has given a blow, even though he runs away, on the condition
that it is not done through hatred or through vengeance, and that one's
actions do not lead to murders which are excessive and harmful to the
state.' The reason is, that one may thus run after one's honour as if
after a stolen object. For though your honour is not exactly in the
hands of your enemy as if it were something which he had picked up, you
can yet recover it in the same way by giving a proof of greatness and of
authority, and by thus acquiring human esteem. Indeed, he continues: 'Is
it not true that he who has received a blow is considered disgraced
until he has slain his enemy?'"

This appeared to me so horrible that I had difficulty in restraining
myself. I felt that I had heard enough.

_III.--THE CHARGE OF RAILLERY_

Reverend Fathers,--I have read the letters which you have published in
answer to some of mine on the subject of your moral principles; and I
find that one of the principal points in your defence is that I have not
spoken seriously enough of your maxims. You repeat this charge in all
your writings, and you go so far as to say that I have turned holy
things into ridicule.

This is a surprising and very unjust reproach; for where is a passage to
be found in which I have treated holy things with raillery? It is true
that I have spoken with little respect of the teachings of certain among
you, but do you suppose that the imaginations of your authors are to be
taken as the verities of the faith? Is it impossible to laugh at
passages of Escobar, and at the very fantastic and unchristian
conclusions of others of your authors without being accused of
ridiculing religion? Are you not afraid lest your reproaches should give
me a new subject for ridicule, or lest it should be seen that when I
make sport of your moral principles I am as far from laughing at holy
things as the doctrine of your casuists is far from the holy teaching of
the Evangel!

Truly, fathers, there is a great difference between laughing at
religion, and laughing at those whose extravagant opinions are its
profanation. It would be impious to be wanting in respect for the truths
which the Spirit of God has revealed, but it would hardly be less
impious that we should not show our contempt for the falsities which the
human spirit has opposed to them.

I pray you to consider that just as Christian truth is worthy of love
and of respect, the errors that are contrary to i