DP Tool Club 24/CD_ASCQ_24_0995.iso/vrac/relig_2.zip/CHAPT29.TXT

Text File | 1992-11-06 | 56KB | 1,041 lines

                16 page printout, page 490 - 505
                          CHAPTER XXIX

                  The Jesuits: Religious Rogues

   The Sainted Ignatius -- The Men of Jesus as Men of Blood --
       The End and the Means -- Two Centuries of Jesuitry

                      THE SAINTED IGNATIUS

     IN the year 1521, when Martin Luther was waiting nervously in
Wittenberg to hear Rome's reply to his burning of the Pope's Bull;
when Canon Nicholas Copernicus was, a few hundred miles further
north, brooding over the terrible truth that the earth turns round
the sun; when Magellan made the mightiest voyage yet known in
history -- a Spanish officer named Inigo de Loyola passed through
a religious crisis in his father's castle at the foot of the
Pyrenees. He had been shot in the French war, and be learned that
he was lame for life. On what could his fierce energy and ambition
now expend themselves? Inigo was a northern Spaniard, a Basque, a
veritable Quixote in knightly ambition, and only about thirty years
old. A lame leg ... His career as a soldier was closed.

     Such little details have more than once helped to shift the
course of history. As the fiery little man with the dark blazing
eyes lay cursing on his bed, a pious sister put the "Lives of the
Saints" near him. Caramba de caramba, here was a new kind of
fighting -- against devils -- in which lame legs did not matter!
Hitherto Inigo, or Ignatius, as he re-christened himself, had
tempered the chaste austerity of his love of God with the love of
maids; though he had been, for a Christian soldier, rather sober.
He had been, one who knew him says, "prone to quarrels and amatory
folly." But lame men do not wisely pick quarrels; and maids do not
offer smiles to lame men. So Ignatius was converted.

     It was a long business. Whenever you read about Ignatius and
the Jesuits, you read about "the great authority on the subject,"
M. Cretineau-Joly. Understand at once that this man's history of
the Jesuits, which even neutral historians sometimes follow, is
just as reliable as a Christian Science account of the history of
Mrs. Eddy. It was written in collusion with the Jesuits. It is a
Jesuit tract. I can show you the value of it at once. Cretineau-
Joly speaks of Inigo's change of plan as a "sudden revolution": the
grace of God, of course, and all that bunk. Well, the process
lasted nine months, as is well known. But a lame leg thrown into
the scale of Jesus and Mary, as against Mars and Aphrodite, turned
the balance.

     Certainly Inigo -- or let us now call him Ignatius -- was
converted and became a deeply religious man. The best proof is that
he momentarily lost what reason he had. He decided, after a
pilgrimage to Montserrat and a visit to Rome, to cross the sea and
convert the Turks to Christianity. Somehow, it took him a year to
get out of Spain, and the flimsy excuses of his biographers are
silly.

     In Montserrat, a famous shrine of the Virgin, he was housed in
a Benedictine monastery, and he quite clearly got here the idea of
founding a new monastic body, a fighting army of his own. His
temporary insanity continued in proof of the depth and sincerity of
his conversion. He gave his rich clothes to a beggar, and donned

                         BANK of WISDOM
                  Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
                               490

               THE STORY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY

the beggar's rags; and children laughed and pointed the finger at
"Father Sackcloth," with long dirty nails and unkempt hair, as he
walked the streets. Which, in a Spanish grandee, is a sure proof of
piety to the verge of insanity. After a time he lodged in a
solitary cavern at the foot of the hills and practiced great
austerities. Here he wrote the famous "Spiritual Exercises" of the
Jesuit Society.

     In other words, Ignatius of Loyola most decidedly became
profoundly religious. We may set aside melodramatic theories that
he just exchanged a secular for a clerical ambition as firmly as we
set aside the "sudden revolution" theory. But the Jesuit story,
based upon his own assurances, that he worked out at this time, in
the Manresa cavern, the plan of his famous regiment for fighting
Protestantism, is moonshine. For one thing, Ignatius kept on saying
for a further five years that his business was to convert the
Turks. As a fact, he went to Syria, and the monks at Jerusalem
promptly shipped him back to Venice as an undesirable. He did not,
in any case, know a word of any language except Basque and Spanish.

     He went back to Spain, and he had sense enough to see that his
dense and unlimited ignorance was not a good qualification for the
new kind of fighting. He laboriously acquired some education and
gathered disciples about him. The young men of Barcelona nearly
beat him to death for persuading the nuns to abandon their amours;
the Inquisition at Alcala threatened him; the Rector of Paris
University -- he traveled everywhere, even to London -- ordered him
to be publicly flogged. He was regarded everywhere as an ignorant
and obnoxious fanatic, the butt of the street-boys and the bane of
respectably immoral clerics. The fellow was trying to imitate
Christ.

     In short, Ignatius of Loyola was no schemer at first. But he
slowly acquired an education and a half dozen close followers in
the course of ten years. They formed a secret society for promoting
the glory of God. They vowed now either to go and convert the Turks
or to do whatever the Pope ordered. The only Jesuitical feature as
yet was the melodramatic secrecy that Ignatius imposed. But he also
imposed -- this is the exact opposite of Jesuitry -- the most
sternly ascetic practices and admitted only youths of real piety
and ability. The result was that he got only six men in his secret
society in fifteen years, out of three Christian countries, and in
1537 the seven of them, in apostolic rags, walked from Paris to
Rome and asked the Pope's blessing on their mission to the Turks.
"If you get there," said the Pope, smiling.

