and Define That those Five Propositions were drawn out of the Book of the same Cornelius Jansenius Bishop of Ipres entituled Augustinus as also that they were condemned in the sense intended by the same Cornelius and as such we condemn them anew applying to them the same censure wherewith every one of them was particularly branded in the forementioned Declaration and Definition And we again condemn and prohibit the same Book of the so oft recited Cornelius Jansenius entituled Augustinus and all other Books as well Manuscripts as Printed or which may hereafter happen to be printed wherein the above-condemned Doctrine of the same Cornelius Jansenius is or shall be defended asserted or maintained Prohibiting all Faithfull Christians to hold preach teach or expound the said Doctrine either by word or writing or to interpret it either in publique or in private or to cause it to be printed either openly or in secret and this under the Penalties and Censures specified in the Law against Heretiques instantly to be incurred ipso facto without further Declaration Wherefore we enjoyn all our Venerable Brethren Patriarchs Primates Metropolitans Archbishops Bishops Ordinaries of places Inquisitours of Heresie and all other Judges Ecclesiasticall to whom it shall belong to cause this above-said Constitution Declaration and Definition of Pope Innocent our Predecessour to be observed according to our present Determination and to restrain and punish all disobedient and Rebellious persons by the aforesaid Penalties and other remedies Juris facti even by imploring the assistance of the Secular Arm if it shall be necessary Given at Rome at St. Marie Major the Sixteenth of October in the year of our Lord God 1656. and of our Pontificate the second This Bull was received with the joy and approbation of all Catholique Princes Prelates and People notwithstanding in France there remained and do remain still to this day some who could not or would not be brought back to the unity of the Catholique Church The chief of these as for matter of Action are the Disciples of San-Cyran Inhabitants or Confederates of Port-Royall the Seminary of this Heresie and under-hand divers mutinous spirits glad to embrace any thing that looks like a Faction Among these one and as far as I hear the principall one is Arnauld of whom I will now treat § 3. Of Anthony Arnauld This man was a Disciple of San-Cyran and sometimes Directour of those at Port-Royall He was made Doctour of Sorbon before he set forth his Book of Frequent Communion I say His because the Book beareth his name though it were at least the Body and Substance of it made by San-Cyran as appeareth by San-Cyrans own Letter kept by the Reverend Fathers Minimes at Paris The Hereticall and condemned Maximes which this man hath taught in his Book of Frequent Communion and other Works are many Some few I here set down I have taken them out of the Answer to the Apology which Arnauld made for himself in a Letter to the Queen of France which Answer was printed in the Year 1644 and there for every one of these Hereticall Tenets several Texts of Arnaulds are produced His Doctrine then is this Arnauld's Doctrine taught in his Book of Frequent Communion 1. That the Church is corruptible in her Manners and Discipline that is her Doctrine of Manners 2. That there is no other Rule whereby to know Catholique Verities but onely Tradition So the Pope and Councells and Scriptures and Theologicall Demonstration are excluded from being any rule of knowing Catholique Verities 3. That St. Peter and St. Paul are two Heads of the Church which make but one 4. That the Absolution of the Priest gives not to the Penitent any thing else but the Grace of an exteriour Reconciliation but that it is the Canonicall Satisfaction which gives justifying Grace and revives the Soul And that it is therefore onely that Confession is necessary that the Priest may set a proportionable Penance 5. That the practise of Penance for all mortall Sins whether publique and scandalous or private is according to the Fathers and Primimitive Church to go thus First you must confesse and demand Penance Secondly the Penance is given Thirdly the Penance is to be fulfilled during a proportionable space of dayes moneths or years Fourthly cometh Absolution which is immediately followed with the Communion or receiving of the Blessed Sacrament And he that communicateth before he hath fullfilled his Penance communicateth unworthily 6. That the manner of doing Penance or frequenting the Sacrament of Penance now adays is different from what was practised for the first twelve hundred years that it is an abuse and wonderfull blindenesse 7. That the practice of Penance which is nowadayes favours the generall impenitence of the world In his second Edition he hath changed this Proposition thus That the Practice of Penance which is now-adayes most common is favoured by the generall impenitence of the world All this he hath in his Book of Frequent Communion and the long Preface to it This Book when it first came out was looked on by many who judged of it onely by the Title as a good and pious Work But the Jesuites at Paris who discovered the malice of the above mentioned Maximes preached and wrote against it and at length it was condemned By this the Iesuites got the ill will of the Jansenists and animated Port-Royall against them Yet all good Catholiques thanked the Jesuits for having stood up for the Church and hindred the consequences which were like to have followed and the errours into which many were running unawares Many things were writ to and fro The Jansenists defending Arnauld and the Jesuites with other Catholiques impugning him At length Arnauld who besides the above mentioned pernicious Maximes held also for Jansenius writ a little Tract called The Second Letter of Monsieur Arnauld to a Duke and Peer of France where he excuses Jansenius and the Jansenists from Heresie in the same manner which the Authour of the Provinciall Letters afterwards held to wit by saying that the Five Propositions could not be found in Jansenius that it was matter of Fact and not any Theologicall point wherein the Jansenists and others disagreed and consequently that they could not be called Heretiques This Letter was after a long Examen of it condemned in the Sorbon and Arnauld refusing to submit and further protesting against the Determination of the University was cashier'd the Sorbon and had his Title of Doctour taken from him in the Year 1656. the last of January as appeareth by the Act then passed in Sorbon This set the Jansenists in a rage And whereas hitherto they had defended themselves with some shew of modesty and pretense of learning and piety now they turned to write furious Satyrs which they call Provinciall Letters against the Sorbon first then against the Dominicans but their main fury they discharged against the Jesuites whom they would needs imagine to be the Authors of all their disgraces of which
AN ANSWER TO THE Provinciall Letters Published by the JANSENISTS Under the Name of Lewis Montalt Against the Doctrine of the JESUITS And School-Divines Made by some Fathers of the Society in FRANCE There is set before the Answers in this Edition The History of Jansenisme and at the end A conclusion of the Work where the English Additionalls are shewed to deserve no Answer Also an Appendix shewing the same of the Book called A further Discovery of Jesuitisme Printed at Paris in the Year 1659. The PREFACE to the READER A French man not long since under the counterfeit Name of Lewis Montalt printed Satyricall Libells which he called Provinciall Letters His main drift was to establish the Heresie of Jansenius that is that Heresie which denieth Christ to be the Redeemer of all men and among other Enormities teacheth that God commandeth things that are impossible not onely to Sinners but even to the Just This I say was his main drift for this was the occasion of his writing with this his first Letters begin in this he câ—iefly labours and with this his last Letters end Yet to cloak this foul design with a pleasing out-side he often makes Profession of sincere Faith and of great Reverence to the Sea Apostolique and condemneth verbally the Five Propositions of Jansenius censured by the Church as Hereticall Yet this he doth so as still to excuse Jansenius his Doctrine and the Jansenists from Heresie He would be thought to drive at nothing but the old pretence of Innovatours a Reform in correcting abuses and errours crept into Divinity-Schools especially among the Jesuites and by their means into the Church of Christ All this he doth with Raillery and Merriment The unwary vulgar glad to make merry at any mans cost sported with his Letters not marking that whilest they were invited to make a jeast of Charity it was that they might lose their Faith in earnest But the Learned and all those who with a sober judgement could ponder things right were struck with a horrour at these scandalous Libells and fearing the sad events which these prophane Railleries did bode thought themselves obliged in conscience to suppresse them For this reason these Letters were forbid to be printed in Paris and the Parliament of Aix in Provence commanded the Seventeen first Letters for the Eighteenth was not then come out to be publiquely burnt by the Hang-man the 9. of February in the year 1657. On the 13. of July in the same year the Archbishop of Machelen Primate of the Low-Countreys to secure his Subjects gave his Approbation to the Answers of the Provinciall Letters and a Moneth after to wit on the 13. of August the Vicar Generall of Liege did as much And on the 6. of September then next ensuing the universall Pastour of the Church Pope Alexander the Seventh now sitting condemned all the Eighteen Provinciall Letters under the Penalties specified in the Councell of Trent and the Index of Forbidden Books These infamous Letters then branded with the ignominy of so many Censures and banisht all Catholique Countreys came for their refuge into England And they found a Translatour who either for his hatred to the Catholique Church or private spleen to the Jesuites or for love of Jansenisme or for desire of gain for nothing sells better then a Libell set them out in an English dresse And that they might the better please those ears which itch to hear something against the Jesuites he baptized them by a new name of the Mystery of Jesuitisme it being common to Fugitives that are forced to flye their Countrey to change their name And the good Translatour presumed so much of his own Work that in the Preface to his first Edition he could not hold from prophesying in his own praises and telling us what a strange Metamorphosis there would follow in the world upon reading these Letters done by him into English For speaking of his Book he saith It must needs work a strange alteration in mankinde What Alteration This. The Jesuites hitherto by all men held in esteem for Learning and Vertue if we believe this Translatours Poeticall Prophesie will be looked on hereafter as the most abominable and despicable thing in the world Surely this man taketh the Jesuites for an Army of Philistims which he is to conquer with the Jaw-bone of an Asse But Good Mr. Translatour do you indeed think as you say The world hath thought the Jesuites men of some worth The Wisest of our Age have given them commendation they have had learned Adversaries both Protestants and Catholiques who opposed them so as not to despise them Their Industry hath travelled through all Sciences as well as their Charity through all Nations Their Books are honoured in all Libraries and their Persons reverenced in all the Countreys Cities and Towns where Catholick Religion is in esteem Must all the world now change their judgement and must they that have hitherto had a good repute be looked on hereafter as the most abominable and despicable thing in the world But Why How by What Means must this strange Alteration be wrought in Mankinde let 's hear Quid dignum tanto scret hic promissor hiatu The reason is because a French man whose Letters this Translatour hath done into English saith so But who was that French man A man that by his own confession is no Church-man no Priest no Doctour no Protestant no Catholique A man of whom all the good that 's known is that he can write a Libell well and challenge others boldly without ever heeding whether what he saith be true or false Catholique or Heterodox sense or non-sense A man that 's ashamed of nothing but of himself for in all his daring Propositions he dareth not say who he is in all his desperate adventures he will not venture to shew his face And shall such a man as this work that strange Alteration in Mankinde Shall a Libell be able to sway the judgement of the Wise and ballance all that the Light of Reason can dictate to the contrary The Catholique Church is full of men of all ranks and conditions Rich and Poor Noble and Ignoble Religious and Secular Souldiers and Gown-men who from their childhood to the severall ages they are now in have been familiarly acquainted with the Society and had the first Tinctures of Learning and Vertue under them must they now all change their judgements and hereafter count the Society the most despicable and most abominable thing in the world because a French Libell turn'd into English speaketh them to be quite contrary to what the world knoweth them and seeth them to be Ad populum phaleras The world as old as it is is not yet come to so doting an age as to think they must rather believe an infamous Libell then their own eyes their own reason their own long experience The effect sheweth what spirit animated the Translatour in this Enthusiasme 'T is two years since the Book hath been out
and which yet does not destroy the great commandment unlesse it be destroying of it to explain it after the same manner the Son of God himself explained it in the Gospel when he assured us That he loves him who keeps his words Which gave occasion to that famous Chancellour of the University of Paris to say r Gerson iâ— Opusâ—ulo Tripartito That the Law which bindes us to love God with all our hearts is conveniently accomplisht by men if their works execute his Commandments Thus s See Fath. Caussin in his answer to the Moâ—al Divinity have eight Councels of France explicated the Precept of Charity which explication hath been inserted into the Ritualls of Paris Thoul and Bourges by the Authority of the Prelaâ—â—s to the end that it might be proposed to the people as the most proâ—itable to the ediâ—ication of souls And it is following them that Father Sirmond said t 〈◊〉 of the Defence of Vertue pag. 23. That we are bound under a grievous penalty to love God with an incomparable love of an inestimable value so great that we never equall any thing with him nor ever vâ—luntarily stagger between his service and the creatures being uâ—certain to which of them to give our selves much lesse that we never preâ—er any thing before him or suffer our selves in any important occasion to run to any thing contrary to his will Is this ranversing the Gospel and destroying the great commandment of the Law Is this â—â—ying The Love of God is not necessary to Salvition as the Jansenist saith he does He is so 〈◊〉 from that opinion that he professes the contâ—ary That the â—ormal act of loving God is necesâ—â—râ— by an absolute necessity by an indispensable necessiâ—y by a necessity at least suâ—passing that of Precâ—pt as all Divines acknowledge If a man sayes he were dying out of the state of Grace unlesse Charity assisted him it is indeed then in effect necessary and that necessitate medii by a necessity of means which is more then the necessity of Precept Whence it appears that when he disputes whether or no we are obliged to produce interioâ—r acts of the love of God by the necessity of Precept he speaketh onâ—ly of that Divine Law which Divines call Positive not of that which they call Naturall because it is grounded on naturall Principles And yet he does not deny even the precept of Positive Law but professes to explain the meaning of St. Thomas which he thinks to be doubtfull and uncertain affirming That it is not evident this Holy Dâ—ctour acknowledged this particular precept of the love of God which he cannot say of the Naturall Precepâ— because a little before he told us his opinion concerning the naturall Obligation every man hath to add 〈◊〉 himself towards God so soon as he begins to have the use of reason to the end he may 〈…〉 the first fruits of his heart to him But suppose he should absolutely deny the Positive Precept as long as he agrees with all Divines concerning the Naturall Law why will you quarrel with him on a subtilty which is never used but in School Disputes and of which the vulgar people are no wayes capable What prejudice can this Doctrine bring to Christians as long as they still know they are bound by an indispensable necessity to love God What matter is it to the faithfull whether they be bound by a Positive Law or a Naturall By a necessity of means necessitate medii or a necessity of Prâ—â—â—pt Will all the Gospel be destroyed for this Must we needs make such a noise for a distinction which does not yet free us from the obligation of loving God but which contrarily grounds this obligation on the essentiall principles of all reasonable creatures Yet if this Doctrine be to be condemned why does not the Jansenist condemn it in its Source Why does â—e not set upon St. Bernard who distinguishes thesâ— two sorts of Love