Cum inter Dectores non conveniat quando peccet mortaliter qui non facit elecmosynam non facile condemnandi sunt divites qui non faclunt Sa verb. Elcemos n. 2. pag. 201. The Doctors being not agreed when we sin mortally in not doing alms we must not easily condemn the rich who do them not at all And a little after citing Tolet in the place before alledged with some other Casuists and reporting that Judgment he concludes thus 3 Extra extremam necessitatem eleemosynam sub mortali peccato non esse praeceptam dicunt Ibid. They say that unless in case of extream necessity alms is not commanded under mortal sin That is to say that unless we see some person that hath his Soul in a manner hanging on his lips or who is in evident danger of death it is no great sin for him that is able to assist him to abandon him This is to speak properly to discharge men from the obligation of giving alms these extream necessities never falling out in a manner and there being few persons who see any such in many years or not at all in their whole lives and when such an one by great accident is presented we are not obliged any farther to provide for them according to these Doctors if we have not wealth to spare and riches that are superfluous and there being hardly any person who believes he hath such or who indeed hath such so much doth Covetousness Luxury House-keeping rack men at this day and makes all men in a manner necessitous so the obligation of giving alms shall be abolished and there shall hardly be any person found who shall think himself obliged to assist his neighbour to what necessity soever he be reduced But the words of Tolet are considerable and discover also with advantage the solidity of this Doctrine 4 Istam teneo propter communem Doctorum sententiam nec audeo obligare sub mortall quos tot tanti Doctores excusant I am saith he of this opinion because it is the common judgment of the Doctors and I dare not engage him in mortal sin whom so many great Doctors excuse He calls the Casuists of these last times great Doctors and he dares not depart from their opinion though he avows after that they are themselves departed from that of the holy Fathers who were the Doctors and Masters of the Church before them which hath proposed them as such to all the faithful of latter Ages and by much stronger reason to Priests and Divines who ought to be the most perfect amongst the faithful For he acknowledges that although the Scholasticks discharge the rich from the obligation they have to give alms of that which they have superfluous the holy Fathers for all that and the common judgment of Antiquity obligeth them thereunto 5 Etsi Scholasticorum communis sententia eos excuser tamen Doctores Sancti eos damnant ita ut profecto sit sententia probabilis illos obligari sub praecepto Tolet. l. 8. c. 35. n. 3. pag. 1242. Though the common opinion of the School-men excuse them saith he yet the holy Doctors condemn them So that it is very probable that they are obliged thereunto by Precept He is not content to say in general that this is the Judgment of the holy Fathers but he cites many passages of S. Ambrose S. Jerom S. Austin S. Basil and of S. Chrysostom who place in the rank of those who rob or detain unjustly the goods of others all them who give not to the poor what remains of their wealth after they have provided for their just and true necessities You see saith he after he had named all these Fathers 6 Vides tot Sanctos damnare superflui retentionem multùm ergo timendum est Ibid. so many of the Saints who condemn them that do not their alms of what they have of superfluity There is therefore herein much cause to fear He might have added to the Authority of these Fathers that are the most illustrious and the most famous of the Church that of all the rest for they all agree in this Point so that there is not one found to say the contrary So that if there be one Point of Doctrine established on the ancient and universal Tradition of the Church this is as clearly as any other and if that which is established upon this Tradition ought to pass for indubitable amongst Catholick Divines and amongst all the Faithful as it hath always certainly been until this present we cannot call this Doctrine into doubt without wounding the Authority of the Church and the foundations of the Faith and to say it is probable as Tolet saith Profecto sententia probablis est is not of much â—atter effect than to say that it is false because this is to hold always for doubtful the ancient and universal Tradition of the Church and to give men liberty to decide Points of Divinity and to expound Scripture against the consent of the Fathers which is expresly forbidden by the Council of Trent Another that hath not read the Fathers might be excused by his ignorance But this excuse hath no place in Tolet who forsakes them after he had cited them and which is yet more unsupportable and more injurious to these great Saints he renounces their Judgment after he had acknowledged it to follow that of the new Divines of our times 1 Et nisi esset tam unanimis Scholasticorum sentâ—ntia qua possunt exculari modo aliquo tales homines absque dubio damnanda esset talis retentio Ibid. If the School-men saith he did not agree so unanimouslâ— as they do in this very Judgment by which we may in some sort excuse these persens who give not in alms what they have of superfluity we must without doubt have condemned this sparingness so as the holy Fathers condemn it as he saith himself Vides tot Sanctos damnare superflui retentionem He pretends then that the holy Fathers on one side condemn those who give not in alms what they have of superfluous and on the other hand the new Scholasticks excuse them we must hold to the Judgment of these later if we will believe this Jesuit and follow his Example But if it be lawful in this manner to oppose the new Divines to the ancient Tradition in this Article and in this opposition to prefer the Judgment of the Casuists before that of the holy Fathers instead of judging and correcting the Moderns by the Tradition of Antiquity it will be lawful to do the same thing in all other Points which concern Manners or Religion and so there shall be nothing fixed in the Doctrine of the Church and Antiquity shall be no more a mark of Truth and Faith but Novelty shall be more considerable though until this present it hath passed for a Vice and a mark of Errour But for all that he hath over-reached in saying that this new Opinion
