Jesuit Education/Chapter 15

by Robert Schwickerath

 

Chapter XV.

Training of the Jesuit Teacher.

It is generally admitted that even at present the Jesuits exercise considerable influence in the world. What is the secret of their hold on Catholics? What the source from which their power springs? The real secret of the Jesuits' influence is to be found in their training. Dr. Freytag in his review of Father Duhr's work on the Ratio Studiorum remarked: "After the perusal of this learned work, one will understand that only highly talented young men can join that Order; for what is demanded of them [in the line of studies] is extraordinary."^[1] We have to see how far this training of a Jesuit is a satisfactory preparation for his work as teacher in high schools and colleges, how far it tends to make the Jesuit teacher—in the words of the Hon. G. C. Brodrick—"a man of self-sacrifice," and whether it gives him a "solid knowledge of his subject and the art of teaching, through close attendance from a master of experience."

The first requisite is, that the original material, the candidate for the Order, is good. The statue, however deftly carved, will not be a success if the marble has serious defects. Therefore, such only are to be admitted into the ranks of the Society, as are capable of receiving the Jesuit 'form,' only those who show a capacity for imbibing its spirit and submitting to its discipline.^[2] The Constitutions of the Society

are quite explicit on this point. They say that the person having the power of admission "should not be turned by any consideration from that which he shall judge most conducive in the Lord to the service of God in the Society; to promote which he should not be too eager to grant admission."^[3] The Provincial Superior is further exhorted "to watch that his subjects are not too anxious (ne nimii sint) to attract people to the Society, but by their virtues they should endeavor to lead all to Christ."^[4] The teachers in particular are told "even in private conversations to inculcate piety, but without attracting any one to the Order."^[5] Now what qualities does the Society require of those applying for admission? The Constitutions want men endowed with the highest gifts of nature. In order that they may be able to benefit their fellow creatures, the candidates of the Society should be endowed with the following gifts: as regards their intellect, they should possess good judgment, sound doctrine, or the talent to acquire it. As to character, they must be studious of all virtue and spiritual perfection, calm, steadfast and strenuous in what they undertake for God's service, and burning with zeal for the salvation of souls. In externals, facility of language, so needful for the intercourse with fellow men; besides, the applicant should possess good health and strength to undergo the labors of the Institute. ^[6]

Such is the material of the future Jesuit; no mean material indeed. How does the Society carry out the modelling of the young members? How does she – to confine ourselves to the question of training teachers – train them to become efficient instructors and educators? To understand this better, it will be good to follow a young Jesuit through the course of his training. Take a young man, a student of a college, perhaps of a university. May be, he has been educated in a Jesuit college, he has seen the Jesuits working for education, has heard them preaching and lecturing, he feels attracted by their work: he wants to become one of them. Perhaps he has never seen a Jesuit, but he has heard of them, has read of the great achievements of the famous missionaries of the Order, beginning from St. Francis Xavier down to our days; he has come across a book written by a Jesuit, he hears how much they have done in the defense of Christianity, above all how they are hated and persecuted by the enemies of the Church: the ideal inspirations of his heart grow stronger, and he inquires where he can find these men so much spoken of. It is a fact that during the Kulturkampf in Germany, the German Province of the Society almost doubled its numbers. Many students, who had never seen a Jesuit, left the gymnasium or university to join the exiles, just because of the singular hatred of which the outlawed Order was the object. They concluded that a body of men thus singled out, must possess something extraordinary, something especially praiseworthy, as they could not believe that the calumnies spread by the enemies of the Jesuits could have any foundation. The student, frequently the brightest of his class, travels to the nearest place, perhaps to a foreign country, where he finds a house or a college of the Order.^[7] He is introduced to the Superior, to whom he expresses his desire of joining the ranks of the sons of St. Ignatius. He is strictly examined as to his studies, his character, the motives which led him to apply for admission to the Society, and above all, whether any one, especially a Jesuit, has influenced him to take this step, which latter fact would be considered an impediment to his admission. The hardships of the religious life, the long course of studies prescribed by the Society, the sacrifices to be undergone, the obedience to be rendered, all this is explained to him. But suppose these representations do not deter him, then after a careful examination conducted by several Jesuits, if the student is thought to possess sufficient talent, and a good moral disposition, he is received as a novice of the Society.

Perhaps the young candidate expected soon to be sent to the missions, or to be employed in teaching or writing, but the Society holds to the old principle that he who is to teach, is first to learn. Above all, he has to learn the most necessary science, expressed by the old Nosce teipsum: "Know thyself," and that not in a merely speculative, but in a severely practical manner. By this intense self-knowledge, the young religious is enabled to understand the characters of others and to deal with them successfully. During the first two years, in strict seclusion from the world, he learns that self-knowledge, self-control, and "self-sacrifice," which are necessary to the future missionary, and no less so, to the future teacher. It is a religious, a spiritual training which the future educator receives first as the foundation of all other training. Education and reform must begin at home. The teacher is to instruct his pupils in the principles of true and solid morality. If he does not possess and practise these principles himself, he will be a corrupter of youth instead of a father and friend, "a blind leader of the blind, and both shall fall into the pit," as the Divine Teacher expresses it. If without practising these principles he endeavors to teach them, he is a hypocrite; his deeds will belie his words, and the eyes of the young are sharp and their perception is keen; they will soon discover the discord between the teacher's action and his precepts, and the former will have a more powerful influence on them, than the latter, as the Latin adage has it: Verba movent, exempla trahunt. Even the pagan rhetorician Quintilian insists on this point: Ipse (magister) nec habeat vitia, nec ferat: "The teacher should neither have nor tolerate faults."^[8] The teacher is daily for hours with his pupils, speaking to them, moving before them, his every word, his every gesture, his every smile is watched by a set of keen critics. All this must imperceptibly exercise a deep influence on the youthful mind. How perfect, therefore, ought the teacher to be, how faultless, how exemplary! But this moral perfection cannot be acquired except by severe self-control, by rigorous self-discipline, the acquirement of which forms the great end of the religious noviceship. It was St. Ignatius' oft-repeated maxim, not only: Nosce te ipsum, but, Vince te ipsum: "Conquer thyself." This is the way of training men, characters, of whom there is greater need than of scholars.

In frequent meditations on the end of man, on the life of the Divine Master, the young religious beholds the true dignity of man, the true "sanctity of the individual," which consists in his relation to God, his Creator. These truths brought home to the religious by daily reflection will inspire him with that genuine zeal, that pure love of man, which is ready to undergo any hardship, to spend time, talent, health, and life, in order to make his neighbor's soul good and noble on earth and happy throughout eternity. To the practical study of the character, of the life, of the words and actions of the Divine Master, not only the novice, but every Jesuit, devotes an hour every day in his morning meditation. In this school he learns to deal with pupils, seeing with what patience, kindness and love Christ dealt with little ones and with His disciples whose "slowness of grasp and understanding" (Luke 24, 25) would have been too much for any teacher, except him who was so "meek and humble of heart" (Matt. 11, 29). From Christ, the poor, and the friend of the lowly, he learns to "slight no one, to care as much for the progress of the poor pupils as of the rich," as his rule enjoins him.^[9] From Christ, who sacrificed the most tender relations on earth to the will and service of God, in order to be "about his father's business" (Luke 2, 49), the future teacher must learn how to control the affections of his heart, so as not to show any partiality, any special love to particular pupils. All these qualities and virtues, so necessary for the teacher, the young religious endeavors to acquire during the time of his preparation. The new school of educators may sneer at this "asceticism," still we know that godliness, although not sufficient for everything, is nevertheless profitable for everything,^[10] especially so for education.

