".Tansenistic jirinciples now became far more wide- ly diffused. The authorities of the Chiu-ch of Rome thought a Janseiiist was not necessarily a heretic ; the schools of Port-Royal flourished even more than before the persecution and imprisonment ;" the learned Tille- mont became one of her recluses, and Racine one of her students. The incumbents of the papal chair even be- came the friends of Port-Royal, and obtained no little aid from it in their opposition to the Jesuits, which In- nocent XI more especially manifested. This, of course, exasperated the Jesuits more than ever, and the great friend and protector of Jansenism at court, the duch- ess of Longueville, having died, they succeeded in gain- ing over Louis XIV, who, it is said, "abhorring Jansen- ism quite as much as he abhorred Protestantism, and very much more than he abhorred atheism," had ab- stained from open violence only at the instance of the duchess of Longueville. An edict was issued forbid- ding the admission of new members to Port-Royal, and the recluses were ordered to " quit the valley of Port- Royal at once and forever ;" while Dr. Arnauld, the principal support of Jansenism, was obliged to tiee from
France, and to seek a refuge in the Low Countries, where he died in 1694. Another and last personal disciple of Cyran died in 1695. In the same and the following year passed away also the other great supports of Jansenism, and it was already whispered among the Jesuits and at the French court that the heretical movement had been successfully eradicated, when suddenly the crijiplcd Jan- senism received a fresh start. A priest of the ( Jratory of Paris, P. Quesnel, a man of learning, zeal, and spirit- uality of mind, had i)ublished the New Testament witli annotations wliicli were of a practical and edifying char- acter, but strongly tinged with Jansenistic doctrines. It had been published in successive portions from 1671 to 1687, It had met at first with a most favorable re- ception. The Sorbonnehad approved it; pope Clement XI had commended it ; Franc^ois Harle, archbishop of Paris, an avowed enemy of the Jansenists, had cx])ress- ed his approbation of it; Louis Antoine de Noailles, bishop of Chalons, subsequently archbishop of Paris, and finally a cardinal, who was then a zealous advocate of the Jansenistic doctrines, had even taken the work under his special protection, and enjoined its perusal in his diocese. It had been and still was eagerly read, and had alreadj' passed through many editions. An- other edition had just (1702) become necessary, which was published under the title of Le nouveau Testament en Francois, avec des reflexions morales sur chuqiie ver- se, pour en rendre la lecture plus utile, et la meditation plus aisee. The author had never signed the five prop- ositions, and his confessor now put the question to the Sorbonne "whether he might admit to communion a spiritual person who had done no more than maintain the 'reverential silence,' as some of the bishops had done," and the reply from the Sorbonne came that, with regard to points of fact, respectful obedience was suffi- cient obedience. But hardly had the cos de conscience, as it is technically termed, become known at Rome, when poiie Clement XI condemned it in the most severe terms (Feb. 12, 1703), and complained to the king of those who so thoughtlessly stirred up the old controver- sy. Finally, the bull Vineam Domini (July 15, 1705) confirmed and renewed all preceding condemnations of the five propositions. Tliis bull was accepted by the assembly of the clergy, and registered in Parliament. But with it the Jesuits were by no means (piieted. They desired complete victory. Another edition of Quesnel's Reflexions morales having become necessary, and it being the production of a decided Jansenist, pop- ularizing the Port-Royalists, who made it one of their duties to distribute it freely among the people, they de- termined that it also should be suppressed. They per- sisted in their efforts to secure the condemnation of the work by the papal see until at last success crowned their undertakuig. In 1708 Clement XI pronounced against it, and in 1712 it was prohibited by a papal edict as "a text-book of undisguised Jansenism." By this time the king of France (Louis XIV) and the Jesuits were in league together, and we need not wonder that the Jan- senists, as opponents of the Jesuits, were severely dealt with. Indeed, it is asserted that this bull, as well as many others that were issued about ttiis time in Rome, and aiming at the French Church, were one and all dic- tated in Paris. Says Tregelles (Jansenists, p. 38), "The king and the Jesuits procured whatever buUs they Avant- ed from the pope, and when they did not sutHciently set forth the Jansenist heresy, they were returned from Paris to Rome with corrections and alterations, to which the pope acceded." No wonder, then, that the bull of 1712 was in 1713 followed by another still severer, fa- mous as the bull Unif/enitus, by which were condemned all of the writings of (Juesnel, and all that had ever been or might ever be written in their defence. It also sin- gled out 101 iiropositions from the works of Quesnel " as false, captious, evil sounding, offensive to pious (!) ears, scandalous, pernicious, rash, and injurious to the Church and its customs ; contumelious, not against the Church merely, but also against the secular authorities;