Father Jules Chevalier — Study of His Life and Works (1824–1869)

Rev. Father Henri Vermin, M.S.C.

Translated by Rev. Father J. Tierney, M.S.C. • Rome, 1957

---

CHAPTER I RICHELIEU

(i) RICHELIEU – The Town (ii) THE CHEVALIER FAMILY (iii) THE FIRST SIXTEEN YEARS.

CHAPTER II SAINT GAULTIER – THE JUNIOR SEMINARY

CHAPTER III BOURGES THE MAJOR SEMINARY

History of the Town and Province of Bourges The Ecclesiastical History of the Bourges Diocese. JULES AT THE SEMINARY. HIS STUDIES. SPIRITUAL FORMATION.

CHAPTER IV CONVERSION AND SPIRITUAL INITIATION

Some Principles of the Spiritual Life. Spiritual History of the Vocation of Jules Chevalier. WAS THE SPIRITUAL LIFE OF JULES CHEVALIER TOO HARSH AND RIGOROUS?

CHAPTER V THE CALL.

The Devotion of Jules Chevalier to the Sacred Heart of Jesus

CHAPTER VI EARLY MINISTRY,

First Appointments ISSOUDUN – ITS LIFE AND CHARACTERISTICS THE CHURCH IN ISSOUDUN

CHAPTER VII THE FOUNDATION OF THE MISSIONARIES OF THE SACRED HEART

CHAPTER VIII THE FIRST COMMUNITY

CHAPTER IX DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES

CHAPTER X THE MISSION AND ANXIETIES OF A FOUNDER

The Particular Mission of Father Chevalier Father Piperon’s Ideas on the End and Object of the Society. Victory in sight.

CHAPTER XI TRANSFER OF THE PARISH AND COMPLETION OF THE CHURCH

Appeal for Funds. The Parish of Issoudun handed over to the Missionaries. Father Maugenest rejoins the Society, and is appointed Parish Priest. Priest of St Cyr. New Archbishop of Bourges, Friend of the Society Father Piperon’s Journeys to collect Funds. The Devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. The Church is Completed.

CHAPTER XII THE ASSOCIATION OF SECULAR PRIESTS OF THE SACRED HEART

PART I THE ASSOCIATION AN ANNEX OF THE EARLY SOCIETY

PART II CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE JESUITS

PART III DIFFERENCE OF OPINION BETWEEN FATHER FOUNDER AND VAUGIRARD

CHAPTER XIII THE ASSOCIATION OF SECULAR PRIESTS

PART I EARLY HISTORY OF THE ASSOCIATION MOVEMENT IN FRANCE. INFLUENCE OF FATHER LE BEURIER, SULPICIAN

PART II THE ASSEMBLY IN PARIS

PART III THE ASSEMBLY AT ISSOUDUN

PART IV THE PROPOSED PLAN FOR THE ASSOCIATION.

PART V FATHER JOUET’S MISSION OF INQUIRY TO ISSOUDUN

PART VI TRIALS OF FATHER JOUET. TRIBUTE TO HIS WORK.

CHAPTER XIV THE CLERICAL SCHOOLS OF THE SACRED HEART

PART I FATHER VANDEL AND HIS WORK FOR COUNTRY PARISHES,

PART II FATHER VANDEL IN CONTACT WITH FATHER CHEVALIER.

PART III THE MEETING OF FATHER VANDEL WITH FATHER CHEVALIER: FATHER VANDEL JOINS THE SOCIETY

PART IV ORIGIN AND EARLY HISTORY OF THE APOSTOLIC SCHOOL

PART V THE MISSIONARIES OF THE SACRED HEART TAKE CHARGE OF THE CLERICAL SCHOOLS OF RIMONT AND TOURNUS.

CHAPTER XV THE ASSOCIATION OF OUR LADY OF THE SACRED HEART

PART I ORIGIN OF THE DEVOTION. THE FIRST STATUE.

PART II L’ABBE DE CHAMPGRAND VISITS ISSOUDUN.

Acquisition of the Property by Father Chevalier.

PART III FATHER FOUNDER’S STATUTES FOR THE CONFRATERNITYBASED ON THOSE OF OUR LADY OF VICTORIES IN PARIS.

PART IV THE RETREAT HOUSE FOR WOMEN ASSOCIATES

Extraordinary Help of Mlle. Marchand.

PART V THE FEAST OF OUR LADY OF THE SACRED HEART,THE ANNALS: THE REMARKABLE GROWTH OF THE ASSOCIATION,

PART VI EXTENSIONS TO THE MONASTERY

Our Lady’s New Chapel

PART VII FATHER CHEVALIER VISITS ROME WITH THE ARCHBISHOP

PART VIII OPPOSITION FROM MARSEILLES AND ORLEANS

PART IX FATHER CHEVALIER RECEIVED IN PRIVATE AUDIENCE BY THE POPE

PART X THE CONFRATERNITY ERECTED INTO AN ARCHCONFRATERNITY

CHAPTER XVI THE THIRD ORDER, AND THE CONSTITUTIONS.

PART I GENERAL IDEA OF A THIRD ORDER, THE THIRD ORDER OF THE SACRED HEART.

PART II INFLUENCE OF MLLE DE MONTAIGNAC ON THE HISTORY OF THE THIRD ORDER.

PART III DIFFICULTIES WITH FATHER RAMIERE

PART IV THE THIRD ORDER IN NAPLES UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF MLLE. VOLPICELLI .

PART V FATHER RAMIERE’S OBJECTIONS SPECIFIED.

PART VI FATHER CHEVALIER’S OBJECT AND SPIRIT IN HIS FOUNDATION

PART VII THE SPIRIT OF THE APOSTOLATE OF PRAYER

PART VIII STATISTICS OF THE SOCIETY AT THE END OF 1868. FINAL APPROBATION.

CHAPTER XVII AFTER FIFTEEN YEARS – 1669

PART I THE CROWNING OF THE STATUE OF OUR LADY OF THE SACRED HEART.

PART II FATHER CHEVALIER IS SUMMONED TO ROME.

PART III THE NOVITIATE

PART IV THE GENERAL COUNCIL, AND THE CANONICAL VOWS.

CHAPTER XVIII SPIRITUAL TRENDS. THE SPRITUAL AFFINITIES

PART I THE WORK OF FOUNDERS: A RESULT OF CHARACTER AND UNITY OF PURPOSE,

PART II FATHER CHEVALIER’S FIDELITY TO HIS MISSION.

Influence of St. Ignatius His loyalty to the Holy See,

PART III AFFINITIES WITH THE SPIRIT OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS

PART IV MAIN FEATURES OF THE SPIRITUALITY OF FATHER CHEVALIER.

PART V SOME GENERAL IDEAS ON THE NATURE OF DEVOTION.

CHAPTER X1X SPIRITUAL TRENDS: THE SACRED HEART

PART I: THE OBJECT OF THE DEVOTION

PART II: THE SACRED HEART, THE HEART OF THE SOVEREIGN PRIEST.

PART III: THE THEORY AND THE PRACTICE OF THE DEVOTION.

CHAPTER XX SPIRITUAL TRENDS: OUR LADY OP THE SACRED HEART

PART I: PRELIMINARY INFLUENCES LEADING TO THE INSPIRATION OF THE TITLE

PART II: THE MEANING OF THE DEVOTION. MARY’S POWER THE RESULT OF THE DIVINE MATERNITY.

---

PREFACE

To date there exists only one written work on the life of the Venerated Father Jules Chevalier, Founder of the Congregation of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart – that composed by one of his first companions, Father Charles Piperon. In the letter of approbation dated 12th April, 1912 this work is called “a short, pious and interesting memoir”, and the letter expresses the hope that “the complete and detailed life will soon appear.” Father Piperon himself gave his book the title of “a simple biographical memoir” – “Notice biographique”. It is understandable then that the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart at their General Chapter in 1947 should express the desire that a more complete and studied biography be published. With this in view Very Rev. Dr. Patrick McCabe, the Superior General, entrusted the author of this book with the task of writing a strictly historical biography of our Venerated Founder. This necessarily required an account of the origin and early stages of the Congregation, since the life of Father Chevalier is naturally inseparable from the history of the first fifty years of the Society he founded. In order to acquaint himself with the material for this double task, the author undertook the preliminary research-work. It was necessary to collate all the available documents, and by closely examining and studying them to arrive at definite conclusions. These investigations led little by little to the discovery of documents from which emerged new facts and conclusions. The result of these studies has been presented in more or less logical order, in different chapters, some dealing with the subsequent discoveries, some in the nature of summaries of the data; others in the form of notes, which are important. Certain points abound in detail, and perhaps may seem superfluous, while others lack sufficient documentation, and have to be treated with greater precision. If, in spite of these difficulties, the author has consented to the publishing of this book, it is in response to the often-expressed desire of his confreres that he do so and it is to them that he would now like respectfully to dedicate this first volume of the work. It is also with the intention of rendering service to so many dear friends who wish to know more fully “the marvelous history” of the Congregation and its Venerated Founder. These first studies deal with the Life and Works of Very Rev. Father Chevalier until 1869. They were without doubt the most important years, even if the most difficult. The central figure, of course is the Founder. Father Piperon, whom we shall quote frequently in the book, wrote in the Issoudun Annales (1897 – p.34-7) “All the thoughts of the Rev. Father, all his activities had as their end the foundation of the Society. His Congregation, yet so small and weak, occupied the first place in his affections. He was ceaselessly studying the means of strengthening and developing it. Father Chevalier lived, and wished to live only for his Congregation; he worked solely for it. Sure proof this that the Voice heard in his innermost heart was the Voice of Jesus. He awaited with unwavering confidence the realisation of his hope.” At the beginning of this work the author would like to thank all those who helped him in his effort. He is not able to mention them all, but would like to thank especially Rev. Father Jos China and Rev. Father Jos Dontenwill for their unsparing devotion in translating the Dutch text into French. Henri Vermin, M.S.C.

CHAPTER I: RICHELIEU

(i) RICHELIEU

The Town “What a delightful place this Richelieu is!” So wrote the poet La Fontaine to his wife. Having seen the Loire district he enthused about its beauty and charm, but he added; “I had only one fault to find with it, and that was that having seen it, I imagined there was nothing more of interest and curiosity to see. Richelieu has certainly made me change that idea.”(1) Without sharing the admiration of the poet, we must admit that Richelieu is a remarkable little town from more than one point of view. There is something abnormal in its very location and set-up. One wonders why people ever decided to build a town in such a place, away from any main highway or navigable stream, on a very inhospitable tract of land. Artificiality seems to be its keynote. Its history, its civic life, its traditions would seem to provide a link between La Touraine where it is situated, and the neighbouring countryside, the ancient French provinces of Anjou and Poitou. Both districts have the same climate, the same features, the same type of soil. This Central Plain of France abounds in picturesque sites and historic mansions. In spite of the different types of architecture, of location, of style, there is a similarity of character throughout the countryside depicting its historical and romantic past. However, Richelieu itself retains its own individuality and distinctiveness, and it is precisely the interesting history of the place which explains this. At the time when Cardinal Richelieu became Prime Minister, the estate, which has borne his name through the years, was a simple freehold. When in 1631 the domain was raised to the rank of a Duchy, the new Duke, the Cardinal Minister of the King, decided to mark the honour by erecting a monument worthy of the occasion. He would build a “grand chateau” and a town, which would make the efforts of past generations pale into insignificance. In order to efface the memory of a time when his plans of future greatness were no more than dreams, he demolished his old ancestral mansion and the farms surrounding it, dismantled the neighbouring villages to destroy their importance, and then here on this historic plain, where, we might say, the past history of France converges, he built a palace and a town, which were to be the expression of his own personal genius, and a symbol of the new era which his elevation inaugurated.(3) The result was a building of pre-Baroque style, of enormous dimensions, and “of a magnificence and grandeur worthy of the man who built it”.(4) On three sides of the palace there were vast gardens, and to the left the town which was to house the courtiers and servants of the palace. The names of those who lived there are inscribed in the “Design of Richelieu’s Town” preserved in the National Library.(5) (Notes Jacques Lemercier, famous as the architect of the Chapel of the Sorbonne in Paris drew up the plans for the building, and his brother Pierre carried out the work.) The town itself formed a rectangle – approximately half a mile long by a quarter of a mile wide. Four parallel streets ran along its length, the principal of which was La Grande Rue. This opened up at both ends near the gates of the town to form Community Centres. Precisely in the middle – for in Richelieu everything was drawn up in straight lines and squares – this street was intersected by another called La Rue Transversale. The rectangle was then divided into four blocks of equal dimensions, along whose streets stood the rigid little tenements, each joined to the other in perfect alignment, giving the impression that the blocks were just the one big building. Nothing distinguished one house from another. If you saw one, you saw the lot. Each consisted of one storey, built over a cellar; each had its gabled roof with three little garret windows; all were built on the same level, to the same height and width; each made from the same number of stones and bricks; each boasting the same number of windows. Since they were all joined together they presented but the one facade, and even the guttering was as long as the street itself. As the poet expressed it: “On a fait tous les logis D’une pareille symetrie.”(6) The best way of finding one’s way home was to count the doors, especially at night. It must have been a town which lent itself to some amusing episodes, especially after a banquet at the palace or a night at the hostelry. Over the years this rigid uniformity has changed somewhat owing to the mood of the times and the necessities of commercial life, but it has not made the place look any more picturesque or attractive. One gets the impression that an attempt has been made to brighten up an old monument by a few modern touches. All around the town there is the drab spectacle of sameness and monotony. If you look out any door you get the same view as you would by looking out the door opposite. If you look down the street your view is invariably blocked by the walls which surround the town. Restricted to this little world, Richelieu is still stamped by the seal imprinted on it by the Cardinal, its Founder. Even the few buildings which have later been built around the original setting – built for the most part by stones from the palace – have followed along the lines of the first plan.

It is true then to say that Richelieu is indeed a remarkable little town, remarkable for its originality and abnormal character in a region where history has expressed itself in such a spiritual and lively manner. One would have thought that it would have captured a little of the vibrant spirit of the bigger neighbouring towns, but there in the midst of progress Richelieu, so depressing in its geometrical framework, has remained like an inanimate statue, a picture without charm or poetry. The grand dream of the Cardinal vanished with himself. After his death the courtiers sold their houses, some of which had never been quite completed, and made off to seek their livelihood in other places. The heir of the Cardinal, his grand-nephew, went off to Paris and took with him all the works of art that had adorned the palace. From then on the empty chateau lost all its interest, became as a body without a soul, and the ravages of time did the rest, assisted by the neighbours, who helped them selves to its stones. Today nothing remains of the once beautiful palace. After the Cardinal’s death most of the people whose only livelihood was in the employ of the chateau, went in search of a new life elsewhere. In 1663 we once again find La Fontaine visiting the place, but this time he is not so enthusiastic. Seeing the nature of the ghost-town with its lack of activity and its empty houses, he wrote: “La plupart sont inhabitee, Je ne vis personne en la rue; Il m’en deplut; j’aime aux cites Un peu de bruit et de cohue.”(7)

(Most (houses) are uninhabited I saw no one in the streets. It made me sad. In the streets of towns I like a little noise and rush of crowds.)

Now an entire village was for sale. One by one the local families departed, but gradually other people from the various regions of France and even from foreign countries arrived to take their place. With them they brought new ideas and customs. Several merchants opened shops in the old patrician homes. In 1830 the town had again a population of about 2,500. It had become the main town of the regional canton and mainly a market place for fruit, wine and farming products. It had its own refineries and distilleries. With the progress of time it could boast of a railway station, several tileries and brick-kilns, a preserving plant whose high chimney only accentuated the old fashioned nature of the town and countryside.

(ii) THE CHEVALIER FAMILY

According to a tradition, Louis XIV knighted a soldier who was conspicuous for his courage. This man is known to us only by his name of “Chevalier” i.e. a knight, who distinguished himself amongst his comrades. This military title became the family name and was handed down to his descendants. We find this family in the town of Richelieu, where one, John Charles, had come to establish himself. He was the eldest of four children, and his family origin and background destined him to take up an academic career. However, when his mother died the family circumstances forced him to seek work as a tradesman to gain a living, and he became a baker. At the age of 28 he married, on the 22nd January, 1811, in the parochial church of Notre Dame, Louise Orly, a dressmaker, who was 10 years younger than himself.(8) Their home stood on the corner of Loudun Road and Cygne Street, a small cross street which ran from the church to the walls opposite the granary. In 1904 this house was still in its primitive state, but has since been entirely renovated.(9) The early days of married life were very happy. There was great joy at the birth of the first child, Charles and then came a baby daughter, Louise to bring them further happiness. Business was flourishing and continued so for several years. After a time, however, unforeseen difficulties, weariness and sickness threatened to disturb the peace of the home. On the 15th March 1824 a third child was born. He was baptised the next day by the Parish Priest, Father M. J. Picard, and was given the name of Jules Jean. A cousin, Pierre Hilaire Orly was God-father, and his aunt, Adelaide Baudrin, wife of the merchant, Onesimo Chevalier, was God-mother. When Father Chevalier became a person of note certain interested people made much of the unhappy circumstances of the family during his infancy to spread a pious story that all his later work was attributable to Our Lady of Richelieu, whose miraculous statue is honoured in the local church.(10) The story, written under the title of “Our Lady of the Rosary of Richelieu” by an anonymous writer, paints a rather black picture of the parents and the family background, and would have us believe that Jules even from his earliest days was taken under a special celestial protection by Our Lady of Richelieu. Father Piperon inserted this story in his manuscript of 1899, but in his Notice Biographique of 1912, he greatly modified the judgment that had been passed on Father Chevalier’s mother, stating that the evidence he had received in the meantime was not in accord with the original impression. This Notice Biographique, supplemented by studies we have consulted allows us to give the following reliable picture of the Chevalier-Orly family. The father, Jean-Charles Chevalier, had been forced, rather against his wishes, to go to work at a trade he did not like, to tide him over a difficult period. Brought up in a rather easy-going milieu, he was not really adapted to the world of commerce, and had no love for his work as a baker. However, all went well during the early years. After the birth of the children, Charles and Louise, the father reasoned that having sacrificed his own personal ambitions of independence, he should also give up the hope he had cherished of assuring his children a better future. Then came difficult times when many reverses and disappointments made him lose heart. He argued that he had always been an honest man, and now his sense of justice was outraged. He felt the spirit of revolt stirring in his soul. Brought up in the troubled days of the aftermath of the Revolution, he had not the necessary background to seek help and consolation from his religion. Adversity discouraged him, and naturally his wife and children were the first to suffer. In these unhappy conditions the birth of Jules after 13 years of married life did not exactly enchant him. The shattered hopes, the miserable state of his household, his own hasty temperament may serve to explain the “scene of the market place”, which has received a deal of prominence in the story of Jules’ early life. One day, so the story goes, peeved at the fact that his wife was late in returning to prepare the evening meal he left the house and, finding her in the market place, publicly abused her even making threats as to what he would do with the child, Jules. Almost out of her mind with worry she carried the baby to the church, and placed him before the statue of Our Blessed Lady, asking Her to take care of him, for it seemed impossible to do so at home. From that moment Our Lady is supposed to have taken him into her special care. Even if one gives credence to this story, “the scene” loses much of its dramatic effect when we consider the circumstances. After all, it was the climax of a domestic upset, the result of a sudden burst of anger rather than the expression of husband and wife’s usual relationship. Charles Chevalier was not a brutal man by nature. We have plenty of evidence to show that he was not. For instance, when he applied to Monsieur Juste for the position of caretaker to the Vatan Woodlands, his fellow-citizens gave him very good references, stating that he was honest and trust-worthy. The Benedictine Sisters, who owned the Woodlands, received such favourable recommendations that they did not hesitate to take him into their service. When he was leaving the district, the Municipality of Richelieu assured him of a good position should he return.

There has been a tendency to emphasise his lack of religion. He did not receive a strict religious training during his youth, and as a consequence his Christian life was not all it might have been. He was one of those – and there are plenty about today – of whom we could say: “He is a good Catholic, but not practical”. We have the testimony of Father Chevalier himself that it was a great consolation to him to see his father receive the last Sacraments when he died at the age of 65 years.(12) We must remember there is a big difference between being a careless Catholic and being an anti-clerical, or, as the saying goes, “a hater of priests.” The relationship between the Chevalier family and the clergy was quite normal and good both at Richelieu and Vatan. We also know that the father did not oppose the vocation of his son and that he allowed him to become an altar boy and a member of the pious Sodalities. When young Jules spoke of the sermons and the ceremonies of the Church he raised no objection, and he always interested himself in his religious and secular education. When he joined the service of Monsieur Juste the agreement which he signed contained the clause that he would not stand in the way of his son entering the seminary. All this is proof of the fact that he was a man certainly not hostile to religion. As regards the mother – she appears in an entirely different light. Louise Orly, born in 1793, was the youngest of a family of thirteen children, eleven brothers and one sister, who was 20 years older than herself. Louise was brought up by a maternal aunt, Agnes Taffoneau. For supernatural motives this aunt did not marry. She interested herself mainly in charitable works, which made her a suspect to the agents of the Revolution. She was brought before the Tribunal, but was released, and retired to her property called “La Belle Cave”, about an hour’s journey from Richelieu. She often sheltered people, particularly nobles and priests, who were being hunted by the Revolutionaries. For this she used the near-by caves, where the Catholics often came secretly to assist at Mass. While living with her aunt, little Louise received a very good grounding in her religion, but owing to the distance from the school, her education was mostly neglected, and it always remained at an elementary stage. It is true that during the unsettled period of French history many people did not even learn to read or write.(13) In his “Notice Biographique” Father Piperon writes: “After her marriage Louise Orly was known and esteemed by the people of Richelieu, who praised her for her courage, her “savoir-faire” and her good temper. Referring to the incident of the market place and the church, he remarks: “As regards the scene it was no more than an impulsive act, a sudden burst of irritation. As a matter of fact, having soon calmed down and ashamed of this act of despair, she returned straight away to the church”..(14) We permit ourselves to think that the whole incident has been made too much of. As regards his actual consecration to Our Blessed Lady Father Chevalier himself writes; “A short time after my baptism, my mother carried me to the church and consecrated me to the Most Holy Virgin and to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Often in her old age she would recall this touching scene which she with heart and imagination used to describe to me in almost poetic language.” These lines of Father Chevalier clearly show us that this Consecration had a special significance, and involuntarily we think of the scene of the market plane. It is difficult to believe, as some would have us do, that this was an abandonment of the child. That would hardly inspire the words “touching” and “poetry”, and it would be no reason “to recall it often with heart and imagination”. In his poems “Songs to the Sacred Heart of Jesus” we again find Father Chevalier using the expressions “sweet memory” and “touching scene” when recalling his early Consecration to the Sacred Heart and Our Blessed Lady: (translation in prose) : Heart of Jesus, I was still very young; When my feeble voice learnt to call Your Name. Hardly had my reason dawned, When I knew how to bless and love You. In these first raptures my good and tender mother Would say to me; “My child may the Heart of Jesus Be always your support, your treasure and your light If you wish to take your place amongst the elect.”

Then often she would love to take me to the temple Before Thy wonderful and ravishing image; “Join your hands, my child, pray, adore and contemplate. It is the Heart of thy God. Do you see how beautiful He is?”

Then see on this side; behold the Virgin Mary! Oh, how sweet the memory! From your first breath I have ever placed you under her blessed protection Praying her to open to you the Heart of her Son.”

In recalling this touching scene I feel My heart moved with joy and happiness. For then I discover there in a joyful way Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.

(iii) THE FIRST SIXTEEN YEARS.

It was in this setting then – in the ordinary milieu of social and family life that Jules Chevalier spent the first sixteen years of his life. From the outset he was no different from any other baby. He liked being made a fuss of; he knew how to play up; he knew how to scream just for the sake of it; he loved to get his little hands on anything within reach. When his mother took him to church he readily seized the adorned statue of Our Lady. When the prayers were too long for his liking, or when the statue was out of reach, he knew how to express his displeasure in no uncertain terms. In other eventualities, and for reasons which would baffle a specialist, his tears and crying would often exasperate his parents already weary with cares of their own. When his mother went out to sell some bread or goods to get a little money for the household, she would carry him with her in a basket. She would deposit him at the corner of La Grande Rue and the Market Square under the statue of Our Lady, who even today affords Her protection to the passers-by. She usually took him with her wherever she went, and this gave her the opportunity of getting to know his young character well and of correcting when necessary, his little whims and fancies. And so, like Benjamin, he was his mother’s favourite. She discovered in him all kinds of qualities – “qualities which I didn’t know I had”, he once remarked, but she did not spoil him. He tells the story himself of an incident which happened when he was about four or five years old: He had gone with his mother to the markets, and while she was busy doing some shopping, the attention of the small Jules was attracted by some nice-looking apples on a stall. The temptation of Eve in Paradise. While the two women were busy with their bartering, he quickly slipped one of the apples into his pocket. On returning home things went wrong. He had just taken a quick, sly bite of the apple, when his mother caught him in the act. She made him disgorge the mouthful of the object of his larceny, but that was not sufficient. She led the culprit, whimpering and sobbing, along the street back to the fruiterer, made her apologies, asked pardon and then handed back the apple – ‘bite out’ and all -. The punishment was effective, and, as the priest later avowed: “The lesson was never forgotten”.(15) This wise and sensible mother could not understand parents who would give in to every whim and fancy of their children and thought them intelligent when they tried to be funny. She attached great importance to the early training of the children. Not content with fostering their piety and virtue from their earliest age, she was firm and relentless in correcting their faults, their disobedience, their greed, their untruths. In spite of their excuses and tears, if they deserved punishment they received it. It is not surprising that Jules more than once came up against this repressive justice of his mother, “My nature was lively and bubbling over”, he said himself, “my character ardent and impetuous”. In that he resembled his father. But from his mother he inherited the traits of courage, energy and tenacity in the time of trial, proof of which he gave on many occasions later on in life. He resembled her also in another way. His mother had a keen sense of humour, and was quick to see the ridiculous or comic side of a situation, to appreciate a good joke or a ‘bon-mot’. Jules was certainly like her in this respect and he retained his sense of humour to his old age. He used to amuse himself now and then by composing, under an assumed name, some harmless epigrams on his fellow-priests, and his eyes would sparkle if he had the occasion to crack a joke or tease a friend. As a young boy Jules, with his alert spirit, took a keen interest in the ceremonies of the church, and he reenacted at home what he saw and heard there. His mother, a pious woman herself, encouraged this taste in him for holy things. When the Lazarist Fathers had come at the invitation of the Cardinal, to look after the parish, they introduced the custom of evening prayers in common in the church, and practically every evening Mdme. Chevalier took Jules along with her. He often spoke of these visits to the church: “If ever I became restless or distracted in the middle of the religious exercises one stern look or gesture sufficed to bring me to my senses.” At the age of six Jules went to the school, situated at the other end of the town. Each morning he made off with his books and note-paper in a little basket, and his neatly-wrapped lunch. He did not return home till the evening. This greater freedom gave him more scope to exercise his natural tendency for fun and pranks and was an outlet for his boyish energy. Opportunities were certainly not lacking. During the first few months he managed to get tangled up under a moving vehicle and had the horse not got the excellent idea of pulling up short, there would have been no occasion to go ahead with this story. One winter’s day he went skating on the frozen waters of the little stream that flows just outside the walls of the town. The ice was too thin, and he plunged headlong into the cold bath. Luckily he was able to drag himself through the broken ice to the bank. To make matters worse, when he returned home, finding that his parents had gone out, he decided to dry his wet boots by throwing them in the fire-place amongst the warm ashes. At this inopportune juncture his parents happened to return, and he received a good whipping, “which”, he said, “I remembered for a long time.” The severe attack of pleurisy which he suffered in his ninth year was mainly caused as he tells us himself, by not looking after his health, “by imprudence and carelessness”.(19) Anyone acquainted with Richelieu knows that it takes a deal of initiative and skill to find ways and means of getting up to mischief or playing pranks. From a child’s point of view, it would seem that the Cardinal must have had this in mind when he approved the plans for its layout. Nothing could happen which would escape the vigilant eyes of the city-fathers, the teachers, or the parents. How were the young folk, with their dreams of romance and adventure, to find a suitable playground in a place like this? Richelieu with its stolid old rectangles, with never a portico or a colonnade, without any interesting by-ways, lanes, or adventuresome twisting roads offered little scope for their youthful energy and imagination. Woe to him who would take the risk of ringing a doorbell or would throw stones at the neighbours. Or if one preferred less war-like games, such as “Hide and Seek” there was little opportunity for an escape or a hide-out. The two town squares were more promising, but even there prospects were not always the brightest. In the Place des Religieuses one had to cope with the dignified scrutiny of monks, nuns and students, and in the Market Square, there were too many people about. The buildings there really fine specimens of 17th century carpentry – with their massive beams, pillars and niches, offered a ready-made stage for any youthful drama, but the merchants were not over-keen on mixing business with pleasure, particularly since they suspected that the boys might have hands which were too enterprising. The presence of the Watchman, and the all-seeing eyes of the four Evangelists looking down on them from the near-by church had a dampening effect on their youthful activities. In these restricted limits young Jules’ pranks did not usually go beyond strolling among the shoppers and giving a playful tug to a goose or duck tucked under the arm of a proud owner, and then making himself scarce amidst the protecting clamour of the birds and the irate victim. One incident of those early days he used often to recall in later days. Many of the basements in Richelieu were used as workshops especially by the weavers. The fan-lights were on street-level, and several had greased paper as a substitute for glass-panes. During working hours they were usually left open, and became tempting targets for a gentle kick from the school-boys returning from school – which naturally the weavers did not greatly appreciate. One disgruntled old fellow who was known to have a nasty temper became the object of special attention from Jules and his class-mates. He used to hurl abuse at them in his deep husky voice, threatening all kinds of dire punish ments if he caught them. One afternoon he was waiting for them, and, as they drew near, he bounded out, heavy cudgel in hand, and chased them down the street. He frightened the life out of them, and later on, in a council of war, they decided to avenge their hurt pride by playing a trick on him. From some hollow reeds they made what was known as a “canne piphonere”, a kind of long syringe, which they filled with some ox-blood from one of the gutters coming from the abattoirs. Then at twilight they made their way to the house of their victim who was working behind the closed paper-fanlight by the light of an oil lamp. Very quietly they pierced a small hole in the greased paper and pushed the end of the syringe through. As one of the villains in the piece fired his pop-gun, Jules squirted the blood over the poor fellow, who jumped to his feet in a panic. As he saw the blood dripping from his face he naturally thought someone had shot and wounded him. He began to scream for help, and his wife and the neighbours came running in. After a minute search for any wound, they realised a practical joke had been played on him and began to laugh. He naturally did not quite share their amusement. Whether or not Father Chevalier in later life regretted this youthful exploit, he still thought it humorous enough to write up as a comic-sketch for a concert in the Apostolic School under the title of “The Crime of St.-Ouen-les-Chevres”. He called ‘the hero’ Claude, – the name of his first curate.(21) The best playground was just outside the walls, only a few minutes from Jules’ home. This offered more chances for childish adventure as it did not conform to the rigid design of the town itself but had grown up around the little stream Amable. Those who could not find accommodation in the village had built homes from stones from the Chateau, out here, where they had filled in the little inlets of the river, allowing just the main water-way to flow through. Besides, the gardens there were a welcome change from the prosaic rigidity of the town. The dismantlement of the Chateau was one of the big events of Jules’ time in Richelieu. During the Revolution it had been declared National Property, and administrators had come to sell up all they could. The towns people adorned their back yards and houses with its spoils, for instance, the working-man in the Grande Rue who proudly displayed four marble busts in front of his house. Other works of art had a more ignoble fate. The heads of Louis XIII and Cardinal Richelieu himself were used as counterweights on the weighbridge till the time they were rescued and given more worthy haven. Louis’ head was eventually donated to the Western Museum at Poitiers, and that of the Cardinal was offered to Pope Gregory XVI in 1840. To this day the marketplace glories in the gift of Joseph Boutron, the gentleman who eventually bought the ruins of the Chateau. This was a marble statue of the river-god Fleuve, holding an urn in his hand. Young Jules would probably have been more interested in the little cock-robin, Fontaine, which was part of the statuary. Jules would surely have known this Monsieur Joseph Boutron. In 1807, this Parisian had bought what remained of the Chateau for 153,700 francs, and decided to capitalise on it by selling the stones. He entrusted the stone yard to his niece, Mme. Jeanne Chapuis, a sharp and relentless old business woman, who immediately put up the price of everything. To help amateurs in their choice of buying, she displayed the goods in the fields round about, statues, busts, marble slabs, rubble, beams, joists, each tabbed with its weight and price, until she had even the foundations up for sale. A visitor to the place in 1843, Bosseboeuf, wrote of the old lady; “Fleet of foot and watchful of eye – she is like an insect feeding off an old corpse. She would sell you a paving stone at two francs a yard and a piece of rock at four sous a foot. She boasted that her prices were the best around the country.”(22) By the time Jules was to leave Richelieu in 1843 practically nothing remained of the once glorious old Chateau, and today on the historic sight there are but the open fields and a few rose gardens. However, the memory of those happy boy-hood days, when he spent many an hour with his friends playing around the dying mansion, remained fresh in his mind to his last days. During this period of his life, in spite of all the boyish pranks and harmless mischievousness, there was already evidence of the deep spiritual nature of his character. One of his companions who knew him well in those days later referred to him as a deeply interior boy, noted for his piety and modesty. It would seem that Our Lady already had this future priest and champion of Her Blessed Name under her special protection. He was often seen in the church visiting the Blessed Sacrament, and kneeling before the statue of Our Lady, his young heart and mind centred on the Object of his ardent love – the Sacred Heart of Jesus. The following story, simple and perhaps unimportant in itself, would indicate that even at an early age Jules was a serious-minded boy, particularly with matters concerning his religion. We cannot vouch for the authenticity of the incident, but it was narrated to Rev. Fr. Bertin in 1904 by a Religious Sister of the Order of St. Vincent, a contemporary of Jules, and independently confirmed by an old lady in a conversation with Rev. Father Rigault. Father Piperon saw fit to mention it on Father Rigault’s testimony in “Notre Dame du Rosaire”(23). However, Octavie Poirier, a trustworthy witness, and daughter of another contemporary of Jules, makes no mention of it in the memoirs she gathered herself from the oldtimers around Richelieu, and Father Heriault, close friend and confidant of Father Founder during the last thirty-two years of his life does not record it. The story goes that during the days when the family was feeling the dire effects of poverty and hardship there was often very little food in the home. Even on Sundays the main meal would consist of potatoes and beans. Meat was seldom seen on the table, and on the rare occasions when the parents could obtain some, or a kind neighbour gave them some, the mother would not hesitate to use it, even on a Friday. This was in no disregard for the law of abstinence, as the mother was a good Catholic, and probably had permission from the Parish Priest at any rate. However, young Jules, then no more than six years of age, was not so sure of the theological propriety of this. Although his school was not conducted by Religious, the lay teachers there were anxious to give the children a good Christian education, and so he had already heard of the Law of Abstinence on Fridays. On this particular day – a Friday – there happened to be a small piece of pork in the home – and little else. The poor mother wondering what to give the child for his school-lunch, cut up a few pork sandwiches. When Jules protested, his mother explained that there was nothing else to give him. He said nothing, but at an opportune moment, while his mother’s back was turned, he quietly slid the pork from the bread back into the frying-pan. His mother had noticed the performance, but pretended she had not seen it. As he triumphantly made off to school she remarked to her next door neighbour; “See my little scamp. He will surely be Pope some day.” When at the age of nine he suffered a serious attack of pleurisy, we have another proof of his sincerity. Thinking he was in danger of death, he asked his parents to send for a priest, which they immediately did. With the profound conviction that he was nothing else than a wretched sinner, a sentiment which characterised his later spiritual life, he feared for his salvation. He wrote years later in reference to this sickness: “If God had seen fit to take me with all my faults which I could have avoided, I fear now for my salvation.”(24) His parents, particularly his mother, did their best to tide him over these difficult years of his boyhood. His mother consecrated him to the Sacred Heart and to Our Blessed Lady, taught him to pray with attention, curbed any wayward tendencies he showed and fostered in him the spirit of devotion and piety. “My character,” he wrote, “was ardent and impetuous, and exposed me to great dangers.” She paid particular attention to the type of companions with whom he associated and guarded him from any loose talk or suspect stories by prudently giving a turn to the conversation. According to the custom of those times he did not make his first Holy Communion till he was comparatively old, on Trinity Sunday, 29th Mary, 1936. Usually reserved about his personal spiritual experiences, he wrote in later life of this great day: “My heart was overflowing with love and joy.” He would surely have renewed his baptismal vows and his consecration to the Mother of God on this happy occasion. Three years later, on the 22nd of May, 1939, he received the Sacrament of Confirmation from the hands of the Archbishop of the diocese, Mgr. Louis Augustin, Archbishop of Tours.(26) Naturally, the parish church featured very intimately in the spiritual formation of this future Apostle of the Sacred Heart. Only a few moments walk from where he lived in La Rue Cygne, he spent many hours there as an altar-boy and in his frequent visits to the Blessed Sacrament. The church, designed by Pierre Lemercier, (who was buried there on 8th November, 1638)(27) followed the style of his brother’s work at La Sorbonne, even if a poor reproduction. The exterior is somewhat spoilt by the squat facade which extends over five bays, and the low pointed roof which seems out of perspective with the rest of the building. However, the stern exterior is not in keeping with the devotional nature of the interior. The church is welllit from high Roman windows, and small roof-lights. Two lines of doric-style pillars separate the three naves, and the ceiling, walls and architraves are well ornamented in stucco by garlands, little coronettes, palms, stars etc. The high altar, fashioned in baroque marble is well-built, as is the choir. Copper altar rails separate the altar from the body of the church. At the head of the two side naves there are two smaller altars, which originally supported two wooden statues; one, the miraculous statue of Our Blessed Lady, and on the other side a statue of St. Joseph. In 1825, at the time of a mission in the church, these statues were given a more prominent place on the sanctuary, surmounted on marble bases. Later on in 1866 the Statue of Our Lady was placed in a more conspicuous place just inside the entrance to the church in front of the baptistry and against the first pillar on the left. According to the pamphlet Notre Dame du Rosaire, we can be sure that the incident of the abandonment of Jules to Our Lady took place after the statue had been removed from its original position in February 1925 when he would not as yet have been one year old. Also during this mission, two large pictures, about nine feet high were placed on the side altars in place of the statues, one of Our Lady holding in her hands Rosary beads and the Scapular, and the other one of the Sacred Heart. It would have been before this picture “magnificent and ravishing”, as he wrote in his poem, that he was consecrated to the Sacred Heart. The parish priest, Father Picard, who had baptised Jules, took occasion of the mission of 1825 to reawaken in the parish the spirit of devotion to the Sacred Heart, and as he grew up, young Jules learnt to know and love the various practices of this devotion. The Confraternity of the Sacred Heart had already been established, and every First Friday, Mass was celebrated before the picture of the Sacred Heart. Every three months on the first Friday, there was Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament in honour of the Sacred Heart, and every evening during the Month of June, special devotions were held in His Honour. All this was a testimony to the apostolic zeal and energy of the parochial clergy in Richelieu at the beginning of the last century. During the sad days of the Revolution the church had been sacked and desecrated by the wild maurauders, and was left in ruins. The goddess Reason had taken possession, and the four Evangelists on the facade had been given the names of Rousseau, Voltaire, Marat and Duchesne. For a time after this profanation the church was not used, but after the Concordat the town authorities decided to hasten ahead with the necessary repairs, and it had been completely restored by Jules’ time.

During these days of his early childhood, Jules was already showing signs of his future vocation as a priest. Owing to his prodigious memory and flair for imitation – traits he showed all through his life – he used to return from the church and give a fair rendition of the sermon he had heard at Mass. Mounting a chair as pulpit, and imitating the tone and gestures of the preacher, he would re-enact the oratorical effort before his parents and sometimes his neighbours. Sometimes they must have smiled as the young preacher, seeing himself already a priest, did not hesitate to put in a few ideas of his own, particularly if he thought the audience needed it. However, his good mother put a time limit to his efforts and dispersed the congregation when she thought they had had enough. They often went away discussing the points he had given them.(28) One day during catechism class the curate’s tonsure caught his imagination. Seeing that he was going to be a priest one day, he decided that it would not be out of place if he had a tonsure himself. With the willing cooperation of his companions he managed to secure a beautiful, outsize one. Hardly had it been cut, than he began to regret the deed, fearing the consequences when he returned home. For a while he tried to cover his head, so the parents would not notice, but he was soon found out. The father thought it was a good joke and laughed heartily, but the mother did not share his amusement. She said it showed a lack of respect for the clergy and she severely dressed him down. Next day he returned to the catechism class, very conscious of the bald patch. He sat in his usual place, trying to look inconspicuous and hoping the priest would not notice him. But the other pupils had different ideas, and their sniggering soon gave the game away. The priest gave a loud laugh, which the class took up, and then even Jules saw the funny side of it. Forty years later the Abbe Moriet, Dean of la Chapelle-sur-Loire, still remembered the incident, and related it to the Community at Issoudun, where he had come on a pilgrimage with his parishioners.(29) Meanwhile Jules had come to the end of his primary schooling. We have no particular records of how he got on in his studies and exams, but the fact that he was allowed to become an altar and choir boy on account of his notable piety would indicate that at least he was of average intelligence and acumen.(30) When later he sought references for his admission to the Seminary at Tours, the local clergy gave him an excellent one. Although he was now only thirteen years of age, the ardent desire of becoming a priest seemed to pervade his every thought and action, and he asked his parents if he could go to the Seminary at Tours where already one of his cousins and several of his former school-mates were studying.(31) In spite of her own fervent wish of one day seeing him one of God’s priests, his mother had to explain to him that in their present poor circumstances the expense involved was beyond them. She advised him to seek a trade for the time being, and to put his vocation in the hands of Almighty God, who would certainly later on provide the means of joining the Seminary, if he wanted Jules as one of his priests. Disappointed and sad that he could not immediately fulfil his ambitions he remarked: “I will take a trade, but as soon as I have earned enough money, I will go and knock on the door of some Monastery and will ask them to take me in.” His mother told his father and some of her friends about his comment, and sometimes they jokingly asked him when he was going to knock on “that Monastery’s door.” He was indifferent as to what trade he should take up, and his parents did not wish to influence him in his choice. He eventually became an apprentice to a bootmaker, who was a friend of the family. A noticeable change was developing in his character these days. He seemed to lose interest in the old boyish games and pranks, and spent more time studying and furthering his knowledge where he could. In spite of his companions’ efforts to get him to join them, he preferred to keep to himself and became very serious minded. Possibly he realised that his vivacious temperament might prove a danger to his vocation, if he joined wholeheartedly in their amusements. When one of the priests founded a youth club, The Association of Perseverance, he readily joined it as a safeguard to his future hopes and plans of joining the priesthood. About this period of his life he fell victim to a severe illness, a kind of croup and influenza which was raging in the district. The doctor feared for his life, and he received the Last Sacraments. Hardly able to breathe, he lost consciousness. His parents were inconsolable, but, thank God, the crisis passed, and soon he was on the road to recovery.(34) The remarkable change in his character did not escape the notice of his neighbours, and even made them appreciate his qualities the more. They had always liked him for his gentleness, and his polite and obliging manners. His love of the poor and his willingness to help them was one of his outstanding characteristics. He had no money, but made his spare time available to them free of charge. He would often give the good lady who looked after the church a hand, and did not spare himself in doing odd jobs around the presbytery. The priests often held him up as a model to the youth of the community in this regard.(35) The wife of his employer was not slow to avail herself of his good dispositions, and soon he found himself spending more time doing domestic chores for her than in learning his trade. She made it too much of a good thing, and he eventually realised that he would hardly have enough money this way to pay his way to the Seminary. So one day he thought he would try to get another position in the bootmaking trade with a Monsieur Poirier, who had a flourishing business in La Grande Rue. He knocked on his door and the following conversation took place: “Monsieur Poirier, would you like to have me as your apprentice?” “Look here, young man. I’m not the one to pick fights with my friends. You are working for Monsieur B…….. . Why do you want to leave him?” “Well I was simply not learning the trade there. Madame seemed to think I was working for her and not her husband.” He then went on to explain what she expected him to do around the house – even to the extent of preparing her bath and cleaning up afterwards. Monsieur Poirier feigned indifference, and Jules was on the verge of tears. “So you don’t wish to take me on as your-apprentice?” As he was about to leave, M. Poirier enquired: “Did your boss send you here?” “No, but he told me to clear out.” “Why would he have said that to you?” “Because I told him I was not satisfied, and wished to come and work for you. He then roared at me, and told me I was nothing more than a lout, and I could get out. So here I am, and won’t you take me on, please? Please, Monsieur Poirier?” ”One moment. Has your boss really dismissed you? I would not like people to say I stole his apprentice. Go home and tell your father to settle the matter finally with Monsieur B., and then you can both come and see me.” “Then you will take me on?” “That will depend on your father.” Jules ran off home as quickly as he could, and within an hour returned with his father. “Well, M. Poirier,” said the father, “my son here wants a job with you. Do you want him?” M. Poirier replied that he really did not need another apprentice, but he would take him on, as the lad seemed so anxious to work. Having come to an agreement with Jules’ father, Monsieur Poirier gave his instructions to the new apprentice: “Young man, the main thing for you to do here is to work. You won’t have to work outside the shop. I don’t want any trouble. Have you got a leather apron? Good, well put it on. There is your place at that bench, and I will teach you the trade myself. I will expect you to be obedient, and to listen to what I have to tell you.” Jules applied himself very diligently to his new work, and was delighted when his employer told him he was satisfied with him. After a couple of months, when he had grown used to his new surroundings, he could not but help noticing that Madame Poirier was often in minor difficulty with some household chore, such as carrying a bucket of water up the stair-way, or gathering some firewood. During his lunch-hour his natural gentlemanly instinct often prompted him to give her a hand, which in spite of early protestations, she eventually accepted. This did not escape the notice of the other boys who probably thought he was trying to win her favouritism. The following incident shows that Jules was not exactly a “softy”. One of the fellows seemed keen to pick a fight with him. He frequently annoyed him by brandishing a duster in his face. For a while Jules took it in good part, but one day one of his companions said to him “Why don’t you give him a good hiding?” The next time the smart lad tried to make a nuisance of himself, Jules said to him; “Look here, old chap, if I were to raise a finger to you, you would think you were being murdered.” Nothing daunted, the young man replied: “Come on then, put them up and I will show you how.” With that he gave Jules a resounding slap in the face. He met more than his match, and immediately got a solid punch on the nose. As he saw the blood streaming down his face, the now not-so-brave aggressor yelled out; “Quick, he has killed me.” All this being against Jules’ usually peaceful nature he was rather upset, and fearing M. Poirier’s reaction, he made off home. Thinking that he had seriously injured the lad, he was very worried till Madame Poirier came looking for him to assure him that the only damage done was a bruised nose, which the follow richly deserved. Later on the young man tried to patch up the quarrel by inviting Jules to have a glass of beer with him in one of the near-by taverns, but Jules replied that he was not accustomed to going into taverns, and perhaps the young fellow would be better advised in giving the money to his mother.(36) One more incident, perhaps trivial in itself, throws a light on Jules’ character. At his sister’s wedding-party, he was asked to have a dance with a young girl. Being shy, and not used to dancing, he tried to get out of it by remarking that he would probably tread on the poor girl’s toes. His protests were in vain, and he was forced to comply. To the disappointment of the gathering, but to his own immense relief, no sooner had the music started up, than the strings of the violin snapped and in the consequent confusion, he was able to make his escape.(37) In 1838 Rev. Father Redon, the Superior of the Lazarist Fathers in Tours came to Richelieu to preach a mission and a retreat.(38) Seeing an opportunity here to strengthen the spirit of his vocation, Jules followed the exercises with attention and devotion. His piety did not escape the notice of a Mlle. Elise Gillet, a prominent parishoner, who was president of several of the pious Sodalities. She judged what was going on in Jules’ mind and heart, and one day remarked to his mother: “I have been watching your boy during the mission, and am convinced that God wishes him to become a priest. What do you think yourself?” “I am well aware of what he wants to be,” replied Madame Chevalier, “but you realise our financial position and understand that we could not see our way clear to pay his expenses.” “Yes, I know that,” Mlle. Gillet rejoined, “but I have friends, and we could see to it.” Jules was overjoyed at this good news, and applied himself with greater zest to his studies. Someone had given him a Latin grammar, and a brother of Mlle. Gillet, who had finished his secondary studies helped him with the rudiments of the language.(39) He kept on working for M. Poirier, but by early rising and late retiring, and giving up his Sundays, he made time for study. Abbe Hauduit, the Superior of the Junior Seminary at Tours finally agreed to accept Jules free of charge. Jules was delighted and with the help of his parents made all the preparations for his departure. Then came bitter disappointment, and the plans fell through. The bishop, on visitation had just found that the Junior Seminary was heavily in debt. Abbe Mauduit was replaced and his successor given strict instructions not to admit any students who could not pay their way. We can imagine his feelings of sorrow and frustration. So Jules continued at his trade as a boot-maker, but did not miss any chances of furthering his education. Little by little the secret that he intended to join the priesthood became known to the other apprentices, and they began to tease him. His Latin grammar, which he kept in one of the drawers of his bench was stolen, and they would often ask him how the “budding priest is keeping.” Jules took it all in good part, and at least succeeded in getting his grammar back. Even little Octavie Poirier, the daughter of his employer, joined in the bantering, and imitating the boys used to ask him how the would-be priest was getting on. He would reply: “Have patience, my little one, and one day you will see me a priest all right. All things come to those who wait.” On one occasion when she tried his patience too much, he sharply rebuked her and told her to “Keep quiet!” She showed her resentment by promptly giving him a smack with a stick. Madame Poirier severely admonished the child, and was about to punish her, when Jules intervened and remarked: “She is only a child and besides, she hasn’t done any damage. You won’t do it again, will you, Octavie?” And Octavie, who tells this story herself, solemnly promised she would not call him “a would-be priest” again.(40) The Abbe Bourbon – the new parish priest of Richelieu was a real paternal friend to Jules. It was he who had made the arrangements with the authorities at Tours for the boy’s admission to the seminary. Like Jules, he was bitter disappointed when the plans fell through, but continued to give him every encouragement. He had observed his protege’s piety over the years, and realised that Jules had a vocation. Practically every morning after Jules had serve his Mass the two of them would make a thanksgiving together in the Sacristy, and then the priest would take him over to the presbytery for breakfast. (Note: The presbytery formed part of the old Lazarist Monastery of former days. It was a large spacious building part of which had been converted into homes for the people. The front portion was well preserved and well-lit by large windows, but the rest was poorly built, consisting of clay-walls, small windows, roughly hewn beams, and rather shabby rooms built over the cloister around the inner court yard.) After breakfast Jules would run across the Square and down the Rue Grande so as not to be late for work. M. Poirier, although he did not say much was very pleased to observe his piety and devotion to his church, particularly because it went hand in hand with progress in his work.(40) That Jules became quite proficient in his trade is evident from the following incident. One evening a visitor to Richelieu came into the shop and asked M. Poirier if he could make a pair of boots for him by the following evening. The bootmaker, in spite of the customer’s pleas of urgency, told him this was hardly possible. Hearing the conversation, Jules offered to do the job himself; and to the great satisfaction of M. Poirier and the client, the boots, made to measure, were ready on time. Meanwhile his companions did not slacken their efforts to make him less serious-minded, and to get him back into their games and amusements. To then he had become somewhat of a stranger – a crank pursuing an impossible dream to which he had sacrificed his friends, and his “joie de vivre”. At sixteen years of age, they argued, he was far too serious and matured, but to all their reasonings, protestations and banter, he quietly offered an adamant will and a determined perseverance.(42) Truth to tell, he was now quite a different person from the boisterous and impulsive lad we have already depicted. From a frolicsome mischievous child, even ready to take his revenge when his plans went awry, he had now become a sober, reflective young man. At heart he had always been a serious child, but now all his external actions and interests were affected by the firm conviction that God meant him to be a priest. We must not forget the part that Grace was playing in this transformation. God had destined him for a special vocation – as subsequent history was to show, and these were days of special preparation. This supernatural influence explained the apparent change in his outlook and character, as in spite of all the obstacles and difficulties, he was firmly convinced that God was calling him to the priesthood. This conviction afforded him strength of soul and consolation in time of trial. The earlier imitations of the priest saying Mass and preaching his sermon had given place to an interior thoughtful attitude – prelude to the reality of his own future Masses and sermons. He realised that a vocation to the priesthood is a tremendous, God-given grace, which requires many sacrifices, and is not to be taken lightly.

This clear vision of his future encouraged him over the dark days from his thirteenth to his sixteenth year when it seemed almost impossible to find ways and means of fulfilling his hopes, and when even his good mother, who had consecrated him to the Sacred Heart and Our Lady, thought his dream would never be realised. Even the priests could give him little hope that he would ever get to the Seminary. Father Bourbon continued to advise and console him, but could offer no solution to the difficulties. The people of Richelieu, some sympathetic, some sarcastic, awaited the outcome with a deal of curiosity. Fillet made an attempt to help, but little financial assistance was forthcoming from her friends, and she was powerless to do much herself. But Jules never lost faith and confidence in the Sacred Heart and Our Blessed Mother, praying daily before the Tabernacle that they one day would lead him to the Altar. In his “Notes Intimes”, which he wrote in 1902, (and did not intend for publication) Father Chevalier mentions that his keen desire to be a priest and to give his life to Our Lord, want back to 1838, when he received his first Holy Communion, and made the retreat given by Father Redon(43) The missioner had impressed him by a sermon on Apostolic Vocations, and from then on he determined to be a priest. He writes; “I said to myself, deep down in my heart: “What a glorious calling it is to be a missionary? How happy I would be if God were to give me the grace to be one some day.”(44) This sturdy faith was his support over the difficult period when there seemed little hope of achieving his ambition. His resignation to God’s will, his naturally sensible disposition guarded him from any sentiments of bitterness or revolt. Of a natural, affable disposition he could hold no grudge against anyone even those who had been unkind to him. He took a special interest in the sick and the poor, and tried to help them where he could. Octavie Poiriei was able in later years to write this of him: “He was so good that he loved doing charitable acts for people, and if he had any spare time in the evening it was spent with some poor sick person. He seemed to gain this spiritual strength from his frequent visits to the Blessed Sacrament.(45) As mentioned before his whole life centred around the church, his attendance at daily Mass, his participation in all the devotions and ceremonies and his friendship with the priests. He had free access to the presbytery, where he learnt to know the priestly life better, observing the rule of life of the priests, and learning to appreciate their spirit of self-sacrifice. In spite of all the religious indifference and atheism which were rife during this first half of the 19th century, Jules imbibed from these good priests some of their own zeal and devotion for the Cause of Christ. At a time when the world offered a young man so many attractions and pleasures he never wavered in his desire to serve God. We muast not think that he was entirely free from faults or was already a saint. He had his hasty impulsive temperament to contend with, and would have been subject to the ordinary temptations of youth, but the remarkable thing is that in spite of this temperament, in spite of the poverty-stricken nature of his home, in spite of the efforts of his companions to make him one of themselves, he grew in solid virtue during these delicate years between thirteen and seventeen, and had already put the stamp of a future priest and apostle on his youthful personality. The long-awaited solution to his difficulties of entering the Seminary came unexpectedly in 1841. A certain Monsieur Juste, who was an administrator in the Forestry Department happened to book in at the Hotel du Faison in Richelieu. He himself lived in Brain-sur-Allones in the Maine-Loire district. It soon became news in the town that he was the brother of the Vicar General of Rouen. One of the maids at the hotel happened to hear M. Juste remark over the dinner table that he was looking for a reliable caretaker for the forest near Vatan, which was owned by the Benedictines of Paris. This young lady happened to be a friend of the Chevaliers and knew that Jules’ father had long since been tired of his work as a baker, and was anxious to find a more remunerative occupation and one more to his taste. After dinner she took it on herself to mention this to M. Juste giving M. Chevalier a high recommenda tion. She told him there was one difficulty: “He has a wife, and a boy who wants to be a priest.” “That doesn’t matter” he replied, “as long as the man is suitable. Can he read and write, as that is necessary.” She assured him he could. The outcome was an interview with Jules’ father, who made a good impression on his future employer. After discussing terms and arrangements a contract was drawn up and signed. “I believe you have a son who wishes to be a priest. If you wish I will help him to enter the Seminary and be responsible for him.”(46) And so, in March, 1841, when Jules was 17 years of age, the Chevalier family left Richelieu. They sold up their household effects and went off to Vatan in the Le Berry district. In December that year Monsieur Chevalier had his name inscribed in the Register of the Forestry Administration as official, mounted Caretaker of the forest of Vatan.(47) For Jules, Le Berry was an entirely new environment – quite different from La Touraine in its history, its outlook, its culture and its population. The agreement signed between M. Juste and his father now gave him the longed-for opportunity of realising his ambition of becoming a priest. He took Le Berry to his heart, this country which was to become his life-long field of apostolate, in a manner that he little dreamed of at present. Richelieu, with all its memories, was the stage on which had been played the drama of his childhood and youth; Le Berry was to be the theatre of his future life and activities. It is difficult to say exactly what influence Richelieu had made on his young personality, but this we know that it was there in the very precincts of the parish church that his soul was inundated with his great love of the Blessed Eucharist, the Sacred Heart of Jesus and Our Blessed Lady, and prepared in for his special vocation and the great work he was destined to perform in the Church.

CHAPTER II: SAINT GAULTIER – THE JUNIOR SEMINARY

Vatan is a small country town in the Berry district situated in a large fertile plain about 21 miles north of Issoudun. In 1841 it had a population of about 3,000. The church there, built by the Templars, dates back to the year 1005, A.D.. It is crowded in between a row of squat houses and a large building called La Perrine. The structure is of wood standing on a stone basement. Some of the buttresses and a fine 11th Century tower recall the importance of the town in those days. Four miles from the town is La Buisson, the caretaker’s cottage where the Chevaliers came to live. The parish of Vatan is in the Deanery of Issoudun. The parish priest at that time was a Father Darnault. Father Chevalier wrote of him: “He was a man of great piety and faith, zealous and courageous, with a noble, generous character. During his long and laborious ministry he was never appreciated as his merits deserved.” On arriving at Vatan the Chevalier family called at the presbytery to pay their respects to the parish priest, who received them with kindness and interest. Monsieur Juste had already told him of Jules’ intention and his own willingness, to help him. The Dean gave him every encouragement and asked his curate, Father Poldevese, to tutor him in his Latin studies. Every day Jules made the four miles journey from La Buisson to the presbytery to present his homework and carry on his lessons. He made such rapid progress that Father Darnault arranged for his admission to the Junior Seminary at Saint Gaultier. Actually the diocese had two seminaries – the one at Saint Gaultier in the ancient Priory of the Augustinians, and the other at Bourges.(1) Before leaving for the Seminary, Jules returned to Richelieu for a few days to say ‘good-bye’ to his old friends, especially the Poirier family. His parting words to Monsieur Poirier have been recorded: “I am making my departure and taking the first step. I am not unaware of the difficulties that lie in my path, and even the heart-breaks, but I am putting my confidence in God, and the Blessed Virgin. I trust Providence will see me through. I expect all from the Good God and His Holy Mother.”(2) And so at the beginning of the month of October, 1841, he entered the seminary at Saint-Gaultier, in the diocese of Bourges. In this same month of October another young man – Charles Piperon – joined the Major Seminary of the diocese in the town of Bourges itself. Neither knew the other or had the faintest idea of the designs Providence had in store for them. In later life their lot was to be thrown together, and Charles Piperon was to be an intimate friend of Jules Chevalier especially in the early days of the history of the Congregation of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. Jules was now seventeen and a half years of age, and he entered the Junior Seminary full of joy and enthusiasm. The reality of Seminary life and the difficulties he encountered were sorely to test this enthusiasm. Father Piperon writes: “These initial stages of his training were extremely trying. He endured some heartbreaking hours.”(3) Father Chevalier himself in recalling these early days of hardship has written: “I remember most of the priests but especially one, whom I shall not name, to whom I owe my perseverance. I bless his memory.”(4) He was obviously referring to Monsignor Avee, the Rector of the Seminary, who had been a real friend to him. The classes at the Junior Seminary commenced with 8th grade, but owing to his age and the fact that he had already begun his studies Jules was elevated to 6th grade. Even then he found himself amongst younger boys – of about 14 and 15 years of age – and here he struck his first big difficulty. He himself did not mind being amongst them, but boys of that age, whether Seminarians or not, can be thoughtless and rather cruel, and they seemed to resent the presence of this “old chap” in their class. This attitude came as a shock to Jules as he had expected a more mature outlook in a Seminary, even though the boys were comparatively young. At Richelieu he had kept to himself a lot, but now he thought he should mix more with his classmates since they were striving for the same ideal – the priesthood. However, the boys, with exceptions of course, seemed to think he was too serious for them, and he really could not enter whole-heartedly into their boyish conversation, or take part in their games. He was too big, too old, too strong for them, they argued, while he, on his part, must often have thought that their main object in life was “catching birds”. Coming up against this unexpected thoughtless, these petty jealousies and acts of unkindness, Jules was rather disillusioned and felt his position keenly. They little dreamed of the difficulties he had experienced and the sacrifices he had made in order to enter the Seminary. They did not hesitate to ridicule him when he made mistakes, or to make him a victim of their practical jokes. They did not realise that he was trying desperately to come down to their level and be one of them. “Boys at that age,” he later remarked, “are rather heartless.” This was hardly in keeping with the dream he had entertained at Richelieu of what a training school for the priesthood would be. Was his vision of the future sublimity and glory of the life only a mirage? A Seminary, he thought should be a place of happiness and joy with a true religious spirit, but was he finding it here? The ideal was somewhat shattered by the reality, and the coveted horizons of the priesthood seemed ever more distant. He could still see them, but for the next eleven years it would be like struggling through a dark and almost impenetrable forest to reach them. Apart from this positive difficulty with his class-mates, he naturally found other things hard during these first few months. The monotony and routine of student life did not come easily to him after the type of life he had led at Richelieu with its variety of work at the bootmaker’s shop, his visits to the presbytery, his visits to the sick and the company of his father and mother. Here it was, day by day, the same old building, the sane routine of bells and classes, the same faces. Also, he did not find his studies over easy. His early schooling had been somewhat short and interrupted, and now he had to struggle with the minutiae of syntax and grammar, and to contend with the pitfalls of mathematics. He could only progress step by step, word by word, rule by rule. What seemed good enough at Richelieu was only routine work here. There he had thought that a priest’s education was mainly concerned with learning Latin but he now realised there was much more to it than that. We can appreciate, then, the obstacles and difficulties that this young man of seventeen encountered during his early training. Often disheartened, he wondered if he should go ahead, but his firm spirit of faith and piety, and his habit of prayer stood to him. Father Piperon, as mentioned before, had written that Jules had found this period very trying, but he also added “Happily, he was endowed with an energetic and determined character. Assured that God meant him to be a priest, he battled on, and responded to the calling.(5) Fortunately, he had a good and wise friend in the Superior of the College, Father Claude Francois Avee. Born in 1789 at Issoudun this good priest had done his studies at Bourges, and after his ordination had been appointed to the teaching staff at Saint-Gaultier, where he later succeeded the Abbe Godin as Superior. He had an affable manner and was well liked by the students. Father Chevalier has written of him in his “Religious History of Issoudun”: “Having gained the co-operation of the staff and the confidence of the students he endeavoured to introduce an atmosphere of home into the Seminary. He strove to bring a spirit of piety, discipline and study into the College. His goodness, his approachable nature, his ‘savoir-faire’ made him popular, and the students were anxious not to cause him any trouble. Should a boy show signs of dissipation, or manifest a bad spirit, he would call him aside, reason with him, and ask him to do better. If he found someone depressed, weary, or discouraged he would have a quiet talk with him, putting before him the ideal of his vocation. He frequently came to recreation with them, and often remarked: ‘It is in their games and sport that they reveal their characters, and you are able to study them the better’. If a student were sick, he spared nothing to get him the best attention, and did everything himself to make him comfortable and restored his health. On the rare occasions when a death occurred he was inconsolable, and even shed tears for the dead boy.’(6) It was only in later years that Father Chevalier saw these early trials in their right perspective, and realised they were a God-given grace to test the worth of his vocation and the special mission, which unbeknown to himself in those days, Our Lord was to entrust to him. It was this realisation that gave him such an appreciation of Father Avee for tiding him over the difficult period. We must not think that all these early days in the Seminary were days of complete unhappiness and misery, as apart from the encouragement give him by Father Avee and the priests, he knew full well that he had only to correspond with grace to achieve his heartfelt desire, and the means were here before him. We venture to say they were mainly days of happiness. As a matter of fact, it is chiefly from Father Piperon that we learn about these early hardships, and not from himself. Most people experience difficulties in new surroundings and Seminarians are certainly no exception. The following quotation from his “Notes Intimes” clearly indicates that he regarded the first few weeks at Saint-Gaultier as the crisis in his vocation. “The Devil tried his best to give me a distaste for this kind of life to which I was not accustomed. Hardly had a fortnight passed than I wanted to return home. Every day I asked Father Avee if I could go, but, being the prudent and wise priest that he was, he told me to wait till after the retreat, which was to be given by a Jesuit Father. ‘Be patient and pray,’ he said to me, ‘and you will win through’. After the retreat, all my fears disappeared, and peace and joy filled my heart. Hell had been conquered.” A typical case of homesickness and despondency. He even thought that the Seminary at Tours might be more suitable for him. He had a cousin and several friends there, and he thought their company would be a help. However in the light of subsequent history and his own particular mission in life as Founder of two Religious Congregations it was obvious that Divine Providence intended him to be precisely here at Saint-Gaultier in the diocese of Bourges, where the future field of his Apostolate lay. By becoming a member of the clergy of this diocese he was destined to be stationed at Issoudun which played such an intimate and important part in his life and mission. This is why in his “Notes” written in 1902 after he had founded the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart he remarks that this homesickness was a temptation of the Devil trying to destroy his vocation. It was not that he lost his desire to be a priest, but that the early obstacles at Saint-Gaultier discouraged him and made him want to return home. He could not see himself enduring these difficulties over several years.(7) But Saint-Gaultier was where God wished him to be, and the Province of Berry, which he learnt to love was to be the field of his activities. We might say that he not only found a new country, but a new soul within himself. After the retreat he became his old bright self again, and his relations with the other students improved considerably. He became more used to his surroundings, and began to take a keen interest in the history and the affairs of the diocese. In every Seminary one finds a certain union, and common interest amongst students who are to be ordained for a particular diocese. They speak about their hometowns, their parishes and the different modes of life each place and so the students learn the general nature of the diocese. Several of the students came from around the Issoudun district and Jules was always glad to hear of the place, even though in those days he little dreamt that he would ever be posted there. He would often hear them speak of the town’s past history, particularly of the glorious resistance to the New Republic and its brutalities, which earned the inhabitants of Issoudun the name of “the Maccabees”. The Superior, Father Avee, was also a native of Issoudun, and spoke of its religious history lamenting the fact that the parish had now declined and presented a great field for mission work. “It is the poorest parish in the diocese,” he used to say. And so gradually Jules became more mature in his outlook and more at home in this new life. It was as if the words in the Book of Genesis were being applied to him; “Leave your country, your people, the house of your father and go into a strange land that I will show you.”(10) Although he was no less serious in his outlook, the tension had gone, and his natural vivacity happiness returned to him. He made more allowances for the boyish nature of many of his companions, and again joined them in their games and sport. Even some of his own boyish impulsiveness began to show itself, as the following incident shows: One fine Thursday, about the middle of his first Winter in Saint-Gaultier, probably early in 1842, the students went for a walk along the Route d’Argent in the direction of Conives, a small hamlet about five miles from the Seminary. After passing the Chateau de Ligondes there is a smaller branch road which leads to a fairly high and steep cliff, the top of which is covered in snow during winter months. On climbing the path to the summit one is rewarded with a magnificent panorama of the nearby river and the distant Thenay forest. However, no matter how beautiful the scenery may be many young people regard a cliff as a challenge to their climbing ability. Having gone to the top by the path and admired the view, Jules tempted two of the other students to make a direct descent with him over the boulders and through the thickets. All went well for a while, but about 40 feet from the bottom they began to slip and slide in the snow. His two companions were able to cling to some branches but in snatching at them, they bumped into Jules who lost his balance and went tumbling down the hill-side, finishing up in a thicket at the bottom. When the other students reached him he was unconscious. In their panic they thought he was dead. They carried him to the near-by Chateau, and did not realise that on the way his consciousness partly returned, although he could not move or open his eyes. All he could do was faintly hear what they were saying. He could hear them repeatedly saying that he was dead and he recalls thinking at the time: “Well, if I am dead, why hasn’t my soul been already judged by God? I began pitying and asking for Divine Mercy.” In the Chateau, he showed no sign of reviving, and candles were lit around the bed, while the Rosary and De Profundis were recited. Meanwhile, some of the students had hurried back to the Seminary to break the sad news to the Superior and the Community. Father Avee immediately despatched the house-doctor to the Chateau, while he assembled the Community in the Chapel waiting to receive the corpse. A few minutes after the doctor arrived at the Chateau, Jules regained consciousness, opened his eyes, and asked where he was. A few of the students almost died of fright themselves. The doctor gave him a thorough examination and announced that except for some rather severe bruises to his head and body he was all right. With his clothes in tatters, Jules was carefully placed in the doctor’s carriage and taken back to the Seminary. It was now about 9 o’clock at night. Hearing the carriage approaching, Father Avee and the Community came out to meet it. We can imagine their great shock when Jules sat up and remarked: “But Father, I am not dead.” The old priest, who had actually been crying when he had announced the news in the chapel was upset for several days; Jules was placed in the Infirmary, but recovered quickly enough to take his place in the class-room on the following Monday morning, adorned with a number of bruises and scars.(12) This close call to death left a longer impression on Jules’ soul that it did on his body. Even ten years later Father Piperon tells us, he used to speak of it with emotion. (Note: Father Piperon has wrongly dated the accident at the end of Father Chevalier’s Juniorate, so it would have been about 15 years later in 1855 the year the Founder first mentioned the title “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart to his confreres – that this conversation between the two priests took place. Later on we will see that one of the reasons which inspired Father Chevalier to call Our Lady by that title was gratitude for preserving his during the fall down the cliff).(13) We have it not only from Father Piperon, but also from his teachers and contemporaries at St.-Gaultier that Jules did become very pensive and solemn after the accident. In his “Memoir of the Origin of the Society” Father Piperon has this to say: “Until then he had been a good scholar devoted to his work, a pious seminarian, regular in his religious exercises, but showing at times faults of temperament from which even the best of seminarists are not exempt. Henceforth he became more serious, faith guiding his every action. His recollection was more pronounced. His teachers and fellow students have said that the interior man in him seemed to be entirely renewed, ‘he became a model to us all’. He had seen death so close.”(14) We may state from these definite testimonies of his contemporaries that his life at Saint Gaultier was spiritually divided into two periods, the one before his accident full of doubts and difficulties: and that afterwards when he concentrated on striving for perfection. He had already made such an impression on his Superiors that even though, in spite of the formal agreement, no fees were paid for his education after two years they never hesitated to keep him at the Seminary.(15) When he was recalling these days towards the end of his life he was not quite as enthusiastic about his virtue as his classmates had been. “I should have been confirmed in grace after such a miraculous protection from death been an edification to my fellow students, but that was not the case. I did try to keep the rule and be a good student, but I am afraid my lively heart had lost nothing of its impulsiveness.” To prove his contention he quoted an incident which happened shortly after the accident: “One day during this same year I was in the chapel making a short visit to the Blessed Sacrament as we usually did after classes, after dinner and before recreation. I was on my knees when two students came in and knelt behind me. They seemed to like teasing newcomers, and one of them pulled my hair and gave me a gentle push in the back. This was repeated at least three times. Instead of getting up and leaving the chapel, which I probably should have done, I turned around and gave him a resounding slap on the jaw. He evidently did not forget it, as he never tried it again.(16) At the end of his first year the authorities saw fit to put him in 4th class, thus missing the 5th grade. Some have expressed the opinion that this was at the risk of neglecting certain subjects, although he was already proficient in Latin(17). However, Octavie Poirier, who always seems well informed on the details of these days, has stated that he passed from 4th Grade having completed the regular course of studies.(18) Personally this was a help to him as he found himself amongst students more or less of his own age. One story of this period is amusing enough to narrate. He had been put in charge of supervising the Junior dormitory. One very cold winter’s night he was awakened by a noise at the foot of his bed. He opened his eyes, and saw what he thought was a ghost holding a candle, which was casting weird shadows around the dormitory. Although very scared, he was conscious of his duty, and quietly got out of bed, making a grab at the candle. It happened to be the Rector, Father Avee who had decided, on account of the freezing night, to do the rounds and see if all his charges were well covered.(19) Jules reached 2nd class in the due course of events. He was then old enough for military service, but his father had put his name into a ballot for exemption, and he was lucky enough to draw a favourable number. As he was going on holidays to his family, the Superior permitted him to wear a soutane. His family had returned to Richelieu, as Monsieur Juste had retired and the new man in charge had taken care of the Vatan forests himself. Jules father was offered a good position in his old home town as Rural Guard and beadle.(20) When the people of Richelieu saw Jules in his soutane they concluded he had already entered the Major Seminary. This no doubt gave rise to the rumour that he went through the Junior Seminary in four years. One day during his holidays he was chatting with a group of his old friends, when one of them said; “Now that you are free from military service, you ought to leave the Seminary and get a good position in civil life. You would do well.” Jules replied: “Sorry, but I am determined to be a priest, I am not interested in what the world has to offer me.” The tone of his reply cut short the conversation.(21) During these holidays the family were reunited for the first time in many years. His married brother who lived in Paris and his married sister who lived in Tours returned to Richelieu for a few weeks. They naturally had plenty to discuss, and in the course of one conversation they suggested to Jules that now that he seemed assured of becoming a priest, he should interest himself in the welfare of their children. Many priests, they told him had helped their families and secured good positions for their nephews and nieces. But Jules thought this was a rather mercenary outlook on his vocation and hastened to remark. “If you are counting on me to do the same thing I am afraid you will be sadly disappointed. If I become a priest, I will be working in the service of God, and not that of my family. It will be to win souls for Jesus Christ, and not to enrich my family.”(22) After the holidays, Jules returned to Saint-Gaultier for his last year in the Junior Seminary. He went into Rhetoric Class. In his “Notes” Father Chevalier refers to a great grace he received during this final year, namely that of breaking off a particular friendship he had formed with one of the students. He does not tell us when this friendship began, but we can gather from the “Notes” that it dated from his early days at the Seminary, when he was home-sick and finding things difficult. Writing some sixty years later about this inordinate affection he gives us the impression that it was something serious. However, in all his writings Father Chevalier had the habit of introducing moral reflections amongst the facts he was recording, and this often unduly emphasised the gravity of a situation. We cannot be sure that in this case it was not anything that went wrong that was worrying him, but what could have gone wrong. “O God”, he writes, “how I thank You, in the light of my numerous faults, for opening my eyes, and stopping me on the brink of disaster.”(23) Ho regarded the forfeiting of this friendship as the condition God required of him for greater holiness of life and union with Our Lord. This renunciation, which we often find even in the life of great mystics, was to him the necessary means of his personal sanctification and the fulfillment of the special work God had in store for him. To place this friendship in its right perspective we may consider the following points: A strong friendship in student’s life is not necessarily a harmful one. On the contrary healthy friendships can often be a source of mutual help and encouragement. The testimony of his confreres that Jules was always most particular about the Rule, and that he was regarded as a model amongst them, surely indicates that they did not regard this friendship of several years standing as anything abnormal. Also, if Father Depigny is correct in giving the name of this friend, we are doubly reassured that it was just a strong mutual understanding and affection. The friend followed Jules to the Major Seminary twelve months after his own entry, and continued to call him by his Christian name.(24) The following extracts from his “Notes” puts the whole matter in its right perspective: “There was never anything bad in our relations with one another. Our conversation usually was on pious subjects, on our studies, on the best ways of being good students and later on, good priests”.(25) “I had, unhappily, formed too great a natural affection for him. He was always in my thoughts, and this became a big distraction for me. Even during my prayers and in the Chapel I would be thinking of him. I sought his company at recreation, and was always delighted when in his presence.” Looking back after all the year’s he continued; “My Last two years were spent in tepidity and dissipation. I waited with impatience my entry to the Major Seminary.”(26) Father Piperon merely states: “In Rhetoric he received a great grace which was the means of lifting him up to a state of higher perfection.’ (27) Some time later Jules left Saint-Gaultier for good. After his holidays at Richelieu, he entered the Major Seminary at Bourges. This was a decisive step in his life. He was to be incardinated into this diocese, to spend his life there as a priest, and as yet unbeknown to himself, to become the Founder of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, and the Daughters of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.

CHAPTER III: BOURGES THE MAJOR SEMINARY

History of the Town and Province of Bourges Bourges was the capital of the ancient Province of Berry, which was divided into Upper and Lower Berry. Vatan and Saint-Gaultier where we have been following Jules’ early life were in Lower Berry, while Bourges, a richer and more developed country, was in the Upper part. In 1790 “The Constitution” gave the name of “L’Indre” to Lower Berry and “Cher” to the Upper division, but the inhabitants of the Berry territory regard themselves as one people, and the Church has respected this sentiment in the light of their common history, and has made the boundaries of the old Province in the main those of the Archdiocese. Bourges is the seat of the Archbishopric with its several Suffragancies. At Saint-Gaultier Jules had already heard many of the stories concerning the glorious past of Bourges and its environs. Fifty years later he incorporated several of them in his “Religious History of Issoudun”.(1) Originally the “Berry-ites” were known as Bituriges – a name which itself proves the antiquity of the district. They tell us that in the Chaldaic and Armenian languages “Bit” meant “Son of” and the rest of the word refers to “Ogyges” – the founder of the city who was a grand-son of Japhet. Without being too sure of it Father Chevalier seems to give credence to the legend.(2) According to an ancient historian, whom he calls the Abbe Monveron, the Bourges area was known to the Cimbres as “Avvoeric”, which meant “the kingdom of the Ancients” or “The most ancient of the Kingdoms”. This accounts for the Latin names. “Avaricum” for the town, and “Avara” for the river that flows near-by. (Now called L’Yevre). An historian called Chameau in 1562 claimed that the town dates back to the year 134 after the Deluge, which even when he made his calculations would give it the respectable old age of 3,733 years. Father Chevalier does not mention these figures. He is on surer ground when he quotes Julius Caesar’s Gallic Wars. He learnt there that the Celts had settled in this region to apply themselves to agriculture and breeding of live-stock. Their strongholds on the heights were no longer sufficient, so they migrated to the plain, where they built their fortifications. (Actually some of the masonry used around Bourges was similar in type to that used 1000 years before the time of Our Lord). Bourges itself would have been the main political centre of this region of France, even though it may not have reached the solid municipal unity of the Averni who, under the leadership of Vercingetorix, put up such a magnificent fight against Caesar. In the story of the Gallic Wars, Bourges earns the striking tribute from Caesar that it was the most beautiful town of the region “pulcherrimam prope totius Galliae urbem”. It was the custom of the people in the smaller hamlets to burn their crops and even their houses before the approach of the all-conquering Caesar – “the policy of the burnt earth.” When it came to Bourges’ turn, the people begged the National Assembly to let them defend their beloved town. Apart from its narrow entrance there were streams and marshes on all sides, and this gave them hope of success. However Caesar had no trouble in taking the town and reducing it to ashes.(3) Father Chevalier notes that many historians state that Issoudun was one of the 200 villages burnt during Caesar’s campaign. The survivors of Bourges and the neighbouring towns left their burnt ruins and went off to found a new place to live, called Biturgale, which is now actually the town of “Bordeaux”(4) The Bourges people of today like to remind the Bordeaux-ians of this fact.

The Ecclesiastical History of the Bourges Diocese.

In his historical notes it is obvious that Father Chevalier was more interested in the history of Christianity in his adopted country than in its secular history. “Christianity”, he said, “changed the whole nature of the country.”(5) In a series of articles in the magazine “Semaine Religieuse du Diocese de Bourges”, and later included in the brochure “Apostolicity of the Principal Churches of France?” he has written at length on the glories of the early history of the diocese. He was inclined to agree with the many authors who followed Faillon’s manuscript, published in the 8th or 9th century, that Saint Ursin, the first Bishop of Bourges, was not a disciple of the seven bishops sent from Rome to France in the tine of the Emperor Decius, but of a person who had witnessed the life and Passion of Our Lord, possibly the Nathaniel of the Gospels. This would confirm also the tradition that the church in Issoudun itself went back to almost Apostolic times, as Saint Ursin is supposed “to have built two churches there”.(6) However, as he stated he was quite prepared to leave these details of the obscure origin to the competent authorities.(8) In Bourges then during the days of his training he recalled the glorious and venerable history of the centuries as he gazed upon its monuments and ruins. Here in this picturesque setting on the slopes of the rocky Sancerrois, whence flow La Langis and La Moulan, where the waters of the Yevrette and Yevre meet to make their way to the Cher, Jules would have often contemplated the splendour of the past. The town in those days had a population of some 22,000 people from about 5,500 homes. Today Bourges is modern enough with its Canal du Berry, its good roads and railways connecting it with the other towns of France, but in Jules’ time the mark of antiquity was visible everywhere. Spread over a large area the houses, most with gardens and courtyards, were often separated by areas of cultivation and the numerous boulevards followed the contours of the old fortifications, some of which had as many as 80 towers. A few of these still stand today. Around the town the lime soil is fertile enough, and there are plenty of farms and gardens. Early in the 3rd Century the Senator Leocadius donated a house and some land to Bishop Ursin for the use of the Christians. On this site three successive Cathedrals have stood in their grandeur over the centuries. The last – the Cathedral of St. Etienne – was commenced towards the end of the 12th Century, and was one of the most beautiful Gothic structures of that period in France. On the summit of a hill it dominated the town with its inspiring towers and flying buttresses. Its high arched vault, its numerous stained-glass windows, its sixty columns, its four side-naves, each with its own impressive entrance made it truly a majestic and imposing building. The front steps lei to a wide terrace over which was a facade “eloquent in shadows” – an imitation of Notre Dame do Laon. The five frontal porticos were richly adorned with statues, the central one with the striking figure of Christ and the tympan of the Last Judgment. Today some of the statues have deteriorated somewhat; others have entirely disappeared, but what remains gives us an idea of the original value of the work. It is a Cathedral in the full sense that the Middle Ages attached to the meaning of the word – namely – the expression of the pride of the people in their Faith, a living Faith shown over the centuries, as also an expression of their efforts and sacrifices in building it. Begun in 1180, it was eventually consecrated in 1324. In the 15th Century the Northern Tower had to be recon structed, as it developed some flaws, and was causing concern. The last of the stained-glass windows were put in in the 17th century, while the oldest of them, which have been described as “red and blue checker-work which give the appearance of a mosaic” belong to the 13th century. Those which represent the adoration of the Magi came from the school of Chartres where “the gentle creators of dreams installed their furnaces.”(8) Gillet has written of these Cathedrals of France; “One must see them steeped in the history of the towns which they have made and which they are still carrying through the sort of life like great dream-ships. They have been the monuments of the cities. The people of other days did not regard them merely as places of empty ceremonies; their houses grew up around then as though they were the family host. The Cathedral is one of the immortal features of the life of France – of a people of Faith.” Jules’ heart must have been filled with emotion and sadness every time he visited the Cathedral and saw this past splendour spent and shattered. It had always been such an intimate part of the life of the town, but now in the spiritual sense it interested only a small portion of the people. What then had happened to this Faith? The Cathedral with its dilapidated desertion, and broken statues clearly gave the answers, as did every other aspect of Religion. The churches, pillaged, damaged, ruined, occupied by the civil powers, were testimony to the decadence of society. Jules beheld it with his own eyes; he heard his teachers and class-mates speaking of it; he noticed it in the decline in priestly vocations; he read about it in the reviews, papers and books widely distributed in his time. He read the complaints about the irreligious state of France in the Catholic magazines. Father Dufriche Desgenettes summed it up thus: “Impiety of the masses, stupid indifference of the majority, a few faithful souls, but sparse and rare. Materialism openly and brazenly professed; the Religion of Jesus Christ rejected; His Divine Sacraments – our one resource on earth – despised and abandoned; the days consecrated to Our Lord without sanctification, profaned by monstrous and criminal debaucheries; the corruption of morals even among youth and children, and to complete this hideous picture – suicide taken as a matter of course. That is the deplorable state of our France at present.”(9) Behold then what remained of the great spirit of Faith that built the Cathedrals”. But Jules was also able during these days of his scholasticate to study and admire the evidence and relics of another France – the glorious memory of the old Royal race of Saint Louis with its battles – but also with its loyalty to the Church. The first great royal event which Bourges witnessed was the Coronation of Louis XI in the ancient Cathedral. The town also played an important role in the Hundred Years’ War against England, in the Great Western Schism, and in the Civil War between the Armagnacs and Bourguignon. John of France, the tutor of Charles VI and Charles VII lived there, and was often called “John of Bourges”. When Charles VII was Dauphin he fled to Bourges with the help of Tanneguy du Chatel at the time when John the Fearless took Paris. There, as Regent till the death of his father, he set up the Government of France, and Bourges housed the Royal family for many years. It was there that Louis XI, his son, was born. Later Louis was to set up a University in his native town. In the garden of the ancient Seminary, which was used as a barracks in Jules Chevalier’s time, there can still be seen the remains of the Tower where Louis XI, then Duke of Orleans was interned. Two other names well known in French history are associated with Bourges. The first is that of Saint Joan of France, daughter of Louis XI who founded there the Sisters of the Annunciation, and the other, that of Jacques Coeur, the famous paymaster of Charles VII, whose coat of arms can still be seen on many of the neighbouring monuments, and who brought a prosperity to Bourges previously unknown. During the Wars of Religion, Bourges was captured by Montgomery. It has known its own St. Bartholomew’s Day. After its capture it paid homage to Henry IV, but became entirely Royalist again under Louis XIV.

JULES AT THE SEMINARY. HIS STUDIES. SPIRITUAL FORMATION.

In this historic milieu, so rich in memories of Church and Royalty, Jules commenced his studies of Philosophy and Theology. Since the year 1822, the Seminary was situated in La Rue des Arenes, what used to be the old Ursuline Convent. It was a very large building whose plan Father Chevalier more or less followed when building the Monastery at Issoudun. In 1907, by virtue of the ‘Law of Separation’ it was confiscated by the Government. Ironically enough it then became the ‘Palais de Justice’. The small Oratory of the garden, where Jules celebrated his First Mass has been pulled down, and the gardens have become part of the City Park. In this old building Jules Chevalier did his major studies from October 1846 to mid June 1851. During the fifties of the previous century the Church had decided to reorganise methodically the life of the French Seminaries, a thing she could not do before on account of the Revolution and its aftermath. This reform coincided, as far as the diocese of Bourges was concerned, with the arrival of two prominent men, who were to have a great influence in the formation and work of Jules Chevalier. On 24th April, 1842, Mgr. Jacques, Marie Antoine Celesti Villefranche Du Pont was transferred from Avignon to Bourges as Archbishop and in August of the same year the Superior of the Major Seminary at Avignon, the Sulpician priest, François Theophile Ruel rejoined his Archbishop in order to replace his confrere, Father Renaudet, as Superior of the Seminary. This change had been brought about as a consequence of a rather solid difference of opinion between M. Renaudet and the Archbishop on matters liturgical. The Archbishop, Sardinian by birth, Roman by training and coming from a region where the Roman liturgy had been in use for centuries, was firmly determined, in accordance with the wishes of the Holy Father, to introduce the Roman spirit and liturgy into his new diocese.(10) On the other hand, Father Renaudet, born in Bourges itself, and having taught there in both the Junior and Major Seminaries, was strictly partisan in outlook and favoured the local liturgy. For many years he had worked at the codification of the local Ceremonial and had just brought out a new edition of “Les Offices Notes”(11) Since he still was not prepared to accept the Archbishop’s views, he was recalled by the Superior of the Sulpicians, and Father Ruel, who had got on well with the Archbishop at Avignon, was sent to take his place. Father Ruel was then 37 years of age. He was not altogether unknown at Bourges, as he had taught Moral Theology there before becoming Superior of the Major Seminary at Avignon.(12) If it was left to the Archbishop to introduce the Roman spirit and liturgy into the diocese, it was the function of Father Ruel to inspire the Seminarists with new zeal and enthusiasm. We are told in the official history of the Seminary: “He applied himself wholeheartedly to awakening in the house a greater ardour for study and for a more tender piety.”(13) Father Ruel strove to direct this piety and spirituality along the lines of the Sulpician tradition, while taking into account the opinions of the other professors and the nature of the Seminary of which he was in charge. And, as we will see later on some of the professors did not wholly approve of Jules and his “Ultra-Montaine” ideas, and he struck a certain amount of trouble with them. However, Divine providence had brought Father Ruel to Bourges and happily he was to become the Spiritual Director of Jules, and finally to be the guide and protector of his vocation – a protection which had the approval of the Bishop. The first big change introduced by Father Ruel was to lengthen the course of studies from four to five years. That was in 1844, two years before Jules arrived at the College. He also insisted that besides Philosophy and Theology, a course in the Sciences must be included in the curriculum, being aware of the changing nature of the times. Anyone who examines closely the unfavourable opinion about the intellectual state of the French Seminaries of this period must admit that it has mainly been formed on the remarks of a few contemporaries and not on a scientific investigation. There is plenty of evidence in books and biographies of the time to contradict this opinion, and we have only to consider the great number of gifted and zealous priests that the Seminaries of the time did produce to refute the accusation that they were of low intellectual standard. Certain aspects of Seminary life of that period have often been discussed such as the intrinsic value of the various methods of studies, the influence of a scientific course in the future ministry of a priest, the reason for the apostasy of the masses etc. and these discussions may have confused the question in point. On the other hand, all the propaganda for ‘higher clerical studies’ and the Utopian ideals set forth only obscure the issue. Chanoine Cristani in reviewing the period has written; “The picture that is painted of the students wasting their time on this study and that is nearer caricature than fact…. As to being able to refute Kant and Hegel it is only a joke to ask it of them.(14) In endeavouring to answer the question whether the Seminarists of the time did receive a proper training for their future ministry we can only judge by the results, taking into consideration the nature of the period and the average intellectual standard of the people amongst whom they were to work” Happily we possess enough documents on the studies of Father Chevalier to form a serious opinion on his philosophical and theological courses and his ability to deal with them. The Notes which he made during his Scholasticate are fortunately available to us, and even if they are incomplete, they still cover more than 400 pages (some 14,600 lines) of small, carefully ruled writing. And in the light of future discussions on his ability, it is interest ing to find these resumes of the systems not only of Lamennais, Bautain and Hermes, but of Kant himself.(15) These Notes afford us the opportunity of a comparison between the methods of study in those days and our own. Nowadays each subject is treated as fully as possible in class by the various professors, but in Jules time, mainly owing to the shortage of staff, the students themselves had to cover some subjects by making written analyses out of class and then presenting them to the professors. This personal study seems to have applied at Bourges particularly to Sacred Scripture and Church History. This was not only done during the term, but set-work was given the students to be completed during the holidays – “Holiday Home Work”. In his Notes Father Chevalier has indicated what work he did during the vacations. In order to gain an independent and unbiased opinion of the Notes we thought it would be interesting to give them to a present day student of theology. This student has done very well in his own exams and is considered by his professors to have good judgment and talent. He was given a double task that of making a catalogue of the various theological matters mentioned, and that of noting what attracted his attention in them. When that was done he was asked to make a general criticism of the Notes. He was quite unaware of any reason for making this request. Here is what he says regarding the matter and the system of teaching: “What struck me most of all was that the questions were treated in a more profound and detailed way than I would have imagined. This was very evident in spite of the fact that the matter is mainly contained in resumes and notes. This is a pity! One is struck by the different mentality brought to the study of Philosophy from that of Theology. The French Idealism and Subjectivism seems to pervade the whole atmosphere of the Philosophy. All is seen from within, from the spirit. The names of the philosophers quoted and explained speak for themselves: Plato, Descartes, Leibnitz etc. On the other hand the approach to the study of Theology is much the same as that of our own, today. Many of the annotations to the philosophical Notes are quite modern, and would certainly interest any student today. Numerous authors of the various periods are dealt with and summarily refuted, including the “thinkers” of the period. However, the order is always quite logical, and there is a laudable economy of words. The tract on Ethics is much more in the traditional style than the rest. With Theology the method of study is much the same as our own. We have the accepted classical Tracts with their subdivisions and their arguments, which are brief, well set out and “in forma”. Perhaps some of the arguments from Scripture and Tradition seem a little superficial and the exegesis not scientific enough, although it is obvious the students knew their Bible. A happy surprise is to find so many side notes on the history of the various outstanding problems. Noticeable also is the emphasis put on the Tracts De Religione and De Ecclesia, especially on the subject of the Internal Structure of the Church.” Father Chevalier writes: “I did my Philosophy in Descartes of whose genius the professor never tired of talking, and my Theology in Bailly, who we were told, “was a practical author, and sure in his opinions.” God gave me the grace not to share these sentiments. The Cartesian theory seemed to be false and dangerous. I challenged it in class in spite of the respect due to the professor. As regards the theories of Bailly, the Arch-Gallican, especially on the Constitution of the Church, the General Councils, the Papacy etc., I instinctively held them in horror. The discussions often became ardent and heated. I was regarded as an “Ultra-Montaine”, but I was not the only one. Nearly all the students were against the author and the teacher.(16) The same position held in the other Seminaries. Doubtless the students at Bourges were encouraged in their rebellion against Bailly as a text book by the knowledge that their Archbishop was openly Roman in his sympathies, and that even before he became a Cardinal in 1847, he had introduced the Roman Liturgy into his diocese, and was endeavouring to educate his clergy to think with Rome.(18) The good judgment of Jules and his colleagues was vindicated when in 1852 the Manual of Bailly was put on the Index “donec corrigatur”. Strange enough, although Jules vigorously opposed the anti-Roman doctrine of Bailly in the Dogmatic Theology classes, he did not protest against his rigorous moral teachings, a clear proof of his own rigorous outlook and attitude at this period of his life.(18) Later on, of course, Jules Chevalier reacted against this severe and tense outlook, so foreign to the type of spirituality which was to become his own. But during these early years of his scholasticate it seemed to accord with his own state of soul. Father Piperon has written of this period; “The life of Abbe Chevalier was very severe.”(19) What then were the intellectual capabilities of Jules Chevalier during the course of his superior studies? In an article in the Analecta of the Society, 1929, there are two statements the truth of which is at least debatable. To a question put by Mlle. Marchant, Father Maugenest is reported to have replied; “I know that at the beginning of his studies it was doubted if Jules Chevalier was intelligent enough to be a priest”, but he added: “Whether the Directors of the Seminary shared that doubt, or whether they hesitated to receive him I do not know.” Whatever may be admitted about any early doubts they certainly could not apply to the later stages of his scholasticate.(20) There was no hesitation in giving him his SubDiaconate on 8th April, 1850 and he left the Seminary soon after in June, 1851. The second statement clearly refers to the years of his Philosophy: “He had great difficulty in applying himself to his Philosophy, and his friends more endowed with intelligence than himself used to try during recreation to teach him what was given in class.”(21) The two statements obviously refer to the first two years, but Father Piperon himself makes very light of any difficulties of this period, and immediately goes on to say: “In any case, if there were doubts, they were quickly dispelled. Very soon Jules Chevalier was regarded amongst the good “scholars.” The opinion of Father Piperon, who had not enthused about Jules’ intellectual capabilities at Saint-Gaultier, perhaps unreasonably so, is a better guide to the true position, and his evidence is reliable and first-hand.(22) In commenting on the discussion he wrote in 1912: “Virtue alone is not sufficient for the priest. Science and learning are also necessary. Without these qualifications his sublime ministry could become an occasion of ruin, not only to himself, but to others. Firmly convinced of this double need Father Chevalier applied himself to his studies with the same zeal and ardour as he did to acquiring the virtues of his holy calling. If for a start the professors did not find in him any outstanding or brilliant intellectual promise, and even if they did doubt for a while if he would get through, the doubts were soon dispelled. He was soon regarded as amongst the good scholars. His relentless application soon enabled him to overcome his inner difficulties and to catch up on the time lost by his late entry to the Seminary. He was now revealing the intelligence which perforce had been too long latent.(23, 24) Here then, we have just an average student, but one who was achieving good results by his zeal and hard work. He was endowed with a clear and practical judgment, a strong will which no difficulty could shake.(25) To quote Father Piperon again: “Others have been gifted with .. more active and fertile brain, but rare are the men who did so much work as Jules Chevalier.”(26) Rev. Father Pasquier, who had been a professor at Bourges since 1875, the Superior since 1894 till the expulsion of the Sulpicians, remembered one of the brief reports on Jules in the Seminary register: “Excellent in piety, average in intelligence.”(27) The young seminarist whose opinion we sought on Father Chevalier’s scholastic notes has added to his previous remarks: “They must have worked hard at Bourges especially Jules Chevalier, who was most faithful in taking his notes and making his resumes. He did this always with clarity and precision, even if one does not find any brilliant personal comments there. It is obvious that he clearly understood what had been taught in class and he was able to summarise briefly what he had heard and read. One would say that he had a predilection for the grand fundamental truths, and his special gift was: clarity. To sum up then: From the above evidence presented by those who have studied the question quite independently and from different angles, we can definitely say that as a seminarist, Jules Chevalier was a sincere and hard working student, who got very good results without having any exceptional intellectual gifts.

SPIRITUAL FORMATION

In any seminary, of course, the main training is in things spiritual, and so the Rule and the spiritual exercises form the framework of each day. On this point Father Piperon has written: “The life in a seminary is necessarily regular. Each hour is occupied from the time of rising to time of retiring. All goes according to Rule, and the Rule does not change. The week begins by carrying on the occupations with which the last one finished. The prayers the studies, the joyful recreations fill up each day. “Days of work and weariness,” the cynic might say. Rather, “days of fruitful work and virtue” the good seminarist and priest will reply. What true priest does not recall with nostalgic happiness the cherished memories of his Seminary days?(28) The Sulpician Society has always fostered in its Seminaries a good and friendly relationship between the professors and the students, and it is justly proud of having preserved the spirit and ideal of its Founder in this respect. This amicable spirit certainly held during Father Chevalier’s years at Bourges. The Rule of the Bourges Seminary was old, older even than the book which contained it. It was titled: “Regulations of the Major Seminary of Bourges, 1829”. The sub-title read: “General Statutes for the Seminaries of St. Sulpice, drawn up at the Grand-Seminary of Bourges” (25) The Rule was probably formulated by M. Olier, and definitely re-edited by his second successor, M. Ironson (1676-1700). Levesque has an interesting observation to make on the spirit and the observance of the Rule at Bourges: “The method of obtaining fidelity to the Rule in this Seminary was different from that in the seminaries of St. Charles, where they relied on continual, and often mistrusting, supervision. Here the onus was put mainly on the conscience of the seminarist, his response to friendliness and confidence, his reaction to a paternal discipline, which expected a more spontaneous obedience. Moreover, the community life between the professors and students was closer than in the other seminaries in Paris, There the teaching staff, while living in the same house, made their exercise apart from the students, leaving one of the priests on supervision. At Saint Sulpice priests and students followed the same rule, made their spiritual exercises together, their prayers, their particular examen, their divine Office. Even the recreations were taken together as far as possible. Thus the day was regulated under the common rule, and all were expected to keep it. This common life, this close contact, this mutual example had the observance more by individual conscience than by duress.”(30) But, after all, the rule is only the exterior safeguard of the spiritual life – the foundation on which the ascetical life if built. Ruel, the Superior of the Seminary, was very conscious of this fact, and just as he had lifted the standard of the studies, so he endeavoured to inculcate a strong yet tender piety into the life of his charges. For the rest, he was content to let the work of the Holy Spirit take effect in their lives. This good and wise Superior believed in respecting the difference in personality in each of his students, and this is why he encouraged any sensible initiative, not only in matters of study, but also in their spiritual activities. For instance, when in 1846 a group of students asked permission to form a literary and discussion club – this would have been a short time before Jules arrived – it was readily given, and he even encouraged them to discuss the then delicate topics of the Roman Rite, the supreme authority of the Sovereign Pontiff etc.. (31) Whether these discussions had anything to do with the opposition to the professor in class, we do not know. Jules himself was allowed to form a ‘Spiritual Group’ called “The Small Society of Seminarists of Good Will”, which had a larger membership and a longer life than the literary club. We cannot stress too much the influence of Father Ruel on the life of our Father Founder. His appointment to Bourges as Superior and Rector was really a great blessing for Jules. He encouraged him in his studies and his spirit of piety; he kept assuring him that he had a priestly vocation, and that Our Lord wanted him; he became, we might say, the protector of that vocation, and all this in an atmosphere of confidence and esteem. Their friendship lasted long after Seminary days, and for Father Ruel, Father Chevalier always remained “Jules”.(32) Not only did he help him over difficulties during these days of his training, but after ordination he assisted him, even financially at times especially when Jules was about to “launch out into the deep” with his new foundation. Father Ruel followed every step of this venture with interest and benevolence. Though he had no idea during the days of training of the plans of Divine Providence for Jules, we can say it was mainly Father Ruel who had fostered in the future Founder that particular spirit and type of spirituality which was to characterise him and his followers later on. By his broadness of outlook, and by his respect for the action of the Holy Ghost in individual souls, he had allowed Jules to develop completely, freely and harmoniously. Another outstanding Sulpician who had a profound influence on Jules was Rev. Father Gabriel, Etienne, Joseph Mollevant.(33) This priest seems to have been one of the notable personalities in ecclesiastical circles during this period. For years the Sulpician Novice Master, he was much in demand for missions and retreats; he was the confidant of Bishops, Religious Superiors, and especially Directors of Seminaries. In spite of what appeared to be an unconcerned and detached manner, his extraordinary personality made a deep impression on all who met him. Father de Ravignan, S. J. wrote of him to his mother on 5th May, 1822; “This Father Mollevaut is a man of God – as unconcerned and detached as I would like my own soul to be. When Father Frayssinous told me in Paris to go and see him, he said: “Whatever he tells you about your future vocation, you will be as peaceful as if God Himself had told you”.(34) Father de Ravignon all through his life had a deep and tender veneration for this priest who after the retreat simply said to him: “You are going to be a Jesuit.”(35) Another testimony from Achille Valroger indicates that Father Mollevaut was not just the severe unbending type of holy person, but kind and understanding – “He insisted on my taking plenty of rest whenever I was sick.”(36) The Abbe Bernard tells us that when he was appointed Vicar General of Cambrai he sought advice from Father Mollevaut, who had always been his confidant and director(37) and this is what he told him; “Always speak simply, warmly and practically – like St. Liguori, whom you ought to learn off by heart. Never forget Mary. Keep the customary and popular devotions. I am convinced of the truth of the words of St. Vincent de Paul that all the calamities in the world happen because of bad priests. The only way to reform the world is to give it good priests.”(38) As Superior of the Novitiate House “La Solitude”, and as Superior at Saint Sulpice, he was entirely dedicated to the formation of future priests. His great desire was to restore the ancient rule and the customs of Saint Sulpice of which he himself was a good example. He became a specialist in Seminary life, and his advice was sought not only by the Directors of other Seminaries, but by the bishops themselves. During holiday time they used to gather around him and listen to his lectures. His devotion to Our Blessed Lady was outstanding. During his many missions in the various parishes he inspired many a boy to become a missionary. A brief biographical note on this remarkable priest would not be out of place. He certainly crowded plenty of experience into his years. Born on 10th March 1774 at Nancy, he grew up desiring to be a priest and to follow in the footsteps of his uncle and godfather, the parish priest of St.Vincent. However, his father, afraid of the disturbed state of the Church in those revolutionary days, would not give his consent, and they went to Paris, where he was appointed to the Court of Appeal. He became Secretary to Serbonelli a high dignitary of the Republic at Milan and was enrolled in the army in 1795. During these years he became careless about the practice of his Faith. After the year 1800 he began studying seriously, and became a professor of Classical languages at Nancy, and later at Metz. Gradually he returned to the practice of his religion and in the epidemic of 1813 he heroically spent his time looking after the sick. The desire to be a priest returned and he gained admission to Saint Sulpice the following year. He was ordained a priest on 31st May 1817 and immediately became professor of Moral Theology. In 1838 he became Novice Master and began his great work in the formation of the clergy. At the age of 72 his years were beginning to tell, and he resigned his professorship of Sacred Scripture. It was owing to this resignation that the Seminary of Bourges was able to obtain him for the annual retreat in mid-October 1846. This would have been his last retreat, for he retired to Issy immediately after it, and died there on 4th February, 1854. It was during this retreat that Jules met him and listened to his inspiring conferences. He made a lasting impression on this young seminarian commencing his first year scholasticate, and, as we will see, Jules regarded it as one of the great graces of his spiritual formation. One of the directors of the Seminary wrote of this retreat: “The Venerable Father was enthusiastically received by the students, who had heard of his reputation as a saintly and practical preacher. They used to gather around him during their recreations, reluctant to let him out of sight or hearing. Although he used to talk in an unaffected and almost casual manner, he brought about a real change in the house, and inspired a more ardent devotion to Our Blessed Lady. As a souvenir of the retreat he donated a beautiful statue of Her to the Seminary.”(39) Jules himself wrote of the retreat: “His words, simple, yet full of fire and faith, made a profound impression on my soul. The preacher recommended to me three principal virtues – fidelity to the Rule, mortification and humility. I made every effort to practise them during my five years in the Seminary, but alas, how many shortcomings, how many imperfections!”(40) Was not this the very doctrine of Father Olier himself being preached now, years later by Father Mollevaut? Humility, modesty, charity, mortification, fidelity to the rule. The retreat-master had said: ease and peace with yourself is not to strive after beings; to prefer not to be sought after, humoured or even consoled.”(41) But this retreat was for Jules not just a revision of the fundamental principles. It brought about a decisive change in his life. “I came away from that retreat” he said “converted, and most desirous of being an exemplary seminarist.”(42) As a matter of fact it was an experience which was very significant in his spiritual life and which had a definite bearing on his future vocation. It was the beginning of that “new life” of which he was dreaming at the end of his days at Saint Gaultier, the fountain from which sprang the Divine Grace that was to prepare him for his special situation of Founder of a new Congregation in the Church.

CHAPTER IV: CONVERSION AND SPIRITUAL INITIATION

Some Principles of the Spiritual Life.

God invites every man to cooperate effectively with Him in the plan of salvation and to achieve this end by “reuniting all things in Christ”, in whom resides the plenitude of Divinity. He is the Embodiment of all Power and Dominion. Likewise Christ is the Head of the Church, which is His Body, that which “embraces all in all”, and no man can belong to this Body unless he be united to Christ, the Head. It is from Christ that this Body receives its life – a life of faith and charity – each member, like cells of the human body, depending on and helping the others in their various functions. This union with Christ is a life of Faith and Love, energised by the action of the Holy Spirit, whom He promised to send us and through whom we are “grafted” on Him. Christ dwells by Faith in our hearts, which become “rooted and grounded in charity” in proportion to the extent that we put on “the new man”, a creature of justice and true sanctity.(1) The fundamental law governing this union of the soul with Christ has been formulated by Our Lord Himself: “He who would save his life must lose it; he who will lose his life for My Sake and the sake of the Gospel, shall save it.”(2) Christ Himself has given us the example by His own obedience. Being the perfect Son that He was He has shown us by His sufferings what it is to obey, and now He will save all those who will obey Him.(3) Only those who are willing to obey Him really love Him, and consequently are loved by the Father; “If anyone loves Me He will keep My Word, and My Father will love him, and we will come and make our abode with him.”(4) The proof of our love, then, is precisely in this obedience, in the fulfilling of our particular vocation in life in the faith ful accomplishment of all those duties incumbent on us as members of the Mystical Body of Christ. The work of the Holy Ghost in our souls is to lead us to this orderly life of love, to take our part in the orderly functioning of the Mystical Body. Since the very Person of the Holy Spirit is the Love of the Father and the Son, He will direct our every action and shape “our heart in the love of God and the patience of Christ.”(5) This love, being of its nature diffusive, will seek its expression in winning other souls to Christ. The obligation of taking a keen and active part in the apostolate is a logical consequence of our union with Christ, and of our membership of his Mystical Body, the Church. The Holy Ghost uses every soul, according to its gifts and the degree of sanctity it has reached, in furthering the cause of this apostolate. The injunction of St. John applies to every Christian: “Love one another as Christ has loved you.”(6) The Holy Ghost calls everyone of us without exception to take part in the apostolate – in the spreading of the Faith – by praying for one another, and by giving good example in living a good Christian life in the spirit of charity. But he calls some souls to a more particular and special apostolate. When the will is more closely united with the Will of God and when a person’s human activities are ordered to the harmonious functioning of the Mystical Body, Christ will come to that soul in a special way. He will visit it in the place and circumstances of its own particular vocation. To the contempl ative He will come in the silence and recollection of prayer; to the mission ary He will come in the trials of many difficult hours – hours of weariness, hours of worry about organisation, hours of wondering how to win the people to God. Each soul, no matter where it is placed, no matter what its task, must aim in the spirit of pure charity towards that union with Christ for which Our Lord Himself prayed and which for us is perfection – “God in us, and we in God”.

Our Lord accepted the Divine Plan of Redemption in its entirety. He did not seek to change or restrict it. He did not pray to His Father to take us out of the world, but to guard us from evil. He did not tell His Apostles to avoid the people, but rather to go out seeking them, to go out to all the nations. To those who would share in His redemptive Priesthood, He would give His graces and His own strength making them partakers of the Divine Nature, sharers in His own Dignity as Son of God. He knew that their mission would involve risks and dangers. The Gospels are full of warnings to this effect, and the Apostles themselves often repeated them. No one is immune from these dangers, as they are inherent in our weak fallen nature, and are a necessary consequence of free-will. As long as we live on the face of the earth, we will live by Faith, and not by the certitude of the clear vision of God which will be our joyful lot in Heaven.(6) Even when our actions are prompted by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, we still have to contend with the infirmity of our human nature, our earthly attachments, our battle against the world, the flesh and the devil. The Saints themselves were certainly no exception in experiencing trials and dangers. St. John of the Cross and St. Teresa of Avila have written at length on the temptations and tribulations that assail the Contemplative. They all experienced their own particular “dark night of the soul.” And naturally the missionary out in the world will have to “fight the good fight” in a hundred and one ways. However God’s help will never be failing to the one who remains faithfully at his post; he will receive his own particular grace of state, and he will be rewarded by the grace of a more intense love of God and his neighbour. The history of every vocation is different. God Himself determines the locale, the circumstances and the type of work we shall do for Him and for the Cause of the Gospel. The time and the manner of the call depend on the limitless bounty of God. It is He who enlightens the intellect; He who founds us in charity; He Who bestows and strengthens the two necessary virtues of faith and love. He may call one person to the apostolate by lead ing him through contemplation to such an intense love that it illumines his faith as the theologian says “connaturaliter,” and clearly indicates the path God wishes him to follow. Another He may lead step by step, or by a sudden inspiration, to an understanding and realisation of his particular mission, granting at all times the grace of complete confidence in God’s help and encouragement. AS faith works through charity and as the ultimate object of all Christian preaching and endeavour is to promote the love of God in souls through a good conscience and a lively faith, Christ Our Lord will not fail to grant greater graces of charity along with the development and expansion of the missionary’s work. As the trials, the difficulties the doubts arise, God’s grace will be there to meet them. The price Our Lord demands of course is fidelity and devotion to the work in hand.

Spiritual History of the Vocation of Jules Chevalier. There is no doubt that Divine Providence had chosen Jules Chevalier to fulfil a very special apostolic mission – a complement and completion of his own priestly vocation. Looking back over his life we can clearly see the wonderful design of Providence in his life and the various spiritual mile stones of his career. Early in his childhood, there was the firm conviction that one day he would be a priest – the preparatory grace, we might say. This conviction already was inspiring his dreams of the future and influencing his every boyhood action – his prayers, his sacrifices, even his games. He had a keen sense of faith, and responded to the graces God gave him which raised his youth to a supernatural level. The Holy Ghost was already planting the seeds of his vocation in his soul, but as yet there is nothing to distinguish him from any other good Catholic boy, especially from one who thinks he has a vocation. He was loading a pious life of faith and charity – much the same as any boy is taught to do by a pious mother. During this period there are no extraordinary sign of the future apostolate or the special vocation. We could perhaps interpret his impersonation: the priest saying Mass and his repetition of the sermon at home, when he was only ten years old, as an apostolic tendency in his make-up. The impression that the missioner, Father Redon made on his young mind also indicates that his thoughts and desires were towards the Church. What is extraordinary is the strong will and tenacity he showed once he had made up his mind to be a priest. In spite of opposition, and even mockery, he was resolute in his determination to surmount all obstacles in his path to the priesthood even though he had no idea how he would be able to achieve his ambition. During that long period of difficulty at Richelieu he shunned anything that might make him waver in his resolution, and faithfully lived each day as it came, even though each day seemed to take him further away from his goal. His ideal impregnated his every thought and action, and he never lost confidence. His devotion to the needy and the sick also reveals the future apostle. This sense of practical charity would flow from his quiet confidence that one day he was to be a priest. It was a result of his firm faith his spirit of sacrifice, and above all, of his ardent love of Jesus and Mary. He was grateful to God for this spirit of faith and confidence which he knew was sustaining him. The ever recurring difficulties only strengthened his will, and purified his motives, making him rely on the assistance of Divine Providence and not on human help. On admission to a Seminary the vocation of a young man takes definite shape and form. He considers the priesthood as a logical consequence of this admission. He is now occupied by the duties and routine of each day, and is content to let the difficulties of his future life look after themselves. In his early days at Saint-Gaultier Jules’ difficulties were not directly concerned with his vocation, but rather with the trials of adjustment to the new life amongst the younger boys, with his temperament, studies etc. . Apart from the brief temporary bout of homesickness, his whole conduct bore the mark of certitude about the ultimate outcome of his vocation. It would have been strange if this young man who had relied so completely on Divine Providence to get him to the Seminary looked no further than that. The incident of his fall down the cliff on the banks of the Grouse was definitely a milestone in his spiritual development. He had come very close to death and the serious thoughts that had passed through his mind in his semi- conscious state left a lasting impression on him. In those dread moments when he was powerless to move and when his companions thought, he was dead, there flashed before his mind a clear vision of the brevity of life, of our complete dependence on God who holds our lives in His hands, and of the futility of serving anyone but Him. His emotions were so violent and deep during the subsequent days that ten years later Father Piperon remarked; “That accident brought this young man face to face with the great problem of life and death and clearly showed him the vanity of earthly things and the necessity of serving God alone.”(9) It was because it gave him such a clear and lasting realisation of these fundamental truths that the accident is important in the story of his life. He was granted the grace of a clear concept of his total dependence on God, and the necessity of giving himself entirely to His service. In those brief moments, when he could hear his companions saying he was already dead, his soul cried out to God to forgive him his sins and to have mercy on him. He promised that if he was restored to life he would serve God with all his strength and will, more wholeheartedly than he had ever done before.(l0) In granting his prayer Almighty God bound him to his promise during the rest of his life. Even if this were not the real conversion in his spiritual life – it was a turning point to a more earnest and serious service of God in which he directed his energetic character and strong will to a deeper application to prayer. (11) When he was a boy at Richelieu Jules considered the priesthood mainly as life of devotion spent for the service of souls. This idea attracted him, and he admired it greatly when he saw it in operation by such priests as Father Redon, the missioner. What reasons would explain this attraction and admiration, it is difficult to say. Doubtless a combination of natural and supernatural motives. However after his accident he was given the grace to see the priesthood in a new light. It was not only the serving of souls, but principally it was the serving of God. He could see that it was only by serving God, the Lord and Master, the sole Dispenser of Life and Death, and making this the main object of the priesthood, that the service of souls could be effective. Until this time we might say that for Jules God had been considered in his meditations and prayers as the Supreme Reality, the Great Creator of Heaven and earth, the Eternal Judge. Now, with the coming to the end of his training at Saint-Gaultier, we notice that he is beginning to realise more clearly and vividly the Personal Nature of the Godhead, and to be very conscious of the fact that there are three Persons in God. With this consciousness came the re-orientation of his devotion and spiritual life, making Christ, the God Man the centre and main object of his love and attention. He was beginning to understand, as it were, the “Mystery of Christ”, the Redeemer, and the necessity of our incorporation with Him. He could see that the basis of all true spirituality for the Christian is a personal union with Christ, and that any hindrance to that union must be conquered and put aside. His answer to his relatives during the holiday at Richelieu when they suggested he should help them financially after he became a priest, is significant. “If I become a priest,” he had said, “it will be to serve God, and not my family. It will be to gain souls for Jesus Christ and not to enrich my family.”(12) He still regarded the priesthood as the service of God but God is seen now in the Person of Jesus Christ and the apostolate consists not so much in bringing Christ to souls, but in bringing souls to Christ. It was this new realisation of the necessity of complete union with Christ as the basis of all true holiness that made him uneasy about his friendship with his fellow-student at Saint-Gaultier. He began to look upon this too natural attraction as a hindrance to his union with Christ. His friend was coming between him and Christ. Even he went to the chapel to pray he would find himself thinking of his companion instead of Our Lord, and it was becoming a source of tepidity and dissipation to him. He knew he had to make a choice, an important decision. “At the end of my year of Rhetoric”, he said, “I was impatiently awaiting my entry to the Major Seminary in order to begin a new life.”(13) It was, then, at the beginning of his Scholasticate at Bourges during the retreat given by Father Mollevant that he made his act of complete abandonment to Christ and the offering of himself entirely to Him and His service. Having made the offering, he began to receive an insight, even if as yet a faint one, of his special vocation in the Mystical Body of Christ. It is this act of abandonment, and the deep imprint Christ had now made on his soul that Jules Chevalier calls his conversion.(14) A conversion, according to Penido(15) is a personal psychological reaction resulting from coming face to face with Eternity. The soul consider the Eternal realities and one’s conduct is affected accordingly. Conversion for the religious soul, according to Father Lallement, is the passing beyond the stage of merely serving God, to the higher stage of devoting oneself entirely to His service in a state of perfection. This seems to have been Jules’ desire and ambition from now on. Father Piperon has written: “The episode of the natural friendship at the end of Rhetoric was the means chosen by the Divine Mercy to lift him to a higher state of perfection.” Father Lallement continues: “To take this step we must renounce once and for all our own will, depend from now on only on the good pleasure of God and put ourselves entirely in His hands.”(l6) Saudreau remarks that seminarists often make this decision, but it is a question of perseverance. “The soul must be truly faithful, recollected and resigned. It must apply itself courageously to humility and mortification and accept of the trials that Providence will send it.”(l7) This evolution of the soul postulates a new attitude. It is not just a question of developing this or that virtue but of an abandonment of the whole person to God. The soul is raised to a new supernatural level. It consists principally in the choice between God and man; in the decision to lose one’s life in order to find that of Christ, and to accept all the hardships that the sacrifice will entail. After God had asked him for the sacrifice of this natural friendship, which was a source of tepidity and distraction to him (18) – innocent though the friendship was in itself – Jules conceived a now idea of the spiritual life and his priesthood. He saw there the opportunity of offering himself entirely to God, and accepted the invitation of Our Lord to raise himself to a higher state of perfection.(19) He made his choice. His resolution at the end of Rhetoric to begin a new life when he came to Bourges was now put into effect, and had become a reality. “I put my whole energy” he said, “during the five years of my Scholasticate, into trying to put into practice the resolutions of the retreat.”(20) Father Piperon sums up his life at this stage as a life of deep faith, of abnegation, of penance and of prayer.(21) It was indeed a real conversion, a turning of the heart to God.”(22) God granted him a clear vision of the path he was to tread in order to accomplish his resolution. Father Mollevant during the retreat had indicated the way: “Fidelity to the rule, mortification and humility.” We will see that Jules made these three virtues the means of making his act of abandonment to Our Lord, and made them the weapons with which he attacked his faults and passions preparing his soul for the free action of the Holy Spirit within him.(23) He was “losing his life in order to gain Christ.” The object of the Sulpician formation is “to unite oneself with Our Lord and to enter into the dispositions of His Heart.”(24) According to this concept the divine life of the souls consists in the indwelling of the Blessed Trinity brought about by our participation in the life of Jesus Christ, Who dwells in our soul through faith. (Ephes. 3:17)(25) It is a participation in the glorified Life of the Risen Christ, and by it we are made “partakers of the divine Nature” and “temples of the Holy Ghost.” In the measure that Christ lives in us, and in the measure that our thoughts, our desires and our will are conformed to His, we achieve this interior union with Him. We can say with St. Paul; “For me to live is Christ” and “It is not I that live, but Christ lives in me.”(26) It was in order to give us this new supernatural life and to show us the way to Eternal Life, that the Word was made Flesh. The life of the God-Man on earth was the supreme example of the way “to live our human lives. His life was a life of abasement, humiliation and abnegation – even unto His death of propitiation on the Cross. Only certain privileged souls are asked to bear severe external sufferings in imitation of our Crucified Master, but every ardent follower of Christ must at least bear them interiorly. These external pains and sufferings are like sacraments of the internal virtues which ought to operate in our souls. Father Olier has said: “What Our Lord suffered exteriorly, we should do interiorly.”(27) The understanding and practice of this union with Christ will come only from meditation on His life and death, but since our nature is vitiated by sin and we are proud, selfish and even rebellious, we must subdue and discipline our wills. If we are to understand, this “sensus Christi” we must mortify our wills and senses. Father Oiler used to repeat again and again: “We must rid ourselves of the old man.” (He used to say it so vehemently at times that the old gardener at St. Sulpice thought he was referring to him!) He used to stress the fact that mortification and humility were the two powerful weapons with which to attack the enemies of true holiness – self love and pride. Mortification is “the virtue by which a Christian subdues the flesh and its inclinations by privations and sufferings”, but this by itself is not enough.(20) Humility is its necessary complement, as it purifies the intentions and gives mortification a meaning. True humility makes a man mortify himself interiorly.(29) Each one of us has to renounce that “old man” within us inherited from Adam himself.(30) Mortification and humility will make us indifferent to our own personal satisfaction and comfort, and will pave the way for a more perfect union with Christ. During the first three years of his scholasticate, from October 1846 to April 1850, Jules Chevalier applied himself diligently to the practice of the interior virtues – faith, recollection and prayer. He realised that to persevere in fervour and piety he must constantly practise mortification, penance and humility. Father Piperon has given us an intimate study of him during this period: “Who will ever know of the personal penances and holy acts of self-denial that he quietly practised? Some of us at times tried to take him unawares in his acts of penance, but no one ever succeeded. However, it was common knowledge amongst us that he wore a hair-cloth shirt, and that he frequently took the discipline.” The senior students used to point him out to the newcomers as the model seminarist. And a model he was. He was always the first to arrive at the Community exercises, always most particular about keeping the silence, an assiduous worker, recollected and grave in his deportment, reserved yet simple and friendly in his conversation, gentle and charitable to all, severe on himself.” “It was difficult to find even the slightest fault in him. His fellow students admired his exemplary fidelity to the rule, his spirit of silence, his zeal for study and his habit of prayer. They saw in him the model seminarist, the virtuous cleric striving to reproduce in himself the virtues of Jesus Christ, the Sovereign Priest. The Superiors and teachers liked him, thought a lot of him for the good example he showed and the high standard he set amongst the other students. The less fervent amongst them were encouraged to better efforts.” “During his five years at the Seminary he was never known to have lit a fire in his room, even though the climate in winter was bitterly cold. One particular year he shared a common study room with one of his cousins, who was also a seminarist at Bourges. In spite of the inviting fireplace, Jules chose to study in his cell even on the coldest nights. He doubtless regarded this as an opportunity for penance.” “His spirit of poverty was extraordinary, and even became a matter of comment. His soutane was always neat and clean, but carried many stitches and patches obviously the work of his own hands. It would seem that he took Our Lord’s injunction to the Apostles literally: “Do not have two tunics.” His boots became legendary for their shape and old age, and were often the object of friendly raillery from the students. His spirit of charity was no less conspicuous, not only to his fellow students, but even to outsiders. The following incident is a typical example: A poor man, a bootmaker by trade, sick and worried with the cares of a big family used to come to the Seminary each day to clean the toilets. Apart from the meagre wage he earned, he was given what food might have been left over from the meal of the previous evening and he mended any shoes or boots that the students gave him. Jules felt sorry for him, and went out of his way to get him what trade he could and even to collect a few alms amongst the students for him. He did more. For a long time he did part of his work in order to spare him fatigue. When the rising bell sounded in the morning he discreetly made his way to the post which he had assigned himself where he accomplished his disagreeable but charitable task. We would never have known of this practical act of humility had not one of his confreres happened one morning to surprise him in the very act.” “Another trait in his character worthy of comment was the ease with which he could turn a conversation along pious and spiritual lines in a natural and unobjectionable manner, and the facility he had for getting the students to discuss serious subjects.” Father Piperon concludes his character sketch thus: “Right to the end of his Seminary days he was a model for his regularity, his zeal for the glory of God and the good of souls, for his poverty, his simplicity and his affability. His keen faith sustained him in the faithful observance of all the rules and exercises of Seminary life.” (31) Father Piperon was perfectly aware of the extraordinary nature of Jules Chevalier, and in order to forestall any doubts that his future biographers might have, he wrote these telling lines; “I knew Jules Chevalier very well in the years we spent together in the Seminary: I honestly believe that I have not painted his character in over-glowing colours. Our fellow-students, if they ever read these lines, will be able to bear me out.”(32) In spite of the general esteem in which Jules was held in the Seminary he did meet with some quite formidable opposition from a certain group in the College, who did not approve of his consistently serious outlook and his unbending demeanour. We are not referring to the goodhearted banter he received about his clothes, boots etc., or the prankish efforts of some of the students to catch him practising his penances, but rather to a positive opposition – almost amounting to hostility – which a group comprising, as Father Piperon says, “a good number of the students” showed him. Father Piperon admits that at this stage of his training “his life did take on a severe form.” The students maintained he was far too aloof, and many of them objected to his founding of the “Little Society of Knights of the Sacred Heart”, which, they said, only interrupted the smooth running of College life. Father Piperon remarks that his critics were comprised, mainly of the “less generous, less fervent type whose characters were as yet undeveloped.” He was criticised for his taciturnity during recreation unless the subject of conversation on pious lines, and for not taking part in any light-hearted or amusing talk. Even those who did not criticise him openly, seemed anxious for a time to avoid his company, as they thought he was over-doing his determined effort to be always recollected. Any influence for good which he might have had on them seemed nullified by his excessive seriousness.(33) Even those who belonged to his “Society of the Sacred Heart” were not always in accord with him. And so the word “rigourism” began to be associated with his name. After his ordination to sub-diaconate this state of antipathy seems to have vanished as Father Piperon remarks that “a marked change was apparent in him; he became the life of his Association, and had a great influence on all his fellow-students.” (34) Father Piperon in retrospect asks the pertinent question: Can we honestly say that this period of his life at Bourges was one of rigourism? Rigorism? No. A forcible restraint, a tense and even violent effort to conquer and subdue his impetuous nature, yes. Actually Jules Chevalier never subscribed to the theory that strain and tenseness is a necessary concomitant of holiness. On the contrary his real nature – as the subsequent years proved – was just the opposite. He did not at any time consider that his own serious demeanour was the ideal, nor did he expect it of other people, but he was striving quite earnestly to mortify himself in order to draw closer to Our Lord. Father Piperon himself admits that in Jules’ inexperienced state as a zealous seminarist his manner was perhaps exaggerated at times, and his seriousness was excessive. But he went on to say that, even if this were so, it was an innocent exaggeration and a harmless excess, occasioned by his anxiety to please Our Lord. His purity of intention was never in doubt. Being the experienced Novice Master that he was, Father Piperon adds: “Every sincere beginner in the way of perfection commits these excusable exaggerations in the quest of Christian virtue.”(35) The spiritual writer, Saudreau, has a pertinent passage on this very point; “Most spiritual books,” he writes, “tell us that we must never give in to the inclinations of nature; that we must in all things follow the impulses of grace. It is precisely on this point that young ardent souls need firm and sure direction. All their acts of piety are stamped with the mark of earnestness. In their anxiety to practise recollection they often do violence to themselves; in their desire to live in the presence of God they become deadly serious, and spend many hours in anguish of heart and tenseness of soul, instead of enjoying a relaxed and pleasant recollection. In the initial stage of a devout life, when the soul has made the firm resolution of spending itself in the service of God, we expect to find sudden and even violent outbursts of first fervour. These generous emotions should not be repressed, but firmly directed. While stressing the beauty and sublimity of the virtue the novice is trying to acquire he must be advised to seek it in peace and patience. Anything that is violent does not last. He must be warned, against pre cipitation, anxiety and over-eagerness.(36) We can admit this was the case with Jules Chevalier. In his singleness of purpose in trying to reach a stage of perfection he was perhaps “a sign of contradiction.” His one aim was to live a deep interior life, and to prepare himself for a fruitful apostolate but his efforts often appeared to some of the other students as sanctimonious. However it was by these trials that his spiritual progress was going on apace. Knowing his sensitive nature, we can be sure that he felt the situation keenly, and it must have caused him many heart-burning hours. In an unfinished sermon which he wrote in his third year Scholasticate, in 1849, we gain an intimate insight into his reaction to the opposition of the students to which even if he does not say so, he was obviously referring. We can admire his Christian spirit of forgiveness: “Everyone regards a person who would wilt under an injury as a weak and timid soul. Although it is painful to our corrupt nature, it is heroic to forgive sincerely affronts and offences. No matter how difficult it is, God has a right to expect it of us; indeed He has commanded us to do so, and He has certainly given the example Himself. You may tell the person who offended you that you have forgiven him, even that you love him, but perhaps this is only to avoid further trouble, and fearing that his company may re-awaken angry thoughts, you decide to keep out of his way. What kind of forgiveness and love is this that the mere presence of the one you pretend to love only inflames you with hateful and angry thoughts? You say you love your brother, and yet you try to avoid his presence. ‘That is blindness’. This is not in the spirit of Our Lord’s command. The trouble is you are seeing only the man and not God in him. Even if it is hard to love your enemies you must see God in them. “Suscipe ilium sicut Me.” Our Lord does not say “I wish you to forgive him,” but rather “I wish you to forgive Me. I am the Father of all men; you are my children; you are all in my heart. If a person offends you, he is offending Me; if you forgive him, you are forgiving Me. ‘Quod fecisti uno de minoribus his, mihi fecisti’. I was the man I commanded you to love, and you have hated Me. I commanded you to forgive, but you have not forgiven Me.” Would you persecute your brother who is covered with the blood of your God? Would you strike the one who is held in the arms of Jesus? Jesus loves him, and holds him in His heart. Pierce him and you pierce the Heart of Jesus where he is held.” (37)

Conversion is a personal relationship entered into with the other world.

