27. The Jesuits

 

THE “Society of Jesus,” commonly called “the Jesuits,” is a secret order of the Roman Catholic Church, founded August 15, 1534, by the Spaniard, Ignatius Loyola, and sanctioned by Pope Paul III, September 27, 1540. Loyola had received a military training, and when he later became an extreme religious enthusiast, he conceived the idea of forming a spiritual militia, to be placed at the service of the pope. The Jesuit T. J. Campbell says:

“They are called the Society or Company of Jesus, the latter designation expressing more correctly the military idea of the founder, which was to establish, as it were, a new battalion in the spiritual army of the Catholic Church.” - The Encyclopedia Americana, art. “Jesuits.”

 

Organization and Rules of the Society

 

Loyola organised his Company on the strictest military basis. Its General was always to reside at Rome, supervising from his headquarters every branch scattered over the world. Theodor Griesinger says:

“Its General ruled as absolute monarch in all parts of the world, and the different kingdoms of Europe, Asia, Africa, and America lay at his feet divided into provinces. Over each province was placed a provincial, as lieutenant of the general, and every month it was the duty of this provincial to send in his report to his General. . . . From these thousands of reports the General was in possession of the most accurate information regarding all that was going on in the world. Moreover, by means of the Father Confessors at the various Courts, he was initiated into all the secrets of these latter. [The officials] had to be careful to report nothing but the exact truth, [for] each one of them was presided with an assistant who was also in direct communication with the General, [who checked the reports of the one against the other.]” - “History of the Jesuits,” p. 280. London: 1892.

The Abbate Leone, after personal investigation, writes:

“Every day the general receives a number of reports which severally cheek each other. There are in the central house, at Rome, huge registers, wherein are inscribed the names of all the Jesuits and of all the important persons, friends, or enemies, with whom they have any connection. In those registers are recorded . . . facts relating to the lives of each individual. It is the most gigantic biographical collection that has ever been formed. The conduct of a light woman, the hidden failings of a statesman, are recounted in these books with cold impartiality. . . . When it is required to act in any way upon an individual, they open the book and become immediately acquainted with his life, his character, his qualities, his defects, his projects, his family, his friends, his most secret acquaintances.” - “The Secret Plan of the Order,” with preface by M. Victor Considerant, p. 33. London: 1848.

Similar registers are also found in the offices of the provincials, and in the “novitiate houses,” so that when one Jesuit follows another in office, he has at his finger tips the fullest knowledge of the most secret lives of those for whom he is to labour, whether they are friends or foes. The Abbate Leone says of his secret investigation of this fact:

“The first thing that struck me was some great books in the form of registers, with alphabeted edges.

“I found that they contained numerous observations relative to the character of distinguishedindividuals, arranged by towns or families. Each page was evidently written by several different hands.” - Id., p. 31.

Those who enter the Jesuit society spend two years of “noviceship,” and then take the “simple vows.” After several more years of intensive training, they take the fourth vow, by which they pledge themselves under oath to look to their General and their Superiors as holding “the place of Christ our Lord,” and to obey them unconditionally without the least hesitation.

The Jesuits being a secret order, they did not publish their rules. How then can we be absolutely sure about these regulations? Dr. William Robertson says:

“It was a fundamental maxim with the Jesuits, from their first institution, not to publish the rules of their order (“The Constitutions” - was preserved only in handwritten manuscripts. And allowed only to a few select members of the Society; and when these books finally were printed, they were not for the public).  These they kept concealed as an impenetrable mystery. They never communicated them to strangers, nor even to the greater part of their own members. They refused to produce them when required by courts of justice.” But during a lawsuit at Paris, in 1760, Father Montigny committed the blunder of placing the two volumes of their “Constitutions” (the Prague edition of 1757) in the hands of the French court. “By the aid of these authentic records the principles of their government may be delineated.” - “History of Charles the Fifth,” Vol. II, p. 332. (See also “History of the Jesuits,” Theodor Griesinger, pp. 435-489, 474-476).

