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