In the Catholic view, the “other world” has a precise and positive meaning. However, it also includes such a rich series of values, each related to the other, that contact with the “other world” presents many aspects and hence is shown in various ways. In the main they consist of a more direct and personal relationship with the Persons of the Blessed Trinity, with Christ or His Blessed Mother. In Father Chevalier, this, relationship became manifest, by a more intimate, personal friendship with the Person of Christ. The development of his vocation makes it clear that he had the desire to be an apostle even before he realized the preponderant part that Christ has in the work of the apostolate. This desire was the work of the Holy Spirit and in responding to it he drew nearer to Christ. His yearning for the apostolic life and his friendship with Christ were so linked that as he grew in the knowledge of Christ so also he developed his love of the missionary ideal, which became the inspiration and motive force of his spiritual growth. Well does Guibert exclaim: “With what wisdom does divine Providence guide men!” The important stage begins with his “conversion” when he entered into a close union with Christ – a union which in the Divine economy of salvation has its origin in faith. To know Christ is to accept a mystery. The mystery takes first place. Jesus Christ is His own proof, because of His mystery, which is at the same time light. This is what St. Augustine makes clear in commenting on the text of the Gospel. “The light came into the world and the darkness did not comprehend it.” One does not illuminate the light, but it gives witness by dissipating the darkness. We must believe Him on His word. We must follow Him without hesitation or evasions. What He asks and dearly loves is that state of surrender of the soul which obscurely recognises in Him his God. Jesus Christ is absolute truth who becomes accessible to our eyes only by purifying them, and united to our intelligence only by transforming it. “We enter into the Truth”, and the Bible says, that is to say “it does not come to us unless we surrender to it.”(58) Father Piperon shows us the form which this contact with Christ took, while pointing out at the same time its importance in the conversion of Jules. “Under the influence of grace, with which his soul was filled, he saw the priesthood in an entirely new light. He understood more clearly the sublime virtues which it demanded and he resolved to acquire them, even at the cost of great sacrifices. We can easily understand what must have been the progress of such a generous soul who never wavered in carrying out his perfect resolutions.”(39) “From the beginning of his clerical life Father Chevalier had the highest idea of the priestly dignity. He repeated often to himself and to us, his young fellow students that the priest should be another Christ. It is necessary then that he shows forth in his life the great virtues of which Christ has left us such sublime examples. Like Christ, he should be meek and humble of heart; like Him, the priest should love poverty, practice penance, be sympathetic to the weak, be helpful to sinners and bring back the lost sheep on his shoulders to the divine fold. Like his Divine Model, the priest should be ready to suffer all things for the salvation of souls. Neither trials nor sufferings nor persecutions nor the fear of death itself should deter the priest in his service of God. This was the ideal of our young seminarist; this was the ideal that he wished to put into practice by God’s grace during the years of his priestly formation. He recalled unceasingly St, Paul’s exhortation to the first Christians: “let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the origin and crown of all faith, who to win his prize of blessedness endured the cross and made light of its shame, Jesus, who now sits on the right of God’s throne.” (Heb: XII:2) He also wished to fix his eyes on the Author and Perfection of our faith, whose Sacred Heart has loved us beyond all measure and delivered Himself without counting the cost for the salvation of souls.”(40) The thing that strikes one in this interior development is the general design of this plan of the Holy Spirit, which is the unifying principle in this life. The new insight which decisively attracted him corresponds to the ideal which drew him from the time of his childhood and which urged him on still in the same direction: the priesthood seen under the aspect of the apostolate. There is continuity here. The conversion brought about by the greater comprehension of the truth resulted in a deepening of the old ideal, and the new attitude by which the conversion is manifested is a more internal putting into practice of this long cherished ideal. Thus we must pause a moment to consider this new element, in order the better to understand Father Piperon’s description. The aspect under which the Holy Spirit manifested the Person of Christ to Father Chevalier is that Sulpician Spirituality. The purpose for which Christ came on earth was to “establish the Kingdom and the religion of His Father” and in addition to “bring reverence and love…. the two things which make up religion.”(41) Man, who became a sinner in Adam and by his own personal falls, has lost this divine religion. “Our Lord desired to repair this disorder and to re establish on earth the worship and the religion of His Father. That is what appeared on earth like a new “religious” who is not content to be devoted to God, His Father, in His own behalf, but who wishes to spread abroad his religion and to multiply it in the hearts of all men.” (42); Thus the greatest and most ardent desire of the Heart of the Son of God was to glorify continually His Father and to be in perpetual communion with Him, loving Him, thanking Him, beseeching Him and adoring Him unceasingly.(43) Our Lord has asked this grace for us and has merited and obtained it by His life and death, becoming thus the way we must follow in order to return to the reverence and the love of the religion of His Father. After His death Christ has continued by every device of His love to obtain for men this religion towards God, and has given them his very spirit, which is that of God living in Him, to implant in them the sentiments of His Soul, so that spreading abroad in this way His holy religion, He, with all Christians may become one – as it were – one “religious” dedicated to God. While reigning in Heaven, He lives in the heart and in the pen of the evangelists, in the heart and on the lips of the apostles to proclaim everywhere the Kingdom of God, to procure the adoration which His Holy Name deserves and to win for Him perfectly obedient followers and adorers who will reverence Him in spirit and truth.”(44) Our vocation as Christians then, consists of receiving the Spirit of Christ, the spirit of the living God in order to produce in us the sentiments of the Soul of Christ and to form in union with Him and with all Christians, as it were, “one religious”, dedicated to God. It means living interiorly as Jesus Christ the perfect Religious lived. “He pours Himself out on us; He penetrates our being; He takes possession of our soul and fills it with interior dispositions of His own religious Spirit so that His Soul and ours are one.” (45) “It is precisely the state of the “risen” life to which we are called in “imitation of Christ, who wishes that we also should be interiorly risen and conformed in Him. This is why He says that He has communicated to men the glory that the Father had given Him. This glory is the risen state – which He possesses in the Host: That they may be one as We are one: I in them and They in Me. I am in them, having the same effect as You, Our Father, who art in Me, have in Me. I vivify them as You vivify Me. I perfect them as Thou hast perfected Me.”(46) “There is no salvation except in Jesus Christ”, said Father Chevalier. “In Him we live and move and have our being. He is a blazing fire; He divinizes us; He is All. Our real life is only in union with Him. The practical consequence of this is imitation is to be Christ-like. In the practice of the virtues, Father Chevalier looked beyond the virtue itself. His inspiration was the thought that each act of virtue and each virtue was something of Our Lord Himself which is made part of me…we do separate the acts and the virtues from the Person of Christ, and this implicitly in the final analysis that the practice of the virtues of Jesus means union with Jesus.”(47) Father Piperon and Father Chevalier are able to consider perfection only as union with Jesus. That is the sum total of their doctrine on perfection. The degrees of perfection for them are measured by our growth in this union. All the rest is but the preparation, the putting off the “old man”, the freeing of the soul to permit the action of the Holy Spirit so that we may become one with Christ through the influence of His graces: “I live now not I, but Christ lives in me.” (Gal.II.20) This work of Christ in souls is achieved in the Church. “After the generation of the Word and the mission of the Holy Spirit, nothing is dearer to the Father than His Church which He forms each day by means of the Word, in the Blessed Sacrament and by the offering of the Holy Spirit, through whose gifts Jesus Christ is formed in the hearts of the faithful.”(48) “In order to spread His holy religion towards God and to multiply it in our souls, our Divine Lord comes to us and delivers Himself into the hands of His priests as a victim of praise to communicate to us His spirit of Victim; to associate us with His praises and communicate to us interiorly the sentiment of His religion.” Over and above the interior exercises of this religion which are common to all, there are others regarding the special worship and the external public functions. Above all, the supreme tribute we must render to God – that is, the offering of sacrifice. This Sacrifice is the sum total all religion. It is at the same time its epitome and its final perfection; the priest who alone is chosen to offer this public Sacrifice in the church is the one who is the perfect religious man, whose life is a compendium of all religious perfection. This Sacrifice infinitely surpasses all the states of penance and mortification, of love and praise that can be found in the Religious Orders.”(50) And Christ is the High Priest of this Sacrifice. In itself, the title of High Priest expresses only the offering of the Sacrifice. But when one considers the full meaning of the phrase, the expression Jesus Christ, High Priest, presents a more complex idea. In fact “Jesus was the Priest of His Sacrifice and the Victim of His Priesthood; in Him Priest and Victim are one.” Nor is this title to be limited to one happening, for example the Sacrifice of the Cross or that of the Mass. “The State of Victim sums up the whole life of Christ on earth and in heaven,” and the priesthood flows from this state of Victim. Consequently the author continues “His life was but one unique sacrifice whose different parts are made up of the different mysteries, and it is really by the Incarnation that the Word became Man and at the same time, Priest. The work of Christ the Priest is to glorify the Father by sacrificing Himself for the salvation of souls.”(51) The title of High Priest is the sacerdotal expression of the sane reality as the title of Religious common to all the faithful, that is to say, the Word incarnate in the concrete reality of His life and history. And that “in the highest and most exalted quality and grandeur that the Son of God has acquired in our nature by the Incarnation.” The task of the Priest is to reproduce Christ, to give the Holy Spirit to the Church and to sanctify the faithful; to give the Eternal Father while giving Christ Jesus in Communion to the Church.(52) “For,” remarks M. Olier, “the function of the priest is twofold. The one relates to God, whose glory he must procure; the other relates to the neighbour, for whose salvation he must labour.”(53) They must continue the embassy of Christ, whose preoccupation was to teach the unlettered people and the little children the first principles of religion. Hence, the priests preach and make known His secrets, they have the honour to be bearers of the words of Jesus, whom God has sent to His Church, as the unique Society with which He desires to have official relations. The priests then become the protecting walls which beat back the waves of the sea; the ramparts of the world and the Church against the malignity of the demons and the rage of hell. They are the “torchbearers of the Church bearing the light of faith to illumine the world.”(54) What grandeur there is in this priestly office: “It is the greatest of all, surpassing all others. This office of Sanctifier of souls, of offering, of blessing, of Sacrificing God to God. It means having the salvation of the whole universe in one’s hands; the sanctification of every creature, the praise of the whole world, the good works of all the Saints, all the prayer of Paradise at one’s disposal.” (55) In a word, it is the continuation of the work of Christ, the High Priest as described in the epistle to the Hebrews. The priest thus becomes, as it were, a ‘Sacrament’ of Jesus Christ; a ‘Religious’ of God the Father, and as such renders his homage to God. By means of this office he is able to accomplish what would be otherwise wanting in his religion. He becomes a mediator between God and men, who pays to God the tribute of His Church and distributes to this same Church the gifts of God. In a word, this office of the priest is a summary and epitome of all his religion.”(56) “The priest is in the church like another Christ.”(57) “The priest should bear Christ within himself, sanctifying souls and he should be so filled with grace that in the Church he is as Jesus Christ Himself of whom it is said: (l Cor. 15.45) “He was made into a quickening spirit.”(58) “They are chosen by Our Lord to be the living expression in the Church of His Spirit and His Heart, and to do this they must reproduce Him exteriorly in their lives.”(59) The dominant idea of these texts and the great significance of this concept is that the priest of himself is nothing and represents nothing, but he becomes all by his union with Him, Who is in the full sense of the words, God, Mediator, Spouse of the Church, Servant of all in order to save them, Jesus Christ, the High Priest. Father Chevalier has thus expressed this idea of the priesthood; “O Priest, who are you: You are not of yourself, because you are from nothing. You are not for yourself, because you are a mediator between God and man. You do not belong to yourself, since you are the Spouse of the Church. You do not live for yourself, since you are the servant of all; you are not even yourself, since you are God. What are you, O priest? You are nothing – and All.”(60) It follows that the priest must be transformed into Christ, living in Him, vivifying the Church through Him. By his attitude and by his interior sentiments he should be “Jesus Christ Himself…. mingling with us, filling us; with His perfections and His substance, penetrating us with Himself entirely, by expressing in us His divine qualities, so that by this union and intimate penetration by His Substance, He and we become one.” (61) “The very depth of their soul should be transformed, into Jesus Christ, living in the, and vivifying the Church through them.”(62) Because “God wishes to be in us as in the risen Christ…transforming us entirely into Him by the power of His Grace.”(63) This vision of the incorporation of the priest in Christ, and consequently of his absolute dependence on Christ, for his power, his apostolate and his sanctification gives to the thought of Father Chevalier a direction in which the sovereignty of the Priesthood of Christ sheds its light on everything. He thus discovers a new dependance. Without doubt, the priesthood remains what he believed it to be; a grace from God, given to lead souls to Christ. But the apostolate appears now to be a continuation and extension of the activity of Christ Himself, and the Priesthood a grace of intimate and continuous union with Him, from whom follows all priesthood and all apostolate. A union so intimate that the Holy Spirit wishes to transform the priest into the risen Christ, Who lives in him and makes him a vivifying force in the Church. But for that it is necessary for him to lose his own life in “fidelity to the rule, mortification and humility,” (64) in order to live the life of Christ by a unifying imitation of His virtues, above all as a priest. The divine response to these efforts was the elevation of Jules to a greater perfection. Strongly fortified interiorly by the Holy Spirit, Christ came to dwell in his heart by a deeper faith and his charity was more intense. Parallel with this growth, God gave him conformably to the richness of the glory received by his soul, an understanding of the mystery of Christ which was expressed, with some initial hesitation, first of all in the desire of the missions, then in the idea of founding a Community of apostles. Then when he will have seen in the Sacred Heart the love of Christ, which surpasses all understanding (65) His mission will become very clear to him in the “beautiful dream” of the Congregation of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. To complete the summary of Sulpician spirituality which influenced the concept of Father Chevalier it is necessary to say a few words of devotion to the Eucharist and to Our Blessed Lady. Father Olier considers it the special task of the priest to honour the God-Man “as He is in the august Sacrament of the Eucharist, and to renew by this means the sentiments of His Divine Life in the hearts of men.” The centre of sacerdotal formation, according to him is the Holy Eucharist. The risen Christ has become really near to us in this Sacrament, where He takes up a state that is so suited to the priest that every seminarist beginning his seminary life should say to God: “I enter into a state where I make profession of imitating Your Son, the Victim dedicated and consecrated to Your adorable Majesty and destined to die.” (67) We will speak later of Father Chevalier’s devotion to Our Lady during his seminary days. As an example and to sum up his ideas we will quote the conclusion of a sermon for Pentecost, which must date from his earlier years when his attention was attracted towards the Cross rather than to the Sacred Heart. Implicitly he returns to Father Olier as the source of his Marian doctrine; “Spirit of strength and light, of wisdom and counsel, You have perhaps in your immutable designs destined me to continue the work of these generous apostles. Of myself I am but ignorance, darkness and corruption. Come, I implore you, and enkindle in my heart the sacred fire of your love. Consume what there is that is worldly or too human in my soul. Make all my thoughts, my desires and my actions to be only for my divine Saviour, all my glory and my knowledge only for Jesus Crucified. Ah, my God, what use would it be for me to have all the knowledge in the world if I did not know You the Truth and the Life? But where shall I gain this knowledge? In persevering prayer like the Apostles, at the feet of my Redeemer, nailed to the cross. As you have taught us: qui appropinquant pedibus eius, accipient do doctrina eius; “Those who kneel at His feet, will share in His teaching.” It is there that all the saints have gained this knowledge. I see one of Your faithful servants; about to render his soul into the hands of God, asking that his book be brought to him. Those who are caring for him, men whose hearts are occupied with earthly cares, look for the book in vain. Meanwhile, eternity approaches and again ho asks for his book. “But what book is it you want?” they ask him. “My Crucifix” he replies, and he dies with his lips pressed to the Figure of his beloved Master. O Virgin Mother of my God, can I forget you on this solemn festival when you received all the gifts of the Holy Spirit to distribute them to the priests of the New Law as has been so sublimely stated by one of your faithful servants. Adorn my heart with your ineffable favours. Engrave there in characters that will not fade, the love of the Cross. I ask of You favours which I am confident You will obtain for me to love Your Son without reserve and to make Him loved and to love You, Mother, as le deserve to be loved and to spread the glory of Your name. Amen”

CHAPTER V: THE CALL.

The Devotion of Jules Chevalier to the Sacred Heart of Jesus Jules Chevalier received the Tonsure on 29th May, 1847. The same year his father fell seriously ill and during the August holidays of the following year he died fortified by the Sacraments. ”This was a great consolation to me,” wrote Jules. Only a few days after his father’s death, his mother, worn out by the long nursing of her husband, collapsed and was in danger of death. However, thanks to the numerous prayers offered for her, she recovered. Jules returned to Bourges at the beginning of October, 1843 to continue his theological studies. Even at this early stage he suspected that God had great designs in his regard. But what? At the beginning of 1849 he formed a desire to go to the Foreign Missions after his ordination. ”After reading the Annals of the Propagation of the Faith,” he writes, “I felt a strong urge to give my life to the Missions. I was prepared to make any sacrifice to bring the light of the Gospel to the infidels. I went to my spiritual director, Father Ruel, and told him of my wish, but he was not enthusiastic about it. He told me the diocese was short of priests, and to put the idea out of my mind at least for the time being. I submitted to his decision, and decided to await the designs of Providence.”(2) It was in this year, 1849 that the three future priests who were to form the nucleus of the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart found themselves together at the Bourges Seminary – Jules Chevalier, Charles Piperon, and Sebastien Maugenest. Sebastien Maugenest, who had studied the Humanities at Chezal-Benoit, was just beginning his philosophy and Charles Piperon, who had completed his studies at the Junior Seminary at Bourges, arrived four months later to join him. Charles had stayed at home for these four months, as he was worried by scruples about his vocation. He arrived at Bourges on 1st January, 1849. Jules received his Minor Orders on 4th February, 1849.(3) Encouraged by Father Ruel, he began to show a great interest in the welfare of the diocese where his apostolate lay, and he was appalled by the religious indifference of the age. A sermon, which he wrote at this time on “Religious Indifference” deplores the lack of faith and religion amongst the majority of people, the collapse of morality and the licentiousness of society. Faith and prayer are the only antidotes. Another sermon “Mundum gaudebit” which he wrote about this time shows his distress at the spirit of rationalism and materialism which was eating out the Spiritual heart of France. It was the realisation of the sad state of religion in France at the time no doubt the aftermath of the Revolution – that turned Jules’ thoughts away from the Foreign Missions to concentrate on a plan, which was taking shape in his mind, of founding a Congregation of Missionaries for the Home Missions. In a manuscript written in 1859 – five years after he had founded his Congregation is important; “Our little Society”, he wrote, “is not the work of man, but of God. It was born in the Sacred Heart of Jesus under the powerful protection of Mary. May I say that it is only with a sense of repugnance that I trace its history here. I am doing so only under obedience, and for the glory of God.”‘ “Ten years ago, while I was still in the Seminary, reflecting on the sad state of Society in this century, I conceived the idea or rather God inspired the thought in me, to found a Community of Missionary-Priests to help cure the disease. I told Father Ruel, my Spiritual Director about the project. He replied that it was only a “Utopian dream” – an hallucination and the child of a too-lively imagination. Feeling rather foolish, I resolved to think no more about it. However, in spite of myself, the plan kept recurring to my mind, and as each month passed the concept grew clearer and stronger. It was as if a voice kept saying to me: “You will succeed one day. God is in favour of this work.” I intended confiding my plan to a fellow-seminarist, who I thought would be the one to encourage and help me. However I became timid about it and did not mention it to him.” Although Father Chevalier does not mention his name, this seminarist was none other than Pere Maugenest. “Already I was thinking of a suitable place where I might found this new Society, and suddenly Issoudun with its 14,000 souls and its three priests can to my mind.” (5) When we consider this Manuscript of 1859 we cannot help but notice that Father Chevalier wrote of these early inspirations, and how they came about, with a deal of reluctance. He used the strong term – “with repugnance” – as though the subject were too intimate to discuss openly, and told us that he did so only “under obedience.” This reluctance stayed with him till his death. When telling us of his desire to go to the foreign missions he discusses the subject quite openly and naturally, but on the subject of these early promptings and inspirations he speaks only of the last phase, the time when, as we shall see, his plan was completed by the devotion to the Sacred Heart. And because in this latter regard the biography of Saint Margaret Mary had a decisive influence on him, he connects it with the reading of this book. Although he wrote voluminously on the Sacred Heart throughout his life, he regarded this period as something very intimate and sacred, and not to be discussed. When he had told Father Ruel of his desire to go to the missions, his Spiritual Director had discouraged him, but he had said he would think about it, and advised Jules to postpone his decision. On the contrary when Jules mentioned his idea of founding a Congregation of Missionaries, Father Ruel had emphatically told him it was the idea of a visionary, and to put it out of his head immediately. He stressed the fact that it was an impracticable idea. These days would have been days of trial and indecision for Jules Chevalier. With his deep sense of obedience he did not wish to go against the opinion of Father Ruel, yet he was convinced that God had a special work for him to do. This conflict in his soul would account for his timidity about the whole project. Father Piperon has already given us a description of his usually decisive and practical character, which would preclude any tendency to self delusion or visionary flights of fancy. “He was a relentless worker; a solid character. He was endowed with a sound and practical judgment and a strong will which no difficulty could deter. Having made a decision, he resolutely carried it out, and if the obstacles seemed insurmountable for the time being he patiently awaited more favourable circumstances to achieve his object.”(6) It would seem then that this timidity and indecision was out of character with this usually certain and practical young man. After his interview with Father Ruel, why should he feel ashamed of himself, and resolve not even to think of the project again? And why should this same timidity deter him from mentioning his plans to the other young seminarist who he thought, would encourage him? Why should this realistic and practical young student believe that a voice was telling him to proceed with his plan? And yet, try as he might, he could not banish his “dream” from his mind, and in spite of his resolution not to think of it, it was forever in his thoughts. The only possible explanation of this uncertainty, and his consequent unwillingness to discuss or write about it – even in later life – was the manner in which the whole plan evolved. Like all good works in the Church it was the work of the Holy Ghost, and Jules was to be the instrument of that same Holy Spirit in founding a new Congregation. He had no desire to oppose the advice of his spiritual director, but in his prayers and meditations he was daily becoming more convinced that he had a special work to do. “Suddenly,” he tells us, “the good God inspired the thought in my soul to found a Community of Missionary priests to fight the religious indifference of the times.” “But where?” I asked, and the answer came promptly: “At Issoudun.” This inspiration was, as it were, a complete up-surging of his whole soul. It subjected his practical intelligence to its impulse; took complete possession of his will; and became almost an obsession which forcibly dominated his mind. It puzzled the prudent and observant Father Ruel, who was used to Jules’ practicality, and he could only remark – rather bluntly – “It’s an illusion.” Even when Father Chevalier and Father Maugenest found themselves together as curates at Issoudun, it was with difficulty and diffidence that he confided his plan to his fellow priest. Even when the “illusion” had become a reality, he was still loathe to go into intimate detail – even with the co-founder – about what went on in his soul during these Seminary days when his “dream” was taking shape. We can understand the attitude of Father Ruel, the Rector of the College, and Jules’ spiritual director. We have stated previously that when Jules eventually did found the Congregation Father Ruel followed its progress with sympathy and interest, but at this stage it was his duty to treat the proposal with caution and even distrust. After all, Jules was only a student beginning his theology, and his plan of founding a Congregation seemed rather grandiose and ambitious. That his discouragement was not absolute is evident from the fact that he did not forbid Jules to discuss it, even publicly with the other students. Father Piperon writes: “Often he spoke to us of Issoudun, the most un-Catholic and irreligious parish of the diocese. He had in mind the establishment of a Society of Missionaries to work for the spiritual rejuvenation of town and its environs. With his closer friends he used to discuss the proper details of this foundation.(7) He used to speak with conviction as if the Congregation were already established. He did not take him very seriously and regarded the subject as merely an imaginative topic of conversation during recreation. To our smiles of incredulity he would reply: ‘Very well, you will see one day. What I am telling you is the truth.'”(8) Father Ruel had encouraged Jules’ devotion to the Sacred Heart, and willingly gave his permission for the founding of the little association in College, “The Knights of the Sacred Heart”, but he definitely opposed at this stage Jules’ larger scheme for a future foundation of Missionary-priests. He told him to reserve his energy for his work in the diocese later on.(9) His opposition to the plan can be put under three headings: Firstly, he disliked and discouraged the idea that Jules was acting under any special divine inspiration: secondly, he doubted the possibility and practicality of a foundation of this nature; and thirdly he disapproved of the universality – the wide field of operation – of the proposed foundation. After long talks with Father Ruel Jules decided to try and forget his plans, and he no longer discussed it with his fellow students. Father Piperon tells us that at the time he himself had no idea of the intimate thoughts that were going through Jules’ mind. While this drama was being enacted in the mind of Jules, the tract “de Incarnatione” came up for study. The professor supplemented the tract with a treatise on Devotion to the Sacred Heart. Jules was so impressed by it that he copied it out entirely. (10) The manuscript has been preserved. It consists of a clear exposition of the devotion in the rather archaic language of the time, with the answers to the objections proposed. It concludes with a Note and explanation of the Devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.(11) “This doctrine went straight to my heart,” he wrote, “and seemed to penetrate my very being. I tasted new delights.” His confessor gave him about this time the “Life of Blessed Margaret by Mgr. Languet, and it made a profound impression on him.(12) “This book,” he wrote, “gave me the ardent desire to become an apostle of Devotion to the Sacred Heart – a devotion which Our Lord Himself had given to the world, and which He desired to be spread everywhere.”(13) As subsequent history was to prove, this spreading of the Devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus was to be his life’s work – and a special work indeed. Devotion to the Sacred Heart, of course, was not something new to him. We have seen that he practised it as a boy at Richelieu, where special devotions were held in the church before the large painting of the Sacred Heart. His good mother had taught him the devotion at an early age and she had consecrated him to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. At Saint Gaultier the Feast of the Sacred Heart – introduced to the diocese with its proper Mass and Office by Cardinal de Villele – was solemnly celebrated each year with a procession during which the students sang the hymn “Ave Admirabile”.(14) At Bourges also the Feast was celebrated with solemnity, and the Superior frequently made the subject of his conferences the Devotion to the Sacred Heart. Jules Chevalier then, had understood and practised this devotion in its general outlines since childhood, but it was now after studying its theology in class and reading Mgr. Languet’s book on Blessed Margaret Mary, that the devotion took on a special significance for him. Besides gaining a deeper intellectual appreciation of the Devotion, it now captured his heart. “It seemed to penetrate my very being. I tasted new delights.” His predominant wish from now on was to be an Apostle of this Sacred Heart, and to spend himself in spreading the devotion. He regarded this all through his life as special grace and a particular spiritual experience which was to determine the nature of his apostolate. The richness of the Devotion and its efficacy as a powerful means of sanctification were now to be the main subjects of his preaching and priestly activity. He was indeed now a Missionary of the Sacred Heart. The students themselves from this juncture could not help but notice the “exuberance of his soul” in the fervent and familiar way he would speak of the Sacred Heart, and his zeal imparted itself to their own souls. It was not that his ideas of the apostolate wore radically changed, or his previous spiritual convictions altered, but a new grace and light were given him as to the method he would employ in this Apostolate. He would reach the hearts of men by preaching the Love and Mercy of the Heart of Jesus. His basic idea of the apostolate remained the same. It was more than just a human enterprise. It was a life in itself – effective only by union with Christ, for it is Christ who saves. A human effort, certainly, but a supernatural and redemptive effort. The apostle must be a man totally dedicated to his cause under God’s guidance,(15) and this cause is to make known and loved Jesus, our Saviour. That is why Father Piperon describes Jules Chevalier as a young Seminarist who had ever before him Jesus – the Author and Finisher of Faith, Whose Sacred Heart loves us beyond measure. His ideal was to become a true disciple of Christ, to become a worthy priest and apostle, with Jesus living in his soul, so that he could impart that life to others. This conception of his apostolate now linked with his ardent Devotion to the Sacred Heart deter mined the form of his special vocation. The spirit of Love of the Sacred Heart which he was to impart to his new Congregation after 1854, and which was to become the dominant characteristic of the Society, was already fore-shadowed in the little association he formed in the Seminary called “Knights of the Sacred Heart and of Mary.” (Fittingly enough the French title was “Chevaliers du Sacre Coeur et de Marie”) To quote Father Piperon again; “Under the vigilant supervision of the Superiors, and with their permission Jules established and directed – even though he took the lowest place in it – the “Society of Knights of the Sacred Heart and of Mary.” This group had Father Ruel’s wholehearted approval and blessing. He ever obtained an indulgence from the Cardinal for the members to be gained by visiting the Blessed Sacrament in the Chapel of the Garden – a subsidiary chapel in the grounds of the College, where, incidentally, Jules was to offer his first Mass. The forming of this group amongst the students contradicts the charge that Jules was too much of a hermit, who did not welcome the company of his fellow-students. On the contrary, as Father Piperon testifies, they looked up to him and admired the ease with which he could talk on spiritual topics.(18) One who referred to Jules’ activity in his little Society as an apprenticeship for the future religious life in his new Congregation writes: “The end of the Association was the exercise of the clerical virtues and priestly zeal by mutual help and by theological and spiritual discussions.” The members, of this fraternal union used to meet once or twice a month – either out in the grounds or in one of the recreation rooms according to the season. A cordial and frank friendship sprang up amongst them. They took it in turns to speak in an informal way on various subjects of interest, and methods of improving their spiritual lives. Without having any superiority complex any student was invited to point out any external faults in his companions, and suggest ways of improvement. Although the theological and spiritual topics were discussed seriously, a general gaiety pervaded the meetings. If a student who did not belong to the Association, should happen to come along, he was given a warm welcome, and the business in hand was postponed while the object and constitutions were explained to him.(19) One of the chief practices of the Association was to make special visits to the Blessed Sacrament during recreation and on walk-days. With permission they used to take it in turns to make five-minute visits to the Chapel of the Garden during recreation periods, and on walk afternoons they would visit the country house which belonged to the Seminary. Here the Blessed Sacrament was reserved and the visits would be for a quarter of an hour. Special acts of reparation were made to the Sacred Heart, and special intentions prayed for. It was to these visits that the Cardinal granted the special Indulgence on the usual conditions.(20) “It was in the establishment of this small Society,” continues Father Piperon “That Jules began his active apostolate for the Sacred Heart. With St. Paul he could say: ‘Caritas Christi me urget’ – ‘The love of Christ is my motive.’ More than once, when the opportunity arose during recreation or during our walks, we listened intently to him exposing his intimate ideas on Devotion and speaking of the ineffable treasures of love and mercy of the Sacred Heart. His own ardent sentiments communicated themselves to us, and we could feel our hearts beating with his. Happy and tender moments, which passed all too quickly. After sixty years their memory comes back vividly to me with it the regret that I did not profit more therefrom.”(22) Jules’ practice of the Devotion to the Sacred Heart had a marked influence on his external manner and conduct. In October of 1849, he was commencing his fourth year at Bourges and his second in Theology. In April 8th of the following year, 1850, he was ordained a Sub-deacon. Until then, as we have seen before, he had been criticised for being too aloof and serious. “From the day of his ordination to sub-diaconate” states Father Piperon, “a marked change came over him.” Until then, stiff in his bearing, inclined to be taciturn and too serious, he now began to reveal his real nature. With the grace of Orders he seemed to be sure of himself; he became affable, approachable and jovial. This pleasant manner was manifest till the end of his seminary days, and as a consequence he had a greater influence on the students. It was noticeable also that the numbers of Knights of the Sacred Heart increased. As Father Piperon remarks; “They were now quite numerous.”(24) The tension of manner which had followed his “conversion” had been a worry both to himself and his spiritual director, and it had been the cause of mis understanding with the students. Now all this was a thing of the past. “When a soul is master of itself in firm resolution,” writes Father Saudreau, “it avoids all precipitation, anxiety and restless activity.”(25) This grace came to Jules with his sub-diaconate. He was just as strict as ever with himself, but his external demeanour was more relaxed and flexible. “Today after fifty years” writes Father Piperon, “we find him always affable, complaisant and friendly to all who approach him. He has made himself “all things to all men” in order to gain them for Christ. This is the secret of his influence on so many people no matter to which country they belong. No one goes away from him without a word of consolation and good wishes.”(26) Having resolved that his future work would be mainly concerned with the spreading of the Devotion to the Sacred Heart, Jules made it the object of his meditations. He endeavoured to acquaint himself with every aspect of the doctrine and imbued his soul with its spirit. We must remember that this evolution in his spiritual life was taking place during the period when he was struggling with the idea of founding a Society of Missionary-priests, and it was only natural that the two great desires – that of spreading devotion to the Sacred Heart and that of founding a Society should become fused as the one ideal. He realised that Devotion to the Sacred Heart was a powerful means of sanctification, and offered great scope as an efficacious means of apostolate. He would spread this devotion through his future Congregation. What part can a particular devotion play in the sanctification of our souls – in our spiritual progress? All through his training, his spiritual masters had impressed on him the necessity of having an intimate knowledge and love of the Interior Life of Jesus, and now in his devotion to the Heart of Jesus he had before him a real personal Object of love and adoration. He wrote in his “School of the Sacred Heart”: “The end of this devotion is to offer love and adoration to the human Heart of flesh of Our Lord – the symbol of His infinite love for men. By uniting our own hearts with His, we will burn with the fire of divine love, and be one in spirit with Him in all things.” The devotion to the Sacred Heart then was not just an aid to Jules’ spiritual life; it informed that life, became, as it were, its very essence. It epitomised all his previous ideals and convictions – His desire for union with Christ; his desire for personal sanctification; his desire to heal the spiritual wounds of the people. The treasures of Love and Mercy that were to be found in the Heart of Jesus were the answers to the spiritual needs of the masses. Union with that Sacred Heart brings us life, salvation and grace – the joy and peace of mutual friendship. Father Olier had written: “Union with Christ is our vocation, our perfection. In and by the love of His Heart we are able to imitate His virtues and make ourselves like unto Him. By this means it is possible for us to put into practise his divine injunction: “Be ye perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect.” Never abandon this divine love, it will attract you as it did Mary Magdalen. On thing is necessary, He told her. That was to love Him. Unite yourselves to the sentiments and dispositions of Jesus, which repose in His loving Heart. Your meeting-place with your Lover will be in the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar where He will favour you with the abundance of His love – as a Spouse to his beloved.”(27) In union with Jesus, Love is the bond.(28) Live in this love, for it is the nourishment of the soul, which Jesus Himself has prepared.”(29) Find Him also in your daily exercises which are the rendezvous of lovers.(30) The love of Sacred Heart is your life.” The devotion of Jules Chevalier to the Sacred Heart was not based on merely pious sentiment, but was strictly in accord with the approved theology of the Devotion and the official proclamations of the Church. The professor had dealt with the subject historically and canonically in class. In Jules’ Notes we find the following: “The French bishops, meeting in Council in 1769, pointed out the three-fold end of this Devotion, as revealed by Our Lord Himself to Blessed Margaret Mary Alacoque. They are the same ends or objects of the Devotion approved by “Pope Clement XIII in the decree which extended the Feast of the Sacred Heart to Poland. This threefold end was: (1) To remind the faithful of the Infinite Love of Christ for them, and to stir up love for Him in their own hearts; (2) To procure for them an abundant share in the fruits of Redemption; (3) To make reparation to the Divine Heart of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament – especially during the Octave of Corpus Christi for the injuries inflicted on Him by mankind. The professor had told them; “It is useful and salutary to honour this Divine Heart in a special manner, especially in those days of religious indifference, when men need to be drawn to Christ by an external and sensible devotion, which will touch their hearts. The direct and ordinary effect of this Devotion is an increase of grace, of piety and of perfection in the soul and at the same time it is an excellent means of worshipping the adorable person of the Lord made Flesh and His human Heart so full of love and mercy. All the Feasts in honour of Our Lord have as their material object the Person of the God-Man. The formal object of the devotion to the Sacred Heart is the eminent Divine and Human Love of Christ symbolised by His Human Material Heart. Its true and real foundation is in the Hypostatic Union of the Lord with the human Heart of Christ – united in the immense love of Our Lord for men. In teaching this doctrine the professor was only reiterating the truths taught in the diocese of Bourges – at least over the previous twenty-five years. On 1st March, 1825 a special Votive Mass and Office in honour of the Sacred Heart had been authorised for use in the diocese of Bourges by the Council of the Vicars Capitular – the See being vacant at the time. The official document bears the signature – “Cassot-Vicar Capitular.” In the Introit of the Mass we capture immediately the spirit of the Feast: “Venite exultemus Domino diem festum celebrantes in honorem Amantissimi Cordis Jesu Christi, in quo sunt omnes thesauri caritatis et misericordiae Dei, Cujus amore et passione salvati sumus. Ipsi laus, Ipsi gloria, Ipsi imperium cordium in aeternum.” In the Gradual we are invited to seek refuge in the Heart of Jesus, “as the doves find shelter in the recesses of the rocks.” “Ad hoc enim vulneratum est Cor Jesu ut in Illo habitare possimus.” The Sequence exalts the splendours of the Heart of Christ – the Victim of love, the joy and consolation of men, the glory of the Blessed Trinity. For the Son of God has united Himself to this Heart, the Holy Spirit finds His repose there; the Father His happiness. The mandate of 18th Mary, 1834 by Archbishop Guillaume-Aubin de Villele making the feast obligatory for the diocese contains doctrine very similar to Father Chevalier’s writings, proof no doubt that he had studied it carefully. Several passages are worthy of quoting: After tracing the history of the devotion in certain parts of the diocese where it had reawakened the faith of the people, the Archbishop gives the reasons why he was extending the Feast to the whole diocese: “In the midst of the tragic atmosphere of irreligion in which we live, when we are witnessing the decline of Faith and the growth of sacrilegious impiety and licentiousness which is affecting all classes of society, even our youth; in this Godless age when we see the Lord and His Christ attacked on all sides, we look for a powerful and salutary remedy, an antidote to the poison of false doctrines and immoral customs of the age. This “human wisdom”, which does not look beyond the things of this earth, and which is distorted by pride and the unbridled reign of the passions, has seduced the people by offering them hopes that can never be fulfilled and happiness that can never be found. This moral scourge which is afflicting France today is much more formidable than the recent plague which ravaged the city of Marseilles. It is with supreme confidence then in the Adorable Heart of Jesus, Who has entrusted to us the care of His flock that we consecrate our diocese and our own person to this same loving Heart – asking Him for protection from this general contagion. Let us make our home in this Heart, there to find refuge from the Vengeance of God. It is from the Heart of Jesus, burning with the flames of love and mercy, that the world receives its light, and our souls their warmth and ardour. It was in this Sanctuary of Love and Mercy that all the divine plans of our Redemption were conceived. It is in this haven of peace and happiness that we can find a sure refuge from the wiles of the enemy, and enjoy the precious consolation and joy of our union with God.” “The Devotion to the Sacred Heart is as old as Christianity itself, since it is the devotion to the Person of the Incarnate Lord – to which this Divine Heart is hypostatically united. The object of the Feast is to bring before our minds the Infinite Love of God for men. It behoves us therefore to celebrate it with dignity, and to unite ourselves intimately with the Heart of Christ, according to the exhortation of the Apostle “Let that mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus.” The new Office expresses the same sentiments: The richness of the Heart of Jesus, which is the Salvation of the World, and the necessity of our union with Our Blessed Lord. The beautiful prayer, the “Ave Admirabile Cor Jesu”, was incorporated in the Office and Father Chevalier adopted it in the official prayers of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart.(31) The invitatory begins: “Jesum Christum qui dilexit nos, venite adoremus.” The lessons are taken from the Epistle of St. Paul to the Ephesians, the theme of which is the Love of God for us through the gift of His Son, and our incorporation with Him. “That Christ may dwell by Faith in your hearts, that being rooted and grounded in charity, you may be able to comprehend with all the Saints what is the breadth and the length the height and the depth; to know also the love of Christ which surpasseth all knowledge that you may be filled unto all the fullness of God.” (Ephes. III, 17-19) To revert to the book of Bishop Languet on the Life of Blessed Margaret Mary which had such a profound influence on Jules. This was really the only work to that time on the life of the Saint and the Devotion to the Sacred Heart as revealed to her. (The better known “Life and Works” published by the Sisters of Paray-le-Monial was not printed till 1867.) Jules tells us that after reading the book he determined to become an apostle of the Devotion to the Sacred Heart. The main part of the work is a history of the Revelations and extracts from the writings of the Saint. The Preface is a treatise by Bishop Languet himself called “The object and end of the Devotion to the Sacred Heart.” After dealing scientifically with the miracles and their authenticity the author treats of the history of the devotion and gives his own personal reflections. “Devotion to the Sacred Heart is devotion to the whole person of Christ and Love is the principle. When we honour His Heart we are honouring His whole Personality, just as when we offer our hearts to Him we are offering our whole being.” After mentioning various Saints who had particular devotion to this or that aspect of Our Lord’s Personality, he continues: “Is it astonishing that a soul dedicated to a life of contemplation, as was the religious of whom I write, should have penetrated to the very Heart of Jesus – seeing there the source of all His merits, all His virtues, His entire Will and His sentiments. She was not the first of the Saints who were noted for their devotion to the lovable qualities of the Human Christ; others well before her had been caught up in the fire of this divine love – which after all, is the consolation of the Saints. But Margaret Mary has called our attention in a special way to this Sacred Heart of Jesus, as the fount of all His desires, His affections. His feelings, that Heart which beats in Heaven for the glory of God, and which beat on earth for the souls of men whom He made His brothers, for whom He was born at Bethlehem and for whom He died on Calvary. The infinite love of Jesus Christ for His Eternal Father and his tender love for us his creatures is the object of this devotion of which I write. From our point of view the end of the devotion is to return this love and to dedicate our lives to it. He has loved us beyond measure. Let us in return love Him with our whole heart, our whole mind and with all our strength.” “Happy is the soul who has found the way to the Heart of Christ, and so opens that way to others. ‘He who loves fulfills the Law’, says the Gospel, and in the love of the Sacred Heart we have the admirable means of complying with the precept, and achieving our salvation. Plenitudo legis, dilectio.(32) For Jules Chevalier then this love of and devotion to the Sacred Heart permeated all his religious thought and activity. The Sacred Heart to him is the Incarnate Word of God, the High Priest of the New Law, the Redeemer, the Friend of mankind. In this Heart were all the treasures of Love and Mercy. As Father Piperon saw it, the synthesis of all devotions to Our Lord was the Devotion to His Sacred Heart; “He was constantly thinking of the Author and Finisher of Faith, Jesus the High Priest, whose Heart has loved us beyond measure and has consumed Itself for our salvation.”(33) We might ask ourselves why Almighty God chose this particular period of Jules’ life – when he was still an inexperienced student – to introduce him so intimately to the devotion to the Sacred Heart and to convince him that he was to be its apostle in a special way. Would it not have been better to wait till he was a fully-developed man, an ordained and experienced priest? The Holy Spirit does nothing by chance, and these years in the Seminary were years of preparation for his special mission. The Hand of Providence is clearly evident in the course of subsequent events, the action of the Holy Spirit obvious in every step from now on. Gold is tried by fire; Jules’ vocation was tried by his own special trials and difficulties during these Seminary days at Bourges. God directed and prepared him gradually. He gently arranged the circumstances one by one, which enabled Jules eventually to fulfil his heart’s desire, his “beau reve”. These days of preparation in the Seminary were days of grace and encouragement. He told us, says Father Piperon, of his future plans. “When I am a priest, I intend to ask some of my zealous confreres to join me in forming a Society to spread devotion to the Sacred Heart.”(34) “I already had in my mind two of my fellow-students who seemed to me admirably suited for my plan, but fearing they might ridicule the idea at this stage, I kept my ‘beau reve’ to myself. I confided it to no one except the Sacred Heart of Jesus and His Immaculate Mother.”(35) The original idea of founding a Society of Missionary-priests was conceived as a counter to the appalling religious and spiritual state of the nation. The priests would work to cure this social disease. As the idea developed in his mind we notice there is a greater tendency to emphasise the positive nature of the apostolic work: the personal sanctification of the future members, who would preach not so much on the evils of the time, as on the infinite Love and Mercy of the Heart of Christ. The remedy would be stressed more than the disease. The loving Heart of Christ would be presented to the people as the solution to their religious indifference and hostility. Devotion to the Sacred Heart would be the badge, the pledge, the insignia of the Society, the members of which would be devoted exclusively to the task of spreading this devotion.(36)

In his memories, when writing of this period of formation, Father Chevalier merely mentions the main idea of his future plan, i.e. to found a Society of Missionary priests who would work for the spiritual reformation of the people. At the time of writing, the Society was already well known and he did not go into detail about motives. However, we can be sure that his first concern would have been not only to found a Society of priests, but a Society of “pious and zealous” priests – as he mentioned to his confreres, priests, moreover, who would be willing to make Devotion to the Sacred Heart the main work of the Society. It was to be a Society with a special aim and purpose. Intensely preoccupied, at the time with the work of his own personal sanctification, he was convinced that the priest before he could be a true apostle of Christ, must himself be a holy and sincere disciple of Our Lord. He would form such a group of priests into a new Congregation, and love of the Sacred Heart would be the spirit and strength of that Society. Anticipating our story a little, Father Piperon tells us that this spirit informed and permeated the little Congregation from the very beginning at Issoudun. The Founder and his first Confrere had only one desire – one ambition – to live as perfectly as possible the life of Christ Himself, the life of the Supreme Priest and to reproduce in themselves the sentiments of His Divine Heart. How could one love the Heart of the Crucified Christ, unless one was completely in love with and dedicated to the God-Man Himself. How could one impart this love to others unless he were deeply steeped in it himself? Some have been inclined to think that the really effective intention of founding’ a Society with the particular object of honouring and working for the Sacred Heart came to Jules after Seminary days, but we can find no evidence either in events or his writings to support this view. From the time of his ordination to his appointment to Issoudun the project seems to have been slumbering. It was only when he was appointed to Issoudun and found himself with his fellow-curate, Father Maugenest, that he felt convinced that the hand of Providence was directing him to the fulfilment of his “beau reve”. Here he was at the very town that had played such a prominent part in his dream, and with the very companion of former days to whom before all others he wished to confide his plans.(37) Father Piperon asks the question: did Jules have a clear idea when he came to Issoudun of God’s designs regarding his Foundation and of the spirit which would pervade it? We are sure he did. The motives, born of the convictions of student days, leave no doubt in our mind, Reviewing the history of the project to this juncture – for as yet still just a project – we can state that Jules was firmly convinced of the desirability of a Society of Missionaries dedicated to the cause of the Heart, and that God wished him to be the Founder of this Society. But we must realise that to undertake such a stupendous project and put it into effect, he still had to make the important and final decision himself. Would he go ahead with the idea? Knowing the difficulties and the inevitable heart-breaks that would be involved, it would have been easy to forget the whole plan, and leave it just as a beautiful dream. It was only natural that he would have misgivings on the success of the plan, and doubts as to his own qualifications to implement it. We cannot say that to date he had received much encouragement. Father Ruel, his Director, had told him it was a “utopian ideal” and an “illusion”. His reaction to this was to feel discomfiture and to try to forget the whole thing. The students had been inclined to laugh at the idea. Although he had decided to be an apostle of the Sacred Heart, was it to be as the Founder of a Religious Congregation? Nothing he had read in the Life of Blessed Margaret Mary, in the revelations of Our Lord to her, or in his own ardent desire to spread the devotion contained a clear or definite invitation to him to found a Congregation. He was troubled by the conflict between the promptings of his heart and the advice of his spiritual director. He submitted to this advice, and ceased speaking of the plan to his confreres, and entrusted his secret to the Heart of Jesus and His Immaculate Mother. He became timid about mentioning it even to Sebastien Maugenest who, he thought, would be an admirable recruit. However, little by little, he became certain of God’s design in his regard, and the more he meditated on the Sacred Heart, on the richness of the Devotion, the more he became convinced that God wished him – Jules Chevalier, with his limitations and weaknesses – to be the Founder of a new Congregation in Church. He made his decision, and awaited with trust and confidence the moment when God would show him how to realise his plan. Providence had already brought him into contact with the two persons who were to eventually help him to achieve his “dream”, although none of them knew it at the time. In the Seminary, Sebastien Maugenest had attracted his attention as an ideal helper, although, as we have seen, he became faint-hearted about confiding in him. He later wrote of him: “Sebastien Maugenest was zealous, good, pious, sure of himself, and devoted. He had an extraordinary memory, and was no mean orator. His speech was simple, and often eloquent. You would never hear him say anything bombastic or common-place. He seemed to speak more to the heart than the mind. He had a flair for detail, and never failed to impress an audience.”(39) Charles Piperon, who was regarded by Jules as a likely candidate for his new Congregation was a different character. He did not have the eloquence or the exterior appearance of Father Maugenest, and at the beginning of his Major Seminary days, he was even doubtful about his vocation – a doubt which delayed his entry by a few months. However, Jules regarded this sincere and holy young man as his “second candidate”. The following conversation reported by Father Piperon himself, was a prophecy of things to come. “One day at one of the meetings of the Association of the Sacred Heart one of the students (it was himself, Charles Piperon) remarked rather naively that he did not feel greatly attracted by the ordinary ministry and that he would prefer to live and die as a religious. Jules Chevalier regarded him with a serious and searching look, and said; ‘My dear friend, guard your vocation carefully. It is a precious gift of God to you.’ ” Father Piperon continues; “Were those words and that significant look a prediction of the future?” Jules never mentioned the incident again, and Charles Piperon soon forgot about it. “However”, says Father Piperon, “after five years when, in the ways of Divine Mercy, that student was to become one of the first companions of the Founder in the new Society, he recalled the words and the look and he never forgot them.”(40) After Jules Chevalier’s ordination as a sub-deacon, both Sebastien Maugenest and Charles Piperon left the Seminary. In August Sebastien left for the novitiate of St. Sulpice as he wished to join that Order, and Charles in the following January was granted leave of absence on account of sickness. Thus Jules found himself alone with his dream of the future, till his ordination to the Priesthood on 14th June, 1851. “I celebrated my First Mass”, he wrote in his Memoirs, “in the little Chapel of the Garden dedicated to the Blessed Virgin. At the sacred moment of the Consecration the grandeur of the Mystery and the thought of my own unworthiness penetrated me so deeply that I broke into tears. I needed the encouragement of the priest who was assisting me to complete the Holy Sacrifice. O unforgettable day! Why did I not die at the foot of the Altar after my Mass? How many faults would I not have avoided. At that happy hour Heaven was mine, while today on account of my sins I tremble for my salvation. O Sacred Heart of Jesus, have pity on me. Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, protect me.”(41) All through his life Father Chevalier was to build his interior, spiritual life on the firm foundations laid during these important days of the Seminary. Till his death he persevered along the lines of the resolutions he took as a Seminarist at Bourges. The particular form of his spirituality and the nature of his devotion in these important days of training characterised his priestly and religious life to the end. Father Piperon has given formal testimony of that, and the Founder’s writings bear it out. At the end of his life, looking back over the distant past, he would tell how God’s grace directed him, and how he regarded his first retreat at Bourges as the date of his conversion. He allowed his soul, according to the counsel given by Father Lallement, to be directed by the Holy Spirit. It was a life of self-renunciation, a daily struggle against sin, imperfections and distractions. It was a life of obedience, recollection and prayer, always striving for greater union with Our Lord. Jules had no other interests, no other desires, than those which were to lead him to God and the Altar. He developed a calm and patient nature awaiting the fulfilment of God’s will. Ever before him was the Person of Jesus, the High Priest. He sought to make himself “another Christ”, to be the Shepherd of souls as He was, and to be prepared to endure hardships even death itself for His sake. His great desire was to lose himself in the very Heart of Christ, that Heart which has loved us beyond measure. Charity was his conspicuous virtue even in the days when his manner seemed aloof and the students found him difficult. He was kind on all occasions not only to his confreres, but to the poor and sick, and his desire to go to the missions was prompted by his sympathy and pity for the poor people who knew not Christ. After his sub-deaconate this charity blossomed forth into an affable, smiling manner which won all hearts to him, and distinguished him right through his life. His love of the Church and his affection for the Holy See made him the true Catholic in thought and deed. In all his sentiments and devotions he made sure he was acting in accordance with the teaching of the Church, especially in his love and devotion to the Sacred Heart. As stated originally the Sulpician training is evident in all his spirituality: the principles of Father Olier, the lectures of Father Mollevaut, the advice of Father Ruel. The fundamental principle of this spirituality is the union of one’s will with the Will of God through the love of his Divine Son. “Enter into union with Him through love” was Father Olier’s dictum. “Live by love since it is the nourishment of the soul. Where can the soul gain its strength in the practice of virtue; where can it gain strength to carry the Cross except in the love of Jesus.” For Jules this love became his life, his ardent passion. He strove so ardently for this union of love with his Divine Master that, as Father Piperon testifies, the students found it hard to find even the slightest fault in his conduct. It was only natural that this love should find its expression in his ardent devotion to the Sacred Heart. He had established in the Seminary his little Sodality “Knights of the Sacred Heart and of Mary” not only for mutual help in the quest of virtue, but mainly to honour those two Sacred Hearts. He had asked Our Lady for just two graces – to love Her, and to love unreservedly Her Divine Son. And God rewarded him with many graces in return – his conversion, his singleness of purpose in seeking holiness, his repugnance to sin, his spirit of trust and confidence, and finally his effective desire to found the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. This analysis of the various stages of his Vocation at least helps us to understand better his strong character and to appreciate the difficult road that he had to traverse. It likewise reveals the courageous nature of the man who had still to face many a trial in the realisation of his dream, the founding of the Society, the fulfilment of his special mission in the Church. Jules Chevalier left the Seminary three days after his ordination, and was immediately appointed as Curate to the parish of Yvey-le-Pre, at the other end of the diocese. He had hoped it would be Issoudun, but in God’s design – not yet. In the not so far distant future Issoudun was to be his home, the field of his labours, the cradle of his beloved Congregation. No wonder he never wanted to leave Issoudun.

CHAPTER VI: Early Ministry, First Appointments

The parish of Ivey-le-Fre is in the northern part of the diocese of Bourges, hidden away in the Sancerrois Mountains, with the river “La Petite Sauldre” flowing peacefully by. It is a very old town, boasting in the mid-fifties of the last century, of a population of about 2500. It belonged to the shire of La Chapelle d’Angillon, and ecclesiastically, to the deanery of Sancorre. The steel industry mainly supported its inhabitants. “The parish priest of this good Christian parish,” wrote Father Chevalier, “was a holy, prudent and zealous man. He was a great help to me in these early days of my priestly ministry.” Father Piperon has noted that these early days at his first parish were difficult, as Father Chevalier contracted a severe cyst on the knee, and had to spend the first two weeks in bed. In his Memoirs Father Chevalier recalls two interesting old characters that he met during his short stay of seven months at Ivey-le-Pre. The first was an old retired Oratorian, almost a hundred years old, Father Delpoux by name. He had lived through the terrible days of the Revolution arid was now staying at the home of a Monsieur de Montreuil, whose teacher he had been. “I used to visit the old man often,” recalls Father Chevalier, “and found him an entertaining old character. He used to boast of the fact that he had seen Voltaire. “Were you in Paris when he died?” I used to ask. “Oh yes, of course.” “Do you know how he died?” That was the invitation to tell once again the story of the last moment of the dying philosopher – a story, he said, that he had from the very lips of the woman who attended him. The other old gentleman, Monsieur Chedeau, was a former doctor almost as old as Father Delpoux. He was a dyed-in-the-wool Jansenist. ‘Every time I tried to get him to go to Confession he would reply: ‘Not now, later on. God expects you to go to Confession only when you are dying.’ I was pleased to hear after I left the parish that he did receive the last Sacraments before his death.”(l) According to the diocesan Register, Father Chevalier left Ivoy-le-Pre on 21st January, 1852 for Chatillon-sur-Indre at the other end of the diocese in the Touraine district, his native territory. The little town of about 3500 people was situated on a hill to the left side of the River Indre. On the summit of the hill stand the picturesque ruins of an old XIth Century chateau with its two imposing towers. The church which must be at least a century older, with its remarkable sculpturing is not without its beauty. A fine public square which commands a panoramic view of the neighbourhood, and an attractive promenade around the village add to the charm of the place. The main industry of the town was the fabrication of textile material. The Parish Priest was the Abbe Legay, a priest trained in the post-Revolution period after the seminaries had been reopened. Owing to the scarcity of priests he had, right from the outset, been overburdened with work, and now, even though only 57 years of age, he was worn out and asked the bishop for a curate. When he left the parish in 1855, he was appointed as one of the Canons of the Bourges Cathedral. Father Chevalier applied himself with great zeal and devotion to his parochial duties. Father Piperon has written; “Even today after 46 years, the young curate is still remembered in Chatillon.”(2) On account of the sickness of the parish priest, most of the work fell on his shoulders. “I was enthusiastic about my work,” he later wrote, “concentrating mainly on the sick, the poor and the children.” Some of the well-to-do parishioners came to his aid in his endeavour to help the poor. He mentions by name Madame la Contesse de Bryas and Madame de Chauderoy. Later on these good people also helped him generously when he was founding the young Congregation at Issoudun. “When I arrived at Chatillon,” he writes, “I noticed that the church was deserted during the day, although the population was Christian and quite good. The good God inspired in me the thought of forming a Guard of Honour to the Blessed Sacrament. I submitted the plan to the parish priest, and got his ready approbation. I arranged with the parishioners to have half-hour watches throughout the day from 9 o’clock in the morning till six at night, so that there would always be someone there to adore Our Lord in the Sacrament of His Love. At the time of writing,” he adds, “I am told that this custom is still in vogue. May God be praised.”(3) It is here probably that we find the origin of the idea which he cherished right from the beginning of founding a Congregation of religious women parallel to the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart of which he dreamed.(4) In order to persevere in his piety, and to increase his priestly zeal he decided while he was here in Chatillon, to become a Member of the Third Order of St. Dominic. Father Meunier, the parish priest of Orsennes received him in the name of Pere Lacordaire, the Provincial of the Dominicans. The Provincial granted him the power to give the habit of the Third Order to other people whom he judged worthy. In transmitting to him this faculty, Pere Lacordaire traced for him in his own handwriting the rules which should guide him in his choice of postulants. In his own letter of admission (13th October, 1853) he was given the Third-Order name of Dominic. The salary of curates in those impoverished times was a mere pittance. We have found a few references on the back of a notebook regarding his finances: “My salary,” the note says, “is 400 francs. I give 300 francs from this to the Parish Priest for board and keep and let him have my Masses on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation. In January (1853) the Parish Priest told me the salary would be raised to 800 francs, so I gave him all my Mass intentions,” Half of this was paid in silver, and the rest would come from Mass stipends. The final arrangement was that he would be paid 800 francs in silver, and Mass intentions would go to the Parish priest. During Father Chevalier’s second year at Chatillon he was surprised to receive a letter from the Archbishop transferring him to Aubignysur-Nere. The leave-taking was not without its regrets as the people had become fond him, and he of them. ”At Chatillon,” he wrote in later life, “I was very happy, I was trying to do God’s Will and the will of my Superiors. I had no desire to go elsewhere.”(6) His successor was a Father Tamisier, who later on was to go to Issoudun as curate. Aubigny was not quite as big as Chatillon and not as picturesque. It had a beautiful promenade lined with large fir-trees. There were few traces of its past history left, except a very old church, and a curious old Gothic home with some notable sculpturing. The fire which raised the town in 1512 left very little else. We might say it was even an ugly looking town with badly built dwellings. The river Nero and the main highway from Paris to Bourges ran through it, and the two inns “Lion d’Or” and “Le Boeuf” were sufficient to accommodate any visitors. However, from the religious point of view the town had an excellent name, and was regarded as one of the best of the small parishes of the Cher district, if not of the diocese. The new curate found plenty of scope there for his priestly zeal. Practically all the parish duties were his responsibility and he showed himself equal to the position. “He very quickly won the esteem and affection of the people.”(7) The parish priest was a very old man, Abbe Louis Quentin. Father Chevalier wrote of him: “He was a Saintly old man – and spent his life and himself in the service of souls.” He was born on 10th February, 1790, and had been looking after the parish of Aubigny since 1820. He directed it with as much success as zeal. He was a talented priest with a deeply apostolic faith. He had founded several pious associations in the parish and they were all flourishing. However, he contracted an incurable disease which confined him to his room, and having as curate another sick priest, he asked His Eminence Cardinal du Pont, Archbishop of Bourges, to send him a young and energetic priest who could care for the parish. “I do not know,” wrote Father Chevalier, “why or how the choice fell on me, but I was transferred to Aubigny on 14th October, 1855” This date was the date of his nomination, as he mentions elsewhere that he arrived at Aubigny on 20th October, 1853(10) and the parish register gives the date of his installation as Saturday, the 22nd October. The sick curate was probably Father Louis Gogin, who stayed on in the parish, but could do little external work. In his Notes Father Chevalier writes: “I did my best to carry on the good work that had already been done, for girls and boys, of Christian Mothers and of the men were all well attended. Every Sunday and major Feast day about 150 young men with their the patronage of Saint Liguori, used to meet after Vespers. We used to go together to make a visit to the various Calvaries which line the roadways of the neighbourhood. We would then return to the church where I would deliver a short sermon and give Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament. He held on the Feasts of Corpus Christi, the Assumption, Rogation days, and during the Month of May. The Feast of the Sacred Heart was celebrated with special ceremonies. It was edifying and encouraging to see the very large crowds.(9) The first sermon he preached to the select band of men who called themselves the Liguorians was on the first Sunday of Advent, 27th November, 1853. The sermon has been preserved. After expanding the text of St. Paul’s Epistle in the Mass of the days “Let us abandon the works of darkness,” he congratulates the men on their piety and initiative. “When I came to this parish” he says “the news that there was a group of men who had placed themselves under the special protection of a Saint in order to increase their faith and piety, filled me with inexpressible joy.”(l0) He particularly cherished the memory of one very saintly old man in Aubigny, Monsieur Leclerc. His charity was outstanding and his home seemed to be a haven for the poor. His only son – saintly like himself – had distinguished himself in the intellectual milieu in Paris by his lecturing and writings. He numbered amongst his close friends such men as Louis Veuillot, and Montalembert. Just before Father Chevalier had come to Aubigny this remark able young man had taken ill and had returned to his father’s home to recouperate. He was a model in virtue to the townsfolk, and each day he would spend several hours in the church. He took a special interest in the poor, and was referred to by them as “the saint.” “Unfortunately,” says Father Chevalier, he died just before I arrived at Aubigny, but his name was on every tongue. The whole town came out for his funeral, and the townsfolk eagerly sought fragments of anything that had belonged to him to keep as relics. His father had a special funeral chapel built over his tomb, and every day the old man would go to the cemetery to recite the prayers for the dead, followed by the Magnificat and the Te Deum to thank God for having given him such a noble son. I used often go with him and join with him in the prayers.” In another extract from his Memoirs Father Chevalier has given us a touching account of the last hours of his parish priest, Father Queritin: “The health of my dear and revered Parish Priest was declining day by day. Fearing he was close to death, he asked me to give him the Last Sacraments. Many of the parishioners were present at the anointing, and even then, weak though he was, he could not resist the opportunity of commenting on the five senses of the body, publicly confessing that he had offended God by these gifts and asking pardon for his sins. He expressed sorrow for any neglect of his parochial duties. Tears were in his eyes and the parishioners could not hide their grief. Towards evening he called me close to him and gave me this advice. ‘My dear Abbe, I am about to go to God, and I would like you, a priest, to profit by the mistakes I made during my priesthood. Looking back I can see that I spent too much time looking after the people who didn’t need my attention as much as other poor souls who did. I have been inclined to give my time to looking after the devout and the pious – especially the women, instead of getting out amongst the men and youth, seeking the lost sheep. It is easy for priests to spend their time the more comfortable way, by busying themselves with the devout, especially the devout women. This way they delude themselves that they are really busy – haven’t a moment to spare – while the main work of their apostolate of their apostolate is being neglected. My son, avoid that pitfall. Prefer to get out among the children, the poor, the ignorant and the lowly. Don’t go hankering after the rich and the worldly smart-set’. I knelt down beside his bed; he stretched out his feeble hand and gave me his blessing, a few hours later he breathed his last.”(12) Several of Father Chevalier’s sermons which he wrote whilst at Aubigny are still in existence. There is the one already referred to which he preached to the Liguorians; there are two on Our Blessed Lady, and the other four are practical instructions on “False Devotion”; “The dangers of the Carnival”, “The necessity of penance,” and “Dangers of false opinions.” The Abbe Quentin died on the 15th August, 1854, and Father Chevalier looked after the parish till the 1st October when the new parish priest Pere Larbaletrier was installed. The main reason of his presence in Aubigny no longer applied, and Father Chevalier expected a new appointment in the near future. Although, as we have said, the cherished plan of founding his Society may have been slumbering during these first few years after Ordination, it was certainly not dead. “My project of founding the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart was forever before my mind,” he wrote, “and for some reason, Issoudun always seemed associated with it. Perhaps the fact that it had 15,000 souls with only the one parish and three priests influenced my thoughts. Here was ready-made field of apostolate, as the place was regarded as the most backward in the diocese on account of its spirit of irreligion and indifference. I really thought I would be appointed priest in charge of some small independent parish, as the diocese was short of priests.” It was not rare to see young priests even after two or three years put in charge of some small parish or chaplaincy. Father Piperon for example, on account of his shy nature and diffidence about parish work, went straight into a chaplaincy at Bourges after Ordination. The expected letter from the Archbishop was not long in coming. Before opening it he fell on his knees and made an act of resignation to God’s Will. “Dear Lord”, he prayed, “I happily accept in advance Your Divine Will, whatever place to which I am posted.” “I slowly opened the letter and before I could read the first few lines I could see the word – Issoudun – underlined. Yes, I had been appointed to the town I had dreamed of so much – Issoudun. I hastily looked up the Ordo to see what priests were there. Imagine my surprise when found that my fellow-curate there was to be none other than Sebastian Maugenest the former student of college days to whom I thought of confiding my plan.”

“And so I set out for Issoudun. I arrived there on Saturday, 14th October 1854 – just twelve months after my arrival in Aubigny. I was received with great charity and cordiality.” (13) (Note: It seems that 14th October was the date of his appointment, not the date of his arrival, as the parish register states he arrived at Issoudun on Friday, 20th October and took up duties the following day.) This was the fourth time that he found himself in the Province of Lower Berry. Previously he had been at Vatan, Saint Gaultier and Chatillon. He was to remain in this country till his death in 1907. Issoudun was now to be the cradle of his great achievement – the founding of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart – the Society whose members were destined to spread the Gospel not only in the Province of Berry, but throughout the entire world. Issoudun is situated at the junction of two of the three regions which comprise the Province of Lower Berry – “La Boischant” and “La Campagne”. “Two countries,” says the Tourist-Guide of 1838, with a deal of exaggeration, “where things are different. A different climate, different customs, different occupations.”(15) Boischant occupies seven tenths of the Province including a third of the Shire of Issoudun. This area is mainly made up of small farms, separated by hedges, ditches and occasional woodlands. The other two-thirds of the Shire belongs to La Campagne, and consists of large farms and holdings. The smallest division, one-tenth of the Province, is La Brenne, an inhospitable tract of land, mainly made up of swamps, which have no natural drainage and over which there seems to hang a perpetual fog. It is a territory unhealthy both for man and beast. Jules Chevalier knew it well, as it was just across the border from Saint-Gaultier. The whole area is in the Loire basin in the southern part of the great Western Plain of Europe. In Summer, the maximum temperature is usually between 80° and 96°, and in Winter it goes as low and lower than freezing point. The prevailing winds are those from the South West and North East – with the occasional dreaded “galerae” from the North West, which plays havoc with the crops. The land is mainly flat except for some hilly country in the western division where Chatillon is situated. The soil is Jurassic over a sub-stratum of limestone and the lower reaches are rich in iron and minerals. The iron is of excellent quality, and good mica, flint and lithographic stone are found there. There are also good quantities of black granite, quartz, pottery clay, and marble with red and white veins which polishes very well. In the secondary industries there are large textile factories, tanneries and tileworks”. In 1850 there were 559 primary and secondary establishments throughout the district, employing some 3000 men, 1000 women and 450 children. The annual income for the district was estimated at 18,470,000 francs. Agriculture was the principal industry. The workable land was planted with wheat, oats, rye, barley, vegetables and potatoes. 40,496 acres were planted with vines, and the State had a forest of 215,050 acres planted with oaks, elms, ash and chestnut, trees. The livestock, estimated at nearly 1,100,000 head, often had to be turned out for pasture on the waste-land, which accounted for their generally poor condition. There was a great number of sheep, and horses and donkeys were bred for export. The grape-growing industry was not without its particular difficulties owing mainly to the inexperience of the growers and the many diseases to which the vine is susceptible. The vines were brought from Bordelais, and the wine matured more quickly than at Bordeaux owing to the high content of tanin. However, it was considered as of mediocre quality and had a poor market in Paris. In their anxiety to get a quick return for their labours, the growers were inclined to harvest the grapes too early, and the method of storing was primitive and unhygenic. They were following methods which were at least 200 years old and were not beyond adding a little water to the wine. The nature of the work is of itself laborious and painstaking, and many of the growers looked elsewhere for a living.(16) Every year on the eve of the Feast of the Assumption the growers used to place a ripe grape in the hand of the statue of Our Blessed Lady asking for her protection for their crops. Stanislaus Martin tells us: “The vine-growers of Issoudun will recall for a long time the fact that they were not permitted in 1860 to place the grape in the hands of the statue. That year the crop failed. Another popular custom in Issoudun was the celebration of the Harvest Festival at the end of October each year. This was an ancient tradition handed-down from the times when the trade was flourishing, and the probity the vine-growers beyond suspicion. (17) The same author, Stanislaus Martin has written; “How we looked forward each year when we were children to this wonderful Festival. A thousand happy voices would make the slopes of the vineyards resound with their laughter and joy.” Another event eagerly awaited each year was the opening of the hunting season. The near-by forests sheltered quite a variety of game wild boar; roe-deer and many species of fur and feathered game. The opening day in August was celebrated by merry-making. The populace with the gun and pistol made off to the forests, but unfortunately the occasion was often marred by accidents. The agricultural pursuits of the district were worked mainly on the share farming system. The owner of the land accepted as rent part of the proceeds. He provided the initial capital, and stock, whereas the farmer contributed his labour, what implements he could, and the help of his family. The contracts were usually drawn up for a period of three years and the proportionate share arranged according to the nature, size and locality of the farms. This system of share farming was not something new, but dated back well before the Revolution. It had its advantages both to the owner and the farmer, but it was not without its draw-backs. Bailly de Merlieux – an authority on the subject at that time – after speaking of the advantages of mutual cooperation in the system mentions two main obstacles; “The estates generally are too large, and the activities of the farmer too general. It results in the neglect of some sections of the property. The ideal area for a successful farm seems to be about 150 acres, which a farmer and his family can work effectively. The second difficulty is that the system seems to kill any laudable ambition in small farmers to better his condition. He is content to earn his modest livelihood, supply his few needs for his family, visit the fairs and markets to do little buying and selling (he had ample scope as there were some 337 fairs markets in 155 communes) and generally to lead a dull, unpretentious life year in and year out. Unlike the farmers of the North, they do not seem to have ambition of living comfortably, to own their own properties, or to provide higher education for their children.”(18) The population of the whole Province at this time was 271,938. Apart from public buildings, administrative offices, church property etc., there were 54,900 separate properties, and 56,792 buildings. There was a definite house shortage, and it was not uncommon to have two or more families living on the block of land. The number of men in the district seemed to outnumber the women rather considerably. The Municipality of Issoudun was divided into 1,011,469 lots, belonging to 96,744 owners who paid 1,868,089 francs per annum in land tax. The gross amount of taxation, personal, property registration and postal duties etc. yielded the Municipality 6,215,817 francs per annum. Generally, the houses were not of a very high standard, but outside the towns the countryside was not unattractive with the variety of fruit trees and particularly the chestnut trees which seemed to grow everywhere. “Most of the farm-houses were shaded by large elms, whose leaves were useful for feeding the cattle. After pruning the sap of these elms would harden into knotty elbows, which could be used in cabinet making. Most of the houses also had their own little cluster of vine the sap of which was supposed to be endowed with special medicinal qualities, particularly for the curing of skin and eye complaints. The dry branches made ideal fire-wood for the roasting of the chestnuts.”(20) In Issoudun itself the majority of houses were poverty-stricken dwelling by modern standards, slums of the worst type. Exteriorly they were most un attractive, many of them joined together as though helping one another to stand up. The roofs were so low you had no difficulty in putting your hand up to touch the guttering. Some had large slabs of tile to replace the thatch, but mainly they were in a state of delapidation. The interior consisted of a couple of rooms, and in most, the living room, bed room and kitchen were all one and the same. It was not unusual to see three or four beds, perhaps a baby’s cot, a chest-of-drawers, a wardrobe, a dining table, a wash tub, all in the same room. The floor was of earth, and the friendly pigs seemed welcome any time they wished to stroll in. The writer, L. Bignon wrote in 1865: “When one thinks of this crowded existence, of this communal bed-room for all members of the family, one wonders if it were possible to outrage decency and morality more.” Usually the master had his bed in the place of honour next to the fire place.

As houses in France were taxed according to the number of doors and windows they possessed, it was usual to have only one entrance, and a small fan-light instead of windows. Consequently the wretched dwellings were badly lit and poorly ventilated. Even in the neighbouring countryside, where fresh air was plentiful, the same conditions attained, and the interior of the houses were dark, dank dungeons rather than suitable living abodes. It is a shameful fact that in France even as late as 1880 over a quarter of a million dwellings had only one door; over four million houses, occupied by 14 million people – i.e. one-fifth of the whole population of France – had no more than two windows – all this in an endeavour to avoid paying extra tax. It is recorded that in the year 1857 the Municipality of Issoudun collected 182,998 francs from the taxes on windows and doors in the area. We must keep this in mind when we consider that in the first small monastery that he built, Father Chevalier himself lived in a room without windows, the only light coming through a pane of glass in the door which opened out into the passageway. It is understandable that in these shockingly unhygienic conditions sickness and disease were rife amongst the people. Epidemics and plagues were not uncommon, resulting in a high death rate throughout the Province – higher than anywhere else in France. Lack of proper sanitation, insufficient medical care, careless preparation and conservation of food all contributed to this lamentable state of affairs. One severe epidemic was traced back to a germ in the flour, caused by an insect known as the wheat moth, or grain butterfly. The moth hid itself amongst the grain in the storage barns causing an infection which spread quickly; then in June it attacked the growing plant in the field leaving its larvae to affect the crop. The resulting epidemic took the form of a painful throat infection almost like cancer. Winnowing did not sufficiently separate the good from the bad grain, and careless preparation with suspect water, plus the humidity of the climate did the rest. From the years 1833 to 1852 the population of the Berry province declined by 25%. Actually 28% in Issoudun and 34.5% in Bourges.(21) The inhabitants of the Province of Berry were regarded by the rest of France as not being too bright intellectually, but they had a native shrewdness, especially in business matters, which often confounded their critics. The average ‘Berry-ite’ was usually a taciturn type, serious and shy of the company of strangers. He was a child of the country and preferred to remain in his restricted rural domain. He was regarded as being slow of mind and speech and his interests were confined to a very small circle. His gaiety was not on the surface. He laughed silently.”(22) On account of the long years of revolutionary upheaval, education had naturally suffered, and in Father Chevalier’s time the Municipality was rated in the Educational Statistics by the unflattering mark of 79th in the whole of France. Perhaps it gained some consolation from the fact that the neighbouring Province of Cher was 84th. There were only 200 primary schools throughout the whole Province with an attendance of 15,000 pupils, and the overall estimate of those who could read or write among the populace was only 17%. Monsieur de la Tramblain was hardly complimentary when he wrote in 1862; “Berry has the unenviable reputation of being one of the most ignorant provinces of the whole Republic, one which hardly deserves our attention. It enjoys the lowly social position it deserves. It lost its self-government centuries ago. Now that it has been divided into Municipalities there may be some hope for it. That is an event of great importance for it.”(23) The religious glory of this part of France was a thing of the past. We have already spoken of the ancient splendour and glory of the Faith which was planted there as far back as the early days of Christianity, but the cruel hand of the Revolution had fallen heavily on this people and their religion, when Father Chevalier arrived in 1854 there was a general spirit of apathy and religious indifference amongst the populace. There had been a brief religious revival after the Revolution, but in 1830 the followers of Voltaire gained the upper hand and the people relapsed into their former indifference. Father Chevalier wrote in his “Religious History of Issoudun”: “Piety had grown cold, and a distressing indifference pervaded the whole neighbourhood of Issoudun.”(24) From the ecclesiastical point of view, the Municipality formed the Archdeanery of Indre, comprising 26 parishes in which there were 152 churches and chapels of ease, and six curacies. The author, Louis Raynal in his History of Berry, edited in 1845, has perhaps given us the best picture of the Province and its people: “We must remember that the people of the Berry district are sedentary. The desire to travel, to better themselves, to seek their fortune elsewhere is quite a foreign thought to them. They are slaves to the soil where they were born. And this applies not only to the humble peasants, but to all classes of society. There are admittedly different characteristics amongst them according to the different localities, but it is not difficult to recognise in them similar qualities and manners – even similar faults – which reveal their common origin. Gay and casual in the land of the vineyards; indefatigable workers, as hard as the iron they were handling, in the mineral country; sickly and without mental or physical energy in the Sologne and Brenne regions; with a shrewdness and a native common sense which was difficult to fault. If the people of the towns and villages of Berry did not approve of innovations, or ever dare to attempt them, at least their lack of initiative kept them out of mischief. Anyone who attempted anything new was regarded with thorough distrust, and their fear of making mistakes made them follow the less dangerous practice of walking up and down the broken footpath gossiping and criticising – a habit hardly conducive to progress. They preferred to play safe and just be prudent, reserved, orderly and economic.” However, such a judgment is hardly fair, for underneath this exterior indolence and dullness of intellect there were latent qualities of worth which came to the fore, when put to the test. Open up a new horizon to them, school them in the ways of the world, and they could develop quickly into useful and resourceful citizens. Marshal de Belle-Isle is reported to have said that he was always glad to have soldiers who came from Berry. Their only fault, he said, was that they were inclined to get home-sick. The Jesuits recorded that they had many sterling vocations from the Berry district, but that they always worked better when not in their native-country. Perhaps the greatest character of which Berry can boast is the famous preacher – Bourdaloue. The people of the Province are rightly proud of him, as his genius was the expression of all that is good and excellent in the local spirit. By study and research he became an eminent scholar, logical in his argumentation, brilliant in his exposition and eloquent in his preaching without having recourse to dramatic outbursts, or poetic flights of fancy. His style both in preaching and writing was marked by its simplicity, its sureness and its common sense. He made an impact not only on the people of his own time, but has done so on scholars and laymen ever since.(25) This then was the country where Father Jules Chevalier was to work and with the help of its people, achieve his life’s work, the founding of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. He himself, as the people often noticed, was not “Berrichen” in character. On the contrary, he had a quick and enterprising nature, which seized opportunities as they came along. For him the idea passed quickly to its realisation if it was a good one. He did not waste much time in weighing up the pros and cons of a venture once he was convinced it was feasible. The easy-going parishioners at first looked with surprise and misgiving on this energetic young curate who seemed to walk over obstacles as though they did not exist, but he quickly won them by his sincerity, and in spite of his different ways and disregard for minor conventions, they soon regarded him as one of themselves. And indeed he was to become one of them and Issoudun was forever to be his adopted home. Wherever he travelled in future years, he tells us he was homesick till again he saw the White Tower of Issoudun. Although Issoudun fitted in, generally, to the pattern of the Berry district, it still had its own characteristics – due to its history and location. We have already spoken of its ancient origin. In Roman times the population built their town on the verdant banks of the Cher tributary – “La Theols”, a pretty stream which takes its source in the Bommier Hills some twenty miles away. In these early wartime days the inhabitants grouped themselves at the foot of the Castle on the hill. It is from this fact that the town gets its name; In the Celtic language “Is” means “below”, and “dunum” is the word for hill. Issoudun then was known as “the town beneath the hill.” Even today remnants may be seen of the ancient wall that surrounded the town and of the two large fortifications, one built for the protection of the aristocracy the other for the plebians. The lower part of the town with its narrow untidy streets has kept in the main its medieval character, but the upper part, rebuilt in the 18th-century, is comparatively more up to date. In the middle of the last century it was described as “a nice-looking, well-built and spacious town”. Today with the development of its suburbs it is a typical country French town. Glimpses of its vanished glory are seen in the White Tower which stands sentinel over the town, and the old belfry over the ancient Bastille. In 1883 some excavations at the foot of the Tower revealed vestiges of an early Christian Church, which the historian, Peremee, placed in the 4th or 5th century. Father Chevalier was inclined to think that it went back to the first century when Christianity was brought to the region.(26) In his Histoire Religieuse d’Issoudun, Father Chevalier quotes the rather uncomplimentary opinion of Peremee regarding the townsfolk of Issoudun, qualifying it here and there with his own impressions. Peremee wrote some time before Father Chevalier arrived there. “Issoudun”, he wrote “is an agricultural centre, and the trade and professional activity deal with things of the country. The town comes to life only on market days or days of the fair. On the other days of the week, it seems to fall into a profound sleep, and hardly shows any sign of life. The stranger crossing the street becomes scared of the sound of his own footsteps in this dead city. If you wish to find any activity at all you have to go out into the suburbs. There you meet the different types – the average cross-section of the Community – half urban, half rustic. There you meet the farmers, the gardeners and above all, the vine-growers who are easily distinguishable by their arrogant bearing; there you see the peasant with his countryfied look, proud and cunning individuals always bitter and discontented, constantly irritated by the “up-starts” – the name coined for the bourgeoisie, the town traders and anyone who wore a dress coat. The peasants blamed them for the high price of bread and the low prices they got for their wine.” Father Chevalier here remarks: “They were irritated and bitter only with those who looked down on them and regarded them as their inferiors. They were more noisy than malicious. They objected to the many taxes, direct and indirect, put upon their grape-growing industry, a financial arrangement they could not understand or tolerate.” That they could be stirred to action can be seen from the following extract from Peremee: “The Revolution of July 1830 which overthrew Charles X and put Louis Phillippe on the throne had its reaction in Issoudun. The wine growers, who formed two-thirds of the population, took the opportunity to stage their own revolution. As a protest against the heavy taxes they stormed the offices of the agents, tore up the registers and threw them into the street to the cheers of the populace. Rioting broke out all over the town and the streets were lined with frenzied zealots threatening to put to death anyone who would not join their revolt.(27) Armed troops were sent to quell the disturbance, but the rioters erected barricades, and a pitched battle ensued.(28) Referring to this incident, Peremee continues: “In spite of this show of rebellion these people are at heart a peaceful race – with a natural sense of probity (and Father Chevalier adds “of justice”) inherited from their fathers. Crime and delinquency are rare compared with other parts of France. Statistics show that there are fewer criminal cases brought before the Courts in this province than anywhere else in France.” One of the main defects, and hindrances to progress was the very conscious class-distinction amongst the people of Issoudun. There was the upper class which asserted its imaginary superiority and the lower class which suffered from an inferiority complex – a phenomenon not unusual in country towns and suburbia all over the world. Father Chevalier notes that it was very rare to see any marriages between members of the two classes, as they shared neither the same ideas nor the same customs. The so-called upper-class possessed the same fundamental characteristics as the lower class – even had the same faults, though perhaps modified somewhat by better education. They preserved the old bourgeois tradition of their ancestors, were critical and intolerant, sometimes even malicious, cold and caustic. Even their jokes were at times loaded with bitterness. On the credit side, they wore usually honest and sincere, well-mannered and reserved. They had the reputation of being hospitable, but as Poreree, himself a native of Issoudun, remarks “They were more friendly to strangers than to their fellow citizens.” Father Chevalier confirms this by saying: “Even with strangers they were very reserved, especially at first, not offering much help and leaving the newcomer to himself till he tired himself out.” Being a stranger himself, Father Chevalier could talk from experience. “The native of Issoudun,” continues Peremee, seems to have been brought up on the milk of discouragement inherited from his forebears, and accepted the decline and decay of his town as a matter of course. Nevertheless it was always his first love. No matter how far he journeyed away from it, no matter for what reason he left it, his chief desire was to return and to die there. This bitter rivalry between the two classes, this exaggerated class distinction, was a real drawback to the progress of the town, and the cause much unhappiness in a district which offered great possibilities of development and prosperity. Even when members of either class happened to meet in other localities, when most people are glad to see their townsfolk, there was this awkward barrier between them. They seemed further apart than serfs from the masters. The bourgeoisie seemed ever conscious of their ancient stock and regarded all others as strangers, newcomers or interlopers. Just where the line of demarcation began and ended it was difficult to say. No one of either class was willing to recognise anyone superior to himself, and the salient trait of each class was a lofty personal independence. The man in the suburb or from the country held his head just as high as the man in the town, and the lowliest citizen was equally as proud as the highest. “One class,” explains Peremee, “was inclined to think too much of the past, whilst the other did not think of it enough.” Father Chevalier has added: “In recent times the ultra-radicalism and uncompromising opposition of the masses have forced the nobles and the old-stock bourgeoisie to leave the place, so much so that this ancient town, once so vibrant and active, resembles a dead city without commerce or spirit. What is left, moreover, is tainted by easy-living and vanity.” Peremee concludes his summary by expressing the hope that the new national revival of enlightened thinking, and the improvements in modern amenities, such as the coming of the railway to the town would usher in a happier era of wealth and progress. Father Chevalier likewise concludes: “Let us hope that better days are in store for Issoudun. Above all, let us hope that the people will return to the Faith of their ancestors.”(29) The town left much the same impression in 1873 on Madame Hello who has painted this unflattering picture: “Sheltering in the shadows of its old high towers, the town has the appearance of a parasitic growth. The people potter around on their little momentary tasks and errands, without any desire to look back over the past, or forward to the future. Here no one wants to remember, or even to hope. In this cold, dead town the many ruins are the monuments to the neglect and indifference of an unambitious people – it is a veritable tomb – dark and frightening.”(30)

THE CHURCH IN ISSOUDUN

Although Father Chevalier had estimated the population of Issoudun as some 15,000 inhabitants, the official figure was closer to 12,000. The whole town comprised but the one parish with only the one church – the Church of St. Cyr. The several ancient churches which adorned the town from the time of the Middle Ages were all destroyed during the Revolution. Taken over and sold by the Republic according to the Decree of Appropriation of 17th August, 1792, they were desecrated and demolished. St. Cyr was badly damaged, but its structure was allowed to stand, and it was used as a hall for National celebrations. The two towers, one a beautiful Romanesque structure supporting a steeple, and the smaller one over the facade were both demolished in 1793. A band of revolutionary soldiers passing through Issoudun threatened to sack and burn the town, if these symbols of superstition were not pulled down. The Council agreed, and a carpenter and stone-mason made the handsome sum of 1200 francs in effecting the destruction and selling the material. The bells were thrown from the tower onto the pavement below and smashed to pieces, the heaviest, dating back to 1603 was kept and used as the town tocsin till the church was restored. An altar to the Goddess, Reason, was erected in place of the Mass altar, and the church was used for profane purposes – celebrations, a second-hand clothes market and even as a wheat-barn. The Church furniture, sacred images and even relics were sold at paltry prices. Only a few were saved.(31) After the Concordat of 1802, the church was restored to the ecclesiastical authorities except for the choir which the Commune kept as token possession. This eventually was handed over after a court judgment.

The first Parish Priest after the restoration was Abbe Yvernault, appointed by His Grace Isidore de Mercy, archbishop of Bourges. Assisted by a curate, he had to look after not only Issoudun but several of the neighbouring parishes. His successor was the Abbe Mauderon who was given a second curate. On 6th December, 1829, Abbe Guillaume Crozat took charge as Parish Priest, and was able to concentrate on the parish of Issoudun itself, as other priests were available to look after the adjacent parishes. Father Crozat was still the parish priest when Jules Chevalier was appointed there twenty-five years later. Father Crozat came from a small hamlet called Charmensac in the Margeride Mountains at the extreme of the Cantal Shire, in the diocese of Saint-Flour. Only seven families lived in the small village which was attached to the parish of Chaliers, until the closer town of Loubaresse was erected a parish about the year 1800. The Crozat family was reported to have had the best farm in the district, but rather too original methods of agriculture, such as growing oats for bread making, led to disaster and they eventually left the village. Guillaume Crozat studied for the priesthood in the diocese of Saint -Fleur, but a few years after ordination transferred to the diocese of Bourges, which, we are told, was short of at least 150 priests, whereas his own diocese was fairly well staffed. Several of his class-mates were already stationed in Bourges, and no doubt, they enticed him to come and join them. On the 27th of September, 1822 he was put in charge of the district of Saint-Gaultier, and on 1st July, 1825 he became archpriest of Chatre. In 1829 he took over the parish of Issoudun, where he laboured till he died on 9th January, 1864. In spite of our searching enquiries into the early life of Father Crozat, there seems to be quite a deal of conflicting evidence as to dates and identity arising from the confusing fact that in the Crozat family there were two brothers by the name of Guillaume – one ‘Guillaume Bertrand’ and the other just plain ‘Guillaume.’ According to the story handed down to the later generation, Father Crozat had been married before becoming a priest in 1817. His father, so the story goes, was anxious to avoid having him conscripted for military service, and insisted on his getting married. He is supposed to have had a daughter, who died young, and two sons, one of whom was called Pierre. The name of Pierre Crozat is entered in the register of births at Chaliers, and several people knew a Pierre Crozat at Issoudun and earlier at Chaliers. The wife died several years after the marriage, and Guillaume Crozat entered the Seminary and was eventually ordained a priest. The inscription on his tomb and also the register at Bourges give the date of his birth as 4th March, 1787. In our early enquiries we discovered in the registers of the Bishopric of Saint-Flour, with the help of Father le Chan, the name of a Jean Crozat, who was ordained a priest on 20th May 1814. We thought at first this was possibly the future parish priest of Issoudun, but Monsignor Jacques Magne, the Superior of the Major Seminary later found in the old archives of the College the following record; ”Guillaume Bertrand Crozat, of the parish of Chaliers was ordained priest on 20th December, 1817. Talents quite good; conduct very good.” At the same time Monsieur Doumergue, mayor of Chaliers, discovered in the local register that a Guillaume Crozat, son of Pierre Crosat and Marguerite Cathelat, was born on 4th March, 1787, and that at the age of nineteen and a half he married Jeanne Brun on 16th September, 1805. On 8th July 1809 a son, Peter was born to them. As this date of Guillaume’s birth corresponded with that on the tomb, we thought we had the data we were seeking, and that the story of the marriage was well authenticated. However the Abbe Pelegry, parish priest of Chaulhac (Lozere) and priest in charge of Chaliers discovered, as late as 1950, other evidence which calls the fact of the marriage into doubt. He discovered that the Guillaume Crozat born on 4th March, 1787, who married Jeanne Brun on 16th September, 1806, had a younger brother Guillaume Bertrand, who was undoubtedly the one ordained in 1817. The date of the birth of this younger brother is in terms of the new calendar drawn up by the 1st Republic “the 26th Pluviose of the 6th year of the Republic.” As this date corresponds with our 14th February, 1798, Guillaume Bertrand would have been eleven years younger than his brother. It would seem safe then to conclude that the Abbe Crozat had never been married. One could object that if we take 1798 as the year of his birth, he would been only twenty when he was ordained, but we must remember that in those times, when there was such an acute scarcity of priests, it was not unusual to find seminarists being ordained at an early age. The report that his talents were “quite good” would confirm this possibility. It remains to explain why Guillaume Bertrand took the name of his elder brother, and used the dates of his birth-certificate even till the time of his death. The fear of conscription could not have been the reason, as the Concordat exempted seminarians from military service, and when Napoleon abdicated at Fontainebleau on 4th April, 1814, the young man would have been only sixteen years of age, and fourteen at the beginning of the Russian campaign. Even if this was the reason there was no point in continuing the deception after 1814. Let us hope that Father Mourgues, M.S.C., a fellow-countryman of Guillaume Crozat will be able to unravel the mystery in his further researches, and be able to find some new evidence which may alter the dates.(32) Happily, his contemporaries have left us more definite evidence on the character and personality of Father Crosat. Father Chevalier has given us the following pen-picture of him; “He was a venerable and kind old man, a worthy priest held in high esteem in his parish and throughout the diocese, and possessed qualities which were greatly appreciated by his superiors, who availed themselves of his experience and good counsel. He was pious, friendly, charitable and discerning, and was always dignified in his bearing. He had the reputation of being a good theologian and a distinguished casuist. His favourite authors were Gousset, Bourdaloue and Berthier. In his later years his health failed, and he was able to take little part in the work of the parish, leaving it to his curate. He spent most of his praying, especially reciting the rosary, to which he had great devotion. Any time you met him he would have his rosary beads in his hand and often he would hide himself in some remote corner of the church, or even the Confessional and pray by the hour. With St. Paul he desired only one thing – to make Our Lord known and loved. He was always interested in the work of his curates, and rejoiced at any success that came their way. He was truly a humble man, had simple tastes, and always seemed to be in a good humour. His presbytery, his heart and his purse were open to everyone – even if some abused his generosity. One winter’s night he heard a noise down in the cellar under the house. In spite of his age and his natural timidity, he lit a candle and quietly made his way down the stairs. There he found two of his well-known parishioners helping themselves to the wine-cask. “My friends,” he said in his gentle voices “what are you doing there? You know if you had asked me for some wine, I would have given it to you. Take what you have already drawn, and be good and go home.”(33) Madame Hello has written of his disappointments in his apostolic work, and has suggested that he was really too gentle and timid for an ungodly parish like Issoudun. “His apostolic zeal” she wrote, “was foiled in this most pagan of all the towns of France. In vain did he distribute his goods to the poor; in vain did he preach the Word of God, in vain did he give then good example through the years by an austere life, and his unstinting charity. The good seed he tried to sow fell upon the rocks and was carried away by the birds of the air. …. He prudently kept on good terms with the local authorities and the bourgeoisie, and this policy brought results in trouble sometimes when his curates had to work amongst a hostile and unbelieving populace. This flock, so deaf to the voice of the shepherd, entirely immersed in the things of this world and the baser things of life, needed a strong, energetic, enterprising and fearless pastor, and Father Crozat, in spite of his virtues, was really too gentle, too timid, too shy to deal with it.”(34) Madame Hello, in this last remark has probably hit on the reason why the ecclesiastical authorities appointed Jules Chevalier, who had already earning the reputation in the diocese of being an active and enterprising young priest, to the parish of Issoudun. We must remember that when Father Crozat came to Issoudun in 1830 his task was not an easy one. Monsieur Kremp has written in his ”History of the Town of Issoudun”, “The moral upheaval after the Revolution was profound. Perhaps here more than any other part of France there was a complete break from the ideas and beliefs of former days.”(35) Father Piperon has candidly admitted that one of the main causes of the loss of faith was the defection of many of the clergy themselves. “Grave scandals” he wrote, ”caused the loss of faith in this once religious town. Several priests, and alas even Religious, contracted sacrilegious marriages, and their numerous offspring, as though accursed for the sins of their fathers, gave up all practice of faith and religion.” Father Crozat was able to reconcile some of those unfortunate priests to the Faith before they died repentant deaths, but the memory of those depressing defections hung over the parish like an evil spell, paralysing all efforts of faith and piety.(36) Father Delailler, the Parish Priest of Lazenay, about 16 Miles north of Issoudun, also wrote in 1848 of the lamentable lack of zeal of many of the clergy: “The three priests of Issoudun,” he wrote “didn’t seem to be very busy in those days.”(37) After 1830 when Father Crozat arrived, the followers of Voltaire had taken charge throughout the Province and had relentlessly thrust their rationalistic philosophy on the minds of the people. His was a delicate and arduous task endeavouring to counter these false doctrines with the truth of the Church, and to impart any sentiments of Christian humility to the minds so proud. It is a tribute to his character that in spite of the wholesale spirit of irreligion around him on all sides, he did lead many souls back to their Faith by his sincerity, kindness and good example. He put the interests of his people before his own, and became the first amongst the poor of the parish.(38) One of the first casualties of the Revolution were the Christian schools and Father Crozat made it his first duty to try to bring home Christian doctrine to the children and the youth of the parish. The Ursuline Nuns, who had conducted a school at the lower end of the town had been evicted by the Revolutionaries and their property confiscated. The Sisters of the Visitation who had a boarding-school at the top end of the town met with the same fate. The Brothers of Christian Doctrine who had a school since 1741 in the old hermitage of Pont Saint-Denis for the education of boys were likewise driven from the town. Father Crozat with the help of his curate, Father Malleron, succeeded in establishing a new school on the 11th May, 1830 conducted by the Sisters of Charity from Bourges. These good nuns quickly won the confidence of the people, especially the mothers of the children, who told their husbands: “Look after these good Sisters, and do not disturb them. They are here in the interests of our children, and you must defend them if necessary.” Hardly had the Sisters settled in their new convent than the angry revolt of the vine growers broke out in July. Father Crozat feared for their safety and advised them to pack up and return to Bourges. He even ordered a carriage to take them back. However the curate, Father Malleron, was more optimistic, and dressed as a layman, he went out amongst the crowd to learn what plans they had in mind regarding the Sisters. We can imagine the fright the Sisters got when at midnight, while the revolt was at its height, the door bell rang loudly. They expected the worst, but it was only Father Malleron with the good news: “All is well. The mob is on your side.” In time the school progressed, and thanks to the help of various bene factors the nuns were able to build an establishment for 300 pupils. Encouraged by this success Father Malleron enticed the Brothers of St. Joseph of the Cross from Mans “to open a school for boys in September, 1834, but they remained only two years. Cardinal DuPont, the Archbishop of the diocese then, persuaded the Brothers of Christian Doctrine to return to their old post, and they took possession of the old and battered buildings again on 5th October, 1836, aided financially by Madame du Quesne and other benefactors. They became so popular that the Municipality in 1851 granted then an annual subsidy after the death of several of their benefactors.(39) The children were now receiving regular religious instruction. “Formerly”, wrote Father Piperon, “the instruction of the little ones was sadly neglected. Several of them received about a fortnight’s instruction before their First Holy Communion, but after that were left to themselves. The church was deserted; the Sacraments neglected.” (40) However the picture was not completely black; in spite of the general indifference and lack of faith there were a few hundred faithful souls from all classes of Society, who had never lost their love of God and His Church. Through the Mercy of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and His Immaculate Mother this small band had stood firm in the midst of the moral desolation and spiritual wreckage all around them. Faithful to their Mass, their Sacraments, prayers and religious practices, they were as a beacon of light to the poor shipwrecked souls about them, illuminating the way back to God and happiness. One of the newly-arrived nuns, Sister Scholastica, writing to her Mother Superior General remarked; “The people are kindly disposed towards us, but alas, most of them are far from God and their Faith. However, what is surprising and encouraging is to see several of them at Mass each morning of the week, and receiving Holy Communion three or four times a week.” Father Crozant himself tells the story of the good example given by one of the parishioners. Some time before Father Chevalier had introduced the Mass for Men in 1857, and at a time when men were conspicuous by their absence is the Church, a new commander came to Issoudun in charge of the local garrison. He was a devout Christian and fearless in the public practice of his Faith. The first time he came to confession – about Easter time – Father Crozat, knowing his public position and the general hostility to the Faith of most of the people, asked him what time he would like to receive Holy Communion. “I will go with the others at the Mass tomorrow,” he replied. “But that may not be wise for a person in your position,” the priest suggested. “It may cause you grave inconvenience.” “Grave inconvenience. What do you mean, Father?” came the response. “I am a soldier, and hope I am not a coward. I am a Christian and have nothing to hide. I will be at Communion in the Church in the morning.” He kept his word, and his presence at the Altar Rails did not go unnoticed. Soon the news spread throughout the town, and it is an indication of the bitter hostility to religion of a section of the community that later on that day there was a demonstration outside his home, and the windows were pelted and smashed, as a gesture against this ‘pious foolhardiness’.(41) However that did not deter the brave commander, and he continued to openly profess and practise his faith. Referring to him Father Piperon has written: “For a long time he was the only man who had publicly fulfilled all his Easter duties. He attended Mass every Sunday and the major feast-days. He often told me of this early opposition, and Father Crozat confirmed it.(42) Madame Hello tells of another incident, simple yet pathetic. “One day Father Crozat on going into the church, saw a woman on her knees before the Blessed Sacrament. Approaching her he asked: “Madame, do you live in Issoudun?” “No,” she replied, “I am a visitor just passing through, and I always visit the church in any town I pass through to pray to Almighty God.” “Pray, my dear lady, pray,” the old priest muttered, and went away almost in tears. Madame Hello continues: “The priest had to take every precaution to protect his reputation against a malicious and gossiping community. Whenever he visited the Sisters of Charity he did so in biretta and rochet to safeguard his name against their evil tongues – a gesture which in itself was an expression of his own opinion of their low standard of intelligence and morality.”(43) Abbe Delailler tells us that Father Crosat’s original presbytery was a small house on the southern side of the church of St. Cyr. The two curates lived separately in the town, and later when they did come to live with the parish-priest, they continued the practice of having most of their meals with friends or in the cafes of the town – a custom which did not greatly please the old priest. Another custom, frowned upon by Father Crozat, was that of allowing visitors – especially women – into the rooms of the curates. When Father Chevalier arrived he put an end to this practice, and some of the pious old ladies thought he was a little narrow-minded.(44) Eventually a new place of abode was acquired for the clergy – an old house in Berthier Street, built at the end of the XVth or beginning of the XVIth century according to the style of that period. According to Peremee it was about the only old house left in Issoudun worthy of mention.” The advent of the two new curates, Maugenest and Chevalier in 1854 ushered in a new era for the church in Issoudun. Sebastien Emile Maugenest arrived on the 10th January and Jules Chevalier was to follow him the sane year on 20th October. Sebastien Maugenest was born on 5th December, 1829 at Culan. He did his primary and secondary studies at Chezal-Benoit, where his family lived. In October, 1848 he entered the Major Seminary at Bourges, but left in August 1850 to join the Novitiate of the Sulpicians. He had been keen to become a member of that Order, but before his ordination, his confessor advised him to re-enter the diocese of Bourges, as he considered that was his real vocation. He was ordained at Saint-Sulpice on the 17th December, 1853 – the Saturday of the Christmas Quarter-Tense, and his first appointment was to Issoudun.(46) Father Chevalier wrote of him: “In the Seminary he was known and appreciated for his zeal, his piety and his gift of eloquence. As regards his character he was always energetic and ardent; had a good judgment even if a lively imagination. He kept himself versed in current topics and opinions, and was not beyond changing his mind and convictions on various subjects.(47) He was a gifted priest, and was consumed by the desire to use his talents for the good of souls and the Church.”(48) When Father Chevalier arrived on 20th October (or the 21st, may be) he was given a cordial reception by both Father Crozat and Father Maugenest, and soon made himself at home. Soon after his arrival he happened to be passing the cottage of a good parishioner called Monsieur Voisin. The good man was leaning against the door post leading onto the street when he noticed the strange priest go by. He called out to his wife: “Come here, this is worth seeing. I hope it is not the new curate we have been promised, as his clothes are very shabby and we will have to deck him out from head to foot.” The next day Father Chevalier called on them, as they had a son a priest, a classmate of his in the Seminary. They became good friends. The three priests wasted no time in having a conference re the allocation of work and boundaries. Father Crozat was now very feeble and the two curates agreed to share the work. Father Chevalier would care among other things for the Hospice for the Dying and his confrere would look after the public hospital. They also decided on a few innovations and the correction of a few abuses – notably to receive all visitors in the parlour and not in their rooms. As mentioned before some of the old-timers did not approve of this new priest introducing his new-fangled ideas into the parish. Besides, they said, he looked untidy with his big crop of hair and his shabby clothes. Father Chevalier tells a humorous story about one old lady who decided to teach him a lesson. “One day” he said, “I went to my Confessional and found a parcel on the seat addressed in my name. I opened it, wondering what it could contain. Inside was a brush, a comb and a tin of boot-polish. I enjoyed the joke.” On one occasion, several years later, when the name of Jules Chevalier was becoming well known throughout the diocese on account of the new Society he had founded and the Basilica he had built there was a large gathering at Issoudun for a religious demonstration of faith, attended by the Cardinal and several bishops. A visiting priest amongst the congregation, looking up at the official platform asked one of the parishioners; “Could you tell me which one is Father Chevalier?” The parishioner pointed in the opposite direction to a lone figure in cassock standing on the steps of the Basilica watching the proceedings from afar. “There he is over there,” he said. “But surely,” remarked the priest, “that cannot be the host to all the important prelates. He looks like a country curate, and from a not very civilised part of the country at that.” The time was to come when even members of the Royal Family were to visit him and to be impressed by his personality, as indeed were all who came to visit him. Even the ladies of the town were soon won over to him in spite of the present of the brush and comb. Father Sadouet, M.S.C. in his “Personal Recollections” has written of Father Chevalier in these early days at Issoudun: “He inspired confidence in those who met him. In appearance he was a man of average height, well proportioned, of a straight carriage and possessed of a large crop of hair. He had a pleasant countenance, and used to speak in a friendly, if rather slow manner. His modesty, his zeal, his devotion to duty, his affable piety and his prudence were soon noted by the people, and his Confessional was besieged by numerous penitents. He won the affection and esteem of his venerable parish priest, whose faith and humility he admired, as also of his confrere Father Maugenest, whose talents and piety still appealed to him as an admirable prospective help in the design he cherished in the secret of his heart.(50).

