The secret policy of the Iansenists, and the present state of the Sorbon. Discovered by a doctour of that faculty, who having learnt Iansenisme when he studied divinity, vnder a master that taught it there publickly, has been since disabused, & followes the Catholick party. / Translated out of the French copie.

The seventh Proof.

Take the last resemblance they have with the Jansenists, Ther is no dissimulation, disguise, cheat or imposture, which thes He∣reticks do not vse, against their adversaries. Montalte is the cunningest at it in the world, in his first Letters, against the Censure of Monsieur Arnauds heresies, opposite to the Catholike doctrine, of sufficient grace, and contrary to the Dominicans & other Catho∣lik Doctours. And in his last, he attributes to the Jesuits at a venture, all the strangest Maxims, he could devise. Wheras thos Fa∣thers, in their Apologies, prove the perfect harmony, between thos slanders, and thos which du Moulin heretofore, cast vpon the Roman Church. Besides they convince the

Jansenists of 29. evident impostures, con∣taind in 8. Lettres of Montalte, viz: the 11.12. &c. And in their last answears, they lay open the other calumnies of thes Hereticks, which the Sorbonists exactly imitate. And truly the defender of Monsieur Vernant, in his Book of the antient divinity of the Sor∣bon, complains in his Preface & pag. 519. that they attribute vnto Monsieur Vernant, a do∣ctrine, of which he makes not the least men∣tion in the 176.384.388. pages quoted by the Censurers, nor in his whol Book. He ob∣serves 495. that in the extract of censured Propositions, pag. 630. they slip over vnder thes points (.......) the reasons & proofs, by which they are authorized. In the 426.427. pages he charges them with making fals suppositions, and perverting the sense of the propositions drawn out of pag. 365.366. & then proves them to be Orthodox, if not cor∣rupted by their malicious explication. In his whol Book Of the Ancient doctrine of the devines of Paris, he clearly demonstrates, that they took no notice, of Monsieur de Vernant his proofs, drawn out of the Authors, which I cited in my 5. Proof. That they slighted his reasons, & maliciously interpreted his words. And that in condemning him, they have con∣demned vnder his name, the Councils Fa∣thers,

Popes, their own Devines, all foraign Doctors, the most eminent in dignity, the most famous for learning, & zeal for the true Faith. So true is that, which Lactantius says, that they oppugn the truth, & will not see it, least acknowleging their innocency, who de∣fend it, against their errours, they should not be able to condemn them, without ma∣nifest injustice. Student damnare tamquam no∣centes, quos vtique sciunt innocentes; constare de ipsa innocentia nolunt: verentur enim quod si au∣dierint, damnare non possint.

But what shal I say, of their Censure of Amadeus Guymenius? In good earnest, I dislike, & had I sufficient authority, would condemn, his manner of defending the Je∣suits, against the Dominicans. Tis true he proves wel, that the Dominicans, have taught worse opinions then the Jesuits; but to what purpose is it, to let the people see, so many odious opinions, bundled vp in a litle vo∣lumn? I wonder the Jesuits, had so litle Po∣licy, as not to hinder, if they could, the printing of that Book, especially at a time, when they had so many professed enemies. Yet because I only vndertake, to prove the Sorbonists falsifying, & impostures without meddling with their doctrine, I will set down the foul calumnies, which they cast vpon

Guimenius; not all: it were too trouble∣some, but some of the most conspicuous.

