A history of the so-called Jansenist church of Holland; with a sketch of its earlier annals, and some account of the Brothers of the common life

Front matter

F i asa As x 1s aly On oe i

Se

Cane Ee Sa ~ : 73 a 2 an ae ae as aaa en un cee aX tal at . = ef + : ® bd

Preface

Ir was in the spring of the year 1851 that, during the course of a visit at Utrecht, I became acquainted with the venerable Archbishop of that See, and interested in the history of the Church over which he presides. At that time there was, I believe, not a single work in English which treated of the subject ; nor was there any book, not out of print, whether French or Dutch, which gave any detailed account of the fortunes of the so-called Jansenists of Holland. The information generally possessed by English Churchmen, with respect to the Church of Utrecht, was about as full,and as accurate as that contained in Murray’s « Handbook of Holland :’’— “Utrecht is the head-quarters of the Jansenists, a sect of dissenters from the Roman Catholic Church, who object to the Bull of Pope Alexander VII. condemning as heretical certain doctrines of Jansenius, Bishop of Ypres. They scarcely exist in any number, except in Holland, where they are now reduced to five thousand.”’

From the time that I first became acquainted with the story of its afflictions and its endurance, it has always been my wish to give English Churchmen the opportunity of becoming better acquainted with the history of the Church of Holland; and having, through the kindness of the Archbishop himself, and

b vi PREFACE.

several of his ecclesiastics, amassed a considerable number of the most important and rarest books on the subject, I have kept my plan in view from that time to this, and the result is now presented to the reader.

Shortly after my first visit to Utrecht, Dr. Tregelles, so well known for his works on Biblical criticism, published a short general history of the “‘ Jansenists,”’ some pages of which were devoted to their proceedings in Holland. In a review of that work for the “Christian Remembrancer” of January, 1852, I endeavoured to give a more detailed account of that body than had before appeared in English; and some passages in the following pages are quoted from that and from another article contributed by me to the same Review, on the ‘‘ Mystic Theology of Holland.”

In the October of 1854, I spent a week at Utrecht, for the purpose of examining the Archives, which were most unreservedly placed at my disposal by the kindness of the Archbishop. Of the great value and importance of those Archives I shall have occasion to speak more at length hereafter.

I have in the Appendix given so very full a list of the works which treat of the history of the Church of Utrecht since the great schism, that I need here only mention a few of the subsidiary helps which I have employed in my task.

The Introduction contains a sketch—for it professes to be nothing more—of the annals of French “‘ Jan- Senism,”’ some acquaintance with which is absolutely necessary to the right understanding of the more immediate subject of my work. In this I have been under greater obligations to the Abbé Guettée’s noble Histoire de 1 Eqlise de France than to any other book,—

PREFACE. Vil not forgetting, however, the works of S$. Cyran, Nicole, and Arnauld, and the Nouvelles Hecléstastiques.

Mr. Dalgairns has published a work entitled ‘‘ The Devotion to the Heart of Jesus,’ with—what he calls —an Introduction on the History of Jansenism. I only mention the book because it would be difficult to find a single page in the Introduction which does not contain the grossest, and sometimes positively ludicrous, errors. ‘To take an example or two. It is said that—“‘ the principal evidence on which 8. Cyran was sent to Vincennes was that of S. Vincent de Paul.” S. Vincent was never even interrogated regarding S. Cyran till after the imprisonment of the latter, and remained, as we shall see at p. 6, his friend till his death. A little further on, Mr. Dalgairns says, “‘ In one of 8S. Vincent’s letters the following passage occurs ;” and he then quotes an extract not to be found in S. Vincent’s letters anywhere, but taken from his biography by Abelly, and which the biographer himself had to retract. Again, he says, p. 27, ‘“‘ One of the chiefs of the Jansenist party wrote a book against frequent Communion.”’ It is only to be hoped that Mr. Dalgairns has never opened the work of Arnauld’s to which he alludes, or such a statement would be worse than an error. Once more: ‘‘It was one of their opinions that absolution was invalid if it were given before the penance imposed were performed.” Compare this with the formal statement of the Articles of Louvain, and the second Council of Utrecht: “The procrastination of absolution is sometimes necessary, sometimes useful, sometimes pernicious.”’ I have said enough to give an idea of the general amount of truthfulness which characterizes the ‘‘ Introduction.”