CHAPTER VII: THE FOUNDATION OF THE MISSIONARIES OF THE SACRED HEART

One of the priests associated with the foundation of the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, even if indirectly, was the Abbe Gasnier. This outstanding Sulpician priest had been Professor of Moral Theology when Jules Chevalier was at the Major Seminary. He was a Diocesan Consultor, and later on, it was on his advice that the Cardinal Archbishop appointed both Sebastien Maugenest and Jules Chevalier to Issoudun. Pierre Gasnier was born at Angers on 26th November, 1793. After his theological studies were completed he entered the Sulpician Novitiate, “La Solitude”, on the 11th October, 1817 and later became a member of the Order. From October 1818 to July 1822 he was Professor of Sacred Scripture and Latin at Autun. During these years he contracted a severe throat infection which left him in poor health throughout his life. In April, 1823, he was transferred to the Major Seminary at Bourges, where he became in turn Director of Studies, and Superior. On his death, 7th March, 1875, the Archbishop paid him a striking tribute in a circular letter to the clergy. “Father Gasnier spent first years of his teaching between life and death, but his sufferings, at times very intense, did not prevent him from fulfilling his duties with regularity and courage. Faithful to the traditions of Saint-Sulpice, exact and methodical in all he did, tolerant and charitable to others, endowed with a remarkable spirit of discernment, humble and modest, he inspired confidence in all who net him. He was loved and esteemed by all. His clear judgment, his disinterestedness in worldly affairs, his unpretentious simplicity, his affable manner, and above all his great knowledge of the clergy, made him an invaluable asset on my Episcopal Council.”(2) Father Gasnier became Superior of the Seminary in September 1851 after the departure of Father Redon.(3) As mentioned above, he was Professor of Moral Theology when Father Chevalier was a student. We do not know for sure, but it was most probable, particularly since he was Charles Piperon’s spiritual director, that he would have heard of Jules’ desire to found a Society of Missionary priests. Considering that the general terms of the plan had been discussed openly by the students, Father Gasnier most likely had heard of it, but he would not have known of Jules’ more specific intention of founding a Society of Religious priests with the name of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. Other dioceses had missionhouses of secular priests, and this is probably what Father Gasnier had in mind. Whether it was in consequence of Father Chevalier’s plan or independent of it, it is certain that about 1853-54 Father Gasnier cherished the idea of having a mission-house established in the irreligious town of Issoudun – not only for its own spiritual welfare, but for that of the whole province of Berry. This is undoubtedly why, as a Diocesan Consultor, he suggested in 1864 the appointment of both Father Maugenest and Father Chevalier, as he knew they were two young active priests, and would win the confidence of the prudent Father Crozat, the parish priest. After his ordination Father Maugenest had been appointed to the Cathedral staff at Bourges, but was suddenly transferred to Issoudun. A new parish priest had just been appointed to Aubigny after the death of the previous pastor, and this made Father Chevalier available for Issoudun. As we have seen before, the appointment came as a surprise to him, not knowing that Father Gasnier had anything to do with it. With his coming to Issoudun all the memories and desires of his Seminary plan reawakened with a fresh ardour in the heart of Jules Chevalier. Was not this act of Providence the first step in the realisation of his cherished dream? As yet uncertain and anxious, he would await the further designs of God. Was it not also providential that his colleague here should be none other than Sebastien Maugenest – his former confrere of Seminary days with whom he wanted to share his plans? Was this not a further confirmation that the Sacred Heart wished him to go ahead? But what would be Father Maugenest’s reaction now if he put the project before him? Their relations with one another were good, but in spite of the close daily contact, Father Maugenest had never once referred to their discussions of Seminary days. Had he forgotten all about it, and would he regard it all as but the fanciful dream of a pious, inexperienced student? When they had discussed the plan in College it was merely with the view of establishing in the diocese a house of missionaries who would use the Devotion to the Sacred Heart as a means towards the conversion of the lapsed laity. Now it would be necessary to tell his fellow priest that his desire was to found a religious Congregation of Missionary priests whose spirit and life would be the devotion to the Sacred Heart, the latter devotion being its means of apostolate. What would be the reaction of Sebastian Maugenest to that? Being able to stand this state of indecision and uncertainty no longer, he decided to approach Father Maugenest and open his heart to him, telling him candidly of his plans and desires. “After studying Father Maugenest closely,” he writes, “I decided the time had come to confide in him. That was towards the end of November, 1854.(5) Elsewhere he wrote: “A month after my arrival in Issoudun I approached him, and commenced: “Two plagues are the scourge of this unhappy century – indifference and selfishness. We need an efficacious remedy. That remedy is to give the Sacred Heart – the Heart of love and charity – to the people. His adorable Heart is entirely devoted to men, but they do not return His love. They ignore the treasures to be found there. I think the only answer is to have a Congregation of priests who will work to make the Sacred Heart known and loved. They will be called Missionaries of the Sacred Heart.”(6) Father Maugenest’s reaction was a surprise. Not only was he enthusiastic and ready to co-operate, but he assured Father Chevalier that ever since their discussions in the Seminary, even before he had thought of becoming a Sulpician, he had shared the same idea and cherished the sane desire. “I also,” he said, “have been dreaming of such a plan for a long time. I am with you. Let us begin immediately.(7) I have been trying to make up my mind for a long time, and now you have made it up for me. I wish to devote myself to the cause with you.(8)” Filled with emotion the two priests embraced each other, knelt down thanked God for directing them, begging His help and grace in their future project. “O my God” later wrote Father Chevalier, “How wonderful are Your ways. How you dispose all things strongly yet sweetly.”(9) Indeed Father Maugenest was so anxious to put the plan into effect without delay that Father Chevalier had to curb his enthusiasm somewhat, pointing out the many difficulties to be surmounted and the graces to be obtained. After all they were only two humble curates, quite inexperienced and without any money or worldly goods. If God wished this work in honour of the Sacred Heart to succeed, they agreed, then He would show them the way to overcome the difficulties. At present the main thing was to know if it was according to His will,(10) The first thing they decided to do was to acquaint their parish priest of their intention and ask his advice. If he were favourably inclined to the project, he would be very useful in presenting it to the ecclesiastical authorities as he was held in high esteem in the diocese. Another important decision and one which was to have very far-reaching and significant results in the founding of the Congregation was to make a Novena to Our Blessed Lady to finish on the 8th December, 1854 – the day the Church was to define the Immaculate Conception as an Article of Faith. “Since we were very poor,” wrote Father Chevalier, “and had no means wherewith to launch our project, and realising that the important date of the definition of the Immaculate Conception was approaching, we decided to make Novena to Our Immaculate Mother to obtain from Her Divine Son some definite, visible sign that our plan was according to His Divine Will, and to grant us means of accomplishing our project.” “We went to Father Crozat and informed him of our intentions. Whilst he was reflecting on what he had heard, we looked to the statue of the Immaculate Conception on his desk, whispering a prayer to our good Mother to inspire him. After a few moments he turned to us and said with conviction: ‘My children! not only do I approve of your plan, but I will help you any way I can to establish a house of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart at Issoudun. If you found it, I will happily say my ‘Nunc Dimittis'”.(11) Little time was left to make preparations for the Novena. The small altar in Father Chevalier’s room was specially decorated (12) and Father Maugenest, who according to Father Piperon was “hardly an artist”, displayed his keen, and lively imagination by painting a scene which portrayed the motif of the Novena.(13) Father Piperon, who had seen the original, describes the painting thus: “Two priests were kneeling before an image of the Sacred Heart from which rays of light were shining on them.” The painting was placed on a pedestal which supported a statue of the Immaculate Conception. Two candles were placed on a small table one on each side of the statue, and every day the two priests knelt there to recite earnestly the prayers of the Novena. Father Maugenest in 1908 recalling the historic Novena wrote; “All the details of this homely little altar given by Father Piperon are exact.” The Museum of the Issoudun Basilica has a replica of the tableau, which, however, does not reproduce all the details of the original. Father Piperon records elsewhere: “Ten years later, after he had become parish priest of Issoudun, Father Maugenest retouched the painting, inserting the Basilica, partly built, in the back-ground.(14) The description given by Father Chevalier corresponds with the painting as we know it: “The painting,” he writes, “represents the future Community, born of the Heart of Jesus, as from its natural source, at the prayer of Mary. Thick clouds seem to screen the Heart of Jesus, but the powerful hand of the Immaculate Virgin is dispersing them. The saintly old parish priest, Father Crozat, is pictured in the background with arms extended towards Heaven, saying his “Nunc Dimittis.” Above all are two angels holding between them a scroll on which was written; “O Immaculate Heart of Mary, save us and establish the Priests of the Sacred Heart.”(15) Anyone who has seen the painting will recall what Madams Ernest Hello humorously wrote of it: “The colours, the drawing, the subjects and the laws of perspective atrociously outraged, show that if Our Blessed Lady granted their requests, it was certainly not from Her love of art.” (16) The object of the Novena is expressed in these words by Father Chevalier: “If we are granted our request, we will take the title of “Missionaries of the Sacred Heart.” Our specific mission will be to render to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, the Seat of all Wisdom, Love and Mercy, the special devotion of adoration homage and reparation, to spread everywhere this devotion and to make known to man the treasures of sanctification which It contains. Also as a special end of the Society, we will endeavour to make Mary, our Mother, loved and honoured by every means possible and in a special manner.”(16) Without being unmindful then, of the many difficulties that lay in their path the two priests began their Novena on the 30th November, 1854. They poured out, their hearts in sincere prayer to the Sacred Heart and Mary Immaculate for the success of their project. They pleaded that the Congregation they had in mind would be realised, and they asked for a special sign that it was in accordance with God’s Will.(l8) “Every day we recited the prayers of the Novena in common and made our other exercises of piety together.”(19) They did not know what was before them, but they devoutly besought the Sacred Heart and the maternal Heart of Mary in a spirit of faith and confidence to point out the way.(20) The great day of the Feast of the Immaculate Conception arrived – a great day in the history of the Church when the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception was infallibly defined by the Holy Father in Rome – 8th December, 1854. In Issoudun the occasion was marked by the Celebration of High Mass, sung by Father Chevalier himself. The intention in the Mass was that of the Novena – the foundation of the Society and the granting of a definite sign.(21) The three priests considered this Mass as the final prayer of the Novena, and for this reason the little altar with its painting was solemnly carried by two acolytes and placed on the Sanctuary just before the Offertory, (Mademoiselle Marchard, in her story of the foundation does not mention this event, but that is not surprising, as being ignorant of the Novena at the time, she would have thought, as did the other parishioners, that it was some special ceremony connected with the Proclamation of the Dogma. The writing on the scroll was so small that only the servers and the sacristan would have been able to read it, and it would mean little to them.) The placing of the Statue on the Sanctuary was a sign of their unshakable confidence that Mary Immaculate would hear their prayers. “We were all visibly moved,” Father Chevalier recalled. “The ceremony made a profound impression on us. Father Crozat actually wept with emotion.”(23) After the Mass the sacristan came to Father Chevalier and told him that Monsieur Petit, one of the few fervent parishioners, wished to see him urgently.(24) Father Chevalier took the good man across to the presbytery after he had made his thanksgiving. From Father Chevalier’s own notes and other documents written on this prompt and important sequel to the Novena, are able to reconstruct the scene thus: No sooner had Father Chevalier closed the door than Monsieur Petit handed him a letter saying: “I have good news for you Father. Read this.” The letter was from a Monsieur Philippe de Bengy addressed to Monsieur Petit, asking him to do him the favour, since he was unable to come himself, of informing Father Chevalier about an important matter of which he had just been apprised. It was to the effect that a certain person, who wished to remain anonymous for the time being, but in whom he had complete confidence, wished to donate 20,000 francs towards the establishment of some good work to benefit the souls of the people of the Berry district. Monsieur de Bengy went on to say that the kind benefactor did not have precise and exclusive ideas as to the nature of the proposed work, but he had gained the impression that he favoured the idea of the money being spent on a House of Missionaries. “A House of Missionaries,” repeated Father Chevalier, deeply moved and astonished. “But that is precisely what we have been dreaming about. We have just made a Novena for that very intention. The little altar we put on the Sanctuary was for that purpose – to remind the Immaculate Virgin on this great day that we needed Her help. My friend, you are a messenger from Heaven. Our Lady has answered us through you.” “What a beautiful response from Heaven,” replied Monsieur Petit. “It is indeed miraculous that the benefactor should have the same intention in mind as yourself. I must go and tell Monsieur de Bengy immediately.” “But are you sure we can count on this money?” asked Father Chevalier. “Without any doubt. Monsieur de Bengy is certain of it. The money is yours, if you can find use for it in establishing some good work for the good souls. The only condition the donor requires is that it has the approval of the Cardinal.” “We are deeply grateful,” replied the stunned priest. “Please convey our thanks to our generous benefactor and Monsieur de Bengy. Tell them the wish will be carried out. Assure them that our prayers will never cease for them and that God will reward this very kind benefactor.”(26) Many years later in 1908, Father Maugenest recorded his impressions of this historic day: “After High Mass,” he wrote, “I went into the side-chapel of Our Lady of the Rosary to make my thanksgiving, and add some prayers to our Novena. I felt supremely confident that the Immaculate Mother of God was going to hear our prayers. Acting on a sudden impulse of this confidence, I almost ran to the presbytery and burst into Father Chevalier’s room, crying! “I have just come from Our Lady’s Chapel and am sure She is going to work a miracle for us.” “You are right. She has already worked the miracle,” he replied, throwing his arms around my neck. “I have just had a visit from Monsieur Petit who assured me that a stranger, who doesn’t want to be known for the time being, wishes to give us 20,000 francs to establish a missionary work here in Issoudun. In the excess of my joy and gratitude to the Blessed Virgin, in my complete confidence in Father Chevalier’s work, I didn’t even stay to ask if the money was already donated or merely promised, but went off to thank the Mother of God, convinced that She had indeed worked a miracle for us – that she had directly inspired this unknown benefactor to place this money in our hands for the achievement of our desires.”(27) “We spent the rest of the day in prayers of thanksgiving”, wrote Father Chevalier. Together we poured out our sentiments of gratitude to our powerful Protectress. O Mary, O good Mother, May you be ever blessed! What a happy day for us! The day when Holy Mother the Church has proclaimed your Immaculate Conception will be the day of the Conception of the new Congregation of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, for today there has begun for it the mystery of life.”(28) This is the reason why the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, by an unbroken tradition regard the 8th December, 1854 as the date of their Foundation.(29) When the two curates informed Father Crozat of the gift and the purpose for which it was given, he shared their happiness and hopes, but not their assurance. Being a man of experience in diocesan affairs, he wondered what the Cardinal would think of the scheme, and whether he would readily give his consent. “Father Chevalier and Father Maugenest were anxious to make overtures to His Eminence immediately. After such a definite sign from Our Lady, they argued, he could hardly refuse his approval. Was not the Will of God already clearly expressed? The Cardinal could hardly go against the Will of God. But the wise and saintly old priest advised them not to be in such a hurry. After all not even the general outlines of the project had yet been defined, and he urged them to wait and give the whole matter further consideration before presenting it to the authorities. He himself wanted time to reflect on the whole project before he would dare put it to His Eminence and ask his approval.(30) After careful deliberation the good parish priest consented during the month of January, to write a letter to His Eminence the Cardinal, putting the project before him and asking him to grant permission to the two young priests to begin their work. He told him of the remarkable answer to the Novena they had made, and stating that he himself wholeheartedly approved of the plan, he begged His Eminence’s authorisation. Father Chevalier made an appointment with the Cardinal, and took the letter to him personally. Whether the Cardinal was already conversant with Father Gasnier’s idea of the desirability of a mission-house in the Province of Berry we do not know, but after carefully reading the letter he said to the hopeful young priest: “I am deeply touched with all you have put before me and am disposed to give my permission, but what are you going to live on? It is all very well to have a mission house, but where are you going to get the finance to sustain you?” “Your Eminence,” replied Father Chevalier, “We will at least have the stipends for our Masses and sermons, and will have to rely on Divine Providence for the rest.” “Divine Providence – that is all right,” rejoined the Cardinal, “but you must not tempt Divine Providence. I am afraid I will be able to authorise your plans, only when you are assured of an adequate and definite revenue. However, if God wills your work, He will see to it that you will not want the necessary help. Pray to the Blessed Virgin that She will complete the work She has so admirably begun.” Father Chevalier in relating the interview remarked: “The Cardinal’s language was that of prudence and of faith.”(32) Certainly the problem that the Cardinal had stressed was not a simple one. The two curates possessed neither money nor worldly goods. The mere pittance they received as salary was hardly enough to cover their personal needs, but such was their enthusiasm that money seemed a secondary consideration at this stage, while he can appreciate their optimistic enthusiasm, lack of finance was in reality the main obstacle to their venture in this early period and soon began to realise it. Where could they look in this un-Christian parish for support? And where could they look outside the parish, as, after all, they were still two comparatively unknown curates with little influence and few acquaintances?(33) They decided then that they would make a second Novena. The parish church was a regional centre of the Archconfraternity of the Immaculate Heart of whose headquarters was in the church of Our Lady of Victories in Paris.(34) The feast of the Archconfraternity was kept on the Sunday before Septuagesima (35) In this year – 1855 – the Sunday fell on the 28th January. They decided to finish the Novena on this day, and in Father Chevalier’s words: “In order to solicit Our Lady’s interest in our work, we decided to make a pact with Her.(36) We have two versions of this contract both from the hand of Father Chevalier – the first in his MANUSCRIPT written in 1859, and the second in his COMMENCEMENTS. This second version seems to be but a recasting of the first. We doubt that the first was the original text, and believe that the original was lost before 1859.(37) On 21st April, 1908 Father Maugenest wrote: “We wrote a contract with Our Lady only for the second novena. I do not recall the literal text of the terms of the pact, but I am certain that the main clause was a promise made to Mary Immaculate that, if She would help us, we would consider Her the Foundress of the Society and that we would work in a very special way to spread Devotion to Her amongst men. The theme was that we would honour the Sacred Heart of Jesus revealing Itself to the world, in order to save it through the inter cession of Mary Immaculate.” Father Chevalier would have been relying on his memory in handing down the terms of the pact to us. He was anxious to keep these promises before the minds of the future members of his Congregation. What is important for us is not the particular form in which the contract was expressed, or the literal wording but the profound significance of the promises. The wording of both texts is substantially the same but as a matter of interest we will place them side by side and compare the variations and additions. Perhaps it will help us to remember better the central idea of the pact and the nature of the promises:

MANUSCRIPT 1859 COMMENCEMENTS Contract made between the most Holy Virgin and two priests of the S.C. Sacred pledges taken by us at the feet of our good Mother, and placed in Her Immaculate Heart, with limitless confidence If the Holy Virgin, our great Queen our one Refuge and our sole Protection, triumphs over all the difficulties which Hell raises against us, and establishes our proposed work this year, For the salvation of souls and the glory of Her most dear Son, we undertake on our own behalf these following engagements – not only for ourselves but for those who will work in the same Company.

ARTICLE I The priests entrusted with the task of continuing the work of Saint Ursin, first Apostle of Berry, will take the Name of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. ARTICILE II They will have quite a special love and a singular piety for the Adorable Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary; they will work with all their strength to make these two Hearts everywhere loved. (Not in 1859 Text)

ARTICLE III They will never preach without saying a few words about Jesus and Mary. They will not hear even one confession without proposing these two Names those two Hearts to the invocation and love of the penitent.

ARTICLE IV The principal picture in their Chapel will represent the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the Adorable Heart of Jesus saving poor sinners.

ARTICLE V There will be in the Chapel (l) A statue of the Sacred Heart ( of Jesus 9 (2) A statue of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, (3) A banner on which the picture will perpetuate the memory of the great favour received.

ARTICLE VI The patronal Feast of the Congregation will be that of the Sacred Heart. The special feasts of the Order will be those of the Immaculate Conception, the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Saint Ursin, Saint Solange and Saint Dominic. The feasts of the Most Holy Virgin will be celebrated with very special solemnity.

ARTICLE VII The priests of the Sacred Heart in their solitude will imitate by preference the hidden and interior life of Mary in the Temple and in the House of Nazareth.

ARTICLE VIII In their apostolic life they will imitate Her groat Mercy, and following Her example, they will seek no more beautiful title than that of “Refuge of Sinners.” between Mary of the Sacred Heart.

A sacred engagement with confidence Most Holy Virgin our one hope. (These words do not appear in this Text) who will form part of the same Society.

The priests who will form part of our little Congregation will take the title of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and will engage themselves to fulfill all that the title signifies.

“They will have quite a special devotion to the work of making the Adorable Heart of Jesus loved and glorified by the priests and the faithful and making reparation for the outrages which It receives. In thanksgiving to Mary they will regard Her as their Foundress and Sovereign; they will associate Her in all their works, and make Her loved in a special way. Her Immaculate Heart will be the object ex their piety.

In so far possible they will preach,

…as also they will try not to hear any confession without proposing these two Hearts to the invocation etc..

…the Adorable Heart of Jesus revealing Itself to the World for its salvation through the intercession of Mary

(2) Another one of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. [ (3) An “ex-voto” which will perpetl

..will be the Feast of the Sacred The secondary feasts will be those of St. Joseph, St. John the Evangelist St. Ursin the first apostle of Berry

…the hidden life of Mary.

…Her zeal for the salvation of soulsr and Her great Mercy towards sinners.

When we compare the two documents we find they are substantially the same. Here and there greater emphasis may be put on a particular point, or the arrangement slightly altered, but there is no change of any importance. That confirms our opinion that the Manuscript of 1859 was a copy from memory and not the original, otherwise in his COMMENCEMENTS Father Chevalier would have been content to give us the original contract as it was written. When we recall that right from the beginning the principal end of the Society was Devotion to the Sacred Heart, we can see that Father Maugenest’s recollection of the general details of the contract were correct. He clearly states the special place that Devotion to Our Blessed Mother was to take in new Society. The founders both used the same expression – “in a very special manner” when speaking of this devotion. This intention, then, of giving special honour to the Mother of God as an end of the Society existed right from the beginning and was not just an afterthought by Father Chevalier in order to link the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart with the very foundation of the Congregation. One last observation: The correction to Article I shows that Father Chevalier did not regard the Apostolate of the district of Berry as an exclusive obligation on the founders or their successors. In the text this is inferred as only one of the works of the new Congregation. They did not engage them selves precisely to the apostolate of Berry, but expressed their proposal to continue the work of St. Ursin as one of their works. The contract does not express this exclusive obligation, although it was the main thought in the mind of the Abbe de Champgrand when he donated the house at Issoudun – as we shall see later in this chapter. This undoubtedly was one of the reasons besides many others, why Father Chevalier never wished to leave the parish of Issoudun. He would have felt obliged to stay there on account of the gift made to the two curates. Side by side then with Devotion to the Sacred Heart which was the primary end of the Society would be this Devotion to Mary “in a very special manner”. They would regard Her as the Foundress of the Society, and would work to spread Devotion to Her. This was the pact made with Her not only for themselves but for all the future members of the Congregation. Speaking of Father Chevalier’s devotion to Mary, Father Piperon writes: “He did not regard this mission as merely his own, but it was his dearest wish to see all his confreres full of zeal in propagating devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. He used often to impress on us that it was one of the principal ends of the Society, and a powerful means of glorifying the Heart of Jesus and making It loved. He said to me one day: ‘When Father Maugenest and I promised to take the name of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, and to honour the Holy Virgin in a special way, if our requests were granted, our thoughts were not of ourselves only, but we undertook to pledge our Congregation formally to the achievement of its two fold end. If we are Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, as our name and motto indicate, we must also be apostles devoted to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. That is our vocation.”(38) In accordance with this aim they promised to place in their chapel the statues and the “ex voto” lamps. The corrections to Article III – “in so far as possible” and ”they will try” explain their intentions on these points. “Each day of the Novena the written pact was placed on the Altar while they offered up the Adorable Victim. On the day of the feast when the novena ended, their prayers were more ardent and the promises renewed.”(39) AS on the 8th December a special ceremony was enacted during the High Mass. The pact was solemnly brought to the Sanctuary by two acolytes and offered to Our Lady “through the hands of the priest.”(40) During these weeks the parish priest, Father Crozat had been busy looking for help and resources for his curates’ plan. On the day of the feast 28th January – at the end of the Novena he informed them that a generous benefactress, an anonymous lady – inspired by grace had promised to grant an annual revenue of 1000 francs to the two curates for their livelihood (41) as long as they had need of it.(42) The secret of the identity of the benefactress was well guarded. Father Piperon wrote: “Never to my knowledge was the name mentioned. He wondered if Father Chevalier even knew who it was(43) but he certainly did later on since after the death of the lady he published the name in the Analecta of the Society in 1900. It was the Viscountess du Quesne. We do not know how long she paid the subsidy. “On hearing the news” wrote Father Chevalier, “our joy knew no bounds. Mary, it is to you, after Your Divine Son, that we owe our Society and its glory. It is yours. In that is our strength and our security.”(44) This gift has always been regarded as Our Lady’s answer to the Novena. “The response of Mary was not long in forthcoming,” wrote Father Piperon, and Father Chevalier agreed.(45) The intention of the novena was to resolve the difficulty of finance, which had been raised by the Cardinal. How were they going to live? His Eminence had considered the uncertain revenue of their ministry quite insufficient, but now this obstacle had been obviated. The approbation of the authorities was still to be obtained, and we can be sure that apart from the financial aid they sought, the main intention of the novena was ultimately to have their plan approved by the Church. Father Maugenest recalls: “The intention was to obtain from our Sovereign Queen the necessary means of livelihood, but this only that we could obtain the authorisation of our plan.” After mentioning the opposition, he continues; “This approbation ultimately obtained by the result of our second novena was, to my mind, a greater miracle than the gift of 20,000 francs after the first.” Father Chevalier also thought the same way: “From then on” he wrote in his Manuscript of 1859, “Hell was conquered, the obstacles were surmounted; and besides the generous gift of 20,000 francs to purchase the house in which we now live, a kind benefactress offered us 1000 francs a year.”(47) The Abbe Rigault informs us that he learnt from Father Chevalier that the promised 20,000 francs was received only after the second novena, after a lot of difficulties had been straightened cut.(48) Two of the three people concerned in this Novena had quite a different intention which Father Maugenest never suspected. It is question here of the project of a certain Abbe de Champgrand who was to play an important part in the development of the affair. It concerned certain new difficulties arising from conditions which the donor stipulated. Edward, Ferdinand Marie de Champgrand was born at Jussy-Champagne, near Bourges, on the 18th August, 1813. He was educated by the Jesuits first at their college in Billom (Puy-de-Dome) and then at Fribourg in Switzerland. 12th October, 1831 he commenced his Seminary studies at Issy and later went to Saint Sulpice. He joined the Sulpicians and after his ordination on 20th May 1837 he was appointed to the Major Seminary of Bordeaux where in turn he was Professor of Dogmatic Theology (1837-40), Bursar (1841-44); Professor of Moral Theology (134449) and of Sacred Scripture (1849-60). (49) Knowing that he came from a wealthy family, Father Gasnier had appealed to him to ask his relatives to help finance a plan he had in mind for the spiritual welfare of the people of Berry – the native country of Abbe de Champgrand and the region where his family had their properties. This plan concerned the formation of a Community of Missionaries to evangelise the people of Berry. The idea appealed to the Abbe and in a letter to Father Gasnier he wrote: “It is an eminently practical idea, and you have done well to interest me in it personally. I had at heart much the same idea – the necessity of a Community of Missionaries to evangelise above all the poor people of the fields who in most of our district of Berry are very backward in religious knowledge. Whether Abbe de Champgrand at this stage wished to urge the immediate accomplishment of the project, or was merely seeking further details or again whether he thought it preferable to leave the initiative to the clergy of Issoudun we do not know, but after Father Chevalier’s arrival in the parish had spoken of the plan to his brother-in-law Monsieur Philippe de Bengy who resided in Issoudun.(51) He had instructed him to approach the two curates without mentioning his name, and inform them that if they wished to undertake a work for the good of the souls of the Berry district, for example to establish a mission-house, he would donate the sum of 20,000 francs towards the cause. He would have known of the character of the two priests and of their good intentions, and the condition that he stipulated namely – the permission of Cardinal – would assure that the work would be under the authority of Bourge; and that Father Gasnier would take the matter in hand himself, and give them good advice personally. We must state that right from the beginning Abbe de Champgrand found himself in a false position. He did not realise that the scope of the plan in the mind of the two curates was wider than that of his own. When he received their reply through Monsieur de Bengy he envisaged the foundation of a mission house staffed by diocesan priests for the good of the Berry province, and did not know of their further intentions which they meant to submit to the Cardinal. In the conference with Monsieur Petit the main topic had been the foundation of a mission-house for Berry with the permission of the Cardinal. Without any intention of deception or suppression of facts Father Chevalier in his elation and enthusiasm did not mention anything about the intention of founding a religious Congregation in honour of the Sacred Heart. In reference to the difficulties that later arose, Father Piperon has written: “In the effusion of his gratitude the good Father forgot to make known just in what way this generous gift of 20,000 francs was the fulfillment of his prayers and the assurance that his plan was in accordance with the will of God. Had he not now the means of purchasing some little corner of the earth for his longed-for mission house which would shelter his future missionaries? Was not this the answer of the Immaculate Virgin bidding him to proceed with the foundation of his Religious Society?(52) During the conversation concerning the gift there was nothing in the mind of Monsieur Petit except the foundation of a mission-house for Berry, whereas in the mind of Father Chevalier the main thought was that now the sign prayed for in the Novena had been granted, the sign asked of God regarding the founda tion of the Congregation. Its realisation now depended only on the approval of the Cardinal, in accordance with the condition laid down by the donor. The first interview with the Cardinal, as we have seen, left the two priests full of hope, and in conformity with his wish, they had obtained the financial security of at least 1000 francs per annum. Now His Eminence could hardly refuse their request. Soon the rumour was noised abroad that the two curates of Issoudun had in mind not only a mission-house, but the foundation of a religious Congregation, letters of both Father Maugenest and Father Rigault show that this intention was known even before the end of the second novena. The Abbes de Champgrand heard of it, no doubt from Monsieur de Bengy. He was profoundly upset by the news. This was not the purpose for which he had promised the money. His intention had been to finance the purchase of a mission house for diocesan priests, not to establish a new Religious Institute. He did not wish that any price. It was an eventuality he had not dreamed of when offering his help. Monsieur de Bengy who could see complications ahead, prudently withdrew, but the Abbe de Champgrand, in spite of his desire to remain anonymous, decided to make his mind clear on the subject. It was thus that Father Crozat and Father Chevalier learnt his name. The Abbe summarily threatened to withdraw his offer of 20,000 francs, unless the idea of a Religious Congregation be dropped and the money used exclusively for a mission-house for Berry. Even then the imperturbable Jules Chevalier did not seem to take the threat very seriously. Such was his confidence that he thought that if the Cardinal would now give his permission, all could be arranged happily. After all, Madame du Quesne had promised the annual sustenance; the important thing was to see the Cardinal immediately and obtain his authorisation. So the determined curate from Issoudun set off once again for Bourges to interview Cardinal du Pont. The Cardinal received him cordially and listened attentively to what Father Jules told him. “His Eminence was profoundly impressed by my story,” he later wrote. “He said to me: ‘The hand of God is there, I can see that. I will submit the whole matter to my Council, and will let you know their decision.'” Alas, all the members of the Council without exception were opposed to project. “What are the reasons for your refusal?” His Eminence asked them. “They are only a couple of inexperienced curates without money or standing!” replied one. “We must save them from becoming the joke of the Diocese.” Another proposed; “This foundation of Missionaries is not only adventuresome, but compromising to the diocese. If it does not succeed, as seems probable, all the responsibility will fall back on the Diocesan authorities. We will be blamed for taking the matter so lightly, and will have to bear the odium ourselves. And so on. Three times during the Council the project was brought up and three times it was unanimously rejected. “Gentlemen,” His Eminence finally said; “This matter seems to me a grave one. We will decide nothing further today. I ask you to think seriously about it and we will discuss it again at a future date.” And so the meeting broke up.(53) The main objection of the Council was to the fact that the project of the two curates was to found a new Religious Congregation. They did not object to a new mission-house in Issoudun, for the apostolate in Berry, but to the plan of a new Religious Society. Even Father Gasnier was one of the objectors. This did not seem to him the solution he was looking for to revive the Faith in the Berry Province, and the scheme of the two young priests could easily impede his own plan of inaugurating a mission house in the area. He admitted later that in the early stages of the foundation he took no active part in assuring its success.”(54) We can appreciate his position for as Superior St. Sulpice he held an important place on the Diocesan Council, and wanted to be sure of his ground. After the Council was over he sought out Father Chevalier and tried to convince him that the project was not feasible. Father Chevalier wrote; “He said to me: My dear friend, drop the idea of your religious Congregation. You will never have it passed by the Council. They attacked it vehemently for over half an hour. I think it is dead and buried’. ‘” “Did the Cardinal give his final decision?” asked Father Chevalier. “No,” came the reply, “he postponed his decision to a later date, but you can be sure the Council will not give in, and His Eminence never goes against their advice. You had better consider the matter finished.” “But not so fast, Father Superior, Our Lady has not yet given Her final word. We will pray to Her.” “Good, you may do that by all means, but if you win through She will have worked a first-class miracle.” “We are counting on Her. She is already too much in this work to abandon us now. I have confidence in your prayers, Father, and I know you will join them to ours.” “Very willingly,” replied Father Gasnier. “From my own personal point of view I would be very happy to see your Congregation happily established.”(55) Was this last reply merely politeness on the part of the good priest or was he beginning to be affected by such faith and such perseverance? Was he beginning to understand that in conjunction with these convinced men his own plan would be realised only by the foundation of which they dreamed? Was he becoming aware that behind their zeal and enthusiasm was a Force with which he had not reckoned? These young priests were convinced they had received a Sign from Heaven, and believed they were not free to ignore it. This, thought Father Gasnier, was the only explanation of this firm resolution of Jules Chevalier in the face of such opposition. And in fact this was the truth. His determination was a result of the events of December 8th, the culmination of a long quest for heavenly assurance. All this he surely would have told Father Gasnier in their conversation and quoted to him the Cardinal’s words “The hand of God is in this.” Father Chevalier returned to Issoudun with the discouraging news of the Council’s decision. Later, in summing up the unfavourable attitude he encounter at Bourges he wrote: “They received me much like a dog in a game of skittles,”(55) He postponed the letter which he promised to write to the Abbe de Champgrand. If the Cardinal was not to give his approval, the letter would be superfluous. “Only one thing now was left to them – recourse to the Immaculate Mother of’ God. They prayed to her with renewed fervour. In his COMMENCEMENTS Father Chevalier recalls the spirit of hope and trust with which they approached the Mother of God during this difficult period. Already the spirit of the Devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart is evident in their prayers. “We turned again to Her Who is the Hope of the hopeless, and against all human foresight we obtained the approval of authority. O Mary, may you ever be blessed! You are indeed the Foundress of our Society. How can we ever thank you enough. What title can we give you to exalt your power and goodness in the work of the Sacred Heart?”(56) Some have maintained that the prayers offered by the two priests after the refusal of the Council took the form of a third novena, but there is no evidence of that. There is no record in the writings of Fathers Chevalier, Maugenest and Piperon that such was the case, and Father Maugenest has noted that the necessary approbation came after the second novena. Meanwhile the opposition of Abbe de Champgrand had grown stronger, and he refused to donate the 20,000 francs under the existing circumstances. He remarked that he had no intention of financing an adventure. He went further and made another condition: that the proposed mission-house be confided to care of an already established Religious Order. This would assure the stability of the work, and not leave it to the hazy and nebulous concept of two young inexperienced priests. In a letter to Father Gasnier he candidly stated his views: “When I heard that the two curates intended to form a new religious Congregation and were going to call themselves Missionaries of the Sacred Heart I was dismayed. I did not wish to see at Issoudun the head-house of a new religious Congregation. Such a thought was a thousand miles from my mind when I offered the money. On the contrary I groan to see Institutes springing up on all sides. They were not known to our predecessors and many of them have failed to prove their utility. The name of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart which these young men wish to assume dismays me. They should attach themselves to one of the approved Orders which would imply their name. If these men are animated by the Spirit of God, which I believe they are, they will be doing themselves a good turn if they join some established Institute which will be able to nourish them. If this does not appeal to them I believe they are not instruments which Providence can use. (non de semine virorum illorum per quos salus facta est Israel!) I am glad to think, Father Superior, that you are in accord with my views, and hope you will be able to bring this matter to a satisfactory conclusion.” Father Crozat wrote the Abbe several letters explaining the intentionsof the two curates, but they were to no avail. The reminder that the only condition he had required – the approval of the Cardinal – had been met, brought no result. From the Abbe’s point of view, these two young curates were prepared to use deceitfully for their own purposes the money he had promised for the establishment of a mission-house in Issoudun with a view to the apostolate of the abandoned people of the Berry country-side. Who could have foreseen that they would take it into their heads to initiate still another of these new Congregations which were nothing but a scandal to him. Under these circumstances he did not feel bound to his promise. The project of the curates was entirely different from the one he had in mind when he offered the money. It was idle to state that the only question was the establishing of a mission-house. The nature of the mission house should have been made clear. Besides, his condition, the approval of the Cardinal – had not yet been definitely fulfilled. But while the Abbe de Champgrand was relying on the support of Father Gasnier, we can see that this good priest was already beginning to qualify his opposition and modify his unfavourable views. After his interview with Father Chevalier he was convinced that the two young priests believed in the Divine inspiration of their project, the possibility of which he was not free to dismiss himself. He had confidence in the judgment of Father Crozat, who had written to him explaining the whole plan and expressing the opinion that it was feasible. Father Gasnier had forwarded the letter to Abbe de Champgrand explaining that he himself was inclined to take a more favourable view of the enterprise and reserve his judgment for the time being. Abbe de Champgrand replied on 24th March, 1855; “I am returning to you the project of Abbe Crozat. I have studied it carefully, as I did your own letter. I have written to Monsieur de Bengy concerning the matter asking for certain details, and am awaiting his reply.” The tone of the letter would suggest that the Abbe felt his position was weakening somewhat. He was not as uncompromising as before. It is a pity that we do not know the exact contents of Father Crozat’s pro ject. The reaction of the Abbe de Champgrand to it indicates that it merited serious consideration. Did the venerable parish priest propose the compromise which Abbe Champgrand eventually accepted? It is certain that he carried the attack into the enemy’s camp. He stated plainly that a promise had been made, and that it ought to be honoured. He also pointed out that 20,000 francs would not be enough to buy a house such as the Abbe de Champgrand had in mind. At least 25,000 would be required. As regards the stability of the project, which the Abbe was doubting, he simply pointed out that this was guaranteed by the fact that the members would engage themselves by vows. But Abbe de Champgrand would not admit the three points mentioned by Father Crozat. He continued in his letter to Father Gasnier: “It may be just as well to make two observations before a final decision can be given, which I cannot do at present. Firstly, my promise was not made just for any project at all, and it is a mere supposition to think I would increase it to 25,000 francs. Secondly, I still have doubts on the stability of the work, if it remains in the hands of these missionaries, even though they might be bound by vows.” Meanwhile the Issoudun clergy anxiously awaited further news from Bourges. What would the final decision of the Cardinal be? His Eminence eventually called his Council together, and the subject was brought up again. The proposal met with the same opposition – this time stronger if anything. After the discussion the Cardinal rose to speak: “Gentlemen,” he said, “I have reflected on this matter; I have prayed about it. As you know, it is not my custom to go against your decisions. This time, however, I am going to do so, as I believe I would be going against the Designs of Providence if I agreed with you. I promised these two priests that if they could show me another sign of the Will of God regarding their resources, I would approve their plan. This sign they have shown me, and I am going to keep my promise. From today I am authorising the two curates at Issoudun to unite and commence their work. From today I ask you to nominate two priests to replace them.” This historic approval was granted on Monday 4th June, 1855, and Father Chevalier and his companions heard of it the following day. “The next day,” wrote Father Chevalier, “we received a letter from His Eminence announcing his decision.” The first curate named was a young priest ordained only the preceding Saturday – Father Joseph Lelot. His nomination is dated 4th June. The other curate was Father Antoine Tamisier, who had succeeded Jules at Chatillon. His nomination was dated 5th June. Father V. Chastre, the archivist at Bourges, informs us that there is a record in the diocesan register under the date of 10th June. “The Revorend Jules Chevalier has been authorised to take the title of Missionary of the Sacred Heart”, and has been relieved of his duties as curate at Issoudun.” Regarding Father Maugenest the record merely states he was permitted to bear the title “in 1855.”(60) The time had come – with the definite approval of the Cardinal assured – for Abbe de Champgrand to make a decision. The condition stipulated on 8th December of the previous year had been fulfilled – the Cardinal had granted approbation. The Abbe realised that the Cardinal knew of his promise and naturally it put him in a delicate position before the prelate. He had before him, at least during the life-time of the Cardinal, the alternative of abandoning the idea of a mission-house at Issoudun as he had conceived it, or accepting the new Religious Congregation, which he considered a dead-weight and a risk to the diocese. Reluctantly he finally decided to support the new Society. “I must yield at least exteriorly”, he lamented on the 3rd April, 1856. But he attached a condition. The condition, which may have been that suggested by Father Crosat in his letter, was that he would buy a house for no more than 20,000 francs in his own name, and then after a time, if the Congregation prospered, and was a help to the Berry district, he would donate the property to it. This actually happened seven years later in 1863. Reviewing then the history of the foundation we can see that the 8th of December, 1854 was the important date. In spite of the consequent conflict of opinion re ways and means, the sign had been given from Heaven on that day. The “dream” of student days had become a reality; the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart had been founded. The project had been achieved by a combination of the spiritual and the material. Father Chevalier had been convinced that the Sacred Heart and His Immaculate Mother had a special work for him to do. With the help of Father Maugenest he had prayed for this, worked for it and fought for it. The two priests had faith and confidence, but how to accomplish their plan had been another matter. From the material point of view we might say that humanly speaking the project was in the hands of Abbe de Champgrand. Without knowing it, and even without wishing it, he was the instrument of Divine Grace. He had been difficult, but nevertheless, his offer had been taken by the Founder as the required sign from Heaven, and had initiated the practical steps towards the establishment of the Society. We can see how Almighty God uses human elements even unwilling ones at times, for the accomplishment of his works.(61) Looking back over the succession of events, we can clearly see that the two similar yet independent projects – that of Father Gasnier and the Abbe Champgrand on the one hand, and that of Father Chevalier on the other, were brought together by Divine Providence on the historic date of 8th December, 1854. This surely was a result of the novena made by the two curates. In spite of the conflict of opinions and the cross-purposes, the final agreement and collaboration of the two parties confirmed the grace received on the 8th December. Was it not a miraculous event?

“A miracle,” says Professor Dondeyne, “as a religious phenonomen is the coming together of extraordinary and astonishing facts, which in the religious context in which they happen, are a sensible and certain sign that God is with his Saints………..Miracles appear in the religious history of mankind as the sensible response of God to the faith of man – a visible manifestation of Divine Providence.”(62) The great event of the morning of the 8th December, 1854 was for Jules Chevalier this visible manifestation of Divine Providence in response to his ardent prayers. And this Divine response was for him, as Founder, the confirmation of his mission and the Divine approval of the Society he had established.

CHAPTER VIII: THE FIRST COMMUNITY

Convinced that the foundation of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart was in accord with the plans of Divine Providence, and in spite of the difficulties raised by the Abbe de Champgrand, the clergy of Issoudun went in search of a suitable dwelling to house the first members of the Congregation. Their search began in the early months of 1855. We have already seen that the Abbe had written a letter on 24th March, 1855 stating he would definitely not go beyond 20,000 francs.(l) Wishing to avoid public comment, the priests enlisted the services of their next door neighbour, Monsieur Voisin, who was a good Catholic with a brother and a son in the priesthood. Being an expert carpenter he knew the building trade well, which was a big help. Without putting him in complete charge of negotiations, the priests instructed him to look for a suitable dwelling, which he would purchase in his own name, not revealing the identity of the real buyers till the last moment.(2) Although willing to co-operate Monsieur Voisin was rather embarrassed, as he had just purchased a nice cottage, where he hoped to retire, and he knew the village tongues would start to wag at this new purchase. Several places were examined, but most were unsuitable to their purpose. One was too dear; another in the wrong locality; another too small, and so on. Eventually an abandoned villa at one end of the Place de Vouet caught their interest as it offered possibilities.(3) After an inspection at nightfall, the priests decided to buy it. The agent, Monsieur Petit was rather astonished when Monsieur Voisin approached him and said he wanted to buy the place. He had just sold him a house, and naturally wondered what was behind this latest move. However, he was only too willing to do business, as the villa had not been occupied for about five years, and was in a bad state of disrepair.(4) Just when the sale was about to be finalised, an unexpected rival-purchaser appeared on the scene, and was prepared to pay a higher price than the priests could afford. It was just what he wanted, he said, and the price was right, but he would have to consult his wife before finalising the deal. The good lady arrived and was pleased with what she saw. Just as she was about to leave she noticed a grave-yard about 300 yards away, and asked “What is that, over there?” “Oh, that is a cemetery” the agent replied. “Oh dear, this house would be too mournful. I could never live near a cemetery” she replied, much to the relief of the missionaries. Time was passing and still there was no decision from Abbe de Champgrand. If the Congregation was to be established in suitable quarters before the end of the year, it would have to be before Trinity Sunday. The diocese was short of priests and the only hope of getting replacements was after the Ordination which took place on the Saturday before the Feast of the Blessed Trinity. However, the Cardinal resolved that difficulty by appointing two priests immediately after his decision to authorise the Congregation. The parishioners began to suspect that something was going on at the Presbytery, but they did not know what. When the nomination of the two new priests was announced, the local paper, “Le Droit Commun” commented that whilst awaiting the execution of projects yet to be disclosed, four curates were attached to the parish. Everyone was convinced that the district was far too big for two curates to administer and that hence in future four priests would help the parish priest in his responsibilities. The two new priests were Father Tamisier, recent curate at Chatillon, and Father Lelot, recently ordained. The supposition was far from being true for until Abbe Champgrand gave his consent, from June 10th on Fathers Chevalier and Maugenest found themselves on the street. They decided they would return to their home-towns and live with their people until they could take possession of a house in Issoudun. And so Father Chevalier went off to Richelieu, and Father Maugenest to Chezal-Benoit. Jules’ homecoming was not a very happy event, as his aged mother had expected him to be taking charge of a parish and had intended to spend her last days with him. He had written to her telling her that his days as a curate in Issoudun were over, and she had inferred from this that he was now to be a parish priest. She had been looking forward to this for some time, so she could go and live with him. “I arrived at Richelieu,” he writes, “my heart full of emotion, apprehensive of my mother’s reaction to my future plans. After our warm greetings, she asked me what was the name of my new parish. I evaded the question by speaking of other subjects, but the next day she plied me with questions again: “Was the parish far from Issoudun? Was it a nice place? Were the people there good Christians? Did I like the change?” etc.. I decided to tell her of my plans. “Mother, I am staying on at Issoudun, not as parish priest but as a missionary. “A Missionary!”’ she repeated. The word seemed to stun her. Seeing all her dreams shattered, she began to cry and actually fell into a faint. For a moment I thought she was dead. My heart ached for her, and I felt very miserable because of the pain I was causing her. When she came to, she continued to cry, and begged me to change my mind. I asked God for help and tried to calm her. For the next eight days I had to withstand a veritable onslaught from the members of my family, but, knowing I was acting according to the Will of God, I remained steadfast in my resolution, not without a lot of mental anguish. I was torn between my love for my dear mother with the desire to help her, and the call of God to fulfill my mission. The words of Our Divine Master kept recurring to me: ‘He who loves father or mother more than Me, is not worthy of Me.’ They were eight days of martyrdom. Gradually the spirit of faith and good sense reconciled my mother to my decision, and she began to see my motives. She knew when she was to say goodbye to me it would probably be forever in this life, and I must say when the actual parting came, she was heroic.” “Before returning to Issoudun, I went to Poitiers to make a retreat, conducted by the Jesuit Fathers, in order to renew my religious and priestly ideals, I wrote out my resolutions, and placed them on the tomb of Saint Radegonde.”(9) The sojourn in Richelieu and the retreat at Poitiers would have occupied the second half of the month of June, and it would have been early in July when the two priests met again in Issoudun to prepare to enter their new home. The actual deed of sale was signed in Paris before a Monsieur Dufoir on the 1st September in the presence of Mme. Prudence Josephine Mayet-Bernard who owned the property. In the meantime the assurance of the Abbe de Champgrand had been obtained, and a provisional deed of sale drawn up, which enabled the priests to take possession in July. Father Chevalier tells us: “On our return to Issoudun, we immediately set about making the necessary adjustments and repairs. They were anxious to have the place in good shape for the official opening on 9th September. The property was situated in the suburb of Croix-Rouge, adjacent to the Place de Vouet now known as the Place du Sacre-Coeur – in the northern part of the town. The property, which is on the northern part of the Square, was divided into three parts; a small vineyard to the east running parallel to the Rue des Champs d’Amour; a garden to the west, surrounded by a wall about six feet high, and in the centre the buildings which consisted of the dwelling itself and a large long lumber room, with a courtyard between the two. The buildings were about 25 yards in length, and connected on the street side by a wall similar to that surrounding the garden. A door and gate in this wall led into the courtyard. At the far ends were the wells and the wood-pile. The two missionaries put themselves to the work of improvement and repair with zest, without being too fastidious. The dwelling was of one storey, and was divided into four main apartments. Nearest the street was the parlour – a large room about 20 feet square with a glass door opening towards the Place de Vouet, another onto the courtyard and a window overlooking the garden, then in order along the length of the building, came the bed-room, the dining room, small stair way leading to the attic, and the kitchen with built-in cupboards etc.. A passage way ran half-way along the left wall of the building turning right towards the garden. The main alterations which the Fathers decided to make were to divide the old large bedroom into two small living rooms or cells, to extend the passage way along to the front parlour, and to put two beds in the attic for future use. The wall, built to extend the passage way, unfortunately shut off the light and sun from the two cells. One had a window facing the garden, but the one in which Father Chevalier unselfishly chose to live had no natural light at all. It was decided to put a pane of glass in the upper portion of the door, but even then the only light entering the room was from the passage-way. He occupied this pokey little room for several years until his health began to fail, when his confreres got his permission, not without difficulty, to put a door in the wall leading out onto a bay facing the garden.(12) Mlle. Marchand records that during these days of preparation and renovation Father Mangenest’s Mother used to come over from Chezal-Benoit to give a hand and keep the house in order. The good lady used to catch the coach back home at four o’clock in the morning.(14) It was decided to turn the old lumber rooms on the opposite side of the courtyard into a chapel. This was an elongated building similar to the main house, much in the shape of a barn, but in three separate sections, whose roofs fortunately were of the same height – about nine feet.(15) The conversion of this building into a chapel was made as Father Piperon tells us, “under the direction of the ingenious Founder,”(l6) and the super vision of Monsieur Voisin. Actually it is hard to find anything “ingenious” about the construction, but Father Piperon was probably thinking of the fact that the transformation was made with the very meagre resources at Father Chevalier’ s command. Finance actually was the big problem. The 20,000 francs of the Abbe de Champgrand barely covered the cost of the property, and he had refused the extra 5000 francs. Monsieur Voisin had put aside a small sum of money for his daughter’s marriage, and offered to lend this, but that would have been only for a short time.(l7) This lack of money explains why the original house lacked many ordinary amenities, and could hardly boast of the bare necessities. The interior walls were knocked out of the building and a vaulted ceiling replaced the flat one. Two sacristies were built, one on each side of the main altar, which itself consisted of a simple table painted white and supported by wooden pedestals. In front of the sacristies were two side altars – that of Our Lady on the Epistle side and St. Joseph on the Gospel side, and a wooden Communion rail ran from wall to wall in front of the Sanctuary. Two confessionals were built, one on either side of the main entrance over which was a round rose-glass window, and chairs were used for the seating.(18) The tabernacle was just a plain wooden structure (19) and above was a small throne, where the Blessed Sacrament might be exposed. Mlle. Marchand had tried to make the altar and throne a little more attractive by decorating them with artificial flowers (roses and jasmine), and later Madame Du Quesne donated a more elaborate throne of carved wood.(20) The Chapel was lighted by eight windows, the glass of which was frosted in various colours which gave a devotional tone to the sanctuary.(21) After Father Piperon arrived in 1856, he made his own “stained glass” windows by pasting various types of coloured paper in various designs on the glass. “As this was a rather long process,” wrote Mlle. Marchant, “he enlisted the help of my father, and the two of them worked at their ‘stained glass’ in the little workshop in the attic.(22) The Chapel, which according to Father Piperon was able to hold comfortably from five to six hundred people, was finished by September.(23) The Abbe Dalailler recalls: “I have seen this old barn transformed into the Chapel of the Sacred Heart by means of white and red paint, by camouflage of the old walls and their supports, and the adornment of poor altars.” Father Chevalier himself remembers with humble simplicity: “This improvised chapel had the privilege of extreme poverty and lowly appearance.” However, Father Piperon affectionately recalls: “In spite of its poverty and complete lack of style (elsewhere he referred to it as “barn” architecture) the chapel was not with out its charm with its quaint murals and dainty paintings and its consoling atmosphere of piety. It invited prayer, and the good, if few, worshippers were proud of their little church.(25) While the work of renovation was going on the priests said their daily Masses in the Chapel, and heard the Confessions of the faithful. On the 9th September the official blessing and opening took place. In the absence of the Cardinal, who was sick, the Vicar-General, the Abbe Caillaud performed the ceremony and preached.(26) A large crowd, gathered, and all the neighbouring clergy was in attendance. A prominent figure amongst them was Abbe Crozat, beaming with joy. During his discourse the Vicar General said he was officially delegated by the Cardinal to confer the name of “Missionaries of the Sacred Heart” on the now Congregation. He said that it was no mere coincidence that this joyful day happened to be the Feast of the Holy Name of Mary, the loving Mother who had so carefully guarded and guided her infant Congregation. It was just nine months since the Conception of the Society on the 8th December, and this could well be called the day of its birth. “Father Founder,” says Father Piperon, “used often remind us of this fact, and he wished that each year the 9th September be celebrated with extra solemnity in order to thank the Mother of God for Her protection. On this day he would tell us, the Church gave us the name of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. On the first anniversary of this Feast a great flock of birds of all species invaded the courtyard and precincts of the chapel at dawn, flying around and vying with one another in their warbling and twitter. Father Chevalier remarked on seeing them. “They have come to sing the praises of the sweet name of Mary. Let us bless Her with them.” Several years in succession the birds came on this happy feast, and Father Piperon has fittingly written: “We loved to join with these gracious musicians in their songs of praise of the Queen of Heaven and earth.” Father Chevalier had another important and very significant reason for remembering and celebrating the Feast of the Holy Name of Mary, and one which Father Piperon did not suspect. It was on this day – the day of the official recognition of the Society that he first thought of the title – “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.” Here is the text in which Father Chevalier gives to this day its complete significance. On Sunday, 9th September, 1855, on the Feast of the HOLY NAME OF MARY, the Missionaries were installed with the authority of His Eminence, Cardinal Du Pont, Archbishop of Bourges, and given the name of MISSIONARIES OF THE SACRED HEART OF JESUS. That same day, wishing to show their love and gratitude to Mary, they gave her in their thought the NAME OUR LADY OF THE SACRED HEART. A wonderful coincidence that only Heaven could arrange.” (29) By “they” Father Founder meant “I”, as he did not reveal the thought to his confreres till later on. Father Piperon adds the note: “In underlining the titles and writing them in capital letters Father Chevalier draws attention to the fact that there had been not one but two changes of names on that feast of the Holy Name of Mary; The missionaries became Missionaries of the Sacred Heart and Mary became Our Lady of the Sacred Heart: the former officially, the latter in thought. Almighty God inspired this new title in the heart of Jules Chevalier while he was praying in the chapel, which had just been blessed. Did not he himself say, “The devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart had for its cradle the chapel of the Missionaries the Sacred Heart.”(30) In their pact with Our Lady on 19th January, 1955, the two founders had promised to put three images in their chapel. Father Maugenest had painted two pictures for the side-altars, one representing as promised, the Immaculate Heart of Mary; the other a painting of St. Joseph. When Father Piperon arrived, those pictures had been replaced by statues.(31) The third and principal picture, according to Article IV of the promise was to be a representation of “the adorable Heart of Jesus revealing Itself to the world in order to save it by the intercession of Mary Immaculate.”(32) Accordingly over the main altar was hung an oil painting measuring 2.5ft. x 2 ft. which symbolised all those concepts. Father Chevalier always regarded this picture as a precious souvenir of the early days of the Congregation, and when the new church was built, he kept it in his own room. At the time of the expulsion shortly before his death his main concern was for the preservation of this painting. It can now be seen in the Museum at Issoudun. In his book on Our Lady of the Sacred Heart Father Founder describes it thus: “I have here before my eyes another picture – not without its artistic merit. It dates back to the 18th century, and perhaps further. In the upper part of the picture the Sacred Heart shines in glory, Its brilliant light illuminating the whole sky. Near by is the Blessed Virgin Mary, shrouded in splendour, pointing out the Heart of Her Divine Son to the Angels, the Saints and the Patriarchs, who are contemplating It in admiration while adoring and blessing It. From the Wound in the Sacred Heart a stream of light flows directly to Mary, and from Her it is diffused on a group of five people representing the various Continents of the world. This group occupies the lower portion of the painting. The garb of each of the five persons indicates the country he comes from – Europe, Asia, America., Africa and Oceania. All are in an attitude of prayer and supplication, beseeching the Mother of God to bestow on them the light of grace and strength that they need.”(33) During the ceremony of the official installation and bestowal of their new title the two missionaries were kneeling together before the altar in their humble chapel. Their thoughts went back over the years and the marvel of their vocation – back to their seminary days when all this had been but “a dream”, back to the days of trial and disappointment, of hope and waiting, back particularly to the almost unbelievable events of the past six months. Preeminently amongst the days stood out the historic 8th December with the miraculous answer to their Novena. At each period of reverse and disappointment when it would seem the plan must fail, Mary seemed to intervene to overcome the particular obstacle and to give them new hope. She was their powerful Mediatrix with the Divine Heart of Her Son. They had made their pact with Her, and full of confidence they knew that in spite of all difficulties they would one day be Missionaries of the Sacred Heart and they would honour their Heavenly Queen in a special way. Graces had poured abundantly from Her Immaculate Heart, and now here they were on this happy day being officially recognised by the Church and bearing the longed-for name of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. Gratitude and love filled the hearts of these first two members of the new Congregation. Their eyes turned to the picture above the altar. There before them was the symbolism of their mission – to bring to souls the glory of the Heart of Jesus through the all-powerful Heart of Mary, His Mother. While looking with love and tenderness on this picture of Mary pointing to the Heart of Her Son there came to Father Chevalier as if by illumination, the title “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.” This name, unheard-of till now, filled the soul of the valiant missionary with a holy joy. A vivid light seemed to reveal the power and charm of this new name and title, the profound and glorious significance for his Heavenly Mother. He immediately knew that the august Mother of God wished to be honoured under this blessed name, and that by dedicating himself and his new Congregation to spreading devotion to Her under this title he would be fulfilling his promise to make Her known and loved “in a special manner.”(34) Enriched by this grace, and now officially recognised by the Cardinal the two Missionaries commenced their new life, or, as Father Piperon has put it, “they began the Novitiate of this new kind of life, which would not conclude till the 25th December in the following year.” They both tried to model their lives on that of Jesus during His days at Nazareth and during His public ministry. Their one ambition was to reproduce in their life that of Jesus Christ, King of the poor, their one ambition to devote themselves as did He to the salvation of their brethren. Their first concern, accordingly, was to draw up a rule of life for themselves in accord with their new kind of life. They wished to become missionaries and apostles of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. They had promised this to Mary Who in accepting them had accepted their promise. Now the apostolate requires two essentials: holiness and knowledge. If either of those qualities was missing then the apostle was not fully-equipped, and the fruits of his sacred ministry would be impaired, if not wholly lost. Father Chevalier and his confrere sincerely wished to become apostles after the Heart of Christ, and to live only for His glory and the salvation of souls. From the very first day their motto was: “May the Sacred Heart of Jesus be Everywhere loved.” How could they make the Heart of the Crucified Christ loved by men if they did not burn with that love themselves? How could they teach the Infinite Perfection of His love and mercy, if they did not study it and become imbued with It? It was necessary then, that they carefully draw up a Rule of Life, which would foster this love and school them in the sacred sciences. The two words – in large characters – which best describe their life in these days are Poverty and Privation. Their chapel was poor, their dwelling was primitive, their furniture was shabby. In each cell was a wooden cross, a little table, two chairs, a book-shelf and a bed (and as Father Piperon, who had slept therein, wryly remarked “And what a bed!”)(35) “Nazareth itself”, writes Father Piperon, “could not have been poorer, but the poverty did not frighten them. They loved and desired it, convinced that the foundations of true religious life must be built on poverty such as Jesus, the Divine Model, taught and practised. It was the firm rock on which the edifice was built strong enough to withstand the furious blasts of the tempest. The missionaries accepted it with joy and even gratitude. The poverty of Bethlehem, the destitution of the Stable was theirs at Issoudun, and afforded them the opportunity of modelling themselves more closely on Jesus, the King of the poor.(36) Despite the joy with which the missionaries embraced poverty and the lack of necessities, despite their desire to imitate Christ, and despite the arguments which Father Piperon himself put forth on the value of poverty in the apostolic and religious life, it was circumstances rather than the spirit of their foundation which forced them to practise it to such a degree during these first years. The self-same Father Piperon recognises that their intent was to practise an asceticism influenced by the Sulpician tradition and the rule that they had known at the Seminary. “Both of them,” he says, “were trained for the priesthood by the disciples of Father Olier, and had a true esteem and affection for the traditions of the Seminary. They thought they could not do better than to base their own Statutes on those of the Seminary adapting and altering them where necessary, according to the nature of their work. An example of the prudence of the young Founder in drawing up the Rule for his Congregation is shown in the rules referring to penance and mortification. Although he himself had long been accustomed to the practice of even rigorous penances, and although his own temperament shunned anything soft or indulgent, he clearly stated in the rule that any acts of corporal penance were left to the free will of the individual member.(37) In these privations of the first days of monastic life, Father Chevalier again revealed the qualities that Father Piperon had attributed to him in the Seminary: “a robust sanctity and a firm will which even the greatest of difficulties could not shake.(38) The Founder himself wrote: “The beginnings were certainly hard. Housed as it were, in a stable like Our Lord Himself, we had practically nothing. Our school was that of privation. We had to do without oven the most essential household items.”(39) They had no money to pay a housekeeper, and had to look after the place and do the cooking themselves. “For a long time” wrote Father Chevalier, “we did our own cooking, and God knows how poor it was.” Mlle. Marchant tells a story. “One Sunday morning after the 9 o’clock Mass, the gate into the courtyard happened to be open and I could not resist having a peep inside. There was Father Chevalier at the far end of the yard, in a white apron beside a small wall which separates the courtyard from the garden. He was busy cleaning cabbages. I have often seen them sweeping the snow from the court-yard,” she continues, “as they could not afford to employ servants. On one occasion I saw Father Chevalier holding the frying-pan while Father Maugenest was stirring up an omelette. They both seemed to be enjoying the fun.”(40) Father Chevalier tells the following story against himself: “One day it was my turn to prepare the meal. I decided to make an omelette. Endeavouring to imitate the experts, I tried turning it over by throwing it in the air, but it ended up in the ashes. I washed and cleaned it as best as possible, and we ate it – but what a flavour!” “During these early days which we often refer to as the ‘Golden Age’ we not only did the cooking but gathered and chopped our own wood, swept out the house, kept the chapel in order, and worked in the garden during recreation time. Every morning we swept and dusted the chapel before opening it to the faithful, who were beginning to come in increasing numbers.” (41) Mlle. Marchant introduces us to Etienne, the first servant employed by the priests. This was a young lad from the country who had more good will than skill, and the culinary art was not one of his outstanding acquirements. One day during Lent the priests had to go to the chapel to preach and hear confessions. Before they went, they instructed Etienne to prepare some spinach for the evening meal. They told him it was growing in the garden. When they returned and sat down for the meal Etienne proudly brought in a plate full of thorns off the gooseberry bush cooked in butter. “We began to laugh”, says Father Chevalier, “even though we did not wish to embarrass poor Etienne. Needless to say the meal

didn’t last very long.” The story went the rounds of the town, and Etienne was somewhat abashed. The priests took it in good part, but didn’t like losing their butter, as they were very poor.(42) As we have said, in drawing up the Rule, Father Chevalier followed the general horarium of the Seminary where possible. The main points were: Rise 4.30.a.m. followed by an hour of prayer and meditation. Then Mass and Thanksgiving. After the breakfast the priests were free for study or sundry duties till 11.45 a.m. when they met for Particular Examen. Dinner at Noon. Then recreation till 1.30 p.m. In the afternoon they said their Rosary and Office, made their Spiritual Reading and Visit to the Blessed Sacrament. On Feast Days there were certain modifications on account of extra work in preaching.(43) “Recreation,” records Father Piperon, “was taken in common and no one could be absent without permission or serious reason. This hour of relaxation was considered important not only from the point of view of physical health, but for the interchange of intellectual and spiritual ideas, The joyous and care-free atmosphere helped to renew their forces and prepared them for the tasks ahead. Piety, too, was nourished by the exercise of the virtues one practised there.”(44) Following this Rule and relying on the grace of God the Missionaries counted on completing their Novitiate in the spirit of silence, study and prayer. There were no special services in their chapel and they were too little known to be called on to preach Missions. But scarcely a month after their installation an event happened which disturbed their peace and solitude and drew upon them the attention of the town. One Wednesday morning there was great consternation when the priests opened up the chapel about 5 a.m. They found that during the night the wall on the far side of the chapel had collapsed near the statue of St. Joseph. The weight of the roof had proved too much for the slender props put in during the renovations. In the darkness they could not immediately estimate the extent of the damage, but they could see a big hole facing the street outside and the roof leaning dangerously over it. The poor Founder immediately feared for the rest of his chapel and wondered where he would find the money for this new expense.(45) When the dawn broke they inspected the damage more closely, and happily, inside the church, except for a thick layer of dust and some broken plaster from the ceiling, little harm had been done. The haste with which the barn had been transformed into the chapel, and the lack of finance were the reasons for this set-back. Where the partitions had been knocked out, the roof was held by pillars, some of which were badly placed, and the walls took a good deal of the weight. Monsieur Voisin had expressed his concern at the time, but lack of money gave him little alternative.(46) Three years later when announcing to his flock that a new church was to be built, Father Chevalier said: “Do not be astonished, as you know the walls here were not made to support the weight they are carrying at present. Also the right-hand-side wall is badly out of alignment and leans over rather dangerously, under the great weight of the roof. The ominous chinks in the wall are not reassuring.” Father Piperon has written that from the beginning there were some iron stanchions put outside in support of the walls, but these were probably put there after the accident, as they are not shown in the original sketches.(47) As soon as possible after daylight Monsieur Voisin was on the scene with several of his workman, and they got to work on repairing the damage. Father Chevalier put the task of collecting the necessary money in the hands of St. Joseph, their powerful Protector: “Saint Joseph,” he said, “the damage is on your side of the chapel and so it is up to you to find the money for the repairs.” And St. Joseph did not fail them. No sooner had the word gone around the town than curious groups gathered to see what had happened. Feeling sorry for the struggling missionaries many of the sight-seers made donations and Father Chevalier was happy to state the “expenses have been more than covered.” With the money left over it was decided to erect a bell-tower. But a belfry without a bell is only an empty shell, so a rich citizen, called Monsieur Daussigny, decided to donate a suitable bell. According to the local paper the bell (not “bells” as the journal stated) was blessed with due ceremony on the 11th November, the Feast of the Dedication, by the Abbe Crozat. The chapel was packed for the occasion, and the congregation was very interest in the blessing read from the Roman Ritual, an imposing ceremony, which the faithful rarely see. Father Maugenest preached the occasional sermon, and impressed everyone by his eloquence and sincerity. A further ceremony was held in the evening for the ringing of the bell. The blessing is referred to as the “Baptism of the Bell,” and the donor and his daughter-in-law who was the wife of the Mayor of Issoudun were named the two sponsors. In the spirit of the Feast, when gifts are made, they donated two very acceptable presents; Monsieur Daussigny giving a silver monstrance and his daughter-in-law a beautiful white-silk cope. After describing the two ceremonies, the local paper, “Le Droit Conmun,” next day added a happy touch: “If we may be permitted to introduce a light note to the serious ceremonies, we noticed that as soon as the altar boys appeared outside the church they were showered with lollies and sweets. We can conclude that the little fellows did their part well.”(48) Father Piperon was always enthusiastic about this little blue-slate bell tower which gave a certain tone and quaint charm to the chapel. “The little tower” he wrote “seemed quite proud of itself standing above the roofs of the neighbouring houses. It was the envy of many a poor parish church in the district. It stood out as a little monument in the Place de Vouet overlooking the poor and small houses around about it. These typical little French houses still abound in the lower quarters of the town, and the tourist still finds a few of them – interesting relics of a past age in the precincts of the Basilica. The townsfolk became quite fond of this quaint little chapel and, as if to excuse them, Father Piperon remarked that “they had no great knowledge of the architecture of religious monuments.” Perhaps the charm it held for them was on account of its homely warmth and devotion compared with the parish church of St. Cyr, which had never recovered from the havoc of the Revolution. Peremee has written this rather devastating description of it: “It is but the mutilated corpse of what was once a healthy and noble body – a perfect example of decayed elegance. What they call the parish church is merely a patched up shell of a hall, ungainly, without any symmetry, not pretending to be anything but what it is. It has no bell-tower, no approaches, has no exterior appearance, is surrounded by shops and houses which hide and bury it to such an extent that from any distance at all it is hard to disting uish it as a church.”(49) The people began attending Mass and the various devotions in the chapel in increasing numbers. The ceremonies were enhanced by the gift of an organ donated by one of Father Maugenest’s brothers, who had come to Issoudun to practise as a doctor. “The priests were delighted with this happy progress, They realised there was so much good they could do in their beloved parish, which for so long had been languishing in religious indifference.”(50) During this first year 1855 there were many calls on the two missionary priests for sermons and missions in the neighbouring parishes. In spite of their desire to live a secluded life of prayer and recollection during this year of what they termed their Novitiate they could hardly avoid the public ministry owing to the great shortage of priests. The Cardinal had freed them for missions and could hardly do without their aid for a whole long year. The Abbe de Champgrand, who, of course, owned all the property was anxious to see the two priests out amongst the people. He still regarded the work as his own foundation, and would never have agreed with the idea of a year’s Novitiate. He was impatient to see them aggregated to an already existing Institute, and have his money put to use for the good of souls around the Berry district. Even Father Crozat looked on the new Congregation as being founded chiefly for the spiritual good of the town of Issoudun. The main idea of the diocesan-priests was to use these two active missionaries for the local apostolate and that as soon as possible. If the two priests had any illusions on this matter they were to be dispelled at the end of 1855. Issoudun had two hospitals: the main General Hospitals and the Hospice for the Incurables. The founders of these two hospitals had stipulated that certain number of Masses be offered each year and in perpetuity for themselves and their relatives after their deaths. The Revolution had taken over all church institutions, and naturally the Masses were not said. Even after the Restoration when the hospitals were handed back to ecclesiastical administration, no one assumed the obligation of offering the Masses. In 1855 the administrators appealed to Rome through the Cardinal to know what their obligations were. On account of the now meagre financial resources of the Administration of the two Institutes, the Holy See replied that a daily Mass throughout the year would suffice, and for that purpose the authorities put aside a sum of 1200 francs to cover each year. The condition was that the priest who would say the Masses would become the chaplain, and look after both hospitals. The proposition made on the 12th August, 1855 met with the approval of both the civic and ecclesiastical authorities. In December of that year, 1855 another young priest wished to join the newly formed Congregation of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, Father Antoine Morel. He had been a class-mate of the founders at Bourges and a member of the Association of the Sacred Heart there. Father Piperon tells us, “He was a talented and virtuous priest and high hopes were held of him.”(52) Born on 2nd June, 1828 at Charenton in the Cher district, he had been ordained on 8th October, 1852, one year after Father Chevalier, and had been appointed the parish of Levroux as curate. On the 1st of June of the following year he was appointed to the church of Saint Bonit in Bourges itself. When he applied to the Cardinal for permission to join the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart Issoudun, His Eminence saw here the solution of providing a chaplain for the hospitals. He granted him permission to join the Congregation on the condition that he would do the chaplaincy work. The founders were not enthusiastic about the arrangement but had no option other than comply with the Cardinal’s wishes. Accordingly Father Morel’ s name was submitted to the hospital administration in December, 1855, and he took up duties on 2nd January, 1856.(52) A little time later he was to impress all who heard him when he preached on the Feast of the Holy Name of Jesus, on 20th January. Early in 1856 the Abbe Crozat came forward with a proposition, which was received with mixed feelings by the Founders. He suggested that since the town of Issoudun was big enough for at least two parishes, the area around the Sacred Heart chapel should be erected into a new parish under the care of the Missionaries. He realised there would be difficulties, not the least of which was the fact that the chapel and the property still belonged to the Abbe Champgrand. In a letter to Father Gasnier dated 3rd April, 1856, the Abbe Champgrand had written: “I note with pleasure that Abbe Crozat and his Council have realised the necessity of creating a second parish in Issoudun, and I sincerely hope the municipal authorities will share this conviction. If the Mayor obtains a favourable vote and His Eminence authorises the plan, I am sure that after a short time a church can be built and an adequate staff provided. Now that the Government is no longer embarrassed with heavy war debts, it is more willing to grant permission for new parishes. I am perfectly in accord with the Abbe Crozat, but I do not agree with the idea of handing the parish over to these new Missionaries. I will oppose that with all my power, as I would consider it the ruination of our work. We have always had the intention of establishing at Issoudun a group of auxiliary priests who would work for the Province of Indre and even for the whole diocese. We realised that to fulfill this purpose there were needed men vowed to the religious life, interior, learned men who after periods of the apostolic life always more or less dissipating, would restrengthen their virtue in solitude and the exercises of a common life. Now it is proposed to implicate these men in the active life of parochial ministry; to spend their time, so necessary for study, in the administration of baptisms, marriages, burials, etc.: to expose them to contact with the world at the risk of losing the spirit of their vocation. These are the reasons why I oppose the idea. The venerable Cure of Issoudun is a worthy priest, but I suspect he is allowing himself to be influenced in this matter by his natural affection for his parish. He is looking on it from the local aspect only. For myself I can take a more disinterested outlook, and consider the wider end of the foundation we have in mind. I believe we would be killing the work in its infancy if we accepted Abbe Crozat’ s project of handing the parish over to the care of the Missionaries. That is why I am vigorously opposing it. I received a letter some time ago from the young missionaries. I was pleased with the spirit it showed, and I think they have begun well, but one must look to the future when a new institution is established. I have maintained right from the beginning that this religious house should be entrusted to the care of some established Order. I have been forced to give in exteriorly in order not to crush their project entirely, but I still adhere to my convictions, and what has already taken place does not change them. The more they wish to give the Missionaries secular work, the more I wish to see them ‘regularised.’ ” On 20th April he further wrote: “We have fundamentally the same ideas (1) The necessity of a group of priests to evangelise the people of the Berry countryside who are so backward in their religious knowledge and practice. (2) The necessity of the division of Issoudun into two parishes, which to me has been a matter of urgency for a long time. The only point where we seem to disagree is on the nature of the union of these two projects. I believe they should be kept separate, and that the new parish should be staffed independently of the Missionaries. I do not agree with the idea of transforming their chapel into a parish church, or giving them parochial duties to perform. As regards the necessity of keeping the two works separate, I do not think it is even debatable. It is quite possible to have a second parish in Issoudun staffed with secular clergy, while leaving the Missionaries their independence, both as regards their chapel and as regards themselves. If the Cardinal wishes it, I believe this is the best solution. We have only to consider what has taken place here. Monseigneur Donnet has built new churches and several chapels of ease, and during the last year he created a new parish at Bordeaux staffed by a parish priest and two curates. This church – St. Ferdinand’s – will be the fourteenth church in the parish. The needs of Issoudun seem even more obvious. The Government itself must see that. Besides, the numbers who are daily going to the chapel of the Missionaries, and the good they are doing among the people make it clear that a new parish is needed. Sooner or later, and I hope it will be very soon, the municipal Council will surely agree with the Mayor and cast a favourable vote on the generous and unselfish plans of Father Crozat. By this means, the two works will operate side by side without friction or confusion, each functioning freely in its own sphere “These, then, my honoured Father Superior are my humble ideas on the matter. I have given you my views on the “regularisation” of the Missionaries. I still hope to see the Congregation succeed, but I think it will do so only in association with an established Order. Our work for the people of Berry should be kept separate to the work for Issoudun.” Yours etc. According to the Concordat of 1801 the erection of parishes and the nomination of parish priests had to be approved by the Government, who agreed to share the expenses. As we have seen the Abbe’ Champgrand was keen to get approval and financial help from the Government for the new parish, but the local Municipal Council was not inclined to agree with the Mayor and the parish priest on the matter. They considered that the Missionaries with their chapel could meet the requirements. However, Abbe Champgrand who owned both chapel and property strenuously opposed this. In the meantime the small community suffered another set back. It became more and more evident that the health and strength of the first recruit Father Morel – was not able to stand up to the life of the Congregation. “His health,” according to Father Piperon, “did not match his other qualities, and he was not able to accommodate himself to the difficulties of the beginning. After several months of generous efforts, he decided that he could not stand up to the rigours of poverty and the hardships of the Rule.”(54) This meant now that the hospitals would be without a chaplain. Happily, another recruit was to take his place – the Abbe Charles Piperon, who was to play such an important and invaluable part in the early foundations. Father Piperon had been chaplain to the Hospice for Incurables and also to the Prison at Bourges, and as we saw in his Seminary days, he always had leanings towards the religious life. He had confided to Father Chevalier when they we both students that he wished “to live and die as a religious.” Although the work he had been doing up till now was favourable to his spiritual progress he felt he was “being drawn by the eddy circling above the gulf.” What would happen to him with his “deplorable nature” when he was given other types of ministry with greater freedom? “I am heading for shipwreck; I am lost,” he argued. In religious life doing always with Jesus the Will of the Heavenly Father and not his own, nothing could hinder him sanctifying himself as the silent monks at Sept-Fons were doing.(55) He made a retreat with the Trappists at SeptFons and decided on 12th August 1855 that he would join his two former confreres and seek admission to the Congregation. On 4th May, 1856, Cardinal du Pont visited Issoudun to administer the Sacrament of Confirmation. After dinner His Eminence paid a visit to the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. He was taken first to the Chapel where a large congregation had assembled to hear him speak. He delivered a short but touching sermon. He spoke with emotion about the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart and the work they were doing, and would do in the future for Issoudun and the diocese. He then blessed the priests and the people. A visit was then made to the house which, he remarked, “was poor but suitable.”(56) The “Droit Common” reported: “His Eminence was very satisfied with the healthy out-lay of the buildings, and impressed by the simple yet elegant decoration of the chapel which was in good taste.(57) Before departing the Cardinal spoke words of encouragement to the priests, and showed them signs of deep affection.” The exchange of Father Morel for Father Piperon was approved by the authorities, Father Morel going as parish priest to Saint Denis-dePaulin, and Father Piperon taking up duties as chaplain to the hospitals. The local paper records his appointment in its issue of 7th June, 1856.(58) Here is Father Piperon’ s humble appraisement of himself at the time he joined the Society: “On Trinity Sunday 1856, after Father Morel had departed, another young priest came to take his place. The newcomer did not possess the same qualities as his predecessor, but he at least enjoyed good health and had plenty of good will which did not baulk at difficulties. In His Infinite Mercy the Heart of Jesus had deigned to choose this postulant in spite of his obvious and miserable shortcomings, to use him as it were, as a rough un-hewn stone in the founda tions of the new building which He wished to consecrate to His Glory. May He be forever blessed for it!”(59) It would seem now that on account of the opposition of the Abbe to the Missionaries doing parochial work, and the lack of enthusiasm of the Municipal Council, the parish was destined not to be divided. It has remained the one parish even to the present day. The Abbe Crozat was naturally disappointed and he feared that the new foundation in which he had collaborate would drift further and further away from any parochial interests. He wished the people of Issoudun to realise that, although not officially committed to the local apostolate, the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart were very much a part of the parish. To emphasise this idea he decided to have a joint procession, on a large scale, in honour of the Feast of the Assumption. The parishioners of St. Cyr and those who attended the Sacred Heart Chapel would join in a huge demonstration of Faith in honour of Our Blessed Lady. The ceremony was described by the “Droit Cotnmun” thus: “This year the Feast of the Assumption marked for Issoudun the occasion of a remarkable demonstration of religious faith. Scenes of extraordinary enthusiasm were witnessed and those who participated will long have happy memories of the splendid solemnities. It cemented, if one can use the word, the alliance between the old church of St. Cyr and the new Chapel of the Sacred Heart. This imposing ceremony in honour of the double Feast (it was also the feast of Saint Napoleon, the patron saint of Napoleon III) has surpassed in splendour and majesty anything seen to date in this district. The church and civil authorities cooperated in the procession’s smooth and dignified progress through the streets of the city. Leaving the Church of St. Cyr at five o’clock in the evening, the procession of the Blessed Sacrament was led by a band of soldiers from the Garrison. It proceeded down the La Grand Rue to the Stone Cross, where on a near-by rockery, an altar had been erected, beautifully but simply decorated. After the first Benediction the Blessed Sacrament was then carried along the Champ Elysees and La rue des Trois Places to the Place de Vouet where a large crowd had gathered. Outside the residence of the Missionaries a striking Altar of Repose had been erected in a spacious amphitheatre, on either side of the Altar standing two Adoring Angels. Father Piperon, the chaplain to the hospital, gave the Benediction to the vast crowd kneeling in the Square. The procession then moved on down the Rue de Vouet, to the Croix Rouge, where again Benediction was given: then along La Rue de Rome to the Place du Marche where from a large Altar built in a conical shell the final Benediction was given. The procession re-entered the church of St. Cyr at 8 o’clock.”(60) Father Depigny pays tribute to Father Piperon by remarking: “He gave on this memorable occasion the first proof of his ability as an organiser of processions, and his cleverness and taste in erecting altars.” On other occasions the Droit Commun has made references to the participation of the Missionaries in parochial ceremonies, and mentions particularly that they had a large share in preparing the children for their first Holy Communion in 1857(61) However, in spite of Father Crozat’s wishes, the Missionaries confined themselves to giving missions, and participated in parochial activities only when necessary. No mention is found in the Rules of either 1855 or 1857 of parochial ministry. It was at a later date as we shall see, that this type of work was introduced into the works of the Society. The book of Rules at this early stage mentions only the following works “which the Society may undertake.” (1) Retreats. Any priest or lay person may be admitted to make a retreat eight or fifteen days – or more or less if requested. One of the Missionaries will conduct the retreat, if so required. If they wish they may take their meals in private. The fee for the retreat is left to their own generosity. (2) Conferences of the Sacred Heart, (a) The Missionaries will conduct Conferences of the Sacred Heart for the youth and for men similar to those of Saint Francis Xavier, etc. (b) Conferences for soldiers (c) Conferences for Apprentices. The Rule of 1855 also adds (d) Conferences for Women (e) for Workmen (f) for Domestics, but these last three are not mentioned in the Rule of 1857 and are included under the general term, “etc.” The Rules state: A special procedure will be drawn up for each of these Conferences. (3) Education of Youth. (4) Affiliation or the Third Order for priests. This was worded in 1857: “Affiliation for priests only.” (We will return to this subject later on.) But it would be a mistake to think that because as mention is made here of giving missions they were undertaken only under pressure from M. de Champgrand. They were covered by the privilege of a special clause added to the Rule, and in fact the conducting of home missions was considered as an essential activity of the Society. The second part of the Manuscript of 1855 has as its title; “Relations of the Missionaries with the people during Missions.” Then under separate headings the following aspects are dealt with: (l) Means of succeeding in the Missions; (2) Relationship with the Parish priests; (3) Exercises of the Mission; (4) The Morning Instruction; (5) The sermons; (6) The Confessions; (7) Stipends; (8) Requests for Missions -all of which occupies some nine pages of the Manuscript. There are another 68 pages on the “Rule of the Priests of the Sacred Heart during Missions.” Of the 123 pages of the Manuscript 77 are on the home Missions, 27 of which are extracts from Father Augry, S.J. – “Notes on the Missions, especially those in the country.” In a letter of introduction to his work, dated at Laval, 15th December, 1839, Father Augry stated that he wrote the ‘Notes’ at the request of his confreres mainly from his own wide experience.(62) After a time the Missionaries gained a reputation for their preaching and were highly thought of by the parish-priests for their zeal and virtue. Father Piperon has summarised their individual styles thus: “Father Maugenest was outstanding as a Christian orator. His tall slim bearing, his modest yet assured manner, his obvious humility and sincerity won him the confidence of his listeners; his powerful voice, his facile and elegant diction, his lively, imaginative style, his clear and solid exposition made him a preacher well above the ordinary. Added to those qualities were an ardent zeal for the glory of God and the good of souls, a keen faith which relied wholly on grace for the success of his work, and a trusting spirit of prayer. In short he possessed the masterly qualities of an apostle, and he dearly loved his vocation. If Father Chevalier lacked the oratorical brilliance of his younger confrere, he was, none the less, a forceful and effective Missioner. What was lacking in literary flourish was amply compensated for by his evangelical simplicity and power to grip his audience, which became one with himself. He was gifted with a strong clear voice which was pleasant to listen to, and had a commanding appearance. In the ardour of his zeal he could paint in vivid colours the terrible effects of divine justice, the hideousness and black ingratitude of sin, the beauty of grace and virtue, and above all the infinite Mercy of the Heart of Christ and the sublime excellence of the Mother of God. Several tines I heard him preach, and he was indeed eloquent. Fifty years have passed since then, and the memory is still vivid in mind. He had a profound respect for the word of the Gospel. He exhorted all his subjects to treat it worthily and prepare it with care. He certainly gave us the example himself. So as never to be unprepared he had formed the habit even from Seminary days of preparing sermons on various subjects which could be used in the ministry. Any spare moments he had you would find him at his desk continuing his sermon writing, working out new plans, expressing old and new ideas in new form and language. Even the sermons which happily have been left to us fill five big volumes, where thousands of ideas are expressed. We do not say they are all perfect works, ready for printing – many of them are in the form of notes and plans – but they are a testimony to the enormous amount of work that he put into sermon-writing. I have consulted them often, and have found them precious documents from which I have borrowed many an idea.(63) The most important activity in the ministry of the Missionaries was naturally that which took place in their chapel. The people grew used to the regular exercises of piety – the Holy Mass, the Confessions – the Devotions, and they continued to come along in ever-growing numbers. “The Divine Heart of Jesus blessed our efforts,” they wrote, and it was a real reawakening of the Faith in Issoudun.”(64) The great sorrow of Father Chevalier was not to see men in his chapel.(65) His main concern was how to attack this religious indifferentism of the men. His fervent and apostolic soul longed to bring these men back to God and their faith. Was not this the advice that the dying parish-priest at Aubigny had given him – to go out amongst the people and win them for Christ? He often spoke of his desire with his confreres and discussed plans with them. To regain the men for the Church it was necessary to organise them, to group them, to give them special instruction according to their needs. With this in mind he decided to put on a special Mass on Sundays for the men of the parish, to be followed by special talks. Several parishes already had special lectures for men, for example, the Conferences to Men at Notre Dame in Paris, the various branches of the Saint Vincent de Paul Society, the “7o’clock Mass at Marseilles when the sermon was always addressed to the men.(66) He would reserve a Mass on Sundays for the men of the parish and try to make personal, individual contact with them. And so, in the Autumn of 1856, the three priests went out amongst those who lived in the vicinity of the Chapel asking the men individually if they would come to this special Mass. About thirty attended on the first Sunday, which the priests considered quite good, considering the irreligious state of the town. “They were mainly workmen and orchardists,” says Father Piperon, “who followed the ceremonies with devotion and recollection. After Mass, Father Chevalier spoke a few words of gratitude and encouragement, and the priests met the men before they left for home.”(67) The thirty good men had to run the gauntlet of scorn and derision as they left the church-grounds. Such an unusual sight as thirty strong men coming away from “church” excited the curiosity of the near-by populace. On practically every doorstep, little groups of men and women gathered and poked fun at the “Mass-goers.” Their sneering looks and remarks were aimed at discouraging the men but they had the opposite effect. They only strengthened their resolution and devotion. “That day,” remarks Father Piperon, “human respect was conquered and the work amongst the men solidly begun. If today (he wrote this in 1912) there is a healthy nucleus of practical men in our parish, in spite of the sad times and the many obstacles, it is due to the zeal and perseverance of Father Chevalier and his fellow-priests.” (68) Gradually the numbers increased. By the following Easter over two hundred men were attending the evening lectures, and on Easter morn over fifty men of this new group knelt at the Altar Rails to receive the Bread of life. It was the first public Holy Communion of men witnessed in Issoudun since the beginning of the century.(69) Mlle. Merchant has made reference to this apostolate to the Men. “Every Sunday,” she writes, “there was a Mass at 9 o’clock and in the evening a special Benediction at 8 o’clock specially for the men. When my father would return home after the Devotions my mother and I would immediately ask: ‘Were there many men there?’ ‘Yes, there must have been about 300’ ‘would come the answer.” Everyone was delighted with the success of the venture. Soon the 9 o’clock Mass was packed to the doors, and the priests led the men in the singing of hymns. Father Maugenest’s brother played the organ, and Father Maugenest himself sang the antiphons, and the choir took up the verses. One I remember very well, which expressed the following sentiments: “Deliver us from bondage Give us back the Faith of our Fathers Preserve it in us forever So we all will see Thy Face in Heaven.” The year’s Novitiate was drawing to a close, and Fathers Chevalier and Maugenest decided to reconsecrate their lives to the service of the Sacred Heart. “Towards the end of Advent,” wrote Father Piperon, “Fathers Chevalier and Maugenest decided to finish their year’s Novitiate on Christmas Day by taking the three private vows of Poverty, Chastity and Obedience – and a fourth of Stability in their Vocation. Since they were not yet canonically authorised to take public vows, they resolved to make the ceremony a private yet solemn occasion. (The reference of the Abbe de Champgrand as far back as March of that year to “these men who are bound by vows” obviously meant “who hope to be bound by vows.”) Describing the important event, Father Founder has written: “In order to gain greater merit, and to give more stability to our work, we decided to bind ourselves by the Vows of Poverty, Chastity, Obedience and Stability. We chose, in order to give ourselves without reserve to the Heart of Jesus, the day when He gave Himself to us. We made a retreat in preparation for this important occasion.” At midnight on the Feast, after they had celebrated the Sacred Mysteries, the community of three priests, with the doors of the Chapel closed, knelt before Our Divine Redeemer in the Crib. In the deep recollection of night, Fathers Chevalier and Maugenest prostrated before the Infant Jesus to make their consecration. (Father Piperon who had not completed his twelve months Novitiate, was to make his vows later). In the presence of Mary, His Mother, and St. Joseph, His foster-father, they took the vows of Poverty, Chastity and Obedience and the vow of Stability in their holy vocation. Father Piperon completes the story: “The only witness on earth of that generous oblation on that solemn night was their young confrere who had been sharing their labours for the past six months. But the Angels of God, the Angels of the Nativity were there presenting to God these two victims who were offering to Him their entire lives to make Him loved.” Father Chevalier always recalled that sacred night with deep emotion: “Oh night a million times blessed! Oh Night of unutterable delight! Your memory will never be effaced from my heart. Oh Heart of Jesus, so good and so merciful. We felt that our sacrifice was pleasing to You and that You were pouring into the hearts of Your two young apostles unspeakable graces.”(72) Until now Father Chevalier by reason of his seniority and his position as Founder of the Congregation had been regarded as the Superior of the small community, but it had been more or less in an informal way. The occasion was probably taken of this Christmas day when they made their vows to regularise the position and Father Chevalier was officially declared the Superior with Father Maugenest as Assistant. He himself had suggested that they ask Father Crozat, whom they regarded as their “father and protector” to be their Superior, but he refused making his old age an excuse.(73) For a long time now the Chapel had been too small to accommodate the ever increasing numbers who were attending Mass. Mlle. Marchant, recalling the situation tells us “This did not apply only to special occasions. If the Mass for men was overcrowded, you can imagine the position for the other Masses on Sundays.” Father Piperon says: “I can remember on more than one occasion the old chapel being filled with tightly packed rows of men.”(74) Two years later when Father Chevalier was making his appeal for a new church he took as his text: “Adhuc dicent filii sterilitatis tuae; Angustus est mihi locus, fac spatium mihi ut habitem.” (Sons born to thee in the days of thy barrenness shall cry out: ‘Here all is confined. Give me room to live.’ (Is. 49:20) He compared the former Issoudun with Jerusalem, which “had seen its temple deserted” and its religious ceremonies ignored, but those days of sadness were over. “It is now imperative,” he pointed out, “to build a bigger and more fitting church to cope with this happy religious revival. Some people think we are rich, but, I am afraid, poverty and want are our lot and we need your help. Sunday after Sunday,” the preacher continued, “we see many of the faithful not able to gain entrance to the church – exposed to the wind, the cold, the rain, the snow, and in Summer the severe heat. Those inside the church could hardly be called comfortable on account of the distracting overcrowding, and the low roof is hardly conducive to good ventilation. The chapel is in a sad state of old age and disrepair, and is on the point of falling down.” We suspect this last remark was a pardonable piece of rhetorical exaggeration, as when a few weeks later the Cardinal, acting on an unfavourable report, ordered the Chapel to be closed, Father Chevalier put up a spirited defence of its safety. He informed his Eminence that “we have secured the walls as best we can, and the architect at Issoudun has assured us that the building is good for at least another ten years.”(75) A certificate to this effect was officially submitted to the Cardinal in November, 1858. In fact the main reason for the necessity of a new church was not the dangerous state of the old one but the fact that it was far too small. Some of the chronicles have unnecessarily exaggerated the dilapidated state of the old chapel. From the first months of 1857 serious thought had been given to plans a future church – one which would not only serve the needs of the present till but those of the future also. It is not surprising to read in Father Piperon notes that it was the main topic of conversation at recreations even before the Cardinal precipitously closed the old chapel. “First amongst our cherished ambitions,” he wrote, “was that of a new church. The present chapel was too poor and too small. It would have been useless trying to renovate it, as the unsteady walls would not support any weight. Often during the good season when we had recreation out-of-doors Father Chevalier would sit in the shade of the linden-trees near the wall and trace plans and schemes in the sand. His idea was to build not just an ordinary church but a Basilica and he gave his imagination free rein, as he sketched, rubbed-out and resketched in the obliging sand. He would say to us half seriously, half jokingly: In a few years that will be our beautiful new church. The people will come from far and wide to visit it.”(79) Teasingly I would say to him: “When I see it, I will call it a miracle and you a prophet.” “All right, you will see,” he would reply. And the dream was to come true. The Basilica – the monument to our beloved Father Founder is there for all to see.(76) Father Maugenest also recalls those recreations under the linden-trees when the conversation was on another plan very dear to the heart of the Founder – the Devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. “In those days,” he writes, “when I belonged to the small community, Father Chevalier would sit in his favourite place under the linden-trees and tell us of his desire of presenting Our Blessed Lady to the Catholic World under the title of “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.” I still remember the prophetic confidence with which he would speak about the spreading of this devotion in the near future, and of the numerous pilgrims, seeking the protection of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, the Hope of the Hopeless, who would come to Issoudun, as to Lourdes and Paray-le-Monial. He revealed these thoughts to us in the first years of the Foundation at the same time that he was still drawing up the Constitutions. Although as we have seen, Father Chevalier had the inspiration of giving to Our Lady the title “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart” on the day of installation 9th September, 1855, he did not speak of it publicly or even to his confreres for some time till he was sure it was theologically acceptable and not in conflict with Catholic teaching. Just when he began to speak of the title publicly is difficult to say, but this last statement of Father Maugenest indicates that it was definitely before December, 1857 as Father Maugenest left for Bourges in that month. Father Piperon wrote in 1865: “It was in 1857 that the Immaculate Virgin Mary, Mother of God, was named “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.” Elsewhere he stated it was “either at the end of May or beginning of June” that the Founder began talking openly of his plans in respect to the Devotion.(78 and 79) The unexpected closing of the chapel by the Cardinal had at least the good effect of hastening the plans for the new church and making everybody realise its necessity. “It produced good results” wrote Father Piperon. “Until now the plans had been mainly those in the sand, but the time had arrived for action.” Now that definite steps were being taken for the construction of the church, Father Chevalier felt obliged to confide in his confreres concerning his plans for spreading devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. He had in mind particularly the Consecration of a special altar in the new church in Her honour. A year and a half had passed since the day of the installation when the name had first occurred to him, and. although he had not spoken of it, it was always in his mind. Before manifesting “his secret”, he wished to study all the theological aspects, “‘as the title in harmony with the teachings of the Church? Could he find any justification for it in the writings of the Doctors of the Church? That was his main concern.(80) Convinced of the validity of the title – so illuminating and profound did these simple words “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart” appear to him – he kept meditating on it with love and gratitude always seeking the principles on which rested the Power of the Mother of God: over the Heart of Her Divine Son. If we are able, he argued, to call Mary “Our Lady”, because she is our sovereign Queen, would not Jesus Himself admit her sovereignty over His Heart Her incomparable and “sublime dignity as Mother gave Her rights and power over the Heart of Her Son. Assuredly these rights and this power, in the absolute sense belonged to God, the Creator alone, and the humble Virgin, even though His Mother was subject to Him. She could never be His equal, as She was servant and creature, and as such had no rights over Him. But, as His Mother did She not have power over Him by privilege and condescension. A son, and particularly a Son who is all-powerful, can confer powers and rights on a Mother He loves so well. If the teachings of the Saints and the Fathers is true that no grace comes to man except through the maternal hands of Mary, then the treasures of His Sacred Heart are no exception. What power She has when She pleads with the Heart of Her Son for mercy on us Her children also. Surely we can go to Her knowing our prayers will be heard. These reflections and many others convinced Father Chevalier that it was by spreading devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart that he would fulfil his promise of honouring the Mother of God “in a special way”. He was convinced moreover, that this was in accordance with the Will of Divine Providence. It remained then to formulate this doctrine in appropriate terms to teach the faithful the part that Mary plays in the manifestations of the Sacred Heart of Her Son and the ineffable power which She has over It. To Father Chevalier, the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart was the putting into practice of the motto “Ad Jesum per Mariam”(81) All the Feasts of Our Lady were celebrated with special ceremony and devotion. Mass was said on these days at Her altar, and the people were encouraged to attend and receive Holy Communion. They were being taught that the best and most profitable way of celebrating a Feast Day was to receive Our Divine Lord. Devotions were held in the evening, when a sermon would be preached followed by Benediction. These practices however, were not considered by Father Chevalier as the fulfillment of his promise to the Mother of God. The new title under which the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart would henceforth render homage to the Virgin, blessed over all, would be Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.(82) The time had come when he was to confide his innermost thoughts and desires to his confreres concerning “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart” and the part She was to play in the future history of the Congregation.(83) Father Piperon has told the story in his “Le Pouvoir du N.D. du Sacre Coeur.” One warm afternoon “about the end of May or the beginning of June” the community went out into the garden as usual to take their recreation. They sat down in the shade of the four big linden-trees whose green leaves formed a natural vault over their heads. Close by standing on the wall at the end of the court yard was a small statue of Our Blessed Lady. Besides the three members of the Community, i.e. the two Founders and the novice, Father Piperon, there were some visiting priests there from St. Cyr’s or the neighbouring parishes, which would suggest it was a Feast Day. It could have been the Ascension, 21st May, Pentecost Sunday, 31st May, or the Feast of Corpus Christi, the 11th June as they fell in that year. The conversation was bright and lively, the main topic being the new church. Suddenly Father Chevalier, who had seemed to be lost in his own thoughts for a few moments, asked: “Under what title will we place the altar of the Blessed Virgin in our new church?” Several proposals were made according to the particular devotion of the various priests. One suggested “The Immaculate Heart of Mary;” another “Our Lady of Victories;” another “Our Lady of the Rosary” and so on. “No,” replied Father Chevalier seriously, “we are going to have “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.” This blessed title was then pronounced for the first time and naturally it caused a deal of surprise. “Excellent” remarked Father Piperon. “That will signify Our Lady invoked in the church of the Sacred Heart.” “Not that, my dear friend,” replied Father Founder. “This title, ‘Our Lady of the Sacred Heart’ encloses a profound significance. It reveals to us the maternal power that Mary has over the Heart of Her Divine Son, and tells us that we must go to Him through Her.” “But that is a novelty,” cane the objection. “Not as much as you think. Let me explain my ideas to you, and you can judge if they are reasonable or not..” He then spoke of his plans and desires with obvious feeling. He recalled how Mary had been responsible for all the graces received by the young Congregation, how She had guided it step by step, and surmounted every obstacle. We owe all to Her,” he said. “We have promised to honour Her in a special way and this title “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart” is our answer. It will be a perpetual thanksgiving to the Mother of God for all Her favours, and will be the fulfillment of our vow to Her. “But is it theological?” asked Father Piperon. “Assuredly””replied Father Chevalier. “First of all, in using this title we are thanking and glorifying Almighty God Himself for having chosen Mary, before all creatures, to conceive in Her virginal womb and from Her own very substance, the Adorable Heart of Jesus. Then, we are honouring in a special way the sentiments of love, of humble submission, of filial respect which Jesus nurtured in His Heart for His Holy Mother. We are recognising by this special title the ineffable power which Our Loving Saviour gave to His Mother over His own Heart. We are beseeching this compassionate Mother to lead us Herself to the Heart of Her Son, to reveal to us the mysteries of Love and Mercy which It contains, to open to us the treasures of Grace of which It is the Source, and to distribute them personally to all those who call upon Her and invoke Her powerful intercession. All that is contained in this loving and gracious invocation: “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, pray for us.” Father Piperon, with a fresh insistence sought to weaken the argument, “That’s all very well, but it is still something new. Don’t you think you may be going too far? It seems to me to smack a little of heresy.” A strong word, certainly, let fall in the heat of the discussion, but in view of the circumstances not to be taken too seriously. “It will not be difficult,” replied Father Chevalier confidently, “to justify what I have just said by the teachings of the Fathers and the theologians their writings on the greatness and power of Mary. What is more, I am sure the Mother of God Herself, wishes to be invoked and honoured under this title in our future sanctuary. We will dedicate this Altar to Her under the title ‘Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.’ By Her and with Her we will glorify the Heart of Jesus, Whose love and mercy we have vowed to preach. It will be a means of fulfilling our motto ‘May the Sacred Heart of Jesus be everywhere loved’, will go to Jesus through Mary ‘Ad Jesum per Mariam’.” And so the first members of the Congregation and their priest-friends heard from the lips of the Founder the first exposition of the Devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. As the recreation came to an end the priests discussed what they had heard with a lively interest. By way of a parting joke Father Chevalier turned to Father Piperon and said; “And you, who put up all the objections and were so hard to convince, you can write, by way a penance, in big and beautiful letters around the base of Our Lady’s statue: ‘Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, pray for us’.” The young priest did so with joy. It was the first external act of homage rendered to the Mother of God under Her new title.(85) The rest of the year 1857 passed without further incident. The members of the small Congregation went about their tranquil community life and apostolic duties until the month of December, when Father Maugenest, whose renown as an orator had spread abroad, was invited by the parish priest of “Saint Pierre” in Bourges to preach the Advent sermons in his church. ‘It was an honour for the preacher and the young Community, but, unfortunately, it was the beginning of a profound crisis for Father Chevalier.’

CHAPTER IX: DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES

While Father Maugenest was preaching the Advent sermons in Saint Pierre, Bourges, the Cardinal happened to be looking for a new administrator for the Cathedral. He had nominated Father Caby, and had obtained the necessary ratification from the Government, but Father Gaby, a shy and reserved priest, had adamantly refused to accept the position. Father Maugenest, whose excellence as a preacher was the topic of the moment, came to his mind as an admirable choice. He sent for him and informed him of his intention of appointing him as Archpriest of the Cathedral. Father Maugenest was dumb founded. He begged His Eminence to reconsider his decision in view of the newly-established work at Issoudun. In spite of his protestations, his pleading and even his tears, the Cardinal, already embarrassed by Father Gaby’s refusal, demanded his obedience. “I am your Archbishop,” he said, “and, as such, your religious Superior. I want you to go to Paris, make a retreat at the Seminary, and come back ready to do my will.” To make matters worse, the Cardinal forbade him to mention the appointment to anyone – not even to Father Chevalier, until he returned from the retreat. His letter, written from Saint Sulpice to Father Chevalier was in the circumstances “rather obscure”, but the latter, who had already heard of the “Gaby incident” rightly judged what had taken place.(l) The news shocked and saddened Father Chevalier. After supper he took Father Piperon into his room and broke down completely. “Whatever is the matter?” asked his confrere. “Our little community is about to be broken up. We are about to be separated “Separated, Why?” “His Eminence has just nominated Father Maugenest Administrator of the Cathedral. It looks certain that he does not wish us to continue with our missionary work. We ourselves will probably be appointed to parish work again.” “Nothing of the sort. If the Cardinal wishes to disband our small Congrega tion, we will go elsewhere. I can assure you that even if you do not wish to try elsewhere, I myself have no intention of going back to a parish. I will seek admission to some other Order or Congregation. I will go to the ends of the earth before accepting work in a parish. However, we will find out first exactly what the Cardinal has in mind before making any decisions. For the rest of the evening the two priests discussed ways and means by which they could carry on their work and save their young Society. Writing of this sad night in his Life of Father Chevalier, Father Piperon humbly remarks: “We can easily understand the grief and mental anguish of the dear Founder. Of his two confreres he was losing the one who was so highly endowed intellectually, and from whom he was hoping so much. He was left now with only one companion who had so very little to offer. The future looked black indeed.”(2) In his humble contempt of himself, Father Piperon has not brought out the magnitude of the problem which faced Father Chevalier. He has regarded the matter only from the subjective view point of his own person. Father Chevalier saw something very different in the appointment of Father Maugenest, as we shall see. It was decided that the best thing to do was for Father Chevalier to take the coach next day for Bourges and seek an interview with the Cardinal, begging him to change his mind and leave Father Maugenest with tho young Society. The visit brought no result in spite of Father Founder’s heartfelt pleadings. “His Eminence” he wrote, “let me talk and I pointed out that without Father Maugenest the very existence of the Society was threatened. To this the Cardinal replied with the reasoning of Gamaliel: ‘Either your work is from God, and I believe after all the graces you have received that it is, or it is the work of man. If it is from God then the transfer of Father Maugenest will ultimately not affect it. If it is just the work of man then his presence won’t save it.’ I made my act of submission” he continues, “retraced my steps to Issoudun, brokenhearted. Dear Father Piperon was anxiously awaiting me. He also was deeply grieved when I told him the outcome of the interview. After discussing our plans, we decided that the best thing we could do in order to gain our right perspective and some spiritual consolation was to make a retreat with the Trappist Fathers at Fongembault.”(3) Father Maugenest took up his duties as Canon and Archpriest of the Cathedral on the 11th January, 1858. The Issoudun newspaper “Le Droit Commun” paid him a warm tribute: “While the town of Issoudun keenly regrets the loss of this worthy and virtuous Missionary of the Sacred Heart, who has just had the honour of being appointed as Administrator to the Cathedral, the diocese as a whole will rejoice at the Cardinal’s wise choice. Father Maugenest possesses all the qualities necessary for such a high and important office. In renouncing the kind of life to which he had vowed himself when founding, in collaboration with a virtuous colleague the modest Community of the Sacred Heart at Issoudun he is acting only in a spirit of self-sacrifice and obedience. In the voice of his Superiors he has heard the Voice of God, The people of Issoudun are deeply grateful to the good priest for the many acts of charity and devotion he has shown over a difficult and trying period. If his voice is no longer to be heard in our pulpit here at Issoudun, his virtues and his good deeds will remain in our memories and hearts for a long time. Every class of society in our town will mention his name with gratitude and affection.”(4) However, if the loss of Father Maugenest was to be felt in Issoudun it was grievously more so in the small community of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. There were left now only two members, and Father Chevalier and Father Piperon had been relying so much on the talents of their gifted companion to help them in these difficult early days of the Society. The two priests returned from their retreat determined to carry on, as they were convinced their work was in accordance with the Will of God. Kneeling together before the Tabernacle they renewed their resolutions of continuing their work for the Sacred Heart and enduring any trials and sorrows in the course of establishing the Society. Father Piperon wrote very humbly: “What a change had come about in our community. The tree, as yet so young and tender, had only three branches. Two were vigorous and healthy, promising abundant fruit, the third was weak and frail, not giving much promise. And then a cruel, unforeseen storm raged and tore away the limb which promised most fruit.”(5) The newspaper “L’Echo des Marches” announced in its number dated 27th January, 1858 that the Rev. Father Pierre-Maria Mallet was joining the Congregation of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. (Father Piperon dates his entry as about the time of Trinity Sunday). Unfortunately Father Mallet showed little sign of entering into the spirit of religious life, and his entry proved more of an embarrassment than an acquisition. The Abbe Mallet was born on the 17th January, 1831 at Montigny in the Cher district, and after his ordination on the 16th May, 1856 had been appointed as curate at Issoudun. Small of stature, he was energetic, eloquent and well-meaning enough, but his conduct at times, to say the least was singular and original. Even his habit of smoking, which in these days was something unusual, became a matter of comment. It is not surprising that he did not stay very long in the Congregation. On the 15th October he was appointed to the parish of Luant, and some time later joined the Trappists, but again he did not persevere and rejoined the diocese – this time in the parish of Transault – on 22nd February, 1873. He died there in 1892.(6) When it became obvious that Father Mallet was not fitted for the life and that he showed little inclination to keep the Rule, Father Chevalier had to ask him to withdraw. Smarting under this rebuff he sought an interview with the Cardinal and did not hesitate to speak disparagingly of his former confrere. He made a special point of attacking the unsafe condition of the chapel, where, he said, one’s life was in constant peril, where it was impossible to Celebrate Mass or say one’s Office without expecting the place to fall down at any moment, and where a serious accident to the faithful could easily take place. He spoke so vehemently and convincingly on the subject that the Cardinal became worried and decided to take prompt action. In spite of his usual prudence and the affection he had always shown for Father Chevalier and the new Congregation, and without consulting the priests or sending a delegate to investigate, he ordered “that within twenty four hours the chapel be closed as a place of worship. This was on the 9th October, 1850. “Satan,” wrote Father Chevalier, “was evidently not happy at the good for souls being done in our chapel, and wished to destroy it. The Heart of Jesus however, wanted a more worthy sanctuary and the designs of human wisdom were thwarted.”(7) The Cardinal’s order came as a great shock not only to the priests but to the parishioners as well. Deeply upset, and not knowing as yet why the Cardinal had acted so peremptorily, Father Chevalier hastened to Bourges to find out what it was all about. He was able to answer, to the satisfaction of His Eminence, the charges made by Father Mallet, but the Cardinal insisted that any necessary repairs to the Chapel must be carried out immediately, and a Certificate of Safety obtained from a qualified architect . Four days later this certificate was forwarded to His Eminence, who then authorised the re-opening of the Chapel. In the meantime, the priests had been saying their daily Mass at St. Cyr’s, while a few alterations were made to Chapel. The cost of the repairs was not very high, although heavy enough for the small community with its limited resources. Actually the temporary closing of the Chapel turned out to be a blessing in disguise, as it called attention in emphatic terms to the urgent need for a new church. It was decided there and then to initiate plans for a new edifice, which would be a more worthy abode for the Divine Majesty.(8) The first big difficulty that presented itself was the selection of a suitable site in the limited space available. Father Chevalier wished to build a large rectangular church facing the Place de Vouet on the land where the old chapel stood. As the dimensions would be much larger than those of the chapel, the question was where to look for the extra space. By using the courtyard in order to avoid the angle on which the chapel was built, there would arise difficulty of shutting out the light from the presbytery and making the place too cramped. The most reasonable solution and the one which was ultimately adopted – was to buy some land on the western side of the chapel. The small Ruelle de Vouet – a cul de sac about twelve yards long which ran along the top side of the Chapel was public property and not for sale, but the lower portion was the private property of Madame Julienne Dansard, wife of Pierre Champiolat. If this land could be bought the new church could be built farther to the west and sufficient space left between it and the presbytery. Two-major problems would have to be solved before any progress could be made. The first was where the money was to cone from and the second was the necessary co-operation of the Abbe de Champgrand, who still owned all the property the Missionaries were using. Just what negotiations took place with the Abbe or whether he showed any enthusiasm or not we do not know. However an agreement with the Champiolat family must have been reached before March 1859, as the foundations of the church were laid at that time. It was not till the 14th March, 1860 that the official deeds were signed between Madame Julienne Dansard and the Abbe de Champgrand before Monsieur Binet, the resident notary at Issoudun. The Abbe met the expenses of the transaction.(9) While negotiations were progressing favourably regarding the land deal, the Missionaries were endeavouring with the help of influential friends to obtain a subsidy from the Government. Their efforts, however, were not successful. Father Chevalier wrote to Madame des Mesloizes, one of the helpers, on 3rd May, 1859: “I am very grateful for the efforts you have made on our behalf. The Minister of Religion has replied that there are no funds available for our chapel, as we are not recognised officially by the State. The Empress, to whom Monsieur Touragin referred our petitions, has replied through her secretary that the matter has been placed in the hands of the Minister of Religion. This is tantamount to a refusal, as we already know the intentions of the Minister. However,” concludes Father Chevalier, “if men fail us, Almighty God for Whom we are working will surely be on our side. We will go ahead with our work and refuse to be discouraged.” It was certainly not a matter of encouragement to be trying to build a church without money, and this in a town like Issoudun where three-quarters of the population were indifferent to religion and quite unused to making any sacrifices in the cause of the Church. The only confidence Father Chevalier had was in the Providence of God on which he had always relied. What were his plans to be? First of all, he resolved to place the work in the hands of the Immaculate Mother of God, the Protectress of his Congregation. Then he would wait patiently, letting the plan mature in his mind, examining the means of achieving his object, and not pushing the work further than the resources he would have in hand allowed. Prudence demanded this.(11) In a sermon of which we have previously spoken Father Chevalier outlined the position to his congregation. The present chapel was too small and shabby. It should have been replaced long ago, but lack of funds had prevented this. “Many people,” he said, “think we are wealthy, but how wrong they are. Our position is really difficult and even precarious. We receive neither subsidy nor salary from the State, the Diocese, or the town. We are left entirely to our own resources, and have no income except what we receive from our Mass stipends or a few gifts from charity. We appeal then to your generosity. We promise, with the approval of the Cardinal to offer a Mass every First Friday of the month for our benefactors and their parents both living and dead, and to inscribe their names on an Honour-Roll.” The next day a poor working woman, whose only means of livelihood was her needle, approached Father Chevalier and handed him a small, neatly-wrapped packet. He opened it and there gleaming before his eyes were five gold pieces of twenty francs each. By self-sacrifice and frugal living she had saved 100 francs, and although it was all the money she had, she was prepared to give it to the priests. “Yesterday,” she said, “when I heard your sermon I promised the Sacred Heart of Jesus that I would bring these gold pieces to you. Take them. It delights my heart to be able to give them to you.” Father Chevalier was deeply moved by this act of generosity, but knowing the impecunious state of the donor, he took one piece from the packet and handed back the other four. “My child,” he said, “you will need these yourself for the future.” “No, Father,” she replied, “I promised them all to the Sacred Heart. I can’t keep any back now.” “But say if you lose your work. Say if you become sick.” “Father,” she answered spiritedly, “this money doesn’t belong to me any longer. It belongs to God. I have given it to him, and I won’t take one iota of it back. What the future holds for me is in God’s hands, and I place my trust in Him.” Considering himself rich indeed with this 100 francs so nobly given in the cause of the Sacred Heart, Father Chevalier decided to take the first step, and he had the holy audacity to ask Monsieur Farlier, the diocesan architect to draw up a plan.(12) He had dreaned of a plan in the form of a heart, but this was deemed impracticable at the time. Monsieur Farlier duly presented his plan “with the one nave leading to the chancel set in a semi-circular apse. On either side was a semi-circular chapel, the one on the right the Shrine of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart and on the left that of St. Joseph. The facade was as it is today, except that it has been somewhat embellished.”(l3) In the meantime Father Chevalier had launched his appeal in Issoudun, but it was not well received in many quarters. Mlle. Marchand has recorded: “Father Chevalier approached several persons and asked them to accompany him on his canvas for funds, but they all refused for various reasons of their own. He asked me to try to get my father interested. At first he refused saying that although he would like to help, it would cause embarrassment to his friends if they visited their homes to ask for money. When I told the good priest this, he replied: “We will cause no inconvenience; we will simply stay in the hall.” After my mother and I had further pleaded with him, he consented to go on the rounds with Father Chevalier. Next morning they set out together and continued the appeal each day till all the likely homes been visited; Father Chevalier seemed pleased enough with the response.” However, Father Chevalier’s comments in his private Notes show that at best he got a mixed reception. “How many doors were shut in my face! What humiliating refusals I received! What insults were hurled at me! Soon it was evident that the money raised in Issoudun and the few donations received from friends outside the town were quite inadequate for the proposed church. Apart from his desire to use the old chapel as long as he could before it would be dismantled, the lack of finance was responsible for his decision to build only the top portion of the church for the time being. The architect was not keen on this, but submitted to his will, at the same time seeing to it that the general plan was not interferred with.(15) On 26th March, 1859 the work was begun and the foundations of the chancel, side chapels and the first three bays of the nave were sunk to a depth of 20 feet.(l6) On 3rd May, Father Chevalier wrote; “We hope to have the solemn blessing of the foundation stone towards the end of the month or the beginning of June. If the Cardinal is able to come for the ceremony about that date will create a good impression and be a big help. If not, I hope to get Fatehr Caillaud, who has always shown a great interest in our work, to perform the ceremony.”(l7) The Cardinal died on 27th May, and Father Caillaud, who was one of the Vicars Capitular of the diocese, came to Issoudun for the laying of the foundation stone. The stone itself was a large one occupying the base of the pillar – at floor level – on the right hand side of the sanctuary. Inside it was placed a glass tube which contained the details of the ceremony written on parchment together with some small coins and medals dated for that year. The following poem composed by Father Chevalier was embedded under the stone: “Malheur, malheur a qui detruira cette Eglise, Et s’il veut echapper au bras vengeur de Dieu, Il faut que par ses soins elle se reconstruise, Grande, majestueuse, et sur le meme lieu.”(19)

“Woe to him who destroys this church, If he wishes to escape the Vengeful Arm of God, Let him see to it that it is rebuilt, Grand, majestic and on this very site.” The ceremony took place on 6th June, the Sunday within the Octave of Corpus Christi. It was held in conjunction with the annual Procession of the Blessed Eucharist from the church of St. Cyr. After Vespers the procession left the church led by the worthy and venerable Father Crozat. A great crowd of people lined the route of the procession which led to the Place de Vouet where already a vast assembly had gathered. The crowd was estimated in the vicinity of 6000 and the marching of the fire-brigade and town-band added a spectacular touch to the proceedings. All the notable personages of the district were in attendance, the Sub-Prefect, the Mayor, the Chief Justice, the Imperial Prosecutor and most of the aldermen. Father Caillaud preached the occasional discourse taking as his text: “Super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam,” and the ceremony concluded about half past six.(20) Judging by the glowing newspaper reports, and the presence of such a large crowd, we might think that the people of Issoudun were sympathetic and helpful to the Missionaries, but, unfortunately, such was not the case. On the contrary they had to contend with quite an amount of opposition. In a letter written on 27th June – the day after the ceremony – Father Chevalier wrote: “The crowd was immense, and our triumph was complete.” The word “triumph” would indicate that there were certainly obstacles to be overcome. After enumerating a number of the notable people present, he continues “What do you think of this change of face? What kind of men are they? When it was a question of helping in the noble work they became angry or, at least, were not at all interested. Now that it looks like succeeding, they begin to praise it and want to have a hand in directing it. Poor human nature!” After the function Father Chevalier invited some of the gentlemen who had helped voluntarily to a small social gathering, but the general opposition to his plans was to last for some time yet. Any hope he had of signing the peace was disillusioned. When the opposition reached its peak in 1861, Father Maugenest was to write to Father Crozat in a letter dated 5th July, of “that state of affairs that has now lasted four years.” He refers in the letter to a group “of young people who spend about a year in the parish” stirring up this opposition. We naturally think of Father Mallet and his followers. The young curate had entered the Congregation in January, 1858, and before the end of the year had been responsible for closing down the chapel. Father Chevalier himself has written: “An over-excited young priest who spent a short time in Issoudun went to Bourges with some false stories.” In fact there were many spiteful stories – not only about the Chapel – being circulated at the time by idle gossipers who wished the young Congregation no good. This is obviously what Father Maugenest was referring to in his letter to Father Crozat. In the light of this opposition we can readily understand why Father Chevalier found it difficult to get anyone to go around with him to make the appeal for funds and why even such a good man as Monsieur Marchand hesitated for fear of hurting the susceptibilities of his friends. It explains the reason for the humiliating refusals, the insulting remarks etc. It also throws light on his remark that the Cardinal’s presence at the laying of the foundation stone “would make a good impression”, on his use of the word “triumph” when the people turned out in force for the ceremony, and his reference to “change of face” when so many notables attended. Madame Hello has recalled this opposition in what we might call a piece of fanciful writing were it not based on fact. She assumes the role of a young man called Jean Lander who calls on an imaginary aunt living in Issoudun. “My poor aunt seemed very upset about the advent of the Sacred Heart priests to the parish. She would stay awake at night thinking of that small campanile and that the bell that Madame Dausigny had donated would disturb her dreams. She protested in the name of Saint Cyr, and she for one would never abandon St. Cyr, dear old St. Cyr! She said she would make such a fuss about it that the Sacre Coeur would never take the parishioners away from St. Cyr’s. “But aren’t you taking sides?” I asked her. “Of course,” she answered quickly. “There’s no middle course -“it’s either St. Cyr or the Sacre Coeur, and through thick and thin I’m for St. Cyr. Never will I abandon dear old St. Cyr, our old church, for this new chapel. “But, aunt,’ I interposed, “it appears that many graces are being obtained at the Sacred Heart and I have heard it said that not many people prayed in your town till the Sacred Heart church appeared.” My aunt’s eyes blazed. “Now, my nephew, whatever do you mean by that? Whom do you think you’re talking to? So nobody prays in St. Cyr’s, eh? Haven’t I been in the parish myself for the past 40 years?” “But aunt,” I said with a smile, “are you sure you have always been so devoted?” “Of course I have,” she replied. “The trouble is that since the people started going to the Sacre Coeur, my old love for St. Cyr’s has been awakened as has that of many other people. When I saw Sacre Coeur being built I thought that poor old St. Cyr’s would be abandoned, and become a home for the birds only, so off I went to St. Cyr’s and many of the faithful are going also. The bells are ringing out with new vigour.” “But aren’t you being hard on the people who go to Sacre Coeur?” I ventured. “You are a shrewd little devil, my nephew. Yes, perhaps I am. But I am an ‘old-timer’, in love with the past, and I am head-strong and easily aroused. If you stay here long enough I will make you that way too. I am rounding up all the good back-sliders, those who haven’t put a foot inside the church since they were babies, and there are plenty of them. I declare I’ll have them singing hymns in no time. I am determined to avenge St. Cyr’s. You mark words. Only wise people go to St. Cyr’s; the fools go to the Sacre Coeur. Just fancy sensible people going and cramming themselves into that old barn in preference to St. Cyr’s, dear old St. Cyr’s. St. Cyr’s is the pride of our town. I made my first Holy Communion there. The old-timers will always be faithful to St. Cyr’s and the Missionaries can do what they like, but they won’t stop us from going to the old church. It will be packed on Sundays, Feast Days and even at Vespers and Benediction.” Then to make her story good, Madame Hello makes her imaginary character Jean Landur, remark: “This much was quite clear. The keen rivalry between St. Cyr’s and the Sacre Coeur would ultimately result in the Glory of God and the salvation of souls. People started going to St. Cyr out of stubborness and rebellion, but thereby regained their love of religion, and once love was there, they didn’t mind going to the Sacre Coeur. This was proven to me that very evening as my aunt came along with me to – the Sacre Coeur.”(21) However, the reconciliation was not as virtuous and complete as Madame Hello would imply. There was still an active opposition to the Missionaries particularly after the implicit rebuke to Father Mallet when the chapel was reopened. He actually had done them a good turn – even if unwillingly – in hastening the construction of the new church. The opposition was to become even violent later on at the time of the transfer of the parish, and when Father Crozat himself saw fit to take part in it, it became an open scandal as we shall see. In retrospect we can see that one of the main reasons for the confusion and opposition would have been what Father Maugenest termed “the irregular state of affairs” in Issoudun. To understand what he meant by this “irregularity” it is necessary to recall briefly the history of the foundation in its relationship to the parish. Although, as we have seen, Father Crozat gave the two young curates every help and encouragement in their desire to found the Society, his interest was mainly in the welfare of the parish of Issoudun itself, and only vaguely in the home missions. His heart and soul were in Issoudun in spite of its religious tepidity, and he could see the advantage of having a Community of priests in the parish to continue the work to which he had devoted so many years. We recall his strenuous efforts to have the Sacre Coeur made into a parish, and when the Abbe de Champgrand had frustrated this plan, he had endeavoured to incorporate the Mission chapel as a subsidiary to St. Cyr. Had not the Droit Commun emphasised this fact in its report of the procession on the Feast of the Assumption which, the paper said, was organised “to cement by a solemn consecration the union between the church of St. Cyr and that of the Sacred Heart.” We remember also the Abbe de Champgrand’s remark. “The parish priest of Issoudun is a worthy priest, but I suspect that in these circumstances he has, doubtless, let himself be influenced by too natural an affection for his parish.” When the ceremony of laying the foundation stone had taken place, Father Crozat led the procession of the parishioners of St. Cyr as a gesture of good will and encouragement to the young Missionaries. He had in mind the good of the parish of Issoudun and hoped that after his death these missionaries would take it over. In 1872 Father Chevalier wrote: “Father Crozat wished to have us permanently stationed here to assist him and to carry on the ministry in his beloved Issoudun. He helped us by his knowledge, his advice, his experience and influence. I can say this in all truthfulness – without him the work of the Sacre Coeur would not have come into existence. The many and seemingly insurmountable difficulties that eventuated would never have been overcome. When this man of God learned that Issoudun was to become our permanent abode, his joy was complete, and he looked on our presence as an opportunity of reviving the Christian life of the town. He sincerely hoped that the diocesan authorities would entrust the care of this large and important parish to us after his death. He used to say that he wanted the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart to succeed him. We were the comfort of his old age and his dear friends. He regarded himself as one of us, and used to say: ‘We are three Missionaries.’(22) We will deal in a later chapter with the misunderstanding about Father Crozat’s retirement, and the details of the transfer of the parish when the relations between the venerable parish priest and the Missionaries became strained, and Father Crozat went over to the ranks of the opposition. The point we are establishing here is that the transfer was not “engineered” by the Missionaries themselves. On the contrary the end for which the Society had been founded had a much larger scope than just the evangelisation of the town of Issoudun. In this connection Father Maugenest, in his capacity as Archpriest of Bourges, wrote to Father Crozat in 1861: “It was you who founded the Congregation. It will model itself on you, and will remain after you are to carry on the traditions of your zeal and holiness. This you know yourself and it is the reason why you first provoked the irregular state of affairs which now confronts the religious administration of Issoudun.”

