they allow not any Grace to be sufficient but what is also efficacious So Refutat du P. Ferrier c. 11. pag. 64. Because say they this word Grace sufficient is not to be found either in the Scripture or in the Councils or in the Fathers c. therefore no Jesuit has right to oblige us to make use of it farther than we please And to shew their dislike of this sufficient Grace which the Mâ—linists do so much Idolize the Jansenists a while since in a Shew at Paris framed a Chariot wherein sat two Virgins the one with fair and beautiful fruit in her hands without use which they called sufficient Grace the other with fruit useful and nourishing which they stiled Grace Efficacious See their sentiments of Sufficient Grace Part 1. 4. The Jansenists as Jansenius and St. Cyran their heads Of Justifiâ—ation by â—aith â—one seem good friends to Justification by Free Grace and Faith in the blood of Christ without any regard to human merits as abused in the Popish sense 'T is true they make use of the name merit but in no other sense than it was used by Austin without any approbation of the thing as the ground of Justification This is manifest not only from their Books but also by their Practice It was the usual method of Jansenius for the comforting of afflicted consciences to send them to the blood of Christ alone and Mr. St Cyran seems mighty warme and pressing on this point The like instances I have had touching others of this persuasion in France who being to deal with dying persons insisted much upon pressing them to have recourse to the blood of Christ. Neither indeed are the Jansenists verst only in speculative and notional §. 29. Their practical Theologie but also in practick and active Theologie especially the chief of them Jansenius and St. Cyran seem to have had a very deep broad spiritual light and insight into the Mysteries of the Gospel and true Godlines and I am apt to persuade my self they had some feeling apprehensions and inward acquaintance with those choice Gospel truths they commend to others They talk much of studying the Scriptures and acquainting our selves with the mind and Spirit of God therein they presse with some affectionate importunitie to the renouncing our own righteousnesse strength wisdom wills c. They greatly commend to us spiritual povertie soul-humilitie heart-mortification self-emptinesse and abjection c. These things they insist upon not according to the Monkish mode of external mortification but in a Gospel strain with so much meeknesse of wisdom and yet with so much spiritual passion and warmth as if their words were but sparks or ideas of that Divine fire which burned in their hearts This I have particularly observed in Mr. St. Cyrans Epistles in reading whereof and comparing his expressions with the Character and Idea I have of his Spirit and life I must confesse I have been much recreated But thus much of their Doctrine The Jansenists begin also to have very moderate and favorable persuasions about Church Discipline Their principles of Church Discipline as it appears by these particulars 1. They are come now generally to disavow 1. That there is no human infallible Judge in matters of Faith not only the Popes but all human Infallibilitie This is one of the last refuges they have made use of against their adversaries as it appears by a Paper of theirs lately publisht titled Abregé d'un Traicté intitulé l'Illusion Theologique The summe whereof they comprise in this Syllogisme One ought not to hold for Hereticks any but such as resist an Infallible Authoritie in matters of faith Now its certain the Pope has not such an Autoritie Therefore c. The second Proposition adde they is clear as well as the first for an Infallible Autoritie iâ— Soverein in its kind and acknowledgeth no superior c. 2. Hence they also hold 2. That the definition of Dogmes belongs to the Word and the definition of facts to the Church to which we owe only a submission of respect not of Faith that the Definition of Dogmes and submission of faith thereto belongs only to the Word of God which they make to be the measure of faith and seat of all Church-Power So the Bishop of Comenge in his Letter to the King an 1664. touching the Jansenists speaks thus of them It is true Sire that they place not in the same rank the submission which they render to the Definition of Dogmes and that which they render to the Definition of particular facts because the one is a submission of faith and the other a submission of respect and of Discipline The truth Sire of things revealed by God may not enter into comparison with those not revealed thâ— Dogmes are revealed and not particular facts We ought therefore to separate the Dogmes and fact decided in the Constitutions receiveâ— by the whole Church to the enâ— that we submit to the one with 〈◊〉 submission of faith and to the other with a submission of pure respect Thus also the Jansenists themselves in their La simple verité à Paris 1664. The common light of reason say they shews even to the most grosse that two things that are essentially separate as a particular fact and a