the earliest phase of the jansenist controversy … · part ii: the cases of augustinus of’s...

THE EARLIEST PHASE OF THE JANSENIST CONTROVERSY AMONG THE FLEMISH

CAPUCHINS

Part II:the cases of Augustinus o f ’s Hertogenbosch and

Fulgentius of Maaseik*

A b strac t

T he last and m ost thorough treatm ent o f the Jansen ist controversy am ong the C apuchins o f the F landro-B elgian P rovince was published in 1951/1957 by H ildebrand o f H ooglede (O .F.M .Cap.). T he present article, which consists o f two parts and is based on a large selection of unedited or p reviously neglected docum ents, assesses H ildebrand’s m ethodology and (som e o f his) conclusions.

T he first part (which was published in the previous issue of this jo u rnal) show ed that H ildebrand’s account o f the controversy depends to a high extent on the apologetic discourse that was used by one of the parties involved in the controversy and that is best illustrated by the Com pendiosa et historica enarratio m iserrim i status Prouinciae F landro-Belgicae fratrum Minorum Capucinorum by M ichael o f O udenbosch and A ngelus of A ntw erp (1700). In addition, it was show n that by using a purely form al definition of Jansenism, H ildebrand m anaged to deny the existence of any ‘rea l’ Jansenist am ong his predecessors o f the 17th and 18th centuries. A detailed analysis o f som e works by Eugenius o f Bruges (1680s) proved that the use of this purely fo rm al definition has lead to historically untenable conclusions.

The article’s second part now exam ines a claim by Silvester o f H asselt in his Ad enarrationem com pendiosam et historicam responsio fidelis et sin-cera (1700), according to which A ugustinus o f ’s H ertogenbosch and especially Fulgentius o f M aaseik w ere the first to propagate Jansenius’ teaching within the F landro-B elgian Province. It is shown against H ildebrand that the anti-Jansenist decree that was issued by Provincial Patricius o f Hazebroek in 1668, had indeed been provoked by Fulgentius o f M aaseik’s theological course at A ntw erp during the years 1665-1668. Just like his d isciple Eugenius was to do in the 1680s, Fulgentius cham pioned the doctrines presented in the Augustinus, the consequence being that Silvester o f Hasselt and other anti- Jansenists, w ho w ere convinced that Jansen ius’ book was rightly condem ned by Innocent X and A lexander VII, did have serious theological (and not only personal or political) m otives for accusing him of having been a Jansenist heretic.

226 G. PARTOENS

4. A u g u s t in u s o f ’s H e r to g e n b o s c h

A u g u s tin u s o f 's H e rto g e n b o sc h w a s b o rn W a lra m L o em el in 16 0 9 /1 6 1 0 an d to o k th e h a b it in 1629. H e w a s o rd a in e d p r ie s t in 1636 a n d d ie d in th e c o n v e n t o f M a a s tr ic h t in 1688 .iio A c c o rd in g to th e ab o v e q u o te d f ra g m e n t f ro m S ilv e s te r o f H a s s e lt’s A d en arra tion em co m p en d io sa m e t h is to r ic a m re sp o n s io , A u g u s tin u s w a s th e f irs t J a n s e n is t in th e F la n d ro -B e lg ia n P ro v in c e (see A u gu stin ian a 61 [2011] p p . 1 7 2 -1 7 3 ). T h is p ic tu re i s c o n f irm e d b y o th e r so u rc e s , th o u g h it sh o u ld b e m e n tio n e d th a t , j u s t l ik e th e te x t o f S ilv e s te r , th e y a ll e x p o u n d an a n ti-Ja n se n is t p o in t o f v iew .

A c c o rd in g to a d o c u m e n t w ritte n in 1657 b y th e a n ti-Ja n se n is t F ra n c isc u s V le m in c x an d e d ite d b y L . C e y sse n s a f te r th e p u b lic a tio n o f H ild e b ra n d ’s a c c o u n t o f th e c o n tro v e rsy , A u g u s tin u s o f ’s H e rto g e n b o sc h h a d s ig n e d in 1 6 5 4 a d o c u m e n t in fa u o re m d o c tr in a e J a n se n ii to g e th e r w ith 3 0 0 o th e r p e r s o n s .111 T h ro u g h th e B ru sse ls In te m u n c io G iro la m o D i V ec ch i, th e d e c la ra tio n o f V lem in c x rea ch ed th e C a rd in a l S e c re ta ry o f S ta te G iu lio R o sp ig lio s i, w h o su b se q u en tly o rd e re d D i V e c c h i to m a k e th e n e c essa ry in q u ir ie s a b o u t th e p e rso n s m e n tio n e d pe th e d o cu m en t. A cc o rd in g to C e y sse n s , th is in v e s tig a tio n e x p la in s w h y A u g u s tin u s w a s e x p e lle d sh o r tly a f te r f ro m th e S p an ish

* I thank Emest Persoons, Toon Van Houdt, Michel Van Meerbeeck and Anthony Dupont for their comments on a first draft of this article. In what follows, the 10 volumes of the De Kapucijnen in de Nederlanden en het prinsbisdom Luik by Hildebrand of Hooglede (Antwerpen 1945-1956) will be referred at as Hildebrand I, II, i l , etc.

110 See Hildebrand VII, pp. 98-99 (n° 578a).111 See Arch. Vat., Nunziatura di Fiandra 41, f. 443. Dutch translation: L. Ceyssens,

Jansenistische strubbelingen in Asse rond 1650-1660, in: Eigen schoon en de Brabander 45 (1962) pp. 418-430. Latin edition: L. Ceyssens, La fin de la première période du jansénisme. Sources des années 1654-1660. II. (1657-1660) (Bibliothèque de l ’institut historique belge de Rome 13, Bruxelles-Rome 1965) p. 168 (n° 772): Hac 3" Septembris 1657, comparuit Franciscus Wingaerde, incola Ascanus, qui declarauit quod circiter a tribus annis post publicatam constitutionem SanctissimiDomini Inno- centii X contra doctrinam Cornelii Jansenii Episcopi 1prensis quidam Pater Capuci- nus, nomine Augustinus, natus in Campinia in Maioratu Siluaeducensi, domi suae pernoctauerit et mane in ecclesia oÿ'icium legerit et diu manserit in sacristia cum pastore dicti loci, D. Theodoro Hubraken, et quod ipse deponens interrogauerit dictum Patrem Augustinum ubi tandiu fuisset? Qui respondebat se occupatum fuisse in sacristia cum praedicto pastore et quod ibidem signare debuisset quandam chartam, in qua habebantur plures signaturae diuersarum personarum ascendentium bene ad trecentas personas, quae omnes signauerant in fauorem doctrinae Jansenii, paratae earn doctrinam defendere, sicut et ipse Pater asserebat quod paratus erat se igni tradere pro ueritate dictae doctrinae, et illam chartam hic a dicto Capucino signatam sibi seruabat pastor praedictus, quem ipse deponens scit semper stetisse pro defensione Jansenii.

THE EARLIEST PHASE OF THE JANSENIST CONTROVERSY 227

L o w C o u n tr ie s . 1 1 2 E a r lie r, H ild e b ra n d h a d re la te d th is e x p u ls io n w ith th e fa c t th a t A u g u s tin u s h a d sp rea d P a s c a l’s P ro v in c ia l le t te r s a m o n g h is f r ie n d s . 113 In th is , H ild e b ra n d w as fo llo w in g S ilv e s te r o f H asse lt, w h o se a c c o u n t te lls u s n o n e th e le ss m u c h m o re c o n c e rn in g A u g u s tin u s ’ su p p o se d J a n se n is t sy m p a th ie s th a n H ild e b ra n d d o es :

[ .. .] eius [= Fulgentius o f Nieuwpoort] nostrique aduersarij, quorum antesignanus fu it P. Augustinus Buscoducensis, qui sub annum 1656. infames istas litteras Prouinciales, erroribus Jansenianis scatentes, et postmodum a S. Sede damnatas, tanta partialitate distribuit tantumque strepitum causauit, ut ideo dicatur ex mandato Reuerendissimi tunc Domini Internuntij dimissus extra ditiones Regis Catholici; quamuis postea intercessione P. Constantini B ruxellensis'14 sub emendationis prom isso, licentia eiusdem Illustrissimi Domini Internuntij reuersus, nec tamen emendatus; utpote coram PP. M arcello M enenensim et Antonino Antuerpiensi116 non ueritus dicere (ut postea Mechliniae in pleno Definitorio repetijt et confessus est) quod haberet omnem suam notitiam et scientiam ac doctrinam de libertate et gratia ex Augustino Jansenii, libro toties haereseos conuicto et damnato; imo interrogatus de bullis Innocentij X. et Alexandri VII contra Jansenium editis, non ueritus illas, etsi absolu tas,facere condicionales: interrogatus enim a P. Antonino M echliniensis conuentus uicario ob rationes quomodo illas acceptet, respondit intrepide: ‘Si uere habeantur illae propositiones in Jansenio et si uere in sensu ab ipso intento sint damnatae, illas [sc. bullas] accepto '; adeo suam fidem faciens conditionalem [ .. .] . (f. 1r)

A n to n in u s o f A n tw e rp , w h o is m e n tio n e d tw ic e in th is q u o ta tio n , te lls u s an a lm o s t id e n tic a l s to ry a t th e e n d o f a lo n g le tte r w h ich h e w ro te in 1683 o n so m e J a n s e n is t p ro p o s itio n s th a t h a d b e e n sp read b y le c to r e s w h o u se d th e w o rk s o f L a u re n tiu s N e e se n fo r th e p re p a ra tio n o f th e ir th e o lo g ic a l co u rse s (D o g h m a ta ex p lu r im is a liq u a quae m an an t p e r P ro u in c ia m n o stra m ex lib r is R . D . L a u ren tij N eesen , qu i non sin e o p p o s it io n e 117 ja m a b an n is o c to 118 n o b is p r a e le c tifu e r u n t e t

112 See L. Ceyssens, Jansenistische strubbelingen [n. 111] p. 430. See also L. Ceyssens, De Capucijnen van en te Asse, in: Ascania 9 (1966) pp. 36-41 (esp. p. 38).

113 See Hildebrand VI, p. 352.114 See Hi1debrand V, p. 6 6 ; VII, p. 194 (n° 1284).115 See Hildebrand VII, p. 461 (n° 3278).116 See Hildebrand VII, p. 76 (n° 423).117 For the anti-Jansenist opposition against the works of Neesen, see Hildebrand

VI, pp . 368, 372 and 387.1 Neesen’s first handbook (Theologia mora/is Christiana de actibus humanis)

appeared at Mechelen in 1675. See É. Amann, Neesen Laurent [n. 47] c. 61.

G. PARTOENS

adh u c h o d ie p ra e leg u n tu r , non o b s ta n te etiam n u m eoru m g ra u issim a in h ib ition e):

Prim us et causa totius m ali V. P. Augustinus pred ica tor et jubilarius Busceducensis. Iste ita feru et et excedit pro suo Jansenio, cui uacauit annis am p/ius .40., ut non uereatur dicere - ego audiuii{9 — quod omnem suam scientiam de gratia quam habet, debeat Jansenio. Et quod ex ipso d idicerit quomodo debeat orare, antea dicit: 'Non debe-bam orare pro gra tia sufficiente, quia illam sem per ad manum crede-bam .’ H ie bonus Pater ab annis .25. de mandato Illustrissim i Internuntij Bruxellis resedentis pulsus est extra terras R egis nostri Catholici. Ego uidi abeuntem. Alia ratio inueniri non po tera t quam quod excesserat in lectione et distributione quarum dam infamium epistolarum aduersus PP. Jesuitas, quas deinde damnauit Alexander 7. ut scatentes erroribus Jansenianis. Annis aliquot p o s t praefatus P. Augustinus intercessione R. P . G uardiani120 et hac lege ut se emen-daret, perm issus est redire. Sed emendatus in peius: nam deinde sem p er conatus fu it lectores (expertus loquor)l2[ trahere in suum spiritum et sensum. Et sic ante annos .20. V. P. Fulgentium Masecanum lec-torem tunc Antuerpiae, cuius qualitates d ignosci merentur. (ff. 5v-6r)

T h e fac ts re la te d b y S ilv e s te r a n d A n to n in u s a re a lso a tte s te d to in F N (see A u gu stin ian a 61 [2011] pp . 166 -168). In th is list, A u g u s tin u s ’ c o n fe ss io n th a t h e a d h e re d to th e te a c h in g o f Ja n sen iu s , is lin k e d w ith a q u o ta tio n fro m a h o m ily w h ich h e h e ld in th e n e ig h b o u rh o o d o f M e c h e le n o n th e fe a s t o f S a in t A n d re w in 1684. U n lik e S a in t A n d re w , A u g u s tin u s is to ld to h a v e sa id , h e h im s e lf w o u ld n o t b e ab le to k ee p u p th e F a ith u n d e r to rtu re , s in c e h e h a d n o t y e t re c e iv e d th e n e c essa ry g ra tia efficax. A c c o rd in g to F u lg e n tiu s o f N ieu w p o o rt, th is d e c la ra tio n im p lied th a t A u g u s tin u s su b sc rib e d to th e f irs t o f th e f iv e p ro p o s itio n s c o n d e m n e d b y In n o c e n t X an d A le x a n d e r V I I . T h is w as o n ly n a tu ra l, th e a c c u s e r a d d e d , s in c e A u g u s tin u s o n c e a ff irm e d th a t n o t o n ly h is k n o w le d g e a b o u t g ra c e a n d fre e w ill, b u t a lso h is re lig io u s z e a l h a d b e e n in sp ire d b y J a n s e n iu s ’ A u g u s tin u s .122 M o re o v e r, th e C a p u c h in

119 Compare the fragment from FN that is quoted in n. 123.120 Viz. Constantinus of Brussels, who was Guardian of the convent in Brussels

in 1658-1661 (see Hildebrand V, p. 6 6 ). The intervention of Constantinus is also mentioned in the previous fragment.

121 Antoninus was Sacrae Theologiae lector at Mechelen in 1667-1671: Hildebrand Vlll, p. 534 (n° 43).

122 According to Fulgentius of Nieuwpoort, Augustinus’ position with regard to divine grace was also manifest in the following thesis regarding the difference between the Holy Virgin and a sinner (FN, cap. I [In materia de gratia et libero arbitrio], n° 27): P. August. Buscod. ‘Sola gratia distinguit inter Diuam Virginem et hominem pessimum.' Hanc sustinuit P. August. Buscoduc. contra P. Norbertum


f r ia r w as sa id to h a v e p la in ly u tte re d a ro u n d 1680 : E g o sum Jan sen is- t a l 23

F u lg e n tiu s ’ lis t o f a c c u sa tio n s a lso c o n ta in s in fo rm a tio n re g a rd in g A u g u s tin u s ’ a ttitu d e to w a rd s th e c o n d e m n a tio n o f th e f iv e p ro p o sitions. A c c o rd in g to th e lis t, A u g u s tin u s d e c la re d in 1681 in M e ch e len in th e p re se n ce o f h is G u a rd ia n th a t h e c o n d e m n e d th e p ro p o s itio n s in sen su P o n tif ic is , b u t n o t in sen su J a n sen ii.m T h e d if fe re n c e b e tw e e n a c o n d e m n a b le a n d an o r th o d o x m e a n in g o f th e f iv e p ro p o s it io n s is a lso m a d e in th e fo llo w in g f ra g m e n t o n a c e r ta in N o rb e rtu s o f H asse lt, w h o is sa id to h a v e ad h e red to th e p o s it io n o f A u g u s tin u s an d the d o c to re s L o u an ien ses: 125

‘P. N orbert. Hasselens. Antuerpiae. ‘P. Augustinus Buscoducens. et doctores Louanienses intelligunt bene a liter propositiones Jansenij. Et ego quoad 2 am propositionem etiam illam non sic teneo. [m o Cardi- nalis D e Bona dixit: Vtinam essent plures tales isti Jansenij in E cclesia .' H aec a quadriennio dixit P. Francisco Buscoducensi, dum inter se loquerentur d e doctrina damnata Jansenij, prou t hie postea depo- su it coram Diffinitione, sed R. P. M ichael etiam pro tunc Prouincialis omnia fere excusauitP 6

Lyran. tanquam assertam a D. Guilielmo Huygens, addens sese aliquando praedicasse: ‘quod si maximus peccator accepisset tantam gratiam quantam accepit B. Maria Deipara, [quod] esset aeque sanctus atque ilia.' Satis conformiter ad sua principia de gratia (for Guilielmus Huygens, see R. Aubert, 2. Huygens (Guillaume), in: Dictionnaire d'histoire et de géographie ecc/ésiastiques 25 [Paris 1995] cc. 487-488). According to FN, Augustinus also warned against exaggerated devotion towards the Holy Virgin. See FN, cap. VI (De ueneratione sanctorum ac sacrarum imaginum).

123 See FN, cap. I (In materia de gratia et libero arbitrio), n° 30: P. August. Buscod. Extant apud me quatuor diuersorum litterae de hoc dicto. Praedicauit infesto S" Andreae 1684 in quodam pago Wallem prope Mechliniam haec uerba: ‘S. Andreas debuit habuisse magnam gratiam ad spernenda ista tormenta. Si autem ego constitutus essem inter Turcas et subeundum esset martyrium, negarem fidem meam, quia mihi deest gratia efficax.' An hoc differata / “. propositione Jansenij? Neque mirum. Dixit enim aliquando PP. Marcello Menenensi et Antonino Antuerpiensi ‘quod omnem suam scientiam de gratia et libertate, imo et deuotionem haeserit ex Augustino Jansenij', prout ipsi sancte testantur. Quod amp/ius est, iam a quinque annis dixit diserte D, Du Thot consiliario regio Mechlin.: ‘Ego sum Jansenista', prout iste mihi et P. Leonardo socio meo narrauit. [... ]

124 See FN, cap. V (In materia decretorum ac bullarum necnon Baij ac Jansenij), n° 2: P. Augustinus Buscoduc. Maechlin. 1682, Cum ille P. Felicissimo Antuerpiensi ibidem tunc Guardiano diceret ‘sibi suisque sufficere quod suae sententiae non essent condemnatae ', replicuit P. Felic issim. 5' propositiones Jansenii satis aperte esse con- demnatas in sensu authoris, ad quod respondit P. Augustin. ‘se illas condemnare in sensu Pontificis'; numquam uere uoluit dicere se illas condemnare in sensu Jansenij.

125 See Hildebrand VII, p. 506 (n° 3640).126 See FN, cap. V, n° 9.

23 0 G. PARTOENS

T h e la st se n te n c e o f th is f ra g m e n t a lso in c rim in a te s M ic h ae l o f O u d e n b o sc h , w h o w as P ro v in c ia l o f th e F la n d ro -B e lg ia n P ro v in c e d u r in g th e y e a rs 1 6 7 8 -1 6 8 1 , 1 6 8 4 -1 6 8 7 a n d 1 6 9 0 -1 6 9 5 ,127 an d w h o w as a c c u se d o f fo s te r in g Ja n se n is t sy m p a th ie s a t o th e r p la ce s in F N .]28 T h e sam e in s in u a tin g a s s o c ia t io n o f A u g u s tin u s a n d M ic h a e l o f O u d en b o sc h is m a d e in tw o o th e r f ra g m e n ts o f FN . In a f irs t fra g m en t, F u lg en tiu s ac c u se s A u g u stin u s o f h a v in g re c e iv e d a n d sp rea d Ja n se n is t p u b lic a tio n s d u r in g h is s tay in th e c o n v e n t o f L ie r in 1674, w h e n M ic h a e l w a s th a t v e ry c o n v e n t’s G u a rd ia n . ^ 9 A u g u s tin u s h a d u sed th e se p u b lic a tio n s fo r th e p re p a ra tio n o f so m e h o m ilie s h e p ro n o u n c e d in th e n e ig h b o u rin g n u n n e ry o f N a z a re th :

P. Augustin. Buscoduc. Lyrae ab 11 annis. llle Pater habitans Lyrae sub m oderno R. P. P rouinciali ibidem G uardiano saepius recepit Bruxellis fascicu los libellorum noui sensus, ut uocant, p ro quibus turn p e r syndicam , turn p e r a liam deuotam dictam ‘D om icella Thas' ju beba t solui pecunias, d icen s illo s esse p ro sorore sua, cum essent ut plurimum linguae Latinae. Illos porro libellos distribuebat pastoribus suae doctrinae sectarijs. Quin imo eosdem perlegebat uel ex eisdem praed icaba t e cathedra ad m onachas in N azareth p rope Lyram, prou t quidam laicus mihi scripsit, qui haec eadem uidit et audiuit.no

A cc o rd in g to a se co n d frag m en t, A u g u stin u s h a d c la im e d sh o rtly b e fo re th e co m p ila tio n o f F N th a t in itia lly h e h ad on ly fe w d isc ip le s a m o n g th e F lem ish C a p u c h in s , b u t th a t th e ir n u m b e r h a d b e e n in c re a s in g e v e r since an d b y th e m id 1680s e v e n in c lu d ed th e en tire D efin ito - rium to th e e x c e p tio n o f o n e m e m b e r , 131 th e la tte r p ro b ab ly being F u lg en tiu s o f N ie u w p o o rt, w h o b e lo n g ed to th e P ro v in c ia l D efln ito riu m fro m 1674 u n til 1 6 8 7 .m

127 See n. 45.128 See n. 45.129 See Hildebrand V, p. 105.130 See FN, cap. V, n° 8 ; Hildebrand VI, p. 367 n. 2. FN contains still other

accusations at the address of Augustinus, which I have not taken into account here: cap. II (De charitate et relatione operum in Deum), nos 13 and 14; cap. Ill (De attritione et contritione atque confessione), nM 14, 15, 20 and 50; cap. IV (De Summo Pontifice), n° 15.

