The Provincial Letters of Blaise Pascal

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on Hbrary shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project

to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the

publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at |http : //books . google . com/|

PROVINCIAL LETTERS
BLAISE PASCAL

WITH HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION AND NOTES

BY

THOMAS M'CRIE, D.D., LL.D.

A NEW EDITION

LONDON

CHATTO & WINDUS

1S98

** It my lettm u« enn<l«nn«<d at Borne, that which I eondemn hi them u eonoemnca u
heaven.'*— Pamal

"11m 'Piovbidal Letters' are modeia of elnqaenee and pleaeantrjr. The bent eomedlei of
If oUere have not more wit in them than the flnt Letter* ; Boeniethae nothing more eublime
than tha oonehirting oom."— Tolta taa.

*'Tke ' ProTindal Lettan' oo the fhUaaiea of the Jeeulta. whUe they exhibit as entire a
freedom from Mgotiy, exhibit ale9 aa mudi pointed wit. and ae much eound reasoning, as are
tabeCMaidintheirtiolemaaormodamphiioeophj.''— HaNwaa Moms.

V •

a-

»31I7

CONTENTS.

HiSTOftlGAL iMTRODVOriON, . . . « • • X^^l

LxrniB I.— Disputes in the Sorbonne, and the inyention of proximate
pow«r-^ tenn employed by the Jesuits to procure the censure of M.

Arnauld, 09

LsTrEaII.~Of sufficient grace, ...... 81

Kkplt of " the Provincial " to the first Two Letters of his Friend, . 92

Lettek III.— Ipjustice, absurdity, and nullity of the censure on M.
Amauld, . . ...... 94

Lkttbb lY.— On actual grace and sins of ignorance, ... 103

V Lbttbb Y Design of the Jesuits in establishing a new system of morals

—Two sorts of casuists among them— A great many lax and some
severe ones— Reason of this difference— Explanation of the doctrine
of probabilism— A multitude of modem and unknown authors, sub*
Btituted in the place of the holy fathers, .... 119

^ LKTTKa VL— Various artifices of the Jesuits to elude the authority of
the gospel, of councils, and of the popes— Some consequences which
result tmm. their doctrine of probabilism— Their relaxation in &vour
of beneficiaries, priests, monks, and domestics— Anecdote of John
d'Alba, .... .... 132

i^LGTTBa Vn.— Method of directing the intention adopted by the casuists
—Permission to kill in defence of honour and property, extended
even to priests and monks— Ourious question raised by Caramuel as
to whether Jesuits may be allowed to kill Jansenists, . . 14S

1^ Lbttbb TIIL— Oormpt maxims of the casuists relating to Judges-
Usurers— The contract Hohatra— Bankrupts— Restitution — Divers
ridiculous notions of theie same casuists, • t • •161

a2

-T- -m

vm CONTENTS.

P««t
r Lettxk IX^False worship of the YLrgin introduced by the Jesuits—
Devotion made easy— Their maxims on ambition, envy, gluttony,
equivocation, mental reservations, female dress, gaming; hearing
mass, .... 176

Lbttsb X— Palliatives applied by the Jesuits to the sacrament of pen-
ance, in their maxims regarding confession, satisfaction, absolution,
proximate occasions of sin, contrition, and the love of God, • 192

LETTB& XL— Bidicule a fiilr weapon, when employed against absurd
opinions— Bules to be observed in the use of this weapon— The pro*
fane buffoonery of Fathers LeMolne and Garrassa, , . 208

liKTTSB Xn.— Beftitation of the chicaneries of the Jesuits regarding alms*
giving and simony, .••.... 223

Lettbb XIII.~The doctrine of Lessius on homicide the same with that
of Yalentia— How easy it is to pass from speculation to practice— Why
the Jesuits have recourse to this distinction, and how little it serves
for their vindication, . . ' . . . . • 238

Lbttba XIV.- In which the ™*-HTnM of the Jesuits on murder arereftited
from the Fathers— Some of their calumnies answered— And their doc-
trine compared with the forms observed in criminal trials, . 253

Lbttbb XY.— Showing that the Jesuits first exclude calumny from their
catalogue of crimes, and then employ it in denouncing their opponents, 268

LiTTBB XYL— Shameftil calumnies of the Jesuits against pious clergy-
men and innocent nunsi, ....•• 234

Lbttbb XYIL— The author of the Letters vindicated firom the charge of
heresy -> A heretical phantom — Popes and general councils not in-
fallible in questions of fact, • . • • • 307

Lbttbb XYIIL— ^Showing still more plainly, on the authority of Father
Annat himself, that there is really no heresy in the Ohurch, and that
in questions of fact we must be guided bT our senses, and not by au-
thority even of popei» «•.»•• 328

■■0^-

THE TEANSLATOB'S PEEFACB,

The following translation of the Provincial Letters wag
undertaken several years ago, in compliance with the sug-
gestion of a revered parent, chiefly as a literary recreation
in a retired country charge, and, after being finished, it was
laid aside. It is now pubUshed at the request of friends,
who con»dered such a work as peculiarly seasonable, and
likely to be acceptable at the present crisis, when general
attention has been again directed to the Popish controversy,
and when such strenuous exertions are being made by the
Jesuits to regain influence in our country.

None are strangers to the fame of the Provincials, and
few literary persons would choose to confess themselves alto-
gether ignorant of a work which has acquired a world-wide
reputation. Tet there is reason to suspect that few books
of the same acknowledged merit have had a more limited
circle of bona fide English readers. This may be ascribed,
in a great measure, to the want of a good English translap
lion. Two translations of the Provincials have already ap-
peared in our language. The first was contemporary with
the letters themselves, and was printfv) lit London in lG57t

xii translator's prepack.

lected, and drawn from a variety of authorities not generally
accessible^ illustrating the history of the Letters, and of the
parties concerned in them, with a vindication of Pascal from
the charges which this work has provoked from so many
quarters against him.

AUOUSTIME AND PELAGIUS. XT

being represented as created with concupiscence^ to account
for his aiberrations from rectitude — ^in other words, with a
constitution in which the seeds of all evil were implanted-^
the authorship of sin was ascribed, directly and primarily, to
the Creator.*

Augustine was a powerful but unsteady writer, and has
expressed himself so inconsistently as to have divided the
opinions of the Latin Church, where he was recognised as a
standard, canonized as a saint, and revered under the title of
^ The Doctor of Grace." On the great doctrine of salvation
by grace^ he is scriptural and evangelical ; and hence he has
been frequently quoted with admiration by our Reformed
divines, partly to evince the declension of Rome from the
faith of the earlier fathers, partly from that veneration for
antiquity, which induces us to bestow more notice on the ivy-
mantled ruin, l!han on the more graceful and commodious
modem edifice in its vicinity. When arguing against Pela-
gianism, Augustine is strong in the panoply of Scripture;
when developing his own system, he fails to do justice either
to Scripture or to himself. Loud, and even fierce, for the
entire corruption of human nature, he spoils all by admitting
the absurd dogma of baptismal regeneration. Chivalrous in
tho defence of grace, as opposed to free-will, he virtually
ammdons the field to the enemy, by teaching that we are
justified by our works of evangelical obedience, and that the
faith which justifies includes in its nature all the offices of
Christian charity.t

During the dark ages, the Church of Rome, professing the
highest veneration for St Augustine^ had ceased to hold the
Augustinian theology. The Dominicans, indeed, yielded a
vague allegiance to it, by adhering to the views of Thomas
Aquinas, *^ the angelic doctor" of the schools, from whom

* Neander, BibL Bepoe., ilL 94; L^decker, de Janaen. Bogm., 413
t This remark may be supposed by some to bear too hard on the " Doctor
of Grace ;** but it is the result of strong impressions, produced by the study of
hia works many years ago, and renewed by later investigations into the dis>
putes which were maintained between the Jansenists and the reformed di-
vines of France.

TVl HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.

they were termed Thomists ; while the Franciscans, who op-
posed them, under the auspices of Duns Scotus, from whom
they were termed Scotists, leant to the views of Pelagius.
The Scotists, like the modern advocates of free-will, in-
veighed against their opponents as fatalists, and charged
them with making God the author of sin; the Thomists,
again, retorted on the Scotists, hy accusing them of annihi-
lating the grace of God. But the doctrines of grace had
sunk out of view, under a mass of penances, oblations, and
intercessions, founded on the assumption of human merits,
and on that very confusion of the forensic change in justifi-
cation with the moral change in sanctification, in which Au-
gustine had unhappily led the way. At length the Reforma-
tion appeared ; and as both Luther and Calvin appealed to
the authority of Augustine, when treating of grace and free-
will, the Romish divines, in their zeal against the Reformers,
became still more decidedly Pelagian. In the Council of
Trent, the admirers of Augustine durst hardly show them-
selves ; the Jesuits carried every thing before them ; and the
anathemas of that synod, which were .aimed at Calvin fully
as much as Luther, though they professed to condemn only
the less guarded statements of the German reformer, had a
decided leaning to Pelagianism. .

The controversy was revived in the Latin Church, aboxLt
the close of the sixteenth century, both in the Low Countries
and in Spaui. In 1588, Lewis Molina, a Spanish Jesuit,
published lectures on "The Concord of Grace and Free-Will ;"
and this work, filled with the jargon of the schools, gave rise
to disputes which continued to agitate the Church during the
whole of the succeeding century. Molina conceived that he
had discovered a method of reconciling the divine purposes
with the freedom of the human will, which would settle the
question for ever. According to his theory, God not only
foresaw from eternity all things possible, by a foresight of in-
telligence, and all things future, by a foresight of vision ; but
by another kind of foresight, intermediate between these two,
which he termed acientia media, or middle knowledge, he

■•

MOLINA. XVil

foresaw what might have happened under cei*tain circum-
stances or conditions, though it never may take place. All
men, acording to Molina, are favoured with a general grace,
sufficient to work out their salvation, if they choose to improve
it ; hut when God designs to convert a sinner, he vouchsafes
that measure of grace which he foresees, according to the
middle knowledge, or in all the circumstances of the case,
the person vnll comply with. The honour of this discovery
was disputed by another Jesuit, Peter Fonseca, who declared
that the very same thing had burst upon his mind with all
the force of inspiration, when lecturing on the subject some
years before.*

Abstruse as these questions may appear, they threatened a
serious rupture in the Bomish Church. The Molinists were
summoned to Rome in 1698, to answer the charges of the
Dominicans ; and after some years of deliberation. Pope Gle-
ment VUI. decided against Molina. The Jesuits, however,
alarmed for the credit of their order, never rested till they
prevailed on the old pontiff to re-examine the matter ; and
in 1602, he appointed a grand council of cardinals, bishops,
and divines, who convened for discussion no less than seventy-
eight times. This council was called Congregatio de Auosiliis,
qr council on the aids of grace. Its records being kept se-
cret, the result of their collective wisdom was not known
with certainty, and has been lost to the world.t' The pro-
bability is, that, like Milton's '* grand infernal peers, " who
reasoned high on similar points,

" They found no end, in wandering maset lost"

Those who appealed to them for the settlement of the
question had too much reason to say, as the man in Terence
does to his lawyers — " Fecktis probe ; incertior w/m multo
quam dudum"X Each party confidently asserted that they

* The question of the middle knowledge is learnedly handled by Y oet (Bisp.
TheoL, L 264), by Hoombeeck (Socin. Oonfnt), and other Protestant divines,
who have shown it to be untenable^ useless^ sjid fraught with absurdities.

t Dupin. Sccl. Hist, 17th cent, 1-14.

I *' Well done, gentlemen; you have left me more m the dark than ever."

^Viii mSTOBIOAL INTRODUCTION.

had obtained the victory, and that their opponents had heez
condemned, though, for the sake of peace, the sentence had
not been made public.

But this interminable dispute was destined to assume a
more popular form, and lead to more practical results. In
1604, two young men entered, as fellow-students, the uni-
rersity of Louvain, which had been distinguished for its hos-
tility to Molinism. Widely differing in natural temperament
as well as outward rank, Cornelius Jansen, who was after-
wards bishop of Tpres, and John DuvergerdeHauranne, after-
wards known as the Abb6 de St Cyran, formed an acqu£untance
which soon ripened into friendship. They began to study to-
gether the works of Augustine, and to compare them with
the Scriptures. The primary result was, an agreement in
opinion that the ancient father was in the right, and that the
Jesuits, and other followers of Molina, were in the wrong.
This was followed by an ardent desire to revive the tenets of
their favourite doctor ; a task which each of them prosecuted
in the way most suited to his respective character.

Jansen or Jansenius, as he is often called, * was descended
of humble parentage, and bore October 28, 1585, in a village
near Leerdam in Holland. By his friends he is extolled for
his penetrating genius, tenacious memory, magnanimity, ai^.d
piety. Taciturn and contemplative in his habits, he was
frequently overheard, when taking his solitary walks in the
garden of the monastery, to exclaim: ** O Veritas f Veritas!
— O truth I truth I" Keen in controversy, ascetic in his de-
votion, and rigid in his Catholicism, his antipsithies were
about equally divided between heretics and Jesuits. Towards
the Protestants, lus acrimony was probably augmented by
the consciousness of having embraced views which might
expose himself to the suspicion of heresy ; or, still more pro-
bably, by that uneasy feeling with which some cannot help
regarding those who, folding the same doctrinal views with

* He was the son of a poor artisan, whose name was Jan, or John Ottho;
henee Jansen, corresponding to onr Johnson, which was Latinized into Jao
eeoiui.

JANSEN. SIX

themselves, may have made a more decided and consistent
profession of them. The first supposition derives coun-
tenance from the private correspondence between him and his
friend St Cyran, which betrays some dread of persecution.*
The second is confirmed by his acknowledged writings. He
speaks of Protestants as no better than Turks, and gives it
as his opinion that '' they had much more reason to congra-
tulate themselves on the mercy of princes, than to complain
of their severities, which, as the vilest of heretics, they richly
deser r«Hi." t His controversy with the learned Gilbert Voet
led the latter to publish his Desperata Causa Papatus^ one
of the best exposures of the weaknesses of Popery that ap-
peared on the Continent. When to this we add that the
Calvinistic Synod of Dort, in 1618, had condemned Arminius
and the Dutch Remonstrants as having fallen into the errors
of Pelagius and Molina, the position of Jansen became still
more complicated. With Arminius he could not coincide
without condemning Augustine ; with the Protestant Synod
he could not agreej unless he chose to be denounced as a
Calvinist.

But the natural enemies of Jansen were, without doubt,
the Jesuits. To the history of thb Society we can only now
advert in a very cursory manner. It may appear surpris-
ing, that an order so powerful and politic should have owed
its origin to such a person as Ignatius Loyola, a Spanish
soldier of no education, and of slender talents ; and that a
wound in the leg, which this hidalgo received at the battle
of Pampeluna, should have issued in his becoming the founder
of a Society which has embroiled the world and the Church.
But, in fact, Loyola, though the originator of the sect, is

* Petitot» Collect des Memoires, Notice sur Port-Royal, torn, xndii., p. 19.
This author's attempt to fix the charge of a conspiracy between Jansen and
8t Qjran to oyertom the Ghnrch, is a piece of epecial pleading, bearing on its
CRoeitsown refutation.

t The followers of Jansen were not more charitable than himself in their
judgments of the Befoimed, and, it is alleged, showed an equal zeal with the
Jesuits to persecute them, when they bad it in their power. (Benoit, Hist, da
PEdit de Nantes, Ui. 200.)

XX HISTORICAL INTRODUOTION.

not entitled to the hononry or rather the disgrace, of orga-
nizing its constitution. This must be assigned to Lajnez
and Aquaviva, the two generals who succeeded him — ^men
as superior to the founder of the Society in learning as he
excelled them in enthusiasm. Ignatius owed his success
mainly to circumstances. While he was watching his arms
as the knight-errant of the Virgin, in her chapel at Mont-
serraty or squatting within his cell in a state of body too
noisome for human contact, and in a frame of mind verging
on insanity, Luther was making Germany ring with the first
trumpet-notes of the Reformation. The monasteries, in
which ignorance had so long slumbered in the lap of super-
stition, were awakened ; but their inmates were totally unfit
for doing battle on the new field of strife that had opened
around them. Unwittingly, in the heat of his fanaticism,
the illiterate Loyola suggested a new line of tactics, which,
matured by wiser heads, proved more adapted to the times.
Bred in the court and the camp, he contrived to combine the
finesse of the one, and the discipline of the other, with the
sanctity of a religious community ; and proposed that, in-
stead of the lazy routine of monastic life, his followers
should actively demote themselves to the education of
youth, the conversion of the heathen, and the suppression of
heresy. Such a proposal, backed by a vow of devotiop to
the Holy See, commended itself to the pope so highly, that,
in 1540, he confirmed the institution by a bull, granting it
ample privileges, and appointed Loyola to be its first general.
In less than a century, this sect, which assumed to itself,
with singular arrogance, the name of "The Society of
Jesus," rose to be the most enterprising and formidable order
in the Romish communion.

Never was the name of the blessed Jesus more grossly
prostituted than when applied to a Society which is certainly
the very counterpart, in spirit and character, to Him who
was " meek and lowly, and having salvation.*' The Jesuits
may be said to have invented, for their own peculiar use, an
entirely new system of ethics. In place of the divine law,

¥HB JESUITS. XXI

they prescribe, as the rule of their conduct, a ^ blind obe-
dience'' to the will of their superiors, whom they are bound
to recognise as *' standing in the place of Ckd," and in ful-
filling whose orders they are to have no more will of their
own " than a corpse, or an old man's staff." * Pretending,
with singular hypocrisy, to aim in all their maxims and pro-
ceedings at '* the greater glory of Qod—ad majorem Dd
gloriam^* they in reality identify this end with the aggrandize-
ment of their own Society; and holding that ''the end sanc-
tifies the means," they scruple at no means, foul or fair,
which they conceive may advance it. The supreme power
is vested in the general, who is not responsible to any other
authority, civil or ecclesiastical. Altogether, it presents the
most complete political organization in the world. The
members are employed as spies on each other, and a secret
correspondence is maintained with head-quarters at Rome,
by means of which every thing, that can in the remotest de-
gree affect the interests of the Society, is made known, and
the whole machinery of Jesuitism can be set in motion at
once, or its minutest feelers directed to any object at pleasure.
Every member is sworn, by secret oath, to obey the orders,
and all are confederated in a solemn league to advance the
cause of the Society. It has been well defined to be '* a naked
sword, the hilt of which is at Rome." Such a monstrous
combination could not fail to render itself obnoxious to every
community possessing the least spark of independence. Ever
intermeddling with the affairs of civil governments, with
aUegiance to which, under any form, its principles are en-
tirely at variance, it has been expelled in turn from almost
every European State, as a political nuisance. Constantly
aiming at ascendency in the Church, in which it is an im-
perium in imperiOf the Society has not only been embroiled
in perpetual feuds with the other orders, but has repeatedly
provoked the thunders of the Vatican. But Jesuitism is

* CoBca quadam 6bedieniia.~^Ut Christitm Dominium in tuperitfre quoli-
bet agruaeere ttudeai%i,-~Perinde ae ti cadaver euent, vd timiliter atque
eenis bacuhu, (Oonstit. Jesuit, pan yi. cap. 1 ; Ignat Epist, &c.)

rxii mSTORIOAL INTRODUCTION".

the very soul of Popery ; both have revived or declined to-
gether ; and accordingly, though the order was abolished hj
Clement XIV., in 1775, it was found necessary to resuscitate
It under Pius VII., in 1814, who found that without the aid
of " these vigorous rowers" the vessel of the Church was in
danger of foundering. The Society, which has been termed
'* a militia called out to combat the Reformation," was never
in greater power, nor more active operation, than it is at the
present moment. It boasts of immortality, and, in all pro-
bability, it will last as long as the Church of Borne. Exhi-
biting, as it does to this day, the same features of ambition^
treachery, and intolerance, it seems destined to fall only in
the ruins of that Church, of whose unchanging spirit it is
the genuine type and illustration.*

In prosecuting the ends of their institution, the Jesuits
have adhered with singular fidelity to its distinguishing spirit.
As the instructors of youth, their solicitude has ever been
less to enlarge the sphere of human knowledge than to keep
out what might prove dangerous to clerical domination;
they have confined their pupib to mere literary studies^
which might amuse without awakening their minds, and
make them subtle dialecticians without disturbing a single
prejudice of the dark ages. As missionaries, they have been
much more industrious and successful in the manual labour
of baptizing all nations than in teaching them the Gospel, t

* Balde, whom the Jesoita honoar in their schools as a modern Horace^
thus celebrates the longevity of the Society, in his Carmen iSeculare de Sj-
eietatc Jesu, 1640 :■—

" Proftiit qoisquis Yoloit nocere.
Guncta subsident sociis ; ubique
Ezoles yivont, et ubique cives I
Stemimus victi, snperamus imi,
Surgtmns plures toties cadendo."

t Their feunous missionary, Francis Xavier, whom they canonized, wa»
ignorant of a single word in the languages of the Indians whom he professed
to evangelize. He employed a hand-bell to summon the natives around him;
and the poor savages mistaking him for one of their learned Brahmans, he
baptized them until his arm was exhausted with the task, and boasted of
every one he baptized as a regenerated convert I

OASUISTBT. xxill

As theologians, they hare uniformly preferred the views of
Molina ; regarding these, if not as more agreeable to Scrip-
ture and right reason, at least (to use the language of a
late writer) as ''more consonant with the common sense
and natural feelings of mankind/'* As controversialists,
they were the decided foes of all reform and all reformers,
within or without the Church. As moralists, they cultivated,
as might be expected, the loosest system of casuistry, to qua-
lify themselves for directing the consciences of high and low,
and becoming, through the confessional, the virtual gover-
nors of mankind. In all these departments they have, doubt-
less, produced men of abilities ; but the very meaiiS which
they employed to aggrandize the Society have tended to
dwarf the intellectual growth of its individual members;
and hence, while it is true that '* the Jesuits had to boast
of the most vigorous controversialists, the most polite scho-
lars, the most refined courtiers, and the most flexible casuists
of their age,"i< it has been commonly remarked that they
have never produced a single great man.

Casuistry, the art in which the Jesuits so much excelled,
is, strictly speaking, that branch of theology which treats of
cases of consciencei, and originally consisted in nothing more
than an application of the general precepts of Scripture to
particular cases. The ancient casuists, so long as they con-
fined themselves to the simple rules of the Gospel, were at
least harmless, and their ingenious writings are still found
useful in cases of ecclesiastical discipline ; but they gradually
introduced into the science of morals the metaphysical jargon
of the sdiools, and, instead of aiming at making men moral,
contented themselves with disputing about morality.} The
main source of the aberrations of casuistry lay in the unscrip-

• Macfntcrt, Hist ofSnglaiid, iL 283.

t Ibid., it 3S7.

I Angnitine himaelf it efaazseable with, haying been the flnt to introduce
the Tfiolafitic mode ot treating moralitj in the form of trifling qoeftiooi,
■ore fitted to iratiiy caiUMitf, and diq>la7 acumen, than to ediiy or eo-
Bgfctm His examine was foOawtd and mieefablj aboied bf the moralifte of
(Bod'lei iMgoge^ toL L p. 568.)

XXIV raSTORICAIi IHTBODUCTIOIf.

tural dogma of priestly absolution — ^the right clidmed hj
man to forgive sin, as a transgression of the law of Ood ;
and in the adventitious distinction between sins as venial and
mortal — a distinction which assigns to the priest the prero-
gative, and imposes on him the obligation, of drawing the
critical line, or fixing a kind of tariff on human actions, and
apportioning penance or pardon, as the case may seem to re-
quire. In their desperate attempt to define the endless
forms of depravity on which they were called to adjudicate,
or which the pruriency of the cloister suggested to their own
imaginations, the casuists sank deeper into the mire at every
step ; and their productions, at length, resembled the com-
mon sewers of a city, which, when exposed, become more
pestiferous than the filth which they were meant to remove.
Even under the best management-, such a system was radi-
cally bad ; in the hands of the Jesuits it became truly abomin-
able. To their "modern casuists," as they were termed,
must we ascribe the invention o^ probabilism, mental reserva-
tion, and the direction of the intention, which have been suf-
ficiently explained and castigated in the Provincial Letters.
We shall only remark here, that the actions to which these
principles were applied were not only such as have been
termed indifferent, and the criminality of which may be
doubtful, or dependent on the intention of the actor: the
probabilism of the Jesuits was, in fact, a systematic attempt
to legalize crime, under the sanction of some grave doctor,
who had found out some excuse foe it ; and their theory of
mental reservation and direction of the intention was equally
employed to sanctify the plainest violations of the divine law.
Casuistry, it is true, has generally ** vibrated betwixt the ex-
tremes of impracticable severity and contemptible indul-
gence;" but the charge against the Jesuits was, not that
they softened the rigours of ascetic virtue, but that they pro-
pagated principles which sapped the foundation of all moral
obligation. "They are a people," said Boileau, **who
lengthen the creed and shorten the decalogue."

Such was the community with which the Bishop of Ypres

AUOUSTINirS. XX?

ventured to combat. Already had he incurred their re-
sentment by opposing their interests in some political nego-
tiations; and by publishing his **Mars Gallicus," he had
mortally offended their patron, Cardinal Richelieu; but,
strange to say, his deadly sin against the Society was a post-
humous work. Jansen was cut off by the plague, May 8,
1638. Shortly after his decease, his celebrated work, en-
titled ** Augustinus,'' was published by his friends Fromond
and Galen, to whom he had committed it on his death-bed.
To the preparation of this work he may be said to have de«
voted his life. It occupied him twenty-two years, during
which, we are told, he had ten times read through the works
of Augustine (ten volumes folio I), and thirty times collated
those passages which related to Pelagianism.* The book
itself, as the title imports, was little more than a digest of
the writings of Augustine on the subject of grace.t It was
divided into three parts ; the first being a refutation of Pe-
lagianism, the second demonstrating the spiritual disease of
man, and the third exhibiting the remedy provided. The
sincerity of Jansen's love to truth is beyond question, though
we may be permitted to question the form in which it was
evinced. The radical defect of the work is, that instead of
resorting to the living fountain of inspiration, he confined
himself to the cistern of tradition. Enamoured with the
excellencies of Augustine, he adopted even his inconsistencies.
With the former he chaUenged the Jesuits; with the latter
he warded off the charge of heresy. As a controvsrtbt, he
is chargeable with prejudice rather than dishonesty. As a
reformer, ho wanted the independence of mind necessary to
success. Instead of standing boldly forward on the ground
of Scripture, he attempted, with more prudence than wisdom,
to shelter himself behind the venerable name of Augustin«.
If by thus preferring the shield of tradition to the sword

* Lancelot, Tour to Alet» p. 173 ; Leydecker, p. 122.

t The whole title waa: "Angnstiniu Gomelii Janaenli epiacopi, seu doc«
trioa sancti Angustiiu de hnmaiud natune sanitate ogritadinsB medica, ad-
Venus Felagianoa et Hassiliensea." Louvain, 1640.

ly

ZZVl HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.

of the Spirit, Jansen expected to out-manoeuvre the Jesuits^
he had mistaken his policy. " Augustinus/' though pro*
fessedly written to revive the doctrine of Augustine, was
felt hy the Society as, in reality, an attack upon them, under
the name of Pelagians. To conscious delinquency, the lan-
guage of implied censure is often more galling than formal
impeachment. Jansen's portrait of Augustine was hut too
faithfully executed ; and the disciples of Loyola could not
^fail to see how far they had departed from the fidth of the
ancient Church; hut the discovery only served to incense
them at the man who had exhibited their defection before
the world. The approbation which the hook received from
forty learned doctors, and the rapture with which it was wel-
comed by the friends of the author, only added to their exas-
peration. The whole efforts of the Society were summoned
to defeat its influence. Balked by the hand of death of their
revenge on the person of the author, they vented it on hb
remains. By a decree of the Pope, procured through their
instigation, a splendid monument, which had been erected
over the grave of the learned and much-loved bishop, was
completely demolished, so that, in the words of his Holiness,
"the memory of Jansen might perish from the earth." It is
even siud that his body was torn from its resting-place, and
thrown into some unknown receptacle.* His literary remains
were no less severely handled. Nicholas Oornet, a member
of the Society, after incredible pains, extracted the heretical
poison of *< Augustinus/' in the form of seven propositions,
which were afterwards reduced to five. These having been
submitted to the judgment of Innocent X., were condemned
by that pontiff in a bull dated 31st May 1653. This ded-
sion, so far from restoring peace, awakened a new contro-
versy. The Jansenists, as the admirers of Jansen now began
to be named by their opponents, while they professed acqui-
escence in the judgment of the pope, denied that these pro-
positions were to be found in ** Augustinus." The succeeds

* Leydecker, p. 182; Lanceloty p. ISQi *

THE FIVE PEOPOaiTIONS. ZZVll

ing pope, Alexander VII., who was still more favourable to
the Jesuits, declared formaUy, in a bull dated 1657, ** that the
^Ye propositions were certainly taken from the book of Jan-
senius, and had been condemned in the sense of that author."
But the Jansenists were ready to meet him on this point ;
they replied, that a decision of this kind overstepped the
limits of papal authority, and that the pope's infetUibility did
not extend to a judgment of facts.*

The reader may be curious to know something more about
these famous five propositions, which, in fact, may be said
to have given rise to the Provincial Letters. They were as
follows : —

1. There are divine precepts which good men, though
willing, are absolutely unable to obey.

2. No person, in this corrupt state of nature^ can resist
the influence of divine grace.

3. In order to render human actions meritorious, or other-
wise, it is not requisite that they be exempt from necessity,
but only free from constraint.

4. The semi-Pelagian heresy consisted in allowing the
human will to be endued with a power of resisting grace, or
of complying with its influence.

5. Whoever says that Christ died or shed his Uood for
all mankind is a semi-Pelagian.

The Jansenists, in their subsequent disputes on these pro-
positions, contended that they were ambiguously expressed,
and that they might be understood in three different senses
•»a Galvinistic, a Pelagian, and a Catholic or Augustinian
sense. In the first two senses they disclaimed them : in the
last they approved and defended them. Owing to the extreme
aversion of the party to Calvinism, while they substantially
held the same system under the name of Augustinianism,
it becomes extremely difficult to convey an intelligible
idea of their theological views. On the first proposition,
for example, while they disclaimed what they term the Cal-

* Eaake^ Hist of the Popes, yoL iii. 143; Abbe Ba Mas, HisL des Oinq Pro-
position^ p. 48.

XXViii HISTORICAL UiTKODUCTION.

vinistic sense, — ^namely, that the best of men are liable to
sin in all that they do, — ^they equally disclaim the Pelagian
sentiment, that all men have a general sufficient grace, at all
times, for the discharge of duty, subject to free will; and
they strenuously maintained that, without efficacious grace,
constantly vouchsafed, we can do nothing spiritually good.
In regard to the resistibility of grace, they seem to have
held that the will of man might always resist the influence
of grace, if it chose to do so ; but that grace would effec-
tually prevent it from ever so choosing. And with respect
to redemption, they appear to have compromised the matter,
by holding that Christ died for all, so as that all might be
partakers of the grace of justification by the merits of his
death; but they denied that Christ died for each man in
particular, so as to secure his final salvation ; in this sense,
he died for the elect only.

Were this the proper place, it would be easy to show that,
in the leading points of his theology, Jansen did not differ
from Calvin so much as he misunderstood Calvinism. The
Calvinists, for example, never held, as they are represented
in the Provincial Letters,* " that we have not the power of
resisting grace." So far from this, they held that fallen
man could not but resist the grace of God. They preferred,
therefore, the term "invincible," as applied to grace. In
short, they held exactly the victrix delectatio of Augustine,
by which the will of man is sweetly but effectually inclined
to comply with the will of God.t On the subject of neces-
sity and constraint, their views were precisely similar. Nor
can they be considered as differing essentially in their views
of the death of Christ, as these, at least, are given by Jansen,
who acknowledges in his *' Augustinus," that, ** according to
8t Augustine, Jesus Christ did not die for all mankind."
It is certain that neither Augustine nor Jansen would have
uubscribed the views of grace and redemption held by many

• Letter xyiU.

t Witaii (Econom. FoecL, lib. iii.; Turret. TheoL, Elenct. xv. quest. 4; De
Moor Comment iy., ^6; Mestrezat, ^%niL sur Rom., yiU. 274.

ST CTBAN. XXIX

who, in our day, profess eyangelical sentiments. Making
allowance for the different position of the parties, it is very
plain that the dispute between Augustine and Pelagius, Jan-
sen and Molina, Calvin and Arminius, was substantially one
and the same. At the same time, it must be granted that,
on the great point of justification by futh, Jansen went
widely astray from the truth ; and in the subsequent contro-
versial writings of the party, especially when arguing against
the Protestants, this departure became still more strongly
marked, and more deplorably manifested.*

The revenge of the Jesuits did not stop at procuring the
condemnation of Jansen's book ; it aimed at his living fol-
lowers. Among these, none was more conspicuous for virtue
and influence than the Abb6 de St Cyran, who was known
to have shared his counsels, and even aided in the prepar-
ation of his obnoxious work. While Jansen laboured to
restore the theoretical doctrines of Augustine, St Cyran
was ambitious to reduce them to practice. In pursuance of
the moral system of that father, he taught the renunciation
of the world, and the entire devotement of the soul to the
love of €tod. His religious fervour led him into some extra-
vagances. He is said to have laid some claim to a species
of inspiration, and to have anticipated for the Son of God
some kind of temporal dominion, in which the saints alone
would be entitled to the wealth and dignities of the world.t
But his piety appears to have been sincere, and, what is
more surprising, his love to the Scriptures was such that he
not only lived in the daily study of them himself, but ear-
nestly enforced it on all his dbciples. He recommended
them to study the Scriptures on their knees. ** No means
of conversion," he would say, ^ can be more apostolic than

* I refer here partieolarlj to Aroanl^ treatise, entitled, "Benyersement
de la Morale de Jesna Cbrist par lee CalTiniates," which was answered bj
Jorieu in his "Justification de la Morale des Beformez,** 1685, by M. Merlat,
and others. Jnrien has shown at great length, and with a sereri^ for wliich
he had too mnch provocation, that Amaold and his firiends, in their violent
tirades against the Beformed, neither acted in good faith, nor in consistency
with the sentiments of their mnch-admired leaders, Angostine and Jansen.

* Fentaine^ Memoires,!. 200; Mosheim, £ccl. Hist, cent, xvii 2.

O

XXX mSTOBICAL INTRODUCTION.

the Word of God. Every word in Scripture deserves to be
weighed more attentively than gold. The Soriptures were
penned by a direct ray of the Holy Spirit ; the fathers only
by a reflex ray emanating therefrom." His whole character
and appearance corresponded with his doctrine. " His simple,
mortified air, and his hamble garb, formed a striking con-
trast with the awful sanctity of his countenance, and his
native lofly dignity of manner." * Possessing that force of
character by which men of strong minds silently but surely
govern others, his proselytes soon increased, and he became
the nucleus of a new class of reformers.

St Cyran was soon called to preside over the renowned
monastery of Port-Royal. Two houses went under this
name, though forming one abbey. One of these was called
Port-Royal des Champs, and was situated in a gloomy forest,
about six leagues from Paris ; but this having been found
an unhealthy situation, the nuns were removed for some time
to another house in Paris, which went under the name of
Port-Royal de Paris. The abbey of Port-Royal was one of
the most ancient belonging to the order of Oiteaux, having
been founded by Eudes de Sully, bishop of Paris, in 1204.
It was placed originally under the rigorous discipline of St
Benedict, but in course of time fell, like most other monas-
teries, into a state of great rexalation. In 1602, a new abbess
was appointed in the person of Maria Angelica Arnauld,
sister of the famous Arnauld, then a mere child, scarcely
eleven years old I The nuns, promising themselves a long
period of unbounded liberty, rejoiced at this appointment.
But their joy was not of long duration. The young abbess,
at first, indeed, thought of nothing but amusement ; but at
the age of seventeen a change came over her spirit. A cer-
tain Capuchin, wearied, it is said, or more probably disgusted,
with the monastic life, had been requested by the nuns, who
were not aware of his character, to preach before them.
The preacher, equally ignorant of his audience, and suppos-
ing them to be eminently pious ladies, delivered an affecting

* Lancelot, p. 123.

PORT-BOTAL — ^MERE aNGELIQUE. ZZxi

discourse, pitched on the loftiest key of devotion, which left
an impression on the mind of Angelica never to be effaced.
She set herself to reform her establishment, and carried it
into effect with a determination and self-denial far beyond
her years. This "reformation," so highly lauded by her
panegyrists, consisted chiefly in restoring the austere discip-
line of St Benedict, and other severities practbed in the
earlier ages, the details of which would be neither edifying
nor agreeable. The substitution of coarse serge in place of
linen as under-clothing, and indulging, as an occasional re-
laxation, in dropping melted wax on the bare arms, may be
taken as specimens of the reformation introduced by Mere
Angelique. In these mortifying exercises the abbess showed
an example to all the rest of the sisterhood. She chose as
her dormitory tho filthiest cell in the convent, a place in-
fested with toads and vermin, in which she found the high-
est delight, declaring that, while in this wretched abode,
she ** seemed transported to the grotto of Bethlehem." The
same rigid denial of pleasure was extended to her food, her
dress, her whole occupations. Clothed herself in the rudest
dress she could procure, nothing gave her greater offence
than to observe in her nuns any approach to the fashions
of the world, even in the adjustment of the coarse black
serge, vnth the scarlet cross, which formed their humble
appareL* Tet, in the midst of all this " voluntary humility/'
.her heart seems to have been mainly directed to the Savionr.
It was Jesus Christ whom she aimed at adoring in the wor-
ship she paid to ** the sacrament of the ahar." And io a
book of devotion, composed or adopted by her for private
ose^ she gave expression to sentimaits sarooring too modi
of undivided affection to the Savioitr, to escape the ceniitre
of the CbundL It was dragged to li^^ and condemned at
Bome.t There is reason to bdiev e that, under the direc-

* UmuibtBfcnr mxrir tkTEiMagie deTofUlUfftlt'WiA. U pp, 2$, l^,U^
t Ibu,pw49&Ilietifle of this piece iTM, " the Beeni oi^ &t ftf UOf

fiMnBBcnt.* U iMtiaewhentaegfbed to her ftma§ett^klUir,Jkp»m4»fMiti

FwaL See PtoT. Letteo^ Let XTt

xxxii HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.

tion of M. de St Gyran, her religious sentiments, as well as
those of her community, became much more enlightened.
Her firmness in resisting subscription to the formulary con-
demning Jansen, in spite of the most cruel and unmanly
persecution, and the exalted piety and humble faith she
manifested on her death-bed, when, in the midst of exquisite
suffering, and in the absence of the last rites of her religion,.
which her persecutors denied her, she expired in the full
assurance of salvation through the merits of the only Re-
deemer, form one of the most interesting episodes in the
martyrology of the Church.

But St Cyran aimed at higher objects than the manage*
ment of a nunnery. His energetic mind planned a system
of education^ in which, along with the elements of learning,,
the youth might be imbued with early piety. Attracted by
his fame, several learned men, some of them of rank and for-
tune, fled to enjoy at Port-Boyal des Champs a sacred re-
treat from the world. This community, which differed from
a monastery in not being bound by any vows, settled in a
farm adjoining the convent, called Les Granges. The
names of Arnauld, D'Andilly, Nicole, Le Maitre, Sacy,*
Fontaine, Pascal, and others, have conferred immortality on
the spot. The system pursued in this literary hermitage
was, in many respects, deserving of praise. The time of the
recluses was divided between devotional and literary pur.
suits, relieved by agricultural and mechanical labours. The
Scriptures, and other books of devotion^ were translated
into the vernacular language ; und the result was, the sin-
gular anomaly of a Roman Catholic community distinguished
for the devout and diligent study of the Bible. Protestants
they certainly were not, either in spirit or in practice. Firm
believers in the infallibility of their church, and fond devo-
tees in the observance of her rites, they held it a point of
merit to yield a blind obedience in matters of faith to the

* Sacy, or Saci, was the inverted name of Isaac Le Maitre, celebrated for
bis translation of the Bible.

POBT-BOTAL— ITS DEVOTION. xxxiii

dogmas of Rome. None were more hostile to Protestantism.
'St Oyran, it is said, would never open a Protestant book,
«ven for the purpose of refuting it, without first making the
sign of the cross on it, to exorcise the evil spirit which he
believed to lurk within its pages.* From no community did
there emanate more learned apologies for Bome than from
Port-Boyal. Still, it must be owned, that in attachment to
the doctrines of grace, so far as they went, and in the ezhi*
bition of the Christian virtues, attested by their sufferings,
lives, and writings, the Port-Boyalists^ including under this
name both the nuns and recluses, greaily surpassed many
Protestant communities. Their piety, indeed, partook of
the failings which have always characterized the religion of
the cloister. It seems to have hovered between superstition
And mysticism. Afraid to fight against the worlds they fled
from it ; and, forgetting that our Saviour was driven into
the wilderness to be tempted of the devil, they retired to a
wilderness to avoid temptation. Half conscious of the hol-
lowness of the ceremonial they practised, they sought to
graft on its dead stock the vitalities of the Christian faith.
In their hands, penance was sublimated into the symbol of
penitential sorrow, and the mass into a spiritual service, the
benefit of which depended on the preparation of the heart of
the worshipper. In their eyes, the priest was but a sugges-
tive emblem of the Saviour ; and to them the altar, with its
crucifix and bleeding image, served only as a platform on
which they might obtain a more advantageous view of Cal-
vary. Transferring to the Church of Rome the attributes
of the Church of God, and regarding her, in spite of her
eclipse and disfigurement, as of one spirit, and even of one
body, \nth Christ, infallible and immortal, they worshipped
the fond creation of their own fancy. At the same time,
they attempted to revive the doctrine of religious i a

And penitential suicide, the anecmtissement, or absor] a of
the soul in Deity, and the total renunciation of every tl
in the shape of sensual enjoyment, which afterwai i *■
* Moshelm, EccL Hist, cent xviL 2 2.

XXxiv HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.

tinguished the mystics of the Continent. Even in their lite-
rary recreations, while they acquired an elegance of style
which marked a new era in the literature of France, they
betrayed thdr ascetic spirit. Poetry was only admissible
when clothed in a devotional garb. It was by stealth that
Bacine, who studied at Port-Royal, indulged his poetic vein
in those dramatic pieces which afterwards gave him cele-
brity. And yet it is but fair to admit, that the mortifica-
tions in which this amiable fraternity engaged consisted ra-
ther in denying themselves the pleasures of sense than in the
self-infliction of bodily torments, and that the object aimed
at in these austerities was not so much to merit heaven as to
attain a sort of ideal perfection on earth. Port-Royalism»
in shorty was Popery in its mildest type, as Jesuitism is Po-
pery in its perfection ; and, had it been possible to present
that system in a form calculated to disarm prejudice and to
veil its native deformities, the task might have been achieved
by the pious devotees of Les Granges. But the same mer-
ciful Providence which, for the preservation of the human
Rpecies, has furnished the snake with his rattle, and taught
the lion to ** roar for his prey,** has so ordered it that the
Romish Church should betray her real character, as " the
Beast" and the "Babylon" of prophecy, that his people
might " come out of her, and not be partakers of her sins,
that they receive not of her plagues." The whole system
adopted at Port-Royal was regarded from the commence-
ment with extreme jealousy by the authorities of that
Church ; its famous schools were soon suppressed ; its ve-
nerable recluses were dismissed ; its pious nuns were scat-
tered in all directions, and subjected to the most barbarous
usage ; and the Jesuits never rested till they had destroyed
every vestige of the obnoxious establishment.

The enemies of Port-Royal have attempted to show that
St Cyran and his associates had formed a deep-laid plot for
overturning the Roman Catholic faith. From time to time,,
down to the present day, works have appeared, under the
auspices of the Jesuits, in which this charge is reiterated^

PORT-BOTAL— ^S EZfEinSS. XXXT

and the old calumnies against the sect are revived—a perio-
dical trampling on the ashes of the poor Jansenists (af%«r
having accomplished their ruin two hundred years ago),
which reminds one of nothing so much as the significant
grinning and yelling with which the modem Jews cele-
brate to this day the downfal of Haman the Agagite.* In
one point only could their assailants find room to question
their orthodoxy — the supremacy of the Pope — ^in regard to
which, certainly, they were led, more from circumstances^
than from inclination, to lean to the side of the Galilean '
liberties ; and the distinction between faUh and foGt — in
regard to the former of which they held the Pope to be
absolute^ while in regard to the other he might be deceived.
But more obedient sons of <' Holy Mother Church " could
hardly be found. Even Jansen himself, after spending a
lifetime on his *^ Augustinus," and leaving it behind him as a
sacred legacy, abandoned himself and his treatise to the
judgment of the Pope. The following are his words, dio*
tated by himself half>an-hour before his death : *< I feel that
it will be difficult to alter any thing. Yet if the Romish See
should wish any thing to be altered, I am her obedient son ;
and to that Church in which I have always lived, even to
tUs bed of death, I will prove obedient. This is my last will.''
The same sentiment is expressed by Pascal, in one of the
letter8.t Alas, bow sad is the predicament into which
the Church of Rome brings her conscientious votaries I Both
of these excellent men were as firmly persuaded, no doubt, of
the truths which they taught, as of the facts which came
under their observation; and yet they held themselves
bound to cast their religious convictions at the feet of a fel-
low-mortal, notoriously under the influence of the Jesuits,
and professed themselves ready, at a signal from Rome, to

* We may refer partienHtrly to Petitot, in his OoUectkn des Memoires,
tfl tn, zxxiiL, Pftrifly 1821 ; and to a " History of the Company of Jesas," by J.
OretineaiKJoIy, Paris, 1846. With high pretensions to impartiality, these
works abound with the moet glaring specimens of special pleading and party
abuse.

t Letter sviL

ZZXVl HISTOBIOAL XNTBOBUOTION.

renounce what they held as divine truth, and to embrace
what they regarded as damnable error ! A more piteous
spectacle can hardly be imagined than that of such men
struggling between the dictates ni conscience, and the night-
mare of that " strong delusion '* which led them to ^ believe
a lie."

In every feature that distinguished the Port-Boyalists,
they stood opposed to the Jesuits. In theology they were
antipodes — ^in learning they were rivals. The schools of
Port-Boyal already eclipsed those of the Jesuits, whose policy
it has always been to monopolize education, under the pre-
text of charity. But the Jansenists might have been allowed
to retam their peculiar tenets, had they not touched the idol
of every Jesuit, ^ the glory of the Society/' by supplanting
them in the confessional. The priests connected with Port-
Boyal, from their primitive nmplicity of manners and seve-
rity of morals, and, above all, from their spiritual Christianity,
acquired a popularity which could not fail to give mortal
offence to the Society, who then ruled the councils both of
the Church and the nation. Nothing less than the annihila-
tion of the whole party would satisfy their vengeful purpose.
In this nefarious design they were powerfully aided by Car-
dinal Bichelieu, and by Louis 2HV., a prince who, though
yet a mere youth, was entirely under Jesuitical influence in
matters of religion ; and who, having resolved to extirpate
Protestantism, could not well endure the existence of a sect
within the Church which seemed to favour the Beformation
by exposing the corruptions of the clergy.*

To effect their object, St Cyran, the leader and ornament
of the party, required to be put out of the way. He was ac-
cused of various articles of heresy ; and Cardinal Bichelieu
at once gratified his party-resentment and saved himself the
trouble of controversy, by immuring him in the dungeon of
Vincennes. In this prison St Cyran languished for five
years, and survived his release only a few months, having
died in October 1643. His place, however, as leader of the
• Voltaire, Siecle de Louis XTV., t ii.

ANTHOirr ABNAULD. ZXXVU

«

Jansenist party, was supplied by one destined to annoy the
Jesuits by bis controversial talents fully more than hb pre-
decessor bad done by bis apostolic sanctity. Anthony Ar-
nauld may be said to have been born an enemy to the Jesuits.
His father, a celebrated lawyer, bad distinguished himself
for his opposition to the Society, having engaged in an im-
portant law-suit against them, in which he warmly pleaded,
in the name of the university, that they should be interdicted
from the education of youth, and even expelled from the
kingdom. Anthony,'who inherited bis spirit, was the young-
est in a family of twenty children, and was bom February
6, 1612.* Several of them were connected with Port-Royal.
His sister, as we have seen, became its abbess; and five
other sisters were nuns in that establishment. He is said to
have g^ven precocious proofs of his polemic turn. Busying
himself, when a mere boy, with some papers in bis uncle's
library, and b^g asked what be was about, he replied,
«< Don't you »ee that I am helping you to refute the Hugo-
nets?" This prognostication he certainly verified in after
life. He wrote, with almost equal vehemence, against Borne,
against the Jesuits, and against the Protestants. He was,
for many years, the facile prineeps of the party termed Jan-
senists ; and was one of those characters who present to the
public an aspect nearly the reverse of the estimate formed of
them by their private friends. By the latter he is repre-
sented as the best of men, totally free from pride and pas-
son. Judging from his physiognomy, his writings, and his
life^ we should say the natural temper of Amauld was austere
and indonutable. Expelled from the Sorbonne, driven out
of France, and hunted from place to jdaoe, he continued to
fight to the last. On one occaaon, wishing his friend Nicole
to assist him in a new work, the latter observed, ^ We are
now old, is it not time to rest?'' *< Best 1" exclaimed Ar-
nanld, ** have we not all eternity to rest in ? '^

Such was the character of the man who now entered the

• Mcmoircs de P. BoTBl, L ISL Bkyle insiste that hif tether had tvcaty4wo
diOdroi. Diet, art. .AnuwU.

ZXZVm mSTOBIOAL INTRODUCTIO::^ .

lists against the reboubtable Society. Ilis first offence was
the publication, in 1643, of a book on *<Freqaent Com-
munion;" in which, while he inculcated the necessity of a
spiritual preparation for the eucharist, he insinuated that the
Church of Borne had a twofold head, in the persons of Peter
and Paul.* His next was in the shape of two letters, pub-
lished in 1656, occasioned by a dispute referred to in the first
Proyincial Letter, in which he declared that he had not been
able to find the condemned propositions in Jansen, and added
some opinions on gr&ce. The first of these assertions was
deemed derogatory to the holy see ; the second was charged
with heresy. The Jesuits, who sighed for an opportunity of
humbling the obnoxious doctor, strained every nerve to pro«
cure his expulsion from the Sorbonne, or college of divinity
in the university. This object they had just accomplished,
and every thing promised fair to secure their triumph, when
another combatant unexpectedly appeared, like one of those
closely- visored knights of whom we read in romance^ who so
opportunely enter the field at the critical moment, and with
their single arm turn the tide of battle. Need we say that
we allude to the author of the Proyinoial Letters ?

Bayle commences his Life of Pascal by declaring him to
be ** one of the sublimest geniuses that the world ever pro-
duced.'' Seldom, at least, has the world ever seen such a
combination of excellencies in one man. In him we are
called to admire the loftiest attributes of mind with the love-
liest simplicity of moral character. He is a rare example of
one bom with a natural genius for the exact sciences, who
applied the subtlety of his mind to religious subjects, com-
bining with the closest logic the utmost elegance of style,
and crowning all with a simple and profound piety. Blidse
Pascal was born at Clermont, 19th June 1623. His family
had been ennobled by Louis XI., and his father, Stephen Pas-
cal, occupied a high post in the civil government. Blaise
manifested from an early age a strong liking for the study of
mathematics, and, while yet a child, made some astonishing

« Weisman, Hist. Eccl., ii. 204.

PASCAL. XXXllC

discoveries in natural philosophy. To these studies he de-
voted the greater part of his life. An incident, however,
which occurred in his thirty- first year — a narrow escape from
sudden death — had the effect of giving an entire change ta
the current of his thoughts. He regarded it as a message
from heaven, calling him to renounce all secular occupations,
and devote himself exclusively to God. His sister and niec&
being nuns in Port-Boyal, he was naturally led to associate
with those who then began to be called Jansenists. But
though he had read several of the writings of the party,
there can be no doubt that it was the devotion rather than
the divinity of Port-Boyal that constituted its charm in the
eyes of Pascal. His sister informs us, in her memoirs of
him, that ''he had never applied himself to abstruse questions
in theology." Nor, beyond a temporary retreat to Port-
Royal des Champs, and an intimacy with its leading solitaries,
can he be said to have had any connection with that esta-
blishment. With a fragile irame, the victim of complicated
disease^ and a delicacy of spirit almost feminine, unfitting
him for the rough collisions of ordinary life, he found a con-
genial retreat amidst these literary solitudes ; while, with hi»
clear and comprehensive mind, and his genuine piety of
hearty he could not fail to sympathize with those who sought
to remove from the Church corruptions which he sincerely
deplored, and to renovate the spirit of that Christianity which
he loved far above any of its organized forms. His life, not
unlike a perpetual miracle, is ever exciting our admiration,
not omningled, however, with pity. We see great talents
enlisted in the support, not indeed of the errors of a system,
bnt of a system of errors— we see a noble mind debilitated
by superstition— we see a useful life prematurely terminating
in, if not shortened by, the petty austerities and solicitudes of
monastidsm. Truth requires us to state, that he not only
denied himself, at last, the most common comforts of life, but
wore beneath his clothes a girdle of iron, with sharp points,
which, as soon as he felt any pleasurable sensation, he would
strike with his elbow, so as to force the iron points more

xl HISTORIOAL introduction:

deeply into his sides. Let the Church, which taught him
such folly, he responsihle for it; and let us ascribe to the
gprace of God the patience, the meekness, the charity, and the
faith, which hovered, seraph-like, over the death-bed of ex-
piring genius. The curate who attended him, struck with
the triumph of religion over the pride of an intellect which
continued to burn after it had ceased to blaze, would fre«
quently exclium : ^' He is an infant I — humble and submissive
as an infant ! ** He died on the 19th of August 1662, aged
thirty-nine years and two months.

While Arnauld's process before the Sorbonne was in de-
pendence, a few of his friends, among whom were Pascal and
Nicole, were in the habit of meeting privately at Port-Boyal,
to consult on the measures they should adopt. During these
conferences one of their number said to Arnauld: ''Will
you really suffer yourself to be condemned like a child, with-
out saying a word, or telling the world the real state of the
question/'* The rest concurred; and in compliance with
their solicitations, Arnauld, after some days, produced and
read before them a long and serious vindication of himself.
His audience listened in cold silence, upon which he remarked :
^ I see you don't think highly of my production, and I believe
you are right ; but," added he, turning himself round and
Addressing Pascal, '' you who are young, why cannot ^ou
produce something?" The appeal was not lost upon our
author ; he had hitherto written almost nothing, but he pro-
mised to attempt a sketch or rough draft, which they might
fill up; and retiring to his room, he produced, in a few hours,
instead of a sketch, the first Letter to a Provincial. On his
reading this to the assembled friends, Arnauld exclaimed,
''That is excellent! that will go down; we must have it
printed immediately."

Pascal had, in fact, with the native superiority of genius,
pitched on the very key which, in a controversy of this kind,
was calculated to arrest the public mind. Treating theology
in a style entirely new, he brought down the subject to the
^comprehension of all« and translated into the pleasantries of

ANECDOTES OF THB FBOVINOIALS. zli

comedy, and familiarities of dialogue, discussions which had '
till then been confined to the grare utterances of the school.
The framework which he adopted in his first letter was ex-
ceedingly happy. A Parisian is supposed to transmit to one
of his friends in the provinces an account of the disputes of
the day. It is said that the provincial with whom he affected
to correspond was Perrier, who had married one of his sisters.
Hence arose the name of the Prowndals^ which was given
to the rest of the letters.

This title they owe, however, to a mistake of the printer ;
for in an advertisement prefixed to one of the early editions,
it is stated that ^ they have been called * Provincials,' because
the first having been addressed without any name to a person
in the country, the printer published it under the title ' Let-
ter written to a Provincial by one of his Friends.' " This-
may be regarded as an apology for the use of a term which,,
critically speaking, was rather unhappy. The word pro^
virunal in Frenchl when used to signify a person residing in
the provinces, was generally understood in a bad sense, as
denoting an unpolished clown.* But the title, uncouth as it
is, has been canonized and made classical for ever ; and ^ The
Provincials" is a phrase which it would now be fully as ri-
diculous to attempt to alter, as it could be at first to apply
it to the Letters.

The most trifling particulars connected with such a pub-
lication must prove interesting. The Letters, we learn, were
published at first in separate stitched sheets of a quarto size ;
and, on account of their brevity, none of them extending to
more than one sheet of eight pages, except the last three,
which were somewhat longer, they were at first knovm by
the name of the ^ Little Lettebs." No stated time waa
observed in their publication. The first letter appeared

* Father Bonhonn^ a Jesuit, ridicules the title of the Letters, and says
he it surprised they were not rather entitled " Letters from a Ciountiy Bump<
kin to his Friends," and instead of "Les Proyindales," called "Les Cam-
poifnardet—Tha Bumpkins.'' (Bemaxques sur la langue Fran., p. IL ao&
Did Univ., art ProvinddL)

Xlli HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.

January 13, 1656, being on a Wednesday ; the second on
January 29, being Saturday; and the rest were issued at
intervals varying from a week to a month, till March 24,
1657, which is the date of the last letter of the series; the
whole thus extending over the space of a year and three
months.*

All accounts agree in stating that the impression produced
by the Provincials, on their first appearance, was quite un-
exampled. They were circulated in thousands in Paris and
throughout France. Speaking of the first letter. Fattier
Daniel says : '* It created a fracas which filled the fathers of
the Society with consternation. Never did the post-office
reap greater profits ; copies were despatched over the whole
kingdom ; and I myself, though very little known to the
gentlemen of Port-Royal, received a large packet of them,
post-paid, in a town of Brittany where I was then residing.''
The same method was followed with the rest of the letters.
The seventh found its way to Cardinal Mazarin, who laughed
over it very heartily. The dghth did not appear till a month
after its predecessor, apparently to keep up expectation.t In
short, everybody read the '* Little Letters," and, whatever
might be their opinions on the points in dispute, all agreed
in admiring the genius which they displayed. They were
found lying on the merchant's counter, the lawyer's desk, the
doctor's taJ)le, and the lady's toilet ; every where they were
sought for and perused with the same avidity.^ The success
of the Letters in gidning their object was not less extra-
ordinary. The Jesuits were fairly checkmated; and though
they succeeded in carrying through the censure of Arnauld,
public sympathy was enlbted in his favour. The confes-
uonals and churches of the Jesmts were deserted, while those
of their opponents were crowded with admiring thousands. §

* The title under which the Letten appeared when first collected into a
volmne, was, "ZeOra icritetpar Louit de MontaUef h un Provineidl de tet
amis, et aux BB. PP. Jetuites, 8w la nwrdU et la poUHque de on Pint."

t Daniel, Entretiens, p. 19. { Petitot, Notioei^p. 12L

I Benoit» Hist de I'Edit de Nantei^ iU. 198.

ANECDOTES OF THE PROYINGIALS. xlii!

^ That book alone," says one of its bitterest opponents, ''has
done more for the Jansenists than the 'Aug^ustinns' of Jansen,
and all the works of Amanld put together."* This is the
more surprising when we consider that, at that time, the
influence of the Jesuits was so high in the ascendant, that
Amauld had to contend with the pope, the king, the chan-
cellor, the clergy, the Sorbonne, the universities, and the
great body of the populace; and that never was Jansenism
at a lower ebb or more generally anathematized than when
the first Provincial Letter appeiu*ed.

This, however, was not all. Besides having the tide of
public favour turned against them, the Jesuits found them-
selves the objects of universal derision. The names of their
favourite casuists were converted into proverbs : Eacobarder
came to signify the same thing with ** paltering in a double
sense;" Father Bauny's grotesque maxims furnished topics
for perpetual badinage ; and the Jesuits, wherever they went,
were assailed with inextinguishable laughter. By no other
method could Pascal have so severely stung this proud and
self-sufficient Society. The rage into which they were thrown
was extreme, and was variously expressed. At one time it
found vent in calumnies and threats of vengeance. At other
times they indulged in puerile lamentations. It was amus*
ing to hear these stalwart divines, after breathing fire and
slaughter against their enemies, assume the querulous tones
of injured and oppressed innocence. ** The persecution which
the Jesuits suffer from the buffooneries of Port-Boyal," they
said, ^'is perfectly intcderable: the wheel and the gibbet are
nothing to it; it can only be compared to the torture in-
flicted on the ancient martyrs, who were first rubbed over
with honey and then left to be stung to death by wasps and
wild bees. Their tyrants have subjected them to empoisoned
raillery, and the world leaves them unpitied to suffer a sweet
death, more cruel in its sweetness thui the bitterest punish-
ment-^

« Daniel, Bntretieni^ p. 11.

t Mioota^NotwrarUzLLettre^iiLSaa.

xliy mSTOBIOAL INTRODUCTION.

The Letters were published anonymously, under the ficti-
tious signature of Louis de Montalte, and the greatest care
was taken to preserve the secret of their authorship. As is
common on all such occasions, many were the guesses made,,
and the false reports circulated ; but beyond the oirde of
Pascal's personal friends, none knew him to be the writer,
nor was the fact certainly or publicly known till after his
death. The following anecdote shows, however, that he was
suspected, and was once very nearly discovered : After pub-
lishing the third letter, Pascal left Port-Royal des Champs,
to avoid being disturbed, and took up his residence in Pans,
under the name of M. de Mons, in a hotel garni, at the sign.
of the King of Denmark, Rue des Poiriers, exactly opposite
the college of the Jesuits. Here he was joined by his bro-
ther-in-law, Perrier, who passed as the master of the house.
One day Perrier received a visit from his relative. Father
Fretat, a Jesuit, accompanied by a brother monk. Fretat
told him that the Society siispected M. Pascal to be the au-
thor of the ^' Little Letters,'' which were making such a
noise, and advised him as a friend to prevail on his brother-
in-law to desist from writing any more of them, as he might
otherwise involve himself in much trouble, and even danger.
Perrier thanked him for his advice, but said, he was afraid
it would be altogether useless, as Pascal would just reply
that he could not hinder people from suspecting him, and
that, though he should deny it, they would not believe him.
The monks took their departure, much to the relief of Per-
rier, for at that very time several sheets of the seventh or
eighth letter, newly come from the printer, were lying on the
bed, where they had been placed for the purpose of drying,
but, fortunately, though the curtains were only partially
drawn, and one of the monks sat very close to the bed, they
were not observed. Perrier ran immediately to communi-
cate the incident to his brother-in-law, who was in an ad-
joining apartment ; and he had reason to congratulate him
on the narrow escape which he had made.*

* BecneU de Fort-Eoyal, 278, 279 ; Petitot, pp. 122, 12S.

AITEODOTES OF THE PBOYINOULS. xIt

As Pascal proceeded, he transmitted his manuscripts to
Port-Royal des Champs, where they were carefully revised
and corrected hy Arnauld and Nicole. Occasionally, these
expert divines suggested the plans of the letters; and hy
them he was, beyond all doubt, furnished with most of his quo-
tations from the voluminous writings of the casuists, which,
with the exception of Escobar, he appears never to have
read. We must not suppose, however, that he took these
extracts on trust, or gave himself no trouble to verify them.
We shall afterwards have proof of the contrary. The first
letters he composed with the rapidity of new-bom enthusiasm ;
but the pains and mental exertion wMch he bestowed on the
rest are almost incredible. Nicole says, ''He was often
twenty whole days on a single letter ; and some of them he
recommenced seven or eight times before bringing them to
their present state of perfection.''* We are assured that he
wrote over the eighteenth letter no less than thirteen times, f
Having been obliged to hasten the publication of the six-
teenth, on account of a search made after it in the printing-
office, he apologises for its length on the ground that *' he
had no time to make it shorter.'' {

The fruits of this extraordinary elaboration appear in every
letter; but what is equally remarkable is the art with
which so many detached pieces, written at distant intervals, {
and prompted by passing events, have been so arranged as /
to form an harmonious whole. The first three letters refer ▼
to Amauld's affair ; the questions of grace are but slightly
touched, the main object being to interest the reader in fa-
vour of the Jansenists, and excite his contempt and indigna-
tion against their opponents. After this prelude, the fourth
letter serves as a transition to the following six, in which he

« HiBtoire des Provindalii^ p. 12.

t Fetitot, p. 124. The eighteenth letter embraces the delicate topic of
Papal authority, as well as the distinction between faiUh and fault, in stating
which we can easily conceive how sererely the ingenuous mind of Pascal must
haye laboured to find some plausible ground for rindicating his consistency
as a Boman Oatholio. To the Protestant reader it must appear the mo^t un-
satisfiMstory of all the Letters.

t Letter xtL

D

V

i

Zlvi HISTOUOAL INTBODUOTION.

/ takes up the maxims of the casuists. In the eight condud-
iDg letters he resumes the grand ohjects of the work — the
morals of the Jesuits and the question of grace. Each q£
these three parts has its peculiar style. The first is dis-
tinguished for lively dialogue and repartee. Jacobins, Je-
suits, and Jansenists are brought on the stage, and speak in
character, while Pascal does little more than act as reporter.
In the second part, he comes into personal contact with a
casuistical doctor, and extracts from him, under the pretext
of desiring information, some of the weakest and the worst
of his maxims. At the eleventh letter, Pascal throws off
his disguise, and addressing himself directly to the whole
order of the Jesuits, and to their Provincial by name, he
pours out his whole soul in an impetuous and impasaoned
torrent of declamation. From beginning to end it is a well-
sustained battle, in which the weapons are only changed in
order to strike the harder.

The literary merits of the Provincials have been universally
acknowledged and applauded. On this point, where Pas-
cal's countrymen must be considered the most competent
judges, we have the testimonies of the leading spirits of
France. Boileau pronounced it a work that has '* surpassed
at once the ancients and the modems.'' Perrault has g^ven
a similar judgment: *' There is more wit in these eight^n
letters than in Plato's Dialogues ; more delicate and artful
raillery than in those of Lucian; and more strength and
ingenuity of reasoning than in the orations of Cicero. We
have nothing more beautiful in this species of writing."*
" Pascal's styl^" says the Abbe d'Artigny, " has never been
surpassed, nor perhaps equalled."t The high encomium of
Voltaire is well known : " The Provincial Letters were mo-
dels of eloquence and pleasantry. The best comedies of
Moliere have not more wit in them than the first letters;
Bossuet has nothing more sublime than the concluding ones."
Again, the same writer says : <* The first work of genius

* Perrault, Farallele des Anc. et Mod., Bayle, art Ftuoal.
t D'Artigny, Noaveaux Memoires, iiL p. 34.

OHARAOTEB OF TBE PROVINCIALS. zlvii

that appeared in prose was the collection of the Provincial A
Letters. Examples of every species of eloquence may there
be found. There is not a single word in it which, after a
hundred years, has undergone the change to which all living
languages are subject. We may refer to this work the era
when our language became fixed. The Bishop of Lugon
told me, that having asked the Bishop of Meaux what work
he would wish most to have been the author of, setting his
own works aside, Bossuet instantly replied, * The Provincial
Letters.' "* " Pascal succeeded beyond all expression," says
D'Alembert ; *' several of his bon-mots have become prover-
bial in our language, and the Provincials virill be ever re-
garded as a model of taste and style." f To this day the
same high eulogiums have been pronounced on the work by
the first scholars of France. X

To these testimonies it would be superfluous to add any
criticism of our own, were it not to prepare the English
reader for the peculiar character of our author's style. Pas-
cal's wit is essentially French. It is not the broad humour
of Smollet ; it is not the cool irony of Swift ; far less is it
the envenomed sarcasm of Junius. It is wit — ^the lively,
polite, piquant wit of the early French school. Nothing 1/
can be finer than its spirit ; but from its very fineness, it '
is apt to evaporate in the act of transfusion into another
tongue. Nothing can be more ingenious than the transi-
tions by which the author glides insensibly from one topic
to another ; and in the more serious letters, we cannot fjul
to be struck with the mathematical precision of his reason-
ing. And yet there is a species of iteration, and a style of
dovetailing his sentiments, which does not quite accord with
our taste ; and the foreign texture of which, in spite of every
effort to the contrary, must shine through any translation.

• Yoltaiie, Siede de Louis XIV., tam. iL pp. 171, 274.

t D* Alembert, Destract des Jesaites, p. 64.

i BordaA-Demoiilin, Eloge de Pascal, p. zxv. (This was the prize essay
before the French Academy, in June 1842.) Yillemain's Essay on the Gen^sS
and Writings of FascaL

i

xlviii HISTORICAL INTRODUCTIOIT.

High as the Provincials stand in the literary world, they
were not suffered to pass without censure in the high places
of the Church. The first effect of their publication, indeed,
was to raise a storm against the casuists whom Pascal had
80 effectually exposed. The cures of Paris, and afterwards
the assembly of the clergy, shocked at the discovery of such
a sink of corruption, the existence of which, though just be»
neath their feet, they never appear to have suspected, deter-
mined to institute an examination into the subject. Hither-
to the tenets of the casuists, buried in huge folios, or only
taught in the colleges of the Jesuits, had escaped public ob-
servation. The clergy resolved to compare the quotations
of Pascal with these writings ; and the result of the investi-
gation was, that he was found to be perfectly correct, while
a multitude of other maxims, equally scandalous, were
dragged to light. These were condemned in a general as-
sembly of the clergy.* Unfortunately for the Jesuits* they
had not a single writer at the time capable of conducting
their vindication. Several replies to the Provincials were
attempted while they were in the course of publication ; but
these were taken up by the redoubtable Montalte, and fairly
strangled at their birth.t Shortly after the Letters were
finished, there appeared **An Apology for the Casuists," the
production of a Jesuit named Pirot, who, with a folly and
frankness which proved nearly as fatal to his cause as it did
to himself, attempted to vindicate the worst maxims of the
casuistical school. This Apology was condemned by the
Sorbonne, and subsequently at Rome; its author died of
chagrin, and the Jesuits fell into temporary disgrace.}

But, with that tenaciousness of life and elasticity of limb
which have ever distinguished the Society, it was not long

* Nicole, Hist des Provinciales.

t The names of these nnfortunate prodactions alone sorvlye : 1. "First
lieply to Letters^ Ac, by a Father of the Ciompany of Jesus." 2. "Provin-
clal ImpostoreB of Siear d» Montalte, Secretary of Port-Royal, discovered
and reftited by a Father of the Company of Jesus." 8. " Reply to a Theo-
logian," Ac. 4. " Reply to the Seventeenth Letter, by Francis Annat," Ac, &a

t Eichhom, Oeschichte der Litteratur, vol. 1 pp. 420-423.

PAPAL CONDEMNATION OF THE PROTINOIALS. zlix

before they rebounded from their fall and regained their
feet. Unable to answer the Letters, they succeeded, in Feb- i
ruary 1657, in obtaining their condemnation by the Parlia- ^
ment of Provence, by whose orders they were burnt on the
pillory by the hands of the common executioner. Not con-
tent with this clumsy method of refutation, they succeeded
tn procuring the formal condemnation of the Provincials by
a censure of the Pope, Alexander YII., dated 6th September \
1657. In this decree the work is '* prohibited and condemned,
under the pains and censures contained in the Council of
Trent, and in the index of prohibited books, and other
pains and censures which it may please his holiness to or-
dain."

It is almost needless to say that these sentences neither
enlarged nor lessened the fame of the Provincials. It must
be interesting to know what the feelings of Pascal were, on
learning that this work, into which he had thrown his whole
heart and mind and strength, and which may be sidd to have
been at once the masterpiece of his mind and the confession
of his ffuth, had been condemned by the head of that church
which he had hitherto believed to be infallible. Warped as
his fine spirit was by education, his unbending rectitude for*
bids the supposition that he could surrender his cherished
and conscientious sentiments at the mere dictum of the pope.
An incident occurred in 1661, shortly before his death, strik-
ingly illustrative of his conscientiousness, and of the sincerity
of purpose with which the Letters were written. The per-
secution had begun to rage agiunst Port-Boyal : one momde-
ment after another, requiring subscription to the condemna-
tion of Jansen, came down from the court of Bome ; and the
poor nuns, shrinking, on the one hand, from violating their
consciences by subscribing what they believed to be an un-
truth, and trembling, on the other, at the consequences of
disobeying their ecclesiastical superiors, were thrown into the
most distressing embarrassment. Their ^ obstinacy," as it
was termed, only provoked their persecutors to more strin-
gent demands. In these circumstances, even the stern Ar-

I HISTORICAL INTBODX^DTIOX.

nauld and the scrupulous Nicole were tempted to make some
compromise, and drew up a declaration to accompany the
si^ature of the nans, which thej thought might save at once
the truth and theur consistency. To this Pascal objected, as
not sufficiently clear, and as leaving it to be inferred that they
condemned ^ efficacious grace/' He could not endure the
idea of their employing an ambiguous statement, which ap-
peared, or might be supposed by their opponents to grant,
what they did not really mean to concede. The consequence
was a slight and temporary dispute — not affecting principle
so much as the mode of maintaining it — in which Pascal
stood alone against all the members of Port-BoyaL On one
occasion, after exhausting his eloquence upon them without
success, he was so deeply affected that his feeble frame, la-
bouring under headache and other disorders, sunk under the
excitement, and he fell into a swoon. After recovering his
consciousness, he explained the cause of his sudden illness, in
answer to the affectionate inquiries of his sister: ''When I
saw those," he said, ** whom I regard as the persons to whom
Gk>d has made known his truth, and who ought to be its
champions, all giving way, I was so overcome with grief that
I could stand it no longer." Subsequent mandemenU^ still
more stringent, soon saved the poor nuns from the tempta-
tion of such ambiguous submissions, and reconciled Pascal
and his friends.

But we are fortunately famished with his own reflections
on the subject of the Provincials, in his celebrated ''Thoughts
on Religion." "I feared," says he^ "that I might have
written erroneously, when I saw myself condemned ; but the
example of so many pious witnesses made me think different-
ly. It is no longer allowable to write truth. Ip mt let-

* Becueil de FMrt-Koyal, pp. 814-323. Some papers passed between Pascal
and his friends on this topic These he committed, on his death-bed, to hia
Mend M. Domat» "with a reqnest that he would bum them if the nuns of
Port-Boyal proyed Ann, and print them if thej should yield."— (lb. p. 322.)
The nuns having stood firm, the probability is that they were destroyed. Had
they been preserred, they might hare thrown some ftirther light on the opi>
nions of Pascal regarding Papal authority.

pascal's opnnoir of thb frotincials. li

TERS ABB CONDBMNBD AT ROME, THAT WHICH I CONDBMN DT
THBiC IS CONDBMNBD IN HBATBN." *

It is only necessary to add, that Pascal continued to main-
tain his sentiments on this subject unchanged to the last.
On his death-bed, M. Beurrier, his parish priest, adminis-
tered to him the last rites of his Church, and came to learn,
after having confessed him, that he was the author of the
** Provincial Letters.'' Full of concern at having absolved
the author of a book condemned by the pope, the good priest
returned, and asked him if it was true^ and if he had no re-
morse of conscience on that account. Pascal replied, that
**he could asssure him, as one who was now about to give an
account to God of all his actions, that his conscience gave
him no trouble on that score ; and that in the composition of
that work he was influenced by no bad motive, but solely by
regard to the glory of God and the vindication of truth, and
not in the least by any passion or personal feeling i^ainst the
Jesuits." Attempts were made by Perefixe, archbishop of
Paris, first to bully the priest for having absolved such a no-
torious ofiender,t and afterwards to concuss him into a false
account of his penitent's confession. It was confidently re-
ported, on the pretended authority of the confessor, that Pas-
cal had expressed his sorrow for having written the Provin-
cials, and that he had condemned his friends of Port-Boyal
for want of due respect to Papal authority. Both these alle-
gations were afterwards distinctly refuted — ^the first by the
written avowal of M. Beurrier, and the other by two deposi-
tions formally made by Nicole, showing that the real ground
of Pascal's brief disagreement with his friends was directly
the reverse of that which had been assigned.}

Few books have passed through more editions than the
Provincials. The following, among many others, may be

* 8%§Mi Lettret «9hI eondamn4e$ h Borne, eequeff eondamne, eA eon-
doMM^daiubciel. (Pexutot de Blaise Pascal, torn. iL leSw Paris, 1824.)

t *<H<nr came yoa," said the archbishop to BL Beorrier, "to administer the
■^i^r^imm^ to soch a pcrsoii ? Didn't yon know that he was a Jansenist ?"
(Baen^ de Port-Eoyal, 848.)

% Beca«a de Port-Boyal, pp. 827-390; Petitot, p. 16S.

Kl raSTORICAL INTBODUCTION.

mentioned as French editions: — ^The first in 1656, 4to; a
second in 1657, 12mo; a third in 1658, Svo; a fourth in
1659, Svo; a fifth in 1666, 12mo; a sixth in 1667, Svo; a
seventh in 1669, 12mo ; an eighth in 1689, Svo ; a ninth in
1712, Svo ; a tenth in 1767, 12mo.* The later editions are
beyond enumeration. The Letters were translated into Latin,
during the lifetime of Pascal, by his intimate friend, the
learned and indefatigable Nicole, under the assumed name
of "William Wendrock, a divine of Saltzburg."t Nicole,
who was a complete master of Latin, has given an elegant,
though somewhat free, version of his friend's work. He has
frequently added to the quotations taken from the writings
of ihe Jesuits and others ; a liberty which he doubtless felt
himself the more warranted to take, from the share he had
in the original concoction of the Letters. Nicole's valuable
preliminary dissertation and notes were translated by Made-
moiselle de Joncourt, a lady, it is said, "possessed of talents
and piety, and who, to the graces peculiar to her own sex,
added the acomplishments which are the ornament of ours.''{
Besides this, the Provincials have been translated into nearly
nil the languages of Europe. Bayle informs us that he had
seen an edition of them in Svo, with four columns, contain-
ing the French, Latin, Italian, and Spanish.^ The Spanish
translation, executed by Gratien Gordero of Burgos, was sup-
pressed by order of the Inquisition. || Besides the present
translation, the Letters have been thrice translated into
English : first in 1657, immediately after the publication of
the French collection, both in a snuJl quarto and a duodecimo

• Walchii BibUoth. TheoL, U. 285.

t The title of Nicole's translation, now rarely to be met with, Is^ Ludovtei
MontaUii Littera Provinciates, de MorcUiet PolitioaJemitarumDitGijpUna,
A WiUdino Wendrockio, SaZUburgenti Theologo, Several editions of this
transUition were printed. I haye the first, published at Oologne in 1668; and
the fifth, much enlarged, Oologne 1679.

X Aver t issem e n t , Les Provinciales, ed. 1767. Mad. de Joncourt, or Jon-
oouz, took a deep Interest in the falling fortunes of Port-RojaL (See some ac-
count of her in Madame Schimmelpenninck's History of the Demolition of Foif*-
Soyal, p. 136.)

I Barle. Diet, art PoicaL I Daniel, Entretiens, p. HI.

Daniel's answer to the provincials. liii

form; next in 1744, in two volumes octavo; and again in
1816, in one volume octavo.*

All the efforts made for the suppression of the Provin-
<uals only served to promote their popularity; and their
enemies found that if they would silence, they must answer
them.

Forty years elapsed after the publication of the Provincials
before the Jesuits ventured on a reply. At length, in 1697,
appeared an answer, entitled EivtretieiM de Cfleandre et cf
Evdoxe, sur Us Lettres au Provincial. The author is known
to have been Father Daniel, the historiographer of France.
This learned Jesuit undertook the desperate task of refuting
the Provincials, in a form somewhat resembling that of the
Letters themselves, being a series^ of supposed conversations
between two friends, uded by an abbe, ^ who is excessively
frank and honest, one who never could bear all his life to
see people imposed upon." The dialogue is conducted with
considerable spirit, but is sadly deficient in vraisemblance.
The author commences with high professions of impar-
tiality. Oleander and Eudoxus are supposed to be quite
neutral — somewhat like the free-will of Molina, ^ in a state
of perfect equilibrium, until good sense and stubborn facts
turn the scale.'' But, alas! the equilibrium is soon lost,
without the help either of facts or of sense. The friends
have hardly uttered two sentences till they begin to talk as
like two Jesuits as can well be imagined. Party rage gets
the better of literary discretion; the Port-Royalists arf
^honest knaves," ^ true hypocrites," ^villains animated with
subbom fury f* Amauld's pen ^ may be known by the gall
that drops firom it;" Nicole ** swears like a trooper;" and
as to Pascal, he is all these characters in turn, while his
book is ^a repertory of slander," and is ^villanous in a
supreme degree 1"

The whole strain of Daniel's reply corresponds with this
specimen of its spirit. Avoiding the error of Pirot, and yet
without renouncing the favourite dogmas of the Society, such

* See the prefiaoe to this Tolorne.

liv mSTOBICAL INTBODUOTION.

as probabilism, equivocations, and mental reservations, which
he only attempts to palliate, Father Daniel has exhausted hi»
skill in an attack on the candour and honesty of Pascal.
His main object is to convey the impression that the Pro*
vincials are a libel, written in bad faith, and fall of garbled
texts and false citations. In selecting this plan of defence,
the Jesuit champion evinces considerably more cunning than
ingenuousness. He was well aware that, at the time of their
publication, the Letters had been subjected to a sifting pro-
cess of examination by the most clear-sighted Jesuits, who
had signally failed in proving any falsifications. But he
knew also that, during the forty years that had elapsed, the
writings of the casuists had faUen into disuse and contempt,
mainly in consequence of the scorching which they had re-
ceived from the wit of Pascal, and that it would be now a
much easier and safer task to call in question the fidelity of
citations which none would give themselves the trouble of
verifying. In this bold attempt to turn the tables agsdnst
the Jansenists, by accusing them of chicanery and pious
fraud, the very crimes which they had succeeded in esta-
blishing against their opponents, the unscrupulous Jesuit
could be at no loss to find^ among the voluminous writings
of the casuists, some plausible grounds for his charges. At
all events, he could calculate on the readiness with which
certain minds, fonder of generalizing than of investigating
facts, would lay hold of the mere circumstance of a book
having been vmtten in defence of his order, as sufficient to
show that a great deal may be said on both sides. As to the
manner in which Daniel has executed his task, it might be
sufficient to say, that it has been acknowledged by the Jesuits
themselves to be a failure. Even at its first appearance,
great efforts were made to suppress it altogether, as likely to
do more harm than good to the Society ; and in their refer-
ences to it afterwards, we see the disappointment which they
felt. *• There was lately published," says Richelet, ** an an-
swer to the Lettres Provinciates, which professes to demolish
them, but which, nevertheless, will not do them much harm.

Daniel's answer to the peovinoials. Ir

Do yott ask how ? The reason is, that although this answer
shows the horrid injustice, the ahominahle slanders, and in-
jurious falsehoods of the Provincials, against one of the most
famous societies in the Church, yet these Letters have so
long, hy their facetious strokes, got the laughers of all deno*
minations on their side, that they have acquired a credit and
authority of which it will be difficult to divest them. It must
be confessed," he adds, with great simplicity, '^ that preju-
dice, on this occasion, is very unjust, very cruel, and very
obstinate in its verdict; since, though these Letters have
been condemned by popes, bishops, and divines, and burnt by
the hands of the hangman, yet they have taken such deep
root in people's minds as to bid defiance to all these autho-
rities."* "The reply," says another writer, **as may be
ea^y imagined, was not so well received as the Letters had
been. Father Daniel professed to have reason and truth on
his side; but his adversary had in his favour what goes much
farther with men — ^the arms of ridicule and pleasantry." -h
This, however, is a pure begging of the question. Midentem
dicere verumiy quid vetat f It is quite possible that Father
Daniel may be lugubriously in the wrong, and Pascal laugh-
ingly in the right. This was very triumphantly made out
in the answer to Daniel's work, which appeared in the same
year with the Entretiens^ under the title of ''Apology for the
Provincial Letters, against tlie last Reply of the Jesuits, en-
titled Conversations of Cleander and Eudoxus." The author
was Dom Mathieu Petitdidier, benedictine of the congrega-
tion of St. Yanne, who died bishop of Macra.:): In this
masterly performance, the accusations of Daniel are shown
to be totally groundless, his answers Jesuitical and evasive,,
and his arguments untenable. The ''Apology" was never
answered, and Daniel's work sank out of sight.

More modem apologists of the Jesuits have, however, foU
lowed the line of defence adopted by Father Daniel. It ha»

* Bayle, Diet, art Patcal, note K.

t AbM de Gastres, Les TtoIb Siedes, U. 63.

I Barbler, Diet, des Ouynges Aoon. et Fseadon.

!yi HISTORICAL INTBODUCnON.

become common with them to assert, with as much confi-
dcDce as if it were beyond all controversy, that Pascal has
done injustice to his opponents, by misquoting and exagge-
rating their sentiments^ The continued repetition of this
calumny, though long since disposed of, renders it necessary
to advert to it. For the strict fidelity of Pascal's citations,
we have not merely the testimony of contemporary witnesses,
but what will be to many a sufficient guarantee, the solemn
^iffidavit of Pascal himself. In a conversation that took
place within a year of his death, and which has been pre-
served by his sister, he thus answers the chief articles of in-
dictment that had been brought against the Provincials : —

** I have been asked, first, if I repented of having written
the Provincial Letters ? I answered that, far from repent-
ing, if I had it to do again, I would write them yet more
strongly.

^ I have been asked, in the second place, why I named the
authors from whom I extracted these abominable passages
which I have cited ? I answered. If I were in a town where
there were a dozen fountains, and I knew for certain that
one of them was poisoned, I should be under obligation to
tell the world not to draw from that fountain ; and as it
-might be supposed that thb was a mere fancy on my part, I
should be obliged to name him who had poisoned it, rather
than expose a whole city to the risk of death.