is altogether equal to a Lay-mans Cum in hoc Religiosus Secularis fint omnino pares But Escobar forgot these words or rather left them out purposely though they seemed favourable enough to the design he had of establishing unto Monks the right of killing for honour Without doubt he believed that this would debase too much the right of the Monks in this point to make them equal to Lay-men For the right of the Monks being grounded according to him on their Profession and Vertue as the Laicks on their valour and dexterity in managing their Arms being the Profession and Vertue of Monks is more elevate and more to be esteemed than the Exercise of Arms it must necessarily follow by this reason of Amicus that the right which the Religious have to kill for honour being better grounded should also be stronger and greater than the Laicks And by consequence he ought not to have said that the condition of the one and the other was altogether equal but it must be concluded by the Principle and Argumentation of these Jesuits that in this the Monks ought to have advantage over the Laicks and that they may kill with more liberty and upon less occasion those who invade their honour And the reason hereof is clear Because the more precious honour is the more easie it is to hurt it and the fault of him that doth it is the greater and as offences which are slight being done against private persons are very great and deserve exemplary chastisement being done against the honour of a Prince or a King so an injury which would not be considerable against the person of a Laick would be criminal being done against a Monk to blast his or his Orders reputation By this Rule it is easie to judge how far this pretended right may be extended or rather it will be hard to judge of its so great extent As it will be at the pleasure of Monks to set their honour vertue and the respect due unto their Profession at what rate they please so it will also be in their power to judge of the greatness of the faults which are committed against them in this point and consequently of the penalty they deserve who commit them And if it be lawful for a Lay-man to kill for a matter of small value licet sit res parvi pretii as Vasquez saith by example for an Apple or a Crown ut pro pomo vel etiam uno aureo servando as saith Lessius as we have seen when a mans honour is concerned in the taking these things from him we must confess that a yet lesser occasion if a less can be had than an Apple or a Crown will suffice according to this Divinity to give the same toleration to a Monk We need only look surlily upon him do or say the least thing to offend him to incur his displeasure and thereupon to dye by his hand if he please to make use of this right which the Jesuits attribute unto him as they also usurp it themselves and pretend they may use it as we shall see in the following Point where we relate the Opinion of Father Petavius upon this matter V. POINT The Conformity of the Jesuits who in our days have taught in their Colledges with the more Ancient in the Doctrine of Murder THis Doctrine having been invented and established partly by the most ancient and most considerable Divines of the Company of Jesuits as we have now seen in the preceding Points their Authority hath given such credit and such a current to it amongst their Fraternity that passing thus from one to another as a Tradition of the Society it hath been ever since maintained by their Schools and is propagated unto our days without any interruption On the contrary it hath by succession of time received a notable increase and far greater Authority by the multitude of those who have followed it the later always endeavouring to add something and to augment the inheritance of their Fathers by expounding and extending more and more the bloody and inhumane Maxims which they had left them on this subject For some years this Doctrine hath also been taught in divers places of this Realm in many Colledges of the Jesuits at the same time and many years together in the same Colledges Father Flachaut and Father Le Court have taught it at Caen and in teaching it have been transported to all excess which therein could be committed I will only report here one or two passages of one of these two Casuists faithfully extracted out of his Writings which have been verified by publick Authority by the diligence of the Rector of the University of Paris wherein he hath heaped together and said in short a great part of what Lessius and others have propounded upon this subject See here his own words 1 Dico 5. probabiliter licitum esse cuivis etiam Clerico Religioso per se loquendo semoto scandalo occidere furem fugientem etiam non resistentem ferentem res tuas pretiosas puta equum praesertim Ecclesiae si aliter recuperare nequces I say that it is probably lawful for all sorts of persons even for Clergie-men and Monks speaking absolutely and setting aside scandal to kill a Thief who flyes though he make no resistance when he takes away some precious thing as a Horse especially Church-goods and which he cannot otherwise recover 2 Itemque licitum esse occidere fugientem si id necessarium sit ad defensionem honoris tui notabiliter amittendi I say moreover that it is lawful to kill a Thief who flyes if it be necessary to the preservation of mine honour therein notably concerned 3 Denique licet volentem te percutere leviter occidere ubi id insignis est injuria praesertim in Nobilibus nimirum accepta alapa gladio percutere statim ad vitandam ignominiam conservandumque honorem Ita docti permulti Finally it is lawful especially for Gentlemen to kill him who is minded to smite them though slightly if the injury and dishonour they receive thereby be remarkable so after they have received a box on the ear they may presently strike with the Sword to avoid disgrace and preserve their honour This is the opinion of many learned men These learned men are Molina Lessius Sanchez and others whom we have produced in the fore-going Points as the Authors and Fathers of this Doctrine since they have confessed themselves that they found it not in the Books of other Divines at least as to certain the most important Propositions The same Casuist saith that a man who fears lest another should lay some Indictment against him or accuse him unjustly that he might destroy him because he hath affirmed that he hath such a design may justly kill this his enemy challenge him into the field or rid his hands of him by secret means as he judges it convenient And then he advises rather to
