Storia do Mogor 358: PROTEST OF FATHER MICHEL
Storia do Mogor (Irvine) 358
- Language
- English
Contents
PROTEST OF FATHER MICHEL
358.1.1
After the Pastoral of Monsignor the Bishop of San Thome had issued, in which he accused us of having published the decrees without his permission, the reverend Father Michel Ange wrote him a quite civil and courteous letter, wishing to hear from his lordship's own mouth the assertion that he had given no permission for publishing the above-named decrees. His lordship, in reply to the letter of the reverend Father Michel Ange, wrote upon its margin the following words: 'I have given no permission to your Reverence, not even in thought, much less in words' (notice, gentlemen, the accusation). 'I said to you that you could publish the decrees of your own authority, just as you could publish any other order whatever that you liked within your church, without my permission and without anyone hindering you' (See here, gentlemen, our justification, and the most authentic permission that could be desired).
358.1.2
'For I did not issue the Pastoral to stop the decrees of the Sacred Congregation' (Notice here, gentlemen, the contradiction, since by a Pastoral his Lordship took away jurisdiction from the Capuchin fathers and gave it to the reverend Jesuit fathers, against whom the decrees were issued), 'but only to repress the audacity with which the reverend Father Spirito announced in his church that the reverend fathers of the Society [of Jesus] were not the parish priests of the Malabārīs, but that all those people belonged to his (Esprit's) parish' (Gentlemen, it was not the reverend Father Esprit who made this declaration, but the decrees which said so, as you will hear a little farther on), 'interfering in our jurisdiction in a matter which had been disposed of by the authority vested in me as bishop, under the sacred canons and the decrees of the Sacred Council of Trent, concerning the erection and the division of parishes according as I may believe the welfare of my flock requires.'
358.1.3
Gentlemen, I have certainly read the decrees of the Sacred Council of Trent, but I have never seen there that a bishop could withdraw a cure from the hands of a friar of one order and place it in those of religious of another. But to convince you, here are the very words of the Sacred Council of Trent, Chapter X., 'De Reformatione,' Sessio 14: 'Regularia beneficia in titulum regularibus professis provideri consueta, cum per obitum, aut resignationem, vel alias illa in titulum obtinentes vacare contigerit, religiosis tantum illius ordinis, vel iis qui habitum omnino suscipere, et professionem committere teneantur, et non aliis, ne vestem lino lanaque contextam induant, conferantur.' [Benefices of Regulars, which it has been the custom for professed Regulars to hold, when they happen to become vacant by the death of the titulary incumbent, or by his resignation, or otherwise, shall be conferred on religious of that order only, or on persons who shall be absolutely bound to take the habit and make that profession, and upon none others, that they may not wear a garment that is woven of woollen and linen together (Deut. xxii. 11).
358.1.4
It is quite true that in the same Council of Trent, Cap. 4, Sess. 21 [213], it may be read that when a congregation becomes so numerous that a single cure is not enough, then the bishop may order him to engage as many priests as he knows to be necessary to administer the sacraments and celebrate the Divine office. But not even here is it provided that the bishop may remove the legitimate pastor, particularly when he is leading an irreproachable life, and appoint another. 'Episcopi, etiam tamquam sedis apostolicae delegati, in omnibus Ecclesiis Parochialibus vel Baptismalibus in quibus populus ita numerosus sit, ut unus Rector non possit sufficere Ecclesiasticis Sacramentis ministrandis et cultu divino peragendo, cogant Rectores, vel alios, ad quos pertinet, sibi tot Sacerdotes ad hoc munus adiungere, quot sufficiant ad Sacramenta exhibenda, et cultum divinum celebrandum.' [In all parish churches, or those wherein baptism is administered, in which [churches] the people are so numerous that one rector is not enough for the administration of the sacraments of the Church, and for the performance of Divine worship, the bishops, even as delegates of the Apostolic See, shall compel the rectors, or others whom it may concern, to associate to themselves for this office as many priests as shall be sufficient to administer the sacraments, and to celebrate Divine worship.]