the one u Est Charitas in actu est in effectu Et de illâ quidem quae operis est puto datam esse legem hominibus mandatumque formatum Nam in affectu quis ita habeat ut mandatur Ergo illa mandatur â—d meritum ista ut praemium datur Et infra Quomodo ergo jubenda fuit quae implenda nullo modo erat St. Bern. Serm 50. in Cantica effective the other affective And who assures us the first is commanded us but not the second If there be a good sense to be given his words as Monsiour Du Vall in his Treaty of Charity shews thâ—râ— is why must that be holy in the works of St. Bernard and criminall in the writings of Father Sirmond Yet if we do but reflect on the drift of the Book which he clamours against with such passion and animosity it will be no hard matter to finde what it is which nettles this unjust Accuser For the Authour of that work in his first Treatise aims at nothing but the maintaining the merit and excellency of vows which was vilisied by an injurious Comment on the Book of Holy Virginity censured some years before in Sorbon And in the second part which is that we speak of Father Sirmond impugneth an errour of certain absurd Heads who under pretence of going to God onely by Love cannot endure a man should help himself with Hope and Fear as if it were unworthy of a Christian to exercise those vertues they being full of self-love imperfections and sins In which errour those men follow the spirit of Luther who teacheth That all Morall Vertues and all the good works we do before we have Charity are sins A Proposition which was x Censura Sorbonica Anni 1521. condemned in the Year 1521. on the fifteenth of April as false rash capable of frighting sinners from the amendment of their lives and in fine tasting somewhat of Heresie Falsa temerariè asserta peccatorum ab emendatione retractiva sapiens haeresim You see what it is that displeases the Casuist of Port-Royall in Father Antony Sirmond but not daring to tel it and on the other side engaging himself stoutly for the Interests of Calvin and Luther whose opinions he aâ—mires he pretends this Father cannot be a Champion for those vertues unlesse he declare himself an enemy to Charity nor maintain the other commandments without violating that of the Love of God Let us give him some good advice on this Subject An Advertisement to the Jansenists To satisfie you I have shown you what Love of God it is which according to all Divines is necessary to salvation Now to bring you out of those errours into which you run give me leave a little to teach you what Love it is not and this according to the judgement of able Persons It is not at all necessary to give ones whole heart to a creature and to love it as much as God himself This is a little â—oo much for a Directour of
believed to have wronged Janseniuâ— by false accusations And you set out many Histories of the Errours of Popes and Councels that it might as easily be believed that the Pope and Synod of France have â—rrâ—d in condemning Jansenius upon the Jesuits false information And so you leave nothing certain in the Church nothing to be obeyed for what is certain what is to be submitted unto if not the Decrees of Popes and Councels But I desire the Reader to take notice that as you have done in the Jesuits Books so in the Histories of the Popes and Councels which you mention you have falsified and misapplied many things and given for certain that which the best Authors have delivered as very dubious and suspected as may be seen in Baronius Bellarmin and others where is set down a clear answer to every one of these stories But you did not think sit to set down the Answers it was enough for you to bring the Objections so to undermine as much as you could the Authority of the Church by making the world think Fathers were against Fathers Popes against Popes Councells against Councells which never was in any matter which brings any consequence to destroy the union of Faith and submission to the Church which is that you would overthrow It would be too long a businesse to refute every particular story I content my self then to tell the Reader That 't is you that tell these stories that is one who for his perpetuall Imposture deserves no credit all And that Baronius and Bellarmin and many Learned Controvertists beside have solved all the difficulties which occurre in these passages all which have been objected by many Adversaries of the Catholique Church with more vigour then this Pedant objects them with The last thing then which you say and with which I conclude is That you tell us in the end of your Eighteenth Letter That Jesuits wrong the memory of a Bishop that died in the Communion of the Catholique Church and make a great noise about a matter of no concern Your Piâ—â—y to Jansenius his memory is but meer Hypocrisie You would have him judged a Saint though it were with censuring Pope Innocent and Pope Urban and Pope Alexander and the whole Synod of France who are not excusable if Jansenius his Book be Catholique But you care not that all the Popes and Bishops of the Church â—e thought never so wicked so Jansenius passe but for a Saint You care not how impious you be against all both living and dead so you be but pious towards Jansenius because of your affection to his Herrâ—ie And how can you call this a matter of small importance for which you make so great a noise and which evidently is such that the whole Church is concerned in it If what you say be true the whole Church is in an errour for falsely condemning Jansenius If your Arguments be good there must be no power in the Church to condemâ— any Heretique for never any was or can be more clearly and legally condemned then Jansenius his Book If you might have your will the Church should lose all Authority in deâ—ining matters of Faith because you will in all cases as well as this of Jansenius â—inde matter of Fact wheresoever any words written or spoken do intervene which shall serve you to cast a mist before the eyes of ignorant people to delude them and winde them into an errour against Faith The question is not betwixt the Jesuits of France and an idle Libeller whom they might easily contemne but it is betwixt the Church of Christ and Hereâ—ie If the Jesuites appear in this quarrell they do their duty and oblige all Catholiques whose common cause they defend in a matter where though you slight it the Authority of the Church is at stake and would be over-thrown if the Jansenists of Port Royall could prevail But he that secured his Church from the Gates of Hell will secure it from Port-Royall Portae inferi non praevaelebunt The Conclusion of the VVORK concerning those things which are not answer'd and concerning the Additionalls which deserve no Answer Reader By perusing the precedent Work you will see That the Authour of the Provinciall Letters remaines still under the same censuâ—e of a Slaunderer Falsifier and Jansenist That in all these Letters he hath not made good so much as one of the Twenty Nine Impostures laid to his charge That he undertook a dâ—fence of Four or Five of them but sucâ—eded so ill that he durst not adventure on the rest Out of this I conceive every rationall man will conclude That as hath often been incuâ—cated in this Work he ought not to be believed in any thing And consequently That the Reader ought at least to suspend his judgement and not give his Vâ—rdict against any Authour of the Society or others upon this mans Testmony till he hath viewed the Books For none can justly be esteemed criminall because an arrant Liar giveth him out for such This then is desired of all That before they passe their censure if they be able they will be pleased to hear both Sidâ—s and when they have read what this man objects then view the Authours in their own Works which as it seemeth but a reasonable request so I am confident it is enâ—ugh to clear all the Casuists and Doctours whom this man slaundereth It was thus a Lawyer of our Nation not long since did For having read the Provinciall Letters he who knew it was not a legall nor rationall way to judge before both Sides were heard took some pains to turn to the Authours that were taxed And he was soon satisfied For having loâ—ked on three or four Citations and found them all false he gave no more credit to the Provinciall Letters but esteemed all of no credit and cited a Maxime of the Law That he that is once convinced a Lyar ought never to be believed In this manner I appeal to all the men of England that have ability enough to understand the Authours and desire them to be Judges provided onâ—ly they will be pleased to read the Authours in their own Works And as for those who 〈◊〉 want of Abilities cannot look into Books of Divinity I entreat them that they will be pleasâ—d to aâ—k that Question which the Roman Oraâ—â—â—â— did in a defâ—â—ce of his Quis quem accusat 〈◊〉 accuseth whom The Author of the Provinciall Letters accuseth the Fathers of the Society of Jesus and with them all the Schools of Divinity Whom are we to believe It is evident that one single man ought not to bear down all the world And more evident that an ignorant man ought not to censure a number of Learned Divines And most evident that no man in reason can conceive a prejudice against the Doctrine of many great Divines to whom the world hath for many years given publique applause for Learning and Vertue upon the report of an infamous Libell condemn'd of ignorance by learned
it was more then probable that many of them upon that account were easily drawn in and made to embrace the defence of the Book which they esteemed to have given so fatall a Blow to the Jesuits Doctrine that one of the Sorbonists called it the Jesuites Tomb. As for the Oratorians their speciall Obligations to San-Cyran and Jansonius drew them in before they well knew what was intended For it was a plot of Jansenius and San-Cyran which they had practised of a long time to raise up these Oratorians in opposition to the Jesuites in hopes as Jansenius expresses in his Letters that they might in a short time get all the Jesuites Scholars to them and being but Clergy-men at the Bishops Disposall they imagined they should carry the universall good-will of the Clergy so that the Jesuites should at last be quite deserted This made those poor Oratorians drink so deep of the Doctrine of San-Cyran and Jansenius that divers of their Books were condemned as namely Gibieufs and Seguenots which I do not say to censure them universally or the major part of them but it is certain that they were looked on as a party and many of them becoming Curez did in their Parishes as well as many other Curez broach Jansenius's Doctrine in Flaunders under the shelter of the University of Lovain and the forenamed Bishops and in France under the name of Sorbon of which as I said a very great part sided with Jansenius and also under the favour of some Bishops of France This animosity appeared greater when Pope Urban who was soon advertis'd of these practises put out his Bull which he did in March 1642. to suppresse Jansenius his Book for then many unmaskt themselves and spoke plain even against his Holinesse Orders in defence of Jansenius though as Pope Urbans Bulls speak Jansenius had renewed condemned Heresies and had incurred Excommunication by writing his Book and treating in it matters forbidden to be treated of in print that is the matters called de Auxiliis forbid by Paul the Fifth to be treated of under pain of Excommunication Pope Urban therefore sent redoubled Briefs to suppresse the rising Faction of the Jansenians as in one of his Bulls he termeth them Many submitted to their duty Yet all Pope Urbans time the Faction was very strong and though it decayed something in Flaunders yet it strengthened daily in France where it least ought to have been received For whereas Jansenius had writ a most bitter Invective against the Crown and Kings of France called Mars Gallicus it was to have been expected that all faithfull Subjects of that Crown ought rather to have sided against Jansenius then for him And this Monsieur Marande presseth much against the French Jansenists in his Book dedicated to the King of France in the Year 1654. which we formerly mentioned where a good part of his discourse tendeth to shew that Innovations in Religion are promoted by those chiefly who aim at Innovation in State Things therefore being come to so great a height in France that now Jansenisme was formed into a considerable body which might in time prove formidable both to the Church and Crown the Bishops in their generall Assembly or Synod at Paris took the matter into their consideration and having well examined the Book of Jansenius they collected Five Propositions out of it which seemed to them to deserve a censure The Propositions were these 1. Some of Gods Commandments are impossible to the Just according to their present forces though they have a will and do endeavour to accomplish them and they want the Grace that rendreth them possible 2. In the state of Nature corrupt men never resist Interiour Grace 3. To merit and demerit in the state of Nature corrupted it is not necessary to have the liberty that excludes necessity but it suffices to have that liberty which excludes coaction or constraint 4. The Semipelagians admitted the necessity of Interiour preventing Grace to every Action even to the beginning of Faith But they were Heretiques in this that they would have that Grace to be such as the will of man might resist it or obey it 5. It is Semipelagianisme to say that Jesus Christ dyed or shed his Blood generally for all men These Propositions the Bishops drew out of Jansenius his Book yet knowing themselves to be but a Nationall Synod they would not lay any censure upon them but in the Year 1650. sent them to Pope Innocent the Tenth then sitting humbly requiring him that through his Paternall care of the Universall Church he would determine what ought to be held it belonging onely to him to define in this cause This Letter was signed by eighty five Bishops then present at the Assembly The Pope thereupon took the matter into Examination and deputed divers Divines to examine the Propositions whom he often heard himself the Deputies of the Jansenists being also present at Rome and having liberty to speak for themselves as they often did At length after two years examination of the matter and many Prayers Fasting and Supplications to God Innocent the Tenth proceeded to censure and defined the said Five Propositions to be Hereticall by his Bull given on the last day of May 1653. This Bull is inserted into the Bull of Pope Alexander the Seventh which by and by I shall produce But all this was not enough to make many of the Jansenists submit Upon sight of the Bull they changed their note and whereas before they had owned the Five Propositions to be in Jansenius but maintained them to be Catholique Tenents and the true Doctrine of St. Augustin now they acknowledged the said Five Propositions were justly censured by the Pope but defended that they were not in Jansenius yet whosoever taught them or wheresoever they were to be found the Jansenists professed to condemn them By this means they thought both to clear themselves from the censure of defending Hereticall Propositions and withall still to maintain the Doctrine of Jansenius as they had done before and so all the fault was to redound on the Pope and the Synod of France as the Jansenists would have it thought â—â— on those who had informed them wrong That the Propositions were in Jansenius which indeed said they were not there at least in the sense in which they were condemned This Discourse though never so frivolous prevailed with many for their constant maintaining of Jansenius so as it was feared the whole endeavour of the Bishops of France and also the Constitution of the Pope would at length come to nothing To prevent this mischief the Bishops of France who were yet remaining in their Assembly at Paris wrote this following Letter to the rest of the Archbishops and Bishops that were absent from the said Assembly and that it might be publique caused it to be printed which for the same reason I have thought fit here to set down translated into English To the most Reverend and Religious the Lords Archbishops
