------------ SENLIS.
------------ ANGERS.
------------ DIGNE.
------------ AUTUN.
------------ VENCE.
------------ EVREUX.
The coadjutor of STRASBOURG.
The bishop of LEICTOURE.
------------ TROYES.
------------ NANTES.
_General Agents for the Clergy._
M. l"abbe DE BROGLIE.
M. l"abbe DE JUIGNe.
{373}
_A Copy of the Letter of the Archbishop of Paris, dated January 1, 1762._
MOST GRACIOUS SOVEREIGN,
If, in company of the other prelates, I did not add my name to the answer which they had the honour to present your majesty, it was not that I differed in the least from their judgment as to the four articles, which your majesty was pleased to propose to their examination, concerning the usefulness, the doctrine, the conduct, and the government of the Jesuits. I am very sensible that, in point of virtue and learning, there is no bishop in the nation to whom I ought not to give the precedency; and, in this view, would willingly have subscribed after all my brother bishops: but there is a regard due to the dignity of the see, to which your majesty has graciously been pleased to call me, and I must not take a step, that may interfere with those prerogatives, which, after the example of your august predecessors, you think it your duty to maintain. No other consideration could have prevented my setting my hand to a testimony so much to the advantage of the Jesuits of your kingdom: and, whilst I have the honour to a.s.sure your majesty of my entire adherency to that solemn act, I once more beg leave to implore your justice and supreme authority in behalf of a religious body, {374} eminent for learning and piety, and well deserving your royal protection, for the great services, which, during the two last ages, they have rendered both to church and state.
(Signed) CHRISTOPHER, Archbishop of PARIS.
THE END.
C. WOOD, Printer, Poppin"s Court, Fleet Street.
NOTES
[1] See Substance of a Speech of Sir John c.o.xe Hippisley, Bart. published by Murray, 1815.
[2] Robertson"s Charles V, vol. iii, p. 225.--To supply the malicious omission of the pamphlet writer, I will here insert the historian"s report of the Jesuits in South America. "But it is in the new world that the Jesuits have exhibited the most wonderful display of their abilities, and have contributed most effectually to the benefit of the human species. The conquerors of that unfortunate quarter of the globe had nothing in view but to plunder, to enslave, and to exterminate its inhabitants. The Jesuits alone have made humanity the object of their settling there. About the beginning of the last century they obtained admission into the fertile province of Paraguay, which stretches across the southern continent of America, from the bottom of the mountains of Potosi to the confines of the Spanish and Portuguese settlements on the banks of the river de la Plata.
They found the inhabitants in a state little different from that which takes place among men when they first begin to unite together: strangers to the arts; subsisting precariously by hunting or fishing; and hardly acquainted with the first principles of subordination and government. The Jesuits set themselves to instruct and to civilize these savages. They taught them to cultivate the ground, to rear tame animals, and to build houses. They brought them to live together in villages. They trained them to arts and manufactures. They made them taste the sweets of society, and accustomed them to the blessings of security and order. These people became the subjects of their benefactors, who have governed them with a tender attention, resembling that with which a father directs his children.
Respected and beloved almost to adoration, a few Jesuits presided over some hundred thousand Indians. They maintained a perfect equality among all the members of the community. Each of them was obliged to labour, not for himself alone, but for the public. The produce of their fields, together with the fruits of their industry of every species, were deposited in common store houses, from which each individual received every thing necessary for the supply of his wants. By this inst.i.tution, almost all the pa.s.sions, which disturb the peace of society, and render the members of it unhappy, were extinguished. A few magistrates, chosen by the Indians themselves, watched over the public tranquillity, and secured obedience to the laws. The sanguinary punishments, frequent under other governments, were unknown: an admonition from a Jesuit; a slight mark of infamy; or, on some singular occasion, a few lashes with a whip, were sufficient to maintain good order among these innocent and happy people."--Charles V, p.
219.