358.1.5
It is equally true that there is to be found in the same chapter a direction that in places where the dwellers in the parish live sufficiently far from the church to make it a great inconvenience to get there, the bishop may, 'etiam' (even) against the will of the cures, erect new parishes. But we do not find that when Christians all live in a city which is not particularly large any action of that kind can be taken. 'In iis vero, in quibus ob locorum distantiam, sive difficultatem, Parochiani, sine magno incommodo ad percipienda Sacramenta et Divina Officia audienda accedere non possunt, novas Parochias, etiam invitis Rectoribus, iuxta formam constitutionis Alexandri Tertii quae incipit "Ad Audientiam," constituere possint.' [But as regards those churches, to which, on account of the distance, or the difficulties of the locality, the parishioners cannot, without great inconvenience, repair to receive the sacraments and to hear the divine offices; the bishops may, even against the will of the rectors, establish new parishes pursuant to the form of the constitution of Alexander III., which begins Ad Audientiam.'] You gentlemen who live in Pondicherry, tell me, I conjure you, whether the Christians are so numerous that four Capuchin friars, all in priest's orders, are not sufficient. Tell me also, if you please, whether the distances between the places are so considerable that the Christians cannot get to church without great inconvenience.
358.1.6
The first of these is not true, for, including the French gentlemen, the Topasses (persons of mixed blood), and the Malabãrís (Tamils), there may be three thousand Christians, and at the outside that is the total number [214]. But, in addition to this fact, the second condition is even less true, and there is also another circumstance worth remembering. If the Lord Bishop of San Thome has taken the cure out of the hands of the Capuchin fathers and placed it in those of the reverend Jesuit fathers by reason of the distance between the places, which is the only ground of action that can be rightly adduced, the Christians are not relieved in any way by transfer to the reverend Jesuit fathers, whose church stands at the gateway of that of the Capuchins. If the Lord Bishop of San Thome had this object in view as his motive in removing the Capuchin fathers from their cure of the Malabãrís and making it over to the reverend Jesuit fathers, it seems to me that he ought to have erected new churches in addition to appointing new pastors, so as to deliver the parishioners from the inconveniences previously suffered by them, instead of forcing them to attend a church quite close to that of the Capuchin fathers, from whom his Lordship has taken the cure of the mission to the Malabãrís and transferred it to the reverend Jesuit fathers.
358.1.7
By this detail you can see, gentlemen, that they bring forward quite out of place the Sacred Council of Trent, since this proves to be opposed to the bishop's intention. But since the Lord Bishop of San Thome and the reverend Jesuit fathers allege the Sacred Council of Trent as the justification for their conduct, and as proof of the good grounds they had for taking away from the Capuchin fathers the said mission to the Malabãrís, I would beg them to tell me how it is necessary to understand those words, which you will find, gentlemen, in Caput 9, Sessio 25, 'De Reformatione,' where can be read in clear and plain words that cures and benefices, et cetera, which have been acquired 'per subreptionem' (clandestinely), and by illegitimate means, ought [215] to be replaced in the hands of those who previously possessed them. 'Quae vero [accessiones] a quadraginta citra annis factae, effectum, et plenam incorporationem sunt consectuae; hae nihilominus ab Ordinariis, tamquam a Sede Apostolica delegatis, revideantur, et examinentur; acquae per subreptionem, vel obreptionem' (Reflect well, gentlemen, on these terms, I beg of you) 'obtentae fuerint, simul cum unionibus irritae declarentur;
358.1.8
ac beneficia ipsa separentur et aliis conferantur.' [But as regards those augmentations which, having been made within the last forty years, have come into effect and complete incorporation, such shall nevertheless be reviewed and examined by the Ordinaries as the delegates of the Apostolic See, and those which shall be found to have been obtained by deceit or stealth shall, together with the unions, be declared invalid, and the benefices themselves shall be separated and be conferred upon other persons.] Therefore, if there ever has been a cure that has been taken away surreptitiously and by illicit means, it is the very one which has been taken from the Capuchin fathers and given to the reverend Jesuit fathers; hence, as a true inference, there never was a case which more legitimately calls for restoration of the cure to the Capuchin fathers than does that of Pondicherry. As it seems to me, gentlemen, it is impossible to inform you more clearly of the injustice which has been perpetrated, and which they continue to perpetrate in what concerns us, than by quoting to you the Sacred Council of Trent, adding thereto the chapters and sessions, whereby you can discover whether I quote incorrectly.
358.2.1
Although all this that I take the liberty of writing is clear and simple, I must pray you, in order to convince you completely of that truth, to tell me whether you can persuade yourselves that the Sacred Congregation, which is the Council of his Holiness, on whom the Supreme Pontiff has conferred absolute power over all missions, both in general and in particular, a body which these same pontiffs have designated by the [216] exalted title of Sacred Congregation 'de Propagande Fide,' does not know as well as the Lord Bishop of San Thomé the meaning of the Sacred Council of Trent, and, further, what the sacred canons allow them to do. Whence it arises that, if the said Sacred Congregation, after having been informed that the cure of the Malabãrls at Pondicherry had been taken from the Capuchin fathers and given to the reverend Jesuit fathers, ordered the Lord Bishop of San Thome to make over once more the said cure of the Malãbarís into the hands of the Capuchin fathers ; and in order to carry the same into effect dispatched such clear and precise decrees ; no one who is not a Jesuit could have any doubt in the matter.
