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. XII.

Of the grand Audience which the Pope give us May 19. being the first and last which we had of all that had been promis'd us.

THis morning we got our Writings ready and sign'd them. And according to the order given us by the Ambassador, we went out of our Lodging to Monte Cavallo about three a clock. Where when we came we found some of the Con∣sultors in the two outer Chambers, and amongst others, M. Hallier's servant, who was lately made Priest, who came thither openly and without fear of our perceiving that he came to spye what he could discover. But we were advertis'd, that one of M. Hallier's Collegues hid himself in some place under the staires or came thither a little af∣ter us; to assure himself whether we would be there; which he no soonner understood, but went down immediately out of Monte Cavallo leaping alone and clapping his hands and lifting them up to Heaven, for joy that we should be heard be∣fore the Pope. A religious Augustin who saw him go down the staires in that transport, conceiv'd that some disgrace had befallen us, and went home sad, that he might not be witnesse of the disaster: but when he afterwards heard the great successe wherewith our audience was follow'd, he knew not whereunto to impute that joy. An length he understood the cause of it, when he saw the Con∣stitution came forth some dayes after this audi∣ence, judging that our Adversaries must needs have then known that it was resolv'd upon and determin'd, and that they conceiv'd our appearing before the Pope would give them ground to re∣port that we were condemn'd after we had been heard.

We stay'd in the first antichamber where the Consultors were, and doubted at first whether we should enter into the second with them; but presently considering that they were not to be ac∣counted as our Judges, we enter'd into the se∣cond Antichamber with them, and sate down by them. Here we stay'd near half an houre ex∣pecting the comming of the Cardinals, and in the mean time doubting whether at our intro∣duction to the Pope we should go to kisse his feet

(because we knew not in what posture we might find him) I proposed doubt to a Chambelain of honor, who could not absolutely resolve it, but intimated that if we had done it when we sa∣luted the Pope first, he did not judge it necessary in this case; neverthelesse so further satisfaction he refer'd me to the Maistre de Chambre, and he to M. Albizzi. But having no mind to consult the latter about any thing, we resolv'd to do as we should see expedient.

A little while after the coming of the Cardinals, the Consultors were call'd, and enter'd one after another according to their Seniority. Soon after we were call'd, and advertis'd to leave our Hats behind us. We found the Assembly in this order; being in the secret Antichamber, which is but a narrow place. The Pope sat in a Chair like that in which he usually gives audience, but so plac'd towards the door, that at our entrance, his Holi∣ness's face was directly upon us at the distance of about ten paces. One pace distant from his Ho∣liness's Chair were on each side two Benches with backs of carved and painted, wood capable of three persons. In the midst, a Turquy Carpet was spread upon the floor; and at a little distance from thence was a Table at which M. Albizzi (who otherwise stood) kneel'd down to write when he pleas'd. The four Cardinals sat upon the Benches with their Caps on. Cardinal Spada sat first on the Pope's right hand, Cardinal Ginetti next to him on the same side, Cardinal Ghiggi on the other side right over Cardinal Spada, and Cardinal Pamphilio opposite to Cardinal Ginetti. But their order was as in a Circle, beginning from the Pope's right hand, Cardinal Spada being, the first, Cardinal Ginetti the second, Cardinal Pamphilio the third, and Cardinal Ghiggi the fourth. The same order was observ'd among the Consultors. They stood all successively according to their degrees, beginning from the Pope's right hand round to his left, and F. Tartaglia who was the last in degree stood nearest his Holinesse's left hand. The square made by the benches and persons thus di∣spos'd, was open on the side of the door right a∣gainst the Pope, and was just large enough to re∣ceive my Collegues and me all five in a row. The Abbot of Valcroissant stood in the middle of us in a direct line to the Pope, F. Des-mares on his right hand, I on his left, M. Manessier on the right hand of F. Des-mares, and M. Angran on my left.

Being thus rank'd at the edge of the Foot-Car∣pet, we all made a Genuflexion, and at the same instant the Pope made a signe with his hand to us to rise up, and spoke this word to us, Proponele, say what ye have to say.

The Abbot of Valcroissant having taken breath, when he began his Oration, made another genu∣flexion as he pronounc'd Beatissime Pater, and we all with him. We rose up immediately, and he continu'd his Oration gravely and deliberately, and animated it in a very sprightly and agreeable manner. I subjoin here a most faithful and exact translation of it.

An Oration pronounc'd before the Pope by the Abbot of Valcroissant.

MOST HOLY FATHER,

THere is nothing more reasonable and just (as Possessor an African Bishop sometimes said to Pope Hormisdas) then to have recourse to the Head when the members are sick, to the end to draw from it the strength which they need in their lan∣guishment. For who can have more care of the soules which are subjected to him, or from whom can greater support be expected to confirm the tot∣tering Faith then from his successor, who having first sat upon the Apostolical Thrones, heard Jesus Christ himself say to him with his own mouth, Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my Church!

We are oblig'd M. H. F. to represent to Your Holinesse, by how many Artifices and secret Am∣bushes some persons employ certain obscure, e∣quivocal, and maliciously contriv'd Propositions to undermine the Church at this day, by assault∣ing and endangering the doctrine of S. Augustin touching the Grace of Jesus Christ so often ap∣prov'd by the H. See, and authoris'd without dis∣continuance by the universal consent of the whole Church.

Upon which we shall speak M. H. F. with the now assurance and confidence, for that we speak before the H. Apostolick See and before the Ro∣man Church, which being founded upon the immobility of a Rock, preserves with invincible constancy, and intire purity the unshaken firm∣nesse of its Faith and Doctrine, without ever suffering that to be violated which it hath once confirm'd by its approbation, and whereof it hath declar'd it self protectresse.

We have then the advantage of speaking be∣fore the Roman Church concerning the doctrine and authority of him who hath always had the supream Pontifs for approvers, admirers and de∣fenders, and alwayes found so powerful prote∣tection from them as often as complaint hath been made to them of such as impugned, wound∣ed oor despis'd his authority and doctrine.

Now haply is never came to passe, that the au∣thority and sentiments of that H. Father were more dangerously invaded then at this day, but certainly never more maliciously or with more artifice. Yet we praise God, M. H. F. for that the danger is pass'd, since those ambushes are discover'd. For to have given the Romane Church knowledge of them, is to have dissipated them: and it being advertis'd of the danger wherein S. Augustine's doctrine is, there re∣maines no doubt but the same will be secur'd and authoris'd as much as ever.

But this our confidence in the H. Apostolick See is further augmented, because besides the autho∣rity of S. Augustin so powerfully establisht, the doctrine in question carries a priviledge with it which is wholly peculiar to it self. For though there be none of the Truths of the Catholick

Faith whereof this first See of the World is not the illustrious Depository; neverthelesse it at∣tributes to it self by proper right the care of pre∣serving the Grace of Jesus Christ; inasmuch (as according to what S. Augustin observes in his sixth Letter to Sixtus) 'tis principally to this Church that the great Apostle S. Paul spoke and taught the mysteries of the Grace of God, which is given us by Jesus Christ our Lord. And the same S. Augustin in another Book, shewing at the same time both that the Grace of Jesus Christ ought to be preacht throughout all the earth, and that this Church is the head of all others, with these words, This great Apostle hath shown the power of Grace, principally in his Epistle to the Romanes, to the end that the preaching of the heavenly Do∣ctrine, might passe from this prime City of the World into all places of the Earth. Which mani∣fests, that the Faith concerning the grace of Chri∣stians may be said by a special priviledge to be the Faith of the Roman Church. 'Tis also for this reason that S. Augustin, its greatest Doctor and Defender next the Apostle, never was op∣pos'd concerning this matter, but the Roman Church ardently undertook his defence, and at∣tributed his doctrine to it self as its own, and as its peculiar inheritance according as a 1.1 S. Clement VIII. speaks.

And certainly, 'tis not without ground that the Apostle gave this first Church of the World such sublime instructions of the mysteries of the Grace of Jesus Christ, since it is the fruit of his blood, the bond of God with men, the spirit of Jesus Christ and Christian Religion, and that which truly establishes the new Law and the Gospel. This Grace is not that which is taught by those who retain only its name, to avoid the indigna∣tion and scandal of the faithful, should they deny it absolutely; but 'tis that which was in question between S. Augustin on one side, fighting in the name of the Church, and Pelagius and his fol∣lowers on the other: that, as S. Augustin saith, writing to Pope Innocent the first. b 1.2 which the Christian faith teaches and publishes to be pro∣per and peculiar to Christians; that c 1.3 which the Catholick Bishops were wont to read in the books of God and to preach to God's people: that d 1.4 which Pelagius ought to acknowledge, if he would not only be call'd a Christian, but be truly one: and lastly, that (as he saith in a∣nother place) upon which are supported the principal fundamentals of Faith and Christian Pie∣ty, which will subsist as long as it stands, and be in danger to be overthrown when it is shaken.

Wherefore when in these last times, some have attempted to overthrow the true Grace of Jesus Christ, they conceiv'd nothing more expedient to advance their design, then to dilacerate, as e 1.5 S. Prosper speaks, in dilacerating S. Augustin with outragious words, the most learned of all the Fa∣thers in the Doctrine of the Church, and the most powerful Defender of the grace of Jesus Christ; then to weaken the authority of his Writings which impugn the error of the Pelagians, and to despoil him of the belief which he hath in the minds of the faithful: they who form'd so un∣hapdy a design, not doubting (as the same S. Prosper saith again) to be able at length to over∣throw all the authorities Which uphold the purity of the doctrine of Grace, if they could once beat down with all their Engines of Pelagianism this strong and potent Tower which serves for defence to the truths of Faith.

This enterprise against the Grace of Jesus Christ hath proceeded so far, that in regard of the close union of S. Augustin with S. Paul in what con∣cerns this matter, we see that at this day the En∣terprizers fear not to attaque them both together, by daring to accuse them of having pass'd even into Excesses.

For at the same time that the five Propositions in question were contriving for the overthrow of S. Augustin's doctrine, F. Adam a Jesuite printed a Book, in which he flyes out with no less fury against S. Paul himself then against S. Au∣gustin; having the boldnesse to maintain therein, that either of them leaving themselves to the blind impetuosity of their temper, have gone beyond the bounds of the Truth and Faith. Is it then to be wonder'd that this Jesuite who treats Apostles and Prophets in this manner, has had the boldnesse to declare S. Augustin's doctrine impious and heretical? But who can without hor∣ror see pronounc'd against this great Saint with∣out any palliation the most outragious Censure that can be imagin'd? This Book so injurious to S. Paul, and to other Canonical Writers, and chiefly to S. Augustin, hath been printed & publisht with the approbation of their Provincial of Paris and three other Divines of their Society, and receiv'd with a publick joy of all the Jesuites in France.

What then ought not to be fear'd M. H. F. from the enterprises of this Society? For if to discredit S. Augustin they dare assail S. Paul, be∣cause 'tis from that Apostle that S. Augustin de∣riv'd what he writ; what remaines but that they rise up against Jesus Christ himself, since 'tis from him that S. Paul learnt what he teaches us of the mystery of Grace? Behold, M. H. F. where∣unto tends their design, who in reference to the belief which ought to be had in Christian Reli∣gion touching Grace, follow not the traces which are show'd us by the Church, but measuring these mysteries by their own sense, judge of them ra∣ther by conjectures and seeming reasons, then by the perpetual and most certain authority of the tradition of the Church. 'Tis not M. H. F. by vain Imaginations, but by invincible proofs that we shall manifest to Your H. this publick Con∣spiracy of the Jesuites form'd against S. Augustin. Behold in my hands above a hundred Propositi∣ons against that Saint drawn out of several books made since 50 yeares by the Jesuites, which shew, that the boldnesse wherewith they assault him encreases daily, in such sort that they inces∣santly charge him with new & greater outrages.

We know, M. H. F. that though our Ad∣versaries have and do still testifie to manifest an aversion against S. Augustin, yet they make semblance of reverencing his authority, and dare commend him even in presence of your H. and boast themselves to be his defenders and di∣sciples. But this is onely to put a colour of feigned respect upon their real disdain, and car∣rie it more free from blame. 'Tis onely to a∣void the punishment of the insolence wherewith they outrage him. 'Tis onely to hide their a∣version of his Doctrine under the Commendati∣on of his person. 'Tis only to dimish the care which in these contests ought to be taken for ex∣amining which are the true sentiments of that H. Father, and to make it believ'd that the same are not concern'd in the Propositions which have been presented to your H. because they who op∣pose them make profession of following the Do∣ctrine and revering the authority of that Fa∣ther; that so avoiding the condemnation of their temerity by such feigned and fallacious elogiums of S. Augustin, and the obligation of subscri∣bing any thing in this matter by your Holinesses order, they and their partisans may reject his authority with more boldnesse then ever, con∣demn his Doctrin, and continue to banish it out of their Schools as Calvinistical and dangerous; especially if it happen that your H. be led un∣der any pretext to condemn these Propositions; because they will not fail afterwards to reflect the censure of them upon S. Augustin, as a Je∣suite hath plainely declar'd in a late published work, wherein he hath been so bold as to write, Have a little patience, dear Reader, Rome will shortly tell you, what S. Augustin's sentiments are or ought to have been in this matter. O most pre∣sumptuous word, yet fallen from this pen by a wonderful judgement of God, who overrules by his Providence even the darknesse and disor∣ders of men; since the Jesuites M. H. F. give you clearly to understand thereby, that the Doctrine of S. Augustin is included in these five Propositions, and that they expect not the con∣demnation of them from your H. but that they may afterwards condemn S. Augustin, which Chri∣stian eares cannot hear without horror.

But though our Adversaries speak honourably too sometimes of S. Augustin, yet in their Wri∣tings they cannot forbear to declare themselves his enemies, by insinuating that his Doctrine is contrary to the sentiments of the H. Apostolick See. We are not ignorant, M. H. F. with what boldnesse they dare affirme that what S. Augustin teaches * 1.6 constantly to be the princi∣pal Doctrine of the Grace of Jesus Christ, and a certain, indubitable, Propheticall, Apostoli∣cal, and Catholick faith, is onely a dubious and uncertain opinion, and may consequently, say they, be rejected without fear. For this end they strive to perswade that S. Augustin do's not agree with himself, that he contradicts himself, that there are some things in his Writings which favour our sentiments, others on the contrary which favour theirs.

In which M. H. F. 'tis not so much S. Augu∣stin whom they so insolently outrage, as the H. Apostolick See, and the Universal Church, since they would thereby cause men to believe that being the H. See approves and ownes contra∣dictory sentiments, it is not regulated and go∣vern'd by the H. Ghost who is the spirit of u∣nity and truth, but hath chosen a blind guide to encounter the enemies of Grace, and propo∣ses him for a director to the Divines and the Faithfull, though contradicting himself he cannot make us know what we are oblig'd to believe and follow.

The true Disciples of S. Augustin and the sin∣cere venerators of the H. Apostolick See are ve∣ry farre, M. H. F. from having a thought so rash and unworthy of the respect which ought to be borne to that great Doctor of the Church. Let our Adversaries choose either to take him wholly, or leave him to us wholly. He is all theirs, or all ours; if he be not all ours, we do not envy them with him, being so far from desiring to do him and the H. See so much wrong as to wish him divided in pieces, that we might have a part.

Your H. sees that the present difference be∣tween our Adversaries and us hath great resem∣blance with that of the two mothers, upon which Solomon pronounc'd so wise a judgement that it hath been ever since and shall be to all a∣ges in admiration. Our contest concernes S. Augustin who is our Father and Master; either part pretends him on their side, and our Adver∣saries perceiving they cannot challenge him wholly to themselves, (being forc't to confesse that many of his sentiments are contrary to them, and favour us) they say he must he di∣vided, in halfe, and either of us have a part. But we who are the true children and disciples of that Father, cannot suffer this partition. We main∣tain that he must either be all theirs, or all ours, inasmuch as to divide him were to destroy him, because his authority would fall to the ground if he were found contrary to himself; or rather, the H. See would be torn and pull'd in pieces by this division of S. Augustin, since it should have ap∣prov'd and own'd sentiments perfectly opposite between themselves.

Wherefore we conjure Your H. with all the power and tendernesse of affection which chil∣dren can have for their Father, not to suffer that S. Augustin be divided. And, if it be law∣full for me to use the words of the Scripture in this occasion, rather give him wholly to them and alive, then stay him by dividing him be∣tween us. Can any other judgement be expect∣ed from your Holinesse in this contest then that of Solomon? Can you repute those S. Augustin's true disciples who would have him divided, and not rather those who would sooner be depriv'd of him altogether then that he were divded? your H. will undoubtedly pronounce this sentence in our favour; Give S. Augustin alive without dividing and slaying him to these latter, for they are his true disciples. By this meanes, M. H. F. the whole Church will know that the wisedom of God directs Innocent 10. to render justice.

And indeed, M. H. F. 'tis so certain that S. Augustin is not in any place on our Adversaries side; that they cannot produce one sole passage which is favourable to their sentiments, unlesse they cut it in the middle, maime and mulilate it, ta∣king it out of its proper place, and putting ano∣ther sense upon it then it hath of it self. Your H. will find it so, M. H. F. by the confuta∣tion of the Writing which they presented to you, wherein having cited sixty passages of S. Au∣gustin against the first Proposition, we have related them all in the answer which we have to present to your H. upon those passages, where∣in we shew that scare one of them is truely and fairly alledg'd.

But our Adversaries would have not onely S. Augustin, but also the Grace of Jesus Christ divided, though neither the one nor the other can admit division or partition; because a 1.7 S. Pro∣sper saith, they reject Grace wholly, who do not wholly confesse it. And elsewhere he useth these words, b 1.8 We will not suffer that any member of the body of that so justly condemn'd Doctrine rise up in the Church, because 'tis certain the disguisements and artifices of that falsehood are so subtle that if under pretext of a feign'd recantation it may preserve the least root of opinions that favours it, that root will like a quick-set cause it all to spring up againe. For when there is nothing else in the whole then in each part, 'tis not a sign of piety to reject almost the whole; but to retaine never so little por∣tion thereof is an argument of insincerity.

Hence it is M. H. F. that our Adversaries so vehemently wish that your H. would pluck up some small part of True Grace, that is to say, of the Effectual Grace of Jesus Christ, by giv∣ing them leave not to retain it all intire; in as much by this meanes it will be easie for them to ruine it all, to abolish all S. Augustin, and to revive the whole Pelagian Heresie by one of its parts.

You may judge hereby M. H. F. how im∣portant this affair is, in which S. Augustin's Doctrine, and authority, & even the true Grace of Jesus Christ is concern'd; in which nothing can be decided in favour of one party but it will have the whole advantage; and in which 'tis ne∣cessary that all things be first exactly examin'd and discussed before any certainty can be pro∣nounc'd or establisht. Wherefore we cannot sufficiently admire, that in the midst of so many occupations wherewith your H. is in a manner overwhelm'd under the weight of the Churches affaires, God through a singular providence has inspir'd you with a purpose to examine this im∣portant question with so much care and diligence that you may decide it fully, after having weigh∣ed, searcht and consider'd all things; and we cannot too much thank his divine goodnesse that he hath pleas'd to increase the strength and con∣firme the health of your H. and together with this vigor of body and mind in so venerable an old age to inflame you with the same zeale, wherewith through his most celestal favour, for the deciding of this very cause he fill'd the In∣nocents, Zozimes, the Bonifaces, the Celestines and other great Popes your Predecessors.

We confesse, M. H. F. and your H. knows sufficiently that this matter is spinose, and de∣serves a long and most attentive discussion. Na∣ture which flatters us, never ceases to oppose in us the mystery of the grace of Jesus Christ. Our Reason seekes meanes on all sides to free it self from that absolute submission which we are ob∣lig'd to have for God; it forgets nothing to in∣duce ever our faith to embrace these opinions; it insinuates every thing that favours this conna∣tural pride in us. S. Augustin himself confesses that without thinking of it he remain'd a long while in the error of the Semipelagians, and got not perfectly out of it till after a deep meditation of the H. Scriptures, particularly of S. Paul, & an exact reading of the H. Fathers which preceeded him, which hapned but a little after his being call'd to the Episcopacy. And there∣fore 'tis no wonder that in all times there have been found so many difficulties and repugnances to cure the minds of the faithfull of the error of Pelagianisme.

Besides all which, M. H. F. there is a deter∣minate resolution for Molina's defence of the whole Society of Jesuites, who by their Sermons, printed books, publick Lectures and many other wayes have mightily endeavour'd to embroile, obscure, alter and ruine the heavenly Doctrine of S. Augustin touching the grace of Jesus Christ; & have perverted the minds of so great a number of persons; and amongst so many clouds and obscurities 'tis difficult to discern the truth and to get clear of the Jesuites Principles and Do∣ctrines, which many, even Divines too, have embrac'd and through custome remain insensi∣bly therein, either loth to take the pains which is necessary for their undeceiving, or affraid of the shame of changing their judgement, or through some other secret and hidden inclinati∣on. But this difficulty is further increased by the malicious artifice wherewith the Propositions have been contriv'd, only for the secret ruining of the true Grace of Jesus Christ by their equivocal expressions.