In the Propositions, which they censured, viz the 4. they have cut off Guimenius his words, & so alterd his sense. pag. 86. n. 2.3. In the 7. they suppress the good sense of Gui∣menius his words pag. 87. n. 3. In the 9. they dissemble, that Guimenius answears Anony∣mus, & that the Jesuits are of a contrary opinion, pag. 94. n. 1. In the 15. they impose vpon Guimenius, by cutting of the last words of the Proposition. pag. 28. num. 3. In the 25. they make Guimenius approve an opinion, which he says, is not to be maintained pag. 127. In the 27. They take no notice, that Gui∣menius holds the contrary, rejecting ••ajetan & Sylvester, both Dominicans, pag. 237. In the 33. Guimenius rejects it, pag. 114. n. 5. In the 37. all the Jesuits deny it, & reject it with S. Antonin, pag. 158 n. 1. &c. In the 47. They are the very tearmes, & proper doctrine of S. Thomas, whos words they mangled, to corrupt the sense, that they might condemn it. pag. 109. n. 3. In the 54. They are Anony∣mus his words, who lays a horrible calumny vpon Sanchez, whos words & sense are quite contrary, pag. 34. n. 2. How then came the Sorbonists to approve him? In the 59. they suppress the name of Sotus, and Guimenius

his words, to make their Censure, fall vpon the Jesuits, pag. 142. In the 61. they omitt Guimenius his words, who says that Claudius Aquaviva, General of the Jesuits, forbad them to teach publickly, or privatly, or to practise such kind of opinions, pag. 210. In the 69. they are the words of the Roman Sa∣cerdotal, quoted by S. Antonin and yet they condemn them. pag. 221. n. 1! In the 70 Gui∣menius rejects it, as contrary to the Council of Trent. pag. 233. n. 5. He does the same in the 72. pag. 277. num. 18. In the 75. they have not drawn it out faithfully, and besides it is the opinion of Sylvester. pag. 177. n. 4. In the 77. It is Anonymus his doctrine, which Gui∣menius rejects with horrour. pag. 285. propo∣sition 5. num 2. In the 79. they cut off, by a strange infidelity, Guimenius his words, which justify him. pag. 284. n. 3. In the 80. they ma∣liciously leave out Guimenius his answear, who confutes his accuser. pag. 244. Prop. 2. In the 81. they confirme the horrible Impo∣sture of Anonymus against Vasquez, who has not a word of the proposition censured pag. 25. Proposit. 12 In the 15. Propositions, which they cite only by their first words, it is only Anonymus, that advanced them, Guimenius maintains, that the Jesuits detest them. A∣mongst the censured Propositions ther are

28. of Anonymus & 44. of other Authors, no Jesuits, & yet the Sorbonists, attribute them all to Guimenius, that they might have occasion to censure them, & the Jesuits in his person, because he relates the calumnies, with which he defiles their doctrine and re∣putation.

From thes Proofs, which are all in mat∣ter of Fact, it is easy to conclude, that the Sorbonists, exactly follow, the false dealing, & cheating way of the Jansenists. Had they proceeded, as Catholike Doctors ought to do, according to rules of conscience, and Christian sincerity, they would have censured the Propositions, vnder the names of their Authors, whom they should have named, & not have taxed the Jesuits, to satisfy the hatred they bear them. Who in the mean time, have this advantage against the Sorbo∣nists, that Heresy cannot be justly layd in their dish.

Behould Sir, the deplorable state of our Faculty, which you will not question, if you take but the pains, to consider with at∣tention, the Proofs which I have set down. And how should they not be infected, with the Jansenists heresies, since they drew them from the beginning, out of the writings, & publick lessons of Saint Beuve, who chose

rather, to renounce his degree & chayre of Doctour, then Jansenisme? Since they obsti∣nately defend their errours? Since they ap∣prove & cry vp their Books & Translations in which they deliver their errours? Since they do not censure, & condemn thos that renew them? Since they Censure the Books of Catholicks their enemies? Since they have a mortal hatred for the Pope, as all Here∣ticks have? Since they bear the same hatred to Religious, because they destroy heresy & defend the Catholike Faith? Since they vse the same tricks, & the same calumnies, to censure them, & to tarnish the lustre of their reputation, which thes Novellists em∣ploy, against Orthodox Doctors? All thes Caracters, being equally common to them, force vs to confess, that they have the same opinions, the same design, and the same in∣terests with the Jansenists.