Failure of the Papal Brief to give peace to the Church — Liguori and Tanucci — Joseph II destroying the Church in Austria — Voltaireanism in Portugal — Illness of Clement XIV — Death — Accusations of poisoning — Election of Pius VI — The Synod of Pistoia — Febronianism in Austria — Visit of Pius VI to Joseph II — The Punctation of Ems — Spain, Sardinia, Venice, Sicily in opposition to the Pope — Political collapse in Spain — Fall of Pombal — Liberation of his Victims — Protest of de Guzman — Death of Joseph II — Occupations of the dispersed Jesuits — The Theologia Wiceburgensis — Feller — Beauregard's Prophecy — Zaccaria — Tiraboschi — Boscovich — Missionaries — Denunciation of the Suppression in the French Assembly — Slain in the French Revolution — Destitute Jesuits in Poland — Shelter in Russia.

Clement XIV did not give peace to the Church as he had hoped. On the contrary, distressing scandals were continually occurring in the Holy City itself under his very eyes. Infamous books and pamphlets directed against the Church were hawked about the streets, and actors and buffoons parodied the most sacred ceremonies in the public squares. Elsewhere the same conditions obtained. Tanucci who had governed Naples for over forty years was continuing his ruthless persecution of every thing holy, and enriching himself by the spoliation of ecclesiastical property. Even St. Alphonsus Liguori could not obtain from the Pope the recognition of the Redemptorists as a congregation because Tanucci opposed it. Doctrinal views leading to schism in the Church were openly advocated in the schools and universities of Austria, in spite of the entreaties and threats of the Sovereign Pontiff. Maria Theresa had proved feeble or false, and her son Joseph II was in league with the Bourbon princes in their work of destruction. In Portugal, Pombal was still raging like a wild beast; filling the schools with the disciples of Voltaire, flouting the papal nuncio, and keeping in dark and filthy dungeons the members of the detested Order which he had exterminated. The Philosophers and Jansenists were rejoicing in their triumph, and were suppressing all religious communities and seizing their property; the morality and orthodoxy of Poland were being rapidly corrupted; Catherine of Russia was creating bishops and establishing sees as the fancy prompted her, and Freemason lodges were multiplying all over Europe. Worst of all, the Pope's own household with but few exceptions kept aloof from him and were silent about what he had done, while many bishops of various countries of Europe and the entire episcopacy of France endorsed the sentiments expressed in the terrible letter of the Archbishop of Paris, denouncing the Suppression.

Ineffably shocked by all this, the Pope began to show signs of depression, and everyone was in consternation. St. Alphonsus Liguori, especially, was anxious about him and kept continually repeating: "Pray for the Pope; he is distressed; for there is nowhere the slightest glimmer of peace for the Church. He is praying for death, so crushed is he by the sorrows that are overwhelming the Church; he remains continually in seclusion; gives audience to no one; and attends to no business. I have heard things about him from those who are at Rome that would bring tears to your eyes." His mind was unbalanced, and one of his successors, Pius VII, related later what he had been told by a prelate who was present at the signing of the fatal Brief: "As soon as he had affixed his signature to the paper he threw the pen to one side and the paper to the other. He had lost his mind." Before that, Pius had said the same thing to Cardinal Pacca at Fontainebleau, when in an agony of remorse for having signed the Concordat with Napoleon: "I cannot get the cruel thought out of my mind. I cannot sleep at night and I am haunted by the fear of going mad and ending like Clement XIV." Another writer who received his information from Gregory XVI tells the same sad story (de Ravignan, ClÉment XIII et ClÉment XIV, I, 452). St. Alphonsus Liguori was with the Pope when he died, but according to a Redemptorist writer, it was "in spirit," and not by bodily bilocation. The end came in September 22, 1774, thirteen months after the unfortunate Brief was issued.

Of course, when he died, the report went abroad that the Jesuits had poisoned him, by administering a dose of aqua toffana, but although no one has ever found out what aqua toffana is or was, and as there were no Jesuits in Rome at the time, the story was nevertheless believed by many and was adduced as a proof of the wisdom of the Pope in suppressing the iniquitous organization. The Jansenists even made a saint of the dead Pontiff and circulated marvellous romances about the incorruption of his body and the miracles that were wrought at his tomb.

CantÙ in his "Storia dei cent' anni" says that "the Pope whose health and mind were grievously affected, died in delirium, haunted by phantoms, and begging for pardon. It was claimed that he had been poisoned by the Jesuits, but the truth is that the physicians found no trace of poison in the body. Had the Jesuits possessed the power or the will to do so, one might ask why they did not do it before and not after Clement had struck them. But passion often makes light of common sense." The post-mortem which was made in the presence of a great many people showed that the sickness to which he had succumbed arose from scorbutic and hemorrhoidal conditions from which he had been suffering for many years, and which were aggravated by excessive work and the system he had followed of producing artificial perspiration even in the heats of summer."

The poor Pope had exclaimed before he signed the Brief: "Questa soppressione mi darÀ la morte" (this suppression will kill me.) "After it," says Saint-Priest in his 'Chute des JÉsuites,' "he would pace his apartments in agony, crying: 'Mercy! Mercy! They forced me to do it. Compulsus feci.' However, at the last moment his reason returned. He showed his indignation at a proposal made to him even then, to raise some of the enemies of the Society to the cardinalate and drove them from his bedside with loathing.

Bernis, the French ambassador at Rome, wrote to Louis XV that "the Vicar of Christ prayed like the Redeemer for his implacable enemies," and insinuated that he was poisoned. Knowing this d'Alembert warned Frederick II to be on his guard against a similar fate, but the king replied: "There is nothing more false than the story of the poisoning; the truth is that he was profoundly hurt by the coldness manifested by the cardinals and he often reproached himself, for having sacrificed an Order like that of the Jesuits, to satisfy the whim of his rebellious children." Becantini (Storia di Pio VI, i, 31) says: "Nowadays no one believes the story of the poisoning of Clement XIV. Even Bernis who first stood for it, afterwards disavowed it." Cancelleri one of the most distinguished savants of Italy denies the fact; so does Gavani, a bitter enemy of the Church and the Society. Finally, Salcetto the physician of the Apostolic palace, and Adinolfi the Pope's own doctor, in their official report to the majordomo, Archinto, declare it to have been an absolutely natural death and they explain that the corruption which set in was due to the excessive heat that prevailed at the time.