The “irregular state of affairs” was precisely this that on account of the union and alliance between the parish of St. Cyr and the Sacre Coeur which Father Crozat had desired and established, the older the parish priest grew, the more the effective ministry of the parish fell into the hands of one-time curate, Father Chevalier. Hence the people looked more to the Sacre Coeur than to St. Cyr’s. “Father Chevalier” continued Father Maugenest, “has only the good of the parish at heart, and he has done a lot of good. In his activities he is only acting in your stead. That is the natural state of affairs as they stand, and he is doing only what you did ten years ago. He will probably remain on as parish priest of Issoudun.” Cardinal Du Pont had been content to let things go their own way in Issoudun. In many respects this parish had been a difficult problem for him. Perhaps, he thought, this plan of Father Crozat with all his years of experience was the best solution. At least there would be a regular and permanent community and a guarantee of sufficient personnel to carry out ministerial duties. This was also Father Maugenest’s opinion. In the letter to Father Crozat from which we have quoted above, he states: “It would appear certain to me that at some future moment the Community of the Sacred Heart will take charge of the parish and be its salvation. Will it have enough missionaries to carry the Gospel to other fields? This I do know, but I have good reason to believe that it will be dedicated to the work in Issoudun and will be its salvation. That is to say it will complete the good work you have begun.”(25) In the midst of all the opposition and difficulties Father Chevalier’s health began to fail. The first symptoms of an illness which came to a head in 1865 began to appear; a general exhaustion brought on by too much work and excessive privation. He contracted granular laryngitis, which played havoc with his general condition.(26) In January, 1860 we find the first mention of his sickness in a letter he wrote to Madame des Mesloizes. The fever, he tells her, has abated; he has not so many headaches and the rheumatism is clearing up.(27) And again on April 5th he assures her: “There is no need for anxiety. My main sickness has passed. I am now going to have a good rest. Part of his so-called “rest” was to organise a series of Lenten lectures for the men of the parish. Each Sunday evening he preached to them at 7 o’clock, and the response was excellent. “The crowd of men,” he wrote, “was large and enthusiastic. This unexpected gathering is encouraging and significant.”(28) However these lectures, added to his worries of church construction, finance, misunderstanding etc., proved too much for him and he was forced to take a rest which, according to Father Piperon, was “more painful to him than the most exhausting work.(29) The whole set of circumstances and difficulties during the years 1858-1860 actually reduced Father Chevalier to a state of nervous exhaustion and mental depression. Father Piperon speaks of its acuteness in his second manuscript: “How could this young priest, as yet unknown, without finance or influence of any sort bring this enterprise to a successful conclusion? Had he not tempted Providence? Was he not running headlong into a catastrophe which would spell death to his newly born work and instead of saving souls prove a stumbling-block to them? These were the thoughts which haunted him day and night, and in spite of an inner voice which kept saying to him “Have confidence he could not rid himself of the tormenting anxiety, which kept him awake through the long hours of the night. His health, normally robust, began to fail under the strain and more than once I came upon him in a fit of sadness and melancholy, despite his valiant efforts to hide what was passing through his mind. He had recourse then to prayer. He turned to Mary the Patroness of difficult causes, and begged Her to sustain him and to plead with the Merciful Heart of Jesus not to abandon him.”(30) Father Piperon has not gone into the causes of this physical and psychological breakdown, but it may help us to understand the situation better if we pause for a moment to consider what led up to this state of affairs. Father Piperon refers to “lack of money” as a contributing cause but it is clear that this was only one reason and a comparatively minor one, for what he calls Father Chevalier’s “overwhelming apprehensions”. A more serious reason was the fear of failure in what he had started, and the possible scandal to the people if the work was closed down. This possibility saddened and sickened him. Naturally building of a church involves a great deal of financial worry, but knowing Father Chevalier as we do, and remembering all the obstacles which his determined spirit had overcome and the innumerable graces he had received, we can be sure that this was far from being the main cause of the collapse of his health. Father Piperon has been loud in his praise of the prudence shown by him in not rushing the work, and the reference to the “pious audacity” in asking for a plan is proof of this. At no time was the financial situation wholly desperate, and when the first part of the church was completed, it was opened free of debt. Father Chevalier’s record of the receipts and expenses confirms this also. The money did not come in all at once, or at the last moment, but gradually as the work progressed. Mlle. Marchand has noted that sometimes “the plan was altered to effect various improvements as the money came in.(31) The only disturbing aspect, perhaps, was that the work dragged on at times, but even this was not a very serious consideration, as the old chapel was still in use. Without minimising then, the fact that finance was a worry, it was certainly not the basic cause of Father Chevalier’s distress and depression. His despondency and fears, which resulted in his sickness must be attributed to other factors. The first was the unexpected and undeserved opposition to his work, in which he saw a grave danger to the good of souls in the parish. When Father Crozat himself later joined in this opposition, he was saddened beyond measure, and regarded it as a scandal to the people. This opposition threatened the effectiveness of the work in the parish, but, as such, it did not constitute a danger to the future of the Congregation he had founded. After all they still had the goodwill and approbation of the ecclesiastical authorities in Bourges, and that was the main thing that mattered. What then was the chief cause of his worries and fears, of this danger which seemed ever to be haunting him? It was surely the fear for the future of his beloved Congregation and the frustration of the object for which he had founded it, namely the work of the missions. The beginning of the crisis for him had been the loss of Father Maugenest. We remember his words when he broke the news to Father Piperon; “We are going to be separated. I can see that His Eminence is no longer interested in our work as Missionaries, and soon will recall us for parish work.” For him the object of the Society was missionary activity. As we have seen, he misjudged the intentions of the Cardinal in this matter, but had he himself not put the Congregation in this very danger by involving it too deeply in the parochial life of Issoudun? The building of the church itself and the many ministerial activities of the two Missionaries constituted the very danger that he feared – namely that he would be nominated parish priest, and that the work of the Congregation would be restricted to Issoudun. He knew that the Cardinal wished him eventually to take over the parish, and at this time Father Crozat wished it himself. Father Piperon tells us that the main motive of the pilgrimages which Father Chevalier made was to seek advice and spiritual consolation after the loss of Father Maugenest. Speaking of the journey to Paray-le-Monial he writes: “Downcast at the departure of Father Maugenest, Father Chevalier wanted to console himself by a pilgrimage to the tomb of Blessed Margaret Mary.” His visits to La Salette and Ars were both prompted by the desire to “heal this wound in his heart.” It was not so much that he was losing a friend, for Father Maugenest always remained his dear friend, and, after all was only 25 miles away, but that he was losing such a valuable member of his young Congregation on whom he relied so much, particularly for the home-mission work. Father Maugenest himself has recorded: “At that tine I was seldom at home on account of my preaching.”(33) That had been the work allotted to him, while Father Chevalier cared mainly for the parish, and Father Piperon, the hospitals. With the loss of this gifted preacher, Father Chevalier could see the end of the Home-missions, which he considered an integral part of the Society’s work. When at the beginning of 1860 it seemed most probable that he would be nominated the parish priest of St. Cyr he was far from enthusiastic about the idea. The fact that he kept making alterations to the plan of the new church, thus delaying its completion, and that he spent some of the money in renovating the monastery shows where his real interest lay. By this time he had sought advice at both Paray-le-Monial and Ars, and he was convinced that his concept of the Society was the right one. On April 5th of that year he wrote: “It is most probable that Father Crozat will shortly tender his resignation. I know that he spoke about this to Father Lamblin, the Vicar General who passed through Issoudun six weeks ago. The Vicar General told him that the Cardinal would not put any obstacles in his way. Father has not mentioned the matter to me, but I know of his approach to the Vicar General and also what the authorities think on the subject. All he wishes now is to retire to Madame du Quesne’s Estate and be chaplain there. What will become of all this I do not know. It is in the hands of Providence. We must pray about it. God can change men’s ideas if He wishes.” Father Crozat did change his mind, and with a sense of relief Father Chevalier wrote ten days later; “I have great pleasure in telling you that the parish priest has changed his mind. He no longer wishes to be chaplain, but remain on as parish priest of Issoudun. God grant that he stays in this frame of mind.”(34) To summarise then, we can see, mainly from the testimony of Father Piperon, that the causes of the breakdown in health of Father Chevalier were the accumulation of financial worries, the opposition of a section of the people and clergy, and chiefly his fear for the future of his beloved Society. At the height of his troubles Father Chevalier decided to go on a number of pilgrimages and seek advice from experienced and saintly people as to what he should do in the future. The fact that those journeys were suggested and financed by sympathetic friends is proof of God’s loving care for those who sincerely strive to do His Holy will. Now that the foundation stone had been laid and the construction of the church was well under way, Father Chevalier entrusted the care of the parish to his sole confrere, Father Piperon, during his absence. In spite of objections by the architect, it was decided not to hurry the building and to use the old chapel as long as possible. In the next thirteen months he was to make three pilgrimages. He wrote to the Marchioness des Mesloizes telling her that on his first journey he would be away from Issoudun from July 1st to the 15th. The first pilgrimage was made possible through the generosity of one of the Canons of the Bourges Cathedral, the Abbe Guay d’Aubilly. “This priest,” wrote Father Chevalier “was a dear friend of mine, and had always shown great interest in our work.” Father Piperon refers to him as “a saintly priest who spent all his money on charitable works, and for a long time had been the Director of the Sodality of the Holy Childhood in the diocese.”(36) In 1859 he proposed to Father Chevalier that they both go together to the Shrine of Our Lady of Puy, then on to La Louvesc, La Salette, to la Grande Chartreuse and finally to Ars. “I accepted all the more willingly,” wrote the Father Founder “since he offered to pay all the expenses.” “From Notre Dame de France,” he wrote in the report of the journey, “we went to the tomb of St. Francis Regis, and made a retreat there under the direction of the Jesuit Fathers.” From there we made the journey to La Salette passing through Grenoble. The road across the Holy Mountain, once the town of Corps was left behind, was considered difficult and even dangerous, but ‘we’ managed to cross without mishap. A few weeks previously pious and well-to-do merchant from Marseilles, following the same track, had fallen with his horse to the bottom of the gorge. While he lay injured and waiting for help, he promised Our Lady that, if his life was saved, he would donate a marble statue of Herself to the sanctuary of Her Shrine. He was rescued and after his recovery he kept his promise. The statue which adorned the Church today is his gift.” “We visited the place of the apparition and whilst there ardently recommended our young Congregation to Our Lady of La Salette. We then made our way back to Grenoble. My companion had more time than I, as I had to be back in Issoudun by the 15th, so I decided to forego the visit to Grande Chartreuse in order to make my pilgrimage to Ars where I hoped to see the saintly Cure and ask his advice if possible. I arrived in Ars on the morning of July 14th. My main concern was to know if it would be possible to obtain an interview with the Cure. The first news I received was not encouraging as some of the townspeople told me he was ill, and had not even been visiting the church for some days past. I decided to call at the mission-house where he lived and make further enquiries. I chose the wrong hour to call, as it was half-past twelve and the Fathers were still at lunch. I rang the door bell, and waited. There was no response. I had the temerity to ring it a second time and that more loudly. I could hear footsteps coming quickly down the passage-way, and the door was flung open abruptly. A priest asked me what I wanted in a rather angry tone of voice. I enquired if it would be possible to see the Cure. “No,” he replied irritably, “All we get here are importunate priests asking the same thing. The Cure is not receiving visitors.” He then closed the door. I was bitterly disappointed and began to make my way to the church with my head bowed and tears coming to my eyes. Hardly had I gone a few yards when I heard a voice calling after me. “Father, Father – just a minute’.” I turned, to see the same priest who had just closed the door on me. Father Toccanier was his name. “Father” he said, “I must apologise for my bad manners; we are so much disturbed every minute of the day that I could not control my annoyance. Come in, and I will try to get the Cure for you within the next quarter of an hour. He is slightly improved this morning.” “I had waited a short time when the door opened and the holy Cure came in, a surplice across his arm. His face was pale, his figure gaunt; his eyes were sunken in their sockets yet keen and full of life; his head was bowed and his body stooped from his many penances and macerations. I thought I was seeing a vision from another world. He bade me sit down, and asked me where I was from and what I had come to ask him. After introducing myself, I told him all about our small Congregation and my hopes for it. He listened intently as I told him it was completely dedicated to the Sacred Heart and to Our Blessed Lady. He gave me great encouragement telling me to have confidence. He told me my trials, which I would feel keenly, had only just begun. The powers of Hell he said, would do everything to try and destroy the work, as its object was the salvation of souls and the Glory of God. He warned me that the agents of Hell would raise such fury against the work that at times I would think it must fail. However the Heart of Jesus and the Mother of God would intervene to the confusion of its enemies. Strengthened by his, words I asked him if ho would make a Novena for the Congregation. He willingly agreed, and told me he would commence it on July 16th. Commending myself to his prayers I took my leave, and immediately returned to Issoudun. A short time after my return, we learnt of the death of the saintly Cure. He is surely our protector in Heaven.”(37) In his “Annals of the Society” Father Chevalier again makes reference to his historic interview. “During a visit of over a quarter of an hour I told him of our little Society of the Sacred Heart and of the end it proposed to itself, I asked him what he thought of it and if God would bless it. The man of God replied; ‘This is the work of works. Heaven will bless it without a doubt, but only after many trials. Have courage and confidence.'” “When will you arrive back in Issoudun?’ he asked me. ‘On July 16th, Father,’ I replied. ‘Very well, then; we will begin our Novena on that day. You and your confrere unite your intention to mine, and the Sacred Heart of Jesus will protect you.’ The saintly priest would hardly have had time to finish the Novena – to which we attached great importance – for he died a few days Later.”(38) “During the winter of the same year,” writes Father Chevalier, “I felt the need of praying at the tomb of Blessed Margaret Mary, and asking her for the success of our little Congregation whose object was the spreading of Devotion to the Sacred Heart, and so must be dear to her heart. The good Sisters of the Visitation received me with great kindness, and showed me over the places hallowed by the Saint. The sight of these holy places, so intimately associated with the appearance of Our Lord, so redolent of the Devotion to His Divine Heart and His marvelous revelations, made an impression on me, which I find difficult to describe. My first Mass was said at the altar where Jesus had appeared to the Saint showing her His Sacred Heart and saying: ‘Behold this Heart which has loved men so much.’ The second Mass was celebrated in the chapel of the Garden, where the Adorable Heart of Jesus had revealed many of the secrets of His Love. As I knelt at the tomb of the saint, I made her the confidante of our sorrows our trials and our hopes. I begged her since Our Lord had constituted her the heiress of the treasures of His Heart for time and eternity, to obtain from Him all the graces we needed. I stayed there a long time conversing with her.”(40) “As an offering I placed a heart of gilded wood, which I had obtained at Moulins, on the tombstone, I had enclosed in it a list of all my intentions for the present and the future. I placed myself and all who are mine under the protection of this great lover of the Sacred Heart. Before I left, the Mother Superior gave me, at my request, some cuttings from the famous hazel-nut tree where Our Lord had appeared to the Saint. On my return I planted them in our garden, and today they form a large retreat where we have placed a tableau representing Our Lord appearing to Blessed Margaret Mary. “Our Basilica,” Father Chevalier continues, “has the privilege of having the first altar, after that of Paray-le-Monial to be dedicated tod Saint after her beatification. By a special indult from Rome we celebrate her feast-day with all solemnity and. recite her Office. The beautiful stained-glass window in her chapel represents the exchange Our Lord made of His Heart for hers, and on a scroll are the words: “I make you for time and for eternity the heiress of all the treasures of My Heart.”(41) Father Chevalier’s great devotion to St. Margaret Mary, in whose honour he made the pilgrimage four years before her beatification, flows from its intimate connection with Devotion to the Sacred Heart. This devotion was greatly strengthened by his visit to her Shrine at Paray-lo-Monial. Usually reticent about his innermost spiritual sentiments, Father Chevalier does enlarge on his spiritual reactions during the pilgrimage, but Father Piperon has written: “What took place in the soul of this Apostle of the Sacred Heart during these sacred days we do not know, as the humble missionary has never expressed himself publicly on the subject, at least to my knowledge. But I know that the fervent pilgrim passed long hours at the tomb and in the convent chapel that he prayed unceasingly and urgently to the humble virgin of Paray to obtain for him and his developing Congregation a more intimate and profound knowledge of the Heart of Jesus, and a more burning zeal to make that Heart known and loved throughout the world. He recommended his work to her in a special manner – that work as yet so frail and tender that the least hurt could destroy it. A few years later when I myself had the privilege of visiting the privileged Sanctuary, I found that the nuns still remembered our venerated Father, so greatly impressed had they been by his deep piety, his fervour and the simplicity of his humility. They expressed their admiration of his virtue and the knowledge he showed of the real spirit of Devotion to the Sacred Heart. Father Piporon gives us the happy news of his recovery to health and beneficial result of his visit to Paray-le-Monial. “Whatever it was that happened to him, Father Chevalier came back a new man. Instead of his for anxiety and worry, he showed a completely calm submission to the Will of Sacred Heart of Jesus, and he seemed confident of the success of his future work. His conversation and his conferences on the Sacred Heart clearly show that at Paray he had imbibed the true spirit of the Sacred Heart, which he endeavoured to infuse into us. For this reason we must look upon his pilgrimage to the Sanctuary of the Blessed Margaret Mary as a remarkable epoch, an important phase in the life of our venerated Father.”(42) The following August, Father Chevalier made the third of his pilgrimages, again at the suggestion of a friend. “While the work on the church was proceeding,” he tells us, “Father Urban who was Parish Priest of Oudinvillel (this should read “Doudinville – Seine Inf.) – a friend who had always taken interest in our work, came to Issoudun and suggested that I make a trip to Rome offering to pay all my expenses. I was delighted with the opportunity of going to the Holy City and kneeling at the feet of the Holy Father to ask his blessing on our newly-born work.”(43) Before making arrangements for the journey there were the celebrations in honour of the Feast of the Sacred Heart to be organised. The triduum was preached by the Father Damourette, and was attended by large congregations. On the evening of the feast – 16th June – the special sermon was preached by Father Moulinet, the parish priest of Notre Dame de Chateauroux. On June 18th Father Chevalier again went to Fontgombault to make a retreat in preparation for his pilgrimage. At the end of August the two priests began their journey and called at Lyons, Geneva, Chambery, Turin, Milan and Genoa. On the 27th August they embarked from Genoa arriving at Livourne next morning about 7 o’clock. As travelling companions they had about 40 Garibaldians who asked if the Palace at Avignon was being got ready for the Pope whom they said they were going to expel in three or four weeks time! Disappointment awaited them at Livourne, where they learnt there were no boats to Civitta Vecchia until the following Friday, and. this was only Tuesday. They decided to fill in the time by visiting the two near-by towns of Pisa and Florence. Returning to Livourne on the Thursday, Father Chevalier remarks that they were beset by a great number of beggars during the night they slept there. Next morning the boat left at 5 o’clock for Civitta Vecchia, where they arrived the following morning – Saturday – at 10 o’clock. At 4 p.m. they boarded the train for Rome, and arrived in the Eternal City at 7 o’clock that evening – 1st September. It had been a pleasant trip, without sea-sickness, but they were unfortunate to arrive in Rome during a heat-wave, when many people, especially visitors, were stricken down by fever. Happily the two pilgrims were spared. (45) They stayed at the Monastery of St. Bridget with the Holy Cross Fathers during their days in Rome. After the Fathers had given them a warm welcome, they lost no time in looking up Monsignor la Croix, a Protonotary to whom they had a letter of introduction from the Archbishop of Bourges. He received them graciously, as did also Cardinal Villecount, one-time bishop of La Rochelle, who suggested ways and means of obtaining the various favours they sought. Another helpful friend was Archbishop Charles Amable, Prince de la Tour d’Auvergne, Lauraguais, a member of the Roman Rota.(46) Father Chevalier also had a letter of introduction from Archbishop Menjaud to Cardinal Barnabo, Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith. The letter has fortunately been preserved. It is dated Paris, August 17th, 1860. It reads as follows: Your Eminence, Father Chevalier of the diocese of Bourges, who will have the honour of presenting this letter to you is one of my most devout and zealous priests. Though still young, he has already rendered great service in the cause of religion, and if God deigns to favour the exceptionally holy work he has begun, and in which we take a great interest, he will do even greater things in the future. This is the reason why I ask your Eminence a special favour – that of seeking for Father Chevalier the title of Apostolic Missionary, which will be a fitting reward for the work this worthy priest has done, and a powerful encouragement for his followers……… By a special decree of the Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, Father Chevalier received this title and for a number of years signed himself Apostolic Missionary of the Sacred Heart. He was anxious in Rome to obtain various relics for himself and for others, but in this he was not as successful as he had hoped. He wrote in a letter on September “Relics are in such demand that hardly anyone gets what he wishes. I will not be able to bring back those I have obtained as it takes 15 days for to be prepared.”(47) The great occasion arrived for his audience with the Holy Father. The appointed day was a Sunday, and, fittingly, it was the Feast of the Holy of Mary. “It was the 5th anniversary of our installation and the beginning of our religious life” he writes in his Notes.(48) “What a holy coincidence. The Vicar of Jesus Christ, by his fruitful blessing, consecrated all the memories of those five years. Admitted into the presence of the Holy Father, that grand and immortal Pontiff, Pius IX, we prostrated ourselves respectfully, full of joy and admiration. I presented a letter to His Holiness which Archbishop Menjaud had given me. The Holy Father read it, then said to me: ‘This is very good, my child. I see who you are. So you are striving to establish a Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. What a beautiful work! The only hope for the world and the Church is in the Heart of Jesus. Only He can cure all our ills. Increase and multiply. Preach everywhere the salutary devotion to the Heart of the Divine Master. Before I die I hope to give canonical approbation to your Congregation.’” In the Annals of the Society, Father Chevalier speaks of the audience more detail. He tells us that the Holy Father let him speak at length on work of the Sacred Heart, on its special end, and the ways and means he had in mind for achieving its success. He pointed out that its end was the glorification of the Heart of Jesus by all possible means, the sanctification of the souls of the priests and the people by this precious devotion, the offering of the Heart of Jesus to the world as the remedy for its ills and a means Reparation for the outrages suffered by that same Sacred Heart. It would present a means of perfection for his missionaries by the living of a truly religious life. The means of obtaining this end would be by preaching, education of youth, the spiritual direction of souls, the exercises of the sacred ministry, priestly and lay Associations and the spreading of devotion to Our Blessed Lady. Pius IX replied: “This work seems to me to provide the answer to our present-day needs and I sincerely hope it succeeds. I give it my blessing with all my heart, and I should like all priests to share in it. Increase and multiply. Develop it as quickly as you can, and I will be happy to give you the canonical approbation you need.” ‘”Holy Father’, I then said to him. ‘We have a motto which seems to echo the sentiments you have just expressed. Perhaps it may sound a little ambitious. If your Holiness approves of it, I humbly ask you to grant 100 days indulgence for its invocation. It would be a pledge of blessing and prosperity for us. Here it is: The Holy Father read the words: ‘May the Sacred Heart of Jesus be everywhere loved.’ ‘Excellent,’ he said, ‘I willingly grant the indulgence you ask.’ He then took his pen and wrote his signature together with the words ‘Pro Gratia’. Our highest hopes had been fulfilled, and after kneeling for his fatherly blessing, we made our departure, with joy in our hearts.” We can claim that the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart possess the first invocation in honour of the Sacred Heart to be enriched by an indulgence. It is recorded in the official “Preces et pia opera indulgentiis ditatae.”(49) When Father Piperon spoke of the “crisis” through which Father Chevalier was passing he told us that he had recourse to prayer in order that Mary would come to his aid, that the Sacred Heart would not abandon him. The result of the pilgrimages proves he was right. We must remember also that apart from seeking spiritual consolation, he was also looking for practical advice and the assurance of certainty. He wanted to be certain of the future, to be able to dispel his doubts and fears, to ask saintly and experienced people what he should do. St. Jean Baptiste Vianney had repeated what the inner voice had been telling him: “Have Confidence.” One day you will succeed,” He had told him to expect difficulties, even great ones. “The powers of Hell will do everything to destroy this work.” But the Sacred Heart and His Blessed Mother would protect the Society. And so he goes to Paray-le-Monial to find the “heiress of the treasures of the Sacred Heart”. It had been while reading her life that his vocation had defined itself and this journey now marks, as Father Piperon says, “an important milestone in his life. He there gained a greater confidence and a deeper insight into the true spirit of the Sacred Heart which he endeavoured to infuse into us.” The doubts and anxieties, listed by Father Piperon, now appear in a new light. Financial cares and local opposition now fade into the back-ground as relatively unimportant. Henceforth the paramount thought is the Congregation, its character and its object. The one Person that really mattered was the Sacred Heart of Jesus. His main desire in going to Rome was to seek approbation from the Holy Father for his Congregation, even though at the time he had only one companion. Later on, when one day thinking of his temerity in asking the Holy Father personally for an indulgence without going through the regular procedure, he remarked to Father Piperon: “You know, Father, we were a couple of simpletons asking straight-out for an indulgence for our invocation – “May the Sacred Heart of Jesus be everywhere loved.'”(50) If we wish to know if God’s blessing is on any particular work we look to its origins and motives. These are its credentials. The valuable Manuscript of 1859 which is the only source of information we have on the intimate spiritual experiences of Father Chevalier during the period of his “crisis” is above all an exposition of the various hopes and trials of his vocation as a Founder. It was written “under obedience of authority,” most probably that of Archbishop Menjaud. In it we find his act of faith – his unwavering belief – in the divine origin of the Society. The very first lines are: “Our small Society is not the work of man but of God. It was born in the Sacred Heart of Jesus under the powerful protection of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.” He expresses the same sentiments as an introduction to His first Book of Rules written in 1855. In the document he makes three main points. He recalls, firstly, the various early stages and extraordinary graces of his vocation. Secondly he dwells on the obligation incumbent on him after His promise and agreement with Our Lady, the text of which he quotes in full. (Two of the pages which comprise the document are on this subject.) And finally, he tells of the installation and approval of the Society of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. All this, he concludes, was an answer to their prayers for Divine protection of their work. The fact that he recorded these impressions, “with”, as he said, “a certain distaste, and only under obedience, for the glory of God” throws the various stages of his vocation into bold relief. In the analysis of his vocation we must remember that the primary intention throughout all his life and activity was to found a Congregation of Missionaries – and that in honour of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. It was for that intention that he had asked “the special sign” from God. “The good God inspired me,” he wrote, to found a community of Missionary Priests who would work to heal the sickness which was afflicting our century.” He had proposed the plan to Father Maugenest in these words: Two evils are destroying our unhappy century – indifference and selfishness. We need an effective remedy to cure these diseases. That I remedy is to be found in the Sacred Heart of Jesus, which is all Love and Goodness. This adorable Heart, so devoted to us, is ignored by mankind. Men do not realise the treasures It contains. We need priests who will work to make these treasures known. They will be called Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. This then was his main desire and object, the completion of his vocation, the fulfilment of his life’s ambition. God wished and blessed the work, Church approved it by the installation of the 9th September, 1855, despite the opposition it had encountered in its early stages – an opposition which had made Father Chevalier fear for its future. If we look at the picture as painted in the three documents, the writings of Father Piperon, the account of the journeys and the Manuscript of 1859, the following features stand out: After the installation but before January of 1858, Father Chevalier doubts if his work can proceed. First there was the loss of Father Maugenest, and the consequent cessation of the home missions, which he thought would spell ruin to the future of the Congregation. There was the fear that the Cardinal would appoint himself and Father Piperon to parish work though actually the Cardinal approved the work, but would not give up Father Maugenest. Added to this were the worries that accrued from the building of the church and the opposition he encountered. There was the constant fear that he would be appointed as parish priest of St. Cyr and their work restricted to Issoudun alone. All this made him doubt what was the Will of God in his regard. On the one hand he was convinced his project was inspired by God, and that its development had been accompanied by special graces. He was formally committed by his promise, and the ecclesiastical approval seemed to indicate it was God’s Will. On the other hand the work the Missionaries were doing in Issoudun had been greatly blessed in awakening the faith of many of the people; the Archbishop seemed to wish them to work there, and the very fact that he had become so involved in building a church there would indicate this was the field of their apostolate. Had he not tempted Providence by undertaking this work? Or was God merely testing his fidelity to his promise and his original plans? He was quite prepared to do God’s will as long as he knew what it was. And so he made his pilgrimages to find out. He returned happy and convinced that God wanted him to found the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. At Ars he received the advice of a Saint that God willed his Congregation and that he must expect all manner of difficulties and opposition – even from Hell itself. In the end the Sacred Heart and Our Lady would see to it that he succeeded. At Paray-le-Monial he received a deeper understanding of the Sacred Heart. He was given the grace of a clear concept of the nature and character of the Society he was endeavouring to found. Finally, he had received the comforting reassurance from the lips of the Holy Father, the Vicar of Christ himself, that God wished him to go ahead with his original plan. The above analysis shows the chain of the divers elements which constituted the crisis which beset Father Chevalier, and their relative importance, but it does not explain them. Precise information is too often lacking, and the general nature of Father Piperon’s writings leave many questions unanswered. Two of these questions are – Why did Father Chevalier see such a danger to his Congregation in the existing state of affairs at Issoudun, and what effect did it have on his own life and that of the Society. We can perhaps gain light on the subject by studying the reaction after 1860, and considering more fully what were the character and substance of his mission, and the means which he believed he must take to realise them.

CHAPTER X: THE MISSION AND ANXIETIES OF A FOUNDER

Founders – The Instruments of God’s Grace.

A Religious Institute is a stable social organism in the Church, whose particular form of Christian life is determined by the special nature of the work it carries out. The foundation of such an Institute is an instrumental participation in the activity of Christ Himself, Who as Head of the Mystical Body “fulfills all in all.”(l) (Ephs.1/23) The establishment of any new form of religious life in the Church is attributable to Christ, Who illumines the mind of the Founder, and translates His Will into action.(2) Pope Pius VI wrote of the Founders of the various Orders and Congregations: “They established their societies only under divine inspiration,(3) and Pope Pius XI, similarly: “It is certain that these excellent men, in founding their Institutes, were obeying the inspiration of God.”(4) Four days before this statement Pope Plus XI in referring to Father Chevalier himself had said: “He seems to have made his decision only after receiving a sign from God.”(5) Consequently, the foundation of a Religious Congregation is not an ordinary work dependant on the will of man, who is free to undertake it on such as building a monument, establishing a business or any other work of human ingenuity. Whoever would think so is ignoring the fundamental truth of our holy religion. The Founder receives his mission from God, Who speaks to him as He did to Moses: “Think upon it, and do it as thou hast been shown.” (Exod. 24/40) On the Founder’s fidelity in corresponding to the lights given by the Holy Spirit, will depend the success or the failure of his enterprise.(6) By reason of its origin, its significance and its object, the mission of a Founder is a holy and sanctifying work, whether it is accompanied by miracles and revelations or not. Without fidelity to God’s direction the work of any Founder must come to nought. The nature of his mission demands this, for God has ordained not only the special place and function of the Founder in His Mystical Body, but also those of the members of his Institute with all the graces that will be granted to them. This fidelity is but the co-operation in the work of the Holy Spirit, who directs and guides the Church. But the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Love, Who builds with love and consequently His work in the Church is a work of Love. The collaboration must be of the same nature as the principal activity. The instrument must be adapted to the mode of activity of the Worker. He will be a perfect instrument in God’s hands only when he himself is matured in and animated solely by love. Fidelity in love is what God asks of us for the fulfilment of any mission which He entrusts to us. God can fructify all human activity and utilise it for His Own ends. He orients towards the realisation of His designs physical causes and at times even the devices of the Devil himself. If the work is done without love, the human instrument achieves nothing, except the punishment of God for refusing to give his cooperation.(7) The Mission of a Founder is also regulated by the general law in the plan of salvation – namely that he sanctify himself in the particular place and work that God has allotted him, and that he achieve this by his love of God. The perfect accomplishment of the mission is then the great proof of love which God exacts of those to whom He has confided it. At the same tine a divine apostolic mission carries with it grave responsibilities, the neglect of which can plunge the soul into the abyss of perdition; whereas a loving and humble fidelity can transport the soul to unfathomable depths of close intimacy and familiarity with God. The charism, by this fidelity, leads to transforming union with Him.(8) Like all apostolic activity, this mission calls for that spiritual effort, which purifies love, and sets its seal on fidelity. Charism for the good of the Church and souls, this mission is also the way of sanctification for the soul who receives it. The founder remains the man who must suffer in his purification, in his progress towards God, and he shares the sorrowful lot of the apostle whose fidelity in love God purifies by the very work to which He calls him and which the apostle himself undertakes precisely in an upsurge of love and fidelity towards God. Such is the foundation of the Christian idea that the works of God are blessed in trial, suffering and tears. But every charisma carries with it graces for him whom God has chosen as His collaborator. God is love also for His faithful servant. In order to comprehend the difficulties which beset any Founder it is important to bear in mind this double aspect of his mission. The difference between the various Founders, as between the difference in the obstacles they encountered, arises not only from their individual characters and temperaments; but from the particular nature of their mission. The same variety which characterises the omnipotence and bounty of God in the distribution of His graces reflects itself in the calling of the various Founders. The call can, for example, include the entry of the Founder into the new Institute, as it can demand only that he provide the material conditions for its success. Again, spiritual paternity alone shows a great variety. In its plenitude this grace signifies for the Founder that he organise the community, give it its end, its direction, the character of its activities, lay down the spirituality which will inspire it in all things and in all its members and lead thorn to fecundity and sanctity. God is able to entrust this multiple charge to the Founder alone, or to arrange that others share it with him, either at the same time or in successive stages. To one He may give a sudden inspiration, confirmed and illumined by certain signs. To another he may reveal His plans slowly and step by step. Of one Founder He may demand immediate action; of another the patient awaiting of favourable circumstances; in one He may inspire just the general idea of His plan to be developed into definite and specific form as time goes on; in another He may inspire immediately the complete concept, at least in its general outlines. God displays a veritable richness of variation and combination in giving to each foundation its particular character, to each Founder his distinct personality, and to each Institute, its historical and sociological rhythm. This last aspect accentuates the different modes of action of the various Founders. He who has only the initial general concept of his ideal in mind must limit his activity until he communicates his plan to sympathetic collaborators, and common research and the grace of God will determine the form it is to take in due time. During the period of development the Founder awaits calmly and patiently the moment when it will come to fruition. That is all God expects of his fidelity for the time being – to wait patiently to maintain the ideal in all its purity. It will be different with the Founder who has clearly in mind from the beginning a determined plan. The edifice is already designed in its main features, and all he has to do now is to realise as exactly as possible the plan which has been presented. With him it is not a question of waiting and feeling his way in determining his plan, its object and its operation; it is more a question of knowing, what to accept and what to reject in its fulfilment. Here it is not a matter of patient waiting and hesitant experimentation, for he already knows the Will of God, but a matter of arriving at common agreement with his advisors as to the best method of giving his plan tangible expression. Here the way is clearly indicated by God to the Founder, and he must show it and it alone those who will come to him, exacting resolutely that they give to their life in a meritorious obedience, that form which he will specify and which will not be the outcome of investigation and mutual experience. He stands thus, more, or less isolated in the midst of his disciples before a task which demands the entire personality and which he alone can accomplish. Being entirely bound by God, his fidelity will consist in following with firmness and perseverance the directives received from Him. The anxieties of a Founder will follow from the particular manner in which he receives his mission. God may make him aware of his task by a direct illumination or by a less striking grace. The nature and the value the mission is not affected, but naturally a special inspiration from God carries with it a certitude which influences the mental and spiritual faculties of the one who receives it. We have seen that Father Chevalier, in spite of all his efforts, could not put the thought out of his mind that God was inspiring his desire to found a Congregation. Objectively and from the point of view of the onlooker an unbroken series of sensible signs give a greater guarantee that the work is from God than an extraordinary grace. In this latter case there is greater possibility of illusion, and it is only normal and logical to doubt it. Thus it was that Father Ruel refused to accept as coming from God the communication which Father Chevalier made to him.

Whatever the nature of the heavenly communication, it is always received in a human manner, and interpreted according to the human faculties of the one who receives it. Grace and the personal reaction work together, so that we might ask where grace concludes and human effort begins. It is easy for us in the light of subsequent history to see that the various circumstances in the initial stages were the work of God, but we must remember that often for the Founder who could not foresee the future, they were matters of perplexity and exacting research. He was responsible for the work, and it was not always clear what were the intentions of Divine Providence. As long as the Founder has complete confidence in his mission and sees clearly the task ahead of him, he will possess enough strength within himself not to give in before obstacles and difficulties, and not to bow to the wishes of those who would have him deviate from his original project. Relying wholly on God he uses the favourable circumstances and avoids those, even though they seem feasible, which could impede his plan. But when a serious doubt concern ing the vocation, or the interpretation of the mission arises, a crisis follows such as happened in the case of Father Chevalier when he wondered “if God would bless his work.” For the certitude that he is accomplishing a mission willed by God is the sole strength of a Founder, a strength which enables him to meet all difficulties. This certitude is the sole foundation of his role, of his right and his duty to proceed, his sole title to the graces needed to accomplish his mission.

The Particular Mission of Father Chevalier The Vocation of Father Chevalier presented various aspects which lenrd themselves to the danger of too personal an interpretation, and thereby obscure the God-given nature of his work. If the solution of the financial troubles which conditioned the foundation was due rather to prayer than to personal relationships, it involved by that very fact obligations towards persons each of whom desired the realisation of his own particular views in the work to be founded. The Abbe de Champgrand, for instance, without whose initial help the work would not have begun, became very difficult, and wished the activities of the missionaries to be limited to the Province of Berry. He entertained a violent antipathy to the devotion to the Sacred Heart and to the foundation of a new religious Institute, and became the suspicious custodian of his property, interfering in the affairs and designs of the missionaries themselves. Abbe Crozat also had his own ideas. He favoured a Religious Institute but one which would confine its interests to the parish of Issoudun. There was furthermore Father Chevalier’s strong, personal attachment to the Congregation itself. If he does not expressly speak in any of his writings of any obligation to become a Missionary of the Sacred Heart, it is because the matter went without saying, and as its Founder, he took on himself the task of governing his Society over a period of almost fifty years. We have seen that after what he calls his conversion during student days all his conduct and ideals were shaped with this end in view – to establish his beloved Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. The awareness of his vocation sprang from his spiritual belief that this was what God wanted him to do. For him, the founding of the Congregation was the realisation of his ideal, the full flowering of all his personal experience and activity. In considering this fact we might ask: Where did the action of God finish, and his own human and personal effort and influence begin? But that does not explain why the doubts arose in his mind after the installation, or why the certitude he had enjoyed up to this juncture now gave way to fear and misgiving. Nor does it indicate to what precise points in the program the doubts and uncertainties were connected. It was not that he doubted his vocation as a Founder. All through the difficult period he kept his firm conviction, that God was calling him for this particular work. His constant preoccupation was how best to achieve it. The vehemence of the crisis and questions which Father Chevalier was putting to himself, did they not spring from the fact that he discovered an opposition in principle, till then unsuspected between his project and the reality. Let us never forget that the solution of the problem will effect in him a total change in his apostolic conduct and that the consultation with the holy Cure of Ars and the words of Pius IX concerned only the end of the Society, its organisation and its opportuneness. The crisis appears then as a doubt regarding the content of his mission. His main fear was that in the situation as it was developing! Issoudun he would not be able to fulfill his mission as he had understood it. Yet since it was God Himself Who had allowed this situation to arise, and since He had even blessed it Father Chevalier began to distrust his own manner of acting, and the interpretation he had given to the message of the Lord. For the time being the situation had resolved itself in a loss of the mission-work and the concentration of their activity on Issoudun alone. If we admit that Father Chevalier’s project was limited merely to the spiritual regeneration of Issoudun or to the idea of establishing an association of priests who would use the devotion to the Sacred Heart as a means of reclaim an indifferent and even hostile people to the practice of their Faith, are not at the crux of his problem.(10) There was no real opposition to the spreading of this devotion in Issoudun. Even the Abbe de Champgrand had resigned himself on the subject and if there had been any positive opposition Father Maugonest would surely have mentioned it in his letters to Abbe Crozat. Nor was it a question as to how to spread this devotion in the town. During this period in France throughout the various dioceses there were associations of priests who, while restricting their activity to their parishes, practised the devotion to the Sacred Heart and preached it as a powerful means of salvation. And if it were simply a question of holding to the missions, this would not have been a great source of anxiety as he knew that the work could be resumed at a later date after more recruits joined the Society. Why then this very special interest in the question of the missions? Could it not be that they were only a symbol, the sole manner of expressing at the moment a wider and more fundamental concept of the plan God had in mind for him? A closer study of what he considered this mission to be will help us understand the reason for his cares and doubts. We have seen that the genesis of his special vocation was his desire to bring the Gospel to the infidels in foreign lands. After the Abbe Ruel’s opposition to his plan, he was inspired by the idea of founding a Congregation of Missionaries who would work to heal the moral sickness of the age. This decision included a total submission the Will of the Supreme Priest, an entire detachment from earthly things and consequently, whether consciously or not, a greater and wider scope of action. He gave up the idea of a regular ministry in a particular parish for the ideal of a more general apostolate. He did not intend his Congregation to work only in a particular area but to combat the moral disease of the age wherever it was to be found. Then came the idea of the devotion to the Sacred Heart, not just as a matter of form or a minor detail, but the determining and decisive factor which would concentrate around itself all other forces and ideas, so as to mould them to itself, to direct and perfect them. Thus the devotion to the Sacred Heart, by becoming the end of the Society, but enlarged the field of apostolate, limited only by the opportunity which it offered of making known the treasures of love and mercy which the Heart of Jesus contained. And, as Father Piperon has remarked, since this was the ideal which inspired the Founder in all he did, it is necessarily, the inspiring force in his Congregation.(11) In the light of this concept all the works of the Society are but means to its end – namely the spreading far and wide of the Spirit of the Sacred Heart amongst men. To obtain this end, the objective of the Founder must be to protect the universality of his concept and to gather priests around him whom he will train for this special task by a total dedication of their person and their apostolate to the Sacred Heart – a devotedness which will express itself in the forms of the institute: a religious Congregation of Missionaries and apostles. The proposed exclusive concentration of the Missionaries’ sacerdotal activity on Issoudun alone, carried with it the same danger as Father Chevalier encountered during his seminary days, when Father Ruel told him to confine his zeal and interest to the spiritual regeneration of that town. In the 1859 Manuscript the Founder shows his anxiety at the possibility of the work of the Society being limited to Issoudun, and mentions that a group of “secular priests of the Sacred Heart” would suffice for that. To his mind this situation would imperil the nature and function of the Society as he willed it. (Incidentally the Archbishop de la Tour d’Auvergne was in agreement with him as a letter to the Fathers of Vaugirard, 1862, shows.) His ardent wish was that his Institute would be “a true Religious Order approved by the Holy See.”

We may ask here what precise meaning did Father Chevalier, in his writings dealing with the early days of the Society, give this term “Religious Order”. In those days it was necessary to be very careful and prudent in the use of the words: “Religious”, “Order” “Congregation with Simple Vows” etc. The foundation of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart was established according the correct canonical procedure and we must keep this in mind in case of error on the matter. After the French Revolution several new Institutes had sprung into being to meet the needs of the time.(12) In order to justify their right of existence they relied, as was the custom, on the decrees dealing with the foundation of new Institutes, dating as far back as the Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Lyons (1273). However, they came into conflict as regards their juridical status with the decisions of Pope Pius V who in 1566 and 1568 had decreed that the members of all Religious Institutes must take solemn vows, otherwise the particular Institute would be dissolved.(13) On account of the large number of Institutes of this kind existing during the last century, the situation became more and more abnormal, as the Roman Curia would not give them pontifical approbation unless they embraced the Religious State.(14) The Institutes were so varied in form, and the opinions and terminology of the canonists so diverse that it was difficult to classify the Religious State into categories.(15) When in 1850 the Synod of Bordeaux wished to make these decisions obligatory on any Institute striving for evangelical perfection, declared that the law applied to those Institutes which considered themselves as Religious, and were called such by the people.”(16) In spite of this evolution in public opinion, the Roman Curia maintained the juridical term “Regular” for all those in the Religious State. (l7) Thus in canonical legislation all those Institutes which were not “Regular” were considered as “Secular” Institutes, i.e. non-Religious Institutes. This group comprised all those foundations which differed from the old Orders only by reason of the fact that they did not have solemn vows, right down to pious associations whose members did not take vows at all, wear a religious habit, nor lead a community life.(18) We have every reason then to be careful in explaining the terms used in documents of that time. Thus “a Religious Congregation with Simple Vows” is a juridical conception incorporated into Code of Canon Law, and is considered as a subdivision of the Religious state (Canons 807,808). In the last century such Congregations were approved by laudatory Decrees, and in the approbation of the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart the Society was referred to as “an Institute or a Congregation with Simple Vows under the government of a Superior General,’ without any reference to its canonical religious state. In the Analecta of the Society in 1929 (p.277) Father Depigny, M.S.C. quotes from some brochures written after 1861 to prove that Father Chevalier passed through a period of indecision before he finally decided that his Society would be a religious Congregation with Simple Vows. However the author could have had in mind only the nature the of the vows, as the form of “Religious Congregation” is expressly mentioned in the brochures. If our suppositions are correct he was following an opinion current about the year 1900 and held by some young members of the Society, but Father Piperon was able to quote the evidence of Father Chevalier himself and his confreres of the early years – “of us his first subjects” – to contradict this viewpoint.(19) “From the beginning,” wrote Father Piperon in 1912, “Father Chevalier conceived his Congregation as we know it today, a Society with simple religious vows the various works set down in the Constitutions. His confreres of the early years have never had the slightest doubt on this subject. He himself affirms in his Notes that that was his idea of the Congregation and it was also that of his first confrere.” In his Manuscript, Father Piperon has written; “One might wonder if Father Chevalier had had the intention from the beginning of forming a Religious Congregation with vows according to the canonical requirements; if he had conceived his Institute such as it is today. The answer is ‘Yes,’ definitely yes. Such was his intentionrom the beginning. We, his first subjects, often heard him explaining it thus and exhorting us to make ourselves worthy of this ‘great privilege,’ a favour of which he always spoke with emotion and a saintly rapture.”(20) Father Chevalier then definitely conceived his Congregation as “a religious Society with simple vows” as early as the year 1855. What of his intentions before that? There is no definite reference in any of the writings, but we have already seen that there are convincing proofs that this was his intention, at least according to the essential features, as far back as his Seminary days. If the taking of vows was included in his original project they could not, of course, be taken immediately. We can appreciate the reason given by Father Piperon knowing the canonical difficulties involved. “If the Father Founder”, he writes, “did not expect the members to take vows from the beginning, it was because he had no power to impose them since at that time we did not have any approved Constitutions. He himself had taken private vows, and he advised us to do likewise.” Speaking of himself, Father Piperon says that he did not make his religious profession until much later, in 1869, “when the Constitutions were approved by Rome.” Elsewhere he wrote; “Before that time the members were not able to contract the responsibilities which religious vows entail.”(22) Until such time as Rome officially approved the Society the members could take only private vows. The reply which the Sacred Congregation gave in 1890 regarding the Constitutions of the Daughters of the Heart of Mary would not apply with the same precision to the early Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. The reply stated: “These vows are not private in the sense that they could be considered purely and simply as vows of devotion such as any member of the faithful could make in a particular case. By virtue of these vows there are certain obligations to the Society, and so as is stated elsewhere, dispensation from these is reserved to the Holy See.(23) What Father Chevalier understood by the name of “Religious” we are able to glean from certain pamphlets written about 1865. “One may ask” he writes, “if the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart are a recognised, regular, religious Congregation.” We reply that they are, for they have all the necessary approbations – the approval of the Archbishop of the diocese and the encouragement of the Holy Father himself” (which as we have seen was given in 1860).(24) On the subject of the Third Order which he founded he writes: “This Association is not a Religious Society, properly so called, where one is able to attain perfection by renouncing the world, for the members are not taken from those who leave the world, in order to lead a more perfect life.”(25) Also he refers to the affiliated priests who do not belong to the Issoudun community as “secular priests”, and of his own community he writes: “We study the manuels and the treatises which concern the religious life and its obligations. We try our best to observe the holy vows and the regular discipline.”(26) Father Piperon continues: “Such was the life of the newly-born community in the early days before the Constitutions were officially approved. It was the embryonic period if we may speak that way and the gestation took over ten years. “In these days no vow or special promise was strictly binding on the subject. It remained for each to oblige himself by private vows if he so desired or to remain free. The only conditions were that he submit himself to the exact observance of the Rule and that he obey the Superior. Nevertheless, a truly religious spirit reigned in the young community. The first members practised the virtues of their holy state “with a generous fervour, becoming that of even the best regulated Institute. They had only one desire – one ambition: to live as perfectly as possible the life of Jesus, the Supreme Priest, and to reproduce in themselves the sentiments of the Divine Heart of their Master.”(27) Religious life, then, for the early members of the Congregation meant the imitation of the example of Jesus, the Sovereign Priest, in the exercise of the virtue and the practice of the evangelical counsels, and that by living in a community with ecclesiastical approbation, an embryonic state until such time as the Congregation received approbation from Rome, and the vows became obligatory in the canonical sense.

The first Rules of the Congregation Fortunately we have a very valuable document which provides us with first hand evidence of the progress of the Society in these early days. It is the “Regles des Missionaires du Sacre Coeur” and there are three editions, dated 1855, 1857, and 1862. The first edition was called “Essai Provisoire,”(ES) the second “Regles”(R) and the third composed during a course of correspondence with the Jesuit Fathers at Vaugirard in 1862 was named “Abrege des Regles.” By comparing the three editions and the corrections and additions to the two, we are able to follow the evolution of the various details, and to notice the underlying persistence of the essential characteristics. The main features are: “The Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart is established for the glory of God, and the salvation of souls by preaching, instruction and the various functions of the apostolic ministry.” (Ab.l) It is therefore a clerical Institute since it exercises the sacred ministry which is reserved to clerics and consequently the majority of its members will be priests.(Can.488) The name “Missionaries of the Sacred Heart” is strictly reserved to the priests and to those who are studying for the priesthood. Members of the laity “who will present themselves” as lay-brothers will not be called “Missionaries”, but “Brothers of the Sacred Heart.” A special Novitiate is provided for “Missionary Novices” and another for the “Lay Brother Novices,” each with its own Master of Novices. The distinction and the two-fold name is maintained in the three editions. (ES. 11,12,14,15 R. 11,19,23,27. Ab. 6, IV) The two groups will form the one community, and the lay-brothers will be put to the same tests and training and undertake the same obligations as the Missionaries, and as far as possible will follow the same rule. (ES. 13,14. R.27 Ab.6) As no special habit is required for the Brothers they will wear civilian clothes, but the Missionary-Novices will each be provided with two soutanes and cinctures, etc. (R.2l) The main distinction between the two groups will be in their various occupations. The Missionaries will consecrate themselves to the sacerdotal ministry, as will also the Missionary-Novices where permissible. These will live with the Professed members, whose rule they will follow.(Es. 11, R.8 24) The Brothers will look after the material and domestic duties of the house. Should any extern come to make a retreat a brother will look after his room, and a priest will conduct the exercises. (Es.25, R.51) If a ‘Missionary-Novice in special circumstances have charge of the Brothers, he will direct them in the interior management of the house, but always with gentleness, kindness and charity. (R.P. 22,24. Es. 11.) The following quotations from the “Regles” in their three editions clearly indicate the apostolic character of the work which Father Chevalier was establishing. ”Since the Missionaries are dedicating their lives to the ministry of preaching, it is necessary that they enjoy good health, study sacred eloquence, have an ardent zeal for the glory of God and the salvation of souls, and be worthy, capable ministers of the work entrusted to them.” (Es.11; R.9; Ab.4) The “Essai Provisoire” states that “for a beginning only priest or deacon novices who have finished their theological studies will be admitted.”(Es.11) The Novices shall apply themselves seriously to the study of Sacred Scripture, Theology, the Fathers of the Church, the ecclesiastical sciences, and the Lives of the Saints. Without this knowledge the Missionary’s efforts will be weak and futile, his advice without avail, and his spiritual direction fruitless. Every day, or at least several times a week, a conference of approximately one hour shall be given on special subjects. The Master of Novices shall instruct his charges on the general principles of sacred eloquence – an exercise which must be considered as very important.” (R.p 22.) “Likewise the Novice Master will direct and instruct the intellectual talents of each of his subjects, giving prominence to a taste for study and work, and a love for the ecclesiastical sciences. He will urge them, above all, to a pious and effective study of the Sacred Scriptures, and teach them to read the Lives of the Saints in the same spirit that prompted their writing. He will put particular emphasis on the immortal Epistles of St. Paul, the model of preachers. His writings, with their doctrine and spirit, should to the manual of all our Missionaries.” (R. p 14) Before being admitted as a member of the Society, i.e., as the Rules say, “making one’s profession,” the Novice will be examined by the Council on dogmatic and moral theology, the ecclesiastical sciences and other necessary knowledge. (R.25; Ab.5) The nature and extent of the examination will be determined by the period for which the vows are to be taken, i.e. for one year, for five years or perpetually. (Es.16; R.30) The Rules also proscribe that studies be continued after professions “Every day each of the professed must spend one half hour in the study of Sacred Scripture, one hour in the study of theology and a similar time in studying ecclesiastical history, canon law or liturgy. If on any occasion they should be engaged on a more pressing duty, they will be permitted to shorten or omit these, studies, but, as it is easy to delude oneself in these matters, they will ask permission of the Superior. Any spare time should be spent in the preparation of “sermons, instructions “etc. (Es.18;R,36,37; Ab.3) Every Tuesday at 6 p.m. there will be a Conference. On the first Tuesday of the month there will be a discussion on Moral Theology; on the second, the spiritual life; the third the ecclesiastical sciences, and on the fourth homiletics. (ES,20: R.40;Ab.ll) The Rules also state that on the second, third and fourth Friday of each month there will be a spiritual conference on the practice of religious and sacerdotal virtue. Each Missionary will take his turn in giving the conference when there are sufficient members at home, i.e. four at least. The Superior will advise the lecturer of his turn some days in advance and specify the subject of the discourse. They will deliver their instruction in an edifying, pious and simple manner. (R.39) As we have seen the Missionaries called themselves “Religious,” because, having been approved by the bishop they were living the religious life. The Rules themselves indicate the character of the Institute, as we see by those already quoted. Theirs was a life founded on the uses and customs of the established Religious Orders, but adapted to the character and end of their particular Society. In the “Essai Provisoire” it is clearly stated that the proper living of the religious life must be the first consideration of each member. The Novices must form themselves in the spirit and ways of true religious, and while applying themselves diligently to study they must not forget that the main work of the Novitiate is the work of sanctification of their souls. (ES.11) With St. Paul, the only glory they will seek is the “knowledge of Christ, and Him crucified.” Following the example of the Saints, they will learn more at the foot of the Cross than from their books. In the Rules we find many thoughts which Father Chevalier had already expressed in a sermon to his colleagues while at the Seminary; “The members will apply themselves assiduously to all their spiritual exercises. They make their main delight, and consider as their most precious moments, the time set apart for their prayers, their conversation with God. Destined to become priests and apostles of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, they will love to practice His gentleness, humility, charity, His obedience, and His spirit of poverty. Although the Novices have not as yet contracted any lasting obligations, they will submit themselves in virtue of the Rule, to all that the vows prescribe for the Professed. They will be prepared to obey – even blindly – the will of their superiors, and to accept any hardships asked of them in their training in the ways of perfection. Regarding interior mortification as the foundation of true and solid piety, they will strive earnestly to acquire this virtue. They will practise any corporal mortifications which the Rule prescribes or counsels, but will not undertake any others except with the permission of Superior or their spiritual director.(R. 22-23) United amongst themselves by the bonds of charity, penetrated by a religious respect for authority, having a cordial deference in their relationship with the professed, the Novices will avoid the spirit of criticism, of dissension, of defiance and insubordination which is so ruinous to the welfare of any community.”(R-24) The life of the Professed is a continuation of the life learnt in the Novitiate. Three times a month they will study together the virtues of the religious and sacerdotal life, having as their guide the rule, and religious discipline prescribed by the vows. They will practise interior mortification which is death to the senses, to the instincts of nature, and to all self-seeking.(Bs.23) This perpetual crucifying of the Will, of our human tastes, caprices and inclinations should be one of the main virtues of a Missionary of the Sacred Heart. He will also keep a constant watch on his affections, his thoughts, on the very powers of his soul. He will deny himself all that would tend to flatter his self-love and his pride. Likewise he will moderate any natural impulsiveness, which brooks no delay in what he wants, or what he wants to avoid. He should be cheerful and kind in speech, which will be a reflection of his inner thoughts and spirit. If he should harbour a natural antipathy towards anyone let him seek out his company and be particularly kind and attentive to him. Let him beware of undue sentimentality and softness which pamper to the senses, and let him wage constant warfare on his apathy, his dislikes, his over-vivaciousness, his fits of anger, his sadness and his weariness. In such moods Nature seeks to satisfy itself. Let him not be anxious to speak about his ills and his crosses, and to seek consolation from Jesus Himself rather than from creatures. If he has a special attachment to any person or thing, let him renounce it, the more perfectly to be united with God. The good religious should not always be talking about himself, his deeds, his accomplishments, his family or anything that redounds to his own praise. If he should be humiliated, hurt in his pride, ignored or even misunderstood let him not complain, but try to bear his cross with joy. Should he be the victim of calumny, unjust judgment or false accusation, he should not strive to defend himself, unless the common good, charity or obedience demand it. He should not let others see the troubles and trials that may be going on in his own soul, and, calm and resigned in his trials, he should force himself to appear happy and content. He will obey without murmuring and resentment the orders of his Superior, even though they may be repugnant to his own judgment and will. Without showing his feelings, let him make the sacrifice willingly, offering up “his trials his reverses, his annoyance and his suffering to the Will of God. In a word, the Missionary of the Sacred Heart should regard himself as a living host, prepared to offer himself always on the altar of mortification, as a victim of the adorable Heart of Jesus.” (R. 56-57) Those who are admitted to the community life are divided into two classes; those who have made a simple profession without vows, and those who have taken vows. All are Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. The order of precedence is determined by the date of entry to the Congregation. This is included in the Rules only for the sake of good order. (Es.l6; R.44) With a view to the future it was also stated that only those professed with vows could take part in voting, and only those with final vows could be nominated for a position of authority in the Community. (ES. 4 ,5,6,11; R.4, 9, 11, 15, 16, 17; Ab.9) A formula for the taking of the Vows is in existence, but not one for the profession without vows. The vows take a more prominent part in the re-edition of the Rules. In the original 1855 edition they are placed in an appendix, but in the 1857 copy, they form the matter of the first chapter. Before taking those vows of Poverty, Chastity and Obedience it was necessary to have the approbation of the Council, and, as we have seen to pass an examination. This would indicate that the vows were made to the Congregation, which in turn would prove that the Congregation had been approved by the Pope. The members could take the Vows for one year only after they had spent at least two years in the community, for five year after a sojourn of three years, and final vows after a period of eight years, (in the third edition the ‘Abrege”, this is stated as “ten years” ). Two years after final vows (the Abrege says “at the same time”) the vow of Stability was taken. ( Es.15,49; R. 19,35; Ab. 5,5) Dispensation from the vows was reserved to the Bishop but according to the “Essai Provisoire,” dispensation from the Vow of Stability was reserved to the Holy See. The Brothers also could, take vows, but a sojourn of ten years in the community was necessary before they were admitted to perpetual vows. (Es.15; R.29) From the beginning, then, the Vows formed a most important part in Father Chevalier’s plan for his Society. This method – to use a phrase of Monsieur Vailhe in his “Life of Father d’Alzcn” was “to assure the strength of the Congregation by the creation of a kind of aristocracy… recruited with care….with a special view to the future of the Institute.”(30) This method was used by other Founders of new Congregations. For example, Father d’Alzoi arranged that the members of his Congregation take simple vows, but wished that a certain number at least, after ten years, would take solemn vows. Father Chevalier at no time contemplated the members of his Congregation taking solemn vows or reciting the Divine Office in choir, as did Father d’Alzon, who wished to model his Institute, as closely as possible, on the ancient Orders.(31) Father Chevalier did not have in mind any juridical similarity between his Institute and the old Orders of the Church, – but looked to the vows and the common life as the basis of his plan. As these two elements were the essence of the religious life they were necessary in his Institute. Thus private vows, which he and Father Maugenest took at Christmas in 1856, were in Father Piperon’s words “a first step and a preparation for the religious life.” (32) The special significance of the Vows as the determining factor in the Congregation resulted in some stipulations concerning the associate Secular priests, who were actually not following the Community life. In 1855 the “Essai Provisoire” stated in their regard; “They will follow the rules of the missionaries as a basis for their lives. They will pursue the same end, but they will not take vows.” (Es.27) However, in 1857 this was worded “They will take vows if they so desire.” (P.52) The object, of course, which dominated all the Rules is the Devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. However we note, rather with surprise, that even making allowances for the embryonic nature of the Rules, there is comparatively little reference in them to the Sacred Heart. In the ascetical considerations and in the Rules themselves there are, for example, more prayers and exercises of devotion in honour of Our Lady than of the Sacred Heart. However, in general, the two devotions go hand in hand and the prayers – and exercises are directed to both the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary. In the portion dealing with the interior life of the members, again surprising we find hardly any references to the supremacy of the devotion to the Sacred Heart, where naturally we would expect to find them. There is no separate chapter on the spirit of the Society, but in the Conclusion we find it admirably expressed; “The greatest charity, the most perfect union shall always reign amongst the members of the little community of the Sacred Heart. The virtues of gentleness, humility, obedience, the spirit of poverty, zeal, sacrifice and devotedness shall be their characteristics.” “All for Jesus – Nothing for self. All things for Heaven – Nothing for earth.” (Es,27; 11.120) Happily these Rules states “Each member should strive to practise the virtues of the Heart of Jesus, particularly His gentleness and His humility. (Es.17; R.44-) The Master of Novices shall teach his charges to love and practise in a special way the virtues of obedience and humility, which ought to be the outstanding virtues of the Society, for they are those of the Heart of Jesus Himself.” (R.12) “The Novices will strive to make themselves worthy children of the Heart of Jesus, and destined, as they are, to become priests and apostles of the Heart of Jesus, they will love to practise His gentleness, humility, charity, obedience and spirit of poverty.” ( Es.ll; R.23) The only text which goes further than the simple enumeration of virtues is one which is added to an injunction in “Essai Provisoire” (P.47) “Infinitely holy, perfectly pure, the Heart of Jesus wishes His priests to be pure of heart, irreproachable in chastity. The virginity of Mary gave the adorable Heart of Jesus to the world. The purity of Saint John allowed him to repose on the breast of the Divine Master and to know all the treasures of Its love and mercy. Called, as was the Apostle of Love, to make known the grandeur and beauty of the Heart of Jesus; destined as Mary was to give that Heart to the world, the Missionary of the Sacred Heart will be pure like Saint John, pure like Mary, pure like the Heart of Jesus Himself.” This text is not inserted in the “Regies”, where we find repeated the original text of the “Essai”; “The Missionary of the Sacred Heart, of that Heart so pure and holy, will carefully shun anything that could blemish the beauty of a virtue which should shine in his soul with special brilliance.” (R.34) As regards the other vows the first two manuscripts merely mention that the members “should follow the example of Our Lord Jesus Christ, their Leader and their Model.” (Es. 45,58; R.31,35) The “Abrege” omits this text altogether. Reference to the Sacred Heart is made at the conclusion of the text on interior mortification, and when speaking of exterior mortification the Rules advise: “Let no meal pass without making some small act of sacrifice in honour of the sorrowful Heart of Jesus.” (R.57-58) These texts occur only in the “Regle’s”, which also is the only manuscript which stresses the importance of the devotion to the Sacred Heart in the interior life; “The Missionaries will have a tender devotion to the Adorable Heart of Jesus. Let them not forget that He is the source of all graces, the fount of light and love, the abyss of all mercy. They will have recourse to Him in all their sorrows, temptations, their weariness and their difficulties,” (p53) None of these texts are retained in the third edition – the Abrege, which, however, in speaking of the end of the Society, remarks: “The Society aims principally to make known all the treasures of the Divine Heart of Jesus, and the grandeur and richness of the Immaculate Heart of His august mother. The Missionaries of the Sacred Heart will profess a tender and special devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, Who is the Head of the Society; to the most holy Heart of Mary and to St. Joseph. (p.1). The special character of the Society is mentioned only when the end or object of the Institute is spoken of, especially in the “Regles”. The “Essai provisoire” gives just the brief definition: “The end of the Society is to make known to men all the treasures of Love and Mercy, which the Heart of Jesus contains and to entice them to surrender themselves entirely to Him.” After insisting on the obligation of practising devotion to the Sacred Heart, the “Regles” continue: “They will accomplish no work of their sacred j ministry, and undertake no task without entrusting it to the powerful protection of the Sacred Heart. They will strive to spread the devotion everywhere, and to inflame the hearts of men with the fire of this Divine Love. In order to do this they will propose it to their listeners in all their sermons and to their penitents in confession.” We remember this was the promise made in the pact in 1855: “They will make the faithful realise that this Divine Heart is the Source of their Salvation, of their graces, and of the Sacraments they receive. They will speak often of the treasures which this Heart contains, and of Its immense Love for mankind, (R.53-541 Es.40) In this regard the “Essai” continues: “They will make known the Sacred Heart in all their exhortations. They will receive sinners with the charity of the Hearts of Jesus and Mary.” (Bs.34) As this devotion is presented, above all, from the angle of the apostolate we find several texts in the Rule regarding the missions: “One of the ceremonies during the missions will be the Consecration to the Sacred Heart and the act of Reparation for the outrages committed against Him.” (Es. 16,85; R.90) “Every day some words of invitation will be addressed to poor sinners, who are so dear to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.” (Es.l0; R.106)’ “The Missionary should inspire a great devotion to the Sacred Heart, the inexhaustible source of all grace, in the hearts of the faithful, entice them to place themselves in His care, and every day, morning and night, to say the invocation ‘Sacred Heart of Jesus, have pity on me.’ (Es,112, R.lll) This, according to Saint Margaret Mary is an infallible means of perseverance.” The apostolic point of view is again stressed in Rules for the Association of Secular Priests: “To give to the Heart of Jesus adorers and victims is the object of this affiliation.” ( R.53) Both the “Essai” and the Regles present the same object to these priests as to the Missionaries: “They will strive to make known to their parishioners the richness of the Heart of Jesus.”(Es.27; R.52) The formula of the Vows summarises the Spirit of the Society: “In the Name of the Most Holy and Adorable Trinity – the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost; in the name of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, to Whom I now consecrate myself, in honour of Mary of all the Angels and Saints of Heaven, I.. . . …… make the vows.. . . ……. in the Society of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, established to procure the glory of God and the salvation of souls, to make known all the treasures of love and mercy of the Divine Heart of Jesus, as also the grandeur and richness of the Immaculate Heart of His August Mother and I promise to keep faithfully these vows for a period of.. . . ..etc. (Es.52;R.30)”(33) Father Chevalier expressed the apostolic nature of the Society in the invocation he chose as its motto: “May the Sacred Heart of Jesus be forever praised, loved and adored,” which he changed soon after to: “May the Sacred Heart of Jesus be everywhere loved.” (Es.I; R.l) This latter form of the invocation must already have been in use when Father Piperon arrived in May-June, 1855, for he tells us that “this was the motto right from the earliest days.” In the early chapter of the “Essai”, which refers only briefly to the end of the Society, it is stated that “Rules are necessary to succeed in this sublime enterprise.” This is replaced in the “Regles” by a text remarkable from many points of view; ”The Sacred Heart of Jesus, the only Source of Light, of Truth and of Life, is not sufficiently known in the world. However, His Love has saved the world, His Blood has purified it, His Grace has changed it, and His Tenderness has preserved it.” “To make known the splendours and the treasures of Mercy of the Heart of Jesus, to spread everywhere the sacred fire of His love, to save souls which are so dear to Him, to combat the selfishness and indifference which outrage His love – that is the end of our Society, the object of our work.” “To make themselves worthy of this sublime mission, it is necessary that the members of the Society strive to become apostles and saints. It is necessary that they have complete command of their passions and inclinations, that they keep a firm heel on the enemy they wish to conquer in others. We have indeed retired from the world into a solitude, which is dear to the Heart of our Divine Saviour, into a fortress where that Heart is King and Master -‘Urbs fortitudinis nostrae Sion. (Is.26/l) However, this retreat, holy as it may be, is not a sufficient guarantee against our human weakness. The angels fell in Heaven, Adam turned away from God in the terrestrial Paradise; Judas sinned in the Cenacle itself, and even in the sanctuary of prayer a religious is able to sin, to fall, to be lost.” “Even in the solitude of monastic life it is possible for a religious to be followed by the love of riches and the spirit of the world, to be attracted by earthly pleasures, troubled by his own inconstancy, persecuted by the fury of the enemy he in fighting. He must take shelter behind the rampart, which rail protect him – “Salvator ponetur in ea murus. (Is.26/1) And what will be this rampart? The Vows of Poverty, Chastity, Obedience and Stability. They will be the defence against the spirit of the world, of concupiscence, false liberty and fickleness. They will make him impervious to the blandishments of the world and the insidious attacks of the enemy.” “But the vows themselves, a disastrous contract when they are badly kept, need a safeguard also in the form of constant fidelity to the Rules of the Institute. By the Rules, Poverty is safeguarded as they determine even the smallest details relative to the receiving, possessing and using of worldly goods, submitting all to authority, and. putting the will of Superiors in place of one’s own liberty and rights. Chastity is safeguarded, because the Rules impose a constantly occupied life, a temperate mode of living apart from the world and its dangers, a protecting submission to Authority. Likewise the Rules protect the Vow of Obedience, as they imply a complete submission of the will, a curtailment of liberty, a shield against pride, source of so many evils, and a guarantee of humility by submitting to Authority all our projects and achievements. By keeping the Rules, Stability is assured, as they guard the Religious against idle dreams, and grant him an inward peace and happiness, a grace and hope of salvation which he knows he will not obtain elsewhere. “Without the safeguard of the Rules faithfully observed, what will be of the religious with all his natural weakness and the clangors that surround him on all sides? He will certainly be confounded. ‘Qui spernit modica paulatim decidet.’ The devil, no longer hindered, will launch against his soul every murderous attack, and grievously wound him. ‘Adversarius vester diabolus tamquam leo rugiens circuit quaerens quem devoret – Qui dissipat sepem mordebit cum coluber.’ (Eccl.8) What will happen to the Community itself where the Rule is not kept? It must surely perish. History has proved that a religious Society can survive only by the faithful observance of its Rule, which is its bulwark. “Ego dedi te hodie in columnam ferream et in murum aencum.’ (Jer. 8/l8) When these bulwarks are broken, the fortress soon crumbles and topples in ruins.” “Guilty, then, is the religious who would violate the Rules under the specious pretext that he is not committing sin when he infringes them on the points contrary to the vows. Why? Because he is thereby depriving God of His glory – depriving the Sacred Heart of being loved, and hindering souls from being saved, because he is compromising the future of his Congregation, scandalising his confreres and exposing himself to the loss of his vocation.” “Since these are important considerations, let us guard the Rules scrupulously, not from fear of reprimand or giving offence – we can leave fear to slaves, – not from the culpable desire of winning the esteem of Superiors, but simply from love of the adorable Heart of Jesus. This is the sacred bond which should attach us to our Rules as a safe means of salvation. Let us cherish these Rules which protect all the moments of our daily life, both those of our intimate religious life and those of our contact with the world. They are the barque which will carry us, without fear of shipwreck, over the perilous seas till we reach the haven of Heaven.” One can easily follow the main thoughts of Father Chevalier in these ideals which he has handed down to us: The Son of God, made man, the Source of all Light, Truth and Living has in His love bestowed every treasure of His Sacred Heart on us. His Love has saved and preserved the world, the souls of men so dear to Him. This saving Love, symbolised in His Sacred Heart is not sufficiently known and loved. It has not attained Its object. The end of the Society, then, is to make known these treasures by preaching the devotion to the Sacred Heart thereby combatting the evils of selfishness and indifference. The members of his Society must be apostles and saints who have overcome the enemy by the faithful practice of their vows, safeguarded by observance of their rules. This is possible only when it is motivated by love of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. The text emphasises the idea that the Sacred Heart is the Foundation of the apostolic life, of the religious life and of one’s own personal sanctification. The love of the Sacred Heart for us is the salutary grace in our lives, and our love for Him the condition of our salvation. Despite this central idea the text needs a little interpretation and explanation as it would seem to imply a certain conflict between the apostolic and monastic ideals of the Society. It is not that Father Chevalier does not explain the harmony between being an apostle and a saint as the common end of the Missionaries. We know that he drew up the rules for priests formed according to the Sulpician method of spirituality (as already explained in Chapter V) and that they are to be understood from this point of view. However difficulty lies in the passage dealing with the religious life compared with that of the apostolic life of which it is the consequence. The religious life is so prominently put before us as a safeguard from worldly dangers that we are justified in asking ourselves: “Are we to turn away from the active apostolate and find refuge in the solitude of the monastery in order to arrive without danger of shipwreck on the shores of Eternity? It is true that the Sacred Heart is placed before us as the foundation of our spirituality, but the two allusions merely say that he who breaks the rules “impedes the Sacred Heart from being loved,” and that the rule ought to be kept through love of the Sacred Heart.” What is lacking in the text is an expression of the bond between the apostolic life and the religious life, The final impression is that Father Chevalier describes two kinds of life consecrated to the Sacred Heart – one apostolic, the other monastic. In the first the Love of the Sacred Heart is an incentive to apostolic work; in the second it would be a reason for staying in the monastery to sanctify one’s own soul. However, we know from many other sources the mentality of Father Founder on the subject, and that his idea was that the apostolic and “religious life go hand in hand in achieving the aims of the Society. Father Piperon has told us that in the Community at Issoudun “their one desire was to reproduce the life of Jesus Christ at Nazareth and in His ministry their one ambition , as his was, to devote themselves to the salvation of their brothers. They wished, moreover, to become apostles according to the Heart of Jesus, and to live only for His glory and the salvation of souls – to live as perfectly as possible the same life as Jesus, the Supreme Priest, and to model themselves on His Sacred Heart.” In his brochures Father Chevalier was himself to write soon afterwards: “The salutary influence of the Devotion to the Sacred Heart is to conform the interior life of the priest to that of Jesus Christ, to aid him to sanctify himself and his brethren. Perfection for him will consist in practising always the precept of St. Paul: “Let that mind be in you which was in Christ Jesus.” This Divine Heart will be the union between their exterior and their interior lives, the strongest and most gentle bond between themselves and other souls. Thanks to this blessed devotion they will be able to enjoy the happiness of which the author of the Imitation wrote: ‘He to whom all things are simple, who sees and seeks all things in unity, will know stability of heart and enjoy a lasting peace.’ One, indeed, could not find a stronger and mere vibrant bond than with the Heart of Jesus, who every day unites the hearts of his priests with His Own, making them one with Him and in Him.” In this Introduction to the Rules we find no development of the theme of perfection in relation to the virtues of the Sacred Heart. For example in the following text, which would have offered an opportunity, there is no reference to the imitation of these virtues, which he developed in the Rules themselves when treating of the vows; “The virtue most dear to the priests of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, is charity, because it is the characteristic virtue of Him whom they have taken as their model. From the beginning, this devotion has always been the soul of Christian piety, for it has been the expansion of love.” Nor is there reference to the great value and importance that Father Chevalier attached to the vows, of the emotion he showed when he used to speak of these and to present them to his companions “as a great favour to be merited.” This is surprising by contrast to his often repeated references in other places to the part the vows were to play in the Society, e..g. “Those who wish to practise this dedication to the Sacred Heart in all its perfection, and under all the forms involved, will be able to enter more intimately into the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart by pronouncing the three vows of Religion. “It is certain” he said in his brochures “that a vow in itself has a greater excellence than a simple act of good will. God loves sacrifice, as it is part of all worship, and the grace it gives draws hearts to a more perfect immolation of the will and affections. This immolation is expressed in the vow of obedience, the vow of poverty and the vow of chastity. The Society the Sacred Heart accepts and makes itself responsible for the souls drawn to this perfection, of the Christian life. In the light of these texts how poor the sketch of Religious Life appears as it is given in the Introduction to the Rules, and how isolated it is in the grand synthesis which Father Chevalier taught and tried to realise. If perhaps we are tempted to think that the brief nature of the Introduction, and its emphasis on the monastic rule were a result of the period of doubt and hesitation, we must remember that it is only an isolated text in the midst all the others which precede, accompany and follow it. We look elsewhere, then, for an explanation of the anomaly, and the following extract from Father Piperon’s writings would help to explain it. Speaking of the first two Missionaries of the Sacred Heart he says: “Both formed for the sacerdotal life by the disciples of Father Olier, they had preserved a profound esteem and real affection for the traditions of the Seminary. They thought they could do better than continue in their solitude to practise the Rule to which they had become accustomed, adapting it where necessary to their new kind of life; modifying it when experience and the direction of the Holy Ghost demanded it.(34) Consequently, at first they drew up a tentative rule, resembling as closely possible that of the Major Seminary.”(35) This was the Rule in the text we have quoted. It was not “the Constitutions,” nor even a complete formula, which he did not draw up till later on, but a mode of life based on that of the Seminary, and for the purpose of directing them in their new Seminary – the Novitiate where they would learn to become Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. Father Tronson, author of the final edition of the Rules which Father Olier gave to the Seminary, had stressed their importance. Father Chevalier’s Rules were but an adaptation of Father Tronson’s ideas, expressed in the 1st and 2nd Conferences in his “Manual for Seminarists,” and in his tract on “Obedience and Submission to the Rule.” The prime consideration according to Father Tronson, was not the apostolate, but the formation and value of religious solitude in the Seminary. He speaks only of “our perfection, while we are here in the house.” “Here,” he says, “we have only one thing to do – to perform “all our exercises well – to strive for our advancement, our perfection. We are here in a place of retreat, separated from the world, in a community where we are obliged to live under a rule.” In the whole of Father Chevalier’s exposition of the Rules there are only two points not in Father Tronson’s edition, namely the Vows and the Devotion to the Sacred Heart. In introducing the Vows he makes the necessary modifications to the life of the Seminary, and changes where necessary the application of the verse from Isais 26/1 used by Father Tronson. The “Rampart of the commandments and the law” is changed to “the rampart of the vows,” and he stresses all Father Tronson’s ideas on the importance of the vows as the “rampart,” it is the rule which he emphasises at the end without further expanding the intrinsic value of the vows. They are mentioned mainly as “a means of defence.” When Father Tronson speaks of God fortifying “our souls” with the safeguard of the Rules, for Father Chevalier it is the fortifying of “our solitude”. Although he repeats what Father Tronson says: “It is not the holy places which sanctify men, and it is not enough just to live in a holy house, still the vows and the rules remain the “ramparts of solitude.” The Rules, he says, are “the bulwarks of the fortress.” The other assertions about the effects of violating the rules, e.g. the picture of shipwreck on the sea studded with reefs” etc. are taken from Father Tronson. (36) The conclusion from all this is that this passage from the “Introduction” concerning the religious life is but a collection of ideas and quotations from Father Tronson, written for people and circumstances quite different from those Father Chevalier had in mind. Impressed by the image of the fortress and its ramparts and convinced that the conclusions of Father Tronson concerning the violation of the rules were exact, Father Chevalier adapted them for application in his own Community, without occupying himself too much with their logic or the context in which they were written. His main idea was to impress on his subjects the necessity of keeping the Rule: “He who breaks the Rule injures himself, deprives God of His glory, hinders the Sacred Heart from being loved, and souls from being saved, compromises the future of the Society, scandalises his brethren, and exposes himself to the loss of his vocation. Let us observe the Rules, then, through love of the Adorable Heart of Jesus.” The rest is but a literary introduction. Although it does not reflect the complete concept of Father Chevalier regarding his Congregation it reflects well the ideal of the one companion who stayed with him during these years.

Father Piperon’s Ideas on the End and Object of the Society Father Charles Piperon did not join the community at Issoudun precisely in view of the Apostolate, nor even of devotion to the Sacred Heart. Nowhere in the spiritual exercises of his early years do we meet the name of the Sacred Heart. We could even believe that he came to Issoudun for want of something better: because of the unwillingness of the Archbishop or his spiritual director to allow him to take notice of his natural fear of parish work and the apostolate. We know that during his Seminary days he had spoken with Jules Chevalier on this subject and had told him that his desire was to sanctify himself in silence and retirement, as did the Trappists at Sept-Fons, “for what will become of me” he had said, “when the ministry gives greater freedom to my deplorable nature?” He himself gave the reply: “I will be ship-wrecked; I will be lost.”(37) The introduction to the Rules should have suited him, for, as we have seen, they promised that safety “from ship wreck on a sea strewn with reefs, and a safe arrival, full of life, on the shores of Eternity.” We recall the difference of outlook on the natter of the apostolate in the conversation he had with Father Chevalier after Father Maugenest had been recalled. Father Chevalier had said; “Soon our turn will come to be appointed to charge of a parish,” insinuating that, although he did not wish it way, he was, nevertheless, prepared to carry on the apostolate elsewhere. Father Piperon, however, had other ideas: “If the Cardinal disbands our community, we will go elsewhere. If you do not wish to come, I know quite well what I will do. I will not join the parochial clergy. I will look for a Congregation which will accept me. I will go to the ends of the earth rather than work in a parish.” What is primarily in his mind is the religious life under any form at all, and as yet no signs of the apostolate of the Sacred Heart. Later Father Piperon was to prepare his novices for this veryu apostolate but at present he was a long way from the sentiments he expressed later in a beautiful meditation – “Our special end as Missionaries of the Sacred Heart.” Even in 1873 he was still opposed to parish work, and was thinking of joining La Chartreuse. Father Chevalier wrote to him: “As regards your idea about La Chartreuse, I will not repeat here what I have already told you on the subject. I pray God that you will get rid of this temptation.”(38) Of his two confreres Father Piperon wrote; “Both consumed by the same zeal for souls, both animated by an ardent desire of sacerdotal perfection, they seemed destined to perform the same works and live the common life.” (39) Compared with them he considered himself more of an obstacle than, a help, and a force of little value to them. Undoubtedly, an expression of deep humility of which he had a generous endowment but rather a strong and exaggerated enunciation of the situation, and one in which we might suspect a tinge of romanticism, did we not realise that underneath, he had his own firm and divergent opinion about the nature and end of the Congregation. This difference of opinion between himself and Father Chevalier was in fact a source of difficulty, and one which must have caused in the latter some doubts as to what exactly was the Will of God. However, when he was certain that his project was according to God’s Will, he relentlessly pursued his plan and declared, that “those who desire to find in devotion to the Sacred Heart only a help to live as holy priests will content themselves by joining the Association of Priests of the Sacred Heart and not the Congregation itself. ” It was then that Father Piperon, tormented by doubt, wondered if his vocation was in the Institute. With the departure of Father Maugenest, Father Chevalier had lost the confrere who saw eye to eye with him regarding the purpose of the Society, and Father Piperon’s different ideas on the subject would certainly have played their part in his doubts and his crisis. He was by himself now in defending and maintaining his plan for the Society such as he had conceived it right from the very beginning. The Congregation, as he saw it would be an Institute entirely devoted to the Sacred Heart, with the complete dedication of its members to an apostolate which would be the “raison d’etre” of their existence – devoted in all their interior life, even to the immolation of the vows, to the cause of the Divine Heart, Whose love would be their inspiration. In that Heart they would find their unity and their power, for His love is the soul of Christian piety and apostolic endeavour. This ideal naturally, opened up a vast field of activity, while the specific end remained the same. Father Piperon tells us that Father Chevalier’s aims and ambitions estended far and wide. “Often during recreation the conversation turned to the foreign missions. We admired the zeal of the Apostles, their sufferings, their sacrifices, their heroic exploits. We were envious of those called to this sublime apostolate. Every time the conversation was on these lines, Father Founder would enthusiastically tell us in burning words of his desire of seeing the future Missionaries of the Sacred Heart charged with one of the distant and perilous foreign fields, and he would express the hope that he would have the grace of finishing his days that way himself.”(40) Among the functions of the pastoral ministry” he wrote, “there is a special one for the priests of the Sacred Heart, as it was for the Divine Heart Himself, to look after the people who are the most needy and most neglected in the world.”(41) There were two other special works for his future Society which were dear to his heart, the home missions, and the affiliation of secular priests with the Congregation, of which we will speak more fully later on. Of the home missions he wrote in one of the brochures: “These missions, with their practical sanctifying exercises, offer the most favourable opportunities for spreading devotion to the Divine Heart.(42) Regarding the Association of secular priests let us recall his words to Father Maugenest; “It would be necessary for a beginning to have the help of priests in making known this Adorable Heart.” Other numerous texts which we have already quoted show how he appreciated the importance of this movement and how it coincided perfectly with his idea of the priesthood.

VICTORY IN SIGHT Now that wo have closely studied the ideas of Father Chevalier and the historical foundation of the Society we are able to get a clearer concept of the difficulties and cares that beset him, and to see how he conquered them. Convinced that their special vocation was calling them to a life completely consecrated to the Sacred Heart in order to bring the love of Jesus to as many people as possible and to make them love Him in return, Father Chevalier and Father Maugenest had founded the Missionaries of tho Sacred Heart,, These two intrepid priests formed the nucleus of the grand movement whose ideals were aptly expressed in their motto; “May the Sacred Heart of Jesus be everywhere loved.” Living a common life together, and having taken their vows, their aim was to procure the Glory of God and the salvation of souls by preaching the love of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. They began successfully throughout the Province of Berry by their preaching to the people, and interesting the clergy in their work. Although this interest was real and sympathetic amongst the priests the applications to join the Institute were at first not very numerous. This, amongst other things, could be attributed to the fact that they were not very well known outside their own province of Berry, and to a lack of knowledge amongst the clergy of what the vows entailed. However the Founders were anxious to attract priests of good-will to their ranks, even though they would not be bound by the vows, which as yet had no canonical status because not yet approved by the Holy See. They hoped that by close association with community life these priests would lose any fear they had of the vows, and eventually join the Society. But even under these conditions, the Congregation gained very few recruits during the first few years. Father Piperon was the only one who persevered, and we might say that he did so at this early juncture mainly from personal reasons. One disappointment succeeded another. First of all Father Maugenest was recalled by the Cardinal and that meant the end of the home-missions. They had looked to this form their apostolate to interest priests outside Issoudun in their work and thereby spread devotion to the Sacred Heart. Then there was the fear that, being a community of only two, any day now they might be put back to parish work and the Society be dissolved. As we have seen they misread the Cardinal’s intention on this point, as he was keen to maintain the Society even though he had taken Father Maugenest from it. Father Chevalier had resigned himself but he could see the dream of his beloved Society gradually fading, and the whole disappointing situation was aggravated by the fact that the one colleague left to him had other ideas about the end and object of the Congregation. Blessed Peter Julian Eymard, Founder of the Blessed Sacrament Fathers, had the same heart-breaking experience when two of his first companions deserted him, leaving him alone with Father de Cuers. He also went to seek advice and encouragement from the saintly Cure of Ars. As though these troubles were not enough, the Cardinal had closed the chapel, forcing the Founder to precipitate the building of the new church, which in itself presented plenty of worry, and to bind himself more closely to parish work. The opposition he met in various quarters, of which we have previously treated, and the imminent possibility of having to take Father Crozat’s place further contributed to make the picture a black one indeed. Under these conditions it is little wonder that few priests wished to join such an Institute, especially as already Issoudun did not have a very good name as a parish amongst the clergy. It looked as though the Community there would merely be a body of priests looking after the needs of the parish. But in spite of all his difficulties, Father Chevalier remained firmly convinced that God was calling him to promote Devotion to the Sacred Heart throughout the entire world, and to found a Society with this end in view. How was this conviction to be reconciled with the present situation? Had he not failed in his mission by becoming too deeply involved in the parish of Issoudun itself? Had he not tempted Providence by directing the Will of God to just the ministry of Issoudun, and by building this new church, had he not ruined for all time the work of his newly born Society? It is true that this state of affairs had been imposed on him by the Cardinal, who had taken away Father Maugenest, closed the chapel, and encouraged Father Crozat in his efforts to restrict the work of the Missionaries to the parish. On the other hand was not this the will of authority? And the obvious blessing of God on their ministry in the parish – was it not an indication that this is what God wanted them to do? Perhaps after all he had wrongly interpreted his mission, and should now change or limit its object’. Father Chevalier prayed earnestly about it. He sought the help of God, and the Saints. La Salette, Paray and Ars brought him light and certitude, blessed the work and invited him to continue, and to direct everything openly and simply towards the end as he had envisaged it, and towards the end of the Institute as he had always seen it. He must now leave the future in the hands of Providence in all confidence and humility. “The Reverend Father” wrote Father Piperon, “returned from Rome full of confidence in the success of his mission. Pius IX had blessed and encouraged him. From now on he would go ahead with complete assurance in spite of all difficulties. Were not the blessings and encouragement of the Holy Father those of Jesus Himself? Henceforth no difficulty, no obstacle would break his determined resolution.”(43) From all these trials Father Chevalier emerged the man as the Society was to know him for the rest of his life: unshakable before all and everyone in defence of the end and distinctive character of the Institute because he was its Founder and such was his duty. As Father Piperon remarked: “At Paray he had become imbued with the very Spirit of the Sacred Heart, which he strove to impart to us. This pilgrimage was a remarkable event, an important phase in the life of the venerated Father.” The “crisis” then, resolved itself for Father Chevalier personally in a more complete abandonment to God Whose ways are not clear but Whom he follows in spite of all. The Will of God dominates him still more completely – he obeys it always more blindly. This is the victory of his fidelity to his mission which God was asking of him – his purification which had given him a greater certitude and a greater love. It was to be the beginning of a new era, an era of a surer and more energetic activity in the development of the Society. Before turning his attention to the building of the second part of the church he will now renovate and enlarge the Monastery. We shall then see God offering him the means of establishing the association of Secular Priests and of founding the Third Order of Lay People. God will use circumstances in such a way that soon there will be presented the practical and efficacious means of developing immediately a world-wide activity in honour of the Sacred Heart; the Arch-confraternity of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Father Maugenest is to return, as parish priest of Issoudun, and be the means of binding the parish to the Congregation – a union in which Father Chevalier will then see great opportunities for the growth of his work. God is to send him worthy collaborators, who will found the Apostolic School thus assuring the Society future priests. The Annals of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart will come into being to spread the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart throughout the world, for the greater glory of the Sacred Heart. Lastly, God will place an Archbishop in the See of Bourges who will devote himself to the Congregation and its works as a paternal friend. Thus the “crisis” of the early days, borne with humility and prayerful supplication, was to be a source of grace, of greater abandonment to the Will of God, of certitude and growth in love. Also, by the grace of God, it will be of fundamental significance for the Congregation.

CHAPTER XI: TRANSFER OF THE PARISH AND COMPLETION OF THE CHURCH

Appeal for Funds: Father Chevalier returned from Rome, reassured, confident, and ready face the future with courage. He had told the Holy Father what he believed to be the Will of God in his regard, and had received the Pontiff’s blessing. On 1st December, 1862, he wrote to Father le Blanc S.J. “Two years ago, 20th September, I knelt at the feet of His Holiness, and spoke to him of our work, such as Almighty God had inspired it, Pius IX lifted his eyes towards Heaven and seemed happy in spite of all his cares.” The rest of his letter is a resume of the designs he had in mind for the Society, emphasising the main points. The end of the Society is the honouring of the Sacred Heart by all possible means, and the sanctification of souls and of the clergy by this so precious means; it is the application to a sick society of the means which It offers to cure it; it is reparation for the outrages inflicted upon that Heart; it is the perfection of its missionaries by the exercises of a regular and essentially religious life. The means of spreading the Devotion will by preaching, the conducting of missions, the education of youth, the direction of souls, the work of the sacred ministry, sacerdotal and lay associations, and the spreading of devotion to Mary etc.(l) The main work confronting Father Chevalier on his return was the completion of the first part of the Church. He records in his Notes; “We put all our energy into the finishing of our beloved Church of the Sacred Heart.”(2) Worried how to finance the building, he decided to seek the help of benefactors by distributing pictures of the Sacred Heart, and stating the needs of the newly-born Society. He remembered having read in the writings of Blessed Margaret Mary that Our Lord had asked her to distribute images of His Sacred Heart, and that she had done so as an effective means of spreading the Devotion. This he thought, could also be a way of propagating the Devotion and, at the same time, gathering some very necessary finance for the very worthy cause of the completion of the church. He resolved to have printed a large number of pictures of the Sacred Heart, and to distribute them far and wider. A small offering would be asked in exchange, but he hoped as the Society became known, it would result in more benefactors becoming interested in the work. Even though he felt that it was the Sacred Heart who had inspired the dea he let it ripen in prayer and reflection, and asked the Community to do likewise. His first difficulty was that, knowing little about religious art himself, he would have to seek expert advice on the design and type of picture, which would have to be both liturgical and artistic. Providence provided the answer. In the Seminary of Saint Sulpice in Paris, there was a priest, Father Boitoux, a well known connoisseur of religious art, who was in contact with the right people in the engraving and printing business. He was a very charitable priest, who had the reputation of helping any needy cause. In spite of his many daily duties he was never known to turn anyone away. Father Chevalier decided to seek his help, and duly called on him. Father Boiteux showed great interest in the newly founded Congregation, and be became a staunch friend. Not only did he promise to take in hand the present venture, but over the next ten years was to prove himself a real benefactor of the Society. On the occasion of the pilgrimage to the new Shrine at Issoudun on the 8th September, 1873, he visited the Monastery and Church for the first time, and was visibly affected as he knelt before the altar of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, to the construction of which he had contributed so many valuable ideas. He was greatly impressed by the devotion of the numerous pilgrims, and for over two hours helped in the distribution of Holy Communion. It was estimated that on that memorable day, over 11,000 pilgrims approached the Holy Table.(3) Father Boiteux himself designed the engraving for the new picture, and took on the responsibility of having the copies printed.(4) The idea of distributing those pictures of the Sacred Heart had occurred to Father Chevalier after his visit to Paray-le-Monial, and they were put into circulation shortly before his visit to Rome. We find the first reference to the plan dated 5th April, 1860. He mentions that the pictures had not yet arrived at Issoudun, as the printer was sick, but that he expected them at the end of the week. Ten days later he wrote that he was taking some of them to Bourges, as that day Madame Chauvenau-Lagarde was bringing a few thousand copies from Paris. By 18th February, 1861 the copies of the first impression had all been distributed, and Father Chevalier impatiently awaited the next printing. On 6th April he was able to present a balance sheet, which shewed that he had received 18,350 francs as a result of the appeal, and that he expected more as many of the letters had not yet been answered. Several impressions were made, and we have been able to find a copy on which was mentioned an indulgence granted by the Pope, on 20th September, 1860 for the recitation of the invocation; “May the Sacred Heart of Jesus be everywhere loved.” On the 31st July, 1862 Father Chevalier mentions that he has just received some new pictures.(5) One copy in Italian states the object of the offering, and adds that an indulgence of 40 days has been granted by the Archbishop of Bourges for the invocation: “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, pray for us.” The picture represents the bust of Our Lord, “holding His Heart in His left hand, and pointing to it with His right hand. Underneath is the text: “Behold this Heart which has loved mankind so much. My child, give me thy heart.” On the reverse side of the card is a statement of the benefits which are conferred on the donor: participation in a Special Mass each first Friday, and in the prayers and good works of the Missionaries. The names of the benefactors will be inscribed in a special register, and will be placed in a vermeil-coloured “heart” in the new chapel. After 1861 pictures of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart were also printed and distributed. Sometimes a little booklet containing “Hymns to the Sacred Heart” was posted with the pictures, as we learn from a letter written to Father Le Blanc on 26th December, 1865. From the time he had conducted missions in the country areas, Father Chevalier felt the need of such a collection of hymns in honour of the Sacred Heart to meet in a simple way the requirements of the people. He considered it an excellent method of preaching the devotion to the country folk. Not being able to find anything of that nature available, he decided to compile the booklet himself – a modest little edition of some twenty-five to thirty pages comprising the more popular hymns, which people could easily understand and sing with enthusiasm. Such was the origin of the “Collection of Hymns to the Sacred Heart” which he published in an enlarged edition some years later, and which was to become very popular, running through many editions.(6) The hymns were not exactly literary gems to stir the enthusiasm of poets and artists. Their aim was more elevated than that – namely to teach the young and the simple folk the devotion to the Sacred Heart with all its richness. It became a very “useful little manual and was in the Christian sense of the word, a good work.(7) Besides being a means of propagating devotion to the Sacred Heart and securing finance for the new church, the appeal served two other useful purposes. It helped to make the young Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart known beyond the confines of the Berry district, and it prepared the way for the spreading of the Devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.(8) The appeal actually succeeded beyond all expectation as the small pictures of the Sacred Heart became very popular and were in much demand, not only throughout France itself, but even in the neighbouring countries. The same Divine Providence which feeds the mighty rivers from the little streams; and the latter in their turn, from the little drops of rain lifted from the vast reservoirs of the oceans – all with the purpose of nourishing the earth, that same Providence was attentive to the needs of the humble Founder and supplied the means for the accomplishment of his designs.”(9) He himself was amply rewarded because he trusted in the words of Our Lord to Saint Margaret Mary that he would bless the homes where an image of His Sacred Heart would be honoured, and that He would bless in a special way all those who spread Devotion to His Sacred Heart.(l0) Since he firmly believed that all graces come to us through the intercession of Mary, he attributed the success to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Father Piperon agreed with this sentiment for he has written “What mysterious power was responsible for drawing these resources to a small town hardly known half a century ago to the rest of the world? Let us state simply that it was not the influence of Father Chevalier, for he was completely unknown outside the local district. We have to look elsewhere for the explanation. This power was none other than that of the Immaculate Mother God, the Protectress of our young Society, Who wished this new church to be a centre of devotion to the Heart of Her Son, and to teach us that She is the Ineffable Treasurer of this Divine Heart. In Her maternal hands, Father Chevalier was but the instrument chosen to effect Her merciful designs. Of this he himself was profoundly convinced. He would severely have reprimanded us if we had attributed to him any influence which he did not possess. As a matter of fact he was extremely sensitive on the point. We can bear witness to the fact that never either in public or in private conversation did we once hear him say anything of a self-laudatory or complacent nature about the works he was directing. He certainly loved these works. They were his great passion: the object of his every thought and care. For their success he spent himself daily without measure and would willingly have died for them. However, he rarely spoke of them, and if he did it was to thank the Heart of Jesus and His Blessed Mother for the graces received and to urge us to do likewise. When ever it was necessary to refer to the work in addressing the faithful, he did it so delicately and with such humility that a stranger would not have guessed that he himself was the originator of this work. One day during a large gathering of members of the Archconfraternity of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, he was describing the progress of this work and recounting the innumerable favours which Our Lady confers on those who invoke Her under this blessed title. We could feel the fire and sincerity of his words, but not once did he indicate by word or gesture that he was the instrument which God was using in this marvellous work. His powerful words focused the attention of the listeners on God and His Mother, and the orator himself was utterly forgotten. Coming away from the gathering, I remarked to one of my confreres; ‘If Father Chevalier had been speaking of achievements accomplished a century ago or in a distant country would he have spoken otherwise?’ ‘No’, he replied, ‘he spoke of the whole enterprise as though he himself had been an utter stranger to its origin.’” “Many other people noticed the same trait in his character – a complete aversion to talking about himself in any boasting manner. In all my dealings with him I can never remember once finding him at fault in this matter. He shunned any praise of himself. In private conversation he attributed any personal success to the Author of all Good, and adroitly changed to another topic. If the eulogy was public he could hardly hide his embarrassment, and after the gathering would deplore the incident. On one occasion he had invited a talented and zealous religious to conduct a novena in the church. He was impressed by the soundness and simplicity of the preacher, but on the last day the latter fell from grace in the eyes of the Founder, when he publicly spoke of the zeal and energy of Father Chevalier and the great work he was doing. Hardly had we left the church than he turned to me and said; ‘He must have lost his head. I will never get him again to preach in the church. The pulpit should not be used for that kind of talk.’” “However, we must say that as the years went by he became less drastic in his reactions, but he always showed a distaste for human praise.”(11) Father Chevalier was firmly convinced that the promising success of his work was due entirely to grace, obtained through the intercession of the Mother of God. This conviction followed from the astonishing, even miraculous circumstances in which the Society was born. The brief period of doubt, when he wondered if he were “tempting Providence” had passed and now this calm conviction permeated all he did. He based this conviction on faith more than any intrinsic evidence that the work would succeed. He had clearly in his mind now what he wanted to do, but how to translate the theory into practice was his present concern. How was he, tied to Issoudun and with only one companion to obtain enough priests and Brothers to spread his Congregation throughout the world? His faith in the validity of his mission, confirmed by his pilgrimages, was his strength, and he calmly placed his confidence in the Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Virgin Mary who had always conferred so many blessings on his Congregation. He had before him a twofold task: to organise his Institute in its initial stages and to organise the apostolate which was to be its special work. Convinced that everything in his work was the fruit of Divine grace which comes to us through the channel of ecclesiastical authority and circumstances, he had come to doubt the end of the Institute. This was on account of the apostolate in which he had become involved, and through the medium of which he saw no possibility of attaining this sublime general end. Thanks, however, to the supernatural light received through saints living and dead, and to the approbation given by the highest authority in the Church, had now arrived, at the certitude that his projects were in conformity with the Divine Will. Nevertheless, this certitude was not modifying the situation in which found himself involved, and the only thing left for him to do was to trust blindly in Jesus and Mary to give the solution and bring his ideal to the fulness of fruition. The crisis had had the good result – that he now knew himself to be on the right way and that Jesus and Mary would guide and bless him. We must not think that Father Chevalier, no matter how strong his conviction about his mission, was content just to pray and calmly await developments, leaving all the work to God. He understood only too well the necessity of human collaboration in the plan, of salvation. In his apostolic work he appreciated the words of St. Paul: “To fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body which is the Church, where I am made a minister according to the dispensation of God.” (Col. 7/21) He was by nature a person of extraordinary energy, a fact which the following tribute from Father Piperon bears out: “He was in every sense of the word a worker. If someone had told me that, like St. Alphonsus Liguori, he had taken a vow never to waste a moment in useless occupations I would willingly have believed it. I never at any time saw him idle for a moment. His energy was far above the ordinary. It is no exaggeration to say that during his long life he crowded into one day the work it would have taken four of his subjects to do. This is the reason why he initiated the many important works left as a legacy to his disciples.”(12)

The Parish of Issoudun handed over to the Missionaries. Father Maugenest rejoins the Society, and is appointed Parish Priest of St. Cyr. In later chapters we will speak more of Father Chevalier’s co-operation with grace, and the energy he put into his activities after 1860. For the moment all his attention and energy were needed to deal with the rather painful situation that had developed in the parish. Before speaking of this we must remember that France was at this period in a state of political turmoil, which probably had its minor repercussions in Issoudun. After the Orsini incident on 14th January, 1858, the Emperor Napoleon III gradually changed his attitude towards the Papal States. By various intrigues he tried to preserve his prestige with the French Catholics, while at the same time endeavouring to win favour with the Italian Revolutionaries. After the Convention of Plombieres war broke out between the Piedmontese and Austria. The Austrians were defeated and in the ensuing Treaty of Villafranca and the Peace Treaty of Zurich, the Revolutionaries had their own way and the Pope was deprived of the Romagna and other possessions. Pope Pius IX vigorously protested in September, 1859 and the French bishops supported him more or less openly, condemning the intrigues and the politics of the Emperor. The Vicomte de la Gueronniere wrote his pamphlet “The Pope and the Congress,” but this only added fuel to the fire, and bitterness reached its zenith in 1860. In a letter to the Pope, Napoleon suggested that he consider the situation as a “fait accompli”, to which the Holy Father replied by the Encyclical “Nulli Certi”, which excommunicated all the usurpers of the Papal possessions. The Government suppressed Louis Veuillot’s paper “L’Universe”, but “Le Monde” appeared to take its place. In the following summer the Organisation of the Zouaves Pontificaux was formed. Many French soldiers joined it and offerings poured in from all over the country for Peter’s Pence. Garibaldi, however, captured Sicily; Cavour seized more of the Papal possessions, and the Zouaves were defeated at Castelfidardo, their General, Lamoriciere, surrendering at Ancone in September 1860. In February, 1861 the Vicomte took up the attack again in a second pamphlet “France, Rome and Italy.” The French Bishops reacted violently at times in their Pastoral letters, for example, Bishop Pie’s admonition to Napoleon: “Wash your hands, O Pilate.” In the midst of all this political upheaval a new Archbishop was appointed to Bourges. Cardinal du Pont had died, and was succeeded by His Grace, Alexandre, Basile-Alexis Menjaud. Born on 1st June, 1791, he was consecrated bishop in 1839 as Coadjutor to Archbishop de ForbinJanson of Nancy. When the Archbishop went as a missionary to the United States, as “an exile” rumour had it, Bishop Menjaud administered the diocese until his appointment at the age of 68 to the Archdiocese of Bourges on 26th September, 1859. During the short time of his occupancy of the See, Archbishop Menjaud showed great interest in the newly-founded Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart and proved himself a staunch friend.(13) He was in favour of following the policy of his predecessor in handing over the parish of Issoudun to the Missionaries. He was anxious to hurry the transfer on account of the disturbed political situation, as such a move needed the Imperial sanction, and it was becoming more difficult to obtain approval for a Religious Society, which as yet had not been officially recognised by the Government to undertake such work. We remember that Father Maugenest had written to Father Crozat about the latter’s proposed resignation, and the transfer of the parish; “The time is pressing and that which can be done now might be impossible later on.” The occasion of the move made by the Archbishop must have resulted from the letter that Father Chevalier wrote on the 5th April, 1860, which we have already quoted. Father Crozat had already intimated to the Vicar General, when he passed through Issoudun, that he wished to resign as parish priest, and that dignitary had told him that the Archbishop would not be opposed to it. The fact that the Archpriest had not officially reported the matter to Father Chevalier, who must have heard of it only later on, seems to indicate that this was the reason why the relationship between Father Crozat and the Missionaries became strained and that the parish priest joined the ranks of the opposition. This is confirmed by a letter written on 15th April saying that Father Crozat had decided not to resign, and on 17th June, Father Chevalier wrote; “The parish priest has suddenly recovered from his fatigue.”(14) In the meantime, the Archbishop had come to Issoudun for the Confirmations on 29th April. From the events which followed we naturally wonder if His Grace insisted on the resignation of Father Crozat and informed him that Father Chevalier was to be his successor. In any case from this time on the attitude of the old parish priest changed, and he became hostile and even offensive to the Missionaries, as Father Maugenest’s letters testify. The supposition that Father Chevalier had been involved in the matter by the Archbishop himself, even though he did not wish to take over the parish can be deduced from a letter written on 8th April, 1861, wherein he announced his intention of calling on both the Archbishop and Father de Champgrand. The fact that the latter was opposed to the Missionaries taking care of the parish, and that he still held all the deeds of the property would explain the reason for the two-fold visit. The root of the trouble with Father Crozat was that he had come to believe that Father Chevalier was manoeuvring to hasten his departure, and to take over charge of the parish himself. The situation came to a head on 30th May, at the residence of Madame du Quesne in a violent outburst by the parish priest. The Archbishop had been invited by Madame du Quesne to visit her property which had belonged at one time to the Visitation Order. She had built a private chapel there, and also a small convent for the Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul, where three of the Sisters had taken up residence on 15th November, 1859 in order to look after the poor of the neighbourhood. In the chapel was a family vault whore her husband, Vice-Admiral du Quesne was buried. The good lady had invited the Archbishop to bless the chapel and Father Maugenest to preach the occasional discourse. Amongst the guests were the clergy of Issoudun and the Missionaries. Father Crozat took the occasion, probably at the dinner table to launch an attack on Father Chevalier and the Missionaries. It was so violent that Father Maugenest was shocked and later wrote to the old priest: “What you said by your open reproaches, your curates said by their coldness. Everyone noticed it. It was a blur on an otherwise happy day. All the families which love you and have been coming to you over the past 20 or 30 years are grieved by the incident.”

Father Crozat had hoped, as we are told, to spend the last years of his life as chaplain here to the du Quesne Chapel, and probably what raised his ire was some chance remark by the Archbishop or one of the guests to this effect. The two victims of the attack – Fathers Chevalier ant Piperon never mentioned the incident, but Father Piperon has written of the gesture of friendship by the Archbishop after the dinner. His Grace said to then while walking in the grounds: ‘”Come let us sit down. I have good news for you’. When we had taken our places by his side, he continued. ‘You see, my children, I want to tell you of something good. I have done perhaps the best thing I have done in my life. I have got myself a coadjutor who is going to succeed me. He will be very good to you. He is young, very intelligent and burning with zeal. For myself, I no longer enjoy good health and have little energy left. I am afraid I will not be with you much longer, but my Coadjutor, Monseigneur le Prince de la Tour d’Auvergne will do what now I am unable to do.’ And the old man quite happy to be able to give us this news, continued to tell us of the eminent qualities of his successor.”(15) The building of the first part of the new church had advanced sufficiently to ask the Archbishop about its solemn blessing. Considering the strained atmosphere in the parish the Archbishop decided that he would not preside himself, but would appoint one of the Vicars General to perform the ceremony. The local paper makes only a brief reference to it. “The blessing of the Church of the Sacred Heart will take place on Friday, 7th June. It will be given by one of the Vicars General of the diocese.”(16) Father Piperon, who had described at length the laying of the foundation stone by enumerating the notable people present etc. was content just to note: “The Abbe Lamblin, the Vicar General of Bourges, was sent by Archbishop Menjaud to bless the first part of the new church, and open it for religious purposes. The ceremony was a solemn one. The collection procured sufficient money to cover the expense of the stained-glass window for the back of the sanctuary – a window portraying the scene of Our Lord appearing to Saint Margaret Mary. Father Chevalier also makes but brief mention of the occasion: “In the month of April, 1859, the work on the first section of the church was begun and on 15th June, 1860 (this should read 7th June, 1861) the Missionaries were able to take possession of this part, consisting of the Sanctuary and the first three bays of the nave.”(17) The complete plan provided for six bays, with a tower and a gallery over the vestibule. At the sides of the sanctuary there were to be two altars, one in honour of Our Blessed Lady and the other of St. Joseph. The three windows of the apse were to be of stained glass, whereas those of the nave were to be of plain white glass. The stained-glass windows of the two side chapels were donated by two well-to-do families, that in Our Lady’s chapel by the Mesloizes of Linetiere, and that of St. Joseph by the la Chatre du Breuil family. The image of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart featured in stained glass in Her chapel was the first representation as conceived by Father Chevalier. When the present shrine of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart was built this original window was inserted as an inset in the much larger window at the back of the chapel. The window from St. Joseph’s altar was placed later in the small chapel to the left of the side nave, as one enters Our Lady’s Shrine. The original altar of Our Lady was also removed to the lower nave before the altar of Saint Margaret Mary, and is now called the altar of St. Anne. The main stained-glass window which was purchased with the proceeds of the collection of June 7th, 1861 bears the Coat of Arms of the town of Issoudun.(18) Although Archbishop Menjaud was anxious to entrust the care of the parish to the Missionaries, he thought it wiser in view of the difficulty with Father Crozat, to leave the transfer to his successor. However, the difficulty seems to have solved itself before the end of the year. Just how this came about we do not know but Father Maugenest in his capacity as parish priest of the Cathedral parish would have played an important part in its solution. The regrettable incident at the du Quesne residence made him decide to intervene in the conflict. We have only two letters of Father Maugenest on the subject. The first was a reply to a letter of Father Crozat’s which we do not possess, and which Father Maugenest says “came to console and reassure him.” It is dated 14th June, 1861 and reads: “My dear and venerated Father, It appears certain to me that at any time now the Community of the Sacred Heart will take over the parish of Issoudun, and will be the means of saving it. Whether the Community will have missionaries to evangelise other parts I do not know, but I have every reason to believe that it will have enough for the work and the salvation of Issoudun – that is to say to complete the good work that you have commenced. It was you who founded this Community. After you have gone it will imitate you, and continue the traditions of zeal and holiness which you have established there. This is what you hoped yourself, and it is really you are responsible for the irregular situation in which the religious administration of Issoudun finds itself. This present situation is a necessary transition to a state of immense good. There are some inconveniences involved, one will say. No, there are not any inconveniences ultimately, because there is not a soul less to be saved. The present state of affairs is only temporary. If anything is wrong, it is this: Your curates hear few confessions, and not many people come to hear their sermons. It would be a pity to lose, hinder or discredit this work, to deprive a town, which you love and of which you are really the father, where you are revered and can never be forgotten, of its salvation and conversion, just to satisfy the selfish wishes of two young people who will at any rate, spend only a year in the parish. Here is the whole reason of the opposition, and if you, the founder of the work, and the one who should be its main support, now condemn and renounce before the people of Issoudun, it is only because of the jealousy of these young men. You have a soul which is too lofty for such sentiments. You have been wrong to allow yourself to be influenced by them. What you have said your open reproaches, your curates have said by their coldness. Everyone noticed it. It was a blur on an otherwise happy day. All the families which love you, and have been coming to you over the past 20 or 30 years were upset and concerned about the incident. With your influence, you would have soon destroyed the work you have built up, by going on in that manner. I can assure you that you have caused me great sorrow, and that I am wondering how a man as wise and holy as yourself could have allowed yourself to become a supporter of such a wrong cause. I would be profoundly upset if I thought you were still able to think and speak against the welfare and salvation of your dear children, and so destroy your work with your own hands. Your letter has consoled and reassured me. I certainly needed it. It has consoled and edified me as much as your conduct hurt me. You know well, my dear venerated Father, that I have a great love for you. Perhaps you will accuse me of being flattering. No, I am only speaking the truth. You are too great of soul not to recognise the truth; too good not to pardon me for what I am saying to you. Here is what I really think: For more than 30 years you have worked for the salvation of Issoudun. If your present attitude and conduct bear results, you will destroy the work you have done. It is a sad way to prepare yourself to appear before God, and all because you are too kind. Father Chevalier wishes only to do good, and he works hard. What you did ten years ago, he is doing now. He will probably remain on as parish priest of Issoudun. Will you continue to support his enemies and diminish his influence? That would be most regrettable. You have only to follow your own judgment, your piety, your heart, and you will think as I do, as authority does, as do all the families which you have now hurt and made sad. You will then not subscribe to ideas prompted only by jealousy. You must, my good and venerated Father, before you say your next Mass, promise God that you will never again say any thing against a work which the good God is blessing, and which will be a consolation to you after the flatterers are gone and which will pray for you when the others have forgotten you. You must pardon me for writing thus, but my candour is permitted by your virtue. The good God often uses children and sinners to speak to great Saints I ask your pardon and your prayers. Yours sincerely – Maugenest; Archpriest.”

A short time after this letter was written the Archbishop sent Father Maugenest to discuss the whole matter with Father Crozat. The letter which he wrote the next day, 5th July, makes reference to a new plan by which the Archbishop hoped to solve the problem of Issoudun.

My dear Father, What I have foreseen has now happened. Authority will never demand your resignation. It is not able to do so on account of your position which it respects, nor does it wish to do so on account of the high personal regard in which you are held. However, the time is pressing, and what can be done now, may be impossible later on. I have made my sacrifice, but it is worthless without your own, on which it depends. I have made a fruitless journey, which I undertook in the hope of presenting a solution to the state of affairs which has now been going on for four years, and which a word from you could have changed. I have done my duty. I leave all the responsibility to you now, if your refusal delays the accomplishment of the project. I have given much thought to that which you told me yesterday. I have found no sound reason in your motives for your refusal to resign. If you say ‘I have awaited the successor whom I wanted. He has now arrived, and I am resigning,’ everyone will applaud your decision. If, on the other hand, you say; ‘The Archbishop has demanded my resignation’, everyone will believe that authority has judged you incapable of continuing your ministry, and this surely will be a dreadful humiliation for you. I have written my last word on the natter. I have done my duty. I expect now that your faith and conscience will prompt you to do likewise, and enable me to realise this project, whose circumstances Providence has designed, and which now calls for a settlement. Accept, my dear and venerated Father, my affectionate regards. Your humble servant, Maugenest – Archpricst.”

To sum up – the circumstances demanded a prompt decision and Father Maugenest was insisting on it. But Father Crozat was peeved at the insistance of the Archbishop and his attitude to Father Chevalier, who had been suggested in the first letter as his successor, was so bitter that it seemed he wanted nothing to do with him. On his part, Father Chevalier did not want this appointment, as he did not consider it to be in the interests of the Society. At this juncture, someone had suggested a means of palliating Father Crozat’s sensitiveness and overcoming his opposition. Father Maugenest visited him to gain his consent. The Archbishop would not ask for his resignation, in fact he could not do so as his nomination had been approved by the Government. However, by discarding the nomination of Father Chevalier, whom Father Crozat did not now want and proposing another successor who would be acceptable to the old priest, his departure would be a free and willing act. And Father Maugenest’s words: “I have made my sacrifice”, it is evident that he himself was the proposed successor to the parish priest. What could be more honourable and fitting for the Archpriest of Issoudun to have as successor the Parish Priest of the Cathedral and the Archpriest of Bourges, whose talents were known and appreciated by the whole town? Without referring to the circumstances leading up to this proposal, and without mentioning himself, Father Chevalier speaks of the final result: “Ever since his nomination, Father Maugenest was desirous of returning to his little cell in our Monastery of the Sacred Heart, where he had spent so many happy days. He had never been able to accustom himself to living far away from this work, which was his own, and into which he had put his whole heart and soul. It seemed to him that during the celebration of his Masses and during his prayers, he could hear the Voice of God urging him to return to share our pains and weariness, our joys and our sorrows. At least twenty times had he asked Cardinal du Pont to let him return, but always in vain. Finally, Archbishop Menjaud, understanding the ardent longings of his soul, agreed to let him return to us. On hearing the good news, we ran to the Chapel to thank the Divine Heart of Jesus and Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.” “The Archbishop took the opportunity of this happy occasion to grant to our work, which was dear to his heart a great mark of esteem and sympathy. The Venerable Father Crozat, who had played such a big part in the foundation of our Society now wished as a last sacrifice, to prove his desire for its prosperity. Weighed down by age and long service the saintly old man decided to resign and hand over the care of the parish to our Society. Archbishop Menjaud, who had hoped for this for a long time, willingly gave his consent, and his Coadjutor, Monseigneur de la Tour d’Auvergne approved of the transfer and later, as successor to the See, officially gave it his approbation. Now the question prose – who amongst us would be best to direct in the name of the Society, this important parish? The choice fell on Father Maugenest as being the most experienced although it was against his wish, and it was only through obedience that our beloved confrere, whilst remaining a religious, consented to this second appointment.”(19) Father Crozat, who had at first objected to this proposal, finally agreed. On 29th July, Father Chevalier was able to write: “Father Maugenest, Parish Priest of the Cathedral has come back to us. Father Crozat has resigned in our favour, and Father Maugenest will be Parish Priest in the name of the Society.(20) It is with a divided heart that he returns to Issoudun. Wishing to live as member of the Sacred Heart Congregation, he nevertheless consented to make the sacrifice of his monastic and missionary life in the interests of peace and that of the Society. These changes took place in the course of the month of September. On 17th Father Maugenest took up his duties as parish priest, and lived at the presbytery with the two curates who did not belong to the Congregation. Father Crozat went to live at the home of Mdme du Quesne, where he was able to offer Mass during his last years, when his health permitted. He died on 8th January, 1864 and was buried near the family tomb in the crypt of the chapel of the Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul, who were attached to the chateau.(22) Needless to say the ‘opposition’ in the town took advantage of the emotional reaction to Father Crozat’s resignation to stir up further animosity towards the Missionaries. When it became known that Father Chevalier had collected 40,000 francs for the new church they exploited the political situation and spread the rumour that he had actually gathered 100,000 francs, and had sent 3,000 to the Pope – a story as Father Chevalier put it which must have come from the mouth of a malevolent simpleton.”(23) It was a severe setback to opponents of the Missionaries to see Father Crozat submit to the wishes of Archbishop and to ascertain that Father Maugenest had not only established peace with the Missionaries, but was working in close collaboration with them. They turned their attacks on him and accused him of being more interested in the work of the new Congregation than he was in his own church. After a few years Father Maugenest himself, being sensitive to their accusations and insinuations was to resign quietly in order to avoid further friction. For the time being a spirit of co-operation and religious peace reigned in the parish to the great satisfaction of the Archbishop and his Coadjutor who was gradually taking over the administration of the Archdiocese. Father Chevalier took advantage of this period of calm, in the summer of 1861 to make some necessary additions to the little monastery. If they were to receive new members, they must have somewhere to put them, and at present there were no more than four cells. It was decided that the new extensions would provide at least twelve cells. Father Piperon writes: “The house in which we lived from the beginning was too small, and Father Chevalier decided to add another storey, which could be used for the cells. While the renovations were being effected we had no alternative accommodation, and so for a few months we often had to sleep in roofless rooms exposed to the vagaries of the weather. Now and then a storm flooded our cells, but when the building was completed we felt that at last we had a monastery. With the help of our imagination we looked upon the building as an important monument. We thanked the Sacred Heart for providing us with the necessary funds for these first additions. From then on, we were able to accommodate any subjects who might wish to join us in our work.”(24)

New Archbishop of Bourges, Friend of the Society From the time of their foundation, the Missionaries had enjoyed the friendship and sympathy of the two Archbishops of Bourges Cardinal du Pont and Monseigneur Menjaud. The latter had already assured then that his successor, Monsigneur le Prince de la Tour d’Auvergne, was also kindly disposed to the Founder and his work. Archbishop Menjaud died on 10th December, 1861.