131 See FN, cap. I (ln materia de gratia et libero arbitrio), n° 30 [see also n. 123] : [ ... ] Addebat etiam ‘quod ab initio pauci fuerint suae doctrinae sectarij in nostra Prouincia, sed quod modo multi sunt, etiam toto Diffinitio, excepto uno.'

132 See n. 42.

THE EARLIEST PHASE OF THE JANSENIST CONTROVERSY

5 . F u lg e n t iu s o f M a a s e ik

F u lg e n tiu s o f M a a se ik ( s e c u la r n a m e : P e tru s V os) w as b o rn in 1627 , to o k th e h a b it in 1647 a n d d ie d in M a a se ik in 17 0 5 .133 H e w as

p h ilo s o p h ia e le c to r in A n tw e rp d u r in g th e y e a r s 1 6 6 3 -1 6 6 5 a n d S a c ra e T h e o lo g ia e le c to r in th e s a m e c ity d u r in g th e y e a rs 1665- 16 6 8 .‘34 A c c o rd in g to S ilv e s te r o f H a s s e l t ’s A d en a rra tio n e m com - p e n d io s a m e t h is to r ic a m r e s p o n s io , F u lg e n tiu s h ad b e e n s tro n g ly in f lu e n c e d b y th e th o u g h t o f A u g u s tin u s o f ’s H e r to g e n b o sc h , b u t it w a s m a in ly th ro u g h F u lg e n t iu s ’ th e o lo g ic a l te a c h in g tha t J a n se n is t v ie w s f ir s t s p re a d th ro u g h o u t th e F la n d ro -B e lg ia n P ro v in c e . T h is , in tu rn , h a d p ro v o k e d th e f ir s t a n t i- J a n s e n is t a c tio n s o f h is p e e r a n d n a m e s a k e o f N ie u w p o o r t .^ M o re o v e r , a t th e e n d o f h is th e o lo g ic a l c o u rse in 1668 , se v e ra l f r ia rs h a d o p p o s e d h is te a c h in g in th e c o n v e n t o f B ru s s e ls , th e r e s u lt b e in g th a t th e p r o v in c ia l D e fin ito r iu m is s u e d a d e c re e th a t p ro h ib i te d th e te a c h in g o f s e v e ra l J a n s e n is t p ro p o s it io n s :

Tandem ille P. Augustinus inter alios ad suum sensum abdu.xit P. Ful- gentium Mos^canum, qui sub annum 1665 in conuentu nostro Antuerp iensi S. T. lec to r publice in scholis nostris pr^legit e t disseminauit dogm ata eiusm odi noua et uisa non sana, quibus est turbata Prouin- cia, cuius m ali principio obuiare conatusfuit P. Fulgentius N eoportanus, affectans manutenere Prouinciam in sua pristina constitutionum Apostolicarum sincera obseruantia. [ . . .] Cum enim fin ito cursu theologico P. Fulgentij M os^cani in conuentu nostro Bruxellensi anno 1668. contra doctrinam ab ipso traditam nonnulli sese opposuissent, Definitorium nostrum uidens ex doctrina eiusm odi Prouinciam tur- bari, debu it expresso decreta m onere lectorem et studiosos, ut non docerent aut tenerent certos dam natos Jansenism os expressos in decreta quod incipit P ropter justas causas. (f. 1 v)

In sp ite o f a ll th is , F u lg e n tiu s o f M a a s e ik w as re a p p o in te d p h ilo so p h ia e le c to r in 166 8 , a fu n c tio n h e e x e rc is e d in th e c o n v e n t

133 See Hildebrand VII, p. 304 (n° 2114).134 See Hildebrand VIII, p. 534 (n° 40).'35 The early lifes of both Fulgentii ran almost parallel. Fulgentius of Maaseik

(°1927) took the habit in 1647 and was lector in the years 1663-1670 (1663-1665 [philosophy, Antwerp]; 1665-1668 [theology, Antwerp]; 1668-1670 [philosophy, Ghent]). Fulgentius of Nieuwpoort (°1628) took the habit in 1651 and was lector in the years 1663-1669 (1663-1666 [philosophy, Mechelen]; 1666-1668 [theology, Ghent]; 1668-1669 [theology, Brussels]). See Hildebrand VII, pp. 304 (n° 2114) and 305 (n° 2118); VIII, p. 534 (n°‘ 40-41 and 45).

2 3 2 G. PARTOENS

o f G h e n t u n til 1 6 7 0 .136 A t th e e n d o f th is p h ilo s o p h ic a l c o u rse , h o w e v e r , h e w as n o t a p p o in te d S a c r a e T h e o lo g ia e le c to r . In s te a d , h e b e c a m e G u a rd ia n o f th e c o n v e n t a t H asse lt, w h e re , a c c o rd in g to a f ra g m e n t in F N , h e cam e in to co n flic t w ith th e c o n v e n t’s c o n fe sso rs b ec au se o f h is r ig o ris t v ie w s o n th e sa c ra m e n t o f p e n a n c e . A s a c o n s e q u e n c e , F u lg e n tiu s w a s d e p o s e d a t th e In te rm e d ia te C h a p te r o f 1671.138

O th e r a n t i- J a n s e n is t so u rc e s , such as th e a lre ad y m e n tio n e d D o g h m a ta ex p lu r im is a liq u a q u a e m a n a n t p e r P ro u in c ia m n ostram ex lib r is R. D. L a u ren tij N ee sen b y A n to n in u s o f A n tw e rp (18 A p ril 1683), o ffe r a c o m p a ra b le sk e tc h o f F u lg e n tiu s an d h is ro le in th e d if fu s io n o f J a n se n is t v ie w s th ro u g h o u t th e F la n d ro -B e lg ia n P ro v in c e . T o th is sk e tch , A n to n in u s a lso ad d s a sh o rt lis t o f F u lg e n tiu s o f M a a s e ik ’s m o s t ze lo u s d isc ip le s : F ra n c isc u s o f W e e rt, E u g e n iu s o f B ru g es , R e g i- n a ld u s o f O u d e n a a rd e a n d H u b e rtu s o f S in t-T ru id e n . n 9

136 See Hildebrand VIII, p. 534 (n° 45).137 See FN, cap. 3 (De attritione et contritione atque confessione), n° 28: Exem-

plo sit P. Fulgentius Masecan, qui priuatus suo lectoratu secunda ab annis 14. ob suos excessus in materia doctrinae et honoris gratia factus Guardianus Hasseleti [...].

138 See the continuation of the fragment quoted in the previous note: [...] ibidem dixit coram fratribus ‘quod ex mille confessionibus uix una ualeret et ex centum confessarijs uix unus saluaretur.’ Vnde factum fuit quod confessarij nollent amplius excipere confessiones in illo conuentu et R d Pat. compulsi fuerint ipsum Capitula intermedio subsequente deponere a Guardianatu. Sed modo habetur a nostris tamquam apostolus. Compare also Hildebrand V, p. 398; VI, 366; Acta Capitularia (Archiuum Capucinorum Belgii Ill, 1006, p. 651).

139 See Doghmata ex plurimis etc. (in the file Archiuum Generate O.F.M.Cap.G.22.13.2. Prou. Flandro-Belgica. De Jansenismo: propositiones edoctae, prouisiones superiorum. 1668-1717), f. 6 ': Nam deinde <Xugustinus Buscoducensis> semper conatus fuit lectores (expertus loquor) trahere in suum spiritum et sensum. Et sic ante annos .20. traxit V. P. Fulgentium Masecanum lectorem tunc Antuerpiae, cuius qualitates dignosci merentur. I V. P. iste Fulgentius est qui ante annos .16. publice in nostris scholis prqlegit et uehementer inculcauit has doctrinas tarn nouas, suspectas et male olentes. Adeo in istis excessit ut eius studio theologico jam absoluto et examine facto, RR. Patres debuerint monere et alios lectores per decretum, quod et ego accepi, ne teneant uel doceant uarios Jansenismos et baianismos ibi specificatos et per Pontifices saepius damnatos. I Discipuli uero huius lectoris magis feruentes et zelosi pro doctrina sui magistri sunt V. P. Franciscus Weertensis nunc Guardianus Masecae, P. Eugenius Brugiensis concionator (hie solebat pingere imagines Jansenij et dare extraneis; propter excessus in suis concionibus fuerunt saepius depositae quaerelae, etiam a PP. J. Societatis, contra quos, ut sibi et doctrinis suis maxime aduersarios, semper inuehitur, tantis passionibus ut ausus fuerit, occulto quidem nomine, illos describere ut Pelagianos in nupera sua quadragesima habita Louanij). Est et P. Reginaldus Aldenardensis (qui ita ardet pro istis doctrinis ut corresponden- tiam teneat per litteras cum famoso illo Arnaldo Galla Jansenistarum principe et coriphço; saepius fuit etiam per patres correctus, sed nihilo melior); item P. Hubertus Trudonensis. Compare also Archiuum Capucinorum Belgii I, 1374, pp. 1-2 and


In a re p o r t o n th e s itu a tio n in th e F la n d ro -B e lg ia n P ro v in c e , w h ich h e su b m itte d a t th e G e n e ra l C h a p te r o f 16 9 8 (S ta tu s P rou in c iq F la n d ro -B e lg ic q , s ig n a n te r q u o a d C a p u c in o s e tc . c o ra m R. A. P . G en e ra li a c D efin ito r ib u s G en era lib u s re p rq sen ta tu s p e r f Ju u en alem A n an ien sem E x d efin ito rem G en era lem in C a p itu lo G en e ra li a ° 169 8 ), th e T y ro le a n Ju v e n a lis o f N o n sb e rg , w h o g o v e rn e d th e P ro v in c e as C o m m issa r iu s G e n e ra lis d u r in g th e y e a rs 1 6 9 5 -1 6 9 7 ,140 m e n tio n e d th a t F u lg en tiu s w a s still a m o n g th e liv ing in 1698 , a lb e it in a m e n ta lly d e p lo ra b le sta te . H e h a d b e e n re m o v e d fro m th e c o n v e n t in M a as tr ic h t in 1696, since it w as fe a re d th a t h e w o u ld ta k e re fu g e in H o lla n d o r ev en c o m m it su ic id e b y d ro w n in g h im s e lf in a p it. A ll th is h a d h a p p en e d , a c c o rd in g to Ju v e n a lis , in p u n ish m e n t f o r th e ce n tra l ro le w h ich F u lg e n tiu s h a d p la y e d to g e th e r w ith h is sp iritu a l m e n to r A u g u s tin u s o f ’s H e r to g e n b o sc h in th e sp re a d in g o f J a n se n is t te a c h in g s a m o n g the F lem ish C a p u c h m s .m

5 .1 . The a n ti-J a n se n is t d e c re e o f 1 6 6 8

T h e a n t i- Ja n se n is t d e c re e re fe rre d to b y S ilv e s te r o f H a sse lt w as issued in th e c o n v e n t o f B ru sse ls b y th e P ro v in c ia l P a tr ic iu s o f H aze- b ro e k an d h is e n tire D efin ito r iu m a t th e In te rm e d ia te C h a p te r o f Ju ly 1668. It h a s b e e n p re se rv e d in se v e ra l d o c u m e n ts , th e m o s t im p o rta n t b e in g th e A c ta C a p itu la r ia o f th e F la n d ro -B e lg ia n P ro v in ce (A rchiuum C a p u cin o ru m B e lg ii I l l , 1006 , pp. 6 3 6 -6 3 7 ). N ex t to th e se A c ta , th e re a re c o p ie s in th e A rch iu u m C a p u c in o ru m B e lg ii an d th e A rch iu u m G en era te O .F .M .C a p . in R o m e . 142 T h e fo llo w in g e d i t io n o f th e d e c re e

Hildebrand VI, p. 354, who only mention Franciscus of Weert, Eugenius of Bruges and Reginaldus of Oudenaarde as Fulgentius’ major disciples.

140 See Hildebrand VI, pp. 439-441.141 See Hildebrand VI, pp. 440-441; Status Prouincit( Flandro-Belgict( etc. (in:

(3.22.13.2 Prou. Flandro-Belgica. De Jansenismo: propositiones edoctaelprouisio- nes Superiorum. 1668-1717), f. 1': [...] inueni prouinciam istam [ ... ] nunc a 36 annis circiter occasione quorumdam placitorum doctrinalium Vniuersitatis Louani- ensis per quemdam P. Augustinum Sylut(ducensem, deinde per alium Fulgentium Most(canum (qui ultimus ut lector ea docere inter Capucinos Ct(pit) mirum in modum conuulsam, diuulsam ac in partes miserabiliter conscissam fuisse. Et signanter notandum est quod ille P. Fulgentius Most(canus, qui talia primo docuit, in hunc diem superstes, at fere ad delirium redactus, ne ad Hollandos fugeret, ut quidam suspicabantur, aut ex capitis perplexitate se in puteum prt(cipitaret, ut alij pie caue- haiit, a loco Trajectensi ante biennium mutari debuerit, quod in pt(nam delicti euenisse credo.

142 See the documents referred at in nn. 156 and 160 as well as the second text discussed in §5.3. Next to these, see also the following document in Archiuum Generule O.FM.Cap. G.22.13.2. Prou. Flandro-Belgica. De Jansenismo: propositiones edoctae.

2 3 4 G. PARTOENS

is based on the Acta Capitularia, in which the decree is presented as the last decision taken at the Intermediate Chapter o f July 1668 (pp. 633-637).

Postea propter iustas causas iudicarunt Reuerendi Patres expedire ut admonerentur Venerandi Patres lectores et studiosi nostri ne quis doceat uel teneat haec sequentia:

1. Quod ad peccandum uel bene agendum non requiratur libertas a necessitate, sed sufficiat a coactione in statu naturae lapsae, quia damnata est talis propositio ab Innocentio X . tamquam h(!reticaM3 Hinc nemo doceat uel teneat quod homo necessario peccet uel necessario bonum agat, aut non possit dissentire gratiae Dei si uelit, aut non possit euitare peccatum si uelit, quia est expresse contra T rid e n tin u m ^ Et recordentur quod similiter sequentes propositiones damnatae sint a Summis Pontificibus: Q uod uoluntarie fit , etiamsi necessitate fia t , libere tamen f i t [45 et Sola uiolentia repugnat hominis libertati na turali146.

- Interiori gratiae in statu naturae lapsae num quam resistitur: ut heretica ab Innocentio X °147- Similiter haec ut falsa et h(!retica: Sem ipelagiani in hoc erant hr;retici quod uellent eam gratiam (scilicet necessariam ad sin-gulos actus, etiam ad initium fidei) talem esse cui uoluntas hum ana p o sset resistere uel ob tem perare{4%•Vnde patet esse secundum sanam doctrinam hominem posse gratiae Dei resistere uel obtemperare.M9

prouisiones superiorum. 1668-1717: Prouisiones factae a Superioribus Prouinciae Capucinorum Flandro-Belgicae circa sequentes propositiones. anno. 1668.

143 Cf. 3td of the 5 propositions condemned in Cum occasione (Innocent X; 1653); H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2003. For the condemnation as hftretica, see Cum occasione, censura, prop. 3 (H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2006).

'44 Cf. Sess. 6 de iustificatione, can. 4 (H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 1554).

145 39 th of the 79 propositions condemned in Ex omnibus afflictionibus (Pius V; 1567); H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 1939.

146 66th proposition condemned in Ex omnibus afflictionibus; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 1966.

147 2"d proposition condemned in Cum occasione; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2002. For the condemnation as heretica, see Cum occasione, censura, prop. 2 (H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2006).

148 4‘h proposition condemned in Cum occasione; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2004. For the condemnation as falsa et hftretica, see Cum occasione, censura, prop. 4 (H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2006).

149 The first prohibition regards the third proposition condemned in Cum occasione as well as the principles on which the latter proposition was based, viz. the doctrine of the delectatio uictrix and the identification of what is free with what is done voluntarily (see the synthesis in J. Carreyre, Jansénisme [n. 2] cc. 490-491). In the wake of the third proposition of Cum occasione, five other propositions involving

prouisiones superiorum. 1668-1717: Prouisiones factae a Superioribus Prouinciae Capucinorum Flandro-Belgicae circa sequentes propositiones. anno. 1668.

143 Cf. 3td of the 5 propositions condemned in Cum occasione (Innocent X; 1653); H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2003. For the condemnation as hftretica, see Cum occasione, censura, prop. 3 (H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2006).

'44 Cf. Sess. 6 de iustificatione, can. 4 (H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 1554).

145 39 th of the 79 propositions condemned in Ex omnibus afflictionibus (Pius V; 1567); H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 1939.

146 66th proposition condemned in Ex omnibus afflictionibus; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 1966.

147 2nd proposition condemned in Cum occasione; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2002. For the condemnation as heretica, see Cum occasione, censura, prop. 2 (H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2006).

148 4th proposition condemned in Cum occasione; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2004. For the condemnation as falsa et haeretica, see Cum occasione, censura, prop. 4 (H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2006).

149 The first prohibition regards the third proposition condemned in Cum occasione as well as the principies on which the latter proposition was based, viz. the doctrine of the delectatio uictrix and the identification of what is free with what is done voluntarily (see the synthesis in J. Carreyre, Jansenisme [n. 2] cc. 490-491). In the wake of the third proposition of Cum occasione, five other propositions involving


2.° Nemo teneat hanc propositionem: Omnia opera infidelium sunt peccata, similiter nec istam: et philosophorum uirtutes sunt uitia, quia utraque est damnata; unde nec contorqueat ad alienos sensus150-

3 .0 Non teneat aut doceat quis saltem in publico quod Pontificis judicium fallibile sit extra concilium uniuersale.

4 .0 Nemo teneat seu doceat crude siue sine debita explicatione: ‘Christus non est mortuus uel non fudit sanguinem pro omnibus hominibus’, propter propositionem hanc damnatam ut falsam, temerariam et scandalosam, imo et balsphemam et hereticam: Semipelagianum est dicere Christum pro omnibus omnino hominibus mortuum esse aut sanguinem f u d i s s e t

5. Nemo doceat uel teneat quod Deus positiue uelit (et non solum negatiue) multos paruulos non fieri saluos e t directe uelit exclusos et quod Deus ordinet causas secundas non libere agentes in interitum puerorum antequam sint baptisati, ad quorum interitum sequitur damnatio, et quidem quod Deus illud sic ordinet in illum finem ut impediat quo minus ad salutem necessaria perueniant.152

6.° Tandem nullus dicat aliqua Dei praecepta esse hominibus iustis uolentibus et conantibus secundum prt;.sentes quas habent uires, impossibilia. Et deest quoque ipsis gratia qua possibilia fia n t153, quia damnata fuit ab Innocentio decimo. Sic enim ait: temerariam, impiam, blasphemam, anathemate damnatam et hereticam declaramus et ut talem damnamus}54

Ita factum de consilio et assensu Reuerendorum Patrum Diffinitorum Joan- nis ^Landensis, Constantini Bruxellensis, Felicissimi Duacensis et Francisci Belliolensis. Subsignatum f. Patritius Minister Prouincialis indignus.155

the same principles are prohibited as well (homo necessaria peccet etc. and the propositions identified in the four preceding notes). All six propositions are condemned as being contradictory to the fourth canon of the sixth session of the Council of Trent. The first prohibition comprises these six propositions in a l preserved copies of the decree, except in Archiuum Capucinorum Belgii I, 1374, p. 1, where the first prohibition has been split up into five separate prohibitions (the 4th proposition of Cum occasione has been eliminated from the version of the decree preserved in Archiuum Capucinorum Belgii I, 1374, p. 1), which together with the remaining five form a series of ten instead of six prohibitions. See also Hildebrand VI, p. 353 n. 1.

150 2 5 th proposition condemned in Ex omnibus afflictionibus; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 1925.

151 5th proposition condemned in Cum occasione; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2005. For the condemnation asfalsam, temerariam et scandalosam, imo et balsphemam et ht;reticam, see Cum occasione, censura, prop. 5 (H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2006).

152 Compare Jansenius, Augustinus, tom. 3, lib. 3, cap. 20. For more details, see n. 211 of this article.

153 1 “ proposition condemned in Cum occasione; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2001.

'54 Cum occasione, censura, prop. I (H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2006).155 Patricius of Haze:broek led the Flandro-Belgian Province together with Joannes

of Landen, Constantinus of Brussels, Felicissimus of Douai and Franciscus of Bailleul in the years 1666-1669. See Hildebrand VI, p. 561 (n° 45). All six prohibitions of

2 3 6 G. PARTOENS

T he v e rsio n o f the decree in the A c ta C a p itu la r ia on ly focuses on th e co n d em n ed p ropo sitio n s an d d o es no t m en tio n th e n am e o f F u lgen tiu s o f M aaseik . T h is is no t th e case , how ever, in o th e r cop ies o f the d e c re e , w h ich exp lic itly link it w ith F u lg e n tiu s ’ teach ing . T he la tter d o cu m en ts m o stly da te fro m the 1680s/1690s and aim ed at p ro v in g th a t Ja n se n is t te a c h in g had b een c irc u la tin g am o n g the F lem ish C apuch ins since m ore th an a decad e and th a t severe m easu res h ad to be tak en in o rd e r to p rev en t th e ir fu rth e r sp read : (a ) A cco rd in g to A r c h iu u m C a p u c in o r u m B e lg i i I, 1374, w h ich dates from 1693156 and o ffe rs an overv iew o f severa l an ti-Jan sen is t m e a su res ta k e n in th e F lan d ro -B e lg ian P rov ince , th e p ro v in c ia l D efin ito rs had d isco v ered d u rin g the final exam s o f F u lg e n tiu s ’ s tu d iu m , w h ich to o k p lace in th e co n v en t o f B russels a t th e o ccas io n o f the In te rm ed ia te C h ap te r o f 1 6 6 8 ,157 tha t som e o f the le c to r 's s tuden ts adhered to su sp ec ted p ro p o s itio n s . ^ 8 T h e sam e d o cu m en t te lls us th a t the dec ree w as send to all le c to r e s o f the F lan d ro -B e lg ian P ro v in ce in o rd e r to av o id fu r th e r tro u b les , but rem ained p a rtia lly in effec tiv e , since sev era l o f F u lg e n tiu s ’ d isc ip les (R eg in a ld u s o f O u d en aard e , E ugenius o f B ruges and F ran c iscu s o f W eert) co n tin u ed to sp read th e ir te a c h e r’s be liefs f ro m the p u lp it . ^ 9 (b ) In a d o cu m en t fro m the

1668 were almost literally integrated in the more comprehensive anti-Jansenist decree that was issued on 22 January 1674 by Minister General Stephanus of Cesena during his visitation of the Flandro-Belgian Province (see nos 3/4 [prohibition I], 9 [prohibition 2], 10 [prohibition 3], 8 [prohibition 4], 6 [prohibition 5] and 2 [prohibition 6]). For the decree of Stephanus, see Hildebrand VI, pp. 357-359. After 1674, Rome repeatedly insisted on the strict observance of Stephanus' decree: Hildebrand VI, pp. 382 (1682), 386-387 (1683), 392 + 394-396 (1685) and 398 + 412 (1686-1687). For Flemish resistance against the decree, see Hildebrand VI, pp. 382 (1682), 392-396 (1685) and 404-405 (1678).