Doctrine of faith may be also separate in the creance of believers c. Hence also the Jansenists assert 3. That the Church has only a Declarative power and that as to matters of fact and Discipline i. e. Ministerial only and subordinate unto that of Christ. This is evident by their La simple Verité pag. 60. In the state of this life the Church demands of her children nothing but love and accord and the obedience she requires of them touching the facts which she decides is nothing but modestie and peace not a creance or belief She commands them to believe nothing but what she has learnt of Jesus Christ. She declares to them his Word not her own leaving to them as other things so also that libertie which he has given unto them provided that they loose not that respect which they owe to their Mother and trouble not the union of her children Thus the Jansenists of the Churches Power and Discipline 4. Hence also 4. Libertie of Conscience as it naturally follows the Jansenists allow yea contend for a Libertie of Conscience as to matters of fact and Ecclesiastick determinations about things indifferent or things not clearly revealed This evidently appears by and flows from what was lastly mentioned of them where all that they require to the Churches definitions is only a submission of respect and in case of difference in persuasions a respectuous silence so far as the Churches Peace and Vnity requireâ— it c. 5. Hence also we see what Vniformitie 5. What Uniformitie is requisite and Obedience they require as to Church determinations about matters of fact which is the alone object of her power namely a submission of respect or in case of differences a respectuous silence only not a submission of faith 6. Hence as to Church Censures they hold 6. Of Censures La simple Verité pag. 58. that Excommunication implies a penal death of the soul and seeing this death is the last of punishments which the Church can impose she ought not to ordain it but conformably to the Scripture and holy Decrees which are those of the Spirit of God for undubitable crimes and worthy of death against those who are convicted 7. Touching Schisme 7. Of Schisme they hold that be is the Schismatick who treats others more Catholick than himself as guilty of Schisme As for Heresie they say 8. Of Herâ—sie 1. 'T is an Heresie to judge of Heresies without the Word of God 2. That 't is an Heresie to believe that all those who have a spice of Heresie are Hereticks They make Heresie to consist mostly in the affection as in their La simple Verité pag. 50. FINIS ERRATA PAge 9. line 24. for works read Augustinus p. 15. l. 11. for au r. at p. 16. l. 22. r. Gautruche p. 20. â— 22. r. Jansenius's Augustinus l. 25. for against r. from p. 23. l. 27. after besides adde that p. 53. l. 26. r. drew p. 66. l. 19. for nos r. nobis p. 78. l. 10. for was r. has p. 81. l. 2. for it r. there p. 87. l. 24. r. Heretical p. 93. l. 23. r. rest p. 139. l. 22. for by r. to p. 148. l. ult for compleasant r. pleasant
Dogmatick Idea of Jansenisme The Principles of Jansenisme as laid down by Jansenius 1. Efficacious Grace the first Principle of Jansenisme of habitual and actual adjutorie 2. The traduction of Original sin 3. How far Invincible ignorance is sin 4. Of sinfull Concupiscence 1 Joh. 2. 16. 5. Of the nature of Fruition and that God is its alone object 6. Why love to the creature for it self is irregular 7. The pestiferous effects of creature-love and fruition 8. No free-will to good 9. Indifference not essential to Liberty neither does voluntary Necessitie exclude it 10. The state of pure Nature since the fall is but a philosophick figment 11. Love to God in the state of Innocence both natural and supernatural How love to God is a debt to humaâ— Nature and yet of Grace 12. Therâ— is no natural Grace or Happines bâ— what is supernatural 13. How Gâ— cannot but punish sin Sin the greateâ— punishment of sin 14. No Obligatioâ— on God to give Grace to such as improve Naturals 15. The impotence 〈◊〉 the Law as to salvation and the irrâ—â—tation of sin thereby 16. Of Medicâ—â—nal efficacious Grace and its necessitiâ— 17. The nature of efficacious Grace iâ— Divine suavity 18. There is no sufficient Grace but what is efficaciouâ— 19. How many wayes Gods Precept are usefull and possible without sufficient Grace 20. The Distributions 〈◊〉 Efficacious Grace into preventing anâ— subsequent 21. All Grace in love 〈◊〉 God 22. Of servile fear its causes c. 23. Of Free-will its nature c. 24. The mode of reconciling Free-wiâ—â— with Efficacious Grace 25. Of Preâ—destination its act object motives c 26. Of Reprobation and against Vnâ—versal Grace 27. Against Scholastick Theologie 28. The Jansenists Dâ—gmes of faith touching the perfection of Scriptures efficacious Grace justification by faith c. 29. Their practical Theologie 30. Their Principles as to Church Discipline 1. That there is no humane infallible judge in matters of faith 2. That Churchâ—power is declarative only 3. For liberty of Conscience c. HAving given some Historick account of Jansenisme §. 