The author was so fortunate as to have the privilege of carefully reading “The Constitutions of the Society of Jesus.” He saw a Latin edition of 1558, and an English translation of it printed in 1838, together with the three Papal Bulls: 1. The Bull of Pope Paul III, given September 27, 1540, sanctioning “The Society of Jesus.” 2. The Bull of Clement XIV, abolishing the “Society,” July 21, 1773. 3. The Bull of Pius VII, restoring it, August 7, 1814. We shall now quote from “The Constitutions,” thus presenting first-hand evidence of their Rules:

“It is to be observed that the intention of the Vow wherewith the Society has bound itself in obedience to the supreme Vicar of Christ without any excuse, is that we must go to whatever part of the world he shall determine to send us, among believers or unbelievers.” – “ Constitutions,” pp. 64, 65.

“Displaying this virtue of obedience, first to the Pope, then to the Superiors of the Society . . . we . . . attend to his voice, just as if it proceeded from Christ Our Lord; . . . doing whatever is enjoined us with all celerity, with spiritual joy and perseverance; persuading ourselves that everything is just; suppressing every repugnant thought and judgment of our own in a certain obedience. . . . Every one . . should permit themselves to be moved and directed under divine Providence by their Superiors just as if they were a corpse, which allows itself to be moved and handled in any way. . . . Thus obedient he should execute anything on which the Superior chooses to employ him.” - Id., pp. 55, 56.

It is this corpse-like obedience, required of all its members, that has made the Jesuits such a power in the world. Rene Fulop-Miller in his book: “The Power and Secret of the Jesuits,” commended by Father Friedrich Muckermann, leading Jesuit writer of Germany, and Father Alfonso Kleinser, S. J., and the Deutsche Zeitung, Berlin’s leading Catholic organ, says:

“The Society of Jesus represented a company of soldiers. Where ‘duty’ in the military sense is concerned, as it is in the Society of Jesus, obedience becomes the highest virtue, as it is in the army.

The Jesuit renders his obedience primarily to his superior . . . and he submits to him as if he were Christ Himself.” - “The Power and Secret of the Jesuits,” pp. 18, 19.

“So the Jesuits seek to attain to God through ‘blind obedience.’

“Ignatius requires nothing less than the complete sacrifice of the man’s own understanding, ‘unlimited obedience even to the very sacrifice of conviction. “‘ - Id., pp. 19, 20.

He taught his Jesuit members by a complete “corpse-like obedience” to be governed by the following principle:

“‘I must let myself be led and moved as a lump of wax lets itself be kneaded, must order myself as a dead man without will or judgment.” - Id. p. 21.

“It was the obedience of the Jesuits that made it possible to oppose to the enemies of the Church a really trained and formidable army.” - Id. p. 23.

“For, within a short time after the foundation of the order, the Jesuits were acting as spiritual directors at the courts of Europe, as preachers in the most remote primeval forests, as political conspirators, disguised and in constant danger of death; thus they had a thousand opportunities to employ their talents, their cleverness, their knowledge of the world, and even their cunning.” - Id., p. 26.

 

Jesuits Decide On Their Mission

 

Loyola first planned to convert the Mohammedans of Palestine, but finding himself entirely unprepared for that work, and the road blocked by war, and finding, after his return to Paris, that the Protestant Reformation was turning the minds of men from the Roman church to the Bible, he resolved to undertake a propaganda of no less magnitude than the restoration of the Papacy to world dominion, and the destruction of all the enemies of the pope. The Jesuit T. J. Campbell says:

“As the establishment of the Society of Jesus coincided with the Protestant Reformation the efforts of the first Jesuits were naturally directed to combat that movement. Under the guidance of Canisius so much success attended their work in Germany and other northern nations, that, according to Macaulay, Protestantism was effectually checked. In England . . . the Jesuits stopped at no danger. . . . and what they did there was repeated in other parts of the world. . . . The Jesuits were to be found under every disguise, in every country.

“Their history is marked by ceaseless activity in launching new schemes for the spread of the Catholic faith.

