Hughes Thomas
Loyola and the Educational System of the Jesuits
CHAPTER XII
YOUTHFUL MASTERS
When Ignatius of Loyola was governing the Society, the multiplicity of affairs which he had to administer, and the absorption of mind which they demanded, did not prevent him from devoting to every minute element the attention which it specially invited. Hence he required the young Scholastics, who were reviewing their literary studies at Valencia, to send him their orations and a poem. So, too, with the Masters of the lower classes at Messina, in Sicily. This college had opened with the higher courses of letters; but the very next year such numerous throngs of younger boys came asking for admission, that the system, begun with Rhetoric and Humanities, was carried down to meet their needs; and the entire course was distributed into five grades. Ignatius required the teachers of these lower grades, no less than those of the higher, to write each week, and send him an account of the affairs of his class.182
It is indeed an eventful moment, when a man becomes a teacher of others. They may be boys. But, whether they are boys merely blossoming into life, or youths on the verge of manhood, the teacher of them has to be a teacher of men; and perhaps more so with the boy than with the man, inasmuch as his control of the younger student has to be so much the more complete. It is not merely such a control as will address the intellects of men mature, whose characters are already far advanced in the way of formation, or are perhaps fixed for life; but it must be such as will form a whole human nature, which is still pliable and docile.
As an almost universal rule, the Jesuit Scholastic, after his course of Philosophy, takes his place in a college to teach Grammar or Literature. If it be asked, why should this be an almost universal rule, several reasons are at hand. In the first place, the candidate for admission into the Order has been accepted with special reference to this work. If this reference was expressly overlooked, the candidate so admitted is in an exceptional category. In the second place, the whole tenor of what has to be said in the present chapter will show the pedagogical policy in the arrangement. But, in the third place, not to pass over too summarily one special fitness, I will say a few words upon it at once.
The manner of teaching the young is oral and tutorial. All through the Jesuit System the manner followed is oral: in the examinations of the lower classes, where writing is admitted, it is only as a specimen of style and composition that writing enters the examination exercises. With the younger students, the manner of teaching is oral in its most specific sense. It is not that generic quality which will suit as well the lecturer or the public speaker. But it is the tutorial manner, which includes a fund of sympathy, of that tact which supposes sympathy, of such a superiority, both moral and intellectual, as knows how to stoop, and elevate the boy by stooping, and does it all naturally, instinctively, gracefully. In the ordinary course of human affairs, this magnetic power of the teacher is more intense, according as in years he is nearer to the subject on whom his ascendancy plays, and by whom it is spontaneously admitted. I mean that inestimable and precious subject, the mind and heart of the impressionable boy, who is about to develop into manhood, first young, and then mature.
The youthful subject is rich, though not in positive acquisitions already made its own; for, in this respect, it may rather be considered parum fructuosa, as Sacchini says; that is, bearing little fruit as yet, either of judgment or positive acquirements. But it is rich in its promise, as it struggles upward into the sunshine of varied and beautiful truth. This is the fact which imposes upon liberal education the duty of omitting nothing that is either beautiful or polished, in imagination, thought, or style. It justifies Belles Lettres and the most finished course of Literature, as being the chosen garden of flowers and fruit, to entertain withal, richly and exquisitely, the youthful promise of mind, sentiment, and heart.
Or, inverting the figure, if we liken the mind itself in youth to the choice and prolific soil of a garden, we may note that, to till such soil, there is need of a gardener who has a delicate hand and a light touch. He must not be a lecturer who stands off, nor a speaker who declaims, nor a text-book monger who reads, and hears recitations of what a book says; nor is he to dole out methods and analyses to an inquisitive sense and emotional fancy, which, in the youthful soul, are the temporary vesture of an unfolding intellect; even, as in nature around, things tangible and palpable are bursting, to the boy's inquisitive eyes, with the great intellectual truths which they contain. Analyses, text-books, lectures are not the powers with the young mind. But, often enough, we see where the real power lies; when young men, scarcely as yet approaching the prime of life, exercise over impressionable and brilliant youths, not much beneath themselves in age, such a personal influence as bids fair to rank them among the greater forces of human nature – forces which are great in leading, because they know so well how to follow. That other form of ascendancy, more purely intellectual, and originating in wide learning and maturity of scholarship, belongs to the University Professor of a later stage of life. Hence it appears that youthfulness in the Master is an advantage for the tutorial teaching of the young.
