rfect expression of his literary genius, and touch theological questions with such an inimitable grace and felicity of expression as to have awakened a u

icacy, its keenness and yet its lightness. We shall, however, endeavour to give as clearly as we can an account, first, o

Ottosen, or John the son of Otto; as the son in his turn was Cornelius Jansen, or the son of John. Jansen was the younger of the two friends, having been born in 1585; but he appears to have exercised a powerful influence over his older companion. The great bond of their union and common enthusiasm was the study of St Augustine. For the purpose of pursuing this study undisturbed, they retired to the seaside near Bayonne, and here they established themselves in scholastic seclusion. Smitten with the desire of attaining theological truth, they found the Schoolmen constantly appealing to St Augustine as their authority, and they consequently resolved to examine this authority for themselves, and so ascend to what they believed to be the source of their favourite science. Had they taken on

s employment divided their attention with the arduous task upon which they had entered, of mastering and digesting the principles of the Augustinian theology. The Bishop of Bayonne offered preferment to D'Hauranne, and there were projects of settling Jansen also at the head of a college; but i

uence far more powerful than that of any bishop of his day. And so penetrating and dangerous did this influence seem to the great Minister whose efforts to bind him to his side had so often failed, that he at length shut him up in Vincennes (May 1638). Here he remained in close confinement for more than four years; but even from this gloomy retreat the impression of his great p

believes that contrition is necessary. [106] And in the affair of Monsieur's marriage all France has given way to me, and he alone has the hardihood to oppose it." Against all enticements and assaults alike he set a proud and firm faith in his own mission-a patience sublime in its calmness, and in the unwavering consciousness of Divine right on his side. "I am careful to complain of nothing," he said in his imprisonment. "I am ready to re

ly known in the ecclesiastical world. His fame, however, rests not on any political or ecclesiastical labours, but on the results flowing from his original studies at Bayonne. He never forgot his devotion to St Augustine. He is said to have read the whole of his writings ten times, and the treatises against the Pelagians not less than thirty ti

s for the simplicity of my error. I know that if I have erred, it is not in the assertion of Catholic truth, but in the statement of the opinion of St Augustine; for I have

rried out in such a spirit, mi

k receive a more stormy welcome. Within a few weeks of its appearance the University, the Jesuits, the executors of Jansen, the printer of the 'Augustinus,' the Spanish governor of the Low Countries, and the Papal Nuncio were engaged in a warfare of pamphlets, treatises, pasquinades, pleadings, synods, audiences, which it would be impossible to set fort

ny longer to wreak their vengeance on the author himself, they were resolved to put his work under ban; and accordingly, a Bull was obtained from Rome in the summer of 1642, condemning Jansen by name, and declaring that the 'Augustinus' contained "many propositions already condemned" by the Holy See. It was doubted whether the Pope, Urban VIII., designed to go the length announced in the bull, and th

ealously the Augustinian doctrines. A splendid prospect seemed opening before him, had he chosen to enter the Church and pursue an ecclesiastical career in the ordinary manner. But while thirsting for theological distinction, he had scruples about his vocation to the holy office. He overcame his scruples so far as to become a priest; but not only would he not accept the benefic

many pious bishops and doctors testifying approbation of its contents; on the other hand it was violently assailed. The Jesuit pulpits resounded with abuse of it and of its author. All Paris was disturbed by the noise which it made. "There must be a snake in the grass somewhere," it was wittily remarked, "for the Jesuits were never so excited when only the glory of God was at stake." The learned Petavius, and even the Prince de Condé, did not disdain to mingle in the combat. For a time Arnauld seemed to triumph, but f

sitions were afterwards reduced to five; and at length, on the 31st of May 1653, a formal condemnation of them was obtained from the Court of Rome. There was no longer any doubt as to the attitude of the Holy See. All the propositions were declared to be distinctly heretical, and the first and the fifth, moreover, to be blasphemous and impious. This result was not reached without much debate and delay. No sooner had Cornet's propositions appeared than Arnauld assailed them and all who supported them. A congr

s such were condemned by the Papal Bull of 31st May 1653, are so intimately connected

