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
SIR,—Nothing can come up to the Jesuits. I have seen Jacobins, doctors,
and all sorts of people in my day, but such an interview as I have just
had was wanting to complete my knowledge of mankind. Other men are
merely copies of them. As things are always found best at the
fountainhead, I paid a visit to one of the ablest among them, in company
with my trusty Jansenist—the same who accompanied me to the Dominicans.
Being particularly anxious to learn something of a dispute which they
have with the Jansenists about what they call _actual grace_, I said to
the worthy father that I would be much obliged to him if he would
instruct me on this point—that I did not even know what the term meant,
and would thank him to explain it. “With all my heart,” the Jesuit
replied; “for I dearly love inquisitive people. Actual grace, according
to our definition, ‘is an inspiration of God, whereby he makes us to
know his will, and excites within us a desire to perform it.’”
“And where,” said I, “lies your difference with the Jansenists on this
subject?”
“The difference lies here,” he replied; “we hold that God bestows actual
grace _on all men in every case of temptation_; for we maintain, that
unless a person have, whenever tempted, actual grace to keep him from
sinning, his sin, whatever it may be, can never be imputed to him. The
Jansenists, on the other hand, affirm that sins, though committed
without actual grace, are, nevertheless, imputed; but they are a pack of
fools.” I got a glimpse of his meaning; but, to obtain from him a fuller
explanation, I observed: “My dear father, it is that phrase _actual
grace_ that puzzles me; I am quite a stranger to it, and if you would
have the goodness to tell me the same thing over again, without
employing that term, you would infinitely oblige me.”
“Very good,” returned the father; “that is to say, you want me to
substitute the definition in place of the thing defined; that makes no
alteration on the sense; I have no objections. We maintain it, then, as
an undeniable principle, _that an action cannot be imputed as a sin,
unless God bestow on us, before committing it, the knowledge of the evil
that is in the action, and an inspiration inciting us to avoid it_. Do
you understand me now?”
Astonished at such a declaration, according to which, no sins of
surprise, nor any of those committed in entire forgetfulness of God,
could be imputed, I turned round to my friend the Jansenist, and easily
discovered from his looks that he was of a different way of thinking.
But as he did not utter a word, I said to the monk, “I would fain wish,
my dear father, to think that what you have now said is true, and that
you have good proofs for it.”
“Proofs, say you!” he instantly exclaimed: “I shall furnish you with
these very soon, and the very best sort too; let me alone for that.”
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