FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65  
66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   >>   >|  
of the time, the uneasy and bewildered state of every one's conscience on the morrow of a period of religious wars, harassed by passions. In the dull tranquillity that succeeded, in the nullity of the present, the past would rise up in glowing colours, and the remembrance of it become the more importunate. Then was awakened in many minds, especially among weak and impassioned women, the terrible question of eternal bliss or woe. The whole fortune of the Jesuits, and the confidence placed in them by the nobles and fine ladies, arose from the clever answer they gave to this question. It is, therefore, indispensable to say a few words about it. Who can save us? The theologian on the one hand, and the jurist or philosopher on the other, give diametrically opposite answers. The theologian, if he be really such, attributes the greatest share to Christianity, and answers, "It is the grace of Christ, which serves us as a substitute for justice[1], and saves whomsoever it will. A few are predestined to be saved, the greater number to be damned." The jurist answers, on the contrary, that we are punished or rewarded according to the good or bad use that we freely make of our will; that we are paid according to our works, according to justice. This is the eternal debate between the jurist and the theologian, between justice and predestination.[1] In order to have a clearer idea of the opposition of these two principles, let us imagine a mountain with two declivities, its summit terminating in a very narrow ridge, with the edge as sharp as a razor. On one side is predestination that damns, on the other, justice that strikes--two terrible monsters. Man is on the top, with one foot on one slope and one on the other, ever on the point of slipping. And when was the fear of sliding stronger than after those great crimes of the sixteenth century, when Man was top-heavy, and lost his balance? We know the religious horror of Charles IX. after the massacre of Saint Bartholomew: he died for want of a Jesuit confessor. John III., King of Sweden, who killed his brother, did not die of remorse: his wife took care to send for the good Father Possevino, who purified him and made him a Catholic. The means employed by the Jesuits to calm consciences fill us, at first sight, with surprise. They adopted both skilfully and carefully; still they did adopt the principle of the jurists, namely, that man is saved or lost by his work
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65  
66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
justice
 

answers

 

jurist

 

theologian

 
Jesuits
 
question
 

eternal

 
terrible
 

religious

 

predestination


sliding

 

slipping

 
stronger
 

summit

 
terminating
 
declivities
 

mountain

 

principles

 
imagine
 

narrow


monsters

 

strikes

 

Charles

 
employed
 

consciences

 
Catholic
 

Father

 

Possevino

 

purified

 

surprise


jurists

 

principle

 
adopted
 

skilfully

 

carefully

 

opposition

 
massacre
 
Bartholomew
 

horror

 

century


sixteenth

 

balance

 

brother

 

remorse

 
killed
 

Sweden

 
confessor
 

Jesuit

 
crimes
 

number