gh willing, are unable to obey; and the grace by which

e of fallen nature, is abl

ious or otherwise, liberty from necessity is

r grace preceding all actions-were heretics, inasmuch as they said that thi

n saying that Christ died or shed

very statement bristles with controversy, and the half-extinct meanings of old questions that go to the root of Christian thought lie hid in their language. All the propositions were condemned without reserve, but two points were left unsettled. It was no

the part of Mazarin, an interest on behalf of the Jesuits. Yet he was reluctant to move actively against the Jansenists. M. d'Andilly still had his ear in matters of State, and by his intervention and that of others the project of an armistice was for a time entertained. Port Royal was to keep silence, if its enemies did not push their triumph to an extremity. Even the indefatigable Arnauld seems to have promised to be quiet. But the Jesuits were too conscious of their power, and too relentless in their hostility, to pause in their determination to crush their opponents. They had recourse both to

esire of peace plunged him all the more into war. His letter called forth numerous replies. He responded by a "Second Letter," in the shape of a volume. In this letter his enemies seemed to see his fate written. They extracted from it two propositions which in their view clearly contravened the Papal verdict-namely, 1st, that he had expressed doubts whether the five propositions condemned as heretical were in Janse

y members. But, as Pascal afterwards said, "it was easier to find monks than arguments." The second and doctrinal point received professedly more deliberate discussion. The sittings regarding it were protracted till the close of the month, the 29th of January. But the result was really forestalled. The restriction laid on free debate was such as to lead no fewer than sixty doctors to withdraw, protesting to Parliament against the interference with their rights. Their protest, however, came to nothing. Sentence was finally passed, against not only Ar

right information in a popular form. Arnauld, ever ready with his pen, was prepared himself to undertake this task; and in a few days afterwards he read to his friends a long and serious paper in vindication of his position. But his friends were not moved as he expected. His pen, powerful in its own sphere, was not fitted to tell upon the popular mind; and his audience were too honest to conceal their disappointment. Arnauld, in his turn, frankly acknowledged the truth forced upon him. "I see you do not find my paper what you wished, and I believe you are right," he said; and then, turning all at once to Pascal,

penetrating and rapid intelligence, but a brightness of wit, and a dramatic creativeness, which made the Sorbonne and its parties, the Jansenists and their friends, alive before the reader. Never was the triumph

resses his surprise at what he has come to learn of

nvocation of an assembly so illustrious as that of the Theological Faculty of Paris, attended by so many extraordinary and unprecedented circumstances, induced such high expectations that one could not help believing the busines

examination-"the one a question of

being in Jansen's book after the bishops had declared that they were. No fewer than seventy-one doctors undertook his defence, maintaining that all

ontrary, found sentiments entirely at variance with them. They then earnestly begged that if any doctor present had discovered them, he would have the goodness to point them out; adding that wh

sing to examine whether he has spoken truly or falsely-who, in fact, have declared that they have nothing to do with the veracity of his

of parties regarding it, Pascal dismisses it at once, i

ld is presumptuous or the reverse; and should I be tempted from curiosity to ascertain whether these propositions are contained in Jansen, his bo

t led to doubt that they were so from the absurd refusal to point them out. In this respect he fears the censure will do m

ens to take up the question of right, as touching t

whether it is given to all men, or whether it is efficacious of itself. But truly we were deceived

race is not given to all men." He was equally unfortunate in his second inquiry. His neighbour, opposed as he was to Jansenism, would not condemn the doctrine of efficacious grace. The doctrine, on the contrary, was quite orthodox, was held by the Jesuits, and had even been defended by himself in his thesis at the Sorbonne. The inquirer is confounded, and ventures to ask then in what M. Arnauld's heresy consisted? "In this," replies his friend, "that he does not acknowledge that the just have the power of obeying the commandments of God in the way in which we understand it." Having got to what he supposes the "heart of the affair," he posts off to a Jansenist acquaintance, "a very decent man no

ake it out ourselves. It is quite beyond your understanding. Suffice it for you to know that the Jansenists will indeed say that the just have alw

