210.  Let us now see the reverse of the medal in the altered M. Bayle.  After having quoted in his Reply to the Questions of a Provincial (vol.  III, ch. 155, p. 962) these words of M. Jacquelot, which are much to my liking:  ’To change the order of the universe is something of infinitely greater consequence than the prosperity of a good man,’ he adds:  ’This thought has something dazzling about it:  Father Malebranche has placed it in the best possible light; and he has persuaded some of his readers that a system which is simple and very productive is more consistent with God’s wisdom than a system more composite and less productive in proportion, but more capable of averting irregularities.  M. Bayle was one of those who believed that Father Malebranche in that way gave a wonderful solution.’ (It is M. Bayle himself speaking.) ’But it is almost impossible to be satisfied with it after having read M. Arnauld’s books against this system, and after having contemplated the vast and boundless idea of the supremely [260] perfect Being.  This idea shows us that nothing is easier for God than to follow a plan which is simple, productive, regular and opportune for all creatures simultaneously.’

211.  While I was in France I showed to M. Arnauld a dialogue I had composed in Latin on the cause of evil and the justice of God; it was not only before his disputes with Father Malebranche, but even before the book on The Search for Truth appeared.  That principle which I uphold here, namely that sin had been permitted because it had been involved in the best plan for the universe, was already applied there; and M. Arnauld did not seem to be startled by it.  But the slight contentions which he has since had with Father Malebranche have given him cause to examine this subject with closer attention, and to be more severe in his judgement thereof.  Yet I am not altogether pleased with M. Bayle’s manner of expression here on this subject, and I am not of the opinion ’that a more composite and less productive plan might be more capable of averting irregularities’.  Rules are the expression of general will:  the more one observes rules, the more regularity there is; simplicity and productivity are the aim of rules.  I shall be met with the objection that a uniform system will be free from irregularities.  I answer that it would be an irregularity to be too uniform, that would offend against the rules of harmony. Et citharoedus Ridetur chorda qui semper oberrat eadem.  I believe therefore that God can follow a simple, productive, regular plan; but I do not believe that the best and the most regular is always opportune for all creatures simultaneously; and I judge a posteriori, for the plan chosen by God is not so.  I have, however, also shown this a priori in examples taken from mathematics, and I will presently give another here.  An Origenist who maintains that all rational creatures become happy in the end will be still easier to satisfy.  He will say, in imitation of St. Paul’s saying about the sufferings of this life, that those which are finite are not worthy to be compared with eternal bliss.