Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 14.djvu/122

 SOCIETY

98

SOCIETY

edict delayed indeed the execution of its arrel, and meantime a compromise was suggested by the Court. If the French Jesuits would stand apart from the order, under a French vicar, with French customs, the Crown would still protect them. In spite of the dangers of refusal, the Jesuits would not consent; and upon consulting the pope, he (not Ricci) used the since famous phrase, Sinl ut sunt, tut rum sint (de Ravignan, "Clement XIII", I, 105, ^he A-ordsare attributed to Ricci also). Louis's intervention hin- dered the execution of the arret against the Jesuits until 1 April, 1763. The colleges were then closed, and by a further arret of 9 March, 1764, the Jesuits were required to renounce their vows under pain of banishment. Only tliree priests and a few scholastics accepted the conditions. At the end of November, 1764, the king unwillingly signed an edict dissolving the Society throughout his dominions, for they were still protected by some provincial parlements, as Franche-Comt6, Alsace, and Artois. But in the draft of the edict he cancelled numerous clauses, which imphed that the Society was guilty; and, writing to Clioiseul, he concluded with the weak but significant words: "If I adopt the advice of others for the peace of my reahn, you must make the changes I propose, or I will do nothing. I say no more, lest I should say too much".

Spain, Naples, and Parma. — The Suppression in Spain and its quasi-dependencies, Naples and Parma, and in the Spanish colonies was carried through by autocratic kings and ministers. Their deliberations were conducted in secrecy, and they purposely kept their reasons to themselves. It is only of late years that a clue has been traced back to Bernardo Tan- ucci, the anti-clerical minister of Naples, who acquired a great influence over Charles III before that king passed from the throne of Naples to that of Spain. In this minister's correspondence are found all the ideas which from time to time guided the Spanish policy. Charles, a man of good moral character, had entrusted his Government to the Count Aranda and other followers of Voltaire; and he had brought from Italy a finance minister, whose nationality made the government impopular, while his exactions led in 1766 to rioting and to the publication of various squibs, lampoons, and attacks upon the adminis- tration. An extraordinary council was appointed to investigate the matter, as it was declared that people so simple as the rioters could never have pro- duced the political pamphlets. They proceeded to take secret informations, the tenor of which is no longer known; but records remain to show that in September the council had resolved to incriminate the Society, and that by 29 January, 1767, its ex- pulsion was settled. Secret orders, which were to be opened at midnight between the first and second of April, 1767, were sent to the magistrates of every town where a Jesuit resided. The plan worked smoothly. That morning 6000 Jesuits were march- ing like convicts to the coast, wh?re they were deported first to the Papal States, and ultimately to Corsica.

Tanucci pursued a similar pohcy in Naples. On 3 November the religious, again without trial, and this time without even an accusation, were marched across the frontier into the Papal States, and threatened with death if they returned. It will be noticeil that in these expulsions the smaller the state the greater the contempt of the ministers for any forms of law. The Duchy of Parma was the smallest of the so-called Bourl)on Courts, and so aggressive in its anti-clericalism that Clement XIII addressed to it (.30 January, 176S) a vioin'lorinm. or warning, that its excesses were puni.shalilc with ecclesia.stical censures. At this all parties to the Bourbon "Family Compact" turned in fury against the Holy See, and demanded the o-ntire destruction of the Society. As a preliminary Parma at once

drove the Jesuits out of its territories, confiscating as usual all their possessions.

Clement XIV. — From this time till his death (2 February, 1769) Clement XIII was harassed witk the utmost rudeness and violence. Portions of his States were seized by force, he was insulted to his face by the Bourbon representatives, and it was made clear that, unless he gave way, a great schism would ensue, such as Portugal had already comjnenced. The conclave which followed lasted from 15 Feb. to May, 1769. The Bourbon Comts, through the so- called "crown caidmals", succeeded in excluding any of the party, nicknamed Zelanli, who would have taken a firm position in defence of the order, and fi- nally elected Lorenzo GanganelU, who took the name of Clement XIV. It has been stated by Cretineau-Joly (Clement XIV, p. 260) that Ganganelli, before his elec- tion, engaged himself to the crown cardinals by some sort of stipulation that he would suppress the Society, which would have involved an infraction of the con- clave oath. This is now disproved by the statement of the Spanish agent Azpuru, who was specially deputed to act with the crown cardinals. He wrote on 18 May, just before the election, "None of the cardinals has gone so far as to propose to anyone that the Suppression should be secured by a wTitten or spoken promise"; and just after 25 Rlay he wrote, "Ganganelli neither made a promise, nor refused it". On the other hand it seems he did write words, which were taken by the crown cardinals as an indication that the Bourbons would get their way with him (de Bernis's letters of 28 July and 20 November, 1769).

No sooner was Clement on the throne than the Spanish Court, backed by the other members of the "Family Compact", renewed their overpower- ing pressure. On 2 August, 1769, Choiseul WTOte a strong letter demanding the Suppression within two months; and the pope now made his first written promise that he would grant the measure, but he declared that he must have more time. Then began a series of transactions, which some have not unnatu- rally interpreted as devices to escape by delays from the terrible act of destruction, towards which Cle- ment was being pushed. He passed more than two years in treating with the Courts of Turin, Tuscany, Milan, Genoa, Bavaria, etc., which would not easily consent to the Bourbon projects. The same ulterior object may perhaps be detected in some of the minor annoyances now inflicted on the Society. From several colleges, as those of Frascati, Ferrara, Bologna, and the Irish College at Rome, the Jesuits were, after a prolonged examination, ejected with much show of hostility. And there were moments, as for in- stance after the fall of Choiseul, when it really seemed as though the Society might have escaped; but event- uaDy the obstinacy of Charles III always prevailed.

In the middle of 1772 Charles sent a new ambassa- dor to Rome, Don Joseph Monino, afterwards Count Florida Blanca, a strong, hard man, "full of artifice, sagacity, and dissimulation, and no one more set on the suppression of the Jesuits". Heretofore the negotiations had been in the hands of the clever, diplo- matic Cardinal de Bernis, French ambassador to the pope. Monino now took the lead, de Bernis coming in afterwards as a friend to urge the acceptance of his advice. At last, on 6 Sept., Monino gave in a paper suggesting a line for the pope to follow, which he did in part adopt, in drawing up the Brief of Sup- pression. By November the end was coming in sight, and in December Clement put Monino into conuiiunication with a secretary; and they drafted the instrument together, the minute being ready by 4 January, 1773. By 6 February Monino had got it back from the pope in a form to be conveyed to the Bourbon Courts, and by 8 June, their modifications having been taken account of, tlie minute was thrown