Eighth Objection: Compulsion in the literal Sense is maliciously misrepresented, by supposing it authorizes Violences committed against the Truth. The Answer to this; by which it is prov'd, that the literal Sense does in reality authorize the stirring up Persecutions against the Cause of Truth, and that an erroneous Conscience has the same Rights as an enlighten'd Conscience.
Bayle, Pierre. Philosophical Commentary on the Words of the Gospel 'Compel Them to Come in'. (Anonymous Translation) 1708.
I don't believe and one will contest the Truth of this Principle, Whatever is done against the Dictates of Conscience is Sin; for it is so very evident, that Conscience is a Light dictating that such a thing is good or bad, that it is not probable any one will dispute the Definition.
Bayle, Pierre. Philosophical Commentary on the Words of the Gospel 'Compel Them to Come in'. (Anonymous Translation) 1708.
But I go still further, and say, that a Sin does not only become the greatest that can be in its kind, by being committed against the greatest degree of Knowledge, but also that of two Actions, one of which we call good, the other bad, the good being done against the Instincts of Conscience, is a greater Sin than the bad Action done from the Instincts of Conscience. I shall explain by self by an Example.
Bayle, Pierre. Philosophical Commentary on the Words of the Gospel 'Compel Them to Come in'. (Anonymous Translation) 1708.
The doing a thing which we call evil, from the Dictates of Conscience, tho in reality erroneous, renders this Action much less evil, than another Action of the nature of those which we call good, done against the Dictate of Conscience suppos'd to be truly inform'd. From all these Principles I may reasonably conclude, that the first and most indispensable of all our Obligations, is that of never acting against the Instincts of Conscience; and that every Action done against the Lights of Conscience is essentially evil: So that as the Law of loving God can never be dispens'd with, because the hating God is an Act essentially evil; so the Law of never violating the Lights of our Conscience is such as God himself can never dispense with; for asmuch as this were in reality indulging us in the Contempt or Hatred of himself, Acts intrinsically and in their own nature criminal. There is therefore an eternal and immutable Law, obliging Man, upon pain of incurring the Guilt of the most heinous mortal Sin that can be committed, never to do any thing in violation and in despite of Conscience.
Bayle, Pierre. Philosophical Commentary on the Words of the Gospel 'Compel Them to Come in'. (Anonymous Translation) 1708.
That If once it be suppos'd, that God has clearly and distinctly reveal'd a Law to Christians in general, obliging them to exterminate all false Religions by Fire and Sword; a Socinian, who lets the other Sects of Christianity live in quiet, who does not bestir himself to establish his own Religion, or perhaps favors those who are supplanting it, and establishing a different Sect with all their might, cannot be excus'd in his Conduct but upon one or other of the following reasons: Either because he believes the Law in question ought not to be understood in the strictness of the Letter, but has a mythical Meaning which all the World is not oblig'd to dive into; or because he thinks, that the Execution of this Law does not belong to him; or because he is not overcertain, that Socinianism is the true Doctrine; or last of all, because believing any Religion good enough, it's equal to him which is uppermost: he'l for his part look on and let things work, resolv'd to be a Prey to the Conqueror; or perhaps favors one side, tho very opposite to Socinianism, that he may enter the Lists with a better Grace, when this has got the day. These, in my opinion, are all the ways that can be thought on for disculpating a Socinian, who is tardy in propagating his own Religion, after God had reveal'd the suppos'd Law; and consequently he must be wholly inexcusable, or exceedingly criminal, if he maintain'd this Neutrality, or if he prejudic'd his own Sect, while persuaded, 1. That God enjoins propagating the Truth by Fire and Sword; 2. That Socinianism is the Truth.
Bayle, Pierre. Philosophical Commentary on the Words of the Gospel 'Compel Them to Come in'. (Anonymous Translation) 1708.
But before I make an end of this, I shall answer an Objection from a very common Topick. You did not, they'l tell me, make a fair Enumeration of ways and means, when you said, the Socinian had but one of three Choices to make. There's a fourth, and that the only good one, which is changing to the Truth; and then he may follow the Instincts of his Conscience with Impunity. This I confess is the better part; but as it cannot be chosen except on one condition, I maintain, that so long as this condition is wanting, he must necessarily chuse among the other three. The Condition I speak of needs not being explain'd. All the World is satisfy'd this is one, that the Party know the Truth to be the Truth: every Heretick, provided he knows it, and as soon as he knows it, but not otherwise nor sooner; for so long as it appears to him a hideous Grotesque of Falshood and Lye, so long he is not to admit, he is to fly and detest it.
Bayle, Pierre. Philosophical Commentary on the Words of the Gospel 'Compel Them to Come in'. (Anonymous Translation) 1708.
The first thing therefore a Heretick shou'd be desir'd to do, is, to search after Truth, and not opinionatively pretend he has found it. But if he answer, that he has searched as much as possible, that all his In quirys have ended, in making him see more and more, that the Truth is on his own side; and shou'd he watch day and night, that he never shou'd believe any other thing, but what's already firmly ingrafted in his Soul, to be the reveal'd Truth; 'twere ridiculous telling him to beware following the Lights of his Conscience, and think of Conversion.
Bayle, Pierre. Philosophical Commentary on the Words of the Gospel 'Compel Them to Come in'. (Anonymous Translation) 1708.
Every one ought to set apart some Portion of his time for Instruction, and even be ready to renounce what he had believ'd most true, if it be made appear to him false: but after all one can't be a Sceptick or Pyrrhonist in Religion all his Life long, he must fix upon some Principles, and act according to them; and whether he's determin'd to true or false, 'tis equally evident, that he ought to exercise Acts of Virtue and Love towards God, and shun that capital Offence of acting against Conscience. Whence it ap pears, that a Socinian, who has done his utmost Endeavors towards discovering the Truth, is limited in his Choice to one of the three things I propos'd. Sending him back eternally to the fourth, means, that he shou'd spend his whole Life in mere Speculation, without ever consulting his Conscience to act according to its Lights. Now this of all Absurditys were surely the greatest...