they were so sensible that they seem'd half desperate For now San-Cyrans wicked Maximes were laid open in the Information made against him which Monsieur Preville printed Jansenius was condemned I mean his Book as Hereticall and the last Pillar of Jansenisme Arnauld was ignominiously turned out of Sorbon This is the summe of the History of Jansenisme as to the main Heads of it This the occasion of the Provincial Letters I suppose the Reader when he hath read this will not wonder that the Jesuites are against the Jansenists Doctrine nor will he think strange that the Jansenists after having broached such Impious Doctrine after having endeavoured to corrupt the Articles of the Catholique Faith after having shewed so much disrespect to the Popes Bishops and whole Catholique Church should falsifie the Jesuites Doctrine and treat them with those terms of igâ—ominy of which their Provinciall Letters are full The first Answer To the Provincial Letters Which The Jansenists have published against the Society of Jesus Note that this Answer was made at the coming out of the Ten first Letters as a general warning about the Authors Quality and Conditions the proof of his Forgeries in particular being reserved to the second Answer called The Impostures The Argument of this first Answer 1. THe Author of the Provinciall Letters discovered to be an Heretique 2. His pittiful shifting off the main Question of Jansenisme which he was obliged to defend and in place of defence turning to Slanders against the Jesuites 3. The wrong he hath done the Church in endeavouring to make pass in the vulgar Tongue under the Name and Authority of the Jesuites and thereby giving them a shew of truth amongst the vulgar many false Opinions which they never taught but the quite contrary 4. That what he saith is taken chiefly out of a Book condemned long since and burnt by the Hang-man 5. His citing of Authors is full of gross untruth and ignorance scarce ever alledging any of them in his true meaning 6. His unworthy handling of Divinity by impugning grave Authors and treating most serious matters onely with fleering and scoffing 7. His ignorant attributing to the whole Society that which haply some one amongst them may have taught though all the rest have opposed it and taught the quite contrary 8. His gross Metachronisme or mistake of Times making Jesuites to be the first Authors and Inventors of that which was taught and received many Ages before there were any Jesuites in the world IT cannot be denied that the Author of those Letters which are spread abroad against the Society and fill the world with so much noise is a Jansenist If notwithstanding it be the work of one single man and not rather of the whole party of the Jansenists I conceive that if the Author were questioned and would answer truly to his name he must use the same words which that Devil did who tormented the miserable wretch that dwelt among the Tombs and say My name is Legion for we are many But howsoever that the Author is a Jansenist is manifest For in his four first Letters he maintaineth that Doctrine which the Pope hath condemned under the name of Jansenius his Doctrine And in the following Letters he chargeth the Jesuits with having been the first that discovered and impugned those hainous Errours which make up Jansenius his Book The Jansenists had writ many things in defence of the Doctrinal Points of Jansenius now condemned by the Church but they were answered so briskly that they were forced to lay down their arms and abandon the defence of those infamous Propositions which since their being Anathemaâ—â—z'd at Rome have been a horror to all that have not renounced their Fâ—ith but live under the name of Catholique This hath forced the Jansenists to change their manner of fighting they stand no more upon their Defence but are bâ—come Assailanâ—s They have quiâ—ted the 〈◊〉 intherto agitated of the Doctrinal Pâ—inâ—s of Faiâ—h wherein they were alwayâ—s worsted and now they muster up as their â—â—st Reserve Accusations Slanders Calumnies tracing in all this proceeding the steps of their Predecessors the ancient Heretiquâ—s The resolution of the Faâ—hers of the Society whom thesâ— Letters attaque was first not to spare them an inch wheresoever the Doctrine of Faith should be questioned that being the Interest of God and next to pass by their Calumnies and slight their Slanders since herein none were concerned but they themselves who had long since learnt of their Master this Lesson taught in the Gospel Blessed are ye when they shall revile you and persecute you and speak all that is naught against you untruly for my sake But since their patience in suffering and their modesty in being silent has made up one part of the Scandall whereof they stand accused it is necessary to give some Antidote to the Readers of those infamous Letters to the end that poison which has been offered them in the Babylonish Cup of gold as the Scripture speaks that is to say under the gilt of some fond railing and jeasting words have not the sad effect which those Hereticall Wrâ—ters true poisoners of mens Souls do pretend And that they may have no better fortune in their Calumnies then they met with in their wicked Doctrine I hold it necessary to desire the Readers as well of those Letters as of this Writing to consider In the first place the subtle and malicious wayes of the Jansenists who as I have already hinted by a sleight very ordinary with Heretiques have quitted their poste in the sight of the whole world not giving now the least Answer to those Reproaches made against them concerning the falsenesse of their Propositions challenged to be Erroneous Scandalous and Hereticall which as defendants they ought to have maintained but reproaching the Jesuits with the wickedness of their Moral by that means becomming the Assaulters and obliging the others to the Defensive part in a matter which concerned not the questions in hand Thus did the Arians deal with great St. Athanasius when finding it impossible to answer the force of his reasons they laid that care aside and became reproachers of his life obliging him to justifie himself from those horrible Accusations with which they set upon his innocency accusing him for ravishing a woman and barbarously murthering a man that he might cut off his hand to use it in Enchantment The question was not here what Answers the Jesuits have made concerning sundry Cases of Conscience which have either been proposed to them or which their Adversaries have forged at their pleasure or to speak yet more truly which the Enviers of their Glory and Abilities have maliciously attributed unto them but of the Doctrine of Jansenius and of the five Propositions taken out of that Author and condemned as his by the holy See That the Jesuits have well or ill answered or writ on the subject of Duels Usuries Restitutions and other Cases which their Adversaries impertinently impose
on them does not hinder the five Propositions taken out of Jansenius and presented to the Pope by my Lords the Bishops of France from being condemned by the Holy See Nor does it hinder those who now follow the Doctrine of the five Propositions from being as much Heretiques as the Calvinists of Charenton or their Benifices if they have any from being vacant whether they have charge of Souls or no which they have now lost by Heresie Nor if the Jesuits should be proved to erre in Morals is it therefore forbid to say the Jansenists are excommunicated and that those who know them to be Jansenists cannot in conscience receive the Sacraments from their hands Nor does it hinder their Books from deserving the fire and fagot as well as their Persons if the Primitive severity of our Laws were yet in use and there were not some hope of their amendment This the Readers of those Letters ought to consider reflecting on the quality of their Authors who being Jansenists are Heretiques and as such mortal enemies of the Jesuits who have still this advantage that all those who are enemies to the Church at the same time become theirs like that which the Roman Oratour once said of himself 'T was the happiness of his destiny that never any became his Enemy who was not at the same time an Adversary likewise to the Common-wealth This made a great Person of our times and one who was a scourge of Jansenism say One should give no other answer to those wicked Letters then these three words Jansenists are Heritiques In the second place consider likewise with how little discretion or conscience the Writers of those detestable Letters have cunningly published and authorized to the whole world certain pernicious Maximes whilest they charge the Jesuits for having writ them in their Books The Jesuits Opinions whatsoever they were remained in their own Volumes unknown to any but Schoolmen and Doctors to whom such Writings could do no harm since they are the Censurers of them and even in the same Volumes the Jesuits propose the different opinions and the 〈◊〉 Judgements of Authours the one being the Correctour of the other whereas our Jansenist gathers all that he can make seem extravagant out of many severall places and puts all together exposed to the eyes of ignorant Readers in the vulgar Language to persons uncapable of judging betwixt the false and the true the profitable and dammageble that which is to be received and that which is not casting a stumbling-block in the blinde mans way to make him fall and opening a Cistern without covering it contrary to the prohibition made us in Exodus I know well enough the malice of his intention was to create a Horror of the Jesuits by the malignity of the Doctrine which he imposes on them but let him know there is great danger lest he perswade these untruths and wicked Maximes to many under the authority of the Jesuits name to which the greatest part of the world will give more credit then to such petty Buffoons as he is who hath neither sense conscience nor authority Whereas on the contrary the Jesuites are in the universal good opinion of all except onely Heretiques and some others who malice them so that thinking to cry down such Doctrines they render them probable by the Authority of the Jesuits who have another manner of repute in the world then the Jansenists whom every body knows to have been condemned as Heretiques and it is no lesse known that the Jesuites have been the first who opened their eyes against the Errours and Heresies both of Jansenius and the Jansenists being of the number of those in the Church who have most of all fought against Heresies Liberti nisme and Vice in their Books in their Pulpits and Sermons in their Disputes and Conversation Insomuch as it is commonly believed that to be of the same judgement with the Jesuites is to be Orthodox even so far that many will be easily perswaded to receive for a lawfull Opinion and for an unblamable Resolution in respect of their moral life and conduct that which they shall understand to be the common opinion and universall tenet of the Fathers of that Society Therefore the Writer of those pernicious Letters cannot excuse himself from having brought into the whole Church of God and especially into France a horrible scandall and which deserves punishment slandering learned and vertuous Persons by opprobious speeches falsifications lies and calumnies and seducing the ignorant the weak and licentious by a wicked Doctrine By attributing this Doctrine to the Jesuites he has rendred it probable through the credit these Fathers have with the greatest part of the word who will believe it upon their score and by casting it in a vulgar Language among the people he hath thrown a stone of offence at which the weak will stumble and the wicked authorize their unlawfull enterprizes through this belief that they can commit no sin whilest they follow the judgement of so many so knowing and so vertuous Persons as are the Fathers of the Society Thirdly you must know this scraper and patcher up of Calumnies alledges almost nothing in his Letters that is new but makes us read a second time the work of one of his Brethren written near twelve years since against the Fathers of the Society of Jesus to which Work the Author gave this Title The Divinity of the Jesuites Out of this he has taken all the grand reproaches which he makes against those Fathers quoting the very same Authors and Places and using the same Forgeries multiplying his Letters according to the shreads he picks up that he may be able to make many Books out of that one all that is his is that now and then he addeth the names of two or three Auâ—hors not cited in the former Pamphlet and withal dilateth himself in the Narrative of a Romance fit for Jan Potage that he may render the Jesuites ridiculous to the Wits of his gang by such ways of answering which he attributes to them as are childish and foolish the best part of his Boyish Dialogues and which deserve not to go unpunished For the rest he is careful enough not so much as to mention the three Books which were then written in answer to that supposed Moral taking no notice of the answers which were made to the calumnies it contained nor the entertainment that pernicious Book met with which was a condemnation to the flames to be burnt by the hand of the Hangman and this by the sentence of one of the wisest and most August Parliaments in France Fourthly do but cast your eye on his Rhapsody of Passages and Quotations you shall finde nothing but untruths and calumnies the Author of it falsifying the greatest part of those places he alledges and many times lying most boldly and impudently making Authors say that which they never dreamt croping and hacking their words and not producing them entire to the end that
one may not understand their true sense purposely omitting the modifications and limitations which they use to render them ridiculous or monstrous in their opinions fancying to himself that having cited the places quoted the Books and written some of the Authours words every one will credit him though the Author of the Morall Divinity has been convicted of falsity in the most of the self-same Allegations Do but remember after what manner the Calvinists who have as little truth in their Quotations as they have in their Faith alledge the holy Scripture and Sentences of the holy Fathers that falshood is entailed on Heresie and that the Jansenists have that Character of Errour in their Sect that it is now become a Proverb in many places when one would call one an impudent Liar to say That he over-reaches as much as a Jansenist I know not what I ought to blame most in these men and their writings whether their falseness and impudence in lying or their malice in inventing calumnies or their ignorance in so ill understanding and so ill alledging of Authors and their Opinions or their injustice in forging crimes where there are none or their inveterate hate against the Jesuites whom they set upon by false and unreasonable accusations Fifthly reflect on the manner of this Authors writing who in matters of Divinity of Morall of Cases of Conscience and Salvation uses a taunting foolish stile I will not onely say unworthy of a Divine or an Ecclesiasticall person but even of a Christian who ought not to treat holy Things like a Scoffer or Comedian He calls himself as all of that Sect of his doe Disciple of St. Augustin Let him finde me one place in the writings of that great Doctour where he takes upon him the part of a Jeaster or Buffoon 'T is the spirit of Heresie which has nothing in it of serious but rage and fury if yet notwithstanding men swayed with those passions deserve to be termed serious 'T is the spirit of the ungodly and Blasphemers which is spoken of in Job Imitaris linguam blasphemantium Thou speakest like a Blasphemer the Original bears Irrisorum Thou hast the tongue of Jeasters It is also a kinde of Blasphemy to treat holy things in Rallicry thus the Devils often endeavour by their jeastings to put by the force of Exorcismes speaking like Buffoons to stir up the common people to a loose kinde of Laughter the Enemy of Devotion and the Ruine of Religion Yet 't is the whole advantage this naughty Writer has for having neither solidity nor science nor truth he took his recourse to his best fortâ—sse which is Fooling and that alone it is which gives utterance to his Work although his Work found another way of a facil vent which was that many Copies were distributed at the cost and charges of the whole Party out of the Almes of Jansenisme The Wise man advises us what entertainment we are to give such spirits and writings in the 22. of the Proverbs Ejtâ—e derisorem Drive far from you the Mocker and Buffoon he deserveth nought but disdain both of his Person and his Work but being also a Jansenist we must drive him away with a horrour since that every Jansenist is an Heretique In the sixth place consider the ill reasoning of this malicious Writer who often attributes to the whole Body of the Jesuites that which none of them has said or at most what escaped from some one of their Body notwithstanding that all the rest have written against it Who yet ever saw that from one particular a man could conclude an universal Must we call those the Maximes or the Moral of the Jesuits which were scarce ever said by any one of the Jesuits If Gerson Chancellour of the University of Paris have had some erroneous opinion upon the difference of Venial and Mortall sin must we censure that as the Maxime or the Moral of the Sorbon Richerius had a particular Opinion which was not approved concerning the sovereign Pastour must we therefore blame the whole Faculty If any of the holy Fathers have had some opinion which since his time hath not been approved must we therefore attribute it to all the holy Fathers Had this Authour but one grain of sincerity whilest he accuseth one Jesuit for advancing an opinion which seems not true to him why conceals he that many other Jesuites have taught the contrary This Caveat he might have read in the Reply to the Moral Divinity which we shall be constrained to make him read in the Second Answer which will be made to his Letters to his Falsities and to his malicious Dissimulations I appeal to any judicious man what is properly to be called the Jesuites Doctrine whether that which onely one of that Body shall have said or that which many amongst them have taught to the contrary and if it be not an insupportable injustice and which deserves not to escape unpunished maliciously to impute to a whole Community not what the greatest part have taught but what onely one of them has said Were it not injustice to impeach the whole Colledge of the Apostles for Treason because one of their number betrayed his Master Finally let any man judge whether it be not a loud calumny and grosse foolery to charge the Jesuites as Introducers and first Authors or sole defenders of opinions which were taught for many Ages in all the Universities of Europe before the Order of the Jesuites was established They call Opinions and Maximes of the Jesuites those very assertions which have been and are the opinions of others and which the greatest part of the Iesuites oppose in their Writings as may be seen in the Answer to the Book called Morall Divinity But all that is odious must be cast upon the Iesuites they are used by their enemies such as are commonly Heretiques and the followers of Jansenisme as the Primitive Christians were by the Heathens for as to those it was crime enough to be a Christian so to these 't is enough to be a Iesuite to lie under the lash of every ones censure when there is power and impunity That which is past by in some Writers and which is not so much as a light fault in the Books of others is in the Iesuites a crime an attempt against publique Order an abomination The Authour of the Letters does not reproach the Iesuites with any one Maxime Decision or Answer which is not either falsly alledged by that Impostor or corrupted and disguised or so separated from its own place from its modifications and limitations that it is no more the same If any opinion that seemeth to give scope to Liberty be taught by any of the Society it is opposed by many others of the same body Nay whatsoever any particular person of the Society hath advanced contrary to the sentiments of the rest of his Order that very same hath been formerly taught by many Doctours out of his Order in all Universities and by
