23. Reshaping the Society of Mary ( )

Transcription

1 23. Reshaping the Society of Mary ( ) Introduction; Severing the branches: the Marist brothers; The Marist sisters; Pulling back in Oceania; A bombshell from Rome; Moving forward in education; Establishing the contemplative/eucharistic work. Introduction By the end of 1850, Jean-Claude Colin was intent on resigning as superior general. He needed to prepare the Society for a future without him. He also needed to take steps to ensure that the validity of the election of his successor would be legally safe and unassailable from attack at the time or later. This would eliminate one of the fears expressed at the time of his earlier attempt to resign in 1845, that his resignation would perhaps sow the seeds of dissension among its members. 1 As we shall see in the next chapter, this process turned out to be somewhat more complex and drawn out than he probably expected and, in fact, was not completed until late in While waiting for the moment to come, he might have largely withdrawn from the government of the Society or simply played out the remainder of his time in office with routine administration, leaving further big decisions to his successor. He had every reason to take such a course: he was old beyond his 60 years, tired and in poor health. Instead, he adopted a quite different policy. Before he went, he wanted to leave the Society of Mary in the state in which he believed it should be. A great part of this consisted in finishing its constitutions a task which, despite several periods of leave from the government of the Society for this purpose, he had not so far been able to complete. He seems, however, to have concluded that he could not achieve it until he had been totally relieved of the office of superior general. There was a further task he set himself, which was the definitive configuration of the Society. The shape he had in mind was in many respects quite different from that envisaged by the original aspirants of Saint-Irénée and Fourvière, or by Colin himself at Cerdon, or even as recently as It had in part been imposed by events or by other facts; other aspects of it emerged from developments in his own thinking. Into bringing it about he put 1 See above, chapter 20.

2 2 the remainder of his still considerable energy. The Society of Mary as envisaged in its early years was to consist of several branches: a branch of priests and collateral branches of teaching brothers and sisters; there was also to be a lay movement, often called a Third Order. In time, coadjutor brothers were added to the priests branch. The constitutional structure of this multi-branched organisation was at first rather vague; but, at least by the time Colin made his first attempt to get the Society approved by Rome in 1833, the teaching brothers and the sisters were meant to be largely autonomous bodies, subject ultimately to the superior general of the priests. In 1836, the Holy See approved the priests branch alone; the Third Order had already received some recognition in 1834 by being granted indulgences originally intended for the priests as a consolation prize for not receiving papal approbation. Until 1842, Colin was still trying to get papal approval for the teaching brothers (and implicitly also for the sisters) as branches of a single Society. Cardinal Castracane and others in Rome finally convinced him that a society with this configuration would never be approved: they saw the tree with several branches rather as several bodies with the same head a monster ; besides, the teaching brothers already outnumbered the priests by four to one and sooner or later would inevitably demand full self-government. Colin therefore determined that the brothers and sisters should, as soon as possible, become fully independent congregations: 1846 can be regarded as the turning point. This task had not yet been completed, especially regarding the sisters, where his plans did not at all accord with the views of their foundress Mother Saint-Joseph (Jeanne-Marie Chavoin). The seminarians who in 1816, under the inspiration and leadership of Jean-Claude Courveille, committed themselves to setting up the Society that Mary wanted, certainly foresaw that some day they, like the Jesuits who were their models, might engage in foreign missions. Their openness to this possibility was expressed in the letter they sent to Pope Pius VII in 1822 and in other documents. They did nothing, however, to obtain a foreign mission or to prepare themselves specifically for taking it on. Then, in 1835 and 1836, by a series of unforeseen events, the Marists, now under the leadership of Jean-Claude Colin, were offered and accepted the mission field of the south-western Pacific. This necessarily gave the Society a new shape, as it brought in many recruits eager to evangelise a vast, distant, difficult and largely unknown area. Most of them were already ordained priests; initially, they received only a brief and summary formation as religious. It would have been easy for the Marists to become in effect a missionary society of priests,

3 3 closer to the model of the Foreign Missionaries of Paris: Church officials often assumed they were and treated them accordingly. Colin, however, insisted that the Society of Mary was a properly religious congregation of pontifical right, with perpetual (though simple) vows a rather new type of organisation, not yet a familiar part of the Church s landscape. According to the Marist rule, foreign missions were only one of the ways by which to work for the salvation of the neighbour and thereby arrive at holiness. Reconciling this identity and finality with the needs of the Oceanian mission led to misunderstandings and tensions, compounded by clashes of personalities. Wearied by conflict, weighed down by his sense of responsibility for the temporal and spiritual welfare even the eternal salvation of those he sent out to the mission, dismayed by the many deaths due to violence, disease or privation (and under pressure from the missionaries families), Colin came to the conclusion that the Society was badly overstretched. He had already decided to reduce significantly its commitment to Oceania. By the time he resigned, he was also reconsidering the whole question of the suitability of a religious body such as the Society to take charge of a new mission territory. At the same time, he wanted to expand the work of the Society in France, which, he believed, was really as pagan as the unevangelised Pacific. The preferred field was education, an apostolate in which Marist priests had already been engaged since 1829 and in which Colin continued to take a close interest. In recent years, he had agreed to staff existing schools and start new ones and was organising a network of Marist fathers establishments and the systematic preparation of priest-teachers. He continued in this path until the end of his time as superior general. Finally, Colin began to give sustained attention to the creation of a contemplative work, which was not in the primitive scheme but had for some years formed part of his developing idea of the Society. This took more concrete shape in 1850 with the purchase of the property of La Neylière near Lyons. Its direction was increasingly influenced by the newly invigorated Eucharistic movement in the Catholic Church, especially in France. In this chapter, we shall deal with Colin s efforts to reshape the Society in the years immediately preceding his resignation in May They aimed at four objectives: the independence of the branches; the reduction of the Marist commitment to Oceania; the expansion of the fathers schools in France; the development of the contemplative- Eucharistic work. This intention to reshape the Society was never declared as a programme ; it may not even have existed as a fully articulated project in Colin s own mind,