     Here the story of Ignatius begins to lose its holy simplicity.
These pupils or disciples of his were clever students, some of them
brilliant, but neither he nor they learned a word of Turkish or
Arabic or anything about Mohammedanism. Moreover, they had, after
years of delay, started for the east just after the east was
hopelessly closed against them by a new war. They were all monks in
life (except that they were strictly chaste), but they refused to
join any existing order. They met always in secret, and kept their
plans secret. They tended the sick and taught in various Italian
towns but above all they fished for new recruits for the
unauthorized "Company of Jesus," as Ignatius called his little


                         BANK of WISDOM
                  Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
                               491

               THE STORY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY

group. Ignatius himself remained in Rome, and in his angling for
the authorization of his body, he founded the diplomatic tradition
of his society. "Let us," he said piously to his pupils, "avoid all
relations with women except those of the highest rank." Not because
the latter are less inflammatory.

     They all gathered in Rome in 1538: eleven in number after
sixteen years, and hated by half the world for their secretive and
eccentric ways. Ignatius applied for authorization. One of the
three cardinals appointed to consider the matter was so sore about
the monks -- had not the corrupt rascals brought this new German
pest upon the Church? -- that he blocked the way. But Ignatius
secured a shower of "unsolicited testimonials," and in 1540 the
Society of Jesus was authorized. It was founded by diplomacy, for
no one wanted it. It won its authorization by cultivating the rich
and powerful, at the direct command of Ignatius. It brought itself
into close relationship with the Papacy by professing itself a
special regiment under the direct orders of the Pope. It took up,
especially, the work of education -- its early care of the sick, by
which it won its way, was soon abandoned -- and it made blind
obedience to superiors its specialty. Its own historians speak of
the "holy wiles" of its founder during those years. In plainer
English, the end justified the means, from the start.

     The Society of Jesus is not a monastic body. Rome knows,
though American Catholics do not seem to know, that no monastic
body ever remained uncorrupted for fifty years. The Vatican wanted
no more of them. And, although the rules of the Society are really
monastic, there was from the first one peculiar distinction from
all the monastic bodies in the world. Instructions were given that
rich and noble, not poor, youths were to be sought to fill the
ranks.

     In other words, by a singular development the stupid-looking
and entirely unworldly fanatic of 1522, "Father Sackcloth," had
become a real Jesuit by 1540. Intrigue became a passion with him.
Power, to do good, of course -- was what he sought incessantly.

     I need say nothing further about Ignatius himself than that he
ruled the Society until he died, in 1556, entirely in that spirit.
In Italy and Spain he wanted the Pope and Inquisition to stifle in
blood any dissent from the creed. In the new Protestant lands his
men were to be white-fleeced lambs bleating about the sacred
principle of liberty of conscience. Everywhere they had above all
to accommodate themselves to the circumstances. Their vow of
poverty was to be no ban against their living in a rich man's
house; but, when the man died, his house and wealth must be secured
for the Jesuits. Generally they were in a new place to beg their
bread and tend the sick. Once this had attracted wealthy patrons,
they abandoned the sick, built colleges, and selected the boys of
noble and wealthy families among their pupils for persuasion to
become Jesuits. They were fiercely attacked in most countries; and
one by one their critics, even bishops and archbishops, were
silenced by messages from the Pope. The "black Pope" was already
installed at the Vatican.




                         BANK of WISDOM
                  Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
                               492

               THE STORY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY

     This diplomacy and a certain appeal to the melodramatic and
picturesque and military elements in human nature enabled the
Society to count its thousand members before Ignatius died.
Already, in 1556, there were Jesuits in Abyssinia, the Congo,
India, Japan, and Brazil; and they had penetrated Protestant
England and Germany. It must not, however, be imagined that the
thousand soldiers of Jesus in 1556 were like the heroic six who had
walked afoot from Paris to Rome in 1537. The great college at
Coimbra, in Portugal, was corrupt as early as 1546, and the Jesuit
in charge fought for his post against reformers. But Ignatius won,
as he always did. He left, on the whole, a fine battalion, of equal
astuteness and fighting spirit, at the disposal of the Pope for the
struggle against Protestantism. That had become the great aim, and
I suspect that Ignatius had foreseen it twenty years earlier.

     For the strange chapters which follow I do not intend to refer
the reader to other writers, and I recommend no books here. The
literature about the Jesuits is as melodramatic as the Jesuits
themselves: in one half the books the Jesuits are devils, in the
other half angels. They were men, acting in peculiar conditions,
under a peculiar set of rules and maxims. I have written a large
"Candid History of the Jesuits" (1913), based upon the original
documents and the best authorities, and I need not repeat the
references here where I differ from the naive Catholic story of the
Jesuits. Few people, in any case, look up references. Footnotes in
historical works are largely testimonials to the erudition of the
writer. But I have minutely studied the story of Inigo de Loyola
and his followers from the year 1521 to the year 1910, and every
statement I make here is substantiated in my larger history.

                THE MEN OF JESUS AS MEN OF BLOOD

     Long before he died Ignatius, as I said, concluded that the
proper work of his Society was the restoration of the faith in
Protestant lands by means of intrigue. The end was obviously the
greatest service a man could then render to religion; the means he
chose suited his temperament and the peculiar vanity which every
reformer blends with his idealism; the work enabled him to live the
life of a saint, a soldier, and a statesman.

     Rome had never seen such a figure as that of the first General
of the Society of Jesus. He was a saint: yet half the priests in
the city hated him. Whenever the Jesuits in modern times are
attacked, one of them mounts the pulpit and modestly reads out the
"Spiritual Exercises": the manual of prayer, meditation, and
asceticism which Ignatius composed for them. "There we are," the
Jesuit implies, "in real truth. Do you think that we who are
nurtured spiritually on such diet as this are likely to be guilty?"
Then the preacher descends to join his colleagues merrily over a
bottle of the best that the country affords and draw up a list of
the pleasant ladies (not their charwomen) whom he will visit on the
morrow. I have shared the bottle, and I know.