smiled, and said coldly, "Tell me in what sense you use the expression, and I will tell you what I believe about it." But this was just what he could not do. So he gave the haphazard answer, that he used it "in the sense of the Molinists." "Which of the Molinists?" was the rejoinder. "All of them together, as being one body, and having one and the same mind," was the

ew Thomists." Both of these were real characters: the former a doctor of the Sorbonne, and a violent anti-Jansenist, who had written on the subject of grace; the latter a Dominican, who is said, however, by Nicole to have abandoned the principles of his order and embraced Pelagianism. The bewildered seeker after theological knowledge resorts, not to these worthies themselves, with whom he professes to have no acquaintance, but to certain disciples of theirs. In this manner he gets a definition of "proximate power," from which it is apparent that, wh

e always the power of praying to God, but that nevertheless they never pray without an efficacious grace which determines them, and which is not always given by God to all the just. Is such a one a heretic?' 'Wait,' said my doctor; 'you take me by surprise. Come, gently. Distinguo. If he calls this power proximate power, he is a Thomist, and yet a Catholic; if not, he is a Jansenist, and therefore a heretic.' 'He calls it,' said I, 'neither the one nor the other.' 'He is a heretic then,' said he; 'ask these good fathers.' It was unnecessary to appeal to them, for already they had assented by a nod of their heads. But I insisted. 'He refuses to use the word proximate, because no one can explain it to him.' Whereupon one of the fathers was about to give his definition of the term, when he was interrupted by M. le Moine's disciple. 'What!' said he; 'do you wish to recommence our quarrels? Have we not agreed never to attempt an explanation of this word proximate, but to use it on bot

d "Of Sufficient Grace," i

unate circumstance for the gratification of my curiosity. For he is thoroughly informed in the questions of the day, a

s out, as before, the substantial identity in opinion of the Dominicans and Jansenists, notwithstanding the junction of the former with the Jesuits to oppress the latter. The Jesuits hold the old Pelagian doctrine that grace is given to all, dep

ce given to all men, they nevertheless hold that with this grace alone men cannot act, but require furt

is that of the Jansenists, that men require efficacious grace in order to pious action. What is the meaning of all this jumble of opinion? Simp

ave really gained enough. But the world is content with words; and so the name of sufficient grace being received on all sides, though in different senses, none except the most

ct of conversational by-play, sim

' said I. 'Do they shape your discourses by a certain measure?' 'Yes,' said he, 'for some days past.' 'And do they oblige you to speak half an hour?' 'No, we may speak as shortly as we like.' 'But not,' I said, 'as much as you like. What a capital rule for the ignorant-what an excellent excuse for those who have nothing worth saying! But to come to the point, my father-this grace which is given to all, is it sufficient?' 'Yes,' said he. 'And yet it has no effect without efficacious grace?' 'Quite true,' said he. 'And all men have the sufficient, but not all the efficacious?' 'Exactly so.' 'That is to say,' I urged, 'that all have enough grace, and yet not enough-that there is a grace which is sufficient, and yet does not suffice. In good sooth, my father, that is subtle doctrine. Have you forgotten, in quitting the world, what the word sufficient means? Do you not remember that it includes everything necessary for acting? . . . How, then, do you leave it to be said, that all men hav

. Clearly he fights on their side against the Jansenists at the expense of his honesty a

ty. Do you not understand the difference? We depend upon superiors; they depend upon others. They have promised our votes, and what woul

ignorance introduced by the Reformation, had disseminated their principles with great rapidity, and become masters of the popular belief; while the poor Dominicans found themselves in the predicament of either being denounced as Calvinists, and treated as the Jansenists then were, or of falling into

respondent pity in the writer. But his Jansenist

Names are inseparable from things. If the term sufficient grace be once admitted, you may talk finely about only understanding thereby a grace insufficient; but this will be of no avail. Your explanation will be held as odious in the world, where men spe