Bayle, Pierre. Philosophical Commentary on the Words of the Gospel 'Compel Them to Come in'. (Anonymous Translation) 1708.
Can any thing be thought of less just at bottom or less solid, than this Comparison of St. Augustine's between a frantick Person bound hand and foot to keep him from throwing himself out at a window, and a Heretick forcibly restrain'd from following the Motions of his Conscience? . . . A very lame unexact Comparison! because to save the Life of a Mad- man, who is ready to throw himself down a Precipice, it's wholly indifferent whether he consent or no; he's equally preserv'd from the danger with or without his consent, and therefore a wise and charitable Act it is to frustrate his Intentions, and bind him tightly if need be, how great a reluctance soever he shews: but as to the Here tick, there's no doing him any good with regard to Salvation except his Consent be had. They may please themselves with bringing him by force into the Churches, with making him communicate by force, with making him say with his lips, and give under his hand while the Cudgel is over head, that he abjures his Errors, and embraces the Orthodox Faith; so far is this from bringing him nearer to the Kingd om of Heaven, that on the contrary it removes him farther from it. . . .
Bayle, Pierre. Philosophical Commentary on the Words of the Gospel 'Compel Them to Come in'. (Anonymous Translation) 1708.
I must offer one Remark in this place, which to me seems of some weight. He who makes but the least use of his Reason, is very capable of knowing that all Remedys ought to be adapted to the Nature of the Disease; consequently Error being Distemper of the Soul, requires Applications of a spiritual nature, such as Argument and Instruction.
Bayle, Pierre. Philosophical Commentary on the Words of the Gospel 'Compel Them to Come in'. (Anonymous Translation) 1708.
Revelation, far from contradicting this Maxim, confirms and recommends it powerfully: He therefore who makes use of this kind of Remedy towards those in Error, has done his duty; and if he has not bin able to convert Men by this means, he may safely wash his hands of them; he has acquitted himself in the sight of God of the Blood of these Men, and may commit the whole matter to him. Now if after all Arguments and Instructions, our Reason shou'd suggest an Expedient [i.e. method] which appear'd proper for recovering a Man from his Heresy, what must be done in this case? I answer, that if the Expedient be a thing in its own nature indifferent, and which if the worst came to the worst cou'd have no ill consequence he ought forthwith to try it ...
Bayle, Pierre. Philosophical Commentary on the Words of the Gospel 'Compel Them to Come in'. (Anonymous Translation) 1708.
I'll allow St. Augustine, that the joining Instruction to Threats is a lesser Evil than threatning and smiting without offering any Instruction; but here I shall stick, till the Gentlemen Apologists will be pleas'd to answer, if they can, to what was laid down in the first and second Chapters of the second Part of this Commentary, and which amounts to this: 1. That the filling Men with the Fears of temporal Punishments, and with the Hopes of temporal Advantages, is putting them in a very ill state for discerning the true Reasons of things from the false. 2. That joining Threats to Instruction with this condition, that if, at the expiration of a certain term of time, the Persons under Instruction declare they'l continue in their former Persuasion, they shall suffer all the Punishments they were threaten'd with in the utmost rigor; is a Conduct which plainly shews there was a direct, tho somewhat a more remote, Intention of forcing Con science, and plunging them into Acts of Hypocrisy. .
Bayle, Pierre. Philosophical Commentary on the Words of the Gospel 'Compel Them to Come in'. (Anonymous Translation) 1708.
It is most certain that there's no arguing from the Liberty of wholesom Reproof, for a Right of inflicting such Punishments as the Emperor's Laws ordain'd. Reproofs are allowable between Friends and Enemys; and therefore any one may make use of them, when he thinks he has a proper occasion: but Robbery and all the ways of Violence are of another strain; it is not lawful to make use of these either with Friends or Enemys, either directly or indirectly. We can neither take away our Neighbor's Goods by our own Authority, nor prompt others to do it, nor approve those that do; much less may we drive him from his House, and Home, and Country, or procure his Expulsion by the power of others. And therefore how allowable soever it may be in us to thwart and rudely to oppose the unlawful Pleasures of our Friends, it does not from hence follow that we ought to importune the Prince to deprive them of their Property, to imprison or banish them; and shou'd the Prince do this, we are in conscience oblig'd to look on it as a tyrannical Abuse of that Power with which God has entrusted him. For here in fine is the result upon this case: If the confiscating any private Party's Goods were a tyrannical Invasion, supposing him Orthodox in his Principles; and if it becomes a most-righteous Action from hence only, that he happens not to be so, it follows that the same Action of a Sin becomes a Vertue from this single Circumstance, that it's perform'd for the Interest of Religion, which plainly overthrows all Morality and natural Religion, as I think I have fully demonstrated. . . .
Bayle, Pierre. Philosophical Commentary on the Words of the Gospel 'Compel Them to Come in'. (Anonymous Translation) 1708.