** 1 have been asked, thirdly, why I adopted an agreeable,
jocose^ and entertaining style? I answered, If I had written
dogmatically, none but the learned would have read my book ;
and they had no need of it, knowing how the matter stood,
at least as well as I did. I conceived it, therefore, my duty
to write so that my Letters might be read by women, and
people in general, that they might know the danger of all
those maxims and propositions which were then spread
abroad, and admitted with so little hesitation.

'* Finally, I have been asked, if I had myself read all the
books which I quoted ? I answered. No. To do this, I had
need have passed the greater part of my life in reading very

pascal's SELP-VINDICATIOIT. Ivi^

had books. But I have twice read Escobar throughout ; and
for the others, I got several of my friends to read them ; Imt
I have never used a single passage without having read it
myself in the hook quoted^ without having examined the caso
in which it is brought forward, and without having read the
preceding and subsequent context, that I might not run
the risk of citing that for an answer which was in fact an
objection, which would have been very unjust and blame-
able."*

If this solemn deposition, emitted bj one whose heart was
a stranger to deceit, and whose shrewdness placed him be-
yond the risk of delusion, is not accepted as sufficient, we
might refer to the mass of evidence collected at the time in
the Fa^itwms of the cur^s of Paris and Bouen^ to the volu-
minous notes of Nicole^ and to the apology of Petitdidier, in
which the citations made by Pascal are authenticated with a
carefulness which not only sets all suspicion at rest, but leaves
a large balance of credit in the author's favour, by showing
that, so far from having reported the worst maxims of the
Jesuitical school, or placed them in the most odious light of
which they were susceptible, he has been extremely tender
towards them. But, indeed, the truth was placed beyond all
dispute, through the efforts of the celebrated Bossuet, in 1700,
when, by the sentence of an assembly of the clergy of France,
the morals of the Jesuits, as exhibited in those *' monstrous
maxims, which had been so long the scandal of the Church
and of Europe," were formally condemned, and when it may
be sidd that the Provincial Letters met at once their full
vindication and their final triumph.t

Another class of objectors, whom the Jesuits have had the
good fortune to number among their apologists, are the scep-

* Tabarand, DistertaHon sur lafoi qui est due au Temoignage de Pa8CQ.%
daru set Lettres Prwinciales, p. 12.— This work, published some years ago in
li'ranoe, contains a complete Justification of Pascal's picture of the Jesuits in
the Frorincials, accompanied with a mass of authorities.-^The above senti-
ments have been introduced into Pascal's Thoughts. (See Craig's Translft'^
ticn, p. 186.)

t Vie de BoMiiet» t iv. p. 19 ; labaraud, Dissert, sur la foi, ^c, p. 4S.

Ix raSTORIOAIi INTRODUCnON.

Jesmts more cautious in the culture of devotional feelings.
They well knew that hut few can prudently engage in open
hostility with what, in ascetic language, is called the world."*
The strange mixture of truth and error in this statement i»^
apt to leave an unfavourahle impression on the mind ; but
we feel its fallacy even before we have time to analyze it. It
is true that nothing could be more opposite to the laxity of
the Jesuits than the asceticism of Port-Boyal. But it is
doing injustice to Pascal to insinuate that he measured Jesui-
tical morality by ** the strict, unbending maxims of tbe Jan-
senists ;" and it is flagrantly untrue that the Jesuits merely
aimed at reducing monastic enthusiasm to the standard of
common sense and ordinary life. We repeat that the real
charge which Pascal substantiates against them is, not that
they softened the austerities of the cloister, but that they
saCTificed the eternal laws of morality — ^not that they pru-
dently accommodated their rules to men's tempers, but that
they licensed the worst passions and propensities of our
nature — ^not that they declined urging all to forsake the
world (which he never expected), but that, for their own
politic ends, they veiled its impurities, and sanctioned its evil
customs.

Disguising their hostility to science, under the mask of

friendship to literature^ the Jesuits have succeeded in making

to themselves friends of many who are acquainted with

them only through the medium of their writings. And it is

the remarkable fact of our day, that while on the Continent,

where they are practically known, the Jesuits have enlisted

a^nst themselves the pens of its most eminent novelists,

historians, and philosophers, in Protestant England it is

quite the reverse. The most talented of our periodical

wnieara have exerted all their powers to whitewash them,

1.0 paint and paper them, and set them off with ornamental

Icsigns; and where they have not dared to defend, they

^ave endeavoured t>o blunt the edge of censure. Following

^ the same line ^^ defence, a certain class of Protestant

^ Letken from Spain, p. 88.

ORmOISUS ON THE PB0TINCIAL6. Ixt

writers, vain of historical paradox, or of i^>pearing 8iq>erior
to vulgar prejudices, have volanteered to protect the Jesuits.
<< No man is a stranger to the fame of Pascal/' says Sir
James Macintosh ; ^ hut those who may desire to form a
right judgment on the contents of the Lettres PromneicUes
would do well to cast a glance over the Entretiens dPArisU
et cPEugwiey hy Bouhours, a Jesuit, who has abty vindicated
his order."* Sir James had heard, perhaps, of Father
Daniel's Entretiens de Cleandre et cPEudoxey but it is very
evident that he had never even ** cast a glance over" that
book; for the work of Bouhours, which he has confounded
with it, is a philological treatise, which has no reference
whatever to the Provincial Letters. And yet he could say
that the Jesuit ^has ably vindicated his order!" Next to
the art which the Jesuits have shown in smuggling them-
selves into places of power and trust, is that by which they
have succeeded in hoodwinking the merely literary portion of
society.

But, not to dwell longer on these objections, the Provin-
cials are liable to another charge seldomer advanced, and not
so easily answered ; which is, that the loose casuistical mo-
rality denounced by Pascal was not confined to the Jesuits,
nor to any one of the orders of the Bomish Church, much
less, as Voltaire says, to ^ a few Spanish and Flemish Je-
suits," but was common to all the divines of that Church,
and was, in fiict, the native ofispring and inevitable growth
of the practices of confession and absolution. It is ad-
mitted that the Jesuits were mainly responsible for its pre-
servation and propagation; that they have been the most
zealous in reducing it to practice ; that, even after it had
incurred the anathemas of popes, bishops, and divines, and
afier it had been disclaimed by all the other orders of the
Church, the Jesuits pertinadously adhered to it ; and that,
even to this day, they have identified themselves with the
worst tenets of the casuists. But Protestant writers have
generally all^^, not without reason, that the corruptions

* Mm t*"**^**, ffiitory of Englandf toL U. 860, note.

E

Ixii HKrrOKIOAti INTBOBVOnOtr.

of eatnistical diTinity may be traced from the days of Thomas
Aquinas and Oajetan, whom the Ohurch of Borne owns as
authorities; ihat the ''new casiusts" merely carried the
mazhns of their predecessors to their legitimate conclusions;
and that, though condemned by some popes, the censure has
been only partial, and has been more than neutralized by
the condemnation of other works written against the mora-
lity of the Jesuits. Thus, in a work entitled '' Guimenius
Amadous," the author, who was the Jesuit Moya, boldly
claimed the sanction of the most venerated names in favour
of the modern casmsts. This work, it is true, was con-
demned to the flames in 1680, by Pope Innocent XI., who
was favourable to the Jansenists ; but the Jesuits boast of
having obtluned other Papal constitutions reversing the
judgment of that pontiff, whom they do not scruple to stig-
matize with heres}.* It cannot be denied that the Jesuits
have aU along succeeded in obtaining for their system the
sanction of the highest authorities in the Church ; while
those works which undertook to advocate a purer morality
were printed clandestinely, without privilege or approbation,
and under fictitious names of authors and printers; nor can
it be forgotten that the Provincial Letters, the most power-
ful exposure of Jesuitical morality that ever appeared, were
censured at Bome^ and burnt by the hands of the exe-
cutioner.f In short, and without entering into the question
so ingeniously discussed by Nicole and otlier Jansenists,
whether the modem casuists were justified in thdr excesses
by the ancient schoolmen, it is undeniable that this is the
weakest point of the Provincials, and one on which the
thorough-going Jesuit occupies, on Popish principle^ the
most advantageous position. The disciples of Loyola
constitute the very soul of the Papacy; and they must be
held as the genuine exponents of that atrocious system of

« Mchhorn, Gesohichte der Litter, toL L pp. 42&-425; Weisman, Hlat ScoL,
ToL IL 21; Jnrieo, PrciIiigeB Legitimes cont. le Papisme, p. 886; OUuide, De-
fence of the Beformation, p. 29.

t Jurieu, Justification de la Morale dee Beformez, contre M. Amauld, L
p. 80.

CBinOISMS OV THE PROVINGIALS. Ixiii

morals which, engendered in the privacy of the cloister dm
ing the dark ages, reached its maturity in the hands of a
designing priesthood, who still find it too convenient a tool
for their purposes to part with it.

There are other respects in which we cannot fsdl to detect,
throughout these Letters, the enfeebling and embarrassing
influence of Popery over the naturally ingenuous mind of the
author. Among all the maxims peculiar to the Jesuits,
none are more pernicious than those in which they have
openly taught that disobedience to the Papal see releases
subjects from their allegiance and oaths of fidelity to their
sovereigns, and authorizes them to put heretical rulers to
death, even by assassination.* On this point Pascal has failed
to speak out the whole truth. Whether it may have been
from the dread of heresy, or from a wish to spare the dignity
of the pope, it is easy to see the timidity, the circumspection,
the delicacy, with which he touches on the point of Papal
authority.

The Jansenists have been called the Methodists of the
Church of Rome ; but the term is applicable to them rather
in the wide sense in which it has been applied, derisively, to
those who have sought reformation or aimed at superior
sanctity within the pale of an established Church, than as
applied to the party now known under that designation.
They disclaimed the title of Jansenists, as a nickname ap-

* A disingenuoufl attempt has been eometimes made to identify these nefa-
rious maxims with certain principles held by some of our reformers. There
is an essential difference between the natural right claimed, we do not say
with what Justice, for su):tjects to proceed against their rulers as tyrants,
and the ri{^t assumed by the pope to depose rulers as heretics. And it is
equally easy to distinguish between the disallowed acts of some fEuiatical in-
dividuals who have taken the law into their own hands, and the atrocious
deeds of such men as Chatel and Bavaillac, who could plead the authority of
MftrifWA the Jesuit, that *' to put tyrannical princes to death is not only a
lawful, but a laudable, heroic, and glorious action." (Dalton's Jesuits; their
Principles and Acts. London, 1848.) The Church of St Ignatius at Borne
is or was adorned, it seems, with pictures of all the as s a ssin ations mentioned
in Scripture, which they have, most presumptuously, perverted in justifica-
tion of their feats in this department (FAlembert, Dost, of the Jesuit^
p. 101.)

Ixiv HISTORICAL INTEODUCTION.

plied to them by their adversaries. They held themselves to
be the true Catholics, the representatives of the Ohurch as
it existed down, at least, to the days of St Bernard, whom
they termed ** the last of the fathers/' They ascribed a
species of semi-inspiration to the early fathers of the Church.
They reverenced the Scriptures, but received them at second-
hand, through the medium of tradition. To be a Catholic
and a Christian were with them convertible terms. Hence
the horror evinced by Pascal, in his concluding letters, at the
bare idea of "heresy existing in the Church." "Embar-
rassed at every step," it has been well observed, " by their
professed submission to the authority of the popes, galled and
oppressed by their necessary acquiescence in the flagrant
errors of their Church, these good men made profession of
the great truths of Christianity under an incomparably
heavier weight of disadvantage than has been sustained by
any other class of Christians from the apostolic to the present
times. Enfeebled by the enthusiasm to which they clung,
the piety of these admirable men failed in the force necessary
to carry them through the conflict with their atrocious enemy,
*the Society.* They were themselves in too many points
vulnerable to close fearlessly with their adversary, and they
grasped the sword of the Spirit in too infirm a manner to
drive home a deadly thrust. The Jansenists and the inmates
of Port-Royal displayed a constancy that would doubtless
have carried them through the fires of martyrdom ; but the
intellectual courage necessary to bear them fearlessly through
an examination of the errors of the Papal superstition, could
spring only from a healthy form of mind, utterly incompa-
tible with the dotings of religious abstraction, and the petty
solicitudes of sackclothed abstinence The Jansenists had
not such courage ; if they worshipped not the Beast, they
cringed before him : he placed his dragon-foot upon their
necks, and their wisdom and their virtues were lost for ever
to France.*'*

It is the policy of the Jesuits at present, as of old, to deny>
* Taylor, Natural Hist, of Eathosiasm, p. 25&

OONGLUDIN0 REFLECTIONS. IxY

point-blank, the truthfulness of Pascal's statements of their
doctrine and policy— to reiterate the exploded charge of his
having garbled his extracts— and, after affecting to join in
the laugh at his pleasantry, and to forgive, for the wit's sake,
his injustice to thdr innocent and much-calumniated fathers,
to declare that, of course, he could not himself believe the
half of what he said against them, nor comprehend the pro-
found questions of casuistry on which he presumed to argue.
Under this affectation of charity they dexterously evade
Pascal's main charges, and slyly insinuate a vindication of
the heresies of which they have been convicted. Thus, in a
late publication, one of their number actually attempts to
vindicate the old Jesuitical doctrine of probdbUism I* At
the same time, they retain, with undiminished tenacity, the
moral maxims which Pascal condemns. The discovery lately
made of the Theology of Dens being still taught by the
Jesuits in Ireland, is a proof of this; for it is nothing more
than a collection of the most wicked and obscene maxims of
casuistical morality. Matters are no better in France. Dr
Oilly mentions a publication issued at Lyons, in 1825, which
is so bad that the reviewer says, '' We cannot, we dare not
«opy it ; it is a book to which the cases of conscience of Dr
Sanchez were purity itself, "f The disclosures made still
more recently by M. Michelet and M. Quinet are equally
startling, and wiU, in all probability, issue in another expul-
sion of the Jesuits from IVance.

The policy of the Society, as hitherto exhibited in the
countries where they have settled, describes a reg^ular cycle
of changes. Commencing with loud professions of charity^
of liberal views in politics, and of an acconamodating code
of morals, they succeed in gaining popularity among the non-
religious, the dissipated, and the restless portion of society.

* De rSxifltence et de I'lnstitnt des JesnitM. Far le K. P. de RaTignan,
•de la Oompagnie de Jesus. Paris, 1846, p. 83. ProbabUitm is the doctrine,
that if any opinion in morals has been held by anj grave doctor of the Church,
it ia probably true^ and may be safely followed in practice.

t Gillj, Narratire of an Excursion to Piedmont, p. 156w

bnri BISTOBIOAL nrrBODUOTION.

Ayailing themselves of this, and carefully concealmg, m a
Protestant country, the more ohnoxious parts of their creeds
their next step is to plant some of the most plausible of their
apostles in the prindpal localities, who are instructed to esta-
blish schools and seminaries on the most charitable footing,
so as to ingratiate themselyes with the poor, while they secure
the contributions of the rich ; to attack the credit of the
most active and influential among the evangelical ministry ;
to revive old slanders agunst the reformers ; to disseminate
tracts of the most alluring description; and, when assailed
in turn, to deny every thing and to grant nothing. Kising
by these means to power and influence, they gradually mono-
polize the seats of learning and the halls of theology — they
glide, with noiseless steps, into closets, cabinets, and palaces
— ^they become the dictators of the public press, the persecu-
tors of the good, and the oppressors of all public and private
liberty. At length, their treacherous designs being dis-
covered, they rouse against themselves the storm of natural
passions, which, descending on them flrst, as the authors of
the mischief, sweeps away along with them, in its headlong
career, every thing that bears the aspect of that active and
earnest religion, under the guise of which they had succeeded
in duping mankind.

What portion of this cycle they have reached among us, it
is needless to demonstrate. They have evidently got beyond
the first stage; and it is highly probable that, in proof of it,
the present publication may elicit a more than ordinary ex-
hibition of their skill in the science of defamation and denial.
It is far from being unlikely that, at the present point of
their revolution, they may find it their interest, after all the
mischief that Pascal has done them, and all the evil that they
have spoken against Pascal, to claim him as a good Catholic,,
and take advantage of the prestige of his name to insinuate,
that the Church which could boast of such a man is not to
be lightly esteemed. And, in fact, it requires no small ex-
ercise of caution to guard ourselves against such an illusion.
It is difficult to characterize Popery as it deserves without

CONCLUDING REFLECTIONS. Ixvii

apparent uncharitableness to individuals, such as Fenelon
and Pascal, who, though members of a corrupt Church,
possessed much of the spirit of true religion. But though
it would be impossible to class such eminent and pious men
with an infidel car<£nal or a Spanish inquisitor, it does not
follow that they are free from condemnation. It has been
justly remarked, that ^ their example has done much harm,
and been only the more pernicious from their eminence and
their virtues. It is ^fficult to calculate how much assistance
their well-merited reputation has given to prop the falling
cause of Popery, and to lengthen out the continuance of a
delusion the most lasting and the most dangerous that has
ever led mankind astray from the truth."* With regard to
our author, in particular, it may be well to remember, that
he was virtuous without being indebted to his Church, and
evangelical in spite of his creed ; that his piety, for which
he is so much esteemed by us, was the very quality that ex-
posed him to odium and suspicion from those of his own
communion ; that the vital truths, for his adherence to which
we would clum him as a brother in Christ, were those which
were reprobated by the authorities of Rome ; and that the
following Letters, for which he is so justly admired, were, by
the same Church, formally censured and ignominiously burnt,
along veith the Bible which Pascal loved, and the martyrs
who have suffered for ** the truth as it is in Jesus."

* Dooglas on Errors in Religion, p. 113.

THE PBOVINOIAL LETTEBS.

LETTEB L

DISPUTES IN THE SOBBONNE, AND THE XNYENTION OF PBOXl-
MATE POWEB — A TEEM EMPLOTED BT THE JESUITS TO
PBOOUBE THE OENSUBB OF M. ABNAULD.

Pabis, January 23, 1656.

Sib,— We were entirely mistaken. It was only yesterday
that I was undeceived. Until that time I had laboured
under the impression that the disputes in the Sorbonne
were vastly important^ and deeply affected the interests of
religion. The frequent convocations of an assembly so illus-
trious as that of the Theological Faculty of Paris, attended
by so many extraordinary and uDprecedented circumstances,
led one to form such high expectations, that it was impos-
sible to help coming to the conclusion that the business
was of extraordinary importance. You will be greatly sur-
prised, however, when you learn, from the following account,
the upshot of this grand demonstration, which, having made
myseff perfectly master of the subject, I shall be able to
describe to you in very few words.

Two questions, then, were brought under examination ;
the one a quesdon of fact, the other a question of right.

The question of fact consisted in ascertaining whether
M. Arnauld T^as guilty of presumption, for having asserted in
bis second letter* that he had carefully perused the book

• Anthany Amankl, or Amaad, priest and doctor of the SorboniM^ was
the son of ijithony Arnauld. a fiunous advocate, and bom at Parii^ Fdbffoary
<!, 1812. He early distinguished himself in philosophy and divlnitv, advo-
eating the doctrines of Augustine and Por^Koyal. and opposing ttioee of
the Jesuits. The disputes concerning grace, which broice out about 1648 in
the University of Puis, served to foment the mutual animosity between M-

70 PEOVWOIAL LXTTEBS. [LET. I,

of JameDins, and that be had not discovered the proposi-
tions condemned b; the late pope; but that, neTertheleas,
U be condemned these propositions whererer thej might
ocear, he condemned tbero in Jaa«enins, if they nere re^j
OOntained in that worlc.*

The question here was, if he could, without presumption,
lanlertain a doubt that tbeae propositions were in Jansenius,
after the bishops had declared that theTwere,

The matter having been brought WoTe the Sorbonne,
sermt^r-ODe doctors undertook hia defence, maintaining
that the onlv replj he coald possibly give to the demands
made upon nim in so many publications, calling on him to
say if he held that these propositions were b that book,
was, that be had not been able to find them, but that if
th^ were in the book, he condemned them in the book.

Some even went a Bl«p farther, and protested that, after
all the search ther had made into the book, thej had never
stumbled upOD these propositions, and that the; had, on
ihe contrar;, found sentiments entlrelj at variance with
them. They then eamestlj b^ged that if an; doctor pre-
sent had discovered them, he would have the goodness to
point them out; adding, that what was so eaa; could not
reasonably be refused, as this would be the surest waj to
ulence the whole of them, M. Amauld included; but this
proposal baa been uniforml; declined. So much for the

On the other ude are a'ghtj secular doctors, and some
forty mendicant friars, who nave condemned M. Arnauld's
proposition, without choosing to examine whether he has
spoken troly or falsely — who, in faot^ have declared that
tbey have notUns to do with the reradty of his proposiUiw,
bat umply with its temerity.

AthooM arid tha Jefla1U,Tho entertained a hereditary fCad against the vhoLq
luntlT.Crom Ibe iieliTe part Ukea kr tbelr tuOiei at^asttim Soole^io tbe
close fn the precedlDgcenGury. lal6»,lthappciLedtEi4t a certain dnltei who
was iidQcamiK bli ETBiid.daiightsr at Pert-BoTa^ Uie Jsnsei^lBt moAJislery,
aodlieptaJaiiBSDin abM Inlili hoiue, on preieDtlnE hlmKlf for uhHbIoii
la a pfl«t nnder the Inflasnn of tbs Joalia, nu reused atiaoliiilim, nnleiB
hs pnmiMd to reoiU hU Ei«ad.dsudit«r and dlscant his ilib^ Tbii pn-

dneed twolatter«(lroniM.Ajm<il<I,la U- j - — .i-v . . .1..

alnnmla and teMtieg with wbloh ue Ji

tlGuda 01 pamphlsU. Tliia I0 tha leCtB re

* nubsok which Dandoned Iheaa dlinitii . .

ni mitlen br Cometliii Jaumlm dr Jodmii, Uahni ot TprM, and pi^
lirtwd «ne( hli death. Stva pnipoittlonK. sdaoled trom tllli work, were
eoodauitd b; the Pope ; snd aimed with theib ■■ with a waouia, the Je-
folli eootiimed toperHmte theJnwnlititillllHf auoopUahedthtiriiilu.

LET. I.] DISPUTES IN THB 80BB0NNE. 71

Besides these, there were fifteen who were not in fayour of
the censure, and who are called Neutrals.

Such was the issue of the question of fact, regarding
which, I must own, I give myself very little concern. It
does not affect my conscience in the least whether M.
Amauld is presumptuous or the reverse; and should I be
tempted, from curiosity, to ascertain whether these proposi-
tions are contained in Jansenius, his book is neither so very
scarce nor so very large as to hinder me from reading it
over from beginning to end, for my own satisfaction, without
consulting the Sorbonne on the matter.

Were it not, however, for the dread of being presumptu-
ous myself, I really think that I should be disposed to adopt
the opmion which has been formed by the most of my ac-
quaintances, who, though they have believed hitherto on com- ,
mon report that the propositions were in Jansenius, begin
now to suspect the contrary, owing to this strange refusal
to point tnem out — a refusal the more extraordinary to me,
as I have not yet met with a single individual who can say
that he has discovered them in that work. I am afraid,
therefore, that this censure will do more harm than good,
and that the impression which it will leave on the minds of
all who know its history will be just the reverse of the con-
clusion that has been come to. The truth is, people have
become sceptical of late, and will not believe things till they
see them. But, as I said before, this point is of very little
moment, as it has no concern with the faith.*

The question of right, from its affecting the futh, appears
much more important, and, accordingly, I took particular
pains in examining it. You will be relieved, however, to
find that it is of as little consequence as the former.

The point of dispute here was an assertion of M. Ar-
nauld's in the same letter, to the effect, **that the g^ace
Tidthout which we can do nothing, was wanting to St
Peter at his faU." You and I were supposing that the
controversy here would turn upon the great principles of
grace ; such as, whether grace is given to all men ? or, if it

* And yet "the question of fitct," which Pascal professes to treat so
li^^Uy. became the taming point of all the subsequent persecutions directed
aadnst the unhappy Port-JKoyalists I Those who hare read the sad tale of
the demolition ox Port-Boyal will recollect, with a sigh, the sufferings in-
flicted on the poor sdiolars and pious nuns of that establishment, solely on
the groond thal^ firom respect to Jansen and to a sood conscience, th^
would not subecribe a fbrmulary acknowledging the five propositions to be
eontalned in his book. (i:5ee Narrative of the Demolition of the Monasteiy
of Port-Boyal, by Mary Anne Schimmelpenninck, p. 170, Ac.)

72 PEOYINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. I.

is efficacious of itself? But how sadly we were mistaken I
You must know I have become a great theologian within this
short time ; and now for the proofs of it.

To ascertain the matter with certainty, I repaired to my

neighbour, M. N , doctor of Navarre, who is, as you

are aware, one of the keenest opponents of the Jansenists ;
and my curiosity having made me almost as warm as himself,
I asked him if they would not formfdly decide at once that
<< grace is given to all men," and thus set the question at rest.
But he gave me a sharp retort, and told me that that was
I not the point ; that there were some of his party who held
that grace was not given to all ; that the examiners them-
selves had declared, in a full assembly of the Sorbonne, that
that opinion was problematical; and that he himself held
the same sentiment — ^which he confirmed by quoting to me
what he called that celebrated passage of St Augustine:
** We know that grace is not given to all men."

I apologized for having misapprehended his sentiment,
and requested him to say if they would not at least con-
demn that other opinion of the Jansenists which is making so
much noise, ^ That grace is efficacious of itself, and invin-
cibly determines our will to what is good." But in this second
query I was equally unfortunate.

" Sir," said he, " you know nothing about the matter ;
that is not a heresy — it is an orthodox opinion; all the
Thomists* maintain it ; and I myself have defended it in my
Sorbonnic thesis."t

I did not venture agidn to propose my doubts, and yet I
was as far as ever from understanding where the difficulty
lay ; so, at last, in order to inform myself more fully, I begged
him to tell me in what the heresy of M. Arnauld's proposi-
tion consisted ?

^< It lies here," said he, *' that he does not acknowledge
that the righteous have the power of obeving the com-
mandments of God, in the manner in which we under-
stand it."

On receiving this piece of information, I took my leave of

* The Thomists were so caUed after Thomas AcrnliMML the celebrated
" Angelic Doctor" of the schools. He flourished in the thirteenth century,
and was opposed, in the following century, by Duns Scotus, a British, some
say a Sconish, monk of the order of St Brands. This gave rise to a fierce
amd protracted controversy, in the course of which the li^nciscans took
the side of Duns Scotus, and were called Scotists ; while the Dominicans

T»used the cause of Thomas Aquinas, and were sometimes called Thomists.
8ort»nique—sn act or thesis of divinity, delivered in the hall of the
college of the Sorbonne by candidates for the degree of Doctor.

)

LET I.] DISPUTES IN THE SOBBONNE. 73

him ; and, quite proud at having discovered the knot of the

question, I sought M. N , who is gradually getting better,

and was sufficiently recovered to conduct me to the house of
his brother-in-law, who is a Jansenist, if ever there was one,
but a very good man notwithstanding. Thinking to insure
myself a better reception, I pretended to be very high on
what I took to be his side, and said : ^' Is it possible that the
Sorbonne has introduced into the Church such aii error as
this, ' That all the righteous have always the power of obey-
ing commandments ? '

** What say you ?" replied the doctor. ** Call you that an
error — a sentiment so catholic, that none but Lutherans and
Calvinists find fault with it?"

** Indeed!" said I, surprised in my turn; "so you are not
of their opinion?"

** No," ne replied ; " we anathematize it as heretical and
impious."*

Confounded by this reply, I soon discovered that I had
overacted the Jansenist, as I had formerlv overdone the-
]^.Iolinist.t But not being sure if I had rightly understood .
him, I requested him to tell me frankly if he held "that |
the righteous have always a real power to observe the
divine precepts?" Upon this the good man got warm (but
it was with a holy zeal), and protested that he would not
disguise his sentiments for any consideration — ^that such
was indeed his belief, and that he and all his friends would
defend it to the death, as the pure doctrine of St Thomas, |
and of St Augustine, their master.

This was spoken so seriously as to leave me no room for
doubt; and under this impression I returned to my first
doctor, and said to him, with an air of great satisfaction,
that I was sure there would be peace in the Sorbonne very
soon ; that the Jansenists were quite at one with them in re-
ference to the power of the righteous to obey the com-
mandments of God ; that I could pledge my word for them,
and could make them seal it with their blood.

* The Jansenlfltey in their dread of being classed with Lutherans and
Calvinista, condescended to quibble on this question. In reality, as we
shall see, thOT agreed with the Reformers, for they denied that any could
Mctually obey the commandments without efficacious grace.

t MolinisL— The Jesuits were so called, in this dispute, after Lewis
Molina, a fiuodous Jesuit of Spain, who published a work, entitled ConooV'
dia OraHcB et lAJberi Arbitrii. in which he professed to have found out a new
way of reoonoUIng the freedom of the human will with the divine pre-
scienoe. This new inyention was termed Scientia Media, or middle know-
ledge. All who adopted the sentiments of Molina, whether Jesuits or not^
were tenned Holinists.

74 PROVINCIAL LETTEBS. [LET. I.

^Hold there I" said he. *^ One must be a theologian to
see Uie point of this question. The difference between us
is so subtle, that it is with some difficulty we can discern it
ourselves ; you will find it rather too much for your powers
of comprehension. Content yourself, then, with knowing
that it is very true the Jansenbts will tell you that all the
righteous have always the power of obeying the command-
^ ments; that is not the point in dispute between us; but
X mark vou, the^ will not tell you that this power is proximate.
That IS the point."

This was a new and unknown word to me. Up to this
moment I had managed to understand matters, but that
term involved me in obscurity ; and I verily believe that it
has been invented for no other purpose than to mystify. I
requested him to give me an explanation of it, but he made
a mystery of it, and sent me back, without any further satis-
faction, to demand of the Jansenists if they would admit this
* proximate power. Having charged my memory (my under-
standing was out of the question) with the phrase, I hastened
with all possible expedition, fearing that I might forget it,
to my Jansenist friend, and accosted him, immediately after
our fu*st salutations, with this question : —

" Tell me, pray, if you admit the proximate power f "

He smiled, and replied coldly : *^ Tell me yourself in what
sense you understand it, and I may then inform you what I
thmk of it."

As my learning did not extend quite so far, I was at a loss
what reply to make; and yet, rather than lose the object
of my visit, I said at random : *' Why, I understand it in the
sense of the Molinists."

<< To which of the Molinists do you refer me ? " replied
he, with the utmost coolness.

I referred him to the whole of them together, as forming
one body, and animated by one spirit.

"Ah, you know very little about the matter," returned
he. " So far are they from being united in sentiment, that
some of them are diametrically opposed to each other. But,
being all united in the design to ruin M. Arnauld, they have
resolved to a^ree on this term proximate^ which both parties
might use indiscriminately, though they understand it diversely,
that thus, by a similarity of language, and an apparent con-
formity, ^ey may form a large body, and get up a majority
to crush him with the greater certainty."

This reply filled me with amazement ; but without imbib-

LBT. I.] DISPUTES IN THB 80BB0NNB. 75

ing these impressions of the malicious designs of the Mo-
linists, which I am unwilling to believe on his word, and
with which I have no concern, I set myself simply to ascer-
tain the various senses which they give to that mysterious
word proseimate, ** I would enlighten you on the subject
with all my heart/' he said ; ^' but you would discover in it
such a mass of contrariety and contradiction, that you would
hardly believe me. You would suspect me. To make sure
of the matter, you had better learn it from some of them-
selves; and I shall give you some of their addresses. You
have only to make a separate visit to one called M. le Moine,*
and to Father Nicolai." t

^ I have no acquaintance with any of these persons," said I.

** Let me see, then," he replied, " if you know any of those
whom I shall name to you ; they all agree in sentiment with
M. le Moine."

I happened, in fact, to know some of them.

'* WeU, let us see if you are acquainted with any of the
Dominicans whom they call the 'New Thomists,'^ for they
are all the same with Father Nicolai."

I knew some of them also whom he named ; and, resolved
to profit by this counsel, and to ezpiscate the matter, I took k V

my leave of him, and went immediately to one of the disciples I

of M. le Moine. I begged him to inform me what it was to
have the proximate power of doing a thing.

" It is easy to tell you that," he replied ; "it is just to have
all that is necessary for doing it in such a manner that no-
thing is wanting to performance."

* Piarrt le Moine was a doctor of the Sorbonne, whom Cardinal Bichelieu
employed to write against Jansen. This Jesuit was the author of several
works, which display considerable talent, though little principle. His book on
Grace was forcibly answered, and himself somewhat seyerely handled, in a
work entitled, " An Apology for the Holy Fathers," which ne suspected to
be written by Amauld. It was Le Moine who, according to Nicole, had the
chief share in raising the stoxm against Arnault of whom he was the bitter
and avowed enemy.

t Farther Nicolai was a Dominican— an order of firiars who professed to be
followers of St Thomas. He is here mentioned as a representative of his
class; but Nicole informs us that he abandoned the principles of his order,
and became a Molinist, or an abetter of Pelagianism.

X New ThomisU.— It is more difficult to trace or remember the various
sects into which the Roman Church is divided, than those of the Protestant
Church. The New Thomists were the disciples of Diego Alvarez, a theologian
of the order of St Dominic, who flourished in the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries. He was sent from Spain to Rome in 1596, to defend the doctrine of
grace against Molina, and distinguished himself in the Cangregatio de Auxi'
Xiii, &e New Thomists contended for ^icacious arace, but admitted, at
the same time, a tuMdent grace, which was given to all, and ]ret not sufficient
for any actual performance without the emcacious. The ridiculous incon-
gruity of this doctrine is admirably exposed by Pascal in his second letter.

V

76 PROVINOIAL LETTERS. [lET. I,

•* And 80," said I, " to have the proximate power of cross-
ing a river, for example, is to have a boat, boatmen, oars^
^ and all the rest, so that nothing is wanting?"
^^ " Exactly so," said the monk.

** And to have the proximate power of seeing/' continued I^

** must be to have good eyes and good light ; for a person

with good si^ht in the dark would not have the proximate

y power of seemg, according to you, as he would want the

tight, without which one cannot see?"

•^Precisely," said he.

" And consequently," returned I, ** when you say that all
the righteous have the proximate power of observing the
commandments of God, you mean that they have always all
the grace necessary for observing them, so that nothing is
wanting to them on the part of God."

** Stay there," he replied, " they have always all that is
necessary for observing the commandments, or at least for
asking it of God."

^^I understand you," said I; ^they have all that is neces-
sary for praying to God to assist them, without requiring
any new grace ftom God to enable them to pray."

" You have it now," he rejoined.

*'But is it not necessanr that they have an efficacious
grace, in order to pray to God ? "

" No," said he, ** not according to M. le Moine."

To lose no time, I went to th^acoBins;;) and requested an

interview with some whom I kne v^ to bc3 !Srew Thomists, and

I begged them to tell me what " proximate power " was,

'* Is it not," said I, '* that power to which nothing is want-

\ ing in order to act?"

« No," said they.

" Indeed, father ! " said I ; "if any thing is wanting to
that power, do you call it proximate ? Would you say, for
' instance, that a man in the night time, and without any
light, had the proximate power of seeing ? "

* Jaoobing was another name for the IXominicans in France, where they
were so called from the street in Paris, Bue de St. Jacques, where their first
convent was erected, in the year 1218. In England they were called Black
Friars. Their founder was Dominic, a Spaniard. His mother it is said,
dreamt, before his birth, that she was to be delirered of a wolf with a torch in
his mouth. The augury was realized in the barbarous humour of Dominic,
and the massacres which he occasioned in various parts of the world, by
preaching up crusades against the heretics. He was the founder of the In-
quisition, and his order was, before the Beformation, what the Jesuits were
after it-4he soul of the Bonush hierarchy, and the bitterest enemies of the
truth.

t-}

M k

^Yes» indead, lie woaU baf« i^ in our opuiioa» if 1m tt ^
not bfiDd.*

*I grant that," sud I; *bat M. k Moine undiHrsiakiids U
ID a different manner.*

"Yerj tm^* tfaey repfied; ^ bot ao it is that we and«r>
stand itT*

**! have no objeetions to that,** I aaki; ^for I nevi^r
qoarrd aboot a tom, proYided I am apptiied of Ike sense in
whidi it is nnderstood. But I perceiTe from this that
wh«i yoa speak of the righteons having always the proxi* \
mate power of prajing to Qod, you understand that they |
require another supply of help to pray, without which they !
wiU never pray.**

** Most excell«[it I* exclaimed the good fathers, embracin)^
me; ** exactly the thing; for they must have^ besides, an I
efficacious gpraoe, which is w4 bestowed upon iJl, and which
determines thdr wills to pray ; and to deny the necessity of
that efficacious gprace in order to pray is heresy.

** Most excellent 1** cried I» in return ; ** but, according to
you, the Jansenists are Catholics, and M. le Moine a heretic; s>^
for the Jansenists maintain that, while the righteous htive ^
power to pray, they require, nevertheless, an efficacious
grace; and this is what you approve. M. le Moine, again,
maintAins that the righteous may pray without efficacious
grace ; and this you condemn."

*^ Aj^ said th^; ^but M. le Moine calls that power
fTQximate pcwtr.

^How now, fathersl'' I exclaimed; ''this is merely play-
ing with words, to say that you are agreed as to the common
terms which you employ, while you differ with them at to
the meaning of these terms.''

The fathers made no rej^lyi and at this juncture, who
should come in but my old friend, the disciple of M. le Moinvl
I r^^arded this at the time as an extraordmary piece of ffood
fortune, but I have discovered since then that such meeUn|fti
are not rare— that, in fact, they are constantly in the habil
of meeting together.*

'' I know a man," said I, addressing myself to M. le Moine'i
disciple, ''who holds that the righteous have always the
power of praying to Qod, but that, notwithstanding thii,
they will never pray without an efficacious grace, which de«

* Thia ii a stroke at the Dominicans for comblolnc with their natortl «&^
miei the Jesoitiy in order to accomplish the ruin of sL AmauUL

f

PROVINOIAL LETTEnS. [LET. I

termioes them, and which Gt>d does not always give to all
the righteous. Is he a heretic ? "

** Stay," said the doctor; "you might take me by surprise.
Let us go cautiously to work. Distinaiuo* If he call that
power proximate powers he will be a Thomist, and therefore
a Catholic ; if not, he will be a Jansenist, and therefore a
heretic.**

** He neither calls it proximate nor non-proximate," said I.

" Then he is a heretic," quoth he ; ** I refer you to these
good fathers if he is not."

I did not appeal to them as judges, for they had ah*eady
nodded assent ; but I said to them : " He refuses to admit
that word prooBvmate, because he can meet with nobody who
will explain it to him."

Upon this one of the fathers was on the point of offering
his definition of the term, when he was interrupted by M. le
Moine's disciple, who said to him : " Do you mean, uien, to
renew our quarrels? Have we not agreed not to expl^dn
that word proximate, but to use it on both sides without
defining what it signifies ? " To this the Jacobin gave his
assent.

I was thus let into the whole secret of the plot ; and ris-
ing to take m^ leave, I remarked : " Indeed, fathers, I am
much afraid this is nothing better than a mere quibble ; and
whatever may be the result of your convocations, I venture
to predict that, though the censure should pass, peace will
not be established. For though it should be decided that
the syllables of that word proximate should be pronounced,
who does not see that, the meaning not being explained,
each of you will be disposed to claim the victory? The
Jacobins will contend that the word is to be understood in
their sense; M. le Moine will insist that it must be taken in
his ; and thus there will be more wrangling about the ex-
planation of the word than about its introduction. For,
after all, there would be no great danger in adopting it with-
out any sense, seeing it is through the sense only that it can
do any harm. But it would be unworthy of the Sorbonne
and of theology to employ equivocal and captious terms with-

* Digtingtto—*'! draw a distinction"— a sly allusion to the endless dis-
tinctions of the Aristotelian school, in which the writings of the casuists
abounded, and by means of which they mi^ be said to have more frequently
eluded than elucidated the truth. M. le Moine was particularly fiEuuous for
these disHnguot, fireqnently introducing three or four of them in succession
on one head; and the disciple in the te» is made to echo the Cayoorite phrase
of his master.

LET. I.] PROXIMATE POWER. 79

out giving any explanation of them. In short, fathers, tell
me, I entreat you for the last time, what is necessary to he
believed in order to be a good Catholic ? **

^Tou most say," they all vociferated simultaneously, I
*^ that all the righteous have the proximate powery abstract- (
ing from all sense — from the sense of the Tnomists and the
sense of other dxv'mes^—ahstrahendo a sensu Thomistarum et
a sensu aliorum theologonmi."

" That is to say," I replied, in taking leave of them, ^ that
I must pronounce that word to avoid being the heretic of a
name. For, pray, is this a Scripture word ?'*

" No," said they.

''Is it a word of the Fathers, the Oouncilsi or the
Popes?"

"No."

" Is the word, then, used by St Thomas? "

•*No."

" What occasion, therefore, is there for using it at all, .
since it has neither the authority of others nor any sense j
of itself?" '

" You are an opinionative fellow," said they ; " but you
shall say it, or you shall be a heretic, and M. Arnauld into
the bai^ain; for we have the majority, and should it be
necessary, we can bring a sufficient number of Cordeliers*
into the field to carry our point."

On hearing this substantial argument, I took my leave
of them, to write you the foregoing account of my inter-
view. From this you vnll perceive that the following^ v
Soints remun undisputed and uncondemned by either party : \
^rstf That grace is not given to all men. Second, That \
all the righteous have always the power of obeying the ^.
divine commandments. Third, That they require, never- «
theless, in order to obey them, and even to pray, an effica- {
cious gprace, which invincibly determines their wUl. FourtJif \
That this efficacious grace is not always granted to all the |
righteous, and that it depends on the pure mercy of God. f '
So that, after all, the truth is safe, and nothing is in any
danger but that word without sense — proximate.

&ppy the people who are ignorant of its existence 1 —

* Oorddien, adeelgnatlon of the Franclacans, or monks of the order of St

FlftQCiB.

t It has been Jostlj remarked^that Pascal here leaves the disputed points
in a stranm JnmUe after all. This is owing to his Jansenist leanings. See
aittiaTiciu Introduction,

so PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lbT. I

liappy those who lived before it was born I for I see nc>
help for it, unless the gentlemen of the Academy,* by an
act of absolute authority, banish that barbarous term, wnich
causes so many divisions, from beyond the precincts of the
Sorbonne. Unless this be done, the censure appears cer-
tain ; bat I can easily see that it will do no other harm than
diminish the credit t of the Sorbonne^ and deprive it of
that authority which is so necessary to it on other occasions.
Meanwhile, I leave you at perfect liberty toehold by the
word proanmate or not, just as you please; I^love you too
much to persecute you under that pretext.' IT .^us account
is not displeasing to you, I shall continue to acquaint you
with all tnat passes. — ^I am, &c.

* The Royal Academy, which compiled the celebrated Dictionary of the
n French Language, and was held at that time to be the great umpire in
^\ literature.

t The edition of 1667 had it, " Rendrt la, Smboimt iii«pr{nii!>2e— render
the Sorfoonne contemptible"— an expression much more Just, but which
the editors durst not aUow to remain in the subsequent editions.

LET. n.] OF SUinCIENT GRACE. 81

LETTER n.

OP SUFFICIENT ORACE.

Paris, January 29, \^5i^.

Sir, — Just as I had sealed up my last letter, I received a

visit from our old friend M. N . Nothing could have

happened more opportunely for the gratification of my curi-
osity; for he is thoroughly informed in the questions of
the day, and is completely in the secret of the Jesuits, at
whose houses, including those of their leading men, he is
a constant visitor. After having talked over the business
which brought him to my house, I asked him to state, in a
few words, what were the points in dispute between the two
parties.

He immediately complied, and informed me that the prin-
cipal points were two ; the first about the proximaU power,
and the second about sufficient grace, I nave enligntened
you on the first of these points in my former letter, and
shall now confine myself to the second.

In one word, then, I found that their difference about .9uffi-
cient grace may be defined thus : The Jesuits maintain that
there is a grace ^ven generally to all men, subject in such a
way to free-will that the ynW renders it efficacious or inefficaci-
ous at its pleasure, without any additional aid from God, and
without needing any thing on his part in order to act effec-
tively ; and hence they term this grace suffi^iient, be<iause it
suffices of itself for action. The Jansenists, again, will not
allow that any grace is actually sufficient which is not also
efficacious : that is, they hold that all those kinds of grace
which do not determine the will to act effectively are insuf-

82 PROVIwaAL LETTERS. [LET. IT.

ficient for action ; for they hold that a man can never act
without effieaciom grace.

Such are the points in controyersy between the Jesuits
and the Jansenists. My next object was to ascertain the
doctrine of the New Thomists.* " It is rather an odd one,"
he said ; " they agree with the Jesuits in admitting a mfi-
cimt grace given to all men ; but they muntain, at the same
time, that no man can act with this grace alone, but insist
that, in order to this, he must receive from God an efficaci-
ous grace, which really determines his will to the action, and
whicn God does not grant to all men."

** So that, according to this doctrine," said I, '* this grace
is sufficient without bein^ sufficient!"

"Exactly so," he replied; "for if it suffices, there is no
need of any thing more for acting ; and if it does not suffice,
why — ^it is not sufficient."

" But," asked I, " where, then, is the difference between
them and the Jansenists?''

" They differ in this," he replied, " that the Dominicans
have this good quaUfication, that they do not refuse to say
that all men have the sufficient grace,**

" I understand you," returned I ; " but they say it without
thinking it ; for they add, that, in order to action, we must
have an efficacious grace, which is not given to all ; conse-
quently, if they agree with the Jesuits in the use of a term
which has no sense, they differ from them, and coincide with
the Jansenists in the substance of the thing."

" That is very true," said he.

" How, then, said I, " are the Jesuits united with them ?
and why do ther not combat them as well as the Jansenists,
since they will always find powerful antagonists in these men,
who, by maintuning the necessity of the efficacious grace
which determines the will, will prevent them from establish-
ing that grace which they hold to be of itself sufficient?"

" The Dominicans are too powerful," he replied, " and the
Jesuits are too politic to come to an open rupture with them.
The Society is content with having prevailed on them so far
as to admit the name of suffi^sient grace, though thev under-
stand it in another sense ; by which manceuvre they gain
this advantage, that they will make their opinion appear un-
tenable, as soon as they judge it proper to do so. And this
will be no difficult matter; for, let it be once granted that

* The Dominicans.

LKT. II.] OF SUFFICIENT GRACE. 83

all men have the sufficient grace, nothing can he more
natural than to conclude, that the efficacious grace is not
necessary to action — ^the sufficiency of the general grace
precluding the necessity of all others. By saying syMGienti
we express all that is necessary for action ; and it will serve
little purpose for the Dominicans to exclaim that they attach
another sense to the expression ;* the people, accustomed to
the common acceptation of that term, would not even listen
to their explanation. Thus the Society gains a sufficient
advanti^e from the expression which has heen adopted by
the Dominicans, without pressing them any further; and
were you but acquainted with what passed under Popes Cle-
ment Vm. and Paul Y., and knew how the Society was
thwarted by the Dominicans in the establishment of the
sufficient grace, you would not be surprised to find that it
avoids embroiling itself in quarrels with them, and allows
them to hold their own opinion, provided that of the So-
ciety is left untouched ; more especially when the Domini-
cans countenance its doctrine, by agreeing to employ, on all
public occasions, the term sufficient grace,

" The Society," he continued, " is quite satisfied with their
complaisance. It does not insist on their denying the ne-
cessity of efficacious grace ; this would be urging them too
far. People should not bear hard on their friends ; and the
Jesuits have eained quite enough. The world is content
with words ; few thiiik of penetrating into the nature of
things ; and thus the name of suffi^cient grace being adopted
on both sides, though in different senses, none, except the
most subtle theologians, ever dreams of doubting that the
thing signified by that word is held by the Jacobins as well
as by the Jesuits ; and the result will show that these last are
not the greatest dupes."*

I observed, that they most be a shrewd class of people,
these Jesuits; and, availing myself of his advice, I went
straight to the Jacobins, at whose gate I found one of my
good friends, a staunch Jansenist (for you must know I have
got fViends among all parties), who was calling for another
monk, different from him whom I was in search of. I pre-
vailed on him, however, after much entreaty, to accompany
me, and inquired for one of my New Thomists. He was
delighted to see me again. " How now I my dear father/'

* Btla tuUefera voir que ca demiers ne sont pcu lei pUu dupes This

claoM, which appears in the last Paris edition, is wanting in the ordinary
editions. The following sentence seems to require it.

84 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. H.

I began ; ^^ it seems it is not enough that all men have a
proaimate power, with which they can never act with effect ;
they must nave besides this a sufficient grace, with which
they can act as little. Is not that the doctrine of your
school?"

" It is," said the worthy monk ; ** and I was upholding it
this very morning in the Sorbonne. I spoke on the point
during my whole half-hour; and, but for the sand-glass, I
bade rair to have reversed that wicked proverb, now so cur-
rent in Paris: 'He votes without speaking, like a monk in
the Sorbonne?'"*

" What do you mean by your half-hour and your sand*
glass?" I asked; *'do they cut your speeches by a certain
measure?"

** Yes," said he ; " they have done so for some days past."

** And do they oblige you to speak for half-an-hour ? "

" No ; we may speak as little as we please. "

" But not as much as you please? said I. "0 what a
capital regulation for the dunces! what a blessed excuse
for those who have nothing worth saying I But, to return
to the point, father ; this grace given to all men is sufficient,
is it not?"

"Yes," said he.

** And yet it has no effect without efficacious grace f**

** None whatever," he replied.

'*And all men have the sufficient," continued I, ^and
all have not the efficacious ?"

"Exactly," said he.

" That is," returned I, " all have enough of grace, and
all have not enough of it; that is, this grace suffices,
though it does not suffice — ^that is, it is sufficient in name,
and insufficient in nature. In good sooth, father, this is
particularly subtle doctrine! Have you forgotten, since
you retired to the cloister, the meaning attached, in the
world you have quitted, to the word sufficient f — don't you
remember that it includes all that is necessary for acting ?
But no, you cannot have lost all recollection of it ; for, to
avail myself of an illustration which will come home more

* n opine du hownetf comme un moine en Sor^>onne^lltenLD.j, " He rotes
with his cap, like a monk in the Sorbonne," alluding to the custom in that
place of taking off the cap when a member was not disposed to speak, or
m token of agreement with the rest. The half-hour sand-glass was a trick
of the Jesuits, or Molinist parly, to prevent their oj^nents from entering
closely into the merits ot the controversy, which required frequent refer-
ences to the fathers. (Nicole, i. 184.)

liET. n.] OP suTFiciEirr grace. ^ 86

vividly to your feelings, let us suppose that you were sup-
plied with no more than two oUnces of bread and a glass of
water daily ; would you be quit« pleased with your prior were
he to tell you that this would be sufficient to support you,
under the pretext that, along with something else, which,
however, he would not give you, you would have all that
would be necessary to support you? How, then, can you
allow yourselves to say that all men have sufficient grace for
acting, while you admit that there is another grace abso-
lutely necessary to acting, which all men have not? Is it
because this is an unimportant article of belief, and you leave
all men at liberty to believe that efficacious^ grace is neces-
sary or not, as they choose ? Is it a matter of indifference
to say, that with sufficient grace a man may really act ? "

"What!" cried the good man; "indifference! — ^it is
heresy — formal heresy. The necessity of efficacious grace
for acting effectively, is a point of faith — it is heresy to
deny it."

"Where are we now?" I exclaimed; "and which side
am I to take here ? If I deny the sufficient ^ace, I am a
Jansenist. If I admit it as the Jesuits do, in the way of
denying that efficacious grace is necessary, I shall be a
heretic, say you. And if I admit it as you do, in the way
of maintaining the necessity of efficacious grace, I sin
against common sense, and am a blockhead, say the Jesuits.
What must I do, thus reduced to the inevitable necessity
of being a blockhead, a heretic, or a Jansenist? And what
a sad pass are matters come to, if there are none but the
Jansenists who avoid coming into collision either with the
faith or with reason, and who save themselves at once from
absurdity and from error ! "

My Jansenist friend took this speech as a good omen,
and already looked on me as a convert. He said nothing to
me however ; but, addressing the monk, " Pray, father,'' in-
quired he, " what is the point on which you agree with the
Jesuits?"

"Wd agree in this," he replied, "that the Jesmts and
we acknowledge the sufficient grace given to all."

" But," said the Jansenist, " there are two things in this
expression sufficient grace — there is the sound, which is only
so much breath ; and there is the thing which it signifies,
which is real and effectual. And, therefore, as you are agreed
with the Jesuits in regard to the word sufficient^ and opposed
to them as to the sense^ it is apparent that you are opposed to

86 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. II.

them in regard to the substance of that term, and that
you only agree with them as to the sound. Is this what yoi
call actinff sincerely and cordially ? ''

''But, said the good father, ''what cause have you to
complain, since we deceiye nobody by this mode of speaking?
In our schools we openly teach that we understand it in a
manner different from the Jesuits."

"What I compkdn of," returned my friend, "is, that
you do not proclaim it every where, that by sufficient grace
you understand the grace which is not sufficient. Tou are
bound in conscience, by thus altering the sense of the ordi-
nary terms of theology, to tell that, while you admit a suffi-
cient grace in all men, you understand that they have not
sufficient grace in effect. All classes of persons in the world
understand the word sufficient in one and the same sense ;
the New Thomists alone understand it in smother sense.
All the women, who form one-half of the world, all cour-
tiers, all military men, all magistrates, all lawyers, merchants,
artisans, the whole populace — in short, aU sorts of men,
except the Dominicans— understand the word sufficient to
express all that is necessary. Scarcely anybody is aware of
this singular exception. It is reported all the world over,
simply that the Dominicans hold that aU men have sufficient
grace. What other conclusion can be drawn from this, than
that they hold that all men have all the grace necessary for
action; especially when they are seen joined in interest and
intrigue vnth the Jesuits, who understand the thing in that
sense? Is not the uniformity of your expressions, viewed
in connection with this union of party, a manifest indicatior
and proof of the uniformity of your sentiments ?

" The multitude of the faithful inquire of theologians :
What is the real condition of human nature since the fall ?
St Augustine and his disciples reply, that it has no suffi-
cient grace until God is pleased to bestow- it. Next come
the Jesuits, and they say that all have effectively sufficient
grace. The Dominicans are consulted on this contrariety
of opinion; and what course do they pursue? They unite
with the Jesuits: by this coalition they make up a ma-
jority; they secede from those who deny the sufficient
grace; they declare that all men possess it. Who, on
earing this, would imagine any thing else than that they
gave their sanction to the opinion of the Jesuits? And then
they add that, nevertheless, this said sufficient grace is per-
fectly useless without the efficacious, which is not given to all !

LET. n.] OF SUFFICIENT GRACE. 87

^ Shall I present you with a picture of the Church amidst
these conflicting sentiments? I consider her very like a
man who» leaving his native country on a journey^ is en-
countered by robbers, who inflict many wounds on him,
and leave him half-dead. He sends for three physicians
residing in the neighbouring towns. The first, on probing
his wounds, pronounces them mortal, and assures him that
none but God can restore to him his lost powers. The
second, coming after the other, chooses to flatter the man —
tells him that he has still sufficient strength to reach his
home; and, abusing the first physician who opposed hi^
advice, determines to be the ruin of him. In this dilemma,
the poor patient, observing the third medical gentleman at
a distance, stretches out his hands to him as the person who
should determine the controversy. This practitioner, on ex-
amining his wounds, and ascertaining tne opinions of the
two first doctors, embraces that of the second, and uniting
with him, the two conspire against the first, and being the
stronger party in number, drive him from the field in dis*
grace. From this proceeding, the patient naturally con-
cludes that the last comer is o^Jiu^ same opinion with the
second; and, on putdj^j^^JrifB question to him, he assures
him most positivelyrffit his strength is sufficient for pro-
secuting his journey. The wounded man, however, sen-
sible or his own weakness, begs him to explain to him
how he considered him sufficient for the journey. * Be-
cause,' replies his adviser, 'you are still in possession of
your legs, and legs are the organs which naturally suffice
for waging.' * But,' says the patient, * have I all the strength
necessary to make use of my legs ? for, in my present weak
condition, it humbly appears to me that they are wholly use-
less.* 'Certainly you have not,' replies the doctor; *you
will never walk effectively, unless Qoa vouchsafe some extra-
ordinary assistance to sustain and conduct you.' *Whatl'
exclaims the poor man, * do you not mean to say that I have
sufficient strength in me, so as to want for nothing to walk
effectively?' *Very far from it,* returns the physician.
*You must, then,' says the patient, 'bo of a diflferent
opinion from your companion there about my real con-
dition.' ' I must admit that I am,' replies the other.

" What do you suppose the patient said to this ? Why,
he complained of the strange conduct and ambiguous terms
of this third physician. He censured him for taking part
with the second, to whom he was opposed in sentiment.

88 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. IL

and with whom he had only the semblance of agreement, and
for having driven away tne first doctor, with whom he in
reality agreed; and, after making a trial of his strength,
and finding by experience his actual weakness, he sent
them both about their business, recalled his first adviser,
put hiii.8elf under his care, and having, by his advice, im-
plored from God the strength of which he confessed his
need, obtained the mercy he sought, and» through divine
help, reached his house in peace/'

The worthy monk was so confounded with this parable,
that he could not find words to reply. To cheer him up a
little, I said to him, in a mild tone : *' But, after all, my
dear father, what made you think of giving the name of
sufficient to a grace which you say it is a point of faith to
believe is, in fact, insufl&cient?"

"It is very easy for you to talk about it," said he.
** You are an independent and private man ; I am a monk
and in a community. Cannot you understand the difference
between the two cases ? We depend on superiors ; they
depend on others. They have promised our votes ; — ^what
would you have to become of me ? "

We understood this hint ; and it brought to our recollec-
tion the case of his brother monk, who, for a similar piece
of indiscretion, has been exiled to Abbeville.

*' But," I resumed, " how comes it about that your com-
munity is bound to admit this grace? "

"That is another question," he replied. "All that I
can tell you, in short, is, that our order has defended, to
the utmost of its ability, the doctrine of St Thomas on
efficacious grace. With what ardour did it oppose, from
the very commencement, the doctrine of Molina! How
did it labour to establish the necessity of the efficacious
grace of Jesus Chris t I Don't you know what happened
under Clement Vlll. and Paul V., and how the former
having been prevented by death, and the latter hindered
by some Italian affairs from publishing his bull, our arms
still sleep in the Vatican?* But the Jesuit^ availing
themselves, since the introduction of the heresy of Luther
and Calvin, of the scanty light which the people possess
for discriminating between the error of these men and the
truth of the doctrine of St Thomas, disseminated their
principles with such rapidity and success, that they be-
came, ere long, masters of the popular belief; while we,

* See Historical IrUrodudion, p. xriii.

LET. II.] OF SUFFICIENT GRACE. 89

on our part, found ourselves in the predicament of being
denounced as Calvinists, and treated as the Jansenists are
at present, unless we qualified the efficacious grace with
at least the apparent avowal of a sufficient. In this ex-
tremity, what better course could we have taken for saving
the truth, without losing our own credit, than by admit-
ting the name of sufficient grace while we denied that it
was such in effect ? Such is the real history of the case."*

This was spoken in such a melancholy tone, that I really
b^an to pity the man; not so, however, my companion.
" Flatter not yourselves," said he to the monk, " with having
saved the truth ; had she not found other defenders, in your
feeble hands she must have perished. By admitting into the
Church the name of her enemy, you have admitted the enemy
itself. Names are inseparable from things. If the term
sufficient grace be once established, it will be vain for you
to protest that you understand by it a grace which is not
sufficient. Your protest will be held inadmissible. Your
explanation will be scouted as odious in the world, where
men speak more ingenuously about matters of infinitely less
moment. The Jesuits will gain a triumph — ^it will be their
grace, which is sufficient in fact, and not yours, which is
only so in name, that will pass as established ; and the con-
verse of your creed will become an article of faith."

"We will all suffer martyrdom first," cried the father,
" rather than consent to the establishment of sufficient grace
in the sense of the Jesuits, St Thomas, whom we have
sworn to follow even to the death, is diametrically opposed
to such doctrine."

To this my friend, who took up the matter more seriously

* "It is certain," says Bayle, "that the obligation which the Romish
Gbarch is under to respect the doctrine of St Aagostine on the subject of
grace, in consequence of its haying received the sanction of Popes and
Councils at various times, placed it in a veiy awkward and ridiculous situation.
It is so obvious to every man who examines the matter without pre^judice,
and with the necessary means of information, that the doctrine of Augustine
and that of Jansenius are one and the same, that it is impossible to see,
without feelings of indignation, the Court of Ilome boasting of having con-
demned Jansenius, and nevertheless preserving to St Augustme all his glory.
The two things are utterly irreconcilable. What is more, the Council of
Trent, by condemning the doctrine of Calvin on firee-will, has, by necessity,
condemned that of St Augustine ; for there is no Calvinist who nas denied,
or who can deny, the concourse of the human will and the liberty of the soul,
in ttie sense wluch St Augustine gives to the words concourse, cooperation,
and liberty. There is no Calvinist who does not acknowledge the fi^edom of
the will, and its use in conversion, if that word is understood according to
the ideas of St Augustine. Those whom the Council of Trent condemns do
not reject firee-will, except as signifying the liberty of indifference. The
Thomists, also, r^ect it under this notion, and yet they pass for very good
Catholics." (Bayle's Diet., art. Augustine,)

90 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. IL

than I did, replied : " Come now, father, your fraternity has
received an honour which it sadly ahuses. It abandons
that grace which was confided to its care, and which has
never Deen abandoned since the creation of the world. That
victorious grace, which was waited for by the patriarchs,
predicted by the prophets, introduced by Jesus Christ,
preached by St Paul, explained by St Augustine, the greatest
of ihe fathers, embraced by his followers, confirmed by St
Bernard, the last of the fathers,* supported by St Thomas,
the angel of the schools, t transmitted by him to your order,
maintained by so many of your fathers, and so nobly defended
hj your monks under Popes Clement and Paul — ^that effica-
cious grace, which had been committed as a sacred deposit
into your hands, that it might find, in a sacred and ever-
lasting order, a succession of preachers, who might proclaim
it to the end of time — is discarded and deserted for interests
the most contemptible. It is high time for other hands to
arm in its quarrel. It is time for God to raise up intrepid
disciples of the Doctor of grace, % who, strangers to the en-
tanglements of the world, will serve God for his own sake.
Grace may not, indeed, number the Dominicans among her
champions, but champions she shall never want; for, by
her own almighty energy, she creates them for herself.
She demands hearts pure and disengaged ; nay, she herself
purifies and disengages them from worldly interests, incom-
patible with the truths of the Gospel. Reflect seriously
on this, father ; and take care that God does not remove this
candlestick from its place, leaving you in darkness, and with-
out the crown, as a punishment for the coldness which you
manifest in a cause so important to his Church."§

He might have gone on in this strain much longer, for he
was kindling as he advanced, but I inteiTupted him by rising
to take my leave, and saying, *' Indeed, my dear father, had I
any influence in France, I should have it proclaimed, by sound
of trumpet: ^Be it known to all men, that wJien the JDo^

*««The famous St Bernard, abbot of Glairva]* whose influence throughout
all Earope was incredible— whose word was a law, and whose counsels were
regardea by kinss and princes as so many orders, to which the most respectftU
obedience was due ; tnis eminent ecclesiastic was the person who contri-
buted most to enrich and aggrandize the CSstercian order." (Mosh. EoeL
Hist^cen. xii.)

t niomas Aquinas, a scholastic divine of the thirteenti4 century, who was
termed the Angdic J>octor,

t Augustine.

2 Who can help regretting that sentiments so evancrelical, so truly noble, and
eo eloquently expressed, diould have been held by Pascal in cozmection with
a Church which denounced him as a heretic for holding them I

LET. II.] OF SUmOIENT GRACE. 91

minica/ns say that sufficient grace is given to all, they vrvean
that all have not the grace which actually suffices/* After
which, you might say it as often as you please, but not other-
wise." And thus ended our colloquy.

Tou will perceive, therefore, that we have here a politic
sufficiency, somewhat similar to proximate power. Mean-
while I may tell you, that it appears to me that both the
oroximate power and this same sufficient grace may be safely
aoubted by anybody, provided he is not a Dominican.

I have just come to learn, when closing my letter, that the
censure* has passed. But as I do not yet know in what
terms it is worded, and as it will not be published till the
15th of February, I shall delay writing you about it till the
next post. — I am, &c.

* The censure of the Theological Faculty of the Sorbonne passed against
M. Arnauld, and which is Ailly discussed in Letter iii.

92 PROVINCIAL LETTERS.

REPLY OP " THE PROVINCIAL"

TO THE FIRST TWO LETTERS OF HIS FRIEND.

February 2, 1666.

Sir, — ^Tour two letters have not been confined to me.
Everybody has seen them, everybody understands them, and
everybody believes them. They are not only in high repute
among tneologians — they have proved agreeable to men of
the world, and intelligible even to the laSes.

In a communication which I lately received from one of
the gentlemen of the Academy — one of the most illustrious
names in a society of men who are all illustrious — who had
seen only your first letter, he writes me as follows : " I only
Avish that the Sorbonne, which owes so much to the memory
of the late cardinal,* would acknowledge the jurisdiction of
his French Academy. The author of the letter would be
satisfied ; for, in the capacity of an academician, I would au-
thoritatively condemn, I would banish, I would proscribe — I
had almost said exterminate — to the extent of my power, this
proximate power, which makes so much ado about nothing,
and without knowing what it would have. The misfortune
is, that our academic ^ power* is a very limited and remote
power. I am sorry for it; and still more sorry that my
small * power* cannot discharge me from my obligations to
you," «c.

My next extract is from the pen of a person whom I shall
not indicate in any way whatever. He writes thus to a lady

* The Cardinal de Richeliea, the celebrated founder of the French Aca<
iemj. The Sorbonne owed its magnificence to the liberality of this eminent
statesman, who rebuilt its house, enlarged its revenue^ enriched its library,
and took it under his special patronage. The French Academy being en-
gaged with their famous Dictionary of the French Language, Pascal takes
advantage of this in denouncing the barbarous terms employed by the Sor-
bonne.

I

BEPLT TO THE PTOST TWO LETTERS. 93

who had transmitted to him the first of your letters: ** You
can have no idea how much I am obliged to you for the
letter you sent me, it is so very ingenious, and so nicely
written. It narrates, and yet it is not a narrative ; it clears
up the most intricate and involved of all possible matters;
its raillery is exquisite ; it enlightens those who know little
about the subject, and imparts double delight to those who
understand it. It is an admirable apology; and, if they
would so take it, a delicate and innocent censure. In short,
that letter displays so much art, so much spirit, and so much
judpnnent, that I burn with curiosity to know who wrote
it," &c.»

Tou, too, perhaps, would like to know who the person is
that writes in this style ; but you must be content to esteem
without knowing him ; when you come to know him, your
esteem will be greatly enhanced.

Take my word for it, then, and continue your letters ; and
let the censure come when it may, we are quite prepared for
receiving it. These words, " proximate power, and " suffi-
cient grace," with which we are threatened, will frighten us
no longer. We have learned from the Jesuits, the Jacobins,
and M. le Moine, in how many different ways they may be
turned, and how little solidity there is in these new-fangled
terms, to give ourselves any trouble about them. — Mean-
while, I remain, &c.

* Though some have supposed that Pascal could not have written in such
a complimentary style of his own production, there seems no reason to ques-
tion tnat he was the author of the above reply. Nothing is more customary
in such kind of writings than to keep up the vraisemblance by some such
self-praise. Had Pascal l>een able to foresee the fame which his Letters would
really act^uir^ he would not have indulged in this badinage^

94 PROVINCIAL LBTTERS. [lBT. IH.

LETTER III.

INJUSTICE, ABSURDITY, AND NULLITY OP THE CENSURE ON

M. ARNAULD.

Paris, February 9, 1666.

Sir, — I have received your letter ; and, at the same time,
there was brought me a manuscript copy of the censure. I
find that I am as well treated in the former, as M.' Arnauld
is ill treated in the latter. I am afraid there is some extra-
vagance in both cases, and that neither of us is sufficiently
well known by our judges. Sure I am, that were we better
known, M. Arnauld would merit the approval of the Sor-
bonne, and I the censure of the Academy. Thus our inte-
rests are quite at variance with each other. It is his interest
to make himself known, to vindicate his innocence ; whereas
it is mine to remain in the dark, for fear of forfeiting my
reputation. Prevented, therefore, from showing my face, I
must devolve on you the task of making my acknowleclg-
ments to my illustrious admirers, while I undertake that of
furnishing you with the news of the censure.

I assure you. Sir, it has filled me with astonishment. I
expected to iind it condemning the most shocking heresy in
the world ; but your wonder will equal mine, when informed
that these alanning preparations, when on the point of
producing the grand effect anticipated, have all ended in
smoke.

To understand the whole affair in a pleasant way, only
recollect, I beseech you, the strange impressions which, for
a long time past, we have been taught to form of the Jan-
senists. Recall to mind the cabals, the factions, the errors,
the schisms, the outrages, with which they have been so long

LET. m.] THE CENSURE. 95

charged; the manner in which they have heen denounced
and vilified from the pulpit and the press ; and the degree
to which this torrent of ahuse, so remarkable for its vio-
lence and duration, has swollen of late years, when they have
been openly and publicly accused of being not only heretics
and schismatics, but apostates and infidels — ^with *' denying
the mystery of transubstantiation, and renouncing Jesus
Christ and the Gospel." *

After having published these startling t accusations, it was
resolved to examine their writings, in order to pronounce judg-
ment on them. For this purpose the second letter of M.
Arnauld, which was reported to be full of the grossest
eiTors, % is selected. The examinators appointed are his
most open and avowed enemies. They employ all their
learning to discover something that they might lay hold upon,
and at length they produce one proposition of a doctrinal cha-
racter, which they offer for censure.

What less could any one infer from such proceedings, than
that this proposition, selected under such remarkable circum-
stances, would contain the essence of the blackest heresies
imaginable? And yet the proposition so entirely agrees with
what is clearly and formally expressed in the passages from
the fathers quoted by M. Arnauld, that I have not met with
a single individual who could comprehend the difference
between them. Still, however, it might be imagined that
there must be a very great difference ; for the passages
from the fathers being unquestionably catholic, the proposi-
tion of M. Arnauld, if heretical, must be widely opposed § to
them.

Such was the difficulty which the Sorbonne was expected
to clear up. All Christendom waited, with eyes widely
opened, to discover, in the censure of these learned doctors.,
the point of difference which had proved imperceptible to
ordinai7 mortals. Meanwhile M. Arnauld gives in his

* The charge of *' denying the mystery of transubstantiation,** certainly did
not justly apply to the Jansenists as such; these religious devotees denied
nothing. Their system, so far as the dogmas of the Church were concerned,
was one of implicit faith; but thoueh Arnauld, Nicole, and the other learned
men among them, stifBy maintained the leading tenets of the Komish Church,
in opposition to those of the Reformers, the Jansenist creed, as held by their
pious followers, was practically at variance with transubstantiation, and
many other errors of the Church to which they nominally belonged. (Mad.
Schimmelpenninck's Demolition of Port-Royal, pp. 77, 80, Ac.)

t Atroces—" atrocious." (Edit. 16670

X Des plus detestables erreurg—" the most detestable errors." (Edit 1667.)
Erreun—" errors." (Nicole's 1 dit , 1767.)

i HmriMcmtnt coniraire—" horribly contrary." (Edit. IWl.)

93 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. HI.

defences, placinpf his own proposition and the passages of the
faihers from which he had drawn it in parallel columns, so
as to make the agreement between them apparent to the
mo^t obtuse understandings.

He shows, for example, that St Augustine says ih one
passage, that " Jesus Christ points out to us, in the person
of St Peter, a righteous man warning us by his fall to avoid
presumption." He cites another passage from the same
father, in which he says, " that God in order to show us that
without grace we can do nothing, left St Peter without
grace." He produces a third, from St Chrysostom, who
says, " that the fall of St Peter happened, not through any
'^oldness towards Jesus Christ, but because grace failed him ;
and that he fell, not so much through his own negligence as
throiigh the withdrawment of God, as a lesson to the whole
Church, that without God we can do nothing." He then
gives his own obnoxious proposition, which is as follows:
" The fathers point out to us, in the person of St Peter, a
righteous man to whom that grace without which we can
do nothing was wanting."

In vain did people attempt to discover how it could possibW
be, that M. Arnauld's expression differed as far from those
of the fathers as truth from error, and faith from heresy.
For where was the difference to be found ? Could it be in
these words, ** That the fathers point out to us, in the person
of St Peter, a righteous man?" St Augustine has said
the same thing in so many words. Is it because he says
" that grace had failed him ? " The same St Augustine,
who had said that '* St Peter was a righteous man," says
" that he had not had grace on that occasion." Is it, then,
for his having said "that without grace we can do nothing?"
Why, is not this just what St Augustine says in the same
place, and what St Chrysostom had said before him, with
this difference only, that he expresses it in much stronger
language, as when he says, "that his fall did not happen
through his own coldness or negligence, but through the
failure of grace, and the withdrawment of God ? " *

Such considerations as these kept everybody in a state of
breathless suspense, to learn in what this diversity could con-

* The in*»aning of these fathers is good, but their expressions are often
more remarkable for their strength than their precision. The intelligent
reader hardly needs to be reminded, that if divine gra e can be said to have
failed Ihe Apostle Peter at his fall, it can onl^ be in the sense of a temporary
suspension of its influences; and that this withdrawment of grace must ba
regarded as the punishment, and not as the cause, of h>s own negligence.

LET. Iir. ] THE CENSURE. 97

sist, when, at length, after a great many meetings, this fa-
mous and long-looked-for censure made its appearance. But,
alas ! it has sadly baulked our expectations. Whether it be
that the Molinist doctors would not condescend so far as to
enlighten us on the point, or for some other mysterious reason,
the fact is, they have done nothing more than pronounced
the following words : " This proposition is rash, impious, blas-
phemous, accursed, and heretical !*'

Would you believe it. Sir, that most people finding them-
selves deceived in their expectations, have got into bad hu-
mour, and begin to fall upon the censors themselves ? , They
are drawing strange inferences from their conduct in favour
of M. Arnauld's innocence. " What !" they are saying, " is
this all that could be achieved, during all this time, by so
many doctors joining in a furious onset against one indivi-
dual? Can they find nothing in all his works worthy of re-
prehension except three lines, and these extracted, word for
word, from the greatest doctors of the Greek and Latin
Churches ? Is there any author whatever whose writings,
were it intended to ruin him, would not furnish a more spe-
cious pretext for the purpose ? And what higher proof could
be furnished of the orthodoxy of this illustrious culprit ?

" How comes it to pass," they add, " that so many denun-
ciations are launched in this censure, into which they have
crowded such terms as * poison, pestilence, horror, rashness,
impiety, blasphemy, abomination, execration, anathema, he-
resy* — the most dreadful epithets that could be used against
Arius, or Antichrist himself; all to combat an imperceptible
heresy, and that, moreover, without telling us what it is ? If
it be against the words of the fathers that they inveigh in this
style, where is the faith and tradition ? If against M. Arnauld*s
proposition, let them point out the difference between the
two ; for we can see nothing but the most perfect harmony
between them. As soon as we have discovered the evil of
the proposition, we shall hold it in abhorrence ; but so long
as we do not see it, or rather see nothing in the statement
but the sentiments of the holy fathers, conceived and expressed
in their own terms, how can we possibly regard it with any
other feelings than those of sacred veneration ? "

Such is a specimen of the language in which they are
giving vent to their feelings. But these are by far too deep-
thinking people. You and I, who make no pretensions to
such extraordinary penetration, may keep ourselves quite easy
about the whole affair. What ! would we be wiser than our

98 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. HI.

masters ! No : let as take example from them, and not un-
dertake what they have not ventured to perform. We should
inevitably get entano^led in^such an attempt. Why, it would
be the easiest thing inoaginable to render this censure itself
heretical. Truth, we know, is so delicate, that if we made
the slightest deviation from it, we fall into error ; but this
alleged error is so extremely fine-spun, that, if we diverge
from it in the slightest degree, we fall back upon the truth.
There is nothing between this obnoxious proposition and the
truth but an imperceptible point. In fact, the distance be-
tween them is so impalpable, that I was ajarmed lest, from
pure inability to perceive it, I might, in my over-anxiety to
agree with the doctors of the Sorbonne, place myself in op-
position to the doctors of the Church. Under this apprehen-
sion, I judged it expedient to consult one of those who, through
policy, were neutral on the first question, that from him I
might learn the real state of the matter. I have accordingly
had an interview with one of the most intelligent of that
party, wholii I requested to point out to me the difference
between the two things, at the same time frankly owning to
him that I could see none.

He appeared to be amused at my simplicity, and replied,
with a smile : *• How simple it is in you to believe that there
is any difference I Why, where could it be ? Do you ima-
gine that, if they could have found out any discrepancy be-
tween M. Arnauld and the fathers, they would not have
boldly pointed it our, and been delighted with the oppor-
tunity of exposing it before the public, in whose eyes they
are so anxious to depreciate that gentleman ? ''

I could easily perceive, from these few words, that those
who had been neutral on the first question, would not all
prove so on the second ; but anxious to hear his reasons,
I asked : " Why, then, have they attacked this unfortunate
proposition ? *'

" Is it possible," he replied, " that you can be ignorant of
these two things, which I thought had been known to th»
veriest tyro in these matters — ^that, on the one hand, M.
Arnauld has uniformly avoided advancing a single tenet which
is not powerfully supported by the tradition of the Church ;
and that, on the other hand, his enemies have determined,
cost what it may, to cut that ground from under him ; and,
accordingly, that as the writings of the former afforded no
handle to the designs of the latter, they have been obliged,
ii order to satiate their revenge, to seize on some propo-

LET. in.] THE CENSURE. 9%

sition, it mattered not what, and to condemn it without tell-
ing why or wherefore? Do you not know how the Jan-
senists Keep them in check, and annoy them so desperately,
that they cannot drop the slightest word against the prin-
ciples of the fathers without heing incontinently overwhelmed
with whole volumes, under the weight of which they are
forced to succumb ? So that, after a great many proofs of
their weakness, they have judged it more to their pur-
pose, and much less troublesome, to censure than to reply—*
It being a much easier matter with them to find monks than
reasons." *

" Why then," said I, " if that be the case, their censure is
good for nothing ; for who will pay any regard to it, when
they see it to be without foundation, and refuted, as it no
doubt will be, by the answers made to it ? "

" If you knew the temper of the populace," replied my
friend the doctor, ** you would talk in another strain. That
censure, censurable as it is, will produce nearly all its designed
effect for a time ; and although, by the dint of demonstration,
it is certain that, in course of time, its invalidity will be
made apparent, it is equally true that at first it will tell as
effectually on the minds of most people as if it had been the
most righteous sentence in the world. Let it only be cried
about the streets : * Here you have the censure of M. Arnauld !
— here you have the condemnation of the Jansenists I * and the
Jesuits will find their advantage in it. How few will ever
read it! How few of those who do read will understand it!
How few will observe that it answers no objections I How
few will take the matter to heart, or attempt to sift it to the
bottom I — Mark, then, how much advantage this gives to the
enemies of the Jansenists They are sure to make a triumph
of it, though a vain one, as usual, for some months at least
— and that is a great matter for them. When that is ex-
hausted, they will look out for some new means of subsist-
ence. They live from hand to mouth. Sir. It is in this
way they have contrived to maintain themselves down to the
present day. Now it is by a catechism, in which a child is
made to condemn their opponents ; then it is by a procession,
in which sufficient grace leads the efficacious in triumph;
again it is by a comedy, in which Jansenius is represented
as carried off by devils ; next time it is by an almanac ; and
now it is by this censure." t

* That is, they could more readily procure monks to vote against IL
Araauld, than arguments to answer him.
t The allusions la the text afford carious illastratlons of the mode of

loo PROVINCIAL LETTERS. {lET. HI.

"In good sooth," said I, ** I was on the point of finding
fault with the conduct of the Jesuits ; but after what you
have told me, I must say I admire their prudence and their
policy. I see perfectly well that they could not have fol-
lowed a safer or more judicious course."

" You are right," returned he ; " their safest policy has
ever been to keep silence; and this led a certain learned
divine to remark, Uhat the cleverest among them are those
who intrigue much, speak little, and write nothing.'

"It is on this principle that, from the commencement of
the meetings, they prudently ordained that, if M. Arnauld
came into the Sorbonne, it must be simply to explain what
be believed, and not to enter the lists of controversy with any
one. The examinators having ventured to depart a little
from this prudent arrangement, suffered for their temerity.
They found themselves rather too vigorously * refuted by his
second apology.

" On the same principle, thev had recourse to that rare
and very novel device of the half-hour and the sand-gk ^,t
By this means they rid themselves of the importunity of tnose
troublesome doctors,t who might undertake to refute all
their arguments, produce books which might convict them of
forgery, insist on a reply, and reduce them to the predica-
ment of having none to give.

" Not that they were so blind as not to see that this en-
croachment on liberty, which has induced so many doctors
to withdraw from the meetings, would do no good to their
censure ; and that the protest of nullity, taken on this ground
by M. Arnauld before it was concluded, would be a bad pre-

warbre pursued by the Jesuits of the seventeenth century. The first re-
fers to a comic catechism, in which the simple language of childhood was
employed as a vehicle for the most calumnious charges against the oppo-
nents of the Society. Pascal refers again to this catechism in Letter xvii.
The second device was a sort of school-boy masquerade. A handsome
youth, disguised as a female, in splendid attire, aud bearing the insciiption
of sufficient grace, dragged behind him another dressed as a bishop (repre-
ienting Jansen, bishop of Tpres), who followed with a rueful visage, amidst
the hootings of the other boys. The comedy referred to was acted in the
Jesuits college of Olermont The almanacs published in France at that
{>eriod being usually embellished with rude cuts for the amusement of
the vulgar, the Jesuits procured the insertion of a caricature of the Jan-
senists, who were represented as pursued by the Pope, and taking refh^e
among the Calvinists. This, however, called forth a retaliation, in the
shape of a poem, entitled "The ^ints of the Famous Jesuitical Almanac,"
in which tne Jesuits were so successftdly held up to ridicule, that ihev
could hardly show face for some time in the streets of Paris. (Nicole, i.
p. 208.)

* VertemerU—" anxartlj." (Edit 1857.)

t See Letter ii.

I Cu ttoctmrt--" those doctors." (Edit. 1767.)

LET. m.] l-HE CENSURE. 101

amble for securing it a favourable reception. They know
very well that unprejudiced persons place fully as much weight
on the judgment of seventy doctors, who had nothing to gain
by defending M. Arnauld, as on that of a hundred others who
had nothing to lose by condemning him. But, upon the
whole, they considered that it would be of vast importance
to have a censure, although it should be the act of a party
only in the Sorbonne, and not of the whole body ; although
it should be carried with little or no freedom of debate, and
obtained by a great many small manoeuvres not exactly ac-
cording to order ; although it should give no explanation of
the matter in dispute ; although it should not point out in
what this heresy consists, and should say as little as possible
about it, for fear of committing a mistake. This very si-
lence is a mj^stery in the eyes of the simple ; and the censure
will reap this singular advantage from it, that they may defy
the most critical and subtle theologians to find in it a single
weak argument.

" Keep yourself easy, then, and do not be afraid of being
denounced as a heretic, though you should make use of the
obnoxious proposition. The proposition is bad, I assure you,
only as occurring in the second letter of M. Arnauld. If
you do not believe this statement on my word, 1 refer you to
M. le Moine, the most zealous of the examinators, who, in
the course of conversation with a doctor of my acquaintance
this very morning, on being asked by him, where lay the
point of difference in dispute, and if we would no longer be
allowed to say what the fathers had said before us, made the
following exquisite reply : * This proposition would be ortho-
dox in the mouth of any other — it is only as coming from
M. Arnauld that the Sorbonne have condemned it 1 ' You
must now be prepared to admire the legerdemain of Jesuit-
ism, which can execute such astonishing changes in the
Church, that what is catholic in the fathers becomes hereti-
cal in M. Arnauld; what is heretical in the semi- Pelagians
becomes orthodox in the writings of the Jesuits; the ancient
doctrine of St Augustine becomes an intolerable innovation;
and new inventions, daily fabncated before our eyes, pass for
the ancient faith of the Church 1 " So saying, he took his
leave.

This piece of information has served my purpose. I gather
from it that this same heresy is one of an entirely new species.
It is not the sentiments of M. Arnauld that are heretical ;
it is only his person. It is a personal heresy. He is not a

102 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [leT. IIL

heretic for any thing he has said or written, hut simply be>
cause he is M . Arnauld. This is all they have to say against
him. Do what he may, unless he cease to be, he will never
be a good Catholic The grace of St Augustine will never
be the true grace, so long as he continues fo defend it. It
would become so at once were he to take it into his head to
impugn it. That would be a sure stroke, and almost the
only plan for establishing the truth and demolishing Jesuit-
ism. Such is the fatality attending all the opinions which
he embraces.

Let us leave them, then, to settle thejr own differences.
These are the disputes of theologians, not of theology. We,
who ai^e no doctors, have nothing to do with their quarrels.
Tell all our friends the news of the censure, and love me
while I am, &c.*

* In Nicole's edition, this letter is signed with the initials "E. A A. B. P.
A. F. D. E. P.** which seem merely a chance m 'dley of letters, to perplex
those who were so anxious to discover the author. There may have been an
allusion to the absurd story of a Jansenist conference held, it was said, aX
Bourg Fontaine, in 1621, to deliberate on ways and means for abolishing
Christianity; at which Anthony Arnauld was ridiculously accused of having
been present under tha initiiiU A. A. (See Bayle*! Diet., art. A nt. AmuuM.)

