which are less animated by the love of truth, than CENT. by the spirit of faction.

XVI. SECT. III. PART I.

ral classes

church of

Rome.

XXXII. Whoever looks with attention and impartiality into these controversies will easily perceive, that there are two parties in the Roman Two genechurch, whose notions with respect both to of doctors doctrine and discipline are extremely different. in the The Jesuits, in general considered as a body [w], church maintain, with the greatest zeal and obstinacy, the ancient system of doctrine and manners, which was universally adopted in the church before the rise of Luther, and which, though absurd and ill-digested, has, nevertheless, been considered as highly favourable to the views of Rome, and the grandeur of its pontiffs. These sagacious ecclesiastics, whose peculiar office it is to watch for the security and defence of the papal throne, are fully persuaded that the authority of the pontiffs, as well as the opulence, pomp, and grandeur of the clergy, depend entirely upon the preservation of the ancient forms of doctrine; and that every project that tends either to remove these forms, or even to correct them, must be, in the highest degree, detrimental to what they call the interests of the church, and gradually bring on its ruin. On the other hand, there are within the pale of the Roman church, especially since the dawn of the Reformation, many pious and well-meaning men, whose eyes have been opened, by the perusal of the inspired and primitive writers, upon the corruptions and defects of the received forms of doctrine and discipline. Comparing the dictates of primitive Christianity with the vulgar system of popery, they have found the latter full of enormities, and have always been desirous of a Reformation

VOL. IV.

[w] The Jesuits are here taken in a general and collective sense of that denomination; because there are several individuals of that order, whose sentiments differ from those that generally prevail in their community.

SECT. III.

CENT. mation (though indeed a partial one, according to XVI. their particular fancies) that thus the church might be purified from those unhappy abuses that have given rise to such fatal divisions, and still drawn upon it the censures and reproaches of the heretics.

PART I.

The main controver

From these opposite ways of thinking, arose sies that di- naturally the warmest contentions and debates bevided the tween the Jesuits and several doctors of the church Rome, re- of Rome. These debates may be reduced under duced to six the six following heads;

church of

heads.

First sub

ject of de

bate.

The first subject of debate concerns the limits and extent of the power and jurisdiction of the Roman pontiff. The Jesuits, with their numerous tribe of followers and dependents, all maintain, that the pope is infallible;-that he is the only visible source of that universal and unlimited power which Christ has granted to the church;-that all bishops and subordinate rulers derive from him alone the authority and jurisdiction with which they are invested;-that he is not bound by any laws of the church, nor by any decrees of the councils that compose it;—and that he alone is the supreme lawgiver of that sacred community, a lawgiver whose edicts and commands it is in the highest degree criminal to oppose or disobey. Such are the strange sentiments of the Jesuits; but they are very far from being universally adopted. For other doctors of the church of Rome hold, on the contrary, that the pope is liable to error; that his authority is inferior to that of a general council;-that he is bound to obey the commands of the church, and its laws, as they are enacted in the councils that represent it;that these councils have a right to depose him from the papal chair, when he abuses, in a flagrant manner, the dignity and prerogatives with which he is intrusted;-and that, in consequence of these principles, the bishops and other inferior rulers

rulers and doctors derive the authority that is annexed to their respective dignities, not from the Roman pontiff, but from Christ himself.

CENT.

XVI.

SECT. III.

ᏢᎪᎡᎢ 1.

debate.

XXXIII. The extent and prerogatives of the church form the second subject of debate. The Second Jesuits and their adherents stretch out its borders subject of far and wide. They comprehend within its large circuit, not only many who live separate from the communion of Rome [x], but even extend the inheritance of eternal salvation to nations that have not the least knowledge of the Christian religion, or of its divine Author, and consider as true members of the church open transgressors which profess its doctrines. But the adversaries of the Jesuits reduce within narrower limits the kingdom of Christ, and not only exclude from all hope of salvation those who are not within the pale of the church of Rome, but also those who, though they live within its external communion, yet dishonour their profession by a vicious and profligate course of life. The Jesuits, moreover, not to mention other differences of less moment, assert, that the church can never pronounce an erroneous or unjust decision, either relating to matters of fact, or points of doctrine [y]; while the adverse party declare,

Q 2

[x] They were accused at Spoleto, in the year 1653, of having maintained in their public instructions there, the probability of the salvation of many heretics. See Le Clerc. Biblioth. Univers. et Historique, tom. xiv. p. 320.

