a^ 
 
 A 
 
 3 
 
 oy^ ''V 
 
 >' V 
 
 -m >;■ 
 
 .s? 
 
 e^ > 
 
 (3^ 
 
 /^ 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 'ii 1^ IIIII15 
 
 mi 
 
 36 
 
 I.I 
 
 
 1 2.2 
 2.0 
 
 1.8 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 
 
 1.25 1.4 
 
 1.6 
 
 
 'm 6" — 
 
 
 ► 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 V/EBSTER,N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
4^; 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut canadien de microreproductions historiques 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 □ Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 I I Covers damaged/ 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 D 
 D 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 n 
 
 Couverture enojmmagie 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaurde et/ou peilicul^e 
 
 I I Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes g6ographiques en couieur 
 
 Coloured inlt (i.e. other than blue or blacit)/ 
 Encre de couieur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couieur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reli6 avec d'autres documents 
 
 r~7] Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La reliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 
 distortion le long de la marge intdrieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas 6t6 film^es. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppldmentaires; 
 
 Tl 
 to 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a &t6 possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la mdthode normale de filmage 
 sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. 
 
 D 
 D 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 s/ 
 
 n 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 
 
 Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couieur 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagdes 
 
 Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages restaur^es et/ou pelliculdes 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages d6color6es, tachetdes ou piquies 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages d6tach6es 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Tl 
 
 P< 
 ol 
 fil 
 
 O 
 
 b< 
 th 
 si 
 oi 
 fil 
 si 
 
 Ol 
 
 I I Quality of print varies/ 
 
 Quality indgale de I'imprsssion 
 
 Includes supplementary material/ 
 Comprend du materiel supplementaire 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc., ont 6Xi filmdes A nouveau de fapon d 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 Tl 
 sk 
 Tl 
 w 
 
 M 
 di 
 er 
 b< 
 
 "< 
 re 
 m 
 
 10X 
 
 
 
 
 14X 
 
 
 
 
 18X 
 
 
 
 
 22X 
 
 
 
 
 26X 
 
 
 
 
 30X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 >/ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
B 
 
 Itails 
 s du 
 lodifier 
 r une 
 Image 
 
 IS 
 
 The copy filmed here has been reproduced ihanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 National Library of Canada 
 
 The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, aind ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol — ^ (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grflce d la 
 g6n6rosit6 de: 
 
 Bibliothdque nationale du Canada 
 
 Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettet6 de l'exemplaire film6, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprimde sont filmds en commenpant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par ia 
 dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le s«)cond 
 plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont filmis en commenpant par la 
 premidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernidre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la 
 dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbole — ^> signifie "A SUIVRE", le 
 symbols V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent 6tre 
 film6s d des taux de reduction diffdrents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre 
 reproduit en un seul cliche, il est filmd A partir 
 de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la mdthode. 
 
 srrata 
 to 
 
 pelure, 
 m & 
 
 n 
 
 32X 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
c. 
 
THE 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS: 
 
 MORAL TEACHINGS OF THE JESUIT FATHERS 
 
 OPPOSED TO THE CHURCH OF ROME 
 
 AND LATIN VULGATE. 
 
 BY 
 
 Blaise pascal. 
 
 "I speak a8 to wise men, judge ye what I say."—! Cor. x. I.',. 
 
 Translated from the original French into mriom langvxige». 
 
 / 
 
 ^aris. 
 Wwm. lonboit. 
 
 TORONTO : 
 WILIvIAlVI BRIGGS, 
 
 WESLEY BUILDINGS. 
 C. W. COAXES, Montreal, Que. s. F, HUESTIS, Halifax, N.S. 
 
 1892. 
 
preface. 
 
 EVENTS recently transpired in this Dominion are ample 
 reasonn for issuing the first Canadian edition of this cele- 
 brated work. The author* — whose family ranked with the nobility 
 of France, liberally educated, acquainted with the Jesuit Fathers 
 resident in Paris, familiar with the approved publications of their 
 society— was a writer and mathematician of consummate ability, 
 and still more valuably distinguished by his unblemished morality, 
 devout piety, strict and life-long attention to his religious duties, 
 and died with solemn rite in the communion of the Church of 
 Rome. He pours into this volume an erudition, research and 
 rationale, ttiat won for it a continental and enduring popularity, 
 created a spirit of investigation in the circles of the court and 
 doctors of the Sorbonne, wliich resulted in the expulsion of the 
 entire Jesuit body from France, Canada, and dependencies. The 
 F^uropean nations in succession followed the example of France 
 and Italy in their suppression and banishment. The present race 
 of Jesuits in this Dominion being the legalized and professed repre- 
 sentatives of the proscribed society, in property, teaching and 
 practise ; this antidotal and admirable volume is respectfully dedi- 
 cated to the cultivated intellect and ever-brightening intelligence of 
 our national community. 
 
 * See iiicinoir. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Like ok the Authou 
 
 PAOB 
 
 LETTER FIRST. 
 
 Discussions in Sorbonne. Invention of Proximate Power ; how 
 
 used by the Jesuits to secure the censure of M. Arnauld 41 
 
 LETTER SECOND. 
 Sufficient Grace -.-.... 
 Answer of the Provincial to his friend's first two Letters 
 
 63 
 66 
 
 LETTER THIRD. 
 
 Injustice, Absurdity, and Nullity of the Censure of M. Arnauld 
 
 68 
 
 LETTER FOURTH. 
 
 Of Actual Grace always present, and of Sins of Ignorance • - 79 
 
 LETTER FIFTH. 
 
 Design of the Jesuits in establishing a new Morality. Two sets of 
 Casuists among them. Many of them Lax, some Strict. 
 Ground of this Diversity. Doctrine of Probability explained. 
 Herd of Modern and L; nknown Authors substituted for the 
 Holy Fathers - - - - - - - 96 
 
 LETTER SIXTH. 
 
 Artifices of the Jesuits to evade the authority of Scripture, Councils, 
 and PojHJs. Consequences of the Doctrine of Probability. 
 Their corruptions in favour of Beneficiaries, Priests, Monks, 
 and Domestics. History of John of Alba - 114 
 
VI 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 LETTER SEVENTH. 
 
 The Method of directing the Intention according to the Casuists. 
 Of their r)entiiHsion to Kill in defence of Honour and Fio- 
 perty. This extended to Priests and Monks. Curious ques- 
 tion projKJsed by Caranniel : May the .Jesuits lawfully kill 
 the Jansenists ?-----.. 
 
 PAOII 
 
 132 
 
 lp:tter ekjhth. 
 
 Coirupt Maxims of the Casuists concerning Judges, Usurers, tl 
 Contract Mohatra, Bankrupts, Restitution, etc. Varioi 
 extravagances of the Casuists - 
 
 le 
 irious 
 
 152 
 
 letter ninth. 
 
 Of Spurious Devotion to the Blessed Virgin introduced by the 
 Jesuits. Different exjjedients which they have devised to 
 Save themselves without pain, and while enjoying the Plea- 
 sures and Comforts of Life. Their Maxims on Ambition, 
 Envy, tiluttony. Equivocation, Mental Reservation, Freedom 
 allowable in Girls, Female Dress, Gaming, hearing Mass - 172 
 
 LETTER TENTH. 
 
 How the Jesuits have softened do\\^l the Sacrament of Penitence, 
 by their Maxims touching Confession, Satisfaction, Absolu- 
 tion, Proximate Occasions of Sin, Contrition, and the love 
 of God 191 
 
 LETTER ELEVENTH. 
 
 Ridiculous Errors may be refuted by Raillery. Precautions to be 
 used. These observed by Montalte : not so by the Jesuits. 
 Impious Buffoonery of Father le Moine and Father Garasse - 212 
 
 LETTER TWELFTH. 
 
 Refutation of the Jesuit quibbles on Alms and Simony 
 
 232 
 
 LETTER THIRTEETH. 
 
 The Doctrine of Lessius on Homicide the same as tliat of Victoria : 
 How easy it is to pass from Speculation to Practise : Why the 
 Jesuits have made use of this vain distinction ; and IujVv' little 
 it serves to justify them ------ 252 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 VU 
 
 LETTER FOITRTEENTH. 
 
 Tlio Maxims of tlie Jesuits on Hoinii-ich- refuted from the Fathers. 
 
 oc- 
 
 PAOB 
 
 Answer in passi 
 
 ssing to some of their Cahitiinies ; Their I> 
 id with the forms ohsei \e(l m ('riminal trials 
 
 LETTER FIFTEENTH. 
 
 The Jesuits erase Calumny from the list of sins, and make no 
 
 scruple of using it to cry down their enen les • - - 293 
 
 LETTER SIXTEEN' H. 
 
 H(>rril)le Calumnies of the .Tesuits against j ious Ecclesiastics and 
 
 holy Nuns ....... 314 
 
 LETTER SEVENTEETH. 
 
 Proof on removing an Ambiguity 'n the meaning of Jansenius, that 
 there is no Heresy in the Church. Hy the unanimous con- 
 sent of all Theologians, and especially of the Jesuits, the 
 authority of Popes and (Ecumenical douncils not Infallible 
 in (juestions of 1 act ...... 344 
 
 LETTER EIGHTEENTH. 
 
 Proved still more invincibly by Father Annat's reply, that there is 
 no heresy in the Church : everybody condemns the doctrine 
 which the Jesuits ascribe to .Tansenius, and thus the views of 
 all the faithful on the Five Propositions are the same : differ- 
 ence between Dis])utes as to Doctrine, and as to Fact : in 
 (.Questions of Fact, more weight due to what is seen than to 
 any human authority ..... 
 
 372 
 
;9HpL 
 
 I 
 
LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 Blaise Pascal was born i Clei mont, 'u the Province 
 of Auver^ne. His father, Step')en Pascal, president 
 in the Court of A-ids, in that citv, married Antoinette 
 Begon, by whom he had f(>ur children : the tirst was 
 a son, who died in infancy ; Blaise, the subject of the 
 present memoir; and two daughters, Gilbene, Tvho 
 was married to M. Perier, and Jacqueline, who took 
 the veil in the convent of Port Royal. 
 
 The family of Pascal had received a patent of 
 nobility from Louis XI., and from that period had 
 held many official situations of considerable importance 
 in Auvergne. Besides these hereditary advantages, 
 Stephen Pascal was distinguished, not only for his 
 legal knowledge, but for superior attainments in 
 literature and science, combined with great simplicity 
 of manners, and an exquisite relish for the calm and 
 pure delights to be met with in the bosom of liis family. 
 The early departure of his amiable and excellent wife, 
 Antoinette Begon, a stroke most deeply felt, increased 
 his interest in the education of his children, an object 
 for which he had always been solicitous, but which, 
 
10 
 
 LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 from that time, became paramount to every other. 
 In order to pursue it without distraction, he resit^ned 
 an official sittiation in favor of his brother, and 
 removed at once to Paris. Here he had free access to 
 persons whose tastes were coni,'enial with his own, and 
 enjoyed the amplest means of information from books 
 and other sources. His principal attention was 
 directed to his only s(m, who gave indications, almost 
 from his cradle, of his future eininence ; at the same 
 time he instructed his dau<diters in the Latin languaije 
 and general literature, studies whidi he looked upon 
 as well adapted to produce a spirit of reflection, and 
 to secure them from that frivolity which is the bane 
 and reproach of either sex. 
 
 The famous Thirty Year.s' War at that time raged 
 through Europe; but, amidst all its disasters, E!o(|uence 
 and Poetry, which had flourished in Ttaly for more 
 than a century, began to unfold their lustre in 
 France and Eiiixland : the severer sciences issued from 
 the shades in which they had been enveloped ; a sound 
 plnlosophy, or rather a sound method of philosophizing, 
 made its way into the schools, and the revolution, 
 which had been commenced by Galileo and Des Cartes, 
 rapidly advanced. Stephen Pascal partook ot" the 
 general impulse, and united himself with men of simi- 
 lar talents and pursuits, such as Mersenne, Roberval, 
 Carcavi, Le Pailleur, and others, for the purpose of 
 discussing philosophical subjects, and of opening a 
 correspondence with the promoters of Science in 
 France and other countries. To this association mav 
 
 (!i 
 
LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 11 
 
 be traced the origin of the Academy of Sciences, 
 established under royal authority. 
 
 Youni; Pascal sometimes joined in the scientific con- 
 versations held at his father's house. He listened to 
 everything' with extreme attention, and eagerly inves- 
 tii'ated the causes of whatever fell under his observa- 
 tion. It is said that at the age of eleven years he 
 composed a small treatise on Sounds, in wdiich he 
 endeavored to explain why the sound made by 
 striking a plate with a knife ceases on applying one's 
 hand to it. His father, fearful that too keen a relish 
 for the sciences would impede his progress in the lan- 
 <^nages, which were then considered tlie most important 
 part of education, decided, in concert with his friends, 
 to abstain from conversing on philosophical subjects in 
 his presence. To pacify his son under this painful 
 interdiction, his father promised that when he had 
 acquired a complete knowledge of Greek and Latin, 
 and was in other respects qualified, he should learn 
 Geometry ; only observing that it is the science of 
 extension, or of the three dimensions of the body, 
 length, breadth, and thickness; that it teaches how to 
 form figures with accuracy, and to compare their rela- 
 tions one with another. Slight as these hints were, 
 they served as a ray of light to develop his genius for 
 mathematics. From that moment his mind had no 
 rest ; he was engcn' to explore the mysteries of a 
 science withheld from him wnth so much care. In his 
 hours of recreation ho shut himself up in a chamber, 
 and with a piece oi charcoal drew on the Hoor tri- 
 
12 
 
 LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 I i 
 
 angles, parallelograms, and circles, without even 
 knowing the names of these figures ; he examined the 
 different positions of convergent lines, and their mutual 
 relations. By degrees he arrived at the conclusion 
 that the sum of the three angles of a triangle must be 
 measured by a semi-circumference ; or, in other words, 
 are equal to two right angles, which is the thirty- 
 second proposition of the First Book of Euclid. 
 While meditating this theorem, he was surprised by 
 his father, who, having learnt the object, progress, and 
 result of his researches, stood for some time dumb 
 with astonishment and delight, and then hastened, 
 almo>,t beside himself, to tell wliat he had witnessed 
 to his intimate friend M. Le Pailleur. 
 
 The young Pascal vvas now left at full liberty to 
 study Geometry. The first book on the subject put 
 into his hands, at twelve years old, was Euclid's 
 Elements, which he understood at once, without the 
 slightest assistance. He was soon able to take a dis- 
 tinguished station among men of science, and at 
 sixteen composed a small tract on Conic Sections, 
 which evmced extraordinary sagacity. 
 
 The happiness which Stephen Pascal enjoyed in 
 witnessing the rapid progress of his son was for a 
 short time interrupted by an unexpected event. The 
 Government, whose resources had been impoverished 
 by a succession of wars, at length decided to make 
 some reduction on the interest of the public debt, 
 a measure which, though very easily adopted, excited 
 great dissatisfaction among the proprietors, and occa- 
 
 11 i 
 
 itii 
 
LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 13 
 
 sioned meetings which were denounced as seditious. 
 Stephen Pascal was accused as one of the most 
 active on this occasion, which his liaving laid out 
 the greatest part of his property in the purchase of 
 shares rendered somewhat plausible. An order was 
 issued for his arrest, but having received timely notice 
 from a friend, he secreted himself, and withdrew into 
 Auvergne. His recall was owing to the good offices 
 of the Duchess d'Aiguillon, who prevailed on his 
 daughter Jacqueline to perform a part in a comedy 
 before Cardinal Richelieu. On the Cardinal express- 
 ing his satisfaction with the performance, she pre- 
 sented him with a copy of verses applicable to her 
 father's situation, on which Richelieu immediately 
 procured his recall, and within two years made him 
 Intendant of Rouen. 
 
 During Pascal's residence at Rouen, when scarcely 
 nineteen years old, he invented the famous arithmeti- 
 cal machine which bears his name. It was two years 
 before he brought it to a state of perfection, owing not 
 merely to the difficulty he found in arranging and 
 combining the several parts of the machinery, but to 
 the unskilfulness of the workmen. Many attempts 
 have since been made to simplify it, particularly by 
 Leibnitz, but, on the whole, its advantages have not 
 compensated for the inconvenience arising from its 
 complexity and bulk. 
 
 Soon after this, he entered on a course of inquiry 
 relative to the weight of the atmosphere, a subject 
 which engaged the attention of all the philosophers of 
 

 14 
 
 LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 lil!^ 
 
 Illili 
 
 Europe. The venerable Galileo harl opened the way 
 to correct views of it, but left to his disciple Torricelli 
 and others to establish the true explanation of the 
 phenomena connected with this branch of physics. 
 Pascal published an account of his experiments, in a 
 valuable work entitled, " New Experiments Relat- 
 ing to Vacuum." He wrote also two treatises on 
 the equilibrium of fluids, and the wei(j;ht of the atmos- 
 phere, which were printed shortly after the Author's 
 lamented decease. These tracts were succeeded by 
 some others on geometrical subjects, none of which 
 appear to have been preserved. We deeply regret that 
 they were not published at the same time as his other 
 philosophical treatises, as tliey would have contributed 
 to give us more accurate conceptions of the extent to 
 which their author pushed his researches. Besides 
 this, the productions of a man of genius, though, owing 
 to the advance of science, they 'nay present nothing 
 new, are always instructing from the exhibition they 
 make of his mode of arranijing his thouohts and rea- 
 sonings. They are not to be valued so much, perhaps, 
 for the actual knowledge they comnmnicate, because 
 in scientific researches there is a constant progression, 
 and works of the highest order in one age are sue- 
 ceeded in the next by others more profound and com- 
 plete. It is not so in matters of taste and imagina- 
 tion ; and a tragedy which gives a vivid and correct 
 representation of the passions common to mankind, 
 will never become obsolete. The poet and the orator 
 have also another advantage ; they address, though a 
 
LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 15 
 
 he way 
 orricelli 
 I of the 
 physics, 
 its, in a 
 ■; Relat- 
 tises on 
 I atmos- 
 j^iithor's 
 eded by 
 ■ which 
 ;ret that 
 lis other 
 trihuted 
 xtent to 
 Besides 
 1, owing 
 nothinf]^ 
 m they 
 md rea- 
 oerhaps, 
 )'ocause 
 ression, 
 re suc- 
 d com- 
 Inagina- 
 correct 
 mkind, 
 orator 
 lough a 
 
 less select yet afar more numerous aiiditory, and their 
 names speedily attain celebrity. Yet the glory of 
 scientific discoveries appears more solid and impres- 
 sive ; the truths they develop circulate from age to age, 
 a common good, not subject to the vicissitudes of lan- 
 guage ; and if their works no longer contribute to the 
 instruction of posterity, they remain as monuments to 
 mark the height to wliich the human mind had reached 
 at the time of their appearance. Of Pascal's genius 
 there remain memorials sufficient to place him in the 
 front rank of mathematicians ; such are the Arithmeti- 
 cal Triangle, his papers on the Doctrine of Chances, 
 
 and his treatise on 
 
 .' 1 
 
 Cvcloid. 
 
 Intense application gradually undermined his health. 
 He was attacked for three months by a paralytic affec- 
 tion, which almost leprived him of the use of his limbs. 
 Some time after he removed to Paris with his father 
 and his sister Jacqueline. Whilst surrounded by his 
 rolation.s, he somewhat relaxed his studies, and made 
 several excursions into Auvergne and other parts. 
 But he had the misfortune to lose his endeared father, 
 and not long after his sister Jacqueline entered the 
 convent at Port Royal. His other sister and her hus- 
 band, M. Perier, resided at a distance, at Clermont. 
 Thus left alone, he gave himself up to such excessive 
 mental labour as would have soon brought him to the 
 tomb. The failure of his bodily powers forced him to 
 relax hi.-s studies, which his physicians had in vain 
 advised. He therefore entered into society, and though 
 his disposition was tinged with melancholy, always 
 
16 
 
 LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 gave pleasure from his superior understanding, which 
 accommodated itself to the various capacities of those 
 he conversed with. He j^radually acquired a relish 
 for society, and even indulged thoughts of marriage, 
 hoping that the attentions of an amiable and sensible 
 companion would alleviate his sufterings and enliven 
 his solitude ; but an unexpected event changed all his 
 projects. As he was one day taking his usual drive 
 in a coach and four, a dangerous accident occurred 
 while passing over the bridge of Neuilly : the two 
 leaders became ungovernable on a part of the bridge 
 where there was no parapet, and y!unged into the 
 Seine. Happily the first shock of their descent broke 
 the traces which connected them with the hindmost 
 horses, so that the coach stopped on the edj^e of the 
 precipice. The concussion given to the feeble frame 
 of Pascal may be easily conceived ; he fainted away, 
 and a considerable time elapsed before he came to him- 
 self again. His nerves were so violently agitated, 
 that in many of the sleepless nights which succeeded 
 during the subsequent period of his life, he imagined 
 that he saw a precipice by his bedside, into which he 
 was in danjier of falling. He regarded this event as 
 an admonition from heaven to break off all worldly 
 engajrements, and to live henceforward to God alone. 
 His sister Jacqueline had already prepared him by 
 her example and her conversation for adopting this 
 resolution. He renounced the world entirely, and 
 retained no connection but with friends who held simi- 
 lar principles. The regular life he led in his retire- 
 
 fill 
 
LIFE OF THE AUTHOU. 
 
 17 
 
 nient gave some relief to his bodily sufFerinijs, and at 
 intervals a portion of tolerable health ; and durini;' 
 this ])eriod he composed many works of a kind very 
 different to those on scientific subjects, but which were 
 new proofs of his genius, and of the wonderful facility 
 with which his mind grasped every object presented 
 to it. 
 
 The convent of Port Royal, after a long interval of 
 languor and relaxation, had risen to a high reputation, 
 under the direction of Angelica Arnauld, This cele- 
 brated woman, desirous of augmenting the reputation 
 of the establishment by all lawful means, had drawn 
 around her a number of persons distinguished for 
 learning and piety, who, disgusted with the world, 
 sought to enjoy in retirement the pleasure of reflec- 
 tion and Christian tranquility. Such were the two 
 brothers, Arnauld d'Andilli, and Antoine Arnauld, 
 Le Maitre, and Saci, the translator of the Bible, Nicole, 
 Lancelot, Hermant, and others. The principal occu- 
 pation of these illustrious men was the education of 
 youth ; it was in their school that Racine acquired a 
 knowledge of the classics, a taste for the great models 
 of antiquity, and the principles of that harmonious 
 and enchanting style, which places him on the summit 
 of the French Parnassus. Pascal cultivated their 
 acquaintance, and was soon on terms of the most 
 familiar intimacy. Without making his fixed residence 
 with them, he paid them, at intervals, visits of three 
 or four months, and found in their society everything 
 that could instruct him, reason, eloquence, and devo- 
 
■,-r— 
 
 ^^ 
 
 ill II 
 
 
 < 
 
 18 
 
 LIFE OF THK AUTHOR. 
 
 tion. On their part, they were not slow to apprehend 
 the extent and profundity of his ffonius. Nothing 
 appeared strani^e to him. The variety of his know- 
 ledge, and that fertility of invention which animated 
 him, gave him the ability to express himself with 
 intelligence, and to scatter new ideas over every sub- 
 ject he touched upon. He gained the admiration and 
 the love of all these eminent recluses, but especially of 
 Saci. This laborious student, who spent his life in 
 the study of the Scriptures and the Fathers, was 
 devoted to the writin^js of St. Augustine, and never 
 heard any striking sentiment on theology to which he 
 did not imagine he could find a parallel in his favourite 
 author. No sooner had Pascal uttered some of those 
 elevated thoughts which were familiar to him, than 
 Saci remembered having read the same thing in 
 Auffustine; but without diminishing his admiration of 
 Pascal ; for it excited his astonishment that a young 
 man who had never read the Fatheis, should, by his 
 native acuteness, coincide in his thoughts with so cele- 
 brated a theologian ; and he looked upon him as des- 
 tined to be a firm supporter and defender of Port 
 Royal, which was at this period exposed to the viru- 
 lent assaults of the Jesuits, 
 
 Cornelius Jansen, bishop of Ypres, esteemed for 
 his talents and character, and who was very far 
 from ic eseeing that his name would one day become 
 the signal of discord and hatred, had occupied himself 
 in meditating and reducing to a system the principles 
 which he believed were contained in the writings of 
 
 s 
 
 
LIFE OF THE AITHOK. 
 
 10 
 
 St. Augustine. Ho wrote bis work in Latin, witli the 
 title of Augustinus. It was scarcely finished when its 
 author was taken off by the phiji^ue, which be cau;4ht 
 while examining some manuscripts belonging to one 
 of his clergy, who had died of that malady. The 
 Augustinus niHde its appearance at length in huge folio, 
 written without order or method, and not more ob- 
 scure from the nature of the subject than from the 
 dirt'useness and inelegance of the style. It owed its 
 unfortunate celebrity to the illustrious men wdio forced 
 it into notice, and to the implacable animosity of their 
 enemies. 
 
 The Abbe de St. Cyran, a friend of Jansen, enter- 
 tained the same sentiments, and abhorring the Jesuits 
 and their tenets, extolled the Augustinus even before 
 it appeared, and spread its doctrines b\^ means of an 
 extensive correspondence. The recluses of Port Royal 
 soon after pul)licly professed their approbration of it. 
 The Jesuits, irritated to the extreme wdien they behehl 
 their own theology falling into contempt before it, and 
 jealous of the Port Royalists, who eclipsed them in 
 ever}'' department of literature, set themselves with 
 all their might to oppose the work of Jansen. The 
 nature of the subject laid it open to and)iguities of 
 language ; and by garbling the words of the author, 
 they formed five propositions wdiich presented a sense 
 evidently false and erroneous, and by these misrepre- 
 sentations, procured a censure from Pope Innocent X., 
 though without its being determined whether they 
 were exactly contained in the work of Jansen or not. 
 
r 
 
 20 
 
 LIFE OK TFIE AUTHOU. 
 
 ■ i! 
 
 ■ V 
 I 
 
 . I : 
 
 The clcrujy oi' France, in their .snl)se(|nent convocation, 
 demanded a fresh sentence, and represented the Jan- 
 fsenists as rebels and lieretics. Alexander VII., the 
 succeeding pontiff', issued a hull wliich a<5ain eondt'iuned 
 the five propositions, with a clause declarini,' that they 
 were faitlifuU}' extracted from Jansen's work, and 
 heretical in the sense of their author. This bull .served 
 as the l)asis of a formulary which the clei'ijfy prepared, 
 and of which the Court undertook to exact the sio-na- 
 ture rif^orousl}'. Alexander VII. issued a .second bull, 
 with a formulary on the same subject. 
 
 It is probable that the Jesuits would have failed in 
 their persecution of the Jansenists, if the first states- 
 men in Europe had not felt it their interest to sup- 
 port them. Cardinal Richelieu, who had a per.simal 
 hatred to the Abbe St. Cyran, had tried, at first, to 
 procure the condemnation of his writings by the Papal 
 See ; but as he was not a man to endure the ordi- 
 nary delays of the Romish court for an object so 
 frivolous in his eyes as the cen.sure of four or five 
 theological propositions, put forth by a single eccle- 
 siastic, he found it more easy and convenient to lodge 
 St. Cyran in confinement in Vincennes. 
 
 Mazarin, less violent, but more skilful in concealino- 
 his hatred, and in effecting his vindictive purposes, 
 aimed in secret the most deadly blows at the Jansen- 
 ists. In his heart he was indifferent to all theoloo-ical 
 opinions ; he had little affection for the Jesuits, but 
 knew that the Port Royal party kept up a connection 
 with his most formidable enemy, the Cardinal de Retz. 
 
1,IKE OK T[1K AlTHOll. 
 
 21 
 
 ocation, i 
 he .1 an- 
 
 il., the 5 
 
 (It'uuied i 
 
 lat they ; 
 
 »rk, and . 
 
 11 served | 
 
 (repared, ;| 
 
 le si^iia- 1 
 ond bull, 1 
 
 failed in 'f 
 
 it states- J 
 
 b to sup- 1 
 
 personal m 
 
 t iirst, to 1 
 
 he Papal 
 
 the ordi- , 
 
 )V)ject so 
 
 r or live 
 
 ^■le eccle- 
 
 j to lodo-e 
 
 oneealing 
 
 purposes, 
 3 Janson - 
 
 leolog'ical 
 suits, but 
 
 Dunection 
 
 I de Retz. 
 
 Without in(]uirin<( into tht; nature of this connection, 
 he decided on its criminality, and to avent^^e himself, 
 oxcitisd the cloruv to demand the first Bull of Alexander 
 VII. Thus the State was disturbed for a centur3% 
 because the defenders of a book which, had it depended 
 on its ov,'n merits, would have sunk into oldivion, 
 were the friends of an archbishop of Paris, who was 
 the enemy of the prime minister of h' ranee. Mazarin, 
 doubtless, did not foresee the melancholy consequences 
 of his error in introducing^ the secular power into a 
 theological warfare, of the very existence of which he 
 oui^dit to have been ii^norant. Let princes and prime 
 ministers take a lesson from his example. 
 
 The recluses at Port Royal, and many other theolo- 
 oians. without defendint; the literal sense of the five 
 condenmed propositions, professed that they were not 
 in the Auu'ustinus ; or that if thev were, that their 
 nieanino- as therein expressed was agreeable to the 
 Catholic faith. They were answered by contrary 
 assertions ; the controversy became every day more 
 violent, and a multitude of works appeared, which, 
 from the indulgence of human passions, and the viola- 
 tions of Christian charity they exhibited, gave the 
 enemies of religion a sad occasion of triumph. 
 
 Of all the abettors of Jansenism, none showed 
 greater zeal than Arnauld, a man of elevated mind 
 and austere manners. When he entered on the 
 clerical function, he gave almost all his property to the 
 institution of Port Royal, declaring that poverty be- 
 came a minister of Jesus Christ. His attachment to 
 
22 
 
 LIFE OF THE AlTTHOn. 
 
 what ho believed to bo truth was as intloxibh} as trutli 
 itself. He (letoste<l the corrupt morality of the Jes- 
 uits ; an<l was ecjuaily the object of their Imtred, not 
 only on his own account, but because he was the son 
 of the advocate who had pleaded with vehemence on 
 behalf of the university that they sjiould lit; interdicttMi 
 from en<^a<^in^ in the instruction of youth, and even 
 be banished from the kingdom. The followinir anec- 
 dote will show the intense interest with which he 
 espoused the cause of Jansenism. One <lay, his friend 
 and fellow-soldier in the same cause, but naturally of 
 a mild and yieldinj^ <lisposition, complained tliat he 
 was weary of the conflict and longed for repo.se- 
 "Repose!" replied Arnauld, "will you not have all 
 elernitj) to repose in!"' 
 
 With this disposition, Arnauld published a decided 
 letter, in which he said that he had not f(jund in Jan- 
 sen the five condojnned propositions; and in relation 
 to the (juestion at issue re.spectini^ .special grace, added, 
 that St. Peter in his denial of Christ was an example 
 of a true believer to whom that grace, without which 
 we can do nothing, was wanting. The first of the.se 
 assertions appeared contemptuous to the Papal chair ; 
 the second made him suspected of heresy; and both 
 excited great ferment in the Sorbonne, of which 
 Arnauld was a member. His enemies used every 
 means to bring upon him a humiliating censure. His 
 friends urged upon him the necessity of self-defence. 
 He was possessed of great native eloquence, but his 
 style was harsh and negligent. Aware of it.s defects, 
 
LITE OF TIIK AUTHOU. 
 
 23 
 
 he was the first to point out Piiscal as the only man 
 Cfipable oF <i()inLj justice to the subject. Pascal wil- 
 iiiii,'!}' consented to use his pen in a cause so dear to hia 
 heart. 
 
 i*ascal published, under the name of Louis de 
 Montalte, his tirst lettt.'r to a Provincial, in which 
 Ik" treated tlu; nieetinns of the Surbonne on the 
 affair of Arnauld with a delicate and refined hu- 
 ■.;<jur, of which there then existed no model in the 
 French hint:juaLre. This letter met with prodi;,nous 
 .success; but the party whose object was to destroy 
 Arnauld, had so well taken their measures, and had 
 brou^dit to the as<end)ly so many doctors and monks 
 devoted to their authority, that not only the two pro- 
 positions above named were condemned by a majority 
 of votes, but their author was exclude*! for ever 
 from the faculty of theolo;.'y by their otlicial decree. 
 The triumph of his enemies was somewhat checked 
 by the 2nd, 'ird, and 4th letters to a Provincial, 
 which followed close upon the decree of the Sor- 
 bonne. The Dominicans who, to maintain their 
 credit and to gratify their paltry resentments, ap- 
 peared on this occasion to have abandoned the doc- 
 trine of Aquinas, were overwhelmed with ridicule ; 
 but the Jo.suits in particular, who had contributed 
 most to Arnauld's condemnation, paid dearly for the 
 joy their success gave them. From their own writ- 
 ings Pascal drew the materials for opposing their un- 
 truthfulness ; and he became the remote instrument 
 of their destruction. The absurd and scandalous deci- 
 
. 
 
 
 m I 
 
 ^4 
 
 'iAFE OV THE AUTHOR. 
 
 sions of tlieir casuists furnished him with evidences of 
 their impiety in abundance. But it required a genius 
 such as his to combine his materials into a work which 
 might interest not merely theologians, but men of the 
 world and of all ranks. So much has been said of the 
 Provincial Letters that it is needless to eulogize them. 
 They are universally acknowledged to be unequalled 
 in their kind, and from their publication the fixation of 
 the French language may be dated. Voltaire declares 
 that they combine the wit of Moliere with the sub- 
 limity of Bossuet. I will only remark that one great 
 niierit of these compositions appears to be the admirable 
 skill with which the transitions are made from one 
 topic to another. The destruction of the Jesuits may 
 have diminished the attractions of the work to certain 
 classes of readers, but it will always be esteemed by 
 men of letters and taste as a master-piece of style, wit, 
 and ekxjuence. Unfortunately for the Jesuits, they 
 had not a single good writer among them to reply to 
 it ; and the answers they attempted were as defective 
 in style as tlu-y were objectionable in sentiment. In 
 short, they met with a total failure, while all France 
 was ea<rer to read the Pro\incial Letters, which the 
 Jansenists, to increase their circulation, translated 
 into Latin and the principal modern languages. 
 
 Among other works put forth by the Jesuits on 
 behalf of their casuists, there was one which gave 
 general dissatisfaction, entitled, An Apology for the 
 Neiv Casuists afjalnst the Caliiinnics of tfie Janscniufs. 
 The clergy of Paris and some other places attacked 
 
LIFE OF THE AUTIIOK. 
 
 this book with a powerful and vehement eloquence, 
 worthy of Demosthenes. These productions proceeded 
 cliietty from Arnauld, Nicole and Pascal. The two 
 former furnished the materials, which were elaborated 
 by the latter. They produced a powerful sensation 
 afjainst the Jesuits, and in spite of all the credit the 
 Fathers possessed with the clergy, many eminent 
 bishops published express mandates against Tlie Apo- 
 logy for the Casuists. 
 
 The controversy carried on by Pascal against the 
 Jesuits lasted three years ; and it prevented his labour- 
 ing as soon as he had wished, at a great work which 
 he had long meditated, on the truth of religion. At 
 different times he set down on paper rejections con- 
 nected with it, and fully intended to execute the 
 work, but his bodily infirmities increased so rapidly 
 as to prevent its completion, and nothing but the frag- 
 ments are left to us. He was first attacked with an 
 ejvcruciating pain in the teeth, which deprived him 
 almost entirely of sleep. During one of his wakeful 
 nights the recollections of some problems relative to 
 the Cycloid roused his mathematical genius. He had 
 long renounced the study of the sciences ; but the 
 beauty of the problems and the necessity of diverting 
 his mind by some powerful effort from his bodily suf- 
 ferings, led him into researches of which the results 
 are, even at the present day, reckoned among the finest 
 efforts of the human mind. 
 
 The curve well known to mathematicians by the 
 name of Trochoid or Cycloitl, is the line described by 
 
" 
 
 
 
 i li 
 
 
 ■ i 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 i 
 
 ', 
 
 il 
 
 26 
 
 LFKE OF THE Al'TIIOH. 
 
 the motion of any one point in tlio circumference of a 
 wheel runnin>T on the !:j;roun(l. It is not certain by 
 whom this curve was first distinctly noticed, though 
 an allusion to it occurs in Aristotle. Roberval was the 
 first to demonstrate that its area is triple that of its 
 generatini:^ circle. He also determined, soon after, the 
 solid descriljed by the revolution of the Cycloid on its 
 base, and, what was more difficult for the geometry of 
 that day, the solid described by its revolution on the 
 diameter of its generating circle. Torricelli ■■blished 
 most of these problems, as discovered by hiiu..v,lf, in a 
 somewhat later work, but it was asserted in France 
 that Torricelli had found the solutions of Roberval 
 among Galileo's papers ; and Pascal, in his history of 
 the C3'cloid, hesitates not to treat Torricelli as a pla- 
 giarist ; but after examining the papers on this subject, 
 I must confess that Pascal's opinion seems to have 
 been too hastily formed, and there is reason to believe 
 that Torricelli rt'SolvcMl these problems independently 
 of Roberval. 
 
 It still remained to find the length and the centre 
 of gravit}' of the Cycloid, and of the vsolids, both those 
 around the base and round the axis. But these re- 
 searches recjuired a new geometry, or at least a novel 
 application of the principles alieady known. Pascal, 
 within a weok, and amidst extreme suffering, found a 
 method which included all the problems just men- 
 tioned, founded on the sunnnation of certain series of 
 which he has given the elements in some papers which 
 accompany his tract on the Arithmetical Triangle. 
 
 m 
 
 Ij'! 
 
LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 27 
 
 From tliis to tlio differential and integral calculus 
 there was only a step, and there is good reason for 
 helievinfj that had Pascal been able to devote more 
 time to his scientitic in(|uiries, lie would have deprived 
 Leibnitz and Newton of the glor}- of their inventions. 
 Having communicated his miMlitations to some friends, 
 and particularly to the ])uke de Roannez, the latter 
 conceived the design of making them contribute to the 
 trimnph of religion. Pascal fiu-nished an incontestable 
 proof that it was possible for the same person to be a 
 consutinnate mathematician and an hundde believer. 
 His friends therefore thought, that even if other 
 matheiiiaticians should succeed in resolving those 
 ({uestions wdiich were to be propounded, and a reward 
 otl'ered for the solution of them, they would at least 
 perceive their ditticulty ; and thus, while science would 
 be promoted, the honour of accelerating its progress 
 would always belong to the lirst inventor ; if on the 
 contrary, they could not solve these problems, unbe- 
 lievers would, thenceforward, hav*^ no pretext for 
 beijig more <lifUcult in regard to the proofs of religion 
 than Pascal was, who had shown Inujself so profoundly 
 skilled in a science founded altogether on (hiuionstra- 
 tion. Accordingly, by his consent, a programme was 
 published, in wdiich it was proposed to find the mea- 
 sure and centre of gravity of an\' segnient of a cycloid, 
 the dimensions and centres of gravity of solids, demi- 
 solids, etc., which such a segment would produce by 
 turning round the ab.sci.ss or the ordinate: and as the 
 calculations foi- the complete solutions of all these 
 
28 
 
 LIFE OF THE AtlTHOR. 
 
 ifr 
 
 Hi 
 
 problems would requiie much trouble and labour, in 
 default of such a solution, the competitors for the 
 prizes were required to furnish the application of these 
 methods to some remarkable cases, such, for example, 
 as when the absciss is equal to the radius, or to the 
 diameter of the generating circle. Two prizes were 
 offered, one of 40, the other of 20 pistoles. The most 
 celebrated mathematicians in Paris were selected to 
 examine the papers of the competitors, which were to 
 be transmitted, at an appointed date, to M. de Carcavi, 
 one of the judges, with whom also the premiums 
 were deposited. In the whole affair, Pascal concealed 
 himself under the name of Amos Dettonville, an 
 anagram of Louis Montalte, the name he had assumed 
 as writer of the Provincial Letters. 
 
 The programme excited afresh the attentions of 
 mathematicians to the properties of the Cycloid, which 
 had been for some time neglected. Hughens squared the 
 segment contained between the summit and the ordi- 
 nate, which answers to a fourth part of the diameter 
 of the generating circle. Sluze, canon of the Cathe- 
 dral of Liege, measured the era of the curve by a new 
 and ingenious method ; Sir Christopher Wren showed 
 that any arc of a cycloid, measured from the summit, 
 is double the corresponding chord of the generating 
 circle ; he also determined the centre of gravity of the 
 cycloidal arc, and the surfaces of its solids of revolu- 
 tion. Fermat and Roberval, on the simple announce- 
 ment of Wren's theorems, each gave demonstrations. 
 But all these investigations, though very ingenious, 
 
LIFE OF THE AUTHOI?. 
 
 29 
 
 (lid not fully answer the requisitions of the prof^ramnie. 
 Only two persons laid claim to the prize : Lallouere, 
 the Jesuit, and Wallis, who is so justly celebrated for 
 his Arithmetic of InHnities. After a strict scrutiny, 
 however, by the appointed judi^es, it appeared that tlieir 
 methods w^ere too defective to satisfy the conditions. 
 Several years afterwards Pascal published his own 
 treatise on the Cycloid, which Wallis himself de- 
 scrilied in a letter to Huofhens as a ' work of irreat 
 
 •xemus. 
 
 Meanwhile Pascal was descending rapidly to the 
 j^rave. The last three years of his life were little else 
 than a perpetual agony, and he was almost totally 
 incapacitated for study. During the short intervals of 
 comparative ease, he occupied himself with his work 
 on religion ; his thoughts were set down on the Hrst 
 piece of paper that came to hand, and when he was no 
 longer able to hold a pen, they w^ere dictated to an 
 intelligent domestic who constantly attended him. 
 These fragments were collected after his death by the 
 members of Port Royal, who published a selection from 
 them under the title of Pennees de M. Pascal sur la 
 Rclhjion, et siw quelques aiUres sujcts. The first 
 edition of the Thoughts omitted many very interesting 
 fragments, and even some complete Essays, such as 
 those on Authority in matters of Philosoph}^ the 
 Pveflections on Geometry, and on the Art of Persuasion, 
 which are invaluable for their justness and originality. 
 
 In private life, Pascal was continually engaged in 
 mortifying his senses and elevating his soul to God. 
 
t MSi 
 
 m 
 
 ii 
 
 ii 
 
 ■*' ;i ' 
 ^ % "Ml 
 
 ;ili 
 
 < M^ 
 
 Hi m 
 
 m m 
 
 30 
 
 LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 It was a maxim with him to renounce all indnlf^jences 
 and superfluities. He removed from his apartment all 
 articles of ornament ; he ate only to satisfy the 
 necessary calls of hunt,'t'r, and not to <.,a'atify his palate. 
 When he first retired from ^'eneral society, he ascer- 
 tained what quantity of food was necessary for his 
 .support, which he never exceedeil, and wliatever disgust 
 he felt, never failed taking it ; a method of which the 
 motive may be respected, but which is very ill adapted 
 to the vai'iable state of the human frame. 
 
 His charity was very gi-eat : he regarded the poor 
 as his brethren, and never refused giving alms, though 
 often at the cost of personal privation, for his means 
 were very limited, and his intirmities at times called 
 for expenses which exceeded his income. Some time 
 before his death, he received under his roof a poor man 
 and his .son, moved only by Christian pity. The child 
 was seized with the small pox, and could scarcely be 
 removed without danger. Pascal himself was very ill, 
 and needed the constant assistance of Madame Perier. 
 But as her children had never had the small pox, 
 Pascal would not expose them to the danger of infec- 
 tion. He therefore decided against himself in favour 
 of the poor man, and occupied a small incommodious 
 apartment at his sister's. We may here mention 
 another remarkable instance of his benevolence. One 
 morning, returning from church, a beautiful girl, about 
 sixteen years of age, came to him to beg alms, pleading 
 that her father was dead, and that her mother had 
 that morning been taken ill and carried to the Hotel- 
 
•^% 
 
 I,TFE or THE AUTHOR. 
 
 31 
 
 in(lul<:;ences 
 partment all 
 
 satisfy the 
 fc'y his palate. 
 by, ho ascor- 
 ssary for his 
 itever disgust 
 of which the 
 •y ill adapted 
 
 led the poor 
 alms, though 
 or his means 
 b times called 
 . Some time 
 3f a poor man 
 V. The child 
 1 scarcely be 
 ; was very ill, 
 adame Perier. 
 le small pox, 
 ger of infec- 
 elf in favour 
 ncommodious 
 lere mention 
 olence. One 
 ful girl, about 
 1ms, pleading 
 mother had 
 the Hotel- 
 
 Dieu. Impressed with the danger to which the poor 
 girl was exposed, he placed her immediately in a 
 seminary under the care of a venerable ecclesiastic, to 
 whom he gave a sum of money for the expenses of 
 food and clothes, and continued his aid till she was 
 placed in a respectable family. The purity of his 
 milliners was most exemplary. He carried his .scrupu- 
 losity so far as sometimes to reprove Madame Perier 
 frr the caresses she bestowed on her children. To 
 repress feelings of self-complacency, he wore a girdle 
 of iron armed with points, which he used to strike 
 with violence whenever he felt any undue elation of 
 mind. Persuaded that the law of God forbids the 
 surrender of the heart to created objects, he carefully 
 controlled his affection, even for his nearest relations. 
 Madame Perier sometimes complained of the coldness 
 of his manners ; but when an occasion presented itself 
 for his services, he evinced so deep an interest in her 
 welfare, that she could no lonoer doubt of his sincere 
 ati'ection. She then attributed his former insensibility 
 of behaviour to the iniluence of bodily disorders, not 
 aware that it had a purer and more elevated source. 
 
 While the disputes l)etween the Jesuits and the 
 Jansonists w^ere at their height, an event happened 
 which was looked upon by the latter as a testimony 
 from heaven in their favour. A daughter of Madame 
 Perier, between ten and eleven yc^ars old, had been 
 afflicted for three years and a half with a lachrymal 
 fistula of the worst kind ; [)urulent and extremely 
 ofi'ensive matter was discharged from the eye, nose, 
 
 m 
 
 m 
 
32 
 
 LIFE OF TUE AUTHOR. 
 
 and inouth. On an appointed day she was touched 
 witli what was deemed a relic of tlie Holy Thorn, 
 which had been lent to the convent of Port 
 Royal hy M. de la Poterie, an ecclesiastic of eminent 
 piety ; the .consequence is asserted to have been an 
 instant cure. Racine, in his history of Port Royal, 
 says that such was the silence habitually maintained 
 in the convent, that for more than six days after the 
 miracle, some of the sisters had not heard of it. It is 
 not usual for persons of ardent faith to behold a 
 miracle wroui;'ht under their eyes, without beinj^ struck 
 with astonishment and impelled to gloi'ify God by 
 comuiunicatinuf it to others. The reserve of the mem- 
 bers of Port Royal, on this occasion, may appear to 
 some persons to cast doubts upon the fact itself; by 
 minds favourably disposed, it will be considered an 
 arffumcnt that the cure was not one of those pious 
 frauds which are adopted by the leaders of a party in 
 order to gain over a credulous multitude. The direc- 
 tors of Port Royal, believing it was their duty not to 
 conceal so signal a favour of Providence, wished to 
 confer on the fact the highest marks of credibility. 
 Four celebrated ph5^sicians, and several eminent sur- 
 geons, who had examined the disease, certified that a 
 cure was impossible by human means. The miracle 
 was published with the solemn attestation of the 
 vicars-general who had fijoverned the diocese of Paris in 
 the absence of Cardinal de Retz. The manner in 
 which it was received by the world completed the 
 confusion of the Jesuits. They endeavoured to deny 
 
 ! i 
 
LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 33 
 
 it, and, to support their incredulity, employed this 
 ridieulou^^ argument : Port Royal is heretical, and God 
 never works miracles for heretics. To this it was 
 replied : The miracle at Port Royal is certain ; you 
 cannot bring into doubt an ascertained fact ; the cause 
 of the Jansenists is good, and you are calumniators. 
 A particular circumstance gave weight to this reason- 
 ing ; the relic wrought no miracles except at Port 
 Royal ; transferred to the Ursulines or Carmelites, no 
 etibcts were produced ; it cured none ; it was said 
 because these latter establishments had no enemy, and 
 needed not a miracle to prove that God was with them. 
 Whatever judgment may be formed of this event, 
 whether the cure (for that seems indisputable) is to be 
 imputed to the operation of natural causes, not ascer- 
 tained by the medical science of the times ; to the 
 influence of a credulous imagination in the patient, or 
 to what some persons will perhaps admit, the divine 
 power supernaturally excited in condensation to a 
 sincere and genuine piety, though mixed with many 
 errors (and such the leading members of Port Royal 
 will be allowed by candid Protestants to have pos- 
 sessed), one thing is certain, Pascal, of whose integrity 
 and love of truth there can be no doubt, remained sat- 
 isfied that the cure was the work of God, and his niece 
 retained the same conviction durinix the whole course 
 of a long life. 
 
 During the last two years of Pascal's life, his suffer- 
 inus, both of mind and body, were extreme. In this 
 period he endured the pain of witnessing the'rise of that 
 
 if 
 
 .1 
 
 ?'.r 
 
 I'"!: 
 
 
1 
 
 '■1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ( 
 
 I 
 
 M 
 
 
 i iijli ^; 
 
 34 
 
 LIFE OK THK AriHOR. 
 
 \oncr persecution under which the institution of Port 
 Royal at last sunk. The favour in wliich the Jansenists 
 were held by the puhlic only exasperated the Jesuits. 
 To ensure their dtistruction, the Jesuits obtained an 
 order for all the members of the Convent to sijjn the 
 Formulary, bein<; certain that the advice of their 
 directors would be either not to sii;n it, or to sign it 
 with limitations e([ually favourable to their projects 
 of venc^eance. The Yi(.'a''-Gfeneral of Paris, in conse- 
 quence, received orders to execute tiiis mandate with 
 the utmost rigour. It is needless to describe the sad 
 dilemma in which the Port Royalists found themselves 
 placed : forced to pass a judgment on the work of 
 Jansen, of which they understood neither the lan;:^uage 
 nor the matter ; on the one hand, honouring the 
 authority which oppressed them, on the other, dread- 
 ing to betray the truth : rebels in the eyes of the 
 government if thsy refused to sign, and culpable in 
 the eyes of their directors if they signed a document 
 which they considered as drawn from the clei'^^y and 
 the Pope by the intrigues of the Jesuits. These cruel 
 perplexities shortened the life of Jacqueline Pascal. 
 At the time of the visit of the Vicar-general, she was 
 sub-prioress of Port Royal ; the violent conflict she 
 endured, arising from her anxiety to submit, and the 
 fear of violating her conscience, brought on an illness 
 resulting in her death, titc first victhn (as she 
 expressed it) of tlie Formulary. Pascal loved her 
 tenderly, and when informed of her death, said, ' God 
 grant us grace that our death may be like her.s.' 
 
 I 
 I 
 
 .» 
 3. 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 m 
 m 
 
 nil iM 
 
LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 35 
 
 The members of Port Royal addressed some tem- 
 jierate complaints to the Court, which were construed 
 by the Jesuits as a criminal resistance, and they 
 insinuated that the directors of the monastery were 
 fomenting a dangerous heresy. Yet they had never 
 hesitated to condemn the five propositions abstractly ; 
 they had only distinguished in the Const'didion of 
 Alexander VII. two (juestions, the one of right, the 
 otlier of fact ; they received as a rule of faith the 
 (|uestion of right, that is, the censure of the five propo- 
 sitions in the sense they ottered at first sight, and 
 abstracted from all the circumstances which could 
 restrict or modify them ; but they did not consider 
 themselves obliged to adhere to the assertion of the 
 Pope when he said that the five propositions were 
 formally contained in Jansen, and were heretical in 
 the sense of that author, because it was possible, 
 according to them, that the Pope, and even the Church, 
 might be deceived on questions of fact. Pascal adopted 
 this distinction very fulh', and makes it the basis of 
 his irresistiltle reasoning in the last two Provincial 
 Jjetters. Four years after, when it was again 
 attempted to procure signatures to the Formu- 
 lary, the Jansenists made a fresh concession ; they 
 consented that the nuns should sign it, declaring 
 simply that they could not judge whether the ])roposi- 
 tions condenmed by the Pope, and which they also 
 condemned sincerely, were taken or not from Jansen. 
 But this slight and reasonable limitation would not 
 content the Jesuits, whose object was to destroy the 
 
 
 
I 
 Ij 
 
 i 
 
 ;j(; 
 
 ) ■; 
 
 i ■: 
 
 .. i 1 
 
 1 ; 
 t ; 
 
 : i!! '! 
 
 1 'I 
 
 , 
 
 
 
 
 '. 
 
 
 
 i I 
 
 \i 
 
 86 
 
 LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 Port Royalists, or to force tliein to a dislionourable 
 recantation. This result Pascal had foreseen, and, far 
 from ap{)roving of the concessions of the .lansenists, 
 he always told them, ' You aim to save Port Royal; 
 you will not save it, and you will betray the truth.' 
 He even changed his opinion as to tlie distinction 
 between the (|uestion of right and of fact. The doc- 
 trine of Jansen on the five propositions appeared to 
 him to be exactly the same as that of St. Paul, St. 
 Augustine, and St. Prosper, whence he inferred that 
 the Pope, in condemning the sense of Jansen, was mis- 
 taken, not only on a point of fact, but of right, and 
 that no one could conscientiously sign the Formulary. 
 Hecharged the Port Royalists with weakness; he told 
 them plainly, that in their different writings they had 
 had too much regard to present advantage, and had 
 changed with the times. The elevation and rectitude 
 of his mind saw in these temporizing measures, noth- 
 ing but subterfuges, invented to serve an occasion, and 
 perfectly unworthy of the true defenders of the 
 Clmrch. They replied to these reproaches by explain- 
 ino", in a lonix and ino-enious manner, a method of 
 subscribing to tiio Formulary without wounding their 
 consciences or offendinjx the government. But all 
 these explanations produced no change of sentiment 
 in Pascal ; they had an opposite effect to what was 
 desired : they occasioned a degree of coolness in his 
 intercourse with the recluses of Port Roval. This 
 little misunderstandimx, which was not concealed on 
 either side, wa,s the occasion of a singular misrepresen- 
 
LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 37 
 
 tation, of wliicli tlie Jesuits were very ready to tako 
 advatitai^e. M. Benrier, minister of St. Steplien's-un- 
 tlie-Hill, a pious but not well informed man, wlio 
 attended Pascal in his last illness, having heard it 
 va"uelv said bv this celebrated man that he did not 
 think with the Port lloyalists on the <[uestionof i,M-ace, 
 believed that these words im[)lied that he thought 
 with their adversaries. He never imagined that it 
 was possible for any one to be more a Jansenist than 
 Nicole and Arnauld. About three years after Pascal's 
 death, M. Beurier, on the confused evidence of his 
 memory, attested in writing to the Archbishop of 
 Paris, Hardouin de Peretixe, a zealous Molinist, that 
 i'ascal had told him that he had withdrawn himself 
 from the Port Royalists on the (piestionof the Formu- 
 lary, and that he did not consider them suliiciently 
 submissive to the Holy See. Precisely the contrary 
 was the fact. But the Jesuits made a pompous exhi- 
 l)ition of this declaration: unal)le to reply to the 
 Provincial Letters, they endeavoured to per.suade the 
 world that their author had retracted them, especially 
 the last two; and, finally, had adopted their theology. 
 I Jut the Jansenist.s easily confuted these ridiculous 
 assertions. They opposed to the evidence of M. 
 Beurier, contrary testimonies infinitely more circum- 
 stantial 'and positive; and, to remove every doubt, 
 produced the writings in which Pascal explained his 
 sentiments. Overpowered by these proofs, M. Beurier 
 acknowledged that he had misunderstood Pascal's 
 words, and formally retracted his declaration. Hence- 
 
 1( 
 
 ill 
 
 ■^f- 
 
ii 
 
 ,IM 
 
 I 
 
 fi 
 
 38 
 
 LIFE OF THE AUTFIOR. 
 
 forward the Jesuits were forced to acknowledge that 
 Pascal died in the principles of the most rigorous 
 Jansenism. To return to the particulars of his last 
 illness. He w^as attacked by a severe and almost con- 
 stant colic, which nearly deprived him of sleep. The 
 physicians who attended him, though they perceived 
 that his strength was much reduced, did not appre- 
 hend immediate danger, as there were no febrile 
 symptoms. Ho was far from having the same security : 
 from the first moment of the attack, he said that they 
 were deceived, and that the malady would be fatal. He 
 confessed himself several times, and would have taken 
 the viaticum, but not to alarm his friends, consented 
 to a delay, being assured by the physicians, that in a 
 day or two, he would be able to receive the communion 
 at Churcli. Meanwhile his pains continued to increase, 
 violent headaches succeeded, and frequent numbness, 
 so that his sutierings were almost insupportable. Yet 
 so resigned was he to tlie will of God, that not the 
 least expression of complaint or impatience escaped 
 him. His mind \vas occupied with plans of benefi- 
 cence and charity. He made his will, in which the 
 greaier part of his property was left to the poor ; he 
 would have left them all, if such an arrangement had 
 not been to the injiiry of the children of M. and 
 Madame Perier, who were by no means rich. Since 
 he could do no more for the poor, he wished to die 
 among them, and urgently desired to be carried to the 
 Hospital of the Incurables, and he was induced to 
 abandon this wish only by a promise, that if he re- 
 
 # 
 
 •f 
 
 IS? 
 
 .1 
 
 i 
 
LIFE OF THK AUTHOR. 
 
 39 
 
 covered, he should be ut liberty to consecrate liis life 
 and property entirely to the service o^ the poor. 
 Two days previous to his death he was seized with 
 violent convulsions. His attendants reproached them- 
 selves for havini^ opposed the ardent desire he had so 
 often expressed of receivinjif the lOucharist. But they 
 had the consolation of seeinnr hiui fully recover his 
 recollection. The minister of St. Stephen's then 
 entered with the Sacrament and said ' Behold Him 
 whom you have so long desired ! ' Pascal raised him- 
 self, and received the viaticum with a devotion and 
 resignation that drew tears from all around him. Im- 
 mediately after, the convulsions returned, and never 
 left him till he expired, aged thirty-nine years and 
 two months. 
 
 On examining his body, the stomach and liver v/ere 
 found 'nuch diseased, and the intestines mortitied ; it 
 was remarked with astonishment that the quantity of 
 brain was enormous, and of a very solid and dense 
 consistence. 
 
 Such was this extra,ordinary man, who was endowed 
 with the choicest gifts of mind, a goemetrician of the 
 first order, a profound dialectician, an eloquent and 
 sublime writer. If we recollect that in the course of a 
 short life, oppressed with almost continual suffering, 
 he invented the arithmetical machine, the principles of 
 the calculation of probabilities, the method for resolv- 
 ing the problems of the Cyclo'd ; that he reduced to 
 certainty the opinions of philosophers relative to the 
 weight of the atmosphere ; that he was the first to 
 
 if ^ 
 
 i -I 
 
 III 
 
 iHHi 
 
 
 i 
 
 1- 
 
 iji! 
 
 IP' 
 km 
 
: 
 
 40 
 
 LIFE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 establish on geometrical demonstration, the general 
 laws of the equilibrium of fluids ; that he was the 
 author of one of the most perfect specimens of compo- 
 sition in the French language ; that in his ThougJds 
 (unfinished and detached as they are for the most 
 part), there are fragments of incomparable profundity 
 and eloquence, we shall be disposed to believe that 
 there never existed in any nation a greater genius, or, 
 we may add, a more devout believer. 
 
 11 
 
I 
 
 general 
 vas the 
 
 compo- 
 'houglits 
 be most 
 (fundity 
 ;ve that 
 nius, or, 
 
 m 
 
 THE PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 LETTER FIRST. 
 
 DISCUSSIONS IN SORBONNE. INVENTION OF PROXIMATE POWER : 
 HOW USED BY THE JESUITS TO SECURE THE CENSURE OK M. 
 ARNAULD. 
 
 Paris. 
 
 Sir, — We are greatly mistaken. I was not unde- 
 ceived till yesterday. Till then I thought that the 
 subject debated in Sorbonne was very important, and 
 of the utmost conse((Ucnce to religion. So many 
 meetings of such a celebrated body as the Theological 
 Faculty of Paris, and at which things so strange and 
 unexampled have taken place, give so high an idea of 
 the subject that one cannot but believe it to be very 
 extraordinary. And yet you will be surprised when 
 you learn from this letter what it is that has caused 
 all the noise. This I will tell you in a few words, 
 after having thoroughly acquainted myself with it. 
 
 Two questions are considered ; the one of fact, the 
 other of doctrine. That of fact is, whether M. Arnauld 
 is chargeable with presumption, for having said in his 
 second Letter that he has carefully read the work of 
 Jansenius without finding the propositions condemned 
 
 
 u 
 
 
 
 iii 
 
^ 
 
 I 
 
 '^ 1 
 
 m :» 
 
 ISi! T 
 
 42 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 by the late Pope ; and, nevertheless, as he condemns 
 these propositions wherever they are met with, he 
 condemns them in Jansenius, if they are in Jansenius. 
 
 The question here is, whether he could, without 
 presumption, thus declare that he doubts whether the 
 propositions arc in Jansenius, after the bishops have 
 declared that they are. 
 
 The affair Is brought forward in Sorbonne. Seventy- 
 one doctors undertake his defence, and maintain that 
 he could not give any other answer to those who, in 
 so many publications, asked hiui if he held that these 
 propositions are in that book, than that he has not 
 seen them in it, and that he nevertheless condemns 
 them in it if they are in it. 
 
 Some even going further, have declared that after 
 all the search which they could make, they have never 
 found them, and have even found otliers of quite an 
 opposite nature. They have then urgentl}'' requested 
 that any doctor who has seen them, would have the 
 goodness to show them ; that a thing so easy could 
 not be refused, since it was a sure means of silencing 
 all of them, and M. Arnauld himself; but the request 
 has always been refused. So much for what has taken 
 place on that side. 
 
 On the other side are eightv secular doctors and 
 some forty merdicant monks, who have condenmed M. 
 Arnauld's propositions without choosing to examine 
 whether what he has said is true or false ; and have 
 even declared that thev had to do not with the truth, 
 but only with the rashness of the proposition. 
 
DISCUSSIONS IN SOPBONNE. 
 
 43 
 
 Besides these, there ai-e fifteen who were not for the 
 censure, and are called neutrals. 
 
 Tims has it fared with the (juestion of fact, as to 
 which I give myself very little trouble. For be M. 
 Arnauld rash or not, ui}- consci(ince is not concerned ; 
 and if I felt curious to know whether these pi'oposi- 
 tions are in Jansenius, his book is neither so rare nor 
 so lar^e that I could not read it through to inform 
 myself, without consultino- the Sorbonne. 
 
 But if I did not fear likewise to be rash, I believe I 
 would follow the opinion of most people I see, who, 
 havinfjj believed hitherto on public report that these 
 propositions are in Jansenius, begin to suspect the 
 contrary from the odd refusal to show them ; indeed I 
 have not j^et met with any person who says he has 
 seen them. So that I fear tliis censure will do more 
 harm than good, and give those who learn its history 
 an impression directly the reverse of the conclusion. 
 For in truth the world is becoming suspicious, and 
 believes things only when it sees them. But, as I 
 have already said, the point is unimportant, faith not 
 l)eing concerned. 
 
 The question of doctiine seems much more weighty, 
 inasmuch as it touches faith. Accordingly, T have 
 taken particular care to inform myself upon it. But 
 you will be pleased to see that it is of as little impor- 
 tance as the other. 
 
 The subject examined is a passanfe in the same 
 letter in which M. Arnauld says, that " the grace with- 
 out which we cannot do anything was wanting to St. 
 
 B 
 
 iill 
 
 I" 
 
 
 . . 1 t ( 
 
 l 
 
 ' i 1 ? 
 
 f ■ ; '^ ^ 
 
 ■. ■■; !' \ 
 
 ! .^ 
 
 I'- 
 
 . 1 
 
 ; ■ '■ 
 '. 1 
 
 lii 
 
 ■ i 
 
 
 i'i 
 
 ^i^ !i 
 
 ill 
 
44 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 I !l ' 
 
 ■It! I 
 
 'I !i 
 
 Peter in his fall." Here you and I thought that the 
 greatest principles of grace were in question, such as 
 whether it is not given to all men, or whether it is 
 efficacious; but we were much mistaken. I am become 
 a great theoloofian in a short time, and you are cfoini: 
 to see proofs of it. 
 
 To learn the real state of matters, I paid a visit to 
 
 Mr. , a doctor of Navarre, who lives near me, and 
 
 is fis you know, a most zealous opponent of the Jan- 
 sc-uists : and as my curiosity made me almost as keen 
 as himself, I asked him if they would not formally 
 ui cidu :iiai grace is given to oil, and so set the ques- 
 tion at rest. But he bluntly rebuffed me, and told me 
 that that was not the point ; that there were persons 
 on his side who held that grace is not given to all ; 
 that even the examinators had said in full Sorbonne, 
 that this opinion is problemaf leal ; and that it was 
 liis own sentiment, which he confirmed by this j)assage 
 from Augustine, which he says is famous: "We believe 
 that grace is not given to all men." 
 
 I apologized for having mistaken his sentiments, and 
 prayed him to tell me then if they would not at least 
 condemn that other opinion of the Jansenists which is 
 making so much noise, namely, that "grace is effectual, 
 and determines our will to do good." But I was no 
 happier in this second (juestion. ' You don't under- 
 stand it at all,' said he ; ' that is not a heresy, it is an 
 orthodox opinion : all the Thomists hold it ; and I 
 myself maintained it in my Thesis.' 
 
 I durst not propose n.y doubts to him, and I did not 
 
 ■J 
 "•J 
 
 
PROXIMATE POWER. 
 
 45 
 
 even know where the difficulty was, wlien, to get light 
 upon it, I begged him to tell me in what the heresy of 
 M. Arnauld's opinion consists. ' It is,' said he, ' in his 
 not acknowledging that believers have the power of 
 fullillimr the commandments of God, in the manner in 
 which we understand it,' 
 
 I left him after this information ; and, (juite proud 
 
 of having the kernel of the afiair, I called for Mr. , 
 
 who is getting better and better, and was in sufficient 
 health to go with me to his brother-in-law, who is a 
 Jansenist if ever there was one, and a very worthy 
 man notwithstanding. To be better received, I feijxned 
 to be strongl}^ of his party, and said to him, ' Can it be 
 possible that the Sorbonne will introduce into the 
 Church this error, " that all believers have always the 
 power of fullilling the Commandments ? " ' ' What are 
 you saying ? ' asked my doctor : ' do you give the 
 name of error to a sentiment which is strictly orthodo.K, 
 and which the Lutherans and Calvinists alone call in 
 (luestion?' ' What,' said I to him, 'is that not vour 
 opinion V ' No ; ' said he, ' we anathematize it as 
 heretical and impious.' Surprised at this answer, I 
 saw well that I hail over-acted the Jansenist, as I liad 
 Ix'fore over-acted the Molinisfc. But not being able to 
 give full credit to his answer, I beu'iied Www to tell me 
 in confidence if he held tliat helieivt's kavc always a 
 real power of observing the commandments. My friend 
 warmed at this ; l)ut with a devout zeal, he said that he 
 would never disguise his sentiments for any man ; that 
 this was his belief, and that he and all his party would 
 
 i: 
 
 U 
 
 Ij ii 
 
 ;?i 
 
 i 
 
 f 
 ! 
 1 
 
 ;■ 
 
 ■ M i 
 
 HI '■ 
 
 : ■ Mi 
 
 Am 
 
 
 'j 
 
 
 'i 
 1 
 
 '] 
 
 t 
 
 1 
 
f 
 
 : 
 
 i \ 
 
 1 ; ;• 
 
 I 
 
 I I I 
 
 ; < ' 
 
 PI. 
 
 If 
 
 
 h! 
 
 46 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 defend it to the death, and as beinrj the pure doctrine 
 of St. Thomas, and Augustine their master. 
 
 He spoke so seriously that I could not doubt him. 
 With this assurance I returned to my first doctor, and 
 told him with much complacenc}', that I was sure 
 there would soon be peace in Sorbonne ; that the Jan- 
 senists admitted the power which believers have to 
 fulfil the commandments ; that I would be their secu- 
 rity, and make them sign it with their blood. ' All 
 very fine,' said he ; ' it is necessary to be a theologian 
 to see the bearing of it. The diti'erence between us is 
 so subtle, that we can scarcely define it ourselves ; it 
 would be too difficult for you to understand it ; be 
 contented therefore to know that the Jansenists will 
 indeed tell you, that believers have always the power 
 to fulfil the commandments; as to this we have no 
 dispute: but they will not tell you that this power is 
 'proximate. That is the point.' 
 
 The word was new and unknown to me. Hitherto 
 I had understood matters, but this term threw me 
 into the dark ; and I believe it has only been invented 
 for strife. I asked for explanation, but he made a 
 m3^stery of it ; and without further satisfaction sent 
 me back to ask the Jansenists, if they admitted this 
 proximate power. I charged my memory with the 
 term, for my understanding had no part in it. For 
 fear of forgetting it, J hastened back to my Jansenist, 
 to whom, after the first exchange of civilities, I forth- 
 with said, ' Tell me, I pray, if you admit proxiviate 
 power.' He fell a-laughing, and said to me coolly, 
 
PROXIMATE POWER. 
 
 47 
 
 'Tell me yourself in what sense you understand it, 
 and then I will tell you what I think of it.' As my 
 knowledge did not go so far, I felt at my wits' end for 
 an answer ; and nevertheless, not to make my visit 
 useless, I said to him on chance, I understand it in the 
 sense of the Molinists. My friend, without changing 
 a feature, asked, ' To which of the Molinists do you 
 refer me ? ' I ofi'ered hiiu the whole of them, as 
 forming only one body, and actuated by one spirit. 
 
 But he said to me, 'Your information is very 
 imperfect. They are so far from being of the same, 
 that they are of the most opposite sentiments. Being 
 all leagiied in the project of ruining M. Arnauld, they 
 have fallen upon the device of agreeing to this term 
 proximate, which they might all equally use, though 
 understanding it differently, in order to speak the 
 same language, and by this apparent conformity form 
 a considerable bod}', and swell their numbers so as to 
 make sure of crushing him.' 
 
 This answer astonished me. But without being 
 persuaded of the wicked designs of the Molinists, 
 which I am unwilling to take on his word, and with 
 which I have no concern, I endeavoured merely to 
 ascertain the different meanings which they attach to 
 this mysterious word pro.rimatf. He said : ' I would 
 readily explain them, but you would see such a repug- 
 nance and gross contradiction, that you would scarcely 
 believe me. I would be susjiected by you. Your saf(?r 
 plan will be to learn it from them.selves, and I will 
 give you their addresses. You have only to see separ- 
 
 i 
 
 
 ?■; 
 
 ' w 
 
 iiii^f 
 
 'i 
 
 .! . 
 
 ;i" 
 
 1 '! 
 
 
' i 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 ' 1 
 
 '1 
 
 ll 
 
 r 
 
 ! 
 
 1 
 
 M 4 
 
 ■\i 
 
 ■; '^1 
 
 48 
 
 IMIOVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 ately M. I^o Moine and Father Nicolai.' ' I don't know 
 either of them,' said I. ' See, then,' said he, ' it' you 
 are not ac(|uainted with some of those whom I am 
 going to mention, for they hold the views of JM. Le 
 Moine.' I did know some of them : he then said, ' See 
 if you have not some ac(iuaintance among the Domi- 
 nicans, for they are all with Father Nicolai.' I like- 
 wise knew some of those he mentioned ; and being 
 resolved to seek his advice and have done with the 
 affair, I left him and called first on one of the disciples 
 of M. Le Moine. 
 
 I begged him to tell me what was meant by 
 having proximafe 'i)ower to do avij thing. ' That is 
 easy,' said he : ' it is to have whatever is necessary to 
 do it, so that nothing is wanting in order to act.' 
 ' And so,' said I, ' to have proxiiinate poiuer to cross a 
 river is to have a barge, bargeinan and oars, etc., with 
 nothing wanting.' ' Very well,' said he. ' And to have 
 the proximate power of seeing,' said I, ' is to have good 
 eye-sight, and be in open day. For a person with good 
 eye-sight, but in darkness, would not have the proxi- 
 mate power of seeing according to you.' 'Like a 
 Doctor,' said he. 'Consequently,' I continued, 'when 
 you say that believers always have the proximate 
 power of observing the commandments, you mean that 
 they always have all the grace necessary to perform 
 them ; nothing being wanting on the part of God.' 
 ' Stay,' said he, ' they always have all that is necessary 
 to observe them, or to ask God for it.' * I see per- 
 fectly,' I said ; ' they have all that is necessary to pray 
 
 il 
 
 i. -lis 
 
 Kig 
 
 IIM 
 
I'KOXl.MATK POWER. 
 
 49 
 
 to God to assist them, without nt'odinijf any new c^race 
 t'min ( io<l to pray.' ' You understand it,' said he. ' It 
 is not necessary then to liave an efit'ctua! <^raco to pray 
 to (jod ?' ' No,' said he, ' according to M. Le Aloine.' 
 
 To lose no time, I went to the Jacohins, and aslvod 
 for those whom J knew to be New Thomists, I hefrj^'ed 
 them to tell me the meaning of iiroxlnmie power. ' Is 
 it not,' I asked, 'a power to which nothing is wanting 
 in order to act ?' ' No,' said they. ' What, father ! if 
 this power wants something, do you call it 2'>i'o.''iinafe '. 
 and will you say that a man in the night time, and 
 without any light, has the proximate power of siieinfj ! ' 
 ' Yes, indeed he has, according to us, it* he is not blind.' 
 ' So be it,' said I, 'but M. Le Moine understands the 
 contrary.' ' True,' said they, ' but we understand it 
 thus.' ' I have no objection,' said I, ' for I never dis- 
 pute about a word, provided I am made aware of the 
 meaning which is given to it ; but I see that when 
 you say, believers have always a proximate power to 
 pray to God, you understand, that they have need of 
 other assistance, witliout which they will never pray.' 
 ' V'^ery well explained,' replied the fathers, embracing 
 me, ' very well explained : they require moreover an 
 effectual grace, which is not given to all, and v'jich 
 determines their will to pray ; and it is heresy to deny 
 the necessity of this effectual grace, in order to pray.' 
 
 ' Very well explained,' said I to them in my turn ; 
 
 'hut according to you, the Jansenists are orthodox, 
 
 and M. Le Moine heretical : for the Jansenists hold 
 
 that believers have power to pray, but that notwith- 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 , 
 
 t- 
 
 
 1 
 
 \\ 
 
 ' i 
 
 \: 
 
 .!■■ 
 
 ,,U 
 
:m^ 
 
 !'it ^' 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 '1 
 
 'i 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 , 
 
 'I 
 
 'Till 
 
 li i, 
 
 oO 
 
 I'KOVrNCIAl, LKTTEUS. 
 
 standiiii^ an effectual j,'racc is necessary, and tliis you 
 Mpprove; M. liO Moine says, that believers p '• with- 
 out effectual grace, and this you condein ' Yes,' 
 said they, 'but M. Le Moine calls this power, proxi- 
 mate poiuer.' 
 
 ' What, fathers !' said I, ' it is a play upon words, to 
 say that you are ao-reed because of the common terms 
 you use, while you give them contrary meanings.' The 
 fathers made no answer : and on this my disciple of 
 M. Le Moine ai-rived bj^ good chance, \\'hich I thought 
 extraordinary ; but I have learned sijice that their 
 intercourse is not rare, and that they are constantly 
 in each other's company. 
 
 I then said to my disciple of M. Le Moine know 
 a man who says that believers have always ^j^ ,/er to 
 pray to God ; but that, nevertheless, they will never 
 pray without an effectual grace which determines 
 thein, and whicli God does not always give to all 
 believers. Is he heretical?' ' Stay,' said my Doctor, 
 ' you might take me by surprise ; softly, if you please ! 
 distmfjiio : if he calls this power, proximate 'power, 
 he will be a Thomist, and of course catholic : if not, 
 he will be a Jansenist, and of course heretical.' ' Ho 
 does not,' said J, ' call it either proximate, or not 
 proximate.' ' He is heretical,' then said he : ' ask 
 these worthy fathers.' I did not take them as judges, 
 for they were already nodding assent, but I said to 
 them, 'He refuses to admit this word ^9ro.ci7>iaf(^ be- 
 cause it is not explained.' On this, one of the fathers 
 was going to give his definition, but he was inter- 
 rupted by the disciple of M. Le Moine, who said, ' Do 
 
 m 
 
liis you 
 
 " with- 
 
 ' Yes," 
 
 , proxi- 
 
 vords, U) 
 n terms 
 ;s.' The 
 sciplo ol' 
 thouLjht 
 mt tliuir 
 instantly 
 
 I'llOXIMATK rOWEU. 
 
 :.l 
 
 yon wish, then, to renew our scjualdilini^'s ? Ifavo wo 
 not coino under an aoTeeincnt, not to explain tin's 
 word 25>v).*;i7)ja/<', but to ust; it on either sid(\ without 
 sayinij what is meant ?' The Jacobin assented. 
 
 r>V this I penetrated their desisj;n, and f n risinj^ to 
 i^o said to them: 'Verily, fathers, I much fear tliat all 
 this is mere chicanery ; and whatever comes of your 
 meetin'^s, I venture to y)redict, that, thoui^-h the cen- 
 sure were passed, peace would not be established. 
 For thoun^h it were declared necessary to pronounce 
 the syllables pro.rhmife, who does not see that, not 
 having been explained, eacli of you will claijn the 
 victory. The Jacobins will sa}^ that the word is 
 understood in their sense ; M. De Moine will saj' that 
 it is in his ; and thus there will be far more di.sputcs 
 in explaining than in introducing it. After all, there 
 would be no great danger in receiving it without any 
 meaning, since it is only by the meaning that it can 
 do harm. But it would be unworthy of the Sorbonne 
 and of theology, to use equivocal captious terms, with- 
 out explaining them. In fine, fathers, tell me once 
 for all, what I must believe in order to be orthodox.' 
 'You must,' exclaimed all in a body, 'say that all 
 believers have ;^?)U*;i7>j/afe 2miver, wholly abstracting 
 from anv meaninc:; (ihstrnhendo a sannii TliomUta- 
 ram, et a nensii aliorum The oh uj or urn.' 
 
 ' In other w^ords,' said I, on quitting them, ' it is neces- 
 sary to pronounce this word, for fiar of being here- 
 tical in name. Is it a Scripture term V ' No,' said 
 thoy. 'Ts it from the Fathers, or Councils, or Popes ?' 
 ' No.' ' Is it from St. Thomas ?' * No.' ' What neces- 
 
 
 <i 
 
 l> 
 
 
 I 
 
 i :'i 
 
 m 
 
 U 
 
 11 
 
 4 
 
 '■'4 
 
 - ! '■ 
 ■ I ■ 
 
 n . 
 
 n : 
 
62 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 sity is there for saying it, since it has neither author- 
 ity nor meaning in itself ?' ' You are obstinate,' said 
 thoy : ' you shall say it, or you shall be heretical, and 
 M. Arnauld also; for we are the majority, and if need 
 be, we will bring Cordeliers enough to carry it !' 
 
 I have just left them on this last reason, in order 
 to send you this narrative, from which you will see 
 that none of the following points are agitated or con- 
 demned by either party. 1. Grace ix not (jlven to (dl 
 men. ... Alt bdievers have iiower to perform the 
 commandments of God. o. Neve rtJicl ess, in order to 
 perform them, and even to pray, t/tetj reqwire an 
 ejfeclwd grace, luhich determines their will. 4. 'J'^'^i^ 
 effectual grace is not alwaijs given to all believers, 
 and depends on the mere mercy of God. So that 
 nothing but the word proximate, without meaning, 
 runs any risk. 
 
 Happy the people who know it not ! Happy those 
 who lived before its birth ! For I see no remedy, 
 unless the members of the Academy banish from 
 Sorbonne this barbarous term, which causes so much 
 division. Without this, the censure appears certain ; 
 but I see, that the only harm of the proceeding will 
 be, to give less weight to Sorbonne, and deprive it of 
 the authority which it needs so much, on other oc- 
 casions. 
 
 Meanwhile, I leave you free to espouse the word 
 proximate or not: for I love you too much to make 
 it a pretext for persecuting you. If this narrative is 
 not disagreeable, I will continue to acquaint you with 
 all that takes place. I am, etc. 
 
t-S' 
 
 ii 
 
 ■a 
 -'I 
 
 those 
 iiiiedy, 
 1 from 
 much 
 lertaiii ; 
 Of will 
 it of 
 
 LETTEK SECOND. 
 
 SUFFICIENT (illACE. 
 
 Paris. 
 
 Sir, — As I was closing my letter to you, I had a 
 
 call from our old friend, Mr. . Nothing could be 
 
 more fortunate for my curiosity, for he is well in- 
 formed on the (juestions of the day, and peifectly 
 acquainted with the policy of the Jesuits, with whom, 
 and with the leading men among them, he has hourly 
 intercourse After speahing of the occasion of his 
 visit, I begged him to tell me, in one word, the points 
 debated between the two parties. 
 
 He immediately complied, and told me that there 
 were two ])rincipal points ; the first respecting 'proxi- 
 mate j^oiver, and the second respecting sufficient grace. 
 My former letter explained the first ; I will now speak 
 of the second. 
 
 In one word, then, I learned that their difierence 
 respecting grace lies here. The Jesuits liold that there 
 is a grace given generally to all men, but so far sub 
 ject to flee will, which, as it chooses, renders it effectual 
 or inefi'ectual, without any new assistance from God, 
 and without anything wanting on his part, to enable 
 it to act efi'ectually. Hence they call it nujHclenl, 
 
 •ml 
 
 hi 
 
 \ 
 
 ■ I 
 
 
 , ■ '. 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 / t. ■' 
 
 
 'j 
 
 % 
 
 '■■ 
 
 if 
 
 llll 
 
 'MV 
 
 • ■ ■ ., 
 
 t> 
 
 'H ^9 
 
 \\ 
 
 II 
 
 
 11 
 
 f . 
 
 !■ S 
 
 «m 
 
 i, 
 
 ■Il 
 
 'II 
 
 V:> 
 
W '1 
 
 fill 
 
 ■^r 
 
 i 
 
 ;i 
 
 ^ I 
 
 r i 
 
 m 
 
 54 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 i 
 
 '\ 
 ■'X 
 
 li;r 
 
 because by itself it suffices for actino^. The Jansenists, 
 on the contrar}', hold that there is no j,a'ace actually 
 sufficient, without being effectual ; in other words, 
 that all grace which does not determine the will to 
 act effectually, is insufficient for acting, because they 
 maintain that we never act without ef aal grace. 
 Such is the diflerence between them. 
 