The critics who drew up the preliminary Ratio in 1586 were of opinion that the Masters in the literary courses should be assigned to their work, not after their course of Philosophy, but before.183 They would except from this arrangement only the Professor of Rhetoric; perhaps, also, in the chief colleges, the Professor of Humanity or Poetry; besides, of course, those "whose age or deportment shows that they are too young to become Masters as yet, or too far advanced in years to be kept back from their Philosophy." In support of this view, they urge several reasons, which do not much concern us here; as, for instance, that, if young men have once tasted of the subtleties of the philosophers, they can hardly bring themselves to take pleasure any more in the insipid subject-matter of Grammar; they will pore over philosophical lore; they will branch off, during class, into philosophical digressions, which may serve for show, but not for utility. The critics also express a fear that these philosophers will bring into the school-room a style of language infected with philosophical terms; and they quote the eminent Jesuit, Annibal Codret, to the effect that, if Philosophy has been tasted beforehand, nothing brilliant in literary style can subsequently be guaranteed. But, these arguments notwithstanding, the Society, when it came to sanction a final arrangement, in the legislative document of 1599, seems to have entertained a higher idea of the younger members, and of their ability and resolution to shake off any deleterious effects of scholastic Latin, when they advanced to the chair of purest Latinity. Hence the legislation ordains that Philosophy is to be studied before undertaking to teach Letters.184
There are several reasons, however, which, as urged by these critics, are quite relevant to our present topic. They urge that Grammar studies require a certain fervor, or alacrity, which is rather to be found in persons who are younger, and so far are nearer to the thoughts and sentiments of boyhood. The fuller results of education, in this respect, are not to be had from them when older. If authority or experience is felt to be wanting, it can readily be supplemented by the Prefect of Studies, who is constantly in attendance on the classes of Grammar; and his direction finds a sufficient response in the teacher's aptitude and docility. Indeed, docility to counsel is so indispensable a requisite, on the part of young teachers, that the General Mutius Vitelleschi observes: "If they were to show themselves impatient of correction, and were to refuse the necessary aids for becoming efficient, they should on all accounts be removed from teaching, even if they had filled only half a year; since it is more just and expedient that one suffer shame, than that many be injured."185
Unless singular talents, or the bare force of circumstance, recommend another course of action, it is not desirable that new teachers should at once become Masters of the higher class of Grammar or of Humanity, though otherwise not unfit for these grades. On all accounts, say the critics, the rule should be that they start with the lowest classes, and then, year after year, advance to the next higher grade, with the best part of their scholars. A certain crudeness and inexperience which, at the beginning, are unavoidable in their management, will cause, as long as it lasts, not so much evil with the younger as with the older students. Inexperience wears away with practice. Then again, if the Masters go up each year, and the scholars go with them, the same students are very much with the same teachers. The young people have not to pass so often from one kind of management to another. Frequent change entails a waste of time, until each party comes to know the other, and understand his own as well as the other's part.186 In 1583, Father Oliver Manare, visiting the German Provinces by the General's authority, had noticed this point, in his ordinance for the management of convictus, or boarding colleges; that "frequent changes were burdensome to the students themselves, because they were forced to accommodate themselves often to new teachers or prefects."187
In the same sense, these critics, whom we are following, consider it undesirable that a Master should resign his post in less than three years. Frequent and manifold changes provoke complaints on the part of the outside world. Besides, the Master's own efforts at acquiring perfection in the magisterial art will be cut short. When there is no prospective permanency in a position, the mind is not so seriously applied to the work in hand.188
In all this, a most important question regarding boys is being faced by these critics; and a definite practical solution is adopted. The question is, which of the two alternatives to adopt, whether to submit boys to one person's dominant influence, or to pass them on through the hands of divers experienced and permanent Professors, stationed respectively in the different grades. This latter alternative, if it is understood to mean that one Professor remains perpetually in one grade, and another in another, scarcely seems to merit consideration with them, except as regards the two highest literary classes, – of Poetry and Rhetoric, – where the requirements of erudition are so considerable as to need a lengthened term of years for filling the chairs worthily. But, if the alternative regarding permanent Professors means that the same teachers remain constantly within the limits of the same curriculum, then the question seems to be the one which the critics of the preliminary Ratio argue about in both senses, for and against; and they finally arrive at a solution, or rather a compromise.189
The severest thing they say against the plan is in this wise, when speaking directly of the two highest grades: "Perpetuity of that kind may give occasion to mere idleness and indifference; for after acquiring, in the first years, some esteem and name for their learning (in Poetry or Rhetoric), Masters prefer to enjoy the fruit and name of the labor already undergone, however moderate that was, rather than wear themselves out with new labors. Hence they make no new acquisitions in the learning and accomplishments proper to their branch; they get rooted in very much the same spot, and teach what they have taught before over and over again, though with some variations. What is worse, as if they were quite worn out with their prolonged exertions, they say that they cannot any longer stand all the labor of exercising their students; whence everything freezes, and they ask for an assistant, who, if he is unlearned, does more harm than good; if learned, then why are two doing the work of one?"
