Nicholas Koss, O.S.B.

Fu Jen Catholic University was founded in Peking by the American Benedictines of St. Vincent Archabbey in the mid-1920s under the leadership of Archabbot Aurelius Stehle, O.S.B. (1877-1930) at the request of the Vatican. Last year, the history of St. Vincent Archabbey was published by Catholic University of America Press under the title of Mission to America: A History of St. Vincent Archabbey, The First . Chapter Six of this history, Mission to China (1918-1930) describes the founding of Fu Jen Catholic University, and Chapter Seven, Depression and Judgment, presents the circumstances that forced the Benedictines to hand the University over to the Society of the Divine Word in 1933.

In 1924, Archabbot Aurelius appointed fifty-four year-old Fr. Ildephonse Brandstetter, O.S.B., former Prior of St. Vincent Archabbey, to go to Peking to investigate establishing a university. Fr. Ildephonse and another Benedictine, Fr. Placidus Rattenberger, O.S.B., arrived in Peking on July 8, 1924 and immediately began the monumental task of ascertaining the possibility of setting up a Catholic University. Shortly thereafter, Fr. Ildephonse began writing letters back to St. Vincent. Many of these letters were to Archabbot Aurelius both informing him of the situation in Peking and also asking for his instructions as to how to proceed. On average, Fr. Ildephonse wrote a letter to St. Vincent Archabbey every two weeks. The Archives of St. Vincent Archabbey contains nine letters written by Fr. Ildephonse for the year 1924 .

These letters are mainly written to Archabbot Aurelius Stehle, O.S.B., Archabbot of St. Vincent Archabbey. Mission to America describes at length Archabbot Aurelius' tenure as Archabbot and his role in directing the founding of Fu Jen Catholic University. In the folder for the letters of Fr. Ildephonse are also carbon copies of five letters written by Archabbot Aurelius to Fr. Ildephonse in 1924. These letters of Archabbot Aurelius will be referred to only to help in understanding the content of Fr. Ildephonse's letters. A detailed study remains to be done on Archabbot Aurelius' many letters related to Fu Jen Catholic University. An interesting factor in the relationship between Archabbot Aurelius and Fr. Ildephonse is that as a young priest Fr. Aurelius was under Fr. Ildephonse when he served as Prior to Archabbot Leander. With Fr. Aurelius' election in 1918 as abbot coadjutor, however, Fr. Ildephonse, who was seven years older than Archabbot Aurelius, then had the former Fr. Aurelius as his superior.

Other letters by Fr. Ildephonse for 1924 were written to the Prior of St. Vincent Archabbey, to his Benedictine priest-confreres, to the Mercy Sisters of St. Xavier Academy, and Fr. Barry O'Toole. The prior at a Benedictine abbey is appointed by the abbot and assists the abbot in running the abbey. St. Xavier Academy, run by the Pittsburgh Sisters of Mercy, was a private Catholic high school for girls very near to St. Vincent Archabbey. Fr. Barry O'Toole, a diocesan priest who was teaching at St. Vincent Archabbey and who was the first, on a trip to Peking, to suggest the American Benedictines as a possible choice to operate a university there, was soon to be appointed the first Rector of the Catholic University in Peking, and was at this time finishing the writing of a book in the United States.

The 1924 letters of Fr. Ildephonse provided Archabbot Aurelius with much information about the situation regarding the establishment of a Catholic university in Peking before his visit to Peking in February of 1925. In this paper, therefore, I will study these letters to see what they contain in this regard, especially concerning these issues: whether a college (i.e., high schoool) or university should be set up first, where the students would come from, the courses to be taught, the site, finances and the role of Chinese Catholic laymen. These letters also contain fascinating comments on the Catholic Church in China and on the political situation in China as well as remarks related to how Fr. Ildephonse as a Benedictine monk handled the situation of being sent at the age of fifty-four to work in a culture entirely new to him. These passages, however, will be the subject of another study.

The letters in the Archives of St. Vincent written by Fr. Ildephonse do not include all of the letters he wrote from Peking as can be seen in the mention of letters in the extant letters that are not in the folder. For example, in his letter of August 20, 1924, Fr. Ildephonse refers to his letter of August 1, which is not found in the Archives. Then, in a letter date October 18, 1924 from Archabbot Aurelius to Fr. Ildephonse, there is reference to Fr. Ildephonse's letter of September 19, 1924, but this letter, too, is not in the Archives.

The time it took for a letter from Peking to reach St. Vincent Archabbey was usually a month or six weeks. Archabbot Aurelius, in his letter of September 17, 1924, notes that Fr. Ildephonse's letter of July 31 only arrived on September 16. Later, the Prior of St. Vincent would also mark on letters from Fr. Ildephonse the date of arrival. Thus, on Fr. Ildephonse's letter of October 11, 1925, there is the notation Re'd Nov. 6, '25. Needless to say, the amount of time necessary to exchange letters at times created problems for Fr. Ildephonse who at times needed immediate answers from the Archabbot. In some of these cases, cablegrams were used to expedite communication. Some of these cablegrams too have been preserved in Fr. Ildephonse's folders of letters. Finally, it should be noted that German, not English, was Fr. Ildephonse's first language. St. Vincent Archabbey was founded from Bavaria in 1846. Archabbot Aurelius was the first Archabbot of St. Vincent not to have been born in Germany. Some of the letters of Fr. Ildephonse, especially to his confreres, are written in German, though the great majority are in English.