     For Ignatius and his early followers those "Spiritual
Exercises" were very real. He slept only four hours a night. In the
morning be spent four hours in prayer. He had only three books in
his room, the Bible, the Breviary (the priest's prayer-book), and


                         BANK of WISDOM
                  Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
                               493

               THE STORY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY

an "Imitation of Christ"; and he was excused by the Pope from
reading the Breviary because he wept so much over the lives of the
saints in it that his sight was threatened. He was not out to fight
heresy with books. He worked at his desk until noon, when, in
strict silence, he and the others dined. Then he spent several
hours visiting hospitals, visiting cardinals and nobles -- visiting
anybody whom it was useful to visit. Then a common evening meal in
silence, a secret report to him on the conduct during the day of
every inmate of the establishment, and finally the prolonged
meditation by the light of the midnight lamp. The last is the part
I understand best, for it is my custom; though, while the
inspiration of Ignatius was a crucifix, mine comes from a pipe and
a bottle of beer or port. It makes no difference.

     It was a strange new Europe over which the apostles of the new
type were sent, nightly surveyed by the arch-diplomatist of
religion. Nearly half of Christendom was lost to the Papacy, and
other countries were being rapidly contaminated.

     Protestantism was making serious progress in France. Catholics
have an absurd idea that the French were always the most devoted
children of the Pope, whereas there had been almost more heresy in
France than anywhere else before the Reformation; after that date
until the nineteenth century the French clergy gave Rome more
trouble than any in the world; and today France is the least
religious civilization on the earth. A French historian of
distinction has recently said that in point of fact his country
never seriously adopted Christianity.

     France at once opposed the Jesuits, and Ignatius saw all his
plans foiled. He won a French cardinal, who won the king for him,
but it was no use. When the king authorized the good Jesuits to
settle in France, the Parliament refused to register his letter of
authorization, the University (the very cradle of the Society)
scorned the new semi-monks and their privileges, and the Archbishop
turned them out of Paris. A very strange lot these new apostles
are, the French said. How humbly they walk, and how meekly (at
first) they wash the sores of the sick; and how, the moment you
cross them, they produce Papal privileges from their grips which
none had ever enjoyed before, and all sorts of counts and cardinals
(or countesses and cardinals' mistresses) get busy behind the
scenes! Even when they won the queen, even when they were
instructed to drop their name and all their rights and their
privileges, the lawyers, clergy, and people bitterly opposed their
entrance into Paris. Ignatius' successor had to go in person to
France and spend months there; and he so bullied and terrorized the
superstitious Italian queen, Catherine de Medici, who virtually
ruled after her husband's death, that at last the Jesuits got in --
and the Protestants got out, murdered.

     The Jesuits had got in by the influence of the queen and her
young son, but they were hated. Then they had a stroke of "luck."
In 1567 Father Oliver Manares, the head of the Jesuits in Paris,
"discovered" a great plot of the Huguenots (Protestants) in that
city. This put up the prestige of the Jesuits so high, and turned
the scale against the Protestants so heavily, that the chief Jesuit
at Lyons, Father Auger, "discovered" a plot in that city also.


                         BANK of WISDOM
                  Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
                               494

               THE STORY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY

There is some evidence of plotting at Lyons, but the Paris business
was sheer Jesuitry. The fabricator of the plot, Manares, was
afterward found by the Jesuits themselves to be a corrupt and
ambitious man. In 1581 they had to appoint a commission to consider
his personal conduct, and it condemned him. He was one of the most
eminent of the early Jesuits.

     And there is very good reason to believe that this brilliant
idea of the Jesuit, that the Huguenots were plotting a great
massacre of Catholics, actually inspired the St. Bartholomew
Massacre of the Protestants themselves. The historian who in
considering crimes of the Jesuits demands positive evidence is an
ass. Secrecy and the obliteration of evidence were from the start
a vital part of their policy. We need to take a reasonable view of
the probabilities, and not go beyond the probabilities. The new
practice of listening to the Jesuits themselves lands our
historians in all sorts of contradictions. In what ought to be the
weightiest modern work on the St. Bartholomew Massacre, the
"Cambridge Modern History," we are told on one page (twenty) that
the Pope "is said to have expressed dismay" -- which is a grossly
misleading concession to a late perversion of well known facts --
and on another page (two hundred and eighty-five) that the Pope
heard the news of the vile carnage with "triumphant acclamation."

     In another hundred years, if there are any Catholic apologists
left, they will be proving that the St. Bartholomew Massacre was a
myth. It was a cowardly, brutal, almost unprecedented orgy of blood
(August 24-25, 1572). The Protestants of France had become strong
enough to sustain a civil war for eight years, and the ablest of
the French Jesuits, Auger and Possevin, accompanied and egged on
the troops on the field of battle. This "war of religion" disgraced
even the later Middle Ages by the barbarity of the combatants. A
peace had to be arranged, and the queen then lured all the leading
Huguenots to settle in Paris by a hypocritical show of favor and by
marrying her daughter to the Protestant prince Henry. Then she
presided over the cold and deliberate plot of massacring them all
while they slept in their beds, and orders were sent over France to
imitate the glorious heroism of the capital. Something like fifty
thousand Protestants -- estimates run from thirty thousand (as
counted by the butchers) to seventy thousand (as counted by the
butchered) -- were slain in this revolting service to God and the
Pope.

