• Aboriginals in North America
  • Beast Literature
  • Canadiana.1
  • Dances & Music
  • Europe: Ukraine & Russia
  • Fables and Fairy Tales
  • Fables by Jean de La Fontaine
  • Feasts & Liturgy
  • Great Books Online
  • La Princesse de Clèves
  • Middle East
  • Molière
  • Nominations
  • Posts on Love Celebrated
  • Posts on the United States
  • The Art and Music of Russia
  • The French Revolution & Napoleon Bonaparte
  • Voyageurs Posts
  • Canadiana.2

Micheline's Blog

~ Art, music, books, history & current events

Micheline's Blog

Tag Archives: Jansenism

La Princesse de Clèves, 4

08 Friday Jan 2021

Posted by michelinewalker in 17th-century France, France, French Literature, Gallantry, Love

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

amour fatal, Diane de Poitiers, Henri II, Jansenism, La Princesse de Clèves, Le Duc de Nemours, Le Prince de Clèves, Predestination, Two moral standards, Virtue

Madame de La Fayette,
gravure de 1840 d’après Desrochers.

We know the immediate historical background of the Princesse de Clèves, and I have suggested intertextuality. Marguerite de Navarre’s L’Heptaméron features intrigues and disloyalty at court. But the discourse on love takes us back to the ancient Roman poet Ovid’s Ars Amatoria, and it may have antecedents such as extremely distant fairytales. These will be refined in seventeenth-century French salons. Charles Perrault’s Tales of Mother Goose are “re-told” tales.

LE COUP DE FOUDRE

However, let us return to our narrative. The Princess of Cleves and the Duc de Nemours have fallen in love. It is the coup de foudre, or love at first sight, à première vue. In Jansenist France, this is l’amour fatal, as fatal as Tristan’s love for Iseult and Iseult’s love for Tristan, but without recourse to a magical potion. They have seen one another and fallen in love. But the Princess of Clèves has married and she has been taught loyalty to one’s husband. A liaison with the Duc de Nemours would be illicit. Therefore, she must suppress and hide her feelings, which is not possible.

The Mareschal de St. André’s Second Ball

The mareschal de St. André’s will host a second ball which the Princess is expected to attend. However, after hearing that the Duc de Nemours would not want his mistress to attend a ball he is not hosting, she feigns illness not to attend the ball. She has betrayed herself.  

Vous voilà si belle, lui dit madame la dauphine, que je ne saurais croire que vous ayez été malade. Je pense que monsieur le prince de Condé, en vous contant l’avis de Nemours sur le bal, vous a persuadée que vous feriez une faveur au maréchal de Saint-André d’aller chez lui que vous feriez une faveur au maréchal de Saint-André d’aller chez lui, et que c’est ce qui vous a empêchée d’y venir. Madame de Clèves rougit de ce que madame la dauphine devinait si juste, et de ce qu’elle disait devant monsieur de Nemours ce qu’elle avait deviné. (ebooks, p. 19)
[You look so pretty, says the Queen-Dauphin to her, that I can’t believe you have been ill; I think the Prince of Conde when he told us the duke de Nemours’s opinion of the ball, persuaded you, that to go there would be doing a favour to the mareschal de St. André, and that that’s the reason which hindered you from going, Madam de Cleves blushed, both because the [Q]ueen-[D]auphin (Marie Stuart), had conjectured right, and because she spoke her conjecture in the presence of the Duke de Nemours.] (Wikisource [31])

Madame de Chartres has accompanied her daughter and vows that the Princess was genuinely ill, but le Duc de Nemours is not convinced. Madame de Clèves has behaved the way he wants his mistress to behave. Besides, Madame de Clèves blushes in the presence of the Duc. As she is dying, Madame de Chartres tells the Princess of Clèves that she is “sur le bord du précipice” (ebooks, p. 21), “on the brink of a precipice.” (Wikisource [35-36])

Mademoiselle de Chartres is so beautiful that when she arrives at court she appears as in the word “apparition.”

Il parut alors une beauté à la cour, qui attira les yeux de tout le monde, et l’on doit croire que c’était un beauté parfaite, puisqu’elle donna de l’admiration dans un lieu où l’on était si accoutumé à voir de belles personnes. Elle était de la même maison que le vidame de Chartres, et une des plus grandes héritières de France.
(ebooksgratuits, p. 7)
[There appeared at this time a lady at Court, who drew the eyes of the whole world; and one may imagine she was a perfect beauty, to gain admiration in a place where there were so many fine women; she was of the same family with the Viscount of Chartres, and one of the greatest heiresses of France, (…)]
(Wikisource [8])

As for the Duc de Nemours, he is described as “perfection” itself. Therefore, a worried Madame de Chartres tells her daughter that he Duke of Nemours is incapable of falling in love.