The first two years of the life of the young Jesuit are principally devoted to this religious and moral training. However, his future life work is not lost sight of even during this time. Many exercises and practices of the novitiate have a direct bearing on his scientific preparation. As a rule, the students are admitted only after they have finished their classical course, in Germany and Austria for instance after completing the gymnasium, which is a classical course of nine years; in this country, after Sophomore class, which amounts to four years academic or high school work and two years of college properly so-called. Of course, there are exceptions to this rule, not a few enter after having finished a course of philosophy or after having taken special courses at a university, in addition to their classical studies, while sometimes students are admitted who have not completed the whole college course. During the first two years, novices have frequent oratorical exercises, they receive theoretical instructions on explaining Christian doctrine, and still more frequently – in accordance with the fundamental maxim of the Society, that practice and exercise are most important means of training – they have to give catechetical instructions. This exercise is an excellent preparation for explaining any subject in a simple and intelligent manner, a thing most valuable for instructors in lower classes. Their conversations throughout a great part of the day are to be carried on in Latin. Besides, there are several hours a week devoted to regular schools in Latin, Greek, and the mother tongue; thus the knowledge of languages is at least kept alive, if not perfected.

After the two years novitiate, the young Jesuits have to repeat the classical studies for one, two or three years – the time varies according to the studies made previous to admission to the Society. Special attention is paid to the precepts of aesthetics, poetics, and rhetoric, and to various practical applications of these precepts. Then follows a three years' course of philosophy, mathematics and natural sciences, especially physics, chemistry, biology, physiology, astronomy and geology. The system pursued is entirely different from that followed at our universities, where the student listens to the lectures of the professor, takes down notes and studies them at home, and then goes up for examination at the end of the year. Not so with the Jesuits. The lectures of the professor are not the only, perhaps not even the most important part in the philosophical and scientific training. Characteristic and most essential are again the exercises, foremost among them the disputations, for which three or four times a week a full hour is set apart. In what do they consist? One of the students has to study carefully a thesis previously treated in the lectures, in order to expound and defend it against the objections which are being prepared in the meantime by two other students. On the appointed day the defender takes his place at a special desk in front of the class, opposite him the two objectors. The defender states his proposition, explains its meaning, and the opinions of the adversaries, ancient and modern, then gives proofs for it, in strictly syllogistic form, all this in Latin. After a quarter of an hour, the first objector attacks the proposition, or a part of it, or an argument adduced in its proof, all this again in syllogisms. The defender repeats the objection, then answers in a few words to major, minor and conclusion, by conceding, denying, or distinguishing the various parts of the objector's syllogism. The opponent urges his objection, by offering a new subsumptive syllogism to the defender's solution. After a quarter of an hour the second objector does the same for fifteen minutes. During the last quarter, either the professor, or any student present, may offer objections against the defender's proposition.

These disputations are regular intellectual tournaments, the objectors trying to show the weak points of the thesis, the defender striving to maintain his proposition. "This system of testing the soundness of the doctrine taught, continued as it is throughout the theological studies, which come at a later period of the young Jesuit's career, provides those who pass through it with a complete defense against difficulties which otherwise are likely to puzzle the Catholic controversialist. It is a splendid means of sifting truth from falsehood. Many of those who take part in it are men of ability and well versed in the objections that can be urged against the Catholic teaching. Such men conduct their attack not as a mere matter of form, but with vigor and ingenuity. . . . Sometimes the objector will urge his difficulties with such a semblance of conviction as even to mislead some of those present. ... So far from any check being put on the liberty of the students, they are encouraged to press home every sort of objection, however searching and fundamental, however bold and profane (e. g. against the existence of God, free will, immortality of the soul, Divinity of Christ, the Catholic Church etc.), that can be raised to the Catholic doctrine. In every class are found to be men, who are not to be put off with an evasion, and a professor who was to attempt to substitute authority for reason, would very soon find out his mistake. This perfect liberty of disputation is one of the many happy results of the possession of perfect and unfailing truth."^[11]

Every six or eight weeks, all the more important theses discussed during the preceding time, are defended in the monthly disputations, at which all the different classes of the institution and all the professors of the faculty are present. Sometimes more solemn disputations are held, to which frequently professors from other institutions are invited, and any one is free to offer objections which the defender has to solve. There can be no doubt that this method has many great advantages. First of all, it forces the student to study his proposition most thoroughly; for he is not aware what objections shall be made. Therefore, both defenders and objectors have to prepare most carefully, to examine closely the proposition on all sides, to know its exact meaning, to understand the arguments, and to discover its weak points. The professor, of course, is present, sees that strict syllogistic form is kept, and in case the defender is unable to solve the difficulties, has to give the final decision. At the same time it forces the professor to be most careful and accurate in the opinion he holds, and especially in the arguments which he proposes, as fullest liberty is given in attacking every point, and as the students, frequently mature men and highly gifted, try their very best to show any weak point in the argumentation of the text book, or in the professor's propositions. Professor Paulsen observes on the disputations of the medieval schoolmen, of which the disputations of the Jesuit schools are a modification: "As regards the disputations, it may be said that the Middle Ages were hardly mistaken. They were undoubtedly fitted to produce a great readiness of knowledge and a marvellous skill in grasping arguments."^[12]

It has frequently been asserted that this uniform training of the Jesuits crushes out all individuality. Professor Paulsen says: "Great individualities do not appear in the history of the Order," and Cardinal Newman writes: "What a great idea, to use Guizot's expression, is the Society of Jesus! what a creation of genius in its organization; but so well adapted is the institution to its object that for that very reason it can afford to crush individualities, however gifted; so much so, that, in spite of the rare talents of its members, it has even become an objection to it in the mouth of its enemies, that it has not produced a thinker like Scotus or Malebranche!"^[13]

Does uniform training necessarily result in uniformity of character? Certainly not. If all those trained had the same disposition, the same nature to be worked upon, perhaps it would. Does the same nourishment given to a number of children produce the same result, the same complexion, the same color of hair, the same seize? Why should mental food? Does the same training in a military academy produce a perfect likeness in all? The military system of the "Great Powers" gives the most uniform training in the world. Does it crush out individuality of the generals and officers in tactics and strategy? Jesuit pupils will be surprised at being told that their teachers have all the same mould of character and are destitute of individuality. But no one smiles more at the above mentioned assertion than Jesuit Superiors, whose hardest task it is to unite all the different characters in one common effort, without interfering too much with their individuality. They know too well that the crushing out of the individuality would mean the crushing of energy and of self-activity so much insisted on by. St. Ignatius in his Spiritual Exercises. It was St. Ignatius who told those who have charge of the spiritual training of the members of the Order: "It is most dangerous to endeavor to force all on the same path to perfection; he who attempts this does not know how different and how manifold the gifts of the Holy Ghost are."^[14]