From hence it appears, that it is their Duty to enquire, whether People observe the Rules of the true Religion within their Dominions, or whether they are guilty of Profaneness and Irreligion. But the great Question is, how they ought to behave themselves when they are inform'd, that a Party of their Subjects follow not that Religion which their Princes believe to be true, but exercise another Worship which they look on as impious and damnable. I think I have already most evidently prov'd, to all who are not utterly blinded by their Prejudices, that Princes ought in this case to content themselves with letting the Controversy play, and convincing them, if it be possible, by sound Arguments and Instructions. Having done their Duty this way as much as in them lies, they ought to think themselves acquitted before God; and for the rest take care, that this Sect, which differs from their own, contain themselves within Bounds, and live like good Subjects, and good Citizens. But say they, this Sect is daily committing the horriblest Impietys and Profanations. Yes, say I, if you define things by your Notions of them, but not if you consider them according to the Definitions of the Sect; for they pretend, that the Impietys and Profanations are all of your side, and that their own is the only true and perfect Worship of God. This brings me again to the applying a Thought of the Bishop of Meaux [i.e. Bishop Bossuet], as I did once before;
Bayle, Pierre. Philosophical Commentary on the Words of the Gospel 'Compel Them to Come in'. (Anonymous Translation) 1708.
Persuaded, as I always was, that the literal Sense of the Words, Compel them to come in, is indefensible, impious, and absurd; I did not doubt St. Augustine's defending it weakly enough, but never cou'd imagine that he'd have help'd it out with so much fallacious Reasoning. Nor did I perceive this, till I was actually in confuting him; and I'm now more sensible than ever, that one's struck with the false glare of a Paralogism [i.e. fallacy] when he reads over a Book only for an Amusement, infinitely more than when he sits down with a design to consider and answer it. I have a hundred times admir'd, while I was writing the third Part of my Commentary, how a Man cou'd have so much Wit as St. Augustine, and yet reason so wretchedly; but I'm come at last to this, that nothing is more rare than a Justness of Judgment, and a sound logical Head. Every Age produces uncommon Genius's, bright and pregnant Wits, who have a rapid Imagination, who express themselves with a deal of Eloquence, and have inexhaustible Sources for maintaining what they please: This was exactly St. Augustine's Character.
Bayle, Pierre. Philosophical Commentary on the Words of the Gospel 'Compel Them to Come in'. (Anonymous Translation) 1708.
But we find very few, who have a talent at taking the stress of a Difficulty, and who, when they go about to solve it, suffer not themselves to be dazled by Reasons, as they fancy, of their own finding and which, far from a satisfactory Solution, are liable to be retorted [i.e. turned back on them], prove too much, are wide of the point, or subject to some defect or other of this kind. What wretched things are most of St. Augustine's Comparisons! He cou'd not perceive, that the Counterparts of his Parallels clash like a couple of Loadstones [i.e. magnets] presented by their opposite Poles. This is a mighty Oversight, especially where the Point to be defended is destitute of all direct Proof. Possibly I may often make use of them: but beside that they shall be always just, I'l take care not to bring them in, after I have fairly prov'd my Thesis from evident Principles. The Reader may see how they lie in my Commentary.
Bayle, Pierre. Philosophical Commentary on the Words of the Gospel 'Compel Them to Come in'. (Anonymous Translation) 1708.
The books written against father Maimbourg's " History of Calvinism," contain so full an account of his genius and conduct, it is not necessary to dwell upon his character here; but as those who have refuted him have said nothing of a certain sermon, which furnished a writer of Port Royal with a merry tale, I will briefly allude to it. It is in a preface before the defence of the Mons translation of the New Testament, of the Cologne edition, 1668, which was not reprinted in the Geneva edition, of all the pieces which concern this translation. Hence it comes to pass that this story is but little known. It will not therefore be impertinent to insert it here, as the author of the preface tells it.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
The history of Aaron, high-priest of the Jews, and brother of Moses, is so fully related in the Pentateuch, and in the dictionaries of Moreri and Simon, that I may be excused from making an article of it in this place. I shall only observe, that his weakness in complying with the superstitious request of the Israelites, in the matter of the golden calf, has occasioned a great variety of fabulous notions. About the beginning of the seventeenth century, one Monceau or Moncaeius published an Apology for Aaron, which was condemned by the inquisition at Rome, as had been foretold to the author by the Jesuit Cornelius a Lapide. In that Apology it is supposed that Aaron designed to represent the very same form which Moses exhibited some time after, namely, a cherub ; but that the Hebrews fell down and worshipped it, contrary to his intention. An effectual confutation of this notion was published in the year 1609, by one of the doctors of the Sorbonne, who was a canon of the church of Amiens.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
The first murder originated in the first religious dispute.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
The occasion which induced Abelard to write upon this subject was, that his scholars demanded from him a philosophical account of it. " They were not satisfied with words—they desired ideas—and declared loudly, that it was impossible for them to believe what they did not understand, and that it was an imposition upon mankind, to preach up a doctrine equally incomprehensible to the teachers and the hearers ; which was as if the blind should lead the blind, according to our Saviour himself J." Upon which he set himself to explain to them the Unity of God, by comparisons drawn from human things. Pasquier accuses him of maintaining, that we ought not to believe a thing, of which we can give no reason ; " which," adds he, " is in plain terms, to destroy the general foundation of our faith." I do not ask this author, who told him that a professor approves all the conceits of his scholars, when he is so complaisant as to prevent, to the utmost of his power, the ill consequences of them. It is indeed probable that Abelard did not
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
ABELIANS, OR ABELONIANS.
This sect of heretics rose in Champagne, near Hippon, and had been some time extinct in St Augustin's days. They professed very strange principles, and such as were not likely to continue long. They ordained that each man should be in possession of his particular woman; they thought it improper, and would not allow, that a man should con. tinue single; it was necessary, according to the statutes of the order, that he should have a helpmate like unto himself: but it was not permitted him to lean upon this prop, that is, to be corporeally united to his wife: she was to him the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, the fruit of which was forbidden him under severe penalties. These people were for regulating matrimony upon the footing of the terrestrial paradise, in which Adam and Eve were united only in their affections;
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
ABRAHAM AND SARAH.