4 4 which inclined towards practical rather than speculative ideas. It emerges clearly, however, by examining what he did in the last years of his generalate. This important period in Colin s life and the history of the Society of Mary was marked by yet another change of political regime in France. The year 1851 ended with a stalemate between the legislative and executive branches of government, which was resolved by President Bonaparte s coup d état of 2 December effectively suspending the constitution of the second republic. Disturbances in Lyons and other cities were put down with loss of life. A plebiscite held on December authorised the president to draw up a new constitution. This was promulgated on 14 January 1852 and gave the executive increased powers at the expense of the legislative branch. A new legislature favourable to Bonaparte was elected during the first half of March. The final steps came in November and December 1852, when a decree of the senate, confirmed by a plebiscite, transformed the second French republic into the second French empire and, exactly a year after his coup d état, Prince Louis- Napoleon Bonaparte was proclaimed the Emperor Napoleon III. The new regime, which stayed in place until 1870, gave France a period of peace and economic prosperity, cultural brilliance and leadership in Europe. The price paid was in the restriction of political and civil liberties, including the freedom of the press. The second empire was in no sense a Catholic regime, but it did favour the Church as a pillar of order. In particular, religious congregations, including the Society of Mary, were able to continue and extend their engagement in education. Severing the branches: the Marist brothers Since 1846, the teaching brothers had been moving towards total independence of the fathers. This took place gradually: neither group wanted an abrupt break in the constitutional ties, and both presumed that fraternal relations and friendly co-operation would continue. Marist fathers would still give retreats to brothers communities and serve as resident chaplains at the Hermitage and other brothers establishments. An important event took place on 20 June 1851, when the president of the French republic, Prince Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte, signed the decree giving legal recognition to the brothers as a congregation. They had been working at obtaining this status since the time of Marcellin Champagnat and, we have seen, were twice on the point of obtaining it when the downfall of the government and change of regime in 1830, then in 1848, returned them to the starting-point. In this quest, the Marist fathers aided the brothers, and, when François and

5 5 Louis-Marie came to Paris in February 1851 to conduct negotiations with the government, they stayed as a matter of course with the fathers in the rue du Montparnasse. It would be difficult to exaggerate the importance for the brothers of gaining this legal recognition from the French state: with their numerous schools and other establishments in many parts of the country, they were very visible and lacking legal status correspondingly vulnerable to attacks by those who resented the presence of religious congregations in primary school education. They were conscious that their organic connection with the Marist fathers offered them some protection. The fathers themselves also lacked state recognition, but they were priests and were approved by the pope as for their schools, they were few and small and, as secondary schools, not in the front line of the educational battle. Now that the brothers had their state recognition, they no longer needed the protection of the fathers. The independence of the brothers was in effect declared at their general chapter held at the Hermitage from 31 May to 15 June Jean-Claude Colin had already anticipated it in effect by treating Br. François as the superior general of a fully autonomous congregation. So, for example, in May 1852, he told Claude Chavas of a letter he had just written to François in support of a request by the bishop of Périgueux for brothers in his diocese. 3 He remarked: You know that s as far as I can go; we are not the superiors of the brothers of the Hermitage, and we can only address requests to them, like anyone else. Nevertheless, Br. François had sent Fr. Colin a draft of common rules that were to be adopted at the chapter; these were examined by Benoît Lagniet, who sent his comments in writing. On the morning of 4 June 1852 Colin was at the Hermitage to address the brothers general chapter. It is not known whether he was formally invited to attend the chapter, speak at it or even preside over the assembly it is not impossible, but perhaps not very likely, that his presence was as unexpected as that of the brothers representatives at the fathers chapter of In any case, a summary of his address was inserted in the chapter minutes. 4 Colin addressed the assembled brothers as my dear brothers and also as my sons (mes enfants), and began by recalling fondly the old days and the origins of the project of the Society of Mary and of the brothers as an integral part of it. Fr. Champagnat had, before his death, named Br. François as his successor, but had also made Colin the depositary of his last wishes. He could have interfered in the brothers affairs; but I understood perfectly that that could only cause confusion in your government. So he had left everything in the hands 2 For this chapter, cf. Bourtot, Frères et pères, and CS 4, 330:1 (9 May 1852, Colin to Chavas). 4 See CS 4, 341 (4 June 1852), with the editor s introduction.

