As all these things have great influence with mankind, they often rendered the victory of the Jesuits quite dubious; and perhaps the Jansenists would have triumphed if the cause of the Jesuits had not been the cause of the church; the safety of which depends, in a great measure, on those opinions which the Jesuits hold.

§ 42. Various circumstances lead to the conclusion that Urban VIII., and afterwards Innocent X., were solicitous to suppress these dangerous commotions in their commencement ; as the former pontiffs had wisely suppressed the contests between Baius and the Dominicans. But they were unable to do it in consequence of the highly excitable and fervid tempers of the French. The adversaries of the Augustinian doctrines extracted from the work of Jansenius five propositions which were thought to be the worst; and instigated especially by the Jesuits, they urged Innocent incessantly to condemn them. A large part of the French clergy resisted such a measure by their deputies sent to Rome with great zeal; and wisely suggested that it was of the first importance to distinguish the different constructions that might be put upon those propositions, since they were ambiguous, and would admit of a true, as well as a false interpretation. But Innocent X., overcome by the incessant and importunate clamours of the Jesuits, without maturely considering the case, hastily condemned those propositions in a public edict, dated May 31st, 1653. The substance of the first proposition was: That there are some commands of God, which righteous and good men are absolutely unable to obey, though disposed to do it; and that God does not give them so much grace that they are able to observe them.-Secondly:

the Jansenists contend for the reality of these miracles, with good faith: for this sect abounds with persons, who are by no means corrupt, but whose piety is unenlightened, and to whom the truth and divinity of their cause appear so manifest, that they readily believe it cannot possibly be neglected by the Deity. But it is incredible that so many persons of distinguished perspicuity, as formerly were, and still are, followers of this sect, should not know that the powers

of nature, or the operation of medicines, or the influence of the imagination, accomplished these cures, which deceivers, or men blinded by party zeal, have ascribed to the almighty power of God. Such persons, therefore, must be of the opinion, that it is lawful to promote a holy and righteous cause, by means of deceptions, and to take advantage of the misapprehensions of the multitude, in order to confirm the truth.

That no person in this corrupt state of nature can resist divine grace operating upon the mind.-Thirdly: That in order to a man's being praise or blameworthy before God, he need not be exempt from necessity, but only from coercion. Fourthly: That the Semi-Pelagians erred greatly by supposing that the human will has the power both of admitting and of rejecting the operations of internal preventing grace.-Fifthly: That whoever affirms that Jesus Christ made expiation by his sufferings and death for the sins of all mankind, is a Semi-Pelagian.—The four first of these propositions Innocent pronounced to be directly heretical; but the fifth, he declared to be only rash, irreligious, and injurious to God'.

§ 43. This sentence of the supreme ecclesiastical judge was indeed painful and perplexing to the friends of Jansenius, and grateful and agreeable to their enemies: yet it did not fully satisfy the latter, nor entirely dishearten the former. For Jansenius himself had escaped condemnation; the pontiff not having declared that the heretical propositions were to be found in his Augustinus in that sense in which they were condemned. The Augustinians, therefore, under the guidance of the very acute Anthony Arnauld, distinguished in this controversy between the point of law and the point of fact; (quæstionem juris and quæstionem facti ;) that is, they maintained that we ought to believe those propositions to be justly condemned by the pontiff; but that it was not necessary to believe, nor had the pontiff required a belief, that those propositions were to be found in Jansenius' book in that sense in which they were condemned. Yet they were not allowed to enjoy this

This Bull is extant, in the Bullarium Romanum, tom. v. p. 486. It is also published, together with many public Acts relating to this subject, by Charles du Plessis d'Argentre, in his Collectio Judiciorum de noris Erroribus, tom. iii. pt. ii. p. 261, &c. [Dr. Mosheim mistook, in regard to the sentence pronounced on the several propositions. The Bull says of the first: "Temerariam, impiam, blasphemam, anathemate damnatam, et hæreticam declaramus, et uti talem damnamus." Of the second and the third, it says simply: "Hæreticam declaramus, et uti talem damnamus." Of the fourth, it says:

VOL. IV.

"Falsam et hæreticam declaramus, et uti talem damnamus." And of the fifth, it says: "Falsam, temerariam, scandalosam, et intellectam eo sensu, ut Christus pro salute dumtaxat prædestinatorum mortuus sit: Impiam, blasphemam, contumeliosam, divinæ pietati derogantem, et hæreticam declaramus, et uti talem damnamus.” So that the sentence on the fifth proposition was the most severe; and that on the first, next to it in severity. Tr.]

Dictionnaire des livres Jansenistes, tom. i. p. 249. tom. ii. p. 7, &c.

K

consolation long, for the pertinacious hatred of the adverse party, drove Alexander VII., the successor of Clement, to such a height of imprudence, that he not only declared, in a new Bull of the 16th of October 1656, that the condemned propositions were those of Jansenius, and were to be found in his book; but he moreover, in the year 1665, sent into France the formula of an oath, which was to be subscribed by all who would enjoy any office in the church, and which affirmed that the five condemned propositions were actually to be found in Jansenius' book, in the very sense in which they had been condemned by the church'. This imprudent step, which appeared intolerable not only to the Jansenists, but likewise to the better part of the French clergy, was followed by immense commotions and contests. The Jansenists immediately contended, that the pontiff might err, especially when pronouncing an opinion without the presence of a council, in all questions of fact; and therefore that they were not under obligation to subscribe to that formula which required that they should swear to a matter of fact; the Jesuits, on the contrary, had the boldness publicly to maintain, in the city of Paris, that the pope's infallibility was equally certain and divine, in matters of fact, as in contested points of ecclesiastical law. Some of the Jansenists said they would neither condemn nor approve the formula; but they promised, by observing silence, to show respect to the authority of the head of the church. Others appeared ready to subscribe with some explanation or distinction, oral or written, annexed; but by no means without qualification. Others attempted other modes of evasion. But none of these courses would satisfy the impassioned mind of the Jesuits; and therefore the recusants were miserably harassed with banishment, imprisonment, and other vexations, the Jesuits having the control and guidance of the measures of the court.