Abraham, the father and source of the faithful, was the son of Terah. He descended from Noah by Shem, from whom he was nine generations distant. The opinion that supposes him horn in the 130th year of Terah, seems to me more likely than that which places his birth in the 70th year of the same Terah. It is very likely that he was born in the city of Ur in Chaldea, whence the Holy Scripture informs us that his father went to the land of Canaan. Abraham went out with his father, and stayed with him at Haran until his death. He afterwards followed his first design, which was the journey into Palestine. The Scripture shows the divers stations he made in the land of Canaan; his journey to Egypt, where they took his wife from him, who was also his sister by his father; his other journey to Gerar, where she was likewise taken from him, and afterwards restored again as at the first time ; the victory he obtained against the four kings that had plundered Sodom ; his complaisance to his wife, who was willing he should have children by their maid-servant Hagar ; the covenant that God made with him, sealed with the sign of circumcision ; his obedience to the order he had received from God to offer up his only son ; the manner how that act was hindered ; his marriage with Keturah ; his death at 175 years of age ; and his being buried near his first wife Sarah in the cave of Machpelah. It would be useless to enlarge on these things; the Protestants know them at their fingers' end ; they learn them at the fountain-head from their youth ; and as for the Roman Catholics, they have no need of a new dictionary to instruct them; those of Mr Simon and Mr Moreri do it sufficiently. It is more proper for such a compilation as mine to mention the falsities and the uncertain traditions that concern Abraham ; but their great number would be able to discourage the most indefatigable writers. For what has not been supposed concerning the motives of his conversion ? What exploits have not been ascribed to
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
It is'a common opinion, that Abraham sucked in the poison of idolatry with his milk; and that his father Terah made statues, and taught that they must be worshipped as Gods. Some Jews have asserted, that Abraham exercised Terah's trade himself for a considerable time, that is to say, that he made idols and sold them. Others say, that the impiety which reigned in those countries being the worship of the sun and the stars, Abraham lived a long time in that idolatry, from which he converted himself by the reflections he made on the nature of the planets. He admired their motions, their beauty and order; but he observed also imperfections in them; and from all this he concluded, that there was a Being superior to the whole frame of the world, an author and a director of the universe.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
It is certain that Josephus, without owning that the patriarch was for some time infected with idolatry, maintains that, hy his wisdom and by the consideration of the universe, he ascertained the unity and the providence of God ; and that he was the first that durst oppose the popular error concerning it. He found an opposition strong enough to make him resolve to forsake his country ; which was perhaps the first time that any body exposed himself to banishment from religious zeal. If so, Abraham would be, in relation to that kind of punishment, under the law of nature, what St Stephen was, in regard of capital punishment, under the law of grace. He would be the Patriarch of the Refugees, as well as the Father of the Faithful. I do not see how it can be denied that his father was an idolater, seeing that the Holy Scripture assures us of it, calling him by his name ; but all that can thence be inferred is, that Abraham before the age of discretion was of his father's religion.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
ABSOLUTION.
This book of the taxes of the Roman chancery was printed at Paris in the year 1520. It is not the first edition, as some have imagined ; the edition of Bois-le-duc, 1664, shows that this book was printed at Rome in the year 1514, and at Cologne in 1515; and was entitled " Regulae, Constitutions, Reservationes, Cancellari S. Domini nostri Leonis Papae decimi, noviter editae et publicatae." In folio 67 it has these words: " Taxae Cancellariae, per Marcellum Silber, alias Franck, Romas, in Campo Florae, anno Mdxiv, die xvin Novembris impresse, finiunt feliciter :—The Chancery Taxes, printed by Marcellus Silber, alias Franck, at Rome, in the Campus Florae, the 18th of November, 1514, is happily completed." This is attested by two of the echevins of Bois-le-duc, together with the town-clerk, who had collated this edition of Rome, word for word, with that published by Stephen du Mont, b6okseller at Bois-le-duc, in the year 1664.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
ADAM.
Specimen of the strange and visionary Opinions concerning him.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
Of the sexual form of Adam.
A great number of the rabbis believed that Adam's body was created double, male on the one side, and female on the other ; and that the two bodies were joined together by the shoulders ; the heads looking directly opposite, like the heads of Janus. Thus they pretend that when God made Eve, he only divided the original body into two: the part which was of the masculine sex forming Adam, and that which was of the feminine sex Eve. Manesseh-Ben-Israel, the most learned rabbi of the seventeenth century, maintained this fantastical opinion, if we may believe Heidegger. The learned Maimonides, the honour and glory of the Jewish nation, had already maintained a similar notion ; and Antoinette Bourignon pretends, that before Adam sinned, he had the principle of both sexes in himself, and the virtue to produce his likeness without the help of woman. The necessity that each sex has at present to unite to each other for multiplication, is (she says) a consequence of the alterations that sin has made in human bodies. " Men think that they have been created by God as they are at present, but it is not true, seeing that sin has disfigured the work of God in them, and instead of men as they ought to be, they are become monsters in nature, divided into two imperfect sexes, unable to produce their like alone, as trees and plants do, which in that point have more perfection than men or women, who -are incapable to produce by them.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