LET. IV.] ACTUAL GRACE AND SINS OF IGNORANCE. 103

LETTER IV,

ON ACTUAL GRACE AND SINS OF IGNORANCE.

Paris, Fehrwiry 25, 1656.

Sir, — Nothing can equal the Jesuits. I have seen Jaco-
bins, doctors, and all sorts of people, in my day, but such an
interview as I have just had with these fathers was wanting
to complete my knowledge of mankind. Other men are
merely copies of them. As things are always best at the
fountainhead, I paid a visit to one of the ablest among them,
in company with my trusty Jansenist — the same who accom-
panied me to the Dominicans. Being particularly anxious
to learn something of a dispute whicn they have with the
Jansenists about what they call ctctuoU grace, I said to the
worthy father, that I should be much obliged to him if he
would inistruct me on this point — ^that I did not even know
what the t^rm meant, and would thank him to explain it.
" With all my heart," the Jesuit replied, " for I dearly love
your inquisitive people. Actual grace, according to our
definition, ' is an mspiration of God, whereby he makes us
know his will, and excites within us a desire to perform it.'"

** And where," said I, ** lies your difference with the Jan-
senists on this subject?"

" The difference lies here," he replied ; " we hold that God
bestows actual grace on all men in every case of temptation ;
for we maintain, that unless a person have, whenever tempted,
actual grace to keep him from sinning, his sin, whatever it
may be, can never be imputed to him. The Jansenists, on
the other hand, affirm that sins, though committed without
actual grace, are nevertheless imputed ; but they are a pack
of fools." I got a glimpse of his meaning ; but, to obtain
from him a fuller explanatioid, I observed : <* My dear father^

104 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. IT.

it is that phrase actual grace that puzzles me ; I am quite
a stranger to it, and if you would have the goodness to tell
me the same thing over again, without employing that term,
you would infinitely oblige me.**

"Very good,** returned the father; **that is to say, you
wish me to substitute the definition in place of the thmg it-
self; that can make no alteration on the sense ; I have no
objections. We maintain it, then, as an undeniable prin-
ciple, that an action cannot he imputed as a sin, unless God
bestow on us, before committing it, the knowledge of the evil
that is in the action, and an inspiration inciting us to avoid
it. Do you understand it now ? *'

Astonished at such a declaration, according to which no
sins of surprise, nor any of those committed in entire forget-
fulness of God, could be imputed, I turned round to my
friend the Jansenist, and easily discovered from his looks
that he was of a different way of thinking. But as he did
not utter a word, I said to the monk : ** 1 would fain wish,
my dear father, to think that what you have now said is true,
and that you have good proofs for it."

" Proofs, say you ! '* he instantly exclaimed : " I shall fur-
nish you with these very soon, and the very best sort too;
let me alone for that."

So saying, he went in search of his books ; and I took this
opportunity of asking my friend if there was any other per-
son who talked in this manner ? "Is this so strange to
you ? " he replied. " Depend upon it, neither the fathers,
nor the popes, nor councils, nor Scripture, nor any book of
devotion, employ such language; but if you wish casuists
and modern schoolmen, he will bring you a goodly number
of them on his side."

" 1 but I care not a straw for these authors, if they ai*e
contrary to tradition," I said.

" You are right," he replied.

As he spoke the good father entered the room, laden with
books; and presenting to me the first that came to hand,
« Read that,^* he said; it is 'The Summary of Sms' by Fa-
ther Bauny* — the fifth edition too, you see, which shows
that it is a good book."

* Etienne Baani, or Stephen BauDV, was a French Jesuit His " Sum-
uarv," which Pascal has immortalized, by his frequent references lo it, was
published in 1633. It is a large volume, replete with the most detestable
doctrines. In 1612, the General Assembly of the French clergy censured
his books on moral theology, as containing propositions " leading to llcenli-
eoaness and the corruption of good manners, violating uatuial equay, und

LET. IV.] ACTUAL GRACE AND SINS OF IGNORANCE. 105

" It is a pity, however," whispered the Jansenist in my ear,
" that this same book has been condemned at Borne, and by
the bishops of France."

" Look at page 906," said the father. I did so, and read
as follows : ** In order to sin and become culpable in the sight
of God, it is necessary to know that the thing we wish to do
is not good, or at least to doubt that it is — to fear or to judge
that God takes no pleasure in the action which we contem-
plate, but forbids it ; and in spite of this, to commit the deed,
leap over the fence, and transgress."

** This is a good commencement," I remarked.

" And yet, said he, " only see how far envy will carry
some people. It was on that very passage that M. Hallier,
before he became one of our friends, quizzed Father Bauny,
by applying to him these words: * Ecce qxii tollit peccata
mundi — ^Behold the man that taketh away the sins of the
world!'"

" Certainly," said I, " according to Father Bauny, we may
be said to have an entirely new kind of redemption ! "

"Would you have a more authentic witness on the point?"
added he. " Here is the book of Father Annat.* It is the
last that he wrote against M. Arnauld. Turn up to page
34, where there is a dog's ear, and read the lines which I
have marked with pencil — they ought to be written in letters
of gold."

I then read these words: ''He that has no thought of
God, nor of his sins, nor any apprehension (that is, as he
explained it, any knowledge) of nis obligation to exercise
the acts of love to God, or contrition, has no actual grace
for exercising those acts ; but it is equally true that ne is

excusing blasphemy, nsurj, simony, and other heinous sins, as trivial mat-
tera.** ^icole, i. 1€4.) And yet this Hbominable work was Ibrmally d»>
fended in the " Apology for the Gas^uists," written in 1657, by Father Pirot,
and acknowledged by the Jesuits as having been written under their direc-
tion ! (Nicole, Hist, de^ Provinciales, p. SO.)

* Francis Annat was bom in the > ear 1590. He was made rector of the
College of Toulouse, and appointed bv the Jtrsuits their French provincial ;
and, while in that situation, was chosen by Louis XiV. as his confessor.
His fjriends have highly extolled his virtues as a man ; and the reader may
Judge of the value of tnese eulogiums from the fact, that he retained his

?osi; as the favourite confessor of that licentious monarch, without interrup-
ion, till deafness prevented him fiom listening any longer to the confessions
of his royal penitent. (Bayle, art. AnncU.) They have also extolled his
answer to the Provincial Letters, in his •* Bonne Foy des Jansenistes," in
whiv^h he professed to expose the falsity of the quotations made from the
Casuists, with what success appears from the notes of Nicole, who has com-
pletely vindicated Pascal from the unfounded charges which ihc Jesuits
have reitei-ated on this ) oiui. (Notes Freliminaires, vol. i. p 266, Ac; £u-
tretiens de Gleandre et Jb.udoxe, p. 79.)

i'

100 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. IV.

guilty of no sin in omitting them, and that, if he is damned.
It will not he as a punishment for that omission." And a
few lines below, he adds : ** The same thing may be said of
a culpable commission."

** You see,** said the monk, " how he speaks of sins of
omission and of commission. Nothing escapes him. What
say you to that?"

" Say ! " I exclaimed ; " I am delighted I What a charm-
ing train of consequences do I discover flowing from this
doctrine! I can see the whole results already; and such
mysteries present themselves before me ! Why, I see more
people, beyond all comparison, justified by this ignorance
and forgetfulness of God, than by grace and the sacraments ! *
But, my dear father, are you not inspiring me with a delusive
joy ? Are you sure there is nothing here like that sufficiency/
which suffi^ces not f I am terribly afraid of the Distingue : —
I was taken in with that once aleady. Are you quite in
earnest ? "

**' How now ! " cried the monk, beginning to get angry ;
'* this is no matter for jesting. I assure you there is no such
thing as equivocation here."

'* I am not making a jest of it," said I ; '^ but that is what
I realhr dread, from pure anxiety to find it true."

" Well then," he said, " to assure yourself still more of it,
here are the writings of M. le Moine,t who taught the doc-
trine in a full meeting of the Sorbonne. He learned it from
us to be sure; but he has the merit of having cleared it up
most admirably. Only observe how particular he is ! Ho
shows that, in order to make out an action to be a sin, all
these things must have passed through the mind. Read, and
weigh every word."

I then read what I now give you in a translation from
the original Latin : ** First, On the one hand, God sheds
abroad on the soul some measure of love, which gives it a
bias toward the thing commanded ; and on the other, a re-
* When Madame du Valois, a lady of birth and high accomplishments,

one of the nuns of Port-Koyal, among other trials by which she was harassed
' *5r not siRuiny - - •
>eing depri'^
she replied: "if at the awftil hour of death I should be deprived of those

and tormented for not siRuins< the formulary condemning .Tani>en. wafi threat-
ened with l>eing deprived of the benefit of the sacraments at the hour of death.

assistances which the Church grants to all her children^ then Ood himself
will, by his grace, immediately and abundantly Mipply their instnimentality.
I know, indeed, that it is most painful to appioach Uia awfiil hour of death
without an outward participation in ihe sacraments ; but it is better dying, .o
enter into heaven, thouga without the sacraments, for the cause of truth,
than, receiving the sacraments, to be cited to Irrevocable Judgment for com-
mitting jpeijury." (Narrative p* ©em. of Port-Boyal, p. 176.)
t See before, pa^e 75.

LET. IV.] ACTUAL GRACE AND SINS OP IGNORANCE. 107

bellious concupiscence solicits it in the opposite direction.
Second, God inspires the soul with a knowledge of its own
weakness. Third, God reveals the knowledge of the physi-
cian who can heal it. Fourth, God inspires it with a desire
to be healed. Fifth, God inspires a desire to pray and soli-
cit his assistance." " And unless all these things occur and
pass througH the soul," added the monk, " the action is not
properly a sin, and cannot be imputed, as M. le Moine shows
in the same place and in what follows. Would you wish to
have other authorities for this ? Here they are.

"All modem ones, however," whispered my Jansenist friend.

" So I perceive," said I to him, aside; and then, turning to
the monk : " O, my dear Sir," cried I, " what a blessing this
will be to some persons of my acquaintance ! I must posi-
tively introduce them to you. You have never, perhaps, in
all your life, met with people who had fewer sins to account
fori In the first place, they never think of God at all;
their vices have got the better of their reason; they have
never known either their weakness or the physician who can
cure it; they have never thought of 'desiring the health of
their soul,* and still less of 'praying to God to bestow it;'
so that, according to M. le Moine, they are still in the state
of baptismal innocence. They have * never had a thought
of loving God, or of being contrite for their sins;' so that,
according to Father Annat, they have never committed sin
through the want of charity and penitence. Their life is
spent in a perpetual round of all sorts of pleasures, in the
course of which they have not been interrupted by the
slightest remorse. These excesses had led me to imagine
that their perdition was inevitable; but you, father, inform
me that these same excesses secure their salvation. Blessings
on you, my good father, for this new way of justifying people !
Others prescribe painful austerities for healing the soul ; but
you show that souls which may be thought desperately dis-
eased are in quite good health. What an excellent device
for being happy both in this world and in the next ! 1 had
always supposed that the less a man thought of God, the
more he sinned; but, from what I see now, if one could only
succeed in bringing himself not to think upon God at all,
every thing would be pure with him in all time coming.
Away with your half-and-half sinners, who retain some sneak-
ing affection for virtue! They will be damned every soul of
them. But commend me to your arrant sinners — hardened,
unalloyed, out-and-out, thorough-bred sinners. Hell is no

103 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. IV,

place for them ; they have cheated the devil, bj sheer devo-
tion to his service ! '

The good father, who saw very well the connection between
these consequences and his principle^ dexterously evaded the
point; and maintaining his temper, either from good nature
or policy, he merely replied, " To let you understand how
we avoid these inconveniences, you must know that, while
we affirm that these reprobates to whom you refer would* be
vnthout sin if they had no thoughts of conversion and no
desire to devote themselves to God, we maintain that they
all actually have such thoughts and desires, and that God
never permitted a man to sin without giving him previously
a view of the evil which he contemplated, and a desire, either
to avoid the offence, or at all events to implore his aid to
enable him to avoid it : and none but Jansenists will assert
the contrary."

" Strange, father ! " returned I ; "is this, then, the heresy
of the Jansenists, to deny that every time a man commits a
sin, he is troubled with a remorse of conscience, in spite of
which, he * leaps over the fence and trangresses,' as Father
Bauny has it ? It is rather too good a joke to be made a
heretic for that. I can easily believe that a man may be
damned for not having good thoughts ; but it never would
have entered my head to imagine that any could be subjected
to that doom for not believing that all mankind must have
good thoughts ! But, father, I hold myself bound in con-
science to disabuse you, and to inform you that there are
thousands of people who have no such desires — ^who sin with-
out regret — who sin with delight — who make a boast of sin-
ning. And who ought to know better about these things
than yourself? You cannot have failed to have confessed
some of those to whom I allude ; for it is among persons of
high rank that they are most generally to be met with.* But
mark, father, the dangerous consequences of your maxim.
Do you not perceive what effect it may have on those liber-
tines who like nothinor better than to find out matter of
doubt in religion ? What a handle do you give them, when
you assure them, as an article of faith, that on every occasion
when they commit a sin, they feel an inward presentiment of

♦ The Jesuits were notorious for the assiduity with wliich they sought ad-
mission int J the families, and courted the confidence of the great, with whom,
from the laxness of their discipline and morality, as well as from their supe-
) )or manners and accomplishments, they were, as they still are, the favourite
confessors. They have a maxim among tlieir secret instnictions, that in
dealing with the consciences of the great, the confessor must be guided by
the loo-v sort of opinions.

LET. IT.] ACTUAL QSACB AHC SINS OF ISHOBANOE. 109

the evil, and » desire to avoid it I Is it not obvionB that,

feeling convinced bv their owd eiperience of the falsitj of
jour doctrine on this point, which yoa saj is a matter of
ffutb, they will extend the inference drawn from tWs to all
the other points ? Thev will argue that, sinoe jou are not
truattvorthy in one article, you are to be suspected in them
all ! and thus you shut them up to conclude, either th&t r&.
ligton is false, or that you most know very little about it." *

Here mj friend the Jansenist, following up mj remarks,
said to him : " Yoa would do well, father, if yon wish to pre-
serve your doctrine, not to explain so precisely as you nave
done to us, what jou mean by actual grace. For, how
could you, without forfeiting all credit in the estimation of
men, openly declare that nobody tins without having ptwi-
otaly the lHwwkdge of hit weahaest, and of a phytieiati, or
the detire of a ewe, and of asking it of Qodt Will it be
beliered, on your word, that those who are immersed in
avarict^ impurity, blasphemy, duelling, revenge, robbery, and
sacrilege, have really a desire to embrace chastity, humility,
and the other Christian virtues ? Can it be conceived that
those philosophers who boasted so loudly of the powers of
nature, knew its infirmity and its physician ? Will jon mun.
tain that those who held it as a setUed maxim 'that it is not,
Ood that bestows virtue, and that no one ever asked it from
him,' would think of asking it for themselves ? Who can
believe that the Kpicureans, who denied a divine providence
ever felt any inclinations to pray to Qod ? — men who said
that 'it would be an insult to invoke the Brity in our neces-
sities, as if he were capable of wasting a thought on the like
of us ? ' In a word, how can it be imagined that idolaters
and atheists, every time they are tempted to the commission
of un — in other words, infinitely often during th^ live^—
have a deare to pray to the true God, of whom they are
ignorant, that he would bestow on them virtues of which
Uiey have no conception ? "

"Yes^" said the worthy monk, in a resolute tone, "we will
affirm it : and sooner than allow that aaj one sini vrithout

* Paacid hu h^re unMlttlnglyiaqchsdoDoiw of Iha reuooi Which aoeonnt
far the more inteUi^EDt Bomaa CaltaoUca ■> olt«a lUllDS Into InlldeUl;.
Blind lilOi, when demiDded in oppoiitlan to Uw tcaUiuHij at Ow hdmi,
u In Uu out or inunbdanUatlon, ia tot V f Im* >n ■» Uth U ill.
yoUnlnind Ihe othsr French infldeti^nucolu on tIU>prlnelBK'*n pav-
tlegltrtf Indtgnant ■( tlie Froteatanti, who woou hav* s^tiaMaCliilMlaDi^'
tVom Bommftm. IHiey telC ■orelf mulblo that the fnroe of th^ i fwiilnij
Uw point or ilMir sUIie, and the KUldltT oC Ihdr noand, ill dnnndMI on
Iha fire thlDgi being identified.

110 PBOYHrCIAL LETTERS. [LBT. IV.

having the consciousness that he is doing evil, and the desire
of tibe opposite virtue, we will maintain that the whole
world, reprobates and infidels included, have these in-
spirations and desires in every case of temptation. You can-
not show me, from the Scripture at least, that this is not the
truth."

On tins remark I struck in, by exclaiming: ''What, father 1
must we have recourse to the Scripture to demonstrate a
thing so clear as this? This is not a point of faith, nor even
of reason. It is a matter of fact : we see it— we know it —
we feel it."

But the Jansenist, keeping the monk to his owji terms, ad-
dressed him as follows : " If you are willing, father, to stand
or fall by Scripture, I am ready to meet you there. You
must promise, however, to yield to its authority ; and since it
is written that ' God has not revealed his judgments to the
heathen, but left them to wander in their own ways,' you
must not say that God has enlightened those whom the
Sacred Writings assure us * he has left in darkness and in the
shadow of death.' Is it not enough to show the erroneous-
ness of your principle, to find that St Paul calls himself * the
chief of sinners' for a sin which he committed * ignorantly,
and with zeal ? ' Is it not enough to know, from the Gosnel,
that those who crucified Jesus Christ had need of theparaon
which he asked for them, although they knew not the malice
of their action, and would never have committed it, according
to St Paul, if they had known it? Is it not enough that
Jesus Christ apprizes us that there will be persecutors of the
Church, who, while making every effort to ruin her, will
* think that they are doing God service ;' teaching us that this
sin which, ih the judgment of the apostle, is the greatest of
all sins, may be committed by persons who, so far from know-
ing that the^ were sinning, would think that they sinned by
not committmg it ? In fine, is it not enough that Jesus Christ
himself has taught us that there are two kinds of sinners, of
whom the one sin with ' knowledge of their Master's will,'
and the other without knowledge; and that both of them
will be * chastised,' although, indeed, in a different manner ?"

Sordv pressed by so many testimonies from the Scripture,
to whicn ne had appealed, the worthy monk began to ^ive
way; and leaving the wicked to sin on without inspiration,
he said : " You will not deny that good meny at least, never

nn, unless Gk>d give them"

.« You are flinching," said I, interrupting him; ^you are

LET. IT.] ACTUAL GRACE A5D SINS OF lONOSAKCE. Ill

flinching now, my good father; you abandon the general
principle, and findine that it will not hold good in. regard to
the wicked, you womd compound the matter, by mtddng it
apply at least to the righteous. But in this point of view
44ie application of it is, I conceive, so circumscribed, that it
will hardly apply to anybody, and it is scarcely worth while
to dispute the point."

My friend, however, who was so ready on the whole
question, that I am inclined to think he had studied it that
very morning, replied : ^ This, father, is the last entrench-
ment to which those of your party who are willing to reason
at all are sure to retreat ; but you are far from being safe
even here. The example of the saints is not a whit more in
your favour. Who doubts that they often fall into sins of
surprise, without being conscious of them ? Do we not learn
from the saints themselves how often concupiscence lays hid-
den snares for them ; and how generally it happens, as St
Augustine compkuns of himself in his Confessions, that with
all their discretion, they * give to pleasure what they mean
only to yield to necessity ? *

" How usual is it to see the more zealous friends of truth
betrayed by the heat of controversy into sallies of bitter
passion for their personal interests, while their consciences,
at the time, bear them no other testimony than that they are
acting in this manner purely for the interests of truth, and
they do not discover their mistake till long afterwards !

*' What, agun, shall we say of those who, as we learn from
examples in ecclesiastical history, eagerly involve themselves
in affairs which are really evil, because they believe them
to be really good ; and yet this does not hinder the fathers
from condemning such persons as having sinned on these
occasions ?

** And were this not the case, how could the saints have
their secret faults ? How could it be true that God alone
knows the magnitude and the number of our offences ; that
no one knows whether he is worthy of hatred or love; and
that the best of saints, though unconscious of any culpability,
ought always, as St Paul says of himself, to remain m * fear
and tremblmg?'*

* " The doubtsome iSiuth of the popeu" as it was styled bj our Befoimers, is
here apparent The "fear and tremblin|^ of the i^ostle is that of anxious
care and diligence, not of doubt or apprehension. It is the fear of the tra-
veller, walking safely but warily along the brink of a precipice: viewing the
Snlf below, he may well fear £o/aU Into it; but walkinK on the highwaj of
uty, and with the support of the promises, he need not jear that he vfiUfaU

112 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. IV.

"You perceive, then, father, that this knowledge of the
evil, and love of the opposite virtue, which you imagine to be
essential to constitute sin, are equally disproved by the ex-
amples of the righteous and of the wicked. In the case of
the wicked, their passion for vice sufficiently testifies that
they have no desire for virtue ; and in regard to the right*
eous, the love which they bear to virtue plainly shows that
they are not always conscious of those sins which, as the
Scripture teaches, they are daily committing.

" So true is it, indeed, that the righteous often sin through
ignorance, that the greatest saints rarely sin otherwise. For
how can it be supposed that souls so pure^ who avoid with
80 much care and zeal the least things that can be displeasing
to God as soon as they discover them, and who yet sin many
times every day, could possibly have, every time before they
fell into sin, * the knowledge of their infirmity on that occa-
sion, and of their physician, and the desire of their souls'
health, and of praying to God for assistance,' and that, in
spite of all these inspirations, these devoted souls ' neverthe-
less transgress,' and commit the sin ?

" You must conclude, then, father, that neither sinners nor
saints have always that knowledge, or those desires and m-
spirations every time they offend ; that is, to use your own
language, they have not always actual grace. Say no longer,
with your modem authors, that it is impossible for those to
sin who do not know righteousness ; but rather join with
St Augustine and the ancient fathers in saying that it is
impossible not to sin, when we do not know righteousness:
Necesse est lU peccet, a quo ignoratur fustitia"

The good father, though thus driven from both of his
positions, did not lose courage, but after ruminating a little,
** Ha ! " he exclaimed, " I shall settle the point immediately."
And again taking up Father Bauny, he pointed to the same
place he had quoted before, exclaiming: "Look now — see
the ground on which he establishes his opinion I I was sure
he would not be deficient in good proofs. Bead what he
quotes from Aristotle, and you will see that after so express
an authority, you must either burn the books of this prince

The Church of Borne, with all her pretensions to be regarded as the only
Fafe and infallible guide to salvation, keeps her childreu in darkness ar.d
doubt on this point to the last moment of me; they are never permitted to
reach the peaceful assurance of God's love, and the humble hope of eternal
life, which the Gospel warrants the believer to cherish; and this, while it
serves to keep the superstitious multitude under the sway of priestly domina>
tion, accounts for the gloom which has characterized, in all ages, the devotion
of the best and most intelligent Romanists.

LET. IV.] ACTUAL GBACB AND SINS OF IGNORANCE. 113

of philosophers or adopt our opinion. Hear, then, the prin-
ciples which support Father Bauny : Aristotle states first,

* that a/n action cannot be impuited as blamewortht/, if it be
involwntary' "

*' I grant that," said my friend.

" This is the first time you have agreed together," said I.
** Take my advice, father, and proceed no further."

'* That would he doing notning," he replied ; ^ we must
know what are thd conditions necessary to constitute an
action voluntary."

^ I am much afraid," returned I, *' that you will quarrel
on that point."

<' No fear of that," said he ; ^ this is sure ground — Aris-
totle is on my side. Hear, now, what Father Bauny says :
' In order that an action be voluntary, it must proceed from
a man who perceives, knows, and comprehends what is good
and what is evil in it. Voluntarium est — ^that is, a volun-
tarv action, as we commonly say with the philosopher' (that
is Aristotle you know, said the monk, squeezing my hand) ;

* quod fit aprincipio cognoscente singula in qutbus est actio —
which is done by a person knowing the particulars of the
action ; so that when the will is led inconsiderately, and
without mature reflection, to embrace or reject, to do or
omit to do any thing, before the understanding has been
able to see whether it would be right or wrong, such an
action is neither good nor evil ; because previous to this
mental inquisition, view, and reflection on the good or bad
qualities of the matter in question, the act by which it is
done is not voluntary.' Are you satisfied now ? " said the
father.

*.'It appears," returned I, **that Aristotle agrees with
Father Bauny ; but that does not prevent me from feeling
surprised at this statement. What, sir! is it not enougn
to make an action voluntary that the man knows what he is
doing, and does it just because he chooses to do it ? Must
we suppose, besides this, that he 'perceives, knows, and
comprehends what is good and evil in the action?' Whpr,
on this supposition there would be hardly such a thing m
nature as voluntary actions, for nobody almost thinks about
all this. How many oaths in gambling — how many ex-
cesses in debauchery — how many riotous extravagances in
the carnival, must, on this principle, be excluded from the
catalogue of voluntary actions, and consequently neither
good nor bad, because not accompanied by these 'mental

114 PROVINCIAL LETTEnS. [LET. IV.

reflections on the good and evil qualities ' of the action ?
But is it possible, father, that Aristotle held such a sentiment
as that ? I have always understood that he was a sensible
man."

*' I shall soon convince vou of that," said the Jansenist ;
and requesting a sight of Aristotle's Ethics, he opened it at
the be^nning of the third book, from which Father Bauny
had taken the passage, and said to the monk: ''I excuse
you, my good sir, for having believed, on the word of Fa-
ther Bauny, that Aristotle held such a sentiment ; but you
would have altered your mind had you read him for your-
self. It is true that he teaches, that * in order to make an
action voluntary, we must know the particulars of that ac-
tion ' — singula in quibus est actio. But what more does he
mean by that, than the pa/rti(mla/r ctreumstanees of the
action ? The examples which he adduces clearly show this
to be his meaning, for they are exclusively confined to cases
in which the persons were ignorant of some of the circum-
stances ; such as that of ' a person who, wishing to exhibit
a machine, discharges a dart which wounds a bystander ; and
that of Merope, who killed her own son instead of her enemy,'
and such like.

'* Thus you see what is the kind of ignorance that renders
actions involuntary, namely, that of the particular circum-
stances, which is termed by divines, as you must know,
ignorance of the fact. But with respect to ignora/nce of the
right — ^ignorance of the good or evil in an action — which is
the only point in question, let us see if Aristotle agrees with
Father Bauny. Here are the words of the philosopher:
* All wicked men are ignorant of what they ougnt to do, and
what they ought to avoid ; and it is this very ignorance which
makes them wicked and vicious. Accordingly, a man can-
not be said to act involuntarily merely because he is ignorant
of what it is proper for him to do in order to fulfil his duty.
This ignorance in the choice of good and evil does not make
the action involuntary ; it only makes it vicious. The same
thing may be afiirmed of the man who is ignorant ge-
neridly of the rules of his duty ; such ignorance is worthy
of blame, not of excuse. And consequently, the ignorance
which renders actions involuntary and excusable is simply
that which relates to the fact and its particular circum*
stances. In this case the person is excused and forgiven^
being considered as having acted contrary to his inclina-
tion.

LET. IV.] ACTUAL GRACE AND SINS OF IGNOBANGE. 115

*' After this, father, will you maintain that Aristotle is
of your opinion? And who can help hein^ astonished to
And that a Pa^an philosopher had more enlightened views
than your doctors, in a matter so deeply affecting morals,
and the direction of conscience, too, as the knowledge of
those conditions which /ender actions voluntary or invo-
luntary, and which, accordingly, stamp them with, or save
them from, a sinful character ? Look for no more support,
then, father, from the prince of philosophers, and no longer
oppose yourselves to the prince of theologians, who has thus
decided the point : ' Those who sin through ignorance^ though
they sin witnout meaning to sin, commit the deed, onl^ he-
cause they vnll commit it. And, therefore, even this sm of
ignorance cannot be committed except by the will of him
who commits it, though by a will which incites him to the
action merely, and not to the sin, and yet the action itself is
nevertheless sinful, for it is enough to constitute it such that
he has done what he was bound not to do.' " *

The Jesuit seemed to be confounded, though more with
the passage from Aristotle, I thought, than that from St
Auffustine; but while he was thinking on what he could
reply, a messenger came to inform him that Madame la
Mareschale of , and Madame the Marchioness of ,

requested his attendance. So taking a hasty leave of us,
he said : ^ I shall speak about it to our fathers. They will
fintl an answer to it, I warrant you ; we have got some wise
heads amongst us."

We understood him perfectly well ; and on our being lefb
alone, I expressed to my friend my astonishment at the sub-
version which this doctrine threatened to the whole system
of morals. To this he replied that he was quite amazed
at my astonirfiment. "Are you not yet aware," he said,
" that they have gone to far greater excesses in morals than
in any other matter?" On this point he gave me some
strange illustrations, promising me more at some future
time. The information which I may receive on this point
wiU, I hope^ furnish the topic of my next communication.—
I am, &c.

• Aogustiiie^f BetnictatioiiB, book L, chap. xr.

116 PEOVINOIAL LETTERS. [LET. V.

LETTER V.

DESIGN OF THE JESUITS IN ESTABLISHINQ A NEW SYSTEM OF
MORALS — ^TWO SORTS OF CASUISTS AMONG THEM, A GREAT
MANY LAX, AND SOME SEVERE ONES — TREASON OF THIS
DIFFERENCE— EXPLANATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF PRO-
BABILISM — ^A MULTITUDE OF MODERN AND UNKNOWN AU-
THORS SUBSTITUTED IN THE PLACE OF THE HOLY FATHERS.

Paris, March 20, 1656.
Sir, — ^According to my promise, I now send you the first
outlines of the morals taught by those good fathers, the
Jesuits — ^'Uhose men distinguished for learning and saga*
city, who are all under the g^dance of divine wisdom — a
surer guide than all philosophy." Tou imagine, perhaps,
that I am in jest — but I am perfectly serious; or rather,
they are so when they speak thus of themselves in their book
entitled ^ The Image of the First Century." * I am only
copying their own words, and may now give you the rest of
the eulogy : '* They are a society of men, or rather let us
call them angels, predicted by Isaiah in these words, * Cto,
ye svirifb and ready angels.'" f The prediction is as clear as
day; is it not? ^* They have the spirit of eagles; they are a
flock of phcenixes (a late author having demonstrated that
there are a great many of these birds) ; they have changed

* Inuwo Frimi Seeulu— The work to which Pascal here refers was printed
by the Jesuits in Flanders in the year 1640, under the title of "l/lmage du
Premier Si^le de la Socidtd de Jesut;,'* being a history of the Society of the
Jesuits from the period of its establishment in 1540— « centuzr before the pub-
lication. The work itself is very rare, and would probably have fUlen Into
oblivion, had not the substance of it been embodied in a kttle treatise^ itself
also scarce, entitled " La Morale Pratique des J^suites." The small specimen
which Pascal has given conveys but an imperfect idea of the mingled blas-
phemy and absurdity of this Jesuitical production.

t m. zviii. 2.

JLET. v.] POUOY OP THE JESUITS. 117

the face of ChristeDdom 1 " Of course^ we must believe all
this, since they have said it ; and in one sense you will find
the account amply verified by the sequel of this communica-
tion, in which I propose to treat of their maxims.

Determined to obtain the best possible information^ I did
not trust the representations of our friend the Jansenist, but
sought an interview with some of themselves. I found, how-
ever, that he told me nothing but the plain truth, and I am
persuaded he is an honest man. Of this you may judge from
the following account of these conferences.

In the conversation I had with the Jansenist, he told me
so many strange things about these fathers, that I could
with difficulty believe them, till he pointed them out to me
in their writings ; after which he left me nothing more to
say in their defence, than that these might be the sentiments
of some individuals only, which it was not fair to impute to
the whole fraternity.* And, indeed, I assured him that I
knew some of them who were as rigid as those whom he
quoted to me were lax. Thb led him to explain to me the
spirit of the Society — a secret which is not kuown to every
one; and you will perhaps have no objections to learn some-
thing about it.

'* Yon imagine," he began, ** that it would tell considerably
in their favour, to show that some of their fathers are as
friendly to evangelical maxims as others are opposed to
them ; and you would conclude from that circumstance, that
these loose opinions do not belong to the whole Society.
That I gprant you ; for had such been the case, they would
not have sufiered persons among them holding sentiments
so diametrically opposed to licentiousness. But as it is
equally true that there are among them those who hold these
licentious doctrines, you are bound also to conclude that the
spirit of the Society is not that of Christian severity ; for
had such been the case, they would not have sufiered persons
among them holding sentiments so diametrically opposed to
that severity."

** And what, then,*' I asked, ** can be the design of the
whole as a body ? Perhaps they have no fixed principle, and
every one is left to speak out at random whatever he thinks."

" That cannot be," returned my friend ; " such an im-
mense body could not subsist in such a hap-hazard sort of

* The reader is requested to notioe how completely the charse brought
against the Provincial Xetters by Voltaire and others is here anticipated aud
reftited. (See Hist. Introduction.)

118 PBOYINCIiU:! LETTERS. [LET. Y.

way, or withont a soul to govern and preside over its move-
ments ; besides, it is one of their express r^ulations, that
none shall print a page without the approval of their supe*
riors."

** But/' said I, ^ how can these same superiors give their
sanction to maxims so contradictory ? **

** That is what you have yet to learn/' he replied. " Know,
then, that their object is not the corruption of manners —
that is not their design. But as little is it their sole aim to
reform them — that would be bad policy. Their notion is
briefly this : They have such a high opinion of themselves as
to believe that it is useful, and in some sort essentially neces-
sary to the good of religion, that their influence should ex-
tend every where, and that they should govern all consciences.
And the evangelical or severe maxims being best fitted for
managing some sorts of people, they avail themselves of
these when they find them favourable to their purpose. But
as these maxims do not suit the views of the great bulk of
people, they waive them in the case of such persons, in order
to keep on good terms with all the world. Accordingly,
having to deal with persons of all classes and of all different
nations, they find it necessary to have casuists adapted to this
diversity.

** On this principle, you will easily see that if they had
none but the looser sort of casuists, they would defeat their
main design, which is to embrace all and sundry ; for thosi
that are truly pious are fond of a stricter discipline. But
OS there are not many of that stamp, they do not requii'e
many severe directors to guide them. Of these they have a
few for the few ; while whole multitudes of lax casuists are
provided for the multitudes that prefer laxity.*

'' It is in virtue of this ' obliging and accommodating' con-
duct, as Father Petaut calls it, that the^ may be said to
stretch out a helping hand to all mankind. Should any
person present himscSuP before them, for example, folly re-
solved to make restitution of some ill-gotten guns, do not

* ** It mnat be observed that most of those Jesoits who were so severe in
their writiDfl^ were less so towards their penitents. It has been said of
Bomdakme miOBelf that if he required too much in the pulpit, he abated it
tn tbteooiBSsifmal chair ; a new stroke of policy well understood on the part
«f ttie Jesuits, inasmuch as speculative severitj suits persons of rigid morals,
and practical condescension attracts the multitude." (IXAlembert, Account
€f Dest of Jesuits, p. 44.)

t Fetaa was one of the obscure writers employed by the Jesuits to publish
deCunatory libels Ufainst M. Amauld and those oi^ops who approved of hia
book on Frequent Communion. (Ooudrette* !!• 426.)

LET. v.] POLICY OP THE JESUITS. 119

suppose that they would dissuade him from it. By no
means ; on the contrary, they will applaud and confirm him
in such a holy resolution. But suppose another should come
who wishes to be absolved without restitution, and it will be
a particularly hard case indeed, if they cannot furnish him
with means of evading the duty, of one kind or another, the
lawfulness of which they will be ready to guarantee.

"By this policy they keep all their friends, and defend
themselves against all their foes ; for, when charged with
extreme laxity, they have nothing more to do than produce
their austere directors, with some books which they have
written on the severity of the Christian code of morals : and
simple people, and such as never look below the surface of
things, are quite satisfied with these proofs of the falsity of
the accusation.

*' Thus are they prepared for all sorts of persons, and so
ready are they to suit the supply to the demand, that when
they happen to be in any part of the world where the doc-
trine of a crucified God is accounted foolishness, they sup-
press the offence of the cross, and preach only a glorified and
not a suffering Jesus Christ. This plan they followed in the
Indies and in China, where they permitted Christians to prac-
tise idolatry itself, with the aid of the following ingenious
contrivance : — They made their converts conceal under their
clothes an image of Jesus Christ, to which they taught them
to transfer mentally those adorations which they rendered
ostensibly to the idol Cachinchoam and Keum-fucum. This
charge is brought against them by Gravina, a Dominican,
and 18 fully estsublished by the Spanish memorial presented to
I^hilip lY., king of Spain, by the Cordeliers of the Philip-
pine islands, quoted by Thomas Hurtado, in his * Martyrdom
of the Faith,' page 427. To such a length did this practice
go, that the congregation De Propaganda were obliged ex-
pressly to forbid the Jesuits, on pain of excommunication, ta
permit the worship of idols on any pretext whatever, or to
conceal the mystery of the cross from their catechumens ;
strictly enjoining them to admit none to baptism who were
not thus instructed, and ordering them to expose the image
of the crucifix in their churches : — all which is amply de-
tailed in the decree of that Congregation, dated the 9th of
July 1646, and signed by Cardinal Capponi.*

* The policy to which Pascal refers was introduced by Matthew Bicci, aa
Italian Jesuit who succeeded the ftunous Francis Xavier in attempting tO'
convert the Chinese. Rioci declared that, after consulting the writings of the

120 PBOYINCIAJi LETTEBS. [LET. T.

* Such is the manner in which they have spread themselves
over the whole earth, aided by the doctrine of probable opi-
nionsy which is at once the source and the basis of all tnis
licentiousness. Tou must get some of themselves to explain
Uiis doctrine to you. They make no secret of it, any more
than of what you have already learned ; with this difference
only, that they conceal their carnal and worldly policy under
the ^arb of divine and Christian prudence ; as if the fidth,
and tradition its ally, were not always one and the same at all
times and in all places ; as if it were the part of the rule to
bend in conformity to the subject which it was meant to re-
flate ; and as if souls, to be purified from their pollutions,
had only to corrupt the law of the Lord, in place of * the law
vf the Lord, which is clean and pure, converting the soul
A^hich Ueth in sin,' and bringing it into conformity with its
salutary lessons!

** Go and see some of these worthy fathers, I beseech you,
and I am confident that you will soon discover, in the liudty
x>f their moral svstem, the explanation of their doctrine about
grace. You will then see the Christian virtues exhibited in
Such a strange aspect, so completely stripped of the charity
which is the life and soul of them — ^you will see so many
crimes palliated and irregularities tolerated, that you will no
longer oe surprised at their maintaining that ' all men have
alwavs enougn of grace' to lead a pious life, in the sense in
whicn they understand piety. Their morality being entirely

Chinese literati, he was persuaded that the Xamti and Gachinchoam of the
mandarins were merely other names for the King of Heaven, and that the
idolatries of the natives were harmless civil ceremonies. He therefore
allowed his converts to practise them, on the condition mentioned in the
text. In 1631, some new paladins of the orders of Itominic and Francis, who
«ame from the Philippine Islands to share in the spiritual conquest of that
vast empire, were grievously scandalized at the monstrous compromise be
tween Christianil^ and idolatry tolerated by the followers of Loyola, and car-
ried their complaints to Rome. The result is illustrative of the Pajj^ policy.
Pope Innocent X. condemned the Jesuitical policy ; Pope Alexander Til.,
In 1666(when this letter was written}, sanctioned it ; and in 1669, Pope Cle-
ment JX. ordained that the decrees of both of his predecessors should continue
in full force. The Jesuists, availing themselves of this, paid no regard either
to the poi>es or their rival orders, the Dominicans andTranciscans, who, in
the persecutions which ensued, always came off with the worst. (Coudrette,
iv. &1 ; Hist, of D. Ign. Loyola, pp. 97-112.)

The order given to the Jesuits oy the caroinals, to expose the image of the
<nrucifix in their churches, appears to us an odd sort of cure for idolatry— very
little better than the disease. Bossuet, and others who have tried to soften
lown the doctrines of Kome, would represent the worship ost^ibly paid to
the crucifix as really paid to Christ, who is represented by it. But even this
does not accord with the determination of the Council of Trent, which de-
clared of images, Eisqtie venerationem impertiendam; or with Bellarmine,
who devotes a chapter expressly to prove that true and proper worship is to
be given to images. (Stillingfleet on Popery, by Dr Cunningnam, p. 77.;

LET. v.] POUCT OP THE JESUITS. 121

Pagan, nature is quite competent to its observance. When
we maintain the necessity of efficacious grace, we assign i(
another sort of virtue for its object. Its office is not to cure
one vice by means of another; it is not merely to induce men
to practise Ithe external duties of religion ; it alms at a virtue
higher than that propounded by Pharisees, or the greatest
sages of heathenism. The law and reason are ' sufficient
graces' for these purposes. But to disenthral the soul from
the love of the world — to tear it from what it holds most
dear — to make it die to itself — ^to lift it up, and bind it wholly,
only, and for ever, to God — can be the work of none but an
all-powerful hand. And it would be as absurd to affirm that
we have the full power of achieving such objects, as it would
be to allege that those virtues, devoid of the love of God,
which these fathers confound with the virtues of Christianity,

J re beyond our power."
Such was the strain of my friend's discourse, which was
elivered with much feeling ; for he takes these sad disorders
very much to heart. For my own part, I began to entertain
a high admiration of those fathers, simply on account of the
ingenuity of their policy ; and following his advice, I waited
on a good casuist of the Societj&oneof my old acquaintances,
with whom I now resolved purposely to renew my former
intimacy. Having my instructions how to manage them, I
had no great difficulty in setting him aflpat. Retaining his
old attachment, he received me immediately with a profusion
of kindness ; and a^ier talking over some indiffisrent matters*
I took occasion from the present season,* to learn something
from him about fasting, and thus slip insensibly into the
main subject. I told him, therefore, that I had difficulty in
supporting the fast. He exhorted me to do violence to my
inclinations ; but as I continued to murmur, he took pity on
me, and began to search out some ground for a dispensation.
In fact, he suggested a number of excuses for me, none of
which happened to suit my case, till at length he bethought
himself of asking me whether I did not find it difficult to
sleep without tsJking supper ? " Yes, my good father," said
I ; ** and for that reason I am obliged often to take a refresh-
ment at mid-day, and supper at night." f

* Lent

t " According to the roles of the Roman Catholic fast, one meal alone i»
allowed on a fast-day. Many, however, fall off before the end of Lent, and
take to their breakfasts and suppers, under the sanction cf some good-natured
doctor, who declares fasting injurious to their health." (Kanco ^hite. Let-
ters from Spain, p. 272.)

132 FBOTINCIAI. LBTTERa. [lBT. V.

" I wn extremelj happy," he replied, " Ui hAve fouii J oul s
way of relieving you without sin : go in peace — you are under
DO obligatioD to fast. Howerer, I would not bare yon de-
pend OD thj word : step thia way to the library."

On going thither with him, he took up abook,exclainung,
with great rapture, " Here is the authority for you : and, bj
my conscience, Guch an authority 1 Itianoleutna&EsCOBAB
himself 1 " •

" Who is Escobar ?" I inquired.

"Wliatl not know Escobar?" cried the monk; "the mem-
ber of our Society who compiled this Moral Theology from
twenty-four of our fathers, and on this founds an analogy, in
his preface, between his book and ' Lhat in the Apocalypse
which was sealed with seven seals,' and states that ' Jesus
presents it thus sealed to the four living creatures, Suaiez,
Vesquez, Molina, and YaleDCJa,t in presence of the four-and-
twency Jesuits who represent the four-and-twenty elders?' "

He read me, in fact, the whole of that allegory, which he
pronounced to be admirably appropriate, and which conveyed
to my mind a sublime idea of the excellence of the work. At
length, having sought out the passage on fasting, " O, here
it is t " he said ; treatise 1, example 13, no. 67 : ' If a man
cannot sleep without taking supper, 'a he bound to fast?
Answer : Bg no meantl' Will that not satisfy you?"

" Not exactly," replied I ; " for I might sustain the fast

slUon at Uauatmrertcd (^iDioni In I
.^MDDdi iribh UiB most UceaUoDB docEi

nnmeroiuJoanlilcslwTlten.kaiiTdedaiiiuiiiaiaioruiBuureoiruiiu. tdb
obaraiteciMio stBUTdUf of ttdi aathor a, thst Us qnotloiunDllOniilT exhibit
(wo (ueB— an afflimBtlTB and a nnstlTe-w) tbu ambardrnv bmouDe a
nmonrme in FmuH for iluplicity. (ffioaraplile Pitt^reaque des JunitetL par
A.0.itI1aauii,Patit,mS,f.SS.) Mli»Ig^»ia oi tliUSe had In till pou^
^on It portent at liie ouuiit, wblch gave bSm a " resoluts uul decialvB atstat
conntenanee'— D0leiactl7wlutmlKhtiitrelie«a eipected from UidoBble-
fcai gnolioni. HIb frleods dcicribe EKObar u a good man, s labcirioDg

name and nritinga were so frequently noticed in llle Provtndat Lettcij, he
l«(er« Iwl floM. fleUeaa luu celebrated him in the foUowiog couplet :—
Bl Bonrdaloae nn ma ■ivire,
Neu dlt, cralnieila voluptlj;
Etcobar, ltd dlton, mon pen,
Hour Is pmmet pom la ■ul«.
It Bonrdalone, ■ Uttls b» KTere,
<Me8, " FIt from pleamrs'i &tal AKJnatlont*
" EKObar.' nyg iLe oiher, " Tstber dear,
I'amiu It u a bsaithj relaiatloii."
t I'Dnt cdelmtted caaoiili.

LET. v.] POLIOT OF THB JESUITS. 123

by taking my refreshment in the morning and supping at
night."

*< Listen, then, to what follows ; they have provided for
all that : ^ And what is to be said, if the person might make
a shift with a refreshment in the morning and sapping at
night?'"

" That's my case exactly."

" * Answer : Still he is not obliged to fast ; because no per-
son is obliged to change the order of his meals.' "

^ A most excellent reason ! " I exclaimed.

'< But tell me, pray," continued the monk, ^ do you take
much wine ? "

" No, my dear father," I answered ; " I cannot endure it."

'^ I merely put the question," returned he, " to apprize you
that you might, without breaking the fast, take a glass or so
in the morning, or whenever you felt inclined for a drop ;
and that is always something in the way of supporting na-
ture. Here is the decision at the same place* no. 57 : * May
one, without breaking the fast, drink wine at any hour he
pleases, and even in a Urge quantity ? Yes, he may : and a
dram of hippocrass too.' * I had no recollection of the hip-
pocrass," added the monk ; " I must take a note of that in my
memorandum-book."

'*He must be a nice man, this Escobar," observed I.

" Oh ! everybody likes him," rejoined the father ; ** he has
such delightful miestions ! Only observe this one in the same
place, no. 38 ; * If a man doubt whether he is twenty-one
years old, is he obliged to fast ? f No. But suppose I were
to be twenty-one to-night an hour after midnight, and to-
morrow were the fast, should I be obliged to fast to-morrow ?
No ; for you were at liberty to eat as much as you pleased
for an hour after midnight, not being till then fully twenty-
one ; and therefore having a right to break the £Bst-day, you
are not obliged to keep it.' **

*' Well, that is vastly entertaininf|^!*' cried L

** Oh," rejoined the father, ** it is imposnble to tear one's
self away from the book: I spend whola days and nights in
reading it; in fact, I do nothing elsq^l^

The worthy monk, perceiving that r was interested, was
quite delightCKO, and went on with his quotations. ** Now,"

* Hippoenut—9, medicated wine.

t All persons aboye the a^ of one«nd-twen^are bound to obsenre the
roles of the Uoman Catholic tut during Lent. The oMlgation of tutiiig be-
gins at midnight, jnst when the leading clock of every town striken twwve
(Letters firom Spain, p. 270.)

124 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. V.

said be, " for a specimen of Filiutius, one of the four-and*
twenty Jesuits : ^ Is a man who has exhausted himself any.
way — ^by profligacy, for example* — obliged to fast? By no
means. But if he has exhausted himself expressly to procure
a dispensation from fasting, will he be held obligea? No,,
even though he should have had that design.' There now!
would you have believed that?"

^ Indeed, my good father, I do not believe it yet,'' said I.
** What! is it no sin for a man not to fast when ne has it in
his power? And is it allowable to court occasions of com-
mitting sin, or rather, are we not bound to shun them? That
would DO easy enough surely."

" Not always so," he replied; ** that is just as it may
happen."

"Happen, how?" cried T.

** Oho ! " rejoined the monk, " so you think that if a per-
son experience some inconvenience in avoiding the occasions
of sin, he is still bound to do so ? Not so thinks Father
Bauny. ' Absolution,' says he, ' is not to be refused to such
as continue in the proximate occasions of sin^t if they are so
situated that they cannot give them up without becoming the
common talk of the world, or subjecting themselves to per-
sonal inconvenience.' "

" I am glad to hear it, father," I remarked : " and now
that we are not obliged to avoid the occasions of sin, no-
thing more remains but to say that we may deliberately court
them."

"Even that is occasionally permitted," added he; "the
celebrated casuist Basil Ponce has said so, and Father Bauny
quotes his sentiment with approbation, in his Treatise on
Penance, as follows : ' We may seek an occasion of sin di-
rectly and designedly — primo et per M^^when our own or
our neighbour's spiritual or temporal advantage induces us

tO;dO 80.'" '

idy," swd ^ " it appears to be all a dream to me,
>n I near grave divines talking in this manner ! Come
now, my dear father, tell me conscientiously, do t/ou hold
such a sentiment as that ? "

* Ad ituemtendam omtcom. (Tom. it tr. 27, part 2, c. 6, n. 143.) The accu>
ney witti which the references are made to the writings of these casuists
ihowi amr thing but a design to garble or misrenpresent themu

t In the technical language of theology, an ''occasion of sin" is any situa-
tion or course of conduct which has a tendenOTto Induce the commission of
'Sin. "Proximate occaiions" are those which iiaTe a direct and immediate
tendency of this kind.

wRen ]

LET. y.] DOCTRINE OF PROBABILISM. 125

« No, indeed," said he, « I do not."

'< You are speaking, then, against your conscience," con-
tinued I.

*' Not at all," he replied ; '' I was speaking on that point
not according to my own conscience, but according to that
of Ponce and Father Bauny; and them you may follow
with the utmost safety, for I assure you they are able
men."

'* What, father I because they have put down these three
lines in their books, will it henceforth become allowable to
court the occasions of sin ? I always thought that we were
bound to take the Scripture and the tradition of the Church
as our only rule, and not your casuists."

"Goodness!" cried the monk, "I declare you put me in
mind of these Jansenists. Think you that Father Bauny and
Basil Ponce are not able to render their opinion probable f "

"Probable won't do for me," said I; "I must have
certainty."

" I can easily see," replied the good father, " that you know
nothing about our doctrine of probable opinions. If you
did, you would speak in another strain. Ah I my dear sir,
I must really give you some instructions on this point ; with-
out knowing this, you positively know nothing at alL Why,
sir, it is the foundation — the very A, B, c, of our whole moral
philosophy."

Glad to see him come to the point to which I had been
drawing him on, I expressed my satisfaction, and requested
him to explain what was meant by a probable opinion.*

** That, he replied, " our authors will answer better than
I can do. The generality of them, and, among others, our
four-and-twenty elders, describe it thus: 'An opinion is
called probable, when it is founded upon reasons of some con-
sideration. Hence it may sometimes happen that a single
very grave doctor may render an opinion probable.' The
reason is added: 'For a man particularly given to study
would not adhere to an opinion unless he was drawn to it by
a good and sufficient reason.'"

* " The oftsuists are divided into ProbabUistCB and Probdlfiliorista, The first,
among whom were the Jesuits, maintain that a certain d^pree of probability
as to uelawftilness of an action is enouj^ to secure against stn. Thesecon<^
supported by the Dominicans and the Jansenists (a kind of Oatholio Calyi-
nists condemned l^ the Church), insist on always taking the Ktfleat or most
probatde side. The French proverb, Le mieux est Vennemi du bien, is per-
fectly applicable to the practical effects of these two systems in Spain." (Let-
ters firom Spcdn, p. 277.) Nicole has a long dissertation on the subject in his
Notes on thu Letter.

126 PBOVmOIAL LETTEBS. [lET. V.

" So it would appear," I observed, with a smile, " that a
single doctor may turn consciences round any way he pleases,
and yet always place them in a safe position."

^ You must not laugh at the doctrine, sir," returned the
monk ; *^ nor need you attempt to combat it. The Janse-
nists tried this ; but they might have saved themselves the
trouble ; it is too firmly established. Hear Sanchez, one of
the most famous of our fathers : ' You may doubt, perhaps,
whether the authority of a single good and learned doctor
renders an opinion probable. I answer, that it does ; and
this is confirmed by Angelus, Sylvester Navarre, Emanuel
Sa, &c. It is proved thus : A probable opinion is one that
has a considerable foundation. Now, the authority of a
learned and pious man is entitled to very great consideration :
because (mark the reason), if the testimony of such a man
has great influence in convincing us that such and such an
event occurred — say at Rome, for example — why should it
not have the same weight in the case of a question in
morals?'"

" An odd comparison this," interrupted I, " between the
concerns of the world and those of conscience ! "

''Have a little patience," rejoined the monk; ''Sanchez
answers that in the very next sentence: 'Nor can I assent
to the qualification made here by some writers, namely, that
the authority of such a doctor, though sufficient in matters
of human right, is not so in those of divine right. It is of
*>• vast weight in both cases.' "

" WeU, father," said I, frankly, " I really cannot admire that
rule. Who can assure me, considering the freedom your
doctors claim to examine every thin? by reason, that what
appears safe to one may seem so to all the rest? The diver-
sity of people's judgments is so great — "

"You don't understand it," said he, interrupting me;
" no doubt they are often of different sentiments, but what
signifies that?— each renders his own opinion probable and
s^e. We all know well enough that they are far from being
of the same mind ; what is more, there is hardly an instance
in which they ever agree. There are very few questions,
indeed, in which you do not find the one saying Yes, and the
other saying No. Still, in all these cases, each of the con-
trary opinions is probable. And hence Diana observes on a
certain subject : ' Ponce and Sanchez hold opposite views of
it ; but, as they are both learned men, each renders his own
opinion probable.^

»M

LET. v.] DOCTRINE OP PROBABILISM. 127

'* But, father," I remarked, " a person must be sadly em-
baiTassed in choosing between them I" — "Not at all," he
rejoined; ^he has only to follow the opinion which suits
him best." — "What! if the other is more probable?" "It
does not signify." — "And if the other is the «afer?" "It
does not signify," repeated the monk ; " this is made quite
plain by Emanuel Sa, of our Society, in his Aphorisms*
*A person may do what he considers allowable according
to a probable opinion, though the contrary may be the safer
one. The opinion of a single grave doctor is aU that is
requisite.'"

" And if an opinion be at once the less probable and the
less safe, is it allowable to follow it,*' I asked, " even in the
way of rejecting one which we believe to be more probable
and more safe ?

" Once more, I say Yes," replied the monk. " Hear what
Filiutius, that great Jesuit of Home, says : ' It is allowable
to follow the less probable opinion, even though it be the
less safe one. That is the common judgment of modern
authors.' Is not that quite clear ? "

"Well, reverend father," said I, " you have given us sin-
ners ample room, at all events I Thanks to your probable
opinions, we have liberty of conscience with a witness! —
But are you casuists allowed the same latitude in giving your
responses?"

" O yes," said he, ** we answer just as we please ; or rather,
I should say, just as it may please those who ask our advice.
Here are our rules, taken from fathers Layman, Yasquez,
Sanchez, and the four-and-twenty worthies, in the words of
Layman: 'A doctor, on being consulted, may give an ad-
vice, not only probable according to his own opinion, but
contrary to his opinion, provided this judgment happens to
be more favourable or more agreeable to the person that
consults him — si forte hcec Javordbilior seu exoptatior sit.
Nay, I go further, and say, that there would be nothing un-
reasonable in his giving those who consult him a judgment
held to be probable by some learned person, even though he
should be satisfied in his own mind that it is absolutely
false.'"

" Well, seriously, father," I said, " your doctrine is an un-
commonly agi'eeable one ! Only think of being allowed to
answer Yes or No, just as you please! It is impossible to
prize such a privilege too highly. I see now the advantage
of the conflicting opinions of your doctors. One of them is

128 PROVINCIAL LETTfiRSr. [lET. V.

always ready to serve your pui^pose, and the other never gives
you any annoyance. If you do not find your account on the
one side, you fall back on the other, and always land in per-
fect safety."

" That is quite true," he replied ; " and accordingly, we
may always say with Diana, on finding that Father Bauny
was on his side, while Father Lugo was against him: Scepe
premente deojfert deus alter opemJ* *

" I understand you," resumed I ; " but a practical diffi-
culty has just occurred to me, which is, that supposing a
person to have consulted one of your doctors, and obtained
from him a pretty liberal opinion, there is some danger of
his getting into a dilemma by meeting a confessor who takes
a different view of the matter, and refuses him absolution
unless he recant the sentiment of the casuist. Have you not
provided for such a case as that, father?"

" Can you doubt it?" he replied. *' We have bound them,
sir, to absolve their penitents who act according to probable
opinions, under the pain of mortal sin, to secure their com-
pliance. * When the penitent,' says Father Baun^^ ' follows a
probable opinion, the confessor is bound to absolve him,
though his opinion should differ from that of his penitent.' "

" But he does not say it would be a mortal sin not to ab-
solve him," said I.

" How hasty you are!" rejoined the monk: " listen to what
follows; he has expressly decided that, * to refuse absolution
to a penitent who acts according to a probable opinion, is a
sin which is in its nature mortal.' And to settle that point,
he cites the most illustrious of our fathers — Suarez, Vasquez,
and Sanchez."

** My dear sir," said I, " that is a most prudent regulation.
I see nothing to fear now. No confessor can dare to be re-
fractory after this. Indeed, I was not aware that you had
the power of issuing your orders on pain of damnation. I
thought that your skill had been confined to the taking
away of sins ; I had no idea that it extended to the intro-
duction of new ones. But from what I now see, you are
omnipotent."

" That is not a correct way of speaking," rejoined the
father. " We do not introduce sins ; we only pay attention
to them. I have had occasion to remark, two or three times
during our conversation, my dear sir, that you are no great
scholastic."

•* " When one god presses hard, another brings relief

LET. v.] DOCTRINE OP PROBABILISM. 129

'* Be that as it may, father, you have at least answered my
difficulty. But I have another to suggest How do you
manage when the Fathers of the Church happen to differ
from any of your casuists?"

" You really know very little of the subject," he replied.
" The Fathers were good enough for the morality of their
own times; but they lived too far back for that of the pre-
sent age, which is no longer regulated by them, but by the
modern casuists. On this Father Cellot, following the
famous Reginald, remarks : ' In questions of mora£, the
modern casuists are to be preferred to the ancient fathers,
though those lived nearer to the times of the apostles.' And
following out this maxim, Diana thus decides : ' Are bene-
ficiaries bound to restore their revenue when gtiilty of mal-
appropriation of it? The ancients would say Yes, but the
moderns say No; let us, therefore, adhere to the latter
opinion, which relieves from the obligation of restitution.' *'

*' Delightful doctrine this! and how comfortable it must
be to a great many people!" I observed.

" We leave the fathers," resumed the monk, " to those who
deal with positive divinity.* As for us, who are the direc-
tors of conscience, we read very little of them, and quote
only the modern casuists. There is Diana, for instance, a
most voluminous writer; he has prefixed to his works a list
of his authorities, which amount to two hundred and ninety-
six, and the most ancient of them is only about eighty yeai's
old."

'* It would appear, then," I remarked, '< that all these have
come into the world since the date of your Society?"

" Thereabouts," he replied.

" That is to say, dear father, on your advent, St Augus-
tine, St Chrysostom, St Ambrose, St Jerome, and aU the
rest, in so far as morals are concerned, disappeared from
the stage. Would you be so kind as ^ve me the names, at
least, of those modern authors who have succeeded them?"

'* A most able and renowned class of men they are," re-

* In the twelftli centuiy, in consequence of the writings of Peter Lombard,
commonly called the ''M&^ter of the Sentences,'' the CImstian doctors were
divided into two classes— the PonMve or dogmatic, and the Scholastic diyines.
The Positive diTines, who were the teacners of systematic divinity, ex-
pounded, though in a wretched style, the Saered Writings, and conmmed
their sentiments by Scripture and tradition. The Scholastics, instead of the
Bible, explained the Book of Sentences, indulging in the most idle and ridi-
culous speculations. — " The practice of choosing a certain priest, not only to
be the occasional confessor, but the director of the conscience, was greatly en>
couraged by the Jesuits." (Letters from Spain, p. 89.)

130 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. V.

plied the monk. ** Their names are, Villabolos, Conink,
Llamas, Achokier, Dealkozer, Dellacrux, Veracruz, UgoliD*
Tambourin, Fernandez, Martinez, Suarez, Henriquez, Vas-
miez, Lopez, Gomez, Sanchez, De Vechis, De Grassis, De
Grassalis, De Pitigianis, De Graphceis, Squilanti, Bizo^g]*],
Barcola, De Bobadilla, Simancha, Perez de Lara, Aldrett^
Lorca, De Scarcia, Quaranta, Scophra, Pedezza, Cabrezza>^
Bisbe, Dias, De Clavasis, Yillagut, Adam k Manden, Iri-
barne, Binsfeld, Volfangi k Vorberg, Vosthery, Streves-'
dorf."*

" 0, my dear father," cried I, quite alarmed, " were all
these people Christians?"

** How! Christians!" returned the casuist; " did I not tell
you that these are the only writers by whom we now govern
Christendom?"

Deeply affected as I was by this announcement^ I con-
cealed my emotion from the monk, and only asked him if all
these autnors were Jesuits?

**No," said he; "but that is of little consequence; they
have said a number of good things for all that. It is true
the greater part of these same good things are extracted or
copied from our authors, but we do not stand on ceremony
with them on that score, more especially as they are in the
constant habit of quoting our authors with applause. When
Diana, for example, who does not belong to our Society,
speaks of Vasquez, he calls him ' that phoenix of genius;' and
he declares more than once, ^ that Vasquez alone is to him
worth all the rest of mankind — instar omniu/m,* Accord-
ingly, our fathers often make use of this good Diana; and if
you understand our doctrine of probabilism, you will see that
this is no small help in its way. In fact, we are anxious that
others besides the Jesuits would render their opinions pro-
bable, to prevent people from ascribing them all to us ; for
you will observe, that when any author, whoever he may be,
advances a probable opinion, we are entitled, by the theory
of probabilism, to adopt it if we please; and yet, if the
author do not belong to our fraternity, we are not respon-
sible for its soundness."

" I understand all that," said I. ^ It is easy to see that
all are welcome that come your way, except tne ancient fa-

* In this extraordinary list of obscore and now forgotten casuistical writers,
most of them belonging to Si>aiB, Portugid, and Flanders, the art of the author
lies in stringing together the names (which would sound very outlandish in
French ears) according to their terminations, and placing them in contrast
with the Ten^rable and well-known names of the ancient fathers.

LET. v.] DOOTRimS OF PBOBABUJSM. 131

thers; you are masters of the field, and have only to walk
the course. Bnt I foresee three or four serious (&fficulties
and powerful barriers which will oppose your career."

^* And what are these?'' cried the monk, looking quite
alarmed.

" They are, the Holy Scriptures," I replied, ** the popes,
and the councils, whom you cannot gainsay, and who are aU
in the way of the Gospel."*

'* Is that all!" he exclaimed; ^I declare you alarmed me.
Do you imagine that we would have such an obvious scruple
as that, or that we have not provided against it ? A good
idea, forsooth, to suppose that we would contradict Scrip-
ture, popes, and councils I I must convince you of your mis-
take; for I should be sorry you should go away with an im-
pression that we are deficient in our respect to these autho-
rities. You have doubtless taken up this notion from some
of the opinions of our fathers, which are apparently at va-
riance with their decisions, though in reality they are not.
But to illustrate the harmony between them would require
more leisure than we have at present; and as I should not
like you to retain a bad impression of us, if you agree to meet
with me to-morrow, I shall clear it all up then. "

Thus ended our interview, and thus shall end my present
communication, which has been long enough, besides, for one
letter. I am sure you will be satisfied with it, in the pros-
pect of what is fortncoming. — ^I am, &c.

* That is, th^ were all, in Pascal's opinon, fovourable to the Gospel tclMme
of morality.

132 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LBT. VI.

LETTER VL

VARIOUS ARTIFICES OF THE JESUITS TO ELUDE THE AUTHORITY
OF THE aOSPEL, OF COUNCILS, AND OF THE POPES — SOME
CONSEQUENCES WHICH RESULT FROM THEIR DOCTRINE OF
PROBABimSM — THEIR RELAXATION IN FAVOUR OF BENE-
FICIARIES, PRIESTS, MONES, AND DOMESTICS— ANECDOTE
OF JOHN d'aLBA.

Paris, April 10, 1656.

Sir, — ^I mentioned, at the close of my last letter, that my
good friend, the Jesuit, had promised to show me how the
casuists reconcile the contrarieties between their opinions
and the decisions of the popes, the councils, and the Scripture.
This promise he fulfilled at our last interview, of which I
shall now give you an account.

** One of the methods," resumed the monk, " in which we
reconcile these apparent contradictions, is by the inter^eta-
tion of some phrase or other. Thus, Pope Gregory AlV.
decided that assassins are not worthy to enjoy the benefit of
sanctuary in churches, and ought to be dragged out of them;
and yet our four-and-twenty elders affirm that * The penalty
of tms bull is not incurred by all those that kill in treachery.'
This may appear to you a contradiction ; but we get over
this by interpreting the word assassin as follows: ' Are
assassins unworthy of sanctuary in churches? Yes, by the
bull of Gregory XIV. they are. But by the word assassins
we understand those that have received money to murder
one; and accordingly, such as kill without taking any re-
ward for the deed, but merely to oblige their friends^ do not
come under the category of assassins.

LET. VL] JESUITICAL ELUSIONS. 13S

C" Take another instance: It is said in this Gospel, ' Give
alms of your superfluity.'* Several casuists, however, have
•contrived to discharge the vtrealthiest from the obligation of
alms-giving. This may appear another paradox, but the
matter is easily put to rights by giving such an interpretation
to the wrord superfluity that it will seldom or never happen
that any one is troubled with such a thing. This feat has
been accomplished by the learned Yasquez, in his Treatise on
Alms, c. 4 : • What men of the world lay up to improve
their circumstances, or those of their relatives, cannot be
termed superfluity; and, accordingly, such a thing as super-
fluity is seldom to be found among men of the world, not
even excepting kings.' Diana, too, who generally founds on
our fathers, having quoted these words of Vasquez, justly
concludes, Hhat as to the question whether the rich are
bound to give alms of their superfluity, even though the
affirmative were true, it will seldom or never happen to be
obligatory in practice.' "

"I see very well how that follows from the doctrine of
Vasquez," said I. ** But how would you answer this objec-
tion, that, in working out one's salvation, it would be as safe,
according to Yasquez, to give no alms, provided one can
muster as much ambition as to have no superfluity; as it is safe,
according to the Gospel, to have no ambition at all, in order
to have some superfluity for the purpose of alms-giving? "t

** Why" returned he, "the answer would be, that both of
these ways are safe, according to the Gospel ; the one accord-
ing to the Gospel in its more literal and obvious sense, and
the other according to the same Gospel as interpreteid by
Yasquez. There you see the utility of interpretations.
When the terms are so clear, however," he continued, " as
not to admit of an interpretation, we have recourse to the

* Luke xi. 41.— Quod tupereat, date deemosynam (Vulgate) ; r» hfStrtt ion
(Gr.) ; Ea qucB penes voi sunt date (Beza) ; ''Give alms of such things as ye
have." (Eng. fer.)

t When I^lscal speaks of alms-giving "working out our salvation," it is evi-
dent that he r^arded it only as the evidence of our being in a state of salva-
tion. Judging by the history of his life, and by his " Thoughts on Religion,"
no man was more tree from spiritual pride, or that x>oor species of it which
boasts of its eleemosynary sacrifices. His charity flowed from love and gra-
titude to God. Such was his regard for the i)oor, that he could not reflise to
nve alms, even though compelled to take from the supply necessary to re-
lieve hia own infirmities ; and on his deathbed he entreated that a poor i>er«
son should be brought into the house and treated with the same attention as
himself ; declaring that when he thought of his own comforts, and of the
multitudes who were destitute of the merest necessaries, he felt a distress
which he could not endure. " One thing I have observed," he says in his
Thoughts—" that let a man be ever so poor, he has always sometliiug to leave
on his deathl^ed."

134 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. VI.

observation of favourable circumstances. A single example
will illustrate this: The popes have denounced excommu-
nication on monks who lay aside their canonicals ; our ca-
suists, notwithstanding, put it as a question, ^On what occa-
sions may a monk lay aside his religious habit without incur-
ring excommunication?' They mention a number of cases
oi which they may, and among others the following : * If
he has laid it aside for an infamous purpose, such as to pick
pockets or to go incognito into haunts oi profligacy, meaning
shortly after to resume it.' It is evident the bulls havejia
reference to cases of that description." *

I could hardly believe this, and begged the father to show
me the passage in the original. He did so, and under the
chapter headed ** Practice according to the School of the
Society of Jesus — Praxis ex Sodetatis Jesu Schola" — ^I read
these very words: Si habitvi/m, dimittat utfuretwr occultey vel
fomicetur. He showed me the same diing in Diana, in
these terms : Ut eat incognitus ad Iti/panar, " And why,
father," I asked, '* are they discharged from excommunica-
tion on such occasions?"

" Don't you understand it?" he replied. " Only think
what a scandal it would be, were a monk surprised in such a
predicament with his canonicals onlj And have you never
heard," he continued, ** how they ansvver the first bull Contra
soUidtantesf and how our four-and-twenty, in another chap-
ter of the Practice according to the School of our Society,
explain the bull of Pius V. Contra clericos, &c.?"*

** 1 know nothing about aU that," said I.

** Then it is a sign you have not read much of Escobar,"
returned the monk.

** I got him only yesterday, father," said I; ** and I had
no small difficulty, too, in procuring a copy. I don't know
how it is, but everybody of late has been in search of him."t

** The passage to which I referred," returned the monk,
" may be found in treatise 1, example 8, no. 102. Consult it
at your leisure when you go home."

I did so that very night; but it is so shockingly bad, that
I dare not transcribe it.

The good father then went on to say : * You now under-
stand vmat use we make of favourable curcumstances. Some-

* These bulls wers directed against gross and oimataral crimes prevailing
among the clergy. (Kicole, ii., pp. 372-376.)

t An allusion to the pof iilarity of the Letters, which indvced many to in-
quire after the casuistical friHings so often quoted in them.

LET. VI.] JESUmOAL ELUSIONS. 135

times, however, obstinate cases will occur, which do not ad-
roit of this mode of adjustment ; so much so, indeed, that
you would almost suppose they involved flat contradictions.
For example, three popes have decided that monks who are
bound by a particular vow to a Lenten life,* cannot be ab«
solved from it even though they should become bishops.
And yet Diana avers that, notwithstanding this decision,
they are absolved.''

** And how does he reconcile that?" said I.

'' By the most subtle of all the modem methods, and by
the nicest possible application of probabilism," replied the
monk. " You may recollect you were told the other day,
that the affirmative and negative of most opinions have
each, according to our doctors, some probability — enough,
at least, to be followed with a safe conscience. Not that
the fro and con are both true in the same sense — ^that is
impossible — but only they are both probable, and therefore
safe, as a matter of course. On this principle our worthy
friend Diana remarks : ' To the decision of these three popes,
which is contrary to my opinion, I answer, that they spoke
in this way by adhering to the affirmative side — which, in
fact, even in my judgment, is probable ; but it does not fol-
low from this that the negative may not have its probability
too.' And in the same treatise, speaking of another subject
on which he again differs from a pope, he says : ' The pope,
I grant, has said it as the head of the Church ; but his de-
cision does not extend beyond the sphere of the probability
of his ovm opinion.' Now, you perceive that this is not do-
ing any harm to the opinions of the popes ; such a thing
would never be tolerated at Rome, where Diana is in high re-
pute. For he does not say that what the popes have decided
IS not probable ; but leaving their opinion within the sphere of
probabilitjT, he merely says that the contrary is also probable."

** That IS very respectful," said I.

^ Yes," addeii the monk, ^* and rather more ingenious
than the reply made by Father Bauny, when his books were
censured at Kome ; for when pushed very hard on this point
by M. Hallier, he made bold to write : ' What has the cen-
sure of Rome to do with that of France ? ' You now see
how, either by the interpretation of terms, by the observa-
tion of favourable circumstances, or by the aid of the double
probability of ipro and con^ we always contrive to reconcile
those seeming contradictions which occasioned you so much
* Leiden lift—^Xi abstemious life, oif life of fasting.

1S8 PBOVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. VL

surprise, without ever touching on the decisions of Scripture,
councils, or popes."

" Reverend father," said I, " how happy the world is m
having such men as you for its masters ! and what blessings
are these probabilities ! I never knew the reason why you
took such piuns to establish that a single doctor, if a grave
one, might render an opinion probable, and that the contrary
might be so too, and that one may choose any side one
pleases, even though he does not believe it to be the right
side, and all with such a safe conscience, that the confessor
who should refuse him absolution on the faith of the casuists
would be in a state of damnation. But I see now that a
single casuist may make new rules of morality at his discre-
tion, and dispose, according to his fancy, of every thing per-
taining to the regulation of manners."

" What you have now said," rejoined the father, " would
require to be modified a little. Pay attention now, while I
explain our method, and you will observe the progress of a
new opinion, from its birth to its maturity. First, the grave
doctor who invented it exhibits it to the world, casting it
abroad like seed, that it may take root. In this state it is
very feeble ; it requires time gradually to ripen. This ac-
counts for Diana, who has introduced a great many of these
opinions, saying : ' I advance this opinion ; but as it is new,
I give it time to come to maturity — relinquo tempori matur-
andum,' Thus in a few years it becomes insensibly consoli-
dated ; and after a considerable time it is sanctioned by the
tacit approbation of the Church, according to the grand
maxim of Father Bauny, 'that if an opinion has been ad-
vanced by some casuists, and has not been impugned by the
Church, it is a sign that she approves of it.' And, in fact,
on this principle he authenticates one of his own principles
in his sixth treatise, p. 312."

"Indeed, father I cried I, "why, on this principle the
Church would approve of all the abuses which she tole-
rates, and all the errors in all the books which she does not
censure!"

" Dispute the point with Father Bauny," he replied. " I
am merely quoting his words, and you begin to quarrel with
me. There is no disputing with facts, sir. Well, as I was
saying, when time has thus matured an opinion, it thence-
forth becomes completely probable and safe. Hence the
learned Caramuel, in dedicating his Fundamental Theology to
Diana, declares that this great Diana has rendered many opi-

LET. VI.] JESUmCAIi ELUSIONS. 137

nions probable which were not so before — quce antea non
erant; and that, therefore, in following them, persons do not
sin now, though they would have sinned formerly— ^am non
peccant, licet ante peccaverint, ' "

"Truly, father, I observed, "it must be worth one's
while to live in the neighbourhood of your doctors. Why,
\>f two individuals who do the same actions, he that knows
nothing about their doctrine must be a sinner, while he that
knows it does no sin at all. Tt seems, then, that their doc-
trine possesses at once an edifying and a justifying virtue ?
The law of God, according to St Paul, made transgressors ; *
but this law of yours makes nearly all of us innocent. I be-
seech you, mv dear sir, let me know all about it. I will not
leave you tilf you have told me all the maxims which your
casuists have established."

"Alas!" the monk exclaimed, "our main object, no doubt,
should have been to establish no other maxims than those of
the Gospel in all their strictness : and it is easy to see, from
the Rules for the regulation of our manners, that if we tole-
rate some degree of laxity in others, it is rather out of com-
plaisance than through design. f The truth is, sir, we are
forced to it. Men have arrived at such a pitch of corruption
now-a-days, that, unable to make them come to us, we must
e'en go to them, otherwise they would cast us off altogether;
and what is worse, they would become perfect reprobates. It
is to retain such characters as these that our casuists have
taken under consideration the vices to which people of vari-

* Prevartcateurs.—AHviding probably to such texts as Rom. iv. 16: "The
law worketh wrath ; for where no law is, there is no transgression— 17^ enim
non est lex, nee prevaricatio" (Vulg.) ; or Rom. v. 13» &c.

t The Rtdes (Regvlas Communes) of the Society of Jesus, it must be ad-
mitted, are rigid enough in the enforcement of moral decen<^ and discipline
on the members ; and the perfect candour of Pascal appears in the admission.
This, however, only adds weight to the real charge which he substantiates
against them, of teaching maxims which tend to the subversion of morality.
With r^ard to their personal conduct, different opinions prevail. " What-
ever we may think of the political delinquencies of Uieir leaders," says Blanco
White, '* their bitterest enemies have never ventured to charge the order of
Jesuits with moral irregidarities. The internal policy of that body," he adds,
';j>recluded the possibihty of gross misconduct." (Letters from Spain, p. 89.)
We are fax fh>m being sure of this. The remark seems to apply to only one
species of vice, too common in monastic life, and may hold true of the con-
ventual establishments of the Jesuits, where outward decency forms part of
the deep poli<^ of the order ; but what dependence can be placed on the
moral punty of men whose consciences must be debauched by the use of such
maxims? Jarrige informs us that they boasted at one time in Spain of pos-
sessing an herb which preserved their chastity ; and on being auestioned by
the kmg to tell what it was, they replied : ** It was the fear or G«d." But,
says the author, "whatever they might be then, it is plain that th^have
since lost the seed of that herb, for it no longer grows in their garden." (Jo-
suites sur I'Echaufaud, ch. 6.)

138 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. VI.

ous conditions are most addicted, with the view of laying
down maxims which, while they cannot he said to violate the
truth, are so gentle that he must be a very impracticable sub-
ject indeed who is not pleased with them. The grand pro-
ject of our Society, for the good of religion, is never to repulse
any one, let him be what he may, and so avoid driving peoj^e
to despair.* They have maxims, therefore, for all sorts of
persons ; for beneficiaries, for priests, for monks ; for gentle-
men, for servants ; for rich men, for commercial men ; for
people in embarrassed or indigent circumstances ; for devout
women, and women that are not devout ; for married people,
and irregular people. In short, nothing has escaped their
foresight."

** In other words," said I, " they have maxims for the clergy,
the nobility, and the commons.f Well, I am quite impatient
to hear them."

" Let us commence," resumed the father, " with the bene-
ficiaries. You are aware of the traffic with benefices now
carried on, and that were the matter referred to St Thomas
and the ancients who have written on it, there might chance
to be some simonists in the Church. This rendered it highly
necessary for our fathers to exercise their prudence in find-
ing out a palliative. With what success they have done so
will appear from the following words of Valencia, who is one
of Escobar's * four living creatures.* At the end of a long
discourse, in which he suggests various expedients, he pro-
pounds the following, page 2039, in vol. iii., which, to my
mind, is the best : ^ If a person gives a temporal in exchange
for a spiritual good' — that is, if he gives money for a benefice
— < and gives the money as the price of the benefice, it is mani-
fest simony. But if ne gives it merely as the motive which
inclines the will of the patron to confer on him the living,
it is not simony, even though the person who confers it
considers and expects the money as the principal object.'
Tanner, who is also a member of our Society, affirms the
same thing, vol. iii., p. 1519, although be ^ grants that St
Thomas is opposed to it ; for he expressly teaches that it is
always simony to give a spiritual for a temporal good, if the

* It has been observed, with great truth, by Sir James Mackintosh, that
" casuistry, the inevitable growth of the practices of confession and absolu-
tion, has generally vibrated betwixt the extremes of impracticable severity
and contemptible indulgence." (Hist, of England, vol. ii., p. 869.)

t Tiers etot.— These were the three orders into which the people of France
were divided; the tiers etat, or third estate, corresponding to oar com-
mons.

LET. TI.] UAUM8 FOS PKIEn'S. 139

temporal is the end id riew.' By this meani wo prevent an
immeDse number of Bimoniacal troDBactionB ; for who would
be so desperately wicked as to refuse, when givinff money
for a. benefice, to take the simple precaution of so directing
his intentions as to gire it as a moftM to induce the bene-
ficiary to part with it, instead of giving it as the price of the
benefice ? No man, surely, can be so far left to himself as
that would come to."

" I agree with you there," I replied ; " all men, I should
think, hare eu^Uient grace to make a bargain of that sort."

" There can be no doubt of it,** returned the monk.
" Such, then, is the wajr in which we soften matt«rs in re-
gard to the beneficiaries. And now for the priests — we
have maxims pretty favourable to them also. Take die fol-
lowing, for eiample, from our four-and-twentj elders : ' Can
a priest, who has received money to say a mass, take an ad-
ditional sum upon the same mass? Yes, saya Filiutius,be
may, bj applying that part of the sacrifice which belongs to
himself as a priest to the person who paid him last; provided
he does not take a sum equivalent to a whole mass, but only
a part, such as the third of a mass.' "

" Surely, father," said I, " this must be one of those cases
in which the pro and the am have both their share of proba-
hibty. What you have now stated cannot fail, of course, to
be probable, having the authority of such men as Filiutins
and Escobar ; and yet, leaving that within the sphere of pro-
bability, it strikes me that the contrary opinion might be
made out to be probable too, aad m^ht be supported by such
reasons as the following: That, while the Church allows
priesta who are in poor circumstances to take money for thdr
masses, seeing it is hut right that those who serve at the altar
should live by the altar, she never intended that they should
barter the sacrifice for money,* and still less, that they shonld
deprive themselves of those benefits which they ought them-
selves, in the first place, to draw from it; to which I might

•WlthaUiupn Pucal utd hta eood tEntl 11 la plain tint then
li a w difference I u»lBd the epcaCle from the

■ price th !i

th urdio?Boine,ot potting

oiniete into a mopmau, who

inar et price, gr any price
th supenUtiene of Home

lie pleased. T tb

■tantii Ih

Lh tb centurr lliU the

bread wi are Ui

to lb real bod; and bkad ot

140 PROVINCflAL LETTERS. [LET. VI.

add, that, according to St Paul, the priests are to offer sa>
orifice first for themselves, and then for the people ; * and
that accordingly, while permitted to participate with others
in the benefit of the sacrifice, they are not at liberty to forego
their share, by transferring it to another for a third of a
moss, or, in other words, for the matter of fourpence or five-
pence. Verily, father, little as I pretend to be a grave man,
I might contrive to make this opinion probable."

" fi would cost you no great pains to do that," replied the
monk ; ** it is obviously probable already. The difficulty lies
in discovering probability in the converse of opinions mani-
festly good ; this is an achievement which none but great men
can attempt. Father Bauny excels in this department. It
is really delightful to see that learned casuist examining, with
characteristic ingenuity and subtilty, the negative and affir-
mative of the same question, and proving both of them to be
right I Thus in the matter of priests, he says in one place :

* No law can be made to oblige the curates to say mass every
day ; for such a law would unquestionably {hand duhi^) ex-
pose them to the danger of saying it sometimes in mortal
sin.* And yet in another part of the same treatise, he says,

• that priests who have received money for saying mass every
day ought to say it every day, and that they cannot excuse
themselves on the ground that they are not always in a fit
state for the service ; because it is in their power at all times
to do penance, and if they neglect this they have themselves

Christ It was never settled in the Romish Church to be a proper pro-
pitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead till the Council of Trent, in
the sixtenth century; so that it is comparatively a modem invention.
The mass proceeds on the absurd assumption that our blessed Lord offered
up his body and blood in the institution of the supper, before offering them
on the cross, and partook of them himself; and it involves the blasphemy of
supposing that a sinful mortal may, whenever he pleases, offer up the great
sacrifice of that body and blood, which could only be offered by the Son of
God, and offered by him only once. This, however, is the great Diana of the
Popish priests— by this craft they have their wealth— and the whole of its his-
tory proves that it was invented, for no other purpose than imposture and
extortion.

^ Heb. vii. 27. — It is astonishing to see an acute mind like that of Pascal
so warped hj superstition as not to perceive that in this and other allusions
to the Levitical priesthood, the object of the apostle was avowedly to prove
that the great sacrifice for sin, of which the ancient sacrifices were the
types, had been " once offered in the end of the world," and that the veir
text to which he refers teaches that, in the person of Jesus Christ our high
priest, all the functions of the sacrificing priesthood were fulfilled and ter-
minated : " Who needeth not daily, as those nigh priests, to offer up sacrifice,
first for his own sins, and then for the people's ; for this he did once, when he
ofiiered up himself." The Lord Christ is the only Prophet, Priest, and King
of his Church. The ministers of the New Testament are never in Scripture
called priests, though this name has been applied to the Christian people who
oifer up the " spiritual sao^dficef " of praise and good works. (Heb. xiii. L%
16;lI^t.U.6.)