§ 44. The lenity or the prudence of Clement IX., in the

This Bull also, together with various documents, is in Charles du Plessis d'Argentre's Collectio Judiciorum de moris Erroribus, tom. iii. pt. ii. p. 281-288, 306, The Formula of the oath, by Alexander VII. occurs ibid. p. 314,

together with the ordinance of the king, and other papers.

* See Du Mas, Histoire des cing Propositions, p. 158, &c. Gerberon, Histoire generale du Jansenisme, pt. ii. p. 316, and many others.

year 1669, gave some respite to the persecuted party, who defended Augustine to their own loss and injury. This was occasioned by four French bishops, those of Angers, Beauvais, Pamiers, and Alet, who courageously declared that they could not conscientiously subscribe to the prescribed oath, without adding some explanation. And when the Romish court threatened them with punishment, nineteen other bishops espoused their cause; and addressed letters in their behalf, both to the king and to the pontiff. These were also joined by Anne Genevieve de Bourbon, a lady of great heroism, and after her renunciation of the allurements and pleasures of the world, a warm friend of the Jansenists; who very urgently besought Clement IX. to assume more moderation. Influenced by entreaties and arguments so numerous and of so much weight, Clement consented, that such as chose might subscribe the oath above mentioned, annexing an exposition of their own views. Upon this liberty being allowed, the former tranquillity returned; and the friends of Jansenius, now freed from all fear, lived securely in their own country. This celebrated event is usually called the peace of Clement IX. But it was not of long continuance'. For the king of France, at the instigation of the Jesuits, disturbed it by his edict of 1676; in which he represented it as granted only for a time, in condescension to

The transactions relative to this subject, under the pontificate of Clement IX. are fully narrated, by cardinal Rospigliosi, in his Commentaries; which Charles du Plessis d'Argentre has subjoined to his Elementa Theologica, Paris, 1716. 8vo. and which are also extant, in the Collectio Judiciorum de noris Erroribus, tom. iii. pt. ii. p. 336, where likewise are the letters of Clement IX. Among the Jansenists, the history of the peace of Clement IX. has been expressly written by Varet. the vicar of the archbishop of Sens ; (for the Catéchisme Historique sur les Contestations de l'Eglise, tom. i. p. 352, testifies, that Varet wrote the anonymous history ;) Relation de ce qui s'est passé dans l'affaire de la Paix de l'Eglise sous le Pape Clément IX. 1706. 12mo. and by Paschasius Quesnel, (whom Dominic Colonia, among others, Bib

lioth. Janseniste, p. 314, declares to have been the author,) in his book: La Paix de Clement IX. ou démonstration des deux Faussetez capitales avancés dans l'Histoire des cing Propositions contre la foi des disciples de S. Augustin; Chamberry, or rather Brussels, 1701. 2 vols. 12mo. The following work: Relation de ce qui s'est passé dans l'affaire de la Paix de l'Eglise sous la Pape Clément IX. avec les Lettres, Actes, Mémoires, et autres pièces qui y ont rapport; without mention of the place, 1706. 2 vols. 8vo. is an accurately written history. The part which Anne de Bourbon took in this business, is elegantly narrated by Villefort, in his Vie d'Anne Geneviève de Bourbon, Duchesse de Longuerille, tom. ii. livr. vi. p. 89, edit. Amsterd. 1739. 8vo. which is much fuller than the Paris edition.

consolation long, for the pertinacious hatred of the adverse party, drove Alexander VII., the successor of Clement, to such a height of imprudence, that he not only declared, in a new Bull of the 16th of October 1656, that the condemned propositions were those of Jansenius, and were to be found in his book; but he moreover, in the year 1665, sent into France the formula of an oath, which was to be subscribed by all who would enjoy any office in the church, and which affirmed that the five condemned propositions were actually to be found in Jansenius' book, in the very sense in which they had been condemned by the church'. This imprudent step, which appeared intolerable not only to the Jansenists, but likewise to the better part of the French clergy, was followed by immense commotions and contests. The Jansenists immediately contended, that the pontiff might err, especially when pronouncing an opinion without the presence of a council, in all questions of fact; and therefore that they were not under obligation to subscribe to that formula which required that they should swear to a matter of fact; the Jesuits, on the contrary, had the boldness publicly to maintain, in the city of Paris, that the pope's infallibility was equally certain and divine, in matters of fact, as in contested points of ecclesiastical law. Some of the Jansenists said they would neither condemn nor approve the formula; but they promised, by observing silence, to show respect to the authority of the head of the church. Others appeared ready to subscribe with some explanation or distinction, oral or written, annexed; but by no means without qualification. Others attempted other modes of evasion. But none of these courses would satisfy the impassioned mind of the Jesuits; and therefore the recusants were miserably harassed with banishment, imprisonment, and other vexations, the Jesuits having the control and guidance of the measures of the

court.

§ 44. The lenity or the prudence of Clement IX., in the

7 This Bull also, together with various documents, is in Charles du Plessis d'Argentre's Collectio Judiciorum de noris Erroribus, tom. iii. pt. ii. p. 281288. 306. The Formula of the oath, by Alexander VII. occurs ibid. p. 314,

together with the ordinance of the king, and other papers.

8 See Du Mas, Histoire des cinq Propositions, p. 158, &c. Gerberon, Histoire générale du Jansénisme, pt. ii. p. 516, and many others.