Patient restorer of the Order

Fr. Cosimo Chiara, Fourth General of the Pious Schools

Patient restorer of the Order.

Fr. Cosimo Chiara, Fourth General of the Pious Schools

Author: György Sántha

Publicaciones ICCE

(Instituto Calasanz de Ciencias de la Educación)

Conde de Vilches, 4 - 28028 Madrid

www.icce.es

ISBN: 978-84-7278-???-?

Translated by F. Antonio Marco

Copyright is reserved.

Reproduction, publication and distribution, whether total or partial, of all the original material contained in this book is expressly forbidden unless written authorization has been given.

For further information contact: www.icce.es

Patient restorer of the Order

Fr. Cosimo Chiara, Fourth General of the Pious Schools

www.edicionescalasancias.org

Fr. Cosimo Chiara (Art Gallery of Superior Generals San Pantaleo - Roma)

When we set out to write about the life and deeds of Father Cosimo Chiara, the fourth General of the Order of the Pious Schools, we once again take on a difficult task, not so much because of the particular and personal vicissitudes he experienced during his seventy-two years, but rather because of the serious matters of the Order, he had to deal with as General, both in relation to the beatification process of Calasanz and the reintegration of the Piarist Order, which he commendably resolved or tried to accomplish with the help of others during the six-year period from 1665 to 1671.

Although these problems have been dealt with by other authors, they have not yet been examined and presented with the depth and care that historians deserve.

When this biography is completed, or more precisely, when these issues are uncovered, there is reason to hope that the whole problem of the Innocentian Reduction, with all its circumstances and implications, will be presented more truthfully and clearly, and the complicated story of the final legal consolidation of the Order will at once appear fully transparent to readers and researchers. Therefore, although this life very rarely touches directly on the Calasanzian period of the Order’s history, it will nevertheless indirectly illuminate many aspects of it, when some problems that already arose in the time of Calasanz are only now finally resolved.

CHAPTER I

LIFE AND ACTIVITY OF FATHER COSIMO CHIARA FROM HIS BIRTH TO THE GENERALATE (1616-1665)

Father Cosimo Chiara of Jesus and Mary, as layman Philip Chiara, was born and baptized on 4 December 1616 in Bisacquino, in the diocese of Monreale (Sicily). His father’s name was Vincent and his mother was Catherine Falco Iuguli. The young Philip opted for the clerical profession and devoted himself to philosophical and theological studies in the seminaries of Monreale and Palermo. However, called by God to follow the evangelical counsels, and on the advice of the Venerable Servant of God, Father Luigi la Nusa S.J., he received the religious habit in the Pious Schools of Palermo on February 24, 1638, when he was already a subdeacon and twenty-one years old, together with his younger brother Peter Antony, from the hands of Father Andrew Sabino of the Passion of the Lord, the first Provincial of Sicily. After successfully completing the two-year probationary period, he and his brother made their solemn profession on February 25, 1640 in Palermo before Father John Dominic Franchi of the Cross, the provincial of Sicily at the time. The two brothers took the names Cosimo of Jesus and Mary and Peter of Jesus Christ[1]. While still a novice, driven by the ardent desire to visit Calasanz, as some of his companions, including his brother, had moved from Palermo to the Roman novitiate, Cosimo, as far as we know, also humbly asked Calasanz in a letter to send him to Rome. However, the Founder did not allow him to do so and prophesied in a letter that he would later come to Rome as a new Abraham to become the father of a great offspring. This actually happened in 1665, when he arrived in Rome to take part in the General Chapter as Provincial of Sicily and was elected Superior General of the Order[2].

Barely a year after his solemn profession, on May 25, 1641, he was ordained a priest in Mazara del Vallo by the Most Eminent Reverend Cardinal Dominic Spinola, the archbishop of the city[3].

Calasanz had decided to send the new priest, who immediately took on the role of teacher in Palermo, to Messina[4], where he was to lead the first grammar class under the obedience of Father Vincent Berro, the rector of the house at the time. But the Fathers of Palermo, who had also put him in charge of the grammar class, prevented his transfer[5]. Nevertheless, he was sent to Messina in the school year 1642-1643, where he remained until 1655 and taught the first grammar class.

At the beginning of 1644, Fr. Cosimo sent a detailed report to the Roman superiors, i.e. the Assistants and the Apostolic Visitator, about a new foundation that should have taken place in Taormina under the best conditions. However, this was not accepted because of the ban on new foundations that had been imposed on the Piarists two years earlier[6]. After the Innocentian reduction of the Order, Fr. Chiara expressed his unshakeable loyalty to the Institute and to Calasanz in a letter to the holy Founder dated July 14, 1646. He also worked diligently in the school of Messina, following the exhortations of Calasanz himself and under the guidance of Fr. Francis Podestà of Jesus, the rector of the house. He gave himself completely to all, he obtained from the magistrates of the royal monarchy and even from the viceroy himself, Marquis de los Vélez, that the Brief of reduction in the Kingdom of Sicily be softened a little and that each of the houses of the province, taking refuge in the protection of the royal authority, could escape the jurisdiction of the ordinaries, at least in the election of local superiors[7].

In April 1648, Father Chiara was elected rector of Messina for one year by the fathers of the community. It is said that during this period Calasanz himself - miraculously appearing to him - offered to help him in his efforts to alleviate the extreme need of the house in caring for and feeding the religious family[8]. In August, in a very beautiful letter to Calasanz, who was about to die, he again expressed his confidence and informed him of his many works for the good of the community in the church, the refectory and the classrooms[9].

In 1650, 1651 and 1655, Father Chiara was again elected rector of the house of Messina, proving in a unique way that he was an excellent teacher, father, priest and superior[10].

In 1655, when Alexander VII was elevated to the head of the papacy, he worked to ensure that as many letters as possible were sent from Sicily to the newly elected pope or to the Roman prelates asking for the reintegration of the Order[11].

After the partial reintegration in 1656 by Alexander VII, Father Chiara was appointed Rector of the House of Palermo on April 15th of the same year by Father John García, the Superior General[12], and confirmed in this office on February 28, 1660 by Father Camillo Scassellati, the second successor of Calasanz. On February 10, 1662, he was elected Provincial of Sicily by Father Scassellati and his Assistants after receiving four out of five votes cast[13]. As provincial, following the instructions of the Roman superiors[14], he endeavored to consolidate discipline and religious observance; he increased the assets of the province[15], he endeavored to defend the rights of the Congregation[16], without ever completely abandoning his academic commitments, although he was always busy with many things[17].

In 1644 he traveled to Rome and Florence to deal with certain problems of the Congregation[18], where he spoke with Ferdinand II, Grand Duke of Etruria, and his son Cosimo, as well as with Cardinal Leopold, the former’s brother[19]. After the Provincial chapter had been duly held in the same year, at the beginning of May 1665, Father Cosimo, together with the elected delegates (Fathers Charles Beli of St. Ignatius and Francis Podestà of Jesus), loaded with merits for his good management and appreciated by most of the capitulars for his zeal in promoting the old Piarist observance, went to Rome to attend the General Chapter[20].

On the morning of May 13th, after the failed attempts of Fr. Scassellati on the one hand and Fr. Fedele on the other, Fr. Chiara was elected General on the third ballot with 18 votes out of 30[21]. The election was prepared by Fr. Onofrio Conti, who was absent, and Fr. John Charles Caputi. In the afternoon of the same day, the four new General Assistants were elected, excluding the previous ones, namely Fr. Angel Morelli of St. Dominic, Francis Podestà of Jesus, Alexis Armini of Conception and Joseph Pennazzi of St. Eustace. The latter, however, was only admitted to the Congregation thanks to pressures from Cardinal Ginetti, the president of the Chapter. On May 15th, Fr. Chiara appointed Fr. Archangel Peres of the Mother of God, from the Province of Sicily, as General Procurator[22].

The newly elected General’s program of government was drawn up in part by the General Chapter itself. Already on the day of the election, even before the election, it approved almost unanimously the Rites and Common Rules that had finally been drafted by order of the previous General Chapter, following the models of the ancient Rites and Common Rules and the Declarations on the Constitutions and Rules. They provided both superiors and subordinates with a very rich treasure of the best Calasanzian traditions and formed the solid basis for the discipline and religious observance that would later be practiced in the Order[23]. The same Chapter established that the studies of the Piarists should be promoted to a greater extent[24] and ensured that the life and work of Calasanz would be handed down to posterity[25]. But also, the program of government, as we shall see, was partly elaborated later by Father Chiara himself, once he held the office of supreme moderator of the Order, according to the circumstances.

CHAPTER II

GENERALATE OF FATHER COSIMO CHIARA (1665-1671)

GENERAL VISITATION OF ITALIAN PROVINCES (1665-1666)

After the appointment of the Major and the local superiors, one of the main concerns and most important matters of the newly elected General was the Canonical Visitation of the provinces of the Order, at least the Italian[26], which he wanted to undertake immediately,

“…to be able to carry out with greater perfection the work of God for the increase of our Institute and the progress of regular observance”[27].

For this reason, after notify the provincials of the Visitation on August 16th28 and asking the Assistants on October 9th to give him full authority to proceed in the most serious cases, and after giving the same authority to the Assistants who were to remain in Rome[29], he left on October 12th accompanied by Fr. Archangel Peres of the Mother of God, Procurator General, as secretary[30]. He left Rome to visit the Roman province[31], then Etruria[32], Liguria[33] and finally the Neapolitan province[34]. A storm prevented him from also visiting Sardinia[35]. The visitation and the questioning of persons according to the provisions of the Constitutions[36] and the Common Rules recently approved by the General Chapter[37] were duly completed in Naples in May 1666[38]. Father Chiara had everywhere proved to be a zealous guardian of the old Constitutions and Rules. However, he did not visit the provinces of Germania and Poland due to the difficulties of the journey[39].

On his return to Rome in May 1666, he devoted himself with particular zeal to resolve the important matters of the Order.

THE PROCESS OF BEATIFICATION OF THE HOLY FOUNDER

Among these topics, the case of the beatification of Calasanz took first place. Since the General Chapter of 1659 had already decreed that there should be a Procurator for such an important matter, Father Camillo Scassellati had appointed this Procurator in August of the same year in the person of Father Joseph Pennazzi de S. Eustace, then General Procurator[40]. Father Cosimo, partly to avoid discord and partly to give the whole matter more impetus, issued a decree on October 9, 1655, at the request of Father Caputi and after consultation with the assistants[41], appointed three procurators at the same time to conduct the process: Fathers Angel Morelli of St. Dominic, Joseph Pennazzi of St. Eustace, General Assistants, and Father John Charles Caputi of St. Barbara. He did this,

“…so that they could and can do everything that seemed necessary to them, not only for the introduction of the process of the life, but also for the entire process of beatification and canonization, individually or together, but in mutual union, with diligence and reliability; and so that at least once a month, in the congregation of Father General and the Assistants, they would give an account of what they had done”[42].

However, these three Procurators - or, as they are called today, Postulators - of the cause of the Holy Founder were in fact reduced to Father Caputi, who, after Father Vincent Berro had left Rome to assume the rectorate in Florence[43] and especially after his death on April 5, 1666, practically always and everywhere carried the burden of this matter on his shoulders alone, moved by his love for Calasanz and the Order. This father obtained on April 8, 1666[44] the appointment of Cardinal Scipione Rebiba of the Counts of Elce, Archbishop of Pisa, as relator or presenter for the initiation and prosecution of the matter. This was done with the recommendation of Donna Leonor Baroni, a famous singer in Rome - who was also known to Cardinal Rospigliosi, later Clement IX[45] - and president of the Confraternity of Saint Anne, which was very flourishing at the time in the church of St. Pantaleo. He and the other Cardinal Consultors of the Sacred Congregation of Rites greatly admired the enlightened virtues of Calasanz and his great services to the Church of God[46]. Meanwhile they requested letters of postulancy from the princes of Rome and the world, from the bishops, the religious orders and the confraternities[47]. Cardinal Scipione, carefully briefed on the matter by Fr. Caputi, submitted to the Sacred Congregation of Rites a magnificent report on the life, habits, virtues and deeds of Calasanz when Alexander VII was still alive. The receipt of the same is recorded in a rescript of the Sacred Congregation dated March 5, 1667. The notification was made somewhat later due to the death of Alexander VII - namely in the solemn session of the Sacred Congregation of Rites on October 4, 1667 before Pope Clement IX, who had promised him all his support in a private conversation with Father Cosimo shortly after his accession[48]. There, with the same Cardinal of the Counts of Elce again as relator, it was decreed “that the cause for the introduction of the process of the Venerable Servant of God Joseph of the Mother of God may be signed”[49].

This “signature” of the introduction of the process was really very important for the beatification of Calasanz. For as soon as this had happened, the process was initiated the following year, 1668, “so that the evidence would not be lost”, but it only led to a happy outcome in 1690[50]. In the meantime, on December 2, 1684, the decree “de non cultu” was published and on December 18th of the same year, the process “on the fame of sanctity in general” was also begun, but it was only during the generalate of Fr. Alexis Armini on July 30, 1689, that it came to a happy conclusion, with the publication of the decree in which it was declared “that there are proofs of the fame of holiness, virtues and miracles in general”[51]. In this way, Fr. Cosimo, actively supported by Fr. Caputi, did not achieve everything he had wished for, but nevertheless contributed much to the beatification of the venerable Fr. Founder, thereby also increasing the fame of the Institute in the Roman Curia itself and before outsiders, and - most important of all - he also instilled a good dose of knowledge and self-esteem in the Piarist religious, who, having recovered from the humiliations of times past, could finally contemplate with great confidence the venerable image of Calasanz, who would later be included in the glory of the saints. In this way, the apotheosis of the Founder also brought about, in a certain way, the growth of the Institute he had founded, and strengthened its members.

REINTEGRATION OF THE ORDER

Another matter of great importance that Father Cosimo took care of was the restoration of the Congregation to its original state and its religious title of Order. In this respect, Alexander VII had already done enough, who, with the Brief Dudum felicis recordationis Paulus Papa V, published on January 24, 1656, had raised the institute from the status of a secular congregation without vows, without communication between the houses and without Major superiors to the rank and title of a Congregation with simple vows. However, since the letter did not remove the jurisdiction of the Ordinaries over the houses of the Congregation, and some restrictions were imposed on the admission of novices, the age of teachers and prefects, and because of no less doubts as to the daily application and execution, as we have already seen, it caused difficulties which clearly hindered the desired progress of the Institute everywhere. Added to this was the fact that the profession of simple vows alone made it easier and more frequent for religious who had grown weary of the observance to leave the Congregation, which meant no small loss for the Institute.

In order to resolve some of these difficulties, Father Cosimo Chiara, following the example of his predecessor[52], sent a petition to Clement IX[53] towards the end of 1667. After it had been read, the Congregation was again granted by decree on December 7, 1667, this time definitively, that

“…religious who had not yet reached the age of twenty-eight, provided they had received the holy order of the presbyterate, could exercise the profession of schoolteacher, and likewise that novices could be admitted to profession after only one year of probation, if they had reached the age of seventeen”[54].

As for certain privileges granted to other religious orders, Father Cosimo himself, in order to avoid frequent trouble with the parish priests, had obtained a decree from the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Religious some time earlier, in July 1655, in which it was declared

“…that the Order of the Pious Schools should enjoy the privileges with regard to funerals and the fourth funeral and other similar things corresponding to the other regular orders according to the apostolic constitutions”[55].

However, despite these privileges, the Institute had to endure many difficulties, especially in Italy and Poland, as its legal situation was not so stable and clear. Thus, the Jesuits in Poland, mainly under the pretext that the Piarists were not a exempt order, wanted to prevent Michael Korybut Wiszñiewiecki, the new King elected on June 19, 1669 after the abdication of John Casimir Vasa, from confirming certain privileges that had been granted to the Order by its predecessors regarding the opening of schools both throughout Poland and in the city of Warsaw itself[56]. Moreover, immediately after the abdication of John Casimir, while the interregnum was still in progress, the same Jesuits opened schools in Warsaw with no small disregard for the rights and good name of the Pious Schools[57].

But also in Rome, the priest and lawyer Francesco Firmiano, who had written a magnificent Apology of the Pious Schools in 1645, which was to be handed over to the Congregation of Cardinals responsible for the affairs of the Calasanzian Institute[58], filed a complaint against the Pious Schools in 1668, questioning their right to open a new house in Rome on the Esquiline near St. Maria Major, as they had been reduced to the category of a simple congregation[59]. Finally, even within the Congregation itself, there were quite a few religious who, because of the lesser commitment that the simple vows entailed, although they had taken them with an oath of perseverance, intended to leave the Institute immediately after the superiors had reprimanded them for certain shortcomings or errors[60].

All these things urged Father General and his Assistants more and more each day to find the most effective way and means to avoid such unpleasantness. Therefore, at the meeting of the General Congregation on May 29, 1668, after a long debate and after due consideration of the pros and cons, they decided to petition the Pope, albeit not in explicit terms, for the full reintegration, but introducing the variant that the religious would only be admitted to solemn profession by Father General, with the consent of his Assistants, after they had duly exercised the teaching ministry for a decade[61]. At the same meeting, Father Joseph Pennazzi, General Assistant, was entrusted with the task of dealing with the matter before the Holy See. To this end, Father Pennazzi shortly afterwards wrote a long memorandum in which he set out in great detail the votes and wishes of the General Congregation and at the same time those of the entire Institute[62].

However, this customary procedure seemed too lengthy and uncertain to Fathers John Charles Caputi and Peter Mussesti, then rector of the House of St. Pantaleo. In fact, after reading the memorandum, Clement IX sent it back to the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars[63]. There was also a danger in the delay. And so, with the agreement of Father Cosimo, the Fathers in question took a different path, hoping, above all with the patronage of the Medici family and the help of Donna Leonor Baroni Castellana, to achieve the desired goal with greater certainty and more quickly. To this end, from September 1668 onwards, they negotiated several times in secret with Don Torcuato Montauti, then Resident of the Grand Duke of Tuscany in Rome, in order to achieve a more efficient handling of the matter, and all the Fathers agreed that it would be most favorable, to entrust the matter of reintegration not to the entire Congregation of Bishops and Regulars for examination and decision, but to a special Commission of three persons from Etruria who were well respected in the Roman Curia and at the same time wanted to favor the Grand Duke of Tuscany and Cardinal Leopold as well as the Institute of Pious Schools. This led to the appointment of three well-known figures in the Roman Curia, namely Don Carlos de Vecchis, Bishop of Clusio, Secretary of the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, Don Esteban Agustín, Secret Master of Donations, Secretary of memoranda of Cardinal Rospligliosi and nepote of Cardinal Francesco Paoluzzi, and the third, Don Peter Francis de Rubeis, promoter of the faith and famous lawyer of the Curia, who had already outed himself in the beatification process as a sincere admirer of Calasanz[64]. After being privately informed of the matter and asked for their consent, the three agreed to grant the favor requested of them as soon as they were designated to do so by the pope. Through the intercession of the Grand Duke of Tuscany, Cardinal Leopold and Count Torcuato Montauti, as well as Donna Leonor Baroni Castellana, Father Caputi obtained the appointment of the congregation he desired in the private conversation he had with Clement IX on February 13, 1669, and the exclusion of Don Prospero Fagnani, whom Father Caputi, despite being the most famous jurist of the time, wanted to avoid at all costs because of his excessive severity[65].

