and does away with the Divinity altogether, for he says that the world is a mere work of nature, which necessarily produced all creatures from all eternity. That which we call God, he says, is nothing else but the power of nature diffused in external objects, which, he says, are all material. The nature of all things, he says, is one substance alone, endowed with extension and mind, and it is active and passive; passive, as to itself-active, inasmuch as it thinks. Hence he supposes that all creatures are nothing but modifications of this substance; the material ones modifications of the passive substance, and the spiritual ones-that is, what we call spiritual, for he insists that all are material-being modifications of the active substance. Thus, according to his opinion, God is, at the same time, Creator and Creation, active and passive, cause and effect. Several authors, as Thomasius, Moseus, Morus, Buet, Bayle, and several others, Protestants even, combated this impious system by their writings. Even Bayle, though an Atheist himself, like Spinosa, refuted it in his Dictionary: I, also, in my work on the Truth of the Faith (4), have endeavoured to show the incoherence of the principles on which he founds his doctrines, and, therefore, I do not give it a particular refutation in this work. Notwithstanding the monstrosity of his system, Spinosa had followers; and it is even said, that there are some at present in Holland, though they do not publicly profess it, only among themselves. The work itself was translated into several languages, but its sale was prohibited by the States of Holland. Spinosa died at the Hague, on the 23rd of February, 1677, in the 59th year of his age. Some say, that his servants being all at church on a Sunday, found him dead on their return, but others tell that he was dying of consumption, and feeling death approaching, and knowing that it is natural for every one to call on God, or some superhuman power, to assist him, at that awful moment, he, dreading to call on God for assistance, or to let it be seen that he repented of his doctrine, ordered that no one should be allowed into his chamber, and there at last he was found dead (5).

ARTICLE II.

THE ERRORS OF MICHAEL BAIUS.

6. Michael Baius disseminates his unsound Doctrine, and is opposed. condemns seventy-nine Propositions of Baius, and he abjures them. written by Baius, and confirmed by Pope Urban VIII.

7. St. Pius V. Retractation

6. MICHAEL BAIUS was born in Malines, in Flanders, in 1513, was made a Doctor of the University of Louvain, in 1550, and subsequently Dean of the same University. He was a man of learning,

(4) Verita della Fede, Par. 1, c. 6, s. 5. (5) Gotti, cit. in fin.

and of an exemplary life, but fond of new opinions, which he maintained in his works, published about 1560 (1), and thus he sowed the first seeds of that discord which disturbed the Church in the following century. Some Franciscan Friars thought his doctrines. not sound, and submitted them, in eighteen chapters, to the Faculty of Sorbonne, and that learned body judged them worthy of censure. This only added fuel to the fire, and the party of Baius published an Apology in opposition to the censures of the Parisian University. Cardinal Commendon, who was then in the Low Countries, sent by the Pope for some other affairs, thought himself called on to interfere, as Apostolic Legate, and imposed silence on both parties, but in vain, for one of the Superiors of the Franciscans punished some of his subjects for defending the doctrines of Baius, and this proceeding caused a great uproar. At last the Governor of the Low Countries was obliged to interfere to prevent the dispute from going any further (2).

7. Some time after this Baius was sent by Philip II., as his Theologian, to the Council of Trent, together with John Hessel, and Cornelius, Bishop of Ghent (not Cornelius Jansenius, Bishop of Ipres), all Doctors of Louvain. His opinions were not examined in the Council of Trent, though he had already printed his works on Free Will, Justification, and Sacrifice. When he returned from the Council he printed his Treatises on the Merit of Works, the Power of the Wicked, on Sacraments in general, on the Form of Baptism; and hence his opinions were spread more exensively, and disputes grew more violent, so that at last the Holy See was obliged to interfere. St. Pius V. then, in a particular Bull, which begins, "Ex omnibus affectionibus," after a rigorous examination, condemned seventy-nine propositions of Baius (in globo) as heretical, erroneous, suspect, rash, scandalous, and offensive to pious ears, but without specifying them in particular, and with this clause, "that some of them might, in rigour, be sustained, and in the proper sense which the authors had," or as others explain it," that although some of them might be in some way sustained, still the Pope condemns them in the proper and rigorous sense of the authors." Here are the words of the Bull: "Quas quidem sententias stricto coram nobis examine ponderatas, quamquam nonnullæ aliquo pacto sustineri possent, in rigore et proprio verborum sensu ab assertoribus intento, hæreticas, erroneas, suspectas, temerarias, scandalosas, et in pias aures offensionem immittentes damnamus." The name of Baius was not inserted in the Bull in 1567, nor did Pius command that it should be affixed in the public places, as is customary, but, wishing to act with mildness, consigned it to Cardinal Granvell, Archbishop of Mechlin, then in Rome, telling him to notify it to Baius, and to the University of Louvain, and