358.2.2
We know very well, gentlemen, though in no way thereby surprised, that the Lord Bishop of San Thome has written to your Council that the decrees of the Sacred Congregation spoke not a word about the parish priests of Pondicherry. But to obviate exaggeration, I will place before your eyes the precise words used by His Most Illustrious Lordship, that you may see, gentlemen, whether those words correspond to the original which you have in your possession. 'The reverend Father Fra Spirito (Esprit) came forth with an unlooked-for and scandalous resolution' (Does it seem to you, gentlemen, a great scandal that we should have published, with his permission, the said decrees of the Sacred Congregation and of his Holiness, issued in our favour, in order to obtain once more our old cure ?) [217] ' without more foundation than that of his many letters, when he ought to have awaited the decision of France, to which this affair had been remitted ' (Here is a fine piece of respect, gentlemen, to the Court of Rome, the preferring to it of an inferior tribunal ; and here is a fine method of gaining the good graces of a monarch whose title of Most Christian King was acquired in no other way than by continual submission to the Holy See!), 'and assumed the right to decide about those decrees of the Sacred Congregation ' (Here is a heavy burden that his Lordship casts on us;
358.2.3
when, then, ought we to come to a decision and be satisfied, if not when we hold the orders of his Holiness and of the Sacred Congregation?) 'which he (Spirito) says have reference to the division of the parishes which we have carried out, making over the cure of the Malabãrls to the reverend fathers of the Society.' (Here we have, gentlemen, a fine piece of reasoning. Why and wherefore did the Sacred Congregation send out decrees in favour of the Capuchin Fathers ? Did it, perhaps, issue them in jest — ficar chouma, as the Portuguese say ?) ' If you, gentlemen, send for and inspect the decrees, you will see if any one of them says a single word about the Pondicherry parishes.' Gentlemen, although the Lord Bishop of San Thomé could not know how to respect or esteem you too highly, to me it seems, according to my feeble understanding, that his Lordship has no right to make you judges in an affair which three great bishops, when deputed by His Most Christian Majesty, declined to examine because they learnt that the Sacred Congregation had passed a decision upon it.
358.2.4
Gentlemen, if the Lord Bishop of San Thomé and the reverend Jesuit fathers had obtained decrees against us, as we have against them, they would be able to see very distinctly that those decrees dealt with the cure of the Malabāris in Pondicherry. But as we hold decrees against them instead of their having them against us, those decrees are couched in a language which our opponents decline to understand. In truth, gentlemen, must not men be very prejudiced, not to say . . ., who talk like that ? We made an appeal to his Holiness and to the Sacred Congregation about the cure of the Malabāris in Pondicherry, which had been so unjustly [218] taken from the Capuchin fathers, and the Reverend Father François Marie of Tours, Capuchin and apostolic missionary, started from Pondicherry on his way to Rome with the object of informing his Holiness and the Sacred Congregation about all that had happened, and there (at Rome) he prepared his statement, which we reproduce in its own words :
358.2.5
Frater Franciscus Maria Turonensis Ordinis Capucinorum Missionarius Apostolicus humillimè exponit Eminentiis Vestris quod contra Mandatum, sub die 28 Aprilis 1698, Illustrissimus Dominus Episcopus Meliapurensis absque causa, nee consulta hac Sacra Congregatione, abstulit à Patribus Capucinis Províncias Turonensis Missionariis Apostolicis Pudicherii in orâ Choromandel existentibus, curam animarum gentis Malabaricae, quam a plusquam triginta annis fundaverant, et non sine fructu et edificatione populorum gerebant illam ; quam dedit Patribus suae Societatis Jesu : quod dicti Patres Capucini videntes mandatis Illustrissimi Domini Episcopi obtemperaverunt, ne scandala excitarentur oppositione quamvis iusta, maxime quod sperarent ut Eminentise Vestrae justo illorum juri faverent statim atque de illis informarentur. Quapropter Devotus Orator humillimè supplicat, quatenus Eminentise Vestrae dignentur super hoc mandatum particulare dare predicto Illustrissimo Domino Episcopo Meliapurensi ut dictos Patres insert in footnotes. Mere differences of spelling and punctuation I have corrected according to the above printed texts. Action seems also to have been taken at the Court of Louis XIV. through Father Paul of Vendôme, Capuchin, as Procurator for the whole Capuchin Order of all ranks. There is a copy of his 'Mémoire' in Bib. Nat., Nouvelles Acquisitions Françaises, MS. No. 9,352, fol. 274, a copy made by P. Margry ; but he does not state the provenance of the original.