The solution which they arrive at is a compromise, which recognizes peculiar advantages in both arrangements. It is embodied in several rules of the Ratio Studiorum.190 As many perpetual Professors as possible, for Grammar and Rhetoric, are to be provided; and some candidates for admission to the Order, who seem qualified for this field of work, though apparently not likely to succeed in the higher studies of the Society, may be admitted on this condition, that they devote themselves in perpetuity to this work of zeal. Thus such exigencies are provided for as postulate a perpetuity of professorship within the same limited curriculum.
On the other hand, the normal process is that which arranges a constant succession of teachers in the college, but not a constant change with the same boys. The same boys go hand in hand with the one Master, with whom they have most to do. And no one is to take charge of them, however transiently, says the General Vitelleschi, "whether on account of fewness of numbers, or merely to supply for another in his absence, of whom it is not certain that he is qualified for the post."191 The very frequent mention, in all these discussions, of something like domestic tragedies resulting from the change of masters, seems to show two things; first, it justifies the practice of keeping the same Professor over the same boys for a certain term of years, if not until the class itself dissolves into higher courses; secondly, it shows what a usual condition it was for masters to have won the most absolute attachment to themselves, in the exercise of their magisterial duties, both on the side of parents and on the part of the scholars. Thus, speaking of the Professors mounting with their classes, the critics say: "They will have observed what their disciples need; they will take them up to the next class. And hence, that changing of Masters, which has caused so many tragic scenes, will not be felt so much."192
Add to these elements of permanency and identity, another which is most fundamental of all, the identity of their formation as Masters; so that the young Jesuits, as the General Visconti sums up the matter in 1752, "must have the most accomplished Professors of Rhetoric, immediately after their novitiate, men who not only are altogether eminent in this faculty, but who know how to teach, and make everything smooth for them; men of eminent talent and the widest experience in the art; who are not merely to form good scholars, but to train good Masters"; and that "two years entire must be given to Rhetoric, according to the custom of the Society, which term is not to be abridged, unless necessity is urgent."193 Add, moreover, the uniformity of plan, "so that the form of our schools may be everywhere as much as possible the same, and, when Masters are changed, itself need undergo no change."194 It follows that, though the flow of new blood is constantly entering the pedagogic body, and a constant renewal is taking place, neither the permanency nor the identity of the teaching body and its system is found to depend upon the same individuals remaining at the same posts. Naturally, such conditions are not to be looked for, except in the special circumstances of a religious community, with perfect organization in the body, with the conscientiousness of a self-denying formation actuating the members, with the landmarks of traditions, and a statutory method to show the way; and, finally, with executive officials adequate to control.
As to this last-named condition of executive superintendence over persons and things in the system, several rules for the Prefect of Studies of these literary courses will explain themselves. The Ratio of 1599 says: "Let him have the rules of the Masters and scholars, and see that they are observed, as if they were his own. Let him help the Masters themselves and direct them, and be especially cautious that the esteem and authority due to them be not in the least impaired. Let him be very solicitous that the new Preceptors follow with accuracy the manner of teaching, and other customs of their predecessors, provided that these were not foreign to our method; so that persons outside may not have reason to find fault with the frequent change of Masters. Once a fortnight, at least, let him listen to each one teaching."195
This moral identity being secured, in the ways, means, and views of the teaching body, the individual and personal elements, which each Master brings to bear upon the work before him, are no more interfered with, or hampered by community of method, than are all the varieties of race, nation, politics, and environment, slighted or interfered with by a single system of collegiate institution being placed in their midst. It was in view of being everywhere, that the system was cast in its precise and adjustable form, so that, in spite of being everywhere, it should be found equally manageable and effective. And similarly, in spite of the system itself being one, the play of individual talents can be various, as are the movable factors in any great organization.