In the history of Utrecht itself I have principally viii PREFACE.

followed the thread of De Bellegarde’s narrative, (//istoire Abregée de ? figlise Metropolitaine d@ Utrecht,) the third edition of which having been commenced by the Abbé Van der Hoeven, now with Gop, was published in 1852, by my friend the Abbé Karsten, rector of the Seminary at Amersfoort. But it is the thread of narration only which I have followed,—having dwelt on some subjects at much greater length, and on others with far more brevity, than De Bellegarde. Thus, the acts of the Second Council of Utrecht, which I have related with considerable fulness, are dismissed by him in a few lines: thus, also, I have compressed into a few pages the events which occurred previous to the disestablishment of the National Church, and the elevation of Sasbold Vosmeer to the Vicariate Apostolic. The Batavia Sacra, the Historia Episcopatuum foederats Belgu, and its enlarged translation, the Kerkelijke Historie en Outheden der zeven vereenigde Provincien, have always been at my side; and the works mentioned in the Appendix have, with scarcely an exception, been consulted either in England or in Holland.

Of books not mentioned there I may specify :—For the History of the Brothers of the Common Life, the ~ very interesting Verhandeling over de Broederschap van Geert Groote, by G. H. M. Delprat (Second Edition, Arnheim, 1856). The author, though a Protestant, enters well into his subject, and has produced a very instructive book. Several papers in the Wederlandsch Archief voor Kerkelijke Geschiedenis, published by Professors Kist and Royaards. The works of Thomas a Kempis, Henry Herph, and Gerlach Petersen. The Athene Belgice of Francis Sweertius, (Antwerp, 1628), For the main body of the history, the superb edition of the works of Arnauld, edited by De Bellegarde, in 49 volumes, (1775 to 1781). The edition of Van

PREFACE. iX

Espen, in three folio volumes (Louvain, 1767). The Mémoires Historiques sur Vaffaire de la Bulle “ Unigenitus” dans les Pays-Bas Autrichiens, §c. (1755). The Dictionnaire des Livres Jansénistes, (4 volumes, Antwerp, 1752,) one of the most furiously Molinist books ever printed, but valuable from its references to the contents of scarce and forgotten pamphlets. I may add the Leven van Martinus Steyaert, bestryder van het Jansenistendom, by E. A. Dobbelaere, Ghent. Bellegarde’s History ends in 1784. The works on which I thenceforth depend are given in the Appendix. To these | must add the Handelingen van de Regering en de Staten-Generaal over de Grondwets-Bepulingen nopens de Godsdienst, (Schiedam, Roelants, 1854,) which gives an excellent account of the troubles occasioned by the intrusion of the new Roman hierarchy in that year.

I have now to express my thanks, in the first place, to the venerable Archbishop of Utrecht, Monseigneur Van Santen, for his kindness in supplying me with books, directing me by letter to sources of information which I could not have discovered for myself, and assisting me in every way during my visits to Utrecht. For similar kindness I should have had to thank the late Canon Van Werckhoven, had he lived to read a book which I think he would have perused with interest; as I now have to thank the Abbé Karsten, of Amersfoort, and the Canon Mulder, pastor of the Church of S. Gertrude in den Hoek at Utrecht. Nor must I forget the kindness of the Ven. Archdeacon Otter, and of F. H. Dickinson, Esq., in supplying me with ‘“ Jansenist’ works from their libraries. Whatever importance the Annals of the Church of Utrecht must always have possessed, they undoubtedly have acquired increased interest now, x PREFACE.

when the Ultramontanism of such works as the Univers, and the new school of French theologians, and also the promulgation of the Bull Jzeffadilis, has revived the ardour and the devotion of the old Gallican party, the party of Gerson, Pierre d’Ailly, and Bossuet. The sympathy felt by this school with the oppressed Church of Holland is not obscurely expressed in its historical masterpiece, the Abbé Guettée’s History ; in the respect and veneration with which he speaks of the present head of that communion, Archbishop Van Santen.

One more remark may not be out of place. The part which the Jesuits have played in the oppression of the Church of Utrecht obliges an historian of that communion to dwell on the dark, with scarcely any reference to the bright, side of that wonderful Society. The Udi male, nemo pejus is certainly demonstrated in the following pages; but Gop forbid that we should forget the other part of the same proverb, when we remember the exertions of the Company in Japan, in Cochin-China, in Paraguay, in North America,— Udi bene, nemo melius.