As soon as this congregation was appointed, it immediately began to examine the matter entrusted to it. The most important promoter of the cause was the jurist Peter Francis de Rubeis, who, after reading the memoranda written by the jurist Pedro Pifferi at the suggestion of Father Caputi, in which he explicitly called for full reintegration and the communication of privileges, presented his carefully prepared vote to his colleagues. He expressed his opinion that the Institute of Pious Schools in accordance with the constitution issued by Gregory XV on November 18, 1621[66] “In supremo apostolatus solio” could and should be restored to its original state. This vote, which was discussed in several meetings and finally approved on July 11, 1669, resulted in the following decree of the Congregation: “The Superior General and the Fathers of the Secular Congregation of the Clerics Poor of the Mother of God of Pious Schools asked the Holy Father to restore the Congregation to the regular state and title of Religion with the profession of the three solemn vows, as it had been at another time by Gregory XV of holy memory by the apostolic letter of November 18, 1621, with the communication of all privileges, immunities, faculties, exemptions and other graces and indulgences granted in any way to the mendicant orders, as expressly stated in another letter of the same Gregory XV of October 15, 1622. These documents were later revoked by the supreme pontiffs of happy memory Innocent X and Alexander VII in apostolic letters... The said Father Superior and the Fathers of the Secular Congregation of the Clerics Poor of the Mother of God of Pious Schools requested that the said privileges and communications be restored in the same manner as before. And since His Holiness has appointed a special Congregation composed of certain prelates of the Roman Curia to consider these petitions, this Congregation, after having thoroughly discussed and weighed the matter, judged on July 11, 1669, that

“…if it pleases Your Holiness, the reduction, reinstatement and communication of the privileges which they have requested by apostolic letter may be granted to the orators within the limits of the said letters of Gregory XV”[67].

Thereupon Don Carlos de Vecchis, without reporting the matter to the pope, immediately transmitted this decree to the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars for its information, and the Sacred Congregation did indeed include it in its Minutes at the session of August 23, 1666[68]. The decree had no effect, however, since Clement IX, updated on the matter afterwards, wanted the whole issue to be discussed again by the entire Congregation of Bishops and Regulars[69]. The Piarists then sent a new memorandum to the Sacred Congregation in which they asked for full reintegration, the communication of the privileges, the confirmation of the old Constitutions and the fulfillment of the Brief “Cum sicut accepimus’ of 28 April 1660 promulgated by Alexander VII, concerning the duration of the office of Superior General, the authority of the Assistants, the custom of accompanying poor children to their homes and the quality and making of the habit; as well as the ability to admit to solemn vows those who since 1656 had only taken simple vows[70].

Caputi, who was in no way discouraged by these new difficulties, found an excellent advocate in Cardinal Lawrence Imperiali, who, after being informed of everything by him, and after Fr. Caputi had obtained the opinion of every single cardinal, he reported on the matter with great skill and expertise in the plenary assembly of October 4, 1669 and obtained the plenary assembly’s approval of the decree of the above-mentioned deputy commission on reinstatement, together with the inclusion of the above-mentioned Brief of Alexander VII, which, together with the Brief of Gregory XV, would form the other legal basis for the reinstatement of the Order to its original state and title[71].

On October 14, Clement IX approved this new decree and ordered that the Brief on Reinstatement be issued in accordance with it[72]. The letter was actually achieved immediately thanks to the perseverance and urgency of Father Caputi who was readmitted to the presence of Clement IX[73] through the intercession of Donna Leonor Baroni Castellana. The desired Brief, whose introduction had been written by Father John Bona OP, the future cardinal, at the request of the Piarists, was finally issued on October 23rd to the great joy of the entire Order - which had almost risen from the ashes - and its friends[74]. Even Clement IX himself, when signing the Brief, said that he was happy “because a Religion that was already dead has risen again while he was pope”[75]. For his part, Cardinal Marcio Ginetti, the protector of the Order, kissed the Brief that had been given to him and, on his knees, immediately thanked Almighty God for such a great boon[76].

The solemn publication of the Brief took place on October 26 in the Oratory of the House of St. Pantaleo, in the presence of seven official witnesses who had been specially invited for the occasion. Afterwards, the religious sang a solemn Te Deum and gave each other the kiss of peace[77].

On the following Sunday, October 27, Donna Leonor Baroni Castellana also went to the house of St. Pantaleo to congratulate the religious. She saw to it that five copies of the new Brief were elaborately decorated and adorned, one of which she sent to the Pope himself[78]. Father Caputi immediately had eight hundred copies of the new Brief printed to distribute to the Piarists, friends and protectors[79].

Thanks to Father Caputi, who was always supported and protected by Father Cosimo Chiara on every occasion, it was brought to a happy conclusion the long struggle that the Holy Founder and his most faithful sons had so heroically waged for the greater glory of God and the good of their neighbor from the moment of the reduction. In achieving this goal, a great role was played by Father Peter Mussesti, who had meanwhile died on December 5, 1668, and Father John Charles Caputi, whose expertise and ability to win friends among the powerful was certainly of great benefit in the successful resolution of this matter. But the role of Father Cosimo should not be overlooked either, for thanks to his authority, his prudence, his moderation and his frequent interventions, he skillfully steered the progress of the matter amidst the doubts, fears and difficulties of the religious.

It would certainly take a lot of time to go into the causes and reasons why the reintegration of the Pious Schools finally took place during the pontificate of Clement IX. Nevertheless, it is difficult to overlook the fact that this success was not only due to the clever and courageous tenacity of the religious, but above all and first and foremost to the benevolence of Clement IX towards Calasanz and his institute. As a prelate who attended the General Chapter held in 1637, Rospigliosi got to know Calasanz well during his lifetime and wanted him to be included among the saints after his death. In addition to this benevolent attitude of Clement IX, the Pious Schools certainly owe much to the entire Medici family, especially Ferdinand II and Cardinal Leopold, as well as Cardinal Lawrence Imperiali, the great friend and protector of Father Caputi, and finally the members of the Special Congregation charged with examining the affairs of the Pious Schools, especially Don Peter Francis de Rubeis. The most sincere thanks were expressed to all of them[80].

The benevolence of so many and such eminent persons who were friends of the Pious Schools, as well as the withdrawal or “conversion” of some who were against them, meant that the matter, although not fully dealt with “sine ira et studio”, was nevertheless examined with greater interest than violence in the Sacred Congregations. Moreover, “the serious disturbances” in the Order, which according to Innocentian Brief had given rise to the reduction, gradually ceased, while the usefulness of the ministry of the Pious Schools, as already stated in the letter Dudum felicis recordationis Paulus Papa V, became increasingly clear to all. For this reason, not only the subjective reasons for the decline disappeared, but also, at least partially, the objective ones.

On the other hand, according to Fr. Caputi, the experts’ opinion that the Brief of Innocentian reduction was invalid because of certain formal defects was not at all rare. In fact, it had not been affixed to the doors of the basilicas and at Campo dei Fiori, nor had it been published as required by law. The first Brief of Alexander VII was also disregarded and considered invalid by legal scholars, as it was based on the above-mentioned Brief of Innocent X[81]. In order to re-establish the legal basis of the Institute, it was therefore necessary to return to the constitutional Brief of Gregory XV and to replace and complete it with the Brief Cum nuper of Alexander VII of April 28, 1660, as the jurist Peter Francis de Rubeis had done with his vote and Cardinal Lawrence Imperiali in his report to the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars.

To all these causes and reasons, we seem to add the heavenly and solicitous protection of the Holy Founder, through which he wanted his Institute to return to its original state, as he had promised. But the fair assessment of these circumstances is beyond the penetration and capacity of any historical research.

NEW PROBLEMS AFTER REINTEGRATION

The reintegration of the Pious Schools into the Order of Solemn Vows once again raised new problems among the religious, as could be foreseen[82]. There were some who, according to the first Brief of Alexander VII, had only taken simple vows, albeit with a vow of perseverance, and who refused to bind themselves with the perpetual bond of solemn vows, and so they thought of leaving the Institute[83].

The General Congregation, which took place on November 8, 1669, granted the said religious full liberty, without prejudice to precedence or other rights, to take or not to take the solemn vows in haste[84]. However, the generosity of the General Congregation did not resolve the problems and difficulties that arose, on the one hand, from the inequality and differences between religious with solemn vows and those with simple vows and, on the other hand, from the fact that for some religious who had only taken simple vows, the new Brief offered a convenient and easy way to abandon the institute of Pious Schools. They all appealed to the Pope with petitions, and the General Procurator of the Order did the same in accordance with the decision of the General Congregation of April 22, 1670[85]. The new Pope Clement X then entrusted the matter to the special Congregation, which had been previously appointed by Clement IX. After repeatedly examining and carefully considering the problem, the Congregation decided at its meeting on September 30, 1670

“…that the Superior General of the Religion of the Clerics Poor of the Mother of God of Pious Schools for all those who, when they were in the state of the Congregation, both clerics and laity, had taken simple vows and the oath of perseverance, and who had not yet made solemn profession in accordance with the above-mentioned reintegration, a period of two months for those residing in Italy, of three months for those residing in the neighboring islands, and of four months for those residing outside Italy and the neighboring islands, so that they may declare whether they wish to make solemn profession by availing themselves of the above-mentioned reintegration and so that they may make the same solemn profession. When this period has elapsed and solemn profession has not been made, the laity and clerics who are only initiated into minor orders must be dismissed and are released and discharged from the obligation of simple vows and the oath by the said Superior General. As for clerics initiated into holy orders, if they receive a patrimony or an ecclesiastical benefice sufficient for a congruent maintenance, as prescribed by the Holy Council of Trent, they must be dismissed in such a way as to remain under the obedience of the local Ordinary. Those who have no property or benefices shall be allowed to remain in the houses or convents of the said religion, together with the solemn professed, but without active or passive vote. Should they, however, prefer to leave the monastery, they shall be dismissed in the same manner, remaining under the obedience of the local Ordinary, and suspended from the exercise of their orders, unless and until they receive a sufficient patrimony or benefice”[86].

On the following day, October 1, 1670, this judgment was also read to Pope Clement X, who approved it without reservation. The Pope then saw and approved the Brief Cum felicis on October 13th, which had been written in accordance with the judgment, so that it was issued on October 18, 1670[87].

According to the Brief, Father General immediately released many from the simple vows and from the oath of perseverance[88] and he also conferred the same dispensation on the provincials, or at least on Father Onofre Conti of the Blessed Sacrament, then provincial of Sardinia[89]. The latter, for his part, after receiving the Brief and the decree, immediately dismissed ten rebellious Fathers, four clerics and one lay brother[90] in the same year 1670, at a very difficult time for the Province of Sardinia, although he did not always comply exactly with the provisions of the Brief. Despite everything, the number of religious dismissed from the Order as a result of this letter barely exceeded forty, as Father Caputi reports[91]. Their departure was certainly good for the inner peace of the Order. Finally, after so many vicissitudes, the Order achieved almost complete and total juridical stability and, little by little, disciplinary stability[92].

DEVELOPMENT OR EXPANSION OF THE ORDER

The noble zeal for the expansion of the Institute of Pious Schools, which had already inflamed the heart of his predecessor, Father Camillo Scassellati, also nourished the soul of Father Cosimo Chiara and his Assistants. But Father General did not want to accept a foundation that was contrary to the provisions of the Constitutions[93] or that lacked what was necessary for the maintenance of the religious. Therefore, before allowing and approving the foundation of a new house or school, he made sure that the documents or instruments of foundation were sent to the General Curia, showing the allocation of an annual sum for the maintenance of the work and the Fathers. In this matter, then, Fr. Cosimo demanded even more than the old Constitutions and the primitive customs of the time of Calasanz. And the fact is that after the first Brief of Alexander VII, which had concretely softened the rigor of the “supreme poverty” of the Founder, it was already very difficult to maintain the very modest conditions of the primitive Piarist foundations without any change[94].

Father Chiara was only rarely disposed to take on parishes or other tasks outside the ministry of the Pious Schools[95]. He always reserved to himself and his Assistants the right to found new houses, as well as the final judgment on the appropriateness of accepting the houses offered, despite the claim of the Provincial of Poland to act according to his personal criteria in this matter[96].

In accordance with these principles and standards, the House of Schlackenwerth in Bohemia[97] and that of Prievidza, the first in the Kingdom of Hungary[98], were founded in 1666; that of Chelm in Poland[99] and the residence of Murány, of very short duration, in Hungary[100] in 1667; and finally, the following year, 1668, the House of Lowicz in Poland[101]. In addition to these three new foundations, underpinned by new instruments or enlarged by new buildings, the House of Brindisi[102], that of Isili[103] and that of Pescina[104] were further and more firmly established. In addition, fruitful discussions about the foundation of Tempio[105] began in 1669.

Of the many foundations that were offered to the Pious Schools everywhere, but which were not accepted due to the lack of personnel or the lack of a secure annual allocation of subsidies, the foundation of Finalborgo[106] and that of Campania in the Kingdom of Naples deserve special mention, which were repeatedly offered in 1667, albeit unsuccessfully, by the Bishop of Campania John Caramuel, an extraordinary friend of the Piarists who had strongly promoted the entry of the order into Bohemia at the time of Calasanz[107].

GOVERNMENT OF THE PROVINCES

The paternal care with which Father Cosimo Chiara looked after each of the Order’s provinces is clearly demonstrated by the fact that, as already mentioned above, as soon as he assumed the Generalate he set about personally visiting at least the provinces located in Italy, which he did in part during the six months of the 1665-66 school year. As far as the Italian provinces were concerned, which for some reason he could not visit personally, Father Chiara wanted other Visitators appointed by him to visit them. Thus, with the help of visitators, he inspected the provinces of Sicily[108], Sardinia[109] and the houses of the Neapolitan province, that he was unable to visit personally due to the difficulties of long journeys[110].

In 1670, he also sent an extraordinary Visitator to the province of Poland in the person of Father Charles Pessau, the former provincial of Germania[111].

The task of these Visitators, like that of the Father General himself, was to visit the Provinces and restore the regular discipline in all Provinces, but especially in Sardinia and Poland. These two provinces were struggling with enormous internal difficulties at the time, partly because of the dissolute habits of some religious, but also because of a crisis of obedience to superiors, especially in the province of Poland.

The indirect and involuntary cause of the unrest in Sardinia was Father Cosimo himself. When the appointment of Father Carlo Maria Rosiani as Commissary General of the Province of Sardinia[112] had become ineffective, on May 22, 1665 he appointed Father Dominic Marcia, the former rector of S. Pantaleo and teacher and master of the Juniors, as Provincial of Sardinia[113]. The latter, as soon as he returned to his province, due to his arrogance and disobedience, became the leader of those who despised the authority and instructions of the Roman superiors and had opted for a more relaxed life.

Moreover, Father Cosimo was too lenient with the urgent requests of Father Elisio Sotorreal of St. Joseph. As soon as his mandate began, he sent him from the exile of Nursia, where he had been banished by Father Scassellati for six years[114], back to Cáller, to his province of Sardinia - but without active or passive voice. As soon as he returned home, Father Efisio, restless as he was, stirred up the province even more than Father Marchia[115] with his rebellious temperament. For all these reasons, Father General sent Father Philip Xiria of St. Francis[116] to Sardinia as a Visitator as early as June 1667. However, because of the enormous discord that prevailed among the religious and on the orders of Father General himself[117], he only visited the two houses of Cáller. After making inquiries and requesting the execution of certain regulations of the General Congregation[118] that had been sent to him specifically in response to the report sent to Rome on December 1667, he came back to the eternal city. After hearing his report, Father General decided that the five religious who had done the greatest harm to the discipline of the Order, namely Fathers Dominic and Thomas Marchia, Father John Chiavari of the Conception, Father Saturnino Omnis of the Mother of God and Father Elisio Sotorreal of St. Joseph, should be transferred immediately to the Province of Naples[119]. But they, with the support of some nobles, refused to carry out the order. Moreover, Father Elisio Sotorreal, who had also traveled through Spain without the permission of his superiors[120], was accused, not without reason, of having been in some way involved in the assassination of the Viceroy of Sardinia on July 21, 1668[121]. To avoid greater evils, on August 7, 1669, Father Cosimo appointed Father Eusebio Amoreto of St. Cecily as Visitator of the province[122]. However, given the poor situation in the province and after being received by the religious not without difficulties[123], he was hardly able to accomplish anything. Although Father Elisio was sent into exile by the new Viceroy, the remaining leaders of the relaxed life, who had in no way agreed to be bound by the bond of solemn vows after the promulgation of the Brief of reintegration, remained. Moreover, they assured that they already had full freedom to leave the Order.

In the meantime, precisely in September 1669, the most venerable fathers of the province implored Father General and his Assistants to immediately provide a Provincial for the province, which had already been without a head for two years[124]. As a result, on March 3, 1670, the General Congregation decided to send Father Onofrio Conti of the Blessed Sacrament to Sardinia as Provincial in order to restore order and discipline[125]. After taking office on June 8, 1670, Father Onofrio immediately took on efficaciously the difficult task of restoring the religious discipline. After the promulgation of Clement X’s letter Cum felicis recordationis (October 18, 1670) and after Father General had given Father Onofrio the power by decree of October 25, 1670 to expel from the Order those religious who had refused to take solemn vows within two, three or four months[126], Father Conti did not hesitate to dismiss ten fathers, four clerics and one lay brother from the Province within a short period of time without having received the Brief and without strictly following the provisions of the Brief. At the same time, however, thirty-one religious were admitted to solemn profession. Peace and discipline gradually returned to the thus cleansed and restored province[127].

But Father Conti’s opponents, above all Father Joseph Fedele and his followers, in order to prevent his admission to the General Chapter that was to take place in 1671, claimed that he had acted completely against the law and that he had ipso facto been deprived of his active and passive voice. But they did not prevail at all, as we shall see later, as Father Onofrio Conti[128] claimed for his right on proper time, and Father John Charles Caputi brought the matter with great skill before the Sacred Congregations in Rome[129].

The difficulties of the Province of Poland stemmed from two main sources: the ever-increasing desire for full autonomy of the Province, and the almost inevitable conflict with the Jesuits.

On the first issue, remarkable progress was made as early as the beginning of 1662, when, as we have already seen, the Province of Poland was separated from the Province of Germania, to which the houses founded in Poland had belonged since 1641. Later, in 1664, Fr. Scassellati and his congregation who had agreed to this separation, allowed the new provincial, Fr. James Wazyrka of St. Barbara, at his request and for once - as had happened previously, on May 12, 1662, to the provincial of Germania[130] - that the provincial himself, with his consultors, could appoint the rectors of the houses due to the insufficient knowledge of the people living in Poland. These names were to be submitted to the approval of the General Congregation[131]. To demand this concession as a right due to them - and even more matters - some capitular fathers of the province, led by Father Stanislaw Papczynsky, decided at the Chapter held in Podolin in August 1664 to ask the General Chapter to grant the Provincial Chapter the right to elect both the provincial and local superiors[132]. Although this request was not even dealt with in the General Chapter of 1665, some Fathers, led by the aforementioned Father Stanislaw, believed that the Province of Poland had received the powers it had requested in the aforementioned General Chapter[133]. After the Roman superiors had appointed Father Wenceslaus Opatowski of the Blessed Sacrament as the new Provincial on May 21, 1665, they eagerly awaited the next Provincial Chapter, which was to take place in 1667 and from which they hoped to be able to take over the leadership of the Province without any problems, as the desired election system had already been implemented. Father Cosimo initially refused permission to hold the Chapter at the suggestion of Father Opatowski in order to avoid unnecessary expenditure of time and money as well as the dangers of war. But later, at the persistent request of Father Stanislaw Papczynski and his companions, granted permission to hold the Chapter, but left to the discretion of the Provincial, in a letter dated August 20, 1667[134]. Thus, the second Provincial Chapter of Poland was finally held in Podolin from November 6th to 12th, 1667. The Chapter dealt with the matter and the case of Father Stanislaw and his companions four times in three days and judged that the said Father, who in the meantime had received an obedience of September 1667 ordering him to go to Rome[135], should be severely punished by Father General and his Assistants as a troublemaker of the Congregation in the Province of Poland[136]. Father General, duly informed of Father Stanislaw´s behaviour and also in view of his reckless conduct in Rome, with which he wanted to present himself before the Pope and the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Religious in order to fraudulently inform them about the Piarist problems in Poland, he ordered him to leave Rome immediately and go to Moravia, to the house of Nikolsburg[137].