[3] The author of the following Letters, who owed the publication of them to the liberality of the editor of the PILOT, complained of the refusal of the editor of the TIMES to admit into that paper a vindication of character, though he had opened his pages to the blaster of it. As newspapers in modern times have erected themselves into a kind of tribunal of the dernier resort, the editors should not forget the indispensable maxim of all courts of justice, and _concede alteri parti occasionem audiri_ should be a standing rule with them, or they must submit to pa.s.s for the star-chambers of jacobinism, or of some other party.
[4] D"Alembert said to one of his intimates, with whom he had been to hear the celebrated sermon preached by P. Beauregard against the apostles of infidelity, "These men die hard."
[5] The pa.s.sage above cited, though not published with his name, is well known to have proceeded from the pen of M. de Lally Tolendal.
[6] It is well known, that the Dutch, at this time, did every thing in their power to undermine the Portuguese in j.a.pan, and that they fabricated tales of the Jesuits to alarm the government, which, they said, was to be subverted, the emperor to be dethroned, and the people made slaves to the pope. In consequence of these slanders, no Christian was suffered in the empire; when, to preserve their commerce, the Dutch abjured Christianity, and, in proof of their sincerity, consented to tread publicly upon the cross at certain times.
[7] Encyclopedia Britannica.
[8] Spirit of Laws, book v, chap. 14.
[9] Robertson"s Charles V, vol. iii, page 224.
[10] See Sully"s Memoirs.
[11] This pa.s.sage is also from the pen of M. Lally Tolendal.--When I was at Paris, in the autumn of 1814, he was engaged on the Life of Charles I, of England. After the return of Bonaparte, Louis XVIII appointed him one of his ministers.
[12] See Letter IV.
[13] This, if well executed, would be a very interesting work, and it is not impossible, that it may be attempted.
[14] See Letter III.
[15] Lord Clarendon, vol. i, page 73.
[16] Hume"s History of England, vol. vi, page 297, &c.
[17] Hume"s History of England, vol. vi, page 378.
[18] On the subject of the popish plots, see Dr. Milner"s Letters to a Prebendary.
[19] As to the judges of those times, see what a picture is drawn of a chief justice by the most celebrated of our historians:--"To be a Jesuit, or even a catholic, was of itself a sufficient proof of guilt. The chief justice (sir William Scroggs), in particular, gave sanction to all the narrow prejudices and bigoted fury of the populace. Instead of being counsel for the prisoners, as his office required, he pleaded the cause against them, browbeat their witnesses, and on every occasion represented their guilt as certain and uncontroverted. He even went so far as publicly to affirm, that the papists had not the same principles which protestants have, and therefore were not ent.i.tled to that common _credence_, which the principles and practices of the latter call for. And, when the jury brought in their verdict against the prisoners, he said, "You have done, gentlemen, like very good subjects, and very good Christians, that is to say, like very good protestants.""--Hume"s History of England, vol. viii, ch. 67, p.
91. See also what the same author says in his third appendix: "Timid juries, and judges, who held their offices during pleasure, never failed to second all the views of the crown. And, as the practice was anciently common, of fining, imprisoning, or otherwise punishing the jurors, merely at the discretion of the court, for finding a verdict contrary to the direction of these dependent judges, it is obvious, that juries were then no manner of security to the liberty of the subject."--Vol. v, p. 458. And, if these be not enough, take conviction from the pen of one of the most penetrating geniuses of the age: "The proceedings on the popish plot," says Mr. Fox, in his History of James II, "must always be considered as an indelible disgrace upon the English nation, in which king, parliament, judges, juries, witnesses, prosecutors, have all their respective, though certainly not equal shares. Witnesses, of such a character as not to deserve credit in the most trifling cause, upon the most immaterial facts, gave evidence so incredible, or, to speak more properly, so impossible to be true, that it ought not to have been believed if it had come from the mouth of Cato: and, upon such evidence, from such witnesses, were innocent men condemned to death and executed. Prosecutors, whether attornies and solicitors-general, or managers of impeachment, acted with the fury which, in such circ.u.mstances, might be expected; juries partook, naturally enough, of the national ferment; and judges, whose duty it was to guard them against such impressions, were scandalously active in confirming them in their prejudices, and inflaming their pa.s.sions. The king, who is supposed to have disbelieved the whole plot, never once exercised his glorious prerogative of mercy. It is said he dared not. His throne, perhaps his life, was at stake."--History of James II, by the right honourable Charles James Fox, page 33.