 On inquiring as to the doctrine of the New Thom- 
 ists, ' There is an oddness about it,' said he, ' they agree 
 with the Jesuits in admitting <i sufficient (jrace given 
 to all men; but they insist, notwithstanding, tliat 
 men never act with this grace alone ; and that in order 
 to make them act, God nmst give an effectual grace, 
 which really determines their will to action, but which 
 God does not oive to all.' ' So that according to this 
 doctrine/ said I, ' this grace is suffcient without being 
 so.' ' Precisely,' said he, ' for if it suffices, no more is 
 necessary for action ; and if it does not suffice, it is 
 not sufficient.' 
 
 ' What, then,' I asked, ' is the diffi'rence between 
 thein and the Jansenists ? ' ' They differ,' said he, ' in 
 the Dominicans having at least this nmch good in 
 them, that they refuse not to say that all men have 
 sufficient grace.' 'I understand,' replied I, ' but they 
 say it without thinking it, since they add that in 
 order to act, it is necessary to have an effectual grace, 
 which is not given to all ; thus, if they are conform- 
 able to the Jesuits in a word which has no meaning, 
 they are contrary to them, and conformable to the 
 Jansenists in substance.' ' That is true,' .said he. 
 
\</}'acc, 
 li'orm- 
 (aMing, 
 to the 
 Id he. 
 
 SUFFICIENT CJIIACE. 
 
 ■fi) 
 
 ' ilow, then,' said I, ' are the Jesuits united with them ^ 
 and why do tliey not combat them, as well as the 
 .jiuiseni.sts, since they will always find in them power- 
 ful opponents, who, maintaininix the necessity of an 
 elft'ctua'., determining grace, will prevent them from 
 estaidishino' that which thev hold to be of itself 
 suHicient ? ' 
 
 ' The Dominicans are too powerful,' said he, ' and the 
 conipanj' of the Jeauits too politic to make open war 
 ujion them. They are satisfied with having gained 
 from them an admission, at least, of the name of s'ti(ji- 
 cient (jvace, although they understand it differently. 
 Theii advantage in this is, that whenever they judge 
 it expedient, they will be able, without dilliculty, to 
 discredit the opinion of the Dominicans, as not main- 
 taina'hle. Fur assuming that all men have sufficient 
 <frace, nothinn- is more natural than to infer that 
 effectual grace is not necessary in order to act, since 
 the sutficiency of this grace excludes the necessity of 
 any other. Sufficient includes all that is necessary in 
 order to act, and it wo-ild little avail the Dotrunicans to 
 cry out that they give a ditl'erent meaning to the w^ord 
 f<ii(licl('nf. The people, accustomed to the conunon 
 acceptation, would not so much as listen to their 
 explanation. Thus, the Company have a sullicient 
 advantage in the reception of the term by the Domin- 
 icans, without pushing them farther; and if you wer; 
 acquainted with wdiat took place under Popes Clement 
 Vlll. and Paul V., and knew how much the Company 
 were thwarted by the Dominicans in establishing 
 
 :l 
 
 I 
 'II 
 
 '.ill 
 ill 
 
 4 
 
 1^ 
 
 ■ y 
 ■i i 
 
 m 
 
 .1.- 
 
 
 : 1 
 
 ia 
 
 '1 
 
 
 If 
 
 
 111 
 
 ' > i 
 
 ■n^Ur 
 
 
 1 ■L 
 
 1 
 
 -,■■■ 
 
 D 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 nig 
 
 :M 
 
 ^Bnl 
 
 M 
 
 r 
 
 1 
 

 56 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 sufficient grace, you would not be surprised at their 
 not quarrelling with them, and consenting to let them 
 hold their opinion, the Company also being free to 
 hold theirs, and more especiallj'' the Dominicans 
 favouring it by the terra suffi.cient grace, which they 
 have agreed to use publicly. 
 
 The Company is very well satisfied with this con- 
 cession. They do not insist on a denial of the neces- 
 sity of effectual grace ; this were to press them too 
 hard : one must not tyrannise over one's friends : the 
 Jesuits have gained enough. For people deal in 
 words, without giving heed to the meaning of them ; 
 and thus the term sitfficient grace being received by 
 both parties, although with different meanings, none 
 but the nicest theologians will imairine that the thins: 
 meant by it is not held as well by the Jacobins as by 
 the Jesuits.' 
 
 I admitted to him that they were a clever race ; 
 and to turn his information to account, went straight 
 to the Jacobins, when at the gate I found one of 
 my intiiTiate friends, a great Jansenist (for I have 
 friends among all parties), who was inquiring for some 
 other father than the one I was in quest of. By force 
 of entreaty, I got him to accompany me, and asked for 
 one oi" mv new Thomists. He was delighted to see 
 me again. 'Well, father,' said I to him, 'it is not 
 enough that all men have a proximate power, by 
 which, however, they in fact never act. They must 
 have, moreover, a safficient grace, with which they 
 >M ■: as little. Is not this the opinion of your school ? ' 
 
SUFFICIENT GRACE. 
 
 57 
 
 m 
 
 'Yes,' said the worthy father, 'I mentioned it this 
 morning in Sorbonne ; I spent my whole half hour 
 upon it, and but for the sand glass I would have 
 changed the sad proverb now current in Paris.' 
 
 He thinks hy the bonnet like a monk in Sorbonne. 
 'What do you mean by your half hour and your sand 
 glass ? ' I asked. ' Do they cut your opinions to a 
 certain measure ? ' ' Yes,' said he, ' for some days past. 
 ' Are you obliged to speak half an hour ? ' ' No, we 
 speak as little as we please.' ' But not so much as you 
 please,' said I ; ' an excellent rule for the ignorant, a 
 tine pretext for those who have nothing good to say ! 
 But in short, father, is the grace given to all men 
 sufficient ? ' ' Yes.' ' And yet it has no effect without 
 effectual grace ?' 'True.' 'And all men,' I continued, 
 ' have the su'^cient, but not all the effectual ?' ' True.' 
 ' In other words,' said I, ' all have enough of grace, and 
 yet all have not enough ; in other words, this grace 
 suffices though it suffices not ; in other words, it is 
 sufficient in name, and insufficient in fact. In good 
 sooth, father, this doctrine is very subtle. Have you, 
 on retiring from the world, forgotten what the word 
 ^uijic'ient signities ? Do you not remember that it 
 nicludes whatever is necessary to act ? But you have 
 not lost the recollection of it; for, to use an illustration 
 to which you will be more sensible. Were you served 
 at table with only two ounces of bread and a glass of 
 water a day, would you be satisfied with your Prior 
 when he told you it was sufficient for your nourish- 
 ment, on the pretext that with something else which 
 
 ^5;li ■: 
 
 Ml 
 
 il 
 
 Mi 
 
 i^! 
 
 i I 
 
 
 .! ' 
 

 .58 
 
 PROVINCIAL LKTTEUS. 
 
 Kii: 
 
 h<» (lid ric^t give you, you would have all that was 
 neec'-^iaiy for your nourisliiuent ? How then can you 
 allow yourself to say that all men have safficient <jrace 
 to act, while you confess that in order to act there is 
 another ahsolutely necessary grace which all men have 
 not ? Is it because this belief is unimportant, and you 
 leave men at liberty to believe or not believe that 
 effectual grace is necessary ? Is it a matter of indif- 
 ference to hold that with suificient grace we do in 
 effect act? 'How indifferent,' said the worthy man. 
 ' It is licresij, a foruial liercny. The necessity of effec- 
 tnal grace to act effectually is a point of faith : it is 
 heresy to deny it!' 
 
 'Where are we then,' exclaimed I, 'and which side 
 must I take ? If I deny safhcient grace, I am Jan- 
 seiiht ; if I admit it in the sense of the Jesuits, as if 
 effectual grace were not necessary, I will be Jieretical ; 
 so you say ; and if I admit it in your acceptation, as if 
 effectual grace wei'c necessary, I sin against common 
 sense, and am preposterous ; so say the Jesuits. What, 
 then, must I do in this inevitable necessity of being 
 either preposterous, or heretical, or Jansenist ? And 
 to what straits are we reduced if the Jansenists are 
 the only persons who have no quarrel either with 
 faith or with reason, and who escape alike from folly 
 and error ! ' 
 
 Liy Jansenist friend took what I said as a good 
 omen, and thought me already gained to his party. He 
 said nothing to me, however, but, addressing the fathei', 
 ' Tell me, I pray, father, in what you are conformable 
 
 m 
 
.SUFFICIENT GRACK. 
 
 oO 
 
 200(1 
 
 Ho 
 
 thci', 
 uible 
 
 to the Jesuits.' ' In this,' said he, ' that the Jesuits 
 acknovvledj^e sufficient grace given to all.' ' But,' 
 replied he, * there are two things in the expression siif- 
 t'u' lent grace ; there is the sound, which is only wind, 
 and the thing signified hy it, which is real and eliec- 
 tive ; and thus wliile you are at one witli tlie Jesuits 
 touching the words siifliclent grace, and contrary to 
 theui in the meaning, it is plain that you are contrary 
 to them as to the substance, and at one only as to the 
 sound. Is this to act sincerely and from the heart ? ' 
 ' But why,' said the worthy man, ' of what do you 
 complain, since we do not ndslead any one by this 
 mode of speaking ? For in our scliools we say openly 
 that we understand it in a contrary sense to that of 
 the Jesuits.' ' I complain,' said my friend to him, ' of 
 your not publishing, in all (quarters, that you mean by 
 sufficient grace, a grace which is not sufficient. While 
 thus changing the meaning of the ordinary terms of 
 religion, you are obliged in conscience to say, that 
 when you adnnt a satficient grace in all men, you un- 
 derstand that they have not a grace which is sufficient 
 in fact. All the persons in the world understand the 
 word sitfjicient in one same sense; the New Thomists 
 alone unJcrstand it in another. All women, wlio form 
 the half of mankind, all persons at court, all military 
 men, all magistrates, all connected with the coui'ts of 
 justice, merchants, artizans, the whole people in short, 
 all classes except Dominicans, understand that the 
 word stifficient comprehends everything that is neces- 
 sary. Scarcely any person is made aware of this single 
 
 l':i 
 
 '• I 
 
 i If 
 
 i\ 
 
 ■iH 
 
 I 
 
 nil 
 nw 
 
 ■ i( 
 
 lU 
 
 
 u 
 
 -I -I' 
 
 . 1.: ., 
 
 li 
 
 n^ 
 
 M: 
 
60 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 Si! ^ 
 
 exception. The only thing said, everywhere, is, that 
 the Jacobins hold that all men have suffi^cient grace. 
 What conclusion can be drawn, but just that they hold 
 that all men have all the grace which is necessary to 
 act, more especially when they are seen 'leagued and 
 intriguing with the Jesuits, who so understand it ? Is 
 not your agreement in expression, taken along with 
 your party union, a manifest interpretation and a con- 
 firmation of uniformity of sentiment ? 
 
 'All the faithful put the question to theologians, 
 What is the true state of human nature since the fall ? 
 St. Augustine and his disciples answer that it has no 
 longer sufficient grace, except in so far as God is 
 pleased to impart it. The Jesuits afterwards come 
 and say, that all have the grace which is actually suf- 
 ficient. The Dominicans are consulted as to this con- 
 trariety ; and what do they ? They unite with the 
 Jesuits, by this union forming the majority ; they 
 separate from those who deny sufficient grace, and 
 declare that all men have it. What can be thought of 
 this, but just that they give their sanction to the 
 Jesuits? After all this, they add that sufficient is 
 useless without effectual grace, which is not given to all. 
 
 ' Would you see a picture of the Church in regard 
 to these different views ? I consider it like a man who, 
 having set out on a journey, is attacked by robbers, 
 who wound him in several places and leave him half 
 dead. He sends to the neighbouring towns for three 
 physicians. The first having probed his wounds, thinks 
 them mortal, and declares that God only can recover 
 
SUFFICIENT GRACE. 
 
 61 
 
 him. The second, coming after, and wishing; to flatter 
 him, tells him that he has still sufiicient strength to 
 reach his home, and, insulting tho first for opposing 
 this view, seeks to ruin his credit. The wounded man, 
 in this dubious state, seeing the third at a distance, 
 stretches out his hand to him as the person who must 
 o-ive the decision. He, after examining his wounds, 
 and hearing the opinions of the other two, embraces 
 the second, and unites with him. Both combine against 
 the first, and, being the stronger party, drive him away 
 with insult. The wounded man judges by this pro- 
 cedure that the third agrees in opinion with the 
 second ; and, in fact, on putting the question to him, 
 is distinctly informed that he has sufficient strength to 
 complete his journey. Feeling his weakness, however, 
 he asks him why he thinks his strength sufficient. 
 The answer is, ' Because you have still your limbs, and 
 the limbs are the organs which naturally suffice for 
 walking.' ' But,' rejoins the patient, * have I all the 
 strength necessary to use them, for to me they seem 
 useless, I feel so feeble ?' ' Certainly you have not so 
 much strength,' says the physician, ' and, in fact, you 
 will never witlk unless God send you extraordinary 
 assistance to sustain and conduct you.' ' What ! ' says 
 the patient, ' I have not then in myself a strength 
 which is sufficient, and want nothing to enable me 
 actually to walk ! ' ' Far from it,' says he. ' Your 
 opinion, then, in regard to my real condition,' rejoins 
 the wounded man, ' is contrary to that of your 
 comrade.' ' I confess it,' he replies. 
 
 
 4 
 
 i 
 
 :» tfl 
 
 : ffl 
 
 ni 
 ■w 
 
 u. 
 
 
 I i -ii 
 
 Ji' 
 
 1 ^ 
 
 'i 1 i. 
 
 HI 
 
 
 i: 
 
62 
 
 PHOVINCIAF. LETTERS. 
 
 ' What do yon think tlic patient said ? 11(3 com- 
 plained of the stranf^e hcdiaviour and aiiihii^uous 
 language of this third pliysician. }Ie hlained liiiii for 
 having leagued with the second, to whom he was 
 0])po,site in sentiment, and with whom he had only an 
 apparent conformity, and for having driven away the 
 first with whom he in fact agreed. Having made trial 
 of his strength, and ascertained by experience the real 
 extent of his weakness, he dismissed both of them, 
 and, calling back the first, places himself in his hands. 
 Takinof his advice, he asked of God the strenoth which 
 he confessed he had not, was heard, an<l obtained 
 a.ssistance which enabled him to reach his home.' 
 
 The worthy father, confounded at this parable, 
 made no answer. To bring him to himself, I said to 
 him mildly, ' After all. Father, what made you think 
 of giving the name of sufficient, to grace which you 
 say it is a point of faith to regard as insufficient in 
 fact ?' ' You speak very much at your ease,' said he. 
 ' You are free and single. I am a monk, the member 
 of a community. Can you not allow for the difference ? 
 We depend on superiors, w^ho themselves also depeml 
 elsewhere. They have promised our votes ; what 
 would you have me to become ?' We understood what 
 he w^ould sav. It brought to our minds the case of 
 one of his brethren who had been banished to 
 Abbeville for a similar cause. 
 
 ' But what,' said I, ' led your community to admit 
 this grace ?' ' That is a different affair,' said he. 'All 
 that I can say to you, in one word, is, that your order 
 
(Iniit 
 
 ■All 
 rder 
 
 SUFFICIENT rUlACt 
 
 03 
 
 lias, as \onrf as it coulrl, niaintaincMl tiit doctrint; of St. 
 Tlionias in rej^artl to cftectual <^raee. How eaj^orly cHd 
 it ()])pose the growth of Molina's doctrine I How iimch 
 has it laboured to establish the necessity of the effec- 
 tual grace of Jesus Christ ! Are you ignorant of what 
 took place under Clement VIII. and Paid V., and that 
 death overtaking the one, and some Italian affairs 
 preventing the other from publishing his Bull, our 
 arms have remained in the \'atican ? But the Jesuits, 
 who, from the commenci'ment of the heresy of Luther 
 and Calvin, had taken advantage of the little ability 
 which the people have to discriminate between error 
 and the truth of St. Tliomas's doctrine, had in a sliort 
 time made such progress in spreading their views, that 
 we soon saw them masters of the popular belief, and 
 ourselves in danger of being cried down as Calvinists, 
 and treated like the Jansenists in the present day, if 
 we did not modify the doctrine of effectual grace, by an 
 admission at least apparent of sufficient grarc In 
 this extremity, what better could we do in order to 
 save the truth without losing our credit, than just 
 admit sufficient jxrace in name, while denyino- it to be 
 so in fact ? In this way the thing has happened.' 
 
 He said this so dolorously that I felt pity ; but not so 
 my companion, who said to him : ' Do not flatter your- 
 self with having saved the truth ; had it not had other 
 protectors it had perished in such feeUe hands. You 
 have admitted into the Church the name of her enemy ; 
 this is to have received the enemy himself. Names are 
 inseparable from things. If the word sitfjicient grace 
 once gets a firm footing, it will be in vain for you to 
 
 1 
 
 ! , 
 
 
 , : i : 
 
 i::i 
 
64 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 urnlt3r.stan(l by it a grace which i.s insufficiont ; you 
 will not be listened to. Your explanation will disgust 
 the world, where less important things are spoken of 
 more seriously : the Jesuits will triumph ; their grace, 
 sufficient in fact, and not yours, sufficient only in 
 name, is the grace which will be held to be estal)lished, 
 and the opposite of your belief will become an article 
 of faith.' 
 
 ' We will all suffer martyrdom,' said the father, 
 'sooner than consent to the establishment of sufficient 
 grace in the sense of the Jesuits : St. Thomas, whom 
 we vow to follow till death, being directly opposed to 
 it.' On this my friend, who was more earnest than I, 
 said : ' Pooh ! father, your order has received an 
 honour of which it proves unworthy. It abandons 
 that grace which had been entrusted to it, and which 
 has never been abandoned since the creation of the 
 world. This victorious grace, which was longed for 
 by the Patriarchs, foretold by the Prophets, brought 
 by Jesus Christ, preached by St. Paul, explained by St. 
 Augustine, the greatest of the Fathers, embraced by 
 his followers, confirmed by St. Bernard, the last of the 
 Fathers, sustained by St. Thomas, the angel of the 
 schools, transmitted by him to your order, mn'w 
 tained by .so many of your fathers, and so dov jusl^ 
 defended by your body under Popes C' it and 
 Paul; this efficacious grace, which had be pldced as 
 a deposit in your hands, that it might have, in a holy 
 order always subsisting, preachers who would puolish 
 it until the end of time, now finds itself as it were 
 forsaken for paltry interests. It is time for other 
 
SUFFICIENT GRACE. 
 
 60 
 
 you 
 
 for 
 
 ught 
 ySt. 
 
 by 
 
 the 
 the 
 rtir 
 usly 
 and 
 1 as 
 loly 
 .lish 
 ■vere 
 
 liands to arm in its cause. It is time that Cfod raiso up 
 intrepid disciples of the doctrine of grace; men who, 
 knowint' nothing of worldly engagements, will serve 
 God for God. Grace may indeed no longer have the 
 J)oininicans for defenders; but it will never want 
 defenders, for it trains them for itself by its alniiglity 
 power. It demands hearts pure and disengaged ; it 
 purifies them itself, and disengages them from worldly 
 interests incompatible with the truths of the Gospel. 
 Think well of this, father, and bew^are lest God remove 
 your candlestick out of its place, and leave you in 
 darkness and without a crown, to punish your luke- 
 wainmess inacause which is so important to his Church.' 
 
 He would have said much more, for he waxed 
 warmer and warmer. But 1 interrupted him, and 
 said, on rising, ' In truth, father, if I had credit in 
 France, I would proclaim by sound of trumpet : Notice 
 IS iiEREHY GIVEN, that when the Jacobins say that 
 sufficient grace is given to all, they mean that all have 
 not the grace which efectiudly suffices. Were this 
 done, you might use the term as often as you please, 
 but not otherwise.' Thus ended our visit. 
 
 You see then that we have here a politic sitjJicicRcy 
 similar to proximate poiuer. I may, however, say to 
 you that the denial of proximate poiuer and sufficient 
 grace seems dangerous to none but a Jacobin. 
 
 While closing my letter, I learn that the censure is 
 passed; but as I do not yet know in what terms, and 
 it will not be published for .several days, I will not 
 write about it till the first post thereafter. — I am, etc. 
 
 ■a 
 
 '1 
 
 
 in 
 
 IM 
 
 ;i 
 
 m 
 
 \ 
 
 
 ';1M 
 
 w 
 
 
 I M 
 
iiJM 
 
 i-.. 
 
 1 1 1^ 'i' 
 
 -r' 
 
 ANSWEE OF THE PROVINCIAL. 
 
 TO HIS friend's two FIRST LETTERS. 
 
 Paris. 
 
 Sir, — Your two first Letters have not been for me 
 only. Everybody sees, everybody hears, everybody 
 believes them. They are not only esteemed by theo- 
 logians ; they are moreover interesting to men of the 
 world, and even intelligible to females. 
 
 A member of the Academy (one of the most distin- 
 guished of a body whose members are all distin- 
 guished), who had only seen the first Letter, writes me 
 as follows : 
 
 " I wish that the Sorbonnc, which owes so much to 
 the memory of the late Cardinal, would recognise the 
 jurisdiction of his French Academy. The author of 
 the Letter would be satisfied ; for in my capacity of 
 Academician, I would authoratively condemn, banish, 
 proscribe, little keeps me from saying extenniaate to 
 the extent of m\' power, this pfoximate power which 
 makes so much ncise for nothing, and without know- 
 ing what it would be at. The evil is, that our Aca- 
 demical power is very remote and limited : I am sorry 
 for it, and much more sorry that my little power does 
 not enable me to discharge all my obligations to your- 
 self," etc. 
 
 id 
 
 .diiil. 
 
1 to 
 the 
 or of 
 y oi 
 ish , 
 
 ANSWER CF THE PROVINCIAL. 
 
 67 
 
 A personage, whom I will not designate in any way, 
 writes to a lady who had sent her your first Letter : 
 
 " I am more obliged than you can imagine by the 
 Letter which you have sent me ; it is most ingenious 
 and admirably composed. It narrates without narrat- 
 ing, it clears up the most puzzling of all matters, and 
 has a fine vein of irony in it : it instructs even those 
 who do not know much of the case, and redoubles the 
 pleasure of those who understand it. It is moreover 
 an excellent apology, and, if you will, a delicate and 
 innocent censure. There is, in fine, so much ability, 
 wit, and judgment in this Letter, that I .should like 
 to know who has composed it," etc. 
 
 You would also like to know who it is that writes 
 in tliese terms ; but be contented to honour her with- 
 out knowing her, and when you know her you will 
 honour her much more. 
 
 Continue your Letters then on my word, and let the 
 censur.' come when it will, we are very well prepared 
 to receive it. The words pru.cimate poiuer and suffi- 
 I'ieat (jrace, which they use as bugbears, will not 
 frighten us. We have learned too much of the Jesuits, 
 the Jacobins, and M. Le Moine — how many shapes 
 they take, and how little substance there is in those 
 new terms — to feel any concern about them. Mean- 
 while, I am ever, etc. 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 im\ 
 
 
 our 
 
 l\ 
 
IK 
 
 LETTEK THIRD. 
 
 INJUSTICE, ABSURDITY, AND NULLITY OF THE CENSURE 
 OF M. ARNAULD. 
 
 Paris. 
 
 Sir, — I have just received your letter, and at the 
 same time been handed a copy of the censure in manu- 
 script. I find myself as well treated in the one as M. 
 Arnauld maltreated in the other. I fear there is ex- 
 cess in both cases, and that we are not sufficiently 
 known to our judf^es. 1 am sure if we were more so, 
 M. Arnauld would deserve the approbation of Sor- 
 bonne, and I the censure of the Academy. Thus our 
 interests are directly opposite. He should make him- 
 self known to defend his innocence, whereas I should 
 remain in obscurity not to lose my reputation. Hence 
 not being able to appear, I commit to you the office 
 of returning thanks to my distinguished patrons, and 
 undertake that of giving you news of the censure. 
 
 I confess, Sir, that it has surprised me exceedingly. 
 I expected to find the most dreadful heresies condemned, 
 but you will wonder, like me, how all this noise, and 
 all these preparations, have become abortive at the 
 moment of producing the grand result. 
 
 To qnderstand it satisfactorily, recollect, I pray, the 
 
 I 
 
 1 ' 
 
 ri 
 
 ' it 
 
THE CENSURE OF M. ARNAULD. 
 
 69 
 
 mod, 
 and 
 the 
 
 , the 
 
 strange impressions which have for so long a time been 
 irivcn us of the Jansenists. Call to mind the cabals, 
 the factions, the errors, the schisms, the crimes with 
 which thej' have so long been charged ; how they have 
 been cried down and blackened in the pulpit and by 
 the press ; and how much this torrent, so violent and 
 so lasting, has grown during the last year or two, in 
 which they have been accused openly and publicly of 
 being not only heretics and schismatics, but apostates 
 and infidels ; of denying the mystery and transub- 
 Hiantkition,andahjurinf) Je^us Christ and his Gospel. 
 
 In consequence of these many startling accusations, 
 it was resolved to examine their books in order to give 
 judgment upon them. Choice was made of the second 
 Letter of M. Arnauld, which was said to be full of the 
 gi'osest errors. The examinators assigned him are 
 his most avowed enemies. They employ their utmost 
 diligence to discover something reprehensible, and they 
 liring forward a proposition of a doctrinal nature, 
 which they submit to censure. 
 
 What could one thin from the whole procedure, 
 but that this proposition, selected in such remarkable 
 circumstances, contained the essence of the blackest 
 heresies imaginable ? And yet, such is its nature that 
 there is nothing in it but what is so clearlv and for- 
 mally expressed in the passages which M. Arnauld has 
 <luoted from the Fathers, at the place where the pro- 
 ])osition occurs, that 1 have not seen any person who 
 is able to comprehend the difference. People, never-- 
 theless, presumed it must be great ; since the passages 
 
 
 ■■• t ; 
 
 ■ W 
 
 liir 
 
 "Hi] 
 
 ! ; til 
 
 
Hit! 
 
 70 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 f.om the Fathers being undoubtedly orthodox, the 
 proposition of M. Arnauhi behoved to be extremely 
 opposite to them to be heretical. 
 
 The Sorbonne was expected to give the explanation. 
 All Christendom was lookinj^ intent to .see in the 
 censure of these Doctors a point which, to ordinary 
 men, was imperceptible. Meanwhile M. Arnauld frames 
 his ' Apologies,' in which he gives his proposition, and 
 the passages of the Fathers from whom he took it, in 
 separate cohimns, in order to make their conformity 
 apparent to the most undiscerning. 
 
 He shows that Augustine says in a passage which 
 he quotes, that " Jesus Christ exhibits in the person of 
 St. Peter a believer, who teaches us by his fall to 
 guard against presumption." In another passage which 
 he quotes, the .same Father says, " God, to .show that 
 without grace we can do nothing, left St. Peter with- 
 out grace." He gives a pa.ssage from St. Chrysostom, 
 who says, " The fall of St. Peter was not occasioned 
 by lukewarmness to Christ, but by want of grace ; 
 was occasioned not so much by negligence as by aban- 
 donment b}' God, to teach the whole Church that 
 without God we can do nothing;." After this he ofives 
 his accused proposition, which is as follows : " The 
 Fathers .show us, in the person of St. Peter, a believer 
 to whom the grace without which we cannot do any- 
 thing, was wanting." 
 
 Hereupon people try in vain to discover how it pos- 
 .sibly can be, that the proposition of M. Arnauld is as 
 different from that of the Fathers as truth from error, 
 
 
11 
 
 pos- 
 iH as 
 Irror, 
 
 THE CENSURE OF M. ARNAULD. 
 
 71 
 
 nnd faith from heresy. For wherein lies the differ- 
 ence ? Can it be in his saying that " the Fathers 
 show us a believer in the person of St. Peter " ? St. 
 Augustine has used the very words. Is it in saying 
 that " grace was wanting to him " ? Augustine, who 
 says that " St. Peter was a believer," also snya that 
 " he had not grace on this occasion." Is it because he 
 says that " without grace we can do nothing " ? But 
 is not this what St. Augustine says in the same place, 
 and what St. Chrysostom also had said before him, 
 with this single difference, that Chrysostom expresses 
 it in a much stronger manner, as when he says that 
 " his fall was not owing either to his lukewarmness or 
 his neoliijence, but to want of ij^race and abandonment 
 by God " ? 
 
 All these considerations were holding the world in 
 breathless suspense to learn wherein the difference 
 consisted, when the censure, so famous and so eagerly 
 looked for, at length, after numerous meetings, appears. 
 But alas ! it has indeed disappointed our expectations. 
 Whether the Molinist Doctors have not deigned to 
 lower themselves so far as to instruct us, or for some 
 other secret reason, they have done nothing more than 
 pronounce these words: Tliis iiropot^ition is iush, im- 
 piov.s, hlasphemoui<, anafhemafised, dvd licreticaL 
 
 Can you wonder. Sir, that most people seeing their 
 hopes deceived, have lo.st temper, and turned against 
 the censors themselves ? They draw very strong in- 
 ferences, from their conduct, in favour of M. Arnuuld. 
 What • they say, after all this time, have all these 
 
 i|;n 
 
 m 
 
 ■It 
 
 in 
 
 t| 
 
 J i 
 
^: Ul 
 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 'Im 
 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 fhir 
 
 ' 
 
 ^ 
 
 W, "': 
 
 ■5 -v. 
 
 
 I I' 
 
 
 } 
 
 
 "' 
 
 il 
 
 mk 
 
 ; 1 :' 
 
 '^ 
 
 
 72 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 Doctors, with all their inveteracy against a single in- 
 dividual, been able to do no more than find three lines 
 to censure in all his works, and these expressed in the 
 very words of the greatest Doctors of the Greek and 
 Latin Churches ? Is there an author whom it was 
 wished to ruin, whose writings would not afford a 
 more plausible pretext ? Could a stronger proof be 
 given of the soundness of the faith of this illustrious 
 accused ? 
 
 How comes it, they ask, that t 's censure is so 
 filled with imprecations ? that the terras 'poison, 
 pestilence, horror, temerity, impiety, blasphemy, abom- 
 ination, execration, anathema, heresy, the very worst 
 that could be found for Arius, or Antichrist himself, 
 are raked together to denounce an imperceptible 
 heresy, and that even without discovering it ? If 
 quotations fiom the Fathers are to be treated in this 
 manner, what becomes of faith and tradition ? If the 
 only object of attack is the proposition of M. Arnauld, 
 let them show us where the difference lies, since we 
 see only perfect conformity. When we perceive the 
 heresy in it, we will hold it in detestation ; but so 
 long as we see it not, and only find the sentiments of 
 the Fathers conceived and expressed in their own 
 words, how can we do otherwise than hold it in holy 
 veneration ? 
 
 Such is the way in which many feel ; but they 
 belong to the class of those who are too sharp-sighted. 
 Let us who not go so deep into things, keep our- 
 selves at ea&>3 on the whole matter. Would we be 
 
 I 
 
THE CENSURE OF M. ARNAULD. 
 
 73 
 
 more knowing than our masters ? Let us not under- 
 take more than they. We should lose ourselves in the 
 search. The least thing in the world would make the 
 censure heretical. The truth is so delicate, that any 
 deviation from it, however small, plunges us into error; 
 while the error is so minute that a single step away 
 from it brings us to truth. There is only one imper- 
 ceptible point between this proposition and sound 
 faith. The distance is so insensible, that my fear, 
 while not seeing it, has been, that I might become 
 contrary to the Doctors of the Church in my anxiety 
 to be conformable to the Doctors of Sorbonne. In this 
 fear I judged it necessary to consult one of those who, 
 from policy, were neutral on the first question, that I 
 might learn how the case truly stands. Accordingly I. 
 waited on one of them, a very clever person, and begged 
 him to have the goodness to specify the particular 
 points of difference, frankly confessing to him that I 
 saw none. 
 
 Laughing, as if amused at my simplicity, he replied : 
 ' How silly you are to believe there is any diflference ! 
 Where could it be ? Do you imagine that if any 
 could have been found, it would not have been dis- 
 tinctly specified, and that they would not have been 
 delighted to expose it to the view of all the people 
 in whose minds they desire to lower M. Arnauld ? ' I 
 ■saw plainly, by these few words, that all who were 
 neutral on the first question would not have been so 
 on the second. Still, however, I wished to hear his 
 reasons, and said, ' Why then did they attack this 
 
 ^J 
 
 nil 
 
 . 1 ■• 
 ■ 1 i' 
 
 ■ m 
 
 '{ill 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 I. 4' 
 
 Hi 
 
1 '' 
 
 ■^1^ 
 
 
 1 
 
 '; 
 
 
 74 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 proposition ? ' He replied, ' Are j-on ignorant oF two 
 things, which the hiiist informed on these matters 
 know ? the one, that M. Ainauld has always avoided 
 saying anything that was not strongly founded in the 
 tradition of the Church : the other, that his enemies 
 were determined to exclude him from it, cost what 
 it might ; and these his writings, giving no handle 
 to their designs, they, to gratify theii- passions, have 
 been compelled to take up a proposition at hazard, 
 and without saying why or wherefore ? For do 
 you not know how the Jansenists keep them at bay, 
 and press them so very closely, that whenever a 
 word escapes them in the least degree contrary to 
 the Fathers, they are forthwith borne down by whole 
 volumes, and forced to succumb ? After the many 
 proofs of their weakness, they have judged it more 
 expedient and less laborious to censure than to rejoin, 
 because it is far easier for them to find monks than 
 arguments. 
 
 ' But the matter so standing,' said I, ' their censure 
 is useless ; for what credit will it have when it is seen 
 to be without foundation, and is overthrown by the 
 answers which will be made to it?' 'If you knew 
 the spirit of the people,' said my Doctor, 'you would 
 speak in a ditferent manner. The censure, most cen- 
 surable though it be, will have almost full effect for a 
 time ; and though by dint of demonstrating its inval- 
 idity, it certainly will come to be understood, just as 
 certainly will the tirst impression of the great majority 
 be that it is perfectly just. Provided the hawkers in 
 
f-m 
 
 THE c;EXSURE of M. ARXAITLD. 
 
 75 
 
 m 
 
 the streets cry: Here you hive the censure of M. 
 Arriauhl! Here you have the condemn at ion of the 
 Jdnsenists ! the Jesuits will have gained their object. 
 How few will read it ? How few who read will un- 
 derstand ? How few perceive that it does not meet 
 the ohjections ? Who do you think will take the 
 matter to heart, and probe it to the bottom ? See, 
 then, wdiat advantage the enemies of the Jansenists 
 have here. In this way they are sure of a triumph 
 (though according to their wont, a vain triumph), for 
 several months ut least. This is a great deal for them: 
 they will afterwards look out for some new means of 
 subsistence. They are living from hand to mouth. 
 It is in this way they have maintained themselves 
 hitherto ; at one time by a catechism, in which a child 
 condemns their opponents ; at another by a procession, 
 in which sufficient grace leads ePectual grace in 
 triumph ; at another by a comedy, in which the devils 
 carry off Jansenius ; once by an almanac, and now by 
 the censure.' 
 
 ' In truth,' said I, the proceedings of the Molonists 
 seemed to me objectionable in every point of view ; 
 but after what you have told me, I admire their pru- 
 dence and their policy. I see well that there was 
 nothing the}^ could do either more judicious or more 
 sure.' ' You understand it,' said he. ' Their safest 
 course has always been to be silent, and hence the 
 saying of a learned theologian, that the ahlest among 
 them are tliose who intrigue much, speak little, and 
 wrile none.' 
 
 iii( 
 
 1-3 ■' 
 
 1 
 
 I, i a 
 
 m 
 
 MM 
 
 ■ I* 
 
 1 ■. 
 
*','^ 
 
 76 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 ' In this spirit they had, from the cominoncenient of 
 their meetinjijs, prudently ordered that if M. Arnauld 
 made appearance in Sorbonne. it sliould only be to 
 j^ive a simple exposition of his belief, and not to enter 
 the lists with any one. The exaniinators havinrj 
 chosen to deviate somewhat from this rule, did not 
 f,'et well out of it. They saw themselves very roughly 
 handled by his second Apology. 
 
 * In this same spirit they have fallen upon the rare 
 and very novel device of the half hour and the sand 
 glass. They have thereby rid themselves of the im- 
 portunity of those Doctors who undertook to refute 
 all their arguments, to produce books convicting them 
 of falsehood, and challenge them to reply, while put- 
 ting it out of their power to reply with efiect. Not 
 that they w^ere unaware that this want of liberty, 
 which caused so many Doctors to withdraw their 
 attendance, would do no good to their censure ; and 
 that the protest of nullity which M. Arnauld took 
 before it was concluded, would be a bad preamble for 
 securing its favourable reception. They know well 
 that all who are not prejudiced, attach at least as 
 much weight to the judgment of seventy Doctors who 
 had nothing to gain by defending M. Arnauld, as to 
 that of the hundred who had nothing to lose by con- 
 demning him. 
 
 'But still, after all, they thought it always a great 
 matter to have a censure, although it were only by a 
 part of Sorbonne, and not by the whole body ; though 
 it were passed with little or no freedom, and secured 
 
m 
 
 e for 
 well 
 
 ist as 
 who 
 as to 
 con- 
 
 great 
 
 lough 
 
 THE CENSURK OF M. ARNAULD. 
 
 77 
 
 by many paltry, an<l some not very regular, methods ; 
 although it explains nothing as to the point in dispute, 
 does not specify wherein the heresy consists, and says 
 little from fear of mistake. This very silence gives 
 the thing an air of mystery to the simple, and gains 
 this singular advantage to the censure, that the most 
 critical and subtle theologians will not be able to tind 
 any false aigument in it. 
 
 'Set your mind at rest then, and fear not to be 
 heretical in using the condemned proposition. It is 
 bad only in the second Letter of M. Arnauld. Are 
 you unwilling to take this on my word ? Believe M. 
 Le Moine, the keenest of the examinators, who, speak- 
 ing this very morning with a friend of mine, a Doctor, 
 who asked him wherein the ditterence in (juestion lies, 
 and whether it would no longer be lawful to say what 
 the Fathers have said, gave this valuable reply : 
 " This proposition would be orthodox in an other 
 jiwdfh : it is only in M. Arnauld that tlie Sorbonae 
 h<iH condemned it." And now admire the enffines of 
 Molinisin, which effect such prodigious revolutions in 
 the Church, making that which is orthodox in the 
 Fathers become heretical in M. Arnauld, that which 
 was heretical in the Semi-Pelagians become orthodox 
 in the writinijs of the Jesuits ; makin<j: the ancient 
 doctrine of St. Augustine become an intolerable 
 novelt}', while the new inventions which are daily 
 fabricated under our eyes pas.s for the ancient faith of 
 the Church.' On this he left me. 
 
 This lesson was enough. It taught me that the 
 
 I 
 
 < , I'd 
 
 i 5i 
 
 1 1 
 
 Mil 
 
Vv^. 
 
 ■: 
 II 
 
 i 
 
 We' 
 
 78 
 
 PIIOVINCIAL LKTTERS. 
 
 heresy here was of a new species. It is not thi senti- 
 ments of M. Arnauld, Imt his person tliat is heretical. 
 It is a personal heresy ! He is not heretical hecause 
 of anything lie has said or written, but only because 
 he is M. Arnauld. This is all that is objectionable in 
 him. Let him do what he may, unless he cease to 
 live, he will never be a fijood Catholic. The grace of 
 St. Augustine will never be true so long as he shall 
 defend it. It would become so if he were to combat 
 it. This were a sure stroke, and almost the only means 
 of establishing it and destroying Molinisin ; such mis- 
 fortune does ho bring on the principles which he 
 supports. 
 
 Here, then, let us have done with these disputes. 
 They are the quarrels of theologians, not questions of 
 theology. We who are not Doctors have nothing to 
 do with their .squabbles. Give the news of the cen- 
 .sure to all our friend.s, and love me as much as — I am, 
 Sir, your very humble and obedient servant, 
 
 E. A. A. B. P. A. F. D. E. P. 
 
LETTEPv FOUETH. 
 
 OK ACTUAL CiRACE ALWAYS I'KESEN T, AND OF SINS OF IGNORANCE. 
 
 cen- 
 ani, 
 
 P. 
 
 Pa It IS. 
 Sir, — There are none like the Jesuits. I have seen 
 inaiiy Jacobins, Doctors, and all sorts of people, 1>nt a 
 visit like this was wantinn' to complete my instruction. 
 Others only copy them. Thinii;s are always best at 
 the source. I have accord in:,'ly visited ne of the 
 cleverest of them, accompanied by my faithful Jan- 
 .senist, who went with me to the Jacobins. And as I 
 wished particularly to be eniii.;htened on the subject 
 of a difference which they hav(! with the Jansenists 
 touching actual grace, I told the worthy father how 
 much I should be obliged to him if he would have the 
 goodness to instruct me, as I did not even know what 
 the term meant ; I therefore begged him to explain it 
 to 1110. ' Very willingly,' said he, ' for I like inquisi- 
 tive people. Here is the dertnition of ;t. Actual 
 grace is an ini^piration from God, hi/ wltlcJo he makes 
 us know his luill, and excites in us a desire to per- 
 form it! 'And wherein,' I asked, ' are you at variance 
 with the Jansenists on this subject ?' ' It is,' said he, 
 ' in our holding that God gives actual grace to all men 
 on every temptation, because we maintain that if on 
 
■p 
 
 80 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 every temptation actual grace not to sin were not 
 given, no sin whatever that might be committed could 
 be imputed. The Jansenists say, on the contrary, that 
 sins cominitted without actual grace are imputed not- 
 withstanding : but they are dreamers. I had some 
 idea of what he meant, but, to make him explain him- 
 self more clearly, I said, ' Father, the term actual 
 grace conmses me ; I am not accustomed to it : if you 
 will have the grodness to tell me the same thing 
 'vithout using th it term, I will be infinitely obliged.' 
 ' Yes,' said the father, ' in other words you wish me 
 to substitute the definition in place of the thing de- 
 fined ; that never makes any change on the meaning ; 
 I am very willing to do it. We niiuntain, then, as an 
 indubitible principle, that an oxtion cannot he im- 
 puted as sinful unless God r/ives us, before lue com- 
 mit it, a knowledge of the evil luhich is in it, and iin 
 inspiration yrompting us to avoid it. T)o you under- 
 stand me now ?' 
 
 Astonished at this language, according to which all 
 sins of surprise, and those done in complete i'orgetful- 
 ness of God, cannot be imputed, I turned towards my 
 Jansenist, and saw plainly by his manner that he did 
 not believe a word of it. But as he made uo answer, 
 I said to the father, ' Father, 1 wish much that what 
 you tell me were true, and that you could furnish 
 good proof of it.' '])o you wish it T said he imme- 
 diately, ' I will furnish you, and with the very best: 
 leave that to me.' On this he went to fetch his books. 
 J said meanwhile to my friend, ' Does any other of 
 
 L 
 
 iLii'Hki.^*L 
 
ACTUAL GRACE, AND SINS OF IGNORANCE. 81 
 
 Ml] 
 
 m 
 
 me 
 
 them speak like him ?' ' Is that so new to you ?' he 
 replied ; ' rest assured that no Father, Pope, or Coun- 
 cil, neither Scripture, nor any book of piety even in 
 these last times, ever spoke in that manner; but as to 
 casuists ami new schoolmen, ho will bring you them 
 in abundance.' 'What!' said I, 'f care not a straw 
 for those authors it' they are opposed to tradition.' 
 ' You are rinht,' said he. As he spoke, the worthy 
 father arrived loaded with books, and, offering me the 
 first in his hand, ' Read,' said he, ' the Sum of Sins, by 
 Father Bauni. Ht;re it is ; the fifth edition, moreover, 
 to show you that it is a good book.' ' It is a pity,' 
 wliispered my Jansenist, ' that this book was con- 
 demned at Rome, and by the bishops of France.' 
 ' Look,' said the father, 'at page 906.' I looked and 
 found as follows : To sin and incur guilt before God, 
 it is necessary to kinnv that the thing which ive wish 
 fi> (Jo is icorthless, or at least to suspect this ; to fear, 
 or rather judge, that God takes no pleasure in the 
 urtion we are contemplating, that he forbids it, and, 
 votivithstanding to do it, to take the leap and go 
 heyond. 
 
 'This makes a good beginning,' said I. 'And yet,' 
 said he, ' see what a thing envy is. It was for this 
 that H. Hallier, before he was a friend of ours, jeered 
 at Father Bauni, fipplying to him the words, Ecce 
 qui toliit j)eccata mundi ! Behold him who taketh 
 awaii ^he sins of the world !' 'It is true,' said I, ' that 
 this is a new redemption, a la Father Bauni.' 
 
 ' Are you desirous,' he added, ' to have a graver 
 
 *i:i: 
 
 M- 
 
 Him 
 
 \ I 
 
nfTTTrv: 
 
 «2 
 
 PROVINCIAL LEITEUS. 
 
 authority ? Look at this work of Father Aniiat. It 
 is the last whicli he has written against M. Arnauld. 
 Look at page .'J4, where it is folded down, and read the 
 lines which 1 have marked with a pencil : they are all 
 letters ot" o-old.' I read accordingly : J/e who Jk's no 
 thought of God, nor of his sins, nor any opprcltension, 
 that is, as he exphr ed to me, any knoivlcdge of the 
 iMigation to do acts of love to God, or of cotitritlon, 
 has no > tual grace to do tJiose acts ; hut it is also true 
 that he does not sin in omitting thciii, and, th<d. If he 
 is damned, it will not he in ininishment of thi>^ oinis- 
 sion. Some lines farther down : And ive may say the 
 same thing of a culpaMe omission. 
 
 'Do you see how he speaks of sins of omission and 
 sins of commission ? For he forgets nothino". What 
 say you ?' ' O how I am delighted,' replied L ' What 
 beautiful conse(iuences I see ! The whole series is 
 already in my eye ; what mysteries rise into view I I 
 see incomparably more people justified by this ignor- 
 ance and forgetfulness of God, than by grace and the 
 sacraments. But, father, are you not ffivinij me a false 
 joy I* Is there nothing here akin to the sufjiciencn 
 A*'hich suffices not ? I am dreadfully afraid of the 
 Distingno ; I was caught by it before. Are you in 
 earnest?' 'How,' said the father, warming; 'it is 
 no jesting matter ; there is no equivocation here.' ' I 
 am not jesting,' said I, ' but I fear it is too good to be 
 true.' 
 
 ' To make you more sure, then,' said he, ' turn to the 
 writings of M. Le Moine, who has taught it in full 
 
ACTU,\L GRACE, AND SINS OF IGNORANCE. 
 
 83 
 
 ;■ 
 
 'H ! 
 
 id the 
 
 false 
 
 [■ievcij 
 
 l)f the 
 
 on in 
 
 'it is 
 
 ; 'I 
 
 to be 
 
 |to the 
 
 n full 
 
 Sorbonne. Tie learned it from us, it is true, but he 
 has well expounded it. liow firmly he has e.-.tab- 
 lished it! He teaches, that before an act cayi he sin- 
 ful, (ill these thiiK/s must take place in the soul. Read 
 and weijj;h every word.' I read in Latin what you 
 will here see in French : 1. On the one hond, God in- 
 fuses into tJie soul some feel ivr/ of lore, inclininrj it 
 towurds the thing commanded, u'hile, on the olJter 
 hard, rehellious concupiscence urcjes it to the con- 
 trary. 2. God inspires it ivith a hnouiedge of its 
 weakness. 3. God inspires it witli a knowledge of the 
 ^^hysician luho is to cure it. 4. God inspires it with 
 a desire of cure. 5. God inspires it with a desire to 
 irray to Jdni, and imjylore his assistance. 
 
 ' Unless all these things take place in the soul,' said 
 the Jesuit, ' the action is not properly sin, and cannot 
 be imputed, as M. Le Moine says in the same place, 
 and in the sequel throughout. 
 
 ' Would you have more authorities ? Here they are.' 
 ' But all modern,' (pii'^tly observed my Jansenist. ' I 
 see,' I replied ; and, addressing the father, said, ' O 
 father, what a blessing to some persons of my acquain- 
 tance ! I must bring them to you. Perhaps 3'ou have 
 seldom seen people with fewer sins, for they never 
 thitdc of God ; their vices got the start of their reason ; 
 they have never known either their infirmity, or the 
 Physician wdio can cure it ; they have never thought 
 of desiring the health of their soul, and still less of 
 asking God to give it ; so that they are still, according 
 to M. Le Moine, as innocent as at their baptism. They 
 
 
 % 
 
 i 
 
 m 
 
 i iH, 
 
 iiiii 
 
'■FT 
 
 84. 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 have never once tboup,ht of loving God or being sorry 
 for tbeir sins; .so that, according to Fatlier Aniiat, 
 tliey have never sinned, being devoid both of love and 
 repentance. Tiieir whole life is a continued search 
 after pleasure of every sort, and their course has never 
 been interrupted by the slightest remorse. All these 
 excesses made me think their perdition certain ; but 
 you, father, teach me, that these excesses make their 
 salvation secure. Blessings on >ou, father, for thus 
 justifying people! Others teach how to cure souls by 
 painful austerities, but you show that those whom we 
 might have thought most desperately diseased, are in 
 good health. ! the nice way of l>t!ing happy in this 
 world and in the next. I always thought that we 
 sinned the more, the less we thouglit of God. But 
 from what I see, when once one has so far gained upon 
 one's self, as not to think of him at all, all things in 
 future become pure. None of your half sinners who 
 have some lingerin<>- after virtue ! Thev will all be 
 damned, those half sinners. But for those frank 
 sinners, hardened sinners, sinners without mixture, 
 full and finished, hell does not get them ; they have 
 cheated the devil ; by dint of givinjj: themselves over 
 to him !' 
 
 The worthy father, wlio clearly enough saw the 
 connection of these consequences with his principles 
 adroitly evaded it, and without troubling hiiwsolf, 
 whether from meekness tjf prudence, simply said to 
 me, ' That you may understand how we avoid these 
 inconveniences, know% that we indeed say that the 
 
M 
 
 ACTUAL GRACE, AND SINS OF IGNORANCE. 
 
 85 
 
 iiijpious persons you refer to, would l>e without sin, if 
 tliey had never had any thoujjjhts of conversion, or 
 desires of giving themselves to God. But then we 
 maintain that they all have these thoughts, and that 
 God has never allowed a man to sin without previously 
 irivinir him a view of the evil which he is fjoini; to do, 
 and a desire either to avoid the sin or at least to im- 
 plore his assistance to enable him to avoid it. None 
 but the Jansenists say the contrary.' 
 
 ' What ! father,' I rejoined, ' is it heresy in the 
 Jansenists to deny that in every instance when a man 
 commit'- sin, he has a feeling of remorse in his con- 
 science, in spite of which he proceeds to take the leap 
 (iniLpasi< heijond, as Father Bauni says! It is rather 
 anmsing to be a heretic for that. I always thought 
 that men were damned for not havinc tifood thou'dits : 
 but that they are damned for not believing that every 
 body has them, of a truth, never occurred to me. But, 
 father, I feel bound in conscience to disabuse you, and 
 tell you that there are thousands of people who have no 
 such desires, who sin without regret, sin gladly, and 
 make a boast of it. Who can know this better than 
 yourself ^ Do you not confess some such persons as I 
 speak of, for it is among persons of high rank that 
 tlu-y are most frec^uently met with ? But beware, 
 father, of the dangerous consequences of your maxim. 
 Do you not perceive what effect it may have upon 
 those libertines whose onl}- wish is to be able to doubt 
 tile truth of religion ? What a handle for this do you 
 i^ive when you tell them as an article of faith, that at 
 
 ,:t 
 
 m 
 
 111 
 
 iH 
 
 'I 
 
 111! ; 
 
 A 
 
 m 
 
 m 
 
8G 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 every sin whicli tliey couuiiit, they are warned, and 
 feel an inward desire to abstain from it ! For is it not 
 obvious, tlmt, their own experience assuring them of 
 the falsehood of your doctrine on the point which you 
 say is an article of faith, they will extend the; infer- 
 ence to all the others ? They will say that if you are 
 not true in one article, you may be suspected in all ; 
 and thus you will oblige them to conclude either that 
 relii^ion is false, or that vou are ill instructed in it.' 
 
 But my second, taking up my view, saiil to him, 
 ' In order to preserve your doctrine, father, you will 
 do well not to explain, so precisely as you have done 
 to us, what you understand by actual grace. How 
 could you, without losing all credit in the minds of 
 men, declare openly that nohodij sins luithout pre- 
 viuuslij haciivj a kiuniicdge of Ids infirmitu and of 
 the Plujsicmv, a desire of cure, and of ashing God U> 
 grant it? Will it be believed on your word, that 
 those who are addicted to avarice, unchastity, blas- 
 phemy, duelling, revenge, theft, sacrilege, have really 
 a desire to cultivate chastity, humility, and the other 
 Christian virtues ? Will it be thought that those 
 philosophers who vaunted so highly of the power of 
 nature, knew its intirmitv and the Phvsician ? Will 
 you say that those who held as an indubitable maxim, 
 that God docs not give rlrtiic, and tliat no person ever 
 asked it of him, thought of asking it themselves ? 
 
 ' Who will believe that the Epicureans, who denied 
 divine Providence, had inspirations inclining them to 
 pray to God ? men who said, it luas an insult to 
 
 m 
 
d io 
 that 
 jlas- 
 'ally 
 )ther 
 those 
 }r of 
 Will 
 Lxini, 
 ever 
 
 ACTUAL GKACP:, AND SINS OF KINOUANOE. 
 
 S7 
 
 "Pl'-fJ '''* ^'^^^'^ ^^^ ^^^^' tvants, <w if he were capdhle of 
 mnnsivg hiitisclf witlt tldnkliiij of Ufi. In tine, is it 
 iiua<TinaV>Ie, that idohitors and atheists have, in all the 
 temptations inclining them to sin, (that is, an infinite 
 numher of times during their life) a desire to pray to 
 the true God of whom they are ignorant, to give them 
 the true virtues which they do not know ?' 
 
 ' Yes,' said the worthy father, with a determined 
 tone, 'we will say it; and sooner than say that men 
 shi without having a perception that they are doing 
 cviL a]id a desire of the opposite virtue, we will main- 
 tain that the whole world, both wicked men and 
 infidels, have these inspirations and desires on every 
 temptation. For you cannot show me, at least from 
 Scripture, tliat it is not so.' 
 
 1 here took the liberty to say to him, ' What ! father, 
 is it necessary to have recourse to Scripture to demon- 
 strate so clear a matter ^ It is neither an article of 
 faith, nor a tit subject of argument. It is a matter of 
 fact. We see it, we know it, we feel it.' 
 
 But my Jansenist, taking up the father on his own 
 terms, said to him, ' If you insist, father, on yielding 
 only to Scripture, I consent, but at least do not resist 
 it; and, seeing it is written that God has not made 
 known hisJH.df/ments io the Gentiles, and that he has 
 left them to wander in their oiun ways, say not that 
 God has enlightened these whom the Sacred Books 
 declare to have been left in darkness and the shadow 
 of death. 
 
 'To perceive that your principle is erroneous, is it 
 
 -rtl 
 
 i 
 
 
 ^■>""l 
 
 
 M 
 
 Ml'' 
 
 I' 1 '1 i'( 
 
 \ Hi 
 
 i 
 
88 
 
 PUOVIN'CIAL LETliaiS. 
 
 not enough to see that St. Paul calls himself the cldef 
 of sinners, because of a sin which he coniiiiitteJ 
 through Ir/norance and U'ith zeal. 
 
 ' Is it not enough lo see from the Gospel tliat those 
 who crucified Jesus Christ needetl the pardon which 
 he asked for them, although they knew not the full 
 wickedness of the deed, and, according to St. Paul, 
 would not have done it had they known ? 
 
 ' Is it not enough, when Jesus Christ warns us that 
 there will be persecutors of the Church, wdio will 
 think they are doing God service in striving to over- 
 throw it, to remind us, that this sin which, according 
 to the Apostle, is the greatest of all, may be committed 
 by persons, who, so far from knowing that they sin, 
 would think it a sin not to do so ? And, in tine, is it 
 not enough that Jesus Christ himself has told us that 
 there are two kinds of sinners — tho.se who sin with 
 knowledge, and those wdio sin without knowledge ; 
 and that they will all be punished, though in difi'er- 
 ent degrees ? ' 
 
 The worthy father, pressed by so many passages of 
 Scripture to which he had appealed, began to give 
 way, and, leaving the wicked to sin without inspira- 
 tion, said : ' At least you will not deny that the 
 rio-hteous never sin without God (rivini; them—' 
 ' You are drawing back,' .said I, interrupting him, 
 ' you are drawing back, father ; you are giving up the 
 general principle ; and, seeing that it won't hold in 
 regard to sinners, you would fain compound the mat- 
 ter, and make it, at least, subsist in regard to believers. 
 
 
 n; 
 
 It 
 
Tt^ 
 
 ACTUAL GUACE, AND SINS OF IGNORANCE. 
 
 89 
 
 ive 
 )ira- 
 
 tl 
 
 le 
 
 nun, 
 
 111 that case, the use of it is greatly curtailed, very 
 few will be able to avail themselves of it, and it is 
 scarcely worth while contesting it with you.' 
 
 But my second, who, I believe, had studied the whole 
 (juestion that very morning, so much was he at home 
 upon it, replied, ' This, father, is the last entrenchment 
 into which those of your party who have been pleased 
 to debate tlie point retire. But you are far frt)m being 
 safe in it. The example of believers is not a whit 
 more favourable for you. Who doubts that they often 
 fall into sins of surpri.se without perceiving it ? Do 
 we not learn from the saints themselves, how many 
 secret snares concupiscence lays for them, and how 
 frequently it happens, let them be temperate as they 
 may, that they give to pleasure wdiat they think they 
 are only giving to necessity, as h't. Augustine says of 
 himself in his Confessions ? 
 
 ' How conunon is it in debate to see the most zealous 
 give way to ebullitions of temper for their own interest, 
 while the only testimony which their conscience gives 
 ut the time is, that they are acting solely for the 
 iriterests of truth, this erroneous impression sometimes 
 continuinir for a lono- time after ? 
 
 ' But what shall we say of those who engage with 
 eagerness in things which are really bad, believing 
 them to be really gooa, cases of which Ecclesiastical 
 Hi.^tor}' furnishes exam})les, and in which, according 
 to the Fathers, sin is nevertheless committed ( 
 
 ' But for this, how could believers have hidden sins ? 
 How could it be true that God alone knows the maiiui- 
 
 fi 
 
 % 
 
 i 
 
 i.U' 
 
 :ii; 
 
90 
 
 I'lioviN'ciAL lkttf:ks. 
 
 tilde Jind tho nmiiher of tlicin ? That no one knows 
 whotlier ho is doservinu' of love or of hatred, and that 
 tlie greatest saints nnist always remain in fear and 
 trenihlinic, althouijh thev are not conscious of trans- 
 «:;ression, as St. Paul says of himself ? 
 
 ' Understand then, father, that the examples, both of 
 the righteous and the wicked, eijually disprove your 
 suj)posed essential retjuisite to sin, namely, a knowledge 
 of the evil and a love of the contrary virtue, since the 
 passion which the wicked have for vice plainly testifies 
 that they have no desire for virtue, and the love which 
 the righteous have for virtue loudly proclaims that 
 they are not always aware of the sins which, accord- 
 ing to Scripture, they connuit every day. 
 
 ' So true is it that believers sin in this manner, that 
 distinguished saints seldom sin otherwise. For how 
 is it conceivable, that those pure souls whoso carefully 
 and earnestly eschew whatever may be displeasing to 
 God the moment they perceive it, and who, neverthe- 
 less, sin repeatedly every day, .should, previously to 
 each lap.se, have aknoivledyeof their infirmity on that 
 occasion, and oftlie Physician, a desire to obtain health, 
 and to pray to God to succour tJi em ; and, notwith- 
 standing of all these inspirations, these zealous .souls 
 should still pass beyond and commit the sin ? 
 
 * Conclude then, father, that neither the wicked nor 
 even the righteous have always that knowledge, those 
 de.sires, and all tho.se inspirations every time they sin ; 
 in other words, to use your own terms, they have not 
 actual grace on all the occasions on which they sin. 
 
 'til 
 
 J W 
 
ACTL^VI- OKACE, AND SINS OF HiNOKANCE. 
 
 !)1 
 
 N(J loiiifor say witli your new autlifjrs, tluit it is im- 
 possible to sin without Ivnowinjjf riglitoousncss ; but 
 s!iy rather with St. Aui.,fustine and the ancient Fathers, 
 that it is impossible for any man not to sin who is 
 ignorant of rii^hteousness. Necetm csf lU peccet, aqua 
 hjiiordtiLi' jit'Stitia.' 
 
 The worthy father, findinif liimself precluded from 
 iiiaintainiiiLj his opinion in rei;ard to the rii^hteous, as 
 well as in regard to sinners, did not, however, lose 
 coura^'e. Pondering a little, he said, ' I am sure I am 
 going to convince you ; ' and, taking up his Father 
 Bauni at the place which he had shown us, ' See, see 
 the reason on which he founds his view. I know well 
 that he had no lack of good proofs. Read his quota- 
 tion from Aristotle, and you will see that after so 
 express an authority, you must barn the books of this 
 prince of philosophers, or be of our opinion. Listen 
 then to the principles which Father Bauni establishes. 
 He says, first, that an act cam not he imjmtecl to sin 
 when it is involuniarij.' ' Admitted,' said my friend. 
 'This,' said I, 'is the first time that 1 have seen you 
 agree. Stay where you are, father, if you will take 
 my word.' ' That were to do nothini;,' said he, ' for 
 we must ascertain what conditions are necessary to 
 make an action voluntary.' ' I greatly fear,' replied I, 
 'That you will split upon that.' ' Fear not,' said he, 
 ' the thing is sure. Aristotle is with me. Listen 
 attentively to what Father Bauni says: An action, 
 to hi' voluntary, must he done hy one vjho sees and 
 kaoivs, and thorour/ldy perceives the good and evil 
 
 \\\\ 
 
 " Ml 
 
 i» , I 
 
 i 
 
 1+. r 
 
 m 
 
 
 ii 
 
 tir. \l 
 
 jiJi 
 
IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 o 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 1.25 
 
 .. |32 
 
 lit 
 
 i JO 
 
 2.0 
 
 U lllll 1.6 
 
 V2 
 
 VI 
 
 e". 
 
 c*J 
 
 ^a 
 
 s>. 
 
 
 /. 
 
 .^->^ 
 
 » 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, NY. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
o 
 
 <•■■ .#'5 
 
 "^0 'v/s^. Ti 
 
 u. 
 
 ''/y^ 
 
m 
 
 nr 
 
 
 
 {■:■ y 
 
 92 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 ivhich is in it Voluntarium est (as is commonly 
 defined by the philosopher. You are aware,' said he, 
 giving my hand a squeeze, ' he means Aristotle,) QUOD 
 
 FIT A PRINCIPIO COGNOSCENTE SINGULA IN QUIBUS EST 
 
 actio; so much so that when the ivill at random, and 
 without discussion, proceeds to will or dislike, to do or 
 not do something, before the understanding han 
 been able to see whether there is evil in ivillivg or in 
 shunning it, in doing it or leaving it undone, such 
 action is neither good nor bad; in as much as, previous 
 to this requisite, this view and reflection of the mind 
 as to the good or bad qualities of the thing in question, 
 the act which is done is not voluntary.' 
 
 ' Well,' said the father, ' are you satisfied ?' ' It 
 seems,' rejoined I, ' that Aristotle is of Father Bauni's 
 opinion, but I am surprised at it. What ! father, in 
 order to act voluntarily, is it not enough to know what 
 we do, and to do it because we please to do it ? Must 
 we moreover see, know, and thoroughly perceive the 
 good and evil that is in the action ? If so few actions 
 of our lives are voluntary, for we seldom think of all 
 that, what oaths at play, what excesses of debauchery, 
 what irregularities during carnival, must be involun- 
 tary, and consequently neither good nor bad, from not 
 being accompanied with those reflections of the mind 
 on the good or bad qualities of what is done ! But, 
 father, is it possible that this can have been Aristotle's 
 ideii ? I have always heard that he was a man of 
 talent.' ' I will explain to you,' said my Jansenist, 
 and, having asked the father for Aristotle's Ethics, he 
 
 im 
 
ACTUAL GRACE, AND SINS OF IGNORANCE. 
 
 93 
 
 opened at the beginning of the third book, where 
 Father Bauni has taken the words he quotes, and said 
 to the worthy father, 'I forgive you for believing on 
 Father Bauni's word, that this was Aristotle's opinion. 
 You would have thought differently if you had read it 
 for yourself. It is very true he teaches that to make 
 an action voluntary, it is necessary to know the par- 
 ticdars of the action; singula in quibus est actio. 
 But what does he mean by this, except the particular 
 circumstances of the action ? This is clearly proved 
 by his illustrations, which refer only to cases in which 
 some one of those circumstances is unknown, as that 
 of a imrson who, in ivinding up a machine, sets free a 
 dart, by luhich some one is hurt ; or of Merope, ivho 
 slew Iter son, mistaking him for an enem.y, and .^o on. 
 'You thus see the kind of ignorance which renders 
 actions involuntary ; it is only that of the particular 
 circumstances, which, as you, father, very well know, 
 is called by theologians, ignorance of fact. But as to 
 that of right, in other words, as to ignorance of the 
 good or evil which is in the action, the only point here 
 in question, let us see if Aristotle is of the opinion of 
 Father Bauni. These are the philosopher's own words: 
 All wicked men are ignorant of ivhat they ought to 
 do, and of what they ought to shun. And this is the 
 very thing which renders them wicked and vicious. 
 Hence, we cannot say that because a man is ignorant 
 of what it is expedient for him to do, in order to dis- 
 charge his duty, his act is involuntai^. For this 
 ignorance in the choice of good and evil, does not make 
 
94 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 m 
 
 ii ' > 
 
 ■i 'U'd: 
 
 * ^ -f i 
 
 ii I 
 
 the act involuntary^ but only makes it vicious. The 
 same thing must he said of him ivho is ignorant in 
 general of the rules of his duty, since ignorance makes 
 man deserving of blame, and not of excuse. And hence 
 the ignorance which renders actions involuntary and 
 excusable, is only that which regards the particular 
 fact, and its special circumstances. In that case, we 
 pardon the man and excuse him, considering him to 
 have acted against his will. 
 
 ' After this, father, will you still say that Aristotle 
 is of your opinion ? Who will not bo astonished to 
 see a heathen philosopher more enlightened than your 
 doctors on a matter so important to morality in general, 
 and even to the direction of souls, as a knowledge of 
 the conditions which make actions voluntary or invol- 
 untary, and which, in consequence, exempt or do not 
 exempt them from sin ? Hope nothing, then, father, 
 from this Prince of Philosophers, and no longer resi.st 
 the Prince of Theologians, who thus decides the point. 
 (Retr. liv. 1, o 15.) Those who sin from ignorance, 
 act only because they wish to act, cdthough they sin 
 without wishing to sin. And thus even the sin of 
 ignorance can be committed only by the will of him 
 who comm^its it, though by a will which disposes to the 
 act and not to the sin. This, however, does not hinder 
 the act from being a sin, because for this it is enough 
 to have done what there ivas an obligation not to do.' 
 
 The father seemed surprised, and still more at the 
 passage from Aristotle than at that from St. Augus- 
 tine. But while he was thinking what to say, a 
 
ACTUAL GRACE, AND SINS OF IGNORANCE. 
 
 9.) 
 
 messaire announced that the Countess of 
 
 and the 
 
 Marchioness of were waiting for liim. Takinij a 
 
 hasty leave, he said, ' I will speak of it to our fathers. 
 They will certainly find some answer. Some of ours 
 here are very ingenious.' We perfectly understood 
 jiiin, and when I was alone with my friend, I expressed 
 my astonishment at the revolution which this doctrine 
 maile in morals. He replied that he was very much 
 astonished at my astonishment. ' Do you not know 
 that their corruptions in morals are much greater 
 than in other matters ? ' He gave me some curious 
 examples, and left the rest for another time. I hope 
 to give vou what I shall learn from him the tirst time 
 1 write. 
 
 I am, etc. 
 
 ■A 
 
 ' 
 
 i! 
 
 ■ ! 
 ■'I 
 11' 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 !l' 
 
 im 
 
 i • 
 
 
LETTER FIFTH. 
 
 DESION OF THE JESUITS IN ESTABLISHING A NEW MORALITY. TWO 
 SETS OF CASUISTS AMONG THEM. MANY OF THEM LAX, .SOME 
 STRICT. GROUND OF THIS DIVERSITY. DOCTRINE OF PRO- 
 BABILITY EXPLAINED. HERD OF MODERN AND UNKNOWN 
 AUTHORS SUBSTITUTED FOR THE HOLY FATHERS. 
 
 ,|i 
 
 Paris. 
 
 Sir, — Here is what I promised you. Here you have 
 the first specimens of the morality of the worthy Jesuit 
 fathers, those 'men eminent for learning and wisdom, 
 ivho are aU guided by Divine wisdom, luhich is mucli 
 surer than any j)hilosophy. You perhaps think me 
 in jest. I say it seriously, or rather they themselves 
 say it in their book, entitled. Imago Primi Sacidi. 
 I only copy their words, which thus continue the 
 eulogium : It is a company of men, or rather angels, 
 tvhich was foi'etold by Isaiah in these luords, ' Go, 
 angels, jwompt and swift' How clearly the pro- 
 phecy applies ! They are eagle spirits, a troop of 
 phoenixes (an author having lately shown that there, 
 are more than one). They have changed the face 
 of Christendom. We must believe it since they say 
 it. You will be fully persuaded of it by the sequel 
 of this letter, which will acquaint you with their 
 maxims. 
 
ARTICLES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 97 
 
 I was desirous to have the best information. I did 
 not trust to what our friend had told me. I was 
 desirous to have it from themselves. But I have 
 found that he spake no more than the truth. I believe 
 he never misrepresents. This you will see from the 
 narrative of my interviews. 
 
 In the one which I had with him, he told me such 
 strange thinjjs that I could .scarcely believe him ; but 
 he showed them to me in the books of their fathers, 
 so that I had nothing left to say in their defence, ex- 
 cept that they were the sentiments of some individuals, 
 which it was not fair to impute to the body. I, in 
 fact, assured him that I knew some who are as strict 
 as those he quoted to »ne are lax. On this he ex- 
 plained to me the spirit of the Company, which is not 
 generally known, and you will, perhaps, be very glad 
 to learn it. What he said to me was this : 
 
 ' You think it a great deal in their favour to show 
 that they have fathers as conformable to the maxims 
 of tlie Gospel as the others are opposed to them, and 
 you infer that these lax opinions belong not to the 
 whole Company. I know it. For if it were so, they 
 would not tolerate their purer teachers. But since 
 thev have some who teach this licentious doctrine, the 
 infttrence is, that the spirit of the Company is not that 
 of Christian severity. If it were, they would not 
 tolerate what is so opposed to it.' ' How,' replied I, 
 ' what object then can the entire body have ? It must 
 be that they have no definite object, and every one at 
 liberty to say at a venture whatever he thinks.' ' That 
 7 
 
 % 
 11 
 
 "J 
 
 ■ii I 
 
 J!) 
 
 '1 
 
 I 
 
 
i' i 
 
 li ;ii i • 
 
 1^ S ?:J 
 
 
 vM ■,<!i':ii 
 
 98 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 cannot be,' he replied ; ' so large a body could not exist 
 under random guidance, and without a spirit to govern 
 and regulate all its movenier 'S. Besides, a special 
 regulation forbids any to print without the permission 
 of their superiors.' ' What,' said I, ' how can their 
 superiors consent to such different maxims ? ' ' This I 
 must tell you,' replied he. 
 
 ' Know, then, that their object is not to corrupt 
 manners ; that is not their intention. But neither is it 
 their only aim to reform them ; that were bad policy. 
 Their view is this : they have a good enough opinion 
 of themselves to believe that it is conducive, and in a 
 manner necessary to the welfare of religion, that they 
 should be everywhere in repute, and govern all con- 
 sciences. And because strict Gospel maxims are titted 
 to govern some sorts of persons, they use them on the 
 occasions to which they are suitable. But as these 
 maxims are not in accordance with the views of most 
 people, they, in those cases, abandon them, that they 
 may be able to .satisfy all and sundry. Hence it is, 
 that having to do with persons of all classes, and with 
 nations differing widely from each other, they require 
 to have casuists assorted to this great diversity. 
 
 ' From this principle, you can easily see, that if they 
 had only lax casuists, they would defeat their princi- 
 pal object, which is to embrace the whole world, since 
 those who are truly pious require a stricter guidance. 
 But as this class is not numerous, they do not require 
 many strict directors to guide theiu. They have few 
 for the few, while the great crowd of lax casuists are 
 ready for the crowd who desire laxity. 
 
ARTICLES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 90 
 
 r ifj 
 
 By this obliging and accommodating behaviour, as 
 Father Petau terms it, they hold out their liand to all 
 the world. Should any one come before them firmly 
 ri'solved to re.store ill-gotten gains, don't imagine they 
 will dissuade him. They will praise him on the con- 
 trary, and confirm his holy resolution. But let another 
 come who wishes to have absolution without restoring, 
 the thing will be difficult indeed if they do not furnish 
 him with means, the safety of which they will guar- 
 antee. 
 
 ' In this way they preserve all their friends, and 
 defend themselves against all their enemies. For, if 
 they are charged with their extreme laxity, they 
 forthwith produce to the public their austere directors, 
 with some books which the)' have composed in the 
 strict .spirit of the Christian law ; and the simple, and 
 those who do not examine to the bottom of things, are 
 .satisfied with the.se proofs. 
 
 'They are thus provided for all .sorts of persons, and 
 meet the demand so completely that when they 
 happen to be in countries where a God crucified 
 .setMiis fooli.shne.ss, they suppress the offence of the 
 Cross, and preach only a triumphant, not a suffering 
 Jesus ; as they have done in the Indies and China, 
 where they allowed the converts even to practise idol- 
 atry, by the subtle device of making them concePi 
 under their dress an image of Jesus Christ, to which 
 thi'y were mentally to refer the public worship which 
 they paid to the idol Cachinchoam, and their Keum- 
 f ucum, as they are charged by the Dominican Gravina, 
 
 ii'j 
 
100 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 it' 3.]' 
 
 |j|;;| ! 
 
 and is attested by a memorial in Spanish, presented to 
 Pliilip IV. of Spain by the Cordeliers of the Philippine 
 Isles, and quoted by Thomas Hurtado in his treatise 
 entitled, the Martyrdom of Faith, p. 427, so that the 
 congregation of cardinals, 'de propaganda fide, was 
 obliged specially to prohibit the Jesuits, under pain of 
 excommunication, from permitting the worship of idols 
 under any pretext, and concealing the mystery of the 
 Cross from those whom they instruct in religion, 
 expressly commanding them not to admit any to bap- 
 tism without ascertaining their knowledge in this 
 respect, and ordaining them to exhibit a crucifix in 
 their churches, as is contained at large in the decree 
 of the Congregation, and officially signed by Cardinal 
 Capponi. 
 
 ' In this way they have spread themselves over the 
 whole earth by the aid of the doctrine of Probability, 
 which is the source and basis of all this corruption. 
 This you must learn from themselves. For they make 
 no secret of it any more than of what you have just 
 heard, with this single difference, that they cloak their 
 human and politic prudence with the pretext of .'i 
 divine and Christian prudence, as if the faith and tra- 
 dition which maintain the latter were not always one 
 and invariable in all times and places ; as if it were 
 the rule that ought to bend in order to meet the sub- 
 ject, which should be conformable to the rule ; and as 
 if souls, in order to be purified from their stains, hud 
 only to corrupt the law of the Lord, whereas it is the 
 law of the Lord, which is without spot and perfect, 
 

 m 
 
 ARTICLES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 101 
 
 that should convert souls, and make them conformable 
 to its salutary lessons. 
 
 ' Go then, I bog of yon, visit these worthy fathers, 
 ami I feel sure that, in the ladty of their morality, 
 you will easily discover the cause of their doctrine 
 concerning ixt'ace. You will see Christian virtues 
 which are elsewhere unknown, and devoid of the 
 charity which is their .soul and life ; you will see so 
 many crimes palliated, and so many disorders per- 
 niittod, that you will no longer see anything strange 
 in their maintaining that all men have always grace 
 enough to live piously in the way they understand it. 
 As their morality is wholly heathenish, nature is suffi- 
 cient to observe it. When we maintain the necessity 
 of eft'ectual grace, we give it other virtues for its 
 object — not merely to cure one set of vices by another, 
 not merely to make men practise the external duties 
 of reli^fion, but a riirhteousness exceeding; that of the 
 Pharisees and the greatest sa^jes of heathenism. For 
 such rigliteousness as theirs, reason and the law gave 
 safficient grace. But to disengage the .soul from the 
 love of the world, to withdraw it from all that is 
 dearest to it, to make it die to itself, to carry it and 
 attach it solely and invariably to God, is the work of 
 an almighty hand. And it is as unreasonable to main. 
 tain that we have always full power to do .so, as it 
 would be unreasonable to deny that virtues devoid of 
 love to God, which those worthy fathers confound 
 with Christian virtues, are in our power.' 
 
 These were his words, and he spoke them in great sor- 
 
 * 
 
 ui 
 
 i 
 
 II 
 
 
 
102 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 ! u i' 
 
 51 j 
 
 row, for he is seriously distressed at all these disonlers. 
 I, for my part, admired these worthy fathers for the 
 skilfulness of their policy, and set off, as he advised 
 me, to find a good casuist of the company. It was an 
 old friend, whose acquaintance I desired to renew for 
 the very purpose, and as I was instructed how to 
 manage with them, 1 had no difficulty in putting 
 matters in train. He at first hugged me a thousand 
 times, for he always loves me, and, after some talk on 
 indifferent subjects, I took occasion from its being the 
 .season of Lent, to learn something from him on fast- 
 ing, in order to get insensibly into the subject. I 
 signified to him that I was scarcely able to support 
 fa'^ting. He exhorted me to make an effort, but as I 
 continued to complain, he felt for me, and began to 
 .search for some ground of dispensation. He, in fact, 
 offered me several, which did not suit me, when at last 
 it occurred to him to ask if I did not find it difficult 
 to sleep without supping. ' Yes, father,' said I, * and 
 this often obliges me to lunch at noon and sup in the 
 evening.' ' I am very glad,| he replied, ' at having 
 found a way of relieving you without sin. Go to, you 
 are not obliged to fast. I do not ask you to believe 
 me, come to the library.' I went, and there, taking 
 down a book, ' Here is a proof,' said he, ' and, God 
 knows, good proof. It is Escobar.' ' Who is Escobar, 
 father ?' I asked. ' What, do you not know Escobar 
 of our Society, who has compiled this Moral Theology 
 from twenty-four of our fathers ? He allegorises this 
 in the preface, and likens his book to the Apocalypse, 
 
ON FA5?TIN0. 
 
 103 
 
 rvhich ivns sealed ivifh Hevcn sealn. He says that Jcsna 
 nfer.^ if thus sriiledfo the four living orenturcs, Siutrez, 
 Vdsqnez, Miilina, and V(dcntia. in presence of four- 
 (ind-tirenfi/ Jesuits, who represent the elders' Ho read 
 tlu' whole of tlie allcfrory, which he consitlered very 
 exact, and therohy i^ave me a very hi<;;h idea of* the 
 excellince of the work. Having afterwards looked 
 for the passajTfe on fasting, ' Here it is,' said he, ' t . i. 
 ex. V'\, no. 07. Jf a person cannot sleep unless he has 
 supped, is he obliffed to fast } No. Are you not sati.s- 
 lied V ' Not (|uite,' said T, 'for I can bear fa.sting if I 
 lunch in the morning and sup in thr evening.' ' Look, 
 then, to what follow, s,' .said he, ' for they have thought 
 of everythini,' : What, if he can do it by taking a col- 
 lation in the morning and supping in the evening. 
 My very case ! No more is he obliged to fast, for no 
 man is obliged to change the order of his repasts.' 'An 
 excellent reason,' said I. ' But tell me,' continued he, 
 '<lo you use much wine.' ' No, father,' said I, ' I can- 
 not boar it.' ' I asked,' replied he, ' to make you aware 
 that vou might drink it in the morning, and when 
 you please, without breaking the fast ; and this holds 
 in every case. Here is the decision at the sanie place, 
 no. 75. Can one, without breaking the fist, drink 
 wine at any hour he pleases, and even in large quan- 
 tities? He may, even hypocras. I had forgotten this 
 hypoeras' said he, ' I must put it in my note-book.' 'He 
 is an honest man, this Escobar,' said I. ' Everybody 
 likes him,' replied the father, 'he puts such pretty 
 questions. Look at this one which is at the same 
 
 B' ■ ' t ! 
 
 ' ' ! S 
 
I \ 
 
 104 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 H r 
 
 place, no. 38. If a man doubts whether he is twenty- 
 one, is he obliged to fast ? No. But if I am tiventy- 
 one complete, an hour after midnight, and the fast is 
 to-morro%u, ivill I be obliged to fast to-morrow ? No. 
 For you might eat as much as you please from mid- 
 night till one o'clock, since you would., till then, be 
 under tiventy-one, and thus, being entitled, to break 
 the fast, you are not bound by it.' ' How amusing 
 that is,' said I. ' Tliere is no getting away from him,' 
 repUed he, ' I spend my days and nights in reading 
 him, I do nothing else.' The worthy father, seeing me 
 pleased, was delighted, and continued, ' See, also,' said 
 he, ' the tract of Filiutius, who is one of the twenty- 
 four Jesuits : Tom. II. tr. 27, part 2, c. 6, no. 143. 
 When one is fatigued in any way, as in running 
 after a girl, is he obliged to fast ? No. But if he has 
 fatigued himself for the very purpose of being relieved 
 from the fast, will he be bound by it ! Thougli he 
 should have done it of set purpose, he tvill not be 
 obliged.' ' Well, would you have thought it V said he. 
 ' In truth, father,' 1 said, ' I scarcely believe it yet. 
 What, is it not a sin not to fast when one can do it ? 
 Is it lawful to seek occasions of sinning ? Are we not 
 rather obliged to shun them ? That would be very 
 convenient.' 'Not always obliged,' said he, ' accord- 
 ing to — ' ' According to whom ?' I asked. ' Ho, ho,' 
 rejoined the father, I aske<l, ' Were any inconveni- 
 ence suffered by shunning occasions, would there, in 
 your opinion, be any obligation to shun them ?' 'Father 
 Bauui, at least does not think so. See p. 1084 : We 
 
mi 
 
 PROBABLE OPINIONS. 
 