358.2.6
The attached documents, of which a list is given, would have been of value if forthcoming. They were (1) extracts from the registers of baptisms and burials ; (2) a deed of gift for the Capuchin church outside the fortress of Pondicherry ; (3) letters to prove that the Capuchins returned (? in 1699) at the request of Governor Martin ; (4) letters from the Bishop of San Thome, who is, they say, entirely under Jesuit influence ; (5) various letters addressed to Father Michel Ange, of Bourges, Superior at Madras ; (6) a letter from the Bishop to Father Esprit, of Tours; (7) a letter from Governor Martin to the said Superior, dated July 7, 1699, asserting that he (Martin) would not have written to the Bishop asking for a transference of the parish had not Father Beauvollier written from San Thome that the Capuchins made him (Martin) pass for a fourbe. The petitioner remarks that he had already earlier in the year (1703) presented letters from the Pondicherry Capuchins to Mr. de Pontchartrain. There are also ten letters of 1702 and 1703 connected with these Pondicherry disputes in the Archives Nationales, Paris, No. K 1,374, Nos. 39-43 and 51-55.
358.2.7
Capucinos pristino juri restituat, pro qua gratia Deus, et cetera.' [F. François Marie of Tours, apostolic missionary of the Capuchin order, most humbly sets forth to your Eminences that, in opposition to the Decree [of the Sacred Congregation], the Most Illustrious Lord Bishop of Meliapur, without cause, and not having consulted the Sacred Congregation, has taken from the Capuchin fathers of the Touraine Province and Apostolic Missionaries at Pondicherry upon the coast of Choromandal, the cure of souls of the Malabar folk, [a mission] which they had founded more than thirty years ago, and were carrying on not without good results, and to the edification of the people. This [the bishop] transferred to the fathers of his own Society of Jesus. Seeing which, the aforesaid Capuchin fathers obeyed the commands of the Most Illustrious Lord Bishop, in order that no scandals might arise from their opposition, however just, and this [they did] more especially in the hope that your Eminences would see them righted as soon as you were informed of the matter. Wherefore your devoted Petitioner most humbly prayeth that your Eminence will deign to issue a special order in this matter to the aforesaid Most Illustrious Lord Bishop of Meliapur that he restore the aforesaid fathers to their former rights. For which favour may God, etc.]
358.2.8
Here, then, gentlemen, is the petition of the Pondicherry Capuchins, not of those at Madras or Surat, in Persia or in Turkey. What, then, is the reply of the Sacred Congregation? You have it, gentlemen, written at the foot of the very petition of the Pondicherry Capuchins. Let it be specially noticed that if it were not written at the foot of the petition itself, but on a separate sheet of paper, maybe something could possibly be found to say against it. But when the answer of the Sacred Congregation is engrossed at the end of the petition from the Pondicherry Capuchins, who can deny that the said decrees are issued with reference to the cure of the Malabārīs in Pondicherry? No one [219], gentlemen, except the Lord Bishop of San Thomé and the reverend Jesuit fathers!