Pm C8 be

14,

Contents

. Tur Church of Holland before the Reformation.

. The Brothers of the Common Life.

. The Church of Holland in the Reformation.

Introduction

A SKETCH

OF THE

RISE AND PROGRESS

OF

SO-CALLED JANSENISM

IN FRANCE.

a ii dis Mec eanee Mas a

) pike OOF ir ve

‘ a, ar , By cue * a tN ri wits oh . home a

INTRODUCTION.

1. On a winter’s evening of the year 1630, twos. Vincent personages, both learned, both zealous, both reformers, “?; °°? were seated in a student’s room in Paris, and dis- 8. Gy oe cussing the state of the Church. The one, tall, stern, pale, harsh, commanding, looked every inch an ascetic ; the other, words, eyes, manner impregnated with love, the true missionary to a miserable people. The name of the former was Jean du Verger de Hauranne, Abbat of S. Cyran; that of the latter, Vincent de Paul: the one the great saint, the other, according to Ultramontane teaching, the great heresiarch, of the seventeenth century.

2.. Who were these two men, and what their past life? Let us begin with the saint. <A priest, yet. Vincent directing the holiest bishops of his time; a roturier,“°**" yet the companion of nobility; a saint, yet the favourite of a corrupt court ; a Catholic, yet beloved by heretics ; how did he acquire his name and his influence in the Church ? He had been a slave in Morocco, and there his heart was touched with that love which became the guiding principle of his life. Hence that most blessed institution, the Sisters of Charity. Hence, when the armies of this world swept and reswept over miserable Lorraine,—when fields lay fallow for years,—when wolves boldly entered villages and

B 2 towns,—when the hearths of cottages and mansions were alike fireless during the winter,—when mice, rats, and adders were publicly sold, and bought at enormous prices,—when the starvation in the villages was so fearful, that men shut their eyes as they passed,— when, to use the words of an eye-witness, the peasants that wandered about were like ‘‘ skeletons covered with tanned sheep’s-leather,”—when highborn ladies sold their honour to the brutal soldiers of Germany or France, that their children might not — Hislabours die before their eyes,—then this true servant of Gop mast noured his army of missionaries over the devoted country. They, taking their lives in their hands, in perils from pestilence, marauders, wild beasts, went out into the highways and hedges. Alms were absolutely rained in upon them from Paris. Death thinned their ranks; but Vincent, like a determined general, maintained his post, and poured in fresh soldiers to supply the place of the fallen. They took the infant from the breast of the dead mother; they set free the ecclesiastic from drawing the plough like a beast ; they rescued women from perilling their salvation for a piece of bread; they lived the lives of angels; and ‘they died,” says a contemporary, ‘as I pray and beseech God that I may die.”” he expenses of this holy war were reckoned at £400,000. The same charity planted missionaries in Harris and Lewis, in Benbecula and the Uists, in islands that since the Reformation had never seen a minister of any sect ; consoled the Roman Catholics of Ireland under the savage persecution of Cromwell; entered the dark and fetid holds of the galleys, and turned many a prisoner from darkness to light ; solaced the captives of Algiers and Tunis; ransomed them for their return, or fortified them for their martyrdom. Thence, too, foundlings, rescued from the horrors of the Rue

S. Landri, became the special charge of the Ladies of The Ladies Charity ; thence, when the funds of the new institu- ee tion were totally inadequate to the work in hand, Vincent called together its supporters, and “I appeal

to you,” said he, ‘‘ no longer as their mothers, but as

their judges: pronounce, if you will, the sentence of

their death: I proceed to take your votes.’? Neck-

lands and fair houses afterwards,—were poured in to

the succour of the helpless children; and to that de-

cision, and to that priest, a million of infants owe

their lives annually in all parts of the world. Such

was the great saint of the seventeenth century.