 105 
 
 must not refuse absolution to those icho remain in 
 proximate occasions of sin, if they are so situated that 
 they cannot vjithdraiu without giving occasion to the 
 world to speak, or without snhjecting themselves to 
 inconvenience' ' I rejoice at it, father ; all now wanted 
 is to say, that we may of set purpose seek occasions, 
 since it is permitted not to shun them.' ' Even this is 
 sometimes permitted,' added he : ' the celebrated cas- 
 uist, Basil Ponce, says so, and Father Bauni quotes 
 and approves his opinion in his Treatise on Penitence, 
 q. 4, p. 94. One may seek an occasion directly, and 
 for itself, Primo ET per se, ivlien the spiritual or tem- 
 poral welfare of ourselves or our neighbours deter- 
 mines us.' 
 
 ' Truly,' said I, ' it looks as if I were dreaming when 
 I bear men of the cloister speaking in this way. But, 
 father, tell me in conscience, is that your opinion ?' 
 'No, indeed,' said the father. 'You are speaking 
 then,' I continued, ' against your conscience ?' ' Not 
 at all,' said he, ' I was not speaking according to my 
 own conscience, but according to that of Ponce and 
 Father Bauni ; and you may follow them in safety, 
 tor they are men of ability.' ' What, father, because 
 they have put these three lines in their V)ooks, can 
 it have become lawful to seek occasions of sin ? I 
 thought the only rule to follow was Scripture and the 
 tradition of the Church, but not your casuists.' ' Good 
 God ! ' exclaimed the father, ' you put me in mind of 
 those Jansenists. Are not Father Bauni and Basil 
 Ponce able to make their opinion probable ?' ' Proba- 
 
 M 
 
 il 
 
 ', 
 
 ; - 
 
 in 
 
 M I 
 
 il:il 
 
 im 
 
w 
 
 106 
 
 ^ f 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 I'- I 
 it 1 
 
 It 
 
 ii 
 
 :!1 i 
 
 ■'■; 
 
 bility does not satisfy me,' said I, ' I want certainty.' 
 ' I see well,' said the worthy father to me, ' that you 
 know not the doctrine of probable opinions. You 
 would speak otherwise if you knew it. Indeed I 
 must make you acquainted with it. Your visit will 
 not be lost time ; without this, you cannot understand 
 anything. It is the foundation and the a b c of all 
 our morality.' I was delighted at seeing him fall on 
 what I wished, and saying I would be glad to learn, 
 begged him to explain what was meant by a probable 
 opinion. ' Our authors will tell you better than I can,' 
 said he. ' Here is the way in which it is generally 
 explained by all, and, among others, by our four-and- 
 twenty in the beginning of Ex. iii. n. 8. " An opinion 
 is called probable when it is founded on reasons of 
 some weiglit ; hence, it sometimes happens that a 
 single very grave doctor may render an opinion prob- 
 able. Here, too, is the reason. For a man specially 
 devoted to study, would not adhere to an opinion if 
 he were not drawn to it by a good and sufficient 
 reason.'" 'And thus,' said I, 'a single doctor may 
 whirl consciences round, and tumble them over and 
 over at his pleasure, and always in perfect safety.' 
 ' You must not laugh,' said he, ' nor think to combat 
 the doctrine. When the Jansenists tried it, they lost 
 their time. It is too well established. Listen to 
 Sanchez, who is one of the most celebrated of our 
 fathers. Sum, L. i., n. 9. c. 7. " You doubt, perhaps, 
 if the authority of a single good arid learned doctor 
 can render an opinion probable. I answer yes. And 
 
 l:i 
 
PROBABLE OPINIONS. 
 
 107 
 
 this is confirmed by Angelus, Sylvius, Navarre, Em- 
 manuel Sa, etc. The way in which they prove it is 
 this : A probable opinion is one which has a consider- 
 able foundation. Now, the authority of a learned 
 and pious man is of no small weight, or rather is of 
 frreat weight. For " (listen well to this reason), " if 
 the testimony of such a man is of great weight to 
 .assure us that a thing has taken place, for example, 
 at Rome, why should it not have the same weight in 
 a dubious point of morals ?" 
 
 ' Rather amusing,' said I, ' to compare the things of 
 the world with those of conscience.' ' Have patience ; 
 Sanchez replies to that in the lines which immediately 
 follow. " I do not approve of a qualification by certain 
 authors, that the authority of a certain doctor is 
 sufficient in matters of human right, but not in those 
 of divine right. For it is of great weight both in the 
 one and the other.'" 
 
 ' Father,' said I frankly, ' I cannot make any use of 
 this rule. What security have I, that in the liberty 
 which your doctors take to examine things by reason, 
 a point which appears sure to one will appear so to 
 all ? There is such diversity of judgment — ' ' You 
 do not understand it,' said the father interrupting me ; 
 ' they accordingly very often are of diflferent opinions ; 
 hilt that is of no consequence. Each makes his own 
 probaljle and safe. Verily, we know well that they 
 arc; not all of one way of thinking. And so much the 
 bitter. On the contrary, they seldom if ever agree. 
 There are few questions on which you do not find 
 
 :V. 
 
 ?;? 
 
 !i ': 
 
 ; 1 
 
 , ! 1 .J il 
 
 1 iji ^M 
 
 

 i] 
 [ 1 ' 
 
 fit' 
 
 II! 
 
 i ■^'•i 
 
 if 
 
 iff ■■ 
 
 ill 
 
 9, 1 
 
 I Hi 
 lillf 
 
 108 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 that the one says Yes and the other No. And, in all 
 those cases, each of the opposing opinions is probable. 
 This makes Diana say on a certain subject, Part 3, to. 
 4, r. 244. " Ponce and Sanchez take opposite views, 
 but, as they were both learned, each makes his opinion 
 probable." ' 
 
 ' Then, father,' said I, ' one must be very much at a 
 loss how to choose.' ' Not at all,' said he, ' you have 
 only to follow the opinion which you like best.' ' But 
 what if the other is more probable ?' 'No matter,' 
 said he. 'And if the other is more safe?' 'No 
 matter,' again said the father, ' here it is well explained 
 by Emmanuel Sa of our company in his Apliorism De 
 dubio, p. 183. We 'may do ichat ive think latvful ac- 
 cording to a probable opinion, although the contrary 
 may be more safe. The opinion of a grave doctor is 
 sufficient.' ' And if an opinion is at once both 
 less probable and less safe, wuU it be lawful to follow 
 it, to the exclusion of that which is believed to be 
 more probable and more safe?' 'Yes; once more,' 
 said he, ' listen to Filiutius, the great Jesuit of Rome. 
 Mor. Quest., tr. 21, c. 4. n. 128. It is lawful to follow 
 the less probable opinion though it be the less safe. This 
 is the common opinion of the new authors. Is not 
 that clear?' 'We have, certainly, large scope, rever- 
 end father,' said I, ' thanks to your probable opinions. 
 We have fine liberty of conscience. And you casuists, 
 have you the same liberty in your answers ?' 'Yes,' 
 said he, ' we answer as we please, or rather, as pleases 
 those who consult us. For here are our rulea, taken 
 
 \M , 
 
~r? 
 
 PROBABLE OPINIONS. 
 
 109 
 
 from our fathers, Layman, Theol. Mor., 1. i., tr. i. c, 2, 
 s. 2; n. 7; Vasquez, Dist. 62, c. 9, n. 47 ; Sanchez, Sum, 
 ]. i, c. 9, n. 23 ; and our four-and-twenty, princ, Ex. 3, 
 n. 24. Here are the words of Layman, whom the book 
 of the four-and-twenty has followed : " A doctor being 
 consulted may crive counsel not only probable accord- 
 ing to his opinion, but contrary to his opinion, if it is 
 esteemed probable by others, when this contrary 
 opinion happens to be more favourable and more 
 aj^reeable to the person consultini^. Si FORTE ET ILLI 
 FAVORABiLioR SEU EXOPTATIOR SIT. But I say, more- 
 over, that it v.ould not be unreasonable for him to 
 give those who consult him, an opinion deemed prob- 
 able by some learned person, even though he be fully 
 convinced that it is absolutely false.'" 
 
 ' Very good, father, your doctrine is most convenient. 
 Only to answer yes, or no, at pleasure ! One cannot 
 sufficiently prize such an advantage. I now see clearly 
 wlifit you gain by the contrary opinions which your 
 doctors have on every subject. The one is always of 
 use, and the other never does any harm. If you do 
 not tind 3'our gain on one side, you turn to the other, 
 and always in safety.' 'True,' said he, 'and thus we 
 can ahvays say as Diana did, on finding Father Bauni 
 for him, when Father Lugo was against him : " Sa3pe 
 prcmente Deo, fert Deus alter opem." If one god 
 presses, another brings relief.' 
 
 'I understand,' said I, 'but a difficulty occurs to me. 
 After consulting one of your doctors, and getting from 
 him an opinion somewhat wide, we might, perhaps, be 
 caught if we were to fall in with a confessor of a 
 
 ■:! 
 
 Ml 
 
 th: 
 
 4 t 
 
 a-iJ! 
 
 I H ' 
 
fffi ^ \} 
 
 • ii 
 
 110 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 I m 
 
 ;i 
 
 II '■':): 
 
 :. ,i; 
 
 :'ii! 
 
 different temper, who might refuse absohjtion if we 
 did not change our view. Have you not provided for 
 this, father V 'Do you doubt it ? ' replied he, ' con- 
 fessors are obliged to give absolution to their penitents 
 who have probable opinions, and under pain of mortal 
 sin, that they might not fail to do so. This has been 
 well shown by our fathers, among others, by Father 
 Bauni, Tr. 4, De Poenit, Q. 13, p. 9*3. When the peni- 
 tent follows a 'probable opinion, the confessor must 
 absolve him, though his opinion be contrary to that 
 of the penitent' ' But he does not say it is a mortal 
 sin not to absolve him ? ' ' How hasty you are,' 
 said he, * listen to what follows ; he infers this in 
 express terms : To refuse absolution to a penitent who 
 acts on a probable opinion, is a sin luhich is in its 
 nature mortal. In confirmation of this opinion, he 
 quotes three of our most famous fathers, Suarez, tr. 4, 
 d. 32, s. 5 ; Vasquez, disp, 62, c. 7 ; and Sanchez, 
 num. 29.' 
 
 * father,' said I, ' how very prudently this has 
 been arranged. Now there is nothing to fear. No 
 confessor would dare to refuse. I did not know that 
 you had the powder of ordaining under pain of damna- 
 tion. I thought you only able to take away sins. I 
 did not think you knew how to introduce them. But 
 you have all power, from what I see.' ' You do not 
 speak properly,' said he, ' we do not introduce sins, we 
 only call attention to them. I have already observed, 
 two or three times, that you are not a good logician.' 
 ' Be this as it may, father, my doubt is fully solved. 
 But I have still another to state, it is this : I cannot 
 
!"!'! 
 
 PROBABLE OPINIONS. 
 
 Ill 
 
 ' see what you are to do, when the Blithers of the 
 Church are contrary to the opinion of some one of 
 your casuists.' 
 
 ' You know very little of the matter,' said he, ' the 
 
 Fathers were good for the morality of their day, but 
 
 they are too remote for ours. Not they, but our new 
 
 casuists, now give the rule. Listen to our Father 
 
 Cellot {<le Hier, 1. 8, c. 16, p. 714), who, in this, follows 
 
 our famous Father Reginald: "In questions of morality 
 
 the new casuists are preferable to the ancient Fathers, 
 
 although they were nearer the apostles." Proceeding 
 
 on this maxim, Diana says, p. 5, tr. 8, r. 31, "Are the 
 
 liokkTs of benefits obliged to restore the revenue 
 
 which they apply improperly ? The ancients said yes, 
 
 hut the moderns say no ; let us hold by this opinion 
 
 which discharijes the obligation to restore." ' ' Fine 
 
 sentiments,' said I, 'and full of consolation for numbers 
 
 uf people ! ' ' We leave the Fathers,' said he, ' to those 
 
 who deal in theory, but we who govern consciences 
 
 read them seldom, and in our writings cjuote only the 
 
 new casuists. See Diana who has written so much. 
 
 At the beginniuix of his book, he oives a list of the 
 
 authors quoted. There are 290, and n(<t one more 
 
 than eighty years old.' ' That is, since the existence 
 
 of your Company ? ' ' About it,' he replied. ' That is 
 
 to say, father, that on your arrival, St. Augustine, St. 
 
 Clirysostom, St. Ambrose, St. Jerome, etc., so far as 
 
 rei^ards morality, disappeared. But at least let me 
 
 know the names of their successors ; who are those 
 
 new authors ? ' ' Tiiey are very able and very cele- 
 
 hrated persons,' said he ; * they are, Villalobos, Conink, 
 
 ■:i 
 
 IM 
 
 : i 
 
 3 
 
112 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 I..: . 
 
 li lii 
 
 % * 
 
 , ! 
 
 Llamas, Achokier, Dealkozer, Dellacrux, Veracruz, 
 Ugolin, Tanibourin, Fernandez, Martinez, Saurez, Hcn- 
 riquez, Vasquez, Lopez, Gomez, Sanchez, De Vechis. 
 De Grassis, De Grassalis, De Pitigianis, De Graphmis, 
 Squilanti, Bizozeri, Barcola, De Bobatlilla, Simanclia, 
 Perez de Lara, Aldretta, Lorca, De Scarcia, Quaranta, 
 Scoplira, Pedrezza, Cabrezza, Bisbe, Dias, De Clavasio, 
 Villagut, Adam a Manden, Iribarne, Binsfield, Volfan- 
 gi a Vorberg, Vosthery, Strevesdorf. ' ' father, ' 
 exclaimed I, quite frightened, 'were all these people 
 Christians ? ' ' How Christians,' replied he, ' did I not 
 tell you that they are the only persons by whom we 
 govern Christendom in the present day ?' I felt pity, 
 though I did not show it, and merely asked if all those 
 authors were Jesuits. ' No,' said he, ' but no matter, 
 they have said good things, notwithstanding. Not 
 that the greater part have not taken or imitated thein 
 from us, but we do not stickle upon the point of 
 honour ; and, besides, they quote our fathers every 
 hour and with eulogium. See Diana, who is not of 
 our Company, when he speaks of Vasquez, he calls him 
 the PhiPAiix of mindf^, and he sometimes says, that io 
 him, Vasquez alone is luorth all the rest of men pid 
 together. Instar omnium. Accordingly all our fathers 
 make very frequent use of the worthy Diana ; for, if 
 you properly understand our doctri le of probability, 
 you will see that his not being of our Company is of 
 no consequence. On the contrary, we are quite will- 
 ing that others, besides Jesuits, should be able to 
 render their opinions probable, in order that they may 
 not all be imputed to us. Hence, when any author 
 
 J 
 
 ,ti,di'.;.i.iki:!!i 
 
 m 
 
IMU)I5AI5LE OIMNIONS. 
 
 li:{ 
 
 whatever has advanced one, we are entitled by the 
 doctrine (jf probable opinions to take it if we choose, 
 and we are not its <:(uarantees wdien tlie author is not 
 of our bo(U'.' ' I understand all that,' F said ; ' 1 see 
 that all comes well to you, except the ancient Fathers, 
 and that yon are masters of the field. All you have 
 to do is to career in it. 
 
 ' Ijut 1 foresee three or four great inconveniences and 
 formidable barriers, which you will have to encounter 
 in your course.' ' And what are they ?' said the father, 
 (juite aniazed. 'They are,' I replied, ' the Holy Scrip- 
 tures, Popes, and Councils, which you cannot gainsay, 
 and which are all in strict accordance with the Gospel.' 
 ' Is that all ?' said he, ' you gave me a fright. Do you 
 imagine that a thing so palpable was not foreseen, and 
 has not been provided for? I really wonder at your 
 thinking that we are opposed to Scripture, Popes, or 
 Councils. I must make you understand the contrary. 
 I would be very sorry you should think we fail in 
 wliat we owe them. You have, no doubt, formed this 
 notion from some opinions of our fathers, which seem 
 to run counter to their decisions, though it is not so. 
 But, to show their agreement, we must have more 
 leisure. I wisli you not to remain imperfectly in- 
 formed concerning us. If you will be so good as 
 to return to-morrow 1 will give you the explanation.' 
 Here ended our conference, which will also be the end 
 of my discourse, and it is quite enough for one letter. 
 Trusting you will be satisfied with it while awaiting 
 the sequel, I am, etc. 
 
 8 
 
 FFF- 
 
 ,:j 
 
 1' 
 
i ! 
 
 I 'H 
 
 LETTER SIXTH. 
 
 AHTlI'lrKS OF THK JKSL'ITs TO KVADH THK AITIIOniTY (<\- 
 SCUIP'rillE, COUNCILS, ANU I'Ol'KS. CONHEQUKNCKS OK TFIK 
 DOCTUINE OK I'UOBABILITY, THKIR CORKLPTIONS IN l-'AVori; 
 OK nKNKKICIAKIES, PRIESTS, MONKS, AND UOMEbTICS. HISTORY 
 OK .lOIIN OF ALBA. 
 
 Paris. 
 
 Sir, — I told you at the end of my last letter, that 
 the worthy Jesuit had promised to instruct me how 
 the casuists reconcile the contrariety between their 
 opinions and the decisions of Popes, Councils, and 
 Scripture. He did so instruct me on my second visit, 
 of which I now give you an account. 
 
 The worthy father spoke to me as follows : ' One 
 of the ways in which we reconcile these apparent 
 contradictions, is by the interpretation of some par- 
 ticular term. For example. Pope Gregory XIY. has 
 declared that assassins are not entitled to the benefit 
 of asylum in churches, and ought to be taken out of 
 them by force. Notwithstanding, our four-and- 
 twenty elders say, tr. 6, ex. 4, n. 27, That all u'ho 
 rmirder frcacherously s/tould not incur the imins of 
 this Bull. This seems to you a contradiction, but we 
 reconcile it by interpreting the word asmssin as they 
 do in these terms. Are not assassins umvorthy of the 
 
KVASIONS OF THE JF.SUJTS. 
 
 115 
 
 pririli'fjf of (fsylam in churches? Yes. /?// fhi Hull 
 of Pofie Gretjonj XIV. L'ul vc uiidersftnul the term. 
 nss(i.sslii to riiCiin those who htire receiveil moueji to 
 iiuirder treacheronsly. He/nee it follows, that those 
 ic/io ruarder vdthoiit recewivg on;/ sum, <iu<l vierehj 
 fii oJtl'if/e their friends, (ire not cedled ussdssins. In 
 tlio same way it is said in the Gospel, Gii'c <dms out of 
 ijinir siiperflnity. Notwithstandinr;, several casuists 
 have; found means to discliarge the most wealthy from 
 tlu.' obligation of giving alms. This also seems to you 
 a contradiction ; but it is easily reconciled by inter- 
 preting the word fin])erffuiti/ in such a way. that it 
 seldom or ever happens that a person has it. This has 
 been done by the learned Vasquez in his treatise on 
 alms, c. 4. What men of tlie ivorld keep to niise their 
 own condition and that of their kindrtd, is not 
 etdled superiiaity, and. this is t/ie reason v:]iy snper- 
 ihi'dy is seldom if erer to he found in men of the ivorld, 
 and even in kings. 
 
 'Diana also, after (juoting this passage from Vas- 
 quez (for he usually founds on our fathers), very 
 })rop('rly infers that in thi' question vhefher the rich 
 (ire obliged to give alms of their superjiuity, (dthough 
 tite affirmative were true, it mould never, or almost 
 aovcr, become obligatory in practice.' 
 
 'I see plainly, father, that that follows from the 
 doctrine of Vasouez. But what answer would be 
 given to thf objection, that in order to secure salvation, 
 it would, according to Vasquez, be as safe not to give 
 alms, provided one has ambition enough to leave no 
 
 u'^.i^ 
 
 fi -i 
 
 
 il) 
 
 ! 5 
 
 H 
 
 u: 
 
 
 '' 
 
 1 
 
 
 1; 
 
 1 
 
 
 
no 
 
 I'llOVINCIAL LETTEUS. 
 
 I 
 
 fiuporfluity, as acconlinj^j to the Gospel it is safe to bo 
 without ainbitiofi, in order to have a suporthiity out 
 of whicli to <;ive alnis ;'' ' Tt would he necessary to 
 answer,' said he, ' that both methods are safe according' 
 to the same Gospel ; the one according; to the Gospel in 
 the most literal and obvious acceptation, and the other 
 according to the same Gospel intei'pretetl by Vas{[uez. 
 This shows 3'ou the utility of interpictation. 
 
 ' But when the terms are so clear that th(iy admit 
 of none, we make use of the consideration of favour- 
 able circumstances, as you will see by an example. 
 The popes have excommunicated monks for layini,' 
 aside their habit, and yet our four-and-twenty elders 
 speak in this way, tr. 0, ex. 7, n. 103. On ivliat 
 occasions 7)iay a rnvnl: vJiaiKje his dress without in- 
 currinij excoywinunication 1 He mentions several, 
 among others the following : ///if changes it to go (ind 
 thieve, or to go incognito into houses of bad fame, in- 
 tending shortly to resume it. Indeed it is clear that 
 the bulls do not speak of such cases.' 
 
 ^ could scarcely believe tliis, and prayed the father 
 to show it to me in the original : and I saw that tht-' 
 chapter in which the words occur is headed, Praxis ex 
 Socieiatis Jesu Schola : Practice according to the school 
 of the Company of Jesus. Here I saw the words: Si 
 hahitum dimittat ut fiiretur occulte, vcl fornicetnr. 
 He showed me the same thing in JJiana in these 
 terms : Ut eat incog nitus ad lujmnar. * How comes it, 
 father, that they have freed them from excomumnica- 
 tion in this instance ?' ' Do you not comprehend V said 
 
ii 'i! 
 
 EVASIONS OF TIIK .IKSl'lTS. 
 
 117 
 
 he. ' Do you not seo what scandal it would give to 
 surprise a iiionU in tliis state witli liis reli<jfious drt'ss? 
 And have you never heard,' continued lie, 'how the 
 tir.st hull, cjnilvd i^vllicltiuttes, has been met, and in 
 what way our four-and-twenty, in a chapter which is 
 also in tlie Pnnt'iCA' of (lie. ISc/toul of our Compani/, ex- 
 plain the bull of I'ius v., contra devices, etc. T ' I know 
 nothing of all this,' said I. ' You seldom read Escobar, 
 then,' said he. ' I only got - »-; yesterday, father, and 
 with dithculty. I don't know what has happened 
 lately to set everybody on the search for him.' 
 ' What. I told you,' rejoined the father, ' is at tr. 1, ex. 
 ^, n. 102. Jjook for it in your copy. It will give you 
 a tine specimen of the mode of interpreting bulls 
 favourably.' 1 did see it that very evening; but I 
 dare not give it to you : it is frightful. 
 
 The worthy father then continued. ' You now 
 understand the use which is made of favourable cir- 
 cuinstjinces. ^ut the bulls are sometimes so precise 
 that contradictions cannot be reconciled in this way. 
 In such cases you might well suppose that the contra- 
 dictions would 1 le real. For example : three popes have 
 decided that monks, bound by a particular vow to a 
 perpetual Lent, are not dispensed from it by V)ecoming 
 bishops. And yet Diana says that notwithstanding 
 til 18 decision, tliey are dispensed.' 'And how does he 
 reconcile it T said I. * By the most subtle of all the 
 new methods,' replied the father: 'by the greatest 
 tinesse of Probability. 1 am going to explain it to 
 you. The principle is that of which you heard the 
 
 li 
 
 m 
 
 1 
 
 .' :! 1. 
 
 
 i 
 
 ■i , ..:i: 
 
 '^ 
 
 
 
 ill 
 
 
 i!.H 
 
TnwTr ! 
 
 lilii 
 
 118 
 
 I'ROVINCI A L LETTERS. 
 
 ',3 
 
 mu 
 
 §n. 
 
 
 other day, namely, that the affirmative and negative 
 of most opinions have e;ich some probahility, in t\\i' 
 judj^mont of our doctors ; indeed, enough to be fol- 
 lowed with safety of conscience. Not that the pro 
 and the <'()ii. ava both true in the same sense : that 
 is impossible ; but only that they are both probable, 
 and conse(iuently safe.' 
 
 ' On this principle Diana our good friend speaks 
 thus in Part 5, tr. 13, r. .31). " I roply to the decision 
 of these three popes, which is contrary to my opinion 
 that they liave sp(jk(.n in this way from fixing on tho 
 affirmative, which iii fact is probable even in my judg- 
 ment ; liut it does not follow tliat the negative lias not 
 nlso its prol)ability." And in the same treatise, r. G">, 
 on anotliei" subject, in which he is again of a contrary 
 opini(jn to a i)o{)e, he speaks thus : " That the Pope 
 may have said it as head of the Church, I admit; 
 but ln' has only done it to the extent of the 
 sphere of the probability of his sentiment." Now you 
 see plainly that this is not to go counter to the senti- 
 n)ents of the popes : it would not be tolerated at Rome, 
 where J)ia:ia is in such high credit. For he does not 
 say that what the popes have decided is not probable : 
 but leaving their opinion in the full sphere of Proba- 
 bility, he yet says that the contrary is also probable.' 
 ' This is very respectful,' said I. ' And it is more 
 subtL,' added lie, ' tha!i the reply which Father Bauni 
 made when his books were censured at Rome ; for in 
 writing against M. llallier, who was then persecuting 
 liim furiously, the w^ords slipped from him, What han 
 

 EVASIONS OF THK JESUITS, 
 
 119 
 
 the censure of Home in common ivith flutt of France ? 
 Vou now see plainly enough how, either by the consid- 
 eration of favourable circumstances, or, in tine, I)y the 
 double pr(jbability of the pro and the con, we always 
 reconcile these i)retended contradictions which previ- 
 ously astonished you, and always as you see without 
 nuuiing counter to Scripture, councils, or popes.' 
 ' lieverend father,' said I, 'how happy the worhl is to 
 liiivc' you for masters ! How useftd these probabilities 
 arc 1 1 did not know why you had been so careful to 
 L'stablisli thut a sinij^le doctor, tf lir Ix grave, may ren- 
 der an opinion })robable ; but the contrary may be sq 
 also, and that we ma}' choose the pro or the eon, as 
 best [)leases us, althoULdi not believing it true, and 
 with such safety of conscience, that a confessor who 
 •should refuse to give absolution on the faith of these 
 casuists would be in a state of damnation. Hence I 
 understand that a single casuist can at pleasure make 
 new rules of morality, and dispose according to his 
 fancy of everything that regards tin.' conduct of man- 
 ners.' ' What y(ju say, 'said the father, ' must be taken 
 with some limitation. Attend well to tliis. Here is 
 our method, in which you will .see the progress of a 
 new ojjinion from birth to maturit}'. 
 
 ' At lirst the yrave doctor who has discovered it ex- 
 hihits it to the world, antl casts it like a seed to take 
 ro(jt. it is still weak in this state, but time nnist 
 mature it b}' degrees. And hence Diana, who has 
 introduced several, says in one place : " I advance this 
 opinion, but because it is new, I leave it to be matured 
 
 ' 
 
 m 
 
 ■ , : 
 
 1 
 
 :r.. 
 
 ■;l 
 
 ill 
 
 jl 
 
 III 
 
 ' '* lilt' 
 
 ■ H % 
 
 < 1 1^ 
 
 t ? 1 
 
 ' 'i 
 
 1 F 
 1 '^ 
 
 •t 
 
 ::r 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 • 
 
 
 !:■ 
 
 \\ 
 
 
 ''■'\i 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 : i 
 
 ■: 
 
 . (11. 
 
 a; 
 
 
 
(^¥ 
 
 120 
 
 T'ROVIxNX'IAT, LETTERS. 
 
 ::| ::^i[ ,1 
 
 iH 
 
 by time." Thus we see it for a few years insensibly 
 fjaining strenoth, till after a considerable period it 
 becomes authorized by the tactic approbation of the 
 Church, accordini; to this ofreat maxim of Father 
 Bauni : " An opinion being advanced by some casuists, 
 and tlie Church not opposing it, is evidence that she 
 a})proves it." And, in fact, it is by this principle he 
 sanctions one of his sentiments in his treatise G, p. 
 :Ji2.' ' What, father !' said I, ' the Church will at that 
 rate approve of all the abuses which she sufiers, and 
 all the errors in the hooks which she does not censure ?' 
 ' Dispute,' said he, ' against Father Bauni. I give you 
 a statement, and you debate with me. There is no 
 disputing upon a fact. I said then that when time 
 has thus ripened an opinion, it is quite probable and 
 safe. Hence the learned (Jaramuel, in the dedication 
 of his Fundamental Theology to Diana, says, that this 
 great Diana " his rendered several opinions probable 
 which were not so before ; qua; ante non erant ; and 
 that thus there is no longer any sin in following them, 
 though there was sin before ; jam non licccaut, licet 
 ante peccaver int." ' 
 
 ' Of a trutli, father,' said I, ' it is a mighty advantage 
 to be beside your doctors. Of two persons doing the 
 same things, the one who does not know their doctrine 
 sins, and the one who knows it does not sin. Is it 
 then at once both instructive and justifying ? The 
 law of God according to St. Paul, made transgressors: 
 yours makes almost all men innocent. I entreat you, 
 father, to infoini me fully on the subject. 1 will riot 
 
^■m 
 
 the 
 trine 
 s it 
 The 
 iors ; 
 you, 
 
 not 
 
 
 MAXIMS FOR BENEFICIARIES AND PUIKSTS. 121 
 
 leave you until you have told me the principal maxims 
 whicii your casuists have established.' 
 
 'Alas!' said the father, 'our principal aim should 
 have been to establish no other maxims than those ot" 
 the Gospel in all their strictness. And it is plain 
 enough from the correctness of our own manners, that 
 if we suffer any laxity in others, it is rather ho\i\ com- 
 plaisance than from desi^ijn. We are forced to it. Men 
 are n "-a-days so corrupted, that being unable to make 
 theux V. - :ne to us, we nmst of course go to them. Other- 
 wise, they would leave us ; they would do worse, they 
 would become utterly ref];ardless. With a view to re- 
 tain them, our casuists have considered the vices to 
 which all ranks are most disposed, thus to be able, 
 without however injuring the truth, to establish max- 
 ims so mild that one must be strangely constituted 
 not to be satisfied ; for the capital design which our 
 Company has formed for the good of religion is to 
 rebuff none, to beware of driving people to despair. 
 
 'Accordingly, we have maxims for all classes of 
 persons; for holders of benefices, for priests, for monks, 
 for gentlemen, for servants, for the rich, for persons in 
 trade, for those whose affairs are in disorder, for pious 
 women, and such as are not pious, for married people, 
 for libertines. In short, nothing has escaped their 
 foresight.' ' In other words,' said 1, 'you have them 
 fur clergy, lords and commons. I atn very desirous to 
 hear them.' 
 
 ' Let us begin,' said the father, ' with the holders of 
 benelices. You know what traffic is now carrieil on in 
 
 ;•■ i 
 II 
 
 .m|| 
 
 Hi 
 
 
 l;i' 
 
 S 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 i ' 
 
 ■. '1 
 
 i 
 
 j ■ 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 \l'^ 
 
 ^|i 
 
flT 
 
 
 'in 
 
 }• ri, 
 
 [«i!i 
 
 'M 1 
 
 1 1 
 
 122 
 
 PROVINX'IAL LETTERS. 
 
 benefices, and tliat if we were to proceed on what St. 
 Thomas and the ancients have written on the subject, 
 there woidd be a vast number of Simonists in the 
 Cliurch. Hence, it was most necessary for our fathers 
 to temper things by their prudence, as the following 
 passage of Valentia, one of Escobar's four living crea- 
 tures, will inform you. It is the conclusion of a long 
 discourse in which he furnishes several expedients ; 
 but this in my opinion is the best. It is at p. 2089 of 
 vol. iii. " Where a temporal good is given for a spiri- 
 tual good (in other words, money for a benefice), and 
 the money is given as the price of the benefice, it is 
 manifest simony : but if it is given as a motive which 
 disposes the patron to bestow it, it is not simony, 
 although he who bestows it considers and expects the 
 money as the principal inducement." Tannerus, who 
 is also of our Company, says the same thing: in his vol. 
 iii., p. 1519, although he admits that "St. Tliomas is 
 against him, im;.smuch as he teaches absolutely that it 
 always is simony to give a spiritual good for a tem- 
 poral, if the temporal is the end." By this means we 
 prevent an infinitude of simonies. For who would be 
 so wicked, while giving money for a benefice, as to re- 
 fuse to make it his intention to give it as a motive 
 which disposes the holder of the benefice to resign it ? 
 No man can be so far left to himself.' ' I agree,' said 
 I, ' that all men have sufficient grace to take such u 
 step.' ' Not a doubt of it,' rejoined the father. 
 
 ' Thus have we softened matters in regard to the 
 holders of benefices. As to priests we have several 
 
 '. 1 
 
 
 1 
 .1 
 
 \ 
 
 11 
 
 .^|:. 
 
MAXIMS FOR r.ENEFlCIAlUES AND PRIESTS. 123 
 
 jimxinis, which are verv favourable to thein. For 
 fXiiiuph^ that of No. xxiv., tr. 1, ex. 11, n. 9G : " May a 
 prifst who l>as been paid to say mass, receive money a 
 si'coud time for the same mass :* Yes," says Filiutius, 
 '• y>y applying the part of the sacrifice, which belongs 
 to him as })riest, to the person who makes the second 
 paymeiu, provided lie do not receive full pa\'ment for 
 ii whole mass, but only for a part, e.g., a third of the 
 
 mass. 
 
 ■ Assuredly, father, this is one of the cases in wdiich 
 the pro and ran are very probable. Your last state- 
 ment cannot but be so, on the authority of Filiutius 
 uiid Escobar. But, while leaving it in the sphere of 
 its probability, the contrary might, methinks, be also 
 said and supported on these grounds. When the 
 Church permits priests who are poor to take money 
 for their masses, because it is very just that those wdio 
 serve the altar live by the altar, it does not therefore 
 mean, that they are to barter the sacrifice for monev, 
 still less deprive themselves of all the grace which 
 tliey should be the first to draw from it. 1 would say, 
 moreover, that according to St. Paul, priests are obliged 
 tu offer sacrifice first for tJiemselven and then for the 
 people, and that thus wddle it is lawful for them to 
 nlluw others to participate in the benefit of the sacri- 
 tlci', they may not voluntarily renounce thi; wdiole 
 liL'uefit of it for themselves, and give it to another for 
 the third of a mass ; that is, for four or five sous. 
 bi(K;L!(!, father, how far soever I might be from being 
 ijrurc, I could rentier this opinion probable.' 'You 
 
 ■ji- 
 
 f| 
 
 , f. 
 
 *M 
 
 ! i 'i 
 
 
P'fi ! 
 
 
 124 
 
 PIIOVIXCTAL LETTERS. 
 
 m 
 
 ill 
 
 •11 '^'> i 
 
 5 1*°^ :.'!) i 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 m 
 
 '! 
 
 n 
 
 M 
 
 would have no n-reat difficulty,' said he. ' It is visibly 
 so. The difficulty was to iind probability in the oppo- 
 site ot" opinions which are manifestly f^ood. And this 
 is only the privilege of great minds. Father Bauni 
 excels in it. It is a pleasure to see this learned casuist 
 penetrating into the pro and con of the following ques- 
 tion, whicli also respects pi'iests, and finding reason 
 everywhere ; he is so ingenious and so subtle. 
 
 ' He says in one place (it is in tr. 10, p. 474), "A law 
 could not be passed obliging curates to say mass every 
 day; because such a law would expose them indubitably 
 {lutud duhie) to the peril of sometimes saying it in 
 mortal sin." Nevertheless in the same tract, 10, p. 441, 
 he says that " priests who liave been ])aid to say mass 
 daily, ought to say it daily, and cannot excuse them- 
 selves ^on the ground of not being always properly 
 prepared, because they can always perform an act of 
 contrition, and if they fail it is their own fault, and 
 not his who makes them say the mass." To obviate 
 the great difficulties which might prevent them, he, in 
 the same tract ((|U. 32, p. 457), thus solves the ques- 
 tion : ■' May a priest, the same day he has conunitted a 
 mortal sin, and one of the most heinous, say mass, by 
 confessing previously? No, says VillaloVios, because of 
 his impurity ; but Sanchez says yes, and without any 
 ^■* ■ -.d i ixoM that his opinion is safe, and should be 
 u u ■' vu practice. Et tttfd cf sequenda in pruxi." ' 
 
 • ,V' ;• rather, tliis opinion is to be followed in 
 ]ir , • - Woahl a priest who had fallen into such a 
 state dare, the same day, to approach the altar on the 
 
 I 'M 
 
I ' 
 
 MAXIMS FOR MONKS, 
 
 125 
 
 word of Father Bauni ? Ought he not to show <lefer- 
 eiice to the ancient laws of the Church, whicli ex- 
 cluded from tlie sacrifice for ever, or at h^ast for a long 
 period, priests who had committed sins of this descrip- 
 tion, rather than ad(^pt the new opinions of your 
 casuists, who admit tliem to it the very day they have 
 fallen?' 'You have no memory,' said the father; 
 ' did I not formerly instruct you that in morality 
 we were to follow not the ancient Fathers, but the 
 new casuists.' ' I remember well,' replied I. ' But 
 there is more in this. There are here laws of the 
 Church.' ' You are right,' said he, ' but you do not 
 yet know the fine maxim of our fathers, " that the 
 laws of the Church lose their force when no longer 
 observed, cum, jam desiietudine ablerunt," as Filiutius 
 says, tom. 2, tr. 25, n. 3o. We see the present neces- 
 sities of the Church better than the ancients. If we 
 were to be so strict in excluding priests from the altar, 
 you can easily perceive that there would not be so 
 <:^reat a number of masses. Now multiplication of 
 masses brings so much glory to God, and advantage to 
 men, that I would venture to say with our father 
 Cellot, in his Treatise on the Hierarchy, p. Gil, printed 
 at Rouen, " that there would not be too many priests, 
 though not only all men and women, if that were pos- 
 sible, but also inanimate things, and the very brutes, 
 (hrufa aniimdla) were changed into priests, to cele- 
 brate mass." ' I was so struck with the oddness of the 
 idea, that I was unable to speak, so he continued thus : 
 ' But, enough on the subject of priests, I might be- 
 
 n 
 
 i'i 
 
 !l 
 
 Ui 
 
 ♦ . 
 
 
 1 
 
 ;; 
 
 ( ■. 
 
 '■ ; 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 J 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 i ' t 
 
 _ jt ■: 
 
 
 . 
 
 '\ 
 
 
 • iij 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 ) 
 
 "! 
 
 V 
 
 
 \ 
 
 ;■■ 
 
 
 
 
 W 
 
 
 
 
 ii» 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 t 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
m 
 
 infif 1,11 
 
 ■9' \ 
 
 i'hi 
 
 lis 
 
 111 
 
 ;ia yi,i 
 
 P 
 
 11 
 
 126 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 come tedious; let us proceed to monks. As their 
 greatest difficult}' is the obedience which tliey owe to 
 their superiors, listen to the softening which it has 
 received from our fathers. Casro Paleo of our Com- 
 pany says, Op. Mor. p. ], disp. 2, p. 6 : "It is l)eyon(l 
 dispute that the monk who has a probable opinion in 
 his favour is not bound to obey his superior, although 
 the opinion of the superior is the more probable. For, 
 in that case, the monk is at liberty to adopt the one 
 which is the most agreeable to him {quae sib'i grafior 
 fiterit,)" as Sanchez says. " Moreover, tliough the 
 command of the superior be just, that does not oblige 
 you to obey him : For it is not just in all points and 
 in all modes (non undequaque juste pmecipif), but 
 only probably, and thus you are only bound probably to 
 obey him, and you are probably not bound. Prohihll- 
 iter ohligatus et prohahiliter deohligatiis.' ' Certainly, 
 father, we cannot too highly value this tine fruit of 
 double probability ! ' 'It is of great use,' said he, ' but 
 let us abridge. I will not speak of the treatise of our 
 celebrated Molina, in behalf of monks who have been 
 expelled from their convents for misconduct. Our 
 father Escobar refers to it, tr. 6, ex. 7, n. Ill, in these 
 teruis, " Molina affirms that a monk expelled from his 
 monastery is not obliged to reform, in order to bo 
 re-admitted, and is no longer bound by his vow of 
 obedience.'" 
 
 'Now then, father,' said I, 'ecclesiastics are very 
 much at their ease. I see well that your casuists have 
 treated them favourably. They have acted in the mat- 
 
 ^ il 
 
 l: St 
 
 .iii;;i: 
 
 L\' 
 
a 
 
 MAXIMS FOR KEUVANTS. 
 
 12< 
 
 tor as if for themselves. I much fear tliat other classes 
 of persons will not be so well treated. Every one 
 must look to himself.' ' They could not have done 
 hotter for themselves,' rejoined the father ; 'all have 
 been treated with equal charity, from the highest to 
 tlic lowest. And this leads me to prove it, by telling 
 you our maxims concerning .servants. 
 
 ' With regard to them, we have considered the diffi- 
 culty which those of them, who are conscientious, must 
 fool in serving debauchees. For, if they do not (exe- 
 cute all of the messages on which they are sent, they 
 lose their livelihood, and if they do, they feel remorse. 
 To solace them, our four-and-twenty fathers (tr. 7, ex. 
 4, n. 223,) have specified the service which they may 
 perform with a safe conscience. Here are some of 
 them : " To carry letters and presents to open doors 
 and windows, to assist their master in getting up to 
 the window% to hold the ladder while he mounts ; all 
 this is permitted and indifferent. It is true that in 
 the latter case they must be threatened more than 
 usual if they refuse. For it is an injury to the mas- 
 ter of the hou.se to get in at the window.'" 
 
 'You .see how very judicious this is.' 'I expected 
 no less,' .said I, 'from a book compiled from four-and- 
 twonty Jesuits.' ' But,' added the father, ' our Father 
 Bauni has well instructed servants how to perform all 
 these services for their masters, innocently, bv taking 
 care to direct their attention, not to the sins in 
 which they become art and part, but to the profit 
 which accrues from them. This he has well explained 
 
 :i 
 
 t 
 
 I SI 
 
 1 ''. 
 
 1 
 
 
 ( 
 J 
 
 \ V. 
 
 1 5 r 
 
 : UlW 
 
 ilr 
 
 J ( 
 
128 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 if 
 
 m i 
 
 I 
 
 ■i llJ 
 
 ^i 
 
 ,6S I 
 If 
 
 18 1 ' 
 
 in tlie Sum of Sins, p. 710, l.st ed. " Let confessors 
 observe carefully that they cannot give absolution to 
 valets who carry dishonest messapfes, if they consent 
 to the sins of their masters ; but the contrary must be 
 said if they do it for their temporal advantage." And 
 that is very easily done ; for why should they persist 
 in consenting to sins, of which they have only the 
 trouVde ? ' 
 
 ' Father Bauni has likewise established a grand 
 maxim in favour of those who are not content with 
 their wages. It is in the Sum, pp. 213, 214, 6th ed. 
 " Maj' servants who complain of their wages increase 
 them of tlieir own accord, by fingering as much of the 
 propel ty of their masters as they imagine necessary 
 to equal said wages to their work ? They may on 
 some occasions, as when they are so poor and out of 
 place, that they are obliged to accept of any offer that 
 is made to them, and other valets of their class receive 
 much more." 
 
 ' Father,' said I, ' that is exactly the case of John of 
 Alba.' ' What John of Alba,' said the father, ' what 
 do you mean ?' ' What, father ! have you forgotten 
 what took place in this city several years since i 
 Where were vou then ?' 'I was teachinor cases of con- 
 science,' said he, ' in one of our colleges a good way 
 from Paris.' ' I see, then, father, that you do not 
 know this story. I must tell it you. A person of rank 
 told it the other day where I was. He said that this 
 John of Alba, being in the service of your fathers of 
 the College of Clermont, in St. James street, and not 
 
■\i' 
 
 CASE OF JOHN OF ALU/. 
 
 129 
 
 being satisfied with his waj^es, stole soipctliin^ by way 
 of compensation. Your fathers having discovered it, 
 put hiiu in prison, charging him with domestic theft. 
 The case came into (,'hatelet for judgment, it' my 
 memory serves me right. For he mentionc*! all those 
 particulars, without which they could scarcely have 
 been credited. The culprit being interrogated, con- 
 fessed that he had taken some tin plates from your 
 fathers; but he maintained for all that that he had 
 nut stolen them, founding his justitication on this doc- 
 trine of Father Bauni, which he pres<'nte<l to the 
 judges with a writing of one of your fathers who had 
 taught him the same thing. On which M. de Mon- 
 roui^e, one of the most distinjifuished members of the 
 Court, gave his opinion, " that he did not think that in 
 consequence of writings by these fathers containing a 
 doctrine which was illegal, pernicious, and opposed to 
 all laws, nntural, human and divine, capable of upset- 
 ting families, and authorizing all domestic thefts, the 
 paiu'l ought to be aquitted. But his opinion was, 
 that this too faithful scholar should be whipped in 
 front of the college gate by the hand of the execu- 
 tioner, who shoukl at the same time burn the writings 
 of those fathers on the subject of larceny, prohibiting 
 them at the peril of their lives henceforth to teach 
 any such doctrine." 
 
 ' While w^aiting the result of this opinion, which was 
 
 very much approved, an incident ha]")pen<.Ml which 
 
 caused the process to be remitted. But in the 
 
 meantime the prisoner disappeared, it is not known 
 
 9 
 
 I < 
 
 \\\ 
 
 ■ 
 
 I i 
 
 1^ 
 
 i; ,1 
 
 i 
 
 . i 
 
 
 t'y* 
 
 ! 1 II 1 
 
 \ 
 
 1 
 
 .i 
 
 i 
 
 \ 
 
 
 ii 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 
 ■f 
 
 
 '» 
 
 
 ■ti 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 ^^^1 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
^■■f ■» " 
 
 1 
 
 
 il '5' ^ 
 
 ill 
 
 i 
 
 f . 
 
 
 '1 i 1 
 
 1 
 
 If * 
 
 1 ' 
 
 h \ 
 
 u ■ ■ ' 
 
 i 
 
 ■ h ' I 
 
 ; 
 
 
 
 :ii' 
 
 'I 
 
 
 1 
 
 'l V 
 
 : ■< \ 
 
 ■ 
 
 1 
 
 1 J. 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 1' 1 
 
 180 
 
 PIIOVINX'IAI. LETTKUS. 
 
 how, and the affair was no more heard of, so that 
 John of Alba got off without giving buciv his plate. 
 He told us this, and added that tlie opinion of M. de 
 Monrouge is anionof the records of the (Jhatelet, where 
 any one may see it. We were amused with the 
 story.' 
 
 ' Why do you trirle so,' said the father ; ' what does 
 all that signify ? I am speaking to you of the max- 
 ims of our casuists ; I was preparing to speak to you 
 of those which concern gentlemen, and you interrupt 
 me with stories out of place.' ' I only told it to you 
 in passing,' said I, ' and also to call your attention to 
 an important point of the subject, which I find you 
 have forgotten in establishing your doctrine of proba- 
 bility.' ' What,' said the father, ' what can have been 
 missed after so many gifted men have dealt with it ?' 
 ' It is this,' I replied. * You have indeed made those 
 who follow your opinions secure as regards God and 
 conscience ; for from what you say, they are safe in 
 those quarters when they follow a grave doctor. You 
 have also made them secure in regard fo confessors, 
 for you have obliged priests to absolve them on a pro- 
 bable opinion under pain of mortal sin. Put you have 
 not secured them in regard to judges, and hence 
 they find themselves exposed to the lash and the gib- 
 bet in following your probabilities. This is a capital 
 defect.' ' You are right,' said the father, ' you give me 
 pleasure. But that is because we have not so much 
 power over judges as over confessors, who are obliged 
 to apply to us in cases of conscience in which we are 
 
DOCTIUNK OK PUOI'.AHIMTY. 
 
 i:n 
 
 siijiromo judges.' ' I undor.stand,' said I. 'But if on 
 tilt' one hand you are tlio judi,'(!s of confessors, are not 
 you on tlie other the confessors of judges ? Your 
 po\v(!r is of great extent: compel theui to acfjuit crim- 
 inals who have a probable opiiiion under pain of exclu- 
 sion fi'om tlie sacraments, that it niay not turn out to 
 the great contempt and scandal of proliability, that 
 those whom you render innocent in theory are whipped 
 and hung in practice. Without this, how will you 
 tind disciples ?' 'It will be necessary to think of it,' 
 said he ; 'the thing is not to be overlooked. I will 
 mention it to our father Provincial. Still 3'ou might 
 reserve your advice for another time, and not interrupt 
 what I have to tell you of the maxims which we have 
 established in favour of gentlemen. I will not instruct 
 you unless you promise not to tell me any more 
 stories.' 
 
 This is all you sliall have to-day, for more than one 
 letter will be required to acquaint you with all I 
 learned at a single interview. 
 
 Meanwhile, I am, etc. 
 
 ;'■' I 
 
 ^ 
 
 iri 
 
 
 ;l !• 
 
 m 
 
 
 < i' 
 
 1! 
 
 1 
 
 i ■ 
 
 >i 
 
 
 ii 
 
 ^' s 
 
 'MI 
 
 i : 1 
 
 I 4 
 
 M 
 
 
 F 
 
 ! 
 i 
 
 ' ' ' 
 
 
 f. 
 
 i , ; 
 
 3 ! 
 
 i : 
 
 If"-] 
 
 
LETTEE SEVENTH. 
 
 THE METHOD OF DIRECTING THE INTENTION ACCOKDING TO THE 
 CASDISTS. OF THEIR PERMISSION TO KILL IN DEFENCi; OF 
 
 HOTTOUR AMD PROPERTY. THIS EXTENDED TO PRIESTS AND 
 MONKS. CURIOUS QUESTION PROPOSED BY CARAMUEL : MAY 
 THE JESUITS LAWFULLY KILL THE JANSENISTS ? 
 
 Paris. 
 
 Sir, — After appeasinjy the worthy father, whom I 
 had somewhat disturbed by the story of John of Alba, 
 he resumed, on my assuring him that I woukl not tell 
 any more of the same kind, and spoke to me of the 
 maxims of his casuists respecting gentlemen, nearly in 
 these terms : 
 
 ' You know,' said he, ' that the ruling passion of 
 persons of this class is the point of honour, which 
 hourly involves them in violent proceedings, very much 
 opposed to Christian piety, so that it would be neces- 
 sary to exclude almost the whole of them from our 
 confessionals, had not our fathers somewhat relaxed 
 the strictness of religion in accommodation to human 
 weakness. But, as they wished to remain attached to 
 the Gospel by doing their duty towards God, and to 
 the men of the world by practising charity towards 
 their neighbour, we had need of all our talent to devise 
 expedients which might temper things so nicely, that 
 
inv?i 
 
 DIRECTING THE INTENTION. 
 
 133 
 
 iion ol:' 
 wliich 
 uuch 
 nt'Ct's- 
 
 )ui our 
 
 human 
 ihed to 
 and to 
 owards 
 devise 
 y, that 
 
 honour iniglit be maintained and redressed by the 
 means ordinarily used in tlie world, without, however, 
 oiiendiiii]^ conscience ; thus at once preserving two 
 things, apparently so opposite, as piety and honour. 
 
 ' But, in proportion to the utility of this design, was 
 
 the difficulty of executing it. For I believe you are 
 
 fully aware of the magnitude and laborious nature of 
 
 the enterprise.' ' It astonishes me,' said I, with some 
 
 coolness. 'Astonishes you?' said he, 'I believe it; it 
 
 would astonish many others. Are you ignorant that 
 
 on the one hand the law of the Gospel enjoins us not 
 
 to render evil for evil, and to leave vengeance to God ; 
 
 and that, on the other, the laws of the world forbid 
 
 any one to suffer an injury without taking satisfaction 
 
 for it, often by the death of an enemy ? Have you ever 
 
 seen anything that appears more contradictory ? And 
 
 yet, when I tell you that our fathers have reconciled 
 
 these things, you simply say it astonishes you.' ' I 
 
 did not fully explain myself, father. I would hold the 
 
 thing impossible if, after what I have seen of your 
 
 fathers, I did not know that thev can easily do what 
 
 is impossible to other men. It is this which makes me 
 
 btliove that they have certainly found some method 
 
 whieh 1 adn\ire without knowing it, and which I beg 
 
 you to unfold to me.' 
 
 ' Since you take it thus,' said he, ' I caimot refuse 
 yon. Know, then, that this marvellous principle is 
 our grand method of directing the intention, the im- 
 portance of which is so great in our moral system that 
 I Would venture almost to compare it to the doctrine 
 
 m 
 
134 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 of probability. You have seen some traces of it in 
 passing, in certain maxims which I have mentioned to 
 you. For, when I showed you how valets may, in 
 conscience, execute certain disagreeable inessages, did 
 you not observe that it was merely by turning away 
 their attention from the evil in which they are act and 
 part to the gain which accrues from it ? This is what 
 is meant by directing the intention. In like manner, 
 you have seen how those who give money for bene- 
 fices would be real simonists without a similar diver- 
 sion. But I wish now to ihow you this great method, 
 in all its lustre, on the subject of homicide, which it 
 justifies on a thousand occasions, in order that b}^ its 
 effect here, you may be able to judge what it is cap- 
 able of etfec'^'ng.' ' I already see,' said I, ' that by 
 means of it everything will be permitted ; nothing 
 will escape.' ' You are always going from the one 
 extreme to the other,' replied the father, ' correct that. 
 For, in order to show you that we do not permit every 
 thing, know, for example, that we never permit any 
 one to have a formal intention of sinning for the mere 
 sake of sinnin<r, and that whenever any one whatever 
 persists in having no other end in evil than evil itself, 
 we break with him ; the thing is diabolical ; this hoMs 
 without exception of age, sex, or quality. But when 
 one is not in this unhappy disposition, we endeavour to 
 put in practice our method of directing the i7itent'wn, 
 which consists in making a lawful object the end of 
 our actions. Not that we do not, as far as we can, 
 dissuade from things forbidden ; but when we cannot 
 
 Mmi 
 

 e one 
 that, 
 very 
 
 any 
 
 mere 
 
 ever 
 
 tself, 
 
 liolti.s 
 
 hen 
 our to 
 ition, 
 ad of 
 i can, 
 annot 
 
 REVENGE. 
 
 135 
 
 prevent the act we at least purif}'' the intention, and 
 tlms correct the vice of the means by the purity of the 
 end. 
 
 'In this way our fathers have found a method of 
 permitting the violence which is practised in defending 
 honour. It is only to turn away the intention from 
 the desire of revenge, which is criminal, to direct it to 
 the desire of defending honour, which, according to 
 our fathers, is lawful. Thus they fulfil all their duties 
 towards God and towards men. For they please the 
 world by permitting actions, and they satisfy the 
 Gospel by purifying intentions. This the ancients did 
 not know ; this is due to our fathers. Do you now 
 comprehend it?' 'Very well,' said I, 'you bestow on 
 men the external and material effect of the action, and 
 you give God this internal and spiritual movement of 
 the intention ; and, by this equitable division, you 
 bring human laws into unison with the divine. But 
 father, to tell you the truth, I am somewhat distrust- 
 ful of your promises, and I doubt if your authors say 
 as much as you.' ' You do me wrong,' said the father ; 
 ' I advance nothing which I do not prove, and, by so 
 many passages, that their number, their authority, 
 and their reasons, will fill you with admiration. 
 
 ' To show you the alliance which our fathers have 
 made between the maxims of the Gospel and those of 
 the world, by this direction of intention, listen to our 
 father Reginald, in his Proxies, 1. 21, n. G2, p. 2G0. " It 
 ib forbidden to individuals to avenge themselves ; for 
 St. Paul says, Rom. xii.. Render to no man evil for 
 
 n-i 
 
 H; 'i 
 
 ili 
 
186 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 i:| -\i 
 
 ;:■! 
 
 13 ! 'V. 
 
 i\i .-' •! 
 
 i *it •! 
 
 evil ; and Eccl. xxviii., He who would avenge himself 
 will bring down the vengeance of God, and his sins 
 will not be forgotten ; besides, all that is said in the 
 Gospel about forgiving offences, as Matthew vi. 18." ' 
 ' Certainly, fatiier, if after that he says any thing else 
 than is in Scripture, it will not be for want of know- 
 ledge. What, then, is his conclusion V ' Here it is,' 
 said he: "From all these things it appears, that a 
 military man may, on the instant, pursue him who has 
 wounded him, not indeed with the intention of ren- 
 dering evil for evil, but with that of preserving his 
 honour. Non ut malem pro vialo reddat, sud et con- 
 servet honorer)i." 
 
 'Do you see how careful they are to forbid the 
 intention of rendering evil for evil, because Scripture 
 condemns it ? They have never allowed it. See Les- 
 sius de Just., 1. 2, c. 9, d. 12, n. 79 : " He who has 
 received an injury may not have the intention of 
 avenging himself, but he may have that of avoiding 
 infamy, and for this may, on the instant, repel the 
 injury, and that with the sword : etiam cum gladiu." 
 We are so far from allowing them to take vengeance 
 on their enemies, that cur fathers will not even allow 
 them to wish death from a movement of hatred. See 
 our Father Escobar, tr. 5, n. 145 : " If your enemy U 
 disposed to hurt you, you ought not to wish his death 
 from a movement of hatred, but you may do so in 
 order to avoid loss." For that, accompanied with this 
 intention, is so lawful, that our great Hurtado de 
 Mendoza says, " that we maj^ pray God for the speedy 
 
 lili 
 
'\n 
 
 DUELLING. 
 
 187 
 
 death of those who are disposed to persecute us, if we 
 cannot otherwise avoid them." It is in his Treatise Do 
 Spe, vol. 2, d. 15, s. 4, sec. 48.' 
 
 ' Reverend father, the Church has surely forgotten 
 to insert a petition to this effect, among its j)rayers.' 
 ' Everything,' said he, ' has not been inserted that God 
 iniirht be asked to grant. Besides the thing could not 
 be, for this opinion is later than the breviary. You 
 are not a good chronologist. But, without quitting 
 this subject, listen to this passage from our Father 
 Gaspar Hurtado, de Sub. pecc. dift". 9, quoted by Diana, 
 p. 5, tr. 14, r. 99. He is one of Escobar's twenty- 
 four fathers. " A beneficed person may, without 
 mortal sin. desire the death of him who has a pension 
 from his benefice, and a son that of his father, and 
 rejoice when it happens, provided it is only for the 
 advantage which accrues from it, and not from personal 
 hatred.'" 
 
 '0 father !' said I, ' this is a lovely fruit of the direc- 
 tion of intention. 1 see plainly that it is of great 
 extent. But, nevertheless, there are certain cases, the 
 solution of which would still be ditficult, although very 
 necessary for gentlemen.' * State them, that we may 
 see,' said the father. ' Show me,' said I, ' that with all 
 this direction of intention it is lawful to fight a duel.' 
 'Our great Hurtado de Mendoza,' said the father, 
 'will satisfy you instantly, in the passage which 
 Diana quotes, p. 5, tr. 14, r. 99 : " If a gentleman who 
 is challenged in a duel is known not to be devout, and 
 the sins which he is seen committing every hour without 
 
 "■■\\. 
 
 'M; 
 
 1 i 
 
 I :l 
 
 "... 
 
 i' ■ ; 
 
 •i 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 i 
 
 : ! 
 
 1 
 
 j 
 
 , i 
 
 
 
 Mi 
 
 i 
 
 i(i 
 
m 
 
 I 'I 
 
 u 
 
 
 li 
 
 138 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 f 5T t, 
 
 scruple, make it easily to be judged, that if he refuses 
 to fifjht it is not from the fear of God, but from 
 cowardice, and it is hence said that he is a chicken 
 and not a man, gallina, et non vir, he may, to preserve 
 his honour, be at the place assigned, not indeed with 
 the express intention of lighting a duel, but only with 
 that of defending himself, if he who has called him 
 out comes there to attack ^ira unjustly. And his act 
 will be quite indifferent u. itself. For what harm is 
 there in going into a ^eld to walk in it, while waiting 
 for a man, and defending « :ie'L aeif, if there attacked ? 
 And thus he does not sin in any manner, since he does 
 not at all accept a duel, his attention being directed to 
 other circumstances. For the acceptance of a duel 
 consists in the express intention of fighting, which he 
 has not." ' 
 
 ' You have not kept your word, father ; that is not 
 properly to permit duelling. On the contrary, he 
 thinks it so strongly forbidden that, to make it lawful, 
 he avoids calling it a duel.' ' Ho, ho,' said the father, 
 ' you begin to penetrate ; I am delighted at it. I might 
 say, nevertheless, that in this he permits all that is 
 asked by those who fight a duel. But, since it is 
 necessary to answer you precisely, our Father Layman 
 will do it for me, by permitting the duel in express 
 terms, provided the intention is directed to accept it 
 solely to preserve honour or fortune. It is at 1. 3, c. 3, 
 n. 2, 3 : " If a soldier in the army or a gentleman at 
 court, finds himself so situated that he must h se his 
 honour or his fortune if he does not accept a duel, I do 
 
 m !\ 
 
'}m 
 
 DUELLING. 
 
 139 
 
 not see how we can condemn him who accepts it in 
 self-defence." Peter Hurtado says the same thing as 
 reported by our celebrated Escobar, tr. 1, ex. 7, n. 96, 
 98, when he gives us Hurtado's words : " That one may 
 fight a duel even in defence of one's property, if that 
 is the only means of preserving it, because every man 
 is entitled to defend his property, and that even by 
 the death of his enemies." ' At these passages I won- 
 dered, to think how the piety of the king employs 
 his power to prohibit and abolish duelling in his 
 dominions, and the piety of the Jesuits tasks their 
 subtlety in permitting and sanctioning it in the Church. 
 But the worthy father was so communicative that it 
 would have been wrong to stop him, so he continued 
 thus : ' In fine,' said he, ' Sanchez (see what persons I 
 quote to 3'ou) goes farther. For he makes it lawful 
 not only to accept but to send a challenge, by properly 
 directintj the intention. And in this our Escobar fol- 
 lows him at the same place, n. 97.' ' Father,' said I, ' I 
 hold him excused if it is so. But that I may believe 
 he wrote it, allow me to see it.' ' Read him. then, your- 
 self,' said he, and I, in fact, read those words in the 
 Moral Theology of Sanchez, 1. 2, c. 39, n. 7. " It is very 
 reasonable to hold that a man may fight a duel to save 
 his life, his honour, or his property to a considerable 
 amount, when an attempt is made to wrest them from 
 him by lawsuits and chicanery, and this is the only 
 means of preserving them. And Navarre says very 
 well, that on this occasion, it is lawful to accept and to 
 send a challenge : Licet acceptare et ojferre diLellum 
 
 T!) 
 
 ! S 
 
 ;; ^ 
 
 t 'i 
 
 i: ill 
 
 •:- VI 
 
m 
 
 i 
 
 
 1 1 ill 
 
 *ll 
 
 i'ii 
 
 1 
 
 1 lltll 
 
 1 
 
 '|i| 1 
 
 1 
 
 jj*i |l 
 
 i 
 
 ■M IV '» 
 
 1 
 
 140 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 And also that one may waylay his enemy and slay 
 hiiii ; and, even in those rencounters, when the method 
 of duelling cannot be used, one may waylay and kill 
 his enemy, and so get out of the affair. For, by this 
 means, we avoid at once both exposing our life in com- 
 bat, and partaking of the sin which our enemy would 
 commit in a duel." ' 
 
 'Behold, father,' said I, 'a pious assassin, but, though 
 pious, he is always an assassin, because permitted to 
 kill his enemy treacherously.' ' Have I said to you,' 
 said the father, ' that any one may kill treacherously ? 
 God forbid ! I tell you that anyone may kill in am- 
 bush, and you thence conclude, that one may kill 
 treacherously, as if it was the same thing. Learn from 
 Escobar tr. 6, ex. 4, n. 26, what is meant by killing 
 treacherously, and then you may speak. " A man i.s 
 said to kill treacherously when he kills a person who 
 does not at all suspect him. And this is why one who 
 kills his enemy is not said to kill treacherously, though 
 it be from behind, and in ambush : Licet per insidias 
 aut a tergo percutiat." And, in the same treatise, n. 
 26 : " He who kills his enemy, with whom he had been 
 reconciled on a promise of not again attempting his 
 life, is not absolutely said to kill in treachery, unless 
 the friendship between them was very close. Arctior 
 amicitia." 
 
 ' You see from this that you do not even know the 
 meaning of terms, and yet you speak as if you were a 
 doctor.' ' I confess,' said I, ' that that is new to me, 
 and I learn from this definition that it is impossible to 
 
ASSASSINATION. 
 
 141 
 
 kill in treachery. For people seldom think of assassi- 
 nating any but their enemies. But be this as it may, 
 we may, accorclinf; to Sanchez, kill boldly, I no longer 
 say in treachery, but from behind or in ambuscade, 
 any person pursuing us before a court of justice?' 
 ' Yes,' said the father, ' but by carefully directinj^j the 
 intention ; you always forget the principal thing. 
 And this is what Molina also maintains, torn. 4, tr. 3, 
 disp. 12. And, even according to our learned Reginald, 
 1. 21, cap, 5, n. 57, "We may also kill the false witnesses 
 whom he suborns against us." And, in fine, according 
 to our great and celebrated fathers, Tanneras and 
 Emanuel Sa, we may even kill both the witnesses and 
 the judge, if he is in concert wnth them. Here are his 
 words, tr. 3, disp. 4, q. 8, n. 83 : " Sotus," he says, " and 
 Lessius hold that it is not lawful to kill false wit- 
 nesses and the judge who are leagued to put an inno- 
 cent man to death, but Emanuel Sa and other authors 
 are right in disapproving of that view, at least, as 
 regards conscience." And he moreover assures us 
 at the same place that we may kill both witness and 
 judge.' 
 
 ' Father,' said I, ' I now understand your principle of 
 directing the intention well enough, but I desire much, 
 uiso, to understand the consequences of it, and all the 
 cases in which this method gives power to kill. Let 
 us go over those which you have told me, for fear of 
 mistake ; ambiguity here would be dangerous. First, 
 we must take care to kill seasonably, and on a good 
 probable opinion. You have next assured me, that by 
 
 'I 
 
 
 I, ,; 
 
 i: J 
 
 m\ 
 
 ';! 
 
 li 
 
 n 
 
 ■a\ 
 
 ?! 
 
 it 
 
 ■'I 
 
 A 
 
 u 
 
 '' I 
 
 IP 
 
 .11 : 
 
 'Pit' 
 
 Iff 
 
142 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 W 
 
 carefully directing our intention, we may, according to 
 your fathers, in order to preserve our honour, and even 
 our property, accept a challenge, and occasionally send 
 it, waylay and kill a false accuser and his witnesses 
 along with him ; and, moreover, the corrupt judge who 
 favours them ; and you have also told me, that he who 
 has received a blow, may, but without taking revenge, 
 take redress by the sword. But, father, you have not 
 told me to what extent.' ' There can scarcely be a 
 mistake,' said the father, * for you may go the length 
 of killing him. This is verily well proved by our 
 learned Henriquez, 1. 14, c. 10, n. 3, and others of our 
 fathers, reported by Escobar, tr. 1, ex. 7, n, 48, in the.se 
 words : " We may kill him who has given a blow 
 though he is in flight, provided we avoid doing it from 
 hatred or revenge, and do not thereby occasion exces- 
 sive murders hurtful to the State. And the reason is, 
 that we may thus run after our honour as after stolen 
 property ; for, although your honour is not in the 
 hands of your enemy, as stolen clothes would be, it 
 may, nevertheless, be recovered in the same manner, 
 by giving proofs of magnanimity and authority, and 
 thereby acquiring the esteem of men. And, in fact, 
 is it not true that he who has received a blow, is 
 reputed to be without honour, until he has killed his 
 enemy ? 
 
 This appeared to me so horrible, that I could scarcely 
 restrain myself, but to know the rest I allowed him to 
 continue thus : * We may even,' said he, ' to prevent a 
 blow, kill him who means to give it, if that is the only 
 
ASSASSINATION. 
 
 143 
 
 means of avoiding it. This is commonly held by our 
 fathers. For example, Azor. Inst. Mor., p. 3, p. 105 
 (he also is one of the four-and-twenty elders), " Is it 
 lawful for a man of honour to kill him who wishes to 
 give him a blow with the fist or with a stick ? Some 
 say no, and their reason is, that the life of our neigh- 
 bour is more precious than our honour ; besides that it 
 is cruelty to kill a man merely to avoid a blow. But 
 others say it is lawful, and I certainly find it probable 
 when it cannot otherwise be avoided. For without 
 that the honour of the innocent would be continually 
 exposed to the malice of the insolent." The same is 
 said by our great Filiutius, torn. 2, tr. 29, c. 3, n. 50 ; 
 and Father Hereau in his writings on Homicide, t. 2, 
 disp. 170, s. 16, sec. 137; and Bechan, Som., t. 1, q. 64 ; 
 de Homicid. And our fathers Flahaut and Le Court, 
 in their writings which the University in their Third 
 Request quoted at some length, with the view of dis- 
 crediting them, but without success ; and Escobar at 
 the same place, n. 48, all say the same thing. In sliort, 
 it is so generally maintained, that Lessius decides it as 
 a point which is not disputed by any casuist, 1. 2, c. 9, 
 c. 76. For he adduces a great number who are of this 
 opinion, and none who oppose it, and he even claims, 
 n. 77, Peter Navarre, who, speaking generally of af- 
 fronts of which there is none w^orse to bear than a 
 blow, declares, that according to the opinion of all the 
 casuists, ex sententia oonniuni, licet contumeliosuvi 
 occirlere, si aliter ea injuria arceri nequit. Do you 
 wish any more ? ' 
 
 li 
 
 ' M 
 
144 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 I thanked him, for I had only heard too much. 
 But, in order to see how far this damnable doctrine 
 would go, I said to him, ' But, father, is it not lawful 
 to kill for somewhat less ? Cannot we so direct our 
 intention, as to be able to kill anyone for giving us 
 the lie ? ' ' Yes,' said the father, ' according to our 
 Father Baldelle, 1. 3, disp. 24, n. 24, quoted by Escobar 
 at the same place, n. 49 : " It is lawful to kill him who 
 says to you, You have lied, if you cannot repress him 
 otherwise." And we may kill in the same way for 
 slander, according to our fathers. For Lessius, whom 
 Father Hereau, among others, follows word for word, 
 says, at the place already quoted : " If you try, by 
 calumnies, to ruin my reputation with persons of 
 honour, and I cannot avoid it otherwise than by 
 killing 3'ou, may I do it ? Yes, according to modern 
 authors, and even though the crime which you publish 
 be true ; if, however, it is secret, so that you cannot 
 discover it in course of justice. And here is the proof. 
 If you would rob me of my honour by giving me a 
 blow, I may prevent you by force of arms. The same 
 defence, therefore, is lawful when you would injure 
 me with the tongue. Besides, we may prevent in- 
 sults, therefore we may prevent evil speaking. In 
 tine, honour is dearer than life ; now we may kill to 
 defend our life, therefore we may kill to defend our 
 honour," Here are arguments in form. This is not 
 to discover, but to prove. And, in fine, this great 
 Lessius shows at the same place, n. 78, that we may kill 
 for a simple gesture, or expression of contempt. " We 
 
 M 
 
m 
 
 i 
 
 ASSASSINATION. 
 
 145 
 
 may," says he, " assail and destroy honour in several 
 wa; . A'hich defence appears very just, as when one 
 would strike with a stick or the fist, or affront us by 
 words or signs. Sive per signa."' 
 
 ' fatlier/ said I, ' we have here everything that 
 can be wished to put honour in safety ; but life is 
 much exposed, if for evil speaking nierely, or offen- 
 sive gestures, we may kill in conscience.' ' That is 
 true,' said he, ' but as our fathers are very circum- 
 spect, they have deemed it proper to forbid the doc- 
 trine to be put in practice on slight occasions. For 
 they sr 7, at least, that it scavcly should he pradhed. 
 Anr^ '.^ was not without reason ; here it is.' 'I know 
 it,' I, 'it is because the law of God forbids to kill.' 
 
 ' That is not the view they take of it,' said the father, 
 ' they find it allowable in conscience, and considering 
 the truth merely in itself.' ' And why, then, do they 
 forbid it ? ' ' Listen,' said he, ' it is because a State 
 would be depopulated in no time, were all evil 
 speakers in it slain. Learn from our Reginald, 1. 21, 
 n. 63, n. 260 : " Although this opinion that we may 
 kill for evil speaking, is not without probability in 
 theory, the contrary must be followed in practice. 
 For we must always avoid doing damage to the State 
 by oui' mode of self-defence. Now, it is clear that by 
 killing all persons of this description, there would be 
 too great a number of murders." Lessius speaks in 
 the same way, at the place already quoted : " It is 
 necessary to take heed that the practice of this maxim 
 
 10 
 
 I. -I 
 
 I 
 
 ? 
 
 ■ 1 
 
 ■ i 
 
 i 
 
 % 
 
 ■J. 
 it 
 
 
 
 I] 
 
 
 i 
 
i^ 
 
 .1 :i 
 
 146 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 be not hurtful to the State. For, then, it must not be 
 permitted. Tunc enim non est jjevniittendits.'" 
 
 ' What, father ! then it is only a prohibition of policy, 
 and not of religion ? Few people will be stopped by 
 it, especially when in passion. For it might be prob- 
 able enough that no harm was done to the State by 
 ridding it of a wicked man.' ' Accordingly,' says he, 
 ' our Father Filiutius joins to this a much more weighty 
 reason, tr. 29, c. 3, no. 51. It is, that we luoidd he 
 punished criminally for killing in this tvay.' ' 1 was 
 right in saying to you, father, that you would never 
 do any thing to the purpose, so long as you have not 
 the judges on your side.' ' The judges,' said the father, 
 'not penetrating to the conscience, only judge the out- 
 ward action; whereas, we look principally to the 
 motive, and hence it is, that our maxims are at times 
 somewhat different from theirs.' ' Be this as it may,' 
 said I, ' It follows very clearly from yours, that, 
 damage to the State avoided, we may kill evil speakers 
 with a safe conscience, provided we can do it with a 
 safe person. 
 
 ' But, father, after having provided so well for 
 honour, have you done nothing for property ? I know 
 that this is of less importance, but no matter. It seems 
 to me, that we might properly direct our intention so 
 as to kill in preserving it.' ' Yes,' said the father, 
 ' and I have touched on a matter which may have 
 given you this hint. All our casuists agree, and even 
 permit it. " Although we no longer dread any violence 
 from those who rob us of our property as when they 
 
ASSASSINATION. 
 
 147 
 
 are in flight." Azor, of our Society, proves it, p. 3, 1. 
 2, e. 1, q. 20.' 
 
 ' But, father, what must the value of a thing be to 
 carry us to this extremity V ' It is necessary, according 
 to Reginald, 1. 21, c. o, n. 06 ; and Tanneras, in 22, 
 (lisp. 4, q. 8, d. 4, n. 09, " that the thing be of great 
 service in the judgment of a man of skill." Layman 
 and Filiutius speak in the same way.' ' That is saying 
 nothing, father ; where will we go to look for a n\an 
 whom it is so rare to meet, in order to make this 
 vahiation ? Why do they not determine the sum ex- 
 actly?' 'How,' said the father, 'was it so easy a 
 matter in your opinion, to estimate the life of a man, 
 and a Christian in money ? Here I wish to make you 
 feel the necessity of our casuists. Search in all the 
 ancient Fathers for how much it is lawful to kill a 
 man. What will they nay, mm occidcfi : thou shalt 
 not kill.' 'And who, then, has been bold enough to 
 determine this sam ?' rejoined I. 'Our great and 
 incomparable Molina, the glory of our Company, who, 
 by his inimitable prudence, has valued it " at six or 
 seven ducats, for which lie oflirms that it is lawful to 
 kill, though he who Is carrying them otf is in flight." 
 It is in his t. 4, tr. 3, disp. 16, d. 0. And he says, more- 
 over, at the same place, that " he would not presume 
 to condemn a man as guilty of any sin who kills one, 
 wishinnr to inh him of a thing of the value of a crown 
 or less : iiniits aurei, vel minoris ddhic valoris." 
 Which has led Escobar to lay dowu this general rule, 
 
 f ; '■ 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 ill 
 
 3 
 
 m 
 
 
 ■ ■ '. 
 
 r 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 -if ,' 
 
 
 ^ !_ 
 
 liiil;!! 
 
 r 
 1 
 
 
 ,: i. !; 1 ; 
 
 Ei 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 Bl 
 
 i '1 
 
 .) 
 
 i ! ;l 
 
 I i 
 
 1 : i ,ij 
 its 
 
 ii; I 
 
 M 
 
 it 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 ;' 1 
 
 1 
 
 • 
 
 
 I 
 
 i£ 
 
 mi 
 
148 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 n. 44, that " regularly we may kill a man for the value 
 of a crown, according to Molina.'" 
 
 ' Dear father, where can Molina have been enlight- 
 ened to determine a thing of this importance, without 
 any aid from Scripture, Councils, or Fathers ? I see 
 plainly that on the subject of murder, as well as that 
 of grace, he must have had special light, and light of 
 a very different kind from St. Augustine. I am now 
 very learned on this chapter, and I know perfectly, 
 that none but churchmen will henceforth abstain from 
 slaying those who injure them, either in their honour 
 or their goods.' 'What do you mean?' replied the 
 father, * would it, in your opinion, be reasonable that 
 those whom we ought to respect most of all, should 
 alone be exposed to the insolence of the wicked ? Our 
 fathers have provided against this irregularity. For 
 Tanneras, tom. 2, d. 4, q. 8, d. 4, n. 76, says, " that it is 
 lawful for ecclesiastics and even monks to kill, in 
 defending not only their life but also their property, 
 or that of their community." Molina, as reported by 
 Escobar, n. 43 ; Becan, in 2, 2, t. 2, q. 7 ; de Hom. concl. 
 2, n. 5 ; Reginald, 1. 2, c. 5, n. 68 ; Layman, 1. 3, tr. 3, 
 p. 3, c. 3, n. 4 ; Lessius, 1. 2, c. 9, d. li, n. 72 ; and others, 
 all use the same words. 
 
 ' And, even according to our celebrated Father L'Aiiiy, 
 it is lawful for priests and monks to be beforehand 
 with those who would blacken them by calumnies, by 
 killing them as a means of prevention ; but always by 
 carefully directing the intenti'^n, Here are the terms, 
 t. 5, disp. 36, n. 118: "It is lawful for an ecclesiastic, 
 
 fl 
 
 iU 
 
„ "'"Wl 
 
 I 
 
 ASSASSINATION. 
 
 149 
 
 a monk, to kill a calumniator, who threatens to publish 
 scandalous charojes af];ainst his community or himself, 
 when this is the only means of preventing it, as when 
 he is ready to circulate his slanders if not promptly 
 despatched. For, in this case, as the monk might 
 lawfully kill, on wishing to deprive him of life, it is 
 also lawful to kill him who would rob him or his 
 community of honour, in the same way as men of the 
 world might." ' 
 
 ' I did not know that,' said I, ' but J merely believed 
 the contrary without thinking, from having heard say, 
 that the Church is so abhorrent of blood, that it does 
 not even permit ecclesiastical judges to officiate in 
 criminal trials.' ' Do not rest upon that,' said he, ' our 
 Father L'Amy proves this doctrine very well, although 
 with a feeling of humility becoming this great man, 
 he submits to prudent readers. And Caramuel, our 
 illustrious defender, who refers to it in his Funda- 
 mental Theology, p. 543, thinks it is so certain as to 
 maintain that ilie contrary is not probable ; and he 
 draws admirable inferences from it, for instance, this 
 one which he calls the conclu)iion of conclusions, con- 
 dttsionum conclasio: " that a priest not onl}' may, on 
 certain occasions, kill a calumniator, but that there are 
 occasions in which he ought to do it ; et'iain aliqiiando 
 occidcre." ' On this principle he examined several new 
 questions, for example, the following. Whether the 
 Jesuits may kill the Jansenists ? ' That, father,' 
 exclaimed I, * is a wonderful point of theology, and I 
 hold the Jansenists dead already by the doctrine of 
 
 :1 
 
 'Mill! 
 
 '!ii 
 
 t '; 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 t ,\u 
 
150 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 ^ f^'i 
 
 ii'i :\ ■■;! 
 
 Father L'Amy,' ' There you are caught,' said the 
 father, ' Caramuel infers the contrary from the same 
 principles.' ' How so, father ? ' ' Because,' said he, ' they 
 do not hurt reputation. Here are his words, n. 1140, 
 1147, pp. 547, 548: "The Jansenists call the Jesuits 
 Pelagians ; might we kill them for that ? No, inas- 
 much as the Jansenists no more obscure the lustre of 
 our company than an owl that of the sun ; on the con- 
 trary they have heightened it, though contrary to 
 their intention; occidi non possiuit, quia nocere non 
 potuerunt." ' 
 
 ' Eh, father ? then the lives of the Jansenists depend 
 only on whether or not they hurt your reputation ? 
 If so, I consider them far from safe. For, if it becomes 
 probable in any degree, however small, that they injure 
 you, from that moment they may be slain without 
 scruple. You will make an argument of it in form, 
 and then, with a direction of intention, nothing more 
 is necessary for despatching a man with a safe con- 
 science. Happy the people who are unwilling to suffer 
 injuries, in being instructed in your doctrine ! But 
 how unhappy those who offend them ! In truth, 
 father, itwould be as well to have to do with people of 
 no relifjion, as with those who have learned it to the 
 extent of this direction. For, after all, the intention 
 of him who wounds is no comfort to him who is 
 wounded ; he does not perceive this secret direction, 
 and he only feels that of the blow which smites him. 
 I even know not a '^ether it would not be less galling 
 to be brutally murdered by an infuriated man, than 
 
 ii Hi 1 
 
ASSASSINATION. 
 
 151 
 
 to feel one's self poignarded conscientiously by a 
 devotee. 
 
 ' In good sooth, father, I am somewhat surprised at 
 all this : and those questions of Fathers L'Amy and 
 Caramuel do not please me.' ' Why,' said the father, 
 ' are you Jansenist ? ' 'I have another reason,' said I ; 
 ' from time to time, I give one of my friends in the 
 country an account of what I learn of the maxims of 
 your fathers. And though I only simply report and 
 taiibfully quote their words, I kpow not, nevertheless, 
 but some odd fellow might be met with who, imagining 
 that this does you harm, might draw from your prin- 
 ciples some wicked conclusion.' ' Go to,' said the 
 father, ' no mischief will happen you ; I will be 
 caution. Know that what our fathers have printed 
 themselves, and with the approbation of their superiors, 
 it is neither bad nor dangerous to publish.' 
 
 I write you, then, on the word of this worthy father ; 
 but what always fails me is paper, not quotations. 
 The latter are so many and so strong that, to give all, 
 wouhl require volumes. 
 
 I am, etc. 
 
 is; i 
 
 <l 
 
 
 ! I 
 
 r. 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
■I ■)' 
 
 if 
 
 s I '■ ,r i 
 
 i;!' ^'i 
 
 LETTEK EIGHTH. 
 