The Pelagians; as Innocent 1. relates, made use of the same artifice when they began to sow their heresie, as that H. Pope calls it, which was the first that condemn'd it, and approv'd S. Augustin's Doctrine. Behold in what manner he speaks of them. c 1.9 Their words being full of dangerous subtleties, they took, for pretext of their dispute, the defence of the Catholick faith, to the end to poyson their mindes whose sentiments were Orthodox, by causing them to embrace the bad side; and thus they endeavor'd to subvert the Catholick belief of the true Doctrine of Grace. This is what the Event will show, and your H. will further find that the Bishops who sent us were induced by consideration of the H. See, and the defence of S. Augustin's authority and of the grace of Jesus Christ, to demand, as they do, of your H. a Congregation in which the parties may he heard viva voce and by writing in pre∣sence one of the other; and wherein, after

reciprocal communication of all their Writings, all the points of this controversie may be fully and plainly clear'd by resuming things from their original and examining them a new one after a∣ther.

But, M. H. F. though Nature and Reason are very unapt to comprehend what is the grace of Jesus Christ; and though this Doctrine be inve∣lop'd as with so many clouds by the various new inventions of new Divines, and by the equi∣vocations and ambiguities of the Propositions in question; neverthelesse we dare boldly affirm that albeit this mystery is very profound, yet it is not so difficult to understand, provided the meanes be used and the rules followed which the Church hath establisht for clearing and deciding the Doctrines of our faith; and if (according to the Custome of the Church and the H. See, practised and confirmed lately in the Council of Trent) the H. Scriptures, the supream Pon∣tifs, the Councils, and Fathers, particularly S. Augustin as the principal minister and defender of the grace of Jesus Christ be consulted. If your H. uses this course, we hope you will clearly know that the Doctrine of Grace maintain'd by us is so certain and well grounded, that no doubt can remain concerning it. For we shall shew your H. so many passages and such clear testimonies drawn out of these sources of Divine Wisdome, that we believe our Adversaries can∣not solidly refute so much as one of them; where∣as on the contrary we undertake by Gods assi∣stance that among those which they shall pro∣duce against our opinion and the sense where∣in we defend these Propositions, there shall scarce be one which we will not fully destroy. And we here again maintain without fear in presence of your H. and this whole assembly, (what we have subscrib'd with our own hands in the con∣clusion of the two writings in forme of Memori∣als which we have presented to your H.) that our Adversaries with all their endeavours can∣not forme any objection against the Propositi∣ons as we understand them, nor propose a∣ny argument drawn from the H. Scripture or Reason, which we cannot manifest to have been us'd by the Pelagians or Semipelagians against S. Augustin, either expressely or in words wholly equivalent, and which he hath not refuted by his answers, as we hope to destroy theirs by the most powerfull and solid reasons of that H. Do∣ctor.

Whereunto we shall adde, M. H. F. that of all the arguments which we shall produce against them, there shall not be one, where to it may be said that S. Augustin hath answer'd in any wise; so consistent he is alwayes with himself, so manifest it is that he favours us, so wholly he is on our side, and so true and evident it is that the controversie renew'd at this day, is, not onely the same which was agitated under Cle∣ment VIII. between the Dominicans and the Je∣suites, but likewise the very same which was be∣tween S. Augustin and Pelagius under your Pre∣decessor Innocent 1. And your H. shall find, not without wonder, that 'tis renew'd in such man∣ner, that our adversaries, both in their manner of proceeding and writing, imploy the same a∣tifices and the same deceits of those ancient ene∣mies of Grace, of which S. Augustin and S. Pro∣sper incessantly complain.

The Writing alone which they presented to your H. consisting of sixty passages of S. Augu∣stin, fully proves with how great reason and ju∣stice we frame so important an accusation against them, and your H. will become fully perswad∣ed hereof if you permit us to refute in your pre∣sence what they have advanc'd in that Writing. Your H. shall see that they suppose therin what no body hath taught; that they refute what no body hath disputed; that the passages alledg'd out of S. Augustin are maim'd or perverted; that they maliciously suppresse those which clearly explain his meaning; that they attribute to him a sense wholly contrary to his own, as the same passages manifestly show. And lastly your H. shall see that they are all either falsely, or ma∣liciously or impertinently alledg'd; that they act without shame or faith before you in this mat∣ter of faith, that they approach your Apostoli∣cal Throne without any reverence, and that no other reason leads them under colour of a false respect to reject and decline the Conference which we desired to have with them, but because they well know that they cannot avoid being pub∣lickly convinc'd of foul dealing and ignorance. And consequently we are assured that as much as your H. loves sincerity, candor and justice, so much will you be mov'd with most just indigna∣tion against them.

But this assurance, M. H. F. wherewith the truth, which we conceive we maintain, causes us to speak before your H. diminishes nothing of the full and intire submission which we shall alwaies have to the judgement which you shall passe: as the boldnesse and confidence where∣with they, who before us encounter'd the er∣rors sprung up or reviv'd in the Church before the same were condemn'd, attaqu'd their ad∣versaries, did not hinder but that they were perfectly submissive to the decisions of the H. See and Councils. Now being we have no other aime in this affair but to seek the Truth, which alone causes us to speak, and since we are deputed to your Holinesse by some Bishops one∣ly out of a design to serve the Truth and the H. See, as much as we shall be able our desire shall be accomplisht if your H. judge that the honor of Truth and the H. See obliges you to correct or even condemne somethihg of what we maintain; and we not onely submit our selves to your judgement, but being glad of being cor∣rected, we shall publish the same everywhere with joy.

But if on the contrary your Holinesse findes that we defend the faith of the Catholick, Apo∣stolick and Romane Church; and that the Je∣suites and Doctors who contrived these Propo∣sitions, designe by the obscurity of their equi∣vocal words, to subvert the true grace of Jesus Christ defended by S. Augustin in the name of the whole Church, and to banish it out of the minds of all the Faithful, and that they are en∣gaged in pernicious errors; we expect from

Your Holiness's justice, and with as much humility as urgency desire, that you condemn their errors, and establish the Catholick Faith. Neither they nor we ought to be spar'd. Truth ought to be strongly upheld against us, if it appear that 'tis we who injure it: it ought to be establisht a∣gainst us in its whole strength. This is that which we avoid not, but desire.

Now if our Adversaries have the same purpose of seeking truth and peace, they will have no o∣ther wishes, nor make other demands, and Your Holiness will hear the same words from their mouthes as from ours. Let neither we, nor those engag'd in the same party with us be consider'd; but let regard be had only to the Truth, the ho∣nour of the Church, and the dignity of the H. A∣postolick See.

Thus M. H. F. after having implor'd the assi∣stance of the Holy and Indivisible Trinity, we are prepar'd to maintain in Your Holiness's presence this so important point of the Catholick Faith, and trusting to that same Grace of Jesus Christ our Saviour, to the defence and glory whereof we consecrate all our words and Writings; we implore his divine illumination, that we may be able rightly to understand and explicate the mat∣ter in question. And it will be great consola∣tion to us, that in speaking before him who is the Oracle of Truth, what we shall not be able to comprehend in such difficult questions, will not (as S. Augustin speaks) be imputed to the truth which profitably exercises pious soules even when it is hid from them, but to our little light which hinder'd us from being able rightly to comprehend them, or well explicate what we comprehended. And lastly M. H. F. We here make the protestation which S. Augustin saith is the token of a truly Catholick spirit; that if it should be so that the sentiments hitherto held by us be not conformable to the Truth, we are rea∣dy to renounce the same as soon as it shall be dis∣cover'd to us, and to submit our selves to your judgement, as being that of the Vicar of Jesus Christ, and of S. Peter's successor.

Whilst this Harangue was pronouncing, the Pope and whole Assembly heard it with great si∣lence and attention; the Pope advancing himself a little out of his Seat which was the ordinary manner of his greater attentivenesse. Whenever the Jesuites were mention'd by their names, he instantly turn'd his head and cast his eyes upon F. Palavicini's, and held them fixt upon him, as often as any thing a little more vehemently was spoken against them; as if he meant to observe that Je∣suites countenance, or ask him what he had to answer to the charge. The Abbot of Valcrois∣sant had his Oration in his hand, as the custome is at Rome, to fix his memory the better, and though he lookt upon his paper sometimes to follow it, yet he pronounc'd it all without need of recur∣ring to it.

At the end of the Oration we all made a genu∣flexion together. M. Manessier and Angran brought some books with them which they laid upon the end of the Benches whereon the Cardi∣nals sat; and I had with me the Writings which we had prepar'd to present to the Pope. That which contain'd the hundred and six Propositions extract∣ed out of the books of the Jesuites against S. Au∣gustin's authority, I deliver'd into the hands of M. de Valcroissant; he also gave me his Oration. Assoon as ever it was begun, M. Albizzi fell to writing, and did the like at several passages, espe∣cially, by what I could observe, at such as mention'd submission, respect and affection to the H. See. No doubt, he conceiv'd this Oration would not be seen, and fear'd lest those words of grandeur and esteeme for the H. See should escape him.

After M. de Valcroissant had made a little pause, he began a Discourse, not prepar'd like his Oration, but only a sequel and proof of it. For he further remonstrated that the design of this whole Affair, was nothing else but to subvert S. Augustin's autho∣rity & doctrine. To which purpose he made a short recapitulation of our Writings de Gestis; and laid open to the Pope's eyes the chief projects of our Adversaries mention'd therein. Neverthelesse that it might not be said, that he declin'd the main matter by standing too long upon one thing (which yet was very important to be known to his Holinesse) and so reserving himself to speak more largely both of his Writing, and that con∣cerning the authority of S. Augustin's doctrine, in another Consideration wherein this matter should be further consider'd, he began to give the Pope a General Idea of the five Writings a∣bove-mention'd, which we were to present to his Holinesse at this time.

Then returning in particular to the first of those Writings which is the first part of the second Information touching Fact, containing a hundred and six Propositions extracted out of the Jesuites Books against S. Augustin, he read a great num∣ber of them, and amongst the rest those out of F. Adam's book, in which S. Augustin's doctrine is term'd heretical and Calvinistical, and S. Paul and other Canonical Writers accus'd together with S. Augustin, of being transported in their Writings bryond the bounds of Truth. During this read∣ing, M Angran and I observ'd how at every Proposition that was read F. Palavicini hearkned attentively, and shak't his head, either as appro∣ving it, or intimating that it was not worth speak∣ing of. When M. de Valcroissant had done read∣ing, he represented the circumstances of the time at which this book of F. Adam was printed, namely, at the breaking open of M. Cornet's en∣terprise, of whom he also related with what con∣fidence he had blotted out this Proposition out of a Thesis whilst he was Syndic, That S. Augustin's doctrine in the matter of Grace may safely be fol∣low'd. But for that I observ'd that this book of F. Adam made great impression upon the minds of some in the Assembly; and that M. de Valcrois∣sant for compendiousnesse sake, considering the multitude of things which he had to say, did not, to my conceit, sufficiently set forth the circum∣stances of that book's coming forth; I first offer'd to suggest something to him which he had not ob∣serv'd; which not taking effect, because he could not mind it and speak to, I desir'd him to permit me to speak whilst he took a little breath. Ha∣ving made a genuflexion to the Pope, I said, that I conceiv'd his Holinesse would not be displeas'd to hear me tell him that this book of F. Adam's,

whence all those horrible Propositions were ex∣tracted, was printed in the vulgar tongue, and very common to be had; that its Author preacht the same Maximes in one of the most eminent Pa∣rishes of Paris near the profess'd House of the Jesuites before a numerous Congregation, the whole Society knowing and approving it. I also beseecht his Holinesse to remember the prodigi∣ous boldnesse of their Father Labbe, (mention'd by M. de Valcroissant) who dar'd to write, that Rome would suddenly pronounce of what opinion S. Augustin was, and ought to have been; not dissembling that their design was to get him con∣demn'd by the Constitution which they aim'd to extort from his Holinesse, and holding themselves as sure not to misse of it, as if they were the ma∣sters of his Pen and Tongue, or had the supream disposal of those whose ministry they knew his Holinesse us'd in his deliberations and decisions. This I press'd with such indignation as the know∣ledge of the prepar'd Bull animated me to, and a sudden design to give the Pope some diffidence of those who were about him, and counsel'd him to so sad a resolution. All was heard as the rest, neither the Pope or any else replying ought thereun∣to. I made a second genuflexion and M. de Valcroissant resum'd his discourse: In which he further urg'd to the Pope, how great reason we had to summon our Adversaries to acknowledge S. Augustin's authority solemnly, by signing the six Propositions at the end of our Writings de Ge∣stis, to which he summon'd them again, and be∣seecht the Pope to oblige them to declare them∣selves thereupon.

But, To enter further into the main of the mat∣ter in question, M. de Valcroissant left this Wri∣ting, and pass'd to that of the Distinction of the senses of the Propositions. He spoke largely up∣on the substance of the Preface, in which we with all the Bishops of France beseecht his Holinesse to pronounce upon the Controversie between the Molinists and us. We read the words of the Let∣ters of either side to show the Pope, that the que∣stion was not about any Calvinistical or Lutheran opinions which we condemn'd, and had alwayes condemn'd, nor against these Propositions as they were couch'd under ambiguous terms which ren∣der'd them capable of different senses, (since we were not the authors of them, and knew no other authors of them but our Adversaries them∣selves, who contriv'd them thus to involve the Catholick Faith with Error in one condemnation, and to put all things in the Church by this means into a general confusion) but onely about the Propositions reduc'd to the Catholick senses which we defended, and which were those alone that our Adversaries impugned. Hereupon M. de Valcroissant read the explication of those senses and the declaration of our sentiments upon each of them, as they follow a little below in three co∣lumes. Which when he had done, and declar'd at every Proposition, that it was that alone to whose defence we adher'd, he made an evident reducti∣on of them to the point of Grace Effectual by it self, showing as clear as the day that nothing but the connexion which these Propositions rightly understood, and purg'd from their bad senses, had with that capital point of the Churches faith and S. Augustin's doctrine in this matter, induc'd us to endeavor to prevent an absolute and confus'd condemnation of them, in regard of the conse∣quences. When he was at the conclusion, he spoke something concerning our declaration and protestation to the Pope alwayes to maintain the Propositions reduc'd to the Catholick senses which we defended, or rather those senses and Catholick Truths which lay hid under the terms of these Pro∣positions, whilst it appear'd not to us that these truths had been expresly condemn'd by a positive and solemn judgement, whatever condemnation might otherwise befall the Propositions consider'd in themselves as M. Cornet propos'd them to the Faculty, and as they were presented the Pope by the Bishops of France who first writ to him.

Being this distinction of Senses was read throughout and word for word before the Pope, it will be expedient to insert the same here, though it was printed since apart as it follows, as well in respect of the Titles, as Contents and Subscripti∣ons.

Beatissimo Patri Innocentio Papae X. brevissi∣ma quinque propositionum in varios sensus distinctio, apertaque de iis tum Calvinistarum ac Lutheranorum, tum Pelagianorum ac Mo∣linistarum, tum S. Augustini ejusque discipu∣lorum sententia.

BEATISSIME PATER,

EPiscopi Galliarum quorum votis atque expe∣ctationi Vestra Sanctitas satisfacere se velle te∣statur, circa quinque propositiones controversas judicium ab ipsa postulant, quod & veritatem di∣lucidare ac confirmare & controversias compo∣nere, & pacem Ecclesiae restituere idoneum sit. Petunt ergo ut de iis quae in controversiam inter nos & adversarios vocata sunt, expressam sententiam ferat, non de iis de quibus nulla contentio, nulla quaestio, nulla difficultas exorta est. Hoc ex va∣riis omnium Episcoporum qui ad Vestram Sancti∣tatem scripserunt, litteris manifestum est. Qua∣propter primum officii nostri est Sanctitatis Ve∣strae oculis id aperte exponere de quo hinc & inde contendimus, ut de re quae inter nos & ad∣versarios in controversiam vertitur, ipsi constet. De propositionibus autem non in sensu alieno ad quem trahi possent, quique a nobis respuitur, sed in sensu legitimo qui à nobis defenditur, atque adeo de fide Catholica in iis contenta controversia est; DEQUE IIS SIC SUMPTIS distinctum ac perspicuum judicium expectatur.

Ne igitur in toto hoc negotio ullus pateat ae∣quivocationi, calumniae, malignitati, dubitationi locus, veros & germanos propositionum sensus quos sustinemus, quosque impugnant adversarii, si aliquid agunt, ante omnia vestrae Sanctitati quam brevissime ac dilucidissime fieri potest, ex∣ponimus, atque ex una parte errores illis con∣trarios, quos adversarii tuentur, & ex alia hae∣reses illis similiter contrarias, quas impugnare se jactitant cum propositiones impugnant, subji∣cimus: Ut Sanctitati vestrae innotescat nos neque

d dexteram neque ad sinistram declinare, sed doctrinae Ecclesiae unice adhaerere, & inde Calvi∣nistarum eorumque sequacium, hinc Pelagiano∣rum eorumque reliquiarum haereses ac errores ex aequo detestari.

De utrorumque sententia circa has quinque pro∣positiones, & de nostra quae inter hanc & illam est media, aperte & sincere id quod profitemur Sanctitati vestrae aperimus, praetermissis atque in suum tempus ac ordinem dilatis eorum omnium quae asserimus, invictis, ut putamus, probationi∣bus, nunc nihil aliud intendentes quam ut primo aspectu ac veluti in compendio exihibeamus, tum id de quo judicium fieri postulent expectentque universi Galliae, Episcopi, tum etiam quam Catho∣lice sentiamus.

PRIMA PROPOSITIO, à loco suo dolosè avulsa & exhibita.

Aliqua Dei praecepta hominibus justis volentibus & conantibus secundum praesentes quas habent vires sunt impossibilia; Deest quoque iis gratia qua possibilia fiant.

Sensus haereticus. Qui primae propositioni malignè affingi posset, quem tamen legitimè sumpta non habet. Justis omnibus quan∣tumlibet volentibus & conantibus secundum praesentes quantascun∣que vires quae a gratia magna & efficace ha∣bentur, mandata Dei sunt impossibilia. Deest quoque illis semper & quamdiu vivunt gratia qua possint vel unum ex mandatis Dei sine peccato adimplere. Haec propositio est hae∣retica, Calviniana aut Lutherana, & à Conci∣lio Tridentino damnata.

PRIMA PROPOSITIO, ut à nobis intelligitur ac defen∣ditur. Aliqua Dei praecepta aliquibus justis volentibus & conantibus invalide & im∣perfecte secundum praesentes quas ha∣bent vires, parvas scilicet, & infirmas, seu auxilio efficaci ad plene volendum & operandum necessario destitutis impos∣sibilia sunt proxime & complete, seu ab iis adimpleri proxime non possunt. De∣est quoque illis gratia efficax qua prae∣cepta illis proxime possibilia fiant, seu deest illis speciale illud auxilium sine quo justificatus, ut ait Concilium Tridenti∣num, in accepta justitia, id est, in obser∣vatione mandatorum Dei, perseverare non potest. Sustinemus ac demonstrare parati sumus hanc propositionem ad fidem Ecclesiae perti∣ne re & in Sancti Augustini doctrina indu∣bitatam esse, atque à Concilio Tridentino de∣finitam.

PROPOSITIO primae contraria ut ab adversariis defenditur. Omnia Dei praecepta justis volentibus & conantibus se∣cundum praesentes quas ha∣bent vires, sunt semper possibi∣lia per gratiam eorum libero arbitrio subjectam. Nec un∣quam ipsis deest gratia ad ope∣randum vel saltem ad oran∣dum proxime necessaria, qua possibilia fiant. Sustinemus ac demostrare pa∣rati sumus hanc propositionem, quae est Molinae & adversario∣rum, esse Pelagianam vel Semi∣pelagianam, quia gratiae ex se efficacis ad singulos actus neces∣sitatem destruit. Atque ita de∣claratum est in Congregatione Romana de Auxiliis sub Cle∣mente Octavo & Paulo Quinto.

SECUNDA PROPOSITIO, fabricata & exhibita.

Interiori gratiae in statu naturae lapsae nunquam resistitur.

SENSUS HAERETICUS. Qui primae propositioni malignè affingi posset, quem tamen legitimè sumpta non habet. Interiori gratiae efficaci in statu naturae lap∣sae eatenus nunquam resistitur, quatenus vo∣luntas hominis respectu gratiae efficacis mere passive se habet, & velut inanime quoddam nihil omnino agit, nec cooperatur nec libere assentitur. Haec propositio est haeretica, Calviniana, Lu∣therana, & à Concilio Tridentino damnata. Alius sensus erroneous. Interiori gratiae sumptae pro simplici qua∣dam illuminatione intellectus & suasione vo∣luntatis in statu naturae lapsae nunquam resi∣stitur. Haec propositio est falsa & erronea, quia ta∣lis gratia non est vera gratia Christi, ut docet S. August. in libro de gratia Christi. Alius sensus erroneus. Interiori gratiae Christi, cum adhuc parva est, & dat tantum voluntatem inchoatam, in statu naturae lapsae nunquam resistitur, quan∣tum ad effectum interiorem ad quem disponit. Haec propositio est falsa & erronea.