6 6 of the brother director general and his assistants. 5 Under their administration, the brothers had developed, so that he could say that your congregation is the work of the blessed Virgin, and that she continues to bless it and make it prosper. It was clear, he continued, that Providence wanted the brothers to govern themselves. They no longer needed to be cared for as when they were like newborn infants, but had reached adult maturity. It would now be imprudent for the fathers to interfere in their administration, since they were no longer conversant with the way the brothers did things and could only cause confusion in their government. After much prayer and reflection, Colin no longer thought it possible to have both branches of brothers and priests depend on the same superior. Rome took the same view, and Colin, rather unfortunately, repeated Cardinal Castracane s quotation from Deuteronomy 22:10 that the ass and the ox should not be tied together. 6 For the rest, my dear brothers, let providence act. Colin continued with reflections on the role of the superior then moved to the model for our congregation, by which he appears to mean the whole Society of Mary taken in its broadest sense. His precise words are of interest to those who wish to follow the development of his thought about this: [God s] will was that it should be based on the primitive Church. The house of Nazareth, that was the model I put before me [emphasis in the source]. After the example of the blessed Virgin our congregation should do much good, but without making a lot of noise (sans éclats). May humility, simplicity, modesty be our favourite virtues and distinguish us from other congregations [emphasis in the source]. Oh! my sons, let us make ourselves little and God will bless us I repeat, make yourselves very small, and soon you will invade the whole earth. In conclusion, Colin reassured the brothers that, although he would not take any part in their government, he had no intention of breaking with them. On the contrary, he had for some time been trying to find some way of linking their congregation with that of the fathers, without interfering with their government. If he could not do this, he promised that he would put something in the fathers rule that would establish relations of friendship and interest between the two branches. 7 At the end of his speech, Colin gave his blessing and left the 5 This was not entirely the case: as we have seen, he did at times act as ultimate superior of the brothers. 6 More exactly: You shall not plough with an ox and an ass together. The editor, p. 577, note 1, remarks that this was the only thing that was later remembered from Colin s speech. Presumably, both Castracane and Colin meant that two different sorts of animals do not make for harmonious yoke-fellows. Cf. also Mayet 4, 49m (I owe this reference to Gaston Lessard). 7 As the editor remarks, p. 578, note 1, in fact the Constitutions of the priests of the Society of Mary approved in 1873 do not mention the brothers (or, for that matter, the sisters).

7 7 meeting. Both fathers and brothers and their respective superiors had to get used to the new relationship of being equal members of a family; inevitably, there were times when one side might have thought the other had overstepped the mark. Only a week after his appearance at the chapter, and while it was still sitting, Colin passed on to François complaints he had received from a number of brothers, notably concerning the ill health and early death of certain young brothers, which they attributed to poor food and lack of time for proper meals. 8 He reminded the brothers director general that it was his principal duty to keep them in good health and told him that, if complaints should arise presumably in public it would be a terrible blow to your congregation. He bade him: Share my letter with the two assistants and see together while you are in chapter if there is no way of making a concession and giving the congregation a small satisfaction, which would have a happy result. He assured him of the interest I take in you, which has moved me to bring it to your attention. One might allow that Colin s monition was, after all, fraternal, but might also wonder what would have been his reaction if Br. François had taken him to task in such a way. More fundamentally, should he have allowed these brothers to complain to him about their director general? Before the month of June was out, Colin was writing to François about retreat preachers and chaplains; the tone was friendly and the writer signed with tender affection. 9 Early in the following year it was he who had a favour to request from Br. François, for a brother to help out with the teaching at the fathers college of La Seyne. 10 François hesitated. 11 He would like to oblige, as a way of fostering unity between brothers and fathers. This would, however, constitute an innovation and a precedent and leave him with no answer to give to the many requests that were coming in to staff secondary schools, something the brothers were reluctant to do. 12 Having set out his reflections, he left the final decision to Colin, hoping, no doubt, that he would withdraw his request. Colin seems to have felt that, in view of all the services the fathers provided, the brothers should be prepared to give this help. 13 His reply of 10 February profoundly 8 CS 4, 347 (11 June 1852, Colin to François). 9 CS 4, 354 (29 June 1852, Colin to François). 10 CS 4, 419 (31 January 1853, Colin to François). 11 CS 4, 422 (8 February 1853, François to Colin). 12 In fact, Colin s request had been for someone to teach reading and writing, so in the primary department of the college. 13 Colin s response is no longer extant, but cf. the editor, p. 673, note 1.

