urg'd to condemn it because supposing they do not understand it they can neither truely averr that they do reject it nor promise truely that they will not embrace it for peradventure they may be engag'd to doe it without knowing of it and perhaps fall into it before they are aware 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 onely know it by particular waies 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 Jesuites would not fail presently to say that this were not yet what the Pope understands and what they ought to condemn in fine that 't were 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 enwrapp'd in any Errour 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 Catholick 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 Catholick Doctrine of the free Predestination of the Elect receiv'd by the whole Church and maintain'd 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 Catholick Schools as these very Bishops do assure us a certain Sense different from efficacious Grace repugnant to S. Augustine and which has been constantly condemn'd by the Dominicans and the Jesuites 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 least which they but very confusedly know They know all that the Jesuites 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 reduc'd for the justification of their Faith and to avoid the reproch 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 condemn'd it without knowing it to conjure them to explain it that so they may be inabled to confound their Accusers in shewing the world how free they are from any Errour This is the onely reason which makes them require with so much earnestness the Explication of this Sense for they have otherwise no such hast to know it They hold the truth of the Doctrine of Efficacious Grace per se and reject whatsoever Errour is repugnant to it whether it be in attributing too little to Grace as the Molinists or in destroying its liberty as this pretended Errour of Jansenius's Sense should be This suffices them so as men molest them not with the indetermin'd 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 forc'd to continue the pressing of them to explain this Sense nor can they refuse to doe 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 't is 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 subtile 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 compos'd 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 deny'd without being an Heretick The other poor and abandon'd 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 Heretick This is the Idea which F. Ferrier gives us of the Church in his Treatise But as there is nothing more prodigious then 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 Errour to reign in it And every man may by himself be convinc'd of the falseness of this phantastick Supposition For unless a man wilfully shut his own eyes one cannot deny but there are in the Church no less then four different Opinions upon the Formularie The First is that of the Jesuites who affirm that matter of Fact is inseparable from that of Right and that quatenus so it cannot be deny'd without Heresie 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 Formularie The Third and the most embrac'd consists in affirming that a man is not oblig'd to believe the matter of Fact as decided either by divine or humane Faith but that one may for all that sign the Formularie without violating his Conscience because the Signature does never concern or fall upon the Facts
before any man had the boldness to maintain them This we generally find in all Heresies The Doctrine of Arius is an Heresie 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 Heresie 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 repell that unjust Reproch which they fling upon us of being sectators of a new Heresie For we sincerely protest that we intirely 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 corde meo non exaudiet Dominus We do not conceal our sense but are ready to referre it to the Pope and to the Bishops and to accept them for our Judges We have offer'd it several times and have this consolation that those who are the most prejudic'd 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 Jesuites 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 publickly accuse of Heresie before the Pope or the Bishops How clear and ingenuous Sir is this Declaration how truly Catholick and exceedingly remote from all suspicion of Heresie and that not onely for acquitting these persons of Errours but for shewing that they could not be culpable of Heresie if without their knowledge and consent they should haply fall into some Errour since all the world knows that the crime of Heresie does not consist simply in the Errour but in the Obstinacy to maintain and dwell in an Errour against the judgment of the Church Now how is it possible that these people should impudently maintain an Errour they are totally ignorant of against a judgement of the Church which they know nothing of But this does not satisfie the Jesuites and because they do not find their reckoning in it they continue their accusation of Heresie and this is it which has oblig'd the Divines to give them this defiance and which is certainly very urging Either set the Heresie you impute to us distinctly and clearly down or acknowledge your selves Calumniators for accusing us of an Heresie which you cannot tell what to make of On this it is that the Jesuites have reveal'd the Mysterie of their Politicks and the whole secret of the Heresie In stead of endeavouring to set down describe the Positions a thing which upon trial did never succeed with them they intrench 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 Catholick the Pope declares it heretical behold then your Heresie But as they had to doe with persons very well prepar'd 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 prov'd it well too For some of them it seems condemn his Sense and his Doctrine as heretical whiles others defend it for Catholick without the least difference between them concerning Faith because it is not the same precise and determin'd Sense which is thus condemn'd by some and approv'd 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 Catholick and others that 't is 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 Jesuites 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 then did the Council and by giving him a Catholick sense 'T is the very same case in the present Dispute The Pope saies 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 Catholick 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 't is held by S. Augustine and by the whole School of S. Thomas Now 't is clear that the Pope does no-where condemn this Doctrine as he makes all the Church believe and indeed as both the Church and the Jesuites 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 doe with the rest but reject it in general as we are ready to doe in particular when-ever the Church shall please to describe it in particular or to shew us where it is And thus you have the whole state of this ten-years Dispute The Jesuites 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 Heresie and to answer all those Writings which made it plainly out that it is but a mere Chimaera but especially he undertook to replie 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 Heresie consists or else we must never hope to understand it whiles we live What saies this Reverend Father to us then That 't is expedient to publish