Fathers Ildephonse and Placidus arrived in Peking on Tuesday, July 8, 1924. On July 17, they wrote a joint-letter to Archabbot Aurelius. The letter is a brief exposition of the prevalent conditions and impressions bearing upon our enterprise, received from authoritative sources. The enterprise is establishing a Catholic university. The authoritative sources are Archbishop Celso Constantini, the first Apostolic Delegate to China, who had arrived in Peking in 1923; Bishop Stanislaus F. Jarlin, C.M., retired vicar apostolic of northern China; and Bishop Jarline's coadjutor, Bishop Fabrique.

The interviews were conducted in Latin with the French ecclesiastics as can be seen from a subsequent letter (July 20, 1924) where Fr. Ildephonse writes, . . . none of these men [the French missionaries at Peitang] speak English. . . . Then too we soon noticed that Ciceronian style was not in vogue, and the rules of Englemann [the author of a Latin grammar] were infringed upon with impunity; but this we must concede that some of these Fathers in fact most of them have quite a fluency in the use of the Latin tongue. Latin was probably used in the interviews with Archbishop Constantini too, for in later years Fr. Ildephonse becomes the Archbishop's instructor in conversational English.

The letter of July 17 indicates that the journey of Frs. Ildephonse and Placidus to Peking is exploratory in nature when at the end it is mentioned that the Apostolic Delegate is very anxious that the Benedictines should accept this honor and preference [of establishing a Catholic University in Peking]. Apparently, no final decisions have as yet been made by the Benedictines in this regard. This letter is thus the first, on-site report to the Archabbot to provide him and the St. Vincent Chapter with material to be used in making the final decision.

In the second paragraph of this letter, describing their first interviewwith Archbishop Constantini, which was made on Wednesday, July 9 according to a subsequent letter (July 20, 1924), Frs. Ildephonse and Placidus write that the Apostolic Delegate laid stress on the difficulty and importance of the task. He emphasized the necessity of charity and harmony in all our dealings. The Benedictines then note, in a kind of an aside, that the importance of this advice was seen during their subsequent visits with the bishop and others. Concluding their description of this first visit to Archbishop Constantini, they write, Especially did he impress upon us to consult the Bishop frequently, accept suggestions freely, promise nothing, and only after mature deliberations to draw our conclusions.

What this second paragraph does is to present indirectly the very complicated canonical situation at work with the Benedictines arriving in China. The Benedictines are an exempt religious order within the structure of the Roman Catholic Church. As such, they ordinarily operate within a diocese at the invitation of the Bishop but the work they do is not determined by the Bishop, except that episcopal permission is needed for parochial activity. This exempt status is taken most seriously by Benedictine abbots. But, both exempt religious orders and Bishops, in various ways, are subject to the Holy Father. The Benedictines of St. Vincent Archabbey arrived in China at the request of the Holy Father, who apparently was responding to petitions from Chinese Catholic intellectuals. It was not Bishop Jarlin who initiated the request for the Benedictines to go to Peking, yet he would have known very clearly that it was the wish of the Holy Father. Therefore, when Archbishop Constantini was telling Frs. Ildephonse and Placidus the necessity of charity and harmony in all our dealings, it was said in light of this complex canonical situation.

A COLLEGE (I.E., HIGH SCHOOL) FIRST?

In the third paragraph of the letter of July 17, Frs. Ildephonse and Placidus describe their first meeting with the Bishop. Since Bishop Jarlin has already retired, I take Bishop here to refer to Bishop Fabrique, the Coadjutor.

The Bishop refers to the word University, as mentioned in our document, most emphatically. He expresses himself positively again the establishment of a college [high school] as such, but is willing to concede a two years preparatory course for the university. This preparatory course he calls a Gymasium Major course. His reasons for opposing the erection of merely a college [high school] are as follows: 1. There are already colleges in Peking. 2; (sic) A mree [sic; pencil corrected to mere] college will not attract the Chinese students. 3. The document from Rome demands the erection of a University.

With this paragraph comes a controversial issue related to establishing a Catholic university in Peking, and one that will often be discussed in later letters of Father Ildephonse: whether or not the Benedictines can set up a college prior to establishing a university. Here the meaning of college as used in this and subsequent letters, is similar to that of high school in the American sense of the word. In stressing the importance to start a university and not a college what the Bishop does not mention but which is reported by Fr. Ildephonse in a much later letter is that the Bishop himself is planning such a school. But certainly it is the Bishop's right to set up whatever schools he wants in his jurisdiction.

