conjugal authority, all combined, will be weaker than the fearful power which the Jesuit exercises over the victims of his enchantment. The Protestant father will have but little control over children whose mother is a Papist, and under their influence. His offspring will scorn him.' The partner of his destiny will distrust him; she will be taught to despise him; she will be tutored to deceive him. The Jesuit will know all his affairs; while living, he will thwart his purposes, and when dead, he will invade his property. The man is a mere tool in the hands of an unknown foe, and while unconscious of the fact, has the main current of his destiny decided by another. And this is indirectly accomplished through the agency of those who have been subjected to Jesuitical dominion.*

Now the hierarchy are well aware of the infinite value of such an organization in promoting their interests. They have even given to the Jesuits the unequivocal term of the jannissaries de l'eglise; and thereby confessed that they were the firmest, the safest guardians of its interests. They intermeddle with every object of human pursuit. From the king upon the throne, through every grade of society, down to the lowest menial, none are so great or so small as to escape their intrigues. They compass sea and land, move heaven and earth, and oftener hell, to attain their purposes, irrespective of the means which they employ, or the consequences which they produce. Hence they have disturbed the repose of a kingdom as successfully as of a family. Their moral code is one tissue of hypocrisy, falsehood and filth; granting all things, commending all things, however abhorrent to every just idea of what is right, provided the end (which sanctifies the means) is attained thereby. These assertions are confirmed by their recorded deeds, preserved in the fears, and oftener in the just execrations, of every community in which they have set their foot.

Now it is this society to which Jansenism was opposed; and it was against such proceedings that it made its earnest protest. Such an act must receive the approbation of every Christian mind. And yet, in the great struggle which ensued between these two orders, the undisguised approbation of the papal power, and of its clergy, was uniformly granted to the Jesuits. Why was such an association thus befriended and patronţsed by the church? The answer is plain. The head and front of the Jansenist's offending was, that he would fain curtail ecclesiastical usurpation and tyranny, and grant greater freedom to God's heritage, which was thus stripped and plundered. The great merit of the Jesuit was, that, though black with guilt, and

* In proof of all this, see Instructions Secrètes des Jésuites, ou Monita Secreta Societatis Jesu, Blois et Paris, 1845.

reeking in the blood of men's bodies and souls, he was a firm adherent to the power of the hierarchy; he was ready with any sacrifice, prepared for any expedient which the interests of the church demanded. Such allies were too valuable to be alienated; they must at all hazards be retained; and it matters nothing in whatsoever conflict they may become involved, however just and praiseworthy the cause of their opponents may be, they must be supported and commended. Hence we find that as in every other case, so was it in reference to Jansenism, the Apostolic See decided against it, and gave therein another proof of the relation which it holds to Jesuitism. And that relation it will doubtless always maintain; we may expect that in future these favored and restless champions of the pa pacy will be operative among us—not as solitary agents, but as the accredited emissaries of the hierarchy. The church never changes; and having thus, in ages past, so heartily admired and defended this order, we may justly infer, that Jesuitism among us will hereafter be sustained by all the power and resources of the pontifical throne.

VII. We think that the history of Jansenism furnishes a valuable suggestion, as to the duty of Protestants toward any reforming movement in the Romish church. It not only shows the importance of their sympathy, but the absolute necessity of it, in order to the attainment of success. In the case before us, the Protestant churches of Europe did not exert their influence, in behalf of Jansenism, as they should have done. They appeared to show no interest in its success, and, beside this, arrayed themselves in such a hostile attitude toward it, that the champions of Jansenism were compelled to parry their blows, on the one hand, with as much earnestness as those of their papal adversaries on the other.

It may be doubted by some, whether the interposition of Protestants is necessary to the success of reforms in the Romish Church. But we believe the point can be made out without difficulty. The history of that church teaches, that the tendencies to dormant indifference to truth, within her, are pow. erful; and that the incentives to improvement and change, are comparatively weak. If a struggle for better things should wy any strange accident start into operation, it is easy to see, that the chances for its success are much smaller than the probabilities of its eventual failure. In such a struggle, the endeavors of a few are arrayed against the potent energies of the strong. The only power capable of coping with the strength of Romanism, is that of the Protestant world. To make the contest, and the contending agents equal, the interposition of the latter is plainly necessary. And inasmuch as God uses means in the execution of his will, the more efficient the means, the more extensive will be the result. But aside from this, how discouraging is the impression produced necessarily on the spirits of a struggling few, to behold the only mass of men, whose assistance, so far as human things are concerned, could ensure success, standing at a distance, and surveying with indifference, and perhaps with contempt, a contest, in which they themselves are so deeply interested? Had the Protestant community exerted themselves in behalf of Jansenism; had they not assumed a discouraging attitude; the influence and success of that association would have been greatly extended. It might have triumphed. It might have been a second Reformation. Jansen might have worn the mantle of Luther, and St. Cyrau have possessed the spirit, as well as left the memory of a Calvin. The hierarchy might have beheld another rich portion of their domains moving off in a mass, withdrawing entirely from their communion, and delivering France, not only from the evils of a corrupt Christianity, but also from the terrors of a more horrible infidelity, and even of a more dreadful revolution.