Being Coadjutor to Monseigneur Menjaud and having worked with him for several months, Archbishop de la Tour d’Auvergne had already had dealings with the Missionaries, and Father Chevalier had met him previously in Rome. Although he realised that the new Archbishop was favourably inclined to the Congregation, Father Chevalier was rather anxious about the immediate success of his own building fund, when he learnt from his architect, Monsieur Tarlier, that His Grace was going to launch an appeal for the restoration of the Chapel of St. Celestine in Bourges. He wrote to his very good benefactors Monsieur De Linetiere and Monsieur des Meleizes that it would be advisable to hasten the appeal, and that a word to the Archbishop from them might not be out of place. However, he need not have had any fears, as the Archbishop was to prove himself the staunch supporter and protector of the Society. Monseigneur le Prince Charles-Amable de la Tour d’Auvergne Lauraguais was born on 6th December, 1826, at Moulins (Allier). He began his studies at Arras, where his grand-uncle, Cardinal de la Tour d’Auvergne was Arch bishop, and then went to the Stanislaus College in Paris, and later to the Junior Seminary of Saint Nicholas, at that time directed by the Abbe Dupanloup, later Bishop of Orleans. In 1843, when he had finished his humanities, he received the tonsure at the Seminary of Issy, where he completed his philosophical studies and then proceeded to the Major Seminary of St. Sulpice for his theology. After his ordination on 12th August, by his uncle in the Arras Cathedral, he was immediately named a Vicar-General. He had been an honorary Canon there since his sub-diaconate. Monseigneur Parisis, who succeeded the Cardinal on his death in 1851 did not hesitate to retain the young priest as his Vicar General, as he had shown his ability and zeal by his preaching, his catechetical instructions, his work amongst the soldiers and his retreats to religious communities. In 1855 he was called to Rome as the French representative on the Roman Rota. There he made an intensive study of Canon Law, Ecclesiastical History and Sacred Archeology. He was a keen judge of men and events, and soon became a well known figure in Rome. His years in the eternal city gave him a strong attachment to the Chair of St. Peter and a filial veneration for Pope Pius. Honoured by the Consistory of July 22nd 1061 as the Titular Bishop of Colos, he was raised to the dignity of the episcopate on 1st August in the church of Saint Louis des Francais in Rome by the hands of Cardinal Villecourt, assisted by Bishops Spaccapietro and Gianelli, the latter a future Cardinal. One of the Archbishop’s first tasks after the death of Monseigneur Menjaud was to make the Roman Rite obligatory throughout the Archdiocese and to unify the Liturgical Music. He then established a permanent fund for Peter’s Pence, and a fund for the seminaries. He showed his concern for the aged and sick priests by establishing a special Home for them. Besides instituting the perpetual adoration of the Blessed Sacrament where convenient, he organised retreats and ecclesiastical conferences for the clergy. He authorized the building of spacious and fitting chapels for the two Junior Seminaries, and acquired for the diocese the ancient Abbey of the Benedictines at Chezal-Benoit. A Council of Diocesan Consultors for Building Plans was given the task of examining and approving the construction and repairing of churches and presbyteries throughout the Archdiocese, and a special council for the fostering of Studies – particularly history and archeology, was set up in the cathedral parish. The Archbishop encouraged the faithful to make pilgrimages to the various shrines, and often led them himself, taking advantage of the occasion to preach to the pilgrims and instruct them in their faith. He was a theologian of no mean repute, and wrote extensively particularly on the Doctrine of Papal Infallibility. He devoted much of his time and talent to his work: “The Catholic Tradition of Papal Infallibility” or “The Definition of the Vatican Council confirmed by Scripture, Fathers and History,” a thesis much appreciated by contemporary theologians. Unfortunately a large part of this work, together with many other documents was lost in the disastrous fire which gutted the Archbishop’s residence in 1871. He showed the same zeal in the administration of his diocese. During the eighteen years of his administration he made four general visitations of the parishes and called four General Synods. Over fifty churches were consecrated by him during that period. Devoted body and soul to Catholic progress throughout the Archdiocese, he was known for his generosity and personal interest in any deserving cause, especially those for the amelioration of conditions for the working class. His charity seemed to know no limit, particularly in regard to any unfortunate who was suffering hardship. Tall in stature, handsome in appearance with a ready and amiable smile he soon dispelled any timidity in those who approached him by the friendliness of his welcome. Always dignified in bearing, his paternal and sympathetic manner soon put people at ease, and the affability of his conversation made him universally popular. His piety was evident by the ease with which he could speak of holy and sacred subjects, and his demeanour on the altar bespoke reverence and love.(26) Thus do his contemporaries describe this great prelate in his majesty and simplicity, in his piety and religious zeal, and fortunate indeed were the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart in being able to call him a close and sympathetic friend. It was not without reason that Monseigneur Duquesneay in preaching the panegyric at his Requiem turned to them and said: “Religious of the Sacred Heart of Issoudun, you would have cause to reprimand me, if not with reproaches at least with sorrow, if I did not here call on you as witness. Tell us – was there anything more that he could have done for you that he did not do?”(27) It was really with his assent and encouragement that Father Chevalier was able to develop the many great activities of which we will speak in later chapters, and to give to the Society the form which he considered was in conformity with God’s will. For the time being his apostolic zeal and energy were restricted to parish of Issoudun, where he was busy helping the new parish priest. One of their first duties was to see that the Feast of Saint Vincent, the Martyr, 22nd January (1862) was celebrated with due ceremony, as he was the Patron Saint of the Vine-growers, who comprised a large proportion of the local population. According to tradition, King Childebert, after his victory in Spain, brought back to Paris some relics of the saintly deacon, and placed them in the Abbey of Saint Germain des Pres, which he had built himself. From there the devotion to the Saint had spread throughout France, and those in the grape industry entrusted their crops to his safekeeping. The pictures of the Saint represent him with a pruning knife, and holding in his hand a bunch of grapes and some vine branches. Some imaginative people tried to associate the origin of the cult with the fact that the Saint’s name commenced with “Vin” (Wine), while others, with more reason, maintained it was from a text in an old Missal, printed in Constance in 1504, where it is not on his feast day (22nd January): “Vincenti Festo, si Sol radiat, memor esto: Tunc magnum fac vas, quia vitis dabit tibi uvas” which may be translated: “lf the Sun shines on the feast of St. Vincent, Prepare the big casks, for the vine is going to bear grapes.” Father Chevalier, who wrote a small pamphlet on the Saint for the occasion, emphasises the fact that as a Deacon, the Saint’s function at Mass was to pour the wine into the chalice.(28) In spite of their Saint, the vine-growers of Issoudun were hardly “pillars of the church”. Some cynics had even said they worshipped the Sun. As they formed a large percentage of the population, Father Chevalier readily acquiesced when a deputation approached him asking for a High Mass and special celebrations for St. Vincent’s Feast that year (l861). In a letter to Madame des Mesloizcs he gives the following amusing account of his conversation with them: “We want a deacon and a sub-deacon, a special sermon, and the organ put at our disposal” “And what would you want the organ for?” I asked. “To play our special song.” “Have you got a copy of the song with you?” “Yes, here it is.”

I could hardly look at it quickly enough, as I feared the worst. Sure enough, it contained some rather suspicious morality, and was in deplorable taste. “My friends,” I said to them, “the organ will play the tune of your song, if you allow me to put new words to it. I will distribute copies free to all the vine-growers.” “My suggestion was accepted with enthusiasm, and they went away happy. I had 2,500 copies printed and distributed amongst them, and for the four days before the Feast the new song was practised with great gusto. On the day of the Feast a large crowd gathered at St. Cyr’s. Father Maugenest preached a special sermon which pleased them greatly, and on this day at least these usually difficult people were beside themselves with joy. They rated Father Maugenest and your humble servant as amongst the really great poets.”(29)

Father Piperon’s Journeys to collect Funds. To facilitate the appeal for the second part of the church it was decided that the priests would make a concerted effort. On 26th March, 1862, Father Chevalier wrote that except for four or five days, he would remain at home in Issoudun for the year, and that Fathers Maugenest and Piperon would be responsible for the appeal outside the parish. Father Maugenest, who had a natural distaste for appeals of any description, agreed only with reluctance to take part in it. “I have been asking him for a long time,” writes Father Chevalier, “after giving him the necessary ideas, to draw up a circular letter to be presented for approval to the Archbishop. He told me yesterday that I was asking him something beyond his powers and that he was incapable of composing the circular, that he had neither ideas nor taste for it.” This is why Father Chevalier asked Monsieur de Linitiere if he would undertake the task – to compose a circular in suitable terms which he felt he was unable to do himself. It was proposed to make the appeal throughout the Province of Berry and the suffragan dioceses amongst the clergy and the faithful. After all, had not the Province, since the time of Archbishop de Villele been consecrated to the Sacred Heart and there was no monument to commemorate the fact. Indeed, since the Council of Clermont, the whole ecclesiastical province had been consecrated to the Sacred Heart. Would it not be an excellent idea in memory of that fact to build a Sanctuary dedicated to the Sacred Heart in the metropolitan diocese?(30) Father Maugenest considered himself incapable, not only of drawing up the circular, but also of going abroad to make the appeal, and the travelling was left to Father Piperon, who used to refer to himself during these days as the “Father Collector”. In 1862 he journeyed through the Alps country and the Rhone Valley, that is to say, Lyons, Grenoble, Gap, Digne, Frejus and Marseilles with their neighbouring smaller towns. The following year he canvassed throughout new territory across the Nievre, 1’Allier, le Puy de Dome, le Cantal, la Jaute-Loire, la Correze, la Dordogne and La Gironde. Father Chevalier wished him to visit also la Touraine, l’Anjou and Brittany, which he did during the holidays of 1863. The proposed visit to the other dioceses of France was postponed for the time being, and eventually called off, on account of various difficulties, much to the delight of Father Piperon who found the work arduous and distasteful. Apart from the fact that each journey lasted some three months, many of his visits were fruitless and he often met with humiliating refusals and even insults. However, generally speaking, the appeal was successful. Not only was the necessary money collected for the new church, but it was a means of making the young Congregation known, of winning many sympathisers and benefactors, and of preparing the way for the spreading of devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.(31) Father Piperon’s journeys served the practical purpose of spreading the Devotion to the Sacred Heart. We possess two of the sermons he used during these tours. After speaking of the “object of the appeal, he then explained the main features of the Devotion, emphasising the points already familiar to us through the teaching of Father Chevalier – the Sacred Heart is the Source of all graces, and the Devotion is the antidote to the social disease of religious indifferentism and selfishness. Even to some of the parish priests the Devotion, in those days was not well known, and in some places Father Piperon’s subject was often received with a deal of misgiving and apprehension, as the following incident indicates. In the course of the appeal in 1863 the Archbishop of Moulins , Mgr. De Dreux Breze suggested that he pay a visit to the parish of Notre Dane at Montlucon, where the Cure, the Archpriest, Antoine Guillaumet had successfully established a special Mass for the men. He received a friendly welcome from the good parish priest, who invited him to preach to the men at their Mass the following day, which was a Sunday. When Father Piperon told him he would be preaching on the Sacred Heart, the priest replied: “Oh, no, Father. You had better keep that subject for a High Mass or some similar occasion. The men who will be at this Mass are not theologians, religious or devotees. They are just simple folk who wish to fulfill their ordinary duties and no more. It would be inadvisable to teach them such practices which, after all, are works of supererogation. If we overdo it, they might abandon everything.” The surprised Father Piperon replied: “I am sorry, Father, at a time when I am your guest, and you have received me so kindly, to have to disagree with you. Before I left the Community at Issoudun I promised that I would not preach unless it was on the subject of the Sacred Heart. I am afraid that under these conditions your own approach and eloquence will suit the men better tomorrow than my own. However, if you insist that I do preach, then I’m afraid the sermon will be on the Sacred Heart. The next morning, just before Mass was to commence, the Archpriest came to me and said: ‘Father, go ahead and preach. I submit to your judgment.’ The attention and interest with which the large congregation of men listened to the sermon, convinced him more than ever that you do not have to be a theologian, a religious or a devotee to understand and appreciate the doctrine of Devotion to the Sacred Heart. The simple folk, the little children, the humble parishioners all have the necessary aptitude to profit from the graces of Our Lord – promised to those who honour the Sacred Heart. After Mass the zealous priest was humble and good enough to thank me, adding; ‘If I had known the manner in which you were going to explain this important doctrine, I would have raised no objection.” This manner of presentation used by Father Piperon has its importance for us, as he had learnt it from Father Chevalier himself. The idea hold the Archpriest Guillaumet and many others that Devotion to the Sacred Heart is only for the select few, and that the ordinary simple and humble person incapable of appreciating it, is fundamentally wrong. This opinion, which prevailed for too long, deprived many a humble parishioner of the benefits promised by Our Lord to those who love and honour His Sacred Heart. After all, is not the language of the heart the most simple and the most readily understood by the ordinary people? Any Christian who is living a life of faith, no matter how simple or ignorant he may be, can be deeply moved by hearing of the profound mysteries of the Passion and Death of Our Lord. Can he not appreciate the simple yet eloquent sermon in the mere expression: “See how the Heart of Jesus has loved you. See what He has suffered for you?” If there is left in his soul but the slightest vestige of noble sentiment will he not cry out with St. John, the Apostle of true love; “I must love the Heart of Jesus, because He has first loved me.” Such an act of faith and love from a grateful heart is an act of homage to the Heart of Our Saviour. Father Piperon concludes: “Father Chevalier never admitted that there was any class of society to which the Devotion to the Sacred Heart could not be preached with profit. All need the graces of that Heart; all ought to love Him. We must not neglect to teach it to everyone. This was his ambition – to spread Devotion by every possible means.”(32)

The Devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Side by side with the spreading of Devotion to the Sacred Heart was the making known of the title of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Father Piperon tells us that already the pictures of Our Lady under that title had been distributed far and wide, and that he always carried a supply on his travels. We have already spoken of the origin of the title, how Father Chevalier thought of it on the 9th September, 1855, on the occasion of the installation of the Missionaries, how he meditated and studied it in the silence of his heart and how in 1857 he revealed it to an intimate circle of friends, his companions and some fellow-priests. We recall that Father Piperon had questioned the theological soundness of the title on which subject he wrote: “Father Chevalier did not make just the one reference to it. It became the subject of our conversations every day during recreation after lunch for many weeks. We put up as many objections as possible, but he answered them easily. We could see that he had studied the subject deeply. Sometimes the conversation became animated as we argued the matter, and this would continue till the bell went for prayers. The following day we would take up the subject where we left off. Needless to say, Father Founder won through, and answered all our difficulties to our satisfaction. Many enquiries came in after the distribution of the pictures, which bore invocations “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, pray for us.” The people wanted to ask about the origin, nature, and means of spreading the devotion. “Who is Our Lady of the Sacred Heart? What is the best way of practicing Devotion to Her? Is there a Shrine in Her honour in France? Are there any Associations of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart?” These, and many other questions poured in, and the correspondents seemed delighted that under this one invocation both the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and His Blessed Mother were being honoured. Such was the interest shown that it was decided to write a small pamphlet explaining the meaning of the title. I was entrusted with the task, and put in writing the origin and meaning of the devotion, as it was explained to us by Father Founder during the course of our discussions and arguments. To answer all the letters was impossible for the time being, so we decided to have the pamphlet printed for distribution. An important incident in the spreading of the devotion occurred when Father Piperon met the Rev. Father Ramiere in 1862. Father Piperon describes it thus: “The ‘Father Collector’ visited the town of Puy and called at the Maison de Vals , where the Rev. Father Ramiere lived. This good priest was the Director of the Apostleship of Prayer and the editor of the Messenger of the Sacred Heart’. I told him about the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, and he became very interested. I gave him one of the small pictures, which he received with obvious joy. ‘Have you any written matter on the Devotion?’ he asked. ‘Nothing yet has been printed, but I have with me here several pages written on the subject.’ Opening my bag, I gave him the modest pages. He read them with interest, and said to me: ‘Let me publish those in the Messenger. The people will appreciate them.’ ‘That would be rather impossible, Father,’ I replied. ‘They really don’t belong to me. I would have to get permission from my Superior. If you wish, you could write to him.’ He took me at my word, and duly wrote to Father Chevalier.” Tradition has it that Father Chevalier was willing to let Father Ramiere print the matter, but Father Piperon vigorously protested, saying that the publication on Devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart should come from Father Chevalier himself and not from outside sources. Let us continue Father Piperon’s narrative. “Father Chevalier accepted my point of view, and hastened to compose a small work on the subject himself, setting out the origin and meaning of the Devotion. It was a concise summary of all the circumstances leading up to the use of the title, and the interpretation that should be put on it. This was Father Chevalier’s first published work, and was entitled: “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart” By Rev. Fr. Chevalier Missionary Apostolic of the Sacred Heart. He submitted it to the Archbishop of Bourges for approbation, which was readily given in November, 1862. Six months later it was sent to Father Ramiere, who had been asking for it for a long time, and it appeared in the May edition of the messenger in 1863, which carried at the same time to all its subscribers the picture of our Mother.(34) Another important contact which Father Piperon made, and which helped considerably in making Our Lady of the Sacred Heart better known, was with Monseigneur Guibert, Archbishop of Tours, later to be transferred to the See of Paris. Fr Piperon had come to Tours to preach a Novena in honour of Our Lady of La Salette, and when he called on the Archbishop he gave him a copy of the recent publication on Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. After studying it carefully, the Archbishop gave it his approbation in very laudatory terms and was enthusiastic about it. He was the first bishop after Monseigneur de la Tour d’Auvergne, to set the seal of high authority on the new devotion, and thereby helped to spread the love and knowledge of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.(33) Encouraged by the approval of this learned and highly-regarded Archbishop, the Missionaries sent the brochure to other prelates of the Church to acquaint them with Our Lady’s new title.

The Church is Completed. As a result of the various appeals throughout the whole of France it was possible, immediately after the additions to the Monastery were finished, to undertake the building of the second part of the church. Father Piperon records: At the end of 1863 the main work on the church was finished. In order to make it available to the faithful as soon as possible, the final touches were hurried through.”(36) The Moniteur de l’Indre, in its copy of June 30th, 1864, notes; “The Archdiocese of Bourges now has in the town of Issoudun a fitting monument commemorating the fact of its two-fold consecration to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. The dedication of this precious Sanctuary will take place on 2nd July next at 7 o’clock in the morning. At 4 p.m. there will be Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament. The occasional sermon will be preached by one of the outstanding dignitaries of France, Monseigneur Dupanloup, Bishop of Orleans.” Father Piperon continues; “There were very few churches throughout France dedicated to the Sacred Heart. His Grace, the Archbishop wished to make the function a solemn one, as he regarded our church as the diocesan Shrine commemorating the fact that the ecclesiastical province of Bourges was consecrated to the Sacred Heart. His Grace had invited all the provincial bishops to the ceremony, but only one was able to attend, His Lordship, Bishop Fruchaud of Limoges. The others sent their apologies on account of previous commitments. However, on the Saturday when the church was officially consecrated, the Archbishop, who had always shown great interest in our work was assisted by several prelates from other parts of France. Archbishop Guibert, the archbishop of Tours, performed the actual ceremony of the Consecration. Also in attendance were the Archbishop of Smyrna, Monseigneur Scappapietro – a Lazarist, then in France collecting for his mission, Monseigneur Fruchaud, Bishop of Limoges, Monseigneur Dabert, Bishop of Periguoux, who was a native of the Berry district, and the mitred Abbot of Fontgombault, the Most Rev. Father Dosithee. Besides these dignitaries there were also present about 150 priests from the various dioceses. A large crowd assembled in glorious sunshine in front of the church, which itself was packed to the doors. It seemed as though the whole town land the neighbouring countryside had turned out for the occasion, and Issoudun had never seen such an impressive gathering before. The parishioners had erected six or seven triumphal arches each gaily and tastefully decorated. Even the newly-formed Society of Vine-growers had its own special arch. The neighbouring square and the nearby streets carried their festoons, and garlands of flowers hung from the trees. At eight o’clock the Archbishop of Tours began the Consecration ceremony, and at half past nine the procession to the church of St. Cyr set forth. The procession was both impressive and spectacular. Troops from the local garrison formed a guard of honour and the fire-brigade band supplied the appropriate music for the singing of the hymns and psalms. The faithful lined the route of the procession, which was led by 30 students from the Major Seminary at Bourges and the clergy dressed in surplices walking in pairs. Following then were 16 priests wearing golden coloured copes; then the Canons and finally the six bishops in their mitres carrying their crosiers and blessed the people as they proceeded. At the church of St. Cyr the ministers were entrusted with the sacred relics which wore to be placed in the magnificent newly consecrated altar the new church. While the procession made its way back to the church of Sacred Heart 100 men, each holding a lighted candle, formed a guard of honour around the sacred reliquary. When the final ceremonies of the consecration of the High altar were completed, His Lordship Bishop Limoges sang the Pontifical High Mass , the 130 priests present forming the choir. As the church was not big enough to accommodate the large crowd present, another Mass was offered at the same time on a raised altar outside, the celebrant being the Most Rev. Abbot de Fontgombault. After the Gospel, Father Ramiere delivered an eloquent sermon befitting the occasion. At four o’clock in the afternoon again a large crowd assembled for the solemn Benediction, and once again the preacher was Father Ramiere. Each of the bishops imparted his blessing from the steps of the church to the vast crowd which literally covered the Vouet Square. The collecting of funds for the occasion had been put in the hands of Madeline Dufour and Monsieur de Verneuil, Madamc Dausigny and Monsieur le Commandant Lucconi, Madame des Mesleizes and Monsieur le President Fougere, Madame Rousseau and Monsieur Chaveau all good benefactors. They were able to hand Father Chevalier 1200 francs. In the evening after the Angelus, Bishop Limoges blessed the statue of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, which stands in front of the Church. On the Sunday, Bishop Perigueux celebrated Mass in the church of St. Cyr. Archbishop Scappapictro presided, and preached on his mission in Smyrna. As a result of his appeal, the collection amounted to 800 francs. Naturally, the Monastery was too small, in spite of its additions, for, the official reception, so a big marquee was erected in the grounds, where some 120 guests were entertained to dinner. Madame la Vicomtosse du Quesne was the official hostess, and received the guests. The civic Council of the city of Bourges sent its representative for the occasion.(38) From that time onwards the lovers of the Sacred Heart and Our Lady of Sacred Heart have come as pilgrims to Issoudun from all parts of France and the neighbouring countries

CHAPTER XII: THE ASSOCIATION OF SECULAR PRIESTS OF THE SACRED HEART

PART I: The Association an Annex of the Early Society

The organisation of Secular Priests of the Sacred Heart was a result of the initial uncertainty and indecision of Father Chevalier as to the best way of establishing the Society. We have already spoken of these difficulties in Chapter X. The brochures written at the end of 1862, apart from the matter dealing with the Third Order of the Laity, treat with this Association of Secular Priests. We have already refuted the opinion of those who concluded from these brochures that at first the Founder had only a vague and general idea of the nature of the Society he wished to found, and that it was only after 1860 that the project took definite form in his mind. The testimony of his contemporaries, as Father Piperon has stressed, and the documents of the period clearly show that from the beginning his intention, in fact his cherished and definite ideal, was to found not just an Association of priests to preach devotion to the Sacred Heart as a means of combating the religious apathy of the age, but to establish a canonically-formed Religious Congregation whose members would live the common life, and take the vows of religion. His ardent wish was to found an Institute whose main aim and purpose would be to love and honour the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and to spread that devotion throughout the world – a Congregation whose members would live a life of consecration and dedication by means of their religious vows and the exercises of the interior life, which would be the fount of their unity and strength. Father Chevalier envisaged the Society as an Institute exclusively dedicated to the Glory of God and the Heart of Christ. The wording of the early Rules clearly indicates this, as does the formula of the vows. Vows are taken “in the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, which is established to procure the Glory of God and to save souls by making known all the treasures of love and mercy of the Sacred Heart of Jesus.” (ES. 52, R. 30). As the basis of his plan the Founder regarded as paramount the twofold object: the reawakening of a Christian life and spirit in society, which had grown so irreligious, and the achievement of this by the spreading of devotion to the Sacred Heart. The nature of this devotion, as his writings tell us, lies in the participation in the life-giving fruits of the redemptive love of Christ. And as the communication of these graces is essentially the work of priests, Father Chevalier’s main concern was to recruit priest-subjects for his Congregation. It was to be a widespread mission, and his desire was enlist the services of as many apostles as possible. To quote his own words: “The Heart of Jesus wishes to preserve the love of the good and to convert the hearts of sinners. He wishes that all men be saved, and for this He needs helpers. He needs Missionaries of His Sacred Heart, and looks for them particularly in men whose vocation calls them to the religious life. He seeks them also amongst the secular priests who are working amongst the people of the world, and who, by this very contact, may be exposed to special dangers. It is certain that in these unsettled times there are new and previously unheard-of dangers threatening the Faith and the Church. In a time of war soldiers and sentinels are needed, and the defences must be strengthened.”(l) The enemies use every modern device of warfare to achieve their aims and are united in their efforts to destroy the Church. We priests – religious and secular – must also unite to safe guard the Church. Our unity will be also a means of safeguarding ourselves, especially in these days when so many priests in France are forced to live in isolation, which is a danger threatening their effectiveness and paralysing their activity. The theory and ideal of this union resides in an association with the Congregation in its interior spirit, an attachment to the Society in the service of the Sacred Heart, from whose sanctity it takes its life and meaning – a dedication of all the forces and powers of one’s body and soul, even to the complete immolation of the will, one’s earthly goods, one’s affections, such as is achieved by the taking of the vows.(2) However, all priests who wish to join this Association need not necessarily take vows. There are many souls who are disposed to a life of piety and Christian perfection but are rather frightened at the thought of taking vows, while still remaining in the world. Notwithstanding, the needs of the time make their affiliation with an organised Religious Society desirable. Would it not be a pity to deprive these souls of the precious resources of religious life, and to deprive the Congregation of their help and spiritual merits, merely because they do not wish or dare to tie themselves by vows?(3) Others who do not wish to live alone yet are unable for various reasons join a community can still be a help to the Society, and the Sacred Heart can enlist them in the ranks of His new army. In the Society there is room for all degrees of vocation and virtue, for the Heart of Jesus is the Divine Model of all perfection. Surely if His Infinite Goodness accepts even the least homage from weak souls, His infinite Sanctity can inspire the actions of the stronger and more perfect, his latter class will be those who consecrate themselves by the vows, and they will form the nucleus of the Society, which receives and claims them as souls drawn to the perfection of Christian life. However, it is not only in a religious house that the action of grace can operate. It can also be affective out in the world. ‘The Spirit breatheth where He wills.”‘(4) Thus were formed the various groups in the Society of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. From the beginning, the Institute recognised as members the Missionaries and Brothers who, with or without vows, lived in the community at Issoudun. But side by side with these was the group of secular priests who, with or without vows, was affiliated to the Society in the nature of a Third Order. In studying this Association of Secular Priests who, in the beginning, at least, were considered as “affiliated” and not “direct” members, we are dealing precisely with the organisation of the Institute as such but more with the associated works by means of which the object of the Society could be achieved, namely the Apostolate of the Sacred Heart. Such were the two groups, distinct, although intimately linked together, over which Father Chevalier found himself in charge. His was now a twofold task. According to their objects, we must divide the work of the two groups those directly concerned with the apostolate and those concerned with auxiliary activities. The first kind of work is that performed by Missionaries as such, whereas the second is performed by associates in a helping capacity. For example, a mission to the infidels is essentially the work of a missionary, whereas an association of catechists on the same mission is an auxiliary organisation. Thus for Father Chevalier the education of youth is a field of apostolic activity, but the Association of Secular Priests is an auxiliary work of the Society, although in general terms the two are referred to by him as “Works of the Society.” Naturally, the association of priests is more intimately connected with the end of the Society than the youth they would be educating. The wording of the Rules on the matter was as follows: “The Community can affiliate with itself secular priests. The Council will judge the advisability of their admission. They may take vows, if they so wish. They will follow the Rule of the Missionaries on the fundamental points. They will participate in all the advantages and privileges of the Missionaries themselves. For they are pursuing the same end and are endeavouring to make known to all their parishioners the richness of the Heart of Jesus,”(R. 52-53)] The original organisation of the Missionaries had already been transformed before the appearance of the brochures with which we are dealing now, and these minor changes were independent of the development of the Association of Secular priests. At the beginning the status of member or just simple associate was determined by the residence of the subject. Anyone who actually lived in the Community at Issoudun was a member, but a priest who continued to live in his own parish was an associate, but not a member of the Institute. However, in 1861 the situation was changed, mainly because of the position of Father Maugenest. This good priest had now returned as a member of the Congregation, but as parish priest of St. Cyr’s he was living at the presbytery with his two curates. From this fact emerged the idea that the membership of the Society need not be restricted to just those who resided in the Community at Issoudun. The Society could operate from other houses also. From then on it was accepted that one could be a true Missionary of the Sacred Heart without necessarily living in the original house at Issoudun. This new concept, in its turn, presented difficulties regarding the taking of the vows and the authority of the Superior. It is not surprising that at times certain confusion would arise as to matters which concerned the authority of religious superiors, and those relating to diocesan authority. There did occur, as a matter of fact, many doubts and changes on this point over a fairly long period of time. The Missionaries, now with or without vows, could be established in parishes, just as the affiliated secular priests – whether bound by vows or not. We can easily appreciate that, in these circumstances, there was the danger of the two groups regarding themselves as identical, and so it was necessary to find a new basis on which the distinction might be defined. What would be the criterion of this distinction? What would be the status of the associated priests in comparison with that of the Missionaries? The brochures published by Father Chevalier and the correspondence on the subject show that it was not easy to find a solution, and hence the indecision and uncertainty of the Founder for the time being. AS we have said before, it would be a false conclusion to deduct from these doubts and hesitations that it was only now that Father Chevalier was forming a clear concept of the nature of his Society. The evidence of his contemporaries and the previous written documents give the lie to that. Would Father Chevalier during this period have incorporated the secular priests into his Society, even if only for the time being, in order to tide him over his period of indecision? The solution to this problem depends on the answer to two other questions. Firstly, were the secular priests considered as true members of the Institute or as merely associate members, and, secondly, did this incorporation exclude the idea of a religious congregation, canonically formed, embracing vows and the common life?” To which we might add a subsidiary question: Was this incorporation, which admitted members without vows to take their place beside the professed, merely a transitional step towards a definite form, or was it essentially a modification of the original definite plan? In order to gain a clearer idea of the situation, we must recall again that during the last century there were many variations of interpretation as to what constituted a religious. On the precise point, with which we are occupied at present, Canon Law did not make any exact or constant ruling. There were periods when the common life, and the exclusion of people living in the world were required before a religious Institute could be recognized as such. These institutes were composed of the two usual classes – Fathers and Brothers, or, for the Nuns – choir Sisters and lay Sisters, known in those days as Sisters of the Community or Sisters of the House.(5) But “there were other periods when these conditions did not seem to be required. The question was officially put to the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, when the Oblates of the Sacred Heart of Montlucon were approved as a Congregation with simple vows on the 11th May, 1838. The reply was that only the two traditional classes were to be considered as religious, and that the so-called externs were not able to be considered as part of the Institute, but merely as a separate affiliated association. The “Ecclesia Christi” confirmed this declaration, and added a general condition, namely, that if the extern members continued to constitute an essential part of the community, the Institute could not be recognized as a religious Congregation. And so as the association of externs was no longer a constituent part of their institute, the Constitutions of the Oblates of Montlucon were approved on the 23rd April, 1894, “although the organisation of the associations for external members had not yet undergone the trials of experience.”(6). But some little time later, as Gambari notes, the Sacred Congregation was not adverse to a closer link between the religious congregations and their associated externs.(7) Thus it was that in 1909 the same Oblates received permission to admit their externs to vows. In 1911 the Statutes for the Extern Sisters of the Oblates of the Sacred Heart of Naples were approved by the Sacred Congregation. These statutes stated that the extern sisters are members of the Institute with the same title as the intern sisters and are able to be admitted to vows. Gambari notes in conclusion: “Until about the last ten years of the 19th century there was no distinction made in the approbation of Societies which were living the common life and had their distinctive habits, and the various other societies. The procedure and the reasons given were the same for the recognition and approbation of both.” And he gives examples of this until the year 1880. It is only between 1888 and 1905 that the Church began making definite requirements in the matter. If Father Piperon describes the original plan such as Father Chevalier had always wished it, i.e., as a canonically-formed Religious Congregation, it does not necessarily follow that all the members were expected to take vows and live in the community. In the period of which he is speaking, according to the common opinion an Institute remained a Religious Congregation, even when some of its members remained out in the world, such as our own Secular Priests, provided that the nucleus, i.e.. the intern members satisfied the obligations of the vows and lived the common life. But Father Piperon definitely excluded this interpretation when he replied affirmatively to the question: “Did Father Chevalier originally conceive his Institute as it is constituted to-day?” For in 1900, when he wrote on this matter, all the members of the Society were bound by vows and lived in canonically-erected communities, according to the idea expressed in 1861, from the time of Father Maugenest’s appointment as parish priest of Issoudun. The Secular Priests then were a kind of annex or, to use the expression in the first Rules, “a special Work.” We will see in what measure the brochures confirm this judgment. The point must be stressed in view of the contention later made by some of the young members that Father Chevalier was hazy about his original plan. It is necessary to state that those who lived during the early years of the Society – “we his first subjects,” as Father Piperon says, and those he quotes in evidence of his contention – had no doubts that Father Founder always had in mind one and the same project. None of them had any difficulties concerning the content of the brochures. They all knew them, and some of them had helped in their composition. They did not find in them any of the doubts and difficulties that the younger members wished to find later on. Moreover, they, if anyone, knew the authentic sense of the brochures – their meaning which we must study thoroughly.

The fact that the first Rules of 1855 already quote as “a work” of the Society the Association of Secular Priests clearly shows that the idea dates from the beginning of the Congregation. Father Piperon has written: “From the beginning the Rev. Father had the thought of affiliating with his work all the secular priests who wished to live a more regular life in their parochial or professorial duties.” In his Biographical Notice of Father Founder he expressed the idea even more clearly: “All his life Father Chevalier professed a profound respect and a lively affection for his confreres in the priesthood. All those who lived close to him knew with what warm cordiality he received them. The loneliness in which most of the parochial priests were forced to live frightened him. He always opened his house to them as he did his heart. He wished to extend to all of them the benefits of religious life in keeping with the needs of their parochial ministry. From this desire was born the Work of Secular Priests of the Sacred Heart, which began, we are able to say, almost at the same time as the Congregation itself.”(9). Father Chevalier himself speaks thus of its origin: “The Association of Secular Priests of the Sacred Heart of Jesus was born with the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, which, as the Constitutions state (1877), made it one of its principal works.(l0). That it was always a cherished idea in the mind of the Founder is proved from the text in the Rules of 1857, from the Abrege of 1862 and from the pact that it was one of the main items he mentioned to the Holy Father, Pope Pius IX in 1860. On that occasion His Holiness had expressed the wish that as many priests as possible would join the Association. We are not able to say at what precise time the Association came into being. It began, it seems, as just a personal contact with several secular priests who were interested in the work of the new Society. “The Association,” to quote Father Chevalier’s own words, “was born spontaneously from the relationship of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart with many of the parochial clergy.”(11). In 1890 he wrote: “Its existence goes back some thirty years,” which would put the date of its origin as 1860. In a petition to the Holy See, dated 19th June, 1874, it is stated: “The Association has now been in existence 16 years,” which takes us back to 1858.(12). In the History of the Society, which he wrote in 1901, Father Chevalier after speaking of the enlargement of the Monastery in 1861, goes on: “Several of the secular priests became acquainted with our work and asked to be affiliated with it, while still remaining in their parishes, in order to gain the advantages of a Rule appropriate to their life and a safeguard against the moral isolation of their position.”(13). From correspondence with the Jesuit Fathers at Vaugirard, which began in 1862, we can conclude with certainty that there was an affiliated group as early as 1860 after the encouragement given by Pope Pius IX, but that it was not definitely organised till 1862. We find the first mention of it in a letter to Father Le Blanc, S.J., dated 1st December. 1862:

My dear Rev. Father, Father Piperon has handed me your letter so full of affection and attachment. Thank you for all the interest you are taking in our work. The Divine Heart will bless you for it. You are probably the instrument He wishes to use in order to consolidate it. Deo Gratias! I have always believed that the good God had merciful designs concerning our small Monastery, and the unexpected suggestions you have now make me sure of it. Our origin had nothing merely human about it, and regarding the success of the mission which you seem to see developing for it, permit me, dear Rev. Father, to speak to you with an open heart and tell you the secret of its foundation. For a long time the thought of spreading devotion to the Sacred Heart preoccupied us. We were desirous that this Heart, the Source of all Graces and so rich in mercy, should have Missionaries. In 1854, nine days before the promulgation of the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception, we turned to Blessed Virgin and asked Her, as one of the first fruits of Her illustrious prerogative, to adorn the Church with a Society of Priests consecrated to the Heart of Her Divine Son. On the 8th December, we miraculously received the assurance that a generous person was putting at our disposal the necessary sum to commence our work. We entrusted the Immaculate Mother of God with the task of obtaining all the necessary approbations from His Eminence, Cardinal du Pont. From then on Hell itself let loose all its violence against the small mustard seed. Humanly speaking, it should have been uprooted a hundred times by the savage storms that lashed it on all sides. But no! Planted and nurtured by the Heart of Jesus Himself, it withstood the rage of the tempest. Two years ago, on the 20th September, I knelt at the feet of the Holy Father and told him of this work for the Sacred Heart, such as God had inspired it. Pius IX, lifted his eyes to Heaven and appeared happy in spite of all his cares. He told me that the Heart of Jesus would be the salvation of the world and the Church, that our Congregation was a pressing need of the times, that he wished all the priests to be associated with it, and that we must do all in our power to propagate it. He then gave the work his blessing, adding that he would be happy to recognise and approve it canonically. Would you be able, dear Rev. Father, to help us by your support to grant to the afflicted heart of our beloved Pontiff this sweet consolation. His Grace, Archbishop de la Tour d’Auvergne of Bourges, is very devoted to our work, and has placed us in charge of the parish of Issoudun. The parish priest is and always will be a member of our Society. The house which we occupy is well set up and in excellent condition. Our establishment, being in a railway town and in the heart of France, offers great possibilities. Now, dear Father, regarding the priests who have become associated with us, we are very glad to be united with them as their thoughts and desires conform to our own. I see in this union, as you do yourself, the designs of Divine Providence. Several priests from the diocese of Lyons, having heard of our work for the Sacred Heart, now wish to join us. Three of them have come to see us and at the present moment are seeking the permission of their Archbishop. I see in all these events which are taking shape the stones placed in position by the Divine Architect in the new edifice of the Sacred Heart. Let us hope that soon we will all form, as it were, one monument. If you wish, I will send you a copy of our Rules which at present are only in a provisional state. You can tell me, for the good of our work, what you think of them. Once again, dear Father, accept my sincere thanks and the expression of my profound respect. In the Hearts of Jesus and Mary, JULES CHEVALIER, Apostolic Missionary of the Sacred Heart.

The letter allows us to reconstruct the first stages. Father Piperon has been in touch with Father Le Blanc, S. J.. As Paris is not listed as one of the places where he made his appeal, he probably met the Jesuit on one of his visits to Father Boiteux, the designer of the picture of the Sacred Heart. In a letter written on 26th December, 1862, by Father Piperon, he tells Father Le Blanc what has taken place at Issoudun. The Jesuit has spoken of the work to other priests who have shown great interest, being animated by the same ideals. As these priests have suggested an affiliation with the work, Father Le Blanc wrote to inform Father Piperon of the fact, and Father Chevalier was keen on the suggestion. The priests referred to in the letter are probably those stationed in Paris and its environs, as in a letter of 3rd November, 1863, Father Chevalier mentions “the Priests of Paris and elsewhere of whom you have spoken, and who cherish the same ideals as our own.” But the important thing is to find out what the Founder and the priest-associates had in mind concerning the nature of the union. Did these priests wish to join the Issoudun community or merely to form an affiliated Association of secular priests? Was there any idea of forming a new institute or a Federation? Father Chevalier had mentioned that he regarded the various offers to join the Association as “stones in the new edifice of the Sacred Heart,” but we seem to hear echoes of this from other sources as well. The Founder regarded the movement as a means of consolidating the work at Issoudun and sought approbation of it from the Holy See as an association of the Society. That he meant Issoudun to be the centre of movement is apparent from his letter to Father Le Blanc, in which he referred to the origin of the Society, the suitability of the Monastery headquarters, the advantage of the central position of the town, etc. The fact that the Holy Father had given his blessing to the work and that the Archbishop had entrusted the parish to the care of the Missionaries enabled the Founder to proceed with confidence.

PART II: CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE JESUITS

We learn from a letter of 26th December, 1862, that Father Chevalier had made a trip to Vaugiraud to discuss the whole natter with the Jesuit Fathers, especially Father Le Blanc, S.J. He probably went more than once, as he mentions in the letter a season travelling ticket, which the Fathers had given him and which he was now returning. The Jesuits themselves wished to help Father Chevalier in his work with the secular priests, but at this stage seem a little afraid of premature publicity. A correspondence between Father Le Blanc and his Provincial, Father Fessard, is interesting, and throws some light on the nature of the association. In a letter to his Superior, Father Le Blanc poses the question: “Tell me if I have understood correctly your intentions on the subject of these unions and associations of priests.” In his reply Father Fessard gives his approval for the movement while advising prudence and discretion. He tells Father Le Blanc to advise Father de Ponlevoy that he wishes him to take charge of such a congregation, to draw up an instruction for these small congregations of priests similar to that of Father Boyer including the additions drawn from Father de Clarivere. He suggests that it would be a good idea to establish at the house on the Rue de Sevres a monthly day of retreat for priests who wish to make it. This would explain to interested observers Jesuit connections with several secular priests. What interests us mainly is that Father Le Blanc sought permission of his Provincial to send Father Chevalier any pertinent matter on the subject, including the Constitutions of the Society of Jesus, the ordinances of Superiors General, etc., and likewise asked permission to examine and modify the Rules submitted by the Missionaries of Issoudun. The main object was to clarify rules – firstly those relating to the Community, secondly those for priests who took vows but remained in their presbyteries, and thirdly for the associate priests who did not take any vows. The priests with vows, although still living in their own presbyteries, formed a group distinct from those without vows and were considered as “agreges” (associates). In the light of future difficulties it is important to remember that the vows were the important factors. The work, which formed the main book of reference on the subject, was the “Specimen” composed by Father Picot de Clorivere in 1790. Father Chevalier wrote on 8th January, 1863: “The more we study this work of the Sacred Heart as treated in the precious documents of Father de Clorivere, the more we realise how opportune it is at the present moment. It is a veritable need of our century. It is able to do an immense amount of good amongst the clergy and in the church.” In the general archives of the Society we have found a copy of this an entitled “Abridged Plan of the Society of the Heart of Jesus,” with the underlined text from St. John (17/15) “I do not ask that you take them out the world, but that you preserve them from evil.” It in a literal transcription of the original with a few inserted modifications, e.g., the duration of the vows, the choice of Superiors, the reception of members from other dioceses, etc. These modifications were necessary to conform to the mind of Pope Pius Vll who gave verbal approbation to the movement on 19th January, 1801. The “Specimen” played an important part in the new project. Its rules seem to have been the guiding factors to the priests of Paris who wished to join the Association. According to the introduction to the book, the plan of Father de Clorivere was to form a religious Society to cope with the calamitous circumstances of the post -Revolution period. Now that the ancient Orders, which in olden tines awakened and nourished the piety of the people, were violently attacked by the godless spirit of the age, it was necessary to found such a “valuable and useful organisation, even without the knowledge of the people and against their wishes. “It is desirable to establish amongst ourselves a Society which has as its end the Glory of God and the Good of Religion, whose members, united in Jesus Christ by a common spiritual bond, but having no uniform habit, no common monasteries or churches, no earthly goods or riches, will go forth amongst the people, independently of each other, as did the first preachers of the Gospel, and as do the missionaries of today amongst the infidels.(14) Father T’errien, S.J., refers to this as “the fundamental idea, the specific and distinctive character of the Institute revealed to Father de Clorivere – an idea which would preserve and perpetuate the practice of the Evangelical Counsels amongst the people, even unbeknown to themselves.” “To this end,” Father Terrien tells us, “one of the experiments was to apply to the Holy See for permission to re-establish the Society of Jesus, giving it a new form appropriate to the conditions of the age.” Father de Clorivere further expands: “An institute under another form, under another with a different rule, but having the same spirit and working for the same end.”(15) ”The establishment of the new Society and the reestablishment of the old are not incompatible. The two are able to help one another mutually, while keeping their separate forms and spirit.” (l6) We find the reflection of these ideas in the correspondence that took place between Vaugirard and Issoudun. The Specimen had stated that the members of the new Institute would recognise St. Ignatius of Loyola as Father and Founder, seeing that it came into being through the Society he had founded. Its members would follow, even if from afar, the maxims and spirit of his Society if the Institute was approved by the Supreme Pontiff. If they were not able to be honoured by the same name as the first Society of Jesus, they could call themselves “The Society of the Heart of Jesus.”(17). Referring to his own Association of Secular Priests, Father Chevalier wrote to the Jesuits on 28th December, 1862: “This Society, a daughter of your own, would be its reflection, its expansion. It would regard the great St. Ignatius as its own Founder, would be united with yours by the most intimate and sacred bonds, its glory and strength being to enrich itself with your light and experience. This Society of the Heart of Jesus, sustained by yours and depending on it, embracing all ranks of the clergy throughout the countryside, will resist the powers of Hell and render great service to the Church and to our own Congregation. Its motto will be: “Ad Majorem Dei et Sacratissimi Cordis Jesu gloriam.” Ten days later on the 8th January, he wrote in the name of Archbishop de la Tour d’Auvergne: “His Grace is relying on you to a large extent to help in the formation of this work. After what I told him, he thinks, as we do, that it should draw its pith and life from your Constitutions and organisation, imbibe your spirit and benefit from the sacred bonds which ought to unite us – in a word, that the Society should be a daughter of your own. It will be an expansion of the work of the Society of Jesus, which Blessed Margaret Mary said would spread by its ministry the Devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.” We note in this letter that Father Chevalier is using the expression, “this new Society,” and that he is stressing the fact that it will be a means of spreading Devotion to the Sacred Heart.

Father de Clorivere had stated in the Specimen: “There is a marked difference between those who live apart from the world and those who remain out in the world, be they clerics or lay-people.”(18) This explains why Father le Blanc was anxious that special rules be drawn up for those in community life, and for the priests who took vows but remained in their presbyteries, and who, according to Father de Clorivere, are members of the Institute, because of these vows.” In reference to Issoudun and the diocese of Bourges let us stress again some points from the Specimen. The word “residences,” for example, is not used, but “colleges,” meaning particular areas or groups.(19) The members remain attached to their dioceses, and are allowed to leave only with the consent of their bishops.(20) We see in this a prelude to the modern secular institutes.(2l) Regarding the vows, which were the main topic of discussion in the correspondence between Issoudun and Vaugirard, the Specimen states: “For many grave reasons we are convinced that it is advisable that those who wish to consecrate themselves to God in this Society should bind themselves by the three essential vows of Religion. It is the only means of making the Society a Religious Body, and thus repairing, in some small measure, the great loss the Catholic Church has sustained in the suppression of so many of her Religious Orders. If the Professed members are priests, and if, in the judgment of their Superiors , they are distinguished by their learning and virtue they may add a fourth vow to the other three, by which they will bind themselves more directly to the Holy See, and promise to go anywhere the Supreme Pontiff may send them at a moment’s notice. The Superiors can be selected only from amongst the professed priest members. Those who, after two years’ probation, do not wish to take the vows through fear or any other motive, may still remain attached to the Society as helpers. They will be considered as “auxiliary members” of the Society, provided they have the firm resolution of remaining permanently with it, and are acceptable to the Superiors.”(22) Father Chevalier clearly stated that, as far as he and the Archbishop were concerned, the new Society should be directly associated with the Society of Jesuit priests. “It should be a daughter of your own. It will draw its life from your Constitutions.” On the 26th December he wrote: “It is necessary to keep in mind that these Constitutions are those of a true Religious Order approved by the Holy See. While awaiting this approbation, which apparently will be readily given, it will be immediately under the jurisdiction of the Bishops. With it, as with yourselves, it will be necessary, in the interests of the Institute, to have a central house to be, as it were, the soul of this large body, the hearth from which life and warmth will radiate to its members, a home ever open to the dispersed children, whether they live in community or not, whether they have vows or have simply made promises. There the Religious life may be openly lived, if the laws of the State permit it. If the storm of persecution breaks out afresh, the life may be lived in spirit and in silence, and those priests who live separately out in the world can hide their affiliation if it is to the greater good of the Church. The countryside is blessed with all types of ministry are able to procure the glory of God and the Sacred Heart and to effect the salvation of souls. His Grace, the Archbishop, is wholeheartedly behind this work which, in view of the present state of affairs, is just as urgent as in the time of Father de Clorivere. He believes that the time is opportune to begin the work, and is anxious that we do so immediately while the conditions are favourable. His Grace is sure that the Holy Father will view this new Society with a lively satisfaction, seeing that it meets the needs of our time. Several priests from the Berry province and elsewhere are anxiously waiting to join us. My confreres at Issoudun were delighted with what I told them of my visit to Paris. They have read with much interest the plan of Father de Clorivere.” On 8th January followed the communication: “His Grace wishes that we be definitely organised, and that all the rules will be drawn up before the date of the Beatification of Blessed Margaret Mary who, like himself I am sure, will wish to see the work begun. He has told me that this happy occasion would be an admirable time to have the Society recognised and approved by Holy Father.” One last question Father Chevalier put to Father le Blanc in the letter of 26th December: “Would you, as Father de Clorivere did in his time, think it advisable to extend the benefits of this Society to lay people living in the world, who desire and would be able to take part in it while still remaining in their own particular sphere where Providence has placed them? I myself think it would be a great advantage. It would complement our work. I know several people who would be very happy to join the Company.” These first stages show that the work was fundamentally based on the plan of Father de Clorivere but with certain adjustments to meet the exigencies of Issoudun. The religious character, first of all, was maintained, as the Specimen required, by the taking of the vows. A central house and branch communities were deemed necessary. A general organisation including lay-people was desirable, and the Institute would not be limited to any particular area, embracing the clergy of all ranks, no matter where they might be. The same day that Father Chevalier sent his second letter, 8th January, he received a reply from Father Le Blanc to his first of 26th December. After telling Father Chevalier that he had not as yet found time to distribute the pictures he had sent him, and doubting if the appeal would successful in Paris, he came to the subject of the letter: “We have been busy on the matter, but it will take some time to finalise things. I have shown your plan to one of our priests, who has been in charge of that type of work, and we intend to discuss it further at length. I will keep you posted of our decisions, and you may deem it advisable to come to Vaugirard, where you know you are always welcome. We would like to see Father Maugenest also. We have the greatest respect for the wishes of the Archbishop of Bourges, and we agree with him that we should take advantage of the present favourable circumstances. Yes, we think the Society should include lay-people but naturally here we must act with care and prudence. Except for those who merit this favour by their proved virtue, it would be better to wait till the Society of priests is properly organised before admitting the laity. This, of course, does not apply, to lay-brothers. After much experience we realise that discretion is the key-note to success, and we will be pleased to inform you on the details of this experience. The most urgent need at present is to draw up a plan which may be presented to Rome for approbation. We will follow, as closely as possible, the ideas of Father de Clorivere. All that I have read in the works and correspondence of this religious reveal him as a true man of God, full of wisdom and ripe experience. Our Father Provincial has carefully noted all you have written, and is very interested in your work. Our Company, as you know, does not have a Third Order. Thus we would not be able to form with yours any ties involving direction. However, we are willing to maintain useful contact with it – “ad majorem Dei et Sacratissimi Cordis Jesu Gloriam.” Here then, dear and respected Father, is the work we propose to you. You will be able to judge in all simplicity if it is acceptable to you, and your worthy Archbishop will tell you what he thinks of it. I suggest that the Latin translation of your motto be worded: “Ametur ubique terrarum Cor Jesu Sacratissimum!” Father Rector and Father Bienville wish to be remembered to you.” The Father Bienville mentioned here is probably the priest who, at the direction of the Provincial, drew up the project for Father Chevalier. We have ‘a letter written to Father Chevalier by a Jesuit priest dated 10th January, 1863. The signature has faded except for the letter “s” before the name and “S.J,” after it. The address has also faded and only the date is legible at the top. From the postscript it is clear that the author is not Father Le Blanc, as it reads: “I have shown your letter to Father Le Blanc and hope he sends you the documents you request.” The letter indicates that the writer has been in contact with Issoudun and has been consulted on the subject of the Association. He urges all possible speed in commencing the foundation, but stresses the fact that it must be based on a solid plan, with a clear idea of the end and the general means involved. He does not always agree with the wishes of Father Chevalier, whose reaction we will see later on. The most important part of the letter is as follows: “The end of the Society can be found in the words of Our Lord to His faithful servant, Blessed Margaret Mary: “Quicumque meum Cor coluerit et late colendum procuraverit.. . . .,” where He promises to priests the grace to touch even the most hardened hearts. In general the end of your Society is the same as any other, namely the Glory of God, but in particular it is the Glory of God procured by the conversion of sinners even the most hardened. The principal means of achieving this is by Devotion to the Sacred Heart and the spreading of the devotion as far as possible. All your activity should be directed to this end. These are my views. It is for you to judge if they are helpful. Having established the definite end of the Society, what are its works? The general answer is obvious: Any work that has as its object the conversion of sinners, but in particular the conducting of missions, not on the home-front but amongst the infidels and the heretics; the apostolate of preaching, especially with special sermons during Advent, Lent, the month of Our Lady, etc., special lectures to workers; retreats to Religious engaged in charitable works, direction of students in the Seminaries, etc. What now of the Constitution of the Society and its Association? We must keep in mind the two essential points: (1) That the Society must form one solid body, constituted on definite rules and centrally organised. (2) That it be not restricted to just the Issoudun area, but extend as far as possible. In effect, the Society will be composed of two classes of Religious: those living in community and those remaining at their posts out in the world. The first will be the professed, both priests and Brothers, who are considered as the “corps d’ elite” or the main section of the Society. The second are the priests or lay-folk living in the world but who have taken the vows of religion – called the Associates. The “agreges” or the affiliated helpers are priests or lay people remaining in the world, who do not take any vows but merely make a promise. The distinction then is fundamentally based on the vows. The Associates are considered as Religious and are obliged by the Constitutions and Rules, saving the right of their bishops over them. However, since they are living in the world, they will have greater freedom in the matter of poverty. Since the vows are, as it were, the touchstone, all those in affiliation with the Society before the first vows are considered as “agreges.” In the Community there will be no distinction regarding rank amongst the different grades. No particular place is reserved in the chapel, the refectory or other places where the Community meets, except for the Superior. However, for the sake of order, the priests will be in one section, the non-priests next to them, then the novices and lay Brothers. In the Novitiate the priest-novices take precedence over the others. The professed members living in Community must regard themselves as exclusively dedicated to the Society, consecrated by their vows to a life of poverty and obedience, wholly occupied in the works of the Congregation. They alone have the “active and passive” voice in the government of the Society and it is only from their ranks that the Superior General and his assistants and the Superiors of provinces may be chosen. The associates may hold any other positions. The agreges will be the pious helpers, priests or lay-people who will work for the same end as yourselves, be advised by your counsels and participate in all the graces, prayers and privileges of the Society – forming, as it were, a Third Order. For admission to the Society, those who wish to join the Community and take vows, besides possessing good health in body and mind, must be persons of good character and reputation. They will spend at least fifteen days as postulants, and during that time make a retreat, examine the Constitutions, and make a thorough examination of their state of soul. Regarding the associates, they should spend at least one year on probation and reside for at least ten days in one of the Communities of the Society during which they will make a retreat of eight full days before pronouncing their first vows. If it is more convenient, they will be permitted to make this retreat in one of the Jesuit communities and take their vows there. Each year the professed will make a retreat and the associates who are about to take their final vows will make a retreat of fifteen days, or even thirty days where possible. If, in particular cases, they cannot make the fifteen days then at least eight days is necessary. The agreges or aspirants who wish to become associates may make the long retreat in the Novitiate if they so desire. After being accepted, when the time of probation is over, the novice may take simple vows, but should wait eight years before taking final vows in the case of associates, and ten years in the case of the first-class members. Members may pass from one class to the other, and the Society has the right and duty to transfer to the association those who are not fitted for life in the community. By this means the interests of both the members and the Society are safeguarded. The Novitiate is of two years’ duration, but may be repeated for another two years. In the interim between the taking of simple and final vows, those who are priests may be employed in the ordinary works of the Society, and those not in sacred Orders will occupy themselves in the study of philosophy and theology. They may be employed as professors or supervisors in the Junior Seminary. A second Novitiate of at least three months is advised for all priests before taking their final vows. A Superior General will be elected from amongst the finally professed. As the Society grows it will be divided into Provinces with a certain number of houses, as necessity demands. Besides the Novitiate there will be a house of studies and a mission house for diocesan missionaries. The Superiors will be named by the Superior General or the Provincial with his consent. Those in charge of parishes will be named by the bishop, but the Society may elect a Superior of the Community in which the parish-priest lives. Finally, besides the Constitutions it will be necessary to draw up statutes for the various classes, rules for the community, rules for the priests, students, preachers and those for priests living outside the community. The letter concludes; “Our Father Provincial has instructed one of our priests to draw up a list of Constitutions which may help you. I will endeavour to see him soon and compare notes with him. I have written, somewhat at length, the above suggestions as I promised you. No doubt, you will see fit to alter them here and there. I would do so myself when putting them in final definite form. At least you have my general ideas on the subject, and I hope they may be useful to you later on.” We have quoted almost entirely the contents of the above letter, not only because of the immediate influence it had on Father Chevalier although there were many suggestions with which he did not agree – but because later on he used it to answer objections by various members on certain rules and aspects. In a letter dated 12th January, Father Le Blanc, after stating that he was enclosing 100 francs for the pictures of the Sacred Heart, gives his own opinion on various aspects of the proposed Rule. He makes the following points: “I think it will be better for you to adopt the Rules of the Society founded by Rev. Father de Clorivere, and to modify some of your own. The venerable Father insisted on a morning meditation of at least one hour.” The Abrege of the Rules submitted by Father Chevalier had stated: “The members will go to the Chapel at a quarter past five and will say their prayers in common and make their meditation till 6 o’clock.” “Whereas your rules say that the members shall make an annual retreat of several days,’ Father de Clorivere made it more definite for his Company of Jesus by stipulating a retreat of eight or ten days. A Novitiate of two years was required, and after one year the novices could, with permission, take the religious vows of devotion.” “Father de Clorivere required that the members of his Company take annual vows till they reach the age of thirty, and after that perpetual-vows, provided they had been members for at least five years.” “We presume the Holy See will permit the taking of perpetual vows even though Pope Pius Vll seemed unwilling in 1801 to grant such permission. If permission for perpetual vows is not granted, then we can ask that they be taken for five year periods. It is also advisable to take the extra vow of stability.”

In Father Chevalier’s Abrege the period of the Novitiate was “one entire year,” and the vows were to be taken for one year, then five years, followed by perpetual vows. Final vows could be taken only after a sojourn of seven years in the Community. Father Le Blanc continues: “It is very desirable to have as many lay-Brothers as possible. Also virtuous lay people living in the world may be affiliated, and even take vows under certain conditions. The administration of the Society will be carried out by the priests only.” This last group is not mentioned in Father Chevalier’s Abrege. Regarding affiliated priests without vows, Father de Clorivere had admitted them also, while stressing the need for care and prudence in the matter. The letter concludes: “We are going to add some supplements to the Latin text of the Specimen so wisely composed by Father de Clorivere. This will take some time, but I shall forward it to you on its completion. It seems to me that it should prove the basis of your Constitutions – all the more since it has the sanction of experience. We must say there are certain differences of opinion in the letter written by the unknown author, probably Father Bienville, and that of Father Le Blanc. The matter becomes even more complicated when Father Le Blanc writes another letter on January 22nd, changing his own opinion on certain natters, especially on the point of admission of the secular clergy. He now thinks that the organisation of secular priests and laypeople should be postponed to a future date. “You yourselves,” he writes, “are not yet sufficiently organised to worry about outsiders.” For the present you should not engage yourself with lay-people – even the very good ones – except to keep spiritual contact with them so that later on they may become true members of your Society. Father de Clorivere did admit them “positis ponendis.” He also changed his mind about taking the vow of stability. He now regards it as superfluous for those with perpetual vows, but mentions that in the Company of Jesus the scholastics, who have not yet taken definite vows, are advised to take this vow of stability. It is obvious that this letter is a reply to one from Issoudun which, unfortunately, has been lost. Father Le Blanc expresses the need for drawing up complete and definite constitutions. We are suggesting (when I say “we” I refer to Father Provincial, Father Bertrand, a former Superior our missions in Madura with whom I have had frequent conferences, and, finally, myself) that you draw up a summary (a kind of formula) which can be presented to the Holy Father for approval as was done with our own Company of Jesus. Little by little the Constitutions take definite form, and after trial and experience are formulated by a General Chapter. We ourselves are busy drawing up such a plan, which may help you. You can examine it carefully and change it where you think necessary. You can submit it to Grace the Archbishop and discuss it with him. You are fortunate in having a bishop who takes such a keen interest in your newly-founded Society. We are anxious to help you and, if you think it would be an advantage, one of our Fathers could go and spend several days with you at Issoudun in order to explain more fully to the Fathers the various aspects of the plan.” Father Le Blanc promised to send within a week a copy of the Jesuit Constitutions and the “Thesaurus Societatis Jesu;” he mentions that Father de Clorivere had written much about the Society he had founded and those he had directed. “However, I do not say that you must follow him in all matters, as the Spirit of God works differently in different cases, and you must follow your own way. The Venerable Father, nevertheless, understood religious life very well, even for people living in this age.” These last words would seem to indicate that the Fathers of Vaugirard realised that Father Chevalier was not going to follow all the directions they gave him, and that he had ideas of his own – a fact which caused some voices to be raised to doubt the practicality of the correspondence and the consultation. Father Chevalier, for example, stressed the fact that the emphasis must be placed on devotion to the Sacred Heart, to which Father Le Blanc replied: “Yes, by all means, keep your desire to honour the Sacred Heart and to make reparation to It. On the First Fridays the act of reparation could be publicly read at Benediction and even a procession of the Blessed Sacrament held inside the church. On the Feast of the Sacred Heart a solemn procession could be held in the precincts of the church, and the various communities. That has been the custom in our Colleges since 1828. Permission from the bishop is necessary.” Father Le Blanc then goes on to speak of a number of secular priests from Orleans who wish to become affiliated members of the Society – a subject with which we will deal more fully in the next chapter. “I know,” he wrote, “that there has been a meeting of these priests in Paris, and, if it is convenient, you could send me a copy of the minutes. My own opinion is that it would be better not to admit them all in a body, but advise each one to weigh up before God the pros and cons of the project, and to keep them informed of what you are doing. While you are in the process of organising the nucleus of your Congregation it would be better not to have the care of outsiders on your hands. The chief concern at present is to organise the priests with vows, who live in community or in their presbyteries. We must not be unaware of the danger that some priests who may be called by God to take vows, may content themselves with merely retraining amongst the affiliated members. On the other hand, if you should find some priests who would be better suited in the lower category, you could advise them what is best for the good of their souls. I therefore suggest that you do not hasten arrangements. The association with the Orleans clergy had its own and special bearing on the early history of the Society. The correspondence between the Founder and the Jesuits from this point onwards makes frequent reference to it, as it was this organisation which had such a marked bearing on the association of secular priests with the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. Father Chevalier’s letter of January 28th expresses agreement with several of the points raised by Father Le Blanc, e.g., the necessity of not hastening the project especially in organising the lay associates. “We submit entirely to your advice and your experience,” he wrote. “You understand our work very well – the needs of the time and the desires of the Heart of Jesus.” He goes on to say that he will not hasten the union with Orleans, but that he is going to meet these Reverend gentlemen on the following Tuesday. He will send Father Le Blanc a report of the previous meeting held with them in Paris, but we will not quote it here, as it is rather long, and several of the subjects treated are of little importance. He agrees that the vow of stability is superfluous for those who have made perpetual profession, but suggests that it be replaced by a vow of readiness to put oneself at the service of the Holy Father. Emphasising the fact that the important thing for the future of the Society is the organisation of priests with vows, and to have a definite plan for the Society, he remarks: “Our work for the Sacred Heart owes much to you, my dear Father. Our Society will indeed be a child of your own. How wonderful are the ways of God’.” The letter concludes with some news. “On the coming Feast of the Blessed Trinity we are expecting two or three more priests to join up here at Issoudun. When they do so I will ask your Father Provincial to supply a preacher for the retreat. In the meantime you might join us in making a Novena to start on January 29th for the success of our work. All the Convents of the Visitation have promised to unite with us.” Issoudun then was quite prepared to follow the advice from Vaugirard. On one point, however, Father Founder considered it his duty to throw greater emphasis. It was the fourth point of the letter to which Father Le Blanc made only brief reference – namely the Spreading of the Devotion to the Sacred Heart, and the necessity of making Reparation to that same Sacred Heart. “One of the ends of our Society,” he wrote, “is to spread Devotion to the Sacred Heart and to make Reparation to the Divine Heart. With this end we have in our chapel every first Friday of each month special devotions which the faithful attend. These spiritual exercises are most edifying, we endeavour to make the pious souls who attend Adorers and Victims of the Sacred Heart. Reparation through the Heart of Jesus is also one of the needs of our century, as so many sins and outrages are committed against Heart of God. To do so, moreover, is to respond to the desire of the Heart of Jesus Himself.” It would seem that Father Chevalier made the journey to Orleans on the 27th January, 1863, as a result of which, another plan was discussed and negotiations began with Vaugirard. However, before speaking of this, let us look at the “Plan for the Society of Missionaries of the

Sacred Heart” presented to Father Chevalier by the Jesuits in April of the same year. The Plan reads: (1) End of the Society. The Missionaries of the Sacred Heart Jesus desire to form a Society which will help them to devote themselves more efficaciously to the greater glory of God, their own sanctification, the salvation of souls and the good of the Church. (2) Added to this general end, which is common to all Religious Orders, is the special end of working with all the powers their minds and bodies to attain evangelical perfection themselves, and to cause it to flourish in others, even outside the cloister, and especially among the secular clergy. The name which they have the honour of bearing will remind them that they have engaged themselves to honour the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary and to propagate these precious devotions everywhere in order to spread amongst men the graces of which they are the source. The Missionaries of the Sacred Heart will regard themselves as specially dedicated to the Church of Rome, the Mother of all Churches. The word and decisions of the Holy Father will always be sacred for them. (3) The Matter and Form of the Society: The Society, similar to other Religious Congregations in things pertaining to the interior life, differs from them, however, in the exterior life in so far as its members have nothing to distinguish them from other secular priests in the matter of dress or mode of dwelling, although they are exhorted, where possible, to live together. They will have the same general rule as regards domestic upkeep and food, the distribution of time and work, each remaining subject to the authority of the Ordinary, and doing the work assigned to by his religious Superiors. (4) Bonds of the Society. The Vows. Being deprived to a large extent of the exterior means of unity and common life which other Religious Orders enjoy, the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart will realise the necessity of cultivating every interior and spiritual means for their sanctification. They will ardently embrace the three vows of religion, firstly, “because they are the most powerful bond of union with Jesus Christ. Secondly, because they are the essential conditions of any religious body. Thirdly, they are the most efficacious means of striving for perfection and achieving the end of the Society, as they are likewise its protection against the inconstancy and weakness of human nature. Fourthly, the vows offer us the way of life lived by Jesus Himself and the opportunity of living like the Apostles who abandoned all to follow their Master, fifthly, they provide us with the necessary weapons to combat the spirit of the world, and offer a safe rampart against the attacks and seductions of an environment in which priests are forced to live. (5) While embracing the vows as its constitutive principle, the Society is not able to give to these vows the same extension nor exterior practice as that given by other Religious Orders, particularly in regard to the vows of Poverty and Obedience. It is evident that man obliged to live a separate life out in the world, and who have to look after their own livelihood are not able to practise Poverty as strictly as those living in community. The same with Obedience. Those living out in parishes, who have not ready access to their Superiors, and whose position often calls for immediate decisions, would not be expected to practise Obedience in the same manner as those living in community life. However, it goes without saying that the religious, while accommodating himself to the particular circumstances, must always observe the essentials of the vows. There then follows an exposition of the practice of the three vows. On the subject of this part of the plan Father Chevalier replies to the author (who is not Father Le Blanc) on the 20th April: “I have received your plan of Association. We studied it with great interest. Thank you very much indeed. It expresses perfectly the end we have in mind. You have pointed out a clear way of reconciling the practice of the vows of poverty and obedience with the various duties of the subjects. It is a formidable problem that you smoothed out.” However, Father Chevalier was not in complete accord with the last part of the Plan which dealt with the Organisation and Government of the Society. Here is the text of the passage: “All members in a Province or a diocese will be governed by a Superior General elected by a General Chapter with an absolute majority of votes. This latter will be aided by four Assistants likewise elected by the General Chapter. The members who are in a town or canton will be subject to the local Superior who will be nominated by the Superior General and his consultors. In each Province a Novice Master will be appointed, and in each town or district where there are members a Confessor will be appointed by the local Superior. If new houses are established in other dioceses where there are sufficient members and associates a new province should be created. While being united in the closest bonds of charity, new provinces, at least in the beginning, should remain independant in administration. It is better in these matters to leave the future in the hands of God and to trust in His Providence. If later on the work is to develop more extensively there will be time then to deal with the eventualities as they take place. God’s works are not organised a priori but develop gradually and imperceptibly. Trying to hurry them would present the danger of substituting our own ideas for those of Divine Wisdom. When God’s Will become sufficiently manifest, we can go ahead, aided by experience and the disposition of things, to examine with more assurance what is the best method of organisation. The monastic institutions approved by the Church are many and various, but from the point of view with which we are concerned here they can be divided into two general classes. The ancient orders such as those of St. Benedict and St. Augustine are not so centralised in administration, leaving to the various provinces and houses a greater deal of liberty, spontaneity and autonomy, whereas the more recent Societies, such as that of St. Ignatius, are more centrally organized at the cost of a certain amount of particular liberty. Both forms have their advantages and drawbacks. It is the law of things human. The best form for any particular religious Society is that which best conforms to its nature and helps it to achieve the end for which it was instituted. Following this rule, we consider that the Society of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart is composed of members who are not able, on account of their diocesan ties, to devote themselves exclusively to the regular life, and since their principal object is to exercise a salutary influence on the secular clergy, they conform by their nature more to the first class mentioned above than to the second, and this for reasons obvious in themselves.

PART III: DIFFERENCE OF OPINION BETWEEN FATHER FOUNDER AND VAUGIRARD

But it was with this idea that Father Founder did not agree. This plan would seem to contradict and destroy his fundamental idea of founding a religious society with all the true characteristics of religious life and organised in such a way that it would help Associate-secular priests who wished to be Apostles of the Sacred Heart, as the members themselves, and to participate as much as possible in the living of the religious life. The plan was based on a misunderstanding of what was the intention and mission of Father Chevalier. The author evidently thought the Founder’s wish was to found only a Congregation of secular priests who would take vows and work indirectly in the cause of the Sacred Heart through their sacred ministry. Father Le Blanc had understood Father Founder’s mind and intentions better as we find amongst his notes the following extract: “In a general plan we should strive, according to good sense, to level out the path, and solve the difficulties concerning principles. The rules, the details, should he left to the wisdom of the Founders, acting under the watchful eye of God. The foundation of a new Order presupposes the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and the special inspiration of Almighty God. Who have a right to expect this assistance if not Founders of religious Orders?”(23) Father Chevalier, consequently, felt himself bound to express his disagreement with this latter part of the Plan submitted to him by the Fathers of Vaugirard. He wrote in the letter, part of which we have already quoted: “You will permit me, dear Rev. Father, to speak with simplicity. We were hoping that the plan would be more embracing, or rather we were wanting more than just a plan. I have made known to our worthy friend, Father Le Blanc, what was in our mind, and was hoping he would have communicated it to you.” We are agreed that the new Society ought to have: (l) The same interior organisation as that of St. Ignatius with the same Constitutions. We were hoping you would give us, with this end in view, positive and detailed rules: (a) for the general constitutional administration of the Society (b) for those members living in community, for we realise the urgent necessity of them. (c) for those remaining out in the world. (d) for affiliated members without vows, i.e., for a Third Order. (2) Definite terms regarding the conditions of entry, the nature and duration of the Novitiate, the different kinds of vows -perpetual, temporary, vow of stability. (3) The Society, at some time in the near or distant future, must be submitted for approbation to Rome and the Holy Father. The Constitutions must be drawn up with this end in view. (4) There must be unity of outlook, of interests and of administration. A Mother House is necessary on which the others will depend whilst allowing a certain amount of latitude and respecting the rights of their Lordships, the Bishops, over their subjects. This is the way that His Grace of Bourges and my confreres interpret the new Society. The various small diocesan associations form, as it were, a confederation but at present the members who belong to them feel they are not sufficiently united by solid bonds. Although they are all working for the same end, carry the same name and are united by close bonds of charity, each group is autonomous and lives its own particular life. We feel there is an imperative need for one united body – for one united society, in order that the work prove solid and lasting. To delay achieving this would be to expose the work to extinction. Each group would have its own particular spirit, its own preconceived ideas, its prejudices and its internal divisions. Admittedly, to seek to unite these units into one body will present great difficulties, but if these obstacles are not surmounted, they will remain purely diocesan associations, and experience proves that as such they would have no future. Sooner or later they disappear on account of internal strife more or less scandalous. Moreover, if they remain purely diocesan associations they naturally remain completely in the hands of diocesan authority which becomes the soul and pivot of the organisation. Whilst one bishop may be favourably inclined and have a good understanding of such religious institutions, another may not be so favourable and may be even hostile. One bishop who is friendly may be succeeded by another not so friendly who might seek to change, modify or abolish the Constitutions. You can surely see a grave danger in such possibilities. On the contrary, if the Association is established on a solid basis, on approved constitutions, and becomes a general and uniform organisation, we build, as it were, while safeguarding the rights of the Ordinaries, a central health from which will radiate life and warmth to the members. Such a unity of action will have great advantages. After the approval of the Holy See the rules will be fixed and permanent, and there will be nothing to fear from the intervention or caprices of human beings. While building a rampart for the society in the various dioceses, it does not mean that the rule in particular cases could not be adjusted to local customs and the needs of the locality.” “I see an essential difference between the independent monastic houses, of which you speak, and the diocesan associations. The first have a common rule approved by Rome which no one can change. They have a cloister which protects them from worldly dangers, and a safeguard of common life for all the members. They are not directly subject to episcopal authority. Their occupations are a safeguard against dissipation as their mode of life is more severe and the discipline more stringent. If later on when the work is established, the spirit well formed and the Constitutions observed, there should be need to separate the various diocesan houses, then that can be effected. We think also, my dear Father, that for the good of the work it will be necessary to have independent novitiates, as your Society has. The bishops would be more inclined to permit young men to enter if this is so, especially if we undertake to educate them. These Novitiates themselves could be centres for the priests interested in the work, and a means of gaining more vocations in the various dioceses. The Congregation would then have need of certain common houses, which would belong to itself or to associate members. If you think these observations, which are also those of the Archbishop of Bourges, are worthwhile, I still ask you, my dear Father, to draw up for us a new Plan in detail with specific constitutions. Seeing that the work is important and could be of great value to the Church, could you yourself come and preach the retreat which we hold each year preparatory to the Feast of the Sacred Heart for our good people here in Issoudun? We are well known now in the diocese of Bourges, and His Grace and the clergy are favourably inclined to us and our work. Mgr. de la Tour d’Auvergne has expressed the desire that priests out on the ministry unite with us and has put no obstacle in their way if they wish to do so. His attitude is so favourable to us that he has entrusted the parish, which now comprises 14,000 souls, to our care, and the parish priest is a member of our Society.”

Father Chevalier’s reply to the submitted Plan was evidently not received with enthusiasm at Vaugirard. In reply to a letter which has been lost Father Founder wrote on 9th June, 1863: “My dear Rev. Father, We have only one desire in the matter we have been discussing – to accomplish the Holy and Adorable Will of God. ‘Nisi Dominus aedificaverit domum, in vanum laboraverunt qui aedificant eam.’ To wish to substitute our ideas for those of God would be foolish. May the Heart of Jesus guard us from such a stupidity’. The moment you regard the new plan more suitable to our purpose and more likely to succeed we will willingly adopt it. We are too small, too weak, too ignorant to insist on our own ideas. For us, who in the matter of experience are still children, the surest way is to follow the advice of experienced and virtuous men to whom God has communicated His Wisdom and Designs.” This reply would suggest that the author of the submitted plan had not been altogether enthusiastic at the changes and reservations made by Father Chevalier. Moreover, from further remarks of Father Le Blanc we can gather that there was not complete unanimity on the subject at Vaugirard itself. On 22nd April, Father Le Blanc notes that he must write to Father Chevalier to stress once again the necessity of approbation from Rome, the necessity of central control from a Mother-house on which the others would be dependant, and the necessity of perfect union between the houses. The Jesuits themselves had learnt all this from experience. We have already quoted Father Le Blanc’s conviction that the drawing up of rules for any religious society should be left to its Founder, who is directed by God, and he now goes on to say: “It is true that the Constitutions of the Company of Jesus could form a basis for the new Society, but their complete application is neither wise nor even possible. If a religious constitution is to last it must be perfect and appropriate to the nature and end of the Society for which it is drawn up. It must also take into consideration the position of the personnel it deals with. Our Constitutions in the Company of Jesus presuppose a central administration and the necessary dependence of all members on it, but with this new Association this is impossible. The priests are subject to the bishops and dependant on them for appointment and faculties. This would naturally lead to multiple cross-purposes and interior confusion, which in turn would have its exterior consequences – clash of personalities, distrust, mild persecutions and even scandals – all of which would only be defeating the end for which the Association was founded, namely, the sanctification of the secular clergy by the gentle influence of devotion to the Sacred Heart.”

The same day he wrote the following note; “Observations approved by our Very Rev. Father Provincial: ‘I fear our own Company may be gravely compromised if we busy ourselves further with this new movement. It will probably produce no real or solid good. The Rev. Father recommends that we now disassociate ourselves from the movement. It is necessary either to halt the whole movement, if they are willing (it is already a little late for that!) or to disengage ourselves from it.”’ Looking back, we can see that the exchange of opinions underwent many variations since that day – December 25th – when the Jesuit Provincial, consulted by Father Le Blanc on the subject of examining and modifying the ‘rule of Issoudun,’ had replied: “Examine and modify? Yes, but do not impose. Merely propose.” On the 15th April, Father Le Blanc noted his uneasiness re the development of the affair: “I dread the extension and the consequent publicity arising from the movement. Third Orders are all very well in the large and well-established orders of St. Francis and St. Dominic. Third Orders are satellites of religious bodies. This one is going to take too much building up. We can see the difficulties encountered by Third Orders of religious orders for women. There are Confraternities of the Sacred Heart, a religious Congregation of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, a Congregation of the Sacred Heart of Mary, and one of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary’.” “A religious Congregation of women in the world should be completely independant of that of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, different regarding its position, its nature and even its end.” This then was the beginning of the end of the ‘Vaugirard period. ‘ The correspondence with Father Le Blanc continued till July, 1865, and the good priest followed the progress of the Society with help and interest. We will see that in August, 1863, Rev. Father Bertrand, S.J., defended the idea of again submitting a plan to Issoudun. Perhaps he was the author of the original. We will see that Rev. Father Bienville, S.J., whose name is mentioned often in the correspondence will be sent from Bourges to lend his assistance. Certain friction is to arise between Rev. Father Vandel, M.S.C., the Founder of the “Oeuvre des Campagnes,” and the Jesuits in Paris, which, however, did not affect the friendly relationship between the two Societies, as is proved from the fact that the Jesuits always came to Issoudun to preach on the occasion of the big feasts. Officially, however, there is no further contact with the Jesuits in Paris. The role of adviser was taken over by one of their confreres from Toulouse, Rev. Father H. Ramiere, S.J., whom we shall meet frequently in future pages. Actually, the ideas put forward by Vaugirard were not, in the main, in concord with those of Father Founder. Father Chevalier had founded the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart as a Society of priests who would consecrate themselves entirely to the Sacred Heart. Christ had shown him His Heart, asking him to make It known and loved throughout the world as a means of saving souls. The Apostolate of the Sacred Heart was then the end and object of the foundation. To achieve this he sought the help of the secular clergy, desiring at the same time to offer them a means of sanctification and total dedication most agreeable to the Sacred Heart. He offered them a life of immolation by the taking of vows, which would sustain them in the difficult circumstances in which they lived. Thus was the origin of the Association of Secular priests of the Sacred Heart. In the first analysis of the end of this movement given by Vaugirard the accent was put more on the conversion of sinners than on the positive devotion to the Sacred Heart. We have seen that Father Chevalier disagreed with this. He had no quarrel with the formula of the Plan of 1863 which stated that “the special end is to work with all their efforts to cause evangelical perfection to flourish outside the Cloister, above all amongst the secular clergy.” This was quite in harmony with Devotion to the Sacred Heart, but it was on the point of organisation that the difference of opinion occurred. Vaugirard wanted an organisation whose principal end would be the helping of secular clergy in leading a life of holiness, of perfection. This to Father Chevalier was a secondary end, and it would not suffice to form a Congregation of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart as he envisaged it. While wholly desirous of helping his fellow-priests out in the world, his main object was to found a Society of Missionaries. That is what the Congregation meant for him. If his reply to the author of the plan seems but a refutation of the fact that a less rigid and more supple organisation was needed for the secular clergy, the real difference of opinion lay in the fact that the Society must primarily be a Congregation in honour of the Sacred Heart. Had the Founder not written on the very evening before he received the plan? (9th April); “I beg of you to make the Institute while offering the common life to the clergy, essentially one devoted to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, whose destiny is to propagate that devotion everywhere. This is the important thing. The Sacred Heart of Jesus needs Apostles and Victims.” And referring to the many requests to found a Third Order of lay-people he added: “Does not this general longing of hearts for the Heart of the Master prove that the reign of the Sacred Heart has begun? Fiat! Fiat!” After the difference with Vaugirard we appreciate the fact that the help and advice of Father Ramiere was to be a great consolation to Father Chevalier, as this good priest saw and judged all in the light of Devotion to the Sacred Heart. In this respect he was closer to Father Chevalier than the Fathers of Vaugirard. If Father Chevalier remained resolute in the midst of all his troubles, in the pursuit of the end for which he founded the Society, he remained equally faithful in caring for its other essential needs – the Vows, and the establishment of a community which would be the centre of his Institute. He hoped to establish such a house in each diocese of France. When we hear him speak of a ”New Institute” which ought to be founded we must look elsewhere for his motives. He is willing to accept the exterior organisation of Father de Clorivere in so far as it fits in with the essential conditions of devotion to the Sacred Heart. He told Father le Blanc that he was anxious to get into contact with the Society of Jesus, for, according to Saint Margaret Mary, that Society had been entrusted with the mission of spreading devotion to the Sacred Heart. This new Institute would be the union of the different small groups of priests whose common ideal and object would help to bring the world to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. This aim and spirit of his life-work which he did not quite share in common with the Fathers of Vaugirard he was to share perfectly with Mgr. Lebeurier, the President of the Priests of Orleans. This contact and its consequences will form the matter for our next chapter, even though, chronologically, some of the events may overlap those with which we have just treated.

CHAPTER XIII THE ASSOCIATION OF SECULAR PRIESTS

PART I: Early History of the Association Movement in France. Influence of Father Le Beurier

Sulpician Victor Emmanuel Le Beurier according to the baptismal register was born on the 6th May 1832 at La Grange, a hamlet in the district of Villedieu (Manche) and was baptised the following day.

After preparatory studies in a private school in his home town, he entered the Junior Seminary at Munneville-sur-Mer in the diocese of Coutances in 1843, and at the age of seventeen was admitted to the Major Seminary. In 1846 this Seminary had been entrusted to the care of the Sulpicians by Archbishop Robion. Amongst the new professors was Father Gaduel, later to become Titular Canon of Orleans, and Vicar General to Archbishop Dupanloup. He was destined to play an important part in the movement of the Association. Father Gaduel, a native of Marseilles had been greatly influenced in his early life by L’Abbe Jean Joseph Allemand founder of many of the benevolent societies there. Through him he had become acquainted with an Association of the Sacred Heart to which the Abbe Allemand attributed his vocation.(1) From then on Father Gaduel had a twofold ambition: To make known in the ministry the methods which had succeeded so well with the youth in Marseilles, and to popularise the idea of associations amongst the secular clergy. His ideas on this subject were a result of his interest in the Association of the Sacred Heart which had been established in Marseilles as far back as pre-Revolution days. Since the attempts to restore it brought Issoudun and Marseilles into mutual discussions on the matter, it is fitting that we examine the character of the Association more closely.(2) L’Abbe Brunello,, who wrote the Life of Father Jean Joseph Allemand, recalls the devastating plague which ravaged Marseilles in the early part of the 18th century. Although it ceased with the consecration of the city to the Sacred Heart by Mgr. de Belzunce, the inhabitants did not give up their worldly ways. Love of money was the besetting sin and Marseilles was notorious for its wild speculation on the stock-exchange. Jansenism was rife, even amongst many of the clergy – both secular and religious – who were often in open rebellion against their bishops. Philosophical thinking was too liberal and independent, which led to a lack of true Christian spirit in the community. Added to these abuses was the dire fact that the plague had claimed as victims as many as 250 priests and religious in Marseilles and its environs, leaving a tragic void in the members of the apostolate. This is why Father Brunello refers to the foundation of the Priests of the Sacred Heart as the second good effect of the consecration of Marseilles to the Sacred Heart.(3) As far back as 1729, Father Denis Truillard had established a small society of Secular Priests to live in community, whose main work was to conduct missions and interest themselves in the sanctification of the young people by giving them retreats and encouraging them to join sodalities.(4) Father Truillard enlisted the help of several priests, especially Father Dandrade, in his project and they called themselves Priests of the Sacred Heart. To the people they became known as the Priest of the Good Shepherd after the name of the Church which the bishop had given them. Although the church bore the title of the “Good Shepherd,” it was actually one of the first in France consecrated to the Sacred Heart. In their Rules which were drawn up in July 1747 it is stated: “The end of the Congregation of Priests of the Sacred Heart, while performing the various functions of the ministry, to present the Divine Heart with a certain number of faithful adorers who will make reparation for the outrages inflicted on that Heart especially by renegade or careless priests themselves. With this end in view the priests of the said Congregation will endeavour: (1) To awaken the virtue of piety in the youth of Marseilles. (2) To form good ecclesiastics for the service of the diocese. (3) To work for the salvation of souls by preaching the word of God by the administration of the Sacrament of Penance, and by other suitable means which Providence may present. They will choose preferably those works which are difficult, obscure and neglected as being those most agreeable to the Sacred Heart, while at the same time the most necessary. As such a holy work requires saintly men, the priests of the Congregation will strive ceaselessly to be humble, gentle, obedient, lovers of poverty, penitent, mortified, detached from the world and their relatives, full of zeal for the glory of God and the good of souls, ready to sacrifice their possessions, their talents their leisure, their person – even their lives for the love of Our Lord, Jesus Christ, the service of the Church and the sanctification of the neighbour. They will find in the Sacred Heart the most accomplished Model of all the virtues and the most inspiring motive to practise these virtues. In their interior life they will use the ordinary means proper to the priestly and religious life, but will have a particular devotion to the Sacred Heart, which will sanctify the other means, and inspire them to spread the devotion to other souls. These priests were not bound by the vows of poverty and obedience. After the Revolution the Society was reconstructed by Father Dandrade and two other members who had survived the persecution. In their petition to Bishop de Beausset-Roquefort they expressed the wish of forming amongst ourselves an association of twenty four priests who, without any obligations except those of charity and zeal, without necessarily having to live together or forfeiting the right to possess things in common, without prejudice to any work which Your Lordship entrusts to us may yet be authorised to carry on the work of the former Priests of the Sacred Heart, who for 50 years laboured so zealously and successfully in their Apostolic Ministry. Father Gaduel notes the characteristics of these earlier priests struck him the most. They did not take vows, but voluntarily embraced a state in which they strove for perfection in virtue, and the perfect fulfilment of all their ecclesiastical duties. They obliged themselves to live only for God and the welfare of souls in keeping with the true idea of the priesthood and in conformity with the spirit of Our Lord and the Apostles. The main idea of both Father Truillard and Dandrake had been to offer members of the secular clergy a means of living a more perfect sacerdotal and religious life. In this they were following the ideas and ideals already expressed by Cardinal de Berulle and Father Olier in Paris and the Venerable Holzhauser in Germany. Like the Apostles themselves the Priests of the Sacred Heart decided at first to limit their number to twelve, but they began receiving associates who wished to join them, admitting them one by one to the ranks of the chosen twelve as soon as death claimed one of their numbers. All the members were entirely subject to the bishop, accepting his jurisdiction and obeying but the one Superior.” (6). These were the ideas imprinted in the mind of Father Gaduel when he came as professor to Coutances. Several of the students desirous of founding an association in the seminary similar to that founded by Jules Chevalier at Bourges approached Father Gaduel to seek his help and advice. He encouraged them to proceed with their plan, to enlarge its scope and to take away with them from the seminary an idea of true sacerdotal union. When Victor Le Beurier arrived as a student at Coutances in 1849 Father Gaduel had just left the College, but the newcomer was promptly enrolled in the association which the good priest had so firmly established. After his three years’ theology and still too young to be ordained, being only twenty years of age, Victor was sent to St. Sulpice to take the Higher Course. Although he confessed later on that he found these higher studies trying, his sojourn at the Sulpician College was the occasion of his giving thought to joining the Society of Jesus. Having become a professor at the new college of Saint Lo, while he was preparing for Major Orders the problem of his vocation became more acute. The company of Jesus held a fascination for him which lasted all his life. The Jesuit type of apostolic ministry regulated by a strict rule, and its spirituality so practical yet rigorous, seemed to correspond to the needs of his own soul. He confided his hopes and state of soul to his superiors, but Bishop Eobion replied: “Join the Jesuits? Never! A Franciscan, a Dominican, a Carmelite – anything you like, but not a Jesuit! Their philosophy is too liberal! After deliberating whether he would become a Jesuit, a Sulpician or a foreign Missionary, he wrote: “It was decided that I would become a Sulpician for I found in that Society a certain liberty of action with which I could reconcile certain ideas which were dear to me.” The Sulpicians gained permission from Mgr. Eobiou that the newly ordained, Father Le Beurier, would be reattached to the Major Seminary at Coutances as assistant professor of Philosophy, which would serve as a period of probation before his admittance to St. Sulpice. Before entering the Novitiate at La Solitude Father Le Beurier took the opportunity of his period of teaching to make a profound study of the basic ideas which were to form his life’s work. The ideas of Father Gaduel had matured in his mind and he realised it was little use proposing ideals of piety and priestly union to students unless the means of achieving them were made practical, when they went out into the ministry. He realised that the big danger for priests out in the world, most of them living alone in isolated presbyteries, would be their lack of communication with one another. Consequently it was necessary to offer them, under one form or another, some means of a common life. This had been Father Gaduel’s main concern as it had been that of the Venerable Holzhauser in Germany in the 17th Century. They both wished to offer secular priests living apart in the world the same help and means of perfection that the common life gave to Regulars. Father Gaduel had developed these ideas in a series of articles in the magazine “L’ami de la Religion” in 1851 and 1853. In February 1858 Father Le Beurier informed Father Gaduel that he had in mind the foundation of a community of Regular Clerics in the diocese of Coutances. Encouraged by Father Gaduel he explained his plan to the seminarists in one of his lessons. It was favourably received by the students, and a certain number of priests showed their interest and co-operation. A discussion with Father Yvetot, who as diocesan missionary was affiliated with the Eudist Fathers, convinced him that the function of a missionary would procure many advantages for the association and he persuaded him to join forces with the Coutances group. On the occasion of the diocesan retreat, those interested in the movement held several meetings. The proposition of Father Le Beurier to put all revenues at the disposal of the Community, as was done in the Holzhauser Institute met with a deal of opposition but it was eventually adopted and remained a rule of the Association of Coutances over a period of ten years. . Father Le Beurier entered the Novitiate at La Solitude on 7th Oct., 1858. During his Novitiate the project took on a more definite form in Coutances, and its progress presented personal difficulties to Father Le Beurier as to where his interest and activities should lie. The work of Saint Sulpician was primarily one concerned with seminaries and the training of students. “I will have plenty of trouble,” he wrote February, 1859, “confining myself to work in seminaries.” This was in view of his interest in the association of the secular priests. After several conversations with the Superior General at La Solitude it was agreed that he would leave all decisions in the hands of the Superior General. He eventually became a Sulpician, and during the holidays after his profession he had several meetings with his priest friends in Coutances when they exchanged views on the ideals and object of the union. The main question to be decided was whether they were to become Regular priests or to remain Secular; whether they were to adopt the practice of poverty in matters connected with ecclesiastical salaries or merely to live according to the spirit of religious vows. After his holiday, Father Beurier, instead of returning to Coutances, was appointed to the seminary at Orleans – perhaps on account of all the activity and discussion concerning the proposed Association. On arrival, one of his visits was to the Vicar General, Father Gaduel, who encouraged him to plant the seed of the Association as he had done so fruitfully in Coutances. With the permission of the Superior, he founded an Association amongst the seminarists similar to the one in Coutances, as an experiment in the common life. “At my request and to help my plans,” notes Father Le Beurier, “Father Gaduel wrote the life on the servant of God, Bartholomew Holzhauser. The book appeared in November, 1861, with an enthusiastic preface by the bishop, Mgr. Dupanloup, and bore the title, “Secular Clerics Living in Community.” The bishop had the preface read publicly in the seminary and received wide publicity, letters were received from outside the Diocese, and Father le Beurier was asked to answer them. Coutances and Chartras showed special interest. In Coutances Father Yvetot became head of the movement, and a set of rules was drawn up for the Institute of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. In 1861, sufficient money was raised and plans drawn up for the house “for pilgrimage of Notre Dame-sur-Vire, where Father Yvetot and two other Members took up their abode on the 19th November. At Chartres the Movement had begun as early as 1853 under the keen direction of Father Ychard, later to become the Rector of the Junior Seminary there. He and his fellow-priests kept in close contact with Father Le Beurier and adopted the rules of the Organization in Orleans.

PART II: THE ASSEMBLY IN PARIS

As there were now associations in Grenoble, Avignon, Moulins and Blois, the priests decided to hold a General Assembly in Paris at the Foreign Mission House on the 26th and 27th of August, 1862. Later that year Father Yvetot, one of the delegates, went to Rome for the canonisation of the Martyrs of Japan, and was granted an audience with Pope Pius IX. He explained to His Holiness the project in the minds of his confreres concerning a form of common life for the secular clergy and informed Him of the main resolution of the Paris conference – namely that “a certain number of secular priests from various dioceses in France were anxious to avail themselves of a method of religious life in the exercise of their sacred ministry.” The Holy Father replied: “This seems to me an excellent idea. I even command you to go ahead with it, and I give my blessing to the priests of this Association of the Sacred Heart.” This title was the one adopted by the priests as the most fitting.(8) In preparation for this first General Assembly Father le Beurier had gone to Bourges to make a retreat – from the 2nd to the 10th of July. Had he at that time heard of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart of Issoudun? Most probably he had as Father Le Blanc’s letter of 22nd January, 1865, refers to the already established contact between Issoudun and Orleans on the subject of associated priests, although it is certain that Issoudun was not represented at the General Assembly of the previous August. The dioceses represented at this General Assembly were Orleans, Chartres, Blois, Moulins, Coutances, Avignon and Grenoble – the personnel comprising eleven delegates. The matter dealt with at the first session concerned the nature of the association and the advisability of taking vows. A long discussion ensued on whether the obligation of obedience should go as far as taking a vow as a necessary bond of association in view of all the difficulties involved. It was decided that the decision on this point be adjourned for the time being. The matter and scope of poverty was discussed at the second session, special reference being made to the different circumstances of the various groups involved. The official decision stated: “The Assembly has unanimously declared that any ecclesiastical goods and assets should be commonly shared – a system preferable to any other and more in keeping with the end of the association. Each member present has declared his willingness to do this, but in the dioceses where the association has already been established, and is working under different conditions, the difficulties are appreciated. Let those who have already been following the proposed system continue to do so, and the others strive to conform to it as fast as possible.” The third session, held on the 27th August, discussed the question of the vows “ex professo.” The President, Father Le Beurier continued the discussion of the evening before by maintaining that the vows were a powerful link amongst the associates and a guarantee of perseverance, whilst admitting that, for some members who lived alone by nature of their duties, they could become a source of embarrassment of conscience. He also pointed out that these members who could not live in community could possibly not have the same good influence on their confreres as before; that the bishops might have reason to fear for their authority over the priests; that it was difficult in a meeting of this nature to determine the matter and object of the vows; and, finally, that the thought of so vigorous an obligation could alienate many priests from the desire of joining the association. Having weighed all these considerations, the President asked the delegates to express their minds on the advisability of taking vows. Opinions were divided. The representatives from Coutances, Orleans and Avignon, who had already pronounced them in their own associations voted “Yes,” whilst others argued that they preferred to follow the example of the Apostles, who did not take vows, but were still men of great obedience and poverty. Others maintained that, in view of all the difficulties involved, it would be better to postpone any definite decision on the matter, which proposal was adopted by the Assembly. Father Le Beurier then proposed that a General President be elected, who could convoke an assembly when necessary, and who would inform the Superiors every three months of the progress of the Associations in the various dioceses. Apart from this function, the President would have no authority over his confreres. He was to be “the link of communication” between the various associations, and his recommendations would be purely directive. Finally, it was decided to limit the official reports of the General President to the diocesan superiors to an annual conference and, if necessary, an immediate conference. It had been unanimously agreed that the general Constitutions would be those of the Venerable Holzhauser modified according to circumstances by Father Gaduel. These would express the spirit of the Association and be placed at the head of the Rules. During the 4th session, some members argued that the Association was taking on too pretentious a form, that the idea of religious life was being stressed too much since it was to be an Association of Secular priests whose purpose was to emphasise the brotherhood of the clergy of the various dioceses and to offer them a common rule for their mutual aid and sanctification in their priestly work.(9). In all it was a period of tension, even opposition and conflict, while the research for the proper form of the Association went on – a situation which did not lend itself to the harmonious and effective establishment of the project. The Assembly warned its members to exercise great prudence and circumspection in propagating the movement, and the meeting dissolved without any definite decisions being arrived at.

PART III: THE ASSEMBLY AT ISSOUDUN

In order to understand better the events that follow, especially in reference to the association of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart with the movement, it is necessary to keep in mind that the only contact Father Chevalier had with the federation to this time was through Father le Beurier and the members of his association at Orleans. In the course of the discussions between Father Chevalier and these priests the relationship had been kept on a purely personal basis. For example, there was the matter of the annual retreat, which had been considered inadvisable at the General Assembly because of the difficulties of an interdiocesan liason. In spite of this decision Father Le Beurier and his followers at Orleans seemed anxious to organise such a retreat at Issoudun the following year. The fact that the Archbishop of Bourges was completely behind the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart and had officially recognised them in his diocese would have given weight to his decision. Also it is important not to lose sight of the fact that Father Le Beurier’s attraction to the religious life would have given rise to mutual sympathies between Orleans and Issoudun. We recall that this worthy priest’s vocation was dominated by “a profound attraction to the religious life which inspired him to leave the world and seek a life of perfection.” When he resolved to interest himself in the work of the secular clergy he still maintained his desire and ambition. We remember that from the beginning he strongly advocated that members of the Association should possess things in common and live a common life in preference to being united by a simple morel link. Even before the Assembly he had proposed to Father Yvetot that Coutances should adopt the rules of Orleans – that which eventually did take place when Father Petetot, restorer of the Congregation of the Oratory in France took an interest in the movement. At the Assembly, Orleans, Coutances and Avignon members were the ones in favour of taking vows and living a common life. These ideas remained dear to Father Le Beurier all through his life, even after he had to abandon them later on owing to the pressure of circumstances. The association in the diocese of Coutances, at the request of Bishop Bravaid, eventually was transformed into a diocesan congregation with vows of religion, having as its particular end – teaching and preaching. It was in these circumstances and in this frame of mind that Father Le Beurier entered into relationship with Issoudun at the beginning of 1863. Replying to a letter from Issoudun on the 22nd January, Father Le Blanc S.J., advises against the fusion of the two works for the time being. The Association founded by Father Holzhauser, on which the work in Orleans was based, admitted affiliated priests with vows, and Father Le Blanc was of the opinion that Issoudun was not yet ready for this. Six days later, Father Chevalier replied: “I appreciate your point of view. We will not press for the fusion at present. When I go to Orleans next Tuesday I will discuss the matter with the Fathers there, and on my return will acquaint you with what takes place…. The principal concern will be whether the organisation of priests should take vows.” However, the visit to Orleans was to produce results different from those foreseen in this letter. Father Founder was to find out that the taking of vows by the Associates was also the main ideal of Father Le Beurier. On the 8th February, he sent the following report of his interview to Father Le Blanc: “I made my journey to Orleans. I had a long conversation with the Archbishop, Mgr. Dupanloup, who is enchanted with our work. He told me on more than one occasion that it was a work answering an urgent need of the times; that we must strive fervently to achieve it; and that God would certainly bless it. He informed me, as I have already told you, that several of the priests of the diocese intend joining it.” “If your Society of the Sacred Heart,” His Grace added, “is founded on solid and extensive lines, it will be a great help to the Episcopate and the welfare of the Church. Go ahead courageously! You can count on my personal help and interest.” “I also met the President of the Sacred Heart Society and an influential priest interested in the movement. We had a long talk, on the work, its organisation, its objects, etc. We agreed that to put it on a solid basis and to make it useful to the Church, the salvation of souls and the glory of the Sacred Heart, it would be necessary to draw up a serious and stable constitution which would provide for the taking of religious vows, such as is practised in your own Institute, likewise it was agreed that those who wished to make only promises could be accepted as affiliated members.” “The main difficulties would be concerned with the following problems: (1) To what extent would the Vows of Obedience and Poverty oblige the members of the Association who are living outside Communities? What are their duties, their obligations, their rules? (2) What is the best policy of reconciliation between the rights of the Ordinaries and those of the Religious Superiors over their subjects? On this point we would appreciate your advice based on the experience of your own Society. (3) Where there might be opposition of members and non-members of the Association every effort should be made to have the members live together even in twos. They should not live alone except where necessary, and in this case the separated subject ought to keep in contact frequently with the Superior and visit his confreres often.

(4) Should all the ecclesiastical revenue be put back into the parish work or should a part of it, say one-fifth, be used by the Society? (5) In the case of “Pastors inamovibiles” who may wish to join, would it be better for them to forego their titles, as Father Maugenest did in Issoudun, so that the bishops and superiors could direct them more easily? Father Chevalier continued: “I also saw Father Gaduel. This holy priest was inclined to favour purely diocesan associations whose members would not take vows, and would not have to rely on Superiors outside their dioceses. However, after several explanations based on experience and reason, he now accepts the fact that such an organisation would have no future, being built on shifting sand, and he has come around to our point of view.” “After, talks with these good priests we decided that during the next holidays the clergy of the various dioceses who wished to join the movement should meet at Issoudun – perhaps forty in number, – to make a retreat given by one of your Fathers, to be chosen by Rev. Fr. Fessard, the Provincial. There, in recollection and with the help of grace and the Holy Spirit, we will examine the Constitutions which you have drawn up for us; we will hold the elections and the Society will be definitely founded. This retreat will commence on the Monday following the Feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary.” “You, see then, my dear Father, that the designs of Providence in this work are manifesting themselves more and more, I believe that we are now approaching the solemn moment when we can establish it on a firm and lasting basis. ‘Fiat, fiat ad majorem Dei et Sacratissimi Cordis Jesu gloriam” And so at Orleans Father Chevalier found support for his ideas that Vaugirard had regarded as premature and with this help he insisted on his point of view. Evidently, Father Le Blanc did not write after this for some time as we find Father Chevalier asking him, in a letter of April the 9th, if he were ill. The correspondence continued with Orleans. “I have received quite recently a letter from the President of the Priests of the Sacred Heart,” he wrote to the Jesuits. “He tells me that these priests on account of their ministerial duties, will be able to stay in Issoudun only four or five days. The retreat will begin on the evening of the 17th August and finish on the evening of the 21st. I will be very grateful, my dear Father, if you can send us the Rules you are drawing up as soon as possible. We are very anxious to study them.” Since he had already notified Orleans of this Plan we can presume the “We” referred to himself and Father Le Beurier, who had already expressed his interest in the Company of Jesus. Can we likewise suppose that the Founder was expressing Father Le Beurier’s sentiments when he insisted that the work be dedicated to the Sacred Heart? We have already spoken in the last chapter of Father Chevalier’s reaction to the Plan proposed by the Jesuits. There is no doubt that the priests of Orleans reacted the same way. The Plan was not accepted when the priests discussed it at the Assembly in Issoudun in the month of August. Issoudun had now joined the federation centred in Orleans. In May Father Le Beurier wrote to his former Superior in La Solitude, Father Caval: “The reunion of the Associated Priests of the Sacred Heart of which I have sent you an account has had very happy results. Under the encouragement and impulse given by this reunion all the diocesan Associations have organised themselves on a firm basis.” “In order to continue an enterprise so visibly blessed by God and so full of possibilities a new General Assembly will take place at Issoudun in August at the Monastery of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, who are now part of our confederation. Their central location is an ideal place for a meeting.” In the same letter Father Le Beurier speaks of his own doubts of conscience as to where his vocation lies in the future: “That which you have foreseen Rev. Father Superior, has come about. I am asking myself at the present moment whether it is not God’s Will that I leave Saint Sulpice in order to give myself entirely to this grand work of organising the Associations of Secular Priests, which after all is a continuation and complement of the work of the Seminaries, and so one not far distant from the ideas and practice of our early Fathers.” Father Caval replied advising patience, while resigning himself to the probable separation. However, the Sulpician Superiors took a hand in the matter and requested Father Le Beurier to abstain from taking any part in the Assemblies or in the government of the Association. This unexpected turn of events evidently affected the number of priests who ultimately attended the assembly and retreat in Issoudun. In February Father Chevalier had written that he expected “about forty” to attend. In June he reduced the number to “about thirty,” but Father Piperon has gone on record as stating: “About ten priests from the various dioceses came to make the retreat and to discuss the basis on which the union might be founded.” At the reunion itself the absence of Father Le Beurier had rather a dampening effect on the proceedings. He himself had previously written to his Superior: “Several members of the Association, the most serious and devoted of them, are convinced that if I am not at the General Assembly, the reunion will be more harmful than useful, and that the newly-formed bonds of union will be broken. They have mentioned the serious issues involved, have begged me to be present, and have appealed to my conscience.” Father Yehard was to add after the conference: “All the members who were able to keep the rendez-vous were anxious to proceed with the movement, but unfortunately, we no longer had our president of last year with his keen and constructive ideas.” As the Archives of the ‘Apostolic Union’ have disappeared, we have to content ourselves with a few extracts from Father Olichon’s notes regarding the format and subject-matter of the Assembly, which we will quote in the next few pages. “The meeting,” he wrote, “was convoked at Issoudun with the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart who at the time seemed to be the centre of attraction.” The ideas of Father Le Beurier and Father Chevalier were certainly in accord on the matter of the Association, and Father Piperon has recorded: “At this time the life and works of the Blessed Holzhauser were being read with interest, and his success with the similar movement in Germany inspired the French clergy to imitate his methods. Father Founder got in contact with the principal directors of the work, and towards the end of August, 1865, he was able to bring together in Issoudun a number of them to hold a kind of congress, his main thought being to establish a union of priests under the patronage of the Sacred Heart. This ardent love for the Sacred Heart made him desirous of making the Association a means of spiritual profit to all.” Again in his first manuscript Father Piperon expands this idea further: “His main thought had been to reunite all the associations already founded into one, all consecrated to the Sacred Heart and united with the Congregation by a common rule.” According to Father Olichon, eight dioceses were represented at Assembly, whose presidents in turn represented 123 members. Father Piperon recalls: “There were present priests from Orleans, Chartres, Blois, Moulins, a professor from Grenoble, and the exercises were conducted by Rev. Father Bertrand, S.J., then the Director of the Major Seminary at Blois, and later Founder of the Mission in Madura. This priest also acted as chairman for the meeting.” On 3rd November Father Chevalier was to write: “Our dear work remains at much the same point as when Father Bertrand left it.” This was only to be expected as there had been certain divergencies of opinion at the meeting. The promoters of the association, Fathers Le Beurier and Chevalier, were prepared to make the Jesuit plan from Vaugirard the basis of the discussions and Father Bertrand naturally followed this line of thought from the beginning. Father Olichon contented himself by remarking: “The various delegates were consulted regarding the ideas and tendencies of their individual groups.”

Father Piperon, who had been present at the meeting, has recorded: “At this humble congress many projects were discussed and many obscure points elucidated, but no complete basis for the union was decided on. It was agreed that a simple yet large federation be formed with each group keeping its autonomy, under the bond of fraternity in the Sacred Heart of Jesus.”(10) When Father Chevalier informed Father Le Blanc of the meagre results of the conference, he remarked: “The outcome of the conference did not effect a complete union, but strengthened the bonds of association. The priests accepted a common rule which I submitted to them. That was all we were able to do for the moment, with the main question undecided, namely whether the members should take vows or not. My own conviction is that if they do not take vows, the movement will come to nought.” We have recorded that Father Le Beurier was in accord with him on this point but the Council could not agree on the matter. Were the priests to become regular or remain seculars? Should they adopt the common life as religious, or should there be nothing of that nature? On another point which Father Chevalier regarded as fundamental, namely the emphasis on Devotion to the Sacred Heart, a compromise was reached. “It was agreed,” wrote Father Olichon, “that all the Association should strive for a two-fold end: The sanctification of the clergy, and the practising and spreading of Devotion to the Sacred Heart.” It was desirable that all the Associates should recite a common prayer – the official prayer to the Sacred Heart with the added ejaculation: “May the Sacred Heart of Jesus be everywhere loved.” We note again the two tendencies of the movement, “the one stressing the sanctification of the clergy, the other putting the accent on Devotion to the Sacred Heart. They went hand in hand, in varying degrees towards the achieving of the two-fold end of the Association. The basis of unification remained undetermined. The special character of the work was that of “a kind of confederation which left each group with its autonomy but united them all in matters not affecting their independence”. As a matter of fact the grand dream of establishing the one organisation for all was fast disappearing. Father Chevalier himself was quite prepared to amalgamate his Institute with this new Society, provided it maintained the same characteristics as those which his vocation as Founder had imparted to his own work. First of all, it must be a Society dedicated to the Sacred Heart, whose members would lead the religious life and take vows while at the same time being open to secular priests who desired in certain ways to participate in its advantages. Now that the organisation had become a federation of many diverse plans and tendencies Father Chevalier realized that his first duty was to concern himself with his own Institute and its development. However, his experience with the sacerdotal associations had convinced him, in spite of Father Le Blanc’s advice, that he should interest himself in the associated sacerdotial movement even before it became an organisation of priests with vows. To this effect he wrote to Father Le Blanc on 3rd November: “My many duties have prevented me from working on the composition of a general rule for the associates. I hope to do so soon and will let you know, the result. The Archbishop in Bourges is very favourably inclined, and wishes as we do, that if it is God’s Will, the work of Father Clariviere regarding the ‘associates without vows’ should be revived.” We recall that Father Le Blanc had previously written: “To draw up rules is the function of Founders,” and Father Chevalier put himself to the task anew, keeping in mind the resolutions made at the Issoudun Assembly. Father Piperon has noted: “If a definite union was not effected the assembly was far from being sterile, as it furnished the Founder with the data from which he was able to draw up a more solid rule for the secular priests of the Sacred Heart, which had now been in existence for several years.” “The Annals of the Priests of the Sacred Heart,” – several copies of which are still extant -, commenced their fifth year of publication in 1867. Whether the magazine was brought out by the Issoudun Associates only or by the collaboration of all the groups we cannot be sure, but, in any case, we know that in 1867 the editorship was in the hands of Father Chevalier, Father Ychard – who, according to a letter written 26th August 1864 was already affiliated with the work at Issoudun – and Father Devaux, whose name we find inscribed in the register of the “Secular Priests of Issoudun.” The copies of the following year – 1868 – tell us that the administration of the publication was in the hands of Father Chevalier and Father de Grenobe, also inscribed in the register, while the editor was Father Pigelot of Bourges, whose name also appears on the other publications from Issoudun.(11) These names show us that already amongst the individuals obliged to make a choice between the different trends of the movement, several affiliated themselves with Issoudun. Immediately after the Assembly Father Chevalier had written to Father le Blanc: “Two dioceses wish to join with us by taking vows and making one body.” In fact only the diocese of Moulins eventually did so. The first names subscribed in the aforesaid register were priests of this diocese and in the period before 1869 they comprised most of the members. The first name is that of Abbe Guyot, a delegate to the Assembly in Paris and later in Issoudun. Father Piperon tells us that one of the happy results of the meeting at Issoudun was the affiliation of this good parish priest of St. Paul de Montlucon, who from that time became one of us, whilst remaining attached to his parish.” The “Register of the Professed” from 1869 to 1895 contained in Father Piperon’s handwriting a brief note on the first six entrants. Concerning Father Guyot he notes: “He joined us on the 15th Jan., 1864, and on the 16th Jan. the following year took his first vows at the feet of Father Chevalier.” One might conclude from this extract that Father Guyot’s association with the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart was much the same as Father Maugenest’s but the fact that he is named at the head of the list of priests of the Sacred Heart, i.e. the associates makes us doubt it. This list comprises names of Associate Priests who were not considered Missionaries of the Sacred Heart from the very first days of their contact with Issoudun; to mention a few, Fathers Druin, Jouet, Gonon, Chape, Pion. We gain the impression that not sufficient emphasis was put on the distinction between the two classes,(l2) which was to lead to a deal of confusion later on. In the recruiting of members for the two categories Issoudun had been greatly helped by the Jesuit Fathers, particularly by Father Bienville. In August of 1864 he had been transferred to Bourges. Father Guyot had made a retreat under the direction of Father Bienville before making his decision. This was in accord with the wish of Father Chevalier, who had written to Father Le Blanc: “We are resolved to accept only those priests who make the Spiritual Exercises under Father Bienville or one of your priests. Several of your Fathers are well acquainted with the work, and take a great interest in it.”(13) The recruiting of Missionaries went on side by side with that of the Secular Priests. Before the 1863 Assembly, Father A. Mousseaux from the diocese of Bourges entered on the 15th June, immediately after his ordination, followed a little later on by a fellow-seminarian Father Ferragu, who, however, stayed only two months. He was replaced in December by Father L. M. Bazire, from the diocese of Caen, who had been for a time with the Trappists. It is difficult to follow the development of the Association of Secular Priests on account of the incomplete nature of the register. For example, Father Ychard, of whom we have already spoken, is not even mentioned. There is a note to the effect that Father Chevalier, in September 1864, was waiting to receive “two priests who seriously wish to join us, whilst remaining at their posts.” Father Le Blanc at this time had already introduced to the Founder Father Vandel, who was to play a prominent part in the early days of the Society and of whom we will speak later on in more detail. There was plenty of work to be done, and in a letter to Father Le Blanc, Father Chevalier regrets the fact that there were all too few priests to do it. “It is necessary,” he wrote, “that two or three more priests join our house. At the present moment we have only three. If you know any good ecclesiastics who would like to come and live our community life with us, we would be very grateful to have them.” Father Le Blanc sent him a few addresses, but in a reply, the Founder said he would “wait a little while before writing to these good priests.” A month later he wrote that he had received some “precious sympathetic” responses, and in the following December he wrote: “The work is beginning to grow, – slowly and carefully, it is true – but at last we are making some conquests. From Caen we have two new priests who have taken up the work with enthusiasm. One holy priest from Marseilles has become very interested and wishes to spread the movement in his diocese. We have just made two new recruits in Moulins.” The information concerning the development of the work in these parts ceases with the last letter we possess of the Founder to Father Le Blanc – dated 15th July 1865. The letter reads: “The work is functioning in five or six dioceses. The priests who belong to it are very edifying. The Archbishop of Marseilles is very keen on it, and is it’s patron. Before his sickness His Grace sent us two of his best priests to study our rules and join the movement. Since then three other priests have joined them. The Archbishop of Moulins is delighted with the idea, and wishes to propagate it in his diocese. He has conveyed to me through the Archbishop of Bourges, who has always been devoted to it, the wish to see me with a view to extending it in his diocese. Also Archbishop du Puy, whom I have seen quite recently, is very keen and wishes to speak to several of his priests about it. “The fact that the Abbe Vandel is joining us will make it easier to attract missionary priests to our work.” We might note here that it was in this letter that the Founder mentioned two priests, Father Jouet of Marseilles and Father Vandel, who were to play an important part in the future history of the Society.

PART IV: THE PROPOSED PLAN FOR THE ASSOCIATION.

This growth of the movement made it necessary to draw up an exposition of the aims and methods of the work for the priests. This was done in the first brochure – printed in 1864. It was called: “Plan of the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, established at Issoudun (Indre) encouraged and blessed by Our Holy Father, Pope Pius IX, and approved by His Grace, the Archbishop of Bourges. To the greater Glory of God and the Sacred Heart of Jesus.” On the 26th September, 1864, Father Chevalier wrote to Father Le Blanc: “I am sending you the printed Plan of our Society. The Rule for the Associates is in the process of being printed at this moment. Last Wednesday I had the happiness of having a long talk with Father Gautrelet on our beloved work for the Sacred Heart. He is most enthusiastic about it, and his approval of the Plan and the general organisation is a great encouragement to us. ‘There will be plenty of difficulties,’ he told us, ‘but the combination of the two classes, such as I now understand it, will offer the means of solving these, and will be a guarantee of its success.(13)” In December Father Chevalier wrote that the Plan was only provisional, and he would willingly accept suggestions which, if good, could be incorporated in a revised edition. Vaugirard persisted in maintaining its own point of view, which we gather from their observations made on the Plan, e.g., on the moral theology concerning dispensations from the vows reserved to the Holy See; on the revenues collected by the Superiors; on the matter constituting mortal sin by infringement of poverty; on the vows themselves. In the Plan Father Chevalier, while profiting from the experience of the past few years, and adapting himself to the situation as it had developed, maintained the original fundamental principles of the Society. The beginning of the Plan stressed the opportune nature of the work, and the necessity of Devotion to the Sacred Heart. In the Introduction Father Chevalier puts a question to the Secular Clergy: “In this association what part are you to play, and to whom do you owe obedience?” Answering it himself he writes: “We, of course, are Secular Priests and we owe obedience to our bishops.” Then followed a passage which was to cause considerable comment: “For this Association, offering as it does a powerful means of perfection will halt the emigration of the better type of priests, whose presence in their diocese is so necessary to reanimate the piety of their confreres and reawaken the feeble faith of the people.” Father Ramiere commented on this idea on the occasion of the affiliation of the Oblates of the Sacred Heart of Montlucon in the month of December, by remarking: “I can well understand the fears manifested by the priests who are not connected with the Association, and who now judge the sentiments of its members by an unfortunate phrase used by Father Chevalier in his first set of Rules. The good Father stated that one of the advantages of his work would be to retain in their dioceses those priests whose desire of religious perfection would lead to their entering religious institutes. The expression, which I do not recall very well, is actually more regrettable than the idea itself. I do not doubt for a moment that the intentions of Father Chevalier are perfectly in order, and I only wish that he be able to organize his work without delay, and to infuse his own spirit into the young priests who join him.”(14) The General End of the Plan states that it is “to offer to priests and the faithful, who have the desire of perfection a powerful means of sanctification. This is elaborated in the following points: (a) To introduce a common and religious life amongst the Secular Clergy. (b) To offer this means of sanctification to the laity, particularly the discharged soldiers. (c) To achieve this by the practice of the evangelical virtues. The Special End, as stated in the Plan, is that: (a) The members should spread Devotion to the Sacred Heart by all possible means. (b) They should make reparation to the Sacred Heart for the insults He receives by leading good lives, and offering to Him for this intention all their acts of religion, their good works, their labours, their mortifications, their sufferings and their trials.” The Institute recognised three groups of members – Religious, Associates and Tertiaries. The Plan deals only briefly with the last two classes, leaving that to several other publications. It concerns itself mainly with the first group – the Religious. It speaks of them as the “Corps d’Elite” of the Society which embraces both the Priests and the Lay-Brothers, whether living in community or doing their particular work out in the world. They will be known as Missionaries of the Sacred Heart or Religious of the Sacred Heart. They will take the vows of Obedience, Chastity, Poverty and Stability. These vows will be taken annually for five years and then in perpetuity. However, no one is obliged to take final vows. The Superiors of the Society will be chosen from those who have pronounced their final vows. The Plan also indicated in what measure the vows would oblige those living in community and those living out in the world.

The position brought about by the return of Father Maugenest had thrown the emphasis on the fact that it was the taking of the vows and not the fact of living in community which was the important thing – that which constituted the Missionary of the Sacred Heart. Once the subject had taken his final vows he became a member of the Society, in contradistinction to the affiliated members who are simply referred to in the Plan as “those who do not take vows.” It is interesting to note in the early records that Father Piperon took his first vows “in the course of the year 1864,” and the early Register tells us that Father Guyot was professed on the 16th January, 1866, Father Durin the same year and Father Georgelin on the Feast of the Sacred Heart, 1866.

