Kolbe's Greatest Books of World Civilization: Saint Ignatius of Loyola Introduction

The Ratio Studiorum Societatis Iesu, here translated into English, with explanatory notes, was the result of many years of planning and experimentation. Into its making went the best efforts of a group of brilliant administrators and teachers, the manifold influence of Renaissance theory and practice, particularly the influence of the University of Paris, and the practical wisdom gained from prolonged tests in a hundred Jesuit colleges in many countries. Its progenitors were Father Jerome Nadal’s 1551 plan for the college at Messina in Sicily, his later plan called Ordo Studiorum, the Fourth Part of the Jesuit Constitutions, written by Ignatius of Loyola, and the substantial De Ratione et Ordine Studiorum Collegii Romani of Father James Ledesma. The Ratio was first printed for private review in 1586, revised in 1591, and given final form and official sanction in 1599. A more modern experimental edition was published in 1832, but was never revised or officially approved.Hence, when historians of education write about Jesuit education, they invariably refer to the official Ratio Studiorum of 1599: the Order and Method of Studies in the Society of Jesus .An English translation of this 1599 edition, by A. R. Ball, was published in 1933 in the McGraw-Hill Education Classics under the title Saint Ignatius and the Ratio Studiorum, and edited by E. A. Fitzpatrick. However, that publication has been out of print for nearly thirty years, and is seldom to be found even in university libraries. The translation presented here is completely new, based on the original text of 1599 and on G. M. Pachtler’s reprint, which is accompanied by a German translation, in Ratio Studiorum et Institutiones Scholasticae Soc. J. This work is to be found in Volume II of the series Monumenta Germaniae Paedagogica (Berlin: A. Hofmann, 1887), pp. 234-481. We should say here that Jesuit education has deserved a more accurate and impartial record in the history of education than is usually accorded it in most textbook histories. The generally unfavorable judgment is owing in large measure to the fact that earlier historians of education were unduly influenced in their account of Western education by one of the most thoroughly biased critics of the Jesuit system, Gabriel Comparayé in his two-volume Histoire Critique des Doctrines de l’Éducation en France depuis le Seizième Siècle, Paris, 1879, and translated into English by W. H. Payne, under the title of History of Pedagogy, London, 1900. A more general explanation is that the history of Jesuit education has been based on second-hand sources, often borrowed by one author from another, rather than on an acquaintance with available original documents, such as the Spiritual Exercises, the Fourth Part of the Constitutions and the Ratio Studiorum. A notable exception is Robert R. Rusk’s The Doctrines of the Great Educators, revised and enlarged, Macmillan, 1957. In his chapter on Loyola (Ignatius of Loyola, Jesuit founder), Rusk gives ample evidence of familiarity not only with the documents mentioned above, but with complementary documents and studies, such as those of Jouvancy, Petavius, Pachtler, Corcoran, Charmot, Hughes, Schwickerath, and Broderick. He quotes liberally from the Fourth Part of the Constitutions and the Ratio Studiorum, often, but not exclusively, availing himself of the English translations in St. Ignatius and the Ratio Studiorum, edited by E. A. Fitzpatrick. Worthy of special notice is Rusk’s thoroughgoing analysis and commentary on both the Constitutions and the several editions of the Ratio. Toward the end of his analysis (p. 81), he states: As more criticism than study has been devoted to this system by writers on the history of education, it is advisable incidentally to enumerate some of the topics in regard to which the Jesuits have anticipated modern practice, and by implication to reply to the unfounded criticisms of these writers.