If one studies the works of the great writers of the Society, he will be struck by the variety and difference of opinions held by professors and writers of the same period, v. g. Suarez and Vasquez.^[15] It is amusing to read how one attacks and refutes the other, speaking of "the opinions of a certain modern author which cannot be maintained at all" etc. Cardinal Newman says in his Historical Sketches: "It is plain that the body is not over-zealous about its theological traditions, or it certainly would not suffer Suarez to controvert with Molina, Viva with Vasquez, Passaglia with Petavius, and Faure with Suarez, de Lugo and Valentia. In this intellectual freedom its members justly glory; inasmuch as they have set their affections, not on the opinions of the Schools, but on the souls of men."^[16] Professor Paulsen seems to have forgotten his own statement: "Greatest possible power of the individual is preserved without derangement of the organism of the Order, spontaneous activity and perfect submission of the will, contrasts almost irreconcilable, seem to have been harmoniously united in a higher degree by the Society, than by any other body."^[17] A recent English writer,^[18] speaking of the "crushing of individuality practised by the Jesuits," seems to trace it to the pernicious influence of the spirit of the Latin races. The Latins "keep men in leading strings;" "liberty to Latins means license;" "true Latins cannot understand the principle of personality." The Spaniards, in particular, are regarded with special horror. The Roman Curia is said to have adopted the system used by the Spaniards, "who could not endure discussion or publicity; centralization was the ideal; routine the practice," and so on. "The Jesuit system of blind obedience was founded to bring about the absolutism of authority;" this "makes them akin (strange though it may seem) to that Puritan strain so often found in those doing or desirous of doing great things." This is strange indeed, but far stranger are the absurdities and contradictions into which prejudiced men are led. The Jesuits are said to be deprived of personality and individuality, and in the same breath it is sometimes asserted that everywhere they know how to adapt themselves to the most different circumstances: In England, America, Germany, Spain, France, Russia, China, Japan, Paraguay, Abyssinia. It is said the General wants a man for some secret mission. He opens his list and there he finds a man especially fitted to influence the court of St. Petersburg, or the Padisha in Constantinople; then one who knows so well how to ingratiate himself with Cromwell as to become his friend, dine at his table, play chess with him;^[19] then one who is fitted for guiding his Celestial Majesty in Pekin; here one to rouse the starving peasants of Ireland to enthusiasm for their 'Romish' faith, then one who by all sorts of devices tames the savages of Paraguay; one who disputes with the bonzes in Japan, or becomes a Brahmin in India, as the famous Robert de Nobili; there is one who is best suited to conquer the refractory Professors at the University in Louvain, and the Doctors of the Sorbonne, then another who wins the confidence of the townspeople and villagers in Switzerland, the Tyrol, and Germany – in short men for every possible mission.^[20] Such are the opinions of the adversaries of the Society. But is not the greatest variety of characters needed for all these employments? And yet, they are supposed to be deprived of individuality! Or is that unpersonal trait which is infused into every Jesuit so universal that all other individualities are contained in it, as the scholastic philosophers express it, eminenter, in a subtle and mysterious form? Is every Jesuit a sort of Proteus, who could change himself into a lion, a serpent, a pard, a boar, a tree, a fountain? A wonderful system of training, indeed, for which the diplomats of our modern courts might envy the Jesuits. To be serious, that depriving of personality, attributed to the Jesuit system, is nothing but one of the numerous Jesuit myths.

We have left our young Jesuit in his philosophical course. But what becomes in the meantime of the study of the classical languages? It is not neglected during the course of philosophy, at least the Ratio Studiorum provides special means to foster and promote this important branch of study. The lectures in mathematics and natural sciences are given in the mother tongue, but the lectures and disputations in philosophy are all conducted in Latin, so that the young Jesuit is in the habit of speaking Latin and may speak it with ease and fluency. It is true, the Latin of these disputations and lectures in not exactly Ciceronian, still it is by no means as barbarous as the opponents of this system represent it. Some of the Latin text books on philosophy are written in accurate Latin.^[21] It is not, however, this custom of speaking Latin which we wished to adduce as a provision of the Ratio Studiorum, to advance the study of Latin during the course of philosophy. But we find in the Ratio, among the rules for the Prefect of the higher studies, the following clause: "He shall give every student of philosophy a classical author and admonish him not to omit reading it at certain hours."^[22]

In this manner six or seven years of training have been spent in the Society in addition to about the same number of years devoted to higher studies previous to the admission into the Order; thus, before the Jesuit begins his work as teacher, twelve years, on the average, have been spent in studies after the completion of the elementary or public school course. The Jesuit teacher is then employed in the academical or high school department. His training compares favorably to that of the high school teachers in this country, at least as far as the length of time is concerned. In Massachusetts (1897) one per cent of high school teachers were graduates of scientific schools, thirteen per cent of normal schools, sixty-six per cent of colleges, twenty per cent unclassified. – In the State of New York (1898) there were thirty-two per cent college graduates, thirty-nine per cent normal school graduates, nineteen per cent high school graduates, ten per cent had other training.^[23] Thus the average of higher studies is certainly not more than eight years, against the twelve years of the Jesuit teacher.

It may be asked how far the Jesuit's studies are preparatory to his work as teacher? The repetition of the classics in the two years "Juniorate" previous to the study of philosophy, is not only considered as part of the general culture, but is especially viewed as a preparation for the Jesuits' work as teachers. Quick has correctly said that the Juvenats or Juniorates were the training schools where the young Jesuit learned the method of teaching.^[24] That this was the aim of this course is apparent from what the General Visconti said: "Immediately after their novitiate they [the young Jesuits] must have the most accomplished professors of Rhetoric [by which word is understood general philological knowledge], men, who not only are altogether eminent in this faculty, but who know how to teach and make everything smooth for the scholars; men of eminent talent and the widest experience in the art; who are not merely to form good scholars, but to train good masters."^[25]