 CORRUPT MAXIMS OF THE CASUISTS CONCERNING JUDGES, USURERS, 
 THE CONTRACT MOHATRA, BANKRUPTS, RESTITUTION, ETC. 
 VARIOUS EXTRAVAGANCES OF THE CASUISTS. 
 
 Paris. 
 
 Sir, — You did not think there would be any curi- 
 osity to know who we are, and yet people are trying to 
 guess at it, but with little success. Some take me for 
 a doctor of Sorbonne. Others ^ive my letters to three 
 or four individuals, who, like myself, are neither 
 priests nor ecclesiastics. All these false guesses only 
 tell me that I have tolerably succeeded in my inten- 
 tion of being known only to yourself, and the worthy 
 father, who always tolerates my visits, and whose 
 harangues I always tolerate, though with great diffi- 
 culty. I am obliged to keep myself xn check, for he 
 would not continue were he to perceive that I am 
 shocked, and I should thus be unable to keep my 
 promise of acquainting you with their system of mor- 
 ality; I assure you you should give me some credit for 
 the violence which I do to my own feelings. It is very 
 painful to see Christian morality completely over- 
 thrown by these monstrosities without daring openly 
 to contradict them. But, after having borne so much 
 for your satisfaction, I believe I shall break out at 
 
r ;T-T^' 
 
 BRIBERY. 
 
 153 
 
 last for my own, when he has no more to tell me ; 
 meanwhile, I will use as much self-restraint as possible ; 
 for the less I say, the more he tells me. He told me so 
 much the last time, that I shall have great difficulty 
 in repeating the whole of it. You will find principles 
 vory convenient for avoiding restitution. For what- 
 ever be the mode in which he glosses his maxims, 
 those which I am about to explain go in eflfect to 
 favour corrupt judges, usurers, bankrupts, thieves, pros- 
 titutes, sorcerers, who are all very liberally discharged 
 from restoring what they gain in their different lines. 
 This is what I learned from the worthy father on this 
 occasion. 
 
 At the commencement of our interview, he said, ' I 
 engaged to explain the maxims of our authors, in 
 regard to all classes of society. You have already seen 
 those relating to beneficed persons, priests, monks, 
 servants, and gentlemen ; let us now extend our 
 survey to others, and begin with judges. 
 
 ' I will, in the first place acquaint you with one of 
 the most important and advantageous maxims which 
 our fathers have taught in their favour. It is from 
 our learned Castro Palao, one of our four-and-twenty 
 elders. Here are his words. " May a judge, in a 
 question of law, decide according to a probable opin- 
 ion, while abandoning the most probable ? Yes, and 
 even against his own conviction. Imo contra propriam 
 opinUmem." This is also referred to by our Father 
 Escobar, tr. 6, ex. 6, n. 45.' ' O father,' said I, ' here is a 
 fine beginning ; the judges are much obliged to you ; 
 
 n 
 
 >\il 
 
 m 
 it t , 
 
 ■;■? 
 
 ii 
 
 :l 
 
 I. n 
 
 !, ■ i 
 
 .'I 
 
 
 n 
 
 : il 
 
 ^^i 
 
 I 
 
 ^MS 
 

 154 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 and I consider it very strange that they oppose your 
 probabilities as we have sometimes observed, since 
 they are so favourable to them. For you thereby give 
 them the same power over the fortunes of men that 
 you have given yourselves over consciences.' ' You 
 see,' said he, ' that we do not act from interest ; we 
 have had regard only to the quiet of their consciences, 
 and it is here that our great Molina has laboured so 
 usefully on the subject of presents made to them. To 
 remove the scruples which they might have in taking 
 them on certain occasions, he has been careful to 
 enumerate all the cases in which they can conscien- 
 tiously receive them, unless there be some special law 
 prohibiting it. It is in his t. 1, tr. 2, d. 88, n. 6. Here 
 they are, " Judges may receive presents from parties 
 when they give them either from friendship or grati- 
 tude for the justice which has been done them, or to 
 dispose them to render it in future, or to oblige them 
 to take a particular care of their business, or to engage 
 them to give it quick despatch." Our learned Escobar 
 also speaks of it in this way, tr. 6, ex. 6, n. 43. " If 
 there are several persons, none of whom is more en- 
 titled to despatch than the others, would it be wrong 
 in the judge to take a present from one on condition 
 in pado, of despatching his case first ? Certainly not, 
 according to Layman, for he does no injury to the 
 others, according to natural law, when he grants to the 
 one in consideration of his present what ne might have 
 granted to any one he pleased, and even being under 
 equal obligation towards all, from the equality of their 
 
BRIBERY. 
 
 155 
 
 right, he becomes more obliged towards him who 
 makes the gift, which binds him to prefer him to 
 others, and this preference seems to admit of being 
 estimated by money. Qum obligatio vkletiir pretio 
 (iHtiinahilis.'" ' 
 
 ' Reverend father,' said I, ' I am surprised at this 
 permission whicli the first magistrate of tlie kingdom 
 does not yet know. For the first chief President 
 brought a bill into Parliament to prevent certain 
 officers of court from taking money for this sort 
 of preference. This shows he is far from thinking 
 that judges may Lawfully do so, and this reform, so 
 useful to all parties, has been universally applauded.' 
 The good father, surprised at my language, replied, 
 ' Is that true ? 1 knew nothing of it. Our opinion is 
 only probable, the contrary is probable also.' ' In- 
 deed, father,' said I, ' it is considered that the Presi- 
 dent has more than probably done right, and that he 
 has thereby arrested a course of corruption which was 
 well known, and had been too long permitted.' ' I 
 think so, too,' said the father, ' but let us pass this, let 
 us leave the judges.' ' You are right,' said I, ' besides, 
 they are not duly grateful for what you do for them.' 
 ' It is not that,' said the father, ' but there is so much 
 to say upon all, that it is necessary to be brief upon 
 each. 
 
 ' Let us now speak of men of business. You know 
 that the greatest difficulty which we have with them 
 is to dissuade them from usury, and it is of this ac- 
 cordingly that our fathers have taken a particular 
 
 ': |i 
 
 t! ' 
 
 ■ 1 
 
 \ 1 1 i 
 
 a 
 
 
 ■t:i ,} 
 
 ill: 
 
 I r 
 
 S:-l, 
 
 t . 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 ^ i 
 
 ii 
 
 111 
 
 il 
 
'I 3 a :( 
 
 II; 
 
 I H 'I 
 
 156 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 \i •-, 
 
 i 
 
 1 :' : i ^ 
 
 1 ill 
 
 care, for such is their detestation of this vice, that 
 Escobar says, tr. 3, ex. 5, n. 1 : To say that usury is 
 not a sin would he heresy. And our fatlier Bauni in 
 the Sum of Sins, ch. 14, fills several pages with tlie 
 penalties due to usurers. He declares them iv famous 
 during life, and unworthy of hiirial after their death.' 
 ' O father, I did not think him so severe.' ' He is 
 when he ought,' said he, ' but this learned casuist hav- 
 ing also observed that men are enticed to usury 
 merely by the desire of gain, says at the same place, 
 " It would be no small obligation to the world, if, 
 while guaranteeing them from the bad effects of usur}', 
 and, at the same time, from the sin which is the cause 
 of it, we were to furnish them with the means of 
 drawing as nmch and more profit from their money, 
 by some good and legitimate employment, than they 
 draw from usury." ' ' No doubt, father, there would 
 be no usurers after that.' ' And this is the reason,' 
 said he, ' why he has furnished a general method for 
 all classes of persons, gentlemen, presidents, coun- 
 sellors, etc., and one so easy that it consists merely in 
 the use of certain words, which are to be pronounced 
 when lending money, in consequence of which, they 
 may draw profit from it without fear of its being 
 usurious, which, doubtless, it would otherwise be.' 
 ' What are these mysterious terms, father ? ' Here 
 they are, and in the very words, for you know that he 
 has written his Sum of Sins in French, to he under- 
 stood by all the tuorld, as he says in his Preface. " He 
 from whom money is asked, will answer in this way . 
 
 '\iin 
 
7 ft 
 
 USURY. 
 
 157 
 
 I have no money to lend, though T have to lay out for 
 honest and lawful profit. If you wish the sum you 
 ask, to turn it to account by your industry, half gain, 
 half loss, I may perhaps agree. It is true, indeed, that 
 as there might be too much difficulty in arranging 
 about the profit, if you would secure me in a certain 
 Riiiovmt, and in the principal also, which is to run no 
 risk, we might more easily come to an agreement, and 
 I will let you have the money forthwith." Is not this 
 a very easy method of gaining money without sin ? 
 And is not Father Bauni right when, concluding his 
 explanation of this method, he says : " Here, in my 
 opinion, is a method by which a vast number of 
 persons in the world, who, by their usury, extortion, 
 and illicit contracts, provoke the just indignation of 
 God, may save themselves while drawing full, fair, 
 and lawful profits." ' 
 
 ' father,' said I, ' these are very potent words ! 
 Doubtless they have some hidden virtue to drive away 
 usury, which I do not understand ; for I have always 
 thourdit that this sin consisted in getting back more 
 money than was lent.' ' You know very little of this 
 matter,' said he. ' Usury, according to our fathers, con- 
 sists almost entirely in the intention of drawing this 
 profit as usarious. And this is why our Father Escobar 
 makes it practicable to avoid usury by a simple change 
 of intention. It is at t. 3, ex. 5, n. 4, 33, 34. " It 
 would be usurious," he says, " to take profit from those 
 to whom we lend, if it were demanded as due in strict 
 justice ; but if demanded as due from gratitude, it 
 
 n 
 
 »i' 
 
 I .' 
 
 ¥ 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 \ L 
 
i 
 
 
 III 
 
 
 '"• 
 
 1 
 
 ( 
 
 :ili 
 
 11'^^ 
 
 
 m 
 
 Mm 
 
 Wm'\ 
 
 [ 
 
 |l 
 
 J 
 
 itt ^ ' 
 
 
 J 3 ■'■ 
 
 ' 
 
 ;■ ijlj ^ 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 158 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTFIIS. 
 
 is not usury." And at n. .S : " It is lawful not to 
 intend direct protit from money lent, but to claim it 
 through the medium of the f^ood will of him to whom 
 it was lent. Media benevolent id is not usury." 
 
 ' These are subtle methods, but one of the best, in 
 my opinion (for we have a choice of them), is that of 
 the contract Mohatra.' ' The contract Mohatra, father ! ' 
 ' I see,' said he, ' you don't know what it is. There is 
 nothing strange but the name. Escobar will explain 
 it to you, tr. G, ex. 3, n. 36. *' The contract Mohatra 
 is that by wliich goods are purchased dear, and on 
 credit, with the view of selling them back to the seller 
 for ready money and cheap." ' This is tlie contract 
 Mohatra, from which you see tliat a certain sum is 
 received in hand while you remain bound for a larger 
 sum.' ' But I suppose, father, nobody but Escobar has 
 ever used the term ; do any other books spealv of it r 
 ' How little you know of things,' said the father ; 
 ' the last book of Moral Theology, printed at Paris this 
 very year, speaks of the Mohatra, and learnedly. Its 
 title is Epilogus Summarum, and is, as the title page 
 bears, "an abridgment of all the Sums of Theology 
 taken from our fathers Suarez, Sanchez, Lessius 
 Hurtado, and other celebrated casuists." You will see 
 them at p. 54. " The Mohatra is : when a man who is 
 in want of twenty pistoles, purchases goods from a 
 merchant for thirty pistoles, payable in a year, ami 
 sells them back to him on the spot for twenty pistoles, 
 cash." You see from this, that the Mohatra is not a 
 term that has never been heard of.' ' Well, father, is 
 
THE CONTRACT MOHATRA. 
 
 159 
 
 this contract lawful ? ' ' Escobar,' replied the father, 
 'says at the same place, that there, ure l(i>rs which 
 prohitnt it under vcrij strict pevnlties.' ' It is useless, 
 then, father.' ' Not at all,' said he, ' for Escobar at the 
 same place, gives expedients for making it lawful. 
 "Aithou^^h the principal intention of him who sells 
 and buys back is to make profit, provided always that 
 in selling he does not take more than the hi;^diest price 
 of goods of this sort, and in buying back, does not go 
 below the lowest price, and that there is no previous 
 apjreement in express terms or otherwise." But Les- 
 sius, de Just., 1. 2, c. 21, d. 16, says, tbat " though the 
 sale may have been made with the intention of l)uying 
 back cheaper, there never is any obligation to return 
 the profit, unless, perhaps from charity, in the ca.se 
 where the other party is in poverty, and also, provided 
 it can be returned without inconvenience ; si commode 
 potest." After this, there is no more to be said.' ' In 
 fact, father, I believe greater indulgence would be 
 sinful.' ' Our fathers,' says he, ' know well where to 
 stop. From this you plainly see the utility of the 
 iMohatra. 
 
 l ' "■ many other methods which I might teach 
 
 • on ; but these are sufiticient, and I have to speak to 
 you of tl se whose attairs are in disorder. Our fathers 
 hnve thought how to solace them, in the state in which 
 
 iiey are. For, if they have not means enough to sub- 
 sist decently, and, it the same time, pay their debts, 
 they are permittee I to put away a part from their 
 creditors and declare them.selves bankrupt. This is 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 '1' 
 
 y 
 
 hi* 
 
 II 
 
 ' 4 
 
 1 ■ . 
 i 
 
 >| '! 
 
 1 
 
 ij 
 
 I'lM: 
 
 ' ■ * '' ' J 
 
 If? !■! 
 ; iv. 
 
 P 
 
\ 
 
 
 M- 
 
 Si 4.9^1 
 
 160 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 what our Father Lessius has decided, and Escobar 
 confirms, tr. 8, ex. 2, n. 163, " Can he who becomes 
 bankrupt, retain with a safe conscience as much of his 
 efiects as may be necessary for the respectable main- 
 tenance of his family ; ne indecovc vivat ? I say yes, 
 with Lessius, and even though he may have gained 
 them by injustice and criires notorious to all the 
 world; ex injtistitia et votorio delicto;" although, in 
 this case, he may not retain so large a quantity as h(> 
 might otherwise have done.' ' How, father, by what 
 strange charit}'' will you have these effects to remain 
 with him who has gained them by thievish tricks, f(jr 
 his respectable subsistence, rather than with his credi- 
 tors, to whom they legitimately belong ? ' ' It is im- 
 possible,' said the father, ' to please every bodj'-, and 
 our fathers have thought particularly of solacing these 
 pooi' wretches. In favour of the indigeiit also, our 
 great Vasquez, quoted by Castro Palao, torn, i, tr. G, d, 
 6, p. 6, n. 12, says, that " when we see a thief resolved 
 and ready to steal from a poor person, we may dissuade 
 him, by calling his attention to some particularly 
 wealthy individual to steal from instead of the other." 
 If you have not Vasquez or Castro Palao, you will find 
 the same thing in your Escobar ; for, as you know, 
 almost every thing is taken from twenty-four of the 
 most celebrated of our fathers. It is tr. 5, ex. 5, n. 
 120. The practice of ovr Society in regard to charily 
 toivards our neiijhhour.' 
 
 ' It is a very extraordinary charity, father, to pre- 
 vent the loss of the one by the injury of the other. 
 
J V, ■ 
 
 ! 1 
 
 1 .1 
 
 i :il 
 
 
 THEFT. 
 
 161 
 
 But I think the thing should be made complete, and 
 
 that he who gives the counsel should be obliged, in 
 
 conscience, to restore to the rich man what he may 
 
 have made him lose.' ' Not at all,' said he, ' for he did 
 
 not steal from him himself ; he only counselled the 
 
 other to do it. Now, listen to this sage solution of 
 
 our Father Bauni, on a case which will astonish you 
 
 still more, and in \;hich you would think yourself 
 
 much more obliged to restore. It is at ch. 13 of his 
 
 Sum. Here are the words in his own French. " Some 
 
 one entreats a soldier to beat his neighbour, or to set 
 
 fire to the granary of a person who has offended him, 
 
 and it is asked if, failing the soldier, the «ne who 
 
 asked him to do the outrage, should, out of his own 
 
 substance, repair the evil which has ensued. ^ly 
 
 opinion is no. For no man is bound to restitution 
 
 who has not violated justice. Is it violated by asking 
 
 a favour of another ? Whatever request we make, he 
 
 is always free to grant it or deny it. To whatever 
 
 side he inclines, it is his will that determines him ; 
 
 nothing obliges him to do it, but kindness, civility and 
 
 a facile temper. Should the soldier, then, not repair 
 
 the evil which he does, it would not be riirlit ho ';orn- 
 
 pel him at whose entreaty he injured the innocent.'" 
 
 This passage well nigh put an end to our colloquy, for 
 
 1 was on the point of bursting into a fit of laughter at 
 
 the Idndness and civility of the firer of a barn, and at 
 
 the strange arguments for exempting the prime and 
 
 true culprit in tire-raising from restitution, whom the 
 
 judires would not exempt from death ; but if I had not 
 
 II 
 
 '■'■I 
 
 f\ 
 
 n 
 
 !|1 
 
 ^Ml 
 
 1i 
 
 \M 
 
 u 
 
 % IjsJiilt! 
 
 mn 
 
ifwr 
 
 i' V ■ I 
 
 } ii ! m ki' M' ,t^' 
 
 Hiffis: 
 
 '!':, 
 
 li^i 
 
 162 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 checked myself, the good father would have been 
 offended ; for he spoke seriously, and afterwards said 
 to me with the same air : 
 
 ' You ought to see by all these proofs how vain your 
 objections are, and yet they divert us from our subject. 
 Let us return, then, to persons ancomfortably situated, 
 for whose comfort our fathers, among others Lessius, 
 1. 2, c. 12, n. 12, affirms that it is laiuful to steal not 
 only in an extreme necessity, hut also in a grave 
 necessity, though not extreme. Escobar also quotes 
 him tr. i, ex. 9, n. 29.' 'This is surprising, father; 
 there are few people in the world who do not consider 
 their necessity grave, and to whom you do not tluis 
 give power to steal with a safe conscience. And, 
 though you should confine the permission only to per- 
 sons who are actually in this state, you open the door 
 to an infinite number of petty thefts, which the 
 judges would punish notwithstanding of this grave 
 necessity, and which you are bound a fortiori to 
 repress; you who ought not only to maintain justice 
 among men, but also charity, which this principle 
 destroys. For, do we not violate it, and injure oiir 
 neighbour when we cause him to lose his property 
 that we may ourselves profit by it ? So I have hither- 
 to been taught.' * It is not always so,' said the fatlier, 
 ' for our great Molina has taught us, t. 2, tr. 2, disp. 
 328, n. 8, that " the rule of charity does not recjuire us 
 to deprive ourselves of a profit in order thereby to 
 save our neighbour from an equal loss" Tliis lie 
 shows in order to prove, as he had undertaken at that 
 
ILLICIT GAINS. 
 
 163 
 
 place, that " we are not obliged in conscience to restore 
 the goods which another might have given us to de- 
 fraud his creditors." And Lessius, who maintains the 
 same view, confirms it by this same principle, 1. 2, c. 
 20, n. 168. 
 
 ' You have not pity enough for those who are ill at 
 ease ; our fathers have had more charity than that. 
 They render justice to the poor, as well as to the rich. 
 I say much more ; they render it even to sinners. For, 
 although they are very much opposed to those who 
 commit crimes, they nevertheless teach that the goods 
 (rained by crime may be lawfully retained. This 
 Lessius teaches generally, 1. 2, c. 14, d. 8. " We are 
 not ol>liged," says be, " either by the law of nature or 
 positive law, in oth^r words, no law obliges us to 
 restore what we have received for committing a crimi- 
 nal act, as adultery, although this act be contrary to 
 justice." For, as Escobar, quoting Lessius, says, tr. 1, 
 ex. 8, n. 59, " the property which a wife acquires by 
 adultery is truly gained by an unlawful jioans; but 
 nevertheless, the possession is lawful; Qaavivis mulier 
 illicUe acquirat, I'lclfe famen retinet (icqaisita." And 
 this is the reason why the most celebrated of our 
 fathers formally decicte, that what a judge takes from 
 a party with a bad cau.se, to give an unjust decree in 
 his favour, and what a soldier receives for murdering 
 a man, and what is gained by infamous crimes, may 
 be lawfully retained. This, Escobar collects out of our 
 authors, and brings together, tr. 3, ex. 1, n. 23, where 
 he lays down this general rule : " Property acquired 
 
 '•i 
 
 I ' 
 
 m 
 
 ^1, 
 
 
mm •' ! 
 
 Irlii 
 
 iiiliil 
 
 iLilill 
 
 1 
 
 r' 
 
 n 
 
 33' 
 
 
 
 
 m i ' 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 1; 
 
 ;1 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 Hh^ a 1 
 
 1 
 
 HUH ' '' 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 >£^ 
 
 It 
 
 JgL,^ 
 
 164 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 by shameful methods, as by murder, an unjust sen- 
 tence, a dishonest action, etc., is possessed lawfully, 
 and there is no obligation to restore it." And again, 
 tr. 5, ex. 6, n. 53 : " We may dispose of what we receive 
 for murder, unjust sentences, infamous sins, etc., be- 
 cause the possession is just, and we acquire the 
 dominion and property of things which are so gained." ' 
 ' dear, father,' said I, ' I never heard of this mode of 
 acquiring, and I doubt if any court of justice will sanc- 
 tion it, and regard assassination, injustice and adultery 
 as good titles.' ' I know not,' said the father, ' what 
 books of law may say, but 1 know that ours, which 
 are the true regulators of conscience, speak as I do. 
 It is true they except one case in which they make 
 restitution obligatory. It is, " when money has been 
 received from tho.se who have not the power of dispos- 
 ing of their property, as children in family, and monks." 
 For our great Molina excepts them, de Just., t. 1, tr. 2, 
 disp. 94 : nisi mulicr accepisset ah eo qui alienare tion 
 potest, ut a religioso ct Jiliu-familias. For then the 
 money must be restored. E.scobar quotes this passarje, 
 tr. 1, ex. 8, n. 59, and he confirms the same thing, tr. 3, 
 ex. 1, n. 23.' 
 
 ' Reverend father,' said I, ' I see monks better treated 
 here than others.' ' Not at all,' .said the father, ' is 
 not as much done for minors generally, and monks are 
 minors all their lives ? It is just to except them. IJut, 
 with regard to all others, there is no obligation to 
 restore what is received from them for a bad action. 
 Lessius proves it at large, de Just., 1. 2, c. 14, d. 8, n. 52. 
 
'^I 
 
 reated 
 \er, 'is 
 lUs are 
 , l^ut, 
 ion to 
 action. 
 ,, n. 52. 
 
 ILLICIT GAINS. 
 
 165 
 
 " For," say.s he, " a wicked action may be estimated in 
 money, considering the advantage received by him 
 who causes it to be done, and the trouble taken by 
 him who executes it ; and this is the reason why there 
 is no obligation to restore what is received for doing 
 it, be its nature what it may, murder, unjust sentence, 
 filthy action " (for these are the examples which he 
 uniformly employs on this subject), " unless it has 
 been received from those who have not power to dis- 
 pose of their property. You may say, perhap.s, that 
 ho who receives money for giving a wicked stroke 
 sins, and thus can neither take it nor retain it ; but I 
 reply, tliat, after the thing is executed, there is no 
 longer any sin either in paying or receiving payment." 
 ' Our great Filiutius enters still more into practical 
 detail, for he observes, " that we are obliged in con- 
 science to pay acts of this sort differently, according 
 to the different conditions of the persons who commit 
 them, and as some are worth more than other.s." This 
 he establishes on solid ground, tr. 31, c. 9, n. 231 : 
 occulta- fornicariw debet ar pretium in conscientla, et 
 iiiulto ma/jore ratione, quam jyuhliac. Copla eniiii 
 (juain occhlta facit rmdier siii corporis, multo plus 
 valet quam ea quam publica facit meretrix, nee idla 
 est lex positiva quae reddat cam incapacem pretii 
 Idem discendum de j^^'^tio promisso virgini, conju- 
 g(d(i', moniali, et cuicumque alii Est enim omnium 
 eudem ratio.' 
 
 He afterwards showed, in his authors, things of this 
 nature so infamous that I dare not report them, and 
 
 i 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 M 
 
 ^1 
 
 ni' 
 
 1 1 
 
 I 
 
 iilLiiki-i:-li.t.»i..^ 
 
hi I 
 
 Ul 
 
 166 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 I ( 
 
 ■f! 
 
 11; I' 
 
 ! ' , '! 
 
 f l! 1 I 
 
 1 u 
 
 at which he himself would have been horrified, for he 
 is a worthy man, but for the respect he has for his 
 fathers, which makes him venerate every thing that 
 comes from that quarter. Meanwhile I was silent, less 
 from any intention to make him continue this subject 
 than from surprise, at seeing the writings of monks full 
 of decisions at once so horrible, unjust, and ext^ iva- 
 gant. He therefore continued his discourse at free »m, 
 and concluded thus : ' Hence our illustrious Molina 
 (after this I believe you will be satisfied) thus decides 
 the question : " When a man has received money for 
 doing a wicked action, is he obliged to restore it ? We 
 must distinguish," says this great man ; " if he has not 
 done the act, for which he has been paid, the money 
 must be restored ; but if he has done it, there is no 
 such obligation ;" si non fecit hoc malum, tenet ur 
 restituere ; secas, si fecit. This is what Escobar re- 
 lates, tr. 3, ex. 2, n. 138. 
 
 ' Such are some of our principles touching restitu- 
 tion. You have been well instructed in thein 
 to-day. I wish now to see how far you have profited. 
 Answer me, then: "Is a judge who has received 
 money from one of the parties, to give decree in his 
 favour, obliged to restore it?"' 'You have just told 
 me no, father.' ' I suspected as much,' .'^aid he : ' did I 
 say generally ? I told you that he is not obliged to 
 restore if he has given d 3ree in favour of the party 
 who is in the wrong. Biii, if he is in the right, would 
 you have him to pay for gaining what he was lawfully 
 entitled to ? You do not reason. Do you not perceive 
 
 ■ LjiMi «!L, k.j>^ 
 
ILLICIT GAINS. 
 
 167 
 
 tliat the juiii^o oiucs justice, and therefore cannot sell 
 it, but that he Joes not owe injustice, and therefore 
 may take money for it. Accordingly, all our principal 
 authors, as Molina, disp. 94, 99 ; Reginald, 1. 10, n. 84, 
 LS4, 185, 187; Filiutius, tr. 31, n. 220, 228; Escobar, 
 tr. 8, ex. 1, n. 21, 23 ; Lessius, lib. 2, c. 14, d. 8, n. 52 ; 
 unii'orinly teach, " that a judge is indeed obliged to 
 restore what he has received for doing justice, if it has 
 not been given him out of liberality, but is never 
 obliged to restore what he has received from a man 
 in whose favour he has given an unjust decree.'" 
 
 I was struck dumb by this fantastic decision, and 
 whilst I was considering the pernicious consequences 
 of it, the father prepared another question for me, and 
 said : ' Answer this time with more circumspection. I 
 now ask you. Is a man who deals in divination 
 obliged to restore the money ivhich he has gained by 
 practising it?' ' Just as you please, reverend father,' 
 said 1. ' How as I please ? Truly you are strange ! 
 It would seem from your way of speaking that truth 
 depends on our will. I see plainly you never could 
 discover this one of yourself. See Sanchez then solve 
 the difficulty, who indeed but Sanchez ! First he dis- 
 tinguishes in the Sum, 1. 2, c. 38, n. 94, 95, 90 : " where 
 the diviner has used only astrology and other natural 
 means, and where he has employed diabolic art." He 
 says that he is obliged to restore in one of the cases, 
 and in the other not. Will you now say in which ? ' 
 'There is no difficulty there,' said I. 'I see plainly 
 what you mean,' replied he, ' you think he ought to 
 
 ■ . '■ 'l ■ 
 
 
 i '! i f 
 
 ■ ! ai 
 
 
 M 
 
 ■'h 
 
 ftiHI 
 
 \ ■■\U k'\ 
 
 . ,1 
 
 1 :!; 
 
 1 , .,.11 
 
.; '< i 
 
 .} 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 ili 
 
 
 168 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 restore in the case where he has used the intervention 
 of demons ; but you do not understand the matter at 
 all, it is the very opposite. Here is Sanchez' solution 
 at the same place : " If the diviner has not taken the 
 trouble and the care to know by means of the devil 
 what he could not know otherwise ; si nullam operom 
 apposuit lot arie diaboli id sciret, he must restore, but 
 if he has taken the trouble, he is not obliged.'" ' And 
 how is that, father ? ' ' Do you not understand ?' said 
 he. ' It is because we may truly divine by the art of 
 the devil, whereas astrology is a false method.' ' But, 
 father, if the devil does not answer truly, for he is sel- 
 dom more true than astrology, the diviner must then, 
 for the same reason, restore.' ' Not always,' said he. 
 " Distinguo," says Sanchez, upon that ; " For if the 
 diviner is ignorant in the diabolic art, si sit artes dia- 
 holica ignarus, he is obliged to restore ; but if he is a 
 skilful sorcerer, and has done his utmost to know the 
 truth, he is not obliged, for then the diligence of such 
 a sorcerer may be estimated in money. Diligentia a 
 mago apposita est pretio cestimahilis." ' ' That is sound 
 sense, father,' said I, ' for here is a means of inducing 
 sorcerers to become learned and expert in their art, 
 from the hope of gaining wealth legitimately, accord- 
 ing to your maxims, by faithfully serving the public' 
 ' I believe you are jesting,' said the father ; ' that is not 
 right ; for, were you to speak thus in places where 
 you are not known, there might be persons who would 
 take your words in bad part, and charge you with 
 turning the things of religion into derision.' ' I would 
 
 :i'' 
 
 1 i|,[^ 
 
'Tf^ 
 
 Illicit gains. 
 
 169 
 
 easily defend myself from the charpje, father ; for I 
 believe that if care is taken to ascertain the true mean- 
 ing of my words, not one will be found that does not 
 completely show the contrary ; and, perhaps in the 
 course of our interviews an opportunity will one day 
 occur of making this fully appear.' ' Ho, ho,' said the 
 father, ' you are not now laughing.' ' I confess to you,' 
 said I, ' that this suspicion of mocking sacred things 
 wouM touch me deeply, as it would be very unjust.' 
 ' I did not say so, altogether,' rejoined the father, ' but 
 let us speak more seriously.' ' I am quite disposed if 
 you wish it, father; it depends on you. But I acknow- 
 ledge to you, that I have been surprised at seeing that 
 your fathers have so far extended their care to all 
 classes, that they have been pleased even to regulate 
 the legitimate gains of sorcerers.' ' It is impossible,' said 
 the father, ' to write for too many people, or to be too 
 particular with the cases, or to repeat the same things 
 too often in different books. You will see it plainly 
 from this passage of one of the greatest of our fathers, 
 as you may suppose him to be, since he is at present 
 our Father Provincial. It is the Reverend Father 
 Cellot in his Hierarchy, 1. 8, c. 16, sec. 2. " We know," 
 says he, " that a person who was carrying a large sum 
 of money to restore it by order of his confessor, having 
 stopped by the way at a bookseller's, and asked if 
 there was nothing new, num quid novi, was shown a 
 new book of Moral Theology ; and, while carelessly 
 turning over the leaves without thinking, fell upon 
 his own case, and learned that he was not obliged to 
 
 ■ 1 a 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 . I 
 
 i n 
 
 i 
 
 ■ ' 1 
 
 
 
 ^ ^ 
 
 
 ' i 
 
 ' : \ 
 
 ' ,■ r. 
 
 ■ : c- : 
 
 ''i 
 
 1 ' 
 
 
 H' 
 
 i 
 
 \ 
 
 i' 1 
 
 M 
 
il ,4 
 
 tl 
 
 *'! 
 
 , 
 
 i'l 
 
 * ' 
 
 ' 1 
 
 ^\ 
 
 ; 
 
 1 
 
 ! 1 
 
 H 
 
 li 
 
 ilill:!;!! 
 
 
 I:' 
 
 ||i||i|: 
 
 170 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 restore, so that, being disencumbered of the burden ot' 
 his conscience, and still remaining burdened with the 
 weight of his money, he returned home greatly 
 lightened : ahjeda scrupidi sarcina, retento auri pon- 
 dere, levior dumurn repetit" 
 
 'After this, tell me whether it is useful to know our 
 maxims ? Will you now laugh at them ? Will you 
 not rather, with Father Cellot, make this pious reflec- 
 tion on the fortunate coincidence ? " Coincidences of 
 this sort are in God, the effect of his providence ; in 
 the guardian angel, the effect of his guidance ; and in 
 those to whom they happen, the effect of their predes- 
 tination. God, from all eternity, was pleased that the 
 golden chain of their salvation should depend on such 
 an author, and not on a hundred others, who say the 
 same thing because they do not happen to meet with 
 them. If the one had not written, the other would 
 not have been saved. Let us then beseech those by 
 the bowels of Christ, who blame the multitude of our 
 authors, not to envy them the books which the eternal 
 election of God and the blood of Jesus Christ has pro- 
 cured for them." Such are the tine words in which 
 this learned man so solidly proves the proposition 
 which he had advanced, namely, " the utility of having 
 a great number of writers on Moral Theology. Quam 
 utile sit de Tlieologia Morcdi Tnultos scrihere." ' 
 
 ' Father,' said I, * I will defer to another time de- 
 claring what my sentiment is in regard to this passage, 
 and at present will say no more than this, that if your 
 maxims are useful, and it is important to publish 
 
■T" 
 
 ILLICIT GAINS. 
 
 171 
 
 tlioni, you ouf^lit to continue to instruct me. For I 
 assure you, that the person to wliom I send them 
 shows them to a vast number of people. Not that we 
 liavc any intention of using them ourselves, but be- 
 cause, in fact, we think it useful that the world should 
 be fully informed of them.' 'Accordingly,' said he, 
 ' you see that 1 do not conceal them ; and, in continu- 
 ing, 1 will speak to you next occasion on the comforts 
 and conveniences of life, which our fathers permit, in 
 order to make salvation easy, and devotion pleasant. 
 Thus, after having learned what regards particular 
 conditions, you will learn what applies generally to 
 all, and thus nothing will be wanting to make your 
 instruction complete.' The father, after he had thus 
 spoken, left me. — I am, etc. 
 
 J have always forgotten to tell you that there are 
 Escobars of different editions. If you purchase, select 
 those of Lyons, with the frontispiece of a lamb on a 
 book sealed with seven seals, or those of the town of 
 Brussels. As these are the latest, they are better 
 and fuller than those of the previous editions of 
 our old city of Lyons. 
 
 m 1 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 I. • 
 
 rr 
 
 'IH 
 
 'Ml 
 
 1 ■:! 
 
 i t 
 
 ■it 
 
 ■■■'•!.' ' 
 
 1 ' 
 
ilill'^^ilii 
 
 : k 
 
 • I * 
 
 ,1 
 
 
 
 I'm 
 
 i 'li >iii 
 
 pi '5^ 
 
 -rf * - rl 
 
 II 
 
 LETTER NINTH. 
 
 OF SPURIOUS DEVOTION TO THE IJLESSED VIRGIN INTRODUCED HV 
 THE JESUITS. DIFFERENT EXPEDIENTS WHICH THEY HA\ i; 
 DEVISED TO SAVE THEMSELVES WITHOUT I'AIN, AND WHILE 
 ENJOYING THE PLEASURES AND COMFORTS OF LIFE. THEIK 
 MAXIMS ON AMBITION, ENVY, GLUTTONY, EQUIVOCATION, 
 MENTAL RESERVATION, FREEDOM ALLOWABLE IN GIRLS, 
 FEMALE DRESS, GAMING, HEARING MASS. 
 
 Paris. 
 
 Sir, — I will present my compliments in no higher 
 strain than the worthy father did to me the last time 
 I saw him. As soon as he perceived me, he came up, 
 and, with his eye on a book which he held in his hand, 
 said : " Would not he who should open paradise to 
 you do you an infinite service ? Would you not give 
 millions of gold to have the key to it, and to go in 
 whenever you pleased ? You need not be at so great 
 expense ; here is one worth a hundred more costly." 
 I knew not whether the good father was reading or 
 speaking from himself, but he removed my doubt by 
 saying, ' These are the first words of a fine work, by 
 Father Barri of our Society; for I never say anything 
 of myself.' ' What work, father ? ' said I. ' Here is 
 its title,' said he : ' Paradise opened to Philagio, by a 
 
 HBi«'':i' 
 
 I i. 
 
ill 
 
 SPURIOUS DEVOTION. 
 
 17^ 
 
 HuiidnMl Devotions to the Mother of God, of easy prac- 
 tice.' ' Wliat, father ! does each of tliese devotions 
 sulUce to open heaven ? ' ' Yes,' said he ; ' look at the 
 ,se(iuel of tlie words which you have heard, " The devo- 
 tions to the Mother ot* God, which you will find in this 
 book, are so many heavenly keys, which will com- 
 pletely open paradise, provided you practise them ; " 
 and therefore he concludes with sayin*,^ " that he is 
 satisfied if one only is practised." ' 
 
 ' Teach me, then, father, some of the most easy.' 
 Thoy are all so,' he replied ; ' for example, " to bow to 
 the blessed Virj^in on meeting any image of her : to 
 say the little chaplet of the ten pleasures of the 
 Virgin : frequently to pronounce the name of Mary : 
 to give permission to the angels to present our respects 
 to her : to wish to build more churches to her than all 
 monarchs together have built : to bid her good day 
 every morning, and good evening late at night : daily 
 to say the Ave Maria, in honour of the heart of Mary." 
 And he says that this devotion is sure, moreover, to 
 win the heart of the Virgin.' 'But, father,' said I, 
 ' that is, provided we also give her ours.' ' That is not 
 necessary,' said he, ' when one is too much attached 
 to the world.' ' Listen to him : " Heart to heart ; this, 
 indeed, is what ought to be, bat yours is somewhat too 
 umcli tied, clings somewhat too much to the creature. 
 Owing to this I dare not invite you at present, to offer 
 this little slave whom you call your heart." And thus 
 he contents himself with the Ave Maria which he 
 had recjuested. These are the devotions in pp. 33, 59, 
 
 1 
 
 ! 
 
 ul 
 
 n 
 
 
 ' ■ 
 
 ll 
 
 u 
 
 I I 
 
 1! 
 
i. ,. 
 
 .;! 
 
 
 1 
 
 •( .1 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 »wlir«i! tn 
 
 -11 
 
 
 i 
 
 174 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 15G, 172, 258, 420, first edition.' 'This i.s quite con- 
 venient,' said T, ' and I don't think anybody will be 
 damned after this.' ' Alas ! ' said the father, ' I see 
 plainly you know not how hard the hearts of some 
 people are. There are some who would not take the 
 trouble of daily saying Good day, Good evenimj, hiicsiune 
 that cannot be done without some effort of memory. 
 Hence, it vas necessary for Father Barri to furnish 
 them with practices still more easy, as " to keep a 
 chaplet night and day on the arm, in the form of a 
 bracelet, or «,o carry about one's person a rosary, or 
 image of the Virgin." These are the devotions at pp. 
 14, 320, 447. " Say now that I do not furnish you 
 with easy devotions to ac({uire the good graces of 
 Mary," as Father Barri expresses at p. 100.' 'This, 
 father,' said I, ' is extremely ea.sy.' ' Accordingly,' sai'l 
 he, ' it is all that could be done ; and I believe it will be 
 sufficient. A man must be a poor wretch, indeed, if he 
 will not spend a moment of his whole life inputting' 
 a chaplet on his arm, or a rosaiy in his pocket, and 
 thereby secure his salvation with such certainty, that 
 those who try it were never deceived by it, in what- 
 ever way they may have lived ; though we still counsel 
 them to live well. I will only give you at p. .'34, the 
 instance of a woman who, while daily practising the 
 devotions of bowing to tlie images of the Virgin, lived 
 all her life in mortal sin, and died at last in this state, 
 but was, nevertheless, saved through the merit of this 
 devotion.' ' How .so?' exclaimed I. ' Because,' said he, 
 ' our Lord raisea her from the dead, for the very pur- 
 
■ ifirf' 
 
 iiU 
 
 the 
 
 SPURIOUS DEVOTION. 
 
 175 
 
 pf)sc. So certain is it, that we cannot perish wliile we 
 practise some one of these devotions.' 
 
 ' in truthi, father, I know tliat devotions to the Virgin 
 are a powerful means of salvation, and that the least 
 have f,'reat merit when they proceed from feel infers of 
 faith «nd charity, as in the saints who have practised 
 them ; hut to persuade those who use them without 
 chanj^ing their bad lives, that they will be converted 
 at death, or that God will raise them again, seems to 
 me far more fitted to suj)port sirmers in their miscon- 
 duct, by the false peace which this rash confidence 
 ffives, than to turn them from it by the true conversion 
 which ijrace alone can effect.' ' What matter's it,' said 
 he, 'how we get into paradise, provided we do get in ?' 
 as was said on a similar subject, by our celebrated 
 Fatlicr Binnet, who was once our Provincial, in his 
 excellent treatise, On the Marks of Predestination, n. 
 81, p. LSO, of the fifteenth edition. "Whether by 
 leaping or tiying, what matters it, provided we take 
 the city of glory," as this father says, also, at the .same 
 phice ? 'I confess,' said T, 'that it is of no consequenc; 
 hut the question is, whether we shall so enter ? ' ' The 
 Virgin,' said he, ' guarante(;s it. Sec the last lirhjs of 
 Father Barri's treatise: "Suppose that at death the 
 enemy had some claim upon you, and that then; was 
 sedition in the little republic of your thoughts, you 
 have only to say that Mary is yovir surety, and that it 
 is to her he must a])ply." ' 
 
 ' P>ut, father, any one who chose to push that, would 
 puzzle you. Who assures us that the Virgin answers 
 
 iM 
 
 ■k5i u; 
 
 ^ I' 
 i eI I f i 
 
 ' •' § I f i 
 :'i|M 
 
i!:i 
 
 176 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 
 '. i 
 
 
 
 
 |i| ' 
 
 
 ■i f 
 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 i1 
 
 , i 
 
 
 : 1! 
 
 
 
 I 1 
 
 i 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 for us ? ' ' Father Barri,' said he, ' answers for her,' p. 
 465. "For the proHt and happiness which will accrue 
 to you, I answer, and become surety for the blessed 
 Mother." ' But, father, who is to answer for Father 
 Barri ? ' ' How ? ' said the father, ' he is one of our 
 Company, and do you not knc . -, moreover, that our 
 Society guarantees all the writings of our fathers ? I 
 must explain this, xO is right you should know it. By 
 an order of our Society all sorts of booksellers are 
 prohibited from printing any work of our fathers with- 
 out the approbation of the theologians of our Com- 
 pany, or without the permission of our suptriors. 
 This regulation was made by our excellent kinL,^ 
 Henry III., and confirmed subsequently by Henry i\'., 
 and by Louis XHI., of pious memory ; so that our 
 whole body is responsible for the writings of eaeli 
 of our fathers. This is a peculiarity of our Company. 
 And hence it is that no work comes out among us 
 without having the spirit of the Society. It was 
 apropos to inform you of this.' ' Father,' said I, ' }'ou 
 have done me a service, and I am only sorry I did not 
 know it sooner, for this knowledge obliges one to pay 
 much moro attention to your authors.' ' I would have 
 done it,' said he, ' if the opportunity had occurred, but 
 profit by it in future, and let us continue our dis- 
 course. 
 
 ' 1 believe I have unfolded to you means of securinjjj 
 salvation; means easy enough, sal'e enough, and in 
 sufficient nvnnber ; but our fathers would fain have 
 people not to rest at this first degree, in which nothing' 
 

 EASY DEVOTION. 
 
 177 
 
 DthinL' 
 
 is done but what is strictly necessaiy for salvation. 
 
 As they aim constantly at the f,^reatcst glory of God, 
 
 they would wish to raise men to a more pious life ; 
 
 and because men of the world usuall}'' feel repugnant 
 
 to dovotion from the strange idea which is given them 
 
 of it, we have thought it of the last importance to 
 
 remove this first obstacle ; and it is for this that 
 
 Father Le Moine has acquired great reputation by his 
 
 treatise of Easy Devotion, composed with this view. 
 
 In it he draws a charming picture of devotion. It was 
 
 never si w*. T. described before. Learn this from the 
 
 first senteiiCi^s of the book : " Virtue has never yet 
 
 shown herself to any one ; no portrait of her has been 
 
 made that resembles her. It is not strange that so 
 
 few have been in a haste to scramble up her rock. 
 
 She has been represented as peevish, loving only 
 
 solitude ; she has been associated with pain and toil ; 
 
 and, in fine, she has been made the enemy of diversion 
 
 and sport, which are the bloom of joy and seasoning 
 
 of life." This he says, p. 92.' 
 
 'But, father, I know well that there are great saints 
 whose life was extremely austere.' ' Tru(?,' said he, 
 'but besides these there have alwayshecn polite saints 
 tnd civilized devotees, as this father says, p. 191, and 
 you will see, p. 80, that the difference in their manners 
 is owing to that of their humours. Listen to him : 
 " I deny not that we see devout men of a pallid and 
 molancholy hue, who love silence and retreat, have 
 only phlegm in their veins and earth in their coun- 
 tenance. But many others are seen of a happier 
 12 
 
1: 
 
 FfF^ 
 
 17.S 
 
 PROVINCIAL LE'ITERS. 
 
 m 
 
 1^ 
 
 
 complexion, with an ovortlow of that soft and warm 
 teinperanient, that benio-n and rectitied blood which 
 inspires joy." 
 
 ' You see from this that the love of retreat and 
 silence is not common to all devout persons, and that, 
 as I told you, it is more the result of their complexion 
 than of their piety ; whereas, those austere manners 
 of which you speak, are properly the characteristics of 
 a wild and savage nature. i\ccordingly, you will see 
 them classed with the ridiculous and brutish manners 
 of melancholy madness in the description which Father 
 Le Moine gives in the seventh book of his Moral 
 Portraits. Here are some of the features. " Vii' is 
 without eyes for the beauties of nature and art. lie 
 would think himself burdened with a heavy load if he 
 had taken an}' enjoyment for its own sake. (h\ 
 festival days he retires amono- the dead ; h<' likes him- 
 self better in the tiuidv of a tree, or in a grotto, than 
 in a palace or on a throne. As to affronts and injuries, 
 he is as insensible to them, as if he had the eyes and 
 ears of a statue. Honour and glory are idols which 
 he knows not, and to which he has no incense to oti'er. 
 A lovely person is to him a spectre ; an<l those im- 
 perious and connnanding features, those agreeable 
 tyrants which everywhere make voluntary and en- 
 chained slaves, have the same power over his eN'es 
 that the sun has over those of owls." ' 
 
 ' Reverend fathei', 1 assure you that if you had 
 not told me that M. Le Moine is the author of thi> 
 picture, I would have said that it was some infidel 
 
f^flr? ' ' ' ' f '! 
 
 EASY DEVOTION. 
 
 179 
 
 had 
 
 tln> 
 ilidel 
 
 wlio lia<l drawn it t'(ii' tlio purpose of tni'ning tlio 
 saints into ridicule. For, il' it is not tlie representa- 
 tion of a man completely estranijfed from the feelinrjs 
 wldcli the Gospel requires us to renounce, [ confess 
 I understand nothing of tlie matter.' ' See, tlien,' 
 said he, ' how little you do know of it, for these are 
 nuirhs of a weak and savajje spi)lf, luhic/t has vonr 
 of llie liovest and n<itur((l af actions wliirJi if oii,;jlif to 
 liiire, as Father Le Moine says at the end of this de- 
 scription. It is b}' tliis means he teaches riiiuc and 
 Christian philosopkj/, ai^reeahly to the design wliicli 
 he had in this work, as he declares in the advertise- 
 ment. And, indeed, it cannot ho denie<l that this 
 method of teaching devotion is far more acceptable to 
 the world than that previously in use.' ' Tliere is no 
 comparison,' said I, ' and I Viegin to hope you will 
 keep j'our word to me.' ' Yon will see it far better in 
 tlio sequel,' :-aid he ; ' I have ^-et spoken only of piety 
 ill i^eneral. But to show you in detail how much our 
 fathers have relieved matters, is it not most consola- 
 tory for the ambitious to learn that they can preserve 
 a true devotion with aii excessive love of grandeur?' 
 ' \Vh;it. father, whatever excess they may display in 
 th' Neaix^n ? ' * Yes,' said he, ' for it would always be 
 no moiv than a venial sin, unless grandeur should be 
 'If'sjred as a more effectual means of oflending God or 
 the State. Now, venial sins are not compatible with 
 il devout spirit, since the greatest saints are not 
 exempt from them. Listen then to Escobar, tr. 2, ex. 
 2, n. 17: "Ambition, which is an irregular appetite 
 
 ^\i 
 
 1 
 

 180 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 
 for place and station, is in itself a venial sin ; but 
 when elevation is desired as a means of hurtincr the 
 State, or having more opportunity of offending God, 
 these external circumstances make the sin mortal." ' 
 
 ' That is convenient enough, father.' ' And is it 
 not, moreover,' continued he, ' a very pleasant doctrine 
 for nusers to say, as Escobar does, tr. 5, ex. o, n. 25:^, 
 " I know that the rich do not sin mortally in not giv- 
 ing alms of their superfluity, in the great necessities 
 of the poor. Scio in gravl iiawperum veressifate 
 divites iion damlo superflua non peccare mortalitev! " 
 ' In truth,' said I, ' if that is so, it is plain that I have 
 little knowledge of my sins.' ' To show you the thing 
 still better, do you not think that a good opinion of 
 ourselves and complacency in our own works, is one 
 of the most dangerous sins ? And will you not be 
 much surprised if 1 let you see that even should this 
 good opinion be without foundation, it is so little of 
 the nature of sin, that it is on the contrary a gift of 
 God ? ' 'Is it possible, father ? ' ' Ye.s,' said he, ' and 
 this our great Father Garasse has taught us in his 
 French work, entitled, SiiniTnarij of the lead'unj 
 truths of Religion, p. 2, p. 419. " One eflfect of com- 
 mutative justice is, that all honest labour is rewarded 
 either with praise or satisfaction. When men of 
 ability compo.se an excellent work, they are justly re- 
 warded by the public applause. ?)Ut when a person 
 of mean intellect labours much in doing nothing worth 
 while, and thus cannot obtain public applause, still, 
 that the work may not go unrewarded, God gives him 
 

 EASY DEVOTION. 
 
 181 
 
 rflll 
 
 a personal satisfaction, which he cannot be envie<.l 
 without injustice more than barbarous. Thus God, 
 who is just, makes frogs feel satisfaction in their own 
 music' 
 
 ' These,' said I, ' are fine decisions in favour of 
 vanitj-, ambition, and avarice ? Will not envy, father, 
 be more difficult to excuse ?' ' It is a delicate subject,' 
 said the father. ' It is necessary to use Father Bauni's 
 distinction in his Sum of Sins. For his opinion, c. 7, 
 p. 123, fifth and sixth edition, is that "envy of the 
 spiritual good of our neighbour is mortal, but envy of 
 hi>i temporal good only venial." ' And for what reason, 
 father?' 'Listen,' said he; "for the good found in 
 temporal things is so meagre and of so small con- 
 se(|uence for heaven, that it is of no importance before 
 God and his saints." ' But, father, if this good is so 
 ineaijre, and of so little consequence, how do you 
 allow men to be killed in order to preserve it ? ' ' You 
 mistake matters,' said the father, ' we tell you that 
 the good is of no importance in the view of God, but 
 not in the view of men.' ' I did not think of that,' 
 said I, ' and I hope that through these distinctions, 
 there will no longer be any mortal sins in the world.' 
 'Do not think so,' said the fatlier, 'for some are 
 always mortal in their nature, laziness for example.' 
 
 'O father,' said I, 'then all the conveniences of life 
 are gone?' 'Wait,' said the father, 'till you know 
 the definition of this vice by Escobar, tr. 2, ex. 2, n. 81. 
 "Laziness is regret that spiritual things are spiritual, 
 just as if one were sorry that the sacraments are a 
 
 ! i^ 
 
m 
 
 m 
 
 'i 
 
 Mi 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 f^T'f 
 
 
 > 
 
 [jC^ 
 
 
 
 
 i' 1 
 
 I P 
 
 '■ ,, 
 
 jt;i J 
 
 1^ i 1 i' 
 
 i'' li- 
 
 
 
 
 
 y 
 
 5' ^■■ 
 
 V' 
 
 .'■! 
 
 >, 
 
 182 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 source of grace. And it is a mortal sin." '0, fatlier! 
 I don't think tliat ever anybody ilionght of \>q'u\<^ Ja/y 
 in that way.' ' Accordingly,' said the father, ' Escobar 
 adds, n. lOo : "1 confess it is very rare for any one to 
 fall into the sin of laziness." Do you perceive cleai ly 
 from this how important it is to define things })roperly V 
 'Yes, father,' said I, 'and on this I remember youi 
 other delinitions of assassination, amljush, and supei- 
 tluity. Whence comes it, father, that you do not 
 extend this method to all sorts of cases, so as to detine 
 all sins after your manner, that men might no longer 
 sin in gratifying their desires ? ' 
 
 ' It IS not always necessary for that,' said he, ' to 
 change the delinitions of thinj^js. You are <j;oing to see 
 this in regard to good cheer, wliich passes for one of 
 the greatest pleasures in life, and which Escobar, in the 
 Practice according to our Society, permits in this way, 
 n. 102. " Is it lawful to eat and drink one's full with- 
 out necessity, and from mere voluptuousness ? Yes, 
 certainly, according to Sanchez, provided it is not hurt- 
 ful to health, because natural appetite may lawfully 
 enjoy the acts which are natural to it : An comet d re 
 at b'lbere usque ael saiietattiii ahstjue necessitate oh 
 suluiii coluqddtem, sit 2^cccatuiu .^ Cudi Sanctio nega- 
 tive respondeo, moJo non obsit valetadini, quia licite 
 poteH a/ppefUas ndtiindis suis actibas frui."' '0 
 father,' said I, ' that is the most complete passage, and 
 the most finished principle in all your morality : from 
 it also we may draw convenient inferences. Tlicu 
 gluttony is not even a venial sin ? ' ' No,' said he, 
 
 iMWi 
 
Gl.inTONV. 
 
 is:] 
 
 'in the way which I have iust stateth but it wouhl be 
 a venial sin accordinL,^ to Kscobar, n. ')C, " if, without 
 any necessity, one More to j^'or^e liimself witli meat 
 and «1i'ink even to vomiting: Si (/ii'is sc 2is(jue <><l 
 rondtu/iii ii)f/ur(/itct." ' 
 
 ' Enoufijli on this subject. 1 will now sp^-ak to you 
 of the facilities which we have introduced for avoid- 
 inij: sins in worldly conversation and intrigue. One of 
 tlie most end^arrassinof of all thinirs is to a\'oid false- 
 hood, especially when one wishes to accredit something 
 false. This object is admirably gained l)y our doctrine 
 of equivocation, which "allows ambiguous tei'ms to be 
 used, by causing them to be understood in a sense 
 (lifi'erent from that in which we ourselves understand 
 tlRMu," as Sanchez say.s, Up. mor., p. 2, 1. "•], c. G, n. LS.' 
 '1 know that, father," said 1. 'We have published it 
 so much,' continued he, ' that at length everybody is 
 aciiuainted with it. But do you know how to act 
 when equivocal terms are not to be foun<l :* ' ' No, 
 father.' ' I doubted as much,' said he ; ' that is new : 
 it is the doctrine of mental reservations. Sanchez 
 Ljivos it at the same place : " A man," says he, " may 
 swear th.at he lias not done a thing, although he lias 
 really done it, understanding in himself that he did 
 not do it on a certain day, or before he was born, or 
 internallv addinjx some other similar circumstance, 
 without using wonls which niay let the moaning l)e 
 known. And this is very convenient on many occa- 
 sions, and is always very just when necessary or use- 
 ful for health, honour, or estate.'" 
 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 )l 
 
 
 
 I if fi 
 
 I 
 
!1 
 
 
 184 
 
 PROVINCIAL f-ETTEKS. 
 
 il 
 
 <i' 
 
 l!.f 
 
 'How, father; is it not a lie, and even perjury ?' 
 ' No,' said the father ; 'Sanchez proves it at the same 
 phice, and our Filiutius tUso, tr. 25, c. 11, n. 331 ; "be- 
 cause," says lie, " it is the intention that regulates the 
 quality of the act." He also gives (n. 328,) another 
 surer means of avoiding falsehood : It is after having 
 said loud out, / sivear Ihat 1 did not do it, we add, in 
 a whisper, to-day ; or, after saying loud out, / siuear, 
 we whisper, that I say, and afterwards continue aloud 
 tlud I did not do it. You see plainly that this is to 
 speak the truth,' ' I admit it,' said I ; ' but perhaps 
 we would find that it is to speak the truth in a whis- 
 per and falsehood loud out: besides, I should fear that 
 many people would not liave sufficient presence of 
 mind to use these methods.' 'Our fathers,' said he, 
 ' have at the same place for the sake of those who can- 
 not use these reservations, taught that to avoid the 
 lie it is sufficient for them to say simply, that they did 
 not do what they did, provided that iJiey have a 
 general intention to rjive their laiKjuaye the meaning 
 luhicJi a man of ability ivould give it 
 
 ' Tell the truth : many a time have you been thrown 
 into embarrassment for want of this knowledge ? ' 
 'Occasionally,' said I. 'And will you not likewise 
 admit that it would often be very convenient to be 
 dispensed in conscience from keeping certain promises 
 which you may have made ? ' ' Father,' said I, ' it would 
 be the most convenient thing in the world.' ' Listen, 
 then, to Escobar, tr. 3, ex. 3, n. 48, where he gives this 
 general rule, " Promises do not oblige when we have 
 
FALSEHOOD — UNCHASTITY 
 
 185 
 
 no intention of obliginf:f ourselves by making them. 
 Now it seldom happens that we have this intention, at 
 least without confirming them by oath or contract, so 
 that when we simply say, I will do it, we mean tliat we 
 will do it unless we change our intention. For we 
 mean not thereby to deprive ourselves of our liberty." 
 He gives other rules which you may see for yourself, 
 and he says at the end: "all this is taken from Molina 
 and our other authors: Om aid ex Molina et aliis." 
 So that there can be no doubt on the subject.' 
 
 ' Father,' said I, ' I did not know that the direction 
 of intention was of force to make promises null.' 'You 
 see,' said the father, ' that great facility is here given 
 to the intercourse of society. But what gave us the 
 jjreatest trouble was to regulate conversation between 
 men <■ d women ; for our fathers are more reserved in 
 regard to chastity. Not that they do not handle curi- 
 ous enough questions and give sufficient indulgence, 
 especially to married persons, or persons betrothed.' 
 On this I was instructed in the most extraordinary 
 questions that can be imagined. He gave me materials 
 to fill several letters, but i will not so much as note the 
 passages, because you show my letters to all classes of 
 persons, and I should not like to furnish such reading 
 to those who would only seek it for diversion. 
 
 The only thing he showed me in the books, even in 
 lu'ench, which I can point out to you, is what you may 
 see ill Father Bauni's Sum of Sins, p. 1G.3, as to certain 
 little freedoms which he there explains, provided the 
 intention is properly directed, as in pussing for a 
 
 • 11 m 
 
 
 :■ ' f 
 
 
 
 
 ij 
 
 1 J 
 
IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 /. 
 
 
 '■o ^ /„. ^^ 
 
 y. 
 
 ^ 
 
 o 
 
 1 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 1.25 
 
 ;5« 
 
 ill 
 
 IM 
 
 |Z2 
 
 M 
 
 1.8 
 
 U IIIIII.6 
 
 V] 
 
 ■c'^ 
 
 'r>l 
 
 r>. 
 
 
 O 
 
 A 
 
 V" 
 
 ''# 
 
 / 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, NY. 14S80 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 

 t/j 
 
I 
 
 186 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 gallant : and you will be surprised to iind at p. 148, a 
 principle of morality concerninj^ the power which he 
 says daughters have to dispose of their virginity 
 without their parents' consent. Here are his words: 
 "when this is done with the daughter's consent, thouoh 
 the father has cause to complain, nevertheless, it is 
 not because the said daughter, or he who corrupted 
 her, has done him any wrong, or has, as regards him, 
 violated justice ; for the daughter is as much in pos- 
 session of her virginity as of her body, which she may 
 do with as seems to her good, with the exception of 
 killing or dismembering it." By this, judge of the 
 rest. This brought to my mind a passage in a heathen 
 poet, who was a better casuist than these fathers, since 
 he says that " a daughter's virginity does not belong 
 entirely to herself, but partly to her father and partly 
 to her mother, without whom she cannot even dispose 
 of it by marriage." I doubt if there is a judge who 
 would not lay down a rule the reverse of this maxim 
 of Father Bauni. 
 
 This is the utmost I can tell you of all which I heard 
 on this subject, on which the father dwelt so long, 
 that I was obliged at last to beg him to change it. 
 He did so, and spc^ke to me of their regulations as to 
 female dress in the following terms : ' We shall not 
 speak of those females,' said he, ' whose intentions are 
 impure, but in regard to others, Escobar says, tr. 1, ex 
 8, n. 5. " If they dress with no bad intention, and 
 only to gratify the natural inclination to vanity, oh 
 naUiralem ftistus indinationern, it is either only a 
 
FEMALE MODESTY. 
 
 187 
 
 venial sin, or no sin at all." And Father Bauni in his 
 Sum of Sin.s, c. 40, p. 1094, says, that though " the 
 woman should be aware of the bad etiect which her 
 attention to dress would produce both on the body and 
 soul of those who should behold her adorned in rich 
 ami costly attire, she nevertheless would not sin in 
 using it." He (|Uotes oui Sanchez among others, as 
 being of the same opinion.' 
 
 ' But, father, what answer do your fathers give to 
 the passages of Scripture which so vehemently de- 
 nounce the least approach to anytliing of this sort ? ' 
 ' Lessius,' said the father, ' answered learnedly, de Just. 
 1. 4, c. 4, d. 14, n. 114, where he says, "that those pas- 
 sages were binding only on the women of that time, 
 that they might by their modesty give an edifying 
 example to the heathen." ' ' And where did he get 
 that, father ? ' ' No matter where he got it ; it is 
 enough that the opinions of those great men are al- 
 ways probable in themselves. But Father Le Moine 
 has in one respect modified this general permission, for 
 he will not on any account allow old women to use it, 
 as appears from his Easy Devotion at inter alia, pp. 
 127, 1 57, 103. " Youth," says he, " has a natural right 
 to be decked. A female may be permitted to deck 
 herself at an age when life is in its bloom and verdure; 
 but there it must stop : it would be strangely out of 
 place to seek for roses among snow : only to the stars 
 does it belong to be always in full dress, because they 
 have the gift of perpetual youth. The best course 
 then in this matter would be to take counsel of reason 
 
 \'t 
 
 
 
 ...liif 
 
188 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 I! 
 
 and a good mirror, to yield to decency and necessity, 
 and withdraw as night approaches." ' ' That is quite 
 judicious,' said I. ' But,' continued he, ' that you may 
 see how our fathers have attended to everything, I 
 must tell you that after giving permission to women 
 to indulge in play, and seeing that this permission 
 would '^iten be of no use to them if they did not also 
 give chem wherewith to play, they have established 
 another maxim in their favour, which is seen in Esco- 
 bar in the chapter on larceny, tr. 1, ex. n. 13. "A 
 woman," says he, " may play and take her husband's 
 money for the purpose." ' 
 
 ' Indeed, father, that is very complete.' ' There are 
 many other things besides,' said the father, ' but we 
 must leave them to speak of the most important max- 
 ims for facilitating the use of holy things, for instance, 
 the manner of attending at mass. Our great theo- 
 logians, Gaspar Hurtado, de Sacr. t. 2, d. 5, dist. 2, and 
 Coninck, :^ 83, a. 6, n. 197, teach on this subject, that 
 " it is sufficient to be bodily present at mass though 
 absent in spirit, provided the countenance is kept 
 externally decent." Vasquez goes farther, for he says 
 that " the injunction to hear mass is satisfied even 
 though the intention has nothing to do with it." All 
 this is also in Escobar, tr. 1, ex. 11, n. 74, 107, and also 
 tr. 1, ex. 1, n. 116, where he explains it by the example 
 of those who are forcibly taken to mass, and have the 
 express intention not to hear it.' ' Truly,' said I, ' I 
 would never believe this if another did not tell me.' 
 ' In fact,' said he, ' this stands somewhat in need of the 
 authority of these great men, as well as what Escobar 
 
HEARING MASS. 
 
 189 
 
 says, tr. 1, ex. 11, n, 31, " that a wicked intention, such 
 as looking at women with a lustful eye during the hear- 
 ing of mass, properly does not hinder the injunction 
 from being satisfied : Nee obest alia jyrava intentio, 
 ut aspiciendi libidinose feniinas." 
 
 There is also a convenient thing in our learned 
 Turrianus, Select. 2, d. 16, dub. 7. " You may hear 
 the half of a mass from one priest, and then the other 
 half from another ; and you may even hear the end 
 first from one, and then the beginning from another." 
 I must tell you, moreover, that it is lawful " to hear 
 two halves of a mass at the same time, from two 
 different priests, the one beginning the mass when 
 the other is at the elevation ; because we may have 
 our attention on these two sides at once, and two 
 halves of a mass make an entire mass : duce medletates 
 unam tnissam constituunt" So have decided our 
 fathers, Bauni, tr. 6, q. 9, p. 312 ; Hurtado, de Sacr. 
 t. 2, Missa, d. 5, difF. 4 ; Azorius, p. 1, 1. 7, c. 3, q. 3; 
 Escobar, tr. 1, ex. 11, n. 73, in the chapter on the rule 
 for hearing mass according to our Society. And you 
 will see the inferences which he draws in this same 
 book, editions of the city of Lyons. The words 
 are : " Hence I conclude that you can hear mass in 
 a very little time : if, for example, you fall in with four 
 masses at once, which are so arranged that when one 
 begins, another is at the Gospel, another at the conse- 
 cration, and the last at the communion." ' Certainly, 
 father, we shall in this way hear mass in an instant at 
 Notre Dame.' ' You see then that better could not be 
 for facilitating the mode of hearing mass.' 
 
 
 i 
 
 . 
 
 ! : 
 
 ! 
 
 Vi 
 
 I 
 
 ^l' 
 
 r:.\ 
 
 ^i| 
 
 It.-.'! 
 f . . 
 
 I ' ^ W : 
 
 
 
 ■^.■ 
 
 ', uf* 
 
 
1! 
 
 
 'I 
 
 It- 
 
 190 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 ' I wish now to show you how thoy have softened 
 down the use of the sacraments, and especially that of 
 penitence.. For herein you will see the highest proof 
 of benignity in the conduct of our fathers, and you 
 will wonder how the devotion which fills every one 
 with awe could have been handled by our fathers 
 with so much prudence, that " having struck down the 
 obstacle which demons had placed at its entrance, they 
 have rendered it easier than vice and more pleasant, so 
 that mere living is incomparably more difficult than 
 good living," to use the words of Father Le Moine, 
 pp. 244, 291, of his Easy Devotion. Is not this a mar- 
 vellous change ? ' 'In truth, father,' said I, ' I cannot 
 help telling you my mind. I fear that your measures 
 are ill-chosen, and that this indulgence is capable of 
 offending more people than it can attract. The mass, 
 for example, is so venerable and holy that nothing 
 more would be necessary to discredit them in the minds 
 of many persons than to show in what manner they 
 speak of it.' ' That is very true,' said the father, 
 ' with regard to certain people, but do you not know 
 that we accommodate ourselves to all sorts of persons? 
 It seems you have lost sight of what I have so often 
 told you on this subject. I mean, then, to treat of it 
 our first leisure time, deferring for that purpose our 
 consideration of the mitigations of confession. I will 
 make you understand it so thoroughly that yon never 
 will forget it.' On this we separated, and thus I 
 imagine that the subject of our next interview will be 
 their policy. I am, etc. 
 
 !i.'Hf ■• 
 
LETTER TENTH. 
 
 HOW TIIK lESllTS HAVK SOFTENED DOWN THE SACKAMENT OK 
 I'KNITENCE, BY THEIR -MAXIMS TOUCHINO CONFESSION, SAT- 
 ISFA< TION, ABSOHTION, PROXIMATE 0(!CA.SIONS OF .SIN, 
 CONTRITION, AND THE LOVE OF OOD. 
 
 Paris. 
 
 Sir, — I do not yet give you the policy of the Society, 
 but one of its greatest principles. You will here see 
 the mitigations applied to confession, certainly the best 
 means which these fathers have discovered to attract 
 all and repulse none. It was necessary to know it 
 before going further ; for this reason, the father judged 
 it proper to instruct me in it as follows : 
 
 'You have seen,' said he, 'from all 1 have hitherto 
 told you, with what success our fathers have laboured 
 to discover, by the light given to them, that many 
 things are permitted which were supposed to be for- 
 bidden; but because there are still sins remaining 
 which cannot be excused, and the proper cure for them 
 is confession, it becomes necessary to smooth the diffi- 
 culties by the methods which I have now to explain- 
 Hence, having pointed out in our previous conversa- 
 tions, how the scruples which troubled the conscience 
 have been relieved by showing that what was thought 
 to be bad is not so, it remains at this time to point out 
 
 •i" 
 
 ! 
 
 m 
 
 ' t ; 
 
 ?■'■■ 
 
 1 \.m 
 
 till 
 
192 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 - t )| 
 
 a simple mode of expiatino; what is truly sinful, by 
 rendering confession as easy as it was formerly diffi- 
 cult.' ' And by what means, father ? ' * By those 
 ad"iirable subtleties,' said he, * which are peculiar to 
 our Company, and which our fathers in Flanders call, 
 in the " Image of our first Century," 1. 3, or. 1, p. 401, 
 and 1. 1, c. 2, "Pious and holy finessing, and a holy 
 artifice of devotion. Pidrti et religiosam calliditdtem, 
 et pietatis solertiam," 1. 3, c. 8. By means of these 
 inventions, " crimes are expiated in the present day, 
 alacrius, with more alacrity and eagerness than they 
 were formerly committed, so that many persons efface 
 their stains as quickly as they contract them*: Plii- 
 rimi vix citins maculas contrahunt, quam eluunt," as 
 is said in the same place.' ' Pray, father, do teach me 
 this salutary finessing.' ' There are several heads of 
 it,' said he, ' for as there are many painful things in 
 confession, so particular mitigations have been applied 
 to each. And because the principal difficulties which 
 men feel, are shame at confessing certain sins, particu- 
 larly in detailing the circumstances, penance to be 
 inflicted, resolutions not to relapse, avoiding the im- 
 mediate occasions which lead to this, and regret for 
 having committed them, I hope to show you to-day, 
 that there is now scarcely any annoyance in all this, 
 so careful have we been to remove all that is bitter 
 and all that is sharp, in this necessary remedy. 
 
 ' To begin with the difficulty which is felt in con- 
 fessing certain sins, as you are not ignorant that it is 
 often very important to preserve a confessor's esteem, 
 
PENANCE. 
 
 193 
 
 so is it very convenient to permit, as do our fathers, 
 and among others, Escobar, who also quotes Suarez, 
 tr. 7, c. 4, n. 135, " The having of two confessors, the 
 one for mortal, and the other for venial sins, so as to 
 remain in good repute with the ordinary confessor: Uti 
 honamfamam apud ordinarium tueatur, provided it 
 is not inade a handle for remaining in mortal sin." 
 And he afterwards gives another subtle method of 
 confessing a sin even to an ordinary confessor, with- 
 out his perceiving that it has been committed since 
 the last confession. " It is," says he, " to make a gene- 
 ral confession, and throw this sin in among the others 
 which are confessed in the lump." He again states 
 the same thing at the beginning of ex. 2, n. 73, and 
 you will admit, I am sure, that the shame felt in con- 
 fessing relapses is much relieved by this decision of 
 Father Bauni, Thcol. Mor. tr. 4. q. 15, p. 137 : " Except 
 on certain occasions, which occur but seldom, the con- 
 fessor is not entitled to ask whether the sin confessed 
 is habitual, and there is no obligation to answer such 
 a question, because he has no right to inflict on 
 his penitent the shame of acknowledging frequent 
 relapses." ' 
 
 'How, father,-! would as soon say that a physician 
 has no right to ask his patient if Im has long had {ever. 
 Are not sins very different according to their different 
 circumstances, and should not the purpose of a true 
 penitent be to expose the state of his conscience to his 
 confessor, fuUj' with as much sincerity and openness 
 of heart as if he were speaking to Jesus Christ, whose 
 13 
 
 !• I 
 
194 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 
 place the priest occupies ? Now is not a man very fur 
 from being in this disposition when he conceals his 
 frequent relapses in order to conceal the greatness of 
 his sin ? ' This, I saw, puzzled the worthy fath(T, 
 who accordingly tried to evade the difficulty rather 
 than solve it, by informing me of another of tlioir 
 rules, which merely sanctions a new irregularity, witli- 
 out at all justifying this decision of Father Bauni, 
 which is, in my opinion, one of their most pernicious 
 maxims, and one of the fittest to encourage the vicious 
 in their bad practices. ' I am free to admit,' said he, 
 ' that habit adds to the heinousness of the sin, but it 
 does not change its nature, and this is the reason why 
 there is no obligation to confess it according to the 
 rule of our fathers, to whom Escobar refers at the 
 beginning of ex. 2, n. 39, " One is only obliged to con- 
 fess the circumstances which change the species of sin, 
 and not those which only aggravate it." 
 
 ' Proceeding on this rule, our Father Granados says, 
 part 5, cont. 7, t. 9, d. 9, n. 22, that " one who has eaten 
 flesh in Lent, does enough by confessing a breach of 
 the fast, without saying whether it was in eating tlesh 
 or taking two meagre repasts." And according to 
 Father Reginald, tr. 1, 1, 6, c. 4, n. 14, " A diviner who 
 has used diabolic art, is not obliged to declare the 
 circumstance : it is sufficient to say that he has inter- 
 meddled with divination, without saying whether by 
 chiromancy or compact with the devil." Fagundez, of 
 our Society, also says, p. 2. 1. 4, c. 3, n. 17, " Ravisliin<,' 
 is not a circumstance which one is bound to discover 
 
PENANCE. 
 
 195 
 
 when the girl has consented." Our Father Escobar 
 refers to all this at the sane place, n. 41, 61, 02, with 
 everal other curious enough decisions on circum- 
 stances which there is no obligation to confess. You 
 may there see them for yourself.' ' These artijices of 
 devotion,' said I, ' are very accommodating.' 
 
 ' Nevertheless,' said he, ' all this would be nothing 
 if we had not mitigated penance, which, more than any- 
 thing else, produces the greatest repugnance to con- 
 fession. But the most fastidious cannot now feel any 
 apprehension, since we have maintained in our Theses 
 at the College of Clermont, that if the " confessor 
 enjoins a suitable penance, conventientem, and the 
 penitent is, notwithstanding, unwilling to accept it, he 
 may retire, renouncing absolution and the penance 
 enjoined." Escobar moreover says, in the Practice of 
 Penance according to our Society, tr. 7, ex. 4, n. 188, 
 " If the penitent declares that he wishes to put off his 
 penance till the next world, and suffer in purgatory 
 all the pains due to him, the confessor, for the integ- 
 rity of the sacrament, should impose a very light 
 penance, and especially if he sees that a greater would 
 not be received." ' ' I believe,' said_[I, ' if that were so, 
 confession should no longer be called the sacrament of 
 penance.' ' You are wrong,' said he, ' for we always 
 ^'ive one at least in form.' ' But, father, do you deem 
 a man worthy of absolution who refuses to do any- 
 thing painful, in order to expiate his offences ? And 
 when persons are in this condition, ought you not 
 rather to retain their sins than to remit them ? Have 
 
 [Pp. 
 
 
 \~ i 
 
 ll 
 
 ■ m 
 
 \'\i<.'- 
 
a 
 
 m '% 
 
 I 
 
 196 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 you a true idea of the extent of your ministry ? Do 
 you not know that you there exercise the power of 
 bindini^ and loosing ? Do you think it lawful to give 
 absolution indifferently to all who ask it, without pre- 
 viously ascertaininjx that Christ looses in heaven those 
 whom you loose on earth?' 'Eh!' said the father, 
 ' do you think we don't know that, " the confessor 
 must constitute himself judge of the disposition of the 
 peritent, as well because he is obliged not to dispense 
 the sacraments to those who are unworthy of them, 
 Jesus Christ having enjoined him to be a faithful 
 steward, and not to give holy things to dogs, as 
 because he is judge, and it is the duty of a judge to 
 judge justly, by loosing those who are worthy of it, 
 and binding the unworthy, and also because he must 
 not absolve those whom Jesus Christ condemns?'" 
 ' Whose words are these, father ? ' ' Those of Father 
 Filiutius,' he replied, ' to. 1, tr. 7, n. 354.' ' You sur- 
 prise me,' said I, ' I took them to be from one of the 
 Fathers of the Church. But, father, this passage must 
 greatly perplex confessors, and make them very cir- 
 cumspect in dispensing the sacrament in order to 
 ascertain whether the sorrow of their penitents is 
 sufficient, and whether the promises they give to sin 
 no more in future are receivable.' ' There is nothing 
 at all embarrassing in this,' said the father ; ' Filiutius 
 took good care not to leave confessors in this diffi- 
 culty, and therefore, after the above words, he gives 
 them the easy method of getting out of it : " The con- 
 fessor may easily set himself at rest touching the dis- 
 
PENANCE, 
 
 197 
 
 position of his penitent ; if ho does not j^ive sufficient 
 sinrns of sorrow, tlio confessor has only to asl< him if he 
 does not in his soul «letest sin, and if he answers yes, 
 he is oblijifed to believe him. Tiie same must be said 
 of his resolution for tlie future, unless there be some 
 obligation to restore, or to abandon some proximate 
 occasion." ' ' This passaf,a\ father, I see plainly, is 
 from Filiutius.' ' You are mistaken, for he has copied 
 it, word for word, from Suarez, in 3 par, to. 4, disp. Tiz, 
 s. 2, n. 2.' 'But, fath"/' this last passage of Filiutius 
 destroys what be had laid down in the first. For con- 
 fessors will no longer be able to constitute themselves 
 judges of the dispositions of their penitents since 
 they are obliged to believe them on their word, even 
 though they do not give any sufficient sign of sorrow. 
 Is it because there is such a certainty of their word 
 being true, that it alone is a convincing sign ? I 
 doubt whether experience has taught your fathers 
 that all who give these promises keep them : I am 
 nustaken if they do not often experience the con- 
 trary.' ' It matters not,' said the father, ' we always 
 oblige confessors to believe them. For Father Bauni, 
 who has gone to the bottom of this question in his 
 Sura of Sins, c. 46, p. 1090, 1091, 1092, concludes, that 
 "whenever those who frecjuently relapse without 
 showing any amendment, present themselves to the 
 confessor, and tell him that they are sorry for the past, 
 and mean well in future, he must believe them on 
 their word, although there is reason to presume that 
 such resolutions go no farther than the lips. And 
 
198 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 it-;] 
 
 though they afterwards persist with more freedom 
 and excess than ever in the same faults, absolution 
 must, nevertheless, be given, according to my opinion." 
 I am confident all your doubts are now solved.' 
 
 ' But, father,' said I, ' you seem to impose a great 
 bui len on confessors, in obliging them to believe the 
 opposite of what they see.' ' You do not,' said ho, 
 ' understand it ; it is only meant that they are obliged 
 to act and absolve as if they believed the resolution to 
 be firm and steadfast, although they do not believe it 
 in fact. This is explained by our fathers, Suarez and 
 Filiutius, in the sequel of the above passages. For, 
 after saying that " the priest is bound to believe his 
 penitent on his word," they add that " it is not neces- 
 sary for the confessor to be persuaded that the resolu- 
 tion of his penitent will be executed, or even to judge 
 it probable : it is difficult to think that at the instant 
 he has the intention generally, although he is to relapse 
 in a very short time. This all our authors teach : ita 
 (locent omnes aufores." Will you doubt the truth of 
 what our authors teach ? ' * But, father, what t'nen 
 will become of this which Father Petau is obliged to 
 acknowledge in his preface to Pen. Pub., p. 4 : " Koly 
 fathers, doctors, and councils agree as in an infalliltle 
 truth, that the penitence which prepares for the 
 eucharist must be true, steady, bold, not lax and 
 sleepy, not liable to relapses, mbject to fits and 
 starts." ' ' Don't you see,' said he, ' that Father Petau 
 is speaking of the ancient Church ? But that is now 
 so little in season, to use the expression of our fathors> 
 
 i 6 
 
ABSOLUTION. 
 
 199 
 
 that according to Bauni, tlie very opposite is true : tr. 
 4, <(. 1.'), p. 95: "There are authors who say that we 
 oni^'ht to refuse absohition to those who often relapse 
 into the same sins, and especially when, after having 
 been repeatedly absolved, there appears no amend- 
 ment ; others say no. The only true opinion is, that 
 absolution must not be refused ; and that although 
 they profit not by all the advices which have repeat- 
 edly been given them, iliough tliey have not kept the 
 promises they made to change their life, though they 
 have not laboured to purify themselves, no matter ; 
 whatever others say, the true opinion, and that which 
 oui,'ht to be followed is, that even in all these cases 
 absolution is to be given." And tr. 4, q. 22, p. 100, 
 " We ought neither to refuse nor defer to absolve 
 those who are addicted to habitual sins against the 
 law of God, of nature, and of the Church, although we 
 see no prospect of amendment : etsl emendationis 
 fiUune nulla spes apparcat." ' 
 
 ' But, father, this certainty of always obtaining 
 absolution may well incline sinners — ' ' I understand 
 yon,' said he, interrupting me, ' but listen to Father 
 Bauni, q. 15 : " We may absolve him who acknow- 
 ledi^es that the hope of being absolved has disposed 
 him to sin more readily than but for this hope he 
 would have done." And Father C'aussin, defending 
 this proposition, says, p. 211 of his Resp. ad Theol. Mor., 
 " that if it was not true, the greater part of mankind 
 would be interdicted from confession, and the only 
 remedy left to sinners would be the branch of a tree 
 
 i , 
 
 ■,f' 
 
 W 
 
200 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 and a rope." ' ' O father, what numbers of people 
 these maxims will attract to your confessionals!' 
 'Accordingly,' said he, 'you cannot think how many 
 come ; " we are weighed down, and, as it were, op- 
 pressed under the numbers of our penitents ; poeni- 
 tentium numero ohntimur" as it is expressed in 'The 
 Image of our First Century,' 1. 3, c. 8. 'I know,' said 
 I, ' an easy means of relieving you of this pressure. 
 You have only to oblige sinners to abandon proximate 
 occasions ; in this device alone you would find com- 
 plete relief.' 'We do not want this relief,' said he; 
 ' quite the contrary ; for, as is said in the same book, 
 1. 3, c. 7, p. 374, " the aim of our Society is to labour 
 in establishing virtue, in warring upon vice, and in 
 servinn; a crreat number of souls." And as few are 
 willing to quit proximate occasions, we have been 
 obliged to define a proximate occasion, as is seen in 
 Escobar, in the Practice of our Society, tr. 7, ex. 4, n. 
 226 : " By proximate occasion we do not mean that in 
 which a man sins but seldom, as with his landlady, 
 from sudden transport, three or four times a year," or, 
 according to Father Bauni, in his French work, " once 
 or twice a month," p. 1082; and also 1089, where he 
 asks, " What is to be done in the case of masters and 
 servants, male and female cousins, who live together, 
 and from so doing are mutually disposed to sin ? " ' 
 ' Separate them,' said I. ' He also says so, ' if the re- 
 lapses are frequent, and almost daily ; but if they but 
 seldom oti'end together as once or twice a month, and 
 they cannot separate without great inconvenience and 
 
1 
 
 ABSOLUTION. 
 
