Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 14.djvu/133

 SOCIETY

109

SOCIETY

Holy See, many of which, however, and those the most extensive, have accrued to them by communica- tion with the other orders to which they had been primarily granted: but that the Society has been accustomed to use its privileges with moderation and prudence.

The fourth and last of the questions is not per- tinent here, and we omit the answer. The Arch- bishop of Paris, who was one of the assembled bishops, bat on some ground of precedent preferred not to sign the majority statement, endorsed it in a separate letter which he addressed to the king.

(e) It is not to be denied that, as the Society acquired reputation and influence even in the Courts of powerful kings, certain domestic troubles aro.se, which had not been heard of before. Some jeal- ousies were inevitable, and some losses of friend- ship; there was danger too of the faults of the Court communicating themselve.s to those who frequented it. But it is equally clear that the Society was keenly on its guard in this matter, and it would seem that its precautions were successful. Religious observ- ance did not suffer to any appreciable extent. But few people of the seventeenth century, if any, noticed the grave dangers which were coming from absolute government, the decay of energy, the dim- inished desire for progress. The Society like the rest of Europe suffered under these influences, but they were plainly external, not internal. In France the injurious influence of Gallicariism must also be admit- ted (see above, France). But even in this dull period we find the French Jesuits in the new mission-field of Canada showing a fervour worthy of the highest tra- ditions of the order. The final and most convincing proof that there was nothing seriously wrong in the poverty or in the discipline of the Society up to the time of its Suppression is offered by the inability of its enemies to substantiate their charges, when, after the Suppression, all the accounts and the papers of the Society passed bodily into the ath'ersaries' p(5.sseB- sion. What an unrivalled opportunity for proving to the world those allegations which were hitherto unsupported! Yet, after a careful scrutiny of the papers, no such attempt was made. The conclusion is evident. No serious fault could be proved.

Neither at the middle of the eighteenth century nor at any previous time was there any internal decline of the Society; there was no lo.ss of numbers, but on the contrary a steady growth; there was no falling off in learning, morality, or zeal. From 1000 members in 12 provinces in 15.56, it had grown to 13,112 in 27 provinces in 1615; to 17,665 in 1680, 7890 of whom were priests, in 35 provinces with 48 novitiates, 28 professed houses, 88 seminaries, 578 colleges, 160 residences, and 106 foreign missions; and, in spite of every obstacle, persecution, expulsion, and suppres- sion during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, in 1749 it numbered 22,5s9 members, of whom 11,293 were priests, in 41 provinces, with 61 novitiates, 24 professed houses, 176 seminaries, 669 colleges, 335 residences, 1542 churches, and 273 foreign missions. That there was no falling off in learning, morality, or zeal historians generally, whether hostile or friend- ly to the Society, attest (see Maynard, "The Jesuits, their Studies and their Teaching").

On this point the testimony of Benedict XIV will surely be accepted as incontrovertible. In a letter dated 24 April, 1748, he says that the Society is one "whose religious are ever>'where reputed to be in the good odour of Christ, chiefly because, in order to advance the yoimg men who frequent their churches and schools in the pursuit of liberal knowledge, learn- ing, and culture, as well as in deeds and habits of the Christian religion and piety, they zealously exert every effort greatly to the advantage of the yoimg".

In another bearing the same date he says: "It is a universal conviction confirmed by pontifical declara-

tion [Urban VIII, 6 August, 1623] that as Ahnighty God raised up other holy men for other times, so He has raised up St. Ignatius and the Society established by him to oppose Luther and the heretics of his day: and the religious sons of this Society, following the luminous way of so great a parent, continue to give an unfailing example of the religious virtues and a dis- tinguished proficiency in every kind of learning, more especially in sacred, so that, as their co-operation is a great service in the successful conduct of the most important affairs of the Catholic Church, in the res- toration of morahty, and in the liberal culture of young men, they merit new proofs of Apostolic favour." In the paragraph following he speaks of the Society as "most deserving of the orthodox religion", "and further on he says: "It abounds in men skilled in every branch of learning." On 27 September, 1748, he commended the General of the Society and its members for their "strenuous and faithful labours in sowing anfl propagating throughout the whole world Catholic faith and imity, as well as Christian doc- trine and i>iety, in all their integrity and sanctity". On 15 July, 1749, he speaks of the members of the Society as "men who b}' their assiduous labour strive to instruct and form all the faithful of both .sexes in every virtue, and in zeal for Christ ian piety and doc- trine". "The Society of Jesus", he wrote on 29 March, 1753, "adhering closely to the si)lendid lessons and examples set them by their founder, St. Ignatius, devote themselves to this pious work [spiritual exer- cises] with so much ardour, zeal, charity, attention, vigilance, labour . . .", etc.