Secunda PROPOSITIO, ut à nobis intelli∣gitur, ac defen∣ditur. Gratiae Christi ad singulos pie∣tatis actus pro∣xime necessariae nunquam resisti∣tur, hoc est, nunquam illa fru∣stratur eo effe∣ctu ad quem a Deo proxime datur. Sustinemus ac demonstrare para∣ti sumus hanc pro∣positionem ad fi∣dem Ecclesiae per∣tinere & in San∣cti Augustini do∣ctrina indubitatam esse.

PROPOSITIO secunda contraria, ut ab adversariis defendi∣tur. Gratiae Christi ad singu∣los pietatis actus, seu ope∣randi seu saltem orandi, ne∣cessariae, in statu naturae lap∣sae aliquando resistitur, hoc est, illa aliquando frustratur eo effectu ad quem a Deo proxime datur. Sustinemus ac demonstrare parati sumus hanc propositio∣nem, quae est Molinae & ad∣versariorum, esse Pelagianam vel Semipelagianam, quia gratia Christi ad singulos a∣ctus necessariae vim & effica∣ciam destruit. Atque ita de∣claratum est in Congregatione Romana de Auxiliis.

TERTIA PROPOSITIO, fabricata & exhibita.

Ad merendum & demerendum in statu naturae lapsae non requiritur in ho∣mine libertas à necessitate sed sufficit libertas à coactione.

Sensus haereticus. Qui tertiae propositioni malignè affingi pos∣set, quem tamen legitimè sumpta non habet. Ad merendum & demerendum in statu naturae lapsae non re∣quiritur in homine libertas a necessitate naturali, qualis eti∣am reperitur in mo∣tibus indeliberatis, sed sufficit mera li∣bertas a coactione. Haec propositio hae∣retica est, Calviniana aut Lutherana.

TERTIA PROPOSITIO, ut à nobis intelligitur ac de∣fenditur. Ad merendum & demeren∣dum in statu naturae lapsae non re∣quiritur in homine libertas a ne∣cessitate infallibilitatis, sed sufficit libertas a coactione cum judicio rationis, si consideretur praecise es∣sentia libertatis & meriti, quam∣quam ex ratione status semper re∣periatur indifferentia potentiae qua voluntas etiam sub gratia proxime necessaria & ex se efficace potest non velle, non tamen ut nunquam simul cum eadem gratia non ve∣lit. Sustinemus ac demonstrare parati sumus hanc propositionem esse Catho∣licam & Augustinianam.

PROPOSITIO TERTIAE contraria, ut ab adversariis defenditur. Ad merendum & demerendum in statu naturae lapsae requiritur in homi∣ne libertas a necessitate infallibilitatis, seu necessaria est indifferentia proxi∣ma agendi & non agendi, qua voluntas instructa omnibus ad agendum Praerequisitis pro suo nutu modo se flectit in unam partem, modo in op∣positam. Sustinemus ac demonstrare parati sumus hanc proposisionem, quae est Mo∣linae adversariorum, Pelagianam esse, quia gratia ex se efficacis ad singulos pietatis actus necessaria possibilitatem destruit. Atque ita declaratum est in Congregatione Romana de Auxiliis.

QUARTA PROPOSITIO, fabricata & exhibita.

Semipelagiani admittebant praevenientis gratiae interioris necessitatem ad singulos actus, etiam ad initium fidei. Et in hoc erant haeretici quod vellent eam gratiam talem esse cui posset humana voluntas resistere vel obtemperare.

Sensus haereticus. Qui quartae proposi∣tioni malignè affin∣gi posset, quem ta∣men legitimè sump∣ta non habet. Gratia Christi praeveniens talis est ut liberum arbitri∣um hominis ab ea motum & excita∣tum non possit dis∣sentire si velit. Ali∣ter dicere, Semipe∣lagianum est. Haec propositio est haeretica, Calvinia∣na, aut Lutherana, & à Concilio Tri∣dentino damnata.

QƲARTA PROPOSITIO, ut à nobis intelligitur ac defenditur. Semipelagiani admittebant prae∣venientis gratiae interioris neces∣sitatem ad singulos actus imper∣fectos, etiam ad initium fidei; & in hoc haereticè sentiebant, quod vellent eam gratiam talem esse ut voluntas illi pro nutu suo ob∣temperaret vel eam respueret, seu ut ex se efficax non esset. Sustinemus ac demonstrare pa∣rati sumus hanc propositionem quo∣ad primam partem quae spectat qua∣stionem facti, esse veram: quoad se∣cundam vero ad fidem Ecclesiae pertinere, & in Sancti Augustini doctrina indubitatam esse.

PROPOSITIO QƲARTAE contraria, ut ab adversariis defenditur. Semipelagiani non admittebant prae∣venientis gratiae interioris necessita∣tem ad singulos actus imperfectos nec ad initium fidei; nec in hoc errabant quod vellent eam gratiam talem esse, ut ex se efficax non esset. Sustinemus ac demonstrare parati sumus hanc propositionem, quae est Molinae & adversariorum, Pelagianam aut Semi∣pelagianam esse, quia gratiae efficacis ad singulos actus necessariae Catholicam fi∣dem & simul omnem Sancti Augustini auctoritatem destruit. Atque ita decla∣ratum est in Congregatione Romana de Auxiliis.

QVINTA PROPOSITIO, fabricata & exhibita.

Semipelagianum est dicere, Christum pro omnibus omnino homini∣bus mortuum esse aut sanguinem fudisse.

Sensus haereticus. Qui quintae proposi∣tioni malignè af∣fingi posset, quem tamen legitimè sumpta non ha∣bet. Christus mortu∣us est tantummo∣do pro praedesti∣natis, ita ut ii soli per meritum mor∣tis Christi veram fi∣dem ac justitiam ac∣cipiant. Haec propositio est haeretica, Calvinia∣na, aut Lutherana, & à Concilio Tri∣•…•…entino damnata.

QƲINTA PROPOSITIO, ut à nobis intelligitur ac de∣fenditur. Semipelagianum est dicere, Christum pro omnibus omnino hominibus, seu nemine ex∣cepto, mortuum esse, eo sensu ut omnibus nemine ex∣cepto, per mortem ejus oblata sit gratia ad salutem necessaria, quam consequi in nutu arbitrii sit positum sine gratiae ex se effi∣cacis adjutorio. Sustinemus ac demonstrare parati sumus hanc propositionem ad fidem Ecclesiae pertinere & in S. Augustini doctrina indubita∣tam esse.

PROPOSITIO QƲINTAE contraria, ut ab advesariis defenditur. Non est Semipelagianum, sed Catholicum, dicere Christum morte sua omnibus omnino hominibus seu nemine excepto communi∣casse gratiam proximè necessariam ad oper∣andum, aut saltem ad incipiendum & ad oran∣dum. Sustinemus ac demonstrare parati sumus hanc Propositionem, quae est Molinae & ad∣versariorum, continere doctrinam Concilio Tri∣dentino contrariam, atque etiam esse Pelagi∣anam aut Semipelagianam, quia gratiae Christi ex se efficacis ad singulos actus necessitatem destruit. Atque ita declara∣tum est in Congregatione Romana de Aux∣iliis.

Haec sunt Beatissime Pater, ad quorum omnium plenam explanationem, probationem, confirma∣tionem a Vestra Sanctitate & verbo & scripto au∣diri postulavimus, & ad quorum discussionem pergere parati sumus quam brevissime feret rei gravitas & amplitudo, & quam diligentissime patientur Sanctitatis Vestrae curae & occupationes. Interea jam videt ex supra positis nullam de Calvinianis Lutheranisve haeresibus inter nos at∣que adversarios esse aut fuisse quaestionem. Si illas ipsi anathematizant, ex animo eas pariter ipsi anathematizamus semperque anathematiza∣vimus, neque cum de his hodie quaestio non sit, eorum impugnationem contra nos suscipere pos∣sunt nisi ut nos calumnientur, atque sub illorum pretextu & involucris sensum Catholicum quem sustinemus, condemnationis periculo exponant, suumque nostro contrarium, Pelagianum scilicet aut Semipelagianum, & cum eo sexaginta & am∣plius nefandos errores ex illo ut ostendemus ne∣cessario consequentes, pro fide Catholica obtru∣dant. Iterum atque iterum, Beatissime Pater, Sanctitati Vestrae cum omnibus Gall••ae Episcopis, humillime supplicamus ut de re proposita & con∣troversa claram firmamque proferat sententiam; profitemurque coram ipsa, nos & universos Sancti Augustini discipulos ac defensoros (qui, ut olim aiebat Sanctus Prosper ad Ruffinum cap. 2. nunc etiam in ipsis his locis, in quibus adversus eum querimonia concitatur, propitio Deo ad perceptionem Evangelicae Apostolicaeque doctrinae saluberrimis ejus disputationibus imbuuntur; & quotidie in membris corporis Christi in quantum ea ipse multi∣plicat dilatantur) pro indubitata tanti Doctoris atque adeo Ecclesiae doctrina praedictas proposi∣tiones ut a nobis superius expositae sunt, perpetuo defensuros, quandiu de illis expresse ut supra expositae sunt, intellectis prolatum non erit (quod a Sanctitate Vestra postulamus) solenne definiti∣vumque judicium, quo nobis aperte constet eas in sensu quem asserimus Catholicum, esse dam∣natas.

Quod quidem nunquam fore Deo adjuvante confidimus; ut vel ex eo conjicere licet, quod jam pridem omnium sermonibus percrebuerit, Vestram Sanctitatem ita sibi proposuisse de prae∣dictis propositionibus agere ut ante omnia statu∣erit suo loco stare & illibatam servari debere Sancti Augustini auctoritatem, cujus doctrinae potissima pars & quasi summa est gratia ex se efficax, cum qua praedictae propositiones invio∣labili insolubilique nexu conjunctae sunt. Quem∣admodum videre, est in ipso limine scripti se∣quentis, in quo ejusdem gratiae ex se efficacis ad singulos actus necessitas solidissimis apertissimis{que} demonstrationibus comprobatur.

Quae omnia Sanctitatis Vestrae correctioni ac judicio subjicimus.

Subscriptum Romae die Lunae 19 Maii anno 1653.

Sic subscriptum.

• Natalis de la Lane Doctor Facultatis Parisiensis, Abbas B. M. de Valle Crescente.
• Tussanus Desmares Presbyter Congrega∣tionis Oratorii Domini Jesu.
• Ludovicus de Saint-Amour, in sacra Fa∣cultate Parisiensi Doctor ac Socius Sorbonicus.
• Nicolaus Manessier, in sacra Facultare Parisiensi Doctor ac Socius Sorboni∣cus.
• Ludovicus Angran, ejusdem sacrae Facul∣tatis Parisiensis Licentiatus ac insignis Ecclesiae Trecensis Canonicus.

A COMPENDIOUS DISTIN∣CTION of the Five Propositions touching Grace; Presented to the Pope by the Pari∣sian Doctors defenders of S. Augustin, and clearly shewing in three Columes the several senses whereof the said Propositions are ca∣pable, and the Sentiments of the Calvinists and Lutherans, of the Pelagians and Moli∣nists, of S. Augustin and his Disciples; MDCLIII.

To our most H. F. Pope Innocent. X

MOST HOLY FATHER,

THe Bishops of France, whose wishes and expectation Your Holinesse professes an intent to satisfie, beseech you to passe a judge∣ment upon the Five controverted Propositions, which may suffice both to clear and confirm the Truth, extinguish differences, and restore peace in the Church. These Prelates supplicate Your Holinesse therefore to make an expresse decision only upon the things in contest between our Adversaries and us, and not upon such whereof there is no dispute, question or difficulty. The same desire is manifestly set forth in sundry Let∣ters written by all the abovesaid Bishops to Your Holinesse. Wherefore 'tis the chief duty of our Commission to lay before your eyes what things are disputed on either side, to the end you may have perfect cognisance of the present Con∣troversie. It is certain that the Contest at this day in the Church touching the Five Propositi∣ons, is not in regard of a remote and evil sense which may be put upon them, and is rejected by us, but in regard of a legitimate sense, & which we defend, and of the Catholick Faith, which is found contain'd therein. 'Tis of the Propositions taken thus in the legitimate and Catholick sense, that we expect a clear and decisive Judgement.

To the end therefore that in all this important Affair there may be no place for equivocation, or calumny, or the artifices of evil minds, or any doubts; We first lay open to Your Holinesse as briefly and clearly as may be, the true and le∣gitimate senses of those Propositions which we maintain, and which must be impugned by our Adversaries, if they will act against us. On one side we represent the errors contrary to the Or∣thodox senses of the Propositions, which are defended by our Adversaries; and on the other side, the Heresies in like manner contrary to those Catholick interpretations, which our Adversaries boast that they impugne, whilst they impugne

the Propositions without distinction. Whence Your Holinesse may behold, that we decline neither to the right hand nor to the left, but solely adhere to the doctrine of the Church, and by consequence equally detest on one side the Heresies and Errors of the Calvinists and their followers; and on the other the Heresies and Errors of the Pelagians, and those who have succeeded them.

We openly and sincerely declare to Your Ho∣linesse our judgement touching the opinions of those two Sects in reference to the Five Propo∣sitions, and nakedly represent our own belief which is plac'd in the middle between the said Erroneous opinions, Reserving to their due time and order the proofs of what we assert, which shall be, as we believe invincible; we pretend nothing further at present, then to give a clear and compendious draught of the things upon which all the Bishops of France expect and de∣mand the H. See's judgement, and to show how Catholick our sentiments are.

THE FIRST PROPOSITION, maliciously pull'd out of its place and expos'd to Censure.

Some of God's Commandments are impossible to just men, even when they are willing and endeavour (to perform the same) according to the present strength which they have. And the Grace which should render the same possible to them, is wanting to them.

The Heretical sense, which may be maliciously fastned upon this Proposi∣tion; which yet it hath not, when taken as it ought to be. Gods Commandments are impossible to all the just, whatever will they have, and whatever en∣deavors they use, even although they are induc'd with all the strength that the greatest and most effe∣ctual Grace affords. Also they alwayes during their lives want such Grace whereby they might ac∣complish without sinning, so much as one of God's Commandments. This proposition is he∣retical, Calvinistical, and Lutheran; and hath been condemn'd by the Council of Trent.

THE FIRST PROPSITION, in the sense wherein we understand and defend it. Some Commandments of God are impos∣sible to some just persons, who will and en∣deavor weakly and imperfectly according to the extent of strength that they have in themselves, which is small and weak. That is to say, being destitute of the effectual ayd which is necessary to the full willing and acting, these Commandments are impossible to them according to this next and compleat possibility, the privation whereof puts them in a state of not being able effectively to perform these Commandments. And they want the Effectual Grace, which is needful that those Commandments may become pro∣ximately and totally possible to them. Or, they are unprovided of that special assistance, without which a justify'd man, as the Coun∣cil of Trent saith, cannot persevere in the righteousnesse which he hath receiv'd, that is, in the observation of God's Command∣ments. We maintain, and are ready to demonstrate, that this Proposition is consonant to the Faith of the Church, indubitable in S. Augustin's do∣ctrine, and defin'd by the Council of Trent.

THE PROPOSITION contrary to the first, as it is defended by our Adversaries. All Gods Command∣ments are always possible to the just through Grace which is subject to their Free Will, when they are willing and endeavour according to their present strength. And Grace pro∣ximately necessary to render the Command∣ments possible, is never wanting to them to act, or at least to pray. We maintain, and are ready to demonstrate, that this Proposition which be∣longs to Molina and our Adversaries, is Pelagian or Semipelagian, because it destroyes the necessity of Grace effectual by it self to all good works. And so it was declar'd in the Con∣gregation de Auxiliis held at Rome under Clement VIII. & Paulo V.

THE SECOND PROPOSITION, fram'd and expos'd to Censure.

In the state of corrupted Nature, Internal Grace is never resisted.

THE HERETICAL SENSE, which may be maliciously put upon this second Proposition; which neverthelesse it' hath not, when taken as it ought to be. In the state of corrupted nature, Internal and Effectual Grace is never resisted, because Man's Will is purely passive in respect of such Effectual Grace, and being as a thing inanimate acts nothing at all, it neither cooperates nor consents freely. This Proposition is Heretical, Calvinistical Lu∣theran, and condemn'd by the Council of Trent. Another Erroneous sense, which the Pro∣position may receive. In the state of corrupted Nature, Internal Grace taken for a meer illumination of the Understand∣ing, and a perswasion of the Will, is never resisted. This proposition is false and erroneous, because such Grace is not the true Grace of Jesus Christ, as S. Augustin teaches in his Book de Gratia Christi. Another Erroneous sense, which may be imputed to the same proposition. In the state of corrupted Nature, the internal Grace of Jesus Christ, whilst it is yet weak, and gives only—is never resisted as to the effect whereunto it disposeth. This proposition is false and erroneous.

THE SECOND PROPOSITION, as it is understood & defended by us. The Grace of Jesus Christ pro∣ximately neces∣sary to every act of piety, is never resisted. That is to say, it is never frustrated of the effect, for which it is effectually given by God. We maintain and are ready to demonstrate, that this proposition pertains to the Faith of the Church, and is indubitable in S. Augustin's Do∣ctrine.

THE PROPOSITION. contrary to the second, defend∣ded by our Adversaries. The Grace of Jesus Christ which is necessary to every act of piety, whether of ope∣rating, or at least of pray∣ing, is sometimes resisted in the state of corrupted Na∣ture. That is to say, This grace is sometimes frustrated of the effect for which it was directly given by God. We maintain and are rea∣dy to demonstrate, that this proposition, which is own'd by Molina and our Adversa∣ries, is Pelagian or Semipe∣lagian, because it evacuates the power and efficacy of the Grace of Jesus Christ, which is necessary to every good acti∣on. And so it was declar'd in the Congregation de Auxiliis held at Rome.

THE THIRD PROPOSITION, fram'd and expos'd to Censure.

To merit and demerit in the state of laps'd Nature, 'tis not requisite that there be in Man a freedom from Necessity, but a freedom from constraint (or coaction) is sufficient.

The Heretical sense, which may maliciously be attributed to this third Proposition, which neverthelesse taken in a right man∣ner it hath not. To merit and de∣merit in the state of corrupted Nature, there is not required in man a freedome from Necessity natu∣ral, such as is found even in indeliberate motions; but 'tis suf∣ficient that be be only free from coa∣ction. This proposition is Heretical, Calvini∣stical, and Lutheran.

THE THIRD PROPOSITION, as understood and defended by us. To merit and demerit in the state of corrupted Nature, there is not requir'd in man a freedom from the Necessity of Infallibility; but 'tis sufficient that he have a liberty from coaction accompani'd with the judgement and exercise of Rea∣son, if the essence of liberty and merit be precisely consider'd. Although in regard of the state wherein we are in this life, our soul hath alwayes such an indiffe∣rence, whereby the will can, even when it is guided and govern'd by Grace proxi∣mately necessary, and effectual by it self, not will, yet 'tis in such sort that it never willeth not when it is actually assisted by such Grace. We maintain and are ready to demonstrate, that this proposition is Catholick and taught be S. Augustin.

THE PROPOSITION, contrary to the third, and de∣fended by our Adversaries. To merit and demerit in the state of corrupted Nature, there is requir'd in Man a freedome from the necessity of infallibili∣ty, or 'tis necessary that he have a proximate indifference to act or not act, where be the Will be∣ing furnisht with all things pre∣requisity to act or not act, in∣clines sometimes to one side, sometimes to the other as it pleases. We maintain and are ready to demonstrate that this proposition which is taught by Molina & our Adversaries, is Pelagian, because it destroys the power of that Grace effectual by it self, which is neces∣sary to every act of piety. It hath also been declar'd in the Con∣gregation de Auxiliis.

THE FOƲRTH PROPOSITION, fram'd and expos'd to Censure.

The semipelagians admitted the necessity of internal preventing Grace to all good works, even to the beginning of Faith. And they were Hereticks in this, that they held that Grace to be such as the Will of man might either resist, or obey.

The heretical sense; which may maliciously be put upon the fourth proposition, although taken in a right manner it admits not the same. The preventing grace of Jesus Christ is such, that Mans Free Will, being mov'd and ex∣cited by it, cannot resist the same if it would do so. To affirm other∣wise, is Semipelagian. This proposition is he∣retical, Calvinistical or Lutheran, and hath been condemn'd by the Coun∣cil of Trent.