LET. TI.] UAXTMS FOR PRlESTg. 141

to blame for it, and not the person who made them say mass/
And to relieve their minds from all scruples on the subject,
he thus resolves the question : ' May a priest say mass on the
same day in which he has committed a mortal sin of the worst
kind, in the way of confessin^^ himself beforehand ? ' Yillabolos
says he may not, because of his impurity ; but Sancius says
he may, without any sin ; and I hold his opinion to be safe,
and one which may be followed in practice— et tuta et se^
quenda in praxi,** *

" Follow this opinion in practice!" cried I. ** Will any
priest who has fallen into such irregularities, have the assur-
ance on the same day to approach the altar, on the mere
word of Father Bauny? Is he not bound to submit to the
ancient laws of the Church, which debarred from the sacri-
fice for ever, or at least for a long time, priests who had com-
mitted sins of that description — instead of following the mo-
dern opinion of casuists, who would admit him to it on the
very day that witnessed his fall ?"

** You have a very short memory," returned the monlc.
** Did I not inform you a little ago that, according to our
fathers Cellot and Reginald, 'in matters of morality we are to
follow, not the ancient fathers, but the modern casuists ? ' "

" I remember it perfectly," said I ; ** but we have some-
thing more here: we have the laws of the Church."

" True," he replied; *' but this shows you do not know
another capital maxim of our fathers, ' that the laws of the
Church lose their authority when they have gone into desue-
tude' — cum jam desuetudine abiertmt — as Filiutius says.t We
know the present exigencies of the Church much better than
the ancients could do. Were we to be so strict in excluding
priests from the altar, you can understand there would not
be such a great number of masses. Now, a multitude of
masses brings such a revenue of glory to God and of good
to souls, that I may venture to say, with Father Cellot, that
there would not be too many priests, * though not only all
men and women, were that possible, but even inanimate
bodies, and even brute beasts--6rw<a animalia — were trans-
formed into priests to celebrate mass/ "J

" I was so astounded at the extravagance of this conceit,
that I could not utter a word, and allowed him to proceed
with his discourse. — " Enough, however, about priests ; I am

♦ Treatise 10, p. 474 ; ib., p. 441 ; Quest. 32, p. 457.

t Tom ii. tr. 25, n. SJ. And yet they will pretend to holdtbat their Church
is Ififailible I
t Book of the Hierarchy, p. 611, Roaen edition.

142 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. VI.

afraid of ^retting tedious : let us come to the monks. The
grand difficulty with them is the ohedience they owe to their
superiors ; now observe the palliative which our fathers apply
in this case. Castro Palao* of our Society has said: ' Be-
yond all dispute, a monk who has a probable opinion of his
own, is not bound to obey his superior, though the opinion
of the latter is the more probable. For the monk is at
liberty to adopt the opinion which is more agreeable to him-
self— ^ob sibi gratior fuerit — as Sanchez says. And though
the order of his superior be just, that does not oblige you to
obey him, for it is not just in all points or in every respect—
noil undequaqui jtist^ prceeepit — but only probably so ; and
consequently, you are only probably bound to obey him, and
probably not bound — probahiliter obligatus, et probabiliier
deobligatus.* "

" Certainly, father," said I, " it is impossible too highly to
estimate this precious fruit of the double probability.

** It is of great use indeed," he replied ; " but we mudt
be brief. Let me only give you the following specimen of
our famous Molina in favour of monks who are expelled
from their convents for irregularities. Escobar quotes him
thus : ' Molina asserts that a monk expelled from his
monastery is not obliged to reform in order to get back again,
and that he is no lon^^er bound by his vow of obedience.' "

** Well, father," cried I " this is all very comfortable for
the clergy. Your casuist^ I perceive, have been very in-
dulgent to them ; and no wonder — tliey were legislating, so
to speaks for themselves. I am afraid people of other con-
ditions are not so liberally treated. Every one for himself
in this world."

** There you do us wrong," returned the monk ; " they
could not have been kinder to themselves than we have
been to them. Sir, we treat all, from the highest to the
lowest, with an even-handed charity. And to prove this,
you tempt me to tell you our maxims for servants. In re-
ferei\ce to this class, we have taken into consideration the
difficulty they must experience, when they are men of con-
science, in serving profligate masters. For if they refuse
to perform all the errands in which they are employed, they
lose their places ; and if they yield obedience, they may have
their scruples. To relieve them from these, our four-and-
twenty fathers have specified the services which they may

* Op. Mor., p. 1, disp. ii . p. 6. Ferdinand de Castro Pa'ao was a Jesuit Ot
^paiIl^ and author of a work on Virtues and Vices, published in 108L

LET. VI.] MAXIMS FOR SERVANTS. 143

render with a safe conscieDce ; such as, * carryiDg letters
and presents, opening doors and windows, helping their
master to reach the window, holding the ladder while he is
mounting. AU this,* say they, * is allowable and indifferent;
it is true that, as to holding the ladder, they must be
threatened, more than usually, with being punished for re-
fusing ; for it is doing an injury to the master of a house to
enter it by the window.' You perceive the judiciousness of
that observation, of course?"

" I expected nothing less,*' swd I, " from a book edited by
four-and-twenty Jesuits."

" But," added the monk, " Father Bauny has gone beyond
this ; he has taught valets how to perform these sorts of
offices for their masters quite innocently, by making them
direct their intention, not to the sins to which they are
accessory, but to the gain which is to accrue from them. In
his Summary of Sins, p. 710, first edition, he thus states the
matter : * Let confessors observe,' says he, * that they cannot
absolve valets who perform base errands, if they consent to
the sins of their masters ; but the reverse holds true, if they
have done the thing merely from a regard to their temporal
emolument.' And that, I should conceive, is no difficult
matter to do ; for why should they insist on consenting to
sins of which they taste nothing but the trouble ? The same
Father Bauny has established a prime maxim in favour of
those who are not content with their wages : * May ser-
vants who are dissatisfied with their wages, use means to
raise them by laying their hands on as much of the property
of their masters as they may consider necessary to make the
said wages equivalent to their trouble ? They may, in cer-
tain circumstances ; as when they are so poor that, in looking
for a situation, they have been obliged to accept the offer
made to them, and when other servants of the same class are
gaining more than they elsewhere? * "

** Ha, father ! " cried I, ** that is John d'Alba's passage, I
declare."

" What John d'Alba?" inquired the father; « what do
you mean ? "

•* Strange^ father I " returned I : ** do you not remember
what happened in this city in the year 1647 ? Where in the
world were you living at that time? "

^' I was teaching cases of conscience in one of our colleges
at a distance from Paris," he replied.

^ I see you don't know the story, father : I must tell it

144 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. VI.

you. I heard it related the other day by a man of honour,
w horn I met in company. He told us that this John d'Alba,
who was in the service of your fathers in the College of Cler-
mont, in the Rue St Jacques, being dissatisfied with his
wages, had purloined something to make himself amends ;
and that your fathers, on discovering the theft, had thrown
him into prison on the charge of larceny. The case was
reported to the court, if I recollect right, on the 16th of
April 1647; for he was very minute in its statements, and
indeed they would hardly have been credible otherwise. The
poor fellow, on being questioned, confessed to having taken
some pewter plates, but maintained, nevertheless, that he had
not stolen them ; pleading in his defence this very doctrine
of Father Bauny, which he produced before the judges,
along with a pamphlet by one of your fathers, under whom
he had studied cases of conscience, and who had taught him
the same thing. Whereupon M. De Montrouge, one of the
most respected members of the court, said, in giving his
opinion, 'that he did not see how, on the ground of the
writings of these fathers — writings containing a doctrine so
illegal, pernicious, and contrary to all laws, natural, divine,
and human, and calculated to ruin all families, and sanction
all sorts of household robbery — thev could discharge the
accused. But his opinion was, that this too faithiiil disciple
should be whipped before the college gate, by the hand of
the common hangman, who should, at the same time, burn
the writings of these fathers which treated of larceny, with
certification that they were prohibited from teaching such
doctrine in future, upon pain of death/

•* The result of this judgment, which was heartily approved
of, was waited for with much curiosity, when some incident
occurred which made them delay procedure. But in the
mean time the prisoner disappeared, nobody knew how, and
zjothing more was heard about the affair; so that John
d'Alba got off, pewter plates and all. Such was the account
he gave us, to which he added, that the judgment of M. De
Montrouge was entered on the records of tne court, where
any one may consult it. We were highly amused with the
anecdote."

" What are you trifling about now ? " cried the monk.
*^ What does all that signify ? I was explaining the maxims
of our casuists, and was just going to speak of those relating to
gentlemen, when you interrupt me with impertinent stories.**

" It was only something suggested by the way, father/' I

LET. VI.] ANECDOTE OF JOHN D'aLBA. 145

observed ; " and besides, I was anxious to apprize you of an
hnportant circumstance, which I find you have overlooked in
establishing your doctrine of probability."

" Ay, indeed ! " exclaimed the monk, "what defect can this
be, that ha» escaped the notice of so many ingenious men ? "

" You have certainly," continued I, " contrived to place
your disciples in perfect safety so far as God and the con-
science are concerned ; for they are quite safe in that quarter,
according to you, by following in the wake of a grave doc-
tor. You have also secured them on the part of the confes-
sors, by obliging priests, on the pain of mortal sin, to absolve
all who follow a probable opinion. But you have neglected
to secure them on the part of the judges ; so that, in following
your probabilities, they are in danger of.coming into contact
with the whip and the gallows. This is a sad oversight."

" You are right," said the monk ; " I am glad you men-
tioned it. But the reason is, we have no such power over ma-
gistrates as over the confessors, who are obliged to refer to us
m cases of conscience, in which we are the sovereign judges."

** So I understand," returned I ; " but if, on the one hand,
you are the judges of the confessors, are you not, on the
other hand, the confessors of the judges ? Your power is
very extensive. Oblige them, on the pain of being debarred
from the sacraments, to acquit all criminals who act on a
probable opinion; otherwise it may happen, to the great
contempt and scandal of probability, that those whom you
render innocent in theory may be wnipped or hanged in prac-
tice. Without something of this kind, how can you expect
to get disciples? "

" The matter deserves consideration," said he ; " it will
never do to neglect it. I shall suggest it to our father Pro-
vincial. You might, however, have reserved this advice to
some other time, without interrupting the account I was
about to give you of the maxims which we have established
in favour of gentlemen ; and I shall not give you any more
information, except on condition that you do not tell me any
more anecdotes."

This is all you shall have from me at present; for it
would require more than the limits •of one letter to acquaint
you with all that I learned in a single conversation. — Mean-
while, I am, &c.

146 PROVINCTAL LETTERS. [LET. VH.

LETTER Vn .♦

METHOD OP DIRECTING THE INTENTION ADOPTED BT THE
CASUISTS— PERMISSION TO KILL IN DEFENCE OP HONOUR
AND PROPERTY, EXTENDED EVEN TO PRIESTS AND MONKS
— CURIOUS QUESTION RAISED BT CARAMUEL, AS TO WHE-
THER JESUITS MAT BE ALLOWED TO KILL JANSENISTS.

Paris, April 26, 1666.

Sir, — ^Having succeeded in pacifying the good father, who
had been rather disconcerted by the anecdote of John d'Alba,
he resumed the conversation, on my assuring him that I
would avoid all such interruptions in iiiture, and spoke of the
maxims of his casuists with regard to gentlemen, nearly in
the following terms: —

" You know," he said, ** that the ruling passion of per-
sons in that rank of life is * the point of honour,' which is
perpetually driving them into acts of violence apparently
quite at variance with Christian piety; so that, in fact,
they would be almost all of them excluded from our con-
fessionals, had not our fathera relaxed a little from the
strictness of religion, to accommodate themselves to the
weakness of humanity. Anxious to keep on good terms
both with the Gospel, by doing their duty to God, and with
the men of the world, by showing charity to their neigh-
bour, they needed all the wisdom they possessed to devise
expedients for so nicely adjusting matters as to permit these

fentlemen to adopt the methods usually resorted to for vin*
icating their honour, without wounding their consciences,
and thus reconcile two things apparently so opposite to each
* This Letter was revised by M. Nicole.

LET. rn.] BIRECTINa THE INTENTION. 147

other as piety and the point of honour. But, sir, in pro-
portion to the utility of the design, was the difficulty of
the execution. Tou cannot fail, I should think, to rea-
lize the magnitude and arduousness of such an enter-
prise ? "

" It is certMnly surprising," said I, rather coldly.

" Surprising, forsooth ! " cried the monk. ** I can well
helieve tnat ; it may well surprise many hesides you. Why,
don't you know that, on the one hand, the Gospd commands
as * not to render evil for evil, but to leave vengeance to God ;*
and that, on the other hand, the laws of the world forbid
our enduring an affront without demanding satisfaction
from the offender, and that often at the expense of his life ?
You have never, I am sure, met with any thing to all ap-
pearance more diametrically opposed than these two codes of
morals; and yet, when told tnat our fathers have recon-
ciled them, you have nothing more to say than that it is sur-
prismg !

^I did not sufficiently explain myself, father. I should
certainly have considered the thing perfectly impracticable,
if I had not known, from what I have seen of your fathers,
that they are capable of doing with ease what is impossible
to other men. This led me to anticipate that they must have
discovered some method for meeting the difficulty — a method
which I admire even before knowing it, and which I pray
you to explain to me."

" Since that is your view of the matter," replied the monk,
'*I cannot refuse you. Know, then, that this marvellous
principle is our grand method of directing the intention —
the importance of which in our moral system is such, that I
might almost venture to compare it with the doctrine of pro-
bability. You have had some glimpses of it in passing, from
certain maxims which I mentioned to you. For example,
when I was showing you how servants might execute cer-
tain troublesome iobs with a safe conscience, did you not
remark that it was simply by diverting their intention from
the evil to which they were accessory, to the profit which
they might reap ^m the transaction r Now, that is what we
call directing the intention. You saw, too, liiat were it not
for a similar diversion of the mind, those who give money
for benefices might be downright simoniacs. But I will
now show you this g^rand method in ail its glory, as it ap-
plies to the subject of homicide — a crime which it justifies
m a thousand instances ; in order that, ftom this starthng

148 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET, VII.

result, you may form an idea of all that it is calculated to
eflFect."

" I foresee already," said I, " that, according to this mod^
every thing will be permitted ; nothing will escape it."

"You Sways fly from one extreme to another," replied
the monk : " prithee avoid that habit. For, just to show
you that we are far from permitting every thing, let me tell
you that we never suffer such a thing as the formal intention
to sin, with the sole design of sinning; and if any person
whatever should persist in having no other end but evil in
the evil that he does, we break with him at once : such con-
duct is diabolical. This holds true, without exception of age,
sex, or rank. But when the person is not of such a wretched
disposition as this, we try to put in practice our method of
directing the intention, which simply consists in his propos-
ing to himself, as the end of his actions, some allowable ob-
ject. Not that we do not endeavour, as far as we can, to
dissuade men from doing things unlawful; but when we
cannot prevent the action, we at least purify the motive, and
thus correct the viciousness of the mean by the goodness of
the end. Such is the way in which our fathers hare con-
trived to permit those acts of violence to which men usually
resort in vindication of their honour. They have no more
to do than to divert their intention from the desire of ven-
geance, which is criminal, and direct it to a desire to defend
their honour, which, according to us, is quite warrantable.
And in this way our doctors discharge all their duty to-
wards God and towards man. By permitting the action,
they satisfy the world ; and by purifying the intention, they
satisfy the GospeL This is a secret, sir, which was entirely
unknown to the ancients; the world is indebted for the
discovery entirely to our doctors. You understand it now, I
hope?"

"Perfectly well," was my reply. "To men you grant
the outward and substantial effect of the action; and to
God you give the inward and spiritual movement of the
intention ; and by this equitable partition, you form an al-
liance between the laws of God and the laws of men. But,
ray dear sir, to be frank with you, I can hardly trust your
promises, and suspect that your authors will tell another
tale."

" You do me injustice," rejoined the monk ; " I advance
nothing but what I am ready to prove, and that by such a
rich array of passages, that altogether their number, their

LET. Vn] PRIVATE REVENGE PERMITTED. 149

authority, and their arguments, will fill you with admira*
tion. To show you, for example, the alliance which our
fathers have formed between the maxims of the Gospel and
those of the world, by thus regulating the intention, let me
refer you to Reginald.* * Private persons are forbidden
to avenge themselves ; for St Paul says to the Romans
(ch. 12th), " Recompense to no man evil for evil ; " and Ec-
clesiasticus says (ch. 28th), " He that taketh vengeance shall
draw on himself the vengeance of God, and his sins will not
be forgotten. " Besides »11 that is said in the Gospel about
forgiving offences, as in the sixth and eighteenth chapters of
St Matthew.'*'

" Well, father, if after that he says any thing contrary to
the Scripture, it will not be from lack of scriptural know-
ledge, at any rate. Pray, how does he conclude ? "

" You shall hear," he said. " * From all this it appears
that a military man may demand satisfaction on the spot
from the person who has mjured him — not, indeed, with the
intention of rendering evil for evil, but with that of preserv-
ing his honour — non ut malum pro malo reddat, sed ut
conservet honorem.' See you how carefully they guard'
against the intention of rendering evil for evil, because the
Scripture condemns it ? This is what they will tolerate on
no consideration. Thus Lessiusf observes, that ' if a man
has received a blow on the face, he must on no account have
an intention to avenge himself; but he may lawfully have an
intention to avert infamy, and may, with that view, repel the
insult immediately, even at the point of the sword — etiam
cum gladio ! * So far are we from permitting any one to
cherish the design of taking vengeance on his enemies, that
our fathers will not allow any even to wish their death —
by a movement of hatred. ' If your enemy is disposed to
injure you,* says Escobar, * you nave no right to wish his
death, by a movement of hatred ; though you may, with a
Tiew to save yourself from harm.' So legitimate, indeed, is
this wish, with such an intention, that our great Hurtado de
Mendoza says, ' that we may pray Ood to visit with speedy
death those who are bent on persecuting us, if there is no
other way of escaping from it.' " $

" May it please your reverence," said I, " the Church has
forgotten to insert a petition to that effect among her prayers."

♦ Inpraxi ; llv. xxi., num. 82, p. 260.

t De Just., liv. ii., c. 9, d. 1'^ n. 79.

I In liis book, De gpe, vol U., d. 15, sec. i, 84ft.

150 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. TH.

** They have not put every thing into the prayers that one
may lawfully ask of God," answered the monk. ** Besides,
in the present case the thing was impossible, for this same
opinion is of more recent standing than the Breviary. Tou
are not a good chronologist, friend. But, not to wander
from the point, let me request your attention to the fol-
lowing passage, cited by Diana from Gaspar Hurtado,* one
of Escobar's four-and-twenty fathers : * An incumbent may,
without any mortal sin, desire the decease of a liferenter
on his benefice, and a son that of his father, and rejoice
when it happens ; provided always it is for the sake of the
profit that is to accrue from the event, and not from personal
aversion.'"

" Good ! " cried I. " That is certainly a very happy idea ;
and I can easily see that the doctrine admits of a wide ap-
plication. But yet there are certain cases the solution of
which, though of great importance for gentlemen, might be
attended with still greater difficulties."

** Propose them, if you please, that we may see," said the
monk.

" Show me, with all your directing of the intention," re-
turned I, " that it is allowable to fight a duel."

" Our great Hurtado de Mendoza,** said the father, ** will
satisfy you on that point in a twinkling. ' If a gentleman,'
says he, in a passage cited by Diana, * who is challenged to
fight a duel, is well known to have no religion, and if the
vices to which he is openly and unscrupulously addicted are
such as would lead people to conclude, in the event of his
refusing to fight, that he is actuated, not by the fear of God,
but by cowardice, and induce them to say of him that he
was a ken, and not a man — gallina, et non vir; in that case
he may, to save his honour, appear at the appointed spot —
not, indeed, with the express intention of fighting a duel,
but merely with that of defending himself, should the per-
son who challenged him come there unjustly to attack him.
His action in this case, viewed by itself, will be perfectly in-
different ; for what moral evil is there in one stepping into
a field — taking a stroll in expectation of meeting a person
— and defending one's self in the event of being attacked?'
And thus the gentleman is guilty of no sin whatever ; for,
in fact, it cannot be called accepting a challenge at aU, his
intention being directed to other circumstances, and the
acceptance of a challenge consisting in an express inten-
* De Sub. Pecc.^ di£ 9 ; Diana, p. J, tr. 14, r. 99.

LET. Vn.] DUFXLTNG PEBBnTTED. 161

tion to fight, which we are supposing the gentleman never
had."

"You have not kept your word with me, sir," said I.
** This is not, properly speaking, to prevent duelling ; on the
contrary, the casuist is so persuaded that this practice is for-
bidden, that, in licensing the action in question, he carefully
avoids calling it a duel."

" Ah ! " cried the monk, " I am glad to see you begin to
get knowing on my hand. I might reply, that the author
I have quoted grants all that due11*sts are disposed to ask.
But since you must have a categorical answer, I shall allow
our Father Layman to give it for me. He permits duelling
in so many words, provided that, in accepting the challenge,
the person directs his intention solely. to the preservation of
his honour or his property : ' If a soldier or a courtier is in
such a predicament tnat he must lose either his honour or
his fortune unless he accepts a challenge, I see nothing to
hinder him in doing so in self-defence.' The same thing is
said by Peter Hurtado, as quoted by our famous Escobar ;
his words are: 'One may figbt a duel even to defend one's
property, should that be necessary ; because every man has
a right to defend his property, though at the expense of his
enemy's life I ' "

I was struck, on hearing these passages, with the reflec-
tion that, while the piety of the king appears in exerting all
his power to prohibit and abolish the practice of duelling in
th^ State,* the piety of the Jesuits is shown by employing
all their ingenuity to tolerate and sanction it in the Church.
But the good father was in such an excellent mood for con-
versation, that it would have been cruel to have interrupted
him ; so he went on with his discourse.

" In short," said he, " Sanchez (mark, now, what great
names I am quoting to you !) Sanchez, »r, goes a step far-
ther; for he shows how, simply by managing the intention
rightly, a person may not only receive a challenge, but give
one. And our Escobar follows that opinion."

* Before the age of Looia XIY. the practice of duelling prevailed in France
to such a frlghtiu] extent, that a writer, who is not given to exaggerate in
such matters, says, that " it had done as much to depopulate the country as
the civil and foreign wars, and that in the course of twenty years, ten of
which had been disturbed bv war, more Frenchmen perished bv the hands of
Tienchmen than by those of their enemies." (Voltaire, oieclede Louis XIV.,
p 42.) The abolition of this barbarous custom was one of the greate^t uer
rices which Louis XIV. rendered to his country. This was not roily acoom*
plished till 1863, when a bloody combat of four against four determined
nim to put an end to the practice, by making it deathi withoat benefit of
clergy, to send or accept a challenge.

152 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. VII.

** Prove, that, father," said I, " and I shall give up the
point : but I will not believe that he has written it, unless I
see it in print."

*' Read it yourself, then," he replied : and, to be sure, I
read the following extract from the Moral Theology of
Sanchez: ''It is perfectly reasonable to hold that a man
may fight a duel to save his life, his honour, or any consi-
derable portion of his property, when it is apparent that
there is a design to deprive him of these unjustly, by law-
suits and chicanery, and when there is no other way of pre-
serving them. Navarre justly observes, that in such cases
it is lawful either to accept or to send a challenge — licet ac-
eeptare et qferre duellum. The same author adds, that
there is nothing to prevent one from despatching one's ad-
versary in a private way. Indeed, in the circumstances
referred to, it is advisable to avoid employing the method of
the duel, if it is possible to settle the affair by privately kill-
ing our enemy ; for, by this means, we escape at once from
exposing our life in the combat, and from participating in
the sin which our opponent would have committed by fight-
ing the duel 1 " *

*' A most pious assassination ! " said I. ^ Still, however,
pious though it be, it is assassination, if a man is permitted
to kill his enemy in a treacherous manner."

"Did I say that he might kill him treacherously?" cried
the monk. " God forbid 1 I said he might kill him pri-
vately, and you conclude that he may kill him treaeher'
ously, as if that were the same thing I Attend, sir, to Esco-
bar's definition before allowing yourself to speak again on
this subject: 'We call it killing in treachery, when the per-
son who is slain had no reason to suspect such a fate. He,
therefore, that slays his enemy cannot be said to kill him in
treachery, even although the blow should be giveil insidiously
and behind his \)Si,Q)ir-^icet pefi* insidias aut a tergo pereutiaU'
And again : ' He that kills his enemy, with whom ne was re-
conciled under a promise of never again attempting his life,
cannot be absolutely said to kill in treachery, unless there
was between them all the stricter friendship — arctior ami-
citia.'f You see now you do not even understand what
the terms signify, and yet you pretend to talk like a doc-
tor ! "

" I grant you this is something quite new to me," I re-

* Sanchez, Theol. Mor«, llv. ii., c. 3$^ XL 7.
t Escobar, tr. 6^ ex. Ik, A. 26, 66.

LET. Til.] ASSASSINATION PERMITTED. 153

plied, " and I should gather from that definition that few,
if any, were ever killed in treachery ; for people seldom tak«
it into their heads to assassinate any hut their enemies. Be
this as it may, however, it seems that, according to Sanchez,
a man may freely slay (I do not say treacherously, but only
insidiously, and behind his back) a calumniator, fur example,
who prosecutes us at law ? "

" Certainly he may," returned the monk : " always, how-
ever, in the way of giving a right direction to the intention:
you constantly forget the main point. Molina supports the
same doctrine ; and what is more, our learned brother Regi-
nald maintains that we may despatch the false witnesses
whom he summons against us. And to crown the whole,
according to our great and famous fathers Tanner and Ema-
nuel Sa, it is lawful to kill both the false witnesses and the
judge himselfi if he has had any collusion with them. Here
are Tanner's very words : * Sotus and Lessius think that it
is not lawful to kill the false witnesses and the magistrate
who conspire together to put an innocent person to death ;
but Emanuel Sa and other authors with gooa reason impugn
that sentiment, at least so far as the conscience is concerned/
And he goes on to show that it is quite lawful to kill both
the witnesses and the judge."

" Well, father," said I, " I think I now understand pretty
well your principle regarding the direction of the intention;
but I should like to know something of its consequences, and
all those cases in which this method of yours arms a man
with the power of life and death. Let us go over them
again, for fear of mistake, for equivocation here might be at-
tended wiih dangerous results. Killing is an affair that
would require to be well-timed, and to be backed with a
good probable opinion. You have assured me, then, that, by
giving a proper turn to the intention, it is lawful, according
to your fathers, for the preservation of one's honour, or even
property, to accept a challenge to a duel, to give one some-
times, to kill in a private waj a false accuser, and his wit-
nesses along with him, and even the judge who has been
bribed to favour them ; and you have also told me that he
who has got a blow may, without avenging himself, retaliate
with the sword. But you have not told me^ father, to what
length he may go."

" He can hai'dly mistake there," replied the father, ** for
he may go all the length of killing his man. This is satis-
factorily proved by the learned Henriquez, and others of our

154 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. VII.

fathers quoted by Escobar, as follows : * It is perfectly right
to kill a person who has given us a box on the ear, although
he should run away, provided it is not done through hatred
or revenge, and there is no danger of giving occasion there-
by to murders of a gross kind and hurtful to society. And
the reason is, that it is as lawful to pursue the thief that has
stolen our honour, as him that has run away with our pro-
perty. For, although your honour cannot be said to be in
the hands of your enemy in the same sense as your goods
and chattels are in the hands of the thief, still it may be
recovered in the same way — by showing proofs of great-
ness and authority, and thus acquiring the esteem of men.
And, in point of fact, is it not certain that the man who
has received a buffet on the ear is held to be under dis-
grace, until he has wiped off the insult with the blood of his
enemy?

I was so shocked on hearing this, that it was with great
difficulty I could contain myself; but, in my anxiety to hear
the rest, I allowed him to proceed.

" Nay," he continued, " it is allowable to prevent a buffet,
by killing him that meant to give it, if there be no other way
to escape the insult. This opinion is quite common with our
fathers. For example, Azor, one of the four-and-twenty
elders, proposing the question, * Is it lawful for a man of
honour to kill another who threatens to give him a slap on
the face, or strike him with a stick ? ' replies, * Some say he
may not; alleging that the life of our neighbour is more
precious than our honour, and that it woum be an act of
cruelty to kill a man merely to avoid a blow. Others, how-
ever, think that it is allowable ; and I certainly consider it
probable, when there is no other way of warding off the in-
sult ; for, otherwise, the honour of the innocent would be
constantly exposed to the malice of the insolent.' The same
opinion is given by our great Filiutius; by Father Hereau,
in his Treatise on Homicide ; by Hurtado de Mendoza, in
his Disputations; by Becan, in his Summary; by our Fa-
thers Flahaut and Lecourt, in those writings which the uni-
versity, in their third petition, quoted at length, in order to
bring them into disgrace (though in this they failed) ; and
by Escobar. In short, this opinion is so general, that Lessius
lays it down as a point which no casuist has contested ; he
quotes a great many that uphold, and none that deny it ;
and particularly Peter Navarre, who, speaking of affronts
in general (and ther<> is none more provoking than a box

LET. VII.] KILLING FOR A LIE. 165

on the ear), declares that, * by the universal consent of the
casuists, it is lawful to kill the calumniator, if there be no
other way of averting the affront — ex sententia omnium^
licet contunieliosum occidere, gi aliter ea injuria arceri
nequit.* Do you wish any more authorities ? " asked the monk.

I declared I was much obliged to him ; I had heard rather
more than enough of them already. But just to see how
far this damnable doctrine would go, I said: "But, father,
may not one be allowed to kill for some thing still less?
might not a person so direct his intention as lawfully to kill
another for telling a lie, for example?"

" He may," returned the monk ; " and according to Fa-
ther Baldelle, quoted by Escobar, * you may lawfully take the
life of another for saying. You have told a lie ; if there is no
other way of shutting his mouth.' The same thing may be
done in the case of slanders. Our Fathers Lessius and He-
reau agree in the following sentiments : ' If you attempt to
ruin my character by telling stories against me in the presence
of men of honour, and I have no other way of preventing this
than by putting you to death, may I be permitted to do so ?
According to the modern authors 1 may, and that even though
I have been really guilty of the crime which you divulge,
provided it is a secret one, which you could not establish by
legal evidence. And I prove it thus : If you mean to rob
me of my honour by giving me a box on the ear, I may pre-
vent it by force of arms ; and the same mode of defence
is lawful when you would do me the same injury with the
tongue. Besides, we may lawfully obviate affronts, and
therefore slanders. In fine, honour is dearer than life ; and
as it is lawful to kill in defence of life, it must be so to kill
in defence of honour.' There you see, are arguments in due
form; this is demonstration, sir — not mere discussion. • And,
to conclude, this great man Lessius shows, in the same place,
that it is lawful to kill even for a simple gesture or a sign
of contempt. 'A man's honour,' he remarks, 'may be
attacked or filched away in various ways^in all which vin-
dication appears very reasonable; as, for instance, when
one offer? to strike us with a stick, or give us a slap on the
face, or affront us either by words or signs — siveper signa,* "

" Well, father," said I, " it must be owned that you have
made every possible provision to secure the safety of reputa-
tion ; but it strikes me that human life is greatly in danger,
if any one may be conscientiously put to death simply for a
scurrilous word or a saucy gesture."

166 PROTINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. YH.

'* That is true," he replied ; ** but as our fathers are very
circumspect, they have thought it proper to forbid putting
this doctrine into practice on such trifling occasions. They
say, at least, * that it ought hardly to be reduced to practice
— practice vix probari potest: ' ^d they have a good reason
for that, as you shall see."

" Oh I I know what it will be," interrupted I ; ** because
the law of God forbids us to kill, of course."

"They do not exactly take up that ground," said the
father : " as a matter of conscience^ and viewing the thing
abstractly, they hold it allowable."

" And why, then, do they forbid it?"

** I shall tell you that, sir. It is becau«e,.were we to kill
all the slanderers among us, we should very shortly depopu-
late the country. * Although,* says Reginald, * the opinion
that we may kill a man for calumny is not without its proba-
bility in theory, the contrary one ought to be followed in prac-
tice ; for, in our mode of defending ourselves, we should
always avoid doing injury to the commonwealth ; and it is
evident that by killing people in this way there would be too
many murders.' * We should be on our guard,' says Les-
sius, * lest the practice of this maxim prove hurtful to the
State ; for in this case it ought not to be permitted — twne
enim non est permittimdus* "

" What, father I is it forbidden only as a matter of policy,
and not of religion ? Few people, I am afraid, will pay any
regard to such a prohibition, particularly when in a passion.
Very probably they might think they were doing no harm to
the State, by ridding it of an unworthy member."

" And accordingly," replied the monk, " our Filiutius has
fortified that argument with another, which is of no slender
importance, namely, ' that for killing people after this man-
ner, one might be punished in a court of justice.'"

" There now, father ; I told you before that you will never
be able to do any thing worth the while, unless you get the
magistrates to go along with you."

" The magistrates," said the father, " as they do not pene-
trate into the conscie ce. Judge merely of the outside of the
action, while we look principally to the intention ; and hence
it occasionally happens that our maxims are a little different
from theirs."

" Be that as it may, father ; from yours, at least, one
thing may be fairly infeiTed — that, by taking care not to in-
jure the commonwealth, we may kill slanderers with a safe

LET. VII.] VALUE OP HITMAN LIPB. 157

conscience, provided we^can do it with a sound skin. But,
sir, after having seen so well to the protection of honour,
have you done nothing for property ? I am aware it is of
inferior importance, hut that does not signify ; I should think
one might direct one's intention to kill for its preservation
also."

" Yes," replied the monk ; ** and I gave you a hint to that
effect already, which may have suggested the idea to you.
All our casuists agree in that opinion ; and they even extend
the permission to those cases * where no further violence is
apprehended from those, that steal our property ; as, for ex-
ample, where the thief runs away/ Azor, one of our So-
ciety, proves that point."

'* But, sir, how much must the article be worth, to justify
our proceeding to that extremity? '*

** According to Reginald and Tanner, * the article must be
of great value in the estimation of a judicious man.' And so
think Layman and Filiutius."

^* But, father, that is saying nothing to the purpose ;
where am I to find ' a judicious man ' (a rare person to meet
with at any time), in order to make this estimation ? Why
do they not settle upon an exact sum at once ? "

" Ay, indeed ! " retorted tha monk ; ** and was it so
easy, think you, to adjust the comparative value between
the life of a man, a Christian man, too, and money ? It is
here I would have you feel the need of our casuists. Show
me any of your ancient fathers who will tell for how much
money we may be allowed to kill a man. What will they
say, but * Non occides — Thou shalt not kiU? ' "

** And who, then, has ventured to &l that sum ? " I in-
quired.

" Our great and incomparable Molina,** he replied — " the
^lory of our Society — who has, in his inimitable :Pvisdom,
^timated the life of a man * at six or seven ducats ; for
which sum he assures us it is warrantable to kill a thief, even
though he should run off ; ' and he adds, * that he would not
venture to condemn that man as guilty of any sin who should
kill another for taking away an article worth a crown, or
even less — unius ayrei, vel minoris adhuG valoria;' which has
led Escobar to lay it down as a general rule, * that a man
may be killed quite regularly, according to Molina, for the
value of a crown-piece. "

*^ tJEither ! " cried I, '< where can Molina have got all this
wisdom to enable him to determine a matter of such import-

158 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. YU.

ance, without any aid from Scripture, the councilfl^ or the
fathers ? It is quite evident that ne has obtained an Ulami-
nation peculiar to himself, and is far beyond St Augustine in
the matter of homicide, as well as of grace. Wdl, now, I
sui^pose I may consider myself master of this ch^ter of
morals ; and I see perfectly that, with the exception of eode-
siasticfly nobody need refrain from killing those who injure
them in their property or reputation.''

" What say you ? " exclaimed the monk. ^ Do you then
suppose that it would be reasonable that those who ought of
all men to be most respected, should alone be exposed to the
insolence of the wicked ? Our fathers have provided against
that disorder ; for Tanner declares that ' ohurchmeny and
even mouks, are permitted to kill, for the purpose of d^end-
ing not only their lives, but their property, and that of their
community.' Molina, Escobar, Becan, Reginald, Layman,
Lessius, and others, hold the same language. Nay, accord-
ing to our celebrated Fi^tber Lamy,* priests and monks may
lawfully prevent those who would injure them by calumnies
from carrying their ill designs into effect, by putting them to
death. Care, however, must be always taken to direct the in-
tention properly. His words are : * An ecclesiastic or a monk
may warrantably kill a defamer who threatens to publish the
scandalous crimes of his community, or his own crimes, when
there is no other way of stopping him ; if, for instance^ he
is prepared to circulate his calumnies unless promptly des-
patched. For, in these circumstances, as the monk would
be allowed to kill one who threatened to take his life^ he is
also warranted to kill him who would deprive him of his re-
putation or his property, in the same way as the men of the
world.'- ^ ^ ^* ^

'< I was not aware of that," said I ; ^ in fact, I have been
accustomed simply enough to believe the very reverse, without
reflecting on the matter, in consequence of having heard that
the Church had such an abhorrence at bloodshed as not even
to permit ecclesiastical judges to attend in criminal cases." t

* Trancoifl Amicus, or I/Amy, was chancellor of the UniversKnr of Grate.
In his Cours Theologique, published in 1642, he adyanoes the moefe dufooiu
tenets, particularly on the subject of murder.

t This is true ; but in the case of heretics, at least, they found out a oonve-
nient mode of compromising the matter. Having condemned their yiotlin as
worthy of death, he was delivered over to the secular oourt, with the disfiu^
ing farce of a recommendation to mercy, couched in these terms : " My lord
judge, we beg of you, with all possible affection, for the love of God, and as
you would expect the gifts of mercy and compassion, and the benefit of our
prayers, not to do any thing ingurious to this miserable man, tending to death
or the mutilation of his body!" (Grespin, Ilist. de« Martyred, p. 186^

LET. Vn.] MAT JESUITS KILL JANSENISTS ? Ibv

" Never mind that," he replied ; " our Father Lamy has
completely proved the doctrine I have laid down, although,
with a humility which sits uncommonly well on so great a
man, he submits it to the judgment of his judicious readers.
Oaramuel, too, our famous champion, quoting it in his Fun-
damental Theology, p. 643, thinks it so certain, that he de-
clares the contrary opinion to be destitute of probability, and
draws some admirable conclusions from it, such as the fol-
lowing, which he calls * the conclusion of conclusions — con-
cliLsiontim eonclusio : ' ' That a priest not only may kill a
slanderer, but there are certain circumstances m which it
may be his duty to do so—etiam aliquamdo debet occidere.'
He examines a great many new questions on this principle,
such as the following, for instance : ' itfoy the Jesuits kill the
Jansenistsf "

" A curious point of divinity that, father ! " cried I. " I
hold the Jansensists to be as good as dead men, according to
Father Lamy's doctrine."

'* There now, you are in the vnrong," said the monk :
^ Caramuel infers the very reverse from the same prin-
ciples."

" And how so, father ? "

"Because," he replied, "it is not in the power of the Jan-
senists to injure our reputation. ' The Jansenists,' says he,
* call the Jesuits Pelagians ; may they not be killed for that ?
No, inasmuch as the Jansenists can no more obscure the glory
of the Society than an owl can that of the sun ; on the con-
trary, they have, though against their intention, enhanced it
— occidi nan possunt, quia noeere non potuerunt,' "

" Ha, father 1 do the lives of the Jansenists, then, depend
on the contingency of their injuring your reputation ? If so,
I reckon them far from being in a safe position ; for suppos-
ing it should be thought in the slightest d^ree probable that
they might do you some mischief why, they are killable at
once ! You have only to draw up a syllogism in due form,
and, with a direction of the intention, you may despatch your
man at once with a safe conscience. Thrice happy must
those hot spirits be who cannot bear with injuries, to be in-
structed in this doctrine ! But wo to the poor people who
have offended them ! Indeed, father, it would be better to
have to do with persons who have no religion at all, than
with those who have been taught on this system. For, after
all, the intention of the wounder conveys no comfort to the
wounded. The poor man sees nothing of that secret direc-

1 00 PROVINCIAL LETTEBS. [LET. VH.

tion of which you speak ; he is onlj sensible of the direction
of the blow that is dealt him. And I am by no means sore
but a person would feel much less concerned at being
brutally killed by an infuriated ruffian than being conscien-
tiously stilettoed by a devotee. To be plain with yen,
father, I am somewhat sta^ered at all this ; and these ques-
tions of Father Lamy and Caramuel do not please me at alL"

** How so ? " cried the monk. ** Are you a Jansenist ? '*

** I have another reason for it," I replied. ** You must
know I am in the habit of ifiTiting, from time to time, to a
friend of mine in the country, all that I can learn of the
maxims of your doctors. Now, although I do no more than
simply report and faithfully quote their own words, yet I am
apprehensive lest my letter should fall into the hands of some
stray genius, who may take it into his head that I have done
you injury, and may draw some mischievous conclusions from
your premises."

*' Away I " cried the monk ; '* no fear of danger from that
quarter, Fll give you my word for it. Know that what our
fathers have themselves printed, with the approbation of
our superiors, it cannot be wrong to read nor dangerous to
publish."

I write you, therefore, on the faith of this worthy father's
word of honour. But, in the mean time, I must stop fbr
want of paper — not of passages; for I have got as many
more in reserve, and good ones too, as would require volumes
to contain them. — ^I am, &c.*

* It may be noticed here, that Father Daniel has attempted to evade the
main charge against the Jesuits in this letter, by adroitly altering the etate
of the question. Ue argues that the intention is the soul of an action, and
that which often malies it good or evil ; thus cunningly instnnating that his
casuists refer only to ind^erent actions, in regard to which • nobody dmies
tliat it is the intention that malces them good or bad. (Entretlens de Gleandra
ct d'Eudoxe, p. 834.) .It is unnecessary to do more than refer the reader back
to the instances cited In the letter, to conyince him that what these <

reallT maintain is, that actions in themselves evU may be allowed, provided
the vntentiong are good ; and, moreover, that in order to make these intoi-
tions good, it is not necessary that they have any reference to God, but niflflU
cient if they refer to our own convenience, cupidity, or vuiity. (Apolocie
dea Lettres Provinciales, pp. 2X2-221.)

LET. Vm.] COBBUPT MAXIMS OF THE CASUISTS. 161

LETTER vm/

CORRUPT MAXIMS OF THE CASUISTS BELATINO TO JUDGES
— USURERS— THE CONTRACT MOHATRA — ^BANERUPTS-^
RESTITUTION — ^DIVERS RIDICULOUS NOTIONS OF THESE
SAME CASUISTS.

Paris, May 28, 1666.
Sir, — You did not suppose that anybody would have the
curiosity to know who we were ; but it seems there are people
who are trying to make it out, though they are not very
happy in their conjectures. Some take me for a doctor of
the Sorbonne ; others ascribe my letters to four or five per-
sons, who, like me, are neither priests nor churchmen. All
these false surmises convince me that I have succeeded pretty
well in my object, which was to conceal myself ^om all but
yourself and the worthy monk, who still continues to bear
with my visits, while I still contrive^ though with connder-
able difficulty, to bear with his conversations. I am obliged,
however, to restrain myself; for were he to discover how
much I am shocked at his communications, he would discon-
tinue them, and thus put it out of my power to fulfil the
promise I gave you, of making you acquainted with their
morality. You ought to think a great deal of the violence
which I thus do to my own feelings. It is no easy matter, I
can assure you, to stand still and see the whole system of
Christian ethics undermined by such a set of monstrous prin-
ciples, without daring^ to put in a word of flat contradiction
against them. But after having borne so much for your
satisfaction, I am resolved I shall burst out for my own satis-
faction in the end, when his stock of information has been
* This letter also was revised bj M. Nicole.

162 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. Vni.

exhausted. Meanwhile, I shall repress my feelings as much as
I possibly can ; for I find that the more I hold my tongue,
he is the more communicative. The last time I saw him,
he told me so many things, that I shall have some diffi-
culty in repeating them all. On the point of restitution, you
will find tney have some most convenient principles. For,
however the good monk palliates bis maxims, those which I
am about to lay before you really go to sanction corrupt
judges, usurers, bankrupts, thieves, prostitutes, and sorcerers
— all of whom are most liberally absolved from the obligation
of restoring their ill-gotten gains. It was thus the monk re-
sumed the conversation : —

'* At the commencement of our interviews, I engaged to
explain to you the maxims of our authors for all ranks and
classes; and you have already seen those that relate to bene-
ficiaries, to priests, to monks, to domestics, and to gentlemen.
Let us now take a cursory glance of the remaining, and begin
with the judges.

''Now I am going to tell you one of the most important
and advantageous maxims which our fathers have laid down
m their favour. Its author is the learned Castro Palao, one
of our four-and-twentjr elders. His words are: *May a
judge, in a question of ng^ht and wrong, pronounce according
to a probable opinion, m preference to the more probable
opinion? He may, even though it should be contrary to his
own judgment — imo contra propriam opinionem/"

** Well, father," cried I, " that is a very fair commence-
ment I The judges, surely, are greatly obliged to you ; and
I am surprised that they should be so hostile, as we have
sometimes observed, to your probabilities, seeing these are so
favourable to them. For it would appear from this, that you
give them the same power over men's fortunes, as you have
given to yourselves over their consciences."

** You perceive we are far from being actuated hy self-in-
terest," returned he; "we have had no other end in laew
than the repose of their consciences ; and to the same asefal
purpose has our great Molina devoted his attention, in re-
gard to the presents which may be made to them. To re-
move any scruples which they might entertain in accepting
of these on certain occasions, he has been at the pains to
draw out a list of all those cases in which bribes may be
taken with a good conscience, provided, at least, there be ne
special law forbidding them. He says: 'Judges may re-
ceive presents from parties, when they are given them either

LET. Vra.] BRIBEBT. 16

•>

for friendship's sake, or in gratitude for some former act of
justice, or to induce them to give justice in future, or to
oblige them to pay particular attention to their case, or to
engage them to despatch it promptly.' The learned Escobar
delivers himself to the same effect: 'If there be a number of
persons, none of whom have more right than another to
nave their causes disposed of, will the judge who accepts of
something from one of them on condition— eo; pacto — of
taking up his cause first, be guilty of sin ? Certainly not,
according to Layman ; for, in common equity, he does no in-
jury to the rest, by granting to one, in consideration of his
present, what he was at liberty to grant to any of them he
pleased; and besides, being under an equal obligation to
them all in respect of their right, he becomes more obliged
to the individual who furnished the donation, who thereby
acquired for himself a preference above the rest— a prefer-
ence which seems capable of a pecuniary valuation— ^uof
ohligatio videtur pretio oestimahilis.' **

" May it please your reverence," said I, " after such a per-
mission, I am surprised that the first magistrates of the
kingdom should know no better. For the first President *
has actually carried an order in Parliment to prevent certain
clerks of court from taking money for that very sort of pre-
ference — a sign that he is far from thinking it allowable in
judges ; and every body has applauded this as a reform of
great benefit to all parties."

The worthy monk was surprised at this niece of intelli-
gence, and replied : ''Are you sure of thatr I heard no-
thing about it. Our opinion, recollect, is only probable ; the
contrary is probable also.''

** To tell you the truth, father," said I, ** people think that
the first President has acted more than probably well, and
that he has thus put a stop to a course of public corruption
which has been too long winked at."

" I am not far from being of the same mind," returned
he ; " but let us waive that point, and say no more about
the judges."

" You are quite right, sir,*' said I ; " indeed, they are not
half thankful enough for all you have done for them."

" That is not my reason," said the father ; " but there is
so much to be said on al] the different classes, that we must
study brevity on each of them. Let us now say a word or

* The President referred to was Pompone de Bellievre^ on whom M. Pelif*
son pronounced a beaatiftd eulogy.

164 PROVINCIAL LETTKBS. [LET. VIII.

two about men of business. Tou are aware that our great
difficulty with these gentlemen is to keep them from usury
— an object to accomplish which our fathers have been at
particular pains; for they hold this vice in such abhorrence^
that Escobar declares ' it is heresy to say that usury is no
sin ; ' and Father Bauny has filled several pages of his Sum-
mary of Sins with the pains and penalties due to usurers.
He declares them ' infamous during their life, and unworthy
of sepulture after their death.' "
** O dear I " cried I, ** I had no idea he was so severe."
^ He can be severe enough when there is occasion for it,"
said the monk ; ** but then this learned casuist, having ob-
served that some are allured into usury merely from the
love of gain, remarks in the same place, that * he would con-
fer no small obligation on society, who, while he guarded it
against the evil effects of usury, and of the sin which gives
burth to it, would suggest a method by which one's money
might secure as large^ if not a larger, profit, in some honest
and lawful employment, as he could derive from usurious
dealings.' "

** Undoubtedly, father, there would be no more usurers
after that."

** Accordingly," continued he, " our casuist has suggested
' a general method for all sorts of persons — gentlemen, pre-
sidents, councillors,' &c. ; and a very simple process it is,
consisting only in the use of certain words which must be
pronounced by the person in the act of lending his money ;
after which he may take his interest for it without fear of
being a usurer, which he certainly would be on any other
plan."

"And pray what may those mysterious words be, father?"
" I will give you them exactly in his own words," said the
Father ; "for he has vnritten his Summary in French, you
know, * that it may be understood by every body,' as he says
in the preface : * The person from whom the loan is asked
must answer, then, in this manner : I have got no money
to lends I have got a little, however, to lay out for an hon-
est and lawful profit. If you are anxious to have the sum
you mention, in order to make something of it by your in-
dustrv, dividing the profit and loss between us, i may per-
haps be able to accommodate you. But now I think of it,
as it may be a matter of difficulty to agree about *the profit,
if you will secure me a certain portion of it, and give me so
much for my principal, so that it incur no risk, we may come

LET. Vin.] USOBT — ^THB MOHATBA. 165

to terms much sooner, and you shall touch the cash imme-
diately/ Is not that an easy plan for gaining money without
sin ? ^d has not Father Bauny good reason for concluding
with these words : ' Such, in my opinion, is an excellent plan
by which a great many people, who now provoke the just in-
dignation of God by their usuries, extortions, and illicit bar-
gains, might save themselves, in the way of making good,
honest, and legitimate profits ? ' "

*' 0, sir I " I exclaimed, ** what potent words these must
bet Doubtless they must possess some latent virtue to
chase away the demon of usury which I know nothing
of ; for, in my poor judgment, I always thought that that
vice consisted in recovering more money than what was
lent."

" You know little about it indeed," he replied. ** Usury,
according to our fathers, consists in little more than the in-
tention of taking the interest as usurious. Escobar, accord-
inglv, shows you how you may avoid usury by a simple shift
of the intention. * It would be downright usui*y,' says he,
' to take interest from the borrower, if we should exact it as
due in point of justice ; but if only exacted as due in point
of gratitude, it is not usury. Again, it is not lawful to
have directly the intention of profiting by the money lent ;
but to claim it through the medium of the benevolence
of the borrower — media benevolenHa — is not usury.' These
are subtle methods ; but, to my mind, the best of them all
(for we have a great choice of them) is that of the Mohatra
bargain."

« The Mohatra, father I "

** Tou are not acquainted with it, I see," returned he.
^ The name is the only strange thing about it. Escobar
will explain it to you: 'The Mohatra bargain is effected
by the needy person purchasing some goods at a high price,
and on credit, in order to sell them over again, at the
same time and to the same merchant, for ready money and
at a cheap rate.' This is what we call the Mohatra — a
sort of bargain, you perceive, by which a person receives a
certain sum of ready money, by becoming bound to pay

more."

''But, sir, I really think nobody but Escobar has em-
ployed such a term as that; is it to be found in any other
book?"

" How little you do know of what is going on, to be sure! "
cried the father. *' Why, the last work on theological mo-

166 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. VHI.

rality, printed at Paris this very year, speaks of the Mohatra,
and learnedly, too. It is called EpUogus Summarum, and
is an abridgment of all the summaries of divinity — extracted
from Suarez, Sanchez, Lessius, Fagundez, Hurtado, and
other celebrated casuists, as the title bears. There yott
will find it said, at m 64, that 'the Mohatra bargain takes
place when a man wno has occasion for twenty pistoles pur-
chases from a merchant goods to the amount of thirty
pistoles, payable within a yea)-, and sells them back to him
on the spot for twenty pistoles ready money.' This shows
you that the Mohatra is not such an unheard-of term as you
supposed."

''But, father, is that sort of bargain lawful? "

"Escobar," replied he, "tells us in the same place^ that
there are laws prohibiting it under ?ery severe penalties."

"It is useless, then, I suppose?"

"Not at all; Escobar, in the same passage, suggests ex-
pedients for making it lawful: 'It b so, even though tbe
principal intention both of the buyer and seller is to make
money by the transaction, provided the seller, in disposmg of
the goods, does not exceed their highest price, and in re-
purchasing them does not go below their lowest price, and
that no previous bargain has been made, expressly or other-
wise.' Lessius, however, maintains, that ' even though the
merchant has sold his goods, with the intention of repur-
chasing them at the lowest price, he is not bound to make
restitution of the profit thus acquired, unless, perhaps, as an
act of charity, in the case of the person from whom it has
been exacted being in poor circumstances, and not even then,
if he cannot do it without inconvenience — H commode non
potest.' This is the utmost length to which they could go."

"Indeed, sir," said I, "any further indulgence would, I
should think, be rather too much."

" Oh, our fathers know very well when it is time for them
to stop," cried the monk. " So much, then, for the utility
of the Mohatra. I might have mentioned several other
methods, but these may suffice; and I have now to say a
little in regard to those who are in embarrassed circum-
stances. Our casuists have sought to relieve them, accord-
ing to their condition of life. For, if they have not enough
of property for a decent maintenance, and at the same time
for paying their debts, they permit them to secure a portion
by making a bankruptcy with their creditors.* This has
* The Jeaaitfl exemplified their own maxim in this case hj the funoua

LET. Vm.] BANKEUPTS — ^RESTITUTION. 167

been decided by Lessius, and confirmed by Escobar, afr
follows : ' May a person who turns bankrupt, with a good
conscience keep back as much of his personal estate as may
be necessary to maintain his family in a respectable way —
ne indeeor^ vivat f I hold, with Lessius, that he may, even
though he may have have acquired his wealth unjustly and
by notorious crimes— ear injustitia et notorio delicto', only, in
tnis case he is not at liberty to retain so large an amount a&
he otherwise might.* "

''Indeed, father! what a strange sort of charity is this,
to allow property to remain in the nands of the man who has
acquired it by rapine, to support him in his extravagance,
rather than go into the hands of his creditors, to whom it
legitimately belongs ! "

" It is impossible to please every body," replied the father;
" and we have made it our particular study to relieve these
unfortunate people. This partiality to the poor has induced
our great Vasquez, cited by Castro Palao, to say, that * if
one saw a thief going to rob a poor man, it would be lawful
to divert him from ms purpose by pointing out to him some
rich individual, whom ne might rob in place of the other.'
If you have not access to Vasquez or Castro Palao, you will
find the same thing in your copy of Escobar ; for, as you are
aware, his work is uttle more than a compilation from twenty-
four of the most celebrated of our fathers. You will find it
in his treatise, entitled ' The Practice of our Society in the
matter of Charity towards our Neighbours.' "

" A very singular kind of charity this," I observed, * to
save one man from suffering loss, by inflicting it upon
another I But I suppose that, to complete the charity, the
charitable adviser would be bound in conscience to restore to
the rich man the sum which he had made him lose ? "

^ Not at all, sir," returned the monk; ^ for he did not rob
the man — ^he only advised the other to do it. But only attend
to this notable decision of Father Bauny, on a case which

bankniptOTof their College of St Hermenigilde at Serille. We have a ftill
account of it in the memorial presented to the king of Spain by the Incklesa
creditors. The simple pathos and sincere earnestness oi this document pre-
clude all soepiclon of the accura<^ of its statements. ^ the advice of their
Father ProYincial, the Jesuits, in March 1645, stopped payment, after having
borrowed upwards of 460,000 ducats, mostly from poor widows and friendless
girls. This shameful aflbir was exposevi before the courts of Justice, during a
lonjg litigation, in the course of which it was discovered that the Jesuit
fathers Euad been carrying on extensive mercantile transactions, and that,
instead of spending the money left them for pious uses— such as ransoming
captives, and almsgiving— they had devoted it to the purposes of what they
tenned " oar poor httle house of profession." CTheatre Jesuitique, p. 200, &c.>

168 PROYINOIAL LETTERS. [lBT. Vni.

will still more astonbh you, and in which you would suppose
there was a much stronger obligation to make restitution.
Here are his identical words : ' A person asks a soldier to
beat hb neighbour, or to set fire to the barn of a man that
has injured him. The question is, whether, in the absence
of the soldier, the person who employed him to commit these
outrages is bound to make reparation out of his own pocket
for the damage that has followed ? My opinion is, that he
is not. For none can be held bound to restitution, where
there has been no violation of justice ; and is justice violated by
■asking another to do us a favour ? As to the nature of the
request which he made, he is at liberty either to acknowledge
or deny it; to whatever side he may incline, it is a matter
of mere choice; nothing obliges him to it, unless it may be
•the goodness, gentienifss, and easiness of his disposition. If the
soldier, therefore, makes no reparation for the mischief he has
done, it ought not to be exacted from him at whose request he
injured the innocent.' "

This sentence had very nearly broken up the whole con-
versation, for I was on the point of bursting into a laugh at
the idea of the goodness aid gentleness of a burner of barns,
and at these strange sophisms, which would exempt from the
^uty of restitution the principal and real incendiary, whom
the civil magistrate would not exempt from the halter. But
had I not restrained myself, the worthy monk, who was per-
fectly serious, would have been displeased; he proceeded,
therefore, without any alteration of countenance, in his obser-
vations.

^^ From such a mass of evidence, you ought to be satisfied
now of the futility of your objections; but we are losing
sight of our subject. To revert, then, to the succour which
our fathers apply to persons in straitened circumstances,
Lessius, among others, maintains that ^ it is lawful to steal,
not only in a case of extreme necessity, but even where the
necessity is grave, though not extreme.' "

" This is somewhat startling, father," said I. There are
very few people in this world who do not consider their cases
of necessity to be grave ones, and to whom, accordingly, you
would not give the right of stealing with a good conscience.
And though you should restrict the permission to those only
who are really and truly in that condition, you open the door
to an infinite number of petty larcenies which the magis-
trates would punish in spite of your * grave necessity,* and
which you ought to repress on a higher principle — ^you who

LET. Vra.] ILLICIT GAINS. 16^

are bound by your office to be the conservators, not of justice
only, but of charity between man and man, a grace which
this permission would destroy. For after all, now, is it not
a violation of the law of charity, and of our duty to our
neighbour, to deprive a man of his property in order to turn
it to our own advantage ? Such, at least, is the way I have
been taught to think mtherto."

" That will not always hold true," replied the monk; "for
our great Molina has taught us that * the rule of charity does
not bind us to deprive ourselves of a profit, in order thereby
to save our neighbour from a corresponding loss.' He ad-
vances this in corroboration of what he had undertaken to
prove — ' That one is not bound in conscience to restore the
goods which another had put into his hands in order to cheat
his creditors.' Lessius holds the same opinion, on the same
ground.* Allow me to say, sir, that you have too little com-
passion for people in distress. Our fathers have had more
charity than that comes to; they render ample justice to the
poor, as well as the rich ; and, let me add, to sinners as well
as saints. For, though far from having any predilection for
criminals, they do not scruple to teach that the property
gained by crime may be lawfully retained. *No person,*
says Lessius, speaking generally, ' is bound, either by the law
of nature or by positive laws (that is, by any law\ to make
restitution of what has been gained by committing a criminal
action, such as adultery, even though that action is contrary
to justice.' For, as Escobar comments on this writer, ' though
the property which a woman acquires by adultery is certainly
gained in an illicit way, yet once acquired, the possession
of it is lawful— g[uamvis mulier iUiciie acqaisat, licit^ tamen
retinet acguiaka/ It is on this principle that the most cele-
brated of our writers have formally decided that the bribe
received by a judge from one of the parties who has a bad
case, in order to procure an unjust decision in his favour,
the money got by a soldier for lulling a man, or the emolu-
ments gained by infamous crimes, may be legitimately re-
tained. Escobar, who has collected this from a number of
our authors, lays down this general rule on the point, that
' the means acquired by infamous courses, such as murder,
unjust decisions, profligacy, &c., are legitimately possessed,
and none are obliged to restore them.' And further, ' they
may dispose of what they have received for homicide, profli-

* Molina, t li., tr.2, disp. a28» n. 8; Lessius, liv. iL« ch. 20, dist 19, n. 168,

170 PBOVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. Vm.

gacy, &c., as they please; for the possession is just, and they
nave acquired a propriety in the fruits of their iniquity/ "•

** My dear father," cried I, '' this is a mode of acquiution
which I never heard of before ; and I question much if the
law will hold it good, or if it will consider assassination, in-
justice, and adultery, as giving valid titles to property/'

''I do not know what your law books may say on the
point," returned the monk; '** but I know well that our books,
which are the genuine rules for conscience, bear me out in
what I say. It is true they make one exception^ in which
restitution is positively enjomed ; that is, * in the case of any
receiving money from those who have no right to dispose of
their property, such as minors and monks.' ' Unless,' says the
great Molina, ' a woman has received money from one who
cannot dispose of it, such as a monk or a minor — nisi mtdier
accepisset db eo qui alienare non potest ut a religioso en JUio
familias. In this case she must give back the money.' And
BO says Escobar, "t

*' May it please your reverence," said I, ^' the monks, I sec,
are more highly favoured in this way than other people."

^ By no means," he replied ; ^ have they not done as much
generally for all minors, in which class monks may be viewed
as continuing all their lives ? It is barely an act of justice to
make them an exception; but with regard to all other people,
there is no obligation whatever to refund to them the money
received from them for a criminal action. For, as has been
amply shown by Lessius, ' a wicked action may have its price
fixed in money, by calculating the advantage received by the
person who orders it to be done, and the trouble taken by him
who carries it into execution ; on which account the latter is
not bound to restore the money he got for the deed, whatever
that may have been — ^homicide, injustice, or a foul act' (for
such are the illustrations which he uniformly employs in this
question) ; ' unless he obtained the money from tnose having
no right to dispose of their property. You may object, per-
haps, that he who has obtained money for a piece of wicked-
ness is sinning, and therefore ought neither to receive nor
retain it. But I reply, that after uie thing is done^ there can
be no sin either in giving or in receiving payment for it.'
The great Filiutius enters still more minutely into details,
remarking, * that a man is boim^ in conscience to vary his

* Escobar, tr. 8, ex. 1, n. 23, tr. 5, ex. 5, n. 58.

t Molina, 1, torn. i. De Just. tr. 2, disp. M; Egcobar, tr. 1, ex. 8, n. 59, tr. 3,
4ix. 1, n. 23.

LET. VIU.] ILLICIT GAINSL 171

paymeDts for actions of this sort, accordiDg to the different
conditions of fhe individuals who commit them, and some
may hnng a higher price than others/ This he confirms hy
very solid arguments." •

He then pointed out to me, in his authors, some things of
this nature so indelicate that I should he ashamed to repeat
them; and indeed the monk himself, who is a g^ood man, would
have heen horrified at them himseLT, were it not for the pro-
found respect which he entertains for his fathers, and which
makes him receive with veneration every thing that comes
from them. Meanwhile, I held my tongue, not so much with
the view of allowing him to enlarge on this matter, as from
pure astonishment at finding the hooks of men in holy orders
stuffed with sentiments at once so horrible, so iniquitous, and
so silly. He went on, therefore, without interruption in his
discourse, concluding as follows : —

« From these premises our illustrious Molina decides the
folloveing question (and after this I think you will have got
enough) : * If one has received money to perpetrate a wicked
action, is he obliged to restore it? We must distinguish
here,' says this great man ; ' if he has not done the deed, he
must give back the cash ; if he has, he is under no such obli-
gation I't Such are some of our principles touching restitu-
tion. You have had a great deal of instruction to-day: and
I should like now to see what proficiency you have made.
Oome^ then, answer me this question : ' Is a judge, who has
received a sum of money from one of the parties before him,
in order to pronounce a judgment in his favour, obliged to
make restitution?"'

'* Tou were just telling me a little ago, father, that he was
not."

''I told you no such thing," replied the father; <<did I
express myself so generallv ? I told you he was not bound to
make restitution, providea he succeeded in gaining the cause
for the party who had the wrong side of the question. But
if a man has justice on his side, would you have him to pur-
chase the success of his cause, which is his legitimate right ?
You are very unconscionable. Justice, look you, is a debt

* Tr. 81, e. 9, n. 23L— " Oocolte fomicariffi debetur pretimn in consoientia,
et malto mi^jore ratione, quam pablica. Oopia enim quam occulta &cit mu-
lier soi corporis, molto plus valet quam ea quam pnblica focit meretrix ; nee
ulla est lex positiva quss reddit earn incapacem pretiL Idem dicendnm de
pretio promisso virc^ni, coi\Jugat», moniali, et cuicumqo^ alii. Est enim
fM&nium fad f im ratio."

t Quoted by Escobar, tr. S^ ex. % n. 18&

172 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [leT. Vm,

Avhich the judge owes, and therefore he cannot sell it ; but
he cannot be said to owe injustice, and therefore he may law-
fully receive money for it. All our leading authors, accord-
ingly, agree in teaching ' that though a judge is bound to
restore the money he had received for doing an act of justice,
unless it was given him out of mere generosity, he b not
obliged to restore what he has received from a man in whose
favour he has pronounced an unjust decision.' "♦

This preposterous decision fairly dumbfounded me, and while
I was musing on its pernicious tendencies, the monk had pre-
pared another question for me. ** Answer me again," said
ne, " with a little more circumspection. Tell me now, * if a
man who deals in divination is obliged to make restitution of
the money he has acquired in the exercise of his art ? ' "

" Just as you please, your reverence," said I.

''£hl what! — just as I pleasel Indeed, but you are a
pretty scholar ! It would seem, according to your way of
talking, that the truth depended on our will and pleasure. I
see that, in the present case, you would never find it out your-
self : so I must send you to Sanchez for a solution of the
problem — ^no less a roan than Sanchez. In the first place, he
makes a distinction between ' the case of the diviner who has
recourse to astrology and other natural means, and that of
another who employs the diabolical art. In the one case, he
says, the diviner is bound to make restitution ; in the other
he is not.* Now, guess which of them is the party bound?"

'' It is not difficult to find out 'that," said I.

" I see what you mean to say," he replied. " You think
that he ought to make restitution in the case of his having
employed the agency of demons. But you know nothing
about it ; it is just the reverse. * If,' says Sanchez, * the sor-
cerer has not taken care and pains to discover, by means of
the devil, what he could not have known otherwise, he must
make restitution—^ ntdlam operam apposuit ut arte diaboU
id sciret; but if he has been at thiat trouble^ he is not
obliged. ' "

" And why so, father ? "

** Don't you see ? " returned he. " It is because men may
truly divine by the aid of the devil, whereas astrology b a
mere sham."

<< But, sir, should the devil happen not to tell the truth
(and he is not much more to be trusted than astrology), the

* Molina, H 80; Reginald, 1, 10, 184; FUiatiofl^ tr. 81; Escobar, tr. 8;
Lessius, 1, 2; li.

LET. Vni.] SORCfERT. 173

magician must, I should think, for the same reason, be obliged
to make restitution ? "

" Not always," replied the monk ; " Distinguo^ as Sanchez
says here. ' If the magician be ignorant of the diabolic art
— 9% sit artis diabolicce ignants — he is bound to restore : but
if he is an expert sorcerer, and has done all in his power to
arrive at the truth, the obligation ceases ; for the industry
of such a magician may be estimated at a certain sum of
mon^.' "

" There is some sense in that," I said ; " for this is an ex-
cellent plan to induce sorcerers to aim at proficiency in their
art, in the hope of maJdng an honest livelihood, as you would
lay, by faithfully serving the public."

^' You are making a jest of it, I suspect," said the father;
" that is very wrong. If you were to talk in that way in
places where you were not known, some people might take it
amiss, and cnarge you with turning sacred subjects into
ridicule."

" That, father, is a charge from which I could very easily
vindicate myself: for certain I am that whoever will be at the
trouble to examine the true meaning of my words will find my
object to be precisely the reverse ; and perhaps, sir, before our
conversations are ended, I may find an opportunity of making
this very amply apparent."

** Ho, ho," cried the monk, '' there is no laughing in your
head now."

*' I confess," said I, ^ that the suspicion that I intended to
laugh at things sacred, would be as painful for me to incur,
as it would be unjust in any to entertain."

" I did not say it in earnest," returned the father ; " but
let us speak more seriously."

*' I am quite disposed to do so, if you prefer it ; that de-
pends upon you, father. But I must say, that I have been
astonished to see your friends carrying their attentions to all
sorts and conditions of men, so far as even to regulate the
legitimate gains of sorcerers."

" One cannot write for too many people," siud the monk,
'< nor be too minute in particularizing cases, nor repeat the
same things too often in different bo(^s. Tou may be con-
vinced of this by the following anecdote, which is related by
one of the gravest of our fathers, as you may well suppose,
seeing he is our present Provincial — ^the reverend Father
Cellot : * We know a person,* says he, * who was carrying a
large sum of money in his pocket to restore it, in obedience

M

174 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. Vm.

to the orders of his confessor, and who, stepping into a book-
seller's shop by the way, inquired if there was anything new?
— numquid novi f — wnen the bookseller showed him a book
on moral theology, recently published ; and turning over the
leaves carelessly, and without reflection, he light^ upon a
passage describing his own case, and saw that he was under
no obligation to make restitution ; upon which, relieved from
the burden of his scruples, he returned home with a purse no
less heavy, and a heart much lighter, than when he left it :
^—aJbjecta scrtipuli scvrcvna^ retento avri pondere, levior dO"
mwm repetiit.' *

^ Say, after hearing that, if it is useful or not to know our
maxims ? Will you laueh at them now ? or rather, are you
not prepared to join wiui Father Geliot in the pious renec-
tion which he makes on the blessedness of that incident?
' Accidents of that kind,' he remarks, ^ are, with Gk>d, the
effect of his providence ; with the guardian angel, the effect
of his good guidance ; with the indiyiduals to whom they
happen, the effect of their predestination. From all eter-
nity, God decided that the golden chain of their salvation
should depend on such and such an author, and not upon a
hundred others who say the same thing, because they never
happen to meet with them. Had that man not written, this
man would not have been saved. All, therefore, who find
fault with the multitude of our authors, we would beseech,
in the bowels of Jesus Christ, to beware of envying others
those books which the eternal election of God and the blood
of Jesus Christ had purchased for them I ' Such are the
eloquent terms in which this learned roan proves so success-
fully the proposition which he had advanced, namely, ' How
useful it must be to have a great many ymters on moral
theology — qtidm utile sU de theohgia morali multos
Bcriberef"

*' Father/' said I, ^ I shall defer giving you my opinion of
that passage to another opportunity; in the meantime, I
shall only say that as your maxims are so useful, and as it
is so important to publish them, you ought to continue to
give me further instruction in them. For I can assure you
that the person to whom I send them, shows my letters to a
great many people. Not that we intend to avail ourselves of
them in our own case ; but indeed we think it will be useful
for the world to be informed about them."

" Very well,** rejoined the monk, " you see I do not conceal
* Cellot, liv. yiiU, de la Hierarch, c 16, 2>

LET. VIII.] ADVANTAGES OF THE MAXIMS. 175

them ; and, in continuation, I am ready to furnish you, at
our next interview, with an account of the comforts and in-
dulgences which our fathers allow, with the view of render-
ing salvation easy, and devotion agreeahle ; so that, in addi-
tion to what you have hitherto learned as to particular con-
ditions of men, you may learn what applies in general to all
classes^ and thus you will have gone through a complete
course of instruction." So saying, the monk took his leave
of me. — I am, &c.

P,S. — ^I have always forgot to tell you that there are dif-
ferent editions of Escobar. Should you think of purchasing
him, I would advise you to choose the Lyons edition, having
on the title-page the device of a lamb lying on a book sealed
with seven seals ; or the Brussels edition of 1651. Both of
these are better and larger than the previous editions pub-
lished at Lyons in the years 1644 and 1646.*

* ** Since all this, a new edition has been printed at Paris, by Piget, more cor-
rect than any of the rest. But the sentiments of Escobar may be still better
ascertained from the great woric on moral theology, printed at Lyons." (Note
in Nicole's edition of we Letters.)

I may ayail myself of this space to remark, that not one of the charges
brought against the Jesuits in this letter has been met by Fath^ Daniel in
his celebrated reply. Indeed, after some vain efforts to contradict about a
dosen passages in the Letters^Jie leaves avowedly more than a hundred with-
out danng to answer them. The pretext for thus failing to perform what he
professed to do, and what he so loudly boasts, at the commencement, of his
Deing able to do, is ingenious enough. " You will easily comprehend," says
one of his characters, " that this confronting of texts and quotations is not a
great treat for a man of my taste. I could not stand this disagreedbU labour
much longer." (Sntretiens de Cleandre et d'Eudoxe, p. 277.) We reserve our
remarks on the pretended falsifications charged against Pascal, till we come
to his own masterly defence of himself in the subsequent letters

176 PROYINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. Uu

iiETTER IX.

FALSE WORSHIP OP THE VIRGIN DTTRODUOED BY THE JESUITS
— ^DEVOTION MADE EAST — THEIR MAXIMS ON AMBITION^
ENVY, GLUTTONY, EQUIVOCATION, AND MENTAL RESER-
VATIONS — FEMALE DRESS — GAMING — SHEARING MASS.

Paris, Juli/ 3, 1656.

Sir, — ^I shall use as little ceremony with you as the worthy
raonk did with me, when I saw him last. The moment he
perceived me, he came forward with his eyes fixed on a hook
which he held in his hand, and accosted me thus : ^ * Would
you not he infinitely obliged i-o any one who should open to
you the gates of paradise ? Would you not give millions of
gold to have a key by which you might gain admittance
whenever you pleased? You need not be at such expense;
here is one — here are a hundred for much less money/ "

At first I was at a loss to know whether the good father
was reading or talking to me, but he soon put the matter
beyond doubt by adding : —

*' These, or, are the opening words of a fine book, written
by Father Barry of our Society; for I never give you any thing
of my own."

« What book is it ? " asked I.

"Here is its title," he replied: *** Paradise Opened to
PhilagiOf in a Hundred Devotions to the Mother of God,
easily Practised,' "

" Indeed, father ! and is each of these easy devotions a suf-
ficient passport to heaven?"

"It is," returned he. "Listen to what follows: *The
devotions to the Mother of God, which you will find in this

LET. IX.] DEYOTION MADE EAST. 177

book, are so many celestial keys, which will open wide to you
the ^ates of paradise, provided you practise them;' and ac-
cordingly, he says at the conclusion, * that he is satisfied if
you practbe only one of them.' "

"Pray then, father, do teach me one of the easiest of
them."

" They are all easy,*' he replied ; " for example — ^ Saluting
the Holy Virgin when you happen to meet her image — say-
ing the little diaplet of the pleasures of the Virgin — fervently
pronouncing the name of Mary — commissioning the angels
to bow to her for us — wishing to build her as many churches
as all the monarchs on earth have done — bidding her good
morrow every morning, and good night in the evening —
saying the Ave Maria every day, in honour of the heart of
Mary — which last devotion, he says, possesses the additional
virtue of securing us the heart of the Virgin." *

" But, father," said I, " only provided we give her our own
in return, I presume?"

" That," he replied, ** is not absolutely necessary, when a
person is too much attached to the world. Hear Father
Barry : * Heart for heart would, no doubt, be highly proper;
but yours is rather too much attached to the world, too
much bound up in the creature, so that I dare not advise
you to offer, at present, that poor little slave which you call
your heart.' And so he contents himself with the Ave Maria
which he had prescribed." f

" Why, this is extremely easy work," said I, " and I should
really tlunk that nobody will be damned after that."

" Alas I" said the monk, *' I see you have no idea of the
hardness of some people's hearts. There are some, sir, who
would never engage to repeat, every day, even these simple
words, Good day^ Oood dventn^, just because such a practice
would require some exertion of memory. And, accordingly,
it became necessary for Father Barry to furnish them with
expedients still easier, such as weanng a chaplet night and
day on the arm, in the form of a bracelet, or carrying about

* " Towards the conduBion of the tenth century, new accessions were made
to the worship of the Virgin. In this age (the tenth century) there are to be
found manifest indications of the institution of the rotary and croum (or
chaplet) of the Virgin, by which her worshippers were to reckon the number
of prayers they were to offer to this new di'vinity. The rosary consists of fif-
teen repetitions of the Lord's Prayer, and a hundred and filcy salutations of
the blessed Virgin ; while the crown consists in six or seven repetitions of the
Lord's Prayer, and seven times ten salutations, or Ave Marias/*— {Moahiem,
centz.)

t These are the devotions presented at pp. 33;, 59, 145, 156, ITS; 259, 420, ol
the first edition.

178 PBOVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. IX.

one's person a rosary, or an image of the Virgin.* * And,
tell me now,' as Father Barry says, * if I have not provided
you with easy devotions to ohtain the good graces of
Mary?'"

" Extremely easy, indeed, father," I observed.

^* Yes," he said, " it is as much as could possibly be done,
and I think should be quite satisfactory. For he must be a
wretched creature indeed, who would not spare a single mo-
ment in all his lifetime to put a chaplet on his arm, or a
rosary in his pocket, and thus secure his salvation ; and that,
too, with so much certainty, that none who have tried the
experiment have ever found it to fail, in whatever way they
may have lived ; though, let me add, we exhort people not to
omit holy living. Let me refer you to the example of this,
given at page 34 ; it is that of a female who, while she prac-
tised daily the devotion of saluting the images of the Virgin,
spent all her days in mortal sin, and vet was saved after all,
by the merit of that single devotion.'

**And how so?" cried I.

" Our Saviour," he replied, " raised her up again, for the
very purpose of showing it. So certain it is, that none can
perish wno practise any one of these devotions."

" My dear sir," I observed, " I am fully aware that the de-
votions to the Virgin are a power^ mean of salvation, and
that the least of them, if flowing from the exercise of faith
and charity, as in the case of the saints who have practised
them, are of great merit; but to make persons believe that,
by practising these without reforming their wicked lives, they
will be converted by them at the hour of death, or that God
will raise them up again, does appear calculated rather to
keep sinners going on their evil courses, by deluding them
with false peace and fool-hardy confidence, than to draw
them off from sin by that genuine conversion which grace
alone can effect." t

" What does it matter," replied the monk, " by what
road we enter paradise, provided we do enter it? as our
famous Father Binet, formerly our provincial, remarks on

* See the derotioiiB. at pp. 14, 826, 447.

t The Jesnits raised a great oatcry against Pascal for having, in this letter,
as they alleged, turned the worship of the Tirgin into rioicale. Nicole
seriously undertakes his defence and draws several distinctions between true
and false devotion to the Yirgin. The Mariolatry, or Mary-worship, of Pascal
and the Port-Royalists, was certainly a very different sort of thing from tiiat
practised in the Church of Rome ; out It is sad to see the straits to which
these sincere devotees were reduced, in their attempts to reconcile this prac-
tice with the honour due to God and his Son.

LET. IZ.J DEVOTION MADE EAST. 179

a similar subject, in his excellent book. On the Mark of Pre-
destination. * Be it by hook or by crook,' as he says, * what
need we care, if we reach at last tne celestial city.' "

** Granted," said I; '* but the great question is, if we shall
get there at all ? "

" The Virgin will be answerable for that," returned he ;
** so says Father Barry m the concluding lines of his book :
' If, at the hour of death, the enemy should happen to put in
some claim upon you, and occasion disturbance in the little
commonwealth of vour thoughts, you have only to say that
Mary will answer tor you, and that he must make his appli
cation to her.' "

'' But, father, it might be possible to puzzle you, were one
disposed to push the question a little further. Who, for ex-
ample, has assured us that the Virgin will be answerable in
this case?"

** Father Barry will be answerable for her," he replied.
^ ' As for the profit and happiness to be derived from these
devotions,' he says, ' I will be answerable for that ; I will
stand bail for the good Mother.' "

" But, father, who is to be answerable for Father Barry?"

** How!" cried the monk ; " for Father Barry ? is he not
a member of our Society ? and do you need to be told that
our Society is answerable for all the books of its members ?
It is highly necessary and important for you to know about
this. There is an oyder in our Society, by which all book-
sellers are prohibited from printing any work of our fathers
without the approbation of our divines and the permission
of our superiors. This regulation was passed by Henry IH.,
10th May 1683, and confirmed by Henry IV., 20th Decem-
ber 1603, and by Louis XT1L, 14th February 1612 ; so that
the whole of our body stands responsible for the publications
of each of the brethren. This is a feature quite peculiar to
our community. And, in consequence of tois, not a single
work emanates from us which does not breathe the spirit of
the Society^ That, sir, is a piece of information quite
apropos." *

* lather Daaid makes an ingenioiu attempt to take off the force of this
statement, by representing it as no more than what is done by other soeieties.
oniyersities, Ac (Entretiens, p. 32.) Bat while these bodies acted in good
faith on this role, the Jesuits (as Pascal afterwards shows. Letter ziii.) made
it subservient to their double policy. Pascal's point was gained by establish-
ing the fact, that the books published by the Jesuits had the imprimatur of
the Society ; an^ in answer to all that Daniel has said on the point, it may be
sufficient to ask. Why not try the simple plan of denouncing the error and
censuring the author ? (See Letter r., p. Iw.)

180 PROVINOIAL LETTERS. [LET. IX.

" My good father," said I, " you oblige me very much,
and I only regret that I did not know this sooner, as it will
induce me to pay considerably more attention to your
authors."

" I would have told you sooner," he replied, " had an
opportunity offered : I hope, however, you will profit by the
in^rmation in future, and, in the meantime, let us prosecute
our subject. The methods of securing salvation which I
have mentioned are, in my opinion, very easy, very sure, and
sufficientlv numerous ; but it was the anxious wish of our
doctors that people should not stop short at this first step,
where they only ao what is absolutely necessary for salvation,
and nothing more. Aspiring, as they do without ceasing,
after the greater glory of God,* they sought to elevate men
to a higher pitch of piety; and as men of the world are
generally deterred from devotion by the strange ideas they
have been led to form of it by some people, we have deemed it
of the highest importance to remove this obstacle, which
meets us at the threshold. In this department. Father Le
Moine has acquired much fame, by his work entitled De-
votion Made East, composed for this very purpose. The
picture which he draws of devotion in this work is per-
fectly charming. None ever understood the subject beibre
him. Only hear what he says in the beginning of his
work: 'Virtue has never as yet been seen aright; no
portrait of her, hitherto produced, has borne the least veri-
similitude. It is by no means surprising that so few have
attempted to scale ner rocky eminence. She has been held
up as a cross-tempered dame, whose only delight is in soli-
tude ! she has been associated with toil and sorrow ; and, in
short, represented as the foe of sports and diversions, which
are, in fact, the fiowers of joy and the seasoning of life.' "

" But, father, I am sure I have heard at least that there
have been great saints who led extremely austere lives."

" No doubt of that," he replied ; " but still, to use the
language of the doctor, ' there have always been a number
of genteel saints, and well-bred devotees;' and this differ-
ence in their manners, mark you, arises v3Rtu*ely from a dif-
ference of humours. * I am far from denying,' says my
author, ' that there are devout persons to be met with, pale

* There is an allusion here to the phrase which is perpetuallv occurring in
tlie ConstittUioru of the Jesuits, " Ad majorem Dei gloriam— To the greater
glory of Qod** which is the reason ostentatiously paraded for almost all their
laws and customs.

LET. IX.] DEVOTION MADE EAST. 181

and melancholy in their temperament, fond of silence and
retirement, with phlegm instead of hlood in their veins, and
with faces of clay; hut there are many others of a happier
complexion, and who possess that sweet and warm humour,
that genial and rectified hlood, which is the true stuff that
joy is made of.'

" You see," resumed the monk, " that the love of silence
and retirement is not common to all devout people; and
that, as I was saying, this is the effect rather of their com-
plexion than their piety. Those austere manners to which
you refer are, in fact, properly the character of a savagct
and barharian, and, accordingly, you will find them ranke<l
by Father Le Moine among the ridiculous and brutal man-
ners of a moping idiot. The following is the description he
has drawn of one of these in the seventh book of his Moral
Pictures : * He has no eyes for the beauties of art or nature.
Were he to indulge in any thing that gave him pleasure, he
would consider himself oppressed with a grievous load. On
festival days, he retires to hold fellowship with the dead.
He delights in a grotto rather than a palace, and prefers the
stump of a tree to a throne. As to injuries and affronts, he
is as insensible to them as if he had the eyes and ears of a
statue. Honour and glory are idols with whom he has no
acquaintance, and to whom he has no incense to offer.
To him a beautiful woman is no better than a spectre ; and
those imperial and commanding looks — those charming
tyrants who hold so many slaves in willing and chainless
servitude — have no more influence over his optics than the
sun over those of owls,' &c."

" Reverend sir," said I, " had you not told me that Father
Le Moine was the author of that description, I declare I
should have guessed it to be the production of some profane
fellow, who had drawn it expressly with the view of turning
the saints into ridicule. For if that is not the picture of
a man entirely denied to those feelings which tne Gospel
obliges us to renounce, I confess that i know nothing of the
matter." ♦

"You may now perceive, then, the extent of your ignor-
ance," he replied ; " for these are the features of a weak, un-
cultivated mmd, * destitute of those virtuous and natural affec-
tions which it ought to possess,' as Father Le Moine says

* If Rome were in the right, Pascal's notions would be correct. Tlie re-
ligion of the monastery is the only sort of piety and seriousness known to, or
sanctioned by, the Romish Ghurch. See Historical Introduction.