take a false Oath even before a Judge without perjury ibid. Section II. Rules and Examples of Equivocation taken out of the Books of the Jesuits Escobar Filliutius Sanchez Pag. 55 Section III. When and on what occasions one may make use of Equivocations Sanchez Filliutius Pag. 57 Section IV. The Jesuits Method to frame Equivocations and to use them commodiously Filliutius Pag. 60 Section V. The Method of the same Jesuits to hinder their Equivocations from being ever discovered and that no person may be deprived of his liberty to make use of them Sanchez Pag. 62 The last Article A general proof that the Jesuitical Authors favour and nourish the lust of men in all things and the common principle from which they draw all that they say in favour of it Escobar Amicus Tolet Celot Posa Pag. 65 CHAPTER II. Of Sins in Habit or habitual Sins That there are scarcely any habitual Sins according to the Jesuits and that custom of sinning may make a man uncapable of sinning Sanchez Escobar Filliutius Layman Pag. 72 Chap. III. Of Sins of Ignorance That ignorance excuses sins committed without knowing them and even those which are committed afterwards And that there are properly no sins of ignorance according to the Jesuits Bauny Sanchez Filliutius Amicus Escobar Pag. 75 Chap. IV. Of good and bad Intention Pag. 84 Article I. That the Jesuits teach that we may fulfil the Commandments of God and the Church not only without intention but with an intent contrary and altogether criminal Escobar Lessius Layman Filliutius Celot Bauny ibid. Article II. That according to the Divinity of the Jesuits we sin not if we have not an intention to sin Sa Filliutius Sanchez Bauny Pag. 88 Chap. V. Of the Matter of Sin Pag. 94 Article I. That the Jesuits enhanse and debase as they please the goods of this world which are the usual object or matter of sin and so nourish vice and dispense with the Law of God Bauny Escobar Sa Sanchez ibid. Article II. The consequence and explication of the same subject by two examples and two sequels which the Jesuits draw from their Principles concerning the matter of sin 1. That God can no more than men command or forbid a matter that is in it self slight under the penalty of mortal sin 2. That he that hath a design and will to commit all venial sins if he were able sins only venially Sa Amicus Escobar Pag. 98 The Second Part of the First Book Of the external Principles of Sin THat the Jesuits nourish them that they may gratifie the passions of men and by consequence excite them to sin Pag. 103 Chap. I. Of the Maxims of Reason and humane Authority ibid. Article I. That the Jesuits make profession to follow novel Maxims and to contemn Tradition and Antiquity Posa Maldonat Escobar Azor Filliutius Reginaldus Pag. 104 Article II. Of the Doctrine of Probability Pag. 111 I. Point The principal Maxims of the Jesuits concerning Probability Pag. 112 Section I. The Opinions of Layman and of Azor concerning Probability ibid. Section II. The Opinions of other Jesuits conformable to the preceding for making all things probable and to give liberty to follow all sorts of Opinions Filliutius Escobar Pag. 120 Section III. The Opinion of Sanchez concerning the probability of Opinions Pag. 123 II. Point The pernicious consequences and effects of the Jesuits Doctrine of Probability Pag. 133 Section I. That the Jesuits Doctrine of Probability favours disorderly persons Libertines and Infidels Caramuel Escobar Petrus Michael de Sanroman Sanchez Pag. 134 Section II. That this Doctrine of Probability favours the Hereticks and nourisheth them in Heresie Celot Sanchez Filliutius Caramuel Pag. 137 Section III. That the Jesuits Doctrine of Probability destroys the Commands of God and the Church and teaches to clude all Laws divine and humane even that which forbids to do unto others that which we would not have done unto our selves Caramuel Escobar Tambourin Mascarenhas Pag. 142 Section IV. That the Jesuits Doctrine of Probability ruines entirely the Authority of the Church of Pastors and Superiors of all sorts Caramuel Pag. 150 Section V. That an opinion probable being once received all the Prelates of the Church and all the men in the World cannot hinder that it should be probable and safe in conscience according to the Jesuits Caramuel Celot Pag. 153 Article III. That the Divinity of the Jesuits is obsequious and mercenary Escobar Filliutius Amicus Celot Pag. 157 Article IV. That the Jesuits Divinity is subject to contradiction and change in opinions Dicastillus Tambourin Pag. 163 Chap. II. Of evil Customs That the Jesuits allow those which corruption hath introduced into all sorts of conditions and make use of them to excuse sins and vices Escobar Bauny Layman Pag. 168 Chap. III. Of the Occasions of Sin That the Jesuits retain men in them and that according to their Maxims there can be no next occasions of sin Sanchez Bauny Layman Escobar Pag. 171 An Abridgment of the Doctrine of the Jesuits about the next occasions of sin Pag. 177 The last Chapter Of the Accessories of Sin Tambourin Pag. 178 The Second Book Of the Inward and Outward Remedies of Sin The First Part. Of the Inward Remedies of Sin CHap. I. Of the Grace of Jesus Christ Pag. 185 Article I. That the Jesuits destroy the Grace of Jesus Christ by their Divinity Celot Amicus Escobar ibid. Article II. That Jesus Christ might have sinned might have been subject unto vices might have fallen into errour and folly according to the Jesuits Divinity Amicus Pag. 189 Chap. II. Of Repentance Pag. 194 Article I. Of Sorrow for Sin That according to the Jesuits we may be justified by the Sacrament of Penance by a natural sorrow and even without any true sorrow for sin Filliutius Amicus Sa Escobar Bauny Pag. 195 The Sum Of the Doctrine of the Jesuits related in this Chapter concerning the sorrow which is necessary to blot out sins in the Sacrament of Penance Pag. 201 Article II. Of Confession and Accusation of Sins That the Jesuits do destroy the integrity thereof Layman Bauny Filliutius Escobar Sa. Pag. 202 Article III. Of Absolution That the Jesuits make it depend on the Opinion and the Will of the Penitent rather than the disposition and judgment of the Confessor Sa Layman Amicus Filliutius Sanchez Bauny Pag. 211 Article IV. Of Satisfaction That the Divinity of the Jesuits destroys this part of Penance Pag. 217 Article V. Rules of Conduct for a Confessor according to the Jesuits Pag. 223 I. Point Rules to examine Penitents according to the Jesuits Bauny Filliutius Dicastillus Tambourin Escobar ibid. II. Point Of the Advice which a Confessor ought to give his Penitent according to the Jesuits Escobar Amicus Filliutius Tambourin Petrus Michael de Sanroman Pag. 225 III. Point Of the inward disposition of the Penitent and of sorrow for sin according to the Jesuits Filliutius Tambourin Sa Bauny Dicastillus Pag. 226