358.3.1
'Dentur decreta Episcopo emanata die 28 Aprilis [1698] super dubiis propositus à Patribus Capuccinis Provinciæ Turonensis in Urbe Suratensi missionariis ; videlicet. [6] ' An in missionibus qui sunt magis antiqui missionarii Parochi in tali missione censeantur, maximè si Capellam seu Sacellum, aut Ecclesiam et sepulturam habeant publicam. [7] Ubi sic Missionarii Parochi censentur, novis missionariis advententibus, Vicarius Apostolicus vel Episcopus ad libitum possit Parochiam ab eis amovere novis Missionariis concedat.' [Let the Bishop be given the decrees which were issued on the 28th day of April, 1698, regarding (certain) doubtful points propounded by the Capuchin fathers of the Province of Tours, missionaries in the town of Surat — to wit : (6) Whether in missions the older missionaries, acting as parish priests, are to be reckoned as in the mission, especially if they hold a chapel or oratory or church with a public churchyard. (7) Where the missionaries are thus to be considered parish priests, can the Vicar Apostolic or Bishop at will, on the arrival of new missionaries, remove the parish from their charge and make it over to the new-comers ?] You have now seen, gentlemen, the doubts propounded by the Capuchin fathers ; hear now, if you please, the answer of the aforesaid Sacred Congregation : ' Ad sextum, " non esse vere Parochos "; ad septimum " posse nisi ex gravi causa, et consulta prius Sacra Congregatione." '
358.3.2
[As to No. 6 (the answer is) : ' They are not really parish priests'; as to No. 7, ' they cannot be (removed) except for weighty reason, and after consulting the Sacred Congregation.'] It seems to me, gentlemen, that the above is quite clear and plain, and as a necessary consequence, the Lord Bishop of San Thomé having had no urgent reasons, nor having consulted the Sacred Congregation, his Lordship could not legitimately take away the said mission ; and though he did take it from the Capuchin fathers, and give it to the reverend Jesuit fathers, the latter, nevertheless, have never been, and are not now, the legal pastors of the Malabar Christians of Pondicherry. My Lord Bishop of San Thomé says in his letter written to your Council : ' I have sent forth a Pastoral by which I declare afresh, as I have already declared provisionally, that the reverend Fathers of the Company are the parish priests of the Malabārīs, an office which in no shape belongs to the Capuchin Fathers, neither by order of his Holiness nor by mine, as they falsely allege.' If, say I, the Lord Bishop did write these words to your Council, what is there we can do when our adversaries are our judges ?
358.3.3
Although His Most Illustrious Lordship says it, this statement is very hard of digestion : ' neither by order of his Holiness nor by mine, as they falsely allege.' Here is his authentic permission, which I write once more, to clear us of his Lordship's calumny : ' I did not give your Reverence permission, not even in thought, much less in words. I only said . . .' Weigh well these words, gentlemen, I beseech of you, and think how a bishop, who ought never to act unless by God's Spirit, could address to you these words, ' as they falsely allege,' after having expressed himself in the following terms : ' I only said to him that he could publish the decrees on his own authority, just as he could publish any other order (as he thought fit) in his church, without my permission and without anyone hindering him.' Gentlemen, if it had not been a bishop, to whom I owe all imaginable respect, but any other person who had written these words, ' as they falsely allege,' after having given so valid a permission, I might make use of the expression in Holy Scripture, ' De ore tuo te judico ' [Vulgate, Luke xix. 22]. But remembering, as I do, the respect I owe to his Lordship, all I will say is that he accuses us very much out of place of having falsely alleged an order of his Holiness. For the Sacred Congregation, which does no act without his orders and without his consent, has sent us the decrees, dated January 11 of the year 1656, of which we insert here the tenor.
358.3.4
'Sacra Congregatio censuit nullo modo [in] posterum licere, pro bono Religionis Catholicæ ad tollendas inter Missionarios dissentiones, et litigia, in locis in quibus existunt missionarii Apostolici unius ordinis, novam missionem aliorum Religiosorum, et etiam Societatis Jesu, fundare, vel illam sub quovis prætextu, aut authoritate exercere absque expressa licentia ejusdem Sacræ Congregationis, sub poena privationis officii, privilegii, et facultatis, ipso facto incurrendâ, non obstantibus quibuscumque.' [The Sacred Congregation has decided that for the welfare of the Catholic religion, and to prevent litigation and disputes among missionaries hereafter, it shall in no way be permitted, under any pretext or authority whatsoever, that missionaries of a different order, not even those of the Society of Jesus, shall establish a new mission in places where there is already an established mission without having an express permission from the Sacred Congregation, any transgressor being subject to privation of office, privilege, and faculty, to be incurred by the very act itself, in spite of all objections that may be made for the invalidation of the present order.]
358.3.5
After such an authentic decree, drawn up in terms so strong, how can the Lord Bishop of San Thomé attribute to us error and falsehood because we allege an order of his Holiness? And how is he able to assert that the mission to the Malabārīs in Pondicherry does not belong in any manner to the Capuchin fathers: [221] 'and that in no way do they appertain to the reverend Capuchin fathers either by order of his Holiness or mine, as falsely alleged.' After that, gentlemen, his Lordship dares farther to write to you that, by a consideration of the decrees, it will be seen that not one of them says a single word about the parishes of Pondicherry. 'Let your lordships call for the decrees, and you will see whether any one of them speaks a single word about the parishes of Pondicherry.' But if the decrees do not speak of them, to what end, then, gentlemen, upon their presentation to Monsignor with a request to have them put into execution according to their tenor, did he write the following words? 'The Reverend Father Guy Tachard has already seen this petition and the decrees of the Sacred Congregation. Dated San Thomé, February 12, 1706. (Signed) The Bishop of Meliapur.'