     Of course you will find no proof that Jesuits were in the
plot. I do not even suggest that any of them had been told in
advance of the actual conspiracy. That will never be known, and I
am not prepared to say that it is probable that they were so
informed. The General of the Jesuits had seen Catherine de Medici
a few months earlier, and critics suggest that he, vaguely at
least, inspired the plot. That is not in keeping with his personal
character. But three things are certain and instructive. First, the
Jesuits were ridiculously unsuccessful in intellectual controversy
with the Protestants. Secondly, the Jesuits all over Europe
advocated the extinction of heresy by the blood of the heretics.
Thirdly, the leading French Jesuits were particularly aggressive,
and they had a very great influence on the queen. For years they



                         BANK of WISDOM
                  Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
                               495

               THE STORY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY

had lashed her against the Huguenots and supported the war. They
acquiesced in her hypocritical disarming of the Protestants as well
as the massacre. They created her state of mind and applauded the
result.

     Auger, the chief Jesuit, was the father-confessor of the king;
and he was as ready to overlook the constant debauches of that
degenerate son of the miserable Italian queen as to approve his
neurotic bloodthirstiness. And, when this poor caricature of a king
proved not Catholic enough and was murdered, in 1588, Jesuits
hailed the murder openly as "the eternal glory of France." Nearly
every distinguished Jesuit of the time held that it was lawful to
murder a king in the interest of religion. Cretineau-Joly himself
quotes fourteen of them. Father Mariana (1599) wrote a special book
("On the King and the Institution of the King") to prove it. And in
1595, only about twenty years after St. Bartholomew, the Jesuits
were ignominiously thrown out of France, and their leader executed,
for plotting to murder the new king.

     There is little of interest to say of the Jesuits in England
in those early days, except that here they began their theatrical
practice of wearing disguises. The number of Jesuit martyrs in the
glorious campaign against the English heretics is small. They very
sensibly proceeded on the maxim that a living Jesuit provides more
seed of Christians than a dead martyr. Two of them went to Ireland
-- a rather silly business as they spoke no Irish and little
English -- and to Scotland, where they stiffened the king against
the Reformation. The modern Irish Catholic will learn with surprise
that these early Jesuits of the sixteenth century reported that
almost all the leading men in Ireland were in sympathy with
Protestantism! They seem to have been practically driven out of the
country.

     They avoided England, and Jesuit writers are not very clear
when they have to explain how it was that Jesuits were not even
permitted to enter the country under the Catholic "Bloody Mary."
There is no reason to doubt the explanation given in Burnet's
"History of the Reformation" (ii, 526). Ignatius had laid down the
condition that the rich monastic property confiscated by Henry VIII
should be handed over to the Jesuits! For the next half-century
they could do nothing but make furtive visits to England and
Scotland in heavy disguise -- one as a money-lender (apparently an
early joke on the Scots), another as a military officer, and so on
-- until a few of them made a brave show under Elizabeth and earned
the martyr's crown which as a rule they energetically avoided.
Father Campion, under torture, betrayed a number of English
Catholics. Most of them were up to the neck in political plots
against Elizabeth.

     A rather amusing squabble among the martyrs occurred in 1587,
Father Weston was captured and sent to Wisbeach Castle for
detention. A number of ordinary (secular) priests were already
there, and the Jesuit at once tried to get command of the little
colony of angels. England was presently amused to hear of the
candid comments on each other of the family party. The priests, who
were trying to keep a few sparks of their faith alive in England,
hated the Jesuits and begged Rome not to send them. Priests were


                         BANK of WISDOM
                  Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
                               496

               THE STORY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY

more or less tolerated in England, even under Elizabeth, until the
Jesuit plotters, in their picturesque disguises, came along. Father
Weston was therefore told in good medieval English what the priests
thought of his pretensions, and he was roundly accused of
fraudulent practices, with paid accomplices, to impose on the piety
of the faithful; which seems to have been true. He retorted that
the secular priests were so addicted even while they awaited the
crown of martyrdom -- to drunkenness, gambling, and impurity that
he had to get a corner of the prison for himself. The government
later transferred the quarrel to the Elysian Fields, but it is
piquant that Queen Elizabeth herself took an interest in it, and
set four of the priests at liberty in order that they might go and
complain to the Pope!

     There was the same acrid quarrel in nearly every country to
which the Jesuits were sent. From the start they were hated, as
they are today, by most of the other clergy. What Rationalist and
Protestant writers have said of them is not a whit worse than what
devout Catholic priests have said for four centuries.

     I must, however, before leaving the English Jesuits, say a
word about the famous "Gunpowder Plot." Catholic attempts to
belittle this foul plot to murder the King, the royal family, and
the Lords and Commons (Deputies) of England when the Parliament was
to be solemnly opened in 1604, are preposterous and silly
manipulations of an undisputed historical fact. The only question
is how far the English Jesuits were implicated in this proposed
large-scale murder, I have shown in my book, and it is allowed by
all but Jesuits, that Father Garnet, whose wriggles to extricate
himself from the guilt are something new in the annals of
martyrdom, admitted that he was consulted, with sufficient
clearness, about a plot which would entail the killing of innocent
people and he then learned the full details of the plot from
another Jesuit. These two Jesuits would have crushed the design if
they had firmly declared it criminal, but they feared to offend the
laity by condemning it, and they, as far as they were concerned,
let the diabolical conspiracy run on. The knowledge was not
obtained "under the seal of confession," as some writers say.

     Cretineau-Joly says that more than a hundred Jesuits were
executed in England under Elizabeth. I have shown that during that
time there were not more than a score of Jesuits in England, and
this number includes certain priests who were induced to join the
Society in prison, so that it could count them as "Jesuit martyrs."
Only five regularly admitted Jesuits were put to death, and two
Jesuits purchased their lives by turning informers. Truly a
glorious record.