In the first place the scholastics teach generally, that the distinctive character of God and of the creatures, is, that God has nothing that comes from elsewhere, and that the creatures have nothing but what proceeds from elsewhere. This is what they express by the barbarous words aseitas, and abalieitas, from whence they conclude that all the attributes of God are communicable to the creature except the aseitas; and consequently that it is possible for a creature to be eternal, d parte ante et d parte post*, and infinite as to knowledge, power, local presence, goodness, justice, fyc. They commonly teach, that by the obediential power creatures are susceptible of the faculty of operating all sorts of miracles, and also of the power of creating. So that if God did effectually confer on the Holy Virgin all that he could confer upon her, it follows, according to the doctrines of the school which the sister Mary of Jesus valued much, that the Holy Virgin existed from all time, that she can do all things, that she knows all things, that she fills all places, and that she is infinite in all regards. I need not suppose that our abbess of Agreda followed the doctrine of the Spanish schoolmen for I am not concerned whether she knew, or was ignorant of it.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
Robert D'arbrissel, founder of the famous abbey of Fontevraud, in the diocese of Poitiers, in the province of Anjou, was born about the year 1047, in the village of Arbrissel, seven leagues from Rennes. He went to Paris in the year 1074, and was there made a doctor of divinity. A bishop of Rennes, who though no scholar loved learned men and employed them, called him back to Britanny about the year 1085, and conferred upon him the dignities of arch-priest and official, and had the satisfaction to see him boldly struggle with the disorders that disgraced his diocese, in which the quarrels, simony, and concubinage of the clergy caused a great deal of disturbance and scandal. After Robert had for four years endeavoured to stop these disorders, seeing himself exposed by the death of his bishop to the ill will of the canons, who did not like his spirit of reformation, he bent his thoughts another way. He first went to Angers to teach divinity, but seeing the depraved manners of the age, he grew out of conceit with the world, and withdrew into a desert. His austere life in that place making a noise, many came to him to see and hear a saint, and he kept some of them with whom he began to make a sort of regular canons about the year 1094. Urban II. being in France two years after, heard so good a character of him that he sent for him, and willing to hear hin preach, he ordered him to preach a sermon at the consecration of a church.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
On the other hand, Atheism does not so necessarily imply a corruption of manners, as false religion ; and to imagine so, can only arise from neglecting to attend to the genuine principles of human actions. The usual mode of reasoning, is as follows :— " Man is by nature reasonable, he never loves without knowing why; he is naturally actuated by a regard to his own happiness, and a dislike to his own misery, and consequently he prefers the objects which operate accordingly. If he be convinced that a Providence governs the world, which nothing can escape, and which recompenses virtue with everlasting happiness, and punishes vice with eternal torment, he will not fail to embrace virtue, and fly from vice.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
The Theological advantages of Descartes's opinion concerning beasts being mere automata, do not stop there. They diffuse themselves over many important principles, which cannot be sufficiently maintained, if beasts be allowed to have a sensitive soul. Mr Locke has declared himself to be against those who will not allow reason to brutes. The following words will show you wherein he places the difference between men and beasts. " This I think I may be positive in, that the power of abstracting is not at all in them, and that the having of general ideas is that which puts a perfect distinction betwixt man and brutes ; and is an excellency, which the faculties of brutes do by no means attain to. For it is evident, we observe no footsteps in them of making use of general signs, for universal ideas ; from which we have reason to imagine, that they have not the faculty of abstracting, or making general ideas, since they have no use of words or any other general signs. And, therefore, I think we may suppose, that it is in this that the species of brutes are discriminated from men; and it is that proper difference wherein they are wholly separated, and which, at last, widens to so vast a distance.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
Isaac de Benserade was one of the finest French wits of the seventeenth century. He made himself known to the court by his verses, and had the good fortune to please Cardinal Richelieu, and Cardinal Mazarine; which was the means of making his fortune. I insert the following passage from a scarce book, entitled, " Arliquiniania."
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
BOCCACCIO'S DREAM.
This production is a proof of the disorderly intrigues of its author with the fair sex, and of the troubles with which they were attended. It is an invective against women, and the author wrote it When he was angry with a widow whom he loved, who had jilted him. I observe indeed, that generally speaking, no writers so much slander the fair sex, as those who have most frequently loved and idolized them. Women therefore, ought to mind their slanders very little, being proofs of their dominion—the murmurs of a slave, who feels the weight of his chains, or who being freed, perceives the marks of his servitude remaining on his body.—Art. Boccaccio.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
After the death of Innocent X., finding that the new pope Alexander VII. renewed the tribunals, and caused more care to be taken of everything, he despaired of having time sufficient to increase tne number of his followers, as his design required ; and therefore he left Rome and returned to Milan. He acted the devotee there, and by that means gained credit with several people; whom he caused to perform certain pious exercises, which. bad a great appearance of a spiritual life. He engaged the members of his new congregation to take an oath of secrecy to him; and when he found them confirmed in the belief of his extraordinary mission, he prescribed to them certain vows by the suggestion of his angel, as he pretended.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
EVE.
(Extraordinary traditions, concerning.)
