prudence did harm to his doctrine, which was already sharply
attacked. He did not need so compromising an alliance, but what he
wanted was political support. In his last extremity he addressed
himself to the Jesuits, and took one of them for his confessor; for
they had taken the precaution to have some on both sides.

To fall back from Fenelon to Godet, and undergo his blunt and harsh
direction, was more than the new nun could support. One day, when he
came to her with the little decrees and petty regulations which he had
composed with Madame de Maintenon, La Maisonfort could contain herself
no longer, but spoke out, before him and the all-powerful foundress,
all the contempt she felt for them. A short time after, a letter with
the king's seal expelled her unfeelingly from Saint-Cyr.

She had defended herself too successfully against such persons as
Godet, Brisacier, and others of the hostile party. Though abandoned by
Fenelon, she endeavoured to remain faithful to his doctrines, and was
determined to keep his books. They were obliged to invoke the most
powerful man of the time, Bossuet, in order to bring the rebel to
reason. But she would not receive even his advice, till after she had
asked Fenelon whether she might do so. He replies to this last mark of
confidence, I regret to say, by a dull, disagreeable letter, in which
are shown but too plainly his jealousy, and the regret he feels in
seeing one, whom he had abandoned, pass under the control of another.

[1] A bishop, at that time an inspector of the University, boasted
before me (and several other persons, who will be witnesses if
necessary) that he had burned some of Fenelon's letters.

CHAPTER IX.

BOSSUET AS DIRECTOR.--BOSSUET AND SISTER CORNUAU.--HIS LOYALTY AND
IMPRUDENCE.--HE IS PRACTICALLY A QUIETEST.--DEVOUT DIRECTION INCLINES
TO QUIETISM.--A MORAL PARALYSIS.

Nothing throws more light upon the real character of _direction_ than
the correspondence of the worthiest and most loyal of directors--I mean
Bossuet. Experience is decisive; if here, too, the results are bad, we
must blame the method and the system, but by no means the man.

The greatness of his genius, and the nobleness of his character would
naturally remove Bossuet far from the petty passions of the vulgar herd
of directors, their meanness, jealousy, and vexatious tyranny. We may
believe what one of his own penitents says of him:--"Without
disapproving," says she, "o