THE FOURTH PROPOSITION, as by us understood and defended. The Semipelgians admitted the neces∣sity of preventing and internal grace to begin all actions, even to the be∣ginning of Faith; and their sentiments were heretical in this respect, that they held that Grace to be such as the Will might obey or reject at pleasure, that is to say, that the said Grace is not Effectual. We maintain and are ready to de∣monstrate, that this proposition is true as to the former part, which concerns matter of Fact; and that as to the lat∣ter, it pertains to the faith of the Church, and is indubitable in the doctrine of Saint Augustine.

THE PROPOSITION contrary to the fourth, and defended by our Adversaries. The Semipelagians did not admit the necessity of internal preventing Grace to begin every action, nor yer to the beginning of Faith; and they did not err in holding that Grace to be such, as that it was not Effectual by it self. We maintain and are ready to de∣monstrate, that this proposition which it held by Molina and our Adversa∣ries, is Pelagian or Semipelagian, be∣cause it destroyes the Catholick belief of Effectual Grace necessary to every good work, and likewise all S. Au∣gustin's authority. And so it hath been declar'd in the Congregations de Auxiliis held at Rome.

THE FIFTH PROPOSITION, fram'd and expos'd to Censure.

'Tis a Semipelagian Error to affirm, that Jesus Christ dy'd, or shed his blood for all men, without exception of any one.

The heretical sense, which may be malici∣ously put upon this fifth proposition, which yet it hath not, if it be taken as it ought to be. Jesus Christ dy'd on∣ly for the predestinate, so that they alone re∣ceive true Faith and Righteousnesse by the merit of Christ's death. This proposition is Heretical, Calvinisti∣cal or Lutheran, and hath been condemn'd by the Council of Trent.

THE FIFTH PROPO∣SITION, as understood and defended by us. 'Tis a Semipelagian error, to say, that Christ dy'd for all men in particular, none ex∣cepted, so that by his death saving Grace is offer'd to all, none excepted; and that it depends on the motion and power of the Will to obtaine salvation by such a general Grace without the help of any other grace effectual by it self. We maintain and are ready to demonstrate, that this proposition pertains to the faith of the Church, and is indubitable in the doctrine of S. Augustin.

THE PROPOSITION contrary to the fifth, and defended by our Adversaries. 'Tis not an error of the Semipelagians, but a Catholick Proposition, to say, that Jesus Christ hath by his death communi∣cated to all men in particular, none ex∣cepted, the Grace proximately and pre∣cisely necessary to work, or at least to begin salvation and to pray. We maintain and are ready to demonstrate, that this proposition which is taught by Mo∣lina and our Adversaries, contains a doctrine contrary to the Council of Trent, and likewise is Pelagian or Semipelagian, because it de∣stroyes the necessity of Grace effectual by it∣self to every good work. And it hath been declared thus in the Roman Congregations de Auxiliis.

These, M. H. F. are the Propositions, for the full explication, proof and confirmation whereof we have demanded of Your Holinesse to be heard both viva voce and by Writing. These are the points of Doctrine, for the discussion of which we are ready to labour, and plead with as much bre∣vity as the importance and amplitude of the mat∣ter, and with as much diligence as the cares and affaires of Your Holinesse will permit. In the mean time Your Holinesse by what we have here set forth, that there neither is, nor ever was any Contest between us and our Adversaries touching the heresies of Calvin and Luther. If they ana∣thematize them, we do, and have alwayes done the same; and the question not being now about those heresies, they cannot undertake to impugne the same by acting against us, unlesse it be to ca∣lumniate us; to expose the Catholick sense main∣tain'd by us to the danger of condemnation under pretext and colour of these Errors; to substitute in place of the Catholick Faith their Pelagian or Semipelagian sentiments which are contrary to ours; and lastly, to make current above sixty de∣testable Errors which we shall show follow by necessary consequence from the doctrine which they would establish.

M. H. F. We still earnestly reiterate to Your Holinesse the most humble request formerly made bv us with all the Bishops of France, that you will passe a clear and decisive sentence upon the matter now in controversie. And we protest before your Holinesse that we, and all the disciples and defen∣ders of S. Augustin (who, as S. Prosper some∣times writ to Ruffinus, In the several Countries where complaints and accusations are rais'd against that H. Father, receive by Gods assistance the Evan∣gelical and Apostolical doctrine, being fill'd with his holy and wholsome instructions, and grow and spread every day, according as it pleases our Lord Jesus Christ to multiply them and increase the members of his body) we all protest, that remaining firm to the undoubted Doctrine of that great Doctor, which is own'd by the Church, we shall alwayes defend the controverted Propositions in the sense wherein we have explain'd them, if in the solemn & definitive judgment (which we demand of Your Holinesse) there be nothing expresly pronounc'd concernig them in that sense, whereby it may be openly declar'd to us, that they are condemn'd in the sense which we maintain to be Catholick.

Which we trust, with Gods help shall never come to passe, and we have ground to hope so, since 'tis already diffus'd through the whole world, that Your Holinesse hath resolv'd so to act in re∣ference to these Propositions, that you have in the first place establisht as indubitable, that S. Augu∣stin's authority ought alwayes to have the same esteem it ever had, and to be preserv'd in its inte∣grity; and also that the principal part of his do∣ctrine and the sum and substance of what that Father hath taught, consists in the proposition of Grace effectual by it self, with which the abovesaid Propositions are conjoyn'd and united by an in∣violable and indissoluble bond, as plainly appears by the following Writing, in which the necessity of such Grace effectual by it self to every good work is prov'd by very solid and clear demonstra∣tions.

We submit all these things to Your Holinesse's Correction and Judgement.

Written at Rome, Monday May 19. 1653.

• Noel de la Lane Doctor of the Faculty of Paris, &c.
• Toussaint Des-mares Priest of the Congre∣gation of the Oratory our Lord Jesus Christ.
• Louis de Saint Amour Doctor of the Fa∣culty of Paris, &c.
• Nicolas Manessier Doctor of the same Faculty. &c.
• Louis Angran Licenciate of the same Fa∣culty, &c.

As M. de Valcroissant read this Writing, assoon as he had ended one of the Propositions, he went to the third of our Writings, which demonstrated the indissoluble connexion of each of them un∣derstood our way with Grace Effectual by it self, and he extended himself more or lesse in this de∣monstration according as the matter requir'd, and it seem'd requisite for convincing the hearers thereof. Although the said demonstration might reasonably have been included in the foregoing Writing as it was in reading; yet we thought more fit to make it an Introduction to the Writing of Effectual Grace, that so we might avoid the blame laid upon us of entring into the examination of that matter contrary to the Pope's will, and therein justifie our selves for so doing; considering the necessity there was for it, and to show that it was not possible to judge well of these Propositions till that point were decided.

Now being all that preface was read to the Pope, and the connexion of the Propositions demon∣strated in his presence, it seems fitting to insert a faithful translation thereof in this place.

AN INFORMATION touching Grace Effectual by it self, or pre∣determinating Grace, which is necessary to every action.

THE PREFACE. In which the necessity of handling this Doctrine is set forth, and the connexion of the Five Pro∣positions, as understood by us, with the same briefly manifested.

THere are two principal foundations which comprize the whole Controversie and Do∣ctrine of Grace; whereof the first is S. Augu∣stin's authority and doctrine touching the matter of Grace; and the second whereunto all his do∣ctrine is reduc'd, is the necessity of Grace Effectual by it self, and predeterminating to every good action. We have already made good the first of

these foundations in the Writing which we have presented touching S. Augustin's authority, which is prov'd by the Tradition of the whole Church. The second is now to be establisht, to proceed or∣derly in this Dispute concerning the contested Propositions. But lest it should be objected, that we come not to the point in question, we have thought fit to make some remarks first, to show most clearly how necessary it is to examine that doctrine before all things.

1. 'Tis impossible to terminate the great Con∣test rais'd among Catholicks touching the matter of Grace, without examining the Opinion which is the capital principle and original of all difference. Now this Principle consists, in that there are some who call in doubt and impugne the doctrine of Grace effectual by it self necessary to every acti∣on. All the difference between our Adversaries and us, as to doctrine, hath no other source but this; here it begins, here it ends; and all the com∣bustions and stirs rais'd about this matter come on∣ly from this diversity.

We agree in many things; and the first ground of division is, that our Adversaries ascribe the u∣sing of Christs grace to Free Will, whereas we at∣tribute it to the efficacy and vertue of the Grace it self. Upon this depend all the other questions in dispute; and there is now no other considerable controversie among Divines, saving that some hold Grace effectual by it self necessary to every acti∣on, and others deny it. Wherefore this Point ought first to be handled, since after it is once judg'd, there will be no more ground of dispute; and till it be, none can be remov'd.

2. Our Adversaries had no other aim in forg∣ing these equivocal Propositions, but covertly to overthrow the doctrine of Grace effectual by it self necessary to every action, as it is held by S. Augustin; and for a full discovery of their design, it suffices to consider that there is not any of the Propositions expos'd to Censure, but hath a most manifest connexion with Effectual Grace, accord∣ing as we explicate and defend them. That of all the arguments which they produce, there is not one whose force consists not in destroying Effectual grace (if there be such as have really any force): and lastly, that of all the works which have been pub∣lisht in defence of the Propositions as we under∣stand them, there is not any whose principal scope is not the defence of the same Effectual Grace.

3. Moreover, There is so visible and necessary a connexion of that Grace with the Propositions thus understood, that so long as that shall subsist, they will subsist also, as its destruction woud be their ruine: so that we defend not any of them, but so far forth as it hath a necessary connexion with Effectual, nor do our Adversaries impugne any of them but to destroy the same Grace, as for proof we are now going compendiously to demonstrate.

The Connexion of the Five Propositions (as the same are defended by us) with Grace effectual by it self, succinctly demonstrated.

THE FIRST PROPOSITION, as it is maliciously taken out of its true place, and presented to Censure

Some of Gods Commandments are impossible to just men, even when they will, and endeavor according to their present strength; and the Grace which should render the same possible is wanting to them.

THE FIRST PROPOSITION, in the sence wherein we hold and defend it. Some of Gods Commandments are impossible to some just men who will and endeavor weakly and imperfectly according to what strength they have, which is small and weak; That is to say, being destitute of the effectual aid which is necessary to will fully and to do; these Commandments are impossible to them according to that next and compleat possibility, the pri∣vation whereof puts them in a state of inability to perform those Commandments effectively. And they want the Grace whereby it is needful that those Commandments become proximately and perfectly possible to them: or, they are unprovided of that special assistance, without which, as the Council of Trent saith, A justifyed man cannot persevere in the Righteousnesse which he hath receiv'd, that is, in the observation of Gods Command∣ments. We maintain and are ready to demonstrate, that this proposition pertains to the faith of the Church, is indubitable in S. Augustin's doctrine, and hath been defin'd by the Council of Trent.

THE PROPOSITION contrary to the first, and defended by our Adversaries. All Gods Commandments are al∣ways possible to the just by the grace which is subject to Free Will, when they will & labour according to their present strength. And the Grace which is proximately necessary to render the Commandments effectively pos∣sible, is never wanting to them to act, or at least to pray. We maintain and are ready to demon∣strate, that this proposition taught by Molina & our Adversaries is Pelagian or Semipelagian, because it destroyes the necessity of Grace effectual by it self to all good works. And thus it hath been declar'd in the Congregation de Auxili∣is held at Rome under Clement VIII. & Paul V.

The Connexion of our Proposition with Effectual Grace.

THe Grace of Jesus Christ effectual by it self is necessary to every action of piety. There∣fore the first Proposition is true in the sense where∣in we present and maintain it; because if Grace effectual by it self is necessary to an action of pie∣ty, as a principle requisite before the same be per∣form'd, then when it is present to us, we do the thing for which it is given; and when we do it not, it is not present to us, otherwise it would not be effectual by it self; and not only we act with it, but also without it we cannot act proximately and with all accomplishment necessary to action. For whoever hath not all that which is previously ne∣cessary to another thing as a principle, cannot do that thing proximately and with the utmost ac∣complishment necessary to do it. And hence the first Proposition which we have presented and defended, necessarily follows. For it happens sometimes that some just men being press'd with a great temptation, make weak and imperfect at∣tempts to perform some Commandment, and yet perform it not. Therefore in these cases they have not that great and effectual Grace which is necessary to the performance of it: or as S. Augustin faith, They have not a Grace so great as to be sufficient for performing that Command∣ment; they have not the strength most effectual for overcoming the temptation, otherwise they would surmount the temptation and perform the Commandment; and consequently, according to their present strength they have not that next power, to which nothing is wanting for perform∣ing that Commandment; and they want that great and effectual Grace by which the Commandment may become possible to them with a next and com∣pleat power, to which nothing is deficient to pro∣ceed to action: or, they want that special help, without which, as the Council of Trent saith, He who is justifi'd cannot persevere in Righteousness, i. e. in the observance of Gods Commandments.

'Tis in this sense only that we defend the first Proposition.

On the contrary our Adversaries have an here∣tical sense in impugning this Proposition, because they destroy the necessity of Grace effectual by it self to every action of piety. For they hold, that every just man is alwayes able to perform any Commandment whatsoever, because he hath al∣wayes grace to perform it according as it pleases his Will. Now since he doth not alwayes perform it, it followes, that they believe that the Grace which is necessary for performing it, is not effe∣ctual by it self. Which opinion is heretical and contrary to the true grace of Jesus Christ. There∣fore our Adversaries hold an heretical sense in opposing the first Proposition, that is, they de∣fend in an heretical sense the Proposition which is contrary to it.

THE SECOND PROPOSITION fram'd and presented to Censure.

In the state of corrupted Nature, Internal Grace is never resisted.

THE SECOND PRO∣POSITION. as we understand and defend it. The Grace of Jesus Christ proxi∣mately necessary to every act of pie∣ty, is never resisted, i. e. is never frustrated of the effect for which it is effectually given by God. We maintain and are ready to de∣monstrate, that this proposition pertains to the faith of the Church, and is indu∣bitable in the doctrine of S. Augustin.

THE PROPOSITION contrary to the second, and defended by our Adversaries. The Grace of Jesus Christ which is necessary to every act of piety, whether of operating, or at least of praying, is some∣times resisted in the state of corrupted Nature, i. e. This Grace is sometimes frustrated of the Effect for which it is proximately given by God. We maintain and are ready to demonstrate, that this proposition whish is held by Molina and our Adversaries, is Pelagian or Semi∣pelagian, because it destroyes the power and efficacy of the grace of Jesus Christ which is necessary to every good action. And thus it was declar'd in the Roman Congregation de Auxiliis.

The Connexion of our Proposition with Effectual Grace.

THe Grace which is necessary to every pious action is effectual by it self. Therefore in the state of corrupted Nature the Grace which is necessary to every pious action is never resisted; that is, it never fails to do the effect whereunto it is given by God proximately, either for a weak and imperfect action of the Will, and it produces the same effectively by it self; or it is given for a great and perfect action, and pro∣duces the same likewise by it self, otherwise it would not be effectual. For though small graces are resisted, as to the utmost and perfect action whereunto they dispose, yet they are never re∣sisted or rejected as to the imperfect action for which they are given, and ought to operate pro∣ximately.

'Tis in this sense alone that we defend the se∣cond Proposition.

On the contrary our Adversaries hold an here∣tical sense whilst they impugne this Proposition, because they destroy the power and efficacy of the Grace of Jesus Christ necessary to every pious action. For they maintain that in the state of corrupted Nature, the internal Grace proximately necessary to every action of piety is sometimes resisted, i. e. 'tis rejected and depriv'd of the effect for which God gives it proximately, because they say, it is not effectual by it self, but is subject to Free-Will, which rejects or submits thereunto as it lists.

THE THIRD PROPOSITION, fram'd and expos'd to Censure.

To merit and demerit in the state of laps'd Nature, 'tis not requisite that there be in Man a freedom from Necessity of willing or acting, but a freedom from con∣straint (or coaction) is sufficient.

THE THIRD PROPOSITION as we understand and defend it. To merit and demerit in the state of laps'd Nature, there is not requisite in Man a freedom from the Necessity of Infallibility and necessary certainty; but 'tis sufficient that he have a free∣dome from coaction accompany'd with the judgement and ex∣ercise of Reason, if the essence of liberty and merit be precisely consider'd. Although by reason of the state wherein we are in this life, our soul hath alwayes such an Indifference, whereby the Will can, even when it is guided and govern'd by Grace, proximately necessary and effectual by it self, not will; yet 'tis in such sort that it never willeth not, when it is actually assisted by such Grace.

THE PROPOSITION contrary to the third, and defended by our Adversaries. To merit and demerit in the state of corrupted Nature there is requir'd in Man a freedom from the necessity of Infallibility and necessary certain∣ty. Or 'tis necessary that he have a proximate indifference of acting or not acting, whereby the Will being furnisht with all things necessary to act, inclines it self sometimes to one side, sometimes to the other as it listeth.

The Connexion of our Proposition with Effectual Grace.

IF Grace necessary to every action be effectual by it self, it by its own strength predetermines the Will after an indeclinable, insuperable, infal∣lible and perfectly victorious manner, to do an action of piety. Therefore in all free and meri∣torious actions there is found a necessity of infalli∣bility, which comes from the promotion of Grace, and is a consequence of Grace effectual by it self; and if this kind of Necessity destroy'd Liberty and Merit, it would follow, that Grace which is given to perform all free and meritorious actions were not effectual by it self. As for those words: 'Tis sufficient that he have a freedom from coaction, they do not signifie that there is not an indifference of power in the merit and demerit of this state; for this would be heretical, and was never held by any Catholick: and therefore this opinion cannot be attributed to us without imposture and calumny; but 'tis to be understood by these words, that this kind of indifference of power in the state of fallen Nature, is not that which precisely, essentially and formally makes the act which tends to a good end, free and meritorious; although this kind of indif∣ference be alwayes found; —as the power to sin in the state of fallen Nature is not the essence of liberty nor part of it; and neverthelesse by reason of the state of this life, it is alwayes found therein as a sequel of liberty.

'Tis in this sense only that we defend the third Proposition.

On the contrary our Adversaries hold an Here∣tical sense in opposing it, because they destroy Grace effectual by it self. For they say, it is ne∣cessary to liberty and merit to have this proximate indifference of acting, whereby the Will having

all pre-requisite strength to act, turns it self as it pleaseth, sometimes one way, and sometimes ano∣ther: and consequently they pretend at liberty from the necessity of Infallibility; which ariseth from the vertue of Effectual Grace infallibly pre∣determinating the Will by its own strength, is re∣quisite in this state to act freely: whence it fol∣lows, that they destroy the necessity of Grace effectual by it self to every action of piety; and thus they hold an Heretical opinion whilst they oppose the third Proposition.

THE FOURTH PROPOSITION, fram'd and expos'd to Censure.

The Semipelagians admitted the necessity of internal preventing Grace to all good works, even to the beginning of Faith. And they were Hereticks in that they held that Grace to be such as the humane Will of man might either resist, or obey.

THE FOURTH PROPOSITION, as we understand and defended it. The Semipelgians admitted the necessity of pre∣venting and internal Grace to begin all actions, even for the beginning of Faith; and their opinion was heretical, in that they held that Grace to be such as the Will obeys or rejects as it listeth, i. e. that it is not Effectual Grace. We maintain and are ready to demonstrate, that this proposition as to the first part which concerns mat∣ter of Fact, is true; and that as to the second it per∣tains to the faith of the Church, and is indubitable in S. Augustin's doctrine.

THE PROPOSITION contrary to the fourth, and defended by our Adversaries. The Semipelagians admitted not the necessity of internal preventing Grace to begin every action, nor yer to the beginning of Faith; nor did they err in holding that Grace to be such as is not Ef∣fectual by it self. We maintain and are ready to demonstrate, that this proposition, held by Molina and our Adversa∣ries, is Pelagian or Semipelagian, because it destroys the belief of Effectual Grace necessary to every good work, and likewise all S. Augustin's authority. And thus it hath been declar'd in the Congregations de Auxiliis held at Rome.

The Connexion of this Proposition with Effectual Grace.

GRace Effectual by it self necessary to every pious action, is the true medicinal Grace of Jesus Christ, which is proper to fallen and weak men, to the end they may will and operate all that belongs to piety. This faith is without doubt the true Prophetical, Apostolical and Catholick faith, as S. Augustin saith in Chap. 2. de Cor. & Grat. Therefore the Error or Heresie of the Semipela∣gians consisted, in their denying Grace Effectual by it self to be necessary to the beginning of faith, and to other imperfect acts of piety.

'Tis to be observ'd that by these words, And they were Hereticks in holding that Grace to be such as Humane will may either resist or obey; nothing else is meant (as 'tis express'd in the Proposition which we maintain) saving that the Semipelagians err'd, in holding the Grace necessary to the begin∣ning of faith and other acts of inchoated piety, to be such, as is not effectual by it self, or which the Will sometimes resists, sometimes obeys at plea∣sure.

There is in the fourth Proposition a question of Fact, namely, whether the Semipelagians admit∣ted an internal Grace subject to Free-will for the beginning of Faith. We shall show that it is so; but if once it be evident that they err'd, in denying Grace Effectual by it self for the beginning of Faith, that question of Fact will be of little im∣portance.

