Scepticism, atheism and libertinism; a study of the polemic between François Garasse and François Oaier, 1623-25. by Andrew Duncan Erskine Thesis submitted for PhD examination University of London July 1996 Total number of words : 97,392 ProQuest Number: 10017480 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest. ProQuest 10017480 Published by ProQuest LLC(2016). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 11 ABSTRACT The Jesuit Garasse's Doctrine curieuse (1623), an attack on what he saw as the rise of atheism, has been quoted by many modern scholars, most notably Pintard in his Libertinage érudit (1943), as proof that libertinism existed in doctrinal form from the 1620s. This 'intellectual libertinism', as Pintard calls it, was allegedly practised by such influential thinkers as Gassendi, Naudé and La Mothe Le Vayer, and was the direct forerunner of later 17th- and 18th-century free thought. Pintard's case rests on the assumption that Garasse was right to condemn Charron's De la Sagesse (1601) as the work of a secret atheist. Ogier, on the other hand, read De la Sagesse as a secular work by a Christian sceptic and humanist who was unquestionably devout and true to his priestly calling. In his Jugement & censure du livre de la doctrine curieuse (1623), Ogier condemns Garasse as a wordy scholastic unfit to judge the works of learned humanists; he sees him as an ignorant and narrow scholastic teacher, inaccurate in his scholarship and with a mind closed to humanist learning. A historical study of the polemic between Ogier and Garasse shows that their differences were the traditional ones one might expect: both the scholastic Garasse and the humanist Ogier use terms and arguments common in the polemics of their Renaissance antecedents. Ogier's view of Charron as a Christian humanist is echoed by Port-Royal's Saint-Cyran in his attack on Garasse's Somme théologique (1625) where he defends Charron as an Augustinian and condemns Garasse as an incompetent theologian. Ill Moreover, Garasse's Somme, where he expresses his own Christian apology and theology, contains a surprising development: while continuing to censure Charron as a writer, he himself makes use of many of the Christian sceptics' arguments - precisely those for which he had condemned Charron. IV CONTENTS Introduction................................................ 1 One: Humanists and scholastics in the Renaissance and seventeenth century 1. Pierre Charron........................................... 7 2. The humanist-scholastic debate...........................9 3. Desiderius Erasmus (1467 - 1536)........................11 4. Pietro Pom^onazzi (1462 - 1525).........................18 5. Michel de Montaigne (1533 - 1592).......................21 6. The question of Charron's faith.........................25 7. Garasse: scepticism seen as a cloak for atheism......... 34 Two: The history of criticism of Garasse 1. Garasse's bibliothèque des libertins................... 41 2. Garasse in the nineteenth century.......................42 3. Garasse as chronicler of libertinism....................45 4. Charbonnel: libertinism as Italian naturalism.......... 49 5. Busson: French christianisation of Italian naturalism...52 6. Pintard's Libertinage érudit............................56 7. Kristeller: a defender of Pomponazzi....................60 8. Popkin: the libertins érudits as Christian sceptics 63 9. Post-Pintard defenders of Charron.......................65 10. Garasse the rhetorician and polemicist................ 66 11. Mÿ own methodology..................................... 68 Three: François Garasse 1. Garasse's early life....................................72 2. Garas se ' s early works...................................73 3. The Banquet des sages and the Rabelais reformé......... 76 4. The Recherches des recherches and Doctrine curieuse 79 5. The Apologie and the Somme théologique................. 83 6. Garasse in exile........................................ 84 Four: François Ogier 1. Ogier's life and works................................. .87 2. Ogier's philosophical position..........................88 Five: La Doctrine curieuse (1): the text 1. Garasse's targets....................................... 92 2. The maxims..............................................93 3. The expositions & preuves of the maxims................ 96 4. The refutations of the maxims.......................... 98 Six: La Doctrine curieuse (2): The main butts of Garasse's polemic (1): Théophile de Viau and Lucilio Vanini 1. Garasse's uncontroversial targets......................107 2. Garasse's treatment of Théophile de Viau...............108 3. Garasse's treatment of Vanini..........................112 Seven: La Doctrine curieuse (3): The main butts of Garasse's polemic (2): Pierre Charron 1. Garasse's direct references to Charron............... 120 2. The three categories of people.........................120 3. On the humanity of Christ.............................. 127 4. Charron and the maxims................................. 130 5. Charron as libertine................................... 137 6. Garasse's treatment of other humanists.................142 Eight : Jtiaement & censure du livre de la doctrine curieuse (1): the text 1. The structure of the Jüqement & censure...............149 2. The prefatory documents............................... 150 3. The Censure du livre de la doctrine curieuse..........154 Nine: Jugement & censure du livre de la doctrine curieuse (2): Ogier's critical standpoint 1. Ogier a self-knowing humanist..........................169 2. Ogier as defender of Charron...........................174 3. Ogier as follower of Charron...........................175 Ten: Jugement & censure du livre de la doctrine curieuse (3): Ogier's methods of attacking Garasse 1. Ogier's belittling of Garasse..........................180 2. Ogier's belittling of Garasse's book...................182 3. Ogier's views on Garasse's defence of his polemical style.................................................. 184 4. The influence of Charron on Ogier's arguments.........185 5. Garasse and ohilautia................................. 191 6. Ogier's use of invective.............................. 194 7. Ogier's conclusion: that Garasse is a self-loving fool................................................... 196 Eleven: Jugement & censure du livre de la doctrine curieuse (4): Ogier and the issue of atheism 1. Ogier and Charron as defenders of Christian humanism...199 2. Other critics of De la Sagesse........................ 201 Twelve: Garasse's Apologie (1): the text 1. The two editions of the Apologie...................... 207 2. The second edition.................................... 209 3. The structure and content of the Apologie............. 211 4. A conciliatory conclusion............................. 217 Thirteen: Garasse's Apologie (2): Garasse's objections to Charron and scepticism 1. Garasse's reasons for attacking Charron............... 219 2. Garasse's objections to Les Trois veritez............. 220 3. Garasse's criticism of De la Sagesse.................. 226 4. Charron: Epicurean Christian or atheist?.............. 232 5. Garasse's objections to scepticism in Ogier's work 235 6. Garasse's objection to the sceptic's concern with the body............................................... 237 VI Fourteen: Garasse's Apoloaie (3): Garasse's methods of attack 1. Garasse's response to Ogier's polemic................. 241 2. Garasse and the Jesuits................................245 3. Conclusion: the unchanging positions of Garasse and Ogier.............................................. 251 Fifteen: The letters of reconciliation 1. Garasse's letter....................................... 254 2. Ogier's letter......................................... 257 3. The meaning of the reconciliation..................... 259 Sixteen: The Ant i-Garas se 1. The text............................................... 266 2. Rémy's polemical strategy..............................267 3. Rémy's new criticisms of Garasse.......................269 4. Rémy's focus on Garasse as a pedant................... 272 5. Rémy's use of classical allusions......................273 Seventeen : The Nouveau -jugement 1. The text............................................... 280 2. Garasse's attack on humanism...........................283 Eighteen: La Somme théoloaiaue (1): the text 1. Garasse's project...................................... 287 2. The preface............................................ 288 3. Book 1: De l'Athéisme..................................291 4. Book 2: De Dieu........................................ 295 5. Book 3: De Jesus Christ................................297 Nineteen: La Somme théoloaiaue (2): Garasse's treatment of Charron 1. Garasse's approach to Charron: a counter-attack....... 300 2. Garasse's objections to Charron's text.................301 3. 'Qui des couvre mieux la foiblesse humaine que la Religion'............................................. 303 Twenty: La Somme théoloaiaue (3): Garasse