3. We now come to him whom Ultramontanes call s. cyran: its great heresiarch—the Abbé de S.Cyran. His for- see tunes are so interwoven with those of his ally, Corne- #8" lius Jansen, Bishop of Ypres, that we must pursue them together. Jansen, born in 1585, near Leerdam, in Holland, was educated first at Utrecht, and then at - Louvain, where he formed an acquaintance with Jean du Verger, with whom he visited Paris, and afterwards Bayonne, the native place of his friend. Hence he returned to Louvain, was made Principal of the College of 8. Pulcheria, Professor of Holy Scripture, and finally Bishop of Ypres. This see he only held six months, being carried off by the plague in 1636. Hauranne became Vicar-General of Poictiers, and obtained the abbey of S. Cyran, by the name of which he is generaily known. Here he formed the acquaintance of Robert Arnauld d’Andilly, with whose family and the he removed to Paris, and became intimate with their SE ip connexions. ‘The elder Arnauld was manager of the estates of the Abbey of Port Royal, and by his means De Hauranne was there introduced, and acquired

His death and high reputation.

The Petrus Aurelius.

ereat influence. Agnes and Angelica, in particular, the daughters of Arnauld, received his instructions with avidity, and venerated him as a saint. Accused of false doctrine, he was imprisoned in the Chateau de Vincennes, and after seven years’ confinement, was released only to die, in 1643.

4. But it was Vincent de Paul who consoled De Hauranne in his Jong imprisonment ; who was constantly subjected to interrogatories intended to draw from him some censure of the prisoner’s doctrines ; and who, when the corpse was lying in the Church of S. Jacques de Hautpas, was the first to sprinkle it with holy water. And the literary organ of that day, the Gazette de France, tells us that the dying man “‘ received the viaticum with a piety worthy of his eminent virtue: the prelates who are at present in town, wishing to give a public testimony of their esteem for so great a personage, recognised by all as one of the most learned men of the present day, attended his funeral ; the Bishop of Amiens performing the service, and the Archbishop of Bordeaux, and the Bishops of Valence, Chalcedon, Aire, and the coadjutor of Montauban, assisting at the ceremony.”

5. It was Jansenius and 8. Cyran who had early agreed to dedicate their talents to the exposure and overthrow of the entire system of the Jesuits as regarded the Doctrine of Grace on the one hand, and the Discipline of the Church on the other. he question of Discipline was undertaken by S. Cyran, and treated at full length in his celebrated work called Petrus Aurelius. 'The immediate occasion of its composition was as follows. Urban VIII. had, in the year 1625, sent into England Dr. Smith, with the title of Archbishop of Chalcedon, and with jurisdiction over all English Roman Catholics. The Jesuits attacked the

INTRODUCTION. i)

Bishop in every possible way; one of their number, named Floyd, published a work which was completely subversive of all episcopal rights whatever, and which was denounced by the Roman clergy in England, and by the University of Douay. The question was warmly agitated in France; and it was then that the origin of Petrus Aurelius appeared, and immediately became the “° “*™ grand object of attack to the whole Company. They were compelled, however, to disavow Floyd’s book ; while 8. Cyran’s work, which acquired a continuallyincreasing reputation, was formally approved by the assembly of the French clergy in 1642, ordered to be printed in a handsome manner at their expense, and Printed at to be presented to every Bishop and Chapter through- ih eB out the kingdom. One may still see in the cathedral sl a libraries of France those three huge folios, bound, ac- “rey: cording to the Assembly’s order, in tooled calf; and probably eliciting from the ecclesiastical librarian the simple remark, Jd/ais c’est tout-a-fait Janscniste. Thus was 8. Cyran’s part of the compact performed ; and it will be observed that the name Aurelius is also that of the great Bishop of Hippo, whose sworn disciples both the friends were. But the work of Jansenius, if not more learned than that of his coadjutor, became far more celebrated ; and produced an effect on the whole history of the Western Church for the succeeding 150 years which probably no other volume ever occasioned. I allude, of course, to his Augustinus ; in which he endeavoured to restore the theology of the seventeenth century to the doctrine of the saint who has always been regarded as the Doctor of Grace,—Augustine. Before speaking further of this work itself, it will be necessary to give a brief sketch of the then state of the controversy.

6. We shall see, in the second chapter of this His-

The tory, that the great reformers of Holland in the four- Church nq teenth and fifteenth centuries, Ruysbroek,Geert Groote, supports. Herph, Thomas ® Kempis, and their companions, baa! of brought most prominently forward the Augustinian Gree Doctrine of Grace. Partly in consequence of their labours, the same tendency had long characterized the

Baus. University of Louvain. Baus, a predecessor of Jansenius in his professorial chair, had openly accused the Jesuits of Pelagianism, and was in his turn accused by

them of Calvinism. Seventy-six propositions extracted

from his works, though not ascribed to him by name,

were condemned by Pope Pius V., and the Professor himself had been compelled to sign the condemnation.

