Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 2.djvu/774

 BOSSUET

700

BOSSUET

tations", were applied by Lamartine and Vigny to ineir o'mi first poetic works? Such are the essential characteristics of Bossuet's eloquence, to which might easily be added a great many others, perhaps more showy, but which may be found in other preachers, while those we have mentioned belong to him alone.

Meanwhile, the reputation of the preacher was growing even,- day. Above all, his Lenten confer- ences before the Court in 1662 and in 1666 had brought him into prominence, particularly the second series, which included some of his finest "Sermons''. The Protestants, on the other hand, although they had no adversarj' more moderate than he, had none more formidable; and when some startling conversion, like that of Turenne, took place, the honour or the blame of it was laid upon the Abb^ Bossuet. His little book, circulated in manuscript under the title of "Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholic Church on Subjects of Con- trovers}'", worried the Protestant di\-ines more than had any folio in fifty years. The public voice marked him out for a bishopric. We know, too, that, though doubtless T\ithout his being aware of it, his name figured, after 1667, among the candidates for the office of preceptor to the Dauphin, those names hav- ing been selected, by the king's command, under the direction of Colbert. It is true that Louis XIV did not favour Bossuet's appointment; he preferred the President De Perigny. In 1669, however, Bossuet was appointed Bishop of Condom. It was as Bishop of Condom that in September of that same year he pronounced the "Funeral Oration on Henrietta of France", and was summoned to preach the Advent of 1669 at Court. When, soon after this, the daughter followed her mother to the grave, he was again summoned, in 1670, to pronounce the "Funeral Oration of the Duchess of Orleans". In the mean- while, the President De Perigny died xmexpectedly, and this time the choice of Louis XIV went straight to Bossuet. He was named preceptor to the Dauphin, 5 September, 1670, and a new period began in the history of his life.

Second Period (1670-81). — In order to devote himself solely to his task, he gave up his Bishopric of Condom, which he never saw, and returned to the profane studies which he had been obhged to abandon. He himself laid down in his letter to Pope Inno- cent XI, the programme he made his royal pupil foUow, a programme the intelligent liberality of which it is impossible not to adinire. But, while gi\'ing the closest personal attention to the Dauphin's education, his own genius completed, in a way, its process of ripening by contact with antiquity; his ideas collected themselves and gained in precision; he took conscious possession of what may be called his originality as a thinker, and made for himself his private domain, as it were, in the vast field of apolo- getics. And, as the other Fathers of the Church have been, in the history of Christian thought, one the theologian of the Incarnation, another, the theologian of Grace, so did Bossuet then become the theologian of Providence.

Here we may take an excellent example of what is to-day called the development, or evolution, of a dogmatic truth. The idea of P^o^^denee surely con- stitutes the basis of Christian belief in all that touches the relations of man with God, and in this respect it may be said that the "Discourse on L'niversal His- tory" is completely anticipated in the "City of God" of St. Augustine, or in the "De Gubematione Dei" of Sah-ianus. We are perfectly willing to add that in this wide, and even shghtly vague, sense it is found also in the Old Testament, and notably in the Book of Daniel. But that does not alter the fact that Bossuet in his turn appropriated this idea of ProWdence to himself, made it profoundly his o\mi.

and without any innovation — for every innovatior in this field inspired liim T^ith horror — formed from ii deductions which up to his time had never beer perceived.

The idea of Providence, in Bossuet's theology, ap- pears to us as at once (a) the sanction of the mora law, (b) the very law of history, and (c) the founda- tion of apologetics.

(a) It is the sanction of the moral law, in the first place, inasmuch as, being able to act only under thf eyes of God, no act of ours is indifferent, since then is not one but is for us an occasion of, or, to put il better, a manner of acquiring, merit or demerit. Il is under this aspect that the idea of Pro^idenw seems to have presented itself primarily to Bossuet and that it is found in some sort scattered or diflusec in his earliest "Sermons". But, since, moreover nothing happens to us which is not an effect of God'f Will, therefore we ought always to see in whatevei happiness or unhappiness — according to the world'i judgment — may befall us only a chastisement, a trial or a temptation, which it is for us to make a meam either of salvation or of damnation. Here is tht mystery of pain and the solution of the problem ol evU. If we did not place entire confidence in ProH dence, the existence of e\-il and the prosperity of th( wicked would be for the human mind nothing but ar occasion of scandal; and if we did not accept ouj sufferings as a design of God in our regard, we should fall into despair. A source of resignation, our trust in Pro%adence is also a source of strength, and it governs, so to speak, the entire domain of mora action. If our actions are moral, it is by reason ol their conformity with, or at least of their analogy to the views of Pro\'idence, and thus the life of th( Cliristian is only a perpetual realization of the Wil of God. We merit according to our endeavours t< know it in order to carry it into effect; and, on th( contrarj', to demerit consists exactly in not taking account of God's Will or warnings, whether the omis- sion be tlirough negligence, pride, or stubbornness

(b) This is why the idea of Pro%-idence is at the same time the law of history. If the crash of empirei "faUing one upon another" does not in truth expresi some purpose of God regarding humanity, thei historj-, or what is called by that name, is indeed nt longer anj'thing but a chaotic chronologj', the mean- ing of whjch we should strive in vain to disentangle In that case. Fortune, or rather Chance, would be thi mistress of human affairs; the existence of humanitj would be only a bad dream, or phantasmagoria whose changing face would be inadequate to mask! void of nothingness. We should be fretting oiu^elvei in that void •without reason and almost ■p'ithoui cause, our very actions would be but phantoms, anc the only resiilt of so many efforts accumulatet through so many thousands of years would be thi con%"iction, every day more clear, of their useless ness, which woiild be another void of nothingness And why, after all, were there Greeks and Romans' Of what use was Salamis'? — Actium? — Poitiers?— Lepanto? Why was there a CjEsar, and a Charle magne? Let us frankly own, then, that unless some thing Di\-ine circulates in history, there is no history Nations, like indi^■iduals, Uve only by maintaininf uninterrupted communication with God, and it ii precisety this condition of their existence which ii called by the name of Providence. The hj'pothesii of Pro\'idence is the condition of the possibility oi history, as the hj-pothesis of the stability of th( laws of nature is the condition of the possibility ol science.

(c) Ha^-ing made Pro'sndence the sanction o: morahty, we are now led to make it the basis a apologetics. For if there be indeed more than on( way which leads to God, or, in other words, manj means of establishing the truth of the Ciu-istiai