 201 
 
 damage, we may absolve them according to those 
 authors, among others Suarez, provided they promise 
 fairly to sin no more, and are truly sorr}'^ for tlie past." 
 I thoroughly understood him, for he had already 
 taught me what ought to satisfy a confessor in judg- 
 ing of this sorrow. 'And Father Bauni,' continued 
 he, p. 1084, ' permits those who are living in proxi- 
 mate occasions, " to continue, when they cannot quit 
 them without giving occasion to the world to talk, or 
 without suffering inconvenience."' He likewise says, 
 Theol. Mor., tr. 4, de Ptvnit. q. 14, p. 94, and ([. 18, p. 
 03, "that we may and must absolve a woman who has 
 a man in her house with whom she often sins, if she 
 cannot make him leave reputably, or if she has some 
 cause for retaining him, si non potest honeste ejlcere, 
 aiU habeat al'iquam causam reiinendi, provided she 
 indeed purposes to sin no more with him." ' 
 
 ' 0, dear father,' said I, ' the obligations to shun oc- 
 casions of sin is greatly softened if we are exempted 
 the moment we should suffer inconvenience ; but I 
 presume we are at least obliged to do it when there is 
 no difficulty V ' Yes,' said the father, ' though that is 
 not, however, without exception. For Father Bauni 
 says, at the same place, " all sorts of persons may go 
 into infamous houses, to convert prostitutes, though 
 it is very probable that they will fall into sin, as 
 where they have already often experienced that they 
 have been led into sin by the appearance and cajolery 
 of these women. And althou<;h there are doctors who 
 do not approve this opinion, and think it is not lawful 
 
 «il 
 
 ! ; 
 
 : V 
 
 AM 
 
202 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 am 
 
 voluntarily to endanger our own salvation in helping 
 our neighbour, I still very willingly embrace the 
 opinion which they combat." ' ' Behold, father, a new- 
 sort of preachers ! But on what does Father Bauni 
 found in giving them this mission ? ' 'It is,' said he, 
 ' on one of his principles which he gives at the same 
 place after Basil Ponce. I formerly spoke of it to 
 you, and I think you remember it. It is, '* that we 
 may seek an occasion directly and for itself, primo et 
 per se, for the temporal or spiritual welfare of our- 
 selves or our neighbour." ' These quotations so hor- 
 rified me, that I was on the point of breaking with 
 him ; but I checked myself, in order to let him go 
 his full length, and contented myself with saying : 
 ' What resemblance is there, father, between this 
 doctrine and that of the Gospel, which enjoins us to 
 " pluck out an eye, or part with the things most 
 necessary to us, when they are injurious to our salva- 
 tion ? " How can you conceive that a man who 
 voluntarily continues in occasions of sin, detests it 
 sincerely ? Is it not visible, on the contrary, that his 
 feelings, in regard to it, are not what they ought to 
 be, and that he has not yet attained to that true con- 
 version of heart which makes us love God as much as 
 we have loved the creature ? ' 
 
 ' How ? ' said he ; ' that would be genuine contrition. 
 It seems you do not know that, as Father Pintereau 
 says, in the second part of the Abbe du Boisic, p. ■)0, 
 "all our fathers teach, with one accord, that it is an 
 error, and almost a heresy, to sav that contrition is 
 
ATTRTTION. 
 
 203 
 
 necessary, and that attrition by itself alone, and pro- 
 duced solely by a dread of future punishment, which 
 excludes any wish to offend, is not sufficient with the 
 sacrament." ' ' What, father ! it is almost an article of 
 faith, that attrition, produced by the mere dread of 
 punishment, is sufficient with the sacrament ? I be- 
 lieve this is peculiar to your fathers ; for others who 
 believe that attrition with the sacrament suffices, insist 
 on its bein<^ accompanied with at least some love of 
 God. And, besides, it seems to me that your authors 
 themselves did not formerly hold the doctrine to be 
 so certain ; for your Father Suarez speaks of it in this 
 way, de Pienit., q. 90, art. 4, disp. 15, n. 17: "Although 
 it is a probable opinion that attrition is sufficient with 
 the sacrament, it is not, however, certain, and it may 
 be false; von est ccrta, et potest esse falsa. And if it 
 is false, attrition is not sufficient to save a man. He, 
 then, who dies knowingly in this state, voluntarily 
 exposes himself to moral risk of eternal damnation. 
 For this opinion is neither very ancient nor very 
 common ; nee valde antiqua, nee midtuni communis." 
 No more did Sanchez consider it so certain, since he 
 says in his Sum, 1. 1, c. 9, n. 34, "that the sick man 
 and his confessor should content themselves with attri- 
 tion and the sacrament at death, would sin mortally, 
 because of the great risk of damnation to which the 
 penitent would be exposed if the opinion that attrition 
 is sufficient with the sacrament should prove not to be 
 true;" nor Comitolus, also, when he says, Resp. Mor,, 
 1. 1, ([. 32, n. 7, B, " that he is not altogetlier sure that 
 attrition is sufficient with the sacrament." ' 
 
 if 
 
 ! : I 
 
 
 [■■ 
 
 \ i 
 
 
 
 i ■ 
 
 i . i : 
 
 ■ . - . • i 
 
 
 Mil 
 
 ■■'^^^ 
 
 ^iin 
 
204 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 f I 
 
 The worthy father here stopped me. 'And so,' said 
 he, 'you read our authors? You do well; l)ut you 
 would do still better were you not to read them with- 
 out some one of us. Do you not see, that from having 
 read them by yourself you have concluded tliat these 
 passages contradict tho.se which now maintain our 
 doctrine of attrition ? wJiereas it could have been 
 shown you that there is nothing which does them 
 higher honour. For wiiat an honour is it to our 
 fathers of the present da}', to have, in less than no 
 time, spread their opinion everywhere so generally, 
 that with the exception of theologians, eveiybody 
 imagines that what we now hold on the subject of 
 attrition has always been the belief of the faithful i 
 And thus, when you show by our fathers themselves, 
 that a few years ago t/tw opinion icas not certain, 
 what else do you than just give our latest authors all 
 the honour of establishing it ? 
 
 ' Hence Diana, our intimate friend, thought he would 
 do us a pleasure by pointing out the different steps in 
 its progress. This he does, p. 5, tr. 13, where he says, 
 " formerly, the old schoolmen maintained that contri- 
 tion was necessary as soon as we had committed a 
 mortal sin ; then the belief came to be, that we are 
 obliged to this only on festivals ; and, at a later period, 
 when some great calamity threatened the kingdom; 
 according to others, the obligation was not to delay it 
 long when death was approaching. But our fathers, 
 Hurtado and Vasqaez, have excellently refuted all 
 these opinions, and fixed that we are obliged to it only 
 
 [jli 
 
w 
 
 ATTRITION. 
 
 205 
 
 when we cannot obtain absolution in any other way, 
 or are in articulo mortis." To continue the marvel- 
 lous procuress of this doctrine, I will add, that our 
 fathers, Fagundez, pra^c. 2, t. 2, c. 4, n. VS, Granados, 
 in 'S p., cont. 7, d. 8, s. 4, n. 17, and Escobar, tr. 7, ex. 
 4, n. 8.S, in the Practice of our Society, have decided 
 that "contrition is not necessary even at death; be- 
 cause," say they, " if attrition with the sacrament was 
 not sufficient at death, it would follow that attrition 
 would not be sufficient with the sacrament." And our 
 leai'ned Murtado, de Sacr. d. G, quoted by Diana, part 
 .'), tr. 4, Miscell., r. 193, and by Escobar, tr. 7, ex. 4, n. 
 01, i^oes still farther. Listen to him: "Is re^^ret for 
 having- sinned when produced only by the temporal 
 evil resultino" from it, as the loss of health or money, 
 sullicient ? It is necessary to distinn[uish. If the sin- 
 ner does not think that the evil is sent by the hand of 
 God, this regret is not sufficient; but if he believes 
 that this evil is sent of God, as, indoed, all evil," says 
 Diana, '' except sin, conie-^ from him, this regret is 
 .sufficient." Thus Escobar speaks in the Practice of 
 our Society. Our Father Francis L'Amy also main- 
 tains the same thing, t. <S, dis. .'3, n. 13.' 
 
 ' Vou surprise me, father, for I see nothing in all 
 this attrition but what is natural, and thus a sinner 
 iniifht make himself deserving of absolution without 
 any supernatural grace. Now, everybody knows that 
 this is a heresy condemned by the Council.' ' 1 would 
 have thought like you,' said he ; ' and yet that cannot 
 be, for our fathers of the College of Clermont have 
 
 
 ! :P 
 
 1 i 
 
 I i 
 
 ' : i 
 
 • r 
 
 U- 
 
 :.rr 
 
TT 
 
 206 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 m 
 
 I i 
 
 maintained in their widely celebrated Theses, col. 4, 
 n. 1, that ' an attrition may be holy and sufficient 
 for the sacrament, though it be not supernatural ; " 
 and in a subsequent one, "that an attrition which 
 is only natural, is sufficient for the sacrament, pro- 
 vided it be honest : " Ad sacranientwm sujjicit aftrifio 
 natiiralis, modo honesta. 
 
 ' This is the utmost that can be said, unless wo add 
 an inference, easily deduced from these principles, 
 namely, that contrition, so far from beinf^ necessary 
 to the sacrament, mit^ht be injurious to it, by wipiii<; 
 away sins itself, and thus leaving nothing for the 
 sacrament to do So says our Fatiier Valcntia, the 
 celebrated Jesuit, torn. 4, disp. 7, v. 8, p. 4, " Contrition 
 is not at all necessary to obtain the principal effect of 
 the sacrament, but, on the contrary, is rather an 
 obstacle : " /mo obsfat potius qaominus efectus seqvu- 
 tur. No more can be desired in behalf of attrition.' 
 ' I believe it., father, but allow me to tell you my 
 opinion, and to show you the excess to which this doc- 
 trine leads. When you say that attrition jyToduccl 
 by the mere fear of punishment is sufficient, with the 
 sacrament, to justify sinners, does it not follow that 
 we might, during our whole life, expiate sins in this 
 way, and thus be saved witho .t having once loved 
 God ? Now would your fathers dare to maintain this :* 
 
 ' I see plainly from what you say, that you require 
 to be told the doctrine of our fathers respecting the 
 love of God. This is the last trait of their morality, 
 and the most important of all. You must have per- 
 
 <i 
 
LOVE OF GOD. 
 
 207 
 
 ceived this from the passages I quoted respecting con- 
 trition. But here are others more precise on the love 
 ot" (Jod ; do not interrupt me, then, for the result is of 
 great importance. Listen to Escobar, who gives the 
 (litferent opinions of our authors on this subject in the 
 Practice of the love of God according to our Society, 
 tr. 1, ex. 2, n. 21, and tr. 5, ex. 4, n. 8, in answer to this 
 question, " When are we obliged to have in reality a 
 love of God ? Suarez says. It is enough if we love 
 him before the hour of death, without specifying any 
 time. Others, when we receive baptism ; others, on 
 festival days. But our father Castro Palao combats 
 all these opinions, and rightly, nierito. Hurtado de 
 Mendoza maintaina that we are obliged to do it every 
 year, and that we are moreover very favourably dealt 
 with in not being obliged to it oftener. But our father 
 Coninck thinks we are oblifjed to it in three or four 
 years. Henriquez every five years. And Filiutius 
 says, it is probable we are not strictly obliged to it 
 every iive years. When then ? He leaves it to the 
 judgment of the wise." ' I allowed all this trifling to 
 pass, in which the wit of man sports so insolently with 
 the love of God. ' But,' continued he, ' Father Antony 
 Sirmond, who writes triumphantly on this subject, in 
 his admirable work on the Defence of Virtue, t7i which 
 he iipeahs FreMch in France, as he tells his reader, 
 thus discourses, tr. 2, s. 2, p. 12, 13, 14, etc.: "St. 
 Thomas says that we are obliged to love God as .soon 
 as we attain the use of reason. This is rather soon. 
 Scotus, every Sunday. On what founded ? Others, 
 
 
 ; i 
 
 
 'rm 
 
208 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 ^iQ 
 
 when wo are f^reviously tempted. Yes, if this were 
 the only way of avoiding temptation. Sotus, when 
 we receive a favour from God. Right, to thank liiin 
 for it. Others, at death ; this is very late. No more 
 do I think it is eacli time we receive some sacrament ; 
 attrition is here sufficient with confession, if we have 
 opportunity. Suarez says that we are obliged to it at 
 one time. But what time ? He makes you the jud<T;e, 
 and knows nothing about it. Now what this doctor 
 knew not, I know not who knows." He concludes 
 that in strictness we are not obliged to ought else than 
 to observe the other commandments without any love 
 for God, and without giving him our heart, provided 
 we do not hate him. This he proves throughout his 
 second treatise ; you will see it in every passage, and 
 among others, KJ, 11), 24, 28, where he says, God, 
 though commanding us to love him, is satisfied witli 
 our obeying him in his other commandments. Hud 
 God said, I will destroy you, whatever be the obedience 
 wliich you render, if your heart, moreover, is not mine : 
 would such a motive, in your opinion, have been pro- 
 perly proportioned to the end wdiich God ought to have 
 had, and must have had ? It is said then that we love 
 God by doing his will, as if we loved him with affec- 
 tion, as if the motive of charity disposed us to it. It' 
 that really happens, so much better ; if not, we shall 
 nevertheless strictly obey the conunandment of love 
 by doing works, so that (here see the goodness of God) 
 we are not so much connnanded to love as not to hate. 
 * Tims have our fathers discharged men from the 
 
 n 
 
■^■w 
 
 W 
 
 LOVE OF fJOD. 
 
 201) 
 
 jmivful obligation of lovinrj God actually, and this 
 doctrine is so advantacfeous, that our fathers, Annat, 
 Pintereau, Le Moine, and even A. Sirniond, defi^ndod 
 it vigorously when it was attacked. You have only 
 to soe it in their answers to moral theolorry, whilo that 
 of Father Pintereau in the 2nd p. of the Ahbe de 
 Boisic, p. 53, will enable you to judge of the value of 
 this dispensation, by the price which ho says it has 
 cost, namely, the blood of Jesus Christ. This crowns 
 the doctrine. You see, then, that this <lispensation from 
 tlie frouhlesorne obligation of loving God, is a privilege 
 of the Gospel law over the Jewish law. " It was 
 reasonable," says he, " that under the law of grace of 
 the New Testament, God should remove the troul)le- 
 some an<l difficult obligation contained in the law of 
 rigour, of exerting an act of perfect contrition in order 
 to he justified, and that he .should institute sacraments 
 to supply the defect by the aid of a simple arrange- 
 ment. Otherwise, assuredly. Christians, who are chil- 
 dren, would not now have more facility in regaining 
 the good graces of their Father than the Jews, who 
 were slaves, in obtaining mercy from their master." ' 
 
 ' father,' said I, ' no patience can .stand this. It 
 is impossible to listen without horror to things which 
 I have just heard.' ' They are not mine,' said he. ' I 
 know it well father, but you have no aversion to them, 
 and, vory far from detesting the authors of these 
 maxims, you esteem them. Are you not afraid that 
 your consent will make you a partaker of their sin ? 
 
 And can you be ignorant that St. Paul declares worthy 
 14 
 
 I \ 
 
 1 
 
 ! -l 
 
 r\ 
 
V 
 
 nth' ft 
 
 Hit i 
 
 M3 i 
 
 210 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 of deidh not only those who do the evil thing, but 
 thoHo who take ftleasure in them that do it ! Was it 
 not enough to have allowed men to do so much that 
 is forbidden, by the palliations you have introduced i 
 Was it necessary, moreover, to give them the means of 
 committing those very crimes which you have not 
 been able to excuse, by the facility and certainty of 
 absolution which you offer them, by destroying for 
 this purpose the power of the priest, and obliging' 
 them to give absolution rather as slaves than judges, 
 to the most hardened sinners, without change of life 
 or any sign of sorrow, except promises a hundred times 
 violated, without penance, if theij choose not to accept 
 of it, and without forsaking the occasions of sin, if 
 they thereby suffer inconvenience. 
 
 ' But they do not stop here : the license which they 
 have taken to shake the holiest rules of Christian con- 
 duct proceeds the length of entirely subverting the law 
 of God ! They violate the great commandment which 
 comprehends the law and the prophets ; they attack 
 piety in the heart; they take away the spirit which 
 gives lif 3 ; they say that the love of God is not neces- 
 sary to salvation ; they even go so far as to pretend 
 that "this dispensation from loving God is the advan- 
 tage which Jesus Christ brought into the world." It 
 is the height of impiety to say that the price of Christ's 
 blood is to obtain for us a dispensation from loving 
 him ! Before the incarnation, men were obliged to 
 love God ; but since God has " so loved the world as 
 to give his only begotten Son," the world which he has 
 
LOVE OF GOD. 
 
 211 
 
 re'leemed is disclinrfjod from lovinpf him ! Strnrif^o 
 tln'olorry of our days ! We daro to take ofl' tlio anatli- 
 ctaa which St. Paul pronounces ajjjainst tliose who 
 "love not the Lord Jesus Chri.st." We overthrow 
 wliat St. John says, "he that loveth not ahideth in 
 dcatli," and what Jesus Ciirist himself says, " whoso 
 loveth not, keepeth not hi.s connnar Iment.s." Thus 
 those are made worth . >o enjoy God in eternity, who 
 never once loved him on earth ! Behold the mystery 
 of iniquity accomplished. Open your eyes at last, 
 father, and if you have not been touched by the other 
 errors of your casuists, let these last extravaj^ances 
 induce you to withdraw. This is the wi.sh of my heart, 
 l)oth for yourself and all your fathers, and I pray God 
 that he would deign to make them know how false 
 the light is which has led them to such precipices, and 
 fully infu.se his love into the breasts of those who pre- 
 .suine to dispense others from loving.' 
 
 After some discourse of this nature, I left the father, 
 and .see no likelihood of returning. But do not regret 
 it, for were it necessary to continue the subject, I am 
 well enough rep*d in their books to be able to tell you 
 nearly as much of their morality, and at lea.st as much 
 of their policy, as he himself would have done. 
 
 I am, etc. 
 
 :H 
 
 flu 
 
 , i 
 
 lit 
 
 ■ 
 
 M 
 
 ...LI 
 
.? ! 
 
 h'.l 
 
 i&i 
 
 ^ 
 
 LETTEK ELEVENTH. 
 
 TO THE REVEREND FATHER JESUITS. 
 
 RIDICULOUS ERRORS MAY BE REFUTED BV RAILLERY. PRECAU- 
 TIONS TO BE ^^SED. THfcSE OBSERVED BY MONTALTE : NOT 
 SO BY THE .JESUITS. IMPIOUS BUFFOONERY OF FATHER LE 
 MOINE AND r\THER GARASSE. 
 
 Reverend Fathfih, — 1 have seen the letters you 
 are circulating again.st those which I wrote to a friend, 
 on the subject of your morality, in which one of the 
 leading points of your defence is, that I have not 
 spoken with due seriousness of your maxims : this 
 you repeat in all your writings, and push so far as to 
 say that " I have turned sacred things into ridicule." 
 
 This charge, fathers, is very surprising, and very 
 unjust. In what place find you that I have turned 
 sacred things into ridicule ? Do you refer ;)articularly 
 to the " contract Mohatra," and " the story of John of 
 Alba ? " Is this what you mean by sacred things ? 
 Think you the Mohatra a thing so venerable, that it 
 is blasphemy not to speak of it with respect ? Are 
 Father Bauni's lessons on larceny, which disposed 
 John of Alba to put it in practice against yourselves, 
 so sacred that you are entitled to bring a charge of 
 impiety agair^st those who ridicule them ? 
 
RAILLERY IN RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY. 
 
 213 
 
 "^IIR 
 
 ■ ■ 
 
 m&i \]i ■ 
 
 What, fathers ! are the fancies of your authors to 
 pass for articles of faith, and cannot we scoff at 
 passages from Escobar, and the fantastic and unchris- 
 tian decisions of your other authors, without being 
 accused of laughing at religion ? How can you pos- 
 sibly have presumed so often to repeat a thing so un- 
 reasonable ? Do you not fear that in blaming me for 
 having derided your errors, you are giving nie new 
 subject of derision in this charge, and enabling me to 
 retort it upon yourselves, by showing that the only 
 subject of my laughter is what is laughable in your 
 books ; and that thus in ridiculing your morality, I 
 have been as far from ridiculing sacred things, as the 
 doctrine of your casuists is far from the holy doctrine 
 of the Gospel ? 
 
 In truth, fathers, there is a vast difference between 
 laughing at religion, and laughing at those who pro- 
 fane it by their extravagances. It would be impiety 
 to fail in respect for the truths which the Spirit of 
 God has revealed ; but it would be another form of 
 impiety not to feel contempt for the falsehoods which 
 the spirit of man opposes to them. 
 
 For, fathers, since you oblige me to enter into this 
 subject, I pray you to consider, that as Christian 
 truths are deserving of love and respect, so the errors 
 which contradict them are deserving of contempt and 
 hatred ; because, there are two things in the truths of 
 our religion ; a divine beauty which makes them 
 lovely, and a holy majesty which makes tliem vener- 
 able : and there are also two things in error ; impiety. 
 
 * 
 
 PiM 
 
 
% 
 
 ^ ?•, 
 
 ■i! 
 
 I I 
 
 ^iil 
 
 ill 
 
 1 
 
 214 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 which makes it disgusting, and impertinence, which 
 makes it ridiculous. Hence it is, that as the saints 
 always regard truth with these two feelings of love 
 and fear; and their wisdom is wholly comprised in 
 fear, which is its principle, and love, which is its end ; 
 so, the saints regard error with these two feelings of 
 hatred and contempt, and their zeal is employed alike 
 in forcibly repelling the malice of the wicked, and 
 pouring derision on their extravagance and folly. 
 
 Think not, then, fathers, to persuade the world that 
 it is unbecoming a Christian to treat error with deri- 
 sion, since it is easy to convince those who know not, 
 that this course is just, is common with the Fathers of 
 the Church, and is authorized by Scripture, by the 
 example of the greatest saints, and by that of God 
 Himself. 
 
 For, do we not see that God at once hates and 
 despises sinners to such a degree, that at the hour of 
 their death, the time when their state is most deplor- 
 able and wretched, Divine Wisdom will join mockery 
 and laughter to the vengeance and fury which will 
 doom them to eternal punishment ? In intertill ve.slro 
 rideho et suhsannaho. And the saints, acting in the 
 same spirit, will do likewnse, since, according to David, 
 when they shall see the punishment of the wicked, 
 " they shall tremble, and, at the same time, laugh: 
 videb'imt jnsti et timehiint, et super eum ridebuni! 
 Job speaks in the same way: Innocens suhsannahlt eos. 
 
 One very remarkable circumstance connected with 
 this subject is, that in the first words which God 
 
RAILLERY IN RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY. 
 
 21; 
 
 spake to man after the fall, there is, according to the 
 Fathers, the language of mockery, and a cutting irony. 
 Fur, after Adam had disobeyed, hoping, as the devil 
 had suggested, to be like God, it appears from Scrip- 
 ture that God, in punishment, made him .subject to 
 death ; and after reducing him to this miserable con- 
 dition due to his sin, mocked him in this state in the.se 
 derisive words : " Behold, the man is become like one 
 <f us ! Ecce, Adam quasi unus ex nobis ! a deep and 
 cutting irony, with which," according to St. Jerome 
 and the commentators, God, "cut him to the quick." 
 " Adam," says Rupert, " deserved to be derided thus 
 ironically, and was made to feel his folly by this 
 ironical expression much more actuely than by a 
 .serious expression." And Hugo de St. Victor, after 
 saying the same thing, adds, that " this irony was due 
 to his sottish credulity, and that this species of ridicule 
 is an act of justice, when he towards whom it is used 
 deserves it." 
 
 You see then, fathers, that mockery is sometimes 
 the best means of bringingr men back from their wan- 
 derings, and it is then an act of justice ; becau.se, as 
 Jeremiah says, " the actions of those who err are de- 
 serving of laughter, because of their vanity : vaAia 
 sunt ct risu digna." And so far is it from being im- 
 piety to laugh, that it is the effect of divine wisdom, 
 according to the expression of St. Augustine : " The 
 wise laugh at the foolish, because they are wise, not 
 in tlieir own wi.sdom, but that divine wisdom which 
 will lauirh at the death of the wicked." 
 
 ?! 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 ^' 
 
 
 I - 
 
 1 
 P.B 
 
 
 I I 
 
 
 i 
 i 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 J 
 
 m 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 P 
 
 m 
 
210 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTEllS. 
 
 Accordingly, the prophets, who were filled with the 
 Spirit of God, have used this mockery, as we see by 
 the example of Dauiel and Elijah. In fine, instances 
 of it occur in the discourses of Jesus Christ himself ; 
 and St. Augustine observes, that when he wished to 
 humble Nicodemus, who thought himself a proficient 
 in the law, " as he saw him inflated with pride in his 
 capacity of Jewish doctor, he tests and confounds his 
 presumption by the depths of his questions ; and after 
 reducing him to an utter inability to answer, asks, 
 What ! art thou a master in Israel, and knowest not 
 these things ? just as if he had said. Proud chief, 
 acknowledjje that thou knowest nothing." And St. 
 Chrysostom and St. Cyril say on this, that " he de- 
 served to be sported with in this manner." 
 
 You see, then, fathers, that if in the present day 
 persons playing the masters towards Christians, as 
 Nicodemus and the Pharisees towards the Jews, should 
 happen to be ignorant of the principles of religion, 
 and should maintain, for example, that " men can be 
 saved without havino- once loved God during their 
 whole life," it would only be following the example of 
 Jesus Christ to make sport with their vanity and 
 
 Ignorance. 
 
 I feel confident, fathers, that these sacred examples 
 suffice to make you understand that there is nothing 
 contrary to the conduct of the saints, in laughing at 
 the errors and extravagances of men ; otherwise it 
 would be necessary to blame the greatest doctors of 
 the Church, who practised it ; as St. Jerome, in his 
 
 '«■ 
 
RAILLERY IN RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY. 
 
 217 
 
 letters and his writings against Jovinian, Vigilantius, 
 and the Pelagians ; Tertullian, in his Apology against 
 the TjUies of idolaters : St. Augustine, against the 
 monks of Africa, whom he calls the hairy men ; St. 
 Irenwus, against the Gnostics ; St. Bernard and the 
 other Fathers of the Church, who, having been the 
 imitators of the apostles, should be imitated in all after 
 ages, since they are set forth, let men say what they 
 will, as the true models of Christians, even in the 
 present day. 
 
 I (lid not think, therefore, I could go w^rong in 
 following them ; and, as 1 believe I have sufficiently 
 proved this, I will only add on this subject an excel- 
 lent quotation from Tertullian, which justifies my 
 whole procedure : " What I have done is only a mock 
 before a real combat. I have rather shown the 
 wounds which can be given you, than inflicted them. 
 If there be passages which provoke a laugh, it is be- 
 cause the subjects themselves disposed to it. There 
 aie many things which deserve to be mocked and 
 jeered at in this way, for fear of giving them weight 
 by combating them seriously. Nothing is more due 
 to vanity than laughter ; to Truth properly does it 
 belong to laugh, because she is joyous ; and to make 
 sport with her enemies, because she is sure of victory. 
 It is true, care must be taken that the raillery is not 
 low, and unbecoming the truth ; but, with this ex- 
 ception, when it can be used with dexterity, it is a 
 ^luty to use it." Do you not find this (quotation 
 fathers, very pertinent to our subject ? " The letters 
 
 ~ 
 
 
 . \: 
 
 S 
 
 Ifl 
 
 ■ 
 
 ^■i: 
 
 
 T 
 
 
 
 i- 
 
 * 1 
 
 
 
 >i 
 
 
 b 
 
 
 • •./-; 
 
 .i'it, 1 
 
218 
 
 MOVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 i ' 
 
 m 
 
 I have hithevte written are only a mock before a real 
 combat." I hcove done nothing yet but play, and 
 " shown you rather the wounds which can be given 
 you than inflicted them." I have simply exhibited 
 your passages, almost without making them the sub- 
 ject of remark. " If laughter has been excited, it is 
 because the subjects themselves disposed to it ; " for 
 what more proper to excite laughter than to see a 
 grave subject like Christian morality filled wiih such 
 grotesque fancies as yours ? Our expectation in re- 
 gard to these maxims is raised so high when Jesus 
 Christ is said to " have revealed them to fathers of the 
 Society " that on finding " that a priest who has been 
 paid to say a mass, may, besides, take payment from 
 others by yielding up to them all the share he has in 
 the sacrifice ; that a monk is not excommunicated for 
 laying aside his dress, when he does it to dance, pick 
 pockets, or go incognito into houses of bad fame ; and 
 that the injunction to hear mass is satisfied by listen- 
 ing at once to the different parts of four masses, by 
 different priests ; " when I say we hear these and such 
 like decisions, it is impossible that surprise should not 
 make us laugh, because nothing tends more to excite 
 laughter than a ridiculous disproportion between what 
 is expected and what appears. And how could the 
 '^jeater part of these matters be treated otherwise, 
 
 .ce, according to Tertullian, '' to treat them seriously 
 '■' -.Id be to give them weight ?" 
 
 vVhat ! must the power of Scripture and tradition 
 be employed to show that you kill an enemy in 
 
RAILLERY IN RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY. 
 
 219 
 
 ^Tff 
 
 ' r r f ' 
 
 
 '' '1 
 
 treachery, if you stab him from behind and in ambus- 
 cade ; that you purchase a benefice if you give money 
 as a motive to make another resign it. These are 
 matters, then, which must be despised, and which 
 deserve to be derided and Hiiorted ivith. In fine, the 
 remark of this ancient author, that nothimj is more 
 due to vanity than laughter, and the rest of the pas- 
 sage, apply here so exactly and with such convincing 
 force as to leave no room for doubt, that we nmy well 
 laugh at error without offending propriety. 
 
 I will tell you, moreover, fathers, that we may 
 laugh at it without offending charity, although this is 
 one of the charges which you still bring against me in 
 your writings : " For charity sometimes obliges us to 
 lauoh at men's errors, in order to induce themselves 
 to laugh at them and shun them ;" so says St. Augus- 
 tine: H(8C tu miserico7xiiter irride, ut eis ridenda 
 ac fugienda commendes." And the same charity, also, 
 sometimes obliges us to repel them with anger, accord- 
 ing to the saying of St. Gregory of Nazianzen : " The 
 spirit of charity and meekness has its emotions and 
 passions." In fact, as St. Augustine says, " Who would 
 dare to maintain that truth should remain disarmed 
 against falsehood, and the enemies of the faith should 
 be permitted to frighten believers with strong words, 
 or delight them with pleasing displays of wit, while 
 the orthodox must only write with a coldness of style 
 which sets the reader asleep ? " 
 
 Is it not obvious that by so acting we should allow 
 the most extravagant and pernicious errors to be 
 
 % 
 
 v^ 
 
 see; 
 
 
 ;'!-;i- ' 
 
220 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 introduced into the Church, without being permitted 
 to express contempt lest we should be charged with 
 ofi'ending propriety, or vehemently to confute them 
 lest we should be charged with want of chanty ? 
 
 What, fathers ! you shall be allowed to say that a 
 7nan may kill to avoid a blow or an injudice, and 
 we shall not be permitted publicly to refute a public 
 error of such moment ? You shall be at liberty to say 
 that a judge may in conscience retain what he hna 
 received for doing injustice, and we shall not be at 
 liberty to contradict you ? You shall print with 
 privilege and the approbation of your doctors, that 
 we may he saved 'without ever having loved, God, and 
 then shut the mouths of those who would defend the 
 true faith, by telling them they will violate brotherly 
 charity, by attacking you, and Christian moderation, 
 by laughing at your maxims ? I doubt, fathers, if 
 there are any persons in whom you have been able to 
 instil this belief; but, nevertheless, if there should be 
 any whooare so persuaded, and who think that I have 
 violated the charity which I owe you, I wish uiucli 
 they would examine what is within them that gives 
 birth to this sentiment ; for although they imagine it 
 to proceed from zeal, which will not allow them to see 
 their neighbour accused, without being offended, I 
 would beg them to consider it as not impossible that 
 it may have another source ; that it is by no means 
 improbable that it may be owing to a secret dislike, 
 often unconscious, which our corrupt nature never 
 fails to excite against those who oppose laxity of 
 
m^ 
 
 CHARGE OF UNCHARITABLENESS. 
 
 221 
 
 morals. To furnish them with a rule wliicli may 
 enal)le them to detect the true principle, I will ask 
 thorn whether, while they complain that monks have 
 been so treated, they do not complain still more that 
 monks should have so treated the truth. If they feel 
 irritated, not only against the letters, but still more 
 against the maxims therein referred to, I will admit it 
 to 1)0 possible that their resentment proceeds from 
 some degree of zeal, though a zeal by no means 
 enlightened ; and, in this case, the passages quoted 
 above will suffice to enlighten them. But if they 
 are indignant only against the censure, and not 
 against the things censured, verily, fathers, I will not 
 hesitate to tell them that they are grossly mistaken, 
 and that their zeal is very blind. 
 
 Strange zeal, which feels irritated against those who 
 expose public faults, and not against those who commit 
 them ! Strange charity, which is offended when it 
 sees manifest errors confuted, and not offended at see- 
 ing morality overthrown by these errors ! Were these 
 persons in danger of assassination, would they be 
 offended at being warned of the ambuscade which is 
 being laid for them ; and, instead of turning out of 
 their way to avoid it, would they go forward amusing 
 themselves with complaints of the little charity dis- 
 played in discovering the crinunal design of the 
 assassins ? Are they irritated when told not to eat of 
 a dish which is poisoned, or not to go into a town 
 because the plague is in it ? 
 
 Whence comes it, then, that they think it a want of 
 
 I PI? 
 
 iil 
 
 2 L 
 
 11 
 
 
 III 
 
 ■I r 
 
 ;*' 
 
222 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 charity to expose maxims injurious to religion ; and, 
 on the contrary, would think it a want of charity not 
 to warn them of things injurious to their health and 
 life, but just that the love they have for life makos 
 them give a favourable reception to whatever tends to 
 preserve it, while the indifference which they feel for 
 truth causes them not only to take no part in its 
 defence, but even to regret any effort to pat down 
 falsehood ? 
 
 Let them consider, then, as before God, to what an 
 extent the morality which your casuists diffuse on 
 every side is insulting and pernicious to the Church ; 
 how scandalous and unmeasured the license whicli 
 they introduce into morals ; how obstinate and fierce 
 your effrontery in defending them. And if they do 
 not think it time to rise against such disorders, their 
 blindness will be as much to be pitied as your own, 
 fathers, since you and they have like cause to dread 
 the woe which St. Augustine adds to that of our 
 Saviour, in the Gospel : Woe to the blind who lead ! 
 woe to the blind who are led! Vcv ccecis ducentihiis! 
 vce cwcis sequentihus ! 
 
 But, in order that you no longer may have any pre- 
 text for giving these impressions to others, nor adopt- 
 ing them yourselves, I will tell you, fathers (and I am 
 ashamed at your obliging me to tell you what I ought 
 to learn from you), I will tell you what test the Church 
 has given us to judge whereof reproof proceeds from a 
 spirit of piety and charity, or from a spirit of impiety 
 and hatred. 
 
'Tplflfp 
 
 ;i 
 
 NECESSARY PRECAUTION IN DISCUSSION. 
 
 223 
 
 The first of these rules is, that the spirit of piety 
 always disposes us to speak with truth and sincerity ; 
 whereas envy and hatred employ falsehood and 
 calumny : Splendentia et vehementia, sed rebus veris, 
 says St. Augustine. Whosoever makes use of false- 
 hood is actuated by the spirit of the devil. No direc- 
 tion of intention can rectify calumny; anil though the 
 object were to convert the whole earth, it would not be 
 lawful to blacken the innocent, because we must not 
 do the least evil to secure the success of the rjreatest 
 ffood ; and, as Scripture says, " the truth of God has no 
 need of our lie." " It is incumbent on the defenders of 
 truth," says St. Hilary, " to advance only what is 
 true." Accordingly, fathers, I can declare before God, 
 that nothinof do I detest more than to offend truth in 
 any degree however small, and that I have always 
 been particularly careful, not only not to falsify 
 it (wdiich would be horrible), but not to alter or give 
 the slightest colour to the meaning of any passage ; so 
 that if I presumed on this occasion to appropriate the 
 words of the same St. Hilary, I might well say with him, 
 " If the things I spy are false, let my discourse be held 
 infamous; but if I show that the things alleged are 
 public and manifest, I do not exceed the bounds of 
 modesty and liberty in reproving them." 
 
 But it is not enough to say only what is true ; it is 
 necessary, moreover, to abstain from saying all that is 
 true, because we ought only to state what is useful, 
 and not what can only hurt, without conferring any 
 benefit. And thus, as the first rule is to speak truly, 
 
 it. i 
 
 m 
 
224 
 
 PROVINCIAl- LETTERS. 
 
 the second is to speak discreetly. " The wickod," says 
 St. Augustine, " persecute the good in hlindly t*ollowini( 
 the passion which animates them ; whereas the good 
 persecute the wicked with a wise discretion, just as 
 surgeons are careful when they cut, wliile nnir<lorer,s 
 care not where thev strike." You know well, fathers, 
 that, in (juoting the maxims of your authors, I have 
 not produced those to which ^''ou would liave hcen 
 most sensitive, though I mifjht have done it without 
 sinning against discretion, as learned and orthodox 
 men have done it lief ore. All who have read your 
 authors know as well as yourselves, how much I have 
 spared you in this respect; besides, I have not spoken 
 a word with reference to the concerns of any individual 
 among you ; and I should be sorry to have adverted 
 to .secret and personal faults, whatever ])roof I might 
 have had of them, for I know that this is the charac- 
 teristic of hatred and enmity, and oufjht never to be 
 done unless the good of the Church imperatively 
 demand it. It is plain, then, that I have in no respect 
 acted without discretion, in what 1 have been obliged 
 to say respecting the maxims of yoiir moralit}' ; and 
 that you have more cause to congratulate yourselves 
 on my reserve than to complain of my severity. 
 
 The third rule, fathers, is : That when we are obliged 
 to use ridicule, the spirit of piety will dispose us to 
 use it only against error, and not against holy things ; 
 whereas the spirit of buffoonery, impiety and heresy 
 laughs at all that is most sacred. I have already 
 justified myself on this point ; and besides, it is a vice 
 
BUFFOONERY OF FATHER LE MOINE. 
 
 225 
 
 ' 11 f'T' 
 
 n 
 
 I ■'I 
 
 1 
 
 into wliich there is very little danf:;er of falling; when 
 one has only to speak of the opinions which 1 have 
 (juoted from your authors. 
 
 In fine, fathers, to abridge these rules, I will further 
 mention only this one, which is the principle and end 
 of all the others, namely. That the spirit of charity 
 will dispose us to have a heartfelt desire of the salva- 
 tion of those against whom we speak, and to oU'er up 
 prayers to God at the same time that we administer 
 reproof to men. " We must always," says St. Augus- 
 tine, " preserve charity in the heart, even when out- 
 wardly we are obliged to do what men may think rude, 
 and strike with a harsh, but benign severity, their 
 advantage being to be preferred to their satisfaction." 
 I believe, fathers, that nothing in my letters indicates 
 that I liave not had this desire on your account, and 
 thus charity obliges you to believe that I have had it 
 in effect when you see nothing to the contrary. From 
 this, then, it appears you cannot show that I have 
 sinned against this rule, or against axiy of those which 
 charity obliges us to follow ; and therefore you have 
 no right to say that I have violated it in what 1 have 
 done. 
 
 But, fathers, if you would now have the pleasure of 
 seeing a brief description of a conduct which sins 
 aojainst each of these rules, and really bears the charac- 
 teristics of the spirit of buffoonery, envy, and hatred, 
 I will furnish you with examples; and that they may 
 he the better known, and more familiar to you, I will 
 take them from your own writings. 
 15 
 
 ^. 
 
 \H.-' 
 
m 
 
 if| 
 
 I 
 
 Hi 
 
 4 
 
 61, >:L i'] 
 
 226 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 To bej^in with the unworthy manner in which your 
 authors speak of sacred things, whether in their ridi- 
 cule, their gallantry, or their serious discourse, do yon 
 consider the many ridiculous tales of your Father 
 Binet in his ' Consolation to the Sick,' ill adapted to 
 his professed design of giving Christian consolation to 
 those whom God afflicts ? Will you say, that the pro- 
 fane and coquettish manner in which your Father Le 
 Moine has spoken of piety, in his ' Easy Devotion,' is 
 better fitted to produce respect than contempt for the 
 idea which he forms of Christian virtue ? Does his 
 whole volume of ' Moral Portraits,' both in its prose 
 and verse, breathe anything but a spirit filled with 
 vanity and worldly folly ? Is there ought worthy of 
 a priest in the ode of the seventh book, entitled, 
 'Praise of Modesty, in which it is shown that all pretty 
 things are red, or given to blush ? ' He composed it 
 for a lady, whom he calls Delphine, to console her for 
 her frequent blushing. Accordingly, in each stanza 
 he says that some of the things most esteemed are red, 
 as roses, pomegranates, the lips, the tongue. With this 
 gallantry, disgraceful to a monk, he has the insolence 
 to introduce the blessed spirits who officiate in the 
 presence of God, and of whom Christians should always 
 speak with veneration : 
 
 Les cherubins, ces glorieux, 
 Composes de tete ot cl« plume, 
 Que Dieu de son esprit aUume, 
 Et qu'il e'claire do sea yeux ; 
 Ces illustres faces volantes. 
 
BUFFOONERY OF FATHER LE MOINE. 227 
 
 Sont tou jours rouges et brdlantes, 
 Soit du feu de Dieu, soit du leur, 
 Et dans leurs flammes nuituellea 
 Font du mouveinent de leurs ailes 
 Un e'ventail a leur chaleur. 
 
 Mais la rougeur delate en toi, 
 Delphine, avec plus d'avantage, 
 Quand I'honneiir est sur ton visage 
 Vetu de pourpre coninie un roi, etc. 
 
 What say yon to this, fathers ? Does this prefer- 
 ence of Delphine's blush to the ardour of those spirits, 
 who have no other ardour than that of charity, and 
 the comparison of a fan to tlieir mysterious wings, 
 appear to you very Christian-like in lips which conse- 
 crate the adorable body of Jesus Christ ? I know he 
 only said it to play the gallar.t, and for fun ; but this 
 is what we call laughing at sacred things. And, is it 
 not true, that if justice were done him, nothing could 
 save him from censure? although, in defence, he should 
 urge a reason which is itself not less censurable, and 
 is stated in book first, namely, " that Sorbonne has no 
 jurisdiction on Parnassus, and that the errors of that 
 land are riot subject either to censures or to the Iiuiuisi- 
 tion," as if it were only forbidden to be an impious man^ 
 and a blasphemer, in prose. But at least this would 
 not ward off censure from the following passage in the 
 advertisement to the book : " The water of the stream 
 on whose bank he composed his verses, is so well- 
 fitted to make poets, that were it converted into holy 
 water, it would not drive away the demon of poesy.' 
 
 '1^ If 
 
 ff 
 
 m|[;;;: 
 
 
 , 
 
 Miii 
 
 •p 
 
 ; I 
 
\ 1 1 
 
 ! ? ' 
 
 -:l ^ ■ 
 
 ■ i 
 
 w 
 
 II .:, 
 
 f I 
 
 " '■ 1 }| 
 
 228 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 No more would it secure your Father Garasse, who, 
 in his ' Summary of the Leading Truths of ReHgion," 
 joins blasphemy with heresy, by speaking of the sacred 
 mystery of the Incarnation in this manner : " The 
 human personality was grafted, or rode, as if on horse- 
 back, upon the personality of the Word ! " In another 
 passage from the same author, p. 510, without quoting 
 many others, it is said, on the subject of the name of 
 Jesus, usually printed thus, ,,[,,. "Some have taken 
 away the cross, and used the letters merely thus, i.H s., 
 which is a Jesus wich his clothes off." 
 
 In this unworthy manner do you treat the truths of 
 religion, contrary to the inviolable rule which obliges 
 us always to speak of them with reverence. But you 
 sin no less against the rule which obliges always to 
 speak with truth and discretion. What is more usual 
 in your writings than calumny ? Are those of Father 
 Brisacier candid ? And does he speak with truth 
 when he says, part 4, pp. 24, 25, "that the nuns of Port 
 Royal do not pray to the saints, and have no image in 
 their church ? ' Are not these very bold falsehoods, 
 seeing the contrary is manifest to the view of all Paris? 
 And does he speak with discretion when he slanders 
 the innocence of those daughters, whose lives are so 
 pure and so austere, calling them impenitent, unsacra- 
 meiitary, no7i- communicating nuns, foolish virgim^, 
 fantastical, Calarjan, desperate, anything you pleaxe; 
 and blackening them by the many other calumnies, 
 which brought down upon him the censure of the late 
 Archbishop of Paris ; when he calumniates priests of 
 
« }■' 
 
 CALUMNIES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 229 
 
 irreproachable manners, so far as to say, part 1, p. 22, 
 " that they practise novelties in confession, to entrap 
 the fair and innocent, and that it would horrify him 
 to relate the abominable crimes which they commit ? " 
 Is it not insufferable hardihood, to advance such black 
 impostures, not only without proof, but without the 
 least shadow and semblance ? I will not dilate further 
 on this subject. I defer it, intendinpf to speak of it to 
 you more at len(]fth another time, for I have yet to 
 speak with you on this matter ; and what I have now 
 said is sufficient to let you see how much you sin alike 
 against truth, and against discretion. 
 
 But it will perhaps be said that you at least do not 
 sin against the last rule, which obliges us to desire the 
 salvation of those whom we attack, and that you can- 
 not be accused of this without violating the secret of 
 your heart, which is known to God only. It is strange, 
 fathers, that we, nevertheless, have the means of con- 
 victing you, even here, and that your hatred against 
 your adversaries having carried you the length of 
 wishing their eternal ruin, you have been blind enough 
 to disclose this abominable wish ; that so I'ar from 
 secretly forming wishes for their salvation, you have 
 publicly made vows for their damnation ; and after 
 giving utterance to this miserable feeling in the town 
 of Caen, to the scandal of the whole Church, you have 
 since dared, in your printed works, to justify the 
 diabolical act even in Paris. To such outrages on 
 piety nothing can be added ; such outrages as ridicul- 
 ing and speaking unbecomingly of the most sacred 
 
 m 
 
 A 
 
 ly I >. 
 
 i 
 
II i 
 
 230 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 things ; uttering the falsest and vilest calumnies 
 against virgins and priests ; and, in fine, entertaining' 
 desires and putting up prayers for their damnation. 
 I know not, fathers, how you avoid feeling confounded, 
 and how you could oven think of charging me with 
 want of charity — me, v.'ho have spoken with so much 
 truth and reserve — witliout calling to mind the fearful 
 violations of charity which you yourselves commit by 
 such deplorable outbreaks. 
 
 To conclude with another charge which you bring 
 against me. Because, among the numerous maxims 
 to which I refer, there are some which were objected 
 to before, you complain that I again say against yoit 
 luhat had been said. I answer, it is just because you 
 have not profited by what was said that I again repeat 
 it. For where is the fruit of the many written rebukes 
 which you have received from learned doctors, and 
 from the whole university ? What have your fathers, 
 Annat, Caussin, Pintereau, and Le Moine done, in the 
 replies which they have made, but showered down 
 insult on those who had given them salutary advice ? 
 Have you suppr<'ssed the books in which those wicked 
 maxims are taught .- Have you silenced the authors 
 of them ? Are you become more circumspect ? Is it 
 not since then tliat Escobar has been so often printed 
 in France and in the Low Countries; while your 
 fathers, Cellot, Bagot, Bauni, L'Amy, Le Moine, etc., 
 cease not daily to publish the same things, and new 
 ones, moreover, as licentious as ever ? Complain no 
 longer, then, fathers, either that I have upbraided you 
 
"Ill 
 
 ilumnies 
 rtaininj:; 
 nnation. 
 [ounded, 
 me with 
 so much 
 3 fearful 
 [nmit liy 
 
 )U bring 
 maxims 
 objected 
 dnst yoii 
 luse you 
 in repeat 
 rebukes 
 ;ors, and 
 • fathers, 
 e, in the 
 3d down 
 advice ? 
 e wicked 
 authors 
 ? Is it 
 printed 
 ile your 
 )ine, etc., 
 md new 
 plain no 
 ided you 
 
 CALUMNIES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 231 
 
 for the maxims which you have not given up, or that 
 I liave objected to your new ones, and laughed at all. 
 You have only to consider them, in order to behold 
 your own confusion and my defence. Who can refrain 
 from laughing at Father Bauni's decision, regarding 
 the man who sets fire to a granary ; or that of Father 
 Cellot on restitution ; the rule of Sanchez, in favor of 
 sorcerers ; the manner in which Hurtado avoids the 
 sin of duelling, by walking in a field, and there waiting 
 for a man ; the contrivances of Father Bauni to avoid 
 usury ; the mode of avoiding simony by a detour of 
 intention and falsehood, by speaking at one time loud, 
 at another low ; and all the other opinions of your 
 (fiavest doctors ? Is more wanted, fathers, for my 
 justification ? and, as Tertullian says, is anything more 
 " due to the vanity and silliness of these opinions than 
 laughter ? " But, fathers, the corruption of manners 
 which your maxims introduce must be treated differ- 
 ently, and we may well ask, with Tertullian again, 
 " Whether should we ridicule their weakness or deplore 
 their blindness ? " Rideam vanitatem, an cxprobrerti 
 cu'citatem ? I believe, fathers, " we may laugh and 
 weep in turn ; " hccc tolerahilius vel videntur vet 
 peatur, says St. Augustine. Acknowledge, then, with 
 Scripture, that, " there is a time to laugh and a time 
 to weep." I w^ish, fathers, I may not experience in 
 you the truth of a common proverb : " There are per- 
 sons so unreasonable that there is no satisfaction in 
 whatever way we deal with them, whether laughing 
 
 ti i. 
 
 w 
 
 
 or m anger. 
 
 
 

 ( < J ; 
 
 Ell S- 
 
 LETTEE TWELFTH. 
 
 TO THE RKVEREND JESUIT FATHERS. 
 
 REFUTATION O'" THE JESUIT QUIBBLES ON ALMS AND SIMONY. 
 
 4 I 
 
 
 Reverend Fathers, — I was prepared to write you 
 on the subject of the insulting epithets which you 
 have so long applied to me in your writings, in which 
 you call me impious, buffoon, ignorant, farcer, impos- 
 tor, calumniator, cheat, heretic, Calvinist in disguise, 
 disciple of Du Moulin, possessed with a legion of devils, 
 and whatever else you please. I wish to let the world 
 understand why you treat me in this fashion, for I 
 would be sorry it should believe all this of me ; and I 
 had resolved to complain of your calumnies and im- 
 postures, when I saw your replies, in which you your- 
 selves bring the same charge against myself ; you have 
 thereby obliged me to change my purpose, and yet I 
 will still, in some measure, continue it, I hope since, 
 while defending myself, to convict you of real impos- 
 tures, in greater number than the false ones with which 
 you charge me. Indeed, fathers, you are more sus- 
 pected than I ; for it is not probable, that "ingle as I am, 
 without power, and without human support, against so 
 great a body, and sustained only by truth and sincerity. 
 
"^fl 
 
 
 [M 
 
 ALMSGIVING. 
 
 2.33 
 
 I have run the risk of losing everything, by exposing 
 myself to be convicted of imposture. In questions of 
 fact like these, it is too easy to detect falsehood. I 
 should not want people to accuse me, and justice 
 would not be denied them. You, on the other hand, 
 fathers, are not in those circumstances ; and you may 
 say against me whatever you please, while there is 
 none to whom I can complain. Such being the differ- 
 ence of our conditions, I must exercise no little self- 
 restraint, though I were not inclined to it by other 
 considerations. Meanwhile you treat nie as a notorious 
 impostor, and you thus force me to reply ; but you 
 know that this cannot be done without a new expo- 
 sure, and even without going deeper into the points of 
 your moral system ; in this I doubt if you are good 
 politicians, The war is carried on in your country, 
 and at your expense ; and though you have thought 
 that by darkening the question with scholastic terms, 
 the answer would thereby become so long, so obscure, 
 and so perplexing, that the relish for them would be 
 lost, it will not, perhaps, be altogether so ; for I will 
 try to weary you as little as possible with this kind of 
 writing. Your maxims have something so unaccount- 
 ably diverting, that everybody is amused with them. 
 Only remember that you yourselves oblige me to enter 
 upon this explanation ; and let us see which of us will 
 make the best defence. 
 
 The first of your impostures is on " Vasquez' opinions 
 concerning alms." Allow me, then, to explain it pre- 
 cisely, that there may be no obscurity in our debate. 
 
 I ill 
 
 ■I I 
 
 
 1 ■ 
 
 b' ■- 
 
 ,.'. "i J 
 
 
 mi 
 
234 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 '■' 
 
 'I , 
 
 It is very well known, fathers, that according to the 
 mind of the Church, there are two precepts in regard 
 to ahns : the one, " to give of our superfluity in the 
 ordinary necessities of the poor ; " and the other, " to 
 give even what is necessary for our station, when the 
 necessity of the poor is extreme." So says Cajetan, 
 after St. Thomas ; and hence, in order to exhibit the 
 spirit of Vasquez, touching alms, it is necessary to 
 show how he has regulated what we ought to give, as 
 well out of our superfluity as out of our necessary. 
 
 Alms from superfluity, which form the ordinary 
 supply of the poor, are entirely abolished by this single 
 maxim of EL, c. 4, n. 14, which I have quoted in my 
 Letters : " What men of the world reserve to keep up 
 their own station and that of their kindred, is not 
 called superfluity : and hence it will scarcely be found 
 that there is ever any superfluity in men of the world, 
 or even in kings." You see plainly, fathers, that by 
 this definition, all who have ambition have no super- 
 fluity ; and that thus almsgiving is annihilated, in 
 regard to the greater part of mankind. But even 
 those who should have superfluity are dispensed from 
 giving it in common necessities, according to Vasquez, 
 who is opposed to such as would oblige the rich to 
 give. Here are his words, c. 1, n. 32 : " Corduba 
 teaches that when we have superfluity, we are obliged 
 to give to those who are in an ordinary necessity ; at 
 least, a part of it, so as to fulfil the precept in some 
 degree ; but I don't think so ; sed hoc non placet ; for 
 we have shoiun the contrary against Cajetan and 
 
 m^ 
 
 '\ 
 
■^rr 
 
 
 ALMSaiVlNG. 
 
 235 
 
 Kavarre." Thus, fathers, the obligation to give such 
 ahns is absolutely overthrown, according to the view 
 which Vasquez takes. 
 
 As to the necessary which we are obliged to give in 
 cases of extreme and pressing necessity, you will see 
 hy the conditions which he introduces in forming this 
 obligation, that the wealthiest in Paris cannot be bound 
 by it once in their lives. I will mention only two of 
 them. The one is, " we 'must know that the poor per- 
 son will not be relieved by any other; luac intelllgo et 
 cd'tera omnia, quando scio nullum alium openi 
 laturmn," c. 1, n. 28. What say you, fathers ? Will 
 it often happen that in Paris, where there are so many 
 charitable persons, we can know that nobody will be 
 found to assist a poor person who is applying to us ? 
 Anrl yet, if we have not this knowledge, we may send 
 him oft' without relief, according to Vasquez. The 
 other condition is, that the necessity of the poor appli- 
 cant must be such that " he is threatened with some 
 mortal accident, or with the loss of his reputation " 
 (n. 24, 2G), a case very far from common. But what 
 shows its rarity still more is, that according to him, n. 
 45, the poor man who is in such a state as founds an 
 obligation on us to give him alms, " may in conscience 
 rob the rich man." And hence the case must be very 
 extraordinary, unless he insist that it is ordinarily law- 
 ful to rob. Thus, after destroying the obligation to 
 give alms of our superfluity, which is the chief source 
 of charity, he obliges the rich to assis6 the poor out of 
 their necessary only when he permits the poor to rob 
 
 « 
 
 ?■' 
 
 , 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 IS 
 
 I 
 
 ; 
 
 k 
 
 ^^u 
 
 A^ 
 
 m 
 
236 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 the rich. Such is the doctrine of Vasquez, to whicli 
 you refer your readers for their edification. 
 
 I come now to your Impostures. You dilate at first 
 on the obligation which Vasquez lays upon ecclesiastics 
 to give alms ; but I have not spoken of this, and will 
 speak when you please. There is no question about it 
 here. As to the laity, of whom alone we speak, it 
 seems as if you wished it to be understood that, in the 
 passage which I have quoted, Vasquez only gives the 
 view of Cajetan, and not his own. But as nothing is 
 more false, and you have not said it distinctly, I am 
 willing to believe, for your honour, that you did not 
 mean to say it. 
 
 Yoa afterwards complain loudly that, after having 
 quoted this maxim of Vasquez, " Scarcely will it be 
 found that men of the world, and even kings, ever 
 have any superfluity," I have inferred that " the ricli 
 are scarcely obliged to give alms of their superfluity." 
 But what do you mean, fathers ? If it is true that the 
 rich have seldom, if ever, any superfluity, is it not cer- 
 tain that they will seldom, if ever, be obliged to give 
 alms of their superfluity ? I would give you the argu- 
 ment in form had not Vasquez, who esteems Diana so 
 highly that he calls him the " phoenix of minds," 
 drawn the same inference from the same principle ; for 
 after quoting Vasquez's maxim, he concludes, " that in 
 the question whether the rich are obliged to give alms 
 of their superfluity, although the opinion which obliges 
 them were true, it would never, or seldom ever, happen, 
 that it was obligatory in practice." In all the discus- 
 
TT 
 
 ALMSGIVING. 
 
 237 
 
 sion, I have only followed him word for word. What, 
 then, is the nieaninjqr of this, fathers ? When Diana 
 ([uotes Vasc^uez's sentiments with eulogy, when he 
 finds them probable, and very " convenient for the 
 rich," as he says in the same place, he is neither cal- 
 umniator nor forger, and you make no complaint of 
 imposture ; whereas, when I exhibit these same senti- 
 ments of Vasquez, but without treating him as a 
 phenix, I am an impostor, a forger, a corrupter of his 
 maxims. Certainly, fathers, you have ground to fear 
 that the different treatment you give those who differ 
 not in their report, but only in the estimation in which 
 they hold your doctrine, will discover the bottom of 
 your heart, and make it apparent that your principal 
 object is to maintain the credit of your Company. So 
 long as your accommodating theology passes for wise 
 condescension, you do not disavow those who publish 
 it, but, on the contrary, laud them as contributing to 
 your design. But when it is denounced as pernicious 
 laxity, then the same interest of your Society leads you 
 to disavow maxims which injure you in the world ; 
 and thus you acknowledge them, or renounce them, 
 nut according to truth, which never changes, but 
 according to the diversities of time, as an ancient 
 writer expressed it : " Omnia j^ro tempore, nihil j^ro 
 verltate." Take care, fathers ; and that you may no 
 longer charge me with drawing from Vasquez' principle 
 an inference which he would have disavowed, know 
 that he has drawn it himself, c. 1, n. 27, " Scarcely are 
 we obliged to give alms when we are only obliged to 
 
 III 
 
 \m 
 
 ■iiliJ, 
 
*,i 
 
 TJ It 
 
 I M \ -f 
 
 238 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 give it of our superfluity, according to the opinion of 
 Cajetan, and according to MINE; et secanditrti nonfrdDi." 
 Confess, then, fathers, that I have exactly followed his 
 idea ; and consider with what conscience you have 
 dared to say, that " on going to the source it would bo 
 seen with astonishment, that he there teaches (juite the 
 contrary." 
 
 But the point on which you lay your principal stress 
 is when you say, that if Vas([uez does not oblige the 
 rich to give alms of their superfluity, he in return 
 obliges them to give alms of their necessary. But you 
 have forgotten to specify the combination of conditions 
 which he declares necessary to constitute this obligation; 
 these, which I have stated, restrict it so much that tliey 
 almost entirely annihilate it. Instead of thus candidly 
 explaining his doctrine, you say, generally, that he 
 obliges the rich to give even what is necessary to their 
 station. This is saying too much, fathers ; the rule of 
 the Gospel does not go so far ; it would be another 
 error, though one which is far from being Vasquez's. 
 To screen his laxity you attribute to him an excessive 
 strictness, which would be reprehensible, and thereby 
 deprive yourselves of all credit for being faithful 
 reporters. But he does not deserve this reproach, since 
 his doctrine is, as I have shown, that the rich are not 
 obliged, either in justice or charity, to give of their 
 superfluity, and still less of their necessary, in all the 
 ordinary wants of the poor : and that they are only 
 obliged to give of their necessary on emergencies so 
 rare, that they almost never happen. 
 
: I 
 
 ALMSGIVING. 
 
 230 
 
 This is all yon object to mo, and, therefore, it only 
 remains for n»e to show how false it is to pretend that 
 Vnsquez is stricter than Cajetan. This will be very 
 easy, since the cardinal teaches that " wc are bound in 
 justice to frive alms of our superfluity, even in the com- 
 mon necessities of the poor; because, according to the 
 holy Fathers, the rich are only the stewards of their 
 superfluity, to give it to whomsoever of the needy they 
 may select." And thus, whereas Diana speaks of max- 
 ims very convenient and very agreeable to the rich, 
 ami to their confessors," the cardinal, who has not like 
 ^insolation, declares, De Eleem, c. 6, " that he has noth- 
 ing to say to the rich, but these words of Jesus Christ: 
 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a 
 needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of 
 heaven ; and to their confessors : If the blind lead the 
 blind, they shall both fall into the ditch." So indis- 
 pensable did he consider the obligation ! This, accord- 
 ingly, the saints and all the Fathers have laid down as 
 an invariable truth. St. Thomas says, 2. 2, q. 118, art. 
 4, "There are two cases in which we are ol)liged to 
 give alms as a just debt; ex deh'ito legidl; the one, 
 when the poor are in danger ; the other, when we pos- 
 sess siuperfluous goods." And, q. 87, a. 1, "The three- 
 tenths which the Jews were to eat with the poor have 
 been augmented under the new law : because, Jesus 
 Christ requires us to give to the poor not only the 
 tenth part, but all our superfluity." And yet Vastjuez 
 is unwilling that we should be obliged to give even a 
 part of it ; such is his complaisance to the rich and his 
 
 k> L 
 
 M: 
 
 U.i«i. 
 
m' 
 
 240 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 M 
 
 ??i 
 
 hardness to the poor ; such his opposition to those feel- 
 ings of charity, which give a charm to the truth con- 
 tained in the following words of St. Gregory; truth, 
 however, which to the rich men of the world appears 
 80 rigid : " When we give to the poor what their neces- 
 sity requires, we do not so much give what is ours, as 
 restore what h their own : it is a debt of justice rather 
 than a work of mercy." 
 
 In this fashion do the saints recommend the rich 
 to share their worldly goods with the poor, if they 
 would with the poor possess heavenly blessings. Anil, 
 whereas, you labour to encourage men in ambition, 
 owing to which they never have superfluity, an^l 
 avarice, which refuses to give it when they have ; the 
 saints have laboured, on the contrary, to dispose men 
 to give their superfluity, and to convince them that 
 they will have much if they measure it not by cupidity 
 which sutlers no limits, but piety which is ingenious 
 in retrenching, in order to have the means of difl'usini;' 
 itself in acts of charity. " We shall have nmcli 
 superfluity," says St. Augustine, "if we conflne our- 
 selves to what is necessary ; but if we seek after 
 vanity, nothing will sufiice. Seek, i>rethren, as niueh 
 as suffices for tlie work of God," in otiier words, foi 
 nature, "and not what suffices for your cupiility," 
 which is the work of the devil ; " and remember that 
 the superfluity of the rich is the necessary of tlie 
 poor." 
 
 1 wish much, fathers, that wliat I say might not 
 only have the effect of Justifying myself (that weie 
 
t i 
 
 4 
 
 SIMONY. 
 
 241 
 
 i I • U 
 
 little), but also of making j^ou fool an<l abhor what is 
 corrupt in the maxims of j-our casuists, that wo mii:;jht 
 thus be sincerely united in the holy rules of the Gospel, 
 bv which we are all to be judi^ed. 
 
 As to tlie second point, which reji^ards simony, before 
 answerinof the char-jces which you brinu: atjainst me, T 
 vill hf'gin by explaining yoiir doctrine on the subject. 
 Findinoc yourselves embarrassed between the canons of 
 the Church, which inflict fearful penalties on simon- 
 ists, and the avarice of the many persons inclined to 
 this infamous traffic, you have followed your ordinary' 
 nietliod, which is to grant men what they desire, and 
 oive to God words and semblances. For what do 
 sinionist!-! want, but just money, for bestowing their 
 Iienefices ? And it is this that you have exempted 
 from simony. But, because the name of simony must 
 remain, and there must be a subject to which it may 
 be annexed, you liave chosen for this an imaginary 
 i'lea, wliich never enters the niinds of simonists, and 
 which would be of no use to them, namely, to value 
 the money considered in itself as highly as the spiritual 
 p)od considered in itself. For, who would think of 
 comparing things so disproportioned, and so different 
 iiikinil? An<l yet, provided this metaphysical com- 
 parison is not drawn, one may give his benefice to 
 another, and receive money for it withoui simony, 
 accorilhig to your authors. 
 
 It is thus you sport with religion, to favour the 
 passions of men; and yon see, notwithstanling, 
 
 with what gravity your Father VaJentia dealy out his 
 16 
 
 K 
 
-4,- 
 
 
 n 
 
 242 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 dreams at the place quoted in my letters, torn. 3, disp. 
 l(j, p. 2044 : "We may ^ive a temporal for a spiritual 
 in two ways : the one, while prizing the temporal 
 more than the spiritual, and this would be simony 
 the other, taking the temporal as the motive and eiu 
 which determines us to give the spiritual, without, 
 however, prizing the temporal more than the spiritual, 
 and then it is not simony. And the reason is, because 
 simony consists in receiving a temporal as the exact 
 price of a spiritual. Hence, if the temporal is asked, 
 si petatnr temporale, not as the price, but as the 
 motive, which determines to bestow it, it is not at all 
 simony, although the end and principal expectation lie 
 the possession of the temporal ; minime erlt simovui, 
 etiamsi temporale principalitcr intcniJatur d cxpeo- 
 tetur." And has not your great Sanchez made a simi- 
 lar discovery, according to the report of Escobar, tr. (i, 
 ex. 2, n. 40 ? Here are his words : " If a temporal 
 good is given for a spiritual good, not as a price, but as 
 a motive, determining the collator to bestow it, or as a 
 grateful acknowledgment if it has already liceii 
 received, is it simony ? Sanchez affirms that it is not." 
 Your Theses of Caen, of 1644, say : "A probable 
 opinion taught by several Catholics is, that it is not 
 simony to give a temporal good for a spiritual, when 
 it is not given as the price." As to Tannerus, here is 
 his doctrine, similar to that of Valentia, which will 
 show that you are wrong to complain of my havinj; 
 said that it is not conformable to that of St. Thomas, 
 since he himself admits this at the place quoted in my 
 
vifi r^ 
 
 SIMONY. 
 
 243 
 
 letter, t. 3, d. 5, p. 1510: "Properly and truly there is 
 no simony unless in taking a temporal good as the 
 price of a spiritual ; but when it is taken as a motive 
 disposing to give the spiritual, or as an acknowledg- 
 ment for its having been given, it is not simony, at 
 least in conscience." And, a little further on : ' The 
 same thing must be said, even should the temporal be 
 regarded as the spiritual motive, and be even preferred 
 to the spiritual; although St. Thomas and others seem 
 to say the contrary, inasmuch as they affirm that it is 
 absolute simony to give a spiritual good for a temporal, 
 when the temporal is the end. 
 
 Such, fathers, is your doctrine of simony, as taught 
 by your best authors, who in this follow each other 
 very exactly. It only remains for me, then, to reply 
 to your impostures. You have said nothing of the 
 opinion of Valentia, and thus his doctrine remains as 
 before your reply. But you stop at that of Tannerus, 
 and say that he has only decided that it was not 
 sinionj' bj' divine law ; and you wish it to be believed 
 that I have .suppressed the words divine law. In this 
 you are unreasonable, fathers, for the words diviiiP, 
 hi.ir never were in this passage. You afterwards add 
 that Tannerus declares it s'unony hy positive laii\ You 
 are mistaken, fathers ; he has not said so generally, 
 but in particular cases, in aifiihus a jure e.rpressis, as 
 he says at this place. In this he makes an exception 
 to what he had established, generally, in this passage, 
 namely, " that it is not simony in conscience," which 
 implies that it is not simony by positive law, unless 
 
 Hi 
 
 't I 
 
H 
 
 . :i 
 
 I 
 
 
 I! 
 
 244 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 you would make Tannerus profane enoufrh to maintain 
 that simony by positive law is not s.^iony in con- 
 science. But you search about purposely for the 
 words, "divine law, positive law, natural law, external 
 and internal tribunal, cases expressed in law, external 
 presumption," and others little known, that you may 
 make your escape under the cloud, and lead away the 
 attention from your errors. Nevertheless, fatliers, 
 you shall not escape by these vain subtleties, for I will 
 put questions to you so simple that they will not he 
 subject to the dwtivguo. 
 
 I ask you, then, without speaking of iDORitive hnr, 
 or presuvi2)t ion of external tribunal, if a beneficed 
 person will be a simonist, according to your authors, 
 by giving a benefice of four thousand livres annually, 
 and receiving ten thousand francs in cash, not as the 
 price of the benefice, but as a motive deternrjining him 
 to give it? Answer me distinctly, fathers; what is the 
 decision on this case according to your authors ? Will 
 not Tannerus say formally, that " it is not simony in 
 conscience, since the temporal is not the price of the 
 benefice, but only the motive which makes it to he 
 given ? " Will not Valentia, your Theses of Caen, 
 Sanchez and Escobar, in like manner decide that 
 "it is not simonv," and for the same reason? Is 
 more necessary to exempt this beneficiary from 
 simony ; and would you dare to treat him as a simon- 
 ist in y> iY confessionals, whatever your private 
 opinion of him might be, since he would be entitled to 
 shut your mouths by having acted on the opinion of 
 
M':^ 
 
 
 SIMONY. 
 
 245 
 
 mintain 
 in con- 
 i'nr tlie 
 external 
 external 
 :ou may 
 .way the 
 fathers, 
 'or I will 
 .1 not he 
 
 'tivp hi^i', 
 beneficed 
 * authors, 
 annually, 
 ot as the 
 ning him 
 lat is the 
 ? Will 
 inionv in 
 of the 
 it to he 
 of Caen, 
 ido that 
 son ? Ts 
 iry from 
 a simon- 
 private 
 ntitled to 
 pinion oi 
 
 ;e 
 
 so many grave doctors ? Confess that, according to 
 you, this beneficiary is exempt from simony ; and now 
 defend this doctrine if you can. 
 
 This, fathers, is the way to treat questions, in order 
 to unravel them, instead of perplexing them either by 
 scholastic terms, or by chan;>ing the state of the ques- 
 tion, as you do in your last charge, and in this way, 
 Tannerus, you say, declares at least that such an ex- 
 change is a great sin, and you reproach me with 
 having maliciously suppressed the circumstance, which, 
 as you -pretend, j ltd ifies him entirely. But you are 
 wrong, and in several respects. For, were what you 
 say true, the question at the place I referred to was 
 not whether there was sin, but only if there was 
 simony. Now, these are two very distinct questions : 
 sins, according to your maxims, only oblige to con- 
 fession ; simony obliges to restore ; and there are 
 persons to v/hom that would appear very different. 
 For you have indeed found expedients to make con- 
 fession mild ; but you have not found means to render 
 restitution agreeable. I have to tell you, moreover, 
 that the case which Tannerus charires with sin is not 
 t'imply that in which a spiritual good is given for a 
 tenq:)oral, wdiich is even its principal motive; but he 
 adds, where the temporal Is prized more than the sjy'irlt- 
 ual ; and this is the imaginery case of which we have 
 spoken. And it does no harm to charge that with 
 sin, since one would require to be very wicked, or very 
 stupid, not to wish to avoid sin by means so easy as 
 that of abstaining to compare the price of these two 
 
 % 
 
 
 HI , 
 
 1 1 
 1 L.1 
 
 ..|>.'-Kt 
 
m 
 
 
 
 246 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 things, while the one is allowed to be given for the 
 other. Besides, Valentia, at the place already quoted, 
 examining whether there is sin in giving a spiritual 
 good for a temporal, which is the principal motive, 
 states the grounds of those who answer affirmatively, 
 adding, " Sed hoc non videtur mlhi satis certiun ; this 
 does not seem to me quite certain." 
 
 Since that time, your father, Erade Bille, professor 
 of cases of conscience, has decided that there is no siii 
 in this, for probable opinions always go on ripenini,^ 
 This he declares in his recent writings, against wliicli 
 M. Du Pre, doctor and professor at Caen, composed his 
 fine printed address, which is very well known. Fur 
 although this Father Erade Bille acknowledges that 
 the doctrine of Valentia, followed by Father Milliard, 
 and condemned in Sorbonne, is " contrary to the com- 
 mon sentiment suspected of simony in several respects, 
 and punished by the law when the practice of it is 
 discovered," he still hesitates not to say that is a 
 probable opinion, and conseqi ntly safe in conscience, 
 and that there is neither simony nor sin in it. " It is," 
 says he, " a probable opinion, and taught by many 
 orthodox doctors, that there is no simony, and no si it 
 in giving money, or another temporal thing, for a 
 benetice, whether by way of gratitude, or as a motive, 
 without which it would not be given, provided it is 
 not given as a price equivalent to the benefice." This 
 is all that can be desired. These maxims, as you see, 
 fathers, make simony so rare that they would have 
 exculpated Simon Magus himself, who sought to pur- 
 
 llii 
 
SIMONY, 
 
 247 
 
 chase the Holy Ghost, in which he is the type of the 
 purchasinf]^ siinonist; and Gehazi, who received money 
 for a miracle, and is therefore the type of the selling 
 siinonist. For it cannot be doubted, that when Simon, 
 in the Acts, offered the apostles money to obtain their 
 power of working miracles, he made no use of the terms 
 1)11 ijin;/, or selling, or price ; he did nothing more than 
 otf'er money as a motive to make them give him this 
 s[)iritual good. Being thus, according to your authors, 
 exempt from simony, he would if he had known your 
 maxims, have been secure against the anathema of St. 
 Peter. This ifjnorance, likewise, did ijreat harm to 
 Gehazi ; when he was struck with leprosy by Elisha ; 
 for, having received money from the prince who had 
 l»een miraculously cured, only as a grateful return, and 
 not as a price equivalent to the divine virtue which 
 had performed the miracle, he could have obliged 
 Elisha to cure him under pain of mortal sin, since he 
 would have acted with the sanction of so many grave 
 doctors, and since, in like cases, your confessors are 
 oliliged to absolve their penitents, and to wash them 
 tVoni spiritual leprosy, of v/hich corporeal is only a type. 
 In good sooth, fathers, it would be easy here to turn 
 you into ridicule, and I know not why you lay your- 
 selves open to it ; for I would only have to state your 
 other maxims as that of Escobar, in the ' Practice of 
 Simony according to the Society of Jesus,' n. 40: " Js 
 it simony when two monks mutually stipulate in this 
 way : Give me your vote for the office of Provincial, 
 and I will give you mine for that of Prior ? By no 
 
 
 ! : ' 
 ! ■■ 
 
 M 
 
 1 
 
 
 III 
 
 , ..^ 
 
 WKmfif 
 
Mil 
 
 i'' ! 
 
 ■1 1 
 
 \> 
 
 \i 
 
 1 . 
 
 ii 
 
 n 
 
 248 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 means." And tliis other, tr. 6, n. 14 : " It is not simony 
 to obtain a benefice by promising money when there- 
 is no intention actmiUy to pay it; because it is only 
 feigned simony, and is no more real tlian spurious gold 
 is true gold." By tliis subtlety of conscience he has 
 found means, and through the addition of knavery to 
 simony, to secure benefices without money and witliout 
 simony. But I have not leisure to say more, for it is 
 now time to defend myself against your third calunniy 
 on the subject of bankruptcy. 
 
 Than this, fathers, nothing is more gross. You treat 
 me as an impostor with reference to a sentiment of 
 Lessius, which I do not quote for myself, but which is 
 alleged by Escobar, in a passage from which I took it ; 
 and hence were it true that Lessius is not of the 
 opinion which Escobar ascribes to him, what could be 
 more unjust than to throw the blame upon me ? When 
 I quote Lessius and your other authors for mj-self, I 
 am willing to answer for my accuracy; but as Escobar 
 has collected the opinions of twenty-four of your 
 doctors, I ask if I should be guarantee for more than 
 I quote from him ? and if I must, moreover, be respon- 
 sible for the accuracy of his quotations in the passages 
 which 1 have selected ? That would not be reasonable; 
 nc v that is the point considered here. In my letter I 
 gave the following passage from Escobar, faithfully 
 translated, and as to which, moreover, you have saiJ 
 nothing : " Can he who becomes bankrupt retain with 
 a safe conscience as much of his means as may be 
 necessary to live, with honour; ne indecore vivat ! I 
 
f f r '1 
 
 SIMONY. 
 
 249 
 
 simony 
 n there 
 is only 
 3US ^^jld 
 he has 
 ivery to 
 without 
 "or it is 
 ;alumny 
 
 ou treat 
 ment of 
 which is 
 took it ; 
 of the 
 jould be 
 ? When 
 yself, I 
 Escohar 
 of your 
 pre than 
 respon- 
 3assaj,a'S 
 sonable ; 
 letter I 
 lithfully 
 ive saiil 
 ftin with 
 may be 
 Ivat^ I 
 
 answer, yes, with Lessius ; cum Lessio assero j^osse." 
 Hereupon you tell me that Lessius is nut of that 
 opinion. But think a little what you are undertaking ; 
 for if it really is the opinion of Lessius, you will be 
 called imposters for assertinf,^ the contrary ; and if it 
 is not, Escobar will be the imposter ; so that it is now 
 absolutely certain that some member of the Society 
 must be convicted of imposture. Consider a little 
 how scandalous this will be ! You want discernment 
 to foresee the result of things. It seems to you that 
 you have only to apply insulting epithets to persons, 
 without thinking on whom they are to recoil. Why 
 did you not acquaint Escobar with your difficulty 
 before publishing it ? He would have satisfied you. 
 It is not so ditiicult to have news from Valladolid, where 
 he is in perfect health, completing his great Moral 
 Theology, in six volumes, on the tir>t of wliich 1 will 
 be able one day to say something to you. The ten 
 first letters have been sent to him ; you might also 
 have sent him your objection, and I feel confident he 
 would have given it a full answer, for he has, doubtless, 
 seen the passage in Lessius from which he has taken 
 the 'lie indecore vivai. Read carefully, fathers, and 
 you will find it there, like me, lib. 2, c. 16, n. 45 : " Idem 
 collujitiLv apevte ex jarihas cUatis, viaxime quoad ea 
 bona qwc post cesaioiiem acquint, de qiiibus is qui 
 debitor est eilnDi ex delicto 'potcste retinere <itmntuin 
 nevessurium est, lit pro sua conditlone NOX indecore 
 VI VAT. Petes, an leges id permittant de bonis, qute 
 
 1 Ik 
 
2r)0 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS, 
 
 il ■ ! 
 
 f 
 
 
 tempore instantis cesslonis hahebat ? Ita videtur 
 colligi ex JJ.D." 
 
 I will not .stop to show you that Lessius, in author- 
 izing this maxim, defies the law which allows bank- 
 rupts mere livelihood only, and not the means of 
 subsistinij with honour. It is enough to have jus- 
 tified Escobar from your charge ; it is more than I 
 was bo> nd to do. But you, fathers, you do not what 
 you are bound to do, namely, to answer the passage of 
 Escobar, whose decisions are very convenient ; because, 
 from not being connected with anything before or 
 after, and being all contained in short articles, they 
 are not subject to your distinctions. I have given you 
 his passage entire, which permits "those who make 
 cessio to retain part of their effects, though acquired 
 unjustly, to enable their family to subsist with 
 honour." On this I exclaimed in my letters, " How, 
 fathers ! by what strange charity will you have goods 
 to belong to those who have improperly acquired 
 them, rather than to lawful creditors ?" This is wliat 
 you have to answer ; but it throws you into a sad 
 perplexity, and you try to evade it by turning aside 
 from the (question, and quoting other passages of 
 Lessius, with which we have nothing to do. I ask 
 you, then, if this maxim of Escobar can be followed 
 in conscience, by those who become bankrupt ? x ake 
 care what you say. For if you answer, No, what will 
 become of your doctor, and your doctrine of proba- 
 bility ? and if you say Yes, I send you to the 
 Parliament. 
 
 : H 
 

 BANKRUPTCY. 
 
 251 
 
 I leave you in this dilemma, fathers, for I have not 
 room here to take up the next imposture on the pas- 
 sai^^e of Lessius touching liomicide. It will be my first, 
 and the rest afterwards. 
 
 Meanwhile I say nothing of the advertisements filled 
 with scandalous falsehoods, with which you conclude 
 every imposture. I will reply to all this in a letter, 
 in which I hope to trace your calumnies to their 
 source. I pity you, fathers, in having recourse to 
 suL'li remedies. The injurious things which you say 
 to me will not clear up our differences, and the men- 
 aces which you hold out in so many modes will not 
 prevent me from defending myself. You think you 
 have force and impunity ; but I think I have truth 
 and innocence. All the efforts of violence cannot 
 weaken the truth, and only serve to exalt it the more. 
 All the light of truth cannot arrest violence, and only 
 adds to its irritation. WHien force combats force, the 
 stronger destroys the weaker ; wdien discourse is 
 opposed to discourse, that which is true and convinc- 
 ing confounds and dispels that which is only vanity 
 and lies ; but violence and truth cannot do any thing 
 against each other. Let it not. however, be supposed 
 t'r(,..i this that the things are equal ; there is tins 
 e.xtreme difference, that the course of violence is 
 limited by the arrangement of Providence, who makes 
 its effects conduce to the glory of the truth which it 
 attacks ; wdiereas truth subsists eternally, and ulti- 
 mately triumphs over her enemies, because she is 
 eternal and mighty as God himself. 
 