[20] Fox"s History of James II, page 40.
[21] I was unwilling to interrupt the reader at the last quotation from Mr.
Fox, but I beg leave here to say a few words relative to the insinuated calumny on the catholic priests of Ireland, to which I then alluded. As I have before observed, it is easy to see, that this attack, under cover of a.s.sailing the Jesuits, is aimed at catholics in general. The priests in Ireland are charged, in the pamphlet, with great venality and corruption of morals, and this, the writer says, may be affirmed without the fear of contradiction. To notice this slander is allowing myself to be led from my particular subject into the general one; I will not, therefore, dwell upon it, but, referring the reader to a volume of indisputable authority, though written by a catholic (Dr. Milner"s Inquiry into certain vulgar Opinions, Letter xviii), for an interesting account of the Irish clergy and of the Irish poor, I will content myself with extracting a note, or rather reference, from page 182 of the book. "If, gentlemen, you are not under the influence of very gross prejudice, you will, in receiving representations of the necessitous state of Ireland, maturely weigh the allegations of men, who have stigmatized, and still stigmatize as the last of mankind, some of the most deserving and useful men in the community. There are among them preachers and teachers of the first excellence: there are men of profound erudition, men of nice cla.s.sical taste, and men of the best critical ac.u.men. They are not formed, it is true, to shine in the drawing-room or at the tea-table; nor are such qualifications very desirable in churchmen; for you well know, that the refined manners of fashionable life are often as incompatible with Christian morality, as the grosser vices of the vulgar herd. Their manners are, in general, decent; but their exertions are great, their zeal is indefatigable. See them in the most inclement seasons, at the most unseasonable hours, in the most uncultivated parts, amidst the poorest and most wretched of mankind! They are always ready at a call; nothing can deter them; the sense of duty surmounts every obstacle! And there is no reward for them in this world! The good effects of their zeal are visible to every impartial and discerning mind; notwithstanding the many great disadvantages under which it labours. For instance, you may often find a parish so extensive and populous as to require two or three clergymen properly to serve it, and yet the poverty of the parish is such as to be scarcely able to maintain one in a tolerably decent manner. I could point out many other disadvantages, but I forbear at present," &c.--"After all, the good effects are so conspicuous, that, I repeat it, the lower orders of Irishmen are better instructed in the doctrines of Christianity than the lower orders of Englishmen."
I cannot speak of the catholic priests in Ireland from my own knowledge, but the information I have received, from friends well acquainted with the subject, fully corroborates this character of them. With such a character, already drawn before the public with genuine marks of candour, is it possible that any writer to the public should, in calumniating it, say, that there was no fear of his being contradicted? Was he not contradicted, if I may use the expression, by antic.i.p.ation? But uncongenial records are useless things, like _stern lights_.
[22] Rapin"s History of England, vol. ii, page 344.
[23] Hume says, that Campion was put to the rack, and, confessing his guilt, was publicly executed. The confession of guilt is not so clearly proved as the putting to the rack. In the life of Campion the confession is denied; and what Hume himself says immediately before is strong against the imputed guilt, that he and Parsons were sent to explain the bull of Pius, and to teach that the subjects of Elizabeth were not bound by it to rebel against her.--See vol. v, chap. xli, page 238.
[24] Page 327, edition 1615.
[25] Hume"s History of England, vol. viii, chap. lxvii, page 110.
[26] Hume"s History of England, vol. v, chap. x.x.xviii, page 22, &c.
[27] Hume.