“They have been expelled over and over again from almost every Catholic country in Europe, always, however, coming back again to renew their work when the storm had subsided; and this fact has been adduced as a proof that there is something iniquitous in the very nature of the organisation.” - The Encyclopedia Americana, sixteen-volume edition, Vol. IX, art. Jesuits.” 1904.

Loyola’s plan of operation was to have his emissaries enter new fields in a humble way as workers of charity, and then begin to educate the children and youth. After gaining the good will of the higher classes of society, they would, through their influence, secure positions as confessors to the royal families, and advisers of civil rulers. These Jesuit Fathers had been skilfully trained to take everyadvantage of such positions to influence civil rulers and direct them in the interest of the Roman church, and to instill in them, that it was their sacred duty to act as worthy sons of the Church by purging their country from heresy. And when war against “heretics” commenced, the Jesuits would not consent to any truce till Protestantism was completely wiped out.

At the time Loyola and his “knights” took the field, the Protestant Reformation had swept over the greater part of Europe, and one country after another was lost to the Papacy. But in a short time the Jesuits had turned the tide. The Netherlands, France, and Germany were swept by fire and sword till the very strongholds of Protestantism were threatened. The Protestant countries were finally forced to combine in the Thirty Years’ War to save themselves from being brought back by force under the papal yoke. (See “History of the Jesuits,” T. Griesinger, Book II, chap. 2).

 

The Abolition of the Jesuit Order

 

As long as this war of extermination was waged against Protestantism, the assistance of these daring “knights” was accepted, but when they continued to meddle in politics, and to gather the civil reins in their own hands, the Catholic princes at length became aroused to their danger, and complaints began to pour into the Vatican from various heads of Catholic states. Finally, Pope Clement XIV, after four years of investigation, felt compelled to abolish the Jesuit Order. In his “Bull of Suppression,” issued July 21, 1773, he wrote, that repeated warnings had been given to the Society of “the most imminent dangers, if it concerned itself with temporal matters, and which relate to political affairs, and the administration of government.” It was “strictly forbidden to all the members of the society, to interfere in any manner whatever in public affairs.” Clement then cites eleven popes who “employed without effect all their efforts . . . to restore peace to the Church” by keeping the Jesuits out of “secular affairs, with which the company ought not to have interfered,” as they had done “in Europe, Africa, and America.” The Pope continues:

“We have seen, in the grief of our heart, that neither these remedies, nor an infinity of others, since employed, have produced their due effect, or silenced the accusations and complaints against the said society. . . . In vain [were all efforts.]” - “Bull of Clement XIV,” in “Constitutions of the Society of Jesus,” pp. 116, 117. London: 1838.

“After so many storms, troubles, and divisions the times became more difficult and tempestuous; complaints and quarrels were multiplied on every side. In some places dangerous seditions arose, tumults, discords; dissensions, scandals, which weakening or entirely breaking the bonds of Christian charity, excited the faithful to all the rage of party hatreds and enmities. Desolation and danger grew to such a height, that . . . the kings of France, Spain, Portugal, and Sicily, found themselves reduced to the necessity of expelling and driving from their states, kingdoms, and provinces, these very companions of Jesus; persuaded that there remained no other remedy to so great evils; and that this step was necessary in order to prevent the Christians from rising one against another, and from massacring each other in the very bosom of our common mother the Holy Church. The said our dear sons in Jesus Christ having since considered that even this remedy would not be sufficient towards reconciling the whole Christian world, unless the said society was absolutely abolished and suppressed, made known their demands and wills in this matter to our said predecessor Clement XIII - Id., p. 118.

“After a mature deliberation, we do, out of our certain knowledge, and the fullness of our apostolic power, suppress and abolish the said company. . . . We abrogate and annul its statutes, rules, customs, decrees, and constitutions, even though confirmed by oath, and approved by the Holy See. . . . Wedeclare the said society to be for ever annulled and extinguished.” - Id., pp. 119,120.

“Our will and meaning is, that the suppression and destruction of the said society, and of all its parts, shall have an immediate and instantaneous effect.” - Id., p. 124.