PART V: FATHER JOUET’S MISSION OF INQUIRY TO ISSOUDUN

At the end of 1864, the year that the Association of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart was established, an event of great importance took place – an event which was to have a marked influence on the Devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart and consequently on the Society itself. We have already spoken of the origin and history of the Priests of the Sacred Heart or, as they were more frequently called, Priests of the Good Shepherd. We recall that they were founded by Father Truillard of Marseilles and re-established after the Revolution by Archbishop Charles Fortune de Mazenod by a decree issued on 3rd May, 1825. They flourished for a time in Marseilles thanks to the interest and agency of Fathers Allemand and Gaduel. However, six years after he had issued the decree of restoration, the Archbishop seemed to see in the Institute a threat to his authority as spiritual head of the diocese, and he ordered its dissolution on 9th August, 1831. The Archbishop was succeeded by his nephew, Mgr. Charles Joseph Eugene Mazenod, who stated that he was willing to retract the decree of suppression issued by his uncle; but, although attempts were made to restore the Institute, the work remained mainly ineffective and dormant. This was the state of affairs when Patrick Francis Cruice was consecrated bishop of Marseilles on the 25th August, 1861. Born in Ireland, the future Archbishop had come to France at an early age, and was duly ordained a priest in Paris by Archbishop Affre. He became the Director of the Ecole des Carmes in Paris, and, on account of his outstanding piety and talents, was nominated in 1861 as the Bishop of Marseilles. One of his first cares on taking charge of the diocese was to look to the welfare of Catholic education, and he decided to found the College of St. Louis which he opened in October, 1864, appointing Father Victor Jouet in charge. When the bishop had been in Paris in charge of the Ecole des Cannes there was a community of auxiliary priests who devoted themselves to special works of the Sacred ministry, and often helped their student confreres.(15) Their good work made the new bishop of Marseilles anxious to re-establish in his own diocese the former Society of Priests of the Sacred Heart, and this, in turn, was to bring him in touch with the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart at Issoudun. A letter which we have, dated 21st August, 1864, indicates that the Bishop had been in touch with several families closely connected with the Missionaries of Issoudun, e.g., The Countess du Quesne and Madame de Verneuil. However the first personal contact that he had with the Society seems to go back to the previous year – 1863 – when the first brochure on Our Lady of the Sacred Heart had been sent to him. If his coat of arms bore the inscription: “O Cross, Worthy and Good: Cross – powerful against the evils of this world,” the Bishop had likewise inherited from his mother a deep devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. This devotion bore the seal of the Cross, and these two loves naturally gave him a tender filial devotion to the Mother of God. For him the Cross was his standard, the Sacred Heart his Model, and Mary his guide.(l6) We can appreciate his reaction to the receipt of the brochure on Our Lady of the Sacred Heart by his letter to Father Chevalier, dated 16th October, 1853: “I am most grateful to you for sending me the little pamphlet on Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. You have there a very useful and holy thought. The devotion to Mary must always be united to the devotion to the Heart Her Divine Son. It is Mary who teaches us how to love Her adorable Son. It is She who nurtures and causes that Love to grow in our souls.” “Crescamus in illo.” If I had to make one suggestion it would be that the title be: “Our Lady of the Children of the Sacred Heart” instead of “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.”. From then on it appears that the good Bishop kept in close contact with Issoudun. A letter of 21st August, 1864, tells us that he was only too willing to have his name inscribed in the Register of Associates, and that he regretted that he was not able at the moment to accept the kind invitation and that of Madame the Comtesse du Quesne, to visit Issoudun. “My commitments keep me in Marseilles for the time being, but I will be happy to pay you a visit later on.” On the subject of the Association he wrote: “It would take too long to tell you all I think of your pious Association. We will have a talk about it later. It seems to me that your inspiration has come down from the Cross itself. It was during the Passion, during those hours of agony that the Heart of the Son and that of the Mother were tenderly united and suffered together. It was then that the Heart of Mary acquired a sovereign dominion over the Heart of Jesus. That is why these two devotions are inseparable. Pray that they will grow more and more throughout my diocese; that they will obtain for me the conversion of sinners.” Perhaps already now in August the saintly Bishop had in mind the project he was to put into effect in December of sending Father Jouet to Issoudun to study more intimately the work of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. The visit of Father Jouet to Issoudun at the request of his Bishop was officially to study the work of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. We have spoken of the Bishop’s desire to re-establish the Society of Priests of the Sacred Heart in his diocese, and his contact with Issoudun, particularly in reference to the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. It was desirable then, since he could not go himself, to send a priest to study the format and methods of the Issoudun Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. Let us quote at length Father Piperon’s account of the visit: “Mgr. Cruice wished to re-establish in his diocese the Priests of the Sacred Heart, who in the past had done such good work. He had become acquainted with the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart and their work, and he hoped by studying their methods to find a way of achieving his object. Consequently he appointed Father Jouet – a young priest and a professor at the College of the Sacred Heart in Marseilles – to visit us. Father Jouet duly arrived in Issoudun on the day after Christmas, 1864, at the early hour of 4 o’clock in the morning, when the temperature was almost at freezing point. He had come in light clothing, not expecting to find Issoudun so cold. On his reaching the house, we hastened to put him in the best room – called “Bishop’s Room” – and to prepare a fire for him. In this room, there was a statue of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. On seeing it, he showed great interest and enquired what it was. ‘It is a statue of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart,’ we told him. ‘And who is Our Lady of the Sacred Heart?’ he asked. ’We Missionaries of the Sacred Heart honour Our Lady under that title’ we replied, ‘and we have an Association in Her honour.’ ‘How long has this Association been in existence?’ ‘We established it in April of this year, and already it has a membership of 200,000.’ ‘Have you an Altar of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart here?’ he further enquired. ‘Yes, there is one over in the Church,’ we told him. ‘Are you able to offer Mass there?’ ‘Yes, certainly.’ ‘Well, could I offer my Mass there straight away?’ ‘You had better wait a while till we stir the fire up for you. After you have warmed up a little, you can come over to the church and offer your Mass. In the meantime we will prepare the Altar.’ ‘I would really prefer to say Mass straight-away,’ the good priest replied. We left the room for a few moments to get some more wood for the fire, and on returning found Father Jouet on his knees before the statue of Our Blessed Lady, praying with obvious fervour. Our Lady of the Sacred Heart had already captured his soul. He was consecrating himself to Her without reserve. Henceforth he used always love to call himself, making a pun his own name: “I am the toy (jouet) of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.” He insisted on saying his Mass without further delay: “I really am not very cold,” he said. “Take me across to the church, and to the altar of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, where I will offer my Mass.” We prepared the altar for him, and I will never forget the fervour with which he offered up the Holy Sacrifice, the emotion with which he pronounced each word of the liturgy, the tone of supplication in his voice. Several years later, on recalling this first visit to Issoudun, he confided to me that that first glimpse of the statue of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart had been a moment of great grace in his life. “Hardly had I beheld the blessed image of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart in that room than a vivid interior light shone in my soul. I understood that from now on I must devote myself to Her service, and that I belonged unreservedly to Her; Mary, my good Mother, wished it so.” “I clearly saw that it was in the Congregation and with the particular object of spreading this devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, of explaining the relationship between the Hearts of Jesus and Mary, that I must now devote my life. That is why on that day I asked you so many questions concerning the Devotion, and why I could talk of nothing else.”(17) He himself has written of the moving and deep sentiments evoked in his soul by the recitation of the beautiful prayer to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart – the Memorare: “How we love this Prayer so full of charms! Since the happy day when our lips first pronounced you, you have never ceased to be our beautiful song of triumph. Morning and night you have carried from our hearts to the throne of Mary our sentiments of filial love and confidence, and ever have you obtained from our Sovereign Queen the innumerable graces of which we have such need.”(18) “Father Jouet,” continues Father Piperon, “stayed only a few days with us, but before he departed, the important decision was made to publish a magazine called ‘The Annals of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.’ He was so enthusiastic on his return to Marseilles that Mgr. Cruice entrusted him with the mission ‘of employing every means,’ – to use his own words – ‘of spreading far and wide the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.'” And he adds: “This was one of the last infunctions of the Bishop’s episcopate,” as soon the saintly prelate was to die.(19) A student who passed through the hands of Father Jouet’s class in College, one Leo Taxil, has paid a tribute to his former professor’s piety and his devotion – to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. In his “Memoirs of Youth,” he writes: “It was indeed a good year passed in Father Jouet’s class -1866-67. My professor was always burning with a veritable religious zeal. He had brought back with him from Issoudun a new devotion that of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. He was almost obsessed with the desire of founding a new religious Order. (This, no doubt, is an allusion to the association of Priests of the Sacred Heart.) He had the temperament of an apostle convinced of a special and irresistible vocation. When he spoke of his plans in this regard his soul simply overflowed. Forgetting his role as teacher, he became enraptured with his subject as one transfigured, and spoke with real eloquence. Father Jouet paid me the honour of making me his auxiliary in the College, and used to call me his first disciple. We students formed a small confraternity amongst ourselves with the permission of the Superior, Father Magnan. We used to call ourselves ‘La Petite Oeuvre.’ Each member pledged himself to spread devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. One of our aims also was to help the Missionaries of Issoudun financially, as it was there that the devotion, to which Father Jouet dedicated his life, originated. And indeed Our Lady of the Sacred Heart had in Father Jouet a real apostle, ardent and devoted. Besides his work for the “Annals” of which he was to become the editor, he compiled a booklet called “Thirty Considerations on the Devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.”. He wrote the first volume in barely two months in what little spare time he had in between his ordinary duties. This appeared in April of 1865, and went through several editions in the following years. Later he revised and abbreviated the work and it became known as “The Month of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.” On returning to Marseilles, Father Jouet went immediately to the Bishop to give an account of his visit to Issoudun, but unfortunately during his absence the health of the prelate had deteriorated rapidly and he hardly recognised his emissary. He was on the point of death from a tumour on the brain, and survived only a few days. Consequently the mission of Father Jouet to Issoudun was destined not to achieve the object for which it was intended – the end which the Bishop had in mind.”(22) It is typical of Father Piperon in his charity, to restrict himself to the immediate reason for the failure of the mission; but in reality it was not so much the death of Mgr. Cruice which defeated the purpose of the consultations with Issoudun so much as the opposition of his successors Mgr. Place. He was not only opposed to the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, but even to the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, which was now widespread in the diocese of Marseilles. So quickly had the devotion spread that soon after the enthronement the first statue in the parish of Chateau-Gombert by Father Guiol, the Vicar General, over one thousand statues were reproduced in Marseille for distribution in the various parishes and the Confraternity of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart was proving very popular with the people. Meanwhile developments had been taking place in the diocese of Orleans regarding the Association of Priests. We recall that Father Le Beurier had been obliged by his Superiors to withdraw from the movement in 1863, at the time when it was proposed to make Issoudun a centre for the Secular Priests of the Sacred Heart. After that set-back Archbishop Dupanloup pursued his own idea of establishing a diocesan association. He was in close relationship with a Father Petetot who had just introduced the Oratorians to France. The bishop suggested a combination, which in concept was not lacking in grandeur. He offered the Oratorians of Paris the parish of Clery in his diocese, and solicited the help of Father Le Beurier in establishing the diocesan Oratory there. The result was that Father Le Beurier left the Sulpicians and joined the Oratorians. Father Gaduel drew up a rule for the Society which admitted two types of members: Oratorians under the authority of the Superior General and Oratorians subject to the Bishop. The latter class were not to form a religious order nor take vows. They need not even make any engagement re stability, as they would be free to leave at any time. After two years’ trial it was obvious that this was far too Utopian an idea, and was working only in one direction. Whilst. the diocese was enjoying the administration of the Oratorians, the Oratory was not receiving any of the diocesan priests.

Then there was the conflict of authority which led to confusion. The plan was doomed to failure, and the Oratorians eventually returned to Paris, leaving only the diocesan association in Orleans. Returning to Marseilles we find the struggle to establish the movement still going on. Father Gaduel in his panegyric at the Requiem of Father Allemand made a striking appeal for its revival. “The Priests of the Sacred Heart,” he said, “lived in the person of Father Allemand. And may I express, My Lord, the hope that the day is not far distant when some holy priests of this diocese – children perhaps of Father Allemand – under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and by the attraction of the loving Heart of Jesus, will re-establish in Marseilles the Association of Priests of the Sacred Heart.”(24) It is probable that already the new bishop, Mgr. Place, had been won over to this idea, as several years later, he seemed to indicate this in a letter to the author of “The History of the Priests of the Sacred Heart of Marseilles.”(25) This history tells us that Mgr. Place officially re-established the former association by a decree, dated the 16th July, 1869. This, incidentally5 was just four months after the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart had received official approbation as a Society from Rome, dated the 8th March, 1869.

PART VI: TRIALS OF FATHER JOUET. TRIBUTE TO HIS WORK.

We can appreciate the difficulties that Father Jouet encountered after the installation of Mgr. Place as Bishop of Marseilles. He had gone to Issoudun at the wish of Bishop Cruice to study the work of the new Missionaries in the hope of finding ways and means of establishing the Association of Secular Priests in Marseilles. He had returned full of enthusiasm for the Devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. He had consecrated himself to Her and was convinced that the spreading of that devotion was now to be his vocation. To day there is an “ex-voto” before Our Lady’s Altar in Issoudun Basilica written by himself: “A traveller, one day learnt here your glorious title, O Sovereign Queen of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. I fell down at the feet of your ravishing image, and I rose your Missionary for life. In one second what grace! O My Mother what a vocation! 28th Dec., 1864. Victor Jouet, Missionary of the Sacred Heart.” But Mgr. Place was determined not to allow Father Jouet to become a Missionary of the Sacred Heart. To quote Father Piperon: “Mgr. Place absolutely opposed the departure of the good Father, who for six years came to spend the Christmas and the long vacation with us at the feet of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.” “The young community adopted him as one of its own. He acted always as one of the most devout children of the Congregation.”(26) In spite of this close attachment to the Community, Father Jouet’s name is inscribed in the Register of the Secular Priests, as in fact he did not take canonical vows according to the decree of approbation, but made private vows on the 26th Sept., 1869. Father Chevalier does not refer to any profession of Father Jouet, and Father Jouet, in a letter dated 20th Sept., 1870, to Mgr. de la Tour d’Auvergne, thanks the prelate for this help in his appeal to the Holy See for permission to join the Society. In the letter he continues: “Mgr. Place has granted me twelve months’ leave in order to restore my health which has been very indifferent for some time, and is at the moment very weak.” “Elsewhere Father Piperon speaks of this poor health of Father Jouet, and mentions that the leave of absence was extended for another year, during which time (1872) he accompanied Father Chevalier to Rome, where he had the consolation of obtaining permission from the Holy Father himself to live in the community at Issoudun. This authorisation seems to have been only temporary and provisional as appears from a letter from the Cardinal Vicar of Rome, on the occasion when Father Jouet, on account of the opposition that had grown up against him in the Congregation, was thinking of seeking annulment of what vows had taken.(27) The authorisation of the Pope and the long leave granted by the bishop were the consequences of the conflict between Mgr. Place and Father Jouet concerning devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, and in particular in connection with the bishop’s opposition to the Annals of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart which Father Jouet was editing. There is no doubt that Father Victor Jouet was one of the most remarkable figures that Father Chevalier gathered around him in the early days of the Society. We will see later on his intense activity and the important role he played in these early days. We may be surprised that Father Piperon gives such scant space to Father Jouet in his Biographical Notice on Father Chevalier, but in other documents he has written about him extensively, especially in some printed matter which has recently been rediscovered. In this text Father Piperon speaks at length on the worth and merits of Father Jouet, and defends him against those who attacked him during the years of crisis in the Congregration. It has been said that, by referring to Father Jouet only briefly in his Notice, Father Piperon was following the advice of the old adage; “It is better to be charitable than to tell all the facts.” However those who knew Father Piperon would know that that was not his policy. Let us say that he deemed it at least imprudent to make an energetic justification of Father Jouet just after the death of Father Chevalier, when the echoes of dissension had not yet faded away. What is more surprising is that the edition of title Notice brought out in 1912 did not reprint a eulogistic reference to Father Jouet by Father Piperon in the Annals of 1908. This reference had read: “Father Victor Jouet, a name well-knovm end greatly appreciated by the first readers of the Annals, was a priest of gifted intelligence and rare virtue. His geneous soul never faltered before difficulties, no matter how insurmountable they seemed. “Let the trials and difficulties come,” he used to say, as he set him himself to any work obedience gave him to do. His favourite maxim was always: “All for the Heart of Jesus, and Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.”(28) We can appreciate the piety and devotion of this good priest by the sentiments he expressed in the preface of the first number of the Annals: “Two years ago the title of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart was hardly known. Today it is on everyone’s lips. The title has been a delightful surprise for the faithful. The French Episcopate has surrounded it with a halo of glory, has explained its deep meaning and its sublime dignity. Pope Pius IX, in blessing it, has opened treasures of grace to the Church. In that short time the little spark has grown to a mighty flame. The breath of God Himself has spread it through the world with unbelievable rapidity. It has resulted in the most unexpected conversions, the most signal favours, the most extraordinary happenings. We have kept the secret of these marvelous graces to ourselves long enough. To remain silent any longer would be an ingratitude to Mary and Her Divine Son. Our Divine Master, the King of all souls, has Himself revealed this secret to the world. We now know that the Virgin of virgins exercises a royal dominion of love over the Heart of the King Himself. It is an honour to publish the works of God, and in the light of this new title of the Mother of God, we will study God’s designs in her regard, the prerogatives that are Hers, Her incomparable virtues, the influence She exercises around Her – in a word, all that She is and all that She has. Holy Scripture and the writings of the Fathers of the Church will be our guide in the theological treatment of this august title.

In this consoling and gentle light, we will study also the Heart of Jesus, and Mary Herself will teach us the true devotion to this most Sacred Heart. She will instruct us; will be our Model; will walk along with us and give us Her powerful help.”(29) But more of the Devotion later on. Its origin, its development, the letters of thanks, the requests – all will have their place in later chapters.

CHAPTER: XIV THE CLERICAL SCHOOLS OF THE SACRED HEART

PART I: Father Vandel and his Work for Country Parishes

Jean-Marie Vandel was born on the 22nd November, 1808, at Nernier, a village on the River Leman in the Savoy district. As there was no teacher in the small town, Jean received his first reading lessons from a seminarist, the future Abbe Pavre, who spent much of his holiday time instructing the young boy. When it became apparent that he had a possible vocation to the priesthood, he was sent to the Clerical School at Hermance where he was able to attend regular classes. The parish priest of Nernier had taken an interest in the young lad had tried to teach him the elements of Latin, but what with his parish duties and the fact that he already had two more advanced students on his hands, the good priest made little headway with Jean-Marie who, in those days, preferred playing games to studying. He was not inclined to take his studies seriously and the parish priest gave up hope for him. However, the young seminarist, Favre, persevered with him and, after his ordination, was instrumental in getting the boy into the College at Thonon where he had been appointed a professor. Jean-Marie remained at Thonon for eight years and eventually was admitted to the Major Seminary. Sickness, however, forced him to leave after a few months and he returned home. Here he again, rather unexpectedly, came into contact with Father Favre who, on account of sickness, had been granted leave from the College at Melan where he had recently been teaching. Together the two of them opened a small school in Nernier, but it was not to be of long duration as Father Favre’s health gradually deteriorated. Jean-Marie himself, having improved somewhat in health, sought a position more in keeping with his character and ambitions and, at the beginning of the scholastic year of 1834 was appointed as a supervisor at the Jesuit College of Chambery, and later at Fribourg with the same Society. During this period he kept up his studies in theology and was eventually ordained a priest at Fribourg on the 6th June, 1846. By this time he was nearly 33 years of age. He remained at the College for some time and was appointed Administrator there in December, 1848. Later he was appointed Parish Priest of Nyon (Canton de Vaud), a town on the shores of the Lake of Geneva. Nyon was a parish which, according to the census books numbered 992 Catholics including those in the outlying district. After a sickness of five months and several relapses, Father Vandel felt that the work was too much for him and decided to offer his resignation to the bishop. In his Notes of Retreat he wrote: “I have expressed my wish to His Lordship that he relieve me from the responsibility of the parish, which is really beyond me and leaves me little time for study or the affairs of my own salvation. I have asked for a smaller parish with the sincere intention of looking after the interests of my own soul and giving myself an opportunity for study.” The bishop, who knew him well and appreciated all the good work which his zeal had accomplished, would not consent to give him an inferior post or relieve him indefinitely from parish duties. However, knowing that he was in a precarious state of health, he granted him leave of absence which he could take in the diocese or anywhere he chose. Until he joined the Congregation of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart in 1866, Father Vandel took an annual holiday because of his indifferent health, thus gaining an intimate knowledge of the conditions with which the country priests throughout France had to contend. This made him aware of the growing danger of Protestantism throughout the countryside, and he decided to dedicate himself, even from afar, to the conversion of the Province of Vaud. It made him likewise appreciate the difficulties of priests living by themselves in isolated parishes and the dangers which beset them – a valuable experience in light of his future work. His diverse occupations brought him into contact with many people in various walks of life. His energetic apostolate and his public defence of the faith in Nyon had made him known throughout France. Several well-known families invited him to stay with them during his vacation periods. For instance, we find recorded that, on the 20th November, 1856, he set out for Fleury in the diocese of Meaux, to stay at the home of the Comtesse de la Rochejaquelin who had a great regard for his piety and learning. Unable to remain inactive for any length of time, he fulfilled the duties of chaplain at the home of the Comtesse and helped the parish priest by giving instructions in the local schools. Then the Comtesse applied to the Bishop of Poitiers, Mgr. Pie, for faculties for the visiting priest. His lordship replied: “Please inform the good parish priest of Nyon that I grant him full faculties to preach and hear confessions whilst he is in my diocese. You can never invite too many priests such as he to come amongst us. Encourage them to spread God’s blessings amongst the people while they are with us.” Since the doctor had ordered him to keep out in the open air as much as he could, Father Vandel, anxious to do as much good as he was able during his holiday, moved around through the various parishes. He was saddened by the widespread religious indifference and ignorance that he encountered, but what dismayed him most was the disappointment and discouragement of the country clergy who felt they were fighting a losing battle against the materialism of the age. With almost one voice they would say: “There is nothing we can do I”. However Father Vandel did not give up hope so easily and continued to make contact with the people wherever he could. His efforts were not without result and proved to him that personal contact with the laity was necessary. He had discovered, as Father Chevalier had done before his ordination to the diaconate, that, in order to do good amongst the people, one must win their confidence personally and must make oneself liked by them – advice which Father Chevalier himself had received from an old parish priest and which he put into practice all his life. He regarded it as the fundamental secret of a successful apostolate – individual contact with the parishioners, the conquest of souls one by one, “coeur a coeur.”‘ From this experience of the conditions prevailing in the country parishes and the urgent need of re-awakening a spirit of faith amongst the people there, the idea of the Oeuvre des Campagnes or Mission to the Country people slowly developed – an idea always associated with the name of Father Vandel. When he returned to Paris, Father Vandel discussed the pitiable conditions of religion that he found throughout the countryside with a zealous friend, Mlle. de Pomaret. This good woman told him that, by a coincidence, a person who was but a simple domestic had some time previously given her 1,000 francs to send to the parish priest of a poor country parish where she had just spent several weeks. During her stay there she herself had been instrumental in bringing a few people back to the Faith, but she realised that a missionary could do much more than she could. Father Vandel made it his business to meet this young girl (by name Marie Boussin) and promised to devote herself to the work which he had in mind. On her part, Mlle. de Pomaret solicited the interest of three influential lay people. A meeting was arranged at the home of the Comtesse de la Rochejaquelin and a committee was formed to go into the scheme thoroughly. The Committee comprised Father Vandel, the Vicomte de Melun and Messieurs Baudon, de Kegorlay and de Lambel. The next meeting was convened at the home of the Vicomte de Melun on the 3rd April, 1857, when a definite programme of procedure was drawn up, and Monsieur le Comte de Lambel was elected President. Several days later, it was decided, on the suggestion of Father Vandel, to set up a Bureau with an appointed Director who would look after current business and put into effect decisions made by the Council. In order to make the work and its object known to the clergy and the laity, Father Vandel published a brief pamphlet on the subject and later on made a resume of its contents in a still shorter brochure called “A Note on the Origin of the Oeuvre des Campagnes.” In this latter publication, Father Vandel stressed the fact that he regarded the Lay-Apostolate as the special duty of the more well-to-do and better educated classes amongst the Catholics. He urged the members to seek the assistance of associates amongst families which were in comfortable financial circumstances; but, in order not to interfere with the work of the Propagation of the Faith, an annual subscription of only 12 francs from each member and associate would be asked. The following proposals were put forward at the meeting and unanimously agreed on: 1. A bookshop would be opened where Catholic literature, prayer books and objects of piety could be obtained, 2. A charity clothing depot would be set up where poor people could obtain clothing, the lack of which they often used us an excuse for not going to Mass or meetings. 3. The members of the Work would financially help poor parish priests in the upkeep of their curates. Many parishes were without assistant priests because of lack of finance. 4. The priests would be asked to form a group which would devote itself to the work of the Country Mission, thus complementing the efforts made by the lay members. 5. A crusade of “good works” would be inaugurated in the parishes, preceded by a crusade of prayer. The Oeuvre des Campagnes prospered in spite of all the difficulties and of its critics. To seek further enlightenment in his work, Father Vandel paid a visit to the saintly Cure d’Ars. The Cure encouraged him to go ahead, assuring him that the work would succeed. “He told me,” wrote Father Vandel, “that the best means of obtaining results was to multiply our small works of piety and charity at the church and away from the church, amongst the poor, the children, the sick – in fact with everyone we meet. His main advice was to elicit the help of a body of priests who would be willing to form themselves into a Congregation whose object would be to reawaken a spirit of faith throughout the countryside.” After his visit to the holy Cure, Father Vandel’s primary and all-absorbing aim was to establish this company of auxiliary priests. Already he had formed in his mind a rule of life for them. However, in spite of encouragement from many priests to whom he mentioned his scheme, he found it most difficult to find recruits. The Superior of the Missionaries of St. Francis de Sales did not hesitate to express his fears for the success of the venture. “Having had the task of evangelising the country parishes with my Missionaries for the past two years,” he told Father Vandel, “we have had very little success. The auxiliary priest, no doubt, will be able to sow the seeds of the faith here and there; he will be able to harvest a few grains of Christian life by teaching the people to pray and distributing pious objects amongst them, but the difficulty will be to gather these grains into the one bundle and conserve them.” Father Dupont of Tours introduced Father Vandel to Father Diot, the Superior of the Fathers of Our Lady of Hope whose work also included missions to the country people. Father Diot offered to help, and informed Father Vandel that his Society was about to open a Novitiate in Boulig where any of his recruits would be welcome. However, the project of the Novitiate was not proceeded with and the relationship between the two missions remained merely one of good will. There was not complete agreement amongst the members of the Council concerning the plan of auxiliary priests and the allocation of funds in their regard. Father Carriere wrote on this point: “In the mind of the Founder the end to be obtained was the re-awakening of a spirit of Faith in the country parishes by a ministry adapted to the circumstances and needs of the time. It was necessary in order to achieve this to form a group of auxiliary priests, a body of special workers which Father Vandel hoped to found, unite and form. With this object in view he was prepared to use most of the funds collected by the Council. The formation of a group of workers would assure a plentiful harvest. However, several of the members did agree with this point of view. Seeing that the workers amongst the clergy were not forthcoming, they wished to use the resources in hand for more general purposes.” These words of Father Carriere make it clear that Father Vandel’s idea was to bring together a group of priests to carry out his scheme. He was looking for priests, not just young men who desired to be priests, and hoped to prepare and form them for the specific work of evangelising the country parishes. His only intention was the welfare of the Faith in these outlying areas, and he realised that only a group of priests with the same idea could help him conduct missions and help parish priests, even temporarily, in their difficulties. His ideal was to bring a body of priests together who, under the title of Auxiliaries, would live together in community and undertake the humble and meritorious work of the country mission. It was with these ideas and ideals uppermost in his mind that he decided to go and put his problems to Father Chevalier. In the meantime, while he was experiencing difficulty in recruiting auxiliary priests, Father Vandel had inaugurated what he called the Association of Missionary Parish Priests, This was a group of priests who would remain in their parishes but who promised to meet together three times a year for a common conference, to exchange ideas and give an account of their results of the methods agreed on in their Council. They had agreed, in their first meeting on 24th September, 1861, under the presidency of Fathei Vandel, to invite, at least once a year, one of their confreres to preach a series of sermons or conduct similar spiritual exercises in their parishes. They also promised to make themselves available for such work if called upon by their fellow priests. Besides his work amongst the clergy, Father Vandel endeavoured to instruct and enlighten the laity by opening libraries in the various parishes and establishing schools where he could. The difficulty in this latter project was to obtain teachers; so, with this end in view, the School for Country Teachers was founded and suitable candidates who offered their services were trained and their upkeep guaranteed. All these various activities brought Father Vandel into contact with people in all walks of life, both lay and ecclesiastical. In particular, he had many dealings with the Jesuit Fathers, some of whom approved of his ideas and some who did not. Father Le Blanc was a keen supporter and helped him, particularly in the founding of the School for Teachers.

PART II: FATHER VANDEL IN CONTACT WITH FATHER CHEVALIER.

It was really through Father Le Blanc, S.J., that Father Vandel was brought into contact with Father Chevalier. It came about in this way: Father Le Blanc had sent Father Chevalier a copy of Father Vandel’s book, “I’Oeuvre des Campagnes.” Father Chevalier wrote a letter of thanks, stating: “I am very grateful indeed for the precious book you have been kind enough to send me. I was really not aware of its existence. I have read it through and it seems to me to be very useful and practical.” The perusal of this book was the origin of the many communications and interviews between Father Chevalier and Father Vandel. On 28th August, Father Chevalier wrote to Father Le Blanc: “Yesterday, I wrote to Father Vandel at the address you gave me. Judging by his book, he is a man of great worth. If it be the Will of the good God that he join us, we will readily and joyfully appoint him in charge of our mission work. Every day we ask the Divine Heart of Jesus to send us a man of His Own choice to take over this work. The more we progress, the more we realise, in view of the necessity of this work, our inadequacy and the weakness of our resources. Pray for us and for me in particular. I firmly believe that one of the ends of our Society coincides completely with that proposed by Father Vandel. It will be easy for him to accept our plans. I will await his reply before writing to the devout ecclesiastics whose names you gave me.” On the 6th September, Father Chevalier again wrote to Father Le Blanc: “Father Vandel has replied to my letter in a very friendly and cooperative manner. He hopes to come to Issoudun soon to discuss the whole matter with us. I believe that his union with us is indeed a precious conquest. Let us pray it will prove so.” Before this correspondence began, Father Vandel had often heard Father Chevalier spoken of by Mlle. de Larochere, a strong supporter of the work Issoudun.(2) A further letter to Father Le Blanc from Father Chevalier on December reads: “Father Vandel appears to be animated by a very good spirit. I believe he will fit perfectly into our work for the Sacred Heart here. We would willingly make him our Superior. When you see him you might sound out his opinion on this matter.” Father Chevalier was most desirous of having the Parish-Priest-Missionary Group unite their forces with the Missionaries of the Sacred with Father Vandel as Superior, for, in spite of all his energy and activity, his own health was failing and he felt he could not keep up with his work. Father Piperon wrote of him at this time: “The health of Rev. Father Chevalier, until now quite robust, was not equal to his many labours. A chronic state of laryngitis left him very weak and even threatened to lead him to the grave.” This was a sore trial to a man of his energetic temperament which did not know how to rest or relax. Would he have to leave his life work unfinished? There was no one around him at the time who could adequately replace him. Had he not pres to take on more than he could achieve? Perhaps his trust in Divine Providence had been nothing more than an illusion. Without him the work: fail. These indeed were for him agonising possibilities to contemplate: only for him but for his confreres and friends alike. This poor state of health was to continue for two years. It was imperative that he take a long holiday, at least that he spend the Winter months in the Midlands.(3) We are able to follow the course of his sickness by letters, that, he wrote in 1865 when he thought he should “wind up his affairs.” On the 30th July of that year he wrote to Montlucon; “Next Wednesday morning I am going away for ten days. I am going to have a quiet rest with my dear old mother at Richelieu.” From there he wrote to Madame des Mesloizes on 10th August that his health had somewhat improved: “I am hoping to be completely cured in time. I am following the wise advice given me. I intend prolonging my holiday another eight days but will be leaving Richelieu to-day to travel around the Tours district in the interest of our young Society.” Eight days later he wrote: “The journey that I have just made has done me a lot of good. My health seems to be much better.” Part of this recovery was made at Montlucon as a guest of Mlle. de Montaignac who, however, was not enjoying good health herself. On his return he wrote to her: “Thanks very much for your kindness. My health is much better and I hope you will soon be able to say the same of your own. Take care of yourself. If the doctor advises you to take a holiday in the Midlands during the Winter, obey him implicitly.” Another letter written to Mlle. de Montaignac on the 5th October reveals his deeply spiritual views on the question of suffering: “You are a child of trial and suffering. Thank God for it. It is the lot of every soul which reposes on the Heart of Jesus and consecrates itself to His Love. At the last Supper, St. John, in the ecstasy of his love, could see nothing but peace, quietude and happiness in the days before him. There was not a cloud in the heaven of his life. But soon he was to recline on the Breast of his Saviour and learn the secrets of His Sacred Heart. Then all changed. Within hours he was to witness the Agony in the Garden, the scene at the Praetorium, the Scourging, the Gross, Calvary and Death. You are really a privileged soul. May you always be happy in your sufferings. Am I able to pity you? No, but I do wish you well. You will discover that Our Divine Master is good and will give you back your health when you need it.” Father Chevalier concluded the letter by saying that he hoped to arrive at Montlucon again on the 27th, between one and two o’clock, if all went well. However, he was to suffer another relapse on 1st October he wrote: My health continues to be difficult. The bronchitis which I contracted at Mont-Dore will not leave me “.” On the 23rd we find him writing from Chateau de Beauvais, near Clion: “I do not know if it is the weather or my general run-down condition, but my health does not seem to improve. In reproach myself, I am staying here in the country till next Friday.” He was following the advice that he had already given to Mlle. De Montaignac: “You must lock after yourself, health is a treasure given to us by God and we have to account for it to Him just like everything else.” Again he wrote two days later: “There has been a slight improvement in my health, and I think rest is the only thing that will cure me. Everyone here is advising me to stay a few days longer so as to avoid the extreme fatigue of the Confessions in Issoudun on the Eve of the Feast of All Saints. On the following day there was a further relapse and he recorded: “The improvement I felt yesterday seems to have disappeared. Last night I did not sleep at all owing to a state of fever and severe coughing. However, I am following my usual routine. I believe that, if I am going to get well, I must observe an almost absolute silence. This is my main resolution, even if it means not hearing Confessions for several months, if necessary. I believe that, besides the laryngitis, I have severe congestion on the chest.” In December there was a marked improvement: “I believe that your good prayers have brought about a better state of health. I am feeling really much better. I am soon going to start hearing Confessions again – something I have been unable to do in past months.” However, those around him did not share his sentiments of optimism and on the 11th January he wrote: “My health has improved a little but, in spite of that, the doctor has told me I must not stay in Issoudun. Next Monday I am setting out for Hyeres under the protection of the Sacred Heart and Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. How long I will stay there I do not know. Not long, I hope! This journey does not appeal to me at all. I would not go if obedience did not oblige me.” The visit to Hyeres brought results, as Father Chevalier was able to write: “The climate here at Hyeres always does me good. The doctor now suggests that I go on to Amelie-les-Bains, which I hope to do at the end the month or the beginning of March. My health is not really bad at the moment, but I cannot afford to be over-confident lest I be deceiving myself. On 15th March we read in another letter to Mlle. de Montaignac: “I know you yourself have been carrying your Cross. My own health is far from the best. A fresh cold is on me and gives me severe fits of coughing. I have been forced to interrupt my visits to the Baths and so will have to postpone my return to Issoudun till the end of April. I will not be able to make the proposed visit to you till some time in May.” He continued to be handicapped by indifferent health during the following years. On the 3rd January, 1867, almost two years after his initial breakdown, we again find him writing from Amelie-les-Bains: “I hope to be leaving soon as I have followed the treatment and the doctor thinks it is sufficient for the time being.!! On 12th April he again wrote to his sick friend in Montlucon: “It see that Our Lord wishes me to get well, so I will try to visit Montlucon after Easter. In the meantime, you can inform me about the state of the various groups of the Third Order there, and I hope to be able occupy myself more seriously and actively in this most important work.” On the 17th September it was necessary for him to return once again to Amelie-les-Bains for further treatment, and it was not till 1869 that he was able to resume full duties at Issoudun. Father Chevalier’s intense activity over the years had taken its toll. The worry of building the church and the monastery, the organising of the Association of Secular Priests, the Association of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart and the Third Order, apart from all the cares of founding the Society itself, made inroads into his usually robust constitution. Father Piperon was not exaggerating when he wrote that his sickness nearly lead him to the grave and caused deep concern to his confreres and friends. In the critical situation in which the Founder and his Congregation now found themselves, the appearance of Father Vandel on the Issoudun scene seemed to be an act of Providence. But actually the designs of Providence turned out to be quite different from those anticipated. Father Vandel was destined not to take the place of Father Chevalier as Superior.

PART III: THE MEETING OF FATHER VANDEL WITH FATHER CHEVALIER: FATHER VANDEL JOINS THE SOCIETY

Actually, the first meeting of Father Chevalier with Father Vandel was not at Issoudun as intended but at a thermal-bathing pool near Conte-Dore mere they met quite accidentally. In a letter to Father Le Blanc on 16th July, 1865 written soon after his breakdown in health, Father Chevalier stated: “I am at Monte-Dore, endeavouring to get over a severe bout of laryngitis. Last week, Divine Providence brought Father Vandel and myself together by chance in this locality. For a long time I have been anxious to meet this pious and well-respected priest, whom you

yourself appreciate so much, in order to exchange views with him on our dear work of the Sacred Heart, for I was convinced that our ideas and sentiments would have much in common. For four days we were able to meet together and discuss our plans and ambitions. His ideas are ours and ours are his. The main result of our talks was that since we are both working for the same end, and since union is strength, we should unite our forces in order that this admirable work may triumph. We agreed, on some minor modifications to the Plan of our young Society. He will, no doubt, inform you of these as he tells me he is going to see you soon. Father Vandel is indeed a man of God and is a very valuable asset to our work. His knowledge and advice will be a great help to us. I have only one desire, and that is to appoint him in charge of the work which I know he will direct with wisdom and prudence. By uniting himself with us, he will be able to draw his Missionary Parish Priests to our work. Although his usual residence will be at Issoudun, he will be able to carry on his mission to the country parishes and go to Paris as often as necessary.” Such was the fact of the union of these two zealous priests in all its simplicity. There was a common outlook on the ends they were pursuing and a desire to unite forces, with some minor modifications made to the Plan of the Society, permitting the admission of the Missionary Parish Priests and changing some of the Rules pertaining to the Association of Secular Priests, we might legitimately ask: “Were they going too far? Were they aiming too high?” When Father Piperon, who was an intimate friend of Father Vandel, describes this period of the early days of the Society, he stresses the harmony of outlook and ideals between the two priests, in spite of their difference in age. Father Chevalier, at this time, was 41 years of age, in very bad health and in a state of exhaustion on account of his sickness. Father Vandel was 57 and to quote Father Piperon, “was a grand and fine man, more worn out by his excessive activities than by his age.” Father Piperon continues: “The two priests were often condemned to a state of worrying inactivity, more difficult to bear than their sickness itself. Both of them – men of great zeal and virtue – could not conceive life of a priest as anything else but a life of devotion to human souls the glory of God. These two outstanding priests seemed to complement one another. A cordial and pious friendship grew up between them rapidly, their hearts not on fire with the same flame? Did they not both have the same ambition: to make the Heart of Jesus loved and to win souls for Him? We can easily understand what would have been the main topic of their conversations. After these first meetings, Father Vandel journeyed to Paris where had several appointments to keep. All he had seen and learnt at Issoudun had impressed him very much. He had celebrated Holy Mass at the Shrine of Pilgrimage; had prayed long and with great fervour before the image of’ Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. What was passing through the mind and soul of this pilgrim? continues Father Piperon. “That was his own secret, but obvious emotion and burning words revealed his thoughts in spite of himself. When leaving us, he bade us au revoir with such affection and sympathy that he left no doubt as to what his future intentions were. We said amongst ourselves: ‘When we see him again it will not be as a pilgrim; when we see him again at the feet of the Madonna it will be at his consecration to the service of the Sacred Heart; he will return to become a Missionary of the Sacred Heart.'”(5) Father Chevalier must surely have known of these intentions when he previously had written to Father Le Blanc: “Although living at Issoudun, he will be able to carry on his work for the Country-Mission and visit Paris when necessary.” Several months later, Father Ramiere heard of these meetings between the two priests, and he wrote to Father Vandel on 9th October, 1865, “I have learnt that you met Father Chevalier at Monte-Dore and so have come in contact with another work, apart from the Apostolate of Prayer, which is equally dear to me, although I have had only indirect dealings with it: namely, the Association of Secular Priests of the Sacred Heart. Your experience would have already made you aware of the lonely isolation of many of the country priests and the danger it is to the clergy, especially the young priests. You will appreciate, on the other hand, the necessity for these priests, whether it be from the point of view of their own sanctification or the efficacy of their ministry, to seek the companionship of their priest confreres. You did very well in your book to stress several of the advantages of such a union. The Association of priests of the Sacred Heart has, as its object, the establishing and stabilising of a union of this nature under a fixed form and constitution. This work at present is far from being properly organised, and Father Chevalier has asked me to remodel its constitution. Before undertaking this task, I want to avail myself of all the knowledge and experience of priests who have been occupied in similar movements. No one better than yourself, my dear Father, is able to help me in this regard. I would be deeply indebted to you if you could help me, and I am sure you will be performing a very useful work for the glory of God if you give me your ideas on the subject. Father Chevalier most likely has already given you a Copy of the existing rules; if not, I will be pleased to do so myself.” In the course of the following months, Father Vandel felt himself more and more attracted to Issoudun, Here is what Father Piperon has recorded of this period: “Six months went by after Father Vandel’s visit to Issoudun. During this time he reflected deeply on the decision he was about to make; the prayed ardently about it and sought advice from holy priests who he (thought could best help him. Finally, at the end of January, 1866, he made formal application to Father Chevalier to be admitted to the Society of [Missionaries of the Sacred Heart.” Actually, Father Chevalier was at Hyeres receiving further medical treatment and using the curative thermal waters of the spring there when he received Father Vandel’s letter. His health was still very indifferent. We ;have a letter that he wrote from Hyeres on this visit to Madame des Mesloizes, sending her at the same time a copy of the pamphlet, “The Power of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart,” which he praised highly. In the letter, he told her that he “was feeling well, but the doctor was of the opinion. that he should make another visit to Amelie-les-Bains, which he hoped to do at the beginning of next month.”(6) It was from Hyeres that Father Chevalier answered Father Vandel’s letter of application. Knowing that Father Vandel himself was not enjoying good health, he invited him to come to Hyeres and spend a few days with him. “We will receive you here with great joy,” he wrote, “as you have been sent to us by Our Lord Himself. Since you are run down yourself, the climate and the waters here will do you a lot of good, and we will be able to talk about the future and our problems at our leisure. Make sure you come now and I will be awaiting you.” Father Vandel decided to accept the invitation, but he first spent a few days with the small community at Issoudun. He attended all the spiritual exercises, worked with the confreres and took part in the recreations. “Here everything and everybody are very edifying,” he wrote. “There is no better place to pray with devotion than in the holy and magnificent church of the Sacred Heart.” Writing of the Novitiate during this visit to Issoudun, he recorded: “The Novitiate which is before me does not frighten me, as I have been able to observe since coming to the community here that all the tasks are proportioned to the strength and resources of each member. Besides, I have been able to notice the good spirit in the community and now know the kind of life that is lived here. I have found a life which is to my liking, which will help to restore my health and which will be most useful to me in my future work for the Country-Mission.” This genuine appreciation of an eminent witness, such as Father Vahdel, is a tribute to the good spirit that prevailed in Issoudun in the early days of the Society and also to the capable administration of Father Chevalier, in whose hands the government of the young Society rested. He found that the ideas and spirit of the community were in conformity with his own, as Father Chevalier had assured him they would be, and here at last was a way of life most suited to himself and his work. On the last point he wrote: “I am convinced that the house of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart at Issoudun will be the headquarters we are looking for. That is why I am anxious to join forces with Father Chevalier. We will work together to achieve our objects with the help and blessing of Almighty God.”

Although now his life was to be that of a Missionary of the Sacred Heart, his aim was to continue his apostolate amongst the people of the country parishes, and he hoped his membership in the Society would facilitate its accomplishment. All that Father Chevalier had told him the previous year gave him hope that this would be so. Issoudun, he hoped, would provide what the Missionaries of St. Francis de Sales and the Fathers of Our Lady of Hope had been unable to offer – a centre for the auxiliary priests and Missionary-Parish-Priests. After his brief stay at Issoudun, Father Vandel continued his journey to Amelie-les-Bains where, at the beginning of March, he met his friend, Father Chevalier who had arrived there from Hyeres. The two priests were able to discuss their plans at length, and Father Vandel occupied himself in drawing up rules for his School for Teachers and working out ways and means for their livelihood. He kept up his correspondence with Father Le Blanc on this subject, seeking advice as to the best means of procedure. During his conversations with Father Chevalier, Father Vandel became more and more convinced of his vocation. “What happiness! What grace! What Mercy, if I am to become a Missionary of the Sacred Heart. I can only do so with the help of Mary and St. Joseph. I will beg them to assist me every day of my Novitiate.”(7) Both Father Chevalier and Father Vandel wrote to Father Ramiere concerning the Rules for Secular Priests which he was drawing up. They were anxious to study the modifications he was making in order that the Missionary Parish Priests could become affiliated or join the Society. Father Ramiere replied to Father Vandel on the 15th March: “I have just received your letter with that of Father Chevalier. The good Father will permit me to address the reply to you. May the Heart of Our Lord continue to bless the happy thought with which He has inspired you of joining the young Society. I have no doubt that, in spite of your sickness, in fact because of it, you will render eminent service to the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. God has given you talents of which perhaps you would have been completely unaware if you had continued on in your ordinary work and I am sure these talents will produce no less fruits than your most successful missions. In a letter I had some time ago from the holy bishop of Beauvais to whom I had spoken of your sickness, the Prelate remarked: ‘It could well be a blessed sickness that will enable Father Vandel to do even more than he did on the missions.’ You will still be able to continue your work for the Country Mission, and besides you will have the Annals of the Priests of the Sacred Heart at your disposal, in which you will be able to treat of practical matters concerning the object of that important work. With your co-operation the Annals can be the medium of the continuation of your excellent book, and the articles you write will be read with great interest by all those conversant with the movement. I am expecting much from these works dedicated, as they will be, to the Divine Heart of Jesus. I am sending you a rough draught of the Rules and ask you to tell Father Chevalier that as yet it is only a provisional document and not to be printed. Copies can be sent around to capable priests asking for suggestions regarding its modification and completion. Whatever comes of my poor efforts in the matter the union itself is a grand idea and noble work. I am going to pray to the good St. Joseph with all my heart to grant you and Father Chevalier, together with our good friend – Mlle. de Montaignac – the necessary health to glorify the Heart of Jesus.”

PART IV: ORIGIN AND EARLY HISTORY OF THE APOSTOLIC SCHOOL

The activities of Father Jean Vandel, however, were to follow quite a different line from that anticipated by Father Ramiere. Father Jules Vandel, in recording his memories of his uncle, tells us of the origin of the new interest which was to occupy much of Father Vandel’s time – “La Petite Oeuvre” – the Apostolic School. It was Palm Sunday, falling that year (1866) on the 25th March. Father Chevalier and Father Vandel had left Amelie-les-Bains at an early hour to offer their Masses in the church at Arles-sur-Tech, besides which stood the tomb of the Saints Abdon and Sennon, whose bodies had been brought there centuries before. The tomb stood on an elevated piece of ground close to a protecting back wall. Although there were no springs or water pipes in the vicinity of the tomb, at times water flowed from it from an unknown source, and the water was regarded as miraculous. Arriving before the church had been opened, the two pilgrims sat down on the threshold of the church, and it was there in the course of their conversation that the idea of the Apostolic School was conceived. The general lines of the project were written down on a page of a note book the priests placed on the altar while they offered up their Masses. Here is Father Piperon’s rendition of what led up to the idea of founding an Apostolic School: “Father Vandel was explaining to Father Chevalier, with obvious feeling, how he had proposed to the Council that a gift of one sou per year should be asked from as many people of good will as could be contacted, and how the Council had rejected this proposal as impracticable and insufficient. ‘I am completely downcast,’ he added, ‘as this small subscription multiplied hundreds of times would have assured the necessary money for the work and would have guaranteed its future.’ We can readily understand – before continuing with Father Piperon’s narrative – that the Committee of Direction would regard the gift of a soul per year as quite inadequate as the work was faced with not inconsiderable expense, which could be met only by gifts and subscriptions. The quota at first had been fixed at twelve francs a year and later Father Vandel suggested reducing it to one franc per year. This would indicate that there had been little response to the original appeal for twelve francs – a plan which, to succeed, would have needed extensive propaganda and an army of zealous supporters. To the mind of the Central Committee the idea of a “sou a year” only aggravated the difficulties and would have required a campaign amongst a different milieu from the first. The Bureau naturally wondered how this new group could be contacted and whether the results would compensate for the effort put into the appeal. They, therefore, deemed the scheme unacceptable. The local Assembly, on the other hand, had previously accepted it, as Father Vandel later testified: “In a meeting held at the Bishop’s House in Blois, on the occasion of a conference between the members of the Mission, Parish Priests and the committee of the work for the country parishes, I proposed the idea of a sou per year. The proposition was well received” but when I wished to have it adopted by the central body in Paris, Father Hubin opposed my idea and it was voted out.” It was only in his discussions with Father Chevalier that the idea came to life again and had a bearing on the foundation of the Apostolic School. “On entering the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart,” wrote Father Vandel, “I proposed the idea to Father Chevalier who received it with enthusiasm. ‘An excellent idea,’ he said. ‘We will use it to finance and maintain an Apostolic School which will become a nursery for vocations to our humble Society.'” (8) Whence came this idea of an Apostolic School and Father Founder’s rather audacious scheme of financing it on gifts of “a sou a year?” When Father Piperon wrote of the origin of the “la Petite Oeuvre,” he commenced by mentioning the many cares which weighed down the spirit of Father Chevalier at this time – cares and troubles we have dealt with in preceding chapter,! Resuming the narrative, we again quote Father Piperon: “The Very Rev. Father Chevalier was quite engrossed in these ideas, lived, and wished to live, only for his Congregation. Convinced that the voice he heard in the depths of his heart was the voice of Jesus, he waited with an unshakeable confidence the fulfilment of his hopes.” Rev. Father de Ponlevoy, S.J., no doubt still influenced by the Vaugirard ideas, wrote of the Congregation about this time: “This Society will always be the ‘pusillus grex.’ This is what it ought to be and what suffices for it. It is the leaven which will ferment the masses by its example and impact.” However, Father Chevalier had other ideas. He was thinking of his motto: “May the Sacred Heart of Jesus be everywhere loved’.” This is why he was worried about a successor when his health was failing, and about the number of members which at present were all too few. This also was the reason why he was happy to have with him Father Vandel in whom he saw a solution to the first problem and even to the second, as he felt sure the good priest could bring some of the Missionary Parish Priests into the Society. While these thoughts were uppermost in his mind, he listened to Father Vandel speaking of the scheme – “a sou a year.” “Father Chevalier,” continues Father Piperon, “listened in silence, reflecting on the proposed means of finance. Suddenly, as if moved by a clear inspiration, he remarked: “Your idea is fruitful. God always uses small means to accomplish big things. If you think it is feasible, we will use your idea of a sou a year to found an Apostolic School.” A prompt and spontaneous reply which shows what was Father Chevalier’s abiding thought – the welfare of his beloved Congregation. It revealed the mind and spirit of a holy Founder. His Congregation, as yet so small and feeble, occupied the first place in his affections. It was constantly in his thoughts and he was forever studying ways and means of strengthening and developing it. His keen intelligence made him realise the enormous possibilities of an Apostolic School, and Father Vandel’s “sou a year” scheme appealed to him as a means of financing it. Father Piperon leaves no doubt that the idea of establishing an Apostolic School came from the Founder himself. He writes: “Thus the Sacred Heart of Jesus gave to the pious Founder the idea of an Apostolic School and presented him with the means of making it succeed. If the plan still remained to be implemented and completed through the years, ‘La Petite Oeuvre,’ so called from the beginning, continued in the form and ideals originally conceived by Father Chevalier. It was the fruit of his own mind – the result of his own work.”(9) Father Piperon has laid emphasis on the fact that Father Chevalier was the founder of the Apostolic School precisely to correct an opinion expressed in the Annals in 1907 by Father Lanctin, one of the first pupils in 1867 and later to be Director of the School for many years. Father Lanctin was a native of Issoudun and, at the time when Father Chevalier and Father Vandel were discussing their projects at Amelie-les-Bains, he would have been eleven years old. He used to serve the Mass of Rev. Father Mousseau who had succeeded Father Piperon as chaplain to the Hostel and Prison in Issoudun. Father Mousseau often visited the Lanctin family and it was, doubtless, through him that young Arthur was admitted to the newly-formed Apostolic School. In 1907 Father Lanctin wrote in the Annals that Father Mousseau attributed the founding of the school to Father Vandel. Influenced, no doubt, by his affection and sympathy for Father Vandel, who certainly organised the early stages of the school and had more direct contact with the students than anyone else, Father Lanctin concluded that Father Vandel’s meetings with the Councils in Blois and Paris was to raise funds for the upkeep of “an apostolic work.” He quotes Father Vandel as proposing to Council “a very simple means of obtaining funds with a view to obtaining ecclesiastical vocations. No one would have refused it, and this sou, multiplied hundreds of times, would be able – at least I was hoping so – to give priests and apostles to the Church.” However, neither Father Vandel nor Father Piperon has mentioned anywhere that the funds were to be collected for that particular end. We do not find in Father Carriere’s biography of Father Vandel any reference to the fact that he was thinking of founding a school for future priests. The only thing that Father Carriere writes on the subject is: “The founder of the Oeuvre des Campagnes was always hopeful of bringing together, under the title of ‘Auxiliaries,’ a number of devout priests who would live in community and help him in his humble yet meritorious mission, However, seeing that this venture did not produce any durable result, he began to understand that it was not the Will of Providence.”(11) This is why he founded the Association of Missionary Parish Priests and was looking for a Centre where existing Societies could meet – an effort which failed until he met Father Chevalier who interested himself in the movement. Father Vandel then had nothing more in mind than to found an Association of Auxiliary Priests living in community, along much the same lines as the priests at Issoudun. At that time he was not contemplating – nor was Father Chevalier – the establishment of a School for future priests. In those days in France the only provision made for the training of future priests in their early studies were the ordinary local colleges, and in some places, with the authorisation of the Government, Junior Seminaries. Certain parish priests used often gather around themselves groups of likely candidates and teach them the elements of Latin and the secular science, but this was fraught with many difficulties as we will see later on in the case of Elmont and Tournus. Actually, the first idea of a special institution for the training of young boys who wished to be priests is not attributable to either Father Chevalier or Father Vandel. Father Piperon explicitly attributes to Father Chevalier the initiative in founding our Apostolic School for the training of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart; but he does not tell us how or why this idea came to him at that particular time. To answer these questions it is necessary to go back not to Amelie-les-Bains but to Avignon. A Jesuit priest, called Father Alberie de Foresta, who was keenly interested in the foreign missions, maintained that the system of education in the schools of France cost the Church many priestly vocations. The atmosphere or irreligion in the high schools, added to the exorbitant charges which made it impossible for many parents to give their children a secondary education were not favourable to the fostering of vocations to the priesthood. He had a plan of offsetting these difficulties and encouraging vocations for the foreign missions by establishing in the various dioceses “The Work of Apostolic Schools.” To finance the scheme, Father de Foresta obtained donations of 1,000 francs each from a group of people whom he called “Founders,” enlisted the help of subscribers who promised to give 100 francs annually, and launched an appeal for associates who would give at least 2 francs. These last donors, following the system inaugurated by Mlle. Marie Pauline Jaricot for the Propagation of the Faith, were grouped into ten sections, each group comprising ten subscribers. With the help of Religious Superiors and the success of the appeal for funds, Father de Foresta was able to open his school with twelve students in October, 1865, at Avignon – six months before Father Chevalier and Father Vandel met at Amelie-les-Bains. Actually, Father de Foresta did not build a new school but enrolled the students as a distinct group in the Jesuit College at Avignon where they followed the usual course of studies. At the beginning of 1866, Father de Foresta enlarged the scope of his propaganda by issuing a leaflet on the work, the text of which was printed in the Messenger of the Sacred Heart. In the course of his travels, and on account of his frequent meetings with the Jesuits at Avignon concerning the Association of Secular Priests and the Third Order, Father Chevalier would certainly have heard of this work of Father de Foresta, for he modelled his own Apostolic School at Issoudun on the Avignon plan. For Father Foresta the idea offered a solution to the problem. The young aspirants to the priesthood followed the ordinary course of College studies but lived in a separate residence with their own Director – a system admirably suited to the accomplishment of their ideals. The intention of Father de Foresta was to establish several Apostolic Schools in various dioceses, all financed by the same Association, but each keeping its independence and autonomy. At the end of their studies the students would be free to choose their own vocation, i.e., to join a Religious Society, work as a secular priest or go to the foreign missions. Father de Foresta naturally hoped that many would choose this latter field of activity. Father Chevalier, of course, intended his Apostolic School to be a nursery for vocations to his own Congregation, a work as yet limited to France alone. The question of finance had been the big stumbling block, now Father Vandel had presented his idea of “a sou a year,” and in this Father Chevalier saw a solution. Actually, the idea of “a sou a year” was not original. The Propagation of the Faith had already borrowed the idea from an Anglican sect called the Anabaptists who were canvassing for a “sou a week.” Father Vandel’s scheme of a “sou a year” seemed to be far too inadequate but at least it had this advantage that it distinguished it the appeal of Father de Foresta for his Apostolic Schools. To further underline this distinction, so that people would know that the Issoudun School was for the recruitment of future Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, Father Piperon insisted that from the beginning it be called La Petite Oeuvre du Sacre Coeur. Why “of the Sacred Heart?” Father Piperon explains:”Because it is the cradle of the young Congregation of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart; because it is founded to develop and perpetuate this Congregation; because this Petite Oeuvre, like its mother – the Society itself – has been founded to make the Sacred Heart of Jesus known and loved everywhere. The Congregation completes the formation of its members; the Apostolic School prepares then. A student of the Apostolic School, then, is to the Congregation what a bud is in the ultimate producing of the fruit. Finally, the Apostolic School has for its patron the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and especially the Child Jesus, Who at the age of twelve astonished the Doctors by the wisdom of His answers. He is their Model.” Such were the beginnings of the Apostolic School. As we have mentioned before, the project was placed on the altar during the Holy Mass of the two Founders on Palm Sunday, 25th March, 1866, which was also the usual date for the Feast of the Annunciation. That is why Father Vandel wrote: “The Apostolic School had for its cradle an altar, and it was born on the day that the Infant Jesus took Flesh in the womb of Mary, His Mother.” Naturally, the patronal feast of the Apostolic School has always been the Feast of the Annunciation. Father Vandel, writing on the 12th June, 1872, has added another interesting little item: “It seems to me that this Petite Oeuvre, on the very day of its birth, received its baptism on Spanish soil. Sometime after our Mass we made a pilgrimage across the border, in honour of our projected work, to the church in Jonquiera, the nearest parish to French territory just a few miles from Arles-sur-Tech. Just as it is customary to offer presents on a baptismal day, we distributed in the precincts of the church quite a lot of medals of Our Blessed Lady to a large gathering of children who flocked around us. It was the first act of the apostolate of the Apostolic School of the Sacred Heart.” The thermal season of healing waters had come to an end. Father Chevalier returned to the community at Issoudun, and Father Vandel was not long in following him. It was without doubt a sign of the unshakeable confidence that Father Chevalier had in the protection of Our Blessed Lady that he undertook this work on the flimsy prospect of the “sou per year” scheme. But there were reasons to justify this confidence. His many journeys in search of his health had given him many valuable contacts with influential people who were to help him in the future. His tireless efforts to establish the Association of secular priest, and the third Order had won him many sympathisers. His personal experience in financing the building of the church and monastery, and the result of his distribution of small holy cards at 20 cents a copy, had taught him the value of little gifts and small donations. The Annals, which first appeared in the year – 1856 – also presented a means of advertisement and income. In the next Chapter we will speak of the popularity of the many religious publications which appeared about this time. But, above all, the ever-increasing members in the Association of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart was the main reason for Father Founder’s confidence. The Association was now flourishing. At the time of the inception of the Apostolic School, it numbered almost 300,000 members. By September it was to grow to 600,000, by December to 800,000, and in 1857 over 1,000,000 names were inscribed in the register. It was owing to this healthy state of the Association of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart that the project of the Apostolic School was able to be launched and take definite form. Father Chevalier was able to count on a legion of zealous workers who devoted themselves to all the Issoudun undertakings. Moreover, the number of pilgrims to Our Lady’s shrine, who also left their small donations was increasing every day. Taking into account the worthy nature of the appeal, and in spite of the small donation asked, it is estimated that if only half the 800,000 members enrolled on 1st January, 1867, gave a sou each, the sum of 20,000 franks would have been collected for the year. Some, of course, would, have been more generous, thus making up in some way for the non-contributors. This calculation seems to have been exact enough. Commencing with twelve students, the number grew to 27 by the end of the scholastic year. Estimating the upkeep of each student as 500 francs per annum, this would amount to 13,500 francs for all, which, still left an inadequate sum for building and furniture expenses. It is certain that the expenditure and the upkeep of the students exhausted the funds in hand right from the commencement. The Bulletin of November, 1867 – the School opened in October – expressly states: “The present resources prevent us from going further.” The Bulletin also adds, “It was without design or foresight on our part that the first students numbered twelve, the same number as Our Lord’s Apostles.” At the end of 1867, two months after its foundation, four more had been added to the original twelve and two more were expected. Many more students had already applied for admission, but lack of finance and space limited the number to 18 for the time being. The Bulletin further informs us in December: “More than 100 boys have been recommended to us, but we will have to make a choice amongst these proportionate to the funds in hand. At present we have 18 with us.” However, God was to bless the work, and by March, 1868, the number of candidates totalled 150. The finances improved proportionately, as we read in the records: “Several more students are to be received after Easter, and another group will be admitted in October at the beginning of the new term.”(12). Father Piperon has noted: “On his return from Amelie-les-Bains, Father Chevalier, in spite of all his duties and business, did not forget the Apostolic School. However, he was not able to cope with all the implications of this important foundation himself. Neither his indifferent health nor the stress of other engagements permitted this. Fortunately, the Heart of Jesus had just sent him an outstanding subject in the person of Father Jean Marie Vandel, whose vast experience, rare qualities and deep piety made him a valuable member of the Society.” Father Chevalier believed that he could not entrust this beloved work into better hands. From then on he relied entirely on Father Vandel. Appointed Director-General of this work, the latter devoted himself unreservedly to organising and making a success of it. He dedicated to it all his labours, his writings, his preaching, his time – in fact his whole heart. In spite of his health – always doubtful to say the least – one would have thought that he had regained all the energy of his early priesthood. Father Vandel organised the new work entrusted to him along much the same lines as he had organised the Oeuvre des Campagnes. At the head was the Council, that, is, the General administration of the Society. Then, came the Executive Committee with a Bureau-Director and Father Vandel as President, which explains his title of Director-General of the work. This Committee was made up of a body of zealous supporters who looked after the propaganda, the raising of funds and the maintenance of the School. It drew up the annual budget which was submitted to the Head Council for approbation. The Head Council decided on the number of students to be admitted and the suitability of each as a worthy candidate. Father Chevalier, as President, signed the report card of each student at the end of each term. The Director of the Bureau, acting on behalf of the Executive Committee, had the right of directing the use of the funds and of supervising the appeal work in the parishes, schools, libraries, etc. He also had the right to visit the School in order to assess its material needs, its installations, etc. The effective direction of the School, i.e., in matters of spirituality and studies, was in the hands of the Superior, subject to the Director General who, by delegation, carried out the ordinances of the Council. These various titles of those directing the Apostolic School later on led to a deal of confusion amongst those who were not acquainted with the work in its initial stages. For example, Father H. Peeters, who entered the Apostolic School in 1873, after Father Vandel had given up active teaching, has written: “The title of Director of the Apostolic School seemed to signify something quite different from what we understood it to mean. To us the Director meant the priest who was directly in charge of us, and Father Vandel was certainly not that. For one thing, he did not even live at Chesal-Benoit and so was not its Director in fact. We looked upon the Superior there as the Director. Father Vandel used to visit us from time to time at Chezal-Benoit to give us a spiritual lecture or a lesson on some subject in our studies. Sometimes, if a student needed serious correction or wanted spiritual direction, we could see him in his room; but these appearances, often separated by long intervals, hardly justified his being called ‘Director,’ as we understood it.”(13). It is perhaps worthy of note that the first donation that came in under the sou a year scheme was a postage stamp worth four sous from the territory of St. Francis de Sales. The Fathers regarded this blue stamp as the symbol of a new era. “Soon,” wrote Father Piperon, “enough sous cames in to adopt several students.” The main problem occupying the mind of the Founder (Father Chevalier) and his collaborators was where to establish the new School. We have already said that the intention was to follow the plan of Father de Foresta, i.e., to form a distinct community of students attached to some already-established college, where the students could attend the ordinary classes, but live their own separate life under proper direction. But where to find the College which would accept students under these conditions was the difficulty. When Father Chevalier was contemplating and explaining his plan at Airelie-des-Bain he was counting on the help of his bishop, Mgr. de la Tour d’Auvergne – and not without reason. About 17 miles from Issoudun, in a wooded part of the country, stood the ancient Benedictine Abbey of Chezal-Benoit, which had been confiscated by the revolutionaries. The “Echo des Marches” on the 8th April, 1860, had published the news that “the judgment on the property at Chezal-Bcnoit will be given in the court at Saint-Amald on the 29th of this month, and the price of purchase will be 60,000 francs. The newspaper added: “It is rumoured that Mgr Menjaud will buy the property in the name of the diocese.” It was not till two years later that the “Echo” was able to announce on 26th March that the Government decree has approved the acquisition of Chezal-Benoit by the Diocesan authorities.” The Archbishop established there one of the first independent Colleges made possible by the new Falloux law. The Founder and first Director, Father Dubouchat who was replaced on his death by Father Chaumereau in 1861. Father Chevalier had hopes of attaching his Apostolic School to this newly-formed College and put his plans before the Archbishop. Quite near the College – in fact, in its grounds – was a cottage owned by the diocese; which would house at least twelve students. After hearing Father Chevalier’s plans, the Archbishop graciously put the building at the disposal of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. The cottage consisted of two separate apartments together with a spacious barn, and was euphemistically referred in the Annals of Issoudun, 1867, as a house of studies. In the following year, it was necessary to construct a new building from which emerged the real Apostolic School. The Archbishop asked, in compensation for the grant of the cottage, that the Missionaries supply some professors to teach in the College. So, in 1868, we find in the Ordo of the diocese that there were four Missionary priests teaching in the college – referred to as the “Institutio diocesana,” and two in the “Petite Oeuvre,” known as the “Gymnasium Speciale.” The following year, the number grew to seven, and in October, 1869, the Missionaries took over the direction of the College, with Father Marie as the Superior. The Apostolic School remained a separate entity with two or three priests looking after the students. Tradition has it that the Apostolic School officially began on the 2nd October, 1867, the Feast of the Guardian Angels. Father Piperon expressly states: “On the 2nd October, 1867, Rev. Father Vandel personally conducted the twelve students and their professors to their new quarters which had recently been slightly renovated but which could boast of only poor furniture.”(14) However, in his brochure written in 1874, Father Vandel indicates that the twelve students arrived at Issoudun on that date and not at Chezal-Benoit. “The first students,” he wrote, “arrived at Issoudun on the 2nd October, on the Feast of the Guardian Angels. They numbered twelve.”(15) Father Carriere repeats this information in his book, and adds: “A few days later, the place having been already determined, Father Vandel himself presided at their installation.” Much as we dislike upsetting a venerable tradition, we are forced to conclude that these authors were stating what was intended to take place and not what actually happened. The Annals of the Petite Oeuvre, telling of “the arrival of the first students at Issoudun in 1867, records the following interesting details: “The students of the Apostolic School were expected to arrive at Issoudun on the 2nd October, 1867, on the Feast of the Guardian Angels, but, by that date, the house was not yet prepared to receive them, and the arrival of several of them was postponed to the 7th or 8th of the month. However, it was not possible to contact all of them by letter, and on the night of the 1st October three students were received at the House of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. The first student to arrive was Jacques Tesserant who came from the district of La Charente. The second was Ignace Grom from the Lower-Rhine, and the third, Jean-Marie Bufferne from the province of Loire. The next day, the 2nd, two more arrived: Luciani Christophe from La Corse, who, on his way had been quarantined for four days in the Lasaret near Marseilles; and a student called Charles Moulin from the Indre district. There were also two from the town of Issoudun itself: Arthur Lanctin and Louis Quicler. The Chronicle goes on to tell us how these first students occupied their time during these first few days, and informs us that three more arrived on the evening of the 7th October: two from Montlucon – Jean Lagelin and Antoine Durin – and one from Puy de Dome: Jean Pailloncy. Then there is a break in the records of the Chronicle till the 26th December, when we are informed that there are ten students in the School, five of whom had arrived on the 2nd October and two others living with their families in Issoudun. There is actually a deal of confusion in these registers of the personnel of the early Apostolic School. Both Father Piperon and Father Barral mention a Joseph Eyraud of Paris who arrived on the 2nd, Virgile Roux from the town of Napoleon (Vendee),who came on the 5th, and Pierre Grand whose home-town is not noted. At the head of the list they place Lucien Catin, but this is explained by Father Barral’s note that this student had already been with the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart for several months before the Apostolic School was founded, and Father Piperon records the date of his entry as 2nd April, 1867. The rather incomplete register of Father Trevoux further complicates matters by telling us that Jean Gauthier arrived on the 7th October, whereas both Father Piperon and Father Barral make the date of his entry the 20th December, “a few days before Christmas.” There is also mention of a Monsieur Cramaille – aged 24 – who had come to Issoudun on 15th December, 1856, and who followed the classes at Chezal-Benoit and helped with the supervision of the younger pupils. Regarding Lucien Catin, Father Vandel has recorded: “The first of the students, and one of the best subjects, decided, after spending several months with us, that he was called to the Society of Jesus.”(16) Father Piperon puts the date of his departure as the 15th October, whereas Father Barral notes it as “fifteen days after the foundation of the Apostolic School.” The Bulletin of November, 1867, records: “The students began their studies on the 11th October, the number being twelve. The installation at Chezal-Benoit would have taken place on the 10th, and the number twelve would be referring only to those students who presented themselves during the month of October.” If the details of the inauguration and organisation of the Apostolic School fell mainly on the shoulders of Father Vandel, Father Chevalier followed every move with keen interest, and helped where he could. For him it was a “labour of love.” Father Arthur Lanctin has written on this point; “While Father Vandel turned the gifts of his agile mind to the institution, Father Chevalier was combatting the many difficulties from without, difficulties which for well nigh half a century had and were to confront his work. It was only his invincible energy, his consummate prudence, his patience and, above all, his keen spirit of faith which enabled him to triumph over the many obstacles which the powers of hell and the spirit of the world put in his path in the hope of destroying his pious designs.” After mentioning in particular several of the Founder’s efforts in establishing the school, Father Lanctin continued: “It is easy to conclude, after what we have seen, that the Apostolic School owes not only its “birth Father Chevalier, but its life, its growth and its prosperity. It was not merely in a general way that the Founder interested himself in the work and devoted himself to its progress. He took part in every small detail of its development, particularly after the death of Father Vandel.”(l7) We have seen that, in spite of his work for the Apostolic School, Father Vandel was pressed by the interested parties – people such as Father Ramiere – to continue his mission to the country parishes; but this was to involve difficulties. “When I returned to Paris,” he wrote, “I announced to the General Council at the home of Monsieur de Larribel that I had joined the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. On hearing the news, Father Hubin immediately stated that he would withdraw from the movement, unless I collaborated in the work. I assured them that I had no intention of dissociating myself entirely from the mission and that my new life would not completely prevent me from offering it my services. In spite of this assurance, Father Hubin resigned his charge and was replaced by Father Eazin. Although most of his days were occupied by his duties with the Apostolic School, Father Vandel did not forget his cherished work, the Oeuvre des Campagnes which he was now happy to see flourishing and successful. Not only did he contribute an article to each bulletin, but he often journeyed far and wide lecturing on the movement when his duties and strength permitted him. He was assisted in these efforts by his confreres at Issoudun. At the end of December, 1876, he attended, the General Reunion of the Movement at the Jesuit Monastery in Poitiers. Archbishop Pie and: Father Chevalier himself both spoke at this convention, but the main address was given by Father Vandel, who again recalled the end and object of the work, its opportune nature, its progress and the means of making it succeed. He concluded by stating his confidence in the salvation of France and emphasising the fact that that confidence was based on the support and protection of Mary, the Mother of God. Four months later, Father Vandel was found dead in his room at the Monastery.(18)

PART V: THE MISSIONARIES OF THE SACRED HEART TAKE CHARGE OF THE CLERICAL SCHOOLS OF RIMONT AND TOURNUS.

Chezal-Benoit then was the accomplishment of the plan dreamed of and drawn up at Amelie les Bains, but it was not the first clerical school looked after by the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. We have already mentioned that, after the Revolution in France, several parish priests gathered together young prospective students for the priesthood in their presbyteries in order to give them some elementary education and spiritual training. This was to give them a better chance of gaining admission to the few Junior Seminaries that did exist at the time. In 1842, a Father Bordeaux, who owned some property in the small village of Rimont, then attached to the parish of Fley, decided to build a church there. In 1864, the priest in charge of this church in Rimont was a young man called Father Gonon. He made his presbytery available to four young students who wished to become priests, and did his best to instruct them. By 1866, the number had grown to sixteen, and the “presbytery school” came under the notice of the education authorities. The inspector threatened to close it down as Father Gonon had not the necessary diploma to set himself up as a teacher. Father Bordeaux was a close relation of the Dubois family, and this had brought him into contact with Father Vandel. Madame Dubois herself had already established in Rimont a course of instructions for those wishing to obtain diplomas for teaching, especially for young girls who wished to dedicate themselves to the Oeuvre des Campagnes. Father Vandel had highly praised the work of this devoted Catholic in one of his articles in 1866. Father Gonon, who had met Father Vandel through this work, saw here a practical solution to his difficulties. Perhaps the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, which Father Vandel had recently joined, would be able to help him. The outcome of negotiations with the Congregation was that Father Georgelin, who was a Bachelor of Arts and so had the necessary diploma, would take charge of the school for the next scholastic year, 1866-1867. The bishop of the diocese of Autun, Mgr. Frederic de Marguerey, wrote an encouraging letter to Father Georgelin on the 7th January, 1867: “My dear Father, I hope you are about to place the first stone in a work which God will bless. One day, I trust, this diocese of the Sacred Heart will have a House of Missionaries who will establish new works which will infuse a new life amongst us. If trials are not wanting in the devoted efforts of Founders, God’s blessings will follow in due time.” On the 6th January, Father Chevalier had written to Montlucon: “Our good Father Georgelin has gone to the diocese of Autun where he hopes “to found a small community of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. I recommend this work to your prayers.” Father Lephilibert, later to become Director in the Junior Seminary in the diocese, wrote: “Father Georgelin came to Rimont accompanied by a Lay-brother. The Superiors of the Congregation did not like sending members alone, but the requirements of Rimont at the moment did not call for more members.” However, the school at Rimont was not to last. At the end of the scholastic year, Father Georgelin returned to Issoudun, and Father Gonon transferred to Tournus, where he told his students to assemble for the beginning of the next school year in October, 1867. The spiritual requirements of Rimont were looked after by priests of the neighbouring parish for the time being, but in 1861 the diocese again established a clerical college there, which to-day is the Junior Seminary. The idea of transferring the school from Rimont to Tournus was to have the one educational centre for two large localities. Father Chaumont, parish priest of the church of St. Philibert in Tournus, had himself established a “presbytery school” there in 1867 under the title of “Choir School of the Church of St. Philibert of Tournus.” By this means, which was also tried later in Issoudun, the parish priest, doubtless, was hoping to avoid the attention of the education authorities. However, he did not succeed, as Father Petit, who was in charge of the studies, did not possess a teaching diploma and was soon visited by an inspector who insisted on a qualified tutor. The result was an urgent appeal once again to Father Georgelin to come and take over the directorship. This demanded some re-shuffling of staff at Chezal-Benoit as Father Georgelin had been appointed professor of rhetoric there. Suitable arrangements were made, however, and, in due course, Father Georgelin was named Director of the School at Tournus. It seems that some considerable time passed before Father Georgelin’s appointment was finalised, as we find the parish priest, Father Chaumont, anxiously writing to the Vicar General on 25th September: “I thank you for the approval given to our little school. I pray that God will bless it and that, one day, it will bring forth abundant fruit for the diocese. We are assured now of having a qualified teacher with the necessary diploma, but this good priest of Issoudun seems to be committed to so many other obligations that we will probably not be able to start before the Feast of All Saints. Do not forget your promise to come and see us.” The Bishop of Autum wrote to Father Georgelin on 28th September: “My dear Father, I foresee you going to Tournus with the confidence that the Heart of the Divine Master will bless this work and give us good priests for our diocese. I grant you all the faculties given to missionaries while you await the official notification.” Father Georgelin arrived at Tournus at the beginning of October, well before the Feast of All Saints, as Father Chaumont was able to write on the 16th October: “Father Georgelin has arrived. He is an excellent religious, learned, pious and of a gentle disposition. Fathers Petit and Gonon have proved their worth, but they are not able to cope with forty students.”(19) The following further details concerning the school at Tournus are on record and are of interest; Firstly, a letter of Father Vandel to Father J Chaumont: “I received a nice little letter from one of your pupils. Would you be kind enough to give him the enclosed reply. The three clerical schools, that of the Sacred Heart at Tournus, the Apostolic School at Avignon, and our own Petite Oeuvre at Chezal-Benoit, are kin institutions. For my part, I am happy and grateful that your dear students at Tournus wish to correspond with our group at Chezal-Benoit. I believe that this mutual communication will be beneficial to both of us. I sincerely thank you and the students for your kind wishes and sentiments in our regard.”

A letter also of the chief Education Inspector addressed to Father Georgelin on 9th March, 1869, throws some light on the set-up and various divisions of the College. The inspector mentions the following classes amongst the students: the boarders, the part-time boarders, the free external and the externs under supervision. The following classes regarding the studies are also mentioned: the primary class of special instruction, the year of classical instruction, comprising 7th and 8th classes, the years of grammar – 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th classes, and the top class – that of Rhetoric and Philosophy. The inspector was also enquiring about the number who followed the classes regularly, the number who were admitted free, and what was the usual fee for the various classes. There are also extant two circulars, one issued at the foundation of the school, and the other after three years, both setting out the end for which the school was established and its connection with the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart of Issoudun. The title of the first circular reads: “May the Sacred Heart of Jesus be Everywhere loved’. The Clerical School of the Sacred Heart for Ecclesiastical Vocations – with the approbation of His Lordship, the Bishop of Autun – at Tournus (Saone and Loire).” The approbation bears the date of 6th September, 1868. The second circular runs as follows: “The Clerical School of the Sacred Heart, founded three years ago by Father Chaumont, parish priest of St. Philibert (Tournus) assisted by several of the priests of the diocese of Autun, is conducted by :the Religious of the Sacred Heart of Issoudun (Indre) and now numbers forty students.. The benefactors may participate in the following spiritual advantages: (a) A special remembrance in two Masses each week in honour of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. (b) Each day the litany of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart is offered for the intentions of the benefactors. (c) The general prayers of the community always include these intentions. To become a benefactor of the work, a small donation of ten cents per year suffices.” It would seem that the establishment of a house by the Missionaries the Sacred Heart in the diocese of Autun coincided with the taking the school. The first circular mentions the fact that the priests of Philibert of Tournus are now all Missionaries of the Sacred Heart,” second circular modifies this by stating, “The priests of St. Philibert affiliated with the Society of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart.” This seeming contradiction is explained by the fact that the second circular is published after the Decretum Laudis had been received from Rome. This decree had made the vows obligatory for the members of the Society properly so-called, but not for the affiliated secular priests. We find references to this affiliation in the scant correspondence available dealing with this period. For example, Father Chevalier wrote to Father Georgelin on the 3rd January, 1869: “Thanks for your good wishes and the interesting details you sent to me. I am certainly very satisfied with our little Society in Tournus. I am praying that Our Lord will bless it and more.” And then, referring to the admission of some unnamed priest as a novice, “I certainly intend to accept our new confrere as a Novice. Tell him how pleased I am concerning his resolution.” The letter continues, Tell our venerable parish priest that Father Malabat will be at Tournus to open the mission on Quinquagesima Sunday. My sincere good wishes to Fathers Chaumont, Gonon, Petit and Guillemin.” We might ask, “Were these priests novices of the Society or merely affiliated priests?” Father Georgelin’s position as Superior was clear from the following letter of 16th April, 1869: “The upkeep of the house at Tournus – food, clothing, travelling expenses – is your responsibility. The Mass intentions you receive will be for our house here in Issoudun. Any financial gifts you receive, provided they are of a small nature, you may use for the needs of the community.” On the 22nd November of that year Father Founder wrote from Rome: “I am not forgetting my well-beloved confreres of Tournus. I hope to see you all on my return journey. I will willingly receive the vows of those who wish to make then. You could have a word with Father Chaumont, the parish priest, on this matter.” Sickness and travel difficulties, however, prevented Father Chevalier from calling at Tournus on his return journey. “I will come,” he wrote on 12th December, “as soon as I am able. I realise that the time of retreat: an admirable time for the reception of the vows, and so I willingly give approval to our cherished and well-beloved confreres.” Meantime, Father Vandel had visited Tournus and on his return was able to write on 3rd April. 1870: “The last time I had the happiness of being at Tournus, I noticed that Our Divine Lord was blessing all our fraternal relationships. For my own part, I will always be glad and thankful to co-operate in the welfare of the community there whenever obedience permits me.” In spite of his wish to return, Father Vandel fell sick and he had to content himself with a letter: “This note will have to compensate for the visit which Father Superior suggested I should make some weeks ago. However, what is deferred can be accomplished later on. Father Superior believes that it is good and useful that we brothers should visit one another from time to time, as the Apostles themselves did.” The small Society at Tournus continued to prosper until the outbreak of the war of 1870-1871, when it was forced to close its doors. Father Georgelin tried to find quarters elsewhere, but when the war had finished, the general situation of the Society had changed greatly. The military upheaval had wrought its havoc, and the ranks of the members had thinned out, according to the nature of the vows or promises they had made. Circumstances did not permit Father Georgelin to return to Tournus, although the Ordo of the diocese of Autun mentions him as Director of the School there until December, 1873. In spite of the departure of the Missionaries from Tournus, the relationship between the Society and the authorities of Autun remained cordial, as the following letter to Father Georgelin from Father Chaumont shows. With this letter we will conclude this part of the Society’s history. The letter reads: “Tournus. 5th July, 1876. Cor Jesu semper et ubique ametur” Dear Rev. Father, I thank you for your kind remembrance and the good wishes, you extend to me in my declining years. I am particularly grateful for the latter, as all I wish now is to die a good death and go to Heaven. I return these good wishes in your own regard, my dear Father, and I firmly believe that your saintly life lived for the greater part in a spirit of perfect obedience and generosity will be rewarded in Heaven. I sincerely hope that before you go to God you will have the happiness of seeing your Congregation develop, and that Father Chevalier before he dies will have the joy of seeing his beloved disciples extending their vigorous work throughout France. This will be a fitting recompense for all the work entrusted to him by the Mother of God to whom he has devoted himself with such zeal, and whose glory he has extolled by the title of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart – a name now inscribed in the liturgy of the Church and productive of so many marvellous happenings. Our little school continues to progress, if not by a great number of students – at present we have 29 – at least by the spirit of piety and earnest study which, according to all reports, their predecessors have carried with them into the Major Seminary. The school has already given seven priests to the Church – students whom you helped to form, my good Director, amongst whom you will be pleased to hear are Ducret and Jacob. The diocese has a great need of the recruits which the various teachers send to us. The Junior Seminary unfortunately supplies too few of them, and in the first year of theology there are at present only eleven. The ordination of young priests is not filling the gaps made by deaths of the older clergy. At the moment there are 35 parishes where priests could be placed. We are going through a period of sad and pitiable trials, the greatest of which is the loss of faith of so many people, situation, aided by the diffusion of a bad and hostile press, is growing more serious from day to day. Another two or three years of this sad political regime, and the Faith will have disappeared from our beloved France whose history has been so Christian.

Let us pray and beseech St. Peter that he will obtain for us strength, courage and a staunch faith. Give my kind regards to Father Chevalier and all the Fathers and ask them to pray for me• Yours in Our Divine lord, Chaumont, Parish Priest of St. Philibert.”

CHAPTER XV THE ASSOCIATION OF OUR LADY OF THE SACRED HEART

PART I: Origin of the Devotion. The First Statue.

In previous chapters we have spoken of the origin of the title, Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, emanating, as it were, from the very soul of Father Chevalier as he knelt in prayer before an image of Our Lord’s Heart on 9th September, 1855. We recall his conversation with an intimate group of fellow-priests in 1857, when he told them of his inspiration regarding the new title, and the effect the devotion had on them all in the early days of the Society, particularly during the difficult period of the construction of the new church. However, 1857 did not yet mark the beginning of the propagation, on a large scale, of what was to become a world-wide devotion to the Mother of God under her new title. In the second number of the Annals of Issoudun we find the significant comment: “Lowly and hidden in the beginning, this devotion will remain unknown to the world for several years, but its heavenly charms are already enchanting the hearts of the privileged few to whom it was first revealed.”(l) If the plan of “Father Chevalier to consecrate the Marian altar of the new church under the title of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart provided the occasion for the conversation of 1857, the execution of this project was the incentive to his making known and spreading the new title. This brings us to the year 1861. On 7th June, that year, the first image of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart appeared in the church in the form of a stained-glass window built over the altar in Our Lady’s chapel.(2) It was a gift from the faithful Des Mesloizes family, whose members were already conversant with the meaning and significance of the new title. The window was constructed by the firm of Lobin, in Tours, and the design was willingly approved by His Grace, Mgr. de la Tour d’Auvergne. Father Chevalier has recorded that the kindly bishop not only approved the design but granted an indulgence of forty days for each invocation of that thousand times blessed name – Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.”(3) It. would appear here that, in recalling the dates, Father Founder was in error. Mgr. de la Tour d’Auvergne was not nominated as Coadjutor of Bourges until 22nd July, 1861, and did not take over the administration of the diocese until 10th December. This would, indicate that the approbation was given by Mgr. Menjaud. As to which bishop granted the first indulgence for the invocation there could be some doubt, as we do not find any mention of it on the first pictures, but we are inclined to think it would have been Mgr. de la Tour d’Auvergne at a date later than the installation of the stained-glass window. A remark by Father Piperon that Mgr. de la Tour d’Auvergne had granted an indulgence “within the confines of his own diocese” would seem to confirm this.(4) We cannot find any exact date of the granting of this indulgence, but it must have been after the 10th December. Apart from the reason just given, we recall the fact that it was in summer of 1861 that, after having distributed the pictures of the Sacred Heart for his appeal for the new church, Father Chevalier turned his attention to the printing of the pictures of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. This was during the period when he had just enlarged the Monastery and was busy with the completion of the church. Father Piperon quotes him as saying at this time: “The Sacred Heart has played His part. It is now the turn of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart to finish the work.”(5) The earlier reference to the thoughts which guided Father Founder in the first representation of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart came from the pen of Father Piperon in 1865. “Two thoughts were uppermost in his mind,” he wrote: (1) “The picture would represent the august Mother of God, the Dispensatrix of all heavenly treasures; Mary, continuing to give Jesus to the world as the Queen reigning over His Sacred Heart and with Him all the treasures of grace which that Heart contains.”(6) (2) “Our Lord would be represented offering to all men His Sacred Heart, and inviting all souls, particularly the feeble, weary or guilty, to come and find in that Heart all the ineffable treasures of love and mercy which It contains.” (Eph. III, 8; Heb. III, 16) “The question was how to associate in the picture these two concepts and how to express their relationship to the faithful.” “It was decided that Our Lady, Mary Immaculate, would be standing with her arms extended, and her eyes modestly cast downwards Mary, such as she appeared to a humble Daughter of Charity in 1834. Before her would be standing the Child Jesus, one hand pointing to His Sacred Heart illumined by flames of love, encircled by a crown of thorns and surmounted by a cross. His eyes, bespeaking love and kindness, would look straight into the eyes of the faithful, those He would save, and seem to be saying, as He said to St. Margaret Mary: ‘Behold this Heart which has loved man so much – this Heart which contains in Itself all the graces for the salvation of the world. Come joyfully, fearlessly, and draw from My Heart all the salutary graces you need.’ With the other hand, He would point over His shoulder to His Mother, as much as to say: ‘If you wish to obtain these graces with assurance, go to Mary, My Mother. She alone is Its Treasurer. She alone has the key. I have given her power over My Heart.'” After each part of his text Father Piperon develops the meaning: (l) Mary Immaculate. “Does not the work of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart owe its very existence to her? Was it not on the feast and during the octave of the Immaculate Conception that this work was definitely conceived and the initial obstacles overcome? Was it not to Our Lady, the spotless Virgin, that Pope Pius IX entrusted the defence of the Church in those troublesome times on the occasion of the definition of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception? As motive of our faith and of our gratitude, Mary Immaculate will be in this blessed sanctuary a perpetual testimony of our submission to the definition of our revered Pontiff and an everlasting memorial of the gifts she has bestowed upon us. And was it not her incomparable purity that gave her such dominion over the Heart of her Son, the Heart of her God? No wonder the Church applies to; her in the liturgy the words of the Canticle of Canticles; ‘Thou art all fair, my beloved”. There is no stain in thee.’ (Cant. IV, 7). ‘Thou hast ravished my heart, my sister, my spouse; thou hast ravished my heart’.’ (Cant. IV, 9) The picture represents Our Lady standing, slightly inclined forward, with her arms extended to those praying to her, showing her maternal care for her children who call on her for help. Modesty and virtue adorn her beautiful countenance while she lovingly looks down on the Divine Child, her Child, Who is standing before her. In this attitude she seems to be presenting Him to the devout faithful who come seeking her aid. She is telling them that any power she has comes from His adorable Heart, the Source of all Graces. Prostrate before her altar, we beg this Mother of Mercy to turn her eyes of compassion to us; and Mary lowers them towards Jesus, and Jesus looks down towards us.” (2) Why is Jesus Represented as a Child? “Naturally, to indicate in a very sensible way His dependence on her as His Mother and her maternal influence over Him. ‘He went down to Nazareth and was subject to them’ (Luke 11, 5l). We know from Sacred Scripture that this was the happy relationship between the Son and Mother throughout the whole thirty years of His life, but for the purpose of the representation it was fitting to present Our Lord at the age when a mother’s influence is most noticeable on a child; when, as it were, the glory of the authority and power which God has given motherhood shines the brightest. If we can speak thus, how better convey the overall concept and emphasise the humble deference of Jesus towards His august Mother in a practical, living and human way than to portray the characteristics of childhood? And not the least appealing aspect of the representation of Jesus as a Child is that it draws us more closely to Him, as every soul who has meditated on the mysterious charms of the Divine Childhood has experienced.

In this way, too, we are shown in a most consoling manner the humanity and benignity of our God, Who became one of us for our salvation (Titus 111, 4), revealing to us His Sacred Heart, in order to draw more intimately to Himself and to bestow on us His abundant graces.1 Towards the end of his life, after the Roman decisions had framed sentiments in more theological terminology, Father Piperon was to sum up the thoughts of Father Chevalier: “In composing the design of the stained-glass window, Father Chevalier intended to indicate in one striking picture the ineffable power which has over the Heart of her Son. He requested the artist to depict Our Lady the Immaculate Virgin, with her arms extended towards us and her eyes looking down modestly towards her Child and, through Him, looking at us. She was be Our lady of the Immaculate Conception, such as she appeared to Sister Laboure, a Daughter of St. Vincent de Paul, in 1834. The picture was to be a token of love and gratitude to the Immaculate Mother who had ac mercifully heard his pleading prayer on the historic. 8th December, 1854. Our Lord would be represented as a child at the age of twelve, standing before His Mother, one hand pointing to His Heart and the other to her, much as to say: ‘If you wish to obtain grace from My Heart, go to My Mother for she is Its Treasurer and can dispense Its graces at her will.’ The Child was represented at the age of twelve, because the evangelist, St. Luke, narrating the finding of Our-Lord amongst the doctors in the temple, remarked in striking simplicity: ‘He went down to ”Nazareth and was subject them.’ ‘No better means than this image could convey the great intercessory power that Mary has over the Heart of her Divine Son.”(8) We can be definite that it was in the 1860-1861 period that Father Chevalier made public the new title, Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, as he mentioned in his correspondence with Mgr. de la Tour d’Auvergne on the 22nd. March, 1864, when seeking an indulgence for the invocation of the title and permission to establish the Archconfraternity: “It is now three years since the august Mother of God was first invoked in our church of the Sacred Heart under the beautiful title, Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.” (9) The pictures wore received enthusiastically. According to Father Piperon, “thousands, or more exactly, hundreds of thousands of them were distributed far and wide” – but, of course, we do not know the exact number. The great demand for them resulted in the first brochure of 1862 being published, explaining the fundamental ideas of the title and the devotion. The rapid spreading of the devotion was greatly helped by the appearance of this brochure, printed by the Messenger of the Sacred Heart in May, 1863, as well as by the favourable attitude of several bishops who joined Mgr. de la Tour d’Auvergne in their approbation. The June issue of the Messenger refers to the 10th Edition of the brochure. In November of the same year, Father Piperon’s book, “The Power of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart,” went into its 13th Edition. By 1866, Father Deidier’s treatise, “The Devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart,” had gone through fifteen printings. From 1865 to 1866, at least twenty-five French bishops had given their approbation to the practice and propaganda of the devotion in their dioceses. Father Piperon has aptly summed up the reasons for the popularity and rapid growth of the devotion to Our Blessed Lady under her new title: “An appreciation of its meaning, aided by a lively faith and a tender love for the Sacred Heart and an ardent desire for the glory of the Hearts of Jesus and Mary, was a sure guarantee that a devotion, so consoling, so fruitful and so glorious, would be welcomed everywhere with great joy. The Heart of Jesus could not but bless it.” Indeed, the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, contributing, as it did, to a greater knowledge and love of the Heart of Jesus and a more lively confidence in the Mother of God, could not, by its very nature, remain restricted to a small group of devotees. Offering such graces to the faithful, it was destined not to remain local but must become universal. To quote from the “The Power, of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart” of Father Piperon: “If Mary alone possesses the key to the treasures of grace which the Sacred Heart contains; if it is established that, without her, we cannot receive these graces – and who can doubt that? – is it not necessary then to proclaim these glorious prerogatives of our Mother? All her children must learn that by paying tribute to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart they are gaining more ready access to the Heart of her Son.” (11)

PART II: L’ABBE DE CHAMPGRAND VISITS ISSOUDUN. ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY BY FATHER CHEVALIER.

The success of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart at this period touched even the heart of the Abbe de Champgrand, who still owned the property and the house at Issoudun. He began to realise that a re-awakening of the faith amongst the people of the Berry Province could be achieved by means other than merely conducting missions in the parishes – which had been his original idea in lending his financial aid. On the 17th February, 1855 Father Chevalier wrote to his old friend and benefactor, Mme. Des Mesloizes. “The Abbe de Champgrand has been with us since Sunday last. I cannot find words to express how pleased he is with us and our progress. He was really enthusiastic. Everything impressed him: the chapel, the house and especially the piety and devotion of the people. He preached at the Reunion we held yesterday, and he actually cried during his sermon while expressing the joy which filled his soul at what he saw. No eulogy could have been more complete, and he predicted a great future for the Society. He told the congregation that, whilst praying in the chapel, he experienced a feeling of happiness that one would expect only in Heaven. “I thought, as I prayed there for the first time,” he said, “that for a moment I was Mount Thabor and could say with St. Peter in his ecstasy, ‘Lord, it is for us to be here.'”(12) The Missionaries still depended, however, on the goodwill of the Abbe Champgrand regarding the acquisition of the property, and this at a time when the newly-formed Association of Secular Priests called for greater freedom of action. Father Founder, in letters to M. de Linetiere dated 12th and 18th May, made references to “our dealings concerning the future of the property here.” In the first letter the reference may have concerned a difficulty with the local authorities regarding a raffle on behalf of church funds, but there is no doubt that the letter of 18th May referred to the acquisition of the property, as Father Chevalier stated: “I am waiting impatiently for the return of Monsieur de Linetiere to learn of the discussion with the Abbe Champgrand. I believe that 1863 will put an end to all our worries. One way and another, conditions seem very favourable.” Father Chevalier had every reason to consider the conditions favourable, as on 25th August he was able to write: “The Abbe Champgrand could not have been more generous. He has offered to sell me the property for 15,000 francs. I signed the deeds with the solicitor today. Now I fear there may be some trouble with the Registrar at a later date because the price may seem not high enough. Let us hope that may not be so.”(13) Father Founder need not have had his fears, as the deed of sale, drawn up by the solicitor. Monsieur Brinet, and signed by the Abbe Champgrand, settled the price at 15,000 francs – “to the profit of Jules John Chevalier, auxiliary priest, living at Issoudun,” and it further declared that, taking into consideration previous acquisitions of property in 1855 and 1860, the final sum, with interest paid to the 11th August, 1863, would be but the 15,000 francs. The Book of Accounts, dated 29th August, 1863, informs us that Monsieur Brinet, the solicitor, received 1,000 francs for his work in the transfer. A letter from Father Chevalier to Father le Blanc, S.J., 21st August, made no reference to the dealings with the Abbe de Champgrand, but in a later letter, on 3rd November, he happily remarked: “I can tell you that, now our property in Issoudun is in our own hands.”

PART III: FATHER FOUNDER’S STATUTES FOR THE CONFRATERNITY BASED ON THOSE OF OUR LADY OF VICTORIES IN PARIS.

While the work of the Society was expanding and being stabilised, letters kept coming in from the pious devotees of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, asking to be amongst the first enrolled in the Confraternity of Our lady of the Sacred Heart. Father Chevalier’s brochures, to which most of the bishops of France had given their approbation, following the lead of Mgr. de la Tour d’Auvergne, were received with interest and enthusiasm.(l4) For the time being,” however, one difficulty remained: one to be solved very soon for the simple reason that, as yet, the Confraternity did not officially exist. “Many of the pious faithful,” wrote Father Piperon, “presumed it had already been established, and sent in their names, asking to be amongst the first enrolled.” In another passage, Father Piperon states that it was owing to the insistent requests of these devout people that the Confraternity was eventually founded. To quote his words: “It was in response to your supplications, my dear people from the various countries, that the Confraternity was established. Your hearts, full of filial confidence, in Our Lady of the Sacred Heart from the time she became known to you, understood that her power over the Sacred Heart of her Son should not remain merely the object of isolated, private devotion but should be recognised in an Association of Prayer to which you could entrust all your dearest intentions.”(15) “It has been our conviction,” continued Father Piperon, “that the Immaculate Virgin herself urged these good souls to invoke her under this new title which she had inspired into the heart of our Founder and which stressed her powerful influence over the Heart of her Divine Son as His Mother.”(16) The initial step in the actual founding of the Confraternity seems to have come from the Archbishop himself. Father Chevalier was able to write on the 22nd March of the following year: “Having assured himself that the entire Episcopate approved of Our Lady’s new title, His Grace gave us the official approbation to establish the Association of Prayer in her honour.” Father Piperon has recorded the sequence of events as follows: “His Grace the Archbishop of Bourges saw the finger of God in all the requests to Issoudun by the numerous people interested in Our Lady’s new title who sought the founding of a Confraternity to honour her name.” Father Chevalier had sent him a list of the names in November, 1863, and Archbishop immediately gave his sanction to go ahead with the movement. The construction of the second part of the church was now almost completed, and it was time to discuss arrangements with the Archbishop regarding the consecration. His Grace replied that he would come to Issoudun in April, and instructed Father Chevalier to draw up the Statutes for the Association. Strange to say, Father Chevalier, contrary to his custom – and for what reason I do not know – did not turn his attention the matter for some two months. The year 1863 had come to a close before he began drawing up the Statutes.(18) With his keen and ardent nature, usually so prompt to obey even the slightest wishes of authority, he surprised us by saying, when we urged him to begin the work, ‘There is really no hurry’.” One day, however, about the middle of January, as though coming out a deep sleep, he remarked, ‘What is the Archbishop going to think of my tardiness in following out his wishes?’ He applied himself immediately to the task, and in less than a week the Statutes were on the Archbishop’s desk waiting for approval. On the 29th January, the Feast of St. Francis Sales, the Archbishop officially approved the constitutions, and the Confraternity of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart was established. It was not by accident but by design that the feast of St. Francis de Sales was chosen. The Archbishop stated in his official letter that he had chosen the feast day of St. Francis de Sales for the inauguration in order to place under special protection a work so devoted to the glory of the Heart of Jesus and that of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. After all, was not St. Francis de Sales the spiritual father of Blessed Margaret Mary, the apostle of the devotion to the Sacred Heart?”(19) And Father Piperon continues: “Was not the feast of St. Francis de Sales, the Founder of the Visitation Order, a beautiful day to commence an Association whose whole object was to emphasise and honour the power which Mary holds over the Heart of her Son? Was it not on the day of the Visitation that Our Lady began the glorious apostolate which she has continued through the centuries, by bringing to the house of Elizabeth the special “blessings of which she is the dispensatrix, communicating to the Precursor of the Messiah anticipated graces of Salvation? Was it not through the Visitation Order that Our Lord chose to Show the richness of His Heart?”(20) Father Piperon tells us in his Notice that, even after the approbation from Bourges had been “gratefully received and carefully filed, Father Chevalier did not refer to it very much. February and March went by as though he had forgotten it.”(2l) Father Piperon admits he did not understand the attitude of delay, but concludes by expressing a possible explanation: “In all this there was a special action of Divine Providence. Was it not fitting, for the greater glory of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, that the inauguration of the Association be marked by due solemnity?”(22) Later, in 1903, when again referring to Father Chevalier’s delay in launching the movement, he remarks: “Father Chevalier was merely waiting for a favourable occasion.” Perhaps the real explanation is to be found in the multiplicity of Father Founder’s other duties and activities, already almost superhuman, he must not forget that this was the period when he was engaged in founding the Association of the Secular Priests, in building the church and seeking the means to finance it. These activities naturally meant more travelling than usual. Also the widespread interest in the new devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart had increased the daily mail to voluminous proportions and he had only Father Piperon and Father Mousseaux to help him. The idea of the Third Order was also being developed, and his cares were not lessened by Father le Blanc’s warning from Vaugirard: “I doubt the wisdom of the extension.” Humanly speaking, here were enough reasons why he should not be anxious to rush into other commitments with their added worries. However, the Archbishop was keen to have the Association established, and as he was soon to visit Issoudun for Confirmation, Father Chevalier decided to make this visit the occasion of its official erection. “His Grace,” writes Father Piperon, “arrived during the afternoon of the 5th April. That evening he graciously consented to preside at the first meeting of the Association and to promulgate its statutes.”(24) The main question was now how to let the people know of the improvised ceremony which, as yet, had received no publicity; only a small intimate group knew of the project; only a handful knew of the intended ceremony of the following day. The schoolchildren were the answer. They became messengers of peace, carrying the good news throughout the entire parish. The Sacrament of Confirmation was conferred on the 6th April, and the announcement made of the ceremony to take place that evening. Crowds, flocked to the church, which proved too small to hold the congregation which overflowed into the spacious grounds in front. One would have thought that all the people in Issoudun had come out for the ceremony. From his episcopal throne, the Archbishop read the Statutes of the Association, and officially proclaimed its erection in the Church of the Sacred Heart. The ceremony concluded with solemn Benediction. Father Chevalier had announced that there would be a meeting of the executive next morning at half past eight. When the meeting began, the Archbishop asked that the register be brought to him so that he could inscribe his name as the first member. After signing his name, he said: “I wish to be followed by hundreds of thousands of associates to counter-balance the hundreds of thousands of readers of the pernicious ‘Siecle'” – one of the most harmful and infamous newspapers of the time.(25) The preacher of the occasional sermon at the ceremony of inauguration was His Grace, Archbishop Armand de Charbonnel. He was indeed a remarkable character with an interesting history: After working as a missionary in America, he was appointed in 1850 Bishop of Toronto, Canada; but, after years, he sought permission to hand over the administration of the diocese to his co-adjutor, Mgr. Lynch, so that he might become a Capuchin. He returned to France and the Holy See named him Titular Bishop of Sozopolis. In 1880 the Canadian Episcopate requested the Holy See to grant him the title Archbishop, and he became Titular Archbishop of Sozopolis. With truly Franciscan simplicity the Archbishop went around France giving missions and retreats. His episcopal ring had cost him the lowly sum of 40 sous, and for a croisier he simply used his walking-stick. Once, when he had forgotten to bring his stick to some ceremony or other, he simply used a small branch of a tree which he refused to have camouflaged with coloured paper. “Why complicate matters?” he remarked. (26)

On this occasion he happened to arrived t Issoudun at the same tine as the Archbishop of Bourges. “He arrived unattended and unannounced, and asked the Fathers to give him accommodation for a few days in order to have a rest after his recent apostolic labours. He had always shown a keen interest in the newly-formed Society, and, on several previous occasions, had come to Issoudun to exchange ideas with the young founder.”(27) Father Chevalier invited him to preach the occasional discourse and to be the first to pronounce publicly the praises of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart after the establishment of the Association. His ardent and sincere words, some perhaps a little original, were keenly listened to and greatly appreciated. Thursday, 7th April, 1864, then, is in the records as the date of the first meeting of the Association. Most of the fervent people in the parish attended. In an informal talk Archbishop de Charbonnel explained, in his usual animated manner, what constituted the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. “He was most enthusiastic when we showed him the numerous letters we had received telling us of favours granted by Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, asking for prayers under the invocation of her name and seeking further information about the devotion. Before he left us, he gave us this advice: ‘Preserve these early records as precious documents. Enter them in a register right from the beginning. Mary wishes to be honoured in a special way here in Issoudun. Your Association will eventually spread throughout :the whole world. Later on, you would grievously regret it, if you allow the documents to go astray.’ We followed his advice to the letter, and we thank Mary for having inspired him to give it to us.”(28) Shortly after the establishment of the Association, probably in the course of the same month, the first edition of the Notice sur 1’Association was published. This was reprinted in abbreviated form in the May edition of the Messenger.(29) The same number of the Messenger announced that His Grace had erected the Association in Issoudun and had already applied to the Holy See to establish it as an Archconfraternity. We possess a letter written by Father Piperon to the Archbishop regarding this project. The letter is dated 22nd March, 1864, which is obviously an error, as he mentions the fact that the Archbishop has already erected the Association, which actually he did on the 6th April. Inadvertently, Father Piperon must have dated the letter 22nd, March instead of 22nd April. After recalling the fact that the devotion has now been known for three years and that His Grace has founded the Association, the letter goes, on: “Your Grace, seeing all the good which this admirable work is accomplishing and considering its undreamed of expansion, I beg you to seek from the Holy Father, who has the inestimable privilege of making fruitful all that he ; blesses, the following favours: (1) The recognition of the title of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart which we are giving to Mary Immaculate, the Mother of God. With this in mind, I am sending you the little work in which we explain and point out the validity of this glorious name, together with a copy of the Notice which contains the approbations of their Excellencies, the Bishops, praying you to place them at the feet of the Holy Father. (2) The erection into an Archconfraternity of the Association which has been founded in honour of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, and the granting of the power to its Director, the Superior of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, to amalgamate with this Archconfraternity all the other associations which have the same name and the same end.” Then there follows a list of feasts and occasions when either plenary or partial indulgences can be gained. The letter continues: “As the object of this Association is to go to the Heart of Jesus through Our lady of the Sacred Heart, we have established in our chapel the Confraternity of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Its end is; (1) to render to the Sacred Heart a special worship of love, adoration and reparation. (2) to beg His all-powerful protection over the Church, the august person of the Supreme Pontiff, over France and, indeed, over the whole world. (3) to beseech the preservation of the just and the conversion of sinners. (4) to call down His blessing on the Associates and the members of their families. “Knowing that we are Missionaries of the Sacred Heart and that our church is consecrated to that Heart, numerous people have written to us, not only from France but from the entire world, asking to have their names inscribed in the register and begging us to solicit the Heart of Jesus, so rich in mercy, to grant them the graces they need. In order to foster the piety of the faithful towards the Divine Heart of Jesus and to encourage them to enter their names in His Confraternity, we accordingly dare to ask Your Grace to solicit the Holy Father to erect our Association as an Archconfraternity and grant us the faculties to amalgamate all the other Associations which have the same name and object.” The letter concludes with a list of proposed indulgences for approbation. We do not know the exact requests which the Archbishop presented to or whether the Messenger was right in saying that His Grace asked that the Association be raised to the rank of an Archconfraternity. However, when the Archbishop came to consecrate the church on the 2nd July, he brought with him a brief from Pope Pius IX, dated 7th June, in which the Holy Father stated that he had learnt “that at Issoudun there is a pious Confraternity of the faithful – canonically erected or which will be soon – under the title of Blessed and Immaculate Virgin Mary, known as ‘Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.’ Desiring to see this Confraternity grow from day to day, we now accord Then follows a list of the indulgences granted. On the 7th April, when entering his name in the register, the Archbishop had expressed the wish of seeing his name followed by 100,000 more. On 2nd July, the day of the consecration of the church, the Fathers were able show him over 50,000 inscribed names. As we described in a previous chapter, a large concourse of the faith gathered for the consecration of the church, not only from the diocese of Bourges but from all the neighbouring provinces. This gathering was really the beginning of the many future pilgrimages to Issoudun. (31) The influx of pilgrims to the new shrine of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart made it necessary to have a more fitting and ornate statue in her honour. “After all,” said Father Piperon, “people could not be expected to go on praying before only a stained-glass window.” The first statue – now kept in the crypt of the Basilica – was a small one. It was constructed by the firm of Raffle, Rue Bonaparte, Paris. An item in the book of accounts, dated 12th August, tells us that the statue cost 200 francs. It represents Our lady and the Child Jesus without their crowns and is merely a reproduction of the original Lobin design. In the catalogue issued by the firm of Raffle, in January, 1867, we find the following interesting note: “The extraordinary expansion of the veneration of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart throughout France and the foreign countries obliges us to reproduce this statue in various dimensions and various materials.”Then follows a list of the various sizes and the materials used. The advertisement added the warning to the faithful not to confuse the statue with several poor imitations which were being offered for sale and which did not conform with the original. Father Deidier seems to have made reference to these the previous year.(32) Soon, as a matter of course, there were enrolment leaflets and medals with the image of the Sacred Heart on one side and Our Lady of the Sacred Heart on the other. At the end of 1864, there were more than 100,000 Associates enrolled – an extraordinary fact when we consider that as yet Issoudun and the young Congregation were not extensively known and that there were only three priests there to deal with the work. Moreover, the statutes which Father Chevalier had drawn up presented no new salient features and were based on the statutes of the Archconfraternity of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, whose centre was the Church of Our Lady of Victories, Paris. When we study the two sets of statutes, we find there is a marked similarity of ideas and vocabulary between them, drawn up in an identical number of articles. Father Chevalier eliminated Article 6 of the Parisian copy as it referred to local conditions, but made two articles of another one to achieve the same number. This similarity, consequently, throws greater emphasis on what modifications were made and brings out more clearly the specific difference between the two Archconfraternities. This is more clearly defined in the preliminary articles, which precede the statutes properly speaking, than in the actual statutes themselves.(34) The two Archconfraternities are based on their own specific Marian devotion. To appreciate this the better and to avoid confusion, it is well to recall the remark of Father Vermeerch: ‘The specific object of any devotion is not necessarily the object of all the actions associated with it, either in its preparation or as a result of its fruits. In other words, the statutes present us with various aspects under which a devotion, well defined in itself, may be practised in our lives. They allow for a certain number of actions which do not directly touch the object of the devotion but which are in harmony with it and ought to be carried out in its spirit.”(35) The Archconfraternity of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, whose main object was to honour Our Lady because of her Immaculate Heart, prayed, as a special object, for the conversion of sinners through the prayers and protection of Mary. The Archconfraternity of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart practised its devotion by entrusting to Our Lady all the difficult and seemingly hopeless causes both in the spiritual and in the temporal orders. These were called the special objects of the Archconfraternities, as distinct from the general, i.e., honouring Our Lady under her separate titles. The two Associations get their particular character and spirit from object of their prayers, and in this lies their difference. The elder of two Associations enlarged the scope of its special object in 1839 under pressure of circumstances. The Abbe Desgenettes wrote on the point: “We to refuse to include in our Sunday public recommendations any mention of prayers for the sick and afflicted, as was often requested; but this restriction did not suit Our Lady. The Mother of Mercy wished that her all-powerful influence be exercised in favour of all who had need of it. From then on we asked graces for all those who wanted and had need of them.”(36) The wording in the decrees of erection also bring out the different character and spirit of the two Archconfraternities. When approving the Parisian Association, the Archbishop of Paris stated that the Arch-confraternity of the Immaculate Heart of Mary “wished to give a new witness of our devotion to the most holy Virgin, to propagate more and more her cult and to offer the faithful a new means of manifesting their piety towards and love for the august Mother of God.” The Archbishop of Bourges, in approving the Issoudun Association, wrote: “This work is, above all, a movement to procure the glory of God, to foster devotion to the Sacred Heart and to increase the number of the servants of Mary.” Article 7 in both sets of statutes deals with the various objects and spirit of the two Associations. The following extracts bring out more plainly the specific difference between the two devotions: The Parisian statutes urge their members to adore with Mary “the Host Holy Trinity and the Divine Heart of Jesus.” The Issoudun statues omit any reference to the Blessed Trinity and merely state “to adore with Mary the Divine Heart of Jesus.” Again, Paris states: “The Associates will remember that it is above all by purity of heart that they will merit the protection of the pure Heart of Mary. They will procure this purity of heart by good works and frequent Confession and Holy Communion, especially on the feast days of the Association.” Following the same general idea, Issoudun states: “In order to merit the protection of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, the Associates will remember that they must take every care to avoid anything that could sadden the Heart of Jesus, and they will strive at all times to unite themselves with Him. Consequently, they are invited to go often to Confession and Holy Communion, especially on the feasts of the Association.” Father Desgenettes remarked on the Parisian statutes: “Article 7 expresses he whole spirit of the Archconfraternity,” and the same can be said of that of Issoudun. Both articles emphasise “the all-powerful intercession and the merits of Mary” – the one stressing “Her Mercy,” and the other “Her power over the Heart of Her Son.” To quote the Paris statutes again: “The end of our Association is to honour by acts of veneration, homage and prayer the Immaculate Heart of the Holy Virgin, the Mother of Jesus Christ – the Son of God Who became incarnate for love of us, Who died on the Cross for the remission of sin, and our salvation, that admirable Heart, which was the Source of the life-blood which nourished the Body of Jesus Christ, and consequently of His own Sacred Heart, which poured out Its Blood for us;- that Heart so burring with love for God, so full of tenderness and compassion for all mankind. The Associates will offer the homage of religious veneration to the Heart of the Mother of their Divine Saviour, – a tender and filial piety as to the Heart of the best of mothers, – a love and limitless confidence in return for all the blessings and graces which Her love and power with God have obtained for them in every moment of their lives. “In uniting all their acts of religion, their good works and their prayers to the precious merits of the Heart of Mary, they will endeavour to render with Her and through Her to the Divine Heart of Jesus, and the Adorable Trinity, all the tributes of adoration love, obedience and fidelity, which they have a right to expect of us.” This is why Article 2 also stresses: “The end of the Association is to obtain from the Divine Mercy, through the protection and prayers of Mary, the conversion of all sinners.”. Now to quote the Issoudun statutes: “The general end of this Association is: (1) To thank God for having chosen Mary, before all creatures, to form from Her most pure substance, the Adorable Heart of Jesus. (2) To honour most particularly the sentiments of love, obedience and respect which Jesus nourished in His own Heart for His most holy Mother. (3) To recognise and glorify under one title which embraces all the others, the infinite Power which He has given Her over His Heart, -as St. Bernard has said: Ab omnipotentio Filio, omnipotens Mater est. (4) To beg this most Holy Virgin to lead us Herself to the Sacred Heart of Her Son, to make It known and loved, to open the treasures of Love and Mercy, which It contains, and to make us draw more abundantly from this Source of all graces. (5) To make reparation, through Her and with Her, for the outrages inflicted on the Sacred Heart and to console Him, in His sadness and bitter disappointment by leading a pious and edifying life.” Then follows the important phrase: “The special end of the Archconfraternity is to entrust to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart the success of all difficult, extreme, and seemingly hopeless causes, both in the spiritual and temporal orders.” We can note then the differences in the objectives of the two Associations : The words in the Parisian statutes, “to adore the most Holy Trinity and the Sacred Heart,” are replaced in the Issoudun counterpart by the express “to thank God” for having chosen Mary to be his Mother, and to honour the sentiments which Jesus nourished in His Heart for His Mother. Whereas their Association honours the Heart of Mary as the principle of the life-blood, which nourished the Body of Jesus, ours honours by a special title the infinite Power which Jesus gave Mary over His Heart by virtue of Her Maternity, which was the reason for His filial sentiments towards Her. We do not honour this power particularly in one or other of its aspects, but in its Source, which is the Heart of the Divine Son. This is a gratuitous gift of God, apart from the merits of Our Lady Herself. The value of the devotion depends entirely on the extent of this power which Jesus has given Mary over His Heart and the richness which that Heart contains.

The Associates are invited, while recognising the merits of Mary, and uniting their own merits to those of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart in union with those of the Sacred Heart, to go to Her not so much because of Her Mercy but because of Her powerful intercession with Her divine Son, as His Mother. The emphasis of the devotion is precisely on the fact that as His Mother Mary has this extraordinary intercessory power over the Heart of Her Son. It was not by chance that in 1867, when a plenary indulgence was granted for the second patronal feaststday it was the Feast of the Divine Maternity.(38) The preliminary articles of Paris indicate the cult of the Immaculate Heart of Miary as the object of their Association and they add that the grace which they primarily seek is the conversion of sinners. Issoudun indicates a special supplication, which Father Chevalier formulates by saying: “It is to beg the Blessed Virgin to lead us Herself to the Heart of Her Divine Son.” The Sacred Heart is not only the Source of Mary’s powerful intercession, but is the whole object to which She must lead us. That after all is but a summary of the meaning of the Devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. We remember what Father Chevalier told his confreres in 1857: “This invocation has a profound meaning. It implies that Mary in virtue of Her Divine Maternity possesses a great power over the Heart of Her Son and that we should go to this Divine Heart through Her.”(39)(40) We have said that the strict definition of a devotion determines its specific object but also that that object comprises a number of ideas, which justify its choice, and clarify its significance. Its life flourishes from these ideas expressed in actions which are in harmony with the devotion, preparatory to it, or as a consequence of it. The two Archconfraternities with which we are dealing are a good example of this. Each, while seeking the glory of the Mother of God, emphasises different aspects of devotion to Her, and it is in this difference that we find the separate specific ends of the Associations. We may draw the parallel of the liturgical Feasts of the year, from the Annunciation to the Ascension. They all have, as their basis, the dogma of the Incarnation, but each Feast has its own significance. So with the two Archconfraternities. One glorifies Our Blessed Mother through Her Immaculate Purity with the object of bringing sinners back to God; the other glorifies Her because of the ineffable Power which She possesses over the Heart of Her Son, precisely because She is His Mother, and therefore all causes, even the seemingly hopeless, are confidently put in Her maternal hands. Father Deidier, capturing the spirit of the devotion, aptly writes: “To entrust to Mary the success of difficult and hopeless causes is something which naturally flows from the title – “Our Lady of The Sacred Heart.” Where jean this power be shown better than on those occasions, when all hope seems to be lost? Miracles of mercy such as one has never dreamed of, are worked by the Sacred Heart. His main wish for the people of the world is the remission of their sins and their final perserverance. Is not that in itself a difficult and seemingly hopeless cause? And is it not precisely for that that the Heart of Jesus is ever open to sinners?” And Father Piperon re-echoes these sentiments: “When we invoke Mary in the most difficult causes, do we not show an unlimited confidence in Her Power and Goodness? Would She be able to refuse us if we call upon the most august of Her perogatives, the first which flows from Her title of “Mother of God” – Her sovereign Power over the Heart of Her Divine Son?” To help achieve their objectives the two Associations have their own proper Feasts, and express their ideas in certain prayers, which aid the Associates. From the beginning Issoudun made its patronal Feast the 31st May, the introduction to the month of the Sacred Heart. We find this date not only in the Statutes but in the letter of April 22nd, 1864, of Father Piperon, and in the May edition of the Messenger of the Sacred Heart of that year, although the Feast as yet was not able to be celebrated as the Indult from Rome had not yet been received. The Annals of the Society incidentally has a note to this effect: “It would be wrong to attribute this Feast and the date of its celebration to Father Jouet” who did not have any relations with the Society until the 26th December, 1864.(42) Likewise we cannot regard Father Jouet as the author of the various prayers. Regarding these prayers – the Memorare of Paris began: “Remember, O Most pious Virgin Mary,” and that of Issoudun – “Remember, O Our Lady of Sacred Heart;” The only invocation made obligatory for the members was: Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, pray for us,” to be recited twice daily, in place of the two “Ave Maria’s” for the Parisien Associates. Also in place of the invocation: “Mary, refuge of Sinners, pray for us” Issoudun composed the following short prayers, adapted to the devotion: “We have recourse to Thee, as our Refuge, O Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Deign to hear our prayers, which we make to you in our present needs, and deliver us in times of peril, O Mother of the Heart of Jesus.” Soon other prayers to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart appeared. In the Notice on the Association there was printed a Litany to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, and in Father Piperon’s Peurvoir, a Novena in Her honour. The Catholic paper of the Bourges diocese – “La Semaine” suggested various methods of reciting the Rosary in honour of Her name. In other centres apart from Issoudun, the new devotion inspired prayers and pictures in honour of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. For example, the firm of Casterman in Tournai, printed a prayer to her on one of their holy cards. As no picture appeared we can only presume that the author could not procure the printing plate.(44)

PART IV: THE RETREAT HOUSE FOR WOMEN ASSOCIATES EXTRAORDINARY HELP OF MLLE. MARCHAND.

To help spread the devotion and to gain new Associates, Father Chevalier enlisted the help of several good lay-people, as we learn fron his letter to Father Le Blanc 26th August, 1864. The best known of these was the zealous Mlle. Marchand. She herself has recorded in her M/s the different occupations entrusted to her, the many journeys she made on behalf of the work, the various projects she launched to hasten the propaganda and gain resources for the Missionaries. For example she wrote: “Father Chevalier has had the idea of opening a retreat house for women, who come to Issoudun; on pilgrimage. He has been able to obtain the Pouroy house in the Place de Vouet. He has asked me if I would be able to look after it, until such time as he can get a group of nuns to do so.” We must remember that at this time, at Montlucon, the Oblates of the Sacred Heart – then a Third Order – were endeavouring to form themsslves into a Religious Institute, as we shall see. They were eventually to take over the work. To continue her records: “I accepted Father Chevalier’s offer, and stayed there for three years. He was able to get for me a domestic help. Eventually a group of religious came to replace me. During these three years I used to speak to all about work of the Missionaries, and particularly about the Apostolic School. Each would give me some small offering which I would take to Father Chevalier the next day together with the fees for accommodation. Sometimes the Religious numbered from 1,200 to 1,500 and many came to the house for meals. The fee for each person was 5 francs a day. Sometimes we had our troubles. Father Chevalier would say to me: “Tomorrow there will be between 120 and 130 here for lunch.” I would make the necessary preparations only to find, when they arrived, that they had dined at Chateauroux on the way. Othertimes the opposite would happen. We would take it for granted that the pilgrims would dine at Chateauroux, but find, on their arrival, that they were expecting lunch at our place. Then I would hastily have to contact all the grocers in Issoudun to get enough eggs to make omelettes for them.

