Part 7 (1/2)

JESUIT LAXITY AND CHRISTIAN INDIGNATION.

”Such is the way in which our teachers have discharged men from the 'painful' obligation of actually loving G.o.d. And so advantageous a doctrine is this, that our Fathers Annat, Pintereau, Le Moine, and A.

Sirmond even, have defended it vigorously when a.s.sailed by any one.

You have only to consult their answers in the 'Moral Theology;' that of Father Pintereau, in particular (second part), will enable you to judge of the value of this dispensation by the price which it has cost, even the blood of Jesus. This is the crown of such a doctrine.” (A quotation is then given from Father Pintereau to the effect that it is a characteristic of the new Evangelical law, in contrast to the Judaical, that ”G.o.d has lightened the troublesome and arduous obligation of exercising an act of perfect contrition in order to be justified.”) ”'O father,' said I, 'no patience can stand this any longer. One cannot hear without horror such sentiments as I have been listening to.' 'They are not my sentiments,' said the monk. 'I know that well; but you have expressed no aversion to them; and far from detesting the authors of such maxims, you cherish esteem for them. Do you not fear that your consent will make you a partic.i.p.ator in their guilt? Was it not sufficient to allow men so many forbidden things under cover of your palliations? Was it necessary to afford them the occasion of committing crimes that even you cannot excuse by the facility and a.s.surance of absolution which you offer them? . . . The licence which your teachers have a.s.sumed of tampering with the most holy rules of Christian conduct amounts to a total subversion of the Divine law. They violate the great commandment which embraces the law and the prophets; they strike at the very heart of piety; they take away the spirit which giveth life.

They say that the love of G.o.d is not necessary to salvation; they even go the length of professing that this dispensation from loving G.o.d is the special privilege which Jesus Christ has brought into the world. This is the very climax of impiety. The price of the blood of Jesus, the purchase for us of a dispensation from loving Him!

Before the incarnation we were under the necessity of loving G.o.d.

But since G.o.d has so loved the world as to give His only Son for it, the world, thus redeemed by Him, is discharged from loving Him!

Strange theology of our time!-to take away the anathema p.r.o.nounced by St Paul against those ”who love not the Lord Jesus Christ;” to blot out the saying of St John, that ”he that loveth not abideth in death;” and the words of Jesus Christ Himself, ”He that loveth me not keepeth not my commandments!” In this manner those who have never loved G.o.d in life are rendered worthy of enjoying Him throughout eternity. Behold the mystery of iniquity accomplished! Open your eyes, my father; and if you have remained untouched by the other distortions of your Casuists, let this last by its excess compel you to abandon them.'” {150a}

DEFENCE OF RIDICULE AS A WEAPON IN CONTROVERSY.

”What, my fathers! must the imaginations of your doctors pa.s.s for faithful verities? Must we not expose the sayings of Escobar, {150b} and the fantastic and unchristian statements of others, without being accused of laughing at religion? Is it possible you have dared to repeat anything so unreasonable? and have you no fear that in blaming me for ridiculing your absurdities, you were merely furnis.h.i.+ng me with a fresh subject of arousing attack, and of pointing out more clearly that I have not found in your books any subject of laughter which is not in itself intensely ridiculous; and that in making a jest of your moral maxims, I am as far from making a jest of holy things as the doctrine of your Casuists distant from the holy doctrine of the Gospel? In truth, sirs, there is a vast difference between laughing at religion and laughing at those who profane it by their extravagant opinions. It were an impiety to fail in respect for the great truths which the Divine Spirit has revealed; but it would be no less impiety of another kind to fail in contempt for falsehoods which the spirit of man has opposed to them. . . . Just as Christian truths are worthy of love and respect, the errors which oppose them are worthy of contempt and hatred: for as there are two things in the truths of our religion-a divine beauty which renders them lovable, and a holy majesty which renders them venerable; so there are two things in such errors-an impiety which makes them horrible, and an impertinence which renders them ridiculous.” {151a}

Many examples from the Scriptures and the Fathers are then quoted in defence of the practice of directing ridicule against error; and he closes with a singularly appropriate pa.s.sage from Tertullian: ”Nothing is more due to vanity than laughter; it is the Truth properly that has a right to laugh, because she is cheerful-and to make sport of her enemies, because she is sure of victory.”

”Do you not think, my fathers, that this pa.s.sage is singularly applicable to our subject? The letters which I have hitherto written are 'only a little sport before the real combat.' As yet I have been only playing with the foils, and 'rather indicating the wounds that might be given you than inflicting any.' I have merely exposed your sayings to the light, without commenting on them. 'If they have excited laughter, it is only because they are so laughable in themselves.' These sayings come upon us with such surprise, it is impossible to help laughing at them; for nothing produces laughter more than surprising disproportion between what one hears and what one expects. In what other way could the most of these matters be treated? for, as Tertullian says, 'To treat them seriously would be to sanction them.'” {151b}

APPEAL AGAINST THE JESUITS.

