Edmond Paris - The Secret History of the Jesuits

In 1828, Charles X withdrew the Order's right to teach, but it was too late.

The dynasty collapsed in 1830.

Hated and covered with shame, the sons of Loyola nevertheless stayed in France, but disguised, as the Order was still officially abolished. Louis-Philippe and Napoleon III tolerated them. The Republic scattered them in 1880 only, under the administration of Jules Ferry. The closing of their establishments was effective only in 1901, under the law of separation.

During the 19th century, the Company's history in America and half of Europe was equally full of ups and downs as in the past, while fighting the new ideas.

"Wherever liberal-minded people gained victories, the Jesuits were expelled. On the other hand, when the other side triumphed, they reestablished themselves to defend the throne and the altar. So, they were banished from Portugal in 1S34, Spain in 1820, 1835 and 1868, from Switzerland in 1848, Germany in 1872 and France in 1880 and 1901.

"In Italy, from 1859 on, all their colleges and establishments were gradually taken from them, so much so that they were forced to stop all the activities prescribed in their laws. The same thing happened in the republics of Latin America. The Order was suppressed in Guatemala in 1872, Mexico in 1873, Brazil in 1874, Equador and Colombia in 1875 and Costa-Rica in 1884.

"The only countries where the Jesuits lived in peace were the States where Protestantism was in the majority: England, Sweden, Denmark, the United States of America. It may seem surprising at first glance, but the

REBIRTH OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS DURING THE 19th CENTURY 75

explanation lies in the fact that, in these countries, the Fathers were never able to exercise a polticial influence. Without any doubt, they accepted the fact more by necessity than inclination. Otherwise, they would have taken every opportunity to influence legislation and administration, in a direct manner by manoeuvering the ruling classes, or indirectly by constantly stirring up the Catholic masses".(32)

To be truthful, this immunity of the Protestant countries towards Jesuitic ventures was far from complete.

"In the United States", wrote M. Fulop-Miller, "the Company has deployed a systematic and fruitful activity for a long time, as she is not hindered by any laws... "I am not happy about the rebirth of the Jesuits", wrote the former president of the John Adams Union to his successor Thomas Jefferson, in 1816. "Swarms of them will present themselves under more disguises ever taken by even a chief of the Bohemians, as printers, writers, publishers, school teachers, etc. If ever an association of people deserved eternal damnation, on this earth and in hell, it is this Society of Loyola. Yet, with our system of religious liberty, we can but offer them a refuge..." And Jefferson answered his predecessor: "Like you, I object to the Jesuits' reestablishment which makes light give way to darkness".(33) The fears so expressed were to be proved right, one century later, as we shall see.

(32) H. Boehmer, op.cit., p.285.

(33) Rene Fulop-Miller, op.cit., pp. 149-150.

76 Section IV

Chapter 5

The Second Empire and the Falloux

Law—The War of 1870

In the previous chapter, we mentioned the wide tolerance enjoyed by the Society of Jesus in France, under Napoleon III, even though it was officially prohibited. In any case, it could not be otherwise as that regime owed its existence—largely at least—to the Roman Church whose support never failed, as long as the regime lasted. But it was to be very costly for France.

The readers of the "Progres du Pas-de-Calais", a publication for which the future emperor wrote several articles in 1843 and 1844, could not then suspect him of leniency towards "ultramontanism", judging from the following:

"The clergy demands, under the cover of freedom of teaching, the right to instruct youth. The State, on the other hand, also demands the right to direct public instruction for her own interests. This struggle is the result of divergent opinions, ideas and feelings between government and Church. Both want to influence the new generations coming up in opposite directions and for their own benefit. We do not believe, as one well-known orator does, that all ties between the clergy and civil authority must be broken in order to stop this diversion. Unfortunately, France's ministers of religion are generally opposed to democratic interests; to allow them to build schools without control is to encourage them to teach the people the hatred of revolution and liberty".

And again: "The clergy will stop being ultramontane as soon as one compells them to be brought up, as formerly in an up-to-date manner and to mingle with the people gaining their education from the same sources as the general public."

Referring to the way in which German priests were trained, the author clarifies his thoughts in the following manner: "Instead of being shut away from the rest of the world, from childhood, and so be instilled in the seminaries with hatred for the society in which they must live, they would

THE SECOND EMPIRE AND THE FALLOUX LAW — THE WAR OF 1870 77

learn early to be citizens before being priests".(34) This did not encourage political clericalism for the future sovereign, then a

"Carbonari". But the ambition to sit on the throne soon made him more docile towards Rome. Did not Rome herself help him climb the first step?

"Having been made president of the Republic on the 10th of December 1848, Louis Napoleon Bonaparte gathers several ministers around himself, one of which is M. de Falloux. Who is this M. de Falloux? A tool of the Jesuits... On the 4th of January 1849, he institutes a commission whose job is to "prepare a big legislative reform of primary and secondary education"... In the course of the discussion, M. Cousin takes the liberty to remark that maybe the Church is wrong to tie her destiny to the Jesuits.

Monseigneur Dupanloup defends energetically the Society... A law on teaching is being prepared which would "make amends" to the Jesuits. In the past, the State and the University had been protected against the Jesuits'

invasions; we were wrong and unjust; we demanded that the government applied its laws against these agents from a foreign government and we ask their forgiveness for it. They are good citizens who were slandered and misjudged; what can we do to show them the respect and esteem which are due to them?

"Put in their hands the teaching of the young generations".

"This in fact is the aim of the law of the 15th of March 1850. This law appoints a superior council for Public Instruction in which the clergy dominates, (first art.); it makes the clergy masters of the schools, (art.44); it gives religious associations the right to create free schools, without having to explain about the non-authorised congregations (Jesuits), (art. 17,2); it said that the letters of obedience would be their diplomas, (art.49); M. Barthelemy Saint-Hilaire tries in vain to demonstrate that the aim of the authors of that project is to give the monopoly to the clergy, and that this law would be fatal to the University... Victor Hugo exclaims, also vainly:

"This law is a monopoly in the hands of those who try to make teaching come out of the sacristy and the government out of the confessional".(35) But the Assembly ignores these protestations. It prefers listening to M. de Montalembert who exclaims: "We will be swallowed up if we don't stop immediately the current trend of rationalism and demagogy; what's more, it can be stopped only with the help of the Church".

"M. de Montalembert adds these words to make sure the significance of this law is well described: "To the demoralising and anarchical army of teachers, we must oppose the army of the clergy". The law was passed. Never before in France had the Jesuits won a more complete victory.