in such serious Disputes The sixth Imposture French 9. THat the Jesuites excuse such as deliberately and on set purpose hunt after the occasions of sinning because the famous Casuist Basil Pontius who was no Jesuit teaches that one may seek after an occasion to sin directly and for it self primo per se when we are carried to it either for the spirituall or temporall good of our selves or our Neighbours and that Father Bauny the Jesuite quotes him and approves his opinion in the Treaty of Penance Qu. 4. p. 94 Letter 5. pag. 91. Answer It is strange there is not one word of this Calumniatour to be found without some disguise or Imposture Let us therefore force truth out of his hands that we may shew how he labours to corrupt its innocency and fully its purity 'T is a Question in the Morall whether Judith were not a little rash then when she exposed her self so as we know she did to save the Inhabitants of Bethuly Whether St. Ambrose did well in going into Stews to get away some debauched Woman And whether many other Saints could discreetly imitate their zeal as we finde they have done St. Ambrose libr. 3. Offic. cap. 12. justifies a Honestaâ—em secuta est Judith dum eam 〈◊〉 est wilitatem invenit Judith because she considered an honest good sayes he in that dangerous occasion and searching it she found a profitable good And in the second Book of Virgins c. 14. speaks thus in her favour b Judith se ut Adultero placeret ornavit quae tamen quia hoc Religione non Amore faciebat nâ—mâ—â—am Adulteram judicavit Bene sacâ—â—ssit exemplum Judith drest her self that she might take the eyes of an Adulterer and yet never durst any think her an Adultresse because 't was not Love but Religon incited her to do it and therefore the example which she left us sucâ—eâ—ded very happily If the Authority of this holy Doctor does not satisfie the Jansenist he may consult with the Siâ—ur Daâ—dilly and ask him if in the lives of the Holy Fathers of the Desert he have not at large set down the passage of an Hermite who went into a Stew under a disguised dresse that he might get away his Neece with whom he feigned a design of sinning For my own part I do not know any that are resolved to reprove the conduct of these great Saints who voluntarily would expose themselves to danger for the spirituall good of their Neighbour as Saint Ambrose did yea and for some considerable temporall good as Judith But you ask if this were lawfull for all sorts of people who have not the strength those Saints had to overcome the danger yet have the same reasons to search it Suarez a Jesuit whose name is not unknown to Divines maintains in the Treaty of Charity that those who distrust their own weaknesse cannot do it with a safe conscience because he that loveth danger shall perish in it as Holy Scripture tells us The famous Casuist Basil Pontius holds the contrary opinion and assures us a Catholâ—que may marry an Heretique Woman if it be â—â—r reasons of great moment as the Tranquâ—llity of a great Kingdom or the Advancement of Religion although it were not without danger by reason of his own weaknesse that he may be perverted c Dum tamen contraâ—at cum firmo proposito non labendi sidensque de divina misericordia gratia fore ut â—ripiatur ab co periculo fine crimine Siquidem urgente Dei causa illud subire periculum non recusat Basil Pont. Append. de Matrimon Cath. cum Haeâ—eticâ cap. 9. p 894. secund edit alwayes provided that in marrying her his will be resolved to hold constant to the true Faith and that he hope through the immense mercy of God for whose sake he exposes himself to this danger that he shall go through without falling inâ—o Heresie He grounds this on the Authority of the Canons which permit Husbands become impotent by charms or by nature to continue in the same lodgings with their Wives ob honestatem publicam although they be in continuall danger of sinning C. Consult de frigid malesic alâ—bi saepe and on the opinion of above fifteen Authors which the Reader may see in the place I cite and whom Father Bauny has followed in his Treaty of Penance Q. 14. This is the naked truth and now you shall see the imposture and treachery of the Jansenist which would give subject enough of astonishment if it were not so natural to him that they are inseparable First then to render this Doctrine obnoxious to a severe censure he explains it indifferently of all sorts of occasions as if these Authours thought that any one on never so slight motives might cast himself into the danger of offending God whereas Basil Pontius speaks only of extraordinary cases where either the interest of state or Religion is concerned And this Father Bauny who follows him teaches in formall terms That regularly one ought not to absolve him that is in occasion of sinning because Absolution cannot consist with a will to sin Tract de Poenit. q. 14. Is there any malice more black then that of this Detractour Secondly to render the Jesuites odious he attributes to them that opinion because one of them followed it although their more able Writers as Suarez hold the contrary Is noâ— this a plain sign that passion has blinded him In the third place he would make us believe that Father Bauny approves that manner of speaking of Basil Pontius that one may hunt after a direct occasion of Sin primo perse because he approves the opinion of that Author which is a meer wrangling for he may consent to his opinion without approving his mannâ—r of speaking which not being either proper or strict is capable of an ill construction by taking of the word occasion formally so as it carries a man to sin if it were not clearly enough explained in the whole body of the Dispute where he pretends onely this that for the good either of Church or State a man may without sinning marry an Heretick and expose himself to the danger of being perverted by her slatteries supposing that he be resolved through the grace of God to resist them constantly Now to all this though Father Bauny do approve the Doctrine yet is it so false that he approves the manner of speaking of Basil Pontius that he repeats the contrary four times in the fourteenth question of the Treatie of Penance that if one should engage himself in the occasion of sinning upon some just account that occasion must not be either pretended or sought after by him who does so expose himself Judge by this of the maâ—iâ—e and the ignorance of his Accuser oâ— his ignorance if he do not know the merit of Basil Pontius who beyond all dispute is a most learned and judicious Casuist of his malice if knowing it he
him Now as to the second Assertion that Lessius is charged with that to prevent a Box o' th' Ear one may kill him that would give it you and that in the place cited n. 77. he teacheth this to be sure ex sententiâ omnâ—um in the opinion of all which our English Translatour saith is to make it absolutely sterling by the unanimous consent of all to this I will not answer that those words ex sententiâ omnium are not in Lessius in the place cited and so consequently not sterling but of base alloy and false coin Lessius indeed useth those words or rather citeth Petrus Navarrus who useâ—h them in the following number for another businesse But in this number he neither hath the words nor the sense of the words But I will not insist on this 't is too small a falsity to be taken notice of among so many notorious Impostures To come then to the point Lessius in the place cited teacheth That a man of Honour may resist an Invasor that would either cudgel or box him and that he may kill him that setteth upon him if he cannot otherwise defend himself from being bastinado'd or buffeted and this he teacheth after Sotus Navarr Sylvester Ludovicus Lopez Gomez and Clarus whereof none are Jesuites Now that for which I complain of the Jansenist here is first That he would have it thought the Jesuites invented or mainly spread this opinion when in the place he citeth his own eyes are witnesses that it is the opinion of so many others before Lessius wrote Secondly I complain of his want of wit that he would tax this opinion which is a good one For what Would you have a Gentleman cudgell'd and kickt in the Kenâ—el for fear that if he should keep off some insolent ribauld he might at length be forced to draw his Sword and perhaps whilest he defendeth himself be forced to kill his injurious Invasour For he must not kill him if can avoid it saith Lessius His words are Fas est viro honorato occidere invasorem qui fustem vel â—olaphum nititur impingere ut ignominiam inferat si aliâ—èr haec ignâ—minia vitari nequit These are his words What is here to be reprehended It is not to be understood that as soon as you see a man lift up his cudgel against you you may presently pistol him No but if you cannot neither with fair words nor threats nor thrusting him off nor any other way keep your self from his cudgel you are not bound to stand still and let your self be cudgel'd and perhaps kill'd too but you may lawfully defend your self from him that thus setteth upon you though in the strife his death should follow your just defence That this is the meaning of all the Divines who teach this case is evident and as for Lessius his words make his meaning clear for he concludeth thus Si alitèr haec ignominia vitari non potest If this ignominy of being box'd or cudgell'd cannot otherwise be avoided This Doctrine I will give the Translatour leave to call Sterling but not in derision And if he be a Gentleman I assure my self he will be sorry for having quarrelled with Lessius for this opinion and be angry with those who engaged him to employ a good pen in so ill a cause The third assertion wherewith Lessius is taxed in this matter is that he teacheth That one may kill another for reproachfull words and even for a simple gesture or sign of contempt The place quoted is in the same Book and Chapter and the same Dubitation already cited and num 78. where Lessius indeed treateth this matter But Lessius is notoriously wronged by the Jansenist for he doth not teach what is imputed to him but clean contrary He beginneth that numbâ—â—â—â—us It is to be noted that ones honour mâ—â— diâ—ers wayes be set upon in which â—â— seâ—meâ—h granted that one may defenâ— himself He doth not say with what 〈◊〉 Firsâ— if you enâ—eavour to strike one with a Stick or to give 〈◊〉 Box o' th' Ear of which I have already 〈…〉 â—â—â—ondly if you be conâ—umelious to one 〈…〉 or signs Here is also right for a defence For Peter de Navarr saith libr. 2. c. 3. num 376. That it is lawfull ex sentontiâ omnium in the opinion of all to kill him that is contumelious to you Thus doth Lessius state the question in the beginning of that number 78. Then he saith That he findeth not this which Navarr saith expressed in Authours though it seemeth that it may be gathered out of them Then he goeth on and according to his custome bringeth the reasons which may be brought for this opinion of Navarr and the qualifications of it and in fine concludeth thus This opinion is not to be followed For it must be enough in a Common-wealth to represse verball injuries with words and to chastise them with a legal revenge that is that punishment which the Law alloweth With what face then can this Jansenist make the world believe that Lessius teacheth a man may kill another for conâ—umelious words or even for signs when he decideth positively to the contrary Lessius bringeth the reasons for Navar 's opinion and then decideth the question against them So St. Thomas when he proveth there is a God first brings the reasons that Atheists may alledge then he disproveth those reasons and decideth against Atheists How grosse must thiâ—k you his ignorance be that would judge out of this proceeding that St. Thomas was an Atheist just as gross is this Jansenists The fourth thing laid to Lessius his charge in this matter is that he saith That heed must be taken that the practice of this Maxime he would have it understood of Revenge in the cases alledged prove not prejudiciall to the State for then it is noâ— to be permitted tunc enim non est permittendus c. as though Lessius thought that in all thâ—se cases there were no fear of sin but that all the fear were left the State should be interessâ—d I answer That Lessius hath no such words neither in the place cited which is num 78. for to that we are referred in the seventh Letter pag. 148 nor in any plac â—hat belongeth to these questions True it is that in another matter he hath words which are not altogether contrary to thâ—se though very unlâ—ke these So thâ—t here the Jansenist hath â—he 〈◊〉 of a double châ—at both to have cited false and to have pâ—rverted Lessius his words and appliâ—d them to a contrary question I need say no more yet for the Readers satisfaction I will let him see the impudence of this Ignoramus Lessius then after having treated the questions hitherto touched in this answer to the present Imposture goeth on and in the number 81. putteth the case in these words The fourth manner of wronging ones honour is if one should go about to defame you with your Priâ—ce Judge or honourable
to the Reply made in defence of the Twelfth Provinciall Letter Argument 1. THat the Authour of this Reply hath not excused the Authour of the Provinciall Letters from the main crimes objected to him but left him in the lurch 2. Vasquez his Conclusions of Alms set down out of his Treatise of Alms. 3. Out of these Conclusions the Authour of the Reply and the Jansenist are evidently convinced of notorious Imposture 4. Some generall Notions of Simony given 5. Clear Imposture discovered in forging words in the name of Valentia when Valentia hath no such words 6. The Author of the Reply convinced out of his own words of Imposture in his trifling discourse against Tanner SIR YOur Friend the Jansenist is very little obliged to you for instead of helping him out of the miâ—e you have plunged him deeper in You know he was told in the Answer to his Twelfth Letter that he was justly called Heretique since the Church calleth him so for defending the Hereticall Propositions of Jansenius What Answer do you make You know he was told that since as was shewed in the Impostures his objections against the Society were generally the same which Du Moulin had made against the Church he could not take it ill to be called Du Moulins Disciple What Answer do you make You know he was told that the Title of Impostor and Falsiâ—ier was given the Authour of the Book of Morall Divinity burnt by the Hangman and therefore he having formed his Letters on that mould ought not to count it a wrong done him that the Jesuites gave his Letters the Title which the Parliament of Bourdeoux gave the Originall from whence they were copied What Answer do you make The reall crimes which your Friend hath committed make him guilty of these Titles of Heretique of Disciple of Du Moulin of Impostour c. What say you for him If you will defend him you must speak here or else I must tell you as your Friend hath already been told That silence in such crimes as these argueth conviction You tell us You judge these things said to divert the Authour From what That you do not tell us But â—â—e tell you from what These things were said to divert the Author from falsifying and abusing learned Writers which he doth not understand They were said to divert him from stealing calumnies out of condemned Libells They were said to divert him from Heresies They were said to divert others from giving credit to a fabulous Slanderer convinced of so many grosse and ignorant Calumnies It was this diversion was aimed at for his good and the good of those whose facil credulity he abuseth He ought to have cleared himself had it been possible for him from these just accusations and yet you who will needs take up the Cudgels in his quarrel tell us You are glad to see his Thirteenth Letter come abroad without taking any notice of the Answer to his Eleventh and Twelfth Letters where these crimes