156 See Archiuum Capucinorum Belgii I, 1374, p. 2: [ ...] Franciscus Weertensis Guardianus Traiecti hoc anno 1693 publice communicans cum Jansenistis [ ...]. Franciscus of Weert was Guardian of the convent at Maastricht in 1692-1695 (see Hildebrand V, p. 382).

157 Since candidates were in principle examined by the entire Definitorium, the exams often coincided with an official meeting of the provincial Definitors. See Hildebrand VIII, p. 524.

15* Compare the title of the decree in Archiuum Capucinorum Belgii I, 1374, p. I: Decretum RR. Patrum Patritij Haesbruckani et Diffinitorum conditum Bruxellis 1668 in Capitula intermedio ex certa notitia quam ibi acceperant per examen studij P. Fulgentij Masecani Theologiç lectoris quorumdam doctorum Louaniensium discipuli fidelis, contra excessus in materia doctrine.

159 The text of the decree is followed by the following words in Archiuum Capucinorum Belgii I, 1374, pp. 1-2:11/ud decretum sicfactum missumfuit ad omnes Prouincie lectores et jussum obseruari, sed prçcipue studiosis istis, et ista conditione facti sunt concionatores, quorum principalioresfuerunt P' Reginaldus Aldenardensis, qui, prout ex actis scriptis et concionibus constat, publice cum scandala totius


early 1680s, w hich I w ill edit below in section 5 .3 . and w hich p re sents the d ecree to g e th e r w ith an an o th e r im p o rtan t tex t from 1668, it is sa id tha t F u lg en tiu s w as in te rro g a ted by the p ro v in c ia l D e fin i- to r iu m im m ed ia te ly b e fo re th e f in a l ex am s o f 1668 and th a t th e D e fin ito r iu m had b een ob lig ed to issue th e decree , since F u lg en tiu s m an ife s tly ad h ered to B a ian is t, Ja n se n is t and ev en C a lv in is t d o c trines. H ow ever, in the o p in io n o f th e an onym ous co m p ile r o f th e d o cu m en t (F u lgen tius o f N ieu w p o o rt? ) , th e D e fin ito r iu m had b een too co m p lian t, the re su lt b e in g th a t the decree w as no t in p ro p o rtio n to the g rav ity o f the p rob lem posed by F u lg e n tiu s ’ teach in g s: tu n c e x o b lig a t io n e o ff ic i j e t c o n s c ie n tia c o m p u ls i fu e r e c o n d e re d e c r e tu m [ . . . ], q u a m q u a m in e o r e m is s iu s e g e r in t , cu m a d u e r s u s h u iu s m o d i p r o s c r ip to s e r r o r e s o m n i e f f ic a c ia p r o c e d e r e o p o r te a t n ec d is s im u la re . T h ese w ords p o ss ib ly re fe r to the fact tha t the decree had not ex p lic itly m en tio n ed F u lg e n tiu s ’ nam e , th a t no m easu res seem to have b een tak en against the le c to r p e rso n a lly and th a t som e o f the p ro h ib itio n s h ad b e e n fo rm u la ted in a w ay th a t seem ed to ask fo r fu rth e r p ro b lem s: 3 .° N o n te n e a t a u t d o c e a t q u is s a lte m in p u b lic o q u o d [ . . . ], 4 .° N e m o te n e a t seu d o c e a t c r u d e s iu e s in e d e b ita e x p l ic a t io n e [ . . . ]. (c) T h e tw o p rese rv ed co p ies o f S ilv es te r o f H a sse lt 's A d e n a r r a tio n e m c o m p e n d io s a m e t h is to r ic a m re s p o n s io ( 1700) are both p ro v id ed w ith a long lis t o f p r o b a tio n e s , in w h ich the decree is q u o ted in second p lace (L itt. B ) . A gain , the q u o ta tio n o f the decree serves to illu stra te the im pact o f F u lg e n tiu s ’ teach ing on the m inds o f h is fe llow b ro th ers . 160 In firs t p lace (L itt. A ) are q u o ted the per-

prouinciq Jansenistarum partem defendit ideoque per R. P. Arsenium de Fontibus Commissarium Generalem Bruxellis poena carceris fu it mulctatus, et P' Eugenius Brugensis, qui per suos 5 libellos famosos a se compositos et editos declaratus est Romq apertus Jansenista. At illi nunc duo obierunt. Etiam M. V. P. Franciscus Weer- tensis Guardianus Traiecti hoc anno 1693 publice communicans cum Jansenistis et antimonachus, quod omnibus constat, et passim habetur pro uno ex primariis nostris nouatoribus. I Nota hic prima quam infecta ab illo anno 1668 fuerit prouincia, ut RR. PP., uidentes bullas Vrbani 8, Innocentij X et Aleandri 7 iam non sufficere, coacti fuerint damnatas in Luthero, Caluino, Baio et Jansenio hqreses et errores iterum et de nouo suis subditis strictissime prohibere. I Nota 2° quod multi ex illis prifatis studiosis, sic admoniti et correcti, adut concionatores dispersi per prouinciam non se emendarint, sed sua prqconcepta dogmata adeo feruenter disseminarint - non sine Superiorum contemptu et publico scandala - ut R"““ P' Stephanus a Cesena Generalis six annis post - nqmpe a° 1674 uisitata tota prouincia et celebrato Capitula - debuerit prouidereper rigorissimum decretum tenoris ut sequitur: [ ...] . Compare the document entitled Doghmata ex plurimis aliqua quae manant per prouinciam nostram ex libris R. D. Laurentij Neesen etc., f. 6' (quoted in n. 139).

See the following documents in Archiuum Generale O .F.M.Cap. G .22.13.2. p rou. Flandro-Belgica. De Jansenismo: 11“'" et recursus ad S. Sedem.

238 G. PARTOENS

so n a l te s tim o n ie s o f F e lic is s im u s o f A n tw e rp a n d S ilv e s te r h im s e lf , w h ich s ta te th a t F u lg e n tiu s p e rso n a lly u p h e ld (m o st o f ) th e p ro p o s itio n s m e n tio n e d in th e d ec ree . 161

A c c o rd in g to H ild e b ra n d , w h o a im e d a t m in im iz in g th e in f lu e n c e o f Ja n se n is t th o u g h t o n th e F le m ish C a p u c h in s , it is n o w h e re sa id th a t F u lg en tiu s o f M a a se ik a c tu a lly ta u g h t all p ro p o s itio n s p ro h ib ite d b y th e d e c re e o f 1668. In h is v ie w , th e d ec ree h a d o n ly b e e n issu ed a t th e o c c a s io n o f th e f in a l ex a m s o f F u lg e n tiu s ’ s tu d iu m }62 T h is c la im , h o w e v e r, s e e m s to o v e rlo o k tw o im p o rta n t tex ts th a t, to g e th e r w ith F N (5 .2 .) , o ffe r u s a sk e tc h o f th e le c to r 's te a c h in g th a t c o rre sp o n d s in m a n y a sp ec ts w ith th e p ro p o s itio n s p ro h ib ite d b y th e d e c re e : a lis t o f 18 su sp e c te d p ro p o s itio n e s a s c r ib e d to F u lg e n tiu s , e a c h fo llo w e d by a n a p o lo g e tic re sp o n sio b y th e le c to r h im se lf (5 .3 .), an d a sy m p a th iz in g sy n th esis b y E u g e n iu s o f B ru g e s o f h is m a s te r ’s te a c h in g c o n c e rn in g d iv in e g ra c e (5 .4 .).

5 .2 . The te s tim o n y o f F u lgen tiu s o f N ieu w p o o r t (F N )

A p a r t f ro m the a lre a d y m e n tio n e d s ta te m e n t a b o u t the le c to r s r ig o r is m w ith re g a rd t o th e s a c ra m e n t o f p e n a n c e , 163 a ll f ra g m e n ts r e g a rd in g F u lg e n tiu s in F N c o n c e rn th e f iv e p ro p o s it io n s a n d th e q u e s tio n o f p a p a l ( in )fa llib ility . T h e y s te m fro m tw o so u rc e s : F u lg e n t iu s ’ d ic ta ta th e o lo g ic a a n d a so -c a lle d A p o lo g ia p r o d o c tr in a , w h ich

1701-1702: Ad enarrationem compendiosam et historicam responsio fide/is et sincera etc. (version 1, f. P ; version 2, f. P ) and Probationes contentorum in responsione ad compendiosam et historicam enarrationem (version 1, f. 1 rv; version 2 , f. lrv). ------------------

161 See Probationes contentorum in responsione ad compendiosam et historicam enarrationem (version 1, f. 1 ' [basis of following text]; version 2, f. 1 '): Ego infrascriptus attestor quod P. Paulus Teneramundanus praedicator Capucinus et quondam discipulus P. Fulgentij Mosçcani S. T. lectoris (cuius doctrinae i/le P. Paulus sese mu/turn et diu opposuerat) mihi dixerit in mense Decembri anno 1683. quod iste P. Fulgentius omnes propositiones a RR. PP. Bruxellis 22. Julij anno 1668. prohibitas docuerit et tenuerit, excepta forte illa de paruulis, et quod maxime uenenum propina- uerit explicando. Ita est. Erat signatum: f Felicissimus Antuerpiensis Capucinus indignus. if Ego infrascriptus attestor quod P. Reginaldus Aldenardensis Prouinciae nostrae Flandro-Belgicae ff. Minorum Capucinorum concionator defunctus, quondam discipulus P. Fulgentij Mosaecani mihi Antuerpiae studenti circa annum 1681. dixerit quod praefatus P. Fulgentius docuerit plures propositiones a Superioribus nostris suppressis. Datum in conuentu Bruxellensi 17. Augusti 1700. Erat signatum: f Siluester Hasselensis Minister Prouincialis Commissarius Generalis indignus.

162 See Hildebrand VI, p. 353: ‘Deze beslissing werd genomen ter gelegenheid van Fulgentius’ onderwijs; doch nergens wordt gezegd, dat hij al deze veroordeelde leringen voorstond.’

163 Seen. 138.


m u s t h a v e c o u n te d se v e ra l p a g e s , l 64 b u t h a s n o t b e e n p re se rv e d to o u r k n o w le d g e .

A c c o rd in g to a f i r s t f ra g m e n t, F u lg e n tiu s o f M a a se ik su s ta in e d in h is d ic ta ta th a t J a n s e n iu s ’ A u gu stin u s h a d n o th in g in co m m o n w ith th e 5 p ro p o s itio n s a sc r ib e d to h im b y A le x a n d e r V II o r, m o re p re c ise ly , th a t th e b ish o p o f Y p re s d id n o t u n d e rs ta n d th e p ro p o s itio n s in sensu dam n ato . M o re o v e r, th e le c to r is sa id to have a d d u c e d 5 p a s sa g e s f ro m th e A u gu stin u s w h ic h c o n tra d ic te d th e f iv e p ro p o s it io n s in th e co n d e m n e d se n se , a s tra teg y th a t h a d a lre a d y b e e n tr ie d b y A n to in e A rn a u ld in h is Q u in qu e p r o p o s itio n e s a b In n o cen tio X d a m n a ta e e t p ro p o s itio n e s J a n sen ii Y p ren sis E p isc o p i d a m n a tis c o n tra r ia e (1 6 5 4 ), w h ich h e p u b lish e d in re p ly to th e C a u ill i Jan sen ian oru m o f F ra n ç o is A n n a t (1 6 5 4 ): l65

P. Fulgent. Masecan. in dictât. suis theologicis. O stendit ibi ‘quod Jansenius Iprensis in sua doctrina nihil habeat commune cum 5 ‘ propositionibus ip si p e r Alexand. 7um adscrip tis et dam natis, nec eas intellexerit in sensu damnato. ’ A d hoc probandum adducit 5 ‘. loca ex Jansenio quae uidentur contrarium dicere. P. Antonin. Antuerp. et P. Francisc. Buscoduc. dederunt in scriptis sese ilia in dictatis ejus legisse. Sed numquid iste non est dicendus Jansenista? *66

A cc o rd in g to tw o o th e r fra g m e n ts , th e A p o lo g ia p r o d o c tr in a s ta ted th a t th e f iv e p ro p o s itio n s h ad b ee n e rro n eo u s ly a sc rib ed to Jan se - n iu s 1 6 7 an d th a t th o se a ttr ib u te d to B a iu s in E x o m n ibu s a fflic tion ibu s

'64 See the title of FN, cap. IV (De Summo Pontifice), n° 2: In Apolog. p. doctrina p . Fulgent. Masec. pag. /2 . parag. notandum. The fragment is quoted in its entirety at the end of this paragraph.

165 See Œuvres de Messire Antoine Arnauld 19 (Paris 1778) p. 228-229; L. Cognet, Le jansénisme [n. 2] p. 64 (on Am auld’s writings of 1654 against Annat): ‘En ce qui concerne la présence des propositions dans Y Augustinus, il établissait péremptoirement le fait déjà connu des spécialistes: seule la première s'y trouvait textuellement, à quelques mots près; les autres ne pouvaient, en toute hypothèse, être présentées que comme des résumés de la pensée de Jansénius. Amauld s’efforce de montrer ensuite que la première proposition se trouve dans un contexte qui la rend entièrement orthodoxe [compare the position of Eugenius of Bruges described in the first part of this article], et que les passages allégués par le P. Annat pour attribuer à Jansénius les quatre autres correspondent entièrement à la doctrine de saint Augustin; en corollaire, il lui est facile de tirer du texte complexe de 1 Augustinus cinq phrases, reproduites celles-là ad uerbum, nettement contraires aux pr° p°sitions condamnées. D’où il concluait que, si le pape avait justement c° ndamné les Cinq propositions au sens hérétique, ce sens n ’était nullement celui de Jansénius [ ...].'

° 3 See FN, cap. V (In materia decretorum ac bullarum necnon Baij ac JanseniJ),

1 7 See f n , cap. V, n° 6 : Apolog. pro doctrina P. Fulgentij masecan. § notandum bene. Quinque propositiones famosae ordinarie imputatae Rdiss.ma Corn. Jansenio

2 4 0 G. PARTOENS

(1 5 6 7 ) w e re o n ly h e re tic a l in sensu C a lu in i a c L u theri. F u lg e n tiu s o f N ie u w p o o rt co n c lu d e d f ro m th is tha t h is n am esak e o f M a a se ik d id n o t a c c e p t th e e n d o f th e la t te r b u ll, in w h ic h it w as e x p lic itly sa id th a t th e p ro p o s itio n s in q u e s tio n w e re c o n d e m n e d in sen su a b a u th o re seu a u th o rib u s in ten to:

Ibidem [in the A pologia pro doctrina], ‘Recte prohibentur p ropositiones Baianae aut saltern B aio imputatae, sed in sensu Caluini ac Lutheri sumptae, qui liberum arbitrium qu asi totaliter destruunt.' Sed damnatae sunt in sensu ab authore seu authoribus intento, uti habet bulla P ij 5.' in term inis}6%

T h e la s t se n te n c e o f th is f ra g m en t, w h ic h w as a d d e d b y F u lg e n tiu s o f N ie u w p o o rt as a c o m m e n t o n th e q u o ta tio n f ro m th e A p o lo g ia p r o d o c tr in a , r e f e r s to th e fa m o u s e n d in g o f E x om nibus a fflic tion ibu s, w h ic h F u lg e n tiu s o f N ie u w p o o r t c le a rly p u n c tu a te d a s m o s t an ti- Ja n sen is ts u se d to d o , viz. w ith a c o m m a a f te r p o s s e n t a n d n o t a f te r in te n to : Q u a s q u id em se n te n tia s s tr ic to co ra m n o b is exam in e p o n - d era ta s , qu am quam nonnullae a liq u o p a c to su stin eri p o sse n t, in r ig o re e t p r o p r io u erboru m sensu a b a sse r to r ib u s in ten to h a ere tic a s , erro - n ea s [ . . . ] da m n a m u s.m

W h e re a s th e ab o v e f ra g m e n t o n A le x a n d e r V II ’s m is ta k e co n ce rn in g th e p re se n c e o f th e f iv e p ro p o s itio n s in th e w o rk o f J a n se n iu s im p lie s th a t th e P o p e is fa llib le in q u e s tio n s o f fa c t, tw o o th e r f ra g m e n ts , o n e co n ta in in g a q u o ta tio n f ro m th e d ic ta ta , th e o th e r a se n te n c e f ro m th e A p o lo g ia p r o d o c tr in a , g o a s te p fu rth e r. A c c o rd in g to th e fo rm e r , th e d ic ta ta e x p lic i tly a f f irm e d th e P o p e ’s fa l l ib i l i ty in q u e s tio n s o f F a ith an d m o ra ls :

Idem ibidem [= in dicta tis theologicis] consequitur. A sseritur ibidem ‘Pontificis fa llib ilita s in m ateria fid e i et morum, etiam quando loquitur ex cathedra. ' E x quo ibi infertur: ‘D ato quod Pontifex ut talis dam net a liquam conclusionem tam quam haereticam uel d ica t aliquem doctorem sensisse haeretice, non sequitur certo conclusionem illam esse haereticam uel au thorem istum h aeretice sensisse. ’ 170

Iprensium Episcopo falsissime ipsi imputantur, ut ostendit et ad oculum demonstrat quidam liber Gallicus, cujus breuissimum compendium curiosis ueritatis amicisfacile procurari et accommodari potest, si habere desiderent. ’ Ecce uti procurant, legunt, laudant atque distribuunt libros prohibitos, conscriptos in defensionem Jansenij.

168 See FN, cap. V, n° 7.169 For this punctuation, that was preferred by anti-Jansenist authors, see

H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 1980 n. 1 as well as n. 237 of this article.170 See f N, cap. V, no 4.


A cc o rd in g to th e seco n d fra g m e n t, th e A p o lo g ia p r o d o c tr in a c la im e d tha t C h ris t had p ro m ise d th e in fa llib le a s s is ta n c e o f the H o ly S p ir i t to th e C h u rc h , b u t n o t to in d iv id u a l P o p es , as is s h o w n b y the fa c t th a t severa l o f th e m h a d b e e n h e re tic s :

In Apolog. p . doctrina P. Fulgent. M asec. pag. 12. parag. notandum. ‘Dominus Jesus Christus infallibilem Spiritus s." assistentiam prom isit Ecclesiae, contra quam portae inferi non praeualebunt, non autem Pontificibus singulis, cum aliquos ex illis constet fu isse haereticos.’ A llegat autem authoritatem doctorum aliquot Louaniensium ac Pari- siensium necnon G ersonis .m Sed si bene legisset iste apologista con- trouersias Syluij112, a liter deberet sentire et loqui.m

W e m a y th u s c o n c lu d e th a t , a c c o rd in g to F N , th e d ic ta ta as w ell as th e A p o lo g ia p r o d o c tr in a d id n o t r e s tr ic t th e ir d e n ia l o f p a p a l in fa l lib ili ty to q u e s tio n s o f h is to r ic a l fac ts a lo n e . 174 T h is w o u ld im p ly th a t F u lg e n tiu s su b sc r ib e d to th e p o s it io n th a t w as p ro h ib ite d b y th e th ird p ro h ib it io n o f th e d e c r e e o f 1668 . W ith re g a rd to p ro h ib itio n s1, 4 a n d 6 , w h ich all c o n c e rn e d p ro p o s itio n s c o n d e m n e d b y E x o m n ibu s a fflic tion ibu s (1 5 6 7 ) a n d C um o c c a s io n e (1 6 5 3 ), F N su g g e s ts th a t F u lg e n tiu s a c c e p te d th e c o n d e m n a tio n o f th e se p ro p o s itio n s , w ith o u t h o w e v e r a d m itt in g th a t th e y h a d b e e n c o n d e m n e d in th e se n se o f B a iu s o r J a n se n iu s .

For Gerson and the conciliarist tradition, see F. Oakley, The conciliarist tradition. Constitutionalism in the Catholic Church 1300-1870 (Oxford 2 003) pp. 6° -11°.