”Too long have you deceived the world, and abused the confidence which men have put in your impostures. It is high time to vindicate the reputation of so many people whom you have calumniated; for what innocence can be so generally acknowledged as not to suffer contamination from the daring aspersion of a society of men scattered throughout the world, who, under religious habits, cover irreligious minds; who perpetrate crimes as they concoct slanders-not against, but in conformity with, their own maxims? No one can blame me, surely, for having destroyed the confidence which you might otherwise have inspired, since it is far more just to vindicate for so many good people whom you have decried, the reputation for piety they deserved, than to leave you a reputation for sincerity which you have never merited. And as the one could not be done without the other, how important was it to make the world understand what you really are. This is what I have begun to do; but it will require time to complete the work. The world, however, shall hear of you, my fathers, and all your policy will not avail to shelter you. The very efforts you make to ward off the blow will only serve to convince the least enlightened that you are afraid, and that, smitten in your own consciences by my charges, you have had recourse to every expedient to prevent exposure.” {152}

The effect of the 'Provincial Letters' was not only to alarm the Jesuits, but the Church. The scandal of their exposure was so deeply felt, that the _cures_ of Paris and Rouen appointed committees to investigate the accuracy of Pascal's quotations, and the result of their investigation was entirely in Pascal's favour. This led ultimately to the matter being carried before a General a.s.sembly of the clergy of Paris, which, however, declined to give any formal decision. In the meantime, an 'Apology for the Casuists' was published by a Jesuit of the name of Pirot, of such a character as to increase rather than abate the scandal, and a new controversy gathered around this publication. The Sorbonne took up the question, and, after examination, condemned Pirot's Apology (July 1658) as they had formerly done Arnauld's propositions, and ultimately it was included by Rome in the 'Index Expurgatorius,' along with the 'Provincial Letters,' to which it was designed as a reply. While the question was before the Sorbonne, the _cures_ of Paris published various writings, under the name of 'Facta,' in support of the conclusions to which they had come. These writings were prepared in concert with Pascal and his friends, and the second and fifth are ascribed entirely to his pen. It is even said that he looked upon the latter, in which he drew a parallel betwixt the Jesuits and Calvinists (to the disadvantage of the Protestants), as the _best thing he ever did_. {153} Long after Pascal's death (in 1694) an elaborate answer appeared, by Father Daniel, to the 'Provincial Letters,' under the t.i.tle of 'Entretiens de Cleandre et d'Eudoxe sur les Lettres au Provincial;' but notwithstanding a certain amount of learning and apparent candour, the reply made no impression upon the public. Even the Jesuits themselves felt it to be a failure.

”Father Daniel,” it was said, ”professed to have reason and truth on his side; but his adversary had in his favour what goes much farther with men,-the arms of ridicule and pleasantry.” As late as 1851 an edition of the 'Letters' appeared by the Abbe Maynard, accompanied by a professed refutation of their misstatements. But the truth is, Pascal's work is one of those which admit of no adequate refutation. Even if it be granted that he has occasionally made the most of a quotation, and brought points together which, taken separately in their connection, have not the offensive meaning attributed to them, this touches but little the reader who has enjoyed their exquisite raillery or has been moved by their indignant denunciation. The real force of the Letters lies in their wit and eloquence-their mingled comedy and invective. They may be parried or resented-they can never be refuted.

We have already quoted Voltaire's saying, ”The best comedies of Moliere have not more wit than the first Provincial Letters.” ”Bossuet,” he added, ”has nothing more sublime than the concluding ones.” They were regarded by him as ”models of eloquence and pleasantry,” as the ”first work of genius” that appeared in French prose. When Bossuet himself was asked of what work he would most wish to have been the author, he answered, ”The 'Provincial Letters.'” Madame de Sevigne writes of them (Dec. 21, 1689): ”How charming they are! . . . Is it possible to have a more perfect style, an irony finer, more delicate, more natural, more worthy of the Dialogues of Plato? . . . And what seriousness of tone, what solidity, what eloquence in the last eight Letters!” Our Gibbon attributed to the frequent perusal of them his own mastery of ”grave and temperate irony.” Boileau p.r.o.nounced them ”unsurpa.s.sed” in ancient or modern prose. Encomiums could hardly go higher, and yet the language of Perrault is in a still higher strain: ”There is more wit in these eighteen Letters than in Plato's Dialogues; more delicate and artful raillery than in those of Lucian; and more strength and ingenuity of reasoning than in the orations of Cicero.” Their style especially is beyond all praise. It has ”never been surpa.s.sed, nor perhaps equalled.”