     Still more deeply stained with blood is the record of the
Companions of Jesus in Germany. In the early stages of the
Reformation they had little influence. The Catholics detested them
-- at Ratisbon the Catholics threatened to throw Father Le Jay into
the river -- and they retorted with the gravest charges against the
monks and secular clergy. Two of them were at the famous Diet of
Worms in 1540, and they reported to Ignatius that there were not




                         BANK of WISDOM
                  Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
                               497

               THE STORY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY

three priests in the city who were free from immorality or crime.
The Protestant historian who wishes to vindicate the strong
language of Luther or Zwingli will find astonishing material in the
published (Latin) letters of the Jesuits.

     When war broke out at length, the Jesuits marched with the
troops as they did in France, and inflamed them. Then the emperor
proclaimed a temporary peace and compromise, to the fiery and
outspoken anger of Father Boabdilla, and for some time the Jesuits
had to confine themselves to the preservation of the faith in the
Catholic provinces, where they incurred the usual hatred of the
faithful. Their college at Vienna was sacked by a Catholic mob, and
loathsome stories about them were current in Bavaria. But from our
point of view we are chiefly interested in the fierce sectarian
struggle, the Thirty Years' War (1618-1648) which wrecked the new
prosperity of a very large part of Europe and again suspended the
development of civilization. Bohemia had its population reduced
from three million to seven hundred and eighty thousand, and there
were parts of the continent where unburied corpses lay so thick
that the regions had to be avoided until nature had done its work
with the putrefying bodies of the dead.

     The war began in Bohemia, from which the Jesuits had been
scornfully expelled, and so we are not surprised that the camp-
followers of the ruthless Tilly, when he came to subdue the
country, included eighteen Jesuits. All through the war they kept
with the troops, and in places even fought with them. But of their
guilt in shaping the counsels of the aggressive Catholic monarchs
we will not expect to find documentary evidence. They had influence
everywhere. Tilly had passed through the first stages of becoming
a Jesuit. Ferdinand II, Maximilian of Bavaria, and Wallenstein had
been trained in their schools. There was hardly a Catholic court
where they did not intrigue for influence, and the Jesuit writer
who will suggest that they used it in the interests of peace has
still to be born.

     From the Roman side we have a clearer view of their
complicity. General Lainez attended the Council of Trent in 1562,
when the monarchs with mixed populations were in favor of granting
toleration. Lainez fought with fiery zeal against this and urged,
wherever Catholic power was available, the extermination of
heretics. If the civil power was bound, at the dictation of the
Inquisition, to take the lives of individual heretics or batches of
heretics, what different principle was involved in exterminating
thousands? Had not the greatest of the Popes, Innocent III, caused
the slaughter of whole populations of Albigensians? It is almost
ludicrous to attempt to clear the Jesuits in view of general
Catholic principles and their own special zeal, but we have
specific evidence which I have given in my "Crises in the History
of the Papacy.

     The German emperor, upon whom chiefly depended the fate of the
Reformers, wanted a General Council of the Church in which the
dissenting and the orthodox divines should argue, on an equal
footing, as to what the Christian faith really was. The Reformers
were more than willing, if the Council were not presided over by
the representatives of the Pope and if they were met on equal


                         BANK of WISDOM
                  Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
                               498

               THE STORY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY

terms. But the Papacy never for a moment entertained the idea. The
Council was to define doctrine, on the disputed points, in the
Papal sense, and then command the secular arm to exterminate all
who dissented from its definitions. In other words, the Papacy
wanted war. In 1545, before the Council of Trent opened, Pope Paul
III secretly promised the emperor very strong support in men and
money if he would make war on the Protestant princes, and then
betrayed the emperor's design to do so to the Protestants. The Pope
was not a religious man, and he chiefly wanted the restoration and
security of a more or less decent luxury for the Papal Court.

     So far the Jesuits had not been the chief instruments of the
Popes. Ignatius, it is true, whose stern asceticism did not move
him to protest against the semi-pagan frivolity and license which
the Papal Court still maintained, is known to have been one of the
chief instigators of Paul III in reorganizing the bloody apparatus
of the Inquisition in Rome; though even Roman Catholic historians
admit that the records of the Roman Inquisition are still kept in
secrecy (or destroyed), and we do not know how much blood it shed
or how much property it confiscated. After Ignatius, however, and
except under the reign of Pope Sixtus V (1585-1590), who hated and
endeavored to suppress the Jesuits, they found increasing favor
with Popes and princes, and they were the chief stimulators of the
fiery sectarian hatred which again reduced Europe to a state of
semi-savagery. Almost alone the Jesuits denounced the Peace of
Westphalia which closed the war. They had, I may add, fiercely
attacked Richelieu for keeping France out of the war, yet they
induced him, through the king, to stipulate with the Protestant
princes that their property should be spared whenever a Catholic
town was taken.

                      THE END AND THE MEANS

     What is characteristic of the Jesuits from the beginning, we
already see, is a certain ruthlessness in the choice of means to
attain their ends. So positive and widespread is the conviction
that they held that the end justifies the means that their name has
been given, in nearly every Christian tongue, to practices which
seem to rest upon that maxim. We call them Jesuitry. Their
explanation is that their success, their service to the Roman
faith, their remarkable ability and learning, have brought upon
them an especial measure of odium. Why the odium should take
precisely this shape, and why it was as virulent in Catholic
circles in every century as amongst Protestants and Freethinkers,
they have never explained.

     The real indictment of the Jesuits is, not that they said, but
that, as their actions show, they held that the end justifies the
means. You will, of course, not find the express statement by any
Jesuit moral theologian that the "end justifies the means." To
enunciate thus openly a principle which would bring upon them a
storm of abuse from Catholic theologians as well as non-Catholic
moralists is very far indeed from the customs of the Jesuits.