1. The Principles of Jansenisme its Authors Rise and Progresse together with sundry particularities as to matter of fact we now proceed to its Principles both Dogmatick and Practick wherein we may be more affirmative and peremptory than in former matters of fact The Principles of Jansenisme as of all Religiâ—n have a threefold 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or regard 1. To Faith or Doctrine 1. The Notional Principles of Jansenisme as laid down by Jansenius 2. To Discipline and Worship 3. To Morals or Conversation We shall begin with the first namely the Principles of Jansenisme relating unto Faith which though in themselves more speculative and national yet have they a very soverein influence on practice These national principles of Jansenisme may be considered as laid down by Jansenius the Founder of this Sect or as taken up by his Adhaerents We shall first consider them as they are to be found in Jansenius his Augustinus which is made the source and measure of Jansenisme And here we may not engage so deeply as to extract a perfect Idea of all Jansenius's Doctrine but shall content our selves to cull forth and collect such particular notions of his as carrie in them some note of peculiaritie and remarque whence the denomination of Jansenisme received its Original And in this undertaking we shall follow Jansenius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his own words translated and method as well as sense so near as we may 1. As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â— Efficacious Grace the first Principle of Jansenisme the first lie or Idol of Molinisme consists in the asserting of Free-will so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first Truth of Jansenisme regards Efficacious Grace This is the first great fundamental notion which I have remarqued in Jansenius and his Adhaerents who indeed are great Advancers of Efficacious Grace but as great Abasers of Corrupt Nature friends of Free Grace but professed enemies of Free-will So Jansenius in his August Tom. 2. fol. 60. distinguisheth of a twofold Adjutorie or Divine Assistance Of a twofold Adjutorie habitual and actual the one he calls an Adjutorie sine quo non without which we cannot act the other he calls an Adjutorie quo by which we act The first he makes to be only habitual preparatory and potential whereby the Powers of the Soul are prepared corroborated and capacitated to act the second he makes to be an actual energetick or influential Adjutorie whence followeth the application and determination of the power to act Habitual Grace The former potential habitual Adjutories he supposeth to be in the same rank with the Power or Facultie for whose corroboration and assistance they are given for out of them and the power which they informe there is constituted one intire complete operative facultie whence the power cloathed with or informed by these habitual Adjutories receives the denomination of an actus primus a first act which gives not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phil. 2. 13. the will Phil. 2. 13. and the doe but only a complete power of willing and doing Amongst thesâ— dispositive potential Adjutories or Assistances he reckons all Habits or Powers as Intelligible species or Ideas and the light of Intelligence commonly stileâ— intellectual Habits as all moral Habits Dispositions and Preparatory Graces seated in the will Of Actual Grace and its necessitie As for the adjutoriuâ— quo the Adjutorie by which we act oâ— actual Assistance he proves by invincible arguments that both the Will and the freeness of the will as to whatever is morally good depends immediately and wholly on the actual Adjutorie or concourse of Efficacious Grace This he proves at large in his Tom. 3. lib. 1. c. 2 3. but especially cap. 4. fol. 6. where he gives this Demonstrative reason from the cause why no Mâ—tion or Act of the Will can be Morally good without the Adjutorie of Efficacious Grace The true root sayes he why no work morally good can be done without Grace freeing or uncaptivating the will is this That which by the bondage of Concupiscence is taken from good works is not some supernaturalitie of the work or the Reason of merit but it is the very formal Reason by which a good work is constituted such so that upon the defect thereof sin ipso facto followeth For the Pondus or weight of Concupiscence with which the soul is possessed wrests it from the love of justice and rectitude which is necessarily and essentially required in every good work and fastens it to some Creature But of this more hereafter 2. Another great Principle §. 2. 2. The traduction of Original sin on which Jansenius does largely discourse in order to the subversion of Molinisme is touching the Traduction or propagation of Original sin c. So Jansen August Tom. 2. lib. 1. cap. 6. fol. 86. I find it sayes he to be the