'Tis in this sense only that we defend the fourth Proposition.

On the contrary, our Adversaries hold an He∣retical sense whilst they impugne this Proposition, because they deny, that the true Grace of Jesus Christ consists in Grace Effectual by it self neces∣sary to every action. They deny this to be the Catholick Faith; They pretend that the Semipela∣gians never err'd in this point; but on the contra∣ry held the Catholick Faith, although they deny'd the necessity of Grace Effectual by it self to the beginning of faith and other imperfect actions of piety. Which is impossible to admit without o∣verthrowing the belief of the true Grace of Jesus Christ, and destroying S. Augustin's whole Au∣thority and Doctrine.

THE FIFTH PROPOSITION, offer'd to Censure.

'Tis a Semipelagian Error to say, that Christ dy'd, or shed his blood for all men, none excepted.

THE FIFTH PROPOSITION, as we understand and defend it. 'Tis a Semipelagian error to say, that Christ dy'd for all men in particular, none excepted, so that Grace necessary to salvation is offer'd to all, none excepted, by his death; and that it depends upon the motion and power of the will to obtaine salvation by that general grace, without help of other grace effectual by it self. We maintain and are ready to demonstrate, that this proposition pertains to the faith of the Church, and is indubitable in S. Augustin's doctrine.

THE PROPOSITION contrary to the fifth, and defended by our Adversaries. 'Tis not an error of the Semipelagians, but a Catho∣lick Proposition, to say, that Christ by his death com∣municated to all men in particular, none excepted, the Grace proximately & precisely necessary to operate, or at least to begin salvation and to pray. We maintain and are ready to demonstrate, that this proposition, held by Molina and our Adversaries, contains a doctrine contrary to the Council of Trent, and that it is Pelagian or Semipelagian, because it destroyes the necessity of the Grace of Jesus Christ effectual by it self to every good work. And it hath been so declar'd in the Con∣gregations de Auxiliis.

The Connexion of our Proposition with Effectual Grace.

GRace Effectual by it self necessary to every action, is the true Grace of Jesus Christ, and the Catholick Faith. Therefore 'tis a Semipe∣lagian error to say, that Christ dy'd for all men generally, none excepted, in such sense that grace necessary for Salvation is offer'd, by the merit of his death to all, none excepted; and that 'tis at the disposal of Free-will to receive it without the help of Grace effectual by it self. Now this, we affirm, cannot be held without incurring Semipe∣lagianism, because it manifestly infers, that Grace effectual by it self is not necessary to every pious action.

'Tis in this sense alone that we defend the fifth Proposition.

On the contrary our Adversaries hold an Here∣tical sense whilst they impugne this Proposition, because they say, that Jesus Christ dy'd for all men generally; in this sense, that he hath communicated to them all, none excepted, the means necessary for their salvation, either giving them all the Gra∣ces subject to Free-will, as well to begin and to pray, as to act (which is Pelagian, since this opi∣nion excludes the necessity of Grace Effectual by it self for all actions of of piety) or at least giving them all the graces subject to Free-will for the be∣ginning of faith and for prayer, so that every man who makes use of these graces, obtains when he pleases, and as often as he lists. Graces effe∣ctual for acting,

which is Semipelagian, because it excludes the necessity of Grace Effectual by it self for the beginning of faith, and other im∣perfect actions of piety. Moreover, it is con∣trary to the Council of Trent, Sess. 6. Cap. 3. where we read these very words, Although he dy'd for all, yet all receive not the benefit of his death, but only they to whom the merit of his passion is communicated. Which shows, that the true grace of Jesus Christ, which is the fruit or bene∣fit of his death, is not communicated to all by the merit of his passion.

Whilst M. de Valcroissant was speaking all that I have related, which took up about two hours and a half, he twice or thrice took occasion to tell the Pope, that his Holinesse should be much otherwise convinc'd and enlightned in the things which we al∣ledg'd, when they came to be treated more lei∣surely and throughly before him in the presence of our Adversaries, and that when he saw them oblig'd to answer plainly and directly to the things which we should say against them, then his Holi∣nesse would know more evidently then by all our present Remonstrances, how necessary it was to hear both the one and the other contradictorily. M. de Valcroissant spoke this according to agree∣ment between us, to intimate that we had still much more to say; that the presence of our Ad∣versaries was requisite, and that we yielded to this Audience, only that we might obtain such a one as we demanded.

He added further, That the Connexion which he had most clearly demonstrated of the Propositi∣ons reduc'd to our sense with the point of Grace Effectual by it self, evidently shew'd the necessity of beginning the discussion of this Affair, by the Examen and proof of the Efficacy of Grace by it self, both because all the rest depended upon it, and the proof of it serv'd for a general proof of

the Propositions, till we alledg'd the particular proofs of each of them.

When the Abbot of Valcroissant had done, F. Des-mares began, and continu'd the series of his Discourse, (as we had agreed together) and un∣dertook the proof of the Efficacy of Grace. His first argument was taken from the prayers of the Church, and lasted three quarters of an hour. But his vivacity and eloquence so rous'd the Hearers; particularly Cardinal Pamphilio, that they shew'd by their countenances what delight they took in hearing such excellent things so well urg'd and de∣liver'd. I cannot forbear to say, that I never heard F. Des-mares preach better at Paris then he spoke at this time. Which is as much as can be said to such as have been happy enough to hear some of his Sermons. When he cited any passages, as, e. g. of Innocent X. he read the same out of our Writing of Effectual Grace, and then drew so clear and strong arguments from them in a Schola∣stick way, that nothing could be imagin'd more convincing. The day began to fail him at the end of this Argument, and fearing he should want light to read his Quotation, he doubted whether he should proceed to the second; but the Pope and Assembly remaining in great silence, we whisper'd to F. Des-mares to proceed, partly out of respect to his Holinesse, and partly to take from our Ad∣versaries the pretext of alledging that we held our peace because we had no more to say. This second Argument being begun so late, the Father was oblig'd to leave his place once or twice, and go to the window to read some passages out of S. Au∣gustin's book de gratia Christi, and then return'd to his station, and drew his consequences and in∣ductions from the same. But at length it became so dark that the Father could read no longer at the window, and therefore intimated his want thereof, that they might cause a light to be brought if they would have him to continue. In stead of which, M. Albizzi said, it was sufficient, and the Father stopt.

His whole Discourse as he pronounc'd it before the Pope in pure Latin, I have thought fit to insert in a faithful Translation.

A Discourse pronounc'd before the Pope by F. Des-mares.

MOST HOLY FATHER,

I Could wish that the worthy Doctor who hath spoken before me in Your Holiness's presence, had made an end of handling the point of Christ's Effectual and victorious Grace, with the same strength of judgement and eloquence as he be∣gan to explicate it. But since it would have been too laborious to him, I shall continue where he ended (having first most humbly askt Your Holinesse's permission) and endeavor to acquit my self of the Obligation incumbent upon me, to prove that 'tis a Catholick and invincible Truth, that Grace Effectual by it self is absolutely neces∣sary to all actions of piety. For what hath been newly represented to Your Holinesse, shewing clearly that the Necessity of that Grace and our sense of the Propositions are so perfectly united, that the one cannot be granted or deni'd, without granting or denying the other; Where should I begin, M. H. F. and whereunto ought all my endeavors to tend, but to prove by invincible arguments the necessity of such Effectual Grace for all actions of piety; since this Necessity be∣ing once granted and establisht; the whole Con∣troversie which agitates and troubles the Church touching the Five Propositions; will forthwith perfectly cease? and Your Holinesse will clear∣ly see, that the whole question being reduc'd to that single point; If the Effectual Grace which we hold be necessary, we shall become victori∣ous; and if it be not, we shall be over∣come.

The probation of this Necessity is reduc'd chiefly to four Heads:

The first contains sixteen proofs or arguments of S. Augustin, which Fathers authority I prin∣cipally use, because he is the first who by many excellent works prov'd against the Pelagians with no lesse strength then successe, the Necessity of Effectual Grace.

The second Head contains all the Decrees of Popes upon this matter, the definitions of Coun∣cils, and the opinions of all Fathers and Divines who have been in greatest reputation from S. Augustin's dayes to the present. Of all which; to avoid being tedious to Your Holinesse, I shall treat succinctly.

The third Head contains the Doctrine which ought to be held, to avoid falling into the errors of the Pelagians and Semipelagians, according to the judgements which were alwayes pass'd there∣upon in the Congregation de Auxiliis held at Rome.

And the fourth contains sixty signal Errors or Heresies, drawn by necessary consequence from the doctrine contrary to that of S. Augustin, and from the grace held by the Molinists; which to∣tally subvert the principal foundations of Christi∣an Faith.

But to eschew all equivocations and ambigui∣ties, I conceive it necessary to represent briefly to Your Holinesse what is to be understood by the words, Grace Effectual by it self, and by the sufficient Grace of the Molinists.

By Grace Effectual by it self, we understand a Grace which by its internal strength and vertue, and (to use the Apostles words) by its Ener∣gy, not only makes a man able if he will, but makes him most certainly and invincibly to will. Now this strength and vertue of Grace is no∣thing else, (according as S. Augustin showes and teaches in many places against the Pelagi∣ans) but a certain celestial sweetnesse and dele∣ctation of love, or an infusion of charity into our hearts by the Holy Ghost, causing us to perform with a holy love the good, which we know.

For as our own experience teaches us as well as S. Augustin, that which hinders us from doing an action of piety, is either our not knowing good, or not being affected with and delighted in it, at least not so much as we ought. So that to accomplish a pious action, it is requisite that

what is hid from us be discover'd to us, and what doth not please us be made agreeable to us.

The first is effected by the Law and instructi∣ons, which dispel the darknesse of our igno∣rance; a 7.1 and the second by Grace which cures our weaknesse, or, to speak better, both the one and the other are given by Grace, which for this reason S. Augustin terms an Aid added to Nature, and to instruction by the inspiration of a most pure and fervent Charity.

Thus, when Ged will have us love and do some good work, what doth he in us? He inspires in∣to our heart (saith S. Augustin) an ardor of love and charity, the pleasure whereof surpasses the delight of sin, and its Celestial sweetnesse causes that what he commands us, pleases us more then what withdrawes us from obeying him. And it is call'd Effectual Grace, inasmuch as the de∣light and spiritual allurement wherewith it is ac∣company'd surpassing the pleasures of the flesh and the World, infallibly and invincibly causes us to will, because, b 7.2 saith S. Augustin, 'Tis impossible for us not to act according to that which pleases us most.

Your Holiness may judge by what I have newly said, how excellent, clear and true this way of S. Augustin's reasoning is, since among all the ad∣vantages which make truth esteem'd, the principal is, that it is no sooner explicated then acknow∣ledg'd, and needs no other proof but a plain and naked Exposition.

On the contrary, They who maintain the In∣different and Molinistical Grace, say, 'Tis a cer∣tain illumination of the Understanding, and a pious motion in the Will, indeliberate and not free, by meanes whereof a man may will and do some good; but Effectual willing depends upon his Free-will, which according as it lists sometimes willeth, and sometimes willeth not, turning now one way and anon anothet. Thus according to their sentiments, this kind of Grace never pro∣duces Effectually by it self the free consent of the Will, but is term'd Effectual or ineffectual by a certain external denomination, according as it pleases Man's Will to use, or not use it. Whence it sufficiently appears that the Question between us, is, Whether Grace rules over the will, or the will over Grace: whether Grace subdue Free-will to it self, or Free-will Grace. Now we af∣firm, that Grace is victorious over Free-will, and is necessary to every pious action; to prove which, we draw our first Argument from the prayers of the Church, as S. Augustin alwayes did. And truly M. H. F. it cannot be but an admirable Providence of God, that the first day of Rogations, in which the Church offers pub∣lick prayers to God for obtaining his Grace, is the day whereon we begin to prove the necessity of the same Grace by those very prayers which the Church uses to obtain it, they being not on∣ly a powerful meanes for obtaining, but also a most clear proof for evincing the same. Now the Argument is this.

The Grace which the Church begs of God for all actions of piety, is simply and absolutely ne∣cessary for performing the same. But Grace Ef∣fectual by it self, is that which the Church begs of God for every action of piety. Therefore Grace Effectual by it self, is simply and absolute∣ly necessary to the doing of them.

The Major of this Argument cannot be deny'd without wounding the Faith. For one of these three things must be said: Either, that the Grace which the Church begs for all actions of Piety, is no wayes necessary towards the doing of them; or, that it is only necessary for their more easie and certain performance; or lastly, that it is ab∣solutely necessary, so that no man can do good without it. He that should affirm the first, mocks God, as S. Augustin saith, By asking of him what he hath no need of. For what is more ridiculous, then to pray for that to be granted to us which is in our own power? He that maintains the se∣cond, falls into Pelagianism, For no other reason made Pelagius passe for an heretick in the present Question, but that he affirm'd, That Men pray for the grace of God through Jesus Christ, and God gives it to them only that they may the more easily do that by Grace which they are able to do by their own Free-will. Whereupon S. Augustin tells Pelagius, Blot out the Word, more easily, and your sense will be Catholick. It remains therefore that the third be granted, which is, That the grace which the Church de∣sires of God for all sort of pious actions, is ab∣solutely necessary towards the performance of the same.

Now to prove the Minor (in which lyes all the difficulty and all the strength of my Argu∣ment) namely, But Grace Effectual by it self is that which the Church begs for all pious actions: I prove it thus. We do not only pray for a Grace which gives the power to do well, but for a Grace which besides giving that power, causes also by its effectual vertue that the action is ac∣complish'd, and that in every pious action; Or, to speak better, we pray to God to give us the very will and the very action; as for example, To give us faith it self, repentance, continence, perseverance and other Gifts belonging to piety and salvation. For see how S. Augustin speaks to Vitalis, who deny'd that God works all these things in us; Turn all your disputes against the prayers of the Church; and when you hear the Priest at the Altar exhort the people of God to pray for unbelievers that he would convert them to the faith; for the Catechumeni, that he would inspire into them the desire of regeneration; and for the faithful, that they may persevere as they have be∣gun: then scoffe at so holy an exhortation, and say, that for your part, you do not do that whereunto he exhorts you, that you do not pray God to make the Infidels believers, because you conceive the cover∣sion of Infidels is not a benefit of God's mercy, but an effect of man's will.

Now what is this Perseverance which we ask of God (that I may not insist upon the other graces which we receive from him, or rather that we may judge of them by this) See how S. Augustin explicates it in the book De Cor. & Grat. cap. 12. The Saints who are predestinated to the kingdom of God by Grace, do not only receive that help of perseverance (such as that which was given to Adam) but that

which they receive is such, that perseverance it self is given to them, so that they not only could not perse∣vere without that help, but with that help they can∣not but persevere.

Now what S. Augustin speaks of Perseve∣rance, 'tis manifest that he everywhere speaks the same of Faith, Repentance and Continence: Whence this Argument may be form'd, In the same manner that the Church prayes to God for Perseverance, it prayes also for Faith, Repen∣tance, &c. But when the Church prayes for Perseverance, it prayes for the assistance of Ef∣fectual Grace, without which we cannot perse∣vere, and with which we cannot but persevere. Therefore, when it prayes for Faith, Repen∣tance, &c. it prays for the assistance of Effectual Grace, without which we can neither be Belie∣vers, nor Penitent, &c, and with which we can∣not but be so.

Pope Celestine in his Letter to the French Bi∣shops, confirms the same thing so clearly, that the whole eleventh Chapter, shews by the pray∣ers mention'd in it, what is the faith of the whole Church touching the true and Effectual Grace of God. His words are these: Besides the invio∣lable Decrees of the most Holy Apostolick See, by which those most Holy Fathers rejected this dete∣stable Innovation, (whose source is Pride) have taught us, that we ought to refer to the grace of Jesus Christ, both the beginning of a right will in Man, and his increasing in holy life, and his per∣severance to the end: Let us consider also the so∣lemn prayers made by the Priests, which having been left us by Apostolical Tradition, are uniformly ce∣lebrated in the whole Catholick Church throughout the World, to the end that the form of our prayers may be the rule of our faith. For Bishops acting as Ambassadors to God in the name of the faithful committed to their charge, plead the cause of man∣kind in his divine presence, and all the Church ac∣companying their words with sighs and tears prays to God with them to give faith to Infidels; to de∣liver Idolaters from the impiety of their Errors; to make known his Truth to the Jewes by removing the vail which is upon their hearts; to enlighten the minds of Hereticks, by causing them to embrace the Catholick faith; to diffuse a spirit of charity into the breasts of Schismaticks; to grant repentance to such as are fallen, & to open to the Catechumeni the door of the mercy of Heaven in the holy regeneration of the Sacrament of Baptism. And the effects shew that 'tis not in vain, and only for form that we beg all these things of God, since he vouchsafes by his goodnesse to draw many persons out of all kind of errors and wandrings, to deliver them out of the power of darknesse, and bring them into the king∣dom of his beloved Son; and thus to change those into vessels of mercy who were at first vessels of his wrath. Which the Church in such sort acknow∣ledges to be wholly God's work, that it doth not fail to give him thanks for it, and offer to him a song of praises, confessing him the author thereof, and that 'tis he that enlightned the Infidels, and convert∣ed the sinners.

But M. H. F. This will appear more clearly, by considering the very expressions of the pray∣ers which the Church offers to God throughout all the World by perpetual custome, in which it prayes not only for the power to act, but also for the will and action it self. In this manner it speaks on the sixth Sunday after Pentecost; God of all power and might, who art the only author of all true good, graffe in our hearts the love of thy H. Name, cause us to grow more and more in religious piety, to the end that thy self cherishing the seeds of vertue which thou hast planted in us, the same may be preserved by the pious and faithful care which thou shalt cause us to have thereof. And on the eighth Sunday; Grant, Lord, by thy mercy, that thy Spirit may inspire holy thoughts into us, and cause us to produce holy actions, that we who cannot live without thee, may by thee be able to live accord∣ing to thy Will. And on the twelfth Sunday; Al∣mighty and merciful God, through whose grace a∣lone it cometh that thy faithful people do unto thee true and laudable service, be pleas'd so to uphold ue, that without falling through our weaknesse we may constantly run towards those good things which thou hast promis'd. And on the sixteenth Sun∣day; Lord, we pray thee, that thy grace may al∣wayes prevent and follow us; and mako us conti∣nually to be given to all good works. And on the Eve of Pentecost; Grant, Lord, that we may be able to subdue our depraved will, and accomplish in all things the Righteousnesse of thy holy Command∣ments. And in the secret Orison of the Masse on the fourteenth Sunday; Lord, convert and draw unto thee our rebellious wills.

Nothing can more clearly evince, that the Grace which moves our rebellious will to return unto God is not subject to Free-will, or of such a nature as that it sometimes fails of its effect through the resistance of the will. But what mo∣tion is that whereby the Church prayes that it may be turn'd to God? Certainly, 'tis not such an inconsiderate and blind motion, as that where∣with an insensible Instrument is mov'd, but 'tis that motion of divine Love, and that bond of most sweet and heavenly charity, by which God pulls and draws to himself him whom he pleases to render vertuous. In which respect there is no fear of our liberty being violated by that at∣traction and motion how victorious soever it may be. For being nothing is done in us more freely then that which is done by Love (accord∣ing to that saying of S. Augustin, He who doth any thing willingly, alwayes doth it freely;) How can it ever happen that Liberty should be de∣stroy'd by the cause which produces it in its whole plenitude? But I return to the prayers of the Church.

Now the Church speaks thus in the secret Ori∣son which it makes to God for the gift of tears; Cause us to shed tears of compunction for the hard∣nesse of our hearts, to the end we may bewail our sins. And in the Post-Communion, Lord, through thy goodnesse infuse into our hearts the grace of thy Holy Spirit, which may enable us to blot out the stains of our sins by sighs and tears.

Moreover, The Church implores the gift of Charity; O God which canst cause things to work together for the good of those that love thee, stir up in our hearts an ardent sense of thy love, that no temptation may be able to alter the holy desires which thou hast inspir'd into ut by thy goodnesse. And on H. Friday; Let us pray also

for the Catechumeni, that the Lord our God may open the eares of their hearts. And a Little after, Let us pray also for the perfidious Jewes, that the Lord our God may remove the vail which lyes upon their hearts. And in the Orison following; Hear the prayers which we offer unto thee, to take away the blindnesse of that people, that knowing Jesus Christ the light of thy Truth, they may come out of their darkness. And in the next; Let us pray also for the Heathen, that the Almighty God may root out the iniquity which is in their hearts. And on Holy Saturday after the first Prophecy, Grant that our hearts and minds may remaine stedfast a∣gainst the allurements of sin. And after the tenth Prophecy; Give us both to be willing, and to be able to perform that which thou commandest us. And in the Orison which is said at the Altar, ta∣ken out of S. Basil's Liturgy, of which almost the whole Eastern Church makes use, as Petrus Dia∣conus witnesseth in the eighth Chapter of his Trea∣tise De Incarnatione & Gratia; Lord, give us ver∣tue, and enable us to keep it. Cause that the wicked may become good, and continue the good in their goodness. For thou art able to do all things, and none can withstand thee. Thou savest when it pleas∣eth thee, and no man resisteth thy Will.