According to the command, Father Papczynski did indeed go to Nikolsburg in December 1667. From there, however, he returned to Warsaw at the beginning of 1668 with the permission of the Provincial of Germania, as he told. There, by questioning the Provincial’s rightful authority, he became the main cause of new discords. In the meantime, at a meeting on August 23, 1668, the General Congregation decided to take legal action against him again because he had opened letters addressed to the Roman superiors[138].

The condition of the houses in the Polish province deteriorated even further after the reintegration of the Order in October 1669. Father Papczynski not only advocated his old theory of the illegitimate authority of the Provincial, but also openly taught that those who had taken simple vows after 1656 were no longer bound by a vow or an oath and could freely leave the Order and ask for the protection of the Ordinaries. For this reason, the Provincial had him imprisoned in Prievidza. From prison, Father Stanislaw humbly asked the Roman superiors for absolution from the vows and the oath; but since this absolution was reserved for the Pope, they could not grant it to him[139]. The General Congregation, however, duly informed of the new disturbances in the session of February 22, approved the action of the Father Provincial and decided to send Father Charles Pessau of St. Mary, the former Provincial of Germania, there as Visitator[140]. But soon afterwards, in March 1670, Father Stanislaw escaped from the prison in Prievidza and returned to Poland, where he asked for the protection of the Ordinaries. On May 10, 1670, Father Cosimo ordered him to report to Prievidza prison under threat of excommunication, which he would ipso facto suffer, and after the prescribed period of twelve days had elapsed in vain, he excommunicated the said priest as disobedient and rebellious[141].

Nevertheless, Father Stanislaw continued to enjoy the unlawful protection of Bishop of Krakow Nicholas Oborski, until the new Brief from Clement X arrived, which finally gave Father General the opportunity to discharge Father Stanislaw and some of his companions from their vows and oaths. Father Cosimo did so on October 24, 1670, before receiving a new petition from Father Stanislaw dated November 22, 1670[142].

Despite everything, Father Stanislaw’s exit from the Order only settled personal matters, but in no way extinguished the desire cherished by the Province of Poland for greater autonomy in the election of superiors. This is also clear from the petition formulated by the Provincial Chapter on August 4, 1670, which stated

“…the General Chapter is requested to grant permission to our Province to propose in the Provincial Chapters three Fathers suitable for the office of Provincial, to be elected by the joint votes of the capitulars; the Definitor General will elect and declare one of the three as Provincial”[143].

However, this proposal, more modest than the one presented in 1664, was unanimously rejected at the General Chapter held in May 1671[144]. The same fate - if not worse, since it was not even discussed in the General Chapter - was suffered by the proposal of the Provincial Chapter of 1667, which requested that the Father Provincial, with the Assistants and three or four other Fathers, could secretly inform the Superior General of the persons who were to hold offices[145]. It was not until the General Chapter of 1692 that some concessions were made in this matter. Later, in the following General Chapters, they were extended, expanded and codified with greater clarity - even with the involvement of papal authority[146]. Thus, historical developments gradually confirmed what the Province of Poland had already demanded in 1664 in order to consolidate its autonomy with regard to the election, or more precisely the appointment, of superiors. However, Father Cosimo’s time was not yet ripe to accept this electoral system, which was also demanded by the Provincial Chapter of Sardinia, held in 1671, and by the Provincial Chapter of Germania[147]. As we have seen, this resulted in quite a few difficulties, which Father Cosimo overcame with his tenacity and the Polish province endured with indomitable courage. If there were some moments of serious tension between the central government and the province, these were mainly due to the rashness and recklessness of Father Papczynski, because, due to the authority he enjoyed among his companions and outsiders, as well as his not insignificant eloquence, although he was completely lacking in legal knowledge, he easily disturbed the good order of the Province with his restless temperament, to the detriment of religious discipline, as we have seen.

The other great difficulty in the Polish province was that the Fathers of the Society of Jesus opened their school in Warsaw in November 1668, shortly after King John Casimir V abdicated. Previously, both Ladislaus IV and John Casimir had denied the permission and had confirmed for the Piarist Fathers the privilege of opening schools in the Polish capital. Such a move angered the religious and their protectors. This led to a fierce dispute between the fathers of the Society and the Pious Schools, with writings and even insulting words. In this dispute, the Piarists, led by Father Stanislaw Papczynski, invoked their royal privileges, while the Fathers of the Society felt they could claim their right with all the more justification as they denied that the religion of the Pious Schools, reduced to a simple secular congregation, still enjoyed the ancient privilege of the Order[148]. The matter was referred to the Apostolic Nuncio in Warsaw, who in turn was forced to impose silence on the two opponents until the dispute had been settled in court[149]. Shortly afterwards, this unfortunate issue was even brought to the attention of the Roman Curia. Therefore Father Cosimo instructed Father John Charles Caputi to discuss the matter with Father General of the Society, John Paul Oliva. After this commission was fulfilled on February 18, 1669, a truce of sorts was reached, after which the General Congregation decided in a meeting on February 22, 1669, that the Provincial of Poland and the others concerned should henceforth abstain from any controversy. On the same day, a decree on the matter was drawn up and sent to Poland[150]. However, the truce was only fictitious and not real, as evidenced by a monitorium signed in Rome on April 11, 1669 by the Apostolic Prothonotary Nicholas Acciaiolo, refrendario of both signatures. It openly proclaimed the right of the Society of Jesus to open schools in Warsaw and threatened all opponents with severe penalties[151]. Subsequently, during the time of Father Pirroni (1677-1685), there were even more violent disputes, so that the enmity between the two teaching orders in Poland was only ended by two decrees of Clement X[152].

PROGRESS OF STUDIES IN THE PIARIST ORDER

As for the other affairs of the Order’s government, Father Cosimo also continued the noble zeal with which Calasanz and Father Camillo Scassellati had worked to promote studies, literature and the sciences in the Order, and he endeavored to continue the initiatives of his predecessors as far as he was able. He was also helped in this endeavor by the General Chapter held in 1665, at which, on May 15 in particular, certain negligence on the part of students or scholastics was reprimanded and penalties were imposed on those who were negligent[153]. It was also decided to establish or maintain studies in each province, which were to be carried out by the Provincials and also in Rome by Father General. In these studies, the Piarist juniors were to complete their formation without any delay or interruption and without excepting the second-year novices. The same General Chapter already intended to establish canons for the students and their professors as soon as possible, i.e. to draw up a general study plan for the Piarists as soon as possible[154]. The General Chapter decreed and declared on May 16 “that our house of Poli be immediately placed under the authority of the Father General, because a study of humanities is to take place there”[155].

Busy with other matters and also hampered by the extreme poverty of the Order, Father Cosimo was not able to fulfill all the points or decrees of the General Chapter during the six years of his tenure. However, it is clear evidence of his concern for the progress of studies in the Order that when the House of Chieti declared in November 1667 that it was unable, at least temporarily, to bear the burden of supporting twelve students, he arranged for them all to be transferred to Rome, to the residence of the novitiate[156]. A year earlier, precisely on October 27, 1666, the General Congregation ordered the Roman novices of the second year to attend the Collegio Nazareno, under the special care and vigilance of Father Joseph Pennazzi, the Assistant General[157]. The humanistic, philosophical and theological studies were also carried out satisfactorily in Cáller (Sardinia), as some proposals of the Provincial Chapter of February 1671 clearly show. It strongly recommended the continuation of the triennial juniorate, the literary exercises and the philosophical conclusions to be done both publicly and privately[158].

Outside Italy, in 1665, not long after the corresponding decree of the General Chapter, the juniorate of Nikolsburg was established, with Father Karl Hradocki of St. Wenceslas as director of studies, a person who had also rendered outstanding services in other aspects of the appropriate planning of studies in Poland; and three years later, in November 1668, the theological studies of Schlam were also established, presided over by Father Thomas Kosteleczki of St. Wenceslas, a former student of the juniorate of St. Pantaleo[159].

The decree of the General Chapter of 1659, which was also confirmed by the General Chapter of 1665, in which the Provincials and their Assistants were appointed as examiners in each Province, was certainly very useful for the promotion of studies. It was incumbent upon them to approve or reject the ordinands, teachers, confessors, preachers, those who were to be admitted to the habit, and the books of the Piarists which were to be printed[160].

The praiseworthy custom of so-called philosophical conclusions or public academies was spreading more and more, not only in Sardinia but also in Rome, so that on August 21, 1670, the General Congregation, prompted moreover by the example of other Religions, felt compelled to apply some rather strict norms in this matter, “…lest the mind puffed up by science turn away from God, who exalts the humble, and so that the modesty of our religious shine before outsiders instead of boasting”. It was then also recommended that “our religious practice daily and zealously and defend the conclusions privately every month”, but “public conclusions” were forbidden, as was the printing of theses[161].

As we have already seen, no curriculum had yet been drawn up for the Piarists; therefore, the life and work of the students was mainly guided by the respective points of the Constitutions and by the six points of the Rules of the Scholastics contained in the Common Rules approved in 1665[162].

CULTIVATION OF LETTERS

In line with the zeal for studies described above, the ardent love of literature and its cultivation also began to gain strength in the Piarist Institute. Father Camillo Scassellati published several scientific works or texts[163] during this period of six years; Father Gian Carlo Pirroni from the province of Naples already printed some poems[164] during this time, as did Father Segismund Coccapani[165] and Father Lorenzo Fiorita[166] in Etruria. Father Carlo Mazzei did not stop writing his Latin poems and speeches during this generalate either, although he only published one sermon on the Blessed Virgin[167]. Among the religious of the Sardinian province, the restless Father Elisio Sotorreal[168] worked a lot in the field of literature. The noblest province of Poland, for its part, had already begun that enlightened activity and scientific and literary production which soon made it the most fertile mother of almost the entire national life and culture. Among the leading figures are Father Stanislaw Papczynski with his speeches and poems[169], Father Joachim Goralewski[170], Father Ignatius Krzyszkrewiecz with his Poetic Institutions[171], and Father Adalbert Siemierkiewicz, who attracted the sympathy of all the chapter fathers with his speech at the General Chapter of 1671 on the reintegration of the Order[172].

As far as the historiography of the Order was concerned, the General Chapter of 1665 had already entrusted Father Joseph Fedele with the task of beginning the Annals of the Congregation and Father Peter Mussesti with writing the Life of Calasanz[173]. Both tried to fulfil the tasks entrusted to them, but with different results. Father Fedele barely began the Annals, and the few sheets that are preserved today in the General Archives[174] are written without any order[175]. Father Peter Mussesti, to whom we are also indebted for his efforts to restore the Order, worked much more cheerfully and diligently. This religious, who was already active in Father Scassellati’s Generalate, wrote not only the life of the venerable Glycerio Landriani but also a compendium of the life of the Holy Founder in Italian and also began to write his great biography. The compendium of the life, which was revised and completed by Father Cosimo at the beginning of the Generalate and provided with a special dedication to Alexander VII, was given to the Pope by Father General and, as it was never printed, is now in the Chigiana Collection of the Vatican Library[176]. Copies of it can also be found in the General Archives of the Pious Schools[177].

Later, i.e. after his six-year term as General, Father Cosimo Chiara wrote also a Life of Calasanz which we will discuss later.

MISSIONS FOR THE CONVERSION OF HERETICS

The activity of the Piarists in the ultramontane provinces for the conversion of heretics, which had developed so fruitfully since the beginning of the establishment of the Order in these regions, did not cease completely during the generalate of Father Cosimo Chiara, especially in Szepesbéla, a region near Podoliniec in northern Hungary, and from 1666 in Prievidza (Hungary) and the neighboring regions. More than once, petitions were sent to the Holy Congregation of Propaganda Fide calling on the Piarists to open schools as well as to carry out apostolate among the heretics. However, special circumstances prevented these pious wishes from being fulfilled. In 1668, Prince Stanislaus Lubomirski, Count Palatine and Captain of Krakow and Schlam, which was in Hungarian territory but at the time under the jurisdiction and power of the Polish King, humbly asked the Apostolic Nuncio that the mission of Schlam, which had been entrusted to the Fathers of St. Paul, the first hermit, in 1667, should instead be entrusted to the Piarists. The nuncio reported the matter to the provincial of Poland, who indicated that the province could only accept part of this mission. Thus, informed of the situation, the nuncio sent his report to the Sacred Congregation for Propaganda, which, at the meeting of November 5, 1668, after hearing Cardinal Borromeo’s report, rejected this mission to the Piarists for two main reasons: firstly, because the mission had already been entrusted to the Pauline Fathers a year earlier; secondly, because the Piarist Fathers could not take on the entire mission due to the lack of religious and the division of the mission between the Pauline Fathers and the Piarists did not seem opportune or feasible in any way[178]. In 1670, however, at the repeated request of Prince Stanislaus Lubomirski, Father Francis Hanacius of St. Wenceslas was sent to Olasz to assist the Ordinary there in the conversion of heretics[179]. There, after suffering much harassment from the Lutheran heretics, he carried out his apostolic work with such dedication that he achieved numerous conversions in the following years[180].

In 1668 and the following years, the Congregation also attempted to entrust the Piarists - or the Jesuits or the Somascans - with the management of a seminary or college on the island of Zacinto, without any positive result[181].

CHAPTER III

PREPARATION FOR THE GENERAL CHAPTER OF THE YEAR 1671. CELEBRATION OF THE CHAPTER AND MAJOR EVENTS

In the midst of so many important governmental problems, many of which were happily solved by Father Cosimo and his collaborators, especially Father John Charles Caputi, the six-year term of the Generalate was drawing to a close. Therefore, Provincial Chapters had already been convened and celebrated everywhere - even in Sardinia, thanks to the insistence of Father Onofrio Conti[182] - and on November 22, 1670, the Provincials and rectors were also summoned to the General Chapter, which was to begin on 13 May, 1671, in Rome[183].

While Father Cosimo did nothing, directly or indirectly, to be re-elected General, Father Joseph Fedele, the Roman provincial, who had already tried in vain for the office of supreme moderator[184] in the previous Chapter, set about obtaining the office for himself with fervent determination and great preparation.

Assuming that Father Cosimo would somehow obtain another six-year term in Generalate, he presented Clement X with a memorandum on behalf of the Piarists requesting that Father Chiara, who was unsuitable for the duties of government, should not be reappointed to the office without first hearing the Capitular Fathers, especially as the General Chapter had already been convened[185].

He then left no stone unturned to remove Father Onofre Conti, his probable rival, and his most influential friends, the provincials of Germania and Poland, from the General Chapter in every possible way. The truth is that luck seemed to favor him at first, for on the one hand Cardinal Marcio Ginetti, the protector of the Order and great patron of Father Onofrio, died on May 1, 1671, and on the other hand Father Fedele insisted, under senseless pretexts of course, but in an effective way, on proving that the said Fathers had been completely deprived of the active and passive voice because of certain illegal acts committed during their office. But Father Caputi, having learned of this, arranged matters before the respective Congregations of the Holy Office and the Bishops and Regulars in such a way that both Father Onofrio Conti and the said Provincials were able to attend the General Chapter without difficulty[186].

Under these circumstances, the Chapter Fathers were ready to proceed with the election of Father Onofre Conti[187] when Cardinal Camillo de Massimi, the President of the Chapter, who had just been elected President by a Brief dated April 17, 1671, and who had been drawn to the side of Father Fedele by the Duchess of Bracciano and the wife of Prince Gaspar Altieri, the Pope’s nephew[188], suddenly left the Chapter and had to interrupt it[189]. On his return the following day, May 14, he read out an apostolic letter from Clement X before the capitulars, in which Father Joseph Fedele was appointed Superior General and Fathers Camillo Scassellati, Thomas Simone, Alexis Armini and Joseph Pennazzi were appointed General Assistants[190]. The capitulars could not refuse to obey this strict order from Clement X, and Father Conti could do nothing about it either.

Thus ended the six-year generalate of Father Cosimo Chiara. A six-year period full of events, meritorious actions and fruits, in which, even if he himself was not always the main actor - Father Juan Carlos Caputi was often the main actor - he nevertheless proved himself always and on every occasion to be a prudent and careful, fatherly and benevolent moderator, the most vigilant guardian of the best Calasanzian traditions, the most loving of the Founder and his institute. Perhaps, however, he lacked the willpower and energy that the times demanded, especially in the management of the more distant provinces such as Sardinia and Poland. Of course, it was often not he personally who wielded the baton in the most important matters that were decided during his term of office, as the beatification process and the cause of the reintegration of the Order were mainly driven forward by Father Caputi; nevertheless, he possessed a certain diplomatic skill with which he managed on several occasions to bring religious, who were often at odds with each other, to an agreement and to seek the common good.

The positive value of his mandate is further illustrated by the fact that the General Chapter of 1671, which took place just at the end of his govern, did not abolish anything that had been done or removed during his term of office, and hardly added anything to these achievements[191]. It is curious, however, that in this Chapter, with the exception of the speech on the qualities of the General to be elected, given by Father Adalberto Siemierkiewicz[192], there was no mention of the reintegration of the Order, achieved only two years earlier, and no thanks were expressed to Father Cosimo Chiara, who, together with Father Caputi, was the main person responsible for it. Moreover, Father Chiara was severely insulted by Cardinal Camillo de Massimi after reading the Brief about the newly appointed superiors, and he was accused of being ambitious and chasing after vows. However, Father Cosimo bore this humiliation with great patience[193].

CHAPTER IV

LIFE AND ACTIVITIES OF FATHER COSIMO CHIARA AFTER THE GENERALATE (1671-1688)

After the General Chapter, of ungrateful memory for him, Fr. Cosimo Chiara, now free of any burden or the office of a superior, returned to Palermo and devoted himself primarily to pastoral work. He had enough time to write the life of the venerable Father Founder, whom he never knew personally - except that he was present on February 7, 1669, when the body of Calasanz was officially recognized and, taken from the first coffin and placed in another coffin[194] - but he had loved him since his entry into the Religion and for his beatification as well as for the reintegration of the Institute he had worked so hard during his generalate. We do not know exactly when Father Cosme wrote this work, but it is known from certain documents that it was completed as early as the end of 1677-78[195].

It is also difficult to say which sources or documents he used for the preparation of his work. Father Caputi affirms that after the death of Father Berro, Father Cosimo had before him the manuscript of the latter entitled Memorie Historiche. Father Picanyol also does not exclude a certain influence of the life written by Father Elisio Sotorreal, which was printed in Madrid in 1676[196]. In addition to this life and the Memorie Historiche, he could easily have used other documents, which, as General, he made sure were handed over to him and then - when he resigned his office - sent to Sicily to write the desired work with due care[197].

The resulting work, entitled “Life of the Venerable Father Joseph of the Mother of God, Founder of the Religion of the Clerics Regular Poor of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools”, was also very useful for Father Francesco Maria Maggio, a theatine - who published his booklet on the “Facts of the life of the Servant of God Father Joseph of the Mother of God” in Naples in 1680. But, as Fr. John Charles Pirroni testifies, it does not always conform to the postulates of historical truth. It is more a panegyric work written in the style of the ancient hagiographers than a historical work. Perhaps the parts of the work in which the author talks about himself and his personal relationship with Calasanz deserve more trust from readers. The author tried to print his life, but Father Charles Pirroni expressly forbade him to do so because of the shortcomings mentioned above[198]. Father Cosimo did not give up hope of being able to give the Life to the press at some point. To this end, he kept until his death a sum of money that had been given to him for this purpose and which later, when it was found in his room after his death, Father Alexis Armini, then General, at the suggestion of the then Visitator of Sicily, wanted to use to cover the costs of Calasanz’ beatification[199]. For this reason, the life of the Founder, which is divided into thirty-two chapters taking up one hundred and four pages in octavo, is now only kept as a manuscript in the General Archives of the Order[200].

We know little about the other activities that Father Cosimo was able to carry out in Palermo during this period, except that on his return from Rome after the General Chapter, he greeted Father Fedele, his successor in the Generalate, by letter as soon as he arrived in Palermo. He replied to him with gratitude and emotion on July 12, 1671[201]. We also know that in the following months some difficulties arose regarding the religious assigned to him by privilege; Father Cosimo wanted him to become a cleric or priest, while the privilege only allowed the former generals a lay brother[202]. At this time, he also wanted to go to Rome, perhaps to be able to write the life of Calasanz better; but permission to do so was refused[203].

