces, the better to terrify his trembling hearers. As for M. Gleize, he took care to provide himself with additional supplies of holy water and relics after such discourses. But these fears could not stand the test of experience. The boys eventually became men ; they went to theatres, and their friends went to theatres, and no serious retribution followed. Naturally they reasoned, if the fathers terrified, us so needlessly in this matter, why should we respect their teaching in other matters ? 

But there were also sermons on the joys of heaven and the certainty of attaining to these joys for the obedient, especially for those who remained under the direction of the good fathers, and who did not stray into forbidden paths of literature or enter lyceums or colleges which were under the direction of government. " At one moment we were sure of being lost, the next moment we were equally sure of being saved." But there were exceptions when there was no possibility of redemption. But there was one course which must end in our eternal damnation if we were so unhappy as to enter on it. 

The spiritual director of these boys had a horror of Freemasonry which amounted to a mania. In season and out of season he impressed on his charges the dreadful consequences of having any connection whatsoever with persons already past redemption. He shuddered, he groaned, he cried, he shouted, in order to impress what he believed to be the truth. He described the horrible stenches which would proceed from the damned, he desired his charges to place their hands for a moment over the fame of a candle that they might feel in a faint degree the agony which these unhappy persons would suffer for all eternity, and to enforce further his lessons he narrated certain facts which of themselves should have been sufficient to terrify the most hardened. [literally terrorizing these children, THIS IS ROME,it ought not to be this way. D.C]

One of these narratives is recorded in the work from which we quote. A young man so far forgot all the lessons of his youth as to join the Freemasons. But happily for him there was one religious duty which he performed in secret and  never abandoned. He recited one Hail Mary every night before he retired to rest. This proved his salvation; Christ may forsake us, but Mary never, she is the all merciful mother. She touched his heart at last, and he determined to forsake the Freemasons. But he knew that if he did so in France, they would certainly assassinate him, so he fled for his life to America. It was in vain ; the very moment he landed he was assassinated. The good priest shuddered as he related the terrible tragedy, and his little hearers trembled also, and promised that they would never be united to men who could be guilty of such dreadful deeds. 

Indeed such was the horror which this Jesuit father professed to have of the Freemasons, that he declared he would far rather see the devil than see a Freemason. Either the father was wilfully and deliberately deceiving his pupils, or he was so ignorant of the world as to be utterly unfit to educate. His pupils could scarcely continue to respect him when they knew later that Freemasons do not assassinate those who withdraw from their membership. 

M. Gleize describes the days of his first communion, for which all these elaborate preparations had been made. His experience has been the experience of many. The receiving of the " host " was the end for which all this preparation was made, and naturally the over wrought imagination of these  little lads, led them to expect some wonderful effect when the supreme moment had arrived. They had been taught that they were to receive their God, and with all the trusting faith, of youth they believed what was told them. On the eve of the great day they had to practise receiving the Sacrament. They were expressly forbidden either to eat the holy wafer, or to swallow it immediately. It should be moistened slowly in the mouth, and then swallowed with supreme reverence. Even in the merest particle there was a God. M. Gleize relates how he envied one boy, who, when they were practising, succeeded in swallowing the wafer " like a priest." Afterwards it appeared that he had obtained some unconsecrated wafers and practised on them. 

But all this preparation ended in dismal failure of emotion at the moment when religious ecstasy was most desired and expected. " Notwithstanding my fervour and my faith, I was terribly disillusioned. I had anticipated something more mysterious, something more consoling; I thought that my soul would have been wrapped in ecstasy. After I had received the communion I found myself just as I had been before the great event, and I found within me a longing desire which had not been satisfied." 

Weakening the mind by exciting the imagination, and subduing the will by fear, such are the means employed by these religious educators to attach children to the faith. 

The constant observance of religious exercises cuts up the day to a formidable degree. A short prayer was said at the commencement of every change of employment. This might, be suitable for those who had resolved to lead a religious life, and who could arrange their time as they pleased, but for boys or other young persons, the result is not always what their instructors desire. We have indeed known of painful results from the long practise of this incessant devotion. It leads in some cases to a scrupulosity which is mentally dangerous. 

When those who have been accustomed to such practices of piety for many years during the most impressionable period of their lives, return to their homes, where it would be impossible to continue the signing with the cross, and saying prayers, however short, at every stroke of the clock, and at other frequent intervals, they either omit these practices altogether, and, weary of a mechanical devotion, cease to pray, or they fall into spiritual despair because they cannot do what is evidently impossible. 

They cannot understand if it was so serious a matter to omit these practices in the convent or college how they can be justified in omitting them at home. Between the desire to do what they have been taught to consider so essential in order to please God, or rather, to secure their salvation, and the plain fact that such practices cannot be continued, or even remembered without considerable effort, they begin to lose all hope of doing what they once believed to be essential, and fall into indifference, if not into vice, or become morbid and live in a state of despair which sometimes ends in religious mania. 

A spiritual lecture was read every evening. " This lecture was always the life of some saint, and was spiritual only in name." Twice during the mass the boys sang canticles which were set to airs which they heard afterwards on the stage. 

But the Jesuit arrangements for recreation, which indeed are much the same as those in use in all Roman Catholic educational establishments, were the special subjects of M. Gleize's reprehension. Active games were insisted on for two reasons, first because it prevented anything like private conversation, which is dreaded above all things in such places : next, because the exercise was obligatory, and regulated by the superiors, it naturally became very distasteful to the boys, and in the higher classes especially they refused to amuse themselves to order, unless actually compelled to do so. 

Boys who complained were told that they were wanting in the " proper spirit " of obedience, and treated as mauvais sujets. Thus bad feeling was being constantly  engendered between the pupils and the masters, than which nothing could have been more conducive of evil results in the future. 

" I do not wish to draw a comparison between the games and recreations customary in secular colleges : I only desire to show the difference in their methods. Secular colleges encourage physical exercises for the greater good of their pupils. They wish to establish an equilibrium between their mental and animal being. The Jesuits, on the contrary, care nothing for the body, their principal object is to prevent any kind of free intercourse between their pupils. But what an antiquated idea of training for their future life.[sort of like lockdowns and social distancing huh? DC] 

It may be considered necessary to enforce a rule of the strictest silence in religious houses, where to pass even the most cursory remark of criticism on the rule or observances is considered an unpardonable crime. But boys will think, and will talk, even under restrictions which will silence their seniors who are vowed for ever to a life of obedience, and if the thinking is not permitted, or rather if the expression of thought is not permitted in youth, the flames of the volcano may be covered over for the time, but sooner or later they will escape with a force which will destroy the restraints of the past and seriously imperil the future." 

