Father Antonio Gascón Aranda, SM, devotes the first volume of his multipart General History to the rise of the congregation movement of the nineteenth century and the Society of Mary’s place within this new and innovative form of religious life. Gascón’s 528-page work examines the origins of the Society under the first three superiors general (William Joseph Chaminade, Georges Caillet, and Jean Chevaux), the evangelization of youth by means of teaching, and France’s nascent middle-class values that would eventually impact Marianist education.
Illustrated with photographs of the people and institutions where the Society’s apostolic ministry began—starting primarily in rural parts of France and spreading to Switzerland, Austria, Germany, and the United States—Gascón chronicles the framework that called Marianist ministry into being and the graces and pitfalls (sometimes internally constructed) the brothers and the General Administration experienced along the way.
Gascón’s inaugural English volume is the fruit of the mandate from Mission and Culture, the Society’s 1991 General Chapter that called for the publication of a definitive history.
.
Prologue
The Society of Mary (Marianists) was founded in Bordeaux, France, on October 2, 1817, by a Catholic priest, Father William Joseph Chaminade (1761-1850). Chaminade and a group of sodalists from the Marian Sodality of Bordeaux founded a new religious institute dedicated to the Virgin Mary, with the objectives of sustaining the faith and multiplying Christians, for the purpose of combating the religious indifference of the modern era.
From the first moment of its birth, the Society of Mary directed its missionary charism toward the evangelization of youth by means of teaching. Although the task of teaching did not completely realize the evangelizing intention of the Founder, it was the work with which the Marianist brothers were familiar, and they dedicated themselves to this ministry, almost exclusively, from the time of the foundation of the new religious institute until the years following the Second Vatican Council. For this reason, a study of laws about teaching and the pedagogy of the time occupies an important place in the present history of the Society of Mary. From the first moments of the foundation, the new religious agreed they would also preach in churches and at retreats and establish and direct secular associations, or Marian Sodalities.
The Society of Mary found itself among the new religious institutes (or congregations) of France arising after the Revolution of 1789. In this sense, the Society of Mary belongs to the great blossoming of religious institutes arising in the Catholic Church during the nineteenth century. This blossoming was a true work of the Holy Spirit in the Church. The Society of Mary was born in the bosom of the evangelical experience of consecration and mission of the nineteenth-century Church, and much of its charismatic identity (in the form of its life and mission) was a response to the characteristics of the so-called congregational movement of apostolic religious life. The congregational movement of apostolic religious life was a new form of religious life characterized by the union of brothers with simple vows under the direct obedience to a superior general. This new form of religious life propagated itself in the new liberal society, in a perfect cultural synthesis with the values of the bourgeoisie, the dominant social class in modernity. It is significant that through their ministry of teaching youth, Marianist religious worked to better the community by integrating the masses of peasants and working-class people into the new political, economic, cultural, and working institutions of modern society. In this method, the transmission of the Catholic faith happens within the context of engagement with the social and cultural development of the people to which the Marianist religious direct their teaching efforts.
With their simple vows and their clearly apostolic orientation, working closely with the laity (schools, hospitals, orphanages, networks of Catholic publishers, etc.), the modern religious congregations created a new form of consecrated life that is strongly missionary, active, and effective in its social and evangelical works. The peasants, skilled workers, and urban working-class came to know the social utility of religion, Catholicism, and the consecrated life, within the bourgeois mentality, through social, educational, and welfare work. The new congregations also responded to the Catholicism of the workers and encouraged them to cultivate a deep interior life that responded as much to the foundational spiritual experience as to the missionary task being developed.
This volume treats the foundation of the Society of Mary and its first 50 years of existence. Therefore, we will study the nature or spiritual identity of this new religious congregation of the Catholic Church and the process of institutionalization of its forms of life and apostolate, governance, administration, economy, initial formation, forms of piety, etc. We will look at all that forms the social-religious body, with its spiritual values and institutional environment, in an intimate unity of life and mission. This volume begins in the time of the Generalate of its Founder, Blessed William Joseph Chaminade (1818-45), and his two successors, Father Georges Caillet (1845-68) and Father Jean Chevaux (1868-75). In its canonical and civil development, these were the years of the approbation of the Society of Mary as a diocesan congregation by Archbishop d’Aviau of Bordeaux (1818); later came the actual royal decree of November 16, 1825, that awarded it legal recognition in the view of the French state as a pious association dedicated to primary education. Pope Pius IX gave the Society of Mary a canonical approbation by an oral decree on May 12, 1865. Finally, Pope Leo XIII in 1891 provided the approbation of the Constitutions, which occurred during the Generalate of Father Joseph Simler (1876-1905).
