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,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 (letosteT 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 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 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 ■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 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, annt 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^ 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, 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 ■,, 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 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\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 picture, I would have said that it was some infidel f^flr? ' ' ' ' f '! EASY DEVOTION. 179 had tln> ilidel wlio liai 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 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. 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 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: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 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 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 ncluG8 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 homicis 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^ %^ -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 orle 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) irf 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.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 ;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 prefle 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 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/ 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 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 O # o Hiotographic Sciences Corporation 33 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. 14580 (716) 872-'l503 m. ■^ > 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