THE TRUE IDEA OF Jansenisme BOTH HISTORICK AND DOGMATICK By T. G. LONDON Printed for E. Calvert at the West End of St. Pauls and G. Widdows at the Maiden-Head in Aldersgate-Street 1669. THE PREFACE Christian Reader THERE is not any thing which those of the Roman Church do more commonly and constantly boast of as there are many things which they boast of to little purpose and with less truth than the Vnity and Agreement in Doctrines which they have among themselves and the most superlatively excellent way that they enjoy for the preservation and continuance thereof This Story wit◠a tragical exaggeration of differences amongst Protestants serves constantly to fill up many Pages in their Writings and is the principal subject of their Popular Declamations where they have opportunity to vent them And they have told this Tale so often that many of them especially those of the common sort seem to believe it Verùm ad Populum phaleras Those who are wise amongst them cannot but know the vanity and falshood of this pretence It hath been already demonstrated and may be again if need require that there is not one point in which they differ from Protestants wherein they are agreed among themselves However it cannot be denyed but that they industriously improve all imaginable artifices to conceal at least to give a colourable pretence unto their intestine wranglings and debates being herein as to their design wiser than the children of Light though the means whereby they pursue it are remote enough both from wisdom and honesty Where different Opinions and contradictory Assertions have already been vented and have firmed their station in the Writings of the Doctors of their Church as multitudes have done and that in and about Articles of great importance they are ready with their Plea that these differences as managed by their Catholick Masters are not of Faith or do not impugn it which way soever they are determined As though the Faith of their Church were comprehensive of gross contradictions in and about the principal Articles of Religion and those some of them such as that for Opinions of less importance they are ready to brand others for Hereticks and to endeavour their extirpation from the face of the earth This is the whole of what can be pretended for what is past and therefore remediless How destitute of truth and modesty their plea herein is hath been declared by many If any single Person or lesser number of Men among them begin at any time to apprehend and divulge sentiments different from what is generally received unless it be to make some advance in the furtherance and promotion of their own Secular Interest and advantages as all the late inventions and bold attempts of the Jesuits both in their Mystical and Moral Divinity openly and plainly do they have wayes in readiness to cast them and their Opinions out of all notice and consideration where they must lye untill the Earth give up its dead and disclose the bloud that is secretly poured into its womb They seem indeed at present signally resolved to obviate all progression in Opinions true or false unless they have a direct tendency to the establishment or adoreing of their Papal Omnipotency and the increase of their own Interest in the Consciences and over the outward concerns of men And herein are they so blindly zealous as to endeavour at this day to fix and gild the Weather-Cock of Papal Personal Infallibility yea in matters of Fact on the top of that Tower the visible rottenness of whose Foundations threatens them with a downfall every moment Some of their present differences as was observed they know are fixed beyond all possibility of reconciliation or hopes of removal Such are those contradictory Opinions which are the inseparable adjuncts of some of their Religious Orders which as they more and more discover themselves to be irreconcileable so the relinquishment of any of them by their respective Assertors is so remote from all expectation that an Age scarce produceth an Instance of any one individual Person renouncing the Opinions of his own and entertaining those of another Order and if any such should be found he would be looked upon as a Fugitive if not an Apostate The sense I confess of these differences seems to be taken from them by their commonness and certainty It passes for granted amongst them that in some things wherein both sides esteem Religion deeply concerned the Jesuits must be of one Opinion and the Dominicans must be of another so must it be in other matters between the Dominicans and Franciscans the Hildebrandine Jesuits and the Sorbonists also They must believe contradictory assertions and propositions in Religion and write and preach contradictions and confute the Opinions of one another and on that account endlesly pursue mutual feuds and quarrels among themselves and yet they are all at perfect agreement But the relief herein is that these Orders being confirmed and established all of them by the Pope let them differ and contend whilst they please so they fall not into excesses evidently beyond the tedder of former strifes their contentions are to pass for agreements and a part of that unity of Faith which they boast in But yet notwithstanding all palliating pretences and the use of their utmost diligence their differences sometimes arise to such