were laid to his charge This indeed may help to embolden your Friend and make him a little more impudent in belying Authours since you clap him o' the back and are glad to see him slight his being convicted but it will never help to clear him But because you expresse your joy at the sight of the Thirteenth Letter I pray tell me were you glad to see that whereas in the beginning he undertakes to answer the Fourth Imposture in English the Fourteenth and with it Seven more he notwithstanding never toucheth one of those Seven Were you glad to see That that very Fourteenth Impostuâ—e which he handleth is so pittifully treated that it is but reading one short passage of Lâ—ssius which I have inserted in the end of this Book for to see his Ignominy written in undeniable Characters It is no friendly part to be glad that one for whom you have a kindenesse saith what he cannot prove and undertakes what he cannot perform yet you are glad to see this in your Friend which another man would be ashamed of in a Stranger And perhaps your Friend the Jansenist in whose vindication you write will be as glad to see your Letter which is much according to his palate full of falsity and errours You undertake to shew that he hath not wronged Vasquez nor Valentia nor Tanner Let 's see how you perform it And to proceed orderly let 's begin with Vasquez and first lay down the accusations on both sides and then come to you The Authour then of the Provinciall Letters speaketh thus in his Sixth Letter It is said in the Gospel Give Alms of your superfluity and yet divers Casuists have found out a way to exempt even the richest persons from this obligation of giving Alms by interpreting the word superfluity insomuch that it seldom or never happeneth that any man is troubled with any such thing And this is done by the learned Vasquez in this manner What ever men lay up out of a design to raise their fortunes or those of their relation is not called superfluous For which reason it will be hard to finde any among those that are worldly minded that have ought superfluous no not even among Kings And a little after he concludeth That it will be as sure a way according to Vasquez for a man that desires to work his Salvation to be guilty of ambition enough that so he may have nothing superfluous as it is according to the Gospel not to be ambitious at all To this the Jesuites answered That Vasquez taught quite contrary to what the Jansenist imposed on him Here was then the question to be decided in the Twelfth Letter and in its Answer viz. Whether the Authour of the Provinciall Letters â—ad cited Vasquez right or no And you Sir who undertake to second the Jansenist Authour of the Provinciall Letters maintain that Vasquez is not wronged but that he is really Authour of the Doctrine for which he is cited I undertake to prove the contrary Our question must be cleared by looking into Vasquez as he lieth in that Treatise of Alms which consisteth of four Chapters Of these four the first onely is that where he treateth the question in hand concerning Alms which secular men are bound to give I shall therefore draw out from thence all Vasquez his Conclusions concerning this question keeping as near as may be not onely the sense but the very expressions of Vasquez Vasquez his Conclusions concerning Alms which Secular Men are bound to give First all grant that the Precept of actually giving Alms is an Affirmative Precept which doth not oblige at all times Dub. 3. num 10. Secondly all agree that this Precept obligeth under mortall sin when our neighbour is in extream necessity Ibid. Thirdly all seem to agree though perhaps some dissent that no man is bound to give Alms when the necessity of the poor is not urgent but onely ordinary Ibid. Fourthly some say that though you have that which is superfluous not
the memory of the dead If Sorbon do justice on it self and couragiously cut off its own members where they see inflamation and corruption to be gather'd by the contagion of your errours the Jesuits say you are the Corrupters of Discipline and it is necessary to exterminate them for the good of Souls and Glory of God What ever advantage they may have in the Doctrine of Faith yet must they still be attaqued in the point of Manners Their Writers must all be racked and nothing left intire in any of their Books they must be falsified by infamous forgings they must be altered by unfaithfull suppressions a false aspect must be given them by malignant interpretations some passages of them must be shortned others lengthened those must have that cut off which justifieâ— them and these must have something added which may make them appear blameable Divines will soon discover these illusions but the People who are not â—o clear-sighted will be apt to take such apparitions for solid bodies and so you will still finde your account The wise will admire that you take upon you such a wretched employment and that after you have spoken so long like Oracles the language of the Ancient Fathers you are now reduc'd like Moaths to eat the Books of the new Casuists But the wise are not the greater number for one Person of Honour that will be afflicted at this disorder you will make a hundred Libertines laugh who are so pleas'd with detractions of this nature that even the false do often delight them more then the true In fine the Jesuites will not fail to defend themselves and make you blush at your gulleries But you are ready to welcome them if they presse you with the force of reason you will â—ire them with your importunities and repeat so often those words mentiris impudentissime that they will be forc'd to hold their peace perceiving plainly that you have nothing to lose and that they can get nothing of you but injuries Truly Sir you are fallen upon a very commodious way of defending your self and assaulting others since all your dexterity consists in lying impudently which is not hard to do and in giving others the Lye with impunity which is yet more easie in aspersing the Innocent with hideous Calumnies to make them criminall and calling them Calumniators to vindicate your self of all your crimes Let us take a view of your proceeding and see how you reduce to practice the method of Port-Royal You make Father Alâ—y say that Monsieur Puys is an Heretique excommunicate and worthy of the sire You quote his first and second Book and assure us that he confirms in the latter what he had said of him in the former This is an apparent falshood For it is to be seen that from the third page of his second Book he declares to the contrary That men are much to blame to accuse him of having call'd that Pastour Heretique that there is no man of judgement who examines the terms of his first Apology for he assaults not but defends himself but will judge this glosse too violent and that complaint very tender You are therefore an Impostour and that a signall one But what does it avail me to convince and presse you to an answer As your accusation is onely a lie so all your Apology will be to give me that complement You who made no consciâ—noe to lye in imposing upon that Father will have no shame to give me the lie in justifying your self and say Mentirls impudontissimé You accuse Father Bauny of having taught That it is lawfull directly primo per se to seek out the next occasion of sinning for the Spirituall or Temporall good of our selves or neighbour This is a palpable falshood Those words primo per se are none of that Divines I advertis'd you of it in my answer to you ninth Imposture I told you that decision was capable of two contrary senses the first that one may expose himself to an occasion of sinning upon reasons important to the conversion of Souls and welfare of the State as St. Ambrose and many other Saints have done yet so as he have hope by the help of Heaven to overcome the danger and be firmly resolved in himself to overcome it and this is the opinion of F. Bauny and of the famous Basilius Pontius which is not rejected in the Schools The second sense is that one may temerariously expose himself to those occasions and even formally seek them out upon light grounds And this Doctrine the Abbot of Boisic who passes with you for F. Pinthereau calls detestable As to the first sense I accus'd you of ignorance for making a crime of an opinion common in Divinity and for the second I convinc'd you of malice in regard there is not so much as the least print or foot-stop thereof in F. Bauny's Book and consequently cannot be imputed to him as F. Caussin said but by an instrument of the Devill Neverthelesse as though you had quite forgotten it you take me for Surety against your Creditours and make me an Approver of what you say against them that accuse you was there ever seen such a piece of knavery as this But you may do any thing you have a dispensation generall from Port-Royall which â—xempts you from speaking truth and impowers you to give the lye to all that reproach you with unfaithfull dealing See yet another example for you are very â—ruitfull in Impostures as having in you an inexhaustâ—ble Source of them You impute to F. Bauny this Proposition That Priests ought not to deny absolution to those that remain in the habits of Crimes against the Law of God Nature and the Church though they discover not any hops of amendment And you assuâ—e us that F. Pintherâ—an and F. Brisaciâ—r are fallen into a contradiction about the answering your Imposture This is a falâ—hood more evident then the day the answer of the one destroyes not the answer of the other they are both of them alike good and satisfactory to all such who are not sick of envy like your self One answers that Absolution cannot be given to that sort of Sinners when they shew no desire of amendment and denies that ever F. Bauny taught the contrary all this is true The other answers that in the apprehension which a Priest may have of his Penitents relapses considering the frailty of men he is to rely upon the promise of the Penitent and to content himself with his sincere and resolved will to live better testified by his words and regrets without expecting extraordinary revelations to ascertain him of the good disposition of the Sinner and of the infallible effâ—ct that is to follow his present protestations and resolutions which the greatest Saints cannot promise themselves and this he avowes for F. Bauny's opinion This is also true Where is then that imaginary contradiction you accuse them of Where is that streit which is so difficult to get
Heretiques and demands satisfaction for so great an injury He sees not how I can well excuse my self since it is manifest as he imagines that they who are termed Jansenists have perfectly submitted to the Popes Constitution which condemns the five Propositions and do hold the same Propositions for well and duely condemned I have often and long since satisfied this objection But because we have to deal with such as are voluntarily deaf who will hear but what they please and have ears impenetrable to the voice that informs them what they ought but will not do I shall here again unfold the reason I have to call them Heretiques Though it prevail with them no more then formerly yet will it serve to undeceive those who might be caught with the fair shew of their Complaint I affirm therefore that the Jansenists are Heretiques and that without all dispute they ought to be call'd by that name The reason is for want of a due submission to the Constitutions of the Holy Sea and the Declarations made by the Church to advertise that the Doctrine they maintain is Hereticall I will not speak of the Bull of Vrban VIII which affirms Jansenius to have reviv'd a Doctrine already condemn'd to the sâ—andall of Christianity and contempt of the Sea Apostolique and therefore condemns his Book anew Every man knows that both in France and Flaunders they have publish'd a number of Books to perswade the nullity and falshood of that Bull. And if after all they will still vaunt of their submission a man must say that to obey after the Jansenist fashion is to dispute against the command I onely speak of the Constitution of Pope Innocent X. and maintain that they have not submitted to it nor hold the condemned Propositions for well and duly condemned the demonstration whereof is easie For the Pope in condemning the Propositions did not condemn the characters they are written in nor the voice they are pâ—onounced with but the sense of those that write or pronounce them that is to say the judgement corresponding to the proper signification of the voice and characters And that we might not be put to the trouble of divining that sense the Pope who condemns the Propositions declares it to us in the same Constitution when he calls them opinions of Jansenius shewing by those words that he pretends to condemn the opinions of Jansenius in condemning those Propositions and which comes all to one that be intends to condemn those Propositions in the sense they have in Jansenius's Doctrine Since that Constitution the Pope has made another Decree by which he twice pronounced that in the Five Propositions he condemned the Doctrine of Jansenius Wherefore he proscribes or prohibits afresh the pretended Augustine of Jansenius and all Books either written or to be written that shall defend his Doctrine The Bishops of France having explicated the Constitution in the same manner and affirmed that the Five Propositions were condemn'd in the sense of Jansenius the Pope in avowing their explication rejoyced thereat and has again the third time pronounced that he condemn'd the Doctrine of Jansenius in the Five Propositions The assembly generall of the Clergy have receiv'd his Brief and confirm'd it by the testimonies they have given of their satisfaction therein The manifest result of all which is that 't is not a submitting to the Popes Constitutions to say they condemn the Five Propositions and yet approve the Opinions Doctrine or Sense of Jansenius Wherefore we ask the Jansenists whether in condemning the Five Propositions as they pretend to do they condemn the Opinions Sense and Doctrine of Jansenius If they say yes praised be God that they return to the Churches sense and â—enâ—ounce Jansenisme and let us call them no longer Heretiques If they say no they are manifestly Hrâ—tiques since they maintain the Five Propositions in that sense in which the Pope has declar'd them Heretâ—call and by the same reason they have not submitted to the Pope's Constitution And because they have hitherto refused to confesâ—e that truth thâ—â— so constant a refusall being not otherwise interpretable thâ—n an avowment of the contrary we have most just reason to call them absolutely Heretiques as people obstinately defending a Doctrine declar'd and condemn'd for Hereticall So that we cannot change our language except they alter their mindes Their usuall evasion by distinguishing betwixt questions of Right and question of Fact cannot secure them We must consider in that Sect two sorts of persons the Captains or Conductors of the Flock who are their Doctours and the Followers that are blindely engag'd in the Party by faction Caball and adherence to their Conductors The former understand the fact by their own knowledge and therein ought to remain agreed with us The latter know it by adhesion to the knowledge of their Leaders Which is to say that they who make Apologies for Jansenius and daily dispute in defence of his Doctrine and who have written a hundred and a hundred Pieces in Latine and French to perswade men that their Doctrine touching the Five Propositions is the Doctrine of St. Augustine that so it may not be said they have gone sotâ—iâ—hly to work and disputed on a businesse they understood not are oblig'd to confesse that they know it to be the Doctrine of Jansenius as also that it has relation to the Five Propositions and that in the same relation the Five Propositions have a sense conformable the Doctrine of Jansenius We are therefore accorded as to matter of Fact But in case they should deny it they are caught by their own confession They have often avowed it They have acknowledg'd those Propositions to be laid down in Jansenius and that they might be consider'd a In the Book intituled Propositiones de Gratiâ Sorbonae Facultate propediem examinaâ—dae Vt in Jansenii Augustino jacent vel quoad verba vel quoad verborum vim sententiam They have noted the places where they are found saying of the first b Pag. 10. Veniamus ad Jansenium expendamus quo ille intellectu positionem hanâ— usurparit justis omnibus volentibus conantibus c. Habetur ea apud hunc authorem lib. 3. de Gratiâ Salvatoris cap. 13. And of the Second c Pag. 16. Accâ—dat modo Antistes Iprensis Asscrit ipse expliâ—at ex professo propâ—sitam thesim libro tâ—rtio de Gratiâ Salvatoris â—ámque firmat solidâ—ssimè c. And of the Third d Pag. 24. Quoad Iprensis Episcopi hâc in parte sententiam vide ab ipso Augustini aliorumque Patrum omnis atatis congesta loca innumera quibus â—vincit invictissiâ—è solam libâ—rtatem à coactionâ— ad veram libertatem ac proiâ—de ad meritum esse necessariam And notes in the Margent lib. 6. de Gr. Salvatoris cap 6. seq And of the Fourth e Pag. 30. Quid vero senserit de islo argumento Iprensis Episcopus fusissime