358.3.6
Whence proceeds it, then, that when the decrees were notified to the Reverend Father Tachard by the order of the Lord Bishop of San Thomé, his Reverence produced a sentence of my Lord Patriarch in order to hinder their execution? If his Lordship had purposed to write to you that the said decrees did not speak in any shape of the mission or cure of the Malabārīs of Pondicherry, to me it seems that he ought not first to have approved and then subsequently disapproved of them. If the reverend Jesuit fathers had meant not to obey the Sacred Congregation, to me it seems that neither ought they to have met us with the above sentence in order to hinder the execution of its decree as not meeting with their approval. Thus the Lord Bishop of San Thomé would have been to some extent in a reasonable position, and the reverend Jesuit fathers also, by the non-production of that sentence. In addition, they would have spared the Lord Patriarch a well-earned reproof, which might well fall upon him from Rome for having interfered in an affair which had been submitted to the adjudication of the Holy See. By this course we should have been spared the spectacle of the bad faith with which they have acted in producing a sentence passed two years before, of which we should still be ignorant had we not notified to them these decrees [of the Sacred Congregation]; so true is it that, whatever expedient may be resorted to, the Divine oracles are bound to be fulfilled.
358.3.7
[222] For God, who is a just God, gentlemen, and cannot suffer iniquity, but must punish it, has chosen to make public all that these reverend Jesuit fathers had plotted to do in secret. 'Nihil enim est opertum, quod non revelabitur, et occultum, quod non scietur.' ['For there is nothing hid that shall not be revealed, nor secret that shall not be known' (Vulgate, Matt. x. 26).] However much they may seek a means of quieting their consciences, when they continue to perform their duties as usual after the receipt of these decrees, I find it difficult to believe that they will find any. Since whatever they choose to say, whatever sort of authority they may allege, whatever sort of argument they may adduce, it is necessary for them to give me an answer to two things: either the decrees have been given to the reverend Capuchin fathers for their re-entry upon the mission that had been taken away, or the decrees have not been given for that purpose; and if they say that verily his Holiness and the Sacred Congregation have sent them for our restoration to our ancient mission to the Malabārīs, why, then, do they oppose these decrees?
358.4.1
If they say that his Holiness and the Sacred Congregation have not sent them [the decrees] to re-establish us in our ancient mission, and that this subject is not in the least touched upon in the said decrees, will they tell me how they would in that case interpret the following words: 'In locis in quibus existunt missionarii unius ordinis?' etc. Perhaps, because they are Jesuits, they are exempt from that rule. Then what does this mean: 'Aliorum Religiosorum et etiam Societatis Jesu'? Their acts proceed, perhaps, from their having arguments and pretexts which support what they are doing. In that case, what is the meaning of this: 'sub quovis praetextu'? Perhaps it is because they hold in their hands the authority of his Lordship the Bishop of San Thome. Then what does this mean: 'aut authoritate exercere'? Once more, it may be they have permission to act at their own pleasure without the consent of the Sacred Congregation. What [223], then, mean these words: 'absque expressa licentia ejusdem Sacrae Congregationis'? Can it be that if they disobey the said Sacred Congregation their acts will not be open to condemnation? What is this, then: 'Sub poena privationis officii, privilegii, et facultatis, ipso facto incurrenda, non obstantibus quibuscumque'? Perhaps, lastly, the Lord Bishop of San Thomé and the reverend Jesuit fathers are not subject to the Sacred Congregation. Perhaps the Sacred Congregation has no authority over them.
358.4.2
If so, let them put before me the whole of that in writing; I will then hold my tongue and be at peace. Gentlemen, I am absolutely certain that they will do no such thing, which is sufficient proof to any person of discernment, and an obvious revelation that the reverend Jesuit fathers, in acting as they have done, are not devoid of ill-will. If you are in doubt, ask them this yourselves, and you will find them tell you so orally, but will never reduce it to writing. Now, if the Sacred Congregation has the power to issue commands to them whenever judged appropriate, and to inflict on them penalties in case of disobedience, how can they appease their conscience after defying the orders of the said Sacred Congregation, which orders them to obey 'sub poena privationis officii, privilegii, et facultatis, ipso facto incurrenda, non obstantibus quibuscumque'?