I should never have done, if I were to relate all the fictions that are to be found in books concerning Eve and the serpent. Some have said that it was a true serpent which tempted Eve, and they suppose that, at that time, the serpent conversed familiarly with man, and that he lost the use of his speech as a punishment for his malice, in abusing the simplicity of the woman; but this opinion is so absurd, that it is surprising such an author as Josephus should not be ashamed to advance it. Some Rabbins agree with Josephus that the tempter of Eve was a true serpent; but instead of saying, as that Historian does, that the serpent tempted the good woman, pushed on by a spirit of envy, by considering the happiness promised to man in case of obedience to God, they say he was urged to it by a spirit of lust. He wished to be in Adam's place, and hoped he should enjoy that happiness, if she should become a widow; now he believed that his ambush would be fatal only to the husband, because the husband would be the first to eat the apple; therefore he resolved to lay this snare for them. Is it possible to vent more inconsistent impertinence than this ? If we believe Abrabanel, the serpent became a tempter only by the ill consequences that were drawn from his own conduct. He had no design to do harm; he did not say a word to Eve; he only had the faculty, which other beasts had not, of climbing up the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and eating the fruit. Eve, seeing that he was not the worse for it, concluded there was nothing to apprehend from that tree, and eat of it without the fear of death. Is not this to despise holy scripture more than Eve contemned the command, to explain in this manner an account, in which so particular a mention is made of a dialogue between the woman and the serpent ? Some ancient Heretics have dreamed that the tempting serpent was a virtue, produced by Jaldabaoth under the form of a serpent. This Jaldabaoth was vexed that a Deity greater than himself had made man walk upright, who before was but a worm, and had also given him the knowledge of the superior Deities; for Jaldabaoth would willingly have passed for the only true God. Therefore, out of spite, he produced the serpent of Paradise, to whose word Eve gave credit, as if it had been the word of the son of God. These Heretics had a great veneration for the serpent; " for it is he," say they, " who having taken the fruit of the tree, communicated the knowledge of good and evil to mankind." They were called Ophites. If we believe St Augustin, they carried their stupid reveries a great deal further ; for they pretended that the tempting serpent was Jesus Christ; and for that reason they fed a serpent which, at a word from their priests, would creep upon the altars, and twist about the oblations and lick them, and then return into his hole again ; and then they believed that Jesus Christ was come to sanctify their symbols, and they celebrated their communion. The opinion that Eve was seduced by the Devil, concealed under the body of a serpent, has had a thousand suppositions added to it, by the liberties whichhuman invention has taken.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
Floral Games.
According to Lactantius, Flora was a courtezan, who, having got large sums of money by prostituting herself, made the Roman people her heirs, and ordered that the income of a certain fund, which she specified, should be employed in celebrating her birthday. She would have that day remarkable by the games that were to be exhibited to the people, and named after her, Floral. They were celebrated in a very scandalous manner, and were in some sort the courtezans' feast. Lactantius adds, that the senate found a way to hide from the public the original of so infamous an institution ; but, taking the advantage of the courtezan's name, they made them believe that Flora was the goddess presiding over flowers; and that, in order to have a good harvest, it was necessary to honour that goddess every year, and render her propitious to them. " These games, therefore," adds Lactantius, " are celebrated with all the lewdness imaginable, and in a manner that perfectly answers the memory of a prostitute. For, besides the extravagant license whereby obscene talking is encouraged, the courtezans, at the instance of the people, are stripped naked, and play their monkey gambols in their sight, till the eyes of the most abandoned spectators are tired with their abominable behaviour."
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
GOOD AND EVIL.
If the conjecture of a learned critic* be well grounded, Xenophanes was of opinion that there is in nature more good than evil. Many things might be observed upon the question, whether Euripides, who held the same opinion, "is rather to be believed than Pliny, and so many other great men. who have maintained that the evils of human life surpass the good things of it, Let us consider this subject a little, and say in the first place that if the dispute be 1 only about vicious evil, it will soon be decided in favour of Pliny ; for where is a man who dares maintain that the virtuous actions, compared with the crimes of mankind, are in proportion as ten to ten thousand ? In the second place, if the dispute be about painful evil, Euripides will have several adherents. As to the second point, I shall refer it to the following remark, and also offer something there on the first. How detestable soever the opinion of two principles hath constantly appeared to all Christians, they nave nevertheless acknowledged a subaltern principle of moral evil. Divines teach us that a great number of angels having sinned, made a party in the universe against God. For brevity's sake this party is denoted by the name of devil, and he is acknowledged as the cause of the fall of the first man, and as the perpetual tempter and seducer of mankind. The devil having declared war against God from the moment of his fall, hath always continued in his rebellion, and there has never been any peace or truce. He continually applies himself to usurp the rights of his Creator, and seduces his subjects, in order to make them rebels and engage them to serve under his banner against their common master. He succeeded in his first hostilities with regard to man; in the Garden of Eden he attacked the mother of all living, and vanquished her; and immediately after he attacked the first man, and defeated him. Thus he became master of mankind. God did not abandon this prey to him, but delivered them out of their bondage, and recovered them out of that state of reprobation by virtue of the satisfaction which the second person of the Trinity undertook to pay to his justice. This second person engaged to become man, and to act as a mediator between God and mankind, and as a Redeemer of Adam and his posterity. He took upon him to combat the devil's party ; so that he was the head of God's party against the devil, who was the head of the rebellious creatures. The design was not to conquer all the posterity of Adam ; for they were all by birth, in the power of the devil, but to preserve, or recover the country which had been conquered. The design of Jesus Christ, the Mediator, aud Son of God, was to recover it; that of the devil was to hold it.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
The victory of the Mediator consisted in leading men into the paths of truth and virtue ; that of the devil in seducing them into the road of error and vice. So that in order to know whether moral good equals moral evil among men, we need only compare the victories of the devil with those of Jesus Christ. Now in history we find but very few triumphs of Jesus Christ: "Apparent rari nantes in gurgite vasto;" and we every where meet with the triumphs of the devil. The war between these two parties is a continual, or almost continual train of successes on the devil's side ; and if the rebellious party made annals of their exploits, there is not one day in the year but it would be there marked with some ample subject for bonfires, songs of triumph, and such other signs of victory. The annalist would have no occasion for hyperboles and flattery to shew the superiority of that faction. Sacredhistory, in fact, tells us of but one good man in Adam's family, and reduces to one good man the family of that good man, and so on in the other generations to Noah, in whose family we find three sons whom God saved from the deluge with their father, mother, and wives. Thus at the end of sixteen hundred and fifty-six years, all mankind, except one family of eight persons, were so deeply engaged in the interest of the devil, that the enormity of their crimes rendered it necessary to extirpate them. The deluge, that terrible monument of the justice of God, is a lofty monument of the devil's victories ; and so much the more as that general punishment did not deprive him of his prey ; the souls of those who perished in the deluge went to hell.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
Seduction of Youth.