Elle se mit un jour à parler de lui ; elle lui en dit du bien, et y mêla beaucoup de louanges empoisonnées sur la sagesse qu’il avait d’être incapable de devenir amoureux, et sur ce qu’il ne se faisait qu’un plaisir, et non pas un attachement sérieux du commerce des femmes. (ebooksgratuits, p. 20)
[One day she set herself to talk about him, and a great deal of good she said of him, but mixed with it abundance of sham praises, as the prudence he showed in never falling in love, and how wise he was to make the affair of women and love an amusement instead of a serious business.] (Wikisource [32])

The Death of Madame de Chartres

After her mother dies, the princess of Clèves leaves court. Given that she is mourning her mother, her absence is motivated. The Prince of Clèves returns to “faire sa cour,” but should his wife delay her return to Paris, suspicion would arise. Many of the denizens of Henri II’s court may discover why the Duc de Nemours no longer behaves as he did. The Duke is expected to marry Elizabeth Ist of England, and the time has come for him to meet Elizabeth in person or face her scorn. The Court speculates that he is in love, but no one can tell whom he so loves that he would lose interest in marriage to Elizabeth. Marie Stuart, the Queen-Dauphin, cannot wait to tell her friend, the princesse de Clèves.

No, the Queen-Dauphin cannot wait:

Dès le même soir qu’elle fut arrivée, madame la dauphine la vint voir, et après lui avoir témoigné la part qu’elle avait prise à son affliction, elle lui dit que, pour la détourner de ces tristes pensées, elle voulait l’instruire de tout ce qui s’était passé à la cour en son absence ; elle lui conta ensuite plusieurs choses particulières. — Mais ce que j’ai le plus d’envie de vous apprendre, ajouta−t−elle, c’est qu’il est certain que monsieur de Nemours est passionnément amoureux, et que ses amis les plus intimes, non seulement ne sont point dans sa confidence, mais qu’ils ne peuvent deviner qui est la personne qu’il aime. Cependant cet amour est assez fort pour lui faire négliger ou abandonner, pour mieux dire, les espérances d’une couronne. (ebooks, p. 29)
[The evening of her arrival the queen-dauphin made her a visit, and after having condoled with her, told her that in order to divert her from melancholy thoughts, she would let her know all that had passed at court in her absence; upon which she related to her a great many extraordinary things; but what I have the greatest desire to inform you of, added she, is that it is certain the duke de Nemours is passionately in love; and that his most intimate friends are not only not entrusted in it, but can’t so much as guess who the person is he is in love with; nevertheless this passion of his is so strong as to make him neglect, or to speak more properly, abandon the hopes of a crown.] (Wikisource [48])

L’Amour fatal: Two Moral Compasses

Madame de Clèves is perturbed. Who is this woman who would make the Duke de Nemours abandon his marriage with Elizabeth 1st of England? If she, the Princess of Cleves, is the cause of such changes in the Duc de Nemours, he is “in love,” l’amour fatal. But although she is powerless, she feels guilty. She has been raised by a virtuous mother, but at court liaisons are acceptable. Princes and princesses marry to perpetuate a lineage. Therefore, they may have liaisons. However, Madame de Clèves has been taught virtue. When she hears that the Duc de Nemours is no longer interested in marrying Elizabeth 1st of England, which is a huge sacrifice, the Princess feels extremely distressed. The Duc de Nemours has fallen in love and it is l’amour fatal, Tendre-sur-Inclination. The seventeenth century in France was largely Jansenist. One cannot choose; one is chosen: predestination. The Princess and the Prince are powerless.

RELATED ARTICLES

  • About Marguerite de Navarre (1 January 2021)
  • La Princesse de Clèves, 1 (15 December 2020)
  • La Princesse de Clèves, 2 (17 December 2020)
  • La Princesse de Clèves, 3 (22 December 2020)

Sources and Resources

La Princesse de Clèves is a Librivox and Internet Archive Publication FR.
La Princesse de Clèves is an ebooksgratuits.com Publication FR
The Princess of Cleves is a Wikisource publication EN.
La Princesse de Clèves is a Wikisource publication FR.
La Princesse de Clèves is Gutenberg’s [eBook # 18797] FR.
La Princesse de Clèves is Gutenberg’s [eBook # 467] EN.
La Princesse de Clèves is a Librivox and Internet Archive Publication.
Britannica.
Wikipedia.

Love to everyone 💕

Le Bal
Elizabeth I of England (rmg.co.uk)

© Micheline Walker
8 January 2021
WordPress

Micheline's Blog

  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Destiny in l’École des femmes

01 Sunday Nov 2020

Posted by michelinewalker in Molière, Theatre

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

Destiny, Jansenism, L'École des femmes, Le Jeu de l'amour et du hasard, Molière, Pierre Marivaux

c80b548e901709e78f908a2821692c31
La Critique de l’École des femmes François Boucher & Laurent Cars

(Number 62 in Page on Molière)


“D’après nature”

In Le Tartuffe, Molière depicted his faux dévot “d’après nature.” However, the play was banned because Tartuffe, who feigned devotion, acted very much like a devout person, which offended the dévots of Paris: la Compagnie du Saint-Sacrement.