358.4.3
Before the receipt of the decrees of his Holiness and of the Sacred Congregation, the Lord Bishop of San Thomé and the reverend Jesuit fathers were possibly acting in an excusable manner, for it might be assumed that they did not know, in spite of its being a thing of which they should not have been ignorant. But after seeing the decrees, after having approved them, after having notified them to the reverend Jesuit fathers, after having proclaimed them in our church, after being convinced that his Holiness and the Sacred Congregation meant that the Capuchin fathers should re-enter upon their ancient mission, how could Monsignor entrust that mission to the reverend Jesuit fathers by a Pastoral expressly issued? The reverend Jesuit fathers know quite well that the thing is no longer in Monsignor's power, for, as the decrees state, 'sub quovis praetextu aut authoritate exercere absque expressa licentia ejusdem Sacrae Congregationis,' how, then, can they continue to exercise their functions in the usual way? It is no longer a sin of ignorance; it is — pardon me, gentlemen, I hardly dare to say what, and leave you to place upon it the interpretation that you please, and to judge calmly whether the Lord Bishop of San Thome and the reverend Jesuit fathers are right and clear in conscience, or, rather, have all of them incurred the censures set forth in the Sacred Canon?
358.4.4
However great the injustice committed against us, which cries aloud for vengeance before God and in the sight of men, that is not, however, what most weighs down our hearts. It is a certain letter delivered to the Reverend Father Esprit of Tours on November 3, 1706, concerning which the Lord Bishop of San Thome, without reflecting upon whether what he imputed to us is true or false, has written a letter to you in such hard, cruel, sharp words that the public will hardly believe their eyes. However, I constrain myself to quote a few expressions, solely that you may satisfy yourselves, gentlemen, whether they correspond with the original in your possession: 'It concerns you, gentlemen; it is your business to preserve the peace, and uphold my jurisdiction as set forth by me, by compelling the reverend Capuchin fathers, through measures of the requisite rigour, to desist.' You gentlemen who are at Pondicherry know how the Capuchin fathers have behaved. Tell me what is the scandal they have caused, that they should be dealt with in so harsh a way and spoken of in terms so hard? If the Capuchin Fathers had refused to obey, or, rather, had they been wicked men, persons given up to every vice, could worse have been done to them than consigning them to the secular arm, with the direction [225] that they should be treated with the utmost rigour of the law?
358.4.5
Before giving you orders like this, the Lord Bishop of San Thome, as it would seem, could never have read the contents of the Patents conceded to the Capuchin fathers by Henry III. of happy memory. Because, had his Lordship read them, he would have seen about half-way through the said Patent the following words : 'In order that we and our aforesaid subjects may benefit by the prayers and orisons of the said religious fraternity, We have taken and placed and hereby take and place the aforesaid religious fraternity called the Capuchins of the Order of St. Francis, as well as their monasteries, congregations, dependents, and all thereto appertaining, under our protection and special safeguard and that of the kings our successors, of our special grace, plenary power and regal authority. . . .,' etc. Most probably the Lord Bishop of San Thomé has never read the words contained in the Patents of Louis XIV. now reigning. For his Lordship, who professes such great respect for our Invincible Monarch, since he places in his hands the decision about the cure of the Malabārīs, would not in that case have made over to the secular arm friars whom His Most Christian Majesty takes under his singular protection and special safeguard. Here are a few phrases from the Patent we have obtained :
358.4.6
'Equally we desire and it is Our Pleasure that they enjoy the same in perpetuity, permitting them by Our grace and authority, as above stated, to establish themselves again and build convents and houses in all such places as may be offered or given to them hereafter, and that they may carry out therein their religious functions in pursuance of their laudable and saintly custom ; the said places, as also every other thing that is and can be of service to them, we have freed and do by these presents free, permitting them further to remove the said convents and habitations to other more convenient spots, and to this effect, therefore, so far as necessary, we have taken and placed and hereby take and place under our singular protection and safeguard their persons, convents, and all the things [226] that they have or may hereafter have,' etc. A little farther on we read : 'We forbid every sort of person, of whatever station or condition, whoever he may be, to disturb them or offer them any impediment under any pretext whatsoever, and in whatever manner it may be. These things we enjoin on our faithful and well-beloved lieutenants in our courts, parliaments, chamber of accounts, the court of aids, the procurators-general and their substitutes, bailiffs, seneschals, provosts and their deputies, and every other official whom it may regard,' etc.