There is no record that I have found yet of what instructions Fr. Ildephonse was given before leaving St. Vincent, but his letter of July 20 in which he describes their first meeting with Archbishop Constantini suggests that it was to begin with a college [high school]: Naturally the purpose of our coming was discussed, as he [Archbishop Constantini] spoke of naught else but a university, the erection of which was entrusted to us by the Holy See, some misgivings crept into our souls as our ideal was not higher than the rearing of a college. It should also be remembered that at this time the American Benedictines did not operate any universities, but only high schools and colleges. Moreover, the tradition that was begun at St. Vincent and continued at other monasteries of the American Cassinese Congregation was to establish first a high school and then a college, college meaning here a four-year post-secondary liberal arts program. By this time at St. Vincent, besides a college (in the American sense) and seminary, there was also a high school that educated both Benedictine aspirants and regular secular students.

Besides being the ordinary way that American Benedictines went about establishing schools, a second reason for the desire to begin with a college would be that it could also be used for training Benedictine candidates, as was done at St. Vincent where regular students and Benedictine candidates attended classes together. The fourth paragraph of the letter of July 17 thus begins: In an interview, July 14, the Apostolic Delegate was asked directly by Father Ildephonse, whether it would be permitted to erect an academic course for such boys and young men who might become candidates for the Order. As subsequent letters will show, Fr. Ildephonse's interest in this point stems from his realization that if the Benedictines are eventually to be successful in running a university, it is essential to have Chinese Benedictines to help run it.

. The fifth paragraph suggests clearly that Archbishop Constantini understood the point Fr. Ildephonse was making about the need for a monastery, but that he also realized that the permission for a monastery must come from the Bishop:

Our work according to the Apostolic Delegate is twofold: the erection of a monastery with a religious training school, and the erection of a university. The right to establish a university has been granted by Rome, but for the erection of a monastery and training school for candidates, a written petition to the bishop is required. We think it best to leave this to you.

Nonetheless, at the conclusion of this letter it is clear that for the Apostolic Delegate the university comes first in importance. According to the words of the Apostolic Delegate our chief purpose is to erect a university, and every thing else is only accessory.

Subsequent letters of Fr. Ildephonse frequently address the question of whether the Benedictines should begin with a college. In the letter of July 17 to Archabbot Aurelius, this question appears to be rather theoretical. But, in the next extant letter of Fr. Ildephonse to Archabbot Aurelius, dated August 20, 1924, there is raised the possibility of a college in Peking being handed over to the Benedictines:

The other day One [sic] of the Irish [Lazarist] Fathers paid us a visit and in the course of the long conversation informed us that the school, a kind of a High School, which they have been conducting, will be dicontinued [sic] as far as they are concerned. . . . He too mentioned that he is certain the Brothers asked to continue the school, will not accept the offer should they become aware of conditions extant. Hence the natural sequence of events will be according to him that the bishop will offer that school to us and this will be tantamount to allowing us build a college. . .. he believes that the scholars attending that school now will be a good nucleus for further development, he himself being willing if so necessary to wait for one or even two years with his departure for Ireland. Such an arrangement he was sure would work out well. Our men could meanwhile devote some time and energy for the acquisition of the language of the land. To me the project looks splendid though a number of points shall yet have to be investigated before I could give my unqualified statement. This investigation shall gradually be instituted and then communicated to you.

Furthermore, in this same letter it is also said that the Bishop is now hinting he might permit a two or three years' preparatory course for the university, should we [the Benedictines] not be ready to begin the university at once (2).

The Irish priest who was the source of this information is probably Fr. Mullen, who was first mentioned in the letter of July 20 and who, in a later letter, is said to be planning to return to Ireland. The above quotation also shows that another reason for having a college, besides training Benedictine candidates, was that it could be a source for university students. The third reason is that it would give the American

Benedictines a chance to learn Chinese before embarking on running a university. Fr. Iidephonse's tentative enthusiasm for such a school comes through clearly too.

Less than two months later, however, another possibility of a college for the Benedictines to have has developed. In his letter of October 8 to the Mercy Sisters at St. Xavier, Fr. Ildephonse writes:

. . . a splendid opportunity is proffered us in the school of Kaifeng, which the bishop of the city desires us to take in charge. My confrere [Fr. Placidus] and myself deem this a splendid opportunity of establishing ourselves and assuring all the future success of the university. Anxiously are we awaiting the world of acceptance from Father Archabbot. My confere [sic] is even now teaching in that school, whilst I am living the hermit in this populous city of Peking watching the progress of events.

From this letter, Fr. Ildephonse appears to be completely in favor of taking over this school, which is named Pei Wen Catholic Academy, and he assumes Archabbot Aurelius will approve. How the Benedictines came in touch with this school is explained in Mission to America (289-90).

Shortly after writing to the Sisters, Fr. Ildephonse journeyed to Kaifeng himself and on October 16 cabled Archabbot Aurelius:

Immediate acceptance of Kaifeng school most important for success in Peking undertaking. . . . Wire me Kaifeng Catholic Mission.