8 8 distressed François, who felt that his attitude and intentions had been misinterpreted. 14 Nevertheless, he preferred to see in Colin s reproachful reminders of past favours grounds for hope that they would continue, in which case, the brothers would reciprocate: the fathers were making an exception to their rule by providing chaplains for the brothers novitiates; the brothers would make an exception to their rule. If anyone objected that they were being inconsistent, there was a ready reply: There is between the fathers and ourselves an affinity, which our rule invites us to preserve. He hoped soon to go to Lyons to discuss with Colin ways of perpetuating the union and mutual services between the two branches of the congregation and was encouraged by his declaration perhaps expressed in the lost letter that his heart would remain always attached to the work of the brothers and singularly desirous of their progress and development. In the event no brother came to La Seyne in Later in the year, Colin was still refusing to send a chaplain to the new brothers novitiate at Beaucamps and was even thinking of withdrawing fathers from all the brothers novitiates, including the Hermitage, giving as his reason his desire not to have them isolated in houses belonging to a completely distinct and entirely independent congregation. 16 Nevertheless, Marist fathers continued to act as chaplains to brothers communities; and Jean-Claude Colin, by then no longer superior general, went to the Hermitage to preside at the ceremony at which, on 2 September 1855, Br. François made his vow of stability. 17 The Marist sisters From September 1849, we have once again a record of correspondence between Jean- Claude Colin and Mother Saint-Joseph (Jeanne-Marie Chavoin). 18 It seems that there had in fact been little contact between the two since the end of By that time, we have seen, he had come to the conclusion, for reasons of Church law and practice, that the only future for the Marist sisters was to become a diocesan congregation; he had also decided, for reasons that might seem less persuasive, that they should adopt another name. When he made known these decisions to Mother Saint-Joseph, she eloquently expressed her own deep desire that they should remain a branch of the Society of Mary and retain the name of 14 CS 4, 427 (19 February 1853, François to Colin). 15 On this episode, see Bourtot, Frères et pères, Cf. CS 4, 538 (5 November 1853, Louis Vidal to Br. Louis-Bernardin). 17 See CF, p Colin s letters are edited in CS, but we shall follow the correspondence and adopt the translations as presented in CMJ. 19 For what follows, see the editors introduction, CMJ, p

9 9 Marist. Some trace of her hurt at the resulting impasse with Colin may be detected in a letter of consolation she received from her former spiritual director, Jean-Philibert Lefranc. 20 There seem to have been further discordant exchanges between the two founders, as Mother Saint-Joseph noted in her copybook that she had received several letters from Colin in 1847 and 1848 but felt she could not keep them, as he might later be blamed for the severity he showed towards her. 21 Consequently, she had not transcribed copies of her letters to him. These clashes may not, however, have been on the subject of the Sisters status, as there were other possible causes of passing disagreement. 22 Whatever the subject of these letters, he had apparently adopted a peremptory tone, as we have seen he had a way of doing even with Marcellin Champagnat which wounded her. It would, however, be a mistake to interpret the quasi-cessation of correspondence between 1846 and 1849 as indicating a breach of relations. Colin, we have seen, had plenty to occupy him in these years and may simply have put the affairs of the sisters to one side. He certainly did not wash his hands of them: during the revolutionary disturbances of February 1848 he saw to the safety of their two communities at Ste Foy and La Boucle in Lyons; around the same time he authorised Julien Favre to communicate to the community of Bon- Repos and therefore to Mother Saint-Joseph certain letters from Oceania. He did not oppose the decision of two of his own nieces to enter Bon-Repos in 1847, as he might have done if his relations with Mother Saint-Joseph had broken down, and regretted not being able to attend their clothing as novices in the following year. 23 Relations between the two founders re-emerge into the light of day with a flurry of correspondence between 11 September and 16 December These letters make for somewhat painful reading and are not always easy to follow, as they often allude to matters or events that did not need further explanation at the time but may escape the modern reader. Colin s letters we are not obliged to evaluate those of Mother Saint-Joseph do not, it must be admitted, show him at his best. Besides that peremptory tone, which can at times sound querulous, he kept returning to points already dealt with and to old grievances, such as her 20 CMJ, 32 (23 November 1846). 21 CMJ, p As suggested by the editors, CMJ, p. 188: during Colin s absence in Rome in 1847, Mother Ambrose had been transferred from Bon-Repos, where he had made her assistant to Mother Saint-Joseph, to Meximieux as superior; this appointment would very likely have displeased him. 23 CMJ, p. 188 and note Those who wish to follow it in greater detail can easily do so in English in the edition furnished with explanatory introduction and abundant notes in CMJ,

10 10 recourse to Bishop Devie in He made threats, which sounded as if he was on the point of breaking off all dealings with Chavoin and her congregation. These last, however, should not be taken at their face value, as Colin did not act on them and not for the first time in his life seems to have been carried away by the emotion that he was experiencing at the time to say or write things that, on reflection, he may have regretted or at least thought better of. The reader of these letters also needs to know that, by September 1849, there were other questions between the two founders besides that of the diocesan status of the sisters. These other matters arose from within their congregation. Some sisters thought that Mother Saint-Joseph treated her niece, Sister Teresa of Jesus too favourably and listened to her talebearing against them. 26 Closely allied to this was some discontent concerning Mother Saint- Joseph s system of government and even her personality: her countrywoman s blunt speech and plain manners struck certain younger sisters, more genteelly brought up, as offensive. Much more important than any of these petty problems was that of enclosure. At the time, it was usual for religious women to live in their convents with at least a certain degree of enclosure, which naturally restricted the type of work, including ministry, they could do. Mother Saint-Joseph did not want this for her sisters, who were to be free to move around and even visit people in their homes. Colin favoured the adoption of semi-enclosure, which would be less strict than that of cloistered nuns but would on the whole keep them in their convents. Such a life would also favour the contemplative aspect of their vocation, on which he had earlier insisted, for example by having them go to chapel to pray the office, instead of while they were working at communal tasks. In this he was supported by a number of sisters. Instructive in this regard is a remark of Mother Ambrose, superior at Meximieux, in a letter to Mother Elizabeth, superior at Ste Foy: 27 I thanked God for the decision which the Reverend Father gave, it is exactly to my liking, not only because it is the manifestation of God s will, which is our only aim, but because it relieves me of a heavy load at the thought of going out. We will gain as much merit by continuing on our little way as we would have by running, after having made a pause. It is very consoling. Mother Saint-Joseph opened the new exchange of letters by informing Colin that she 25 Cf. CMJ, 30:8 (April 1846, Colin to the community of La Capucinière). 26 Cf. CMJ, 41:5 (2 December 1849, Colin to Mother Saint-Joseph) and her reply, CMJ, 42:4-5 (7 December 1849). 27 CMJ, 52:1 (18 September 1850). According to the editors, p. 238, note 2, the decision of Fr. Colin, to which the writer alludes, was probably the veto he placed on the proposal to make a new foundation at Laus; cf. CMJ, 50 (12 September 1850, Colin to the bishop of Gap) and 51 (14 September 1850, Colin to Mother Saint-Joseph). Mother Ambrose saw in it an implicit decision in favour of enclosure and a more contemplative life-style.