Renatus Ayrault, eldest son of Peter Ayrault, was the cause of great uneasiness to his father. He was born at Paris on the 11th of November, 1567, and was put to school to the Jesuits. Peter Ayrault had a good opinion of them then, and was so fond of them, that he would hardly have undertaken the Parisian clergy's cause against them at that time, as he actually did afterwards in the year 1564. Perceiving in this his eldest son a lively wit, great memory, and many other good qualities, he earnestly intreated the provincial of the Jesuits and the rector of the college of Clermont, when he committed his son to their care, not to solicit him in any manner to enter their order; and assured them he had other children whom he intended to dedicate to the church, but that he designed this son should succeed him in his post, and intended him for the support of his family. They promised to grant his request, but the young gentleman's great abilities soon made the Jesuits desirous of having a subject of this importance in their society, and at length after he had studied rhetoric two years under father James Sirmond, they gave him the habit of their order in 1586.His father, without whose consent or privacy this was done, made a great stir about it; he accused them of seduction, and summoned them to deliver up his son. They answered that they knew not what was become of him. Ayrault obtained a decree of parliament, whereby the Jesuits of the college of Clermont were ordered not to receive Renatus Ayrault into their order, and to notify this prohibition to the other colleges. This decree was not obeyed, the young man was removed from place to place, his name was changed, and he was sent into Lorrain, Germany, and Italy. Henry III caused his Ambassador and the protector of his affairs, to solicit the Pope; Ayrault wrote to his holiness about it; the pope caused the list of all the Jesuits in the world to ' be shewn him; Renatus Ayrault going under another name, did not appear in this list.
Bayle, Pierre (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique. 1696.
PHILOSOPHICAL AND THEOLOGICAL SIN.
Cardinal De Lugo is said to be the first author of the discovery of the philosophical sin. See the book intitled, " The Philosophism of the Jesuits of Marseilles," there you will find the following words. " That which embarrasses De Lugo, in admitting actual sins purely philosophical in a savage, at least during the short time in which he supposes and maintains that he may be inculpably ignorant of God, is, that this savage may possibly die within this small time in his philosophical sins, and that he does not know what God may think fit to do with, nor what judgment he may pass upon such a sinner, nor in what rank he may place him for eternity. Some other Jesuits send him to the limbo of still born infants after a temporal punishment, proportioned to the philosophical sin, of what nature soever it be, whether parricide, incest, &c.; but De Lugo chooses rather to establish a new order of Providence. In this new order, God, rather than banish out of this world the philosophical sin, which is so necessary in it, and not to be embarrassed what to do in the next, with this sort of sinners, will work a miracle rather than let them die in this state. He will give them, before they leave this world, as much knowledge of the true God, as shall be necessary to qualify them for sinning theologically, or at least as much light as may be necessary to create a doubt in their minds that there may be a God, and wait and prolong their life till they have committed, with this knowledge or under this doubt, some sin which he may proceed against as a mortal sin, and punish it eternally in hell.
Pierre Bayle (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique 1696
QUIETISM.
The Indian Bramins have very odd opinions about non-entity, and their morality has a great affinity with the visions of our Quietists. They assert " that the world is but an illusion, a dream, a deceit, and that bodies, to exist truly, must cease to be in themselves, and be confounded with nothingness, which by its simplicity makes the perfection of all beings."
Pierre Bayle (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique 1696
VIRGIN.
(Mahometan holy one.) Some accounts say that Fatima, daughter of Mahomet, and wife of Ali, is the great saint they worship with so much devotion at Com, but most travellers think otherwise. Herbert, in his Persian Travels, having said that the mosque at Com is magnificent, adds, that " the devotion they have for this place has enriched it with many great presents brought to the sepulchre of Fatima, the wife of Mortis Ali, and daughter of Mahomet, the great prophet of all the Mussulmen, who is buried here. The building of the mosque is round, and made after the Epirotic manner. The tomb of the pretended saint is raised twelve feet from the ground, and is covered with white velvet: you go up to it by steps of solid silver." Some say, the saint at Com is the daughter of Ali and Fatima. This appears in Figueroa's narrative; " they informed me," says he, " that at Com there was a famous mosque, dedicated to the memory of a great saint named Leila, grand daughter of Mahomet, and the daughter of Ali and Fatima." The Sieur Bespier advances a conjecture which is very probable: " the name of Leila," says he, " is commonly given to the great ladies of Africa, and it is also the title of honour which they give there to the Blessed Virgin, mother of our Lord Jesus, for whom the Mahometans have a great deal of respect and veneration, as well as for her son." He cites Diego de Torres, who assures us, " that they call the Holy Virgin, Leila Mariam, which signifies the Lady Mary; and that all the daughters of the cherifftook the title of Leila, and he names them all four; viz. Leila Mariam, Leila Aya, Leila Fatima, and Leila Lu." After this, Bespier adds, that he is " inclined to think that Leila was not the proper name of the saint mentioned by Figueroa, but only the title of honour preceding it, and that she had another name which Figueroa has omitted, or was not informed of. The inhabitants of Com, who held that maid for a saint, were content with calling her Leila, or The Lady, by way of excellence: much after the same manner as most Christians now call the Virgin Mary Our Lady."
Pierre Bayle (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique 1696
We do not find, that, till the year 1553, the reformed, whether natives of France, or inhabitants, sang any other Psalms, than these fifty, excepting eight other Psalms, the translators of which are yet unknown ; which eight Psalms, with the first thirty of Marot, were printed, in 1542, in Gothic, at Rome, by order of the Pope, by Theodore Drust, a German, his printer in ordinary, the fifteenth of February; as we read in the last leaf of the book, printed in 8vo., without name of place or printer. Jeremiah de Pours knew nothing of this edition, which, by the way, is the same with that of Strasburgh, 1545, except as to the number of Psalms. The other hundred, put into verse by Beza, appeared probably in 1553, since it was at that time, that being appended to the Catechism and Liturgy of Geneva, they excited the aversion of the Catholics, who, after the example of Francis I, on his death-bed, made no scruple to use the first fifty.