St Thomas to the death. His allusion to the importance of the doctrine only calls forth more severely the indignant eloquence of

aintained by so many of your fathers, and so gloriously defended by your monks under Popes Clement and Paul-that efficacious grace which was left in your hands as a sacred deposit, that it might always, in a sacred and enduring order, find preachers to proclaim it to the world till the end of time-finds itself deserted for interests utterly unworthy. It is time that other hands should arm themselves in its quarrel. It is time that God should raise up intrepid disciples to the Doctor of Grace, who, strangers to the entanglements of the world, should

have found them intelligible and delightful reading. This is no exaggerated picture of the sensation which they produced. Their success was prodigious, and increased with every successive Letter. In an atmosphere charged with the theological spirit, yet wearied with the dulness of theological controversy, Pascal's mode of treating the subject came as a breath of new life. Here was one who was evidently no mere theologian-who knew human nature as well as Divine truth. His clear and penetrating intellect saw at once the man

up the most intricate matters possible; its raillery is exquisite; it enlightens those who know little of the subject, and imparts double delight to those who understand it. It is an admirable apo

with which this is done; the changes of scene and the turns of the dialogue are managed with admirable felicity; there is an exquisite fitness and Socratic point in all the evolutions of the argument, which we feel even now when we see so clearly behind the scenes, and know that Molinist and New Thomist must have had a good deal more to say for themselves. We have only to imagine the atmosphere of the Sorbonne, or the wider social atmosphere throughout France in the seventeenth century, impregnated to its core by a subtle controversial ecclesiasticism, to realise the impression made by "the Small Letters." The question everywhere was, Who could have written them? There seems at first to have been no suspicion of Pascal. He had previously only been known as a scientific writer; and

which have been interpreted to mean "Et ancien ami Blaise Pascal, Auvergnat, fils de étienne Pascal." There can be no doubt that he took a distinct pleasure in the anonymous wounds which he inflicted. He had a certain love of

. It was so difficult to set forth any direct reply to productions mingling such a subtle irony with grave attack. They could only say of them, as they afterwards more formally did-Les menteurs immortelles. Of the first Letters it is said that 6000 copies were printed; but, as they were easily passed from hand

M. Arnauld," and again, the three concluding Letters, [133] are closely connected with the first two. Their object, in one form or another, is the defence of the Jansenist doctrine, and of the Port Royalists, as its supporters. The intervening twelve Letters stand quite by themselves. They open up the whole subject of the moral theology of the Jesuits, and constitute the most powerful ass

h circumstances, that the "blackest heresy imaginable" would have come forth under the condemning touch of the Sorbonne? All Christendom waited for the result. It was true that M. Arnauld had backed up his opinions by the clearest quotations from the Fathers, expressing apparently the very things with which he had been charged. But points of difference imperceptible to ordinary eyes would no doubt be made clear under the penetration of so man

seemed at the least doubtful. The writer is puzzled, as usual, and has recourse to "one of the most intelligent of the Sorbonnists" who had been so far neutral in the discussion, and whom he asks to point out the difference betwixt M. Arnauld and the Fathers. Th

and-by by a comedy, in which the devils carry off Jansen; sometimes by an almanac; and now by this censure.' The truth is, that it is M. Arnauld himself, and not merely his opinions, that are obnoxious. Even M. le Moine himself admitted 'that the same proposition would have been orthodox in the mouth of any other; it is only as coming from M. Arnauld that the Sorbonne have condemned it.' . . . Here is a new species of heresy," concludes the writer. "It is not the sentiments of M. Arnauld that are heretical, but only his pe

l wince, also received some bruises in return. The shamelessness of the attacks made upon his friends and himself, contemptible as they were in their nature, left scars upon a mind and temper so sensitive and reserved as his. The "insufferable audacity" with which "holy nuns and their directors" had been charged with disbelieving the mysteries of the faith was "a crime which God alone was capable of punishing." To bear such a charge required a degree of humility equal to that of th

that 'I am a private individual;' and again in so many words that 'I am not of Port Royal.' . . . You may touch Port Royal if

opinion. The interests of Port Royal were his interests, and its friends his friends. His own sister was one of its zealous inmates. There is a certain force, therefore, in the taunt that Pascal, in "unmasking the duplicity of the Jesuits, did not hesitate to imitate it." His statements are not beyond the licence accorded to those who would drive an enemy off the scent, and shelter themselves within an anonymity which they have chosen to assu

y presence at mass, or in my Christian duty to my parish church? What act of union with heretics, or of schism with the Church, can you lay