With regard to literary education of the Jesuit pupil, M. Gleize is explicit and condemnatory. He  writes without passion, and with an evident desire to do justice not only to the Jesuit, but what is quite as important, to the public. It has been unfortunate for the cause of truth, which is the only cause worth consideration, that so many who have written on the Jesuits have written as partisans. 

Every one who does not agree with their bitter denunciations is a' "Jesuit in disguise;" they do not want truth, they want denunciation, than which nothing is easier, and nothing less satisfactory to men who think. 

They cannot see any side of any question except their own, and their own is narrow with the narrowness of a feeble intellect. They denounce the Jesuit because he denies to others the intellectual and spiritual liberty which they profess to admire, yet they are quite as narrow as he is and they have an inquisition of their own, in which they martyr as far as they are able, those who do not agree with their particular opinions. 

Men who think and who are capable of judging, but who have not time or opportunity for personal investigation, have been at the mercy of these controversialists and have either supposed that the individual Jesuit is little short of a demon incarnate, or that he is a much calumniated man. He is but the victim of his fate and circumstances, but the wise will ask, What does he teach ; what is his real object ? and will pause before they commit the destinies of their country or the youth of today to  those who, however sincere, are bound by a system which denies all liberty, intellectual and moral. [this book is 120 years old, I highly doubt the author and her sources would be calling jesuits victims of fate and circumstances today DC]

In the commencement of this chapter on the literary training given by the Jesuit, M. Gleize relates an anecdote worth recording. Even Jesuit, colleges are examined on occasion by the bishop of the diocese where they are situated, such examination being permitted not as a right but as a diplomatic courtesy. Mgr. de Mazenod, bishop of Marseilles, on one occasion was the examiner in a Jesuit college. One of the pupils proved so stupid and deficient, that he could no longer restrain his impatience. . The rector observed what was passing and whispered to his Eminence, "He is not very bright; but he is very pious." To whom His Grace replied " Yes, yes, but the piety will, vanish ,and the stupidity will remain." The general opinion (of devout Roman Catholics) is, that the Jesuits are the best educators in the world. If, says M. Gleize, we understand by education simply the imparting of prepared knowledge, this may be true. But if we understand by education drawing out the latent faculties of the mind, and assisting the student to think for himself and to cultivate his intellect, the Jesuit does not educate ; he merely teaches. 

The simple fact is that the Jesuit dare not educate. He dare not because he is a Roman Catholic, and Rome does not permit education  in its highest sense ; still less can he educate as a Jesuit, because the rule of his Order is, if possible, still more opposed to the imparting of knowledge than the rule of any other teaching Order in the Church of Rome. This may appear mere assertion, and mere assertions are worth little; but we proceed to give proofs which can scarcely be disputed. 

The subject is certainly one which no thoughtful mind will lay aside without careful and attentive consideration. The writer knew of a case in Ireland where the bishop, who as usual sat beside the superior of the convent, during a public examination, seemed lost in admiration. The superioress not unnaturally supposed that he appreciated the answers of the children which were indeed wonderful. But the bishop was not so easily deceived as the admiring friends and audience of relatives. He was asked what had especially attracted his attention, and replied, not without a gracious smile, "I am amazed at the wonderful memory of the monitress who is examining." 

He had discovered early in the proceedings, that the questions and answers which were supposed to be improvised at the moment, were simply learned by heart. The answers so learned were easily given by the child to whom the interrogation was put, but the effort of memory on the part of the monitress was marvellous, as she had to remember all the questions, not only in their exact sequence, but also which child should be asked the question to which she had learned the reply. 

To the Jesuit there is nothing which is not ''of faith." There can be no liberty of thought, hence there can be no intellectual liberty, and by liberty we do not mean licence. The Jesuit impresses on his pupils that there are certain fixed and immutable rules of literary and philosophical belief, from which no departure is possible, and that it would be the height of presumption to form any independent personal opinion on any subject whatsoever. The Jesuit college is the grave of thought. Here the high and glorious inspirations of youth are strangled at their birth. 

It is true that such inspirations are not always well founded, but if they are not permitted free course how can youth learn wisdom by experience, as the first step to larger judgments, when the impressions of youth have been corrected by time and increased knowledge. The frame of mind which would lead even to scientific discovery is sternly repressed. All books for study are religiously peptonised, so that they may be assimilated without digestion. There is no chance for an expanding intellect, for expansion is unnecessary when there is nothing more to be known. 

Ridicule, the most potent factor in discouraging the young, is freely used if any attempt at originality of thought is manifested. It is the business of the student to learn what is set before him, and to believe in history and science, as well as in religion, what he is taught, and nothing more. What the fathers do not teach him is either not worth knowing or dangerous. All the books used in Jesuit colleges are prepared by the fathers. There are two reasons for this. The fathers can write their history and philosophy so as to suit the views which they hold on these subjects, and they add very largely to their income by the sale of their own books. 

If the necessities of the times had not compelled them to another course, the Jesuits would have continued to give the same education to-day, which their predecessors gave in the 17th century. Another serious disadvantage of Jesuit education is the use which is made of Latin which is not always classical, as a medium of instruction and communication. For this there are also reasons—the Jesuit always has his reasons. For the Jesuit we do not deny that these reasons are good, but the important question remains, Are these reasons good for the education of the youth of today? 

In the Jesuit colleges Latin is spoken everywhere, and used in every study. No doubt this facilitates condensing information, and by condensing it, limits it. But there is yet another and important reason for the constant use of the Latin tongue. Latin is not merely the language of the Church in an ecclesiastical sense, it is also, with rare exceptions, the usual medium of ecclesiastical communication. All Papal pronouncements are written in Latin. All communications with the Roman Curia are written in Latin. When a bishop makes his visit ad limini, he spends some time conning over his syntax before he sets out on his voyage. The popes and the cardinals who reside in Rome, with very rare exceptions, do not understand any language but Italian, and the English and other bishops with rare exceptions, do not speak Italian. 

It is a curious fact that the men who dictate the policy and politics and license the books for foreign countries, do not know one word of the language in which they are written. Everything must be translated into Latin or Italian for their decision or revision. It is still more curious that men of intelligence and education submit to the continuance of such a system, especially when they are not members of the Church which pronounces its fiats on their public and private proceedings. 