2 Rusk then discusses eight contributions which he thinks that the Jesuits have made to educational theory. First, they provided education with a uniform and universal method. Second, Jesuit teachers, far from being subordinated to method, played a principal role in the system and were thoroughly trained for it. Third, though from the beginning the Latin and Greek classics were predominant in the curriculum, the use of the mother tongue, the principles of mathematics, and the methods of natural science, were given their proper place when they proved to be of permanent value. Fourth, "in retaining the drama as an educational instrument, the Jesuits anticipated the modern movement represented by what is termed the dramatic method of teaching history." Fifth, "in insisting on the speak- ing of Latin they likewise anticipated the direct method of teaching the classics." Sixth, the Jesuits substituted supervision for compulsion and dissociated punishment from teaching. Seventh, by promoting abler students after only half a session in a grade, they introduced a procedure now adopted by a number of modern school systems. Eighth, in Sacramental Confession and Communion "the Society possesses powerful instruments for the moral and religious education of the pupil." The Jesuit schools, whose pedagogical principles Rusk investigated so thoroughly, comprised a large segment of European scholastic institutions. Their growth between 1548 and 1773 was phenomenal. From 1548, when the first Jesuit school was founded at Messina in Sicily, to 1556, when Ignatius of Loyola, the Jesuit founder and general, died, thirty-three schools had been opened and six more were ready to open. The countries then represented were Sicily, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Austria, Bohemia, France and Germany. By 1581 the number of schools had increased to 150. When the official Ratio of 1599 was promulgated, there were 245 schools. This number rose to 441 in 1626, to 669 in 1749. At the latter date, in France alone, there were ninety-two schools, enrolling some 40,000 pupils. Meanwhile, the Jesuit system had spread from Europe to India, Cuba, Mexico, and the Philippines.

3 During these years of growth in the number of schools, enrollments also increased sharply. For example, official records show: Country School Year Enrollment

Portugal	Evora 1585 1,400	Lisbon 1586 1,800	Coimbra 1582 1,600
France	Billom 1563 1,600	Clermont 1586 1,500
Germany	Cologne 1581 1,000	Treves 1581 1,000
Italy	Roman College 1567 1,000	Roman College 1594 1,500

4 Jesuit schools in smaller towns averaged between 500 and 800, in the cities between 800 and 1,500. The majority were secondary schools, but a good many of them gradually added the faculty of arts, which, by incorporating the classes of Humanities and Rhetoric, was equivalent to the modern College of Arts and Sciences. At that time there were few Jesuit universities. Four may be mentioned: in Spain, the universities of Gandia and of Coimbra were founded in 1549 and 1551 respectively, the Roman College in 1551, and in France the University of Pont-a-Mousson in 1575. It is a fair question to ask whether the graduates of these many schools and colleges distinguished themselves in literature, science, mathematics, and the learned professions. Gilbert Highet, who qualified himself to answer the question by stating, "I am not a Jesuit myself, or even a Roman Catholic," writes: The success of Jesuit education is proved by its graduates. It produced, first, a long list of wise and learned Jesuit preachers, writers, philosophers, and scientists.

5 Yet if it had bred nothing but Jesuits, it would be less important. Its value is that it proved the worth of its principles by developing a large number of widely different men of vast talent: Corneille the tragedian, Descartes the philosopher and mathematician, Bossuet and Bourdaloue the orators, Moliere the comedian, d’Urfè the romantic novelist, Montesquieu the political philosopher, Voltaire the philosopher and critic, who although he is regarded by the Jesuits as a bad pupil is still not an unworthy representative of their ability to train gifted minds. The Art of Teaching, New York, Vintage Books, 1955, pp. 198-199. Highet could have extended his list of noted Jesuit alumni by including Goldone the creator of modern Italian comedy, Torquato Tasso the Italian poet and author of Jerusalem Delivered, and Calderon de la Barca, the Spanish dramatist and poet. Father Porée, for long professor of rhetoric at Louis-Le-Grand in Paris, lived to see nineteen of his former pupils inducted into the French Academy. The continuity of Jesuit educational history was rudely broken on August 16, 1773, when Pope Clement XIV issued a Brief of Suppression of the Society of Jesus. The abolition of the Jesuit Order meant the closing of 546 schools in Europe and 123 schools in missionary territories chiefly in Hispanic America and in India. Frederick II of Prussia and Catherine II in White Russia nullified the Brief of Suppression. Catherine asked the Jesuits to continue their teaching. Thus the small band of 200 Jesuits maintained their schools at Polotzk, Onsza, Vitepsk, and Dunabourg. In 1804, at King Ferdinand’s request, Pope Pius VII reinstated the Jesuits in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. Between 1804 and 1814 several groups of former Jesuits in England, the United States, France, and Ireland were permitted to affiliate with the surviving Society in White Russia. The final step was taken by Pope Pius VII when on August 7, 1814 he restored the Society of Jesus to its former status as an Order in the universal Church, with all the rights, privileges, and constitutions hitherto granted and approved. v

