Difference between revisions of "Poup0401"

Revision as of 13:43, 22 January 2024

23 March 1858 - Victor Poupinel to Julien Favre.

Translated by ChatGPT. Uploaded by Mayte Ramos.

According to the dispatch, written by Poupinel, APM 1500/21 394, 8 pages. In the same file, the draft of the letter.

At sea, on March 23, 1858, aboard the English schooner 'Jeanie Doue.' Continuation of the report from March 23, 1858, second part.

To the very Reverend Father General of the Society of Mary.

My very Reverend Father,

[1]

In the first part of this report, I delved into ancient history; the second part will be about contemporary history. This is more delicate and more challenging to handle; unfortunately, it will hardly be more comforting and encouraging. I strongly hope that my judgment on Bishop Viard may seem to you, and indeed be, too severe, but I will express it conscientiously.

[2]

Positive information gave me too much to understand how difficult the matter I had to deal with in New Zealand would be and that it would probably have few results. I prayed a lot to guard against a thought of discouragement, and I arrived in Wellington full of confidence in the grace of the mission that you have deigned to entrust me with, in the protection of Mary and Saint Joseph, and in the efficacy of so many fervent prayers made within the Society and outside it for the success of our work. It was necessary to speak the truth frankly to Bishop Viard; I did so. To do this, I had to overcome myself, and God gave me this strength. I made known to the prelate the dedication that your paternity has for missions, with what frankness, what sincerity you want, my very Reverend Father, to keep the regulations published for our missions; that you expect the same frankness, the same dedication from the mission superiors. The past is forgotten, I said; however, it is good to go back a bit among us on our trials to explain the conduct of the Society. Almost all the facts contained in the first part of this report have been recalled to the prelate, and if he wanted to, he understood why the Society of Mary abandoned Bishop Pompallier. The latter had not failed to insinuate his principles, his prejudices against congregations in general, and against our Society in particular, to Bishop Viard. So, while maintaining polite forms, I declared frankly to Bishop of Orthosie that, without the intervention of a concordat, the Society would never have consented to give him missionaries. You said, my Lord, that you would know how to force them to come; you were mistaken. The Propaganda is too wise, it respects the rights of everyone too much to go that far; it will never force a congregation to send its religious to a diocese, to be taken away from it, and to change its superior. One does not force a congregation to work for its own death. Now, my Lord, although you were raised to the episcopate without the consent of the Society of Mary, you were constituted veluti primarium superiorem regularem of all our confreres, and ultimately they were to obey you alone. It is true that you were to regere et moderari your Marist missionaries juxta instituti regulas. But our Society had no approved rules at the time; your authority was therefore unrestricted. There were still the vows, but in the state they became more of a hindrance than an advantage, as Father Comte told you. In such a situation, the Society of Mary was no longer suitable for missions; under such conditions, not a single Marist would have wanted to dedicate himself to it.

[3]

I would have liked Bishop of Orthosie to also share his observations on the past with me; a word of explanation could have dispelled certain seeds of distrust; I could not obtain anything. The prelate has said repeatedly that he committed himself in his letters to the cardinal prefect and to you, my very Reverend Father, to maintain absolute silence on the past, and even that, in order not to create any obstacle to an agreement with the Society, he did not want to express his ideas on the draft regulation. The intention was good, but it was not the means to reach a serious arrangement. The regulation exists; Bishop Viard has written to you, and he told me that he accepts it and wants to observe it. Will he, with the help of this regulation, effectively promote the good of this mission? We will see. The prelate is the superior of a province of the Society of Mary; I must therefore speak to you about him or his style of administration. In my opinion, if he were an ordinary superior, you would not leave him in charge for long, I do not mean of a province, but of an important house. It is not so much the will that is lacking in him as certain qualities necessary for a superior. Here are some facts.

[4]

Bishop Viard is all amazed at the commendatory letters he receives from the Propaganda; the good prelate is unaware of the delicate kindness and exquisite politeness of congregations in their epistolary communications with bishops. Moreover, it is easy to be praised; one just needs to mention the good that has been done, and naturally, Bishop of Orthosie only speaks of that in his letters; he shared them with me. Far be it from me to blame what is good, but it is not the same for the good that could and should have been done and has been omitted, and even for the good that has been done poorly.