7. The Augustinian party were not slow in re-

turning the attack; and it was resolved to make an

The work example of Molina, a Spanish Jesuit, Professor of Go Theology at Evora in Portugal, whose work “ On the Concord of Free-will with Grace and Predestination,”’ published in Lisbon in 1588, was supposed to be the

most Pelagian of any composition of the Jesuits. ‘The Dominicans were the principal assailants ; the Franciscans and Jesuits resolved to make the doctrine

their own. The affair was brought before the Inquisition. ‘The Universities of Louvain, Douay, and Salamanca stood forward in defence of Augustinianism. Baronius in vain besought the Jesuits not to defend Molina. ‘‘I confess,” he writes, under date of March

15, 16038, ‘that I cannot read the books of Molina without indignation: one might say that his sole aim

was to condemn S. Augustine, to reproach him with negligence, and to prove that, on these questions of

Grace, his own lights were far superior to those of that

great bishop, to whom he affects never to give the

name of Saint. Can one see such ostentation without disgust? He glides like a serpent from the hands that would grasp him, so that it is easier to prove his temerity than to convince him of heresy. However, I have marked more than fifty expressions or propositions that savour of Pelagianism or Semi-Pelagianism.” But bolder counsels prevailed. The work of Molina had obtained the approbation of the General Aquaviva, and to desert one was to condemn the other. ‘The Jesuits built their hopes on the condemnation of Baianism, and on the fourth canon of the sixth session of the Council of Trent. The question was referred by Clement VIII. to the memorable Congregations de Auziltis. .

It is not necessary to our purpose to enter into the The Conhistory of those congregations. Carried on under oo aniliis Clement till 1605, the year of that Pope’s death, they were resumed under Paul V., and finished in 1607. They censured the delated propositions of Molina as severally Pelagian, Semi-Pelagian, or approaching to Pelagianism; and a Bull, which is still extant, for their cond mnation was prepared. But the Pope —who, like a successor of his in the next century,

‘‘ wished to live’’—dared not publish it. ‘It was reserved,” he said, ‘‘ till a convenient time :’? which convenient time has never yet. arrived.

8. The system of Molina, if very charitably ex- Thesystem pounded, as it is by Ultramontanes of the present day, *“?"™ resolves itself into the following propositions :—1. God, by the knowledge of simple intelligence, sees all that is possible, and consequently all the orders of possible things. 2. By His hypothetical knowledge, He foresees certainly what, in each of these possible orders each created will, using its own liberty, will do, if God gives it such and such a grace. 3. He wills, with an antecedent and true will, to save all men, on condition that they are willing to save themselves,—that 1s, to act in correspondence with the graces which He shall give them. 4. He gives to all as much help as is necessary and sufficient to their salvation, though He gives more to some than to others. 5. The grace given to angels and men in the state of imnocence is not efficacious in and by itself: in a part of the angels it became efficacious by the good use made of it; in man it was ineflicacious, because resisted. 6. So it is in fallen nature. No absolute decrees, efficacious by themselves, and antecedently to God’s prevision of free consent on the part of the human will: therefore no predestination to eternal life before prevision of merits, no predestination to eternal damnation before prevision of sins. 7. The will of God to save all men, even in the state of fallen nature, is true, sincere, and active; it sent Jesus Christ to be the Saviour of man; and it is by virtue of this will, and of the merits of Jesus Christ, that He gives to all, in a greater or less degree, grace sufficient to salvation. 8. God, by His hypothetical prescience, sees with absolute certainty what man, placed in such and such circumstances, and assisted by such and such grace, will do or will not do; by consequence He foresees who would use grace ill, and who well. When He determines, absolutely and efficaciously, to convert any soul, or to dispose it to perseverance, He forms in Himself the decree to give to that soul the graces to which He foresees that it will consent, and with which it will persevere. 9. By the knowledge of vision, involved in this decree, He sees who they are that will persevere in well-doing ; who they are that will do ill, or will not persevere in doing well. In consequence of this prevision, He predestines the former to eternal glory, and the latter to

INTRODUCTION. Ye eternal damnation. To which’, in fairness, must be added, 10. The sufficient grace, which is, as it were, a watchword of the party, means grace which is insuficient, UNTIL, by its adhesion, the will of man renders it efficacious. And this is the venom of the whole system, because, however the fact may be glossed over, it subjects, in fact, the will of God to the will of man. We shall have occasion to recur to this subject a little further on.