As for L’École des femmes, it was criticized because of details mainly. For instance, one person found the manner Arnolphe questions Agnès rather crude. Arnolphe wants to know if Horace took anything from her other than her hands and arms, which he caressed. She hesitates to tell that he took the ribbon Arnolphe had given her. She says “le” and this “le” was obscene according to Climène, a précieuse.

“Ah ! ruban, tant qu’il vous plaira ; mais ce, le, où elle s’arrête, n’est pas mis pour des prunes. Il vient sur ce, le, d’étranges pensées. Ce, le, scandalise furieusement ; et quoi que vous puissiez dire, vous ne sauriez défendre l’insolence de ce, le.”
Climène (I, 3) La Critique de l’École des femmes
[Oh yes, the ribbon! But that “the,” when she checks herself, is not put there for nothing. Odd ideas are suggested by this “the.” That the is tremendously scandalous.]

The “le” (the) was not only offensive, but it was not there for nothing: “pour des prunes[.]”
“Il y a une obscénité qui n’est pas supportable.”
Climène (I, 3) La Critique de l’École des femmes
[Its obscenity is unbearable.]
Climène (I. 3)

“Les récits eux-mêmes y sont des actions suivant la constitution du sujet.”
Dorante (I, 6) La Critique de l’École des femmes
[There is a good deal of action in it, passing on the stage; the narratives are themselves actions, according to the constitution of the piece, …]
Dorante (I, 7) The School for Wives Criticized

These were indeed part of the action because Arnolphe could not tell anyone, not even Chrysalde, the play’s raisonneur, about the “star […] bent on driving [him] to despair” (The School for Wives, p. 21). Arnolphe was a star-crossed barbon.

The Dramatic Action

In L’École des femmes, the dramatic action is triggered by a doubling of the identity of the blocking character. Horace, our young lover, does not know that Arnolphe, his father’s friend, is Monsieur de la Souche and that in confiding to Arnolphe, he is in fact confiding to his rival. When Arnolphe learns that young Horace has fallen in love with Agnès who is kept sequestered by a very jealous Monsieur de la Souche, he must conceal his grief and bewilderment. He speaks to himself and, if he didn’t, there would be gaps in the dramatic action. There has to be a dialogue, which there is.

“Oh ! que j’ai souffert durant cet entretien !
Jamais trouble d’esprit ne fut égal au mien.
Avec quelle imprudence et quelle hâte extrême
Il m’est venu conter cette affaire à moi-même !
”
Arnolphe (I, 4, v. 357-360) L’École des femmes
[Oh, what I have endured during this conversation! Never was trouble of mind equal to mine! With what rashness and extreme haste did he come to tell me of this affair!]
The School for Wives, p. 9.

Destiny

Destiny plays a key role in L’École des femmes and Arnolphe blames destiny throughout the play:

“Éloignement fatal ! Voyage malheureux !”
Arnolphe (II, 1, v. 385) L’École des femmes
[Fatal absence! Unfortunate voyage!]
The School for Wives, p. 9.

In scene IV, 7 Arnolphe speaks about the above-mentioned “star which is bent on driving [him] to despair,” and remains defiant.

“Quoi ? l’astre qui s’obstine à me désespérer,
Ne me donnera pas le temps de respirer,
Coup sur coup je verrai par leur intelligence,
De mes soins vigilants confondre la prudence,
D’une jeune innocente, et d’un jeune éventé ?”
Arnolphe (IV, 7, v. 1182-1186) p. 56
[What, will the star which is bent on driving me to despair allow me no time to breathe? Am I to see, through their mutual understanding, my watchful care and my wisdom defeated one after another? Must I, in my mature age, become the dupe of a simple girl and a scatter−brained young fellow?]
The School for Wives, p. 21.

Destiny is so cruel to Arnolphe that it brings in a “real” father. When Enrique, Agnès’ biological father, arrives, Agnès ceases to be Arnolphe’s ward, which she has been for 13 years. Arnolphe is so perturbed that, having expressed himself quite fluently in several soliloquies and asides, he suddenly loses his ability to speak. In an aparté, Chrysalde tells Arnolphe, who is returning to his house, that, given his fear of cuckolding, it is best for him not to marry. Arnolphe is indeed spared cuckolding, but he has been crushed by destiny.