But there are other most important regulations concerning the direct training for teaching. Towards the end of the philosophical course, before going to the colleges, there should be an immediate preparation for those who in the near future are to enter on the momentous career of teaching boys. The outline of the Ratio Studiorum of 1586 demands the following course:^[26] "It would be most profitable for the schools, if those who are about to be preceptors were privately taken in hand by some one of great experience, and for two months or more were practised by him in the method of reading, teaching, correcting, writing, and managing a class. If teachers have not learned these things beforehand, they are forced to learn them afterwards at the expense of their scholars; and then they will acquire proficiency only when they have already lost in reputation; and perchance they will never unlearn a bad habit. Sometimes such a habit is neither very serious nor incorrigible, if taken at the beginning; but if the habit is not corrected at the outset, it comes to pass that a man, who otherwise would have been most useful, becomes well-nigh useless. There is no describing how much amiss preceptors take it, if they are corrected, when they have already adopted a fixed method of teaching; and what continual disagreement ensues on that score with the Prefect of Studies. To obviate this evil, in the case of our professors, let the Prefect in the chief college, whence our professors of Humanities and Grammar are usually taken, remind the Rector and Provincial, about three months before the next scholastic year begins, that, if the Province needs new professors for the following term, they should select some one eminently versed in the art of managing classes, whether he be at the time actually a professor or a student of theology or philosophy; and to him the future masters are to go daily for an hour,^[27] to be prepared by him for their new ministry, giving prelections in turn, writing, dictating, correcting, and discharging the other duties of a good teacher."^[28] Professor Ziegler, commenting on this regulation, says: "To the Jesuits must be given the credit of first having done something for the pedagogical preparation of the future teachers in higher schools; and of having paved the way for the Probe- und Seminarjahr of our days."^[29]

Another regulation laid down in the Ratio of 1599, as a duty of the Provincial,^[30] is of the greatest importance: "In order to preserve the knowledge of classical literature, and to keep up a Seminary of teachers, he shall try to have in his Province at least two or three men distinguished in these branches. This he shall accomplish, if, from time to time, he takes care that some of them who have a special talent and inclination for these studies, and are sufficiently trained in other branches, devote themselves exclusively to this vocation, so that, through their efforts and industry, a stock of good teachers is formed."

In order to give the young teachers, who were to be trained in this Seminary, a reliable guide, the general assembly of the Society, in 1696-97, passed a decree that, "besides the rules whereby the masters of literature are directed in the manner of teaching, they should be provided with an Instruction and proper Method of Learning, and so be guided in their private studies even while they are teaching."^[31] Father Joseph de Jouvancy (Latinized Juvencius), one of the greatest authorities on education of his age, was ordered to revise, and adapt to the requirements of this decree, a work which he had published five years previously. This book, after a careful examination by a special commission, appeared in 1703, as the authorized handbook for the teachers of the Society, under the title: Magistris scholarum inferiorum Societatis Jesu de ratione discendi et docendi.^[32] The General Visconti in 1752 wished the little book to be in the hands of all Jesuit teachers.^[33] The little work has been styled a pedagogical gem, and it was highly praised by Rollin and Voltaire.^[34] Dr. Ernst von Sallwürk said of it a few years ago that its importance reaches far beyond the Jesuit schools. "We may consider it a reliable source for information of what Jesuit pedagogy at his time aimed at and achieved. Besides, this book is one of the most prominent works on college pedagogy (Gymnasial-Pädagogik)."^[35] In the following chapters we shall frequently refer to this excellent work of Father Jouvancy.

The account we have given so far of the training of the Jesuit teacher furnishes an answer to the charge, which is brought forward now and then, that the Jesuit teachers were too young. No matter how things stood in the Old Society, at present, according to the above data, the average age of the Jesuit teacher when he begins teaching cannot be less than twenty-four years. Besides, every college, according to the Ratio Studiorum, ought to possess a number of magistri perpetui, permanent teachers, i. e. of men who spend their whole lives in teaching. This is clearly stated in the rules of the Provincial: "He shall procure as many as possible permanent teachers of grammar and rhetoric. This he shall effect if, at the end of the casuistic or theological studies, some men who are thought to fulfil the duties of the Society better in this ministry than in any other, are resolutely (strenue) destined for it, and admonished to devote themselves wholly to so salutary a work, to the greater glory of God."^[36] Father Sacchini devotes the fourth part of his Protrepticon to encouraging the members of the Society first, to offer themselves to the arduous but noble work of education: "The education of youth for many reasons deserves to be preferred by a zealous Jesuit to all the other ministries of the Order." He quotes the words of Pope Paul III., in the Bull of the confirmation of the Society: "They [the members of the Society] shall have expressly recommended to them the instruction of boys and ignorant people. ... For it is most necessary that the General and his council diligently watch over the management of this business; seeing that the edifice of faith cannot be raised in our neighbors without a foundation, and there may be danger among ourselves lest, as each is more learned, he may endeavor to evade this duty [of instructing the young], as at first sight perhaps less engaging: whilst in fact none is more productive, either of edification to our neighbors or of the practice of the duties of charity and humility to ourselves."^[37] Father Sacchini says that this volunteering and application for the work of education, far from being in any way opposed to obedience, on the contrary, is the most beautiful flower and perfection of that virtue, which St. Ignatius recommended when saying, one should not wait for the Superior's command, but should anticipate his very suggestions and silent wishes.

In the second place Father Sacchini exhorts the teacher to devote generously his whole life to this great work. Some writers on the history of education have stated that the Jesuits, after having been admitted to Priest's Orders, did not teach the grammar classes, but gave only the higher instruction.^[38] Compayré goes so far as to assert that "in their establishments for secondary instruction they entrust the lower classes to teachers who do not belong to their Order, and reserve to themselves the direction of the higher classes."^[39] This is utterly false. Lay teachers are only employed when the insufficiency in the number of Jesuits makes it necessary; or for certain branches, as commercial branches, or in professional courses, as in the faculties for Law and Medicine, preparatory schools for Army and Navy, in short, wherever lay experts are needed. The history of Jesuit schools, old and new, refutes the statement of Compayré and other writers. Many priests have taught the lower classes for many years, some for their whole lives. Besides, if priests did not teach these classes, the regulations of the Ratio about "permanent teachers," the earnest appeals of Sacchini and other Jesuit writers, would be altogether meaningless.

Father Sacchini, in order to encourage the Jesuits to devote their whole lives to this noble work, enumerates the various emoluments accruing from this perseverance to the teacher himself, as it gives him facility, interest, and experience in his work. He further points out the advantages of this stability for the pupils and for the Society. He cites in this connection the words of Ecclesiasticus^[40]: "Be steadfast in the covenant, and be conversant therein, and grow old in thy work. Trust in God and stay in thy place." The Greek text has, instead of "place", πόνος, i. e. "hard work, toil, drudgery," a word admirably suited to express the toilsome labor of education. Therefore: "stay in thy place, bear patiently the toil and drudgery necessarily connected with teaching," is the advice given to the teacher of the Society. In fact, numerous Jesuits have heeded this advice, and have spent thirty, forty, fifty, and more years in college work. Not to speak of times long gone by, or of foreign countries, we mention the following fact. In 1888, died at Spring Hill College, near Mobile, Alabama, Father Yenni, author of a Latin and a Greek grammar, who for fifty years had been teaching boys, and, at his special request, always in the lowest classes.