its matter and subject THE SECOND PART OF THE FIRST BOOK Of the eternal principles of Sin That the Jesuits nourish them that they may gratifie the passions of men and by consequence excite them to Sin HItherto we have shewn that the Jesuits nourish sin by nourishing men in passions in evil habits and in vices in Ignorance and in a false pretence of good intentions wherewith they commonly shelter themselves which are as it were the Fountains and the internal principles of Sin I must now make it appear that they favour no less the outward principles of the same sin which are 1. Humaine reason and authority which furnish arms and expedients to defend them 2. With customs which produce examples to support them 3. The next occasions which draw men to them cause them to fall into them and retain them in them We will treat of every one of these outward principles of sin apart as we have done of the inward CHAP. I. Of the maximes of reason and humane authority FAith is not less elevated above reason then reason is above sense and it is no less disorder to regulate the lives of Christians who ought to live by Faith by the maximes of humane reason and much less of reason corrupted as it now is by sin then to desire to judge spiritual things by sense This were to transform men into Beasts and to subject them to follow their senses in the regulation of their life and to treat Christians like Heathens to give them no other rule for their conversations and actions then the maximes of Philosophie and humane reason Yet this is it which the Jesuits have done and all those who read their Divinity and principally that which treats of manners will find therein no other principles in a manner but those of the lowest Philosophie and humane reason and that corrupted They hardly know what it is to cite Scripture or Councils and if they rehearse any passages of the Holy Fathers it is for the most part for form onely or to resute them rather then to use them for foundations or solid proofs of their opinions in relying on the authority of these great men who have advanced nothing of themselves in points of consequence which belong to Faith or manners which they had not taken from those who went before them in the Church and which came not originally from the Apostles and from Jesus Christ by the Tradition of the Church But the Jesuits far enough from this conduct make profession to invent and to speak things of themselves to follow novelty to make every thing probable to leave to the ingenious to choose in all opinions Whence it comes that making use sometimes of one sometimes of another they accommodate themselves easily to the humours of all the world and have wherewith to content all how contrary soever they can be But this also makes them fall many times into contradictions which are inevitable for them who have no other rule but their own proper sence These are the things which I shall handle in this Chapter to shew what a wound they have given unto Divinity and by consequence thereof to good manners in substituting reason into the place of faith and particular and novel opinions to that of antiquity and the tradition of the Fathers I shall make apparent 1. That their Divinity is novel and that they make profession to follow novelty 2. That every thing in it is probable and that they will have the liberty to follow all sorts of opinions 3 That their School is venal and wholly complaisant to the world and that they will have wherewith to content all sorts of persons in answering every one according to his desire 4. That it is full of contradictions I will treat every one of these points severally dividing this Chapter into so many Articles ARTICLE I. The Jesuits make profession to follow novel maximes and to contemn tradition and antiquity NOvelty hath always been odious in the Church if at any time it were objected unto the Saints they did always defend themselves from it as from a calumny and have had an extream care to advance nothing in the Church which they had not learned in the Church it self so far that they have believed that it was no lesse crime to introduce or receive new Doctrines then to make or adore Idols This is the judgement of Saint Augustin upon these words of the 80. Psalm Non erit tibi Deus recens where he saith that a Deus recens aut lapis aut phantasma est S. August in Ps 80. this new God is an Image of stone or a false imagination And a little after he unfoldeth his thoughts more at large in these words b Non dixit à te quasi simulachrum forinsecus adhibitum sed in te in corde tuo in imagine phantasmatis tui in deceptione â—rroris tui tecum portabis Deum tuum recentem manens vetustus Ibid. it is not said thou shalt have no new God without thee as if he would onely mark the outward and visible forms but he saith you shall not have a new God within your selves That is to say you shall not bear within your hearts in your imaginations in the illusion of your errour a new God contining your selves old and corrupt All novel opinions contrary to the Tradition and ancient belief of our Fathers are to speak properly nothing but phantasmes imaginations and errours these are as it were so many Idols which some would introduce into the Church which they would put into the place of Divine truth which at once is the rule of our life the object of our Faith and of our adoration And as those who make Idols those who sell and those who buy them to adore them are all equally Idolaters so in the same manner those who invent novel opinions those who teach them and those who follow them are all complices of the same fault and though these last may be lesse guilty and are more to be lamented then the others because they do sin with more ignorance and wilder themselves by following blind guides yet they all find themselves involved in the same misery and subject to the same condemnation pronounced by the Fathers and by the Scripture who condemn this sin and forbid it as a sort of Idolatry According to these principles of the Scripture and the language of the Prophet and of God himself we may say there are so many Idolaters as there are writers at this day amongst the Jesuits there being none of them in a manner who are not jealous of their own proper thoughts and who have not introduced into Divinity some novel opinion or who do not make profession to maintain and teach some which have been introduced by their Fraternity to the prejudice of the ancients who have been always received and followed in the Church until these last times Poza hath composed a great volumn which he hath intitled Elucidarium