182 PBOVINOIAL LETTERS. [LET. IX.

at the close of that description. Such is his way of teach-
ing * Ohristian virtue and philosophy/ as he announces in his
advertisement ; and, in truth, it cannot he denied that this
method of treating devotion is much more agreeahle to the
taste of the world than the old way in which they went to
work before our times."

** There can be no comparison between them/' was my
reply, '^ and I now begin to hope that you will be as good as
your word."

** You will see that better by and by/' returned the monk.
" Hitherto I have only spoken of piety in general ; but just to
show you more in detail how our fathers have disencumbered
it of its toils and troubles, would it not be most consoling to
the ambitious to learn that they may maintain genuine de-
votion along with an inordinate love of greatness ? "

** What, father ! even though they should run to the utmost
excess of ambition ? "

" Yes," he replied ; " for this would be only a venial sin,
unless they sought siter greatness in order to offend God
and injure the State more effectually. Now, venid sins do
not preclude a man from being devout, as the greatest saints
are not exempt from them.* * Ambition/ says Escobar, * which
consists in an inordinate appetite for place and power, is ot
itself a venial sin ; but when such dignities are coveted for
the purpose of hurting the commonwealth, or having more
opportunity to offend God, these adventitious circumstances
render it mortal.' "

** VeiT savoury doctrine, indeed, father."

" And is it not still more savoury," continued the monk,
" for misers to be told, by the same authority, * that the rich
are not guilty of mortal sin b^ refusing to give alms out of
their superfluity to the poor m the hour of their greatest
need ? — sdo in gravi pauperum necessitate divites non ddmdo
sitperfltuZf non peccare mortaliter* "

" Why, truly," said I, " if that be the case, I give up all
pretension to skill in the science of sins."

" To make you still more sensible of this," returned he,
'' you have been accustomed to think, I suppose, that a good
opinion of one's self, and a complacency in one's own works,
is a most dangerous sin ? Now, will you not be surprised if
I can show you that such a good opinion, even though there

* The Bomish distinction of sins into ttenial and mortal, afforded too fair
a pretext for sndi sophistical conclusions to be oyerlooked bj Jesuitical
casuists.

LET. IX.] AMBITION. 183

should be do foundation for it, is so far from being a sin^ that
it is, on the contrary, the gift of God f

** Is it possible, father? "

"That it is," said the monk; "and our good Father
Garasse* shows it in his French work, entitled Summary of
the Capital Truths of Religion : ' It is a result of commuta-
tive justice, that all honest labour should find its recompense
either in praise or in self-satisfaction. When men of good
talents publish some excellent work, they are justly remuner-
ated by public applause. But when a man of weak parts
has wrought hard at some worthless production, and fidls
to obtain the praise of the public, in order that his labour
may not go without its reward, God imparts to him a per-
sonal satisfaction, which it would be worse than barbarous
injustice to envy him. It is thus that God, who is infinitely
just, has given even to frogs a certain complacency in their
own croaking.' "

" Very fine decisions in favour of vanity, ambition, and
avarice!" cried I; "and envy, father, will it be more diffi-
cult to find an excuse for it ?

" This is a delicate point," he replied. " We require to make
use here of Father Bauny's distinction, which he lays down in
his Summary of Sins: *Envy of the spiritual good of our neigh-
bour is mortal, but envy of his temporal good is only venial.' "

" And why so, father ? "

" You shall hear," said he. •* * For the good that consists
in temporal things is so slender, and so insignificant in rela-
tion to heaven, that it is of no consideration in the eyes of
God and his saints.' "

" But, father, if temporal good is so Blender^ and of so little
consideration, how do you come to permit men's lives to
be taken away in order to preserve it ? " f

"You mistake the matter entirely," returned the monk;
" you were told that temporal good was of no consideration
in the eyes of God, but not in the eyes of men."

" That idea never occurred to me," I replied ; " and now,
it is to be hoped that, in virtue of these same distinctions, the
world will get rid of mortal sins altogether."

* Francois Garasse was a Jesuit of Angouleme; he died in 163L He was
much followed as a preacher, his sermons being copiously interlarded with
buffoonery. His controversial works are Aill of &e and fury; and his theolo-

Sical Summary, to which Pascal here refers, aboimds with eccentricities. It
eserres to be mentioned, as some oflbet to the folly of this writer, that Father
Ckurasse lost his life in consequence of his attentions to his countrymen who
were infected with the plague,
t See before. Letter vii., p. 157.

184 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. IX.

" Do not flatter yourself with that," said the father, ** there
are still such things as mortal sins — there is sloth, for example."

" Nay, then, father dear," I exclaimed, " after that, fare-
well to all * the joys of life ! ' "

" Stay," said the monk; **when you have heard Escobar's
definition of that vice, you will perhaps change your tone :
^ Sloth,' he observes, ' lies in grieving that spiritual things
are spiritual, as if one should lament that the sacraments are
the sources of grace ; which would be a mortal sin.' "

" O, my dear sir ! " cried I, " I don't think that anybody
ever took it into his head to be slothful in that way."

" And accordingly," he replied, " Escobar afterwards re-
marks: < I must confess that it is very rarely- that a person
falls into the sin of sloth.' You see now how important it is
to define things properly."

** Yes, father, and thb brings to my mind your other de-
finitions about assassinations, ambuscades, and superfluities.
But why have you not extended your method to all cases,
and given definitions of all vices in your way, so that people
may no longer sin in gratifying themselves ? "

"It is not always essential, he replied, "to accomplish
that purpose by changing the definitions of things. I may
illustrate this by referring to the subject of good cheer,
which is accounted one of the greatest pleasures of life, and
which Escobar thus sanctions in his ' Practice according to
our Society : ' ' Is it allowable for a person to eat and drink
to repletion, unnecessarily, and solely for pleasure ? Certainly
he may, according to Sanchez, provided he does not thereby
injure his health ; because the natural appetite may be per-
mitted to enjoy its proper functions.' " *

" Well, father, tnat is certainly the most complete pas-
sage, and the most finidhed maxim in the whole of your
moral system ! What comfortable inferences may be drawn
from itl Why, and is gluttony, then, not even a venial
sin ? "

" Not in the shape I have just referred to," he replied ;
" but, according to the same author, it would be a venial sin
* were a person to gorge himself unnecessarily with eating
and drinking to such a degree as to produce vomiting.' t
So much for that point. I would now say a little about the

* ** An comedere et libere usque ad saUetaiim absque necessitate ob solam
voluptatem, sitpeccatum t Cum. Sanctio negative respondeo, modo non obsit
vaZetudini, quia licite potest appetitus naturaZis suis acttbusfrui." (N. 102.)

t " Si quis se usque ad vomitum ingurgiiet." (Esc., n. 66.)

LET. H.] MENTAL RESERVATIONS. 185

facilities we have invented for avoiding sin in worldly con-
versations and intrigues. One of the most embarrassing of
these cases is how to avoid telling lies, particularly when one
is anxious to induce a belief in what is false. In such cases,
our doctrine of equivocations has been found x)f admirable
service, according to which, as Sanchez has it, ' it is permit-
ted to use ambiguous terms, leading people to understand
them in another sense from that in which we understand
them ourselves.'**

" I know that already, father," said I.

" We have published%it so often," continued he, " that at
length, it seems, everybody knows of it. But do you know
what is to be done when no equivocal words can be got?"

« No, father."

*'I thought as much," said the Jesuit; ''this is some-
thing new, sir : I mean the doctrine of mental reservations.
'A man may swear,' as Sanchez says in the same place,
* that he never did such a thing (though he actually did
it), meaning within himself that he did not do so on a
certain day, or before he was born, or understanding any
other such circumstance, while the words which he employs
have no such sense as would discover his meaning. And
this is very convenient in many cases, and quite innocent,
when necessary or conducive to one's health, honour, or ad-
vantage.' "

''Indeed, father I is that not a lie, and perjury too?"
cried L

"No," said the father; "Sanchez and Filiutius prove
that it is not ; for, says the latter, ' It is the intention that
determines the quality of the action.' f And he suggests a
still surer method for avoiding falshood, which is this:
After saying aloud, I swear that I have not done that, to
add, in a low voice, to-day ; or after saying aloud, I swear,
to interpose in a whisper, that I say; and then continue
aloud, thoit I have done that. This, you perceive, is telling
the truth." $

* Op. mor., p. 2, i. &> 0. ^ n. 18.

t Tr. 25, chap. U, n. SSI, 328.

i The methoa by which Father Banid erades this ohaive is truly Jesoiti-
caL First, he attempts to inyolye the question in a doua of difficulties, by
supposing extreme cases, in which equivocation mar be .allowed to preserve
life, Ac. He has then the assurance to quote Scripture in defence of the
practice, referring to the equivocations of Abraham, which he vindicates ;
to those of Tobit and the an^ Raphael, which he applauds; and even to the
sayinra of our blessed Lord, which he charges with equivocation I (Encretiens,
pp. STB, 382.) Even Bossoet was ashamed of this abominable maxim. " I

186 PROTINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. IX.

^^^^^^— — ^^^M^Wi— M^—^I^M^— i^M^^™^^^^^— ^■^^^^^■^-^^^^^— — ^ I ■■ I ■ ^»^^^ .

" I grant it," said I ; " it might possibly, however, be found
to be telling the truth in a low key, and falsehood in a loud
one ; besides, I should be afraid that many people might not
have sufficient presence of mind to avail themselves of these
methods."

*^ Our doctors," replied the Jesuit, '^ have taught, in the
same passage, for the benefit of such as might not be expert
in the use of these reservations, that no more is required of
them, to avoid lying, than simply to say that the^ have fwt
done what they have done, provided * they have, m general,
the intention of giving to their language the sense which an
able man would give to it.' Be candid, now, and confess if
you have not often felt yourself embarrassed, in consequence
of not knowing this ? "

** Occasionally," said I.

<*And will you not also acknowledge," continued he,
^ that it would often prove very convenient to be absolved
in conscience from keeping certain engagements one may
have made?"

" The most convenient thing in the world! " I replied.

'^ Listen, then, to the general rule laid down by Escobar:
' Promises are not binding, when the person in making them
had no intention to bind himself. Now, it seldom happens
that any have such an intention, unless when they confirm
their promises by an oath or contract ; so that when one
simply says, I will do ity he means that he will do it if he
does not change his mind ; for he does not wish, h^ saying
that, to deprive himself of his liberty.' He gives other rules
in the same strain, which you may consult for yourself, and
tells us, in conclusion, Hhat all this is taken from Molina
and our other authors, And is therefore settled beyond all
doubt/ "

" My dear father," I observed, ^ I had no idea that the
direction of the intention possessed the power of rendering
promises null and void."

"You must perceive," returned he, "what facility this
affords for prosecuting the business of life. But what has
given us the most trouble has been to regulate the commerce
between the sexes ; our fathers being more chary in the mat-
know nothing," he says, speaking of Sanches, "more pemioiouB in moraliW^
than the opinion of tnat Jesuit m regard to an oath ; nennaintains that toe
intention is necessary to an oath, without which, in giving a.£al8e answer to a
judge, when questioned at the bar, one is not capatue of perjury." (Journal
de ViLhhi le Dieu, apnd Pissejitttion sur la fi>i qui est due au tonoignage d*
Flascal, Ic, p. ^)

LET. II.] CHASTITT. 187

ter of chastity. Not but that they have discussed questions
of a very curious and very indulgent character, particularl}
in reference to married and betrothed persons."

At this stage of the conversation, I was made acquainted
with the most extraordinary questions you can well imagine.
He gave me enough of them to fill many letters; but a&
you show my communications to all sorts of persons, ani
as I do not choose to be the vehicle of such reading to those
who would make it the subject of diversion, I must decline
even giving the quotations.

The only thing to which I can venture to allude, out of all
the books which he showed me, and these in French, too, is
a passage which you will find in Father Bauny's Summary,
p. 165, relating to certain little familiarities, which, provided
the intention is well directed, he explains ^ as passing far
gallant ;" and you will be surprised to find, at p. 148, a
principle of morals, as to the power which daughters have
to dispose of their persons virithout the leave of their relative!,
couched in these terms : ** When that is done with the con-
sent of the daughter, although the father may have reason
to complain, it does not follow that she, or the person to
whom she has sacrificed her honour, has done him any wrong,
or violated the rules of justice in regard to him ; for the
daughter has possession of her honour as well as of her
body, and can do what she pleases with them, bating death
or mutilation of members. ** Judge, from that specimen, of
the rest. It brings to my recollection a passage rrom a hea-
then poet, a mach better casuist, it would appear, than these
reverend doctors; for he says, ^that the person of a daugh-
ter does not belong whoUy to herself, but partly to uer
father and partly to her mother, without whom she cannot
dispose of it even in marriage." And I am much mis-
taken if there is a single judge in the land who would not
lay down as law the very reverse of this nuudm of Father
Bauny.

This is all I dare tell you of that part of our oonrersation,
which lasted so long that I was obliged to beseedi the monk
to change the subject. He did so, and proceeded to entertain
me with their regfulations about female attire.

** We shall not ^>eak,'' he said, ** of those who are actuated
by impure intentions; but as to others, Escobar remarks,
that * if the woman adorn herself witboot any evil intention,
but merely to gratify a natural inclinadon to ranitj — o6 no-
turalem fastus inelinationem — this is only a renial SiOy or

188 FBOTINCIAL LETTED3. [lEI. I

rather no ain at all.' And Father Bannj majntuns, th
' even though the woman knows tha bad effect which h<
cara in adorning her persoD may have upon the virtue
those who maj behold lier, all decked out in rich and pr
cious attire, she would not sin in bo dressing.' * And amoi;
others, he cites oar Father Sanchez aa being of the tan

" But, father, what do your authors say to those passf^
of Scripture which so strongly denounce every thing ul'^

" Lesaiua has well met that objection," said the mon!
" by observing, * that these passages of Scripture hare tl
force of precepts only in regard to the women of thst perioi
who were expected to exhibit, by their modest demeanour, a
example of edification to the Pagans."'

" And where did he find that, father ? "

" It does not matter where he found it," replied he; "
is enough to know that the sentiments of these great me
ore always probable of themselves. It deserves to be ni
ticed, however, that Father Le &Ioine hns qualified th
general permission ; for he will on no account allow it to t
extended to the old ladies. ' Youth,' he observes, ' is oatt
rally entitled to adorn itself, nor can the use of ornament I:
condemned at an age which is the £ower and vradore c
life. But there it should be allowed to remain : it woni
be strangely out of season to seek for rosea on the snow
The stars alone have a right to be always dandng, f<i
tbej have the gill of perpetual youth. The wseat coon
in this matter, inerefore, for old women, would be to conau
good sense and a good mirror, to yield to decency and Dl
cessity, and to retire at the first approach of the shades (

" A most jadidons advice," I observed.
" But," continued the monk, " just to show you how care
ful our fathers are about every t'Mi^ you can think of,

S"

They had Uu!i

LET. IX.] BEARTITG MASS. 189

■ --^ ■ , Bill I - I

n:&j mention that, after granting the ladies permission ta
gamble, and foreseeing that, in many cases, this license would
be of little avail unless they had somethiig to gamble with,
they have established another maxim in their favour, which
will be found in Escobar's chapter on larceny, n. 13 : * A.
wife,' says he, * may gamble, and for this purpose may pilfer
money from her husband.' "

« Well, father, that is capital ! '* ,

** There are many other good things besides that," said
the father ; " but we must waive them, and say a little about
those more important maxims, which facilitate the practice
of holy things — ^the manner of attending mass, for example.
On this subject, our great divines Gaspard Hurtado and
Ooninck have taught * that it is quite sufficient to be
present at mass in body, though we may be absent ia
spirit, provided we maintain an outwardly respectful de-
portment.' Yasquez goes a step farther, maintaining * that
one fulfils the precept of hearing mass, even though one
should go with no such intention at all.' All this is re-
peatedly laid down by Escobar, who, in one passage, illus-
trates the point by tne example of those who are dragged
to mass by force, and who put on a fixed resolution not to
listen to it."

•* Truly, sir," said I, " had any other person told me that,
I would not have believed it."

" In good sooth," he replied, " it requires all the support
which the authority of these great names can lend it ; and
80 does the following maxim by the same Escobar: 'That
even a wicked intention, such as that of ogling the women,
joined to that of hearing mass rightly, does not hinder a
man from fulfilling the service.'* But another very con'
venient device, suggested by our learned brother Turrian,t
is, that * one may hear the half of a mass from one priest,
and the other half from another ; and that it makes no dif-
ference though he should hear first the conclusion of the
one, and then the commencement of the other.' I might
also mention, that it has been decided by several of our doc-
tors to be lawful * to hear the two halves of a mass at the
same time, from the lips of two different priests, one of
whom is commencing the mass, while the other is at the
elevation ; it being quite possible to attend to both parts at

• "Kee dbext alia prava inUniio, vt anidendi Kbidinosefbgrnifuu," (be
tr. I, ex. U, n. 31.)
t Select., p. 2, U. 16, sob. 7.

190 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. IX.

once, and two halves of a mass makinp: a whole— c^uob ms-
dictates unam missam constitutmt,' * ' From all which/ says
Escobar, ' I conclude, that you may hear mass in a very
short period of time ; if, for example, you should happen to
hear four masses going on at the same time, so arranged
that when the first is at the commencement, the second is
at the gospel, the third at the consecration, and the last at
the communion/"

" Certainly, father, according to that plan, one may hear
mass any day at Notre Dame in a twinkling."

" Well," replied he, " that just shows how admirably we
have succeeded in facilitating the hearing of mass. But I
am anxious now to show you how we have smoothed the
use of the sacraments, and particularly that of penance. It
is here that the benignity of our fathers shines in its truest
splendour ; and you will be really astonished to find that
devotion, a thing which the world is so apt to boggle at,
should have been treated by our doctors with such consum-
mate skill, that, to use the words of Father Le Moine, in
his Devotion Made Easy, ' demolishing the bugbear which
the devil had placed at its threshold, they have rendered
it easier than vice, and more agreeable than pleasure ; so
that, in fact, simply to live is incomparably more irk-
some than to live well/ Is that not a marvellous change,
now?"

" Indeed, father, I cannot help telling you a bit of my
mind : I am sadly afraid that you have overshot the mark,
and that this indulgence of yours will shock more people
than it will attract. The mass, for example, is a thing so
grand and so holy, that, in the eyes of a great many, it
would be enough to blast the credit of your doctors for
ever, to show them how you have spoken of it."

" With a certain class," replied the monk, " I allow that may
be the case; but do you not know that we accommodate
ourselves to all sorts of persons ? You seem to have lost all
recollection of what I have repeatedly told you on this point.
The first time you are at leisure, therefore, I propose that we
make this the theme of our conversation, deferring till then
the lenitives we have introduced into the confessional. I pro-
mise to make you understand it so well, that you will never
forget it/'

With these words we parted, so that our next conversa-

* Bauny, Hartado, Azor, Ac. Escobar, " Practice for Hearing Uaai accord*
i&^ to our Society/' l^ooui ^ditioa.

LET. IX.] flEARINO MASS. 191

lion, I presume, will turn on the policy of the Society. — ^I
ara, &c.

P,S. — Since writme the above, I have seen " Paradise
Opened by a Hundred Devotions easily Practised," by Father
Barry ; and also the " Mark of Predestination," by Father
Binet ; both of them well worth seeing.

192 PBOVINCIAIi LETTERS. L^^^.

LETTER S.

PALUATIYES APPLIED BT THE JESUITS TO THE SACRAMENT 07
PENANCE, IN THEIR MAXIMS REQARDING CONFESSKiN,
SATISFACTION, ABSOLUTION, PROXIMATE OCCASIONS OF
SIN, CONTRITION, AND THE LOTB OF GOD.

Paris, August 2, 1656.

Sir, — I have not come yet to the policy of the Society^
but shall first introduce you to one of its leading principles.
I refer to the palliatives which they have applied to confes-
sion, and which are unquestionahly the best of all the schemes
they have fallen upon to '' attract all and repel none." It is
absolutely necessary to know something of this before going
any farther ; and, accordingly, the monk judged it expedient
to give me some instructions on the point, nearly as fol-
lows:—

" From what I have already stated," he observed, ** you
may judge of the success with which our doctors have' la-
boured to discover, in their wisdom, that a great many things,
formerly regarded as forbidden, are innocent and allowable r
but as there are some sins for which one can find no ex-
cuse, and for which there is no remedy but confessioii^ it
became necessary to alleviate, by the methods I am n*"*.;
going to mention, the difficulties attending that practice^
Thus, having shown you, in our previous conversations, how
we relieve people from troublesome scruples of conscience^
by showing them that what they believed to be sinful was
indeed quite innocent, I proceed now to illustrate our con-
venient plan for expiating what is really sinful, which is
effected by making confession as easy a process as it was
formerly a painful one."

LET. X.] PIOUS FINESSE. 193

** And how do you manage that, father ? "

" Why," said he, " it is by those admirable subtleties which
are peculiar to our Company, and have been styled by our
fathers in Flanders, in * The Image of the First Century,'*
• the pious finesse, the holy artifice of devotion — ^iam et re-
ligiosam calliditatem, et pietatis solertiam,* t By the aid of
these inventions, as they remark in the same place, ' crimes
may be expiated now-a-days alaerius — with more zeal and
alacrity than they were committed in former days, and a
prroat many people may be washed from their stains almost
as cleverly as they contracted them — ■plurimi via cititM tyia-
culas contrahunt guam elutmt.* "

'* Pray, then, father, do teach me some of these most salu-
tary lessons of finesse,"

** We have a good number of them," answered the monk ;
" for there are a great many irksome things about confes-
sion, and for each of these we have devised a palliative. The
chief difficulties connected with this ordinance are the shame
of confessing certain sins, the trouble of specifying the cir-
cumstances of others, the penance exacted for them, the re-
solution against relapsing into them, the avoidance of the
proximate occasions of sins, and the regret of having com-
mitted them. I hope to convince you to-day, that it is now
possible to get over all this with hardly any trouble at all ;
such is the care we have taken to allay the bitterness and
Dauseousness of this very necessary medicine. For, to begin
with the difficulty of confessing certain sms, you are aware
it is of importance often to keep in the good graces of one's
confessor ; now, must it not be extremely convenient to be
permitted, as you are by our doctors, particulai-ly Escobar
and Suarez, * to have two confessors, one for the mortal sins
and another for the venial, in order to maintain a fair cha-
racter with your ordinary confessor — uti bonamfamam apud
ordinarium tueatur — provided you do not take occasion from
thence to indulge in mortal sin ? ' This i« followed by an-
other ingenious contrivance for confessing a sin, even to the
ordinary confessor, without his perceiving that it was com-
mitted since the last confession, which is, ' to make a general
confession, and huddle this last sin in a slump among the
rest which we confess.' J And I am sure you will own that
the following decision of Father Bauny goes far to alleviate
the shame which one must feel in confessing his relapses*

* See before, p. 118. t IvMgo Primi Seculi, I. uL, c. &»

% £sc., ir. 7, a. 4» n. 135 ; also Prioc, ex. 2, n. 78.

194 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. X.

namely, * that, except in certain cases, which rarely occur, the
confessor is not entitled to ask bis penitent if the sin of which
he accuses himself is an habitual one, nor is the latter obliged
to answer such a question ; because the confessor has no right
to subject his penitent to the shame of disclosing his frequent
relapses.' "

*< Indeed, father ! I might as well saj that a physician has
no right to ask his patient if it is long since he had the fever.
Do not sins assume quite a different aspect according to cir-
cumstances? and should it not be the object of a genuine
penitent to discover the whole state of his conscience to his
confessor, with the same sincerity and open-heartedness as if
he were speaking to Jesus Christ himself, whose place the
priest occupies ? If so, how far is he from realising such
a disposition, who, by concealing the frequency of his relapses,
conceals the aggravations of his offence! " *

I saw that this puzzled the worthy monk^ for he attempted
to elude rather than resolve the difficulty, by turning my
attention to another of their rules, which only goes to esta-
blish a fresh abuse, instead of justifying in the least the deci-
sion of Father Bauny ; a decision which, in my opinion, is
one of the most pernicious of their maxims, and calculated to
encourage profligate men to continue in their evil habits.

" I grant you," replied the father, « that habit Aggravates
the malignity of a sin, but it does not alter its nature ; and
that is the reason why we do not insist on people confessing
it, according to the rule laid down by our fathers, and quoted
by Escobar, * That one is only obliged to confess the circum-
stances that alter the species of the sin, and not those that
aggravate it.' Proceeding on this rule. Father Granados
says, ' that if one has eaten flesh in Lent, all he needs to do
is to confess that he has broken the fast, without specifying
whether it was by eating flesh, or by taking two fish raeals.'
And, according to Reginald, * a sorcerer who has employed
the diabolical art is not obliged to reveal that circumstance ;

* The practice of auricular confession was about three hundred years old
before the Reformation, having remained undetermined till the year il50 after
Christ. The early fathers were, beyond all question, decidedly opposed to it.
Chrysostom reasons very differently firom the text " But thou art ashamed
to say that thou hast sinned 7 Confess thy faults, then, daily la thy prayer ;
for do I say, ' Confess them to thy fellow-servant, who may reproach thee
therewith ? ^ No ; confess them to Gfod who healeth them." (In Ps. 1., horn. 2.)
And to whom did Augustine make his ConfesHonsf Was it not to the same
Being to whom David in the Psalms, and uie publican in the Gospel, made
theirs? *' What have I to do with men," says this father, " that they should
) lear my confea&ions, as if they were to heal all my diseases ! " (Confes., lib. x.«
p. 3.)

LET. X.] CONFESSION. 195

it is enough to say that he has dealt in magic, without ex-
pressing whether it was by palmistry or by a paction with
the devil/ Fagundez, again, has decided that * rape is not a
circumstance which one is bound to reveal, if the woman
give her consent.' All this is quoted by Escobar,* with
many other very curious decisions as to these circumstances,
which you may consult at your leisure."

" These * artifices of devotion ' are vastly convenient in
their way,** I observed.

" And* yet," said the father, ** notwithstanding all that,
they would go«for nothing, sir, unless we had proceeded to
mollify penance, which, more than anything else, deters
people from confession. Now, however, the most squeamish
nave nothing to dread from it, after what we have advanced
in our theses of the College of Clermont, where we hold that
* if the confessor impose a suitable penance, and the penitent
be unwilling to submk himself to it, the latter may go home,
waiving both the penance and the absolution.' Or, as Esco-
bar says, in giving the Practice of our Society, * if the peni-
tent declare his willingness to have his penance remitted to
the next world, and to suffer in purgatory all the pains due
to him, the confessor may, for the honour of the sacrament,
impose a very light penance on him, particularly if he lias
reason to believe that his penitent would object to a heavier
one.' *'

"I really think," said I, "that, if that is the case, we
ought no longer to call confession * the sacrament of pen-
ance * "

" You are wrong," he replied ; " for we always administer
something in the way of penance, for the form's sake."

** But, father, do you suppose that a man is worthy of re-
ceiving absolution, when he will submit to nothing painful to
expiate his offences? And, in these circumstances, ought
you not to retain rather than remit their sins? Are you not
aware of the extent of your ministry, and that you have the
power of binding and loosing? Do you imagine that you
are at liberty to give absolution indifferently to all who ask it,
and without ascertaining beforehand if Jesus Christ looses in
heaven those whom you loose on earth? "f

* Princ, ex. 2, n. 89, 41, 61, 62.

t John XX. 23 : " Receive ye the Iloly Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit,
they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ve retain, they are ro-
Uiutfd." All the ancient fathers, such as Basil, Ambrose, Au^riistine, and
Chrysostom, explain this remit^sion of sins as the work of the Holy Ohosfc,
and not of the apostles, except ministerially, in the use of the sp>iritual keys
of dOwti'ine and discipline of interceiBsor}' prayer, and of the sacramentfl.

196 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lAlT. X^

" What ! " cried the father, " do you suppose that we do
not know that ' the confessor (as one remarks) ought to sit
in judgment on the disposition of his penitent, both because
he is bound not to dispense the sacraments to the unworthy,
Jesus Christ having enjoined him to be a faithful steward,
and not to give that which is holy unto dugs; and because
he is a judge, and it is the duty of a judge to give righteous
judgment, by loosing the wortny and binding the unworthy,
and he ought not to absolve those whom Jesus Christ con*
demns?'"

" Whose words are these, father ? "

" They are the words of our father Piliutius," he replied.

*' You astonish me," said I ; *' I took them to be a quota-
tion from one of the fathers of the Church. At all events,
sir, that passage ought to make an impression on the confes-
sors, and render them very circumspect in the dispensation
of this sacrament, to ascertain whether the regret of their
penitents is sufficient, and whether their promises of future
amendment are worthy of credit."

" That is not such a difficult matter," replied the father ;
** Filiutiuil had more sense than to leave confessors in that
dilemma, and accordingly he suggests an easy way of get-
ting out of it, in the words immediately following: 'The
confessor may easily set his mind at rest as to the disposi-
tion of his penitent ; for, if he fail to give sufficient evidence
of sorrow, the confessor has only to ask him if he does not
detest the sin in his heart, and if he answer that he does,
he is bound to believe it. The same thing may be said of
resolutions as to the future, unless the case involves an obli-
gation to restitution, or to avoid some proximate occasion of

sm/"

" As to that passage, father, I can easily believe that it is
Filiutius' own ; there can be no mistaking that."

** You are mistaken though," said the father, " for he has
extracted it, word for word, from Suarez." ♦

''But, father, that last passage from Filiutius overturns
what he had Udd down in the former. For confessors can
no longer be said to sit as judges on the disposition of their
penitents, if they are bound to take it simply upon their
word, in the absence of all satisfying signs of contrition.

(TJshex's Jesuits^ Challenge, p. 122, ftc.) Even the schoolmen held that the
power of binding and loosing committed to the ministers of the Charch ts
not absolute, but must be limited by dave non erranUf or when no error is
committed in the use of the keya
• in » part, 1 4, disp. 92^ sect. i,n.2.

LET. X.] ABSOLUTION. 197

Are the professions made on such occasions so infallible, that
no other sign is needed ? I question much if experience has
taught your fathers, that all who^ make fair promises are
remarkable for keeping them ; I am mbtaken if they have
not often found the reverse."

" No matter," replied the monk ; ** confessors are bound to
believe them for all that ; for Father Bauny, who has probed
this question to the bottom, has concluded * that at whatever
time those who have fallen into frequent relapses, without
j^iving evidence of amendment, present themselves before a
confessor, expressing their regret for the past and a good
purpose for the future, he is bound to believe them on their
simple averment, although there may be reason to presume
that such resolution only came from the teeth outwards.
Nay,' says he, * though they should indulge subsequently to
greater excess than ever in the same delinquencies, still in my
opinion, they may receive absolution.'* Ihere now! that, I
am sure, should silence you."

" But father,*' said I, *' you impose a great hardship, I
think, on the confessors, by thus obliging them to believe the
very reverse of what they see."

"You don't understand it," returned he; "all that, is
meant is, that they are obliged to act and absolve as if they
believed that their penitents would be true to their engage-
ments, though, in point of fact, they believe no such thing.
This is explained, immediately afterwards, by Saurez and
Filiutius. After having said that 'the priest is bound to
believe the penitent on his word,' they add, * It is not neces-
sary that the confessor should be convinced that the good
resolution of his penitent will be carried into effect, nor even
that he should judge it probable ; it is enough that he thinks
the person has at the time the design in general, though he
must very shortly after relapse. Such is the doctrine of all
our author.*) — ita docetit omnes autores,' Will you presume
to dout5t what has been taught by our authors ? "

"But, sir, what then becomes of what Father Petaut

• Summary of Sins, a 46, p. 1090, 1, 2.

t Denis Peiau (Diunysiua Petavius) a learned Jesuit, was bom at Orleans
in 1593v and died in 1052. Ihe catalogue of his works alotie would fill a
volume, lie wrote in elegant Latin, on all subject}— grammar, history,
chronology, &c, as well as theology. Perrault informs U3 that he had an
iiiCredible ardour for the convers.on of heretics, and had almost succeeded
in converting the celebrated Qrotius— a very unlikely story. (Lies Hommes
Illustrtis, p. 19.) Hid took on Public Penance ( i-aris, 1644) was intended
as a refutation of Amauld's " Frequent Communion;" but is said to have
been ill- written and unsuccessftil. ^Ihough he professed the theology of Iiii
order, he is said to have had a kind ol predilection for austere opinions^

198 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. X.

himself is obliged to own, in the preface to his Public Pen-
ance, 'that the holy fathers, doctors, and councils of the
Church agree in holding it as a settled pointy that the pen-
ance preparatory to the eucharist roust be genuine, constant,
resolute, and not languid and sluggish, or subject to afleiv
thoufrhts and relapses ? "

" i)on*t you observe," replied the monk, ** that Father
Petau is speaking of the ancient Church f But all that is
now 80 little in season, to use a common saying of our doc-
tors, that, according to Father Bauny, the reverse is the 0D)y
true view of the matter. * There are some,* says he^ * who
maintain that absolution ought to be refused to those
who fall frequently into the same sins, more especially if,
after being often absolved, they evince no signs of amend-
ment; and others hold the opposite view. But the only
true opinion is, that they ought not to be refused absolu-
tion ; and though they should be nothing the better of all
the good advices given them, though they should have
broken all their promises to lead a new life, and been at no
trouble to purify themselves, still it is of no consequence;
whatever may be said to the contrary, the true opinion
which ought to be followed is, that even in all these cases,
they ought to be absolved.' And again: 'Absolution ought
neither to be denied nor delayed in the case of those who
live in habitual sins against the law of God, of nature, and
of the Church, although there should be no apparent pros-
pect of future amendment — etsi emendationis futuroe nulla
spes appareat.* '*

" But, father, this certainty of always getting al>solutiov
may induce sinners "

" I know what you mean,** interrupted f.he Jesuit ; " but
listen to Father Bauny, q. 15: 'Absolution maybe given
even to him who candidly avows that the hope of being
absolved induced him to sin with more freedom than he
would otherwise have done.* And Father Caussin, defend-
ing this proposition, says, *thatwere this not true, confession
would be interdicted to the greater part of mankind ; and
the only resource left for poor sinners would be a branch
and a rope!****

** O father, how these maxims of yours will draw people to
your confessionals 1 **

being naturally of a melancholy temper. When invited by the p^pe t«
visit Rome, he replied, " I am too old to JLit"--demenaffer, (Diet Univ.,
art. Fetau.
* Reylj to the Moral. Theol.^ p. 211.

LET. X.] OCCASIONS OP SIN. 19D

** Yes," he replied, ** you would hardly believe what num-
bers are in the habit of frequenting them ; * we are abso-
lutely oppressed and overwhelmed, so to speak, -under the
crowd of our penitents — penitentium numero ohruimur * — as
is said in *The Image of the First Century.*"

" I could suggest a very simple method, said I, " to escape
from this inconvenient pressure. You have only to oblige
sinners to avoid the proximate occasions of sin ; that single
expedient would afford you relief a,t once."

" We have no wish for such a relief," rejoined the monk ;
" quite the reverse ; for, as is observed in the same book,

* the great end of our Society is to labour to establish the
virtues, to wage war on the vices, and to serve a great num-
ber of souls.' Now, as there are very few souls inclined to
quit the proximate occasions of sin, we have been obliged to
define what a proximate occasion is. • That cannot be called
a proximate occasion,' says Escobar* ' where one sins but
rarely, or on a sudden transport — say three or four times
a-year ; ' * or, as Father Bauny has it, * once or twice in a
month.* t Again, asks this author, * What is to be done in
the case of masters and servants, or cousins, who, living
under the same roof, are by this occasion tempts to sin?'"

" They ought to be separated," said I.

" That is what he says, too, * If their relapses be very fre-
quent : but if the parties offend rarely, and cannot be sepa-
rated without trouble and loss, they may, according to Saurez
and other authors, be absolved, provided they promise to sin
no more^ and are truly sorry for what is past.' "

This required no explanation, for he had already informed
me with what sort of evidence of contrition the confessor was
bound to rest satisfied.

" And Father Bauny," continued the monk, " permits those
who are involved in the proximate occasions of sin * to remain
as they are, when they cannot avoid them without becoming
the common talk of the world, or subjecting themselves to
inconvenience.' * A priest,* he remarks in another work,

* may and ought to absolve a woman who is guilty of living
with a paramour, if she cannot put him away honourably, or
has some reason for keeping him — si non potest honesto
ejicere^ aut habeat aliquam causam retinendi — provided she
Dromises to act more virtuously for the future.' ' J

"Well, father," cried I, "you have certainly succeeded in

• Esc Practice of the Society, tr. 7, ex. 4, n. 226w f P. 308% 1088.

X Theol Mor., tr. 4^ De Poenit. q. 13, pp. US, U.

200 PROVmOIAL LF.TTEHS. [LKT. X.

relaxing the obligation of avoiding the occasions of sin to a
very comfortable extent, by dispensing with the duty as soon
as it becomes inconvenient ; but I should think your fathers
will at least allow it to be binding when there is no difficulty
in the way of its performance ?"

" Yes," said the father, " though even then the rule is not
without exceptions. For Father Bauny says, in the same
place, ^ that any one may frequent profligate houses, with the
view of converting their unfortunate inmates, though the
probability should be that he fall into sin, having often expe-
rienced before that he has yielded to their fascinations. Some
doctors do not approve of this opinion, and hold that no man
may voluntarily put his salvation in peril to succour his
neighbour ; yet I decidedly embrace the opinion which they
eontrovert.'

" A novel sort of preachers these, father ! But where does
Father Bauny find any ground for investing them with such
a mission ? "

** It is upon one of bis own principles," he replied, " which
he announces in the same place after Basil Pouce. I men-
tioned it to you before^ and I presume you have not forgotten
ic. It isy * that one may seek an occasion of sin, directly and
expressly, primo et per se — ^to promote the temporal or spi-
ritual good of himself or his neighbour.' "

On hearing these passages, I felt so horrified that I was
on the point of breaking out ; but, being resolved to hear
him to an end, I restramed myself, and merely inquired:
** How, father, does this doctrine comport with that of the
Gospel, which binds us to 'pluck out the right eye,' and
* cut off the right hand,' when they * offend,' or prove pre-
judicial to salvation? And how can you suppose that the
man who wilfully indulges in the occasions of sin, sincerely
hates sin ? Is it not evident, on the contrary, that he has
never been properly touched with a sense of it, and that
he has not yet experienced that genuine oonversion of heai*t,
which makes a man love Qod as much as he formerly loved
the creature ? "

" Indeed I " cried he, ** do you call that genuine contrition ?
It seems you do not know that, as Father Pintereau* says,
' till our fathers teach, with one accord, that it is an error,
and almost a heresy, to hold that contrition is necessary ;

* The work ascribed to Pintereau was entitled *' Lea Impostures et lei
IgDorarices du Libelle intitule la Theologl^ Morale des Jesuits : par I'Abbft da
Ikjleic."

LET. X.J ATTRITION. 201

or that attHtion alone, induced by the sole motive, the feai
of the pains of hell, which excludes a disposition to offend
is not sufficient with the sacrament ?* " ♦

** What, father! do you mean to say that it is almost an
article of faith, that attrition, induced merely by fear of
punishment, is sufficient with the sacrament ? That idea, I
think, is peculiar to your fathers ; for those other doctors
who hold that attrition is sufficient along with the sacra-
ment, always take care to show that it must be accompa-
laied with some love to God at least. It appears to me,
moreover, that even your own authors did not always con-
sider this doctrine of yours so certain. Your father Saurez,
for instance, speaks of it thus: 'Although it is a probable
opinion that attrition is sufficient with the sacrament, yet
it is not certain, and it may be false — nonestcerta, etpo^
test esse falsa. And if it is false, attrition is not sufficient
to save a man; and he that dies knowingly in this state,
wilfully exposes himself to the grave peril of eternal dam-
nation. For this opinion is neither very ancient nor very
common — nee valde antiqua, nee multiim communis.* San-
chez was not more prepared to hold it as infallible, when
he said in his Summary, that * the sick man and his con-
fessor, who content themselves at the hour of death with
attrition and the sacrament, are both chargeable with mor-
tal sin, on account of the great risk of damnation to which
the penitent would be exposed, if the opinion that attrition
is sufficient with the sacrament should not turn out to be
true/ Comitolus, too, says that * we should not be too sura
that attrition suffices with the sacrament.'** +

Hers the worthy father interrupted me. ** What I" he
cried, ** you read our authors, then, it seems ? That is all

* That \e, the sacrament of penance, as it is called. " That contrition ttat
all times necessarily required for obtaining remission of sins and justification
is a matter determined by the fothers of Trent But mark yet the mystery.
They equivocate with us in the term contrition, and make a distinction
thereof into perfect and imperfect. The former of these is contrition pro-
perly ; the latter they call ottrition. which, howsoever in itself it be vo true
contrition, yet when the priest, with his piower of forgiving sina^ interposes
himself in the business, tney tell us that attrition, by virtue of the keys, is
made contrition : that is to say, that a sorrow arising from a servile fear of
punishment, and such a fruitless repentance as the reprobate may carry with
them to hell, by virtue of the priest's absolution, is made so fhiitttil that it
shall serve the turn for obtaining forgiveness of sins, as if it had been that
godly sorrow which worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of. Bt
whitrh spiritual cozenage many poor souls are most miserably delndfld.^
(Osshei's Tracts, p. 153 )

t These quotations, carefully marked in the oris^nal, afford a t

answer to Father Daniel's long argument, which consists chiefly of c

L-um Jesuit writers who hold the views above given.

202 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. X.

very well ; but it would be still better were you never to
read them without the precaution of having one of us be*
side you. Do you not see, now, that, from having read
them alone^ you have concluded, in your simplicity, that
these passages bear hard on those who have more lately sup.
ported our doctrine of attrition ? whereas it might be shown
that nothing could set them off to greater advantage. Only
think what a triumph it is for our fathers of the present
day to have succeeded in disseminating their opinion in such
a short time, and to such an extent that, with the exception
of theologians, scarcely any one would ever suppose but that
our modern views on this subject had been the uniform be-
lief of the faithful in all ages ! So that, in fact, when you
have shown, from our fathers themselves, that, a few years
ago, * this opinion was not certain,' you have only succeeded
in giving our modern authors the whole merit of its esta*
blishment !

" Accordingly," he continued, " our cordial friend Diana,
to gratify us, no doubt, ha» recounted the various steps by
which the opinion reached its present position.* 'In former
days, the ancient schoolmen maintained that contrition was
necessary as soon as one had committed a mortal sin ; since
then, however, it has been thought that it is not bind-
ing except on festival days; afterwards, only when some
great calamity threatened the people : others, again, that it
ought not to be long delayed at the approach of death. But
our fathers, Hurtado and Yasquez, nave ably refuted all
these opinions, and established that one is not bound to con-
trition unless he cannot be absolved in any other way, or is
at the point of death!' But, to continue the wonderful
progress of this doctrine, I might add, what our fathers,
jFagundez, Granados, and Escobar, have decided, ' that con-
trition is not necessary even at death ; because,' say they, ' if
attrition with the sacrament did not suffice at death, it
would follow that attrition would not be sufficient with the
sacrament. And the learned Hurtado, cited by Diana and
Escobar, goes still further ; for he asks, * Is that sorrow for
sin which flows solely from apprehension of its temporal
consequences, such as having lost health or money, suffi-

* It may be remembered that Diana» though not a Jesuit, was claimed br
the Society as a favourer of their casuists. This writer was once held in such
hi):b repute, that he was consulted, by people from all parts of the world, as
a perfect oracle in cases of conscience. He is now forgotten. His style, like
that of most of these scholastics, is described as " imiipid, stingy, aaa crawk
iug." (Blogr. Univ., Auc. et Mod.)

LET. X.] ATTRITION. 203

cienl } We must distinguish. If the evil is not regarded
as seiit hy the hand of God, such a sorrow does not suffice ;
but if the evil is viewed as sent by God, as, in fact, all evil,
says Diana, except sin, comes from him, that kind of sorrow is
sufficient.** Our Father Lamy holds the same doctrine." +

^^ You surprise me, father ; for I see nothing in all that
attrition of which you speak but what is natural; and in
this way a sinner may render himself worthy of absolution
without supernatural grace at all. Now everybody knows
that this is a heresy condemned by the Council." %

" I should have thought with you," he replied ; " and yet
it seems this must not be the case, for the fathers of our Col-
le^i^e of Clermont have maintained (in their Theses of the
23d May and 6th June 1644) * that attrition may be holy
and sufficient for the sacrament, although it may not be su-
pernatural:' and (in that of August 1643) 'that attrition,
though merely natural, is sufficient for the sacrament, pro-
vided it is honest.' I do not see what more could be said
on the subject, unless we choose to subjoin an inference,
which may be easily drawn from these principles, namely,
that contrition, so far from being necessary to the sacra-
ment, is rather prejudicial to it, inasmuch as, by washing
away sins of itself, it would leave nothing for the sacra-
ment to do at all. That is, indeed, exactly what the cele-
brated Jesuit Father Valencia remarks. (Tom. iv., disp.
7, q. 8, p. 4.) * Contrition,* says he, * is by no means neces-
sary in order to obtain the principal benefit of the sacra-
ment ; on the contrary, it is rather an obstacle in the way
of it — imo obstat potius qtwrninus effectus sequatur.* No-
body could well desire more to be said in commendation of
attrition.*' •

" I believe that, fathei,'* said I ; " but you must allow me
to tell you my opinion, and to show you to what a dreadful
length this doctrine leads. When you say that 'attrition,

* Esc. Pratique de notre Soci^td, tr. 7, ex. 4, n. 9L

t Tr. 8, disp. 3, n. IS.

X Of Trent Nicole attempts to prove that the "imperfect contrition" of
this Council includes the love of God, and that they i-ondemn as heretical
the opinion that *'any could prepare himself for grace without a movement
of the Holy Spirit." He is more successful in showing that the Jesuits were
heretical when Judged by Augustine and the Holy Scriptures. (Note 2, sur
la X. Lettre.)

I The Jesuits are so fond of their " attrition," or purely natural repent-
ance, that one of their own theologians (Cardinal Francis Tolet) having con-
demned it, they falsified the padss^e in a subsequent edition, malcing him
spealc the opposite sentiment. The forgery was exposed ; but the worthy fa-
thers, according to custom, allowed it to pass without notice^ ad majorem
DcigUirvjM, (Nicole, iii. £6.)

204 PROVINCIAI* LETTERS. [LET. X.

induced by the mere dread of punishment,' is sufficient, with
the sacrament, to justify sinners, does it not follow that a
person may always expiate his sins in this way, and thus
be saved without ever having loved God all his life-time ?
Would your fathers venture to hold that ? *'

" I perceive," replied the monk, ** from the strain of your
remarks, that you need some information on the doctrine of
our fathers regarding the love of God. This is the last
feature of their morality, and the most important of all.
You must have learned something of it from the passages
about coiitrition which I have quoted to you. But nere are
others still more definite on the point of love to God — Don't
interrupt me, now ; for it is of importance to notice the
connection. Attend to Escobar, who reports the different
opinions of our authors, in his ' Practice of the Love of God
according to our Society.* The question is : * When is one
obliged to have an actual affection for God ? Suarez says,
It is enough if one love him before being artieulo mortis —
at the point of death — without determining the exact time.
Yasquez, that it is sufficient even at the very point of death.
Others, when one has received baptism. Others, again,
when one is bound to exercise contrition. And others, on
festival days. But our father, Castro Palao, combats all
these opinions, and with good reason — merito, Hurtado de
Mendoza insists that we are obliged to love God once a-year;
and that we ought to regard it as a great favour that we are
not bound to do it oftener But our Father Goninck thinks
that we are bound to it only once in three or four years ;
Henriquez, once in five years ; and Filiutius says thaX it is
probable that we are not strictly bound to it even once in five
years.' How often, then, do you ask ? Why, he refers it to
the judgment of the judicious."

I took no notice of all this badinage, in which the inge-
nuity of man seems to be sporting, in the height of insolence,
with the love of God.

*• But," pursued the monk, " our Father Antony Sirmond
surpasses all on this point, in his admirable book, ' The De-
fence of Yirtue,' * where, as he tells the reader, * he speaks
French in France,' as follows : * St Thomas says that we are
obliged to love God as soon as we come to the use of reason:
that is rather too soon I Scotus says, every Sunday: pray,
for what reason ? Others say, when we are sorely tempted :
yes, if there be no other way of escaping the temptation.
• Tr. 1, ex. 2, a. 21 ; and tr. 6, ex 4, n. *

LET. X.] LOVE TO GOD. 235

Sotus sayS} when we have received a benefit from God : good,
in the way of thanking him for it. Others say, at death :
rather late ! As little do I think it binding at the reception
of any sacrament : attrition in such cases is quite enough,
along with confession, if convenient. Suarez says that it is
binding at some time or another; but at what time? — he
leaves you to judge of that for yourself — he does not know ;
and what that doctor did not know, I know not who should
know.' In short, he concludes that we are not strictly
bound to more than to keep the other commandments,
without any affection for God, and without giving him our
hearts, provided that we do not hate him. To prove thb is
the sole object of his second treatise; you will find it in
every page ; more especially where he says : * God, in com-
manding us to love him, is satisfied with our obeying him in
his other commandments. If God had said. Whatever obe-
dience thou yieldest me, if thy heart is not given to me, I
will destroy thee ! — would such a motive, think you, be well
fitted to promote the end which God must, and only can,
have in view ? Hence it is said that we shall love God by doing
his will as if we loved him with affection, as if the motive
in this case was real charity. If that is really our motive,
so much the better; if not, still we are strictly fulfilling
the commandment of love, by having its works, so that (such
is the goodness of God !) we are oomi]lianded, not so much
to love him, as not to hate him.'

*' Such is the way in which our doctors have discharged
men from the 'painful' obligation of actually loving God.
And this doctrine b so advantageous, that our Fathers An-
nat, Pintereau, Le Moine, and Anthony Sirmond himself,
have strenuously defended it when it has been attacked. You
have only to consult their answers to the * Moral Theology.*
That of Father Pintereau, in particular, will enable you to
form some idea of the value of this dispensation, from the
price which he tells us that it cost, which is no less than the
blood of Jesus Christ. This crowns the whole. It appears,
that this dispensation from the ' painful' obligation to love
God, is the privilege of the Evangelical law, in opposition
to the Judaicai. * It was reasonable,' he says, * that, under
the law of grace in the New Testament, God should relieve
us from that troublesome and arduous obligation which
existed under the law of bondage, to exercise an act of per-
fect contrition, in order to be justified ; and that the place
of thb should be supplied by the sacraments, instituted in

LET. XI.] RIDICULE A FAIB WEAPON. 209

the verities of the Christian faith, and no man be allowed to
ridicule Escobar, or the fantastical and unchristian dogmas of
your authors, without being stigmatized as jesting at reli-
gion? Is it possible you can have ventured to reiterate so
often an idea so utterly unreasonable? Have you no fears
that, in blaming me for laughing at your absurdities, you
may only afford me fresh subject of merriment; that you
may make the charge recoil on yourselves, by showing that
I have really selected nothing from your writings as matter
of raillery, but what was truly ridiculous ; and that thus, in
making a jest of your morality, I have been as far from sneer-
ing at holy things, as the doctrine of your casuists is far from
the holy doctrine of the Gospel?

Indeed, reverend sirs, there is a vast difference between
laughing at religion, and laughing at those who profane it by
their extravagant opinions. It were impiety to be wanting
in respect for the verities which the Spirit of God has re-
vealed; but it were no less impiety of another sort to be
wanting in contempt for the falsities which the spirit of man
opposes to them.*

For, fathers (since you will force me into this argument),
I beseech you to consider that, just in proportion as Christian
truths are worthy of love and respect, the contrary errors
must deserve hatred and contempt ; there being two things
in the truths of our religion — a divine beauty that renders
them lovely, and a sacred majesty that renders them vener-
able; and two things also about error — an impiety that
makes it horrible, and an impertinence that renders it ridicul-
ous. For these reasons, while the saints have ever cherished
towards the truth the twofold sentiment of love and fear —
the whole of their wisdom being comprised between fear,
which is its beginning, and love which is its end — ^they have,
at the same time, entertained towards error the twofold feel-
ing of hatred and contempt; and their zeal has been at once
employed to repel, hj force of reasoning, the malice of the
wicked, and to chastise, by the aid of ridicule, their extrava-
gance and folly.

Do not then expect, fathers, to make people believe that
it is unworthy of a Christian to treat error with derision.
Nothing is easier than to convince all who were not aware of
it before, that this practice is perfectly just — that it is common

* " Beligioii, they tell ns, ought not to be ridiculed ; and they tell ns truth:
yet surely the oorruptions in it may ; for we are taught by the tritest maxim
m the world, that religion being the beet of things, its corruptions are likelr
to be the worst" (Sinlf s Apology for a Tale of a Tab.)

210 PBOVINOIAL LETTERS. [L8T. XI*

with the fathers of the Church, and that it is sanctioDed by
Scripture, by the example of the best of saints, and even by
that of Gk>d himself.

Do we not find that God at once hates and despises sin-
ners ; so that even at the hour of death, when their condition
is most sad and deplorable, Divine Wisdom adds mockery to
the vengeance which consigns them to eternal punishment ?
"In interitu vestro ridebo et tubBcmnaho — I will laugh at
your calamitv." The saints, too^ influenced by the same
feeling, will join in the derision ; for, according to David,
when they witness the punishment of the wicked, ''they shall
fear, and yet laugh at it — videbunt justiut timebuntf et super
eum fidehunt." And Job says: ^^Jnnocena tuibaannabit eos
— ^The innocent shall laugh at them." *

It is worthy of remark here, that the very first words
which God addressed to man after his fall, contain, in the
opinion of the fathers, '' bitter irony" and mockery. After
Adam had disobeyed his Maker, in the hope, suggested by the
devil, of being like God, it s^pears from Scripture that God,
as a punishment, subjected him to death; and after having re-
duced him to thb miserable condition, which was due to his
sin, he taunted him in that state in the following terms of de-
rision : ''Behold, the man has become as one of us! — Eoce,
Adam gtum tmus ex nobis!" — which, according to St Jeromel*
and the interpreters, is " a grievous and cutting piece of irony,"
with which God "stung him to the quick." "Adam," says Ru-
pert, " deserved to be taunted in this manner, and he would be
naturally made to feel his foUy more acutely by this ironical
expression than by a more serious one." St Victor, after
making the same remark, adds, " that this irony was due ta
his sottish credulity, and that this species of riullery is an act
of justice, merited by him against whom it was durected."t

* Prov. i. 26; Psal. lii. 6; Job xxii. 10. In the first passage, the figure is
evidently what theologians call anthropimcUhiet or speaking of God aftor the
manner of men, and denotes his total disregard of the wicked in the day of
their calamity.

t In most of the editions, it is " St Ghrysostom," bnt I hare followed that of
Nicole.

X We may be permitted to question the correctness of this interpretation,
and the propriety of introducing it in the present connection. Por the for-
mer, the fathers, not Pascal, are responsible ; as to the latter, it was certainly
superfluous, and not very happy, to nave recourse to such an example, to ju8>
ti^ the use of ridicule as a weapon against religious follies. Among other
writers, the Abbfi IVArtigny is very seyere against our author on this score,
and quotes with approbation the following censure on him : " Is it possible
that a man of such genius and erudition could justify the most criminal ex-
cesses by such respectable examples? Not content of making witty old fal-
lows of the prophets and the holy fathers, nothing will serre him but to make
us believe that the Almighty himself has fiimished us with precedents for the

LET. XI.] BmiCULE USED IN SCRIPTURE. 211

Thus you see, fathers, that ridicule is, in some cases, a very
appropriate means of reclaiming men from their errors, and
that it is accordingly an act of justice, because, as Jeremiah
says, " the actions of those that err are worthy of derision,
because of their vanity — vana sunt et risu digna** And so
far from its being impious to laugh at them, St Augustine
holds it to be the effect of Divine wisdom : " The wise laugh
at the foolish, because they are wise, not after their own wis-
dom, but after that Divine wisdom which shall laugh at the
death of the wicked."

The prophets, accordingly, filled with the Spirit of God,
have availed themselves of ridicule, as we find from the in-
stances of Daniel and Elias. In short, examples of it are
not awanting in the discourses of Jesus Christ himself. St
iVugustine remarks that, when he would humble Nicodemus,
who deemed himself so expert in his knowledge of the law,
'• perceiving him to be puffed up with pride, from his rank
as doctor of the Jews, he first beats down his presumption by
the magnitude of his demands, and having reduced him so
low that he was unable to answer. What ! says he, you a
master in Israel, and not know these things ! — as if he had
said. Proud ruler, confess that thou knowest nothing." St
Chrysostom and St Cyril likewise observe upon this, that " he
deserved to be ridiculed in this manner."

You may learn from this, fathers, that should it so happen,
in our day, that persons who enact the part of " masters "
among Christians, as Nicodemus and the Pharisees did among
the Jews, show themselves so ignorant of the first principles
of religion as to maintain, for example, that *' a man may
be saved who never loved God all his life," we only follow
the example of Jesus Christ when we laugh at such a com-
bination of ignorance and conceit.

I am sure, fathers, these sacred examples are sufiicient to
convince you, that to deride the errors and extravagances
of man is not inconsistent with the practice of the saints ;
otherwise we must blame that of the greatest doctors of
the Church, who have been guilty of it — such as St Jerome,
in his letters and writings against Jovinian, Yigilantius, and
the Pelagians; Tertullian, in hb apology against the follies of

most bitter slanders and pleasantries— an evident proof that there is nothing
that an author will not seek to Justifr when he follows his own passion."
(Nouveaux Memoires lyArtigny, ii., 185.) How solemnly and eloquently will
a man write down all such satires, when the jest is pointed agamst himself
and his party 1 D^Artigny quotes, within a few pa^^es, with evident relish, a
bitter and profane satire ag^unst a Protestant minister.

212 PROVINCIAL LETTERS [LBT, XT.

idolaters ; St Augustine against the monks of Africay whom
he styles ** the hairy men ; " St Irensus against the Gnostics:
St Bernard and the other fathers of the Church, who, haying
heen the imitators of the i^>ostles, ought to he imitated
hy the faithful in all timo coming ; for, say what we wiD,
they are the true models for Christians, even of the present
day.

In following such examples, I conceived that I could not
go far wrong . and, as I think I have sufficiently established
this position, I shall only add, in the admirable words of Ter-
tullian, which give the true explanation of the whole of my
proceeding in this matter: '* What I have now done is only
a little sport before the real combat. I have rather indi-
cated the wounds that might be given you than inflicted any.
If the reader has met with passages which have excited his
risibility, he must ascribe this to the subjects themselves.
There are many things which deserve to he held up in this
way to ridicule and mockery, lest, by a serious refutation, we
should attach a weight to them which they do not deserve.
Nothing is more due to vanity than laughter; it is the
Truth properly that has a right to laugh, because she is
cheerfut and to make sport of her enemies, because she is
sure of the victory. Care must be taken, indeed, that the
raillery is not too low, and unworthy of the truth; but,
keeping this in view, when ridicule may be employed with
effect, it is a duty to avail ourselves of it." Do you not
think, fathers, that this passage is singularly applicable to our
subject? The letters which I have hitherto written are
** merely a little sport before a real combat." As yet I have
been only playing with the foils, and " rather indicating the
wounds that might be given you than inflicting any." I
have merely exposed your passages to the light, almost with-
out making a reflection on them. ^ If the reader has met
with any that have excited his risibility, he must ascribe this
to the subjects themselves." And, indeed, what is more
fltted to raise a laugh, than to see a matter so gprave as that
of Christian morality decked out with fancies so grotesque as
those in which you have exhibited it ? One is apt to form
such high anticipations of these maxims, from being told
that ** Jesus Christ himself has revealed them to the fathers
of the Society," that when one discovers among them such
absurdities as '* that a priest receiving money to say mass,
may take additional sums from other persons by ^ving up to
them his own share in the sacrifice;" <* that a monk is not to

LET. XI.] CnARGE OP Ur?CHARITABLENESS. 21 S

be excommunicated for putting off his habit, provided it is
to dance, swindle, or go incognito into infamous houses ; "
and ** that the duty of hearing mass may be fulfilled by listen-
ing to four quarters of a mass at once from different priests;"
— when, I say, one listens to such decisions as these, the sur-
prise is such that it is impossible to refrain from laughing ;
for nothing is more calculated to produce that emotion than
a startling contrast between the thing looked for and the
thing looked at. And why should the greater part of
-hese maxims be treated in any other way? As Tertullian
says: " To treat them seriously would be to sanction them.'*

What ! is it necessary to bring up all the forces of Scrip-
ture and tradition, in order to prove that running a sword
through a man's body, covertly and behind his back, is to
murder him in treachery? or, that to give one money as a
motive to resign a benefice, is just to purchase the bene-
fice? Yes, there are things which it is duty to despise,
and which ** deserve only to be laughed at." In short, the
remark of that ancient author, " that nothing is more due
to vanity than derision," with what follows, applies to the
case before us so justly and so convincingly, as to put it
beyond all question that we may laugh at error without
violating propriety.

And let me add, fathers, that this may be done without
any breach of charity either, though this is another of the
charges you bring against me in your publications. For,
according to St Augustine, ** charity may sometimes oblige
us to ridicule the errors of men, that they may be induced
to laugh at them in their turn, and renounce them — Hac
tu misericorditer irride, tU eis ridenda ac fugienda com-
mendes," And the same charity may also, at other times,
bind us to repel them with indignation, according to that
other saying of St Gregory of Nazianzen : " The spirit of
meekness and charity hath its emotions and its heats."
Indeed, as St Augustine observes, " who would venture to
say that tinith ought to stand disarmed against falsehood,
or that the enemies of the faith shall be at liberty to
frighten the faithful with hard words, and jeer at them with
lively sallies of wit ; while the Catholics ought never to write
except with a coldness of style enough to set the reader
asleep?"

Is it not obvious that, by following such a course, a wide
door would be opened for the introduction of the most ex-
travagant and pernicious dogmas into the Church; while

214 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. H.

none would be allowed to treat them with contempt, through
fear of. being charged with violating propriety, or to confute
them with indignation, from the £ead of being taxed with
want of charity ?

Indeed, fathers, shall you be allowed to maintain, '^ that
it is lawful to kill a man to avoid a box on the ear or an
affiront,'' and must nobody be permitted publicly to expose a
public error of such consequence ? Shall you be at liberty
to say, ** that a judge may in conscience retain a fee recdved
for an act of injustice," and shall no one be at liberty to con-
tradict you? Shall you print, with the privilege and ap-
probation of your doctors, " that a man may be saved without
ever having loved God;" and will you shut the mouth of
those who defend the true faith, by telling them that they
would violate brotherly love by attacking you, and Christian
modesty by laughing at your maxims? I doubt, fathers, if
there be any persons whom you could make believe this ; if,
however, there be any such, who are really persuaded that,
by denouncing your morality, I have been deficient in the
charity which I owe to you, I would have them examine^
with great jealousy, whence this feeling takes its rise within
them. They mav imaeine that it proceeds from a holy zeaU
which will not auow them to see their neighbour impeached
without being scandalized at it ; but I would entreat them
to consider, that it is not impossible that it may flow from
another source, and that it is even extremely likely that it
may spring from that secret, and often self-concealed dissa-
tisfaction, which the unhappy corruption within us seldom
fails to stir up against those who oppose the relaxation of
morals. And to Aimish them with a rule which may enable
them to ascertain the real principle from which it proceeds,
I will ask them, if, while they lament the way in which the
religious* have been treated, they lament still more the
manner in which these religious have treated tlie truth. If
they are incensed, not only against my Letters, but still
more against the maxims quoted in them, I shall grant it
to be barely possible that their resentment proceeds from
some zeal, though not of the most enlightened kind ; and,
in this case, the passages I have just cited from the fathers
will serve to enlighten them. But if they are merely
angry at the reprehension, and not at the things repre-
hended, truly, fathers, I shall never scruple to tell uiem that

* " Religions" is a general term, applied in the Romish Chorch to all who
are in holy orders.

LET. ZI.J CHARGE OF UNCHARITABLENESS. 215

they are grossly mistaken, and that their zeal is miserably
blind.

Strange zeal, indeed I which gets angry at those that cen-
sure public faults, and not at those that commit them! Novel
charity this, which groans at seeing error confuted, but feels
no grief at seeing morality subverted by that error ! If these
persons were in danger of bein^ assassinated, pray, would
they be offended at one advertismg them of the stratagem
that had been laid for them ? and, instead of turning out of
their way to avoid it, would they trifle away their time in
whining about the little charity manifested in discovering to
them the criminal design of the assassin ? Do they get wasp-
ish when one tells them not to eat such an article of food,
because it is poisoned? or not to enter such a city, because
it has the plague?

Whence comes it, then, that the same persons who set
down a man as wanting in charity, for exposing maxims
hurtful to reli^on, would, on the contrary, thmk him equally
deficient in that grace were he not to disclose matters hurt-
ful to health and life, unless it be from thb, that their fond-
ness for life induces them to take in good part every hint
that contributes to its preservation, while their indifference
to truth leads them, not only to take no share in its defence,
but even to view with pain the efforts made for the extirpa-
tion of falsehood?

Let them seriously ponder, as in the sight of God, how
shameful, and how prejudicial to the Church, is the morality
which your casuists are in the habit of propagating; the
scandalous and unmeasured license which they are intro-
ducing into public manners ; the obstinate and violent hardi-
hood with which you support them. And if they do not
think it full time to rise against such disorders, their blind-
ness is as much to be pitied as yours, fathers ; and you and
they have equal reason to dread that saying of St Augustine
founded on the words of Jesus Christ in the Gospel : " Wo^
to the blind leaders! woe to the blind followers! — Vce cascis
ducentibtuf vob ccecis sequentilmsf"

But to leave you no room in futm*e, either to create such
impressions on the minds of others, or to harbour them in
vour own, I shall tell you, fathers (and I am ashamed I should
have to teach you what I should have rather learned from you),
the marks which the fathers of the Church have ^iven for
judging when our animadversions flow from a prmciple of
piety and charity, and when from a spirit of malice and
unpiety.

216 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LBT. XI.

The first of these rules is: That the spirit of piety always
prompts us to speak with sincerity and tnithfulness : whereas
malice and envy make use of falsehood and calumny.
*' Splendentia et vehementia^ ted rebus verts — Splendid and
vehement in words, hut true in things,'^ as St. Augustine
says. The dealer in falsehood is an agent of the devil.
No direction of the intention can sanctify slander; and
though the conversion of the whole earth should depend on
\t, no man may warrantahly calumniate the innocent ; because
none may do the least evil, in order to accomplish the
greatest good; and, as the Scripture says, ''the truth of
God stands in no need of our lie. St Hilary observes, that
^Mt is the bounden duty of the advocates of truth, to advance
nothing in its support but true things." Now, fathers, I
can declare before God, that there is nothing that I detest
more than the slightest possible deviation m>m the truth,
and that I have ever taken the greatest care, not only not to
falsify (which would be horrible), but not to alter or wrest,
in the slightest possible degree, the sense of a single pas-
sage. So closely have I adhered to this rule, that if I may
presume to apply them to the present case, I may safelv say,
in the words of the same St Hilary : ** If we advance things
that are false, let our statements be branded with infamy ;
but if we can show that they are public and notorious, it
is no breach of apostolic modesty or liberty to expose them."

It is not enough, however, to tell nothing but the truth ;
we must not always tell every thing that is true ; we should
publish only those things which it is useful to disclose, and
not those which can only hurt, without doing any good.
And, therefore, as the first rule is to speak with truth, the
second is to speak with discretion. ^ The wicked," says St
Augustine, ** in persecuting the good, blindly follow the dic-
tates of their passion ; but the good, in theur prosecution of
the wicked, are guided by a wise discretion, even as the sur-
geon warily considers where he is cutting, while the mur-
derer cares not where he strikes." You must be sensible,
fathers, that in selecting from the maxims of your authors, I
have refrained from quoting those which would have galled
you most, though I might have done it, and that without
tinning against discretion, as others who were both learned
and catholic writers have done before me. All who have
read your authors know how far I have spared you in this
respect.* Besides, I have taken no notice whatever of what
* "So tsr*' says Nicole, "from his having told all that he might againsi

LET. ZI.] DISCBETION OF THE LETTERS. 217

might be brought against individual characters among you ;
and I should have been extremely sorry to have said a virord
about secret and personal failings, virhatever evidence I
might have of them, being persuaded that this is the dis-
tinguishing property of malice, and a practice virhich ought
never to be resorted to, unless virhere it is urgently demanded
for the good of the Church. It is obvious, therefore,
that in what I have been compelled to advance against
your moral maxims, I have been by no means wanting in
due consideration ; and that you have more reason to congra-
tulate yourselves on my reticence than to complain of my
indiscretion.

The third rule, fathers, is : That when there is need to
employ a little raillery, the spirit of piety will take care to
employ it against error only, and not against things holy ;
whereas the spirit of buffoonery, impiety, and heresy, mocks
at all that is most sacred. I have already vindicated myself
on that score ; and, indeed, one is in no great danger of falling
into that vice so long as one 'confines one's remarks to the
opinions which I have quoted from your authors.

In short, fathers, to abridge these rules, I shall only men-
tion another, which is the essence and the end of all the
rest: That the spirit of charity prompts us to cherish in
the heart a desire for the salvation of those against whom
we dispute, and to address our prayers to God while we
direct our accusations to men. ** We ought ever," says St
Augustine, ^ to preserve charity in the heart, even whUe we
are obliged to pursue a line of external conduct which to
man has the appearance of harshness ; we ought to smite
them with a sharpness, severe but kindly, remembering that
their advantage is more to be studied than their gratifica-
tion." I am sure, fathers, that there is nothing in my
letters, from which it can be inferred that I have not
cherished such a desire towards you : and as you can find
nothing to the contrary in them, chanty obliges you to be«
lieve that I have been really actuated by it. It appears^
then, that you cannot prove Uiat I have offended against this
rule, or against any of the other rules which charity incul-
cates ; and you have no right to say, therefore, that I have
violated it.

the Jesuits, he has spared them on points so essential and important, that
all who have a complete knowledge of their maTims have admired his mode*
ration." " What would haye be^ the case," asks another writer, " had Pas-
cal e^mosed the late infEumous things put out by their miserable casuists, and
unfolded the chain and succession of their regicide authors ? " (Dissertatiou
sur la foi due au Pascal, Ac., p. 14)

218 PROYIXCIAL LETTERS. [LET.

But, fathers, if you should now like to have the pleasure of
seeing within a short compass, a course of conduct directly
at variance with each of these rules, and hearing the genuine
stamp of the spirit of buffoonery, envy, and hatred, I shall
give you a few examples of it ; and that they may be of the
sort best known and most familiar to you, I shall extract them
from your o^ti writings.

To begin, then, with the unworthy manner in which your
Authors speak of holy things, whether in their sportive and
gallant effusions, or in their more serious pieces, do yon
think that the parcel of ridiculous stories, which your FaUier
Binet has introduced into his '* Consolation to the Sick,"
are exactly suitable to his professed object, which is that of
imparting Christian consolation to those whom God has
chastened with affliction ? Will you pretend to say, that the
profane, foppish style in which your Father Le Moine has
talked of piety in his ^ Devotion Made Easy," is nlore fitted
to inspire respect than contempt for the picture that he
draws of Christian virtue? What else does his whole
book of '< Moral Pictures" breathe, both in its prose and
poetry, but a spirit full of vanity, and the foUies of this
world ? Take, for example^ that ode in his seventh book,
entitled '' Eulogy on Basnfulness, showing that all beautiful
things are red or inclined to redden." CSdl you that a pro-
duction worthy of a priest? The ode is intended to comfort
a lady, called Delphina, who was sadly addicted to blush-
ing. Each stanza is devoted to show tliat certain red things
are the best of things, such as roses, pomegranates, tiie
mouth, the tongue; and it is in the midst of this badi-
nage, so disgraceful in a clergyman, that he has the ef-
frontery to introduce those blessed spirits that minister
before God, and of whom no Christian should speak without
reverence : —

" The cherubim— those glorions choirs—

Composed of bead and plumes.
Whom Qod with his own^irit inspires,

And with his eyes illumes;
These splendid faces, as they fly.
Are ever red and burning laigh,
With fire angelic or divine;
And while their mutual flames com)^ine^
The waving of their wings supplies
A fan to cool their extasiesl
But redness shines with better grace,
Belphina, on thy beauteous htce,
IV here modesty sits revelling—
Arrayed in purple, like a img," Ac.

What think you of this, fathers? Does this preference of

LET. XI.] GENUINE PROFANENESS. 219

the blushes of Delphina to the ardour of those spirits, which
is neither more nor less than the ardour of Divine love, and
this simile of the fan applied to their mysterious wings, strike
you as being very Ghristianlike in the lips which consecrate
the adorable body of Jesus Christ? I am quite aware that
he speaks only in the character of a gallant, and to raise a
smile ; but this is precisely what is called laughing at things
holy. And is it not certain, that, were he to get full justice,
he could not save himself from incurring a censure? al-
though, to shield himself from this, he pleads an excuse
which is hardly less censurable than the offence, ** that the
Sorbonne has no jurisdiction over Parnassus, and that the
errors of that land are subject neither to censure nor the
Inquisition;" — as if one could act the blasphemer and pro-
fane fellow only in prose ! There is another passage, how-
ever, in the preface, where even this excuse fails him, when
he says, '^ that the water of the river, on whose banks he
composes his verses, is so apt to make poets, that, though it
were converted into holt/ water, it would not chase away the
demon of poesy." To match this, I may add the following
flight of your Father Garasse, in his ** Summary of the Ca-
pital Truths in Religion," where, speaking of the sacred
mystery of the incarnation, he mixes up blasphemy and
heresy in this fashion : " The human personality was grafted,
as it were, or set on horseback, upon the personality of the
Word?"* And omitting many others, 1 might mention
another passage from the same author, who, speaking of the
subject of the name of Jesus, ordinarily written thus, i, i. g.
observes that *^ some have taken away the cross from the top
of it, leaving the characters barely thus, I. H. S. — which, '
says he, " is a stripped Jesus I "

Such is the indecency with which you treat the truths of
religion, in the face of the inviolable law which binds us al-
ways to speak of them with reverence. But you have sin-
ned no less flagrantly against the rule which obliges us to
speak of them with truth and discretion. What is more
common in your writings than calumny? Can those of Fa-
ther Brisacier t be called sincere ? Does he speak with truth

* The apologists of the Jesuits attempted to JnstilV this extraordinary
illustration, by referring to the use which Augustine and other fathers make
of the parable of the good ISamaritan. who " set on his own beast" the wounded
traveller. But Nicole has shown that, fanciflil as these ancient interpreters
often were, it is doing them injustice to father on them the absurdity of Fa-
ther Qarasse. (Nicole's Notes, iii., 340.)

t Brisacier, who became rector in the College of Bouen, was a bitter enemy
of the Port-Royalists* Uis defamatory libel against the nuns of Port-Boyal

220 PROVINCIAL LETTBBS. [LET. XI.

when he says, that " the nuns of Port-Royal do not pray to
the saints, and have no images in their cnurch?^ Are not
these most outrageous falsehoods, when the contrary appears
before the eyes of all Paris? And can he be said to speak
with discretion, when he stabs the fair reputation of these
virgins, who lead a life so pure and austere, representing them
as <' impenitent, unsacramental, uncommunicants, foolish vir-
gins, visionaries, Galagans, desperate creatures, and any thing
you please," loading them with many other slanders, which
have justly incurred the censure of the late Archbishop of
Paris? or when he calumniates priests of the most irre-
proachable morals,* by asserting ^ that they practise novelties
in confession, to entrap handsome innocent females, and that
he should be horrified to tell the abominable crimes which
they commit ?" Is it not a piece of intolerable assurance to
advance slanders so black and base, not merely without proof,
but without the slightest shadow or the most distant sem-
blance of truth ? I shall not enlarge on this topic, but defer
it to a future occasion, for I have something more to say to
you about it; but what I have now produced is enough
to show that you have sinned at once against truth and
discretion.

But it may be add, perhaps, that you have not offended
against the last rule at least, which binds you to desire the
salvation of those whom you denounce, and that none can
charge you with this, except by unlocking the secrets of
your breasts, which are only known to God. It is strange,
fathers, but true, nevertheless, that we can convict you even
of this offence; that while your hatred to your opponents
has carried you all the length of wishing their eternal per-
dition, your infatuation has driven you to discover the abo-
minable wish ; that so far from cherishing in secret desires
for their salvation, you have offered up prayers in public
for their damnation; and that, after having given utter-
ance to that aspiration in the city of Caen, to the scandal
of the whole Church, you have since then ventured in Paris
to vindicate, in your printed books, the diabolical transac-
tion. After such gross offences against piety, first ridicul-
ing and speaking lightly of things the most sacred; next,
fsdsely and scandalously calumniating priests and virgins;
and lastly, forming desures and prayers for their damnation,

at! tied, " Le Jansenisme Confondu," published in 1651, was censured bj tho
Archbishop of Paris, and vigorously assailed by M. Arnauld.
» The pnests of Port-Koyal.

LET. XI.] CALumrr. 221

■ , . . . , f — ■ ■ .

it would be difficult to add any thing worse. I cannot con-
ceive, fathers, how you can fail to be ashamed of yourselves,
or how you could have thought for an instant of charging
me with a want of charity, who have acted all along with
so much truth and moderation, without reflecting on your
own horrid violations of charity, manifested in those de-
plorable exhibitions, which make the charge recoil against
yourselves.

In fine, fathers, to conclude with another charge which
you bring against me, I see you complain that among the
vast number of your maxims which I quote, there are some
which have been objected to you already, and that I '' say
over again, what others have said before me." To this I re-
ply, that it is just because you have not profited by what has
been said before, that I say it over again. Tell me now
what fruit has appeared from all the castigations you have
received in all the books written by learned doctors, and
even the whole university ? What more have your fathers
Annat, Gaussin, Pintereau, and Le Moine done, in the re-
plies they have put forth, except loading with reproaches
those who had given them salutary admonitions ? Have you
suppressed the books in which these nefarious maxims are
taught ? * Have you restrained the authors of these maxims ?
Have you become more circumspect in regard to them ? On
the contrary, is it not the fact, that since that time Escobar
has been repeatedly reprinted in France and in the Low
Countries, and that your fathers Cellot, Bagot, Bauny, Lamv,
Le Moine, and others, persist in publishing daily the same
maxims over agiun, or new ones as licentious as ever ? Let
us hear no more complaints, then, fathers, either because I
have charged you with maxims which you have not dis-
avowed, or because I have objected to some new ones against
you, or because I have laughed equally at them all. You
have only to sit down and look at them, to see at once your
own confusion and my defence. Who can look without
laughing at the decision of Bauny, about the person who
employs another to set fire to his neighbour's barn ; that of
Cellot on restitution ; the rule of Sanchez in favour of sor-

* This Is the real question, which brings the matter to a point, and serves
to answer all the evasions of the Jesuits. They boast of their unity as a so-
ciety, and thoir blind obedience to their head. Have thev then, ever, as a
society, disclaimed these maxims?— have they even, cu suok, condemned th»
sentiments of their fathers Becan, Mariana, and others, on the duty of de-
throning and assassinating heretical kings? Thf^y have not; and till this is
done, they must be held, at Jesuits, responsible for the sentiments which
they refuse to disavow.

P

222 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lBT. XI,

cerers ; the plan of Hurtado for avoiding the sin of duelling,
by taking a walk through a field, and waiting for a man ;
the compliments of Bauny for escaping usury ; the way of
avoiding simony by a turn of the intention, and keeping
clear of falsehood by speaking high and low ; and such other
opinions of your most grave and reverend doctors? Is
there any thing more necessary, fathers, for my vindication ?
and, as Tertullian says, '* can any thing be more justly due
to the vanity and weakness of these opinions than laughter?**
But, fathers, the corruption of manners to which your maxima
lead, deserves another sort of consideration ; and it becomes
us to ask, with the same ancient writer, ^ Whether ought we
to laugh at their folly, or deplore their blindness? — iCideam
vanitatem, an exprobrem coscitaiem f ** My humble opinion
is, that one may either laugh at them or weep over them,
as one is in the humour. Hcee tolerabilius vd rideaiiury vd
flentuTy as St Augustine says. The Scripture tells us that
'* there is a time to laugh, and a time to weep ;" and my
hope is, fathers, that I may not find verified, in your case^
these words in the Proverbs : " If a wise man contendeth
with a foolish man, whether he rage or laugh, there is no
rest." ♦

P.S. — On finishing this letter, there was put in mv hands
one of your publications, in which you accuse me of talsifica-
tion, in the case of six of your maxims quoted by me, and
also with being in correspondence with heretics. Tou will
shortly receive, I trust, a suitable reply ; after which, fathers,
I rather think you will not feel very anxious to continue this
species of wai'fare.f

* Prov. xxix. 9.

t This postscript, which appeared in the earlier editioni, Is dropt In that
of Nicole and otliers. Pro!i;ahIj because the sentiment is r^eated In tbe fol-
lowing letter, " ^ «^

LET. Xn.] CmCANERIES OP THE JESUITS. 223

LETTER xn.

TO THE REVEBEND FATHERS, THE JESUITS.

REFUTATION OF THEIR GHIGANERIES REGARDING ALMS-

GITING AND SIHONT.

September 9, 1656.

Reverend Fathers, — ^I was prepared to write you on
the subject of the abuse with which you have for some time
past been assailing me in your publications, in which you
salute me with such epithets as "reprobate," "buffoon,**
"blockhead," "merry- Andrew," "impostor," "slanderer,"
" cheat," " heretic," " Calvinist in disguise," " disciple of Du
Moulin," *" possessed with a legion of devils," and every thing
else you can think of. As I should be sorry to have all this
believed of me, I was anxious to show the public why you
treated me in this manner ; and I had resolved to complain
of your calumnies and falsifications, when I met with your
Answers, in which you bring these same charges against my-
self. This will compel me to alter my plan ; though it will
not prevent me from prosecuting it in some sort, for I hope,
while defending myself, to convince you of more genuine
impostures than the imaginary ones which you have ascribed

* Pierre du Moulin is termed by Bavle "oae of the most celebrated minis-
ters which the Reformed Church in Inrance ever had to boast of.** He'waa
born in 1568, and was for some time settled in Paris; but havin;^ incurred the
resentment of Louis XIII., he retired to iiJedan in 1623, where he became a
profe9S ^r in the Protestant University, and died, in the ninetieth year of h\a
age, in 1658, two years after the time when Pascal wrote. Of his numerous
writings, few are known in this countt'y, except his " Buckler of the Faith,"
and his " Auatomy of the Mass," whidi were translated into Bnglisb. (Qnick'f
Byuodioon, n., lUus)

224 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. XII.

to me. Indeed, fathers, the suspicion of foul play is much
more sure to rest on you than on me. It is not very
likely, standing as I do, alone, without power or any human
defence, against such a large body, and having no support
but truth and integrity, that I should expose myself to lose
every thing, by laying myself open to be convicted of impos>
ture. It is too easy to discover falsifications in matters of
fact such as the present. In such a case there would have
been no want of persons to accuse me, nor would justice have
been denied them. With you, fathers, the ease is very dif-
ferent; you may say as much as you please a gain st me,
while I may look in vain for any to complain to. With such
a wide difference between our positions, though there had
been no other consideration to restrain me, it became me
to study no little caution. By treating me, however, as a
common slanderer, you compel me to assume the defensive,
and you must be aware that this cannot be done without
entering into a fresh exposition, and even into a fuller dis-
closure of the points of your morality. In provoking this
discussion, I fear you are not acting as good politicians. The
war must be waged within your own camp, and at your own
expense ; and although you imagine that, by embroiling the
questions with scholastic terms, the answers will be so tedi-
ous, thorny, and obscure, that people will lose all relish for
the controversy, this may not, perhaps, turn out to be exactly
the case ; I shall use my best endeavours to tax your patience
as little as possible with that sort of writing, xour maxims
have something diverting about them, which keeps up the
good humour of people to the last. At all events, remember
that it is you that oblige me to enter upon this exposure,
and let us see which of us comes off best in deiending
themselves.

The first of your Impostures, as you call them, is on the
opinion of Yasqu^z upon almsgiving. To avoid all ambi-
guity, then, allow me to give a simple explanation of the
matter in dispute. It is well known, fathers, that, according
to the mind of the Church, there are two precepts touching
alms — 1st, " To give out of our superfluity in the case of the
ordinary necessities of the poor ; " and, 2dli/, " To give even
out of our necessaries, according to our circumstances, in
eases of extreme necessity." Thus says Cajetan, after St
Thomas ; so that, to get at the mind of Vasquez on this sub-
ject, we must consider the rules he lays down, both in regard
to necessaries and superfluities.

LET. XII.] ALMSGIVDJG. 225

With regard to superfluity, which is the mo<;t common
Bource of relief to the poor, it is entirely set aside by that
single maxim which I have quoted in ray Letters: "That
what the men of the world keep with the view of improving
their own condition and that of their relatives, is not properly
superfluity; so that such a thing as superfluity is rarely to be
met with among men of the world, not even excepting kings."
It is very easy to see, fathers, that, according to this defini-
tion, none can have superfluity, provided they have ambition;
and thus, so far as the greater part of the world is concerned,
almsgiving is annihilated. But even though a man should
happen to have superfluity, he would be under no obligation,
according to Vasquez, to give it away in the case of ordinary
necessity ; for he protests against those who would thus bind
the rich. Here are his own words : " Corduba," says he,
** teaches, that when we have a supei-fluity, we are bound to
give out of it in cases of ordinary necessity ; but this does not
please me — sed hoc non placet — for we have demonstrated the
contrary against Cajetan and Navarre." So, fathers, the
obligation to this kind of alms is wholly set aside, according
to the good pleasure of Vasquez.