 H.i 
 
 
 :..: Id 
 
LETTER THIRTEENTH. 
 
 TO THE REVEREND JESUIT FATHERS. 
 
 !il] 
 
 THK DOCTRINE OF LESSIUS ON IIOMFCIDK THE SAME AS TFIAT OF 
 VICTORIA : HOW EASY IT IS TO I'ASS FROM srEC'ULATluN TO 
 PRACTICE : WHY THE JESUITS HAVE MADE USE OF THIS 
 VAIN DISTINCTION, AND HOW LITTLE IT SERVES TO .IDSTllV 
 THEM. 
 
 Reverend Fathers, — I have just seen your last 
 production, in which you continue your impostures as 
 far as the twentieth, declaring that it tinislies this sort 
 of accusation which formed your first part, preparatory 
 to the second, in which you are to adopt a new iiiethoLl 
 of defence, by showing that many casuists besides 
 yours are lax as well as you. Now, then, fathers, I 
 see liow many impostures I have to answer ; and since 
 the fourth, at which we left, is on the subject of 
 homicide, it wdll be proper, while answering it, to 
 pose at the same time of the 11th, 13th, 14th, L. 
 IGth, 17th, and 18th, which are upon the same subject. 
 
 In this letter, then, I will justify the fidelity of my 
 quotations against the inaccuracies which you impute 
 to them. But because you have dared to advance in 
 your writings that the sentiments of your authors on 
 
TTTiifn 
 
 ™ 
 
 FIDELITY OF MONTALTE S QUOTATIONS. 
 
 2r)3 
 
 iminler aro confornial»lo to the rU'cisions of the popes 
 jind the ecclesiastical laws, j'ou will (jMii^o nic, in my 
 followin*^ letter, to put down a statement so rash and 
 so injurious to the Church. It is of importance to 
 show that she is free from your corruptions, and 
 thereby prevent heretics from avail int^ themselves of 
 your corruptions, to draw inferences dishonourable to 
 lior. Thus, seeinn^ on one hand your pernicious 
 maxims, and on the other the canons of the Church 
 which have always condemned them, the}' will at once 
 perceive both what they are to shun and what to 
 follow. 
 
 Your fourth imposture is on a maxim respecting 
 murder, which you pretend that I have falsely attri- 
 buted to Lessius. It is as follows : " He who has 
 roci ived a blow, may at the very instant pursue his 
 enemy, and even with the sword, not to take revenge, 
 but to repair his honour. Here you sa}' that this is 
 the opinion of the casuist Victoria. That is not pre- 
 cisely the subject of dispute ; for there is no contradic- 
 tion in saying that it belongs both to Lessius and 
 Victoria, since Lessius himself saj'S that it belongs to 
 Navarre and your Father Henri(|uez, who teach that 
 who has received a blow, may, on the very instant, 
 jiursue his man, and give him as manj' strokes as he 
 may judge necessary to repair his honour. The only 
 • [Uestion, then, is, whether Lessius agrees with these 
 authors a-, his colleague does. And hence you add 
 that Lessius refers to this opinion only to refute it, 
 and that thus I, bv ascribing to him a sentiment which 
 
254 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 ■' 
 
 he tulduces only to combat it, do the most cowardly 
 and disgraceful act of which a writer can be guilty. 
 Now, I maintain, fathers, that ho adduces it only to 
 follow it. It is a question of fact, which it will he 
 very easy to decide. Let us see, then, how you prove 
 your statement, and you will afterwards see how I 
 prove mine. 
 
 To show that Lessius is not of this sentiment, you 
 say that he condenms the practice of it. And to prove 
 this you refer to a passage, L. 2, c. 9, n. 82, in which 
 he says, " I condenm it in practice." 1 readily admit 
 that, if we turn to number 82 of Lessius, to which you 
 refer for theso words, we will find them. But what 
 will be said, fathers, when it is seen, at the same time, 
 that he there handles a very dilferent question from 
 that of which we are speaking, and that the opinion 
 which he there says he condemns in practice, is not at 
 all that of which he here treats, but one quite distinct. 
 Yet, to be convinced of this, it is only necessary to 
 open the book to which you refer. For the whole 
 sequel of his discourse will be found to be to this 
 effect. 
 
 He discusses the question, " Whether one may kill 
 for a blow ? " at number 79, and ends at numl)er <S0, 
 without using throughout, a single word of disappro- 
 bation. This question concluded, he takes up a uvw 
 one in article 81, namely, "Whether one may kill for 
 evil speaking," and it is here, in number 82, he uses 
 the words which you have quoted : " I condemn it in 
 practice." 
 
 L im 
 

 FIDELITY OF MONTALTE S QUOTATIONS. 
 
 '.o.-y 
 
 iwardly 
 
 fniiltv. 
 
 only to 
 
 will lie 
 
 u prove 
 
 i how I 
 
 Jilt, you 
 bo prove 
 n wli it'll 
 y adniit 
 lich you 
 •ut wllilt 
 me time, 
 on from 
 
 opinion 
 is not at 
 
 listinct. 
 s.sar\' to 
 whole 
 
 to this 
 
 [nay kill 
 nber SO, 
 isappro- 
 p a new 
 kill for 
 he uses 
 nin it in 
 
 Is it not then, shameful in you, fathers, to produce 
 these words, for the purpose of making it believed 
 that Lessius condemns the opinion, that one may kill 
 for a blow ? After producing this one solitary proof, 
 you raise a shout of triumph and say, "Several persons 
 of distinction in Paris have been aware of this noted 
 falsehood by reading Lessius, and have thereby learned 
 what credit is due to this calunmiator." What, fathers ! 
 is it thus you. abuse the confidence which those persons 
 of distinction place in you ? To make them suppose 
 that Lessius is not of a particular opinion, you open 
 his book to them at a place where he condemns a 
 different opinion. And as these persons have no sus- 
 picion of your good faith, and think not of examining 
 whether, at that place, he treats of the question in 
 dispute, you take advantage of their credulity. 1 feel 
 contident, fathers, that to guarantee yourselves against 
 the consequences of this disgraceful falsehood, j'ou 
 must have had recourse to your doctrine of ecjui voca- 
 tion ; and while reading the passages cloud, you said, 
 <lidte low, that he was there treating of a different 
 matter. But I know not if this reason, wdiich indeed 
 suffices to satisfy your conscience, will s 'iTl^^e to satisfy 
 the just complaint which those people of distinction 
 will make, when they find that you have hoaxed them 
 'n this way. 
 
 Take good care, then, fathers, to prevent them from 
 seeing my letters, since this is the only means left you 
 to preserve your credit some time longer. I do not 
 treat yours in that way : I send them to all my friends ; 
 
256 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 I wish all the world to see them. I believe we are 
 both right; for, at last, after publishing tliis fourth 
 imposture, with so much eclat, behold your credit gone 
 if it comes to be known that you have snbstitnttNl 
 one passage for another. It will readily be concluded 
 that, if you had found what you wanted at the place 
 w'here Lessius treats of the subject, you would nothavo 
 gone to seek it elsewhere; and you have betaken your- 
 selves to this shift, because you found nothing else to 
 serve your purpose. You wished to show in Lessius, 
 what you say in your imposture, p. 10, line 12, "that 
 lie does not grant that this opinion is probable in specu- 
 lation," and Lessius says expressly in his conclusion, 
 number 80, "This opinion of the lawfulness of killing 
 for a blow received, is probable in speculation." Is not 
 this, word for word, the reverse of your discourse ? 
 And now can one sufficiently admire your hardihood, 
 in producing, in express terms, the opposite of a matter 
 of fact ; so that wdiile you infer that Lessius was not 
 of this opinion, it is inferred very correctly, from th'^. 
 genuine passage, that he is of this opinion. 
 
 You wished, also, to make Lessius say that he c<m- 
 deiiins it in practice. And, as I have already said, 
 there is not a single word of condemnation at that 
 place, but he speaks thus, " It seems we should not 
 easily allow it in practice : In praxinon vldetur farllr 
 jicrmittrnda." Fathers, is this the language of a man 
 who condemns a maxim ? Would you say that we 
 must not easlhj permit the practice of adultery or 
 incest ? Should we not, on the contrary, conclude, that 
 
FIDELITY OF MONTALTE'S QUOTATIONS. 257 
 
 f !; 
 
 we are 
 5 fourth 
 (lit f^ono 
 ).stitutiMl 
 >nclu<lt'«l 
 bo pliice 
 not have 
 en your- 
 ff else to 
 
 Lessius, 
 12, "that 
 in specu- 
 inchision. 
 f killinof 
 ." Is not 
 
 scourse 
 
 ? 
 
 irdihood, 
 a matter 
 
 h was not 
 from the 
 
 V 
 
 t he cov- 
 ly said, 
 at that 
 ouhl not 
 iw facile 
 of a man 
 that we 
 ultery or 
 ude, that 
 
 since Lessius says no more than that the practice of it 
 ought not to be easily permitted, his opinion is, that 
 it ought to be permitted sometimes, though rarely. 
 And, as if he had wished to teach the whole world when 
 it ought to be permitted, and to free injured parties 
 from the scruples which might unseasonably disturb 
 them, if they did not know on what occasions they 
 might kill in practice, he has been careful to mark what 
 they ought to avoid, in order to practise it conscien- 
 tiously. Listen to him, fathers : " It seems it onijht 
 not to be easily permitted, because of the danger of 
 acting herein from hatred or revenge, or with excess, or 
 lest it should cause too many murders." Hence, it is 
 clear that this murder will, according to Lessius, be quite 
 lawful in practJ-^e, if we avoid these inconveniences ; in 
 other words, if we can act without luitred, without 
 revenge, and in circumstances which do not load to too 
 many murders. Do you wish an examjile, fathers ? 
 Here is one of rather recent date. It is the blow of 
 Conipiegne. For you will admit t ^- he who received 
 it proved himself, by his behaviour, inaster enough of 
 the passions of hatred and revenge. All, then, that 
 remaineil for him was to avoid a too groat number 
 of murders ; ai.d you know, fathers, it is so rare for 
 Jesuits to give blows to officers of the King's house- 
 hold, that there was no ground to fear that a murder 
 on this occasion would have brought many others in its 
 train. Hence, you cannot deny that this Jesuit was 
 killable with a safe conscience, and that, on this 
 occasion, the injured party might havo practised upon 
 17 
 
 1 : 
 
 ■» 1 
 
 -.1* 
 
i'- \ 
 
 i] 
 
 IP 
 
 258 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 him the doctrine of Lessius. And, perhaps, fathers, he 
 would have done so, had he been taught in your school, 
 and had he learned from Escobar, that " a man who 
 has received a blow is reputed to be without honour 
 until he has slain him who gave it." But you have 
 ground to believe that the very opposite instructions, 
 given him by a curate to whom you have not too <rreat 
 a liking, contributed not a little, on this occasion, to 
 save the life of a Jesuit. 
 
 Speak no more, then, of those inconveniences whicli 
 can be avoided on so many occasions, and but for wliich 
 murder is lawful, according to Lessius, even in pructice. 
 This, indeed, is acknowledged by many of your autliors, 
 quoted by Escobar in the ' Practice of Homicide 
 according to your Society.' " Is it lawful," he asks, " to 
 kill him who has given a blow ? Lessius savs it is 
 lawful in speculation, but that we must not counsel it 
 in practice, 71011 consulendum in praxi, because of tiie 
 danger of hatred or murder, hurtful to the State, which 
 might ensue. But others have judged that, on avoiding- 
 these inconveniences, it is lawful and sure in practice: 
 In praxi jnvhahilem et tiUamJudicariivt Henrique:, 
 etc. See how opinions gradually rise to the height of 
 probability. For thither have you brought this one, 
 by finally permitting it, without distinction of specula- 
 tion or practice, in these terms : " It is allowable, when 
 we have received a blow, forthwith to strike witi' the 
 sword, not for revenge, but to preserve our honMur." 
 So taught your fathers at Caen, in their public 
 writings, which the University produced to Parlia- 
 
I' 
 
 1,1 
 ■I ■ 
 
 SPECULATION AND PRACTICE. 
 
 259 
 
 ,thers, he 
 11 r school, 
 nan who 
 t honour 
 ^'ou have 
 tractions, 
 too great 
 icasion, to 
 
 ces which 
 for which 
 1 practice. 
 ir autliors, 
 Homicide 
 } asks, " to 
 says it is 
 counsel it 
 use of the 
 ate, which 
 avoid iui,' 
 practice : 
 rnriqiiez, 
 hein-ht of 
 this one, 
 :»f specula- 
 ible, when 
 e witl' the 
 honour." 
 cir puhlic 
 to I'arlia- 
 
 ment, when it pre.sented the third petition agamst 
 your doctrine of lioniieide, as is seen at p. 339 of the 
 volume which was then printed. 
 
 Observe, then, fathers, that your authors, of their 
 own accord, destroy this vain distinction between 
 speculation and practice wdiich the University had 
 treated with ridicule, and the invention of which is one 
 of the secrets of your policy, which it is right should 
 be understood. For besides that the understanding of 
 it is necessary for the loth, 10th, 17th and 18th Impos- 
 tures, it is always seasonable to give gradual <levelop- 
 nients of the principles of this mysterious policy. 
 
 When you undertook to decide cases of conscience 
 in a favorable and accommodating manner, you found 
 some in which relimon alone w^as concerned, as 
 ([uestions of contrition, penitence, the love of God, and 
 all those which only touch the interior of conscience. 
 But you found others in wdiich the State, as well as 
 religion, has an interest, sucli as usury, l)ankruptcy, 
 homicide, and the like. And it is a distressino; thing 
 to those who have a true love for tin; Church to 
 see that, on an infinity of occasions in which you liad 
 onb' reli<don to contend with, vou have overturned its 
 law^ without reserve, without distinction, and without 
 fear, as is seen in your very daring opinions against 
 repentance and the love of God, because you know 
 that this is not the place where God visibly exercises 
 his justice; Imtin those in which tlio State is interested 
 as well as religion, apprehension of the justice of men 
 has made you divide your opinions, and form two 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 ft 
 
 k 
 
 
 ■1, 
 
JA aBj M a a. n:, yi. 
 
 ki 
 
 I 
 
 260 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 question^? on those subjects ; the one which you call 
 speculative, in which, considering the crimes in them- 
 selves, without regarding the interest of the State, but 
 only the law of God which forbids them, you have 
 pernr.itted them without hesitation, thus overthrowing 
 the law of God which condemns them ; the other, which 
 you call practical, in which, considerint: the damage 
 which the State would receive, and th». presence of 
 magistrates who maintain the public safety, you do not 
 always approve in practice of those murders and crimes 
 which you find permitted in speculation, that you may 
 thus screen yourselves from animadversion by the 
 judges. Thus,for example, on the question, whether it is 
 lawful to kill, for evil-speaking, your authors, Filiutius, 
 tr. 29, c. 3, n. 52 ; Reginald, 1. 21, c. 5, n. G3, and others 
 answer, " This is lawful in speculation, Ex 'prohuhili 
 opinione licet, but I do not approve of it in practice, 
 because of the great number of murders which would 
 take place, and do injury to the State, if all evil 
 speakers were killed. Besides, any one killing for this 
 cause would be punished criminally." In this way it 
 is that your opinions begin to appear with this distinc- 
 tion, by means of which you only destroy religion 
 without directly offending the State. You thereby 
 think yourselves secure; for you imagine that the credit 
 which you have in the Church will save your attempts 
 against the tru.h from being punished, and that the 
 precautions which you give, against readily putting 
 these permissions in practice, will screen you in regard 
 to the magistrates, who not being judges of cases of 
 
hi J 
 
 '■ !<l 
 
 SPECULATION AND PRACTICE. 
 
 261 
 
 ^011 call 
 n them- 
 :ate, but 
 ou have 
 browing 
 ;r, which 
 damage 
 isence of 
 lU do not 
 id crimes 
 you may 
 I by the 
 jther it is 
 Filiutius, 
 nd others 
 prohohili 
 . practice, 
 ch would 
 
 all evil 
 o' for this 
 is way it 
 is distinc- 
 
 religion 
 
 thereby 
 the credit 
 attempts 
 
 that the 
 
 y puttiii'4 
 
 in regard 
 
 f cases of 
 
 conscience, have properly an interest only in outward 
 practice. Thus, an opinion which would be condemned 
 under the name of practice, is brought forward in 
 safety under the name of speculation. But the founda- 
 tion being secured, it h: not difficult to rear up the 
 rest of your maxims. There was an infinite distance 
 between the divine prohil^ition to kill, and the specu- 
 lative permission of it by your authors ; but the distance 
 is very small between this perndssion and practice. It 
 only remains to show, that what is permitted specula- 
 tively, is also permitted practically. Reasons for this 
 will not be wanting. You have found them in more 
 difficult cases. Would you like to see, fathers, how it 
 is accomplished ? Follow this reasoning of Escobar, 
 who has distinctly decided it in the first of the six 
 volumes of his great Moral Theology, of which I have 
 spoken to you, and in which he sees things very differ- 
 ently from what he did when he made his collection 
 of your four-and-twenty elders. At that time, he 
 thought that there could be probable opinions in specu- 
 lation, which were not safe in practice ; but he has 
 since ascertained the contrary, and very well proved 
 it in the later w^ork. Such is the growth, Vjy mere 
 lapse of time, of the doctrine of probability in general, 
 as well as of each probable opinion in particular. 
 Listen, then, to him, in pnjeloq., n. 14: "I do not see 
 how it can be, that what appears lawful in speculation, 
 should not be so in practice; since, what we may do in 
 practice, depends on what we find permitted in specu- 
 lation ; and tlie.se things only differ from each other as 
 
 nil 
 
 I h 
 
 Ml 
 
 1 : 
 
 
 vf 
 
 (IP 
 
 
 \ : 
 
 i 
 
 
 i. i. IL 
 
 U|iy|L 
 
■■ 
 
 262 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 the cause from the effect. For it is speculation that 
 determines to action. Hence it folloius, that ive may, 
 with a safe conscience, follow in '^yractice opinions, 
 probable in speculation, and even with more safety 
 than those which have not been so well examined 
 speculatively." 
 
 In truth, fathers, your Escobar reasons well enouj^h 
 sometimes. The union between speculation and practice 
 is so close, that when the one has taken root, you have 
 no ditRculty in allowing the other to appear without 
 disguise. This was seen in the permission to kill for 
 a blow, which, from siniple speculation, has been boldly 
 carried b;y Lessius to a practice which should not be 
 easily permitted ; and thence by Escobar to an easij 
 practice; whence you fathers of Caen have brought it 
 to a, fall permission, without distinction of theory aiitl 
 practice, as you have already seen. 
 
 Thus you make your opinions grow by degrees. Did 
 they appear all at once in their utmost excess, they 
 would cause horror ; but "this slow and imperceptible 
 progress gently habituates men to them, and takes off 
 the scandal. By this means the permission to kill, a 
 permission so abhorred by the State and by the Church, 
 is first introduced into the Church, and thereafter from 
 the Church into the State. 
 
 We have seen a similar success attend the opinion 
 of killing for evil speaking. For, in the present day 
 it has attained to a like permission without any dis- 
 tinction. I would not stop to give you the passages from 
 your fathers, were it not to confound the assurance 
 
tM! 
 
 HOMICIDE. 
 
 2G3 
 
 issurauce 
 
 you have had to say twice, in your lii'leenth Imposture, 
 p. 20 and .'iO, "tliat there is not a Jesuit who makes it 
 lawful to kill for evil speaking." When you say this, 
 fathers, you ought to prevent me from seeing it, since 
 it is so easy for me to answer. Not only have your 
 Fathers Reginald, Filiutius, etc., permitted it in specu- 
 lation, as I have already said, while the principle of 
 Escobar leads us surely from speculation to practice, 
 but I have to tell you, moreover, that you have several 
 authors who have permitted it indistinct terms; among 
 others, Father Hereau, in his public lectures, for which 
 the king caused his arrest in your house, because, in 
 addition to several other errors, he had taught, that 
 " when one disparages us before persons of distinction, 
 after being warned to desist, it is lawful to kill him, 
 not, indeed, in public, for fear of scandal, but secretly ; 
 sed clam." 
 
 I have already spoken to you of Father L'Amy, and 
 you are not ignorant that his doctrine on this subject 
 was censured by order of the University of Louvain. 
 ^Jevertheless, not two months ago, your Father Des 
 Bois maintained at Rouen the censured doctrine of 
 Father L'Amy, and taught that " it is lawful to a 
 monk to defend the honour which he has acquired by 
 his virtue, even by killing him w^ho attacks his 
 reputation; etlain cuTii movteinvasoris." This caused 
 such scandal in the town, that all the curates united 
 in silencing him, and obliging him to retract his doc- 
 trine, by canonical proceedings. The process is at the 
 Officiality. 
 
 
 :i.: 
 
 i^(- 
 
 ■li^- 
 
 I '. 
 
hf yi 
 
 liF ! 
 
 264 
 
 t»ROVlNCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 What do you mean, then, fathers ? How do you 
 take it upon you, after this, to maintain that " no 
 Jesuit thinks it lawful to kill for evil speaking?" 
 And was more necessary to convict you, than the very 
 opinions of your fathers which you quote, since thuy 
 do not prohibit the killinfj; speculatively, but only in 
 practice, " because of the evil which would happen to 
 the State." For I here ask you, whether any other 
 point is debated between us than simply whether you 
 have overthrown the law of God which forbids murder. 
 The question is not, whether you have harmed the 
 State, but whether you have harmed religion. Of 
 what use, then, in this discussion, is it to show that 
 you have spared the State, when you at the same time 
 make it apparent that you have destroyed religion, by 
 saying as you do, page 28, 1. 3, "that the meaning of 
 Reginald on the question of killing for evil speaking, 
 is that an individual is entitled to use this sort of 
 defence, con.sidering it simply in itself ? " I need no 
 more than this avowal for your confutation. "An in- 
 dividual," you say, " is entitled to use this defence ; " 
 in other words, to kill for evil speaking, " considering 
 the thing in itself;" consequently, the law of God, 
 which forbids to kill, is overthrown by this decision. 
 
 There is no use in saying afterwards, as you do, 
 that "it is unlawful and criminal, even according to 
 the law of God, by reason of the murders and disorder 
 which it would cause in the State, because God obliges 
 us to have respect to the welfare of the State." This 
 is away from the question ; for, fathers, there are two 
 
 iiib' 
 
 'i' '- 
 

 fiOMICIDE. 
 
 265 
 
 laws to be observed ; the one which forl)ids to kill, 
 and the other which forbids injury to the State. 
 Roi^inald, perhaps, has not violated the law which for- 
 bids injury to the State, but he has certainly violated 
 that which forbids to kill. Now, this is the only one 
 which is here considered. Besides, your other authors, 
 who have permitted these murders in practice, have 
 overthrown both the one and the other. But let us 
 get forward, fathers. We are well aware that you 
 sometimes forbid injury to the State; and you say 
 your design in this is to observe the law of God, which 
 enjoins the maintenance of the State. That may be 
 true, although it is not certain, since you might do the 
 .same thing, merely from fear of the judges. Let us, 
 then, if you please, examine the principle from which 
 this movement proceeds. 
 
 Is it not true, fathers, that if you really looked to 
 God, and if the observance of his law was the first 
 and leading object of your thoughts, this feeling would 
 uniformly predominate in all your important decisions, 
 and dispose you on all these occasions to espouse the 
 interests of religion ? But if it is seen, on the contrary, 
 that you, on so many occasions, violate the most sacred 
 injunctions which God has laid upon men whenever 
 his law is the only obstacle, and that on the very 
 occasions of which we speak you annihilate the law of 
 God, which prohibits these actions as criminal in 
 themselves, and show that your only ground for not 
 approving them in practice is fear of the judges, do 
 you not justify the belief that you pay no regard to 
 
 I in 
 
 
 H 
 
 ti 
 
 •jrr 
 
 L... Hi 
 
< i. 
 
 26G 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 God in this fear, and that, if you in appearance main- 
 tain his law in so far as re^'ards the obligation not to 
 injure the State, it is not for his law itself, but to serve 
 your own ends, just as the least religious politicians 
 have always done ? 
 
 What, fathers ! you will tell us that, if regard is hud 
 only to the law of God, which prohibits homicide, we 
 may kill for evil speaking ? And after having thus 
 violated the eternal law of God, you think you can 
 remove the scandal you have caused and persuade us 
 of your respect towards him, by forbidding the practice 
 of it from State considerations, and fear of the judges ? 
 Is not this, on the contrary, to cause new scandal ? 
 1 do not mean scandal, because the respect which you 
 thereby testify for judges. It is not for that I reproach 
 you (and you make a ridiculous play upon it at p. 29). 
 I do not reproach you for fearing the judges, but for 
 fearing only the judges. It is this I blame, because it 
 is making God less the enemy of crime than men. 
 Did you say an evil speaker may be killed according 
 to men, but not according to God, it would be less 
 intolerable ; but when you pretend that what is too 
 criminal to be allowed by men, is innocent and righteous 
 in the eyes of God, who is righteousness itself, what do 
 you else but show to all the world that by this horrible 
 subversion, so contrary to the spirit of the saints, you 
 are bold against God, and cowardly towards men ? 
 Had you been sincere in wishing to condemn those 
 murders, you would not have interfered with the order 
 of God, which forbids them. And had you been daring 
 
•nfFfp 
 
 POLICY Of THE JESUITS. 
 
 267 
 
 enough to permit these murders at fir.st, you would 
 have openly permitted them in detiancc of the law« 
 both of God and men. But as you wi.sh to permit 
 them insensibly, and steal by surprise on the ma<^Ms- 
 trates, who watch over the public safety, you have 
 resorted to the linesse of separating your niaxnns, and 
 j)rnjK)undinijf on one hand " that it is lawful specula- 
 tively to kill for evil speaking," (for you are allowed 
 to examine matters of .speculation) and producing, on 
 the other, this i.solated maxim, " that what is lawful 
 in speculation, is so, also, in practice." For what 
 interest does the State seem to have in this general and 
 metaphysical proposition ? And thus these two an- 
 saspected principles being received separately, the 
 vii^ilance of the magistrate is lulled to sleep, and 
 nothing more is required than to bring these maxims 
 together, in order to obtain the conclusion at which you 
 aim, namely, that it is lawful in practice to kill for 
 simple .slander. 
 
 For here, fathers, lies one of the craftiest articles of 
 your policy, namely, to give a separate place in your 
 writings to the maxims which go together in your 
 opinitms. In this way you have separately estal)lished 
 your doctrine of probability, which I have often ex- 
 plained. And the general principle being thus secured, 
 you advance propositions separately, which, though 
 possibly innocent in themselves, become horrible when 
 joined to this pernicious principle. As an illustration, 
 1 will give the words which you use at p. 11 of your 
 Imposture, and to which it is necessary for me to reply: 
 
 s 
 
 ^^ ■ ,'- 
 
m' 
 
 i>G8 
 
 HlOVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 " Several celebrated tlieoloijians arc of opinion that 
 we may kill t'oi* a dIow received." It is (piite certain, 
 fathers, that if a person, not holdinj^ the doctrine of 
 probability, had said so, there would be nothinLj to 
 censure in it. In that case it would only be a simple 
 statement, without JUiy conclusion ; but when you, 
 fathers, and all who hoM the danj^erous doctrine, "that 
 wiuit< ver celebrated authors ap})rove is probable uikI 
 safe in conscience," add to this, 'that several celebratud 
 authors are of opinion that one may kill for a blow 
 receiv:d," what is this but to place a dagf^er in the 
 hands of all Christians, to slay those who have otiended 
 them, by assuring them that they can do it with a safe 
 conscience, because, in so doini^ they will follow the 
 opinion of so many grave authors ? 
 
 What horrible language is this, which, while it says 
 that certain authors hold a damnable opinion, is at the 
 same time, a decision in favour of this damnable 
 opinion, and authorizes in conscience whatever it merely 
 relates ! This language of your school, fathers, is now 
 understood ; and it is astonishing how you can have the 
 face to speak of it so openly, since it strips your senti- 
 ments of all disguise, and convicts you of holding it to 
 be safe in conscience " to kill for a blow," the moment 
 you tell us that this opinion is maintained by several 
 celebrated authors. 
 
 You cannot defend yourselves from this, fathers, any 
 more than avail yourselves of the passages of Vasijuez 
 and Huarez, with which you oppose me, and in which 
 they condemn the murders which their colleagues 
 
 H^^IM 
 
POLICY OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 269 
 
 approve. Those testimonies, separated from the rest 
 of your doctrine, might blind those who do not fully 
 understand it. But it is necessary to bring your 
 principles and your maxims together. You say, then, 
 here, that V'^ascjuez does not permit murder: but what 
 say you on the other hand, fathers ? " That the prol)a- 
 bility of a sentiment does not hinder the probability 
 of its opposite." And, again, " That it is lawful to 
 follow the opinion which is least probable and least 
 safe, while discarding that which is most probaV)le and 
 most .safe." What follows from all this taken together, 
 but just that we have entire liberty of conscience to 
 adopt any one of all these opposite opinions that we 
 please ? What, then, fathers, becomes of the benefit 
 which you expected from the.se ((uotations ? It dis- 
 appears ; since, for your condemnation, it is only 
 necessary to bring together those maxims which you 
 separate for your Justification. Why produce passages 
 from your authors which I have not quoted, to excuse 
 those which I have quoted, since th(y have nothing in 
 common? What right does it give you to call me 
 iiiiposfo)'^ Have I said that all your fathers are 
 equally heterodox ? Have 1 not shown, on the con- 
 trary, that your chief interest is to have them of all 
 opinions, in order to supply all your wants ? To those 
 who would kill you will present Lcssiiis, to those who 
 would not kill you will produce Vas(juez, in order that 
 nobod}" may retire dissatisfied, and without having a 
 grave author on his side. Lessius will sjieak as a hea- 
 then of homici<le, and perhaps as a Christian of alms. 
 
mi' 
 
 III 
 
 mmu^ 
 
 ii; 
 
 
 270 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 imiiiii 
 
 Vasquez will speak as a heathen of alms, and as a Chris- 
 tian of homicide. But by means of the probability 
 which Vasquez and Lessius maintain, and which makes 
 all your opinions common, they will lend their senti- 
 ments to one another, and will be oblif^ed to rr'ive absolu- 
 tion to those who have ac^ed according to the opinions 
 which each of them condemns. This variety, then, con- 
 foimds yon the more. Uniformity would be more toler- 
 able, and there is nothing more ccmtrary to the express 
 order of St. Ignatius and your first generals, than this 
 hotch-potch of all sorts of opinions. I may perhaps 
 some day speak of them to you, fathers, nnd it will 
 cause surprise to see how far you have fallen away 
 f'-om the primitive spirit of your order, and how vdur 
 own generals foresaw that the impurity of your doc- 
 trine in regard to morals mirjht be fatal not onlv to 
 your Societj', but to the whole Church. 
 
 I tell you meantime, that you cannot derive any 
 advantage from the opinion of Vasquez. It would ho 
 strange if among so many Jesuits who have written, 
 there should not be one or two who have said what all 
 Christians confess. There is no honour in maintainin<,', 
 according to the Gospel, tliat we cannot kill for a blow, 
 but there is horrid disgrace in denying it. This is, 
 therefore, so far from justifying you, that nothing goes 
 farther to overwhelm you, than the fact, that having 
 among you doctors who have told the truth, you have 
 not remained in the truth, and have loved darkness 
 rather than light. For you have learned from Vas(]uez, 
 •'that it is a heathen and not a Christian opinion, to say 
 
POLICY OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 •271 
 
 a Chris- 
 )babilitv 
 ;h makes 
 ir senti- 
 eabsolu- 
 opinions 
 hen, cou- 
 Dre toler- 
 3 express 
 :han this 
 perhaps 
 1(1 it will 
 en away 
 low your 
 ^'Oiir <loc- 
 t only to 
 
 rive any 
 would I'fi 
 
 written, 
 
 what all 
 ntaininij, 
 )r a blow. 
 This is, 
 \\n(^ goes 
 t having,' 
 
 oil have 
 darkness 
 
 Vas(]uez, 
 jn, to say 
 
 that a blow with a fist may be returned by a blow from 
 a stick ; it is to overturn the Decalogue and the Gospel, 
 to say that we can kill for a blow ; and that the great- 
 est villians among men acknowdedge this." And yet, 
 in opposition to these known truths, you have allowed 
 Lessius, Escobar, and others, to decide that all the 
 <livine prohibitions against homicide do not hinder it 
 from being law^ful to kill for a blow^ Of what use, 
 then, is it now to produce this passage from Vasquez, 
 against the sentiment of Lessius, unless it be to show 
 ' r r^essius i.s a Pagan and a r'lllaim, according to 
 \a.^-l lez ? And this is what I durst not say. What 
 inference can we draw, unless it be that Lessius over- 
 turns the Decalogue and the Gospel ; that at the last 
 (lay Vasquez will condemn Lessius on this point, as 
 Lessius will condemn Vasquez on another ; and that all 
 your grave authors will rise up in judgment against 
 each other, and mutually condemn each other, for their 
 frightful excesses against the law of Jesus Christ ? 
 
 Let us conclude, then, fathers, that since your proba- 
 bility renders the good sentiments of s'»me of your 
 authors useless to the ( Jhurch, and useful < nly to your 
 policy, their contrariety only serves to show the dupli- 
 city of your heart, which you have completely bared 
 before us, in declaring on the one hand that Vas(|uez 
 and Suarez are opposed to murder and on the other, 
 that several celebrated authors are in favour of murder; 
 that you might thus otier two ways to men, thereby 
 destroying the simplicity of the Spirit of God, who 
 pronounces a woe on such as are double-mi!ided, and 
 choose for themselves double ways. 
 
 ! ''i 
 
M it 
 
 1 
 
 : 
 
 1- 
 
 |i 
 
 1:1 ' 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 'iiliiii^ 
 
 LETTEK FvOUETEENTH. 
 
 TO THE REV^ERENO JESUIT FATHERS. 
 
 THE MAXIMS OF THE JESUITS ON HOMICIDE REFUTED FROM TllK 
 FATHEKS. ANSWER IN PASSING TO SOME OF THEIR CALl MNIE.S. 
 THEIR DOCTRINE CONTRASTED WITH THE F<)R:\IS OBSERVEI: IN- 
 CRIMINAL TRIALS. 
 
 Reverend Fathers, — Had I only to answer tlie 
 three reinaininr^ itnpostures on homicide, I should have 
 no need of a long discourse. You will see them here 
 refuted in a few words. But as I deem it far iiiort' 
 important to give the world an abhorrence for your 
 opinions on this subject, than to justify the tidrlity ot 
 my quotations, I will be obliged to employ the greater 
 part of this letter in the refutation of your maxims, to 
 represent to you how widely you have wandered from 
 the sentiments of the Church, and even of nature 
 The permissions to kill, which you give on so m uiy 
 occasions, make it apparent that, in this matter, V'U 
 have to such a deuree forgotten the law of IuhI. mtv: 
 extinguished natural light, that you reijuire to 1- 
 brought back to the simplest principles of religion ami 
 common sense. For what is more natural than t!ie 
 sentiment, that '' one individual has no right over tlu' 
 
HOMICIDE. 
 
 27:} 
 
 life of another?" "Wo are so taiii^lit this l^- our- 
 selves," says St. Clirysostoin, " tluit when God t;-avt! tlio 
 commandnioiit nob to kill, he did not aild, heeaiise 
 homicide is an evil ; because," says this Father, " the 
 law presumes that we have already learned this truth 
 from nature." 
 
 Accordingly, this commandment has be(;n bin<ling 
 on men at all times. The Gospel confirmed that of the 
 law, and the Decalogue only renewed tliat which men 
 had received from God before the law, in the person 
 of Noah, from whom all men were to spring. For at 
 this renewal of the world, God said to Noah, "Surely 
 your blood of your lives will I require ; at the haml 
 of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of 
 man. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall 
 his blood be shed : for in the image of God made he 
 man." 
 
 This general pi'ohibition takes away from men all 
 power over the life of men. And so completely has 
 ({od reserved it to himself alone, that, according to 
 Ciiristian truth, opposed in this to the false maxims of 
 Paganism, man has not even power over his own life. 
 But, because it has pleased his providenc(^ to preserve 
 human society, and punish the wicked who disturb it, 
 he has himself established laws for depriving crimi- 
 nals of life; and thus, those deaths wliich would be 
 punishable nusdeeds without his order, become lau<l- 
 ahle punishments by his order, apart from which every- 
 thing is unjust. This has l)een admirably expounded 
 
 hy St. Augustine, in his City of God, b. i., c. 21. " God 
 18 
 
 *h 
 
Mm 
 
 ! 'fTm 
 
 274 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 ft ill 
 
 Wiillli 
 miiiii 
 
 himself ha>s somewhat iiKxlified this ujonoral ))rohilti- 
 tioM to kill, both by the laws which he luis estaiilisluMl 
 for executing criminals, and by the special orders 
 which he has sometimes given to put individuals to 
 death. In killing, in those cases, it is not man who 
 kills, but God, of whom man is only the instruiiicnt. 
 like a sword in the hand of him who uses it. Hut these 
 cases excepted, whoso kills incurs the guilt of murder." 
 
 It is certain, then, fathers, that God alone lius n. 
 right to take away life, and that, nevertheless, liavini,' 
 established laws for adjudging criminals to die, ]\v hus 
 made kings or republics the depositories of this powor. 
 This St. Paul teaches us, when speaking of the riijht 
 which sovereigns have tc put men to death, he makes 
 it come down from heaven, saying, that "they bear 
 not the sword in vain, because they are the ministers 
 of God, to execute his vengeance on the guilty." 
 
 But as God gave them this right, so he obliires 
 them to exercise it as he himself would do, that is, 
 with justice, according to the words of St. Paul, in the 
 same place, " Rulers are not a terror to good works, 
 but to the evil. Wilt thou, then, not be afraid of the 
 power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have 
 praise of the same : for he is the minister of God to 
 thee for good," And this limitation, far from lowering,' 
 their power, on the contrary, very highly exalts it; 
 because it makes it like that of God, who is impotent 
 to do evil and onmipotent to do good, and distinguishes 
 it from that of devils, who are impotent for good, and 
 have power only for evil. There is only this difFerence 
 

 FIOMICIDE. 
 
 27: 
 
 
 betA^een God and rulers, that God lieinL,' justice and 
 wisdom itself, may put to death on the spot whom he 
 pleases, and hi what way he pleases, i^esides beincr 
 sovereign master of the life of men, it is certain that 
 he never takes it from them without cause, or without 
 cognizance, since he is as incapable of injustice as of 
 error. IJut princes may not so act; because, while 
 they are the ministers of God, they are still men, and 
 not gods. Bad impressions might surprise them ; false 
 suspicions might sour them ; passion might transport 
 them ; and it is this which has disposed them, of tlieir 
 own accord, to stoop to human means, and appoint 
 judges in their States, to wliom they have communi- 
 cated this power, in order that the authority which 
 God has given them may onh'' be emploj'ed for the 
 end for which they have received it. 
 
 Consider, then, fathers, that to be free from murder, 
 it is necessary alike to act by the authority of God, 
 and according to the justice of God ; and that if these 
 two conditions are not combined, there is sin either in 
 killing with his authority, but without justice, or in 
 killing in justice, but without his authority. From 
 the necessity of this union, it follows, according to St. 
 Augustine, that "he wlio without authority kills a 
 criminal, becomes a criminal him.self, chiefly on this 
 ground, that he usurps an authority which God has 
 not given him;" and on the contrary, judges who 
 have this authority, are nevertheless murderers if they 
 put an innocent man to death, against the laws which 
 they ought to observe. 
 
 ii 
 
276 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 Such, fathers, arc the principles of tramiuility and 
 public safety, which have been received at all times 
 and in all places, and on which all the legislators of 
 the world, sacred and profane, have founded their 
 laws ; not even the heathens having ever made an 
 exception to this rule, save when the loss of chastity 
 or life could not otherwise be avoided, because they 
 thought that then, as Cicero says, " the laws themselves 
 seem to offer arms to those who are in such necessity." 
 
 But, apart from this occasion, of which T do not here 
 speak, there never was a law which permitted indi- 
 viduals to kill, and which suffered it as vou do, to 
 ward off an insult, and to avoid the loss of honour or 
 property, when life is not at the same time endangered. 
 This, fathers, I maintain that the infidels themselves 
 never did ; on the contrary, they expressly forbade it. 
 For the law of the twelve tables of Rome bore, that 
 "it is not permitted to kill a robber in the day time, 
 not defending himself with arms." This had already 
 been prohibited in Exodus xxi. 22, and the law Fiirom 
 (ad Leg. Cornel.), which is taken from Ulpian, /o?'?Ht/.s 
 even the killing of robbers in t/te nigJit time, v)lio do 
 not put our life in peril. See this in Giijas, de d'vj. 
 justitia et jure, 1. 3. 
 
 Tell us, then, fathers, by what authority you permit, 
 what laws, both divine and human, forbid, and what 
 right Lessius has to say, 1. 2, c. 9, n. 06-72 : " Exodus 
 forbids to kill robbers in the day time, not defendinsr 
 themselves by arms, and those who so kill are punishetl 
 criminally. Nevertheless, they are not culpable in 
 
 1 .1 
 
HOMICIDE. 
 
 277 
 
 conscience, when they are not certain of being able to 
 recover what is stolen, or are in doubt of it, as Sotus 
 says, because we are not obliged to run the risk of any 
 loss to save a robber. All this, moreover, is lawful 
 even for ecclesiastics." What strancje hardihood ! The 
 law of Moses punishes those who kill robbers when 
 they do not attack our life, and the law of the Gospel, 
 according to you, acquits them ^ What, fathers, did 
 Jesus Christ come to destroy tlie law and not to fulfil 
 it { " The judges," says Lessius, " would punish those 
 who should kill on this occasion, but they would not 
 be culpable in conscience." Is the law of Jesus Christ, 
 then, more cruel and less inimical to murder than that 
 of the heathen, from whom judges have borrowed 
 those civil laws which condemn it ? Do Christians 
 set more value on worldly goods, or less value on 
 human life, than did idolators and infidels ? On what 
 'lo you found, fathers I Not on any express law, either 
 of (iod or man, but only on this strange reason : " The 
 law allows us to defend ourselves against robbers, and 
 repel force by force. Now, defence being permitted, 
 murder is also deemed permitted, since without it, 
 defence would ofttimes be impossible." 
 
 It is false, fathers, that defence being permitted, 
 murder also is permitted. This cruel mode of defending 
 is the source of all your errors, and is called by the 
 Faculty of Louvain, a ^nurderoas defence, defeitslo 
 occuiva, in their censure of the doctrine of Father 
 L'Amy on homicide. I maintain, then, that so great 
 is the difference in the eye of the law, between killing 
 
S' , , 
 
 
 •1 ■* 1 
 
 ••Mi ; '. 
 
 ':'"' iili 
 
 
 '; 
 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 ' 1 
 
 ; i 
 
 1; 
 
 
 W' 
 
 , 
 
 I 'i 
 
 Mi 
 
 278 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 and self-defence, that on the very occasions on wliich 
 defence is permitted, murder is forltidden, provided 
 life is not in danger. Listen to this, fathers, in Cujas, 
 at the same place : " It is permitted to repel him wlu) 
 comes to seize upon your property, hut it is not per- 
 mitted to h''dl hiiiL' And attain, if any one comes to 
 strike and not to kill us, it is indeed permitted to I'epel 
 him, but it Is not permitted to kUl hhu. 
 
 Who, then, £^iive you power to say, as do Molina, 
 Kerjinald, Filiutius, Escobar, Lessius, and others, "it is 
 ])ermitted to kill liim who comes to strike us." Ami, 
 af^^ain : " It is permitted to kill him who wishes to 
 insult us, according to the opinion of all the casuists ; 
 e,v seideidla omnmin," as Lessius says, n. 74. By 
 what authority dou you, who are only individuals, ifive 
 this power of killing' to individuals, and to monks 
 even? How dare you usurp this right of life ami 
 death, which belongs essentially to God only, and is the 
 most glorious symbol of sovereign power ? It was to 
 this your answer was recjuired ; and you think you 
 have satisfied it by simply saying in your thirteenth 
 Imposture, "that the value for which Molina permits 
 us to kill a robber, who is in flight without otteriniif 
 an}' violence, is not so small as I have said, and nuist 
 be larger than six ducats." How weak this is, fathers ! 
 At what do you fix it ? At fifteen or sixteen ducats ? 
 I will not reproach you less. At all events, you cannot 
 say that it exceeds the value of a horse ; for Lessius, 
 1. 2, c. 9, n. 74, decides precisely, that " it is lawful to 
 kill a thief who is »'nnning away with our horse." But 
 
If"' r. 
 
 
 HOMICIDE. 
 
 279 
 
 I tell yoii, iTioreovcr, that accordinf,^ to Molina, this 
 value is fixed at six ducats, as I liave stated ; and if 
 vou will not ponnit this, let us take an arhiter, whom 
 vt)n cannot refuse. I make choice, then, of your father 
 Ixc^iiiald, who, explainin<^ this same passa(,'o of Molina, 
 I. '2], n. G8, declares that Molina there Hxes the value 
 at which it is not permitted to kill at from three to 
 fi\(' ducats. And thus, fathers, I shall not only have 
 .Molina, but also Recfinald. 
 
 It will he less easy foi' me to refute your four- 
 teenth Imposture, concerning the permission " to kill 
 a roi)ber wdio would deprive us of a crown," according^ 
 to Molina. This is so evident, that Escobar will testify 
 it to you, tr. 1, ex. 7, n. 44, where he says " that Molina 
 regularly fixes the value for which we may kill at a 
 crown." Accordinf^ly, in the fourteenth Imposture 
 you merely charge me with having suppressed the last 
 words of the passage, " that we niust here observe the 
 moderation of a just defence." Why, then, do you not 
 also complain that Escobar has not given them ? But 
 liow clumsy you are ! You tliink we don't under.stand 
 what is meant, according to you, by defending one's 
 self. Do we not know that it is to use " a murderous 
 defence ? " You would wish it to l)e understood as if 
 Molina meant that when life is put in peril by hoMing 
 the crown, we may kill, because then it is in defence 
 of our life. Were that the case, why should he say at 
 the same place that herein " he is contrary to Carrerus 
 and Bald," according to wdiom it is lawful to kill, in 
 order to save our life ? I declare to vou, then, he 
 
IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 1.25 
 
 ![ JO 
 
 IM 
 
 1.8 
 
 1-4 IIIIII.6 
 
 V] 
 
 <^ 
 
 /i 
 
 /a 
 
 VI 
 
 % 
 
 '^ :;> 
 
 ^y 
 
 /A 
 
 --* - 'w 
 
 
 o 
 
 / 
 
 Hiotographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, NY. HS80 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
 4" 
 
 \ 
 
 ^v 
 
 \\ 
 
 %s^ 
 
 9%, 
 
 ^ 
 
 Q^ 
 
 %^ 
 
 
 -<i,^ 
 
 I 
 

 
280 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 u 
 
 •J' 
 
 simply means, that if our crown can be saved witliout 
 killing the roV)ber, we should not kill him ; but if we 
 can only save it by killing, even though we run no 
 risk of our life, as when the robber has no arms, we 
 may lawfully take them, and kill him, to save our 
 crown ; and in so doing we do not, according to him, 
 exceed the moderation of a just defence. To show you 
 this, allow him to explain himself, torn. 4, tr. '.], d. 11, 
 n. 5, " we fail not in the moderation of a just defenco 
 although we take arms against those who h ive none, 
 or take better than theirs. I know that some take an 
 opposite view, but I approve not of their opinion, even 
 in the external tribunal." 
 
 Accordingly, fathers, it is evident that your authors 
 make it lawful to kill in defence of property and 
 honour where life is in no danger. On the same 
 principle they authorize duelling, as I have shown by 
 numerous passages, to which you have given no 
 answer. In your papers you only attack a single 
 passage of your Father Layman, who permits it, 
 " when otherwise there would be a risk of losinijj 
 fortune or honour ; " and you say that I have sup- 
 pressed the additional words, that " that case is rare." 
 1 w^onder at you, fathers ! Pleasing impostures these 
 you charge me with ! It is the question, then, is it, 
 Whether that case is rare ? The question is, Whether 
 or not duelling is there permitted ? These are two 
 and separate (juestions. Layman, in his capacity of 
 casuist, has to decide whether duelling is permitted, 
 and he declares that it is. We will easily judge with- 
 
HOMICIDE. 
 
 281 
 
 out him, whether the case is rare, and will declare to 
 liim that it is a very ordinary case. If you like better 
 to believe your good friend, Diana, he will tell you 
 that it is very common, p. 5, tr. 14, misc. 2, resol. 99. 
 But whether it be rare or not, and whether in this 
 Layi'ian follows Navarre, as you are so anxious to 
 make out, is it not abominable in him to consent to 
 the opi lion, that to preserve a false honour it is per- 
 mitted in conscience to accept a duel, against the edicts 
 of all Christian States, and against all the canons ot 
 the Church ; while you cannot produce, in support of 
 all these diabolical maxims, either laws or canons, the 
 authority of Scripture or Fathers, or the example of 
 any saint, but only the impious syllogism : " Honour 
 is dearer than life ; but it is lawful to kill in defence 
 of life ; therefore it is lawful to kill in defence of 
 honour " ? What, fathers ! because the corruption of 
 men makes them love this false honour more than the 
 life which God has given th^m to serve him, they shall 
 be permitted to kill in order to preserve it ? The very 
 circumstance of loving that honour more than life is 
 itself a fearful evil ; and yet this vicious attachment, 
 which is capable of polluting the holiest actions, if it 
 is made their end, will be capable of justifying the 
 most criminal actions, hccmise it is made their end ! 
 
 What perversion, fathers ! And who sees not to 
 what excess it may lead ! For it is visible that it goes 
 the length of killing for the most trivial things, when 
 it is made a point of honour to preserve them ; I say, 
 even to kill for an apple ! You would complain of 
 
 Mr 
 
 ' H 
 
! 
 
 mi 
 
 'lii 
 
 t 
 
 ! 
 
 hi 
 
 1: 
 
 I?' 
 
 i 
 
 ' ( 
 
 li ' 
 
 282 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 5 
 
 I! 
 •ill 
 
 me, fathers, and say that I draw malicious inferences 
 from your doctrine, were I not supported by the 
 authority of the grave Lessius, who thus speaks, n. OH : 
 " It is not lawful to kill to preserve a thing of little 
 value, as a crown or an apple ; aut pro porno ; unless 
 in a case where it were disgraceful to lose it ; for then 
 one might take it back again, and even kill, if neces- 
 sary, to recover it; et 8i opus eat, occidere ; because 
 this is not so much to defend property as honour." 
 That is precise, fathers ; and to finish your doctrine 
 with a maxim which comprehends all the others, listen 
 to this one from your Father Hereau, who had taken 
 it from Lessius : " The right of self-defence extends to 
 all that is necessary to defend us from all injury." 
 
 What strange consequences are contained in this 
 inhuman principle ! and how strong the obligation to 
 oppose it, which lies upon all men, and especially ail 
 men in authority 1 To this they are bound, not only 
 by the public interest, but by their own ; since your 
 casuists, quoted in my letters, extend the permission 
 to kill even to them. And thus the factious, who fear 
 the punishment of their attempts, which they never 
 think unjust, easily persuading themselves that they 
 are put down by violence, will, at the same time, think 
 " that the right of self-defence extends to all that is 
 necessary to keep them from injury." They will no 
 longer have to vanquish remorse of conscience, which 
 arrests the greater part of crimes in their birth ; their 
 only thought will be how to surmount the obstacles 
 from without. 
 
m 
 
 HOMlCinE. 
 
 283 
 
 I will not speak of them here, fathers, any more 
 than of other murders you have permitted, which are 
 still more abominable, and more important to States 
 than all these, and of which Lessius treats so openly 
 in Doubts 4th and 10th, as well as many others of 
 your authors. It were to be wished that these horrible 
 maxims had never come out of hell ; and that the 
 devil, the first author of them, had never found men 
 so devoted to his orders as to publish them among 
 Christians. 
 
 From all I have hitherto said, it is easy to judge 
 how contrary the laxity of your opinions is to the 
 strictness of civil and even heathen laws. What, then, 
 will it be when we contrast them with ecclesia.stical 
 Iftws, which should be incomparably more holy, since 
 the Church alone knows and possesses true holiness ? 
 Accordingly, this chaste spouse of the Son of God, who, 
 in imitation of her husband, well knows how to shed 
 her blood for others, but not to shed that of others for 
 herself, regards murder with very special abhorrence, 
 an abhorrence proportioned to the special light which 
 God has communicated to her. She considers men not 
 only as men, but as images of the God whom she 
 adores. She has for each of them a holy respect 
 which makes them all venerable in her eyes, as ran- 
 somed by an infinite price, to become temples of the 
 living God. And thus she regards the death of a man 
 who is slain without the order of her God, as not only 
 a murder, but an act of sacrilege, which deprives htr 
 of one of her members, since whether he be or be not 
 
 u 
 
 u . 
 
 x\i 
 
284 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 
 L ,>y 
 
 a believer, she always considers him as either actually 
 one of her children, or as capable of being one. 
 
 These, fathers, are the holy grounds which, ever 
 since God became man for the salvation of men, have 
 made their condition of so much importance to the 
 Church, that she has always punished homicide, which 
 destroys them, as one of the greatest crimes which can 
 be committed against God. I will mention some of 
 these examples, though not under the idea that all 
 these severe rules prescribed should still be observed 
 (I know that the Church may vary this external dis- 
 cipline), but to show what is her immutable mind on 
 this subject ; for the penances which she ordains for 
 murder may differ according to diversity of times, hut 
 no change of time can ever change her abhorrence for 
 murder. 
 
 For a long time the Church would not, till death, ho 
 reconciled to persons guilty of wilful murder ; such as 
 those forms of it, which you permit. The celebrated 
 Council of Ancyra subjects them to penance during 
 their whole life ; and the Church has since deemed it 
 sufficient indulgence to reduce the period to a groat 
 number of years. Still more to deter Christians from 
 wilful murder, she has very severely punished even 
 those which had happened through imprudence, as 
 may be seen in St. Basil, St. Gregory of Nyssen, the 
 decrees of Pope Zachariah, and Alexander II. The 
 canons reported by Isaac, bishop of Langres, t. 2, 18, 
 imposed seven years of penance for killing in self- 
 defence. And we see that St. Hildebert, bishop of 
 
HOMICIDE. 
 
 285 
 
 Mans, replied to Yves of Chartres, " that he had done 
 rifjfhtly in interdicting a priest for life, who hud, in 
 self-defence, killed a robber with a stone." 
 
 No longer, then, have the effrontery to say that your 
 decisions are conformable to the spirit and the canons 
 of the Church. We defy you to show one which 
 allows us to icill to defend our property merely, for I 
 am not speaking of the occasions on which we should 
 also have to defend our life, se snaque liberando. That 
 there is none, is confessed by your own authors, among 
 others, your father L'Amy, torn, c, disp. 20, n. 136. 
 " There is not," says he, " any law, human or divine, 
 thiit expressly permits us to kill a robber who does 
 not defend himself." And yet this is what you ex- 
 pressly permit. We defy you to show one which 
 permits to kill for honour, for a blow, for insult, and 
 evil speaking. We defy you to show one which permits 
 to kill witnesses, judges, and magistrates for any 
 injustice apprehended from them. The spirit of the 
 Church is altogether a stranger to those seditious 
 maxims which open the door to those commotions to ' 
 which nations are so naturally exposed. She has 
 always taught her children not to render evil for evil, 
 to give place unto wrath ; not to resent violence, to 
 render to all their due, honour, tribute, submission, 
 obedience to magistrates and superiors, even those of 
 them who are unjust, because we ought always to 
 respect in them the power of God, who has placed them 
 over us. It prohibits them still more strongly than civil 
 laws, from taking justice into their own hands: it is 
 
 [> 
 
 
M 
 
 ■' ! 
 
 i 
 
 
 286 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 in her spirit that Christian monarchs do not so even 
 in crimes ^f high treason, but hand over tho criminals 
 to judges, that they may be punislied according to tlio 
 laws and the rules of justice; a procedure so diH'erc'nt 
 from yours, that the contrast will put you to tho blush. 
 Since the subject suggests it, I pray you to follow this 
 comparison between the mode in which wo may kill 
 our enemies according to you, and that in which judges 
 put criminals to death. 
 
 All the world knows, fathers, that private indi- 
 viduals are never allowed to demand the death of any 
 one, and that although a man should have ruinod us, 
 maimed us, burned our house, slain our parent, and 
 would fain, moreover, assassinate ourselves, and destroy 
 our reputation, no court of justice would listen to any 
 demand we might make for his death. Hence it was 
 necessary to establish public officers, who demand it on 
 the part of the king, or rather on the part of God. In 
 your opinion, fathers, is it from grimace and pretence 
 that Christian judges have established this regulation ? 
 Have they not done it in order to adapt civil laws to 
 those of the Gospel, lest the external practice of justice 
 might be contrary to the inward sentiments which 
 Christians ought to have ? It is plain how strongly 
 these initiatory steps of justice confutes you ; the sequel 
 will crush you. 
 
 Suppose, then, fathers, that these pablic officers de- 
 mand the death of him who has committed all these 
 crimes, what will be done thereupon ? Will the dagger 
 be forthwith plunged into his bosom ? No, fathers : 
 
•^1 
 
 CRIMINAL JUDGMENT. 
 
 287 
 
 the life of a man is too important ; it is treated with 
 more respect ; the laws have not placed it at the dis- 
 posal of all classes of persons, but only at the disposal 
 of judges of proved integrity and ability. And do 
 you think that one only is sufficient to condemn a man 
 to death ? Seven at least are necessary, fathers. It 
 is necessary that, of these seven, there be not one whom 
 the criminal has offended, lest passion might influence 
 or corrupt his judgment. And you know, fathers, how, 
 in order that their intellect may be clear, it is still the 
 practice to devote the morning to these duties. Such 
 are the anxious provisions to prepare them for this 
 great act, in which they stand in the place of God, 
 whose ministers they are, in order that they may con- 
 demn those only whom he condemns. 
 
 And this is the reason why, in order to act as faithful 
 stewards of this divine power in taking away the lives 
 of men, they must, in judging, proceed on the deposi- 
 tions of witnesses, and according to all the other forms 
 which are prescribed : after all this, they must decide 
 conscientiously in terms of law, and judge none worthy 
 of death save those whom the laws condemn to die. 
 And then, fathers, if the order of God obliges them to 
 give up the bodies of these wretched beings to punish- 
 ment, the same order of God obliges them to take care 
 of their guilty souls ; and it is just because they are 
 guilty that they are obliged to take care of them, so 
 that they are not sent to execution till means have 
 been given them to provide for their conscience. All 
 this is very pure and very innocent ; and yet, so much 
 
 H^ 
 
 m 
 
 W: 
 
 r 
 
288 
 
 PROVINCIAL LKTTERS. 
 
 ■I' 
 
 does tbe Church abhor blood, that those wlio have 
 taken part in a sentence of death, thouj^h accompanied 
 with all the circumstances of religion, she judges in- 
 capable of ministering at her altars ; from this it is easy 
 to conceive what idea the Church has of homicide. 
 
 Such, fathers, is the manner in which, in the or<ler of 
 justice, the lives of men are disposed of ; let us now 
 see how you dispose of them. In your new laws there 
 is only one judge, and this judge the very person who 
 is otfended. He is at once j udge, party, and executioner. 
 He passes sentence and executes it on the spot ; and, 
 without respect to either the body or the soul, he kills 
 and damns him for whom Jesus Christ died ; and all 
 this to avoid a blow, or a calumny, or an outrageous 
 word, or other similar offences, for which a judge, with 
 lawful authority, would be cimiinal in passing sentence 
 of death on those who had committed them, because 
 the laws are very far from so condemning them. And, 
 in fine, to crown these excesses, there is no sin or iireffu- 
 larity in killing in this manner, without authority, 
 and against the laws, be the killer a monk, or even 
 a priest. Where are we, fathers ? Are those who speak 
 in this way monks and priests ? Are they Christians ? 
 Are they Turks ? Are they men ? Are they devils ? 
 And are these mysteries revealed by the Lamb to those 
 of his Society, or abominations suggested by the dragon 
 to his followers ? 
 
 In short, fathers, for whom do you wish to be taken ? 
 for children of the Gospel, or for enemies of the Gospel ? 
 It must be the one or the other, for there is no middle 
 
HOMICIDE. 
 
 289 
 
 party. He who is not with Jesus Clirist is aojainst 
 liiiu ; tht'se two classes include all men. Accordinj^ to 
 St. Augustine, there are two nations and two worlds 
 spr3ad over the whole earth; the world of tin; children 
 of God, forming a body of which Christ is head and 
 king ; and the world, inimical to God, of which the 
 devil is head and king. Hence, Jesus Christ is called 
 the prince and God of the world, because he has subjects 
 and worshippers everywhere ; and the devil is also 
 called in Scripture the prince and god of this world, 
 because he everywhere has supporters and slaves. .Fesus 
 Christ has introduced into the Church, which is his 
 empire, the laws which please his eternal wisdom; an<l 
 the devil has introduced into the world, which is his 
 kingdom, the laws which he wi.shed there to establish. 
 Jesus Christ has made it honoural>le to suti'er ; the 
 devil not to suffer. Jesus Chri.st has told those who 
 receive a blow on the one cheek, to turn the other; and 
 the devil has told those to whom a blow is ottered, to 
 kill those who would so injure them. Jesus Christ 
 declares those happy who share his ignominy, and the 
 devil declares tho.se miserable who are in ignominy. 
 Jesus Christ says, Woe to you when men .shall speak 
 well of you; and the devil says. Woe to those of whom 
 the world speaks not with esteem. 
 
 See, now, then, fathers, to which of these two king- 
 doms you belong. You have heard the language of 
 the city of peace, which is called the mystical Jeru- 
 salem ; and you have heard the language of the city 
 of confusion, which Scripture calls "spiritual Sodom," 
 19 
 
 i :;i 
 
 fj 
 
 < i' ' .1 
 
290 
 
 PROVINCIAL LKTTERS. 
 
 ;,M' 
 
 ■ |i 
 
 Which of these two languajjes do you urKlerstaiid ? 
 Which of them do you speak ? According to St. Paul, 
 those who are Christ's have the same sentiments as 
 Christ, and those who are children of the devil, ex 
 patre diaholo, who has been a murderer from the 
 beginning of the world, do, as our Saviour says, follow 
 the maxims of the devil. Let us listen, then, to the 
 language of your school, and interrogate your autliors. 
 When a blow is given us, ought we to bear it rather 
 than kill him who gives it ? or is it lawful to kill in 
 order to avoid the affront? "It is lawful," says Lessius, 
 Molina, Escobar, Reginald, Filiutius, Baldellus, and the 
 other Jesuits, "it is lawful to kill him who would fjive 
 us a blow." Is that the language of Jesus Christ ? 
 Answer once more, would a man be without honour if 
 he sufTered a blow without killing him who gave it !' 
 " Is it not true," says Escobar, " that so long as the 
 man lives who has given us a blow we remain without 
 honour ? " Yes, fathers, icithout that honour which 
 the devil has transfused with his proud spirit into that 
 of his proud children. This honour has always been 
 the idol of men possessed by the spirit of the world. 
 To preserve this honour, of which the devil is the true 
 dispenser, men make a sacrifice to him of their lives, 
 by the rage for duelling to which they abandon theiii- 
 selvesl; of their honour, by the ignominous punishments 
 to which they become obnoxious ; and of their salva- 
 tion, by the peril of damnation which they incur, even 
 sepulture being denied to them by the ecclesiastical 
 canons. But we should praise God for having ill umined 
 
^ 
 
 I' 
 
 HOMICIDE. 
 
 291 
 
 the mind of the kinpj with a purer light than tlmt of 
 your theolopry. His stern edicts on tliis subject have 
 not made duelling a crime; they only punish the crime 
 inseparable from duelling. By the fear of his strict 
 justice, he has arrested those who were not arrested 
 by the fear of divine justice ; and his piety has made 
 him aware that the honour of CI vistians consists in 
 the observance of the commands ol uod and the rules 
 of Christianity, and not in th^^t phantom '^f honour, 
 which, vain though it be, you ..old forth .s a legitimate 
 excuse for murder. Thus your a) ir<lerous decisions 
 are nov; the aversion of the whole world, and your 
 wiser course would be to change y^ur sentiments, if 
 not from a principle of religion, at least on grouivls of 
 policy. By a voluntary condemnation of these inhuman 
 opinions, fathers, prevent the bad effects which might 
 result from them, and for which you would be respon- 
 sible ; and in order to conceive a greater abhorrence 
 of homicide, remember that the first crime of fallen 
 man was a murder in the person of the first saint ; his 
 greatest crime, a murder in the person of the chief of 
 all the saints ; and, that murder is the only crime 
 which destroys at once the State, the Church, nature 
 and piety. 
 
 I have just seen the reply of your apologist to my 
 Thirteenth Letter. But if he has no better answer to 
 this one, which meets the most of his difl^iculties, he 
 will not deserve a reply. I am sorry to see him hourly 
 breaking away from his subject to vent calumnies and 
 insults against the living and the dead. But, to gairx 
 
 ' 
 
 11 
 
 ^«K 
 
292 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 b I 
 
 Mi 
 
 ;,: ; t 
 
 credit for the memorandums with which you furnish 
 him, you should not make him publicly disavow a fact 
 so public as the blow of Compiegne. It is certain, 
 fathers, from the acknowledgment of the injured party, 
 that he was struck on the cheek by the hand of a 
 Jesuit, and all that your friends have been able to do 
 is to make it doubtful whether it was with the palm 
 or with the back of the hand, and raise the question, 
 whether a stroke on the cheek with the back of the 
 hand be or be not a blow. I know not to whom it 
 belongs to decide, but in the mean time, I will believe 
 that it is at all events a probable blow. This saves my 
 conscience. 
 
 [fHr ^ t 
 
 m 
 
I furnish 
 DW a fact 
 i certain, 
 ed party, 
 and of a 
 bble to do 
 the pahii 
 
 question, 
 ck of the 
 
 whom it 
 ill believe 
 5 saves my 
 
 LETTEB FIFTEENTH 
 
 TO THE REVEREND JESUIT FATHERS. 
 
 THE JESUITS ERASE CALUMNY FROM THE LIST OF SINS, AND MAKE 
 NO SCRUPLE OF USING IT TO CRY DOWN THEIR ENEMIES. 
 
 Reverend Fathers, — Since your impostures in- 
 crease every day, and you employ them in cruelly 
 outraging the feelings of all persons of piety who are 
 opposed to your errors, I feel obliged, on their behalf, 
 and that of the Church, to unfold a mystery in your 
 conduct, which I promised long ago, in order that men 
 may be able to ascertain from your own maxims what 
 faith they ought to put in your accusations and insults. 
 
 I am aware that those who do not fully know you, 
 have difficulty in making up their minds on this sub- 
 ject, because they feel themselves under the necessity 
 of either believing the incredible crimes of which you 
 accuse your enemies, or of holding you as impostors, 
 which also seems to them incredible. What ! they 
 ask, if these things were not true would monks 
 publish them ; would they renounce their conscience 
 and damn themselves by their calumnies ? Such is 
 their mode of reasoning ; and thus the visible proofs 
 by which your falsehoods are overthrown, running 
 
 •It [1 
 
 
 w 
 
 f 
 
 1 
 
 :(!/ 
 
 ^M 
 
 
 lMl 
 
n 
 
 !■ i 
 
 294 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 counter to the opinion which they have of your sin- 
 cerity, their mind remains suspended between the 
 evidence of the truth, which they cannot deny, and 
 the duty of charity, which they are apprehensive of 
 violatinfT. Hence, as the only thing which hinders 
 them from rejecting your calumnies is the good opinion 
 they have of you, the moment they come to under- 
 stand that you have not that idea of a calumny which 
 they imagine you have, there cannot be a doubt that 
 the weifjht of truth will forthwith determime them no 
 longer to believe your impostures. This, the ., fathers 
 will be the subject of this letter. 
 
 I will not only show that your writings are full of 
 calunmy ; I will go farther. One may utter falsehoods, 
 believing them to be truths, but the character of liar 
 includes an intention to lie. I will show, then, fathers, 
 that your intention is to lie and calumniate ; and that 
 knowingly and with design you charge your enemies 
 with crimes of which you know that they are innocent, 
 because you think you can do it without falling from 
 a state of grace. Though you know this point of your 
 morality as well as I do, I will, nevertheless, tell it 
 you, in order that there may be no doubt of it when 
 it is seen that I address myself to you, and maintain 
 it to yourselves, while you cannot have the assurance 
 to deny it, without confirming my charge by the very 
 disavowal ; for the doctrine is so common in your 
 schools, that you have maintained it not only in your 
 books, but in your public thesis (the last degree of 
 hardihood) ; among others, in your Theses of Louvain 
 
DOCTRINE OF CALUMNY WITH THE JESUITS. 295 
 
 of 1G45, in these terms : " It is only a venial sin to 
 calumniate and bring false accusations to destroy the 
 cretlit of those who speak ill of us ; Quidnl non nisi 
 veiiude sit, detrahentls dutoritatem magnam, iihi 
 noxiain, falsa crirnlne elidere /" This doctrine is so 
 universal among you, that any one who dares to assail 
 it is treated as ignorant and presumptuous. 
 
 This was recently experienced by Father Quiroga, a 
 German Capuchin, when he sought to oppose it. Your 
 Father Dicastilius took him up at once, and speaks of 
 the dispute in these terms, de Just., 1. 2, tr. 2, disp. 12, 
 n. 404 : " A certain grave monk, cowled and barefooted, 
 CAicidlatus i/ymuopoda, whom I name not, had the 
 temerity to cry down this opinion among women and 
 igDorant persons, and to say that it was pernicious 
 and scandalous, contrary to good morals, the peace of 
 States and Society ; and, in fine, contrary not only to 
 all orthodox doctors, but all who can be orthodox ; but 
 I have maintained against him, as I still maintain, that 
 calumny, when used against a calumniator, though it 
 be a falsehood, is, nevertheless, not a mortal sin, nor 
 contrary either to justice or charity ; and to prove it I 
 referred him en masse to our fathers, and entire uni- 
 versities consisting of them, all of whom I consulted ; 
 among others the reverend Father John Gans, con- 
 fessor to the emperor ; the reverend Father Daniel 
 Bastele, confessor to archduke Leopold ; Father Henri, 
 who was tutor to these two princes ; all the public 
 and ordinary professors of the university of Vienna " 
 (wholly composed of Jesuits) ; " all the professors of 
 
 m 
 
 M 
 
 n 
 
 1 
 
i i 
 
 \. ! 
 
 296 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 the university of Gratz " (wholly of Jesuits) ; " all the 
 professors of the university of Prague " (where the 
 Jesuits are masters') ; "from all of whom I hold 
 approvals of my opinion, written and signed with 
 their own hands ; besides, also, having with me Father 
 De Pennalossa, a Jesuit, preacher to the emperor and 
 king of Spain ; Father Pillieerolli, Jesuit ; and many 
 others, who had judged this opinion probable, before 
 our dispute." You see plainly, that there are few 
 opinions which you have taken so much pains to 
 establish, as there were few of which you stood so 
 much in need. Hence you have so fully sanctioned it 
 that your casuists use it as an indubitable principle. 
 "It is certain," says Caramuel, n. 1151, "that it is a 
 probable opinion that there is no mortal sin in calum- 
 niating falsely to save one's reputation. For it is 
 maintained by more than twenty grave doctors, by 
 Gaspar, Hurtade and Dicastillus, Jesuits, etc., so that, 
 if this doctrine were not probable, there would not be 
 one probable in all theology." 
 
 Abominable theology ! a theology so corrupt in all 
 its heads, and if according to its maxims it were not 
 probable and safe in conscience to calumniate without 
 sin, in order to preserve reputation, scarcely one of its 
 decisions would be sure ! How very probable, fathers, 
 that those who hold this principle do sometimes put 
 in practice ! The corrupt will of man so impetuously 
 inclines him to it, as makes it impossible not to believe 
 that when the obstacle of conscience is removed it will 
 ditiuse itself with all its natural vehemence. Would 
 
mm 
 
 t)OCTRINE OF CALUMNY WITH THE JESUITS. 297 
 
 you have an illustration ? Caramuel will give it at 
 the same place. He says, " This maxim of Father 
 Dicastillus, Jesuit, respecting calumny, having been 
 taught by a German countess, to the emperor's 
 (laughters, their belief that at the most they only 
 sinned venially by calumnies, gave rise to such a 
 number in a few days, and to so many false reports, 
 that the whole court was set in a blaze and filled with 
 dismay. For it is easy to imagine how soon they 
 became adepts in the art of using them ; so that to 
 appease the disturbance it became necessary to send 
 for a good Capuchin, of exemplary life, named Father 
 Quiroga " (it was for this P^ather Dicastillus quarrelled 
 with him so much), " who assured them that this 
 maxim was very pernicious, especially among women, 
 and took particular care to get the empress to abolish 
 the use of it entirely." We cannot be surprised at the 
 bad effects caused by this doctrine ; on the contrary, it 
 would be wonderful if it did not produce this licence. 
 It is always easy for self-love to persuade us that we 
 are attacked unjustly ; to persuade you, especially, 
 fathers, who are so blinded by vanity, that in all your 
 writings you would have it believed that to injure the 
 lionour of your Company is to injure the honour of 
 the Church. And thus, fathers, it might well seem 
 strange, if you did not put the niaxim in practice. We 
 must not say, as do those who know you not, How 
 should these worthy fathers wish to calumniate their 
 enemies, since they could not do it without the lo.ss of 
 their salvation ? On the contrary, we must say, How 
 
 
 jll 
 
 
 I 
 
 '4 
 
 Kf 
 
' '' 
 
 \tU" 
 
 298 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 H : B If! 
 
 h 
 
 * 'S 
 
 
 !«;. 
 
 should these worohy fathers be willing to lose the 
 opportunity of crying down their enemies, since they 
 can do it without hazarding their salvation ? Let no 
 one, then, be astonished at seeing the Jesuits calumnia- 
 tors ; thev are so with a safe conscience, and nothinfir 
 can keep thetn from it, since from the credit they have 
 in the world, they can calumniate without fear of 
 punishment from man, and from the power they have 
 assumed in cases of conscience, they have established 
 maxims to enable them to do it without fear of punish- 
 ment from God. 
 
 Such, fathers, is the source from wl- ch all those 
 black impostures spring ; such the cause which led 
 your Father Brisacier to circulate so many as to draw 
 upon himself the censure of the late archbishop of 
 Paris ; such the inducement to your Father D'Anjou 
 to declaim publicly in the pulpit of the church of St. 
 Benedict at Paris, in the last year, against persons of 
 rank who received alms for the poor of Picardy and 
 Champagne, to which they had themselves so liberally 
 contributed, and to utter the horrid lie which might 
 have dried up the source of this charity, had any credit 
 been given to your impostures, " that he had certain 
 information that those persons had misapplied the 
 money to employ it against the Church and the State," 
 whicli obliged the curate of the parish, who is a 
 doctor of Sorbonne, to mount the pulpit next day, and 
 denounce these calumnies. From this same principle 
 your Father Crasset preached so many falsehoods in 
 Orleans, that it became necessary for the bishop of 
 

 SOURCE OF THE JESUITS CALUMNIES. 
 
 299 
 
 Orleans to interdict him, as a public impostor, by his 
 injunction of 9th September last, in which he declares 
 that " he prohibits friar John Crasset, priest of the 
 Company of Jesus, from preaching in his diocese, and 
 all his people from hearinfj him, under pain of mortal 
 disobedience ; in respect he has learned that the said 
 Crasset had delivered a discourse from the pulpit tilled 
 with falsehoods and calumnies against the clergy of 
 this town, falsely and maliciously charging them with 
 lujlding the heretical and impious propositions, that 
 the commandments of God are impossible ; that inward 
 gi-ace is never resisted ; that Jesus Christ died not for 
 all men; and other similar propositions, condemned 
 by Innocent X. ; " for this is your ordinary slander, 
 and the first charge you bring against all whom you 
 are anxious to discredit. And although it is as im- 
 possible for you to prove this of any of these persons, 
 as for your Father Crasset to prove it of the clergy of 
 Orleans, your conscience, nevertheless, remains at rest, 
 " because you believe that this manner of calumniating 
 those who attack you is so certainly permitted " that 
 you fear not to declare it publicly, and in the face of 
 a whole town. 
 
 We have a notable proof of this in the quarrel which 
 you had with M. Puys, curate of St. Nisier at Lyons ; 
 and as this story gives a perfect manifestation of your 
 spirit, I will state the principal circumstances. You 
 know, fathers, that recently M, Puys translated into 
 French an excellent work of a Capuchin friar, ' on the 
 Duty of Christians to their Parish, and against those 
 
 
 i 
 
 4 
 
300 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTEnS. 
 
 ■ i; 
 
 If 
 
 ' , ■<, 
 
 \\ 
 
 1 I' 
 
 who dissuade them from it,' without using any invec- 
 tive, and without naming any monk, or any particular 
 Order. Your fathers, nevertheless, took it to them- 
 selves, and without any respect for an aged pastor, 
 judge in the Primacy of France, and respected by the 
 whole town, your Father Albi wrote a furious book 
 against him, which you yourselves retailed in your own 
 church on Assumption-day, in which he charged him 
 with several things, and, among others, " with having 
 made himself scandalous by his gallantry, with being 
 suspected of impiety, with being a heretic, deserving of 
 excommunication ; and, in short, fit to be burned." M. 
 Puys replied, and Father Albi, in a second writing, 
 reiterated his charge. It is not certain, then, fathers, 
 either that you were slanderers, or that you believed 
 all this of the worthy priest, and behoved to see him 
 clear of his errors before you could deem him worthy 
 of your friendship ? Listen, then, to what passed at 
 the reconciliation, which took place in presence of the 
 first persons in the town, whose names are given below,* 
 as they appear in the minute which was accurately 
 
 ■*'"M. De Ville, Vicar-General of the Cardinal of Lyons; M. 
 Scarron, Canon and Curate of St. Paul; M. Margat, Chautor; 
 Messrs. Bouvand, Seve, Aubert, and Dervieu, Canons of St, 
 Nisier; M. du Gae', President of the Treasurers of France; M. 
 Groslier, Dean jf Guild ; M. de Fle'chere, President and Lieu- 
 tenant-General ; Messrs. de Boissat, De S. Romain, and De 
 Bartoly, gentlemen ; M. Bourgeois, First King's Advocate to the 
 Treasury Board ; Messrs. Cotton, father and son ; M. Boniel ; 
 who all signed the original declaration, with M. Puys and Father 
 Albi. 
 
um 
 
 m 
 
 CALUMNIES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 301 
 
 our own 
 
 drawn up. In presence of all these persons, M. 
 Puys did nothing more than declare " that what he ha<l 
 written was not addressed to the Jesuit fathers ; that 
 he had spoken in general of those who alienate the 
 faithful from their parishes, without intending thereby 
 to attack the Society, which, on the contrary, he 
 esteemed and loved." By these simple words he got 
 (|uit of his apostacy, gallantry, and excommunication, 
 without retractation and without absolution ; and 
 Father Albi thereafter said to him as follows: "Sir, the 
 belief I had that you were attacking the Company to 
 which I have the honour to belong, made me take up 
 my pen in reply ; and I thought the manner in which 
 I used liwaspermitted me ; but being better informed 
 as to your intention, I here declare that there is no 
 longer any thing to prevent me from regarding you as 
 a man of talent, very enlightened, profoundly learned, 
 and orthodox, of irrej^rehensihle morals ; and, in one 
 word, worthy pastor of your church. This declaration 
 I gladly make, and I beg these gentlemen to remember 
 it. 
 
 They have remembered it, fathers, and the reconcilia- 
 tion has caused more scandal than the quarrel. For 
 who would not wonder at this lanixuage of Father Albi ? 
 He does not say he comes to retract, because he has 
 been informed of a change in the manners and doctrine 
 of M. Puys, but only that, " knowing it was not his 
 intention to attack your Company, there is nothing to 
 prevent his regarding him as orthodox." He did not 
 believe, then, in fact, tliat he was heretical. And yet, 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 ,J^ 
 
 ^^^ 
 
302 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS 
 
 
 ! 'I 
 
 f •! 
 
 il^^ 
 
 after having accused him against his conviction, he 
 does not declare himself in the wrong; on the contrary, 
 he dares to say that " the manner in which he acted 
 was lawful." 
 
 Of what are you thinking, when you testify thus 
 publicly that you measure the faith and virtue of men, 
 only by the feelings with which they regard your 
 Society ? How were you not apprehensive of making 
 yourselves pass, on your own confession, for impostors 
 and calumniators? What, fathers ! the same individual, 
 without undergoing any change, will, according as you 
 believe that he honours or attacks your Company, he 
 " pious " or " impious," " unblameable" or " excommuni- 
 cated," " fit pastor of a church " or " fit to be burni'd," 
 in fine, " Catholic or heretic." In your language, then, 
 to attack your Society and be heretical is the same 
 thing. That is a droll heresy, fathers. And thus, when 
 we see in your writings so many orthodox persons 
 called heretics, the whole meaning is, that you tliinh 
 they attach you. It is good, fathers, to understand tliis 
 strange lan^uajre, according to which there cannot be 
 a doubt that I am a great heretic. Accordingly, it is 
 in this sense that you so often give me the name. You 
 cut me off from the Church, only because you think 
 my Letters do you harm ; and thus, all that remains to 
 make me orthodox, is either to approve of the co'*»'nn- 
 tions of your morality, which I could not do without 
 renouncing every pious sentiment, or to persuade you 
 that in this I am only seeking your true welfare, a 
 persuasion which you must be very far returned from 
 
If 
 
 CALUMNIES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 303 
 
 your errors to recopjnize. So that I am 8tran<;ely 
 involved in heresy, since the purity of my faith hein<jf 
 of no use to recall nie from this species of error, I 
 cannot get quit of it, except by either betrayinjjj my 
 own conscience, or by reformin<^ yours. Till then I 
 shall always be a wicked man and an impostor ; and 
 however faithful I may have been in quotin»^ your 
 authors, j'^ou will ^o about ciyin^^, " He must be a liml) 
 of Satan, to impute to us things of which there is not 
 a mark or vesti(:fe in our books ; " and in this you will 
 only act agreeably to your maxim and your ordinary 
 practice, so extensive is the privilege which you have 
 of lying. Allow me to give you an instance, which I 
 purposely select, as at the same time furnishing an 
 answer to your ninth Imposture, which, like the others, 
 deserves only i. passing refutation. 
 