So it was that in May 1677, shortly before the end of Father Fedele’s six-year term of office, the General Chapter was reconvened to elect the new superior and discuss the general problems of the Order. Father Cosimo, who was over sixty years old, then went to Rome again together with the provincial of Sicily; the delegates did not go to the General Chapter because the Provincial Chapter had not taken place due to the threat of war[204]. At the Chapter, Father Fedele appointed him chairman of the Commission for Constitutions, Rules and Rites, which consisted of ten members[205].

After completing the duties of the Chapter and after the election of Fr. John Charles Pirroni as General, and his four assistants, Father Cosimo was appointed Provincial of Sicily on May 12th206, and after returning to the island as such, he governed his beloved province for another three years, although not without difficulties[207]. At the end of these three years, he again asked for a rest and, on the one hand, devoted himself to completing his Life and, on the other, by uniting himself more and more each day with God, Christ and the Blessed Virgin in mystical love, he devoted himself with great success to pastoral work[208] and took care of the people who came to him, among whom he devoutly spread devotion to Calasanz and Glicerio Landriani.

At the next General Chapter, which took place in 1683, Father Chiara took part again, although his health was already failing. At the end of the Chapter, he intended to stay in Rome for a long time - in fact, he stayed there for four months[209] - perhaps to correct his Life according to Father Pirroni’s wishes. But because of his weak health, Father General persuaded him to return to Naples and to go to Posillipo to visit his dear Father Onofrio Conti[210]. But no sooner had he spent two weeks there than he returned to Palermo, lived as quietly as possible with everyone[211] and was generally revered as the common father of the whole Order and especially of the province of Sicily[212]. On March 28, 1685, at the request of Father Pirroni, who was close to death, the former provincial was transferred to the rectorate of Messina and Father Chiara was appointed the new provincial[213]. But this task, partly because of his failing health, partly because of the rebellious attitude of some religious who did not want to recognize him as provincial after the death of Father Pirroni, he did not carry out so willingly, as can be seen from the letters that Father Alexis Armini addressed to him during his term of office. Even the Provincial Chapter itself, which took place under his presidency at the time, was declared null and void by the Sacred Congregation[214]. For this reason, he did not even take part in the General Chapter that took place in April and May 1686, although he enjoyed a double right as provincial and general. When the new provincial was elected in the person of Father Archangel Peres of the Mother of God, Father Chiara, who had already run out of strength, returned to his “idleness”, full of small matters to be solved. He did not neglect the pastoral work and the correction of the Life of Calasanz; moreover, as we have already seen, he cherished the secret hope of being able to publish it one day. Thus, afflicted with a malignant fever, he departed from earthly life in Palermo on March 2, 1688, when he was seventy-one years old, a few days after having completed fifty years in Religion with so much sanctity and profit.

When the news of his happy demise reached Rome, the members of the Confraternity of the Assumption celebrated a solemn funeral on March 29, 1688, for the soul of one who had once given them a share in all the spiritual merits of the Order with a solemn diploma. For his part, Father Alexis Armini, Superior General, expressed in his own name and in the name of the entire Order to Father Archangel Peres, Provincial of Sicily, in a letter full of filial piety for the deceased “because of his holiness of life and his religious virtues”, the common grief of all at the death of such an illustrious person, the father of the entire Order, but above all of Sicily[215]. And shortly after the death of his beloved father, he also ordered that his portrait, or at least a copy of it, should be brought to Rome[216].

It is said that his body remained flexible after death and that for two years, when it was squeezed, fresh blood gushed out. It was also a unanimous and consistent reputation that Father Chiara preserved his virginal candor until death[217]. For this reason, the general opinion of the Piarists very soon began to venerate him among the Venerable of the Order[218].

EPILOGUE

As a brief conclusion, we may assert without fear of error that Father Cosimo was not a person of privileged intelligence or especially gifted to lead a busy life of various affairs or to bear the burden of government. However, by his piety and prudence, by his amiable way of dealing with everyone, by the constant example of his holy life, as well as by his sincere love for Calasanz, for which he felt inflamed, he was able, thanks to the constant collaboration with Father Caputi and taking advantage of the circumstances, to accomplish various achievements in the Institute or in the Order of the Pious Schools worthy of even the most eminent personalities. The process of beatification of Calasanz is due to him; he also achieved the complete restoration of the Order. Therefore, in a certain sense, he should be considered the second father and founder of the Pious Schools and the outstanding disseminator of the cult of Calasanz throughout the Order. This dissemination was not so much through the Life he wrote, but rather through his Calasanzian piety and the constant hardships he took upon himself. Perhaps we are not far from the truth if we judge the Generalate of Father Cosimo Chiara as the happy fruit of the precious and happy collaboration between him and Father Caputi. In fact, the faithful love and piety of the two finally restored the integrity of what Calasanz had founded with a view to the future, with so many and great sufferings and sacrifices. Through the work of Father Cosimo Chiara and Father John Charles Caputi, the Calasanz Institute was finally and permanently stabilized.

APPENDIX

As an appendix we present the “Life of Father Cosimo Chiara”, written with great care and accuracy in 1743 by Father Philip Scoma, former General Assistant and archivist. The Italian manuscript of this life is in the General Archives of the Pious Schools (Reg. Serv. Dei, 60, no. 36) and translates as follows:

“The holy servant of God, Father Cosimo of Jesus Mary, known in the world as Philip, was the son of Vincent Chiara and Catherine Falco Iuguli. He was born on 4 December, 1616 in Bisacquino, diocese of Monreale (Sicily), and was baptized on the same day by Reverend Marco Commisano” (Original certificate in the Provincial Archives).

He took the clerical habit with the license of D. Gabriel de Santostefano, Vicar General of the Most Ill. and Reverend Jerome Venero and Leya, Archbishop and Abbot of Monreale.

He attended his studies with profit and completed the course of philosophy and sacred theology in the seminaries of Monreale and Palermo (handwritten letter, September 6, 1643).

At the age of twenty, he wanted to become a religious of the Pious Schools... excluding two other Religions. Before doing so, he wanted to ask the great servant of God, Father Luigi la Nusa, for advice. When he met him at the door of his house and began to speak to him, the latter said to him:

“Forgive me, for I am dealing with a gentleman who has called me. As for you, carry out the project you have recently undertaken, for this is the will of God. It is his will, do not change it”.

After saying this, he dismissed him with a smile on his face. So, we read in the life of Father Luigi la Nusa, written by Father Michael Frazzetti of the Society of Jesus, in Palermo in 1677, in book 3, chapter 3, fol. 285.

On February 24, 1638, in Palermo, he received the habit in the Religion of the Pious Schools from the hands of the provincial, Fr. Andrew of the Passion. After completing the two-year probationary period with great edification and profit, he made his solemn profession on February 25, 1640 in the aforementioned city of Palermo at the hands of Provincial, Ven. John Dominic of the Cross (from the book in the Provincial Archives).

At this point it is worth noting what Father Francis Mary Maggio, Cleric Regular and a very learned and respected writer, wrote about Father Cosimo in “On the life and Deeds of the Ven. Servant of God Father Joseph of the Mother of God”, which was printed in Naples in 1680 and was perhaps told by Father Cosimo himself, a close friend of the author (fol. 44, no. 102): “When he was in the novitiate (he speaks of Fr. Cosimo), he wished to go to Rome with others to meet Joseph in person, having heard much of the fame of his virtues; but stopping at Palermo, he expressed his wish to him by letter. The servant of God answered him thus:

“A time will come when, like another Abraham, you will leave your native land to beget a great posterity”.

Thus the author quoted above. The same is also attested in Rome with affidavits from many of our good and ancient fathers, now deceased, through information from Fr. Cosimo himself. From there he was able to write Father Innocent of St. Joseph, of Lucca, rector and later General Procurator of the Pious Schools, in the ‘Life of the Venerable Father Joseph of the Mother of God, Founder, Propagator and First General of the said Religion’, printed in Rome in 1734, in lib. 4, chap. 22. fol. 322:

“When Father Cosimo de Jesus was still a novice of our religion in Palermo, he had a great desire to know his Ven. Father personally, because he heard every day of his life and holiness. And expressing in a letter to his blessed Father the eagerness he had in his heart to go to Rome to meet him, in the event that he would deign to grant him permission to do so, as he requested, the Ven. General answered: ‘Stay there, for a time will come when you, like another Abraham destined for a great multitude, will leave your home and come to Rome’. The good religious did not even understand much later, and how much less then, the meaning of such words.”

Thus the author quoted; and he goes on to verify the prophecy, which is written in the place where it should be mentioned.

On May 25, 1641, in the city of Mazara, he was ordained priest (in the catalog, by his own hand) by His Eminence Cardinal Spinola, bishop of the same city. In the same year, at the request of Father Vincent of the Conception, superior of that house, the Founder wanted to send him to Messina to serve those schools, to which he replied from Rome on September 14 and November 17, 1641. But the Fathers of Palermo kept him because of the need of the first and largest school, to which he was satisfactorily assigned, as can be seen from the letters of the V. Fr. Founder to the said Father, who was in Messina.

In 1642, by order of the V. Fr. Founder, he was transferred to Messina, as we have seen before, but under another superior; and there he was teacher of the first school, confessor and administrator of the house in support of the superior, and because of his virtues, perfection and goodness, always zealous for regular observance. He lived there until 1655, loved and respected by all, religious and laity alike.

In his letter of January 26, 1644 to the superiors in Rome, the Apostolic Visitator and the newly appointed Assistants, he promoted and proposed the foundation of the Pious Schools in Taormina, with a very favorable offer of support from a nobleman of that city, an admirer of his. But since the Religion was governed by people who had little affection for it and for the Ven. Founder, the proposal and the offer were not accepted (Letter in the Gen Arch.).

On March 16, 1646, the Pope... In this time of misfortune and decay of the whole Religion, Father Cosimo, in his letter of July 14, 1646 to the venerable Founder of the Order, affirmed his constancy and confidence in God with all fervor and zeal for the Observance, for his Institute and for the maintenance of that poor house, which had fallen into dire straits from the malcontents. And in accordance with the spirit and virtue of the superior, who was then the servant of God, Father Francis of Jesus, he implored the help of prayers and the blessing of the Founder (from the Gen. Arch.).

On April 23, 1648, in an unhappy time of decline of the Religion, as mentioned above, and of the freedom of some religious, he was elected superior or minister of this poor house:

“For, - wrote Fr. Maggio (quoted above, fol. 97, n. 104) - there was a certain person there as rector, who had been appointed by the Visitator and General Vicar who was more inclined to dissolve the Congregation than to establish it, and who had abandoned the religious habit”.

With all this, Father Cosimo prevented the execution of the above-mentioned Brief in this archiepiscopal court, retained the religious so that they did not abandon the Religion, and ran the school, the refectory and the sacristy, as he wrote to the Founder on August 17, 1648, adding:

“I do not know how to rest in this scarcity and labors, in addition to the daily cares. I commend myself to the prayers of your Paternity, so that with the grace of the Lord I may be able to fulfill everything. Finally, I kiss your feet and ask for your holy blessing” (from Gen. Arch.)

And when the election of a superior for one year was made by the fathers of the community, the above-mentioned father was elected twice more as superior of the house, namely on April 30, 1650 and on May 12, 165l. And each time, as usual, he was confirmed with the patent of the Monsignor of the Monarchy, to whom they were subject by royal protection, which he received at the beginning of the foundation instead of the Ordinary.

During this period and before the death of the Holy Father, which occurred on August 25, 1648, what happened to Father Cosimo in Messina is described by the aforementioned Father Maggio (fol. 98) in these words:

“As there was nothing in the house to feed the community, someone appeared who had never been seen before, and after calling Father Cosimo through the janitor, who was the administrator, he handed him a sum of money and promised to encourage him, that he would never lack divine help. Then he disappeared. The proven accuracy of the prophecy and the striking resemblance of his face indicated that it was an angel, or rather Joseph, as we piously assume, who fell there”.

Perhaps the above-mentioned author had received it from the lips of Father Cosimo himself. As he said, it was formally confirmed under oath by Father John of St. Cosmas and Father Louis of St. Andrew. The latter wrote in his affidavit that after giving him the money, the Father Founder told him that another fifty escudos would be given to him in a few days, which was done after ten days. (He heard it from Fr. Cosimo himself. The records are in the Provincial Archives. It was also written down by Father Joseph of St. Lawrence of the Pious Schools in his book entitled Triumph of the Gospel, in the General Archives).

On August 11, 1655, he was elected and confirmed Superior of the House of Palermo, as before, for one year.

However, on January 24, 1656, Pope Alexander VII, with his Bull Dudum felicis recordationis etc., judging by experience that the Pious Schools were useful to Christian society, as we read in the said Bull, although they had been destroyed and ruined by Innocent X, restored them to the status of a secular Congregation with simple vows and an oath to remain in the congregation, with dispensation and absolution reserved for the Pope alone. With this Bull, the Pious Schools received some relief, but they remained very restricted and limited, for the Congregation and the persons were still subject to the Ordinaries, who had to approve the prefects and the teachers of the schools. The first had to be priests at the age of thirty-two, the others at twenty-eight. Novices were not allowed to put on the habit before the age of eighteen and only took their vows after a two-year probation, during which they were obliged to give up an annual income for their upkeep. On April 4th of the same year, 1656, the said Pope Alexander VII, by another Bull Ex Romani Pontificis providentia, appointed Father John of Jesus Mary as General of the Congregation for three years, together with four other Assistants named in the said Bull, and with the power to appoint the other superiors of the Provinces and houses. They elected and confirmed Father Cosimo as rector of Palermo with a patent a beneplacito, dated April 15, 1656, in Rome. He was confirmed in the direction of the said house by Father Camillo of St. Jerome, the General successor, with a new patent dated February 28, 1660 in Rome (Inocenc., lib. 5; chap. 18 of the Life, etc.).

On February 12, 1662, the above-mentioned Father Camillo, General, appointed Father Cosimo provincial of Sicily. But neither as minister or rector, nor as provincial, either at Messina or Palermo, did he ever fail to teach, like any of the other teachers appointed; and so we read of his hand in the catalogs sent to Rome (from the General Archives).

In 1665, as provincial, it was his turn to travel to the General Chapter in Rome. Although he presented himself there as an unknown, he was nevertheless discovered by the worthy merits of his soul and by the doctrine, and was unanimously elected Superior General on May 13th. It was then that he recognized and understood the prophecy that the Founder had made to him so many years before. Father Cosimo was destined to become the father of a large family. For this reason, the Hemerology of the Religion states that he

“…when he was still a young man who wanted to go to Rome, Our Venerable Patriarch prophesied to him in a letter many years earlier the leadership of the entire Order”.

And in the new summary and answers (in the cause of the beatification of our Founder, printed in Rome in 1714): “As the fourth Superior General, he led the Religion in an outstanding way by word and example”. Immediately after his appointment as General, he had his Procurator General appeal to the Sacred Congregation to free the Institute from the inconveniences of the parish priests who questioned the privileges to which the religious were entitled with regard to funerals, the “fourth” and similar matters. The Sacred Congregation declared in its decree issued in Rome on July 10, 1665:

“The Order of the Pious Schools must enjoy the privileges which, according to the Apostolic Constitutions, apply to burials and the “fourth funeral” and similar matters which apply to the other regular Orders. Without anything to the contrary (here the Visitation enters)”.

After obtaining and receiving the above-mentioned decree of liberation, he immediately prepared personally for a General Visitation for the reform of the customs. He announced it on August 12th and left Rome on October 12, 1665, visiting the provinces of Naples, Florence, Genoa and Sardinia. And in the affidavits, it is testified by the same Father General that while he was traveling in a boat to Sardinia, in the company of other passengers, among whom was a good Jesuit whose name has not been preserved, he was in danger of being killed by a large iron ball that happened to hit him directly in the head while he was lying on the ground. And so it would have happened if a hand that the Jesuit priest in question saw in the air had not blocked the blow, as he reported. The Father General, for his part, always said it was his Ven. Founder Father’s hand. (From the affidavit in the General Archives)

As the Congregation of Pious Schools was suffering at that time from a lack of subjects to support the Institute in the kingdoms, provinces and houses it had founded - both because it had been severely tested by various vicissitudes and because of the damage caused by the plague in the kingdoms of Italy, Poland and Sardinia - he sought and received help from Pope Clement IX to remedy the situation, through the Holy Congregation of Bishops and Regulars dated on December 17, 1667, a grace that went beyond the restrictions imposed by Alexander VII. He granted Father General the right to select and appoint teachers for the schools at his own discretion before they had reached the age of twenty-eight, provided they were priests. That cleric novices could profess after only one year of novitiate, Father General waiving the second year, and that profession could be made after the age of seventeen. Regardless of this, etc.

In 1669 he was not satisfied with the relief he had received from the Apostolic See in favor of his Congregation, but strove to restore its original splendor. He had a memorandum presented to the aforementioned Pope Clement IX in his own name and in the name of the entire Congregation, in which, kneeling at the feet of His Holiness, he explained to him the changed condition and situation of his Congregation under the aforementioned Popes and asked him to restore it to the status of a religious Order, with all the privileges of the mendicant Orders which it had enjoyed at the beginning. And so it happened, with the favor of Grand Duke Ferdinand II of Tuscany, Cardinal Leopold of Florence and many other cardinals and princes, and with the untiring help of Father John Charles of St. Barbara, Procurator; but above all with the fervor of the prayers and patronage of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Our Lady. The Pope entrusted the matter first to the examination of a special congregation of three prelates and then to the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars. And since, after the consultation, the vote of both commisions was completely in favor, His Holiness promulgated the great Bull Ex iniuncto Nobis of October 23, 1669. By it, as a special favor to the present General and for the happy progress of the Religion, he restored, redirected and reintegrated in everything and for everything, to the regular state and true Religion of solemn vows, with the communication of all the privileges of the mendicant orders which they had obtained by virtue of the two Bulls of Gregory XV (Innoc., lib. 5 cap. 19).

And since there was no lack among the religious some with authority who wanted to introduce a relaxation of the rules that the holy Founder of the Order had established and commanded, the above-mentioned Father John Charles, Procurator, upholding the zeal of Fr. Cosimo, his General, and in order to destroy the insidiousness of the common enemy at a stroke, he acted in secret with the Sacred Congregation and the Pope in such a way that in the same diploma of reintegration, the observance of the Bull Cum sicut accepimus, issued by Alexander VII on April 28, 1660, was expressly confirmed and unbreakably prescribed. This established the duration of the General, the authority of the Assistants, the form of the habit and other matters relating to the good government of the Religion. To the incredible joy of Father General and all the good religious, who, not without tears of joy, publicly and devoutly thanked the Lord and then the Pope, because he had finally deigned to grant the struggling Religion its revival and glorification. This confirmed what the Holy Founder and Father had repeatedly predicted to his religious in word and writing until his last breath, assuring them that God would restore the Religion to its original state, and all the more so through the intercession of the most holy Mary, under whose protection and patronage he had founded it for the benefit of poor youth (Fr. Maggi, lib. cit., p. 95. Fr. John Charles, Notizie Historiche, extensively).

Here we should take into account what Father John Charles of St. Barbara wrote in his Notizie Historiche (vol. 1, para. 3, f. 139, n. 513). When the Founder was asked in 1632 by Cardinal Torres, Archbishop of Monreale, who should succeed him as General of the Order, the Founder replied that his successor in the Order had not yet been born. No further thought was given to these words at first, but they were understood when the Religion was restored and Father Cosimo became General. He was the first in the Order after the Blessed Founder, as the other two, namely Father John of Jesus Mary and Father Camillo of St. Jerome, were Generals of the Congregation. He said that he was not yet born, because in 1632 the Order had not been founded in Sicily, nor was Father Cosimo a religious. He wrote this with the confirmation of Brother Mark Anthony of the Cross, who was present when the Father said this, and who trusted the said Brother very much, as a true servant of God, full of zeal and without passion. As such, he almost always praised him in his letters to Palermo, addressed to Father Melchior of the All Saints. When the aforementioned brother was vice-master in Palermo, he also told the novices, among whom was Father Vincent of St. Francis, who died of old age and deposed him, as he had heard from the said brother.