“Our will and pleasure is, that these our letters should for ever and to all eternity be valid, permanent, and efficacious, have and obtain their full force and effect. . . . Given at Rome, at St. Mary the Greater, under the seal of the Fisherman, the 21st day of July, 1773, in the fifth year of our Pontificate.” - Bull for the Effectual Suppression of the Order of Jesuits.” Quoted in “Constitutions of the Society of Jesus,” p. 126.

We now respectfully ask: Can any Roman Catholic doubt that the pope is telling the truth about the Jesuits? If he is telling the truth, can we be blamed for feeling that there is a Jesuit danger, after that society has been reinstated and has laboured incessantly for more than a century, and is unchanged in principle?

When we reflect upon their past history, and remember that the Jesuits have been expelled from fifty different countries, seven times from England, and nine times from France, and from the Papal States themselves, there must be a reason why civil governments, Catholic as well as Protestant, have found it necessary to take such steps. Only in countries such as the United States, where they are allowed to carry on their work peaceably, we hear little of them. But some day Americans may wake up to find our present generation completely Romanised, and our boasted “liberty” a thing of the past. The prophet declares: “And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; . . . and by peace shall destroy many.” Daniel 8:25. Any one desiring to know the historical facts should read the “History of the Jesuits,” by T. Griesinger, and “The Roman Catholic Church,” by F. T. Morton, pp. 167, 168.

“The end justifies the means.” This maxim is generally attributed to the Jesuits, and while it might not be found in just that many words in their authorised books, yet the identical sentiment is found over and over again in their Latin works. Dr. Otto Henne an Rhyn quotes many such sentiments from authorised Jesuit sources. We quote from him the following:

“Herman Busembaum, in his ‘Medulla Theologiae Moralis’ (first published at Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1650) gives this as a theorem (p. 320): Cum finis est licitus, etiam media sunt licita (when the end is lawful, the means also are lawful); and p. 504: Cui licitus est finis, etiam licent media (for whom the end is lawful, the means are lawful also). The Jesuit Paul Layman, in his ‘Theologia Moralis,’ lib. III., p. 20 (Munich, 1625), quoting Sanchez, states the proposition in these words: Cui concessus est finis, concessa etiam sunt media ad finem, ordinata (to whom the end is permitted, to him also are permitted the means ordered to the end). Louis Wagemann, Jesuit professor of moral theology, in his ‘Synopsis Theologiae Moralis’ (Innsbruck and Augsburg, 1762) has: Finis determinat moralitatem actus (the end decides the morality of the act).” - “The Jesuits,” pp. 47, 48. New York: 1895.

“But the mischief is that the whole moral teaching of the Jesuits from their early days till now is but a further extension of this proposition, so redoubtable in its application.” - Id., pp. 49, 50 (See also “The Power and Secret of the Jesuits,” - Rene Fulop-Miller, pp. 150-156; and The Secret Plan, - the Abbate Leone, p. 155. Page 172).

Rene Fulop-Miller says of the Jesuits:

 “In actual fact, the Jesuit casuists deal with two forms of permissible deception: that of ‘amphibology’ and that of reservatio mentalis. ‘Amphibology’ is nothing else than the employment of ambiguous terms calculated to mislead the questioner; ‘mental reservation’ consists in answering a question, not with a direct lie, but in such a way that the truth is partly suppressed, certain words being formulated mentally but not expressed orally.

“The Jesuits hold that neither intentional ambiguity nor the fact of making a mental reservation can be regarded as lying, since, in both cases, all that happens is that ‘one’s neighbor is not actually deceived, but rather his deception is permitted only for a justifiable cause.” - “The Power and Secret of the Jesuits,” pp. 154, 155.

The Jesuit Gury gives examples of this; among others he says:

“Amand promised, under oath, to Marinus, that he would never reveal a theft committed by the latter. . . . But . . . Amand was called as a witness before the judge, and revealed the secret, after interrogation.

