others had here and there d ■ before it. Jesuitism,
moreover, was thefirst to gel up these sophisms as rules; lir-t brought them into an organized system of doctrine, and formed them as methods of the Christian doctrine of morals; lirsl scientifically constituted, authorized, and sanctioned them as leading principles of Catholic mo- rality: and — what is not to be overlooked — lias first applied them to the allotment, of the moral life to the natural weaknesses of the different ranks and classes, in order tint "the kingdom of heaven henceforth may Buffer no violence."
We will not forget, however, that after the Theatines, in a genera] assembly of their order, in 1598, had for- mally renounced probabilism, several members of the Societj o! Jesus likewise raised their voice against the abuses of tin' system: we mention among them the Portuguese Ferdinand l.'ebelle and the Italian CotnitO- lus. A sln>rt time afterwards the general, of the order. Mutius Yiletesehi. expressed similar opinions in a se- ries of writings. We read in one of them: "Nomjul-
lorum ex societate sentential, in rebus prsesertim ad (stantibus, plus nimio libera' non modo pericu- lum est ne ipsam evertant, sed ne ecclesise etiam Dei universes insignia afferant detrimenta. Omni itaque studio perficiant ut qui docent scribuntne minime hac regula et norma in deleetu sententiarum utanliir: I'm ri quis potest, probabilis est, aucton mm caret. Verum ad eas sententias accedant quae tutiores, qua? graviores majorisque nominis doctorum suffragiis sum frequen- tatse; quae bonis moribus conducunt magis; qua; deni- que pietatem alere et prodesse queunt, non vastare, non perdere." The Sorbonne, too, opened fire upon the proba»
bilistic aberrations with the e lemnalion of the Mag- nus director curalorum, vicariorum, it confessariorum of ]'. .Milliard, and t he clergy of France continued the bat- tle with praiseworthy zeal. The University of Louvain made similar declarations. In L653 the Dominicans, in I chapter held at Rome, joined their voice to horities. Again, some Jesuits, among others Candidus Philalethes (Andre Leblanc), censured those of their order who were advocates of probabilism. Vet these antagonistic elements within Jesuitism were the
exceptions I the rule. The rank and tile of I he So- ciety of Jesus were wedded to their new idols; and as tb. Jesuits were ihe ,-hief representatives of Romish
ethics in Ihe lilth and 17th centuries, those who chose
to attack Romanism levelled their guns directly at
probabilism : while those who favored Romanism, or
were themselves its supporter-, but desired the down- fall of Jesuitism, directly charged on this particular body .d' probabilists. Thus, e. g., Jansenism lifted up its voice against probabilism in older to destroy by this detour their enemies the .1. -mi-. Pascal, tie- great, if not immortal, advocate of the Port-Kayalists, adopted this method, in his TMtres Provinciates he puts to- gether these aberrations of members of the Jesuitic ( >r- der; and as he represents the doctrine of probability, it is a curious perversion of the principle of authority—
the applicati if it to legitimatize doubt and license.
He stigmatized probabilism as the •■ morals of the Jes- uits." The great publicity which the Provin I - ters owed to the splendid talent of their author became, especially among the educated classes, an inflexible opinion against Jesuits, which continues to this day. A number of refutations of the Provincial Letters ap- peared, some of them very awkward. The Jesuit Pi- lot, in his Apologu pour les Casuistes (Paris, 1657), made the following assertion: If an opinion is probable, it is sure, and can In- followed; surety has no degrees, but is indivisible, so far as the moral action connected with a probable opinion is concerned; in consequence, a Less probable opinion is a- sure as a more probable {Apol. p. -pit. Similar opinions were sustained by the Jesuits Matthew de Moya, Honore" Lefevre, and Ktienne des Champs (Quwstio Facti d< Sententia TAeologorum Societatis circa Opimones probabiles, Paris. 1659), I he ablest refutation, Reponse aux Lettres provincic ih Montalte; ou Eidrettens de Cleandn et Eudoze, is due to the Jesuit Daniel, the well-known French histo- rian, who gives a very elaborate account of probabilism. He observes that, according to the doctrine of the Jes- uits, two conditions are required for the probability of an opinion: first, it can contradict neither the dogmas and truths taught by the Church, nor any evident rea- son; secondly, it must be founded on sound judgment, and not SPt up wantonly against the prevailing doctrine of the competent teachers.
Among these tumultuous contests iii the domain of Catholic morals, the Apostolic See could not remain silent. Ihe pope condemned the Provincial Letters (Sept. t;. 1657) on one side, and Tirol's Apology on the other (August, 1659). Pope Alexander VI 1 declared against the dangerous excrescences of probabilism in a decree of Sept. 24, L665; and his successor, Innocent XI. strictly defined its limits by his bull of L679. The first-mentioned decree commences with these memora- ble word- : '■ ( >i n most holy father ha- beard, not with- out great sorrow, that several opinions, which weaken Christian discipline and prepare destruction to tin' souls. have been partly revived and partly started for the first time, and that the unbridled license of some extrava- gant minds increases every day. whereby a way of thinking has crept into the Church which is altogether at variance with Christian simplicity and the doctrine of the holy fathers, ami which, should the believers make it the rule of their life, would produce a great moral corruption." Among the moral propositions cen- sured by these two papal decries, the following concern probabilism: from the tirst decree, Prop. 27 "Si liber sit alicujus junioris et moderni, delict opinio censeri pro- babilis, dum non constet rejectara esse a Sede apostolica tanquam improhabilem ;" from the latter. Prop. 1 — " Non est illicitnm in sacramenti- conferendis sequi opinionem probabilem de valore sacramenti, relicta tn- tiore. nisi id vetet lex. conventio ant pcriculutn gravis damni incurrendi. Hinc sententia probabili tantum uteiidum non est in collatione baptismi, ordinis sacer- dotalis aul episcopalis." Prop.2 " Probabiliter existi- mo judicem posse judicarejuxta opinionem etiam minus probabilem." Prop. S -" Generatim, dum probabilitate sive intrinseca Bive extrinseca. quantumvis tenui. modo a probabilitatis finibus non exeatur, confisi aliquid agt- mus, semper prudenter agimus." Prop, l "Abinfide- litate excusabitur infidelis non credens, ductus opinionc