11 11 had received requests from three parishes in their native Beaujolais region to staff parish schools. 28 She told him which request she favoured and why and asked for his approval; she would come to Lyons to discuss it with him. This put Colin on his guard, as she was effectively asking him to act as superior of the sisters congregation, which for some time he had been refusing to do. When Mother Saint-Joseph went to Lyons, she was unable to meet Jean-Claude but talked instead with his brother Pierre (whom she still called our father ). 29 Colin wrote to her on 18 or 19 September, and she replied on 21 st (neither letter has survived). He wrote again soon after, and this time we have his letter. 30 She knew very well, he wrote, that, since he was not and could not be superior of the sisters congregation, he could have no decisions to take. The congregation, he believed, lacked a solid foundation, a certain uneasiness reigned there. This was a reason why it had not grown. Before the sisters could decide about the request to take on a parish school, they needed to settle several questions about the nature of their institute, notably whether their houses would be enclosed, semi-enclosed, or not enclosed at all, whether the sisters would sleep in a dormitory and work in a common work-room or each have her cell, how the congregation was to be governed. Once these were settled, Colin could write the rule, which he had been promising and which the sisters desired. He suggested that Mother Saint-Joseph could discuss them with the superiors of La Boucle (Mother Scholastica), Ste Foy (Mother Elizabeth) and Meximieux (Mother Ambrose). We do not have Mother Saint-Joseph s response. During the month of October, Colin called together the three other superiors and, in a letter that is also not extant, communicated their views to Mother Saint-Joseph. It would appear that their discussion with him had concerned only or mainly the question of the status of the sisters and that they had agreed to that of a diocesan congregation. This was in any case the only matter of Mother Saint- Joseph s response. 31 She accepted that canon law gave the bishops jurisdiction over religious women, but did not see why this meant that the Marist sisters would have to cease to belong to the Society of Mary: it was God s will that they should be a branch of the Society; Fr. Colin, whom God and Mary had chosen to lead the work, would find a way of reconciling the bishops rights with the divine plan. She was not, she believed, being obstinate. Colin 28 CMJ, 37 (11 September 1849, Mother Saint-Joseph to Colin). 29 CMJ, 38 (20 September 1849, Mother Saint-Joseph to Colin). 30 CMJ, 39 (3 October 1839, Colin to Mother Saint-Joseph). 31 CMJ, 40 (7 November 1849, Mother Saint-Joseph to Colin).

12 12 replied that the matter of the rule needed to be settled without delay. 32 He wanted the three other superiors to go to Belley to study its basic articles with Mother Saint-Joseph, but accepted that this might need to wait until the end of winter. She replied immediately, defending herself against his reproaches and implying that it was because of him that the sisters did not yet have a rule. 33 It was to supply this defect that, apparently on the basis of certain lights she had received, she had written the constitutions which I think necessary for our Congregation and left them in the hands of Fr. Favre, then superior at La Capucinière. Colin reacted fiercely. 34 He had long been worried about her and feared that she was suffering from illusions and deceived by the devil on several points. Her latest reply confirmed his misgivings. This was, he proclaimed, the final breach: I leave you then, my dear Sister, to do what you please; I need no longer have anything to do with you or your rule. I shall take immediate steps to see that La Capucinière will have no further relations with your house, and you may be sure that this letter will be the last that charity and zeal for your soul will prompt me to write. Alarmed and distressed, Mother Saint-Joseph humbly begged his pardon, implored him not to abandon the sisters and offered to resign. 35 Colin replied without delay. 36 Since she asked him, he agreed to help her draw up and decide the rules for her congregation: they would try to do this at the forthcoming meeting of superiors in Belley. Therefore, he wrote, you may set your mind at ease on this point. Her submission had forestalled action on his threat to break off relations and so averted a scandal. Nevertheless, he went back over all the grievances old and new, including her freedom of speech with him and his brother, which seemed to him as if she was giving them orders. She should not interpret his warnings to her as springing from ill-temper and groundless prejudice had she used these expressions? as his only object was to help her and make her see the snares of the devil. With the return of spring, Colin asked Mother Saint-Joseph to call the three superiors to meet at Belley in order to settle the main points of their rule. 37 Neither he nor any other Marist would, however, be present. He had given up working on the sisters rule in the previous December, once he learned that she had drawn up articles of her own. He had no intention of imposing a rule on them; they would be left free from any interference so as to 32 CMJ, 41 (2 December 1849, Colin to Mother Saint-Joseph). 33 CMJ, 42 (7 December 1849, Mother Saint-Joseph to Colin). 34 CMJ, 43 (9 December 1849, Colin to Mother Saint-Joseph). 35 CMJ, 44 (14 December 1849, Mother Saint-Joseph to Colin). 36 CMJ, 45 (16 December 1849, Colin to Mother Saint-Joseph). 37 CMJ, 46 (1 April 1850, Colin to Mother Saint-Joseph).