“He ought not to have revealed the theft, but he ought to have answered: ‘I do not know anything,’ understanding, ‘nothing that I am obligated to reveal,’ by using a mental restriction. . . . So Amand has committed a grave sin against religion and justice, by revealing publicly, before the court, a confided secret.” – “The Doctrine of the Jesuits,” translated by Paul Bert, Member of the Chamber of Deputies, Professor at the Faculty of Sciences (in Paris), pp. 168, 169, American edition. Boston: 1880.

Alphonsus de Liguori, the sainted Catholic doctor, says in Tractatus de Secundo Decalogi Praecepto,” on the second [third) precept of the decalogue:

“One who is asked concerning something which it is expedient to conceal, can say, ‘I say not,’ that is, ‘I say the word “not”; since the word ‘I say’ has a double sense; for it signifies ‘to pronounce’ and ‘to affirm’: now in our sense ‘I say’ is the same as ‘I pronounce.’

“A prisoner, when lawfully questioned, can deny a crime even with an oath (at least without grievous sin), if as the result of his confession he is threatened with punishment of death, or imprisonment, or perpetual exile, or the loss of all his property, or the galleys, and similar punishments, by secretly understanding that he has not committed any crime of such a degree that he is bound to confess.

“It is permissible to swear to anything which is false by adding in an undertone a true condition, if that low utterance can in any way he perceived by the other party, though its sense is not understood.” - The Latin text, and an English translation of the above statements are found in “Fifty Years in the Church of Rome,” by Father Chiniquy, chap. XIII, and in “Protestant Magazine,” April, 1913, p. 163.

Violations of the sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth commandments are justified by many leading Jesuit writers, according to many quotations from their books, cited in “The History of the Jesuits,” by Theodor Griesinger, pp. 285-304, 478-488, 508-616, 670, 740; and in Gury’s “Doctrines of the Jesuits,” translated by Paul Bert; and in “The Jesuits,” by Dr. Otto Henne an Rhyn, chap. V.

Theodor Griesinger quotes from eight prominent Jesuit authorities, who advocate that it is permissible to kill a prince or ruler who has been deposed by the pope. Here are a few samples:

“In the ‘Opuscula Theologica’ of Martin Becan, at page 130, the following passage occurs:

“‘Every subject may kill his prince when the latter has taken possession of the throne as a usurper, and history teaches, in fact, that in all nations those who kill such tyrants are treated with the greatest honor. But even when the ruler is not a usurper, but a prince who has by right come to the throne, he may be killed as soon as he oppresses his subjects with improper taxation, sells the judicial offices, and issues ordinances in a tyrannical manner for his own peculiar benefit.’”

“With such principles Father Hermann Buchenbaum entirely agreed, and, in the ‘Medulla Theologia Moralis,’ permission to murder all offenders of mankind and the true faith, as well as enemies of the Society of Jesus, is distinctly laid down. This ‘Moral Theology’ of Father Buchenbaum is held by all the Society as an unsurpassed and unsurpassable pattern-book, and was on that account introduced, with the approval of their General, into all their colleges.

“Imanuel Sa says, in his aphorisms, under the word ‘Clericus’: ‘The rebellion of an ecclesiastic against a king of the country in which he lives, is no high treason, because an ecelesiastic is not the subject of any king.’ ‘Equally right,’ he adds further, ‘is the principle that anyone among the people may kill an illegitimate prince - to murder a tyrant, however, is considered, indeed, to be a duty.’

“Adam Tanner, a very well known and highly esteemed Jesuit professor in Germany, uses almost the identical words, and the not less distinguished Father Johannes Mariana, who taught in Rome, Palermo, and Paris, advances this doctrine in his book ‘De Rege’ (lib. i., p. 54), published with the approbation of the General Aquaviva and of the whole Society, when he says: ‘It is a wholesome thought, brought home to all princes, that as soon as they begin to oppress their subjects, and, by their excessive vices, and, more especially, by the unworthiness of their conduct, make themselves unbearable to the latter, in such a case they should be convinced that one has not only a perfect right to kill them, but that to accomplish such a deed is glorious and heroic.’ . . .

