Jansenism Between Thomism and Calvinism

Home , Antoine Arnauld, Cornelius Jansen, Jansenism, Lettres provinciales

chapter 12 ‘The World Is Content with Words’: Jansenism between Thomism and Calvinism

Eric J. DeMeuse

The controversies on grace which dominated theological discussion in the 17th century evidenced more confessional overlap than has often been recognized. Two loci classici of these controversies were, on the Catholic side, the unre- solved Congregatio de auxiliis between the Dominicans and Jesuits, and, on the Reformed side, the Synod of Dordt (1618–19), which upheld the position of the Counter-Remonstrants over that of the Arminians. In the aftermath of these two events, a number of theologians on all sides recognized certain congruities between the various positions. The philosopher Gottfried Leibniz (1646–1716) noted in 1688 that many Catholics consider Dordt’s position on predestination to be very close to that of Thomas Aquinas (d. 1274)—a judgment confirmed by the other articles in this volume.1 The French philosopher Pierre Bayle (1647– 1706), in his famous Dictionnaire, likewise argued that the position of the “Geneva confession” on grace was identical to that of the Thomists, but to this number he added a third party, the Jansenists.2 Despite admitting in 1684 that “Jansenism is a species of heresy that no one can define,”3 Bayle asserted that “the physical predetermination of the Thomists, the necessity of St. Augustin, that of the Jansenists, and that of Calvin, are all at the bottom exactly the same thing,” and expressed incredulity that the Thomists and the “Court of

1 Leibniz to Landgrave, July or August 1688, cited in Jean Orcibal, Jansénius d’Ypres (1585–1638) (Paris: 1989), 99 n. 24. 2 Pierre Bayle, A General Dictionary, Historical and Critical, eds John Peter Bernard et al., 10 vols (London: James Bettenham, 1734–41), 6:362. 3 Pierre Bayle, Recueil de quelques pièces curieuses concernant la philosophie de Monsieur Des- cartes (Amsterdam: Desbordes, 1684), 23, translated in Tad M. Schmaltz, “What Has Carte- sianism to Do with Jansenism?” Journal of the History of Ideas 60, no. 1 (1999): 37–56, here 42. In Bayle’s defense, Jansenism as a movement proved theologically and geographically diffuse, made more difficult to pinpoint by the liberality with which its opponents wielded the accusation of “Jansenist.” As Ephraim Radner writes, “[F.] Strowski’s judgment that there is no such thing as ‘Jansenism,’ but only individual ‘jansenists,’ is too extreme, but nonethe- less suggestive, given the heterogeneity of Jansenist commitments and their uneven embrace (Strowski, 1910).” “Early Modern Jansenism,” in The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theolo- gy 1600–1800, eds Ulrich L. Lehner, Richard A. Muller, and A.G. Roeber (Oxford: 2016), 436–50.

Rome” could disavow Cornelius Jansen (1585–1638) yet laud Augustine.4 Such sentiments were hardly unique to Leibniz and Bayle.5 This essay investigates Bayle’s claim from the perspective of the Jansenists themselves—or, as they preferred to be called, the “Disciples of St. Augustine.”6 How did Jansen and his later defenders view their theology of grace in com- parison with that of the Thomists and the Calvinists, and, correlatively, what importance did the Congregatio de auxiliis and the Synod of Dordt hold for their self-understanding? Scholars have recognized for a long time now a tendency toward Thomism in “second stage” Jansenism—something the works of E.D. James and Sylvio De Franceschi, to which parts of the present study are very much indebted, have highlighted and deepened.7 There is a question, however,

4 Bayle, A General Dictionary, 2:479. 5 Pierre Jurieu, discussed below, also elides the doctrines de gratia of the Thomists, Calvinists, and Jansenists. Richard Baxter, A Key for Catholicks (London: R.W., 1659), 366, wrote, “How neer come the Dominicans and Jansenians to us in the points of Predestination, Grace and Free-will? For my own part, I scarce know a Protestant that my thoughts in these do more concur with, then they do with Jansenius, (that is indeed, with Augustine himself.)” John Owen identified Jansen’s “System of Doctrines concerning the Grace of God, and the wills of men” as reviving the same Augustinian principles of “one whole Order of their Fryers [Do- minicans].” Owen, Preface to Theophilus Gale, The True Idea of Jansenisme, both Historick and Dogmatick (London: Th. Gilbert, 1669), a4r-a5r. Owen also lauded “the more learned school- men,” like the Dominican Diego Álvarez, who “stoutly maintain the truth herein against the innovating Jesuits.” A Display of Arminianism (London: R. Edwards, 1809), 244. Cf. Sebastian Rehnman, Divine Discourse: The Theological Methodology of John Owen (Grand Rapids: 2002), 43; Carl R. Trueman, John Owen: Reformed Catholic, Renaissance Man (Aldershot: 2007), 23– 26. See also Richard Parr, The life of the Most Reverend Father in God, James Usher, late Lord Arch-Bishop of Armagh (London: Nathanael Ranew, 1686), 32. Goudriaan’s contribution to the present volume provides additional examples. 6 Brian Strayer notes that Jansenists hardly accepted the label, preferring “true Catholics” or “disciples of Saint Augustine.” See Brian E. Strayer, Suffering Saints: Jansenists and Con- vulsionnaires in France, 1640–1799 (Brighton: 2008), 16. He also notes that Antoine Arnauld deemed “Thomist” an acceptable name, but I do not see how this conclusion can be drawn from the source he cites. Strayer cites Arnauld’s Seconde lettre à un Duc et Pair de France (Paris: 1655), in which Arnauld responds to those who call him and his friends “Jansenists,” writing that this is done with derision and not in the same spirit that those who follow the thought of Thomas Aquinas are called “Thomists.” Oeuvres de Messire Antoine Arnauld, eds Gabriel du Pac de Bellegarde and Jean Hautefage, 43 vols (Paris and Lousanne: Sigismond d’Arnay, 1775–83), 19:394. 7 Nigel Abercrombie, The Origins of Jansenism (Oxford: 1936), 118. See E.D. James, Pierre Nicole, Jansenist and Humanist: A Study of His Thought (The Hague: 1972), 7–44; E.D. James, “The Problem of Sufficient Grace and the Lettres Provinciales,” French Studies 21, no. 3 (1967): 205– 19; Sylvio Hermann De Franceschi, Entre saint Augustin et saint Thomas. Les jansénistes et le refuge thomiste (1653–1663): à propos des 1re, 2e et 18e Provinciales (Paris: 2009); Sylvio Hermann De Franceschi, “Le jansénisme face à la tentation thomiste. Antoine Arnauld et le thomisme de gratia après les cinq Articles de 1663,” Revue Thomiste 109, no. 1 (2009): 5–54;