358.4.7
Probably the Lord Bishop of San Thomé, when he wrote those words to your Council [see ante], did not know that His Most Christian Majesty would not concede any respect to episcopal authority in cases where we were badly treated without cause. For there are many judgments by the councils of the parliaments of Paris, Toulouse, Grenoble, Rennes and elsewhere, of July 17, 1662, May 12, 1663, and of the council of Sens in 1667, and others fulminated against the Lord Bishop of Alets, [the Archbishop of] Sens, and other prelates. Yet these had not oppressed us in the severe way adopted by the Lord Bishop of San Thome. All these things you may see, gentlemen, in an extract from the Registers of Parliament entered at the head of our Rule, from which we take a few phrases. 'Meanwhile, that the petitioners may be maintained in the possession of the rights and privileges of their Order, we forbid the Lord Archbishop of Sens and all others to disturb or interfere with their persons, or to hinder their ordinary functions, as also we direct all priests, rectors, rural deans and all others that they issue neither proclamation nor order in regard to any decrees, interdicts, or excommunications,' etc.
358.5.1
You can see this again, gentlemen, in an extract from the Register [227] of the Council of State, inscribed in the Rule of the Capuchin fathers, already referred to; and if you read you will find the following words: 'His Majesty ordained that their first place of establishment should be the city of Paris, in a spot adjoining his royal palace, the Louvre, in order that France, from the position of that site and the situation of that first foundation of the said Capuchin fathers in the realm, might hold in greater veneration the memory of the prince to whom the public were thus indebted. This desire was felicitously carried into effect by the said King Charles IX. selecting a site in the Rue St. Honoré, close to his palace of the Tuileries, adjoining his gardens.' The Pope Gregory XIII., having received a report of the above fact, sent some Capuchins as a mark of his joy to found this establishment in France, praising and holding up to admiration in a Brief the zeal and piety of the above-named king, who for furthering the glory of God possessed a zeal which passed on to Henry III., and equally to the Queen Catharine dei Medici, his mother, and to the princes of his house, as is apparent and results from the Letters Patent of the King Henry III., granted in the month of July, 1576. These prove with precision that the introduction of the Capuchin fathers and their convents into France was secured by the common desire of the royal family.
358.5.2
Following them all the kings, predecessors of his Majesty now happily reigning, have approved of and imitated the said zeal, and above all, his Majesty just referred to, who has conceded a general permission to the Capuchin fathers. But without having recourse to our Letters Patent or privileges, which debar the Lord Bishop of San Thomé from thus making us over to the secular arm, you will see by turning to the Sacred Council of Trent, Cap. 14, Sess. 25, 'De Regularibus et Monialibus,' that his Lordship should have sent the case to our superior and head, and not to other persons, as he has done : 'Regularis non subditus Episcopo, qui intra claustra monasterii degit, et extra ea ita [228] notorie deliquerit, ut populo scandolo sit, Episcopo instante, a suo superiore intra tempus ab Episcopo praefigendum, severe puniatur.' [A regular who, not being subject to the bishop, and residing within the enclosure of a monastery, has out of that enclosure transgressed so notoriously as to be a scandal to the people, shall at the instance of the bishop be severely punished by his own superior, within such time as the bishop shall appoint.]
358.5.3
And as if it were not enough to make these entirely innocent Capuchin fathers over to the secular arm, in the teeth of the decrees of the Council of Trent, his Lordship goes on to direct that they should be punished with all possible severity. 'With all possible severity!' These words are formally opposed to the same Council, Cap. I, Sess. 13, 'De Euchar,' of which the exact words are: 'Quos tamen si quid per humanam fragilitatem peccare contigerit, illa Apostoli est ab eis servanda praeceptio, ut illos arguant, obsecrent, increpent in omni bonitate, et patientia; cum saepe plus erga corrigendos agat benevolentia, quam austeritas; plus exhortatio, quam comminatio; plus charitas, quam potestas.' [Towards whom, however, should they happen to sin in any manner through human frailty, that injunction of the apostle is to be observed by them [the bishops], that they reprove, entreat, rebuke them in all kindness and patience (2 Tim. iv. 2), seeing that benevolence towards those to be corrected often effects more than austerity, exhortation more than menace, charity more than power.]
358.5.4
Gentlemen, although I have set before you much more than was necessary, I have done it to show you that it is nothing but simple passion, and not the Holy Spirit, which drives his Lordship to such acts against the Capuchin fathers. Yet I cannot refrain from calling your attention to the manner in which a bishop ought to bear himself in committing a priest or friar to the secular arm, to be degraded and receive chastisement according to his offences. Those provisions are to be found in the Roman Pontificals of Clement VIII. and Urban VIII.: 'Tum Pontifex degradator efficaciter, et ex corde, et omni instantia, pro misérrimo illo derelicto intercedit apud judicem Saecularem, ut citra mortis periculum, vel mutilationis, contra degradatum sententiam moderetur, dicens: Domine Iudex, rogamus vos cum omni affectu quo possumus, ut amore Dei, pietatis et misericórdiae intuitu, et nostrorum