In the same year the prophecy of the Founder was also fulfilled, which he had made and promised to Father Cosimo when, as a young man, he wanted to go to Rome to see him; for he replied that he would go there, certainly like Abraham, and he also said, “That he would see him on a better occasion.” And so it happened, for after three years as General he endeavored to advance the cause of the canonization of the holy Founder in Rome, and on October 10, 1667, he received from Clement IX the commission to introduce the cause, with the power to examine the process carried out with ordinary authority on April 21, 1688. The decree of the Sacred Congregation to the Cardinal Vicar for the introduction of the process by apostolic authority “ne probationes pereant” (so that the evidence does not perish) was issued on November 24, 1688. A further decree of the Sacred Congregation was issued to the three bishops who had been instructed by Cardinal Vicar to instruct the said process and to examine the tomb and relics of the Servant of God. Finally, on February 7, 1669, Father General Cosimo was present when the body of the Blessed Servant of God, his Founder, was removed from the coffin with due caution and solemnity as described by the commissioned judges, and on this occasion he had the consolation of seeing it as it had been foretold to him.

Father Louis de St. Andrew, a Palermitan, testified and said that Father Cosimo himself told him that when he was General, a brother, a man of holy life, came to him in the morning before the beginning of common prayer, and told him that the previous night the Founder had appeared to him and commanded him to tell Father General to endeavor to restore our Religion, that a place in heaven was prepared for him (from the affidavit in the Prov. Arch.).

At this time Father General was not lacking in contradictions and furious persecutions, which, however, he resisted saintly with all his zeal and overcame them with divine help. When the grace of the longed-for and prophesied reintegration of the Order was obtained, there were, as already mentioned, some religious who had taken simple vows with the oath of perseverance and did not want to enter into the new state of the Order, as they did not feel called to take solemn vows. Unable to live in peace with the solemnly consecrated religious or to live with them without disturbing the peace and government, the Ven. Father Cosimo addressed a request to Pope Clement X to free the applicants from the simple vows and the oath, in order to purify the Religion from the discontented, as the body from the bad tempers that afflicted it. His Holiness entrusted the matter to a Special Congregation of prelates who had been specially appointed for this purpose. After the matter had been examined several times, the consultation was in accordance with the wishes of the most zealous General, for it was approved and confirmed by Pope Clement X in his 23rd constitution Cum felicis rec. Clem. Papae IX, of October 18, 1670 (Bullarium, Vol. 5, p. 520). In it he allowed Father Cosimo to release from simple vows and the oath of perseverance all those clerics and lay brothers who did not make solemn profession within two months in Italy, within three months on the neighboring islands and within four months outside Italy and the aforementioned islands. At the end of this period, which was fixed in the manner indicated, he was to expel them from the Order. But if they were priests and wanted to remain, they were to be deprived of their active and passive voice. And in case they wanted to leave the Order, he was to absolve them as before, and announce to them the suspension of the orders until they were able to support themselves, or to possess sufficient property or benefice to support themselves, under the obedience of the Ordinaries. Many religious were dismissed from the Order, which became purified, stable and calm as a result of this relief. On November 22, 1670, Father General, with the Pope’s blessing, invited all provinces to the General Chapter, which was to take place in Rome on May 10, 1671.

In 1671, the General Chapter was celebrated, as we have just said. On May 14, Father Joseph of the Visitation, through the action of Cardinal Camillo de Massimi, president of the Chapter, was appointed general for six years in a Brief from Pope Clement X and was given four Assistants named in the letter. The former general Father Cosimo was relieved of his office and returned to Palermo, where he did not remain inactive, but always devoted himself to his work and worked for the good of the Order and the house, despite all the illnesses that plagued him. He had to travel to Rome twice more as ex-general to attend the next two General Chapters. He was also twice elected Provincial of Sicily by General Father Gian Carlo Pirroni, on May 12, 1677 and March 28, 1685 until May 28, 1686, the day on which the new election of superiors under Father Alexis of the Conception, the new General, took place.

Apart from what has been said above, what was Fr. Cosimo like? This is clear from the summary of the responses printed in Rome by the Rev. Cam. Ap. 1714 and submitted to the Sacred Congregation for the Beatification of Ven. Father Founder (f.57, n.32), where it says

“Ven. Cosimo of Jesus Mary, of the family of Chiara and Falco, of Bisacquino, diocese of Monreale, in Sicily, a priest of great virtue, fervent in prayer, broken by vigils and fasts, and always indefatigable in other works. He was so obstinate an executor of all the norms of regular discipline that he never omitted a bit or an iota. It is a permanent fame that he preserved his virginal candor intact until death. As the fourth Superior General, he governed the Order in the best possible way with his word and his example. He died in Palermo on March 2, 1688, at the age of 72 and 51 years of Religion. His body was found flexible after his death; and for two years fresh blood flowed when it was pressed”.

In the book entitled “Memories of those who have gone before us in the sign of faith and sleep in peace” and in the Hemerologium it says

March 2, 1688. In Palermo, Sicily, death of Ven. Father Cosimo of Jesus Mary, former General, an honest and exemplary man, very obstinate in the regular discipline, assiduous in hearing confessions, and very zealous for our Institute. He practiced meekness and charity in his government, for which he was loved by God and men, not only by religious and subjects, but also by laymen and nobles. He loved our Venerable Father and Founder deeply while he was still alive, and after his death he venerated him with singular devotion and promoted his beatification with diligent efforts and almsgiving. He guided the Religion excellently with his word and example, restoring it and ensuring that it was reestablished to its original state. It is narrated that he preserved his virginal candor until his death and that he was often seen with the gift of tears and a radiant face during the festivities, as has already been said”.

Everything that is written in the above-mentioned memoirs and in the Hemerologium can be found in the affidavits sent to Rome by the aforementioned religious. Also by Father Vincent of St. Francis, who died in Palermo on December 11, 1699, at the age of 84, and 66 years of Religion, and of Father Dominic of St. Rosalie, who died in Palermo on December 19, 1702, at the age of 81 years and 60 years of Religion.

I, Philip of Jesus Mary, former Assistant General and Archivist, certify that I have written all the above truthfully and taken it from authentic sources. In the Pious Schools of Palermo, January 31, 1743.

NOTES

1 Printed articles of some importance about Fr. Cosme are the following:

Horányi, P. Chiara, Cosmus a Iesu Maria, Scriptores Piarum Scholarum, I, Budae, 1801, pp. 377-378; E. Llanas, Venerable P. Cosme Chiara y Falcon de Jesús y María, Escolapios Insignes, II, Madrid, 1899, pp. 403-408; Th. Viñas, P. Cosmus Chiara a Iesu Maria, Index bio-bibliographicus Scriptorum Scholarum Piarum,III, Romae, 1911, pp. 107-108; L. Picanyol, In antiquos de Sancto Iosepho Calasanctio Scriptores Commentaria, P. Cosmus Chiara a Iesu et Maria, Eph. Cal. II (1933) 56-58. Among the manuscript works, it has some value the Life composed in 1743 by Fr. Philip Scoma, which is currently preserved in the General Archives (Reg. Serv. Dei LX, 36) and which, as an appendix, appears here translated for the first time. Also of some value are some depositions signed under oath on the life and customs of Father Cosimo, which are also in the General Archives (Reg. Serv. Dei, LX, nn. 37-40), but these illustrate only the ascetic aspect of his life. Finally, we find some autobiographical data in the “Life of Calasanz” composed by Father Cosimo (Reg. Cal., 87). The Liber Defunctorum A (Reg. Cal., 36 f, 113) and the Catalogus Religiosorum from 1630 to 1718 (Reg. Cal., 3) hardly add something important.

2 Most of this information is taken from the life written by Fr. Scoma; as for his brother Pietro Antonio, see the Catalogue of Professed of the Sardinian Province (Reg. Prov., 26, 4) and the Catalogue of Religious since 1630... (Reg. Rel., 3, f. 7r.).

3 See the “Life of Calasanz”, written by Fr. Cosimo himself (Reg. Cal., 87, ff. 91-92).

4 See in the Appendix the life composed by Fr. Scoma.

5 Cf. letters P 3741, 544 (P 3742), P 3748, P 3760.

6 Cf. letters P 3773, P 3782, P 3792.

7 See in the Appendix the Life composed by Father Scoma and the Chronological Memoirs of the Province of Sicily, written by the same father, in the General Archives (Reg. Prov., 26. 1).

8 Cf. the Chronological Memoirs (Reg. Prov., 26, 1, f. 1v): “Until 1656 the religion was reduced to a congregation, but the province of Sicily was not subject to the Ordinaries, but was governed as before under the royal protection of the monarchy. Every year the religious of the houses met and elected capitulary the superior under the presidency of a person delegated by the judge of the monarchy, who, once the election had been made by vote, issued the patent to the elected one, in accordance with the commission received from His Excellency the Marquis of Velez, then Viceroy of Sicily. And the Fathers at that time were governed with peace and edification. The ministry was exercised with fervor; and the alms continued, to the point that it was possible to continue developing a little activity. The model of the aforementioned patent was as follows (this is the first patent):

“We U. I. Dr. D. Luis Alonso de los Cameros, of the Council of His Catholic Majesty, Abbot of St. Mary of Terrana and of the Holy Spirit of the city of Caltanissetta, Ordinary Judge of the court of the Monarchy in this kingdom of Sicily in place of His Catholic Majesty.

The election of the local superiors of the Congregation of the Clerics Regular Poor of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools corresponded according to the primitive Constitutions to their Superior General. But since for some years the said congregation has lacked both a general and a provincial, the said fathers have had recourse to us many times in this kingdom of Sicily and have earnestly begged us to deign to receive them and their houses under our tutelage and special patronage, and to provide them with the opportune remedy for the proper administration of the said houses and especially for the election of superiors. We, acceding to their repeated requests and helping them in their need, in order to maintain and preserve, as far as it is on our part, such a pious and proficient work, now deprived of almost all support, we have allowed the said elections to be made by the Chapter of fathers who have voice in the houses. And in order that they might be made with peace and tranquility, we have adopted the custom of appointing or designating a person to take part in the said election on our behalf, and then to approve the one elected and maintain him in office with our patent.

Therefore, since the fathers of the house of Palermo, assembled in chapter with the intervention of M. Rev. Dr. and Canon Cantor of the Sacred Palace D.N.N. as president of the Chapter and acting in our stead in this matter, and with the assistance of N.N., then our pro-master notary, in scrutinizing the votes, have canonically elected you Father N. de S.N. for their minister and superior of the aforesaid house. We approve the aforesaid election and command in virtue of holy obedience to each and every one of the fathers and brothers of the house, that they have, treat and consider you as their true and legitimate superior.

And therefore, that they submit to you in everything and render obedience to you, according to the rules and ministry of the congregation, if they wish to avoid the penalties indicated therein and others that could be inflicted at our discretion.

Given in Palermo on the 11th day of August of the 8th Indiction of 1647. Esteban Cornacchia, promaster Notary”.

9 See the Life written by Fr. Scoma in the Appendix.

10 The letters as such were lost with the passage of time; but the Life written by Fr. Scoma preserves his argument and some fragments of them. Here is one of them which is of interest to our purpose: “I do not know how to rest in scarcity and in labors, apart from daily worries. I commend myself to your prayers, so that with the grace of the Lord I may be able to give satisfaction in everything. In conclusion, I kiss your feet and ask for your holy blessing”.

11 Cf. the Life in the Appendix.

12 Cf. Reg. Prov., 26, n. 8, where in particular we find the letter of the Duchess of Newfoundland, addressed on June 2, 1655 to the Father who resided in Rome, and that of Simeon, Archbishop of Messina, sent on June 21, 1655 to Cardinal Ginetti.

13 Thus is told by Fr. Scoma in his Life repeatedly cited; however, in the register of the General Congregations (Reg. Gen., 8) it is verified that the patent of Fr. Chiara as rector of Palermo was not signed until August 4, 1656.

14 Cf. Minutes of the Cong. Gen. (Reg. Gen., 9, f. 12).

15 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong. (Reg. Gen., 9), on March 10, 1662; April 28, 1662; June 2, 1662; August 25, 1662.

16 With donations offered in consideration of the Province; cf. Minutes Gen. Cong., May 23, 1664.

17 These were the Jesuits, who assured that the Piarists, being of simple vows only, could leave the congregation without major difficulties. Cf. Minutes Gen Cong., June 16, 1662.

18 As stated in the Life written by Father Scoma (cf. Appendix).

19 We do not know what specific matters he dealt with at that time. Perhaps the cause for the beatification of Calasanz. In fact, the postulatory letter of the Grand Duke of Tuscany requesting the beatification of Calasanz is dated June 7, 1664 in Florence. Cfr. Register of Patents, etc., in the Secr. Vat. Arch., S. Congr. of Bishops and Regulars, Piarists, 2, f. 280v.

20 Cf. the Life of Calasanz written by Fr. Cosimo, f. 92r.

21 Cf. the Life written by Fr. Scoma.

22 Cf. Min. Cap. Gen. of the year 1655, in Arch. Schol. Piar., II (1937) 12-13. Read as well what we have written in our article P. Camillus Scassellati, Rector Collegii Nazareni et tertius Generalis Ordinis Scholarum Piarum: “Eph. Cal.”, XXX (1961) 258.

23 Cf. Min. Cap. Gen. 1665, l. c.

24 Cf. Min. Cap. Gen. 1655, Arch. Schol. Piar., II (1937) 11-12.

25 Ibidem, pp. 14-15.

26 Ib. p.14

27 Perhaps at the beginning he thought to visit also the provinces of Germania and Poland, since the letter intimating the visit was read also in Germania. Cf. B. Bartlik, Annales Scholarum Piarum, f. 500v.

28 Cf. Min. Cong. Gen. (Reg. Gen., 10, f. 6r).

29 The text of the letter of intimation can be found in B. Bartlik, o. c., ff. 500r and v, and reads as follows:

“The affection which I treasure for your Reverends makes me somewhat impatient to meet you in each of the houses of our Congregation; for I have the greatest desire to see you all, and to be comforted by your treatment, and to partake of the fraternal love, peace, and union with which you live together in the religious state. I desire this for no other reason than to be inspired to greater perfection by your example. Every religious should not only strive for this, but also feel obliged to do so with the greatest zeal, especially we who are not far from our venerable Founder. To inhale the fragrance of his goodness and holiness should be our main task, so that we may deserve to attain the joy of the Lord that has been promised to us.

Accept, then, Your Reverences, that I am setting out to share with you this common consolation and to reach the goal of my desire, which is to see in reality the affection with which you respond to one another in the Institute. Surely it is no longer time for our religious to doze in deep sleep inside the nave of the Institute, for everyone must fear being rebuked by the divine voice: Why are you so downcast and so sound asleep? Get up and call upon your God! So let us rise to observe closely the course left to us by our venerable Founder, with whom we have also united ourselves in our first vocation. I cannot express in words the joy I shall feel when, God willing, I devote myself to the inspection of our provinces and houses (which I hope to begin next fall), when I see the zeal and fervor of the spirit in the regular discipline and in the optimal formation of the studious youth; and also that the abuses are eradicated which the enemy easily sows through human weakness in the midst of the good seeds of virtue sown and scattered by our first peasants. And when I perceive everywhere the fragrance of piety and Christian holiness, and hear the glory of the poor being extolled to the Mother of God, I cannot but be infinitely grateful to the Divine Majesty. Be joyful, then, beloved in the Lord, be joyful, I say, in mutual affection of perfect charity, and endeavor to preserve the good name before all; and may God, who has sown holy desires in your hearts, inflame you in his love, and give you all his holy, abundant, and luxuriant blessings.

Given at Rome, in our residence of St. Pantaleo, August 16, 1665.

Most humble servant in Christ of Your Reverences

Cosimo of Jesus and Mary, Superior General”.

30 See the decree published on this day, in the Minutes of Cong. Gen. (Reg. Gen., 10, f. 6r).

31 Cf. Min. Gen. Cong. (Reg. Gen. 10, f. 7); B. Bartlik, o. c., f. 502v; J. C. Caputi, Notizie Historiche, III, 7 (2), n. 236.

32 See the intimation of the visit to the Roman houses in B. Bartlik, o. c., ff. 500v and 501r; also the Minutes of the Visitation of Narni, October 14, 1665 (Reg. Prov., 42, Narni, 39).

33 See the Minutes of the General Visitation in the professed house of Florence (Reg. Prov., 20, Professed House, 25; October 28, November 9, 1665).

34 See the Minutes of the General Visitation of Savona (Reg. Prov., 6, Savona, 25; December 5, 1655).

35 Cf. Min. Gen. Cong. (Reg. Gen., 10, f. 13r) and B. Bartlik, o.c., f. 509v.

36 Cf. L. Cavada, Crónica de esta nuestra provincia de Sardeña, I. f. 60. Hist.-Bibl., 24.

37 Const. P. III, cc. IV-V.

38 See the rules and the formula of the Visitation of the Rules and Common Rites approved in the year 1665 (Reg, Gen., 92).

39 Cf. Min. Gen. Cong. on June 17, 1666 (Reg. Gen., 10, f. 13r).

40 On the visit, see also the summary report of P. L. Picanyol in “Rassegna di Storia e Bibliografi a Scolopica”, XVII (1951) 18.

41 See the Register of Patents of Fr. Scassellati in the Arch. Secr. Vat. (Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, Piarists, 2f, 220r. Cf. “Eph. Cal.”, XXX (1961) 268, note 143.

42 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., III, 7 (2), n. 235.

43 Min. Gen. Cong. (Reg. Gen., 10, f. 6v).

44 Cf. Min. Gen. Cong., f. 15; October 3, 1665.

45 See J. C, Caputi, o. c., III, 7 (2), n. 260. This lady, whose full name was Leonor Baroni Castellana (1611-1670), was the daughter of the equally famous singer Adriana Basile and one of the most remarkable personalities of the Italian lyric theater of the seventeenth century. She was celebrated for the goodness of her manners and the quality of her voice in her poems by John Milton, the great English poet, and by D. Giulio Rospigliosi, the Roman prelate of the time. When the latter was elected Pope, he did not forget her, who, already widowed, had her house in Rome as the center of the city’s cultural life. Donna Leonor was initially a penitent of Father Peter Mussesti, and after his death, of Father John Charles Caputi. In 1668, she was elected president of the Confraternity of St. Anne, which was located in St. Pantaleo. In this position she greatly helped the church and the religious, especially through her happy efforts to reintegrate the Order. Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., 111, 7 (2), nn. 228, 231, 232, 258, 260, 418. See also the following works: A. Ademollo, La Leonora di Milton e di Clemente Nono, Edizioni Ricordi, s. a.; V. Costazuti, Applausi poetici alle glorie della Signara Leonora Baroni, Roma, 1639, ed. sec. 1641; Enciclopedia Italiana Treccani, VI, c.225.

46 Cfr. B. Bartlik, o. c., f. 503r and v.

N.B. of the translator. Father Severino Giner in El proceso de beatificación de S. José de Calasanz (Madrid, 1973, p. 119, note 123) has shown that the designation of Cardinal de Elce as presenter of the cause took place on April 8, 1665 (not 1666 as, by mistake, Father Santha states), and therefore still during the generalate of Father Scassellati.

47 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., III, 7 (2), nos. 275-283; L. Picanyol, Lezioni di Storia Scolopica, Lezione XI, “Rassegna di Storia e bibliografia Scolopica”, XVIII (1951) 12-14.

48 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., 111, 7 (2), passim and mainly nos. 292, 396; B. Bartlik, o. c., ff. 502v, 510r; see also the postulatory letters (Reg. Cal, 25).