In his return cable, Archabbot Aurelius instructed Frs. Ildephonse and Placidus to return to Peking. He also announced that he would be going to Peking too.

In a long letter written on October 18, Archabbot Aurelius explains why the Benedictines cannot accept the school in Kaifeng at this time but he allows for the possibility in the future. He further states that Rome is now allowing five years in which to prepare for the university and adds that it took the Jesuits in Tokyo seven years to set up Sophia University.

This letter of course would take some time to reach Fr. Ildephonse, who was determined that accepting the school was the right thing to do. On October 21, he again cabled Archabbot Aurelius:

. . . Kaifeng school must be taken immediately or opportunity lost because exceptional site may be purchased ratione belli gubernium indiget peccuniis kaifeng only logical place for permanent monastic establishment therefrom develop pending foundation

Archabbot Aurelius immediately replied:

Obviously we can not accept a site even for nothing, if it involves doing anything that may interfere with the work outlined by Rome, i.e. the University at Peking. Patience, Obedience!

For Archabbot Aurelius, it simply was not possible to take the school at this time for that was not what Rome had asked the Benedictines to do.

Warlords made it impossible for Frs. Ildephonse and Placidus to return immediately to Peking as they had planned. On November 1, Fr. Ildephonse wrote at length to Archabbot Aurelius on the topic of accepting Pei Wen Catholic Academy and gave various reasons as to why it should be done:

As far as conditions are concerned for commencing at once with teaching some faculties in the university, let me merely add this one consideration. We have interviewed the president of the American indemnity college, two Chinese presidents of universities [sic] in TinTsin [sic] and there also the Jesuit Fathers conducting a university, then a number of priests, both Europeans and Chinese, men rather prominent in Chinese educational circles, all were of one mind that it is impossible to commence a university here without having some feeder for the same and without first gaining through the successful management of a lower school a good reputation. Even with that reputation it is well to be kept in mind that the professors teaching in any school must know the language of the land, if not all at least some who are in charge of discipline and these must not be Chinese unless they be member of our community; any contrary method will not only court, but bring on the gravest difficulties and shall expose us to the ridicule of the entire broad land.

should we not at once grasp the excellent proposition of establishing ourselves here in Kaifeng and then as the time and occasion ripens to think of establishing ourselves in Peking and begin with the university. Here with experienced teachers in charge our men may gain the knowledge of the language and the experience needed for the proper management of our school; here we are favored with the best opportunities of gaining candidates both for an incipient Scholasticate and the lay-brotherhood. Similar chances shall not be given us in the Peking diocese. . . . (1-2)

According to Fr. Ildephonse, the Benedictines, if they are to open a university in Peking, need first a college as a feeder. Next, the American Benedictines must have the experience of running a college first if they are to be able to run a university. Thirdly, it would give the American Benedictines a chance to learn the language. Finally, the school would help to get Benedictine candidates.

But, good monk that he was, having given his side of the issue under contention, Fr. Ildephonse concludes this letter:

Now Father Archabbot rest assured we wish to fulfill you wish and desires best we can and guided by reason and solid human advice fructified by prayer and acts of mortification. As soon as feasible we shall return to Peking, rent a house and await your arrival which we hope will be in the near future. (2)

This letter to Archabbot Aurelius would of course only arrive in early December.

In his letter of November 7 to Fr. Ildephonse, Archabbot Aurelius is clear that the university must come first: Roma locuta, causa finita (2). And, by now it should be clear to Fr. Ildephonse that the Archabbot will follow the instructions of Rome.

Before the arrival of this letter from Archabbot Aurelius, however, Fr. Ildephonse, on November 28, 1924, again wrote to Archabbot Aurelius his views on this matter:

I think I may be brief in this writing and merely ask you a question that I should very much prefer to discuss with you personally but owing to the uncertainty of the political conditions, preventing you at present from coming over I had better place it now. How do you represent to yourself the future of the university at Peking and the establishment there? Do you expect to take in Chinese boys and educate them for the Order? Or do you intend to send all the professors from aborad [sic]? If the former would not our suggestions regarding the acceptance of this Pei Wen school here in Kaifeng be found favorable or what reasons could be brought against them?

It is clear to Fr. Ildephonse that unless Chinese Benedictines are trained, St. Vincent Archabbey and the American-Cassinese Congregation would have to provide all the Benedictines who will teach at the university in Peking, a proposition that he must have thought that neither St. Vincent nor the Congregation would be able to accept.

On December 7, Archabbot Aurelius responded to Fr. Ildephonse's letter of November 1, in which he had presented a number of reasons why the school in Kaifeng should be accepted. Archabbot Aurelius now explains his position, stressing ever so forcefully that Rome is the final arbiter and that there might be other possibilites:

I can never forget the absolute certainty with which good Bishop Tacomi insisted on yes' for a reply. In fact he ruled out No' entirely.

