〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. That is, ANOTHER PART OF The Mystery of Jesuitism; OR The new Heresy of the Jesuits, Publicly maintained At PARIS, in the College of CLERMONT, the XII of December MDCLXI. Declared to all the Bishops of France. According to the Copy printed at Paris. Together with The Imaginary Heresy, in three LETTERS, With divers other Particulars relating to this Abominable Mystery. Never before published in English. LONDON, Printed by James Flesher, for Richard Royston, Bookseller to His most Sacred MAJESTY, 1664. To my most honoured Friend from whom I received the Copy. SIR, I Transmit you here the French Copy which you were pleased to consign to me, and with it the best effects of your injunction that my weak Talon was able to reach to; but with a Zeal so much the more propense, as I judged the publication might concern the World of those miserably-abused Persons who resign themselves to the conduct of these bold Impostors, and who may indeed be said to be what the Athenians mistook S. Paul for, 17 Act. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Setters forth of strange Gods, as well as of strange and unheard-of Doctrines, whilst they take upon them thus to attribute as much to Dominus Deus Papa, Gloss. in Extr. Jo. c. 22. Cum inter de verborum signif. their Lord God the Pope, as to God Almighty himself. I stand amazed that a Church which pretends so much to Purity, and that is so furious against the least dissenters to her Novelties amongst Protestants, should suffer such swarms of impure Infects amongst themselves; lest these Cancerous Members (in stead of edifying the Church, and conducting Consciences) eat out, in fine, the very heart and vitals of the common Christianity. For my part, Exetasis, sive Tho. Albii Purgati●. after I have seen what Mr. White has lately published concerning the Method of the Roman Court in her Decrees, and of her rare abilities to discern, as he there affords us the Prospect; I have no great reason to hope for any redress of these Enormities: and then to what a monstrous growth this Head is like to arrive, let all the World compute, by the strange pretences of these audacious Sycophants. Nor let any man wonder how those other Errors are crept into their Religion, who in a day of so universal light permit such pernicious Doctrines to be publicly asserted, to the dishonour of our B. Lord, the scandal of his beloved Spouse, and the hindrance of that glorious Unity, which none does more earnestly breath after then He who subscribes himself, SIR, Your most humble and most obedient Servant. 21 Sept. 1664. LESSIUS. MOLINA. S. IGNATIUS LOYOLA SOCIETATIS IESV FUNDATOR. VASQUEZ ESCOBAR Optabilior est Fur quam Mendax assiduus; utrique Perditionis haereditatem consequentur Eccles. 20. vers. 25. THE New Heresy of the Jesuits, publicly maintained at Paris in the College of Clermont, by Positions printed the xij. of December, M DC LXI. Declared to all the Bishops of France, etc. AS it is the constant duty of Bishops to stifle those Errors in their very birth and cradle which tend to the ruin and subversion of Faith; so is it no less that of Divines, to make discovery of those Errors to them; and, by giving timely notice of them, to excite and stir up their Pastoral Vigilancy. You will therefore, My Lords, doubtless approve of the Information which is made you of a New Heresy that has been publicly maintained by the Jesuits in their College at Paris, in a Thesis printed and defended the twelfth of December last. The Position bears this Title; ASSERTIONES CATHOLICAE de Incarnatione, contra Saeculorum omnium, ab incarnato Verbo, praecipuas Haereses. CATHOLIC ASSERTIONS concerning the Incarnation, against the principal Heresies of all Ages. By which they sufficiently demonstrate that, abating some few Subtleties of the Schools, they pretend We should accept whatever They oppose against these Heresies, for Catholic Verities and Truths indubitable. In order hereunto They propose for the Heresy of the Tenth Age, the Schism of the Greek Church, and by these words declare the Opinions to which they expect our Assent, as a mark and characterism of our aversion from that Heresy. X. SAECULUM. Romanae Ecclesiae Caput, contra Graecos Schismaticos. Hoc tandem Saeculo Schisma Photii invalescens Graecos ab Ecclesiae Capite disjunxit. Christum nos ità Caput agnoscimus, ut illias Regimen dum in coelos abiit primùm Petro, tum deinde Successoribus commiserit; & EANDEM QUAM HABEBAT IPSE INFALLIBILITATEM concesserit, quoties ex Cathedra loquerentur. DATUR ergo in E.R. Controversiarum Fidei Jadex infallibilis, ETIAM EXTRA CONCILIUM GENERALE, tum in Quaestionibus Juris, tum FACTI. Unde, post Innocentii X. & Alexandri VII. Constitutiones, FIDE DIVINA CREDI POTEST Librum cui titulus, Augustinus Jansenii, esse haereticum, & Quinque Propositiones ex eo decerptas esse Jansenii, & in sensu Jansenii damnatas. Propugnabuntur, Deo duce, & auspice Virgine, in Aula Collegii Claromontani, Societatis Jesus, die 12 Decembris, An. 1661. The TENTH AGE. The Head of the Church of Rome, against the Schismatical Greeks. It was in this Age that the Schism of Photius prevailing did separate the Greeks from the Head of the Church. We acknowledge Christ to be so the Head, that during his absence in Heaven he hath delegated the Government thereof, first to Peter, and then to his Successors; and does grant unto them THE VERY SAME INFALLIBILITY WHIGH HE HIMSELF HAD, as often as they shall speak è Cathedra. There is therefore in the Church of Rome an Infallible Judge of Controversies of Faith, EVEN WITHOUT A GENERAL COUNCIL, as well in Questions appertaining to Right, as in matters of FACT. Therefore, since the Constitutions of Innocent the Xth and Alexander the VIIth, WE MAY BELIEVE WITH A DIVINE FAITH, that the Book entitled the Augustin of Jansenius is heretical; and the Five Propositions which are gathered out of it, to be Jansenius', and in the sense of Jansenius condemned. These shall be defended, by the assistance of God, and the favour of the Virgin, in the Hall of the College of Clermont, belonging to the Society of Jesus, the 12 day of December, in the Year 1661. This Position contains in it two parts; the one concerning the Primacy of the Pope, in which all Catholics do agree: the other touching that Infallibility which these Jesuits do attribute to him. We do not speak here of that which is by some Divines maintained, and which only concerns the Judgements which the Popes have of such Truths as are revealed by God in the Scriptures & in Tradition. It is sufficiently known what has been upon this Subject the sense and opinions of the Gallicane Church, and of the University of Paris, and what we are to understand by this expression, Sententia Parisiensium, when we find it upon this matter in the books even of the Jesuits themselves. As evident is it also, that those amongst some of the new Doctors who would be thought the most favourable to Popes, as Monsieur du Val, have not been afraid to maintain, the Pope's being Infallible was no matter of Faith. Duvallius de Suprema authorit. Rom. Pontific. l. 2. q. 1. Non est de fide Summum Pontificem esse Infallibilem. And, that the Opinion which assures us he is not, is neither erroneous nor rash. Ibid. Non est erroneum neque temerarium, temeritate Opinionis, dicere, Summum Pontificem in decernendo errare posse. But these very Divines (however studious of exalting as much as they could possibly the Authority of the Sovereign Bishops) do acknowledge as a thing certain, indubitable and constant amongst all Catholics, That they are not Infallible in matters of Fact; That therein they may err, and That indeed they are very frequently mistaken. Bellarm, de Sum. Pontif. l. 4. c. 2. All Catholics (says Cardinal Bellarmine) accord in this, That the Pope, acting as Pope, and with the Assembly of his Counsellors, yea, even with a General Council itself, may be deceived in particular facts, which depend upon the information and testimony of men. And applying this general Maxim to a matter of Fact, perfectly resembling that of Jansenius, which is, to consider whether the Heresy of the Monothelites be comprehended in the Epistles of Honorius, as the VI General Council confirmed by so many Popes hath defined it, he adds; A General and Lawful Council cannot err in defining Points of Faith, (as neither has the Sixth Council erred therein▪) but it may err in Questions concerning matters of Fact. Ibid. c. 11. Generale Concilium legitimum non potest errare, ut neque erravit hoc Sextum, in Dogmatibus Fidei definiendis; tamen errare potest in Quaestionibus de Facto. And Cardinal Baronius affirms the very same, upon the same Subject of the Sixth Ecumenical Council. We do not so strictly receive the Condemnation even of General Councils themselves, as to what concerns men's Persons and their Writings: For▪ no body doubts but that, whoever it is, he may be deceived in matters of Fact; and then is that expression of S. Paul to take place, We can do nothing against the Truth, but for the Truth. Baron. ad An. 681. n. 39 In his enim quae Facti sunt, unumquemque contingere posse falli, nemini dubium est. All other Divines, even the most devoted to the Court of Rome, have hitherto contained themselves within these limits; but the Jesuits will no more endure either bounds or Examples in their excess and extravagancies. It suffices not them to render the Pope Infallible, as some Divines may possibly have done: They will have it, that Jesus Christ has absolutely imparted to him the very same Infallibility which He himself possessed upon the Earth: and that as this Infallibility of Jesus Christ extended to all, and not only to things already revealed, but to those things which had never yet been so revealed, and that he made known himself in saying them; so the Pope does also become Infallible, not only in proposing to the Church what is contained in the revealed Will of God, but in proposing to her likewise matters of Fact, which it is evident and certain God has never yet revealed; as when (for Instance) the Question is, Whether these Propositions are in a Book of the Seventeenth Age. Nor are these any Consequences which we may naturally deduce from their doctrine; they draw them thence themselves, and form Catholic Assertions of them, conformable to the Title of their Position. There is then (say they) an Infallible Judge of Controversies of Faith, even extrinsical to a General Council itself, as well for Questions appertaining to Right, as for those which concern matters of Fact. And that you should not doubt what it is they would signify by these Questions of Fact, (albeit the word Fact opposed to Right renders it sufficiently perspicuous) they produce for an Example, and as a new Consequence of this Infallibility of Jesus Christ communicated to the Pope, That, since the Constitutions, we may believe with a divine Faith that the Book of Jansenius is heretical, and that the Five Propositions do belong to this Author. Unde, post Innocentii X. & Alexandri VII. Constitutiones, fide divinâ credi potest Librum, cui titulus est Jansenii Augustinus, esse haereticum, & Quinque Propositiones ex eo decerptas esse Jansenii. Behold then here the Proposition which these men assert publicly in one of the greatest Cities of the World; and it is worth observing, to note the Original and the date of it. For those who now at present promote it so boldly, had long since scattered the seeds thereof in some of their Writings; and it was sufficiently evident that all their design was to be bottomed upon this Error: they had likewise themselves advanced the Conclusions in one place, and the Principles in another; but it was still with certain wind and ambiguities of terms, which as yet furnished them with lurking-holes and places of subterfuge; but now they discover nakedly and without disguise to the Church what it is they pretend to establish in her. Let the whole Church take notice of it then, and record it, That it was the 12 of December, in the year 1661., that the Jesuits openly published that monstrous Opinion which they have been so long a-brooding: That it was upon this day they proposed as a most Catholic Assertion, That whenever the Pope does speak out of his Chair, HE HATH THE SAME INFALLIBILITY THAT JESUS CHRIST HATH, not only in Questions of Right, BUT ALSO IN MATTERS OF FACT; and that hence we are to believe WITH A FAITH DIVINE, that those Five Propositions are of Jansenius. It will, My Lords, be needless to amplify much, in letting the world see that this is not here only a solitary Error or simple Heresy, but a whole source of Errors, and (as one may say) an Universal Heresy, which overthrows all Religion. For you know, My Lords, that the very prime Fundamental of Christian Religion is, That our Faith is not supported upon the word of Men, but upon the Word of God, which is Truth itself: and that it is That which renders it immovable and altogether Divine; whereas it would else prove but Humane, were it upheld by any other Authority less than that of God, and if we were not able to render ourselves that Testimony which S. Paul gives the Christians of Thessalonica, To have received the Word which God hath taught us by his Church; and that, not as the Word of Men, but as the Word of God, and as in truth it is. Non ut verbum hominum, sed, sicut est verè, verbum Dei. De error. Abailardi, c. 4. Whatsoever is comprised in the Faith (says S. Bernard) is built upon solid and certain Truth, persuaded by the divine Oracles, confirmed by Miracle, and consecrated by the production of the Virgin, by the blood of our Redeemer, and by the glory of his Resurrection▪ Totum quod in Fide est, certâ ac solidà veritate subnixum▪ Oraculis & Miraculis divinitus persuasum, stabilitum, & consecratum partu Virgins, sanguine Redemptoris, gloriâ resurgentis. Whosoever therefore shall presume to affirm, that a Thing neither revealed nor attested by God (as is that, to know whether Propositions are really an Author's of these last Ages) is an Object of divine Faith, merely because the Pope has said it, or does establish for a Fundamental of his Belief any humane Authority and word of a mortal Man, subverts the Faith: or that makes a God of the Pope, and of his Word a divine Word and a holy Scripture, is not only guilty of Heresy, but of horrid Impiety, and a species of Idolatry. For Idolatry does not consist merely in giving to Man the Name of God; but infinitely more when we attribute to him those Qualities which are peculiar to God, and when we render him those honours which are alone due to the Deity. Now this entire submission of our Spirit, and of all out Intellectuals comprehended in the act of our Faith, is no other than that Adoration which we pay to the Prime Verity itself▪ and therefore, whosoever he be that renders it to the word of a Man, (whatever rank he may hold in the Church) whoever says that he believes with a Faith divine, that which he would not believe but because a Man has affirmed it, does constitute Man in the place of God, transfers to the Creature that which is alone due to the Creator, and makes (as far as in him lies) a kind of Idol of the Vicar of Jesus Christ. And it is this, My Lords, which will doubtless cause you so much the more to detest this Impiety, That the Promoters of this Doctrine have imagined they shall make it pass under the shelter of that Respect which all Catholics bear towards the Pope; and that none will presume to oppose it, for fear of offending him. But were it possible to offer a greater affront to the prime Minister of Jesus Christ, then to conceive they do him honour by a Blasphemy so injurious to Jesus Christ? that he should suffer them to equal him with his Master, by ascribing to him the same Infallibility which He alone possesses? and that men should render that supreme Cultus of a Divine faith to his Words, which is only due to the Word of God? If S. Paul and S. Barnabas, perceiving certain persons ready to render them the same honours which they gave to their false Gods, did rend their Garments, to testify their extreme grief and resentment, and cast themselves in amongst the people to hinder them of their purpose; we are bound to believe, that if the Pope were well advertized of this fearful and prodigious excess, he would not fail with his whole Authority to repress these profane Adorators; and that, as a Crime capable of losing him for ever before God, he would not permit himself to be so much as once touched with the least complacency of so detestable a Flattery: He would certainly consider, even with trembling, the vengeance which God did execute upon that last King of the Jews, for having only indulged the tumultuary Acclamations of a People, who (after they heard him speak) cried out, The Voice of God, and not of Man, Dei voces, & non hominis; since the Scripture informs us, that the Angel of the Lord did immediately smite him, because he had not given the honour which was due to God. Confestim autem percussit eum Angelus Domini, eò quòd non dedisset honorem Deo. In the mean while, how much less criminal were the Adulations of these People than that of the Jesuits? That might possibly be taken for some sudden transport of Joy, which is oftentimes not regulated by Reason; and sometimes we find that even the Scripture itself gives to Judges and to Princes the appellation of God: but here they attribute to the Pope, and that deliberately, out of a form design, and the establishment of a Dogme and of a Theological Assertion, not a senseless Name, but one of the most resplendent and glorious Titles of God, and the most incommunicable to the Creature; which is, That the Word of a Pope should be so Infallible as it should merit the submission of divine Faith to it, which cannot be rendered without gross Idolatry to any, save to the Prime and Sovereign Verity. For we cannot say upon this occasion what those are wont to affirm who maintain the Infallibility of the Pope in matters of Faith, That in believing what the Pope decides concerning them, they do not establish their Faith upon the word of a Man, because he proposes only what has been by God revealed in Scripture and Tradition; so as still their Faith is founded upon the Word of God. We can say nothing like this upon the subject in hand, and in reference to which the Jesuits pretend that the Pope is as Infallible as Jesus Christ, and his Decision an object of divine Faith▪ When the Pope shall propose a matter of Fact of a Seventeenth Age, as (for example) to divine whether heretical Propositions have been taught by an Author of that Period, we cannot pretend that he propounds a thing which is either revealed in Scripture or in Tradition. Well he may say that so he judges it; but he cannot affirm that God has revealed it: He may aver it of himself; but he cannot say, Dominus locutus est, that God has declared it. In like sort, when it is Man which speaks, and not God, those who assert that we may adhibit a divine Faith to a Decision of this nature, do visibly perpetrate the abominable excess of those blinded people, and join in their acclamation, Voces Dei, & non hominis. Now if the Piety of the Pope do (as doubtless it will) preserve him from being infected with this Sacrilegious Opinion; those who present him this poison will nevertheless be as criminal as those miserable Flatterers who were the occasion of the death of their King by their impious Eulogies. For he is not an homicide of the Soul or Body only, who effectively takes away the Life of one or the other; but he is a Murderer also, who does that which is of itself capable to extinguish either the one or the other. Cyprianus de Lapsis. S. Cyprian names those Christians Parricides, that for fear of Persecution offered their sucking Infants to the Idols: because, though they could not (says S. Augustin) by this Idolatry, and in which the poor Babes had no part, bereave them of that spiritual life which they had derived from their Baptism; yet did they notwithstanding rob them of it, as much as in them lay. Aug. Ep. 23 In illis quidem interfectionem non faciunt; sed, quantum in ipsis est, interfectores fiunt. Flatter not yourselves, adds the same S. Augustin, In lib. de Pastoribus, cap. 4. (speaking of such as gave others occasion of sinning) that your Brother is not yet dead through the scandal you have given him: He is not dead, and yet are you an homicide. Et ille vivit, & tu homicida es. We may say the very same of the Jesuits in relation to the Pope, into whom they strive to inspire an Opinion so mortal, Non sibi blandiantur quia ille non est mortuus; & ille vivit, & isti homicida sunt. But it is not the Pope alone to whom they give an occasion of Scandal, they offer it to all the Faithful in general, whilst they persuade them to establish their Belief upon the Word of a mortal Man, and to submit themselves to it as to the prime Verity, which can in no sort be done (as has already been demonstrated) without a kind of Idolatry. So as the Jesuits do in a manner the very same thing with those Heretics who would have men render Divine honours to the Virgin. For as the true respect which we own to the Virgin (the most holy of all the Creatures) would not diminish the Crime of these Heretics and their Disciples; so nor would the veneration that all the Faithful have for the Head of the Church exempt them from the guilt of a very heinous sin before God, if thus deluded by the Jesuits they should render to the Word of a Man (howsoever conspicuous in the Church) this sovereign deference of Divine Faith, which cannot be paid, without manifest impiety, but to the Word of God himself. Little do the men of the world consider the magnitude of these sorts of offences, since, being wholly carnal, they are not concerned but with things altogether gross and exterior. These hypocritical Devotees permit themselves to be easily transported with such excesses, because they conceive it a great degree of Piety, blindly to embrace whatever it be that elevates those Things and Persons to whom we own respect: and hence it is proceeds that variety of Opinions which they term Pious, without at all putting themselves to the trouble of enquiring whether they are true or false; as if what were false could be a fit object of Piety, or that the God of Truth might be honoured with a Lie. But you (my Lords) know, that those who are bred up in the sincere spirit of Christianism, make a far different account of these matters. They equally detest Lying, to whose profit soever it may possibly appear advantageous, were it to the Pope, to the Virgin, were it even to J. Christ himself. And, which one would hardly say, had not S. Augustin said it before us, for this Father was not afraid to assert it, Aug. de Mendacio, cap. 20. That if the Lying and the Calumny which is used to take away the temporal life of a man be a detestable crime, much more abominable is that which tends to the bereaving us of the life eternal; such as is all prevarication in matter of Religion; yea though it were even employed in ascribing false praises to Jesus Christ himself. Ibid. cap. 10. Wherefore (says the same Father) it were an extreme folly for a Christian not to be rather prepared to suffer all sorts of indignities, and even such as strike a terror into holy Souls, then once condescend to whomsoever would oblige him to corrupt the Gospel by any fictitious praises of J. Christ. Seeing then (according to this holy Saint) it would be an abominable Crime to attribute any false Praises to J. Christ himself, who, being God, is superior to all Praises; how much greater is it to ascribe to a mortal Man, environed with infirmities, (as the Scripture expresses it) the Praises which appertain to God alone? But into what Labyrinths of Errors shall we not precipitate ourselves, if once we grant a liberty to our humane fancy to shroud its various wander under a pretext of Piety? For, if Opinions must be tolerated, how false soever they may be, because an ill-advised Piety judges them Pious; and, if it be a plausible and sufficient reason to exempt Popes from Faults and Errors obnoxious to humane nature, by pretending one may piously believe that God, having entrusted them with the Government of the Church, will never permit them to fall into any Errors which may be prejudicial to it, as the Jesuits do from hence believe they have a right to invest the Popes in the same state of Infallibility which J. Christ had, and that even in matters of Fact, when they propose them to the Universal Church: why may they not as well pretend they have the same right also of attributing to the Popes the same Impeccability which J. Christ had, in all those concernments which relate to the Government of the Church, and the functions of their Sovereign Pontificate? why should not this latter opinion be as pious as the former? Would it not seem incomparably more advantageous to the Church, that the Popes could not sin in this manner, then to be Infallible in matters of Fact? And the Souls which are purchased by the blood of J. Christ, have they not received infinitely more detriment from the wicked Administration of some Popes, than they could ever contract from their want of illumination or due attention in the understanding of some particular Author? A man that had lived in the Primitive Ages of the Church, resting himself upon these Probabilities and Conveniencies of humane Wits, would he not have believed he had reason to say, That God would never permit that the Seat of S. Peter should, for near one entire Age, be possessed by Persons so prodigiously unworthy? Baron. ad An. 897. n. 4. As Cardinal Baronius does with grief acknowledge it happened for during almost the whole Tenth Age, by the power of the Marquis of Toscany; who domineering with his Arms and Money over the Clergy and people of Rome, established such Persons in S. Peter's Chair as were not only wicked in regard of themselves, but were so also to the Church, by introducing most horrible Disorders; such as the same Baronius complains were brought in by John the Xth, who made a Child of five years of age Archbishop of Reims, upon which the Cardinal makes this sad reflection: Tantum nefas, Ad An. 923 n. 11. quo jura omnia Ecclesiastica sauciantur, ejus Pontificis authoritate introductum, quem infamis foemina infami operâ Petri solium intrusisset. Would not this man have believed that God would never have permitted the Vicar of him who said his Kingdom was not of this World, to undertake the disposal of temporal Kingdoms, to depose some from them, and confer them upon others, Mr. du Puis in his Treatise of the Rights of the King to the Kingdom of Navarre. as Julius the IIᵈ did the Kingdom of Navarre, which the Kings of Spain now possess to the prejudice of ours, and that by virtue only of a Gift pretended to be received of this Pope, who took it away from its lawful King? Would he not have believed that God would never have suffered that Schism should have been introduced in the very Seat of Unity after such a manner, as that the Church for almost forty years could not be able to discern its true Pastor from him that was the Hireling and the false one, seeing itself abandoned to two Mercenaries, each of which pretended to the Title and Quality, in this only agreeing together, to keep the Church in a fatal Division; as it happened towards the period of the Fourteenth Age, when one of these Anti-popes' had his Seat at Avignon, the other at Rome? Would he not have believed that God would never have permitted that he, whose principal Office is to keep all Christians in Unity, should by his rash and hasty Excommunications be the occasion of whole Kingdom's Defection from the Catholic Communion, and by this means an infinity of Souls miserably perish by Schism and Heresy; as it came to pass in England, In a Letter to Hen. IU. touching the Venetian affair, dans les Oevures diverses, p. 874 through the precipitancy of Clement the VIIth, presented with so much Zeal to Pope Paul the Vth, that he might thereby stop him from falling into the like oversight in the difference with the Venetians, reinforcing it also by the Example of Leo the Xth in reference to Germany, and by remonstrating to him, that he ought to consider he was now in the same Crisis and at the same point in which Leo the Tenth lost Religion in Germany, and Clement the Seventh ruin'd it in England; but, by which Clement the Eighth did preserve it in France? Indeed to reason only from that which in our fond opinions would appear most advantageous to the Church, and what we should be ready to judge aught to be, according to our weak apprehensions, certain it is, that if those who seem to be the Wisest men had been summoned to the Counsel of God what time he was about the contrivance and model of the Church, they would, doubtless, have thought it fitting that he should never have permitted his Lieutenants upon Earth to fall into such disorders, so diametrically opposite to the duty of their Place, and so prejudicial to those Souls which were committed to them. But the Thoughts of God are immensely wide from the Thoughts of Men, and he has by his most inscrutable Judgements resolved, that the Events should totally confound all our pretended Wisdom, having permitted what we should have believed he would never have permitted. And therefore all truly pious Persons ought to acknowledge from so many sad and deplorable Examples, That God has not thought good the Stability of his Church should depend upon the Sanctity, the Wisdom and the Sagacity of one single Man, though he were the Head and Supreme Pastor of it. It is the religious reflection of Cardinal Baronius upon the Disorders of the Popes of the Tenth Age: Ad An. 897 n. 5. To the end (says he) that God might make appear his Church was not of any humane invention, but an Institution purely divine, he has been pleased to show that it should never lose itself or come to destruction by the Vices of ungodly Popes, as Kingdoms and Commonwealths have frequently done through the Crimes and the Vices of irreligious and ungodly Kings. Ut enim Deus significaret eandem suam Ecclesiam nequaquam humanum esse figmentum, sed planè Divinum inventum, oportuit ostendisse eam nequaquam pravorum Antistitum operâ perdi posse & ad nihilum redigi, sicut de aliis diversarum Gentium Regnis & bene statutis Rebus-publicis factum constat. It is the very same in that kind of Infallibility which these Jesuits attribute to the Pope, by a mistake altogether new and unheard-of; which God has permitted should yet be destroyed by so many Examples, that there is not a Divine who can ever believe it to be true, without manifestly condemning himself of Heresy: For if all the Decisions of Pope's concerning matters of Fact themselves were as so many Articles of Faith, there being hardly one able Divine which does not oppugn some of them, there would in fine be none of them but would be found to oppose the very Faith itself. For instance, Who is there does not at present think that the Epistles attributed to the first Popes were never any of those Pope's Writings, but a Work or Rhapsody rather of