It was even said that the Pope had expressed to the General of the Conventuals, Marzoni, a fear that he had been poisoned. Whereupon Marzoni caused the following statement to be published:

"I, the undersigned Minister General of the Order of the Conventuals of St. Francis, fully aware that by my oath I call the sovereign and true God to witness what I say; and being certain of what I say, I now without any constraint and in the presence of God who knows that I do not lie, do by these words, which are absolutely true, and which I write and trace with my own hand, swear and attest to the whole universe, that never in any circumstance whatever did Clement XIV ever say to me either that he had been poisoned or that he felt the slightest symptom of poison. I swear also that I never said to any one soever that the same Clement XIV assured me in confidence that he had been poisoned or had felt the effects of poison. So help me God.

"Given in the Convent of the Twelve Apostles at Rome July 27, 1775.

"I, Bro. Louis-Maria Marzoni
"Minister General of the Order."

Thus Clement XIV, far from giving peace to the Church, left a heritage of woe to his successor, Angelo Braschi, who was elected Pope on February 15, 1775, and took the name of Pius VI. The new Pope was painfully conscious that an error had been committed by suppressing an Order without trial and without even condemnation, and that a reflection had been cast upon a great number of Pontiffs who had been unstinted in their praise of it, no one more so than Clement's immediate predecessor. The act had also given to the Jansenists a terrific instrument in the implied approval of them by the Sovereign Pontiff. They became more aggressive than ever and organized their forces to introduce their doctrines into Italy itself.

By a curious coincidence the leader of the movement was of the same family as the General of the suppressed Jesuits: Scipio Ricci, the Bishop of Pistoia. Supporting him in the civic world was the Grand Duke of Tuscany who was the brother of Joseph II of Austria. Ricci convened the famous Synod of Pistoia, on July 31, 1786. No doubt July 31 was chosen purposely; it was the feast of St. Ignatius. There were 247 members in attendance, all exclusively Jansenists and regalists. The four Gallican Articles were endorsed and among the measures was that of conferring the right on the civil authority to create matrimonial impediments. It advocated the reduction of all religious orders to one; the abolition of perpetual vows; a vernacular liturgy; the removal of all altars but one from the church; etc. The Acts of the synod were promulgated with the royal imprimatur. Indeed Pius VI found himself compelled to condemn eighty-five of the synod's propositions.

Worse than this was the Febronianism of Austria, which went far beyond the Gallicanism of France or Italy in its rebellious aggressiveness. It maintained that the primacy of Rome had no basis in the authority of Christ; that the papacy was not restricted to Rome, but could be placed anywhere; that Rome was merely a centre with which the individual churches could be united; that the papal power was simply administrative and unifying and not jurisdictional; that the papal power of condemning heresies, confirming episcopal elections, naming coadjutors, transferring and removing bishops, erecting primatial sees, etc., all rested on the False Decretals. It was maintained that the Pope could issue no decrees for the Universal Church, and that even the decrees of general councils were not binding until approved of by the individual churches.

In vain Clement XIV had begged Maria Theresa to check the movement. She was absolutely in the power of her son Joseph II, whose very first ordinances forbade the reception of papal decrees without the government's sanction. The bishops, he ruled, were not to apply to the Pope for faculties; they could not even issue instructions to their own flocks without permission of the civil authority. He established parishes, assigned fast days, determined the number of Masses to be said, and sermons to be preached. He even decided how many candles were to be lighted on the altar; he made marriage a civil contract and abolished ecclesiastical ceremonies.

In the hope that a personal appeal might avail, the Pope determined to make a journey to Vienna to entreat the emperor to desist. He arrived there on March 22, 1782, and was courteously received by Joseph himself, but brutally by his minister, Kaunitz, who forbade any ecclesiastic to present himself in the city while the Pope was there. Pius remained a month in the capital and succeeded only in extracting a promise that nothing would be done against the Faith or the respect due the Holy See. How far the royal word was kept may be inferred from the fact that after accompanying the Pope as far as the Monastery of Marianbrunn Joseph suppressed that establishment an hour after the Pope had resumed his journey to Rome.

In Germany the three ecclesiastical Electors of Mayence, Treves and Cologne with the Archbishop of Salzburg met in a convention at Ems in 1786, and attempted to curtail the powers of the Pope in dealing with bishops. That assembly was also strongly Jansenistic. Thirty-one of its articles were directed against the Pope. Pacca, the papal nuncio, was not even received by the Archbishop of Cologne, and three of the Elector bishops refused to honor his credentials. The famous "Punctation of Ems," which consisted of twenty-three articles, declared that German archbishops were independent of Rome, because of the "False Decretals." They pronounced for an abolition of all direct communication with Rome; all monasteries were to be subject to the bishops; religious orders were to have no superior generals residing outside of Germany; Rome's exclusive power of granting faculties was denied; Papal Bulls were binding only after the bishop of the diocese had given his placet; all Apostolic nunciatures were to be abolished, etc. In brief, the synod, or "Congress" as it was called, aimed at establishing a schismatical church. But the Pope's remarkable letter to the dissidents and the progress of the French Revolution, which was then raging furiously, prevented the application anywhere of the doctrines put forth at the meeting.

Spain, Sardinia, Venice and Sicily were all in this movement against the Church, and Ferdinand IV of Sicily claimed the right of appointment to all ecclesiastical benefices, as well as the power to nullify all Papal Briefs which had not received his approval.