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 Jesuites say the same And the Church saies 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 it self 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 onely 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 then the Semi-pelagians they adde 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 onely 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 abus'd That it was a Crime an Attempt and an Heresie to condemn the Doctrine of S. Augustine of Heresie 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 Heresie without erring in matter of Right and of Faith whether one attacque it for not avowing it to be S. Augustine's as do the Jesuites or acknowledg it for S. Augustine's as did the Semi-pelagians and as those persons would seem to doe to whom this Writing is directed So that the difference which is 'twixt the Church and the Jesuites 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 Errour to S. Augustine That God is the Author of Sin and that he compells 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 Errour both of Right and Fact since he takes that for a Truth which is an Heresie 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 acknowledg S. Augustine's Doctrine to be orthodox one could not justly accuse him of Errour in point of Faith because he should condemn what the Church condemns but of an extreme Temerity onely to have father'd 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 Heretick because he did not doe it but as approving an Errour 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 Catholick because he would say it without any Errour so little regard there is to be had to be able to judge whether a man be Catholick or Heretick and whether the Questions concern matter of Right or of Fact to these wild and indetermin'd Propositions which approve or condemn anothers Doctrine without so much as shewing it 'T is what S. Augustine has himself decided and in respect to himself by these words full of unction and charity Whilest men saies 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 reprov'd by him who condemns this Errour in attributing it to me without reason then to be prais'd by those who would maintain this Errour because they believ'd I had taught it For though the first did wrongfully to attribute an Errour 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 condemn'd by the Truth True it is that this person who should thus impute an Errour to S. Augustine would be oblig'd to say that the Church has not compris'd 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 doe 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 't is lawfull to doe them with Reason but by no means without it And therefore It is lawfull to accuse of Supposition the Council of Sinuessa and it is not so in reference to the Council of Nice It is lawfull to say that Theodoret has been ill understood by the Sixth Council but it is not lawfull to say that Nestorius was so by the Council of Ephesus It is lawfull 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 't is a very frail consequence which F. Ferrier
they let F. Annat alone with his Not that this Reverend Father with all his credit is yet arriv'd 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 annex'd to Faith and That he who denies it is an Heretick 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 fansie themselves not oblig'd openly to oppose F. Annat but that they may safely shelter themselves from this rowling 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 doe by a Subscription which as they affirm engages them to nothing By this means those who refuse to sign remain expos'd to the unjust violence of the Jesuites 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 saies 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 adde that the Jesuites are mistaken who require we should treat those as Hereticks who acknowledge no Fact which we can onely assent to but by humane Faith Yet is this manner of acting more tolerable then that of those who say nothing at all in publick concerning their intention but joyn simply with the Jesuites by an exteriour 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 onely judge things by the out-side take them for approbators of the Opinions of the Jesuites 'T is not therefore an universal Illusion but an universal Baseness which makes these Divines to be oppress'd or rather 't is 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 accus'd they are united with the greater number of the Divines of the Church But the terror and dread of F. Annat keeps all mens tongues bound to defend them and lets them all loose to condemn them uniting in one equivocal expression persons that are extremely distant in Opinion that so F. Annat may seem to be follow'd of the whole Church whenas in truth he is in effect condemn'd by the whole Church Were there indeed no other Life besides the present nor any other Judge save Men it must needs be confess'd that F. Annat were a marvelous 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 abandon'd by all the World But this Father whilest 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 deceitfull 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 Jesuites 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 Heresie under pretence forsooth of destroying an Heresie which is but Imaginary One may therefore justly applie these words of J. Christ to the Jesuites which he spake to a Bishop in the Apocalypse Dicis quòd dives sum locupletatus nullius egeo nescis quia es miser miserabilis pauper cacus nudus You conceit your selves indeed rich and aboundant by the number of your Sectators whereas in the mean time you are miserable and objects of compassion You are poor abandon'd blind and naked since all those who seem so much to follow you do in effect condemn you And one may on the contrary applie to these persecuted Divines those other words of our B. Saviour to another Bishop in the same Book Scio