9. About twelve years after the suspension of the Papal Bull de Auxiliis, Jansenius commenced his great work the dugustinus. In this he attempted to de- Thedugusvelope the teaching of S. Augustine on grace. He” devoted to it the patient labour of twenty years, and is said to have read the entire works of that father as many times. Modern ‘‘ improvements” at Louvain have destroyed the tower in which he was traditionally said to have occupied himself in the labour of his life. ‘The work was still manuscript when the author was seized with the plague, and he recommended it to his chaplain, to his friend, the Doctor Libert-Fromond, and to Henry Calenus. Arrangements were made by them with the leading bookseller at Louvain, by name Zegers, (I suppose of the same family which gave one of his Christian names to the great Van Espen,) for its publication. By the treachery of a workman, some of the proof-sheets were seen by the Jesuits. Representations were made both to Rome and to the faculty of theology at Louvain, that both Paul V. and Urban VIII. had expressly forbidden the publication of any work on the subject of grace. The University summoned the printer, and forbad his proceeding further. Zegers represented the injustice of leaving him with

* The first eight propositions are who adroitly slurs over the last in given as interpreted by Rohrbacher, the 4th and 6th.

Its publication.

Abstract of its contents.

two-thirds of so enormous a work on his hands, and demanded a formal hearing. Temporising with the University, he made his men work by relays night and day, and to the surprise of every one the dugustinus was one morning exposed for sale, with a dedication to the Cardinal Infant, Governor of the Low Countries. This was in 1640, and shortly afterwards a reprint appeared in Paris.

10. A brief outline of this celebrated work is almost necessary, and may at least give a truer idea of its nature than the character bestowed on it by a late pretended historian of the Church: ‘‘ Mahomet, Spinosa, Jansenius—it is all one and the same thing”.” In the first volume, which contains eight books, Jansenius examines the tenets of the Pelagians and the Semi-Pelagians, and enquires in what exact points their heresy consisted, thus shewing that their dogmas, and those of the Molinists, were in point of fact one and the same.

In the second volume he proves, as a preliminary consideration, 1. That the truths and mysteries of Christianity, and especially that of grace, are not to be judged by natural reason, but depend on a superior authority ; that they cannot therefore be decided by human ratiocination, but by the purest and most certain light,—Holy Scripture, Councils, and Fathers: 2. That the Church acknowledges S. Augustine as her Doctor on the matter of grace, and that she has no other doctrine than that of this great saint: 8. That consequently we are bound to follow that which Holy Scripture has discovered, that which the Councils have defined, that which S. Augustine, and the other Fathers who follow him, have taught. He next treats

* This sage observation is to be eigh atio ghty-seventh book of the Abbé found in the fifth section of the Rautoacrsce History. :

of the grace bestowed on, and the blessedness enjoyed by, angels, and by man before his fall, reducing into its due order all that S. Augustine has written on the subject. He proceeds to dwell, in the same way, on the miserable consequences of the fall, and the bondage and darkness of concupiscence and ignorance in which men were held till the grace of God, which bringeth salvation, had appeared. Lastly, he treats of the state which theologians call of pure nature ; and shews that to admit the possibility of such a state is to overthrow all the principles of the doctrine which S. Augustine maintained till his death, against the Pelagians, and to deny the necessity of grace.

In the third volume he treats of the cure of man, and of the re-establishment of the liberty which he had lost bysin. He arranges, with great clearness and skill, everything that S. Augustine has said of the necessity and efficaciousness of grace, and argues in defence of absolute and gratuitous predestination against the Pelagians and the Semi-Pelagians.

11. As soon as the Augustinus had appeared, the Attackea Jesuits lost no time in attacking it by a series of here. theses. Both the book and the theses were condemned by Urban.the Eighth, in his Bull In Eminentz, of March 6, 1642: but this Bull was never legally published in France, and was not accepted by the Sorbonne. Jansenius was also attacked by Habert, afterwards Bishop of Vabres, and the editor of the Greek Pontifical; and defended by Antoine Arnauld, on whom the mantle of S. Cyran appeared to have descended.