[5]

Visits. In a recent letter to the cardinal prefect, the bishop speaks of the visits he made last year to Nelson and Wanganui; he would suggest that he even anticipated the desires of his priests by a few weeks. Allow me to say that this is pure jest. If the bishop wants to talk about blessing a church that was not yet finished, I accept it. But the serious reproach that the priests make to the prelate is all too valid; he has not visited his diocese. He has been in Wellington since May 1, 1850; since then, he has confirmed Lahutt three times, which is only 9 miles from Wellington, and it has always required supplications to get him there. Father Comte, in a way, had to coerce him four years ago to take him to Otaki, 53 miles from Wellington. Father Reignier stayed alone in Ahuriri for more than six years, and the bishop did not visit him once. I spent only five weeks in New Zealand; I believe I know the mission better than Bishop Viard, at least I have visited it more thoroughly. The Protestant bishop is constantly on visits to reclaim, stimulate zeal, instruct, and win over populations; for seven years, he has walked three times across New Zealand, not to mention his other visits by sea. One of ours said that in God's court, this heretical bishop would condemn the Catholic bishop; one is truly vigilant, the other is only concerned with Wellington. Well-intentioned Catholics have complained about the bishop's negligence.

[6]

Episcopal visits could nevertheless be very beneficial to missionaries and the faithful; the prelate acknowledged this in his two visits last year. But I say it with sadness, Bishop Orthosie will not know how to make true visits. When affairs called missionaries to Wellington, or when they returned from visiting scattered Catholics, the prelate never inquired about the state of their station, their difficulties and trials, the successes they might have achieved. This would be a means of learning about the needs of the diocese, examining together the means to advance the work of God; he did not know how to use it. The bishop's letters to his priests could still do them a lot of good, directing, encouraging, enlightening them in their doubts. Often, however, Bishop Viard does not respond to letters or does not answer the questions asked; other times, he simply tells them to do as they can or as they want, or he gives them a little spiritual exhortation, sometimes copied from a piety book. In summary, Bishop Viard directs nothing and lets everyone do as they please at home. This conduct is deplorable, it seems to me, especially in a mission where everything is yet to be created. It is fortunate that Bishop had only priests of uncommon virtue; otherwise, they would have followed the example of Father Comte and left. Father Reignier needed extraordinary energy to remain the only priest in complete isolation without receiving encouragement, direction, or consolation from his bishop.

[7]

Advice. It is enough to know Bishop Viard to be convinced that he does not seek advice from his collaborators, and I even believe that he is not capable of presiding over a council. I had intimate conferences with the prelate for six days; they lasted for more than five hours each day. Drawing inspiration as best as I could from your thoughts, I presented our views to him; we studied the regulations together, and I spoke to him about various points concerning the spirit of the Society. Bishop Viard found everything good, or at least he pretended to think so. I could only get his observations on four points, which would make you laugh if I had the time to tell you about them in detail. It was agreed between the prelate and me that most of these questions would be re-examined in the council during the retreat, which we were to conduct with some of our confreres. This council took place; I will send you a summary of our decisions, and you will see that we dealt with quite practical issues. I truly felt sorry for Bishop Viard; he barely said a word, and only when I addressed him directly. Often in the past, he declared that if he did not hold councils, it was out of prudence to maintain peace, and because councils always led to disputes. For the same reason, he refused to gather the priests who are with him to examine practical theological questions. He repeated to satiety these two great rules of his administration: peace! prudence!

[8]

True advice. There has been none, it is evident; I even believe that in the future there will be none either, if Monseigneur is to be the soul of it. The prelate has sometimes sought advice outside his priests; he has a regular advisor, Mr. Yvert. One could, it seems to me, make good use of this gentleman, who has varied knowledge and unquestionable qualities. Mr. Yvert is a layman, formerly distant from God, and who, since his conversion, has adopted a severe and morose type of devotion. He has narrow ideas, which are the usual share of devout laymen regarding the conduct of souls; moreover, his character is firm and very willful. This is Monseigneur Viard's advisor, the one who has been listened to; this is the one who dominates Monseigneur without any bad intention, I am convinced; but good intentions do not always prevent bad results.

[9]

Convent. Let's talk about the famous convent. Monseigneur brought five or seven young people from Auckland, to whom Mr. Yvert had given lessons to make them teachers; Monseigneur Viard wanted to make them nuns. It is good to note that Father Forest had given the first communion to all these young girls, he was their confessor; at their departure, they were recommended to him by their parents. Even before reaching Wellington, an absolute prohibition was issued to Father Forest and the other fathers from speaking to these young people. The entrance to their house was severely closed to them; Mr. Yvert was their master and their temporal father. This little convent, that's Monseigneur's house; only he says Mass there, only he is the ordinary and extraordinary confessor. If he went there so often, if he stayed there so long, he told me, it was because they were novices and needed guidance and training for religious life and instruction; and I have no difficulty believing it. Monseigneur has been, with regard to his convent, ridiculously jealous and somewhat scandalous. It was only last year and yielding to a sort of moral violence exerted by Father Petitjean that he designated Father Séon as extraordinary confessor, and even then, is Father really? He doubts it like me. Monseigneur's conduct regarding the convent has astonished several Catholics, who have asked several times why the bishop alone goes to the convent and why he goes there so often. The convent, there, my father, is one of the reasons that keep the prelate in Wellington and prevent visits. I expressed my thoughts frankly to Monseigneur about the convent, and he replied: peace! prudence! - Prudence, I replied, is that this house is not a closed house; and if I were in your place, Monseigneur, tomorrow it would no longer exist, if I had to be the only one to set foot in it.