reperies à sexto ad undecimum caput lib. 8. de Hist. Pelagiana c. And of the Fifth f Pag. 36. Augustini verba sententiam summa side repraesentavit Iprensis Episcopus lib. 3. de Gr. Salv. cap. 2. Vbi retulit veterem Ecclesiam Lugdunâ—nsem Sinodum Valentinam expressissime definiâ—ntes velut â—idei Catholicae dogma Non pro omnibus omâ—ino sed pro â—idelibus solis mortuum Christum Crucisixum The Author of the Book of Victorious Grace with six Approbatours sayes That those Propositions are most true and most Cotholique according to the sense of Grace efficacious in it self g Pag. 16. 18 21 22. As it is also in that sole sense that the Lord Bishop of Ipres maintains them against the errours of the Jesuites That they have a good sense in which the Lord Bishop of Ipres and the Disciples of St. Augustine have alwayes defended them And where is it that the Lord Bishop of Ipres has defended them Is it not in his Augustinus And how should he defend them in that Book if they were not there They are therefore the Propositions of Jansenius and they that cannot finde them there again need onely resume the eyes they had before those Propositions were condemn'd Since the Authour of the Memoire touching the Jesuites design affirms That Jansenius's opinions on the Subject of those Propositions are the same wiâ—h St. Augustins and consequently that one cannot determine them condemn'd in Jansenius 's sense without violating all the rules of the Church As also that the ablest Divines would be oblig'd to acknowledge the capitall points of St. Augustine 's Doctrine condemned if the Five Propositions had been condemned in Jansenius 's sense Does â—e not grant those Propositions to have a sense in the Doctrine of Jansenius and consequently that they are Jansenius's either as to the Letter or as to that sense And the Authour of the Illustration upon some new Objections supposeth he not the same when he sayes That though the Jesuites should by surprize have extorted a generall condemnation of Jansenius 's sense Yet all the Learned who are vers'd in St. Austines Doctrine would not be able to believe that they could without wounding their consciences so far blinde themselves as to take the most constant Maximes of that great Saints Doctrine for Heresie and Impietics He is carefull to forbear denying the Five Propositions to contain the sense of Jansenius and contents himself with the common evasion viz. That Jansenius his sense is also the Doctrine of St. Augustine 'T is notoriously known that the five Deputies at Rome a few dayes before their condemnation protested before the Pope in the name of themselves and all the Disciples and Defenders of St. Augustine that they did and would maintain during their lives the Five Propositions in their legitimate sense as containing the undoubted Doctrine of St. Austin and consequently of the Church They well knew that in their opinion the sense of St. Augustine and Jansenius were not different But rightly judging that the defence of St. Austin would appear more reasonable then the defence of Jansenius they in a Bravado stil'd themselves the Defenders of St. Augustine though they were in effâ—ct but the Defenders of Jansenius And consequently till such time as we have a constat of their revoking that generous protestation we are bound to believe them on their Parol that they and the other Disciples and Defenders of St. Austin that is to say all the Jansenists do still and will during life defend the Five Propositions in their legitimate sense which is just the sense of Jansenius We are therefore agreed of the Fact by the Jansenists own confession to wit That the five Propositions are of Jansenius either as to the words or as to the sense they may receive nay as to their legitimate sense if we will believe their Deputies at Rome We must therefore hence forward dispute onely of the Right to know whether the Fact which we are agreed on deserves approbation or condemnation For 't is just as when in secular judgements the supposed criminall confesses the fact he is charg'd with as when Milo for example freely grants that he â—lew Clodius after which it remains onely to enquire whether he had right to do it So since the Jansenists have confessed that they maintain the Five Propositions in Jansenius's sense there 's no further diâ—pute but whether they have right to maintain them But the Pope decides the controversie saying That in those Propositions he condemns the sense of Jansenius And consequently if he be deceived he is deceived in the decision of a point of Right not a point of Fact And if the Jansenists refuse to obey that decision the pretext of its being a question of Fact will not excuse their refusall For 't is but a mear mockery to say they have submitted to the Constitution unlesse in their Morality they call it a submission to refuse to act what is ordained Nor can they alledge that Jansenius's own sense of the Propositions and that which we pretend to be his are divers senses We call no other the sense of Jansenius then that which Jansenius himself has express'd in his Book then that which the Jansenists have preach'd taught publish'd by an infinity of Writings and have abridg'd in the Paper of Three Columns That is the sense we call Iansenius his sense and which also the Pope intends And therefore it was that in the pursuance of his Bull he condemned all Books that defend that sense and namely the Paper of Three Columns That is to say he condemns the expression which Iansenius and the Iansenists themselves have made of their Doctrine in the Five Propositions In a word the Pope having declar'd that he has condemn'd the Doctrine of Jansenius we press the Jansenists with their own Maximes so as 't will be impossible for them to escape without retracting what they have said or renouncing the infallibility of the Church For see how they argue Pope Celestine writing to the Bishops of France declar'd St. Augustines Doctrine touching matter of Grace to be the Catholique Doctrine Therefore they that impugne the same Doctrine of St. Augustine are Heretiques We say in like manner Pope Innocent X. writing to the Bishops of France declar'd that Jansenius's Doctrine is condemn'd as Hereticall Therefore the Jansenists who defend that Doctrine are Heretiques What is there replyable It is they will say a question of Fact wherein the Pope is not infallible viz. whether the Doctrine he condemnes is or is not the Doctrine of Jansenius And 't is also say we a question of Fact wherein the Pope is not infallible viz. whether the Doctrine he established be or be not the Doctrine of St. Augustine What know we say they whether Pope Innocent ever read Jansenius And what know we whether Pope Celestine ever read St. Augustine Pope Celestine express'd in a certain number of Propositions the Doctrine
and laid your ignorance open to the world and by this means he would have saved your labour saved your credit and saved your conscience But your having no dependance on any body made you leap headlong into the precipice into which your passion lead you blindefold On the contrary the Jesuites by the dependance which they have from their Superiours have stood firm and their Doctrine like a rock in the Sea hath received the boisterous waves of your calumnies and contradictions without being ever shaken in the least point I do not say this to averre that all their Writings are irreprehensible I know some Jesuites have writ things which the Pope hath censured as that which you take notice of of Father Halloix and they have willingly submitted to his Holiness's censures Some opinions also have been unanimously impugned by all the rest of their Order and forbid by their Generall This is allowed Yet that which I say is that their Doctrine as to all your Objctions hath stood unshaken and irreprehensible And as I did in the Preface to the Impostures so again I defie you according to the conditions which there are set down to shew me any one point of the Morall Doctrine of the Society which is reprehensible If by the Popes admonition or of themselves they discover any errour in any particular Authour of theirs they presently correct it So for example that which you alledge of Father Amicus in your Eighteenth Letter was long since commanded by Father Generall to be razed out of the Book though Amicus were not the first nor the onely Authour that had taught that opinion Now that in a great number of Writers it should sometimes happen that an unallowable opinion should escape correction for a time is a pardonable errour of humâ—ne frailty On the contrary it is laudable vertue that maketh them renounce any such errour assoon as it is known This advantage then Subordination to their Superiours brings to them that their errours are soon corrected nor can they be taxed for what they themselves endeavour to redresse in the frailty of particulars much lesse are their Superiours criminall if perhaps some one or two opinions chance to displease For that which you bring concerning the Obligation of the Superiours is too frivolous to need an Answer It is senselesse to think that the Generall of the Society from whom all authority of Printing is derived can view all the Books written by the whole Order If we should allow their Generall that which is never heard of in one man abilities enough to judge of all the Books writ by the severall Authours of the Society in all the severall Sciences at least we cannot think that he knoweth all the languages in which they are written nor can he possibly have time to read them all no nor is it practically possible to conveigh them all to him from the severall places of the world over which the Jesuites are spread These are fabulous dreams fit for you Sir to make matter of a Calumny with but not to be believed by any rationall man All that he can do is this He deputes some able men three or four to view every Work that is to be printed and then he regulates himself according to their judgement Now when this is done as it is among the Jesuites very exactly it seldom happeneth that their Books need the Popes Censure if they do then assoon as the errour is perceived it is their desire to correct it All this I have said to satisfie the Reader who by this will judge that as it cannot easily happen that the writings of the Jesuites should be scandalous so it may happen that the three or four Revisours whose judgement must carry it for the present may be overseen such is the nature of humane frailty And if any man can sinde a better way the Jesuites will thank him for it But I go on The second thing concerning the Jâ—suites that I intend to take notice of I finde in the Râ—ply made to Father Annat upon occasion of a Piece published by him called The fair dealing of the Jansenists pag. 326. It is that Father Annat and the same is understood of the rest produces the Piety and Zeal of their Adversaries as a mark of their Heresie I answer that it is not their true piety but their false piety their Hypocriticall Mummery which the Jesuites take as a mark of their Heresie That which Christ noted in the Pharisees That they strained a Gnat and swallowed a Camell For example whilest you will not allow a Penitent to follow his Ghostly Fathers opinion for fear of the Monster of Probability you will and do allow those poor Souls of Port-Royall to abstain Fifteen Moneths from Communion contrary to the express precept of the Church Whilest you will not allow that a man may defend his goods or honour from an unjust Invasour you will allow with the Abbot of St. Cyran that a man may and must sometimes kill himself Whilest you cry out against Revenge you teach that to follow the interior Inspiration so you call it a man may though contrary to the exteriour Law kill his Neighbour Whilest you cry out against the Jesuites admitting men unworthily to the Sacraments you commend it as an act of great Humility to be content to abstain from Communion all ones life long till the last hour 'T is this impious Doctrine that you call Piety which the Jesuites take for a mark of Heresie These and the like Maximes of you Jansenists are cited in the Impostures and in the Answers to your Letters and justly taken by the Jesuites for marks of people fallen from the way of Truth The third thing which you say concerning the Jesuites is very often inculcated by you but most largely in the Eighteenth Letter pag. 343. c. and Letter 17. pag. 312. That the Jesuites have by false Representations deceived the Pope and got of him a condemnation of Jansenius This is no small fault and wherein though the Jesuites are chiâ—fly accused yet the Synod of all the Bishops of France and Three Popes and their Divines are involved the Jesuites for being the Deceivers the rest for being lead blinde so long in a matter which they ought and might easily have examined But what probation do you bring Sir None at all but your bâ—re aâ—â—ertion and so you need no answer but a flat deniall Shew when where and how the Jesuites did thus deceive the world All the world knoweth that Pope Urban when he first forbad the Book of Jansenius though not then as Hereticall forbad also the Theses of Lovain made by the Jesuites in defence of their Doctrine against Jansenius Did the Jesuites procuâ—e this All the world knoweth that Pope Innocent the Tenth was moved by the Bishops of France to examine the Five Propositions which they presented him taken out of Jansenius Were there any Jesuites in that Synod All the world knows that among those
pag. 202. page is not cited whichis a meer childish reply when the Book and Chapâ—â—r is cited After all this if you will needs make a clamour you do but shew that Hereticall Spirit which you would so fain hide for never any Catholique used such extraordinary obstinacy as this is which makâ—th you resolved rather to deny that you have eyes to see that which all the world that will look in the Bâ—ok doth see then to submit to the Authority of the Church which considered you deseâ—ve not at all to be shewed the places Yet because here in our Countrey your asseverations may do hurt not to Catholiques for they know whom they are to believe they know the respect they owe to the Chuâ—ch but to Protestants who may take your bold Assertions for Truths and so think upon your credit that the Pope the Synod of France and the Catholique Church arâ— all in an errour to take away this occasion of scandall I will set down the places and the page too as you desire where the Propositions are fully taught in Jansenius Though I intend noâ— this for to adde any Authority to the Popes Bulls or to the Synod of France's assertion for what can it adde to light a candle at noon-day Nor would I have any man think that if I have not cited the places to his gust therefore they are not in Jansenius No any man may dispute against my opinionâ— none against the Church Yet I am perswaded the places are so clear that no man having once read them can make any doubt but that the Propositions are truly taken out of Jansenius and condemned in his sense which is that that Pope Alexander saith Ex libro Cornelii Jansenii excerptas ac in sensu ab â—odem â—ntenâ—o damnaâ—as fuisse definimus declaramus We define and declare that the Five Propositions are gathered out of the Book of Cornelius Iansenius and that they are condemned in the sensâ— intâ—nded by him And because both the Bull and the Book of Jansenius are written in Latin and cannot be examined but by those that understand Latine I shall content my selfe to cite them in their owne language Those who understand not Latine may be satisfied with the citations in English already set down in Father Annats Discourse before the Answer to the Sixteenth Letter In citing the page and column of Jansenius his Book I use the Impression of Paris of the year 1641. Prima Propositio condemnata Aliqua Dei Praecepta hominibus justis volentibus conantibus secundum praesentes quas habent vires sunt impossibilia Deest quoque illis gratia quâ fiunt possibilia Jansenius Tom. 3. lib. de Gratia Christi Salvatoris cap. 13. pag 135. columna prima prope initium post soluta argumenta in contrarium sic aâ—t Ex â—âc indubiâ—◠â doctri◠â quaedam non parvi momenti ad hanc rem spectantia inferuntur clarescunt Primum quidem esse quaedam homini pâ—aecepta secundum staâ—um vires in quibus constitutus est impossibilia Secundum non adesse semper gratiam quâ possimus hoc est qua eadem praecepta implere sufficiamus Tertium hanc impotentiam reperiri non solùm in exâ—oecatis obduratis infidelibus de quibus nunquam Augustinus vel Ecclesia sed solùm Scholastici nonnulli ex humanis rationibus dubitârunt sed etiam in fidelibus justis qui fidem Christi charitatem Justitiae susceperunt Quartum hanc impossibilitatem fidelibus accidere non tantum quando nolunt praecepta facere sed etiam quando volunt Haec Jansenius loco citato Postquam autem multis Augustini sententiis licet perperà m inteâ—â—ectis doctrinam suam fusâ— stabilisset tum demum pag. 138. colum 2. lit C. sic concludit Haec igitur omnia plenissimè demonstrant nihil esse in Sancti Augustini Doctrina ita scilicet semper Augustini tribuit quod ipse sentit certius fundatius quam esse praecepta quaedam quae hominibus non tantum infidelibus excaecatis obduratis sed fidelibus quoque justis volentibus conantibus secundum praesentes quas habent vires sunt impossibilia Deesse quoque gratiam quâ fiunt possibilia Hoâ— enim â—x Sancti Petri exemplo aliisque multis manifestum est Secunda Propositio condemnata Interiori Gratiae in statu naturae lapsae nunquam resistitur Jansenius Tom. 1. libr. 5. de Haeresi Pelagianâ cap. 17. pag. 120. col 2. lit E. de Gratiâ Christi post Adae lapsum daâ—â quam vocat initio capitis 17. Christianum Adjutorium saepe simpliciter Adjutorium vocat sic loquitur Non est ergo Adjutorium ullum quòd solùm possibilitatem id est potentiam volendi atque agendi adjuvat ut eo pro solo nutu hominis concurrente voluntatem obediendi sibi sumat homo vel tribuat sed quod ipsam voluntatem aâ—que actionem invictissimè dat facit Tom. 3. lib. 2. de Gratiâ Christi Salvatoris cap. 4. pag. 41. columnâ 2. lit A. Adjutorium vero infirmae captivaeque voluntatis vult esse tale scilicet Augustinus vult cui Jansenius suam sententiam semper tribuit quo siâ—t ut vesit hoc est esse hujusmodi ut simul ac daâ—ur ipsum velle voluntati detur si non detur nunquam velit quia fine illo nunc propter infirmitatem velle non possunt Et eodem Tom. ac libr. cap. 24. pag. 82 col 2. lit E. Gratiam Dei Augustinus ita Victâ—icem statuit ut non raro dicat hominem operanti Deo per Gratiam non posse resistere sed è contrario Deum non quicquid voluntatem facturam praevidet sive absoluâ—è sive conditionatè sed quicquid omnino voluerit in voluntate operari Et capite 25. reflectens ad ea quae proximè citato capite 24. dixerat sic incipit Haec itaque est vera ratio radix cur nulla omnino medicinalis Christi gratia effectu suo careat sed omnis â—fficiat ut voluntas velit aliquid operetur Quod quamvis gratiae istius congruae Auctoribus intelligit Theologos Scholasticos praecipuè Societatis Jesu permiâ—um videatur veritas tamen est in Scripturis Sacris Augustini scriptis explorata Et paulo post pag. 83. colum 1. lit A sic habet Apud Augustinum gratia opus bonum ita reciprocantur ut quemadmodum ex grat â datâ mox effectum operis consecuâ—um inferre solet ita vice versa ex defectu operis gratiam non esse datam Porro Titulus istius capitis 25. est talis Decimò ejus gratiae scil efficacissima natura declaratur ex eo quod nulla prorsus â—ffâ—ctu caret sed eum in omnibus quibus datur infallibiliter operatur Qui ergo dicit de interiori gratiâ post lapsum data gratiam ipsam voluntatem actionem invictissimè dare facere