 Ten or twelve years ago you were reproached with 
 this maxim of Father Bauni, " that it is lawful to seek 
 directly, primo et per se, a proxiniate cause of sin, for 
 the spiritual good of ourselves or our neighbour," tr. 
 4, q. 14, of which he adduces in illustration, that " it is 
 lawful to enter notorious houses with the view of con- 
 verting abandoned women, though it is prol)able we 
 will sin there, from having already often experienced 
 that we are wont to allow ourselves to be carried into 
 sin by the caresses of these women." What w^as the 
 answer to this by your Father Caussin, in his I took, 
 'Apology for the Company of Jesus,' p. 128: "Show 
 the place in Father Bauni, read the page, the margin, 
 the advertisement, the appendix, everything else, even 
 
 
 •I 
 
304 
 
 PROTINCIAL LETTEIIS. 
 
 the whole book, and you will not find a slnf^le trace 
 of such a sentence, which could only come into tlie 
 mind of a man extremely devoid of conscience, and 
 must apparently have been suj^gested by the instru- 
 mentality of the devil." And your Father Pintereau 
 says in the same style, part 1, p. 24, " A man must ho 
 devoid of conscience to teach such a detestable doctrine, 
 but he must be worse than a devil to ascribe it to 
 Father Bauni. Reader, there is not a mark or vestif^e 
 of it throuffhout his book." Who would not believe 
 that people who speak in this tone had ground to com- 
 plain, and that Father Bauni had, in fact, been taxed 
 unjustly ? Have you affirmed anything against me in 
 stronger terms ? And how could one venture to 
 suppose that a passage could be in the exact words, at 
 the very place from which it is quoted, when it is said 
 that " there is not a mark or vestige of it throughout 
 the book ? " 
 
 In truth, fathers, that is the method of maki^.g 
 yourselves believed until you are answered ; but it is 
 also the method of making you never more believed 
 after you have been answered. For so certain is it 
 you lied at that time, that you have no difficulty, in 
 the present day, in admitting in your Answers, that 
 this maxim is in Father Bauni,'at the very place which 
 had been quoted ; and what is wonderful, whereas it 
 was " detestable " twelve years ago, it is now so inno- 
 cent that, in your ninth Imposture, p. 10, you accuse 
 me of "ignorance and malice, in quarrelling with Fatlier 
 Bauni for an opinion which is not rejected in the 
 
v^\c trace 
 I into the 
 cnce, and 
 10 instni- 
 Pintert'au 
 1 imist bi! 
 e doctrine, 
 ;ribe it to 
 or vestige 
 lot believe 
 tid tocoin- 
 een taxed 
 inst me in 
 enture to 
 1 words, at 
 1 it is said 
 hroughout 
 
 >f making 
 
 but it is 
 
 e believed 
 
 rtain is it 
 
 fficulty, in 
 
 wers, that 
 
 ace which 
 
 vhereas it 
 
 V so inno- 
 
 ou accuse 
 
 th Father 
 
 ed in the 
 
 CALUMNIES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 .S05 
 
 school. What an advantai^e it is, fathers, to have to 
 do with people who deal in the pro and the con. ! I 
 need none l)ut yourselves to confute you. For T have 
 only to show two thinjifs : the one, that this maxim is 
 worthless ; the other., that it is Father Bauni's ; and I 
 will prove both by yonr own confession. At one time 
 you acknowledge that it is " detestable," and you con- 
 fess that it is in Father Bauni. This double acknow- 
 ' dgment, fathers, sufficiently justifies me ; but it does 
 more ; it discloses the spirit of your policy. For, tell 
 me, pray, what is the end which you propose in your 
 writings ? Is it to speak with sincerity ? No, fathers, 
 since your Answers destroy each other. Is it to f(jllow 
 .sound doctrine ? Just as little, since you authorize a 
 maxim which, according to yourselves, is detestable. 
 Be it considered, however, that when you said the 
 maxim was " detestable," you at the same time denied 
 it to be in Father Bauni, thus making him innocent ; 
 and when you confess that it is his, you at the same 
 time maintain its soundness, thus still makinsf him 
 innocent. So that the innocence of this father, being 
 the only thing common to your two Answers, it is plain 
 that it is the only thing you seek, and that your only 
 object is the defence of your fathers, by saying of the 
 same maxim, that it is in your books, and that it is 
 not ; that it is good, and that it is bad ; not according 
 to truth, which never changes, but according to your 
 interest, which changes every hour. What might I 
 not say to you here, for you see plainly how conclusive 
 it is ? Nothing, however, is more common with you. 
 20 
 
 I SI 
 
 11* 
 
 % 
 
 '|y 
 
 ' \ 
 
 
;•!, 
 
 1 1 I 'i i 
 
 w: 
 
 M t: 
 
 ;joo 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 To (nuit an infinite number of examples, I believe yon 
 will be contented with one more. 
 
 Vou were reproached at divers times witli another 
 proposition of the same Father Bauni, tr. 4, q. 2*2. p. 
 100: "We should neither refuse nor delay f^riving abso- 
 lution to those who are habitual sinners against the law 
 of God, of nature, and the Church, although we see no 
 prospect of amendment: etsi emendationis futarce sprs 
 nulla appareat." Here, fathers, I pray you to tell me 
 wliich of ^he two answered best, according to your 
 taste, your Father Pintereau, or your Father Brisacier, 
 who defend Father Bauni in your two modes: the one, 
 by condemning the proposition, but denying it to l)e 
 Father Bauni's, and the other by admitting it to lie 
 hi.j, but at the same time justifj'ing it ? Listen, then, 
 to what they say; here is Father Pintereau, p. 18: 
 " What is meant by overleaping the bounds of all 
 modesty, and exceeding all impudence, if it is not to 
 impose such a damnable doctrine on Father Bauni, as 
 a thing averred by him ? Judge, reader, of this 
 unworthy calumny : see with whom the Jesuits have 
 to do, and whether the author of so black an imposture 
 ought not henceforth to pass for the interpreter of the 
 father of lies." Here, now, is your Fatlier Brisacier, 
 4 p., p. 21: "In fact. Father BaurtJ says what yoii 
 relate : " this is giving the lie direct to Father Pinter- 
 eau : "but," he adds, in justification of Father Bauni, 
 " do you who censure it wait when a penitent is at 
 your feet, till his guardian angel pledges all the rights 
 he lias to heaven for his security : wait till God the 
 
CALUMNIES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 307 
 
 ;■ -t 
 
 ; 1 
 
 Father swears by his head, that David lied when he 
 said by the Holy Spirit that all men are liars, deceitful 
 and frail ; and till this penitent be no lonjjfer lyiiif;, 
 frail, fickle and sinful, like others, and you will not 
 apply the blood of Christ to any one ?" 
 
 What think you, fathers, of these extravagant and 
 impious expressions, that if it were necessary to wait 
 " till there was some hope of amendment in sinners " 
 before absolving theni, it would be necessary to wait 
 ''till God should swear by his head " that they would 
 never more fall. What, fathers ! is there no difference 
 between hope and certaint}' ? How injurious to the 
 grace of Jesus Christ, to say that it is so little possible 
 for Christians ever to get quit of sins against the law 
 of God, of nature and the Church, that it could not be 
 hoped for ''unless the Holy Spirit had lied !" So that, 
 acccrding to you, were absolution not given to those 
 of whom " we have no hope of amendment," the blood 
 of Jesus Christ would remain useless, and " we should 
 never apply it to any one." To what state, fathers, 
 are you reduced by your excessive desire to preserve 
 the honour of your authors, since you find only two 
 ways of justifying them, imposture or in)piety; so that 
 your most innocent mode of defence is boldly to deny 
 facts that are clear as day. 
 
 Hence it is that you so often use it. Still, this is 
 not vour only shift. You forw writinw to render 
 your enemies odious, as the ' Letter of a Minister to 
 M. Arnauld,' which you retailed over Paris, to make 
 it believed that the work on ' Frequent Communion,' 
 
 If ■ 
 
 m' 
 
808 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 ti .h 
 
 Si 1. 
 
 Wi-: 
 
 i a! 
 
 r':i 
 
 . t; 
 
 *!1 
 
 ■ - ;, H ; 
 
 ; ! :• - 
 
 ■ M.f 2 i 3 3,1; 
 
 approved by so many bishops and so many doctors, 
 but which, in truth, was somewhat opposed to you, 
 had been composed on a secret understanding witli tlio 
 ministers of Charenton. At other times, you attribute; 
 to your opponents, writinc^s full of impiety, as tlio 
 ' Circular Letter of the Jansenists,' the impertinent 
 style of which makes the cheat too gross and too 
 clearl}'' exposes the ridiculous malice of your P'ather 
 Meynier, who dares to employ it, p. 28, in support of his 
 blackest impostures. You sometimes quote book hich 
 never existed, as the ' Constitutions of the Holy k5acra- 
 ment,' from which you give passages which you fabri- 
 cate at pleasure, and make the hair of the simple stand 
 on end, who know not your effrontery in inventing and 
 publishing lies ; for there is no species of caluiuny 
 which you have not put in practice. Never could the 
 maxim which excuses it be in better hands. 
 
 But these expedients are too easily defeated, and 
 therefore you have others of a more subtle nature,' in 
 which you give no particulars, that you may thus leave 
 nothing to j'our opponents to fasten upon in repl}'; as 
 when Father Brisacier savs, " that his enemies commit 
 abominable crimes, but he is unwilling to state them." 
 Does it not look as if a charge so indefinite could not 
 be convicted of imposture? A man of ability has never- 
 theless found out the secret ; and he is again, fatliers, 
 a Capuchin. You are at present unfortunate in Capu- 
 chins ; and I foresee, that some other time vou will 
 very likely be so in Benedictines. This Capuchin 
 is Father Valerien, of the house of the Counts of 
 
in 
 
 CALUMNIES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 309 
 
 Magnis. You will learn by the following short story 
 how he replied to your calumnies : He had happily 
 succeeded in the conversion of Prince Ernest, Landgrave 
 of Hesse-Rheinsfelt. But your fathers being some- 
 what annoyed at seeing a sovereign prince converted 
 without their being called in, forthwith composed a 
 book against him (for you are everywhere persecutors 
 of the good), in which, falsifying one of his sentences, 
 they charge him with heretical doctrine. They also 
 circulated a letter against him, in which they said to 
 him, " Oh ! what things we could disclose," without 
 sjiying what, "at which you would be very sorry ! For, 
 if you do not put matters to rights, we will be obliged 
 to give notice to the Pope and Cardinals." There is 
 .some adroitness in this, and I have no doubt that you 
 speak of me in the same way ; but see what kind of 
 answer he gives in his book at Prague, last year, p. 112, 
 etc. : " What shall I make of these vague and indetinite 
 slanders ? How .shall I rebut charges which are not 
 explained ? Here, nevertheless, is the method. I 
 declare, loudly and publicly, to those who menace me, 
 tliat they are notorious imposters, and very practised 
 and very impudent liars, if they do not discover these 
 crimes to all the world. Comeforward, then, accusers, 
 and publish these things upon the housetops, instead 
 of whispering them in the ear, and from so whispering, 
 lying with assurance. There are some who imagine 
 that these di.sputes are scandalous. It is true, it is 
 a horrid scandal to impute to me such a crime as 
 heresy, and make rae suspected of many other crime.s. 
 
 
 
 
 i: fit 
 
 
 I? 
 
 ]P:' 
 
 Ji«l 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
310 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 
 ? 1 5 ! ■ » ' 11 
 
 ;•■'..■''■■ }« 
 
 But I only meet this scandal by niaintaininir my 
 innocence." 
 
 In good sooth, fathers, you are here rather ronijjhly 
 handled ; and never was defence more complete. For 
 even the least semblance of crime must have been 
 wanting, since you have not replied to his challenge. 
 You sometimes meet with troublesome encounters; hut 
 it does not make you any wiser. For some time after, 
 yoa again attacked him in the same way, on another 
 subject, and he again defended himself on the.se terms, 
 p. 151: "This kind of men who are making them- 
 selves insupportable to all Christendom, aspire, under 
 the pretext of good works, to grandeur and domination; 
 perverting to their own ends almost all laws, divine, 
 human, positive, and natural. Either by their doctrine 
 or by fear, or by hope, they attract all the grandees of 
 the earth, whose authority they abuse, for the accom- 
 plishment of their detestable intrigues. But their 
 attempts, criminal though they be, are neither punished 
 nor arrested : on the contrary, they are rewarded ; and 
 they commit them with as much boldness as if they 
 were doing God a .service. All the world acknowledges 
 thi.s, and all the world .speaks of it with execration. 
 But few are capable of opposing this mighty tyranny. 
 This, however, I have done. I have stopped their 
 impudence, and by the same means will stop it again. 
 I declare, then, that they have lied most impudently, 
 ■mentiris impudent Issime. If their charges against 
 me are true, let them prove them, or let them stand 
 convicted of a lie fraught with impudence. Their pro- 
 
 A. i 
 
CALUMNIES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 311 
 
 cedure will hereupon show who is right. I pray all 
 the world to attend to it, and observe, in the mean- 
 while, that this kind of men, who never put up with 
 the smallest injury they can repel, make a pretence of 
 sultmitting very patiently to those from which they 
 cannot defend themselves, and ijive the cloak of a false 
 virtue to their mere impotence. My object in cutting 
 thus sharply was to make the dullest among them 
 aware, that if they are silent, their silence will be the 
 ert'ect, not of tneekness, but of a troubled conscience." 
 
 These are his words, fathers, and he ends thus : 
 " Those people, whose fabrications are universally 
 known, are so obviously unjust, and from impunity so 
 insolent, that I must have renounced Jesus Christ and 
 his Church, if I did not detest their conduct, and 
 publicly denounce it, as well as to justify myself as to 
 prevent the simple from being led astray." 
 
 Rev<irend fathers, there is now no room to draw 
 back. You must pass for convicted cuhimniators, and 
 recur to your maxim, that this sort of calumny is not 
 a crime. The Capuchin has found out the secret of 
 shutting their mouths ; and this is the course that 
 imist be taken every time you accuse people without 
 proof. It is necessary only to reply to each of you, 
 with the Capuchin father, mentiris impudentissimf. 
 For what other answer could be given, for example, 
 when your Blather Brisacier says, that those against 
 whom he writes are " gates of hell ; pontitis of the 
 devil ; people fallen from faith, hope, and charity ; 
 who build the treasury of Antichrist. This," he adds. 
 
 \\ 
 
 i'hm 
 
u\l 
 
 >.ri 
 
 f 1 
 
 , I 
 
 ?■ ■ 
 
 ■ •] 
 
 n 
 
 '-4, 
 
 
 ill 
 If 
 
 i 
 
 41 
 
 
 I 
 
 312 
 
 PUOVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 " I say not by way of insult, but through force of 
 truth ? " Must a man seriously go about to prove that 
 he is not "a gate of hell," and that he is not buildinir 
 the treasury of Antichrist ? 
 
 In the same way, what answer must I jjive to all 
 tlio vague language of this sort which is in your 
 books and advertisements, concerning my letters ? for 
 example, that " we apply the doctrine of restitution, 
 by reducing creditors to poverty ; that we have offered 
 bags of money to learned monks, who have refused 
 thei^ ; that we give benefices to procure the circulation 
 of heresies against the faith ; that we have pen- 
 sioners among the most illustrious ecclesiastics, and in 
 sovereign courts ; that T, also, am a pensioner of Port 
 Royal ; and that I composed romances before my 
 letters," I, who have never read one, and don't even 
 know the names of those which your apologist has 
 made. What is to be said to all this, but just mentiris 
 im'imdentissime, if you do not specify all those per- 
 sons, their words, the time, the place ? For you must 
 be silent, or state and prove all the circumstances, as I 
 do, when I tell the stories of Father Albi and John of 
 Alba. Otherwise, you wdll only injure yourselves. 
 Your fables might, perhaps, have been of service, 
 befi^'e 3'our principles were known ; but nov/ that all 
 is discovered, should you think of whispering " that a 
 man of honour, wdio wishes his name to be concealed, 
 has told you dreadful things about those people," you 
 will forthwith be reminded of the mentiris impuden- 
 tisiiime of the worthy Capuchin father. You have 
 
^TfM 
 
 CALUMNIES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 313 
 
 too long being deceiving the world, and abusing the 
 credit which was given to your impostures. It is time 
 to restore the reputation of the many whom you have 
 calumniated. For what innocence can be so generally 
 acknowledged as not to sustain some injury from the 
 bold impostures of a Company diffused over the whole 
 earth, and who, under a religious dress, hide souls so 
 irreligious that they commit such sins as calumny, not 
 against their maxims, but in accordance with their 
 maxims ? I shall not be blamed, therefore, for having 
 destroyed the faith which might have been placed in 
 you ; since it is far more just to preserve to the many 
 persons whom you have decried the reputation for 
 piety, which they deserve not to lose, than to leave 
 you a reputation for sincerity which you deserve 
 not to possess. As the one could not be done with- 
 out the other, you see how important it was to let 
 men understand who you are. This I have begun to 
 do here ; but it will take a long time to finish. It 
 shall be seen, however, fathers, and all your policy 
 will not save you from detection ; since any efibrts 
 which you might make to prevent it would only serve 
 to convince the least discerning that you are afraid, 
 and that your conscience upbraiding you with what I 
 had to say, you have left no means untried to prevent 
 me from saying it. 
 
 V 1 
 
 if 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 A 
 
h\i 
 
 LETTER SIXTEENTH. 
 
 TO THE REVEREND JESUIT FATHERS. 
 
 HORRIBLE CALUMNIES OF THE JESUITS AOAINST PIOUS ECCLESI- 
 ASTICS AND HOLY NUNS. 
 
 I'J' 
 
 J 
 
 
 Reverend Fathers, — Here is the sequel of your 
 calumnies. I will first reply to those contained in 
 your advertisements ; but as all your other books are 
 equally tilled with them, they will furnish me with 
 matter enough to discourse to you on this subject so 
 long as I shall deem it necessary. I will tell you, 
 then, in one word, in regard to the fabrications which 
 you have scattered up and down through all your 
 writings against M. d'Ypres, that you maliciously per- 
 vert a few ambiguous words in one of his letters, 
 which, admitting of a good meaning, ought to be in- 
 terpreted favourably, according to the spirit of the 
 Church, and cannot be interpreted otherwise, except 
 according to the spirit of your Society. For why will 
 you insist that in saying to his friend, " Don't give 
 yourself so much trouble about your nephew, I will 
 furnish him with what is necessary from the money 
 in my hand," his meaning was, that he took this 
 money not intending to return it; and not that he 
 
CALUMNIES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 315 
 
 rs ECCLESI- 
 
 mcrely advanced it to be repaid ? But must you not 
 be very imprudent, to bave yourselves furnisbed proof 
 of your falsehood from tbe otber letters of M. (I'Ypres, 
 wliich you bave printed, and wbicli clearly sbow tbat 
 the sums were in fact mere (ulviinceti, wbicb be was 
 to replace ? This appears from tbe one written .SOtb 
 July, wbicb you give, to your own confutation, in 
 these terms: "Be not anxious about tbe advances; be 
 shall want nothing while be is bere;" and from tbat of 
 0th January following, wben be says, " You are in too 
 great baste ; and though it were necessary to render 
 an account, tbe little credit I bave here would enable 
 nu! to find tbe money wanted." 
 
 You are impostors, then, fathers, as well on this 
 subject as in your ridiculous tale of tbe trunk of St. 
 ^lerri. For what advantage can you derive from tbe 
 accusation which one of your good fi-iends reared up 
 against this ecclesiastic, whom you would fain tear to 
 pieces ? Must we infer tbat a man is guilty, because 
 he is accused ? No, fathers ; persons of piety, like 
 him, will always be lialle to be accused, so long as 
 the world contains calumniators like you. It is not, 
 then, by tbe accusation tbat we nmst judge, but by 
 the decision. Now the decision, which was given 23rd 
 February subsequent, fully acquits bim ; and more- 
 over, the party who had rashly involved himself in 
 this proceeding was disavowed bv bis colleagues, and 
 forced to retract. As to what you say in tbe same 
 place of tbe " famous director, who became rich in a 
 moment, to the extent of nine hundred thousand 
 
 P^ 
 
 '\ ' 
 
 
316 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 I 
 
 r 
 
 Hill 
 
 Hi;: i 
 
 i I 
 
 livres," it is enough to refer you to the curates of St. 
 Roch and St. Paul, who will attest to all Paris his 
 perfect disinterestedness in this afl'air, and your inex- 
 cusable malice in this imposture. 
 
 But enough for these vain falsehoods ; they are 
 only first attempts by your novices, and not the master- 
 strokes of your great adepts, I come to these, then, 
 fathers, and begin with one of the blackest calumnies 
 ever conjured up by your spirit. I speak of the in- 
 tolerable audacity with which you have dai'ed to 
 charge holy nuns, and their directors, with " not be- 
 lieving in the mystery of transubstantiation, and the 
 real presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist." Here, 
 fathers, is an imposture worthy of you ; here a crime 
 which God alone is capable of punishing, as you alone 
 are capable of committing. One would require to be 
 as humble as these calumniated sufferers, to bear it 
 with patience ; and to be as wicked as the wicked 
 calumniators, to believe it. I do not, therefore, under- 
 take to justify them; they are not expected. If they 
 needed defenders, they would have better than I. 
 What I shall say here will be, not to demonstrate 
 their innocence, but to demonstrate your malice. My 
 only wish is to make you abhor yourselves, and let 
 all the world understand, that after this there is nothing 
 of which you are not capable. 
 
 You will not fail, nevertheless, to say that I am of 
 Port Royal ; for it is the first thing you say to every 
 one who combats your excesses, as if Port Royal only 
 contained persons zealous enough to defend the purity 
 
JESUIT CALUMNIES AfJAIXST I'OIIT UOYAL. 
 
 317 
 
 Hi 
 
 of Cliristian morality af^ainst you. I am awaro, 
 fathers, of the merit of those pious men wlio live there 
 in solitary retirement; and how much the Church 
 is indebted to their instructive and solid writinirs. 
 I know how pious and enlightened they are. For, 
 althou<^h I have never had any connection with theni, 
 as you wish to be believed, although you know not 
 who I am, I, nevertheless, am acquainted with some of 
 them, and I honour the virtue of all. But God has 
 not confined exclusively to their body the number of 
 those whom he is pleased to oppose to your disorders. 
 With his aid, fathers, I hope to make you sensible of 
 this ; and if he cfives grace to support me in the pur- 
 pose which he inspires, the purpose to employ in his 
 service whatever I have received of him, I will speak 
 to you in such a way as will perhaps make you regret 
 that you have not to do with an inmate of Port Royal. 
 And in testimony of this, fathers, while those whom 
 you outrage by this notorious calumny, content them- 
 selves with ohering up prayers to God for your par- 
 don, I feel obliged, I, who suffer not by the injustice, 
 to put you to the blush in the presence of the whole 
 Church, that I may thereby produce in you that salu- 
 tary shame of which Scripture speaks, and which is 
 almost the only remedy of a hardened impenitence 
 like yours : " Fill their faces with shame, and they will 
 seek thy name, O Lord ! " 
 
 This insolence, from which even the holiest places 
 are not safe, must be arrested. For who will be secure 
 after a calumny of this nature ? What, fathers ! for 
 
 
 !) 
 
 ill 
 !i . 
 
 ll - 
 
 ili 
 
 li.i 
 
I 
 
 r r' 
 
 \v 
 
 iiL 
 
 f 1 
 
 1 1 
 
 n 
 
 I j 
 
 318 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTEUS. 
 
 you to advertise in Paris that scandalous ])ook, witli 
 the name of your Fatlier Mcinier at the head of it, an<l 
 under this infamous tithi of ' Port Royal and Geneva 
 at one as to the lioly Sacrament of the Altar,' in which 
 you charjife this apostacy not only on the Ahln- of St. 
 Cyran, and M. Arnauld, hut also on his sister, Mother 
 Agnes, and all the nuns of this monastery, of wIkhh 
 you say, p. 96, " that their faith, respecting the Kii- 
 charist, is as suspicious as that of M. Arnauld," which 
 you maintain, p. 4, to be " in effect Calvinist I" T here 
 appeal to the whole w-^oild, and ask if there are any 
 persons in the Church against whom you can l)riMg so 
 abominable charges with less probability ? For, tell 
 me, fathers, if those nuns and their directors had " an 
 understanding with Geneva against the holy Sacra- 
 ment of the Altar," (the very idea is horrible) why 
 should they have selected as the principal object of 
 their piety this Sacrament, which they must hold in 
 abomination ? Why should they have joined to their 
 rule the institution of the holy Sacrament ? Why 
 should they have taken the habit of the holy Sacra- 
 ment, the name -if Daughters of the holy Sacrament 
 and called their church the Church of the holy Sacra- 
 ment ? Why should they have asked and obtained 1 
 from Rome a confirmation of this institution, and per- 
 mission every Thursday to use the office of the holy 
 Sacrament, in which the faith of the Church is so ])er- 
 fectly expressed, if they had conspired with Geneva 
 to destroy the faith of the Church ? Why should 
 they have obliged themselves by a special devotion, 
 
JESUIT CALTTMNIES AGAINST PORT ROYAL. 310 
 
 also a]. proved by the Pope, to liavn nuns continually 
 ni<^lit and day in presence of this holy victim, than by 
 their perpetual adoration towards this ])erpetual sacri- 
 fice, they iiii^'ht make reparation for the impious 
 heresy which seeks to annihilate it? Tell me, then, 
 fathers, if you can, why, of all the mysteries of our 
 relijijion, they should have omitted those which they 
 believe, to select one which they do not believe ? And 
 why should they have dedicated themselves so 
 fully and entirely to this mystery of our faith, if they, 
 like heretics, held it to be the mystery of iniipiity ? 
 What answer, fathers, will you give to these clear 
 evidences ; not of words, but of actions ; and not of 
 some particular action, but of the whole course of a 
 life entirely consecrated to the adoraticm of Jesus 
 Christ, as he sits upon our altars ? What answer will 
 you give to what you call the books of Port Royal, in 
 every page of which you find the very terms which 
 the Fathers and Councils have used, in order to define 
 the essence of this mystery ? It is ridiculous, yet 
 horrible, to see you, throughout your whole libel, 
 giving such answers as the following : M. Arnauld in- 
 deed talks of " transubstantiation," but he perhaps 
 means a " significative transubstantiation." He indeed 
 declares his belief in " the real presence ; " but how do 
 we know that he does not mean " a true an<l real 
 figure ? " Where are we, fathers, and whom will you 
 not make a Calvinist at your pleasure, if license is 
 given you to corrupt the most canonical and sacred 
 expression, by the malicious subtleties of your new 
 
 4 
 
i-r^r 
 
 320 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 I 1 
 
 I] 
 
 
 i ! !; 
 
 1 < 
 
 equivocations ? For who has ever used other terms 
 than these, especially in plain pious treatises, in whieii 
 no controversy is discussed ? And yet the love and 
 respect which they have for this holy mystery has 
 made all their writings so full of it, that I defy you, 
 fathers, with all your cunning, to find in them either 
 the least appearance of ambiguity, or the least accord- 
 ance with the sentiments of Geneva. 
 
 Everybody knows, fathers, that the heresy of 
 Geneva essentially consists, as you yourselves state, in 
 holding that Jesus Christ is not contained in the 
 Sacrament ; that he cannot possibly be in several 
 places ; that he is truly only in heaven, where only he 
 ought to be worshipped, and not upon the altar ; that 
 the substance of the bread remains ; that the body of 
 Jesus Christ does not pass into the mouth, or into the 
 stomach ; that he is eaten only by faith, and that thus 
 the wicked do not eat him ; and that the mass is not 
 a sacrifice but an abomination. Listen, then, fathers, 
 to the kind of " understanding which the books of 
 Port Royal have with Geneva." To your confusion we 
 there read that " the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ 
 are contained under the species of bread and wine," 
 (second letter of M. Arnauld, p. 259 ;) that " the Holy 
 of Holies is present in the sanctuarj'-, and should there 
 be adored," (ibid, p. 248 ;) that Jesus Christ " dwells 
 in sinners who communicate by the real and true 
 presence of his body in their stomach, though not by 
 the presence of his Spirit in their heart ; " Freq. Com., 
 3rd part, c. 16, that "the dead ashes of the bodies of 
 
JESUIT CALUMNIES AGAINST POUT ROYAL. 
 
 321 
 
 the saints derive their principal dij^nity from this 
 seed of life which remains to them from contact with 
 the immortal and vivifying flesh of Jesus Christ ; " 
 (1st p., c. 10:) that " it is not by natural power, but 
 by the omnipotence of God, to which nothtng is impos- 
 sible, that the body of Jesus Christ is contained under 
 the host, and under the minutest part of each host ; " 
 (' Theo. Fam., lee. 15,') that " the divine word is present 
 to produce the effect which the words of consecration 
 express ; " (ibid.) that " Jesus Christ, who is humbled 
 and laid upon the altar, is at the same time exalted in 
 glory ; " that " he is by himself, and by his ordinary 
 power, in different places at the same time ; in the 
 midst of the Church triumphant, and in the midst of 
 the Church militant and sojourning," (De la Suspen- 
 sion, rais. 21 :) that " the sacramental species remain 
 suspended, and subsists extraordinarily, without being 
 supported by any subject; and that the body of Jesus 
 Christ is thus suspended under the species ; " that " it 
 depends not on them, as substances depend on acci- 
 dents ; " (ibid. 28 ;) that " the substance of bread is 
 changed by leaving the accidents immutable ; " 
 (' Hcures dans la prose du saint Sacrement ; ') that 
 "Jesus Christ reposes in the Eucharist with the same 
 glory that he hjis in heaven ; " (' Lettres de M. dt; St. 
 Cyran,' tr. 1, let. 98 ;) that " his glorious humanity re- 
 sides in the tabernacles of the Church, under the 
 species of bread, which visibly conceal him ; and that 
 knowing how gross we are, he thus comlucts us to the 
 adoration ai his divinity, present in all places, by that 
 
 i,' 
 
322 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 m 
 
 ili 
 
 > ;it 
 
 • I 
 
 of his humanity, present in a particular place ; " (ibid.) 
 " that we receive the body of Jesus on the tongue, and 
 that he sanctifies it by his divine contact ; " (letter 32;) 
 that " he enters the mouth of the priest ; " (letter 72;) 
 that " although Jesus Christ has made himself acces- 
 sible in the Holy Sacrament, by means of his love and 
 mercy, he, nevertheless, preserves his inaccessibility as 
 an inseparable condition of his divine nature ; for 
 although the body alone and the blood alone are 
 there, by virtue of the words, vi verhorum, as the 
 school speaks, this does not prevent his whole divinity 
 as well as his whole humanity, from being there, by a 
 necessary conjunction ; " (' Defense du Chaplet du S. 
 S;icrement,' p. 217). And, in fine, " that the Eucharist 
 is at once sacrament and sacrifice ; " (Theol. Fam., lee. 
 15;) and that " although this sacrifice is a commem- 
 oration of that of the Cross, there is, however, this 
 difference, that that of the mass is offered for the 
 Church alone, and for the faithful, who are in her 
 communion ; whereas, that of the Cross has been 
 offered for all the world, as Scripture speaks " (ibid., 
 p. 153). 
 
 Enough here, fathers, to show that perhaps there 
 never was greater impudence than yours. But I 
 mean, moreover, to make you pronounce your own 
 sentence. For what do you require in order to take 
 away all semblance of fraternizing with Geneva ? 
 " Had M. Arnauld," says your Father Meinier, p. 83, 
 " said that, in this adorable mystery there is no suli- 
 stance of bread under the species, but only the Hesii 
 
 \:u 
 
 am 
 
-■'WVil 
 
 '.:■; a 
 
 JESUIT CALUMNIES AGAINST PORT ROYAL. 
 
 823 
 
 and blood of Jesus Christ, I would have confessed that 
 he had entirely declared against Geneva." Confess it, 
 then, impostors, and give him public reparation. How 
 often have you seen this in the passages which I have 
 just quoted ? But, moreover, the Familiar Theology 
 of M. de St. Cyran being approved b}' M. Arnauld, con- 
 tains the sentiments of both. Read, then, the whole 
 of lesson loth, and especially the second article, and 
 you will find the words which you require, expressed 
 even more formally than you yourselves express them : 
 " Is there bread in the host and wine in the cup ? 
 No ; for the whole substance of bread and wine is 
 taken away, to make way for that of the body and 
 blood of Jesus Christ, which remain there alone, 
 covered by the qualities and species of bread and 
 wine." 
 
 Well, fathers, will you still say that Port Royal 
 teaches nothinof which " Geneva does not receive ? " 
 and that M. Arnauld has said nothing in his second 
 letter which " might not have been said by a minister 
 of Charenton ? " Make Mestrezat, then, speak as M. 
 Arnauld speaks, in this letter, p. 287, etc. Make him 
 say, "It is an infamous lio to accuse him of denying 
 transubstantiation ; that the foundation of his treatise 
 is the truth of the real presence of the Son of God as 
 opposed to the heresy of the Calvinists; that he con- 
 siders himself happy in being in a place where the 
 Holy of Holies is continually adored in the sanctuary." 
 This is much more contrary to the belief of the 
 Calvinists than even the real presence is ; since as 
 
 ■I 
 
 li 
 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 JjjUl 
 
324 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 Cardinal Richelieu says in his controversies, p. 586, 
 " the new ministers of France having united with the 
 Lutherans, who believe the real presence of Jesus 
 Christ in the Eucharist, have declared that they remain 
 separated from the Church in regard to this mystery, 
 only because of the adoration which Catholics pay to 
 the Eucharist." Make Geneva sign all the passages 
 which I have quoted from the works of Port Royal, 
 and not only the passages but the entire treatises 
 respecting this mystery, as the book on Frequent 
 Communion, Explanation of the Ceremonies of the 
 Mass, the Reasons of the Suspension of the Holy 
 Sacrament, the translation of the Hymns in the Hours 
 of Port Royal, etc., and, in fine, procure the establish- 
 ment, etc., at Charenton of this holy institution for 
 incessantly adoring Jesus Christ contained in the 
 Eucharist, as is done at Port Royal, and it will be the 
 most signal service vou can render to the Church, since 
 then Port Royal will not have an underdanding iv'dh 
 Geneva, but Geneva an understanding with Port 
 Royal and the whole Church. 
 
 In truth, fathers, you could not have chosen your 
 ground worse than to accuse Port Royal of not believ- 
 ing the Eucharist ; but I wish to show what induced 
 you. You know that I somewhat understand your 
 policy. You have strictly followed it on this occasion. 
 Had the Abbe de St. Cyran, and M. Arnauld only 
 spoken of what ought to be believed concerning this 
 mystery, and not of what should be done in preparing 
 for it, they would have been the best Catholics in the 
 
JESUIT CALUMNIES AGAINST PORT ROYAL. 825 
 
 'fWP 
 
 m 
 
 ies, p. 586, 
 ed with the 
 ;e of Jesus 
 they remain 
 lis mystery, 
 ^lics pay to 
 tie passages 
 Port Royal, 
 re treatises 
 n Frequent 
 inies of the 
 f the Holy 
 n the Hours 
 le establish- 
 ititution for 
 ned in the 
 
 will be the 
 urch, since 
 
 nding with 
 with Port 
 
 losen your 
 not believ- 
 lat induced 
 stand your 
 is occasion, 
 nauld only 
 erniiiGj this 
 preparinj^ 
 )lics in the 
 
 world, and no ambiguity would have been found in 
 their terms of real j^resence and transuhs^antiation. 
 But because all who combat your corruptions must be 
 heretical, and on the very point for which they combat 
 them, must not M. Arnauld be so after having written 
 a book expressly against your profanations of this 
 sacrament ? What, fathers, shall he have said with 
 impunity, " that the body of Jesus Christ should not 
 be given to those who are ever relapsing into the same 
 sins, and in whom we see no hope of amendment, and 
 that they should for a time be kept away from the 
 altar to purify themselves by a sincere repentance, so 
 as afterwards to approach it with benefit " ? Do not 
 suffer them to speak thus, fathers ; if you do, you will 
 not have so many frequenters of your confessionals ; 
 for your Father Brisacier says, that if "you followed 
 this method, you would not apply the blood of Jesus 
 Christ to any one." It is far better for you to follow 
 the practice of your Society, which your Father 
 Mascarenhas, in a book approved by your doctors and 
 even by your reverend Father General, describes as 
 follows : " All sorts of persons, and even priests, may 
 receive the body of Jesus Christ, the same day they 
 have defiled themselves by abominable sins : so far 
 from there being any irreverence in these communions, 
 it is on the contrary laudable to use them in this 
 manner. Confessors ought not to dissuade them, but 
 ought on the contrary to counsel those who have just 
 committed these crimes, to communicate at the instant ; 
 because, although the Church has forbidden it, the 
 
320 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 llv. 
 
 ir 
 
 prohibition i.s rendered obsolete by the universal prac- 
 tice of the whole earth." 
 
 See, fathers, what it is to have Jesuits over the 
 whole earth. Such is the universal practice which 
 you have introduced, and which you wish to maintain. 
 It matters not though the tables of Jesus Christ should 
 be filled with abomination, provided your churches are 
 full of people. See, then, that those who oppose this 
 "^e made heretical on the holy Sacrament. It must 
 be done, cost what it may : but how will you be able 
 to do it after the many invincible evidences they have 
 given ot their faith ? Are you not afraid I will state 
 your four great proofs of their heresy ? Well may 
 you, fathers ; but I ought not to spare you the shame. 
 Now then, for the first of them. 
 
 " M. de St. Cyran," says Father Meinier, " in con- 
 soling a friend for the death of his mother, torn. 1, Lett. 
 14, says, that the most pleasing sacrifice which can be 
 offered to God on this occasion, is patience ; therefore 
 he is Calvinist." This is very subtle, fathers ; and I 
 know not if any one sees the ground of it ; let us then 
 learn it from himself. " Because," says this great 
 controversialist, " he does not believe in the sacrifice of 
 the Mass, for it is the most pleasing of all to God." 
 Let them now say that the Jesuits cannot argue. So 
 skilful are they, that they will make any one they 
 please, and even the Holy Scriptures, to be heretical. 
 For would it not be heresy to say as Ecclesiasticu.s 
 does, " There is nothing worse than the love of money ; 
 Nihil est iniquius (^aam amare 'pecuniam," as if 
 
 il 
 
iversal prac- 
 
 lits over the 
 actice which 
 to maintain. 
 Christ should 
 churches are 
 
 oppose this 
 at. It must 
 
 you be able 
 
 es they have 
 
 . I will state 
 
 Well may 
 
 u the shame. 
 
 ier, " in con- 
 tom. 1, Lett. 
 
 ^hich can be 
 therefore 
 hers ; and I 
 let us then 
 s this great 
 e sacrifice of 
 
 lall to God." 
 ,rgue. So 
 ly one they 
 3e heretical, 
 cclesiasticu.s 
 e of money ; 
 am^' as if 
 
 TTT 
 
 CALUMNIES AGAINST ST. CYRAN. 
 
 :i27 
 
 adultery, murder and idolatry were not greater crimes ? 
 And is there a man who does not, every hour, say 
 similar things ; for example, that the sacrifice of a 
 broken and contrite heart is the most pleasing in the 
 sight of God ; because by this language we merely mean 
 to compare some internal virtues with others, and not 
 with the sacrifice of the Mass, which is of a different 
 order altogether, and infinitely more exalted ! Are you 
 not, then, ridiculous, fathers ? and must I, to complete 
 your confusion, give you the terms of this very letter, 
 in which M. de St. Cyran speaks of the sacrifice of the 
 Mass as " the most excellent of all," saying, " offer to 
 God daily, and in all places, the sacrifice of the body 
 of his Son, who has not found a more excellent means 
 than this of honouring his Father ?" And again, "Jesus 
 Christ has obliged us, when dying, to take his sacri- 
 ficed body, that we may thereby render the sacrifice of 
 our own body more agreeable to God ; and to unite 
 himself to us when we die, in order to strengthen us by 
 sanctifying, by his presence, the last sacrifice we make 
 to God, of our life and our body." Conceal all this, 
 fathers, and cease not to say that he dissuaded from 
 communicating at death, as you do, p. 33, and that he 
 did not believe the sacrifice of the Mass. Nothing is 
 too hardy for calumniators by profession. 
 
 Your second proof gives strong evidence of this. To 
 make a Calvinist of the late M. de St. Cyran, to whom 
 you ascribe the authorship of Petrus Aureliiis, you 
 bring forward a passage in which Aurelius explains, 
 p. 80, in what manner the Church conducts herself 
 
 '{' 
 

 •■.'i 
 
 I. 'Xi 
 
 \r> 
 
 3^8 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTEllS, 
 
 towards priests, and even bishops whom she means to 
 depose or degrade. "The Church," says he, "not being 
 able to divest them of the gift of ordination, because it 
 is ineffaceable, does what in her lies : she erases from 
 her memory the character which she cannot erase from 
 the souls of those who have received it : she considers 
 them as if they were no longer priests or bishops, so 
 that, according to the ordinary language of the Church 
 we may say they are so no longer, although they 
 always are so in respect of character 06 indelebilitatem 
 characteris." You see, fathers, that this author, who 
 was approved by three general assemblies of the Clergy 
 of France, says clearly, that " the character of the 
 priesthood is ineffaceable." Here, therefore, you have 
 uttered a notable calumny ; in other words, according 
 to you, committed a petty venial sin. For this book 
 had injured you, by refuting the heresies of your 
 colleagues in England, respecting Episcopal authority. 
 But here is a remarkable extravagance : having falsely 
 supposed that M. de St. Cyran holds the character to 
 be effaceable, you conclude that he does not believe the 
 real presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist. 
 
 Do not expect me to answer this, fathers. If you 
 have not common sense, I cannot give it to you. All 
 who have, will, without any aid, laugh enough at 
 you, as well as at your third proof, which you found 
 upon these words of the Frequent Communion 3rd p. 
 ch. 11, " that God in the Eucharist gives us the same 
 ineat as he gives to the saints in heaven, with only this 
 difference, that here he removes the sensible sight and 
 
he means to 
 :, "not beinof 
 n, because it 
 erases from 
 >t erase from 
 he considers 
 ■ bishops, so 
 ' the Church 
 hough they 
 ielebilitatem 
 author, who 
 E the Clergy 
 -cter of the 
 e, you have 
 s, according 
 r this boolv 
 es of your 
 I authority. 
 I'ing falsely 
 laracter to 
 
 Delieve the 
 
 st. 
 
 ■s. If you 
 
 you. All 
 enough at 
 ^ou found 
 
 on 3rd p. 
 
 the same 
 
 only this 
 
 sight and 
 
 iT'm 
 
 CALUMNIES AGAINST ARNAULD. 
 
 329 
 
 taste, reserving both for heaven." Indeed, fathers, 
 these words so simply express the sense of the Church, 
 that, at this moment, I forget what means vou take to 
 pervert them. For I see nothing in them but what 
 the Council of Trent teaches, sess. 13, c. 8 ; tliat there 
 is no difference between Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, 
 and Jesus Christ in heaven, except that here he is veiled, 
 and there, not. M. Arnauld says not that there is no 
 other ditierence in the manner of receiving Jesus Christ, 
 but only that there is no other in Jesus Christ who is 
 received. And yet you insist, against all reason, on 
 making him say in this passage, that Christ is not 
 eaten with the mouth here any more than in heaven ; 
 and hence you infer his heresy. 
 
 I pity you, fathers. Must further explanation be 
 given you ? Why do you confound this divine nourish- 
 ment with the manner of receiving it ? There is, as I 
 have just said, only a single difference between this 
 nourishment on earth, and in heaven, namely, that 
 here it is hidden under veils, which deprive us of the 
 sight and sensible taste of it ; but there are several 
 differences between the manner of receiving it here and 
 there, the principal of which is, as M. Arnauld says, 
 part 3, ch. 16, "here it enters the mouth and stomach 
 both of the good and the bad, which is not the case in 
 heaven." 
 
 If you are ignorant of the cause of this difference, I 
 will tell you, fathers, that the reason why God has 
 established these different modes of receiving the same 
 meat, is the difference which subsists between the 
 

 1 1 
 
 1 1 ' 
 
 1 ' ; 
 1 ' 1 
 
 
 1 ^ 
 
 ; ' 
 
 
 1 li 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 1 HH 
 
 
 
 1 ' 1 " : ' Itl { 
 
 
 
 f] 
 
 i , 1 
 
 
 1 jjil 
 
 hi 
 
 1 
 
 U'' ' 11 < ': ''f^* 
 
 
 t ,»,' 8 i; '■■ 
 
 i 8' ■ ? i! i ■ ' ■ ' 
 
 1 W : 11^'' 
 
 i» ■ 11 p!.- 
 
 *- If' If '[ ' 
 
 ■ H Ba^ '*' ^ 
 
 ' li' K 1 ^ ' 
 
 1- '»! ' U''' 
 
 
 
 jl ; If V 
 
 9 W . 1 "^ ; ;• ■ . 
 
 
 
 ]1l' ' ' si:! ^'' 
 
 ' -M' fl ti " ' ' 
 
 - if ' ■ ' \ -. 
 
 ' ' ■'! • vi ' 
 
 |il 1. h! 
 
 
 
 -»• ! '■ iir :'■!'- 
 
 
 J ? *■ ' ■ '^ .■ ■• ' 
 
 in 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 If:'! A 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 i mwl '• • 
 
 
 1 
 
 i|mi:'-'^-i'^i^ 
 
 
 i 
 
 IBrlffil ^ ^ i: -^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^9B^^ f i ; -: : < ' t'lll 
 
 
 
 ^mU^^^SSa* ^'■'<- i 
 
 
 
 wKS^^ ' W^^i 
 
 
 
 ^^Bi :|y! [ 
 
 HW ll 
 
 lil 
 
 w. 
 
 330 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 state of Christians in this life, and that of the blessed 
 in heaven. The state of Christians, says Cardinal 
 Perron, after the Fathers, holds a middle place between 
 the state of the blessed and the state of the Jews. The 
 blessed possess Jesus Christ really, without figures 
 and without veil. The Jews possessed Jesus Christ 
 only by figures and veils, as were the manna and 
 paschal lamb. And Christians possess Jesus Christ in 
 the Eucharist, truly and really, but still covered with 
 veils. " God," says St. Eucherius, " has made three 
 tabernacles ; the synagogue, which had only shadows, 
 without reality ; the Church, which has reality and 
 shadows ; and heaven, where there are no shadows but 
 reality only." We .should change the state in which 
 we are (which is the state of faith, and which St. Paul 
 contrasts as well with the law as with clear vision), 
 did we possess figures only, without Jesus Christ; 
 because the peculiarity of the law is to have only the 
 shadow of things, and not the substance ; and we should 
 also change it, did we possess them visibly, because 
 faith, as the same apostle says, respects not things 
 which are seen. And thus the Eucharist is perfectly 
 adapted to our state of faith, because it contains Jesus 
 Christ truly, though under a veil. So that this state 
 would be destroyed, were not Jesus Chiist really under 
 the species of bread and wine, as heretics pretend ; and 
 it would also be destroyed if we received him un- 
 covered, as in heaven, since this would be to confound 
 our state, either with the state of Judaism or that of 
 glory. 
 
CALUMNIES AGAINST ARNAULD, 
 
 331 
 
 of the blessed 
 ays Cardinal 
 place between 
 le Jews. The 
 thout figures 
 Jesus Christ 
 I manna and 
 3SUS Christ in 
 covered with 
 made three 
 3nly shadows, 
 s reality and 
 ) shadows but 
 bate in which 
 ^hich St. Paul 
 clear vision), 
 resus Christ; 
 lave only the 
 nd we should 
 ibly, because 
 not things 
 is perfectly 
 Dntains Jesus 
 lat this state 
 really under 
 pretend ; and 
 ^ed him un- 
 to confound 
 m or that of 
 
 Behold, fathers, the mysterious and divine ground 
 of this most divine mystery. It is this which makes 
 us abhor the Calvinists, as reducing us to the condi- 
 tion of the Jews, and makes us aspire to the glory of 
 the blessed, when we shall have the full and eternal 
 fruition of Jesus Christ. Hence you see that there 
 are several differences between tlie manner in which 
 he communicates himself to Christians and to the 
 Messed ; among others, that here we receive him with 
 the mouth, not so in heaven ; but they all depend 
 merely on the difference between the state in which 
 we are, and that in which they are. And this, fathers, 
 is what M. Arnauld expresses so clearly in these 
 terms : " There cannot be any other difference between 
 the purity of those who receive Jesus Christ in the 
 Eucharist, and that of the blessed, than there is be- 
 tween faith and the clear vision of God, on which 
 alone depends the different modes in which we eat on 
 earth and in heaven." Your duty, with regard to 
 these words, fathers, was to have revered their holy 
 truth, instead of corrupting them, for the purpose of 
 rearing up a heresy, which they do not, and never can 
 contain, namely, that we eat Jesus Christ only by 
 faith, and not by the mouth, as they ".;- maliciously 
 expounded by your fathers, Annat and keinier, so as 
 to form the head of their accusation. 
 
 Here, then, you are sadly at a loss for proof, fathers ; 
 and this is the reason why you have had recourse to 
 a new artifice, namely, to falsify the Council of Trent, 
 in order to make out that M. Arnauld is not conform- 
 
! 
 
 H'l': 
 
 III 
 
 332 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTEUS. 
 
 able to it; so numerous are the means you have to 
 make people heretical. This is don Father Mui- 
 
 nier in fifty places of his book, and eigiit or ten times 
 in the single page 54 ; where he pretends that, in 
 order to speak orthodoxly, it is not enough to say, " I 
 believe Jesus Christ is present really in the Eucharist," 
 but that it is necessary to say, " I believe, tvith the 
 Council, that he is present with a true local pref<cnce, 
 or locally." And on this he quotes the Council, sess. 
 13, can. 3, can. 4, can. 6. Who would not believe, on 
 seeing the words " local presence," quoted from three 
 canons of a universal Council, that they are there in 
 reality ? This might have served you' urpose before 
 my Fifteeiitli Letter ; but people are onger taken 
 
 in by it. They go and look at the Council, and Hud 
 you impostors. For these terms, " local presence, 
 locally, locality," never were there. And I declare to 
 you, moreover, fathers, that they are not in any 
 other part of this Council, nor in any other preceding 
 Council, nor in any Father of the Church. Here, 
 therefore, fathers, I beg you to say, if you mean 
 to bring a suspicion of Calvinism on all who have not 
 used this term. If so, tJie Council of Trent is sus- 
 pected, and all the holy fathers without exception. 
 Have you no other way of rendering M. Arnaukl 
 heretical, without offending so many persons who 
 never did you harm ? among others, St. Thomas, who 
 is one of the greatest defenders of the Eucharist ; and 
 who, so far from using that term, has expressly re- 
 jected it, 3 p. qu. 76, a. 5, where he says : Nulla modo 
 
(.'ALUMNIES AGAINST ARNAULD. 
 
 33:J 
 
 yon havo to 
 
 Father Mei- 
 
 i or ten times 
 
 ends that, in 
 
 <f\\ to say, " I 
 
 le Eucliarist," 
 
 eve, with the 
 
 Odd prenenre, 
 
 Council, sess. 
 
 )t believe, on 
 
 d from three 
 
 '' are there in 
 
 urpose before 
 
 onger taken 
 
 ncil, and Hnd 
 
 cal presence, 
 
 I declare to 
 
 not in any 
 
 er precedinLj 
 
 urch. Here, 
 
 you mean 
 
 10 have not 
 
 rent is sus- 
 
 exception. 
 
 M. Arnauld 
 
 ersons who 
 
 homas, who 
 
 harist ; and 
 
 cpressly re- 
 
 iullo modo 
 
 ('(}i'pu8 Chrlstl est in hoc fnicrnmpnto locaiiter. Who 
 are you, then, fathers, that of your own authority 
 impose new terms, which you ordain us to use for the 
 ])r()per expression of our faith, as if the profession of 
 faith prepared l)y the popes, on the order of the 
 Council, where this term is not to be found, werr de- 
 fective, and left in the creed of the faithful, an am- 
 l»i,i,aiity which you alone have discovered ? What 
 presmiipticm, to prescribe these terms even to doctors ! 
 What falsehood, to palm them upon general Councils! 
 And what ignorance, not to know the difficulties which 
 the most enlightened sainis have had to admit them ! 
 Blush, fathers, at "your ignorant impostures;" as 
 Scripture says to impostors like you : Dc viendacio 
 ineriulltlonis tuae coiifundere. 
 
 No longer, then, attempt to play the master. You 
 have neither character nor ability for it. But if you 
 would advance your propositions more modestly, one 
 might listen to them. For although the term " local 
 presence " was rejected by St. Thomas, as you have 
 seen, because the body of Christ is not in the Eucharist, 
 with thv3 ordinary dimensions of bodies in their place : 
 nevertheless, the term has been received by some new 
 authors on controversy, because they simply inean by 
 it, that the body of Jesus Christ is truly under the 
 species ; and as these are in a particular place, the 
 body of Christ is also there. In this sense, M. Arnauld 
 will have no difficulty in admitting it, M. de St. Cyran 
 and he havincf so often declareil that Jessus Christ in 
 the Eucharist, is truly in a particular place, and 
 
 !•.( 
 
334 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 ; .1* 
 
 miraculously in several places at once. Thus, all your 
 refinements tumble to the ground, and you have not 
 been able to give the least semblance to an accusation 
 which ought not to have been advanced without in- 
 vincible proof. 
 
 But of what use is it, fathers, to oppose their inno- 
 cence to your calumnies ? You do not attribute heresy 
 to them in the belief that they are heretical, but in 
 the belief that they do you harm. This, accordini^ to 
 your theology, is enough to calumniate them without 
 criminality ; and you may say mass without confes- 
 sion or repentance, at the very time you are charuiuif 
 priests who say it every day with believing it to lie 
 pure idolatry ; sacrilege so dreadful, that you your- 
 selves hung your own Father -larrige in etHgy for 
 having said it " at a time when he was in terms witli 
 Geneva." 
 
 I am astonished, then, not at your charging them 
 so unscrupulously with great and spurious crimes, 
 but at 3'our imprudence in charging them with 
 crimes which are so very improbable. For you in- 
 deed dispose of sins at your pleasure ; but do you 
 think you can in the same way dispose of men's belief ;* 
 Truly, fathers, were it the only alternative, that either 
 you or they must be suspected of Calvinism, I should 
 consider you in a bad plight. While their languaue 
 is as orthodox as yours, their conduct confirms their 
 faith, and yours belies it. For if you believe, as \\'?11 
 as they, that the bread is really changed into the body 
 of Jesus Christ, why do you not, like them, require 
 
CALUMNIES AGAINST AllNAULD. 
 
 335 
 
 US, all your 
 u have not 
 I accusation 
 without in- 
 
 their inno- 
 bute heresy 
 ,ical, but in 
 Lccordini^ to 
 em without 
 lOut cont'es- 
 re charging 
 ng it to be 
 t you your- 
 1 efHijfv tor 
 terms with 
 
 ro-ing them 
 Dus crimes, 
 them with 
 or you in- 
 'Ut do you 
 en's belief ? 
 that either 
 n, I should 
 ir language 
 Hrnis their 
 ?ve, as well 
 the body 
 m, require 
 
 that the hard and stony heart of those whom you 
 counsel to approach, should be truly changed into a 
 heart of flesh ? If you believe that Jesus Christ is 
 there in a state of death, that jthose approaching may 
 thereby learn to die in the world, to sin, and to them- 
 selves, why do you induce any to approach, v/hile 
 their criminal passions are altogether unmortified ? 
 And how do you deem those worthy to eat the bread 
 of heaven w^ho would not be worthy to eat earthly 
 bread ? 
 
 great worshippers of this sacred mystery ! wor- 
 shippers who manifest their zeal by persecuting those 
 who honour it by many holy communions, and flatter- 
 ing those who dishonour it by so many sacrilegious 
 communions ! How becoming in those defenders of 
 this pure and adorable sacrifice, to surround the table 
 of the Lord with hardened sinners, who have just 
 sallied forth from their places of infamy ; and to place 
 amidst them a priest, whom even his confessor sends 
 from his unchastity to the altar, there to act as the 
 representative of Jesus Christ, presenting this holy 
 victim to the God of holiness, and putting it, with his 
 polluted hands, into their polluted mouths ! Is it not 
 most seemingly in those who thus act " over all the 
 earth," according to maxims approved by their own 
 General, to charge the author of ' Frequent Com- 
 munion,' and the Daug'Hers of the Holy Sacrament, 
 with not believing the holy sacrament ? 
 
 Even this does not suffice. To satisfy their passion 
 they must at last accuse them of having renounced 
 
PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 Jesus Christ and their baptism. These, fathers, are 
 not the blustering tales you generally tell ; they are 
 the fatal excesses by which you have filled up the 
 measure of your calumnies. This notable falsehood 
 would noi have been in fit hands, had it been allowed 
 to remain in the hands of yoi good friend, Filleau, 
 to whom you suggested it : your Society has openly 
 taken it upon itself; and your Father Memier hits just 
 maintained " as a certain truth," that Port Royal has 
 for thirty-five years formed a secret cabal, of which 
 M. de St. Cyran and M. d'Ypres have been the heads, 
 " for the purpose of overthrowing the mystery of the 
 incarnation, making the Gospel pass.for an apocryphal 
 history, exterminating the Christian religion, and 
 rearing Deism upon the ruins of Christianity." Is this 
 all, fathers ? Will you be satisfied if all this is be- 
 lieved of those whom you hate ? Will your animosity 
 be at last satiated, when j'ou have produced a feeling 
 of abhorrence against them, not only among those who 
 are in the Church, because of their being on terms 
 with Geneva, as you accuse them, but also among all 
 those who believe in Jesus Christ, though out of the 
 Church, because of the Deism which you impute to 
 them ? 
 
 But how do you expect to persuade us on your word 
 alone, without the least appearance of proof, and in 
 the face of the strongest imaginable contradictions, 
 that priests who preach only the grace of Jesus 
 Christ, the purity of the Gospel, and the obliga- 
 tions of baptism, have renounced their baptism, 
 

 CALUMNIES AGAINST PORT ROYAL. 
 
 :M]7 
 
 , fathers, are 
 3II ; they are 
 illed up the 
 >le falsehood 
 )een allowed 
 end, Filleau, 
 ^ has openly 
 inier hfts just 
 •t Royal has 
 al, of which 
 jn the heads, 
 ^stery of the 
 1 apocryphal 
 elif^ion, and 
 lity." Is this 
 1 this is be- 
 r animosity 
 ed a feeling 
 2: those who 
 (J on terms 
 among all 
 out of the 
 impute to 
 
 your word 
 roof, and in 
 itradictions, 
 of Jesus 
 the obliga- 
 baptisni, 
 
 I 
 
 the Gospel, and Jesus Christ? Who will believe it, 
 fathers ? Do you believe it yourselves, wrotches thnt 
 you are ? And to what extremes are you reduced, since 
 you are under the necessity of either proving that they 
 do not believe in Jesus Christ, or of passing for the 
 most abandoned calumniators that ever existed :' Prove 
 it, then, fathers. Name this ecclesiastic of merit," 
 who you say was present at the assembly of Hotirg- 
 Fontaine, and disclosed to your Fatlier Killoau the 
 design which was there formed to destroy the (Chris- 
 tian religion. Name the six persons who you say 
 formed this conspiracy. Name him who is designated 
 by the letters A. A., which you say, p. 15, "means not 
 Antony Arnauld," because he has convinced you he 
 was then only nine years of age, but another who you 
 say " is still in life, and too good a friend of M. Arnauld, 
 to be unknown to him." You know him, then, fathers; 
 and consequently, unless you are yourselves wit lout 
 religion, you are obliged to denounce the impious man 
 to the king and the parliament, that he may be pun- 
 ished as he deserves. You must speak out, fathers ; 
 you must name him, or submit to the ignominy of 
 being henceforth regarded as liars, unfit even to be 
 believed. This, as the worthy Father Valerien has 
 taught us, is the way to " curb " and push such impos- 
 tors. Your silence will amount to a full and complete 
 proof of your diabolical calumny. The most blindcnl 
 of your friends will be compelled to confess that "it 
 will be the effect not of your virtue, but of your impo- 
 tence," and to wonder how you have been so wicked 
 22 
 
PUOVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 as to extend the charge even to the nuns of Port Royal, 
 and to say as you do, p. 14, that "the Secret Chaplet 
 of the Holy Sacrament," framed by one of them, was 
 the first fruit of this conspiracy against Jesus Clirist: 
 and in p. 95, that " they have been taught all the 
 detestable maxims of that writing," which is, according 
 to 3'ou, a lesson in Deism. Your impostures, in regard 
 to this writing, have already been completely ruined 
 by the defence of the censure which the late arc'li- 
 bishop of Paris pronounced on your Father Brisacior. 
 You have no answer to give, and yet you cjase not to 
 act more shamefully than ever, by attributing tlie 
 worst of impieties to virgins whose piety is known to 
 all. Cruel and cowardly persecutors ! Cannot even 
 the most retired cloisters be asylums against your 
 calumnies ? While these holy virgins day and night 
 worship Jesus Christ in the holy sacrament, according 
 to their institution, you cease not day and night to 
 publish that they do not believe him to be either in 
 the Eucharist, or even on the right hand of his Father; 
 and you publicly cut them oflf from the Church, while 
 they are in secret praying for you, and for the whole 
 Church. You calumniate those who have no ears to 
 hear, no mouth to answer you. But Jesus Christ, in 
 whom they are hid, to appear one day along with him, 
 hears you, and answers for them. This day is heard 
 that holy and dreadful voice which at once fills nature 
 with dismay, and consoles the Church. And I fear, 
 fathers, that those who harden their hearts, and 
 obstinately refuse to hear him wdien he speaks as God, 
 
CALUMNIES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 339 
 
 F Port Royal, 
 
 !cret Chaplet 
 
 of them, was 
 
 Jesus Christ: 
 
 light all tho 
 
 1 is, accord ini;' 
 
 res, in re^^ard 
 
 iletuly rniiK!(l 
 
 le late arcli- 
 
 her Brisacior. 
 
 1 coase not to 
 
 -ributing- the 
 
 1 is known to 
 
 Cannot even 
 
 against your 
 
 ay and night 
 
 nt, according 
 
 and night to 
 
 be either in 
 
 his Father; 
 
 lurch, while 
 
 or the whole 
 
 k'e no ears to 
 
 us Christ, in 
 
 ng with him, 
 
 lay is heard 
 
 e fills nature 
 
 And I fear, 
 
 hearts, and 
 
 eaks as God, 
 
 will be forced to listen in terror, when he shall speak 
 to them as Judge. For, in fine, fathers, what account 
 will you be able to give of all these calumnies, when 
 he will examine them, not on the fancies of your 
 fathers, Dicastillus, Cans and Pennalossa, who excuse 
 them, but on the rules of eternal truth, and the holy 
 ordinance of his Church, which, far from excusing this 
 crime, so abhors it that she has punished it as severely 
 as wilful murder ? For calumniators, as well as mur- 
 derers, were debarred from the holy communion until 
 death bj' the first and second Councils of Aries. Tho 
 Council of Lateran adjudged those convicted of it to 
 be unfit for the priesthood, though they fiad reformed. 
 The popes have even threatened the calunmiators of 
 bishops, priests or deacons, with exclusion from the 
 communion till death. And the authors of a libellous 
 writing, who cannot prove what they have advanced, 
 are condemned by Pope Adrian io be whipped ; 
 reverend i&thei's,jlarjell(niTiir! So far has the Church 
 been from countenancing the errors of 3'our Society, a 
 Society so corrupt as to excuse the heinous sin of 
 slander, that it may itself be able to commit it with 
 more freedom. 
 
 Certainly, fathers, j'ou might thus be capable of 
 doing a world of mischief had not God permitted th it 
 you should yourselves furnish tho antidote, and render 
 all your impostures unavailing. For it is only neces- 
 sary to publish the strange maxim which exempts 
 them from sin in order to deprive you of all credit. 
 Calumny is unavailing, if it is not combined with a 
 
 1^ 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
340 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 f\i 
 
 \ I 
 
 Hi :i 
 
 I 
 
 III; i 
 
 -^ 
 
 Ut 
 
 i 1 
 
 great reputation for candour. An evil speaker cannot 
 succeed if he is not thoui^ht to abhor evil speak in i,^ as 
 a crime of which lie is incapable. And thus, fathers, 
 your own principle betrays you ; you have established 
 it to secure your conscience ; for your wish was to 
 slander without beinsjf damned, and to belnno- to tltosr. 
 jnous and holy caluinviators of whom St. Athanasins 
 speaks. You have, accordingly, to save yourselves 
 irom hell, adopted a maxim which saves you from it 
 on the faith of your doctors, but a maxim, which, 
 guaranteeing you from the evils which you dread in 
 the other life, deprives you of the advantage which 
 you hoped to gain b}'' it in the present life ; so that, 
 while thinking io av^oid the punishment of evil speak- 
 ing you have lost the benefit of it; so self-contradictory 
 is evil, and so much does it embarrass and destroy 
 itself by its innate malice. 
 
 You would calunmiate more successfully by pro- 
 fessing to hold with St. Paul, that evil speakers, 
 nialcdici, are unworthy to see God. In that case, 
 your sla. lers would, at least, be more readily believed, 
 although you would thereby pronounce your ov/n con- 
 demnation. But in saying, as you do, that calumny 
 against your enemies is not a sin, you cause your 
 calumnies to be disbelieved, and you damn yourselves, 
 notwithstanding. For it is certain, fathers, that your 
 srrave authors cannot annihilate the justice of God, 
 and that you cannot give a surer proof of not being in 
 the truth than by having recourse to falsehood. If 
 the truth was for you, it would combat for you, it 
 
 Mj t< 
 
 

 CALUMNIES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 341 
 
 would vanquish for you ; and whatever enemies you 
 might have, the truth would, according to the promise, 
 make you free. You have recourse to falsehood 
 merely to maintain the errors with which you tiatter 
 the sinners of the world, and to prop up the calumnies 
 with which you oppress the pious who oppose them. 
 Truth being contrary to your ends, you have found it 
 necessary to put your confidence in lies, as a prophet 
 expresses it. You have said: "The evils which aiHict 
 men will not befall us, for we have hoped in falsehood, 
 and falsehood will protect us." But what says the 
 projjhet ? " Injismuch as you have put your trust in 
 calumny and tumult, ^perastis in caliuiinm et in 
 tarauUa, your ini(|uity will be imputed to you, and 
 your overthrow will be like thai of a lofty wall which 
 tumbles down unexpectedly, and like an earthen vessel 
 which is broken and dashed in pi(;ces l)y a blow so 
 mighty and so complete, that not a fragment shall 
 remain tit for carrying a little water, or carrying a 
 little fire;" "because," as says another prophet, "you 
 have atilicted the heart of the just, whom I have not 
 afflicted, and you have flattered and confirmed the 
 malica of the wicked. I will therefore withdraw my 
 people from your liands, and will cause it to be known 
 that I am their Lord and yours." 
 
 Yes, fathers, it is to be hoped that if you do not 
 change your spirit, God will deprive you of the charge 
 of those whom you have so long deceived, by either 
 leaving these disorders uncorrected through your mis- 
 conduct, or by poisoning them with your slanders. He 
 
342 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 h 
 
 will give some of them to understand that the false 
 rules of your casuists cannot shelter them from his 
 anger, and he will inspire others with a just dread of 
 destroying themselves by listening to you and giving 
 credit to your impostures, as you will destroy your- 
 selves by inventing and circulating them. For be not 
 deceived, God is not mocked ; no man can with 
 impunity violate the command which he has given in 
 the Gospel, not to condemn our neighbour without being 
 well assured of his guilt. And thus, whatever pro- 
 fession of piety may be made by those who lend a 
 willing ear to your falsehoods, and under whatever 
 pretext of devotion they may do so, they have reason to 
 apprehend that they will be excluded from the king- 
 dom of God for this single sin, for having imputed such 
 heinous crimes as heresy and schism to Catholic priests 
 and holy nuns, without other proof than your gross 
 impostures. " The devil," says the bishop of Geneva, 
 "is on the tongue of the evil speaker, and in the ear of 
 him who listens to him." And, " evil speaking," says 
 St. Bernard, " is poison which extinguishes charity in 
 both. So that a single calumny may be mortal to an 
 infinite number of souls, not only killing those who 
 publish, but also those who do not reject it." 
 
 M 
 
 Reverend fathers, my letters were not wont to follow 
 so close, or to be so much extended. The little time I 
 have had is the cause of both. I have made this one 
 longer, only because I have not had leisure to make it 
 shorter. The reason which obliges me to hasten is 
 
CALUMNIES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 348 
 
 better known to yourselves than to me. Your answers 
 were suceeedintj badly; you have done right to change 
 your plan, but I know not it' you have taken the right 
 one, and if people will not say that you were afraid of 
 the Benedictines. 
 
 I have just learned that he who is universally regard- 
 ed as the author of your Apologies, disavows them, and 
 is sorry they should be attributed to him. He is right; 
 and I was wrong in suspecting him ; for however 
 strongly assured of the fact, I should have considered 
 that he has too much judgment to believe your impos- 
 tures, and too much honour to publish them without 
 believing them. Few persons in the world are capable 
 of the excesses which are proper to you, and which too 
 well mark your character, ao that I cannot be excused 
 for not having recognized you. Common report misled 
 me. But this excuse, which would be too good for you, 
 is not sufficient for me, who profess not to say anything 
 without certain proof, and have not, with this excep- 
 tion. I repent it, I retract it, and I wish that you may 
 profit by my example. 
 
 
 
 
 Uf 
 
 ; 
 
LETTEPt SEVENTEENTH. 
 
 TO THE UKVERENI) FATHER ANNAT, JESUIT. 
 
 d': |i 
 
 PROOF ON KEMOVINO AN AMBIGUITY IN THE MEANING OF .lAN- 
 SENIUS, THAT THERE IS NO HERESY IN THE CHURCH : BY 
 THE UNANIMOUS CONSENT OF ALL THEOLOGIANS, AND ES- 
 I'KCIALLY OF THE JESUITS, THE AUTHORITY OP I'OPES AND 
 (ECUMENICAL COUNCILS NOT INFALLIBLE IN QUESTIONS OF 
 FACT. 
 
 Reverend Fatheu, — Your procedure made me sup- 
 pose you desirous that we should remain at rest on 
 both sides; and I was disposed to do so: but you have 
 since, within a short time, produced so many writings 
 as malves it very apparent that peace is far from being 
 securo, wlien it depends on the silence of the Jesuits. 
 I know not if the rupture will be much to your ad- 
 vantage ; but for my part, I am not sorry at the op- 
 portunity it gives me of refuting that ordinary charge 
 of heresy with which you till all your books. 
 
 It is time to put a stop, once for all, to your elfron- 
 tery, in treating me as a heretic ; an effrontery which 
 increases every day. You do it in the book Ahich 
 you have just published, in a way which cannot be 
 tolerated, and which would bring me under suspicion 
 
CALUMNIES OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 34: 
 
 wore I not to answer a charge of this nature as it 
 deserves. I despised this insulting charge in tlie writ- 
 ings of your colleagues, as well as an infinite nuniher 
 of other charges, in which they deal on all occasions. 
 To them my Fifteenth Letter was a sufficient reply ; 
 but you now speak in another style. You seriously 
 make it the leading point of your defence ; it is almost 
 the only one which you employ. For you say, that 
 ■' as a complete reply to my- fifteen Letters, it is suffi- 
 cient to say fifteen times that I am a heretic ; and that 
 being declared such, I am unworthy of belief." In fine, 
 you put my apostacy as no longer a question ; you pre- 
 suppose it is a sure principle on which you build 
 boldly. You are thus, father, quite serious in treating 
 me as a heretic ; quite seriously, also, am I going to 
 reply. 
 
 You know well, father, from the serious nature of 
 this accusation, that it is intolerable presumption to 
 advance it if you have not the means of proving it. 
 I ask you, then, what proofs you have ? When was I 
 seen at Chai'enton ? When did I fail at mass, or in 
 the duties which Christians owe to their parish? 
 When did I do an act in union with heretics, or in 
 schism from the Church ? Wliat Council have I con- 
 tradicted ? What papal constitution have I violated ? 
 You must answer, father, or . . . You perfectly 
 understand me. And what is your answei ? I pray 
 all the world to attend to it. You assume, first, that 
 "he who writes the Letters is of Port Royal." Next, 
 you say " that Port Royal is declared heretical ; " and 
 
 U^ 
 
w 
 
 I 
 
 ( 
 
 34G 
 
 PIIOVIXCIAL LETTEUS. 
 
 thonce you infer that " he who writes the Letters is 
 deeUirod heretical." It is not on nie, then, father, that 
 the chief wei^dit of your accusation falls, hut on Port 
 Royal, and you charj^e ine only because you suppose 
 I belong to it. I .shall thus have no great difficulty in 
 defending myself; since I have only to say that I do 
 not belong to it ; and to refer you to my Letters, in 
 which I have said "I am single;" and in express 
 terms " that I am not of Port Koyal," as I said in the 
 Sixteenth Letter, which is earlier in date than your 
 book. 
 
 Prove, then, in some other way, that 1 am heretical, 
 or it will be universally understood that you cannot. 
 Prove by my writings that I do not receive the Con- 
 stitution. They are not very numerous ; you have 
 only sixteen Letters to examine, and in these I defy 
 you, you and the whole world, to produce the least 
 evidence of this. But 1 will show you plainly the 
 contrary. For example, when I said. Letter Four- 
 teenth, that "by killing our brethren in mortal sin, 
 agreeably to your maxims, we damn those for whom 
 Jesus Christ has died," have I not distinctly admitted 
 that Jesus Christ died for those so damned, and con- 
 sequently, that it is not true " he died 'miy for the 
 elect;" the point condemned -^ 'mb fifteenth proposi- 
 tion ? It is certain, then .ler, that ' have said 
 nothing in .support of th imj^'ous propositions, 
 which I detest with all mv heart. Kven should the 
 Port Royal hold them, I declare to you, that you cat - 
 not from this infer anything against me, because, 
 
i 
 
 ie Letters is 
 , father, tluit 
 , but on Port 
 you suppose 
 ; (JiHiculty in 
 ay that I do 
 y Letters, in 
 in express 
 [ said in the 
 Q than your 
 
 im heretical, 
 you cannot, 
 ve the Con- 
 ; you have 
 hese I defy 
 ce the least 
 plainly the 
 etter Four- 
 mortal sin, 
 e for whom 
 y admitted 
 d, and con- 
 
 y for the 
 ith proposi- 
 
 have said 
 ropositions, 
 should the 
 t you car- 
 le, because, 
 
 LETTER TO FATFIKll ANNAT. 
 
 347 
 
 thank God, I liave no tie upon earth hut the Catholic 
 Apostolic lloman Church, in which I mean to live and 
 di(^ ; and in communion with the Pope, its sovureis^ai 
 head, dut of which Church I am persuaded there is no 
 salvation. 
 
 What will you make of a person who speaks in this 
 maimer, and on what side will you attack nie, since 
 neither my lan^aia^e nor my writin^fs fjjive any pretext 
 for your charj^cs of heresy ; and 1 am secured ai,'ainst 
 your menaces by the obscurity in which I live ? You 
 feel struck by an invisible hand, vvliich nuikes your 
 corruption visible to the whole earth ; and you try, in 
 vain, to attack me in the person of those with whom 
 you think me united. I am not afraid of you, either 
 for myself or any other, not being attached to any 
 connnunity, or to any individual whatever. All the 
 influence you may have, is useless as regards me. I 
 hope nothing from the world ; 1 ap})rehend nothing ; 
 I wish nothing: by the grace of God, I have no need 
 either of the property or the patronage of any one. 
 Thus, father, I escape all your machinations. You 
 cannot reach me in any direction which you nuiy try. 
 You may reach Port Royal, but not me. People have 
 indeed been dislodo-ed from Sorbonne ; but that does 
 not tlislodge me from my home. Y''ou may pnspare 
 violent measures against priests and doctors ; but none 
 against me, who am in none of these capacities. And 
 thus, perhaps, you never had to do with any one who 
 was so completely beyond 3'our reach, and so proper to 
 combat your errors ; being free, without engagement. 
 
 r " 
 
mrr 
 
 f ' 
 
 i\:l 
 
 l-J 
 
 i 
 
 ii 
 
 ;l s: 
 
 •I 
 
 !■ i 
 
 m 
 
 '!•! 
 
 348 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 without attachment, without tie, without relation, 
 without business ; while I am sufficiently acfjuainted 
 with your maxims, and lirml}' resolved to assail them, 
 so far as I think God approves ; no earthly considera- 
 tion being capable either to arrest or retard my pursuit. 
 
 Of wliat use. then, is it, father, seeing you can do 
 nothing- against me, to publish so many caluuniies 
 against persons who are not meddling with our ([uarrel, 
 as all your fathers do ? Yo'j shall not escape by these 
 evasions. You .shall feel the force of the truth which 
 I oppose to you. I tell j'ou that you annihilate Chris- 
 tian morality, by separating it from the love of (Jod, 
 from which you give a dispensation ; and you speak to 
 me of the death of Father Mester, whom I never saw 
 in my life. I tell you that your authors give permission 
 to kill for an apple, if it is disgraceful to lo.se it ; and 
 you tell me that " a trunk has been opened at St. Merri!" 
 What, again, do you mean by daily taking me to task 
 on the book of ' Holy Virginity,' composed by a fat.her 
 of the Oratory whom I never saw any more than his 
 book ? I wonder, father, at your thus considering all 
 who are opposed to you, as a single individual. Your 
 hatred embraces them all at once ; and jjacks thmu, as 
 it v/ere, into one body of reprobates, each of whom, 
 you insist, shall answer for all the rest. 
 
 There is a wide difference between the Jesuits and 
 those who combat them. You truly compose one body, 
 united under a single head ; and your rules, as 1 have 
 shown, forbid anything of j'ours to be printed without 
 the sanction of your superiors, who thus become 
 
■ 
 
 ut relation, 
 
 acquainted 
 
 assail tlicni, 
 
 y considera- 
 
 niy pursuit. 
 
 you can do 
 
 y calunniies 
 
 our ([uarrel, 
 
 ipe by these 
 
 truth which 
 
 lihite Chris- 
 
 ove of God, 
 
 nm speak to 
 
 [ never saw 
 
 B permission 
 
 lose it ; and 
 
 :St. Merri!" 
 
 nie to task 
 
 by a t'at-her 
 
 •e than his 
 
 siderinjj all 
 
 ual. Your 
 
 ks thiini, as 
 
 1 oi" whom, 
 
 lesuits and 
 e u-'ie body, 
 i, as 1 have 
 ,ed without 
 us become 
 
 II KRESY. 
 
 .'549 
 
 rcsponsi1)lo for the errors of all individuals, and cannot 
 excuse themselvcf^ hy saying they have not observed the 
 errors taiujlit, hccause they ouyht to observe them, as is 
 said in your regulations, and the letters of your generals 
 A((uaviva, Vitelleschi, etc. Riglitly, then, are you 
 charged with the errors of your brethren, when these 
 exist in works approved by your superiors, and by 
 the theologians of your Company. But, with regard 
 to me, father, the process must be different. I have 
 not suVtscribed the treatise of ' Hoi}" Virginity.' All 
 the trunks in Paris might be opened without making 
 me less orthodox. In short, I declare to you publicly 
 and distinctly, that nobody is responsible for my Letters 
 but myself; and that I am responsible for nothing but 
 my Letters. 
 
 Here, father, I might rest without speaking of the 
 other persons whom you treat as heretics, in order to 
 include me in the charge. But as I am the occasion, I 
 feel in a manner obliged to use it, in order to draw 
 three advantages from it. One, of some importance, is 
 to display the innocence of the many persons calumni- 
 ated. Another, very suitable to my subject, is to give 
 constant proof of the artifices of your policy in this 
 accusation. But !he third, on which I set the highest 
 value, is that I will thereby acquaint all the world 
 with the falsehood of the scandalous report which you 
 are disseminating in all (juarters, that " the Church is 
 divided by a new heresy." And as you impose upon a 
 vast number of persons, by making them believe that 
 the points about which you try to raise so great a 
 
 ifc 
 
 I 
 'I 
 
 1 ) 
 
 ii 
 
 1 
 
 ' ' '; 
 
350 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 U ' 
 
 IL 
 
 V i 
 
 \V 
 
 1H 
 
 a-. 
 
 storm are essential to faith, I dcein it of the utmost 
 importance to destroy those false impressions, and to 
 explain precisely wherein they consist ; so as to show 
 that, in point of fact, there are no heretics in the 
 Church. 
 
 For is it not true that were the (juestion askeil, 
 Wherein consists the heresy of those whom yon call 
 Jansenists ? you would forthwith answer, that it con- 
 sists in their saying, " that the commandments of God 
 are impossible ; that f^race cannot be resisted, and that 
 we are not free to do good and evil ; that Jesus Christ 
 died not for all men, but only for the predestinate ; 
 and in tine, in their maintaining the five propositions 
 condemned by the pope." Do j^ou not give out that 
 it is for this cause you persecute your opponents ? Is 
 not this what you say in your books, in your dis- 
 courses, in your catechisms, as you did last Christmas 
 at St. Louis, asking one of your little shepherdesses, 
 " For whom did Jesus Christ come, my •♦irl ?" " Foi- 
 all men, father." " What, my girl, then you are not 
 one of those new heretics, who say that he came only 
 for the predestinate ?" The children believe you on 
 this, and many others besides, for you entertain tlujin 
 with the same fables in your sermons as did your 
 Father Crasset at Orleans, when he was interdicted. 
 And I confess that at one time I also believed you 
 myself ; you had given me the same idea of all those 
 persons ; so that when you were pressing them on 
 those propositions, I carefully attended to what their 
 answer might be, and was very much disposed never 
 
IMAGINARY HERESY. 
 
 851 
 
 f the utmost 
 ssions, and to 
 o as to show 
 retics in the 
 
 estion asked, 
 
 lioni yon call 
 
 ^ that it con- 
 
 nients of God 
 
 sted, and that 
 
 Jesus Christ 
 
 predestinate ; 
 
 propositions 
 
 ive out that 
 
 ponents ? Is 
 
 in your dis- 
 
 st Christmas 
 
 epherdesses, 
 
 !;irl ?" " For 
 
 you are not 
 
 e catue only 
 
 ieve you on 
 
 ertain tliem 
 
 as did your 
 
 interdicted. 
 