The evils of Protestant indifference in such instances are illustrated in the case of Ronge. It is well known that this ferment has taken a strong tendency toward Rationalism. It has lost much of the sympathy of the Christian world. Though it has succeeded in one sense, it has failed in a more important one. It has worked itself free from Romanism, but has not assimilated itself with Protestantism, or with Christianity. In the proper sense of the term, it is a failure. It is also known, that the first approvals which Ronge received from those who were not Romanists, were from the Rationalists of Germany. The genuine Protestant communities withheld their supports, left him to struggle in the darkness alone, hid their own light; and when he emerged from the shades of night, it was only to plunge into the glimmering and cloudy gloom of an arctic day. But had he been encouraged by Protestants-by Christians—from the commencement of his struggles, good influences would immediately have surrounded him, he would have exchanged error for pure un; and now, instead of having increased, in great measure, th, influence of unbelief, thousands of his followers would have become effectually acquainted with the saving power of the Gospel, and the world have felt the beneficial results of his activity. The duty of those who are in possession of light, in such cases, is plainly not to hide it. The great error of Protestantism has ever been an indifference to the prevalence of darkness; while their opponents have ever and intensely detested the exista ence of light. Hence the greater zeal of the one, and the greater apathy and inefficiency of the other. One great purpose accomplished by the continued existence of the Romish church, is to THIRD SERIES, VOL. II. NO. 4.


teach, by her more ardent devotion to her own interests, the same important lesson to her opponents; that Protestants may have a constant example, as well as a constant reproof and incentive presented to their observation.

VIII. It is not difficult to draw from the history of Jansenism another comment, not only on the unity of Romanism, but also upon its Catholicity. That it never has had perfect unity, is the plainest and most universal fact in church history. That it does not possess Catholicity, is equally plain, even where this term is defined according to the standards of Romanism. Its most eminent writers, when defining the characteristics of the church, among other things, make this kind of amplitude absolutely necessary to its existence. Hence, where this characteristic is not found, the church cannot exist, beause it cannot be identified. Thus, Bellarmine, speaking of the signs of the church, gives this universality as its fourth feature, and says that Ecclesia enim Catholica, non solum debet amplecti omniu tempora, sed ctiam omnia loca, omnes nationes, omnia hominum genera. (De notis Eccles. Cap. sept.) Assuming this definition as correct, we cannot see how Romanism can be identified with Christianity, or the church. For this definition marks out a visible and external universality, extending to all places and races of men, as its necessary ingredient; and has the church of Rome, or any other church, ever possessed any such outward universality?' Have not communities and nations, in various periods of past history, stricken off from their communion, and formed separate associations? And do not these distinct bodies now constitute nearly one half of the sum total of Christendom? In the case of Jansenism, indeed, the outward unity or connexion was not wholly severed, but the principles were there, which, under more favorable circumstances, would have made a perfect separation.

The Protestant believes that one sign of the Church is its Catholicity, but in a wholly different sense from the Romanist. We believe in the invisible unity and Catholicity which is produced by the reception of the truth, and the influences of the Spirit. In this sense, according to our own definition, Protestants are Catholics. According to the sense of Romanists, and with their own definition, they, themselves, are not Catholics. If they had not defined unity and Catholicity to consist in outward consent and extension, they, too, might claim possession of all the truth; and God eventually would judge between the rival claimants. But now, when we look for this affirmed outward characteristic, it cannot be produced; for the Romish church, as well as Protestants, do not possess it. We lose nothing by this necessary concession; they lose everything; for they must deny

[ocr errors]

all fact and testimony, if they affirm, that outwardly, all nations and places are in connexion with their church.*

Now Jansenism contributed to destroy in the Romish church, that true in ward Catholicity, which is so necessary to the nature of Christianity; and with singular inconsistency these heretics are permitted to retain some outward adhesion to the body of the church. This spiritual severance, while it inflicts a sore wound on the institution which lays claim to so much harmony within itself, has rendered a lasting service to the cause of Protestant truth. We have another illustration, by contrast, of the corruption which marks the Romish system of doctrines; showing, on the one hand, the principles of the Gospel in a state of considerable purity, and on the other, the fierce antagonism of the antiquated corruptions which the depravity of man had fabricated. We have thus furnished, too, another illustration of the changeless character of these corruptions; how they are interwoven into the very texture of the system; how, for these to be changed, would be to change the whole institution; and how, to destroy these, would be obliterating the very institution of Romanisin itself.

We leave the subject with remarking, that the example of Jansenism deserves to be followed, and we hope ever will be followed, by some or other of the votaries of the Romish superstition. May that superstition never repose in peace. May the elements of discord and revolution constantly agitate and break forth, and if they mar the repose, may they disturb the delusions of those connected with it. There is much in human character that is base, and much that is heroic. For the most part, the history of Romanism presents aspects of the former. For the most part, those who have struggled for light, and, in so doing, have been driven out from her communion, exhibit the elements of the latter. Taking a grand survey of her history, we behold her living and acting in the baser elements of human character; enacting many scenes of guilt, often inflicting misery, and often suffering it. Turning away from the dark clouds which rest like a mighty pall over her past career, and viewing the noble endeavors which have been made from time to time, by great and good men, for deliverance from her thraldom, the scene becomes lit up with auroral radiance, the magic tints of day appear, a new creation dawns upon us, filled with verdant prospects, and smiled upon by summer skies; and we seem to gaze entranced upon fairy lands, Elysian fields, and Araby the blest!

The great problem which is to be worked out by the career of the Romish church, is yet far from being complete. The past is

* This point is ably handled by Chemnitz, in his Examen Con. Trident, II., p. 167, where he shows some of the differences which exist between Catholicism and Romanism, which, indeed, are rarely understood.

« VorigeDoorgaan »