     Nor is it very profitable to discuss what we might claim to be
disguised or partial admissions of the maxim. The closest approach
to the formula is Busenbaum's: "If the end is lawful to a man, the


                         BANK of WISDOM
                  Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
                               499

               THE STORY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY

means are lawful"; and Wagemann's: "The end determines the probity
of the act." But the context shows that Busenbaum was not laying
down a general principle, and Wagemann assumed that the "act" was
not in itself immoral. Count von Hoensbroech once took up a
Catholic challenge in the matter, and went to court with a claim
that he had quoted Jesuits formulating the maxim. The German court
held that he had not formally proved his case. His discussion of
the subject -- and as an ex-Jesuit and a fine scholar he is the
best authority -- may be read in his "Fourteen Years a Jesuit" (ii,
320) and his little German work "Der Zweck beiligt die Mittel"
(1904).

     We come nearer to admissions when we examine in detail some of
the remarkable opinions of their casuists, In the seventeenth
century the Jansenists (Catholic Puritans) of France waged a long
and bitter war against them on account of the way in which they
prostituted moral principles, and the famous and pious Pascal
punished them with one of the most scathing exposures ever
published ("Letters to a Provincial," 1656, etc.). Six of these
letters consist mainly of statements -- not verbal quotations, as
a rule, so that Jesuit criticism of them is futile -- of doctrine
in Jesuit works, and they are from the modern point of view most
blatant assumptions that the end justifies the means. Cretineau-
Joly quotes Chateaubriand, calling Pascal's work "an immortal lie,"
and the modern Catholic is invariably told this. But I have shown
in my book that, as the Jesuits well know, Chateaubriand generously
recognized his error in later years. "I am," he said, "now forced
to acknowledge that he [Pascal] has not in the least exaggerated."

     I cannot quote here more than a few of these pretty flowers of
morality which Pascal and his friends culled from the voluminous
works of Jesuit theologians, but some specimens which are beyond
criticism must be given, with the name of the theologian after
each. The exact references are given in Pascal.

     In dealing with the Church law of fasting on certain days it
is said that a man who has exhausted himself by vice need not fast;
and other writers show the Jesuits excusing from the law a wife who
fears that fasting will reduce her charms in the eves of her
husband (Tamburini), a husband who finds that it diminishes his
power of enjoying his wife (Filliutius), and a maid who believes
that it interferes with her attractiveness to possible suitors.
When I add that the Jesuit theologians all held that one could
follow the opinion of one theologian against fifty others who took
a stricter view, the popularity of Jesuit confessors is fairly
explained.

     Some of them held that a servant (or a chaplain) who was
convinced he was underpaid might dip secretly into his master's
cash-box (Bauny). Others hold that, where a serious scolding in
case of refusal would follow, a valet might hold the ladder, and
give other assistance, when his master went to commit adultery. It
was, said others, quite lawful to fight a duel if one incurred
dishonor by refusing (Escobar) to pray to God for the death of a
threatening enemy (Hurtado) to kill a man who spread calumnies
about you, and also his untruthful witnesses (Molina); to search
for and kill a man who has struck you a blow, provided you do not


                         BANK of WISDOM
                  Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
                               500

               THE STORY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY

act out of vindictiveness (Escobar); and it was lawful for a monk
(or Jesuit) to kill a man who defamed his monastery or his monastic
body, if this were the only way to put an end to his conduct
(Amico).

     Others would permit a judge to accept secret gifts, if they
were tendered merely out of gratitude or to encourage him in
rendering just verdicts (Molina); a money-lender to exact a sum of
money beyond his loan, though the Church then condemned interest as
sinful, in the name of gratitude for the loan (Escobar); or a
bankrupt secretly to retain money enough for himself and his family
to live "decently" (Escobar). Lessius and others held that there
was no need, in confessing the sin, to restore money earned by
crime or vice; and Filliutius expressly said that either "a
prostitute, virgin, married woman, or nun" could with safe
conscience keep the price of her virtue.

     Innumerable quotations of this kind showed that even the most
learned theologians of the Jesuit Society put at the disposal of
the father-confessors of the Society a body of lax "principles"
which easily made them popular with sinners, particularly
aristocratic sinners. It is, in fact, enough that Jesuits "kept the
consciences" during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (until
they were suppressed) of nearly all the immoral princes in Europe
as well as of their paramours and of the thoroughly immoral nobles
and ladies of the court. Catholic theology stipulates that the
confession of a sin is useless unless the penitent promises at the
time never to repeat it, yet these aristocratic Jesuit confessors
all over Europe had too fine an appreciation of human nature, when
it was clad in silk or velvet, to insist on this harsh and
unreasonable requirement. Louis XIV and Louis XV were on the best
of terms with their father-confessors. Cretineau-Joly lies again
when he says that one of the confessors of Louis XIV gave him no
rest about his vices, according to the skeptical Bayle. What any
person can find, and the pro-Jesuit writer did find, in Bayle's
"Dictionary" is that the statement is the reverse of the truth.
Three Jesuits in succession shaped the "conscience" of Louis XIV
during seventeen years of the king's notorious amours; and great
were the wealth and power they derived from their corrupt
complaisance.

     It is obvious that men directing others on these lax
principles had long ago abandoned the severe standards of the first
half-dozen Jesuits. I have already said that in Portugal they
betrayed the inevitable degeneration during the life-time of
Ignatius; and the diplomatic ways of the saint were in part
responsible. Portugal was then a rich and great kingdom, though
just entering upon its decline. King John III, a stupid pietist,
invited the Jesuits, and the dry rot spread more rapidly. Against
the rule of "humility" Ignatius let the king have a Jesuit
confessor and a Jesuit tutor at court and he was disposed to let
him have a Jesuit head of the Inquisition. The result was that
within five years the Jesuit college in the capital was reported to
Rome as being very corrupt, and it was with difficulty reformed.