There may be, as there is apt to be in all such concurrent verdicts, a strain of excess. The duller English sense may not catch all the finer edges of a style which it may yet feel to be exquisite in its general clearness, harmony, and point; the absurdities of verbal argument and of Jesuit sophistry may sometimes pall upon the attention, and hardly raise a smile at this time of day. It is the fate of even the finest polemical literature to grow dead as it grows old; yet none can doubt the immortality of the genius which has so long given life to such a controversy, and charmed so many of the highest judges of literary form.

It is not for any Englishman to challenge the verdict of a Frenchman in a matter of style.

Pascal himself evidently thought highly of his success. He liked the controversy, its excitement, and the applausive echo which followed each Letter. Like every true artist, he felt the joy and yet the gravity of his work. He took up his pen with a pleasurable sense of mastery, and yet he wrote some of the Letters six or seven times over. He spared no pains, yet he never wearied. All his intellectual life for the time was thrown into the controversy, and his most finely-tempered strokes made music in his own mind, while they carried confusion to his adversaries and triumph to his friends. The sensation made by the Letters was, of course, mainly confined to France; but the nervous Latinity of Nicole soon communicated something of the same sensation to a wider circle.

{156} Pascal has himself told us that he never repented having written them, nor ”the amusing, agreeable, ironical style” in which they were written. Even the condemnation of the Papal See, abject in some respects as was his devotion to his Church, did not move him on this point. He left on record, amongst his Thoughts, the following solemn declaration: ”IF MY LETTERS ARE CONDEMNED IN ROME, WHAT I CONDEMN IN THEM IS CONDEMNED IN HEAVEN. AD TUUM, DOMINE JESU, TRIBUNAL APPELLO.”

CHAPTER VI.

THE 'PENSeES.'

From Pascal's finished work we turn to his unfinished Remains. The one will always be regarded as the chief monument of his literary skill, and of the executive completeness of his mind. But the other is the worthier and n.o.bler tribute to the greatness of his soul, and the depth and power of his moral genius. Few comparatively now read the 'Provincial Letters'

as a whole; fewer still are interested in the controversy which they commemorate. But there are hardly any of higher culture-none certainly of higher thoughtfulness-to whom the 'Pensees' are not still attractive, and who have not sought in them at one time or another some answer to the obstinate questionings which the deeper scrutiny of human life and destiny is ever renewing in the human heart. No answer may have been found in them, but every spiritual mind must have so far met in the author of the 'Pensees' a kindred spirit which, if it has seen no farther than others, has yet entered keenly upon the great quest, and traversed with a singular boldness the great lines of higher speculation that ”slope through darkness up to G.o.d.”

The literary history of the 'Pensees' is a very curious one. They first appeared in the end of 1669, in a small duodecimo volume, with the appropriate motto, ”Pendent opera interrupta.” Their preparation for the press had been a subject of much anxiety to Pascal's friends. What is known as the ”Peace of the Church”-a period of temporary quiet and prosperity to Port Royal-had begun in 1663; and it was important that nothing should be done by the Port Royalists to disturb this peace. It had been agreed, therefore, that all pa.s.sages bearing on the controversy with the Jesuits and the Formulary should be omitted; but beyond this Madame Perier desired that the volume should only contain what proceeded from her brother, and in the precise form and style in which it had left his hand. She evidently lacked full confidence in the Committee of Editors, of whom the Duc de Roannez was the chief, notwithstanding their professions of strict adherence to the ma.n.u.scripts. The volume at last appeared, with a preface by her own son, and no fewer than nine ”approbations,” signed amongst others by three bishops, one archdeacon, and three doctors of the Sorbonne.

Unhappily Madame Perier had too much cause for alarm. Editors and Approvers alike had claimed the liberty, not only of arranging but of modifying both the matter and the style of the 'Pensees,' and this notwithstanding a statement in the preface that, in giving, as they professed to do, only ”the clearest and most finished” of the fragments, they had given them as they found them, _without adding or changing anything_. ”These fragments,” says M. Faugere, ”which sickness and death had left unfinished, suffered, without ceasing to be immortal, all the mutilation which an exaggerated prudence or a misdirected zeal could suggest, with the view not only of guarding their orthodoxy, but of embellis.h.i.+ng their style-the style of the author of the 'Provincials'!”

”There are not,” he adds, ”twenty successive lines which do not present some alteration, great or small. As for total omissions and partial suppressions, they are without number.” M. Cousin is equally emphatic.

”There are,” he says, ”examples of every kind of alteration-alteration of words, alteration of phrases, suppressions, subst.i.tutions, additions, arbitrary compositions, and, what is worse, decompositions more arbitrary still.”