The enclosed pamphlet shows our position as to the Peking Foundation. We can not jeopardize its success. Whether the simultaneous acceptance of the Kaifeng proposition would even be compatible, Rome would have to decide before we could accept same. Meanwhile for training our men, etc. we can of course avail ourselves of the Kaifeng opportunity. . . .. . But what about the Father Mullen's School in Peking itself, which was offered us? Furthermore, is it really certain that similar chance shall not be given us in the Peking diocese? How about the neighborhood of Peking?

Before receiving this letter, Fr. Ildephonse, on December 28, wrote to one of his confreres, who had written to him earlier. (This letter is simply addressed to My Dear Confrere, and I have not yet been able to identify which one.) Fr. Ildephonse explains what he sees as a great misunderstanding developing between the Archabbot and himself:

In fact the last words from the Archabbot nearly knocked the bottom out of me; had I been on a boat I surely would dropped to the bottom of the sea when he talks of substitution' of the university by the institution here at Kaifeng. We never meant any sort of substitution for the university but believed that under existing conditions we should commence a college here, or rather take over this school here develop it into a college and so render it possible to accept native boys and train them to become teachers and professor and priests. Such a school is to my mind absolutely needed, how else could we get candidates and train them for the order. The university can not and will not be started for some years but here we can busy at once and instead of interfering with the university this school should rather put it on a more solid basis as surely some of these boys so trained would go it and continue their studies. I for myself can not concieve [sic] a future community here without a college or training school for boys, who intend to become Benedictines and priests. But as these will be few especially in the beginning, we then can take in outsiders as at St. V. and to the number desired. For with a good large buidling [sic] hundreds of boys will apply unless the propaganda now for the least three years going on against the foreigners and the foreign schools throughout the country, will gain headway and a revolution be instituted, which at the present moment is advocated in different centers and also in this city. But such a case is extreme and no human mind can foresee conditions depending upon the radical element in the country. We can not be heeding mutterings that may never realize. (1-2)

The word substitution that so upset Fr. Ildephonse appeared in the Archabbot's letter of November 7, in which the Archabbot detailed his plans for a trip to Peking and Rome, and explained what he expected of Frs. Ildephonse and Placidus:

. . . I am relying on you and on Father Placidus to aid in every possible manner to carry out to [the] work enjoined upon us by the Holy See. Only after the task has been found impossible, not merely difficult, but actually impossible , only then can we request substitution of a task that seems to us more readily possible and obviously more likely to prove successful.

It seems that the Archabbot was simply one step ahead of Fr. Ildephonse in formulating contingency plans, but this somehow eluded Fr. Ildephonse. By the time of the Archabbot's arrival in Peking in February 1925, Fr.Ildephonse would have had all of the Archabbot's letters on the question of whether to begin with a college or university. During this up-coming visit of the Archabbot, the decision would be confirmed not to accept the offer of the Bishop of Kaifeng, and plans would go ahead to build the university and monastery in Peking. But, it should come as no surprise given this background that when the Benedictines leave Fu Jen Catholic University in 1933, those who wish to remain in China, including Fr. Ildephonse, decide to go to Kaifeng.

STUDENTS FOR THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY

One of the reasons that Fr. Ildephonse used in arguing that a college should be established first was that it could be a feeder for students to the university once it is set up. The letters of 1924 contain more information on this question. In the first letter to Archabbot Aurelius (July 17), the second point mentioned by whom I assume to be Bishop Fabrique arguing for a university instead of a college is: A mree [sic, corrected in pencil to mere'] college will not attract the Chinese students. Later in this letter, it is stated that both Archbishop and Bishop are positive students will apply to the university if good discipline and a thorough course are offered (2). Furthermore, it is assumed that these students will include both Christians and pagans.

Then, in his letter to the Prior of St. Vincent on July 19, Fr. Ildephonse gives a much more detailed analysis of this question:

Regarding the number of student possibly applying in the beginning to the university opinions widely differ, the bishop and his Fathers being rather sanquine in their expectations whilst Fr.Mullen, of the Irish province of Lazarists and well versed in educational matters expressed his misgivings, pointing out however how a proximate estimate could be obtained by asking the prominent catholic colleges in the land, how many students they could possibly send us. This Feeler we shall throw out in the near future. All interested parties do agree, that the standard set by the university must be of a high grade, equal if not superior to the five or six universities already existing in this section of the land. Only efficiency shall beget success. (2-3)

Here we see that Fr. Mullen appears to be very influential in forming Fr. Ildephonse's opinions. Most interesting, however, is the general agreement among all parties involved that the Catholic university must be equal if not superior to those universities already in operation in Peking. This passage shows that from the very beginning there was the aim to make the Catholic university first-rate. But, in this same letter, Fr. Ildephonse also shows that he was under no illusion as to the quality of the other universities:

Here I may yet mention that the standards extant in the various institutions are rather low, students not properly prepared presenting themselves for the university and being accepted. (3)

By November 1, Fr. Ildephonse has become less sure about getting students for the new university. He writes Archabbot Aurelius:

As to the number of students that would apply for admission to our university the apostolic delegate stands alone in his optimistic views, bishop Fabrique at one time remarked that we would rather have to pay students to come to the institution rather than expect them to pay. (2)

The comment of the Bishop is striking in so far as that it seems to reflect what Fr. Vincent Lebbe has described as the method eventually used by French missionaries in northern China under the leadership of Bishop Jarlin of paying for Chinese to become Christians (Levaux 99-104). The irony of the comment, however, probably escaped Fr. Ildephonse. Nonetheless, before the visit of Archabbot Aurelius to Peking, a second problem that seriously worried Fr. Ildephonse was from where the students for the new Catholic university would come.