                         BANK of WISDOM
                  Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
                               501

               THE STORY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY

     In Italy itself degeneration was not slow in appearing. In
1561 the fathers were driven out of Venice and Naples for their
attention to ladies. At Milan two years later there was a furious
storm when the Jesuit college and its fathers were found to be
tainted with unnatural vice. The Jesuit confessor of the cardinal-
archbishop was said to be enamored with the page of a noble lady,
and he was, in fact, deprived of his post and condemned to the
foreign missions.

     By 1581 the Jesuits were very numerous and prosperous, and
corruption was announced from all sides. At Rome one of the chief
Jesuits was condemned by a commission of the Society. In Spain a
Jesuit, Mariana, wrote a scorching work on the "excessive and
scandalous enjoyments" of the wealthy Jesuit houses in that
country. In 1586 a Spanish Jesuit, Hernandez, wanted to leave the
Society, and, when the General refused him a license, he reported
to the Spanish Inquisition that this was to prevent him from
telling the secret of certain Jesuit gallantries. The Inquisition
at once put four of the leading Spanish Jesuits in its prison,
seized their documents and began an ominous examination of the
rules and practices of the secret Society.

     The General of the Society at Rome tried to avert the ruin of
his body in Spain -- for the exposure would have been sensational
-- by inducing the Pope to see that the Inquisition was encroaching
upon his province in this inquiry. Catholic Spain was so bitter
against the corrupt and intriguing Jesuits that it even fought the
Pope for a time. But Pope Sixtus V was a man of fiery energy, and
he wanted those documents for himself. He loathed the Jesuits and
was determined to destroy them -- less than a half century after
their foundation. The documents he now read utterly shocked him,
and he ordered that the name of the Society should be altered and
its procedure thoroughly reformed. It is a long story how the
Jesuits, the special humble servants of the Pope, now fought Sixtus
V with every means in their power, and obstructed his designs until
he died. Rome was convinced that they poisoned the Pope, but that
seems to me improbable. The Pope's death was expected at any time.

     The degeneration steadily continued. In 1654 a very remarkable
work, the "Teatro Jesuitico," believed to have been written by a
Dominican monk, gave the world once more a piquant picture of their
wealth, intrigues, and vices. Only a few years before, the Jesuit
house at Seville had failed for a sum of half a million dollars, a
debt incurred by borrowing the money from the faithful and
investing it in wild speculations. The creditors closed fiercely on
them, and the higher court of Spain declared their conduct
"infamous." The Jesuits of Spain generally were very wealthy, yet
they allowed their house at Seville to go bankrupt and cheat the
people from whom they had extorted the money.

                    TWO CENTURIES OF JESUITRY

     The Jesuits contrive to disarm the few among the Catholic
laity -- the clergy knew them too well -- who ever venture to read
genuine history, by protesting that this is all calumny. And
certainly there has been calumny. Two Popes are said to have been
poisoned by them -- said by Catholics as well as Rationalists --


                         BANK of WISDOM
                  Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
                               502

               THE STORY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY

but the charge is scarcely reasonable. There has been little
trouble to understand their psychology, as I explain it here.
Probably the majority of them have been, and are (I have personally
known many of them), tolerably religious priests with quite
ordinary ideas of moral principle. The summit of their intrigues is
to secure the favor for their Society of wealthy women, and to
maintain for themselves the reputation for learning which some
writers ludicrously award them. As I have known them, they are as
ignorant as Catholic priests generally are, and not even one in
fifty of their writers is a scholar.

     As to what are called the "typical Jesuits," the plotters, the
lovers of melodramatic adventure, their history is certainly
crowded with such. But the psychology of them is not obscure. The
historical circumstances in which their Society was founded very
largely gave them their peculiar complexion: secrecy, intrigue, and
a readiness to approve bloodshed. The time had gone by when the
Papacy or the Inquisition could crush heretics, except in Catholic
lands. War or large-scale massacres were now the only effective
means by which Rome could hope to regain its lost provinces; and to
arrange such things all the secrecy and intrigue of diplomacy were
required. The personality of Ignatius was a further shaping
influence. To gain the ends of the Church now one needed power, and
so the favor of the powerful and wealthy; and that suited his
temperament. So the chief trait of the new Society was the use of
intrigue to get wealth and power.

     Moreover, once the shock of the Reformation had passed the
acute stage, Catholic countries became as immoral as they had ever
been, and the Jesuits saw that they would lose the rich and noble
if they insisted on strict principles. This led them to develop
casuistry as nobody in the world had ever before developed it.
Every prince and gentleman knew that he might safely allow his
mistress to have a Jesuit confessor. He would not lose her.
Practically, as I said, they proceeded on the maxim, which they
never formulated as such, that the end justifies the means.

     As early as 1574 this casuistic disposition led to one of
those clerical adventures which are peculiar to the Jesuits and are
despised by all other priests. Sweden had become Protestant and was
sternly closed against Catholic priests. The Jesuits first sent one
of their number into the country thinly disguised as a foreign
envoy. His mission was entirely fruitless -- as I said, the Jesuits
were very poor at proselytizing by argument -- but the Swedes dare
not touch an envoy. Then, the Jesuit chronicles themselves boast,
Father Nicolai disguised himself as a Lutheran teacher and actually
got an appointment in the chief Lutheran college at Stockholm. The
man must quite certainly have lied about his beliefs and must have
mendaciously taught the Lutheran creed, for he held the chair of
theology: he even became rector of the college and sustained his
extraordinary lies for a considerable period.