Life as a game of dice: “un jeu de dés”

Destiny is so powerful that in Act IV, Scene 8, Chrysalde, the raisonneur himself, suggests  that all Arnolphe can do, if betrayed by “cursed fate,” is to select an appropriate response to this “accident.” Destiny is an indomitable force that can strike anyone at any time. In fact, Chrysalde tells Arnolphe that cocuage is what one makes of it: “Le cocuage n’est que ce que l’on le fait.” (Chrysalde, IV, 8, v. 1285). Destiny (le sort) gives men a wife and life is a jeu de dés, a game of dice. One corrects such accidents as cocuage though “good management,” une bonne conduite:

“Quoi qu’on en puisse dire, enfin, le cocuage
Sous des traits moins affreux aisément s’envisage;
Et, comme je vous le dis, toute l’habileté
Ne va qu’à le savoir tourner du bon côté.”
Chrysalde (IV, 8, v. 1270-1273) L’École des femmes
[In short, say what you will, cuckolding may easily be made to seem less terrible; and, as I told you before, all your dexterity lies in being able to turn the best side outwards.]
The School for wives, p. 22.

“Mais comme c’est le sort qui nous donne une femme,
Je dis que l’on doit faire ainsi qu’au jeu de dés,

Il faut jouer d’adresse et d’une âme réduite,
Corriger le hasard par la bonne conduite.”
Chrysalde (IV, 8, v. 1282-1285) L’École des femmes
[But as fortune gives us a wife, I say that we should act as we do when we gamble with dice, when, if you do not get what you want, you must be shrewd and good−tempered, to amend your luck by good management.]
The School for wives, p. 22.

Given the power he associates with destiny, Arnolphe’s obsessive fear of cuckolding is in his nature. This immutability of nature is a premise in Molière. Arnolphe is as he is and Agnès is as she is. For instance, she can tell Horace that she is kept by a very jealous man. Agnès may be an ignorant girl, but she knows about jealousy. She also knows about the game of dice.

Agnès and Horace

In L’École des femmes, the laws of comedy are pushed to an extreme. After Agnès escapes Monsieur de la Souche, which could be the resolution of the play, Horace asks Arnolphe to house and guard Agnès so her reputation is protected.

Moreover, it is barely credible that Agnès’ biological father should arrive the moment his daughter is being led away by Arnolphe. It is also barely credible that Agnès should have fallen in love with the young man her father wanted her to marry. Molière doubles the father figure: Monsieur de la Souche and Enrique, who has decided his daughter would marry Horace. Were it not for Chrysalde’s intervention, and the power of destiny, Horace’s marriage may have been a mariage

“(…) Si son cœur a quelque répugnance.
Je tiens qu’on ne doit pas lui faire résistance
.”
Chrysalde (V, 7, v. 1684-1686) L’École des femmes
[If it is repugnant to him, I think we ought not to force him. I think my brother will be of my mind.]
The School for Wives, p. 28.

“Le hasard [chance] en ces lieux avait exécuté
Ce que votre sagesse avait prémédité.”
Horace (V, 9, v. 1764-1765) L’École des femmes
[Accident has done here what your wisdom intended.]
The School for Wives, p. 29.

Such words as “hasard” (chance) and “le Ciel,” (heaven) reveal a view of the world according to which destiny controls mankind. L’École des femmes may therefore reflect Jansenism, but the word Jansenism is not used.

“Allons dans la maison débrouiller ces mystères,
Payer à notre ami ses soins officieux,
Et rendre grâce au Ciel qui fait tout pour le mieux.”
Chrysalde (V, 9, v. 1775 -1765) L’École des femmes
[Let us go inside, and clear up these mysteries. Let us shew our friend some return for his great pains, and thank Heaven, which orders all for the best.]
The School for Wives, p. 29.

Lecture de Molière par Jean-François de Troy

Conclusion

In 1662, the Church of France opposed Jesuits, who at the time used casuistry,[2] and Jansenists, who believed in predestination. Port-Royal (Jansenism) is an indelible page of French history and it inspired Blaise Pascal‘s masterful Lettres provinciales, a brillant attack of casuistry. Pascal’s last Lettre provinciale was written in 1657.

In Tartuffe, there is a reference to casuistry. Tartuffe knows how to “pacify scruples:”

“Je sais l’art de lever [to lift] des scrupules.”
Tartuffe (IV, 4, v. 1486)
[I know the art of pacifying scruples.]
Tartuffe

However, Molière does not associate L’École des femmes with an ideology. We know that Molière borrowed his subject matter from Paul Scarron‘s translation of a Spanish novella by Doña Maria de Zayas y Sotomayor, which Scarron entitled La Précaution inutile. We also know that L’École des femmes has Italian antecedents. It could be, therefore, that ancestors to L’École des femmes gave destiny an important role. Yet, it seems unlikely that they gave destiny as decisive a role as Molière did.

Jansenists maintained that only those whom God had chosen would be saved. This notion was referred to as the theory of predestination, a theory associated with Saint Augustine, or Augustine of Hippo (13 November 354 CE – 28 August 430 CE).