“But most precise are the words of the work, so highly prized above all others by the Roman Curie, ‘Defensio Fidei Catholicae, et Apostolicae [Defence of the Catholic and Apostolic Faith]’ of the Jesuit Suarez, which appeared in Lisbon in the year 1614, as therein it is stated (lib. vi, cap. iv, Nos. 13 and 14): ‘It is an article of faith that the Pope has the right to depose heretical and rebellious kings, and a monarch dethroned by the Pope is no longer a king or legitimate prince. When such an one hesitates to obey the Pope after he is deposed, he then becomes a tyrant, and may be killed by the first corner. Especially when the public weal is assured by the death of the tyrant, it is allowable for anyone to kill the latter.’

“Truly regicide could not be taught by clearer words. . . . The sons of Loyola . . . declared that a more learned, or God fearing book, had never appeared. . . . Indeed, from this time forth no Jesuit professor whatever wrote on moral theology, or any similar subject, without adopting the teaching of Suarez.” – “History of the Jesuits,” pp. 508-511.

Can any one doubt that the Jesuits have faithfully carried out this “Article of Faith,” wherever they thought it advisable, when he reads of the many attempts upon the life of Queen Elizabeth of England; of the “Gunpowder Plot” to murder James I, and to destroy the “Houses of Parliament” in one blast; of the assassination of William, Prince of Orange; of the attempts upon his son, Maurice, Prince of Orange, and upon Leopold I of Germany, by agents of that Society? We could refer to the “Holy League” of 1576, sponsored by the Jesuits, for the purpose of uniting Catholic Europe to crush Protestantism, and the assassination of Henry III and Henry IV of France in the interest of that scheme.

“The Jesuits were, indeed, the heart and soul of the Leaguist conspiracy.” - Id., p. 210. See also pp. 508-608.

If the political activities of the Jesuits, of which Pope Clement XIV complained so pathetically, are not a serious problem to civil governments, then why were the Jesuits expelled from so many states, Catholic as well as Protestant, as the following table shows? Francis T. Morton, Member of the Massachusetts Bar, gives the following:

 

“JESUITS EXPELLED FROM

             

- “The Roman Catholic Church and Its Relation to the Federal Government,” pp. 167,168. Boston: 1909.

Those who feel that the foregoing facts constitute no danger to American civil and religious liberty, would do well to remember that the Jesuits carry on an extensive educational program in this country, and that, according to their textbooks, their principles of civil government are diametrically opposed to the American ideas of separation of church and state. See their “Manual of Christian Doctrine, by a Seminary Professor,” pp. 131-133. Philadelphia: 1915.

The author has stated the foregoing facts, not because of any enmity towards Jesuits as individuals, nor to Catholics in general, but only from a feeling of responsibility to enlighten the American people regarding a public danger. We can truly love the persons, while we warn people against their dangerous tendencies. If we did not sincerely love everybody, we would not be true Christians. (Matthew 5: 43- 48) Jesus loves the sinner, while He hates his sins; and we must have the mind of Christ. (Philippians 2:5; 1 Corinthians 2:16).

To those who wish to study this subject further we recommend the careful reading of the following books, besides those referred to in this chapter:

“History of the Jesuits,” by Andrew Steinmetz, London, 1848;

“History of the Jesuits,” by G. B. Nicolini, London, 1854;

“Secret Instructions of the Jesuits,” translated from the Latin by W. C. Brownlee, D. D., New York, 1841;

“The Footprints of the Jesuits,” by R. W. Thompson;

“The Jesuit Enigma,” by E. Boyd Barrett;

“The Programme of the Jesuits,” by W. Blair Neatby, London, 1903;

“Provincial Letters,.” by Blaise Pascal, New York, 1853;

“History and Fall of the Jesuits,” by Count Alexis de Saint-Priest, London, 1861;

“Political Life of an Italian,” by Francesco Urgos, Battle Creek, Mich., 1876;

and “The Jesuit Morals, collected by a Doctor of the College of Sorbonne in Paris,” translated into English, London, 1670.

 

Home | Previous Chapter | Next Chapter