[10]

Certainly, nuns would do a great deal of good in this mission, and I even believe that the young people in question have done good and are doing good. However, they would have done much more if they had been used properly. They do not enjoy the trust of wealthy parents for education; they are found to be poorly educated, awkward, and unable to say anything in conversation. I am not surprised; Monseigneur took me to his convent; his good little sisters seemed intelligent and pious to me, but they did not say a word. They are kept under constraint, in a state of discomfort; I believe they are shaped by the sad and severe devotion of Mr. Yvert. There is no expansion and life in them. Please believe me, Monseigneur assured me of this: my visit troubled them, disconcerted them; it was an occasion of temptations for them. However, it is not what I told them in three short sentences that could cause this strange result. So the prelate is prudent in not letting anyone but himself into this house. It is truly pitiful. If there were a different kind of conduct in this house, a little life and gaiety, the school would have a reputation, more external students, and boarders. The constraint in which students and mistresses live harms their health and prevents parents from placing their children there, to the point that some of the most pious prefer national schools. My observations on this delicate point struck Monseigneur d'Orthosie to the quick; truly, I felt sorry for him. But he will not do better, that's my conviction.

[11]

Temporal. Now let's come to the temporal, another serious question. In a second report, I will tell you in what state I found the diocese. According to Monseigneur Viard's admission, he arrived in Wellington with a well-stocked purse; he received an annual allowance that he found too small and that I find too large, considering how it was used, local resources, and the small number of Catholics. Monseigneur, still following Mr. Yvert's advice, insisted on appearing to the English as a very respectable person, i.e., someone with money who spreads it around. This public opinion was supposed to have a happy result in favor of the Catholic cause because the bishop will have credit and influence. But for that, it must not be known that the bishop's resources come from the Propagation of the Faith; it must not be imagined that he is poor, that he needs help. Monseigneur did not want the Propagation of the Faith to be mentioned to the faithful, not even to announce the Mass that must be said every year for the deceased benefactors of the work. Forced to let it be announced last year, he forbade the priest from entering into any explanation.

[12]

You know the generosity of English and Irish Catholics for their churches, schools, and the support of their priests; they understand very well this commandment of the Church. Their alms bind them to their faith, and to refuse them would often scandalize them, as was the case in Wellington. In my other report, you will see what establishments exist in this city. Well! The purchase of land, the construction of the episcopal house, the convent, schools for boys and girls, a house for the Maoris, and many other expenses were almost entirely paid with subsidies from the Propagation of the Faith, without making an appeal to the faithful, who would have generously contributed to this purchase and these constructions. For a simple illumination and decoration on the occasion of the Triduum of the Immaculate Conception, the Catholics of Wellington gave £180 sterling, not to mention several donations in kind. I am unaware of what Bishop gives for his convent, girls' school, and providence; it is a secret, but I have it from him that for the other two schools in the city, he annually gives £60 sterling. The faithful would willingly subscribe to support these schools; nothing has ever been asked of them, and several have complained. It was only last year that the bishop, after much insistence, agreed to the collection of fees for church pews. Nothing has been fixed for the casual revenue, and the bishop was far from pushing for its collection. In all these colonies, in addition to the high casual revenue, priests are supported by annual subscriptions and collections made at the church on Easter and Christmas days; Bishop Viard did not want them to be established at Sainte-Marie, while they are done in the other chapel for Father O'Reilly, an Irish priest. So it is still with the alms of the Propagation of the Faith that the bishop and priests of Wellington are maintained. Our fathers are convinced that the prelate will only imperfectly carry out the points we agreed upon on this subject during our retreat. And why? Because Bishop Viard does not know how to preside over a meeting, to address it; he is timid, he does not dare to involve himself personally, and he will not allow another to act in his place. While other stations receive little or no assistance for their works, the money from the Propagation of the Faith therefore flows unnecessarily into Wellington for Catholics who would be ashamed if they knew where these resources come from.