The Ratio speaks more explicitly of the training of the teachers for the literary curriculum; it is understood that those who have to teach mathematics, sciences, etc., receive a special training in their respective branches. Other documents of the Society state this principle in the clearest terms. In the memorandum of Father Clavius, written more than three hundred years ago, it is said: "In order to have always in the Society able teachers of these sciences, some who are especially fitted for this task should be selected and trained, in a private course, in the various mathematical branches."^[41] In another document we read: "The best way, perhaps, is that those who are chosen for this office [teaching mathematics] should, after the course of philosophy, study for a whole year the branches which they will have to teach."^[42] This special course, in addition to the general training in mathematics received in the course of philosophy, was certainly a sufficient preparation for the amount of mathematics which was taught in former centuries.

It is evident, then, that both the general and special training of the Jesuit teacher were well attended to before he was sent out to teach.

Several weeks before the beginning of a new scholastic year, the young Jesuit arrives at the college which is to be the first field of his educational labors. After some time, during which the Rector of the college and the Prefect of Studies have formed acquaintance with the new-comer, a certain class is assigned to him for the next year. It is according to the spirit, not only of the Ratio Studiorum, but of the whole Institute of the Society, that great care be taken that the positions in colleges, as well as elsewhere, are assigned according to the talent, the knowledge and the practical abilities of the individuals. To quote only a few regulations of the Institute, the Constitutions declare: "Every one should be trained according to his age, talent, and inclinations," of course always considering "where the common good can be advanced best."^[43] The Provincial is told "to take care that those who have a special inclination for a certain branch of study, in which they can distinguish themselves, spend more time in this branch,"^[44] – certainly for no other reason than that they should use this knowledge for teaching, or if circumstances require, writing on this special subject. Specialization is, accordingly, no new invention of modern times, but was recognized as important centuries ago, but a specialization which presupposes the solid foundation of general culture. Unless this be done, the educational structure becomes "top-heavy"; "time, money, and labor are put on the superstructure at the expense of the foundation," as an American writer complains of modern educational systems.^[45] The specialties to be provided for by the selection and fostering of special talents, are, in the terms of the second last general assembly of the Order (in 1883), "ancient languages, philosophy, ethnology, history, higher mathematics, and all the natural sciences."^[46] The Institute emphasizes the necessity of selecting the teachers according to their abilities: "In universities and colleges learned and able professors are to be appointed,"^[47] and the Provincial Superior is exhorted "to consider in due time what teachers are to be taken for the single branches, and look out for those that seem best fitted, who are learned, studious, and assiduous (docti, diligentes, assidui), and intent upon the progress of the pupils."^[48] Now, there is scarcely any studiousness or assiduity possible, unless a man takes a natural interest in the subject which he has to study or teach. True, the Jesuit is told by his Institute to do everything from a supernatural motive; still in the special field of studies "great success is hardly possible if one possesses no natural liking for such work," as a distinguished living Jesuit used to tell the younger members of the Order.

Different documents of the Society state the same principle most emphatically. We have heard that those men were to be appointed as teachers of mathematics, who were especially fitted for this task, and who felt an inclination and a liking for this branch.^[49] A second document says: "Those should be chosen who, all other things being equal, are superior to all others in talent, diligence, inclination for these subjects, and in the method of teaching. ... For it happens sometimes that some, proficient enough in other branches, are not mathematicians, be it for want of study or of natural talent for this branch."^[50] The same principle was, of course, applied to other subjects. Father Nadal had laid it down as a general rule of the Prefect of Studies, to see that all the younger members of the Society receive a solid general training, and that special talents should be diligently cultivated. "He must take pains to discover what talent our young men have, and endeavor to advance them accordingly. If one is fitted for the study of rhetoric, see that he is given a longer and more accurate training in the humanistic studies and oratory. The same care must be taken if one is thought to have a talent for poetics, for Greek, for philosophy, theology, Sacred Scripture, the Fathers of the Church, the Councils, and Canon Law. On the other hand, if one seems not to be fitted for a certain branch of study, he should not be detained therein longer than is necessary for acquiring an ordinary knowledge."^[51]

Thus it is clear that the Constitutions of the Society and the documents directly concerning the studies, from the very beginning, insisted on the necessity of assigning each teacher's work according to his natural abilities. The General of the Society, Father Visconti, inculcated this principle later on, saying that "special care should be taken to assign the classes to the teachers according to their talent, knowledge and practical skill."^[52] This must be emphasized much more in our days. For in the sixteenth century, the subjects taught in colleges were fewer, and it was not so difficult to appoint teachers. But in our times, other branches must be taught. This cannot be done effectively by the same man who teaches languages and literature. There are exceedingly few men who can excel in many branches, or can be good teachers in several of them.

Here, however, there is another danger which must be avoided: that of splitting up too much the work of teaching in the same class. This is most injurious to education properly so-called, especially in the lower and middle classes. One teacher should have a prominent position in the class; he should be the teacher, and, in the first place, the educator of his pupils. For this reason he should teach as many subjects as possible in his class – provided he masters them –, all those branches which are more closely connected, as Latin, Greek, also English, in short, languages and literature. With Latin and Greek it is natural to combine also Roman and Greek history. Medieval and modern history may be taught by a special teacher. Mathematics and natural sciences go well together and can easily be taught by the same teacher. In a word, the Society wishes to have class teachers preferably to branch teachers. As is well known, the class system is, to a certain extent, prevalent in Germany. For some time the branch system had been favored, but experience proved that the old class system was unquestionably better. So the "New School Order" for Prussia, 1901, strongly recommends the strengthening of the influence of the class teacher as distinct from the branch teacher, in order to secure, above all, better education. "The splitting up of the teaching in the lower and middle classes among too many teachers, as well as frequent changes of teachers, are considered an obstacle to any enduring educational influence. To put a stop, as far as possible, to these evils, the provincial school authorities are strictly bound to see to it that a professor proposed as a class teacher be suitable for the position, and that he teach in his class as many subjects as possible, so far as his scholastic attainments and practical experience allow it."^[53] The advantages of this system for education need not be demonstrated. It is the only system which gives the teacher a thorough knowledge of the pupil and influence on the formation of his character.^[54]

There is another practice of Jesuit colleges which had for its end the strengthening of the educational influence of the teacher. According to the Ratio Studiorum, it was customary that the teacher should not always remain in the same grade, except the professors of the two highest literary classes, of Humanities and Rhetoric, where more erudition is required. But the young teacher should begin with the lowest class, then year after year advance with the better part of his pupils to the next higher grade, at least for three or four years. Thus the students have not to pass so often from one master, and consequently from one kind of management, to the other; master and pupil understand each other, and if the teacher is a good religious and a fairly efficient teacher, he will have won the esteem, the affection, and the confidence of the pupils, all which gives him inestimable advantages for the real and thorough education of his charges. On the other hand, frequent changes interfere considerably with the training of the pupils. As early as 1583, Father Oliver Manare, visiting the colleges of the German provinces by the General's authority, laid it down as a directive that "frequent changes were burdensome to the students, because they were forced to accommodate themselves often to new teachers and prefects."^[55]

If, for want of a sufficient number of men, some of the regulations laid down for the training of the teacher, were, perhaps, not everywhere and always complied with, the Ratio Studiorum is not to be censured on that account, nor the Society as such, as by wise legislation she endeavored to obviate any such shortcomings.^[56] Moreover, the uniformity of the previous training of the Jesuit teachers, as well as the uniform system of teaching in the colleges of the same province, has the effect that, although teachers are changed, there is no change in the method of teaching. Besides, is not every institution, secular or ecclesiastical, however well organized, open to such or similar temporary defects? Exceptional shortcomings must naturally be expected in any system, as there is nothing on earth altogether perfect and ideal. Deficiencies in individual Jesuit teachers, or in single colleges, do not prove anything against the system, no more than the inefficient administration of one Governor or President proves the worthlessness of the constitution of a State or the Republic. Our contention is only that excellent teachers are trained if the regulations of the Jesuit system are followed.

