The journal of Monsr. de Saint Amour doctor of Sorbonne,: containing a full account of all the transactions both in France and at Rome, concerning the five famous propositions controverted between the Jansenists and the Molinists, from the beginning of that affair till the Popes decision. / Faithfully rendred out of French. ; A like display of the Romish state, court, interests, policies, &c. and the mighty influences of the Jesuites in that church, and many other Christian states, being not hitherto extant.

CHAP. XIV.

What pass'd at Paris during the same Moneth; especially the violences of the Jesuites against some Doctors S. Augustin's Disciples, to remove them from their Employments.

WE were busi'd at Rome all this Month in the most vigorous and assiduous pursuit that was lawful for us to make there, for the first audience in the Congregation which we demanded might be granted to us together with our Adversa∣ries, after our first Writings had been communicated to them, to the end they might come to such au∣dience prepar'd to answer to those Writings, and to what we should add thereunto viva voce. VVe could neither obtain to have a day set for such first Audience, nor that our Writings should be com∣municated, nor know whether they would grant us either one or the other. In the mean time the Je∣suites, and the Doctors their adherents continu'd triumphing at Paris beforehand for the approaching condemnation of the Propositions, of which they held themselves sure, and in which they involv'd ours. By this meanes they caus'd great doubtings and distrusts, both in the Prelates who deputed us, and in our friends, what might be the issue of the Congregation which was signify'd to us, and what justice we should have done us by it; wherefore they sent us word by a Letter of the 22th. That we had done very well in demanding of Cardinal Spada a Hearing and a communication of our Writings; but that it was said there (at Paris) that it would never be granted us, because they would not engage themselves at Rome into the bottom of the Dispute. And they enjoyn'd us severely not to deliver any instruction which might engage us in a single processe by wri∣ting. Also M. de sainte Beuve writ to me the same day that we ought to continue our instances that the Authors of the Propositions mi•…•…t be known, our innocence declar'd, and the NECESSITY OF EFFECTƲAL GRACE establisht, which was the whole point of the Question; and that if we could not obtain this, that at least it might be inserted into the Bull, in case any were made, that we had alwayes declar'd that we undertook the defence of the Propositions, only in the sense where∣in they imply'd the Necessity of Effectual Grace; that by this meanes the Bull would be favourable to us, and moreover, make our Adversaries passe for calumniators and successors of these Semipe∣lagians, as well in their manners and proceedings, as in their doctrine.

But the Jesuites and their Adherents did not stop at these threatnings of future things; they already made advantages as well at Rome as at Paris of the Victories which they had not yet obtain'd. They assur'd their Partisans at Rome, that the Decree which they made against the Propositions, would be received with applause in France by all the Court and all the great persons of the times; and in France they animated all the powers, both Ecclesi∣astical and secular against the learned and pious persons of whom they were jealous, as against per∣son

already condemn'd and declar'd Hereticks; the affairs of M. Manessier and M. Cordon, where∣of one had been elected for the place of Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Caen; and the other for that Principal of the Colledge of Montaigu, who were both cast out of their char∣ges, are two memorable examples thereof, which I than insert here with the circumstances wherewith I understood the same in a Latin letter written to me the 29th. of this month. For that it contains nothing but affairs of the University, I shall leave it in the language of that place.