Molière did not have to refer to an ideology when writing L’École des femmes. He did not need to. Comedy promotes the success of the young lovers. Yet seldom has destiny countered a barbon‘s wishes as imperatively. Dismissing predestination is somewhat difficult because of the central role given soliloquies. Arnolphe must hide from Horace that he is Monsieur de la Souche, until Chrysalde says:

“(…) Ce nom l’aigrit ;
C’est Monsieur de la Souche, on vous l’a déjà dit.”

Chrysalde (V, 7, v. 1712-1703)
[That name annoys him. He is Monsieur de la Souche, as you were told before.]
The School for Wives, p. 28.

As noted above, in L’École des femmes, life is compared to a jeu de dés [dice]. Gambling is also invoked by Agnès herself.

“Mon Dieu, ne gagez pas, vous perdriez vraiment.”
Agnès (II, 5, v. 474) [3]
[Oh, Heaven, do not bet; you would assuredly lose.]
The School for wives, p.10.

However, I will not conclude that L’École des femmes reflects Jansenism, except marginally. The laws of comedy promote the marriage of the young lovers and farces do not tolerate boasting. Moreover, jealousy is a topos, a lieu commun.

But I will note that Molière’s L’École des femmes seems a prelude to Marivaux‘ exquisite comedies. It is a “jeu de l’amour et du hasard,” a “Game of love and chance,” without Watteau‘s ethereal Fêtes galantes.

Love to everyone 💕

RELATED ARTICLES

  • L’École des femmes, part one (29 May 2016)
  • L’École des femmes, part two (2 June 2016)
  • Molière’s Tartuffe, a reading (17 May 2016)
  • Jesuits & Jansenists (2 April 2015)
  • Pascal’s “Provincial Letters” (27 March 2015)
  • Jansenism: a Church Divided (24 March 2015)
  • Casuistry, or how to sin without sinning (25 March 2012)

Sources and Resources

  • L’École des femmes is a Molière 21 publication FR
  • La Critique de l’École des femmes is a Molière 21 publication FR
  • The School for Wives is an e-text (UK) EN
  • The School for Wives Criticized is an Internet Archive publication EN

_________________________

[1] Gabriel Conesa, Le Dialogue moliéresque (Paris: SEDES-CDU, 1992), p. 30.[2] Roxanne Lalande, “L’École des femmes: matrimony and the laws of chance,” in David Bradby and Andrew Calder (editors), The Cambridge Companion to Molière (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), pp. 165-176. 
[3] “casuistry”. Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia
_________________________
Bourbeau-Walker, Micheline. « L’échec d’Arnolphe : loi du genre ou faille intérieure », in Papers on French Seventeenth Century Literature, (Seattle-Tübingen, 1984, Vol. XI, No 20), pp. 79-92.

“Me voilà hors du naufrage”
Charles Tessier, Carnets de Voyages
Claire Lefilliâtre, Le Poème Harmonique.

Bertall

© Micheline Walker
10 June 2016
WordPress

No 62 (Page on Molière)

Micheline's Blog

  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Destiny in “L’École des femmes”

10 Friday Jun 2016

Posted by michelinewalker in Comedy, Molière, Sharing

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

Destiny, Jansenism, L'École des femmes, La Critique de l'École des femmes, Le Jeu de l'amour et du hasard, Molière, Pierre Marivaux

c80b548e901709e78f908a2821692c31

La Critique de l’École des femmes, Francois Boucher (dessin) & Laurent Cars (gravure)

La Critique de l’École des femmes

When L’École des femmes was first performed, on 26 December 1662, it created a controversy, which Molière addressed by writing a one-act play in prose entitled La Critique de l’École des femmes (1663). The short play features characters discussing L’École des femmes. It has often been considered Molière’s ars poetica.

According to Dorante, the most prominent figure in the Critique, if the spectator laughed, the play was a success. The School for Wives had generated laughter so, using Dorante’s criterion, it was successful. Dorante also states that writing comedies is particularly difficult because one has to depict persons “d’après nature,” or as they are:

Mais lorsque vous peignez les hommes, il faut peindre d’après nature[.]
Dorante (I, 6) La Critique de l’École des femmes
[But when one depicts human beings, one must depict their true nature.]
Dorante (I. 7) p. 177

“D’après nature”

In Le Tartuffe, Molière depicted his faux dévot “d’après nature.” However, the play was banned because Tartuffe, who feigned devotion, acted very much like a devout person, which offended the dévots of Paris: la Compagnie du Saint-Sacrement.

As for L’École des femmes, it was criticized because of details mainly. For instance, one person found the manner in which Arnolphe questions Agnès rather crude. Arnolphe wants to know if Horace took anything from her other than her hands and arms, which he caressed. She hesitates to tell that he took the ribbon Arnolphe had given her. She says “le” and this “le” was obscene according to Climène, a précieuse.