13 13 make their own decisions and devise the rule that suited them, provided it got the approval of the bishop of Belley and the cardinal archbishop of Lyons. Mother Saint-Joseph agreed that the meeting should take place as soon as possible and proposed the month of May. She asked only that Colin should examine the rule that the sisters would draw up before submitting it to the bishops. Finally, in an effort to return their correspondence to its old footing, she reminded him that there would soon be a profession and a clothing ceremony at Bon-Repos, in which his two nieces would take part. She asked for his prayers for them and for herself and briefly reported on the state of the community: Our house is going fairly well, the sisters all have a great love of prayer and great charity; when I see these two virtues amongst them, I cannot tell you how happy I am. She signed herself, Your very humble, very submissive and very obedient daughter. The meeting does not seem to have taken place in May. 38 There is no further correspondence for several months. Once again, Jean-Philibert Lefranc was consoling Mother Saint-Joseph and advising how to conduct herself in humiliation and apparent failure. At the end of the summer, she went once more to Lyons hoping to see Fr. Colin, but he was too busy to receive her. 39 He was in fact very busy; but he could no doubt have found the time if he had really wanted to see her perhaps he wished to avoid a scene. She appears to have salvaged something from the visit to Lyons in order to see the superiors of La Boucle and Ste Foy, who agreed to come to Meximieux to meet with her and the local superior Mother Scholastica. In fact, the meeting did not succeed in coming up with anything that could be called a rule. 40 Instead they agreed to give up the name Marist sisters if Colin would agree to give them the fundamental points of their rule. 41 Early in November Mother Saint-Joseph repeated her request that he give the sisters their rule. 42 By then, however, Colin was at La Neylière and immersed in the question of the contemplative branch. The year 1852 saw the disappearance of two men who had been closely involved with the Society, especially in its early days, and with Jean-Claude Colin. Early in February, he had to announce to the Society the death of Jean Cholleton, whom he described as our father, our guide, our light, in the midst of the trials of the Society as it came to birth. 43 By 38 See the editors note, CMJ, p. 227, note See the editors, CMJ, p The editors remark, p. 230: The sisters branch of the Society of Mary was practically incapable, at the time, of taking any decision independently of Fr. Colin. 41 CMJ, 49 (7 September 1850, Mother Saint-Joseph to Colin). 42 CMJ, 53 (5 November1850, Mother Saint-Joseph to Colin). 43 CS 4, 297 (10 February 1852).

14 14 July of the same year, Bishop Devie was on his deathbed and asked to see Fr. Colin, who came to Belley to make his farewell to his second mentor (and occasional tormentor). The dying man gave his blessing to the Society of Mary. 44 He also gave Colin some advice and recommendations. He did not mince his words. Vicar general Guillemin overheard the bishop warning him that he wounded the feelings of his subjects and let his moods run away with him a deal too much. This deathbed advice had its effect, at least for a while: It was remarked that after this death Father Colin showed angelic meekness for some weeks, and often looked up at the portrait of Bishop Devie and murmured a prayer. 45 Devie also asked Colin to take up the sisters rule again, a request in which he was supported by his coadjutor and successor Georges Chalandon. Colin did not delay. Two days after the bishop s death he wrote to Mothers Ambrose and Elizabeth asking them to meet at Meximieux with Mother Scholastica in order to revise the points of rule already decided. 46 A general chapter was called, and Jean-Claude Colin was actively involved in its preparation: he presided at the election of delegates from the various houses and drew up draft rules to be submitted for prior approval to Bishop Chalandon and then to the chapter. 47 When the chapter assembled in Belley between 25 and 30 August 1852, Colin presided, assisted by Frs. Poupinel and Yardin. The result was a complete victory at least for the time being for all that he had been insisting on: the sisters would no longer be called Marist Sisters but Religious of the Holy Name of Mary ; they would be subject to the bishops and consequently would have no superior general but a superior in each diocese; they would adopt a kind of voluntary enclosure, imposed by the rule. The chapter also decided that, in the following year, elections would be held for all superiors and officials. 48 On submitting the decisions of the chapter of 1852 to Bishop Chalandon, Colin had raised the possibility that, at least initially, it might be appropriate for the sisters to elect a superior general, a proposal to which the new bishop of Belley assented. Thus Mother Saint-Joseph, who had governed the sisters since her election at Cerdon on 8 44 CS 4, 360 (26 July 1852, Colin s circular letter announcing the bishop s death on the day before). 45 FA, 389 (July 1852, reported by Victor Poupinel). 46 CS 4, 361 (27 July 1852, Colin to Marie Mortier and Jeanne-Baptiste Rougemont). Did he also invite Mother Saint-Joseph? Unfortunately, owing to lack of evidence, we cannot satisfactorily answer this question or others concerning the relationship between Colin and Chavoin, especially the reason for its breakdown. Rather than speculate, we must often be content to let the past keep its secrets. 47 See the editors, CMJ, p See the editors, CMJ, p