[13]

In a note that Bishop handed to me, where he outlines the needs of his mission to solicit new assistance from the Propagation of the Faith, he asks for little else at the moment than for Wellington, for his schools, to build a kitchen for his convent, for fences, to plant trees around the church, and to have the land around it arranged by his day laborer. It is easy then to form an idea of the complaints of the missionaries, who obtain from the bishop only minimal support, given awkwardly, almost secretly, and after repeated requests. He once wounded me deeply, and this time I got angry. It was agreed that our new organization regarding temporal matters would only begin on the next July 1, since I cannot receive money from Lyon before that time; consequently, Bishop was supposed to cover the expenses of the first six months of this year, as before. He excused himself, saying that he had not yet received his entire allocation, that he had no money. I knew it was a poor excuse, and I proved to him that he was not without resources. He then told me that he had just advanced £60 sterling to his providence. "How, Bishop, does providence take precedence over your missionaries? For sixteen little Maori girls that the government is supposed to support, you deny Fathers Forest and Reignier enough to live! It's a bit harsh, and admit that it's not the way to endear yourself to your priests." With his clumsiness in refusing and even granting requests, Bishop has often hurt our colleagues. Father Forest handed him £130 sterling upon arriving from Auckland. After some time, Father was sent to Lahutt where everything had to be done; he came one day asking for some help from Bishop to assist him in building his house. Bishop, who was spending money so generously on various constructions in Wellington, who was even building a house at that moment to accommodate the Maoris who come to Wellington, refused £10 sterling for the Lahutt house. Father Forest couldn't help but tell Monsieur Yvert that Bishop was cruel.

[14]

Bishop allocated £25 sterling per year for the annual viaticum for each priest or brother, which obviously could not suffice in an English country; hence, the faithful had to supplement it. Below, I will provide you with the sums accounted for by the bishop from January 1, 1851, to the end of 1857, for each station, in addition to the viaticum. In my next letter indicating what has been done, what exists in each station, you will be able to judge the support received from the bishop and the result obtained through the work of our colleagues or with local resources.

Stations that did not receive the entire viaticum:

• Nelson: £21 less

• Ahuriri: £68 less

• Total: £89 less

Stations that received in addition to the viaticum:

• Lahutta: £75

• Wanganui city: £221

• Wanganui Maoris: £60

• Total: £356

[15]

If we deduct what Nelson and Ahuriri received less, the amount given for the other stations, excluding Wellington, will be (£356 - £89) £267 sterling. If Bishop has debts, as he claims, they are not caused by his generosity towards other establishments, and the missionaries are justified in saying that Wellington has absorbed everything without any necessity since the locality could almost self-sustain. I must add, however, that Bishop does not incur enormous personal expenses, and the management of his household is simple. He is a bit too fond of giving to the Maoris, to whites in difficulty. This is still a weak aspect of the prelate; he loves too much to have good things said about him. As he is not bold in asking or seeking money, he is content to receive it from France, which gives him no trouble to find. But it is truly unfortunate that the alms of the faithful are used in this way. Bishop Pompallier is more advanced in this regard; he receives £300 each year from the Catholics of Auckland, and in other stations, the faithful support their priests; even the Maoris themselves contribute.

[16]

I will add some details that will contribute to giving you a better understanding of the nature and character of Bishop Viard; I will not follow any particular order.

[17]

The location where the mission is established in Wellington is excellent; it is a providential stroke to have found it. The priests urged and urged the bishop to buy this land (part of it was given); but as he is fearful and hesitant and retreats as the priests push him, he would have missed this good opportunity. Fortunately, Mr. Yvert agreed with the missionaries, and the matter was settled to the great satisfaction of the prelate.

[18]

Large expenses were made in Wellington for the fences; they are the best-made ones I have seen, and they have been multiplied to excess. As they are made of wood, they need to be renewed about every ten years. Half of them could have been removed without any inconvenience, and a large part of the other half could have been made into a hedge; the plants were bought. For this, it was enough to remove a fence that formed an unused strip of land between the episcopal house and the girls' school; a path, which is like necessary, though not obligatory, was already there. Mr. Yvert did not want it. Well! Today, men and women, boys and girls from the schools, cross the garden at any time, day and night, if they wish, pass along the house, right where our colleagues should stay if they want to take a stroll together. The episcopal house has become a public thoroughfare. The bishop applauds this result; for my part, if I were the superior in Wellington for 24 hours, I would open the other passage, and the one by the house would be closed.