reason and industry of the more prudent there appeared betwixt them so notable a difference that it seemed that it might be said that the former were not men in comparison of the latter So Celot speaks and pretends in the sequel of his discourse that d Quemadmodum in priscorum seculorum hominibus adeo fuit obrutus divinus igniâ— ment is rationis ut cum posteriorum aetaetum politis legantibus ingeniis comparati vix homines appareant Celot l. 5. c. 10. p. 314. as the Heavenly fire of reason had so little vigour amongst the men of the first ages of the world that comparing it with the beauty and politeness of the spirits of latter ages it was hard to believe that they were men In like manner Saint Anthony Saint Paul and the other Hermits who lived in the first ages of the Church compared with the Religious of this present cannot without difficulty passe for true Religious whereas we have cause to wish that these last might be set in comparison with the former and were all worthy to bear the name of their disciples and children In the mean time he is so firm and resolute in his opinion that he cannot so much as onely suffer that the examples of these ancient Fathers of the Monks should be alledged being not willing they should be otherwise considered then as children For see how he bespeaks his adversary e Nae â—u durus importunus qui ad exempla nascentis monachismi perpetuo provocas Ibid. p. 241. You are troublesom and importunate alledging unto us continually the examples of those who lived when the institution of Monks was but yet in its infancy Which he bears so aloft that he fears not to say in expresse terms f Meminerit interim hujusmodi interrogationibus antiquitatem sine periculo respectari nâ—n posse Ibid. That antiquity cannot be attended to without danger As if the opinions and the examples of the Holy Fathers and of the first Religious were not onely unprofitable but also dangerous and that it were more safe to raze them out of the memories of men then to regard and consider them But if there be danger to attend unto antiquity and consider those great Saints who lived in the first ages of the Church it is dangerous also to write and read their lives without doubt for fear that those who observe and read them should thereby become affected with them and imitate them it being manifest that they are not read nor written but on this design We must also condemn the whole Church who publickly celebrates and honors their memory and demands of God for her children grace to imitate them as she declares often in her office So that it cannot be dangerous to observe these ancient Fathers and first Religious and to follow their examples but onely for those who have introduced so many novelties both into their Doctrine and into their conduct that the sole view of antiquity from which they are so prodigiously departed suffices to convince and to confound them ARTICLE II. Of the Doctrine of Probability A Whole Book may be made of this Article which is the principal of this Extract as also the subject which is here handled is the most general and important of the Jesuits Divinity in which in a manner all things are probable as may be seen by Escobars six Volumes of Problematique Divinity which comes to passe not onely by necessity because they examine and regulate all things by their sense and by their reason in quitting the authority of Tradition which onely can quiet the spirit of man and give him some assurance and certainty in the knowledge of truths and particularly of those which respect Religion and manners but also by a particular design of the Society because desiring to govern all the World and not being able without having wherewith to content all sorts of persons there is no means more easie nor Doctrine more commodious for this then that of probability which gives liberty to say and do all that one will as it shall clearly appear in the prosecution of this Article where we will first represent the principal opinions and maximes of the Jesuits touching the Doctrine of probability and in consequence thereof the pernicious effects which it produceth in the Church and in the world which shall be the two principal points of this Article I. POINT The principal maximes of the Jesuits concerning probability THe Doctrine of probability taken out of the Jesuits Books consists particularly in these following points 1. That the Jesuits Divinity makes all things probable 2. That they pretend that an opinion is probable though it be held onely by one single Divine 3. That of two probable opinions we may choose that which is lesse probable and safe 4. That we may even follow sometimes one and sometimes the other though they be contraries Because that these points for the most part depend one on another and are ordinarily handled together and in connexion by the Casuists I will not separate them at all Yet that I may keep some order and hinder the tediousness and confusion which would happen if I should amasse in one sole Article all that I have to relate upon every one of these points I will represent apart the opinions of the principal Jesuit Authors who treat thereon beginning with Layman and Azor who are the most famous of the Society SECT I. The opinion of Layman and of Azor concerning probability LAyman establisheth fairly at first for a fundamental maxime a Ex duabus probabilibus partibus quaestionis licitum est eam sequi quae minus tuta est that when there are two probable opinions about one question it is lawful to follow that Which is lesse sure Of which he renders this reason b Quia in moralibus operationibus necesse non est sequi quod optimum tutissimum sed sufficit sequi bonum ac tutum Layman lib. 1. tract 1. cap. 5. sact 2. p. 4. Because in moral actions it is not necessary to follow the rule Which is absolutely the best and most safe and it sufficeth that it be absolutely good and sure Now he pretends c Quod autem probabilis opinio tradit id bonum ac licitum est Ibid. that what is supported by a probable opinion is simply good and lawful taking lawful and safe for the same thing But if they demand what will make an opinion probable see here the conditions which he requires thereto and the definition which he gives thereof d Probabilis sententia uti communiter accipitur ita definiri potest Quae certitudinem non habens tamen vel gravi autoritate vel non modici momenti ratione nititur Ibid. p. 5. we may call that a probable opinion as it is commonly understood which being not certain and undubitable is notwithstanding supported by some considerable authority or some reason which is not sleight He