In the French Jesuit colleges Latin is the ordinary medium of conversation, and the boys are furnished with phrase books, in which they may find all that is necessary for the very limited intercourse which they are allowed with each other, even in their  games. The Jesuit, however, rarely attempts to teach science. Masters are usually employed to teach the boys these departments, but all the same the books used must have the Jesuit imprint, and the mystic letters A.M.D.G. The professor of algebra in the college where M. Gleize was educated, told his pupils they should learn by heart, for as they really understood nothing they would be sure to make a serious mistake if they altered or added a word. It was, he observes, a singular way of teaching mathematics. 

The Jesuits discourage the study of the exact sciences, and not without reason. They fear that a mind trained to accept nothing which cannot be proved to demonstration, may at last turn on the church, and refuse to believe what is not logically proved. The mathematician accustomed to accept nothing which is not proved, and to discuss and weigh every argument, may one day apply this method of analysis to religious questions, with a result which would be fatal. The Order has a specialist for each study, who prepares the book on each subject. Pere Sengler prepares the grammars of the dead languages. Pere Gazeau writes the ancient and modern histories. Pere Mestrc undertakes the study of general literature. The A.M.D.G. which is found on every title page indicates that the book is written for the greater glory of God, and as the greater glory of the Society is a convertible term, orthodoxy is assured. 

It need scarcely be said that a carefully expurgated history, is not a history likely to benefit young men who would eventually be called on to play their part in the world's story. Distorted views of facts, and perverted representations of character, would leave them helpless victims to prejudice, when they most needed reliable information. Even though many Frenchmen who have received their education from ecclesiastics have practically abandoned their Church, they can never recover lost time, and such education as they have received has not prepared them to make the best use of their freedom. The prejudices of early education are rarely, if ever, overcome, no matter what may be the intellectual freedoms of later life. 

All the more reason why the present generation should leave nothing undone to bequeath a glorious heritage of intellectual liberty to those who are coming after us. The only liberty which Rome allows to her children is the liberty to agree with her, and the liberty which she so loudly demands at the present day from the world at large, is liberty to take away our liberty. 

Rome is the only religion in the world which asks liberty in order to enforce restraint. It is difficult for those who have not studied the subject to understand it, but if the literary history of the Church of Rome  is carefully read, and if her explicit teaching on such subjects was understood, it would be quite sufficient to open the eyes of all who are not either indifferent, or wilfully blind. 

"The History of France," A.M.D.G., revised, corrected, and completed by the Rev. P. Gazeau, of the Company of Jesus, was the title of the work on French history, which was the class book of the college. It was written for the youthful students in order that they might know all that was considered good for them to know, as regarded certain historical events, and that they might be taught to think as their masters thought on every event connected with the history of their country. 

Can it be a matter of surprise if the youth so educated should become incapable of judging for himself, or of understanding the real interest of his native land. At each social cataclysm in France —and they have not been few—-the pious Catholic lifts up his hands in sincere amazement, and wonders how such events can come to pass ! 

But what else can be expected from men who at the most important period of their lives have been trained to think independent intellectual effort a sin, unless, indeed, it is an intellectual effort to remember what they have been taught, and to believe that all else is false and vain. When the necessity for personal decision comes to such men, they either lean weakly on the feeble reed of the advice of a " director," whose mind is as narrow as their own, or they break from all restraint and rush headlong on the first course of action which seems to promise good, or to relieve them from the burden of personal responsibility which they have not been trained to bear. 

The Jesuit professor of history did not believe in the conversion of the world by peaceable means, but rather by the sword and the torture. Providence always intervened for the Church of his affections, and when Providence was too plainly against him, he had reasons to show that it was not at least the fault of the Church. When he is obliged to record the miserable failure of the second crusades, he explains it by saying that the wickedness of the soldiers was extreme, and that the eastern Christians were no better than the infidel whom they desired to exterminate. In this we find he ignored the fact that these bad Christians were devout Roman Catholics, " de quoi expliquer la conduite de Dieu sur cette Croisade; " but he has no explanation to give of the failure, of the lamentable failure, of the Crusades of St. Louis. 

Everything connected with the Reformation is of course grossly misrepresented; pride and a desire for a licentious life was, according to him, the one motive of the " pretended Reformers." Luther secured success by assuring the  German and other princes that they should have all the ecclesiastical spoils. But the Jesuit father does not tell his pupils how it happened that men who had been under the exclusive teaching of his Church for centuries became so opposed to it. 

As for the massacre of St. Bartholomew, it was a mere nothing; it-was an affair of state. We shall see later that it was entirely an affair of the Jesuits. As for the revocation of the edict of Nantes, Louis XIV. only desired to bring the heretics back to the fold of the Church. The new edict, he says, caused "general rejoicing," and was received with enthusiasm. Not one word of the fatal and cruel dragonnades, but he admits that about 70,000 Protestants were compelled to emigrate. 

As for the Albigenses, he declares that Innocent III. desired ardently to save the Christian faith from danger, and that, in consequence, many towns where these dangerous- people lived were put to the sword, and the inhabitants were destroyed. 

He depicts in the most vivid colours the terrible fate of kings who rebelled against the Church, and describes with holy unction the awful consequences of the excommunication of those who would not obey the Pope in temporal as well as spiritual affairs. 

Even the very dishes from which they ate, and the vessels from which they drank, were passed through the fire before they could be used by others, and thus spiritually antisepticated. The kings of France, according to this history, were all more or less religious, generally more. When dying, their sole concern was for the religious future of their country, as, for example, the only care of Louis XIV. when dying, was that he feared "the ravages which Jansenism would accomplish in the Church and in society." 

Enough has been said on this subject, though too much could not be said to impress thinking men and women with the danger of entrusting education to those who are none the less false and fanatical in their teaching because they are unquestionably sincere. A man who is blind either by nature or from circumstances, is scarcely the person to whom one would entrust the care of a youth about to travel in a new country; it would not minimise the danger if the blind guide believed that he, and he alone, possessed sight. 

Of general literature as little was taught as possible. Books which might enlarge the mind were strictly excluded, and a sort of pot pourri of safe extracts was provided by a father who taught this department. Information was given in the form of question and answer, and the study either intentionally or otherwise was made as uninteresting as possible. To permit a boy the range of a well selected library, such as every English public, school possesses, would have been looked upon as a suggestion from an emissary of the evil one. 