I was very happy to meet all the good, pious and edifying pilgrims, but I must confess I was more happy when the religious took over from me, I never let a pilgrimage depart without making my little request for a small offering for the Missionaries. We had a good photo of the exterior of the Basilica, which I used to sell for a small price. When I returned to my own home, I kept in contact with many of these good people, writing to them to obtain new Associates, and asking for some small contribution to the work of the Missionaries.” And we can gratefully say that her efforts were not without success.

PART V: The Feast of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, The Annals The Remarkable Growth of the Association.

The Pontifical brief which approved of the Archconfraternity – 18th June, 1864, – also stated that a plenary indulgence could be gained on the Feast of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, which would be celebrated on the 31st May each year. As with the celebration of major feasts in other places of pilgrimage, where each has its own atmosphere and characteristic, this special feast was a day of joy and happiness in Issoudun. “La Semaine”, the Catholic paper of the Berry Province, tells us that first official celebration of the Feast took place on the 31st May, 1865. It was fitting that this Feast be celebrated in honour of Mary, and that the faithful be given the opportunity of giving free and public expression to their gratitude to Her who had shown them so much evidence of Her Power over the Heart of Her Son. And so, thanks to the benevolence of His Grace the Archbishop of Bourges, and thanks, above all, to the Pontifical approbation, the Feast was able to be celebrated with due ceremony for the first time. “La Semaine” goes on to tell us that Masses were offered continuously from 5 a.m. till the Solemn High Mass at 10 o’clock, and of the large number of the faithful who went to Holy Communion. It also describes the external festivities associated with the Feast. The Annals bear witness to the fact that each year the Feast was celebrated with ever-growing solemnity and fervor. These Annals were a welcome and much-needed addition to what scant literature there existed concerning the Society and the ArchConfraternity. There were the two brochures of Father Chevalier, the “Pouvoir de Notre Dame du Sacre-Coeur” of Father Piperon, and the “ThirtyTwo Considerations” of Father Jouet. These works were popular and met with equal success. Father Chevalier’s first brochure went through fifteen editions, and the second twelve. Father Piperon’s little book was reprinted five times, and Father Jouet’s six. The Annals, which was first printed (1866) with a deal of apprehension, soon rose from 3,000 copies to 4,000, and this number was doubled in the second year. In the meantime, a friend of Father Jouet, the able writer from Marseilles, Father Deidier, brought out his own “Study of the Devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart”. This propaganda soon found its echoes in other countries and these works were translated into the various tongues. Several new works appeared in diverse places, for example, the “Visits to the Sacred Heart, Our Lady of the Sacred Heart and St. Joseph” edited by Goemaere in Brussels in 1867, a booklet which became very popular. The 50,000 Associates of 2nd July, 1864, grew to 100,000 by the end of the year. By December, 1865, there were 200,000 and by 5th July the following year there were 300,000, followed by a rapid growth to 600.000 by September. The million mark was reached in May, 1867, and on the Feast of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart in 1868 there were over 2,000,000 enrolled. The number of recommended intentions rose proportionately – 8,000 in 1865 to 1,719,906 by the Feast day in 1868. The testimonies of thanks sent in rose during the same period from 1,500 to 17,300. Naturally, this increase of devotees to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart had its repercussions at Issoudun, where in the Church of the Sacred Heart, was enthroned Her Statue in a humble side-altar.

PART VI: EXTENSIONS TO THE MONASTERY OUR LADY’S NEW CHAPEL

The activities of Father Chevalier during the years 1868 and 1869 were mainly concerned with obtaining the Pontifical approbation of the Institute of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, and the spreading of the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. On the material side he was busy in enlarging the Monastery, and building a more adequate and fitting Chapel of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. “Our first dwelling,” wrote Father Piperon, “was notoriously inadequate,” and regarding the chapel he remarked: “Who could foresee that the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart would spread so rapidly, or envisage so many pilgrims coming to Issoudun? But how modest was our humble little chapel, how poor and confined! When we first dedicated this narrow little side chapel to Our Lady, we were far from anticipating such a prodigous development of the Association of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. If our venerated Founder could have foreseen the future when he drew up the first plans of the Church of the Sacred Heart, he would not have hesitated to build on a much grander scale, more in keeping with the needs of an important place of pilgrimage.” As it was, Father Founder had remarked in a conversation with some of his fellow-priests: “A time will come when you will see vast numbers of pilgrims gathered here from all parts of France and elsewhere.” When they jokingly referred to him as “a prophet”, he added: “You will see it yourself with your own eyes, and you will bless the Sacred Heart for it.” However, the fact remained that the church itself was hardly a fitting edifice for vast pilgrimages, and the poor little chapel of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart was so small and confined that when the pilgrims arrived, they could hardly believe that this was the privileged sanctuary where they had come to pray.(47) It was obvious then that Father Chevalier and his Missionaries must build again The question of land was a big problem. There was still enough property belonging to the Missionaries on which to build a new Monastery, but after that there would be very little left for any new church building. Fortunately there was a large piece of ploughed land skirting the north side of the Monastery – about one and a quarter acres in area – belonging to the Pirot family. Father Chevalier was able to purchase this on the 10th May, 1865 for 7,000 francs, the deed of sale being drawn, up before his solicitor, M. Brinet. It was decided to build the new Monastery on this site at an angle perpendicular to the church. This building still forms the Northern wing of the present Monastery, for which plans were contemplated as far back as that era. Monsieur Papet was engaged for the building, and undertook to have completed by the following October all the rooms on the ground floor, and the first and second storeys. Monsieur Coulon, the main carpenter, put in a staircase of 69 steps, and at the rear of the building another of 14 step leading to the kitchen. On the 1st Feb., 1866, Father Chevalier wrote: “It appears that is a rumour about, that our new building will cost 80,000 francs. I am afraid 40,000 will have to be the maximum. You understand that we are not out of debt regarding the church.”(49) The first appeal for funds for the new chapel in honour of Our Lady the Sacred Heart appeared in the Annals of January, 1867. The intention had been to commence building in March, as the work had been placed under the patronage of St. Joseph, before whose altar a light was kept perpetually burning. But April arrived, and even then the work had not commenced, because of the prolonged inclement weather. However, towards the end of April the foundations were laid, and the chapel was completed by December of the same year. It was opened for public worship on the 11th April, the following year, on the day that Pope Pius IX celebrated his sacerdotal Golden Jubilee in St. Peter’s in Rome. Regarding the building, the Church was hardly finished when modifications were made. The two walls separating the side chapels were taken down, making two smaller lateral naves. The two chapels of Our Lady and St. Joseph were removed to the back of the main altar, and at the request of Archbishop, the Shrine of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart was constructed “in style and material” better than the Church itself. It occupied a space, led to by a colonnade of stone pillars, a little less than the width of main nave. Under the chapel was built a crypt, where the original statue

of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart stands today, with the bodies of Father Chevalier, Father Piperon, Father Vandel, and the two successors of Father Chevalier as General of the Society, lying at Her feet. In the same copy of the Annals in 1867, in which Father Chevalier announced that the foundations of the new chapel were laid, he also made known the fact that several generous benefactors, as a token of gratitude to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, had sent him some diamonds and other precious jewels, expressing the wish that a diadem be made to adorn Our Lady’s statue. “Perhaps,” they said, “when you visit Rome, you might be able to get the Holy Father to bless it, and seek his permission for a solemn enthronement.” Father Chevalier heartily agreed with the idea and launched an appeal amongst a group of Our Lady’s devotees to make the diadem a worthy one. “As I am going to Rome soon to offer the Holy Father the contributions for the Holy See sent in through the Annals, my joy would be complete if this diadem could be blessed by the immortal Pius IX.”

PART VII: FATHER CHEVALIER VISITS ROME WITH THE ARCHBISHOP

On the 11th June, 1867, Father Chevalier set out for Rome in the company of his Archbishop. They arrived there the following Saturday. The occasion of this journey was a result of an invitation from His Holiness to the bishops of the entire world to visit Rome if possible for the June celebrations in honour of the 18th centenary of the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, when several beatifications and canonisations were to take place. On the Monday after their arrival, which happened to be the anniversary of the Pope’s election, they saw His Holiness in a general audience in the Sistine Chapel. Several days later, the Archbishop was received in private audience by the Pope, and he took the opportunity of presenting Father Chevalier. The arrangements for this presentation were made at the last minute and, taken unawares, Father Chevalier found himself before the Holy Father without his papers of petition or the contributions he had brought from Issoudun. This meant he had to seek a second audience, which proved rather difficult. “Ten times,” he wrote, “we tried to arrange this audience, and ten times we had no success.” However, an interview with Mgr. Mercurelli, the Pope’s private secretary, brought results. His first comments were not very encouraging, but eventually he relented. “I am afraid the circumstances are not very favourable. You see, the Holy Father is so very busy. I have here before me over 200 petitions from various bishops to put before His Holiness. If I had a spare six weeks I might succeed. You have given me only a few days. To tell you the truth, it is just impossible.” Father Chevalier’s reply was typical: “Precisely because it seems impossible, I have confidence. The matter is now in the hands of Our Lady.” The Monsignor with a smile replied “You will certainly need her help. Come back and see me to-morrow, but, in the meantime, don’t be too hopeful.” Father Chevalier deliberately waited two days before returning, knowing that no particular time had been made for an appointment and choosing this particular day for his mission – 28th June, the feast of the Sacred Heart. The Monseigneur received him graciously and remarked, “You certainly have a good advocate.” He handed him the papers of petition, signed by the Holy Father, dated 26th June, the day of his interview with the secretary. The Holy Father had granted the apostolic benediction to all the members of the Congregation and the Archconfraternity of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart; had authorised that the main altar of the Issoudun Basilica be a privileged altar three times a week for the priests of the Instititute; had granted an indulgence of 100 days for the recitation of the following invocations: “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, pray for us.” “Sacred Heart of Jesus, have pity on us.” “Heart of Mary, pray for us.” The very kind and true friend of the early Society, Mgr. de la Tour d’Auvergne, the Archbishop of Bourges, took the opportunity of his pastoral visitation to Issoudun, on 8th August, publicly to inform the people of their new privileges. On the following day His Grace blessed the new tower on the church and spoke very feelingly of the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart and the work of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart in his diocese. “Yes, we love this work of the Sacred Heart,” he said, “and any time an opportunity comes my way of showing appreciation for it, I will gladly avail myself of it. This is why I have stayed with you to-day for this solemn function.” In the article in which Father Chevalier published the favours receive from Rome, he put special stress on the fact that the Archbishop had personally requested “the well-beloved Pius IX” to approve the Archconfraternity. “The Sovereign Pontiff,” he wrote, “will soon send us the official document, and we will hasten to publicise it.” The ceremony of the crowning of Our Lady’s statue had to be delayed as the completion of the chapel took longer than, anticipated. At one stage Father Chevalier, in a letter to Mme. des Mesloizes, mentioned that “it might take the best part of two years.” Also he had not been able to present the diadem to the Holy Father to be blessed for the simple reason that it had not been finished. However, the Pope had given his blessing to a provisional diadem. In the meantime, the impatiently-awaited, document from Rome was not forthcoming. This delay, no doubt, was the reason why a certain opposition to the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart developed in various quarters during the next few years, and there are serious reasons to doubt if the actual submissions made to the Holy See were the same as originally drafted. We recall that the first request was sent to Bourges on 22nd April, 1854, asking that the Association be raised to the rank of an Archconfraternity and seeking a number of indulgences. In its May edition the Messenger was able to announce that the Archbishop had already made the petition to Rome, Was this news premature or had the request been refused? In any case, the Brief of June 7th granted simply the approbation of the Association without making it an Archconfraternity, and granted a list of indulgences, but not so many as had been requested. It was argued in certain quarters that the request for the Archconfraternity was too premature, but this objection loses much of its weight when’ve compare it with similar cases. For example, the Confraternity of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at Our Lady of Victories, Paris, was raised to the rank of Archconfraternity in 1838, barely a year after its foundation, and it was granted for the entire world, even though the request had been made for France only. The same applies to the Confraternity of Our Lady of Hope founded in Saint-Brieuc on the 25th March, 1848. This Association was elevated to the rank of Archconfraternity after only a few months: on 8th August of the same year. We are inclined to think that the delay in ranking the Association of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart as an Archconfraternity was on account of the novelty of the new title and the necessity of making sure of its theological soundness. This novelty, naturally, met with a deal of opposition as it had to be treated with caution and prudence. We cannot say for certain whether the Archbishop himself was ultimately responsible for the delay or whether it was attributable to the authorities in Rome. Father Georgelin’s “Ephemerides” of the Society throw some light on the history of these various petitions. He tells us that Father Chevalier instructed him: “Seeing that we have now 150,000 Associates, draw up a petition that the Association be made an Archconfraternity. You can ask it on account of the indulgences already accorded.” Father Georgelin drew up the petition in Latin which was addressed to the Holy Father. He quotes the same number of Associates, which allows us to date the request as the middle of 1865, a year after the first petition had been sent to Bourges. The letter finishes by begging the Holy Father to grant the Indulgences which will be sought from the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences. Two other extracts from Father Georgelin’s writings contain a detailed list of the requested indulgences and a list of the privileges of the Association. That nothing came of these early requests in 1865 is indicated by the fact that we find them repeated two years later – June 7th, 1867 – in a further petition to the Holy Father to have the Association elevated to an Archconfraternity. The text is practically the same as that of 1865, with a few omissions. It is necessary to recall here that it was only four days after this petition was sent to Rome that Father Chevalier and the Archbishop set out for the Holy City – the 11th June, 1867. The records tell us that it was not this document that the Holy Father signed but one from Issoudun

dated 19th June. It was sent directly to the Pope and not through the Congregation of Indulgences, and His Holiness signed it on the 26th June. The Annals, in referring to this petition, simply remarked that “the Archbishop himself forwarded the request, and the reply was being anxiously awaited.” We might conclude from this that His Grace, after consulting some of his old friends in Rome, decided to deal directly with the Holy Father on the matter which he regarded as one of importance. The number of indulgences and privileges requested – already submitted to the Sacred Congregation – were reduced, but the fact that the Archbishop himself asked for the erection of the Archconfraternity was expected to bring results. However, there was no immediate response from Rome.

PART VIII: OPPOSITION FROM MARSEILLES AND ORLEANS

As a natter of fact, the atmosphere in Rome at the time regarding the new devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart was far from favourable, and this resulted from opposition in certain quarters in France itself. On July 18th, 1868, Mgr. Bartolini, the Secretary of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, had seen fit to write to the Secretariate of the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, informing it that the Association of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart in France was making public the fact that it would soon be raised to the rank of an Archconfraternity and that the Archbishop of Marseilles had regarded it as his duty to warn the Holy See about the manner in which this devotion was being presented, especially in the magazine, the Annals, and that the manner of its presentation contained a certain danger for the faithful. “This is why,” wrote Mgr. Bartolini, “the Holy Father has instructed me to advise the responsible authorities to refuse for the time being all requests. We do not know the date when the protest came in from Marseilles, but the only reference to an anticipated erection of the Association into an Archconfraternity appeared in the August edition of the Annals in 1867, and we know that in the following months Bourges and Issoudun were waiting in vain for the pontifical approbation. As the Archbishop of Marseilles is the only opponent mentioned in Mgr. Bartolini’s letter, we presume that he would have sent his protest to Rome shortly after the article appeared in the Annals in August, 1867, thus frustrating the efforts of the Archbishop of Bourges. So, in spite of the visit of Father Chevalier and the Archbishop to Rome in 1867, the difficulties connected with the Coronation of Our Lady’s statue and the erection of the Archconfraternity remained unsolved. It was in the October Annals of 1868 that we find the first public reference to Father Chevalier’s next proposed trip to Rome. “We will soon retrace our steps to the Holy City,” he wrote. Besides taking with him the offerings for the Holy See received through the Annals, he announced that he would take a small bronze statue of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart modelled on the beautiful marble statue that was at present being constructed in Paris for the new chapel in Issoudun. “I will place the generous alms of the Associates in the pedestal of the statue before presenting it to the Holy Father,” he wrote. The statue being prepared for Our Lady’s chapel in Issoudun was designed and constructed from Carrara marble by Monsieur Blanchard, with the firm of Daniel handling the business arrangements. The Paris firm of Chertier was constructing the diadem for Our Lady, also the imperial crown which was to be placed on the head of the Infant Jesus. “These two crowns will be finished in December and they will be placed on the heads of Our Lady and the Infant Jesus with due solemnity on a fitting feast day”- according to the report in the Annals.(50.) During these months the Annals did not make any reference to the deferred erection the Archconfraternity. Following the opposition to the Archconfraternity, Bourges, and Issoudun decided to change their tactics. From the beginning, they had acted in all simplicity in their efforts to spread the devotion, but now they realised they would have to act with greater circumspection. On 18th October, 1868, two documents were drawn up – one giving an account of the origin, meaning and present state of the Association, and the other a renewed petition for the authorisation of the Archconfraternity and the crowning of Our Lady’s statue. The Archbishop gave his approval to the documents on 8th November, and they were then sent around to a number of bishops, asking for their opinions – and approbation. This was the method employed in 1863 when the first brochure had been sent to their Lordships for their opinion on the devotion and it met with the same success. Indeed, it was a remarkable fact that many of them, not only put their signatures to the documents but gave detailed reasons for their personal approbation. They, doubtless, had heard of the opposition to the movement, and were determined to state clearly their own position. Two dioceses, however, were not so co-operative: Orleans and Marseilles, following their previous attitude to the Association of Secular Priests. Mgr. Dupauloup, who in 1863, had reacted favourably to the brochure on the new devotion and had encouraged Father Chevalier in the founding of the Institute, while making certain reservations about the Secular Priests’ Association, now does not seem so enthusiastic. ”Rev. Father Superior,” he wrote, “I have heard that you are bringing out a new revue of piety. Would you have the goodness to forward me all the numbers which have already appeared. You can count on my profound and religious interest.” However, that was all we were to hear from Orleans and the matter seems to have been dropped there.(5l) The opposition of Mgr. Place, of Marseilles, was more serious. After having stated that he could not give a testimonial in favour of the Congregation, for which he had also been asked, on the grounds that he did so only for Institutes established in his own diocese, he added: What is more, I cannot ignore the fact that I have been often troubled to find in your Annals new doctrines and sentiments which should not have appeared there,” In this letter, dated, 11th November, he made no reference to the protest he had sent to Rome which Mgr. Bartolini had placed before the Sacred Congregations on the previous 18th July.

PART IX: FATHER CHEVALIER RECEIVED IN PRIVATE AUDIENCE BY THE POPE

Encouraged by the co-operation of the majority of the bishops, Father Chevalier set out for Rome at the beginning of February, 1869. His approach to the Holy Father was to take on quite a different character from that of 1867. On his previous visit, he had but briefly been presented to His Holiness by his Archbishop and had been able to obtain the Pope’s signature to his petition through the mediation of Mgr. Mercurelli. This time, however, eight days after his arrival, he was able, owing to the letters of recommendation from the Archbishop, to obtain a private audience with the Pope. It was quite a, long audience. In the Annals, as in his letters, Father Chevalier speaks of the “incomparable kindness” with which the Supreme Pontiff received him. Kneeling at his feet, he presented the Holy Father with the bronze statuette, about one foot eight inches in height. His Holiness showed great interest in it and listened attentively to the Founder’s explanation of its meaning. Father Chevalier then presented 5,000 francs to the Holy Father as Peter’s Pence, money which had been collected through the Annals for this purpose. The Sovereign Pontiff asked him many questions, particularly about the shrine where Our Lady of the Sacred Heart would be honoured, and he then imparted his blessing to Issoudun, the members of the Society and the Associates. Father Chevalier then presented the two crowns for the statue, asking for a special blessing and the privilege of crowning it in the name of the Holy Father himself. The Pope replied: “It is with pleasure that I bless your statue, and I grant you the favour you ask. You can go to His Eminence, Cardinal Clarelli, and tell him that I have asked that he draw up a Brief granting permission t have the statue crowned in my name. I delegate your illustrious and pious Archbishop to perform the ceremony. The Holy Father then took Father Chevalier by the hand and said to him: “Get up from

your knees and give me more details of your work. How many Associates have you now?” “Your Holiness, we have now over two million members, and the Confraternity is only four years old.” “That is most extraordinary,” replied the Pope. He then presented a bound volume of the copies of the Annals, together with a new edition of the work, “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.” Both received special blessings. Turning over the pages, the Pope came across the Brief which he had signed in 1864 approving of the Confraternity. He remarked with a smile. “I see you are already acquainted with this Pius IX’.” After further conversation regarding the Confraternity, Father Chevalier made bold to ask His Holiness to become a member. “With pleasure,” the Pope replied, “but what do I have to do?” “Merely express your wish to have your name inscribed and promise to recite twice daily, ‘Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, pray for us.’ ” “That will be easy,” said His Holiness, and taking a picture of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, he autographed it in Latin which reads: “Pope Pius IX, who wishes to love the Blessed Virgin Mary.” The holy card is preserved at Issoudun as one of its most precious possessions, together with the pen with which the saintly Pope signed the various privileges.

PART X: THE CONFRATERNITY ERECTED INTO AN ARCHCONFRATERNITY

The interview with the Holy Father concluded after Father Chevalier presented the letter from Mgr. de la Tour d’Auvergne, officially asking that the Confraternity “be raised to the rank of Archconfraternity. The result was that the Holy Father granted this favour, at first for the diocese of Bourges only, and then after a short time for the whole of France. Eventually he authorised its extension to the entire world. In a letter written to the community at Issoudun the following day, Father Chevalier, strangely enough, made no reference to the erection of the Archconfraternity; but he did say that the Pope read the Memorare to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart with great interest and immediately granted an indulge of 100 days for its recitation, to be restricted for the time being to the diocese of Bourges. Father Chevalier said in his letter that the Holy Father asked many questions about the meaning of the title and said he was delighted with it. In his letter to the Archbishop he had much to say about the Archconfraternity, and in his reply His Grace said he was very pleased “to hear the good news from Rome,” and, referring to its restriction to the diocese of Bourges, he remarked: “For the time being, that is sufficient.” Recalling the letter of protest presented to the authorities by Mgr. Bartolini, we can appreciate the significance of the Archbishop’s remark, which indicated that he realised the temporary restriction was in deference to the opinions of the Archbishops of Marseilles and Orleans. It was apparent that the Holy Father was on the side of Bourges, but restricted the Archconfraternity to that diocese for the time being to avoid difficulties. This, no doubt, explains also why the list of requested indulgences was not eventually sent to the Sacred Congregation and why Father Chevalier kept repeating in his letters of this time the phrase, “for the time being.” Likewise, it explains why the Brief – dated 5th March, 1869 authorising the Archconfraternity in the diocese of Bourges was not published in the Annals, except for the mention of the 100 days’ indulgence granted for the recitation of the Memorare, whilst full prominence was given in the April edition to the authorisation of the Crowning of Our Lady’s statue. We have mentioned that the 1869 visit of Father Chevalier to Rome attended by much more ceremony than that of 1867. Apart from the privileg of the private audience with the Holy Father, he was introduced to many of’ the Cardinals and Bishops attached to the Vatican staff, who all showed interest in his work and admired particularly the two diadems for the new statue. He mentioned meeting Cardinal Antonelli, Archbishops de Merode, Pacca and Ricci, the Head of the Swiss Guards – General Kartzler – who presented him to the noble guards and he proudly told the priests in Issoudun that he had been able to enrol all the Bishops at the Vatican in the Confraternity and had to go back to the Vatican to deliver the admission leaflets. “Send me,” he wrote, “twelve large copies of the picture of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.” The devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart was, of course, already well known in Rome. Mgr. Pagliari, Bishop of Anagni was already an ardent devotee and had published a brochure on the devotion printed by the Civilta Catholica, and he issued a pastoral letter on the occasion of the canonical erection of the Association in his diocese. Shortly after his arrival in the Holy City, Father Chevalier had a brochure printed in Italian, explaining the nature of the Association, and before he left he was able to inscribe over two thousand new Associates and establish four centres to carry on the good work. The first of these was established at the Vatican itself under the direction of Father Philippe Pirri, Secretary of Archbishop Ricci. The other three were placed under the direction of well-known personalities:.. Signor Mercurelli, Signor Antonelli and Signora Carlotta Antonelli. During this same sojourn in Rome, Father Chevalier had the honour of admitting the Princess Marie Pie of Naples as an Associate, and she presented him with a precious brooch, asking that the jewels in it be inserted in Our Lady’s diadem. She visited Issoudun several times during the ensuing years and interested all her family in the work of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. They became valuable protectors of the work in Italy.(52). A final note about the Memorare before concluding this chapter: We have already mentioned that the Pope had granted an indulgence of 100 days for its recitation in the diocese of Bourges. Before doing this, the Holy Father had carefully examined the wording of the prayer prior to giving his approval. As there had been different forms of the well-known prayer in circulation, the Annals published the official text approved by the Pope – as we have it today.(53).

CHAPTER XVI: THE THIRD ORDER, AND THE CONSTITUTIONS.

PART I: GENERAL IDEA OF A THIRD ORDER, THE THIRD ORDER OF THE SACRED HEART.

When Father Chevalier had asked Father Le Blanc’s opinion regarding the advisability of a Third Order to be associated with the Society similar to that previously founded by their own priest, Father de Clorivere, the Jesuit had at first thought it would be a good idea, then began to doubt it, and finally advised against it, and finally advised against it, at least for the time being.” Their experience with the complexity of such an organisation had made the Jesuits of Vaugirard rather cautious in the matter. However on the 9th April, 1863, Father Chevalier had written to Father Le Blanc: “I am receiving letters from far and wide asking me if we have a Third Order of the Sacred Heart for people out in the world, as the Dominicans and Francisans have.” “In order to accommodate the wishes of these devout souls I have drawn up a provisional plan of Rules, of which I am sending you a copy.” Many people, particularly young women of all classes of society – many of them amongst the well to do type have written asking if we have an Institute for women devoted to the work of the Sacred Heart, founded on the same lives as our own Congregation “of men”. And he added: “As we both know this thought has now been in our minds for almost ten years.” These two projects will now claim our attention in this chapter. They came to fruition about the same time as the movement of the Associated Secular Priests. It was not unusual in the last century to find Religions Institutes having a Third Order. The rules governing these Third Orders were to all practical purposes, as definite and strict as those of the Institutes themselves. There were in existence as Father Le Blanc notes, numerous ecclesiastical documents approving and encouraging these Third Order as a means of spiritual perfection for the laity, especially those attached to the more ancient Orders of the Church. Even in more recent times we find Pope Pius IX, on 8th Sept., 1850, signing a Brief delegating Cardinal de Bonald Archbishop of Lynos, to erect a “Third Order of May,” attached to the Society of Mary of the Venerable Father Colin.

On the following 5th Dec., the Cardinal published a decree, which “Consequent upon the Apostolic Brief, which has invested us with the necessary faculties to specify and design the spiritual privileges requested by the Third Order of Mary, and granted by the holy See, we now declare the aforesaid Third Order established organised and canonically erected, as from next Sunday, the 8th Dec.” Canon Mulsant had a pertinent remark to make here. “In juridical language the Third Order were attached only to those Orders whose members took solemn vows but as solemn vows have disappeared in France since the Revolution the term “Orders” now embraces all Religious Institutes, and the word “Third Order” covers a larger field than originally. For example he described the “Third Order of Mary” as “a vast association in which secular priests and faithful souls in the world, undertook to live according to the Marist ideal, in imitation of the virtues of the Blessed Virgin and to exercise an apostolate on Her behalf amongst their families and friends.”(l) Father Chevalier had the same idea, but directed towards the Sacred Heart. This is why the Association of Secular Clergy which in the first rules were referred to as a Third Order, and the Third Order of laypeople formed a group apart, distinct for example from the Archconfraternity of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. They formed a definite auxiliary organism with their own constitution. Father Chevalier had sent a plan to Father Le Blanc stating the end and object of the Third Order: (1) It will enable its members to work more efficaciously for their spiritual perfection by using the powerful means of sanctification which the Heart of Jesus offers them. (2) They will render special worship to the Sacred Heart, and strive to spread the devotion everywhere. (3) They will make reparation for the outrages inflicted on the Sacred Heart, by leading pious and edifying lives and offering for this intention all their pains and difficulties, their privations and sorrows, their works and their merits.” These objects, after all, were those of the Society itself. In 1865 Father Chevalier wrote his brochure: “General Idea of the Third Order of the Sacred Heart,” which was approved by the Archbishop. The motto of the Association was “Ad majorem Dei et Sacratissini Cordis Gloriam.” In the introduction he stressed the spiritual sickness of the age, and pointed out that its cure lay in the love and devotion to the Sacred Heart. He emphasised the fact that the Third Order was neither a Confraternity, a Congregation or a Religious Society, properly so called. It was a group of men and women leading good Christian lives out in the world, who by their interior dispositions, imitated those who had left the world in order to live a more perfect life. The organisation would have priests as directors, general, diocesan and local, and for the women members Superioresses would also be appointed, assisted by a Council.

PART II: INFLUENCE OF MLLE DE MONTAIGNAC ON THE HISTORY OF THE THIRD ORDER.

At the time that Father Chevalier was founding his Third Order his other cherished idea, that of establishing a feminine organisation corresponding to that of his own Missionaries was about to be realised even though at the time it was not through his own initiative. We must go back a few years to trace the origin of the movement. Since the troublous times of the 1843 Revolution there resided in Moutlucon a certain Mlle Louise Therese de Montaignac de Chauvance.(2) She had been born on May 14th, 1820 at Havre-de-Grace, and had been brought up by an aunt Mme de Raffin who did not have any children of her own. This devout woman had given Louise-Therese a great love of the Sacred Heart. Mme de Raffin had always had the desire of founding an Association of women, who would devote their lives to the Sacred Heart. She was convinced that France could be saved only by devotion to the Sacred Heart, and she wished to found a Congregation whose object would be to adore the Sacred Heart in the most Blessed Sacrament by lives of immolation and reparation. However, as not all are called to the same degree of perfection and all cannot undertake the same type of work, she thought of establishing an institute, which would embrace a variety of works, – much the same idea as Father Chevalier entertained later on. She had first thought of calling her work – “The Association for the Propagation of Devotion to the Sacred Heart.” Then thinking this might sound too ambitions she was content with the title – “The Institute of St. Joseph.” Before her death (4th December, 1845) she confided all these ideas, hopes and plans to her niece, asking her, if possible, to achieve them. In 1848 Louise-Therese settled in Montlucon, and gave herself over to the apostolate under the direction of Father Guilhomet, the Parish Priest. She became a real apostle of devotion to the Sacred Heart, took a special interest in helping the poorer churches and from her own money established the Orphanage of the Sacred Heart where she took up her residence with a few other spiritually-minded people. She now hoped to realise in a practical way the wishes of her devout aunt, i.e., to establish a congregation of women dedicated to the work of the Sacred Heart. She enquired at first, about the possibility of union with already-existing associations, but did not find what she wanted. In 1859 she placed herself under the spiritual direction of Father Gautrelet, S.J, in whom she hoped to find, to quote her biography, “the priest sent by Providence, who with the help of Divine authority would allay all her fears, if she obeyed his directions.” The biography also remarked: “From now on she was hoping to use the grace of this spiritual direction, not only in regard to the thoughts that were occupying her mind regarding her proposed foundation, but particularly for her own personal sanctification. She wished only to be the instrument of the Sacred Heart, to whose service she had vowed her life, in the meantime she had joined the “Zealous Followers of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and Mary, founded by Father Rosin, S.J., but she did not see any possibility here of accomplishing the mission her aunt had entrusted to her. Father Gautrelet had learnt from his dirigee all about this mission, but said he would, naturally, have to act cautiously in the matter. However, according to the biography, Mlle. de Montaignac “always found some means of bringing him back to the subject, and keeping him interested in it.” “Wishing to find,” again to quote the biography, “a vigorous trunk on which to graft the proposed foundation,” she wrote to Mother Barat, who at the time was contemplating a Third Order for her Institute. Because of the many difficulties involved, there was no immediate response, and from 1861 to 1864, Mlle. de Montaignac stayed with the nuns in the Convent in Bellecroix, whilst awaiting a definite reply. A letter from Mother Barat in 1864, informed Louise-Therese that the fusion of the two foundations was not feasible. In 1861, Father Gautrelet had been transferred to Algiers, but, before leaving, he had recommended Louise-Therese to consult Father Ramiere, S.J., who was in charge of the Apostolate of Prayer in Bellecroix. Father Ramiere, a priest devoted, above all, to the Sacred Heart, was doubtful about the wisdom of the fusion, always difficult in practice of associations founded to promote the glory of the Sacred Heart, and said he preferred to await the action of the Holy Ghost for separate foundations. Regarding your active and positive relationship with the new congregation, my advice is to go along happily, act as God directs your heart in the measure of His grace and then wait until you see the way more clearly.” We have seen that Father Chevalier had been in touch with Father Gautrelet in September, 1864, and the latter had stated that, in spite of all the difficulties involved, he regarded the project as offering the best means and guarantee of success to Mlle. de Montaignac’s plans. On the 5th

of the month Father Gautrelet wrote to Louise-Therese: “There still remains a certain amount of uncertitude concerning the fusion with Issoudun. We must have patience, wait and pray. The moment of God will come. I fear that Father Chevalier may not go ahead with the scheme. The work is indeed a complicated one. It would appear to me difficult, even impossible, to realise it as he conceives it. It is not so much Religious Communities that are needed as good people in the world, having a religious spirit and going about their daily lives in a spirit of Faith. I fear that if one aims too high in a work of the nature of yours, one would ruin an idea excellent in itself, and sacrifice what can be done. Let us proceed, consequently, in a quiet way, and wait the outcome of events. ” Then on 12th January Father Gautrelet in a more hopeful mood, went on to encourage her: “Let us go ahead here as the good God would wish. There is, after all, something providential in the set-up of circumstances which finds a new Congregation coming into existence at a time when you are looking for a support and complement of your own work. Our Lord seems to be saying to you: ‘There I am.’ Again, on the 1st February: “I bless God and I am now happy. It seems to me that at last the dream of your heart is partly realised. Without doubt you were hoping for something greater and better. That will come soon, but it seems to me the work has taken a great step forward. Whatever may be the future of the work the present circumstances tide us over the delay which we were not able to foresee. No doubt, later on, there will be misgivings, difficulties and many details to be straightened out in the fusion of your Third Order with the Congregation, but the essential facts are assured.” It was obvious that Father Gautrelet was becoming more and more sympathetic with the idea of the Third Order, for on the 3rd March he wrote: “I regard the Third Order as now launched. It will be able to withstand any storm. Thank God for the way things have turned out, and for solving the difficulties which our human weakness was not able to do. Follow the way which is now open to you. God invites you to do so. Thank Him with confidence. The future now begins to shape itself. The light has broken through. There will, no doubt, be some shadows and clouds, but at present the sun is shining brightly.” In the meantime Mlle. de Montaignac had been in contact with Father Chevalier, mainly by reason of the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, and he himself had already heard of the proposed foundation at Montlucon: his good friend there, L’Abbe Guyot, parish priest of the Church of St. Paul. It was actually from the presbytery of St. Paul that Father Chevalier had written to Louise-Therese, praising her for her devotion to the Sacred Heart and Our Blessed Lady, and telling her of the success of the Confraternity of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, of which she was to become a zealous member. After receiving the negative reply from Mother Barat, Mlle. de Montaignac consulted Father Ramiere, who saw a possible solution of the difficulty. The Associates of Montlucon, he wrote, should join forces with those of Third Order of Issoudun. However at first this project did not appeal very greatly to Louise-Therese, who wrote to her old spiritual director, Father Gautrelet, about matter. The priest was in favour of the idea and replied; “I think God wills this work. This enterprise is for His glory. Something will come of it. It is the seed of something fruitful, which will blossom in the future. For the moment you do not fancy joining the Third Order; you do not see and you do not feel that God wills this work.” Louise-Therese decided to follow the advice of her former director, and wrote accordingly to him. In his reply, dated 11th July 1864, the priest remarked: “I received your letter of the 6th inst., and am replying immediately. The problem, after what you have told me, seems to have solved itself. Deo Gratias! We can perhaps say now – ‘Why didn’t we think of it before?’ It is true that the Society of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart is only newly founded, but it has its roots in the Heart of the Divine Master, its youth will be vigor and it will quickly outgrow its infancy. The circumstances of the Beatification of Blessed Margaret Mary, still so fresh in the mind, drawing the hearts of the faithful to the devotion to the Sacred Heart, will favour the execution and development of your project. Once again we can say May God be blessed! Let us allow Him to do the work. He has commenced it; He will see it through. I do not think you should hesitate, because of the fears you have expressed. When God raises up a new Congregation, when He inspires its members; when His Holy Spirit and Heart are in the work, what is there to fear?” On 23rd July he again wrote; “Let us rely on the sweet and amiable Providence of Jesus. He will solve the difficulties. Go ahead without worrying too much about the future. The future is in the hands of God, as we are ourselves. “Consecrate yourself to God firmly. The future and the grace of God will later on put a special seal on your work.” Mlle. de Montaignac decided not to make any decision before consulting her Bishop. His Lordship, after hearing the facts, replied that he would leave her free to undertake what seemed good to her. He had already read the bouchures from Issoudun, and was impressed with the Constitutions remarking, at the same time, that any modification which would be necessary would be made according to the conditions of the time. The Vicar General, Father Gilbert, was not enthusiastic about the enterprise but having heard the opinion of the Bishop, he wrote kindly: “I see that His Lordship is satisfied, and realises you are happy to have settled the issue. I submit my judgment to his. You must now go ahead courageously, and not be looking for new ideas, which are not in accordance with the work nor necessary to it.” Father Gautrelet was now happy. “What you told me on July 13th,” he wrote, “has given me great consolation. Deo Gratias. A nucleus has been formed. You now have with you six Sisters, united in the Heart of Our Lord.” These, undoubtedly, were the “Novices” referred to in a letter of Father Chevalier to Father Guyot, dated June 2nd – in which he authorised him to receive them as he would not be able to make the journey to Montlucon himself. As soon as the union between Issoudun and Montlucon was definitely decided on, a summary idea of the Third Order was presented to all the branches interested, first of all to the Associates at Montlucon itself, then to Moulins Le Puy and Chambery. It was well received and in the words of Father Chevalier: “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart gave Her blessing to these early beginnings.” In spite of his indifferent health at this time, Father Chevalier visited all these centres during the ensuing months, and kept in constant touch with Father Ramiere about the progress of the movement. He made new contacts, organised new groups, especially the one in Issoudun, from which he sent candidates to Montlucon to live the community life. We must keep in mind that the Third Order was not a Religious Society, strictly speaking, and that the members had no obligation of living in community. However it was stated in the brochure “General Idea of the Third Order” that it was desirable that those, who were free to do so, should live together as a family, and unite their efforts and resources in furthering the cause. The majority of the Associates, of course were not living in community, but they were exhorted to “pledge themselves seriously to Our Blessed Lord.” Realising that many members of the Third Order were not in the position to give themselves entirely to the work, the brochure expressedly used the phrase “only those who are independent enough to consecrate themselves exclusively to the work”, and it mentions as exceptions – “married women, young girls, and widows, who have not absolutely renounced the idea of re-marrying.” Mlle. de Montaignac was chosen as the Superior-General of the Third Order, and Father Chevalier as the Director. She made her solemn promises the 1st September 1865. To these promises she signed herself – “Louise-Therese of the Heart of Jesus.” Father Gautrelet wrote to her later: “Keep that title. It is very beautiful, and recalls many things.” The title was applied to all the members of the Third Order after that, and fittingly so, as it denoted the sincere and ardent devotion to the Sacred Heart.

Regarding the group at Issoudun Father Chevalier wrote on the 11th Jan, 1866, to Mlle de Montaignac: “We have just received some new members. They were delighted. One of them will be writing to you soon. We were very pleased to have your good parish priest of St. Paul with us. I have told him that if I die before he does, the Third Order is in his hands.” On the 25th Aug. 1066 the Bishop of Moulins, Mgr. de Dreux-Breze, gave official approbation to the Third Order in his diocese. The document read: “Peter Simon de Breux-Breze, by the Grace of God and the Apostolic See, Bishop of Moulins. To our beloved daughter Louise de Montaignac health and salvation in Him, Who loves us, Jesus Christ, Our Lord. You have explained to Us that in the church of the Priests of the Sacred Heart at Issoudun, in the diocese of Bourges, there exists a Third Order, dedicated to the Cause of the same Most Sacred Heart, which you now wish to have established in our diocese, according to its laws and constitutions, approved by His Lordship, the Bishop of Bourges. AS nothing is dearer to our heart than the spreading of devotion to the Sacred Heart, and the recommendation of His Virtutes of Humility and Meekness to the faithful, We willingly approve this Third Order in our diocese. Given at Nercence, 25th Aug. 1866, Feast of St. Louis the King.”

PART III: DIFFICULTIES WITH FATHER RAMIERE

In spite of all the respect due to Father Ramiere, to his help and his advice, it would appear that the priests at Issoudun felt that he was inclined to interfere rather too much in the shaping of the Society. For example, Father Piperon was advising Father Chevalier to compose a brochure on the work instead of writing articles in Father Ramiere’s Messenger and in the dealings between Fathers Chevalier and Vandel, both priests were careful not to let him take part in their plans, in spite of his wish to do so. It was the common opinion at Issoudun that Father Ramiere’s ideas on the formation and form of the Society did not concur with those of the Founder and his confreres. Although this reserve kept him from directing the affairs of the Society at Issoudun, he had more influence at Montlucon regarding the Third Order in his role as spiritual director of Mlle de Montaignac. It was he who had suggested the amalgamation with Issoudun, after Mother Barat’s refusal of a union with her Congregation, and perhaps in the light of Father Chevalier’s ready co-operation regarding the Third Order, he had presumed to think that the latter would be amenable to ideas concerning the conduct of the Society itself. In any case it is on record that he gave Montlucon to understand that he “had been asked to draw up the Constitutions for this new Congregation”(5) He had probably gained this impression from correspondence with Father Chevalier two years previously in 1864, after the latter had written a brochure, to which he raised several objections.(4) On the 5th March 1865 he said that he had drawn up “a rough sketch of the Rules for the Priests of the Sacred Heart.” But Father Chevalier had already in 1864, drawn up Rules for the Associate Secular Priests of the Sacred Heart, and had clearly stated that these were not to be confused with the Rules for the society itself. It would appear that on this point Father Ramiere was in error thinking that the Association of Secular Priests and the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart formed the one integral Society. On the 3rd March, 1866, he had written to Montlucon “I have just drawn up the Rules for the Priests of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. I am very happy about them. Would you be kind enough to give me Father Chevalier’s present address, so that I may forward him a copy.” As we will see later on, Father Chevalier was not quite as happy about them, as was Father Ramiere, and from 1866 onwards there were definite differences of opinion between Issoudun and Montlucon. Father Ramiere was to find out that Father Chevalier was not as docile as he had thought and began to realise that he was mistaken in the extent of the work commissioned to him. In any case from now on he occupied himself actively with the affairs of the Third Order and consequently of Montlucon as Father Blanc had written to Father Chevalier when the latter had made contact with Vaugirard the Society of Jesus could not affiliate to itself any Third Order. Father Ramiere therefore submitted the matter to his Superior General and after receiving a reply, he wrote to Mlle de Montaignac: “In reference to the part I can take with regard to the Third Order I am to restrict myself to individual spiritual direction, either in the Confessional or by letter but the official and external administration must be left to the Fathers at Issoudun.” Later on he was to write on 19th October: “When I see you I will explain to you how Father General has taken a more favourable view of the extent of activities with the Third Order.” The first inkling of Father Ramiere’s change of attitude to Issoudun was found in a letter of Father Gautrelet written to Mlle. de Montaignac on 24th June 1866. The two priests had been corresponding with one another, and Fr Gautrelet wrote: “Father Ramiere with his zealous followers, together with his Messenger of the Sacred Heart will serve your cause better than any means has there a powerful means of propagation. He will sow the seed; you will reap the harvest with him.” On 14th January 1867 Father Ramiere wrote of objections he had heard to the union with Issoudun. For example, “In Lyons,” he said, “it was being asked – ‘Why join with the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, whom nobody has heard of?” A priest of the Lyons diocese, Father Monnet, was asking the question publicly. Father Ramiere explained to them that as yet the rules of the union with Issoudun were only sketchily drawn up, and that if a more important and solid centre could have been found, they would have adopted it. “For the rest,” he said, “the Society of Priests of the Sacred Heart was not so much a trunk on which the Third Order was grafted, as another branch of the same tree. They are two sister-works, which must grow together.” Father Ramiere had gone to Germany and had spoken of the Secular Priests in connection with the Apostolate of Prayer Movement. He wrote back that priests had heard of this Association of Secular Priests, but the general opinion, was that it should not be dependent on Issoudun, especially for the German Priests. “Bishop Mermillod” continued Father Ramiere, “with whom I had many talks on the subject, is of the opinion, that this dependence on Issoudun, if given too much prominence could hinder the propagation of the movement.” “It appears evident to me,” writes Father Ramiere, “that if the work had preserved the form that I originally gave it, i.e., an apostolate of the Heart crowning the work of the Apostolate of Prayer, we would not have encountered the difficulties that confront us now.” “Let us pray that we will know the way Divine Providence wishes us to follow in the future.” In another letter to Mlle. de Montaignac Father Ramiere wrote: “Father Superior has sent me a copy of some recent decisions of the Sacred Congregation, one of which is the disapproval of any congregation of women being dependant on a Community of men. If, as a consequence of this decision, you must sever your relationship with Issoudun, except, of course, in regard the spiritual union of devotion to the Sacred Heart, you would lose many benefits on the one hand; but, on the other, it would remove the principal obstacle, which alienates many of our priests from the work. In this case it would be necessary to abandon the name Third Order. I think that the Apostles of the Heart of Jesus would be a good substitute. Let me know what you think of that.” On 1st August he returned again to this last point: “Is it really God’s will that this work should remain a Third Order and, at that, a Third Order of the Priests of the Sacred Heart? You have no need to tell me of the great care, which must be taken in examining this question.

I have spoken to Bishop Chaillot on the matter. He keeps himself au courant with all matters concerning religious congregations. He has already printed in his Analecta the Roman decision disapproving of congregations of women being dependant on those of men concerning matters of administration. Consequently, he could see here an obstacle to the approbation of the Rules by Rome, unless it was stressed that the affiliation was merely a spiritual one based on the common devotion of members to the Sacred Heart. By this means the name, Third Order, might conceivably be preserved. A Third Order of the Sacred Heart would signify an association of lay people with the religious Congregations of men and women, instituted for that end, but without any administrative dependence on them. In a letter I am about to write to Father Chevalier I will inform him of what Bishop Chaillot had to say on the Subject.” In another letter, written on 8th September, Father Ramiere again expressed his opposition to the dependence of the Third Order on Issoudun. “It seems to me,” he wrote, “that at a time like this, when everyone, from the Holy Father himself, to the pious faithful, are complaining that too many Religious Congregations are growing up in the Church seeking the same end by the same means, you should seek your own autonomy.” It is not surprising to find it on record that the Chronicle of Montlucon noted the fact that Father Ramiere’s letters were becoming a little “troublesome.” However a letter from him, received by Mlle. de Montaignac 18th December did much to clarify the position. It read: “I feel obliged to make myself more clear than I have appeared to do in preceding letters. The idea that I am anxious to cause any disruption between the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart and the Third Order is very far from my mind. I respect the authority and opinion of the bishops, who have given their approval to the two Societies. I still desire in all sincerity, to see a happy result from this union, of which, I am happy to think, I was the first instigator. What appears to me to be ultimately impossible is to maintain a dependence on the Society of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, canonically speaking. Advice, which I have welcomed on the matter and my own reflections have led me to the following convictions: (1) Primarily, that this dependence is contrary to the decisions of the Sacred Congregation of Religious. (2) That it will eventually be a source of embarrassment to the Society of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. If the Congregation founded by Father Chevalier is to progress, he will have plenty to do without looking after a Congregation of women, The government of a Society of this nature calls for all the attention of a Founder in its early stages, without outside complications. Consequently, I think either of two things will have to happen: (a) Either Father Chevalier will have to declare his plans regarding the acceptance of complications involved to the detriment of his other works. Or (b) He will hand over his responsibility to the Superioress General of the movement. (3) The dependence on Issoudun must create grave inconveniences to the Third Order itself from the mere fact that it will not be able to live entirely its own life. The Missionaries of the Sacred Heart are as yet too small in numbers to be of much assistance outside their own domain. “Our own priests of the Jesuit Order, and those of other ranks, would be, more or less, disinclined to offer suggestions on matters concerning a new establishment, when it is in the hands of another Society. Do not put this down to jealousy, but to a perfectly legitimate reserve about interfering in matters concerning other Congregations. Father Gautrelet, in a letter, dated 13th November, assured me that he is entirely in agreement with me in my attitude. Perhaps you will tell me that the help of our Society is no longer necessary in your work, and I readily recognise that. However, the thoughts which I am expressing to you are those of men most devoted to your work, and who have been the means of originating and propagating it. There is no need for me, I think, to remind you of the part our priests have played, since the days of Father Varin, in its Foundation. Although our help may no longer seem necessary to you, it can still be very useful and consequently you should avail yourself of it.” Mlle. de Montaignac referred the whole matter to Father Cautrelet, who replied on the 18th February 1868: “You mention the projects of Father Ramiere and his ideas about your association with the priests of the Sacred Heart. It is certain that if Rome makes the separation an essential condition of the approbation of your work, then the sooner the break is made the better. At the present moment, being somewhat removed from the scene of activity, I could not give you definite advice as to what to do – whether to make the break, or merely to proceed quietly until events shape themselves. In general, I can say, as I have mentioned to you before, that in dealing with an Institution which is just commencing, it is better to wait till it has settled down, and then time, experience and grace will present the ways and means of the best method of procedure in the future. Father Ramiere continued to advise Mlle. de Montaignac that independence of Issoudun would be the best course, which is rather surprising in view of the fact that, in all good faith, Father Chevalier was in touch with him about its organisation and entrusting its future to his hands. The first General Assembly of the Third Order took place at Montlucon on the 16th June 1868, and we find Father Ramiere working for its welfare with Father Guyot, who, as the director of the movement in the diocese of Moulins, was acting in the name of Father Chevalier. On the fifth and final session of the Assembly, held on the 20th June, the following resolutions were agreed on: (1) Our main and immediate object is the spreading of devotion to the Sacred Heart by every means in our power, within the bounds of prudence. (2) To foster Devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart so intimately associated with that to the Heart of Her Divine Son. (3) To receive Holy Communion in a spirit of reparation for the many insults which Our Lord has to suffer, especially in the Sacrament of His love. (4) To recommend to members to take an ardent and active interest in the Apostolate of Prayer, so necessary at this present moment in France. (5) To make known the good work already done by the faithful members of the Third Order in the cause of the Sacred Heart, and to endeavour to establish branches in places where as yet it does not exist.

PART IV: THE THIRD ORDER IN NAPLES UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF MLLE. VOLPICELLI.

While these discussions were going on, Father Chevalier’s main concern was with the approbation of the Society from Rome and, as we have already recorded, he set out for the Holy City at the beginning of 1869 with this object in view. On his return journey he spent three days in Naples at the request of the zealous members of the Association of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Besides wishing to make his acquaintance these ladies were anxious to consult him on matters concerning the Third Order. Father Ramiere had visited Naples in 1867, and had interested them in joining the work of the Third Order in Montlucon. One of the most interested was a Mlle. Volpicelli. A letter from her to Mlle. Louise Therese de Montaignac, written on 14th November was to this effect: “My dear Mademoiselle, Last June Father Ramiere honoured me with a visit on his return trip from Rome, and asked me to join the Third Order of the Sacred Heart. He gave me a copy of the Rules, and also left me your address. I have not replied sooner, because I have prayed earnestly to Almighty God to direct me in the matter and now I would like to have precise and detailed information regarding the various centres from which the Third Order is operating. Since last May I have been living with a very good friend of mine, just outside the noise of the city, and we have dedicated our little private chapel to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. We are hoping that other devotees of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart will join us as members of the

Third Order, if it is God’s will.” After further correspondence a letter from Mlle. Volpicelli to Mlle. Louise Therese written in December showed enthusiasm: “I am praying to the Sacred Heart of Jesus that we may be admitted to the Third Order. Your friendly letter of the 25th greatly encouraged me. When it arrived we had just finished our prayer of reparation before the Crib of the Infant Jesus, which we had lovingly built for Christmas Night. We had offered the Sacred Heart, through our Queen and Mother, our entire lives, and we have already commenced our duties. I know several good people who wish to join the Association, but at present the foundation group numbers only five. I have no other wish than to obey your directions, but you will have to pray for me, my dear Mother, for if it were left to myself, I am so weak I could upset the plans of God! I am relying on the all-powerful protection of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, and have my eyes fixed on the Cross, the Crown of Thorns and the Wounds of Jesus.” Mlle. Volpicelli would have wished to visit Montlucon, but, like Mlle. de Montaignac, she was a sick woman, and consequently the desired meeting did not eventuate. She wrote to her friend: “I trust your health will improve through the intercession of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.” The small chapel at Naples soon became the centre of Devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart in that city. Father Chevalier sent Mlle. Volpicelli and her little group of Associates the necessary paper of affiliation & expressed his gratification at their love for Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Mlle. Volpicelli assured him: “We Neapolitans are greatly attracted by this devotion to the Holy Virgin, and we see in it a very efficacious means of spreading devotion to the Sacred Heart.”(5) Father Ramiere’s presentation of difficulties regarding the rules and nature of the Institute, which had confused both Mlle. de Montaignac and Mlle. Volpicelli prompted Father Chevalier to pay a visit to Montlucon and Naples. In a letter to Mlle. de Montaignac, written on 4th January, 1868, Father Ramiere had stated that Mlle. Volpicelli was finding difficulties concerning the dependence on, and union with Issoudun. “This difficulty could be obviated,” he wrote, “if Father Chevalier would adapt the rules according to the suggestions I have made. We could then hope for the approbation of the Cardinal of Naples, which would go a long way in gaining the approval of Rome, through Cardinal Riario Sforza. If you have the occasion to write to Father Chevalier you could inform him of these impressions of mine. We might suggest that this indirect method of corresponding with Father Chevalier was, to say the least, rather strange. A letter from Father Chevalier to Mlle. de Montaignac, dated 8th February informs her of his proposed visit: “My dear Sister in Our Lord, May the Grace of God be always with you! I hope to arrive in Montlucon next Monday accompanied by Rev. Father Vandel. We will have a good talk about all the matters that concern us. The modifications of which Father Ramiere speaks are really only those of details. I have written to Mlle. Volpicelli. She did not give me her complete address. Naples is a big-city, and without the exact number and street, I can only trust in Providence that she will receive it. a Barnataite Father and that, according to Father Ramiere, there was no longer any necessity to deal vlthj Issoudun regarding the establishment of an Association, as the approbation of the Ordinary was sufficient. That, of course, would entail’a complete • separation, and’the name’Third. Order” would have no significance. It would destroy its very, life and soul. Since the Third Order was” approved by His Grace of Bourges in its’ present form, no radical change would have any validity without his permission. In the meantime, my dear Sister? until matter is settled, accept the assurance of my good wishes.” When the groxip of Our Lady’s devotees in Naples, led by Mlle..Volpicel learnt that Father Chevalier was about to make the trip to Rome to seek official approbation of the Society, the members wrote to him asking him to; break his journey at Naples, and give them some lectures on Our Lady of the’ Sacred Heart, We must keop in mind, that the principal reason for his journey to Kome \ was precisely to have the Society canonically approved in the form in which he conceived it 5 and’ that matters dealing with the Archconfraternity and the Third Order wore of secondary importance, in spite of all the suggestions and advice from Father Ramiere. Father Chevalier spent three days with the ^roup in Naples, and was later able to write in the Annals: “His Eminence Cardinal bforza, the Archbishop of Naples, received me graciously; ana assured us all of his keen interest in the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, which he said was very dear to him. He expressed the wish that it would day by day expand throughout his diocese.” The fundamental question concerning the relationship between Montlucon and Issoudun was left in obeyance.

PART V: FATHER RAMIERE’S OBJECTIONS SPECIFIED.

ors of the Society of the Sacred Heart were opposed to it. (3) The third group of objections concerned the nature and character which the Third Order should assume. Father Ramiere objected to the fact that vows were optional and stressed the fact that as yet the rules were merely in a formative state, leaving much to be desired. The main objection of course, was to the dependence of the work of Mlle. de Montaignac and her followers on Father Chevalier and his Missionaries. Father Ramiere did not hide the fact that he was bitterly opposed to it, and, as we will see in the second volume of this work, this opposition eventually led to a rupture between Montlucon and Issoudun each of which in time disengaged itself from the influence of Father Ramiere. Mlle. de la Bruyere, who has recorded the history of these days in her work, “La Pieuse Union,” has written: “We understand that in the beginning the Jesuits interested themselves in our work in an advisory capacity in much the same way as they had done with the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, whose spiritual life was based mainly on the Exercises of St. Ignatius. When the priests of Issoudun gained their complete independence, it became a question of deciding what works to continue with or what to abandon, and this inevitably led to a conflict of opinions between certain Jesuits and the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. Leaving aside the question of exactly what influence the Society of Jesus had in fashioning the spirit of the Society of Missionarie s of the Sacred Heart – we have already given enough data on this point for the reader to form his own opinion, – we must state that Mlle. de la Bruyere, in her Chronicle, attributes to the Jesuit Society many ideas which were merely personal to Father Ramiere and his friends. This is borne out by the fact that the Jesuit Fathers at Vaugirard, when they learnt that Father Chevalier was following a different path from their own encouraged him to go ahead and gave him every assistance. Father Le Blanc wrote at the time: “The foundation of a new Order presupposes the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and the social intervention of God, who has a greater right to hope for and expect this assistance than the Founders themselves.” Father Gautrelet had the same idea when he interested himself in the foundation of Mlle. de Montaignac’s Society. His biographer, Father Burnichon, wrote of him: “Father Gautrelet, in his humility, was always loathe to trust himself or his ideas forward in matters concerning the foundation, and he quotes the saintly priest as saying: ‘You know there are always two convictions in my mind. Firstly I know that God will bless the work and secondly I know that I am in the dark as to how it will be done. I have not the grace of enlightenment myself, but I have confidence in the good work, which this chosen soul has been called to do. I do not see in what way I can be useful as I have been given no special lights or graces, necessary in any religious foundation.”

Father Burnichon adds: “What inspired the saintly Father to use the humble language was not so much his accustomed diffidence in his own judgment, as his complete trust in the guidance of the Holy Ghost in such important matters. He realised the duty that a prudent director of souls has in giving advice, but he likewise realised that Founders – of religious movements, if blessed by God, are given special lights and graces and in these he did not wish to interfere. Convinced that Mlle. de Montaignac was the instrument chosen by God for the establishment of the “Pieuse Union,” he felt the obligation of allowing her to follow her own plans, whilst not hesitating to give advice and make suggestions.”(7) On the other hand, Father Ramiere in all sincerity, thought that his mission was to direct both Father Chevalier and Mlle. de Montaignac along the paths they should follow. He even went so far as to disregard the decisions of Mgr. de Dreux Breze, the Bishop of Moulins, who had approved the Union. (Montlucon was in his diocese). In Father Ramiere’s own words we have expressed the Bishop’s reaction to his efforts: “The bishop has told me rather strongly that I am not to interfere in the movement, and to keep away from it as much as possible.” Father Ramiere eventually was to break, not only with Issoudun, but with Montlucon, when he realised they were taking little notice of his advice. He retired reluctantly. Father Gautrelet, on the contrary, gave his blessing to the plans of Mlle. de Montaignac, as he said he “saw there the designs of God.” On the 1st July, 1882, Father Ramiere wrote: Mlle. de Montaignac’s letter is undoubtedly very tactfully worded, and without worrying over what it implies, i.e., that I am not needed, I must accept what she expresses as the Will of Our Lord. I no longer regard myself as the instrument of God in the matter, since I have had the misfortune of finding myself in disagreement with her, and so I humbly and sincerely accept the situation.” Previously, on 5th June, he had written to a member of the Third Order that he was convinced that he had received special lights from God concerning this work, and that he could not, consequently, advise otherwise than he had done. If these extracts show us that Father Ramiere was always acting in good faith, we can only regret that he did not collaborate with the two Founders, and was so stubborn in his opposition to the fusion between Issoudun and Montlucon. However, God’s ways are not our ways and perhaps the unhappy complications and friction between the years 1864 and 1875 only served to give each Institute a deeper understanding of its particular nature, and to facilitate their individual expansion. The friction is all the more regrettable when we consider that the three main persons involved (Father Chevalier, Mlle. de Montaignac and Father Ramiere) were all motivated by the same ideal, and following the same spirituality – devotion to the Sacred Heart. They were convinced that in the Sacred Heart was to be found all the love of the Redeemer, and that the salvation of mankind was to be achieved through the merits and treasures of that Sacred Heart. They were likewise convinced that there should be an energetic co-operation between all those who had the happiness of knowing the devotion to the Sacred Heart. They realised that, in order to propagate this devotion, they themselves must be deeply imbued with its spirit. To quote from the copy of Father Ramiere’s Messenger of the Sacred Heart of 1863: “In order to spread devotion to the Sacred Heart for the regeneration of society, it is necessary that the devotion must penetrate the very depth of the souls of those who have adopted it. They must form their lives and souls in the very image of the Sacred Heart, and become the docile instruments through which He can show his love for mankind. (8) And so we find these three, zealous devotees of the Sacred Heart striving for the common end – the glory of the Heart of Jesus – but gradually being convinced, by force of circumstances, that God was directing them along different paths, each according to a spirit and ideal peculiar to the group concerned. This action of the Holy Spirit was to determine the particular character and vocation of each, and it was only by preserving this characteristic spirit that harmony between their works was possible. To appreciate more fully the difficulties associated with the beginnings, we must consider the situation and circumstances in which each of the three persons concerned found themselves, when their individual mission became known to them.

PART VI: FATHER CHEVALIER’S OBJECT AND SPIRIT IN HIS FOUNDATION

Father Chevalier was, at the time, a secular-priest, Mlle. de Montaignac a person living in the world, and Father Ramiere had been a religious for many years. The ideal of both Father Chevalier and Mlle. de Montaignac was to found institutes entirely devoted to the Sacred Heart, Father Chevalier in 1854 and Mlle. de Montaignac in 1843. Father Ramiere came in contact with them in 1861 whilst engaged in re-organising the Apostolate of Prayer in order to make it into an association of the Sacred Heart. Father Chevalier and Mlle. de Montaignac were each launching new movements, and seeking souls inspired with the same ideals as themselves, whereas Father Ramiere, with his Apostolate of Prayer, was dealing with an; association already formed and attached to the Society of Jesus. He soon had a group of fellow Jesuit priests around him, who shared his ideals and helped him in his work. This group naturally had a tradition, and it, no doubt, was the reason why in the early stages Mlle. de Montaignac made the remark, when she was trying to decide where to look for direction: “The spreading of the Devotion to the Sacred Heart has been especially entrusted to the Company of Jesus.” Since the Apostleship of Prayer was already attached to the Jesuit Order, its members formed a compact group, finding in the Society of Jesus help and support. What the one possessed was lacking to the two others, as much from the individual, as the social viewpoint, and this had its effect on their ideas and aspirations, both for themselves personally and as regards their organisation. That is why the two founders sought the aid of the Jesuits and tried to associate themselves with the work of Father Ramiere, prompted by the desire to work together on the closest possible union for the glory of the sacred Heart. However, for the very reason that Father Ramiere did belong to an already existing and organised Institute, he was limited in his scope and activity regarding the spreading of the Devotion. Profoundly and intensely as the devotion to the Sacred Heart has become incorporated in the Society of Jesus, and even though this ideal is in accord with the special character of the Order, the end of this Institute is neither entirely nor essentially vowed to the spirituality and the propagation of the cult of the Sacred Heart. The Society of Jesus is not an Institute of the Sacred Heart and its members are not held by the Constitutions or the Vows to conform their spirituality and their activities to this ideal, even though the latter may in different degrees attract and inspire many of its members. The cult of the Sacred Heart remains a simple devotion in their Order, a means of apostolate and, for many, a deepening of their own particular spirit. The devotion to the Sacred Heart, important though it be in the eyes of members of the Society of Jesus, is but one of the works of the Institute. It does not inform it. It is not the Institute itself, its essence, the end of its apostolate nor the basis of its spirit, of its interior and spiritual life, of its organisation. Moreover it is one of the works of the Order. It is subject to certain restrictions, as is stressed elsewhere in the correspondence between Vaugirard and Issoudun and between Father Ramiere and Montlucon. Finally Father Ramiere’s project consisted solely in re-organising an existing work whose spirit and internal structure he had to retain.

The two Founders, on the other hand, were not restricted by any of these limitations, and were at liberty to act in any way they thought would be profitable to the realisation of their ideal in its plenitude. Both plans were to mature and expand in distinctly different ways as it subsequently turned out. Often we have seen in the history of the Church that God has used the individual personality of a particular Founder to cope with the needs of the age in local circumstances. Father Ramiere, for example, looked upon devotion to the Sacred Heart from the point of view of the Society of Jesus in which he had been educated and formed. To him, naturally, the Society and its apostolate came first, and devotion to the Sacred Heart was but one of many means of exercising this apostolate. The other two commenced where Father Ramiere left off. For them Devotion to the Sacred Heart was to be the essential spirit, and chief work, of their Societies. Fundamentally, they were to be Institutes dedicated to the Sacred Heart, and their ideal was to spread devotion to this most Sacred Heart. Looking back, we may say that this is the reason, in the Providence of God, why Father Chevalier himself did not become a Jesuit in spite of his close personal contact with their Society. He was convinced that he had a mission to fulfil, whose object was to honour the Sacred Heart as the very essence of its life, and not merely as one of its works. For both Father Chevalier and Mlle. de Montaignac the Devotion to the Sacred Heart was to be the ideal and end of their Institutes, which were to be organised from this point of view. In the early stages Father Chevalier had looked to the Jesuits, as a stable, well-organised Society for help, “but he had always made it clear was to be the end and object of his own mission, as his correspondence with Vaugirard clearly indicates. He had written: “The Institute will be essentially devoted to the cause of the Sacred Heart and its propagation.” Although he had written to Father Le Blanc that his Institute would be “A daughter of your own” he made it clear that this was in reference to works which concerned devotion to the Sacred Heart. At no time did he consider merging his Institute with that of the Jesuits, but he wished to be united with them in the Sacred Heart, just as Father Clorivere’s Society of the Sacred Heart had been in former days. The ideal of both Father Chevalier and Mlle de Montaignac was, then, to establish a new Institute whose members would be entirely devoted to the glorification of the Heart of Jesus. These members would be formed in this spirit, and their spirituality shaped along its lines, no matter in what field of the apostolate their activities lay. As we have seen many times before, Father Chevalier was convinced that devotion to the Sacred Heart was the remedy for the religious indifference and social evils of the age, and his Missionaries were instructed to work for this end and no matter where they were, to labour for the establishment of the reign of the Sacred Heart in the souls of men. This was to be their apostolate. By their prayers, their work, their preaching they must ever to striving to awaken in the hearts of men a spirit of love for and reparation to the Sacred Heart. This must not be presented merely as a simple devotion one amongst many – but as the vital and essential form of their spirituality, the motif and soul of their interior and exterior life. They will find in that Heart,” he wrote, “all the necessary means of sanctifying themselves, and then the ability to share that sanctification with others.” A universal Institute dedicated to the Sacred Heart presents the Heart of Our Lord to its members as the end and model of perfection, and offers them the means of canonical perfection by a life of imitation of the virtues of the Sacred Heart. It was love that prompted Our Saviour to consecrate Himself entirely to the Will of His Father by His Life of Purity and Poverty. “Behold, I come to do Thy Will, O Lord.”(Heb X. 7) In the Love of His Heart, Christ invites each one of us to follow Him, and His infinite sanctity provokes the most perfect aspirations in our souls. This is the reason why the Institute was to find its most perfect and full expression in the canonical religious life. “However,” – and here we quote Father Chevalier’s words from the Plan of the Association of the Priests of the Sacred Heart – “the Sacred Heart is the model of all perfection, and He wishes to reign in the hearts of all men. His Missionaries must establish this reign in the souls of people of goodwill according to the dispositions of each.” This is why we find in association with the Society of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart the Secular Priests, and the laity who wished to consecrate themselves to the Sacred Heart, each following the perfection proper to his state of life. And to quote again from the Plan of Association: “Besides the motive of personal sanctification, the Church has need of Apostles to spread the Devotion and so this new religious organisation in honour of the Sacred Heart has been formed.” Father Chevalier had expressed all these ideas several times in his brochures from 1864 onwards, but in 1869, when he was seeking recognition of the Society from Rome, he drew up the more precise Formula Institute. After having remarked that numerous religious priests and lay-people wished to form an organisation to honour the Sacred Heart more perfectly, the text read: “In order to afford this salutary devotion towards the Heart of Jesus the necessary means of widespread propaganda, whether it be amongst the laity or the clergy, it was deemed fitting to establish a Religious Society, whose object would be to make better known and loved the Sacred Heart of our Saviour. Its members have been given the name of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, because their glorious mission is to honour the Sacred Heart, to manifest the treasures and graces which It contains, and to make reparation for the outrages inflicted on it by mankind. Of the Society just cited we have given the first formula, adding to this a short resume of the other two associations, i.e., that of the Secular Priests to that of the laity whereby the Religious Society, properly so-called, attains its principal end.” The second part deals with the Association of Secular Clergy. It states: ”Since the devotion to the Sacred Heart affords the secular clergy as well as the religious, the means of sanctification, both of themselves and their neighbour, there is annexed to the Society an Association of Secular priests who are dedicated to and fight for the same cause but with different weapons. Thus, the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart really consists of two societies, namely the principal and regular Society, whose members live in community and a secondary society of secular priests who live out in the world, These priests are intimately united with the regular Society by their common love of the Sacred Heart, and they aim to reach a state of perfection in their particular walk of life by this intimate union of hearts.

Part III of the formula deals with the third order. It commences by stressing the fact that the devotion to the Sacred heart is a salutary means of sanctification and salvation for the laity also. It points out that the name, Third Order, is to be interpreted in the analogous sense, and not in the strictly canonical sense. Behind all this organisation of the various associations was the obvious desire of Father Chevalier to honour and glorify the Sacred Heart by every means possible. It explains his close affinity with the Jesuits, especially with Father Ramiere and his Apostles of Prayer. But the Apostolate of Prayer was not exactly what Father Chevalier was seeking. His ideas were more comprehensive regarding what he wished to establish, although Father Ramiere’s movement was one of the means he could use.

PART VII: THE SPIRIT OF THE APOSTOLATE OF PRAYER

The Apostolate of Prayer really originated through the desire of the Jesuit Scholastics, who were waiting with “veritable impatience” to set out for the Missions, Father Gautrelet showed them how they could be Apostles “immediately and for the rest of their lives” by a life of prayer, united to that of Our Lord praying and immolated in the Tabernacle.(15) We can say, then, that the Apostolate of Prayer was mainly for souls who could not take an active part in missionary endeavour, those preparing for the priesthood, and lay-people out in the world. The first essential for its members was to make a daily offering of all their thoughts words and deeds in union with Our Blessed Lord.(16) The movement also embraced those souls who by their daily circumstances, had little opportunity for apostolic work, and the many who were of good will, but weak and hesitant in their spirituality.

It was pointed out that the Apostolate of Prayer was more a “movement of the spirit” then a “special practice.”(l7) It was to be a spiritual nourishment, and enticement to do good when the occasion presented itself”. More especially, it was a movement to awaken in Christian souls the necessity of honouring the Sacred Heart by a life of Prayer, good works, and suffering. Prayer divorced from good works, is not very fruitful, just as good works without the spirit of prayer are suspect, to say the least.(18) This is why Father Ramiere always emphasised that the members must be motivated by a true spirit of religious zeal in both their prayers and their actions. Zeal is the principle, the soul, and the fruit of the movement. (19) Father Parra, who wrote the life of Father Ramiere, remarks that it was mainly a movement for zealous people out in the world – a form of lay-apostolate.(20) The object was not merely one for the individual sanctity of the members, but envisaged the united aggregate of prayers and good works of a League of zealous Christians to be offered to God and the Sacred Heart for the good of the Church. The only condition was the sincere morning offering of each day, as cited in Article two.(21) Good and useful as this holy movement was, Father Chevalier was looking for something more extensive, and already he had his own Association of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Father Ramiere understood this, as his letter of 22nd November, 1868, to Mlle. De Montaignac indicates: “Since the Fathers of Issoudun have established their Association of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, it would be indiscreet of me to ask you for as active a co-operation as has been proposed to you by them. Father Ramiere had ideas of making his Association a kind of Mother Institution to the other, and one which would, as it were, supervise them. Defending himself against those who maintained he was changing the character of the movement, he wrote: “A work is only altered when one modifies or destroys its principles; it is perfected when those principles are developed.”(22) Since incorporation in Christ was the principle of the Apostolate of Prayer and as Father Ramiere himself remarked “devotion to Christ is summarised in devotion to His Sacred Heart”, the Association was destined to become a League of the Sacred Heart.(23) We can understand that not everyone in those days, when devotion to the Sacred Heart was still considered by many as a novelty, agreed with this synthesis of Father Ramiere. Even the devout advocates of devotion to the Sacred Heart were not always in agreement with the form under which Father Ramiere wished to propagate the devotion. Father Chevalier and Mlle. de Montaignac, for example, did not agree that all the Association’s confraternities and Third Orders should adopt the direction of the Apostolate of Prayer. Father Parra tells us that Father Ramiere was convinced that the “era of the Sacred Heart had arrived,” and that he expanded his ideas with an eagerness and confidence for which he was often reproached. Father Ramiere himself informed Mlle. de Montaignac that he had received special lights on the subject. Father Gautrelet had divided the members into groups of twelve after the methods used by the Society of the Propagation of the Faith. Father Ramiere looked to these groups for the success of the movement. He used to refer to them as “those whose business it is to propagate the devotion; and who will find in the Apostolate the fulfilment of their pious aspirations. By uniting their forces, they increase their strength. Father Ramiere argued that it was better for the members of the various associations, who were the most active for doing good in their various localities, to be united in the one organisation, thus avoiding the cross-purposes which often occurred amongst societies striving for the same end. Naturally, this idea was not received favourably by the leaders of the various associations, who were accustomed to meet each month to receive directions from the diocesan and general Councils of the Apostolate. They regarded Father Ramiere’s intention as presuming too much authority. His attitude to both Issoudun and Moutlucon was that they were superfluous associations, if they did not accept the form he had given the Apostolate of Prayer, or refuse to become instruments in his League. This is why he remarked that Montlucon “could not be grafted on to Issoudun, but must remain a different branch even if from the same trunk.” Knowing that the priests of Issoudun were seeking approval of their Institute as a Religious Congregation with vows, a General Council and set rules, he was not anxious that Montlucon should be dependent on it. He had thought as he wrote in the Messenger of 1863 that the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart were merely to be Priests of the Sacred Heart, without vows or a form of community life. The only thing necessary, he argued, was that priests should be motivated by a common love of the Sacred Heart, which would be their link, and offer them the means of obtaining their objects. “How happy I would be,” he wrote, “if the Apostolate of Prayer and the Messenger of the Sacred Heart could combine to present to the souls of people in the world, to priests and laity a unified way of honouring the Sacred Heart.”(27) He was anxious that Montlucon would resolve itself into a kind of superior association, under the direction of the Apostolate of Prayer, much the same as diocesan unions of priests were constituted. He realised that some form of religious and community life was necessary as a basis and centre for the Movement, but did not favour the members wearing a religious habit after the custom of Mlle. Volpicelli’s followers.(28) Mlle. de Bruyere sums up the situation by remarking that between Montlucon and Father Ramiere there was discord not only concerning points of detail, but on the essential constitution. (29) At the time when Father Ramiere was writing to Mlle. de Monteignac dissuading her from union with Issoudun, Father Chevalier had already presented his “Formula Institute” to Rome, recommending that members of the Third Order should not take vows, or engage themselves in works beyond the scope of their state in life. After Father Vandel came into the story and after the foundation of the Apostolic School, Father Piperon wrote: “During the ensuing years two great projects were uppermost in the Founder’s mind – the completion of the church, and the composition of the Constitutions. Until this time we really had no set Constitutions. We lived according to the Rules of the early days of the Society. The Novitiate existed in rather an elementary state. It consisted more in spending time in Community Life than in following an orderly set of Rules with regular exercises. The time had come to give the Society a definite Constitution, and to establish a regular and canonical Novitiate. Father Chevalier worked long hours in drawing up the Constitutions in order to give his Congregation the form and spirit he desired.” (30) We have already spoken of the part that Father Ramiere played in drawing up the rules for the Association of Secular Priests and the later contribution that Father Vandel made, but it was not till the first half of the year 1866 that the complete “Formula Instituti” was presented to the Archbishop of Bourges. Here again Father Ramiere was in disagreement. On August 19th he wrote to Montlucon: “I am not happy about the result of the Archbishop’s examination of the plan for the three Societies of the Sacred Heart before it has been approved by the Holy See. The few words which Father Chevalier has written to me on the subject led me to believe that the examiners would make the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart similar to the 101 associations established in the various dioceses. I consider that the Plan for the Third Order is too complicated, and that the Rules for the sacerdotal association will cause difficulties with the bishops. If you take away the two chief fields of activity from the Society, what is there to distinguish it from other associations? Father Chevalier said he would answer these objections, when he furnished me with this information, but I have heard nothing from him since.” A month later, on the 17th September, he wrote in happier terms: “Father Chevalier has informed me that the examiners appointed by the Archbishop have approved of the whole Plan of the Society with its three branches, let us hope and pray that this triple plan will now be approved by Rome. Such an approval would be the assurance of the success of the work.” Ever since his visit to Rome, in 1867, in company with the Archbishop, Father Chevalier’ s main concern was with the approbation of the Society. Four days before he left on this visit Father Georgelin had presented him with a tentative project which, however, mentioned only the Missionaries themselves, and the associated Secular Clergy. The position of the Third Order had become so confused that Father Georgelin omitted it in his proposal for approbation. He was aware of the fact that already, at the beginning of 1868, efforts had been made to have it approved in Rome. The following letter of Father Ramiere concerning the date of the first General Reunion of the Third Order at Montlucon is of interest: “During June, Father Chevalier will probably be in Rome. Would it not be better to await his return with definite information from the Holy See regarding the future of the Third Order before we hold the Reunion? We will then be able to draw up a definite constitution, which needless to say, is indespensable to the work.”

PART VIII: STATISTICS OF THE SOCIETY AT END OF 1868. FINAL APPROBATION.

In order that the Institute would be more readily approved in Rome, it was decided to open a Novitiate at Montlucon, with Father Guyot as Novice Master. He was already the Director General of the Third Order, and Parish Priest of St. Paul, in that portion of the town across the River Cher. Mlle. de Montaignac wrote to the members of the Third Order at the time: “I ask you to pray for our Superiors and that the Novitiate here in Montlucon will be blessed. I have no need to stress the importance of this newly-born work. You know that Father Chevalier is about to set out for Rome to seek the official approbation of the Society. Our good wishes go with him.” While Father Chevalier was preparing for his journey to Rome, a suitable site was purchased and the building begun for the Novitiate. It was situated in la Rue Victor Hugo about five minutes’ walk from the church, and about half an hour from Mlle. de Montaignac’s quarters. In the ledger of the Apostolic School there is an entry for 40,000 francs for the building and furnishing of the new building.(32) Before going to Rome, Father Chevalier and his Missionaries sought the goodwill of many bishops in whose dioceses they had at times worked giving missions or propagating devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. The happy result was that on the 25th December the day the Archbishop of Bourges gave his Nihil Obstat to the request, no fewer than twenty five bishops had promised their support. A few days later they were able to add the words “and still more have answered favourably.”(33) In the official request to be presented to the Holy See it was stressed that the foundation of the new Institute was to counteract the spirit of irreligion and indifferentism with which France was afflicted, by teaching the people the devotion to the Sacred Heart such as He had revealed Himself to Saint Margaret Mary. How could the people learn of the treasures of Mercy of this Sacred Heart except by the preaching of Missionaries? “It is, therefore, necessary to send missionaries who will preach the Heart of Jesus, and will reveal to the generations to come the superabundant riches of His grace and goodness towards us. That is why there have been founded Missionaries of this Divine Heart. It is important that priests be formed for this special vocation in order to make known its efficacy and to apply it to the world.” After recalling the early support given the Society by His Eminence, Cardinal du Pont, and stressing the ardent support of his present successor, the document proceeds: “The Missionaries of the Sacred Heart wish to bind themselves with the three simple vows of religion. Not only will they give themselves wholeheartedly to the pursuit of apostolic works, but, if it pleases His Holiness, they will pledge themselves as a sacred duty, and for the edification of the world, to give the example of a more austere life of religious perfection. Then the document gives the present situation of the Institute. There were five houses, the Mother House being at Issoudun, where there were fifteen priests and three Lay-Brothers’. In Montlucon there was the Novice Master with ten Novices. At the Apostolic School in Chezal-Benoit nine priests were engaged in teaching one hundred and twenty students, and at the Clerical School in the same town other priests (the number is not noted) are engaged in training boys in the rudiments of science and languages, especially Latin, with a view to assuring future recruits for the Society (36) The fifth house was at Tournus, where six priests were engaged in the general Catholic education of youth. It was added that there were associations and affiliations in the dioceses of Bourges, Moulins and Autun under the direction of Issoudun. Finally, it was stated that numerous secular priests were associated with the Society in spreading devotion to the Sacred Heart. The financial resources of the Institute was put down as 500,000 francs. And so at the beginning of February 1869 Father Chevalier set out for Rome with the Constitutions of the Society, the vital document in which was contained all the aspirations of his apostolic spirit the fruit of his long meditations his hopes for the future.(37) On February 13th he wrote: “I have been in Rome eight days. To-day I was able to present our petition to the Sacred Congregation. Everything points to a favourable reception and to the final approbation of our young Society. Pray that it will be so. Later to-day I am due to meet the Holy Father.” We have already given an account of this audience with His Holiness Pope Pius IX and the consequent happy results for the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Writing to Issoudun Father Chevalier told his confreres that the Holy Father “listened with interest to the history of our small Society. He has assured me that he will gladly approve of it, as soon as he receives the report from the Sacred Congregation. Last Friday I handed the document to the authorities, and they gave me every hope of a favourable outcome. The result appears certain, but it will take some time to be finalised, and I will not be able to wait for the decision. I hope to be back in Issoudun in 15 days’ time.” In order to hasten the procedure Mgr. de La Tour d’Auvergne wrote a personal letter to the Prefect of the Sacred Congregation. The kindly Archbishop wrote to Father Chevalier on the 20th February telling him that he was sending his secretary, Father Droun, to Rome with the letter, by the next coach. On March 3rd. Mlle. de Montaignac wrote to Mdme. de Battet : “We have excellent news from Father Chevalier. He has told me of the good reception he got from the consultors of the Sacred Congregation, who are examining the Constitutions.” Actually the approval was given before Father Chevalier left Rome. A note to Father Georgelin brought the good news: “I have left Rome. I am carrying with me the document of approval of our Congregation. The Sacred Congregation expressed its pleasure and satisfaction with the Constitutions – and the spirit which animates them. How we must thank God for His mercy. I hope to be in Issoudun on the 19th March.” The Decree, given on March 8th, stated that in the audience granted on March 5th to the Secretary of the Congregation of Religious, His Holiness had praised and encouraged the Society “amplissimis verbis.” Permission was given to organise and develop the Society, but the Constitutions were to be carefully studied, on account of some remarks made about them in certain quarters, and they would be approved at a future date, with modifications if necessary. His Grace of Bourges was immediately notified of the Decree and also of certain observations. The relevant letters were published in the Analecta Juris Pontifici, 1869. The observations of the Sacred Congregation concerned the following points: (1) The authorization of the Holy See regarding the erection of new Novitiates and Provinces as the Society grew. (2) The approbation by the Holy See of resolutions passed by the General Chapter. (3) Authorisation for the Bishops to confide the direction of the Seminary to other Institutes. (4) The transmission of parishes to missionaries, a thing considered risky. (5) The prohibition against sending letters to ecclesiastical authorities without the permission of the Superior. The “manifestatio conscientiae” was to be limited to exterior violations of the Rules and Constitutions.

The letter to the Archbishop stated that these constitutions, modified according to the above could be presented anew for approbation after a given period of experimentation. Many of the items contained in the official Decree are of interest: First of all there was a certain amount of consternation when the ‘historical’ part of the Decree erroneously referred to the Society as that of “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart,” but this was proved to be but an error by the copyist, who elsewhere writes the correct title “Missionari del S. Cuore di Gesu nella Diocesi de Bourges in Francia.” The “Semaine” of Bourges – the Catholic weekly paper – corrected the error in its translation of the official text. The important thing was that the approbation was given to “This pious Congregation, as an Institute whose members take simple vows, and are under the direction of a Superior General.” The decree does not specifically mention the three divisions of the Society, but it stresses the fact that the approbation according to the terms of the Formula is granted to the Congregation in its capacity as a “Regular Society.” After the publication of the decree, Montlucon naturally wished to know if the Third Order had been approved. On the 24th July, Father Ramiere wrote to Mlle. de Montaignac: “The Brief accorded the Institute praises the Constitutions, which has special articles on the Association of Secular Priests (the second Order) and of the Association of Lay-people (the Third Order) so we can take that as a general approbation. Later on, when our rules are properly defined, we will be able to seek special approbation and favours for the Third Order, but at present it is too soon and not necessary. Undue haste would not be the right thing at the moment.” Mlle. de Montaignac’s circular to her followers, dated August 1st, leaves no doubt of her affiliation and loyalty to Issoudun: “You have read in the Annals of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart the details of Father Chevalier’s journey to Rome. The happy success of his interviews with the Holy Father and the Sacred Congregation will be for you, I am sure, a source of special gratitude. The Brief accorded the Institute of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, to which we are affiliated, is a precious approbation in itself of our Third Order, as it is specifically mentioned in the Constitutions as a branch of the Society, a complement of the Congregation.” In effect, although the two affiliations were not specifically, mentioned in the Decree of Approval, the fact that the “Formula Instituti” was accepted and approved meant that the “annexes” (the “adnexa et adjuncta,” to quote the Latin text) were also approved. In concluding this chapter, we quote from a letter of Mlle. de Montaignac dated 31st August, 1869, in which she tells us of the blessing of the Novitiate in Montlucon: “August the 16th was one of those solemn days we will never forget. His Grace the Archbishop of Bourges deigned to come and bless the Novitiate of our Associates at Montlucon. The Bishop of Moulins and Rev. Father Chevalier were also present. It was a simple but beautiful ceremony which impressed those privileged to witness it.(39). That evening, the two Bishops visited our Orphanage and Mgr. de la Tour d’Auvergne gave the little children a special blessing.” Mlle. de Montaignac was busy during these months in preparing for her journey to Issoudun to be present at the solemn ceremony of the Crowning of the Statue of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Since June she had written to her friends asking them to attend. “The ceremonies of the coronation,” she wrote, “must bring you to Issoudun. It will be magnificent.”

CHAPTER XVII: AFTER FIFTEEN YEARS – 1669

PART I: The Crowning of the Statue of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.

With his usual energy, disregard of weariness, and counting as nothing any sacrifice he could make for the glory of Mary, Our Mother, Father Chevalier, on his return to Issoudun, immediately began preparations for the ceremony of the Crowning of the Statue of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.(1) The ceremony was to take place on the fitting date of 8th September. There was much to be organised – the decoration of the streets, the advertisements and propaganda, the arrangements with the Police and Railways and the invitations to the many important people concerned. To accommodate these latter and the large number of pilgrims expected it was necessary to call on the hospitality of the towns-people, as the hotels and guesthouses would not be able to cope with such a crowd. We can read of all the details of preparation in the Annals of 1869. The day was one without compare for Issoudun. After a week of inclement weather, the sun appeared in all its splendour, with not a cloud in the sky. The town was gaily decorated with garlands of ferns and flowers. Each street and square had its Arch of Triumph, every house displayed its banner in honour of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Fifteen members of the hierarchy attended at the invitation of the venerable Archbishop of Bourges, together with other notable ecclesiastics and over 700 priests from all parts of France. The civic and military authorities were well represented, and the number of pilgrims was estimated at several thousands.(3) According to the local paper, the “Echo” “the Railway Station has been a hive of activity now for eight days, and Issoudun has never seen so many people before. All the town, it would seem has taken part in the ceremony.” In order to prepare the minds and souls of the pilgrims for the solemn occasion, Mgr. de la Tour d’Auvergne had himself written an exposition and defence of the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. The immediate preparation consisted of a special Triduum, during which priests from various Orders and parishes heard Confessions and distributed Holy Communion. On the Feast-day itself the Masses began at midnight, and continued till noon. At 1 a.m. Mgr. of Bourges blessed Our Lady’s Chapel and consecrated the Altar while Mgr. of Autun consecrated the high-Altar in the Basilica. The Pontifical High Mass was celebrated by the Archbishop and the Bishop of Poitiers. Mgr. Pie, preached the occasional discourse. For the large crowd of pilgrims who could not gain admittance to the Basilica, an altar had been erected on a temporary platform in front of the church. Here the Bishop of Puy celebrated Mass and addressed the gathering. The military band supplied the sacred music for the occasion. In the afternoon a solemn procession, some two miles in length, took place through the main streets of the town. On its return to the Basilica Mgr. Lebreton, the Bishop of Tulle and one of the outstanding orators of his time, preached the occasional sermon. Then approached the solemn moment of the ceremony – the Crowning of the statue of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Mgr. de la Tour d’Auvergne in a final allocution explained the significance of the coronation and exhorted the people to have a lively devotion to the Mother of God. Finally, on this memorable day the whole town was illuminated with brilliant lights during the hours of the night. In a letter to her friend, Mme. Tresca, Mlle de Montaignac gave her impression of the festivities: “I have been enraptured with this pilgrimage to Issoudun. The ceremony was indeed a splendid one. I was very impressed with the devotion of the Missionaries to all that pertained to the glory of God and the Blessed Virgin.” “Our work is similar to theirs and by accomplishing it we are fulfilling the Will of God and His designs for the expansion of the devotion to the Sacred Heart.” During the three weeks that Mlle de Montaignac spent in Issoudun it was decided that the Third Order would open a Retreat-House in that town, close to the Basilica. (We will treat more fully with this venture in the second volume of this work.)

PART II: FATHER CHEVALIER IS SUMMONED TO ROME.

At the height of these festivities whilst “every heart was filled with a lively and holy joy,” Father Chevalier himself was plunged in a deep sadness and worry. When the final preparations had just been completed and when the bells in the tower of the Basilica were ringing out their

joyful invitation to the solemn High Mass, Father Founder had received a profound shock. The Archbishop, who was staying with the Missionaries, had called him to his room and read him a letter from the Holy Office in Rome, which a postman had just delivered. “You have been summoned to Rome,” the prelate told him, “and you must take with you all the articles which have been written and printed on the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.” Father Chevalier, who had not expected anything of this nature, was dumbfounded. “Your Grace,” he cried in his distress, “What has happened? Why this call to the Holy Office on this day of all days, and at this hour? What am I going to do?”. “My dear Father,” the Archbishop, no less saddened than the Founder, replied: “First of all, you must not give way to despair. Read the letter, put it in a safe place and tomorrow we will consider what we have to do.” Then Father Chevalier remarked that he felt obliged to call a halt to the ceremonies and conclude the pilgrimage there and then, the wise Archbishop continued: “You will obey the Holy See and resolve to follow its instructions. The rest concerns me alone at this hour. We will carry out the programme of festivities as you have arranged them. Nothing shall hinder the ceremonies, as we have received no instruction to the contrary. In the meantime go about your work as if nothing has happened today, and, above all, be master of yourself. You can console yourself in handing over all responsibility to me.” Father Piperon has recorded that he had occasion to go to Father Chevalier’s room soon after this interview, and found him in tears. “Whatever is the matter with you,” I asked anxiously. “What has caused all this?” He handed me the letter. “Read this, he said.” “He then confided the reason of his sorrow and fears to me, and for a while was overcome. However the sharing of his worries seemed to calm him somewhat, and after an effort he become his old self again.” “For the rest of the day he went about his duties attending the ceremonies, meeting the guests and pilgrims as though nothing had happened.” “The Archbishop himself also showed no sign of his grief and anxiety and the day was one of joy for the numerous participants, who little dreamt of the heavy hearts of the two main persons concerned.” “God had so willed that His servant should not completely exult in the triumph of Mary, his Mother. He had mixed some gall in the sweet cup of joy and happiness on that memorable day. But is not suffering the lot of generous souls – the bread by which the Sacred Heart nourishes them?” “It was a day of triumph for Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, but a day of anguish and sorrow for Her apostle. In this way our well-beloved Mother made sure there would be nothing of human pride and glory in the heart of Her son and servant and She was preparing him for the work ahead.” All that had been written and printed on the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart was immediately sent to Rome. At the same time the Archbishop sent a copy of his authorisation in which he established the legitimacy of the new devotion and he publicised the ceremony of the Crowning of the Statue. In Rome the matter was studied with great care. The examinations, (of which we will speak more fully later on) did not result in any sentence. To quote Father Piperon’s words in the Annals of 1908 “No proof was established against the orthodoxy of the title. Its denunciation was rejected. Was not this an approbation of the doctrine of the devotion, even though an indirect one, and an encouragement to go on propagating it with a new assurance and a more ardent zeal? We can say then that the ceremony of the Crowning was an important milestone in the history of the devotion, an outstanding event in its extraordinary development.(4). We can well understand why the Archbishop wrote in his letter of thanks on 10th September: “From now on, the 8th September will remain a memorable date in the history of our beloved Berry – an imperishable and blessed which will live forever in our souls. From now on, Issoudun is a town inseparably associated with the glory of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.”

PART III: THE NOVITIATE

Four days after the ceremony at Issoudun, on Sunday the Feast of the Holy Name of Mary, Father Guyot opened the new Novitiate at Montlucon. The Reverend Father, who was the parish priest of Saint Paul’s in the town, was the first ‘canonical’ Novice Master. It would seem that the parish of Saint Paul, which was an industrial area, would not be very suitable for a Novitiate – hardly a place for recollection! No one knew this better than Father Guyot, but the scarity of personnel and accommodation in those days of the Society made the choice necessary. A few years after the Year of 1870, the circumstances changed considerably and the Novitiate was removed to the small town of SaintGerand-le-Puy, to the old ‘chateau’ of the same name, where it remained till the expulsions of 1880. However, Montlucon had served the purpose of giving the Novices a canonical, religious training according to the Constitutions.(5)

PART IV: THE GENERAL COUNCIL, AND THE CANONICAL VOWS.

On the 12th September Father Ramiere wrote to Mlle. de Montaignac telling her that Father Chevalier had invited him to give the Missionaries their annual retreat during the coming week. This retreat had special significance for the young Society, as, according to the decree of approbation, a General Council was to be held at its completion, when the Superior General and his Consultors were to be elected. Also there was to a profession of vows according to Canon Law. We have an account of the procedure and resolutions of the Council, probably from the hand of the newly-appointed Secretary General, Father Bazire, and certainly not from that of Father Chevalier, as was generally supposed. The retreat commenced on the evening of the 19th September, and the citation tells us that the following priests were present: Fathers Chevalier (Superior), Piperon, Vandel, Mousseaux, Bazire, Georgelin, Malabat. Vigerat, Albert, Maria , Moreau and Hamel. Also present was the Abbe Guillemin, one of the directors of the school at Tournus. On the 26th September, the eve of the closure of the retreat, the election of the Superior General and the Consultors was held. Father Ramiere presided over the proceedings. Those who voted in the election were Father Chevalier, Piperon, Vandel, Mousseaux, Bazire , Georgelin and Malabat, Father Guyot the Parish priest of Montlucon, Father Durin, parish priest of Nocq, Father Miniot, sub-director of the Apostolic School, Fathers Pion and Ledoux, although absent, all recorded their vote by mail. Father Chevalier was unanimously elected as Superior General, and the Consultors were Fathers Piperon, Vandel, Guyot and Bazire. Father Chevalier appointed Father Piperon as first Assistant and Father Vandel as second. Father was also appointed as General Bursar, and Father Vandel as Minister with the power of giving permissions formerly reserved to Father Chevalier. In a marginal note we are told that Fathers Piperon and Vandel were unanimously elected as 1st and 2nd Consultors, and that Father Guyot (spelt in the text as Guillot) received ten votes and Father Bazire eleven. We still have, fortunately, as a precious souvenir, the scrap of paper on which Father Chevalier recorded his vote – preserved, no doubt by Father Georgelin who has jotted down some annotations on it. It read: J.M.J. I nominate as Superior General of the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart the Reverend Charles Piperon, M.S.C. and for Consulters Reverend Father’s Guyot, M.S.C., Bazire M.S.C., Miniot, M.S.C., and Jules Chevalier, M.S.C.” There were, then, 13 retreatants of which seven, who were finally professed, cast their votes. There were five who were not at the retreat, but sent their votes by mail, making twelve votes in all. Father Piperon, when composing the “Register of Professed” some years later remarks that Father Jouet was present at the first General Chapter on the 26th February, 1869, and that he took his vows with the other members of the Society on 28th September that year, but since Father Jouet’s name is not mentioned in Father Bazire’s account of the retreat and Council (which would have been strange for such a notable personality) we conclude that here Father Piperon’s memory was a little astray.

Father Chevalier and his confreres took the opportunity of the retreat, following closely on the important ceremony of the Crowning of Our Lady’s Statue, to take, or renew, their vows which from, now on were obligatory if one wished to be a member of the Society. The Actes of Father Bazire also give an account of this ceremony: “On the Sunday morning of the retreat Father Ramiere celebrated Mass at 5 a.m. in the presence of the Community. After Holy Communion, the Fathers took the perpetual vows of Poverty, Chastity, Obedience and Stability in the Society of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart according to the Constitutions approved by the Holy Father in the Decree of 8th March, 1869. Here is the formula used: “…….” Unfortunately all we have in the document is a blank space, obviously intended for the formula, which, however, was never inserted. The Actes continue: “The following priests took their perpetual vows the order mentioned: Father; Chevalier, Piperon, Vandel, Mousseaux, Bazire, Georgelin and Albert, Father, Guyot and Ledoux pronounced their vows on the 20th October at the Novitiate in Montlucon in the presence of Father Chevalier, the Superior General.” The absence of a few names from the list perhaps needs some explanation. First of all, that of Father Jouet, but we have already dealt with his case in Chapter XIII. Father Miniot had to remain at Chezal-Benoit to look after the students, and so did not make the retreat. Father Piperon has noted that he took his vows on the 26th September, but whether he came to Issoudun for the ceremony, or pronounced his vows separately, as did Father Guyot and Ledoux, we do not know. Father Malabat, who is mentioned as making the retreat did not take any vows. It would seem that, much to Father Chevalier’s sorrow, he left the Society at this junction. Father Depigny in one of his Articles in the Annals mentions him as one of those who were professed on the 28th September, (?) but his name is definitely not on the official list of those professed. The following letter of Father Ramiere to Mlle de Montaignac, 3rd October, confirms this, and would suggest Father Malabat was asked to leave. “It is difficult for me to tell you by letter all about the retreat at Issoudun, more so since you would have heard it all by word of mouth from Father Guyot at this stage. But I can certainly assure you of my sentiments of consolation after the experience. The Heart of Jesus and His gentle Mother have blessed the work. I had misgivings on two points at the beginning of the Exercises, namely, certain doubts about the interior organisation of the Society, and concern about the bad effect produced by the illusions of one of its members. However, the results were beyond all we could have hoped for.” The Actes tell us that Father Malabat took part in the elections, so he must have stayed on till the end of the retreat, but he certainly did not take the vows. One last remark about the dates mentioned concerning which there is a certain confusion. The Actes tell us that the retreat commenced on the 19th September, and the election took place on the 26th, which was a Sunday. We are told also that this was “on the eve of the closure of the retreat” which was the 28th. Father Piperon states this as the correct date in his Register, and being Our Lady’s Feast Day that would be normal.(8) The Actes record the vows as being taken on the Monday, so we conclude that was on the Saturday, the 25th, as Father Georgelin has noted. On that day then, the 27th September, seven Fathers – (perhaps eight, if Father Miniot is included) took their vows at Issoudun and two at Montlucon, according to Father Piperon’s testimony. However the Actes put the date for these latter two as the 20th October. Others in the Society were to take their vows at a later date, while some remained on for the time being as auxiliary members. Since the vows now were of obligation for full membership of the Society, several priests left the Congregation. And so by 1869, the first phase in the life of the Society, that of its infancy, if we can speak thus, was completed. It was now, fourteen years and several months since Father Chevalier and his first confrere took possession of the humble house in Issoudun. If the origin of the Congregation, such as Father Chevalier had conceived it, dates back to the memorable 8th December 1854, its organisation, such as he left it at his death, began during the last week of September 1869. From that date, the young Congregation possessed its own complete, canonical organisation. Under the protection of Holy Mother, the Church, which had adopted the Society, it was now to develop along the normal lines of a Religious Congregation, in spite of all the difficulties and trials which the future held for it. (9)

CHAPTER XVIII SPIRITUAL TRENDS. THE SPIRITUAL AFFINITIES

PART I: The Work of Founder a Result of Character and Unity of Purpose,

The origin of Father Chevalier’s vocation, and its realisation throughout its many vicissitudes have been the object of the preceding chapters. But the exterior events do not always form the principal part in the history of a foundation, and the most stirring happenings are not always the most important in the story of its growth. In order to gain a proper estimate and understanding of a founder it is necessary to appreciate the unity of purpose and the fidelity, which characterised his life and activity in the pursuit of his object. The history of a creative spirit manifests itself, above all, in the work it has accomplished. That work is the expression of its genius. The pursuit of a worthy and clearly perceived object, the practical judgment in choosing the means to accomplish it; the unswerving will in putting these means into action, – such are the usual and permanent characteristics of the lives of men who have achieved great things over the centuries. The manner and accomplishments of these heroes whether in religion or out in the world, are valued by the historian in the measure in which they made themselves one with their work; in the measure of their dedication to the solution of its essential problems. (l) That Father Chevalier was convinced of this truth is shown by the exordiums he used in his sermons on great saints such as St. Ignatius, St. Vincent de Paul and St. Alphonsus. Preaching on the feast day of St. Alphonsus he began: “In speaking to you today of a man whose name is on everyone’s lips and in all our hearts, we naturally ask: ‘What did he do? What did he achieve?’ In answering that question, wherein lies the mystery of the destiny of any hero, we are accustomed to look to the man’s personality for signs of genius, to his actions for signs of a great heart and a great character. All these wonderful traits can be found and admired in the Saint whose feast we celebrate today. St. Alphonsus was a man of genius, for he knew how to create admirable works sealed with the mark of durability! St. Alphonsus was a man of great heart, a man capable of profound love for his fellow-men. Likewise he was a man of strong character, possessing an outstanding firmness of purpose, yet an eminent virtue of patience. Like all men of strong personality, he always acted with vigour tempered by a perservering calmness. Of such a man we can say ‘Fecit mirabilia in vita sua.’ The work of these great souls does not end with their human lives. I find in the tomb of St. Alphonsus, as I do in that of Christ Himself, the germs of fecundity, which from time to time springs to life in the future ages their achievements more glorious in the eyes of posterity.”(2) In the course of events we have discerned this spiritual destiny in the case of Father Chevalier, and we can see that, as time went on, he gradually gained a clear awareness of the important role of his spiritual mission. Having gradually become master of his own soul he was given that spirit of wisdom which in turn gave him the vital force to lead those who wished to follow him. This work was ultimately blessed as is always the case of a man who tends towards God “in fide et in speculo.”

In this we find the crowning of his work, – his value to the Church, as a Founder. In these following chapters entitled “Spiritual Trends” we hope to treat of the particular form of spirituality which characterised the Founder’s work – at least in its fundamental ideas.

PART II: FATHER CHEVALIER’S FIDELITY TO HIS MISSION. INFLUENCE OF ST. IGNATIUS HIS LOYALTY TO THE HOLY SEE,

In 1868 Father Chevalier submitted his “Formula Institute Missionariorum Sacratissimi Cordis Jesu” to the Holy See and the Decree of Approval was granted on 8th March, 1689. In the Formula he had set out the conclusions he had arrived at after the various successes and failures of the early years. The text of the document, especially in the Introduction – “De Opportunitate Instituti,” and the sections on the “End and the Spirit of the Society” clearly indicate that the establishment of the project had been the ardent desire of Father Chevalier ever since his Seminary days, and that he regarded it as his life’s work. This was the words of the text: “To establish a Society of priests and religious exclusively devoted to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, whose mission would be to make known to souls the treasures of Love and Mercy which this Heart contains.” In establishing this work he was answering the fundamental question which every Christian must put to himself: “What does God expect me to do, and in what field of activity does he wish me to lose my life, so that I can find that of Christ?” No one can say that Father Chevalier did not respond faithfully to the promptings of the Divine Will, nor accept the responsibility of his special mission and function in the Mystical Body of Christ. The words of Dom Marmion apply to all those called to the religious life. “The Reason of our Vocation,” he wrote, “is the desire Our Lord has to be served and glorified according to the spirit of the Order or Society we belong to.” If this is true for the ordinary subject, it is all the more so for a Founder whose duty it is to form the spirit of a particular Institute. He, above all, must be faithful in his collaboration with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, who alone can assure this true constancy by the love He infuses in human souls. The same author notes elsewhere: “Fidelity in all things is the delicate flower of love.” (3) We have had ample evidence in the preceding chapters that Father Chevalier acted always under the conviction of the necessity of this fidelity in his duties as a priest and a Founder. This fidelity to the ideal and spirit of the Society, as he wished to found it, explains also why he did not adopt such otherwise valuable religious practices as Solemn Vows, recitation of the Office in Choir, strict enclosure etc.. We recall that he used to make his retreats with the Trappists, and how his confrere, Father Piperon had the nostalgic longing to join the contemplative life. It was not just oversight or force of circumstances which led him not to adopt these practices of the strict Contemplative Orders. His ideal was clear, – to found a Religious Institute whose members would lead the community life and take the simple vows of religion. He defended and maintained this ideal with tenacity, even in times when its observance did not seem feasible in the form he wished it. Even at the risk of losing certain members of his early Congregation, he insisted on these two essential points, and inserted them as the important feature of the Formula. We can repeat here Father Piperon’s eulogy of his strong character: “He was endowed with practical and good judgment and a firm will, which no difficulty could shake. When, after serious reflection, he had made up his mind on a point, he carried it through in spite of any obstacle, which he always seemed to surmount or adjust. If for the time being the obstacle appeared insurmountable, he would patiently await more favourable circumstances, and when the right moment arrived he would take up the project again with renewed energy.”(4) He realised that these practices of the stricter Orders did not conform to the ideal of the Institute he wished to found, and he was convinced that this ideal had been received from God, – the ideal of a priestly and apostolic community of Religious, dedicated to the cause of the Sacred Heart. In the abandonment of his own will to the Will of God, Father Chevalier was not precisely aiming to place his Society in any particular theoretical rank of religious life, nor was he influenced by the many speculative theories as to whether the contemplative or the active apostolic life constituted the higher form of spirituality. He was content to be led along as God directed him, and to give his Institute and its spirit to the men to whom God would give the vocation to follow him. He expected of them the same spirit of fidelity to the life as he himself showed to the directions of the Holy Ghost. Fidelity is the touchstone of a Founder and his disciples, and Father Chevalier and his work were blessed with this spirit of fidelity. Of course, after an Institute has been definitely established it is naturally possible to place it in one or other of the categories of religious and apostolic life. This was actually and formally done by the Chapter of 1897 in its Directorium Generale. Basing its decision on the “End of the Society” as worded in the Decree of Approval the Council stated that the Congregation was a perfect form of religious life combining both the contemplative and active forms, aiming at the same time to praise God by prayer and meditation, and to work for the salvation of souls.(5) It is clear that if the opinion of St. Thomas regarding the combined form of religious, i.e. the contemplative and the active, restricts it to “the pulpit and the pen,” then it does not apply to the life of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, for theirs embraces all the apostolic works of the Church, as did the life of the Apostles themselves. However, it is permissible to ask if this interpretation does not read too much into the doctrine of the Angelic Doctor, and by so doing is missing the essential point. For, after all, the perfection of Christian life is to be found fundamentally in charity. Modern commentators on the works of St. Thomas have agreed that the mind of the Doctor was that Apostolic grace and charity transcend the apparent antimony of the contemplative and active lives harmonising them in their mutual object.(6) For the Founders of Societies which are a combination of the contemplative and the active apostolate, the adage applies “contemplari et contemplata aliis tradere.” Contemplation and action complement one another, uniting their forces in a life of faith and charity in the ideal of perfection, so aptly presented by St. Paul in the Third Chapter of Epistle to the Ephesians. These sentiments are expressed by Father Chevalier himself in his Plan of Association of Priests. “The ministers of the Church,” he wrote, will find the most simple and surest means of sanctifying themselves and others in intimately uniting themselves to the Diving Heart of Jesus, in sharing His sentiments, in co-operating with His merciful designs – in a word, in becoming priests of the Sacred Heart.”(7) In preceding chapters we have often spoken of the Founder’s view on what constituted perfection, especially as shown in his correspondent with the Jesuits at Vaugirard. It is not surprising to find many of these views based on those of the great St. Ignatius himself. Father Galliard in speaking of the Founder of the Jesuits and the times in which he lived has written: “In the new impetus given to religious life as a reaction to the worldly spirit of the Renaissance and the major heresies, it was left to St. Ignatius and his followers to harmonise the contemplative and active forms of religious community life, and make them compatible with the many diverse obligations of the priesthood. He turned his attention to such practical problems as the time to be given each day to prayer, to the time of meditation particularly, and to the form these spiritual exercises should take, to the greatest spiritual benefit of the members of the Society.” These of course, were details which every Founder considered most important, as, for example St. Vincent de Paul in his injunctions to his Daughters of Charity.(8) He warned these religious that they must not try to imitate the rules of the Carmelites who were less active, but must adhere to their own rules and practices.(9)

We recall that Father Chevalier himself, when drawing up the Rules and Constitutions, had emphasised the necessity of meditation and had stipulated the time to be given to it each day. He likewise ordered that the Exercises of St. Ignatius be followed in the annual retreats, and that the thirty days’ retreat would be made by the novices. Father Nadal, one of St. Ignatius’ biographers, summed up the apostolic ideal and end of the Jesuit order as follows : “To work for the salvation of souls, because Christ has loved them and died for them, and to achieve this work under complete obedience to the Visible Head of the Church.” As we have seen many times in the past pages. Father Chevalier had the deepest sense of obedience to the Holy See, and never acted without the concurrence of ecclesiastical authority. In his Formula Institute, he insisted that his followers should do the same: “The Missionaries of the Sacred Heart will always show the most profound respect, the most complete devotion, and the most perfect obedience to the Supreme Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ, the Pilot of the barque of the Church, outside which there is no salvation. They will exercise the greatest care never to estrange themselves in their words, in their writings, in public or in private from the authority of the Supreme Pontiff and his decrees.”(l0)

PART III: AFFINITIES WITH THE SPIRIT OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS

Eucharist, and when Father Nadal identifies contemplation with the illuminative way, such as it appears in the Second and Third weeks of the Spiritual Exercises, we can place at the side of this affirmation the words of Father Koppert M.S.C. who made a special study of the spirituality of Father Chevalier. “The method of meditation and contemplation approved by Father Chevalier was to let each member take the life of Our Lord and study it minutely in the method he found most favourable. He who is looking for an approved method could not do better than follow that of St. Ignatius as set out in the Second and Third weeks of the ‘Exercises.’ The result sought is an intimate knowledge of Christ so that we may love Him more and follow Him more faithfully.” There are still extant many notes on the meditation made by Father Chevalier during the period from 6th December, 1869, to 2nd May, 1870, and they prove that he followed this method. We quote from his meditation on the Adoration of the Shepherds as an example: “When I find myself in the presence of such an inspiring spectacle I can hear again the song of the Angels – ‘Gloria in Excelsis Deo’ Glory be to Him, because He has sent us a Redeemer. I keep repeating these words to myself, and offering my prayer of thanks: ‘O Divine Heart of Jesus, make me know Thee more and more that I may love Thee more and more. Give me purity of heart, and courage to overcome my laziness of spirit. O Divine Heart of Jesus, grant me a lively faith that I may love only you.’ And elsewhere he notes: “If God in His Infinite Goodness has created me from nothing, it is only because of His love for me. By glorifying Him and returning love for love, I will gain the crown of glory in eternity.” And again ha expresses the wish to live only in the love of the Sacred Heart: “Jesus Himself was the first Missionary of His own Sacred Heart. He was the first to make known to men His infinite love for them. He begged His Heavenly Father to have pity on all men, especially those who remained indifferent to His teachings. Everywhere and at all times Our Lord was engaged in the work of His mission. I then must employ all my time following His example by instructing those who are not living in His truth.” He then prays for the spirit of prayer and charity, so that he may know and love the Sacred Heart more: “I desire, Dear Jesus, one thing only – Your love. That will suffice for me.” And so there developed in the soul of Father Chevalier the realisation of what was to be the “specific note,” the ”special grace” of the Society he had founded. To use the term of Father Nadal in his reference to St. Ignatius and his Society “in actione contemplativus” (contemplative in action). It was to be a life of practical faith expressing itself in apostolic action motivated by the forces of contemplation, – in other words a combination of the two forms of human life the necessity of which has always been demanded in the tradition of the apostolate. When Father de Guibert in his work “Mystique Ignatienne” sought to define the ‘characteristic spirit’ of St. Ignatius he quoted Mgr. Saudreau who had distinguished into three categories the various souls to whom God had granted His infused graces – namely the ‘Seraphic,’ ‘Cherubic,’ and ‘Angelic.’ In this arbitrary distinction the author refers to the graces of the will as the ‘seraphic’ class, to those of the intelligence as ‘cherubic’ and those of the memory and imagination as ‘angelic.’ After having remarked that the distinction between the ‘seraphic’ and the ‘cherubic’ forms of contemplation are ‘ancient and classic’ de Guibert says there are three corresponding types of families of contemplation which go to make up Catholic Mysticism. Since the Society founded by St. Ignatius is primarily an active Society we can say that it does not belong to the ‘cherubic’ class or in other words it belongs to what Don. Chautard calls the “mysticism of action.” (13)-(14) The foundation of the life of an apostle “in actione contemplativus” is Union with God. Prayer and religious activity have no meaning, life or unity without this union with God. It is the bond of the apostle with God in prayer as well as in action. It gives meaning and unity to his life from the fact that, whilst being engaged in temporal things he is yet above them: whilst being engrossed in worldly preoccupations he does not lose his peace of soul; whilst being confronted with all manner of difficulties, he is never discouraged; whilst living in the world, he is not of the world. Even in moments of emergency he is able by his love to solicit the help of God who is above all emergency. Even in moments of anguish when souls escape his apostolic efforts, he leaves them to God whom no soul escapes. Above all that is taking place around him in terms of time, he lives in the immutable and peaceful terms of eternity, for his heart is fixed in God.”(15) This union with God will find its own character according to the aspect under which God and Christ are approached, but also according to the particular school of spirituality in which the soul has been trained. “In a minor way” says Mgr. Saudreau, “human souls can adore as the angels do. They are all filled with admiration of the Divine Attributes, but with the Seraphim love is the dominant feature, whereas light and understanding is that of the Cherubim.(16) And so we find this distinction also in human spirituality. The spirituality of St. Ignatius, was not so much of the ‘Seraphi’ or ‘Cherubic’ type but of the ‘Angelic.’ Not that the grace of love or of intelligence was lacking, but the emphasis is more on the note of “Service,” If the spirituality of the Jesuits, in its many varieties, centred as it is in the service of God and Christ, is something real and concrete; it is because it is one of “execution” more than “speculation.” This is not merely a reaction to the spirit of humanism of the 16th century, but a result of the particular form of mysticism which God ordained that the Saint should follow. It fits in with his temperament, his inclinations and the needs of his time – proof again of the wise Providence with which God directs the souls of men. Let us now compare the mission and spiritual outlook of Father Chevalier with that of St. Ignatius. The Founder of the Missionaries of the Sacred heart had the same desire as the saintly Founder of the Jesuits to combat the moral and social ills of the particular period in which he lived, “of an age when,” to quote his own words, – “the salvation of souls was in tragic peril.” Here, like St. Ignatius, he was prepared to depart from the ancient form of monasticism to found a society which would be a combination of the contemplative and the active way of life – “la vie superieure” to use Father Nadal’s expression. His Society was not founded only to offset the moral evils of the age but to correct the many theological errors which were having their repercussions on the lives of the faithful themselves. It was precisely in these two campaigns that the value of the work consisted -a concept in conformity with the evangelical idea itself. The means were to be a life with the vows of religion, and an asceticism in harmony with them, a striving for perfection in co-operation with grace. The text of the “Formula Institute” in the section, “de opportunitate institute,” clearly sets out the role that devotion to the Sacred Heart is to play in combating the evils of the period and emphasis is put on what we might call the “apostolic virtues.”

But if Father Chevalier’s spiritual outlook, like that of St. Ignatius is not of the ‘Cherubic’ school, there are, nevertheless, characteristic differences between the two. “The dominant characteristic of the grace which St. Ignatius received was the desire to serve God and Christ, and this service was not so much a consequence of infused love as the central point of all the graces he received. With Father Chevalier, we can say that his service was the direct consequence of love, which was the incentive of all his activity. If St. Ignatius belongs to the ‘Angelic’ school, Father Chevalier may be stated as being of the ‘seraphic’ group, i.e., of those who received graces pertaining to the will. Motivated by the grace of love, they strive to do good with ardour and strength of purpose. The ‘seraphic’ souls strive primarily to prove to God their love, and are ever seeking means of pleasing Him. “What can I do for God? What work can I undertake for His Glory?” are the questions they are constantly asking themselves. Their work is achieved more by the impulse of love than by the light of the intellect, and we might say that primarily they are more anxious to suffer and work for God than to contemplate the mysteries of His Being.(19) “Father Chevalier’ s whole life,” wrote Father Piperon in his Notice, was summarised in his efforts to achieve the spirit of his Society as expressed in its motto: ‘May the Sacred Heart of Jesus be everywhere Loved”. All he did was for the love of Jesus. That was the sublime ideal which inspired all his work, and kept alive, even to his last hours on earth, the fervour of his early days. His mission was to make known and loved the Adorable Heart of Christ. Following the example of their Founder, may his disciples have only this same desire and may it be the ‘sole motive of their activities’. Let them immolate themselves without reserve so that the Heart of Jesus may be everywhere and always loved and glorified.” (20) We recall the Founder’s words, when he was a seminarian on the occasion of the professor’s treating the doctrine of the Love of the Pierced Heart: “This doctrine went straight to my heart and the more it took possession of me, the more I felt its new charms.” As we have seen, from this ardent love came his mission for the foundation of his Society. Again we remember his remark to Father Maugenest that the remedy for the social and moral evils of the times was in devotion to the Sacred Heart, the Symbol of all Love and Charity. That is why his Institute became a Society of priests exclusively devoted to the Sacred Heart, in order to sanctify themselves and their brothers. According to Mgr. Saudrean, the souls in the seraphic category are accorded spiritual lights and graces as well as the cherubic group but once they have received them they put them into action. This activity, while not being the essence of their spirituality, gives it definite form and purpose, and becomes a prayer in itself. They wish to love God, to serve Him with a firm will, and even in times of spiritual dryness and weariness they press on to their object. God blesses their collaboration with His grace, for the worth of any soul is measured by its fidelity and not by the faculties granted it. If the seraphic soul does not obey the promptings of the will enticing it to sacrifice, then the light of intelligence is denied it. On the other hand the soul which is constantly faithful is given further grace, and is a supple instrument in the hands of God in His divine plan of apostolate. Their activity is rewarded with outstanding success(21) “These souls,” continues Mgr. Saudrean, “are always seeking means of proving their love for God, but the end is more in mind than the means. These latter are but the steps by which they mount to God. Anything that appeals to them as causing joy to the Heart of God becomes the object of their zeal, and for this very reason they achieve greatness in their undertakings. And is it not for the same reason that these souls seem always restless till they have found new means of expressing their love for God, seizing every propitious opportunity to put this love to good effect? This is why on occasions Father Chevalier himself rather scared the Jesuits of Vaugirard with his tendency to undertake works without minutely calculating the possibilites and the resources. An example of this was when, after losing Father Maugenest and during the crisis of the ensuing months, he pushed ahead with his project, energised by his ardent love of the Sacred Heart and confiding in the Providence of God, even though often times he could not see the ultimate result. During this period of groping as we have shown in previous chapters, the dominant characteristic of the Founder was his complete confidence resulting from his love of the Sacred Heart. We can deduce from his own writings and those of Father Piperon that the special lights, which he received, were those mainly pertaining to his Congregation. It became clear in his mind that it was to be an apostolic union of priests, living in community professing the vows of religion, and totally devoted to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. The concept of his Society was more strongly confirmed after his visit to Paray-le-Monial, and he pursued its realisation with all the strength of his soul. Although it was fundamentally the work of God, the details of its practical realisation were left to his own judgment. As we have seen, he based the Rules of the Society on those of the Seminary where he was educated and when it was necessary to form them into regular Constitutions he consulted the Jesuit Fathers of Vaugirard, Paris. Although he freely followed their advice and counsel in most matters, he did not hesitate to disagree with them on points which he considered were not in harmony with his fundamental plan. In the beginning when the form of his Society was taking shape he was inclined to copy the ways of the Society of Jesus, although the Jesuits warned him that this was not possible in many matters. From the many set-backs, obstacles and disappointments there gradually emerged the conviction that God wished him to be the main author of the work himself, and looking back we can see how, even unconsciously, he was guided to the point where he could draw up clearly the “Formula Institute.” During this process we can see a soul powerfully led by love, but not always having a clear vision of the road ahead. It was in ore such moment of uncertainty that he thought he should hand over the government of his newly-born Society to the experienced Father Vandel. It is a characteristic of the seraphic group of souls that its members concentrate on the end they are striving to achieve more than the details of the means towards this end. The situation, circumstances, even the desires and characters of their collaborators, are of secondary importance in the pursuit of their object. Mgr. Saudreau points out that there is always the danger that such a soul unless it has good judgment, may become too stubborn and headstrong, and consequently the action of God on such a one is to make him or her more supple and humble.(22) This could well be the explanation of the many upsets and temporary failures in the projects of Father Chevalier particularly after the year 1870. He himself was the first to admit it:”Whenever I decided to take a certain line of action, God guided me in a different direction. Anything I undertook by myself seemed to fail. Any success I had was due entirely to the Sacred Heart and Our Lady.” However, such was the ardour of his love that it always inspired him to push forward and to combat each difficulty as he met it. It was a love that assured fidelity and perseverance, and it was precisely in these virtues he revealed the worth of his soul. God rewarded his offering and his sacrifices by blessing his Institute, and he lived to see the realisation of the ideal, which inspired all his activity and for which he had battled so strenuously. His uncertainty in the early stages as to the exact form he wished to give the Society, added to his natural tenacity of spirit in pursuing an ideal explains why he tentatively looked to the Society of Jesus as a model on which to found his Institute. God had infused the spirit of love into his heart from which emerged the ideal of founding a Society whose object would be the spreading of love. This would be the form of his apostolate.