49 See the Life of Calasanz written by Fr. Cosimo (f. 92r and v).

50 Cf. B. Bartlik, o. c., ff. 513-514.

51 See L. Picanyol, Dissertatio de Processibus Beatificationis, in “Eph. Cal.”, XVII (1948) 114.

52 Cf. L. Picanyol, Dissertatio de Processibus Beatifcationis, in “Eph. Cal.”, XVII (1948) 115.

53 Cf. the dissertation of Father Scassellati, in “Eph. Cal.”, XXX (1961) 208-209.

54 The text of this memorandum is found in the Arch. Secr. Vat. (Series Regulars, Piarists, 4, no.9).

55 This decree is also found in the place indicated in the previous note. But an authentic copy is also in the General Archives of the Pious Schools (Reg. Gen., 2, n. 4).

56 See the decree in Reg. Gen., 2, n.3.

57 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), ff. 15v and ff. The text of the privilege granted to the Piarists by King Casimir on July 23, 1655, can be found in B. Bartlik, o. c., ff. 424-425. This privilege allows the religious “that they may and can establish the Pious Schools in our city of Warsaw, open them and in them, according to their ministry, to the exercise of which they were called and received by the said Most Serene Predecessor and our brother, teach the youth from the first concepts up to and including rhetoric, as well as teach moral theology and add the practice of arithmetic and writing.”

58 As for the nature of this lawsuit, see what the Apostolic Nuncio in Poland refers to the Roman Curia on November 21, 1688 (Arch. Secr. Vat., Nunciature of Poland, 81, f. 505r and v): “...A few weeks ago the Jesuit Fathers opened public schools in this city, which they have never done in the past, although I understand they have been thinking about it for several years. The Fathers of the Pious Schools want to prevent them from doing so and, as they have not been able to achieve this through the courts, they have turned to the authorities; but they have not even received anything from them so far. The spirits of the religious of one Religion and the other were stirred up, and they provoked each other with writings that were published to the great scandal of the laity. In order that the evil may not increase, I have thought it expedient to call upon both parties to desist from such attempts, conceding to them the right to obtain by judicial process what is due to them in the fundamental question of the schools.” Father Caputi refers practically to the same thing about this litigation, o. c., III, ff. 88-89. On the reduction of the Piarist Order to a simple congregation without vows, which was sought by the Jesuits on this occasion, see the document “Information on the Pious Schools” kept in the General Archives (Reg. Prov., 57, Warsaw House, 16). On the Piarists’ attempt to settle this dispute once and for all, see the report by Fr. Caputi (Reg. Prov., 57, House of Warsaw, 16) and the Minutes of the General Congregation of 22.2.1669 (Reg., Gen, 10, f. 29r), when the Congregation decided the following: “It was decided to write a letter to Poland to the Father Provincial and the others that in the matter of the schools opened by the Fathers of the Society of Jesus they withdraw all controversies and try to maintain good relations, etc., as is more fully set out in the decree recorded on fol. 101 of the Register Book, etc.”.

59 This apology is found in Reg. Cal., 68, phase. 1, fol. 1-14.

60 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), ff. 1-14; see later the memorandum presented by Francis Firmiani to the Supreme Pontiff (Arch. Secr. Vat., Miscell., Cabinet VII, 665, ff. 21-23), which, although rather long, we reproduce here in its entirety to show the attitude of many adverse to the Pious Schools and the precarious juridical conditions of the Piarist institute:

Holy Father:

“We humbly submit to Your Holiness that on January 9, 1668, the Fathers of the Pious Schools of St. Pantaleo in Rome took possession of a house and orchard on the Esquiline near the Basilica of St. Mary Major, where they intend to begin building a monastery and erect a church and even have schools. All this, Holy Father, will harm and cause irreparable damage to twenty churches and old neighboring religious convents from which they will take away the parish. The many children of these inhabitants who would learn a profession at an early age will not learn it as long as they are lured into schools by those Fathers. And then, not getting on, they will remain as adults without any trade or use, and consequently will be obliged to steal and become the plague of the city, as our Lord Cardinal Roma, of happy memory, used to say against these Fathers. And so experience has shown. Also that the said house and orchard are situated in the midst of thirty small orchards adjoining the said Fathers, and separated from each other by earthen walls not more than eight or ten palms high, as may be seen at a glance on the annexed plan; and the women, the owners of the said small orchards, in order to avoid scandal, have been obliged to leave their own houses and orchards, as they are contiguous and dominated day and night by the said Fathers, there being no road separating them.

We therefore appeal to Your Holiness paternal providence and humbly beg you to order the said Fathers to sell the said house and orchard, for there are many purchasers; and that they leave the said place, so that they may not do so much harm to the surrounding churches and convents, and the boys, mostly children of poor people, may devote themselves to learning a trade or other manual labor to help their poor parents; and the women of the neighborhood may use the houses and orchards in peace and without fear of scandal. All this they will receive as the highest favors from Your Holiness, which God, etc., will grant them.

And since it is doubted, Holy Father, that the Sacred Congregation of the Apostolic Visitation has sufficient ability to settle the question of whether or not the said Fathers of the Pious Schools can build a convent and church on the Esquiline, we humbly request Your Holiness to entrust the said Sacred Congregation of the Apostolic Visitation to take care of the said matter and to settle the said question and bring it to a conclusion. All this will also be received as the highest favor from Your Holiness. To whom God …

The following signatures comes from the owners of the orchards and houses shown on the attached map, who can read and write.

Francisco Firmiano, by his own hand,

I, Sister Jacinta Reguardati, currently prioress of St. Mary of Humility.

Etc.”.

61 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), ff. 29-30, 37-40, 53-57.

62 See the Minutes of the General Congregation, May 29, 1668 (Reg. Gen., 10, f. 25v): “It is considered that it would be advantageous for the Congregation to obtain from Our Lord the abolition of the title of Secular Congregation and to receive the title of Regular Congregation, as heretofore; the confirmation of the Constitutions and the privileges granted to it by the Holy See; and that only those religious who have taught for at least ten years may be admitted to the profession of solemn vows by Father General, with the decisive vote of his Assistants. Joseph of St. Eustace, Assistant to the General, is given the authority to deal with this. To this end the mandate is to be given.”

63 The original text of the memorandum composed by Father Joseph Pennazzi is in the General Archives (Reg. Cal., 115, f. 533) and its content is the following:

“Most Holy Father:

The austere life and hardships endured by the religious Poor of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools for their contemplative and active life, as prescribed by their Constitutions and rules, teaching the children in their many schools, together with Christian piety, the letters from the elementary terms, are well known to your Holiness, who presided over the General Chapter of the said Religion in the time of its Father, the Founder. This had its beginnings in the pontificate of Clement VIII of holy memory. In that of Paul V it was declared a congregation with simple vows, and in that of Gregory XV a religious community with solemn vows. Urban VIII confirmed it as such. Under the pontificate of Innocent X, it then suffered great difficulties for more than ten years - presumably through the work of the common enemy, who hates any practice of piety such as that professed by this Institute of Pious Schools - and it was not long before it was completely extinguished.

The piety of Alexander VII of happy memory revived it in 1656 with his special mandate, reuniting it and placing it under the proper religious superiors; he gave it the ancient Constitutions and privileges and called it a Secular Congregation, with the right to admit its religious, after the novitiate, to take the simple vows of chastity, obedience and poverty, as well as the oath of perseverance reserved to the Holy See.

This congregation was introduced in many provinces and kingdoms inside and outside Italy for its pious service. But one has the impression that today, especially among the ultramontane peoples, it no longer enjoys the same veneration as in the past, because it is considered secular. And some religious who live in it think that because it is called a secular congregation, they are allowed to act and live in some things in the same way as secular priests do. This does not lead to the edification of their neighbors or the religious who live with them. But what most distresses and makes the Congregation suffer is that many bishops, parish priests and even civil magistrates make it difficult for the said Congregation to enjoy the privileges granted to it by Your Holiness’s predecessors because of the secular denomination.

Therefore, in order to avoid any occasion for relaxation, litigation and trouble, and so that such an office may be exercised for the good of our neighbors and maintained with the greatest possible perfection and tranquility, Father Joseph of St. Eustace, of Pesara, one of the General Assistants appointed for this purpose by the entire General Congregation, prostrates himself at the feet of Your Holiness and humbly begs you, by a special order, to withdraw from the said Congregation the title of Secular and to restore to it the title of Regular which it formerly had, and to confirm to it the Constitutions and privileges granted to it by the said Popes and by Your Holiness Himself. . And at the same time to grant to Father General, who shall be at all times, the faculty of admitting to the profession of solemn vows, with the decisive vote of his Assistants, only those religious who have already taken simple vows and have practiced the profession of teacher in the schools of the said Congregation for at least ten years after ordination to the priesthood. From this grace is expected the complete perfection of such a pious religious institute. All this, etc... To whom God, etc.”, Cf. also J. C. Caputi, op. c., II, 5 (2), f. 59; B. Bartlik, op. c., f. 515.

64 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), f. 59.

65 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, ff. 51-52.

66 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), ff. 51-62; III, 7 (1), ff. 3-12.

67 The full text of this vote was also previously in the General Archives (cf. Chronological Inventory, prepared by Father Manetti and edited by Father Picanyol, in Rome, 1955, p. 20, doc. 213); now, however, it is only in the Arch. Secr. Vat. (Misc., Armar. 36, v. 11, ff. 400-409) and reads as follows:

Vote of Peter Francis de Rubeis, jurist of the Treasury and the Apostolic Chamber, in the Special congregation appointed by the Holy Father.

Romana of the Pious Schools.

It seems that the legitimate requests of the Superior General and the Fathers of the Pious Schools should be granted, that their Institute should henceforth no longer be designated by the Apostolic See as a Secular Congregation of the Poor of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools with simple vows, but be favored with the title of the Religion of Regular clerics, with the profession of the solemn vows of poverty, chastity and obedience, as established by Gregory XV. who accepted the judgment of the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars in a letter published in St. Peter’s in Rome on November 18, 1621, the first year of his pontificate (Const. 14, in the new volume 3º of the Bulls):

“Our beloved son Joseph of the Mother of God, Prefect General of the Congregation of the Clerics Poor of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools in Rome, has recently let us know that the clerics of his Congregation take the three simple vows of poverty, chastity and obedience, and that, because they aspire to greater perfection, they have humbly asked us to declare them solemn vows. We have instructed our venerable brothers, the Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, who are responsible for the affairs of bishops and religious, to examine this problem carefully and to inform us of their conclusions. After deliberations on August 31 of this year, they declared that the said Congregation of the Poor of the Mother of God, erected with the authority of our predecessor Clement VIII of blessed memory and confirmed by our predecessor Paul V of blessed memory, and presently located in the Church of St. Pantaleo in Rome, may be recognized as a religious order with three solemn vows.

We hereby approve and confirm with our apostolic authority the foregoing deliberation, reaffirm them with our perpetual and inviolable authority, and remove all legal and factual defects which may be contained therein.

We decree that this Brief shall be and remain valid, free from error and effective, that it shall take full effect and that it shall favor Joseph and the said clerics in everything and for everything.”

Added to this is the clause declaring all harmful acts invalid and demanding the removal of all obstacles.

Gregory XV, too, in a letter dated October 15, 1622, the second year of his pontificate, at St. Mary Major, in Rome, printed with the said Constitution 14, communicated to them all and each of the privileges, immunities, liberties, faculties, exemptions and other favors and pardons, both spiritual and temporal, granted in any way to the mendicant orders and their superiors, professors, churches, convents and religious places.

And in another letter, dated in Rome, at St. Peter’s, on January 31, collected in Constitution 17 and Constitution 25, he elected the said Joseph of the Mother of God as General of the Congregation, and finally he abolished the cure of souls in the Church of St. Pantaleo and gave them forever to the said Congregation of Clerics Poor of the Mother of God in Rome, so that they might exercise their ministry there more freely (Constitution 49, in the same Bullarium, Volume 3).

In his Constitution 123, Clement VIII had approved the Congregation of Secular Clerics and Laity of Common Life, which Alexander, Bishop of Lucca, had established in the city of Lucca under the invocation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, to whom Paul V entrusted the direction of the Pious Schools established in Rome for the instruction and education of the poor in par. 3 ff. of his Constitution. In a letter dated in Rome on March 6, 1617, the twelfth year of his pontificate, in his Constitution 101 (in said volume 3 of the Bulls), the same Paul V established another congregation in St. Mary Major under the ring of the Fisherman in the House of Pious Schools, directed and administered by a prefect who wished to be called the Poor of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools to instruct and educate the poor children free of charge and without any stipend. In this school, both the clerics and the brothers take three simple vows, as will be explained in more detail in the third part. In the present par. 2, he revoked the delegation of the administration of the said schools, which he had previously entrusted to the aforementioned Congregation of the Poor of the Mother of God, and entrusted their entire direction, administration and government to Joseph of Calasanz, appointed Prefect of the schools, to whom he also delegated, in par. 4, the power to draw up the statutes.

It is therefore clear that it was founded from the beginning by Paul V as a Congregation with simple vows dispensable by the pope and later elevated by Gregory XV to an Order with solemn vows and endowed with all the privileges granted to mendicant orders, as mentioned above.

For this reason, Urban VIII. in Const. 100 (vol. 4 of the Bulls) called it alternatively as a Religion or Congregation of Regular clerics and wrote in par. 1: “On the part of the minister general of the Religion or Congregation of the Clerics Regular Poor of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools”. And both there and in the following paragraph 2 he repeats several times these names of Religion or Congregation, just as he said at the beginning of his other constitution 107: “Clerics Regular Poor of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools”. However, in Constitution 11, which was drafted on March 16, 1646, the second year of his pontificate, in Rome in St. Peter’s Basilica under the ring of the Fisherman, Innocent X considered it appropriate in paragraph 2 that the said Congregation should in future become a Congregation without vows, following the example of the Congregation of Secular Priests of the Oratory, canonically erected in the church of St. Maria in Vallicella in Rome and bearing the name of St. Philip. Therefore, in para. 3, he allowed on his own initiative any professed of the said religion, priests or lay brothers, to convert to another recognized Religion, even to a more lax one, and forbade that henceforth no one should be admitted to that Religion and that those who were already admitted and living in the novitiates should be allowed to make profession. He placed their houses and premises under the omnipotent jurisdiction of the Ordinaries, and subdued the said Religion, reducing it to a Congregation similar to the said institute of the Congregation of the Oratory, without taking vows, and to be governed and directed according to Constitutions appropriate to its first ministry, which were to be published by a mandate from the pope himself, and which left the regime of Collegio Nazareno entirely to the disposal of the auditors of the Rota. But this constitution was not published.

The same pope, in his other Constitution 43, dated at Rome, in St. Mary Major, under the ring of the Fisherman, on December 4 of the same year 1646, the third year of his pontificate, revoked the Briefs which some religious of that religion had received in order to obtain the habit of secular priests, if they did not avail themselves of it within four months.

Alexander VII called them the Secular Congregation of the Clerics Poor of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools in two Briefs. First, in the letter of April 6, 1656, the first year of his pontificate, in Rome, in St. Peter’s, in which, in order to provide in time for the Congregation, which lacked a Superior General and other superiors, he appointed with apostolic authority for the next three years the Superior General John García, the first Assistant General Francis Castelli, the second Joseph Fedele, the third John Stephen Spinola and the fourth Camillo Scassellati, entrusting them with the direction of the said Secular Congregation. In the second letter, dated in Castelgandolfo, Diocese of Albano, on April 28, 1660, he expressed himself as follows:

“Since, according to what has been communicated to Us, various difficulties have arisen in the Secular Congregation of the Clerics Poor of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools, We, desiring to resolve them, determine on Our own initiative that the Superior General of the said Congregation and the four Assistants remain in office for six years only. In all other respects We order that the ancient Constitutions of the Congregation be observed, in those things which are natural and appropriate to the state of a secular Congregation and do not contradict the present letter.”

It follows that the final state of the Institute is that of a secular congregation and that, in order for it to assume the character of a true religious Order with the profession of the three solemn vows, it needs the grace of re-incorporation according to the above-mentioned letter of Gregory XV with the solicitous intervention of the Holy Father. In fact, it has all the requirements of a religious Order, i.e. a common life with precise Constitutions approved by the Apostolic See, presided over by a Superior General and four Assistants; it bears the special name of the Poor of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools, a two-year novitiate and, at the end of the two-year period, the profession of the three vows of poverty, chastity and obedience. With these vows, those who are admitted to profession commit themselves to this service for ever and ever; they also have their own religious habit. To all this are added reasons that make it absolutely advisable, which are deduced in the speech, as well as the reason to avoid the inconveniences collected in the memorandum.

In accordance with the decree of the Sacred Congregation of Cardinals, which is responsible for the affairs of Bishops and Regulars, by which Gregory XV raised it from the original state of a Congregation with simple vows to that of a true Order with solemn vows, it seems appropriate to grant the requested reinstatement and to annul all decisions made during the pontificate of Innocent X.

And thus

68 The text of this decree is found in the Arch. Secr. Vat. (Sag. Cong. of Bishops and Regulars, Rel. Regul. for the year 1669, f. 147).

69 See the place indicated in note 68.

70 See J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), ff. 92-94; see also the above-mentioned Register of Regulars, where specifically after the transcribed decree is the note: “It had no effect.”

71 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), f. 100. The text of this written memorial is in the Arch. Secret. Vat. (S. Congreg. of Bishops and Regul., Reg. Regul., October 4, 1669):

“Most Eminent and Reverend Lords:

The Father General and the assistants of the Pious Schools, the most humble orators of YY.EE., have petitioned the Holiness of Our Lord for the reinstatement to the status of a religious Order with the profession of the three solemn vows and with the communication of the privileges of mendicant friars, which Gregory XV granted them at another time. Therefore, the cognizance of the petition was referred to three prelates, who judged that it could be granted to them. And after the speakers have presented the request for the issuance of the Brief, Our Lord has sent the resolution to this Sacred Congregation. We humbly request YY.EE. to appoint a rapporteur who will also decide at the same time on the undersigned points, i.e:

l.) That the Brief of Alexander VII of holy memory of April 28, 1660, be fulfilled;

2.) That all the Constitutions of the said Religion be confirmed and the observance of the said Brief be added to them; and also that the said religion may receive legacies and inheritances like the other mendicant orders;

3.) That the General of the said Religion has absolute power in the visitations, like the other Generals of the mendicant orders, and that he may exclude eight or ten of those who have taken only simple vows, who have not behaved well and disturb the others. And he can allow and order that the others who have taken simple vows outside Rome be admitted to solemn vows.

All this, etc.

On the back:

To the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars.

From the general and the assistants of the Pious Schools.

Note in a second hand (Bishop de Vecchi): “To the Em. Imperiali, may he hear and reffer”.

Note in the third hand (Card. lmperiali): “Only the decree of the respective congregation and the second Brief of Alexander VII from 1660 should be kept”.

72 The minutes and decree of the S. Congregation of Bishops and Regulars are to be found in the Regist. of Regulars (year 1669, ff. 171-172); they are also to be found in Secr. Brev. 1434, ff. 131 132 and read as follows:

“In the Congregation held at the Quirinal on October 4, 1669.

The Superior General and the Fathers of the Secular Congregation of the Clerics Poor of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools petitioned the Holy Father that this congregation be restored and reintegrated into the regular state and title of Religion with the profession of the three solemn vows, as it was once established by Gregory XV of holy memory in his Apostolic Letter of October 28, 1621, with the communication of all privileges and all other favors and indulgences granted in any way to the mendicant orders, as expressly contained in another letter of the same Gregory XV of October 15, 1622. All this was later revoked by Popes of happy memory Innocent X and Alexander VII in apostolic letters of May 16, 1646 and January 4, 1656 respectively. The Superior General and the Fathers of the said Congregation of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools requested that the enjoyment of these privileges and communications be restored to them. Also that the norms concerning the duration of the term of office of the Superior General, the authority of the Assistants, the custom of accompanying the poor children home, the quality and making of the habit, and all the other things laid down in the Instruction of Alexander VII of holy memory of April 28, 1660, be demanded without fail.