This made S. Augustin say in cap. 7. De Prae∣dest. Sanctorum; Let not the Church expect long Disputes from us, but consider the prayers which she offers daily to God; she prayes to him that the incredulous may believe; therefore 'tis God that converts them to the Faith, She prayes that they who believe may persevere, and consequent∣ly 'tis God that gives them perseverance to the end of their lives. And he concludes in these words: What man having a sound and vigilant Faith, can listen to humane Reasonings against what is taught him by this loud Trumpet of Truth?

Many other like prayers there are made by Saints, and dispers'd everywhere in the Holy Scriptures; such as this; Create a new heart in me, O God. And this; God open your heart to under∣stand his holy Law, and make you walk according to his Commandments. And this other; God give you all such hearts that you may serve him, and perform his will with affection and zeal. And this other of S. Paul; God incline you to every good thing, by working in you that which is well-pleas∣ing to himself. And we beseech him, not only that you may not do evil, but that you may do good.

From all which passages this Argument may be form'd; He who prayes to God for all the things above-mention'd, namely, to graffe his love in our hearts, to reduce our rebellious will to himself by his goodnesse, to give us the will and the power to perform what he commandeth, to create a new heart in us, to make us walk in the way of his Commandments, to take out of us the heart of stone which hinders us from per∣forming thereof, and to give us a heart of flesh which may cause us to perform the same, to cause that no temptations may be able to alter the holy desires which he inspires into us, & not only that we may not do evil, but do good; He, I say, who prayes for all these things, doth not pray for a sufficient Grace whereby we may be able if we will, which leaves it at the disposal of our Free-will, to will or not will: but he asks an effectu∣al and victorious grace, which causes us to will invincibly, and as far as is needful to perform that which we will. But the Church asks all these things of God in its ordinary prayers. There∣fore, &c.

On the contrary it cannot be said, that the Church ever thought of praying to God for such Grace as the Molinists fancy. For supposing that God has given a just man the Grace to per∣severe, but such a Grace as doth not make him persevere, though he might persevere; can any one be so senslesse as to say, that such Grace is the Grace of perseverance which the Church asks of God in its prayers, and whereof the Apostle saith, We pray God that you do not evil, but that on the contrary you may do good?

Hence therefore we may argue against them in this manner; The Grace which the Church never asks of God, is not the true grace of Jesus Christ necessary and sufficient to every action of piety, Now the sufficient Grace of the Molinists, by which most frequently we neither will nor do good, can neither be that Grace which the Church implores of God. Therefore this kind of grace is not the true Grace of Jesus Christ necessary and sufficient to every action of piety; but a false, fictitious, and illegitimate grace.

Wherefore, M. H. F. If this Grace be ever acknowledg'd to be the true Grace of Jesus Christ, all the prayers of the Church must be chang'd; those holy prayers which ha∣ving been left to it by the Apostle, are repeat∣ed every day in the same manner upon Altars consecrated to God over all the World. For God, according to the opinion of Molina and his Di∣sciples, giving us by his grace to be able if we will, or rather ability to will, and leaving it to our own Free-will to will, it is evident that we should have nothing to ask further of God, and that no other Grace is to be expected from him.

Whence every Christian will for the future be oblig'd to speak to God in this manner; Lord, give me a Grace whereby I may will that which thou commandest me. For as for to will and to do it, that I ask not of thee, because it depends upon my self. Leave that to my Free-will; let not the power and efficacy of thy celestial Grace extend further; for then the liberty of my will would be violated. I desire a grace which may give me a possibility and the progresse of that possibility, which may invite me, call me, and sollicite me to good; but I desire not such a grace as should give me the affection of the will and the effect of cooperation. I desire not such grace as should determine me to will, apply me to action, lead me to act by its invincible force, and operate in me both to will and to do. On the contrary, I would have a grace which I may apply, or not ap∣ply according as I please.

Good God' Can any Christian endure to hear such language as this? What is more unworthy of the School of Jesus Christ, more remote from all sort of piety, and more insupportable to the eares of the faithful, then this manner of pray∣ing; since sinners would never be converted to

God, if they waited till they had the will to be converted, and if by the omnipotence of his grace he did not work in their hearts that good will and that conversion? Moreover, the Church doth not beg for them a grace whereby they may be converted if they will, but a Grace which may make them willing, which may soften their hardnesse, and take away their heart of stone to give them one of flesh. We pray, saith S. Au∣gustin, not only for those wbo are unwilling, hut al∣so for those who resist and oppose. What do we ask then, but that they may be so chang'd as to will that which they were unwilling to, to approve that which they disapprov'd, and to love that which they with∣stood? Because, as the Eastern Church speaks, He saves when it pleases him, and none resists his will. Because, as S. Augustin saith, Lib. de Cor. & Grat. cap. 14. He hath an omnipotent power to lead the hearts of men whether he pleaseth; and be∣cause as he saith in another place, Who is he that can resist God to hinder him from doing what pleas∣eth him?

After so many proofs, M. H. F. who sees not that this manner of praying (consecrated by the universal consent of the Church, and confirm'd by the authentick testimony of S. Augustin) can in no wise consist with the doctrine of Molina and his indifferent Grace? Whatever his Partisans can say or do, and whatever subtilties thy may have recourse to, they will never avoid the just reproach of having endeavor'd to overthrow all the prayers of the Church. Whereof the rea∣son is evident; The Church asks nothing of God but what he doth effect. Now by their principles, God operates nothing in us but the possibility of willng and acting, and the encreasing of that pos∣sibility. But according to the same principles of theirs, God operates not in us the very being willing, the very determination and application of the will to will, faith it self, repentance and the effect of love towards God, inasmuch as all these are other things then power. For accord∣ding to them God works not willingnesse in us, but so far as he gives the power, and sollicites this power in such sort that we perform all these things by using, as seems good to us, the grace which is once given us. Whence it clearly fol∣lowes that they wholly destroy the Churches prayers, whereby she asks of God not only the Faculty, and the power of willing and doing good; but besides this, she precisely asks of him the will to do it, and the action it self which is the effect thereof.

Will the Molinists say, that besides this grace of possibility we have need of some supernatural concourse, by which God acting with us, ope∣rates all actions of piety; and that 'tis this singu∣lar grace which the Church prayes for, when she demands power and willingnesse to accomplish what God commands us? But being that accord∣ing to their opinion this concourse, how superna∣tural soever it may be, is wholly in our own power by meanes of that sufficient grace above∣mention'd, just as natural concourse is in our own power in using our natural strength, which hath all that is necessary to it to render us capable of doing good; What can be more extravagant, as S. Augustin speaks, that to pray that we may be caus'd to do that which we have already pawer to do, and to ask for that to be given us which we possesse already. This concourse therefore is not the grace which the Apostle so highly esteems, & which the Church so importunately implores in its pray∣ers. Which may be invincibly prov'd by this one Argument: That grace, which by the meanes of sufficient grace, is intirely in our own power, so that we may, as we list, use or not use it, and and which can never be withheld from us by God; is not the Grace which the Church implores, when she prayes God to take away this heart of stone and give us one of flesh in its stead; and to cause that we may will that which we will not, consent to what we reject, and love what we formerly oppos'd. But this concourse of the Molinists, how supernatural soever it may be, is such as may be made use of or not, at pleasure. There∣fore it cannot be taken for the Grace so ardently pray'd for by the Church.

Perhaps our Adversaries will say, That that which the Church asks of God in her prayers is not the ability to do good, or that supernatural concourse which is in our power by meanes thereof, but that she prayes him to grant her that ability in times, places, temper of the body and other circumstances of second causes, by means of which he foresees that we will freely consent to his Grace. And 'tis in this temper that they ordinarily place the efficacy of that grace which they hold.

But if by this manner of speaking they meant nothing else but that the efficacy of Gods grace consists in a certain degree of love towards God, that is to say, in a charity greater then cupidity, by meanes of which God begins to appear to us desirable, and good works for his sake, so that we take more pleasure in doing what he com∣mands us, then in not doing what he forbids us; they would agree with us, and there would be no longer dispute between us touching this matter. For what else is the effectual and medicinal grace of Jesus Christ according to S. Augustin, but a victorious pleasure, a sweetnesse and ravishment of divine love which surmounts all the allure∣ments of the flesh; and an ardor of charity over-mastering and subduing cupidity? But because our Adversaries place not the efficacy of Gods grace in the victory of charity over cupidity, but in a cer∣tain temperament accompany'd with the circum∣stances above-mention'd, whence it follows, that such efficacy is still subject to Free-will, and that 'tis necessary for God first to sound the heart of his creature that he may see what it will do in such circumstances before he ordain any thing of its conversion; This is that which we reject and con∣demn as profane, and maintain it to be in no wise that Grace which the Church prayes for. For she prayes God to shed into our hearts such charity, the delectation whereof surmounts the delectati-of sin; she prayes him to fortifie our souls by his H. Spirit, and to ground and root us in charity; she begs of him such medicinal grace as may heal our infirmities and give us inward strength; she prays him to co convert us to him in whatever e∣state we be, either of prosperity or adversity, joy or sadnesse; she desires of him to give us the strength never to consent to sin by leaving our

selves to be overcome by afflictions, allurements or threatnings; and lastly, she prayes to be ena∣led with great charity and patience, to surmount bll the difficulties and accidents which occur in the acourse of our lives. What relation M. H. F. have all these things to the Temper or Constitu∣tion whereof we speak? Do's he who prayes to God in the manner I have set forth, believe that his omnipotent vertue and charity cannot operate conversion in mans heart, unlesse by causing those circumstances of times and places to meet with the will of man? Let them who are of this mind hear what S. Augustin saith, Who is so void of sense and so impious as to say, that God cannot change the per∣verse wills of men, and convert those to good which he pleases, when he pleases and where he pleases? Because, as he saith elswhere, God hath the will's of men more in his power then they have themselves. Let them hear S. Prosper in his Poem of Grace, chap. 16. where he hath this sense; But the Grace of Christ, being through Christ all-powerful, heals a languishing soul after another manner; 'tis the spirit and hand of God himself, both beginning and accomplish∣ing his divine work. Let a man, be young or old, rich or poor, yet when that exerts its activity, any time is favorable; Nothing withstands its power∣ful assistance; hardnesse of heart do's not stop its course. And all the vain power of the second cause yields to his high designes purposed before the foundations of the world. Whence this Argument may be fram'd. The grace of God, which is of such a nature that it can change the most opposite wills of men, and convert to good those whom he pleases, when he pleases, and where he pleases, (he having alwayes in his power the means of doing that which pleases him, without ever being lyable to any retardment from the contrary manners or inclinations of men by any cause or obstacle what∣soever) is perfectly free and independent, as to its efficacy, or any natural disposition whatsoever. But the Grace by which God converts the wills of men, and which the Church asks of him in her prayers, is such, according to S. Augustin and S. Prosper, and the contrary opinion cannot be held without folly or impiety. Therefore the Grace by which God turns the wills of men, and which the Church desires in her prayers, is perfectly free, and independent upon any natural disposition whatsoever; and the contrary opinion is impi∣ous.

But moreover we see that the Churches prayers are grounded not only upon God's prescience but upon his vertue and energy which acts upon our will as it pleases him. For as is above shewn, the Church prayes thus in the Collect of the Holy Al∣tar, us'd almost throughout the whole East; Lord, give us vertue and the meanes to preserve it, cause the wicked to become good, and uphold the good in their goodnesse. For thou art able to do all things, and none can withstand thee. Thou savest when thou pleasest, and no person resists thy pleasure. Whereas on the contrary by this Answer of the Molinists, the prayers of the Church should not be ground∣ed upon the power but the prescience of God; and 'twould not be needful to pray for a Grace whereby he may turn our will to himself and fill us with his love, but only for a Grace whereby he may know by his prescience that we will turn our selves to him, not by the power of a determining and applying grace, but by the motion of our own Free-will. Whence it would follow, that God gives only a grace of Possibility, whereof he foresees our will will make good use in such and such circumstances, and not the grace to will and to do, that is, which operates both the will and the action, which is the most impious opinion that can be imagin'd.

Again, 'tis indubitable that God by his presci∣ence knows all the good works which we are to perform. But the ground of his knowing them beforehand, is, that 'tis himself who will do them; he sees them before they are done, be∣cause he ha's prepar'd and predestinated the good works in which he will have us walk. See how S. Augustin speaks touching this matter in the book De Praedest. Sanctorum, cap. 10. That which the Apostle saith, speaking of good works: That God hath prepar'd them to cause us to walk therein, denotes Predestination, which cannot be with∣out Prescience, as Prescience may be without Pre∣destination. For God by his predestination hath foreseen the things which himself is to do: Whence it it is said by the Scripture, That God doth the things which are not yet come to passe; but he can also know these by his Prescience which himself effecteth not, as all sins. After which he proves, that the good works which we perform are not those which God hath barely foreseen, but which he hath pro∣mis'd, and consequently works in us. For he pro∣miseth, saith he, what he is to effect himself, and not what men are to effect; because though men per∣form holy actions pertaining to the Worship of God, yet 'tis God himself who causeth them to perform what he hath commanded them; and 'tis not they who cause God to accomplish what he hath promis'd; otherwise it would follow, that the accomplishment of Gods promises depended upon men, and not upon God himself, and that 'twas they who acquitted God towards Abraham of what he had promis'd to Abra∣ham. Now that H. Patriarch had no such beleef, but giving glory to God, he stedfastly believ'd that God was able to do what he had promis'd. The Scripture saith not, that God could foretell or fore∣see it. For he can foretell and foresee what o∣thers will do and not himself; but it saith, that he could do it; denoting thereby that what he promis'd, was not what others were to do, but what he would do himself.

From which words of S. Augustin, I shall with Your favor M. H. F. form this Argument. The prayers which the Church makes to God, have no other foundation but Gods very promi∣ses. But Gods promises are founded only upon his power and not upon his prescience. There∣fore the Churches prayers are likewise founded only upon God's power. This Argument may be propounded after another manner and more convincingly. God acts in the hearts of men to work out their salvation in such manner as he ha's promis'd to act therein. But God promis'd A∣braham the faith and conversion of Idolatrous Nations, not because he foresaw that they would believe, but because he had power to cause them to believe. Therefote he daily acts after the same manner in the heart of man in reference to faith and conversion, not because he foresees that man

will turne by his grace, but because he is able and hath resolv'd to work such consent in his heart.

But I will concede to our Adversaries that the Church prays to God for no other grace in order to all actions of piety, then that which they call Congruous in the sense before explicated, and to which he foresees that man will freely consent if he give him the same. Yet this very thing is more then sufficient to refute their doctrine and con∣vince their errors. For, as 'tis evident by what I have already said, the Church asks no other grace of God for a pious action, then that which it believes wholly and absolutely necessary to the doing thereof. But the Church for every pious action desires that grace which they term Congru∣ous. And consequently believes absolutely and wholly necessary to every pious action. Thus they who have not this Grace for a certain action of piety, suppose Repentance, have not all the grace which is necessary to repent. But all whom the Church prays God to turn to himself by repentance, have not this congruous grace of re∣pentance; for if they had, they would be effective∣ly turn'd, and 'twere superfluous to desire God to give it them. Therefore all those for whose conversion to God by repentance the Church prays, have not all the grace which is neces∣sary to repent. How then can it be said that they have a grace perfectly sufficient there∣unto?

Is it not therefore, M. H. F. more clear then the day, the points of the Molinists doctrine are whol∣ly opposite either to the Catholick faith, or to themselves? For they must necessarily grant one of these two things, either that the Grace which the Church implores for the conversion of sinners is not absolutely necessary for their conver∣sion, which is undoubtedly impious and hereti∣cal; or that sinners have not all the grace which is sufficient for repenting, since they have not that which is necessary thereunto.

In the second place another argument may be drawn from the Churches prayers, to show that she implores of God no other grace then that which by its invincible power works in the hearts of men, the motion, the consent, and an actual conversion, and which she believes absolutely necessary for producing so saving an effect. For when Infidels or sinners withstand God's word, she prays for them that they may not resist but consent. She prays, as S. Augustin saith, in the place before alledg'd, that they may be so chang'd as to will that which they will'd not, to approve that which they disapprov'd, to love that which they oppos'd. Thence she belives that when they consent not but resist, they have not from God the grace which is necessary to consenting: which showes that she believes that the necessary Grace is that which surmounts re∣sistance and produces consent: which is no other thing then to say that Grace effectual by it self is absolutely necessary.

Let any Molinist now come to maintain, (what he cannot deny, unlesse he will disclaim all his own principles) that an unbeliever and opposer of the Gospel, suppose some Jew of this City, hath all the grace necessary to believing; never∣thelesse he must acknowledge that the Church prays for him to the end he may believe. What doth she implore for him? What grace doth she pray God to grant to, this Infidel? It cannot be that which is necessary to believing, since if it were, he should not have all the grace necessary to be∣lieving; which is contrary to the Hypothesis, there being a manifest contradiction between these two contradictories, namely that this man hath all the grace necessary to believing, and that he wants some grace necessary thereunto. Thus it followes from the principles of the Molinists that the Grace which the Church implores for this man is not necessary for him, unlesse perhaps to lead him more easily and surely to believe∣ing.

Whence this argument may be form'd. If an Unbeliever who resists the Gospel, hath all the Grace which is necessary for him to believe; it fol∣lowes that when the Church prays for him to the end he may be converted to the faith, she asks not of God to grant him a Grace which is absolutely necessary for his believing. But according to the Molinists, an unbeliever who resists the Gos∣pel, hath all Grace necessary to his believing. Therefore when the Church prays for him that he may be converted to the faith, she asks not a grace which is absolutely necessary to his believing.

You see, M. H. F. how the prayers of the Church are destroyed by this means. For these two things are perfectly opposite, namely, that an Infidel who resists the Gospel hath all the grace from God which is necessary for his believing; and that neverthelesse the Church desires some grace for him which is necessary thereunto. Whence it followes that if an Infidel who resists the Gospel, hath all necessary Grace, 'tis in vain that the Church prays for him; or if 'tis not in vain, then he hath not all the grace necessary to his believing. Whereby Y. H. clearly sees that what Molina holds herein is contradictorily op∣posite to the prayers of the Church, and that we have right to say with S. Augustin; 'Tis then in vain and most unprofitably rather then truly that we addresse prayers to God for them, to the end that by believing they may assent to the doctrine which they op∣pose, if 'tis not the proper effect of his grace to con∣vert to the faith of his Gospel the wills of men who oppose the same faith. But because the Church prays not vainly and unprofitably, it followes that the Infidel who resists the Gospel, hath not all the Grace which is necessary for him to believe, because he hath not the effectual Grace which might cause him to believe. Wherefore Grace ef∣fectual by it self is that which the Church asks of God, and which she believes and maintains to be absolutely necessary to every pious action.

In the third place, M. H. F. this invincible argument may be drawn from the Churches per∣severance in prayer. When the Church prayes for the conversion of an Infidel to the faith, or of a sinner to repentance; what ever grace of pos∣sibility he may have receiv'd whereby he is able to turn himself, but doth not; yet the Church ne∣ver ceases to continue praying to God to convert him and make him embrace repentance, and free him from the bonds of the devil till he be conver∣ted

to God by faith and repentance. Therefore what ever Grace of possibility can be fancied, yet there is another grace besides which subdues free will to it self, & which the Church implores of God, which gives possibility with effect so as to work consent, and which as S. Austin speaks, constraines the unbeliever to embrace the faith. But 'tis this grace which is effectual by it self, which who so hath, is undoubtedly converted, and who so wants is not converted. Therefore the grace of faith of repentance which the Church prays for, is effectual by it self. And because, as I have often said alrea∣dy, the Church asks no grace of God but what she confesses to be necessary; it followes that the Grace which she asks is necessary and effectual by it self. This appears clearly by S. Augustin's words in the end of the 107th letter. Do you not go about to hinder the Church from praying for Ʋn∣believers to the end they may become believers? from praying for such as will not believe to the end they may be willing to believe? from praying for those who contradict her law and doctrine, that the may consent to the same, and that God would give them as he hath promis'd by the Prophet a heart to know God and ears to hear, the receiving of which is denoted by our Savior when he saith, He that hath an ear to hear let him hear? And when the Lord's Priest being at the Altar, you hear him exhort the people to pray to God, or pray aloud himself that he would so constrain the Infidels as to make them embrace his H. faith, will you not answer, So be it?