submit to any authority either Humane or Divine Absurd Must your Senses be judges of all the objects which contain matter of Fact so that neither Reason nor Revelation nor the Word of God can contradict it Foolish My eyes report that a stick put half in thâ— water is brâ—kâ—n or bent at the Superâ—icies of the water may not Reason correct this errour of my senses Faith teacheth many things that Reason cannot reach unto though the object be not supernaturall must not Reason yield to Faith because the matter is an object within the extent of Reason For example to have a soul is a thing to use your own words pag. 347. liâ— 6 7. naturall and intelligible of all which things you say reason is to be judge Now suppose some one could not judge by any reason that occurreth to him that he hath a soul must that man never believe that men have souls Again to judge of the presence of a Body is an object of Sense I say there 's fire because I either see it or feel it I say there 's a man that speaks because I hear him I say this is bread because I taste it And yet Sir how far our Senses are out sometimes is evident in the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar where all Catholiques believe as you professe you do also that there is no Bread after the Consecration though the Sight the Taste the Feeling carry us to judge that there is Bread as well after as before Consecration Truly Sir when I reflect upon your bringing this Argument to prove that which you often say as Let. 17. pag. 298 and Let. 18. pag. 351. and in many other places That there are no Heretiques in the Church and that the Church is without Heresie I cannot but take great compassion of your blindenesse I see you take for an argumenent that there is no Heresie that very thing which is the originall Source and Cause of all Heresie You would have every ones reason judge of all the objects of reason and sense of all the objects of sense and so you sweep away all submission all respect to authority all captivating the understanding in obedience to Faith and by this very means you put an answer into every Heretiques mouth to maintain his perversity with If the Antitrinitarians deny the Blessed Trinity they tell you 't is against reason If the Anabaptist refuse to baptize his Childe he telleth you 't is against reason If the Quaker refuse a civill respect as to put off his hat to any body he telleth you 't is against reason If the Protestant refuse to believe the reall Presence he telleth you 't is against reason and his sense dictates to him the contrary Now if you urge Scripture against these men they will answer with your own words in which you abuse the authority of St. Thomas and St. Augustin pag. 347. in fine When the Scripture presents us with some passage whereof the literall sence is contrary to what the senses and reason judge of it with certainty we must not endeavour to weaken the testimony of these that is of our senses and reason to submit them to that apparent sence of Scripture but we must interpret Scripture and finde out some other sence thereof And if you urge the Authority of the Church they will all finde some matter of Fact to elude the Popes Bulls and the Decrees of Councells and it will be impossible to finde any Decree of Councell or Pope which haâ—h not as much of matter of Fact as the condemnation of Jansenius hath since the very Decrees of Councells and Popes may be called in question 〈◊〉 â—his account that it is matter of Fact whether the Decree be truly the Decree of the Councell or Popes or no. Thus do you put a weapon into every mad mans hand and if any man will fancy himself to have certain reason to say as James Naylour did that â—he hath the Spirit of Christ or is a second Christ you will maintain that such a man is not to submit his certain reason to any body And so instead of making it good That there are no Hâ—retiques in the Church you maintain the ground of all Heresie and take away the Source of all Unity in Faith which is submission to the Church The Tenth Objection Those of Port-Royall that is the Jansenists condemn the Propositions which the Pope condemneth they maintain nothing against him or the Church Therefore they are not Heretiques This is the main subject of the little Letter which is put between the Seventeenth and Eighteenth and in a manner all the reason of it for all is a deducing of this in the example of the Arians Nestorians Euâ—ycâ—ians Monotheliâ—es Lutherans Calvinists c. who were therefore condemned bâ—cause they held Propositions which the Church condemned and confessed they held them which the Jansenists deny But I answer That the Jansenists do not condemn the Propositions which the Pope condemns nor maintain what he maintains Pope Alexander in his Bull saith We define and declare that the Five Propositions are taken out of Jansenius his Book and condemned in the sense intended by Jansenius and we do again condemn them as such and we condemn the Book of Jansenius The Jansenists or those of Port-Royall say the Five Propositions are not in Jansenius nor condemned in Jansenius his Sense that the Book of Jansenius is not condemned and coutaineth not Heresie What can be more opposite to the Popes Definition Now what you reply That this is not matter of Faith to know whether the Propositions be Jansenius's or no I have already answered you in the Second and Third Objection Again for what you say pag. 321. That if any one that hath eyes to read hath not met with the Propositions in Jansenius he may safely say I have not read them there and shall not for that be called an Heretique I answer That he may say so without Heresie for perhaps he understood not or maâ—ke not what he read or read not all Jansenius and meerly to say I have not found the Propositions in Jansenius is not to be an Heretique But to say they are not there * Pag. 300. as you do and to maintain That the Doctrine of the Book is good and wholesome Doctrine and not condemned that is to be a Jansenist and to defend Hereticall Propositions The sequell will shew the Truth of what I say and declare the aim of these turbulent spirits They do not say we have read the Book and cannot finde the Propositions there for to make the world believe that they are Dunces or cannot understand Laâ—ne for it were not for their purpose to be thought simple fools But they say so That the world upon their credit may judge that the Five Propositions are not there or which is equivalent that the Doctrine which is there is good Doctrine and not condemnend And so by saying this they do really approve the Doctrine and
Authority of the Book and condemn the Church for falsely censuring a good Book Nor is this to guesse at their intentions as the Authour of the Provinciall Letters saith Let. 17. pag. 301. For it is evident that no man would tell us as he doth That above Sixty Persons all Doctours have read the Book and cannot finde the Five Propositions there for any other reason then to make the world think that they are not there and that there is nothing condemned in his Book Now as he could not be esteemed a Christian as to his belief who having the repute of a Doctour should say I have read over all the Alcoran and finde nothing in it against reason and which may not well be believed so he cannot be esteemed a Catholique who after the Authority of the Popes Bull the Synod of France and the whole Church should say I have read over all Jansenius his Book and finde no Hereticall Propositions there Certainly it were no rash judgement to thinke that man no Romane Catholique who should say I have read all Luthers Works and all Calvins too and finde not any thing there which is not Orthodox since the Romane Church hath condemned those Books And so also it cannot be deemed a rash judgement to think him no Catholique who saith as much of Jansenius For the Doctrine of the five Propositions is as plainly laid down in Jansenius as anything contrary to the Catholique Faith is in Luther or Calvin or any Heretique And this Sir as it confuteth your reason so I hope 't will take away the wonder you express so largely in the beginning of your Letter at seeing those of Port-Royal called Heretiques who as you say admit the Propositions condemned in the Bull. For if they allow the Bull and condemn the five Propositions condemned in the Bull they also maintain Jansenius and defend the five Propositions in his Book which they will have to be all good and Catholique And in so doing they shew themselves to be manifest Heretiques by really maintaining that which they verbally deny or if you will have it in other terms by granting the five Propositions to be Heretical in the Bull and defending them to be Catholique in Jansenius though they be the same in both places as is evident to all that can read by confronting the places and to all that cannot read by the publique Authority of the Church Whereas on the contrary no man denyeth the Propositions to be in Jansenius that deserveth any credit For that the Author of the Provincial Letters telleth us there are above sixty Doctours who have read Jansenius and finde them not there signifieth nothing that Authour being a man that dareth not shew his face a man convinced of notorious Impostures and falsifications a man that advanceth so many things against reason that he seemeth to have lost his wits or drowned them in passion And yet this very man who brings this to excuse himself from Heresie dareth not name one of those Sixty Persons which maketh all men justly suspect either that there are no such persons to be found or else that they are not responsible men since they dare not own what he assureth that they say So that me-thinks this Argument of Sixty Persons which he bringeth is just as if a man convinced before a Judge by a number of sufficient legal Witnesses of stealing a Horse should answer for himself that above sixty persons whereof he will produce never a one could swear that they never knew him to be a Thief though they have known him all his life time which would never save that man from the Gallowes And so Sir all the Arguments by which you in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Letter and your Friend in the Little Letter which lyeth between these two endeavour to prove that the Jansenists ought not to be called Heretiques are fully confuted and it is made clear that never a reason you alledge excuseth the Jansenists not onely from Schisme which your friend pag. 321. alloweth that they deserve but from the title of Heretique since they maintain in Jansenius those Propositions which the Pope and the unversall Church tell us are Hereticall in Jansenius Now as I promised I will say a word or two to your Stories whereby you would prove that Popes and Councels may erre in matter of Fact The first thing then that I say to all your Stories and passages of Fathers and Divines by which you would prove that Popes and Councels may erre is that they need no Answers at all This is evident because they are all brought to prove that which is not in question betwixt you and your Adversaries It is granted to you that a Catholique may hold that a Pope or Councel may erre in matter of Fact for example that a Pope may upon a false Information esteem a man unjust Simoniacall or Hereticall who is not so It was therefore to no purpose for you to prove this with many Stories and Allegations for it made nothing to your businesse But Sir that which you were to have proved was that they the Popes and Synod have erred in this matter of condemning Jansenius But this is so impossible to do that you never go about it save onely by saying that the Jesuits procured the Bull which how fond a toy it is I shewed in the beginning of this Letter where I answered what you say against the Jesuits This is the first thing I had to say concerning your Stories The second thing is that your alledging these stories as you do maketh me much suspect that which you would so sain hide that is that you are an Heretique What dutifull subject would rip up the faults or disgraces of his Sovereigns predecessours when he were not forced upon it or what Catholique would make it his businesse to divulge the errours committed by Bishops and Popes when it made nothing to the aim of his discourse Constantine is commended for saying that if he saw a Priest commit Fornication he would cover him with his own robes to hide that crime from all the world But you tell us pag. 308. That you think fit to accustome us to the contrarieties which happen in the Church in matter of Fact and give us instances of one Father of the Church against another of a Pope against a Pope and of a Councel against a Councel What Catholique I pray ever thought this â—it or what good can this produce what could the sequel be were you a man of any credit in your storiâ—s but that the people by this means should be lead by the hand as it were to contemne the Authority of Fathers of Councels of Popes and of the whole Church When I read your first Letters I imagined you had some spleen against the Jesuits but now I see your malice is against the Church You load the Jesuits with calumnies that it may be thought that men of such wicked practices as you describe them might easily be