The Society of Mary was born and grew during the Restoration (1814-30), a politically and culturally favorable time. One can see Bertier de Sauvigny repairing French life during the Restoration; these were the years in which the modern transformation of France occurred, thanks to the work of Fresnel and Ampère, of Lamarck and Cuvier, of Burnouf and Champollion, of Benjamin Constant and Bonald, of Lamennais and Chateaubriand, of Saint-Simon and Auguste Comte, of Victor Hugo and Lamartine, and of Delacroix and Berlioz. These years were characterized by a new moral sensibility, new intellectual interests, and a new scientific and historical vision of reality, faith in material and moral progress, the practice of the parliamentary system and political participation, and the perfection of the preindustrial economy and the incipient passage to the mechanization of production. Thus, French society developed a favorable atmosphere for intellectual life: the sciences, letters, and arts. French society, however, developed even more for religious-spiritual values. In this context, the young Society of Mary received the right to teach from the governments of the Restoration and Napoleon III. The Society of Mary was helped by the desire for education and the economic development of French society. In short, this confluence of favorable factors contributed to the expansion of the nascent Society of Mary.
Regarding its geographic expansion, in its first fifty years of history, the Society of Mary extended itself to the Southeast (Garonne Basin), Northeast (Alsace and Franche-Comté), and North (Paris). It quickly passed to Switzerland (1839), the United States (1849), Mainz (the Grand Duchy of Hessen-Darmstadt, Germany, in 1852), and Austria (1857). Marianist schools in European countries responded to the confrontation of Catholics against the liberals in power by claiming the right of the hierarchy and parents to educate their children according to Catholic principles, opposed to the teaching monopoly of the state. It was not the same in the United States, where each state ensured that there was full liberty to teach. In that country, the distinctive nationalities of Catholic immigrants created a network of parochial schools with the purpose of passing on the faith and Catholic culture of each individual nationality. The teaching system and pedagogy of the Marianists adapted to the laws and necessities of each country. But the liberalization of French education, by the Falloux Law of 1850, permitted the Society of Mary to develop its quality pedagogy fully in the direction of collèges of elementary and secondary education. The prestigious Collège Stanislas of Paris stands out as an example.
Historical science concerns itself with the life of human groups and institutions—life expressed in its multitude of values, behaviors, and works. A historical analysis explores the internal and external conditions of human action. But the history of the Church, of its members and institutions, tries, even more, to describe the action of the risen Jesus Christ in the works of his disciples. In order to reveal this divine presence, I have tried to keep myself from analyzing the religious motivations of the origin, configuration, and action of the Society of Mary and its religious. I am convinced the true history of the Society of Mary is laden with traces of the Holy Spirit who acts in the conscience and the deeds of each Marianist religious. The vivid holiness that has been handed down to us is the best gift which the religious of the Society of Mary have to share with the Church and society.
The general history of the Society of Mary, the first volume of which appears now, was begun because of a mandate from the General Chapter of 1991, which bore the title of Mission and Culture, and “took as the perspective for its work the Marianist community in mission in today’s culture.” The capitulants reflected on the method of being and of doing because “our work is actually to evangelize in today’s culture” (presentation of the Chapter to the religious by Superior General Father Quentin Hakenewerth). An objective given by the capitulants to the General Assistant for Religious Life was “to promote appreciation of the Marianist charism,” because we are convinced that it is not possible to evangelize in a culture without possessing an identity or “Marianist culture.” An instrument for discovering our identity or culture is the study of our history. Thus, the Chapter established the following objective: “To organize the materials for a history of the Society of Mary and to generate a plan for the preparation of this history.” The task was entrusted to the hands of the Assistant for Religious Life, Father José María Arnáiz, assisted by a team of Marianists who gathered at the General Administration in Rome, November 23-24, 1992. (See Marianist International Review, no. 14.3, June 1993.) At this meeting, it was decided that each Marianist province, country, or regional unit would arrange its own archives and write its own history. A final editor would use these finished histories and write the general history, which would be presented at the General Chapter of 2001. Father Bernard Vial was named chairman of this team that collaborated with the General Assistant for Religious Life. The minutes of the successive meetings of this working team were published in SM 3 Offices, n. 37 (Jan. 30, 1993) and n. 60 (Dec. 1, 1995). . . .