15 15 December 1824, realised that she would have to face re-election. By then, there was a growing feeling that the congregation needed a new head. The chapter of elections, at which Fr. Colin presided, began at Bon-Repos on 26 April After three days of retreat, on 29 April, Mother Saint-Joseph tendered her resignation, and Mother Ambrose was elected unanimously superior general. 49 The former mother general at first wanted to stay on at Bon-Repos. This, however, would clearly not do. Only one person might be able to persuade her to leave what had been her home since Jean-Claude Colin was still in Belley and could easily have gone to see her. Instead, he preferred to dictate a letter to François Yardin. 50 Now that the storms were over, calm and serenity could be restored to their relationship and even a gleam of the old warmth. Colin began by telling her how extremely moved and edified he had been by her behaviour over the last few days: that was exactly what he would have expected of her. He could now thank her for all the services she had rendered him and no doubt recalling the early days at Belley how eager she always was to please us. In return he wanted to do everything in his power for her happiness and peace. Tactfully, he asked her to consider the following proposal. 51 He feared that her continued presence at Bon-Repos would embarrass both her and her successor and divide the affections of the sisters. After consultation with the bishop, he wanted her to go to Meximieux as at least temporary superior. She would find plenty to occupy her there but also more free time to devote to the life of prayer she so desired. That the suggestion veiled an order was clear in the postscript, which told her she was to leave even before Ascension Day (5 May that year). That was Colin s last word to Mother Saint-Joseph. If she wrote in reply, we do not have her letter. She left Belley for Meximieux on 4 May. Did those two old friends meet for a last time before her departure? In July 1855 Jeanne-Marie Chavoin moved from Meximieux to the village of Jarnosse, not far from her birthplace of Coutouvre, where she died on 30 June Jean-Claude Colin had been meaning to go and see her Minutes of these proceedings are no longer extant; but the events and the highly charged emotional atmosphere around them are well documented by contemporary accounts by Eugène Colin in a letter to Victor Poupinel, CMJ 59 (30 April 1853), and in a report by Denis Maîtrepierre, CMJ, 93 (May-October 1853); see other accounts in CMJ, CMJ, 60 (1 May 1853, Colin to Mother Saint-Joseph). 51 The editors, p. 271, note 11, describe these lines as among the best of their kind that he wrote. It was perhaps a pity that he had not shown similar delicacy and diplomacy in earlier dealings with Mother Saint-Joseph. 52 See CMJ, p. 270, note 5.

16 16 Pulling back in Oceania On 25 September 1850 Colin reflected with Cardinal Fransoni on the catastrophes in Melanesia and New Caledonia. 53 Initially, he wrote, the Oceania missions had had for the Marists a kind of attraction, through the very dangers to which they exposed the lives of the missionaries and the hardships of all sorts to which they condemned them. But for some years, especially since 1847 and 1848, they had come to realise that it was not prudent for an organisation to cast its missionaries, without guides, across the islands of Oceania, and that it needed to have fitting guarantees. Now the Marists in New Zealand, who with the exception of Jean-Baptiste Comte in Wellington were all in the diocese of Auckland, had to leave their stations, which had cost them ten years of heroic patience. For these reasons, he had latterly told Bishop Bataillon that he would need to find other missionaries for Fiji, 54 and had told Bishop Viard that he could send him no more Marists. 55 More recently, however, Viard had agreed with Bishop Pompallier on some new arrangements for New Zealand, which meant that he was asking for more priests. Colin was also forwarding to Rome a petition signed by both bishops for a readjustment of the boundary between the two dioceses. 56 A month later, Victor Poupinel no doubt writing in the name of the superior general told Jean-Louis Rocher at the Sydney supply house that confreres who discerned that they could not continue in the missions and wished to return to France, would be received as well loved brothers. 57 In fact, during the rest of Colin s time in office, only three Marist priests left the Pacific, of whom one left the congregation. Between April 1848 and November 1850, three priests had returned to France spontaneously and one was recalled. Between 1850 and 1854 five brothers in Oceania left the congregation and two others returned to the Hermitage. 58 Early in November, Poupinel, again writing in Colin s name, informed Bishop Viard that he had forwarded to Rome the petition from the two New Zealand bishops, but had to refuse the request to send more priests CS 4, 205 (25 September 1850, Colin to Fransoni). 54 Cf. CS 4, 17:6 (16 September 1848) and 101:9 (2 July 1849). 55 Cf. CS 4, 3:6-10 (16 August and 3 September 1848). 56 This petition is in the archives of the congregation for the Evangelisation of Peoples (Scritture riferite nei congressi, Oceanica, Tome 4 [ ], Folio 525). We do not seem to have Viard s letter to Colin. 57 CS 4, 207 (22 October 1850, Poupinel to Rocher). 58 See the editor, p. 376, note CS 4, 211 (7 November 1850, Poupinel to Viard).