to the contrary by his approbation given to the Answers of the Provinciall Letters which are translated in this Book as may be seen in the end of a Book intituled Responces aux Lettres Provinciales publices par le Secretaire du Port-Royall printed at Liege 1657. The last piece of these Additionalls is a Catalogue of all the names of the Casuists cited in the Provinciall Letters and Additionals A man would think that in a catalogue of Names there should not be any thing to be reprehended yet that this piece might be suitable to the rest of the Book the Authour hath found a way to declarâ— either his grosse ignorance or malice in putting diverse Authors as Jesuits whom all the world know not to be such For example Basilius Pontius is writ in great Letters as one whose Cases this Additioner judgeth specially criminall and that all may redound on the Jesuits he is in this catalogue called a Jesuit yet Basilius Pontius is known to be of Saint Augustins Order Sancius is also called a Jesuit who was a Secular Priest Angelus is also reckoned a Jesuit though he were a Franciscaâ— Frier and Navarre is by no little mystery become a Jesuit in this Catalogue and very ignorantly under one name are confounded two very eminent men For there is Martinâ—s Aspilcueta Navarrus an admirable Canonist and most famous Caâ—uist of the Order of the Canons Regulars of St. Augustin and there is Petrus Navarrus or à Navarrâ a very gallant man who was a Secular Doctour All these this ignorant Additioner calleth Jesuites that the blame which he imagineth they lye under may fall on the Society But if they were Jesuites they would prove a credit to the Society their Doctrine being far above the censure of such an ignorant Additioner who hath so little examined what is cited that he doth not so much as know the Authors that are cietd The like impudence and ignorance is shewed in the Index put in the beginning of the First English Edition where the Translatour endeavouring to fasten upon the Jesuites the names of horrid crimes maketh rather an Index of his own blindenesse malice and passion then of the Book For example under the letter K. he hath this A man may be killed for six or seven Duckats or a Crown and a little after A man may be killed for an Apple By which he would give the Reader to understand That the Jesuites are strangely prodigall of mens lives and their Doctrine guilty of unheard of crueltiâ—s But if we look on the places cited we shall see the case is quite altered and that the Authour of this Index hath made it his businesse to encrease the Fourbe and out-lye the Provinciall Letters for to make the Jesuites more odious The first of these Maximes for which Molina is cited pag. 151. is in that pag. so set down that Moâ—ina is notoriously falsified by the Authour of the Provinciall Letters yet he retains something by which it is clear That Molina speaketh of a Thief who hath robbed you for he hath these words Who hath taken from you the value of six or seven Duckats or a Crown Now because the Doctrine that alloweth to kill a Thief who hath taken from you though but a Crown would not have sounded ill enough for this mans purpose therefore he leaveth out both the term Thief and the other words which the Authour of the Provinciall Letters was not bold enough to suppresse to make it passe for a Maxime of the Jesuites That a man may be killed for six or seven Duckats or a Crown Which Maxime carrieth all that malice in it which this man would shew he beareth the Iesuites whom he would have thought the most despicable and abominable thing of the world whereas the Doctrine of Molina is blamelesse as appeareth in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Impostures The other Maxime is That a man may be killed for an Apple By this the Index-maker would have it thought That the Iesuites value mens lives so little that for an Apple one man may kill another which if it were true you might kill a man that would steal an apple out of your Oâ—chard But turn to the place cited and you will read the malice or ignorance of this Index-maker It is page 343. where Lessius speaketh thus It is not lawâ—ull for a man to kill another to preserve a thing of little value as for a businesse of a Crown or for an Apple which words dâ—râ—ctly contradict the sense intended to be understood in the Index There follow in the words of Lessius in the place cited these words Unlesse it should be a great dishonour to lose it For in such a case a man may recover it nay if need be kill the person that hath it because this is not so much to defend ones goods as ones honour In which place Lessius doth not teach That you may kill for an apple but that a Person of Honour is not bound to stand still and receive an affront though the thing in which he is affronted be of no value For example a Gentleman carrieth a Rose in his hand or an apple an insolent Fellow who would affront that Gentleman snatcheth at the Rose the Gentleman is not bound to let the Rose go but he may safely hold it fast and if the other proceed in his insolency the Gentleman may endeavour to repell him and if in the end of the strife the insolent fellow lose his life the Gentleman shall not be guilty saith Lessius of his blood provided that he keep that which all Divines exact in such cases moderamen inculpatae tutelae the moderation of a blamless defence that is do no more then is necessary for his own defence as Lessius requireth Now this Doctrine which gives the Honourable and Innocent Person a just right to defend himself is very far from teaching That one may kill another for an Apple which Lessius never dreamt of The Authour of the Provinciall Letters would impose it on him but because he doth it not plain enough the Index helps him out in bâ—lying Lessius And this he doth in all the other crimes imputed to the Iesuites which I call to make an Index of hâ—â— own malice blindenesse and passion Now then having run over all the other points of the Additionalls let 's come to the Factums or Representations of the Curâ—z Of these also I say that they ought not to be answered My reason is because that the Pope hath already erected a particular Congregation of Learned men at Rome to examine the Book called the Apology of the Casuists and the Writings of the Curâ—z against that Book Which being so both parties are â—o expect their judgement from that Court and to address their Complaints or Defences to Rome And for my part I will expect their Censure before I give mine as I think it is the duty of every Catholique to do and not to forestall the Popes judgement whom
not setting a number of hands to a Bill which ought to sway but Reason Authority and Learning that must be heard The third Thought concerneth the Apologist that writ the Book which most of these Curez are so violently set against and which maketh so much noise in France The man whosoever he be for he is unknown to me is a very learned man and I believe they that censure him will never be able to disprove him And therefore I could wish they would leave the censure to him to whom it belongeth that is to the Pope and that Judicature which the Pope hath erected for that purpose at Rome whither the Apologist hath appealed He cannot be condemned but that very many of the main Doctours of all Universities and Religious Communities must be condemned with him For he is so wary that he advanceth nothing without great Authority and rather delivereth the opinions of others then his own I will not say but that there may be some fault in him I know divers have condemned him and divers also maintain him and unlesse a greater authority intervene then what one private Academy or any single persons verdict can give he hath and will alwayes have the greatest part of Universities and Divines for him The opinions which he delivereth as probable are so and will be so till he that hath authority to decide and teach the universall Church in matters of Faith and Manners shall be pleased to teach us the contrary When that is done I suppose the Authour of the Apology will submit and all good Catholiques with him Till then if I think the Apology is a learned Book and containeth solid Doctrine I think so with the Archbishop of Tholouse and the Bishop of Reâ—nes in Bretagne whose Faith Doctrine and Life are such that no man can call them in question and this every person may think till Higher Powers dispose otherwise This maketh it clear that all these Factums or Writings of these Additionalls ought not to prejudice the Apologist much lesse can they as they are here intended in England any wayes Patronize the Provinciall Letters which are argued of manifest Impostâ—re in so many and so notorious falsific â—ions Yet he that hath turned the Provinciall Letters into Latine and calleth himself Willelmus Wendrockius supposeth that all these Curez are for him and that they joyn issue with the Jansenists The fourth and last Thought is That I conceive we may justly with due respect ask some Questions of the Cuâ—ez which will breed occasion of wonder First then I ask why the Curez are so much against the Apology of the Casuists That Book was made to vindicate the credit of all Casuists against the scofâ—ing Irrisions of a Pamphleter So that it seemeth That to oppose the Apology may be construed to a â—â—sire of defending a Buffoon against a Religious Order and against all Casuists which I will not suspect of such Persons Secondly I ask why the Curez taking their Cases which they would have condemned out of a Book which containeth Jansenisme never take notice of the greater errors I mean the Heresies contained in that Book I know they endeavour an answer yet it is such as doth not satifie For still the wonder remaineth why the Curez should not shew as much zeal in desiring that Hereticall Opinions which daily spread in France should be suppressed as they do that the Morall Doctrine which they esteem bad should be condemned Thirdly I ask why do not these Curez point us out some body whom we may safely follow in resolving of Cases By taking the authority from all Casuists they leave us in the dark and wholly guidelesse in the many doubts which daily arise Is there no body who may safely be followed in matter of Cases Is there in the Church no means to clear up doubts in Morality Fourthly to end these Queries doth not this way of proceeding prejudice the Curez themselves and take away all their authority in deciding any doubt which may arise in every one of their respective Parishes For if Bonacina if Sanchez if Navarr if Lessius if Suarez if Sylvester may not be believed if their authority must not be heard though Two or Three or Ten or as Wendrockius saith ten thousand agree in a case upon what account shall the Cure be believed Allow the Cure as much vertue and learning as you will yet he cannot expect to be generally esteemed more vertuous or more learned then Navarr And so if one man though never so learned cannot decide a doubt and appease a fearfull conscience then all Curez and all Ghostly Fathers may sit still and shall have no authority in settling consciences and taking away doubts And at length Spirituall Directours shall in matter of conscience have lesse credit then a Physician or Lawyer in their Profession Nay these if they be able and conscientious men shall have more credit even in matter of conscience then a Ghostly Father For the Physician shall be believed if he tell his Patient that he may eat Flâ—sh on a Friday or that he is not obliged to fast and the Lawyer shall be credited if he warrant his Client that he may justly keep the Land which the Client doubted of But the Curâ— shall have no authority left him in any doubt for feare of the Monster of Probability For whatsoever he saith his Parishioners will tell him that he is but one Divine and that one Divine according to his own Doctrine cannot safely be followed All this in my opinion doth evidently inferre that we cannot upon the Curez complaints condemne the Apologist and those Casuists whom he citeth and followeth Yet my intention is not to dispute against the Curez nor do I undertake to defend the Apologist But as I begun so I conclude that since the Pope hath Evocated the Cause of the Curez and the Apologist to himself it is the duty of every good Catholique to expect those censures and not to precipitate his own But whatsoever be the event of the Apology this is sure that the Provinciall Letters are condemned by his Holinesse and that they are convinced of manifest Imposture Slaunder Ignorance and Heresie which being so the Doctrine of the Jesuits and other School-Divines whom those Letters inveigh against ought not to be prejudiced on that account which is all that these Answers intended to shew An Appendix in Answer to a Book entituled A further Discovery of the Mystery of Jesuitisme I Thought to have ended here having answered all that belongeth to the Provinciall Letters and their Additionalls But I am uâ—ged by severall Friends to take notice also of another Pamphleâ— called A further Discovâ—ry of the Mystery of Jesuitisme For my own opinion I conceive it to be so senslesse a Piece that it deserveth not to be taken notice of yet to condescend to the desire of others I will do as I have done in the Additionalls that is I will shew that nothing in that Book
deserveth an answer There are in it Six Pieces whereof the two first are made by one Peter Jarrige during the time of his Apostasie from the Society That these deserve no answer is palpable for three reasons The first is That they were made by an Apostata who renounced the Catholique Faith in which he had from his infancy been bred broke his vows to God forsook his Religious Order upon private disgusts and run away first to Rochel and then into Holland All which if there were nothing else maketh it evidently manifest That he is not a competent witness against the Society A Thief may as well be chosen judge of honest dealing and a Rebell of Allegiance as an Apostata of Religion But such is the misery of those that persecute the Society that as the Jews did against Christ Quaerchant salsum Testimonium adversus cum They â—ought for false witnesse against Jesus so they seâ—k for false witnesses against the Jesuites They â—eed not who beareâ—h witnesle nor whether it be like â—p be esteemed true All they desiâ—e is to finde some body that will speak against the Jesuites But as it happened with Christ so in this doth it happen to the Jesuites Non erat conveniâ—us testimonium illorum They brought no competent witnesse against Christ nor do these that bring this authority of Jarrige's bring a competent witnesse against the Jesuites This first reason might be enough yet the two others speak plainer The second reason then is That Jarrige whilest he writ thâ—se things was not onely a Runnagate such as I have described him but was so upon record condemned by the Parliament of Bourdeaux and hang'd in â—ssigiâ— for his enoâ—mious â—â—imes Now who is so senslesse as to judge That a man by Act of Parliament condemned of Apostâ—siâ— Breach of Vows Caluâ—ny and made publiquely infamous upon record can be credited in those Detractions which make part of his condemnation Thirdly If all this be not enough to shew what I intend at least Jarrige's own Recantation and his Penance for his Enormities speak so plain that nothing can be added It is notoriously known to all the world That Jarrige persecuted by his own câ—imes which gave his restlesse conscience no quiet day noâ— night did after two years and a half of his Apostasie or there abouts make a publique Râ—câ—ntation to ask forgivenesse of the world for the scandall he had given and of the Society for the notorious wrong he had done it in the severall relations which he solemnly professeth to have been effects of his blindenesse and passion This is so peremptory that it voids all that can be said to the contrary Yet our Preface-maker will have it clear That an Apostata in his actuall committing of the foulest crimes is more to be believed then a Penitent man in his most serious protestations which is a Mystery that would never be believ'd out of Bedlam The Tâ—aâ—slâ—tour for the sole proof of what he saith relateth That a Clergy-man told a Father of the Society That they the Jesuites had overshot themselves in it and had been better vindicated had the Recantation been more modest Let 's suppose if you will that this relation were tâ—ue what followeth just nothing For who was that Clergy-man Peâ—haps Monsieur Vincent a Minister of Roâ—hel of whom there is mention made in the beginning of the second Piece of this Mystery But he was publiquely convinced of Falsity and Impostare in his own Town of Rochel by the Lieutenant Generall of Rochel as appeareth by his Act of the 28. of March in the year 1648. So that this Clergy mans word signifies nothing I say not this because he is a Calvinist but because he is convinced of Imposture Bâ—t perhaps some may think That by the name of Clergy-man is understood some Priest of the Catholique Church To this I answer That I do not think any of them were so simple as to talk so foolishly noâ— so forgetfull of their duty as to Patroniâ—e an Apostata's Acts and give them credit against a Recantaâ—ion which the Authour publiquely owned both in Flaunders and France and thought himself obliged to set out so to satisfie for his crimes and to restore the good name to every one of those particulars whom he hâ—d unjustly wronged And so much for the two fiâ—st Pieces For I will not trouble the Reader â—ither with Jarrigâ—'s Recantation or the Paâ—liaments Condemnation of him or the Popes Censure and long Penance he was obliged to perform or the other severall pieces which were set out against him whilest he remained in his Apostasie If this poor mans fall was great his Penance was also great which he willingly embracing is become an example of a good Penitent His fall is a memoriall of our frailty and his Penance an argument of the great mercy of God to him and an Inductive to those that have fallen like him to do Penance like him The Third Piece of this Book hath for the Title The Sâ—â—ret Instructions for the Superiours of the Society of Jesus These are a part of the Mystery too But the answer is easie It is all a meer Fable Never any such Instructions were given in the Society But he that made the Libell thought fit to vent his own pâ—ssion under the Title of Secret Instructions c. Now as to the Invention or strange Discovery of these secret Instructions it containeth indeed a Mystery It is not strange That a Colledge being ransack'd this Book if it were there among other Papers should be found there which he that sets the Work forth calleth a sirange Discovery But the strangenesse is That thâ—â— Bock should be found there where it never was This is the Mystery It were no wonder to have found a Book where it was but to finde it where it was not there 's the strange Discovery This is much like Montalt's jugling who can finde in Lâ—ssius that which is not in Lessius as I have sheweâ— in the Fourteenth Imposture and geneâ—ally appeareth in all this Work To answâ—â— therefore to this sâ—cret I tell you aloud That there nâ—ver was any such thing in the Society I need say no more foâ— thâ—s Pamphlet hath been confuâ—ed long since and shewed to be a mâ—er Forgery The Fourth Piece is a Discovery of the Reasons why the Jesuites are so generally hated by Fortuniâ—s Galâ—ndus To which â— answer That they are not generally hated by Catholiques and so the whole discouâ—â—â— pâ—oceedeth as Philosopâ—â—â—â— speak de subjâ—ctoâ—â— on supponâ—nte which supposeth an errour in him thaâ—â—â—ddeth the discourse and would give a reason why that is thus or thus which is not at all If one would discourse and bring many reasons why the Sunne hath not shined these twelves years past what would you answer to all that mans discourse You would tell him as I tell you that such discourse needeth no answer it being manifest that it proceedeth upon a supposition which is an errour If you