172 Reference to the Libri VI de praecipuisfidei nostrae orthodoxae controuersiis cum nostris haereticis ( 1638) of the Douai theologian Franciscus Sylvius (1581-1649) Md, more precisely, to lib. IV, quaest. II, art. 8 , where Sylvius advocates the Popes’s mfallibility in matters of Faith siue cum generali concilio, siue sine illo: [ ...] fide certa est Romani Pontificis judicium in rebus fidei determinandis esse infallibile, ita ut quando ex cathedra definit, siue quando ut Pontifex proponit Ecclesiae quidpiam f!de credendum, nullo casu possit errore, siue cum generali concilio definiat, siue sine il/o (quoted according to Operum F. Syluii [ ...] tomus quintus [Anuerpiae 1714] P- 313). It should be noted that the works of Sylvius had been recommended to the lectores at the Provincial Chapter of May 1677. Compare Hildebrand VI, p. 368; Archtuum Capucinorum Belgii I, 1399; III, 1006, p. 6 8 8 : Quoniam autem plerique pettuerunt nominari aliquos theologos quos legere et in praxi tuto sequi poterunt, aestimant Reuerendissimi Patres Diffinitionis tales esse sanctos Patres, Summam diui Thomae, Resolutiones et Commentaria Syhm in Summam diui Thomae, Siluestrum, Wiggers, Nauarrum, Bonacinam. Binsfeldium cum annotationibus Svluii. quamuis nec damnemus nec censuremus alios.

173 See FN, cap. IV (De summo pontifice), n° 2.174 Against Hildebrand VI, p. 353 n. 3, who claims - precisely with regard to the

two fragments quoted above: FN, cap. IV, n° 2 and cap. V, n° 4 - that Fulgentius of Maaseik only rejected papal infallibility in factis historic/s: ‘Er zal wel sprake zijn van de onfeilbaarheid “in factis historicis”.'

2 4 2 G. PARTOENS

5 .3 . The lis t o f 18 p ro p o s itio n e s a n d re sp o n sio n e s

T w o d o c u m e n ts p re s e rv e d in th e f i le A rch iu u m G e n e ra te O .F .M .C a p . G .2 2 .1 3 .2 . P ro u . F la n d ro -B e lg ic a . D e J a n se n ism o : p ro p o s itio n e s ed o c ta e , p ro u is io n e s S u perio ru m . 1 6 6 8 -1 7 1 7 c o n ta in a lis t o f 18 su sp e c te d p ro p o s itio n e s th a t a re a sc rib ed to F u lg e n tiu s o f M a a se ik an d o f w h ic h e a c h is fo llo w e d b y a n a p o lo g e tic re sp o n s io by th e le c to r h im se lf . A c c o rd in g to the tit le o f o n e o f b o th d o c u m en ts , F u lg e n tiu s h a d b e e n p re se n te d w ith th e 18 p ro p o s i tio n e s ju s t b e fo re th e f in a l e x a m o f h is stu d iu m a t th e c o n v e n t o f B ru sse ls in 1668: P ro p o s it io n e s seu d o c tr in a e qu as V. P . F u lg en tiu s M asecan u s S a cra e T heologi(( le c to r a 1 6 an n is tra d id it su is d isc ip u lis , e iu sdem re sp o n s io n es a d s in g u la s dum illa e ip s i ex h ib eren tu r a RR . P P . P ro u in c ia li e t D iffin ito r ib u s im m ed ia te a n te exam en su i s tu d ij B ruX ellis. In b o th d o c u m e n ts , th e list is p a r t o f a la rg e r w h o le th a t w as c o m p ile d w ith a n ti-Ja n se n is t in te n tio n s d u r in g th e 1680s. T h is , h o w e v e r, d o e s n o t a lte r th e f a c t th a t th e list i ts e lf - an d esp ec ia lly th e se rie s o f re sp o n s io n es - a llo w s us to h a v e a c lo se lo o k a t so m e o f F u lg e n tiu s ’ th o u g h ts .

A f irs t d o c u m e n t (Q) w as c o m p ile d in R o m e a f te r 2 S e p te m b e r 1683 , w h e n th e S p ecim in a m o ra lis C h ris tia n a e e t m o ra lis d ia b o lic a e o f th e B o g a rd le c to r G ille s G a b r ie lis 175 w e re c o n d e m n e d f o r th e se c o n d tim e ( [ . . . ] cu iu s lib e r d ic tu s S p e c im in a m o ra lis C h r is t ia n a e e t d ia b o lic a e [ . . . ] b is h ie R o m a e e s t d a m n a tu s [ . . . ] ).176 T h e d o c u m e n t c o u n ts 4 p a g e s w ritte n b y a sing le h a n d a n d sh e d s fu r th e r lig h t o n the c irc u m s ta n c e s in w h ic h th e lis t o f 18 p ro p o s itio n e s an d re sp o n sio n e s c a m e in to b e in g , as w ell a s o n its re la tio n w ith th e A p o lo g ia p r o d o c- tr in a m e n tio n e d in F N . In th e fo llo w in g e d itio n , th e lis t i ts e lf has b een sk ip p e d , s in c e it w ill b e e d ite d b e lo w o n th e b a s is o f th e se c o n d d o c u m e n t, w h ic h p a y s m u c h m o re a t te n tio n to th e c o n te n t o f th e p r o p o s it io n e s an d re sp o n s io n e s th a n th e firs t.

In nomine D om ini. Amen.

P ropositiones p a r tim ed o c ta e , p a r tim d ic tae a relig iosis n o s tra e P ro u in- c iae C a p u c in o ru m F land ro -B elg icae , q u a e cau sa fu e re d issensionum , tu r - ba tio n u m e t sc an d a lo ru m eo ru m q u a e m o d o a d h u c in eadem p erseu eran t.

175 See L. Ceyssens, Gilles Gabrielis a Rome (1679-1683). Épisode de la little entre rigorisme et laxisme, in: Antonianum 34 (1959) pp. 73-110; Gabrielis (Gilles), in: Dictionnaire d ’histoire et de géographie ecclésiastiques 19 (Paris 1981) cc. 580582.

176 See J. M. De Bujanda, Index librorum prohibitorum [n. 651 pp. 366-367.


Praecipuus uero horum author fuit P. Augustinus Buscoducensis, qui ob suas exorbitantias in m ateria doctrinae aliquando a D. Intem untio A postolico fuit ablegatus e ditionibus Regis Catholici (de quo uaria assignabim us suis respectiue locis specim ina) quique infecit P. Fulgentium M aseicanum lectorem eiusque studiosos, contra quos hae sequentes propositiones ad D iffinitionem Prouincialem anno .1668. delatae fuerunt et ab eadem datae, ad quas respondit prout ad singulas patebit ex subjunctis.[ . . . ] 177

Occasione huius doctrinae et contra ipsam ediderunt RR. PP. Prouincialis et D iffinitores decretum .21. Ju lij178 .1668. quod incipit: Propter ju stas causas etc. Sed nec lector, nec discipuli eius destitere a suis praeconceptis dogm ati- bus, sed clam auerunt ilia esse Louaniensium et ab ijsdem approbari. Imo uero confecerunt A pologiam pro defensione suae causae et doctrinae, in qua pag ina I.a haec uerba habentur: ‘R. P. Patritius tunc Prouincialis tradidit illico P. Fulgentio M asecano cartam in duas com pilatam colum nas, quarum una continebat puncta ipsius doctrinae tanquam intollerandae et haereticae accu- satoria, altera reseruata era t p ro ipsius defensorio responso. Hanc autem ut accepit, V enerabilem P. G abrielis PP. Bogardorum Bruxellis insignissim um et fundatissim um lectorem adijt ac desuper consultauit. Qui candide confessus est 18. illas accusatorias obiectiones - dem ptis calum nijs - esse ipsissi- m am nudam et crudam rei theologicae ueritatem , quam ante ingressum reli- gionis ipsem et per aliquot annos continuos Louanij ex o re doctorum ac lectione bonorum authorum perceperat, ac idcirco pro tali agnoscendam , sustinendam ac defendendam esse, licet duriuscule ab aduersa parte expres- sam. Iuxta huius aliorum que uirorum consilium fecit P. Fulgentius M asecanus, ut ex ipsius totidem pate t responsis.’Vbi notandum 1°. quod ille et illi aestim auerint sem per, laudauerint et con- su ltauerin t p raefatum P. G abrielis aliosque eiusdem farinae et doctrinae, uirum nim irum cuius liber dictus Specimina m oralis Christianae et diaboli- cae (quem tanti fecerunt et com m endarunt) bis hic Rom ae est dam natus. Notandum .2°. quod P. Fulgentius M asecanus ilium super propositionibus sibi obiectis consultauerit, antequam ad singulas respondisset et ex illis quat- u o r‘79 negasset, et quod ille responderit illas esse ipsissim am nudam et crudam rei theologicae ueritatem etc., et quod depost suas responsiones for- m auerit iuxta huius aliorum que consilium . Vnde patet quod illas sic docuerit p rout jaceb an t , ^ 0 et quod de istorum consilio aliquas negauerit, alias uero exposuerit ad euadendam inuidiam propositionum erronearum aut dam - natarum . Im o P. Paulus T eneram undanus, qui fuit ex eodem studio, adhuc

177 The list of 18 propositiones and responsiones has been skipped here.m Junij Q (cf. n. 239).m quatur Q.11,11 It is not clear to me how the sentence patet quod illas sic docuerit prout jaCP-

bant naturally follows from what preceeds (as it is suggested by the relative adverb unde).

2 ^ G.PARTOENS

pridem dixit P. Felicissim o A ntuerpiensi quod easdem propositiones docui- sset, p rou t eran t ei ob iectae, nisi forsan excipiendo illam de paruulis . 181

T h e ab o v e ed itio n a llo w s u s to rec o n stru c t in g rea te r d e ta il w hat h a p p e n e d in B ru sse ls d u rin g the In te rm ed ia te C h a p te r o f 1668. W h e n F u lg en tiu s o f M aase ik w as accu sed o f hav in g ac q u a in ted his s tu d en ts w ith so m e d u b io u s te ac h in g s o f Jansen ius, the P ro v in c ia l P a tric iu s o f H azeb ro ek im m ed ia te ly p re se n te d a sheet o f p ap e r to h is le c to r , on w h ich the la tter h ad to w rite dow n a rep ly to the 18 su sp ec ted p ro p o s itions th a t w ere asc rib ed to h im . F u lg e n tiu s d id th is , h o w ev er, on ly afte r h a v in g c o n su lte d G ille s G a b rie lis , a B o g a rd le c to r w h o w as o f te n a c cu sed o f fo s te r in g r ig o ris t an d J a n se n is t s y m p a th ie s .^ T h e la tte r c la im ed that, a p a r t f ro m a few ca lum nies, the 18 p ro p o sitio n s reflec ted , a lb e it in a ra th e r h a rsh w o rd in g , the p e rfec tly o rth o d o x teach ing h e had rece iv ed a t th e U n iv ers ity o f L o u v a in . T h is c la im , it is sa id , in sp ired F u lg e n tiu s ’ rep ly and w e w ill see b e lo w that his resp o n sio n es indeed re jec ted a few p ro p o sitio n s as s lan d ero u s, but accep ted m ost o f th em as o rth o d o x (w he ther o r n o t in a m o d ified version ). It w as f o r this reaso n that P a tric iu s o f H az eb ro ek an d his D efin ito rs issu ed the s ix p ro h ib itio n s w h ich I h av e ed ited ab o v e . T h e A p o lo g ia p r o d o c tr in a w as c o m p ile d by F u lg en tiu s a n d h is d isc ip le s on ly a fte r th e se m e asu res h a d b e e n taken .

T h e se co n d d o c u m e n t c o n ta in in g th e 18 p r o p o s i t io n e s an d re sp o n s io n e s co u n ts 8 p ag e s a n d h as b e e n w ritten b y a s in g le h a n d , to th e e x c e p tio n o f th e la s t tw o lin es , w h ic h h a v e b e e n a d d e d by a seco n d w rite r, w h o d ec la re s tha t h e h a d h a n d e d o v e r th e lis t o f p ro p o s itio n s a n d re p lie s to th e A u s tr ia n D efin ito r G en e ra l I ld e fo n su s o f C a rlsh o v en , w h e n th e la tte r v is ite d th e F la n d ro -B e lg ia n P ro v in c e as C o m m issa riu s G en era lis in Ju n e -S e p te m b e r 1682 (P ro p o s itio n e s h asce om n es cum earu n dem re fu ta tio n ib u s tra d id i R. A . P . l ld e fo n s o ) .m T h e d o c u m e n t c o n s is ts o f th e fo llo w in g th re e se c tio n s :

* pp. 1-5: the list o f 18 propositiones and responsiones (title: P ropositiones seu doctrinae quas V. P. Fulgentius M asecanus Sacrae Theologiç lector a 1ô annis tradidit suis discipulis, eiusdem responsiones ad singulas dum illae ipsi exhiberentur a RR. PP. Prouincia li et Diffinitoribus immediate ante examen sui studii Bruxellis).

181 For this testimony of Paulus of Dendemmonde and Felicissimus of Antwerp as its mediator, see the first quotation in n. 161.

182 See L. Ceyssens, Gilles Gabrielis a Rome |n. 175]; Gabriebs (Gilles) [n. !75j183 For the visitation by Ildefonsus, see Hildebrand V I pp. 379-383.

THE EARLIEST PHASE OF THE JANSENIST CONTROVERSY 2 4 5

* pp. 5-7: four considerations concerning the list of propositions and replies by the anonym ous anti-Jansenist com piler o f the whole document: Ecce propositiones et responsiones P. Fulgentij Masecani, super quibus (cum eas exscripserim precise pro ut habeo in transumpto ad me misso) nota prim o [ .. .] . Nota 2° [ .. . ]. Nota 3° [ ... ]. Nota 4° [...] .* pp. 7-8: a copy o f the decree o f 1668: Decretum quod RR. PP. Prouincialis et D ifin itoresfecerun t 21 Julij 1668 contra p rifa ta s doctrinas et explicationes V. P. Fulgentij Masecani.

T h e tex t w ritten by the first h a n d e n d s in th e fo rm u la A ctu m Brux- ellis in C ap itu lo in term ed io d e consensu RR. P P . D iffin itorum 21 Ju lij 1 6 6 8 I E ra t su bscrip tu m I f P atritiu s M in ister P rou in c ia lis indignus, w h ich has led a R o m an arch iv ist to co nc lude that th e tripa rtite docu m en t w as co m p iled du rin g the p ro v in c ia la te o f P atric ius o f H az eb ro ek (3 S epte m b er 1666-13 S ep te m b er 1669).184 T h is co n c lu sio n , ho w ev er, is c o n trad ic ted by the title o f th e firs t section , w h ich says th a t F u lg en tiu s o f M aase ik tau g h t the lis ted p ro p o sitio n s a 16 annis. S ince F u lg en tiu s w as S acrae T heo log iae le c to r f ro m 1665 until 1668 ,185 the w ho le consisting o f th ree sec tions m u st have b een p ro d u ced in the years 1681-1684 , w hen a co m p ile r lin k ed the list an d the d e c re e o f 1668 by m eans o f fou r re f lex ions on th e lis t’s con ten t. T h e co m p ile r m u st h av e b e e n an an ti-Jan sen is t (F u lgen tiu s o f N ieu w p o o rt? ), since h is re flec tio n s o n th e p ro p o sitio n es an d resp o n sio n es h ea v ily c r itic iz e F u lg e n tiu s ’ v ie w s as ‘C a lv in is t, o r Jan sen is t, o r at leas t B a ia n is t’ f e r e om n es illa s p ro p o sitio n es sa p e re uel C aluin ism um , u el Jansen ism um , u el a d m inus B aianism um ) an d p resen t the d ec ree o f 1668 as a ju s tif ie d reac tio n against F u lg e n tiu s ’ v iew s (aliqu as e tiam a p er te c o n tra r ia r i C o n c ilio T riden tin o , qu a p ro p te r etiam RR. P P . tunc e x o b lig a tio n e offic ij e t con sc ien tia c o m p u ls ifu ere con dere decretum q u o d infra). If all th is is correct, the c lo sing fo rm u la at the end o f the docum ent (Actum B ruxellis [ . . . ] f P a tritiu s M in ister P rou in cia lis indignus) only re la tes to the th ird section (the d ec ree ) an d n o t to the w ho le , w hich seem s to be co n firm e d b y the fac t th a t o th e r copies o f the d ec ree o f 1668 en d in the sam e fo rm u la . ^ 6

1,4 For these dates, see Hildebrand VI, p. 561 (n° 45). In the right upper comer of p. 1, a later hand has dated the whole document to 21 June 1668. This suggestion was taken over by the historian Fredegandus of Antwerp in his handwritten notes that are preserved in Archiuum Capucinorum Belgii III. 1068, sectio Vl.l5.192, p. 14v: ‘Ms. latin non paginé de 8 pages - copie - signée par le P. Patrice min. Prov. - Fut soumis au Visit. gén. P. lldephonse.' (my italics)

185 See n. 134.186 Compare the above edition of the decree on the basis of the Acta Capitularia

as well as some of the witnesses of the decree mentioned in n. 142.

246 G.PARTOENS

In th e fo llo w in g ed itio n o f th e se c o n d d o c u m e n t c o n ta in in g th e 18 p r o p o s i t io n e s an d re sp o n s io n e s (R ) ,m I h a v e a d a p te d the p u n c tu a tio n to m o d ern s ta n d a rd s (e x c e p t in th e case o f th e lo n g q u o ta tio n f ro m E x om n ibu s a fflic tion ibu s in N o ta 4 ° [see n. 2 3 7 ]). T h e fo o tn o te s d o n o t a im a t ex h a u stiv ity , b u t on ly o ffe r a f irs t c o n tex tu a l- iz a tio n o f p a rts o f th e d o cu m en t. T h e y m a y su ffice , h o w ev e r, to d e m o n s tra te th e h ig h e x ten t to w h ich F u lg e n tiu s ’ v ie w s d e p e n d e d o n th e te a c h in g o f A u g u stin e as it w as in te rp re ted b y Jan sen iu s .

Jesus

P ro p o sitio n es seu d o c trin ae q u a s V. P . F u lg en tiu s M a sec an u s S ac ra e Theologic; lec to r a 16 annis tra d id it su is d iscipulis, e iusdem responsiones ad singulas dum illae ipsi ex h ib e re n tu r a R R . P P . P ro u in c ia li e t D iffini- to r ib u s im m ed ia te a n te ex a m e n su i s tu d ij B ruxellis.

l a p ropositio . L iberum est quod aduertente ratione a uoluntate uel ad im perium uoluntatis incoacte fit coincid itque cum uoluntario perfecto, quod est illud quod fit a principio intrinseco cum perfecta cognitione fin is188. ltaque nulla ind ifferen tia requ iritu r qua hom o hic et nunc stan tibus ijsdem prçrequisitis possit non peccare, ad hoc ut libere pecce t^9, sed satis est quod aduertat deliberate se malum facere, licet hic et nunc non possit aliter facere. R esponsio . Liberum est etc. Hanc liberi definitionem, quç Louaniensium est, existimo esse bonam . ltaque non requiritur ilia philosophica indifferentia, qua hom o qui peccat sic est indifferens ut stantibus om nibus prçrequisitis possit non peccare, id est laudabiliter peccatum euitare, actualiter et in sensu composito,

187 The first document containing the list of propositiones and responsiones (Q) offers a rather corrupted version of the text. Some interesting variant readings are: prop. 3 sola3] uiolentia add. Q I prop. 5 actionis] uirtuosae add. Q I prop. 8 sanctificante] justificante Q I prop. 10 saluare] liberare et praem. Q I resp. 10 medium] remedium Q I dicere] et quod oppositum non nisi imprudens judicabit add. Q I prop. 14 parum] parui Q

188 Fulgentius has integrated the Thornistic concept of the uoluntarium peifectum (I“-Ilae q. 6 a. 2 eo.: [ . . .] ad rationem uoluntarii requiritur quodprincipium actus sit intra cum aliqua cognitione finis. Est autem duplex cognitio finis, perfecta scilicet et impeifecta. Perfecta quidem finis cognitio est quando non solum apprehenditur res quae est finis sed etiam cognoscitur ratio finis et proportio eius quod ordinatur adfinem ipsum. Et talis cognitio finis competit soli rationali naturae. [...] Perfectam igitur cog- nitionemfinis sequitur uoluntarium secundum rationem perfectam, proiit scilicet appre- henso fine aliquis potest, deliberans de fine et de his quae sunt ad finem, moueri in finem uel non moueri) in a Jansenist denial of the Molinist libertas indifferentiae.

189 Rejection of the Molinist claim Illudagens liberum dicitur quod, positis omnibus reqiiisitis ad agendum, potest agere et non agere (see R. Garrigou-Lagrange, Prédestination, in: Dictionnaire de théologie catholique 12.2 [Paris 1935] cc. 28093022 [esp. cc. 2968-2969]). Compare also Jansenius, Augustinus, tom. 3, lib. 7, cap. l l (Error pelagianus est requin ad libertatem indifferentiam ad bonum et malum).


ad hoc ut libere peccet (sic ut aliquando uerum sit dicere: ‘Homo peccat et positis omnibus prçrequisitis non peccat'), sed non tantum satis est, uerum etiam aliquando superfluum quod aduertat deliberate se malum facere formaliter (id est ut aduertat ad ‘90 malitiam actus), licet hic et nunc non possit peccatum laudabiliter euitare in sensu com posito, ita scilicet ut aliquando fiat quod sic euitet.