And since Our Most Holy Lord has referred such requests for consideration to the Sacred Congregation having jurisdiction over the affairs of Bishops and Regulars, the same Sacred Congregation, after having discussed the matter at length, being His Eminence lmperiali the relator, concluded that “if it pleases His Holiness, the restitution and reintegration requested by the orators, as well as the communication of the privileges, may be granted by an apostolic letter in the form of a Brief within the limits of the said letter of Gregory XV of sacred memory; and that, furthermore, the observance of the said letter of Alexander VII of sacred memory, published April 26, 1660, must be required. Notwithstanding, etc. Rome, October 4, 1669.

M. Card. Ginetti

Charles de Vecchis, Secr.”.

73 See Secr. Brev., 1434, f. 134.

74 Cfr. J. C. Caputi, o. c., 11, 5 (2), ff. 115-117 y III, 7 (1), f. 31.

75 See the text of the Brief in the Bullarium of the Pious Schools, pp. 58-63.

76 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), f. 109.

77 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), ff. 118, 120.

78 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), ff. 125.

79 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), ff. 126-129.

80 Cf. J.C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), ff. 124.

81 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), f. 127.

82 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), ff. 113.

83 See the last memorandum presented by the Piarists to obtain reintegration in note 71, as well as J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), ff. 93-94.

84 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), ff. 126.

85 See the Minutes of the General Congregation (Reg. Gen., 10, f. 26v), in which the following is noted on November 8, 1669:

‘The General Congregation was held, etc.

In view of the new Brief by which the Holiness of our Lord Clement IX has restored to us the state of Religion of solemn vows, it has been decided that those of our religious who have taken simple vows may be admitted to this profession if they wish to make solemn profession spontaneously. Those who do not wish to do so should not be forced to do so in any way. And so those who do not make this new profession shall remain in the place to which they are entitled after having made profession of simple vows, just as the others who will make it shall not be impaired in their place, but shall retain the place of first profession; so that this new profession of solemn vows shall not abrogate the position of anyone, nor shall anyone be impaired in it in any way, but that the Constitutions shall be applied in this respect with respect to first profession.

86 See the Minutes of Gen. Cong. (Reg. Gen., 10, f. 34v), in which the following is noted on April 22, 1670: “It was determined that in due time the necessary steps be taken for the total stabilization of the order and the declaration of the doubts that have remained unresolved”.

87 This decision of the particular Congregation is found in the Arch. Secr. Vat. (Secr. Brev., 1455, f. 175v).

88 See the volume indicated in note 87, ff. 175v and 176v. The text of the Brief is found in the Bullarium of the Pious Schools, pp. 64-66.

89 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., II, 5 (2), f. 140r and v; copies of the petitions are found in Reg. Gen., 203; as for the particular case of Fr. Stanislaw Papczynski, of the province of Poland, see the work written by George A. Navikevicius, MIC (Pont. Univ, Greg., Rome, 1960, pp. 113-148),

90 See the decree of October 25, 1670, given to Fr. Onofre Conti (Arch. Gen., Reg. Prov., Suplem. Sardinia, n. 1, patents, decrees, etc., f. 5r and v), which reads: “Cosimo of Jesus and Mary, Superior General of the Poor Clerics Regular of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools.

We command you, Father Onofrio of the Blessed Sacrament, our Provincial Superior of Sardinia, and all the rectors of your province, by virtue of holy obedience and under pain of disfellowshipping, to publish and cause to be published in all the houses of your province the present apostolic letter which we enclose, so that it may be put into practice. And should it happen that some of our people do not wish to take solemn vows, we grant you in the Lord and delegate to you the power, in accordance with the apostolic letter, in our name and on our behalf, to absolve all of them immediately from their vows and oaths and to dismiss them from our Order so that they may pass to the secular state, as indicated in the series of apostolic letters. We want them to be acquitted and dismissed, and we regard them as such. Keep us informed about everything in this regard. Given in Rome in our House of the Pious Schools of St. Pantaleo, October 25, 1670.

In place of the seal. Cosimo of Jesus and Mary, Superior General”.

91 Cfr. Fr. Charles Quatrin of St. Vincent: Brev. Hist. Prov. Sard, f, 35,

92 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., 11, 5 (2), f. 140r and v.

93 Later, however, more precisely in 1676, during the generalate of Father Joseph Fedele, further doubts arose about the validity of the vows taken since October 23, 1669, because the novices had been admitted to the habit and profession contrary to the provisions of the Bull “Inter cetera” (December 17, 1649). See the memoranda submitted to the Holy See by Fr. Charles John Pirroni, in the Archives of the Vicariate of Rome (vol. 17, ff. 19-23). For the happy settlement of the matter, see the Acts of the Cong. Gen. (Reg. Gen, 10) of March 13, 1676, in which the following is decreed on this matter: “Be it written to the Provincials and Rectors, in accordance with the decree of the Sacred Congregation of Religious, that all those who professed after October 23, 1669, the date of the restoration of the Order to its first state, ratify their profession in order to cure any defect which may consist in their not having asked the said S. Congregation for permission to vest the novices in accordance with the letter “lnter cetera” of Innocent X. They can do it on Easter Day before or after the established formula”,

94 Cf. Const., P. II. c.8.

95 Cf. the decisions of the General Congregation on various foundations offered to the Piarists and rejected by them, lacking the allocation of a certain and annual sum to the religious (Reg. Gen., 10, ff. 17r; 34r and v; B. Bartlik, o. c., ff. 511-513).

96 Cf. the decree of the same General Chapter of 1665 on this matter, in “Arch. Schol. Piar.”, II (1937) 14; also the Minutes of the Gen. Cong., f. 4v, ff. 18-19, f. 37v.

97 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong. , ff. 17-18, on February 3, 1667.

98 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., ff. 8-9; B. Bartlik, o. c., ff. 506-508; L. Picanyol, Brevis Conspectus, p. 151.

99 Cf. B. Bartlik, o. c., ff. 503-506; Province of Germania and Hungary. The manuscript is in the General Archives of the Pious Schools (His.-Bibl., 23). In this manuscript and specifically in the Chronicle of the School of Prievidza (ff. 1-23) we find the letter of Father Cosimo dated March 27, 1966 on this matter. Cf. L. Picanyol, Brevis Conspectus, p. 253.

100 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., ff. 18 and 36. Cf. L. Picanyol, Brevis Conspectus, p. 165.

101 Cf. B. Bartlik, o. c., f. 513v; L. Picanyol, Brevis Conspectus, p. 180; Balanyi, Emlékkönyv a magyar piarista rendtartomdny háromszázéves jubileumára, Budapest, 1943, p. 33.

102 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., f. 20, on October 14, 1667; and f. 36r, on May 17, 1670; L. Picanyol, Brevis Conspectus, p. 165.

103 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., ff .30-31, March 20, 1668; B. Bartlik, o. c., f. 517ff.

104 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., f. 38r, on March 17, 1670.

105 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., f. 38r, on September 30, 1670.

106 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., f. 38r, on March 11, 1669.

107 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., f. 33r and 34, March-April 1670.

108 Cf. B. Bartlik, o. c., ff. 511-513; Acts of the Cong. Gen., f. 17v, on April 29, 1667.

109 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., according to which on July 17, 1666, Father Archangel Peres of the province of Sicily was named Visitator; but he did not accept this appointment (f. 13r). On September 30, 1670, Father Francesco Podestà, also from the province of Sicily, was appointed Visitator. He accepted the appointment and moved to Sicily also to take care of his health (f. 40v).

110 Cf. Minutes of the General Cong. Where it is that Fr. Philip Xiria of St. Francis was appointed Visitator on June 22, 1667. (ff. 18-19); and on August 7, 1669, Fr. Eusebio Amoreto of St. Cecily (f. 30r).

111 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., f. 13, on July 13, 1666.

112 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., f. 32, on February 22, 1670.

113 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., f. l, on May 21, 1665.

114 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., f. 2r, on May 22, 1665.

115 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., f. 5v, on October 9, 1665, when this decree was promulgated:

“In the name of the Lord. Amen.

The Superior General and the Assistants, wishing to meet Father Efisio’s requests with leniency, convert his banishment to the house of Nursia - to which he was sent by a decree of Father Camillus, Superior General, dated January 17, 1662, for a term of six years, commuted to ten years in prison for the offences committed, etc. - to an exile in the house of Cáller, and they allow him to remain there without an active or passive voice. The provincial of Sardinia may not, during these six years, grant him the right to hear confessions or to exercise teaching ministries, except in the lower classes. Moreover, if during this time he commits a sufficiently serious offence or is disobedient in a matter of some importance and does not live very religiously, the Provincial of Sardinia shall, if necessary, institute proceedings, and in such a case it shall also be understood that the past matter shall be resumed and he shall submit to all the penalties that have been accorded him for it.

At the end of the six-year term, may the Provincial inform us whether Fr. Efisio has fulfilled all that was commanded and lived worthily, so that all penalties may be remitted to him. Dated this 9th day of October 1665.

116 Cf. Minutes of the General Congregation, f. 20, on October 14, 1667, f. 20, when the following was decreed: “Likewise, let it be written to the Visitator of Sardinia that, regarding Father Efisio of St. Joseph, since he has not observed our decree of October 9, 1665, which was notified to him and given to Father Dominic, his Provincial, since he has confessed and has not always resided in Cáller, but in Tempio, where he has exercised the office of superior, being deprived of active and passive voice, I declare him incurs in the penalties of that decree, that is to say, the cause and the penalty as at the beginning, with the circumstance that he has gone to Spain without any license”.

117 Cf. note 109.

118 At least with regard to the visit of the house of Tempio; cf. the Minutes of the Gen. Cong., f. 19v, on September 1, 1667.

119 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., f. 19v, on September 1, 1667, and f. 20, on October 14, 1667.

120 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., f. 24v, on May 7, 1668.

121 See note 116, toward the end.

122 Cf. Fr. Charles Quatrin, Compendium Chronicum Sardoae Provinciae, ff. 32-33 (Reg, Gen., 29, n. 1),

123 See note 119.

124 See the documents on this subject in Reg. Prov. 29, n. 9.

125 This urgent request of the fathers is found in Reg. Prov. 29, 8 and is dated September 12, 1669. Dominic Marchia was suspended from his office on July 1, 1667. Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., f. 19v.

126 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., on March 3 and 31, 1670, ff. 33r and 34r.

127 Cf. note 90.

128 Cf. note 91.

129 See especially this letter from Father Onofrio Conti to Father Cosimo dated December 30, 1670 (Reg. Ser. Dei, 60, no. 29): “I have seen what you wrote to me in your three letters of September, which I received recently. In them you express your displeasure to me for having dismissed the former Fr. Dominic and informs me of the request to deprive me of the active and passive vote. I have written you and the General Assistants the enclosed letter, in which I have set out my apologies, which have been imposed on me, together with many other particulars, so that you may see it first and then, if it seems good to you, bring it to the attention of the Assistants. I really wish they were confused and would understand that everything has been done after consultation with doctors and theologians who are not “asses” (as Father Melchior said on a similar occasion in the square of St. Mary of Messina), as those who have slandered, blinded by their passions, should be considered. I care so little for presenting myself to the future General Chapter and the dignity of Superior, that if I had to choose my station once more, I would prefer to be a lay brother, so as not to have so many occupations, and not to be obliged to give an account to God of the souls of my subjects, nor to judge all day long the laxity of those who do not wish to follow Christ with his cross; that it is necessary to gnaw bones and drink bitterness! I thank God who has put his hand to it, for your Paternity had not the courage to write us two words with his pen, commanding them to leave the continent, as I have often written to you. They have left such a reputation for their actions that they must have gone to a place of health. His Excellency’s physician has told me the reason. Your Paternity, please, make the customary suffrages are applied to them., as we have done here.”

130 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., IV, 8. ff. 92-94.

131 Cf. Minutes of Gen. Cong., May 12, 1662 (Reg. Gen., 9).

132 Cf. Minutes of Gen. Cong., February 8, 1664, when the following was decreed: “It was determined that the Provincial of Poland conclude, as he writes, the election of the rectors of his province, having first consulted with his consultors. And when he has finished, let him send us the names for approval”.

133 See the Minutes of the Prov. Chapter on August 1664 (Reg. Prov. 56, n. 15).

134 See a document composed by Father Stanislaus Papczynski, entitled Protestatio Romam abeuntis, found in the work of Father A. Navikevicius cited in note 89, pp. 4-6.

135 Cf. Minutes of Provincial Chapter of the year 1667, in Reg. Prov., 56, n. 16 and the Minutes of the Gen. Cong, , of August 19, 1667, f. 19r.

136 See the Protestatio Romam abeuntis. Cf. note 134.

137 See the following points in the Minutes of the Provincial Chapter of the year 1667 (Reg. Prov. 56, n. 16):

On the morning of November 8th,

Father Provincial, informed by a letter from Father Rector of Warsaw of the tumult and conspiracy which Father Stanislaus of Jesus and Mary had caused among the priests in Warsaw, having been unjustly denied the provincial chapter (as he said), lest the contagion should spread further and the grass wither, came to Warsaw with his assistant, Father Michael of the Visitation. Here he found everything full of confusion, as he had not succeeded in dispelling the preconceived opinions of these Fathers by persuasion, warnings or other means. Not wanting to give rise to unrest that would reach the laity, he summoned Father Antony of the Holy Spirit, a professed priest who, in his words, was the most procrastinate and immodest of the fathers who had joined Father Stanislaus and who at the same time had convened the provincial Chapter. The said Father introduced himself with his rector. Even before he was admitted, the Capitular Fathers had already come to the conclusion that the Father Provincial should order him, by virtue of holy obedience, to explain what they had concocted with Father Stanislaus, for what reason, how and with what obligations. When Fr. Antonio was called in the middle of the chapter, the provincial ordered him to explain himself in his name and in the name of the capitulars; but as he was twisting things, he was asked to leave. The capitulars again expressed their opinion that he should be imprisoned for his impudence if he did not want to testify after being questioned again. When he was called again and after being asked to testify, he replied, ‘I have received a summons to the provincial Chapter, but I do not know what assembly I am looking at. When Father Provincial heard this, he asked him: ‘Then this is not the provincial Chapter? He replied twice: ‘No, it is not; I testify that it is not’. After hearing such cynical words, he was put in prison.

In the afternoon of the same day.

The cause of the unrest that Father Stanislaus of Jesus and Mary had caused in his house in Warsaw was discussed. The Chapter fathers decided to send a report on this matter to Father General.

On the afternoon of November 10

3.º) Fr. Antony of the Holy Spirit, who, repentant for his action, begged for clemency from prison, promised to make amends through emissaries. He was called and came to the Chapter, where after having confessed his error and having received the admonition of the Provincial, he was admitted to the supplication. He detested what he had said, done and attempted in any way when he was in the party of Father Stanislaus against the alleged illegitimacy of the superiors, and asked that it be considered annulled. And principally he revoked the nullity which he had objected to the present chapter, for which he had been put in prison. And he promised with his hand on his breast, binding himself to this, not to take part henceforth in any conspiracy and not to attempt in any way directly or indirectly the like by himself or through others.

On the afternoon of November 11th

The Capitular Fathers decided to ask Father General that Father Stanislaus of Jesus and Mary be seriously punished by Father General and his Assistants as a disruptor of our Congregation in this Province. For the said Father has sent a letter to all the rectors assuring them that he will not obey any superior after August 28, the day on which the provincial chapter of the previous triennium ended (and other things already brought to the attention of Father General); and he has induced other priests to do the same. The present Chapter believes that this may serve to instruct the above matter.138. Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., III, 7 (2), ff. 88-89.

138 Cf. J. C. Caputi o.c. III, 7, (2), ff. 88-89.

139 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong. f. 26v, on August 23, 1668

140 See the response of Father A. Morelli, dated February 8, 1670, found in the above-mentioned work of Father A. Navikevicius, pp. 116-117.

141 Cf. Minutes of Gen. Cong. February 22, 1670 (f. 32r and v), when the following was decreed in the matter of Father Stanislaw:

“We gather from new letters of Father Wenceslaus, Provincial of Poland, that Father Stanislaw of J.M. continues to refuse to recognize the Provincial, and teaching that Father General with his Assistants has no authority to elect superiors. Moreover, after the reading the new Brief of Clement IX, he has begun to teach that each of the professed with simple vows can go to his own house. He has attempted to subject the houses to the Ordinary, and other pernicious things, for which the aforesaid Father Provincial has put him in prison. Therefore, we order that he continue to be confined in prison, and that in the meantime the judicial process be instituted concerning the said and other things which the same Father Stanislaw has committed against the obedience and orders of Father General. Inasmuch as the said Father Provincial of Poland is insistently asking us for a Visitator for this province, both for the cause of the said Father Stanislaw and for any other cause of the said province, Father Charles of St. Mary, at present rector of Horn, has been elected and appointed Visitator and judge, with the possibility of choosing a notary or assessor or any other office, whether regular or secular, which he may need for the said cause, at his discretion. And in case Father Charles should be indisposed or prevented for just causes, it is resolved to send by the next post another patent in blank to the Provincial of Germania, that he may send thither another suitable and able subject with the same authority, suitable to the urgency of the matter and the cause.” So it is.

Alejo de la Concepción, Assist. Gen., Secretary.

142 Cf. J. Navikevicius, o. c., pp. 116-117; 9.

143 See the text of this petition in Reg. Gen. 203 and in the work several times cited by J. Navikevicius, p. 13.

144 Cf. Minutes of the Prov. Cap., year 1670 (Reg. Prov., 56, n. 17).

145 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Chap., year 1671, in “Arch. Schol. Piar.”, II (1937) 27, n. 6.

146 See the Minutes of the Provincial Chapter, year 1677 (Reg. Prov., 56, n. 26).

147 Cf. L. Picanyol, De Brevi “Ex iniuncto Nobis”, in “Ephem. See also the briefs of Clement XIII on this question, granted to the Pious Schools in the years 1759 and 1762 (Bullar. Schol. Piar., pp. 162, 165).

148 Cf. Minutes of the Provincial Chapter, a. 1671 (Reg. Prov., Suppl. 1, n. 2). See also the Minutes of the General Chapter of 1671.

149 See note 58.

150 See the same note.

151 See the same note.

152 The text of this monitorio is in the General Archives of the Pious Schools (Reg. Prov., 57, Warsaw House 16).

153 Specifically “Nobis quibus”, dated 1731, and “Pontificalis officii”, dated 1733, are found in Bull. Schol. Piar. pp. 106-114 and 115-127.

154 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Chap., year 1675, in “Arch. Schol. Piar.”, II (1937) 14.

155 Ibidem.

156 Ibidem, f. 15.

157 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong. (Reg, Gen., 10), on Nov. 25, 1667 (f. 21v) and Sept. 30, 1669 (f. 31v),

158 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong. on October 27, 1667 (f. 14v); B. Bartlik, o, c., f. 509v.

159 See the Minutes of the Provincial Chapter, year 1671 (Reg. Prov. Suppl. 1).

160 Cf. B. Bartlik, o. c., f. 499r.

161 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Chap. for the years 1659 and 1665 in “Arch. Schol. Piar.”, I (1936) 15-16; II (1937) 11.