With regard to necessaries, out of which we are bound to
give in cases of extreme and urgent necessity, it must be
obvious, from the conditions by which he has limited the
obligation, that the richest man in all Paris may not come
within its reach once in a lifetime. I shall only refer to
two of these. The first is, That " we must know that the
poor man cannot be relieved from any other quarter — Jicec
intelligo et coetera omnia, quando scio nullum, aliam opem
laturum" What say you to this, fathers ? Is it likely to
happen frequently in Paris, where there are so many chari-
table people, that I must know that there is not another
soul but myself to relieve the poor wretch who begs an alms
from me? And yet, according to Vasquez, if I have not
ascertained that fact, I may send him away with nothing.
The second edition is, That the poor man be reduced to such
straits " that he is menaced with some fatal accident, or the
ruin of his character" — ^none of them very comn)on occur-
rences. But what marks still more the rareness of the cases
in which one is bound to give charity, is his remark, in an-
other passage, that the poor man must be so ill off *' that he
may conscientiously rob the rich man ! " This must surely
be a very extraordinary case, unless he will insist that a man
may be ordinarily allowed to commit robbery. And so.

223 PROVINCIAL LETTEKS. [LET. XH.

after having cancelled the obligation to give alms out of our
superfluities, he obliges the rich to relieve the poor only in
those cases where he would allow the poor to rob the nch 1
Such is the doctrine of Yasquez, to wnom you refer your
readers for their edification I

I now come to your pretended Impostures. You begin
by enlarging on the obligation to almsgiving which Yasquez
imposes on ecclesiastics. But on this point I have said no*
thing ; and I am prepared to take it up whenever you choose.
This, then, has nothing to do with the present question.
As for laymen, who are the only persons with whom we
have now to do, you are apparently anxious to have it under-
stood that, in the passage which I quoted, Yasquez is giving
not his own judgment, but that of Cajetan. But as nothing
could be more false than this, and as you have not said it in
so many terms, I am willing to believe, for the sake of yoor
ctiaracter, that you did not intend to say it.

You next loudly complain that, after quoting that maxim
of Yasquez, ** Such a thing as superfluity is rarely if ever to
be met with among men of the world, not excepting kings,"
I have inferred from it, " that the rich are rarely, if ever,
bound to give alms out of their superfluity." But what do
you mean to say, fathers? If it be true that the rich have
almost never superfluity, is it not obvious that they will
scarcely ever be found to give alms out of their superfluity ?
I might have put it in the form of a syllogism for you, if
Diana, who has such an esteem for Yasquez that he calls
him " the phoenix of genius," had not drawn the same con-
clusion from the same premises; for, after quoting the
maxim of Yasquez, he concludes, " that, with regard to the
question, whether the rich are obliged to give alms out of
their superfluity, though the affirmation were true, it would
seldom, or almost never, happen to be obligatory in practice."
I have followed this language word for word. What, then,
are we to make of this, fathers ? When Diana quotes with
approbation the sentiments of Yasquez — when he finds them
probable, and " very convenient for rich people," as he says
m the same place, he is no slanderer, no falsifier, and we
hear no complaints of misrepresenting his author ; whereas,
when I cite the same sentiments of Yasquez, though without
holding him up as a phcenix, I am a slanderer, a fabricator,
a corrupter of his maxims. Truly, fathers, you have some
reason to be apprehensive, lest your very different treatment
of those who agree in their representation, and differ only in

LET. Xn.] ALMSGIVING. 227

their estimate of your doctrine, discover the real secret of
your hearts, and provoke the conclusion, that the main object
you have in view is to maintain the credit and glory of your
Company. It appears that, provided your accommodating
theology is treated as judicious complaisance, you never dis-
avow those that publish it, but laud them as contributing to
your design ; but let it be held forth as pernicious laxity,
and the same interest of your Society prompts you to disclaim
the maxims which would injure you in public estimation.
And thus you recognise or renounce them, not according to
the truth, which never changes, but according to the shift-
ing exigencies of the times, acting on that motto of one of
the ancients, " Omnia pro tempore^ nihil pro veritate — Any
thing for the times, nothing for the truth." Beware of this,
fathers ; and that you may never have it in your power again
to say that I drew from the principle of Vasquez a conclu-
sion which he had disavowed, I beg to inform you that he
has drawn it himself: ** According to the opinion of Gajetan,
and according to MY own— «i secundum nostram — (he says,
chap, i., no. 27), one is hardly obliged to give alms at all,
when one is only obliged to give them out of one's superfluity."
Confess then, fathers, on the testimony of Vasquez himself,
that I have exactly copied his sentiment; and if so, how
could you have the conscience to say, that " the reader on
consulting the original, would see, to his astonishment, that
he there teaches the very reverse I "

In fine, you insist, above all, that if Vasquez does not bind
the rich to give alms out of their supei*fluity, he obliges
them to atone for this by giving out of the necessaries of life.
But you have forgotten to mention the list of conditions
which he declares to be essential to constitute that obligation,
which I have quoted, and which restrict it in such a way as
almost entirely to annihilate it. In place of giving this
honest statement of his doctrine, you tell us, in general
terms, that he obliges the rich to give even what is necessary
to their condition. This is proving too much, fathers; the
rule of the Gospel does not go so far ; and it would be an
error into which Vasquez is very far, indeed, from having
fallen. To cover his laxity, you attribute to him an excess
of severity which would be reprehensible ; and thus you lose
all credit as faithful reporters of his sentiments. But the
truth is, Vasquez is quite free from any such suspicion ; for
he has maintained, as I have sho^^n, that the rich are not
bound, either in justice or in charity, to give of their super-

228 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. XII.

fluitie!^, and still less of their necessaries, to relieve the or-
dinary wants of the poor ; and that they are not obliged to
give of the necessaries^ except in cases so rare that they
scarcely ever happen.

Having disposed of your objections against me on this
head, it only remains to show the falsehood of your asser-
tion, that Vasquez is more severe than Oajetan. This will
be very easily done. That cardinal teaches *' that we are
bound in justice to give alms out of our superfluity, even
in the ordinary wants of the poor ; because, according to the
holy fathers, the rich are merely the dispensers of their su-
perfluity, which they are to give to whom they please, among
those who have need of it." And, accordingly, unlike Diana,
who says of the maxims of Vasquez, that they will be ** very
convenient and agreeable to the rich and their confessors,
the cardinal, who has no such consolation to afford them,
declares that he has nothing 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 into
heaven;" and to their confessors: "If the blind lead the
blind, both shall fall into the ditch."* So indispensable did
he deem this obligation 1 This, too, is what the fathers and
all the saints have laid down as a certain truth. ^* There
are two cases," says St Thomas, ** in which we are bound to
give alms as a matter of justice — ex debUo legcUi: one, when
the poor are in danger ; the other, when we possess super-
fluous property." And again: "The three-tenths which
the Jews were bound to eat with the poor, have been aug<
mented under the new law ; for Jesus Christ wills that we
give to the poor, not the tenth only, but the whole of our
superfluity." And yet it does not seem good to Vasquez
that we should be obliged to give even a fragment of our
superfluity ; such is his complaisance to the rich, such his
hardness to the poor, such his contrariety to those feelings of
charity which teach us to relish the truth contained in the
following words of St Gregory, harsh as it may sound to the
rich of this world : " When we give the poor what was ne-
cessary to them, we are not so much bestowing on them what
is our property, as rendering to them what is their own ; and
it may be said to be an act of justice, rather than a work of
mercy."
It is thus that the saints recommend the rich to share

* Pe Eleeinoi^na» c 8.

LET. Xn.] SIMONY. 229

with the poor the good things of this earth, if they would
expect to possess with them the good things of heaven.
While you make it your business to foster in the breasts of
men that ambition which leaves no superfluity to dispose of,
and that avarice which refuses to part with it, the saints
have laboured to induce the rich to give up their superfluity
and to convince them that they would have abundance of
it, provided they measured it, not by the standard of covet-
ousness, which knows no bounds to its cravings, but by
that of piety, which is ingenious in retrenchments, so as to
have wherewith to diffuse itself in the exercise of charity.
" We shall have a great deal of superfluity," says St Au-
gustine, " if we keep only what is necessary : but if we seek
after vanities, we shall never have enough. Seek, brethren,
what is sufficient for the work of God** — that is, for na-
ture — " and not for what is sufficient for your covetous-
ness,*' which is the work of the devil : " and remember that
the superfluities of the rich are the necessaries of the poor."

I would fondly trust, fathers, that what I have now said
to you may serve, not only for my vindication — that were a
umall matter — but also to make you feel and detest what is
cori'upt in the maxims of your casuists, and thus unite us
sincerely under the sacred rules of the Gospel, according to
which we must all be judged.

As to the second point, which regards simony, before pro-
ceeding to answer the charges you have advanced against
me, I shall begin by illustrating your doctrine on this sub-
ject. Finding yourselves placed in an awkward dilemma,
between the canons of the Church, which impose dreadful
penalties upon simoniacs, on the one hand, and the avarice of
many who pursue this infamous traffic, on the other, you
have recourse to your ordinary method, which is to yield to
men what they desire, and give the Almighty only wordg
and shows. For what else does the simoniac want but
money, in return for his beneflce ? And yet this is what you
exempt from the charge of simony. And as the name of
simony must still remain standing, and a subject to which it
may be ascribed, you have substituted in the place of this
an imaginary idea, which never yet crossed the brain of a
simoniac, and would not serve him much though it did-—
the idea, namely, that simony lies in estimating the money
considered in itself as highly as th^ spiritual gift or office
considered in itself. Who would ever take into his head to
compare things so utterly disproportionate and heterogene-

230 PnOVmCIAL LETTERS. [lET. XIL

ous? And jet, provided this metaphysical comparisoa be
not drawn, any one may, acoording to your authors, give
away a benefice, and receive money m return for it, without
being guilty of simony.

Such is the way in which you sport with religion, in order
to gratify the worst passions of men ; and yet only see with
what graveness your Father Yalentia delivers his rhapsodies
in the passage cited in my letters. He says : *' One may give
a spiritual for a temporal good in two ways — first, in the way
of prizing the temporal more than the spiritual, and that
would be simony ; secondly, in the way of taking the tem-
poral as the motive and end inducing one to give away the
spiritual, but without prizing the temporal more than the
spiritual, and then it is not simony. Aiid the reason is, that
simony consists in receiving something temporal, as the just
price of what is spiritual. If, therefore, the temporal is
sought — se petatur temporale — not as the jMnee, but only as
the motive determining us to part with the spiritual, it is by
no means simony, even although the possession of the tem-
poral may be principally intended and expected — ndrntM erit
simonia, etiamsi temporale principaliter intendatur et ex^
pectetur," Your redoubtable Sanchez has been favoured
with a similar revelation ; Escobar quotes him thus : *^ If
one give a spiritual for a temporal good, not as the pricef
but as a motive to induce the collator to give it, or as an oc-
'knowledgment if the benefice has been actually received, is
that simony? Sanchez assures us that it is not." In your
Caen Theses of 1644, you say: ^ It is a probable opinion,
taught by many Catholics, that it is not simony to exchange
a temporal for a spiritual good, when the former is not given
as a price/' And as to Tanner, here is his doctrine, exactly
the same with that of Yalentia; and I quote it again to
show you how far wrong it is in you to complain of me for
saying that it does not agree with that of St Thomas, for
he avows it himself in the very pasHage which I quoted in
my letter : " There is properly and truly no simony," says
he, *' unless when a temporal good is taken as the price of a
spiritual; but when taken merely as the motive for giving
the spiritual, or as an acknowledgment for having received
it, this is not simony, at least not in point of conscience."
And again: ''The same thing may be said although the
temporal should be regarded as the principal end, and even
preferred to the spiritual ; although St Thomas and others
appear to hold the reverse, inasmuch as they maintain it to

LET. xn.] siMoirr. 231

be downright simony to exchange a spiritual for a temporal
good, when the temporal is the end of the transaction/'

Such, then, being your doctrine on simony, as taught by
your best authors, who follow each other very closely on this
point, it only remains now to reply to your charges of mis-
representation. You have taken no notice of Valentia's opi-
nion, so that his doctrine stands as it was before. But you
fix on that of Tanner, maintaining that he has merely de-
cided it to be no simony by divine right ; and you would
have it to be believed, that in quoting the passage I have
suppressed these words, divine right. This, fathers, is a
most unconscionable trick ; for these words, divine rights
never existed in that passage. You add that Tanner declares
it to be simony according to positive right. But you are
mistaken ; he does not say that generally, but only of parti-
cular cases, or, as he expresses it, in easibus a jure enppresdSf
by which he makes an exception to the general rule he had
kid down in that passage, ** that it is not simony in point of
conscience," which must imply that it is not so in point of
positive right, unless you would have Tanner made so im-
pious as to maintain that simony in point of positive right is
not simony in point of conscience. But it is easy to see
your drift in mustering up such terms as *' divine right, po-
sitive right, natural right, internal and external tribunal,
expressed cases, outward presumption," and others equally
little known; you mean to escape under this obscurity of
language, and make us lose sight of your aberrations. But,
fathers, you shall not escape by these vain artifices ; for I
shall put some questions to you so simple, that they will not
admit of coming under your distinguo.*

I ask you, then, without speaking of " positive rights," of
** outward presumptions," or " external tribunals" — ^I ask if,
according to your authors, a beneficiary would be simoniacal,
were he to give a benefice worth four thousand livres of
yearly rent, and to receive ten thousand francs ready money,
not as the price of the benefice, but merely as a motive in-
ducing him to give it ? Answer me plainly, fathers : What
must we make of such a case as thb according to your au-
thors ? Will not Tanner tell us decidedly that ** this is not
simony in point of conscience, seeing that the temporal
good is not the price of the benefice, but only the motive in-
ducing to dispose of it ? " Will not Valentia, will not your

* See before, page 77.

332 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. 7X1,

own Theses of Caen, will not Sanchez and Escobar, agree
in the same decision, and give the same reason for it ? Is
any thing more necessary to exculpate that beneficiary from
Bimony ? And, whatever might be your private opinion of
the case, durst you deal with that man as a simonist in
your confessionals, when he would be entitled to stop your
mouth by telling you that he acted according to the ad-
vice of so many grave doctors? Confess candidly, then,
that, according to your views, that man would be no
simonist; and having done so, defend the doctrine as you
best can.

Such, fathers, is the true mode of treating questions if we
wish to elicit the truth, instead of perplexing them, either
by scholastic terms, or, as you have done in your last charge
Dgainst me here, by altering the state of the question. Tan-
ner, you say, has, at any rate, declared that such an exchange
is a great sin; and you blame me for having maliciously
suppressed this circumstance, which, you maintain, ** com*
pleidy justifies him" But you are wrong again, and that
in more ways than one. For, first, though what you say
had been true, it would be nothing to the point, the question
in the passage to which I referred being, not if it was sinf
but if it was simony. Now, these are two very different
questions. Sin, according to your maxims, obliges only to
confession — simony obliges to restitution ; and there are
people to whom these may appear two very different things.
V ou have found expedients for making confession a very easy
affair; but you have not fallen upon ways and means to
make restitution an agreeable one. Allow me to add, that
the case which Tanner charges with sin, is not simply that
in which a spiritual good is exchanged for a temporal, the
latter being the principal end in view, but that in which the
party '* prizes the temporal above the spiritual;'' which is
the imaginary case already spoken of. And it must be al-
lowed he could not go far wrong in charging such a case as
that with sin, since that man must be either very wicked or
very stupid who, when permitted to exchange the one thing
for the other, would not avoid the sin of the transaction by
such a simple process as that of abstaining from comparing
the two things together. Besides, Yalentia, in the place
quoted, when treating the question, if it be sinful to give a
spiritual good for a temporal, the latter being the main
consideration, and after producing the reasons given for
the affirmative, adds, *^ Sed hoc non videtur mihi $ati$

LET. XII.] SIMONY. 233

cerium — But this does not appear to my mind sufficiently
certain."

Since that time, however, your Father Erade Bille, pro-
fessor of cases of conscience at Caen, has decided that there
is no sin at all in the case supposed ; for probable opinions,
you know, are always in the way of advancing to maturity.*
This opinion he maintains in his writings of 1644, against
which M. Dupre, doctor and professor at Caen, delivered
that excellent .oration, since printed and well known. For
though this Erade Bille confesses that Valentia's doctrine,
adopted by Father Milhard, and condemned by the Sorbonne,
'* is contrary to the common opinion, suspected of simony,
tnd punishable at law when discovered in practice," he does
not scruple to say that it is a probable opinion, and conse-
quently sure in point of conscience, and that there is neither
simony nor sin in it. " It is a probable opinion," he says,
" taught by many Catholic doctors, that there is neither any
simony nor ctiiy sin in giving money, or any other temporsd
thing, for a benefice, either in the way of acknowledgment,
or as a motive, without which it would not be given, pro-
vided it is not given as a price equal to the benefice." This
is all that could possibly be desired. In fact, according to
these maxims of yours, simony would be so exceedingly rare,
that we might exempt from this sin even Simon Magus him-
self, who desired to purchase the Holy Spirit, and who is the
emblem of those simonists that buy spiritual things ; and Ge-
hazi, who took money for a miracle, and who may be re-
garded as the prototype of the simonists that sell them.
There can be no douf>t that when Simon, as we read in the
Acts, ** oflTered the apostles money, saying, Give me also this
power ; " he said nothing about buying or selling, or fixing
the price ; he did no more than offer the money as a motive
to induce them to give him that spiritual gift ; which being,
according to you, no simony at all, he might, had he but
been instructed in your maxims, have escaped the anathema
of St Peter. The same unhappy ignorance was a great loss
to Gehazi, when he was struck with leprosy by Elisha, for,
as he accepted the money from the prince who had been
miraculously cured, simply as an acknowledgment, and not
as a price equivalent to the divine virtue which had effected
the miracle, he might have insisted on the prophet healing
him again on pain of mortal sin ; seeing, on this supposition,
he would have acted according to the advice of your grave

* See before, page 130.

234 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. XII.

doctors, who, in such cases, oblis^e confessors to absolve their
penitents, and to wash them from that spiritual leprosy of
which the bodily disease is the type.

Seriously, fathers, it would be extremely easy to bold you
up to ridicide in this matter, and I am at a loss to know why
yuu expose yourself to such treatment. To produce this
effect, I have nothing more to do than simply to quote Es-
cobar, in his " Practice of Simony according to the Soci«ty
of Jesus : " " Is it simony when two churchmen become mu-
tually pledged thus : Give me your vote for my election as
provincial, and I shall give you mine for your election as
prior ? By no means." Or take another : ** It is not simony
to get possession of a benefice by promising a sum of money,
when one has no intention of actually paying the money; for
this is merely making a show of simony, and is as far from
being real simony as counterfeit gold is from the genuine."
By this quirk of conscience, he has contrived means, simply
by adding swindling to simony, for obtaining benefices widi-
out simony and without money.

But I have no time to dwell longer on the subject, for I
must say a word or two in reply to your third accusation,
which refers to the subject of bankrupts. Nothing can be
more gross than the manner in which you have managed
this charge. You rail at me as a libeller in reference to a
sentiment of Lessius, which I did not quote myself, but took
from a passage in Escobar ; and therefore, though it were
true that Lessius does not hold the opinion ascribed to
him by Escobar, what can be more unfsur than to charge me
with the misrepresentation ? When I quote Lessius or others
of your authors myself, I am quite prepared to answer for it ;
but as Escobar has collected the opinions of twenty>four of
your writers, I beg to ask, if I am bound to guarantee any
thing beyond the correctness of my citations from iiis book ?
or if I must, in addition, answer for the fidelity of all his
quotations of which I may avail myself? This would be
hardly reasonable; and yet this is precisely the case in the
question before us. I produced in my letter the following
passage from Escobar, and you do not object to the fidelity
of my translation : ** May the bankrupt, with a good con-
science, retain as much of his property as is necessary to
afford him an honourable maintenance — ne indecore vivat t
I answer, with Lessius, that he may — ami Lessio cusero
posse." You tell me that Lessius does not hold that opinion.
But consider for a moment the predicament in which you

LET. Xn.] BANKRUPTCY. 235

involve yourselves. If it turn out that he does hold that
opinion, you will be set down as impostors for having as*
sorted the contrary ; and if it be proved that he does not
hold it, Escobar will be the impostor ; so it must now of ne-
cessity follow, that one or other of the Society will be con-
victed of imposture. Only think what a scandal 1 Yoa
cannot, it would appear, foresee the consequences of things.
You seem to imagine that you have nothing more to do than
to cast aspersions upon people, without considering on whom
they may recoil. Why did you not acquaint Escobar with
Your objection before venturing to publish it ? He might
have given you satisfaction. It is not so very troublesome
to get word from Yalladolid, where he is living in perfect
health, and completing his grand work on Moral Theology,
in six volumes ; on the first of which I mean to say a few
words by-and-by.* They have sent him the first ten letters;
you mignt as easily have sent him your objection ; and I am
sure he would have soon returned you an answer, for he has
doubtless seen in Lessius the passage from which he took
the ne indecore vivat. Read him yourselves, fathers, and you
will find it word for word, as I have done. Here it is:
^* The same thing is apparent from the authorities cited, par-
ticularly in regard to that property which he acquires after
his failure, out of which even the delinquent debtor may re-
tain as much as is necessary for his honourable maintenance^
according to his station of life — tU non indecore vivat. Do
you ask if this rule applies to goods which he possessed at
the time of his failure r Such seems to be the judgment of
the doctors."

I shall not stop here to show how Lassius, to sanction his
maxim, perverts the law that allows bankrupts nothing more
than a mere livehhood, and that makes no provision for
"honourable maintenance." It is enough to have vindi-
cated Escobar from such an accusation — ^it is more, indeed,
than what I was in duty bound to do. But you, fathers,
have not done your duty. It still remains for you to an-
swer the passage of Escobar ; whose decisions, by the way,
have this advantage, that being entirely independent of the
context, and condensed in little articles, they are not liable
to your distinctions. I quoted the whole of the passage, in
which ^ bankrupts are permitted to keep their goods, though
unjustly acquired, to provide an honourable maintenance for
their families "—commenting on which, in my letters, I ex-

• See before, p. 1^

238 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. XJEL

claim: "Indeed, father! by what strange kind of charity
would you have the ill-gotten property of a bankrupt ap»
propriated to his own use, instead of that of his lawful cre-
ditors ? " ♦ This is the question which must be answered ;
but it is one that involves you in a sad dilemma, and from
which you in vain seek to escape by altering the state of the
question, and quoting other passages from Lessios, which
nave no connection with the subject. I ask you, then. May
this maxim of Escobar be followed by bankrupts with a safe
conscience, or no ? And take care what you say. If you
answer. No, what becomes of your doctor, and your doc-
trine of probability? If you say, Yes— I delate you to the
Parliament.t

In this predicament I must now leave you, fathers ; for
my limits will not permit me to overtake your next accusa-
tion, which respects homicide. This will serve for my next
letter, and the rest will follow.

In the meanwhile, I shall make no remarks on the adver-
tisements which you have tagged to the end of each of your
charges, filled as they are with scandalous falsehoods. I
mean to answer all these in a separate letter, in which I
hope to show the weight due to your calumnies. I am sorry,
fathers, that you should have recourse to such desperate re-
sources. The abusive terms which you heap on me will not
clear up our disputes, nor will your manifold threats hinder
me from defending myself. You think you have power and
impunity on your side ; and I think that I have truth and
innocence on mine. It is a strange and tedious war, when
violence attempts to vanquish truth. All the efforts of vio-
lence cannot weaken truth, and only serve to give it fresh
vigour. All the lights of truth cannot arrest violence, and
only serve to exasperate it. When force meets force, the
weaker must succumb to the stronger ; when argument is
opposed to argument, the solid and the convincing triumph
over the empty and the false ; but violence and verity can
make no impression on each other. Let none suppose, how-
ever, that the two are, therefore, equal to each other ; for
there is this vast difference between them, that violence has
only a certain course to run, limited by the appointment
of Heaven, which overrules its effects to the glory of the
truth which it assails ; whereas verity endures for ever, and

♦ See before, p. 166.

t " The Parliament of Paris was originally the court of the kioirs of Franca,
to which they committed the supreme admiuistration of justice. " (Boberi>
•oa's Chailes V., vol. i., 171)

^ET. Xn.] VIOLENCfB AHD VERITY. 237

eventually triumphs over its enemies, beings eternal and al«
mighty as God himself.*

* In most of the French editions another Letter is inserted after this^
being a reftitation of a reply which appeared at the time to Letter zii.
Bat as this Letter, though well written, was not written by Pascal, and as
it does not contain any thingr that woold now be interesting to the reader,
we omit it Suffice it to say, that the reply of the Jesuits consisted, as usual,
of the most barefaced attempts to fix the charge of misrepresentation on
their opponent, accusing him of omitting to quote passages firom his au-
thors whic^ they never wrote, of not answering objections which were
never broxu^t aMiinst him, or of not adverting to cases which neither he
nor his authors dreamt of ;— in short, like all Jesuitical answersL it is any
thing and every thing but a reftitation of the cluurges which have been
substantiated uainst them. The following Letter is quite sufficient to sa-
tisfy every candid reader of Pascal'i hones^, and of the wretched duplicitv
»f his opponents.

238 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. (XET. ZIH.

LETTER Xm.

TO THE REVEREND FATHERS OF THE 80CIETT OF JESUS.

THE DOCTRINE OF LESSIUS ON HOHIOIDB THE SAME WITH
THAT OF VALENTIA — ^HOW EAST IT IS TO PASS FROM
SPECULATION TO PRACTICE — ^WHT THE JESUITS HAVE RE-
COURSE TO THIS DISTINCTION^ AND HOW LITTLE IT SERVES
FOR THEIR VINDICATION.

September 30, 1656.

Reverend Fathers, — I have just seen your last produc-
tion, in which you have continued your list of Impostures
up to the twentieth, and intimate that you mean to conclude
with this the first part of your accusations against me^ and
to proceed to the second, in which you are to adopt a new
mode of defence, by showing that there are other casuists
besides those of your Society who are as lax as yourselves.
I now see the precise number of charges to which I have to
reply ; and as the fourth, to which we have now come^ re-
lates to homicide, it may be proper, in answering it, to in-
clude the 11th, 13th, 14ch, 15th, 16th, I7th, and 18th, which
refer to the same subject.

In the present letter, therefore, my object shall be to vin-
dicate the correctness of my quotations from the charges of
falsity which you bring against me. But as you have ven-
tured, in your pamphlets, to assert that ** the sentiments of
your authors on murder are agreeable to the decisions of popes
and ecclesiastical laws,'' you will compel me, in my next let-
ter, to confute a statement at once so unfounded and so in-

LET. XIII.] FIDELITY OF PASCAL'S QUOTATIONS. 239

jurious to the Church. It is of some importance to show
that she is innocent of your corruptions, in order that here-
tics may be prevented from taking advantage of your aber-
rations to draw conclusions tending to her dishonour.*
And thus, viewing on the one hand your pernicious maxims,
and on the other, the canons of the Church which have uni-
formly condemned them, people will see, at one glance, what
they should shun and what they should follow.

Your fourth charge turns on a maxim relating to murder,
which you say I have fasely ascribed to Lessius. It is as
follows : '' That if a man has received a buffet, he may im-
mediately pursue his enemy^ and even return the blow with
the sword, not to avenge himself, but to retrieve his honour."
This, you say, is the opinion of the casuist Victoria. But this
is nothing to the point. There is no inconsistency in saying,
that it is at once the opinion of Victoria and of Lessius ; for
Lessius himself says that it is also held by Navarre and Hen-
riquez, who teach identically the same doctrine. The only
question, then, is, if Lessius holds this view as well as his
brother casuists. You maintain *' that Lessius quotes this
opinion solely for the purpose of refuting it, and that I there-
fore attribute to him a sentiment whicn he produces only to
overthrow — the basest and most disgraceful act of which a
writer can be guilty." Now, I maintain, fathers, that he quotes
the opinion solely for the purpose of supporting it. Here is
a question of fact, which it will be very easy to settle. Let
us see, then, how you prove your allegation, and you will see
afterwards how I prove mine.

To show that Lessius is not of that opinion, you tell us
that he condemns the practice of it ; and in proof of this,
you quote one passage of his (1. 2, c. 9, n. 92), in which he
says, in so many words, *^ I condemn the practice of it."
I grant that, on looking for these words, at number 92, to
which you refer, they will be found there. But what will
people say, fathers, when they discover, at the same time,
that he is treating in that place of a question totally dif-
ferent from that of which we are speaking, and that the
opinion of which he there says that he condemns the practice,
has no connection with that now in dispute, but is quite
different ! And yet, to be convinced that this is the fact, we

* The Church of Rome has not left those whom she terms heretics so
doubtfully to ** take advanta^'' of Jesuitical aberrations. She has done every
thing in ner power to give them this advantage. By identifying herself, at
rarious times, with the Jesuits, she has virtually stamped their doctrines
with her approbation.

240 pBOvmorAL letters. [let. xhl

have only to open the book to which you refer^ and there we
find the whole subject m its connection as follows : At num-
ber 79 he treats the question, '' If it is lawful to kill for a
buffet ? " and at number 80 he finishes this matter without
a single word of condemnation. Having disposed of this
question, he opens a new one at art. 81, namely, ** If it is law-
nil to kill for slanders ? " and it is when speaking of th%»
question that he employs the words you have quoted — '^ I
condemn the practice of it."

Is it not snameful, fathers, that you should venture to
produce these words to make it be believed that Lessius con-
demns the opinion that it is lawful to kill for a buffet? and
that, on the ground of this single proof, you should chuckle
over it, as you have done, by saying: ''Many persons of
honour in Paris have already discovered this notorious false-
hood by consulting Lessius, and have thus ascertained the
degree of credit due to that slanderer?" Indeed! and is it
thus that you abuse the confidence which those persons of
honour repose in you? To show them that Lessius does not
hold a certain opinion, you open the book to them at a place
where he is condemning another opinion ; and these persons
not having begun to suspect your good faith, and never think-
ing of exa,mining whether the author speaks in that place of
the subject in dispute, you impose on their credulity. I
make no doubt, fathers, that to shelter yourselves from the
guilt of such a scandalous lie, you had recourse to your
doctrine of equivocations; and that, having read the pas-
sage in a loud voice, ^ou would say, in a lower hey, that
the author was speaking there of something else. But I
am not so sure whether this saving clause, though quite
enough to satisfy your consciences, will be a very satisfac-
tory answer to the just complaint of those ''honourable
persons," when they shall discover how you have hoodwinked
them.

Take care, then, fathers, to prevent them by all means
from seeing my letters ; for this is the only method now lefb
you to preserve your credit for a short time longer. Such
is not the way in which I deal with your writings : I send
them to all my friends: I wish every body to see them.
And I verily believe that both of us are in the right for our
own interests. After having published virith such parade
this fourth Imposture, were it once discovered that you have
made it up by foisting in one passage for another, you would
be instantly denounced. It will be easily seen, that if you

LET. Xni.] THE BUFFET OF G0MPIE6NB. 241

could have found what you wanted in the passage where
Lessius treated of this matter, you would not have searched
for it elsewhere, and that you had recourse to such a trick
only because you could find nothing in that passage favour-
able to your purpose.

You would have us believe that we may find in Lessius
what you assert, " That he does not allow that this opinion
(that a man may be lawfully killed for a buffet) is probable
in theory ; " whereas Lessius distinctly declares, at number
80 : ^ This opinion, that a man may kill for a buffet, is pro-
bable in theory." Is not this, word for word, the reverse of
vour assertion ? And can we sufficiently admire the hardi-
hood with which you have advanced, in set phrase, the very
reverse of a matter of fact ! To your conclusion, from a
fabricated passage, that Lessius was not of that opinion, we
have only to place Lessius himself, who, in the genuine pas-
sage, declares that he is of that opinion.

Again, you would have Lessius to say " that he condemns
the practice of it ; " and, as I have just observed, there is
not m the original a single word of condemnation ; all that
he says is : ^ It appears that it ought not to be easily per-
mitted in practice — In praxi non videtur facile permit-
tenda,** Is that, fathers, the language of a man who con-
demns a maxim ? Would you say that adultery and incest
ought not to be easily permitted in practice ? Must we not,
on the contrary, conclude, that as' Lessius says no more than
that the practice ought not to be easily permitted, his opi-
nion is, that it may be permitted sometimes, though rarely ?
And, as if he had been anxious to apprize every body when it
might be permitted, and to relieve those who have received
affronts from being troubled with unreasonable scruples,
irom not knowing on what occasions they might lawfully
kill in practice, he has been at pains to inform them what
they ought to avoid in order to practise the doctrine with a
safe conscience. Mark hb words: ''It seems," says he,
'' that it ought not to be easily permitted, because of the
danger that persons may act in this matter out of hatred or
revenge, or with excess, or that this may occasion too many
murders." From this it appears that murder is freely per-
mitted by Lessius, if one avoid the inconveniences referred
to— in other words, if one can act without hatred or revenge,
and in circumstances that may not open the door to a great
many murders. To illustrate the matter, I may give you
an example of recent occurrence — ^the case of the buffet of

242 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. , [LET. XIU^

CompiegDe.* Ydu will grant that the person who received
the blow on that occasion has shown, by the way in whick
he has acted, that he was sufficiently master of the passions
of hatred and revenge. It only remained for him, therefore^
to see that he did not give occasion to too many murders ;
and you need hardly be told, fathers, it is such a rare spec-
tacle to find Jesuits bestowing buffets on the officers of the
royal household, that he had no great reason to fear that a
murder committed on this occasion would be likely to draw
many others in its train. You cannot, accordingly, deny
that the Jesuit who figured on that occasion was kxHabU
with a safe conscience, and that the offended party might
Iiave converted him into a practical illustration of the doc-
trine of Lessius. And very likely, fathers, this miffht have
been the result had he been educated in your school, and
learnt from Escobar that the man who has recdved a buffet
is held to be disgraced until he has taken the life of the
person who insulted him. But there is ground to believe
that the very different instructions which he received
from a curate who is no great favourite of yours, have
contributed not a little in this case to save the life of a
Jesuit.

Tell us no more, then, of inconveniences which may, in
many instances, be so easily got over, and in the absence of
which, according to Lessius, murder is permissible even in
practice. This is frankly avowed by your authors, as quoted
by Escobar in his *< Practice of Homicide, according to
your Society." " Is it allowable," asks this casuist, ** to kill
him who has given me a buffet ? Lessius says it is permissi-
ble in speculation, though not to be followed in practice —
non conmlendwm, in praon — on account of the risk of hatred,
or of murders prejudicial to the State. Others, however,
Iiave judged that, by avoiding these iNCONVEimarcES,

THIS IS PERinSSIBLE AND SAFE IN PRACTICE — in pr<txi

probabUem et ttntam judicarunt Henriqaez" &c. See how
your opinions mDunt up, by little and little, to the climax
of probabilism 1 The present one you have at last elevated
to this position, by permitting murder without any distinc-

* The reference here is to an affray which made a considerable noise at
the time, between Father Borin, a Jesuit, and M. Guille, one of the ofBcers
of the royal kitchen, in the College of Compi^gne. A quarrel having
taken place, the enraged Jesuit struck the royal cook in the face while he
was in the act of preparing dinner, by his majesty's order, for Christiana,
queen of Sweden, in honour, perhaps, of her conversion to the Somish
faith. (Nicole, iv., 37.)

LET. Xin.J SPECULATIVE MUBDBB. 248

tion between speculation and practice, in the following
terms : '^ It is lawful, when one nas received a buffet, to re-
turn the blow immediately with the sword, not to avenge
one's self, but to preserve one's honour." Such is the de-
cision of your fathers of Caen in 1644, embodied in their
publications produced by the university before parliament,
when they presented their third remonstrance against your
doctrine of homicide, as shown in the book then emitted by
them, at page 339.

Mark, then, fathers, that your own authors have them-
selves demolished this absurd distinction between speculative
and practical murder — a distinction which the university
treated with ridicule, and the invention of which is a secret
of your policy, which it may now be worth while to explain.
The knowledge of it, besides being necessary to the right un-
derstanding of your 15th, 16th, I7th, and 18th charges, is
well calculated, in general, to show the gradual development
of the principles of that mysterious policy.

In attempting, as you have done, to decide cases of con-
science in the most agreeable and accommodating manner,
while you met with some questions in which religion alone
was concerned — such as those of contrition, penance, love
to God, and others pertaining only to the inner court of con-
science — ^you encountered another class of cases, in which
civil society was interested as well as religion — such as those
relating to usury, bankruptcy, homicide, and the like. And
it is truly distressing to all that love the Church, to observe
that, in a vast number of instances, in which you had only
Religion to contend with, you have violated her laws without
reservation, without distinction, and without compunction ;
because you knew that it is not here that God visibly ad-
ministers his justice. But in those cases in which the State
is interested as well as religion, your apprehension of man's
justice has induced you to divide your decisions into two
branches. To the first of these you give the name of spect*'
lotion i under which category, crimes, considered in them-
selves, without regard to society, but merely to the law of
God, you have permitted, without the least scruple, and in
the way of trampling on the divine law which condemns
them. The second you rank under the denomination of
practice; and here, considering the injury which may be
done to society, and the presence of magistrates who look
after the public peace, you take care, in order to keep your-
selves on the safe side of the law^ not to ^prove always in

244 FROVINOIAL LETTERS. [lET. Xm.

practice the murders and other crimes which you have sanc-
tioned in speculation. Thus, for example, on the question,
** If it be lawful to kill for slanders?'' your authors, Filiu.
tins, Reginald, and others, reply: *'This is permitted in
speculation— ea; probahili opinione licet; but is not to be
approved in practice^ on account of the great number of
murders which might ensue, and which might injure the
State, if all slanderers were to be killed ; and also hwauM
one might he pwnished in a court of justice for having killed
another for that matter*' Such is the style in which your
opinions begin to develop themselves, under the shelter of
this distinction; in virtue of which, without doing any sen-
sible injury to society, you only ruin religion. In acting
thus, you consider yourselves qmte safe. You suppose that,
on the one hand, the influence you have in the Church will
effectually shield from punishment your assaults on the truth ;
and that, on the other, the precautions you have taken against
too easily reducing your permissions to practice vidll save you
on the part of the civil powers, who, not being judges in
cases of conscience, are properly concerned only with the
outward practice. Thus an opinion which would be con-
demned under the name of practice, comes out quite safe
under the name of speculation. But this basis once established,
it is not difficult to erect on it the rest of your maxims..
There is an infinite distance between God's prohibition of
murder, and your speculative permission of the crime ; bat
between that permission and the practice the distance is
very small indeed. It only remains to show, that what is
allowable in speculation is also so in practice ; and there can
be no want of reasons for this. You have contrived to find
them in far more difficult cases. Would you like to see how
this may be managed ? I refer you to the reasoning of Es-
cobar, who has distinctly decided the point in the firat of the
six volumes of his grand Moral Theology, of which I have
already spoken — a work in which he shows quite another
spirit from that which appears in his former compilation
from your " four-and-twenty elders." At that time he
thought that there might be opinions probable in specula-
tion, which might not be safe in practice ; but he bias now*
come to form an opposite judgment, and has, in this, his
latest work, confirmed it. Such is the wonderful growth
attained, in course of time, by the doctrine of probabilily in
general, as well as by every probable opinion in particolar.
Attend, then, to what he says : '* I cannot see how it can be

LET. 2.1II.J SPECULATIVB MURDER. 245

that an action which seems allowahle in speculation should
not he so likewise in practice ; because what may be done
in practice depends on what is found to be lawful in specu-
lation, and the things differ from each other only as cause
and effect. Speculation is that whioh determines to ac-
tion. ^Whence IT FOLLOWS, THAT OPINIONS PROBABLE IN
SPEOULATION MAT BE FOLLOWED WITH A SAFE CONSOIENOE

IN FBACTiOE, and that even with more safety than those
which have not been so well examined as matters of specu-
lation." •

Verily, fathers, your friend Escobar reasons wonderfully
well sometimes. Li point of fact, there is such a close con-
nection between speculation and practice, that when the
former has once taken root, you have no difficulty in per-
mitting the latter, without any disguise. A good illustra-
tion of this we have in the permission *'to kill for a buffet,"
which, from being a point of simple speculation, was boldly
raised by Lessius mto a practice *' which ought not easUi/ to
be allowed;" from that promoted by Escobar to the charac-
ter of "an east/ practice;" and from thence elevated by your
fathers of Caen, as we have seen, without any distinction be-
tween theory and practice, into a full permission. Thus are
your opinions brought to their full growth very gradually.
Were they present^ all at once in their finishea extrava-
gance, they would inspire every body with horror ; but this
slow imperceptible progress gradually habituates men to the
sight of them, and hides their offensiveness. And in this
way the permission to murder, in itself so odious both to
Chui'ch and State, creeps first into the Church, and then
from the Church into the State.

A similar success has attended the opinion of " kiUing for
slander," which has now reached the climax of a permission
without any distinction. I should not have stopped to quote
my authorities on this point from your writings, had it not
been necessary in order to expose the assurance with which
you have asserted, twice over, in your fifteenth Imposture,
" that there never was a Jesuit who permitted killing for
slander." Before making this statement, fathers, you should
have taken care to prevent it frOm coming under my notice,
seeing that it is so easy for me to answer it. For, not to
mention that your fathers Reginald, Filiutius, and others,
have permitted it in speculation, as I have already shown,
and that the principle udd down by Escobar leads us safely

* In Fnelog., n. 15.

f . :

^H

r-

246 PBOTINOIAL LBTTEBS. [LBT. ]

on to the practice^ I have to inform you, that you have ph
authors who have permitted it in so many words, and am
others Father Hereau in his public lectures, on the coa
sion of which the king put him under arrest in your ho
for having taught, among other errors, 'Hhat when a pei
who has slandered us in the presence of men of honour, (
tinues to do so after being warned to desist, it is allowi
to kill him, not publicly, indeed, for fear of scandal, but ]

FRIYATB WAT— W clam."

I have had occasion already to mention Father Lamy,
you do not need to be informed that his doctrine on this £

iject was censured in 1649 by the University of Louva
II And yet two months have not elapsed since your Father '.

Bois maintained this very censured doctrine of Father La
and taught that '* it was allowable for a monk to defend
honour which he had acquired by his virtue, eybn bt K]
INQ the person who assails his reputation — etiam eum nu
mvcuoria;" which has raised such a scandal in that to
that the whole of the cur6s united to impose silence on I
and to oblige him, by a canonical process, to retract his c
. trine. The case is now pending in the Episcopal court.

[. ■ i What say you now, fathers? Will you attempt, after t]

If; i to maintain that ''no Jesuit ever held that it was lawful

f I , kill for slander?" Is any thing more necessary to convi

I) j you of this than the very opinions of your fathers which

i . ] quote, since they do not condemn murder in speculation,

I !> '.. I only in practice, and that, too, *' on account of the inj

\\\'i that might accrue thereby to the State ? " And here I wo

\[:\- beg to ask, is not the whole matter in dispute between

simply and solely to ascertain if you have or have not s

verted the law of God which condemns murder ? The p<

'\\ in question is, not whether you have injured the comm

wealth, but whether you have injured religion. What n
pose, then, can it serve, in a dispute of this kind, to sc
that you have spared the State, when you make it appart
at the same time, that you have destroyed the faith? Is t
not evident from your saying that the meaning of Begim
on the question of killing for slanders, is, that a private ii

* The doctrines advanced by Lamy are too gross for repetition. BoBL
to say, that they sanctioned the murder not only of the slanderer, but of
person who might tell tales against a religions order ; of one who might si
in the way of another enjoying a legacy or a benefice ; and even of one wj
a priest might have robbed of ner honour, If she threatened to rob him ol
character. These horrid maxlgxs were condemned by civil tribunals
theological faculties : yet the Jesuists persisted in Justifying ihem. (NU
Notes,lv.,41,*c.)

1 ■!•:

4

I
I ■

I •

LET. Xni.] KILLING FOB SLANDEB. 24^

vidual has a rieht to employ that mode of defence, viewing
it simply in its&lff" I desire nothing beyond this concession
to confute you. " A private individual/' you say, " has a right
to employ that mode of defence'' (that is, killing for slanders)^
"viewing the thing in itself;" and, consequently, fathers, by
this decision, the law of God, which forbids us to kill, i&
nullified.

It serves no purpose to add, as you have done, ^Hhat such
a mode is unlawful and criminal, even according to the law
of God, on account of the murders and disorders which
would follow in society, because the law of God obliges us
to have regard to the good of society." This is to evade the
question ; for there are two laws to be observed — one for-
bidding us to kill, and another forbidding us to harm society.
Begindd has not^ perhaps, broken the law which forbids us
to do harm to society ; but he has most certainly violated
that which forbids us to kill. Now, this is the only point
with which we have to do. I might have shown, besides,^
that your other writers, who have permitted these murders
in practice, have subverted the one law as well as the other.
But, to proceed, we have seen that you sometimes forbid
doing harm to the State ; and you allege that your design in
that is to fulfil the law of God, which obliges us to consult
the interests of society. That may be true, though it is far
from being certain, as you might do the same thing purely
from fear of the civil magistrate. With your permission,
then, we shall scrutinize the real secret of this policy.

It is certain, fathers, that if you had reallv any regard ta
God, and if the observance of his law had oeen the prime
and principal object in your thoughts, this respect would
have invariably predominated in all your leading decisions,
and would have engaged you at all times on the side of reli-
gion. But if it turn out, on the contrary, that you violate,,
in innumerable instances, the most sacred commands that
God has laid upon men, and that, as in the instances before
us, you annihilate the law of God, which forbids these actions
as criminal in themselves, and that you only scruple to ap-
prove of them in practice from bodily fear of the civil magis-
trate, do you not afford us ground to conclude that you have
no respect to God in your apprehensions, and that if you
yield an ostensible obedience to his law, in so far as regards
the obligation to do no harm to the State, this is not done
out of any regard to the law itself, but to compass your own
ends, as has ever been the way with godless politicians ?

248 PROVISCIAL LETTERS. [LET. Xm.

What, fathers ! will you tell us that, looking simply to tht
law of God, which says, *' Thou shalt not kill," we have a
right to kill for slanders ? And after hairing thus trampled
on the eternal law of God, do you imagine that you atone
for the scandal you have committed, and can persuade us of
your reverence for him, by adding, that jou prohibit the
practice for State reasons, and from dread of the civil power ?
Is not this, on the contrary, to originate a fresh scanoal ? — ^I
mean not, by the respect which you testify for the magis-
trate; that is not my charge against you, and it is ridiculous
in you to quibble, as you have done, on this point. I blamt
you, not for fearing the magistrate, but for fearing none but
the magistrate. And I blame you for this, b^use it iy
making God less the enemy of vice than man. Had yoi
said that to kill for slander was allowable according to meiiy
but not according to God, that might have been something
more pardonable ; but when you maintain, that what is too
criminal to be tolerated among men, may jet be innocent
and right in the eyes of that Being who is righteousness
itself, what is this but to declare before the whole world, by
a subversion of principle as shocking in itself as it is aliea
to the spirit of the saints, that while you can be braggarts
before (rod, you are cowards before men ?

Had you really been anxious to condemn these homicides,
you would have allowed the commandment of God which
forbids them, to remain intact ; and had you dared at once
to permit them, you would have permitted them openly, in
spite of the laws of God and men. But your object being
to permit them imperceptibly, and to cheat the magistrate,
who watches over the public safety, you have gone warily to
work. You separate your maxims into two portions. On
the one hand, you hold out ** that it is lawful in speculation
to kill a man for slander;" — and nobody thinks of hindering
you from taking a merely speculative view of matters. On
the other hand, you come out with this detached axiom,
^' that what is permitted in speculation is also permissible in
practice;" — and what concern does society seem to have in
this general and metaphysical-looking proposition? But in
this way these two principles, so little suspected, being em-
braced in their separate form, the vigilance of the magistrate
is eluded ; while it is only necessary to combine the two to-
gether, to draw from them the conclusion which you aim at
— namely, that it is lawful in practice to put a man to death
for a simple slander.

LET. Xm.] FBOBABILISM. 249>

It is, indeed, fathers, one of the most subtle tricks of your
policy, to scatter among your publications the maxims wnich
you club together in your decisions. It is partly in this way
that you establish your doctrine of probabilities, which I have
frequently had occasion to explain. That general principle
once established, you advance propositions, harmless enough
when viewed apart, but which, when taken in connection
with that pernicious dogma, become positively horrible. An
example of this, which demands an answer, may be found in
the 11th page of your "Impostures," where you allege that
" several famous theologians have decided that it is lawful to
kill a man for a box on the ear." Now, it is certain that if
that had been said by a person who did not hold Probabilism,
there would be little to censure in it ; it would, in this case,
amount to no more than a harmless statement, from which
nothing could be elicited. But you, fathers, and all who
hold that dangerous tenet, *' that whatever has been approved
by celebrated authors, is probable and safe in conscience,"
when y(m add to this, " that several celebrated authors are of
opinion that it is lawful to kill a man for a box on the ear,"
what is this but to put a dagger into the hand of Christians,
for the purpose of plunging it into the heart of the first per-
son that insults them, and to assure them that, having the
judgment of so many grave authors on their side, they may
do so with a perfectly safe conscience?

What monstrous species of language b this, which, in the
act of announcing that certain authors hold a detestable
opinion, pronounces a decision in favour of that opinion*—
which solemnly teaches whatever it simply tells ! We have
learnt, fathers, to understand this peculiar dialect of the
Jesuitical school; and it is astonishing that you have the
hardihood to speak it out so freely, for it betrays your senti*
raents somewhat too broadly. It convicts you of permitting
murder for a buffet, as often as you repeat that many cele-
brated authors have maintained that opinion.

This charge you will never be able to repel ; nor will you
be much helped out by those passages from Yasquez and
Suarez you adduce against me, in which they condemn the
murders which their associates have approved. These testi-
monies, disjoined from the rest of your doctrine, may hood-
wink those who know little about it; but we, who know
better, join your principles and maxims together. You say,
then, that Yasquez condemns murder ; but what say you on
the other side of the question, my reverend fathers r Why,

250 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. XIH.

** that the probahility of one sentiment does not hinder the
probability of the opposite sentiment ; and that it is warrant-
able to foUow the less probable and less safe opinion, giving
up the more probable and more safe one." What follows
from all this taken in connection, but that we have perfect
freedom of conscience to adopt any of these conflicting judg-
ments which pleases us best ? And what becomes of aU the
effect which you fondly anticipate from your quotations? It
vanishes in smoke ; for we have no more to do than to con-
join for your condemnation the maxims which you have dis-
joined for your exculpation. Why, then, produce those pas-
sages of vour authors which I have not quoted, to qualify
those which I have quoted, as if the one could exculpate the
other? What right does that give you to call me an ^im-
postor ? " Have I said that all your fathers are implicated in
the same corruptions ? Have I not, on the contrary, been
at pains to show that your interest lay in having them of all
different minds, in order to suit all your purposes? Do you
wish to kill your man? — here is Lessius for you. Are you
inclined to spare him ? — here is Yasquez. Nobody need go
away in bad humour — ^nobody without the authority or a
grave doctor. Lessius will talk to you like a Heathen on
Homicide, and like a Christian, perhaps, on charity. YasqueZy
again, will descant like a Heathen on charity, and like a
Christian on homicide. But by means of probabilism, which
is held both by Yasquez and Lessius, and which renders all
your opinions common property, they will lend their opinions
to one another, and each will be held bound to absolve those
who have acted according to opinions which each of them
has condemned. It is this very variety, then, that confounds
you. Uniformity, even in evil, would be better than this.
Nothing is more contrary to the orders of St Ignatius* and
the first generals of your Society, than this confused medley
of all sorts of opinions, good and bad. I may, perh.^ps, enter
on this topic at some future period; and it will astonish
many to see how far you have degenerated from the original
spirit of your institution, and that your own generab have
foreseen that the corruption of your aoctrine on morals might

* It is very sad to see Pascal reduced to the necessity of salating the
founder of the sect which he held up to the scorn of the world, as Saint
Jgnatius I This ignorant fanatic, w^o, in more enlightened times, would
have been consigned to a mad-house, was beatified by one pope, and canon-
ized, or put into the list of saints, by another! Jansenius, in his correspond
dence with St Cyran, indignantly complains of Pope Qregory XV. for haying
canonized Ignatius and Xavier. (^Leydecker, Hist Janaen., p. 28.)

LET. XIII.] PROBABIUSM. 261

prove fatal> not only to your Society, but to the Church
universal.*

Meanwhile, I repeat that you can derive no advantage
from the doctrine of Vasquez. It would be strange, indeed,
if, out of all the Jesuits that have written on morals, one or
two could not be found who had stumbled upon a truth con-
fessed by all Christians. There is no glory in maintaining
the truth, according to the Oospel, that it b unlawful to kiQ
a man for smiting us on the face ; but it is foul shame to
deny it. So far, indeed, from justifying you, nothing tells
more fatally against you than the fact tnat, having doctors
among you who have told you the truth, you abide not in the
truth, but love the darkness rather than the light. You
have been taught by Vasquez that it is a Heathen, and not a
Christian opinion, to hold that we may knock down a man
for a blow on the cheek ; and that it is subversive both of
the gospel and of the decalogue to say that we may kill for
such a matter. The most profligate of men vnll acknow-
ledge as much. And yet you have allowed Lessius, Escobar,
and others, to decide, in the face of these well-known truths,
and in spite of all the laws of God against manslaughter, that
it is quite allowable to kill a man for a buffet !

What purpose, then, can it serve to set this passage of
Vasquez over against the sentiment of Lessius, unless you
mean to show wat, in the opinion of Vasquez, Lessius is a
''heathen" and a ^profligate?" and that, fathers, is more
than I durst have said myself. What else can be deduced
from it, than that Lessius *' subverts both the gospel and the
decalogue;" that, at the last day, Vasquez will condemn
Lessius on this point, as Lessius will condemn Vasquez on
another ; and that all your fathers wiU rise up in judgment
one against another, mutually condemning each other for
their deplorable outrages on the law of Jesus Christ ?

To this conclusion, then, reverend fathers, must we come
at length, that as your probabilism renders the good opinions

* Thia is a singular htct, and applies only to one of the Society's generals,
▼iz., Yitelleschi, who, in a circmar letter, addreraed, January 1617, to the
Company, much to his own honour, strongly recommended a purer morality,
and denounced probabilism. But, says Nicole, the Jesuits did not profit by
his good advice. (Nicole, iy., p. 83.) It is true, however, that tixe Jesuits,
during this centuiqr, had lost sight of the original strictness of their order,
and of all the ascetic rules of their founders, IgDatius and Aquavlva. ''The
spirit which once animated them had fidlen before the temptations of the
world, and their sole endeavour now was to make themselves necessary to
mankind, let the means be what they might." (Banks's Hist of the Popes,
Ui.,p.l39.) .^ B- X

262 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. XIH.

of some of your authors useless to the Church, and useful
only to your policy, they merely serve to betray, by their
contrariety, tne duplicity of your hearts. This you have
completely unfolded, by telling us, on the one hand, that
Yasquez and Suarez are agdnst homicide, and, on the other
hand, that many celebrat^ authors are for homicide ; thus
presenting two roads to our choice, and destroying the sim-
plicity of the Spirit of Gk>d, who denounces his anathema on
the deceitful and the double-hearted : " Vm duplici corde, et
ingredienti duaJbuB viisf — ^Wo be to the double hearts, and
the sinner that goeth two ways!" *

* Ecdesiastlcos (Apocrypha), ii. 12.

LET. ZIY.] ON MUBDEB. 253

LETTER XIV.

TO THE BBYEBEND FATHERS THE JESUITS.

IN WHICH THE MAXIMS OP THE JESUITS ON MURDER ARE RE-
FUTED FROM THE FATHERS — SOME OF THEIR CALUMNIES
ANSWERED — AND THEIR DOCTRINE COMPARED WITH THE
rOBMS OBSERVED IN CRIMINAL TRIALS.

October 23, 1656.

Reverend Fathers, — ^If I had merely to reply to the
three remaining charges on the subject of homicide, there
would be no need for a long discourse, and you will see them
refuted presently in a few words ; but as I think it of much
more importance to inspire the public with a horror at your
opinions on this subject, than to justify the fidelity of my
quotations^ I shall be obliged to devote the greater part of
this letter to the refutation of your maxims, to show how far
you have departed from the sentiments of the Church, and
even of nature itself. The permissions of murder, which
you have granted in such a variety of cases, render it very
apparent that you have so far forgotten the law of God, and
quenched the light of nature, as to require to be remanded
to the simplest principles of religion and of common sense.

What can be a plainer dictate of nature, than that " no
private individual has a right to take away the life of an-
other ? " "So well are we taught this of ourselves," says St
Chrysostom, " that Grod, in giving the commandment not to
kill, did not add as a reason that homicide was an evil ; be-
cause,'' says that father, "the law supposes that nature has
taught us that truth already." Accordingly, this command-
ment has been binding on men in all ages. The gospel has

B

264 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. XIV.

confirmed the requirement of the law ; and the decalogue
only renewed the command which man had received from
God before the law, in the person of Noah, from whom all
men are descended. On that renovation of the world, God
said to the patriarch : ^ At the hand of man, and at the hand
of every man's brother, will I require the life of raan. Who-
80 sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed ; for
man is made in the image of God." (Qen. ix. 5, 6). Thia
general prohibition deprives man of all power over the life
of man. And so exclusively has the Almighty reserved this
prerogative in his own hand, that, in accordance with Chris-
tianity, which is at utter variance here with the false maxims
of Paganism, man has no power even over his own life. But,
as it has seemed good to nis providence to take human so-
ciety under his protection, and to punish the evil-doers that
give it disturbance, he has himself established laws for de-
priving criminals of life ; and thus those executions which,
without his sanction, would be punishable outrages, become,
by virtue of his authority, whicn is the rule of justice, praise-
worthy penalties. St Augustine takes an admirable view of
this subject. <'God," he says, ^*has himself qualified this
general prohibition against manslaughter, both by the laws
which he has instituted for the capital punishment of male-
factors, and by the special orders whicn he has sometimes
issued to put to death certain individuals. And when death
is inflicted in such cases, it is not man that kills, but €k>d, of
whom man may be considered as only the instrument, or as
a sword in the hand of Him that wields it. But, these in-
stances excepted, whosoever kills incurs the g^lt of murder."*
Thus it appears, fathers, that the right of taking away the
life of man is the sole prerogative of God, and that, having
ordained laws for executing death on criminals, he has de-
puted kings or commonwealths as the depositaries of that
power. This truth St Paul teaches us, when, speaking of
the right which sovereigns possess over the lives of their
subjects, he deduces it from Heaven in these words : '* He
beareth not the sword in vain ; for he is the minister of God
to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil" (Rom. xiii. 4).
But as it is God who has put this power into their bands, so
he requires them to exercise it in the same manner as he does
himself; in other words, with perfect justice; according to
what St Paul observes in the same passage : ^ Rulers are not
a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou, then,

' De Civitat. Dei., Ub. L, c 28.

LET. XIV.] THE SCRIPTURE ON MURDER. 266

not be afraid of the power ? Do that which is good ; for he
IS the minister of God to thee for good." And this restric-
tion, so far from lowering their prerogative, on the contrary,
really enhances it ; for it is thus assimilated to that of God,
who has no power to do evil, but is all-powerfiil to do good;
and it is thus distinguished from that of devils, who are im-
potent in that which is good, and powerful only for evil.
There is this difference only to be observed betwixt the King
of heaven and earthly sovereigns, that God, being justice and
wisdom itself, may inflict death instantaneously on whomso-
ever and in whatsoever manner he pleases ; for, besides his
being the sovereign Lord of human life, it is certain that he
never takes it away either without cause or without judg-
ment, because he is as incapable of injustice as \^e is of error.
Eai*thly potentates, however, are not at liberty to act in this
manner ; for, though the ministers of God, still they are but
men, and not gods. They may be misguided by evil coun-
sels, irritated by false suspicions, or transported by passion ;
and hence they find themselves obliged to have recourse, in
their turn also, to human agency, and appoint magistrates in
their dominions, to whom they delegate their power, that the
authority which God has bestowed on them may be employed
solely for the purpose for which they received it.

I hope you understand, then, fathers, that to avoid the
crime of murder, we must act at once bv the authority of
God and according to the justice of Goa ; and that when
these two conditions are not combined, sin is contracted;
whether it be by taking away life with his authority, but
without his justice ; or by taking it away with justice, but
without his authority. IVom this indispensable connection
it follows, according to St Augustine, *' that he who, with-
out proper authority, kills a criminal, becomes a criminal
himself, chiefly for this reason, that he usurps an authority
which God has not g^ven him;" and on the other hand,
magistrates, though they possess this authority, are neverthe-
less chargeable with murder, if, contrary to the laws which
they are bound to follow, they inflict death on an innocent
man.

Such are the principles of public safetv and tranquillity,
which have been admitted at all times and in all places, and
on the basis of which all legislators, sacred and profane, from
the beginning of the world, have founded their laws. Even
Heathens have never ventured to make an exception to
this rule, unless in cases where there was no other way of

256 PROYINOIAL LETTEBS. [LET. ZIY.

escaping the loss of chastity or life, when they conceived, as
Cicero tells us, *' that the law itself seemed to put its wea-
pons into the hands of those who were placed in such an
emergency."

But with this single exception, which has nothing to do
with my present purpose, that such a law was ever enacted,
authorising or tolerating, as you have done, the practice of
putting a man to death to atone for an insult, or to avoid the
loss of honour or property, where life is not in danger at the
same time ; that, fathers, is what I deny was ever done, even
by infidels. They have, on the contrary, most expressly for-
bidden the practice. The law of the Twelve Tables of Kome
bore ** that it is unlawful to kill a robber in the day time,
when he does not defend himself with arms ;*' which, mdeed,
had been prohibited long before in the 22d chapter of Exo-
dus. And the law Furem, in the Lex CometiOt which is
borrowed from Ulpian, forbids the killing of robbers even bj
night, if they do not put us in danger of our lives.*

Tell us now, fathers, what authority you have to permit
what all laws, human as well as divine, have forbidden?
AVho, pray, gave Lessius a right to use the following lan-
gui^e r *< The Book of Exodus forbids the kilHng of thieves
by day, when they do not employ arms in their defence; and
in a court of justice, punishment is inflicted on those who
kill under these circumstances. In conscieneBf however, no
blame can be attached to this practice, when a person is not
sure of being able otherwise to recover hb stolen goods, or
entertains a doubt on the subject, as Sotus expresses it; for
he is not obliged to run the risk of losing any part of his
{•roperty mer^y to save the life of a robber. The same pri-
vilege extends even to clergymen." t Such extraordinary
assurance! The law of Moses punishes those who kill a
thief when he does not threaten our lives ; and the law of the
Gospel, according to you, absolves them ! What, fathers !
has Jesus Christ come to destroy the law, and not to fulfil
it ? " The civil judge," says Lessius, " would inflict punbh-
inent on those who kill under such circumstances ; out no
blame can be attached to the deed in conscience." Must we
conclude, then, that the morality of Jesus Christ is more san-
guinary, and less the enemy of murder, than that of Pagans,
from whom our judges have borrowed their civil laws which
condemn that crime ? Do Christians make more account of
the good things of this earth, and less account of human life,

* S«e Cuj^.s, Ut. dig. de Just, et Jur. ad 1. 3. t L- 2, c 9, xl 06^ 72.

I.ET. XIV.] LESSIUS ON MURDER. 257

than infidels and idolaters ? On what principle do you pro-
ceed, fathers ? Assuredly not upon any law that ever was
enacted either hy God or man — on nothing, indeed, hut this
extraordinary reasoning : " The laws," say you, " permit us
to defend ourselves against rohbers, and to repel force by
force ; self-defence, therefore, being permitted, it follows that
murder, without which self-defence is often impracticable,
may be considered as permitted also."

It is false to say, that because self-defence is allowed, mur-
der may be allowed also. This barbarous method of self-
vindication lies at the root of all your errors, and has been
justly stigmatized by the Faculty of Lou vain, in their cen-
sure of the doctrine of your friend Father Lamy, as " a bloody
defence — defensio occisiva" I maintain that the laws recog-
nise such a wide difference between murder and self-defence,
that in those very cases in which the latter is sanctioned,
they have made a provision against murder, when the person
is in no danger of nis life. Bead the words as they occur in
the same passage of Cujas : " It is lawful to repulse the per-
son who comes to invade our property; but we are not per-
mitted to kill him" And again : ** If any should threaten to
strike us, and not to deprive us of life, it is quite allowable to
repulse him ; but it is against all law to put him to death,"

Who, then, has g^ven you a right to say, as Molina, Regi-
nald, Filiutius, Escobar, Lessius, and others among you,
have said, " that it is lawful to kill the man who offers to
strike us a blow?" or, *Uhat it is lawful to take the life of
one who means to insult us, by the common consent of all
the casuists," as Lessius says. By what authority do you,
who are mere private individuals, confer upon other private
individuals, not excepting clergymen, this right of killing
and slaying ? And how dare you usurp the power of li^
and death, which belongs essentially to none but God, and
which is the most glorious badge of sovereign authority ?
These are the points that demand explanation ; and yet you
conceive that you have furnished a triumphant reply to the
whole, by simply remarking, in your thirteenth Imposture,
" that the value for which Molina permits us to kill a thief,
who flies without having done us any violence, is not so small
as I have said, and that it must be a much larger sum than
six ducats!" How extremely silly! Pray, fathers, where
would you have the price to be fixed ? At fifteen or sixteen
ducats? Do not suppose that this will produce any abate-
ment in my accusations. At all events, you cannot make it

258 PROVINCIAL LETTEBS. [lET. IIT.

exceed the value of a horse; for Lessius is clearly of opinion^
<< that we may lawfully kill the thief that runs off with our
horse/'* But I must tell you, moreover, that I was perfectly
correct when I said that Molina estimates the valne of the
ihieTs life at six ducats ; and, if you will not take it upon my
word, we shall refer it to an umpire, to whom yon cannot
object. The person whom I fix upon for this office is yonr
own Father Keginald, who, in his explanation of the same
passage of Molina (I. 28, n. 68), declares that " Molina there
DETERMINES the sum for which it is not allowable to kill at
three, or four, or five ducats." And thus, fathers, I shall
have Reginald in addition to Molina, to bear me oat.

It will be equally easy for me to refute your fourteenth
Imposture, touching Molina's permission to ^ kill a thief who
offers to rob us of a crown." This palpable fact is attested
by Escobar, who tells us ^ that Molina has regularly deter-
mined the sum for which it is lawful to take away life, at one
crown."t And all you have to lay to my charge in the four-
teenth Imposture is, that I have suppressed the last words of
this passage, namely, ** that in this matter everyone ought
to study the moderation of a just self-defence." Why do you
not complain that Escobar has also omitted to mention these
words? But how little tact you have about you! You
imagine that nobody understands what you mean by self-
defence. Don't we know that it is to employ " a bloody de-
fence f" You would persuade us that Molina meant to sav,
that if a person, in defending his crown-piece, finds himself
in danger of his life, he is then at liberty to kill his assailant,
in self-preservation. If that were true, fathers, why should
Molina say in the same place, that ^' in this matter he was of
a contrary judgment from Garrer and Bald," who gave per-
mission to kill in self-preservation ? I repeat, therefore, that
his plain meaning is, that provided the person can save his
crown without killing the thief, he ought not to kill him ;
but that, if he cannot secure his object without shedding
blood, even though he should run no risk of his own life, as
in the case of the robber being unarmed, he is permitted to
take up arms and kill the man, in order to save his crown;
and in so doing, according to him, the person does not trans-
gress " the moderation of a just defence." To show you that
1 am in the right, just allow him to explain himself: ** One
does not exceed the moderation of a iust defence," says he,
** when he takes up arms against a thief who has none, or
* L. IL c. 0, n. 94. t Treat. 1. examp. 7, n. 44.

LET. XIY.] ' LAYMAN ON HVBDEB. 259

employs weapons which give him the advantage over his
assailant. I know there are some who are of a contrary
judgment ; but I do not approve of their opinion, even in the
external bar."*

Thus it is unquestionable that your authors have g^ven
permission to kill in defence of property and honour, though
life should be perfectly free from danger. And it is upon
the same principle that they authorise duelling, as I have
shown by a great variety of passages from their writings, to
which you have made no reply. Tou have animadverted in
your writings only on a single passage taken from Father
Layman, who sanctions the above practice, " when otherwise
a person would be in danger of sacrificing his fortune or his
honour \** and here you accuse me with having suppressed
what he adds — ** that such a case happens very rarely. ' You
astonish me, fathers ; these are really curious impostures you
charge me withal ! You talk as if the question were, Whether
that is a rare case ? when the real question is, If, in such a
case, duelling is lawful ? These are two very different ques-
tions. Layman, in the quality of a casuist, ought to judge
whether duelling is lawful in the case supposed ; and he de-
clares that it is. We can judge without his assistance,
whether the case be a rare one ; and we can tell him that it
is a very ordinary one. Or, if you prefer the testimony of
your good friend Diana, he will tell you that " the case is ex-
ceedingly comraon."t But be it rare or not, and let it be
grant€^ that Layman follows in this the example of Navarre
— a circumstance on which you lay so much stress — is it not
shameful that he should consent to such an opinion as that,
to preserve a false honour, it is lawful in conscience to accept
of a challenge, in the face of the edicts of all Christian states,
and of aJl the canons of the Church ; while, in support of
these diabolical maxims, you can produce neither laws, nor
canons, nor authorities from Scripture, or from the fathers,
nor the example of a single saint, nor, in short, any thing but
the following impious syllogism : '* Honour is more than life :
it is allowable to kill in defence of life ; therefore, it is allow-
able to kill in defence of honour ! " What, fathers ! because
the depravity of men disposes them to prefer that factitious

* In casuistical divinity, a distinction is drawn between the internal and
the external bar, or forum, as it is called. The internal bar, or the forum
ixrfi, is the tribunal of conscience, or the jadnnent formed of actions aooord-
ing to the law of God. The external bar, or the forwm «oM, is that of human
society, or the Judgment of actions in the estimMion of men, and according to
ciril law. (VoetTDisp. Theol.. iv., 62.)

t Part 6, tr. 19, misc. 2, resol. 99.

260 raoviNOiAL lettsbs. [lbt. st.

honour before the life which Qod hath given them to be de-
voted to his service, must they be permitted to murder one
another for its preservation? To love that honour more
than life, is in itself a heinous eyU ; and yet this vidoui pas-
sion, which, when proposed as the end of our oonducty is
cnougrh to tarnish the best of actions, is considered by jon
capable of sanctifying the most criminal of them!

What a subversion of all principle is here ! And who does
not see to what atrocious excesses it may lead? It is obvioosy
indeed, that it will ultimately lead to the commission of mur-
der for the most trifling things imaginable, when one's ho-
nour is considered to be stakecl for their preservation — mur-
der, I venture to say, even^br an apple! Here you might
complain of me, fathers, for drawing sanguinary inferenoes
from your doctrine with a malicious intent, were I not for-
tunately supported by the authority of the grave Lessias,
who makes tne following observation, in number 68: ^It is
not allowable to take life for an article of small value, such
as for a crown or Jbr an apple— atU pro oomo— unless it
would be deemed dishonourable to lose it. In this case^ one
may recover the article, and even, if necessary, kiU the aggree-
8or : for this is not so much defending one's proper^, as re-
trieving one's honour." This is plain speaking ; and, just to
crown your doctrine with a maxim which includes all the
rest, allow me to quote the following from Father Hereau,
who has taken it from Lessius : ** The right of self-defence
extends to whatever is necessary to protect ourselves from
all injury."

What strange consequences does this inhuman ]>rin(»ple
involve! and now imperative is the obligation laid upon
all, and especially upon those in public stations^ to set their
face against it I Not the general good alone^ but thdr own
, personal interest, should engage them to look well to it;
for the casuists of your school whom I have cited in my
letters, extend their permissions to kill far enough to reaen
even them. Factious men, who dread the punishment of
their outrages, which never appear to them in a criminal
light, easily persuade themselves that they are the victims
of violent oppression, and will be led to bdieve, at the
same time, <<that the right of self-defence extends to what-
ever is necessary to protect themselves from all injury."
And thus, relieved from contending against the checks of
conscience, which stifle the greater number of crimes at
their birth, their only anxiety will be to surmount external
obstacles.

hET, XIV.] THE CHURCH ON MUBDBB. 261

I shall say no more on this subject, fathers ; nor shall I
dwell on the other murders, still more odious and important
, to governments, which you sanction, and of which Lessius,
in common with many others of your authors, treats in the
most unreserved manner.* It were to be wished that these
horrible maxims had never found their way out of hell ; and
that the devil, who is their real author, had never discovered
men sufficiently devoted to his will to publish them among
Ohristians.t

From all that I have hitherto said, it is easy to judge what
a contrariety there is betwixt the licentiousness of your opi-
nions and the severity of civil laws, not even excepting those
of Heathens. How much more apparent must the contrast
be with the ecclesiastical laws, which must be incomparably
more holy than any other, since it is the Church alone that
knows and possesses the true holiness! Accordingly, the
<:haste spouse of the Son of God, who, in imitation of her
heavenly husband, can shed her own blood for others, but
never the blood of others for herself, entertuns a horror at
the crime of murder altogether singular, and proportioned
to the peculiar illumination which God has vouchsafed to
bestow upon her. She views man, not simply as man, but as
the image of the God whom she adores. She feels for every
one of the race a holy respect, which imparts to him, in her
eyes, a venerable character, as redeemed by an infinite price,
to be made the temple of the living God. And therefore
she considers the death of a man, slain without the authority
of his Maker, not as murder only, but as sacrilege, by whicn
she is deprived of one of her members ; for whether he be
a believer or an unbeliever, she uniformly looks upon him,
if not as one, at least as capable of becoming one, of her own
children.}

* Doubts 4th and 10th.

t " I am happy," says Nioole, in a note, " to ttate here an Important fitct,
which confers the highest honour on M. Amauld. A work of oon8idenU>le
size was sent him before going to press, in which there was a collection of
all the authorities, firom Jesuit writers, pr^udicial to the life of kings and
princes. That celebrated doctor prevented the impression of the work, on
the ground that it was dangerous to the life of monarchs and to the honour
of the Jesuits that it should ever see the light ; and, in fiEtct, the work was
never printed. Some other writer, less delicate than M. Amauld, has pub-
lished something similar, in a work entitled Eecueil de Piece* ooncerftant
V Histoire de la Oompagnie de Jesus, par le P. JouvencU*

X Surely Pascal is here describing the Church of Christ as she ought to be,
and not the Church of Rome as she existed in 1656^ at the very time when
she was urging, sanctioning, and exulting in the bloody barbarities perpe-
trated in her name on the poor Piedmontese ; or the same Church as she ap-
peared in 1572, when one ofher popes ordered a medal to be struck in honour
of the Bartholomew massacre, with the inscription, "Strages Huffonokntim

2^ PEOrnrCIAL LETTEAB. [let. ZIT.

Sach, Withers, are the holj reasons whidi, erer nnoe the time
that God became man for the redemption of mflo, have ren-
dered their condition an object of such cooaeqiieiioe to the
Chorcb, that she oniformly punishes the crime of homicide^
not only as destmctiFe to them, bnt as one of the groasest
oatniges that can possibly be perpetrated against Ood. lo
proof of this I shall qnote some examples, not from the
idea that all the severities to which I refer oog^t to be kept
up (for I am aware that the Church may alter the arranffe-
TRent of such exterior discipline), bnt to demonstrate her
immutable spirit upon this subject. The penances which she
ordains for murder may differ according to the diversity
of the times, bnt no change of time can ever effiect an
alteration on the horror with which Ae reguds the crime
itself.

For a long time the Church refused to be leconcQed, till
the very hour of death, to those who had been guilty of wil-
ful murder, as those are to whom you give your sanction.
The celebrated Council of Ancyra adjudged them to penance
during their whole lifetime ; and, subsequently, the Church
deemed it an act of sufficient indul^nce to reduce that
term to a great many years. But, still more effectually to
deter Christians from wilful murder, she has visited with
most severe punishment even those acts which have been
committed through inadvertence, as may be seen in St Basi^ in
St Gregory of Nyssen, and in the decretals of Popes Za-
chary and Alexander U. The canons quoted by Isaac, Inshop
of Langres (tr. 2, 13), ** ordain seven years of penance for
having killed another in self-defence.'' And we nnd St Hil-
debert, bishop of Mans, replying to Yves de Chartres, ** that
he was right in interdictmg for life a priest who had, in
self-defence, killed a robber with a stone.

After this, you cannot have the assurance to persist in
saying that your decisions are agreeable to the spirit or the
canons of the Church. I defy you to show one of them
that permits us to kill solely in defence of our property (for
I speak not of cases in which one may be called upon to de-
fend his life — 86 suaqtte liberando); your own authors, and,
among the rest. Father Lamy, confess that no such canon
can be found. •* There is no authority," he says, " human
or divine^ which gives an express permission to kill a robber

—The nuMsaore of the Hufonots ! " Of what Church, if not of the Bomidt.
oiui it be said with truth, that " in her was found the blood of prophets, Mid
of saint*, and of all that were slain on the earth ? "

LET. Xiy.] CHRISTIAN LEGISLATION. 265

■ ■ i— — ^»— — 1— »»»— fc— — «— »«»»»-^— — — ^»^— — ^t.^

aaIio makes no resistance.'' And yet this is what you permit
most expressly. I defy you to show one of them that per-
mits us to kill in vindication of honour, for a buffet, for an
affront, or for a slander. I defy you to show one of them
that permits the killing of witnesses, judges, or magistrates^
whatever injustice we may apprehend from them. The
spirit of the Church is diametrically opposite to these sedi-
tious maxims, opening the door to insurrections to which
the mob is naturally prone enough already. She has in-
variably taught her children that they ought not to render
evil for evil ; that they ought not to give place to wrath ;
to make no resistance to violence ; to give unto every one
his due — ^honour, tribute, submission; to obey magistrates
and superiors, even though they should be unjust, because
we ougnt always to respect in tnem the power of that God
who has placed them over us. She forbids them still more
strongly than is done by the civil law, to take justice into
their own hands ; and it is in her spirit that Christian kings
decline doing so in cases of high treason, and remit the
criminals charged with this g^ave offence into the hands of
the judges, that they may be punished according to the
laws and the forms of justice ; which in this matter exhibit
a contrast to your mode of management, so striking and
complete that it may well malte you blush for shame.

As my discourse has taken this turn, I beg you to follow
the comparison which I shall now draw between the mode
in which you would dispose of your enemies, and that in
which the judges of the land dispose of criminals. Every
body knows, fathers, that no private individual has a right
to demand the death of another individual ; and that though
a man should have ruined us, maimed our body, burnt our
house, murdered our father, and was prepared, moreover, to
assassinate ourselves, or ruin our character, our private de-
mand for the death of that person would not be listened to
in a court of justice. Public officers have been appointed
for that purpose, who make the demand in the name of the
king, or rather, I should say, in the name of God. Now, do
you conceive, fathers, that Christian legislators have esta-
blished this regulation out of mere show and grimace ? Is
it not evident that their object was to harmonize the laws
of the State with those of the Church, and thus prevent the
external practice of justice from clashing with the sentimenta
which all Christians are bound to cherish in their hearts ?
It is easy to see how this, which forms the oommfiucement of

'2G4 PROVINOIAL LETTERS. [liBT. XIT.

A civil process, must stag^ger you ; its subsequent procedure
absolutely overwhelms you.

Suppose, then, that these official persons have demanded
the death of the man who has committed all the aboYe-men*
tioned crimes, what is to be done next ? Will they instantly
plunge a dagger in hb breast ? No, fathers ; the ufe of man
is too important to be thus disposed of; they go to work with
more decency; the laws have committed it, not to all sorts of
persons, but exclusively to the judges, whose probity and
competency have been duly tried. And is one jndge aoffi-
•cient to condemn a man to death ? No ; it recjoires BBwen
at the very least ; and of these seven there must not be one
who has been injured by the criminal, lest his judgment
should be warped or corrupted by passion. Ton are awarey
also, that, the more effectually to secure the purity of thdr
minds, they devote the hours of the morning to these fono-
tions. Such is the care taken to prepare them £bir the
solemn act of devoting a fellow-creature to death ; in per-
forming which they occupy the place of God, whose ministers
they are, appointed to condemn such only as have incurred
his condemnation.

For the same reason, to act as faithful administratCM^ of
the divine power of taking away human life, they are bound
to form their judgment solely according to the depositions
of the witnesses, and according to all the other forms pre-
scribed to them ; afler which they can pronounce conscien-
tiously only according to law, and can judffe worthy of death
those only whom the law condemns to that penalty. And
then, fathers, if the command of God obliges them to deliyer
over to punishment the bodies of the unhappy culprits^ the
same divine statute binds them to look after the interests of
their guilty souls, and binds them the more to this just be-
cause they are guilty ; so that they are not delivered up to
execution till after they have been afforded the means of pro-
viding for their consciences.* All this is quite fair and inno-
cent ; and yet, such is the abhorrence of the Church to blood,
that she judges those to be incapable of ministering at her
altars who have borne any share in passing or executing a
sentence of death, accompanied though it be with these rdi-
gious circumstances ; from all which we may easily conceive
what idea the Church entertains of murder.

Such, then, being the manner in which human Ufe is dUs-

* Providing for fheir oonsciejuxs—th&t is, for the relief of oonsdeoofl^ bj

confessing to a priest, and receiving absolution.

LET. II v.] JESUITICAL LEGISLATION. 265

posed of by the legal forms of justice, let us now see bow you
dispose of it. According to your modern system of legisla-
tion, there is but one Judge, and that judge is no other than
the offended party. He is at once the judge, the party, and
the executioner. He himself demands ^om himself the
death of his enemy ; he condemns him, he executes him on
the spot ; and, without the least respect either for the soul
or the body of his brother, he murders and damns him for
whom Jesus Christ died ; and all this for the sake of avoiding
a blow on the cheek, or a slander, or an offensive word, or
some other offence of a similar nature, for which, if a magis-
trate, in the exercise of legitimate authority, were condemn-
ing any to die, he would himself be impeached ; for, in such
cases, the laws are very far indeed from condemning any to
death. In one word, to crown the whole of this extrava-
gance, the person who kills his neighbour in this way, with-
out authority, and in the face of all law, contracts no sin and
commits no disorder, though he should be religious, and even
a priest ! Where are we, fathers ? Are these really reli-
gious and priests, who talk in this manner ? Are they Chris-
tians? are they Turks? are they men? or are they demons?
And are these ^ the mysteries revealed by the Lamb to his
Society }" or are they not rather abominations suggested by
the Dragon to those who take part with him ?

To come to the point with vou, fathers, whom do you wish
to be taken for ? — for the children of the Gospel, or for the
enemies of the Gospel? You must be ranged either on the
one side or on the other ; for there is no m^ium here. '* He
that is not with Jesus Christ is against him." Into these
two classes all mankind are divided. There are, according to
St Augustine, two peoples and two worlds, scattered abroad
over the earth. There is the world of the children of God,
who form one body, of which Jesus Christ is the king and
the head ; and there is the world at enmity with God, of
which the devil is the king and the head. Hence Jesus
Christ is called the King and God of the world, because he
has every where his subjects and worshippers : and hence the
devil is idso termed in Scripture the prince of this world, and
the god of this world, because be has every where his agents
and nis slaves. Jesus Christ has imposed upon the Church,
which is his empire, such laws as he, in his eternal wisdom,
was pleased to ordain; and the devil has imposed on the
world, which is his kingdom, such laws as he chose to estab-
lish. Jesus Christ has associated honour with suffering ; the

2G6 PROVINOIAL LETTERS. [lET. XIY.

devily with not suffering. Jesus Christ has told those who
are smitten on the one check to turn the other also ; and the
devil has told those who are threatened with a huffet, to kill
Uie man that would do them such an injury. Jesus Christ
pronounces those happy who share in his reproach : and the
devil declares those to be unhappy who lie under ignominy.
Jesus Christ says, Wo unto you when men shall speak wdl
of you! and the devil says, Wo unto those of whom the
world does not speak with esteem 1

Judge then, fathers, to which of these kingdoms you be-
long. You have heard the language of the city of peaces the
mystical Jerusalem ; and you have heard the hmguage of the
city of confusion, which Scripture terms "the spiritual
Sodom." Which of these two languages do you undmtand?
which of them do you speak ? Those who are on the side
of Jesus Christ have, as St Paul teaches us, the same mind
which was also in him ; and those who are the children of
the devil — ex patre diabolo — who has been a murderer from
the beginning, according to the saying of Jesus Christ, fol-
low the maxims of the devil. Let us hear, therefore, the
language of your school. I put this question to your doc-
tors: When a person has given me a blow on uie cheeky
ought I rather to submit to the injury than kill the offender?
or may I not kill the man in order to escape the affront?
Kill him by all means — it is quite lawful ! ezdaim, in one
breath, Lessius, Molina, Escobar, Reginald, FiliuUus, Bal»
delle, and other Jesuits. Is that the language of Jesus
Christ ? One question more : Should I lose my honour by
tolerating a box on the ear, without killing the person that
gave it ? " Can there be a doubt," cries Escobar, ** that so
long as a man suffers another to live who has given him a
buffet, that man remains without honour?" Yes, fathers,
without that honour which the devil transfuses, from his own
proud spirit, into that of his proud children. This is the
honour which has ever been the idol of worldly-minded men.
For the preservation of this false glory, of wnich the god of
this world is the appropriate dispenser, they sacrifice thear
lives, by yielding to the madness of duelling ; their honour,
by exposing themselves to ignominious punishments; and
their salvation, by involving themselves in the peril of damni^
tion — a peril which, according to the canons of the Church,
deprives them even of Christian burial. We have reason to
thank God, however, for having enlightened the mind of our
monarch with ideas much purer than those of your theology

LET. XIV.] JESUITICAL LKGISLATIOK. 267

His edicts, bearing so severely on this sabject, have not made
duelling a crime — they only panish the crime which is inse-
parable from duelling. He has checked, by the dread of his
rigid justice, those who were not restrained by the fear of
the justice of God; and his piety has taught nim that the
honour of Christians consists in their observance of the man-
dates of Heaven and the rules of Christianity, and not in the
pursuit of that phantom which, airy and unsubstantial as it
is, you hold to oe a legitimate apology for murder. Your
murderous decisions being thus universally detested, it is
highly advisable that you should now change your senti-
ments, if not from religious principle, at least from motives
of policy. Prevent, fathers, by a spontaneous condemnation
of these inhuman dogmas, the melancholy consequences
which may result from them, and for which you will be re-
sponsible. And to impress your minds with a deeper horror
at homicide, remember that the first crime of fallen man was
a murder, committed on the person of the first holy man ;
that the greatest crime was a murder, perpetrated on the
person of the King of saints ; and that of all crimes, murder
is the only one which involves in a common ruin the Church
and the State, nature and religion.