This being suppos'd, M. H. F. I demand whe∣ther or no an Infidel who resists the Gospel hath a heart to know God? whether or no he hath eares to hear? whether or no he hath grace which compels him to the faith? If he hath all these things, to what purpose doth the Church pray for him that he may receive what he already pos∣sesses? If he hath not, then he hath not all the grace which is necessary to him for believing, since (besides what I have frequently evinc'd, that the Church implores no grace of God which is not necessary) 'tis certain that none can know God unlesse he have receiv'd a heart to know him, nor hear his word unless he have receiv'd ears to hear. Moreover, this Grace being effectual by self, since as 'tis impossible for a man to know God unless he have receiv'd a heart to know him, so neither if he have receiv'd such a heart, can he but know him; having receiv'd a heart to repent, he cannot but repent; having receiv'd eares to hear, he cannot but hear; being impell'd by that motion which causeth to embrace the faith, he cannot but embrace the same: It followes clearly, that the grace which the Church implores of God as necessary every action of piety, is effectual by it self.

In the fourth place the same truth is invincibly manifested by the refutation of the Molinistical grace, even in S. Austin's own words, speaking in this manner to Vitalis a Semipelagian; You say, that God as much as lyes in him, causes us to Will, since he gives us the knowledge of his pleasure, but if we will not obey the same, 'tis we who are the cause that God's operation is fruitlesse to us. Which if you affirme, you contradict the prayers of the Church.

Which reasoning of S. Augustin utterly refutes any grace what ever that is subject (in its usse) to Free Will, as being utterly contrary to the prayers of the faithfull. This Argument will evince it. Whosoever establishes a doctrine, from which it follows that he is of an opinion contrary to the prayers of the Church (as S. Augustin here judges that of Vitalis) he is in an error and alienated from the orthodox belief of the Catholick faith. But he who maintains a suf∣ficient Grace subject to Freewill establishes a do∣ctrine from which it followes that he holds an opinion contrary to the prayers of the Church. Which is prov'd by S. Augustin in this manner; Whosoever saith that we through our resistance and unwillingnesse to obey, cause God's operati∣on upon us to become unprofitable, manifestly contradicts the Churches prayers. But he who maintaines a sufficient Grace subject to Freewill, saith that we by resisting such sufficient Grace and by not willing to submit thereunto, cause God's operation to become unprofitable. Therefore he is in an opinion contrary to that of the Churches prayers, and consequently erres, and is not in the belief of the Catholick faith.

Moreover all the thanks rendered to God by the Church prove the same thing; or as S. Au∣gustin speaks in his 107. Epistle to Vitalis, This truth appears no lesse clearly in thanks-giving then in prayer. It appears in the prayer which we put up to God for such as are still unbelievers; and it appears in the thanks which we render to him in behalf of those who are become believers. For as we ought to pray to him to the end he may accomplish that for which we pray, so we ought to render him thanks when he hath accomplisht the same. Wherefore from the duty of thanksgiving I draw the 3. following arguments.

First, We render thanks to God, not only for what we have been able to do, but for what we have been willing to do with piety, and accor∣dingly perform'd. Thus S. Augustin teaches us in his Epistle to Vitalis, where he saith, Whence it is that the Apostle requires the same thing of the E∣phesians, when he saith, Moreover having under∣stood what your faith is towards our Lord Jesus Christ, and your love to all the Saints, I continually give thanks in your behalf: but we speak now onely of the first beginning of faith, when men who were remote and even averse from God, are converted to God, and begin to will that which they willed not, and to have the faith which they had not; for the ef∣fecting of which alteration in them, it is, that we pray for them, although themselves pray not, because they cannot call upon him in whom they do not believe. And when God hath wrought that in them for which we pray'd (i. e. when he hath turn'd their hearts) we give him thanks in their behalf, and themselves do the same. But as for the prayers which they make when they are already believers both for themselves and for the other faithfull, that God would cause them to proceed in his way; and as for the thanks which they render to him, when they do accordingly proceed therein, I conceive there needs no dispute con∣cerning the same.

From which words of S. Augustin, I most hum∣bly beseech Y. H. to give me leave to forme this argument against the Molinists. We give thanks to God for what he hath already wrought in us: But there is no pious motion of our will nor any pious action, for which we do not give him

thanks. Therefore there is no pious motion in our will nor any pious action which God doth not work in us. And consequently the grace of God necessary to every action of piety is effectu∣al by it self of every pious motion of the will and of every pious action.

'Tis therefore unprofitably, saith S. Augustin in the same Epistle to Vitalis, and meerely for fa∣shion, rather then really, that we render thanks to God with joy when any unbelievers are converted, if it be not he who worketh that in them for which we thank him. Let us not deceive men, I beseech you, for as for God we know that we cannot deceive him.

The second Argument is this. The Church doth not give thanks to God for the conversion of any one to faith or repentance, unlesse when the is perswaded that he really believes or repents in his heart for his offences, The Church there∣fore doth not believe, that God hath wrought the conversion of the sinner, and afforded all ne∣cessary assistance thereunto when he hath onely granted the grace which gives onely the power, as the Molinists hold; but then only when he hath inspired the grace by vertue whereof the first conversion undoubtedly follow'd, as I said when I spoke concerning prayer. This is prov'd evidently by that passage of S. Augustin, The Apostle having said that the Law is the strength of sin, subjoynes immediately, But we give thanks to God who hath caus'd its to overcome through our Lord Jesus Christ. And thus the victory whereby we surmount sin, is nothing else but a gift of God, who in this combate assists our Freewill. Up∣on which account Christ himself saith, Watch and pray, that ye fall not into temptation; and thus all who stirre against their concupiscence-ought to pray that they enter not into temptation, that is, that it may not captivate and prevail over them. But we fall not into temptation, when by a right will we surmount an evil lust. These last words of S. Augu∣stin are very much to be observ'd, as whereby he clearly teaches that he who doth not overcome temptation, but on the contrary is overcome by it, hath not had that grace which the faithfull im∣plore of God, when they pray him not to suffer them to enter into temptation, Whence it evi∣dently followes, that the grace necessary for overcomming all kind of temptations, which the faithfull beg of God in their prayers, and for which they thank him when they have receiv'd it, is not onely a grace of possibility dependant up∣on Free-will, but a grace of possibilty, of will and of action, and consequently effectual by it self.

The third Argument is this, If God's grace affords onely a possibility and worketh not the very consent, that is a right or good will, by its own strength, then we ought to thank God for giving us the faculty to will aright or do well, but not for what we have done well and co-operated with his grace. According to Molina's princi∣ples, we ought to thank him for giving us a grace which he foresaw we would use well and co-operate therewith. But to speak according to truth; we could not thank him for that we had us'd that grace well and co-operated there∣with, since this use and co-operation would not be given us by God, but left to our Free-will: which cannot be so much as thought of without impiety.

I conceive, M. H. F. that Y. H. clearly sees how strong and invincible this Argument drawn from the prayers and thanksgiving of the Church, is, to prove that Grace effectual by it self is ne∣cessary to all actions of piety. Which caus'd S. Augustin to say with so great reason in the se∣venth chapter de Dono Perseverantie; Had we no other instructions but this, the Lord Prayer were more then sufficient to uphold the cause of Grace which we defend. And in the 23d. Chapter; As the Church was from its first rise instructed in those Prayers, so she hath been instructed and educated in this faith, and is every day more and more con∣firm'd therein. And in the 95. Epistle to Pope Innocent I. Prayer it self is a most clear proof of Grace. And Pope Celestine in the 10. Chap. of his Epistle to the Bishops of France, The manner ac∣cording to which we ought to pray, teaches us also what we ought to believe. Wherefore 'tis no wonder if S. Augustin in all his Works and all the H. Fathers, who together with him so stoutly maintain'd the true grace of Jesus Christ against the Pelagians, have shewn the tradition and constant and perpetual doctrine of this grace effectual by it self in the prayers which the Church hath offer'd to God from the beginning of her establishment, and which she will con∣tinue to offer to him till the end of the world. For the Church hath alwayes dayly implor'd of God the actual believing and conversion of the hearts of all Infidels, whose wills are remote from, and contrary to him; and in behalf of the faithfull, who believe in him with the heart and confesse him with the mouth, perseve∣rance and victory in temptations: and for all there gifts the incessantly renders thanks to him.

Having therefore most clearly prov'd, M. H. F. that there two principles are of the Catho∣lick faith; first, that the Grace which the Church asks of God in her prayers, is necessary; and secondly, that it is effectuall by it self, and that we cannot imagine that the Church prays for any other. Wherefore it irrefragably fol∣lowes from those prayers of the Church, that Grace effectual by it self is necessary to all acti∣ons of piety, and that consequently whoso de∣nies, manifestly subverts all the Churches prayers.

Your Holinesse, M. H. F. may hence very easily judge what opinion you ought to have of this new doctrine, of a Grace subject to our Free-will; and I dare boldly affirme in your pre∣sence, for a conclusion of this first point of our dispute, that this doctrine of Molina is no lesse pernicious and sacrilegious then the very doctrine of Pelagius. For the Fathers of the Council of Carthage in their Epistle to Pope Innocent, (which is the 90th amongst those of S. Augustin) declare that the opinions of the Pelagians are sacrilegious and pernicious, to as∣much as it necessarily follows from their doctrin, that we ought not to pray to God not to leave us to fall into temptation; and that it seems a vain thing that the Church implores of him in be∣half of his people what the prays for, to the end they may please him by living in his love & fear.

Now he who maintains an opinion from whence such things follow, however his words be different from those of Pelagius, and what∣ever

other grace he admit, yet he also embraces a pernicious, deadly and sacrilegious doctrine; and what he adds concerning the necessity of a sufficient Grace subject to Free-will, hinders nor but that he is in an error; because they who hold this Grace, can as little as the Pelagians, avoid contradicting the prayers & thanksgivings of the Church (as I have prov'd) and declaring them∣selves enemies of that Grace of God, which the prayers of the Saints prove so evidently, that is to say, Grace effectual by it self.

All this Doctrine of the Fathers of the Cartha∣ginian Council, confirm'd also by that of Mile∣vis, was approv'd by Pope Innocent I. in the E∣pistle he writ to them (which is the 91. amongst those of S. Augustin) We see not (saith he) any thing to be added to what you have done, because we see not that you have omitted or forgotten any thing fur the perfect refutation of those Errors, and the convincing of such as maintain them.

It appears also by the whole Epistle that the principal cause why that great Pope detested the Pelagian Error, was, for that it takes away the necessity of Prayer. Pelagius (saith he) and Celestius are so presumptuous as to endeavour to perswade us that we ought to implore God's aid, and have no need of it, although all the Saints affirm that without it we can do nothing. And afterwards; there being nothing whereunto our profession more obliges us, and all our daily prayers tending only to implore Gods mercy, how can we endure them who teach these Errors? But see the thundring words wherwith that most H. Pope strikes the Pelagians; Being arm'd, saith he, in their discourses with false subtilties, they cover themselves with the vail of the Catholick and Orthodox faith, and exhaling a mortal poyson to infect the hearts of those who hold the sound doctrine and cause them to embrace error, they endeavor to overthrow the whole belief of the true faith. Wherefore the course of so dangerous a poyson requires to be checkt, to the end it may spread no further; 'tis requisite to apply the Iron and the Fire to this sore. For what can be more wicked and heathenish, more remote from our holy Re∣ligion, and more opposite to the first of Christianity? Is there any thing more deadly to souls, more apt to thrust them into a precipice, and more likely to ex∣pose them to all kind of dangers? They thereby high∣ly declare themselves themselves enemies of the Ca∣tholick faith; they publish their ingratitude for the benefits which they have receiv'd from God, and care not to be worthy of our Communion, since they have polluted it by publishing such errors. They have absolutely abandon'd our Religion. For there is nothing whereunto our profession more obliges us, and all our daily prayers to God tending only to im∣plore his mercy, how can we endure them who teach such errors? What strange error is that which blinds them? Do not they deserve to be plung'd as they are in such grosse darknesses? 'Tis fit to root them out of the midst of us; they are to be driven far from the Church, that the evil may be kept from taking more root in our bowels, and by spread∣ing further become incurable. What this Gangrene hath corrupted, is to be cut off from what remains sound in the body of the Church, to the end the strength of so dangerous a poyson reach not to the parts which are not yet sick, and that the flock may remain sound by the separation of the sheep in∣fected with this cruel pestilence.

Now wherefore, M. H. F. doth this great Pope speak with so much heat against those He∣reticks, unlesse because they dared to affirm, that men have no need of Effectual Grace for the performing of Righteousnesse, overcoming of sin, and observing of Gods Commandments? For he accuses them throughout the said Letter of denying that assistance of God which we pray for; and consequently of taking away the ne∣cessity of prayer. But the succour which we ask and obtain by prayer, is effectual by it self and cannot be understood after any other manner, as I have most clearly prov'd. Consequently, the cause of his condemning them as Hereticks, and declar'd enemies of the faith and Christian piety, is, because they affirm'd, that we have no need of the grace of God effectual by it self for the accomplishing the Commandments & surmount∣ing temptations. Now this is the very same which the Molinists teach and maintain at this day, whilst they hold their sufficient Grace sub∣ject to Free-will; and I shall further presse them with this Argument, which shall be the conclusion of all that I have hitherto spoken.

The cause why S. Augustin, the Fathers of the Council of Carthage, Pope Innocent I. and the whole Church condemn'd the doctrine of the Pe∣lagians, as impious, heretical & sacrilegious, is, for that it follows from thence, that the Grace which the Church begs of God by her prayers, is not ne∣cessary in order to doing good. Whence it ap∣pears, that every Doctrine from whence the same consequence may be drawn, is likewise he∣retical, sacrilegious, and worthy to be strucken with Anathema. But it follows from the Moli∣nistical doctrine of sufficient Grace subject to Free-will as to its use, that the grace which the Church asks of God by her prayers is not neces∣sary in order to doing good, since, as I have shewn by invincible proofs, the Grace implor'd by the Churches prayers, is effectual by it self, and it followes from the doctrine of sufficient Grace subject to Free-will is not necessary to do∣ing good. Therefore it follows from the doctrine of Molinistical grace, that the Grace implor'd by the Churches prayers is, not necessary to doing good; and thus by manifest consequence the do∣ctrine of Molinistical grace subject to Free-will ought according to the judgement of S. Augu∣stin, all the other Bishops of Africk, Pope In∣nocent I. and the universal Church, to be account∣ed heretical, sacrilegious, and worthy to be struck with Anathema.

I purposed M. H. F. here to end this so long Dispute at this time, for fear of being tedious to Your Holinesse, but judging by the gentle∣nesse and extream goodnesse wherewith You do me the honour to hear me, that You give me full liberty of speaking, and will not be displeas'd that I employ what remains of this day in bring∣ing new proofs; I shall endeavor to show by a second testimony of S. Augustin the truth of the same Proposition which I have undertaken to prove, and which is the subject of all the pre∣sent Contest; namely, that Grace effectual by it self is necessary to all actions of piety. 'Tis the

subject which that great Saint handles in the book De Gratia Christi, wherein he represents so clearly and with such lively colours what is the true Grace of Jesus Christ, to the end that the same may be distinguisht from that false Grace, which Pelagius endeavor'd to establish by his dis∣guisements and artifices. But that the testimony of this great Light of the Church may have as much weight and authority upon Your Holiness's mind as it deserves; I conceive requisite to give Your Holinesse a brief account of the occasion of S. Augustin's writing that Book. 'Tis therefore to be observ'd, as Ecclesiastical History and that Book it self teach us, that Albinus, Pinianus and Melanius, so Illustrious among the Romans for their birth, quality and piety, that none surpass'd them in Nobility, Dignity and Riches, going out of devotion into Palestine, and there finding Pe∣lagius, exhorted him to condemn in writing the evil opinions whereof he was accus'd; where∣unto he scrupled not to condescend, in hope that by pronouncing a false Anathema upon them, and making a disguis'd and artificial profession of faith, he might attract to himself persons of so great authority, and cause all the world to judge him innocent, not only of the crime, but likewise of the suspition of Heresie. See the words which he writ; I anathematise those who affirm or believe, that the grace whereby Jesus Christ came into the World to save sinners is not necessary, not only in all places of the earth, but also in every moment and in all our actions: And I acknowledge, that all they who endeavor to abolish or oppose it, fall into eternal condemnation.

Assoon as Albinus and Pinianus had this con∣fession of Pelagius's faith in their hands, they sent it to S. Augustin, and desir'd him to send them his judgement upon it. He answer'd them, that Pelagius spoke like a Catholick, and yet was much to be distrusted, because he hid his poison under the ambiguity of the word Grace, thereby the more easily to deceive such as took not the more heed thereunto. And upon this occasion he expresly writ a whole Book concerning the grace of Jesus Christ, and sent the same to them; where∣in he descries all Pelagius's artifices, unfolds all the ambiguities of his words, teaches what is to be understood by the words [Jesus Christs Grace] and what Grace that is which Pelagius ought to confesse necessary to every pious acti∣on, if he would not be barely a nominal, but also a real Christian.

Now before I engage further in this discourse, I humbly beseech Your Holiness to give me leave to observe two things by the way: First, That the understanding of the true Grace of Jesus Christ and its efficacy upon the will of men, doth not concern only Doctors, Bishops, Priests and Monasticks, but also the Laicks of what sex and condition soever; for S. Augustin hath address'd his principal works against the Pelagians to Lay-persons, to the end they might not be drawn into their Error by their subtilties and vain Philoso∣phy. For we see that he hath written a Book in∣titl'd De Spiritu & Litera to Marcellinus, and that De meritis & remissione peccatorum to the same; that De natura & Gratia to Jacobus & Fi∣masus; that De Gratia Jesu Christi, (of which I make use for the framing of this Argument) to Albinus, Pinianus & Melanius; that De gra∣tia & libero arbitrio to the Monks of Adrumetum, (for in those dayes Monks were reputed amongst the Laicks) and afterwards to the same that De-Correctione & Gratia. Wherefore 'tis no wonder if the same S. Augustin in his 120 Epistle reckons those in the number of the foolish virgins that are excluded from the Kingdom of heaven; who bear not in thir hearts the understanding and love of Grace; and who are ignorant, as he saith, in chap. 37. that none can be continent unlesse God give him continence.

The second thing which I draw and observe from thence, is, that this single book is more then sufficient to decide all the controversies that can arise touching the grace of Jesus Christ. For Pelagius, ever after the Council of Diospolis, where he was constrain'd to renounce his error, constantly acknowledg'd with the Catholicks, that the grace of God by Jesus Christ is necessary to every action of piety. But the difficulty was, what is to be understood by the terme Grace. Which was the cause that S. Augustin continually repeates the sense thereof in his book. When Pelagius saith, that Free-will hath always need to be aided by the grace and assistance of God, the question is what grace and assistance he means: wherefore 'tis not sufficient to denominate a man a Catholick, that he acknowledges a Grace of God necessary to every act of piety, since here∣ticks themselves believe, or make semblance of believing as much, but we must moreover agree upon the true Grace of Jesus Christ, without con∣triving another in stead of it. Now being S. Au∣gustin compos'd that book of the Grace of Jesus Christ, to take away all ambiguity which might be found in the word Grace, we have nothing else to do but to weigh and consider with great care what he understood by the word Grace when he disputed against Pelagius in the name of the whole Church, and what that Grace is which he would oblige that heretick to confesse neces∣sary to every act of piety, that he might be held a Catholick. In which we cannot be mistaken, being S. Augustin hath unfolded the meaning of it in a great multitude of definitions, whereof I shall briefly recite some of the principal to Y. H.

• 'Tis that, saith he, whereby God inspires a holy delectation, to the end to cause us to do all that which we know we ought to do. chap. 3.
• 'Tis that, whereby God operates in us not only the power but the will and the action, chap. 3.
• 'Tis that, whereby God inspires the ardour of love into the will. chap. 6.
• 'Tis that, whereby every good thing is not only en∣joyn'd but perswaded to us. chap. 10.
• 'Tis that, which is not common to all because, all have not faith, and swasion is not alwayes accom∣pany'd with perswasion. Ibid.
• 'Tis that, which is intimated in those words; No man can come unto me unlesse he be drawn by my Father who sent me. Ibid.
• ...'Tis that, which we ought to believe God diffu∣ses from above into the soul with ineffable sweet∣nesse, not only by causing it to know the truth, but

• ... by inspiring charity into it. chap. 13.
• 'Tis that, whereby God together gives to such whom he calls according to his purpose, both to know what they ought to do, and to do what they know their duty. Ibid.
• 'Tis that, whereby God's commandments seem not terrible but easy. Ibid.
• 'Tis that, whereby all who are drawn and taught by the Father come to the Son: according to those words of the Gospel, whosoever hath heard and lear∣ned of my Father, commeth to me, chap. 14.
• 'Tis that, whereby God teacheth men inwardly, insuch a manner, that not only their mind knows what they have learnt of him, but their will de∣sires it and their actions perform it. Ibid.
• 'Tis that, whereby not only the natural possibility of willing and operating is assisted, but also the will and operation it self. Ibid.
• 'Tis that, which together gives the advancement of the possibility, and the affection of the will and the effect of the action. Ibid.
• 'Tis that, whereby God with an internal, hidden, admirable and ineffable power works in the hearts of men not only a true knowledg but also a right will. chap. 24.
• 'Tis that, which the Apostle pray'd for in these words; we pray God not only that you may not com∣mit evil, but that you may do good. chap. 25.
• 'Tis that, whereby the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the H. Spirit which is given us, so that without it we cannot do any good relating to piety and true righteousnesse. chap. 26.
• 'Tis that, whereby God gives us, not the spirit of fear, but that of vertue, charity and continence. chap. 33.
• 'Tis that, whose assistance giveth the will and the action by the infusion of the H. Spirit. chap. 34.
• And lastly, 'tis that which by the inspiration of a most ardent and pure love is a help and furtherance to do well, added to nature and instruction. chap. 35.