"The Jesuit's dream of a perfect college," says M. Gleize, " is of one where there would be a crowd of young men who would listen only to their masters, 'speak only to their masters, think only as their masters, and have no intercourse with their companions except such as should be altogether unavoidable." In fact, they desire naturally to have the college a replica of the novitiate, and the world outside, if indeed it must exist at all, is looked on as a necessary evil to be availed of for the use of the Church. There is, however, one notable difference between the discipline of the Jesuit colleges in France and those in England. The Rev. Lord Petre, of whose narrative we shall make much use later, accuses the English Jesuit fathers of inflicting the most cruel corporal punishments on their pupils. M. Gleize, on the contrary, declares that corporal punishments are unknown in French Jesuit colleges.[what arrogance,Starting to see why we have so many sociopaths in Washington,the % with 'the' education,has got to be up there.Bill Clinton comes to mind,and Joe has admitted he's a afraid of the jesuits. DC] 

There is one point on which the Jesuits deplore that their educational efforts have not the success which they deserved. Their pupils have no enthusiasm, either for the Order, or for the spread of the faith. They may remain members of the Church so far as to frequent the sacraments on stated occasions, to marry with the rites of the Church, to attend mass occasionally on Sundays,  and even to send their sons to Jesuit colleges, but here the matter ends. They are passive, they never become apostles, they may become opponents. But the Jesuit has only his own system of education to thank for this. 

In every Roman Catholic school and college there are confraternities, and the ambition to become a member of one of these confraternities is the earliest desire instilled. The youngest boys are placed in. the confraternity of the Holy Angels. Later they are removed, if considered worthy, to the confraternity of the Children of Mary. The desire of religious distinction, which is so carefully fostered, often becomes a source of serious evil, since even the walls of a convent cannot change human nature, or exclude the passions of jealousy or ambition. Nor is an ambition less strong because its end is spiritual, nor is the jealousy less bitter because the object desired is presumably pious. But, in addition to these ordinary confraternities, to belong to which a boy or girl is taught by those whose opinions he most respects to believe to be the highest honour, there are also confraternities special to each religious Order. The Jesuits recommend three saints to the imitation of the youth confided to their care : St. Aloysius, St. Stanislaus, and later blessed Berkmans. 

To belong to the confraternity of these saints is considered the greatest privilege possible, and the  honour is coveted accordingly. But these youths are also presented to the Jesuit pupil as the object of his imitation. Now, if all the pupils of a. Jesuit college were to enter the Jesuit novitiate eventually, to emulate the sanctified dirt, or the intellectual idiocy of a saint, might harm no one but the imitator. But these saints, who obtained all their honours because they renounced the world in a very practical manner, are certainly not persons who should be recommended to the young for imitation, unless they propose to live out of the world. 

Yet in season and out of season, the virtues and above all the passive obedience of these holy youths are brought forward and praised. If the Jesuit father, in the making of the future man of the world, impresses on him that to become like a corpse in the hands of his spiritual director, is the very highest end of man, he certainly should not be surprised if the advice he gives so persistently is followed; if the man takes the impression of the seal which is placed on him, and retains it in placid indifference like a piece of wax, or if in the burning heat of the world's strife and life, the wax is rudely melted, and, far from retaining any of the original impression, becomes a flaming torch searching for a liberty which has been so unjustly denied.

CHAPTER VI. 

AN ENGLISH JESUIT COLLEGE. 

AN ENGLISH JESUIT COLLEGE. —Rev. Lord Petre's account of his experience in the English Jesuit College of Stonyhurst. He says English R. C. colleges are far from friendly to each other.—He gives the reason of this plainly.—Only for their unity in religious belief, there would be frequent and open quarrels ; they are unfit to educate because education is not their first object; carrying out the rules of their Order comes first; after that the interests of their pupils.—Grave injustice of sending young and inexperienced Jesuits to teach, because it is part of their rule to do so without regard to their qualifications.—Boys sacrificed for the sake of the training of the Jesuit novice.—Those who have the courage to speak are denounced as  "disloyal" to the church. — Count Hoensbroech on this subject; the secular Press denounces any one who attempts an exposure.—Lord Petre complains of the religious teaching in Jesuit colleges, and says it is "parrotted"— no trouble taken to teach intelligently; contrasts R. C. and Protestant colleges to the great advantage of the latter.—Stonyhurst boys under supervision day and night; this produces many evils ; is fatal to the formation of a self reliant character. —No real recreation permitted ; the boys not allowed to walk even for a moment arm in arm, to shake hands, or to touch each other; must walk like criminals in threes or be absolutely silent; list of the officers masters, and subjects studied at Stonyhurst; very few books allowed for general reading, and these few are "mercilessly expurgated." 

IN Lord Petre's account of his experience of a Jesuit college, he enters more into the formation of character under Jesuit training, than into the subject of intellectual training. The one subject is scarcely less important than the other. It is commonly supposed, particularly by those who are too lazy to think, that Rome has changed in some mysterious way and Rome is no doubt quite content that this idea should prevail. So long as those who might be active to reform suppose that there is no need of reform, evils can continue without, disturbance. It is supposed that Rome has in some way been influenced by the larger views of the 19th century, but where is the proof of this supposition ? 

There is something infinitely pathetic in Lord Petre's allusions to his love for his church. For him there is but one church, but one ark of safety, for the whole world. But he cannot help seeing her evils, or rather—for he would scarcely call those things which he so strongly deplores evils—he would have the blots removed from her fair face. How noble this man is and how grand is his love for - truth, and desire for the triumph and advancement of the cause so dear to him, even at any sacrifice of his personal feelings or interests. In one of his  pamphlets he compares the Benedictine method of teaching and training, which he considers all important, with the methods of the Jesuit. 

But he says, " though the public are dissatisfied, the religious orders will never agree." There are too many pecuniary interests mixed up in this question, and though the religious orders possess enormous wealth, they will not pay teachers to impart knowledge of which they are deficient themselves. They spend money on buildings, which may be an ornament to their particular order, but something more is wanted at the present day than mere material work. One cannot but think of Lourdes and the millions of money hoarded by the Fathers of the grotto, when the poor parish priest, the founder of the shrine, could not get sufficient to build a modest and much needed parish church. 