The young teacher has received his appointment, let us say for one of the high school classes, to teach Latin and Greek. He knows his grammar well, he has in the course of years read many classical authors. Is anything still wanting? Indeed very much: an intimate acquaintance with the authors, facility in handling their languages, skill in explaining the grammar and the authors. All this he has to acquire by a system of continued self-training, under the direction of the Rector or Prefect of Studies. Above all he must study the classic authors themselves. Second-hand knowledge will not suffice for the teacher. Reading over the regulations of the Society in former centuries concerning the preparation of the teachers,^[57] one must be surprised to see what an amount of reading was required of the young teacher, in Latin, Greek, and history. Thus the teacher of the second lowest Grammar class (Media Grammatica) had to study, besides the authors he explained in class, all the philosophical writings of Cicero (the epistles he had read the year before), and some of the orations of the same author; the poets Claudian, Catullus, Tibullus, Propertius, Martial, the first ten books of Livy, Justin, Valerius Maximus, Velleius Paterculus, and the whole of Caesar. In Greek, Aelian, Aesop, and Xenophon's Cyropaedia. Various books on style, poetry, and rhetoric.^[58] The teacher of the third class was to study all the orations of Cicero with a commentary; Horace, Seneca, and other poets; some more books of Livy, Curtius, Sallust; the Philippics of Demosthenes. – Every minute was to be utilized in order to master these authors. Catalogues of books on philology and antiquities were printed from which the young teacher might find assistance in studying and explaining the authors.^[59] The young teacher has to look not so much for pedagogical theories, as for practical knowledge. He is to read carefully the authors, closely observe peculiarities of their style, accurately translate and intelligently expound their meaning. It is exactly the system, according to which Professor Hermann of Leipsic trained his philologians. This practical method of self-activity and self-training we find explained in the first part of Jouvancy's commentary on the Ratio Studiorum, in The Method of Learning.

As the object of this training is to form practical teachers, not a word is said about higher criticism and the like; but Father Jouvancy urges the teacher to acquire in the first place a thorough mastery of three languages: Greek, Latin, and the vernacular. The means of gaining this mastery are plentiful reading of the best authors, and practising compositions of various kinds: letters, orations, essays.

The second part of the learning proper to the master of literature consists, according to Jouvancy, in the thorough knowledge of certain sciences. "The erudition of a master is not confined to mere command of languages; it must rise higher to the understanding of some sciences which it is usual to impart to youth in the classical schools. Such are rhetoric, poetry, history, chronology, geography, philology."^[60] As regards history, it is superfluous to speak of its usefulness for a higher education. History is, indeed, a magistra vitae, a teacher and mirror of life, a school of practical wisdom. Of particular importance for the teacher is the thorough knowledge of the history of Greece and Rome. A scholarly appreciation of the classics is impossible without an intimate acquaintance with the history: political, social, religious, and literary, of these nations.

Here we must say a few words on the teacher's attitude towards ancient history. The religious teacher's viewpoint of history is radically different from that of the agnostic. To the religious teacher historical events are not merely the products of natural agencies. He sees rather in history, to use the words of the Jesuit Kropf, "the wonderful manifestation of God's power and a revelation of the wisdom of a Divine Providence."^[61] History, in this sense, is a record of the development of mankind under the providential guidance of God; or, more precisely, a record of the systematic training and improvement of the human race by divinely appointed means as a preparation for the birth of Christ, that God might, through the coming of His Son, secure from man a spontaneous homage, a worship worthy of Himself. The coming of Christ, in this view, gives a definite character to history, and the periods both before and after that event – the greatest in history – constitute its two grand divisions,^[62] the one the preparation for the coming of Christ, the other the spread and struggle of Christ's kingdom, to the final triumph on the day of Judgment. Christ, therefore, is the central figure of all history, "the stone which was rejected by the builders, which is become the head of the corner."^[63]

From this standpoint, then, the Jesuit masters will study and teach the history of Greece and Rome. Of this viewpoint he will not lose sight when reading and explaining the classic authors. It need not be feared that this view will prevent the teacher from doing full justice to these two great nations. On the contrary. In the Greeks he will acknowledge those brilliant gifts of nature which made them the foremost promoters of human art, human knowledge, and human culture. In the history of Rome he will admire that wonderful talent for ruling the world, and that system of jurisprudence which exercised so potent an influence on the formation of later codes of laws. However, the Christian view of history will prevent the teacher from sharing that one-sided admiration of antiquity which was so disastrous among the humanists during the Renaissance, and which is found sometimes in the ranks of professional philologists. The Greeks were indeed a race endowed with exceptional gifts of body and mind. However, we need not and cannot shut our eyes to their many moral defects, especially to that frightful kind of immorality which has received its name from the Greeks, and which manifests itself even in the finest pieces of their literature.

Nor is the Christian teacher's attitude towards imperial Rome very different. At the time when Christ appeared on earth, Rome under Augustus had risen to the zenith of her glory, and the poets sang that the golden age had returned on earth. But under a glittering surface lay hidden the misery of slavery, universal corruption, scepticism and despair. In the midst of this darkness appeared the "Light to the revelation of the Gentiles."^[64] Yet the darkness did not surrender without a fierce struggle, the greatest which the world has ever seen. The history of this struggle between Christ and Caesar, between Christianity and paganism, between faith and infidelity, is the keynote of the first three centuries, nay more, of the nineteen hundred years which have since elapsed.

The Christian historian, although objecting to Gibbon's explanation of the spread of Christianity from merely natural causes,^[65] admits that, apart from the intrinsic worth and positive character of Christianity as a divinely revealed religion, external circumstances also contributed to the rapid propagation of the religion of Christ. He discovers that the coming of the Desired of Nations had been prepared directly, through "the Law and the Prophets," among the chosen people of Israel, indirectly also among the Gentiles. This indirect preparation was first a negative one; the ancient world had to realize the limitation of the natural powers; it had to experience that all progress in philosophy, art and politics could neither quiet the mind nor satisfy the heart, and was utterly unable to save either the individual or the family, the state or society.^[66] But there was also a more positive preparation of the Gentile world. The Greek methods of philosophy, especially those of Plato and Aristotle, in spite of their many shortcomings, became efficient means with which the early champions of the Church successfully combated the errors and absurdities of paganism and logically defended the doctrines of Revelation. Thus Plato, in the words of Clement of Alexandria, was a παιδαγωΥὁς εἱς Xριόν, a teacher who prepared the way for Christ. Origen, Eusebius and St. Augustine see a special providence of God in the conquest of the world by the Roman Empire. It is this tracing of God's working in history which Father Kropf suggested to the teacher, and it is in this light that he has to study the history and literature of Greece and Rome.