Nor did the Brief of Suppression contribute to the political stability of the nations. In Naples, for example, Tanucci was flung from power when the young king married an archduchess of Austria; so that he disappeared from the scene three years after the suppression of the Society. In 1798 the Bourbons fled from Naples; the city was given over to a mob directed by an innkeeper called Michael the Madman; the Duke della Torre and his brother were burned alive in the public square; the Senate was dissolved; the palaces were pillaged; a republic was proclaimed and the whole Peninsula of Italy fell into the hands of the French.

Charles III of Spain died in 1788, and was succeeded by Charles IV, whom Arnado describes as more deficient in character and ability than his father. The rude Florida Blanca, who was so conspicuous for his brutality in terrorizing Clement XIV, was thrown out of office by the inept Godoy, who allied Spain with France against England, and brought on the disaster of Trafalgar. The king was driven from his throne and country by his rebellious son, Ferdinand, and then laid his royal crown at the feet of Napoleon Bonaparte. Since that time, the country has been in a ferment because its politics are filled with the ideas of the French Revolution and of English Liberalism.

In Portugal, retribution came at a rapid pace. Pombal fell from power in 1777 on the death of the king. He had been detected in a plot to have the young Prince of Beira succeed to the throne to the exclusion of Queen Maria. It was possibly with the same end in view that he had endeavored to start a war with Spain. He had seized Spanish posts in America, mobilized troops and fortified Lisbon, but hostilities were never declared. Queen Maria's first act at her accession was to open Pombal's dungeons. Eight hundred men of all classes issued from these sepulchres in which some of them had been for eighteen years without a trial. They were like ghosts; emaciated; hollow-eyed and ghastly; some were sightless, many were half-naked. Among them were sixty Jesuits. The populace were so infuriated at the horrible spectacle that Pombal feared to venture into the street. He might have been torn to pieces, and he was conducted under guard to his country estates. Father Oliviera, the confessor of the queen, was installed in court, and the venerable Father de Guzman issued the following statement to the public:

"At the age of eighty-one and at the point of appearing before the tribunal of Divine Justice, John de Guzman, the last assistant of the Society of Jesus, for the provinces and dominions of Portugal, would believe himself guilty of an unpardonable sin of omission, if, in neglecting to have recourse to the throne of Your Majesty where clemency and justice reign, he did not place at your feet, this humble petition in the name of six hundred subjects of Your Majesty, the unfortunate remnants of a wrong inflicted on them.

"He entreats Your Majesty by the Sacred Heart of Jesus Christ, by that tender love which Your Majesty bears to the August Queen, His mother, and to the illustrious King Don Pedro, to the princes and princesses of the royal family, that you would deign and even command that the trial of so many of the faithful subjects of Your Majesty, who have been branded with infamy in the eyes of the world, be now reviewed. They are groaning under the accusation of having committed outrages and crimes which the very savages would shrink from even imagining, and which no human heart could ever conceive. They lament and moan that they were condemned without even having been brought to trial, without being heard and without being allowed to make any defense. Those who have now issued from prison are all in accord in this matter, and unanimously attest, that during all the time of their imprisonment, they have not even seen the face of any judge.

"On his part, your suppliant, who is now making this appeal, and who for many years occupied a position where he could acquire an intimate knowledge of what was going on, is ready to swear in the most solemn manner, that the superiors and members of the Spanish assistancy of the Society of Jesus were without reproach. He and all the other exiles are ready to undergo sufferings more rigorous than any to which they have hitherto been subjected, if a single individual has ever been guilty of the least crime against the State.

"Moreover, your suppliant and his brethren, the chief superiors of the Society, have been examined in Rome, again and again, in the most searching manner, and have been declared innocent. Pope Pius VI, now gloriously reigning, has seen the minutes of those investigations, and Your Majesty will find in that great Pontiff an enlightened witness whose integrity nothing on earth can equal; and at the same time you will find a judge who could not commit a wrong without rendering himself guilty of an unparalleled iniquity.

"Deign, then, Your Majesty, to extend to us that clemency which belongs to you as does your throne; deign to hearken to the prayers of so many unfortunates, whose innocence has been proven, and who have never ceased in the midst of their sufferings to be the faithful subjects of Your Majesty; and who could never falter or fail an instant, in the love that they have from childhood entertained for the royal family."

This appeal had its effect. An enquiry was ordered, and in October 1780 a revision of the trial of the alleged conspirators of 1758 was begun. On April 3, 1781, the court announced that "all those, either living or dead, who had been imprisoned or executed in virtue of the sentence of January 12, 1759, were absolutely innocent." Pombal himself was put on trial, found guilty, and condemned to receive "an exemplary punishment." He escaped imprisonment on account of his age, but he died of leprosy on May 8, 1782. His corpse lay unburied until the Society which he had crushed was restored thirty-one years later to its former place in Portugal. One of its first duties was to sing a Requiem Mass over his remains. The details of the trial were suppressed at the request of the Pope, for the reason that too many prominent personages in the Church were implicated. There was another reason. The spirit of Pombal had so thoroughly impregnated the ruling classes that the report was withheld out of fear of a revolution. Indeed, the queen was so terrified by the danger that she lost her mind. Finally, in 1807 a French army occupied Lisbon and the royal family fled to Brazil. Since then Portugal which was once so great counts for very little in the political world.

It is unnecessary to refer to France, except to note that it was Choiseul who purchased Corsica and thus gave his country which he had helped to ruin an alien ruler: Napoleon Bonaparte, who put an end to the orgies of the Revolution by deluging Europe with French blood; who imprisoned the Pope; demolished the Bourbon dynasties wherever he could find them, and bound France in fetters which, in spite of its multiplied changes of government, it has never shaken off.

