Lumen 2018

S TANISLAUS P APCZYNSKI 448 As they investigated the documents, the consultants would take certain sentences out of context, without taking other testimonies into account. This resulted in some serious errors. 134 They also ig- nored the historical and cultural background of the 17 th century. They did not take into account the literary genre of some sources that were polemic in nature. Reference here is being made to the History of the Polish Province of the Pious Schools , to the charges made by the Piarists and gathered by the Jesuits in the Ten Points , to Fr. Papczynski’s Pub- lic Statement Upon Departing for Rome [Protestatio Romam abeun- tis], and to his Apology . While Kraus’s history Provincia Poloniae CC. RR. PauperumMa- tris Dei Scholarum Piarum 135 is not objective, it is nonetheless a valu- able historical document because it includes many details omitted in other sources and allows us to establish the chronology of events more exactly. Therefore, it must be read with the use of a special “filter.” Kraus’s account is tainted with irony. By means of a peculiar kind of sophistry, he can obscure certain events and circumstances favorable to Fr. Stanislaus and sneak in various false statements. Because of this, Kraus’s charges and accusations should be treated with caution, for we are dealing here with statements made by a demagogue. The charges gathered by the Jesuits in the “ten points” 136 are of a similar character to those in Kraus’s History . In spite of this, some consultants gave faith to certain absurd statements made there, such as the one that Fr. Stanislaus preferred St. Francis to Christ. 137 Mean- while, the orthodoxy of his writings was confirmed during the beat- ification process by a special decree issued on July 15, 1775. 138 Father Papczynski’s writings in his own defense, such as Protestatio Romam abeuntis 139 and Apologia pro egressu e Scholis Piis, 140 created a lot of confusion among the consultants. In these writings, Fr. Pa- pczynski took steps in connection with the campaign against him. He tried not so much to defend himself as to defend the values that he embraced, among others, of religious observance. In the case of his Apology , which was written before he founded his new religious community, he had to defend his good name as the future founder