THE NATURE OF THE NEW UNIVERSITY

Given the argument that students will come to a university with a good course, it is worthwhile to see what these letters say about the kind of instruction was being planned to be given at the new university. The letter of July 17, regarding the nature of the university, indicates that Archbishop Constantini

insists that the University include also a philosophical and theological course. The advice of the bishop is to begin with his so-called gymnasium major course, together with one or the other of the following faculties: philosophy, literature both English and Chinese, history.

That the university should also have a theological course according to the wishes of Archbishop Constantini is probably related to the problems of the existing major seminary in Peking run by the Bishop. In his letter of August 20 to Archabbot Aurelius, Fr. Ildephone describes a visit from the Rector of the Major Seminary during which the Rector requested Benedictines to come and teach, supposedly because somehow it would allow degrees to be given to the seminarians. The letters of Fr. Ildephonse have no more on this topic so early on Archabbot Aurelius must have decided against such a proposal. The assignment of St. Vincent Archabbey from Rome was for a university, not a seminary.

As already mentioned, Fr. Ildephonse had doubts about the quality of the students at Chinese universities. His concern is that the Catholic university not follow suit. In his letter of July 19 to the Prior, Fr. Ildephonse writes:

Surely foolhardy it would be for us to fly the flag of a university over a mere college building, such an action would be resented by the ecclesiastical authorities here and much more so at Rome. (3)

This insistence on quality would be characterisitc of the approach of many of those involved with the establishment of the Catholic university.

Another matter that Fr. Ildephonse was already thinking about was the language of instruction. His preference is to use English:

As far as language is concerned it seems to be an established fact that English is becoming more and more the commercial language of the land. This being viewed with regret on part of Frenchmen and a full-hearted cooperation on their side would naturally be out of question. However the advantages offered young men through the knowledge of english [sic] would lead them to an institution where that language is the medium of instruction. (Letter of July 19: 3)

Such a policy would also allow American Benedictines to begin teaching upon their arrival in China. By November 1, however, in his letter to the Archabbot, Fr. Ildephonse has become convinced that some of the American Benedictines who will teach must also know Chinese

. . . it is well to be kept in mind that the professors teaching in any school must know the language of the land, if not all at least some who are in charge of discipline and these must not be Chinese unless they be member of our community; any contrary method will not only court, but bring on the gravest difficulties and shall expose us to the ridicule of the entire broad land. (1)

It is interesting to see too that Fr. Ildephonse has come to the conclusion that Chinese should not be in charge of discipline at the university unless they are Benedictines. He seems to have a very strong sense that this should be a Benedictine operation.

In general, however, Fr. Idlephonse did not speculate too much in his letters about the nature of the university . This was probably because in his August 15 letter to Fr.Ildephonse, Archabbot Aurelius wrote: Stave off the outlining of the course until Dr. O'Toole arrives. Fr. Ildephonse was only to start planning in this regard once Fr. Barry O'Toole had reached Peking. As it turned out, Fr. O'Toole arrived with Archabbot Aurelius in February of 1925.

SITE OF THE UNIVERSITY

One of the basic decisions that had to be made before much else could be done was the selection of a proper site for a Catholic University. And, a closely related question, since the university was to be Benedictine run, was whether the monastery should be at the site of the university. Traditionally schools run by Benedictine monasteries are on the same property as the monastery. But monasteries usually require a large piece of property so another important consideration would be the cost for the property.

In the letter of July 17, Frs. Ildephonse and Placidus write:

All sources giving advice agree that ground should be purchased as soon as the erection of a university has been decided upon. The reason given is that within the near future the value of real estate in and outside of the city will take an upward tendency. Furthermore the fear is expressed that the cost of labor will likewise rise.

From all sides the Benedictines are being told to move quickly in this regard. From the letter of July 20 to Fr. Barry O'Toole, however, it is clear that the St. Vincent Chapter still has not made any final decision regarding taking on a university in Peking, since Fr. Ildephone mentions that Fr. O'Toole should be aware of the proposal now before the Chapter regarding Peking. The immediate purchase of property, therefore, can not be considered. Fr.Idlephonse then continues:

Meanwhile [until Chapter decision] we two shall look about for a favorable spot where the institution might be located, without of course taking definite action. For two sites we shall scour the country, one in the city or its immediate neighborhood, one in the country, where more land could be purchased so we might possess the advantages and conveniences of a farm.

