Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 12.djvu/779

 REDUCTIONS

697

REDUCTIONS

Cruz de la Sierra (1605), and the colleges and missions of Tucuman to the See of Cord6ba (1570). The juris- diction of the bishops was limited only by the exemp- tions of the Society of Jesus, which it held in common with the other orders and which were clearly deter- mined by papal bulls. For the rest, the bishops exercised their episcopal authority and functions freely in the territory of the Reductions, confirmed the euros proposed by the superiors of the order, drew their tithes, performed their pastoral and confirmation visits refiularly (Cardiel, Idc. cit ., 213) and sent reports to the king and to Rome (cf. the brilliant testimony cited by Charlevoix, loc. cit.,'lV, 329; Her- nandez, "El Extra- EccLEsiASTicAL Ch.iir fhom fiamicnto", 188; Loz- S. Tbinidad ano, "Hist, de las

Revoluciones", I, 80, 102, 227 and passim). The visits to the distant Reductions being attended by great difficulties, the bishops conferred extensive rights and powers upon the superiors of the missions (Cardiel, loc. cit., 258); the relations between the Jesuits and the bishops, although the latter mostly belonged to other orders, were very good throughout. One single exception is found in the case of the Bishop of Asuncion, D. Bernardino de Cardenas, O.S.F. (1642-^9), whose actions brought confusion upon the entire countrj', and whose antipathy to the Jesuits threatened to ruin the Reductions. In 1649 he was removed to Santa Cruz de la Sierra, and later became sincerely reconciled to the Jesuits. The Cardenas affair was eagerly taken advantage of by the anti-Jesuit party, particularly under Pombal. The "CoUecion general de documentos ineditos tocantes & la persecucion que los regulares de la Compaiiia suscitaron y siguieron tenazmente. . . desde 1644 hasta 1660 contra el lUmo— y Rmo_ Sr. Fr. D. Bernardino de Cardenas", Madrid, 1708, 2 vols., which was written about that time, is misleading throughout and unliistorical. There can be no doubt on which side right and wTong were, the representation of Marcellino da Civezza (loc. cit.) to the contrary notwithstanding. (See Charlevoix, loc. cit., II, 438; III, 19, and the "Pieces ju.stif."; Southey, loc. cit., II, 381; Cunninghame Graham, loc. cit., 102.) From 1654 onwards the name Reductions was officially altered to Doclrinas and the mission stations treated as parishes, a procedure which, in missionary lands, was by no means contrary to the rules of the order, as the apostate Ibaiiez maintains. Each parish had a cura (pastor) and a vicario, in larger towns several. The entire territory of the Reductions was under the authority of a superior, who resided at Candelaria and had, in order to lighten his burden, a vice- superior in the Parand and one in the Uruguay terri- tory. The Dodrinas together formed a collegium, according to the rule of the order; the superior missionis acted as rector and as representative of the mi-ssion in relation to the ecclesiastical and secular authorities. He was surrounded by a council of eight consultors, chosen from among the oldest and most experienced fathers. Every three or four years the territory of the Reductions was visited once or twice by the Provincial of Paraguay. The discipline of the order was strictly enforced, and the good reli- gious spirit of the members is confirmed by the official testimony of the bishops, governors, and royal in- spectors (Cardiel, loc. cit.. 247; Ulloa, loc.cit., I, 447). A document written in Ouarani, which was found dur- ing the forcible occupation of San Lorenzo (May, 17.56),

and in which the Indian Neenguiru describes the life and activity of the fathers, is touchinglv beautiful (Archiv. Simancas. Est. legajo 7, 450 fol. 21 and 22). N. How the System has been Judged. — The singular nature of the Reductions has roused the interest and admiration of numerous thinkers, philosophers, his- torians, economists, and explorers to an exceptional degree. Men of the most divergent callings and de- nominations, such as Buffon, Montesquieu, Chateau- briand, A. von Haller, Joh. von Muller, Macaulay, Dallas, Robertson, Wappaeus, Southey, Cunninghame Graham, Bluntschli, Joh. Rein, Popping, von Martius, Ungewitter, and many others have expressed their warmest appreciation. These opinions, in conjunc- tion with the brilliant testimonials of the Spanish kings, of governors, inspectors, bishops and others should be sufficiently weighty to characterize as lies and slanderous accusations "the spiteful attacks of professed enemies of the Church and the Jesuits (see bibliography below). It is to be regretted that prejudice against the Jesuit Order still spreads these lies of history. The Reduction system undoubtedly had its weak points and imperfections; they may be advanced against the system, but this should be done in a manner consistent with objective historical re- search. It is certainly inconsistent to bestow im- moderate praise upon the system of the Incas, and at the same time to find fault with the Reduction system, which adopted and Christianized all the good features of that system (Monner-Sans, loc. cit., 51). An objection frequently advanced against the Reduc- tions, even by well-meaning writers, was that the Reduction system did not educate the Indians up to autonomy but al- lowed them to re- main in a state of tutelage. This policy, they main- tain, explains the decline of the Re- ductions after the expulsion of the Jesuits. In answer it may be briefly stated that: —

(a) The work of the Jesuits was de- stroyed before it had reached its highest develop- ment.

(b) As a matter of fact, the Jesuits used every effort to educate the In- dians up to auton- omy (for proof see Cardiel, loc. cit., 286). Their efforts were frustrated bj' the deep-rooted in- dolence of the race. Proof of this is found in the fact that the Indians who left the Reductions and emigrated to the Spanish colonies failed to rise to independent positions, even among the most favourable conditions (ibid., p. 286, n. 110).

(c) The Reduction system must not be measured by European standards but according to the conditions pre- vailing at the time in Spanish colonics. "That it was not only suitable, but perhaps the best that under all the circumstances could have been devised for Indian tribes two hundred years ago, and then just emerged from semi-nomadism, is, I think, clear, when one re-