Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 8.djvu/343

 JANSENIUS

2S9

JANSENIUS

senists who were more consistent in their contumacy, such as Pascal, refused to adopt it or to subscribe to the condemnation of the five propositions in any sense. The greater nvmiber, however, took advantage of it to mislead others or deceive themselves. All of them, moreover, through personal intercourse, preaching, or writing, displayed extraordinary activity in behalf of their ideas. They aimed especially, following the tac- tics inaugurated by St- Cyran, at introducing them into religious orders, and in this way they were in a meas- ure successful, e. g. with the Oratory of Berulle. Against the Jesuits, in whom from the first the}' had encountered capable and determined adversaries, they had vowed a profound antipathy and waged a war to the death. This inspired the "Provinciates" which appeared in 1656. These were letters supposedly ad- dressed to a provincial correspondent. Their author, Blaise Pascal, abusing his admirable genius, therein lavished the resources of a captivating style and an inexhaustible sarcastic humour to taunt and decry the Society of Jesus, as favouring and propagating a re- laxed and corrupt moral code. To this end the errors or imprudences of some members, emphasized with malicious exaggeration, were made to appear as the official doctrine of the whole order. The " Provin- ciates " were translated into elegant Latin by Nicole, disguised fur the occasion under the pseudonym of Wil- helmus Wendrochius. They did a great deal of harm. However, the Sorbonne, again declaring itself against the faction, had, by 13S votes against 68, con- demnetl the latest writings of Arnaidd, and, on his re- fusal to submit, it dismissed him, together with sLxty other doctors who made common cause with him. The assembly of bishops in 1656 branded as heretical the unfortunate theory of right and of fact, and re- ported its decision to Alexander V'll, who had just succeeded Innocent X. On 16 October the pope re- plied to this communication by the Bull "Ad sanctam Beati Petri sedem ". He praised the clear-sighted firmness of the episcopate and confirmed in the fol- lowing terms the condemnation pronoimced by his predecessor: "We declare and define that the five propositions have been drawn from the book of Jan- senius entitled ' .\ugustinus', and that they have been condemned in the sense of the same Jansenius, and we once more condemn them as such. " Relying on these words, the Assembly of the Clergy of the following year (1657) drew up a formula of faith con- formable thereto and made subscription to it oblig- atory. The Jansenists would not give in. They claimed that no one could exact a lying signature from those who were not convinced of the truth of the matter. The religious of Port-Royal were especially conspicuous for their obstinacy, and the Archbishop of Paris, after several fruitless admonitions, was forced to debar them from receiving the .sacraments. Four bishops openly allied themselves with the rebel- lious party: they were Henri Arnauld of Angers, Buzenval of Beauvais, Caulet of Pamiers, and Pavilion of .Aleth. Some claimed besides that the Roman pon- tiiT alone had the right to exact such subscription. In order to silence them, Alexander VII, at the in- stance of several members of the episcopate, issued (15 February, 1664) a new Constitution, beginning with the words, "Regiminis Apostolici". In this he enjoined, with threat of canonical penalties for dis- obedience, that all ecclesiastics, as well as all religious, men and women, should subscribe to the following

very definite formulary: " I, X, submitting to the

.\postolic constitutions of the sovereign pontiffs, In- nocent X and .\lexaniler VII, published 31 May, 1653 and 16 October, 1656, sincerely repudiate the five propositions extracted from the tjook of Jansenius en- titled ' Augustinus ', and I condemn them upon oath in the very sense expressed by that author, as the -Vpostolic See has condemned them by the two above- mentioned Constitutions" (Enchiridion, 1099). VIII.— 19

It would be a mistake to believe that this direct intervention of the pope, sustained as it was by Louis XIV, completely ended the stubborn opposition. The real Jansenists underwent no change of sentiment. Some of them, such as .\ntoine .\rnauld ind the greater numljer of the religious of Port-Royal, defying both the ecclesiastical and the civil authority, refused their signature, on the pretext that it was not in the power of any person to command them to perform an act of hypocrisy; others subscribed, but at the same time protesting more or less openly that it ap- plied only to the question of right, that the cjuestion of fact was reserved and should be so, since in this re- spect the Church had no jurisdiction, and above all no infallibility. .Among those who stood for explicit re- striction and hence for refusal to sign the formulary as it was, must be numbered the four bishops men- tioned above. In the mandates through which they communicated to their flocks the Bull "Regiminis Apostolici " they did not hesitate expressly to main- tain the distinction between fact and right. The pope being informed of this, condemned these mandates, 18 Jan., 1667. He did not stop there, but, in order to safeguard both his authority and the unity of belief, he decided, with the full approbation of Louis XIV, to subject the conduct of the cidprits to a canonical judgment, and for this purpose he appointed as judges nine other members of the French episcopate.

IV. The Pe.\ce op Clement IX. — In the midst of all this, Alexander VII died, 22 May, 1667. His suc- cessor Clement IX wished at first to continue the process, and he confirmed the appointed judges in all their powers. However, the king, who hati at first dis- played great zeal in seconding the Holy See in the af- fair, seemed to have let his ardour cool. Rome had not judged it expedient to yield to all his wishes re- garding the formation of the ecclesiastical tribunal. Together with his court he began to be apprehensive lest a blow should be struck at the "liberties" of the Gallican Church. The Jansenists skilfully turned these apprehensions to their profit. They had already won over several ministers of state, notably Lyonne; and they succeeded in gaining for their cause nineteen members of the episcopate, who in consequence wrote to the sovereign pontiff and to the king. In their pe- tition to the pope these bishops, while protesting their profound respect and entire obedience, observed that the infallibility of the Churcli ditl not extend to facts outside of revelation. They further confounded purely human or purely personal facts with dogmatic facts, i. e. such as were implied by a dogma or were m neces- sary connexion with it; and under cover of this con- fusion, they ended by affirming that their doctrine, the doctrine of the four accused bishops, was the common doctrine of the theologians most devoted to the Holy See, of Baronius, Bellarmine, Pallavicini, etc. The same assertions were repeated in a more audacious form in the address to the king, in which they spoke also of the necessity of guarding against theories which were new and "harmful to the interests and safety of the State ". These circumstances brought about a very delicate situation, and there was reason to fear that too great severity would leatl to disastrous results. On this account the new nuncio, Bargellini, inclined towards a peaceful arrangement, for which he obtained the pope's consent. D'Estrees, the Bishop of Laon, was chosen as mediator, and at his request there were associated with him de Gonflren, .\rch- bi.^hop of Sens, and Vialar, Bishop of Chalons, both of whom had signed the two petitions just spoken of, and were, therefore, friends of the four accused prelates. It was agreed that these last shoukl subscribe without restriction to the formulary and cause it to be sub- scribed to in like manner by their clergy in diocesan synods, and that these subscriptions should take the place of an express retractation of the mandates sent out by the bishops. Pursuant to this arrangement they