Strange as it will seem to some, Lord Petre comments strongly on the failure of Roman Catholic schools to impart a good religious education. Catholic boys show a marked poverty of results, and what they do learn is " parrotted." This statement corresponds with the statements of M. Gleize as to the education given in French Jesuit colleges. The system of espionage as practised in Jesuit colleges is spoken of by him with stern reprobation. He says, " Espionage is yearly,—we speak advisedly, irritating our boys out of all balance of intellect and out of all dignity of character. Where this distortion of supervision is practised, it would seem that Catholic boys must be supposed to come to school so degraded and brutalised, so inferior in purity and rectitude to their Protestant fellows, that they must be treated as meditating the worst kind of evil, at every hour of the day or night. 

" There have been many who have come from the peace of tender and gentle homes, and who have found themselves cast suddenly into a world where suspicion, reserve, the extinction of the natural affections, severe and frequent punishments, have rudely displaced paternal advice and maternal gentleness, and under the oppression of an asceticism for which quaint is a term too mild, many have learnt why it is in countries not our own, the character of the priesthood has already become odious and abhorrent to the feelings of boys, ere yet they were in full possession of their reason. 

" Under such a discipline many beside myself have become ‘ desperate by too quick a sense of a constant infelicity’ . There have I noted the hardening and souring of childhood's sweetness. There have I seen in its working a process all too apt to foster the growth of artificial and constrained habits in some, of rebellious protest and decay of self-respect in others, of a senseless and uncultured Spartanism in very many, of development more or less distorted in all.

"Whose mind can expand when its path is cut between adamantine rocks ? Whose aims should be definite, when his natural and laudable objects are beset with clouds of suspicion and mistrust ? Whose purpose shall find time to concentrate itself upon natural objects, when its whole energy is focussed on avoidance of trumped up moral dangers which, had they never been suggested to him, would by the grace of God never have been seen, or felt, or known ? " 

These are indeed strong words, and coming from such a source, they demand the earnest and careful consideration of those who would place the education of English youth in the hands of Roman Catholic teachers, whether lay or clerical. 

Lord Petre thought that more could be done to improve or rather to form the character of a boy by general care and religious advice, than by the compulsion which the system of espionage involves. He would have youth trained to the love of virtue and to high and lofty ideas which they should put in practice while young, thus forming habits for the future. He says, “ I think we do not come near Eton, Rugby, Cheltenham, Wellington and some other non-Catholic schools in these particulars, viz., in scholarship, secondly, and much more in composition, thirdly in expansion of mind, earnestness of purpose, definiteness of aim." 

Lord Petre compares the English public school  system with the Jesuit system, and very much prefers the former. He says, "Catholic boys are wanting in definiteness of aim, and earnestness of purpose," all personal manifestation of character is sternly repressed. There can be no special aim of life, boys are obliged every hour of the day and even of the night to move about like automatons ; yet he is not without a glimpse of the cause of the evils which he deplores, though naturally he does riot see far enough., He does not realise that the religion which he so much loves Is the actual cause of the evils which he so honestly deplores. He pays the usual and almost fulsome compliments to the ecclesiastical authorities of his church; but he does not see, or if he sees, he considers it either prudent or loyal to conceal the self-evident fact, that the bishops of his Church could remedy all these evils if they pleased to do so. 

But in the case of Jesuit education, he certainly has the courage of his opinions. ? It is a matter of no little importance, when the education of the youth of this country is being placed more. and more in the hands of Roman Catholic ecclesiastics, that we. should show on such high and indisputable authority, what are the characteristics of that education. On two points his condemnation of the Jesuit system is emphatic arid clear, and as one who received his entire school education at Stonyhurst, he speaks  with authority. He says, " The theory and practice which I found in acceptance at Stonyhurst were, at no hour of the day or of the night should boys be away from the eye of a master. Stonyhurst College consisted in my day of a community of some twenty five Jesuits, and 'exclusive of Hodder,' a school of some hundred and seventy boys—perhaps more, perhaps less. " 

The community consists of the following:— 

THE HIGHER LINE. 

1. The Rector.                                  6. The Prefect of Studies. 

2. The Minister.                                7. The Prefect of Philosophers. 

3. The Sub-Minister.                          8. The Master of Rhetoric. 

4. The Procurator.                             9. The Master of Poetry. 

5. The Spiritual Father.                     10. The Master of Syntax. 

THE LOWER LINE. 

11. The Master of Grammar.              15. The First Prefect. 

12. The Master of Rudiments.             16. The Second Prefect. 

13. The Master of Figures.                  17. The Third Prefect. 

14. The Master of Higher  Elements     18. The Fourth or Supply  Prefect. 

19. The Sub-Prefect of Philosophers. 

Several other resident Jesuits, and several other lay Brothers. 

"The rector is the head of the whole establishment, but his office cannot be compared to that of a headmaster, as it comprises two distinct sets of duties. He is, first of all, a religious superior, having under him a religious community, bound by vows to obey him."  

Father Petre, to give him. his religious title, saw plainly the incompatibility of the monastic life with secular teaching. The combining of the two is a relic of the middle ages, and an anachronism. 

" The rector does not teach, but he occasionally sees the boys individually, but on matters of business, rather than with a view of exercising moral influence over them; he conducts all, or nearly ail the correspondence with the parents. He is invariably a priest: he is sometimes a scholar. 

" 2. The minister, 3. the sub-minister, 4. the procurator, are concerned with the temporal affairs of the house, with the commissariat, not being concerned with either spiritual, moral, or intellectual discipline. All three of these officers are priests. 

" 5. The spiritual father. He is a confessor ; his relation with the boys is theoretically very close, practically it may not be so. As far as my personal experience has extended, I have not found generally, that the spiritual father has usually been chosen with reference to his breadth of sympathy with boys, in their eccentricities, troubles, moods, and difficulties, but rather with reference to the vehemence of his personal piety, his zeal for and devotion to the/ special ascetic spirit of St. Ignatius. 

" As a rule, perhaps, the spiritual father may be said not to be successful in gaining the confidence of any boys, excepting those of a decidedly devotional turn. The spiritual father does not teach. The prefect of studies is charged with the complete management of the intellectual work of the school. He is a priest; he is not in any way concerned with the boys out of school. He is always a sound scholar, but is in a great degree bound to conduct the studies according to the tradition common to Jesuit schools throughout the world, and which is of ancient origin." 

This method of teaching is also especially condemned by M. Gleize. 

" Into the merits or demerits of that tradition, I do not hold myself competent to enter. The prefect of studies has under him a staff of masters, who are all Jesuits, and for the most part, junior ecclesiastics. Elements is the lowest class or school, which contains two classes. Elements is usually a very large class. It is entrusted to the almost entire control and care of a young Jesuit, generally a man of two and twenty or three and twenty. He has had no previous experience of teaching. He teaches nearly all subjects to his boys. 