We may close this chapter by observing several far-reaching consequences of the foregoing principles. In the first place, those who, after personal experience in the classes, come to take charge of colleges in the capacity of Rectors, are found, say the critics of 1586, to take full and accurate account of studies and Professors alike; for they themselves "have borne the burden of the schools, and know how to sympathize with others from their own experience"; a fact which is the more conducive to the end in view, as "colleges have been instituted for the study of letters. Besides, not unfrequently there arise in the classes, especially of the smaller colleges, difficulties which can scarcely be overcome, except by a Rector who has personal experience to guide him; otherwise, whether he chances to solve the difficulty aright, or solves it awry, he will not do much good either way, since they do not give him the credit of knowing how."196 The "smaller colleges" spoken of here, as more liable to encounter internal difficulties, are contrasted elsewhere by these critics with "the greater and principal ones, in which there are many counsellors or referees at hand, to whom the Masters can have recourse for assistance; and the schools themselves have sufficient authority." But, in what they call the minor colleges, "the authority of the schools depends for the most part on the reputation and authority of the individual Masters," who happen at a given time to be filling the posts.197
In the spirit of this personal and experienced concurrence with all the affairs of the college, the Rector is required so to moderate the other concerns of his office, as to be prompt in fostering and advancing all literary exercises. He is to go often to the classes, those of the lower faculties as well as of the higher.198 Every month, or at least every other month, he is to hold general consultations with all the Masters below the course of Logic, the several Prefects being present; and, after the reading of some selection from the Ratio, concerning the Masters or the piety and good conduct of the students, he is to inquire what difficulties occur, or what omissions are noticed in the observance of rules.199 Books are never to be wanting, in the sufficiency desired by the members generally, whether they are engaged in teaching, or are pursuing their studies.200 To this regulation, which concerns the chief authority in a Province, the revised Ratio of 1832 adds: "The same is to be said of literary periodicals for the use of the Professors; of museums, physical apparatus, and other equipments, which are needed by a college according to its degree." The General Visconti observes somewhat emphatically, that "in buying books the Rectors will never consider the money of their colleges ill spent."201
Jouvancy applies the same principle to publishing the literary productions of the Masters. He first sketches the series of literary productions expected from them, – the annual addresses of inauguration to be given by each Professor in his own class, the public and solemn one to be delivered, on the same inaugural occasion, by the Professor of Rhetoric, the poem to be composed and read by the Master of Poetry; then, during the year, a certain number of addresses to be delivered; and, at the end, a tragedy composed by the Professor of Rhetoric, a minor drama by the Professor of Poetry, both to be acted on the stage. Jouvancy goes on to recommend that no public occasion be allowed to go by, without receiving the tribute of some such literary work. Then he adds: "Nor is that expense to be considered useless which is incurred for printing and publishing good poems. In all these matter, splendors should be added to literary exercises, and to the exhibition thereof, in such wise that everything meanwhile tends to solidity of erudition."202
A second consequence of the literary cast, marking the whole Order, is the vantage-ground on which it placed the Jesuits, with regard to all the learning and the learned men of Europe. The fluent and elegant command of the Latin language gave at once a mastery over the vehicle of intercourse, in which all learning was conveyed. Our critics of 1586 sum up the bearings of this particular advantage under several heads: The members of the Order deal with so many nations; scholastic disputations, whether in Philosophy or Theology, are always conducted in Latin; the members write so many books; they can do justice to the ancient Fathers of the Church; they have to deal constantly with learned men.203
A last consequence, which I shall present, is suggested by an observation of the same writers, in the same place. It throws no little light upon the history of the Society, and it shows the practical adjustment of the educational system to the times. They say then, it is by the studies of Belles-Lettres, more than by the higher faculties, that the Society has, in a short time, been propagated through all the principal parts of Christendom. Nor can it be preserved better or more solidly, than by the same means through which it was first introduced. Unless they endeavor to maintain this honorable distinction, with which God has been pleased to grace the Society, there is reason to fear that they themselves may yet lapse into the barbarism, which they are far from admiring in others. "As to the other faculties, which are brilliant enough of themselves, there is no trouble in cultivating them. But, natural inclinations feeling a repugnance for less conspicuous pursuits, people have, as it were, to drag themselves to these lower faculties. They should take lesson, therefore, by good husbandmen, who bestow more care on transplanted and exotic growths than on native shoots."204 And they proceed to quote the rule, formulated in the words of Ignatius, by the General Everard Mercurian, who required the institution and preservation of the literary seminary.205 So that we end here this discussion on the lower faculties, at the point where we began.
In all well-assorted plans each element has a reference to every other. Men must match the work, and the work be suited to the men. Were the men not formed, the best system would settle into an inert state; and, the more consistency and vitality of its own it offered to contribute, the more inept and inert would it look, a memorial of what it might do, dead to what it can. In itself, and in its effects, it might appear to be out of date, as not being understood. Only the practical working of a thing, by the man who understands it, shows it off for what it is worth. This is a rule quite universal, wherever practical insight is needed for the working of a mechanism. It must be worked intelligently to be understood. Once it is understood, the practical intelligence grows.