162 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong., on August 21 (f. 38v). The entire decree reads as follows: “In the name of the Lord, Amen. Amen. We desire from our religious both knowledge and a commitment to regular observance, so that the spirit inflamed by knowledge may not drive God into a corner, which exalts the humble (giving rise to discord and quarrels which outrage not so much their own people as outsiders); so that the bond of love which unites the souls of religious may never be broken; so that the humility of our religious may shine forth before outsiders beyond ostentation. Therefore, moved also by the example of some religious and for other just reasons, we decree and determine that henceforth none of our people, neither teachers nor students of philosophy or theology, shall defend conclusions or support those who defend them; nor shall they give them to the press. We desire, however, and we prescribe, that in addition to the daily exercise of dispute, and in the case of our students, conclusions be defended privately every month, to which it is not permitted to invite nobles or princes or prelates or cardinals, nor to dedicate the conclusions to them, and only some religious who are close to our Order may be invited to argue. Likewise, our teachers should not dare to argue in the public conclusions of others without the express permission of the Father General or the Provincial, which must be obtained each time, but only in the private and monthly ones. Those who violate any of the above rules, if they are teachers, will ipso facto be deprived of active and passive voice for one year, without the need for further explanation. If they are students, they will be immediately dismissed from both their studies and the house in which they reside, and will be subject to other punishments at the discretion of the Father General.

163 Cf. Constit. of the Pious Schools, P. II, C. 10. De promovendis ad studia litterarum; see also the Common Rules and Rites transcribed for the use of Father Camillo Scassellati (Reg. Gen., 89), where, among various rules, there are also the Rules of the Scholastics with these points:

I. Those who, having been admitted to profession, are advanced in the true virtues, are to be considered practiced in the letters and in the manner of expounding them (p. 2, c. 10),

II. Let those who devote themselves to study not spend time in leisure outside of ordinary recreation, nor neglect diligence in prayer or modesty of mind.

III. Harmonize study with deep piety, and therefore do spiritual exercises for ten days every year before the Resurrection and the Birth of the Lord, that they may be refreshed and increase the fervor of the soul. Ibid.

IV. Let those who devote themselves to the humanities hold discussions on certain days in the presence of a moderator on topics related to these studies. Let them practice the composition of prose and verse to test the acuteness of their minds, and let them speak to each other in Latin. lbidem.

V. Let no one be admitted to the sciences unless he has a proper command of the Latin language and has been properly instructed in the humanities.

VI. in order to preserve and increase devotion to the Blessed Virgin, let those who have not received Holy Orders recite her Office privately every day.

164 Cf. L. Picanyol, Rerum Latinarum Scriptores. Roma, 1956, pp. 149, 197, 210.

165 Cfr. L. Picanyol, o. c., p. 209.

166 Ibidem, p. 214.

167 Ibidem, p. 206.

168 Ibidem, p. 147.

169 Cf. L. Picanyol, La Biblioteca Scolopica di S. Pantaleo di Roma, I, p. 197; ldem, Rerum Latinarum Scriptores, pp. 91-173. The works cited in these places certainly did not see the light of day during the six-year generalate of Father Cosimo, but the author was already composing several of them at that time.

170 Cf. L. Picanyol, Rerum Latinarum Scriptores, pp. 148, 182, 187, 196.

171 Ibidem, pp. 145, 218.

172 Ibidem, p. 195.

173 Ibid., p. 172.

174 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Chap., year 1665, in “Arch. Schol. Piar.”, II (1937) 14.

175 Cf. Reg. Cal. 83.

176 Cf. L. Picanyol, In antiquos de Sancto Iosepho Calasanctio Scriptores commentaria, in “Eph. Cal.”, II (1933) 55-56.

177 Cf. L. Picanyol, In antiquos de Sancto Iosepho Calasanctio Scriptores commentaria, in “Eph. Cal.”, I (1932) 60-61; the placement of the Life of Calasanz in the Vatican Apostolic Library is this: Mss Chigiani, G.V. 135, ff. 1-51

178 They are found in Reg. Cal., 84, 85, 86.

179 See the Archives of the Sacred Congregation of Prop. Fide, Acts of the Gen. Cong., 37 (1668) f. 227r, Gen. Cong. 134, Nov. 5, 1668: “The nuncio of Poland recommended to Lubomirski the mission of the Fathers of St. Paul, the first hermit, newly established in Szepesbéla. And just as he has shown himself willing to collaborate in the progress of the Catholic religion in these regions, he has also expressed the need with kind words for these peoples, and not in a vociferous way, as Fr. John of Capistrano has done. Moreover, he considers that it would be more advantageous to support such a mission in the Fathers of the Pious Schools, who have a good school in one of these Catholic cities, because since the said Order is there, which is highly esteemed by the same countrymen, more good is to be expected from them than from those of another Order, which has never been seen there and which the heretics would constantly distrust

[Translator’s note. In two or three cases I was forced to make certain assumptions about the translation - which is certainly not unambiguous - since the Italian original or Fr. Sántha’s transcription probably contains some inaccuracies].

The nuncio therefore thought it appropriate to speak to the provincial of the said Fathers, who, however, considered that it would be difficult for them to take over the whole mission because of the lack of subjects, but that they could take over part of it and leave the other part to the Fathers of St. Paul, the first hermit, provided that the Sacred Congregation would give some help for their maintenance. The Nuncio reports on this and awaits the order of the YY.EE.

Rescript

The Emmos. Fathers have not agreed to this for reasons which will be explained to the Nuncio of Poland so that he can communicate them to Mr. Lubomirski.

N.B. This report was written by Cardinal Piccolomini. The reasons given in the rescript are better seen in Cardinal Borromeo’s report on the same matter, delivered before the General Congregation in session on November 21, 1672 (Archives of the S. Congregation of Propaganda Fide). Minutes Gen. Cong., 42 [1672] ff. 285-286); here is the part of the report concerning the Piarists:

“Therefore, the Sacred Congregation decided to write to the said nuncio that his advice was not accepted for two reasons. First, because it does not seem expedient to remove the fathers of St. Paul, the first hermit, who has good relations with them. Secondly, because of the lack of personnel among the Fathers of the Pious Schools, who lack the necessary subjects for this mission, for which it would be favorable to use as a complement religious of the other Order, a measure which experience has shown, in view of the competition among them, usually causes a scandal among the people, to the detriment of the progress of the religion”.

180 Cf. A. Friedreich, Hanacius Ferenc élete, Veszprém, 1906, pp. 33-35.

181 Cf. A. Friedreich, o. c., pp. 36-48.

182 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong. of the Sag. Congreg. of Propag. Fide, vol. 43, ff. 175-176.

183 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong. (Reg. Gen. 10), on November 17, 1670 (f. 41r): “It was decided to announce the General Chapter to the provincials and rectors according to the usual formula and to convene it for May 13th of the coming year 1671. Accordingly, the provincials were to be in Rome with their delegates by the 10th of the said month. And with the usual prohibitions against others coming to Rome on these dates. The provincial of Sardinia should come alone, without other delegates, as they cannot be elected, because there is only one house that can take part in the elections and hold the Provincial Chapter. And the documents or whatever they have to send to the General Chapter should be given to the Father Provincial so that he can present them at the General Chapter.” See also the following letter from Father Onofrio addressed to the Father General on January 4, 1671 (Reg. Serv. Dei, 60, n. 29):

“... As for the displeasure you have received because of the dismissal of Fr. Dominic and others, and the fact that I have confronted you with other letters of mine having been deprived of the active and passive voice, I only state here that we are sad that you were annoyed about it; but if you had taken into account that these religious were professed with simple vows in a secular congregation, apart from the fact that their professions would be invalid, you would not have considered it nonsense (...). For the Holy Council of Trent and the other Brief forbid it for those who have professed in a religious Order and with solemn vows.

As for provincial and local chapters, neither your Paternity nor the general Assistants can prevent their celebration. For if there is no rector in the novitiate house, Father Jorge, who was elected vice-rector by me, is there; and since he holds this office, the local chapter can be celebrated there, as happened in the other chapter. Father Eusebio was also vice-rector in the house of Isili, and he too came to the Provincial Chapter to cast his vote; because it is different with vice-rectors when the rector is present. These fathers are complaining because this Province is kept in the situation of not admitting them to the Provincial Chapter and to the election of the two delegates for the General Chapter. Moreover, the lack of rectors in the said houses is a matter for the YY.PP. after they have so often insisted that you elect at least the rector of the novitiate house. And we know that they have good teachings (?) and they will declare the nullity (?) of the General Chapter that will be held there if those who are elected in this Provincial Chapter do not also intervene. And they will come well equipped and will be heard by the major superiors. Your Paternities should know that they are not stupid and I am not stubborn (?), that I also know how to say what is right for me, because as Provincial I am obliged to defend what is right for the good of this Province, which is also for the honor of our entire Order. Please, do not provoke the anger of your sons...”

See finally the Minutes of the Provincial Chapter, year 1671 (Reg. Prov. Suppl. 1).

184 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Chap., year 1671, in “Arch. Schol. Piar.”, II (1937) 18-19.

185 See note 22.

186 This letter is in the Vatican Secret Archives (Misc. Arm. VIII, 95) and reads:

“To the Holiness of Pope Clement X.

From the Fathers of the Pious Schools.

The Fathers of the Pious Schools, prostrating themselves at the feet of Your Holiness, humbly declare that they have heard that an attempt is being made to confirm their father General Cosimo of Jesus and Mary, a Sicilian, in office. If this is true, you are informed that the provincial Chapters have already taken place and that the orders for the General Chapter to be held next May, at the end of the six-year term, have been issued with your blessing, in accordance with the Instruction of Alexander VII, confirmed in the Instruction of Clement IX, which states: “The Superior General and the four Assistants, both those elected in the last General Chapter and those who will be elected in the future, may remain in office only for a six-year term”. It is also appropriate to replace the present General, as he does not possess the necessary ability to maintain the observance and tranquility of the Religion. Therefore, they reverently beseech your Holiness that in any case, before you make a decision, you order that the orators be heard, especially the Assistants and the Provincials, who are better informed. And by kissing his feet, pray to heaven for your perfect happiness. In God’s name, etc.”

187 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., IV, 8, ff. 92-94; as for Fr. Conti see also notes 129 and 183; as for the Provincial of Poland, W. Opatowski, see also the documents found in the Reg. Prov., 56, with no. 19.

188 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., IV, 8, ff. 97.

189 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., IV, 8, ff. 87v, 98v.

190 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Chap. of the year 1671, in “Arch. Schol. Piar.”, II (1937) 23. Related to the useless attempt of Fr. O. Conti and the two delegates of the province of Sardinia, who wanted to persuade the Cardinal that he should not interfere in the internal affairs of the Order, see J. C. Caputi, o. c., IV, ff. 97-98.

191 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Chap., year 1671, in “Arch. Schol. Piar.”, II (1937)23-25.

192 See the Minutes mentioned.

193 lbidem, p. 20; cf. note 173.

194 Cf. J. C. Caputi, o. c., IV, 8, f. 101.

195 See in the Appendix the Life written by Father Scoma and the official Acts of the recognition (Reg. Cal., 14, 87).

196 Cf. L. Picanyol, In antiquos de Sancto Iosepho Calasanctio Scriptores commentaria, in “Eph. Cal.”, II (1933) 56-58.

197 Ibidem.

198 See the register of letters of Father Alexis Armini from the year 1685 to 1692 (Reg. Gen. 134), and consult the letters of March 27th and May 8th, addressed respectively to the Provincial and the Visitor; these are documents that perhaps Father Cosimo had in his possession.

199 See the letters of Father Pirroni to Father Cosimo of July 31, 1683, in the Register of Letters of Father Pirroni (Reg. Gen., 133. f. 305), in which he comments on this subject:

“As for the life of our Venerable Father, be content not to print it, for it contains many things that could be harmful; you can give it to some followers for private reading, but on no account print it, for that would be immediately forbidden”.

200 See the Register of letters of Fr. Armini (Reg. Gen., 134) and specifically those addressed by him on June 19, 1688 and July 3, 1688 respectively to the Visitator and to the Provincial.

201 In order that everyone may better understand the nature and quality of this Life, we insert here the index of its chapters:

Life of the Venerable Father Joseph of the Mother of God, Founder of the Religion of the Clerics Regular Poor of the Mother of God of Pious Schools.

Proem: ff. 1-3

On the birth of Joseph Calasanz, his education in virtue and his childhood studies. Chapter I: ff. 4-8

Joseph devotes himself with great profit to the study of the sciences. Chapter II: ff. 8-10

After graduating from university, he is esteemed by many princes, and what happened to him. Chapter III: ff. 11-13

What Joseph did on his return to his homeland and throughout the time he spent there. Chapter IV: ff. 13-17

Joseph receives the holy orders and his progress. Chapter V: ff. 17-21

On the death of his father, Peter Calasanz, and his duties and ministry in the diocese of Urgel. Chapter VI: ff. 21-28

José is appointed judge and governor of the Valley of Tremp by the Bishop of Urgel. Chapter VII: ff. 28-29

José is appointed general vicar of the diocese by the bishop. Chapter VIII: ff. 30-34

Because of a serious incident in Barcelona, José travels there to bring peace. Chapter IX: ff. 34-39

After peace has been restored between the warring parties, Joseph returns to Urgel. Chapter X: ff. 40-42

Of Joseph’s arrival in Rome and what he did there in the first days and afterwards. Chapter XI: ff. 42-44

With these exercises of charity Joseph prepares himself to found the Institute of Pious Schools, which he considered necessary for the children. Chapter XII: ff. 44-47

For the sake of simplicity, he decided to move the schools to the city. There Joseph was thrown from the roof of the house to the ground by the devil at the risk of his life. Chapter XIII: ff. 47-49

Of the grievous works and persecutions which the enemy and his henchmen instigated against the Pious Schools. Chapter XIV: ff. 49-52

On the progress of the Institute of the Pious Schools after the above-mentioned persecutions. Chapter XV: ff. 52-54

The work of the Pious Schools is added to the Congregation of the Fathers of St. Mary in Portico. Chapter XVI: ff. 54-55

How the Pope established the Institute of Pious Schools as a secular congregation. Chapter XVII: ff. 55-58

The establishment of the Congregation of the Fathers Poor of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools as a religion; its development. Chapter XVIII: ff. 58-60

Of the last troubles and persecutions that arose against Father Joseph of the Mother of God. Chapter XIX: ff. 60-63

The Visitator promulgates the second General Vicar, with damage to religion, Chapter XX: ff. 63-66

On the last illness of Fr. Joseph of the Mother of God. Chapter XXI: ff. 66-68

On the last days of the illness of Fr. Joseph of the Mother of God Chapter XXII: ff. 68-70

Fr. Joseph of the Mother of God dies; what happened after his happy demise. Chapter XXIII: ff. 70-74

On the faith and the great desire Fr. Joseph of the Mother of God had for its elevation and propagation. Chapter XXIV: ff. 75-76

On the hope of Fr. Joseph of the Mother of God. Chapter XXV: ff. 76-77

On the charity of V. P. Joseph of the Mother of God. Chapter XXVI: ff. 77-80

On the humility and self-image of Fr. Joseph of the Mother of God Chapter XXVII: ff. 80-82

On the patience of V. P. Joseph of the Mother of God. Chapter XXVIII: ff. 82-86

On the obedience of Father Joseph of the Mother of God. Chapter XXIX: ff. 86-87

On the poverty of Fr. Joseph of the Mother of God. Chapter XXX: ff. 87-88

On the chastity of Father Joseph of the Mother of God. Chapter XXXI: ff. 88-89

Of many things foretold by Father Joseph of the Mother of God before his death. Chapter XXXII: ff. 89-100

Of the miracles wrought by God in the life and after the death of Father Joseph of the Mother of God. Chapter XXXIII: ff. 100-104

This list shows that almost half of the life is taken up by the description of the events of the so-called Spanish period (ff. 1-42). The second part of the life describes in only thirty-two pages the birth, consolidation and painful vicissitudes of the Pious Schools as well as the pious death of Calasanz, while the third part, which extends over thirty pages, describes in detail the virtues and miracles of the Holy Founder.

Certainly, the work as a whole deserves little historical trust from readers, as the author describes the events without the slightest critical sense and places more emphasis on subjective panegyric appreciation than on the objective historical aspect.

Father Onofrio Conti was a great help to the author in his choice of miracles, as he himself acknowledges in a note at the end of the life. Moreover, as can be seen from the same note, the author also used the processes of the Holy Founder. So, in addition to Fr. Berro, these processes must be considered first and foremost as sources of inestimable value. Father Picanyol’s hypothesis which Fr. Chiara would have used the work of Fr. Efisio Sotorreal can hardly be proven by comparing the two works.

202 See the Register of Letters of Fr. Fedele (Reg. Gen., 129).

203 See the Register of Letters of Fr. Fedele (Reg, Gen., 130), and specifically the letter of April 2, 1672 (f. 15). See also the Minutes of Gen. Cong. on March 29, 1672 (f. 57v), when the following was decreed in regard to the matter of Fr. Cosimo:

“That Father Cosimo of Jesus Mary remains in Palermo and may have for his present service not a cleric but a lay brother, as the Constitutions allow the same to Fr. General. And should he happen to have left Palermo and arrive in Naples, he shall be ordered, by virtue of holy obedience, not to move or advance until further orders are given; and should he arrive in Rome without touching Naples, Father General shall order him to go to the house that seems best to the same Father General.”

204 See previous note.

205 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Chap., year 1667, in “Arch. Schol. Piar.”, III (1938)7,

206 See the same Minutes of the Gen. Chap. of the year 1677, p. 5.

207 Cf. Minutes of the Gen. Cong. (Reg. Gen., 11, f. lr).

208 See the letter of Father Pirroni to Father Cosimo dated November 18, 1679 (Reg. Gen., 131, f. 175). 209, 131, f. 175).

209 See some depositions on his life and customs (Reg. Serv. Dei, 60, nos. 37, 38, 39. 40).

210 See the letter of Fr. Pirroni to the Provincial of Naples, dated July 16, 1683 (Reg. Gen., 133, f. 288),

211 See Fr. Pirroni’s letter of July 16th, written to the Provincial of Naples (Reg. Gen., 133, ff. 288); another of July 17th to the Provincial of Sicily (ibidem, f. 292), and a third of July 24th addressed to Father Cosimo himself, who was still in Naples (ibidem, f. 297),

212 See Fr. Pirroni´s letter on July 31,1683, addressed to the Provincial of Sicily (Reg. Gen. 133, ff. 304-305); and another to the same Father dated May 27, 1684, (ibidem, f. 564).

213 See the above-mentioned letters of Father Pirroni.

214 See the letter of Father Alexis Armini, then General Vicar, dated June 2, 1685, addressed to the Viceroy of Sicily (Reg. Gen., 134).

215 See the letters of Father Alexis Armini of October 13th, October 20th, November 10th and November 29, 1685, addressed to Father Cosimo (Reg. Gen., 134). Also note the Minutes of the General Chapter, year 1686, in “Arch. Schol. Piar.”, IV (1939) 10.

216 See the letter of Father Alexis Armini of March 27, 1688 to the Provincial (Reg. Gen., 134).

217 See the letter of Father Armini of May 8, 1688 to the Visitator (Reg. Gen., 134).

218 See in the Appendix the Life written by Father Scoma. 219. See this list in Reg. Serv. Dei., 60, no. 1.

Table of Contents

CHAPTER I

LIFE AND ACTIVITY OF FATHER COSIMO CHIARA FROM HIS BIRTH TO THE GENERALATE (1616-1665)

CHAPTER II

GENERALATE OF FATHER COSIMO CHIARA (1665-1671)

GENERAL VISITATION OF ITALIAN PROVINCES (1665-1666)

THE PROCESS OF BEATIFICATION OF THE HOLY FOUNDER

REINTEGRATION OF THE ORDER

NEW PROBLEMS AFTER REINTEGRATION

DEVELOPMENT OR EXPANSION OF THE ORDER

GOVERNMENT OF THE PROVINCES

PROGRESS OF STUDIES IN THE PIARIST ORDER

CULTIVATION OF LETTERS

MISSIONS FOR THE CONVERSION OF HERETICS

CHAPTER III

PREPARATION FOR THE GENERAL CHAPTER OF THE YEAR 1671. CELEBRATION OF THE CHAPTER AND MAJOR EVENTS

CHAPTER IV

LIFE AND ACTIVITIES OF FATHER COSIMO CHIARA AFTER THE GENERALATE (1671-1688)

EPILOGUE

APPENDIX

NOTES