some Cheat and Impostor? And yet not only Pope Nicolas commanded the Bishops of France to receive them, but his Successors have inserted them into the Book of the Decretals, which they have by their Authority Apostolical proposed to serve as a Rule to the Universal Church; and in which they speak at least as much out of their Chair, as in their ordinary Bulls. How then should one without gross impiety believe that these Epistles are forged, P. Sermond P. Peta. and others. as at present all able Churchmen believe them to be, yea even the Jesuits themselves, if we are obliged to acknowledge the same Infallibility in Popes as in Jesus Christ in Questions of Fact? Do we think the Infallibility of J. Christ would permit us to propose to the Catholic Church pieces which are evidently false and supposititious, for such as are genuine and true? There is hardly any matter of Fact of more importance to the Church, then to discern a Council whether it be General or not, Lawful, or Illegitimate. In the mean time, has France been Heretical for not having acknowledged the Council of Florence as Ecumenical; notwithstanding the Bulls of Pope Eugenius the Fourth, and all those Declarations which he prefixed at the head of this Council, to oblige the whole World to own it for a General one? Did the Cardinal of Lorraine oppose the Faith, when he openly testified in these terms to Pope Pius the Fourth what his Opinion was upon this Controversy, and that of all France? As for the latter of those Titles which you would attribute to our holy Father, taken out of the Council of Florence; I cannot deny but that I am a Frenchman, brought up in the University of Paris, in which our Tenent is, That the Authority of a Council is above the Pope, and that they are censured as Heretics who maintain the contrary: That in France they acknowledge the Council of Constance for General in all its parts: That they adhere to that of Basil, and esteem that of Florence for neither Lawful nor General; and, That all the French will sooner perish then be induced to believe the contrary. This Letter of the Cardinal of Lorraine, which he directed to his Secretary then at Rome to be shown Pope Pius IVth, is to be seen in the Collection of the Memoires of the Council of Trent, published by the late Monsieur du Puis, and printed by Cramoisy. During the first difference of Pope Eugenius IVth with the Council of Basil, he published a very authentic Bull by which he declared, that he transferred the Council to Boulogne, and that whosoever should dare maintain this Translation was unjust, did err both from the Truth and Catholic Faith. Fuit igitur à Basileensi Civitate legitima pro tunc nostra Concilii dissolutio, & asserentes contrà sunt penitus ab omni veritate & fide Catholica alieni. And yet, notwithstanding, the Fathers of the Council of Basil persisting that this Translation was unjust and null, Eugenius was forced to acknowledge by another as authentic a Bull, that, in effect, it was void, and that the Council was always legitimately assembled from the beginning of it to that very time. You may find both the one and the other of these Bulls in Raynaldus; the first in the year 1433, and the latter in Anno 1434. Now, shall both of these be embraced for Articles of Faith? And shall we be obliged to believe that the same Council, at the very same time, was an Unlawful Conventicle, and a Lawful Council of the Universal Church assembled by the Holy Spirit? The same Raynaldus mentions a Bull of Eugenius the IVth against the Cardinal d' Arles, Ad Ann. 1640. who presided at the Council of Basil, wherein he is called Iniquitatis alumnus atque perditionls filius. If the Suffrage of the Popes in the Judgements which they make concerning Persons by their Bulls are to be reputed as Infallible as that of Jesus Christ, we should be obliged to hold this Cardinal for a very wicked Caitiff: But what shall we think if God have judged otherwise concerning him; and that, far from willing us to detest him as a Child of Iniquity and a Son of Perdition, he would have us to reverence him for one of the Blessed, confirming his Sanctity by public Miracles, authorised by another Pope, which was Clement the VIIth, who has by an authentic Bull enroled him among the number of the Happy, by declaring, not that he had done Penance after his being a Child of Iniquity, but that he had always led a most heavenly, chaste and immaculate life, as it is to be seen in that Bull of his Beatification recited at large by Ciaconius? These are some Examples which sufficiently discover to us the false pretence of these Jesuits: But, without seeking farther, the very Authors of this Doctrine find themselves plunged in Heresy by the undeniable sequel of their Errors. For they maintain in this very Conclusion, That Pope Honorius has taught nothing in his Epistles but what was most consonant and agreeable to the Catholic Faith, concerning the two Wills and two Operations in Jesus Christ. Duas in Christo Voluntates & Operationes fuisse profitemur; nec aliud à nobis sensit Honorius, dum Operationem Christi unicam esse scripsit. Now, if this be a point of Faith, as these Jesuits pretend, That the Book of Jansenius is Heretical, and that the Five Propositions are of this Author, because two Popes have affirmed it; and that we are obliged to consider what they say in those Particulars, as if J. Christ had himself pronounced it; with how much greater reason may we affirm the same of Pope Honorius' Epistles, which have both been examined, condemned and Burnt by a General Council of the whole Church, where the Pope himself presided by his Legates; and which has been confirmed, as to this very point and Article, by two other General Councils more, and by a very great number of Popes beside? For, if ever Popes speak out of the Chair, it is then when they speak with the General Councils, and confirm them by their Apostolical Authority. And thus, doubtless, Leo, Epist. ad Constan. Pope Leo the Second spoke out of his Chair, when in several of his Epistles which he wrote to confirm the VIth Ecumenical Council, he did in particular ratify the Condemnation of Honorius, and pronounced him Anathema; because he had not enlightened the Apostolical Church (they are the express words) by the doctrine of Apostolical Tradition, but suffered her to be defiled by a profane Tradition. Qui hanc Apostolicam Ecclesiam non Apostolicae Traditionis doctrinâ illustravit; sed prophanâ Traditione maculari permisit. And, by consequence, if then when the Popes dictate from their Chair, whatsoever the Subject be, (matter of Right or Fact) they have the same Infallibility with Jesus Christ, and that all which they pronounce is an Article of Faith; it ought to be as much a matter of Faith, that the Epistles of Honorius are Heretical, and the person who denies it, after assent to this general Maxim, bears the most notorious mark of an Heretic, (according to S. Paul) which is to be self-condemned. It would not signify in the least, to have recourse to that pretended falsification of the Acts of the VIth Council, and the Epistles of Leo the Second: For, as this pretence is altogether unmaintainable, frivolous and extravagant, (as even the most devoted Bishops to the Jesuits have themselves acknowledged in the last Assembly of the Clergy;) were there only this miserable evasion to excuse us from believing with a divine Faith that Honorius was justly Anathematised, and his Epistles legally condemned as replete with Heresies, we must certainly have renounced our common Senses to form any other judgement concerning that Pope, and not to hold his Epistles for Heretical. But, as it is the property of Error to destroy itself, He that should be engaged by this novel Opinion of the Jesuits necessarily to hold, that the Epistles of Honorius are Heretical, by the same would find himself obliged to acknowledge the Fallacy of this Opinion: For, how should he believe that all Popes are endowed with a like Infallibility with J. Christ, what time they speak out of their Chair, considering that Honorius slipped into an Error in a conjuncture in which 'tis difficult to conceive but that he did speak out of his Chair, seeing he spoke as a Judge in a Controversy of Faith, and in order to the adjusting of the greatest difference which was then on foot in the Church, and which had divided all the Oriental Patriarches? And, for all this, not regarding the judgement of the VIth Council, and supposing (what is extremely ridiculous) that the Acts thereof were corrupted; how should it be pretended that Honorius had in this encounter the same Infallibility with J. Christ, since, having by his Letters approved the heretical Epistles of Sergius Patriarch of Constantinople, either he understood it as he ought, and then he erred in point of Right, by approving the heretical Opinion of one single Will in J. Christ, which he had acknowledged to be in effect contained in this Epistle of Sergius; or he understood it amiss, for accepting that in a Catholic sense which Sergius had asserted in an Heretical, and so he had at least erred in point of Faith? So that the Jesuits can in no sort avoid the being Heretics in either sense. For, if it be Heresy (as doubtless it is) to attribute to Popes, speaking è Cathedra, the same Infallibility with Jesus Christ as well in Questions pertaining to Right as to those of Fact, so as their Decisions concerning the Facts themselves may be believed by a divine Faith, they are rank Heretics, as being engaged to maintain this Blasphemy. And in case they pretend that this is a true Opinion, they are nevertheless Heretics, because they oppose the Faith, not submitting to the Decision of so many Popes and General Councils in reference to the condemnation of Honorius, who (according to their Error) we are by divine Faith obliged to believe had been justly condemned, because he was so by Judges as Infallible as Jesus Christ, as well in matters of Right as those of Fact. I insist too long, my Lords, in refuting an Error so notorious. Give me leave yet to represent to you one most pernicious Consequence. You have seen what the design of this Position is, and how specious a Title they have prefixed before it, Assertiones Catholicae contra Saeculorum omnium praecipuas Haereses: This being so, what may we else imagine, when we shall see by the sequel, of that which they oppose to these Heresies, but that they are Catholic Truths maintained by the Church against these Heretics, and which we are obliged to acknowledge under censure of being ourselves Heretics, and of Apostasy from the Communion of the Church? Never then (according to these Jesuits) must we think of receiving the poor Greeks into the Communion of the Catholic Church, or reunite these divided Members severed by so deplorable a Schism, but in obliging them to confess that J. Christ has bestowed the same Infallibility upon all the Popes which He himself has, in all that they propose to the Universal Church; yea, even in matters which concern particular Facts. And, as all the Heretics of these last Ages have embraced the Error of the Greeks against the Primacy of the holy See, we must never open the doors of the Church to them before they make profession of this fine new Article of Faith. But admit we should not exact that so strictly of them, what an Obstacle do we not lay in the way of their Conversion? what Scandal are we not guilty of? and what pretext do we not afford their Ministers to decry the Catholic Church before their abused People, by rendering her odious and contemptible, and by confirming them in those their ancient Calumnies and Reproaches which they have so frequently objected to the Catholics for equalling the Pope to Almighty God? 'Tis well known, that it is from their Principles they have inspired Rebellion into so many People. Should therefore Religious and Pious persons favour them in this detestable design, that they furnish them with Arms to fight against us, and suffer them to look upon the deference which the Faithful own to the Pope as an insupportable Yoke upon the Conscience, in things that do not at all concern any point of Faith, and whereof the knowledge does not in the least conduce to Salvation? This is it (my Lords) which has chief obliged us to speak upon this occasion: And it was highly necessary that the Catholic Divines should make haste to decry this Impiety, lest those Uncircumcised should take occasion of insulting over the Armies of the living God. We were obliged to prevent them, to the end they may see that we do no less abhor this excess in the Catholic Church for the love of Truth, than they appear to detest her by the design which they pretend to justify their faulty separation. But if it be sufficient to acquit Divines of their devoir, that they represent this public Complaint; it is not enough for the honour of the Church, and for the entire reparation of this Scandal, that there have been only Divines which have reproved it. It is You, my Lords, who ought to be inflamed with Zeal for the Purity of the Doctrine whereof You are the Depositaries, for the Salvation of the Faithful of whom You are the Fathers, for the Sanctity of the Church whereof You are the Spouses, les Espouses. for the Honour of J. Christ of whom You are the chief Ministers, to consider, as in the presence of God, what your Duty is upon so important an Occasion, in which the Faith of the Church is violated by a Capital Error which subverts its very Foundation, where the Faithful are empoisoned with an Opinion which tends to the changing of that Veneration into Idolatry, which they ought to bear to their sovereign Bishop; where the Church is profaned by an Impiety that dishonours and exposes her to the outrages of her Enemies; in sum, where J. Christ is horribly offended by the Sacrilegious Parity which is put between the words of his Servant and his own most Sacred Dictates, by making the one as well as the other the Object of a divine Faith. Haply some there be may reply, that this Extravagance deserves not half this aggravation; and doubtless they will make use of it for a pretext to induce you to connive at so foul an excess. But, my Lords, you ought to consider, that how extravagant soever this Opinion may appear, it is promoted by Persons who may give us just occasion to apprehend the strange Consequences of it. For 'tis sufficiently evident, that it is not by chance, or through the blindness of any particular man, that it comes thus to appear in the World: It is long since that they have prepared and disposed all things for its production and entertainment; though they never ushered it in with pomp, before they were well assured all things were favourable for its reception, and that there was not a Champion remaining who had the courage or confidence to oppose it openly. Perhaps indeed their Pretence is not yet so far advanced as to draw a formal Approbation from the Bishops: But that which they hope for is, (since I am obliged to speak all) that their credit, and their power of being able to do good or ill offices, will be a means to retain all the Bishops in silence, so as none of them shall dare to condemn them, for fear of drawing upon them the strength and displeasure of so puissant a Society; and, that the Sorbonne, which they now reckon to be in their dependence, will never have the confidence to Censure this Doctrine, whatever their aversion may be to it. Thus they hope, that during this Silence, and whiles all the World is as it were snorting, dum dormirent homines, this Cockle which they have sown in the field of the Church will take root, and in time get strength: There they will leave it to ripen, and, as they use to say, relinquent tempori maturandum, and, when it shall be arrived to full maturity, produce the natural Consequences that must necessarily spring from it. At present, indeed, they do but say only, One may believe Particular Facts with a divine Faith; but they will shortly pronounce that men are bound to believe them; which will be very easy for them to establish, because it is but a necessary Consequence of their Principle, since it is certain, that one may not believe any thing with a divine Faith but what truly is of divine Faith, and that whatever is so ought to be believed with a divine Faith when it is sufficiently proposed to us. It suffices them for the present, that the Bishops do not condemn this Opinion; but within a little while they will make the Bishop's Approbators; according to another of their Maxims, P. Bauny, Theol. Mor. Tract. p. 321. viz. That the Church does approve all those Opinions which she suffers without opposing. It therefore highly concerns you (my Lords) to consider not only the Peril to which the Church is exposed, but that also wherein you yourselves are; lest the Jesuits one day vouch you for abettors of their Heresy, and lest God himself do lay it to your charge. For though there be nothing more false than that the Church does approve all those Opinions which she does not repress; yet is it no less true, (as both Councils and Popes have taught) that God does impute the approbation of an Error to those Pastors which have not in due time resisted it. Greg. l. 7. p. 2. Ep. 115. Error cui non resistitur, approbatur: Qui non corrigit resecanda, committit. Which induced the Second Council of Tours to declare, Concil. Turon. 2. Anno 1567. That the Shepherd seemed to be at an agreement with the Wolf, who (whiles it was in his power) hindered not the spoil which he made in the Flock. And S. Leo, speaking of those who neglected the application of those necessary Remedies to the Evils of the Church, accuses them as plainly fomenters of them. Leo Magnus, Ep. 4. Qui multam saepe nutriunt pestilentiam, dum necessariam dissimulant adhibere medicinam. But these are Reflections, my Lords, which it were needless to represent to you, whose Zeal and Pastoral Illumination is more capable to inform you what is most expedient for the Church upon this occasion, than all the Discourses which can be made you. It is sufficient, that private Divines display and lay open before you the sad Diseases and deep Wounds which they have given to the Faith, and to say to every one of you in particular, what once the Prophet said to God, Vide, Domine, & considera; Behold and consider what Doctrine is taught in the Church whereof you are the Overseers. Their Duty reaches no farther; after this, they may retire themselves to lament before Almighty God in Humility and Silence. FINIS. An Advertisement to the Reader. IT will be very conducible to the more perfect understanding of divers particulars in these Papers, especially as to what concerns the Five Propositions, pretended to be in Jansenius, that the Reader did cast his Eye upon the Provincials, or Letters written by Lovis de Montalte, and chief upon the 17 Letters, etc. which the Interpreter of these Papers had subjoined to them, were they not commonly to be had at every Bookseller's shop, and already translated into English. THE Imaginary Heresy. The First LETTER. SIR, I Would willingly send you something that were new concerning Church-affairs: but what can be more said of them then that they are still where they were? They perpetually talk of the Five Propositions, and threaten to treat them as Heretics who refuse to acknowledge them to be in Jansenius: Some are preparing to persecute them by secret Cabals; and others to defend themselves as well as they are able by public Writings, which men read, and give their different opinions of. Some commend them and say they are good, others that they are too violent. 'Tis confessed that they prove very well what they pretend. M▪ the Lieutenant Civil has made a very particular judgement of them, as pronouncing them injurious to the Person of the King; whiles others find nothing in them but Eulogies of his Majesty, and the defence of his sovereign Authority. This is all I can inform you of it in general; unless perhaps you would have me add my own reflections, and the truth is there is an ample subject for them. I must needs confess that I have long since admired at the patience of men, and especially of the French, who were not wont to be reproached with that fault: 'tis now at least ten years that they have been continually talking of a thing that did not deserve to be discoursed of one day. What does it signify whether the Five Propositions be or be not in Jansenius' book; whether men believe any such thing, or whether they doubt of it? In the mean time, the whole business of the Church seems to be engaged in this pleasant Question: Nor do the Bishops who superintend the Clergy take notice of any other disorder which they think worthy of their application. They discourse of nothing save this in all their Assemblies: the formulary is almost the only Canon which men are now obliged to obey: and the only great Crime which is punished among the ecclesiastics by privation of their employments is, to but doubt of this matter of Fact. A small grain of anti-Jansenism purges all kinds of defects, as the least degree of Indifference in the Point sullies all their other virtues: so as the most compendious way for one to make his fortune is, to appear something zealous for the formulary; be the man never so Ignorant or Scandalous, this zeal supplies and covers all. In sum, never was the Spanish Catholicon applied to so many uses as these Five Propositions. Nor are they only our men of Learning who talk of these matters, the very Courtiers entertain themselves with nothing else: and though the most understanding persons discourse of it as of a thing really ridiculous & to make sport, there are some Sr Politics that make a great business of it. One would imagine to hear them speak as if all Religion depended on it, and the whole State were concerned; so that there happen no Inundations, Tempests, Storms, Shipwrecks, Poison or Plague which they do not attribute to this Foppery. But what does most of all surprise me (as I said) is, that men should thus persevere to be always talking of the same thing, and of so mean a subject. For my own part, I protest to you, I am so tired with the Five Propositions, and with all that Dispute, that their discourses of it would be insufferable to me, did I not look on the whole affair with a particular view, according to which it affords me a very strange prospect; and I shall impart it to you. There is nothing, in my opinion, more wonderful in all the histories of the Ages past, or in what has happened in our own times, and of which we have been the spectators, then to contemplate the images of the Vanity of men's Fancies, and withal to consider the infinite troubles and agitations which the most inconsiderable Trifles have produced amongst them. Is it not (for example) a thing worthy of astonishment, to behold all the Kingdoms of the World engage themselves in a Quarrel betwixt Augustus and Antonius, the whole force of the Roman Empire and neighbour States reunited in their Armies, and these Armies together by the ears near Actium; when one shall consider that one Female was the sole cause and pretext of this bloody War, which was to decide who should be master of the Universe, and absolutely abolish the whole frame of the Roman State? This signal event, and which drew such a consequent after it, had for its beginning but the face of a Woman; and but for this weak passion Antony had taken other measures, and in all probability nothing of what succeeded it had happened: though for my part I am glad it did, since by it I perceive what a piece of nothing Man is. Antonius, whiles he makes the whole World depend upon him, does himself depend and dote upon a silly Woman. See here the cause of all this stupendious Change, a prodigious image of the Vanity of all humane affairs. You shall read in some of the Indian Histories, that one white Elephant was the cause of the death of five or six great Princes, and of the desolation of several Kingdoms. There was, among others, a King of Pegu who assembled an Army consisting of a million of men, in which there were three thousand Camels, five thousand Elephants, and two hundred thousand Horses, to take this Beast from the King of Siam. He destroyed the whole Country of this poor King, ruined his chief City, which was twice as large as ours of Paris, and in fine forced him to kill himself after the loss of his whole Empire; and all this but for one white Elephant. Yet had this Conqueror three already, he wanted only a fourth for his Coach, and to procure that, he brought a whole Kingdom to desolation. We commonly look upon these Histories as on the Follies and Extravagances of Barbarians; but, in my judgement, we should think otherwise of them. I find nothing in them but what seems very worthy of Men, and exceedingly proportionable to the stretch of their fancy, and so much the less vain, as indeed they serve to discover to us the vanity and emptiness of all those Enterprises which the world, forsooth, would make pass for so glorious and important. Do not imagine, Sir, that these Examples are only to be met withal in profane Histories, as if that of the Church, which is the Kingdom of God, were exempted from them. This were not rightly to understand in what estate God has decreed it should yet remain in the world, which makes S. Paul say, that the Creature is subject to Vanity; Vanitati creatura subjecta est. She is yet, Sir, mingled with good and bad, Chaff and Corn; and so mingled indeed, that the Chaff is a great deal more visible than the Wheat. Nor are those who govern her always true Citizens of Jerusalem; they are oftentimes, says S. Augustine, but Citizens of Babylon, whom God suffers to ascend the thrones of the Church, to render them Ministers of his indignation. In fine, there is ever amongst the honestest men some mixture of weakness, which they draw from their natural corruption, amongst those solid benefits which they receive from God. We are not therefore to wonder if amidst this multitude of Carnal men who fill the visible Church, and the remanent defects of the most Spiritual, we find instances of all humane disorders. Were there nothing but what were edifying and serious in the exterior Government of the Church, she would (as one might say) be too visible and easy to be discerned; by which the Faith of those who adhere and submit themselves to her should not be sufficiently exercised: But God, having by a just judgement left her always sufficient marks whereby to make her known to all humble and rational spirits, is pleased to obscure her to the proud, and such as are carried away by the image of those visible disorders to look on her as upon an humane Assembly which does not otherwise govern herself then other Societies do. For this reason it is that God permits that great troubles should be raised for things of no moment, as well in the Church as in temporal States. What was there (for example) more vain than the fancy which moved Justinian to condemn the Writings of three Authors, for which he turned the whole Oriental Church topsy-turvy, and the Western too, per superfluas Quaestiones, as Pope Pelagius IIᵈ expresses it? and to what did all tend, but to the tormenting of several Bishops, the banishing of some, imprisonment of others, the exciting of a Schism in Italy, and all this to no purpose? For however this Emperor had caused his Opinion to be approved by a General Council and divers Popes; yet did all which was at that time done come to nothing of itself a little while after, since it both is and always was permitted, that men might believe what they pleased touching those Author's Writings. So true it is, that matters of Fact are not to be determined but by Reason and Truth, and not by Authority. But such is the frequent conclusion of such enterprises: They seem to succeed for a time, and soon after dissipate and vanish of themselves. But the misery is, that men have commonly their spirits so narrow, they cannot stretch them beyond their own Times. If they spy a Tempest coming against some particular Book or Person, they presently give all for lost, and that such as succeed after them will judge of it just as they do by the present face of the Storm which terrifies them. I cannot but strangely wonder that Experience should not yet disabuse them of this Illusion, and teach them to distinguish solid and stable Judgements▪ which proceed from an inspection of immutable Truths, from those which spring only from the blindness of a transitory Passion: since these sort of Opinions are as variable as the Passions from whence they rise▪ they are no sooner at an end, but that which appeared so important gins to seem horribly ridiculous, and men are astonished that there should ever have been any so simple as to have amused themselves about them. There's no question but that when the Cordeliers were at a difference between themselves concerning the form of their Capuchon, when those who would be called the Spiritual Brethren would have their Hood narrower, and the others which they named the Brothers of the Communality would have theirs of a larger size, they thought their dispute wonderful considerable: And in good earnest the quarrel lasted almost a whole Age, with infinite heat and animosity on both sides; being at last, with much ado, determined by the Bulls of four Popes, Nicolas IVth, Clement Vth, John XXIIth, and Benedict XIIth. But now it looks as if really it had been only to make the World sport, when men but mention this Dispute; and I verily believe there is hardly a Cordelier at present that cares a rush for the size of his Capuchon. For so in truth a wise Friar would have said when the Contest was at the highest, Let us but have patience a while, and we shall both be laughed at. The same might likewise have been said upon another Question sprung up about the same time, and which is of a nature so thin and airy, that it almost vanishes with the touch. 