beacon lights of history-iii-2-第46部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！


obliged；　by　the　pressure　of　public　opinion　and　of　the　Bourbon

courts　of　Europe；　to　suppress　their　Order。　　The　fall　of　the　Jesuits

was　as　significant　as　their　rise。　　I　need　not　dwell　on　that　fall；

which　is　one　of　the　best　known　facts　of　history。



Why　did　the　Jesuits　become　unpopular　and　lose　their　influence？



They　gained　the　confidence　of　Catholic　countries　because　they

deserved　it；　and　they　lost　that　confidence　because　they　deserved　to

lose　it；in　other　words；　because　they　degenerated；　and　this　seems

to　be　the　history　of　all　institutions。　　It　is　strange；　it　is

passing　strange；　that　human　societies　and　governments　and

institutions　should　degenerate　as　soon　as　they　become　rich　and

powerful；　but　such；　is　the　fact；a　sad　commentary　on　the　doctrine

of　a　necessary　progress　of　the　race；　or　the　natural　tendency　to

good；　which　so　many　cherish；　but　than　which　nothing　can　be　more

false；　as　proved　by　experience　and　the　Scriptures。　　Why　were　the

antediluvians　swept　away？　　Why　could　not　those　races　retain　their

primitive　revelation？　　Why　did　the　descendants　of　Noah　become

almost　idolaters　before　he　was　dead？　　Why　did　the　great　Persian

Empire　become　as　effeminate　as　the　empires　it　had　supplanted？　　Why

did　the　Jewish　nation　steadily　retrograde　after　David？　　Why　did　not

civilization　and　Christianity　save　the　Roman　world？　　Why　did

Christianity　itself　become　corrupted　in　four　centuries？　　Why　did

not　the　Middle　Ages　preserve　the　evangelical　doctrines　of　Augustine

and　Jerome　and　Chrysostom　and　Ambrose？　　Why　did　the　light　of　the

glorious　Reformation　of　Luther　nearly　go　out　in　the　German　cities

and　universities？　　Why　did　the　fervor　of　the　Puritans　burn　out　in

England　in　one　hundred　years？　　Why　have　the　doctrines　of　the

Pilgrim　Fathers　become　unfashionable　in　those　parts　of　New　England

where　they　seemed　to　have　taken　the　deepest　root？　　Why　have　so　many

of　the　descendants　of　the　disciples　of　George　Fox　become　so　liberal

and　advanced　as　to　be　enamoured　of　silk　dresses　and　laces　and

diamonds　and　the　ritualism　of　Episcopal　churches？　　Is　it　an

improvement　to　give　up　a　simple　life　and　lofty　religious　enthusiasm

for　materialistic　enjoyments　and　epicurean　display？　　Is　there　a

true　advance　in　a　university；　when　it　exchanges　its　theological

teachings　and　its　preparation　of　poor　students　for　the　Gospel

Ministry；　for　Schools　of　Technology　and　boat…clubs　and

accommodations　for　the　sons　of　the　rich　and　worldly？



Now　the　Society　of　Jesus　went　through　just　such　a　transformation　as

has　taken　place；　almost　within　the　memory　of　living　men；　in　the

life　and　habits　and　ideas　of　the　people　of　Boston　and　Philadelphia

and　in　the　teachings　of　their　universities。　　Some　may　boldly　say；

〃Why　not？　　This　change　indicates　progress。〃　　But　this　progress　is

exactly　similar　to　that　progress　which　the　Jesuits　made　in　the

magnificence　of　their　churches；　in　the　wealth　they　had　hoarded　in

their　colleges；　in　the　fashionable　character　of　their　professors

and　confessors　and　preachers；　in　the　adaptation　of　their　doctrines

to　the　taste　of　the　rich　and　powerful；　in　the　elegance　and

arrogance　and　worldliness　of　their　dignitaries。　　Father　La　Chaise

was　an　elegant　and　most　polished　man　of　the　world；　and　travelled　in

a　coach　with　six　horses。　　If　he　had　not　been　such　a　man；　he　would

not　have　been　selected　by　Louis　XIV。　for　his　confidential　and

influential　confessor。　　The　change　which　took　place　among　the

Jesuits　arose　from　the　same　causes　as　the　change　which　has　taken

place　among　Methodists　and　Quakers　and　Puritans。　　This　change　I

would　not　fiercely　condemn；　for　some　think　it　is　progress。　　But　is

it　progress　in　that　religious　life　which　early　marked　these　people；

or　a　progress　towards　worldly　and　epicurean　habits　which　they　arose

to　resist　and　combat？　　The　early　Jesuits　were　perhaps　fanatical；

strict；　ascetic；　religious；　and　narrow。　　They　sought　by　self…

denying　labors　and　earnest　exhortations；　like　Savonarola　at

Florence；　to　take　the　Church　out　of　the　hands　of　the　Devil；　and　the

people　reverenced　them；　as　they　always　have　reverenced　martyrs　and

missionaries。　　The　later　Jesuits　sought　to　enjoy　their　wealth　and

power　and　social　position。　　They　becameas　rich　and　prosperous

people　generally　becomeproud；　ambitious；　avaricious；　and　worldly。

They　were　as　elegant；　as　scholarly；　and　as　luxurious　as　the　Fellows

of　Oxford　University；　and　the　occupants　of　stalls　in　the　English