When Joseph II of Austria ended his lonely and unhappy existence in 1790, he saw in France the beginning of the wreck which his friend Voltaire had helped to effect; he did not live to see the execution of his own sister, Marie Antoinette, but enough had occurred to fill him with terror especially as the existence of his own monarchy was threatened; Belgium was lost; Hungary was in wild disorder, and other parts of the empire were about to rebel. Before he died he wrote his own epitaph. It was: "Here lies Joseph II, who never succeeded in any of his undertakings."

What became of the scattered Jesuits? The scholastics and lay-brothers, of course, went back to the world, but, in France, by a refinement of cruelty they were declared by the courts to be incapable of inheriting even from their own parents, because of the vows they had pronounced on entering the Society. That the vows no longer existed made no difference to the lawmakers. As for the priests they were secularized, and in many places were welcomed by the bishops as rectors or professors in colleges and seminaries. They were in demand, also, as directors of religious communities and not a few became bishops. Thus, in America, the first two members of the hierarchy, Carroll and Neale, were old Jesuits, as was Lawrence Graessel who had been named as Carroll's successor but who died before the Bulls arrived. CrÉtineau-Joly has a list of twenty-one bishops in Europe alone. Others were called to episcopal sees, but in hopes of the restoration of the Society they had declined the honor.

Father Walcher was appointed imperial director of navigation and mathematics by Maria Theresa; Cabral, Lecci, and Riccati, were engaged by various governments in engineering works; Zeplichal was employed by Frederick II in exploiting mines. The Theresian College of Vienna became one of the best schools in the world under their direction; and Breslau felt the effects of their assistance, as did other colleges such as the Oriental in Vienna, the University of Buda, and the schools of Mayence, and of various cities in Italy.

They must have been often amused at some of the situations in which they found themselves. Thus, for instance in 1784 the Parliament of Languedoc, which had been one of the bitterest enemies of the Society, met to arrange for the solemn obsequies of the Jesuit Father Sesane "the friend of the poor," and the ecclesiastical authorities were busy taking juridical information for his canonization. Again, although not permitted to exist in Switzerland the Council of Soleuse erected a statue in honor of the Jesuit Father Crollanza, who all his life had shunned honor and was conspicuous for his humility. On the pedestal was the very delightful inscription: "Pauperum patrem, Ægrorum matrem, omnium fratrem, virum doctum et humillimum, in vita, in morte, in feretro suavitate sibi similem amabat, admirabatur, lugebat Solodurum." In the same way, Maria Theresa in an official document dated 1776 declared that "moved by the consideration of the brilliant virtues, the science, the erudition and the regular and exemplary life of Jean-Theophile Delpini; and reflecting moreover on his apostolic labors in Hungary and the Principality of Transylvania where to our great consolation, he led a vast throng of Anabaptists back to the true Faith, we have chosen and we hereby appoint the said Theophile Delpini who has merited much from the Church and the State, and who is therefore very acceptable to us personally, to the post of Abbot of Our Lady of Kolos-Monostros."

Parhamer obtained a similar distinction in Austria and Carinthia. He was an advanced advocate of what is now called social service, and he made use of his position as confessor and friend of the Emperor Francis I to establish useful popular institutions; among which was an orphanage for the children of soldiers who had died for their country. It was a sort of child's HÔtel des Invalides. The discipline was exclusively military, with drills, camp life, etc. Joseph II wanted to make him a bishop but Parhamer asked for two months to think it over and before the two months had expired he was dead. That was as late as 1786. Meantime, Marie Leczinska, the Queen of France, would only have these prescribed Jesuits hear her confession, and two Poles, Radomiviski and Buganski were chosen for that office. On account of their nationality they could not be exiled from France. In Austria, Father Walcher was kept busy building dykes to prevent inundations. Father Cabral, a Portuguese, had to harness the cataract of Velino, which had so long wrought havoc in the city of Terni, and then he did the same thing for his own country by confining the Tagus to its bed. In doing so he did not remember that his country had kept him in exile for eighteen years. Ximenes made roads and bridges in Tuscany and Rome. Riccati saved Venice from inundations by controlling the Po, the Adige and Brenta, and by order of Frederick II of Prussia Father Zeplichal had to locate the metal mines of Glatz, and so on. All this was over and above their ecclesiastical work for which they were called on by every one, even by the Pope who had suppressed them.

The famous astronomer, Maximilian Hell, was another of the homeless Jesuits of that period; and as it happened that from the beginning, astronomy had always been in honor in the Society, there was a great number of such men adrift in the world when their own observatories were taken away from them. The enthusiastic historian of the Society, CrÉtineau-Joly has an extended list of their names as well as those who were remarkable in other branches of science.

The "Theologia Wiceburgensis," which is so popular in the modern Society, was composed by dispersed Jesuits, and, according to Cardinal Pacca, "in the difficulties that arose between the Papal nuncios and the ecclesiastical Electors of Germany it was the former Jesuits who appeared in the lists as the champions of the Holy See, to illumine and strengthen the minds of the faithful by their solid and victorious writings." FranÇois Xavier de Feller belonged to this period, and in the opinion of Gerlache, the historian of the Netherlands, "he exerted a great influence on the Belgian Congress of 1790." It was he who led the assault on Josephinism and Febronianism. With him in this fight was Francesco Antonio Zaccaria who compelled the author of the "Febronius" to acknowledge his errors. Guillaume Bertier revived the famous "Journal de TrÉvoux," and FrÉron made a reputation for the "Journal des DÉbats." Girolamo Tiraboschi wrote his "History of Italian Literature," Juan AndrÉs, his "Origin of All Literature," Francisco Clavigero continued his "History of Mexico" and Antoine de Berault-Bercastel, FranÇois De Ligny, Jean Grou, Giulio Cordara, wrote their various well-known works. Besides writing his still popular "Bible History" Reeve translated into Latin verses much of the poetry of Pope, Dryden and Young. The list is endless. A French-Canadian, Xavier du Plessis, was famous in the pulpits of France in those days, as was Nicholas de Beauregard, who in 1775 startled all France by an utterance he made when preaching at Notre-Dame.