2a p ropositio . V erba Concilij Tridentini quibus ad propositum dicit quod hominis arbitrium cooperetur assentiendo Deo excitanti et possit dissentire si uelit'91, non sunt sic accipienda quasi homo posset stante influxu gratiç efficacis dissentire, sed hoc m odo, scilicet quod eandem gratiam, postmodum interueni- ente tentatione diabolica aut concupiscentia ualidiore insurgente, abijcere possit. R esp. V erba Concilij Tridentini etc. non sunt sic accipienda quasi hom o posset stante influxu gratiç efficacis dissentire actualiter et in sensu com posito, uideli- cet respectu illius effectus ad quem proxirne ex Dei intentione datur (sic ut uerum sit aliquando dicere: ‘Stat influxus gratiç efficacis et hom o non operatur bonum ’), sed hoc modo, scilicet quod eandem gratiam, postmodum interueni- ente tentatione diabiolica aut concupiscentia ualidiore insurgente, abijcere possit actualiter et in sensu com posito, id est ut sçpe fiat quod illam abijciat. 1 2

190 ad ad R191 Cf. Sess. 6 de iustificatione, can. 4 (H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17]

n° 1554). '192 Note the structural parallel between resp. 1 and 2. It is stressed that the freedom

of the human will is not abolished by the fact that a sinner necessarily sins when he fms (resp. 1) and that God’s efficient grace never fails to produce the effect for which it has been given (resp. 2). For the distinction between posse in sensu diuiso and posse in sensu c° mposito, on which both responsiones are based, see J. Carreyre, Jansénisme [n. 2] cc- 426-427; P. Sellier, Pascal et Saint Augustin (Bibliothèque de / ’évolution de rhumanité 12, Paris 1995 [= 1970]) p. 332. For prop, and resp. 2, see especially Jan- semus, Augustinus, tom. 3, lib. 8 , cap. 4 (Conciliatio gratiae Christi quam Augustinus docuit, cum libero arbitrio juxta principia scholasticorum): Et ipsa Scriptura sacra de renato ex Deo loquens: Qui natus est ex Deo peccatum non facit &c. et non potest peccare [1 John 3:9]. Sicut ergo in sensu composito uerae sunt hujusmodi phrases quibus uoluntas acta per diuinam gratiam dicitur non posse resistere Deo, non posse dissentire ab eo quod per earn uult operari Deus, non posse declinari, non posse superari, ita e contrario in sensu diuiso uerae sunt quibus dicitur posse dec/inari, posse superari, posse dissentire. Eodem igitur modo locus Concilij Tridentini quo dicit quod liberum arbitrium à Deo motum & excitatum possit dissentire si uelit [Sess. 6 de iustificatione, can. 4; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 1554], itemque quod inspirationem recipiens illam & abijcere potest [Sess. 6 de iustificatione, cap. 5; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 15251, non difficulter ab eis & a nobis solui potest. Concilium enim in sensu diuiso, inquiunt, loquitur, quo significatur ita hominem reci- pere Dei inspirationem & motionem & excitationem istius delectationis aut praedeter- minationis (addo, si /ibet, etjam actualem ipsius uoluntatis consensionem ac motum) ut nihil auferat ejus uo/untati potestatem dissentiendi, si uelit, quamuis actualis dissensus cum i/lispu;suppositis componi nequeat. Potestas enim dissentiendi non repugnat isti excitationi aut delectationi aut praedeterminationi aut ipsi etjam consensui actuali uoluntaris, sed tantum dissensus actualis; quemadmodum cum paries a/bus uere dicitur esse posse niger, non hoc significatur quod albedine permanente simul in eo nigredo reperii i possit, sed quod simul cum albedine sit in eo potentia ut fia t niger.

248 G. PARTOENS

3 a p ro p . C ondem natio horum duorum articulorum a tribus P on tific ibus193: Quod uoluntarie f it, etiamsi necessitate fia t, libere tamen f i t 194, item : Sola uiolentia repugnat liberta ti hominis naturali^s, nihil contra pr?allegatam liberi co incidentis cum uoluntario perfecto defin itionem , cum probabilius sit quod prim a sententia, pro ut in bu lla dam natur, accip ienda sit uniuersaliter (ut sensus sit: ‘O m ne quod uoluntarie e tc .’), sed negata indifferentia ad oppositum '96; datur ad saluationem bull? m anifesta instantia in pueris, item in m otibus uoluntatis prim o prim is etc.197 Q uantum ad secundam : Sola uiolentia etc., non sola, sed et indeliberatio repugnat l i b e r t a t i ^

193 Pius V: Ex omnibus afflictionibus (1567; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n°'190 1-1980); Gregory Xlll: ProuisionisNostrae (1579); Urbanus VIII: In eminenti ( 1642).

194 39lh of the 79 propositions condemned in Ex omnibus afflictionibus (Pius V; 1567); H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 1939.

*95 66'1' proposition condemned in Ex omnibus afflictionibus', H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 1966.

*96 In prop. and resp. 1 and 2, Fulgentius rejects the Molinist conviction that human freedom implies an indifferentia that makes man capable at any moment to chose autonomously whether he will perform a (bad/good) act or not. The indifferentia referred to in prop. 3, on the other hand, is a kind of indifference that was also recognized by Jansenius. It was the latter’s conviction that post-lapsarian man was subject to a struggle between two opposite delectations - a delectatio coelestis and a delectatio terrena - and that he necessarily consented at any moment with the delectation that currently had the upper hand. For Jansenius, this necessity did not exclude human liberty, for it implied that the human will was not determined by blind, deterministic mechanisms. This conviction is expressed in Jansenius’ indifferentia concept: ‘La liberté humaine actuelle n'est que l'exemption d ’une nécessité volontaire immuable. Durant toute notre vie, il y a conflit entre les deux délectations qui peuvent successivement triompher, suivant la prédominance de l'une ou de l ’autre, dans la volonté qui consent toujours et nécessairement à la délectation la plus forte; par suite, la volonté de l’homme ici-bas n'est point fixée et confirmée dans un état, comme celle des bienheureux dans le bien et celle des damnés dans le mal. Elle peut changer, ou, plus exactement, elle peut être changée. En cela consiste son indifférence et cela est la condition suffisante pour qu’il puisse mériter ou démériter.’ (J. Carreyre, Jansénisme [n. 2] c. 487) Fulgentius subscribes to the papal condemnation of the proposition Quod uoluntarie fit, etiamsi necessitate fiat, libere tamen fit, if the proposition is applied to every act of the will (prima sententia, pro ut in bulla damnatur, accipienda sit uniuersaliter [ ...] ) and simultaneously presupposes the denial of the indifferentia that has just been described ([...] sed negata indifferentia ad oppositum). In that case, the human freedom spoken of by the proposition (libere tamen fit) would be reconcilable with a blind, deterministic necessity that does not involve the indifferentia that Jansenius saw as a sufficient condition for post-lapsarian man to merit or demerit.

*97 If the 39'h proposition of Ex omnibus afflictionibus is given a universal meaning ([...] ut sensus sit: 'Omne quod uoluntarie etc.'), the proposition implies that even acts of the will that are not accompanied by a perfecta cognitione finis (e.g. acts of little children or the indeliberate movements of the will [motus uoluntatis prima primi]) are free. Fulgentius rejects the proposition, if it is interpreted in this universal sense, and thus sees no contradiction between the proposition’s condemnation in Ex omnibus afflictionibus and his own definition of the liberum in prop. and resp. 1.

198 Compare Fulgentius’ interpretation of the condemned meaning of both propositions with Jansenius, Augustinus, tom. 3, lib. 6, cap. 36 (Explicantur propositiones


Resp. E x p lic a tio n s horum duorum articulorum non uidentur mihi incongru?. N otant hie aliqui doctores in bulla Baiana propositiones m ultas non aliqua speciali censura esse censuratas, seu tam quam h?reticas aut scandalosas aut piarum aurium offensiuas etc. nee posse om nes ut h?reticas condem nari, cum aliqu? ex ijs habeantur apud S. A ugustinum .

4a p ro p . D am natio huius articuli om nem huius qu?stionis altercationem to llens199, ut quondam aiebat Innocentius X contra Jansenium : A d merendum et demerendum in statu naturf( laps'( non requiritur in homine libertas a necessitate, sed sufficit libertas a coactione, parum curatur200- R esp. D am natio huius articuli: Ad merendum uel demerendum etc. m ultum curatur et aliud calom niose dicitur.

Sa p ro p . Scripture ill? D euteronom ij: Mandatum quod ego pr^cipio tibi hodie, non est supra te, sed iuxta te, ut facias illud201, item: Testes inuoco cl(lum et terram, quod proposuerim uobis uitam et mortem; elige ut uiuas201, non aliud fere continent quam exhortationes et incitam enta ad bonum et auocam enta a malo. Quibus ut locus sit, non est necesse quod hom o possit idem facere et om ittere stantibus ijsdem pr?requisitis, sed satis est quod actionis2 ° 3 ?que capax sit, cum gratia Dei, ac uitios?. Quo posito non est inutile eum moneri et increpari, cum h? adm onitiones s?pe proxim e uel remote suppeditent ea quibus t ^ ad bonum exercendum quam a malo abstinendum indiget.6 a p ro p . Scriptura ilia de Eccli 15: Reliquit Deus hominem in manu consilij sui; ante eum uita et mors, bonum et malum; quod uoluerit, dabitur illi™ , de hom ine solum ante lapsum intelligenda est.R esp. a d 5 et 6 p ro p o sitio n em . Explicationes scripturarum Deuteronom ij et E cclesiastici non u iden tur m ihi etiam incongru?. Pro posteriori citatu r D. T hom as, S. Augustinus et Louanienses.2 ° 5

ex bulla Pij quinti: Quod uoluntarie fit etc. et Sola uiolentia etc.): Constat enim hujusmodi improuisos uoluntatis motus esse uoluntarios & sine uiolentia ex uoluntate f/uere, nee tamen etjam illo sensu esse liberos. Deest illis quippe id quod praecipuum est, quia non sunt in hominis potestate, non sumus eorum Domini, fiunt sine plena rationis aduertentia, profluunt inuita repugnanteque uoluntate; quae singula essen- tialiter repugnant libertati. Amplius ergo sine dubio requiritur, quam esse uoluntarium & sine uiolentia, ut sit liberum. Hoc Pontifices stabilire uoluerunt, ne tales spontanei necessarij motus liberi putarentur [ ...] .

I<w tollentis R»00 3 rd of the 5 propositions condemned in Cum occasione (Innocent X; 1653);

H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2003.201 Deut. 30: l l and 14.•!02 Deut. 30: I 9.203 Actionis standing for actionis bonae. Cf. infra (Nvta primo aliquas mendas

esse commissas [ ...] ). See also n. 187.Eccli. 15:14 and 18.

' Augustine and Thomas did not restrict Eccli. 15:14 and 18 to Adam’s state ante lapsum. Compare, e.g., Aug., gr. e/ lib. arh. 2, 3, where the verses are quoted as blbllcal proof for the existence of human free will in general. The exegesis proposed

2 5 0 G. PARTOENS

7a Justi non habent auxilium gratiç sem per ad manum, qua dici possint, si uoluerint, in justitia perseuerare; et Deus iuste ipsis potest rogantibus pro maiori auxilio in ualida tentatione exurgente denegare et subtrahere gratiam , qua negata et subtracta necessario, uere tam en peccant.R esp. Existim o quod om nes justi non habeant auxilium gratiç sem per ad m anum , qua dici possint, si uoluerint, in justitia perseuerare actualiter (sic ut ipsum perseuerare dependeat ex m ero beneplacito ipsorum liberi arbitrij cum gratia perfecte sufficienti, quç illis sem per adest et quam possunt reddere efficacem , dum uolunt). A d 2 ^ partem : quod Deus iuste possit ipsis rogantibus, remisse et non sicut oportet, pro maiori auxilio in ualida tentatione exurgente denegare gratiam efficacem , qua negata ineuitabiliter, uere tam en peccabunt.

Sa p ro p . V erba Concilij T ridentini (quç contraria huic assertioni uidentur, dum ait: Si quis dixerit justificatum uel sine speciali auxilio D ei in accepta iustitia perseuerare posse uel cum eo non posse , anathema sit206): Deus namque sem el sua gratia justificatos non deserit, nisi prim o deseratu^o1, hoc

by Fulgentius was defended, however, in the pseudo-Augustinian Hypomnesticon: Quid est autem, Et reliquit ilium in manu consilii sui, nisi: Dimisit eum in possibilitate liberi arbitrii sui? In manu enim possibilitas intellegitur. Ipsa est prima gratia, qua primus homo stare potuisset, si seruare Domini mandata uoluisset. Hac ergo per inoboedientiam desolatus, Deo iudice iusto, factus est serpenti, id est diabolo, cui maluit oboedire quam Deo, captiuus (Responsio 3, 2; J. E. Chisholm, The Pseudo- Augustinian Hypomnesticon against the Pelagians and Celestians. I [Paradosis 20, Fribourg 1967] pp. 155-156 and 11 [Paradosis 21, Fribourg 1980] pp. 119-120, 11. 30-35). It is also implied in Jansenius, Augustinus, tom. 3, lib. 9, cap. 25: [ ...] non esse jam liberum arbitrium in eo statu in quo, quando condebatur ab auctore suo, institutumfnit [...] . Nam quamuis uerissimum sit aequum esse ut creaturae rationalis felicitas & infe/icitas, bonum ac malum ab ipsius proprio arbitrio suspendatur & ante eum posita uita & morte, bono & malo, quod placuerit ei detur illi, postquam jam tamen in manu consilii sui positus alterutrius partis electionem semel fecit, non est aequum ut in istam iterum boni ac mali indifferentiam reuocetur, sed potius ut istius e/ectionis bonitatem aut malitiam praemium aut supplicium consequatur. Nam hoc est ipsissimum illud quod scriptura tangit, dum dicit: quod placuerit ei dabitur illi, uita scilicet, aut mors, bonum aut malum, quibus nihil aliud significatur quam praemium aut poena istius electionis quam manus consilii in quo homo ab initio constitutus est, propria sua libertate fecit. Est autem proprium praemium e/ectionis bonae & malae ut arbitrium in eo quod sibi delegit utrimque firmetur atque hoc ei stabiliter diligendum detur quod sibi diligendum eligendumque iudicauit. It should be noted that the exegesis of Eccli. 15:14 and 18 proposed by Fulgentius is explicitly rejected in the Theologia uniuersa ad usum Sacrae Theologiae candidatorum of the Capuchin friar Thomas a Charmes (originally published in 1751): Eccli 1S. Deus ab initio constituit hominem, et reliquit ilium in manu consilii sui [ ... ] Eo loci, uera exprimitur libertas a necessitate, etiam simplici et uoluntaria; atqui hic locus non debet restringi ad Adam ante lapsum, ut restringitur a Caluino [ ...] (quoted from the Augsburg edition of 1780, vol. 4, p. 79).

™ Sess. 6 de iustificatione, can. 22 (H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 1572).207 Sess. 6 de iustificatione, cap. 1 1 (H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 1537).

THE EARLIEST PHASE OF THE JANSENIST CONTROVERSY

sensu accipienda sunt, scilicet quod Deus nem inem priuet sua gratia sanctificante et habituali, nisi hom o prius peccarit; ex quo non conuincitur quod Deus non possit prius gratiam suam actualem subtrahere, qua subtracta hom o necessario peccat, D eum derelinquit et gratia justificante priuatur.R esp. Explicatio uerborum Concilij Tridentini: Si quis etc. non uidetur m ihi o ^ i n o incongrua, licet forte m elior explicatio dari possit.

9a p ro p . Ista ab Innocentio d ^ rn a ta opinio prçdictç20* conform is: Aliqua D ei prçcepta hominibus ju stis uolentibus e t conantibus secundum présentes quas habent uires, sunt im possibilia: deest quoque ipsis gratia qua possibilia fian t2(®, ad instar prioris nihili fit.R esp . Ista ab Innocentio dam nata etc. Aliqua D ei p rçcep ta etc. ad instar prioris m agni fit et ab alijs calurnnia nobis infertur.

lOa V erba ilia D. A ugustini quibus ait: M ultos paruulorum non fier i saluos, non quia ipsi nolunt, sed quia Deus non uultm , in sensu positiuo, non nega- tiuo sunt accipienda, ac si dicat: ‘M ultos paruulorum perire, non quia ipsi (quippe incapaces) uoluerunt libere perire, sed qu ia Deus ipsos positiue et directe uult exclusos, ordinans ad eum finem sic causas secundas, ut impedi- ant quo minus ad salutis necessaria perueniant.’2" Vnde uerba ilia: Christus

208 See prop. and resp. 4.2M 1“ proposition condemned in Cum occasione; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion

[n. 17] n° 2001.210 Cf. ep. 217 (ad Vitalem), 6, 19.211 In ep. 217, 6, 19, Augustine rejects the use of I Tim. 2:4 (Deus omnes homi

nes uult saluos fieri) as an argument in favour of the claim that ‘all human beings would receive grace if those to whom it is not given would not reject it by their own will.' This claim is mistaken, Augustine says, since children ‘who do not have a will opposed to it’, also die without baptism, even when ‘their parents desire it and hasten to it’. Reason why they do not receive grace, is not that they would reject it by their own will iï it were given to them, but simply that God does not want to give it to them: Quo modo dicitur omnes homines eamfuisse accepturos, si non illi quibus non datur, earn sua uoluntate respuerent, quoniam Deus uult omnes homines saluos fieri, cum multis non detur paruulis et sine illa plerique moriantur, qui non habent con- trariam uoluntatem, et aliquando cupientibus festinantibusque parentibus, ministris quoque uolentibus ac paratis, Deo no/ente non detur, cum repente, antequam detur, expirat, pro quo, ut acciperet, currebatur? Vnde manifestum est eos qui huic resistunt tarn perspicuae ueritati, non intellegere omnino qua locutione sit dictum quod omnes homines uult Deus saluos fieri, cum tarn multi salui non finnt, non quin ipsi, sed_QitM Deus non uult, quod sine ulla caligine manifestatur in paruulis. According to Janse- nius in a chapter on the right interpretation of I Tim. 2:4, Augustine claims in ep. 211, 6, 19 (and other passages) not only that God does not have the w il1 to save a l children, but also that He does not want to save certain children in spite of the efforts of their parents to bring them to baptism and this because He has excluded them from the Kingdom: Haec igitur considerans Augustinus non solum negat habere Deum istam omnium paruulorum sa/uandorum uoluntatem, sed etjam saepius exsertis uerbis docet, hominibus uolentibus quosdam paruulos saluos facere, nolle Deum ut sa/ui fiant, quos justo judicio a regni sui felicitate seclusit (Aitgustinus, tom. 3, lib. 3,

252 G. PARTOENS

p ro omnibus mortuus est212 etc. Deus uult om nes homines saluos f ie r i213 hoc aut sim ili m odo intelligenda sunt: pro omnibus, id est pro aliquibus ex o n n i genere hom inum , uel p ro omnibus, id est pro om nibus qui salui fiunt, uel rursus p ro omnibus, id est quantum ad sufficientiam sitam in eo quod mors in se tanti ualoris sit quod pro om nibus om nino saluandis satis esset, si fuisset om nibus applicata uel per earn om nes uoluisset saluare214; quç interpre- tationes an non repugnent huic dam nato ab Innocentio articulo: Semipelagi- anum esse d icere Christum pro om nibus hominibus mortuum esse aut sanguinem fu d isse215, prudens iudicet.R esp. Existim o posse dici quod pueri m orientes sine baptism o non habeant proprie medium sufficiens ad salutem (I) et quod Deus ordinet causas 2"s non libere agentes in interitum puerorum , antequam sint baptisati, ad quorum interitum sequitur dam natio p rop ter peccatum originale.Explicationes hae216 uerborum S. Scripturç existim o quod non tantum p ru dentes, sed etiam uiri sancti iudicent non esse incongruas aut repugnare huic dam natç ab Innocentio X.: Semipelagianum est dicere.

l l a p rop. Gratia status naturç integrç a statu naturç lapsç in eo distinguitur quod ilia dabat posse, nostra autem absolute sem per facere, adeoque om nis gratia nostra est efficax, nee est adm ittenda diuisio g ratiç in sufficientem et efficacem p ro m odem o statu2|?.R esp. G ratia status naturç lapsç uidetur mihi quod sit sem per efficax ad eum finem ad quem proxim e datur ex Dei intentione, licet non sit sem per efficax ad eum finem ad quem ex natura sua tendit2i8; nee adm ittendum puto pro

cap. 20). Compare the paraphrase by J. Carreyre, Jansénisme [n. 2] c. 398: '[...] Dieu ne veut pas à la lettre sauver tous les hommes. Saint Augustin dit même que Dieu ne veut pas sauver certains enfants, malgré les efforts des hommes qui voudraient les sauver et cela, parce que, par un juste jugement, il les a exclus positivement de son royaume.’ (my italics) Following Jansenius, Fulgentius interprets ep. 217, 6, 19 as implying that God has positively excluded certain new boni children from His Kingdom.

212 2 Cor. 5:15.213 I Tim. 2:4.214 For these interpretations, see Jansenius, Augustinus, tom. 3, lib. 3, capp. 20-21

(Exponitur locus Apostoli: Deus omnes homines uult saluos fieri etc. + Quomodo Christus sit redemptor omnium, pro omnibus crucifixus & mortuus); J. Carreyre, Jansénisme [n. 2] cc. 397-399; L. Cognet, Le jansénisme [n. 2] pp. 55-56.

215 5'h proposition condemned in Cum occasione; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2005.

216 Has would have been preferable. Cf. infra (Nota prima a/iquas mendas esse commissas | ...] ).

217 See Jansenius, Augustinus, tom. 3, lib. 3, cap. I (Tangitur natura adiutorii sufficientis & ostenditur nullum dari post lapsum quin simul efficax sit. Hoc enim repugnat multis principiis Augustini & Ecclesiae).

218 Compare A. Arnauld, Vera S. Thoniae de gratia sufficiente et efficaci doctrina dilucide explanata, art. 23, n° 5, in: (Euvres de Messire Antoine Arnauld 20 (Paris I 778) p. 74: Etsi auxilium omne Dei mouentis semper efficax sit a/icujus


m oderno statu diuisionem gratiç in sufficientem et efficacem (sufficientem scilicet com plete et perfecte, qua scilicet liberum arbitrium sic expeditum est, ut ex m ero ipsius arbitrio pendeat quod actus ponatur uel non).

12a p ro p . Verba ilia A ctorum (et sim ilia, turn V eteris turn Noui Testam enti) quibus S. Stephanus aiebat Judçis: Dura ceruice et incircumcisis cordihus uos semper Spiritui sancta resistitis2^, item ilia Prouerbiorum : Vocaui et renuistis. extendi manum meam et nonfuit qui aspiceret220, tantum de externa uocatione externisque gratiç oblationibus sunt accipienda.R esp. V erba Actorum etc. possunt etiam de internis gratiç oblationibus intel- ligi.

