Showing papers on "Jansenism published in 1988"

Cartesianism And Port-Royal

Abstract: One of the more prevalent misunderstandings in the history of early modern thought concerns the relationship between Cartesian philosophy and the Jansenist community at Port-Royal. There is a tendency, both in the seventeenth century and in recent scholarship, to treat Port-Royal as a bastion of Cartesianism and to see Jansenists generally as enthusiastic pro ponents of Descartes' thought. For example, the orthodox Protestant theologian Pierre Jurieu, in his La politique du clerg? de France (1681), in sists that "the theologians of Port-Royal are as devoted to Cartesianism as they are to Christianity," and notes (with glee) that they are thus no more able to account for Eucharistie transubstantiation than Descartes himself.1 Likewise, Pierre Daniel, in the Voyage du Monde de M. Descartes (1690), claims that "there are very few Jansenists who are not Cartesians."2 In the nineteenth century, the usually reliable Francisque Bouillier, in his monumental study of la philosophie cart?sienne, finds "a natural alliance between the doctrines of Jansenius and those of Descartes . . . thus, the Cartesian sympathies of Port-Royal are well known ... In fact, we can place Port-Royal immediately after the Oratory among the religious societies inclined towards the philosophy of Descartes."3 More recently, Marjorie Grene writes uncritically that "Cartesianism became, we are told, up to a point the official doctrine of Port-Royal."4 In this paper, I present some evidence which corrects this longstanding misinterpretation and show that, far from being "contaminated" by Carte sian principles, Port-Royal was, in fact, a center of opposition to Descartes.5 To be sure, the Cartesian philosophy was a frequent and popular topic for discussion at Port-Royal; and one will certainly find that the degree of antipathy among Jansenists for Cartesianism varies greatly between individuals. But of all the Port-Royalists of the seventeenth cen tury, only Antoine Arnauld can rightfully be called a "Cartesian."6 If one looks closely at the writings and comments of some of the more prominent and important associates of Port-Royal, one finds a strong bias against Cartesianism, a bias based on a variety of philosophical and theological reasons, as well as an evident disdain for the general kind of philosophical activity such a system represents to these extremely pious individuals.

Seventeenth-Century Ireland: The War of Religions

Abstract: Seventeenth Century Irelandwas chosen by CHOICEfor the 1989-1990 Outstanding Academic Books and Nonprint Material (OABN) list. The OABN list includes only the top 10% of all books reviewed by CHOICE in 1989. Contents: Introduction; Identities and Allegiances, 1603-25; The Crown and the Catholics: Royal Government and Policy 1625-37; Fateful Ideologies: The Stuart Inheritance; Wentworth and the Ulster Crisis, 1638-9; On the Eve of Revolution, 1639-41; 1641: The Plot That Never Was; Insurrection and Confederation, 1641-4; In Search of a Settlement: Ormond, Rinuccini and Cromwell, 1645-53; Theology and the Politics of Sovereignty: Jansenist, Jesuit and Franciscan; Ideologies in Conflict, 1660-91; References; Bibliography; Index^R

Gregor McGregor (1681-1740) and the Highland problem in the Scottish Catholic Mission

Abstract: The 'chief trial' affecting the Scottish Catholic Mission in the first half of the eighteenth century was undoubtedly the accusation of Jansenist heresy which was laid against leading missioners, including bishops, by a section of the clergy.1 The factors involved in 'anti-Jansenism', arguably more significant than what it claimed to attack, have recently been clarified.2 The quarrel certainly went well beyond its ostensible focus, the Bull Unigenitus of 1713, which condemned the theology and narrow pastoral emphasis of Cornelius Jansen as reaffirmed by Quesnel. While an international view is in one sense appropriate for this issue, with French Gallicanism close to its heart, another concerns 'frontier' Catholicism,3 the implication for Scotland being that missionary priests were influenced by the Calvinism which they were trained to confront. The best specifically pastoral training was obtained in the Scots College, Paris, in comparison with the Jesuit education provided at the other 'abroad' colleges of Rome, Madrid and Douai.4 But the split was not simply a matter of Paris-trained against the rest. And although Jesuits and Benedictines lined up on the prosecution side the dispute was much more than an extension of the regularsecular issue which had been the chief trial hitherto—and which was eased when the Scottish clergy were placed under the episcopal jurisdiction of a vicar-apostolic, Thomas Nicolson. Within Scotland, the most significant factor in the quarrel over Jansenism, it has been acknowledged, was the division between Highland and Lowland Catholics.5 That is the broad theme of this paper too, but it seeks to explore the origins of that Highland/Lowland divide through the personal history of a leading actor in the drama. When the storm broke in 1731 it was Fr Gregor or Kilian McGregor, OSB, who laid charges of heresy against those who controlled the Mission. Under the pressure of events Bishop James Gordon then agreed to exact an anti-Jansenist oath from his priests, but in 1735 two leaders of the