6 At that date there were in existence five Jesuit schools in White Russia, four in the Two Sicilies, one in the United States (Georgetown), and a few more in France. Progress in reviving the educational apostolate was exceedingly slow. The principal reasons were the almost complete loss of property, which had been confiscated by the States, the growing state control of education in most European countries, and the loss of large numbers of former Jesuits who had died or grown old or assumed other occupations. Consequently it was necessary for the Society to start building up its members and its schools almost from scratch. By 1833 it had charge of only forty-five schools and seventeen seminaries. Its total membership was 2,495. It was not until 1930 that the membership had built up to what it had been prior to the suppression. From 1930 on, however, the "new" Society of Jesus began to achieve far-reaching developments in its missionary and educational activities. First, the number of Jesuits consistently grew: to 26,293 in 1940, to 30,578 in 1950, and to 34,687 in 1960. Second, a statistical analysis by William J. Mehok, S.J., "Jesuit Schools of the World, 1961," in the Jesuit Educational Quarterly, XXV, June, 1962, pp. 42-56, revealed that in 1960 there were 4,059 Jesuit schools throughout the world, with a total enrollment of 938,436. Father Mehok then presented a geographical analysis of these statistics as follows: In Africa there were 1,009 Jesuit schools and 223,692 pupils, in Asia and Oceania 1,379 schools and 236,661 pupils, in North America 691 schools and 257,777 pupils, in South America 378 schools and 87,991 pupils, in Europe 602 schools and 131,315 pupils. Noteworthy in the statistics is the large number of elementary schools which the Jesuits are conducting today. According to the Ignatian Constitutions, Jesuits were forbidden to open elementary schools or supply teachers for them because of the lack of sufficient man-power. But that prohibition referred to Europe, not to foreign missions; for from the beginning it was a Jesuit principle that schools were to be opened as soon and as widely as possible in all missionary territories. In modern times the remarkable growth of Jesuit missions in Africa, Asia, and even in Oceania has necessitated the opening of very many mission schools, which begin at the elementary or elementary-secondary level.

7 This does not mean that secondary schools, colleges and universities are not also growing and spreading, particularly in India, the Philippines, various countries of South America, and most notably in the United States, where in 1968 there were fifty-five high schools with 37,811 students and twenty-eight colleges and universities with 150,884. A question that may profitably be raised at this point is where the official Ratio Studiorum of 1599 fits into the new age of the Society of Jesus. Before attempting to answer that question, it should be noted that the Ratio of 1599 rendered immediate and valuable service for its own era by successfully guiding and governing hundreds of Jesuit schools in Europe, and not a few in the Latin American colonies and in the Asiatic provinces, for a hundred and fifty years. Moreover, since the present Jesuit system takes its origins from 1599, it cannot be dismissed as wholly unrelated to our more complex situation today. It would be illogical, however, to conclude that merely updating the old Ratio would answer the needs of the twentieth century. Such an updating was attempted in the experimental revision of 1832, but after it was carefully examined by the Jesuits of that time it was found to be inadequate. In fact, it is very doubtful that a modern-day official Ratio could be constructed, so various are the conditions and requirements in the many countries in which Jesuits are conducting schools. We should now return to the question of what pertinence the Ratio may have for the new age of the Society of Jesus. A modern Jesuit author approaches an answer when he states that “it may be possible to disengage from the documentary sources of the Jesuit educational tradition certain key-categories or master themes, rudimentary perhaps or barely implicit, which constitute a portion of Christian educational theory and retain significance for places, persons and times very different from those of 1599." John W. Donohue, S.J., Jesuit Education (Fordham University Press, 1963), p. 69.