13a p rop . Per ilia uerba Isaiç 5 ubi conqueritur Dominus dicens: Quid est quod dehui ultra facere uineç meç et non feci? An quod exspectaui u tfaceret uuas, fecit autem lahruscas ?22X solum uult Deus quod tam multa beneficia, item signa externa populo suo222 exhibuisset, tarn patienter ipsos sustinuisset et longa- nim iter cum eis processisset, ut hum ano m odo loquendi nihil amplius quis facere posse uideatur, ut quis animum alicuius sibi rebellem lucraretur; non quod reuera Deus uelit quod omnia necessaria absolute eis subministrasset quibus bonum facere et instar optim ç uineç in dulces fructus pullularet iustitiç . 223

R esp. A d uerba Isaiç non habeo quod contradicam illorum explicationi.

14a p ro p . D am natio huius articuli ab Innocentio X: Interiori gratiç in statu naturç lapsç numquam resistitur224, per quam om nis in contrarium suspicio funditus sublata apparet, parum m om enti reputatur.Resp. Damnatio huius articuli etc. magni momenti reputatur.

effectus, ejus nempe ad quem efficiendum diuina uoluntate distinatur. ut fatentur omnes S. Thomae discipuli; ei /amen interdum resistitur, respectu a/terius effectus ad quem ex natura sua refertur. Vt cum peccatorem Deus ad pie uiuendum excitat, efficit quidem semper ilia gratia ut sec undum mensuram donationis Christi aliquam habeat ille peccator pie uiuendi uoluntatem, qua ratione gratia ilia efficax est. Sed non semper tanta est ilia uoluntas, etiam per gratiam inspirata, ut resistentem sihi peccati delectationem superet & ad piam uitam peccatorem reipsa perducat, qua ratione illi resistitur.

219 Acts 7:51.220 Prov. I :24.221 Is. 5:4.222 The Jews.223 Fulgentius rejects the exegesis of Is. 5:4 according to which God gave to the

Jews everything that is necessary for conversion. For, if God had given them everything that is necessary for conversion, they would also have received the grace that infallibly brings about conversion. For this reason, Fulgentius proposes an alternative interpretation, according to which God's claim in Is. 5:4 is considered a hyperbole: God just wanted to say that He did so much for the Jews that, speaking in human terms, nobody seems to be able to do more in order to win over a reluctant mind.

224 2 "d proposition condemned in Cum occasione; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion In. 17] n° 2002.

254 G. PARTOENS

15a p rop . Omnia opera infidelium sunt peccata; nee contrariatur huic dam naty propositioni: Omnia opera infidelium sunt pecca ta et uirtutes philosophorum sunt uitia225•16a p ro p . Q uia salua manet bulla in bonis uolitionibus et desiderijs quy ante conuersionem Spiritus226 infidelibus im m ittere solet.R esp . ad 15. e t 16. p ro p . Existim o quod om nia opera perfecte infidelium sint peccata , quia non referuntur in Deum , ad quem om nia opera ex prycepto referri debent; per perfecte infideles intelligo illos qui nondum diuinitus incipiunt illuminari227^

17a p ro p . Pontificis judicium non solum in ijs quy sunt facti, sed et alias extra concilium generale est fallibile.R esp. Pontificis jud ic ium in ijs quy sunt facti, existim o esse fallibile; in ijs quy sunt iuris, extra concilium generale, dum ex cathedra loquitur, teneo esse infallibile, licet hoc non uideatur esse de fide22^

18“ p ro p . Indulgentiy non uidentur prodesse nisi ijs qui parati sunt, quantum in ipsis est, diuiny iustitiy satisfacere, cum non appareat nisi am or proprius, qui non est m odus conueniens relaxationem obtinendi.R esp. Indulgentiy etiam prosunt ijs qui parati non sunt, quantum in ipsis est, diuiny iustitiy satisfacere, licet Altisiodorensis, Paludanus et Caietanus apud Estium teneant contrarium22'\ Existimo tam en illos non tain amplas indulgentias lucrari quam istos qui parati sunt, qua itum in ipsis est, diuiny iustitiy satisfacere.

225 2 5'" proposition condemned in Ex omnibus affliclionibus; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 1925.

226 Spirilus sanclus. Cf. infra (Nota primo aliquas mendas esse commissas [ ... ]).227 See n. 268.228 The addition licet hoc non uidealur esse de fide may be compared with the

words sallem in publico in prohibition 3 of the decree of 1668: Non leneal aut doceal quis sallem in publico quod Ponlificis judiciumfallibile sil exlra concilium uniuersale. Both Fulgentius and the decree express their adhesion to the doctrine of papal infallibility in questions of Faith and morals, but avoid presenting it as a dogma. Compare also the opinion fomiulated by Arsenius of Fuentes at the end of his visitation of the Flandro-Belgian Province (Hildebrand VI, p. 412).

229 See Willem Hesselszoon van Est, In quarlum librum Senlenliarum commen- laria. Tomus IV (Parisiis 1638 [first edition: 1615]) p. 292: Porropraeler haec nonnulli pulanl indulgentiarum lhesaurum nec illis prodesse qui quamuis in gralia con- sliluli, negligunl lamen per seipsos salifacere, sed iis dunlaxal qui sollicili sunt ul inlegre in hac uila salisfacianl pro peccalis, alque ob id aul imponi sibi peluni salis- facliones condignas, aul sallem eas sponle assumunl, easdemque implere curanl. Caelerum qui quam minimam pelunl sibi poenileniiam imponi, & praeler eam, quam minimam esse sciunl, non curant amplius de salisfaciendo, sed magis posl hanc uilam conlenli sun! luere in purgalorio, exislimanles sibi sufficere, si euadanl infernurn: non esse cur lales sperenl sibi per indulgenlias subueniendum. Ila senlil & docel Caietanus lracl. /0. de suscipienlibus indulgentias, posl Allisiodorensem & Paludanum.


E cce p ropositiones e t responsiones P . F u lgen tij M asecani, su p e r q u ib u s (cum eas ex sc rip se rim p re c ise p ro u t h a b e o in tra n su m p to ad m e misso) no ta p rim o aliquas m endas esse com m issas uel primo scribendo uel in tran- scribendo. Propositione enim 5 desiderari uidetur absolute li hona, ut sensus sit: sed satis est quod actionis honç çque capax sit. cum gra tia Dei, ac uitiosç. Item propositione 8 : nisi prim o deseratur; sic habet textus Concilij: nisi ah eis prius deseratui2M Item in responsione ad quçstionem seu propositionem 10: li explicationes hq uerhorum debet ad constructionem sic uerti: explicationes has uerhorum. Item in 16 propositione: ad li Spiritus addendum uidetur sanctus, u.g. Spiritus sanctus.

N ota 2° P. Fulgentium non nisi tres propositiones absolute negare, reliquas uero explicare seu potius torquere iuxta suam opinionem et sola sua existi- matione seu electione ductus, dicendo fere ubique: ‘m ihi uidetur’, ‘existim o ', aut quid simile, e t non nisi semel allegando D. Thom am , bis terue D. Augusti- num, et subinde suos DD. Louanienses, qui licet ipsum plurimi faciant atque extollant tam quam unum e prçcipuis suis inter Capucinos sectarijs, consulti tamen a R. P. Joanne Landensi23i super prçdictis propositionibus ac responsionibus responderunt illas nimis esse crudas nec sese ita audere docere. Cum autem om nes istç propositiones uel ex eius dictatis uel saltem doctrina in schola tradita fuerin t extractç et (uti quidem arbitror) a P. Paulo Tenere- m undano (qui fere solus inter studiosos illis aduersabatur)232, credendum est illas a P. Fulgentio fuisse traditas p ro ut iacent,233 et non pro ut ab ipso fuerunt negatç uel explicatç, quia alioquin tantum m odo debuisset RR. Patri- bus exhibere sua dictata ad sui purgationem et ex ijs dem onstrare oppositam doctrinam. Absit uero ut hoc faceret; quinim o, postea dicere non est ueritus doctores Louanienses non eo m odo fuisse locutos de suis propositionibus ac responsionibus quo R. P. Joannes eos referebat locutos.

N ota 3° fere om nes illas propositiones sapere uel Caluinism um , uel Janse- nism um , uel ad m inus Baianism um ; aliquas etiam aperte contrariari Concilio Tridentino, qua propter etiam RR. PP. tunc ex obligatione officij et consci- entia com pulsi fuere condere decretum quod infra subiungetur, quam quam in eo rem issius egerin t, cum aduersus huiusm odi proscriptos errores om ni effi- cacia procedere oporteat nec dissim ulare, eo quod experientia a seculis constet talibus im butos uel num quam uel rarissim e huiusm odi decreta curare et a cçptis suis erroribus resipiscere et resilire, sed e contra illos uel negare, uel

2,0 Sess. 6 de iustificatione. cap. 11 (H. Denzinger, E nciundbii |n . 17] n° 1537).231 For Joannes of Landen, see n. 44.m For the testimony of Paulus of Dendemionde, see n. 1 6 1 ^2,3 Compare the words patet quod illas sic docuerit proul j acehant in the first

document containing the 18 propositiones and responsi°nes (see n. 18°). Apparently, il had not been possible for Patricius and his Defimtors to consult Fulgenttus’ (hctata themselves.

256 G. PARTOENS

defendere, uel subdole et am biguë explicare aut interpretari, et interim alijs instil lare, p ro ut et hic a nostris factitatum fuit.

N o ta 4° P. Fulgentium im pegisse turn in ' bullam Pij 5., G regorij 13. atque Vrbani 8. contra Baium 234, turn in bullam A lexandri 7 ‘ contra Jansenium 235, in quarum prim a hçc form aliter habentur: qitas quidem sententias stricto coram nobis examine ponderatas, quamquam nonnullç aliquo pacto sustineri possen t, in rigore et p ro p rio uerborum sensu ab assertoribu s intento, hçreticas, erroneas, suspectas, tem erarias, scandalosas, et in p ia s aures offensionem im m ittentes2yb, respectiue, ac qurrcumque super ijs uerbo, scrip- toque em issa, prrrsentium authoritate damnamus, circum scribim us, et abo- lemus; deque eisdem et sim ilibus posthf(c quoquo pacto loquendi, scribendi, et disputandi facu lta tem quibuscum que interdicim us. Qui secus fecerin t, ipsos omnibus dignitatibus, gradibus. honoribus, beneficijs. et officijs per- petuo priuam us, ac etiam inhabiles ad quf(cumque decernim us. Vinculo quoque anathem atis eo ip so innodam us. a quo nullus Romano Pontiflce inferior ualeat eos, excepto m ortis articulo, lib era te211. Hçc habet bulla a B. Pio 5 prim o em anata et a G regorio 13 postea ac tandem ab V rbano 8 confirm ata ac renouata. Bulla autem A lexandri 7' contra librum C ornelij Jansenij, qui Augustinus intitulatur, sic habet in fine: ac eundem librum sçpe dicti C ornelij Jansenij, cui titulus A ugustinus, omnesque alios tam manu scrip tos quam typis editos et si quos forsan imposterum edi con tigerit, in quibus eius C ornelij .Jansenij doctrina ut supra dam nata defenditur uel astruitur, uel defendetur uel astruetur, damnamus itidem atque prohibem us, m an dantes om nibus C h ris ti f id e lib u s ne pred ic tam doctrinam teneant, predicent, doceant, uerbo uel scrip ta exponant uel interpretentur, publice uel priuatim , pa lam uel occulte imprimant, sub pçn is et censuris contra hçreticos in ju re expressis ipso fa c to absque a lia declaratione incurren- d is™ . Sic bulla A lexandri 7 .‘

234 Pius V: Ex omnibus affliclionibus ( 1567; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n°s 1901-1980); Gregory XIII: Prouisionis Noslrae (1579); Urbanus VIII: In eminenli ( 1642).

235 Alexander VII: Ad sacram ( 1 656; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n°' 20 I 0 2012); Regiminis Aposlolici (1665; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 2020). For the full text of both documents, see Carolus du Plessis d'Argentré, Colleclio judiciorum |n. 17] pp. 281-282 and 314-316.

236 immettentes R2-37 See Ex omnibus affliclionibus (Revue d'hisloire ecclésiastique 48 [ 1953]

p. 775). I have retained the punctuation of R for the whole quotation. In the first sentence, R has a comma after both possenl and inlento, the most important evidently being that after possenl. For the problem of the so-called comma Pianum. see H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 1980 n. I; T. Quaghebeur, 'Sed illud inluctum reliqueril". Une virgule mal biffée: le comma pianum, la hulle Ex omnibus afflictionibus du St-Ojfice el la lecture du cardinal de Lugo, in: Revue d ’histoire etclési- aslique 98 (2003) pp. 61-79 (with further bibliography).

m See Ad sacram (Carolus du Plessis d ’Argentré, Colleclio judiciorum [n. I7| p. 281).


D ecre tum q u o d R R . P P . P rou inc ia lis et D iffin ito res feceru n t 21 J u li j23 1668 c o n tra p r^ fa tas d o c trin as et explicationes V. P . F u lgentij M asecam 241’

Propter justas causas iudicarunt RR. PP. M inister Prouincialis et Diffinitores huius Prouinci? Flandro Belgic? expedire ut adm oneantur V. Patres concionatores, lectores et studiosi ne quis teneat uel doceat sequentes propositiones: [•••] 24*

Actum Bruxellis in Capitulo interm edio de consensu RR. PP. D iffinitorum 21 Julij242 1 6 6 8

Erat subscriptumf. Patritius M inister Prouincialis indignus

[Propositiones hasce om nes cum earundem refutationibus tradidi R. A. P. Ildefonso ] 243

C o m p a rin g th e ab o v e s ta tem en ts o f F u lg e n tiu s o f M a ase ik w ith the d e c re e o f 1668, o n e m a y co nc lude th a t th e la tte r - p ac e H ild e b ra n d - d id reg a rd e sse n tia l a sp ec ts o f th e le c to r 's th e o lo g ic a l th in k in g , e v e n if th e la tte r w as p re p a re d to c o n d e m n (a c e r ta in in te rp re ta tio n o f) th e p ro p o s itio n s th a t w e re p ro h ib ite d in th e d ec ree .

P r o h ib i t io n 1 a n d 6 : A c c o rd in g to th e co m p ile r o f th e ab o v e d o c u m en t, o n ly th re e o f th e p ro p o s itio n e s a s c r ib e d to F u lg e n tiu s w e re c o m p le te ly an d u n a m b ig u o u s ly re je c te d b y th e re sp o n sio n e s (N o ta 2 ° P . F u lgen tiu m n o n n isi tre s p ro p o s itio n e s a b so lu te n e g a re ).244 T h ese p ro b a b ly a re p r o p . 4 , 9 an d 14, w h ich d en y th e im p o rta n c e o f th e co n d e m n a tio n o f 3 p ro p o s itio n s in C um o cc a sio n e . T h e p ro p o s itio n s in q u e s tio n w ere e q u a lly p ro h ib ite d in th e d e c re e o f 1668:

Prop. 4 Ad merendum et demerendum etc. Cum occasione prop. 3 prohition I of 1668 Prop. 9 Aliqtta Dei praecepta etc. Cum occasione prop. I prohition 6 of 1668245Prop. 14 hiteriori gratiae etc. Cum occasione prop. 2 prohition I of 1668

239 Junij R (cf. n. 178)240 mascani R241 At this place, the document offers a copy of the 6 prohibitions of 1 668, which

I have edited above on the basis of the Acta CapituUiiio °t tlic Flandro-Be|gian Prov- mce.

242 Junij R243 This line was added by a later hand.2+4 According to the first document containing the 18 propositiones and respon-

siones. Fulgentius' replies denied four of the prop°sitions. See n. 1 7 9 .24s The words Ista f ...] damnata opinio in prop. and rt’Sp . 9 can be inteipieted as

a dominant participle construction. meaning the same as the w°rds dunmotio huius arlicitli in prop. and resp. 4 and 14.

258 G. PARTOENS

In e a c h c a se , F u lg e n tiu s ’ re sp o n sio s ta te s th a t, c o n tra ry to w hat is sa id in the p ro p o s itio n , the c o n d e m n a tio n in q u e s tio n d id h a v e its im p o rta n ce . In th is s e n se , o n e c o u ld b e te tn p te d to c o n c lu d e th a t (p a rt o f) th e p ro h ib itio n s I an d 6 o f th e d e c re e o f 1668 d id no t a ffec t F u lg e n t iu s ’ te a c h in g . H o w ev er, th e se th re e re sp o n s io n e s a re lim ite d to a la p id a ry a f f irm a tio n o f th e im p o rta n c e o f th e c o n d e m n a tio n s in q u e s tio n , b u t d o n o t o f fe r an y fu r th e r sp e c if ic a tio n w ith re g a rd to w h a t F u lg e n tiu s th o u g h t to be the sense in w h ich each o f these p ro p o s itio n s h ad b ee n c o n d e m n e d by In n o c e n t X. M o reo v e r, if o n e c o n s id e rs - as th e D efin ito riu m o f 1668 p ro b a b ly d id - th e th re e c o n d e m n e d p ro p o s it io n s to b e th e e x p re s s io n o f J a n s e n iu s ’ d o c trin e s o f th e a b s o lu te n e c e s s ity o f G o d ’s e ff ic ie n t g ra c e f o r A d a m ’s d e s c e n d a n ts to o b e y G o d ’s p re c e p ts (A liqu a D e i p r a e c e p ta e tc .) a n d th e ir re s is t ib ili ty o f e ff ic ie n t g ra c e (In ter io r i g r a t ia e e tc .), a s w ell as o f h is c o n v ic tio n th a t th e n e c e s s ity by w h ich o n e e i th e r sin s o r fu lfils G o d ’s c o m m a n d m e n ts , d o es n o t a b o lish th e f re e d o m o f th e h u m a n w ill (A d m eren du m et dem eren d u m e tc . ) , 246 th e ir p ro h ib itio n by th e d e c re e o f 1668 d id a ffec t F u lg e n tiu s ’ te a c h in g , fo r a ll th re e d o c tr in e s a re im p lie d in som e o f th e p ro p o s itio n e s e t re sp o n s io n e s e d ite d a b o v e (n ec ess ity d o e s n o t ab o lish f re e d o m : p r o p . an d re sp . 1 , 2 , 7 an d 8 ; a b so lu te n e c e s s ity o f G o d ’s e ff ic ie n t g ra c e : p ro p . a n d re sp . 1 1 ; ir re s is t ib ili ty o f e ff ic ie n t g ra c e : p r o p . a n d re sp . 2 ). T h e p re se n ce o f these d o c trin es a lso e x p la in s F u lg e n t iu s ’ c r it ic ism o f th e M o lin is t c o n c e p t o f su ff ic ie n t g ra c e in p ro p . an d re sp . 7 an d 1 1.

A cc o rd in g to p r o p . an d re sp . 3 , F u lg e n tiu s a lso co n d e m n e d th e tw o p ro p o s itio n s fro m E x o m n ib u s a fflic tio n ib u s th a t w e re fo rb id d e n by p ro h ib itio n 1 in th e d e c re e (Q u od u o lu n tarie f i t , e tia m si n ece ss ita te

f ia t , l ib e re tam en f i t a n d S o la u io le n tia e x p u g n a t h o m in is l ib e r ta t i n a tu ra li) . H o w e v e r , F u lg e n tiu s c o n d e m n e d b o th p ro p o s it io n s in a sense that d o e s n o t c o n tra d ic t h is o w n c la im in p ro p . an d re sp . 1 an d 2 th a t h u m a n f re e d o m is n o t a b o lish e d b y th e fac t th a t fa lle n m a n n ec e ssa r ily s in s w h en h e s in s a n d th a t h e ca n n o t re s is t G o d ’s e ff ic ie n t g rac e .

W e m ay th u s c o n c lu d e th a t if th e p ro p o s itio n s a ffe c te d by p r o h ib it io n s 1 an d 6 o f th e d e c re e a re in te rp re te d as e x p re ss in g so m e key d o c tr in e s o f J a n se n iu s , th e ir p ro h ib itio n d id a ffec t th e te a c h in g o f F u lg e n tiu s , ev e n if th e le c to r c o n d e m n e d th e se p ro p o s itio n s h im se lf . T h e la tte r c a n b e e x p la in e d by th e h y p o th e s is th a t F u lg e n tiu s d id n o t in te r p re t th e c o n d e m n e d p ro p o s itio n s in a w ay th a t a f fe c te d h is v ie w s on

246 For these interpretations of the first three propositions condemned in Cum occasione, see J. Carreyre, Jansénisme [n. 2J cc. 479-491.


h u m a n fre e d o m a n d e ff ic ie n t g race . T h is is c e r ta in fo r th e tw o p ro p o s itio n s f ro m E x om n ib u s a fflic tio n ib u s (see p r o p . an d re sp . 3) an d h ig h ly p ro b a b le fo r th e p ro p o s itio n s f ro m C u m o c c a s io n e , s in ce - a t least i f w e m a y give c red it to F N - F u lg e n tiu s c la im e d th a t th e c o n d e m n a tio n o f th e f iv e p ro p o s itio n s b y In n o c e n t X d id n o t a ffe c t Ja n se n iu s ' A u gustin us.