Ah ! ruban, tant qu’il vous plaira ; mais ce, le, où elle s’arrête, n’est pas mis pour des prunes. Il vient sur ce, le, d’étranges pensées. Ce, le, scandalise furieusement ; et quoi que vous puissiez dire, vous ne sauriez défendre l’insolence de ce, le.
Climène (1, 3)

The “le” (the) was not only offensive, but it wasn’t there for nothing: “pour des prunes[.]” This “le” led to strange thoughts: d’étranges pensées and was therefore “furiously scandalous.”

Il y a une obscénité qui n’est pas supportable.
Climène (I, 3) La Critique de l’École des femmes
[It’s obscenity is unbearable]
Climène (I, 3)

Soliloquies or récits and destiny

Obscenity was not the play’s most important ‘flaw.’ However, it was extremely amusing, and Molière wrote comedies. The more relevant flaw, according to our characters, was that Molière had made Arnolphe express himself using numerous soliloquies as well as asides (apartés). These were not part of the dramatic action,[1] said some members of the group.

Dorante countered that:

Les récits eux-mêmes y sont des actions suivant la constitution du sujet.
Dorante (I, 6) La Critique de l’École des femmes
[There is a good deal of action in it, passing on the stage; the narratives are themselves actions, according to the constitution of the piece, …]
Dorante (1, 7) The School for Wives Criticized

These were indeed part of the action because Arnolphe could not tell anyone, not even Chrysalde, the play’s raisonneur, about the “star […] bent on driving [him] to despair” (The School for Wives, p. 21). Arnolphe was a star-crossed barbon.

The Dramatic Action

In L’École des femmes, the dramatic action is triggered by a doubling of the identity of the blocking character. Horace, our young lover, does not know that Arnolphe, his father’s friend, is Monsieur de la Souche and that in confiding to Arnolphe, he is in fact confiding to his rival. When Arnolphe learns that young Horace has fallen in love with Agnès who is kept sequestered by a very jealous Monsieur de la Souche, he must conceal his grief and bewilderment. He speaks to himself and, if he didn’t, there would be gaps in the dramatic action. There has to be a dialogue, which there is.

Oh ! que j’ai souffert durant cet entretien !
Jamais trouble d’esprit ne fut égal au mien.
Avec quelle imprudence et quelle hâte extrême
Il m’est venu conter cette affaire à moi-même !
Arnolphe (I, 4, v. 357-360) L’École des femmes
[Oh, what I have endured during this conversation! Never was trouble of mind equal to mine! With what rashness and extreme haste did he come to tell me of this affair!]
The School for Wives, p. 9.

Destiny

Destiny plays the key role in L’École des femmes and Arnolphe blames destiny throughout the play:

Éloignement fatal ! Voyage malheureux !
Arnolphe (II, 1, v. 385)
[Fatal absence! Unfortunate voyage!]
The School for Wives, p. 9.

In Act V, scene 7, Arnolphe speaks about the above-mentioned “star which is bent on driving [him] to despair,” and remains defiant.

Quoi ? l’astre qui s’obstine à me désespérer,
Ne me donnera pas le temps de respirer,
Coup sur coup je verrai par leur intelligence,
De mes soins vigilants confondre la prudence,
D’une jeune innocente, et d’un jeune éventé ?
Arnolphe (V, 7, v. 1182-1186)
[What, will the star which is bent on driving me to despair allow me no time to breathe? Am I to see, through their mutual understanding, my watchful care and my wisdom defeated one after another? Must I, in my mature age, become the dupe of a simple girl and a scatter−brained young fellow?]
The School for Wives, p. 21.

Destiny is so cruel to Arnolphe that it brings in a “real” father. When Enrique, Agnès’ biological father, arrives, Agnès ceases to be Arnolphe’s ward, which she has been for 13 years. Arnolphe is so perturbed that, having expressed himself quite fluently in several soliloquies and asides, he suddenly loses his ability to speak. In an aparté, Chrysalde tells Arnolphe, who is returning to his house, that, given his fear of cuckolding, it is best for him not to marry. Arnolphe is indeed spared cuckolding, but he has been crushed by destiny.

Life as a game of dice: “un jeu de dés”

Destiny is so powerful that in Act IV, Scene 8, Chrysalde, the raisonneur himself, suggests  that all Arnolphe can do, if betrayed by “cursed fate,” is to select an appropriate response to this “accident.” Destiny is an indomitable force that can strike anyone at any time. In fact, Chrysalde tells Arnolphe that cocuage is what one makes of it: “Le cocuage n’est que ce que l’on le fait.” (Chrysalde, IV, 8, v. 1301). Destiny (le sort) gives men a wife and life is a jeu de dés, a game of dice. One corrects such accidents as cocuage though “good management,” une bonne conduite:

Quoi qu’on en puisse dire, enfin, le cocuage
Sous des traits moins affreux aisément s’envisage;
Et, comme je vous le dis, toute l’habileté
Ne va qu’à le savoir tourner du bon côté.
Chrysalde (I, 4, v. 357-360) L’École des femmes
[In short, say what you will, cuckolding may easily be made to seem less terrible; and, as I told you before, all your dexterity lies in being able to turn the best side outwards.]
The School for wives, p. 22.