" In the schools conducted by monks, the professors must necessarily be drawn from the narrow limits of the Order, and are generally young scholastics, who are appointed to teach, not because they have any special taste or talent for it, but simply because they are scholastics, and take to teaching as a matter of course, as part of their training. If at the end of the year, one is found to be notoriously incapable, doubtless he is removed. But what, meanwhile, has become of the victims of the experiment, the twenty or thirty boys he had to care for ? They have passed another year of their lives, and it will be well if it has only been wasted. 

" If by chance a body of professors has been found who display an aptitude for their work, it will not avail the students long, for as scholastics they must be called away to other and more pressing duties. So the weary round goes on, continual experiments are made on the boys, and masters are formed, and if some good material is wasted, if some young lives are spoiled in the process—why, then it is a part of the system. 

" The master who begins with elements, if tolerably successful, rises in the following year with his boys to figures, thence to rudiments, and so on until he reaches rhetoric, when he prepares the rest of his class for the London University Matriculation Examination. He has worked hard day and night for seven years, and as a chief result (intellectually) some of his pupils pass their examination with more or less credit. 

" His career as a schoolmaster is at an end, he goes to study theology for four years, during which lime he is ordained priest, and, in the majority of instances, he then takes joint charge of a parish,  or is sent abroad on the mission. There are, of course, occasional exceptions to the rule. Meanwhile his place is always supplied from below by a constant stream of junior members of the Society of Jesus. 

"I have now to describe the prefects. These are three gentlemen called respectively first, second, and third. The first is usually a priest, the other two are junior ecclesiastics. It is the business of the prefects to keep their boys at all times under their eyes. This duty is conscientiously performed, and is assisted by the fact that during play time boys are confined within a square of gravel surrounded by railings. A boy is not permitted, except under the most exceptional circumstances, to leave this square of gravel during his recreation time. The entrance to it is guarded always by one and generally by three prefects. 

"There were three play-rooms, in two of which were billiard tables, and a bagatelle table in the third ; these rooms were dirty and ill-ventilated; there was a reading-room for the ' higher line' older boys. All novels were strictly forbidden, and books were mercilessly expurgated. The infliction of corporal punishment was frequent and severe, and administered not by the masters but by the prefects. 

"Everything in the system they work is so thoroughly mechanical, and the fear of anything like  'particular friendship' or favouritism is so strong, that it is difficult indeed for them to do more than energetically and conscientiously act by their card. They are much overworked. It must be further considered that the lower masters and the lower prefects are not priests, but quite incipient ecclesiastics, and very young, whereas intercourse with matured piety and virtue, combined with some experience of life under varied aspects, may be thought for boys manifestly desirable. 

"The boys now have a good cricket ground and' play football. 

" Baths were very rare, and cleanliness and tidiness were not the prominent characteristic of the boys. 

"The boys were not allowed to walk in couples, they were liable to arbitrary separation on the part of the prefects. There is a special fear of 'particular friendships' in the school of which I am speaking. This fear amounts almost to superstition, and is of obvious foreign origin. 

"Any kind of demonstration of affection was regarded with marked suspicion. In all these matters we were surrounded by a close atmosphere of suspicion. There were no monitors; big boys were occasionally put in charge of little boys—but always watched by a prefect. 

"They rose at 5.30, and were watched washing and dressing by prefects, while strict silence was enjoined; at 6.30 to Mass, which lasted forty minutes; chapel over, into the class-room, prepared lesson alone and silently ; at 7.45 breakfast:—strict silence ; 8 o'clock lessons, morning school which lasted until ten. Play until 10,30, school until 12 o'clock—dinner 12.30,' strict silence. Play until 2.36, lessons until 4.30, when bread and beer were served in the refectory. At 5 o'clock chapel, back to school-room for ' night studies ;'. 7 o'clock supper, recreation until 8.30, back to chapel for night prayers. In all the coming and going, all the roads were sentinelled as usual. The last sentinel was the spiritual father, who was posted outside the chapel door. Fifteen minutes allowed for undressing. The rule of silence was enforced in the dormitories with a jealous strictness which could not be exceeded. The prefects remained on guard until the boys were well asleep. Then two of them retired, but by turns each one maintained the watch throughout the night armed with a dark lantern. There was also another night watchman. Vigilance was Stonyhurst's predominant characteristic. 

" There were a very large number of foreigners at Stonyhurst, mostly Spaniards, West Indians, or Spanish Americans. The college is decidedly cosmopolitan ; so, I believe, are most of the Jesuit colleges in England. Added to this it remains to notice the ' philosophers.' They were a body of some  thirty or thirty-five young gentlemen, who lived in a separate part of the house, and have altogether superior accommodation to the boys. It is also open to students at some of our colleges—e.g., Stonyhurst—to follow the course of philosophy. This is a three years' course of logic, metaphysics, and ethics, with natural science. At the same time they have the opportunity of learning Italian and German, and perfecting themselves in French. 

" At present there are at Stonyhurst thirty-two ecclesiastical students of philosophy and thirty-two lay philosophers. 

" Even still and at all Jesuit schools it is considered necessary that up to the age of seventeen or eighteen a boy should be always under the eye of a master by day and by night. If such discipline be -, for the advantage of the Catholic youth of England let it stand, if not, the sooner it is modified the better*" * The Rev. Lord Petre's pamphlets were published in 1878. 

Father Petre points out very plainly the serious difficulties in the way of improving Roman Catholic education, especially as conducted by the Jesuits. His points may be summarised briefly :—All Roman Catholic education of the middle and higher classes is conducted exclusively by the clergy. The clergy are naturally jealous of each other's success, but as Rome never permits any of her family quarrels to come before the public, and has sufficient control of the Protestant Press to have silence preserved, she is safe from public censure. But all the educating clergy agree on one point, and this unanimity is their strength, they are determined to keep education in their own hands, and make a close corporation which excludes even the Roman Catholic laity. 

It is therefore impossible that Roman Catholic educational institutions can be improved or reformed from without, " because no college under the charge of religious could, even if they would, submit to a system of inspection and interference from without. Though the public (Roman Catholic) are dissatisfied, the different religious orders will never unite, nor make any change, nor will they pay qualified lay teachers." 