(1) Possevin. t. 2, in M. Bajum. (2) Gotti, Ver. Rel. t. 2, c. 116; Bernin. sec. 16.

to punish, by censures or other penalties, all who refused to receive it. The Cardinal discharged his commission by his Vicar, Maximilian Mabillon. The Bull was notified to the University, and accepted by the Faculty, who promised not to defend any more the Articles condemned in it, and Baius promised the same, though he complained that opinions were condemned as his which were not his at all, nor could he be pacified, but wrote to the Pope, in 1579, in his defence. The Pope answered him in a Brief, that his cause had already undergone sufficient examination, and exhorted him to submit to the judgment already passed. This Brief was presented to him by Mabillon, who reprimanded him harshly for daring to write to the Pope after the sentence had been once given, and intimated to him, that he incurred an Irregularity by the proceeding. Baius then humbled himself, and prayed to be dispensed from the Irregularity. Mabillon answered that he could not do so till Baius would abjure his errors. He asked to see the Bull, to know what errors he was to abjure. Mabillon said he had not the Bull by him, and prevailed on him there and then to abjure in his hands all his errors. He was then absolved from all censures, without giving any written document, and the matter was private between them (3).

8. After all that, there were not wanting others who defended the opinions of Baius, so after the death of St. Pius V., his successor, Gregory XIII., in his Bull Provisionis Nostræ, expedited in 1579, confirmed the Bull of St. Pius, and published it first in Rome, and then had it presented to the Faculty of Louvain, and to Baius himself, by Father Francis Toledo, afterwards raised to the purple by Clement VIII., who prevailed on Baius to submit quietly, and send a written retractation to the Pope, as follows: "Ego Michael de Bajo agnosco, et profiteor, me ex variis colloquiis cum Rev. P. Francisco Toledo ita motum, et perauctum esse, ut plane mihi habeam persuasum, earum sententiarum damnationem jure factum esse. Fateor insuper ex iisdem sententiis in nonnullis libellis a me in lucem editis contineri in eo sensu, in quo reprobantur. Denique declaro ab illis omnibus me recedere, neque posthac illas defendere velle: Lovanii, 24 Mart. 1580." The Faculty of Louvain then passed a law, that no one should be matriculated to the University, unless he first promised to observe the foregoing Bulls. Urban VIII., in the year 1641, in another Bull, which begins, " In eminenti," confirmed the condemnation of Baius, in conformity with the two preceding Bulls, and this Bull was received by the Sorbonne (4). Baius died about the year 1590, and as he was born in 1513, he must have been seventy-seven years of age. The system of Baius and his errors will be seen in the Refutation XII. of this volume.

(3) Gotti, cit. s. 3, n. 1, 2.

(4) Gotti, Ver. Rel. c. 118, s. 1, n. 1.

ARTICLE III.

THE ERRORS OF CORNELIUS JANSENIUS.

9. Cornelius, Bishop of Ghent, and Cornelius, Bishop of Ipres; his Studies and Degrees. 10. Notice of the condemned Work of Jansenius. 11. Urban VIII. condemns the Book of Jansenius in the Bull "In eminenti;" the Bishops of France present the Five Propositions to Innocent X. 12. Innocent condemns them in the Bull "Cum occasione;" Notice of the Propositions. 13. Opposition of the Jansenists; but Alexander VIIL declares that the Five Propositions are extracted from the Book, and condemned in the Sense of Jansenius; Two Propositions of Arnould condemned. 14. Form of Subscription commanded by the Pope to be made. 15. The Religious Silence. 16. The Case of Conscience condemned by Clement XI. in the Bull Vineam Domini. 16. The Opinion, that the Pontificate of St. Paul was equal to that of St. Peter, condemned.