With ancient history and the classics, the teacher has to connect the study of antiquities. Those who have heard it said again and again that the Jesuit system aims at nothing but "mere formalism, at cleverness in speaking and disputing," will naturally ask in surprise, whether the Jesuits had any place for these subjects in their course of instruction. However, a mere glance at the Ratio, the commentary of Jouvancy and other sources will convince any one that the teaching of antiquities is even prescribed in the colleges of the Society. Under the name of eruditio, i. e. general erudition or general learning, the study of antiquities forms an essential part of the explanation of the authors. The professor of Rhetoric (Sophomore) is told that "one of the three principal points of this grade consists in general erudition. This is to be drawn from the history of the nations and their culture, from the best authors and from every field of learning; but it is to be imparted sparingly and according to the capacity of the pupils." The fifteenth rule of the professor says that "for the advancement of erudition, sometimes, instead of reading the historical author, other subjects might be treated, e. g. hieroglyphics, and symbolic signs, epitaphs,^[67] the Roman or Athenian Senate, the military systems of the Romans and Greeks, the costumes, gardens, banquets, triumphs, sibyls, etc., in short – as the Revised Ratio has it – archaeology. The first rule of the professor of Humanities mentions the same. But that it was intended for all classes, though naturally not to the same extent, is evident from Jouvancy's treatise "On the Explanation of Authors," which we shall give in substance in the next chapter. There it will also be explained why antiquities, according to the Ratio, should be imparted "sparingly."

If antiquities are to be taught in Jesuit colleges, the teacher must carefully study them. This is done partly in the two years of philological studies which follow the novitiate. One of the great teachers of the first century of the Society, Father Bonifacio, who for more than forty years labored in the Spanish colleges, writes: "In the philological seminaries, our young men, besides studying Latin, Greek and Hebrew, should acquire an intimate knowledge of history and classical antiquities."^[68] However, this archaeological learning has to be acquired chiefly throughout the course of teaching. It will always form a part of the preparation of the authors which are, at the time, read in class. Father Jouvancy advises the young teacher to devote especially the holidays to this study, which he calls a useful and, at the same time, pleasant change.^[69]

In the Old Society there existed special lists or catalogues of various works, from which historical and antiquarian information could best be obtained. Very interesting in this regard is the Catalogue of the province of Upper Germany of the year 1604.^[70] In an introductory remark it is stated that the list of philological helps is not made for the old and experienced professors, but for the young masters, for the beginners; and a great number of works is given that every one might suit his own taste and select those authors whom he likes best. The first part of the catalogue contains the best commentaries on the classical authors. The second enumerates works on Roman Law, which will help towards a better understanding of the writings of Cicero. The third gives the titles of about sixty works on antiquities: Roman and Greek games, triumphs, chronology, religion and sacrifices, mythology, banquets, costumes, the army and navy, numismatics, measures and weights, architecture, the triumphal arches, the circus, the amphitheatre, topography, geography, etc.^[71] Several works on these subjects were written by Jesuits. It will appear, then, that although antiquities were to be taught but sparingly, the information of the teacher on these subjects was supposed to be thorough. Jouvancy, at the end of his Method of Learning, reminds the young master that "he must beware of superficiality; he must not be satisfied with a smattering but should endeavor to master thoroughly, to exhaust, if possible, that branch to which, by his natural gifts and God's will, he is destined to apply himself. Above all he must be constant in his studies and devote all his time to earnest self-training. Should he trifle away his time, he would seriously fail in his religious obligations; for God's glory and the honor of the Society demand of him as much progress in learning as he can possibly attain, and one day God will ask of him a rigorous account of his time and his work."

This is the training which the Society gives its young teachers. It is a solid and practical training, one, we think, fitted for forming competent teachers.

 