— Antonio Gascón Aranda, SM
Translator’s Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii
Prologue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiv
Chapter 1. Life and Mission of Father William Joseph Chaminade . . . . . . . . .1
1. Vocation and Mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
a) Saint Charles Seminary in Mussidan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
b) French Revolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
c) Heroic Exercise of His Priestly Ministry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
d) Birth of a Missionary Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
2. Missionary Project for France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
a) Return to Bordeaux . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
b) Marian Sodality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
c) Meeting Adèle de Batz de Trenquelléon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19
d) Sodalists with Private Vows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
e) Announcing and Defending the Faith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28
Chapter 2. Foundation and Constitution of the Society of Mary (Marianists) . . . . . . ..35
1. Congregational Movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36
a) New Form of Religious Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37
b) Congregation of Brothers with Simple Vows . . . . . . . . . . . . .41
c) Canonical Confi guration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44
2. Foundation of Two Religious Institutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52
a) Institutional Rebuilding (Recovery) of the Church Under the Restoration . . . . . . .52
b) Adèle de Batz de Trenquelléon and the Daughters of Mary . .54
c) Foundation of the Society of Mary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60
d) Marian Identity of the Marianist Life and Mission . . . . . . . . .66
3. The Movement Into Teaching in the Society of Mary . . . . . . . . .68
a) Insertion of Teaching in the Missionary Project of Father Chaminade . . . . . . . .68
b) School and Modernization in Western Societies . . . . . . . . . . .72
c) First Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82
4. Expansion of the Institute of Mary in the Northeast . . . . . . . . . . .91
a) Friendship of Louis Rothéa with the Alsatian Clergy . . . . . . .92
b) Foundation of Saint Remy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .96
c) Municipal School of Colmar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .102
Chapter 3. Consolidation of the Society of Mary During the Restoration . . . . . . .109
1. Legal Constitution of the Society of Mary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109
a) A Single Institute of Mary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .110
b) Legal Recognition of the Society of Mary . . . . . . . . . . . . . .113
c) Legal and Canonical Situation of the Society Up to the July Revolution . . . . . . . .125
d) Spiritual Vitality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .127
2. The Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .130
a) Direction of the Municipal Collège of Gray . . . . . . . . . . . . .131
b) Orphanage of Besançon and Professional Education . . . . . .133
c) Chȃteau of Saint Hippolyte and Schools of Ammerschwihr, Moissac, and Lauzerte . . . . . .136
d) Daughters of Mary in the Northeast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .138
e) Paradigmatic Project: Normal Schools (Saint Remy and Courtefontaine). . . . .140
f) Organization and Government of the Houses in the North . .145
g) Reorganization and Expansion of Saint Remy . . . . . . . . . . .147
3. July Revolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .149
a) The Political Framework of France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .150
b) Repercussion on the Society of Mary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .153
c) Closing of the Marian Sodality and the End of Normal Schools . . . . . . . .156
d) Lalanne-Clouzet Conflict . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .159
e) Economic and Administrative Separation of the Daughters of Mary
from the Society of Mary . . . . . . . . . . .160
f) Financial Difficulties and the Problem of Religious Identity . . . . . .164
4. Father Lalanne and Marianist Pedagogy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .167
a) The Guizot Law and the Freedom of Primary Education . . .168
b) Under the Infl uence of the Thinking of Lamennais . . . . . . .170
c) Pedagogical Creed of Liberal Catholicism . . . . . . . . . . . . . .172
d) Marianist Pedagogical Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .177
e) Marianist School and Teacher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .187
Chapter 4. The Expansion of the Society of Mary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .195
1. Industrialization and Expansion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .196
a) The Political, Economic, and Social Formation of Modern France . . . . . . . .196
b) The Society of Mary in Full Expansion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .198
c) The Third Order Regular of the Daughters of Mary . . . . . . .210
2. The Entrance of the Society of Mary in Switzerland . . . . . . . . .212
a) The Political Situation of Swiss Catholics . . . . . . . . . . . . . .212
b) The First Marianist Foundation in Fribourg . . . . . . . . . . . . .213
c) The Catholic School of Lausanne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .217
d) The Municipal School and the Normal Schools of Sion . . . .218
e) The German Language Municipal Secondary School of Tavel . . . . . . . . . . . .219
3. Administrative Improvements and Economic Problems . . . . . . .220
a) Financial Problems of the Pension Sainte Marie . . . . . . . . .220
b) Initial Formation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .224
4. The Canonical Constitution and Physiognomy of the Society of Mary . . . . . . . . . . .229
a) The Constitutions of 1839 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .230
b) The Character of the Society of Mary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .234