than his own Sect though it do not cease to appear unto him also credible But he answers in the second place that this opinion pleaseth him not at all and pretends that in this very case a Pagan is not bound at all to embrace the Faith a Caeterum hoc non placet it a generaliter dictum quippe dum Infidelis sibi persuasum habet suam sectam esse probabitem quamvis contraria sit probabilior tenetur utique in articulo mortis constitutus veram fidem quam probabiliorem judicat amplecti utpote in coarticulo constitutus in quo de extrema salute agitur ac proinde partem quam tutiorem probabiliorem judicat amplectitenetur At extra eum articulum non tenetur quod adhuc prudenter existimet se posse in sua secta perseverare Sanch. op mor. l. 2. c. 1. n. 6. p. 86. Because that when an Infidel is perswaded that his Sect is probable though the contrary which is the Christian Religion appear unto him more probable it is true that at the point of death when his Salvation is reduced to extremity and when by consequence he is obliged to follow that part which he judges to be more sure and more probable he is bound to embrace the true Faith which he believes to be more probable But out of this extremity he is not obliged because he judgeth prudently that he may persist in his idolatry In pursuance of this rule of probability that he acts prudently who follows a probable opinion I believe this Jesuit would not answer for the Salvation of a man who dyes in this estate since he must then believe that he may be saved without Faith and in Idolatry which is the greatest of crimes So that in saying he acts wisely in persisting in Idolatry he saith in effect that it is wisdom to walk in the darkness of death that it is prudence to destroy and precipitate himself into Hell in persuance of his rules of morality and grounding himself upon the principles of probability SECT II. That this Doctrine of Probability favours the Heretiques and nourisheth them in Heresie THe Doctrine of Probability is no lesse favourable to Heretiques then Infidels in that the ordinary arms whereof the Church makes use to defend it self against Heretiques and to assail them being Scripture Counsels Fathers and all that which we have received from the Ancients by Tradition the Jesuits and those who with them defend this Doctrine of Probability find not these evidences for their advantages and are so far from making use of them that they fear and fly from them all they can They cite in their Schools in their writings in a manner as often the Books of the Pagans as of the Scriptures they professe openly to preferre the new Authors above the Ancient they acknowledge not properly for Masters and Fathers any but those of their Society to the judgement and the censure of whom they submit frequently enough the judgements of the Saints which the Church hath always acknowledged for Masters and Fathers Divine or Ecclesiastick authority as well as Faith have scarce any credit in their Schools all as regulated and resolved by the authority of men and humane reason and in all contests and difficulties which they encounter if they cannot prevail by dispute they have recourse to those whom they regard as their Masters and Soveraign Judges in all sorts of matters They appeal to Suarez to Vasquez Molina Lessius and to others such like without making almost any mention of Jesus Christ the Apostles or the Ancient Fathers unless for form and without producing the definitions of the Councils or Traditions of the Church to determine the questions because they find them not conformable to their Spirit nor their designs some can make no use of them because they understand them not and even will not give themselves the trouble to study them and the others because they find not in them what is for their purpose Besides they wish they could content the whole World and answer all persons that consult them according to their humour and disposition Which obligeth them to look out for a Doctrine that is flexible and manageable and which may be accommodated to all occasions The maximes of Faith seem to them too fixed and the rules of the Church and the Gospel too firm and the opinions of the Holy Fathers too exact and too unmoveable For this cause they being not able to make use of them to establish the maximes of which they have need that they may make their designs to prosper and fearing on the other hand that they might be made use of against them to overturn their naughty maximes they find themselves as it were constrained by necessity to do all that they can directly or indirectly to corrupt them weaken them and to take away all credit from them In this they imitate and favour the hereticks of whom they have learned to reject the Holy Fathers especially in the difficulties which regard manners and the conduct of life and to despise Antiquity and Tradition through a blind love of their own novelties and proper imaginations and they are even in some sort more blameable then the Hereticks because they renounce the Father and the Tradition upon a pretence of holding to Scripture and these to follow their new Authors from whom they declare openly that we ought to take Law and rules for Christians Morals rather then from the Fathers of the Church Quae circa fidem emergunt dissicultates eae sunt ex veteribus hauriendae quae vero circa mores homini Christiano dignos à novitiis scriptcribus Colot l. 8 c. 16. p. 714. And indeed there hath never been any heresie which hath not had at the least some sort of probability because there hath yet never been any which hath not had some appearance of truth without which it could have found no followers the spirit of man not being capable to follow any thing but truth nor to be deceived but by the shaddow of it And it often happens that the greatest Heresies took for their foundation the greatest truths and have built on the strongest reasons Which shews clearly that if to follow a probable opinion be to act prudently and if an opinion be probable when it is grounded on the authority of some learned man or some likely reason as the Jesuits and those who hold their Doctrine of Probability tell us there is no heretick who may not maintain against them that he acts prudently whilest he lives in his heresie It is true that the Hereticks have misconceived the truths of which they would make use and especially those of the Scripture which they have corrupted in their sence and in their words that they might fit them to their thoughts and errours b Communis error ex probabili opinione ortus satu est ad gestorum per Sacerdotem vaâ—…em Sanch. op mor. l. 1. c. 9. n. 35. p.