'Tis a certain truth, that what the Cordeliers eat or drink is as well devoured as that which is eaten or drank by those who never made profession of their Rule: This is undeniable. But there sprung a Question among them, Whether the Right to those things which were so consumed by the Usage, as Bread and Wine, appertained to them or not; or whether they had only the simple Usage of them without any Right. The greater part, perceiving this to be a certain degree of Perfection which cost them nothing but their quitting of all right to those things which they devoured by the use, (since this renunciation did not at all hinder the usage, for which they were only interessed) greedily embraced the opinion, That the Cordeliers had indeed but the simple Usage of things without any Title to them; That the Right appertained to the Roman Church, and that there was the Poverty of which J. Christ gave them an Example. Nicolas the IVth, who had been taken out of the Order of the Cordeliers, made a Bull wholly advantageous to this pretention, and defined, That in effect they had but the simple Usage, and that J. C. had given us the example of this perfect Poverty, which consists in the general renunciation of all Right to temporal goods. Thus continued matters for some time: The Cordeliers eaten and drank as well as other men, though without right or title. But John the XXIIth, who was of a fiercer humour, being raised to the Pontificate, found himself importuned with this unprofitable Right which the Cordeliers attributed to the Roman Church, from whence he saw to come no profit, and therefore he took a fancy to end this Question without any regard to the Decision of his predecessor Nicolas. The Cordeliers alarmed at this, being assembled in their general Chapter held at peruse, solemnly protested to adhere to the Definition of Pope Nicolas the IVth. But for all this, John took the adverse party, declaring by his Extravagant Ad conditorem, that he cared not for this right to the bread and wine of the Cordeliers, and other things which they consumed by the usage, since there accrued no profit by it to the Church of Rome: That the Cordelier Friars were never the poorer, and that their intention was that none but themselves should derive any profit from it. Nec Fratrum ipsorum intentio fuerit quòd ad quemcumque▪ alium quam ad Fratres dictarum rerum perveniret compendium. That it was a dishonour that the Roman Church should interess itself for an Egg, or a piece of Cheese. That in things which they devoured after that manner, the Usage and the Right of usage was not to be distinguished; and that all this airy and spiritual refinement was but a pure illusion. In fine, he determined by the Extravagant, Cùm inter nonnullos, etc. That it was a plain Heresy to affirm that Jesus Christ possessed nothing in this World, neither in particular nor in common, and that he should have no title to the things which he used. These Decisions of John the XXIIth appeared quite repugnant to those of Nicolas the IVth, and the difference did so perplex Cardinal Bellarmin, as he really professed they were not to be throughly reconciled. He acknowledged that Nicolas the IVth did teach that one might separate the Right from the Usage; and that John the XXIIth had declared the contrary. He confessed also that Nicolas has determined that this is a holy Poverty; and on the other side, that John the XXIIth looked upon it as Hypocrisy. And upon these two points, unluckily takes the part of Nicolas against John. But forasmuch as in the third point that concerns the Poverty of J. Christ the Cordeliers Opinion is taxed of Heresy by John the XXIIth; that the two Popes should not seem at variance in a point of Faith, he endeavours to piece them together by distinguishing of the times. He says therefore that J. Christ did possess Temporal things at one time, and that he was absolutely bereaved of them at another: That so it is true, that as to one season he prescribed us an example of perfect Poverty, by an absolute renunciation of the possession of all things, as says Nicolas; and that it is as true, he at another time possessed temporal goods which he made use of, as John the XXIIth had decided it. But this way of according the Decisions of the two Popes does not appear so solid: For John the XXIIth does not pretend that J. Christ was master of the temporal things he used at one certain time only, but that he was so always; as appears by the general principle which he makes use of to prove it, which is, That the Usage is unjust which is unaccompanied with Right: Whence it is easily inferred, That J. Christ having made use of temporal things, and never having used them injustly, he had always a Right to the Use of them. But however the matter was, divers of the Cordeliers did not take themselves to be justly condemned, and maugre the Pope, they obstinately maintained that their Bread belonged to the Church of Rome; so as the Emperor Lewis of Bavaria being then at variance with the Pope about his Election to the Empire, they joined themselves to him, and stoutly sustained his right against John the XXIIth. The Emperor on his part upheld the Cordeliers, reproaching to the Pope as a foul Error his Decision touching the Poverty of I▪ Christ▪ In sum, the animosity of both these Antagonists came at last to that height; that the Pope (according to the style of that Age) excommunicated the Emperor, declared him Heretic, favourer of Heretics, deposed him from the Empire, and caused all the poor Cordeliers to be burnt that he could lay hands on. On the other side, the Emperor enters Italy with a puissant Army, seizeth on Rome, declares Pope John (then at Avignon) unworthy of the Pontificate▪ creates a new Pope, or rather Antipope, namely a Cordelier called Peter Ramuceus of Corbaria, who chose the title of Nicolas the Vth, and who for the first action of his Pontificate vacated the Bull of John the XXIIth against the Cordeliers, himself excommunicating and deposing him. But as all this proceeding was irregular and violent, our pretended Pope could not maintain himself against John XXIIth, but was in conclusion delivered up to him; yet did not this determine the difference, there were after this Appeals to the Council, several Excommunications against Lewis of Bavaria, and such an infinity of Procedures of Inquisitors against the Cordeliers, who were by this time revolted all the world over, and especially in Italy, that it would here be too long to rehearse the particulars. And thus was the success of this pleasant Question, Whether the Cordeliers were owners of the bread which they eaten: For so it pleased God to humble men's pride, by suffering them to bring the greatest Trifles to the very height and greatest of extremities; and by that to let them see that they were all but mere Vanity themselves. Thus it is we judge of things at present, because we are now freed from those passions which did then disturb them; but than it was that they passed for very serious matters indeed, and it had not haply been safe to have laughed at them. There's no doubt but it will be just so with our present Disputes, and that within these fifty years they will all be put among the long Hoods, and the Bread and Cheese of the Cordeliers. Verily, I have long since had these Examples in my thoughts, and have looked upon them as equally expedient to demonstrate to us the trifling folly of men's imaginations: The sole difference which I can find is, that there are in the present controversy very many things less reasonable than in the others which I have alleged. 1. For in earnest there is some real difference between a large Hood and a narrow Hood; but 'tis not possible to find any between the Orthodox Faith and the Heresy of our Age. The same individual person, without any alteration of his Opinion, and all the world knowing he has not altered it, is Heretic in the morning, and a good Catholic by after-dinner, A Curate who offers himself to sign the formulary with protestation that he does not engage in the belief of the matter of Fact, and that his Bishop has declared he does not in the least pretend to oblige any man to it, is imprisoned upon this as an Heretic: Afterwards, having signed the formulary without revoking his protestation, and solemnly refusing to revoke it, is freed out of prison as an excellent Catholic. 2. Those spiritual Friars who were so far in love with their narrow Hood, that they could not be brought to obey in it either their Superiors or the Pope himself, were certainly in the wrong; because these exterior things absolutely depend on the power of the Church, which no man may presume to disobey on pretence of not being able to do it, since 'tis always in a man's power to change a Hood when he pleases: But so is it not in the present Dispute, where they command us to alter an Opinion upon a Question of no importance, or to renounce that exteriorly which they permit us to retain in our hearts; both of them equally impossible to conscientious persons; Reason itself not allowing that one should change his Opinion without some new light and subject for it, and Piety not permitting us to belie our sentiment without really altering it. 3. It is manifest that in the dispute 'twixt John the XXIIth and the Cordeliers, they could fix no reproach of Heresy but upon certain Points contained in the Scripture; and therefore this Pope expressly distinguished the Question concerning the Right of the Cordeliers to temporal things from that of the Poverty of J. Christ, and shows that he only applied the note of Heresy to this Question, as believing the Opinion of the Cordeliers upon this point to be repugnant to the Scriptures: But now they pretend here, I know not how, to found an Heresy on the refusing to acknowledge a pure and simple Fact, which every body knows cannot be established or proved by Scripture. In sum, they disputed in those days in good earnest, Pope John the XXIIth making them very well understand what he meant, and subtly answering the others reasons without at all dissembling them, or making as if he did not comprehend them: But in the present difference all the address is made to consist in saying nothing that is intelligible. They perpetually talk of the sense of Jansenius; but what is this sense of Jansenius? 'Tis a Mystery which is forbidden to be revealed. Father Annat one day endeavoured to do it, but was like to have spoiled all; for 'twas told him, that they had condemned what he called the sense of Jansenius: so there was an end of the Question. And since that time men have been very tender of making any such offers, keeping themselves within the inseparability of Fact and Right, for that the world, which understands none of these terms, are not ware of the absurdity: If they were, they would be astonished that men should presume to publish such an extravagance, since, in one word, 'tis as much as to say, that 'tis the same thing to affirm Jansenius has not taught those Propositions, as to maintain in effect those Propositions: and that to say a friend of ours has not killed a man, is all one as really to have killed a man. Behold here the sole foundation of the formulary, which those who are the Authors of it have raised upon this Principle, That one cannot separate matter of Fact from matter of Right. But since no humane Reason is able to suffer such a violence upon it long, they have been forced to seek for other pretexts to defend that which they had done. Most of the Bishops declaring in particular, that it is a most absurd and stupid thing to confound matter of Fact with Right, they pretend that they do not require our belief of the Fact: so as it seemed that after this there remained nothing, and all were at an end; they contest not the Right, nor require they our belief of the Fact: and yet, for all this, the Heresy remains entire, because indeed the Heresy consists in nothing. For at the same moment that they indulge you not to believe the matter of Fact, provided you declare that you do not believe it, you are become an Heretic without remedy. There is therefore visibly something of more extraordinary in our disputes then was in those other Examples which I but now produced; but if the Vanity be equal, the Injustice is here incomparably the greater. And truly 'tis that which prevents a Reply I conceive some persons of the World might make▪ which is, That they are verily persuaded there is nothing more frivolous than all this Contestation▪ and that all those who have any thing to do in it are equally ridiculous; it being as much a wonder there should be people so obstinate as to maintain that Five Propositions are not to be found in a Book, as to see there are others so impudent to avow that they are there. But however this Judgement may conform to the humour of the men of the world, 'tis certainly most unjust in the reality of the thing. For in differences which spring from mean and low considerations, the fault and the injustice is not always of both parties; and oftentimes one may be persecuted for a ridiculous matter, yet without being culpable or ridiculous. For Instance, Pope John the XXIIth having simply enjoined the Cordeliers to obey their Superiors as to the shape of their Hoods, they were doubtless to blame for their obstinacy, though the thing in itself were but a trifle: But if he had commanded them to say and acknowledge that their Hoods were large when as indeed they were narrow, their disobedience had been excusable, and had they been persecuted for so doing, they ought rather to have suffered patiently, then to have obeyed him. I affirm the same as to our Point in difference. If one should say simply to such as doubt whether the Five Propositions are in the Bp of Ypres' Book, Speak no more to us of that, I should blame them for their disobedience: But when they shall command them to acknowledge that those Five Propositions are in Jansenius' Book, and to condemn them too in his sense, they might reasonably reply, We do not know what that sense of Jansenius means which you would have us to condemn, nor can we possibly meet with those Propositions in all his Book: If they should persecute them for this, the Persecution would doubtless prove but ignominious to the authors of it. And the reason is plain, Because 'tis never a small and mean thing to be sincere, be the matter or subject never so small in which one ought to appear sincere. So as all the evil in these rencontres reflects on those only who would constrain men to render to their Opinion in such frivolous Questions, since 'tis in their power not to do it; whiles 'tis not so with persons of honour and integrity, to dissemble what they believe, be the matter never so inconsiderable. But I think all knowing persons will judge more equitably of the matter, and that if Persecution be destined for one party, the derision will fall to the share of the other. This is the sense which, for aught I perceive, all discreet men are of at present. And therefore I believe I shall find but too many of opinion with me, who will look on all this affair as upon a Picture of the baseness of men. I could only wish that they did enlarge their prospect a little farther, and discover the malice of the Devil, who serves himself of this Chimaera for the raising of infinite real evils to the Church; and, on the other side, the secret dispensation of God, who permits so many funest and unlucky consequences to spring from so frivolous an occasion. For 'tis a prodigious thing but to consider the mischiefs which this unfortunate contestation has already produced, and what it is yet likely to bring forth. Hitherto they have made use of it only to countenance all sorts of licentiousness, and to render useless all those Divines who may be found able to oppose it. In the mean time all kind of Zeal for the purity of Manners is become suspected; nor is it now possible to do any thing that is solidly good, but one is immediately accused of this Imaginary Heresy. Thus is this Affair, so far as it has respect to men at least, a perfect image of their Vanity; on the Devil's part, a subtle address and contrivance of his Malice; and as it concerns God Almighty, a terrible judgement of his Justice, who is pleased to exercise his Church, by this impertinent Dispute, with one of his most rigorous Chastisements. I perceive that to satisfy you entirely, I must be forced to add to these reflections of mine on the present state of our affairs, some conjectures what may in likelihood be the event of it hereafter. See then the Prophecy, which I think one may safely pronounce, without being a Prophet. Something I believe there is of certain in the success of this Contest, and something of very uncertain. It is uncertain whether it will long continue, or be quickly at an end; there are presumptions for both: Matters are too far engaged to conclude so suddenly; and they are again too mean to subsist long. But what appears most evident is, that in all appearance they will within a while change face. This generation will pass, the Disputers of either part must shortly go to their long home, in domum aeternitatis suae, and there will spring up another generation of men who will not be concerned with our Passions; and it is certain then, that all this Controversy will pass but for a Comedy and a vain amusement; that they will conceive a just indignation against the Authors of all these Troubles, so frivolous in their cause, and so pernicious in their event; and that they will commiserate a world of gallant and sober men, who in another Age would have been reverenced, and which the present has treated with so much rigour and indignity. I am, Sir,— etc. 24. January, 1664. The Second LETTER. SIR, THE whole Affair of Jansenism is in the very bottom of it but a mere Trifle, think of it what you please; but there is no jesting in the prosecution of it. Father Ferrier (whose Writing you lately transmitted to me) has unworthy designs on foot, and he pretends nothing less than to engage both the Church and the State in the unjust Passions of his Society. 'Twere time the business were therefore well looked after, and to prevent it if possible. The Question is not now, whether the matter in controversy be tractable, or so wild that there's no meddling with it. The end of writing should not be to divert the World and make it sport, but to inform it of things which it concerns men to know. And therefore one should less regard upon this occasion the Niceness of those persons who reject all things that require any serious application, than the Utility of those who have need that we untangle certain terms which impede them, and may possibly engage them into dangerous surprises. But since the Father Ferrier gins to signalise himself in this Affair, 'twere good one knew what he were, that so we be not mistaken; for we should deceive ourselves to take him for an ordinary Jesuit. I assure you the Society do not look upon him for such, since they put it in his head, and have entrusted him with their most important affair, which is the persecution of Jansenism. But otherwise, he is a Disciple and a particular friend of F. Annat's: And there be some people say, that this Father invited him to Paris in spem futurae Successionis, and with endeavour to resign a place to him, which he looks upon as a benefit of his Society. I refer myself to the matter itself. But certain it is, that he has done quite the contrary to what he promised at Tolouse, when they began to treat concerning an Agreement. The Agreement there was, That they should not stand upon the subscription to the matter of Fact, nor the formulary, but only a respectful Silence, according to the proper terms of the Project which M. de Comenges sent to Paris, written with his own hand, and bearing this Title, The Project of the Accommodation concerted between the Bishop of Comenges and Father Ferrier the Jesuit. In the mean time the Father has so dextrously managed his negotiation, that he has brought it to this pass, that it should not suffice to subscribe the formulary. Perhaps he has taken another resolution by the way, and another Conscience too, it may be. For your Doctors of the Probability (such as is the Father Ferrier, who has written a book of it) have this privilege, They change their Conscience as men do their Clothes, and as the Rules of this Doctrine permit them: so as they have one for Tolouse, another for Paris, and another for Rome. I shall not wonder at all, Sir, if this astonish you, for it is indeed most admirable: But you are to understand, that these Gentlemen, the Casuists, are a Corporation within themselves, who have their Laws, their Customs and Reasonings quite different from those of other people; so as the surprise is commonly mutual on both sides. The World is astonished when they hear the Maxims which they teach; and they as much wonder when they learn that the world does by no means approve of them. You were surprised when I told you of the change of Conscience which these Casuists permit, and which they name Mutatio dictaminis; and the Parliament were amazed also when Father Coton publicly declared, that as he maintained in France that the King was not subject to the Pope in Temporals, so he would affirm the contrary if he were at Rome. But Caramuel is wonderfully troubled that the Parliament should make any scruple at this double Conscience of F. Coton's, and therefore does handsomely and ingeniously maintain it in his Fundamental Theology, n. 194. That F. Coton is noways to be blamed for having in France embraced the opinion of the French concerning the Independence of Kings, and at the same time to have declared, that he should change his Sentiment when he changed the Country, and that being at Rome he would be of the opinion that they were of at Rome. For this same chopping of probable Conscience is so certainly indulged, according to Caramuel, that he assures us 'tis as clear as the Sun at noon: Thesim istam (says he) judico luce meridianâ clariorem, n. 285. Edit. Francoford. So as the poor Parliament, who took it seems offence at it, must needs be more blind than those who at midday see no light. 'Tis a prodigious thing, (says one in the world) that the Jesuit L' Amy should dare teach that it is lawful for a Religious man to kill any who shall but mean the publishing of the notorious Crimes of his Society, if there be no other means to hinder him: and that 'tis strange, according to Caramuel, that any one in the world should scruple at this pious doctrine of F. L' Amy; since it is not only (says he) probable, but the contrary improbable in the opinion of all the learned Casuists. Doctrinam Amici solum probabilem, & contrariam improbabilem censemus omnes docti. This was not an unprofitable Digression, seeing it serves to inform us what there is contained in the quality of your Casuists, and which is one of the most conspicuous of F. Ferrier's; for this Father is a wonderful Casuist. And by this one may judge, that it is not altogether unlikely, but that as he came to Paris under pretence of pacifying the differences of the Divines, so he now promotes the same differences to the end he may still continue there. The Doctrine of Probability and of shifting Conscience may well be allowed to go so far, because the prime Rule which it follows is Utility. Now commonly these Provincial Jesuits conceive it very profitable to come to Paris when they are not there, and to dwell there when they once are. whatever it be, to tell you in one word who this Father Ferrier is; You must understand he is a great Jesuit, a great Casuist, and a great friend of F. Annat: he does all by corresponding with him, is his prime Minister, and the depositary of his most reserved and secret thoughts; so that he is to be considered as a person totally illuminated with all that is in F. Annat: and when you speak of F. Annat, you have said all; for who should know any thing of this business, if he do not? He is the sole Author of this formulary that has made such a noise. The late Archbishop of Tolouse was only his property, and therefore it behoved him to know what he thought when he did it, and on what grounds he settled it. He is the principal instigator of all those persecutions which have happened to this pretended Heresy. He therefore ought to know it better than any man, and is the most capable to teach others to know it also: And it is indeed what the Father Ferrier pretends to effect by his orders, and what he promises by the very Title that he has given to this flying sheet, THE TRUE IDEA OF JANSENISM. He is to let us see that it is not an Imaginary Heresy, as they have so confidently published, but an Heresy in good earnest: and in effect the Conclusions which he gathers from them against those whom he accuses are very real ones; for he causes them to be excommunicated by the Church, and overwhelmed by the Royal power; and these are indeed consequences to the purpose. The Question is whether the Principles thereof be also solid: for it were a very strange thing, if they should have no other support for these severe Conclusions but visible Falsities and palpable Equivocations. Doubtless men are never more concerned to reason discreetly, then when they are upon positive resolutions of banishing persons from the Church and State. If it should then appear that the whole Writing of F. Ferrier is but a mere extravagancy of spirit without example, what may one conclude of the Rashness of this Father and of his fellow- Jesuits? and what are we to think of an Heresy which is founded only upon these Imaginations? But to understand them rightly, we are to consider the state of the Dispute when F. Ferrier did first enter upon it, and began to publish to the World his new lights. The Jesuits accused the Divines of Heresy, because they did not condemn the Five Propositions in the Sense of Jansenius: and these Divines replied, that this reproach was a visible, criminal and inexcusable Calumny: nor did they content themselves to have said it, they proved it by a reason which is without contradiction. All Heresy does consist in a certain precise and determinate Dogme opposite to the verity of Faith revealed in Scripture and Tradition, and which may be known and expressed independently from the name of the Author; since all the Verities of Faith are coevous with the Church itself, though they are not often opposed till a long while after the beginning of the Divine revelation. So that as these Verities of Faith were Truths long ere they were opposed; so the Errors which were repugnant to these Truths were doubtless Errors before any man had the boldness to maintain them. This we generally find in all Heresies. The Doctrine of Arius is an Heresy; but it does not consist in the vain and indeterminate words of the Doctrine of Arius, but in this particular Position or Opinion, that the Son is not consubstantial with the Father. It is the very same in all the rest: They all maintain a peculiar and distinct Dogme independent from the name of the Author; and when we do not know the Opinion any more, we say that we know the Heresy no more; and if a man had never known it, he might well say that it never was. This is sufficient, say the Divines, to repel that unjust Reproach which they fling upon us, of being sectators of a new Heresy: For we sincerely protest, that we entirely acquiesce in the Authority of the Universal Church; that we embrace, without the least reservation, all the Dogms which She proposes to us as of Faith; that we submit all our Understanding and Reason to her; and that our hearts do not at all accuse us of holding any Doctrine which is repugnant to her Decisions: so as we can say before God with confidence upon this subject, Iniquitatem si aspexi in cord meo, non exaudiet Dominus. We do not conceal our sense, but are ready to refer it to the Pope and to the Bishops, and to accept them for our Judges: We have offered it several times, and have this consolation, that those who are the most prejudiced against us, have nothing to object against us. In fine, we are so far from embracing any particular Doctrine on the Five Propositions, that though we do not acknowledge the Jesuits for the Rules of our Faith, yet it is most true that we hold no Opinion upon the matter of the Five Propositions, which they dare publicly accuse of Heresy before the Pope or the Bishops. How clear and ingenuous, Sir, is this Declaration, how truly Catholic and exceedingly remote from all suspicion of Heresy? and that not only for acquitting these persons of Errors, but for showing that they could not be culpable of Heresy, if without their knowledge and consent they should haply fall into some Error; since all the world knows that the crime of Heresy does not consist simply in the Error, but in the Obstinacy to maintain and dwell in an Error against the judgement of the Church. Now how is it possible that these people should impudently maintain an Error they are totally ignorant of, against a judgement of the Church which they know nothing of? But this does not satisfy the Jesuits, and because they do not find their reckoning in it, they continue their accusation of Heresy: and this is it which has obliged the Divines to give them this defiance, and which is certainly very urging; Either set the Heresy you impute to us distinctly and clearly down; or acknowledge yourselves Calumniators, for accusing us of an Heresy which you cannot tell what to make of. On this it is that the Jesuits have revealed the Mystery of their Politics, and the whole secret of the Heresy. In stead of endeavouring to set down & describe the Positions, a thing which upon trial did never succeed with them; they entrench themselves, and have recourse to the uncertain expression of the Sense and of the Doctrine of Jansenius, without any farther advance: You hold (say they) the Doctrine of Jansenius to be Catholic; the Pope declares it heretical; behold then your Heresy. But as they had to do with persons very well prepared to defend themselves, so never was there an Equivocation unriddled as this has been. They told F. Annat in express terms, that this was a Scholastical Sophism, unworthy an old Logician, as he was. Nunquámne intelliges, Dialectice senex, puerile argumentationis vitium? and they proved it well too: For some of them, it seems, condemn his Sense and his Doctrine as heretical, whiles others defend it for Catholic, without the least difference between them concerning Faith; because it is not the same precise and determined Sense which is thus condemned by some, and approved by others, though they both of them call it by the same name; and that is but what we daily meet with in the different explication of an Author. For there is ever in these encounters this opposition of words, that some affirm the Doctrine of an Author to be Catholic, and others that 'tis heretical; though neither of them disagree touching the true Faith. The Fifth Council pronounces the Doctrine of Theodoret to be impious and heretical: Father Petavius and many other Jesuits deny it; are they therefore against the Faith of the Council? By no means; since they defend Theodoret but by interpreting him after another way than did the Council, and by giving him a Catholic sense. 