Traditionally American Benedictine monasteries also had large farms so it should not be surprising that Fathers Ildephonse and Placidus were also looking for a possible site outside of Peking. This comment suggests that Fr. Ildephonse was suggesting to have the monastery and university in the same place. Furthermore, aware that in the future he must work closely with Fr. O'Toole, in this letter, Fr. Ildephonse asks him for his opinions about a site.

Arhcabbot Aurelius's letter of August 15 stresses the importance of working with the Apostolic Delegate in selecting a site and also indicates it might be best to have the monastery at a separate place: Be guided by the Delegate's selection of site, but consider for monastery advisability of building elsewhere. On September 17, the Archabbot advises to hold off on the selection of a site unless the Delegate insists.

The final decision regarding a site will be made during the visit of Archabbot Aurelius to Peking and in immediate consultation with the Archbishop, and it will be a place, not far from the Cathedral, for both the university and monastery.

FINANCES

The purchase of a site raises the question of finances. The first mention of finances is near the conclusion of the letter of July 17, where it is said:

He [Archbishop Constantini] also stated in this connection that the erection of a monastery would have to be financed by ourselves. For the erection of a University he promised the necessary assistance from the Congregation of the Propagation of the Faith.

From this statement it is clear that St. Vincent would have to pay the costs connected with the erection of a monastery. But it is not so clear as to who must cover the expenses for the site if the monastery and university are at the same place. Necessary assistance too is rather vague in describing what can be counted on from Rome.

Financing the new university was not the direct responsibility of Fr. Ildephonse, but rather that of Archabbot Aurelius, and the Archabbot devoted much time to thinking about possible financial arrangements. In his letter of August 15, he writes to Fr. Ildephonse: If the Prop. of Faith will pay for the new University Bldg. may pay also ground [that is, Propaganda of the Faith may also pay for the property]. Therefore, at this time, Archabbot Aurelius was hoping for substantial support from Propaganda for the new university, but as subsequent events will reveal, Archabbot Aurelius soon found himself the main person responsible for raising funds for the creation and running or a Catholic university.

The Archabbot must have well realized that the project was too large for the Benedictines alone to finance. Fr. Ildephonse's letter of November 28 is the first one to mention the Boxer Indemnity Commission, which, through the United States, had provided funding for Tsing Hua University and other national schools. By 1922, it began to seem likely that some of the income [from the Boxer funds] would go to mission institutions (Lutz 233). Archabbot Aurelius must have instructed Fr. Ildephonse to contact the Commission, for Fr. Ildephonse writes:

For the last several days I wished to send our Christmas greetings but hoped to state to you the time of meeting of the Boxer Indemnity Commission; since however information is lacking and may not be forthcoming for some time I must delay no longer . . .

Then in the letter of December to the Prior of St.Vincent, Fr. Ildephonse explains:

Am sending you some clippings from a Shanghai paper relative to the funds at the disposal of the Boxer Indemnity Commission. As these lines state the conditions quite well I refrain from adding anything. Kindly give the one copy to Father Archabbot with our best wishes and greetings . . .

Archabbot Aurelius left no door unopened in seeking funds for the university. And that Fr. Ildephonse was determined to do all the Archabbot requested can be seen in the letter of November 28 when Fr. Ildephonse describes the fighting among warlords that prevents his returning to Peking from Kaifeng:

The country however will be full of bandits as the soldiers dismissed from the army of those especially of the removed generals and governors will swarm over the land. Even now report of brigandage are increasing alarmingly. (2)

But he adds:

Allthis [sic] should not indeed keep me from trying to reach Peking had we definite news regarding the meetings of the Boxer indemnity Committee.

Even robbers and brigands would not stop Fr. Ildephonse in his quest for financial assistance for the university.

A final possible source of funding for the university that Fr. Ildephonse refers to in his letters is Dr. Ying. It is not clear whether he investigated this possibility on his own or at the request of Archabbot Aurelius. But what he writes in his letter of November 18 shows that there is little hope of getting financial support from Dr.Ying:

From Mr. Ying we can not expect any financial support as he has little, which was shown at the death of his wife when Mr. Mu helped him with some money for funeral expenses, as a professor he might be of valuable help.

Accordingly, before the arrival of Archabbot Aurelius in Peking there were no clear prospects of any funding from within China for the new university and only the possibility that Rome might be of assistance.

ROLE OF THE CATHOLIC CHINESE LAYMEN

The 1924 letters of Fr. Ildephonse have a fair number of references to advice given by the Apostolic Delegate, the Bishop, Fr. Mullen and others. He does not, however, mention much about the opinions and advice of Dr. Ying and other Chinese laymen who had initiated the proposal for a Catholic university in Peking. In his letter of July 20, however, Fr. Ildephonse does mention to Fr. Barry O'Toole that Messr. Mu and Ying were at the station to meet them upon their arrival in Peking. He further explains to Fr. O'Toole: We have conferred with Messrs. Mu and Ying at various times [;] they have made arrangements for studying the Chinese language and to morrow the teacher shall be here for the first time.