17 17 Rome had agreed in May 1850 to relieve the Marists of the vicariates of Melanesia and Micronesia. Before this could be carried out, however, replacements had to be found. The congregation of Propaganda looked to a new body of missionary priests in the diocese of Milan. At the beginning of 1851, their director Joseph Marinoni, on the recommendation of Bishop Luquet, got in touch with the Marists asking for information about the mission they were going to take on. In Colin s absence at La Neylière, it was the provincial Benoît Lagniet who replied, apologising for the delay of several months due to the late arrival of the messenger bringing his letter from Rome. 60 This was the beginning of a correspondence between the Marists and the Missionaries of Milan, which lasted until the departure of the first group of new missionaries for Melanesia in April All this time, of course, the affairs of the Marist missions in the Pacific still had to be carried on: there were budgets to be drawn up for the association for the Propagation of the Faith and funds to be allocated to the various vicariates, correspondence to be continued with the Sydney supply house and with individual missionaries. There were also letters from Propaganda to be transmitted to the vicars apostolic. One of these was a decree for Bishop Douarre restoring his title of vicar apostolic of New Caledonia, where he had finally succeeded in making a permanent foundation. 61 Much of this business was conducted by Poupinel or others, as Colin was occupied with La Neylière and other matters or too unwell. 62 It would, however, be a mistake to conclude that he was taking no further interest in Oceania: many letters to and about the Pacific, even if physically written by others, seem to have been dictated by him, at least for their substance, and he would have been consulted about everything, at least when he was at Puylata. It could even happen that, when Poupinel was absent, Colin wrote a letter that otherwise the procurator of the missions would have sent. 63 Bishop Douarre was a frequent correspondent. A postscript to one of his letters lifts a corner of the curtain on the Oceania Company. 64 What he had to say could only have deepened Colin s misgivings. He had read in the newspaper L ami de la religion an appeal by the bishop of Châlons-sur-Marne in favour of the work of Oceania (i.e. the company). The good bishop did not realise, wrote Douarre, that with the exception of Captain Marceau 60 CS 4, 232 (15 April 1851, Lagniet to Marinoni). 61 See CS 4, 253:5 (30 August 1851, extract from a letter of Poupinel to Rocher). 62 From March 1852, there are frequent references to the fact that he can no longer write in his own hand ; e.g. CS 4, 311:5 (25 March 1852, Colin to Prosper Goujon and the Marists in New Caledonia). 63 Thus on 23 December 1851, Colin replied to Marinoni s request for practical information about the Melanesia mission (CS 4, 281). 64 LRO 8, 995:10 (13 March 1851, Douarre to Colin).

18 18 the services rendered by this work are those that the Protestants render us and at a much better rate, very often gratis. The reader will have noticed that the company vessels regularly entered the Pacific from the east, via South America, and called at Tahiti and Hawaii before proceeding to the south-western Pacific, where the Marist missions were, thus greatly prolonging the journey for Marists. This, Bishop Douarre pointed out, was because the company had local depots in those places and business to transact in California. He could even say that the affairs of the missions and the interest the company takes in them are just one more means of making money. He regretted that the Picpus superior general had agreed to be its chairman. He did not need to point out that the Picpus missions were in the eastern Pacific and therefore well enough served by the vessels of the Oceania Company. 65 A bombshell from Rome Some time early in 1852, Colin received a letter from Cardinal Fransoni, with enclosures, including one for Bishop Viard, giving a definitive ruling on the relations between religious superiors and vicars apostolic. 66 It had the effect of a bombshell. It referred to a decree of 30 September 1848, which seems to have concerned only certain religious bodies Colin appears to have had no knowledge of it. Since then, at the request of the Jesuits in the vicariate of Madurai in south India, the Holy See had decided to extend its provisions to all missionary districts entrusted to orders, congregations and societies. 67 The cardinal enclosed a copy of the new decree for Colin and a second to be forwarded to Bishop Viard and asked him to communicate its content to the prelates and missionaries of his society. Fransoni summarised the decree of 12 August 1851 and quoted its main provisions. Essentially, in those missionary vicariates where the vicar apostolic or other ecclesiastical superior (whatever his title) belonged to the religious body to which the mission was entrusted, he must also be regarded as the first regular [i.e. religious] superior of the priests of the society, including, according to the rules of the institute, in what concerns the regular 65 The financial difficulties of the Oceania Company continued to mount, and on 23 February 1854 it was wound up. 66 CS 4, 278 (18 December 1851, Fransoni to Colin). 67 Thus the editor in the introduction to CS 4, 278, who suggests that, according to letters written from New Zealand at the end of 1852 (cf. LRO 8, 1184:3; 1186:4; 1207:7), Claude (sic) Viard had also asked for this. The latter could well have known of the decree of September 1848 from Pompallier. The present writer fails, however, to see clear evidence in the sources cited that Viard had asked for its wider application, but allows that there may be just a hint of it in the last document.