tribulationem tuam paupertatem tuam sed dives es blasphemaris ab his qui se dicunt Judaeos esse non sunt I know the Oppressions which you suffer and the poverty which they reproch 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 Errours Sir I am c. This 1. of March 1664. Since this Letter was finished I have receiv'd a large Writing of F. Ferrier's intituled Relation veritable c. A true Relation c. I conceive as to what relates to the Heresie of which he continues to accuse the Divines who are more Catholick then himself you will find nothing in it which is not here overthrown before-hand But as to the prodigious number of Falsities with which his Relation abounds this Father deserves to be particularly answered and I am assur'd there will some body be found out that will so doe it as the Jesuites 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 Heresie of Jansenism but as a rare example of the Vanity of mens 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 spake such impertinent things in the Age they liv'd in and who those silly persons were that suffer'd themselves to be led by their Dotages But these you 'l say are Prophecies and 't is no hard
the true Idea of Jansenism in effect 't is very expedient and there it was it should indeed have been begun For 't is a wondrous strange thing that men should make such a noise about a business which no body yet understands And also saies F. Ferrier because these Divines complain in their Writings that we accuse them of an Heresie without being able to determine what it is I find my self oblig'd to say their complaints are very unjust It has been told them a thousand times over that their Heresie consists in their believing and maintaining that the Doctrine of Jansenius on the Five Propositions is Catholick 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 condemn'd for heretical and at the same moment maintain the Doctrine of Jansenius upon these Propositions not to be the same which the Popes have condemn'd This is all the illumination that F. Ferrier affords us upon this point and to which all his Colours are reduc'd After this 't is to no purpose to hope for any other either from him or from any else He has done his utmost was too far engag'd and we are not to believe that any body will ever be able to out-doe him But in earnest Sir 't is an Abuse beyond all humane patience to promote as F. Ferrier does here a thing so invisible as is this Heresie 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 bloud 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 Jesuites may imagine that being as they are powerfull in the world they may lawfully say and doe 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 Mysterie of this Heresie without Position or to say better this Heresie without Heresie Did not the Cordelier Jubilé doe it before him and fully as well Every body derided it in this Frier and so will they doe in this Jesuite so as if this be all that he has to doe at Paris he may e'en goe back again to his Province His staying at Paris will be no advantage to his Cause and most certainly blemish his Reputation But saies F. Ferrier 'T is a Question of Right to understand whether the Doctrine of Jansenius be Catholick or Heretical as it also is to know whether the Doctrine of S. Augustine be orthodox or not But I maintain that whoever saies so knows not what a Question of Right or a Question of Fact signifies We must doe 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 Catholick Doctrine and Heretical Doctrine come into a Question it is presently a Question of Right since if so several Contestations would likewise be reduc'd 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 Catholick 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 onely to consider what both parties agree in and what they contest for 't is 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 onely whether this Dogm be of such an Author or not the dispute is onely concerning the matter of Fact The Jesuites and the Sixth Council do consent that 't is an Heresie to say There is but one Will in J. Christ but they are at variance whether this Heresie was taught by Pope Honorius The Council affirms it the Jesuites deny it This is only a Question of Fact though it be express'd by terms which look like matter of Right The sense of Honorius is heretical saies the VIth Council The sense of Honorius is Catholick say the Jesuites When men agree on the contrary that an Author has taught a certain Doctrine and the dispute be whether this Doctrine be Catholick 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 Catholick the Council maintains it for Heretical This is a Question of Right express'd by the same terms with the other The Doctrine of Honorius is Catholick say the Monothelites The Doctrine of Honorius is heretical saies the Sixth Council But when they are not agreed concerning a certain Doctrine whether it be Catholick 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 't is a Catholick Doctrine to say there is but one Will in J. C. as Pope Honorius teaches the Jesuites reply the Doctrine is not Catholick and that 't is falsly 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 Jesuites 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 Catholick 'T is an easie 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 Catholick For 't is evident that insisting upon the general terms one cannot distinguish whether they be Questions of Fact or of Right whiles 't is 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
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 contain'd in this Formularie those who scruple it cannot sign it without restriction since the declarations which men make to the Church ought to be intirely 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 Jesuites who make the first ought by the necessary consequence of their Opinion to condemn for Heresie not onely 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 Heresie 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 Heretick then he who should absolutely refuse to sign it So as all those many Bishops that have caus'd 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 believ'd then by humane Faith are as much Hereticks in the judgement of the Jesuites and of F. Annat as these Divines whom they particularly persecute True it is their Politicks oblige them to distinguish of two sorts of Hereticks in France some of which they treat civilly and others most outrageously They place the Bishops Sorbonists the Fathers of the Oratory the Benedictines c. in the first order and whom they do not yet attacque but by consequence though by a very necessary one whiles they range in the other those whom they immediately design for ruine that so they may with the greater force