an height being animated with strong and vigorous spirits as if forcibly shut up too long may threaten thei◠whole Church State with an Earthquake that they are necessitated t◠forego their ordinary Artifices an◠Excuses and to bring their batta◠ad Triarios by venturing to seek fo◠relief from the Papal See This usually is done by one of the Parties litigant yet not untill they find o◠the one hand their own weakness◠or that of their cause not to b◠maintained against the impression◠of their Adversaries and on th◠other are sufficiently prepared to manifest that upon the consideration of the Persons engaged of th◠state of all things in the places where the Controversies are agitated and the Opinions themselves whose confirmation they endeavour that the determination of the points in difference according to their desire is not only suitable unto and compliant with the present Interest of the See and Court of Rome but lyes also in a handsome tendency to the enlargement of its Authority and Reputation little or no danger being to be feared from the dis-satisfactions of the Adverse Party These are the things which upon any such address the Court of Rome doth heedfully and scrupulously enquire into Nor will it engage towards a decision of any controverted points untill it hath received full and ample satisfaction that the determination of them hath an evident consistency with its honour interest and advantage Vntill it can come to a Resolution herein a thousand tergiversations delayes pretences of avocation and diversions by more important occasions difficulties about the things themselves shall be pretended and pleaded In the
France §. 16. An. 1662. Endeavors foâ— Accommodation 'twixt the Jansenists and Molinists and the Pope the Molinists begin to incline to terms of accommodement with the Jansenists neither were there wanting some moderate Bishops well-wishers to the Jansenists who were very zelous in the prosecution of this design who also received a Commission from the King to transact this affair and bring it to some issue The Prelats who had part in this Conference were Mr. the Bishop of Comenge Mr. the Archbishop of Paris and Mr. the Bishop of Laon. The Agents in behalf of the Jansenists who named themselves the Disciples of St. Austin were the Sieurs de Lalane Girard c. Arnauld the Head of the Jansenists refused to ingage in this Conference as 't is conjectured from a Prâ—vision he had of its little successe In the behalf of the Molinists there appeared none but P. Ferrier the Jesuit who was notwithstanding as 't is said influenced and acted by his Chronie P. Annat on whom the whole societie of the Jesuits repose the main stresse of their designs and affairs against Jansenisme The chief of the Prelats that were Mediators in this Treatie was Monsieur de Comenge who sent from Tolouze a writing thus titled A Project for Accommodement between those whom we call Jansenists Against Signature and Formularie and those who are named Molinists debated betwixt the Bishop de Comenge and P. Ferrier the Jesuit The chief point this Project or Writing contained in favor of the Jansenists was that it should not be exacted from them any signature touching the matter of fact viz. Refutat dâ— P. Ferrier chap. 2. p. 13. whether these five Propositions were in Jansenius and condemned in his sense nor yet touching the formularie but only a respectuous silence For the Jansenists would not engage in this Treatie of Accommodement till there was a Promise given them that they would not speak either of signature or of formularie and moreover that the peace of the Church should not be made to depend on a question of Fact This Preliminary Article which the Molinists yielded unto gave the Jansenists after the Treatie was broken off great occasion of scandal In that say they this whole Treatie was on their part viz. the Jesuits no other than one continued perfidie seeing that they have since avowed that they alwaies meant they should condemne the sense of Jansenius that is to say that they should acknowledge that the Doctrine condemned in the five Propositions had been taught by Jansenius This direction of the intention or mental reservation in the Molinists made the Jansenists accuse them of Collusion c. This Treatie began about February 18. §. 17. 1663. New Stile That which was first proposed by the Bishop of Comenge Refut de P. Ferrier cap. 6. as the most proper expedient to reconcile the two parties was that the Jansenists to free themselves from all suspicion should declare That they had no other sentiment about this matter save what was taught by the Thomists The main Article required of the Jansenists is that they conform to the Thomists But inasmuch as there is a difference amongst the Thomists and that for example the manner of speech used by Gregory Ariminensis Estius and many others is different from that of Alvarez the Molinists demanded that the Jansenists should reduce themselves to the forme of speech used by Alvarez and others who writ according to his sentiment And the reason they alleaged of their demand was that