9. I SHOULD remark, first of all, that there were in Flanders, almost at the same time, two of the name of Cornelius Jansenius, both Doctors and Professors of the renowned University of Louvain. The first was born in Hulst, in the year 1510, and taught theology to the Premonstratentian Monks for twelve years, and during that time composed his celebrated book Concordia Evangelica, and added his valuable Commentaries to it. He then returned to Louvain, and was made Doctor. He was next sent to the Council of Trent, by King Philip II., together with Baius, and, on his return, the King appointed him to the Bishopric of Ghent, where, after a holy life, he died in 1576, the sixty-sixth year of his age, leaving, besides his great work, De Concordia, several valuable Treatises on the Old Testament (1). The other Jansenius was born in the village of Ackoy, near Leerdam, in Holland, in 1585. He completed his philosophical studies in Utrecht, and his theological in Louvain, and then travelled in France, where he became united in the closest friendship with Jean du Verger de Hauranne, Abbot of St. Cyran. On his return to Louvain he was appointed, at first Professor of Theology, and afterwards of Scripture. His Commentaries on the Pentateuch and Gospels were afterwards printed, and no fault has ever been found with them. He wrote some works of controversy also, in defence of the Catholic Church, against the Ministers of Bois-le-Duc. Twice he went to Spain to arrange some affairs for his University, and at last was appointed Bishop of Ipres, in 1635 (2).

10. Jansenius never printed his work Augustinus, the fruit of twenty years' labour, during his lifetime, but charged his executors to put it to press. In this work, at the end of the book De Gratia Christi, in the Epilogue, he says that he does not mean to assert that all that he wrote concerning the Grace of Christ should be held as Catholic doctrine, but that it was all taken from the works of St. Augustin; he, however, declares that he himself is a fallible (2) Bernin. cit.

(1) Bernin. t. 4, sec. 18, l. 3, in fine.

man, subject to err, and that if the obscurity of some passages in the Saint's works deceived him, that he would be happy to be convinced of his error, and, therefore, he submitted it all to the judgment of the Apostolic See-" Ut illum teneam (he says) si tenendum, damnem si damnamdum esse judicaverit" (3). He died on the 6th of May, 1638, and left his book to his chaplain, Reginald Lamée, to be printed, repeating in his will that he did not think there was anything in his book to be corrected, but as it was his intention to die a faithful child of the Roman Church, that he submitted it in everything to the judgment of the Holy SeeSi Sedes Romana aliquid mutari velit, sum obediens filius, et illius Ecclesiæ, in qua semper vixi, usque adhunc lectum mortis obediens sum. Ita mea suprema voluntas" (4). Would to God that the disciples imitated their master in obedience to the Holy See, then the disputes and heartburnings which this book caused would never have had existence.

11. Authors are very much divided regarding the facts which occurred after the death of Jansenius. I will then succinctly state what I can glean from the majority of writers on the subject. It is true he protested, both in the work itself and in his will, that he submitted his book Augustinus in everything to the judgment of the Apostolic See; still his executors at once put it into the hands of a printer, and notwithstanding the protest of the author, and the prohibition of the Internuncio and the University of Louvain, it was published in Flanders in 1640, and in Rouen in 1643. It was denounced to the Roman Inquisition, and several theologians composed Theses and Conclusions against it, and publicly sustained them in the University of Louvain. An Apology in favour of the work appeared in the name of the publisher, and soon the press groaned with treatises in favour of, or opposed to, Jansenius, so that all the Netherlands were disturbed by the dispute. The Congregation of the Inquisition then published a decree forbidding the reading of Jansenius's work, and also the Conclusions and Theses of his adversaries, and all publications either in favour of or opposed to him. Still peace was not restored; so Urban VIII., to quiet the matter, published a Bull renewing the constitution of Pius V. and Gregory XIII. In this he prohibited the book of Jansenius, as containing propositions already condemned by his predecessors, Pius V. and Gregory XIII. The Jansenists exclaimed against this Bull; it was, they said, apocryphal, or at all events vitiated. Several propositions extracted from the book were presented to the Faculty of Sorbonne in 1649, to have judgment passed on them, but the Sorbonne refused to interfere, and referred the matter to the judgment of the bishops, and these, assembled in the name of the Gallican

(3) Gotti, s. 3, n. 5. Tournel. de Grat. 4, p. 1.

(4) Pallav. His. Con. Trid. l. 15, c. 7, n. 13; Collet. Cont.