thence by stronger reason that we are not bound thereunto upon any other occasion And by consequence the obligation to give alms is entirely abolished in all sorts of persons times and occasions But Lessius doth yet farther discover this pernicious Doctrine of his Company adding that even then when this so extream and rare necessity doth happen no person is particularly obliged to provide against it for that the obligation to assist our neighbour in this estate of extream necessity being general and common to all those who have means to do it every one may put it off from himself unto others in such manner that we cannot say that this man or that man in particular is obliged thereunto quae rarius ita contingit ut hunc vel illum in particulari graviter obliget That is to say that the Commandment to assist our neighbour in extream necessity is general to all those who are of ability but it doth ordinarily oblige none in particular And so according to Lessius Divinity a poor man being in entremity may dye of hunger in the view of many persons who may and ought assist him whilst they expect and attend one another no one of them being particularly bound to satisfie an obligation which is common unto them all together And it is from this Principle that he concludes 1 Fortè inter Christianos pauci sunt qui propter defectum operum misericordiae corporalium damnentur That it is apparent that amongst Christians there are few who shall be damned for failing to exercise the works of corporal mercy notwithstanding that the Scripture in divers places and Jesus Christ in the Gospel testifie expresly that the greatest part of men and even of Christians shall be damned for not giving alms and assisting their neighbour in his necessities For having declared that there shall be few Elect and few saved even amongst those that are called that is amongst Christians he declares also that in condemning them at the day of Judgment he will only reprove them for the default in alms and works of mercy saying unto them 2 Discedite à me maledicti in ignem aeternum qui paraâ—us est diabolo Angelis ejus 〈◊〉 â—ivi enim non dedistis mihi manducare sitivi non dedistis mihi bibere c Mat. 25. v. 41. Depart from me ye cursed into eternal fire prepared for the Devil and his Angels because I was hungry and you gave me not to eat I was thirsty and ye gave me not to drink Lessius observed this difficulty and he represents and objects it to himself but a consideration so powerful taken from the express word of Jesus Christ and from the sentence of eternal death which shall be pronounced against those who shall fail of performing the works of mercy was not sufficient to divert him from his opinion For without troubling himself with what Jesus Christ saith he replies in a way and expression which contains more of contempt than respect due unto the Word of God See here his terms 3 Nâ—c resert quod Dominus Matth. 25. formam judicii describens meminerit potius operum misericordiae quam aliorum id enim secit ut homines praesertim plebeios qui ad majora spiritualia parum sunt comparati in hac vita ad ea excitaret Haec autem ratio cessat in extremo judicio quia tunc komines nec erunt amplius ad opera misericordiae excitandi Lessiâ—… ibid. It is to no purpose to alledge that our Lord in the 25. Chapter of S. Matthew representing the form of the last Judgment speaks rather of works of mercy than of others For he doth it only to stir up men and particularly those of the common sort who are not capable to comprehend spiritual things to exercise these good works in this life Now this reason cannot have place in the last Judgment because then there will be no need to stir up men unto works of mercy He declares plainly that the Gospel is false and speaks false things to deceive the people and ignorant For if it be lawful to have this opinion of what Jesus Christ himself saith concerning his last Judgment and the circumstances and the words of that Judgment which he will pronounce concerning mens eternal life and death it will by stronger reason be lawful to have the same thoughts of other places of the Gospel which are not so important and generally of all since one cannot be more true than another So we may clude the whole Word of God when we meet therein any thing that doth not agree with our opinions and we shall give occasion particularly in this Subject to those who will conceive with Origen that the pains of the damned shall not be eternal to say that Jesus Christ hath not said that they shall be so but only to divert men from sin and to cause them to fear by proposing unto them infinite punishments according as this Jesuit saith that he neither threatens nor condemns those who fail to do works of mercy but only to intimidate men and particularly those of the Commonalty and to stir them up to employ themselves therein being incapable of other more elevated actions Being all good works are comprised and contained in alms fasting and prayer according to the Scripture it seems that having here treated particularly of alms I ought also to speak of fasting and of prayer because I have said that the Jesuits destroy and corrupt all good works in general But because I have spoken expresly of Fasting in the explication of the Commandments of the Church of Supplication in the Chapter of Prayer and also in that of Ecclesiastick Duties and the obligation which we have to say Divine Service I will be content to send the Reader thither to avoid tediousness and repetitions In reading those places we may find that the Jesuits are no less favourable to mens effeminacy than to their interests and that they are as large and indulgent in freeing them from all the pains of fasting and prayer as in exempting them from the obligation of giving their goods and doing alms testifying by this so obsequious Doctrine and so base and loose a conduct that all their study and care in a manner tends to the establishment of the Kingdom of Lust by favouring the corrupt passions and inclinations of men and in consequence thereof to destroy true Christian piety both in its fountain which is Charity and in its effects and fruits which are good Works CHAPTER V. Of the Sacraments AS the principal Questions which respect the Sacraments depend on the Institution of God and the Church and ought by consequence be resolved by Authority and Tradition the Jesuits who follow most usually their own sense and reason both in Divinity and Philosophy make almost as many faults as steps in this matter My design is not as I have already declared to report generally all their Errours no more than