But there is yet another difficulty in the way of reform in monastic or quasi-monastic teaching institutions. The rule of each order is jealously guarded by the priests, and as the rule must always be the first consideration, the benefit of the pupil takes second place. That this is true, and that its serious inconvenience is felt, and even resented by the Roman Catholic bishops who take a larger view of affairs, may be seen from a touching letter of the late Cardinal Wiseman's, which is published in the biography of Cardinal Manning. Cardinal Manning also protested, but protested in vain, against the selfishness of the religious orders, who would not make the least sacrifice for educational or other work, the requirements of their Rule being their plea for refusal. Of this plea the Cardinal makes very little account. It may be added, however, that whenever there is question of getting a further grant from government for Roman Catholic schools or colleges, there is a unanimous silence on these points. But the thinking public should pause before consenting to place education in the hands of those who are reprehensibly incapable of doing justice to their pupils, above all when this incapacity is deplored by Rome herself. 

It has been admitted by a leading Catholic journal that " the condition of the Catholic youth of what are called the higher classes is such as to warrant the belief that there exists, either in our domestic or collegiate and public education, some grave defects which need a remedy." 

Another and valuable source of information as to the training in Jesuits' colleges has been given to the public lately in Germany. Count Paul Von Hoensbroech has published his reasons for leaving the Jesuits and his experience while with them. He notes especially how their system of training destroys the individuality of those who are subjected to it, but this is precisely what the training is intended to do. The mechanical routine, never varying from day to day, the perpetual silence, the severe and frequent repression, and the continual introspection soon kills the personal vitality, and the " cadaver " takes the place of the living and sentient being. 

Not one action of the day is left to the free will. The Jesuit novice cannot take a drink of water, he cannot use a pen, or paper, he cannot go from one room to another, without first asking and obtaining permission from his immediate superior. How can men who have been and are subjected to this system of intellectual slavery have the nobility of character to educate youth for a world where he must think and act for himself, not only in domestic affairs, but in the most momentous subjects of the day. 

In 1878 the late Lord Petre published another pamphlet in two parts, on the " Position and prospects of Catholic liberal education." As the whole system of Catholic education is sharply, though respectfully criticised, it need scarcely be said that the edition was soon bought up by those who had an interest in suppressing it. To the present generation it is absolutely unknown, but the information which it contains is none the less important. To-day, indeed, it is of possibly more value, since the so called liberality of public men and politicians has placed the education of a vast number of English youth in the hands of men whom some of their coreligionists have declared absolutely incompetent to conduct it. 

It may be thought that the state of affairs here described, is now past, and that Roman Catholic education has advanced with the times. 

The recently published life of Cardinal Manning which has aroused such a storm in Roman Catholic circles, gives undeniable evidence to the contrary. Men who were daring enough to say that Dr. Newman's spirit "must be crushed," were not the men to uphold or desire liberal education. Hence we find Ward and Manning so determinately opposed to anything like higher culture. Rome dare not allow discussion or investigation. She decides every subject for her followers, and when she has the power to do so, she removes, by destroying or mutilating it, all the literature which might supply facts or inferences which would tell against her claims. We have already shown how history is " peptonised" for the Roman Catholic youth in Jesuit Colleges. How can men, who in their youth have been deprived of all that is necessary for the formation of a just judgment on the most important affairs, be able to judge fairly of any subject, literary or religious ? 

Attempts are made from time to time to attract the attention, to gain the admiration of the public for the Jesuit college at Stonyhurst. An article written with this object has been lately published in the Pall Mall Magazine. But though the writer does  not say a word of criticism, there is quite sufficient statement of fact to show that there has been no advance since Lord Petre's opinions were published. The writer frankly admits that " an average public school boy would feel like a fish out of water," in the playgrounds. 

Every school time is begun and ended with prayer. There is a three days' retreat at the commencement of each session. The masters, as in the time of Lord Petre, are appointed to teach because it is a part of their religious training, without any regard for their fitness for such an important duty. Their inclination is never consulted, but a Jesuit is supposed not to have any inclination. 

A great effort is made to produce a show of distinguished men who have been educated at Stonyhurst, but the result is a dismal failure. One general, unknown to fame; one admiral, who looks like a Jesuit out for a holiday, and doubtful whether he should enjoy himself or not; the editor of a comic paper, which is going fast to decay, because he dare not admit a joke not approved by the Church, and the Church is particular as to what shall be said in this direction, for all roads lead to Rome, and Rome leads to the inquisition; to-day this does not mean the stake, but there are social inquisitions, all the same. An astronomer of no special note, and who would scarcely have been mentioned in any scientific  journal, if the public at present was not so specially bent on complimenting Rome. Last, though not least, we find the name of the naturalist Waterton. He may be considered a star of great magnitude in the Roman Catholic church, but what has he contributed to science in comparison with what he might have done if he had been a free man ? Of him an amusing story is told of how he could hoist a Jesuit father with his own petard. 

Waterton proved incorrigible in the matter of breaking bounds, and gave the prefects many a chase in consequence. On one occasion, when hotly pursued by the authorities, he managed to double back, and ran to the friendly shelter of one of the farm servants, who promptly covered him with litter in the pig sty. Waterton has himself related the story, which concludes thus:— 

" The man had hardly complied with my request when in bounced the prefect by the same gate through which I had entered. ' Have you seen Charles Waterton ?' said he, quite out of breath. " 

My trusty guardian answered, in a tone of voice which would have deceived anybody, ‘ Sir, I have not spoken a 'word to Charles Waterton these three days, to the best of my knowledge.' Upon this the prefect, having lost all scent of me, gave up the pursuit and went his way. When he had disappeared, I stole out of cover as strongly perfumed as was old  Falstaff when they had turned him out of the buckbasket." 

The anecdote is amusing, but it is far from amusing to know that English boys should be subjected to moral training which teaches them how to be expert deceivers. 

It is to the credit of our poor humanity that there are men, some of whom at least are better than their creed. 

As regards the intellectual training at Stonyhurst and elsewhere, Lord Petre complains sadly that while enormous sums of money are spent on buildings and halls, nothing will be expended on securing the services of lay teachers who have been properly educated for their work. But such teachers could not be found easily in the Roman Catholic church, as witness the difficulties of the late Cardinal Newman in Dublin, and of Cardinal Manning in London.) In each case it was found necessary to fall back on converts who had received their education at Oxford before entering the Roman Catholic church. 

