History of the Jesuits: Their origin, progress, doctrines, and designsNicolini, G. B. (Giovanni Battista)
History
History of the Jesuits: Their origin, progress, doctrines, and designs
Nicolini, G. B. (Giovanni Battista)
Jesuits -- History
kingdom; joined also to the opinion held of them, that by means of their
colleges and auricular confession, they directed the minds of the youth
and timid consciences to whatever they pleased, gave an opportunity to
the parliament to involve the Society in his punishment.”[186] In fact,
the parliament, by the same _arrêt_ (29th Dec. 1594), by which Chastel
was condemned to the punishment of the parricide, enacted that “the
priests and scholars of Clermont College, and all others of the so-called
Society of Jesus, as corrupters of youth, disturbers of the public peace,
enemies to the king and the state, shall, three days after the present
intimation, be obliged to leave Paris and other towns and places where
they have colleges, and, within a fortnight after, the kingdom; under the
penalty, if found in France after that time, of being punished for high
treason. Their property, movable and immovable, shall be employed for
charitable purposes, and all the king’s subjects, under the same penalty,
are forbidden to send pupils to the colleges of the Society which are
beyond the territories of the kingdom.”[187]
All the Jesuits, except Fathers Gueret and Guinard, who were arrested,
were expelled from France. Gueret, against whom no substantial proofs
of being an accomplice with Chastel, could be produced, was soon after
liberated from prison and banished. This is a striking proof of the
justice and rectitude of the parliament. Guinard, in whose possession
were found most abominable writings, subversive of every principle of
justice and morality,[188] was condemned and executed; in conformity
with a proclamation issued some months before by the king, in which it
was ordered that all books and writings referring to the past troubles
should be burned, under pain of death. Crétineau confesses the fact, but
exculpates the man, by saying that these writings were composed in the
time of the League in the year 1589. But this assertion is contradicted
by the quotation we have given in the note, which shews that some of
them at least were composed after Henry’s abjuration, which occurred
four years later, in 1593. And again, if they _had_ been written at the
time specified, why did he not burn them, in obedience to the king’s
commandment?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account