The provincial letters of Blaise Pascal : $b A new translation, with historical introduction and notes, by the Rev. Thomas M'CriePascal, Blaise
Religion
The provincial letters of Blaise Pascal : $b A new translation, with historical introduction and notes, by the Rev. Thomas M'Crie
Pascal, Blaise
Jansenists -- France -- Early works to 1800; Jesuits -- Early works to 1800; Port-Royal des Champs (Abbey) -- Early works to 1800
It is full time, indeed, that I should, once for all, put a stop to the
liberty you have taken to treat me as a heretic—a piece of gratuitous
impertinence which seems to increase by indulgence, and which is
exhibited in your last book in a style of such intolerable assurance,
that were I not to answer the charge as it deserves, I might lay myself
open to the suspicion of being actually guilty. So long as the insult
was confined to your associates I despised it, as I did a thousand
others with which they interlarded their productions. To these my
fifteenth letter was a sufficient reply. But you now repeat the charge
with a different air: you make it the main point of your vindication. It
is, in fact, almost the only thing in the shape of argument that you
employ. You say that, “as a complete answer to my fifteen letters, it is
enough to say fifteen times that I am a heretic; and having been
pronounced such, I deserve no credit.” In short, you make no question of
my apostasy, but assume it as a settled point, on which you may build
with all confidence. You are serious then, father, it would seem, in
deeming me a heretic. I shall be equally serious in replying to the
charge.
You are well aware, sir, that heresy is a charge of so grave a
character, that it is an act of high presumption to advance, without
being prepared to substantiate it. I now demand your proofs. When was I
seen at Charenton? When did I fail in my presence at mass, or in my
Christian duty to my parish church? What act of union with heretics, or
of schism with the Church, can you lay to my charge? What council have I
contradicted? What papal constitution have I violated? You _must_
answer, father, else——You know what I mean.[319] And what _do_ you
answer? I beseech all to observe it: First of all, you assume “that the
author of the letters is a Port-Royalist;” then you tell us “that
Port-Royal is declared to be heretical;” and, therefore, you conclude,
“the author of the letters must be a heretic.” It is not on me, then,
father, that the weight of this indictment falls, but on Port-Royal; and
I am only involved in the crime because you suppose me to belong to that
establishment; so that it will be no difficult matter for me to
exculpate myself from the charge. I have no more to say than that I am
not a member of that community; and to refer you to my letters, in which
I have declared that “I am a private individual;” and again in so many
words, that “I am not of Port-Royal,” as I said in my sixteenth letter,
which preceded your publication.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account