'Tis the very same case in the present Dispute. The Pope says the Doctrine of Jansenius is heretical; other men say, We find no such matter in Jansenius. The words have indeed an appearance of contrariety, but without implying the least contrariety of Faith; forasmuch as the Doctrine which these Divines maintain to be Catholic and of Jansenius, is not certainly the same Doctrine which the Pope condemns for heretical and as being that of Jansenius. And the proof which they bring is decisive. We do not (say they) maintain on the matter of the Five Propositions any thing save the Doctrine of Grace efficacious alone, as 'tis held by S. Augustine, and by the whole School of S. Thomas. Now 'tis clear that the Pope does nowhere condemn this Doctrine, as he makes all the Church believe, and indeed as both the Church and the Jesuits themselves do accord. It is then certain that the Pope does not condemn that which we understand under the notion of the Sense of Jansenius; as we likewise do not hold what the Pope condemns under these terms; seeing, this Doctrine excepted, we have nothing at all to do with the rest, but reject it in general, as we are ready to do in particular, whenever the Church shall please to describe it in particular, or to show us where it is. And thus you have the whole state of this ten-years Dispute; The Jesuits stand to their sense of Jansenius, and all men that will may perceive the Illusion and Equivocation of the terms. But in fine, F. Ferrier is come up from the very farthest part of all Languedoc to the aid of his Confraternity, and has been chosen by F. Annat to publish this Heresy, and to answer all those Writings which made it plainly out that it is but a mere Chimaera: but especially, he undertook to reply to the Treatise of Just Complaints, which expressly clears this Equivocation of the Sense of Jansenius. Now therefore it is that we shall shortly come to know in what this wondrous Heresy consists, or else we must never hope to understand it whiles we live. What says this Reverend Father to us then? That 'tis expedient to publish the true Idea of Jansenism: in effect 'tis very expedient, and there it was it should indeed have been begun. For 'tis a wondrous strange thing, that men should make such a noise about a business which no body yet understands. And also (says F. Ferrier) because these Divines complain in their Writings that we accuse them of an Heresy, without being able to determine what it is, I find myself obliged to say their complaints are very unjust. It has been told them a thousand times over that their Heresy consists in their believing and maintaining that the Doctrine of Jansenius on the Five Propositions is Catholic, although the Church condemn it for Heretical: which is (quoth he, pag. 3.) a true Question of Right, that presupposes matter of Fact, viz. That Jansenius establishes some Doctrine in his Augustine: and in this Question one cannot divide the Fact from the Right; that is to say, one cannot hold the Doctrine which is condemned for heretical, and at the same moment maintain the Doctrine of Jansenius upon these Propositions not to be the same which the Popes have condemned. This is all the illumination that F. Ferrier affords us upon this point, and to which all his Colours are reduced. After this 'tis to no purpose to hope for any other, either from him, or from any else. He has done his utmost, was too far engaged, and we are not to believe that any body will ever be able to outdo him. But in earnest, Sir, 'tis an Abuse beyond all humane patience, to promote (as F. Ferrier does here) a thing so invisible as is this Heresy without Dogme; and to make as if he understood nothing of so many convincing reasons, by which the falsity of this pretence has been made evident; to stand so obstinately in an Equivocation that has been so fully detected, and to repeat in cold blood, seriously and gravely, Absurdities which have been a hundred times overthrown, as if they were infallible Oracles. I profess to you, Sir, I know not what to think of all this; unless perhaps the Jesuits may imagine, that being (as they are) powerful in the world, they may lawfully say and do what they please themselves; as being no more subject (like other men) to the dictates of Reason and common Sense. Was there any need that F. Ferrier should himself have discovered the Mystery of this Heresy without Position, or, to say better, this Heresy without Heresy? Did not the Cordelier Jubilé do it before him, and fully as well? Every body derided it in this Friar, and so will they do in this Jesuit: so as if this be all that he has to do at Paris, he may even go back again to his Province: His staying at Paris will be no advantage to his Cause, and most certainly blemish his Reputation. But, says F. Ferrier, 'Tis a Question of Right, to understand whether the Doctrine of Jansenius be Catholic or Heretical; as it also is to know whether the Doctrine of S. Augustine be orthodox or not. But I maintain that whoever says so, knows not what a Question of Right or a Question of Fact signifies. We must do all we can then to penetrate through these natural or voluntary Obscurities of F. Ferrier; and after this, if he render not up himself, I shall esteem him for a desperado. We are not to imagine that so soon as ever the words of Catholic Doctrine and Heretical Doctrine come into a Question, it is presently a Question of Right; since if so, several Contestations would likewise be reduced to Questions of Right, which are merely but of Fact, being expressed by these terms: And for instance▪ they would affirm that there is a Question of Right between the Fifth Council and Father Petavius, seeing the Council condemns the Doctrine of Theodoret as Heretical, and this Father maintains it to be Catholic; which in the language of F. Ferrier one would name a Right. But to know in very truth whether a Question be of Right, or of Fact, or of both of them together, you are only to consider what both parties agree in, and what they contest: for 'tis evident that the Question▪ does not fall upon that which is accorded, but wholly on that which is disputed. When therefore two persons are agreed that a certain Dogm or Position is heretical, and question only whether this Dogm be of such an Author or not, the dispute is only concerning the matter of Fact. The Jesuits and the Sixth Council do consent that 'tis an Heresy to say There is but one Will in J. Christ; but they are at variance whether this Heresy was taught by Pope Honorius: The Council affirms it, the Jesuits deny it. This is only a Question of Fact, though it be expressed by terms which look like matter of Right. The sense of Honorius is heretical, says the VIth Council; The sense of Honorius is Catholic, say the Jesuits. When men agree on the contrary that an Author has taught a certain Doctrine, and the dispute be whether this Doctrine be Catholic or heretical, the Question is of the Right, not the Fact; because the Effect is agreed upon, and the Right is contested. The Monothelites and the Sixth Council agreed that Pope Honorius taught that there was but one Will in J. Christ: but the Monothelites pretended that this Doctrine was Catholic; the Council maintains it for Heretical▪ This is a Question of Right expressed by the same terms with the other. The Doctrine of Honorius is Catholic, say the Monothelites; The Doctrine of Honorius is heretical, says the Sixth Council. But when they are not agreed concerning a certain Doctrine, whether it be Catholic or Heretical, or has been promoted by some Author, there the Question is concerning Fact and Right together, because both of them are disputed. The Monothelites affirm that 'tis a Catholic Doctrine to say there is but one Will in J. C. as Pope Honorius teaches; the Jesuits reply, the Doctrine is not Catholic, and that 'tis falsely imputed to P. Honorius: Here the Question is both of Fact and Right. But that which is strange is this, that when they dispute in this manner concerning matter of Fact and Right, they both accord in the expression. For the Jesuits, who neither agree with the Monothelites either in the Fact or Right, do yet consent with them in this expression, contrary to that of the Council, that the Doctrine of Honorius is Catholic. 'Tis an easy matter by this Rule to detect the Illusion of F. Ferrier, who maintains it generally in his Writings, that these are Questions of Right, viz. to know whether the Doctrine of S. Augustine be orthodox or not, or this of Jansenius heretical or Catholic. For 'tis evident, that insisting upon the general terms, one cannot distinguish whether they be Questions of Fact or of Right; whiles 'tis possible to form upon the Doctrine of S. Augustine, and on that of any other Author whatsoever, Questions purely of Right, and Questions both of Right and Fact, and Questions purely of Fact; as will appear by these Examples. The Semi-pelagians affirm that the Doctrine of S. Augustine concerning Grace was not orthodox. The Calvinists, on the contrary, maintain that it is. The Jesuits say the same. And the Church says so too. Whiles we dwell here, one shall never come to know whether these Questions are of Fact or of Right: but we shall easily discover it by the same Rule. The Semi-pelagians acknowledge with the Church that the Doctrine of the Necessity of Grace efficacious of itself for all good actions, was really S. Augustine's; but they reject this Doctrine as not true, at least in regard to the inception of Faith. And the Church, on the contrary, maintains it against them, that it is both certain and very true, as well in respect of the beginning of Faith, as of all other actions of Piety. So as since the matter of Fact was not contested, and that the dispute was only concerning the quality of the Doctrine, the whole Question between the Church and the Semi-pelagians was purely concerning Right. They say with the Semi-pelagians that the Doctrine of efficacious Grace per se is not true: but, as they are a great deal less sincere than the Semi-pelagians, they add, that this Doctrine is not S. Augustine's, which the Semi-pelagians do not affirm. They are therefore agreed upon the Right with the Semi-pelagians, and differ only upon the pure Fact: whereas they neither accord with the Church about the Fact, nor the Right; though they consent with her in this uncertain expression, that the Doctrine of S. Augustine is true; because in particular they maintain that the Doctrine of efficacious Grace per se is false, and not S. Augustine's, albeit the Church has ever acknowledged both the one and the other of these two Points. No wonder at all then, if in speaking to persons who were at variance, not about the Doctrine of S. Augustine in general, but the particular Doctrine of efficacious Grace per se, it has been said to them in a certain Writing, (which F. Ferrier has abused) That it was a Crime, an Attempt and an Heresy to condemn the Doctrine of S. Augustine of Heresy, which the Church has approved: forasmuch as treating of the particular Dogm of efficacious Grace, they had reason to affirm that they could not brand it with Heresy, without erring in matter of Right and of Faith; whether one attack it for not avowing it to be S. Augustine's, as do the Jesuits; or acknowledge it for S. Augustine's, as did the Semi-pelagians, and as those persons would seem to do to whom this Writing is directed. So that the difference which is 'twixt the Church and the Jesuits upon the Doctrine of S. Augustine forms a direct Question of Faith, together with a dispute of Fact. And of the very same nature is that between the Church and Calvin on the same Doctrine of S. Augustine. For he attributing this Error to S. Augustine, That God is the Author of Sin, and that he compels the Will to good and evil, the asseveration which he makes of this general Proposition, that the Doctrine of S. Augustine is orthodox, does not excuse him from a double Error both of Right and Fact; since he takes that for a Truth which is an Heresy, and attributes to S. Augustine a Blasphemy which was infinitely remote from his thoughts. But it may be that the Question concerning the Doctrine of S. Augustine might be purely of Fact from another supposition. For if a man led by a false persuasion, as was Calvin, that S. Augustine teaches God to be as well author of Sins as of Good actions, should at the same time condemn the Blasphemy which Calvin approves, and by a consequent of this Opinion refuse to acknowledge S. Augustine's Doctrine to be orthodox; one could not justly accuse him of Error in point of Faith, because he should condemn what the Church condemns; but of an extreme Temerity only, to have fathered so impious an Opinion on S. Augustine. But what would be strange in this encounter is, That he who should affirm in the sense of Calvin, that the Doctrine of S. Augustine were orthodox, would notwithstanding be an Heretic, because he did not do it but as approving an Error which he imputed to S. Augustine; whereas he that should say, as this person does, that the Doctrine of S. Augustine is not orthodox, should be Catholic, because he would say it without any Error: so little regard there is to be had, to be able to judge whether a man be Catholic or Heretic, and whether the Questions concern matter of Right or of Fact, to these wild and indetermin'd Propositions, which approve or condemn another's Doctrine without so much as showing it. 'Tis what S. Augustine has himself decided, and in respect to himself, by these words full of unction and charity: Whilst men (says he, L. 1. de Trinit. c. 3.) imagine that I have held some false Opinion in my Books, which in truth I never held, and that they condemn this Opinion; the law and dictates of Charity advertise and command me, but with an injunction full of sweetness, to be rather willing to be reproved by him who condemns this Error, in attributing it to me without reason, then to be praised by those who would maintain this Error, because they believed I had taught it. For though the first did wrongfully, to attribute an Error to me which I never committed; they had reason yet to condemn it: But the others are under a double mistake, since they praise me for an Opinion which the Truth condemns, and approve an Opinion which is condemned by the Truth. True it is, that this person who should thus impute an Error to S. Augustine would be obliged to say, that the Church has not comprised it in approving of his Doctrine; which would be very rash and scandalous, because he would say it without and against all Reason: whereas there are some occasions wherein one might do the same thing without temerity or scandal, because one does it not but upon great reason: the only Rule for these kind of things being, That 'tis lawful to do them with Reason, but by no means without it. And therefore It is lawful to accuse of Supposition the Council of Sinuessa, and it is not so in reference to the Council of Nice: It is lawful to say that Theodoret has been ill understood by the Sixth Council, but it is not lawful to say that Nestorius was so by the Council of Ephesus: It is lawful to affirm that they did not understand the Doctrine of Pope Honorius in the VIth Council, but it is not so of the Doctrine of Pope Leo in the Council of Chalcedon. That which makes that some of these things are permitted, and others of them forbidden, is, that there is Reason to say it of some, but none at all to say it of the other. So that 'tis a very frail consequence which F. Ferrier derives in his Writings, That if it be lawful to say the Pope did not well understand Jansenius in condemning him, one might as well say of the Church, that she did not rightly comprehend the Doctrine of S. Augustine in approving it; since it being not permitted to do either of them without Reason, it were lawful to do both when Reason required it. And the truth is, that one of them, which is, to affirm the Doctrine of Jansenius was never throughly understood at Rome, is very lawful, because there is great Reason to believe it; and the other, that the Doctrine of S. Augustine was not well comprehended, is very unlawful, because there is also no Reason for it; as will be demonstrated in another Treatise. One cannot therefore know in general whether it be lawful or not to affirm that an Author has been ill understood by the Church, since it depends on the particular Reasons which induce one to say it: Nor can one also know in general, whether those who dispute whether the Doctrine of an Author be Catholic or Heretical, are at variance upon the Right, or the Fact; since it may be upon either of them: but one may clearly understand it by examining in Particular what is agreed upon, or contested, both by the one and the other. And hence it is they easily prove, that the present Contestation about the Doctrine of Jansenius is a pure Question of Fact. For it would in truth prove a Question of Right, if there were a certain precise Dogm maintained by some for Catholic, and condemned by others for heretical. But seeing the contrary is true, that there is no precise and determined Dogm in the present Contestation▪ as appears clearly from F. Ferrier's not being able to specify any, 'tis visible that the Question is but concerning matter of Fact. And therefore it must be acknowledged, F. Ferrier has not altogether failed of the promise which he makes in the Title of his Treatise, to present us with the true Idea of Jansenism. For this true Idea consisting in conceiving an Imaginary Heresy, his Treatise is of excellent use for the forming of this Idea; since in Heresy without Position, and without any Question concerning Faith, (such as is what he presents us) is the true Idea of an Imaginary Heresy. 'Tis true indeed, this is not his intention in it, but many times men do things contrary to their intentions. Nor was it doubtless his design, to show us that the Jesuits be Heretics: however one might invincibly prove it by an argument like that which he produces against the Divines whom he strives to render Heretics. He acknowledges no other matter of Fact in the Pope's Decision, which declares that the Doctrine of Jansenius on the Five Propositions is heretical, than this, Jansenius teaches some Doctrine on the Five Prepositions, which is certain: he will have all the rest to be of Right; and thence concludes, That the Divines whom he accuses, not denying this Fact, That Jansenius did teach some Dogm upon the Five Propositions, and yet refusing to own that his sense is heretical, deny a Right, and are Heretics. If this argument be valid, behold the Jesuits arrant Heretics without remedy: For there is no more to be said but the same, That it being certain the Sixth Council has condemned the Doctrine of Honorius, this Decision comprehends no other Fact than this, That Honorius teaches some Doctrine concerning the Will of J. Christ, which is indubitable: and by consequent the Jesuits, who do not deny this Fact, yet denying Honorius' sense to be heretical, deny a Right, and are Heretics. This obligation therefore the Jesuits have to F. Ferrier, that he has made them rank Heretics, if you will believe him. But it were yet a great charity to draw them out of this Heresy; they have a world of others, where it is impossible to warrant them. The expedient is easy, it being only to show them after how extraordinary a manner their F. Ferrier is mistaken. For it is very certain, the matter of Fact which he specifies, That Jansenius has taught some Doctrine, is to be found in this Question, whether the Doctrine of Jansenius be Catholic or Heretical: But there yet occurrs another also very distinct and far separate from Right, and which has been the whole subject of this Contestation; and this it is he dissembles. Perhaps F. Ferrier imagines, that when one submits a Book to the Pope, to judge whether the Doctrine in it be Catholic or heretical, 'tis sufficient for him to know that the Book teaches some Doctrine upon a certain matter; and that thereupon addressing himself to God, he reveals to him, that this Doctrine, of which he all this while knows nothing, is Catholic or Heretical. If Ecclesiastical judgements were made after this sort, there would in effect be no need to examine any other Fact than this▪ whether the Author in controversy do teach some Doctrine upon a certain subject: and this Fact being always evident, there would hardly be ever any Questions of Fact, because men seldom dispute, whether an Author have some Doctrine upon a subject no matter what. But because this Imagination comprehends in it a very gross Error, since it supposes particular Revelations in the Pope, which should be the foundations of these Decisions, it is evident that Ecclesiastical judgements are not made in this manner. Neither the Pope nor Bishops can judge whether the Doctrine of a Book be Catholic or Heretical without comparing it with Tradition. Now 'tis impossible they should compare it with Tradition, without they distinctly know it. Men never compare a Doctrine with Tradition which they know not but under the general Idea of the Doctrine of an Author. For 'tis neither Catholic nor Heretical, as Doctrine, nor as Doctrine of an Author. The Doctrine of God is essentially true as being the Doctrine of God, because God is the essential Truth. But the Doctrine of the Devil himself is not false as being the Doctrine of the Devil, because the Devil is not false from his Essence, and because he sometimes speaks truth, as when he acknowledged that J. Christ was the Son of God. A fortiori, the Doctrine of a Catholic Author is not Heretical because it is a Doctrine, and because it is his. Of necessity therefore ought both the Pope and the Bishops, to judge rightly whether the Doctrine of a Book be Heretical or Catholic, pass through the examen of this point of Fact, That it is the Doctrine of this Book; and to reduce it to some precise Position distinct and determinate, from whence first to establish this Judgement of Fact, namely, that This Dogm and Position is of such an Author; and after that this Judgement of Right, This Dogm is Heretical, or Catholic. It is of this distinct Dogm that they affirm these two things, viz. That it is of such an Author, That it is Heretical. But they affirm it by two very separate and remote Judgements, and formed upon most different Reasons. They judge that this distinct Dogm is of an Author, by the very view of the Passages, and the connexion of his Principles. They judge it to be Heretical, or Catholic, by the comparison which they make of it with the Scripture and Tradition. Thus it is the Pope and the Bishops should proceed indeed in condemning the Doctrine of Jansenius. It was not enough for them to know that Jansenius teaches some Doctrine on the Five Propositions; since 'tis ridiculous to conclude from thence that this Doctrine is heretical: but they should necessarily have reduced the vain, uncertain Doctrine of Jansenius to a precise Dogm by a judgement purely of Fact, in judging that this distinct Doctrine is of Jansenius, to be able afterwards to pronounce the judgement of Faith, which insinuates the Doctrine to be heretical. There are not in the whole World things more separate and distinct than these Conclusions, This Dogm is Jansenius', This Doctrine is heretical. The one is matter of Fact, the other of Right. The one is true ever since the Church has been the Church, the other cannot be true but since Jansenius has written, and was before that false. It may be true that this was such an Author's Position, without his being an Heretic; and it may be as true that a Position is heretical, without being such an Author's; because it is not therefore heretical for being such an Author's, nor therefore such an Author's for being heretical. Now these two Judgements, more remote from each other than are the Heavens from the Earth, are both comprehended in this single Proposition, The Doctrine of Jansenius is heretical, which is the result; and thus it comprehends a Right and a Fact really separated, though confounded in the expression. It may be denied as to them both; and, were only the Fact denied, they are not those who fall into the Heresy that do it, but those who accuse them of Heresy under this pretext, as does the F. Ferrier. For 'tis certain that of one part the Pope has formed this Judgement, namely, This is Jansenius' Doctrine; but this is only a matter of Fact, and a Fact not revealed either in Scripture or Tradition. It is also evident this Fact is wholly separate from Right, and that it is comprised within the Pope's Decision, which declares that the Doctrine of Jansenius is heretical. When therefore F. Ferrier accuses those of Heresy who deny it, he falls himself into the Heresy of establishing a point of Faith upon a thing which is neither contained in the Scripture nor in Tradition. He has therefore the choice after this, to say that this Fact has been either revealed to the Pope, or not revealed. If he acknowledge it has not been revealed to him, he falls into this Heresy of making an Article of Faith of a matter of Fact which is nowhere revealed. And if he pretend a Revelation of the Pope's, he falls into a double Error; one for admitting particular Revelations in the Pope, which were to open a gate to all manner of Illusion; and another for founding of Points of Faith upon these particular Revelations, which is repugnant to the essence of the Catholic Faith, which is only established upon Divine Revelation contained in the Scripture and in Tradition. He is therefore guilty of Heresy, whether he do admit of these Revelations, or whether he do not. And, on the contrary, the Divines whom he accuses, for that they pretend Jansenius has not been well understood at Rome, and that they attribute to him a Doctrine which he nowhere maintains, are Catholics, whether they be, or be not mistaken in this their pretention. For it is no way necessary (to exempt them from error of Faith) that the Pope should fall into an error of Fact. They are acquitted, whether the Pope be mistaken in the matter of Fact, or whether he be not. If this be true, that the Pope did not well understand Jansenius, they had reason then not to acknowledge the Doctrine of Jansenius to be heretical. And if it be true that he did well understand it, all that one ought thence to conclude is this, That these Divines did ill understand it, and too favourably explained it, in attributing to it a Catholic sense which it has not, and in overseeing another heretical sense which it truly had; all which amounts but to a simple error of Fact, which is neither a Crime nor Violence, but the most pardonable Mistake in the world, and the most worthy of Man, according to that of S. Augustine, since it all consists in taking the words of a great Bishop in a good sense: Qui error (says the Saint) non solùm humanus est, sed etiam homine dignissimus. All the cruel Conclusions of F. Ferrier, and the Phantasm of his Heresy being founded upon these false Principles, That the Question is de jure; That a Fact is inseparable from Right; That there is no other Fact in the judgement of the Pope, then to know whether Jansenius has taught any Doctrine on the Five Propositions, are not only false, but criminal. Let him make choice of other Subjects to dispute ill upon as long as he pleases: This is a thing which cries for vengeance before God and man, to demand of the King (as he does) Declarations so far remote from his Goodness and Justice upon Arguments so contrary to common Sense. Let him distinctly specify, if he can, what this Heresy is which he accuses these Divines of, and express it under other terms then the ambiguous and uncertain words of the Sense of Jansenius, by which no man can know them. And if he cannot do this, let him hold his peace, and repent of these Extravagances; or rather make them some public reparation, as indeed he is obliged. This Argument is infinitely more pressing then what he emploies against these Divines, pag. 5. in this manner. The Jansenists (says he) cannot deny that they mock God and the Church, when they demand that one should show them this Sense or Doctrine of Jansenius upon the Five Propositions. And why, I pray, do they mock thus? Because (says this Father) if they do know what the Sense of Jansenius is upon the Five Propositions, they are ridiculous to inquire of a thing which they know already. If they do not know what the Sense is, they are doubly to blame, to publish that they are convinced that the Sense of Jansenius is Catholic, when as they do not know what it is; and for refusing to submit to the Church in a matter which is otherwise unknown to them. They reply in a word to F. Ferrier, That the Divines, who are bound to act according to knowledge, and who are not obliged to render the Bishops more than a reasonable obedience, have cause to inquire what the Sense of Jansenius is which they would have them to condemn, whether they do know it, or whether they know it not. If they be ignorant of it, they have reason to ask, to be instructed before they be urged to condemn it; because supposing they do not understand it, they can neither truly aver that they do reject it, nor promise truly that they will not embrace it; for peradventure they may be engaged to do it without knowing of it, and perhaps fall into it before they are ware. Now if we suppose that these Divines do know what the Pope and the Bishops understand by this Sense of Jansenius, they have so much the more reason to demand, because they only know it by particular ways and such as are not authentical: so that if they should themselves determine what the Pope understands by the Sense of Jansenius, (as these Propositions are susceptible of various senses) the Jesuits would not fail presently to say, that this were not yet what the Pope understands, and what they ought to condemn; in fine, that 'twere some other thing, without saying what; and so one should never have an end. It were therefore much better they should make their addresses to those who have the power to determine this Sense; that if they once did it, it might clearly appear by condemning this Dogm together with them in which they had comprehended the Sense of Jansenius; that one be not enwrapped in any Error. But the plain truth is, These Divines both do know, and do not know the Sense of Jansenius. They do very well know a Doctrine in Jansenius to be very holy, very Catholic and most Orthodox, which is that of Efficacious Grace per se, which infallibly causes the Will to act without imposing of a necessity. They acknowledge the Catholic Doctrine of the free Predestination of the Elect, received by the whole Church, and maintained by Bellarmine himself as a point of Faith: and they do acknowledge no other Point upon the subject of the Five Propositions. But since it is evident by the universal consent of the Church, that this is not that which the Pope and the Bishops mean by the Sense of Jansenius which they condemn, but a certain Sense which was never known to our Divines before Baius and Jansenius, according to those Gentlemen the Bishops of the Assembly; a certain Sense contrary to the Doctrine of all the Catholic Schools, as these very Bishops do assure us; a certain Sense different from efficacious Grace, repugnant to S. Augustine, and which has been constantly condemned by the Dominicans and the Jesuits, as F. Annat and M. Hallier have so deeply protested, before the Constitution of Pope Innocent: It is this certain Sense which these Divines do not understand, or at lest which they but very confusedly know. They know all that the Jesuits and the other adversaries of Jansenius have said of it in divers Books: But they see that their Explanations do not agree together, whiles some of them place it in one Point, and others in another. All that they know of this Sense is, that it is different from Efficacious Grace, and by consequent that they do not hold it, and that they reject it, because they hold but this Doctrine, and that whatsoever Doctrine is repugnant to it is false. So as in the necessity to which they are reduced for the justification of their Faith, and to avoid the reproach which they cast on them touching this uncertain, unexplicable Sense, they have reason to appeal to the Bishops, who ought to know it, since