1. In the Centralorgan für die Interessen des Realschulwesens. Berlin.
2. See Father Clarke's article in the Nineteenth Century, Aug. 1896.
3. Const. Soc. Jesu, Pars I, cap. 1, 4.
4. Reg. Prov., 33.
5. Reg. com., 6.
6. Constitutions of the Society, P. I. c. 2.
7. The entrance into religious life and the happiness enjoyed in the novitiate, is beautifully told by the German Jesuit Denis, translator of Ossian's poems, and by the French Jesuit Ravignan, famous for his conferences at Notre Dame, Paris.
8. De Inst. Orat., II, 2.
9. Reg. com. mag. schol. inf., 50.
10. I Tim. 4, 8.
11. Father Clarke in the Nineteenth Century, August, 1896.
12. Geschichte des gel. Unt., vol. I, p. 38.
13. Newman, Historical Sketches, III, p. 71.
14. Selectae S. Ignatii Sententiae, VIII.
15. However, these two theologians did not teach together in the same university, as is often said. See the dates given by Fathers Frins, S. J., and Kneller, S. J., in the Kirchenlexikon, XI, 923, and XII, 634.
16. Hist. Sketches, vol. II, p. 369. Does not this great writer, by so true a statement of facts, refute what, in another passage, he quoted about crushing out individuality?
17. See above p. 18.
18. Father Taunton, A History of the Jesuits in England, 1901. See Month, May 1901, p. 505.
19. Taunton, l. c.
20. There was a time "when behind every Roman Catholic Court in Europe there stood a Jesuit confessor, and a Jesuit emissary ascended the back stairs of every Protestant palace." English Review, vol. V, 1846, p. 65.
21. "Monkish Latin" has become a byword from the days of the humanists on to our age. The technical terms introduced by the scholastics are, it is true, not found in the writings of the ancients. Still we cannot deny that the schoolmen had a right, for the sake of greater brevity and precision, to form new words, from old roots, in order to avoid the cumbrous circumlocutions of a Cicero. Many modern scholars view the scholastic Latin much more favorably than was customary a few decades ago. Thus Mr. Leach, who is anything but friendly to the scholastics, says: "The medieval schoolmen sinned no more against pure Latinity, than the modern scientific writer sins against English undefiled, if such there be. " And Mr. Rashdall writes: "Among the students of a University and among the clergy generally much villainous Latin was no doubt talked, just as much villainous French is or was encouraged by the rule of French-speaking in English Seminaries for Young Ladies. But the Latin which was written by the theologian, or historian . . . was not as bad as is commonly supposed by those who have only heard it abused. J. S. Mill has rightly praised the schoolmen for their unrivalled capacity in the invention of technical terms. The Latin language originally rigid, inflexible, poor in vocabulary, and almost incapable of expressing a philosophical idea, became in the hands of medieval thinkers, flexible, subtle, rich." Univers. of the M. A., vol. II, pp. 595-596. See also Paulsen, l. c., vol. I, pp. 45-48.
22. Reg. Praef. Stud. 30.
23. From Education in the United States, vol. I, p. 190.
24. Educational Reformers, pp. 36-37.
25. Pachtler, vol. III, pp. 130-131. – Hughes, p. 184.
26. Pachtler, vol. II, p. 154. – See Hughes, p. 160.
27. In the final Ratio Stud. of 1599, it was laid down as a duty of the Rector to see that this was done, but the time was limited to three hours a week. (Reg. Rect. 9.)
28. Pachtler, vol. II, p. 154, no. 6. – Hughes, p. 160. – Duhr, p. 39.
29. Geschichte der Pädagogik, p. 111.
30. Reg. Prov. 22.
31. Pachtler, I, pp. 101-2. – Duhr, p. 40. – Hughes, p. 162.
32. A German translation of this work, with introduction and notes, by Robert Schwickerath, S. J., was published in 1898, in Herder's Bibliothek der katholischen Pädagogik, vol. X, pp. 207-322. – An excellent sketch of the life and the works of this "model of a Jesuit Professor" is contained in the Études religieuses, Paris, November and December 1872. – The correct form of the name is Jouvancy, not Jouvency, which latter originated from the Latinized Juvencius.
33. Pachtler, vol. III, p. 132; IV, pp. 401, 435.
34. See above page 163, note 1.
35. In Schmid's Geschichte der Erziehung, vol. IV, Abteilung I, pp. 460 and 538-643.
36. Reg. Prov. 24. – By a very curious mistake some writers (as Professor Müller in Schmid's Geschichte der Erziehung, vol. ILL, Abteilung I, page 41) represent these "permanent teachers" as a separate and inferior grade in the Society, "who received only a special drill in pedagogical courses and were not much esteemed." And yet the Ratio Studiorum, in the rule just quoted, states explicitly that the members of the Society should be appointed as magistri perpetui after the completion of their theological course. Therefore the priests are meant.
37. English transl. from Constitutions of the Society of Jesus, London, 1838.
38. Quick, Educational Reformers, p. 36, note a.
39. History of Pedag., p. 143.
40. Eccli. 11, 21, 22.
41. Monumenta Paedagogica, p. 471.
42. Ibid., p. 475.
43. Pars IV, cap. V, Declar. C.
44. Reg. Prov. 55 (No. 55 of the Rules in the Institute, not of the Rat. Stud.).
45. Is our Educational System Top-heavy? By Elliott Flower, in the North American Review, February 1898.
46. See Pachtler, vol. I, p. 123.
47. Reg. Prov. 47. (Institute.)
48. Rat. St., Reg. Prov. 4 and Const., Pars IV, cap. VI, 6.
49. "Necessarium etiam videtur, ut praeceptor habeat inclinationem quandam et propensionem ad has scientias praelegendas." In the treatise: Modus quo disciplinae mathematicae in scholis Societatis possent promoveri. See Monumenta Paedagogica, p. 471.
50. De re mathematica instructio. (Mon. Paed., p. 476.)
51. Ordo Studiorum, in Mon. Paed., p. 133. It appears from the whole context that by "talent" a "special" talent is meant. Be it added that by "oratory" and "poetics" we have to understand all the studies pursued in the two classes "Humanities" and "Rhetoric".
52. Pachtler, vol. III, p. 131.
53. Lehrpläne und Lehraufgaben, 1901, p. 75. See Messenger, New York, Sept. 1901.
54. On this subject there is a splendid article, written by Father Pachtler in the year 1880, in the Stimmen aus Maria-Laach, vol. XVIII, pp. 49-66.
55. Pachtler I, 415. – Father Ledesma made the regulation that in the beginning of the scholastic year substitutes should be appointed, who had to be ready to step in if a teacher should, by sickness or some other cause, be compelled to discontinue teaching. Mon. Paed., p. 144, 156.
56. Reg. Provinc. 4, 22, 24, 28, 30, etc.
57. Pachtler, vol. IV, pp. 175-235.
58. Pachtler, vol. IV, pp. 203-204.
59. See Pachtler, vol. IV, pp. 12-19, where lists of such books, recommended in the Old Society, are given.
60. Ratio Discendi, ch. II. – It has been proved in chapter IV, pp. 124-129, that history and geography were never neglected in the colleges of the Society. In the mean time I found that the Protestant writers of Schmid's great Geschichte der Erziehung (1884-1901), in sharp contrast with the assertions of M. Compayré, candidly admit the services rendered to history and geography by Jesuit schools and scholars. Thus Dr. von Sallwürk says: "The study of history was considerably advanced by Jesuit writers, but the colleges of the University [of Paris] did not imitate the example of the Jesuits." Geschichte der Erziehung, vol. IV, Abteilung I, p. 436. "The Fathers Sirmond, Petavius, and Labbe have well deserved of historical studies and of the teaching of history in the schools. ... Geography was henceforth zealously cultivated by the Jesuits. ... Of great practical importance were the labors of the remarkably diligent Father Buffier; especially on geography and grammar he has written good books, in which the traditional scholastic tone is happily avoided. ... His Philosophy and Practical Grammar was for a long time considered the only useful grammar of the French language. ... In the schools of the Oratory we find geography as a branch of study; but to the Jesuits must be allowed the merit of having taught this branch before the Oratorians. In their College at Amiens was trained Nicolas Sanson, the 'Father of Geography'." Ibid., p. 456 and 466.
61. Ratio et Via, chapter V, art. 9. (German translation p. 423.) The new Prussian School Order of 1901 uses the same words in regard to Church history, p. 16.
62. Alzog, Church History, vol. I, p. 6.
63. Acts 4, 11.
64. Luke 2, 32.
65. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, ch. XV. See Newman's criticisms on these chapters in Grammar of Assent.
66. Alzog, Church History, vol. I, pp. 127-135.
67. In 1830 the German Jesuits declared these three points to be antiquated. (Pachtler IV, 439.)
68. Father Bonifacio's pedagogical works lately appeared in a German translation, together with those of Father Perpinian and Father Possevin: in the Bibliothek der kathol. Pädagogik, vol. XI. – Herder, Freiburg, and St. Louis, 1901.
69. Ratio Discendi, ch. III, art. 2.
70. Pachtler, vol. IV, pp. 12-19.
71. These works were in the 17th century of the same importance as at present the standard works on antiquities, such as Guhl and Koner, Life of the Greeks and Romans; Schömann, The Antiquities of Greece; Mahaffy, Social Life in Greece; Ramsay, Antiquities; and the works of Mommsen, Becker, Lang, Lanciani, Boissier, Friedländer, Marquardt etc. They took also the place of our modern Classical Dictionaries and of such great collections as Iwan von Müller's valuable Handbuch der klassischen, Altertumswissenschaft.