company, and each member thereof, must fight in faithful obedience to our most holy lord, the pope, and his successors. Doubtless, all the faithful of Christ owe obedience to the Roman pontiff as their head, and the vicar of Jesus Christ; but we have judged it expedient, in all humility, and perfect self-denial (besides the common bond aforesaid), to bind ourselves by a special vow to go whithersoever the pope shall be pleased to send us for the advancement of souls and the defence of the Faith. Without excuse, without a moment's hesitation, whether he send us to the Turks or other infidels, even to the Indies-to heretics or schismatics-in a word, to any and every place, without exception. In conclusion, you need not be told that all must vow obedience to the head of the company. Of course, all must vow perpetual poverty.1

Three proba

his success.

For God-for the Pope-for the Company:—a special vow of obedience to the pope :-absolute power vested in the chief of the company to whom ble causes of obedience is vowed;-chastity and poverty, the additional vows of each member-public preaching, spiritual functions, works of charity, and a prospective glance at "colleges,"-such are the broad ways and means of the institute whose expansion was so wonderful. Assuredly they are not adequate to account for that wonderful development. Something similar, if not identical, had existed, and still existed, in the various institutions of monks-the Orders of St. Francis, St. Dominic, St. Benedict. The design or scheme of Ignatius was not entirely originalunless we confine the peculiarity of his institute to

1 See the Bull establishing the Jesuits, Litt. Apost. Paul III. Soc. Jesu Approbatio.

the fact that the Jesuits were to be papal emissaries scattered over the world, emancipated from convents, and yet essentially monks, by the obligations of their vows. But the pope could always insure the services of the monks they were always ready to obey the Holy Father. Such being the case, why was this new order established? And being established, how are we to account for its wonderful success? It is evident that the secret of this Founder's success is not contained in the proposals of his institute: there was nothing in them likely to captivate, by novelty,' the admiration of the pope for even the promise of obedience to his holiness was but a promise depending upon individual dispositions for its complete fulfilment. Still, the fact of success suggests, at once, three probabilities-that Ignatius was an extraordinary worker--that circumstances favoured his scheme-and that the state of the world at that time was exactly the medium best adapted to facilitate his advancement-like the peculiar fluid in which planets revolve round about their centres. Therefore, as in the case of Mohammed, we have to investigate the circumstances in which Ignatius went forth to fight, and conquer, and raise a shrine whereat to receive ambassadors from all the quarters of the habitable world, "outnumbering the dates that fall from the palm-tree in its maturity." These circumstances may give the force of originality to the scheme of Loyola, or present its results as those of a skilful adaptation of old materials. The investigation must begin with the sixteenth century-some forty years before the rise of the Jesuits. The popedom-religion-politics-men and manners—

Ribadeneyra, the Jesuit, prores this in his "Tratado-De la Compañia de Jesus," which will be noticed in Book III. of the present work.

in a word, the Christendom of those times must be understood, ere we accompany Ignatius and his followers in their wondrous expedition, sailing forth from the Apostolic port to invade the universe, under the most favourable auspices.

the Sixth.

C.MEASON

Ever memorable in the annals of art, science, and politics, the sixteenth century is equally remarkable for the position successively occupied by the popes Alexander of Rome. Alexander the Sixth began the century. He bought the popedom; and was fiercely ungrateful to the cardinals whose ambition and avarice he tempted. His whole pontificate exhibits an unequalled career of private vice and public atrocity. But Alexander was unquestionably a man of talent his

Imago Primi Sæculi Soc. Jesu, p. 46.

reign was prosperous. It is difficult to decide how far we are to hold the pope guilty of those public crimes in which his son, Cæsar Borgia, was most deeply concerned. The son was ambitious; the father was intent on the aggrandisement of his house-let them share the infamy of their crimes. Their aim was to put down the aristocratical factions of Italy. That was the age when monarchs became jealous of rival power, and were struggling to crush the worms of pettier tyrants who crawled within their precincts. Dreadful times for aristocrats were those of Pope Alexander! His terrible son, Cæsar Borgia, was one of those many historical characters to whom ambition and fierce desires make all things lawful-such characters as throng on the page of history which is condemned to narrate the glorious deeds of the sixteenth century. Cæsar Borgia could brook no rival. His own brother stood in his way; he had him murdered one night, and thrown into the Tiber, They had both just supped together at their mother's! Their father, the pope, entirely connived at the dreadful parricide-for he undoubtedly dreaded the same fate from his ferocious son.1 Cæsar Borgia

killed his father's favourite Peroto-killed him beneath the very pontifical mantle; the victim clinging close to his patron: the blood spurted on the pope's face. Cæsar Borgia triumphed in his crimes. Rome, and the States of the Church, bowed to his sway. Think not that he lacked what many did think, and many still may think, redeeming qualifications in his dread depravity. Of surpassing beauty, and wonderful strength of arm, was this blood-thirsty villain in the bull-fight, he would

:

1 "Connivente prorsus ad immane parricidii scelus patre pontifice, qui et ipse vim sibi afferri ab efferato filio procul dubio metuebat.”—Panvinius, Alex. VI.

corpses of murdered Every man held his might not fear that

strike off the brute's head at a single blow. And he was liberal-handed withal-not without traits of magnanimity, as if to prove, for the shame of humanity, that the most venerable virtues, or what seem such to the world, are not necessarily estranged from the most detestable vices; for, as we have seen, he was bloody, and Rome trembled at his name. Cæsar needed gold, and had enemies: every night the men were found in the streets. breath; for there was none who his own turn would come next. Those whom violence could not reach were taken off by poison. There was but one spot where such deeds were possible; that spot alone where unlimited power, and the highest spiritual authority, were united in the same individual: this spot Cæsar occupied. Even monstrosity has its perfection. Many sons and nephews of the popes have attempted similar things; but none ever carried them to such a pitch: Cæsar was "a virtuoso in crime."1 The reader will be surprised, doubtless, to hear that this man was made archbishop of Valencia, and a cardinal, by his father. "He showed himself worthy of such a father," says the Jesuit Feller," by his guilty passion for his own sister Lucretia, and by the murder of his elder brother, who was his rival." 2 The same authority calls him "a monster of debauchery and cruelty ;" and every historian is of the same opinion as to facts, a few of which have been given.

Respecting the indirect influence of the great, by position or genius, on the mass of men, experience attests that the mere rumour of their guilty lives is

1 Ranke's vigorous expression - "Cesar ist ein virtuos des verbrechens." I. p. 52. 2 Biog. Univ. Alex. VI.