Terrent minis Molinistinae quos ratione vincere non possunt. Hac se arte putant Romae plurimùm au∣thoritatis habituras, si potentiam secularem osten∣tare possint. Timeri volunt quando persuadere & vi argumentorum vincere nequeunt. Ita profecto, ni fallor, Romae agent quemadmodum Lutetiae. Hic de futura, ut aiunt, Censura triumphant, illic de Op∣timatum protectione gloriabantur. Enimvero non semel ad vexandos adversarios Romano nomine abusi sunt, eviceruntque ut irascerentur ex Optimatibus & Principibus aliqui in homines Romae damnatos, & tollendos censerent quos Pontificium fulmen ferisset. Nuper hac usi sunt calumnia ut D. Manessier Cado∣mensi Cathedra, & de Cordon Montis acuti Prima∣tu dejicerent; nefas aiebant, in eos conferre suffra∣gium, quorum doctrinam Papa proscriberet. Quam artem ubi non procedere senserunt, ad vim apertam versi, utrumque suo loco pellere voluerunt. Litteras quasi à Rege miserunt ad Gubernatorem Cadomensem (Lettres de cachet, i. e. under the Privy Seal) qui∣bus mandabatur, juberet protinus D. Manessier urbe cedere, sive lectiones orsus esset, sive non, seseque con∣ferre ad Comitatum, Regi actionum suarum ratio∣nem redditurum. Invigilaret quoque P. de Folle∣ville Oratorii Sacerdotis & Professoris Theologi lecti∣onibus et doctrinae. Delata res ad Cadomensem Aca∣demiam, movit indignationem omnium. Causam D. Manessier suam fecere Academeci Proceres. Rescrip∣sere ad Parisiensem Academiam, ut suo alumno pa∣trocinaretur, obstaretque ne Theologi Professores pa∣terent impotentissimorum hominum libidini. Non∣dum res conclusa est apud D. Rectorem. Moras ne∣xuit D. Morel, qui Decani loco illis Comitiis interest; causatus rem esse periculosam, Regiae voluntati in∣tercedere, ingratiam nescio quorum hominum perditae doctrinae, quorum reliquiae et Romae et in Gallia Re∣gia auctoritate brevi conterendae sint. Non impe∣diet tamen ne Parisiensis Academia Doctoris sui de∣fensionem suscipiat. De D. Cordon res ita se habet. Mortuo de Canel, Bursarii palam fecere quàm pro∣penso in illum animo essent. Hoc malè habuit Moli∣nistas. Statim illi advolare ad Poenitentiarium, qui nomine Capituli inspector est, ut electionem istam di∣sturbaret. Itur ad Carthusianos item illius Collegii inspectores; convenitur Prior. Doctores scrupulum movent, videret nempe ne grande piaculum commit∣teret, reusque esset violatae Religionis, si hominem haereticum, daemonis filium, daemonem ipsum, et quid non? Collegio bene Catholico praefici sineret: omnia mala bonaque, justa & injusta tendanda esse ad Dei gloriam. Ille egregie animatus hisce declamationi∣bus Bursarorum animos tentat. Ʋbi non potest ad su∣am pertrahere sententiam, quid agat? Molitur fa∣cinus indignum, indignissimum. Tres ex iis (sex autem omnino sunt habentes jus suffragii) hactenus ut Bursarios ab ipsis quoque Carthusianis, à Capitulo, à Primario, ab omnibus habitos, ipso electionis pervi∣gilio bursa dejiciunt, nescio quid causati. Non ce∣dere illi abdicati quoque, de vi queri, appellare, in∣teresse velle Comitiis, ferre suffragium; eligunt D. Cordon semel, iterum; biduo enim repetita suffragia. Opponunt sese Prior & Procurator Carthusianorum. Inde ad Senatum. Nam cum periculum esset ne Ca∣pitulum Parisiense rei indignitate motum adversus Carthusianos sentiret, obtinuerunt placitum libello supplici oblato, quo rei totius cognitione & judicio Capitulo interdicitur. Tum alio libello supplici ob∣tiuuere ut de Marlier, quem Carthusiani Primarium volebant, licet non electus, Primarium lite penden∣te ageret. Duo Consiliarii sese contulere in Monta∣num Collegium, ut in illud novum Primarium indu∣cerent. Restitere Bursarii, intercessere decreto fa∣cto non auditis partibus. Inde, quod summae aequi∣tatis judicium est, abiere ad Cathusianos duo illi Se∣natores ad paratum convivium. Tertium etiam ha∣bere voluerunt, quo, non obstante intercessione, prius illud Decretum firmarent; sed rejecta est à Senatoribus importuna petitio, quorum magna pars graviter tulit tam praecipitanter rem illam actam esse ab uno aut al∣tero Senatore inconsultâ Curiâ. Nam ita duo prima illa decreta facta sunt. Rem aliàs persequar. Sed non omittam Principis Senatûs dictum, quo rem dixit ad Regiam auctoritatem pertinere, necesse esse ut mos ipsi in Montano gereretur; quasi Regium edictum sit, ne quis adversùs injustam Monachorum tyrannidem reclamet. Vale.

29 Novemb. 1652.