The constitution of the Society of Jesus as an active, organised and approved Institute appealed to him as the model on which he could base the Congregation of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. His close contact with the Jesuits began at the time he was launching the movements of the Association of Secular Priests, and the Third Order and the favourable reception given to him by Father Le Blanc would have encouraged him to follow the Jesuit methods. The Fathers of Vaugirard, however, saw difficulties in the proposal because the characters of the two Institutes were not identical and mode of life quite different. The Jesuit idea of the service of Our Lord being in the nature of a soldier to his King is formally, different, and postulates a different type of life from that of an Institute based on the spirit of mutual love between Redeemer and Redeemed – in a friendship of brotherly love. Father Chevalier hoped to unite the two ideals. He envisaged an ideal which would keep intact the spirit of his mission and yet follow the organisation of the Society of Jesus. Even when, after the examination of the various schemes presented by the Jesuits, it was obvious that this combination was not feasible, he still tried to maintain it where possible, but he was to find that it would lead into many difficulties. The conflict between the exigences of the spirit of his Society and a regime hardly compatible with it led later on to dissatisfaction and strife especially during the crisis that the Society faced in the nineties of the last century, with which we will deal in later pages. We find an echo of this divergence in the “Formula Institute,” which was to persist in the Constitutions till the promulgation of the “Directorium Commune” of 1897. These documents of the early Society clearly express that the Congregation was wholly devoted to the Sacred Heart and its spirit was one of love, but the Sacred Heart is referred to as its “military sign,” its “standard.” “The very name Missionaries of the Sacred Heart,” says the text, “indicates under what flag its members will fight and with what spirit they will be animated.” This military language disappears in the text which follows immediately: “Those who take this glorious and sweet name will find in it an incentive to practise the virtues of the Divine Heart and to propagate its devotion, with an ever-increasing ardour. They will not consider themselves worthy of so beautiful a title until they are earnestly striving to live the life of this same Sacred Heart.”(23) We notice again the contrast in the two following texts: “Obedience will render the Society truly invincible, as a well-disciplined army drawn up for battle,” and “This commendable virtue (Obedience) vivified by Charity, will make the members of the Institute as children of the same mother in one household. It will make them true children of the Sacred Heart, who, although He was God and the King of Kings, subjected Himself to those He lived with in a spirit of admirable humility, and He became obedient under death, even the death of the Cross.”(24) Because his Society was one based on love rather than service, Father Chevalier always emphasised the importance of obedience, if its mission were to be accomplished. While other Institutes gained their object by a rapid organization in keeping with their particular spirit, his Society must gain its strength by its fidelity to the spirit of love. “Those who enter our Society” he said, “can afford to see themselves surpassed by their brothers in knowledge, mortification and poverty, but when it is a matter of obedience and mutual charity, they must not allow anyone to surpass them.(25) The motive for practising these virtues will be the example of Christ who became obedient even unto death.” The analogies and expressions from discipline and army life are not the best suited to indicate an obedience through love, certainly not the relationship between mother and children. They were finally considered as being alien to the spirit of the Congregation, and were revised after the “Directorium Commune” of 1897 when a new wording of the Constitutions was drawn up. The expression “signum militare” was dropped, and the Fathers of the Chapter substituted the “propia nota,” the main clause of which read – “that the whole life of the members should be distinguished and informed by a sincere and ever-fervent love of the Divine Incarnate Heart – a love Which would be the specific mark, – the “signaculum,” of their sanctity, and their inspiration to imitate the virtues of that Sacred Heart.”(26) And the “Directorium Commune” adds: “This love will imbue them with the effective charity of Christ towards their fellow-men and especially, with a spirit of great mercy to the ‘lost sheep’ whom they will not hesitate, following the example of Our Lord, to carry back to the fold on their shoulders.” In the revision of the Constitutions the Chapter developed this idea the Apostolate, and changed the more elaborate wording of the “Formula Institute” regarding the general end of the Society to the simple statement that the members are working “directly and essentially for the two fold end of the glory of God and the good of souls.” The Fathers of the Chapter agreed that Obedience through the motive of Supernatural Charity was more desirable than that from military discipline. Right order and discipline were, of course, necessary in any Institute, but the members must always be mindful of the example of Our Lord, Who was obedient even unto death.(27) Just as Christ showed Himself respectful to all lawfully constituted authority, so His Missionaries will subject themselves to the Superiors through love of Him. From the beginning Father Chevalier had emphasised this necessary virtue. “The Master of Novices,” he wrote, “will strive to make his subject love, cherish and practise the virtues of obedience and humility which must be the main virtues of the Congregation, because they were those of the Heart of Jesus.” He had clearly incorporated this injunction in the Early Constitutions and the Formula.” As important as it is to know the theory of the part that love, knowledge and service play in the religious life, it is still more necessary to keep constantly before one’s mind the object of this love, knowledge and service.

PART IV: MAIN FEATURES OF THE SPIRITUALITY OF FATHER CHEVALIER.

We have no need to stress the fact all Father Chevalier’s spirituality was informed by his ardent love of the Sacred Heart – a result achieved in his life by a continuous and progressive experience. We would be misunderstanding this spirituality and distorting the historical reality if we thought this experience was a sudden awareness of the mystery of the Sacred Heart and not the result of a gradual growth in knowledge and holiness accompanied by its many trials and disappointments. We recall that the origin of his vocation centred around his desire to be a missionary, and apostle, even before he fully understood the part Christ must occupy in any missionary endeavour.

This desire was granted him by the Holy Spirit, and it was fostered by the influence of his contact with the Sulpicians, from whom he learnt to fashion his concept of Christ and His virtues, the basis of his love of and devotion for the Sacred Heart. To live interiorly, as Christ Himself lived, was his ideal to reproduce in Himself the dispositions and sentiments of Christ as revealed in the mystery of His Sacred Heart, He understood that the redemptive work of Christ was entrusted to His Church, and that nothing was dearer to the Heart of God, after His love for the Word made Flesh and the Holy Spirit, than the Church on earth. From this understanding came his own love and devotion to the church, and his true sense of “Religion,” which inspired all his activity and spiritual devotions. For him the expression “The hearts of the faithful” immediately evoked the sentiments of love and respect. His spiritual directors had, early in his life, shown Him the way to God through the virtues of the Sacred Humanity of Christ, especially in suffering and interior dispositions which were to be the key-points of his spirituality. He strove for union with Christ, who reigns in our hearts through Faith and Charity, Who nourishes us with the Blessed Eucharist, and invites us to make an offering of our lives for the glory of God and the salvation of souls. Christ was presented to him not as at any particular moment of His life, but as the complete Christ of History, the Son of God made man, Who through the various stages, of His life gave us the perfect example of service, and Who now from Heaven continues His mission by every means that love can conceive. From Heaven He inspires men to union with God through union with Himself.

This deep sense of religion was the reason why he was so conscious – or what he often referred to us the “evil of modern times” and of his conviction that its remedy was to be found in the devotion to the Sacred Heart. “Protestantism,” he wrote, “has created in Europe a spirit of independence and revolt, and the holiest power there is in the world, the Catholic Church, which speaks in the name of God is ignored.” Then there was the pernicious influence of Jansenism, which undermined the authority of the Church, and made the practice of religion, especially the reception of the Sacraments, almost impossible. To quote his words again. “The work of Hell does not stop there. Protestantism and Jansenism have led to Rationalism which attempts to replace the worship of God by the idolatry of materialism and the senses. Under the name of philosophy, reason has dared to attack and deny the very fundamental doctrines of religion, such as the Divinity of Christ and the Existence of God.”(29) Convinced that Christ is our Life, and that we attain salvation only through our incorporation with Him, Father Chevalier was preaching as early as his Seminary days on the words “In Him we live, move and have our being.” “Christ,” he wrote, “is a consuming fire. He makes us sharers of His Divinity.” To separate ourselves from Him is to deform our manhood, which is the masterpiece of His Creation. It is precisely in this separation of the souls of men from their Creator that the evils of modern times consist, with its concomitant spirit of selfishness and lowering of Christian morals. In the Sulpician form of spirituality the perfection of the priesthood is put before priests and the laity in the Person of Jesus Christ, the Sovereign Priest. Father Chevalier was deeply imbued with a profound love and respect for Christ’s Priesthood, and his ideal was to imitate the High Priest in His love, His sacrifice and His zeal for souls. He was conscious of the intimate union which must exist between one’s personal sanctification and the success of the apostolate. We have ample testimony of this as far back as his Seminary days, as Father Piperon has recorded in his writing. During the years of the 1860’s he composed a prayer to be recited in common by the priests of the Society and the Associated priests which read: “O Jesus, Saviour and Sanctifier of Souls, guard Thy priests from a spirit of complacence, especially us who have the privilege of being Missionaries of Thy Adorable Heart. Pray your Heavenly Father that He preserve us in your love and sanctify us in Truth so that we may glorify you and manifest your virtues to the world. Since we are your Apostles ask Him to Preserve us from evil, and keep us close to you in the bonds of charity. As you are one with the Father, so may we all be one in Your Divine Heart and Sentiments, consecrated to you now and in eternity. Amen.”(30) One might object that the spirituality of Father Olier places too much accent on the indignity of man before the Divine Majesty resulting in a negative and pessimistic effect. However, the general trend of his writings reveals a positive and affective devotion to Christ and the Blessed Eucharist. He presents God to us as an accessible Father, who is ever ready to approach and receive us, (31) and Whom we can love with friendship and holy familiarity. (32) Father Pottier, S.J. in his treatise on the spiritual influences of those times has naively remarked that “owing to a pious equivocation, the disciples of Father Olier were able to say ‘Love is adoration and adoration is love’ and he wonders if this is in keeping with strict theological definition. Be this as it may, we find Father Chevalier with his Sulpician training putting the accent more on the theological virtue of charity than on the moral virtue of religion in all his spiritual outlook and activity. Had not Father Olier instructed him: “Live by love, since it is the nourishment of the soul. Unite yourself to the dispositions of the holy and Sacred Heart of Jesus, in Whom I desire to see you hidden and consumed?”(33, 34) Another aspect of the spirituality of Father Chevalier was his deep devotion to the Passion and Death of Our Lord. He realised that the end and the crowning work of the Sacrifice of Christ was His Death on the Cross. The expression, “Christ crucified,” occurs time and time again in his writings and sermons, as far back as Seminary days. In the Rules he associated the expression with that of the Sacred Heart, uniting the two in his explanation of the function of the Sovereign Priest. On the 15th August, 1900 he wrote to his Missionaries: “We have despoiled ourselves of earthly things in order to put on Christ Crucified. We have been called to religious life in a Society wholly devoted to the Sacred Heart.”(35) He repeatedly emphasised that the Crucified Sovereign Priest was the model of all priests on earth, and in his discourse on the Sacred Heart and the Precious Blood he often used the expression “our brothers covered with the Blood of our God.” Closely associated with his love for the Sacred Heart was his deep devotion to the Blessed Eucharist, evident from his earliest years. The theme of his sermons and instructions on this point was that anyone who wished to take part in the religion of Our Lord must live with the hidden Christ in the Tabernacle, where He is constantly interceding for us with His Heavenly Father, where He is perpetually offering Himself in Sacrifice, Praise and Adoration, and where He is nourishing His Church. This holy Sacrament is the bond which unites us with Christ and makes us one with the Father through Him. Through the Blessed Sacrament we participate in the life of Christ, and there learn to unite our own lives to His through the grace of deeper understanding and imitation of His virtues. There He teaches us respect for and devotion to His Father; there He teaches us a more appreciative love of our neighbour; there we learn His own virtue of humility and gain the strength to fight against sin and the spirit of the world. “Jesus Christ is in the Blessed Sacrament,” he wrote, “because of the great love He has for His Father and His infinite love of mankind. He does not shun the sinner, but patiently and silently waits for him, anxious to communicate His love and favours to him, unmindful of past ingratitude. That is why He gives Himself entirely to each soul seeking Him, not content with having died for all mankind on Calvary, but anxious to pour forth His Precious Blood for each soul individually. His love for the human race is expressed in His personal love for each individual soul. This great love of Christ for human souls must be the abiding disposition of all His priests, who should at all times be ready to spend themselves for the salvation of souls and the reign of Christ on earth.”(36) For Father Chevalier the centre of his devotion to the Sacred Heart was the Blessed Eucharist. There he found His Incarnate God His Sovereign Priest, and his inspiration to imitate the virtues of the Sacred Heart particularly that of Charity. “Being true disciples of Him who professed to be meek and humble of Heart the members of our Society shall practise the virtues of humility and self-abnegation, together with a spirit of gentleness and charity towards the neighbour. Following the example of the Good Shepherd, they will lead the sheep by kindness and love.” Duringhis Seminary days Father Chevalier took a practical interest in the devotion to the Interior Life of Jesus and Mary. The object of this devotion was to make the students conscious of the interior lives of Jesus and His Mother, and so imitate their spirit of prayer and recollection. In his manuscript entitled ”Catechism of the Devotion to the Sacred Heart,” he explains by question and answer what he understands by this devotion and by devotion in general.

PART V: SOME GENERAL IDEAS ON THE NATURE OF DEVOTION

A devotion, according to the Decree of the Beatification of St. Margaret Mary, is “a pious practice in the exercise of the virtue of Religion.” “Religion,” wrote Father Chevalier, “is the supernatural virtue by which man renders to God, to the Three Persons of the Trinity, to Our Lord Jesus Christ, to the Blessed Virgin Mary, to the Angels and Saints, the honour which is due to them.” Consequently the worship or the honour

rendered is in proportion to the dignity, the sanctity and the perfection of the Person concerned.” The basis on which any devotion rests is the virtue of religion, practised in the ideal of its perfection, and expressing itself in the honouring of certain holy persons and objects. By reason of its nature, a devotion is a special cult, whose scope and limits are decided by its object and adapted by the Church to the manner and needs of the time. It is exercised by frequent acts of piety and religion, which are works of supererogation and therefore not obligatory. (38)(39) Father Chevalier concludes: “Devotions are optional and we are free to embrace them or disregard them at will. However, their object is to procure the glory of God by the honouring of holy persons and things and to sanctify souls by inspiring them to undertake practices and good works in keeping with the spirit of the particular devotion. The practices form the nature of the devotion, but we must remember they are merely the means to the end, namely the sanctification of the soul and a more perfect Christian Life. Devotion is distinguished from religion, strictly speaking, by the character of its practices and by its object. Religion is comprehensive, and embraces all that pertains to worship – persons and things, etc., – whereas devotion is singular and embraces but the one object. This is its characteristic: to choose the one object of veneration. Devotion is the complement of religion in so far as it selects some particular object of veneration to be honoured in a specific and explicit manner, and in this sense it goes further than the general virtue of religion in so far as it specializes in a particular cult. It gives formal and explicit honour to the object of its affection and veneration.(40) It is important to remember that the main features in the religious life of Father Chevalier were his two great loves and devotions – the Sacred Heart of Jesus and Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. He himself had listed in various categories the Persons who could become the object of devotion. First are the Three Divine Persons of the Blessed Trinity, then the Mother of God, the Angels and the Saints. Since Jesus Christ is both God and Man He is able to be honoured in a two-fold devotion. If one wishes to honour His Divinity it will be under the devotion to the Incarnate Word, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity; and if His Humanity, under the devotion to the aspect of the life of Our Lord or His Blessed Mother – for example, to some particular period or event in their lives, to some particular mystery, title or virtue – the real objects of the devotion, of course, are the Persons honoured. Father Vermeersch has written, “We honour Jesus Christ in a special way because He has shown such love. Love, then, constitutes the formal object of devotion to the Sacred Heart.”(42) Father Chevalier also has written: “The formal object of devotion to the Sacred Heart is love the love which Christ has for man; or, in other words, it is the person of Our Lord honoured in His love for men. Elsewhere he has written when speaking of the general principles of devotion: “The object of any devotion is the Person honoured under the aspect of the particular devotion concerned. This devotion depends on the material object, which presents in some sensible form the spiritual significance and formal object. There should be an obvious relationship between the material and formal objects of any devotion in keeping with the dignity of the person honoured, and free from any danger of idolatry or heresy Symbolism, of course, plays an important role in the expressions of devotion, the natural and rational symbols representing the spiritual ideas involved. For example, the heart is not merely an organ of flesh but symbolises love, and, in the case of the Sacred Heart, the infinite love of God for man. The symbol becomes the material object including the formal object, or that which is symbolised, which, taken separately, represents the aspect under which the person is honoured. Thus we have distinct realities which are honoured together in the one symbolism. “The material object,” wrote Father Chevalier, “may be honoured apart from the formal aspect, as long as it is not regarded as an end in itself. It is really the means by which the Person is honoured. All devotions then have a material object – at least all those which the Church allows us to practise publicly. All others are in the nature of private devotions, which flow from the piety of the heart, and can even be expressed exteriorly, provided they do not conflict with faith or morals and have due respect for the Saints.”(44) These general ideas of Father Chevalier on devotion will help us to gain a deeper understanding of his two great devotions, and enable us to estimate them more precisely in their true value.

CHAPTER XIX SPIRITUAL TRENDS: THE SACRED HEART

PART I: THE OBJECT OF THE DEVOTION

Father Chevalier had adapted his devotion to the Sacred Heart along the lines of a special devotion and in the form in which he understood and described it. His interpretation of the devotion was in keeping with the teaching of the majority of the spiritual authors. Father Vermeersch has written: “The special object of this devotion is the Heart of Jesus, with the Love it symbolises.”(l) And Father Chevalier: “Devotion to the Sacred Heart has as its object the offering of a special worship to the Heart of Flesh of Our Lord and to the Love of which that Heart is the Source, the Life and the Symbol.” He adds: “This devotion to the Heart of Our Lord and the Love it symbolises is distinct from the essential duties of religion which we owe Our Lord. Unlike these obligations it is not in itself a necessary form of worship.”(2) Our religion obliges us to revere God as our Lord and Creator and Christ as our Redeemer, whereas devotion to the Sacred Heart in itself is not a matter of obligation. With Father Veermeersch Father Chevalier taught that the material or exterior object of devotion to the Sacred Heart is the actual Heart of Flesh of Our Saviour. We have seen in the last chapter that the formal object is the Love that filled the Heart of Christ for men or in other words we honour the human Heart of Christ burning with love for mankind. Again, Father Chevalier is in accord with Father Veermeersch in affirming that the Heart of Our Lord and the Love which it symbolises form the one object of veneration. “Otherwise,” concludes Fr. Veermeersch with Father Terrien “there would be two devotions to the Sacred Heart.”(3) Our authors are equally in agreement on the various problems presented by the devotion. According to Father Chevalier, the love that is honoured is the “free activity of His Humanity” or more precisely in the words of the text already quoted: “the love for men by which this Heart is animated.” “In presenting His physical Heart to us as the material object of the devotion, Our Lord has thereby shown us what is to be the spiritual object, as the Heart is the symbol of love.” In their expositions of the cult both Fathers Chevalier and Veermeersch stress the fact that we are dealing with the living Heart of Christ, and both agree as to what is the final end of the devotion. Father Chevalier writes to the point: “In our devotion to this Sacred Heart, so full of love for God and men, our own hearts, in their turn, are consumed by the fire of this love and so are able to conform themselves in all things to the perfect spirit of the love of God.”(4) We are surprised to find Fr. Veermeerseh, in the first editions of his work, making the following reference to Father Chevalier’s interpretation of the devotion: “With Fr. Chevalier, the Founder of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart,” he wrote, “the scope of the devotion is limitless. He finds the Heart of Jesus in the Word through Whom all things were made, and consequently the beginning of the devotion would go back as far as the creation of the world.”(5) Fr. Veermeersch uses the expression, “the field of the devotion,” but from the title of the chapter and the context it is apparent he is referring to the object of the devotion. Confusing the two notions, Fr. Veermeersch forgets that the Sacred Heart, Who dominates the “field” of the devotion, is understood to have a wider significance than the mere object of the devotion. Whence then arises this difference of opinion?

Fr. Chevalier stresses the fact that God inaugurates a devotion as a spiritual experience, ordinarily by “inspiration, revelation or a series of events by which He reveals His Will in a definite manner to those He has chosen to propagate it.” It is born and developed in the souls of its originators, and gives them the grace to propagate it. Handed on to others, it gradually loses its initial personal characteristics, but acquires others peculiar to the needs of the souls who embrace it. To quote the words of Bainvel: “Little by little it tends to disengage itself from its limited personal origin and to take shape as a distinct devotion with its own practices and prayers. It is now no longer a private subjective, personal relationship between Jesus and the soul of its originator but a wider and more objective devotion of the many. So to speak, it passes from the realm of mysticism to that of Christian asceticism. In other words, from its first growth in individual souls it blossoms into full flower by becoming a general movement, expanding gradually from soul to soul. It takes on the character of a social organisation.(6) The devotion, then, is freed from, its original personal circumstances and the unique experiences of its originators and takes on a social form, or in modern terminology, it becomes an institution with its own objective content, structure and formula, less rich and intimate perhaps than in its early life, but more conducive to the fulfilment of God’s designs in its regard. “For God,” writes Father Chevalier, “permits the establishment of a devotion as a new proof of His Bounty and Love for men, adapted to the circumstances and needs of the time, and as a means of procuring His Glory and the sanctification of men.” A devotion should acquire a social form, free of individual influences, its formula and definition comprehensible to all and not just a speculative study for sublime minds. A propos of this point Fr. Veermeersch laments: “What a mistake it is to read more into a devotion than its object warrants; to disperse its forces, which must eventually weaken it; to enshroud it with a vagueness which can have no influence on the soul. Let us keep our devotions exact, simple and free from all subtlety, so that they remain within the reach of all, and continue to stir the sensitive emotions of the soul. Any haziness of concept which seeks to give a devotion a grand appearance only serves to destroy it. A devotion should preserve intact the properties of a popular movement, destined not merely for the intellectually elite, but for the faithful generally.”(7) It is this social form that the Church recognises and approves as a means to a deeper spiritual life. At first she studies the official reports to make sure it is in keeping with sound Catholic doctrine, and then awaits the numerous requests for its ratification, in the meanwhile examining all the evidence, especially the experiences of adherents, to establish its validity and usefulness. We find the formulation and development of the devotion in the official decrees of the Church, wherein she gives us an exact definition of its object and enumerates the happy effects for the good of souls. As Father Chevalier realised the importance of precise definition and formulation in the matter of a devotion as a means of sanctifying souls, he was always particular in his choice of terms in his instructions and sermons on the Sacred Heart. But anyone who wishes to expose a devotion as a means of sanctification should present it in an attractive and convincing manner, making clear what is the object, the character and means of that devotion and emphasising its importance. In his pamphlets and later in his books, Father Chevalier faithfully followed this ideal in what Father Delaporte in his treatise on the Sacred Heart calls “a quasi-visionary style.”(8) It was to the devotion that the Founder practised in his personal life that the Society and its spirit owe their existence.

PART II: THE SACRED HEART, THE HEART OF THE SOVEREIGN PRIEST.

The comparison of this life of the Founder and the devotion which inspired and influenced it present certain problems which, however, are solved by the study of the ideal. We have spoken of the effect produced by a devotion in a soul already favouring a certain type of spirituality, and we have dealt with the main traits of the spirituality of Father Chevalier. He had always before him, as his ideal, the entire Christ, Who has given us the example of the perfect religious. He strove to imitate Christ in all things, particularly in the sentiments of his inner life. He wished to live with Him and to die with Him. All his priestly activity was actuated by his ideal of Christ as the Sovereign Priest, and the Saviour of mankind, an ideal which produced in his soul an intimate love of Our Lord as Priest. He realised that, if he wished to be a living force in the Church, this ideal must nourish his whole life and soul. Since Christ is wholly present in the Blessed Eucharist, it was there that he found his strength, his faith and his love. The devotion of the Founder to the Sacred Heart added a more intimate meaning to his devotion to Christ the Priest, because it concentrated everything around the personal love of the Redeemer for each one of us, a love that endured to the end. He wrote: “Religion permeated by this devotion is illuminated by an incomparable brilliance. It is like a sun casting its most fiery and purest light on the whole personality of Our Lord.” What little had been written on devotion to the Sacred Heart up to this time stressed the fact that its foundation was the hypostatic union of the Word with the material Heart of Our Lord with its immense love for men. In his pastoral letter Mgr. Villele had written: “The devotion to the Sacred Heart is as old as Christianity itself, since it is associated with the devotion to the Incarnate Word to which it is hypostatically united. We ought then to unite our own hearts intimately with that of Jesus, and follow the exhortation of St. Paul to make our sentiments those of Christ Himself.”(9) Mgr. Languet teaches the same doctrine in his treatise on the revelations of Our Lord to St. Margaret Mary emphasising the fact that the Sacred Heart represents the entire Christ and that love is the principle of all spirituality! “To honour the Sacred Heart,” he writes, “is to honour the whole Christ. When we ourselves speak of offering our hearts to Him and consecrating our love to His, we are referring to the offering of our whole being. Happy is the soul who has found the way to the Heart of his Master and has opened it to others. Happy he who has taught others to meditate on this tender and compassionate love that Jesus has for each one of us, and to love Him in return.” “Love is the fulfilment of the law, and so he who has found the most effective means of awakening and fostering love for God in his heart has at the same time found the most efficacious means of serving God. ‘Plenitudo legis, dilectio.”‘(10) To quote Fr. Chevalier himself: “From the beginning this devotion has been the soul of Christian piety, for it is nothing but the expansion of charity.”(11) This idea is expressed by the Founder even in his earliest writings which, though often treating of devotion in general, clearly state that devotion to the Sacred Heart is an expression of God’s love for us and ours for Him. He often expressed his views to Father Maugenest on the social ills of the time and always remarked that their remedy was in the Heart of Jesus, which was Love and Charity. “This Heart,” he says, “is entirely dedicated to our welfare, yet it is not loved by men and they are ignorant of the treasures it contains. He incorporated the well-known expression -“treasures of love and mercy which It contains” – in the Rules of the Society. All that he understood concerning the interior life of Jesus he summarised under the one word, “Love”. The interior life of the Sovereign Priest meant for him the Love in the Heart of the Redeemer. He had been taught that Christ became the Sovereign Priest in the Incarnation and so we find him preaching at Christmas on the Sacred Heart – “to whose glory I am consecrated.” “Everyone knows that the Mystery of the Incarnation, which we have just commemorated, is the result of God’s love for man. ‘Sic Deus dilexit mundum.’ This immense unlimited love is enclosed in a Heart which is ready to give us all the treasurer of Heaven itself. This is the great fact which we celebrate at Christmas. O ever memorable day when man could place his head on the breast of God in the form of a little child and hear His Heartbeats and feel its pulsations! It was in the stable at Bethlehem at the foot of the Crib that the first adorers of Jesus gathered – the first disciples of that devotion to His Sacred Heart which must save the world.”(12)

We have already encountered this same idea in the Founder’s meditations on Christmas. Christ became the Sovereign Priest at the time of His birth and we find the element of sacrifice in all the mysteries of His life. In fact His life on earth was one unique Sacrifice. “The gospels are but the record of the compassion, mercy and love of the Heart of Jesus.”(13) Father Chevalier from his early days had been taught to regard the Blessed Eucharist as the inspiration to imitate the life of love and sacrifice of Our Lord. It was the living memorial of all the mysteries of Christ. In the Blessed Eucharist he found all the mysteries of the Redemption, the basis of all our hopes, the Heart of Our Lord. “In this Heart,” he wrote, “are found all the motives of our Charity.”(14) This Divine Heart, which daily unites Itself with each of His priests, will be for them “the Way, the Truth and the Life. This Heart is the Centre of all their acts of Faith and Love. It is the living Model of all their virtue, the Source of all their graces.” “Their perfection, unity, stability and peace will be found only by the reproduction of the sentiments of this Heart in their own.”(15) “The climax of the oblation made by the Sovereign Priest was the Sacrifice of the Cross. It was in this Divine Heart that the great work of our salvation was accomplished, that the eternal alliance between God and man was effected, that the kiss of peace eternally sealed the bond between Justice and Mercy. Was it not in this Sacred Heart, as in a living Sanctuary, that the Sacraments, which give us life and salvation, were prepared, and from which they drew their virtue, their strength and their efficacy? Was it not in this Heart, as on a living Altar, that the Divine Saviour immolated Himself for the glory of His Father, and now daily offers Himself for us, and offers the sacrifices due to the Most High – the sacrifice of praise to honour His Majesty; the sacrifice of propitiation to expiate our sins, the sacrifice of thanksgiving in recognition of His favours, and the sacrifice of supplication to beg new graces day by day? Is it not from this Heart, as from an inexhaustible Source, that there daily flows a stream of grace, a stream of living waters that will flow on to life everlasting?” (16) In his sermon on the Passion, Father Chevalier exclaimed: “The Passion of Our Saviour was the final gift from His Sacred Heart. Not only was the Heart of Jesus the principle of life in His Being, but It was the Fount from which flowed His Precious Blood for the salvation of souls. His Sacred Heart had prepared and formed this Blood which was to moisten the soil in the Garden of Gethsemane, which was to stain the cruel whips, which was to flow in the pretorium; this Blood which flowed from His Sacred Heart, Feet and Hands as He lay on the Cross. Was not this Your Blood, O Sacred Heart of Jesus? Was it not You Who washed the very sins of the world with it; Who poured it forth to save me? No wonder then that I should love You, that I should adore You! Your sacred Blood has fallen on me, has covered me, has inundated my very soul. It has penetrated, vivified and purified my being. O who will ever extol enough the excellence of this Sacred Heart, Whose Blood has been the price of the world’s redemption?” (17) Thus Father Chevalier found the Heart of the Sovereign Priest in all the mysteries of His divine life till His supreme sacrifice on the Cross, and he found these mysteries perpetuated in the Blessed Eucharist, the Sacrament of His infinite love. In his treatise on the “Qualities of the Heart of Jesus,” he wrote: “This is the Heart of a God – the Heart of a King, a Father, a Brother and a Friend. He desires that the sweetest and most intimate intercourse be established between His Heart and ours. He wishes us to become the confidants of all His secrets, thoughts and sentiments; that we speak with Him, heart to Heart, about all that concerns and interests us. He had us in His Heart and thoughts throughout all the days of His mortal life. On the tree of the Cross He brought us forth to a new life of grace in the labour of incomprehensible suffering. Aware of our troubles, He nourishes us by His Own Being in the Blessed Eucharist.”(18) “In Jesus we find the dearest of friends, the purest, most loving and devoted of hearts that ever existed. St. John the Apostle who saw Him, heard Him, spoke with Him, shared His secrets and lay on His Breast, tells us in simple language: ‘He was full of Grace and Truth,’ – a constant subject, surely, for our meditations!”(19) “Having been promised by God since the beginning of time for the redemption of the world, Jesus Christ must be the Centre around which all revolves. His Heart, which is the epitome of His whole Being, is the divine Light towards which the Prophets and the Patriarchs instinctively looked. He is the end of all things, the fulfilment of the Law, the Messiah so often prefigured and symbolised in the Old Testament. All that was written, spoken and accomplished by the chosen people of God had either direct or indirect reference to Jesus Christ and so to His Sacred Heart. That is why St. Margaret Mary remarked, ‘The Heart of Jesus is the abyss of all power and love.”‘(20) In all his writings on the qualities of the Sacred Heart the emphasis is always placed on the Divinity of Our Lord. “We have only to study the Sacred Heart to know it is the Heart of a God Who wishes to be united to humanity by the bonds of love.” (21) In the Rules he had incorporated the phrase: “Heart of Jesus, only Source of Light, Truth and Life.” For Father Chevalier to accept with faith and love the mystery of the Sacred Heart and its redemptive love was to understand better the “Length and the breadth, the height and the depth” of the mystery of Christ Himself and the part His Love plays in the trans-formation and sanctification of men. At a later date Father Chevalier was to develop in his writings the relationship of the God of Love and of the Blessed Trinity with the souls of men, but at this stage he concentrated principally on the Person of Our Lord. Further to the quotations we have already given we came across the following idea in a sermon of the Founder on the terrestrial paradise: “The Sacred Heart is the home of the Blessed Trinity which we are permitted to enter by our baptism.”(22) In a letter to Fr. Ramiere he expresses himself as follows: “I welcome with happiness the opportunity of telling you how pleased I am with the publication of the Messenger of the Sacred Heart. You realise what has always been in my mind. You do well to make of the Sacred Heart the centre of the teachings of the Old as well as the New Testament, the pivot around which revolves all our Catholicism, the shining Light of the Church, the Soul of our souls, the source of our Love, the cradle of our holy religion, the origin of the Sacraments, the pledge of our reconciliation, as it is also the salvation of the world, the remedy of our evils and the armoury of Christians. That is how I understand devotion to the Sacred Heart. It embraces all; it answers everything. You appreciate, my dear Father, the relationship which exists between our work and yours. You see also, if our Society succeeds what its mission will be.” Three years later he again wrote to Father Ramiere: “I have read with great satisfaction your article in last March’s edition of the Messenger entitled ‘The Heart of Jesus, the life of men through the Incarnation.’ “Indeed without this adorable Heart and its mysterious influence there is nothing but death – the death of the soul, the intelligence and the heart. In spite of the fact that it is made up of various components, humanity is of the same blood and the same body – ‘Unum corpus, multi sumus!'” “The Heart which gives life to the members of this great body is the Heart of Jesus. He alone unites us and makes us one with God. The moment we separate ourselves from Him we separate ourselves from our brethren, and with the loss of the divine life we lose the true sentiment of human fraternity.” “This divine Heart is the centre around which all human hearts gravitate. It is the indissoluble bond which joins Heaven and earth, so long parted; it is the sacred bridge thrown over the fathomless abyss which separates the Divinity from humanity. It is the support of morality, its centre of gravity its light, its hope, its salvation. It is the Soul of souls, the Heart of hearts, the Life of lives.”(23) Such is the Heart in which Father Chevalier had placed all his faith, the object of his love and zeal – the Heart which he offered to all as their ideal. This Heart was for him the living compendium of the whole person of the Redeemer, the God with us, whose love embraced and expressed everything. This was the Heart he presented to his companions in his Seminary days and to which they made reparation in the Blessed Eucharist. They implored this Divine Heart to save the Church and the world.

It was to this Heart that he dreamed of consecrating the priests of his Institute; a body of priests wholly dedicated to the Sacred Heart and the work of making known to men the treasures of love and mercy which it contains. How often did he mention to Father Maugenest that he was firmly convinced that devotion to the Sacred Heart was the answer to the social ills of the time – a conviction which led to the establishment of the pact of 1855, wherein they pledged themselves to serve the Sacred Heart with a very special love and piety, for the glory of Christ and the salvation of souls. In the first chapel they erected a picture representing Our Lord as the Saviour of sinners. In the formula of their vows they consecrated themselves to this Sacred Heart, the Source of the Light, the Truth and the Way, and promised to make public the grandeur and treasures which it contained. Their ardent wish was to bring as many adorers and victims of love as possible to Our Blessed Lord. Since this Heart is the Centre of all, being the Heart of the God-made-man, Fr. Chevalier could give no better advice to his priests than to unite themselves intimately to the Sacred Heart, to make His sentiments their own and to become the docile instruments of His mysterious designs. He impressed on his priests that the Sacred Heart must inform not only their interior life but their external activities and that each day of their lives they must unite their own hearts with His in the bond of love. The Sacred Heart must be the object of their study, their faith and all their activity. In Him they will find their strength and the graces necessary for themselves and others. The Heart of Jesus will be their living Model. From the Sacred Heart the Founder confidently expected disciples and missionaries to whom he would impart his own spirit of love. The following prayer composed by Father Chevalier is found in the Rules for the Associates: “O adorable Heart of Jesus, ineffable Source of all grace, how can we ever thank You enough for all the benefits Your divine Bounty has conferred on us? Your love has given us life and rescued us from our sins. It has showered us with your favours and sustained us in our weakness. O Divine Heart, have mercy on us always. We consecrate to You all the powers of our soul and body. We offer You all the thoughts of our mind, all the movements of our heart. We wish henceforth to reflect in ourselves the example of Your virtues. We seek refuge in Your sacred Wounds and beg You to be our strength and support. Protect us against the enemies of our salvation and the wiles of Satan. Amen.” In the ‘Formula’ which he drew up for the Society, Father Chevalier puts all his confidence for the future of the Church in the Sacred Heart and enumerates the favours already granted. He urges his priests to have as their supreme ideal the honouring and imitation of the Heart of the Sovereign Priest, Jesus Christ. He urges them to be, above all, true Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. “Those who bear such a glorious and consoling name will find it a stimulus to ceaseless emulation and practice of the virtues of the Divine Heart and an incentive to spread the knowledge and love of It with unflagging ardour. They will deem themselves unworthy of such a grand title unless they come to live the same life as that of the Sacred Heart.” They will vow themselves to the Sacred Heart in the spirit of perfect immolation. Father Chevalier sets down as “the second end of the Society” the personal sanctification of the members. “Availing themselves of all the means which the religious life offers, and taking as their model the Heart of Jesus on Whose powerful protection they will rely, the Missionaries will unite their efforts to progress daily in the virtues which that Sacred Heart has taught them.” He adds that the third end of the Society – directly connected with the two preceding – is to work for the salvation of souls by teaching them devotion to the Sacred Heart, thus making known to them the treasures which It contains. By means of his own personal sanctification and his apostolate the Missionary of the Sacred Heart will thus fulfil the first end of the Society, namely, to honour and glorify the Sacred Heart of Jesus with a deep veneration and love, particularly in the Sacrament of the Blessed Eucharist, and so to offer reparation to that Heart for the many insults and injuries inflicted on it.”(25) His favourite expression – “to live each moment of my life in Your love and to consume myself in Your service” – is a fitting ideal for priests whose hearts are moved to follow this impulse of the Spirit of God in His Church and whose special vocation is to serve the Sacred Heart of Jesus. This Sacred Heart is not merely an historic souvenir of the past nor a reminiscence of a period of the Kingdom of God on earth, recalling the life, passion and death of the Saviour. No, this Heart is a living reality and an effective cause of grace giving life to souls to-day. This Heart has a history indeed, but here we are not concerned with the past but with the living present. We are concerned with the living Heart of the God-madeMan Who at the present moment is giving supernatural life to men, enriching their activity, lifting them up, directing and judging them. It is a Heart which at the present moment is claiming the love and reparation of men and appealing to souls which in reality belong to His Kingdom. Gratitude should be the characteristic of our devotion – gratitude not only for what He has given us in the past but for what He is doing for us at the present moment, applying to our souls and to the Church the salutary graces which He won for us by His Passion and Death. The Heart of Jesus is the Heart of the Redeemer still wishing to save the modern world in all the circumstances of its present life. It was in this light that Father Chevalier regarded the Sacred Heart. His response was a love of reparation, a living and unifying response which expressed itself in intimate converse with the Sacred Heart, making his life and ideals one with His. In the light of this love he based his apostolate and founded his Society. This congregation was the social realisation of what was privately his one desire and ambition, namely, to live as perfectly as possible the very life of Jesus, the Sovereign Priest, and to reproduce in himself the sentiments of the divine Heart – to become an apostle after the Heart of Christ and a Missionary of that Heart for the glory of God and the salvation of souls. As Father Piperon has written in his “Notice” – “In founding his Congregation, Father Chevalier had but one ideal: to form apostles consumed with the desire of making known the ineffable treasures of love and mercy which the Sacred Heart contained and to imbue them with the spirit of zeal for winning souls for Him Who has loved them so much, and thus to spend themselves without reserve for His cause.(27) The whole attitude and conduct of Father Chevalier and his Congregation was based on the love of Christ, the Redeemer. His motto was: “All for the love of Jesus!” In the course of the spiritual experience wherein he discovered the richness of the Heart of Jesus, he gained the conviction that spreading the devotion to the Sacred Heart was to be the means of sharing these treasures with other souls. Accordingly he established what Father Veermeersch refers to as “the domain of the Sacred Heart.” His object was to offer “a special cult to the Heart of Flesh of Our Lord and to honour the Love of which that Heart is the seat, the organ and the symbol.”(20)

PART III: THE THEORY AND THE PRACTICE OF THE DEVOTION.

In comparing the popular conception of the Sacred Heart with the theological definition of the devotion, the question – one which occurs often in modern literature on the Sacred Heart – arises: “How are we to explain the seeming anomaly or disproportion between the definition and the practice, the theory and the reality?”(29) We are surprised, for example, that Bainvel in his work on the Sacred Heart does not attempt to explain the difference between the devotion as treated in the theological tracts and that in the majority of the spiritual books. It is, above all, regrettable that only too often the distinction in the question is avoided by the spiritual writers in spite of the warning of Cardinal Billot. To underline this distinction, we prefer to pose the question in the following terms: “How explain this disproportion between the definition or theory of the devotion and the practice of it in a devout life?” The disproportion is usually found amongst the authors in three ways: the substitution of the whole Person of Christ for the Heart of Flesh; uniting the human love of Christ with His Divine Love, and placing God the Father together with mankind as the object of the charity of Christ. We can perhaps add a fourth point: the transition in the soul of the devotee from practices of the cult to a state of charity.

The answers to those queries depend on the way the various authors view, more or less logically, the distinction in question. Those who consider the formulation and the life as one and the same thing argue about the meaning of the definition, whereas those for whom the formula and the life are two distinct ideas, seek to determine wherein lies the dynamic force of the formulated means. The first justifiably fear that the formula restricts the life too much and seek a more elastic definition – one more adapted to the various modifications of the devotion. But as the terms of the definition do not in themselves allow this extension of meaning they look for a common entity between the formula and the practice to justify a given course of action. Thus Bainvel says: “A devotion specifies itself by its object, but, in itself, it is a combination of ideas, sentiments and practices in keeping with its object.” However, Veermeersch protests to this by stating: “The proper object of a devotion must not be confused with the object of all the acts associated with it, either as a preparation or a result.”(30) Father de Galliffet has defined the devotion precisely as well as speaking of the vital flowering of grace in the soul of the one practising it. He has this further to say: “As in the practice of any other devotion, the devotee should follow the promptings of his own mind and inner spirit rather than scrupulously try to follow the formulas found in books.”(31) Those who logically maintain the distinction between the formula of the definition and the practice which flows from its application have no reason to fear too much rigidity or even paralysis in expressing their devotion. The activity of a soul led by the grace of the Holy Spirit need not be reduced to the terms of a formula but should be allowed reasonable scope for its vital energy. The definition of a devotion does not include all the incidental consequences and ramifications of its practice, just as the definition of a particular rock or stone does not include all the usages to which it can be put, the particular monuments it will form, the technique of the architects, sculptors, builders, etc. The main problem is in examining what are the best means of producing the legitimate effects of the devotion. It will suffice to study the proper character and motive-force of the devotion such as is found in its definition or, in other words, to study its proximate and final ends. Father Chevalier had summed up all these general aspects in a statement we have already quoted. “The devotion to the Sacred Heart has for its end the rendering of a particular worship to the Heart of Flesh of Our Lord and to the love of which this Heart is the symbol, so that, as a consequence, our own hearts, in union with the Sacred Heart, so filled with love for God and men, may be inflamed with this Divine fire and conform their lives with this perfect spirit of the love of God.” The object then is to achieve by worship of Our Lord’s Heart and love an intimate contact with the Sacred Heart and so discover the full measure of His Love. The ultimate object sought is that, by the grace of this contact with the Sacred Heart, divine charity will inflame our hearts and that we will live lives in conformity with God’s perfect love. The devotion is then in practice a special cult, as the quotations of the preceding chapter have made clear. On this point, Father Chevalier has written: “Devotion to the Sacred Heart is the full flowering of our religion; it is religion made perfect. Religion made complete by this devotion glows with an incomparable brilliance.”(32) It can be reasonably understood that the formation of Father Chevalier, for whom Christ was the perfect Religious, was inseparably associated with his devotion to the Sacred Heart and the fact that it occupied such a prominent place in his life. His devotion to the Sacred Heart as a cult dated back to his very first experiences in spirituality, and as time went on became firmly based on the official ecclesiastical documents, the revelations to St. Margaret Mary, and the copious literature written on the devotion. Cardinal Billot has remarked: “One is accustomed to hearing that what is first and foremost proper to the cult is charity, love, and the imitation of the virtues and intimate sentiments of Christ; but, as St. Thomas teaches, there are also definite acts which inform the devotion, are necessary to it and which should be nourished and sustained by it.”(33) Vermeersch likewise remarks: “We honour the Heart of Jesus in order to honour His love the better. These honours paid to His love constitute the proximate end of the devotion.”(34) He thus places the accent on love, but we note that he does not say that the love itself is the proximate end of the devotion but the “honours paid to that love.” The devotion is by its very essence a cult, an adoration. In rendering the Sacred Heart and His love a particular worship, and manifesting this worship by frequent, elevated acts, not of themselves obligatory, we are fulfilling the proximate end of the devotion and, as Father Chevalier says, we are offering the Heart of Flesh of Our Lord a particular cult. The devotion produces in those who practise it a state of fervent adoration which establishes between Our Lord and the soul a religious contact in a more generous service. The final end consists in a relationship full of love which leads to a life of dedication, a conformity in all things with the perfect spirit of the love of God. But here we begin to deal with the devotion in the life of the soul, and the first problem is the point of departure of the cult from an obligatory act of religion to a free act of love. In his later writings, Father Chevalier dealt with this question, but at first he considered it as of purely theoretical interest. He did elaborate on the subject only after he had written that devotion to the Sacred Heart was “religion envisaged on its most intimate point.”(35) Possibly owing to his own particular religious formation he had not given much weight to the difficulty. This would be in keeping with Fr. Pottier’s remark that for the followers of Father Olier “Adoration is Love, and Love is Adoration” – something he considered as a pious equivocation. The quoted extracts show clearly that Father Chevalier regarded Love as the end of the devotion, and this not merely as “an affective love of admiration,” but also as an effective love leading to imitation – a love of friendship blossoming into devotion and holy familiarity.”(36) A. Lemonnyer remarks concerning the transition of religion to charity in the economy of salvation: “It is something which is easily understandable when we consider that the virtue of religion is the highest moral or supernatural virtue by which we serve God, and that charity is the queen of the theological virtues, which leads us to the intimacy of divine friendship and holy familiarity with God. The three vows of religion present a systematic and professional exercise of the virtue of religion and provide a life par excellence that leads to the perfection of charity and its works. These vows are themselves signal acts of the virtue of religion, and, as a devotion, are the ideal means of attaining greater love.”(37) The vows should become an expression of the charity that must rule and integrate the religious life. That is why Father Chevalier regarded the religious life as a superior form of exercising devotion to the Sacred Heart. By means of the devotion he dreamt of leading as many souls as possible to a state of adoration and love. This veneration and charity would naturally find expression in diverse ways, and the imitation of the Sacred Heart in varying degrees. “The Heart of Jesus,” he wrote, “is the divine Type of all perfection. It is responsive to the homage of even the weakest of souls and prompts the aspirations of the more perfect by Its infinite Holiness. God loves the sacrifices of men because He is worthy of their homage. Grace attracts hearts to a more perfect immolation of the will, the faculties and the affections. The vows, then, of themselves constitute a more perfect cult, because they surpass the ordinary practices of devotion, as pleasing as they are to the Sacred Heart.”(38) The Missionary of the Sacred Heart offers this sacrifice and cult in a total consecration of his life to the Sacred Heart, fulfilling the end of the devotion itself. To requote the Founder’s words: “So that in union with the Sacred Heart, so full of love, our own hearts in their turn should be enkindled by this Divine Fire and act in conformity with the perfect spirit of God’s love.” The general end of religion is to lead souls to a state of love of God. In order that this love can be proposed as the special end of a given devotion, there must be in that devotion a particular and precise relationship between the object of veneration and the ideal pursued by the practice of the devotion. Cardinal Billot notes in this regard: “Although the diversity of attributes in the venerated object may not specify the particular devotion by itself, it nevertheless determines the conduct of the devotee and creates the harmony between his actions and the object of his adoration and veneration.”(39) The practice of the devotion must be in conformity with the object of the cult. Thus Father Chevalier writes: “Religion completed by this devotion shines forth with incomparable lustre. It is like a sun whose streams of ardent, pure light illumines the whole person of Our Lord.”

But here we are face to face with the problem already mentioned: “How do we place the emphasis of the devotion on the whole personality of Our Lord and His Love when, strictly speaking, the object of the devotion is the Heart of Flesh of our Saviour and the love It symbolises?” Bainvel offers the following explanation: “The affective life of Our Lord is not wholly confined to the sentiment of love. It is a love diversified according to the condition of its objects. The heart is above all the emblem of love, but the real, living Heart is not that alone. Our whole life, all our intimate and profound sentiments, flow from the heart. Our moral and affective life are intimately united. In popular language, the moral and affective life of any man is referred to as ‘matters of the heart.’ When we practise the devotion it is not only a worship of our interior life but of our whole personality. When we speak of the ‘heart’ then, it is under this general aspect, in what the grammarians call ‘synecdoche,’ the part used for the whole. Not that one always speaks of the heart as representing the whole person, but here it is valid to do so when referring to the affective and moral life, the character and the principle of conduct.”(40) For Father Chevalier, as for Father Bainvel, the Sacred Heart in its totality represented the whole person of Christ under the aspects of the affections, especially that of Love. Understood thus, the devotion is not just an extension of the cult of the Heart of Flesh, which is its proper object, but embraces the Person of Our Lord as its composite end. The worship of the Heart of Flesh may be compared to a canal by which the honours and the veneration is carried to the Person of Our Lord. Any devotion is ultimately directed to a person, and the veneration of material objects is valid only because these objects represent persons. St. Thomas has referred to the veneration of these proper objects of devotion as a ‘manuductio,’ i.e., they lead us, as it were, by the hand to the love and worship of the person, the divinity. They are a help to us in our weakness. (41). When one is free to choose a visible object for veneration, one naturally chooses that which best fits in with or symbolises the person venerated. For example, the hand would symbolise the person’s blessing or his generosity, etc., whereas the heart would symbolise his love. The visible object stands for the invisible one. In Fr. Chevalier’s own words: “The material object expresses in a sensible manner the spiritual object of the devotion. Consequently, the spirit of the devotion is that which flows naturally from its object, and the formal object is the particular aspect under which the person is honoured and venerated. The formal object of devotion to the Sacred Heart is the love or charity for men with which Our Lord’s Heart is animated or, in other words, it is Christ honoured in His Love for men.” All these quoted texts clearly indicate that for Father Chevalier every aspect of the devotion must be studied in reference to the Person of Our Lord even if they appear indirect and remote. The devotion is merely a means of arriving at a conscious veneration of Our Lord, a ‘manuductio,’ a guide to His Sacred Heart. This becomes clear whenever Fr. Chevalier speaks of the power of the devotion. The efficacy of a devotion depends in the first instance on the manner in which it moves God to distribute His graces. In his writings, although not explicitly treating the point, he suggests this as an excellent reason for practising devotion to the Sacred Heart. “Devotions,” he writes, “sanctify souls because they penetrate them, forcefully and abundantly, with their particular spirit and prompt them to practise the pious actions proper to them.” Since the proper spirit of devotion to the Sacred Heart is love, Father Chevalier tells us that the purpose of the devotion is to inflame our hearts with love which will result from contact with Our Lord and to live in conformity with the true spirit of charity. The use of the phrase – “This Heart full of love for God and for men” – obviously refers to the whole Christ and not just the “Heart of Flesh.” This intimate union between the object and the end, between the Heart and the Person, is clearly treated by Father Chevalier when he speaks separately of the various elements of the devotion. All his formation had centred around Christ Risen and Christ the Sovereign Priest, vivifying the Church and souls. Thus he taught us to look upon the Heart of Our Lord not merely as a symbol but as the Living Heart of the Living Christ, not in an abstract manner but as the Heart of the Person we honour and adore. “We must envisage it,” he wrote, “as living in the Body of which It was the principle of life. We must not separate it from the humanity of Our Lord of which It is part, nor from His Divinity to which it is hypostatically united. Although not forming part of the Divine Nature of Our Lord, It nevertheless belongs to the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, the Word Incarnate. It is truly His Heart since in Our Lord there is but the one Person, possessing at the same time both the Divinity and the Humanity. Consequently, the material Heart of Our Lord was united to the Person of the Word, a union more intimate than that of any other part of the body, as the Heart is the seat of love. It is by this love that the hypostatic union of the Divine Word with the Humanity of Christ is most intimately effected. This physical Heart as a result has become the Temple of the Divinity, Sanctuary of the Divine Love. “In quo habitat plenitude divinitatis corporaliter,” in the words of St. Paul. (42) Father Chevalier has noted that, although the representation of the Heart alone is legitimate, he regarded the best image as that representing the whole Person of Our Lord showing His Heart in His open Breast or presenting It in His hands. The heart is the living organ of the living person in both its proper and its applied roles, but just as the real heart is more than the symbol, so the love of Christ surpasses the element directly symbolised. We have seen that love, the direct object of the devotion, is limited under a twofold aspect. The formal object is the love by which this Heart is animated for men, or, in other words, ‘Our Lord in His love for men.’ “The principle which loves in the Heart of Our Lord,” writes Fr. Chevalier, “is the activity of His Humanity. This activity with the aid of incomparable graces produces His love from the time of the Incarnation itself.” In another statement: “His love should not be considered apart from the person of the Incarnate Word, for although it flows from the Sacred Humanity of Our Lord it is, none the less, the love of the Incarnate Word.” To understand better the love of the Heart of Jesus, it is necessary to study it in its source or origin. There is first the human love of Our Lord which is a consequence of His Human Nature, and secondly this human love, elevated and deified by the Hypostatic Union. The love, which He possessed in virtue of His human nature had its beginnings in a principle anterior to His birth, as it was the love of the Saviour of mankind. This principle was God Himself Who created, formed and placed it in existence in creating the humanity of Christ. The three Persons of the Blessed Trinity had concurred in this creation as all the operations “ad extra” are common to the Three. The divine and human love in Our Lord are integrated through the Incarnation. The divine love does not absorb the human love, nor is the human love lost or annihilated in the divine love. Once the Incarnation was accomplished the two loves still remained distinct. The Word preserved the Divine Love in the Divine Nature, and the human, that of His Heart, in His Humanity. In this way the Word Incarnate lives a twofold life of love – Divine and Human. But in the Incarnation the Divine love of the Word is united with the love of the human heart by the closest bonds imaginable. By its union with the Divine this love is elevated, made great and most beautiful in the highest possible degree. Any comparison we use can only give a weak idea of its real beauty and magnificence. The Heart of Jesus has become the adorable abode in which resides corporally the fulness of divinity. It is in this Heart that is found the perfect love of the Word for the only really lovable Being, God, and consequently for the love of His creatures – mankind. The love of the Heart of Jesus follows the love of God. God has loved men with a love of predilection – a truth evident from Sacred Scripture. As to the exact way in which God loves His creatures to whom He has given free will, we have to remain in ignorance. This is in the realm of the secret mysteries of the Godhead. Sacred Scripture, which is the Word of God, does not explain the process. All it says is “God is love.” “God has loved us.” As a consequence of the unity of the two loves, the Heart of Our Lord loves God principally and sovereignly for what He is in His Nature – the Triune God. He loves all the creatures of God because they are an expression of the infinite perfection of God, and He loves them in

the measure that God loves them Himself. In loving the perfection of His creatures, God is loving Himself, and His first love is for the creatures to whom He has given intelligence and free will, because they are capable of giving Him free and intelligent homage. In his Catechism Father Chevalier has written: “All the movements of the Heart of Jesus are in conformity with those of the love of God. That is also true of the love of preference with which God loves men. Nothing is more certain. All that we are going to say will bear evidence to this fact. By this love of preference He gave them the fulness of His love. – In finem dilexit.”(43) In his Catechism Father Chevalier’s main desire was to impress souls with the power of the devotion to the Sacred Heart and to entice them to practise it. “The devotion,” he often repeated, “is to render a particular cult to the Heart of Flesh of Our Lord by which He loves men so much.” This love is the human love of Christ, a love made Divine by the union of the two Natures in Our Lord. The mystery of the Incarnation was itself a result of the love of God, and so the love in the Heart of Christ was the love of the Blessed Trinity itself. By means of questions and answers in his Catechism, Father Chevalier wished to stress this union of the two loves in the person of Our Lord, whilst being careful to make clear their formal distinction. He kept intact the significance, the structure and the substance of the devotion, while pointing out always that it was a means, an instrument, a “manuductio,” to a more perfect loving of the loving Christ. He stressed the marvellous beauty of the human love of Christ exalted by the Incarnation. His human love, which leads to the divine, remains real and living in the triumphant Person of Christ. Father Chevalier was unacquainted with many of the objections made against the representation of the Sacred Heart. He considered the best was that representing the whole Person of Our Lord with His Heart revealed. He accepted the image of the Heart by Itself as representing a living and glorious Heart symbolising love. St. Margaret Mary had seen this Heart in the brilliance of its perfection, represented as seeking the love of mankind. We find Fr. Chevalier, in his sermon on the feast of St. John, referring to “the symbolic accessories of the principal symbol.” The instruments of the Passion surrounding the Heart were reminders that His sufferings for mankind were all because of love. The flames signify the intensity of this love; the crown of thorns reminds us that His sufferings had been caused by the sins of men; the wound; His love pouring itself out on the souls of men; the enveloping light, the symbol of His grace and truth.(44) For the Founder the end of the devotion was that, from contact with the loving Heart of Christ, our own hearts would be fired by love and so live in conformity with the perfect love of God. He wrote: “The Divine Love of the Incarnate Word is not the ‘immediate’ object of the devotion but what we might call the ‘mediate’ (an expression, no doubt, that Fr. Chevalier borrowed from some of the theological books of the time).” The immediate object is the human Heart of Our Lord. The human love honoured in the devotion, having its origin and source in God and united to Him by the closest and most intimate links, naturally tends to the cult of God Himself, and so while honouring the Human Heart of Our Lord we are honouring God Himself. This is not merely an extension of the devotion but a necessary part of it. By virtue of the hypostatic union, the divine Love is really the Source of the Human love and directs it in its activity, so the Heart is legitimately the symbol of both the divine and the human love. In maintaining the devotion in its proper and precise sense, limited yet retaining its dynamic power, Fr. Chevalier presented it as “the remedy for the ills of the age.” In face of those modern social evils which he believed were leading the world of his time to perdition; in face of the denial of God and His authority over earthly things; in face of the spirit of egotism, indifferentism and immorality, he presented the Heart of Jesus – God with us – as the symbol of the love which had sacrificed all for us and which was awaiting our love in return.

CHAPTER XX SPIRITUAL TRENDS: OUR LADY OP THE SACRED HEART

Part 1: Preliminary Influences Leading to the Inspiration of the Title Devotion to the Sacred Heart was already an established fact, recognised and approved, when Father Chevalier became acquainted with it.

The discovery of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, however, was a personal spiritual experience. At the Seminary, during his growth in spirituality, Father Chevalier was well aware of the religious value of devotion to the Sacred Heart, and he built the structure of his spirituality around this devotion, studying carefully the various elements which composed it. “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart,” on the contrary, was a title which sprang into being suddenly from his spiritual life when it was already well formed along its essential lines, Although this name conjured up many beautiful meanings, it was for Fr. Chevalier, first and foremost, a summary of all he gratefully understood concerning the Blessed Virgin. He insisted that, under this title, in the one expression and central idea, could be found all the beauties which the Faith taught him about Mary. It became a devotion, under the influence of that Faith, which brought to souls all the truths concerning Our Lady, grouped and unified under one heading – and this for their own sanctification. In his first brochure on the subject he remarked that it was a “name which love and faith gave to Mary.” The origin, then, of the devotion could hardly be associated with the words of Scripture: “In the beginning God created Heaven and earth,” although after studying the title carefully even this might be permitted. Father Chevalier wrote to Bishop Boyer in July, 1895: “The devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, I must say, is not the result of a special revelation or supernatural intervention; it is a logical deduction from the fact of the divine Maternity.”(l) It found its origin in the ever-growing devotion to the Mother of God which was developing more richly in the life of the Church under the influence of the Holy Spirit. A brief study of this evolution and the events which led up to it will help to explain the full flowering of the title. In the chapters in which we dealt with the childhood and youth of Father Chevalier, we have told the story of his first associations with the Mother of God and his early love of and devotion to her. There was the incident before the miraculous statue in the church at Richelieu when his mother had consecrated him to Mary; and we recall how the tableau of Our Lady of Victories, with its rosary and scapular, had captured his young imagination; how, during his vacation from St. Gaultier, he had joined the Confraternity of the Sacred Heart of Mary in the village church. Later he was to establish this Confraternity at Aubigny where, as a young priest, he preached on the beauty and power of the Mother of God, and we remember the second novena he made for the success of his new foundation of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart which was concluded with due ceremony on Our Lady’s feast day. At Bourges with his fellow-seminarians he formed the Guard of Honour around the altar of the Mother of God with the purpose of honouring “the Immaculate Virgin and asking her intercession for the graces of which the Church has such need.” During his seminary training he became intimately acquainted with the Marian devotion of Father Olier, the devotion to the interior lives of Jesus and Mary. This led him to the ardent devotion he had for the Sacred Heart of Mary as was proved by the novena of the 8th December, 1854, the Pact of 1855, and the practices he incorporated in the foundation of his Society. We have seen also that the first statue of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart was modelled on the miraculous medal used by St. Catherine Laboure. All of which clearly indicates that his life from his earliest days came under the powerful influence of devotion to the Mother of God. Father A. Nicholas, writing in his book – ”The Virgin Mary living in the Church” (Paris 1800) – stated that “after the Revolution, when the Winter of impiety began to give way to a new breath of life, the cult of the Virgin Mary gained new vigour from the awakening.” This manifested itself in the more frequent recitation of the Rosary and the Litanies, the wearing of the scapular, the pilgrimages to the shrines of Our Lady and the devotion shown during the month of May.(3)

While the various religious Institutes were putting themselves under the aegis of Mary and incorporating devotion to her as part of their religious life, the lay people were forming themselves into pious congregations and confraternities. The two principal devotions were those to the Sacred Heart of Mary and the Immaculate Conception.(4) The liturgy of the Church followed the trend. In 1804 the Church in France adopted the Feast of the Immaculate Conception. On 31st August, 1805, the Sacred Congregation of Rites gave permission for a Mass in honour of the Sacred Heart of Mary. On 16th September, 1814, Pope Pius VII instituted the feast of Mary, Help of Christians, in thanksgiving for his return to Rome, and the following year he crowned the miraculous statue of Savone and granted the first indulgences for the Month of Mary.(5) On the 27th November, 1850, St. Catherine Laboure was favoured with the apparition of the miraculous medal whose influence was to play such a big part in Marian devotion until the nineteenth century; and on the 16th December, 1834, the Abbe Charles Desgenettes established the Confraternity of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in the parish of Our Lady of Victories in Paris.(6 & 7) We must note here a remarkable fact worthy of our attention. Very soon the devotions to the Immaculate Conception and the Sacred Heart of Mary began to influence one another mutually. The “Sacred Heart of Mary” began to be referred to as the ‘Sacred and Immaculate Heart of Mary,” and the devotees of the Sacred Heart of Mary were drawn to the Immaculate Conception and vice versa. In 1837 an anonymous writer recorded: “All the congregations which existed in the Church up to this time in honour of the Immaculate Conception had now adopted the name of the Sacred Heart of Mary, and their pious union had as its special object the honouring of the Immaculate Heart of Mary conceived without stain of original sin.”(8) The main propagandist for the devotion to the miraculous medal, Le Guillon, included in his brochure, “Mary Conceived without Sin,” several meditations on the Sacred Heart of Mary, and these were destined to be read by the Associates of the various Confraternities, those of the Sacred Heart, the Holy Scapular, Our Lady of Sorrows, the Rosary and the Holy Hour.(9) The Abbe Desgenettes approved of the combination of the two devotions. In giving his Confraternity the name of the “Sacred Heart of Mary,” he added the word, “Immaculate,” and chose as the insignia of the association the miraculous medal, representing the Immaculate Conception. He had a picture of the “Sacred Heart of Mary” printed, and several of the members pressed him to have a medal made along the same lines. He consented but kept the “miraculous medal of the Immaculate Conception” as the badge of the Confraternity.(10) The spiritual writers of the time began to explain the combination of the devotions, to justify it, and to spread it amongst the faithful.(11) The combination seemed to be a result of the circumstances of the apparition in which Our Lady gave the miraculous medal to St. Catherine Laboure. The circumstances of this manifestation were in three phases. In the second apparition Our Lady appeared standing with her arms extended and the hands inclined under the weight of the treasures of graces she was holding. The apparition was in the form of an oval-shaped picture under which was the inscription, “O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.” St. Catherine was told to have a medal made representing this picture, and Our Lady promised many graces to those who would wear it. In the third manifestation she was shown what was to be on the reverse side of the medal: the monogram of the Blessed Virgin, composed of the letter M surmounted by a cross, having a bar at the base and the two Hearts of Jesus and Mary above. “Being disturbed,” wrote the Saint, “as to what was to be on the reverse side of the medal, one day during meditation I seemed to hear a voice telling me, “M and the two Hearts say enough.'” We see here the two devotions are united, but the accent is on the Immaculate Conception and so on the powerful mediation of Mary. The first phase, made known to the public only after 1876, and represented by a statue four years later under the title of “Virgo Potens” clearly expresses this idea and spirit. Mary is holding a globe of the world in her hands and on each of her fingers there are three rings. Some of the precious stones in the rings are throwing out rays of light, while others are not, and Our Lady explains the significance. The rays of light are symbols of the graces she gives to those who ask for them, while the stones not glittering are the graces she can give but is not asked for. It was a characteristic of Marian devotion of the last century to put the accent on the protection and power of the Mother of God. This was undoubtedly due to the special needs of the time and the spiritual atmosphere of the post Revolution revival. The devotion to the Sacred Heart of Mary emphasised her maternal love and that to the Immaculate Conception her great power which crushed the head of the serpent. The idea of Our Lady’s power, of course, is not strange to the devotion to her Sacred Heart. The works of St. John Eudes and Father de Galliffet, which were being widely read at the time, made much of this attribute of Mary.(12) Both authors, however, make this power only one of the many factors which unite the two Sacred Hearts. The Provincial Synods of 1850 had underlined the special power of Mary Immaculate, while they emphasised her maternal protection in the devotion to her Sacred Heart.(13) The propaganda of the Miraculous Medal and the Confraternity founded by Father Desgenettes followed the same idea. (14) This explains why Issoudun took the image on the Miraculous Medal as the model for the representation of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.(15) But anyone who has carefully read the early literature on devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart will readily understand that, while admitting Our Lady’s power because of her Immaculate Conception, it put the accent on her power over the Sacred Heart of her Son because of the great love He bore her. In doing this there is immediately established that relationship between the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary which is the proper object of the devotion and in which it finds its excellence. Thus the foundation of devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart is the Divine Maternity, which in its full reality sums up on Mary’s part all the relationship between Mother and Son. But these relations between Mother and Son consequent on the Divine Maternity were not a new discovery made by devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. They constituted the fundamental point in the writing of St. John Eudes on the Blessed Virgin. Lebrun wrote, “What Father Eudes recommended above all was to honour Mary less for what she is in herself and for her perfections than for her relationship with Jesus to Whom she gave bodily life, and in Whose Heart she has continued to live spiritually.”(16) Father de Galliffet shares the same opinion: “There exists between Jesus and Mary an inseparable union and an immense love – a union in eternity, in time, in all their states and relationships. There is a resemblance in their perfections, in their virtues, in their privileges, in their richness, their power and their glory. We are able to honour them together.”(17) This was the theological opinion popular in the last century, ratified by the Provincial Synods and the spiritual writers who had systematically studied this relationship.(18) Speaking of the Founder and his first companion, Father Piperon wrote: “Both were trained for the priestly life by the disciples of Father Olier, and both had preserved a profound respect and affection for the traditions of the seminary.”(19) We have already spoken of this in previous chapters, but the influence of Father Olier was most noticeable in their devotion to Our Lady. In Father Faillon’s book, “The Interior Life of the Blessed Virgin,” in which he compiled in 1866 the works of Father Olier, we find much the same ideas as in the notes made by Father Chevalier when preparing his book on Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. There are long lists of quotations from the Fathers already quoted by Father Faillon and identical quotations from Father Olier. The influence of the saintly Sulpician is also very obvious in Father Chevalier’s sermons.(20) To make sure of their spiritual solidarity Father Olier had firmly imbued his disciples in the devotion to the “interior lives of Jesus and Mary,” or more simply, “Jesus living in Mary.” This latter title clearly expresses the relationship between Son and Mother, while making the union with Jesus the central point of the devotion. This was to be the same later on in the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. In speaking of Mary as “Spouse,” Father Olier draws some profound and visionary conclusions. As spouse of the Father, she is the Mother of Jesus according to the flesh and of the Church according to the Spirit. Conjointly with her the Father calls in Jesus Christ those who

wish to become members of His Son, and as Spouse of the Father, Mary is the Mother of the predestined. As Spouse, Mary shares in the Eternal Father’s right to dispose of the merits of Christ, and she becomes not only the Mother of Jesus living in the Flesh, but of Jesus in the glory of His resurrection. As Christ recognises this relationship of Mary with His Eternal Father, He communicates the Holy Spirit to us through her.(21) When the new Adam on the Cross accepted the Church as His Spouse in the person of Mary, He gave her as the seal and precious badge of love – the sword of sorrow. “But after His resurrection He made her share in His royalty. Thus Mary became ‘that dear and ever-loving Princess’ who as Mother of Christ and Spouse of the Father became the dispensatrix of all the treasures of grace to creatures.”(22) And Father Olier concludes by saying that nothing is more admirable than this union between Jesus and Mary wherein the Son accords His Mother joyfully and lovingly everything He is able to give her. “Nothing was more admirable than the union of the Heart of Mary in Jesus – a union which became to her a nourishment, a life, a perfect joy. She was filled with the same sentiments, dispositions, desires and prayers.”(23) We are not surprised to find reference to this relationship in other texts. For example, “Mary is the replica of the interior :life of Jesus.” “Mary is the lively expression of His love and praises.” “She has being, life and movement only through Him. She breathes, sees, speaks and acts interiorly and exteriorly only in Him.” “She is the perfect adorer of Jesus, His Throne of Grace, a Tabernacle where He wishes to be adored, a Voice through which He wishes to be heard, a place of delights, a treasure, a Seat of Justice, a place of repose where He wishes to rest.” “She is our advocate, our asylum, our refuge, the co-redemptrix, the mediatrix with her Son, our Judge.”(24). “What a communion is that between Jesus and Mary! How we ought to honour this relationship between Son and Mother – its love, its colloquys! I beg you to meditate often on this interior life of Mary whom God has given us as the custodian of the sacred gift of her Son to the Church. She is the loving and faithful dispensatrix of grace for the salvation of men, and in her we will find all that is to our advantage here on earth,” Father Olier had an image of Our Lady in a glass case in his presbytery under which was written the text: “With her, by her and in her,” Father Chevalier used the same text on the cover of his first brochure on Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. St. John Eudes summarised the relations between Jesus and Mary in his devotion to the Sacred Heart of Mary. For Father Olier the basis of his devotion was the interior lives of Jesus and Mary. For Father Chevalier it was the power of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Each of these three devotions, whilst being similar in many respects, had their own particular object and seal, and their own particular attraction. As the spirit of a devotion is characterised by its object, these three devotions led souls to Mary and a more holy state of life by three distinct ways. With Father Olier, more so than with St. John Eudes, the accent is placed on the power of Mary. Let us see in what way he exposes and justifies these relations. Several texts will help us to see how closely Father Chevalier followed his ideas. “The love of Jesus Christ,” wrote Father Olier, “was the true principle of power which Mary possessed, and so Jesus took pleasure in procuring good and honour for her and seeing her enjoy the power He communicated to her.” “If she had the great power to procure anything she wished, it was not from the title of justice but from the great love that the Father and Son bore her. Their love was not able to refuse her anything. She proposed to Our Lord the things she wanted with such a tender and powerful love that it would also seem He was subjected to her.” “The power of this Divine Mother,” writes Father Olier, “as it pleases God to show it to me, is such in Heaven that her Son submits Himself to her in her quality as Mother – a power He cannot now take from her.” It is in this spirit that we read the following texts: “Mary possesses by right all the graces which Our Lord has given His Church.” And again, “Behold the reason why Our Lord, before expiring, so that the rights of His Mother over Him would not finish with His death, gave Himself to her in the person of St. John in a twofold manner. Surviving, as it were, in His well-beloved disciple. He would continue His obedience to His Mother.” “Since love is the basis of all, Mary remains always our Mediatrix of love and impetration.” Because of this fact her power grows rather than diminishes and the marvels and miracles in the Church are a sign that this Heavenly Mother has the power of her Son in her hands – a power that she uses according to goodness and mercy.”(26) Father Olier bases this unity and community of power between Mary and God on her state as Spouse. In a sermon which he wrote in the seminary, Father Chevalier used Father Olier’s idea that Mary’s power with the Father was because she was His Spouse, but her power with Jesus was because of her divine maternity. We will consider the difference between these two titles to power a little later on, but first we wish to draw attention to another point: When Father Olier speaks of the power of Mary over the Hearts of the Father and the Son he wishes to say that this influence flows only from the love the two Divine Persons bear her. Because they love her so much they wish her to share their power. But this expression does not speak of the source of this power nor does it tell us in what lies its exact content. For Father Chevalier, on the contrary, the power of Mary over the Heart of her Son flows from His love for her, and its content is in the Sacred Heart. The power which Father Chevalier venerates is the power of love, a power over the treasures of the Sacred Heart which Jesus has merited by His love. The understanding of the devotion to the Sacred Heart includes this comprehension of the devotion to Mary. In a sermon on Pentecost written at Bourges, Father Chevalier refers to Father Olier, “one of Mary’s faithful servants,” as attributing to Mary the power of distributing to priests the graces and gifts of the Holy Spirit. At the end of the sermon he asks Mary for the grace “to love unreservedly your Son and to make Him loved, for the grace also to love you yourself and to spread the glory of your name.” His sermon on the text, “Mundus gaudebit,” also finishes with a prayer: “Mary, help me. Without you I can do nothing. You are the stem of Jesse on which flourishes the flower of salvation. If I wish to gather this flower I must draw this stem towards me.” “Tuus sum ego, salvum me fac.” Again, on the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul he concluded his sermon: “Obtain this love for me from your Son, the love that made St. Peter exclaim: ‘Lord, Thou knowest that I love You!’ For to love Jesus is to possess all. It is to possess you, O my Mother, O my Queen of Heaven!” He affirms that, as Our Lord is the Divine Shepherd, so Mary is the Divine Shepherdess. “On my love for Mary,” he writes, “depends my sanctification and that of the souls entrusted to me. Decrevit nihil dare nisi per Mariam. Ab omnipotenti Filio omnipotens Mater facta est.” He continues with a thought from St. Gregory which he was to use later on in his brochure on Our Lady of the Sacred Heart: “Tanto altior, tanto clementior.” The most important sermon of this period was entitled: “The Mercy of the most Holy Virgin towards Sinners,” for which he took as text, “Ecce Mater Tua.” Father Chevalier often preached this sermon in later years, with a few minor alterations, and he inserted passages of it into other sermons. The classic quotations of St. Bernard and St. Gregory, which he applied to his teachings on devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, were first used in this sermon. After stating that the Church calls Mary the “Mother of Mercy,” he tells the story – as Father Olier had done – of the woman of Thecua whom Joab sent to David to seek pardon from Absalom. Likewise Mary obtains pardon for us.(28) “What have we to fear?” asks St. Bernard. “To doubt the goodness and power of Mary would be to injure her. Mary not only is able to help us, but she wants to help us.” In the first point of the sermon he remarks: “Who will be able to doubt her power when he considers the glory she brings to Our Lord and when he considers her titles of Spouse and Mother?” He emphasises the honour which Mary procures for God by reason of her immaculate purity and her divine maternity. Mary is the one creature in whom the image of God has remained intact. She is the “masterpiece” of the allpowerful God, given to us in all her magnificence. The significance of her maternity follows from the fact that the God-Man was able to offer His Father an honour and reparation worthy of Him. “Judge, then,” he writes, “the greatness of the merits of Mary with the King Who makes recompense for all good.” “That Mary is the Spouse of God is sufficiently established from the words of the Annunciation, and, being so, what right does not this glorious title give her?” He repeats in conclusion the words of Father Olier: “She has conquered the Heart of the Son of God.”

But for Father Chevalier it was the Maternity of Mary which spoke most eloquently of her power. It was a subject about which he always became ardent and enthusiastic in his sermons and instructions. “With this divine prerogative,” he wrote, “what right is there that she cannot expect? Jesus is in Heaven, it is true, but there He is none the less the Son of Mary and she is none the less His Mother; and her prayers, being those of a Mother, are almost in the nature of a command. We have only to recall Cana to see how Jesus always respected the wishes of His Mother. Did it not seem here that He anticipated the time for the working of His miracles? Jesus made it a duty not to refuse His Mother anything. If you enjoyed such power at Cana, what then is your power in Heaven over the Heart of your Son, O Mary?” “It is without limit,” says St. Bernard, “not by nature but by grace. Ab omnipotenti Filio, omnipotens Mater facta est.” God has ordained that all graces be distributed by Mary. Why is this? Because Mary is as that ladder of Jacob by which Jesus comes down to earth and by which we can ascend to Him in Heaven. Jesus is the fruit of the womb of Mary, and it is only right that we go to the tree to gather that fruit. Finally, Mary is the “janua coeli,” the gate of Heaven and, if we wish to enter, it must be through her. “O Mary, how powerful you are! It is imperative that you help us. ‘ Dona dabit semper per Mariam, si quidem ne facultas ei deest !'” The second point of the sermon stresses the fact that Mary’s greatest wish is to help us. “Her bounty towards sinners who invoke her,” says St. Gregory, “is all the greater because of her power with God. Maria, quanto altior, tanto clementior erga converses peccatores.” With Father Olier the young seminarist recalls the example of Mardochy who called upon Esther for help, and he reminds Mary that her Son died for us, and is longing for us. “Since you are able then to be a Mother to us, you can help us.” We have become her children at the foot of the Cross. Christ gave us in the person of St. John to the Mother of Sorrows and said to her: “I am their Redeemer and also their Judge, and as this latter title may possibly diminish their confidence, I appoint you as their powerful Protectress. I give them to you to-day as your children. You will be to them a Mother and, above all, a Mother of Mercy. You know the power you have over My Heart. Do not fear then to intercede for them.” By the words, “Behold your son,” the Blessed Virgin received the heart of a Mother. Later on, Father Piperon, in explaining these thoughts of Father Olier and Father Founder, wrote: “Those ineffable words, indeed almost sacramental words – ‘Woman, behold thy Son,’ – produced in the heart of Mary in a sublime way the sentiments of Mother in our regard.”(29) Father Chevalier goes on to say that we are unfortunate children, and that a mother has always special favours for her needy ones. “We are the price of the Precious Blood. Mary is placed with the alternative of not recognising this Precious Blood, or, as the Mother of Mercy, using It in our regard. She must employ, then, all her power to make us live in the grace of God.”(30) The sermon concludes with an exhortation to greater confidence. Throughout the sermon, Father Chevalier several times mentions Mary as the “Spouse of the Father,” but he does not use this title as the Source of her power. For him this power was a power over the Sacred Heart of her Son and with Father Olier he looked on this Heart as the symbol of Love, but not as yet the source of all the graces merited by Love. The expression, “heart of a mother,” used more than once in the sermon signifies the source of her power. St. John is not representing Christ as the Son of Mary but as representing us. Regarding Father Olier’s reference to the Risen Christ as the Judge of sinners, Father Faillon asks how are we to reconcile the two functions of Our Lord – that of Judge and that of Advocate. This latter role, he says, is left to Mary who is the mediatrix with her Son. Father Chevalier approaches the question from a different angle. For Him Our Lord is the Judge, but not a severe judge, which is in keeping with His Sacred Heart. This modifies the role of Mary. She is the mediatrix with a loving and merciful Judge on Whom she exercises her maternal love. “I am their Redeemer and their Judge, and as this latter title might diminish their confidence, I appoint you as their powerful protectress.” We possess several of the Founder’s sermons and instructions on Our Lady prior to the publication of the title of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, but unfortunately most of them are without dates. We find him treating of the devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, which was the popular devotion of this period. We may note here the main points worthy of our attention: The Heart of Mary is the masterpiece of God’s work. It is a Heart living and glorious in Heaven, full of love for sinners on earth. It is glorious because God formed it for the model of the Heart of His Divine Son, It is a Sanctuary, a living Ark, etc. The Heart of Mary is an abundant source of grace, from which we are able to draw the living waters of grace. It is an admirable Heart because of the graces it has received; because of its virtues, its love and the ineffable glory it enjoys in Heaven. The Heart of Mary loves us because she is the creature who most resembles God and because her Heart is the one most like the Heart of her Son. She loves us tenderly because she is our Mother. The ineffable glory of the Heart of Mary evokes our supreme admiration and confidence. What sublimity of greatness, power and glory we find in her! Her Heart is the Heart of a Mother, a Mediatrix and a Protectress. She is a refuge for the unfortunate and for sinners, a consolation for the dying and for the souls in Purgatory. Again and again in these sermons, as in his Seminary sermon on the Divine Maternity, we find the trilogy: “Love, Power, Glory.” Her love is always the basis of her power and our confidence in her while being the crown of her glory. These ideas continued to influence him after the inspiration of the title of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, as is shown in the sermon he preached on the feast of the Holy Name of Mary, 1857, two years after the inspiration of the title. He commenced the sermon by recalling the circumstances of the inspiration as the title was as yet known only to a small group of his intimate friends: “Oh, Name of Mary, you are all the more dear to my heart as your feast brings back a sweet memory to me. It is exactly two years to-day since this modest sanctuary was blessed under your auspices and that we solemnly received the beautiful name of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, while the whole Church was celebrating your grandeur. I will proclaim then to my well-beloved brethren that yours is a name of glory, power and love. It is indeed a name of glory – ‘Ab initio et ante saecula creata sum.’” He goes on to speak of the place of Mary in the divine plan of redemption. “She is the one privileged by the Holy Trinity. The whole Church goes down on its knees before this glorious name. In the sweet name of Mary is found the summary of all her titles – ‘Deus ex genere meo.’ As Mother of the Incarnate Word, the Virgin is endowed with august prerogatives in keeping with her high dignity. Where could be found a name which would embrace them all? ‘Mary,’ which in Hebrew means ‘Sovereign,! was the answer, and that precisely is what the Virgin is. She is Sovereign in Heaven where the saints place their crowns at her feet; Sovereign on earth where men stand in veneration before her throne; Sovereign even in Hell in so far as her foot still crushes the head of the serpent. According to St. Bernard, the name ‘Mary’ also signified ‘Light,’ a fitting name indeed, since she carried in her womb the bright Sun of all Intelligence. Providence has given her to the world as a shining Light to guide us on our way. It is a name of glory because it shines in brilliance over the vault of Heaven, a name associated with that of Jesus in all His triumphs and conquests.” “The name of Mary,” – so begins the second point – “is not only a name of glory, but one of power because God Himself obeyed it. ‘Et erat subditus illis.’ By virtue of this name we are able to obtain all we, need. When you have some special grace or favour to ask, mention the name of Mary. It is a name of power because it is able to command demons. It is the terror of Hell and Satan is not able to hear it without groaning with rage as souls escape him. Be not astonished at this, for the person who bears this name was created to crush the head of the enemy of mankind. ‘Ipsa conteret caput tuum.’ It is a name of power in all our temptations and can lead us to victory. It is also a name of love, as it is the name of a mother full of tenderness and mercy, watching over and protecting us with great solicitude. Mary is our hope, our guiding star, our consolation. And Father Chevalier concludes: “Never forget to put the name of Mary side by side with the adorable name of Jesus. Never separate them.” By the Immaculate Conception Mary becomes the perfect image of the Divinity. God has for her a tenderness of predilection. He has made her the depository of His power. ‘Omnia mea tua est.'”

We are able to follow Father Chevalier’s main trend of thought concerning devotion to Our Blessed Lady during the first ten years of his priesthood. They were based on the same sentiments and ideas that he had expressed in his sermons during his seminary days. His main devotions were to the Sacred Heart of Mary and the Immaculate Conception. We find the influence of these ideas in the novena in preparation for the 8th December, 1854, as he himself clearly expressed in a text dated 1865: “As there is an intimate and necessary relationship between the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Conception, and since the pure and holy Heart of the Immaculate Virgin is the mediatrix with the Heart of God, it was through a novena to her, at the time of the definition of the dogma in 1854, that the grace of the institution of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart was sought and granted.”(31) These were the preliminary ideas and events which led up to the inauguration of the title of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. As the Founder himself expressed it: “It is to the 8th December, 1854, the memorable day of the proclamation of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, that we must return to find the origin of the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, such as it exists to-day.”(32) The Pact of 1855 and its circumstances again express the Founder’s fundamental thoughts concerning Our Lady, namely her glory, her love and her power. He was looking for a title which would be a combination of all these attributes of his heavenly Mother. This title he found on the 9th September, 1855, whilst he was praying before the image of Our Lady, which seemed to be prompting him to use the words of St. Alphonsus: “O Mary, you can obtain anything you wish from the Heart of your Divine Son.” He was anxious to find a title which would incorporate Mary intimately in his apostolate for the Sacred Heart. On the 24th August, 1884, in a letter to the Archbishop of Bourges he recalled this search: “Knowing that all is achieved through Mary, we had the idea of associating her name in the work of spreading the knowledge of the Heart of her Son. There was wanting a new title, which would embrace her co-operation in the work of regeneration. It was then that the name came to us – ‘Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.'” (33)

PART II; THE MEANING OF THE DEVOTION. MARY’S POWER THE RESULT OF THE DIVINE MATERNITY.

We have studied in other chapters the history of the devotion and the origin of the title, and have quoted the relevant texts. Devotion to the Sacred Heart itself has been the subject of the intense study of theologians who have carefully probed its meaning, its problems, etc. so it is not to be wondered at that devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart has likewise occupied the attention of the spiritual authors, who have studied its meaning and validity. Father Chevalier’s mind on the subject is quite clear from his books and brochures. In his writings on Our Lady of the Sacred Heart he adopted the same plan he followed when treating of the Sacred Heart. Less concerned with defining the devotion or the title in his books he turned his attention to the exposition of the desired ascetical end, i.e., a life conformed to the spirit of the devotion and the glorification of all the worthwhile elements contained in the two ideas of the Sacred Heart and Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. The brochures, on the other hand, contain a precise definition for they are concerned directly with the devotion. The following remark of Father Veermeersch can be applied to the more important of the writings: “The object of a devotion must not be confused with the object of all the acts pertaining to the devotion.” We have seen that there is a difference between the uniform social structure of a devotion and the various types of life which it is able to inform and influence. If certain authors from the beginning of the century have ignored this distinction, it is not to the welfare of the devotion. Far from resolving the difficulty which they consider as a contradiction, they have attempted to modify the traditional definition of the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. However, it is significant that before 1920 no spiritual writer of consequence had admitted that the distinction involved a contradiction. Until then there had been unanimity, a unanimity that followed Father Chevalier’s interpretation of the devotion and which he would let no one change.(34) Another point worth remarking is that in their strange interpretation of the various pertinent texts these modern authors all reach different conclusions, which is certainly not in favour of their theories.(35) They assert that many of the original aspects have been changed by a later influence. Much of the confusion goes back to the establishment of the Confraternity of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, of which we spoke in CHAPTER XV. certain texts have remained intact, while others were changed in the process of founding the confraternity. fortunately we possess an authentic document composed in the days when no one as yet was thinking of forming a Confraternity. It is the Founder’s brochure on Our Lady of the Sacred Heart which appeared in November, 1862. The occasion of its publication was a request from Fr. Ramiere, who wished to print some of Father Piperon’s notes in his “Messenger of the Sacred Heart.” This brochure is the oldest authentic explanation of the title and was printed only after long meditations and discussions between the first Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. It is a source in which we find the original ideas of the Founder. Fr. Piperon calls it: “A short but substantial work on the object of the devotion, 1865.”(36) The brochure consists of an Introduction and two parts. The Introduction gives an exposition of the four ends of the devotion (of which we have treated in Chapter XV). The invocation of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, it says, is a definite cult, and “the child of Mary who invokes the sweet name proposes: (1) to thank God and to glorify Him because He has chosen Mary to form from her pure body the Heart of Christ. (2) to honour the sentiments of love, obedience and filial respect of the Heart of Christ. (3) to recognise and glorify by a special title the power which Christ has given Mary over His Divine Heart. (4) to beg this holy Virgin to lead us to the Heart of her Son, to open to us its treasures and to enable us to partake of them abundantly.” The first part of the brochure deals with the power of Mary – the power that she had with Him on earth and now enjoys in Heaven. After noting that the word “lady” means “Mistress,” the author goes on to elaborate on this power of the Mother of God. Basing his conclusions on the Gospels, Father Chevalier points out that while He was on earth Our Lord always submitted Himself to the will of His Mother, and so in this sense she is mistress of His Heart. The second part treats of our own times and our relationship with Mary living in Heaven. Has Mary still this authority over the Heart of her Son? Is it likely that the Mother of the Saviour would now lose the most precious jewel in her crown? Father Chevalier here quotes five texts from the writings of the Fathers to prove his point. (We note here that it may be difficult to ascertain exactly the source of these texts. This is the only place in his writings where he used the quotation from St. Ignatius of Antioch.) (1) “Mary must always be listened to as God Himself showed her a deference without limit as to His true and spotless Mother.” (St. Germain of Constantinople). (2) “What the justice of God may find difficult to save, Mary saves by her intercession.” (St. Ignatius of Antioch). (3) “All the treasures of grace are in the hands of Mary.” (St. Peter Damien). (4) “Everyone, even God Himself, obeys the command of Mary.” (St. Bernard). (5) “The prayers of the Mother of God are in the nature of a demand.” (St. Anthony). Only two of the texts are accompanied by a commentary: Regarding the text attributed to St. Ignatius, he adds: “We are able to be saved only by the merits of Jesus Christ. If Mary then is able to save poor unfortunate sinners from the decisions of divine justice, is it not by grace of the power she holds over the Heart of her Son?” And on the text of St. Peter Damien he comments: “The treasures of grace being enclosed in the Heart of Jesus – Which St. Paul refers to as the Throne of grace (Heb. 1V 16) – Mary can only take possession of them in so far as she is the mistress of that Heart – the Lady of the Sacred Heart.”

The first part concludes with a resume of the texts, and the final statement that “Mary is always the sovereign, the mistress of the Heart of Jesus, the source of Mercy and the throne of grace.” We note here that from now on Father Chevalier uses the expression “Our Lady of the Sacred Heart,” whereas until now it had been “The Lady of the Sacred Heart.” The sudden transition to the possessive adjective is so natural and logical that he does not even explain it. The second part deals with our attitude in regard to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. “This name ought to be always on our lips and engraved in our hearts as it gives glory to our Mother and is a compendium of all her other titles. When we invoke this name we say, ‘O Mother, be mindful of your power; remember the mercy of the Heart of Jesus, your Son.’ And it is as if we hear Christ saying, ‘Ask, O Mother, for these children all the graces you desire. You know you have supreme power over My Heart.'” “We are able to call Mary,” wrote Father Chevalier, “The Star of the Sea, The Mother of Mercy, The Queen of the Angels, The Queen of the Saints, etc., but above all these titles is that of Mother of God and consequently the one all-powerful over the Heart of her Son. And so we will make known to the whole world that as sovereign and mistress of the Heart of her Son, she draws from that Source all the graces she gives mankind and consequently can be called ‘Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.'” As the brochure was to be published in the “Messenger,” Fr. Chevalier concludes by appealing to all the devotees of the Sacred Heart: “Do you wish to receive a favourable welcome from the Sacred Heart? Do you wish to drink from the living waters of grace – to feel the warmth from this burning furnace of love? Then, do not forget that it was Mary who gave Him to us; that God Himself wished to draw life from the most pure heart of the Virgin, His Mother; that she is still the mysterious channel by which grace comes to us. It is through her, in union with and in her that we must go to the Heart of Jesus. Assured, then, of pleasing Jesus, call His Mother ‘Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.’ This is indeed the way of thanking God for choosing Mary as His Mother.” These, then, are the sentiments of Fr. Chevalier expressed in the most ancient document we have from his pen – thoughts expressed long before other influences, such as the Confraternity, made themselves felt. It is clear from the text that in the Founder’s mind the power of Mary over the Heart of Jesus was fundamental. Indeed we can say it was the only thought that he wished to impress on the minds of his readers. The power of Mary existed on earth and still exists in Heaven – a power based on her divine Maternity. It is the power of a Mother over the Heart of her Son. Father Chevalier demonstrated this twofold power – her terrestrial and heavenly power – from Scripture and tradition. The main text from the gospel – “He was subject to them” – clearly shows her power over her Son while He was on earth, but it is only an introduction to indicate Our Lord’s perpetual regard for His Mother. We have already quoted the extracts from the writings of the Fathers of the Church which the Founder used to prove Mary’s power in Heaven. These indicated the extent of that power, its characteristics, its object, its foundation and the certitude of the result. He summarises these points in the following commentary: “She whose prayer is in the nature of a command, she whom God Himself obeyed, she who possesses in her hands the treasures of grace and whom God always hears because of His limitless deference for her, is none other than the Sovereign, the Mistress of the Sacred Heart, the source of Mercy and the throne of grace – in other words, ‘Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.”‘ There we have the whole meaning of the title. And since such is the total content, the brochure concludes: “Call, then, His Mother, ‘Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.’ By this title you are thanking God Who chose her for His Mothers you will bless Jesus Who has crowned her: as Queen and Sovereign of His Heart; you will recall to our Mother her power, and the source of her goodness to men, and you will give her the purest, most complete and most legitimate praise.” Thus the fourfold end of the devotion is attained when the child of Mary invokes Our Lady under this title, employing these ends in their explicit sense, and not adding other elements which can be deduced from them. We repeat what Fr. Veermeersch has said; “The proper object of a devotion must not be confounded with the object of all the acts pertaining to it,” “even if,” as Bainvel points out, “these acts are directly associated with the object of the devotion.” Fr. Chevalier himself will explain later how these acts and their objects are able to be associated with the proper object of the devotion. In the brochure Fr. Chevalier draws another conclusion, one which followed the theme of many of his sermons: “This power gives glory to Mary and is advantageous for us.” Her power is the first and most glorious jewel in her crown, and as “our” mother she extends it to us both as “the” Lady of the Sacred Heart and “Our” Lady of the Sacred Heart. That which is glorious in the first case is her power over the Heart of Jesus, and in the second case, the fact that she exercises this power in our regard. By invoking her thus we recognise this power that she has over the Sacred Heart. And so we have the transition from “The” Lady of the Sacred Heart to “Our” Lady of the Sacred Heart. The word, “Lady,” is considered in the brochure in a twofold sense, i.e., in relation to the Sacred Heart and in relation to us. In the first sense in which we consider her as the Sovereign and Mistress of the Heart of Jesus, her power is twofold: that which she possessed on earth and that which she now possesses in Heaven. She is always heeded by God who grants her every command. Here she is the Lady. In the second sense her power is considered only in relation to us and only in her present life in Heaven. The principal intention of the Founder is to invite us to venerate Mary under this new title. This is why he emphasises the power which she puts at our disposal. We notice, for example, that he does not bother to comment on the three texts from the Fathers which speak of the power of Mary in general. But he does so with the other two texts which deal with her power with sinners and the treasures of grace with which she favours us. He underlines in both cases the relationship of Mary with the sacred Heart, which is the foundation of the devotion. When we honour Mary under this title Jesus seems to say: “O My Mother, ask graces for these children,” and we in our turn, “O Mother, be mindful of your power; remember the mercies of the Heart of Jesus, your Son.” The entire conclusion speaks only of this power in reference to us, as right from the beginning he kept drawing attention to the fruits of this veneration. “Beg this Holy Virgin to lead us herself to the Sacred Heart of her Son; beg her to open to us the treasures of love and mercy which this Heart contains and to make us drink more abundantly from the fount of all grace.” However, the power of Mary is not restricted merely to our needs. She remains always “the” Lady of the Sacred Heart. It is precisely because of this that she has that power in our regard. It is because she is “the” Lady of the Sacred Heart that she becomes “Our” Lady of the Sacred Heart. If we wish to bring out more clearly this double relationship of which Fr. Chevalier speaks so much, we might render the invocation: “Our Lady, being the Lady, of the Sacred Heart, pray for us.” Incidentally, this twofold relationship implied in the title became the occasion of translation difficulties in 1875. The Polish language has not an expression equivalent to “Our Lady.” For the Poles the Blessed Virgin is always “Matko Bosko” Mother-of- God – which excludes the double meaning which Father Chevalier intended by “Lady.” At best the title would signify for them “The lady.” This is why the translating the title they first resorted to “Queen of the Sacred Heart.” When that title seemed too strong or expressive of further ideas, they translated it as “Mother of the Heart of Jesus,” conforming to the idea of “Matko Bosko.” The Holy Office decreed eventually that the title remain expressed in the French, where it approved of the invocation “Our Lady” as combining the twofold meaning, and approved also of the honouring of Mary by the faithful as “their Lady.”(37) The power of Mary over the Heart of Jesus is the only object we venerate in the devotion side by side with the Person of Our Lady herself. It is the one object with which the brochure treats, and we know that it was Father Chevalier’s mind to have but the one explicit and

separate object to be honoured in any particular devotion. Father Piperon confirms this. He wrote: “A devotion, while having the one object, can accomplish a multiple end.” Father Deidier has written: “It is of the nature of devotions not to be general. The Church does not approve of such devotions. This power is the one object of the devotion, the material object.”(38) “By “this title,” Fr. Chevalier clearly states, “we recognise and glorify the power which Jesus has given Mary over His Heart.” And Father Piperon: “The object of a devotion is that to which the homage is specially directed. The object, then, of devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart is Mary the Mother of God, honoured particularly because of the sovereign power she possesses over the Heart of Jesus. This brings us to the twofold question: (1) “Is this power of Mary venerated in the Church?” and (2) “Is it a valid object of a devotion?” He goes on then to prove that it is. Fr. Deidier, commenting on those texts of Fr. Piperon., sees in this power the same role that the Heart plays in the devotion to the Sacred Heart of Mary. In this devotion Mary is studied in her own Heart, whereas the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart has for its object the power of Mary, the maternal influence of Mary over the adorable Heart of her Son. This is why he says the whole question rests on the principles on which this power is founded. “We wish to proclaim nothing else than the rights of the divine Maternity.” The whole question is “Does Mary exercise a power, a sovereignty over the Sacred Heart?”(39) There are no other texts that would suggest that there is anything except this power that constitutes the object of the devotion. This Object comprises only one element, not two, as we find in devotion to the Sacred Heart where the Heart and Love resolve themselves in their symbolic union into the one object. This is why the power itself represents the mystery of Mary which is honoured, and the aspect under which her person is considered. This power over the Heart of her Son gives glory to Mary and it flows from the love which Jesus has for His Mother. We thus find epitomised under the one title the three ideas which Father Chevalier used to bring out in his sermons. Along with this single object, according to Father Piperon, there exists a multiple end. First of all, the proper end – namely, to recognise and glorify the power which Jesus has given Mary over His divine Heart, or, in other words, the veneration of the power of the Mother of God. Since this is a power over the Heart of Jesus, Father Chevalier calls it “the co-operation of Mary in the work of the Sacred Heart.” By this means one reached the final apostolic end to which the devotion as a whole was tending. To repeat what he said at the end of the brochure: “To beg this holy Virgin to lead us to the Sacred Heart, to open Its treasures to us, and to enable us to draw freely from this Fount of grace. It is through her, in union with her and in her that we must go to the Heart of Jesus.” And Father Piperon: “The most assured way of reaching the Heart of Jesus is by devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.”(40) Since the life of the soul of the devotee must be in conformity with that of the Person venerated, Father Chevalier added a fifth end, namely, “to repair with her and through her the outrages inflicted on the Sacred Heart and to console Him in His sufferings and bitter disappointments, by living a pious and edifying life.” We can easily appreciate that this is only one of the aspects of our imitation of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. We have already said that the Association is merely a means we use, in Father Piperon’s expression, “on the road which leads to the Sacred Heart.” We journey this road “with her and by her,” with the help of her maternal power. In Chapter XV we spoke of what might be called the sixth end, namely, “to confide to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart all the difficult and seemingly hopeless causes, an end which flows from the proper object of the devotion and leads to its final end.” We will consider other possibilities when Fr. Chevalier speaks of the foundation of the devotion. All homage rendered the Saints, says St. Thomas, ascends to God, and both Frs. Chevalier and Deidier have expressly stated that any devotion has the glory of God as its ultimate end. Fr. Deidier explains that a cult brings great glory to God because God is the Source of all supernatural good which is found in creatures. Justifying this theocentric idea, Father Chevalier expressly applies it to devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. The power of Mary, the object of the devotion, has its origin in God Who chose Mary as the Mother of the Incarnate Word, and in the loving communication to her by Christ of all His treasures. Since the devotion leads to God and ultimately must end in Him, the final objects of the devotion will naturally be to thank God for the choice of Mary and to honour the sentiments which Jesus nourished in His Heart for His “Blessed Mother. The authors of the last century were all in accord concerning the essential elements of the devotion, its object and its ends. Father Piperon, in particular, expresses them clearly in the two documents publicising the devotion in 1857. The fact that in the second text he does not include the strict definition is of little account, as the object is contained in the section on the third end of the devotion. We must remember that at the time when this text appeared there was no discord of interpretation, and those concerned were of the same mind. We can understand why the various authors were in agreement in spite of the variety of traits amongst them. All accepted the same definition of the devotion which put a Marian seal of a similar nature on their spirituality. All admitted the same significance of the title, namely, that “Mary, because of her divine Maternity, possesses a great power over the Heart of her Son and that it is through her that we must go to this Divine Heart.” They all had a great honour for the Immaculate Conception which shone forth from the glory and power which Jesus had given her through love and the fruits of which she communicates to us through love. If we are permitted to apply the text in which Fr. Chevalier gives an outline of the nature and end of devotion to the Sacred Heart, we could say here: “The devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart has for its end the rendering of a particular cult to the power of Mary over the Heart of her Son, in order that by contact with this divine Mother, so animated with love for Jesus and us, our own hearts, full of confidence in her maternal bounty, will in their turn burn with this powerful love of Jesus and conform themselves in all things with this perfect spirit of the love of Mary for the Sacred Heart of Jesus.” The proximate end, then, of the devotion is the veneration of the power which Mary exercises for our benefit over the Heart of Christ in her role as Mediatrix and Distributor of the grace of Christ, so that we enter into contact with the person of Mary under the aspect of her powerful Maternity and, confident in this power, we direct our love with hers towards the Heart of Jesus. Through her, with her and in her we strive to live in this spirit of love. Thus, while the devotion and its special object remain intact, the text opens up vast perspectives on the richness contained in the term, the person and the object. As in the devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, we see in this richness, the possibilities which open up to souls in their individual trends, and the special blessings God will grant this devotion, From the beginning of the devotion the relationship between the veneration of Our Lady and that of the Sacred Heart attracted the attention and love of the faithful who found in it a source of blessing in their spiritual life. Its object is the power of the Mother of God over the Heart of Jesus, of the Heart of the Redeemer, the Source of all grace, with Whom Mary is our mediatrix, distributing its treasures to mankind. As the devotee of the Sacred Heart finds his seeking of the all loving Christ the determining factor of his life, the grace he receives from Mary is likewise directed to this end. Thus the practices and aspects of his devotion to the Sacred Heart take on what we may call a ‘Marian atmosphere,’ the expression of a devout soul who has entered into contact with Mary in her role as Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Just as by revering the human love of the Sacred Heart and living more intimately with Him we elevate ourselves to the plenitude of His personal love, so by devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart we benefit from the full extent of her power – the power which Fr. Chevalier names as that of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. In other words, we benefit from the perpetual and inherent power which Mary has over the Sacred Heart and the Heart of God. In this consists the great glory of the divine Mother, the Daughter and the Spouse, the Queen of Heaven and Earth, whose power over the Heart of her Son we are daily able to experience in a sensible form. The perspectives and possibilities which open up before us by this means are well nigh inexhaustible.

In his writings, Fr. Chevalier indicates various ways of realising and developing this extension of the devotion, while respecting its specific object. He wrote, for example, “Mary is Our Lady of the Sacred Heart for two reasons: firstly, because she is the Mother of God, and, secondly, because she is the Mother of men.” And elsewhere, “The title of the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart has its origin in the divine Maternity, its development in its illustrious prerogatives, its ‘raison d’etre’ in our affiliation at the foot of the Cross, and its justification in the name of Mary, which is in itself the complete resume of all the glories of the august Virgin.”(41) Who does not remember his outstanding sermon on the Feast of the Holy Name of Mary in 1857? His books on Our Lady of the Sacred Heart treat of this development of the devotion, just as those on the Sacred Heart deal with the fullness of life to be obtained in the Sacred Heart. He develops the idea of the power of Mary being derived from her divine Maternity in his catechism: “We must conclude,” he writes, “that the Blessed Virgin Mary is truly the Mother of God, since the word ‘Mother’ is applied to a person who brings a son into the world, and the Son she bore was no other than God Himself. However, this physical relationship does not constitute in itself the whole nature of the divine Maternity. In fact, we might say it is the least of the relations between the Incarnate Word and the Blessed Virgin. It constitutes the incomparable privilege of the divine Maternity, but there are other relationships greater and more elevated. However, it does form the foundation of all the others. What, then, are these other relationships? We can distinguish them into the moral and the supernatural. By the moral relationship existing between the Blessed Virgin Mary and her divine Son we mean precisely that which follows in their capacity as Mother and Son. As Mother, Mary acquires certain rights over her Son and contracts various duties towards Him. Likewise, Our Lord, as Son, acquires the right to all those things which a mother should give her child, such as God has ordained, and contracts certain duties and obligations towards her. In this fact consists the moral relationship of which we speak, a relationship which exists between every mother and child. It exists in a real sense between Our Lord :and the Blessed Virgin, since He is truly Man and received His life from Mary. We must remember, of course, that, being God, Our Lord was not obliged strictly and rigorously to obey His Mother who, although perfect, was still a creature. The fact that He did obey Her – “He was subject to them” – resulted from His great love for His Mother and for men. However, by thus establishing this voluntary relationship with His Mother, He conferred on her a right – not an essential one, it is true, but a real right – resulting from a free and voluntary concession. Besides these rights and obligations there is another relationship between mother and child which really defies cold philosophical definition. It is a mysterious bond which unites in a very intimate way the mother to the child and the child to the mother – a bond which brings them so close together that we might say the mother is in the child and the child in the mother. When the mother and child make use of their rights and fulfil their duties in a perfect manner, and in keeping with the intimate bond of heart between the two, there results a moral union between mother and child which surpasses any unity we may conceive in the order of nature and becomes a union of ineffable beauty. By virtue of this union, whatever pertains to the one, i.e., to the mother or child, in the way of dignity, honour, merit or glory, pertains to the other, is communicated to the other and becomes the proper and personal property of each. Now, what is meant by the supernatural relationship? According to St. Thomas, the closer a thing approaches its principle, the more it shares in its glory. By her divine Maternity, the Blessed Virgin is united to the Divine Word, Who has taken His body from her. She is united to Him most intimately, since by virtue of the ineffable bond by which she is united with the Divine Word, she gives life to the Body of the very Son of God. Thus, she makes the Son of God her own Son and is drawn to Him in the closest manner possible. She participates in His glory, His greatness and His prerogatives in a degree which surpasses anything we can conceive. She is constituted in a supernatural order apart from all else, which is called the order of the Divine Maternity.(42) Her Maternity is not merely the fact of a woman becoming a mother. It is a “state” over and above the physical fact implying many other relationships. These relations taken together form the moral and supernatural aspects of this state. When this relationship exists in the highest degree, as it does here between Mary and Jesus, it forms a moral union so intimate and beautiful that we are not able to conceive anything more beautiful in the natural order. Founded on the intimate bond between the heart of the mother and that of the child, it forms a communion of all the great attributes of both their beings. As Fr. Deidier states: “This corporal union never exists without a certain spiritual union.” If this is the aspect of the maternity on which depends the transfer of power from the Son to the Mother, the Divine Maternity strengthens this transmission, thanks to the supernatural relationship. On this point, two ideas dominate the reflections of Father Chevalier. Firstly, he argues that if in the natural order the mother is the principle from which the child takes its being, then in the supernatural order of this Maternity, Mary is the principle of her own Principle, since her Son is God, Who has taken His Body from her. Already he had stated that Our Lord had voluntarily accepted and taken on Himself the natural consequences of His human birth, because of His great love for His Mother and for men. In this case, the child, as it were, does not exist because of the will of the Mother, but she becomes His Mother because of the choice and will of the Son. It follows that in this maternity the accent is put more on the relationship of the Mother to the Son, Who is her Principle, than on that of the child to the Mother. This is what makes Mary glorious: the participation of the Mother in the richness of her Son. Likewise, the acceptance of the Son of all the natural consequences of this maternity is an abundant proof of Our Lord’s love for men. The second idea follows from the first. The Power of this Mother is ineffable and insurpassable because her Son is God, living in glory, majesty and supreme power and because He permits His Mother to participate in these privileges in so far as a human being can do so. In Mary’s Maternity, the Son dominates all, and the Mother is intimately united with Him not only as her Son but as her God.” And so this Maternity contains all the principles on which rest the ineffable power of the Mother of God over the Heart of her Son. The divine Maternity is, consequently, a complex idea which includes a whole group of relations between Mary and Christ, and these in turn lead to a number of effects which make the relationship still more intimate and give us new reasons to believe in this great power of the Mother of God over the Heart of her Son. This power has been demonstrated by many historical facts, examples of the “illustrious prerogatives” of the divine Maternity, which form the basis of our devotion. Under the impulse of the Holy Spirit the soul is moved to honour the power of Mary because of one or other of these reasons. Fr. Chevalier respected this action of grace and left it to the individual devotee to choose the aspect or effect of the divine Maternity which impressed him the most and, inspired him to honour this power of Mary over the Heart of her Son. But it is clear that the fundamental reason for all is the love which united the two persons. In his brochure, Fr. Chevalier expressed the thought which he was to repeat often, namely, that by devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart we are sure of pleasing Mary because it brings to her mind the object dearest to her heart, the Heart of her Son. For Father Piperon, the love of Mary and Jesus for each other is the basis of her power. “The love of a Mother,” he wrote, “what power it has over the heart of a son! Is not love the measure of power of one heart over another?” It is noticeable that the group of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart from the Marseilles region stressed this aspect of the devotion, namely, the union of hearts, in the early days of the Society. Fr. Deidier speaks of “the maternal union of Mary with the body of Jesus and consequently with His Heart.” “The union of the heart of our Mother,” he wrote, “with the Heart of her Son is the basis of the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.” He goes on to explain this spiritual union more fully, concluding: “That which makes Mary so powerful over the Heart of Jesus is assuredly her love for His Heart, her union with Him and the harmony of their sentiments.” The Issoudun ‘Annals’ noted that the altar in Our Lady’s chapel is designed to show “both the tenderness of Mary with her children and the power she has with the Heart of her God – to bring out in particular the relationship between the Immaculate Heart of this august Queen and the

Divine Heart of her Son.” Father Jouet had this relationship of the two hearts continually in mind when he wrote his “Meditations for the Month of May.” In the preface, after explaining the devotion and its foundation, he wrote: “The thirty-two considerations are compiled to make us understand better the grandeurs of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, her limitless power over the Heart of her Son and her great desire of bestowing on us the treasures of love and mercy of which she is the Dispensatrix. God made a Mother worthy of Himself, as He wished her to be. What thought is there that can make us best comprehend the ineffable grandeur of the Queen of the Heart of Jesus?” “If this admirable Virgin had not had the prerogative of becoming the Mother of Jesus, her glory would not have been insurpassable, but, thanks to God, the Incarnate Word was not content merely to have a mother who would give Him His flesh and blood, but He chose one after His own Heart and Soul.” “He did not choose a mother whose work would be done after she gave the God-Child to the world, one who would disappear as the flower before the fruit. He chose a Mother who would be as inviolably united to Him as the root is to the stem, a Mother from whom He would never be separated, with whom He would always be united in love, who would reproduce Him in the souls of men and be an object of glory to the elect in Heaven.” “He chose a Mother who would sit on His right hand; who would reign over His Heart; into whose hands He would place the infinite treasures of His Passion and Death; in whom He would be glorified throughout the centuries. She possesses a sovereign power over the Heart of God. A God is her Son, a God Who is the sublime architect of every work she undertakes; a God Who is the Eternal Protector of anyone who wishes to honour her as a Mother and to serve her for ever.” In practically all the meditations, Fr. Jouet refers to the Heart of Mary in relation to the Heart of Jesus as the source of all Her graces, both for herself and for us. He continues: “Love has bound the two Hearts together in the closest of bonds. The virginal Heart of Mary re-echoes all the sentiments of the Sacred Heart of her Son, shares all His thoughts and sacrifices. Both Hearts, as it were, are the same Heart. No wonder that Christians have hailed this new name of the Mother of God with enthusiasm – Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Having shared His chalice of bitterness with Him, Jesus has given her special rights to share His love, and Mary, as in all the circumstances of the life of her Son, has merited this name – Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Jesus wanted, above all, the Heart of Mary, and she in return has inherited the Heart of Jesus.” “This Heart of Mary has co-operated fully in the work of the salvation of souls. She influences the Heart of her Son with her own maternal Heart in her quest for souls. Daily her all-powerful prayers ascend to the Heart of her Son, gaining abundant graces for the Church. The graces from the Holy Spirit and from the Heart of Jesus were united in the holy reservoir of the Heart of Mary, graces which were dispersed in the hearts of the Apostles. What will be the sentiments of our own hearts when we, by God’s grace, will enter God’s Kingdom? To whom will we unite ourselves if not to the Heart of our Mother, our hope of salvation, who will be waiting for us and whose final favour will be to present us to the Throne of Mercy, to the Sacred Heart of Jesus?” “In Heaven, Mary finds realised a dream of her maternal Heart. She finds the Heart of Jesus multiplied in every heart. One is assured then of going to the Heart of Jesus through the Heart of Mary, and it is a sweet consolation for poor human beings to know, they can invoke her as their tender Mother her who can say to Our Divine Mediator as the Heavenly Father can say, ‘You are my Son.’ That is why we repeat often with faith, hope and love: ‘Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, pray for us.'”(43) This insistence on the fact that the intimate union between the Hearts of the Mother and Son is the source of Mary’s power, no doubt results from the fact that the first faithful followers of devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart were already ardent devotees of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. But the Divine Maternity contains in itself another reason more profound. All the relations of this Maternity find in the union of love their most sublime and most devout expression, and this is the reason why Mary has such power over the Heart of her Son. Thus, all that is comprised in devotion to the Heart of Mary becomes the basis and justification for the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. Because of the close relationship of the two devotions, the Association of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart used to invoke also the Sacred Heart of Mary, and in 1867 under the one request an indulgence was sought for the two invocations. In another document we have found the wording of a request seeking the granting of an indulgence for the recitation of the Litany of the Immaculate Heart and permission to say the Mass of the Immaculate Heart every Tuesday. In all this Father Chevalier was fulfilling his promise of 1855 to honour the Immaculate Heart of Mary by establishing the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, since the devotion was to show the power of Mary resulting from the mutual love of the Hearts of Jesus and Mary. As an epigraph to his brochure, Father Chevalier wrote that this new title, after that of “Mother of God,” is the most beautiful that love and faith can give to Mary. From the belief in this power the cult of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart leads us naturally to the love of Our Lady, and through this love of the Mother of God we are led to the love of her Son. “Love,” says Fr. Chevalier, “is the ultimate word in our relationship with God, the summary of our entire religion.” The power which we revere in Mary is founded on love. It is a power produced by the love of Jesus for His Mother and for us, and its whole object is to lead us to the loving Heart of Christ. We come then to what Fr. Chevalier refers to as the “raison d’etre” of the devotion, a relationship with the Mother of God solemnly ratified at the foot of the Cross when we were made her children. The first authors of the devotion gave a very important place to this scene at Calvary. Father Chevalier had already treated it at length in his important sermon written in his seminary days, and Father Piperon had often repeated the ideas, particularly in his “Pouvoir de Notre Dame du Sacre Coeur.” To quote Father Piperon again, “Not only does a mother love without limit, but she is always anxious to help her children. If she is powerless to do so, she finds the frustration of this maternal instinct more cruel than death itself. Our Lord knew this, and so when He gave Mary the rights and love of a mother, He gave her at the same time a sovereign power over His Heart – that Heart which He would allow to be pierced with a lance as a source of life for men. And would not the great compassion of Mary be a source of power over the Heart of her Son? Would; not the compassion of a tender and devoted Heart give her some authority over the Heart whose sufferings she has shared? It was during the Passion, particularly during the hours of the agony, that the Heart of the Son and that of the Mother were tenderly united and were suffering the same anguish. It was at this time that Mary really acquired the supreme sovereignty over the Heart of Jesus.” Father Deidier uses the same argument: “That which gave the Blessed Virgin such power over the Heart of her Son was her union with It during the numerous sufferings of the Passion.” And Father Jouet: “By partaking of the chalice of bitterness, just as she had done in all the other circumstances of His life, Mary justly earned the title ‘Our Lady of the Sacred Heart’ because in return she received as heritage the Heart of Jesus.” This union between the two Hearts in every circumstance of life and the resulting heritage of the Heart of the Son by the Mother is but a consequence of the divine Maternity. Father Piperon has written: “Further to what we had to say about the power of Mary, it follows that she is the Mother of Divine Grace. She gives us her Son by her powerful and efficacious co-operation. Her love as Mother of God gives her a limitless power over the Heart of her Son, and as the Mother of men, she is the powerful Mother of Mercy, which enables her to fulfil her sacred ministry. As Mother of Sorrows, her compassion for the sufferings of the august Victim of the sins of men has merited for her a supreme dominion over the Heart of Jesus. That is the teaching of the devotion we bring you.”(44) It is evident that any devout soul can concentrate on some other aspect of the devotion, for example, on the reparation of Mary, and find there a moving and telling expression of the divine Maternity. But that remains a personal and individual spiritual outlook regarding the Blessed

Virgin or a transitory experience of his or her spiritual life, which is associated with the object of the devotion. It will lead the devotee to a more intimate and fervent veneration of the proper and specific object of the devotion – the power of the Mother over the Heart of her Son. We repeat Fr. Piperon’s words concerning the Founder’s attitude to the devotion: “It was the object of all his preoccupations; one might say it was ‘the passion’ of his life. Was it not a mission which the Queen of Heaven had entrusted to him for the glory of the Heart of Jesus and the good of souls? The Reverend Father was convinced of it. Far from keeping this mission to himself, his great desire was to see his confreres filled with zeal in their efforts to propagate the devotion to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. He repeatedly taught us that this was one of the principal ends of the Society and the most assured way of glorifying and making known and loved the Sacred Heart of Jesus.” Let us add that, by spreading this devotion, he found an apostolic way, together with the help of the still small band of Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, of establishing a world-wide movement in honour of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart and the Heart of her Son. The history of the devotion clearly proves this. A devotion which originated from the hearing of prayer on 8th December, 1854 – the foundation day of the Congregation – and which was nourished by numerous graces and favours, was to be a source of life for the work commenced by the grace of the Mother of God and under her auspices. As Fr. Chevalier wrote in his Constitutions: “In order that our Society may grow and preserve the fervour of its spirit, all the members must pray assiduously to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and to Mary who is invested with such great power over the Heart of her Son.”(45) We are now able to form an idea of the spiritual experience of Father Chevalier from whom the title and devotion of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart originated. The doctrine of Father Olier had made him conscious of the profound significance of the divine Maternity with its consequences in the mutual relationship of love with her Divine Son – consequences which were emphasised in both the devotions of the Sacred Heart of Mary and the Interior Lives of Jesus and Mary. He was also deeply aware of the consequences of this mutual love as it affected us, that is, of the role of Mary as Mediatrix and Distributor of Divine Grace. For Father Chevalier, as for the early Fathers of the Society, the power of the Blessed Virgin, which is the foundation of all her functions, is primarily expressed in her Immaculate Conception. Just as for him the devotion to the Sacred Heart was an intimate matter of the heart, of the love of Christ, so the power of Mary resided in the fact that she could dispose of the treasures of this Sacred Heart, a power she had received in virtue of her divine Maternity. These treasures she communicates to us through love, because she is our Mother and feels for us with a mother’s heart. On the historic 8th December, 1854, Father Chevalier turned to the Maternal Heart and solicited the foundation of the Society in virtue of her power over the Sacred Heart, a power expressed especially in her Immaculate Conception. The graces she has gained for the Society is sufficient proof of the ineffable power which this Immaculate Mother possesses over the Heart of her Son, a power of distributing the treasures which It contains.