The Irish standard., 1903-12-12
Splendid Defense of the Work Done Bv
Jesuits in the Hundreds of Years
That Have Passed.
The Reply to the Bigoted College Professor
Was Written by Rev.A.Guggenbergsr
Of Buffalo. N. Y.

I for wealth ana political power, and
at the request of the Catholic powers
ordered them forever cXtinwusllrd and
suppressed
~ few remarks on this "hull" must
suffice here.
n Clement XIV did not issue n
bull--thc most solemn form of nnnol
doculncnts-but merely a brief. He
stripped this brief of all forms giving
authenticity to a papn rescript. No
law. ecclesiastical or civil, was Oh
served in it's construction and publica-
tion II was addressed to nobody.
'Ilrrr WAS no consultation with the
cardinals because the majority of the
cardinals would have refused their
consent. II is more than probable
that Clement intended to deprive it Of
all legality. because he issued it with
the grr'tcst reluctance. under the in
r'SSnnt annoy:lnccS of the ambassa-
doris ANA the threats of Il Scllisn made
10y the bourbon courts and lv POrtu-
cal. after actual violence had been re-
sorted to hy the military occupation of
the phlmI territories of Aviynon, the
NrlaiSSin Bcnrvrnto nnl PontrcorvO,
and after he had exhausted all means
OF nN"rtin" or ,lrlnyin" the measure
IT WAS the prir" for Il peace which
afterwards proved to hr no peace
l2I The PARTIES that brought about
TN" suppression were representatives
of nn ,lnbountlrd ANA mrrcilrss absolu-
tiSm recall to mind. if You please,
til" bloody h"SpotiSm of the vile Pom
'Al and the representatives of the
social revolution against throne and
altar already hnnryrnnhing society.
6; The brief. such us il is. con-
| doctrine or tl,r conduct or tho diScip-
| line Of the order or Of its members,
| nor could it, as il was no judicial act.
| Not one Jesuit wHS summoned or
! heard IN the matter. AS II historical
| document or Il Sn,lrr" of facts it is
| absolutely useless. 1t is worth while
to read on this episode the writings
of state Counsellor Fisher. the prus-
sian Diplomntist SchOclI the His
t"rinn Johannes Won Muller. both con-
trmpnrnrics Of the event, the Histor-
nnS GirSclcr. RHnkc. Leo. MenZel.
You Soc my dear professor. have no
intention to lead your ,lnsuspccting
soul into n trap. for all thr Huthori-
ties here mentioned are genuine
Protestant authors.
"In 1851" YOU continue, "the con-
stitrtion of this society was dragged
to light in France ana was ordered
by the French government to he pub
islrd." What unnecessary outlay!
The constitution of the society in
17G1 existed in hundreds of printed
had for the asking i'm any city OF
France or of the civilized world. In
| that document il is expressly stated:
"Thcrc is no obligation to commit sin,
IIloft:I OF Nc1ll:tl unless Ine superior
command them in the name of the
Lord Jesus or in virtue of holy obedi-
cncc." But. my dear professor, where
have you studied your Latin? AS pro-
frssor of ethics you are bound to veri.
fy quotations containing such a stu
prndouS charge. AS dean of the de-
partmrnt of philosophy you ought to
| know something of medieval Latin, or,
to say the least. you ought to know
| the technical terms belonging to your
science. What. then. is the text? The
text of st. Ignatius is: "Visum est
nolis in Domino. excepto espresso
NotO, quo SOcetas SllmmO Pontifici,
pro tcmpore EXISTENT. tenetur. ac
tribls nliiS essentialibus Paupertatis,
ca Hstitntis ct Obedientiae, nullas Con.
stit,ltioncs, Declarations. vel ordnem
! ullum vivendi. posse Obligationem ad
peccatum mortale vel veniale inducere
| nisi superior ca in nomine Domini
Nostri Jesu Christi vel in virtue
obedientiae juberet. I" Correct trans