Probabiliter ergo tam suscipiens quam conferens Ordinem ante ordinandi Confi mationem venialiter deliquit Ibid. that it is then probable that both he who confers and he who receives Orders before Confirmation sin only Venially This is sufficiently to despise the Sacrament of Confirmation not to vouchsafe to take the pains to receive it for preparation to holy Orders then when it may so easily be given by the same Bishop who confers the Orders But this it also a greater contempt of the order of the Church of the Authority of an Oecumenick Council and of all Ecclesiastick Tradition and Discipline not to fear at least to violate it by a voluntary withdrawing from and neglect of these so formal words of the Council of Trent Primâ Tonsurâ non initientur qui Sacramentum Confirmationis non susceperint As if these words did not contain an Ordinance but only a counsel and simple proposition Which is a very easie way to overthrow all the Decrees of Councils and the Church and to render them entirely unprofitable Here we must take notice of the spirit of these Divines and the licence which they take to play with Sacraments and Consciences They debase Confirmation as much as they can and carry themselves with visible passion to the diminishing of the vertue of this Sacrament which is the accomplishment of Baptism without which the grace of Baptism continues imperfect and Christians are not such but only imperfectly according to the Fathers and on the other hand we see them carry indifferently all the world to confession and the Communion with so much ardour and importunity that they make it the head point of their direction as the greater part of those who follow their conduct make it the principal part of their devotion Which thing is so much the more considerable for that if we pre-suppose even with them that there is no command which obliges us to receive Confirmation so also neither is there any that obliges us to confess ofther then once a year and this precept of Confession is not at all for Venial sins which notwithstanding are the matter of the Confessions which they reiterate and cause to be reiterated so often by devout persons and those who defire to live Christian-like and nevertheless if they knew any one who should divert Penitents from their Tribunals or who should only say to them that it was not necessary for them to confess so often when they have only Venial sins which may be blotted out by other ways they would doubtless condemn him and hold him more to blame then if he had committed some great crime and yet they make no scruple to turn away all the faithful indifferently from Confirmation by this reason only although a false one that there is no obligation nor necessity on them to receive it But if any will say that the custom of confessing and communicating frequently is received in the Church and those who make a special Profession of Piety ought to follow it and cannot neglect it without testifying that they contemn it with pride we must confess by this reason that we are much more obliged to receive the Sacrament of Confirmation and we cannot neglect the opportunities thereof without discovering greater pride and contempt against this Sacrament since it is manifest that the order custom and use of receiving it is much more ancient more authorized and more generally and religiously observed in the Church than that of frequent Confession of venial sins this practice becoming common only of late times and that of Confirmation having been generally received and holily observed from the beginning of the Church and in all latter Ages so that there hath never been found any one Saint pious Person or Christian living Christian-like who hath dared to reject it or who hath withdrawn himself voluntarily from it until our times wherein the Jesuits have begun to introduce this new Doctrine and new Practice of Devotion But it is easie to see by the Spirit and ordinary Carriage of the Jesuits that that which carries them on to aggravate with so great care the obligation and necessity of Confession and of the Communion and on the contrary to diminish that of Confirmation to push on Christians indifferently to these two first Sacraments and to keep them at distance from the last is thi◠that they are not Bishops to confirm men as well as they are Priests to confess and communicate and that in recommending with so much importunity Confession and the Communion they make themselves necessary and in diverting the Faithful from Confirmation they advance the design which they have to make Bishops unuseful and to withdraw the people from their guidance that they may be their Masters therein and reign in the Church without any hindrance ARTICLE II. Of the Eucharist and Penance What sort of Dispositions the Jesuits demand for these two Sacraments and that they teach men to prophane them by Sacriledge AS the Jesuits incline all sorts of persons indifferently to confess and communicate it behoves them that they may bring them on thereunto to make the practice and use of these two Sacraments very easie We have already seen in the Chapter of Penance that they have so sweetned the yoke of Confession that to confess well there needs in a manner nothing but to know how to speak and declare ones sins though in many cases they give liberty also to conceal one part and though one do accuse himself in general without specifying any in particular they oblige him not absolutely to repeat his Confession And as for their Penitents who confess frequently they permit them almost any thing even to deceive them and lye in Confession without believing they commit any great fault provided it be only in a matter of venial sin that if they have committed mortal sins which they are ashamed to discover they may by the advice of these directors confess them to other Priests to preserve their reputation with their ordinary Confessor They will also make their Penance as easie as their Confession if they please For if they be not in a humour to perform it that they may give them neither trouble nor scruple they will impose it on them only by way of counsel or without prescribing them any thing in particular they are content to say unto them Impono tibi pro poenitentia quiequid hodie vel hac hebdomada boni feceris vel mali passus fueris I impose upon you for Penance whatsoever good you shall do or evil you shall suffer this day or this week If a person over-run with crimes address himself to them and be troubled to make known the bottom of his Conscience and to discover the corruption of his Heart by declaring his wicked inclinations and habits they will not press on him in this point no more then to tell them in particular the number of his wicked desires impurities and secret crimes which move in his