dox. This was the dilemma of the New Thomists, so pithily expressed by one of themselves in the second Letter. But it was also Pascal's own dilemma; and the consciousness which he and his friends had of the nearness of the Jansenist doctrine to that of Calvin, made them all the more sensitive under the charge of heresy. The Jesuits had art enough to see the advantages which came from this association. The Port Roy

or briefs to join with you in condemning that error. . . . Now, when you have come the length of declaring that the error which you oppose is the heresy of Calvin, it must be apparent to every one that they [the Port Royalists] are innocent of all error; for so decidedly hostile are they to this, the only error with whic

rst Letters against the Jesuit doctrine of a sufficient grace which is not yet sufficient. The truth is, that apart from verbal subtleties, which Pascal could handle no less familiarly, only far more skilfully, than his adversaries, there is no rational position intermediate between the Pelagian doctrine (which is also substantially the Aristotelian) of free will and moral habit, and the Augustinian doctrine of Divine grace and spiritual inspiration. The source of character is either from within the character itself, which has power to choose good and to be good if it will, or it is from a higher sou

ot, indeed, more important in itself, but it is more diversified, and more practically interesting. Here, however, Pascal was more obviously performing a task than in the other Letters. He was speaking less out of his heart. Having grappled with the Jesuits, and noticed their tactics in the affair of the Sorbonne, he is led to loo

of Jesuit doctrine and morality before he began his task of inquiry and assault. Austere and simple in his own principles of virtue, direct and unbending in his modes of action, he was evidently appalled by the study of the Jesuit system, and the endless complexities of compromise and evasion which it presented. In seizing, as he did everywhere, upon the immoral aspects of the system, and touching them with the most graphic colours of exposure, he cannot be said to be unfair; for the materials with which he dealt were all abundant in their writings. His quotat

ice through, and I have employed some of my friends in reading the others. But I have not made use of a single passage without having myself read it in the book from which it is cited, without having exam

ssential principles of morality which Nature and the Gospel alike teach-that its practical excesses were quite in a different direction from the laxity of the Jesuits. But two things are to be remembered, not in favour of the Jesuits, but in explanation of their excesses: 1st, that they aimed, as Pascal himself points out, at governing the world, and not merely a sect-that their whole idea of the Church in relation to the world was different from that of the Port Royalists; and 2d, that their system of morals not merely rested on a wrong and dangerous principle (which Pascal's no less did), but had been endlessly developed in their schools by many inferior hands. This was Pascal's great weapon against them, and so far it was quite a legitimate weapon, as he himself claimed. As none of their books could appear without sanction, the Order was more or less responsible for all the frightful principles set forth in some of these books. All the same, it is not to be presumed that such a system of moral, or rather immoral, consequences was deliberately designed by the Society. Pascal himself exempts them from such a charge. "Their object," he says, "is not the corruption of manners; . . . but they believe it for the good of religion that they should govern all consciences, and so they have evangelical or severe maxims for managing some sorts of people, while whole multitudes of lax casuists are provided for th

y clever Jesuit, accompanied by his trusty Jansenist friend, and gradually unfolds from the mouth of the former the whole system of moral theology which had grown up in the Jesuit schools,-their notions of "actual grace," or the necessity of a special conscious knowledge that an act is evil, and ought to be avoided, before we can be said to be guilty of sin in committing the act; their famous doctrines of probabilism and of directing the intention, and all the consequences springing out of th

more or less. He may wish that Pascal had gone to the roots of the system more completely, and had laid bare its germinal falsehood, instead of heaping detail upon detail, and always adding a darker hue to the picture which he draws. But any such mode of treatment would not half so well have served his purpose. His audience were not prepared for any philosophy of exposure, still less for any attack upon the essential principles of the Church; he himself did not see how the successive laxities which he fixes with his poignant satire, or sets in the light of his withering scorn, spring from a vicious conception of Christianity and of the office of the Church. He does what he does, however, with exquisite effect; and the Jesuit Order, many and powerful as have been its opponents, never before nor since felt itself more keenly and unanswerably assailed. Many of

ver had a thought of loving God, or of being contrite for their sins; so that, according to Father Annat, they have never committed sin through the want of charity and penitence. . . . I had always supposed that the less a man thought of God the more he sinned; but from what I see now, if one could only succeed in bringing himself not to think of God at all, every

h, and leaves an intolerable smart. All that could be said in answer was, that his representations were lies. They were conscious exaggerations, no doubt, as all satirical representations are. This is of their very nature. But the extent to which they told, and the bitterness of the feeling which they excited at the time, and have continued to excite amongst the Jesuits and their friends,