they condemn it, and to the Pope, who could not have condemned it without knowing it, to conjure them to explain it, that so they may be enabled to confound their Accusers in showing the world how free they are from any Error. This is the only reason which makes them require with so much earnestness the Explication of this Sense; for they have otherwise no such haste to know it. They hold the truth of the Doctrine of Efficacious Grace per se, and reject whatsoever Error is repugnant to it: whether it be in attributing too little to Grace, as the Molinists; or in destroying its liberty, as this pretended Error of Jansenius' Sense should be. This suffices them; so as men molest them not with the indetermined Sense of Jansenius, and they will soon leave enquiring what it is. But if they continue their Persecutions thus upon this point, they will be forced to continue the pressing of them to explain this Sense; nor can they refuse to do it without an evident sign of Oppression. For the Bishops cannot in conscience make them condemn it, without they know it; and if they do know it, 'tis a foolery not to be understood that they should refuse to declare it. But, Sir, it is now time we took off our spirits from these subtle matters, and which smell of the School, to oppose another Illusion of Father Ferrier not a whit less dangerous, but somewhat more intelligible. This Father does upon all occasions represent the present Church as divided in two Parties. The one pompous and triumphant, as composed of the Pope, the Bishops, and of all both Ecclesiastical, Secular, and Regular, who condemn the Sense of Jansenius as heretical, who believe that matter of Fact is inseparable from matter of Right, and that therefore it is not to be denied without being an Heretic. The other poor and abandoned, as consisting but of a small number of Divines, who refuse to acknowledge that the Sense of Jansenius is heretical, who hold that there is a Fact separate from Right in the Decision of the Pope which condemns it, and that therefore one may by consequence refuse to believe it without being an Heretic. This is the Idea which F. Ferrier gives us of the Church in his Treatise. But as there is nothing more prodigious than this Idea, so is there also nothing more false. God will never abandon his Church to that degree, as to suffer so gross and visible an Error to reign in it. And every man may by himself be convinced of the falseness of this fantastic Supposition. For unless a man wilfully shut his own eyes, one cannot deny but there are in the Church no less than four different Opinions upon the formulary. The First is that of the Jesuits, who affirm that matter of Fact is inseparable from that of Right, and that quatenus so it cannot be denied without Heresy. The Second is that of a considerable number of Divines, who believe that though it be no Article of divine Faith to hold that the Sense of Jansenius is heretical, and that the Fact may very well be separated from Right; yet that Christian humility obliges us nevertheless to prefer the Sense of the Pope to his proper Illumination, and so they ought to believe the Fact by humane Faith, and under that notion sign the formulary. The Third, and the most embraced, consists in affirming that a man is not obliged to believe the matter of Fact as decided, either by divine or humane Faith; but that one may for all that sign the formulary without violating his Conscience, because the Signature does never concern or fall upon the Facts. The Fourth is the opinion of several other Divines, who are persuaded of one part, that it is most false the Fact should be separated from Right, or that it should be a point of Faith to hold the Doctrine of Jansenius heretical, or that a man is obliged to believe it by humane Faith; but who believe on the other part, that the Fact being contained in this formulary, those who scruple it cannot sign it without restriction, since the declarations which men make to the Church ought to be entirely sincere, and free of all duplicity. It is visible that in this difference of Divines each party condemns the others, but after a sort very different. The Jesuits, who make the first, aught by the necessary consequence of their Opinion to condemn for Heresy, not only the last, who absolutely refuse to sign that the sense of Jansenius is heretical, but those likewise who do not believe it of humane Faith, or that believe it not at all, albeit they sign it. For Heresy consists in the opinion of the spirit, and not in the omission of an exterior action of the hand. A person who should not believe but with an humane Faith that the Body of J. Christ were in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, or that should sign it in infidelity, would be never the less an Heretic than he who should absolutely refuse to sign it. So as all those many Bishops that have caused none to sign, or that receive restrictions concerning the matter of Fact, or that declare they do not require the belief of the Fact, or that pretend not the Fact can be otherwise believed then by humane Faith, are as much Heretics in the judgement of the Jesuits and of F. Annat, as these Divines whom they particularly persecute. True it is, their Politics oblige them to distinguish of two sorts of Heretics in France, some of which they treat civilly, and others most outrageously. They place the Bishops, Sorbonists, the Fathers of the Oratory, the Benedictines, etc. in the first order, and whom they do not yet attack but by consequence, though by a very necessary one; whiles they range in the other those whom they immediately design for ruin, that so they may with the greater force surprise the other. Therefore it is sufficiently evident, that all those persons who have signed the Fact, either of humane Faith, or without believing it, shall be never the more acquitted for that, but be all Heretics in their turn, when they have left off oppressing the others, seeing they must of necessity be so in the opinion of the Jesuits. But on the contrary, all these three last parties, who accord in this point, that this Fact of Jansenius is very separable from Right, that it does not in the least concern the Faith, and that one may safely deny it without Heresy, aught, from a necessary consequence of this their mutual Opinion, condemn the Jesuits both of Calumny and Error. It is certain these four Parties reside in the Church; and that if one would now consider which of them were the most numerous, one might safely affirm that there are none more profligate and abandoned, and who have fewer sincere approbators, then that of the Jesuits. Nor is this an airy Supposition, but a real Verity, to be discerned by every one that has a mind to it, that the Jesuits stand almost single in this pretention, that matter of Fact is inseparable from matter of Right, and that one cannot believe (without being an Heretic) the Doctrine of Jansenius not to be heretical. The most devoted to the Jesuits of the Bishops ask for whom the World takes them, that they should believe them capable of so monstrous a Folly, as is that of affirming that a Fact should be inseparably joined to Faith. They express as much as one would wish in words, that they do not require the assent of Fact. They receive the Subscriptions of those whom they very well know do not believe it, and who declare as much before they sign. All the Curates of Paris do solemnly approve, and by an authentic Act, the Distinction between Fact and Right contained in the first Mandate of Paris: In fine, they proceed with confidence that the Jesuits cannot find six Bishops in all France, and ten Divines of the least considerable persons, who will sign this Proposition which F. Ferrier maintains, and which is the basis of all his Treatise, The Fact of Jansenius is inseparable from Faith, and one cannot reject the Dogm which is condemned, without acknowledging it to be Jansenius ' s. And in particular they affirm, that he could not make M. Grandin sign, nor M. Moret, nor (amongst the Doctors) M. Chamillart, nor Monsieur de Rouën amongst the Bishops. It is certain therefore that the Jesuits are in a manner alone in their erroneous opinions. And 'tis as true, that the Divines whom they persecute are almost wholly united to the Church in this difference which is between them. I confess they have yet some dispute with the other Divines, because against the one they maintain, that one owes not so much as humane Faith to Decisions de facto when there is any cause of doubt administered; and against the other, that it was not altogether sincere in them to subscribe a formulary which clearly comprizes a Fact, without being fully persuaded of the Fact. But this difference has relation to Manners only, and not to Faith; and in this very difference they may make use of the authority of the one, to defend themselves against the other. Those who sign the Fact as of humane Faith, approve of their Doctrine touching the Sincerity of Subscriptions. Those who sign the Fact without believing it, approve what they affirm, That the Church obliges none to believe the Fact by way of command; so as to the truth they have this consolation, that in every of the Points whereof they are accused, they are united in Opinion with the greatest part of the Divines of the Church. Whoever shall take the pains diligently to inform himself of the bottom of these particulars, will clearly find that what I say is most true: And if any man ask why the contrary appears to the World, that the Jesuits domineer everywhere, and the Divines are oppressed▪ it is not very difficult to give a reason for it: They are only to consider what Post F. Annat holds, and what Power the place in which he is affords him, both at Rome and at Paris, to do what he pleases as to this matter▪ They know nothing at Rome but from the Instructions which he sends them: and he stands at the gate of all the Benefices of France, to exclude whoever stands in his way in any thing. Every one has his particular business at Court; and those who have no other, either for themselves or their Communality, enjoy their repose in which they will not be molested. Jansenism is the only affair of Father Annat; so as that people may not be crossed in their particular businesses, they let F. Annat alone with his. Not that this Reverend Father with all his credit is yet arrived so far as to be able to procure the Bishops or the Pope by any formal Decisions to support these particular Absurdities of his Society; That matter of Fact is inseparably annexed to Faith, and, That he who denies it is an Heretic: He is not so weak a man as to attempt that at present. He satisfies himself that every one signs the Fact simply, without taking notice of his intention, to make use of these Subscriptions when time serves, and as may best conduce to his ends: nor for the most part does he find any difficulty in it; since their spirits furnishing them with expedients to sign, without believing the Fact either of divine or humane Faith, their Interests easily persuade them to embrace them. They fancy themselves not obliged openly to oppose F. Annat; but that they may safely shelter themselves from this rolling tempest: and therefore suffer him freely to oppress those against whom he is particularly animated; because they conceive it their own fault that they do not seek their safety, as they do, by a Subscription which (as they affirm) engages them to nothing. By this means those who refuse to sign remain exposed to the unjust violence of the Jesuits: Those who agree with them in certain Points, and condemn them in others, blame them highly in those particulars about which they contest with them; but they are very wary to defend them when they think they have reason on their side. How infinitely are these Gentlemen mistaken (says honest M. Moret in all his Sermons) not to believe the Decision de facto with an humane Faith? But he is wary enough not to add, that the Jesuits are mistaken, who require we should treat those as Heretics who acknowledge no Fact, which we can only assent to but by humane Faith. Yet is this manner of acting more tolerable than that of those who say nothing at all in public concerning their intention, but join simply with the Jesuits by an exterior signature, however different and remote in their sense. If they did but say clearly what they reprove in those who do not sign, the diversity of their opinions would render their authority less considerable: but whiles they say nothing at all, such as only judge things by the outside take them for approbators of the Opinions of the Jesuits. 'Tis not therefore an universal Illusion, but an universal Baseness, which makes these Divines to be oppressed; or rather, 'tis the Oppression of the Church in general which renders their Oppression particular. Let every man speak as he thinks, and they shall be fully justified: Let every man also condemn them as he thinks, and they shall yet be more fully justified; seeing it will appear that in all the Points on which they are accused they are united with the greater number of the Divines of the Church. But the terror and dread of F. Annat keeps all men's tongues bound to defend them, and lets them all lose to condemn them; uniting in one equivocal expression persons that are extremely distant in Opinion, that so F. Annat may seem to be followed of the whole Church, whenas in truth he is in effect condemned by the whole Church. Were there indeed no other Life besides the present, nor any other Judge save Men, it must needs be confessed that F. Annat were a marvellous able man, for knowing how to conceal with so much address the weakness of his Party. How victorious in appearance is he, whenas in effect he is abandoned by all the World? But this Father, whilst he thinks to cheat others, cheats himself first; because the business in agitation here is of things which depend upon the truth, and will be judged by the truth and not on appearance. It is not a deceitful union in an equivocal expression which renders one orthodox, but a real and veritable conformity of ones sense with that of the universal Church in matters which concern the Faith. So as these Divines, maintaining no other Doctrine upon the Fact of Jansenius but that of the whole Church, which is, that this Fact has no relation to Faith, continue Orthodox, whatever Cabal they contrive to oppress them. And both F. Annat and the Jesuits, who would make it a point of Faith, are not Orthodox, for all their power and credit, forasmuch as in this they are really repugnant to the sense of the Church, into which they do introduce a Real Heresy, under pretence, forsooth, of destroying an Heresy which is but Imaginary. One may therefore justly apply these words of J. Christ to the Jesuits, which he spoke to a Bishop in the Apocalypse; Dicis, quòd dives sum & locupletatus, & nullius egeo; & nescis quia es miser, & miserabilis, & pauper, & cacus, & nudus. You conceit yourselves indeed rich, and abundant by the number of your Sectators; whereas in the mean time you are miserable, and objects of compassion: You are poor, abandoned, blind and naked; since all those who seem so much to follow you, do in effect condemn you. And one may on the contrary apply to these persecuted Divines those other words of our B. Saviour to another Bishop, in the same Book, Scio tribulationem tuam, & paupertatem tuam; said dives es, & blasphemaris ab his qui se dicunt Judaeos esse, & non sunt. I know the Oppressions which you suffer, and the poverty which they reproach you of; notwithstanding ye are rich, because the most part of those who appear against you are in truth for you; and you are born down but by people who pronounce themselves Orthodox, but who are indeed replete with Errors. Sir, I am, etc. This 1. of March, 1664. Since this Letter was finished, I have received a large Writing of F. Ferrier's, entitled Relation veritable, etc. A true Relation, etc. I conceive as to what relates to the Heresy of which he continues to accuse the Divines who are more Catholic then himself, you will find nothing in it which is not here overthrown beforehand: But as to the prodigious number of Falsities with which his Relation abounds, this Father deserves to be particularly answered; and I am assured there will some body be found out that will so do it, as the Jesuits will hardly find the advantage they expected of their Impostures. The Third LETTER. SIR, I Have already told you, and I repeat it again, that within one fifty years men will look upon this pretended Heresy of Jansenism but as a rare example of the Vanity of men's spirits, and rank the whole Dispute with that of the Cowls and the Cordeliers Bread. They will then ask with astonishment what this Father Annat and F. Ferrier were, that spoke such impertinent things in the Age they lived in; and who those silly persons were that suffered themselves to be led by their Dotages. But these, you'll say, are Prophecies, and 'tis no hard matter to make others like them, by taking 50 years' time to prove the event of them. I could easily answer you, that they are true, having already proved, that the whole Concernment is but a Trifle, as I conceive I have sufficiently done; and that as one cannot pronounce the same of all sorts of Disputes, one cannot reasonably make the like Predictions of them. But it being beyond my power to advance and hasten the future, to show you the truth of my Prophecy, I choose to leave it off, or rather present you with a picture of what is past, which is certain and invariable, and that will afford us the most certain conjectures how one may foresee what is like to fall out upon the like encounters. 'Tis a Glass which very few persons consult, from I know not what weakness natural to men's spirits. For as men live but in the time that is present; so they are likewise concerned but with things that are present. whatever is remote from the instant which takes them up, vanishes and comes to nothing in respect of them; and if possibly there remain any traces in their memory, they are so weak and indiscernible, that they serve them but in little stead for the reforming of those deceitful impressions which they receive from the present Objects. If a man seem to have the advantage during the moment which employs them, he loses the remembrance of all the past, which might have made him know that this advantage is false and but imaginary. Thus, because the Jesuits make a great bustle, and everywhere cry out on Heresy, men are astonished at the bruit; and because there are but few that oppose them, men easily imagine that they are in effect victorious. In the interim, it is evident that this manner of boulstring their Judgements but upon the present, subjects it to an infinity of Illusions. The passages of the World discover not themselves to us in every moment, but by some of their parts as they succeed one another; forasmuch as being thus consequent, they do not subsist together: in the mean time 'tis by the union of the whole Body, and of all its Members, that we ought to form a Judgement. It would be sometimes very difficult to see the Church victorious over Heresies in all its brightness, did we consider it but in a small part of its permanency, during which she may be so overcast with a mist of Errors, that one can hardly tell who has the better of it, Truth or Falsehood. Did not Arianism seem a conqueror at Rimini, and the Catholic Doctrine so obscure that (as S. Hierom says) All the World was astonished how they should become Arian? To discover then the advantage of the Church over Error, our memories have need of a larger comprehension of time: And then it is we shall see, that after a swift and transitory blaze, Errors do whither away of themselves and come to nothing; whiles the Doctrine of the Church subsists, and conserveses itself in the bosom of the Church, and in the hearts of her legitimate Children. And thus, Sir, to judge rightly of the present Contestation between the Jesuits and their Adversaries, we must not limit all our prospect at the Question of Fact and of Right, to which 'tis for the present totally reduced: But we should consider the several steps of every of its parties, the various Points agitated between them, the success of their particular Disputes, and by what progress they are arrived to the Point where they now stand, seeing 'tis by this only we shall be able to discover who have lost or gained, advanced or recoiled, whom we may believe sincere, and whom for Cheats and Infidels. In fine, 'tis from hence one may form reasonable conjectures of the Success of the remaining Contestation. This is the Design which I have proposed to myself in this Letter, wherein I will present you with a compendious Image of all this tedious War of the Divines, which though it be not bloody, is no less considerable than the temporal Wars, and whose Successes are altogether as great and important. It was in the year 1626. that it began, upon occasion of a Book published by a certain Jesuit named Garasse, entitled Somme de Veritez capitales de la Religion Chrestienne, A Sum of the principal Verities of the Christian Religion, etc. The late Abbot of S. Cyran having noted therein a prodigious number of Falsifications of the Scripture and of the Fathers, together with divers heretical and impious Propositions, conceived that the honour of the Church required him to undertake their Refutation, though at the same time also his modesty made him resolve to conceal his name, as he has always done in the rest of his Books. While the first part of this was under the Press, and the noise of it spread into all parts, it gave occasion for a more through examination of Garasse's Treatise. The Rector of the University complained of it to the Faculty, who named Commissioners to examine the Book. But this alarming the Jesuits, they quickly gave us to understand that it was not so easy an enterprise to censure a Book of a Jesuit: For they so wrought with the Magistrates by their Cabal, that M. de S. Cyran's Treatise was a long while stopped. Moreover, to traverse the Censure, F. Garasse bethought himself of a Supercherie as worthy of the Jesuits as any thing had been practised during all the process of these Contestations. There was a bruit in Paris that the Author of the Refutation was to show above Fifty heretical Propositions or Errors in Garasse's Sum; and it was true: but that part which contained the conviction of Garasse's Errors was not yet come out of M. de S. Cyran's Study▪ However Father Garasse conceited he had found out a way to know what they had to object against him. He chose Fifty Propositions in his Book, the most easy to defend that he could find, and of which number there was not three of them of those which M. de S. Cyran had accused in his Work. In consequence of this he formed a Censure according to his own fancy, and by this address dazzled the world for a time, and disturbed the Examination of his Book which was doing at the Sorbon; so as his Examinators were much confounded, and they began everywhere to say that they extremely wronged the Garasse, to accuse the Sum of so many Errors. M. de S. Cyran had a thousand difficulties to take off the impediments which the Jesuits had contrived to hinder the publication of his Refutation, and to disabuse the World of that wicked artifice of F. Garasse. However, he at last obtained it, and maugre all the Cabals of the Society, and the tedious delays which they granted F. Garasse to make his Retractation, his Book was in fine censured for containing divers heretical Propositions, Errors, Scandals, Temerities, many Falsifications of passages of Scripture and of the holy Fathers falsely cited, and perverted from their true and genuine Sense, with an infinite of words unworthy to be written and read of Christians and Divines. Nevertheless did the Jesuits testify upon this encounter some kind of Prudence. For we must not refuse to give them their just merits when they deserve them, since the occasions are so very rare. They did not persist in the justification of Father Garasse, but relegated him a good distance from Paris to one of their Houses, where they heard no more talk of him, and by this means made an end of the business. Happy had it been that in allaying this difference they had from their hearts also smothered the resentment which they conceived against M. the Abbot of S. Cyran, who has since that engaged them into such horrible excesses. But they would not do it, and have since sufficiently testified that they were not of the number of those wise men who love their Reprovers, and that by warning them of their Faults give them occasion to reform them. They nourished in their breasts a violent aversion against him who had done them this service, and which was yet exceedingly augmented by another obligation of the same nature which he rendered them some few years after, and which affords us the second remarkable accident of this Warr. Pope Urban VIIIth, touched with the miserable condition of the English Church, which had been for thirty years without * According to their false reckoning. Bishop, having sent thither the deceased Mr. Smith, Bishop of Chalcedon, with the Jurisdiction of an Ordinary; he, being there established, would make use of his power in obliging the Regulars to have his approbation to enable them to hear Confessions. This was an heavy Yoke to the Jesuits, who were wont to live in that Country in an absolute independence. Therefore they made complaint to the Bishop by their Provincial, and amongst other reasons they represented to him that this Regulation did diminish their reputation, ☞ and the Presents which the Catholics were used to make them. But when he would not suffer himself to be wrought on by such perverse Arguments, they stirred up so many troubles and factions against him, by decrying him to the Ministers of State of the King of England, that the Bishop was constrained to quit the Kingdom to seek his own security. These clandestine practices were accompanied with the publication of two Books which the Jesuits wrote in English, against Episcopal Jurisdiction, and the necessity of the Sacrament of Confirmation; and the Clergy of England having sent these Books to the Sorbon, there were thirty two Propositions censured by them the 15 of February 1631. This Censure had been preceded some days before by that which M. the Archbishop of Paris published against the same Books the 30 of January in the same year; and by that of all the Archbishops and Bishops which were then in Paris, who condemned them by a Pastoral Letter addressed to all the Bishops of France the 15 of February 1631. These strokes were very sensible to the Nicety and Pride of the Jesuits; and accordingly did they rise up against these Censures after a terrible manner. They writ against M. the Archbishop of Paris, against the Bishops, against the Sorbon, and thought for a time that they had quite laid them on their backs. But this boldness of theirs was not at all to their advantage in the sequel: For this produced against them that famous Book of Petrus Aurelius, which defended the Bishops and the Sorbon, and refuted the Errors of the Jesuits with so much force, eloquence and perspicuity, that the Church was fully revenged, and the Jesuits confounded. Notwithstanding this Confusion, in stead of humbling, did but the more exasperate them: They undertook Aurelius' Book by all the ways they could possibly devise, by secret Calumnies▪ by public Sermons, by huge Volumes, by small Treatises and Pamphlets, by Works in Latin and French; giving it commonly no other Title than that infamous Book of Petrus Aurelius. And as the public voice had attributed this work to M. de S. Cyran, whatever pains he took to take off from himself so glorious a suspicion, they fixed it upon his person, and strove to asperse him by a thousand kinds of Calumnies; and from that time forward formed a constant resolution to decry as Heretics both him, and all those who favoured his Opinion. These were the several Contests of this Hierarchical War; but the event and conclusion of it is remarkable, because it is the picture of the success of all their other Disputes. It pleased God to permit that the noise which was spread against M. de S. Cyran should so prevail upon the spirit of a Minister of State, that he was made prisoner at the Chasteau de Vincennes, where he was kept five years, without other procedure then that of a certain irregular Information, which they were forced to give over. But at the same time he so ordered it, that the Truth triumphed at a greater height, even by the oppression of that person who had so gloriously defended it. The Book of F. Celot (the most considerable of those who undertook to oppose Aurelius) was condemned in the Assembly of Mante, and this Father was compelled to disavow his Errors in the Sorbon. That of Aurelius was approved by three consecutive Assemblies, printed twice at the charges of the Clergy, and they ordered a most magnificent Elegy to be made him by an injunction of the last of these Assemblies. See here the issue of this Hierarchical Dispute, which I have recounted without interruption, though during the time it continued there sprung up another, which was followed with greater consequents: Namely, that concerning Penitence, which took birth from the Book of Frequent Communion, composed by M. Arnauld, Doctor of the Sorbon, for the justification of M. the Abbot of S. Cyran his friend; in which he opposed several Points of the Morale of the Jesuits, and particularly their facility to give Absolution for all sorts of sins. For he maintained against them in this Book, That it was expedient to defer it upon divers occasions, and men were obliged to do it in case of Relapses, habitual Sins, and on the proximate occasions of Sin. There was nothing did more sensibly touch the Jesuits than their being thus attacked upon this so nice a Point; because it is chief by this facility of Absolution that they draw so many people after them. Whereupon they conceived it their principal concernment to overwhelm both the Author and the Book of Frequent Communion, together with all those who were either allied to his sense, or had any friendship with him. Upon this there followed on a sudden an horrible and universal insurrection of all the Jesuits, who broke lose through all the parts of France, yea and through all Europe, against this Book. There was everywhere nothing but furious Declamations, bloody and outrageous Injuries, treating those who approved the sense of this Book with no other name than that of Fourbs and Traitors: And for the Author, he was an Heresiarch, a Schismatic, an Heretic declared: and nothing less would appease them then the Blood and the Life of those whom they called Cyranists and Arnaudists. Great ones, (says their Father Seguin, in his Book entitled Sommarie de la Theologie de l' Abbé de Saint Cyran, & du Sieur Arnaud) to whom God has imparted the power of judging men, you know better than I, and your Piety is a public testimony, that the prime Justice is that which we render to God. Open your eyes, and behold the mischief which threatens the State as well as Religion, since the change of the one does never arrive without the destruction of the other. 