For the early contro\-ersics .«oe the articles Annat, Cerrutti, Forer, Gretser, Orou, and Reifctibcrff in SoMMEBVOGEL and the full list of Jesuit apologies, ihul., X. 1501.

BoHMER-MoNOD. Les jcsuiles (Paris, 1910); Gioberti, II oesuila moderno (Lausanne, 1846) ; Griesinger, Hist, of the Jesuits (London, 1872): Hoensbroech, Vierzehn Jahre Jesuit (Leipzig, 1910); HrBER. Der Jesuilen-Onlen (Berlin, 1873); Muhelet^

Quinet, Des jisuites (Paris, 1843); Mul-i.i ii /. n:ns ,le la

comp. de Jestis (Paris. 1898); Reusch, li':' .> '.. rh. der

Jesuiten (Munich, 1894); Taunton, //i ' .' irs- in

Enill.md (London. 1901); Tiikinkh, 7/,,v(, /- ' ' ■ .hrit.

d'Mucation eccles. (Fr. tr., T. .|t \ ■. I' ,i ■ I - 'i I) ■, h^nsof

the above and of other ho^i 1 1 * ; ' t ' ' i ! i Ir'suit

periodicals cited above; ^< ' ' [ i - \ : '. i mann),

Der Jesuilismus (Ratisbon. I'"v., ; ■ ■ i : ■ by a

Protestant writer, of anti-.Je.';uilir:il I .in I fiii I'npnlo- gHique de Pascal et la mart de Pascal i T ■ I'M! ! '■ ! . i /. ^ j-'su- ites de la legende (.Paris, 1906): Con,, y J I. i :. l'.K)2);

DuHR, yesui(en-FQ6r/fi (Freiburg. T 'I M h ! v.,,/. ,ii' (Paris, 1901); Maynard, T' ■ -•,. .(,/ 7. - ' - <.„;r/,, nf Jesus

(London, 1,S.55);/../ I ';iris, 1851-2);

deP.avignan. £>./■. • .. .; ■, .".- (Paris, 1844),

tr. Seager (London, 1 ^ M . \\ m^^, [,:■■,■> /, ' ,iT y Mendoza

(Freiburg. 1911); \ir-v>,u.t),r hi.hi ,l.r,,,' /,,, '.,, Dol^

LINGER AND ReuSCH, (icsch. dcT MomfMr, i!- I i ,f iil.!„ A

Vimlicalion of .St. hmatixis fr,im Phanal,,, ,...■■■ ■■■ .1, :iiilea from the Calumnies lavl 1,1 Iheir i-h,in,,- i] ■>,, I ' l'"' llrr;HE8, Loyola and Ihf E,i;r„l. ,^,i:-l,m of Ih, J. ■ - " ^ ork, 1S92); Pachtler-Oi tiR, 1<,\',,, .^h,, !,,.}-.,,, :' 1/ ■ ' ■ '/(, padogogica (Berlin, l.ssTi; Sv.i. kfhmh. ,/.■.,; / (,•- History and

Principles m Ih,' Loiht ■-( M,„l,r„ A',/..r ,/,.„ :l rn,''l,ms (St. Louis, 1905)..

Distinguished Members. — Saints: Ignatius Loy- ola; Francis Xavier; Francis Borgia; Stanislaus Kostka; Aloysius Gonzaga; Alphonsus Rodriguez; John Berchmans; John Francis Regis; Peter Claver; Francis de Geronimo, and Paul Miki, John Goto, .James Kisai, Japanese martyrs (1597).

Blessed. — The blessed number 91; among them are Peter Faber; Peter Canisius; Anthony Baldinucci; the martyrs Andrew Bobola; John de Britto (qq. v.): Bernardino Realini; Ignatius de Azevedo (q. v.) and companions (known as the Forty INlartyrs of Brazil), viz. Didacus de Andrada (priest); Antonio Snares; Benedictus a Castro; Francisco Magalhaes; Joao Fer- nandes; Luiz Correa; Manoel Rodrigues; Simon Lopes; Manoel Fernandes; Alvaro Mendes; Pedro Nunhes; Andreas Gontjalves; Juan a S. Martino (scholastics); Gonzalvo Henriques; Didaco Pires; Ferdinand San- cies; Francisco P^rez Godoi; .\ntonio Correa; Manoel Pacheco; Nicolas Diniz; Alexius Delgado; Marco Cal- deira; Sanjoannes (scholaslic novices); Manoel Alva- res; Francisco Alvares; Domingos Fernandes; Caspar