Pierre Bayle (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique 1696
MARRIAGE. (St Paul on that of Bishops.) Reihing, professor of Divinity at Tubingen in the sixteenth century, and the author of his funeral oration, explain the words of St Paul, wherein he seems to command the bishops to marry, as a precept. They pretend that the apostle commands the ministers of the gospel to marry, and to take but one wife.* This would be certainly the meaning of St Paul's words, if they were understood literally, that is, according to the rules of grammar ; for the terms, which denote the marriage of the bishop with one wife, are as much governed by the word must, as those that denote the bishop's blameless life, sobriety, prudence, gravity, modesty, equity, moderation, and disinterestedness. As therefore it were absurd to pretend that St Paul leaves it to the liberty of the ministers to be sober, modest, blameless, &c. or not; so it is absurd to pretend that he leaves it to their choice to marry a wife, or to marry none; I mean that it would be absurd, if we adhered to the literal sense, and supposed that St Paul actually observed grammatical rules.
Pierre Bayle (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique 1696
MATHEMATICS.
Zeno wrote a book against the Mathematics. We are informed of this by Proclus, who adds that Possidonius refuted it. Huetius having told us that Epicurus rejected geometry, and the other parts of the Mathematics,because he believed, that they, being founded on false principles, could not be true, adds, that Zeno attacked them another way. This was by alleging that in order to render them certain, some things should have been added to their principles which were not joined to them. Mathematics are the most evident and certain of all human sciences, and yet they have met with opposers. If Zeno had been a great metaphysician, and followed different principles from those of Epicurus, he might have composed a book not very easy to be refuted, and cut out more work for the geometricians than they imagine. All sciences have their weak side; nor are the mathematics free from that defect. Indeed very few people are able to oppose them well, because to succeed in this engagement it is requisite not only to be a good philosopher, but also a very profound mathematician. But those endued with the latter quality are so ravished with the certainty and evidence of their inquiries, that they never think of examining whether there be any illusion in them, or whether the first foundation be well established. They rarely think of suspecting any deficiency in them, although it is very certain, that several disputes prevail amongst the most famous mathematicians. They refute one another, and answers and replies multiply among them as well as among other learned men. We observe this among the moderns, and it is certain that the ancients were not more unanimous. It is a proof that there are in this road several dark paths, and that a man may wander and lose the track of truth. This must of necessity be the lot of one side or the other, since one affirms what the other denies. It may be urged that this is the fault of the artificer, but not of the art, and that all these disputes proceed from some mathematicians mistaking that for a demonstration which is not so; but that very thing shews that there are some obscurities in this science. Besides, the same thing may be urged, with respect to the disputes of other learned men. It may be said, that if they closely followed the rules of logic, they would avoid the wrong consequences, and false assertions which mislead them. Nevertheless we must confess, that there are many philosophical subjects, concerning which the best logicians are incapable of coming to a certainty, by reason of the want of evidence in the object; but the object of the Mathematics is free from this inconvenience. Be it so; yet there is in this object a very great and irreparable defect; for it is a mere chimera which cannot possibly exist. Mathematical points, and consequently the lines and surfaces, globes and axes, of the geometricians are fictions which never can have a being: they are therefore inferior to those of the poets ; for the latter commonly contain nothing that is impossible, but have at least probability and possibility.
Pierre Bayle (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique 1696
MELANCTHON,
(On his Scepticism.) I Will make some reflexions upon the inclination to Pyrrhonism for which Melancthon is blamed. " He seemed to have been brought up in the school of Pyrrho, for a thousand doubts beset his soul, for fear, said he, of erring. His writings were a continual jumble of uncertainties." Florimond de Remond, who says this, cites some authorities, and tells us no more than what an infinite number of writers have observed. See in the last place the bishop of Meaux in his " Histoire des Variations." I believe they exaggerate the matter, but at the same time I think Melancthon was not free from doubts, and that there were many points about which he could not positively say, it is so, and it cannot be otherwise. He was of a mild and peaceable disposition, he had a great deal of wit, much reading, and a vast knowledge. Such a mixture of natural and acquired qualities is commonly a source of irresolution. A great genius, supported with great knowledge, will scarce find error to be altogether on one side. He discovers a strong and a weak side in each party; he understands what is most specious in the objections of his adversaries, and what is not solid in his own proofs; he does, I say, all this, provided he be not of a choleric temper; for if he be, he is so prepossessed in favour of his own party, that his knowledge is of no service to him. He not only persuades himself that he is in the right, but he has such a fondness for his own sentiments, as moves him to hate bitterly the doctrine that opposes them. From a hatred of opinions he quickly proceeds to a hatred of persons; he aspires to triumph, and being heated with dispute, he is fretted till he obtains the victory: he is angry with those who represent to him, that it is for the interest of heavenly truth, that we should not have recourse to expedients of human policy. He is no less troubled if he hear any body say, that his doctrines are not certain and evident, and that the contrary party can allege good reasons. Being of such a temper, he examines things only for this end, that he may be more and more convinced, that the doctrines he has embraced are true, and he does not fail to find much solidity in his own arguments; for there is no mirror so flattering as prepossession: it is a paint that embellishes the ugliest faces; it does the same offices to a. doctrine that the Venus of the Roman poet did to her son.
Pierre Bayle (Ed.). Dictionnaire Historique et Critique 1696.