"These philosophers," he exclaimed, "are striking at the king and at religion. The axe and the hammer are in their hands. They are only waiting for the moment to overturn the altar and the throne. Yes Lord, Thy temples will be plundered and destroyed, Thy feasts abolished, Thy name proscribed. But what do I hear? Great God! what do I see. Instead of the holy canticles which resounded beneath these consecrated vaults till now, I hear lascivious and blasphemous songs. And thou, the infamous divinity of paganism, lascivious Venus, thou darest to come to take the place of the living God, to sit upon the throne of the Holy of Holies and receive the guilty incense of thy worshippers." The vision was realized eighteen years later.

The sermon caused a tumult in the church. The preacher was denounced as seditious, and as a calumniator of light and reason. Even Condorcet wrote him down as a ligueur and a fanatic. He continued preaching, nevertheless, and his old associates followed his example. During one Lent, out of twenty of the great preachers, sixteen were Jesuits.

Three of these former Jesuits especially attracted attention at this time in the domain of letters and science: Zaccaria, Tiraboschi, and Boscovich.

Francesco Antonio Zaccaria, whose name is sometimes written Zaccheria, was a Venetian who had entered the Austrian novitiate in 1731, when he was a boy of seventeen. He taught literature at Goritz, but was subsequently sent to Rome where he became very distinguished both for his eloquence and his marvellous encyclopedic knowledge. In 1751 he was appointed to succeed Muratori as the ducal librarian at Modena, though Cardinal Quirini had asked for him and the celebrated Count Crustiani subsequently tried to bring him to Mantua. His fame was so great that the most illustrious academies of Italy claimed his name for their registers. In Rome he became the literary historiographer of the Society, and had been so excellent an aid for Clement XIII in the fight against Gallicanism that the Pope assigned him a pension. That was just before the Suppression of the Society; when that event occurred he was deprived of his pension, and after frequently running the risk of being imprisoned in the Castle Sant' Angelo, he was ordered not to attempt to leave Rome. When Pius VI became Pope, Zaccaria's life became a little happier. His pension was restored and even increased; he was made Rector of the College of Clerical Nobles, and regained his old chair of ecclesiastical history in the Sapienza. He died in 1795 at the age of eighty-two. The "Biographie Universelle" says that, besides innumerable manuscripts, Zaccaria left one hundred and six printed books, the most important of which is the "Literary History of Italy" in 14 octavo volumes with supplements to volumes IV and V. His method of leading his readers through the literary labyrinth deserves no less praise than the penetration of his views, and the good taste of his criticism. Besides this literary work, he wrote on moral theology, scripture, canon law, history, numismatics, etc.

Girolamo Tiraboschi, who was born in Bergamo on December 28, 1731, went to the Jesuit school at Monza, and from there entered the Society. His first characteristic work, while teaching literature in Bergamo, was to re-edit the Latin-Italian dictionary of Mandosio. He made so many corrections that it was substantially a new work. When occupied as librarian in Milan, he discovered a set of valuable manuscripts about the suppressed Order of Humiliati. The publication of these MSS. filled up a gap in the annals of the Church, and made Tiraboschi's reputation in the world of letters. The Duke of Modena made him his librarian, the post formerly held by Zaccaria. Thanks to the munificence of the princes of Este, the library was a literary treasure house, and Tiraboschi conceived the idea of gathering up the riches around him and writing a good history of Italian literature; a task that seemed to be too much for one mind. The difficulty was increased by the jealousy of the various Italian states, so that an unbiased judgment about the merits of this army of writers called for a man with courage enough to shut his ears to the clamors of local prejudice. It supposed also a profound knowledge of ancient and modern literature, a sufficient acquaintance with the arts and sciences, and skill enough not to be overwhelmed by the mass of material he had to handle. It took him eleven years to complete the work.

The Spaniards were irritated by the "History" for they were blamed for having corrupted the literary taste of Italy, and three Spanish Jesuits attacked him fiercely on that score. Nevertheless, the Academy accepted a copy of the work in the most flattering terms. The Italians regarded it as a most complete history of their literature and a monument erected to the glory of their country. He was made a knight by the Duke and appointed counsellor of the principality. While he was engaged in this work, the Society was suppressed, and like Boscovich and Zaccaria, he did not live to see its resurrection. He died in Modena on June 3, 1794.

Ruggiero Giuseppe Boscovich was a Dalmatian from Ragusa, where he was born on May 18, 1711. He was a boy at the Jesuit college of that town and entered the Society at the early age of fourteen. He was sent to the Roman College, where his unusual literary and philosophical as well as mathematical abilities immediately attracted attention. He was able to take the place of his professor in mathematics while he was yet in his theological studies, and subsequently occupied the chair of mathematics with great distinction for a generation. His bent, however, was chiefly for astronomy, and every year he issued a treatise on one or another subject of that science. Among them may be mentioned: the "Sun spots" (1736); "The Transit of Mercury" (1737); "The Aurora Borealis" (1738); "Application of the Telescope in Astronomical Studies" (1739); "The Figure of the Earth" (1739); "The Motion of the Heavenly Bodies in an unresisting Medium" (1740); "Various effects of Gravity" (1741); "The Aberration of the Fixed Stars" (1742); and numberless others. Foreign and Italian academies, among them Bologna, Paris and London admitted him to membership. It was he who first suggested the massive pillars of the college church of St. Ignatius as the foundation of the Observatory in Rome; but the Suppression of the Society prevented him from carrying out the plan. When the great dome of St. Peter's began to crack, he allayed the general alarm by placing iron bands around it. His advice was sought for the draining of the Pontine Marshes; he surveyed the Papal States by order of Benedict XIV and induced the Pope to withdraw the obsolete decree in the Index against the Copernican system.

