on a parchment known as his “amulet,” renounced the world and entered on the ascetic life, in close relations with the Jansenist community.  Hence, in the interests of Arnauld, the Jansenist leader, Pascal issued the famous “Letters Written to a Provincial” ("Lettres Ecrites par Louis de Montalte a un Provincial de ses Amis"), a series of eighteen tracts directed with the keenest and bitterest irony against the casuistry of the Jesuits.  The “Letters” appeared during a period of fourteen months, the first being dated January 23, 1656, and the last March 24, 1657.  They took the form of little pamphlets, each of eight or twelve quarto pages; they had a very large circulation, and created an immense impression throughout Catholic countries.  They are open letters, intended really for the public and not for any individual.

I.—­LAX CASUISTS

SIR,—­I send you, as I promised, the chief outlines of the moral teaching of these good Jesuit fathers, these “men so eminent in doctrine and in wisdom, who are led by that divine wisdom which is more trustworthy than all philosophy.”  Possibly you think that I speak in jest.  I speak seriously, or, rather, it is they who have spoken thus of themselves.  I only copy their words where they write, “It is a society of men, or, rather, of angels, foretold by the prophet Isaiah.”  They claim to have changed the face of Christianity.  We must believe it, since they have told us so; and, indeed, you will see how far they have done so, when you have mastered their maxims.

I took care to be instructed by themselves and trusted to nothing which my friend had told me.  I had been told such strange things that I could hardly believe them, until I was shown them in their own books; and then I could say nothing in their defence, except that these must be the principles of certain isolated Jesuits, and not those of the whole society.  Indeed, I was able to say that I knew Jesuits who were as severe as these were lax.

It was on that occasion that the spirit of the society was explained to me, for it is not by any means known to every one.  I was told as follows: 

“You imagine that you are speaking in their favour when you say that there are among them fathers who are as obedient to the principles of the Gospel as others are distant from those principles, and you conclude therefore that these loose opinions do not characterise the whole society.  That is true.  But since the society admits of so licentious a doctrine within it, you must conclude that its spirit is not one of Christian severity.”

“But what then,” said I, “is the purpose of the whole institution?  Is it that everyone should be free to say whatever he may happen to think?”

“That is not so,” was the reply.  “So great a society could not exist without discipline, and without one spirit governing and ruling all its movements.”