The Secret History of the Jesuits – by Edmond Paris
4. Rebirth of the Society of Jesus during the 19th century
Contents
We mentioned that, when Clement XIV was constrained to suppress the Jesuit Order, he apparently said: “I have cut off my right hand”. The phrase seems plausible enough. The Holy See must certainly have found it hard to part with its most important instrument in the domination of the world. The Order’s disgrace, a political measure imposed by circumstances, was gradually attenuated by the successors of Clement XIV: Pius VI and Pius VII; and if the official eclipse of the Jesuits lasted forty years, it was because of the upheavals in Europe resulting from the French Revolution. In any case, that eclipse was never total.
“Most of the Jesuits had stayed in Austria, France, Spain, Italy, mingling with the clergy. They met with each other or gathered in large numbers as much as possible. In 1794, Jean de Tournely founded the Society of the Sacred Heart in Belgium as a teaching body. Many Jesuits joined it. Three years later, the Tyrolean Paccanari, who thought he was another Ignatius, founded the Society of the Brothers of Faith. In 1799, the two Societies merged with Father Clariviere as the head; he was the only surviving French Jesuit. In 1803, they joined the Russian Jesuits. Something coherent was coming back to life again, but the masses, and even most of the politicians, did not recognize it at first”.(31)
(31) Pierre Dominique, op.cit., p.219—Here is, according to M. Daniel-Rops, the strange death of Paccacaci, founder of the Brothers of Faith: “He was brought before the Holy See, imprisoned at the castle of Saint-Ange and finally was “assassinated”. (Etudes, September 19 59).
The French Revolution, and then the Empire, gave the Company of Jesus an unexpected credibility again; it was a defensive reaction against new ideas springing up in the ancient monarchies.
Napoleon the First described the Society as “very dangerous; she will never be allowed in the Empire”. But, when the Holy-Alliance triumphed, the new “monarchs” did not disdain the help of these absolutists in bringing back the people to a strict obedience.
But times had changed. All the skill of the good Fathers could only delay and not stop the propagation of liberal ideas and their efforts were more harmful than useful. In France, the Restoration experienced it in a bitter way. Louis XVIII, an unbeliever and clever politician, tried to contain the rise of “ultras” as much as he could. But under Charles X, narrow-minded and very devout, the Jesuits had it easy. The law which expelled them in 1764 was still being enforced. No matter. They enlivened the famous “Congregation”, first kind of Opus Dei. This pious brotherhood, composed of ecclesiastics and laymen, was found everywhere, pretending to “purge” the army, the magistracy, the administration, the teaching profession; it held “missions” all over the country, planting commemorative crosses wherever it went; many of these are still there today; it stirred up the believers to fight the infidels and made itself so hateful that even the very Catholic and very legitimist Montlosier exclaimed:
“Our missionaries have started fires everywhere. If something has to be sent to us, we would rather have Marseille’s plague than more missionaries”. 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 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.