When King John V of Portugal asked for ten Jesuit Fathers to make an elaborate survey of Brazil, Boscovich offered himself for the arduous task, hoping thus to make a survey in Ecuador, so as to obtain data for the final solution of the problem of the figure of the earth which was then exciting much attention in England and France, but the Pope kept him for the survey of Italy, which Boscovich did, and in 1755 he published a large quarto volume describing the work. In 1748, he had already revived Leibnitz's system of dynamism in the composition of bodies, a view which his fellow-Jesuits generally rejected. When this volume was issued, the publisher added a list of Boscovich's previous works. They amounted to sixty-six and he soon added three more quartos on "The Elements of Mathematics." He even wrote Latin poetry, mostly eulogies of the Pope and distinguished men, and published five volumes of verse on "The Defects of the Sun and the Moon." Boscovich's advice was sought as an engineer for damming the Lakes which were threatening the city of Lucca; and he acquitted himself so well, that he was made an honorary citizen and his expenses were subsequently paid for his scientific exploration in Italy, France and England. He settled a dispute between his native town and the King of France. He journeyed with the Venetian ambassador to Constantinople to complete his archÆological studies, but that journey seriously injured his health. He then accepted the appointment of professor of mathematics at the University of Pavia and helped to found the Observatory of Brera in Milan which with that of the Collegio Romano is among the most prominent in Italy. The London Academy wanted to send him to California in 1769 to observe the transit of Venus, but the opposition to the Jesuits, which was four years later to lead to their suppression, caused the invitation to be withdrawn. Louis XV then called him to France where he was made director of optics for the Navy with a salary of 8,000 francs. He retained this position until 1783, that is ten years after the Society of Jesus had gone out of existence. He then went to Italy to publish five more books, and at the age of eighty-six retired to the monastery of the monks of Vallombroso. On account of his great ability, or rather on account of his being a Jesuit, he was bitterly assailed by Condorcet and d'Alembert and other infidels of France.

Bolgeni, who died in 1811, was made penitentiary by Pius VI in recognition of his services against Jansenism and Josephinism. Unfortunately, however, he advocated the acceptance of some scheme of Napoleon, for which Pope Pius VII deposed him from his office and called Father Muzzarelli from Parma to take his place. In 1809 when Pius VII was exiled, Muzzarelli went with him to Paris or at least followed soon after. His work on the "Right Use of Reason in Religion" ran up to eleven volumes, besides which he produced other books against Rousseau, and several pious treatises, like the "Month of May," which has been translated into many languages.

Possibly a certain number of missionaries remained with their neophytes because they were too remote to be reached. Others, who owed no allegiance to the king who ordered the expulsion, paid no attention to it, as the Englishman King, for instance, who was martyred in Siam after the Suppression; or the Irishman O'Reilly, who buried himself, in the forests of Guiana with his savages; Poirot was kept at the court of Pekin as the emperor's musician; and Benoit constructed fountains for the imperial gardens, invented a famous waterclock, which spouted water from the mouths of animals, two hours for each beast, thus running through the twenty-four hours of the day; he made astronomical observations, brought out copper-plate engravings of maps and so on, and finally died of apoplexy in 1774, one year after Clement XIV had suppressed the Society. Hallerstein, the imperial astronomer, was also there waiting for news of the coming disaster.

B. N. in "The Jesuits; their history and foundation" (II, 274) and CrÉtineau-Joly both declare that there were four of the proscribed Jesuits in the Etats gÉnÉraux which was convened in Paris at the opening of the Revolution: Delfau, de Rozaven, San-Estavan and Allain. Of course, the Rozaven in this instance was not the John Rozaven so famous later on. In 1789 John was only eighteen years of age. In the session of February 19, 1790, the famous AbbÉ GrÉgoire, who afterwards became the Constitutional Bishop of Loir-et-Cher, startled the assembly by crying out, "Among the hundred thousand vexations of the old government, whose hand was so heavy on France, we must place the suppression of the celebrated Order of the Jesuits." The Deputy Lavie had also asked for justice in their behalf. The Protestant Barnave declared that "the first act of our new liberty should be to repair the injustices of despotism; and I, therefore, propose an amendment in favor of the Jesuits." "They have," said the next speaker, the AbbÉ de Montesquiou, "a right to your generosity. You will not refuse justice to that celebrated Society in whose colleges some of you have studied; whose wrongs we cannot understand, but whose sufferings were to be expected."

The sentiments of the speakers were enthusiastically applauded, but it was all forgotten as the terrible Revolution proceeded on its course. Jesuits like other priests were carried to the guillotine; but, as no records could now be kept, it is impossible to find out how many were put to death. We find out, however, from "Les martyrs" of Leclercq that in Paris alone there were eleven: DuPerron, Benoit, Bonnand, Cayx, Friteyre, du Rocher, Lanfant, Villecrohain, Le Gue, Rousseau, and Seconds. CrÉtineau-Joly adds to this list the two Rochefoucaulds; Dulau, who was Archbishop of Aries; Delfaux; Millou; GagniÈre; Le Livec; another Du Rocher; Vourlat; Du Roure; Rouchon; Thomas; Andrieux and Verron; making in all twenty-five. In "Les crimes de la RÉvolution" there are two volumes of the names of the condemned in all parts of France, but as the ecclesiastical victims are merely described as "priests" it is impossible to find out how many Jesuits there were among them. The twenty-five, however, make a good showing for a single city. Probably the proportion was the same elsewhere.

The old Jesuits appear again for a moment in Spain, when in 1800 Charles IV recalled them. A pestilence was raging in Andalusia when they arrived, and they immediately plunged into the work of caring for the sick. Twenty-seven Jesuits died in the performance of this act of charity; but the government soon forgot it and again drove into exile the men whom they had appealed to for help. In Austria they remained in the colleges as secular priests. At Fribourg, Lucerne and Soleure, the people insisted on their retaining the colleges. In China, they clung to their missions until the arrival of the Lazarists in 1783. In Portuguese India, even before the Suppression, they had been forcibly expelled, and the same thing occurred in South America wherever Portugal ruled. The Spanish missions of both South and North America had likewise been wrested from them. In Turkey the French ambassador, Saint-Priest, insisted on their staying at their posts in Constantinople, because of their success in dealing with the Moslems and schismatics. As we have seen when missionaries were needed in the deadly forests of French Guiana, the government was shameless enough to ask the Portuguese Jesuits to devote themselves to the work; and the request was acceded to. They were also entreated to remain in French India.