These are the conditions and properties of the true grace of Jesus Christ, by which it distin∣guishes it from whatever other grace can be feig∣ned or imagined, and which 'tis evident cannot quadrate but to grace effectual by it self. From whence I draw this argument,

The Grace whereunto S. Augustin attributes all these Properties is the true Grace of Jesus Christ necessary to every action of piety. But Grace Effectual by it self is that whereunto S. Au∣gustin attributes all these Properties. Therefore Grace effectual by it self is necessary to every action of piety.

The same Argument which establishes the Ef∣fectual Grace of Jesus Christ, overthrowes the Molinistical Grace subject to Free-will, as I am going to make good by four several proofs. First, the Grace necessary to every act of piety, is, ac∣cording to S. Augustin, a help to doing well, ad∣ded to nature and instruction by the inspiration of a most ardent and pure love. But Molinistical Grace is not such. And by consequence, &c, The Minor I prove thus. The Will cannot re∣ceive the inspiration of a most ardent and pure love, without it begin to be good. But Moli∣nistical grace may subsist without, the will's being good in any sort: but the same may alwayes re∣main bad; because this Grace leaves it still in a state to be good or bad. Therefore Molinistical grace is not by an inspiration of a most ardent and pure love. Hence being S. Augustin affirms in the 31. Chap. de Grat. Christi, that he never found Pelagius acknowledge in any of his Writings such help added to Nature and Instru∣ction by the inspiration of a most ardent and pure love; And being Molina acknowledges the same no more then he did; it followes that he agrees with Pelagius to overthrow the true Grace of Jesus Christ.

Secondly, The Grace of Jesus Christ is an heavenly teaching, whereby God so instructs the heart of man with such inexpressible sweetnesse, that he who receives that instruction, hath not the knowledge only of what he sees, but also the will wherewith he desires it, and the action whereby he performs it, Chap. 14. But the Grace whose use is left to Free-will, is not such: Therefore, &c.

Thirdly, We cannot say of the Grace of Jesus Christ, that by it man learns of God what he ought to do, but that he will not do what it teaches him. Now this may be affirm'd of the Molinistical grace; Therefore the Molinistical grace is not the Grace of Jesus Christ, Chap. 14.

My fourth proof is this; Whosoever receives from God the Grace of Jesus Christ, comes to the Son of God; & whosoever comes not to him, hath not that Grace. Ibid. chap. 14. But many have the Molinistical grace who come not to the Son of God: Therefore the Molinistical grace is not the Grace of Jesus Christ; and consequently is not that Grace which S. Augustin saith was neces∣sary to be acknowledg'd by Pelagius, if he would be a real and not a nominal Catholick.

Now let any one of the upholders of such Mo∣linistical grace appear in presence of Your Holi∣nesse; let him vaunt as much as he pleases that he holds not the opinions of Pelagius; let him say, I am not a Pelagian, because Pelagius ac∣knowledg'd no other grace, but an external aid of the Law and Doctrine, or Instruction; But I moreover confesse an internal and supernatural Grace, whereby God enlightens the Understand∣ing and moves the Will, but whose use is left to Free-will. Certes, I should answer him, 'Tis ve∣ry brave; I am extreamly glad you are not alto∣gether a Pelagian. But what are you the better, if you depart from Pelagius, but cloze not with the sentiments of the Church? And what advan∣tage is it to you, to reject the Pelagian grace, if you do not admit the Christian? For how remote soever you are from Pelagius, whatever Grace you admit, whatever colours you paint it withal, and whatever Title you give it of internal and su∣pernatural, if this Grace be not the same which S. Augustin saith Pelagius must confesse, to the end he may be not only in name, but in Truth a Catholick; the Confession which you make of such other grace, may perhaps keep you from being wholly a Pelagian, but it can never make you passe for a Christian. For I grant it true as you say, (and this is no place to dispute it) that Pelagius deny'd, that there is any internal and su∣pernatural

Grace contrary to what S. Augustin maintain'd, viz. That there is an internal and su∣pernatural Grace; But S. Augustin moreover maintain'd, That this Grace is Effectual and sub∣dues the Free-will to it self. While you hold a∣gainst Pelagius that there is an internal & super∣natural Grace, you hold at the same time against S. Augustin, that the same Grace is subject to Free-will. So that by your acknowledging an internal and supernatural Grace, perhaps you are not a Pelagian therein; but inasmuch as you acknow∣ledge not that the same is Effectual, you are not yet a Catholick. You are as yet neither Pelagian nor Catholick; or rather, you are not at all a Catholick, but you are a Pelagian, in that you agree with Pelagius to oppose that Effectual Grace, which you will not acknowledge to be the true Grace of Jesus Christ.

Whereunto I add, That your sentiment in the confession of this internal & supernatural Grace is not far from that of Pelagius, which I prove by Chap. 13. of the same Book of S. Augustin. He who knows what he ought to do, and doth it not, is not yet instructed of God by Grace, but only by the Law; he hath not been taught by the Spirit, but only by the Letter. And in Chap. 14. Jesus Christ speaking of this manner of teach∣ing, saith, Whosoever hath heard the words of my Father, and hath been taught by him, cometh to me. And it cannot with truth be said of him that comes not to Christ, He hath known and learnt that he ought to come, but he will not do what he hath learnt he ought to do. No certainly, this cannot be said of that manner of instruction according to which God teaches us by his Grace. Now he who hath onely the Molinistical grace, hath not been taught of God by grace and by the Spirit, but onely by the Law and by the Letter; and consequently, the Molinistical grace is no o∣ther then the Pelagian, which consists only in the Law and Instruction. Whereby it appears, that the terms of internal and supernatural Grace, are only simple words made use of by the Moli∣nists to cover and hide their Pelagian grace, to the end to avoid the indignation which the same would excite against them, and by this difference of words to obscure the Truth, and to keep themselves from being so easily convinc'd of their Error.

After this Argument, I shall proceed to S. Au∣gustin's third proof taken out of the same book, de Grat. Christi; where he throughly treats of the assistance of the possibility of the will and of the action; which he maintains to be the true Grace of the Redeemer, and which was the sub∣ject of the whole Dispute between him and Pela∣gius. For see how that great Saint speaks of this Heretick. Pelagius establishing three several things, whereby he saith Gods Commandments may be fulfilled, viz. Possibility, Will and Acti∣on. Possibility, whereby a man is able to be∣come Righteous; Will, whereby he is willing to become Righteous; and Action, whereby he is actually Righteous. He confesses that the first, viz. Possibility, is given by the Creator of our Nature, and depends not upon our selves, since we cannot but have it whether we will or no. But as for the two others, namely, Will and Action, He holds that they are in our power, and that we have so much the dominion of them that they depend only upon our selves. Whence Pelagius concluded, that a man deserves to be commended for his good will and his good actions; or ra∣ther that God and man deserves to be commend∣ed for the same, because God gives him the possibility of that good will, and of that good work, and alwayes assists that possibility by the succour of his Grace. And a little after, That we can do, speak and think any kind of good, it is from God who gives us that power. But that we act, speak, or think well, this is from our selves, because we can turn into evil the power which we have to do all such things.

Now, said Pelagius, Can he who speaks in this manner be taken to deny Grace? And truly, M. H. F. who would not have taken the con∣fession of that Heretick to be wholly Catholick? For to judge thereof by our natural Spirit, what else can the Grace of Jesus Christ be imagin'd to be, but that succour whereby our natural possi∣bility is assisted. Yet if Your Holinesse pleases we will see what S. Augustin answers to this. After a long and exact Dispute which tends to shew that the Grace of Jesus Christ, gives us to∣gether both the advancement of possibility, and the affection of the will, and the effect of opera∣tion, he ends the 47 Chapter with these words: If Pelagius agreed with us, that God assists us, not only by giving us the possibility which may be in man, though he neither will nor do good, but by giving us the very will and action it self; that is, by causing that we both will and do the good, which is not in man except when he willeth good and doth it, and if he further confesses that suc∣cour to be such, as without which we neither will nor do any good; and that 'tis the Grace given us by Jesus Christ our Lord, according to which he makes us Righteous with his Righteousnesse, and not by our own; so that true Righteousnesse is that which is deriv'd to us from him; I think there would be no more ground of Dispute between us touching the help of Gods grace.

In which words of S. Augustin, there are ma∣ny things carefully to be observ'd.

• 1. That the assistance of Possibility, and that of that of the possibility of the Will and of Acti∣on join'd together, are two different assistances.
• 2. That a man have the assistance of possibi∣lity, although he will not do good, and do it not.
• 3. That the assistance of Possibility, of the Will and of Action, is never found in a man, but it causes him to will and to do good.
• 4. That this last sort of assistance is so neces∣sary, that we never either will or do any good without it.
• 5. That this assistance is the true Grace of God, which is given us by Jesus Christ our Lord.
• 6. That it follows from this assistance that the Righteousnesse of good works, by which we are Righteous, is not a Righteousnesse which proceeds from the Law and from Free-will, but a Righteousnesse which comes from God.

These things being premis'd, I argue thus in favor of Effectual Grace. The Grace of God by Jesus Christ our Lord is absolutely necessary to all sort of pious Actions. But the Grace of God by Jesus Christ our Lord is nothing else but the assistance of Possibility, of Will and of Acti∣on, as S. Augustin teacheth when he explaineth the faith of the Church against Pelagius. There∣fore the assistance of Possibility, of Will and of Action, is absolutely necessary to every pious a∣ction. Now this Assistance is Grace Effectual by it self, since 'tis by this assistance that man willeth and alwayes doth good. And consequently, Grace Effectual by it self is necessary to all acti∣ons of piety.

Which Argument against the Molinists I thus manage. Whatsoever name be given to Grace, and although it be styl'd internal and supernatu∣ral, yet if it be such as is found in a man some∣times who neither willeth nor doth good, it may be said to be alwayes included within the bounds of the assistance of Possibility, or rather (to speak more clearly) 'tis onely an assistance of possibility, not the true Grace of Jesus Christ. Whosoever therefore saith, that this Grace is that which is necessary to all actions of piety, with∣out need of a Grace Effectual by it self, he doth, (as Pelagius) acknowledge only a grace of pos∣sibility, and deny the true grace of Jesus Christ, which is the assistance of Will and Action.

Now I demand of a Molinist, whether or no he believes that the grace of Will and Action is necessary to all acts of piety; if he doth not, he cannot, according to S. Augustin be accounted a Christian; if he doth, and yet hold that such a Grace is not Effectual by it self, he cannot deny but it follows from thence that a man may have it, and yet neither will nor do good. Which being suppos'd, I answer thus.

According to S. Augustin, The Grace of Pos∣sibility is that which is found in a man, although he neither willeth nor doth good. And the grace of Will and Action is that which is never in a man but when he wills and do's good. Now Molinistical grace is in a man, although he neither wills nor do's good. Therefore this grace is on∣ly a grace of possibility, and not a grace of will and action. Whence it appears clearer then the day, that although the Molinists acknowledge that there is a grace of will and action, yet they affirm it onely with the mouth, for avoiding the Odium and Indignation which the deny∣ing thereof would draw upon them; but in rea∣lity they deny and oppose it in the sense wherein S. Augustin maintain'd it against Pelagius.

But M. H. F. There follows one thing fur∣ther, which is more detestable, and no doubt will more move Your Holinesse. When S. Augustin disputing against Pelagius, ask'd him, whether a right will and a good action proceeds from man or from God? This Heretick answer'd him, that the same proceeds from both; from man be∣cause he wills and acts; and from God (although he durst not expresse it so clearly) because he gives (said he) that power to man, and assists him alwayes with the help of his Grace. Whence S. Augustin argu'd against him, that according to this opinion a bad action proceeds from God, since he gives man power to do it. See his words in Chap. 17.

Here F. Des-mares was going to read the said passage, but the light fail'd him, so that he was constrain'd to leave this Argument before he had finish'd it, and to do as is above related.

When F. Des-mares had done speaking, we all five advanc'd into the middle of the void square, the Assembly remaining as at the first. And ap∣proaching near the Pope, we kneel'd down and presented to him the five new Writings which we had prepar'd for that purpose, with a Memorial in which mention was briefly made of them, and by which we requested the Pope, that both these and the former might be presented to our Adversaries. The Abbot of Valcroissant askt him, when it pleas'd his Holinesse to have us appear again in order to proceed. The Pope answer'd, that he had not yet thought of it, but he would consider upon it. The Abbot reply'd, that it should be when his Holi∣ness pleas'd, but we conceiv'd it our duty to testify to him that we should be always ready to appear as often as it pleas'd his Holinesse to summon us. As I presented our Writings to the Pope, which contain'd between five and six quires of paper, he offer'd to take them with his own hand, and Car∣dinal Spada arose from his seat, and came to ease the Pope of that trouble; but at the same time I laid them upon a little seat on the Pope's right hand, and Cardinal Spada onely helpt me to place them better: yet by this advance he got a more commodious situation for hearing what we said to the Pope; for being very near him, we spoke sufficiently low. In giving him these Wri∣tings, I told his Holinesse, it would be needful to let them be seen by my Lords the Cardinals, the Divines then present and such other as his Holi∣nesse pleas'd; that several Copies of them were requisite, which it was impossible to supply by the help of Scribes, who committed a thousand faults, that to prevent all these inconveniences, we had presented a Memorial to the Master of the sacred Palace, to desire his permission for their printing only ad hunc effectum, that our Request seem'd to him equitable enough; but that it being an Af∣fair wherein his Holinesse himself was employ'd; the Master of the sacred Palace thought not fit to do any thing in it, unlesse his Holinesse were first consulted, and that it were done by his privity and order; that the Master of the sacred Palace was there present; that if it pleas'd his Holinesse to signifie his allowance thereof, and tell him that it might be done with the conditions propos'd by us which we conceiv'd just, we should be much bound to his Holinesse for the favor: The Pope answer'd us that he would think upon it, and let us know what he should judge expedient. We reply'd that we should attend his orders, and be ready to obey him in this and all other things. We kiss'd his feet, he gave us his benediction, and we withdrew.

The Copy of this last Memorial which we pre∣sented to the Pope with our five new Writings here follows, together with that which we presented to the Master of the sacred Palace.

To our H. Father Pope Innocent X.

A Catalogue of all the Writings which were hitherto presented here in the Affair of the five Propositi∣ons by the Doctors defenders of S. Augustin.

MOST HOLY FATHER,

TIs some moneths ago that we presented to Your Holinesse two Writings with their Abridge∣ment. The first of which is the first Infor∣mation in reference to fact against M. Hallier and his Collegues; and it concerns what pass'd touch∣ing the businesse of the Five Propositions, from Ju∣ly 1. 1649. to July 11. 1652. where we discover a great multitude of the foul dealings and ambushes of our Adversaries.

The second Writing is the first Information touch∣ing matter of Right against the same Adversaries; and it concerns the authority of S. Augustin, which we prove by the whole Tradition of the Church.

At this day M. H. F. we present five other Writings to Your Holinesse.

The first is the first part of the second Informa∣tion as to matter of fact against the Jesuites, and it contains above a hundred Propositions against the au∣thority of S. Augustin, drawn out of their books.

The second comprizes in few words the distinction of the several senses whereof the Five Propositions are capable, and the clear and true sentiment of our Adversaries, of the Calvinists and Lutherans, and also our own touching the same matter.

The third contains the second Information as to matter of Right, namely, that which concerns Grace Effectual by it self, which is the point whereunto this whole Controversie is reduc'd; and we shew that Ca∣tholicks can in no wise question this grace, principal∣ly upon this sole consideration, that 'tis impossible to deny it without establishing at the same time that which is contradictorily opposite to it, to wit, the Molinistical Grace subject to Free-will, and with∣out approving by consequence sixty either Errors or Heresies which necessarily follow from it.

The fourth contains the third Information, as to matter of Right, and concerns the first Proposition now in contest; which we shew is firmly establisht upon the holy Scripture, the Councils and Fathers, and particularly upon S. Augustin and S. Tho∣mas.

The fifth contains the fourth Information, as to matter of Right, and the explication of about sixty testimonies of S. Augustin, which we found to have been employ'd in a namelesse Writing by M. Hallier and his Collegues against the first Proposition. And in the refutation of the said Writing we convince them of having advanc'd nothing at all that makes a∣gainst us, but many things unfaithfully and without ground.

We heartily submit all these Writings, M. H. F. to the correction of the H. Roman Catholick and A∣postolick Church, and to the iudgement of Your Ho∣linesse; and we most humbly beseech Your Holinesse that they may be communicated to our Adversaries when you shall think fit; namely to the Society of Jesuites, and to MM. Hallier, Lagault and Joysel, as also to the most learned Divines, when Your Holi∣ness hath already heard us speak touching the five Pro∣positions, and to all others to whom Your Holiness shall think good to shew them; to the end that if the one or the other conceive that there is in our words or wri∣tings any thing either worthy of correction, or false, or obscure, or dubious, it may be shew'd to us in pre∣sence of your Holiness; and that it may be permit∣ted us either to explicate the same, or prove it by competent reasons, or else amend it according as Your Holiness shall think fit, that so Your Holiness may be fully assured of the truth or falshood of the thing and of its importance. We most heartily wish to Your Holiness all kind of prosperitie, and that God may prolong the course of your yeares, by giving you even some of ours.

Signed,

• Noel de la Lane Doctor of Paris, &c. and Abbot of Valcroissant.
• Toussaint Des-mares, Priest of the Con∣gregation of the Oratory.
• Louis de S. Amour, Doctor of Sorbon.
• Nicolas Manessier, Doctor of Sorbon.
• Louis Angran, Licentiate of the same sa∣cred Faculty of Paris, &c.

The Memorial presented by us to the Master of the sacred Palace for obtaining permission to print our Writings, speaks thus in the Transla∣tion.

THe most R. F. Master of the sacred Palace is most humbly petition'd by the French Doctors defenders of S. Augustin, to consider that the prohi∣bitions of printing any thing touching the matter de Auxiliis concern books and other works intended to be expos'd to sale, and publish'd indifferently to all the world, but they extend not to Writings which are to be presented in private to the Pope, Cardinals, and other Divines to whom his Holiness shall think fit to have them communicated for their instruction, in an Affair which is to be examined before his presence, which be∣ing consider'd, and regard had to the great number of faults inevitable in Manuscript Copies by the ill shaping of Letters, omission of words, and false pla∣cing of Distinctions, to the great trouble of the Rea∣ders, by perverting the sense and interrupting at∣tention; as also that it is impossible to have that great variety of Characters in Manuscripts, which may be had in printing, and serve so well for the Empha∣tical denoting of things, especially in a matter so em∣broyl'd, as that of the Five Propositions. Moreover considering the great number of persons who will be oblig'd to peruse the Informations made upon the said Propositions, the excessive paines and great time o∣therwise requir'd to get them copied out, revis'd and corrected, which alone, whatever diligence were us'd, would swallow up the whole time of the Petitioners,

and besides not satisfy them or any body else; and supposing it objected that there needs not so great a number of Copies, because the same Writings may be seen by many persons, by being transmitted from hand to hand, yet they cannot be so leasurely and ex∣actly examin'd that way, as if every one have a Copy of his own.

For these Reasons the said R. F. Master of the sacred Palace it most humbly petitition'd to grant Li∣cence to print the informations above-mention'd which are to be presented to the Pope touching the Five Pro∣positions, and this upon the condition following: First, That only a limited number of each sheet be wrought off; as two or three quire of paper. Secondly, That it be declar'd upon the first page that the Licence of printing is granted only for the conveniency of exa∣mination, and not any wise in approbation of what is contain'd in the said Informations. Thirdly, That the Doctors who make this request, give no Copy thereof to any person but what shall be subscrib'd with their own hands, as if it were a Manuscript. For so, &c.

Notes

• a 1.1

  In a Discourse which this Pope made in the first Congre∣gation de Auxiliis, held before him in the Vatican, March 20. 1602.
• b 1.2

  Epist. 95.
• c 1.3

  De gratia Christi cap. 10.
• d 1.4

  Q. q. contra Jul. cap. 40.
• e 1.5

  Contra collatere, & in Epist. ad Rssinum.
• * 1.6

  De Corr. & Grat. c. 1.
• a 1.7

  Epist. ad Demetriadem.
• b 1.8

  Cant. Collat. cap. 44.
• c 1.9

  In the Epistle to the Bishops of Carthage which is the 91. amongst those of S. Augustin.
• a 7.1

  Lib. de Grat. Christi.
• b 7.2

  In Ep. ad Gal.