, the following are the only extr

AND CHRISTIA

iments,' said the monk. 'I know that well; but you have expressed no aversion to them; and far from detesting the authors of such maxims, you cherish esteem for them. Do you not fear that your consent will make you a participator in their guilt? Was it not sufficient to allow men so many forbidden things under cover of your palliations? Was it necessary to afford them the occasion of committing crimes that even you cannot excuse by the facility and assurance of absolution which you offer them? . . . The licence which your teachers have assumed of tampering with the most holy rules of Christian conduct amounts to a total subversion of the Divine law. They violate the great commandment which embraces the law and the prophets; they strike at the very heart of piety; they take away the spirit which giveth life. They say that the love of God is not necessary to salvation; they even go the length of professing that this dispensation from loving God is the special privilege which

CULE AS A WEAPO

ooks any subject of laughter which is not in itself intensely ridiculous; and that in making a jest of your moral maxims, I am as far from making a jest of holy things as the doctrine of your Casuists distant from the holy doctrine of the Gospel? In truth, sirs, there is a vast difference between laughing at religion and laughing at those who profane it by their extravagant opinions. It were an impiety to fail in respect for the great truths which the Divine Spirit has revealed; but it would be no less impi

and he closes with a singularly appropriate passage from Tertullian: "Nothing is more due to vanity than laughter; it is the Tru

be given you than inflicting any.' I have merely exposed your sayings to the light, without commenting on them. 'If they have excited laughter, it is only because they are so laughable in themselves.' These sayings come upon us with such surprise, it is impossible to help

AINST THE

not against, but in conformity with, their own maxims? No one can blame me, surely, for having destroyed the confidence which you might otherwise have inspired, since it is far more just to vindicate for so many good people whom you have decried, the reputation for piety they deserved, than to leave you a reputation for sincerity which you have never merited. And as the one could not be done without the other, how important was it to make the world un

ith the 'Provincial Letters,' to which it was designed as a reply. While the question was before the Sorbonne, the curés of Paris published various writings, under the name of 'Facta,' in support of the conclusions to which they had come. These writings were prepared in concert with Pascal and his friends, and the second and fifth are ascribed entirely to his pen. It is even said that he looked upon the latter, in which he drew a parallel betwixt the Jesuits and Calvinists (to the disadvantage of the Protestants), as the best thing he ever did. [153] Long after Pascal's death (in 1694) an elaborate answer appeared, by Father Daniel, to the 'Provincial Letters,' under the title of 'Entretiens de Cléandre et d'Eudoxe sur les Lettres au Provincial;' but notwithstanding a certain amount of learning and apparent candour, the reply made no impression upon the public. Even the Jesuits themselves felt it

iousness of tone, what solidity, what eloquence in the last eight Letters!" Our Gibbon attributed to the frequent perusal of them his own mastery of "grave and temperate irony." Boileau pronounced them "unsurpassed" in ancient or modern prose. Encomiums could hardly go higher, and yet the language of Perrault is in a still higher strain: "There is more wit in these eighteen Letters than in Plato's Dialogues; more delicate and artful raillery than in those of Lucian; and more strength and ingenuity of reasoning than in the orations of Cicero." Their style especially is beyond all praise. It has "never been surpassed, nor perhaps equalled." There may be, as there is apt to be i

me was thrown into the controversy, and his most finely-tempered strokes made music in his own mind, while they carried confusion to his adversaries and triumph to his friends. The sensation made by the Letters was, of course, mainly confined to France; but the nervous Latinity of Nicole soon communicated something of the same sensation to a wider circle. [156] Pascal has himself told us that he never repented havin