All Roman Catholics who have written on the subject of education have either implied, or said expressly, that the religious orders in their Church are selfish and exclusive, and will not allow strangers, even of their own faith, to be admitted to their cloisters. The late Cardinal Wiseman complained bitterly, that though " religious " asked freely for dispensation from Rome in matters which concerned their own comfort, they would neither ask nor take dispensations, which would have enabled them to do more good, to do work which was urgently needed for the Church. 

The present, writer knew of a case in Ireland, where the sisters absolutely refused to receive broken meat and other food from a nobleman's house in their neighbourhood, because it would have given them too much trouble to distribute it to the poor. A book of Rules for the Jesuits was printed in Rome with the approbation of the General in 1607. 

We give some extracts from this, as showing the spirit of the Order. 

RULE 5.—You must not read prohibited books without leave, nor meddle with anything which does not concern you. 

RULE 6.—You must learn to be very ready in the language of the country where you dwell, or may be ordered to dwell. 

RULE 7.—While residing in any college, your chests, boxes and trunks, and your chamber doors, must never be locked ; you must not sleep at night with your chamber window open, nor lay naked, nor go out of your chamber undressed. 

RULE 13.—-You must not complain of one superior to another.  

RULE 17.—No brother must go into the office or chamber of another without leave. 

RULE 18.—While two of the order are in one chamber the door must be open. 

RULE 20.—You must not hold discourse or have any correspondence by letter with any person, without your superior's leave. 

RULE 21.—No person must hold idle talk, or discover without what is done within the college or house. 

RULE 24.—No person must go out without leave, and telling why he goes out, he must write his name down and tell the door-keeper where he goes to, he must return before night, and give notice to his superior on his return. 

RULE 25.—When on a journey, you must always lodge at a Jesuit college, if there is one in the place, and while there, must pay the same obedience to the superior as unto your own. 

RULE 28.—You must divest yourself of all worldly, irregular love towards your parents, relations and friends, and of all worldly affairs. 

RULE 29.—YOU must renounce entirely your own will, and embrace and follow the cross of Christ; you must aspire to humility, perfection and every virtue. 

RULE 32.—You are diligently to aspire to true obedience, and never contradict whatever your superior commands you.  

A series of special rules follow for each office. 

THE RULES FOR THE PROVOSTS OR RECTORS.(Of which Rules there are eighteen.) 

RULE 2.—YOU must impose common penance on those who fail in, or are wanting in their duties, or punish them publicly, either by making them eat under the table, or in making them kiss the others' feet, or by praying in the refectory or by fasting. 

RULE 13.—You must hold a conference twice a week on cases of conscience at which every priest in the house must assist. 

RULE 18.—YOU must not permit any Jesuit to go out of your college or house without a companion with him. 

THE RULES FOR THE MASTERS OF NOVICES. (Of which Rules there are fourteen.) 

RULE 5.—You are to appoint each novice a companion by whom he may be improved. 

RULE 7.—You are to be careful that no novice shall speak to any of his relations without your leave, nor even these without some person being present, for which end you must not suffer any novice to be in any office by which they have any intercourse with strangers, such as purveyor, porter. 

THE RULE FOR THE MONITORS. There are only three rules for them, which are as follows:— 

RULE I.—As monitor or admonisher, you are obliged to put the superior in mind whenever he has failed in his office ; but you must represent this with humility and respect, with the advice of the council, and not let any other person know what is done upon such an occasion. 

RULE 2 .— If after several admonitions the superior remains incorrigible, you must then acquaint the higher powers. 

RULE 3.—You must have a seal for the letters sent to the superior. 

THE RULES FOR PRIESTS. (There are six of these.) 

RULE 2.—You must be very expedient in cases of conscience, and diligent in hearing confessions. 

RULE 4.—When you confess a female, there must be a third person as an eye witness, though not so near as to hear what is said. 

RULE 6.—You must admonish all your sick patients to make their will, but you must not be present when they are making it. In everything else you must observe the general rule. 

THE RULE FOR THE PREACHERS. (Twelve Rules are given.) 

RULE 7.—When sent on mission, or to preach afar off, you must, if able, go on foot, live upon alms, and lodge in religious houses, and also keep a memorandum of the most pious and devout people in each place that you come to. 

RULE 8.—You must not only preach, etc., . . . but seek to make all men your friends. 

RULE 10.—You must write every week to acquaint your superior what progress you have made in your mission. 

THE RULES FOR THE LIBRARIAN. (Four Rules,) 

Rule 1 states: You must always have by you the "Index Expurgatorius," and not keep any forbidden books. 

RULES FOR THE PORTER. (Six Rules.) 

RULE 2.—You must not permit any person to go out without the superior's leave. 

RULE 3.—You must deliver to the superior every letter you receive for any person in the house or college; and you must not let any person in who comes out of the country, without the superior being first acquainted. 

RULE 5.—You must every night lock the doors and give the keys to the provost or regent. Rules are given for. the wardrobe keeper, house steward, cook and purveyor. 

THE RULES FOR THE WATCHMAN. 

It states that he must wake every individual; if they do not get up he must report them to the superior. Four Rules are given of which in Rule 4 it states: 

RULE 4. -At night you must visit every chamber, and ring or knock to advertise each person to examine his conscience. A quarter of an hour after, you must ring the bell for them to go to rest; and in another quarter of an hour you must go to every chamber to see if the light is extinguished, if not you must acquaint the superior. 

THE RULE CONCERNING THE WRITING OF LETTERS. 

RULE I.—The superior or regent of each house or college must write every week to the Provincial (and also to those of the house who are sent to preach on mission) acquainting him with every affair of consequence that regards the Society. 

RULE 2.—He must also write every three months to the General. 

RULE 3.—The Provincial must write every month to the General, and also to the provost, regents, and those who are sent on any business of the province. 

RULE 4.—The General is to write every two months to the provincials, but only twice a year to the regents, etc., unless some affair of consequence obliges him to write oftener. 

RULE 5.—That no letter may be lost or miscarry, several copies must be wrote of each, and they must also be copied into a letter book.  

RULE 6.—Every secret order or affair must be written in characters or cypher. 

RULE 7.—The letters which are written by the General at Rome must be read and carefully preserved in the house or college to which they are sent.

next

https://exploringrealhistory.blogspot.com/2021/03/part-4-black-popelife-in-french-jesuit.html

LIFE IN A FRENCH JESUIT COLLEGE.177s

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. As a journalist, I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of artistic, cultural, historic, religious and political issues. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Copyrighted material can be removed on the request of the owner.