[19]

Another wonder. Absolute and continual silence was maintained in the refectory without any reading. Imagine the looks exchanged by the two or three diners in the presence of each other. Everyone hurried as much as they could, and the stomach of more than one suffered from this method. You might think I'm joking, but I'll tell you the pure truth. In response to my observations on this point, the bishop seemed surprised and annoyed; then, letting himself go to his affectionate manner, he took my hands and said, "To please you, my good father, I desire so much to please the Society, and for that, I will not hesitate to make any sacrifice; in the future, people will talk during meals." - I smiled and added: I really did not think, Your Excellency, that I was asking you for a sacrifice! - I understand that in reality, he makes one, for as soon as the conversation goes beyond trivial things, the bishop is embarrassed, he is afraid of serious conversations. So he stayed little in recreation and disappeared as soon as someone from outside came to ask for him. Everything was stiff, and I would not be surprised to have scandalized the prelate and Mr. Yvert with my cheerfulness.

[20]

Bishop does everything in secret; he has no cordial communication with his priests, and this behavior harms him. He always kept the newspapers with him, and to read them, one had to ask for them every time, which was quite painful for priests older than him. He likes to attract and keep things to himself. He has no less than five chalices, which were not given to him, and no one uses them except him. He is zealous for confession and is on the lookout not to miss the people who come; I am inclined to believe that this is still one of the reasons that keep him in Wellington. He established the months of Mary and St. Joseph, for which I praise him, but only he can perform these pious exercises, for which I blame him. Never does a priest give the blessing of the Blessed Sacrament when the prelate is present; he paid me this extraordinary honor. Works could be established to promote zeal, instruction, and piety; but the priests are bound as if by private charter, have no freedom. The bishop is pious, but with a narrow piety, a piety of women. He is jealous for the ministry like some parish priests I have known. - I have been told on several occasions that he is a liar; it is serious, so I content myself with saying that he is not frank and that he has lacked sincerity with me several times. Like women, one can give up knowing his final thoughts. - I told you that the bishop was affectionate by nature, that he liked to be loved; the real way to be loved by him is to win him over with flattery, flattering words, and small honors; something that repulses a priest. - They say about us, children of beautiful Normandy, that we never say yes or no, that we always have an escape route. What a Norman is Bishop Viard! He does not refuse positively, but he never promises or commits himself frankly: we will see later, he says, let us act with prudence. - He achieves his ends through small tricks and rare inertia. Several other small details would show that Bishop is narrow in his views, small in his means, jealous of his priests, timid, afraid of them, fearing to pay with his person, not knowing how to command and direct. The other day he said in front of me to Father Reignier, who consulted him on what he should do in his new establishment: whatever you do, my good father, will be well done; I approve everything in advance. - For my part, I did not at all approve of this line of conduct, which would establish as many superiors as there are religious. - In summary, Father, it seems to me unfortunate that Bishop Pompallier pulled Bishop Viard from his natural place; he was a good missionary; he will never be a superior.

[21]

Finally, I conclude with regret, my Reverend Father, by telling you that the prelate does not love our Society. It is the conviction of our oldest colleagues, and it is mine too; it is felt, touched, when one is with him. He did not want to attend our little retreat, even at its closure, and for what reason? To ensure that nothing was lacking in the refectory, to respond to those coming and going. We were in all five priests; what embarrassment we must have caused! Isn't it pitiable? I was disappointed, and our fathers were hurt. The prelate's vicar general is Father O'Reilly. I pointed out to the bishop that since the mission is entrusted to our Society, in case of death, it can only be administered by a Marist, and it is even appropriate that from now on one of ours should have the title of his vicar general; let him leave, if he wants, his title to Father O'Reilly, but he should inform him of the change that has occurred to avoid any discussion in case of death. Prudence again prevented him from acting, but he promised me to do it later.

[22]

I did not think it appropriate to communicate all my painful impressions to our fathers, even to the oldest ones; I focused on persuading them that with the help of the regulations that Bishop adopted in all frankness, everything would go well enough. They seemed to doubt it, and they told me several times: we have known Bishop Viard for almost twenty years; you have only been studying him for twenty days. He will hardly change his course; know that he is cunning and stubborn. - I will help him as much as I can; I believe I am more devoted to him than he thinks. I am proud of our fathers, of their good spirit, their unity, their zeal, and their piety; all eight of them can be counted among the truest children of Mary. Nothing has diverted them from the obedience and practical respect they owed to Bishop d'Orthosie, and if he wants to use them, they will always be at his disposal for the glory of God and the salvation of souls.

[23]

I have the honor to be, with the deepest respect, my very Reverend Father, your very humble and obedient servant,

Victor Poupinel s.m.