Speaking of Brazil, Southey says (III): "Centuries will not repair the evil done by their sudden expulsion. They had been the protectors of a persecuted race; the advocates of mercy, the founders of civilization; and their patience under their unmerited sufferings forms not the least honorable part of their character." What Southey says of Brazil applies to Paraguay, Chile and other missions.

Montucla in his "Histoire des mathÉmatiques" tells us that Father Hallerstein, the president of the tribunal of astronomy in China hearing of the Suppression, died of the shock, as did his two distinguished companions. The story related by the Protestant historian Christopher de MÜrr in his "Journal" is also illustrative of the general attitude of mind in this trying conjuncture. Just before the Suppression, he informs us, a French Government ship left Marseilles for Pekin with four Jesuits on board. One was a painter, another a physician and the two others were mathematicians. All of them were to be in the personal entourage of the Emperor of China. They were Austrians from the Tyrol, but France, which had expelled the French Jesuits a few years before, was sending these foreign Jesuits to represent her, and to promote the interests of science in the Chinese court. They set sail in the month of July, 1773, and not a word was said to them about the general Suppression, which Choiseul knew perfectly well would soon take place. The Archbishop of Paris, de Beaumont, had warned them of what was in the air, but they could not believe it possible and so they departed for the Far East.

After a weary journey of four months, they arrived at Macao. Meantime the Brief had been published, and the Bishop of Macao, a creature of Pombal's made haste to inform them of the fact. Had he held his peace there would have been no difficulty about the continuance of the journey to Pekin, and their subsequent standing at the court, for the Brief was not effective until it was promulgated. But once they knew it, the poor men were in a dilemma. Not to heed the invitation of the Chinese emperor meant death, if he laid hold of them; but, on the other hand, to go to China without the power of saying Mass or preaching, or hearing confessions, namely as suspended priests, was unthinkable. For three days, the unfortunate wanderers studied the problem with aching hearts, and finally determined to run the risk of capture by the Chinese with its subsequent punishment of death. They stowed themselves away on separate ships and thus got back to Europe. Incidentally, it serves as a proof that the Jesuits did not go out to China to be mandarins, as some of their enemies alleged. They accepted what honors came to them, but only to help them in their apostolic work.

It was found out subsequently that these poor men would have had better luck had they continued on their journey to China instead of returning to Europe. The promulgation of the Brief and the observance of all the legal technicalities connected with its enforcement was next to impossible in China, and hence we find a letter of Father Bourgeois from Pekin to his friend Duprez in France, which bears the date May 15, 1775, announcing that "the Brief is on its way." It had been issued two years previously. Of course, Bourgeois is in tears over the prospective calamity, and tells his friend: "I have nothing now but eternity and that is not far off. Happy are those of Ours who are with Ignatius and Xavier and Aloysius Gonzaga and the numberless throng of saints who follow the Lamb under the glorious banner of the Name of Jesus."

CrÉtineau-Joly discovered another letter from an Italian lay-brother named Panzi, who writes eighteen months later than Bourgeois. It is dated November 11, 1776. In it he says "the missionaries had been notified of the Bull of Suppression (he does not state how), nevertheless they live together in the same house, under the same roof and eat at the same table." Apparently there had been a flaw in the promulgation of the "Bull" or Brief. The brother goes on to say, that "the Fathers preach, confess, baptise, retain possession of their property just as before. No one has been interdicted or suspended for the reason that in a country like this it would have been impossible to do otherwise. It is all done with the permission of the Bishop of Nankin, to whom we are subject. If the same course had been pursued here as in some parts of Europe, it would have put an end not only to the missions but to all religion, besides being a great scandal to the Chinese Christians who could not be provided for and who would have abandoned the Faith.

"Thanks be to God, our holy Mission is going on well and at present everything is very tranquil. The number of converts increases daily. Father DolliÈres brought over an entire tribe which lives on the mountains two days' journey from Pekin. The Emperor, so far, shows no signs of embracing the Catholic Faith, but he protects it everywhere throughout his vast dominions, and so do the other great men of the Empire. I am still at my work of painting. I am glad I am doing it for God; and I am determined to live in this holy mission until God wishes to take me to himself."

About this time, the Fathers addressed a joint letter to Cardinal de Bernis, the French ambassador at Rome, who had been so conspicuous in wresting the Brief of Suppression from Clement XIV and had originated the calumny about the poisoning of the Pope.

"Would your Eminence," says the document, "cast a glance at the inclosed report on the present condition of the French missions of China and the Indies which has been asked for by the Holy Congregation of the Propagation of the Faith. To these missions as you know, his majesty has sent great amounts of money and a large number of his subjects, knowing as he did that the interests of France are bound up with those of religion, and the advancement of the latter was what he had chiefly in view. It will be gratifying to you to learn that the Chinese Emperor takes great pleasure in having these French missionaries employed in his palace; he frequently takes them with him on his journeys through the empire, and makes use of them to draw up maps of the country, which are of invaluable service to him. On the other hand, the missionaries, on account of the esteem in which they are held, use all their influence to prevent the persecution of Christians and have succeeded in obtaining favors for Europeans and especially for the Frenchmen who arrive at Canton, by protecting them from the annoyances to which they are exposed. Over and above this, several of the Fathers are in correspondence with the Paris Academy of Science, and also with the ministers of State, and are sending them the results of their astronomical observations, and of their discoveries in botany, natural history, in brief, whatever can contribute to the advancement of science and art.