8 In another place he says: "For Jesuit school-men, however, the experience and accumulated wisdom of their predecessors is wonderfully instructive for their own work" (ibid., p. 28). And again: "Certain principles of sixteenth-century Jesuit education may be applied to our contemporary school actualities but they will usually require transposition into a new key" (ibid., p. 121). These statements warn us not to expect too much from the past. Yet, Father Donohue comes nearer, on occasion, to a more liberal recognition of traditional principles and practices which have relevance for our time. For instance, the rhetorical ideal of "Ciceronian verbal grace" has a wider aim that "rests on the conviction that the truly human man must possess both wisdom and eloquence; must know something and be able to say what he knows; must be able to think and to communicate” (ibid., p. 70). Another instance: “It is therefore quite defensible to conclude that developing the arts of communication and eloquentia perfecta are still essential tasks of the secondary school even though the form and content of eloquence changes from epoch to epoch and nation to nation” (ibid., p. 121).Father Donohue then devotes considerable space to describing the prelection, "the characteristic tool" for bringing students to an understanding of the materials and aims of study. After applying the prelection to the classical authors and to philosophy, he concludes: "It is clear that the basic pattern and purpose of the prelection can and ought to be adapted to all teaching and any subject. It is only too easy, unfortunately, to neglect this work of preparing students for individual study since it is always easier to tell them what than to teach them how” (ibid., pp. 150-151).Finally, it must suffice to summarize or list a number of pedagogical principles derived from the Ratio, which, with necessary adaptation, apply to Jesuit teaching everywhere. The aim of the prelection is understanding. "After understanding," says Father Donohue, "mastery is to be sought and this means student activity--exercise and more exercise."

9 The activity was diversified: disputations, debates, repetitions that were held daily, weekly, monthly and annually, written exercises in imitation of the author being read, public correction of the exercises, original essays in the upper grades. But since successful action calls for motivation, the Jesuits provided contests within and between classes, awards, plays and pageants, and academies. In sum, writes Father Donohue, All these pedagogical principles are, then, closely linked together. The learning product sought is genuine growth which is conceived in terms of abiding habits and skills. Habits are generated not simply by understanding facts or procedures but mastery which makes them one’s own and at hand for ready use. Mastery is the product of continual intellectual effort and exercise but fruitful effort of this sort is impossible without adequate motivation and a human milieu (ibid., pp. 150-153).Thus the answer to the question of what relevance the Ratio of 1599 has for our age would seem to be that it retains “significance for places, persons and times very different from 1599.”But what were the sources of the Ratio itself? When the early Jesuit schools began to spread from Italy, Spain and Portugal to France and Germany, claims were made by several headmasters of rival schools, especially by Johann Sturm, headmaster at Strassburg, that the Jesuits had copied their pedagogical practices. As a matter of fact, however, when the manuscript of Quintilian’s Institutio Oratoria was discovered at St. Gall by the humanist Poggio in 1410, Quintilian soon became the favorite source of most of the school programs in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries--at Liege, Strassburg and elsewhere. This was prior to the opening of the first Jesuit school. Ignatius of Loyola and his early followers, on the other hand, took as their chief authority the University of Paris, their Alma Mater. Their preference for Paris resulted from their interest, at that time, in the practice rather than in the theory of education. The University of Paris undoubtedly absorbed a great deal of its pedagogy from Quintilian or from humanist adaptations of Quintilian, but it had reduced these ideas to order and to practice.

10 The early Jesuits were engaged in the actual labor of the classroom and hence were looking for specific and serviceable pedagogical guidance. The success of their efficient and carefully organized educational code, embodied eventually in the Ratio of 1599, may best be explained by acknowledging that they did not merely resurrect and restore old ideas, but impregnated them with their own distinctive spirit and purpose, and subjected them to prolonged tests based on personal knowledge and practical experience. Though the result reflects the multiple influence of other systems, it was not a slavish imitation of either the University of Paris or of Quintilian. There are four principal * areas contained in the Ratio Studiorum, namely, administration, curriculum, method, and discipline. It begins with administration by defining the function, interrelation, and duties of such officials as the provincial, rector and prefects of studies. It outlines a curriculum by placing in their proper sequence and gradation courses of study in theology, philosophy and the humanities. It sets forth in detail a method of conducting lessons and exercises in the classroom. It provides for discipline by fixing for the students norms of conduct, regularity and good order. The following detailed analysis of the Ratio, according to sets of rules, will illustrate these four main divisions. Allan P. Farrell, S.J.

JESUIT RATIO STUDIORUM OF 1599

INTRODUCTION