I have just seen the answer of your apologist to my
Thirteenth Letter; but if he has nothing better to produce
in the shape of a reply to that letter, which obviates the
greater part of his objections, he will not deserve a rejoinder.
I am sorry to see him perpetually digressing from his subjecty
to indulge in rancorous abuse both of the living and the dead.
But, in order to gain some credit to the stories with which

Jrou have furnished him, you should not have made him puh-
icly disavow a fact so notorious as that of the buffet of Com^
piegne.* Certain it is, fathers, from the deposition of the
injured party, that he received upon his cheek a blow from
the hand of a Jesuit ; and all that your friends have been
able to do for you has been to raise a doubt whether he re-
ceived the blow with the back or the palm of the hand, and
to discuss the question whether a stroke on the cheek with
the back of the hand can be properly denominated a bufifet.
I know not to what tribunal it belongs to decide this point ;
but shall content myself, in the meantime, with believing
that it was, to say the very least, a probable bufet. This
gets me off with a safe conscience.

«SecLetturxiiL,p.24l'

268 PROriNCIAL LETTERS. [liBT. XT.

LETTEB XV.*

TO THE BEYBRBin) FATHERS THE JESUITS.

SHOWING THAT THE JESUITS FIRST EXCLUDE OALUMNT FBOU
THEIR CATALOGUE OF CRIMES, AND THEN EMFLOT IT IN
DENOUNCING THEIR OPPONENTS.

November 25, 1656.

Reyerend Fathers, — ^As your scurrilities are daily in-
creasing, and as you are employing them in the merciless
abuse of all pious persons opposed to your errors, I feel my-
self obliged, for their sake and that of the Ohurch, to bring
out that grand secret of your policy, which I promised to
disclose some time ago, in order that all may know, through
means of your own maxims, what degree of credit is doe to
your calumnious accusations.

I am aware that those who are not very well acquainted
with you, are at a great loss what to think on this subject^
as they find themselves under the painful necessity, either of
believing the incredible crimes with which you cnarge your
opponents, or (what is equally incredible^ of setting you
down as slanderers. " Indeed !" they exclaim, " were ihese
things not true, would clergymen publish them to the world
— would they debauch their consciences and damn them«
selves by venting such libels ?'' Such is their way of reason-
ing, and thus it is that the palpable proof of your falsifiou
tions coming into collision with their opinion of your honesty,
their minds liang in a state of suspense between the evidence

* Pascal was assisted by M. Arnaold in the preparation of this letter.
(Nicole, iv., 162.)

LET. XT.] ON OALUMMT. 2C9

of truth which they cantiot gainsay, and the demands oi
charity which they would not yiolate. It follows, that since
their high esteem for you is the only thing that prevents
them from discrediting your calunmies, if we can succeed in
convincing them that you have quite a different idea of
calumny from that which they suppose you to have, and
that you actually helieve that in hlackemngand defaming
your adversaries you are» working out your own salvation,
there can he little question that the weight of truth will
determine them immediately to pay no regard to your accusa-
tions. This, fathers, will he the subject of the present letter.

My design is, not simply to show that your writings are
full of calumnies : I mean to go a step beyond this. It is
quite possible for « person to say a number of false things,
believing them to be true ; but the character of a liar im-
plies the intention to teQ lies. Now I undertake to prove,
fathers, that it is your deliberate intention to tell lies, and
that it is both knowingly and purposely that you load your
opponents with crimes of which you know them to be inno-
cent, because you believe that you may do so without falling
from a state of grace. Though you doubtless know this
point of your morality as well as I do, this need not prevent
me from telling you about it; which I shall do, were it for
no other purpose than to convince all men of its existence,
by showing tnem that I can maintain it to your face, while
you cannot have the assurance to disavow it, without con-
firming, by that very disavowal, the charge which I bring
against you.

The doctrine to which I allude is so common in your
schools, that you have maintained it not only in your books,
but, such is your assurance, even in your public theses ; as,
for example, in those delivered at Louvain in the ^ear 1645,
where it occurs in the following terms : ** What is it but a
venial sin to calumniate and forge false accusations to ruin
the credit of those who speak evil of us?"* So settled is
this point among you, that if any one dare to oppose it, you
treat him as a Uockhead and an arrant fool. Such was the
way in which you treated Father Quiroga, the German
Capuchin, when he was so unfortunate as to impugn the
doctrine. The poor man was instantlv attacked by Dicas-
tille, one of your fraternity; and the following is a specimen
of the manner in which he manages the dispute : ^ A certain

* Qaidni non nisi veniale tit, detra^entes aatoritatem magnam, tibi
noxiam, fUso crimine elidere !

B

270 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. ZY.

meful-visaged, bare-footed, cowled fnaT-~cucuUatus gymno-
poda — whom I do not choose to name, had the bol<me88 to
denoance this opinion, among some women and ignorant
people, and to afiege that it was scandalous and pemicioiia^
against all good manners, hostile to the peace of states and
societies, and, in short, contrary to the judgment not onlj d
all Catholic doctors, but of all true Catholics. But in oppo-
sition to him I maintained, as I do still, that calumny, wnen
employed against a calumniator, though it should be a false-
hood, is not a mortal sin, either against justice or charity;
and to prove the point, I referred him to the whole body of
our fathers, and to whole universities, exclusively composed
of them, whom I had consulted on the subject ; and among
others the reverend Father John Gans, confessor to the
emperor ; the reverend Father Daniel Bastele^ oonfessor to
the archduke Leopold ; Father Henri, who was preceptor to
these two princes ; all the public and ordinary professors of
the university of Vienna" (wholly composed of Jesaits); '^aD
the professors of the university of Gratz" (all Jesaits); '^all
the professors of the university of Prague'' (where Jesuits
are the masters) ; — '* from all of whom I have in my posses-
sion approbations of my opinions, written and signea with
their own hands ; besides having on my side the reverend
Father Panalossa, a Jesuit, preacher to the emperor and the
king of Spain ; Father Pilliceroli, a Jesuit, and many others^
who had all judged this opinion to be probable^ bmre our
dispute be^an."* You perceive, fathers, ihat there are few
of your opmions which you have been at more pains to esti^
blish than the present, as indeed there were few of them of
which you stood more in need. For this reason, doabtlesi^
you have authenticated it so well, that the casubts appeal to
it as an indubitable principle. ** There can be no doubt/*
says Caramuel, '^ that it is a probable opinion that we OOD-
tract no mortal sin by calumniating another, in order to
preserve our own reputation. For it is maintained by more
than twenty grave doctors, by Gaspard Hurtado, and Dicas-
tille, Jesuits, &c. ; so that, were this doctrine not probable^
it would be difficult to find any one such in the whole com-
pass of theology."

Wretched indeed must that theology be, and rotten to the
very core, which, unless it has been decided to be safe in oon-
science to defame our neighbour's character to preserve our •
own, can hardly boast of a safe decision on any other point I
* Dicastillos, De JoBt, L S^ tr. S^ disp. 12; n. 404^

LET.. XV.] ON CALUMNY. 271

How natural is it, fathers, that those who hold this princi-
ple should occasionally put it in practice! The corrupt pro-
pensity of mankind leans so strongly in that direction of itself,
that the ohstacle of conscience once heing removed, it would
he folly to suppose that it will not hurst forth with all its
native impetuosity. If you desire an example of this, Cara-
muel will furnish you with one that occurs in the same pas-
sage : " This maxim of Father Dicastille," he says, " having
been communicated by a German Countess to the daughters
of the empress, the belief thus impressed on their minds
that calumny was only a venial sin, gave rise in the course
of a few days to such an immense number of false and scan-
dalous tales, that the whole court was thrown into a flame and
filled with alarm. It is easy, indeed, to conceive what a fine
use these ladies would make of the new light they had ac-
quired. Matters proceeded to such a length, that it was
found necessary to call in the assistance of a worthy Capu-
chin friar, a man of exemplary life, called Father Quiroga *'
(the very man whom Dicastille rails at so bitterly), ** who
assured them that the maxim was most pernicious, especially
among women, and was at the greatest pains to prevail upon
the empress to abolish the practice of it entirely." We
have no reason, therefore, to be surprised at the bad effects
of this doctrine ; on the contrary, the wonder would be, if
it had failed to produce them. Self-love is always ready
enough to whisper in our ear, when we are attacked, that
we suffer wrongfully; and more particularly in your case,
fathers, whom vanity has blinded so egregiously as to make
you believe that to wound the honour of your Society, is to
wound that of the Church. There would have been good
ground to look on it as something miraculous, if you had
not reduced this maxim to practice. Those who do not
know you are ready to say, How could these good fathers
slander their enemies, when they cannot do so but at the
expense of their own salvation? But if they knew you
better, the question would be, How could these good fa-
thers forego the advantage of decrying their enemies, when
the^ have it in their power to do so without hazarding
their salvation? Let none, therefore, henceforth be sur-
prised to find the Jesuits odumniators; they can exercise
this vocation with a safe conscience; there is no obstacle
in heaven or on earth to prevent them. In virtue of the
credit they have acquired m the world, they can practise
defamation without dreading the justice of mortals ; and.

272 FBOYINCIAL LETTERS. [LBT. XT.

on the strength of their self-assumed authority in matters
of conscience, they have invented maxims for enabling them
to do it without any fear of the justice of Heaven.

This, fathers, is the fertile source of your base slanddrs.
On this principle was Father Brisacier led to scatter his
calumnies about him, with such zeal as to draw down on
his head the censure of the late Archbishop of Paris. Ac-
tuated by the same motives. Father D'Anjou launched his
invectives from the pulpit of the Church dT St Benedict in
Paris, on the 8th of March 1655, against those honourable
gentlemen who were intrusted with the charitable fimds
raised for the poor of Picardy and Champagne, to which
they themselves had largely contributed ; and uttering a base
falsehood, calculated (if your slanders had been oonddered
worthv of any credit) to dry up the stream of that charity,
he had the assurance to say, *^ That he knew, from good au-
thority, that certain persons had diverted that money firom its
proper use, to employ it against the Church and the State ;"
a calumny which obliged the curate of the parish* who is a
doctor of the Sorbonne, to mount the pulpit the very next
day, in order to give it the lie direct. To the same sooroe
must be traced the conduct of your Father Crasset* who
preached calumny at such a furious rate in Orleans that the
archbishop of that place was under the necessity of interdict-
ing him as a public slanderer. In his mandate, dated the
9th of September last, his Lordship declares, ** That whereas
he had been informed that brother John Crasset, priest of
the Society of Jesus, had delivered from the pulpit a dis-
course filled with falsehoods and calumnies against the eccle-
siastics of this citj, falsely and maliciously charging them
with maintaining impious and heretical propositions, such as.
That the commandments of God are impracticable; that in-
ternal grace b irresistible ; that Jesus Christ did not die fbr
all men ; and others of a similar kind, condemned by Inno-
cent X. : he therefore hereby interdicts the aforesaid Crasset
from preaching in his diocese, and forbids all his people to
hear him, on pain of mortal disobedience.^' The above^ fiu
thers, is your ordinary accusation, and generally among the
first that you bring agiunst all whom it is jour interest to
denounce. And mthough you should find it as impossible
to substantiate the charge against any of them, as Father
Crasset did in the case of the clergy of Orleans, your peace
of conscience will not be in the least disturbed on that ac-
count ; for you believe that this mode of calumniating your

LET. XV,] AN ODD HEBEST. 273

adversaries is permitted you with such certidnty, that you
have no scruple to avow it in the most public manner, and
in the face of a whole city.

A remarkable proof of this may be seen in the dispute
you had with M. Puys, curate of St Nisier at Lyons ; and
the story exhibits so complete an illustration of your spirit,
that I shall take the liberty of relating some of its leading
circumstances. Ton know, fathers, that, in the year 1649,
M. Puys translated into French an excellent book, written
by another Capuchin friar, *' On the duty which Christians
owe to their own parishes, against those that would lead
them away from them," without using a single invective^ or
pointing to any monk or any order of monks in particular.
Your fathers, however, were pleased to put the cap on their
own heads ; and without any respect to an aged pastor, a
judge in the Primacy of France, and a man who was held
in the highest esteem by the whole city. Father Alby wrote
a furious tract against him, which you sold in your own
church upon Assumption-day ; in which tract, among other
charges, he accused him of having ** made himself scanda-
lous by his gallantries," described hun as suspected of having
no religion, as a heretic, excommunicated, and, in short,
worthy of the stake. To this M. Puys made a reply ; and
Father Alby, in a second publication, supported his former
allegations. Now, fathers, is it not a clear point, either that
you were calumniators, or that you believed all that you al-
leged against that worthy priest to be true ; and that, on
this latter assumption, it became you to see him purified
from all these abominations before judging him worthy of
your friendship ? Let us see, then, what happened at the
accommodation of the dispute, which took place in the pre-
sence of a great number of the principal inhabitants of the
town, whose names will be found at the foot of the page,*
exactly as they are set down in the instrument drawn up on
the 25th of September 1650. Before all these witnesses M.
Puys made a declaration, which was neither more nor less
than this: ''That what he had written was not directed

* M. De Tille, Yicar-General of M., the Cardinal of Lyons; M. Scarron,
Canon and Curate of St Paul; M. Margat. Chanter; BIM. Bouvand, Seve,
Aubert, and Dervien, Canons ot St Nisier ; M. De Ga^, President of the Trea-
surers of France ; M. Groslier, Prorost of the Merchants ; M. De Fl^chre, Pre*
sident and Lieutenant-General; MM. De Boissart, De St Romain, and De
Bartoly, gentlemen ; M. Bouraeois, the King's First Advocate in the Coort of
the Treasurers of France; MM. De Cotton, father and son; and M. Boniel ;
who have all signed the ori|pnal copy of the Declaration, along with M. Puys
and Father Alby.

274 PROYINOIAL LETTEB8. [LBT. XT.

against the fathers of the Society of Jesus ; that he had
spoken in general of those who alienated the faithful from
their parishes, without meaning hy that to attack the So-
ciety ; and that, so far from having such an intenUon, the
Society was the ohject of his esteem and affection.'' By Tirtue
of these words alone, without either retractation or absolution^
M. Puys recovered, all at once, from his apostasy, his scan-
dals, and his excommunication ; and Father Alby immediately
thereafter addressed him in the following express terms:
'' Sir, it was in consequence of my believing that you meant
to attack the Society to which I have the honour to belong
that I was induced to take up the pen in its defence ; and 1
considered that the mode of reply which I adopted was iuek
08 1 was permitted to employ. But, on a better understand-
ing of your intention, I am now free to declare^ that ikere u
nothing in your work to prevent me from r^arding you as
a man of genius, enlightened in judgment, profound and or^
thodox in doctrine, and irreproachable in manners ; in one
word, as a pastor worthy of your Church. It is with much
pleasure that I make this declaration, and I beg these gentle-
men to remember what I have now said."

They do remember it, fathers ; and, allow me to add, they
were more scandalized by the reconciliation than by the quar-
rel. For who can fail to admire this speech of Father Alby?
He does not say that he retracts, in consequence of having
learnt that a change had taken place on the futh and man-
ners of M. Puys, but solely because, having understood thai
he had no intention of attacking your Society, there was no-
thing further to prevent him from regarding the author as
a good Catholic. He did not then believe him to be actually
a heretic ! And vet, after having, contrary to his oonvictiony
accused him of tnis crime, he will not acknowledge he was
in the wrong, but has the hardihood to say, that he consider-
ed the method he adopted to be *' such as he was permitt4d
to employ I"

What can you possibly mean, fathers, by so publidy aTOW-
ing the fact, that you measure the faith and the virtue of
men only by the sentiments they entertain towards your
Society? Had you no apprehension of making yourselves
pass, by your own acknowledgment, as a band of swindlers
and slanderers ? What ! must the same individual, without
undergoing any personal transformation, but simply accord-
ing as you judge him to have honoured or assailed your com-
munity, be " pious" or ** impious," ** irreproachable" or "

LST. XY.j AN ODD HERESY. 275

communicated," " a pastor worthy of the Church" or ** wor-
thy of the stake;" in short, *« a Catholic" or " a heretic ?"
To attack your Society and to be a heretic, are, therefore, in
your language, convertible terms! An odd sort of heresy
this, fathers ! And so it would appear, that when we see
many good Catholics branded, in your writings, by the name
of heretics, it means nothing more than that you think they
attack you! It is well, fathers, that we understand this
strange dialect, according to which there can be no doubt
that I must be a great heretic. It is in this sense, then, that
you so often favour me with this appellation I Your sole
reason for cutting me off from the Cnurch is, because you
conceive that my letters have done you harm ; and, accord-
ingly, all that I have to do, in order to become a good
Catholic, is either to approve of your extravagant mortdity,
or to convince you that my sole aim in exposing it has been
your advantage. The former I could not do without re-
nouncing every sentiment of pietv that I ever possessed ; and
the latter you will be slow to acknowledge till you are well
cured of your errors. Thus am I involved in heresy, after a
very singular fashion ; for, the purity of my faith bemg of no
avail for my exculpation, I have no means of escaping from
the charge, except either by turning traitor to my own con-
science, or by reforming yours. Till one or other of these
events happen, I must remain a reprobate and a slanderer ;
and, let me be ever so faithful in my citations from your
writings, you will go about crying everywhere, " What an
instrument of the devil must that man be, to impute to us
things of which there is not the least mark or vestige to be
found in our books I" And, by doing so, you will only be
acting in conformity with your fixed maxim and your ordi-
nary practice ; to such latitude does your privilege of telling
lies extend ! Allow me to give you an example of this, which
I select on purpose ; it will give me an opportunity of reply-
ing, at the same time, to your ninth Imposture ; for, in truths
they only deserve to be refuted in passing.

About ten or twelve years ago, you were accused of hold-
mg that maxim of Father Bauny, ^ that it is permissible to
sedc directly (primo et per se) a proximate occasion of sin,
for the spiritual or temporal good of ourselves or our neigh-
bour*' (tr. 4, q. 14) ; as an example of which he observes :
** It is allowable to visit infamous places, for the purpose of
converting abandoned females, even although the practice
hhould be very likely to lead into sin, as in the case of or.

27C PBOYINOIAL LBTTBBS. [LET. XT.

who has found from experience that he has freqnentlj jielded
to their temptations." What answer did your father Cans-
sin give to this charge in the year 1644 ? ^ Just let any one
look at the passage in Father Baany/' said he ; " let him per-
use the page, the margins, the preface, the appendix, in shorty
the whole book from beginning to end, ana ne wiU not dis-
cover the slightest vestige of such a sentenoe^ which could
only enter into the mind of a man totally devoid of oonsoi-
ence, and could hardly have been fora:ed by any other bnt
an instrument of Satan."* Father Fintereau talks in the
same style : ** That man must be lost to all conscience who
would teach so detestable a doctrine ; but he must be worse
than a devil who attributes it to Father Bauny. Beader»
there is not a single trace or vestige of it in the whole of his
book."t Who would not believe that persons talking in this
tone have good reason to complain, and that Father Banny
has, in very deed, been misrepresented ? Have yon ever as-
serted any thing against me in stronger terms ? And, after
such a solemn asseveration, that ^ were was not it singis
trace or vestige of it in the whole book," who would imagine
that the passage is to be found, word for word, in the ^aoe
referred to I

Truly, fathers, if this be the means of securing yonr rcm-
tation, so long as you remain unanswered, it is also^ nnrar-
tunately, the means of destroying it for ever, so soon as an
answer makes its appearance. For so certain is it that yon
told a lie at the penod before mentioned, that yon make no
scruple of acknowledging, in your apologies of the present
day, that the maxim in question is to be found in tne rerj
place which had been quoted ; and what is most extraordi-
nary, the same maxim which, twelve years ago, was ** detest-
able," has now become so innocent, that in yonr ninth Im-
posture (p. 10), you accuse me of " ignorance and malice, in
quarrelling with Father Bauny for an opinion which has not
been rejected in the SchooL What an advantage it is^
fathers, to have to do with people that deal in contradic-
tions I I need not the aid of any but yourselves to confhte
you; for I have only two things to show — ^first. That the
maxim in dispute is a worthless one ; and, secon^y, Tl^iA it
belongs to Father Bauny ; and I can prove both by your own
confession. In 1644, you confessed that it was ^ detestable;^
und, in 1656, you avow that it is Father Baun/s. Thb

• Apology
t First Pa

for the Sodetj of Jesos, p. 128.
'arty p. 24.

LET. XT.] BAREFACED DEIOALS. 277

double acknowledgment completely justifies me, fathers ; but
it does more, it discovers the spirit of your policy. For, tell
roe, pray, what is the end you propose to yourselves in your
writings? Is it to speak with honesty? No, fathers; that
cannot be, since your defences destroy each other. !b it to
follow the truth of the faith ? As little can this be your end;
since, according to your own showing, you authorize a ** de-
testable" maxim. But, be it observed, that while you said
the maxim was '^ detestable," you denied, at the same time,
that it was the property of Father Bauny, and so he was
innocent ; and when you now acknowledge it to be his, you
maintain, at the same time, that it is a good maxim, and so
he is innocent still. The innocence of tnis monk, therefore,
being the only thing common to your two answers, it is ob-
vious that this was the sole end which you aimed at in put-
ting them forth ; and that, when you say of one and the same
maxim, that it is in a certain book, and that it is not ; that it
is a good maxim, and that it is a bad one ; your sole object is
to whitewash some one or other of your Aratemity ; judging
in the matter, not according to the truth, which never
changes, but according to your own interest, which is vary-
ing every hour. Can I say more than this? Tou perceive
that it amounts to a demonstration ; but it is far from being
a singular instance ; and, to omit a multitude of examples of
the same thing, I believe you vnll be contented with me
quoting only one more.

Tou have been charged, at different times, with another
proposition of the same Father Bauny, namely, ** That abso-
lution ought to be neither denied nor deferred in the case of
those who live in the habits of an against the laws of God,
of nature, and of the Church, although there should be no
apparent prospect of future amendment— «tn emendationis
fuiurce &pe8 nulla appareat."* Now, with regard to this
maxim, I beg you to tell me, fathers, which of uie apologies
that have been made for it is most toyour liking ; wheuier
that of Father Pintereau or that of Father Brisacier, both
of your Society, who have defended Father Bauny, in your
two different modes— the one by condemning the proposition,
but disavowing it to be Father Bauny's ; the other by allow-
ing it to be Father Bauny's, but vindicating the proposition ?
Listen, then, to their respective deliverances. Here comes
that of Father Pintereau (p. 8) : ** I know not what can be
called a traii^;ression of all the bounds of modesty, a step

• Tr. 4» q. 22, p. 100.

f

i

278 PBOYINOIAL LETTERS. [LB!

, ^ bejond all ordinary impudence, if the imputation to I

' Bauny of so damnable a doctrine is not worthy of that

nation. Judge, reader, of the baseness of that calumn

^i I what sort of creatures the Jesuits have to deal with

-': !. , say, if the author of so foul a slander does not desenre

.- . i regarded from henceforth as the interpreter of the :

; l» of lies." Now for Father Brisacier : "It is true, I

f Bauny says what you allege." (That gives the lie

to Father Fintereau, plain enough.) <'But," adds 1

, . defence of Father Bauny, '*if you, who find so much

! with this sentiment, wait, when a penitent lies at jo\l

f \ till his g^uardian angel find security for his rights m t

.; } heritance of heayen ; if you wait till God the Father

) ', br himsc^ that David told a lie^ when he said, by the

' r ' uhost, that ' all men are hars,' fallible and perfidious ;

., i ' wait till the penitent be no longer a liar, no long^ fi^

changeable, no longer a sinner, like other men ; if you
I say, till then, you will never apply the blood of
Christ to a angle soul."*
What do you really think now, fathers, of these in
V and extravagant expressions? According to th^n,

would wait " till there be some hope of amendment" i
ners before granting their absolution, we must wait
Qod the Father swear by himself" that they will ner
into sin any more ! Wliat, fathers ! is no distinction
made between Jiope a/nd eertaxntyf How injurious if
the grace of Jesus Christ, to maintain that it is so imp
for Christians ever to escape from crimes against the L
God, nature^ and the Church, that such a thing cam
looked for, without supposing ^ that the Holy Ghoi
told a lie ;" and if absolution is not granted to thos
... ^ give no hope of amendment, the blood of Jesus Chrii

be useless, forsooth, and ** would never be applied to a
soull" To what a sad pass have you come^ fathers, I
extravagant desire of upholding the glory of your an
when you can find only two ways of justifying tnem — I
posture or by impietj; and when the most innocent m(
vtrhich you can extricate yourselves, is by the barefao
nial of facts as patent as the light of day!

This may perhaps account for your having recou:
frequently to that very convenient practice. iBut thi
not complete the sum of your accomplishments in the
self-defence. To render your opponents odious, yoi

•Part 4, p. 21.

LBT. XT.] FLAT OOMTBADICnONS. 279

had recourse to the forging of documents, such as the Letter
of a Miniiter to M, Amauldf which jou circulated through
all Paris, to induce the belief that the work on Frequent
Communion, which had been approved by so many bbhops
and doctors, but which, to say the truth, was rather against
you, had been concocted through secret intelligence with the
ministers of Charenton.* At other times, you attribute to
your adversaries writings full of impiety, such as the Circfular
Letter of the JcmsenisiSf the absurd style of which renders
the fraud too gross to be swallowed, and palpably betrays the
malice of your brother Meynier, who has the impudence to
make use of it for supporting his foulest slanders. Some-\
times, again, you will quote books which were never in ez>l
istence, such as The Constitution of the Holy Sacrament,
from which you extract passages, fabricated at pleasure, and
calculated to make the hair on the heads of certain good
simple people, who have no idea of the effrontery with which
you can invent and propagate falsehoods, actually to bristle
with horror. There is not, indeed, a single species of calumny
which you have not put into requisition : nor is it possible
that the maxim which excuses the vice could have been
lodged in the hands of better practitioners.

But those sorts of slander to which we have adverted are
rather too easily discredited; and, accordingly, you have
others of a more subtle character, in which you abstain from
specifying particulars, in order to preclude your opponents
from getting any hold, or finding any means of reply; as,
for example, when Father Brisacier says that ^' his enemies
are guiltv of abominable crimes, which he does not choose to
mention. Would you not think it were impossible to prove
a charge so vague as this to be a calumny? An able man,
however, has found out the secret of it ; and it is a Capuchin
again, fathers. Tou are imlucky in Capuchins, as times now
^ ; and I foresee that you may be equaOy so some other time
m Benedictines. The name of this Capuchin is Father
Valerien, of the house of the Counts of Magnis. Tou shall
hear, by this brief narrative, how he answered your calum-

• That ia, the Protestant ministers of Paris, who are called " the ministers
of Charenton," fjrom the Tillage of that name near Paris, where they had
their place of worship. The Protestants of Paris were forbidden to hold
meetings in the city, and were compelled to travel fire leagaes to a place of
worship, till 1006, when they were gracioutly permitted to erect their temple
at caiarenton, about two leagues from the cify! (Benoit, Hist, de I'Edit de
Nantes, L 435.) Bven there they were harassed by the bigoted populace, and
at last " the ministers of Charenton," among whom were the famous Claude
and Dailld, were driren fJrom their homes^ their chapel burnt to the ground,
and their people scattered abroad.

2S0 rSOYIXCIAL LETTEBS. [iST. XT.

Dies. He had happily sacceeded in cooTerting Prince Bmesty
the Landgrave of Hesse-Rheinsfelt.* Tour fathers, how-
eyer, seized, as it would appear, with some chagrin at seeing
a Eovereign prince converted without thdr having had anj
hand in it, immediately wrote a hook against the friar (for
good men are everywhere the ohjects of your persecution)^ in
which, hy fidsifying one of his passages, they ascribed to 1dm
an heretical doctrine. They also circulated a letter against
him, in which ther siud: ^ Ah, we have such things to dis-
close" (without telling what), ** as will gall you to ueqtdck!
If you don't take care, we shall be forced to inform the pope
and the cardinals about it." This manoeuvre was pretlr well
executed ; and I doubt not, fathers, but you may speak m the
«ame style of me ; but take warning from the manner in
^hich the friar answered it in his book, printed last year at
Prague (p. 112, &c.): "What shall I do," he sayi^ «to
counteract these vague and indefinite insinuations? How is
it possible to refute charges which have never been q[>ecified?
Here, however, is my plan. I declare^ loudly and (^looly, to
those who have threatened me, that if they do not disooTor
these crimes before the whole world, they are notorious slaa-
defers and most impudent liars. Gome forth, then, mine
accusers! and proclaim your lies upon the house tops, instead
of telling them in the ear, and keeping yourselves out of
harm's way by telling them in the ear. Some may think
this a scandalous way of managing the dispute. It was
scandalous, I grant, to impute to me such a crime as heresy,
and to fix upon me the suspicion of many others bendes ;
but, by asserting my innocence, I am merely applying the
proper remedy to the scandal already in existenoe.

Truly, fathers, never were your reverences more roughly
handled, and never was a poor man more completdy vindi-
cated. Since you have made no reply to such it peremptory
challenge, it must be concluded that you are unable to dis-
cover l£e slightest shadow of criminality against him. Yoa
have had very awkward scrapes to get through oocanonally;
but experience has made you nothing the wiser. For, some
time fliler this happened, you attacked the same individual
in a similar strain, upon another subject ; and he defended
bimself after the same spirited manner, as follows : ** Tbas
class of men, who have become an intolerable nuisance to the
whole of Christendom, aspire, under the pretext of good

* In the first edition itwM laid to be ttieLandgmTft of Damutadtsl^ais-
tikc, as bhowa in a note by Nicole.

LET. XY.] MENTIBIS IMPUDENTISSDIE. 281

works, to dignities and domination, by perverting to their
own ends almost all laws, human and divme, natural and re«
vealed. They gain over to their side, by their doctrine, by
the force of fear, or of persuasion, the great ones of the
earth, whose authority they abuse for the purpose of accom-
plishing their detestable intrigues. Meanwhile their enter-
prises, criminal as they are, are neither punished nor sup-
pressed ; on the contrary, they are rewarded ; and the villains
go about them with as little fear or remorse as if they were
doing God service. Everybody is aware of the fact I have
now stated ; everybody speaks of it with execration ; but few
are found capable of opposing a despotism so powerful. This,
however, is what I have done. I have already curbed their
insolence ; and, by the same means, I shall curb it again. I
declare, then, that the^ are most impudefnt liars — ^icentibis
iMPUDENTissiME. 1£ the charges they have brought against
:ne be true, let them prove it; otherwise they stand convicted
of falsehood, aggravated by the gprossest effirontery. Their
procedure in this case will show who has the right upon his
side. I desire all men to take particular observation of it ;
and beg to remark, in the meantime, that this precious cabal,
who will not suffer the most trifling charge which they can
possibly repel to lie upon them, m3ie a show of enduring,
with great patience^ those from which they cannot vindicate
themselves, and conceal, under a counterfeit virtue, their
real impotency. My object, therefore, in provoking their
modesty, by thb sharp retort, is to let the plainest people
understand, that if my enemies hold their peace, theur ror-
bearance must be ascribed, not to the meekness of their
natures, but to the power of a guilty conscience.'' He con-
cludes with the following sentence : ** These gentry, whose
historjf is well known through the whole world, are so glar-
ingly iniquitous in their measures, and have become so inso-
lent in their impunity, that if I did not detest their conduct,
and publicly express my detestation, not merely for my own
vindication, but to guard the simple against its seducing in-
fluence, I must have renounced my allegiance to Jesus Christ
and his Church/'

Beverend fathers, here is no room for tergiversation. Pass
you must for convicted slanderers, and take comfort in your
old maxim, that calumny is no crime. This honest friar has
discovered the secret of shutting your mouths ; and it must
be employed on all occasions when you accuse people with-
out proof. We have only to reply to each slander as it

282 PROVINCIAL LETTKBS. [lET. XT.

appears, in the words of the Capuchin, ^Mentiris impudent
tistime — ^Tou are most impudent liars/' For instance^ what
better answer does Father Brisacier deserve when he speaks
of his opponents as *' the gates of hell ; the devil's bbhops ;
persons devoid of faith, hope, and charity ; the builders of
Antichrist's exchequer ;" adding, '* I say this of them, not by
way of insult, but from deep conviction of its truth ?" Who
would be at the pains to demonstrate that he is not ^ a gate
of hell," and that he has no ooncem with ** the building up
tf Antichrist's exchequer?"

In like manner, what reply is due to all the vague speeches
of this sort which are to be found in your books and adver«
tisements on my letters ; such as the following, for example;
** That restitutions have been converted to private uses, and
thereby creditors have been reduced to beffgary ; that bags
of money have been oiFered to learned moxuu, who declined
the bribe ; that benefices are conferred for the purpose of
disseminating heresies against the faith ; that penuoners are
kept in the houses of the most eminent churchmen, and in
the courts of sovereigns ; that I also am a pensioner of Port-
Royal ; and that, ben)re writing my letters, I had oompoBed
romancea" — I, who never read one in my life, and who do
not know so much as the names of those which your apolo-
gist has published? What can be said in reply to all this,
fathers, if you do not mention the names of all these persons
you refer to, their words, the time, and the placoi except—
Mentiris impudentissimef Tou should either be nlent alto-
gether, or relate and prove all the circumstances, as I did
when I told you the anecdotes of Father Alby and John
D'Alba. Otherwise, you will hurt none but yourselves.
Tour numerous fables might, perhaps, have done you some
service, before your principles were known ; but now that the
whole has been brought to light, when yon begin to whisper
as usual, '* A man of honour, who desired us to conceal nis
name, hsis told us some horrible stories of these same people"
— ^you will be cut short at once, and reminded of the Capu-
chin's Mentiris imjyadentissime. Too long by far have you
been permitted to deceive the world, *and to aouse the confi-
dence which men were ready to place in your calumnious
accusations. It is high time to redeem the reputation of the
multitudes whom you have defamed. For what innocence
can be so generally known, as not to suffer some contamina-
tion £r'>m the danng aspersions of a body of men scattered
ver the face of the earth, and who, under religious habits*

LET. XY.] MENTimS IMPUDENTI8SIMB. 28S

conceal minds so utterly irreligious, that they perpetrate
crimes like calumny, not in opposition to, hut in strict ac-
cordance with, their moral maxims? I cannot, therefore,
be blamed for destroying the credit which might have been
awarded you; seeing it must be allowed to be a much greater
act of justice to restore to the victims of your obloquy the
character which they did not deserve to lose, than to leave
you in the possession of a reputation for sincerity which yon
do not deserve to enjoy. And as the one could not be done
without the other, how important was it to show you up to
the world as you really are ! In this letter I have commenced
the exhibition ; but it will require some time to complete it.
Published it shall be, fathers, and all your policy will be in-
adequate to save you from the disgrace; for the efforts
which you may mske to avert the blow, will only serve to
convince the most obtuse observers that yon were terrified
out of your wits, and that, your consciences anticipating the
charges I had to bring against you, you have put every oar
in the water to prevent the discovery.

984 PBOYINCIAL LBTTEB8. [LST. XTI.

LETTER XVL*

TO THE BBYEBBND FATHEBS, THE IBBUIIB.

SHAMEFUL CALUMNIES OF THE JESUITS AaAnVBT FIOVS
GLEBOTMBN AND INNOOENT NUNS.

Deember 4» 1656.

Reverend Fathebs, — ^I now come to consider the rest of
j'oar calumnies, and shall be^n with those contained in jour
advertisements, which remam to be noticed. As all yoar
other writings, however, are equally well stocked with dan*
der, they wifl furnish me with abundant materials for enter
taining you on this topic as long as I may judge expedient
In the mrst place, then, with regard to the iMi^ which you
have propagated in aU your writings against the Bishop of
Ypres,t I beg leave to say, in one word, that you have mali-
ciously wrested the meaning of some ambiguous expressions
in one of his letters, which beine capable of a g^ood sense,
ought, according to the spirit of the (gospel, to have been
taken in good part, and could only be taken otherwise ac-
cording to the spirit of your Society. For example, wbai
he says to a friend, ^^ Give yourself no concern about your
nephew ; I will furnish him with what he requires from the
money that lies in my hands," what reason have yon to in-
terpret this to mean, that he would take that money without
restoring it, and not that he merely advanced it with the

* The plan and materiaLi of (his letter were flimlshed by H Nic<dieu
(Nicole, iv., 243.)

t Jansenios, or Jansen, who was made Bidiop of Ypres in 1688. The letters
lo which Pascal refers were printed at that time by the Jesaists themielTeSy
who retained the originals in their possession; these having oome into tbtir
hands in consequence of the arrest of M. De SI Ojnsx,

liET. XVI.] CALUMNIES AGAINST PORT-BOTAL. 285

pui;po8e of replacinpf it? And how extremely imprudent
was it for you to furnish a refutation of your own lie, by
printing the other letters of the Bishop of Ypres, which
olearly show that, in point of fact, it was merely advanced
money which he was bound to refund. This appears, to
your confusion, from the following terms in the letter to
which you give the date of July 30, 1619: " Be not uneasy
about the money advanced; he shall want for nothing so
long as he is here ; " and likewise from another, dated Janu-
ary 6, 1620, where he says : " You are in too great haste ;
when the account shall become due, I have no fear but that
the little credit which 1 have in this place will bring me as
much money as I require."

If you are convicted slanderers on this subject, you are
no less so in regard to the ridiculous story about the charity-
box of St Merri. What advantage, pray, can you hope to
derive from the accusation which one of your worthy friends
has trumped up against that ecclesuistic ? Are we to con-
clude that a man is guilty, because he is accused ? No, fa-
thers. Men of piety, like him, may expect to be perpetually
accused, so long as the world contains calumniators like you.
We must judge of him, therefore, not from the accusation,
but from the sentence ; and the sentence pronounced on the
case (February 23, 1656) justifies him completely. More-
over, the person who had the temerity to involve himself
in that iniquitous process, was disavowed by hb colleagues,
and himself compelled to retract his charge. And as to
what you allege, in the same place, about *' that famous di-
rector, who pocketed at once nine hundred thousand livres,**
I need only refer you to Messieurs the cures of St Roch and
St Paul, who will bear witness, before the whole city of
Paris, to his perfect disinterestedness in the affair, and to
your inexcusable malice in that piece of imposition.

Enough, however, for such paltry falsities. These are but
the first raw attempts of your novices, and not the master-
strokes of your "grand-professed."* To these do I now
come, fathers ; I approach a calumny which is certainly one
of the basest that ever issued from the spirit of your Society.
I refer to the insufferable audacity with which you have im-
puted to holy nuns, and to their directors, the charge of
** disbelieving the mystery of transubstantiation, and the real

* The Jesuits must pass through a long " novitiate," before they are ad*
mitted as " proftaeed," or elevated to the rank of " grahdoprofessed," members
of the Society.

I

286 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. I

I *

presence of Jesus Christ in the eacharist." Here

IS a slander worthy of yourselves. Here is a cri

]j ) God alone is capable of punishing, as you alone ^

" { able of committing it. To endure it with patien

I require a humility as profound as that of thes

Wniated ladies ; to give credit to it would demand
5 of wickedness equal to that of their wretched i

I

: I'

I propose not, therefore, to vindicate them; the;
yond suspicion. Had they stood in need of defe
might have commanded abler advocates than i

: , i \ . object in what I say here is to show, not their ii

■ ' ^' j but your malignity. All that I intend is to n

I , ashamed of yourselves, and to let the whole worl

f : stand that, after this, there is nothing of which yo

V I f capable.

You will not fail, I am certain, notwithstanding
' to maintain that I belong to Port-Royal ; for this I

j . thing you say of every one who combats your err

it were only at Port-Royal that persons could be f(
r ' sessed of sufficient zeal to defend, against your att

purity of Christian morality. I know, fathers, the
the pious recluses who have retired to that monas
how much the Church is indebted to their truly i
edifying labours. I know the excellence of their
their learning. For though I have never had the 1
belong to their establishment, as you, without kno^
or what I am, would fain have it believed, neverthc
know some of them, and honour the virtue of them
Gud has not confined within the precincts of that a
whom he means to raise up in opposition to your cor
I hope, with his assistance, fathers, to make you i
^ and if he vouchsafe to sustain me in the design h<

me to form, of employing in his service all the rei
have received from him, I shall speak to you in sucl
as will, perhaps, give you reason to regret that you
had to do with a man of Port-Royal. And to con^
of this, I must tell you that, while those whom you
suited with this base slander content themselves wi
up their groans to Heaven to obtain your forgivenei
outrage, I feel myself obliged, not being in the least
by your malice, to make you blush in the face of t
Church, and so bring you to that wholesome shame
the Scripture speaks — almost the only remedy for a
of heart like yuurs : *' Imple/acies eoru^ ignominu

LET. XVI.] PORT-ROT ALISTS NO HERETICS. 287

rent nomen tuwm, Domine — Fill their faces with shame^ that
they may seek thy name, O Lord." *

A stop must he put to this insolence, which does not spare
the most sacred retreats. For who can be safe after a ca-
lumny of this nature ? For shame, fathers I to publish in
Paris such a scandalous book, with the name of your Father
Meynier on its front, and under this infamous title, " Port-
Royal and Geneva iu concert against the most holy Sacra-
ment of the Altar ;" in which you accuse of this apostasy, not
only Monsieur the Abbe of St Cyran, and M. Arnauld, but
also Mother Agnes, his sister, and all the nuns of that monas-
tery, alleging that '* their faith, in regard to the eucharist is
as suspicious as that of M. Arnauld," whom you maintain to
be " a downright Calvinist." + I here ask the whole world
if there be any class of persons within the pale of the Church,
on whom you could have advanced such an abominable charge
with less semblance of truth. For tell me, fathers, if these
nuns, and their directors, had been " in concert with Geneva
against the most holy sacrament of the altar" (the very
thought of which is shocking), how they should have come
to select as the principal object of their piety, that very sa-
crament which they held in abomination ? How should they
have assumed the habit of the holy sacrament ? taken the
name of the Daughters of the Holy Sacrament? called their
church the Church of the Holy Sacrament? How should
they have requested and obtuned from Rome the confirmation
of that institution, and the right of saying every Thursday
the office of the holy sacrament, in which the faith of the
Church is so perfectly expressed, if they had conspired with
Geneva to banish that faith from the Church ? Why should
they have bound themselves, by a particular devotion, also
sanctioned by the Pope, to have some of their sisterhood,
night and day without intermission, in presence of the sacred
host, to compensate, by their perpetuad adorations towards
that perpetual sacrifice, for the impiety of the heresy that
aims at its annihilation ? Tell me, fathers, if you can, why
of all the mysteries of our religion, they should have passed
by those in which they believed, to fix upon that in which
they believed not ? and how they should have devoted them-
selves, so fully and entirely, to that mystery of our faith, if
they took it, as the heretics do, for the mystery of iniquity?
And what answer do you give to these clear evidences, em-
bodied not in words only, but in actions ; and not in some
• Pg. LuuiiL 10. t ^- 9% ^

283 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [lET. IVI.

particular acr.ions, but in the whole tenor of a life expressly
dedicated to the adoration of Jesus Christ, dwelling on our
altars ? What answer, again, do you g^ve to the books which
you ascribe to Port-Royal, all of which are full of the most
precise terms employed by the fathers and the councils to
mark the essence of that mystery ? It is at once ridiculous
and disgusting to hear you replying to these, as you have
done throughout your libel. M. Arnauld, say you, talks yerj
well about transubstantiation ; but he understands, perhapsy
only *' a significative transubstantiation." True, he professes
to believe in " the real presence ;" who can tell, however, but
he means nothing more than '* a true and real f^re ?" How
now, fathers ! whom, pray, will you not make pass for a CSal-
vinist whenever you choose, if you are to be allowed the
liberty of pervertmg the most canonical and sacred expres-
sions by the wicked subtleties of your modern equivocations?
Who ever thought of using any other terms than those in
question, especiadly in simple discourses of devotion, where do
controversies are handled ? And yet the love and the reve-
rence in which they hold this sacred mystery have induced
them to give it sucn a prominence in all their writings^ chat
I defy you, fathers, witn all your cunning, to detect m them
either the least appearance of ambiguity, or the slightest
correspondence with the sentiments of Geneva.

Every body knows, fatliers, that the essence of the Gknevaa
heresy consists, as it does according to your own showing, in
their believing that Jesus Christ is not included (mfermi) in
this sacrament; that it is impossible he can be in many places
at once ; that he is, properly speaking, only in heaven, and
that it is as there alone that he ought to be adored, and not
on the altar ; that the substance of the bread remains ; that
the body of Jesus Christ does not enter into the mouth or
the stomach ; that he can only be eaten by faith, and acoord-
ingly wicked men do not eat him at all; and tliat the mass
is not a sacrifice, but an abomination.* Let us now hesTf

* It is hardly necessary to observe, that in the first |nrt of this jitiBMiga Uis
Protestant faith on the Supper is not fairly represented, ^e reformers did
not deuy that Christ was reaUy present in that sacrament, ^ey held ttttt
he was present spiritually, though not corporeally. Some of them <
themselves strongly in opposition to those who spoke of the Sappor u.
or bare sign. Calvin says : ' There are two things in the sacrament-
real symiKjls, by which things invisible are proposed to the senses; and fti
tual truth, which is represented and sealed by the symbols. In the —
of the Supper, Christ is truly exiiibited to as, and therefore his b.
blood." (Ins^v lib. iv., cap. 17, 11.) " The body of Christ," savs Peter :

iLoc. Com., iv., 10), "is not <u&stonftaZ2y present any where Imt in h
do not, however, deny that his true body and true blooi], whioh wers <

LET. r\n.] PORT-BOTALISTS NO HERETICS. 289

then, in what way " Port-Royal is in concert with Geneva."
In the writings of the former we read, to your confusion, the
following statements : That " the flesh and blood of Jesus
Christ are contained under the species of bread and wine;"*
that " the Holy of Holies is present in the sanctuary, and that
there he ought to be adored ; "t that " Jesus Christ dwells in
the sinners who communicate, by the real and veritable
presence of his body in their stomach, although not by the
presence of his Spirit in their hearts ;"$ that " the dead ashes
of the bodies of tne saints derive their principal dignity from
that seed of life which they retain from the touch of the im-
mortal and vivifying flesh of Jesus Christ ;"J that ** it is not
owing to any natural power but to the almighty power of
God, to whom nothing is impossible, that the body of Jesus
Christ is comprehended under the host, and under the small-
est portion of every host ;"|| that " the divine virtue is present
to produce the effect which the words of consecration sig-
nify ;"^ that " Jesus Christ, while he is lowered (rabaisse),
and hidden upon the altar, is, at the same time, elevated in
his glory ; that he subsists, of himself and by his own ordi-
nary power, in divers places at the same time — in the midst
of the Church triumphant, and in the midst of the Church
militant and travelling ;"** that " the sacramental species re-
main suspended, and subsist extraordinarily, without being
upheld by any subject ; and that the body of Jesus Christ is
also suspended under the species, and that it does not depend
upon these, as substances depend upon accidents ;" tt that
*■' the substance of the bread is changed, the immutable acci-
dents remaining the same ;*'tt that " Jesus Christ reposes in
the eucbarist with the same glory that he has in heaven ;"§§
that '* his glorious humanity resides in the tabernacles of the
Church, under the species of bread, which forms its visible
covering ; and that, knowing the grossness of our natures, he
conducts us to the adoration of his divinity, which is present
in all places, by the adoring of his humanity, which is present

for hnman redemption on the cross, are niriiuattf iMurtaken of bj beUerrers
in the holy Supper.** This is the genenu sentiment -* VnUMUti divines.
(De Moor, in Biarck. Oompend. TkeoL, jp. t., 07tf, Ae.) ! iiiiiti>"**mt oten--'
of the passages certoinly represent the Protestint lUtli , -^ *** .*—'-«.
of the whole Church, until corrupted hj th« P^pMjf iA l

* Second letter of M. Amanld, p. 960.

X Frequent Oommunion, Sd part^ dk U. BoUriK-
breast or stomach, in opposition to oomt— Um lieftrt m

i Ibid.,lstpBrt,ch.4Q. | IheoiQi. liBi» 1

**De La Suspension, Rais. 2L

tt Hours of Uie Holy Sacramenl^ In Froit.

|i Letters of M.de St. QyiaD,lQau !.» let 8L

290 PROVINCIAL LETTEnS. [lET. XVl,

in a particular place ;"* that ** we receive the body of Jesns
Christ upon the tongue, which is sanctified by its divine
touch ;"t " that it enters into the mouth of the priest '"t that
*' although Jesus Christ has made himself accessible in the
holy sacrament, by an act of his love and graciousness, he
preserves, nevertheless, in that ordinance, his inaccessibility,
&s an inseparable condition of his divine nature ; because, al-
though the body alone and the blood alone are there^ by vir«
tue of the words, vt verhorum^ as the schoolmen say, his
whole divinity may, notwithstanding, be there also, as well
as his whole humanity, by a necessary conjunction."} In fine^
that '* the eucharist is at the same time sacrament and sacri-
fice ;"|| and that *' although this sacrifice is a commemoration
of that of the cross, yet there is this difference between them,
that the sacrifice of the mass is offered for the Church only,
and for the faithful in her communion ; whereas that of the
cross has been offered for all the world, as the Scripture tes-
tifies.''1[

I have quoted enough, fathers, to make it evident that
there was never, perhaps, a more imprudent thin? attempted
than what you have done. But I will go a step farther, and
make you pronounce this sentence against yourselves. What
do you require from a man, in order to remove all suspicion
of his being in concert and correspondence with Geneva?
" If M. Arnauld," replies Father Meynier, " had said that, in
this adorable mystery, there is no substance of the bread
under the species, but only the flesh and the blood of Jesus
Christ, I should have confessed that he had declared himself
absolutely against Geneva." Confess it, then, ye revilersi
and make him a public apology. How often have you seen
this declaration made in the passages I have just cited? Be-
sides this, however, the Familiar Theology of M. de St Cyran
having been approved by M. Arnauld, it contains the senti-
ments of both. Read, then, the whole of lesson 15th, and
particularly article 2d, and you will find there the words you
desiderate, even more formally stated than you have done
yourselves. " Is there any bread in the host, or any wine in
the chalice ? No : for all the substance of the bread and the
wine is taken away, to give place to that of the body and blood
of Jesus Christ, the which substance alone remains therein,
covered by the qualities and species of bread and wine/'

* Letters of M. de St. Cyran, torn, i., let. 93. t Letter S2. % Letter 7&

8 Defence of the Chaplet of the H. Sacrament, p. 217.

I Theol. lamil., lee. 15. f Ibid., p. 153.

LET. XVI.] PORT-ROTALISTS NO HERETICS. 291

How now, fathers, will you still maintain that Port-Royal
teaches " nothing that Geneva does not receive," and that
M. Arnauld has said nothing in his second letter *' which
might not have heen said hy a minister of Gharenton." See
if you can persuade Mestrezat* to speak as M. Arnauld does
in that letter, at page 237. Make him say, that it is an in-
famous calumny to accuse him of denying transuhstantiation ;
that he takes for the fundamental principle of his writings
the truth of the real presence of the Son of God, in opposi-
tion to the heresy of the Calvinists ; and that he accounts
himself happy for living in a place where the Holy of Holies
is continually adored in the sanctuary — a sentiment which
is still more opposed to the helief of the Calvinists than the
real presence itself; for as Cardinal Richelieu observes in his
Controversies (page 636): "The new ministers of France
having agreed with the Lutherans, who believe the real pre-
sence of Jesus Christ in the eucharist, they have declared
that they remain in a state of separation from the Church on
the point of this mystery, only on account of the adoration
which Catholics render to the eucharist." f Get all the pas-
sages which I have extracted from the books of Port-Royal
subscribed at Geneva, and not the isolated passages merely,
but the entire treatises regarding this mystery, such as the
Book of Frequent Communion, the Explication of the Cere-
monies of the Mass, the Exercise during Mass, the Reasons
of the Suspension of the Holy Sacrament, the Translation
of the Hymns in the Hours of Port-Royal, &c. ; in one
word, prevail upon them to establish at Charenton that
holy institution of adoring, without intermission, Jesus
Christ contained in the eucharist, as is done at Port-Royal,
and it will be the most signal service which you could
render to the Church; for in this case it will turn out,

* John Mestregat, Protestant minister of Paris, was bom at Geneva in
1592, and died in May 1657. His Sermons on the Epistle to ttie Hebrews, and
otiier discovirses, published after his death, are distinguished for sound rea-
soning and ini^enious criticism. He certainly would have been the last man
to have uttered such arrant nonsense as Pascal here quotes fW>m the Port-
Boyalists. This learned and eloquent divine frequently engaged in contro-
versy with the Komanists, and on one occasion managed the debate with such
spirit, that Cardinal Richelieu, taking hold of his shoulder, exclaimed : " Thii
is the boldest minister in France." (Bayle, Diet, art. Mestremt.)

t The leading fallacy of the Romish creed on this subject is the monstrous
dogma of transuhstantiation: the adoration of the host is merely a corollary.
Cavvinists and Lutherans, though differing in their views of the ordinance,
always agreed in acknowledging the reai presence of Christ in the eucharist
though wey considered the sense in which Romanists interpret that term
to be chargeable with blaspbemj and absurdly, and as leading in practice to
the grossest idoUtiy.

292 PROVINOIAL LETTERS. [LBT. ZTL

not that Port-Royal is in concert with Gkneya, but that
Geneva is in concert with Port-Royal, and with the whole
Church.

Certainly, fathers, you could not have been more unfor-
tunate than in selectinp^ Port-Royal as the object of attack
for not believing in the eucharist ; but I will d^ow what led
you to fix upon it. You know I have picked up some small
acquaintance with your policy ; and, in this instance^ yoa
have acted upon its maxims to admiration. If Monsieur the
Abbe of St Cyran, and M. Arnauld, had only spoken of what
ought to be believed with respect to this mjsterjy and said
nothing about what ought to be done in the way dP prepara-
tion for its reception, they might have been the l>e8t Catholics
alive ; and no equivocations would have been disoovered in
their use of the terms *< real presence" and ** transnbstantia-
tion." But since all who combat your licentious principles
must needs be heretics, and heretics, too^ in the very point
in which they condemn your laxity, how could M. Arnauld
escape falling under this charge on the subject of the
eucharist, after having published a book expressly Sffainst
Tour profanations of that sacrament ? What ! must lie be
allowed to say, with impunity, that ** the body of Jesus Christ
ought not to be given to those who habitually lapse into the
same crimes, and who have no prospect of amendment ; and
that such persons ought to be excluded, for some time, from
the altar, to purify themselves by sincere penitence, that they
may approach it afterwards with benefit ? " Suffer no one
to talk in this strain, fathers, or you will find that fewer
people will come to your confessionals. Father. Brisacier
declares, that '* were you to adopt this course^ you would
never apply the blood of Jesus Christ to a single indivi-
dual." It would be infinitely more for your interest were
every one to adopt the views of your Society, as set forth
by Father Mascarenhas, in a book approved by your doc-
tors, and even bv your reverend Fatner-General, namely,
** That persons ot every description, and even priests, may
receive the body of Jesus Christ on the very day they have
polluted themselves with odious crimes; that so far from
such communions implying irreverence, persons who par-
take of them in this manner act a commendable part ; that
confessors ought not to keep them back from the ordinance^
but, on the contrary, ought to advise those who 'have re-
cently committed such crimes to communicate immediately ;
because, although the Church has forbidden it, this prohi-

XiET. XVI.] POET-EOTALISTS NO HERETICS. 293

bition is annulled by the universal practice in all places of
the earth."*

See what it is to have Jesuits in all places of the earth I
Behold "the universal practice" which you have introduced,
and which you are anxious every where to maintain ! It
matters nothing that the tables of Jesus Christ are filled
with abominations, provided your churches are crowded with
people. Be sure, therefore, cost what it may, to set down all
that dare to say a word against your practice, as heretics on
the holy sacrament. But how can you do this, after the irre-
fragable testimonies which they have given of their faith ?
Are you not afraid of me coming out with the four grand
proofs of their heresy which you have adduced ? You ought,
at least, to be so, fathers, and I ought not to spare your
blushes. Let us, then, proceed to examine proof the first.

" M. de St Cyran," says Father Meynier, " consoling one
of his friends upon the death of his mother (torn, i., let. 14),
says that the most acceptable sacrifice that can be offered up
to God on such occasions, is that of patience : therefore he
is a Calvin ist." This is marvellously shrewd reasoning,
fathers ; and I doubt if anybody will be able to discover the
precise point of it. Let us learn it, then, from this mighty
controversialist's own mouth. *' Because," says he, ''it is
obvious that he does not believe in the sacrifice of the mass;
for this is, of all other sacrifices, the most acceptable unto
God." Who will venture to say now that the Jesuits do not
know how to argue ? Why, they know the art to such per-
fection, that they will extract heresy out of any thing you
choose to mention, not even excepting the Holy Scripture
itself! For example, might it not be heretical to say, with
the wise man in Eeclesiasticus, ''There is nothing worse
than to love money ;"t as if adultery, murder, or idolatry
were not far greater crimes ? Where is the man who is not
in the habit of using similar expressions every day? May
we not say, for instance, that the most acceptable of all sacri-
fices in the eyes of God is that of a contrite and humble
heart ; just because, in discourses of this nature, we simply
mean to compare certain internal virtues with one another,
and not with the sacrifice of the mass, which is of a totally
different order, and infinitely more exalted? Is this not
enough to make you ridiculous, fathers? And is it neces-
sary, to complete your discomfiture, that I should quote the

* Mascar. tr. A, disp. 6, n. 284
t Eccleaiasticua (Apocrypha.)

294 PROVINCIAL LETTEHS. [lET. XVL

passages of that letter in which M. de St Oyran speaks of
the sacrifice of the mass, as '*the most excellent^ of «l11
others, in the following terms? ** Let there be presented to
God, daily and in all places, the sacrifice of the body of his
Son, who could not find a morfi excellent waff than that by
which he might honour his Father." And afterwards:
** Jesus Christ has enjoined us to take, when we are dving,
his sacrificed body, to render more acceptable to QoA the
sacrifice of our own, and to join himself with us at the hour
of dissolution ; to the end that he may strengthen us for the
struggle, sanctifying, by his presence, the last sacrifice which
we make to God of our life and our body?" Pretend to
take no notice of all this, fathers, and persist in maintaining,
as you do in page 39, that he refused to take the communion
»n his deathbed, and that he did not believe in the sacrifice
of the mass. Nothing can be too gpross for calumniators by
profession.

Your second proof furnishes an excellent illustration of
this. To make a Calvinist of M. de St Oyran, to whom
you ascribe the book of Petrus Aurelius, you take advantage
of a passage (page 80) in which Aurelius explains in what
manner the Church acts towards priests, and even bishops,
whom she wishes to degrade or depose. " The Church," he
says, << being incapable of depriving them of the power of the
order, the character of which is indelible, she does all that
she can do ; — she banishes from her memory the character
which she cannot banish from the souls of the individuals
who have been once invested with it ; she regards them in
the same light as if they were not bishops or priests ; so thaty
according to the ordinary language of the Church, it may
be said they are no longer such, although they always remain
such, in as far as the character is concerned — ob indelebilita'
tern charcLcteris.'* You perceive, fathers, that this author,
who has been approved by three general assemblies of the
clergy of France, plainly declares that the character of the
priesthood is indelible ; and yet you make him say, on the
contrary, in the very same passage, that " the character of
the priesthood is not indelible." This is what I would call a
downright slander ; in other words, according to your no-
menclature, a small venial sin. And the re^ison is, this book
fias done you some harm, by refuting the heresies of your
brethren in England touching the Episcopal authority. But
the folly of the charge is equally remarkable ; for, after hav-
ing taken it for granted, without any foundation, that M. de

LET. XVI.] POUT-ROTAtlSTS NO HERETICS. 295

St Cyran holds the priestly character to be not indelible, you
conclude from this that he does not believe in the real pre-
sence of Jesus Christ in the eucharist.

Do not expect me to answer this, fathers. If you have
not got common sense, I am not able to furnish you with it.
All who possess any share of it will enjoy a hearty laugh at
your expense. Nor will they treat with greater respect your
third proof, which rests upon the following words, taken
from the Book of Frequent Communion : *•* In the eucharist
God vouchsafes us t?ie same food that be bestows on the
saints in heaven, with this difference only, that here he with-
holds from us its sensible sight and taste, reserving both of
these for the heavenly worli"* These words express the
sense of the Church so distinctly, that I am constantly for-
getting what reason you have for picking a quarrel with
them, in order to turn them to a bad use; for I can see
nothing more in them but what the Council of Trent teaches
(sess. xiii., c. 8), namely, that there is no difference between
Jesus Christ in the eucharist and Jesus Christ in heaven^
except that here he is veiled, and there he is not. M. Ar-
nauld does not say that there is no difference in the manner
of receiving J(isus Christ, but only that there is no difference
in Jesus Christ who is received. And yet you would, in the
face of all reason, interpret his language in this passage to
mean, that Jesus Clirist is no more eaten with the mouth in
this world than he is in heaven ; upon which you ground the
charge of heresy against him.

You really make me sorry for you, fathers. Must we ex-
plain this further to you ? Why do you confound that divine
nourishment with the manner of receiving it? There is but
one point of difference, as I have just observed, betwixt that
nourishment upon earth and in heaven, which is, that here it
is hidden under veils, which deprive us of its sensible sight
and taste; but there are various points of dissimilarity in the
manner of receiving it here and there, the principal of which
is, as M. Arnauld expresses it (p. 3, ch. 16,) " that here it
enters into the mouth and the breast both of the good and
of the wicked," which is not the case in heaven.

And if you require to be told the reason of this diversity,
I may inform you, fathers, that the cause of God's ordaining
these different modes of receiving the same food is the dif-
ference that exists betwixt the state of Christians in this life
and that of the blessed in heaven. The state of the Chris*

* Freq. CouLi 8d part, ch. 11.

296 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. XVI.

tian, as Cardinal Perron observes after the fathers, holds •
middle place between the state of the blessed and the state o
the Jews. The spirits in bliss possess Jesus Christ really,
without veil or figure. The Jews possessed Jesus Christ
onlv in figures and veils, such as the manna and the paschal
lamb. And Christians possess Jesus Christ in the eucharist
really and truly, althougn still concealed under veils. ^ Ood,"
says St Euchar, <*has made three tabernacles — the syna-
gogue, which had the shadows only, without the truth ; the
church, which has the truth and shadows together; and
heaven, where there is no shadow, but the truth alone." It
would be a departure from our present state, which is the
state of faith, opposed by St Paul alike to the law and to
open vision, did we possess the figures only, without Jesus
Christ ; for it is the property of the law to have the mere
fi>^ure, and not the substance of thing^. And it would be
equally a departure from our present state if we powessed
him visibly; because faith, according to the same apostle^
deals not with things that are seen. And thus the eucharisty
from its including Jesus Christ truly, though under a Yeil» is
in perfect accordance with our state of faith. It follows,
that this state would be destroyed, if, as the heretics main-
tain, Jesus Christ were not really under the species of bread
and wine ; and it would be equally destroyed if we receiyed
him openly, as they do in heaven ; since, on these supposi-
tions, our state would be confounded, either with the state
of Judaism or with that of glory.*

Such, fathers, is the mysterious and divine reason of this
most divine mystery. This it is that fills us with abhorrence
at the Calvinists, who would reduce us to the condition of
the Jews ; and this it is that makes us aspire to the glory of
the beatified, where we shall be introduced to the full and
eternal enjoyment of Jesus Christ. From hence you must
see that there are several points of difference between the
manner in which he communicates himself to Christians and
to the blessed ; and that, amongst others, he is in this world
received by the mouth, and not so in heaven ; but that they
all depend solely on the distinction between our state of fiuth
and their state of immediate vision. And this is precisely,

* There is a strange conAision of sentiment her& arising trom the radical
error of confoundinK the symbol of the body of Christ with the thing symbol-
ised. If, as Pascal has admitted above, faith is the medium of oommonloa
between us and him, what can he mean by speaking of his body "entering
into the mouth of the good and the wicked?" And what a distinction, be-
tween the communion of earth and of heaven, ttiat here we eat the bodj of
Christ, and there we shall only behold it I

LET. XVI.] PORT-ROYALISTS NO HERETICS. 297

fathers, what M. Arnauld has expressed, with great plain-
ness, in the following terms : ** There can be no other dif-
ference between the purity of those who receive Jesus Christ
in the eucharist and that of the blessed, than what exists
between faith and the open vision of God, upon which alone
depends the different manner in which he is eaten upon earth
and in heaven." You were bound in duty, fathers, to have
revered in these words the sacred truths they express, in-
stead of wresting them for the purpose of detecting an here-
tical meaning which they never contained, nor could possibly
contain, namely, that Jesus Christ is eaten by faith only, and
not by the mouth ; the malicious perversion of your Fathers
Annat and Meynier, which forms the capital count of their
indictment.

Conscious, however, of the wretched deficiency of your
proofs, you have had recourse to a new artifice, which is
nothing less than to falsify the Council of Trent, in order to
convict M. Arnauld of nonconformity with it ; so vast is your
store of methods for making people heretics. This feat has
been achieved by Father Meynier, in fifty different places of
his book, and about eight or ten times in the space of a
single page (the 54th), wherein he insists that, to speak like
a true Catholic, it is not enough to say, <' I believe that Jesos
Christ is really present in the eucharist," but we must say,
" I believe, with the council, that he is present by a true
local presence, or locally." And in proof of this, he cites the
council, session xiii., canon 3d, canon 4th, and canon 6th.
Who would not suppose, upon seeing the term local presence
quoted from three canons of a universal council, that the
phrase was actually to be. found in them? This might have
served your turn very well, before the appearance of my
fifteenth letter ; but as matters now stand, fathers, the trick
has become too stale for us. We go our way and consult
the council, and discover only that you are falsifiers. Such
terms as local presence, locally, and locality, never existed in
the passages to which you refer ; and let me tell you further,
they are not to be found in any other canon of that council,
nor in any other previous council, nor in an/ father of the
Church. Allow me, then, to ask you, fathers, if you mean
to cast the suspicion of Calvinism upon all that have not
made use of that peculiar phrase ? If this be the case, the
Council of Trent must be suspected of heresy, and all the
holy fathers without exception. Have you no other way of
making M. Arnauld heretical, without abusing so many other

298 PROVINCIAL LETTBR8. [leT. ZVI.

people who never did you any h&rm, and among the rest,
6t Thomas, who is one of the greatest champions of the
eucharist, and who, so far from employing that term, has
expressly rejected it — ** NuUo modo corpus ChrisU est in hoc
Sacramento localiter — ^Bv no means is the body of Christ in
this sacrament locally f^' Who are yon, then, fathers, to
pretend, on your authority, to impose new terms, and to
ordain them to be used by all for rightly expresdng thdr
faith ; as if the profession of the faith, drawn up by the popes
according to the plan of the council, in which this term has
no place, were defective, and left an ambiguity in the creed
of the faithful, which you had the sole merit of discovering?
8uch a piece of arrogance, to prescribe terms even to learned
doctors I such a piece of fraud, to attribute them to general
cr)uncilsl and such ignorance, not to know the objections
which the most enlightened saints have made to their recep-
tion ! " Be ashamed of the error of your ignorance,'' as the
Scripture says of ignorant impostors like you — De mendado
ineruditionis tuce confundere,*

Give up all further attempts, then, to act the masters;
you have neither character nor capacity for the part. If,
however, you would bring forward your propositions with
a little more modesty, they might obtain a hearing. For
although this phrase, loccU presence, has been rejected, as
you have seen, by St Thomas, on the ground that the body
of Jesus Christ is not in the eucharist, in the ordinary ez«
tension of bodies in their places, the expression has, never-
theless, been adopted by some modern controversial writers,
who understand it simply to mean that the body of Jesus
Christ is truly under the species, which being in a particular
place, the body of Jesus Christ is there al^. And in this
sense M. Arnauld will make no scruple to admit the term,
as M. de St Cyranf and he have repeatedly declared that
Jesus Christ in the eucharist is truly in a particular place,
and miraculously in many places at the same time. Thus
all your subtleties fall to the ground ; and you have failed to
give the slightest semblance of plausibility to an accusation,
which ought not to have been aliowed-to show its face, with-
out being supported by the most unanswerable proofs.

But what avails it, fathers, to oppose their innocence to
your calumnies ? You impute these errors to them, not in

• Ecclus. iv. 26 (Apocrypha )

t Jean du V«rger de ilauranne, ike Abb4 <U Saint Oyran, (See Historical
iutioduction, p. xxix. &c.)

LEI. XVI.] SLANDERS AGAINST PORT-ROTAL. 299

the belief that they maintain heresy, but from the idea that
they have done you injury. That is enough, according to
your theology, to warrant you to calumniate them without
criminality ; and you can, without either penance or confes-
sion, say mass, at the very time that you charge priests,
who say it every day, with holding it to be pure idolatry;
which, were it true, would amount to sacrilege no less re-
volting than that of your own Father Jarrige, whom you
yourselves ordered to be hanged in effigy, for having said
mass " at the time he was in agreement with Geneva."*

What surprises me, therefore, is not the little scrupulosity
with which you load them with crimes of the foulest and
falsest description, but the little prudence you display, by
fixing on them charges so destitute of plausibility. You dis-
pose of sins^ it is true, at your pleasure ; but do you mean to
dispose of men's beliefs too ? Verily, fathers, if the suspicion
of Calvinism must needs fall either on them or on you, you
would stand, I fear, on very ticklish ground. Their language
is as Catholic as yours; but their conduct confirms their
faith, and your conduct belies it. For if you believe, as well
as they do, that the bread is really changed into the body of
Jesus Christ, why do you not require, as they do, from those
whom you advise to approach the altar, that the heart of
stone and ice should be sincerely changed into a heart of
flesh and of love ? If you believe that Jesus Christ is in that
sacrament in a state of death, teaching those that approach
it to die to the world, to sin, and to themselves, why do you
suffer those to profane it in whose breasts evil passions con-
tinue to reign in all their life and vigour? And how do you
come to judge those worthy to eat the bread of heaven, who
are not worthy to eat that of earth ?

Precious votaries, truly, whose zeal is expended in perse-
cuting those who honour this sacred mystery by so many
holy communions, and in flattering those who dishonour it
by so many sacrilegious desecrations I How comely is it in
these champions of a sacrifice so pure and so venerable, to
collect around the table of Jesus Christ a crowd of hardened
profligates, reeking from their debaucheries ; and to plant in
the midst of them a priest, whom his own confessor has
hurried from his obscenities to the altar; there, in the place
of Jesus Christ, to offer up that most holy victim to the God

* This Father Jarrige was a famous Jesuit, who became a Protestant, and

1>ublif!hed, after his separation from Rome, a book, entitled " Le JesuCte sur
*Echa/aud— The Jesuit on the Scaffold," in which he treats his old triends with
very little mercj.

800 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LST. ZTI.

of holiness, and convey it, with his polluted hands, into
mouths as thoroughly polluted as his own I How well does
it become those who pursue this course ** in all parts of the
world /' in conformity with maxims sanctioned by their own
general, to impute to the author of Frequent Oommunion»
and to the Sisters of the Holy Sacrament, the crime of not
believing in that sacrament!

Even this, however, does not satisfy them. Nothing less
will satiate their rage than to accuse their opponents of hay-
ing renounced Jesus Christ and their baptism. This is no
air-built fabrication, like those of your invention ; it is a fact,
and denotes a delirious frenzy, which marks the fatal climax
of your calumnies. Such a notorious falsehood as this would
not have been in hands worthy to support it, had it renudned
in those of your good friend Filleau, through whom you
ushered it into the world : your Society has openly adopted
it ; and Father Meynier maintained it the other day to oe a
** certain truth" that Port-Royal has, for the space of thirty«
five years, ' been forming a secret plot, of which M. de St
Cyran and M. D'Ypres * have been the ringleaders, ** to ruin
the mystery of the incarnation — ^to make the Gospel pass for
an apocryphal fable — to exterminate the Christian religion,
and to erect Deism upon the ruins of Christianity." Is this
enough, fathers ? Will you be satisfied if all this be believed
of the objects of your hate? Would your animosity be
glutted at length, if you could but succe^ in making them
odious, not only to all within the Church, by the charge of
'^ coiisenting with Geneva" of which you accuse them, but
even to all who believe in Jesus Christ, though beyond the
pale of the Church, by the imputation of Deism f

But whom do you expect to convince, upon your simple
asseveration, without the slightest shadow of proof, and in
the face of every imaginable contradiction, that priests who
preach nothing but the grace of Jesus Christ, the purity of
the Gospel and the obligations of baptism, have renounced at
once their baptism, the Gospel, and Jesus Christ? Who will
believe it, fathers ? Wretched as you are,t do you believe it
yourselves ? What a sad predicament is yours, when yon
must either prove that they do not believe in Jesus Christ, or
must pass for the most abandoned calumniators. Prove it,
then. Name that " worthy cUrgyma/n" who, you say, at-

* JaoBen, bishop of Ypres.

t " Mis^rables que vous gtes"— one of the bitterest expressions wh!^ Pas*
caI has applied to his opponents, and oue which they have deeplj feU^ but
(he full furce of which can hardly bo rendered into English.

LET. in.] BLANDBBS ASAIK^^ FOBT-BOTAL. 301

tended that aasembl; at BonrK'-Fonttun^ * in 1621, and dis-
covered to Brother Filleau the' design there concerted of
OTertuTDin^ the Christiajl rellKion. Name those six persons
who jou allege to have formed that conspiracy. Name the
indimdual w?io is desigTialed by the htUrt A. A., who ;ou say
" wat not Antfumy Amaulif (because he convinced jou that
he was at that time onl; nine jears of age) " tut another
person, who you lat/ b Hul in MB, but too good afnendof
U. Amavldnot tohtknomn tontnt." Tou know him, then;
and coDsequentlr, if vou are not destitute of reUgion your-
selves, joD are bound to delate that impious person to the
king and parliament, that he may be punished according to
his deserts. You most speak oat, fathers; jon must name
the person, or submit to the di^race of being henceforth re-
garded in no other light than as common liars, unwortbj of
being ever credited again. Good Father Valerieo has taught
us that this is the way in which such characters should t>e
" put to the rack," and brought to their senses. Tour silence
upon the present chaUenKewill furnish a full and satisfactory
confirmation of this diabolical calumny. Your blindest ad-
mirers will be constrtuned to admit, that it will be " the re-
sult, not of your goodness, but your impotencyi" and to
wonder how you could be so wicked aa to extend your hatred
even to the nuns of Port-Royal, and to say, as you do in page
14, that Tht Stent CStapUt of the Holy Saercmeta,-\' com-
posed by one of their number, was the first-fruits of that
conspiracy ^^nst Jesus Christ ; or, as in p^e 95, that "they
have imbibed all the detestable principles of Uiat work,
which is, according to your account, " a lesson in Deism."
Your f^seboods regarding that book have already been
triumphantly refnted, in the defence of die censure of the
late Archbishop of Paris against Father Brisacier. That
publication you are incapable of answering ; and jet yoa du
not scruple to abuse it in a more shameful manner thui ever,

• WiUiregaid la tMiCusaoi MiemblBse >L Bourg-Fontain;, (n wUsh It
wu lUeged a. cdupirftoj ni njriDed bj the jBQBamsIa ngaiit^t l\vb ChnBtlan
nllgtOD, tbeeaThiiun>diiii»TcaiinilIUiBin»kotlI, Arnaulil, eDtlUcdJTi^
raJaPFaMfudtaAniiM, voUfiJt.irticratliere la h deuili^d aaoiuit of ttia
wbols pnoMdlan. (Niule, It., asa.)

t TVAggrNOiaiM^ehiJfMt AWyiSairanniC.— SiK^bnuthstlaeotB
very tauraloa piece ot rnnlc dnotion at thras nr Irnu cag^ the prodnctlOD
orBDunof Port-Honl. csUedKiteT Agnudeat Fan!, wtdchmppetndlD
ISSS. It excited thfl juIoiuT of Itia AiehUibop of BanB— Kt Uia doclon ol
Puis ud UuH adininin I^Uiean— occulaDedBirar otpaniphleta, ud
mi flntUr carried bj appal to the Oooit at Boms, b; ■blub It ■*■ nnh
pniHd. (NIeole, It. IDt) Anm do St FboJ itu tlw fODiigat iSma of t£e
vtTt Antique Arnanld, ud Iwtli mpeu b) Iiavs hid aaun Id Um 0(090-

802 PBOrraoiAL letters. [let. xti.

for the purpose of charging vomeo, whose pie^is nniTenaUy
known, with the vile»t blasphemj.

Crud, oowarijlj persecotorsl Mmt^ theO) tlie moat re-
tiisd cloisters afford no retreat fkim your calnmniee ? White
theee consecrated vifg^ns are emplojed, night and dn, lA-
cording to their institution, in adonng Je«us Christ m tiie

cording to their institution, in adoring
holj Bscrainent, you cease not, night nor uaj, lo paouui
abroad that th^ do not beliere that he is either in the en-
charist or eren at the right hand of his Father ; and jon aK
publiclv eicominnnicating them from the Ohnrch, at th(
very tiine when theT are in secret prajiug for the whole
Church, and for 70a I Ton blacken with jotir alanderi thoM
who have neither ears to hear nor mouths to anawar jonl
Bat Jesus Christ, in whom thp; are now hidden, not to ap-
pear till one daj together with him, hears yon, and answan
for them. At the moment I am now wiiting, that holy and
terrihle voice is heard which confounds nature and oonfolss
the Church.* And I fear, fathers, that those who now Im-
den their hearts, and refuse with ohstinacj to bear him while
he tpeaJis in the character of God, will one da; be oompeDed
to bear him with terror, when he spesJts to them in the
character of a judre. What account, indeed, father% wQt
you be able to rendto' to him of the manj calumnies jon bare

nblcta, uld to iKve luel; Ukea placn in Fnrt-Ko^Bl, nas Uicu crciUoE niacb
HDUtloD. Iha fUU IK brleflT UieH : A tbom, Bud to haie beJonBed to ths
onwDOtUioniiinnibTDiu' Savtaur, h>^DgbeiuiDraeQi«d,l)iUaM!liiai4
n tbe UonagLoT of Fort-BnTBl, the niuu fmll Ihcic niiuig pnpU) mra sar-
miCtod, euta In tnra, to U« llM nlie. One of [he &ttar, foi^DM mjtar,

Itu nl«i at PiKti, a (111 ibor- -' ' — ■— ' ' '

tnablsd nUh ■ dlHaaaln the ej

IkmoTBUtbaphjihiluu or Fu

plied It ta Ott dlKued oiBan, ana an

:pilBe and delight of all the autar^ Uiat Iiai ere wac nompLs

eartUste ilgnid b^aomaof ttaemoat«1An(edpb^<iiwu,at

M, In Quilr Dpinltfiij a mlTmooloiia una. Tit» frlendB of Port-RoTKl, and nona
mora than FaacaJ, wen oreijgnd at thli Intupo^tion, vblch, being followed
bj Mber ennardlnBTT eiirei, uieTi^aTdedaB a voice from liesTeala fBTOor
at (bit iDBtltntlon. nie Jeniita alone rejected It with lidJcala, and pobliibed
iipleee,entJll«l"aiJoMoie,4c.— ADaiopBr; or, OhBersolioaa od what hoi
laleljrbapneneiUtrorl-ftojfdiiaio thPsfliiltdttbeHolyninrii." TbiswM

de Font GhfLleau, who was called "ThfOlerS of IheHoIrTboni,'' aulatedby
Pucal. (HBcaeil do FltiCds, tc, de PoiL-Ra^al, pp. ^3-US.) 11 tau been
well obaened, " th&t manj labcrlDUa aad Tolumtnoiu diacuialoiu migbt hare
beeauTed, If tfaaiimpie andTeir reaaonahla rule had been adopteOofwalT-
Ing fDTOitiEiUJoi] Into the oreditllltj of anj nuratlTa ot iBpemUnnl oi

jToimii; or imder «orwl roaft." (Natuial HIat. otBnSoiiaiBn, p. Sae.) "It
la waU koown," m3iB Afosbeuu, " uiat the Janieniata and AitguB^niaoa hSTC
long pretended to oonflrm their doctrine bjmiraclei; and they even acJuow-

diuedtoadUferaleiituatlon." (Moih^ol. Hint., cent. iYli.,e»:(.a.}

LET. XVI.] CALUMNY BENDEBED INNOCUOUS. 303

Uttered, seeing that he will examine them, in that day, not
according to the fantasies of Fathers Dicastille, Gans, and
Pennalossa, who justify them, but according to the eternal
laws of truth, and the sacred ordinances of his own Church?
She, so far from attempting to vindicate that crime, abhors
it to such a degree that she visits it with the same penalty
as wilful purder. By the first and second Councils of Aries
she has decided that the communion shall be denied to
slanderers as well as murderers, till the i^proach of death*
The Council of Lateran hasjudged those unworthj of admis-
sion into the ecclesiastical state who have been convicted of the
crime, even though they may have reformed. The popes have
even threatened to deprive of the communion at death those
who have calumniated bishops, priests, or deacons. And
the authors of a defamatory libd, who fail to prove what
they have advanced, are condemned by Pope Adrian to be
whipped; — ^yes, reverend fathers, flageUentur is the word.
So strong has been the repugnance of the Church at all times
to the errors of your Society— a Society so thoroughly de-
praved as to invent excuses for the grossest of crimes, such
as calumny, chiefly that it may enjoy- the greater freedom in
perpetrating them itself. There can be no doubt that you
would be capable of producing abundance of mischief in this
way, had God not permitted you to furnish with your own
hands the means of preventing the evil, and of rendering
your slanders perfectly innocuous ; for, to deprive you of all
credibility, it was quite enough to publish the strange maxim,
that it is no crime to calumniate. Calumny b nothing, if
not associated with a high reputation for honesty. The de-
famer can make no impression, unless he has the character of
one that abhors defamation, as a crime of which he is incapable.
And thus, fathers, you are betrayed by your own principle.
Tou established the doctrine to secure yourselves a safe con-
science, that vou miffht slander without risk of damnation^
and be rankea with tnose ** pious and holy calumniators'' of
whom St Athanasius speaks. To save vourselves from hell»
you have embraced a maxim which i^romises you this security
on the faith of your doctors ; but this same maxim, while it
guarantees you, according to their idea, against the evils you
dread in the future worl£ deprives you of all the advantage
you may have expected to reap from it in the present i so
that, in attempting to escape the guilt, you have lost the
benefit of calumny. Such is the self-contrariety of evil, and

804 PBOYINOIAL LETTERS. [LET. XTL

SO completely does it neutraUze and destroy itself by its own
intrinsic malignity.