surprize the other Therefore it is sufficiently evident that all those persons who have sign'd the Fact either of humane Faith or without believing it shall be never the more acquitted for that but be all Hereticks in their turn when they have left off oppressing the others seeing they must of necessity be so in the opinion of the Jesuites 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 Heresie ought from a necessary consequence of this their mutual Opinion condemn the Jesuites both of Calumny and Errour 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 abandon'd and who have fewer sincere approbators then that of the Jesuites Nor is this an aiery Supposition but a real Verity to be discern'd by every one that has a mind to it that the Jesuites stand almost single in this pretension that matter of Fact is inseparable from matter of Right and that one cannot believe without being an Heretick the Doctrine of Jansenius not to be heretical The most devoted to the Jesuites 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 joyn'd 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 Curats of Paris do solemnly approve and by an authentick Act the Distinction between Fact and Right contain'd in the first Mandat of Paris In fine they proceed with confidence that the Jesuites 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 Jesuites are in a manner alone in their erroneous opinions And 't is 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 administred and against the other that it was not altogether sincere in them to subscribe a Formularie which clearly comprizes a Fact without being fully persuaded of the Fact But this difference has relation to Manners onely 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 accus'd 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 Jesuites domineer every-where and the Divines are oppress'd it is not very difficult to give a reason for it They are onely 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 doe 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 who-ever stands in his way in any thing Every one has his particular business at Court and those who have no other either for themselues or their Communalty enjoy their repose in which they will not be molested Jansenism is the onely affair of Father Annat so as that people may not be cross'd in their particular businesses
nice and subtile for many persons that being gross and carnal judge onely 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 kill'd had any Reason on their side There is nothing more ordinary then this Argumentation He is persecuted It is therefore he is in the wrong because he has not the imagination which commonly joines the Idea of Pain with that of the Crime But God would make us see the errour of this in the Christian Religion on which subject this has been most experienc'd in causing on the contrary that this Oppression of the Christians during 300 years which incourag'd 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 onely who founded or maintain'd 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 employ'd to establish it to shew that he was stronger then the World in surmounting the World by that very Victory which the World conceiv'd they had over his Servants The Cause of Truth has almost gain'd the same advantage in these our Times both from the excessive power of the Jesuites which attacqu'd 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 Splendor since there is no man but must conclude that the Jesuites 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 Jesuites be the more the Censures which have past concerning their Doctrine should appear legitimate just and authentick 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 oppress'd and abandon'd the more ought that which has been done against them to be suspected and what has been done to their advantage esteem'd just and legitimate Thus by a most admirable effect of the Divine Providence the power of the Jesuites is the confusion of Jesuites since 't is an evident Conviction of the Falseness of a Doctrine which the Church has condemn'd in their Authors And the oppression of these Divines defenders of the Hierarchie of Penance of Morality and of Grace is in the mean time the reproch of the Jesuites who have so inhumanely persecuted them and the glory and establishment of the Truth which they have maintain'd 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 acknowledgment of my devout subjection c. I F. Valerian Milanese Priest of the Order of the Friers Minors call'd Capuchins being enjoin'd under pain of Excommunication and other Penalties express'd in the Bulls of the Popes your Predecessors declare to your Holiness that I have by a long series of years exactly observ'd that the Clerks Regular named Jesuites whilst they thirst after riches dominion and glory above all mortal men whatsoever publickly commit and perpetrate many things which are prohibited and omit many things that are commanded under the penalty of mortal Sin not shewing the least token of repentance without which they become suspected of Heresie 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 publick Notarie and four Witnesses to frame a supposititious Testament by which fraud the right Heir is depriv'd of an Inheritance of a hundred thousand Crowns which Titius seizes for himself by perverting justice before the Judge whom notwithstanding together with the Notarie and Witnesses he in the Sacrament of Penance absolves from the Crime as not at all oblig'd to make Restitution defending himself against the parties oppressed and others that are highly scandaliz'd hereat with all manner of other pious Works those onely excepted which hinder the procuring of riches glory and dominion such as Praier 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 publick Notarie 2. Perjurie 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 Impunitie for so many and so grievous Crimes and lastly the extreme abuse of the holy Sacrament of Penance These Six Errours 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 Heretick To this Doctrine I firmly adhere and having attested the verity of the Fact declare to your Holiness the foresaid Heresie or to say better Atheism of the Jesuites 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 Heresie which of it self 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 Heresie of the Jesuites nor hath any of them appear'd 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 Jesuites and divers others together with their Assistants and Councel remain'd contumaciously involv'd for many years which I condemn'd as including both Heresie and Atheism The Cardinals understanding by me that the Jesuites had spred a report as if I had been reprov'd for this Address