P r o h ib i t io n 2 : A c c o rd in g to p ro p . 15, F u lg en tiu s su b sc rib e d to th e p ro p o s itio n fo rb id d e n by p ro h ib itio n 2 o f th e d ec ree (O m n ia o p era in fideliu m su n t p e c c a ta e t p h ilo so p h o ru m u ir tu tes su n t u itia ). T h e re p ly to p ro p . 15 an d 16 sh o w s, h o w e v e r, th a t F u lg e n tiu s o n ly su b sc rib e d to th is p ro p o s itio n i f th e in fide les in q u e s tio n are in te rp re ted as b e in g c o m p le te in fid e ls (p erfec te in fid e le s) and , b y co n se q u e n c e , d o n o t inc lude th o se u n b e lie v e rs w h o h a v e a lre a d y re c e iv e d a f irs t, e le m e n ta ry il lu m in a tio n fro m th e H oly S p irit. F o r th is rea so n , p ro p . 16 s ta te s th a t th e c o n d e m n a tio n o f th e sen ten ce O m nia o p era in fidelium su n t p e c c a ta in E x om n ibu s a fflic tio n ib u s is p e r tin e n t, s in c e its u n iv e rsa l c h a ra c te r (om n ia o p era in fidelium e tc .) is co n tra d ic te d b y the fa c t tha t th e acts o f im p erfec te in fideles a re no t n e c e s sa r ily sins. T h is m e a n s th a t F u lg en tiu s a d h e red to an a t te n u a te d v e rs io n o f th e p ro p o s itio n O m n ia o p era in fidelium su n t p e c c a ta : E x istim o q u o d om n ia o p era p e r fe c te in fideliu m s in t p e c c a ta . T h is v e rs io n , h o w e v e r, s till e x c lu d e d th e p o ss ib ility o f g o o d ac ts c o m m itte d b y p e o p le w h o h ad n o t b ee n illu m in a ted , e i th e r fu lly ( a s f id e le s ) o r e le m e n ta rily (as im p erfec te in fid e le s ) , b y th e H o ly S p irit. M o reo v e r, F u lg en tiu s does n o t seem to have fe lt th e n ee d o f m o d ify in g h is p o s it io n re g a rd in g th e se n te n c e u irtu tes p h ilo so p h o ru m sunt u itia . W e m a y th u s co n c lu d e th a t, i f th e se co n d p ro h ib itio n o f 1668 w as is su e d o n th e b a s is o f th e c o n v ic tio n th a t w ith o u t g ra c e fa lle n m a n ca n still a c c o m p lish m o ra lly g o o d ac ts, e v e n if th e la tte r d o n o t lead to e te m a l life , 247 th e se co n d p ro h ib itio n d irec tly re a c te d a g a in s t th e te a c h in g o f F u lg en tiu s , e v e n i f th e la tte r re je c te d th e p ro p o s itio n O m n ia o p era in fidelium su n t p e c c a ta in its u n iv e rsa l sense .

P r o h ib i t io n 3 : W e saw ab o v e th a t, a c co rd in g to FN, F u lg e n tiu s ' d ic ta ta an d the A p o lo g ia p r o d o c tr in a b o th c la im e d th a t th e P o p e 's ju d g m e n t is fa llib le n o t o n ly in q u e s tio n s o f fac t, b u t a lso in q u e s tio n s o f F a ith a n d m o ra ls . T h e le c to r is a sc rib ed the sa m e o p in io n m p ro p . 17, b u t he c o n tra d ic ts it in the c o rre sp o n d in g re p ly : in ijs quf(_ sun! iu ris, ex tra con ciliu m gen era te , dum e x c a th e d ra loqu itu r, te n e o e sse in fa llih ile [ . . . ]. T h is co n tra d ic tio n , ho w ev er, is im m ed ia te ly fo llo w ed

247 For this position, see J. Caireyre. Jansénisme |n. 2] c. 360.

260 G. PARTOENS

by a fu rth e r q u a lif ic a tio n : [ . . . ] l ic e t h oc non u id ea tu r e s s e d e f id e . W e m a y th u s c o n c lu d e th a t p ro h ib itio n 3 o f 1668 w as d ire c te d a g a in s t the p o s itio n w h ich F u lg e n tiu s a d v o c a te d a c c o rd in g to F N in h is d ic ta ta an d the A p o lo g ia p r o d o c tr in a , an d that the le c to r 's d en ia l o f th is p o s itio n in th e list o f p ro p o s itio n e s a n d re sp o n sio n e s is e x p lic itly p re se n ted as n o t b e in g a p o in t o f F aith .

P r o h ib i t io n 4 : I f p ro h ib itio n 4 o f 1668 w as d ire c te d a g a in s t th e d en ia l th a t C h r is t d ie d fo r all m a n k in d - an d I see n o re a s o n to s u p p o se it w as n o t - it c a n b e c o n s id e re d a re a c tio n ag a in s t F u lg en tiu s . O n th e b a s is o f th re e v e ry sp e c if ic in te rp re ta tio n s o f th e w o rd s p r o om n ibu s in 2 C or. 5 :1 5 ( C h r is tu s p r o o m n ib u s m ortu u s es t), w h ic h he p ro b ab ly k n e w fro m J a n s e n iu s ' A u gu stin u s (p ro om n ibu s m e a n in g ‘fo r so m e o u t o f all c la s se s o f m a n k in d ', f o r all w h o a re sa v e d ' o f ‘fo r all h u m a n b e in g s in th e se n se th a t th e p o w e r o f C h r i s t 's re su rre c tio n w o u ld su ffic e to sa v e all m a n k in d if H e w an te d i t ' ) , 248 F u lg e n tiu s w as e v e n a b le to n e u tra liz e th e la tte r v e rse as w ell as 1 T im . 2 :4 (D eu s uult o m n es h om in es sa lu o s f ie r i ) as b ib lic a l p ro o f in fa v o u r o f th e b e l ie f th a t C h ris t d id d ie fo r all m a n k in d .

F u lg e n tiu s ' w o rd s reg a rd in g th e f ifth p ro p o s itio n o f C u m occa - sion e rem a in so m e w h a t am b ig u o u s : E x p lica tio n es h ae [= the p ro p o sed in te rp re ta tio n s 2 C o r. 5 :1 5 an d I T im . 2 :4 ] u erboru m S. S crip tu rq existim o q u o d non tan tum p ru d en tes , sed etiam uiri sa n c ti iu d icen t non e s s e in con gru as a u t rep u g n a re huic da m n a tç a b /n n o cen tio X. < sen ten - tia e > : S em ip e la g ia n u m es t d ic e re < C h ris tu m p ro o m n ib u s h o m in ib u s m o rtu u m esse au t sa n g u in e m fu d isse > (rep . 10). (a) I f o n e co n s id e rs the w o rd s huic d a m n a tç a b In n ocen tio X. < se n te n tia e > an e x a m p le o f the d o m in a n t p a rtic ip le c o n s tru c tio n ^ 9 F u lg en tiu s says th a t h is in te rp re ta tio n o f 2 C or. 5 :1 5 an d 1 T im . 2 :4 is in a c c o rd a n c e w ith In n o c e n t’s c o n d e m n a tio n o f th e f ifth p ro p o sitio n . In th a t ca se , h e p ro b ab ly accep ts th e c o n d e m n a tio n b y p ro je c tin g th e ab o v e th re e in te rp re ta tio n s o f p r o om n ib u s o n to th e w ords p r o om n ib u s h om in ibu s in the c o n d e m n e d p ro p o s itio n . A cc o rd in g to th a t in te rp re ta tio n , the th e s is d ic ere C h ristum p r o om nibus hom inibus m ortuum esse au t sa n g u in em fu d isse can im p o ss ib ly b e S e m i-P e la g ian , w h ich im p lie s th a t the fifth p ro p o sitio n in its en tire ty is fa lse , e v e n fo r a d isc ip le o f J a n se n iu s .230 (b ) I f o n e d o es not

248 See n. 214.249 Compare my interpretation of the words Isla [ ... ] duinnuiu opinio in prop. and

resp. 9 in n. 245.25° For this interpretive strategy, see also P. Sellier, Qu ' cst-ce que /e jansénisme

(7640-/7/3)? [n. 18] p. 70: ‘Nous disposons déja de toutes les nuances nécessaires pour comprendre comment les augustiniens pouvaient condamner la cinquième Proposition: ”11 est sémi-pélagien de dire que Jésus-Chiist est mort et a répandu son sang pour tous


c o n s id e r th e w o rd s h uic dam nat(( a b In n ocen tio X. < se n te n tia e > an ex am p le o f th e d o m in a n t p a rtic ip le c o n s tru c tio n , F u lg en tiu s sim p ly s ta tes at th e e n d o f b o th p ro p , a n d resp . lO tha t h e up h o ld s th e fifth p ro p o sitio n in sp ite o f its c o n d e m n a tio n by In n o cen t X.

P r o h ib i t io n 5 : T h e d o c trin e a ffe c te d b y the f ifth p ro h ib itio n o f 1668 can be re a d in th e A u gu stin u s o f Ja n se n iu s 251 an d is d e fe n d ed w ith o u t any re se rv e in p ro p , an d resp . 10.252

5 .4 . E u gen iu s o f B ru g e s on F u lg e n tiu s’ tea ch in g on d iv in e g ra c e

In J u n e -S e p te m b e r 1682 , D e f in ito r G e n e ra l I ld e fo n s u s o f C a r lsh o v e n v is ite d th e F la n d ro -B e lg ia n P ro v in c e as C o m m issa r iu s G en era lis by o rd e r o f M in is te r G en e ra l B e m a rd u s o f P o r to M au riz io ( t 1684), in o rd e r to v erify to w h a t d eg re e th e an ti-Jan se n is t d ec ree o f S te p h a n u s o f C e sen a (1 6 7 4 ) w as b e in g observed.253 O n 28 Ju ly , he r e c e iv e d in the c o n v e n t o f B ruges a c h a rg e a g a in s t F u lg e n tiu s o f N ieu w p o o rt an d M a rc e llu s o f M enen , w h o w e re accu sed by E u g en iu s o f B ru g e s o f h av in g c a u se d tro u b le s w ith in th e F la n d ro -B e lg ian P ro v ince th ro u g h the ir false ch a rg es a g a in s t fe llo w C a p u ch in s . A co p y o f this c h a rg e w as in te g ra te d by E u g en iu s h im s e lf in a la te r ch a rg e aga in st F u lgen tiu s o f N ieu w p o o rt an d M a rc e llu s o f M enen , w h ich he ad d ressed on 18 A u g u s t 1683 to the C a rd in a ls o f the H oly O ff ic e .2 ^4 T h is la te r c h a rg e has b ee n p re se rv e d in tw o c o p ie s in the A rch iuu m G en era te O .F .M .C ap . (G .2 2 .I I . D im iss io n es , p ro c e ssu s . I 6 8 3 - I 9 2 5 )P 5

In th e c h a rg e o f 28 Ju ly 1682, E u g e n iu s m a k e s th e s a m e c la im as M ich ae l o f O u d e n b o sc h w as to m a k e in 1700 a n d H ild e b ra n d in th e 2 0 th c e n tu ry , viz. th a t th e c h a rg es b y F u lg en tiu s o f N ieu w p o o rt lacked all ju s t if ic a tio n . H e illu s tra te s this by re fe rrin g to th e ca se o f F u lg e n tius o f M a ase ik , fro m w h o m E u g en iu s h ad re c e iv e d his th e o lo g ic a l

les h0mmes sans exception.” Pour eux, affirmer que le Christ est mort pour tous sans exception pouvait en effet avoir un sens catholique, précisé par Augustin Prosper et beaucoup d’autres, dont l'auteur de l'Apolo^ie />«''■ les sain/ Pères |= Antoine Amauld]: soit qu;mt a la suffisance de la Rédemption. soil parce que le Christ a sauvé la nature humaine. Une fois de plus la red action de la condamnation demeurail imprecise

251 See n. 211.^ Against what is suggested in the already quoted testimony ol Paulus ol Den-

dermonde. See n. 161.253 For this visitation, see Hildebrand VI, pp. 379-3K3.

For the charges of 28 July 1682 and 18 August 1683. see Hildebrand V1,p. 415.

255 |t is said at the bottom of both documents that a copy of the charge was sent to the Cardinal Conprotector Giacomo Rospigirnsi ° n |6 March 1684 (and not in 1687. as suggested by Hildebrand VI. p. 4 1 5 n. 2).

262 G. PARTOENS

fo rm a tio n . I t h a d b e e n a t th e in s tig a tio n o f F u lg e n tiu s o f N ie u w p o o rt, E u g e n iu s says, th a t P a tr ic iu s o f H a z e b ro e k a n d his e n tire D efin ito riu m in te r ro g a te d F u lg e n tiu s o f M aase ik in 1668 (E u g e n iu s m is ta k e n ly says 1667) w ith re g a rd to 18 su sp e c te d p ro p o s itio n s . W ith o u t m e n tio n in g th a t an a n t i- Ja n se n is t d e c re e h a d b e e n issu ed a lm o s t im m e d ia te ly a f te r th is in te rro g a tio n , E u g e n iu s s tre s se s th a t n o m e a su re s h ad b e e n ta k e n a g a in s t F u lg e n tiu s o f M aase ik h im se lf. T h is w as on ly n o rm a l, h e say s, s in c e F u lg e n tiu s o f M a a se ik w as a fa ith fu l d isc ip le o f A u g u s tin e and , b y c o n s e q u e n c e , co u ld im p o s s ib ly h a v e b e e n a h e re tic . 256 E u g e n iu s su b se q u e n tly p ro v e s th is b y o ffe r in g a sy n th e s is o f h is m a s te r ’s v ie w s o n d iv in e g ra c e , w h ic h is la rd e d w ith e x p l ic i t re fe re n c e s to th e w o rk s o f th e b ish o p o f H ip p o . T h is sy n th esis ( to g e th e r w ith th e in tro d u c tio n to th e c h a rg e o f 28 Ju ly 1682) is e d ite d b e lo w o n th e basis o f b o th co p ies o f E u g e n iu s ’ c h a rg e o f 18 A u g u s t 1683 (A = d o c . 1, ff. 1 -1v; B = d o c . 2 , ff. 1 -3 r).257 I n b o th c o p ie s , m o s t q u o ta tio n s f ro m th e B ib le an d th e w o rk s o f A u g u s tin e a re id e n tif ie d b y m e a n s o f m a rg in a l n o te s , th e v is ib ility o f w h ic h e m p h a s iz e s th e o r th o d o x y o f F u lg e n tiu s ’ v iew s . I h a v e in te g ra te d a ll m a rg in a l n o te s in th e te x t , b u t p re se rv e d th e ir v is ib ility b y u s in g th e b o ld ty p e fa ce . N e x t to th e se n o te s , th e fo o tn o te s id e n tify q u o ta tio n s th a t E u g e n iu s has le ft w ith o u t e x p lic i t id e n tif ic a tion . T h e d iv is io n in p a ra g ra p h s is m in e .

[ . .. ]Hac die 28. Julij 1682. in conuentu nostro Brugensi ego Fr. Eugenius Brugen- sis sacerdos Capucinus propono coram uobis, R. ad.m P. Ildephonse Austriace Diffinitor ac Com m issary Generalis, per specialem com missionem R. ad.m p. B em ardi a Portu M auritio M inistri Generalis Ordinis Capucinorum 258 judex nobis delegate, contra RR. PP. Fulgentium N eoportanum et M arcellum M ene- nensem , P rouinciae F landro-Belgicae Diffinitores, non animo calum niandi, sed Prouinciam m eam ac prycipuos eius et integerrim os doctrina et pietate uiros a nota hyreseos ac inf^arnibus calum nijs uindicandi, quod ijdem ipsi sint qui iam- dudum eandem Prouinciam sub prytextibus plane chym ericis perturbauerint ac e t i a ^ u m perturbare non desinant, quod sub pyna talionis probare polliceor

256 In a document of 1669 (Archiuum Capucinorum Belgii I, 4930) on the vertues of Justinus of Brussels ( t 1655; Hildebrand VII, p. 416, n° 2939), Fulgentius highly praises Justinus’ love for the teachings of Augustine.

257 There are some st triking parallels between Eugenius’ synthesis of Fulgentius of Maaseik’s teaching and the exposition of his own Augustinian convictions in the letter to Van Hecke that we have discussed above in paragraph 3. See Vltima uox [n. f>5] pp. 45-59.

258 Bemardus of Porto Maurizio was Minister General of the Capuchin Order during the years 1678-1684.

TOE EARLIEST PHASE OF TOE JANSENIST CONTROVERSY

atque hanc litem prosequi usque in finem ; et peto ut secundum ju ra et canones supradicti patres ut perturbatores publicae quietis ac factiosi puniantur.2. V t ueritas in hac causa m agis innotescat, sciendum est perturbationem hanc, quae Prouinciam nostram m iserrim e dilacerat atque in partes scindit, per eundem P. Fulgentium iam dudum coeptam esse, scilicet ab anno 1667., quando se quoad doctrinam form aliter opposuit V en. P. Fulgentio M asecano lectori. Cuius potissim um opera etiam factum u t per R. P. Patritium Hasbrou- canum P rouincialem proponeren tur 18. propositiones quibus idem lector iubebatur respondere, q u ^ ^ aliquae u idebantur expressis term inis concep- tae, u t eundem incautum illaquearent. Ipso autem sim plici responsione ad singulas se faciliter extricante idem P. Fulgentius N eoportanus non cessauit doctrinam p r f a t i lectoris om nibus m odis hucusque persequi sub om nino friuolis ac plerum que falsis allegationibus. V t au tem innotescat ^ m odiosa facta d o c ^ h a , illam paucis uerbis proponam .3. H ^ docet: quod per unum hominem peccatum intrauit in hunc mundum et p e r peccatum mors, quae in omnes homines pertransijt, in quo omnes pec- cauerunt [R om . 5.12.]. Item quod reatu peccati originalis per regenerationis lauacrum sublato eiusdem reliquiae tam quam ^ n a e rem aneant, scilicet igno- ran tia in intellectu et concupiscentia in uoluntate: ilia per legem et doctrinam potest auferri, h ^ autem non nisi gratia m edicinali superari potest. Interro- gante enim apostolo, qui accepit ministerium uerbi a Dom ino Jesu testificari euangelium gratiae Dei [Act. 20.24.]: lnfelix ego homo, quis me liberabit de corpore m ortis huius (scilicet captiuante eum in lege peccati)? [R om . 7.24.], ipsem et respondet: Gratia D e i p er Jesum Christum Dominum nostrum259 Cui adstipulatur fidelis eius discipulus, ipsius Ecclesiae in m ateria g ra tiae defensor irrefragabilis S. A ugustinus d icens: A concupiscentiae dominatu non liberat nisi 'gratia D ei p e r Jesum C. D . N. '260 dono Spiritus S." p er quem ‘d i i f s a cluiritas in cordibus nostris’261 uincit concupiscentias carnales, ne consentiamus eis a d m alefaciendum , sed potius bonafaciam us [1. 1. re tra c t. c. 23.]2M. H anc au tem m edicinalem C hristi Saluatoris gratiam se sc ire dicit idem263 S. D octor a d singulos actus dari [e. 107 a d V ita l.]264, ex quo elici posse u ide tu r nullum actum esse indifferentem in indiuiduo2“ .

259 Rm. 7:25.260 Rm. 1:25.261 Rm. 5:5.262 Aug., retr. 1, 23, l.263 dicit om. B264 Aug., ep. 211 (ad Vitalem), 2, 4 (before the Maurist edition of Augustine's

letters, the present ep. 211 bore the number 101; see PL 33, c. 918, n . a). This letter is quoted also in prop. and resp. 10 (cf. supra).

26s Compare Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae, I“ U"" q. 18, a. 9, co. tytrwn aliquis actus sit indifferens secundum indiuiduum)' [ ... ] necesse est omnem actwn hominis a deliberatiua ratione procedentem, in indiuiduo consideratum, bonum esse uel malum. The Thomistic thesis is based here on Augustmian p rin c ip ^ : mdividual deliberate acts can not be neutral, since they are the effect of either divine grace (good) or concupiscence (bad).

2 6 4 G. PARTOENS

4. Et quod E cclesia de Spiritu S.lü uere canat: Sine tuo numine nihil es t in homine, nihil es t innoxium266, non tam en inde recte inferas omnia opera infidelium esse p ec ca ta 2bl, quia actus indeliberati, item om nia opera ad C hristianism um disponentia (quae gratiae per 2. C oncilium A rausicanum ascribuntur [2. C one . A ra u s . c. 25. in f in . ] ) 268 non possun t esse peccata. V irtutes autem philosophorum non sunt p roprie uitia, sed ab ipsis philoso-

266 Verses 16-18 of the medieval sequence Veni Sancte Spiritus, which the Catholic Church sang at Pentecost since 1570. See G. M. Dreves-C. Blume, Ein Jahrtausend Lateinischer Hymnendichtung. II. Hymnen unbekannter Verfasser (Leipzig 1909) p. 160; P. W. Tax, Zur Verfasserschaft und Entstehungszeit der Pfingstsequenz ‘Veni, Sancte S p ir i tu s in: Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 135 (2006) pp. 13-20.

267 25th proposition condemned by Pius V in Ex omnibus afflictionibus (1567);H. Denzinger, Enchiridion [n. 17] n° 1925. It is the 15'h proposition ascribed to Fulgentius in 1668.