Tou might have slandered, therefore, much more adTan-
tageously for yourselves, had you professed to hold, with St
Paul, that evil-speakers are not worthy to see God; for in
this case, though vou would indeed have been condemning^
yourselves, your sLmders would at least have stood a better
chance of being believed. But by maintaining, as yon have
done, that calumny against your enemies is no crimen yonr
slanders will be discredited, and you yourselves damned into
the bargun ; for two things are certain, — ^first, That it will
never be in the power of your erave doctors to annihilate
the justice of God ; and secondly, That you could not g^ve
more certain evidence that you are not of the Truth than by
your resorting to falsehood. If the Truth were on your
side, she would fight for you — she would conquer for yon;
and whatever enemies you might have to encounter, ^the
Truth would set you free'' from them, aocording to her piro-
inise. But you have had recourse to fidsehood, for no other
design than to support the errors with which you flatter the
sinml children of tnis world, and to bolster up the calumnies
with which you persecute every man of piety who sets bi&
face against these delusions. The truth being diametanally
oppos^ to your ends, it behoved you, to use the langoaffe m
the prophet ** to put your confidence in lies.** xon nave
said, << The scourges which afflict mankind shall not come
nigh unto us ; for we have made lies our refuge^ and under
falsehood have we hid ourselves."* But what says the pro-
phet in reply to such ? ^ Forasmuch,'' says he, ^ as ye nave
put your trust in calumny and tumult — aperastU in edlumF-
nid et in tumtdtu — ^this iniquity and your rum shall be like
that of a high wall, whose breaking oometh soddenlr at an
instant. And he shall break it as the breaking of toe pot-
ter's vessel that is shivered in pieces," — with such violence
that ''there shall not be found in the bursting of it a sh^ to
take fire from the hearth, or to take water withal out of the
pit."t ''Because," as another prophet says, "ye have
made the heart of the righteous sad, whom I liave not
made sad; and ye have nattered and strengthened tlie
malice of the wicked : I will therefore deliver my people
out of your hands, and ye shall know that I am thdr Lord
and yours." t

* Isa. zxTiii. 15. t Isa. xxz. 12-14

I Seek. xUi 22. Pascal does &ol^ either here or eliewher^ when qpMag

LET. ZVI.] OALUMNT BENDBBED INITOOnonS. 305

Tes, fathers, it is to be hoped that if you do not repent,
God will deliver out of your hands those whom, either by
flattering them in their evil courses with your licentious
maxims, or by poisoning their minds with your slanders,
you have so long deluded. He will convince the former
that the false rules of your casuists will not screen them from
his indignation ; and he will impress on the minds of the latter
the just dread of losing their souls by listening and yielding
credit to your slanders, as you lose yours by hatching these
slanders and disseminating them through the world. Let
no man be deceived; God is not mocked; none may violate
with impunity the commandment which he has given us in
the gospel, not to condemn our neighbour without being well
assured of his guilt. And, consequently, what profession
soever of piety those may xnake who lend a willing ear to
your lying devices, and under what pretence soever of devo-
tion they may entertain them, they have reason to apprehend
exclusion from the kingdom of God, solely for havmg im-
puted crimes of such a dark complexion as heresy and schism
to Catholic priests and holy-nuns, upon no better evidence
than such vile fabrications as yours. ** The devil,'' says M.
de Geneve, * <* is on the tongue of him that slanders, and in
the ear of him that listens to the slanderer." ^And evil
speaking," says St Bernard, ^^ is a poison that extinguishes
charity m both of the parties ; so that a single calumny may
prove mortal to an infinite number of souls, killing not only
those who publish it, but all those besides by whom it is not
repudiated.^ t

Reverend fathers, my letters were not wont dther to be
so prolix, or to follow so closely on one another. Want of
time must plead my excuse for both of these faults. The
present letter is a very long one^ simply because I had no
time to make it shorter. You know the reason of this
haste better than I do. Tou have been unlucky in your
answers. Tou have done well, therefore, to change your
plan; but I am afraid that you will get no credit for it,
and that people will say it was done for fear of the Bene-
dictines.

from Scripture adhere veiy doe^ to the origIiial» nor even to the Ynlgate
Teraion.

* This was the name given to St Fr&nds de Sales, bishop and prinoe of
Geneya, previously to his canonisation, which took place in loOfi.

t Serm. 24 in Cantic

806 PBOTINOIAL LETTERS. [UT. JYU

I have just come to learn that the person who was gene-
rally reported to be the author of your Apologies^ discudms
them, and b annoyed at their haying been ascribed to him.
He has good reason ; and I was wrong to have suspected
him of any such thing ; for, in spite of tne assurances whidi
I recdved, I ought to have considered that he was a man of
too much good sense to believe ^our accusations, and of too
much honour to publish them if he did not believe them.
There are few people in the world capable of your extrava-
gances ; they are peculiar to yourselves, and mark your cha-
racter too piainlv to admit of any excuse for having failed to
recognise your hand in their concoction. I was led away
by the common report; but this apology, which would be
too good for you, b not sufficient for me^ who profess to ad-
vance nothing without certain proof, in no other instance
have I been guilty of departing from this rule. I am sorrjr
for what I said. I retract it ; and I only wish that yoa may
profit by my example.*

* These tiro postBoripts have been often admired— the fbrmer for the an-
thor's ingenioos excose for the length of his letter; the latter fbr the adroit-
ness with which he tarns his apology fur an undesigned mistaka into a auraka
at the disingenuousness of his opponents.

LBT. ZYU.] CHARGE OF HEBBST. 307

LETTER XVn.*

TO THE BEVEBEND FATHER ANNAT, JESUTT.f

THE AUTHOR OF THE LETTERS VINDICATED FROM THE
CHARGE OF HERESY — A HERETICAL PHANTOM— POPES
AND GENERAL COUNCILS NOT INFALLIBLE IN QUESTIONS
OF FACT.

January 23, 1657.

Reverend Father, — ^Your former behaviour had induced
me to believe that you Tfvere anxious for a truce in our hos-
tilities ; and I was quite disposed to agree that it should be
80. Of late, however, you have poured forth such a volley
of pamphlets, in such rapid succession, as to make it appa-
rent that peace rests on a very precarious footing when it
depends on the silence of Jesuits. I know not if this rup-
ture will prove very advantageous to you ; but, for my paort
I am far from regretting the opportunity which it affords me
of rebutting that stale charge of heresy with which your
writings abound.

It is Aill time, indeed, that I should, once for all, put a
stop to the liberty you have taken to treat me as a heretic —
a piece of gratuitous impertinence, which seems to increase
by indulgence, and which is exhibited in your last book in a
style of such intolerable assurance, that were I not to an-
swer the charge as it deserves, I might lay myself open to
the suspicion of being actually guilty. So lon^ as tne^ in-
sult was confined to your associates I despised it, as I did a

* M. Nicole famished the materials for this letter. (Nicol^ It., 821)
t JVoncif Annat, the same person formerly referred to at P^125« Be be-
came French provincial of the Jesuits, and confeawr to Louis aTV.

308 PROTINGIAL LETTERS. {liST. XYH.

thousand others with which they interlarded thdr prodno-
tioDS. To these my fifteenth letter was a sufficient replj.
But you now repeat the charge with a different ur: jovl
make it the main point of your vindioadon. It is, in mot^
almost the only thing in the shape of argument that yoa
employ. Tou say that, ^ as a complete answer to m^ fifteen
letters, it b enough to say fifteen tmies that I am a neretio ;
and having heen pronounced such, I deserve no credit." In
short, you make no question of my apostasy, but assume it
as a settled point, on which you may build with all odd-
fidence. Tou are serious then, father, it would seem, in
deeming me a heretic. I shall be equally serious in repelling
the charge.

Tou are well aware, sir, that heresv is a charge of so graTe
a character, that to advance it, without bdng prepared to
substantiate it, is an act of high presumption. I How de-
mand vour proofs. When was 1 seen at CSiarenton ? When
did I ndl in my presence at mass, or in my Ohristian dn^ to
mv parish church ? What act of union wiUi heretics^ or of
schism with the Church, can you lay to mjy charge? What
council have I contradicted? What Papal constitution hftre
I violated? Tou must answer, father, else — Tou know
what I mean.* And what do you answer ? I beseech all to
observe it : First of all, you assume ^ that the author of
the letters is a Port-Royalist ;'* then you tell us ^ that PorU
Royal is declared to be heretical ;" and, therefore^ you oon-
clude, ** the author of the letters must be a heretio.'' It is
not on me, then, that the weight of this indictment fidb^ but
on Port-Royal ; and I am only involved in the crime beoauae
you suppose me to belong to that establishment; ao that it
will be no difficult matter for me to exculpate mysdf from
the charge. I have no more to say than that I am not a
. member of that community ; and to refer you to mv letters^
in which I have declared that ^I am a private individual ;''
and again, in so many words, that ^ I am not of Port-Royal,'*
as I said in my sixteenth letter, which preceded your pumioi^
tion.

Tou must fall on some other way, then, to prove me a
heretic, otherwise the whole world will be convinced that it
is beyond your power to make good your accusation. Prove
from my writings that I do not receive the Gonstitution.t

* A threat, evideiitly, of administering to him the MenHrit impMdmHiU'
time of the Capuchin. (See p. 282.>

t TJie ConstittUion—th&t is, the boll of Pope Alexander VIL, ianifld In
October 1656, in which he not only condemned the IliYe Fropoeitionib trnt^ in

LET. XVU.] CHABfiE OF HBRBBT. 300

MjT letters are not verj volummoos — there are but nsteen of
tbem — and I defy jou or anybody else to detect in them the
ilightest foundation for Bucn a charge. I shall, however,
with jour permission, produce somethinz out of them to
proTe the reverse. When, for example, I say in the four-
teenth that, " by killing our brethren in mortal sin, accord-
ing to your maxims, we are damning those for whom SesoM
Christ died," do I not plunly acknowledge that Jeeue Ohriat
died for those wbo maybe damned, and, consequently, declare
it to be false "diat he died onlyfor the predestinated," which
is the error condemned in the fifth proposition? Certun it
i^ father, that I have not said a word m behalf of these im-
pions propositions, which I detest with all my heart.* And
even though Port-Bojal should hold tbem, I protest against
you drawing any conclusion from this against me, as, thank
Cod, I have no sort of connection with any community ex-
cept the Catholic, Apostolii^ and Roman Church, in the
bosom of which I desire to live and die, in communion with
the pope, the head of the Church, and beyond the pale of
wUch 1 am persuaded there is no salvation.

How are you to get at a person who talks in this way,
father? On what quarter will you assail me, since nmther
my words nor my writings afford the slightest handle to your
accusations, and the obscurity in which my person is enve-
loped forms mj protection against vour threatening*? You
feel yourselves smitten by an invisible hand — a hand, how-
ever, which makes your delinquencies visible to all; and in
vain do you try to thrust at me in the dark, through the
sides of those with whom you suppose me to be associated.
I fear you not, either on my own account or on that of any
other, bring bound by no tie either to a community Of toaoy
Individual whataoenT + All the mfiuanoe which your Society

the effect cluLt tta ^1.1 U1I from JaussD, sod were

■ F*kb1 wh na grest IheolDLiun Ua i^iUr, Hsduna Perisr, IntMm na
"tiabKliiMmidescliocildiciiiltjlili puliaolu' •tDdr* Ibat ''Ghiiit died
IM tboM who mw bi duuwd,* mn bs ■ Fi^ib, ud «VMi klMMenli t DoUon;
Int AuoUlMinnild lAia "dUoUdlt wlthkU Ui bnrt.' "Kot (na d
■hoH dull pnWi,' ■»■ ha, •■ lOr vbom Ohrlit dled.-^ir«> pvB UMU B «i
pnquaiaVkmHitpuTliHual.'' (Aug- KpIbV IM, Op., torn. U., 604.) And
(giln: "QaimitantopritlBTelaiitTac.—Vewbo redeemed iH«t»BT«t

t FucaL might tsj Odi with trath, tOr big oalj rdUlvn baliu ann^ the
UeafeuthlTcelBtionBhipwu coDsldaed bj him m no longer adrtlnEJ Mid
»i^ond pfraonal friendstiii, be lud reaUj 00 conneelioo with Port-Bojil.
niere liu little troth uKirce, tberefoi^ io thetuistof klataadToaM lA

9X0 FROTINOIAL LETTBBS. [LET. XYII^.

possesses can be of no avail in my case. From this world I
hare nothing to hope, nothing to dread, nothing to desire.
Through the goodness of God, I have no need of any man's
money or any man's patronage. Thus, father, I elude all
your attempts to catch me. Tou may touch Port-Royal if
you choose, but you shall not touch me. Tou may turn
people out of the Sorbonne, but that will not turn me oat
of my domicile. Yon may hatch plots agiunst priests and
doctors, but not against me, for I am neither the one nor Ae
other. Indeed, father, you never perhaps had to do^ in the
whole course of your experience, with a person so completely
beyond your reach, and therefore so admirably qualified for
dealing with your errors— one perfectly free— one without
engagement, entanglement, relationship, or buuness of any
kind — one, too, who is pretty well vened in your nuudmsy
and determined, as God shall give him light, to discuss them,
without permitting any earthly consid^tion to arrest or
slacken his endeavours.

Since, then, you can do nothing against me^ what good
purpose can it serve to publish so many calumnies, as you
and jour brethren are doing, against a class of persons who
are m no way implicated in our disputes ? Tou shall not
escape under these subterfuges : you shall be made to feel
the lorce of the truth in spite of them. How does the case
stand? I tell you that you are ruining Christian morality,
by divorcing it from the love of God, and dispensing with its
obligation ; and you talk about ** the death of Father Mester**
— a person whom I never saw in my life. I tell you that
your authors permit a man to kill another for the sake of an
apple, when it would be dishonourable to lose it ; and you
reply by informing me that somebody ** has broken into the
poors box at St Merril" Again, what can you possibly
mean by mixing me up, perpetually, with the book ** On the
Holy Virginity," written by some father of the Oratory,
whom I never saw, any more than his book?* It is rather

the Jesuits, who says, in reference to this passage, " Pascal was intlmaiflhr
connected with Port-Boyal, he was even numbered among itsrednses; and
yet, in the act of unmasking the presumed duplicity of the Jesuits, the aob-
lime writer did not scruple to imitate it" (Hist, ae la Oomp. de Jtfso^ par
J. Cretineau-Joly, torn, iv., p. 54. Paris, 18^.)

* " This book of the Holy Virginity was a translation firom St AusioatiiM,
made by Father Seguenot, priest of the Oratory. So ftr, all was ri|^t : bat
the priest had added to the original text some odd and peculiar remarks of
his own, which merited censure. As the publication came firom the Oratory,
a community always attached to the doctrine of St Augustine, an attenroi
was made to tlirow the blame on those called Jansenists." (Note by MSooul
iv., 332.)

LET. XTH.] THE FIVE PEOPOSTTIONS. 311

extraordinary, that jou should thus regard all that are
opposed to you as if they were one person. Tour hatred
would grasp them all at once^ and would hold them as a
body of reprobates, every one of whom is responsihjle for all
the rest.

There is a vast difference between Jesuits and all their
opponents. There can be no doubt that you form one body,
united under one head; and your reg^ulations, as I have
shown, prohibit you from printing any thing vnthout the
approval of j^our superiors, who are responsible for all the
errors of individual writers, and who *^ cannot excuse them-
selves by saying that they did not observe the errors in any
publication, for they ought to have observed them.'' So say
your ordinances, and so say the letters of your generals,
Aquaviva, Yitelleschi, &c. We have good reason, therefore,
for charging upon yoi^ the errors of your associates, when
we find they are sanctioned by your superiors and the divines
of your Society. With me, however, the case stands other-
wise. I have not subscribed the book of the Holy Yirginity.
All the alms-boxes in Paris may be broken into, and yet I
am not the less a good Catholic for all that. In short, I beg
to inform you, in the plainest terms, that nobody is respon-
sible for my letters but myself, and that I am responsible for
nothing but my letters.

Here, father, I might fairly enough have brought our dis-
pute to an issue, without saying a word about those other
persons whom you stigmatize as heretics, in order to com-
prehend me under that condemnation. But as I have been
the occasion of their ill treatment, I consider myself bound
in some sort to improve the occasion, and I shall take advan-
tage of it in three particulars. One advantage, not incon-
siderable in its way, is that it will enable me to vindicate the
innocence of so many calumniated individuals. Another,
not inappropriate to my subject, will be to disclose^ at the
same time, the artifices of your policy in this accusation.
But the advantage which I prize most of all is, that it affords
me an opportunity of apprizing the world of the falsehood
of that scandalous report which you have been so busily dls-
seminating, namely, *' that the Church is divided by a new
heresy." As you are deceiving multitudes into the belief
that the points on which you are raising such a storm are
essential to the faith, I consider it of the last importance to
quash these unfounded impressions, and distinctly to explain
here what these points are, so as to show that, in point of
fact, there are no heretics in the Church.

SI 2 PROVmCtAL LETTERS. [liBT. XYII.

I presume, then, that were the question to be asked.
Wherein consists the heresy of those called Jansraists? the
immediate reply would be, ** These people hold that the com-
mandments of God are impracticable to men — that grace is
irresistible — ^that we have not free will to do either g^ood of
evil — ^that Jesus Christ did not die for all men, but only for
the elect ; in short, they maintain the five propositions con-
demned by the pope." * Do you not give it out to all that
this is the ground on which you persecute your opponents?
Have you not said as much in your books, in your conversa-
tions, in your catechisms? A specimen d this you gave at
the late Christmas festival at St Louis. One of your little
shepherdesses was questioned thus:-»

''For whom did Jesus Christ come into the world* my
dear?"

«*For all men, father."

''Indeed, my child; so you are not one of those new
heretics who say that he came only for the elect?"

Thus children are led to believe you, and many others be-
side children ; for you entertain people with the same stuff
in your sermons, as Father Crasset did at Orleans, before he
was laid under an interdict. And I frankly own that, at
one time, I believed you myself. You had givea me precisely
the same idea of these good people ; so that when vou pressed
them on these propositions, I narrowly watched their an-
swer, determined never to see them more^ if they did not
renounce them as palpable impieties.

This, however, they have done in the most nneqnivocal
way. M. de Sainte-Beuve,t king's professor in the Sor-
bonne, censured these propositions in nb published writing
lon^ before the pope; and other Augustinian doctors^ m
various publications, and, among others, in a work ^On
Victorious Grace," t reject the same articles as both here-
tical and strange doctrines. In the preface to that work
they say that these propositions are " heretical and Luth-
eran, forged and fabricated at pleasure, and are ndther to
be found in Jansen, nor in his defenders." They complain

• See Historical Introdaction, p. xxvii., Ac.

t " M. Jacques de Saint-BeuTe, one of the ablest divines of his agQ» pr B lta ' r ei l
to relinquish nis chair in the^orbonne rather than concur in the oensore of
M. Amauld, whose orthodoxy he regarded as beyond sospidon. He died in
1677." (Note by Nicole.)

X This work was entitled, " On the Victorious Grace of Jesus Cbrlst ; or,
Molina and his Followers convicted of the Error of the Pelagians and Semi-
Pelagians. By the Sieur de Bonlieu. Paris, lOdL" The real author was thit
celebrated M. de la Lane^ well known in that controven^. (Note tj Nicole.)

LET. XVn.] THE FIVE FBOPOSITIONS. 31S

of being charged with such sentunents, and address joa in
the words of St Prosper, the first disciple of St Augustine
their master, to whom the semi-Pelagians of France had
ascribed similar opinions, with the view of bringing him
into disgrace: '< There are persons who denounce us, so
blmded by passion that they have adopted means for doing
so which ruin their own reputation. They have, for this
purpose, fabricated propositions of the most impious and
blasphemous character, which they industriously cbculate, to
make people believe that we maintain them in the wicked sense
which they are pleased to attach to them. But our reply
will show at once our innocence^ and the malignity of those
persons who have ascribed to us a set of impious tenets, of
which they are themselves the sole inventors.

Truly, father, when I found that they had spoken in this
way before the appearance of the Papal Gonstitution — ^when
I saw that they afterwards received that decree with all
possible respect, that they offered to subscribe it, and that
M. Arnauld had declared all this in his second letter, in
stronger terms than I can report him, I should have con-
sidered it a sin to doubt their soundness in the faith. And,
in fact, those who were formerly disposed to refuse abso-
lution to M. Amauld's friends, have since declared, that
after his explicit disclaimer of the errors imputed to him,
there was no reason left for cutting off either him or them
from the communion of the Church. Tour associates,
however, have acted vejy differently ; and it was this that
made me begin to suspect that you were actuated by pre-
judice.

Tou threatened first to compel them to sign that Gonsti-
tution, so long as you thought they would resist it ; but no
sooner did you see them quite ready of their own accord to
submit to it, than we heard no more about this. Still, how-
ever, though one might suppose this ought to have satisfied
you, you persisted in calling them heretics, ^because," said
you, '* their heart belies their hand ; they are Catholics out-
wardly, but inwardly they are heretics." •

This struck me as very strange reasoninp^ ; for where is
the person of whom as much may not be said at any time ?
And what endless trouble and confusion would ensue, were
it allowed to go on ! " If," says Pope St Gregory, " we re-
fuse to believe a confession of faith made in conformity to
the sentiments of the Church, we cast a doubt over the niith

• B^ponM ii qaelqueB Denumde^ pp. 27, 47.

314 FBOmCUL LETTZBSb [lBT. Xm.

of aD CadM>l3cs whataoerer." I am afraid, fiither, to use the
words of the same pontiff^ when spaJdng of a aimOar dis*
pate in his time^ — ** that toot object is to make theae per-
sons heretics in s|»te of tiiemselveB; bccanae to raliiae to
credit those who testifj by their confeasion that thej are in
the troe faith, is not to purge heresr hot to create it— JUie
non est hcertgim purgartf md faeart. But what oonfirmed
me in my persoasion that there was indeed no heresy in the
Chorch, was finding that onr so-calkd hereticB had irindi.
cated th^nselres so saocessfolly, that yoa were miaUe to ao»
cose them of a single error in the faith, and that yoa were
redaced to the necessity of assailing them on ^nestiona of
fact only, touching Jansen, which could not possibly be oon-
structed into heresy. Tou insist, it now i^ipears, on their
being compelled to acknowledge ** that these propositions are
contained in Jansen, word for word, every one of than, in ao
many terms,^ or, as you express it, Singultutii mdiMdmitB^
totidem verbis apud Jansenium eontentas.

Thenceforth your dispute became, in my eyesy perfectly in-
different. So long as I believed that you were debating the
truth or falsehood of the propositions, t was all attention, for
that quarrel touched the faith ; but when I discoTered that
the bone of contention was whether they were to be found,
word for word, in Jansen or not, as relig^n ceased to be in-
terested in the controversy, I ceased to be interested in it
also. Not but that there was some presumption that you
were speaking the truth ; because to say that such and raoh
expressions are to be found, word for word, in an anthory is
a matter in which there can be no mistake. I do not won-
der, therefore, that so many people, both in France and at
Rome, should have been led to believe, on the authority of a
phrase so little liable to suspicion, that Jansen has actually
taught these obnoxious tenets, ^d for the same reason, I
was not a little surprised to learn that this same point of fact,
which you had propounded as so certain and so important,
was false ; and that after being challenged to quote the pages
of Jansen in which you had found these propositions ^ word
for word," you have not been able to pomt them out to this
day.

I am the more particular in giving this statement, becanaei,
in my opinion, it discovers, in a very striking light, the v^knt
of your Society in the whole of this affair ; and because some
people will be astonished to find that, notwithstanding all the
facts above mentioned, you have not ceased to pubush that

LET. IVn.] THE FIVE PROPOSITICWS. 316

they are heretics still. But you have only altered the heresy
to suit the time ; for no sooner had they freed themselves
from one charge than your fathers, determined that they
should never "want an accusation, substituted another in its
place. Thus, in 1653, their heresy lay in the quality of the
propositions; then came the worcUfor-wordneresj; after
that, we had the Jieart heresy. And now we hear no more
of any of these, and they must be heretics, forsooth, unless
they sign a declaration to the effect *^ that the sense of the
doctrine of Jansen is contained in the sense of the five pro-
positions.

Such is your present dispute. It is not enough for you
that they condemn the five propositions, and every thing in
Jansen that bears any resemblance to them, or is contrary to
St Augustine; for all that they have done already. The
point at issue is not, for example, If Jesus Christ died for the
elect only? they condemn that as much as you do; but. Is
Jansen of that opinion, or not? And here I declare, more
strongly than ever, that your quarrel affects me as little as it
affects the Church, For although I am no doctor, any more
than you, father, I can easily see, nevertheless, that it has no
connection with the faith. The only question is, to ascertain
what is the sense of Jansen. Did they believe that his doc-
trine corresponded to the proper and literal sense of these
propositions, they would condemn it; and they refuse to
do so, because they are convinced it is quite the reverse; so
that although they should misunderstand it, still they would
not be heretics, seeing they tmderstand it only in a Catholic
sense.

To illustrate this by an example, I may refer to the conflict-
ing sentiments of St Basil and St Athanasius, regarding the
writings of St Denis of Alexandria, which St Basil, conceiv-
ing that he found in them the sense of Arius against the
equality of the Father and the Son, condemned as neretical;
but which St Athanasius, on the other hand, judging them
to contain the genuine sense of the Church, maintauied to be
perfectly orthodox. Think you, then, father, that St Basil,
who held these writing^ to be Anan, had a right to brand St
Athanasius as a heretic, because he defended them? And
what ground would he have had for so doing, seeing that it
was not Arianism that his brother defended, but the true
faith which he considered these writings to contain ? Had
these two saints a^eed about the true sense of these writ-
ings, and had both recognised this hereau in them, unques-

816 FROYINCIAIi LETTEBS. [LET. X.Y1L.

tionably St Athanasius could not have approved of them,
widiout being guilty of heresy; but as they were at yarianoe
respecting the sense of the passages, St Athanasius was (nrtho-
doz in vindicating them, even though he may have under-
stood them wrong; because in that case it would have been
merely an error in a matter of fact, and because what he de-
fended was really the Catholic faith, which be supposed to be
contiuned in these writings.

I apply this to you, father. Suppose you were agreed upon
the sense of Jansen, and your adversaries were ready to ad-
mit with you that he held, for example, thai grace ccmnat be
resisted; those who refused to condemn him would be here-
tical. But as your dispute turns upon the meaning of that
author, and they believe that, according to his doctrine, gr€tee
may he resisted^ whatever heresy you may be pleased to attri-
bute to him, you have no ground to brand them as heretics,
seeing they condemn the sense which you put on Jansoa, and
you dared not condemn the sense which they put on him.
If, therefore, you mean to convict them, show that the sense
which they ascribe to Jansen is heretical ; for then they wOl
be heretical themselves. But how could you accomplish this,
since it is certain, according to ^our own showing, that the
meaning which they give to his language has never been
condemned?

To elucidate the point still further, I shall assume as a prm-
ciple, what you yourselves acknowledge — that ike doctrine of
efficacums grace has netter been condemned, and that the pope
has not touched it by his Constitution. And, in faot» when
he proposed to pass judgment on the five propositions, the
question of efficacious grace was protected against all censoze.
This is perfectly evident from the judgments of the consul-
ters,* to whom the pope committed wem for examination.
These judgments I have in my possession, in common with
many other persons in Paris, and, among the resty the Bishop
of Montpelier,t who brought them from Rome. It appears
from this document, that they were divided in thdr senti*
ments ; that the chief persons among them, such as the Mas-
ter of the Sacred Palace, the Gommissary of the Holy Office^
the General of the Augustinians, and others, oonceivmg that

* These Jadgments, or Vota ConstiUorum, as they were called, have been
often printed, and particularly at the end of the JownuU deM.de^ Amomr
—a boolc essentially necessary to the right understanding of all the intrigoaa
employed in the condemnation of Jansenius. (Note br Kioole.)

t This was Francis du Bosquet who, from being Bishop ox LodevQ, waa
made Bishop of Montpelier in 1655, and died in 1678. He was one of the most
learned bishops of his time in ecclesiastical matters. (Note by Nicole.)

LET. XVn.] POPES FADOTI4B IN MATTEB8 OF FACT. 31 7

these propositions mighfe be UDdeTstood in the sense of tffi/na^
eums grace^ were of o[Hnion that thej ought not to be cen-
sured : whereas the r^ while they agreed that the proposi-
tions would not have merited condemnation, had thej borne
that sense, judged that they- ought to be censured, because,
as they contended, this was yery far from being their proper
and natural sense. The pope, accordingly, condemned them ;
and all parties haye acquiesced in his Judgment.

It is certain, then^ father, that efficacious grace has not
been condemned. Indeed, it is so powerfully supported by St
Augustine, by St Thomas, and all nis school, by a great many
popes and councils, and by all tradition, that to tax it with
heresy would be an act of impiety. Now, all those whom
yon condenm as heretics declare that they find nothing in
Jansen but this doctrine of efficacious grace. And this was
the only point which they maintained at Rome. You haye
acknowledged this yourself, when ^ou declare that, " when
pleading before tho pope, they did not say a single word
about the propositions, but occupied the whole time in talking
about efficacious grace."* So that whether they be right or
wrong in this supposition, it is undeniable, at least, that what
they suppose to be the sense is not a heretical sense; and,
that, consequently, they are no heretics: for, to state the
matter in two words, dther Jansen has merely taught the
doctrine of efficacious grace, and in this case he has no errors ;
or he has taught some other thing, and in this case he has no
defenders, llie whole question turns on ascertaining whe-
ther Jansen has actually maintained something different from
efficacious grace; and should it be found that he has, you
will haye the honour of haying better understood him, but
they will not haye the misfortune of haying erred from the
faith.

It is matter of thankfulness to God, then, father, that there
is in reality no heresy in the Church. The question relates
entirely to a point of fact, out of which no heresy can be
made; for the Church, with diyine authority, decides the
points offaUh^ and cuts off from her body all who revise to
receiye them. But she does not act in the same manner in
regard to matters o£f(iet. And the reason is, that our sal-
yation is attached to the faith which has been reyealed to us,
and which is presenred in the Church by tradition, but that
it has no dependence on facts which haye not been reyealed
by Qod. Thus we are bound to beUeye that the command-

* Cavill, p. 35.

818 FIlOVmCIAL LETTERS. [LET. XVH.

ments of God are Dot impracticable; but we are under no
obligation to know what Jansen has sud upon that subject.
In the determination of points of faith, Orod ^ides the Ghurdi
by the aid of his unerring Spirit ; whereas m matters of hct,
he leaves her to the direction of reason and the senses, which
are the natural judges of such matters. None but Gkxl was
able to instruct the Church in the faith; but to learn whe-
ther this or that proposition is contained in Jansen, all we
require to do is to read his book. And from hence it foUowa^
that while it is heresy to resist the decisions of the fSiith, be-
cause this amounts to an opposing of our own spirit to the
Spirit of God, it is no heresy, though it may be an act ^
presumption, to disbelieve certiun particular faots^ because
this is no more than opposing reason — it may be enlightened
reason — to an authority which is great indeed, but in this
matter not infallible.

What I have now advanced is admitted by all theolo^^anfl^
as appears from the following axiom of Cardinal Belarmine^
a member of your Society : ** General and lawful councils
<ire incapable of error in defining the dogmas of faith ; but
they may err in questions of fact.'' In another place he
says : ** The pope, as pope, and even as the head of a uni-
versal council, may err m particular controversies of fkct,
which depend principally on the information and testimony
of men." Cardinal Baronius speaks in the same manner:
** Implicit submission is due to the decisions of councils in
points of faith ; but, in so far as persons and their writings
are concerned, the censures which have been prononnoed
against them have not been so rigorously observed, becanse
there is none who may not chance to be deceived in sadi
matters." I may add, that, to prove this point, the Ardi-
bishop of Toulouse* has deduced the following rule from
the letters of two great popes — St Leon and Pelagius XL :
^ That the proper object of councils is the faith ; and what-
soever is determined by them, independently of the fidth, may
be reviewed and examined anew: whereas nothing ought to
be re-examined that has been decided in a matter oflaith ;
because, as Tertullian observes, the rule of faith alone is
immovable and irrevocable."

Hence it has been seen that, while general and htwfbl
councils have never contradicted one another in points of

* M. de Marca, an illustrious prelate, who was archbishop of Toakmi^ b^
tovd h£ was nominated to the see of Parley of which he was only prevented W
death from taking possession. (Nicole.)

LET. XVn.] POINTS OP PAITH AND PACT. 319

faith, because, as M. de Toulouse has said, " it is not allow-
able to examine de novo decisions in matters of faith ;'' seve-
ral instances have occurred in which these same councils have
disagreed in points of fact, where the discussion turned upon
the sense of an author ; because, as the same prelate observes,
quoting the popes as his authorities, ^^ every thing deter-
mined in councils, not referring to the fsuth, may be reviewed
and examined de novo." An example of this contrariety
was furnished by the fourth and fifth councils, which dif*
fered in their interpretation of the same authors. The same
thing happened in the case of two popes, about a proposition
maintained by certain monks of Scythia. Pope Hormisdas,
understanding it in a bad sense, had condemned it ; but Pope
John n., his successor, upon re-examining the doctrine un-
derstood it in a good sense, approved it, and pronounced it
to be orthodox. Would you say that for this reason one of
these popes was a heretic ? And must you not, consequently,
acknowledge that, provided a person condemn the heretical
sense whi(£ a pope may have ascribed to a book, he is no
heretic because he declines condemning that book, while he
understands it in a sense which it is certidn the pope has not
condemned? If this cannot be admitted, one of these popes
must have fallen into error.

J have been anxious to familiarize you with these dis-
crepancies among Catholics regarding questions of fact,
which involve the understanding of l£e sense of a writer,
showing you father against father, pope against pope^ and
council against council, to lead you from these to other
examples of opposition, similar in their nature, but some-
what more disproportioned in respect of the parties con-
cerned. For, m the instances I am now to adduce, you
will see councils and popes ranged on one side^ and Jesuits
on the other ; and yet you have never charg^ your brethren,
for this opposition, even with presumption, much less with
heresy.

Tou are well aware, father, that the writings of Origen
were condemned by a great many popes and councils, and
particularly by the fifth general council, as chargeable with
<^rtain heresies, and among others, that of the reeoneUiO'
iion of the devils at the day of judgment. Do you suppose
that, after this, it became absolutely imperative, as a test of
Catholicism, to confess that Origen actually maintained
these errors, and that it is not enough to condemn them,
without attributing them to him? u this were true, what

n

S20 PBOTIKCtAI. LBTTEnS. [U

would become of jour worthy Father Halloix, who
tertcd the puritj of Origen's Mth, as well u nu
Catholi(», who Dare attempted the Bome thinr,
Fico Mirandola, and Qenehrard, doctor of the Sc
le it not, moreover, a certun fact, that the sa;
general coancil condemned the writings of T
i^ainBt Bt Cyril, deBcribing them u impious, "coi
toe tnie faitn, and bunted with the Nestoriaii h«
And jet this has not prerented Father Birmood, ^
from defending him, or toi eajing, in his Life of
ther, that " his writings are entirel; free from the I
Nestorina."

It is evident, therefore, that as the Church, in e
ing a book, assumes that the error which she eon*
contained in that book, it is a point of faith to b
error as condemned; but it ia not a point of fkitl
that the book, in fact, contwns the error which the
supposes it does. Enough has been aaid, I think,
this; I shall, therefore, conclude m; esamplea bj ra
that of Pope Honorins, the historj of which is so wel
At the commencement of the seventh centorf, the
being troubled by the heresy of the Monothelite^t tl
with the view of terminating the controversy, passed
which seemed favourable to these heretics, at wfaii
took offence. The affair, nevertheless, passed ant
making moch disturbance during his pontiGcata; 1
years after, the Church being assembled in the sirtb
council, in which Pope Agatnon predded by his 1^
decree was impeached, and, after being read and ea
was oondemned as containing the heresy of the Moni
and under that charater burnt, in open court, aid
the other wTitin^_ of these heretics. Such was thi
paid to this decision, and such the unanimity irith
was received throughout the whole Church, that it
terwaids ratified by two other general councils, and

or dlvMEng 01
otbttr vozdi, npreKaClD'- ■*'- •'-""" — •"— — -

illrlne. Than It same n

Ihs bltb, and that Ui ml oSeam m ,,

wUoh then oimt lnb> TOgoe, 3M Jfudtor VOoi, ■* aaUM la I
whoa b* oiUsd, Id pr«(enn<w, rk* JTaOa- q/dArt.

t This WM JuMi Smrad (UW nnde ot ijithniij, IBimuIr DM
lBuiwdJ«ilt,ud<)iinbMDrtaLODliZm. H* ni dMIvoislM
lilesluUnlhbtnliil. (lUlMa 0* la LUt. Rau., ir., AH)

t Tk* HtnaOiiHla, iriw arose In the seTaiUi «aitiUT, wan ■> a
hcMlDc mat (lun was bat «M wfll In ClulsC, his bomaa Will bdD|

LET. XVn.] POINTS OP PAITH AND PACT. 321

by two popes, Leon 11. and Adrian IE., the latter of whom
lived two hundred years after it had been passed ; and this
universal and harmonious agreement remidned undisturbed
for seven or eight centuries. Of late years, however, some
authors, and among the rest Cardinal Belarmine, without
seeming to dread the imputation of heresy, have stoutly
maintained, against all this array of popes and councils, that
the writings of Honorius are free from the error which had
been ascribed to them ; *' because," says the cardinal, " ge-
neral councils being liable to err in questions of fact, we
have the best grounds for asserting that the sixth council
was mistaken with regard to the fact now under considera-
tion; and that, misconceiving the sense of the Letters of
Honorius, it has placed this pope most unjustly in the ranks
of heretics.'' Observe, then, I pray you, father, that a man
is not heretical for saying that Pope Honorius was not a
heretic; even though a great many popes and councils,
ailer examining his writings, should have declared that he
was so.

I now come to the question before us, and shall allow you
to state your case as favourably as you can. What vnll you
then say, father, in order to stamp your opponents as heretics?
That '^ Pope Innocent X. has declared that the error of the
five propositions is to be found in Jansen?'' I grant you
that. What inference do you draw from it? That "it is
heretical to deny that the error of the five propositions is to
be found in Jansen ? " How so, father ? have we not here
a question of fact, exactly similar to the preceding examples ?
The pope has declared that the error of the five propositions
is contained in Jansen, in the same way as his predecessors
decided that the errors of the Nestorians and the Monothe-
lites polluted the pages of Theodoret and Honorius. In the
latter case, your writers hesitate not to sav, that while they
condemn the heresies, they do not allow that these authors
actually maintained them ; and, in like manner, your oppo-
nents now say, that they condemn the five propositions, but
cannot admit that Jansen has taught them. Iruly, the two
cases are as like as they could well be; and if there be any
disparity between them, it is easy to see how far it must go
in favour of the present question, by a comparison of many

S articular circumstances, which, as they are self-evident, I
not specify. How comes it to pass, then, that when
placed in precisely the same predicament^ your friends are
Catholics and your opponents heretics? On what strange

322 PBOVIKCIAL LETTERS. [lBT. XTU.

principle of exception do you deprive the latter of a liberty
which you freely award to all the rest of the faithful ? What
answer will you make to this, father ? Will joa say, ^ The
pope has confirmed his Constitution by a brief/' To this I
would reply, that two general councils and two popes con-
firmed the condemnation of the Letters of Honorius. Bat
what argument do you found upon the language c^ that
brief, in which all that the pope says is, that ** he has con-
demned the doctrine of Jansen in these five propoutioxis?''
What does that add to the Constitution, or what more can
you infer from it? Nothing, certainly, except that as the
sixth council condemned the doctrine of Honoriai» in the be-
lief that it was the same with that of the Monothdites, so the
pope has said that he has condemned the doctrine of Janaen
m these five propositions, because he was led to suppofie b
was the same witn that of the five propositions. And how
could he do otherwise than suppose it ? Tour Society pub-
lished nothing else ; and you yourself, father, who have as-
serted that the said propositions were in that author ^ word
for word,'' happened to be in Rome (for I know allyoor ibo-
tions) at the time when the censure was passed. Was he to
distrust the sincerity or the competence of so many grvfo
ministers of religion ? And how could he help being conymced
of the fact, after the assurance which yon had given hkn
that the propositions were in that author ^ word for word?*'
It is evident, therefore, that in the event of its bemg found
that Jansen has not supported these doctrines, it would be
wrong to say, as your writers have done in the cases before
mentioned, that the pope has deceived himself in this point
of fact, which it ^is painful and offensive to publish at any
time: the proper phrase is, that you have deceived the pope ;
which, as you are now pretty well known, will create no
scandal.

Determined, however, to have a heresy made outt ooat
what it may, you have attempted, by the following mn-
ncBuvre, to shift the question from the point of fact, and
make it bear upon a point of faith. ^ The pope,** say yoOf
'' declares that he has condemned the doctrine of Jansen in
these five propositions ; therefore it is essenlial to the faith
to hold that the doctrine of Jansen touching these five pro-
positions is heretical, be what U may^ Here is a strange
point of faith, that a doctrine is heretical he toJto t^ may.
\VliatI if Jansen should happen to maintain that *^wt ors
capable of resisting internal grace,** and that **itis fake to

LET. Xrn.] THE POPE DECEIVED. 323

say that Jesus Christ died for the elect onli//' would this doc-
trrne be condemned just because it is his doctrine? Will the
proposition, that **' man has a freedom of will to do good or
evil/' be true when found in the pope's Constitution, and false
when discovered in Jansen ? By what fatality must <he be
reduce{f V> such a predicament, that truth, wnen admitted
into his book, becomes heresy? You must confess, then,
that he is only heretical on the supposition that he is friendly
to the errors condemned, seeing tnat the Constitution of the
pope is the rule which we must apply to Jansen, to judge if
nis character answer the description there given of him; and,
accordingly, the question, Is his doctrine heretical f must be
resolved by another question of fact, Does it correspond to
the natural sense of these propositions f as it must necessarily
be heretical if it <£> correspond to that sense, and must ne-
cessarily be orthodox if it be of an opposite character. For,
in one word, since, according to the pope and the bishops,
** the propositions are condemned in tJieir proper and na^
tural sense/' they cannot possibly be condemned in the sense
of Jansen, except on the understanding that the sense of Jan-
sen is the same with the proper and natural sense of these
propositions ; and this I mfuntain to be purely a question of
fact.

The question, then, still rests upon the point of fact, and
cannot possibly be tortured into one afifecting the faith. But
though incapable of twisting it into a matter of heresy, vou
have it in your power to maLe it a pretext for persecution,
and might, pernaps, succeed in this, were there not good
reason to hope that nobody will be found so blindly devoted
to your interests as to countenance such a dbgraceful pro-
ceeding, or inclined to compel people, as you wish to do^ to
sign a declaration that they condemn these propositions in the
sense of Jansen, without exphuning what tne sense of Jansen
is. E^w people are disposed to sign a blank confession of
faith. . Now, this would really be to sign one of that descrip-
tion, leaving you to fill up the blank afterwards with what-
soeyer you pleased, as you would be at liberty to interpret
aocording to your own taste the unexplained seQse ,of Jansen.
Let it be explained, then, beforehand, otherwise we shall have^
I fear, another version of your proximate pow$r, without any
sense at sM—abstrahendo db omni sensu,* This mode of
proceeding, you must be aware, does not take with the world.
Men, in general, detest all ambiguity, especially in the matter

* See Letter I., p. 78. / '

324 PROVINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. XYTL

of religion, ivhere it is highly reasonahle that one should know
at least what one is ask^ tb condeipn. And how is it pos-
sihle for doctors, who' are persuaded that Jansen can bear no
o^er sense than that of emcacious grace, to consent to de-
clare that ^Bjf condemn his doctrine without explaining it»
since, with their present convictions, which no means are
used to alter, -^is would be neither more nor less than to
condemn efficacious grace, which icannot be condemned with^
out sin? Would it not, therefore, be a piece of monstrous
tyranny, to place* them in such an unhappy dilemma, that
they must either bHng guilt upon their souls in the si^bt of
God, by signing that condemnation against their conscienoei^
or be denounc^ as heretics for refusing to sign it.*

But there is a mystery under all this. Ton Jesmts cannot
move a step without a stratagem. It remuns for me to ex-
plain why you do not explain the sense of Jansen. The 8(de
purpose of my writing is to discover your designs, and, by
discovering,, to.firustrate them. I must, therdTore, inform
those who a;re not already aware of the fact, that your grettt
concern in this dispute being to uphold the sufficiifU grace
of your Moling you could not effect this without destroying
the efficaciotis grace which stands directly opposed to it. Per-
ceiving, however, that the latter was now sanctioned at Bome^
and by all the learned m the Ohurch, and unable to combat
the doctrine on its own merits, you resolved to attack it in a
clandestine way, under the name of the doctrine of Jansen.
You were resolved, accordingly, to get Jansen condemned
without explanation; and, to gtun your purpose^ gave out
that his doctrine was not that of efficacious graces so that
every one might think he was at liberty to condemn the one
without denying the other. Hence your efforts, in the pre-
sent day, to impress this idea upon the minds of such as have
no acquaintance with that author ; an object which you your-
self, father, have attempted, bv means of the following mg^
nibus syllogism : <* The pope has condemned the doctfine of
Jansenms ; but the pope has not condemned effica<nous grace:
therefore, the doctrine of efficacious grace must be different
from that of Jansenius«"t If this mode of reasoning were
conclusive, it might be demonstrated in the same way thai-
Honorius and all his defenders are heretics of the same kind.
*' The sixth council has condemned the doctrine of Honorius ;

* The persecution here supposed, was soon, however, lamentably realised,
and that exactly in the way which our author seemed to think too moostronp
to be attemptea.

t CaviU, p. 23.

LET. XVn.] FEBSECUTION OF JANSENISTS. 325

but the council has not condemned the doctrine of the Church:
therefore the doctrine of Honorius is different from that of
the Church ; and therefore all who defend him are heretics.*'
It is obvious that no conclusion can be drawn from this ; for
the pope has done no more than condemned the doctrine of
the five propositions which was represented to him as the
doctrine of Jansen.

But it matters not ; vou have no intention to make use oi
this logic for any length of time. Poor as it is, it will last
sufficiently long to serve your present turn. All that you
wish to effect by it^ in the mean time, is to induce those who
are unwilling to condemn efficacious grace, to condemn Jan-
sen with the -less scruple. When this object has been accom-
plished, your argument will soon be forgotten, and their
signatures remaining as an eternal testimony in condemnation
of Jansen, will furnish you with an occasion to make a direct
attack upon efficacious grace, by another mode of reasoning
much more solid than the former, which shall be forthcom-
ing in proper time. " The doctrine of Jansen," you will
argue, *^ has been condemned I)y the universal subscriptions
of the Church. Now this doctrine is manifestly that of effi-
cacious grace," (and it will be easy for you to prove that);
** therefore the doctrine of efficacious grace is condemned
even by the confession of his defenders.

Behold your reason for proposing to sign the condemnation
of a doctrine without giving an explanation of it 1 Behold
the advantage you expect to gain from subscriptions thus
procured! Should your opponents, however, refuse to sub-
scribe, you have another trap laid for them. Having dexter-
ously combined the question of faith with that of fact, and
not allowing them to separate between them, nor to sign the
one without the other, the consequence will be^ that, because
they could not subscribe the two together, you will publish
it in all directions that they have refused both. And thus
though, in point of fact, they simply decline acknowledging
that Jansen has nudntained the propositions which they con-
demn, which cannot be called heresy, you will boldly assert
that they have refused to condemn the propositions them-
selves, and that it is this that constitutes theur heresy.

Thus the fruit which you expect to reap from their refusal,
will be no less useful to you than what you might have gained
from their consent. In the event of their signatures being
exacted, they will fall into your snares, whether they sign or
not, and in both cases you will gain your point; such is your

826 PBOVINOIAL LETTERS. [lET. XVn*

dexterity in uniformly patting matters, whatever bias they
may happen to take in their course^ into a train for your own
advantage 1

How well I know you, father ! and how grieved am I to
see that God has abandoned you so far as to allow you such,
happy success in such an unhappy course 1 Your good fortune
deserves commiseration, and can excite envy only in the breasts
of diose who know not what truly good rortune is. It is an
act of charity to thwart the success you aim at in the whole
of this proceeding, seeing that you can only reach it by the
aid of falsehood, and by procuring credit to one of two lies—
eidier that the Church bias condemned efficacious graces or
that iboBe who defend that doctrine muntain the five con-
demned errors.

The world must, therefore, be apprized of two &ct8 : Firsts
That, by your own confession, efficacious grace has not been
condemned; and, secondly. That nobody supports these errors.
Let it be known that those who may refuse to sig^ what you
are so anxious to exact from them, refuse merely in regard to
the question a£fact; and that, being quite ready to subscribe
that oi faUhi they cannot on that account be deemed here-
tical; because, to repeat it once more, though it be matter of
faith to believe these propositions to be heretical, it will never
be matter of faith to hold that they are to be found in the
pages of Jansen. They are innocent of all error; that i»
enough. It may be that they interpret Jansen too favour-
ably ; but it may be also that you do not interpret him favour-
ably enough. Upon this question I do not enter. All that
I know is, that, according to your maxims, you believe that
you may, without sin, denounce him as a heretic^ contrai7 to
your own convictions ; whereas, according to their maxims,
they cannot, without sin, declare him to be a Catholic, unless
they are persuaded he is one. They are more honest than
you, father; they have examined Jansen more £uthfully than
you ; thev are no less intelligent than you : they are, there-
fore, no less eredible witnesses than you. But come what
may of this point of fact, they are certainly Catholics ; for in
order to be so, it is not necessary to declare that another man
is not a Catholic : it is enough, in all conscience, if a person,
without charging error upon any one else, succeed in vindi-
cating himself.

Reverend father, — ^If you have found any difficulty in deci.

phflring this letter, which is csrtainl; not printed In the best
poi^le tjpe, blame nobodj hut jourself. PriTileges ore not
BO easily granted to me astbej' are to ^ou. You can procure
them eren for the porpOBO of combating miracles ; I cannot
obtain them even to defend mjself. The printing-houses aie
perpetuollj haunted. In Boch drcnmstances, jon jourBelf
would not adviM me to write yod an j more letters ; for it is
really a sad annojanee to b« obliged to hava recourse to an
Osuabruck impression. *

• lUi cMlHript, wliliili ii vSDtIng in Oie ordlnur •dlUom Mip ww J In
thgflrUcaiUon^ibavlHBot thlalBtter. From this It aivotn taic in ooo-
Maosiu ntittie eitnau dsdis of (ha Juolls tDdlBcortrlliBanltaoT, ud ttwlr
timniMliig raentmaniagatiut'Iilm, bs im auopdlal to (end thu IMtar to
OBubrndL KiDtminemBateiCkmuj, irhaalt*MnlaMdlaaT>tjBQill
and Isdiatbiiit trw. Tbepr4i>iI<wanfBnMl[airaieoffloUlU«MM)«,b>piln(
boolu, which, St this time, wlientteJesnlUKOro fn po«lv ItwM diffloiih ttt
their apFODeuta to oblolu. Annslhadpnbllslieda^lDsttMiiununaDtPort-

830 PBOYINCIAL LETTERS. [LBT. XTUI.

that they rightly understand Jansen. All I shall say on the
point, father, is, that it appears to me that were he to bo
judged according to your own rules, it would be difficult to
prove him not to be a good Catholic. We shall try him by
the test you have proposed. '^ To know," say you, ** who*
ther Jansen is sound or not, we must inquire whether he
defends efficacious grace in the manner of Calvin, who deniei
that man has the power of resisting it — ^in wfaioh case he
would be heretical ; or in the manner of the Thomista^ who
admit that it may be resisted — for then he would be Cathie
lie." Judge, then, father, whether he holds that grace may
be resisted, when he says, ** That we have alwavs a power to
resist grace, according to the council; that n*ee will may
always act or not act, will or not will, consent or notoonsenty
do good or do evil ; and that man, in this life, has always
these two liberties, which may be called by some oontndio-
tions."* Judge, likewise, if he be not opposed to the error
of Calvin, as you have described it, when neoccuiuesawfaole
chapter (21st) in showing *< that the Church has condemned
that heretic who denies that efficacious grace acts on the free
will in the manner which has been so long believed in ^e
Church, so as to leave it in the power of free will to oonaent
or not to consent ; whereas, according to St Augustine and
the council, we have always the power of withholding our
consent if we choose ; and, according to St Prosper, Gh)d
bestows even upon his elect the will to persevere, m such a
way as not to deprive them of the power to will the con-
trary." And, in one word, judge if he do not agree with
the Thomists, from the following declaration in chapter 4th :
*^ That all that the Thomists have written with the view of
reconciling the efficaciousness of grace with the power of
resisting it, so entirely coincides with his judgment* that to
ascertcun his sentiments on this subject, we have only to con-
sult their writings."

Such being the language he holds on these heads, my oju^
nion is, that be believes in the power of resisting grace ; that
he differs from Calvin, and agrees with the Thomists, because
he has said so ; and that he is, therefore^ according to your
own showing, a Catholic.f If you have any means of know-
ing the sense of an author otherwise than by his expressions;
and if, without quoting any of his passages, you are disposed
to maintain, in direct opposition to his own words, that he

* His Treatises passim, and particularly torn. S^ i. 8, o. 20
t See Historicalintroduction.

LET. XVin.] RESISTIBILITT OF GRACE. 331

** the sense of Jansen." How, indeed, could they be other-
wise than zealous agdnst it, believing as they did the decla-
rations of those who publicly affirmed that it was identically
the same with that of Calvin ?

I must maintain, then, father, that you have no further
reason to quarrel with your adversaries ; for they detest that
doctrine as heartily as you do. I am only astonished to see
that you are ignorant of this fact, and that you have such
an imperfect acquaintance with their sentiments on this point,
which they have so repeatedly expressed in thdr published
works. I flatter myself that, were you more intimate with
these writings, you would deeply regret your not having
made yourself acquainted sooner, in the spirit of peace, wit£
a doctrine which is in every respect so holy and so Christian,
but which passion, in the absence of knowledge, now prompts
you to oppose. You would find, that they not only hold
that an effective resistance may be made to those feebler
graces which go under the name of exciting or in^fieobcwusj
from their not terminating in the good with which they in-
spire us ; but that they are moreover as firm in maintaining,
in opposition to Calvin, the power which the will has to resist
even efficacious and victorious grace^ as they are in contend-
ing against Molina for the power of this grace over the will^
and fully as jealous for the one of these truths as they are
for the other. They know too well that man, of his own
nature, has always the power of sinning, and of resisting
grace; and that, since he became corrupt, he unhappOy
carries in his breast a fount of concupiscence, which infinitely
augments that power ; but that, notwithstanding this, when
it pleases God to visit him with his mercy, he makes the
soul to do what he wills, and in the manner be wills it to be
done, while, at the same time^ the infallibility of the divine
operation does not in any way destroy the natural liberty of
man, in consequence of the secret and wonderful ways by
which God operates this change. This has been most
admirably explained by St Augustine, in such a way as to
dissipate all those imaginary inconsistencies which the oppo-
nents of efficacious grace suppose to exist between the
sovereign power of grace over the free-will and the power
which the free-will has to resist grace. For, according to
that great saint, whom the popes and the church have held
to be a standard authority on this subject, God transforms
the heart of man, by shedding abroad in it a heavenly sweet-
ness, which, surmounting the delights of the fleshi and in-

832 PROYINOIAL LETTEBS. [LET. XYUt,

dudng him to feel^ on the one hand, his own mortalitj and
nothingness, and to discover, on the other hand, the m&jettj
and eternity of €k>d, makes him conceive a distaste for th»
pleasures of sin, which interpose between him and incomm-
tible happiness. Finding his chiefest loj in the God imo
charms mm, his soul is drawn towards nim infallibly, but of
its own accord, by a motion perfectly free, spontaneous, love-
impelled; so that it would be its torment and punishment to
be separated from him. Not but that the person has always
the power of forsaking his God, and that he may not aotuaUy
forsake him, provided he choose to do it. But how could
he choose such a course, seeing that the will always incUnea
to that which is most agreeable to it, and that in the case
we now suppose nothing can be more agreeaUe than the
possession or that one good, which comprises in itself all other
good things. ^ Quod enim (says St Augustine) amfUusnoB
deUctat, Becwtdum operemur necesse est — Our acttons are
necessarilv determined by that which affords us the greatest
pleasure.

Such is the manner in which God regulates the firee-wiD
of man without encroaching on its freedom, and in which the
free-will, which always may, but never will, resist his graoe^
turns to God with a movement as voluntary as it is irresist-
ible, whensoever he is pleased to draw it to himself by the
sweet construnt of his efficacious inspirations.*

These, father, are the divine principles of St Aueustme
and St Thomas, according to which it is equally true Siat w»
have the power of resisting grace, contrary to Calvin's opinion,
and thal^ nevertheless, to employ the langpiage of Pojw CQe-
ment YUI., in his paper addressed to the Osngregation de
AtucUiiSf ** God forms within us the motion of our willy and
effectually disposes of our hearts, by virtue of that empire
which his supreme m^esty has over the volitions of men» as
well as over the other creatures under heaven, according to
St Augustine.''

On the same principle, it follows that we act of ourselves,
and thus, in opposition to another error of Calvin, that we
have merits which are truly and properly ours; and yet, as
God is the first principle of our actions, and as, in the lan-
guage of St Paul, he " worketh in us that which is pleasing

* The reader may well be at s loss to see the difTerenoe between this and
the Reformed doctrine. Some explanations will be found in the Historical
Introdaction.

LET. XVm.] RESISTIBILITY OF GRACE. 333

in his sight;" **our merits are the gifts of God," as the
Council of Trent says.* \

By means of this distinction we demolish the profane senti- '
ment of Luther, condemned hy that coiincil, namely, that
** we co-operate in no way whatever towards our salvation,
any more than inanimate things ;"i* and, hy the same mode
of reasoning, we overthrow the equally profane sentiment of
the school of Molina, who will not allow that it is hy the
strength of divine grace that we are enabled to co-operate
with it in the work of our salvation, and who thereby comes
into hostile collision with that principle of faith established bv
St Paul, ** That it is God who worketh in us both to will
and to do."

In fine, in this way we reconcile all those passages of
Scripture which seem quite inconsistent with each other,
such as the following : " Turn ye unto God" — ** Turn thou
us, and we shall be turned" — ^** Oast away iniquity from you"
— ^" It is God who taketh away iniquity from his people" —
"Bring forth works meet for repentance" — " Lord, thou hast
wrought all our works in us" — ^** Make ye a new heart and a
new spirit" — ** A new spirit will I give you, and a new heart
will I create within you," &c.

The only way of reconciling these apparent contrarieties,
which ascribe our good actions at one time to God, and at
another time to ourselves, is to keep in view the distinction,
as stated by St Augustine, that ** our actions are ours in re-
spect of the free vdll which produces them ; but that they
are also of God, in respect of his grace which enables our
free will to produce them ;f' and that, as the same writer
elsewhere remarks, ^ €K)d enables us to do what is pleasing
in his sight, by making us will to do even what we might
have been unwilling to do."

It thus appears, father, that your opponents are perfectly
at one with the modem Thomists, for the Thomists hold,
with them, both the power of resisting grace, and the infalli-
bility of the effect of grace; of which latter doctrine they
profess themselves the most strenuous advocates. Of this
we may judge from a common maxim of their theology,
which Alvarez,:^ one of the leading men among them, repeats

* Whatever the Oonnoil of Trent may say, every one muit eee that meritt
vndgiJU are two very different things.

t Tus sentiment was falsely ascribed to Lather hy the GoondL (Leydedc,
De Dogm. Jan. 275.) ^ , _.

X Diego (or Didacus) Alvares was one of the most celebrated theologians of
the order of St Dominick; he flourished in the sixteenth and seventeenth cen-

T

LET. XVin.] OBACE AND FREE WILL. 335

Let the whole world ohserve, then, that hy your own ad-
mission, the truth of this efficacious grace, which is so essen-
tial to all the acts of piety, which is so dear to the Church,
and which is the purchase of her Saviour's hlood, is so indis-
putably Catholic, that there is not a single CathoUc, not even
among the Jesuits, who would not acknowledge its orthodoxy.
And let it be noticed, at the same time, that, according to
your own confession, not the slightest suspicion of error can
fall on those whom you have so often stigmatized with it. For
so long as you charged them with clandestine heresies, with-
out choosing to specify them by name, it was as difficult for
them to defend themselves as it was easy for you to bring
such accusations. But now, when you have come the length
of declaring that the error which constrains you to oppose
them, is the heresy of Calvin which you supposed them to
hold, it must he apparent to every one that they are innocent
of all error ; for so decidedly hostile are they to this, the only
error you charge against them, that they protest, by their
discourses, by their books, by every mode, in short, in which
they can testify their sentiments, that they condemn that
heresy with their whole heart, and in the same manner as it
has been condemned by the Thomists, whom you acknow-
ledge, without scruple, to be Catholics, and who have never
been suspected of being any thing else.

What will you say against them now, father? Will you
say that they are heretics still, because, although they do not
adopt the sense of Calvin, they will not allow that the sense
of Jansen is the same witi that of Calvin ? Will you presume
to say that this is matter of heresy? Is it not a pure question
of fact, with which heresy has nothing to do ? It would be
heretical to say that we have not the power of resisting effi-
cacious grace ; but would it be so to doubt that Jansen held
that doctrine? Is this a revealed truth? Is it an article of
faith which must be believed, on pain of damnation? or is it
not, in spite of you, a point of fact, on account of which it
would be ridiculous to hold that there were heretics in the
Church.

Drop this epithet, then, father, and give them some other
name, more suited to the nature of your dispute. Tell them
they are ignorant and stupid — ^that they misunderstand Jan-
sen. '^ '-' ' • ' -^»- ^—

versi

As

to defend them, 1 shall not give myself much trouble to show

LET. XVllI.] THE JANSENISTS GOOD CATHOLICS. 337

denies this power of resistance, and that he is for Calvin and
against the Thomists, do not be afraid that I will accuse you
of heresy for that. I shall only say, that you do not seem
properly to understand Jansen ; but we shall not be the less
children of the same Church.

How comes it then, father, that you manage this dispute
in such a passionate spirit, and that you treat as your most
cruel enemies, and as the most' pestilent of heretics, a class of
persons whom you cannot accuse of any error, nor of any
thing whatever, except that they do not understand Jansen
as you do ? For, what else in the world do you dispute about,
except the sense of that author ? Tou would have them to
condemn it. They ask what you mean them to condemn.
You reply, that you mean the error of Calvin. They rejoin
that they condemn that error ; and with this acknowledg-
ment (unless it is syllables you wish to condemn, and not the
thing which they signify), you ought to rest satisfied. If
they refuse to say that they condemn the sense of Jansen, it
is because they believe it to be that of St Thomas. And
thus this unhappy phrase has a very equivocal meaning be-
twixt you. In your mouth it signifies the sense of Calvin ;
in theirs, the sense of St Thomas. Tour dissensions arise
entirely from the different ideas which you attach to the
same term. Were I made umpire in the quarrel, I would
interdict the use of the word Jansen on both sides; and
thus, by obliging you merely to express what you understand
by it, it would be seen that you ask nothing more than the
condemnation of Calvin, to which they willingly agree ; and
that they ask nothing more than the vindication of the sense
of St Augustine and St Thomas, in which you again perfectly
coincide.

I declare, then, father, that for my part I shall continue
to regard them as good Catholics, whether they condemn
Jansen on finding him erroneous, or refuse to condemn him,
from finding that he maintains nothing more than what you
yourself acknowledge to be orthodox; and I shall say to
them what St Jerome said to John, bishop of Jerusalem,
who was accused of holding the eight propositions of Origen :
" Either condemn Origen, if you acknowledge that he has
maintuned these errors, or else denj that he has maintained
them — Aut nega hoc diansseeum ati% argtdtur; aut ti laou^us
est talia^ eum damna qui diaxrit.

See, father, how these persons acted, whose sole concern
was with princinles, and not with persons; whereas you who

338 PROVINCIAL LETTEBS. [LET. XTIU.

aim at persons more than principles, consider it a matter of
no consequence to condemn errors, unless you procure the
condemnation of the individuals to whom you choose to im-
pute them.

How ridiculously violent is such conduct 1 and how ill cal-
culated to insure success 1 I told you before, and I repeat
it, violence and verity can make no impression on each otiier.
Never were your accusations more outrageous, and never
was the innocence of your opponents more cuscemible : never
has efficacious grace been attacked with greater subtlety, and
never has it been more triumphantly established. Tou have
made the most desperate efforts to convince people that your
disputes involved points of faith ; and never was it more ap-
parent that the wnole controversy turned upon a mere pmnt
of fact. In fine, you have moved heaven and earth to make
it appear that this point of fact is founded on truth ; and .
never were people more disposed to call it in question. And
the obvious reason of this is, that you do not take the na-
tural course to make them believe a point of fact, which is
to convince their senses, and point out to them in a book the
words which you allege are to b$ found in it. The means
you have adopted are so far removed from this straightfor-
ward course, that the most obtuse minds are unavoidably
struck by observing it. Why did you not take the plan
which I followed in bringing to h'ght the wicked maxims of
your authors ? — which was, to cite faithfully the passages of
their writings from which they were extracted. This was
the mode foUowed by the cur^s of Paris ; and it never fails
to produce conviction. But, when you were charged by
them with holding, for example, the proposition of Fathez
Lamy, that ''a monk mav kill a person who threatens to
publish caluomies against himself or his order, when he can-
not otherwise prevent the publication" — what would you
have thought, and what would the public have said, if they
had not quoted the place where that sentiment is literally to
be found ? or if, after having been repeatedlv demanded to
quote their authority, they still obstinately refused to do it ?
or if, instead of acceding to this, they had gone off to Rome,
and procured a bull, ordaining all men to acknowledge the
truth of their statement? Would it not be undoubtedly
concluded that thay had suprised the pope,* and that they
would never have had recourse to this extraordinary methoa,

* Surpriic is the word used to denote the case of the pope when taken at
unawares, or deceived by false accounts.

LET. XVin.] POPES MAT BE SURPRISED. 339

but for want of the natural means of substantiating the truth,
which matters of fact furnish to all who undertake to prove
them ? Accordingly, they had no more to do than to tell us
that Father Lamy teaches this doctrine in tome 5, disp. 36,
n, 118, page 644, of the Douay edition; and by this means
every body who wished to see it found.it out, and nobody
could doubt about it any longer. This appears to be a very
tasy and prompt way of putting an end to controversies of
fact, when one has got the right side of the question.

How comes it, then, father, that you do not follow this
plan ? Tou said, in your book, that the five propositions are
in Jansen, word for word, in the identical terms — iisdem ver-
bis. You were told that they were not. What remained
for you to do after this, but either to cite the page, if you
had really found the words, or to acknowledge that you were
mistaken ? But you have done neither the one nor the other.
In place of this, on finding that all the passages from Jansen,
which you sometimes adduce for the purpose of hoodwinking
people, are not ^ the condemned propositions in their indi-
vidual identity," as you had engaged to show us, you present
us with Constitutions from Rome, which, without specifj^ng
any particular place, declare that the propositions have oeen
extracted from his book.

I am sensible, father, of the respect which Christians owe
to the Holy See, and your antagonists give sufficient evi-
dence of their resolution ever to abide by its decisions. Do
not imagine that it implied any deficiency in this due defer-
ence on their part, that they represented to the pope, with all
the submission which children owe to their father, and mem-
bers to their head, that it was possible he might be deceived
on this point of fact ; — ^that he had not caused it to be inves-
tigated during his pontificate ; and that his predecessor, In-
nocent X., had merely examined into the heretical character
of the propositions, and not into the fact of their connection
with Jansen. This they stated to the commissary of the Holy
Office, one of the principal examinators, stating, that they
could not be censured, according to the sense of any author,
because they had been present^ for examination on their
own merits, and without considering to what author they
might belong : further, that upwards of sixty doctors, and
a vast number of other persons of learning and piety, had
read that book carefully over, without ever having encoun-
tered the proscribed propositions, and that they had found
some of a quite opposite description : that those who had

340 PROVI^*CIAL LETTERS. [LBT. XYIIL

prodaced that impression on the mind of the pope^ might be
reasonably presumed to have abused the confidence he re-
posed in them, inasmuch as they had an interest in decrying
that author, who has convicted Molina of upwards of fifty
errors :* that what renders this supposition still more pro-
bable is, that they have a certain maxim among them, one
of the best authenticated in their whole system of thedogyy
which is, " That they may, without criminality^ calnmnufcto
those by whom they conceive themselves to be unjutdj aiu
tacked: and that, accordingly, their testimony Wng so
suspicious, and the testimony of the other partjr so ra^peet-
able, they had some ground for supplicating his HolmMB,
with the most profound humility, tnat he would ordain an
investigation to be made into this fact, in the presenee of
doctors belonging to both parties, in order that a solemn and
regular decision might be formed on the point in dii^iite.
**Let there be a convocation of able judges (says St Baal on
a similar occasion, Ep. 76) ; let each of them be left at per-
fect freedom; let them examine my writings; let them jadffe
if they contain errors against the faith ; let them read toe
objections and the replies; that so a judgment may be mta
in due form, and wim proper knowledge of the ease^ and not
a def-iitmatory libel, without examination."

It is quite vain for you, father, to represent those who
would act in the manner I have now supposed as deficient in
proper submission to the Holy See. The popes are very &r
trom being disposed to treat Christians with that impenoos-
ness which some would fain exercise under thor name?
" The Church," says Pope St Greffory,t " which has been
trained in the school of humility, does not command with
authority, but persuades by reason, her children whom she
believes to be in error, to obey what she has taught them."
And so far from deeming it a disgrace to review a judgment
into which they may have been surprised, we have the testi-
mony of St Bernard for saying that they glory in aoknow-

« "It may be proper here to give an explanation of the hatred of the
JeBoits against Jansen. When the Atiaiutinus of that anthor wm printed in
1640, Libertus Fromond, the celebrated professor of Loayainf reaofved to In-
sert in the end of the book of his firiend, who had died two years before^ a
Sarallel between the doctrine of the Jesuits on grace, and tiie erron of um
f arseillois or semi-Pelagians. This was quite enough to raise the rancour of
the Jesuits against Jansen, whom they erroneously supposed was the author
of that naralleL And as these fathers have long smce erased from their

(Note by Nicole.)
t On the book of Job, lib. viii., cap. L

LET. Zym.] POPES MAY BB 8UB1*RISED. 341

ledging the mistake. ** The Apostolic See" (he says, Ep.
180) " can boast of this recommendation, that it never stands
on the point of honour, but 'willingly revokes a decision that
has been gained from it by surprise ; indeed, it is highly just
to prevent any from profiting by an act of injustice, and more
especially before the Holy See."

Such, father, are the proper sentiments with which the
popes ought to be inspired; for all divines are agreed that
they may be surprised, and that their supreme character, so
far from warranting them against mistakes, exposes them the
more readily to fall into them, on account of the vast number
of cares which claim their attention. This is what the same
St Gregory says to some persons who were astonished at the
circumstance of another pope having suffered himself to be
deluded: "Why do you wonder," says he, "that we should
he deceived, we who are but men ? Have you not read that
David, a king who had the spirit of prophecy, was induced,
by giving credit to the falsehoods of Ziba, to pronounce an
unjust judgment against the son of Jonathan? Who will
think it strange, then, that we, who are not prophets, should
sometimes be imposed upon by deceivers? A multiplicity of
affairs presses on us, and our minds, which, by beine obliged
to attend to so many things at once, apply themselves less close-
ly to each in particular, are the more easily liable to bo im-
posed upon in individual cases."* Truly, father, I shoutd
suppose that the popes know better than you whether they
may be deceived or not. They themselves tell us that popes,
as well as the greatest princes, are more exposed to deception
than individuals who are less occupied with important avo-
cations. This must be believed on their testimony. And it
is easy to ima^ne by what means they come to be thus over-
reached. St Bernard, in the letter which he wrote to Inno*
cent n., gives us the following description of the prooeas:
" It is no wonder, and no novel^, that the human mmd may
be deceived, and is deceived. You are surrounded bj monks
who come to you in the spirit of lying and deceit. They
have filled your ears with stories against a bishop, whose life
has been most exemplary, but who is the object of thdr hatred.
These persons bite like dogs, and strive to make good appear
evil. Meanwhile^ most holy father, you put yourself into a
rage against your own son. Why have you afforded matter
of joy to his enemies? Believe not every spirit, but try the
spirits whether they be of God. I trust that when you have

* Lib. i. in Dial.

342 PBOYINCIAL LETTERS. [LET. XVin.

ascertained the truth, all this delusion, which rests on a false
report, will be dissipated. I pray the Spirit of truth to
grant you the erace to separate light from darkness, and ta
fkvour the good by reiectuig the eyil." Tou see, then, father,
that the eminent rank of the popes does not exempt tiiem
from the influence of delusion; and I may now add, that it
only serves to render their mistakes more dangerous and im-
portant than those of other men. This is the light in which
St Bernard represents them to Pope Eugenius: ^ There is
another fault, so common among the great of this world,
that I never met one of them who was free from it; and
that is, holy father, an excessive credulity, the source of
numerous disorders. From this proceed violent persecutions
against the innocent, unfounded prejudices against the absent,
and tremendous storms about nothing (pro nihUo). This,
holy father is a universal evil, from the influence of which
if you are exempt, I shall only say, yon are the only indi-
vidual among all your compeers who can boast of that privi-
lege."*

I imagine, father, that the proofs I have brought are be-
ginning to convince you that the popes are liable to be sur-
prised. But, to complete your conversion, I shall merely
remind you of some examples, which you yourself have quoted
iiV your book, of popes and emperors whom heretics have
actually deceived. You will remember, then, that yon haye
told us that Apollinarius surprised Pope Damasius, in the
'~h2me way that Celestius surprised Zozimus. Tou inform us,
besides, that one called Athanasius deceived the Emperor
Heraclius, and prevailed on him to persecute the Catholics.
And lastly, that Sergius obtained from Honorius that infam-
ous decretal which was burnt at the sixth council, ** by play-
ing the busy-body," as you say, ** about the person of that
pope."

it appears, then, father, by your own confession, that those
who act this part about the persons of kings and popes, do
sometimes artfully entice them to persecute the faithfU de-
fenders of the truth, under the persuasion that they are per-
secuting heretics. And hence the popes, who hold nothing
in greater horror than these surprisals, have, by a letter of
Alexander HE., enacted an ecclesiastical statute which is in-
serted in the canonical law, to permit the suspension of the
execution of their bulls and decretals, when there is ground
to suspect that they have been imposed upon. "If," says

* De Consid. lib. ii>. •- ult.

fiBT. Xnn.] TESTIMONT OF THE SENSES. 34S

that pope to the Archbishop of Ravenna, ''we sometimes
send decretals to your fraternity which are opposed to your
sentiments, give yourselves no distress on that account. We
shall expect you either to carry them respectfully into execu-
tion, or to send us the reason why you conceive they ought
not to be executed ; for we deem it right that you should not
execute a decree, which may have been procured from us by
artifice and surprise." Such has been the course pursued by
the popes, whose sole object is to settle the disputes of Christ
tians, and not to follow the passionate councils of those who
strive to involve them in trouble and perplexity. Following
the advice of St Peter and St Paul, who in this followed the
commandment of Jesus Christ, they avoid domination. The
spirit which appears in their whole conduct is that of peace
and truth.* In this spirit they ordinarlyinsert in their letters
this clause, which is tacitly understood in them all — ** Si Ua est
-^sipreces veritate nitomtur — ^If it be so as we have heard it —
if the facts be true." It is quite clear, if the popes them-
selves give no force to their bmls, except in so far as they are
founded in genuine facts, that it is not the bulls alone that
prove the truth of the facts, but that, on the contrary, even
according to the canonists, it is the truth of the facts which
renders the bulls lawfully admissible.

In what way, then, are we to learn the truth of facts ? It
must be by the eyes, father, which are the legitimate judges
of such matters, as reason is the proper judge of things na-
tural and intelligible, and faith of things supernatural and
revealed. For, since you will force me into this discussion,
you must allow me to tell you, that according to the senti-
ments of the two greatest doctors of the Church, St Augus-
tine and St Thomas, these three principles of our know-
ledge, the senses, reason, and faith, have each their separate
objects, and their own degrees of certainty. And as God has
been pleased to employ the intervention of the senses to give
entrance to faith (for "faith cometh by hearing"), it follows,
that so far from faith destroying the certainty of the senses,
to call in question the faithful report of the senses, would
lead to the destruction of faith. It is on this principle that
St Thomas explicitly states that God has been pleased that
the sensible accidents should subsist in the eucharist, in order
that the senses, which judge only of these accidents, might
not be deceived.

We conclude, therefore, from this, that whatever the pro-

* Alas! alasl

344 PROVIXCIAL LETTERS. [LBT. XVIII.

position may be that is submitted to our examination, we
must first determine its nature, to ascertain to which of these
three principles it ought to be referred. If it relate to a su-
pernatural truth, we must judge of it neither by the senses
nor by reason, but by Scripture and the decisions of tiiie
Church. Should it concern an unreyealed truth and some-
thing within the reach of natural reason, reason must be its
proper judge. And if it embrace a point of fact, we must
yield to the testimony of the senses, to which it naturally be-
longs to take cognizance of such matters.

& general is this rule, that according to St Augustine
and St Thomas, when we meet with a passage eyen in the
Scripture, the literal meaning of whidi, at first ug^t, i^
pears contrary to what the senses or reason are certainly per-
suaded of, we must not attempt to reject their testimony in
this case, and yield them up to the authority of that apparent
sense of the Scripture, but we must interpret the SOTipture,
and seek out therein another sense agreeaole to that sensible
truth; because, the Word of God being infallible in the
facts which it records, and the information of the senses and
of reason, acting in their sphere, being certain also, it follows
that there must be an agreement between these two sooroes
of knowledge. And as Scripture may be interpreted in
different ways, whereas the testimony of the senses is uni-
form, we must in these matters adopt as the true interpre-
tation of Scripture that yiew which corre^nds with the
faithful report of the senses. *' Two thmgs," says St Thomas,
''must be obsenred, according to the doctrine of St Au-
gustine : first. That Scripture nas always one true sense; and,
secondly. That as it may recdye yanous senses, when we
haye discoyered one which reason plainly teaches to be
false, we must not persist in maintaining that this is the
natural sense, but search out another with which reason will
agree.'' *

St Thomas explains his meaning by the example of a pas-
sage in Genesis, where it is written that " Qod created two
great lights, the sun and the moon, and also the stars,** in
which the Scripture appears to say that the moon is fpreater
than all the stars ; but as it is eyident, from unquestionable
demonstration, that this is false, it is not our duty, says that
saint, obstinately to defend the literal sense of that passage ;
another meaning must be sought, consisting with the truth
of the fact, such as the following, " That the phrase great

* L p. q. 68. a. 1.

LET. Xym.] TESTIMONY OF THE SENSES. 345

Itghtf as applied to the moon, denotes the greatness of that
lummary merely as it appears in our eyes, and not the mag-
nitude of its hody considered in itself.

An opposite mode of treatment, so far from procuring re*
spect to the Scripture, would only expose it to the contempt
of infidels ; because, as St Augustine says, ^ when they found
that we believed, on the authority of Scripture, in things
which they assuredly knew to be raise, they would laugh at
our credulity with regard to its more recondite truths, such
as the resurrection of the dead and eternal life." ^' And by
this means," adds St Thomas, ** we should render our reli-
gion contemptible in their eyes, and shut up its entrance into
their minds.

And let me add, father, that it would in the same manner
be the likeliest means to sl)ut up the entrance of Scripture
into the minds of heretics, and to render the pope's autho-
rity contemptible in their eyes, to refuse all those the name
of Catholics who would not believe that certain words were
in a certain book, where they are not to be found, merely
because a pope by mistake has declared that they are. It is
only by examining a book that we can ascertain what words
it contains. Matters of fact can only be prove^ by the
senses. If the position which you maintain be true, show
it, or else ask no man to believe it. That would be to^no
purpose. Not all the powers on earth can, by the force Of
authority, persuade us of a point of fact, any more than ther
can alter it; for nothing can make that not to be whicn
really is.

It was to no purpose, for example, that the monks of Ba-
tisbon procured from Pope St Leo IX. a solemn decree, by
which ne declared that the body of St Denis, the first bishop
of Paris, who is generally held to have been the Areopagite^
had been transported out of France, and conveyed into the
chapel of their monastery. It is not the less true, for all
thisy that the body of that saint always lay, and lies to this
hour, in the celebrated abbey which bears his name, and
within the walls of which you would find it no easy matter
to obtain a cordial reception to this bull, although the pope
has therein assured us that he has examined the affair ^ with
all possible diligence (diUgentimni^), and with the advice of
many bishops and prelates ; so that he strictly enjoins (dia-
trieU ttrcectpientes) all the French to own and confess that
these noly relics are no longer in their country." The
French, however, who knew that fact to be untrue, by the

346 PBOVINOIAL LETTERS. [LET. XVHL

evidence of their own senses, and who» upon opening the
shrine, found all those relics entire, as the historians of that
period inform us, helieved then, as they have always b^eved
since, the reverse of what that holy pope had enjoined them
to believe, well knowing that even saints and prophets are
liable to be imposed upon.

It was to equally little purpose that you obtiuned against
Galileo a decree from Rome, condemning his opinion respect-
ing the motion of the earth. It will never be proved by
such an argument as this that the earth remains stationary ;
and if it can be demonstrated by sure observations that it is
the earth and not the sun that revolves, the efforts and argu-
ments of all mankind put together will not hinder ourplaaet
from revolving, nor hmder themselves from revolving along
with it.

Again, you must not imagine that the letters of Pope
Zachary, excommunicating St Yirgilius for maintaining tne
existence of the antipodes, have annihilated the New World ;
nor must you suppose that, although he declared that opinion
to be a most dangerous heresy, the king of Spain was wrong
in giving more credence to Christopher Columbus, who came
from the ^lace, than to the judgment of the pope, who had
never ^^jen there, or that the Church has not derived a vast
benefit from the discovery, inasmuch as it has brought the
knowledge of the gospel to a great multitude of soms, who
might otherwise have perished in their infidelity.

You see, then, father, what is the nature of matters of
fact, and on what principles they are to be determined; from
all which, to recur to our subject, it is easy to conclude, that
if the five propositions are not in Jansen, it is impossible that
they can have been extracted from him ; and that the only
way to form a judgment on the mattter, and to produce
universal conviction, is to examine that book in a regular
conference, as you have been desired to do long ago. Until
that be done, you have no right to charge your opponents
with contumacy; for they are as blameless in regard to
the point of fact as they are of errors in point of faith-
Catholics in doctrine^ reasonable in fact, and innocent in
both.

Who can help feeling astonishment, then, father, to see on
the one side a vindication so complete, and on the other accu-
sations so outrageous! Who would suppose that the only
question between you relates to a single fact of no import-
ance, which the one party wishes the other to believe with«

LET. XVIII.J CONCLUSION. 347

out showing it to them ! And who would ever imagine that
such a noise should have been made in the Church about
nothing, pro nihilOf as good St Bernard says ! But this is
one of the principal tricks of your policy, to make people
believe that every thing is at stake, wnen, in reality, there is
nothing at stake ; and to represent to those influential per-
sons who listen to you that tne most pestilent errors of Cal-
vin, and the most vital principles of tne faith, are involved in
your disputes, with the view of inducing them, under this
idea, to employ all their zeal and all their authoritj^ against
your opponents, as if the safety of the Catholic rehgion de-
pended upon it ; whereas, were they coming to learn that
the whole dispute was about this paltry point of fact^ they
would give themselves no concern about it, but would, on the
contrary, regret extremely that, to gratify your private spite,
they had made such exertions in an affaa of no consequence
to the Church. For, in fine, to take the worst view of the
matter, even though it should be true that Jansen maintained
these propositions, what great misfortune would accrue from
some persons doubting of the fact, provided they detested the
propositions, as they have publicly declared that they do ? If
it not enough that they are condemned by everybody, without
exception, and that, too, in the sense in which y.>u have ex-
plained that you wish them to be condemned ? ^*^ld they
be more severely censured by saying that Jansen mamtsuneo^
them? What purpose, then, would be served by exacting
this acknowledgment, except that of disgracing a doctor and
bishop, who died in the communion of the Church? I can-
not see how that should be accounted so great a blessing as
to deserve to be purchased at the expense of so much dis-
turbance. What interest has the state, or the pope, or
bishops, or doctors, or the Church at large, in this conclu-
sion ? It does not affect them in any way whatever, father ;
it can affect none but your Society, which would certainly
enjoy some pleasure from the defamation of an author that
has done you some little injury. Meanwhile every thing is in
confusion, because you have made people believe that every
thing is in danger. This is the secret spring giving impulse
to all those mighty commotions, which would cease inmie-
diately were the real state of the controversy once known.
And therefore, as the peace of the Church depended on this
explanation, it was, I conceive, of the utmost importance that
it should be given, that by unfolding all your disguisements,
it might be manifest to the whole world that your accosa-

348 PRoymaAL letters. [let. xvm.

tions were without foundation, your opponents without
error, and the Church without heresy.

Such, father, is the end which it has heen my desire to ac-
complish; an end which appears to me, in every point of
view, so deeply important to religion, that I am at a loss to
conceive how those to whom you fumisn so much occasion
for spealdng can contrive to remain in silence. Granting
that they are not affected with the personal wrongs which
fou have committed against them, those which the Church
suffers ought, in mj opinion, to have forced them to com-
plain. Besides, I am not altogether sure if ecclesiastics
ought to make a sacrifice of their reputation to calumny,
especially in the matter of religion. Still, they allow you.
It seems, to say whatever you please; so that, had it not
been for the opportunity which, by mere accident, you af-
forded me of taking their part, the scandalous insinuations
which you are circulating against them in every quarter
would, m all probability, have gone forth without contradic-
tion. Their patience, I confess, astonishes me; and the
more so, that 1 cannot suspect it proceeds either from timi-
dity or from incapacity, bemg weU assured that they want
neither arf^ments for their own vindication, nor zeal for
the truth. And yet I see them religiously bent on silence,
to a dffpree which appears to me altogether unjustifiable,
"^or nay part, father, I do not believe that I can follow their
example. Leave the Church in peace, and I shall leave you
as you are, with all my heart ; but so long as you make it
your sole business to keep her in confusion, doubt not but
that there shall always be found within her bos?*'! children
of peace who will consider themselves bouri to employ all
theii* efforts to preserve her tranquillity.

THE END.

PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED, LONDON AND BBCCLKS.

im UNIVBISITY OP JKUCMWAM
GRADUATE UBRARY

DATI DUE

^^^^niiMn^ ~^^^^^^^H

r "iiiiiiiii" _

■ 3 9015 03339 7236

it^^^^^^B

1 DO NOT REMOVE

1 OR

1 MUTIUTE CARD

THI UNIViRSITY OF MKMOAN
GRADUATE UBRARY

DATC DUE

Jt^^iiilh^

J

3 9015 03339 7236

i

DO NOT REMOVE

OR
MUTILATE CARD