given a longer and more accurate training in the humanistic studies and oratory. The same care must be taken if one is thought to have a talent for poetics, for Greek, for philosophy, theology, Sacred Scripture, the Fathers of the Church, the Councils, and Canon Law. On the other hand, if one seems not to be fitted for a certain branch of study, he should not be detained therein longer than is necessary for acquiring an ordinary knowledge."[1]
Thus it is clear that the Constitutions of the Society and the documents directly concerning the studies, from the very beginning, insisted on the necessity of assigning each teacher's work according to his natural abilities. The General of the Society, Father Visconti, inculcated this principle later on, saying that "special care should be taken to assign the classes to the teachers according to their talent, knowledge and practical skill."[2] This must be emphasized much more in our days. For in the sixteenth century, the subjects taught in colleges were fewer, and it was not so difficult to appoint teachers. But in our times, other branches must be taught. This cannot be done effectively by the same man who teaches languages and literature. There are exceedingly few men who can excel in many branches, or can be good teachers in several of them.
Here, however, there is another danger which must