In the letter of August 20 to Archabbot Aurelius, Fr. Ildephonse mentions visiting Mr. Mu for relaxation. But before receiving this letter, in his letter of September 17, Archabbot Aurelius urges Fr. Ildephonse to [c]ultivate the friendship of Messrs. Mu and Ying, and other Chinese nationals. By October 18, when apparently he still had very little information from Fr. Ildephonse about Ying or Mu, Archabbot Aurelius expresses his displeasure: You never say a word about meeting our true old friends, Dr. Ying or Dr. Mu. Do you really never meet them?

In his letter of November 1, Fr. Ildephonse responds to Archabbot Aurelius' letter of September 17 and explains his relationship with Dr. Ying and other Chinese:

We are fostering the best we can and know the friendship of nationals with whom we became acquainted, but let me state right here that thus far I fail to see any concrete advantage that has spring from such a friendship. On the contrary had we from the very entrance into this land of superstition not been guided by the advice of these men, the knowledge of the language would be further advanced. Particulars when we meet, as it would require too much time to explain in full with a chance of misunderstanding. (1)

Unfortunately, Fr. Ildephonse was unable at this time to develop a positive relationship with the Chinese who had urged the founding of a Catholic university, or, it seems, even with Chinese in general. Ironically, he seemed to get along better with the French missionaries in Peking who might not have been fully behind the idea of the Benedictines establishing a university.

Then in his letter of November 28, Fr. Ildephonse seems to respond indirectly to the Archabbot's question of October 18 as to whether he has contact with Dr. Ying and others:

To me however it would seem imprudent to have our telegrams come through Mr. Mu. May I state in all due reverence and submission that the one letter sent to us through him in the beginning was opened and fully read as subsequent events taught. Father O'Gorman, a good friend of Mr. Mu advised us repeatedly not to trust too much in him as he is a pagan and may readily bring us into difficulties or financial losses.

But Fr. Ildephonse offers no such strong criticism of Dr. Ying. Rather, he notes:

[Since Dr. Ying is] [l]iving close to the Peitang I took leave of him before setting out for Kaifeng.

Finally, Fr. Ildephonse and matters, two other passages from Fr. Ildephonse's letters for 1924 related to the establishment of a Catholic university in Peking deserve attention. In his letter of October 8 to the Sisters of St. Xavier, Fr. Ildephonse reveals he has been carefully studying how an educational institution should be run in China, for he describes how meals for Chinese students should be arranged:

. . . the unanimous advice from all competent authorities is to have the students take care of their meals. The college or university management would offer to the student body its kitchen and they will then hire their cook and either entrust him with the necessary buying of the foodstuffs or what is more frequently the case do the purchasing themselves through a committee appointed from their ranks. . . . Wherever college or university authorities have ventured to supply the meals strikes were the result. (1-2)

The second striking passage, also in this letter to the Sisters, shows that the avoidance of student strikes is of special concern in Fr. Ildephonse's thinking about running a university in China:

The other day I visited a university near Tientsin, a fine Chinese gentleman, the president of the institution and an American professor showed us the premises. In the course of conversation I was informed that the former gentleman was newly installed in his office as his predecessor had to be removed because of the strike of the students.

In conclusion, before the arrival of Archabbot Aurelius in Peking in February of 1924, Fr. Ildephonse was considering a variety of problems, many of which had no obvious solution, and none of which he could resolved until the arrival of the Archabbot. If the university came first, where would the Chinese students come from and how could Chinese Benedictine be trained? If a college (i.e., high school) came first, how could the wishes of the Holy See be fulfilled? If there were interested Chinese students, and this was no guarantee of this, what kind of background could be expected of them, especially if English was to be the language of institution? Where should the university and monastery be located and should they be together? From where would the funding come? And, lastly, how could the Benedictines cooperate with the Chinese Catholic laymen who suggested the need of this university in the first place?

The immediate value of Fr. Ildephonse's letters of 1924 for setting up a Catholic university in Peking is that they gave Archabbot Aurelius a careful and thoughtful evaluation of the existing situation and circumstances. Though Archabbot Aurelius might not always agree with what Fr. Ildephonse suggested, his letters served well to identify the basic problems the Benedictines were facing if they were to set up a university in Peking. Ultimately, Fr. Idlephonse dutifully carried out the instructions of the Archabbot in his letter of October 18:

Listen much, remain passive until a decision reaches. We can't rush at conclusions that may lead to serious entanglements.

WORKS CITED

Levaux, Leopold. Le Pere Lebbe: Apotre de la Chine moderne (1877-1940) . Bruxelles and Paris: Editions Universitaires.

Lutz, Jessie Gregory. China and the Christian Colleges 1850-1950 . Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1971

Oetgen, Jerome. Mission to America: A History of Saint Vincent Archabbey, The First Benedictine Monastery in the United States . Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America P, 2000

| Back |