[100]. “It is certain,” says Bayle, “that the obligation which the Romish Church is under to respect the doctrine of St. Augustine on the subject of grace, in consequence of its having received the sanction of Popes and Councils at various times, placed it in a very awkward and ridiculous situation. It is so obvious to every man who examines the matter without prejudice, and with the necessary means of information, that the doctrine of Augustine and that of Jansenius are one and the same, that it is impossible to see, without feelings of indignation, the Court of Rome boasting of having condemned Jansenius, and nevertheless preserving to St. Augustine all his glory. The two things are utterly irreconcilable. What is more, the Council of Trent, by condemning the doctrine of Calvin on free-will, has, by necessity, condemned that of St. Augustine; for there is no Calvinist who has denied, or who can deny, the concourse of the human will and the liberty of the soul, in the sense which St. Augustine gives to the words concourse, co-operation, and liberty. There is no Calvinist who does not acknowledge the freedom of the will, and its use in conversion, if that word is understood according to the ideas of St. Augustine. Those whom the Council of Trent condemns do not reject free-will, except as signifying the liberty of indifference. The Thomists, also, reject it under this notion, and yet they pass for very good Catholics.” (Bayle’s Dict., art. Augustine.)
[101]. It is a singular fact that the Roman Church, which boasts so much of her unity, and is ever charging the Reformed with being Calvinists, Lutherans, &c., is, in reality, divided into numerous conflicting sects, each sworn to uphold the peculiar sentiments of its founder. If there is one principle more essential than another to the Reformation, it is that of entire independence of all masters in the faith: “Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri.”
[102]. “The famous St. Bernard, abbot of Clairval, whose influence throughout all Europe was incredible—whose word was a law, and whose counsels were regarded by kings and princes as so many orders to which the most respectful obedience was due; this eminent ecclesiastic was the person who contributed most to enrich and aggrandize the Cistercian order.” (Mosh. Eccl. Hist., cent. xii.)
[103]. Thomas Aquinas, a scholastic divine of the thirteenth century, who was termed the Angelic Doctor.
[104]. Augustine.
[105]. Who can help regretting that sentiments so evangelical, so truly noble, and so eloquently expressed, should have been held by Pascal in connection with a Church which denounced him as a heretic for upholding them!
[106]. An ironical reflection on the cowardly compromise of the Jacobins, or Dominicans, for having pledged themselves to the use of the term “sufficient,” in order to please the Jesuits.
[107]. The censure of the Theological Faculty of the Sorbonne passed against M. Arnauld, and which is fully discussed in Letter iii.
[108]. The Cardinal de Richelieu, the celebrated founder of the French Academy. The Sorbonne owed its magnificence to the liberality of this eminent statesman, who rebuilt its house, enlarged its revenues, enriched its library, and took it under his special patronage.
[109]. The charge of “denying the mystery of transubstantiation,” certainly did not justly apply to the Jansenists as such; these religious devotees denied nothing. Their system, so far as the dogmas of the Church were concerned, was one of implicit faith; but though Arnauld, Nicole, and the other learned men among them, stiffly maintained the leading tenets of the Romish Church, in opposition to those of the Reformers the Jansenist creed, as held by their pious followers, was practically at variance with transubstantiation, and many other errors of the Church to which they nominally belonged. (Mad. Schimmelpenninck’s Demolition of Port-Royal, pp. 77–80, &c.)