268 The text probably refers here to deliberate acts of the imperfecte infideles, whom Fulgentius implicitly hints at in his reply to prop. 15 and 16: Existimo quod omnia opera perfecte infidelium sint peccata, quia non referuntur in Deum, ad quem omnia opera ex prficepto referri debent; per peifecte infideles intelligo illos qui nondum diuinitus incipiunt illuminari. The imperfecte infideles can be identified with more precision thanks to Eugenius’ marginal reference to the end of the 25'h - and last - canon of the second Council of Orange (529). Eugenius does not seem to refer to the 25‘h canon itself, but to the defin.itio fidei that immediately follows it and ends in a reference to the gift of Faith which makes people strive for baptism and which God also gave to the good robber of Lk. 23:43, to the centurion Cornelius in Acts 10:3 and to the tax-collector Zachaeus in Lk. 19:6: Hoc etiam sa/ubriter profitemur et credimus, quod in omni opere bono non nos incipimus et postea per Dei misericor- diam adiuuamur, sed ipse nobis nul/is praecidentibus bonis meritis et fidem et amo- rem sui prius inspirat, ut et baptismi sacramenta fide/iter requiramus et post baptis- mum cum ipsius adiutorio ea quae sibi sunt placita, imp/ere possimus. Vnde manifestissime credendum est quod et illius latronis quem Dominus ad paradysi patriam reuocauit et Cornilii centorionis, ad quem angelus Domini missus est, et Zacchei, qui ipsum Dominum suscipere meruit, ilia tam admirabilis fides non fuerit de natura, sed diuinae gratiae largitate donata (CCSL 148 A, p. 63, 11. 213-223). Compare Jansenius' remarks on the centurion Cornelius in his discussion of the opera infidelium (Augustinus, tom. 2, lib. 4, cap. 5: Sancti Augustini loca explicantur, quibus asserere uidetur opera mora/iter bona in infidelibus; J. Carreyre, Jansenisme [n. 2] c. 361): Nunc soluenda sunt nonnulla Augustini testimonia, ex quibus probari putant, in infidelibus esse posse nonnulla opera uere bona. In primis proferunt Augustini /oca de Cornelio centurione, quibus Iibro de praedestinatione sanctorum cap. septimo, & libro primo de baptismo capite septimo, & libro quarto capite uigesimo primo (error enim in citationes irrepsit) eleemosynas Comelii, aitequam in Christum crederet, & iustitiam appellat, & donum Dei esse dicit. At certe impium est dona Dei inter peccata deputare [Bellarminus, De gratia et libero arbitrio, lib. 5, cap. 9]. At certe ista nimis est somnolenta Augustini lectio, ut ex huiusmodi /ocis probetur sine

fide fieri posse opera nonnulla bona. Testatur enim Augustinus in ipso illo loco de Praedestinatione sanctorum qui citatur, & in alijs pluribus, Cornelium nullo modo fuisse infidelem, sed fide jam diuinitus infusa in Deum credidisse, & ex ea fide orasse Deum, in quem crediderat, & eleemosynas erogasse, quamuis in Christum lesum sibi non annunciatum necdum credidisset.

TOE EARLIEST PHASE OF TOE JANSENIST CONTROVERSY 265

phis in se ipsis de illis e t non in D om ino gloriantibus uitiantur. Possunt enim aliqua bona f ie r i non bene facientibus a quibus fiunt269, e t de talibus operi- bus non in Domino g loriari solus impius negat esse peccatum [1. 4. con. Iu lia . c. 3 .]2™5. Hanc uero Christi gratiam ad singulos ch.ristian? uirtutis actus necessariam dicit idem gratiae doctor A ugustinus: se scire non omnibus hominibus dari et quibus datur, m isericordia Dei gratuita dari; quibus autem non datur, iusto iudicio D ei non dari [e. 107 a d V ital.]271- V nde satis euidens est gratiam sufficientem , quam omnibus hom inibus, etiam obduratis et excycatis, generaliter dari - im o dari debere - aliqui272 pertinaciter sustinent et pro sententia273 ipsius E cclesiae m undo obtrudere conantur, non esse gratiam illam quam tanquam ueram Christi gratiam operose contra h?reticos defendit D. Augustinus.6. CCum autem idem dicat uoluntatem nostram non posse in m edio ita consistere, ut nec bona nec m ala sit [1. de pecc. m er. e t rem iss. c. 18.]274, nihil autem esse bonam uoluntatem quam charitatem [de g ra t . C h ris t . c. 2 1.]275, e t inspirationem dilectionis, ut cognita p er legem sancto am ore faciam us, proprie gratiam esse [lib. 4. a d B onif. c. 5 ]276, quid m m m igitur quod ad salutarem attritionem {ad quam om nes et bonam uoluntatem et gratiam necessariam esse contendunt) charitatem aliquam requiramus277, non autem per-

269 Aug., c. lulian. 4, 3, 22. Compare Jansenius, Augustinus, tom. 2, lib. 4, capp. 2/6-11/16; J. Carreyre, Jans^nisme [n. 2] cc. 359- 364; P. Sellier, P ascal et saintAugustin [n. 192] pp. 260-265.

2711 Aug., c. /u/ian. 4, 3, 30.271 Compare Aug., ep. 217, 5, 16 (sententiae 4-6). For the number 107 in Euge

nius’ marginal note, s e n. 2 6 4 .272 Viz. the partisans of Molinism.;7J sentiam B‘74 Aug., pecc. mer. 2, 18, 30.275 Compare Aug., grat. pecc. I, 21, 22.276 15 B. See Aug., c. P e l 4, 5, 11.277 According to the Council of Trent, the attritio which stems from the fear of

future punishment, prepares the penitent for the forgiveness of sins in the sacrament of penance, if together with the hope for forgiveness it excludes the will to sin. This attritio is called a contritio imperfecta, for it is considered a gift of God that makes the penitent approach justification: lllam uero contritionem imperfectam, quae affri- tio dicitur, quoniam ue/ ex turpitudinis peccati consideratione uel ex gehennae et poenarum metu communiter concipitur, si uoluntatem peccandi excludat cum spe ueniae, declarat non so/um non facere hominem hypocritam et magis peccatorem, uerum etiam donum Dei esse et Spiritus sancti impulsum, non adhuc quidem inha- bitantis, sed tantum mouentis, quo poenitens adiutus uiam sibi ad iustitiam parat. Et quamuis sine sacramento poenitentiae per se ad iustificationem perducere peccatorem nequeat, tamen eum ad Dei gratiam in sacramento poenitentiae impetrandam disponit (Sess. 14 de sacramento poenitentiae, cap. 4; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion (n. 17] n° 1678). Fulgentius calls this attritio/contritio imperfecta an attritio salu- taris, which is not limited to fear for future punishment, but also includes a bona uo/umas that depends on a divinely given imperfecta caritas. Compare Jansenius' interpretation o f the contritio imperfecta/attritio in Augustinus, tom. 3, lib. 5, capp.

266 G. PARTOENS

fectam , sed im perfectam 278? N um quid enim (ut bene dicit Augustinus) mox ut nascitur charitas, iam prorsus perfecta est? V tperficiatur, nascitur; cum fu erit nata, nutritur; cum fu erit nutrita, roboratur; cum fu erit roborata, p eu .c itu r [ tra c t. 1. in epis. Jo an . c irca m ed.]™7. D icim us prçterea ignorantiam juris naturae, quam uis a tanto, non tam en a toto excusare280, quia iuxta eundem A ugustinum in ijs qui in telligere noluerunt, sine dubitatione peccatum est; in ijs autem qui non potuerunt, pixna peccati. Ergo in utrisque non est iusta excusatio, sed iusta damnatio [e. 105. a d S i x t . ] A l i a s enim ista ignorantia non esset pçna peccati, sed eiusdem potius singulare beneficium ; nec amplius suspirare deberem us ad D om inum : Illumina tenebras m eas [ps. 17. 29.], sed potius: ‘Illas adauge’, directe contra orationem Ecclesiastici: ne adincrescant ignorantiae meae et m ultiplicentur delicta mea e tp e c c a ta mea abundent [eccl. 2 3 .3 .]282; im o nec docere ignorantes am plius inter opera spiritualis m isericordiae com putari deberet, sed potius pro sum m a habendum esset iniuria, cum per illud hom ines peccati delicijs absque reatu frui im pedirentur.

26-27/34-35; J. Carreyre, Jansénius [n. 2] cc. 410-411; P. Sellier, Pascal et saint Augustin [n. 192] pp. 321-327, esp. p. 323: ‘Selon lui [= Jansenius], l’attrition définie à Trente est une véritable contrition, car elle inclut un certain amour de Dieu, si faible soit-il; en effet une attrition simplement servile ne saurait engendrer le ferme propos de ne plus pécher.’

278 Fulgentius' concept of an imperfecta caritas probably goes back to Aug., gr. et lib. arb. 17, 33, where Augustine defines the caritas imperfecta as a gift of divine grace that makes one will to fulfil the law, but does not yet give the strength to actually fulfil it. This parua et imperfecta caritas makes possible a bona uoluntas that is only parua et inualida: Qui ergo uult facere Dei mandatum et non potest, iam quidem habet uoluntatem bonam, sed adhuc paruam et inualidam; poterit autem, cum magnam habu.erit et robustam. Quando enim martyres magna ilia mandata fecerunt, magna utique uoluntate, hoc est, magna caritate fecerunt [ ...]. Ipsam caritatem apostolus Petrus nondum habuit, quando timore Dominum ter negauit. Timor enim non est in caritate, sicut ait /oannes euangelista in epistola sua, sed perfecta caritas foras mittit timorem [I Ioh. 4, 18]. Et tamen quamuis parua et imperfecta, non deerat, quando dicebat Domino: Animam meam pro te ponam [Ioh. 13, 37]: putabat enim se posse, quod se uelle sentiebat. Et quis istam etsi paruam dare coeperat caritatem, nisi ille qui praeparat uoluntatem et cooperando perficit quod operando incipit?

279 Eugenius’ marginal reference is slightly mistaken: he is quoting Aug., ep. /o. tr. 5, 4 and not ep. lo. tr. 1.

280 Thomistic thesis (cf. Thomas Aquinas, Super Sent., lib. 2, d. 22, q. 2, a. 2, co.: ignorantia uniuersalis [= ignorantia iuris] excusat peccatum sequens non ex toto, sed a tanto), which Fulgentius bases on a purely Augustinian argumentation. The same Augustinian argumentation is developed by Jansenius in Augustinus, tom. 2, lib. 2, capp. 2-6 (especially cc. 4-5). Compare J. Carreyre, Jansénisme [n. 2] cc. 351-353; P. Sellier, Pascal et saint Augustin [n. 192] pp. 265-268.

281 Aug., ep. 194 (ad Sixtum), 6, 27 (before the Maurist edition of Augustine’s letters, the present ep. 194 bore the number 105; see PL 33, c. 874, n. a).

282 Eccli. 23:3.


8. Contra apertas D. A ugustini sententias aliqui se uidentur opponere, quas tam en tantus Ecclesiae D rc to r dicit ad fidem catholicam pertinere. Imo in causa duorum hominum (Adae scilicet et Christi), quorum p e r unum uenumdati sumus sub peccato , p er alterum redimimur a peccatis, asserit pro prie fidem christianam consistere [de pecc. orig. c. 24.]283- [ ...]

In th e ab o v e d e sc r ip tio n o f F u lg e n tiu s ' te a c h in g , n o th in g is sa id c o n c e rn in g th e ir re s is tib ili ty o f G o d ’s e ff ic ie n t g rac e (p ro h ib itio n 1 in th e d e c re e o f 1668), p a p a l ( in fa l l ib i l i ty (p ro h ib itio n 3), G o d ’s p o s itiv e w ill to d a m n c e r ta in c h ild re n (p ro h ib itio n 5) o r th e q u e s tio n c o n c e rn ing th e fu lf illa b ility o f G o d 's c o m m a n d m e n ts (p ro h ib itio n 6). H o w ev e r, it is c le a r f ro m E u g e n iu s ' te x t th a t F u lg e n tiu s su p p o rte d th e d o c tr in e s th a t w ere fo rb id d e n b y p ro h ib itio n s 2 a n d 4.

P r o h ib i t io n 2 : In §4 o f E u g e n iu s ' a c c o u n t, F u lg en tiu s e x p lic itly re je c ts th e p ro p o s itio n s c o n d e m n e d b y th e s e c o n d p ro h ib itio n (O m n ia o p e r a in fid e liu m s u n t p e c c a ta e t p h ilo s o p h o ru m u ir tu te s su n t u itia ) , b u t im p lic itly su p p o rts th e m in a re s tr ic te d se n se , th a t m u s t h av e b ee n e q u a lly u n ac ce p ta b le f o r th e S u p e r io rs w h o issued th e d e c re e o f 1668. F u lg e n tiu s c o n d e m n s th e se n te n c e O m n ia o p e ra in fid e liu m su n t

p e c c a ta in its m o s t u n iv e rsa l a p p lic a tio n , s in c e so m e o p e r a in fid e liu m , h e b e lie v e s , ca n im p o ss ib ly b e s in s , v iz . th e u n b e l ie v e rs ' in d e lib e ra te ac ts (co m p a re p ro p . a n d re sp . 3) a s w e ll a s ac ts th a t so m e o f th e m p e r fo rm u n d e r th e in f lu e n c e o f d iv in e g rac e (c o m p a re th e re p ly to p r o p . 15 a n d 16).284 H o w e v e r , s in c e d e l ib e ra te acts a re sa id to be e i th e r g o o d o r b a d (§§3 a n d 6) a n d th e fo rm e r can o n ly b e p e rfo rm e d u n d e r th e g u id a n c e o f d iv in e g race (§ § 3 a n d 5 ), d e lib e ra te ac ts o f in f id e ls w h o to ta lly lack th e g if t o f F a ith m u s t c le a rly be c o n s id e re d s in s (c o m p a re th e rep ly to p r o p . 15 a n d 16: E x is tim o q u o d o m n ia o p e r a p e r f e c te in fid e liu m s in t p e c c a ta [ . . . ] ; p e r p e r f e c te in f id e le s in te llig o illo s q u i n o n d u m d iu in itu s in c ip iu n t i llu m in a ri) . W ith re g a rd to th e se n te n c e p h ilo s o p h o ru m u ir tu te s su n t u itia , F u lg e n tiu s a c ce p ts its c o n d e m n a tio n in §4 o n th e co n d itio n th a t it m e a n s th a t th e v ir tu e s o f th e p h ilo so p h e rs a re v ic es in th e m se lv e s (p ro p r ie ) . H e ad d s , h o w e v e r , th a t th e v ir tu e s o f th e p h ilo so p h e rs in d e e d b e c o m e v ic es , w h e n e x e rc is e d by so m e o n e w h o p u ts p r id e in h is o w n fo rc es a n d d o e s n o t b e lie v e th a t rea l v ir tu e is a g ra tu i to u s g if t o f G od. F u lg e n tiu s th u s se e m s to h a v e d e n ie d in th e ca se o f b o th s e n te n c e s th e p o s s ib ility o f

283 Aug., gr. ef pecc. or. 2, 24, 28.284 See n. 268.

G. PARTOENS

g o o d ac ts p e rfo rm e d b y p e o p le w h o to ta lly lack th e C h ris tia n F a ith , w h e re a s p ro h ib itio n 2 o f 1668 to all p ro b a b ility m e a n t to sa fe g u a rd th is v e ry p o ss ib ility .

P r o h ib i t io n 4 : E u g e n iu s ’ p o r tra it m a k e s F u lg e n tiu s c la im th a t th e fo rm o f g ra c e th a t is n e c e s sa ry f o r ev e ry s in g le ac t o f C h ris tia n v ir tu e (§ 5 : H a n c [ . . .] C h r is ti g ra tia m a d s in g u lo s ch ris tian q u irtu tis a c tu s n ecessarian s [ . . . ] ) , is n o t g iv e n to a ll (§ 5 : [ . . . ] non om n ibu s h o m in ib u s d a r i) . F u lg e n tiu s th u s d e n ie d th a t G o d g ives his sa v in g g rac e to e v e ry o n e (c o m p a re p r o p . a n d re sp . 10) a g a in s t th e c o n v ic tio n th a t m u s t h a v e b e e n a t th e b a se o f p ro h ib itio n 4 o f 1668.

A t th e e n d o f o u r a n a ly s is o f F u lg e n tiu s o f N ie u w p o o r t’s te s tim o n y c o n c e rn in g th e te a c h in g o f his n a m e sa k e o f M a a se ik (5 .2 .), the 18 p ro p o s itio n e s an d re sp o n s io n e s o f 1668 (5 .3 .) an d E u g e n iu s ’ sy n th e s is o f his m a s te r ’s A u g u s tin ian d o c tr in e o f d iv in e g ra c e (5 .4 .) , w e m a y sa fe ly a s su m e - I th in k - th a t F u lg e n tiu s o f M a a s e ik ’s te ac h in g h ad c a u se d th e p ro m u lg a tio n o f th e d e c re e o f 1668 an d th a t th e le c to r c h a m p io n e d th e d o c trin es im p lied in th e p ro p o s itio n s fo rb id d e n by the d e c re e ’s s ix p ro h ib itio n s , e v e n if h e w as p re p a re d to c o n d e m n a c e r ta in in te rp re ta tio n o f th e p ro p o s itio n s in q u es tio n .

6 . C o n c lu s io n

D u rin g th e y ea rs fo llo w in g o n the pu b lica tio n o f the A u gustinus (1 6 4 0 ), sev era l F lem ish C ap u ch in s - a m o n g o th e rs the P ro v in c ia l C as- s ianus o f G e ld e m (1 6 4 1 -1 6 4 4 ) - w e re p rep a re d to te s tify to th e o rth o d o x y o f J a n se n iu s ’ book . T h ey co n s id e red the w o rk to o f fe r an ad eq u ate in te rp re ta tio n o f the te ac h in g s o f the b ish o p o f H ippo . T h is co n v ic tio n p e rs is te d a m o n g th e F lem ish C a p u ch in s a f te r th e c o n d e m n a tio n o f the A u gustin us by C um occasion e (1 6 5 3 ) an d A d sacram (1 9 5 6 ) as well as by tw o d ec rees o f the O rd e r ’s G en e ra l D efin itoriu m (1 6 5 0 /1 6 5 6 ). In the p rese n t a rtic le , I have tried to illu s tra te th is p e rs is ten c e o n the b as is o f a n an a ly s is o f so m e te x ts w ritte n b y F u lg e n tiu s o f M a ase ik , S a cra e T h eo log iae le c to r at A n tw erp du ring the y ears 1665-1668 , an d his d is c ip le E u g e n iu s o f B ru g es , w h o p u b lish ed sev era l trac ts ag a in s t M o lin - ism and th e Je su it O rd e r d u rin g th e 1 6 8 0 ’s. F ro m th e p o in t o f v iew o f F u lg en tiu s o f N ieu w p o o rt and o th e r an ti-Jansen is ts , w h o w ere co n v in ced th a t th e A u gu stin u s h a d b ee n righ tly c o n d e m n e d by In n o cen t X an d A le x a n d e r V ll, a u th o rs such as th e se h ad to b e c o n s id e re d Ja n se n is t h ere tics , a l th o u g h th e y w o u ld h av e p re fe rre d to b e ca lle d ‘A u g u s tin ia n s ’ th e m se lv e s . E v e n if H ild eb ran d w as r ig h t in c la im in g th a t F u lg en tiu s o f N ie u w p o o rt a n d h is co m p an io n s tried to e n h a n ce th e ir p e rso n a l p o sitio n


w ith in th e O rd e r b y ac c u s in g fe llo w b ro th e rs su c h as F u lg e n tiu s o f M aase ik an d E ugen ius o f B ru g es , th is d o es n o t a lte r the fac t th a t the la tte r ad v o ca ted th e d o c trin es o f Ja n sen iu s an d by d o in g th is o ffe red a th eo lo g ica l occas ion f o r p ro te s t to th o se w h o ch am p io n ed A lex a n d e r V U ’s claim th a t th e fiv e p ro p o sitio n s co n d e m n e d by In n o cen t X in Cum occasion e p e rfec tly re n d e re d the te ac h in g o f Jansen iu s .

H ild e b ra n d ’s c la im th a t th e re n e v e r w as a g e n u in e Ja n se n is t a m o n g th e F le m ish C a p u c h in s a n d th a t th e a c c u s a tio n s o f F u lg e n tiu s o f N ie u w p o o rt a n d o th e rs o n ly w ere a m e a n s o f s e lf-p ro m o tio n , w as b a s e d o n a n a rro w an d p u re ly fo rm a l d e f in itio n o f th e w o rd ‘J a n se n is t ', a c c o rd in g to w h ic h b e in g a Ja n se n is t eq u a ls n o t c o n d e m n in g th e fiv e p ro p o s itio n s . T h ro u g h th is d e f in itio n H ild e b ra n d tu rn e d J a n se n ism in to a p h a n to m , s in c e m o s t o f J a n s e n iu s ’ fo llo w e rs - in c lu d in g F u lg e n tiu s o f M a a se ik a n d E u g e n iu s o f B ru g e s - w ere p re p a re d to c o n d e m n th e f iv e p ro p o s itio n s , b u t s im u lta n e o u s ly su s ta in e d th a t th e ir co n d e m n e d se n se d id n o t re f le c t th e te a c h in g o f th e A u g u stin u s. A n x io u sly try in g to e x c lu d e th e in flu e n ce o f J a n se n is m o n h is p red e cesso rs o f th e 17th an d 18th ce n tu r ie s , H ild e b ra n d th u s p a ra d o x ic a lly fe ll b ac k o n a s tra teg y th a t in a w ay w as a lre ad y d e p lo y e d by J a n s e n iu s ' fo llo w ers th e m se lv e s . It w a s a lso th e s tra teg y b y m e a n s o f w h ic h so m e 1 7 th -cen tu ry F le m ish S u p e r io rs - e s p e c ia lly th e P ro v in c ia l M ic h ae l o f O u d e n b o sc h (1 6 7 8 -1 6 8 1 , 1 6 8 4 -1 687 an d 169 0 -1 6 9 5 ) - tried to p ro v e the im p e r tin e n c e o f se v e ra l a n t i- J a n s e n is t m e a s u re s tha t had b e e n im p o sed b y th e R o m a n a u th o ritie s o n th e F la n d ro -B e lg ia n P ro v in c e .

G e rt P a r to en s L a tin L ite ra tu re , F ac u lty o f A rts

H is to ry o f C h u rc h an d T h e o lo g y , F ac u lty o f T h eo lo g yK .U . L eu v e n

the earliest phase of the jansenist controversy … · part ii: the cases of augustinus of’s...

Documents