"The king and his ministers, have in the past few years, accorded free transportation to the Fathers who are sent out here to the French missions of India, and deservedly so, for these missionaries have frequently rendered important service to France, and for that reason, the Supreme Council of Pondicherry has taken up their defense against the rulings of the Parliament of Paris, which sent officers out here to seize the little property we possess. The Pondicherry authorities would concede only that the Fathers might make a small change in their soutane and be called the "Messieurs les missionnaires de Malabar." It is in accordance with this arrangement that we continue to exercise our functions under the jurisdiction of the bishop. We are the only ones who understand the very difficult language of the country and there does not seem to be any reason why we should not be left as we are. Besides these two missions, there are two others in the Levant, one in Greece, the other in Syria. They have always been and still are under the protection of France. M. le Chevalier de Saint-Priest, who is ambassador to Turkey, said, on his arrival at Constantinople, that the king had explicitly recommended to him the French missions and ordered him to assure the Fathers of the continuance of his protection."

Of the missions in Hindostan it may be of use to quote here the utterance of M. Perrin of the Missions EtrangÈres, who went out to India three years after the destruction of the Jesuit Missions in those parts. "I cannot be suspected when I speak in praise of those Fathers. I was never associated with them. Indeed, they were already extinct as a body when Providence placed me in the happy necessity of having had to do with some of the former members. I belonged to an association which had protracted and sometimes very lively debates with the Jesuit Fathers, who might have regarded us as their enemies, if Christians are capable of entertaining that feeling; but I feel bound to say that, notwithstanding these discussions, we always held each other in the highest esteem, and I hereby defy the most audacious calumniator to prove that the Society of Jesus had ever to blush for the conduct of any of its Malabar missionaries either at Pondicherry or in the interior. All were formed and fashioned by virtue's hand and they breathed virtue back in their conduct and their sermons." (Voyage dans l'Indostan, II, 261.)

Among the French Jesuits in China, Father Amiot was conspicuous. LanglÈs, the French Academian who was ambassador in China, dedicated to him a translation of Holme's "Travels in China," in which the Jesuit is described as "Apostolic Missionary at Pekin, Correspondent of the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres; an indefatigable savant, profoundly versed in the knowledge and the history of the sciences, the arts and the language of China and an ardent promoter of the Tatar-Manchou language and literature." With Amiot was Father Joseph d'Espinha, who was president of the imperial tribunal of astronomy, and simultaneously administrator of the Diocese of Pekin. Fathers de Rocha and Rodrigues presided over the tribunal of mathematics, and Father Schelbarth replaced Castiglione as the chief painter of the emperor; there were other Jesuits also who evangelised the various provinces of the country under the direction of the Ordinary.

This condition of things lasted for ten years and it was only then that the question arose of handing over the work to the Lazarists. Thus in a letter of Father Bourgeois, of whom we have already spoken, he says: "they have given our mission to the Lazarist Fathers." The letter is dated November 15, 1783, namely ten years after the suppression of the Society. "They were to have come last year," continues the writer; "Will they come this year? They are fine men and they can feel sure that I shall do all in my power to help them and put them in good shape." It was not until 1785 that a Lazarist, Father Raux, took over the Pekin Mission, and in 1788, three years afterwards, Bourgeois was able to say to Father Beauregard who had contrived to remain in Paris in spite of the Revolution: "Our missionary successors are men of merit, remarkable for virtue, talent and refinement. We live together like brothers, and thus the Lord consoles us for the loss of our good mother, the Society, whom we can never forget. Nothing can tear that love out of our hearts, and hence every moment we have to make acts of resignation in the calamity that has fallen upon us. Meanwhile it is hard to say in our house whether the Lazarists live as Jesuits or the Jesuits like Lazarists."

The old and infirm Jesuits who were homeless and could find no ecclesiastical employment had much to suffer. They became pitiable objects of charity. Zalenski in "Les JÉsuites da la Russie Blanche" (I, 77) gives an instance of it, in an appeal made to the King of Poland by one hundred and five of these outcasts, many of whom had been distinguished professors in the splendid colleges of the country. They had been granted a miserable pittance out of their own property in the way of a pension, but even that was often not forthcoming. After reminding His Majesty that this pension had been guaranteed them by the Church, by their country, and by the Sovereign Pontiff, and that the allowance was from their own property; and was due to them from the natural law; and also that the amount needed was every day decreasing, because of the great number among them who were dying, they asked him imploringly: "Will Poland, so long known for its humanity, be cruel only to us; will you permit us the Lord's anointed, the old teachers of the youth of Poland, to go begging our bread on the streets, with our garments in rags, and exposed to insults; will you permit that our tears and our cries which are forced from us by the grief and abandonment to which we are reduced should add to the affliction of our country; will you permit that our country should be accused of inhumanity and insulted because it withholds our pension? It is sad enough for us to have lost the Society, the dearest and nearest thing to our heart in this life, without adding this new suffering. Should you not have pity on our lot and grant us a pension? Do not bring us down to the grave with this new sorrow." Whether their prayers were answered or not we do not know. However, as Cardinal Pallavicini denounces the king as "impious and inert," it is very likely that the poor old men were left to starve.

Quite unexpectedly the Protestant Frederick the Great of Prussia and the schismatical Catherine II of Russia insisted on having what Jesuits they could get for educational work in their respective domains. As neither sovereign would permit the Papal Brief to be read in the countries which they governed, a number of the exiles in various parts of Europe flocked thither. Efforts were made to have the Brief promulgated in both countries, but without success; for Catherine as well as Frederick denied any right of the Pope in their regard; nor would either of them listen to any request of the Jesuits to have it published. They were told to hold their peace. Of course, they were condemned by their enemies for accepting this heterodox protection; but it has been blamed for almost everything, so they went on with their work, thanking God for the unexpected shelter, and knowing perfectly well that Clement XIV was not averse to the preservation of some of the victims.