c) Cultivating the Spiritual Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .239
d) The Bourgeois Culture and Religious Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . .241
5. The Difficult Succession of the Founder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .247
a) The Double Undercurrent of the Problem: Institutional and Charismatic . . . . . . .247
b) The Conflict of Father Chaminade with His Assistants . . . .251
c) The General Chapter of 1845 and the Election of Father Caillet . . . . . . . .258
Chapter 5. Marianist Life and Mission in the Era of the
Upper- Middle-Class Society (1845-1870) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .265
1. Industrial and Educational Development in France
During the Second Empire (1848-1870) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .267
a) The Great Bourgeoisie Era . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .267
b) The Church in the Bourgeois Order and the Freedom of Education . . . . . . . . .272
2. The Generalate of Father Georges Caillet (1845-1868) . . . . . . .278
a) The Energetic Administrator and Man of Deep Piety . . . . . .279
b) Spiritual and Institutional Cohesion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .281
c) Administrative Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .286
d) The Organization of the Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .290
3. Expulsion and Renewal of the Marianist Work in Switzerland . .296
a) Promises of Expansion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .297
b) The Sonderbund War and the Expulsion of the Religious Congregations . . . . . .298
c) The Revitalization of the Marianist Educational Work. . . . .301
4. The Foundation in the United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305
a) North American Catholicism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .306
b) The Missionary Vocation of Father Leo Meyer . . . . . . . . .308
c) The Parish School of Holy Trinity (Cincinnati) . . . . . . . . . .310
d) The Catholic School and Civic Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .314
e) The Motherhouse of Dayton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .315
f) Saint Mary’s Institute in San Antonio (Texas) . . . . . . . . . . .316
g) The Province of America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .318
5. Foundation in German-speaking Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . 322
a) Economic Development and Political Conservatism . . . . . .322
b) Called by Bishop Ketteler to Mainz (Germany) . . . . . . . . . .326
c) The Schools in Graz and Frohsdorf in Austria . . . . . . . . . . .330
6. The Society of Mary Enters the Field of Secondary Education . .335
a) The Freedom of Education and the Prosperity of Marianist Schools . . .336
b) The Marianist Schools in Paris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .340
Chapter 6. Charismatic Constitutional Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .355
1. Canonical Approbation of the Society of Mary . . . . . . . . . . . . .356
a) Problems in the Reelection of Father Caillet . . . . . . . . . . . .356
b) The Legislative Work of the General Chapter of 1858 . . . . .359
c) The Seat of the General Administration in Paris and the Province of Paris . . . . . . . . .369
d) Canonical Approbation of the Society of Mary . . . . . . . . . .376
e) Dispute Concerning the Nature and Order of the Constitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .382
f) Institutional Separation of the Society of Mary and the Daughters of Mary . . . . . . . . .394
2. Father Leo Meyer is Recalled and the Society in the United States is Definitively Settled . . . . . .404
a) Father Jean Courtès, Visitor and New Provincial . . . . . . . . .404
b) The Civil War (1861-1865) and the Rise of American Industrialism . . . . . . . . . .408
c) Definitive Stabilization of the Province of America . . . . . . .410
d) Characteristics of Marianist Education in Texas . . . . . . . . . .415
3. The Apostolic Vision of Cardinal Mathieu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .417
a) Internal Dissensions Among the Brothers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .417
b) The Apostolic Visit of Cardinal Mathieu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .421
c) Extraordinary General Chapter of November 1868 . . . . . . .427
4. Disciplinary Measures for Bringing Internal Peace . . . . . . . . . .430
a) Father Chevaux, a Spiritual Master . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .431
b) Valuable Men on the General Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .435
c) Governing Holy Living and Observance of the Rule . . . . . .437
d) Organs and Instruments of Regularity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .441
Chapter 7. The Influence of Political Events on Marianist Works . . . . . . . .445
1. Administrative Problems Caused by the Franco-Prussian War . .445
a) The Collapse of the Second Empire and the Commune of Paris . . . . . . .445
b) The Third Republic and the Consolidation of Parliamentary Liberalism . . . . .451
c) A Resurgence of Religious Sentiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .453
2. The Expulsion from Public Education in Alsace . . . . . . . . . . . .454
a) Fullness and Maturity: Alsatian Nature of the Society . . . . .456
b) The Laws of Expulsion and Efforts to Remain in Alsace . . . . . . .459
c) The Expulsion from the Municipal Schools and Its Consequences . . . .465
3. The Situation of the Society of Mary Outside of France . . . . . .472
a) The Marianist-Redemptorist Alliance in the United States . . . . . . . . . .472
b) Visitation of the Province of America by the General Assistant for Instruction,
Father Simler . . . . . . . . . .476
c) The Stability of the Marianist Work in Austria . . . . . . . . . . .480
4. The General Chapter of 1873 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .485
a) Fear and Dissension Continue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .486
b) The General Chapter of 1873 and the Oath of Fidelity . . . .489
c) Ambiguity Concerning the Approbation of the Constitutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .501
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .503