 )elieved you 
 
 of all those 
 
 \'^ them on 
 
 ) what their 
 
 )0sed never 
 
 > 
 
 
 to .see them af^ain, had they not declared tliat they 
 renounced them as visihly impious. But this they did 
 very distinctly. For M. de Sainte Beuve, kinn;'s pro- 
 fessor at Sorbonne, censured these five propo.sitions in 
 his published writings long before the pope, and those 
 doctors printed several works, among others, that of 
 Vlctoriouf^ Grace, which they produced at the same 
 time, in which they reject those propositions as both 
 heretical and novel. For they say in the prei'ace, 
 " that they are heretical and Lutheran propositions, 
 fabricated and forged at pleasure, and not found either 
 in Jansenius or his defenders." These are their terms. 
 They complain of being charged with holding them, 
 and on this account apply to you the words of St. 
 Prosperus, the tir.st disciple of St. Augustine their 
 master, to whom the Semi-Pelagians of France im- 
 puted similar sentiments, to throw obliquy upon him : 
 " There are persons," says the sairt, " who have such a 
 blind passion for decrying us, that ihey have taken to 
 a course which ruins their own reputation. For they 
 have purposel - fabricated certain impious and blas- 
 phemous propositions, which they circulate in all 
 quarters, to make it believed that we hold them in the 
 sense expressed in tlieir writings ; but from this reply 
 will be seen both our innocence and th<i malice of 
 tho.se who impute to us impieties of which they are 
 the sole inventors." 
 
 Indeed, father, when I heard them speak in this 
 way before the Constitution, when I afterwards .saw 
 that they received it with all possible respect, that 
 
.•552 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 .^} 
 
 ?'! 
 
 ! ? 
 
 ' I 
 
 I I] 
 
 they offered to subscribe it, and that all this had been 
 declared by M. Arnauld in his second Letter mopc 
 strongly than I am able to express, I should have 
 thought it a sin to doubt their faith ; and, in fact, those 
 who had been inclined to refuse absolution to their 
 adherents before M. Arnauld's Letter, have since 
 declared, that after he had so distinctly condemned the 
 errors imputed to him, there was no ground for cuttini; 
 off either him or his friends from the Church. But 
 you have not acted so. It was on this I began to sus- 
 pect that you were actuated by passion. 
 
 You had threatened that you would compel them to 
 s^gn the Constitution, when you thought they would 
 refuse ; but when you saw them inclined of their own 
 accord, you spoke no more of it. But although it 
 seems that after this you ought to have been satisfied 
 with their conduct, you still continued to treat them 
 as heretics, " because," as you expressed it, " their heart 
 belied their hand, and they were outwardly orthodox^ 
 but inwardly heretical, as you yourself have said in 
 your reply to certain demands, pp. 27, 47. 
 
 How strange this procedure appeared to me, father ! 
 For of whom may not as much be said ? And what dis- 
 turbance might not be produced by this pretext ? "If 
 we refuse," says St. Gregory, " to believe the C:)nfes- 
 sion of Faith, by those who make it agreeably to the 
 sentiments of the Church, we bring the faith of all the 
 orthodox into doubt." I feared then, father, that 
 your purpose was to make those persons heretical with- 
 out beiiKj so, as the same pope says on a similar dis- 
 
this bad been 
 Letter iik^i'o 
 ' sbould have 
 I, in fact, those 
 ation to their 
 r, have since 
 condemned the 
 md forcuttini; 
 Church. But 
 began to sus- 
 
 ompel them to 
 it they would 
 I of their own 
 at although it 
 
 been satisfied 
 to treat them 
 t, " their heai't 
 rdly orthodox, 
 
 have said in 
 
 to me, father : 
 And what dis- 
 pretext? "If 
 e the C^nfes- 
 liH'ably to the 
 aith of all the 
 father, that 
 lerctical vith- 
 a similar dis- 
 
 THE FIVE PROPOSITIONS. 
 
 353 
 
 pute in his day : " Because," says he, " it is not oppos- 
 ing heresies, but making a heresy, to refuse to believe 
 those who testify by their confession that they are 
 in the true faith : hoc non est haeresim j)urgare, sed 
 facere." But, indeed, I knew that there was truly no 
 heretic in the Church, when I saw them so completely 
 exculpated from all those heresies, that, instead of con- 
 tinuing to accuse them of any error in faith, you were 
 reduced to the necessity of confining your charge to 
 questions of fact concerning Jansenius, which could 
 not be matter of heresy; for you insisted on compelling 
 them to admit, that " these propositions are m Jan- 
 senius, word for word, all of them, and in exact terms," 
 as you yourselves expressed it, Sing alares, individiue, 
 tot idem verbis ai^ud Jansenium contentcv, in your 
 Cavilli,' p. 39. 
 
 From that time your dispute began to be a matter 
 of indifference to me. When I thought you were dis- 
 puting as to the truth or falsehood of the propositions, 
 I listened to you with attention, for faith was con- 
 cerned ; but when I saw that the whole subject of 
 your dispute was, wnother or not they were " word 
 for word " in Jansenius, as religion was no longer 
 interested, neither did I feel interested. Not that 
 there was not a very strong probability of tlie truth of 
 your assertion ; for when you said that expressions 
 were in an author, " word for word," the very nature 
 of the thing seemed to leave no room for mistake. 
 Accordingly, I am not astonished at the many persons, 
 both in France and at Rome, who believed in a state- 
 23 
 
 fi r 
 
 
354 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 Hit 
 
 fh'^ 
 
 m 
 
 1- 
 
 
 r i 
 
 ment so unsuspicious, that Jansenius had, in fact, 
 taught these propositions. I was, of course, not a 
 little surprised to learn that this point of fact, which 
 you had set forth as so certain and important, was 
 false ; and that, though defied to quote the pages of 
 Jansenius, in which you had found these propositions 
 " word for word," you have never been able to do it. 
 
 I give this full i. atement, because it seems to me 
 that it fully disclos the spirit of your Society in all 
 this business ; and people will be surprised to see that, 
 notwithstanding all I have just said, you have not 
 ceased to publish that they are heretics, but have only 
 changed their heresy to suit the times. For the 
 moment they cleared themselves of one heresy, your 
 fathers supplied its place by another, in order that 
 they might never be without one. Thus, at one time, 
 their heresy was on the merits of the propositions ; 
 afterwards, it was the " word for word." Since then, 
 you placed ii, in their heart. But, in the present day, 
 nothing of all this is spoken of ; you only insist that 
 they must be heretics if they do not, by subscription, 
 declare that "the meaning of the doctrine of Jansenius 
 is contained in that of those five propositions." 
 
 Such is the subject of j^^our present dispute. It is 
 not enough for you that they condemn the five pro- 
 positions, and, moreover, everything in Jansenius 
 which might be conformable to it, and contrary to St. 
 Augustine. For they all do this. So that there is no 
 question, for example, " whether Jesus Christ died 
 only for the predestinate (they condemn this as well 
 
 \M1 
 
THE FIVE PROPOSITIONS. 
 
 35; 
 
 had, in fact, 
 course, not a 
 3i' fact, whic)'. 
 nportant, was 
 
 the pages of 
 e propositions 
 ble to do it. 
 
 seems to me 
 Society in all 
 ed to see that, 
 yon have not 
 but have only 
 es. For the 
 3 heresy, your 
 in order that 
 i, at one time, 
 
 propositions ; 
 Since then, 
 
 present day, 
 
 y insist that 
 
 subscription, 
 
 of Jansenius 
 
 ions." 
 
 ispute. It is 
 the five pro- 
 
 n Jansenius 
 
 )ntrary to St. 
 
 it there is no 
 Christ died 
 this as well 
 
 as you), but whether or not Jansenius thought so. 
 And on this I declare to you more strongly than before, 
 that your dispute concerns me little, as it little con- 
 cerns the Church. For though I am not a doctor any 
 more than yourself, father, I nevertheless see that 
 there is here no point of faith, the only question being 
 the meaning of Jansenius. If they believed his doe- 
 trine conformable to the proper and literal sense of 
 these propositions, they would condemn it ; and they 
 refuse to do so, only because they believe it to be very 
 different. Hence, though they .should understand it 
 wrong, this would not make thom heretical ; since 
 they only understand it in an orthodox sense. 
 
 To illustrate this by an example, I will take the 
 difference of sentiment between St. Basil and St. 
 Athanasius, concerning the writings of St. Dionysius, 
 of Alexandria, in which St. Basil, thinking that he had 
 detected the views of Arius against the quality of the 
 Father and Son, condemned them as heretical ; while 
 St. Athanasius, on the contrarv, thinking he found the 
 true sense of the Church, maintained them as orthodox. 
 Think you, father, that St. Basil, who held these 
 writings to be Arian, would have been entitled to treat 
 Athanasius as a heretic because he defended them ? 
 What ground would there have been, since it was not 
 Arianism that he defended, but the true doctrine 
 which he thought they contained ? Had these two 
 saints agreed as to the true meaning of these writings 
 or had they both recognized this heresy, then, doubt- 
 less, St. Athanasius could not have approved them 
 
 : '■'^' 
 
3o6 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 without heresy; but as they differed as to the meaninj:^, 
 St. Athanasius was orthodox in maintaining thoni, oven 
 though he should have understood thoni ill ; since it 
 would only have been an error of fact, and the only 
 part of the doctrine defended by hiui was the orthodox 
 faith which he supposed them to contain. 
 
 I say the same to you, father: if you were consider- 
 ing the meaning of Jansenius, and your opponents 
 were agreed with you, that he held, for example, that 
 grace is irresidihle, those refusing to condemn him 
 would be heretical ; but when you are disputing as to 
 his meaning, and they believe his doctrine to be, that 
 grace may he resided, you have no ground for treating 
 them as heretics, whatever heresy you may attribute 
 to him; since they condemn the meaning which you 
 suppose in him, and you dare not condemn the mean- 
 ing which they suppose. If you would convict them, 
 show that the meaning which they attribute to Jan- 
 senius is heretical ; for in that case they, too, will be 
 heretical. But how could you do so, since it is evident, 
 on your own confession, that the meaning they assign 
 to him is not condemned. 
 
 To show you this clearly, I will assume the principle 
 which you yourselves admit, namely, "that the doc- 
 trine of effectual grace has not been condemned ; and 
 that the pope has not touched it by his Constitution." 
 And, in fact, when he was pleased to give sentence on 
 the five propositions, the point of effectual grace was 
 reserved from all censure. This is perfectly apparent, 
 from the opinion of the counsellors to whom the pope 
 
THE FIVE PROPOSITIOIJS. 
 
 357 
 
 the meaninf^, 
 ig them, even 
 ill ; since it 
 and the only 
 the orthoilox 
 
 'ere consider- 
 ar opponents 
 example, that 
 iondemn him 
 sputing as to 
 ne to be, that 
 d for treating 
 nay attril)ute 
 III which you 
 in tlie mean- 
 convict them, 
 buto to Jan- 
 too, will be 
 it is evident, 
 thev assign 
 
 the principle 
 lat the doc- 
 cmned ; and 
 .'(mstitvition." 
 sentence on 
 al grace wa> 
 tly apparent, 
 oni the pope 
 
 remitted the examination of them. I have these 
 opinions in my possession, as well as several other 
 persons in Paris; among them, the bishop of Mont- 
 pellier, who brought them from Rome. It appears 
 they were divided in opinion ; the Master of the 
 Sacred Palace, the Commissary of the Holy Office, the 
 General of Augustinians, and others, holding that 
 these propositions might be understood in the sense of 
 effectual grace, were of opinion that they ought not to 
 be censured ; whereas, the others, while agreeing that 
 they ought not to be condenmed if that had been their 
 meaning, thought they ought to be censured, because, 
 as they declared, the natural and proper meaning was 
 very different. It was for this the pope condemned 
 them, and all submitted to his decision. 
 
 It is certain, then, father, that eti'ectual grace has 
 not been condemned. Indeed, it is so powerfully 
 maintained by St. Augustine, by St. Thomas and his 
 whole school, by so many popes and Councils, and by 
 all tradition, that it would be impiety to tax it with 
 heresy. Now, all those whom you treat as heretics, 
 declare that they find nothing else _in Jensonius than 
 this doctrine of grace. Accordingly, this was all they 
 maintained at Home. You yourself have ad?nitted 
 this, Cavilli p. 35, when you declare that, "in plead- 
 ing before the pope, they did not say a word on the 
 propositions, ne rerhitiii quiderti, and that they em- 
 ployed the whole time in speaking of effectual grace." 
 Hence, whether they are mistaken in this supposition 
 or not, it is at least beyond a doubt, that the meaning 
 
»rv.' 
 
 P: 
 
 'Iff: 
 
 Ilii 
 
 !'i 
 
 ; 
 
 till 
 
 a; 
 
 i 
 
 3o8 
 
 PllOVlNCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 which they suppose is not heretical ; and, conse([uently, 
 tliat they are not heretical. For, to say the thing in 
 two words, either Jansenius merely taught effectual 
 grace, and in that case he is free from error ; or he 
 taught something different, and in that case he has no 
 defenders. The whole question, then, is whether Jan- 
 senius, in fact, taught anything else than effectual 
 grace. And if this (juestion is decided in the affirma- 
 tive, you will have the honour of having understood 
 him best ; but they will not have the unhappiness of 
 having erred in the faith. 
 
 Let us, therefore, father, thank God that there is 
 indeed no heresy in the Church, since the whole subject 
 under discussion is matter of fact, which cannot form 
 a heresy ; for the Church decides points of faith with 
 divine authority, and cuts off from her body all who 
 refuse to receive them ; but she does not act so in regard 
 to matters of fact. The reason is, that our salvation 
 is annexed to the faith that has been revealed to us, 
 and is preserved in the Church by tradition, but de- 
 pends not on other particular facts which God has not 
 revealed. Thus, we are obliged to believe that the 
 commandments of God are not impossible ; but we are 
 not obliged to know what Jansenius has taught on 
 this subject. This is the reason why God guides his 
 Church in the determination of points of faith, by the 
 assistance of his Spirit, which cannot err ; whereas, in 
 matters of fact, he leaves her to act by sense and reason, 
 the natural judges of fact. For God only could instruct 
 the Church in faith ; whereas, one has only to read 
 
conHe([uently, 
 the thinrj in 
 ght effectual 
 error ; or he 
 ase he has no 
 whether Jan- 
 han effectual 
 
 1 the affirnia- 
 
 2 understood 
 ihappiness of 
 
 that there is 
 whole subject 
 cannot form 
 of faith with 
 body all who 
 it so in regard 
 our salvation 
 vealed to us, 
 ;ion, but de- 
 God has not 
 eve that the 
 ; but we are 
 as taught on 
 od guides his 
 faith, bv the 
 ; whereas, in 
 e and reason, 
 ould instruct 
 only to read 
 
 ^ 
 
 THE CHUKCII FALLIBLE IN FACTS. 
 
 359 
 
 Jansenius to know whether certain propositions are in 
 his Vjook. Hence it is heresy to resist decisions in 
 faith, because it is to oppose our own spirit to the 
 Spirit of God. But it is not heresy, although it may 
 be presumption, not to believe certain particular facts; 
 because this is only to oppose reason, which may be 
 clear, to an authority which, though great, is not in- 
 fallible. 
 
 This all theologians acknowledge, as appears by the 
 following maxim of Cardinal liellarmine, of your 
 Society : " General and lawful Councils cannot err in 
 defining dogmas of faith ; but they may err in (jues- 
 tions of fact." And elsewhere : " The pope, as pope, and 
 even at the head of a general Council, may err in par- 
 ticular controversies of fact, which depend principally 
 on the information and testimony of men." And 
 Cardinal Baronius, likewise : " It is necessary to sub- 
 mit implicitly to the decisions of Councils in points of 
 faith ; but, in regard to what concerns individuals and 
 their writings, the censures which have been made are 
 not found to have been regarded so strictly, because 
 there is nobody who may not happen to be deceived.' 
 For this reason, also, the archbishop of Toulouse has 
 drawn this rule from the letters of the two great popes, 
 St. Leon and Pelagius II, : " That the proper object of 
 Councils is faith ; and that any point decided there 
 which is not of faith, may be reviewed and examined 
 anew ; whereas, what has been decided in matter of 
 faith must no longer be examined ; because, as Ter- 
 tullian says, the rule of faith is alone immovable, 
 irretractable." 
 
 I? 
 
 
Ill 
 
 i 
 
 II; 
 
 mi 
 
 800 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 Hence, while lawful general dmncils have never been 
 opposed to each other in points of faith, " because," as 
 the archbishop of Toulouse says, " it is not even per- 
 mitted to examine anew what has already been decided 
 in matter of faith," the Councils have sometimes been 
 seen opposed on points of fact, when the meaning of 
 an author was in question, " because," as he says again, 
 after the popes whom he quotes, " everything decided 
 in Councils, except faith, may be reviewed and ex- 
 amined anew." Thus the fourth and fifth Councils 
 appear contrary to each other in the interpretation of 
 the same authors ; and the same thing happened 
 between two popes in regard to a proposition of certain 
 monks of Scythia. For, after Pope Hormesdas had 
 condemned it, understanding it in a bad sense. Pope 
 John II., his successor, examining it anew, and under- 
 standing it in good sense, approved it, and declared it 
 orthodox. Would you say from this that one of these 
 popes was heretical ? And must it not, then, be admitted, 
 that provided we condemn the heretical sense which a 
 pope may have supposed in a writing, we are not 
 heretical for not condemning this writing, while taking 
 it in a sense which it is certain the pope has not con- 
 demned, since otherwise one of the two popes would 
 have fallen into error. 
 
 I wished, father, to accustom you to these contra- 
 rieties, which happen among the orthodox, on questions 
 of fact regarding the meaning of an author, by showing 
 you one father of the Church against another, and a 
 pope against a pope, and a Council against a Council, to 
 
THE CHURCH FALLIBLE IN FACTS. 
 
 301 
 
 /c never been 
 
 because," as 
 
 )t even per- 
 
 been decided 
 
 letinies been 
 
 meaning of 
 
 e says again, 
 
 hing decided 
 
 wed and ex- 
 
 t'th Councils 
 
 rpretation of 
 
 ig happened 
 
 3n of certain 
 
 'mesdas liad 
 
 sense, Pope 
 
 , and under- 
 
 l declared it 
 
 one of these 
 
 be admitted, 
 
 nse which a 
 
 we are not 
 
 vhile taking 
 
 las not con- 
 
 )opes would 
 
 ese contra- 
 m questions 
 
 3y showing 
 ther, and a 
 
 Council, to 
 
 lead you on to other instances of a like opposition, but 
 more disproportioned. For in those you will see coun- 
 cils and popes on the one side, and Jesuits on the other, 
 opposing their decisions touching the sense of an 
 author, without your accusing your brethren, I say not 
 of heresy, but not even of presumption. 
 
 You know well, father, that the writings of Origon 
 were condemned by different Councils and different 
 popes, and even by the fifth general Council, as contain- 
 ing heresies, among others that "of the reconciliation 
 of devils at the day of judgment." Think you from 
 this, that it is absolutely necessary, in order to be 
 orthodox, to confess that Origen in fact held these 
 errors, and that it is not ufficient to condemn them 
 without attributing them to him ? Were it so, what 
 would become of your Father Halloix, who maintained 
 the purity of Origen's faith, as well as of several other 
 Catholics, who undertook the same thing, as Pico de 
 la Miranda, and Genebrard, doctor of Sorbonne ? Is 
 it not also certain, that the same fifth general Council 
 condemned the writings o" Theodoret against St. Cyril, 
 " as impious, contrary to the true faith, and containing 
 the Nestorian heresy ; " and yet Father Sirmond, 
 Jesuit, has not hesitated to defend him, and to say in 
 his life of this father, " that these very writings are 
 free of the Nestorian heresy." 
 
 You see, then, father, that when the Church con- 
 demns writings, it supposes an error which it con- 
 demns. It thus becomes a point of faith that this 
 error is condemned ; but it is not a point of faith that 
 
 !i''l 
 
 h 
 
 ii- '. 
 
 I'i 
 
'":^;:i 111: 
 
 J ; i 4' ;{ !. ! ^ :i !■ r- i 
 
 
 ; ■ ■ 
 
 i ' ■ ' ■■ 
 
 i . i 
 1 1 
 
 
 
 i ! ^ ^ 
 
 ! ! i :.. -. i 
 i 1 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ■ 'Mi 
 
 i si 
 
 M| 
 
 
 862 
 
 PIIOVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 those writings do in fact contain the error which the 
 Church supposes. I hold this to be sufficiently proved ; 
 and therefore I will finish these illustrations with that 
 of Po]ie Honorius, whose history is well known. We 
 know, that at the beginning of the seventh century, 
 the Church being troubled by the heresy of the Mono- 
 thelites, this Dope, to terminate the dispute, made a 
 decree which seemed to favour these heretics, so that 
 se/eral were scnndalized at it. The thing, however, 
 passed over wit.i little noise, under his pontificate; 
 but fifty years alter, the Church being assembled in 
 the sixth general Council, in which Pope Agatho pre- 
 sided by his legates, this decree was submitted to it ; 
 and after being read and examined, was condemned, 
 as containing the heresy of the Monothelites, and 
 burned in this character in presence of the whole 
 Council, with the other writings of those heretics. 
 And this decision was received by the whole Church 
 with such respect and unanimity, that it was after- 
 wards confirmed by two other general Councils, and 
 even by Popes Leo II. and Adrian II., who lived two 
 centuries after, nobody having disturbed this universal 
 and peaceful consent during seven or eight centuries. 
 Notwithstanding some authors in those later times, 
 among others Cardinal Bellarmine, did not think they 
 made themselves heretical by maintaining against all 
 these popes and Councils, that the writings of Honorius 
 are free from the error which they declared to be 
 in theui, " because," says he, " general Councils being 
 capable of error in matters of fact, we may say in all 
 
^m* 
 
 THE POPE DECEIVED BY THE .JESUITS. 
 
 363 
 
 or which the 
 
 ently proved ; 
 
 ons with that 
 
 known. We 
 
 mth century, 
 
 of the Mono- 
 
 pute, made a 
 
 retics, so that 
 
 ng, however, 
 
 s pontificate ; 
 
 assembled in 
 
 Agatho pre- 
 
 mitted to it ; 
 
 3 condemned, 
 
 ithehtes, and 
 
 3f the whole 
 
 lose heretics. 
 
 hole Cliurch 
 
 it was after- 
 
 '^ouncils, and 
 
 10 lived two 
 
 his universal 
 
 ht centuries. 
 
 later times, 
 
 )t think they 
 
 y against ail 
 
 I oi' Honorius 
 
 clared to be 
 
 )uncils being 
 
 ay say in all 
 
 confidence that the sixth Council was mistaken in that 
 fact, and, not having rightly understood the meaning 
 of the letters of Honorius, did wrong in classing this 
 pope with heretics." 
 
 Observe, then, carefully, father, that it is not hereti- 
 cal to say that Pope Honorius was not so, although 
 several popes and Councils declared it even after 
 examination. Now I come to our (juestion ; and I 
 allow you to maktj your case as strong as you can. 
 What will you say, father, in order to make your 
 opponents heretical ? " That Pope Innocent X. has 
 declared that the error of the five propositions is in 
 Jansenius ? " I allow you to do all this. What is 
 3'our inference ? " That it is heresy not to acknow- 
 ledge that the error of the five propositions is in 
 Jansenius ? " How seems it, father ? Is not this a 
 (juestion of fact of the same nature as those above ? 
 The pope has declared that the error of the five 
 propositions is in Jansenius just as his predecessors 
 had declared that the error of the Nestorians and 
 ]\Ionothelites was in the writings of Theodoret and 
 Honorius. On this your fathers have written that 
 they indeed condemn those heresies, but they are not 
 agreed that those authors hold them ; just as your 
 opponents in the present day say ihat they condemn 
 the five propositions, but are not agreed that Jansenius 
 taught them. In truth, father, the cases are very 
 similar; and if there is any difference, it is easy to see 
 how nmch it is in favour of the present (juestion, from 
 a comparison of several special circumstances which 
 
 ,\i 
 
:s^ ' 
 
 ivn 
 
 i'\k 
 
 " '(■! 
 
 i ,! 
 
 ^^f 
 
 S64 
 
 PHOVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 are self-evident, and which 1 do not stay to mention. 
 How comes it then, father, that in the same situation 
 your fathers are orthodox, and your opponents hereti- 
 cal ? And by what strange exception do you deprive 
 them of a liberty which you give to all the rest of the 
 faithful ? 
 
 W^^t will you say to this, father ? That the pope 
 has confirmed his Constitution by a brief? I will 
 answer, that two general Councils and two popes have 
 confirmed the condenmation of the letters of Honorius. 
 But what do j'ou mean to found upon the words of 
 this brief, by which the pope declares "thatbecoi- 
 demns the doctrine of Tansenius in the five prcpo i- 
 tions ?" What does this add to the Constitution ? and 
 what follows from it ? Just that as the sixth Council 
 condenmed the doctrine of Honorius, believing it to 
 be the same as that of the Monothelites, in the same 
 way the pope has said that he condt mns the doctrine 
 of Jansenius in the five propositions, because he sup- 
 posed it was the same as the five propositions. And 
 how could he but believe it ? Your Society publishes 
 nothing else ; and you, yourself, father, who have said 
 that they are in it "word for word," were at Rome at 
 the time of the censure ; for I meet 3'ou at every turn. 
 Could he distrust the sincerit}'- or competency of so 
 many grave monks ^ And how could he but believe 
 that the doctrine of Jansenius was the same as that of 
 the five propositions, assured as he was by you that 
 they were "word for word" in that author? It is 
 obvious, then, father, that if it turns out that Jan- 
 
THE POPE DECEIVED BY THE VJESUITS. 
 
 365 
 
 ' to mention. 
 Line situation 
 nents hereti- 
 you deprive 
 16 rest of tile 
 
 hat the pope 
 
 net'? I will 
 
 popes have 
 
 of Honorius. 
 
 he words of 
 
 that ho' iiOi.- 
 
 Hve prcpo i- 
 
 itution ? and 
 
 ixth Council 
 
 lieviiiij it to 
 
 in the same 
 
 the doctrine 
 
 use he sup- 
 
 tions. And 
 
 y publislies 
 
 10 have said 
 
 at Rome at 
 
 everv turn. 
 
 tency of so 
 
 ut believe 
 
 e as that of 
 
 y you that 
 
 or ? It is 
 
 that Jun- 
 
 senius did not hold them, it will be necessary to say, 
 not as your fathers did in their cases, that the pope 
 was deceived in the point of fact, which it is always 
 grievous to publish, but that you deceived the pope; 
 a circumstance which does not occasion much scandal, 
 now that you are so well known. 
 
 Thus, fathers, this whole matter is very far from 
 bein<>' tit to form a heresy ; but as you wish to make 
 one, cost what it may, you have tried to turn aside 
 the (|uesti()n of fact, and convert it into a point of 
 faith, and the way in which you do it is this : " The 
 pope," you say, " declares that he has condemned the 
 doctrine of Jansenius in tliose five propositions, there- 
 fore it is of faith that the doctrine of Jansonius re- 
 i;ardin<.^ tliese tive propositiv^iis is heretical, be it what 
 it may." Here, father, is a very curious point of faith, 
 namely, that a doctrine is h'eretical, be it what it may. 
 What ! if according,' to Jansenius " we can resist inter- 
 nal i^^race,' and if, accordini; to him it is false to say 
 that Jesus Christ " died only for the predestinate," will 
 this also be condemned because it is his doctrine? 
 Will it be true in the Constitution of the pope, "that 
 we are free to do !j;ood and evil," and will it be false 
 in Jansenius ? And by v/hat fatuity will lie be so 
 unfortunate, that truth becomes, in his book, heresy ? 
 Must it not then l)e confessed that he is heretical only 
 provided he is conformable to these condemned errors, 
 since the Constitution of the pope is the rule to wliich 
 we must apph Jansenius, to judfife wliat he in accord- 
 iiiLT to the relation in which he stands to it ? Tims the 
 
lly 
 
 3G6 
 
 PIIOVINCTAL LETTERS. 
 
 Ui' 
 
 i.ii 
 
 < \i 
 
 question, whether or not "his doctrine is heretical, 
 must be solved by the question of fact " wJ^ether or 
 not it is conformable to the natural sense of these pro- 
 positions ; it bein^ impossible not to be heretical, if it 
 is conformable to them, and not to be orthodox if it is 
 contrary to them. For in fine, seein^^ that according 
 to the pope and the bishops, " the propositions are con- 
 demned in their proper and natural sense," it is im- 
 possible they can be condemned in the sense of Jan- 
 senius, unless it be true that the sense of Jansenius is 
 the proper and natural sense of these propositions ; 
 which is a point of fact. 
 
 The question then always turns on this point of 
 fact, out of which it is impossible to take it, so as to 
 convert it into a point of doctrine. It cannot, there- 
 fore, be made matter of heresy, though you mij^ht 
 indeed make it a pretext f(jr persecution, were there 
 not ground to hope that none will be found to enter 
 so keenly into your interests, as to adopt such unjust 
 procedure, and insist, at your suggestion, on a compul- 
 sory subscription, " condenming the propositions in 
 the sense of Jansenius," without explaining what the 
 sense of Jansenius is. Few people are disposed to 
 sign a confession of faith in blank. But this were to 
 sign one in blank which might afterwards be tilUHl up 
 in whatever way you please, since you wuuUi he free 
 to give any interpretation you eh<we to this sense of 
 Jansenius, which had not been explained. Let us have 
 the explanation tirst, otherwise you will give us an- 
 other case of proximate power; (tbstrnhenda ab omnl, 
 
 i i ii 
 
^m 
 
 is heretical, 
 wi^ether or 
 of these pro- 
 eretical, if it 
 hodox if it is 
 lat according 
 bions are con- 
 ise," it is im- 
 mense of Jaii- 
 
 Janseniiis is 
 propositions ; 
 
 his point ot' 
 
 e it, so as to 
 
 i,nnot, there- 
 
 I you niii^ht 
 
 I, were there 
 
 und to enter 
 
 such unjust 
 
 jn a conipul- 
 
 positions in 
 
 rin wiiat the 
 
 li-; posed to 
 
 this were to 
 
 he tilled up 
 
 v)uld be free 
 
 lis sense of 
 
 Let us have 
 
 H-ive us an- 
 
 '/(t ab omni 
 
 I 
 
 JESUIT POLICY AND EFFECTUAL GRACE. 
 
 :307 
 
 sensu. You know that that does not succeed in the 
 world. There ambiguity is hated, especially in matters 
 of faith, as to which it is but just, at least, to under- 
 stand what it is that is condemned. And how could 
 doctors, who are persuaded that Jansenius has no 
 other meaning than that of effectual grace, consent to 
 declare that thev condemn his doctrine without ex- 
 plaining it ; since with the belief which they have, 
 and in which they are not corrected, this were nothing 
 else than to condemn effectual grace, which cannot be 
 condemned without criminality ? \yould it not, then, 
 be strange tyranny to place them under the unhappy 
 necessity of either incurring guilt before God, by sign- 
 ing this condemnation against their conscience, or of 
 being treated as heretics for refusing to do so ? 
 
 But all this is managed with mystery. All your 
 steps are politic. I must explain why you do not ex- 
 plain the sense of Jansenius. I write only to disclose 
 your designs, and by disclosini:^, frustrate them, I 
 must, then, inform those who know it not, tliat your 
 principal object in this dispute being to exalt the 
 sufficient grace of your Molina, you cannot do this with- 
 out overthrowing effectual grace, which is directly 
 opposed to it. But as you see this now sanctioned at 
 Rome, and among all the learned of the Church, not 
 being able to combat it in itself, you have fallen on the 
 device of attacking it in disguise, under the name of 
 the doctrine of Jansenius, without explaining it; and 
 in order to succeed, you have given out that this doc- 
 trine is not that of effectual grace, with the view of 
 
368 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 making it believed that the one may be condeiimed 
 without the other. Hence your effort in tlie present 
 day to produce this persuasion in those who have no 
 acquaintance with the author. This you yourself 
 attempt, father, in your Cavilli, p. 23, by the following 
 subtle argument : " The pope has condetnned the doc- 
 trine of Jansenius. Now the pope has not condemned 
 the doctrine of effectual grace ; therefore the doctrine 
 of effectual grace is different from that of Janse- 
 nius." Were this proof conclusive, we might in tlie 
 same way show that Honorius and all his supporters 
 are heretics. Thus the sixth Council condemned the 
 doctrine of Honorius ; now the Council did not con- 
 demn the doctrine of the Church ; therefore, the doc- 
 trine of Honorius is different from that of the Church ; 
 therefore, all who defend him are heretics. It is plain 
 that your argument is good for nothing ; since the 
 pope has only condemned the doctrine of the five pro- 
 positions, which he was given to understand was that 
 of Jansenius. 
 
 But no matter ; for you have no wish to use this 
 reasoning for any length of time. Feeble as it is, it 
 will last long enough to serve your purpose. The only 
 necessity for it is to induce those who are unwilling to 
 condemn effectual grace to condemn Jansenius without 
 .scruple. This done, your argument will soon be for- 
 gotten, and the signatures remaining as perpetual 
 evidence of the condeimiation of Jansenius, you will 
 take the opportunity to make a direct attack upon 
 effectual grace by another argument far more solid 
 
 i ' 
 
"^^^ 
 
 JESUIT POLICY AND EFFECTUAL CRACE. 
 
 360 
 
 than the other, which you will put into shape in due 
 time, thus : " The doctrine of Jansenius has been con- 
 demned bv the universal sifjnatures of the whole 
 Church. But this doctrine is manifestly that of effec- 
 tual fi^race," (you will prove this very easily,) "therefore 
 the doctrine of etfectual grace is condemned even by 
 the confession of its defenders." 
 
 This is the reason why a'ou propose to get this con- 
 <lemnation of a doctrine signed without explaining it. 
 This is the advantajfe which you mean to derive from 
 these subscriptions. But if your opponents resist, you 
 lay another trap for their refusal. Having dexterously 
 joined the question of doctrine to that faith, without 
 allowing them to separate them, or to sigji the one 
 without the other, as they will not be able to subscribe 
 both together, yon will go and publish everywhere 
 that they have refused both. And thus, though they 
 in fact only refuse to acknowledge tliat Jansenius held 
 these propositions which they condemn, a refusal which 
 cannot form a lieresy, you will say bohJly that they 
 have refused to condemn the proposition in themselves, 
 and that therein lies their heresy. 
 
 Such is the benefit which you would gain by their 
 refusal, and which would not be less useful to you than 
 that wdiich you would gain from their consent. So that 
 if the signatures are insisted on, they will fall equally 
 into your snare, whether they sign or do not sign, and 
 you will have your account one way or other ; such 
 has been your dexterity in putting things into a state 
 
 U 
 
 M 
 
^rxr 
 
 870 
 
 PllOVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 I'i: 
 
 hi 
 
 
 which will always be advantageous to yon, wlmtcver 
 direction they may take. 
 
 TTow well I know yon, father ! and how fjricved I am 
 to see that God abandons yon so far, as to ^We yon 
 complete success in your unhappy course ! Your suc- 
 cess is deserving of pity, and can only be envied by 
 those who know not wherein true success consists. It 
 is an act of charity to thwart you in the object at whicli 
 you aim by all this conduct ; since you found it upon a 
 lie, and labour to give currency to one of two falsehoods; 
 either that the Church has condemned effectual grace, 
 or that its defenders hold the five errors which have 
 been condemned. 
 
 It is necessary, therefore, to let all the world know 
 both that by your own confession effectual grace is not 
 condemned, and that no one maintains those errors ; 
 thus making them aware that those who would refuse 
 the subscription which you would exact from them, 
 refuse it only because of the question of fact ; while 
 being ready to sign that of faith, the}'^ cannot be here- 
 tical in their refusal ; since, though it is indeed a point 
 of faith to admit that the propositions are heretical, it 
 will never be a point of faith to admit that they were 
 held by Jansenius. They are free from error ; and that 
 is enough. Perhaps they interpret Jansenius too fav- 
 ourably; but perhaps you do not interpret him favour- 
 ably enough. I do not enter into this. I know at 
 least, that according to your maxiins, you think you 
 can without sin proclaim him a heretic against your 
 own knowledge ; whereas, according to theirs, they 
 
yon, whatever 
 
 JESUIT POLICY AND KFFECTIJAL GRACE 
 
 •>/ 
 
 could not, without sin, .say that lie is orthodox, if they 
 were not persuaded of it. They are thus more sincere 
 than you, father; they have examined Jansonius more 
 carefully than you ; they are not less intelliirent than 
 you. But come of this point of fact what may, they 
 are certainly orthodox ; since, in order to be so, it is 
 not necessary to say that another is not so ; and in 
 ref,nird to heresy, it is enough, without charcrin<fanother, 
 to discharge one's self. 
 
 III 
 
 (■ f; 
 
 ! I 
 
 ■IP' i' 
 ..* [ 
 
 ill:'! 
 
t^i 
 
 ! ff 
 
 LETTEll KKfHTEENTH. 
 
 ro THE REVEREND FATHER ANNAT, JESUIT. 
 
 ^f 
 
 Wi 
 
 PROVED STILL MORE INVINCIBLY BV FATHER ANNAT S REPLY, THAT 
 THERE IS NO HERESY IN THE CHL'Ut'H : EVERVnoDY CONr)E^rNs 
 THE DOCTRINE WHICH THE .lESCITS ASCRIIJK TO .1ANSENIUS, AND 
 THUS THE VIEWS OE ALL THE FAITHKl'I, ON THE MERITS OF THE 
 FIVE PROPOSITIONS ARE THE SAME : DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 
 DISPUTES AS TO DOCTRINE, AND AS TO FACT : IN QUESTIONS OF 
 FACT MORE WEIGHT DUE TO WHAT IS SEEN THAN TO ANY 
 HUMAN AUTHORITY. 
 
 'Vi 
 
 U'i 
 
 Reverend Father, — You have long been labouriii',' 
 to detect some heresy in your opponents ; but I am 
 confident you will at last confess that perhaps nothitii; 
 is so difficult as to make those heretical who are not, 
 and who do their utmost to avoid being so. In my 
 last Letter 1 have shown how many heresies, one after 
 another, you have ascribed to them, from inability to 
 find one which you could maintain for any length of 
 time, so tliat nothing was left for you but to accuse 
 them of refusing to condemn the sense of Jansenius, 
 which you insisted on their condemning without 
 explanation. You must, indeed, have wanted heresies 
 to charge them with, when you were reduced to this. 
 
NO HERESY IX THE rilURCH. 
 
 nrn 
 
 H 
 
 r. .1 ESUIT. 
 
 lT s reply, that 
 
 I'nODY CONDEMNS 
 I.TAXSENIUS, ANI> 
 IK MKlllTS OF TIIK 
 HENCE DET\VK1:N 
 IN QUESTIONS ()!•' 
 N THAN TO ANY 
 
 )een labouriii',' 
 
 ts ; but I am 
 
 rhaps nothini; 
 
 who are not, 
 
 iX so. In mv 
 
 sies, one after 
 
 m inability to 
 
 any length of 
 
 but to accuse 
 
 of Jansenius, 
 
 ning without 
 
 mted heresies 
 
 duced to this. 
 
 For wlio ever heard, till now, of a heresy which cannot 
 be expressed ? Accordingly, they have easily answered 
 you by representing, that if Jansenius has no errors, it 
 is not just to condemn him ; and that if he has, you 
 ought to declare theni, in order that they may at Last 
 kiK)vv what it is that is condemned. This, neverthe- 
 less, you have never chosen to do ; but j'ou liave 
 endeavoured to streiiiithen your case by deurecis which 
 make nothing for you, since they do not in any way 
 explain the sense of Jansenius, which is said to have 
 been condemned in those five propositions. Now, that 
 was not the way to terndnate your dispute. Did you 
 both agree as to the true meaning of Jansenius, and 
 were you no longer at variance as to whether or not 
 this meaning is heretical, these judgments declaring it 
 to be heretical would touch the true question. But 
 the great question in dispute being, What is this mean- 
 ing of Jansenius ? some saying that they only see the 
 meaning of St. Auoustine and St. Thomas, and others 
 that they see one which is heretical, but which they 
 do not explain, it is clear that a Constitution which 
 does not sav a word concernin<j this ditference. and 
 which only condeuins the sense of Jansenius generally, 
 without explaining it, decides nothing in this dispute. 
 Hence it has l)een said to you a hundred times, that 
 your disagreement being as to the fact, you will never 
 terminate it, except by declaring what you understand 
 to be the meaning of Jansenius. But as you have 
 always obstinately refused this, 1 have at length 
 brought the matter to its true bearing in my last Letter, 
 
o 
 
 o 
 
 
 © 
 
 o 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-S) 
 
 o 
 
 1.0 *rfl tt IIIIIM 
 
 ■'° lU 1 2.2 
 
 t m 111112.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 o 
 
 1.25 
 
 Vl 
 
 1.8 
 
 1.6 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^» 
 
 c*m .^^5 
 
 a;^^ 
 
 ■<^A 
 
 % 
 
 '^ 
 
 "%> 
 
 O 
 
 # 
 
 o 
 
 Hiotographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 33 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, NY. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-'l503 
 
 m. 
 
 ■^ 
 
 <N-^ 
 
 iV 
 
 :\ 
 
 \ 
 
 ^<?) 
 
 V 
 
 
 o 
 
 .V 
 
 U'~ 
 
 6^ 
 
 <^ 
 
 % 
 
 n? 
 
 >> 
 
 9) 
 
 1 
 
> €?. 
 
 
 r^. 
 
 f/j 
 
 ^►> 
 
 i 
 
374 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 in which I have shown that it was not without a secret 
 purpose you had laboured to obtain the condemnation 
 of this sense, without explaining it ; and that your 
 design is to make this indefinite condemnation one day 
 tell ai^ainst the doctrine of effectual grace, by showing 
 that it is nothing but the doctrine of Jansenius, a 
 point which it will not be difficult for you to estab- 
 lish. This has put you under the necessity of replying. 
 For had you, after this, still persisted in not explaining 
 the meaning, the least enlightened would have seen 
 that effectual grace was really aimed at ; a fact which 
 must have turned to your utter confusion, from the 
 veneration which the Church has for this holy doc- 
 trine. V 
 
 You have, therefore, been obliged to declare your- 
 self ; and this you have done in answering my Letter, 
 in which I had represented to you, " that if Jansenius 
 had, with reference to these five propositions, any 
 other meaning than that of effectual grace, he had no 
 defenders ; and if he had no other meaning than that 
 of effectual grace, he had no errors." You have not 
 been able to deny this, father ; but you draw a dis- 
 tinction in this manner, p. 21 : " It is not a sufficient 
 justification of Jansenius to say that he only holds 
 effectual grace, because it can be held in two ways ; the 
 one heretical, in accordance with Calvin, which con- 
 sists in saying that the will moved by grace has no 
 power to resist it ; the other, orthodox, in accordance 
 with the Thomists and Sorbonnists, and founded on 
 principles established by Councils, namely, that effectual 
 
NO HERESY IN THE CHURCH. 
 
 375 
 
 grace by itself governs the will, but in such a way 
 that there? is always a power of resisting. 
 
 All thifs is granted, father : you end with saying, 
 that " Jansenius would be orthodox if he defended effec- 
 tual grace according to the Thoraists, but that he is 
 heretical because he is contrary to the Thomists, and 
 conformable to Calvin, who denies the power of resist- 
 ing grace." I do not here, father, examine the point 
 of fact, whether Jansenius is indeed conformable to 
 Calvin. It is enough for me that you pretend it, and 
 that you now inform us that, by the meaning of Jan- 
 senius, you understand nothing else than the meaning 
 of Calvin. Was this, then, father, all that you meant 
 to say ? Was it only the error of Calvin that you 
 wished to be condemned, under the name of the meaning 
 of Jansenius ? Why did you not declare it sooner ? 
 You would have spared a world of trouble ; for with- 
 out bulls or briefs, every one would have condemned 
 this error along with you. How necessary this explana- 
 tion was, and how many difficulties it removes ! We 
 did not know, father, what error the popes and bishops 
 meant to condemn under the name of the sense of 
 Jansenius. The whole Church was in extreme per- 
 plexity, and no one would explain it. You now do so, 
 father; you, whom all your party considers as the 
 prime mover of all its coun.sels, and who know the 
 secret of all this proceeding. You have told us, then, 
 that this sense of Jansenius is nothing else than the 
 sense of Calvin, condemned by the Council. This solves 
 a vast number of doubts. We now know that the 
 
.S7G 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 heresy which they designed to condemn, under the 
 term " sense of Jansenius," is nothing less than the 
 sense of Calvin ; and hence we yield obedience to their 
 decrees, when we condemn with them the sense of 
 Calvin, which they meant to condemn. We are no 
 longer astonished at seeing popes and bishops so zealous 
 against the sense of Jansenius. How could they be 
 otherwise, father, while giving credit to those who 
 publicly say, that this sense is the same as that of 
 Calvin ? 
 
 I declare to you, then, father, that you have no longer 
 anything to reprove in your opponents, because they 
 assuredly detest what you detest. I am only astonished 
 to see that j'ou were ignorant of this, and have so little 
 knowledge of their sentiments on this subject, which 
 they have so often declared in their works. I am 
 confident, that if you were better informed, you would 
 regret your not having made yourself acquainted, in a 
 spirit of peace, with this pure and Christian doctrine, 
 which passion makes you combat without knowing it. 
 You would see, father, that not only do they hold that 
 we effectually resist that feeble grace which is termed 
 exciting and inefficacious, by not doing the good which 
 it suggests, but that they are also as firm in asserting, 
 against Calvin, the power which the will has to resist 
 even effectual and victorious grace, as in defending 
 against Molina the power of this grace over the will ; 
 as jealous of the one of these truths as of the other. 
 They only know too well that man, by his own nature, 
 has always the power of sinning and resisting grace ; 
 
NO HERESY IN THE CHURCH. 
 
 377 
 
 and that, since his fall, he bears about with him a 
 miserable load of concupiscence, which infinitely aug- 
 ments this power ; but, that, nevertheless, when God is 
 pleased to touch him in mercy, he makqs him do what 
 he wills, and in the wav he wills; though this infalli- 
 bility of the divine operation does not in any way 
 destroy man's natural liberty in consequence of the 
 secret and wonderful manner in which God produces 
 the change, as is admirably explained by St. Augustine ; 
 a manner which dissipates all the imaginary contra- 
 dictions which the enemies of effectual grace fancy to 
 exist between the soverign power of grace over free 
 will, and the power of free will to resist grace. For, 
 according to this great saint, whom the popes and the 
 Church have made the rule in this matter, God changes 
 the heart of man by a mild celestial influence which he 
 diffuses through it, which overcoming the delight of 
 the flesh, has this effect, namely, that man, feeling on 
 the one hand his mortality and nothingness, and dis- 
 covering on the other the greatness and eternity of 
 God, becomes disgusted with the pleasures of sin, which 
 separate him from incorruptible good. Finding his 
 greatest joy in the God of his delight, he infallibly 
 turns toward him of his own accord, by a movement 
 full of freedom, full of love, so that it would be a pain 
 and a punishment to be separated from him. Not 
 that he is not always liable to become estranged, or 
 that he might not effectually estrange himself, did 
 he will it; but how should he will it, .since the will 
 always inclines to what pleases it most, and nothing 
 
 m 
 
 m 
 
 il 
 
378 
 
 PROVINCIAL LKTTERS. 
 
 then pleases ifc so much as this only good, which com- 
 prehends in itself all other good ? " Quod enim 
 amplius nos clelactat, secundum id operemur necesf<e 
 est, as St. Augustine says. 
 
 It is thus that God disposes of the free will of man, 
 witliout laying necessity upon it; and that free will, 
 which always may resist grace, but does not always 
 choose to do so, inclines to God as freely as infallibly, 
 when he is pleased to attract it by his mild but effec- 
 tual inspiration. 
 
 These, father, are the divine principles of St. Augus- 
 tine and St. Thomas, according to which it is true 
 that we are able to resist grace, contrary to the opinion 
 of Calvin ; and that as Pope Clement VIIT. says, 
 in his writing addressed to the congregation de Aux- 
 iiiis, " God forms within us the movement of our will, 
 and disposes efficaciously of our heart, by the empire 
 which his supreme majesty has over the wills of men, 
 as well as over the rest of the creatures who are in 
 heaven, according to St. Augustine." 
 
 According to these principles, moreover, we act of 
 ourselves, and thus have merits which are truly ours, 
 contrary to Calvin's heresy ; and yet God, being the 
 first beginning of our actions, and " working in us 
 what is well pleasing to him," according to St. Paul, 
 " our merits are," as the Council of Trent says, " gifts 
 of God." 
 
 This overthrows the impiety of Luther, condemned 
 by the same Council, that "we do not co-operate in our 
 salvationin any way, any more than inanimate things;" 
 
THE JANSEXISTS AfiREE WITH THE THOMISTS. 379 
 
 and tliis inoreover overthrows the impiety of the 
 school of Molina, wlio refuses to admit that it is the 
 power of t^race itself which causes us to co-operate 
 with it in the work of our salvation, and by so re- 
 fusiiicT destroys the principle established by St. Paul, 
 " that it is God who worketh in us, both to will and 
 to do." 
 
 By this means, in tine, are reconciled all those pas- 
 sagos of Scripture which seem most opposed to each 
 other : " Turn unto the Lord : O Lord, turn us to thy- 
 self. Put away your inicjuities from you : It is God 
 who taketh away the iniquities of his people. Bring 
 forth fruits Mieet for repentance : Lord thou hast 
 made in us all our works. Make you a new heart and 
 a new .spirit : I will give you a new spirit, and create 
 in you a new heart." 
 
 The only means of reconciling these apparent con- 
 tradictions, which ascribe our good actions sometimes 
 to God, and sometimes to ourselves, is to acknowledge 
 with St. Augustine that " our actions are our own, 
 because of the free will which produces them ; and 
 are aL«o God's, because of his grace which makes our 
 free will produce them," and because, as he elsewhere 
 saj's, " God makes us do what he pleases, by making 
 us will what we might be able not to will : " a Deo 
 fad a in est ut vellent quod nolle i)otuis^ent. 
 
 Thus, father, your opponents are perfectly at one 
 with the new Thomists, since the Thomists, like them, 
 hold both the power of resisting grace, and the infalli- 
 bility of the effect of grace, which they profess to 
 
 dl 
 
 B 
 
 t ; 
 
380 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 maintain so stronjifly, accordinf^ to the capital tnaxim 
 of their doctrine, which Alvarez, one of the most dis- 
 tinguished among them, repeats so often in his work, 
 and expresses (Disp. 72, n, 4,) in these terms : " When 
 effectual grace moves free will, it consents infallibly, 
 because the effect of grace is to cause that though it 
 has the power of not consenting, it nevertheless does 
 in fact consent," of which he assigns the reason from 
 his master, St. Thomas: "That the will of God cannot 
 fail to be accomplished, and thus when he wills that 
 man consent to grace, he consents infallibly, and even 
 necessarily, not from an absolute necessit}', but a 
 necessity of infallibility." Here grace does not inter- 
 fere with "the power which we have to resist if we 
 will it," since it only makes us unwilling to resist, as 
 your Father Peter acknowledges in these terms, toni. 
 1, p. 602 : "The grace of Jesus Christ makes us per- 
 severe in piety infallibly, though not of necessity, for 
 we are able, as the Council says, not to consent if we 
 will ; but this same grace causes that we do not so 
 will." 
 
 This, father, is the uniform doctrine of St. Augus- 
 tine, and St. Prosperus, of the fathers who succeeded 
 them, of Councils, of St. Thomas, and all the Thomists 
 in general. It is also that of your opponents, although 
 you thought not ; it is that, in line, which you your- 
 self have just approved in these terms : " The doctrine 
 of effectual grace, which recognizes our power of re- 
 resisting it, is orthodox, founded on Councils, and main- 
 tained by the Thomists and Sorbonnists." Tell the 
 
THE JANSENTSTS AGREE WITH THE THOMISTS. 381 
 
 truth, fatlier : had you known that your opponents 
 really hold this doctrine, perhaps the interest of your 
 Company would have prevented you from givinjr it 
 this pul)lie approval ; but havinrj iman^ined that they 
 were opposed to it, this same interest of your Company 
 has led you to sanction sentiments which you believed 
 contrary to theirs ; and from this mistake, while wish- 
 ing to ruin their principles, you have yourselves com- 
 pletely established them ; so that in the present day, 
 by a kind of miracle, we see the defenders of effectual 
 friace justified by the defenders of Molina ; so admir- 
 ably does the providence of God make all things con- 
 tribute to the honour of his truth. 
 
 Let all the world, then, learn from your own declara- 
 tion, that this doctrine of effectual grace, necessary to 
 all actions of piety, a doctrine which is dear to the 
 Church, and was purchased by the Saviour's blood, is 
 so uniformly Catholic, that there is not a Catholic, 
 even among the Jesuits themselves, who does not 
 recosxnize it as orthodox. At the same time it will be 
 known by your own confession, that there is not the 
 least suspicion of error in those whom you have so 
 often accused of it ; for when you impute hidden 
 errors, without choosing to disclose them, it was as 
 difficult for them to defend, as it was easy for you to 
 accuse in this manner. But now, since you have made 
 the declaration, that the error which obliges you to 
 combat them is that of Calvin, which you thought they 
 held, every man sees clearly that they are free from all 
 error, seeing they are so strongly opposed to the only 
 
:iH2 
 
 PUOVIiNCIAL LKTTEUS. 
 
 error which you impute to them, and protest by 
 their diHCOurses, their books, and everythin<^ wliich 
 they can produce in evidence of their sentiments, 
 that they condemn this heresy with all tlieir hearts, 
 and in the same way as do the Thomists, whom you 
 recognize without difficulty to be orthodox, and who 
 were never suspected of not bein«]f so. 
 
 What, then, will you now say ajjainst them, fathers? 
 That althoujrh they adopt not Calvin's meaning, they 
 are nevertheless heretical, because they will not 
 acknowledge that the meaning of Jansenius is the 
 same as that of Calvin ? Will you venture to say that 
 that is matter of heresy ? Is it not a pure question of 
 fact, which cannot form a heresy? It would indeed be 
 one, to say that we have not power to resist effectual 
 grace ; but is it one to doubt whether Jansenius main- 
 tains this ? Is it a revealed truth ? Is it an article of 
 faith which must be believed under pain of damnation? 
 Is it not, in spite of you, a point of fact, on account of 
 which it would be ridiculous to pretend that there are 
 heretics in the Church ? 
 
 No longer, then, give them that name, father, but 
 some other, corresponding to the nature of your differ- 
 ence. Say that they are ignorant and stupid, and mis- 
 understand Jansenius ; such charges will be suitable to 
 your dispute ; but to call them heretics is out of the 
 question. This, however, being the only injurious 
 charge from which I wish to defend them, I will not 
 give myself much trouble to show that they properly 
 understand Jansenius. I will only say this, father, 
 
THE SENSE OF JANSENIUS ON GRACE. 
 
 .3S3 
 
 that, judging by your own rule, it is difficult not to 
 hold him orthodox : for here are the tests by which 
 you propose to try him. 
 
 Your wo'ds are: "To determine whether Jansenius 
 is free from challenge, it is necessary to determine 
 whether he defends effectual grace after the manner of 
 Calvin, who denies that we have power to resist it; 
 for then he would be heretical ; or, after the umnner 
 of the Thomists, who admit it, for then he would be 
 orthodox." See, then, father, whether he holds that 
 we have power to resist, when he says in whole 
 treatises, and amoni^ others, tr. 3, 1. 8, c. 20, " That we 
 have always the power of resisting grace according to 
 the Council ; that free will may always act and not 
 act, will and not will, consent and not consent, do good 
 and evil ; that man in this life has always these two 
 liberties, which you charge with contradiction." See, 
 likewise, if he is not opposed to the error of Calvin, 
 as you yourself represent it, when he shows through- 
 out the whole of the 21st chap, that " the Church 
 has condemned this heretic, who maintains that etiec- 
 tual grace does not act upon free will in the manner 
 in which it has been so long believed in the Church 
 namely, by leaving it the power of consenting or not 
 consenting ; whereas, according to St. Augustine and 
 the Council, we have always the power, if we choose, 
 of not consenting ; and according to St. Prosper, God 
 gives even his elect the will to persevere, but without 
 depriving them of power to will the contrary." 
 Judge, in fine, if he is not at one with the Thomists, 
 
384 
 
 PJ'OVINCIAL LEITEUS. 
 
 when he declares, c. 4, that all that the Thomists have 
 written to reconcile the efficacy of j^race with the 
 power of resisting it, is so conformable to his view, 
 that it ia necessary only to consult their books, in 
 order to learn his sentiments : Quod ipni (lixerunt, 
 dictum puta. 
 
 In this way he speaks on all these heads, and I pre- 
 sume that he believes in the power of resisting grace, 
 that he is contrary to Calvin and conformable to the 
 Thomists, because he says it ; and therefore is, accord- 
 ing to you, orthodox. But if you have some other 
 way of getting at the meaning of an author than by 
 his expressions, and if, without quoting from him, you 
 insist, in the face of all his expressions, that he denies 
 the power of resisting, and favours Calvin against the 
 Thomists, fear not, father, that I accuse you of heresy 
 for that ; I will only say that you seem to misunder- 
 stand Jansenius ; but that shall not prevent us from 
 being children of the same Church. 
 
 How comes it, then, father, that in this misunder- 
 standing you act so much under the influence of pas- 
 sion, and treat as your worst enemies, and as the most 
 dangerous heretics, those whom you cannot charge 
 with any error, or with any thing but not understand- 
 ing Jansenius as you do ? For on what do you dis- 
 pute, except the meaning of this author ? You insist 
 on their condemning him, and they ask you what you 
 mean by it ; you say you mean the heresy of Calvin, 
 they answer they condemn it ; and hence, if you cling 
 not to syllables, but to the thing which they signify, 
 
THE SENSE OF JANSENIU8 ON GRACE. 
 
 385 
 
 you ouf^ht to be satisfied. If they refuse to say that 
 they condemn the meaninf^ of Jansenius, it is because 
 they believe it to be that of St. Thomas. Tims the 
 term used between you is very ambi<;uous ; in your 
 mouth, it signifies the meanin<jf of Calvin, in theirs the 
 meaning of St. Thomas ; so that the different ideas 
 which you attach to the same toria is the c i^se of all 
 your divisions. Were I umpire, I woubl in^^trdict both 
 from using the word Jansenius : and ^1 us, Vx'th or'j 
 expressing what is meant by it, it w'>ul<i seei!i that all 
 you ..; is the condemnation of Calvin's meaning, 
 M'hich they are willing to give, and that all they ask 
 is the defence of the meaning of St. Augustine and St. 
 Thomas, as to which you are agreed. 
 
 I declare to you, then, fiither, thot for my part I 
 will always regard them as orthodox, whether they 
 condemn Jansenius if they find errors in him, or refuse 
 to condemn him when they only find what you your- 
 self declare to be orthodox ; and I will say to them, as 
 St. Jerome said to John, bishop of Jerusalem, when 
 accused of holding eight propositions of Origen : 
 " Either condemn Origen, if you acknowledge that he 
 held these errors, or deny that he held them: Aut 
 nega hoc dixif^se eum qui argiiUitr; aut, si locutns 
 est talia, eum damna qui dixerit." 
 
 Such, father, is the way in which those act who aim 
 at errors only, and not at persons ; whereas, you who 
 aim at persons more than errors, count it as nothing 
 to condemn errors, without condemning the persons to 
 whom you are pleased to ascribe them. 
 26 
 
 I 
 
1; 
 
 :i'4 
 
 W 
 
 11 »*!. 
 
 I 
 
 ti. 
 
 m\ 
 
 u> 
 
 
 
 386 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 How violent your procedure, father, but how in- 
 capable of succeeding ! I have told you elsewhere, 
 and I repeat it : violence and truth can do nothing 
 against each other. Never were your accusations 
 more outrageous, and never was the innocence of your 
 opponents better known ; never was effectual grace 
 more artfully attacked, and never was it seen so 
 firmly established. You employ your utmost efforts 
 to persuade us that your disputes are on points of 
 faith ; and never was it better known that your whole 
 dispute is only on a point of fact. In fine, you leave 
 no means untried to convince us that this point of 
 fact is true, and never were men more disposed to 
 doubt its truth. The reason, father, is obvious. You 
 do not take the natural way of establishing a fact, 
 namely, convincing the senses, by taking up the book 
 and pointing out the words which you allege to be in 
 it. You go about searching for means so foreign to 
 this simple course, that the most stupid are necessarily 
 struck by it. Why do you not take the same method 
 which I observed in my Letters, when, in order to dis- 
 close the many bad maxims of your authors, 1 faith- 
 fully mentioned the places from which they are 
 taken. It was thus the curates of Paris acteil, and it 
 never fails to convince. But what would you have 
 said, what would you have thought, if, when they 
 charged you, for example, with the proposition of 
 Father L'Amy, that " a monk may kill him who 
 threatens to propagate calumnies against him or his 
 community, if he cannot otherwise prevent them," th<.y 
 
THE SENSE OF JANSENIUS ON GRACE. 
 
 387 
 
 had not quoted the place which contains it in express 
 terms ? if, notwithstanding of any demand that might 
 have been made, they had always refused to show it, 
 and instead of this, had gone to Rome to obtain a bull 
 which .should enjoin all the world to acknowledge it ? 
 Would it not have been at once concluded that they 
 had taken the pope by .surprise, and that they never 
 would have resorted to this extraordinary means, but 
 from want of the natural means which, when state- 
 ments of fact are made, lie within the reach of all who 
 make them ? Thus, they have simply intimated that 
 Father L'Amy teaches this doctrine in torn. 5, disp. 36, 
 n. 118, page 544, edition of Douay ; and thus all who 
 desired to see it have found it, and nobody has been 
 able to entertain a doubt. This is a very ea.sy and 
 a very prompt method of disposing of (juestions of 
 fact, when one is in the right. 
 
 How comes it, then, father, that you do not act in 
 this way ? You have said in your Cavilli, that " the 
 five propositions are Jansenius, word for w.or(l, entire, 
 and in express terms," iisdeni verbis. Others .^ay no. 
 In this case, what ought to be done but just to (juote 
 the page, if you have really seen thein, or to confess 
 that 3'ou were mistaken ? You do neither ; but, in- 
 stead of this, while .seeing plainly that all the 
 passages of Jansenius which you occasionally alleged 
 as a blind, are not the " condemned individual and 
 special propositions" which you had undc^rtaken to 
 point out in his l)Ook, yon merely present us with 
 Constitutions which declare that the propositions are 
 
388 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 
 » K 
 
 \r 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 *. 
 
 i'' 
 
 
 I 
 
 4 
 
 l„. 
 
 T 
 
 ;ii 
 
 !» 
 
 1 ^ 
 
 ) 
 
 J ( 
 
 , 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 ! 
 
 ^ 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 i 
 
 ♦ 
 
 
 ? 
 
 extracted from his book, but make no reference to the 
 place. 
 
 I know, father, the respect wliich Christians owe to 
 the Holy See, and your opponents give sufficient proof 
 of their firm determination never to fail in it. But do 
 not imagine they would have failed, had they repre- 
 sented to the pope, with all the submission which 
 children owe to their father, and membeis to their head, 
 that he may have been surprised on this point of fact; 
 that he has not submitted it to examination since his 
 pontificate, and that the only point submitted to ex- 
 amination since his pontificate, and that the only 
 point submitted to examination by his predecessor, 
 Innocent X., was whether the propositions were hereti- 
 cal, not whether they were in Jansenius. That hence 
 the Commissary of the Sacred Office, one of the princi- 
 pal examinators, observed, " that they could not be 
 censured in the sense of any author : Non suvt qualifi- 
 cahiles in sensu proferentis : because they had been 
 brought forward to be examined in themselves, and 
 without considering to what author they might belong : 
 Jn ahsiracto, ct ut prascindunt ah umni proferente," 
 as is seen in their opinions recently printed : that more 
 than sixty doctors, imd a great number of able and 
 pious persons besides, have read the book carefulh^ 
 without ever seeing the propositions, while they found 
 others contrary : that those who had given this im- 
 pression to the pope might well have abused the con- 
 fidence which he liad in them, interested as they are 
 to discredit this author, who has convicted Molina of 
 
THE POPES FALLIBLE IN PACTS. 
 
 389 
 
 more than fifty errors ; that this is rendered more 
 credible by a maxim wliieh they hold, and rei^ard as 
 one of the best ascertained in their theology, namely, 
 that " they can, without sin, caliunniate those b}' 
 whom they think themselves unjustly attacked : " and 
 that thus their testimony being so suspicious, while 
 that of the other party is of so nmch weight, there is 
 some ground to supplicate his holiness, with all pos- 
 sible humility, to submit this fact to examination, in 
 presence of doctors from both sides, in order to come 
 to a formal and regular decision. "Let tit judges be 
 assembled," said St. Basil on a similar occasion ; " let 
 each there be free ; let my writings be examined ; let 
 it be seen 'if there are errors in faith ; let the objec- 
 tions and the answers be read, in order tliat judgment 
 may be given after examination, and in proper form ; 
 and not defamation without examination." 
 
 Think not, father, of charging those who should act 
 in this manner with want of submission to the Holy 
 See. The popes are far from treating (christians with 
 that tyranny which some would exercise in their name. 
 " The Church," says Pope St. Gregory, in Job, lib. 8, c. 
 1, "which has been trained in the school of humility, 
 commands not with authority, but by reason persuades 
 what she teaches her children, whom she believes 
 entangled in some error ; Recta qua; errantibus dicit, 
 non quasi ex aucforitate prcacipit, sed ex ratioiie jyer- 
 suadet." And so far from deeming it dishonour to 
 correct a judgment in which they might luive been 
 surprised, they, on the contrary, glory in it, as St. 
 
Ml 
 
 t'', 
 
 .!" 
 
 !;,!{• 
 
 
 
 I"' 
 
 in, 
 III 
 
 390 
 
 HIOVINCIAL LfiTTERS. 
 
 i 
 
 -.4 
 
 
 --tf 
 
 " V J 4' 
 
 Si ,3t| 
 
 Bernard testifies, Ep. 180: "The Apostolic See/' says 
 he " has this to recommend it, that it does not pique 
 itself upon honour, and is readily disposed to revoke 
 what may have been drawn from it by surprise : 
 accordingly it is very just that none should profit by 
 injustice, and especially before the Holy See." 
 
 Such, father, are the true sentiments with which 
 popes ought to be inspired ; since all theologians agree 
 that they may be surprised, and that their sovereign 
 capacity, so far from insuring them against it, on the 
 contrary exposes them the more, because of the great 
 number of the cases which distract them. Hence St. 
 Gregory says to some persons who were astonished 
 that another pope had allowed himself to be deceived, 
 " Why do you wonder," says he, (1. 1, in Dial.) " that 
 we are deceived, we who are only men ? Have you not 
 seen how David, a king who possessed the spirit of 
 prophecy, by giving credit to the imposture of Ziba, 
 gave an unjust sentence against the son of Jonathan ? 
 Who, then, will think it strange that impostures some- 
 times surprise us, us who are not prophets ? The load 
 of business oppresses us, and our spirit being distracted 
 by so many things, applies less to each in particular, 
 and is more easily deceived in any one." In truth, 
 father, I believe the popes know better than you, 
 whether or not they can !be surprised. They them- 
 selves declare that the popes and the greatest kings 
 are more exposed to be deceived than persons with less 
 important occupations. We must believe them. It is 
 easy to imagine that they may happen to be surprised. 
 
^ 
 
 THE POPES FALLIBLE IN FACTS. 
 
 391 
 
 bee, ' says 
 s not pique 
 1 to revoke 
 y surprise ; 
 d profit by 
 le." 
 
 vith which 
 
 f^ians agree 
 
 : sovereig:n 
 
 b it, on the 
 
 f the great 
 
 Hence St. 
 
 astonished 
 
 )e deceived, 
 
 Dial.) " that 
 
 ve you not 
 
 e spirit of 
 
 re of Ziba, 
 
 Jonathan ? 
 
 ures some- 
 
 The load 
 
 t distracted 
 
 particular. 
 
 In truth, 
 
 than you, 
 
 'hey them- 
 
 atest kings 
 
 IS with less 
 
 lem. It is 
 
 ! surprised. 
 
 St. Bernard, in the letter which he wrote to Innocent 
 II., describes it in this way : " It is nothing strange or 
 new for the mind of man to deceive, or be deceived. 
 Monks have gone to you in a spirit of falsehood and 
 deception, they have spoken to you against a bishop, 
 whom they hate, and whose life was exemplary. These 
 persons bite like dogs, and would fain make good pass 
 for evil. Meanwhile, most holy father, you become 
 enraged against your son. Why have you given cause 
 of joy to his enemies ? Believe not every spirit ; but 
 try the spirits, whether they be of God. I hope that 
 when you come to know the truth, all that has been 
 founded on a false report will be dissipated. I pray 
 the Spirit of truth to give you grace to separate light 
 from darkness, and to reprove evil in favour of good." 
 You thus see, father, that the exalted station of the 
 popes does not exempt them from surprise, and that it 
 only serves to make the surprise more dangerous and 
 more important. So St. Bernard represents it to Pope 
 Eugene, de Consid., liq. 2., c. ult. : "There is another 
 defect so general, that I have not seen one of the great 
 who avoids it. It is, holy father, the excessive credulity 
 from which so many disorders arise. For from this 
 come violent persecutions against the innocent, unjust 
 prejudices against the absent, and fearful anger, for 
 mere nothings ; pro nihilo. Here, holy father, is a 
 universal evil, from which, if you are exempt, I will 
 say that you are the only one among all your fellows 
 who have this advantacje." 
 
 I presume, father, this begins to persuade you that 
 
m\ 
 
 I 
 
 01 J.! 
 ■^1 •■ 'I 
 
 Ihil : 
 
 im 
 
 392 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 the popes are liable to be surprised. But to make it 
 perfectly clear to you, I will only put you in mind of in- 
 stances which you yourself give in your book, of popes 
 and emperors whom heretics have actually surprised. 
 For you say that ApoUinaris surprised Pope Damascus 
 in the same way as Celestius surprised Zozimus. You 
 say, moreover, that a person of the name of Athana- 
 sius deceived the Emperor Heraclius, and led him to 
 persecute the orthodox ; and that, in fine, Sergius, by 
 what you call " playing the humble servant to the 
 pope," obtained from Honorius the decree which was 
 burned at the sixth Council. 
 
 It is clear, then, from yourself, father, that those 
 who act thus towards kings and popes, sometimes art- 
 fully engage them to persecute those who defend the 
 faith, while thinking to put down heresies. And hence 
 it is that the popes, who abhor nothing so much as 
 these surprises, have converted a letter of Alexander 
 III. into an ecclesiastical enactment, inserted in the 
 canon law, and allowing the execution of their bulls 
 and decrees to be suspended when it is thought that 
 they have been deceived. This pope, writing to the 
 archbishop of Ravenna, says, " If we occasionally send 
 your fraternity decrees which run counter to your 
 feelings, give yourself no uneasiness. For either you 
 well execute them with respect, or you will state to us 
 your reason for not doing it ; because we will approve 
 of your not executing a decree which may have been 
 drawn from us by surprise or artifice." Thus act the 
 popes who only seek to remove the differences among 
 
tHE POPES FALLIBLE IN FACTS. 
 
 393 
 
 Christians, and not to gratify the passion of those who 
 would produce disturbances ainonr^ them. Tliey do not 
 employ domination, as St, Peter and St. Paul express 
 it, after Jesus Christ ; but the spirit apparent in all 
 their conduct is that of peace and truth. Hence they 
 usually put into their letters this clause, which is 
 always to be understood : " Si ita est : si preces veri- 
 tate nitantu7' ; If the thing is as we have been given 
 to understand ; if the facts are true." Hence it is 
 plain, that since the popes enforce their bulls only in 
 so far as they rest on true facts, mere bulls do not 
 prove the truth of the facts, but, on the contrary, the 
 truth of the facts makes the bulls receivable. 
 
 How, then, shall we learn the truth of facts ? By 
 the eyes, father, which are the legitimate judges of 
 them, just as reason is of natural and intelligible 
 things, and faith of things supernatural and revealed. 
 For since you oblige me, father, I will tell you, that 
 according to the two greatest doctors of the Church, 
 St. Augustine and St. Thomas, these three sources of 
 our knowledge, the senses, reason, and faith, have each 
 their separate objects, and their certainty within this 
 sphere. And as God has been pleased to make use of 
 the medium of the senses to give an entrance to faith, 
 fides ex auditu, so far is faith from destroying the cer- 
 tainty of the senses, that, on the contrary, to throw 
 doubt on the report of the senses would be to destroy 
 faith. And this is the reason why St. Thomas says 
 expressly, that God has been pleased that the sensible 
 accidents should subsist in the Eucharist, in order that 
 
394 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 I'' 
 
 k- 3 
 
 ■:\i 
 
 the senses which only judge of these accidents might 
 not be deceived : Ut 8ensu8 a deceptione reddantar 
 ivimunes. 
 
 Hence let us conclude, that when any proposition is 
 presented to us for examination, the first thing neces- 
 sary is to ascertain its nature, to see to which of the 
 three principles we ought to refer it. If it relates to 
 something supernatural, we will not judge of it either 
 by the senses or by reason, but by Scripture, and the 
 decisions of the Church. If it relates to a proposition 
 not revealed, and proportioned to natural reason, rea- 
 son will be the proper judge; and if, in fine, it relates 
 to a point of fact, we will believe the senses, to which 
 the knowledge of facts naturally belongs. 
 
 Tiiis rule is so general, that, according to St. Augus- 
 tine and St. Thomas, when Scripture even presents to 
 us some passage, the primary literal sense of which is 
 opposed to what the senses or reason recognize with 
 certainty, we must not resolve to disavow them on this 
 occasion, in order to subject them to this apparent 
 sense of Scripture, but we must interpret Scripture, 
 and search for another meaning in accordance with 
 this sensible truth ; because the Word of God being 
 infallible even in facts, and the report of the senses 
 and of reason, acting within their sphere being also 
 certain, these two mu'^it, agree : and as Scripture may be 
 interpreted in different manners, whilst the report of 
 the senses is single, we must in these matters hold 
 that to be the true interpretation of Scripture which 
 agrees with the faithful report of the senses. " It is 
 
THE POPES FALLIBLE IN FACTS. 
 
 395 
 
 necessary," says St. Thomas, 1 p. q. 08, a. 1,' to observe 
 two things accordinf* to St. Augustine : the one, That 
 Scripture lias always a true sense ; the other. That as 
 it may receive several senses, when we find one which 
 reason proves to be certainly false, we must not per- 
 sist in sayint^ that it is the natural sense, but seek 
 another which agrees with it." 
 
 This he illustrates b}-- the passage in Genesis, in 
 which is said that God created " two great lights, the 
 sun and the moon, and the stars al.so.' Here Scripture 
 seems to say that the moon is greater than all the 
 stars ; but because it is clear, from indubitable demon- 
 stration, that this is false, we should not, says this 
 saint, obstinately defend this literal sense, but seek 
 another conformable to this true fact, as in savinj;, 
 " That the word great light means only the greatness 
 of the moon as it appears to us, and not its magnitude 
 considered in itself." 
 
 Were we disposed to act otherwise, we should not 
 thereb}" render Scripture venerable, but, on the con- 
 trary, expose it to the contempt of infidels ; " because," 
 as St. Augustine says, " when they come to learn that 
 we believe, on the authority of Scripture, things which 
 they certainly know to be false, they will laugh at our 
 credulity in other things of a more recondite nature, 
 as the resurrection of the dead, and eternal life." 
 "And thus," adds St. Thomas, " we should make our 
 religion contemptible to them, and even close the 
 entrance against them." 
 
 We should also close the entrance against heretics, 
 
396 
 
 PROVINCIAL LErrERR. 
 
 1 » 
 
 hi 
 
 
 h 
 
 pi 
 
 'lb 
 
 1^^' 
 
 -',! 
 
 and make the authority of the pope contemptihle to 
 them, were we to deny tlie orthodoxy of those wlio 
 refuse to believe that certain words are in a book, in 
 which they cannot be found, because a pope had 
 asserted it through surprise. Only by examining a 
 book can we ascertain what words are in it. Matters 
 of fact are proved only i)y the senses. If what you 
 maintain is true, show it ; if not, do not uvje any one 
 to believe it; it would be to no purpose. All the 
 powers in the world cannot by authority prove a point 
 of fact, any more than change it. For nothing can 
 make that which is, not to be. 
 
 In vain for example did monks of Ratisbon obtain 
 from Leo IX. a formal decree declaring that the body 
 of St. Dionysius, the first bishop of Paris, who is com- 
 monly held to be the Areopagite, had been carried out 
 of France, and deposited in the church of their monas- 
 tery. That does not prevent the body of this saint 
 from having always been, and from still being, in the 
 celebrated abbey which bears his name, in which you 
 would find it dififtcult to make this bull be received, 
 although the pope therein declares that he had ex- 
 amined the matter "with all possible care, dilvjentis- 
 simh, and with the advice of several bishops and 
 prelates, so that he strictly enjoins all the French to 
 acknowledge and confess that they no longer have 
 these holy relics." And yet the French, who knew 
 the falsehood of the fact by their own eyes, and who, 
 having opened the crypt, found all those relics entire, 
 as the historians of that period testify, believed then, 
 
THE POPES FALLIBLE IN FACTS. 
 
 397 
 
 emptible to 
 [ those who 
 a book, in 
 I pope had 
 xaiinninfj a 
 it. Matters 
 I what you 
 '•je any one 
 B. All the 
 'ove a point 
 lothing can 
 
 jbon obtain 
 
 it the body 
 
 vho is coui- 
 
 carried out 
 
 leir nionas- 
 
 this saint 
 
 )ing, in the 
 
 which you 
 
 >e received, 
 
 e had ex- 
 
 dily/entis- 
 
 shops and 
 
 French to 
 
 iger have 
 
 vho knew 
 
 and who, 
 
 ics entire, 
 
 eved then, 
 
 and have ever since believed, the contrary of what the 
 pope enjoined them to believe, knowing well that even 
 saints and prophets are liable to be surprised. 
 
 In vain, also, did you obtain from Rome a decree 
 against Galileo, condemning his opinion concerning the 
 motion of the earth. That will not prove it to be at 
 rest ; and if we had uniform observations proving that 
 it turns, all men could not prevent it from revolving, 
 nor themselves from revolving with it. No more 
 imagine, that the letters of Pope Zachariah, excom- 
 municating St. Yirgilius because he held there were 
 antipodes, have annihilated this New World; and that, 
 ^Ithough he had declared his opinion to be a very 
 dangerous error, the king of Spain has not found his 
 advantage in having believed Christopher Columbus, 
 wlio came from it, rather than this pope who had not 
 been there, and that the Church has not received a 
 great advantage from it, inasnmch as it has brought a 
 knowledge of the Gospel to many nations that must 
 have perisherl in their unbelief. 
 
 Thus, father, you see the nature of matters of fact, 
 and the principles by which they are to be judged ; 
 and hence, with reference to our subject, it is easy to 
 conclude, that if the five propositions are not in 
 Jansenius, it is impossible that they can have been 
 extracted from it, and that the only means of judging 
 of them, and satisfying people in regard to them, is to 
 examine the book at a regular conference, as you liave 
 long been asked to do. Till then, you have no right 
 to call your opponents obstinate ; for they will be 
 
398 
 
 PUOVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 
 i-Ti 
 
 
 without blame on the point of fact, ah they are with- 
 out error on the point of faith; orthodox as reoards 
 the doctrine, reasonable as regards the fact, and inno- 
 cent in both. 
 
 Who, then, father, would not be astonished at seeinjjj 
 on the one side a justification so complete, and, on the 
 other, accusations so violent ? Who would think that 
 there is no question between you but a fact of no 
 importance, which you insist as being believed without 
 showing it ? And who could venture to imagine that 
 so much noise should be made throughout the Church 
 for nothing, pj'o niltilo, father, as St. Bernard says. 
 But herein lies the most artful part of your conduct. 
 By making it believed that everything is at stake, in 
 an afiair of nothing, and by giving persons in power, 
 who listen to you, to understand that your disputes 
 involve the most pernicious errors of Calvin, and the 
 mo.st important principles of faith, you enlist all their 
 zeal and all their authority against those whom you 
 combat, as if the safety of the Catholic religion de- 
 pended upon it ; whereas i*' they came to know that 
 the only question in this minute point of fact, they 
 would take no interest in it, but, on the contrary, deeply 
 regret that they had done so much to gratify your 
 private passions, in an affair which is of no consequence 
 to the Church. 
 
 In fine, to take things at the worst, were it even 
 true that Jansenius held these propositions, what mis- 
 fortune could arise becau.se some individuals doubt 
 this, provided they detest them as they publicly declare 
 
THE POPES FALLIBLE IN FACTS. 
 
 399 
 
 they do ? Ih it not enough that they aro condemned 
 by all the world without exception, in the very sense 
 in which you have explained that you wish them con- 
 demned ? Would they be more censured from its beinf? 
 said that Jansenius held them ? Of what use, then, to 
 demand this acknowledgment, except to decry a doctor 
 and a bishop who died in the connnunion of the 
 Church ? T do not see any so great good in this, as to 
 justify the purchase of it by so many troubles. What 
 interest in it have the State, the pope, the bishops, the 
 doctors, the whole Church ? It does not att'ect them in 
 any way, father. It is only your Society th.it would 
 truly receive any pleasure from the defamation of an 
 author who has done you some harm. Still all is in 
 connnotion, because you give out that all is threatened. 
 This is the secret cause which gives the impulse to all 
 these great movements, which would cease the moment 
 the true state of the dispute was known. It is because 
 the repose of the Church depends on this explanation, 
 that it becomes of the utmost importance to give it, in 
 order that, all your disguises being discovered, it may 
 be apparent to the whole world that your accusations 
 are without foundation, your opponents without error, 
 and the Church without heresy. 
 
 Such, father, is the good which it has been my aim 
 to accomplish, and which seems to me of such impor- 
 tance to religion, that I have difficulty in compreliend- 
 ing how those to whom you give so much cause to 
 speak can remain silent. Though they should be 
 unscathed by the insults which you otfer them, those 
 
u\\ 
 
 li 
 
 u 
 
 400 
 
 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. 
 
 which the Church suffers ought, methinks, to lead them 
 to complain : besides, I doubt if ecclesiastics can aban- 
 don their reputation to calumny, especially in a 
 matter of faith. Still they allow you to say whatever 
 you please, so that, but for the occasion which you 
 have accidentally given me, perhaps no opposition 
 would have been made to the scandalous impressions 
 which you disseminate on all sides. Their patience 
 astonishes me ; and the more that it cannot be sus- 
 pected either of timidity or powerlessne.ss, knowing 
 well that they want neither arguments for their justi- 
 fication, nor zeal for the truth. 1 see them, nevertheless, 
 so religiously silent, that I fear there is excess in it. 
 For my part, father, I do not believe I can do so. 
 Leave the Ohurch in peace, and I will leave you with 
 all my heart. But so long as you shall labour to keep 
 her in trouble, doubt not that there are children of 
 peace, who will think themselves obliged to employ all 
 their efforts to preserve her tranquility. 
 
 
 X 
 
to lead them 
 es can aban- 
 ecially in a 
 ay whatever 
 which you 
 ) opposition 
 impressions 
 eir patience 
 not be sus- 
 ss, knowinir 
 their justi- 
 evertheless, 
 xcess in it. 
 can do so. 
 e you with 
 )ur to keep 
 ihildren of 
 employ all 
 
 X