cathedrals；that　is　all：　as　worldly　as　the　professors　of　Yale　and

Cambridge　may　become　in　half…a…century；　if　rich　widows　and　brewers

and　bankers　without　children　shall　some　day　make　those　universities

as　well　endowed　as　Jesuit　colleges　were　in　the　eighteenth　century。

That　is　the　old　story　of　our　fallen　humanity。　　I　would　no　more

abuse　the　Jesuits　because　they　became　confessors　to　the　great；　and

went　into　mercantile　speculations；　than　I　would　rich　and　favored

clergymen　in　Protestant　countries；　who　prefer　ten　per　cent　for

their　money　in　California　mines　to　four　per　cent　in　national

consols。



But　the　prosperity　which　the　Jesuits　had　earned　during　their　first

century　of　existence　excited　only　envy；　and　destroyed　the　reverence

of　the　people；　it　had　not　made　them　odious；　detestable。　　It　was　the

means　they　adopted　to　perpetuate　their　influence；　after　early

virtues　had　passed　away；　which　caused　enlightened　Catholic　Europe

to　mistrust　them；　and　the　Protestants　absolutely　to　hate　and　vilify

them。



From　the　very　first；　the　Society　was　distinguished　for　the　esprit

de　corps　of　its　members。　　Of　all　things　which　they　loved　best　it

was　the　power　and　glory　of　the　Society；just　as　Oxford　Fellows

love　the　prestige　of　their　university。　　And　this　power　and

influence　the　Jesuits　determined　to　preserve　at　all　hazards　and　by

any　means；　when　virtues　fled；　they　must　find　something　else　with

which　to　bolster　themselves　up：　they　must　not　part　with　their

power；　the　question　was；　how　should　they　keep　it？　　First；　they　are

accused　of　having　adopted　the　doctrine　of　expediency；that　the　end

justifies　the　means。　　They　did　not　invent　this　sophistry；it　is　as

old　as　our　humanity。　　Abraham　used　it　when　he　told　lies　to　the　King

of　Egypt；　to　save　the　honor　of　his　wife；　Caesar　accepted　it；　when

he　vindicated　imperialism　as　the　only　way　to　save　the　Roman　Empire

from　anarchy；　most　politicians　resort　to　it　when　they　wish　to　gain

their　ends。　　Politicians　have　ever　been　as　unscrupulous　as　the

Jesuits；　in　adopting　expediency　rather　than　eternal　right。　　It　has

been　a　primal　law　of　government；　it　lies　at　the　basis　of　English

encroachments　in　India；　and　of　the　treatment　of　the　aborigines　in

this　country　by　our　government。　　There　is　nothing　new　in　the

doctrine　of　expediency。



But　the　Jesuits　are　accused　of　pushing　this　doctrine　to　its

remotest　consequences；　of　being　its　most　unhesitating　defenders；

so　that　jesuitism　and　expediency　are　popularly　convertible　terms。

They　are　accused　too　of　perverting　education；　of　abusing　the

confessional；　of　corrupting　moral　and　political　philosophy；　of

conforming　to　the　inclinations　of　the　great。　　They　even　went　so　far

as　to　inculcate　mental　reservation；thus　attacking　truth　in　its

most　sacred　citadel；　the　conscience　of　mankind；on　which　Pascal

was　so　severe。　　They　made　habit　and　bad　example　almost　a　sufficient

exculpation　from　crime。　　Perjury　was　allowable；　if　the　perjured

were　inwardly　determined　not　to　swear。　　They　invented　the　notion　of

probabilities；　according　to　which　a　person　might　follow　any　opinion

he　pleased；　although　he　knew　it　to　be　wrong；　provided　authors　of

reputation　had　defended　that　opinion。　　A　man　might　fight　a　duel；　if

by　refusing　to　fight　he　would　be　stigmatized　as　a　coward。　　They　did

not　openly　justify　murder；　treachery；　and　falsehood；　but　they

excused　the　same；　if　plausible　reasons　could　be　urged。　　In　their

missions　they　aimed　at　eclat；　and　hence　merely　nominal　conversions

were　accepted；　because　these　swelled　their　numbers。　　They　gave　the

crucifix；　which　covered　up　all　sins；　they　permitted　their　converts

to　retain　their　ancient　habits　and　customs。　　In　order　to　be

popular；　Robert　de　Nobili；　it　is　said；　traced　his　lineage　to

Brahma；　and　one　of　their　missionaries　among　the　Indians　told　the

savages　that　Christ　was　a　warrior　who　scalped　women　and　children。

Anything　for　an　outward　success。　　Under　their　teachings　it　was　seen

what　a　light　affair　it　was　to　bear　the　yoke　of　Christ。　　So　monarchs

retained　in　their　service　confessors　who　imposed　such　easy

obligations。　　So　ordinary　people　resorted　to　the　guidance　of　such

leaders；　who　made　themselves　agreeable。　　The　Jesuit　colleges　were

filled　with　casuists。　　Their　whole　moral　philosophy；　if　we　may

believe　Arnauld　and　Pascal；　was　a　tissue　of　casuistry；　truth　was

obscured　in　order　to　secure　popularity；　even　the　most　diabolical

persecution　was　justified　if　heretics　stood　in　the　way。　　Father　Le

Tellier　rejoiced　in　the　slaughter　of　Saint　Bartholomew；　and　Te

Deums　were　offered　in　the　churches　fo