'Tis the worst of all remedies to temporize with a newborn Heresy. The Church is assaulted at the Heart, and you ought to join the Royal Sword with that of the Church to exterminate this Mischief in our days. In this style were the Jesuits wont to speak in those times, nor is it at all unlike their language at present. And for the Heresy of these Arnaudists, they made no question of that, they reproached them an hundred for one: and as they were all of their own invention, they daily forged new ones. Nor did they ever trouble themselves to colour them over by any passages drawn out of their Books; but when occasion was, they invented also as well passages and Books as Heresies. Was there ever seen a more circumstantiated Imposture, and proposed after a more terrible manner, then that which F. Seguin reproaches against these pretended Arnaudists? My hand (says he) trembles with horror, when it finds itself obliged (to disabuse the minds of those which have been prepossessed with this false Maxim) to describe the bold impiety unto which this unhappy project is arrived, to detourn, and, as I may so say, to snatch away Souls from the holy Communion. I should not say it if the Piece had not been public; the Scandal is not yet altogether taken away; they called it the Chaplet of S. Cyran, which contained the spiritual exercises that he gave to some persons of his own School. One of these Instructions intimated, That it was lawful for a Soul to wish he might at the article of death be deprived of the holy Communion of the Body of Jesus Christ, that so he might imitate the despair of the Son of God upon the Cross, when he was abandoned by his Father. Is this the mouth of a Man, or of an organ animated by some Daemon that has composed this Exercise, and vomited up this Blasphemy? Calvin himself never conceived it with more horror. Who would ever have believed (upon hearing what this man has so confidently said) that this Book, this Passage, and this Practice should ever be in rerum natura, or have a being? And yet there is nothing more certain: The World has been advertised of it, the Jesuits have been themselves confounded upon the point; and yet would they not desist to re-produce this abominable Imposture upon several occasions, by changing the Title of this Imaginary Book, sometimes naming it the Rules of the Port-Royal, and sometimes the Constitutions of the Nuns of the holy Sacrament. After this, no man is to wonder they had so many Heresies to charge on their Antagonists: For being so firmly resolved to make them Heretics whatever it should cost them, they could not fail of finding such as these: And so we see new ones every day appear, which disappear again of course when they are worn out, to give place to others. There were some of them which it had been easy for them to justify, because they were so gross & sensible. For when Father Brisacier by an example accused them in his I. Book, p. 15. for condemning the Chaplet▪ in showing his own Chaplet and in saying they were exempted; when he reproached them for having no Images; there was no more to do but to lead the people to Port-Royal, where they might have beheld enough with their own eyes. When he accused them for rejecting low Masses, they needed only to desire their assistance at those which are every day said in that House. But the Jesuits did not value the being convicted of Imposture, because they knew that those Calumnies being published by so many mouths, would not fail of leaving their Effects, some for some persons, and others for others. Therefore they were diligent to accumulate them, that so there might be some for every body. Thus F. Brisacier accused them all at once, part. 4. p. 24. for being the Devil's Prelates, the Gates of Hell, and for erecting the Treasure of Antichrist; because (says he) they abolish Indulgences, the Cult of the Virgin, the Sacraments of Penitence and of the Eucharist, all the Virtues both Theological and Moral. What will you have more? There were certain Jesuits who, not to fail in matter of Heresy, and hinder them from all possibility of Salvation, conceived it a more compendious way to affirm, that they designed the destruction of the Eucharist, Sacraments, Incarnation, Gospel, Jesus Christ, the Trinity, and, in sum, to form a new Religion of Deists: and in order to this they invented the diabolical Imposture of the interview of Bourgfontaine, where they feigned that M. Jansenius, M. Caspean Bishop of Lisieux, M. du Bellay, M. the Saint Cyran, and M. Arnauld (whom they plainly meant by the first letters of their names, and many other circumstances) met together to confer about the way how they might destroy the Incarnation and the Sacraments; and that in order to this design M. Jansenius undertook to write his Book of the Grace of Jesus Christ, and M. Arnauld the Treatise of Frequent Communion. The person who was made choice of to vend this horrible Calumny was one Fileau by name, one of the King's Advocates at Poitiers, who assured some friends of his, that he received it of a Jesuit, as the Jesuits took the care to spread and maintain it. And although, by the dates, they have made appear that M. Arnauld was but nine years old when they suppose him to have undertaken the composing of the Book of Frequent Communion; yet did not the Jesuits fail to insert this detestable Imposture twice more in two several Books: the one in a Treatise of their Father Meynier entitled, Port-Royal of intelligence with Geneva; the other in that of a certain Jesuit of Bourdeaux. Yea and one of these Fathers preaching in Bourdeaux, recited the whole story to his Auditors out of de Fileau's Book. These were here yet but accessary Heresies, and which only tended to make what M. Arnauld had taught (of being obliged in certain cases to refuse the giving Absolution, till they had given proofs of a solid Conversion) to pass the more easily for an Heresy. And it was this Doctrine that they everywhere assaulted with most violence. One cannot (says F. Brisacier) altar the nature of Satisfaction by transporting it before Absolution, without losing this illustrious title of Catholic. This is (quoth he) the very gate of Desperation, 'tis the highway of Obduration, 'tis the wide gap for men to die in final Impenitence, and without Sacraments; 'Tis the Cullender of Hell; 'tis the leven to corrupt all the Priests, and to make them abuse the Discoveries which they receive in secret. All these Accusations were far more important than those which they now form upon the Case of Jansenius. The Jesuits dispersed them with the same assurance; they treated their adversaries after the same sort with Heresiarches, Heretics, Sectaries and Schismatics; they gave them the names of Sects, as they do now at present. But let us see the event. These bruits and Accusations gave a thousand traverses to the poor Divines whom the Jesuits did in this manner decry: for they are always successful in that. The Divines have continued to be oppressed, and the Jesuits have always been very powerful in the World. Their Calumnies yet destroyed themselves, have been confounded before the face of the whole Church, but still without any punishment; they were still harkening to people so altogether unworthy of belief: nor was there ever yet found one Jesuit of those which appeared in the world who has had the Conscience to testify the least regret for the Extravagances of his Society; a thing prodigious to consider. For what Salvation can they hope in, that thus calumniate without Repentance? On the contrary, they have rewarded those who helped to vend and distribute their most execrable Impostures, whither within or without their Society. They procured for le Sieur Fileau, for publishing the Fable of Bourgfontaine, a Brief of Pope Innocent in his commendation, with Letters from some Noblemen in France. They made Father Brisacier Rector of their chief House, because he was transported to excesses which were altogether inhuman. By all which we may see sufficient marks of their puissance, having been able to support themselves in a Cause in which any else besides themselves had certainly been overthrown. But God has in the mean time been pleased to show that his Truth is infinitely stronger than all the men of the World; for in spite of all the Jesuits credit, maugre the abandoning and oppression of these Divines, not only the Calumnies of the Jesuits are dissipated, but the sincere Doctrine, which they so furiously attacked in the Book of Frequent Communion, has been more and more authorised and practised in the Church; and on the contrary, the Errors of the Jesuits have been formally condemned there. They have censured in the Apology of the Casuists the very same Doctrine which is opposed in the Treatise of Frequent Communion. The Doctrine touching proximate Occasions and Habitudes of Sin, (says the Church of Paris in her third Censure) in which the Author affirms one ought not to refuse Absolution, is false, rash, scandalous, and inductive to an evident peril of sinning. And the 29. Censure of M. the Archbishop de Sens upon the same Propositions, and on that of Recidivations, is, These very Propositions are pernicious, they have been invented to entertain men in a desire to sin; they are injurious to Virtue, and to the Sacrament of Penance: They destroy the judiciary Authority which resides in Priests as Ministers of J. Christ, and render them partakers with other men's Crimes. Divers other of the Bishops did expressly mark in their Censures the precipitate Absolutions practised and authorised by the Jesuits, as one of the greatest Disorders of the Church; and those Five Illustrious Bishops of Languedoc call them in their Censure Sacrilegious Absolutions. And not only is this Doctrine of the Book of Frequent Communion authorised by these Judgements of the Church; but 'tis well known that many great Prelates enjoin the practice of it, as amongst the rest M. the Bishop de Alet testifies in his Apology which he has recommended to all the Confessors of his Diocese: for see how he speaks of it, pag. 11. As touching the delay or refusal of Absolution, it is true that M. de Alet recommends to all the Confessors of his Diocese the careful practice of the Rules of the Church in the dispensation of the Sacraments, and especially that of Penance, that the use of it be not profaned; which is, that they by no means absolve those who are in the proximate occasion of any Sin, or that perceive themselves in a dangerous condition, in which (in respect of their disposition, and upon experience of their life passed) it is morally impossible for them not to offend God: such also as remain in any habitual mortal sin, and do not reform themselves, nor give any sign of their sincere amendment; since it is the constant Doctrine of the Church, and whereof the practice has been carefully recommended by S. Charles, in the advice which he prepared for the Confessors of his Diocese. In fine, the Sanctity of this Doctrine is so universally acknowledged, that they oblige those who but dare to oppose it to most solemn Retractations. I will show you an Example, both new and curious, which I have taken word for word out of a Letter from Tolouse, where the thing happened. A Religious person of the Order of S. Francis, of those whom they call de la grand Observance, preaching this year in Tolouse January the 27, maintained that Confessors were not to refuse or defer the Absolution of Penitents, provided they assured them that they were very sorry for having offended God, though they had never so often confessed the very same sins before; in the belief, said he, that they ought to have, that the moment in which they should refuse it them might be that of their Conversion. The whole City, not accustomed to this dissolute Doctrine, being scandalised at it, the great Vicar obliged this inconsiderate Preacher to make his public Retractation February the 17. in these very terms which were prescribed him. When, about three weeks since, I affirmed in my Sermon of the Cure of the Leprous, that the facility and the promptitude with which jesus Christ stretched forth his hand upon him, was an instruction to Confessors of the obligation which lay on them to give prompt and speedy Absolution to all Penitents, provided they profess themselves sorry for having offended God, and that they would reform in the future; I did not mean to say that Confessors were obliged always to believe the Deposition of Penitents, which were to invalidate the authority which Priests have received in their Ordination, as well to retain as to remit sins: But I pretended only (generally speaking) that when they are indeed sincerely repentant, and that the prudence of an honest Confessor does judge them so, he may then absolve them. WHICH I HAVE SPOKEN WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE CHURCH'S CANONS, and to the Injunctions of this Diocese, which oblige Confessors to defer Absolution to Penitents; especially in case of Habitudes and proximate Occasion in a serious matter, etc. WHICH I ACKNOWLEDGE AUGHT TO BE INVIOLABLY OBSERVED. Thus has the Dispute concerning Penance and the delay of Absolution had the same success with the rest. The power of the Jesuits has procured them impunity for their Calumnies and Errors. M. Arnauld and those who have supported the Cause of Truth have had Persecutions for their share: But the Truth has in fine both triumphed over these Errors, and all the power of the Jesuits besides. The Fourth Contestation, which is that of the Morale of the Casuists, is the most considerable of all the rest for the greatness of the events. Every one knows what authority the Casuists had acquired in the Church; and that albeit the honest men did always govern themselves by Rules which were totally contrary to their Maxims; yet they were, I know not how, got into possession of magisterially deciding the Morals of the Church, and to make the Opinions pass for indisputable which they pleased to agree upon, and those for probable and safe in Conscience which they thought good to doubt of or to controvert. It was above fifty years that this reign of theirs continued in the Schools: and though this their licence was become odious to many knowing persons; yet the small resistences which had been made against them from time to time, were too feeble to remedy so great an evil as had been fomented by all the power of the Jesuits. It was not till the year 1656 that any body undertook to attack them in good earnest. He who made the first onset thought the best way to accomplish his design would be, to represent them as they are in their native colours, and render them ridiculous to all the world. And whereas they exalted themselves like Masters of the Church, he treats them as the very abjects and last of men, and, without troubling himself with opposing Casuist to Casuist, he confounds them pell-mell, Suarez, Vasquez, Molina, Lessius, Filiutius, Escobar, the head and the tail of the Jesuits, undertaking to render them all alike odious and despicable. There was never any design that to the Jesuits appeared more rash, who, looking upon themselves as elevated to a degree so eminent in the Church, looked down as from their sublime Throne on this Incognito, that durst presume to attack the whole Body of their August Society, (which is the name they give themselves) and to accuse them for having corrupted all the Christian Morality. Nor were they ever heard to cry out so hideously through all France; The Author of the Provincials was an Heretic, I, and more than an Heretic; He borrowed all his reproaches against them from Heretics; He assaulted amongst the Jesuits Morals the most undoubted Maxims of the Christian Faith. In fine, to answer Fifteen of his Letters, it was enough to say, according to the R. F. Annat, that they were Fifteen Heretical Letters. For this has ever been a common Reproach with this good Father, to brand those withal who disapproved the Doctrine of his Companions. But above all, he could never sufficiently exaggerate the excess of boldness of this Incognito, who should dare thus to condemn so many grave Authors. And Father Ferrier does triumph in his Book of Probability, in setting out this his Council of Casuists, and in opposing them to this unknown Theologue. But in spite of all these fine Arguments of the Jesuits, maugre the infinite numbers of their Partisans, and the weakness of this Adversary, they were astonished to find themselves in so little a time the Fable of all France, and all the world declaring against them, as themselves are forced to acknowledge in their Apology of the Casuists. I do not question (says Father Pirot, Author of that Book) but the Banishments and Martyrdoms have not been less grievous and more easy to support, than the Abandoning which this Society finds itself constrained to suffer amongst these Railleries: since in all their retreats the FF. Jesuits were still entertained with honour in the Provinces which received them, they had a respect to their Patience and their merit; whereas on this encounter, whatever countenance they preserved, they are basely treated. The Book of Escobar, having been 39 times printed for an excellent Book, was printed the fourtieth time as the most wicked and abominable Book that was ever published, and to satisfy the curiosity only of those who had a desire to search out the passages which the Author of the Provincial Letters had cited out of him. The Curates of Paris, of Rouën, and of divers other considerable Towns of the Kingdom, risen up against these detestable Maxims. A very great number of Bishops condemned them by authentic Censures, so as the Jesuits could not so much as find one single Bishop who would openly take upon him their defence; which, considering all the circumstances of this Affair, aught to be taken for an infallible mark of the universal Consent of the Church in the Condemnation of the Casuists. The Jesuits at first vaunted, that the Pope disapproved what was done in France. But the Pope has himself taken away this pretext so injurious to the Holy See and the Church, by condemning likewise the Apology of the Casuists, and in so manifestly consenting with the Judgements which the Bishops had expressed against the Jesuits Morality. I tell you here nothing but old stories, having only a design to recall them to your memory; but I will now show you some newer ones, and that are more rare, to let you see that the Moral of the Jesuits is as well disapproved at Rome as elsewhere. A certain Professor of Boulogne, named Antony Merenda, having conceived a very just horror at the unbridled licentiousness of these Casuists, composed a considerable Work against them not many years since, in which he chief opposes their Doctrine of Probability as an Invention of the Devil, Commentum Diaboli. A Dominican Inquisitor of Pavia, named Mercorus, published soon after a Book against the same Doctrine, and divers other Loosenesses of the Casuists. And in fine, after these last contestations touching the Moral, a famous Prelate of Rome, called Prosper Fagnani, a person that the Pope honoured with a particular friendship, has inserted in a great Volume which he has composed upon the Decretals, a large Treatise against the Probability of the Casuists, where he represents this Doctrine as the fountain of all sorts of Corruptions and Disorders, and treats it with Merenda as a Diabolical Invention, Commentum Diaboli. In this Treatise he mentions with an Elegy the pursuits which the Curates of Paris and of Rouën have made against the Casuists: He inserts the Extracts which they proposed to the Assembly of several dangerous Propositions of these Authors, and the Censures which have been given them in the Low-Countries: and had he been but acquainted with what has been since done in France, there is no doubt but he would likewise have mentioned the Censures of the French Bishops, as he does those of certain Bishops of Flanders. This was all done by consent of the Pope, and the Book itself is dedicated to him; so as one may well judge it was not very welcome to the Jesuits. Yet durst they never attack him openly. But they made use of two Artifices to have ruined this Work. The First was, To bring Merenda's Book to the Inquisition, and endeavour to have it censured upon some pretext, which in that Country they never fail of, when they desire to blast a Book. And accordingly they soon succeeded, and we have seen the Book of Merenda in the list of such as the Inquisition has condemned. The Second was, To instigate Caramuel, now a Bishop in Italy, to write against Fagnani. He undertook it, and after his manner acquitted himself, that is to say, with his ordinary Impudence. For he maintains in his Book the Doctrine of Probability as an Article of Faith opposed to the Heresy of the Jansenists: He will have all the Curates of Paris and of Rouën, together with all those Bishops who censured the Casuists, to be arrant Jansenists, and of whose authority there is no regard to be had. This put him well with the Jesuits, who were marvellously satisfied with these goodly beginnings; but they were not so with the consequence. For the Pope being clearly advertised by Fagnani of these Intrigues, caused Merenda's Book to be fetched out of the Inquisition, and condemned that of Caramuel, which continues so censured without remedy. And thus, Sir, finished the War against our Casuists, by which it fully appears that they are stuffed with an infinity of pernicious and impious Maxims; that above all the Doctrine of Probability (which is the Source) is an Invention of the Devil; and that therefore F. Ferrier, who has defended it, and as many Jesuits as have maintained it, are Co-operators and Predicators of that Serpent, Praedicatores Serpentis, as S. Augustine says; and that, on the contrary, those who have opposed the Casuists, have done the Church one of the most considerable services that Divines are capable of rendering her. Their Doctrine continues still victorious, as that of the Jesuits quite withered and come to nothing in the contest: But so is it not as to their Persons. The greatness of the Service which these Divines have rendered to the Church has diminished nothing of the Persecutions which they have for so long time suffered; nay, on the contrary, it does but augment them, in provoking the Jesuits to pursue them with the greater violence. Nor have the so many Censures of the Moral of the Jesuits abated aught of their temporal power: 'Tis known they still persevere in the very same Maxims that have been condemned, nor do they themselves conceal them, yet in the mean time they are permitted the administration of the Sacraments. Men would never suffer that the Physicians of our Bodies, who had been known for Empoisoners, should continue to exercise their faculty; whiles yet they permit these Physicians of Souls, convinced to have governed them with their envenomed Maxims, to prescribe this pretended spiritual Medicine, without giving any mark or caution to the Church that they have sincerely renounced them. But it is an Effect of the depth of God's Judgements, who imparts his Graces on his Church according to measure, and boundaries them within the sight of men's Sins. A great one it is which he has bestowed on her, in causing the Moral of the Jesuits to be condemned by so many Bishops, and by thereby giving all men an opportunity, who sincerely pursue their own Salvation, to renounce their Conduct. But he has not altogether accomplished this favour; but suffers the Jesuits to enjoy the same Authority, and to preserve themselves in the same Credit which they formerly had, to the end they may serve him as ministers of his Wrath, that those who deserve to be misled may be misled, and by their Persecutions to prove those who are worthy to be proved. This is their employment and office in the Church, not unlike to that of the King to whom God directs these words in the Scripture, Vae Assur, virga furoris mei. But I beseech you, Sir, do not imagine that it is the difference of Opinions upon the quarrel of Jansenism which imports me to embrace these opinions. The most Religious persons of the Church, and who have never been so much as suspected of any kindness for that which they call Jansenism, have, I assure you, no other Idea of the Jesuits. And amongst others the late M. the Bishop of Cahors, being upon his Deathbed, expressly ordered M. the Abbot Ferrier, great Vicar to my Lord Bishop d' Alby, to say from him to M. de Alet, M. de Pamiers, and M. de Comenge, That he had done all he could to reduce the Jesuits from their Errors, but that he knew them for people incorrigible and without remedy; that he held them for the greatest Enemies of the Church; and did earnestly desire that these Gentlemen would never have any thing to do with them. This person performed his Commission, and said the same things to some persons of great Quality, from whom we have received that which we here mention. I suppose, Sir, that you expect what I should say of the Contestation concerning Jansenism, which is the most tedious and refractory of all the rest; and that you haply think I could not say as much of that, that the Cause of these Divines has had its Triumphs also; seeing the Jesuits produce whole Volumes of Decrees, Briefs, Constitutions, Arrests, and Declarations which they have obtained against them; and that the Letters of these Gentlemen make a great part of those which have furnished the Inquisition of Rome any time these ten years. But all this shall not hinder me yet from assuring you beforehand, that the success of this War will not be at all inferior to that of the others; and that you will there likewise see these Divines oppressed, the Jesuits unpunished, and the Truth triumphing over their Errors. You are only to follow me, as I do that of the various faces of this Dispute. It began first in Flanders at the University of Louvain, it being there that the Jesuits published those famous Theses against Jansenius, where they accused him of an infinity of Errors. But the Doctors of Louvain repelled them with so much vigour, that whiles they insisted on their Books, the Jesuits had no cause to boast of their advantage. A little after the Dispute came into France, upon occasion of the Sermons of M. Habert a Parisian Divine, who in the Pulpit did publicly accuse this Prelate's Book of no less than Forty Heresies. But the first Apology for Jansenius having taught him a little to moderate his Zeal, he reduced these Heresies to the number of Twelve, of which he continued to accuse him in a Treatise which he writ against this Apology. The second Apology for Jansenius, which appeared a little after, made him yet to cut off Seven more: For Monsieur Cornet (however enemy against this Bishop's Book) durst propose but Five Propositions to the Faculty, and that without naming them, though with a design of one day causing his Book to be re-censured. This abatement is very considerable, since we have already Thirty five Heresies retrenched of the number, and that the Disciples of S. Augustine had but to justify themselves of Five which remained, and those are the Five famous Propositions. And this was easy for them to do: For they protested that they maintained upon the Five Propositions but what was the Catholic Doctrine of Efficacious Grace per se, which might there be included; and that (seeing they were captious) it was reasonable they should except the sense of Efficacious Grace before they condemned them. It was on this design they went to Rome, not absolutely to defend these Propositions, but to supplicate the Pope that he would distinguish concerning their divers sense; and to except that of Efficacious Grace per se. This was the scope of the Memorial which they presented to the Pope upon this Subject, in which they prayed his Holiness to cause them to distinguish, and examine the various sense of the equivocal and maliciously-forged Propositions which had been presented to him; ut distingui, & sigillatim examinari faciat varios sensus Propositionum equivocarum, & ad fraudem fictarum. The Dominicans of Rome were touched with the same apprehensions, lest they should invelop the Doctrine of Efficacious Grace per se within the Censure of the Five Propositions; and upon that sought for Audience seventeen times, without being able to obtain it, & presented several Writings to the Pope, as they are since printed in the Journal of M. de S. Amour, wherein these Fathers maintain the sense of Efficacious Grace in these Propositions as the Augustine Doctors do, with this only difference, that the Doctors spoke nothing of Jansenius in the Writings which they produced at Rome, whereas the Dominicans, who had not received the same order, expressly defended it, in maintaining that it was conformable to their Doctrine upon the Five Propositions. Had Pope Innocent granted what these Doctors desired, by excepting formally the sense of Efficacious Grace per se, it could not have been denied but they had had all the advantage, since that was all they demanded. But God was not pleased to permit that they should obtain a thing which would have put an end to a world of Troubles. The Censure of the Propositions was published without distinction. But that the Truth should not suffer, God supplied this omission, as well by divers particular Declarations of the same Pope Innocent, who upon all occasions testified, that he would by no means either touch the sense of Efficacious Grace per se, or the Doctrine of S. Augustine; as by the general Consent of the Church, where the Constitution was received but in this sense, and with exception of Efficacious Grace per se, as being no way violated by this Constitution. After this the Doctors made no difficulty to submit to the Constitution of Innocent; because they obtained by this Consent of the Church the same thing which they had desired should have been inserted in the Bull itself, which is, the exception of Efficacious Grace. And this sense being excluded by the consent of the Jesuits themselves, and by that unanimous accord which regulates the language of the Church, it was very evident they had no more any thing which was good in them, and that one might absolutely condemn them, as most sincerely they did, and as they have done ever since. By this means those pretended Errors whereof they accused the Divines were wholly destroyed, from Forty they were come to Twelve, from Twelve to Five, and from Five to nothing. The Jesuits had but one imaginary advantage, and these Divines had this real advantage, that the Doctrine of Efficacious Grace per se was more and more acknowledged for orthodox by the whole Church. There remained now but one Difficulty upon the matter of Fact, viz. whether these Propositions were, or were not in Jansenius; but as that was not of consequence, no body could ever have thought that such a Trifle should have disturbed the Peace of the Church. Yet it did so notwithstanding, by means of that blind passion which possessed the Jesuits to find out Heresy in their Adversaries. For seeing all other means fail them, they consulted how to erect an Heresy of a new kind, which had no other foundation but this question of Fact. And upon this design it was that they promoted these extravagant Propositions, That the matter of Fact was inseparable from the Right in the affair of Jansenius; and, That whoever should deny that these condemned Propositions were in this Prelate's Book, and should refuse to condemn them as so in his Sense, were Heretics. They enclosed this new Heresy in this mysterious word, of the Sense of Jansenius, which is, according to them, I know not what of Unexplicable, and 'tis impossible to express it but by these words. This is as it were the Quintessence of the Heresy, the Secret whereof is only in the Jesuits breasts. 