[y] This distinction, with respect to the objects of infallibility, was chiefly owing to the following historical circumstance: Pope Innocent X. condemned five propositions, drawn from the famous book of Jansenius, entitled, Augustinus. This condemnation occasioned the two following questions: 1st, Whether or no these propositions were erroneous? This was the question de jure, i. e. as the translator has rendered it, the question relating to doctrine. 2d, Whether or no these propositions were really taught by Jansenius? This was the question de facto, i. e. relating to the matter of fact. The church was supposed, by some, infallible only in deciding questions of the former kind.

CENT. declare, that, in judging of matters of fact, it is XVI. not secured against all possibility of erring.

SECT. III.

PART I.

debate.

XXXIV. The third class of controversies that divided the church of Rome, comprehends the deThe third bates relating to the nature, efficacy, and necessity subject of of divine grace, together with those that concern original sin, the natural power of man to obey the laws of God, and the nature and foundation of those eternal decrees that have for their object the salvation of men. The Dominicans, Augustins, and Jansenists, with several other doctors of the church, adopt the following propositions: That the impulse of divine grace cannot be opposed or resisted; that there are no remains of purity or goodness in human nature since its fall;-that the eternal decrees of God, relating to the salvation of men, are neither founded upon, nor attended with, any condition whatsoever; that God wills the salvation of all mankind; and several other tenets that are connected with these. The Jesuits maintain, on the contrary, that the natural dominion of sin in the human mind, and the hidden corruption it has produced in our internal frame, are less universal and dreadful than they are represented by the doctors now mentioned;-that human nature is far from being deprived of all power of doing good;-that the succours of grace are administered to all mankind in a measure sufficient to lead them to eternal life and salvation;-that the operations of grace offer no violence to the faculties and powers of nature, and therefore may be resisted; and that God from all eternity has appointed everlasting rewards and punishments, as the portion of men in a future world, not by an absolute, arbitrary, and unconditional decree, but in consequence of that divine and unlimited prescience, by which he foresaw the actions, merits, and characters of every individual. XXXV. The

XVI. SECT. III.

PART I.

XXXV. The fourth head in this division of CENT. the controversies that destroy the pretended unity of the church of Rome, contains various subjects of debate, relative to doctrines of morality and rules of practice, which it would be both tedious and The fourth foreign from our purpose to enumerate in a cir- subject of cumstantial manner; though it may not be improper to touch lightly the first principles of this endless controversy [*].

The Jesuits and their followers have inculcated a very strange doctrine with respect to the motives that determine the moral conduct and actions of men. They represent it as a matter of perfect indifference from what motives men obey the laws of God, provided these laws are really obeyed; and maintain, that the service of those who obey from the fear of punishment is as agreeable to the Deity, as those actions which proceed from a principle of love to him and to his laws. This decision excites the horror of the greatest part of the doctors of the Roman church, who affirm, that no

[*] No author has given a more accurate, precise, and clear enumeration of the objections that have been made to the moral doctrine of the Jesuits, and the reproaches that have been cast on their rules of life; and none at the same time has defended their cause with more art and dexterity than the eloquent and ingenious Gabriel Daniel (a famous member of their order), in a piece, entitled, Entretiens de Cleandre et d'Eudoxe. This dialogue is to be found in the first volume of his Opuscules, p. 351. and was designed as an answer to the celebrated Provincial letters of Pascal, which did more real prejudice to the society of the Jesuits than can be well imagined, and exposed their loose and perfidious systems of morals with the greatest fidelity and perspicuity, embellished by the most exquisite strokes of humour and irony. Father Daniel, in the piece above-mentioned, treats with great acuteness the famous doctrine of probability, p. 351; the method of directing our intentions, p. 556; equivocation and mental reservation, p. 562; sins of ignorance and oblivion, p. 719; and it must be acknowledged, that, if the cause of the Jesuits were susceptible of defence or plausibility, it has found in this writer an able and dexterous champion.

debate.