Alvarez having assisted at the Congregations de Auxiliis there is a grand apparence that he and those others who writ at the same time and since took up this mode of speech to salve Libertie according to the movements and sentiments which the Popes Clement 8. and Paul 5th had albeit they made no Decree on this matter It was added that if the Jansenists would determine in this all contestations would end because the opinion of these Thomists being taught as Orthodox there remained not betwixt the Jansenists and the Molinists any more than the Contestation which has for a long time been between the Sâ—hole of the Dominicans and that of the Jesuits which has not made any rupture of communion nor yet of charitie between these two Orders And in this their hearts would be entirely reunited albeit their Scholes were not The Jansenists answer to this Proposition contained these two parts §. 18. The Jansenists Reply touching their conformity to the Thomists 1. That they had refused and that not without reason to tie themselves up generally by a publick engagement to all the expressions of Alvarez because he was not the rule of the Church or measure of their faith Yea many famous Divines and entire Faculties as those of Lovain and Doway serve not themselves of all his expressions 2. The other part of their replie was a Declaration at the same time that there was in the explication of their sentiments which they were disposed to give on the five Propositions that which was conforme not only to the Doctrine but also to the expressions of these New Thomists The Disciples of St. Austin adde they have alwaies said Refutat du P. Ferrier cap. 6. that the Doctrine of Jansenius on the five Propositions seemed not to them different from that of the Thomists And farther to vindicate Jansenius from the imputation cast upon him touching his opposition to the Thomists they adde 1. That the design of Jansenius was not directly to render himself conforme to the Thomists 2. That yet in the chief of those points wherein the error of Jansenius is made to consist his Doctrine is not only by consequence but formally conforme to that of the Thomists 3. That the most part of those general and indefinite Propositions by reason of which they would fain perswade the world that Jansenius was opposite to the Thomists he himself in other parts of his Book does so restrain and limit as that 't is evident he intended nothing lesse than Non-conformitie to the Thomists And whereas it might be objected that the Author des Lettres au Provincial which is called the Mysterie of Jesuitisme in his second Letter complains sadly against the Thomists for not publishing fully what they understood by sufficient Grace the answer hereunto is That the said ingenious Author used and that not without reason somewhat more than ordinary warmth and indignation against some particular persons of the Order of S. Dominick who being joined to the Molinists by a Spirit of Cabal and of faction served themselves of the equivocate term of Sufficient Grace thereby to deceive the world as though they were agreed In fine the Jansenists declared That the Doctrine of Jansenius touching the five Propositions seemed to them nothing different from that of the Thomists and to give a specimen hereof they instanced in the point of Efficacious Grace which said they as it is explicated by the defenders of
Jansenius is reduced to this Proposition common to all the Thomists Omnis gratia Christi est efficax alicuâ—us effectûs ad quem prxime ordinatur quem Deus absoluta voluntate intendit viz. every Grace of Christ 〈◊〉 efficacious of some effect unto which it 〈◊〉 nextly ordained and which God by hiâ— absolute will doth intend But to declare their conformitie to the Thomists more â—ully Mr. de Lalane gave the Bishop of Comenge the Articles of their Doctrine touching the five Propositions Notwithstanding these Concessions of the Jansenists §. 19. The breaking off the Treatie of the Jansenists Apology the Molinists were not satisfied but began to flie off unto their old demands peradventure from a praevision they had of an accord betwixt their King and Pope for a signing the Formularie and condemning the sense of Jansenius on the five Propositions This the Jansenists judged a very hard and unreasonable demand 1. Because it was formally and expresly against the main Praeliminary Article granted in order to the Treatie 2. If they could adde they have signed the Formularie c. they had not needed any such Treatie for accommodement for they should then have been esteemed as good Catholicks as their adversaries the Molinists 3. They judged it too great tyrannie to make the peace of the Church depend upon a matter purely of fact and not of faith For say they suppose the Disciples of St. Austin asserting that the five propositions condemned were not to be found in Jansenius's book nor yet condemned in his sense should be deceived in this their Interpretation of Jansenius yet seeing they condemned the five Propositions as well as others their Error was not in a question of Faith but purely of fact such as could not bespeak them Hereticks For adde they the common light of Reason as well as Faith teacheth the most simple that two things essentially separate viz. a particular fact and a Doctrine of Faith may also be separated in the creance of Believers and therefore there is no shadow to imagine but that one may assent that the Doctrine of the five Propositions is Haeretian without assenting that they are to be found in the Book of Jansenius as if the haeresie of the Doctrine should depend on Jansenius or that it should be haeresie no where but in his book Thus the Jansenists apologize c. But the Molinists adhering violently to their demands for the signing the Formularie c. the Treatie broke off The Jansenists to purge themselves §. 