'Tis a certain concealed Poison which only these Fathers know, though, for its being Catholic, it be necessary, according to them, for all the World to reject it without knowing it. For though they sometimes explicate this Sense of Jansenius as they think good; yet is not this Sense of Jansenius thus explained by them that which makes the Heresy of Jansenius, but a certain other Sense of Jansenius which they do not explain at all. And to demonstrate this to you, it is afterwards that you have rejected all the Dogms in which they comprehend this Sense of Jansenius, that they yet require you to condemn the Sense of Jansenius, as something distinct and separated from all those particular Dogms. For instance, F. Annat in his new Book encloses the Sense of Jansenius within these two Principles; That this Prelate condemns all Sufficient Grace; and requires us to believe that one cannot resist Efficacious Grace. Who would not say to this Reverend Father, Well, Father, seeing this is, according to you, the Sense of Jansenius, I reject these two Principles; I receive Sufficient Grace after the same manner as does the School of S. Thomas; I acknowledge one may resist Efficacious Grace, though in effect one does never resist it, and that this power to resist does in the mean time subsist with this Grace? See there your Sense of Jansenius condemned. But you must yet condemn the Sense of Jansenius, otherwise there will be Yea and Nay between you and the Church, and you will for all that remain an Heretic. Therefore F. Ferrier, who after his manner explains the Sense of Jansenius three or four times in his Relation, when he would describe in his Idea in what the Sense of Jansenius does properly consist, is very cautious not to make it consist in any of those determinated Dogms which he had attributed to Jansenius; but pretends that it is solely comprehended in this general Proposition, The Sense of Jansenius is Catholic. So as, according to the new Philosophy of these Fathers, besides all particular Dogms, be they what they will, yet the Sense of Jansenius must in general be condemned, and it is this general and unexplicable Sense of Jansenius in which (according to the Jesuits) consists the Heresy of Jansenius. It must be confessed that since men did ever reason together, there was never the like Extravagancy. But the consequence is yet infinitely more strange. For albeit the greatest part of the world laughed at it in particular, yet they so carried it in public, as if they were of it; and the Jesuits have the credit to establish this unheard-of Absurdity, to introduce the practice of a Subscription which was never yet heard of in the Church, unless it were amongst the Heretics, who are blamed for it by those who have defended the Church against them. For 'tis requisite we should know, that since the Church was a Church, one has never obliged either Religious men, or Schoolmasters, or Clerks, or so much as simple Priests to sign. They were the Germane Lutherans of the Confession of Ausburg who for one time only caused their Confession of Faith to be signed by the Principals of the Colleges, and the Masters of Schools: And they are reproved for it by Cardinal Bellarmine, as of an insupportable Vanity and a Novelty unheard-of in the Church of God ever since the Apostles. Now, that so strange a thing as this practice, to which there was never any recourse in the most damnable Heresies, should be introduced in France, that is to say, in a Church the freest of the world, and the greatest enemy to these Servitudes, and upon occasion of such Trifles; this is what is most stupendious indeed, but in that manner which we admire the extraordinary effects of the Fantasticalness of men. It is certain yet that the Jesuits could not have better published to the world the excess of that credit which they have in the Church, then by this means. 'Tis nothing to establish reasonable things; no man can tell whether it be Reason or Force which has made them to be received: but to make their power appear indeed, one should choose such things as these, which are most excessively irrational. I can say no more to exalt the power of the Jesuits; and we must acknowledge that having succeeded in this Design, they are able to do whatever is not impossible. But in this, as ill luck would have it, the Heresy of the Sense of Jansenius, which they would universally establish, is one of those impossible things; since to persuade the world of it, they must of course change the common Sense of men: so as, in spite of them, the Cause of their adversaries must of necessity vanquish in this last point, which is as it were the ultimate Redoubt of the Jesuits. I do not only say that it must needs be so for the future, and that all the pretensions of the Jesuits upon the question de facto of Jansenius should pass for ridiculous; but I say, 'tis already so, because they do pass for such already amongst all persons who have any cognisance of those matters, and that there are very few of them but are disabused. This I have demonstrated by other proofs in my precedent Letters; and therefore I satisfy myself for this time with a concluding one. There are divers Bishops in France who have boldly declared in the face of the Church, that matter of Fact and matter of Right are different things in the affair of Jansenius; that all Heresy consists in a precise Dogm; and that one cannot with the least shadow of Justice treat those as Heretics whom they do not reproach with any particular Heresy, because they do simply question whether any such Propositions are in a Book or no. M. de Alet, M. de Vence, M. de Beauvais, and M. d' Angers clearly promote all these Propositions as certain and indubitable; and you may find them all comprehended in M. de Comenge's Letter to the King, which is alone sufficient to ruin all the Impostures of Father Ferrier, and all the Errors of the Jesuits. In the mean time these Fathers with all their credit cannot find Five other Bishops in France that dare formally to promote the Propositions, contrary to those which are maintained by these Prelates. They may find some that may speak of the concealed venom of the Heresy of Jansenism, because they are words which signify nothing, and which they willingly yield to the strongest party. But they could never yet find any that durst affirm that matter of Fact and matter of Right were things inseparable, and that there was ever any Heresy without some particular Dogm; because there is a certain stop to common Sense which hinders those who have never so little wit from such a degree of Extravagance. But you will say at least, that the Jesuits Cause has all the advantage at Rome, because the Briefs are all in their favour. But let me tell you, Sir, 'Tis true, the Calumnies of the Jesuits have rendered the Divines odious there, because they are opposite to the unjust pretences of the Roman Court against the Sovereignty of Kings, and the Jurisdiction of Bishops; and therefore perhaps they are not displeased at Rome at the Oppression which they suffer. But since they have common Sense at Rome as well as at other places, all that these Divines maintain here is received there, and as well believed as in other places, & indeed more generally then in France itself; because Passion has not so much disturbed their Reason and their Judgement. I do not love to report things without proof; and therefore I shall allege one which is very decisive upon this particular, viz. That even the Inquisition of Rome has newly & authentically approved all that those whom they call Jansenists have taught in France upon the Question de facto & de jure, which is so ridiculously opposed by the Jesuits. I conceive you will not require of me to show you that the Inquisition has given this Judgement in favour of them under the express names of Jansenius and Jansenists. You know well enough what Reasons they have to hinder them from rendering them this exact Justice. But you ought to be satisfied that I show you wherein they have rendered it in a Cause so like it, that it differs only in the name. And now judge whether I do not make it good. What do these Divines pretend? There is (say they) a very wide difference between defending of condemned Opinions and such as are repugnant to the Catholic Faith, which they attribute to Jansenius Bishop of Ypres, and maintaining that Jansenius Bishop of Ypres has not taught those condemned Opinions. The First would be prejudicial to the Church, and to their selves; but the Second is not in any kind so. For, as all Divines acknowledge, there is a great deal of difference between saying that the General Councils & the Church can err in jure, in condemning an Opinion which does not deserve to be condemned; and affirming that it can err de facto, in judging that such or such a Proposition has been taught by a certain particular person. The Error of General Councils or the Church in matter of Fact can cause no prejudice to the Church; but the Error of a Council in matter of Right would be extremely prejudicial to the Church. Therefore do we not pretend to defend the Errors of the Five Propositions attributed to Jansenius; but that which we pretend is, that there is no harm in believing that Jansenius is innocent, and at least to acquit him from this ignominious Aspersion. You see what these persons say, 'tis a summary of all their pretensions. Now hear my History, and observe if you can where the difference consists which distinguishes it from the affair of Jansenius. In the Council of Lateran, the fullest of all the Councils since, there were no less than 1280 Prelates at it, they examined the Works of Abbot Joachim, so famous for his Prophecies, and among the rest a small Treatise which he composed on the Holy Trinity against the Master of the Sentences. The Council finding in this Writing a corrupt Proposition, condemned him for an Heretic, and the Condemnation is inserted in the Canon Law. There was at the same time another Abbot, called Gregory de Laude, Doctor in Divinity, who having undertaken to write his Life and interpret his Prophecies, thought himself obliged to justify the Heresy which was imputed to him by the Council of Lateran. This was an otherwise bold undertaking then that of justifying Jansenius of the Errors which were charged upon him. He did it yet without fear in the 67 Chap. pag. 281. of his Book printed at Naples in folio, 1660. where he thus discourses. That none may be scandalised at what we are about to affirm, they are to know, that there is a vast difference between defending an Opinion condemned, and repugnant to the Catholic Faith, which is attributed to Joachim Abbot de Flore, and the maintaining that Joachim Abbot of Flore has not taught those condemned Opinions. The First would be prejudicial to the Church and to myself; but the Second not at all. For, as that most Learned person Dominicus Gravina (according to his custom) says, There is a great difference between saying that General Councils can err in matter of Right, by condemning an Opinion which merits not that Censure; and affirming they may err in matter of Fact, by judging such or such a Proposition was taught by an Author. The Errors of Councils in matters of Fact can do no prejudice to the Church; but the Error of a Council in matter of Right may be highly injurious to the Church. And therefore we do not in the least pretend to defend the Error attributed to Joachim by the Council of Lateran; but that which we pretend is, to defend the innocence of Abbot Joachim, and to discharge him from this stain and ignominy. Benetamen intendimus Joachimi innocentiam defendere, & eum à tali labe & ignominia vindicare. Well, you will reply to me, this is the Opinion of this Author▪ He speaks the Jansenists very language, and the wonder is not great there should be a Jansenist at Naples. But how shall I know that this is the Sense of the Inquisition at Rome? This is that you are to make good. This Book has passed the Inquisition, where they have examined it with extraordinary care. For the Prophecies which he authorises are extremely curious. But haply this passage escaped them? No, They particularly examined this 281 page, finding all the rest very sound, and have changed only one place, which I shall sincerely turn you to, as it stands in the page of the Corrigenda of the Book, printed by order of the Inquisition the 6th of March this very year 1664. You see I bring you no old stories for news. In stead of these words in this 281 leaf, line 11, where 'tis said, Bene tamen intendimus Joachimi innocentiam defendere, that is, We pretend to clear the innocency of Joachim; the Inquisition ordains you should put, Conabimur tamen, si fieri potest, Joachimum defendere, that is, We will endeavour, if it be possible, to defend Joachim. O, how easy would it be to make Peace in the Church of France, were the Jesuits but as reasonable as the Inquisition of Rome is upon this point! I cannot devise why they should be so troubled to find Expedients to terminate this difference. See here one to your hand, and the easiest in the world. There is no more to do then to bid the pretended Jansenists for the future to say, that they will no more defend the Innocency of Jansenius; Bene tamen intendimus Jansenii innocentiam defendere, but content themselves in saying, We will endeavour, if we can, to defend Jansenius, Conabimur, si fieri potest, Jansenium defendere. I dare pawn my word, Sir, that there would not be a man of them who would refuse this Condition, and that would not be yet satisfied with less; so reasonable they are and moderate. And with what justice can it be refused them? Is it that Joachim's Book is more considerable than that of Jansenius, which was without controversy one of the most knowing Prelates of his Age? or that we own more respect to a Constitution of P. Alexander, ☞ then to the Decision of the most Universal of all the Councils? Conclude we therefore, Sir, that the Jesuits have succeeded in the Dispute concerning Grace, as they have done in that of all the rest, to torment men, which is no such great wonder: 'Tis but the natural effect of violence. The Law of the World is, That the weak succumb to the strongest; and therefore we are not to admire, that a small number of Divines, who have nothing on their side save Truth and Innocence, should be overthrown by the Jesuits, that is to say, by an Army of thirty thousand men, who have for so long a time been so cruelly resolved upon their Ruin. But what is most admirable is, to see in the mean time the greatest part of the world persuaded of the justice of the Jesuits, and that yet the Doctrine of those Divines should have more approbators than ever it had, in which properly consists the Victory of Truth. This miserable Question de Facto, this Sense of Jansenius, of which the Jesuits make such a noise at present, is but a wretched corner of ground to which they are retired after their having been beaten out of all their other holds, which have hitherto been the subject of the Dispute; nor are they yet able to make that good. They must either render, or precipitate themselves: that is, they must either acknowledge that the matter of Fact (which is the present Controversy) being no matter of Heresy, there can be no Heresy in all this; or, that obstinately defending this Error, they fall into Heresy themselves. I know very well yet, that this distinction between the Advantage of Persons and that of a Cause is too nice and subtle for many persons, that being gross and carnal, judge only of things by the external, and by the noise; and that one cannot easily make them comprehend that the Cause of those who seem to be oppressed is in effect victorious, and that of their Oppressors overcome. The Miracles and incomparable Sanctity of the Primitive Christians could not for 300 years abate this impression of their Senses in the spirits of a world of Pagans, nor persuade them that the persons whom they killed had any Reason on their side. There is nothing more ordinary than this Argumentation; He is persecuted; It is therefore he is in the wrong; because he has not the imagination which commonly joins the Idea of Pain with that of the Crime. But God would make us see the error of this in the Christian Religion, on which subject this has been most experienced, in causing, on the contrary, that this Oppression of the Christians during 300 years, which encouraged those Pagans to despise them, should prove one of the brightest and most divine marks to distinguish it from the false Religions. For whereas the Kingdoms of the World were established and subsisted by Temporal advantages of those only who founded or maintained them; God would on the contrary have his Empire, which is that of the Truth, should be founded and augmented by the Sufferings and Death of those persons whom he employed to establish it; to show that he was stronger than the World, in surmounting the World by that very Victory which the World conceived they had over his Servants. The Cause of Truth has almost gained the same advantage in these our Times, both from the excessive power of the Jesuits which attacked them, and the extreme weakness of the Divines who defended it: all which contributed to its Establishment, and to the making it appear with the greater Splendour; since there is no man but must conclude, that the Jesuits Doctrine must needs be very naught, and their Morality extremely corrupted, since all their power has not been able to hinder it from being blasted by so many Censures: And that, on the contrary, the Doctrine of the Divines must needs be very orthodox; since they have made the Church approve it, against so mighty an Opposition. The more puissant the Jesuits be, the more the Censures which have past concerning their Doctrine should appear legitimate, just and authentic; since, in regard of the Credit they have in the Church, it should not be hard for them to procure reparation of the Church for the wrong which has been done them by her unjust Censures. And the more the Divines are oppressed and abandoned, the more ought that which has been done against them to be suspected, and what has been done to their advantage esteemed just and legitimate. Thus, by a most admirable effect of the Divine Providence, the power of the Jesuits is the confusion of Jesuits; since 'tis an evident Conviction of the Falseness of a Doctrine which the Church has condemned in their Authors. And the oppression of these Divines, defenders of the Hierarchy, of Penance, of Morality and of Grace, is in the mean time the reproach of the Jesuits, who have so inhumanely persecuted them; and the glory and establishment of the Truth, which they have maintained with so much success against this insolent Society. FINIS. A Copy of a Letter FROM The Reverend Father VALERIAN, a CAPUCHIN, TO Pope ALEXANDER the 7th. Most Blessed Father, AFTER I have kissed your blessed Feet, and made a most humble acknowledgement of my devout subjection, etc. I F. Valerian, Milanese, Priest, of the Order of the Friar's Minors, called Capuchins, (being enjoined under pain of Excommunication and other Penalties expressed in the Bulls of the Popes your Predecessors) declare to your Holiness, that I have by a long series of years exactly observed, that the Clerks Regular named Jesuits, whilst they thirst after riches, dominion and glory above all mortal men whatsoever, publicly commit and perpetrate many things which are prohibited, and omit many things that are commanded under the penalty of mortal Sin, not showing the least token of repentance, without which they become suspected of Heresy, whiles they suppose those enormous commissions not to be prohibited; or, if conscious of their Crimes, they continue to wallow in them, presumed guilty of Atheism. But I explain my deduction by this Example. Titius a Parish-Priest in a City induceth a public Notary and four Witnesses to frame a supposititious Testament, by which fraud the right Heir is deprived of an Inheritance of a hundred thousand Crowns, which Titius seizes for himself, by perverting justice before the Judge, whom, notwithstanding, (together with the Notary and Witnesses) he, in the Sacrament of Penance, absolves from the Crime, as not at all obliged to make Restitution, defending himself against the parties oppressed, and others that are highly scandalised hereat, with all manner of other pious Works, (those only excepted which hinder the procuring of riches, glory and dominion) such as Prayer, Fasting, Alms, and whatever else have merit and commendation from the Austerity of Life. This Fact involves, 1. the Crime of Subornation and falsifying in the public Notary; 2. Perjury in the four Witnesses; 3. the Theft of 100000 Crowns; 4. the perverting of Justice before a Judge; 5. the notorious Scandal of Impenitence, and Impunity for so many and so grievous Crimes; and lastly, the extreme abuse of the holy Sacrament of Penance. These Six Errors, under the guilt of mortal Sin, prohibited all men both by the Divine, natural and positive Laws, whosoever does obstinately and contumaciously deny, whether in these or others of like quality, is an Heretic. To this Doctrine I firmly adhere, and having attested the verity of the Fact, declare to your Holiness the foresaid Heresy, or (to say better) Atheism of the Jesuits. But before I proceed to explain not a few of these and the like Enormities, together with the Circumstances of Place, Time, Persons, and other particulars belonging to them, I shall first assert to your Holiness the innocency of this my Declaration; not from any advantage arising from this suppression of Heresy, (which of itself is sufficiently manifest) but by the very Circumstances of my person. Namely, thus: Since the year 1653 I have frequently signified to the holy Congregation De propaganda Fide, and other Ministers of the Apostolical See, this my opinion concerning the Heresy of the Jesuits; nor hath any of them appeared to disapprove my Zeal, which therefore I have reason to think pious, and not at all unacceptable to them. Above twenty years since I signified to the same holy Congregation Fourteen Commissions and Omissions, wherein the General and two Provincials of the Jesuits, and divers others, together with their Assistants and Council, remained contumaciously involved for many years; which I condemned as including both Heresy and Atheism. The Cardinal's understanding by me, that the Jesuits had spread a report as if I had been reproved for this Address to the Congregation, did of their own accord and by their Letters Patent (corroborated with their Seal, and the subscription of the most eminent Cardinal Borgia) commend and approve that my Letter and Zeal, exhorting me to constancy in rendering my services to the holy See Apostolic. I appeal then to the Archives of the same holy Convocation, animated to make this Denunciation by a Person whom I am ready to produce, as becomes the design in hand. To Father Wadding a Jesuit, (pretended Chancellor of the University of Prague) who endeavoured my Reconciliation with the Society, I promised my most humble services, upon condition he could prove that the aforementioned Fourteen Crimes were not prohibited under penalty of mortal Sin. But he immediately breaking off the discourse, departs in a rage, and was never seen by me since. With like success, some years after, F. Nicolas Lensisius, Exprovincial of Lithuania, (together with Baron Pramorus Dean of the Cathedral of Comacum) in the presence of divers Noble Persons, used much persuasion to induce me to a better intelligence with the Society. But he not having the patience to hear me read what I had written concerning those Fourteen Actions, suddenly departed, nor so much as ever replied to the Letters which I had sent him on this Argument, nor did I afterwards see him any more. Being by these and many of the like nature incited to denounce to the H. Apostolic See this growing, or rather raging Heresy of that Society; I did humbly (by an Epistle dated from our Monastery at Rome) admonish Mutius Vitellescus, than General of the Society, concerning that Affair; a Copy whereof I exhibited to Pope Urban the VIIIth of happy memory, and to some of the Cardinals who are yet living, designing an Exemplar of the same to the Emperor Ferdinand the Second; that my judicial Declaration being thus disposed of, might appear the more innocent, when I found that Evangelical correction did nothing avail. But neither received I any answer from Mutius, nor observed any Reformation in the Society. Thus may I have sufficiently asserted the sincerity of my Declaration, as instituted according to the rule of the Holy Gospel, and the Canons for the Conservation of Faith and purity of Manners. But it also concerns my particular safety, which I supplicate you will protect against the Jesuits, who desire nothing more than my ruin, yea, that I were even buried alive, with as much indignity to those whose Asylum I invoke, as this my personal welfare concerns the integrity of the Catholic Faith. Your holiness's most humble Servant, F. Valer. Capuchinus. 28 April, 1659. The Copy of a Letter from a R. F. Provincial to the R. R. F. General of the Capuchins. WHAT a Tragedy the Apologetic Libel of our Father Valerianus, lately published against the Fathers of the Society, has raised amongst us, I will briefly relate. Upon the Eve of the Purification of the B. Virgin, there appeared in this our Convent of Vienna the Auditor of the Apostolic Nuncio in a Coach, and with him the Secretaries of the Emperor, attended with armed Soldiers. The Auditor having called before him the F. Valerian, the Guardian of the Place being also present, denounces an Arrest against him in the name of the Pope and the Nuncio: But the Secretary commands him in the Emperor's name, to come without delay immediately into the Coach, unless he would be violently seized by the Soldiers. He willingly obeys, and is led to the Imperial Hospital, where he is cast into the most public and infamous Prison, and committed to the custody of the Soldiers, thence to be shortly brought forth, and (as he says) by the command of his Holiness sent Captive to Rome. In the mean time, behold the whole City of Vienna in an uproar; the greater part of both Sexes and of all conditions astonished, and wondering at this lewd manner of proceeding, detests it as scandalous, precipitate, and highly prejudicial to Religion. As well Secular persons as Regulars of almost all Orders, and even the Grandees themselves, run flocking to the Monastery, compassionate the Father's condition; some of them of their own accord repair to the Emperor, the Empress, the Apostolical Nuncio; and others of the Nobility whom it concerned defend the case of Valerianus and of our Order, supplicating that means may be found out to obviate the Scandal. In the streets are heard the clamours of the People, Let the good Capuchins live; Let F. Valerian live; He suffers thus for the truth, etc. Let the FF. of the Society perish; the authors and promoters of all these Confusions. Thus they pursue them with imprecations, casting dirt and stones at as many of them as come in their way. I being at this time employed in visiting the neighbouring Convents, no sooner hear of this, but I hasten to Vienna, find the Apostolic Nuncio exceedingly perplexed, and passing the nights without sleep; declare to him the danger of so great a Tumult; pressing him to seek out some Expedient to appease the present and future Scandals. He replied, That he did truly compassionate us and the F. Valerian, but durst not disobey the Pontifical Mandates; requesting me, that I would think of some means how to avert these imminent evils: and in fine concludes, he would conform himself (Caution being given) to the disposal of Caesar; affirming that he was ignorant of the manner of his Imprisonment. From hence I go to other of the Nobility, and at length to the Emperor himself; who hearing me very graciously, I declare, that I came not to plead for the F. Valerian, or defend his Actions, but to implore Justice; that by his Majestie's Mediation the said Father might be convened before a competent Judge, his Process heard, and being found guilty, might be punished according to his demerits, as he himself also desired: at least I earnestly beseech him, that these Scandals might be repressed, and mature provision made for the honour of our Religion, being myself no otherwise concerned in the affair. To this I add, how much all men are astonished with admiration, that a Capuchin of sixty years in the Order, for Life and Manners of highest reputation, formerly Provincial of this Country, looked upon as one likely to be made General of the whole Order, and in time advanced to the dignity of Cardinal; that had deserved so well of the House of Austria, by whose negotiation and dexterity the Marriage between the King of Poland and the Daughter of the Emperor Ferdinand the IIᵈ succeeded happily; that had managed divers Embassies to the same King of Poland, the See Apostolical, and other Princes with success; meriting no less of the Roman Church, Apostolic Missionary for many years, defending the Faith by his Writings and Disputations, exposing his life to perils, not without admirable advantage of Souls, the Conversion of Princes, and even of some Preachers themselves: That, I say, such a Person, allied by blood to many Nobles and Princes, should with an armed band be surprised in his Convent, or his own House rather, no regard had to the Bodies of so many Emperors and Empresses his Predecessors, nay of his Royal Father and Mother resting in the Lord, in the Church of the same Convent, and like a Malefactor against the whole World, as well as the City, be cast into a public and infamous Gaol, and exposed as a laughingstock and spectacle of derision, not cited, not heard, not sentenced, not condemned. I add yet farther, That no less scandal to the detriment of Religion is to be feared and expected, in case he, passing through so many Provinces, and universally known, should be led by an armed Rabble Captive to Rome, whiles the people remain wholly ignorant of the Cause. To these Objections the Emperor replies; That he exceedingly compassionates both the Religion and the F. Valerianus; that the manner of proceeding displeases him; that he hath no other part in this Affair, then that he could not refuse the Apostolic Nuncio imploring the Secular Arm in the name of the Pope; that he would confer with the said Nuncio, and endeavour to avert the future Evils and Scandals. But in fine, the Emperor being totally disengaged from this Concernment, 'tis concluded in the secret Council, that the foresaid F. Valerian be dismissed out of Prison, and restored to his former Liberty, (Caution being first given by the most excellent Marquis Prince of Baden and Kinsman of F. Valerian, and his Nephew Count Magnus de Strasnits') not in the Convent, but that he remain in the house of the Count de Weitenberg, ' till he find some convenient opportunity to slip thither, without notice taking of his Imprisonment, and there to remain 'til farther resolution from the Court of Rome. This Tragedy, though extremely scandalous, yet seems (Circumstances well considered) to tend rather to the honour then to the disgrace of the Religion and the F. Valerian. The Regulars of almost all Orders evidently favouring the part of Valerian. Meanwhile, how busy the FF. of the Society are, and what Reproaches and enormous Lies they everywhere vent against the F. Valerian, is altogether incredible to be spoken. These particulars I thought fit to declare to your most Reverend Fatherhood, and to inform you truly of the success of the Tragedy; that you may at the Court of Rome, and wherever else it shall appear necessary, defend the honour at least of the Religion, as it shall to you seem good in the Lord. Most Rev. Father, Your most obedient Son. Vien. Austriae, 15 Feb. 1661. A Copy of the Epistle of F. Valerian, Capuchin, to F. Ludovicus à Galice of the same Order. My Lewis, SEeing you so earnestly desire of me those short Replies to the Particulars which are so commonly objected against me, I send them here to you. In the mean time, I beseech you to inquire what Crime of mine it is of that magnitude, that it should be just to begin the Judgement with an Execution so severe and violent, as an ingenuous person would abhor more than Death itself. I am made a Spectacle to the World. Farewell. From the Prison at Vienna, 8 Feb. 1661. 