31
possible topics about “meteors,” chemistry, and natural history. The area of inorganic and astronomical phenomena maintained its traditional preeminence over biological studies.
The General asked physics instructors to support the teachers of philosophy in
apologetics, dwelling on the aspects of design and purpose found in nature. This
area of discourse might be thought of as a sort of “natural theology,” but one should
distinguish it from the traditional school discipline of that name which Roothaan
had reserved for teachers of logic and metaphysics. Of course, finding evidence of
God’s existence and wisdom in the phenomena of nature was as old as Christianity,
but this idea had developed into a kind of apologetics, especially beginning in the
mid-seventeenth century, and particularly in Anglicanism and Calvinism. Its “heretical” origins, its disconnect from traditional theological ways of thinking, and the
fact that it assumed a familiarity with scientific topics all restricted its adoption by
the Jesuit philosophers and theologians while it found more acceptance from the
mathematicians. Therefore, its official introduction was not only a didactic but a
cultural and religious novelty. The degree to which it was integrated into the scientific courses of the Roman College remains to be ascertained; the manuals and treatises written by the instructors of that time are limited to technical topics, and the
few manuscripts with the texts of lessons identified so far have not been studied
extensively. As will be noted below, however, this kind of discourse had a considerable influence on the later reflections of G.B. Pianciani and Secchi.
In the instructions of Father General, there was another important novelty: the
separation of astronomy from mathematics and its assignment to the professor of
physics. This was an epochal intellectual change, moving beyond the seventeenth
century “revolution” that had made mathematics the general language of the natural
sciences and astronomy just one of the disciplines to which it was applied.
Roothaan’s new Ratio, embracing the substance of the educational changes in
the most advanced provinces, was never officially adopted, however, because there
were still serious disagreements about it within the Society. It can be assumed to
reflect the typical teaching situation, but significant variations would have occurred
from one province to another. Attempts to establish a new Ratio resumed after 1850,
but with only partial success. Between Secchi’s studies and his full maturity, therefore, the schools of the Society functioned in a situation of formal autonomy from a
given Ratio, although in the area of science the educational pattern adhered closely
to this outline, as can be seen in the case of the Roman College.
2.6 The Arrangement of Courses and Programs
in the College of Rome
From the curriculum for the years 1828 and 1829 found in the Archivio di Stato di
Roma, Congregazione degli studi, “Istituti di istruzione nei Comuni,” file 364; from
the Catalogs of the Roman Province beginning 1824/25, preserved in the ARSI; and
from biographies and works of the various instructors, we can deduce the following:
2 The Scientific Tradition of the Society of Jesus and the Formation of Angelo Secchi
possible topics about “meteors,” chemistry, and natural history. The area of inorganic and astronomical phenomena maintained its traditional preeminence over biological studies.
The General asked physics instructors to support the teachers of philosophy in
apologetics, dwelling on the aspects of design and purpose found in nature. This
area of discourse might be thought of as a sort of “natural theology,” but one should
distinguish it from the traditional school discipline of that name which Roothaan
had reserved for teachers of logic and metaphysics. Of course, finding evidence of
God’s existence and wisdom in the phenomena of nature was as old as Christianity,
but this idea had developed into a kind of apologetics, especially beginning in the
mid-seventeenth century, and particularly in Anglicanism and Calvinism. Its “heretical” origins, its disconnect from traditional theological ways of thinking, and the
fact that it assumed a familiarity with scientific topics all restricted its adoption by
the Jesuit philosophers and theologians while it found more acceptance from the
mathematicians. Therefore, its official introduction was not only a didactic but a
cultural and religious novelty. The degree to which it was integrated into the scientific courses of the Roman College remains to be ascertained; the manuals and treatises written by the instructors of that time are limited to technical topics, and the
few manuscripts with the texts of lessons identified so far have not been studied
extensively. As will be noted below, however, this kind of discourse had a considerable influence on the later reflections of G.B. Pianciani and Secchi.
In the instructions of Father General, there was another important novelty: the
separation of astronomy from mathematics and its assignment to the professor of
physics. This was an epochal intellectual change, moving beyond the seventeenth
century “revolution” that had made mathematics the general language of the natural
sciences and astronomy just one of the disciplines to which it was applied.
Roothaan’s new Ratio, embracing the substance of the educational changes in
the most advanced provinces, was never officially adopted, however, because there
were still serious disagreements about it within the Society. It can be assumed to
reflect the typical teaching situation, but significant variations would have occurred
from one province to another. Attempts to establish a new Ratio resumed after 1850,
but with only partial success. Between Secchi’s studies and his full maturity, therefore, the schools of the Society functioned in a situation of formal autonomy from a
given Ratio, although in the area of science the educational pattern adhered closely
to this outline, as can be seen in the case of the Roman College.
2.6 The Arrangement of Courses and Programs
in the College of Rome
From the curriculum for the years 1828 and 1829 found in the Archivio di Stato di
Roma, Congregazione degli studi, “Istituti di istruzione nei Comuni,” file 364; from
the Catalogs of the Roman Province beginning 1824/25, preserved in the ARSI; and
from biographies and works of the various instructors, we can deduce the following:
2 The Scientific Tradition of the Society of Jesus and the Formation of Angelo Secchi