Mais comme c’est le sort qui nous donne une femme,
Je dis que l’on doit faire ainsi qu’au jeu de dés,
Il faut jouer d’adresse et d’une âme réduite,
Corriger le hasard par la bonne conduite.
Chrysalde (IV, 8. v. 1282-1285) L’École des femmes
[But as fortune gives us a wife, I say that we should act as we do when we gamble with dice, when, if you do not get what you want, you must be shrewd and good−tempered, to amend your luck by good management.]
The School for wives, p. 22.

If one takes into account destiny’s power, Arnolphe’s obsessive fear of cuckolding is in his nature. This immutability of nature is a premise in Molière. Arnolphe is as he is and Agnès is as she is. For instance, she can tell Horace that she is kept by a very jealous man. Agnès may be an ignorant girl, but she knows about jealousy. She also knows about the game of dice.

Agnès and Horace

In L’École des femmes, the laws of comedy are pushed to an extreme. After Agnès escapes Monsieur de la Souche, which could be the resolution of the play, Horace asks Arnolphe to house and guard Agnès so her reputation is protected.

Moreover, it is barely credible that Agnès’ biological father should arrive the moment his daughter is being led away by Arnolphe. It is also barely credible that Agnès should have fallen in love with the young man her father wanted her to marry. Molière doubles the father figure: Monsieur de la Souche and Enrique, who has decided his daughter would marry Horace. Were it not for Chrysalde’s intervention, and the power of destiny, Horace’s marriage may have been a mariage forcé.

(…) Si son cœur a quelque répugnance.
Je tiens qu’on ne doit pas lui faire résistance.
Chrysalde (V, 7, v. 1684-1686)
[If it is repugnant to him, I think we ought not to force him. I think my brother will be of my mind.]
The School for Wives, p. 28.

Le hasard [chance] en ces lieux avait exécuté
Ce que votre sagesse avait prémédité.
Horace (V, 9, v. 1764-1765)
[Accident has done here what your wisdom intended.]
The School for Wives, p. 29.

Such words as “hasard” (chance) and “le Ciel,” (heaven) reveal a view of the world according to which destiny controls mankind. L’École des femmes may therefore reflect Jansenism, but the word Jansenism is not used.

Allons dans la maison débrouiller ces mystères,
Payer à notre ami ses soins officieux,
Et rendre grâce au Ciel qui fait tout pour le mieux.
Chrysalde (V, 9, v. 1775 -1778)
[Let us go inside, and clear up these mysteries. Let us shew our friend some return for his great pains, and thank Heaven, which orders all for the best.]
The School for Wives, p. 29.

moliere

La Lecture de Molière, Jean-François de Troy

Conclusion

In 1662, the Church of France opposed Jesuits, who at the time used casuistry,[2] and Jansenists, who believed in predestination. Port-Royal (Jansenism) is an indelible page of French history and it inspired Blaise Pascal‘s masterful Lettres provinciales, a brillant attack of casuistry. Pascal’s last Lettre provinciale was written in 1657.

In The Tartuffe, there is a reference to casuistry. Tartuffe knows how to “pacify scruples:”

Je sais l’art de lever [to lift] des scrupules. (Tartuffe, IV, 4, v. 1486.)
[I know the art of pacifying scruples.]
Tartuffe,  IV, 4.

However, Molière does not associate L’École des femmes with an ideology. We know that Molière borrowed his subject matter from Paul Scarron‘s translation of a Spanish novella by Doña Maria de Zayas y Sotomayor, which Scarron entitled La Précaution inutile. We also know that L’École des femmes has Italian antecedents. It could be, therefore, that ancestors to L’École des femmes gave destiny an important role. Yet, it seems unlikely that they gave destiny as decisive a role as Molière did.

Jansenists maintained that only those whom God had chosen would be saved. This notion was referred to as the theory of predestination, a theory associated with Saint Augustine, or Augustine of Hippo (13 November 354 CE – 28 August 430 CE).

Molière did not have to refer to an ideology when writing L’École des femmes. He did not need to. Comedy promotes the success of the young lovers. Yet seldom has destiny countered a barbon‘s wishes as imperatively. Dismissing predestination is somewhat difficult because of the central role given soliloquies. Arnolphe must hide from Horace that he is Monsieur de la Souche, until Chrysalde says:

(…) Ce nom l’aigrit ;
C’est Monsieur de la Souche, on vous l’a déjà dit. (Chrysalde, V, 7, v. 1712-1703.)
[That name annoys him. He is Monsieur de la Souche, as you were told before.]
The School for Wives, p. 28.