1. Qu. Why didst thou, Valerian, accuse to the Pope the Society of the Jesuits, as persons infected with Heresy? Resp. Because they commit, and omit, unpunished, and without the least Scruple, many things which do notoriously involve mortal Sin by the Christian Faith: Because both the Gallican and Belgic Church has censured their Moral Christian, as being repugnant to the Gospel, the State-Politick, and all the necessities of humane life. 2. Qu. Why, Valerian, after the Denunciation frequently repeated, (the Pope being silent) dost thou not cease to declare? Resp. I have not denounced once, that is sufficiently: I have only produced a few Examples of heretical Commissions and Omissions; but there are very many more, and those most Scandalous ones both against the Pope and the Church Universal. 3. Qu. How didst thou, Valerian, dare attack the whole Society? Resp. If I have rashly done it, let my Temerity tend to the honour of the Society; and in that case, I promise to make it satisfaction with the peril of my head. 4. Qu. Why, Valerian, didst thou publish thy Apology in print, contrary to the Decree of the Pope, forbidding it under pain of Excommunication? Resp. That Decree concerns not Valerian alone, but extends to all the Missionaries. I obeyed the Decree when I published not my Disputation with Ororius, Habevo, and Calixtus; though it had been approved by the Apostolic Nuncio, and the Ordinary of the place, before the Decree: I obeyed the Decree, before I had published the greater part of my Philosophy. I published my just Apology, because I was defamed by the Jesuits for an Heretic, condemned of Heresy, destined to Punishment (if I went to Rome,) and presumed to such a degree flagitious, that the tenth part of what was pretended deserved my Expulsion even from the whole Order of the Capuchins. 5. Qu. Why, Valerian, didst not thou demand the assistance and direction of the Judge against these Calumnies? Resp. I often implored it for several years together, but without remedy, or reply. 6. Qu. Why feared you not, Valerian, the indignation of the Pope, for publishing a thing contrary to his Decree? Resp. I did never believe his Holiness would cut me off from the Communion of the Faithful, because (in despair of Justice). I strove to assert myself a Catholic, not flagitious, but a servant of God: But that a person considered in particular circumstances is obliged under the guilt of mortal Sin and of Excommunication from the Society of the Faithful, rather to undergo that Infamy, then to dispense materially with the Pope's Decree, is an erroneous Proposition, involving Heresy, and most pernicious to the Pontifical Jurisdiction, as supposing it unjust, and plainly Tyrannical. 7. Qu. Why, Valerian, wert thou not afraid, that by purging thyself from that Infamy, thou shouldst bring the Pope under suspicion of having denied thee Justice? Resp. I have in my Apology sufficiently declared, that all Popes, though never so holy and prudent, are frequently mistaken concerning the verity of Matters of Fact; and I perceive that Alexander the VIIth is yet wholly ignorant of the truth of this Affair. 8. Qu. Why, Valerian, wouldst thou not rather pass by the Infamy, then bring the Pope under the least suspicion of refusing to do thee Justice? Resp. That question is not worthy of a man in his right wits. 9 Qu. Why, Valerian, dost thou so severely perstringe the whole Society of the Jesuits, and publish thy Denunciation to the whole World? Resp. I have the rather done it, because they traduce me; that the Jesuits being smartly reproved, without calling me in question, it might serve for an evident presumption of mine Innocence; that the Ear which was shut against the truth by the artifice and power of the Jesuits, might be opened by the loudness of this rumour. 10. Qu. Why, Valerian, didst thou not fear the scandal which might arise from these Dissensions of Catholics? Resp. I did therefore publish my Apology, that all might understand the Catholics were not defiled with the Heresy of the Jesuits, nor presuppose an exorbitant Jurisdiction in the Pope unbounded by laws: And that I am rather in such cases obliged by the Canon Law to presume the Innocency of his Holiness. 11. Qu. Why, Valerian, didst thou incline to revolt from the Catholic Faith, and to pass over to the Heretics? Resp. 'Twas never in my thoughts: nay, I came spontaneously and uncalled from Prague to Vienna; where the first time I stirred out of the Monastery, I presented myself to the Apostolical Nuncio, to whom I affirmed that I was ready to answer before a Judge, and upon conviction of my fault forfeit even my head to my Accuser. Notwithstanding this, I was imprisoned before the Pope could take the least cognizance of it. 12. Qu. Why, Valerian, didst thou signify to the Apostolical Nuncio, that you would not go to Rome, though you might indeed be possibly dragged thither, upon his Holiness' command? Resp. I do not believe the Pope (were he conscious of the fact) would decree me a secular Prison, to be guarded by Soldiers so far as Rome, for these very Circumstances of my person; namely, that I am, First, actually engaged in denouncing the Heresy of the Jesuits to the Pope, according to the Decrees of other Popes his predecessors, commanding these Denunciations under penalty of Excommunication: The chief Arguments of which Declaration I could not (as I said) expound in five or six Epistles, which would hardly suffice for the very first. Secondly, The Crimes perpetrated by the Jesuits, as directed (say they) ad majorem Dei Gloriam, were neither discovered, nor indeed observed by me at Rome, but in the hereditary States of the House of Austria, from whence they pretend to carry me away. Thirdly, The acerbity both of a Prison, and of a Journey to Rome, cannot be supported without my infinite confusion. Fourthly, My old Age, craziness, and affliction of mind, (which those who thus treat me aught to suppose) together with my many private inconveniences, are things which I could no ways endure without imminent peril of death. Fifthly, My destruction proceeding from Violences of this nature, would make me appear infamous in their opinion who think well of my Judge. Sixthly, So great an indignity to my person would even grieve and afflict the very Order of the Capuchins, and my own Allies in blood and affinity, and would in fine perturb no small part of the Christian World, to which I am known by many signal and honourable titles. Seventhly, There lies upon me the domestic care of my four Nephews, (who are all of them (one excepted) under age; the Eldest being constituted Guardian of his Brothers, but still under my direction.) The Education of these, and indeed of all our Family of the Counts de Magnis, would actually miscarry and be ruined in my absence. The Imprisonment therefore and designed Journey to Rome is (considered with these and other the like Circumstances) what, in the opinion of wise men, an innocent and generous person would abhor more than corporal Death. 13. Qu. What is therefore the Crime which is objected against thee, the infamy whereof should suspend the Judgement which is begun from an Execution even harsher than Death? Resp. That I cannot divine, being, as I am, imprisoned in the custody of Soldiers, and in vain imploring to be heard, whiles the Apostolical Nuncio denies it lawful for him to take cognizance of the affair. 14. Qu. In fine, Valerian, produce us some Canon, by virtue whereof you find it lawful for you to dispense with a Pontifical Decree; for this Dispensation is strongly objected against you. Resp. Alexander Papa tertius, ad Archiepiscopum Ravennensem C.U.R. de Rescriptis, etc. Si quando aliqua, etc. Alexander the Third, to the Archbishop of Ravenna, C.U.R. de Rescriptis. If at any time it fall out that we enjoin something to your Brotherhood which may possibly seem to exasperate your mind, you ought not to be troubled thereat; but diligently considering the quality of the business concerning which we writ unto you, either reverently obey our Commands, or signify by your Letters some reasonable cause why you cannot: for we will patiently suffer it, when you refuse to do what hath by wicked insinuation been suggested unto us. These three Letters are translated out of Latin, as they are to be seen after the Appendix Albiana published with his Purgatio; where writing to the Cardinals he thus concludes. TErrent hujusmodi exempla, Eminentissimi PP. obsequentissimos sanctae Sedis Filios, etc. Such like Examples, most Eminent Fathers, terrify the most obedient Sons of the Holy See, feeling by sad experience that rigour of Obedience which a particular Order hath arrogated to itself, (whether by the assistances of Piety, or Carnal Wisdom, let those consider whom it concerns) who ought to be regulated, not by the votes of Clergymen, but by Laws and Customs inflicted on them by force, and by the aid of the Secular arm, which their Insinuations have abused: and will doubtless (unless the Wisdom of your Eminences intercede) oblige such as are skilful in Ecclesiastical Antiquity and the Divine-Politick-Law, to inquire into the Remedies left by Christ to the Children of the Bride-Chamber, by which they may emancipate themselves into that Liberty whereby the Faithful of other Patriarchates have formerly maintained Communion with the Roman Church, without that Severity and Subjection which the Western Church has by degrees admitted; the Holy See so promoting wholesome Titles into Laws and Rites, that it hath nevertheless left place for Nature to abrogate the same, when they break forth thus into Abuses and Servitude. But the Prudence and care of your Eminences gives us ground to hope, that the Insolences of your equally arrogant and ignorant Ministers will be corrected, before the force of Nature be compelled to exert itself beyond the Sanctions and Decrees of our Ancestors. Which that it may succeed to the good both of the Roman Church and ours, is the presage and prayer of Your Eminence most humble Servant, Tho. White. To which sense, but more clearly, is this Paragraph out of a Book entitled, La Chaine du Hercule Gaulois, ou les Essays continus Chrestiens, etc. sur quelques importans points & inconveniens des temps, dedicated to Mademoiselle, by her Confessor, and printed at Paris, M.DC.LI. where, speaking of the great mischiefs arising from the disputes 'twixt the Jansenists and Jesuits, pag. 320. he hath this ingenuous passage. ET de uray, n'est il pas pitoyable de voir, qu' on puisse dire avec plus de raison que du temps de l' Arianisme, qu' il semble que toute l' Eglise est devenue heretic? Car, posé ce qui est uray, etc. And to say truth, is it not a most deplorable thing to consider that one may with more reason affirm it then in the very time of Arianism itself, that the whole Church seems to become heretical? For admitting what is most certain, that the Church has decreed Calvinism, Pelagianism and Semipelagianism to be Heresies; and that the Doctors are those who sit in the Chair to be consulted withal upon points of Religion: All Catholics are reduced to a most strange perplexity. For if a man shall address himself to those who are of the Jansenian party, they will tell him that those who are termed Molinists are Pelagians, or, at least, Semi-pelagians; and on the other side, the Molinists will bear him down, that their Adversaries are Calvinists, or else Novatians. Now all the Doctors of the Church Catholic are either of the one or the other party, (except it be some few, which are not yet resolved whether side to embrace.) I leave you then to consider, to what prodigious straits the minds of men are reduced, since this is held as a Maxim, That whoever fails in one point of Faith, fails in all. To what other refuge than does this necessity seem to compel us, but to have recourse to the Faith of the Primitive Church, and to limit ourselves to that pure simplicity of Belief, wherein we are assured that our first Christian Brethren attained to Salvation? ANno Domini 1554. die verò primâ Decembris, Sacratissima Theologiae Facultas Parisiensis, post Missam de Sancto Spiritu in aede sacra Collegii Sorbonae ex more, etc. In the year of our Lord 1554. the first day of December, the Venerable Faculty of Divinity at Paris, after celebration of the Mass of the H. Ghost in the Chapel of the College of Sorbon, and upon Oath taken, now the fourth time assembled in the same place, to determine on certain Bulls which two of our most holy Popes, viz. Paul the Third, and Julius the Third, have (as they give out) granted to a sort of men who out of a singular affectation would be entitled of the Society of Jesus, the which two Bulls the Senate or Court of Parliament of Paris had sent to the said Faculty by an Officer, to be viewed and examined by them: After recital of their obedience to the holy See, etc. it follows, Sed quoniam omnes, praesertim verò Theologos, etc. But for that all men, and especially Divines, should be prepared to give satisfaction to every one that desires to be enlightened in matters which concern the Faith, Manners, and Edification of the Church; the said Faculty have esteemed it their duty to satisfy what has been by the said Court commanded and required. Having therefore diligently and frequently read, repeated, and understood all the Articles of the said two Bulls, and, as the gravity of the thing required, for many months, days and hours (as the manner is) accurately discussed and examined it, they have by an unanimous consent (but with all reverence and humility to the correction of the Apostolical See) thus at last concluded. This novel Society insolently arrogating to themselves the Name of Jesus, so licentiously, and without any care in the choice, admitting all sorts of persons, how flagitious soever, illegitimate and infamous, differing nothing in their exterior Habit from the Secular Priests, in Tonsure, in Canonical Hours, which they repeat in private, or sing publicly in the Churches, in Cloisters and in silence; in choice of Meats and Days, Abstinences, and divers other different Ceremonies, (by which the state and order of Religions are preserved and distinguished;) as having received so many and ample Privileges, Indulgences and Immunities, especially in what concerns the administration of the Sacrament of Penitence, and of the holy Eucharist; and that without any difference or regard had to Places and Persons; and even in the Office of Preaching, Reading and Teaching, to the great prejudice of the Ordinaries and Hierarchical function, and that of other Religions, yea even of Princes and Temporal Lords, against the Privileges of all Universities, and finally to the exceeding regret and burden of the People: This Society seems to us to violate the honour and discipline of the life Monastical, and to enervate and weaken the studious, pious and necessary exercise of the virtues of Abstinence, Ceremonies, and Austerity; nay, gives occasion of freely apostatising from other Religions; besides, it evacuates the due obedience and subjection to Ordinaries, it unjustly deprives as well the Temporal as the Ecclesiastical Lords of their just Rights, excites troubles and perturbations as well in the one as the other Polity, induces a world of quarrels amongst the common people, multitudes of dissensions, variances, contentions, emulations, rebellions, and, in sum, an infinity of Schisms. All these particulars, together with sundry others, having been therefore most diligently weighed and considered, We pronounce and judge this Society to be (as to matter of Faith) pernicious, contrary to the peace of the Church, subversive of the Monastical Religion, and tending rather to Destruction then at all to Edification. NOw whether this Censure of that Learned Faculty were not as prophetical, as (by the consequence, and experience of one entire Age) we have found it just and reasonable, let the religious and impartial Reader candidly determine; since in this fatal period and Catalysis of true Piety, even this very Faculty itself (the so famous Sorbon) has been perverted by these Atheistical Sycophants, blasphemous and profane Wretches, from their primary station & integrity. We have produced this Decree to justify what we affirm; and to let all the world see how requisite it is to put a timely stop to their prodigious Exorbitancies, by that noble and resolute example of the Gallican Church, which God Almighty in his due season improve, to the consummate unity of all devout Christians. THE SENSE OF The FRENCH Church Concerning the Pope's Infallibility & Power, Lately declared by Authority. SInce the Bishop of Rome got so much Authority in the Catholic part of the World, as to be able by his Ministers and Negotiations to attempt to govern private Churches out of his own Metropolitan Diocese, there has been waged a great War amongst Divines about the Quality of his Authority. And, as Man's Soul by her Powers and Operations is twofold, of Understanding and Will, Speculation and Practice: so the Divines Questions, the Gates by which such Tenets get entrance into the Church, are also two-leaved; the one opens to the Power the Pope has to command assent to his Resolutions of Speculative Points, the other to what Obedience is due to his Commands. The party whose interest it is by application to the highest See to dilate their own privileges and exemptions from the ordinary Government of the Church instituted by Christ, and received by continual Tradition to our days, have striven with all their might to possess the World, that both for assent to Christian Truths, and for regulating of Discipline, Christ had given all power to Saint Peter and his Successor; so that the whole Hierarchy in effect remained in him alone. The rest, as far as not infected by them, maintained constantly the contrary; and that, though the Pope was chief of Bishops, yet the Congregation of Bishops was the Court from whence final resolutions were to be expected. The former Tenet had of late gotten a great strength through the most parts of Christendom; but the Divine Providence, when it found it fitting, raised the French Church, which at the present is very flourishing, to set a bar to their great advance, as may be seen by the Papers here inserted. The substance of the Advocate General's Plea against a Thesis defended in Sorbon concerning the Pope's Infallibility. Translated out of the French Copy. I Do (says he) acknowledge my carelessness in having suffered to scape unpunished those horrible Blasphemies which the Jesuits vomited out against Jesus Christ, in a Thesis defended the last year in the College of Clermont, which maintained that the Pope was as infallible in matters both of Fact and Right as Jesus Christ himself. Has a greater Impiety been heard of? But it is ordinary with them to teach erroneous Doctrines. And I believe 'tis from the impunity of that Crime that the boldness has been taken to defend the like Errors in Sorbon, against her Statutes, the Doctrine of the Gallican Church, and the Maxims of State and of this Court. How? That the Pope with five or six ignorant Divines with mercenary souls should be Infallible to make Articles of Faith of whatsoever Passion, Interest, or Ambition shall suggest to him? Our Ancestors have seen the fatal consequences and effects of this pernicious Doctrine. Wherefore, lest this poison should spread itself farther, and this pernicious Doctrine take root if it be left unpunished, I conclude the Thesis shall be struck out and blotted, the Defendant and Precedent constrained to maintain the direct contrary, and the Syndic never to approve such like Theses, under pain of being extraordinarily proceeded against. The Pope and Bishops are not Authors of our Faith, but faithful Guardians and irrefragable Witnesses of universal Tradition received from hand to hand, from Jesus Christ to us; according to Vincentius Lirinensis, Quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus creditum est, hoc de Fide est, etc. Notes upon it. Those who are acquainted with the Government of France, understand that the Parliament of Paris is made of Members given to Learning and reading of Fathers, and to the skill of Languages, particularly Greek and Latin, and by consequence of Church Antiquities; and that the King's Advocate, who at this present is called Monsieur Talon, is ordinarily one of the most eminent; and that in matters of Divinity they are tenacious of the Decrees of the Sorbon, the greatest Catholic University in our parts of the World, and whose Doctrine passeth for the Doctrine of the Church of France, especially their Ancient Decrees. It is again to be noted, that he saith that the Tenet of the Pope's Personal Infallibility in making Doctrines to be of new accepted for Articles of Faith, is against the Maxims of the French Government; that is, that it toucheth upon Treason: which if it be true in France, it can be no less in England; and he cannot be truly loyal to his Country who obstinately maintaineth that Error. The reason is clear: for, if that be true, the Pope may define and oblige Subjects to believe that he can depose a Prince, and bind his Subjects to take Arms against him, as was insinuated in a Letter confidently reported to have been lately written from Rome to Ireland, by a great man of that Court; though others say the Letter was counterfeited. Extracted out of a Letter written from France to a Person of Quality. The Jesuits having defended formerly that the Pope hath the same Infallibility with Jesus Christ, Monsieur Talon the Advocate General complained of it publicly in Parliament; remonstrating that this was a most horrible Impiety, and highly deserving open and corporal Punishment. Whereupon the Court of the said Parliament has ordained that the Precedent, the Regent, and the Scholars which maintained it, should appear personally to receive a Reprehension for the first time, and a denouncing of corporal and public punishment, intended and resolved to be inflicted, in case any of them should relapse into the like Blasphemy hereafter. Notes upon it. The Thesis mentioned is that against which was divulged the Paper entitled, THE JESUITS NEW HERESY; which insinuates, that the Tenet of the Pope's Infallibility was their former Heresy: which is a gentle Censure upon a Doctrine able to introduce Heresies without number into the Church of God; as is evident to whosoever shall consider how easy it is for a dozen of Divines to be either corrupted or deceived; and yet our Faith by this Position is made to depend on their Science and Integrity. Note again, that the King's Advocate professeth, that the Tenet of the Pope's Infallibility in matters of Fact deserveth public and corporal punishment; which signifies no less than whipping, banishment, or some such like punishment: and that it is a Crime deserving that the Civil Magistrate ought to take notice of it. This Absurdity was invented by the Jesuits, in envy to the great Scholar Jansenius; to the end that people might be persuaded he held Errors not visible in his Books, of the which they calumniated him, and would prove him guilty of them only by the Pope's Infallible word defining him to be so: which mad Prank of theirs has made such a pother in France of late years. A Decree of the Court of Parliament against a Theological Conclusion, intended to have been maintained the 19 of January 1662/3. by Monsieur Gabriel Droüet of Ville-neufve, Bachelor. Given the 22 of January 1662/3 at Paris. Extracted out of the Registers of Parliament, and faithfully rendered into English. THis day the Court having deliberated upon what was by the King's Council represented the 19 and 20 of this present Month, concerning a Thesis intended to have been maintained the said 19 day by Monsieur Gabriel Drovet of Ville-neufve in Britain, Bachelor in Divinity, at the Act called The great Ordinary of SORBON, which contained in its Second Position, Christus Sanctum Petrum ejúsque Successores summâ supra Ecclesiam Auctoritate donavit, Christ gave Saint Peter and his Successors highest Authority over the Church; in its Third, Romani Antistites Privilegia quibusdam Ecclesiis, sicut Ecclesiae Gallicanae, impertiunt, The Bishops of Rome bestow Privileges upon certain Churches, as upon the French Church; in its Eighth, Concilia Generalia ad exstirpandas Haereses, Schismata, & alia tollenda incommoda, admodum sunt utilia, non tamen absolutè necessaria, General Councils are very profitable to extirpate Heresies and Schisms, and to take away other inconveniencies, but not absolutely necessary; and many other Propositions contrary to the Authority of the Church, to the Ancient Doctrine always received and conserved in this Kingdom, to the holy Canons, to the Decrees of General Councils, and to the Liberties of the Gallican Church; tending also to exalt the power of the Pope above that of General Councils, and beyond the limits which have always been most religiously conserved in the Church of France: having heard the Syndic of the Faculty of Theology, and Monsieur Vincent de Meurs, Doctor in the said Faculty, of the College of Navarre, who was to preside at the said Dispute, and the said Droüet the Respondent, who had all been sent for in pursuance of the Decree of the 19 of this Month, as also having heard the King's Council in their Conclusions; the Court hath prohibited and forbidden, and doth prohibit and forbidden, the said Droüet to defend the said Thesis; hath ordained, and doth ordain, that it be suppressed, together with all the rest that shall be found to contain such like Propositions; prohibits and forbids all Bachelors, Licentiats and Doctors, and other persons, to write, defend and dispute, to read and teach directly or indirectly in the public Schools or elsewhere any such like, or other Propositions contrary to the Ancient Doctrine of the Church, to the holy Canons, Decrees of General Councils, to the Liberties of the Gallican Church, and to the Ancient Decrees of the Faculty of Theology of Paris, under pain to be proceeded against according to their demerits. Prohibits the Syndic of the said Faculty, and the Doctors who shall there preside at the Acts, to suffer any such Propositions to be inserted in any Thesis. Ordains that this present Decree be read at the general Assembly of the said Faculty of Theology to be holden in Sorbon the first day which the Court shall command, in the presence of two Counsellors of the said Court, who, together with one of the Substitutes of the King's Attorney-general, shall go thither expressly for that purpose. To which Assembly shall be summoned all the Doctors of the said Faculty, as also even the Bachelors of the first Licence. And this Decree shall be Registered in the Registers of the said Faculty, and signified to the Rectors, Deans and Proctors of the other Faculties, there to be Read and Registered, and sent to other Universities, as also to the Bayliages and Stewardships of this Jurisdiction, there to be likewise Read, Published, and Registered by the procurement of the Substitutes of the King's Attourny-General, who within one Month are to make Certificate thereof to the Court. Given in Parliament, the 22 Jan. 1662/3. Signed, Robert. Collationed. Notes upon it. The Error of the First Proposition lies in the word supra, above; for the French Church holds the Pope to have the highest Authority in the Church, that is, over particular men, but not over the whole Church: for so it professed in the Council of Trent, that it was the Faith of France, received from the Councils of Constance and Basil, that a General Council is above the Pope, as also hath been practised by divers General Councils. The Error of the Second Proposition is, That the Privileges of Ancient Churches (such as the French Church is) come from the Indulgence of the Pope, and not from the Succession to the Apostles and Apostolical Founders of them and their first Institution. The form of which Churches is to be the Rule to all Christian Churches by whomsoever they are founded: nor is it lawful to bring in new forms without violating Divine Right delivered in the constant Tradition of the Church. The Error of the Third Proposition consisteth in this, That it takes away the Practice of the Church, begun by the Apostles, and continued to the Council of Trent; is against manifest Experience, and, in effect, takes away all efficacity of extinguishing Heresies and Schisms, reducing it to the weak principle of the Pope's Infallibility and extraordinary Power: of which enough is above delivered in proportion to these short Notes, to show how dangerous the mentioned Errors are, and how necessary to be condemned and avoided by all good Christians, as pernicious both to Church and State. Postscript. Since the foregoing News, 'tis advertised that the contrary to the before-condemned Theses hath been publicly defended by the Son of Monsieur Le Tellier, one of the chief Ministers of State, the Archbishop of Paris himself presiding. FINIS.