20. The Jansenists Vindication by the Bishop of Comâ—nge his Letter to the King after this Treatie drew up certain Articles which I suppose were the same with those they offered in the Treatie containing the explication of their own sentiments on the five condemned propositions These Articles they sent to Rome with their submission to the Pope not as they phrase it a submission of Faith but only a submission of Respect or Discipline which notwithstanding was acceptable to the Pope After this Mr. De Lalane and Mr. Girard presented a Declaration to the King by the hand of the Bishop of Comenge containing the Abridgement of what they had offered in the Treatie and what was comprehended in their Articles sent to Rome This Declaration having been condemned by some of the Bishops is vindicated by a Letter from the Bishop of Comenge â—o the King dated Jan. 21. 1664. Thus I avow Sir that it seemed to me after I had obliged those whom they call Jansenists to declare their sense there could not be any more of heresie or hereticks in the Church the door being shut both to Error and opiniatretie In effect Sir in those Conferences which the Sieurs the Abbot De Lalane and Girard had in the names of all those who are engaged in this cause with P. Ferrier the Jesuite they were reduced to declare so neatly what was their Doctrine on the subject of the five Propositions condemned wherein all that is called Jansenisme is comprehended as also to speak so precisely the language of the Thomists which is received in the Church that there cannot remain any thing of Errour in their Dogme In such sort Sir that on the one side making them to speak as the Catholick Schools speak and on the other side they having submitted themselves to have no other sentiments but those of the Holy See there remains not more of Error or of Opiniatretie Now their last Declaration which I had the honour to present to your Majesty signed by 〈◊〉 Sieurs de Lalane and Girard is but 〈◊〉 Abregement of all that we have doâ— in nine months travail They reneâ— in this Act the Assurance which the have given me and the See by me 〈◊〉 to have any other sentiments on 〈◊〉 five Propositions but what aâ— contained in their Articles and tâ—â— submission which they have made 〈◊〉 these very Articles to the judgementâ— his Hoâ—ines For this Declaration 〈◊〉 relative to the Articles which weâ— sent and submitted to the Pope anâ— which contain the sentiments of theâ— Theologiens on the five Propositions It is true Sir that they place not 〈◊〉 the same rank the submission which they render to the Definition of Dogmes and that which they render to the Definition of particular facts because the one is a submission of Faith and the other is a submission of Respect and 〈◊〉 Discipline Things being thus dismingled and differenced Sir your Majesty may when you please give peace to the Church of France in pursuit of the generous dessâ—in which your pietie has given you to 〈◊〉 c. Thus the Bishop of Comenge in behalf of the Jansenists The Molinists since the Treatie §. 21. The Molinists persecution of the Jansenists have been very active and pressing on the King for his Declaration against all such as will not sign the Formularie and condemnation of Jansenius's book The Jansenists have not been wanting to give their reasons against such rigorous procedures affirming That there was not as yet any ordinance of the Church obliging thereto neither was this Formularie approved by the Pope or Bishops yea that the Jesuits themselves were forced to abandon it as before The Jansenists also publisht in the year 1664. certain Apologies for themselves but all could not secure them against the unwearied endeavours of their adversaries the Molinists who obtained the Popes Bull for the imposing the Formularies as also the Kings Confirmation of the same The Popes Bull runs as it follows ALexander Bishop Servant of Servants of God for perpetual memorie The Reason of Apostolick Government by Divine Providence committed to us though undeserving requires that we applie our whole mind and care so far as we may in the Lord unto such matters chiefly as are most conducible to the conservation and propagation of the Catholick Religion to the salvation of souls and to the repose of Believers 'T was from the Intuition hereof that we endeavoured the Second year of our