     Equally mendacious and still more picturesque was the conduct
of Father de Nobili in 1605. He joined the mission in India, then
mysteriously isolated himself from it and learned the most intimate
details of the Hindu religion. Presently be turned up amongst the
Hindus, dressed in a flame-colored robe and a tiger's skin, with


                         BANK of WISDOM
                  Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
                               503

               THE STORY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY

all the marks and emblems of the sacred caste of the Saniassi. When
challenged, he swore that he was of high caste, and he produced a
document proving that he was Tatuva Podagar Swami. Naturally, once
he had thus, by a whole pack of lies, won the confidence of the
Hindus, be began to make secret converts. The scandalized
archbishop had him recalled to Rome, to appear before the
Inquisition, but the influence of the Jesuits was such that he got
permission to resume his work in India. His dress and caste-
practices had, he said, only a social and sanitary significance! In
the daily lies which his position implied no Jesuit finds anything
to blame. The end justified the means. Other Jesuits followed him.
It was claimed that de Nobili made a hundred thousand high-caste
converts, and another Jesuit thirty thousand. But in a more precise
Jesuit document we read that one of the most astute of these pious
tricksters converted only nine Brahmans in eight months, and that
this was more than any colleague had done in ten years. They lied
in Europe about their lies in India.

     In time the Jesuits quite openly lived as Brahmans among the
Hindus, traveling in gaudy palanquins with natives cooling them
with fans of peacock feathers. One, Father Beschi, won a native
prince, became his chief minister, and rode about with an escort of
thirty horses and a band. Others became pariahs and wandered about
with a few dirty rags on them. The news exalted the pious ladies of
Europe, especially when prodigious figures of conversions were
thoughtfully added to the story; but priests and laymen were
scandalized, and a fresh fierce attack was made on the Jesuits.

     Both in China and India they made converts by blending the
native superstitions with a discreet selection of Christian
doctrines. When hot-blooded Indian women refused to exchange the
little golden tingam (male organ) they wore at their breasts for a
cross, the good Jesuits were content to engrave a cross on the
treasured phallus! Other Jesuits held that wearing the sexual
emblem of the Hindu deity was an innocent social custom, or that
the woman had merely to convert it into a pious Christian act by a
"direction of intention." Every variety of native superstition was
thus consecrated, until the Papacy, after a prodigious struggle,
was shamed by the leers of the increasing skeptics of Europe into
suppressing the "Chinese and Malabar rites." The "converts" melted
away at once.

     The Jesuits at Rome used all their influence to protect these
corrupt practices, and the reason was not merely that they might be
able to boast of their hundreds of thousands of converts. For a
hundred years they sanctioned this conduct of their missionaries in
China and India, and, as usual, they fought the Pope and his
Legates doggedly when they were ordered to desist. For ten years
after their condemnation by Pope Clement XII they sustained their
practices in the east, and Benedict XIV had in turn to issue two
stern and indignant Bulls against them. The chief reason was that
they were doing a most Prosperous trade on the strength of their
missionary work. A manager of the French East India Company's
branch at Pondicherry in the eighteenth century said that they did
a larger and more profitable business in India than either the
English or the Portuguese merchants. On the books of his own
company a single debt of one hundred thousand dollars stood in the
name of the Jesuit Father Tachard.

                         BANK of WISDOM
                  Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
                               504

               THE STORY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY

     And here we have the meaning of the famous Jesuit settlements
in Paraguay. They were admitted to the country early in the
seventeenth century and, as the Spaniards had treated the natives
with extreme brutality, the Jesuits soon won their devotion by the
wiser policy of humanely organizing them for industrial purposes.
Unquestionably their settlements were ideal in comparison with the
brutal exploitation of the natives by Spanish laymen; but just as
unquestionably it was merely another form of commercial
exploitation, and, when Spain ceded part of the territory to the
Portuguese, the Jesuits threw native armies in bloody warfare upon
the Christian troops. The natives were in many respects harshly
treated and they received no wages. The Jesuits, says their
literary tool Cretineau-Joly, "did not think it proper to give
ideas of cupidity to Christians"; so they kept them themselves.
They defied the bishops and almost surpassed the audacity of their
colleagues in any other part of the world. And they became mighty
rich by their unselfish labors in South America.

     Another side of their activity, which no less betrays how they
acted on the maxim that the end justifies the means, is seen in
their readiness to approve assassination, to which I have
previously referred. After tasting blood in the Bartholomew
Massacre and the religious wars, they lost any primeval horror of
it that they may have experienced. When the French king who ruled
at the time of the massacre was himself murdered, Father Mariana
spoke of the event as a "memorable spectacle, calculated to teach
princes that godless enterprises do not go unpunished." Father
Commolet, the chief Jesuit at Paris and an influential preacher,
theatrically called for "a second Ehud" to assassinate Henry of
Navarre, then a Protestant Prince and aspirant to the throne. The
Jesuits threw themselves with all their energy into the political
and military league against Henry, and, when he became king and a
Catholic, they, against the Pope's express orders, rendered
important services to him and protested that they had worked in the
league against him only to dampen its ardor! But, when within a
year, two pupils of the Jesuits attempted to assassinate the new
king, and most compromising documents were found in their house,
their leader was executed and the Society was expelled from France,
to the intense joy of most of the people.

                          ****     ****


    Reproducible Electronic Publishing can defeat censorship.

   The Bank of Wisdom is a collection of the most thoughtful,
scholarly and factual books. These computer books are reprints of
suppressed books and will cover American and world history; the
Biographies and writings of famous persons, and especially of our
nations Founding Fathers. They will include philosophy and
religion. all these subjects, and more, will be made available to
the public in electronic form, easily copied and distributed, so
that America can again become what its Founders intended --

                 The Free Market-Place of Ideas.




                         BANK of WISDOM
                  Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
                               505