beacon lights of history-iii-2-第51章

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！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



his　subordinates　tools　and　instruments。　　The　General　appointed　the

presidents　of　colleges　and　of　the　religious　houses；　he　admitted　or

dismissed；　dispensed　or　punished；　at　his　pleasure。　　There　was　no

complaint；　all　obeyed　his　orders；　and　saw　in　him　the　representative

of　Divine　Providence。　　Complaint　was　sin；　resistance　was　ruin。　　It

is　hard　for　us　to　understand　how　any　man　could　be　brought

voluntarily　to　submit　to　such　a　despotism。　　But　the　novice　entering

the　order　had　to　go　through　terrible　discipline；to　be　a　servant；

anything；　to　live　according　to　rigid　rules；　so　that　his　spirit　was

broken　by　mechanical　duties。　　He　had　to　learn　the　virtues　of

obedience　before　he　could　be　fully　enrolled　in　the　Society。　　He　was

drilled　for　years　by　spiritual　sergeants　more　rigorously　than　a

soldier　in　Napoleon's　army：　hence　the　efficiency　of　the　body；　it

was　a　spiritual　army　of　the　highest　disciplined　troops。　　Loyola　had

been　a　soldier；　he　knew　what　military　discipline　could　do；how

impotent　an　army　is　without　it；　what　an　awful　power　it　is　with

discipline；　and　the　severer　the　better。　　The　best　soldier　of　a

modern　army　is　he　who　has　become　an　unconscious　piece　of　machinery；

and　it　was　this　unreflecting；　unconditional　obedience　which　made

the　Society　so　efficient；　and　the　General　himself；　who　controlled

it；　such　an　awful　power　for　good　or　for　evil。　　I　am　only　speaking

of　the　organization；　the　machinery；　the　regime；　of　the　Jesuits；　not

of　their　character；　not　of　their　virtues　or　vices。　　This

organization　is　to　be　spoken　of　as　we　speak　of　the　discipline　of　an

army；wise　or　unwise；　as　it　reached　its　end。　　The　original　aim　of

the　Jesuits　was　the　restoration　of　the　Papal　Church　to　its　ancient

power；　and　for　one　hundred　years；　as　I　think；　the　restoration　of

morals；　higher　education；　greater　zeal　in　preaching：　in　short；　a

reformation　within　the　Church。　　Jesuitism　was；　of　course；　opposed

to　Protestantism；　it　hated　the　Protestants；　it　hated　their

religions　creed　and　their　emancipating　and　progressive　spirit；　it

hated　religious　liberty。



I　need　not　dwell　on　other　things　which　made　this　religious　order　so

successful；not　merely　their　virtues　and　their　mechanism；　but

their　adaptation　to　the　changing　spirit　of　the　times。　　They　threw

away　the　old　dresses　of　monastic　life；　they　quitted　the　cloister

and　places　of　meditation；　they　were　preachers　as　well　as　scholars；

they　accommodated　themselves　to　the　circumstances　of　the　times；

they　wore　the　ordinary　dress　of　gentlemen；　they　remained　men　of　the

world；　of　fine　manners　and　cultivated　speech；　there　was　nothing

ascetic　or　repulsive　about　them；　out　in　the　world；　they　were　all

things　to　all　men；　like　politicians；　in　order　to　accomplish　their

ends；　they　never　were　lazy；　or　profligate　or　luxurious。　　If　their

Order　became　enriched；　they　as　individuals　remained　poor。　　The

inferior　members　were　not　even　ambitious；　like　good　soldiers；　they

thought　of　nothing　but　the　work　assigned　to　them。　　Their　pride　and

glory　were　the　prosperity　of　their　Order；an　intense　esprit　de

corps；　never　equalled　by　any　body　of　men。　　This；　of　course；　while

it　gave　them　efficiency；　made　them　narrow。　　They　could　see　the

needle　on　the　barn…door；they　could　not　see　the　door　itself。

Hence　there　could　be　no　agreement　with　them；　no　argument　with　them；

except　on　ordinary　matters；　they　were　as　zealous　as　Saul；　seeking

to　make　proselytes。　　They　yielded　nothing　except　in　order　to　win；

they　never　compromised　their　Order　in　their　cause。　　Their　fidelity

to　their　head　was　marvellous；　and　so　long　as　they　confined

themselves　to　the　work　of　making　people　better；　I　think　they

deserved　praise。　　I　do　not　like　their　military　organization；　but　I

should　have　no　more　right　to　abuse　it　than　the　organization　of　some

Protestant　sects。　　That　is　a　matter　of　government；　all　sects　and

all　parties；　Catholic　and　Protestant；　have　a　right　to　choose　their

own　government　to　carry　out　their　ends；　even　as　military　generals

have　a　right　to　organize　their　forces　in　their　own　way。　　The

history　of　the　Jesuits　shows　this；that　an　organization　of　forces；

or　what　we　call　discipline　or　government；　is　a　great　thing。　　A

church　without　a　government　is　a　poor　affair；　so　far　as　efficiency

is　concerned。　　All　churches　have　something　to　learn　from　the

Jesuits　in　the　way　of　discipline。　　John　Wesley　learned　something；

the　Independents　learned　very　little。





But　there　is　another　side　to　the　Jesuits。　　We　have　seen　why　they

succeeded；　we　have　to　inquire　how　they　failed。　　If　history　speaks

of　the　virtues　of　the　early　members；　and　the　wonderful　mechanism　of

their　Order；　and　their　great　success　in　consequence；　it　also　speaks

of　the　errors　they　committed；　by　which　they　lost　the　confidence

they　had　gained。　　From　being　the　most　popular　of　all　the　adherents

of　the　papal　power；　and　of　the　ideas　of　the　Dark　Ages；　they　became

the　most　unpopular；　they　became　so　odious　that　the　Pope　was

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