As noted above, in L’École des femmes, life is compared to a jeu de dés [dice]. Gambling is also invoked by Agnès herself.

Mon Dieu, ne gagez pas, vous perdriez vraiment. (Agnès, II, 5, v. 474.) [3]
[Oh, Heaven, do not bet; you would assuredly lose.]
The School for wives, p.10.

However, I will not conclude that L’École des femmes reflects Jansenism, except marginally. The laws of comedy promote the marriage of the young lovers and farces do not tolerate boasting. Moreover, jealousy is a topos, a lieu commun.

But I will note that Molière’s L’École des femmes seems a prelude to Marivaux‘ exquisite comedies. It is a “jeu de l’amour et du hasard,” a “Game of love and chance,” without Watteau‘s ethereal Fêtes galantes.

I apologize for the long delay. I could not concentrate.

Love to everyone ♥

RELATED ARTICLES

  • L’École des femmes, part one (29 May 2016)
  • L’École des femmes, part two (2 June 2016)
  • Molière’s Tartuffe, a reading (17 May 2016)
  • Jesuits & Jansenists (2 April 2015)
  • Pascal’s “Provincial Letters” (27 March 2015)
  • Jansenism: a Church Divided (24 March 2015)
  • Casuistry, or how to sin without sinning (25 March 2012)

Sources and Resources

  • L’École des femmes is a Molière 21 publication FR
  • La Critique de l’École des femmes is a Molière 21 publication FR
  • The School for Wives is an e-text (UK) EN
  • The School for Wives Criticized is an Internet Archive publication EN

_________________________

[1] Gabriel Conesa, Le Dialogue moliéresque (Paris: SEDES-CDU, 1992), p. 30.

[2] Roxanne Lalande, “L’École des femmes : matrimony and the laws of chance,” in David Bradby and Andrew Calder (editors), The Cambridge Companion to Molière (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), p. 165-176. 

[3] “casuistry”. Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia

moliere-622x390-1389653020

“Me voilà hors du naufrage”
Charles Tessier, Carnets de Voyages
Claire Lefilliâtre, Le Poème Harmonique.

MarivauxGameLoveChance

Bertall

© Micheline Walker
10 June 2016
WordPress

Micheline's Blog

  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Jesuits & Jansenists

02 Thursday Apr 2015

Posted by michelinewalker in France, Religion

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Augustinus, Casuistry, Cornelius Jansen, Cum Occasionum, Jansenism, Jean Duvergier, Pascal, Port-Royal, Provincial Letters, Unigenitus

Les Lettres provinciales
Les Lettres provinciales

Blaise Pascal

Blaise Pascal

In 1656-1657, Blaise Pascal (Louis de Montalte) wrote his eighteen Provincial Letters in defense of the Jansenists of the abbey of Port-Royal-des-Champs, located near Paris, and Port-Royal abbey in Paris. Jansenism had been brought to France by Jean Duvergier de Hauranne (1581 – 1643), afterwards the abbot of Saint-Cyran-en-Brenne. Duvergier had studied theology in Leuven /Louvain where he met and befriended Cornelius Jansen (28 October 1585 – 6 May 1638), the father of Jansenism. During his stay in Louvain, Duvergier and Jansen opposed the Jesuits to protect Belgian theologian Michael Baius or Michel de Bay (1513 – 16 September 1589) whom Jesuits suspected had been influenced by Calvinism.

The Jesuits or Society of Jesus was founded in 1540. Jesuits were therefore a new order that could have helped curb the spread of Protestantism. (See « La Querelle entre jansénistes et jésuites », Jésuites de la province de France. FR) Changes were needed, but not to the point of using moral irresponsibility to benefit Roman Catholicism. Extremes are extremes.  

In 1653, Pope Innocent X issued the bull Cum Occasionum condemning as heretical five propositions contained in Cornelius Jansen’s Augustinus. The Augustinus, a long work that is considered the Jansenists’ “book,” was published posthumously in 1640. It should be noted, however, that the Augustinus was the work of Cornelius Jansen and that it was published several years after he and Jean Duvergier de Hauranne were students in Leuven, Holland. In fact, by 1640, the two friends had long been separated. Cornelius Jansen had spent a few years in France after he and Jean Duvergier graduated with a degree in theology from the University of Leuven. Moreover, as noted above, the book was published two years after Cornelius Jansen’s death. Cornelius Jansen died in an epidemic.

It should also be noted that, after serving as abbot of Saint-Cyran-en-Brenne, Jean Duvergier, known as Saint-Cyran, had settled at the abbey of Port-Royal-des-champs, a Cistercian abbey. The Cistercian order was established in 1204 and its rule was more severe than the Rule of Benedict, precepts observed by Benedictine monks. In 1623, he had become the spiritual director of the nuns living and working at Port-Royal-des-champs, one of whom was the abbess Angélique Arnauld (8 September 1591 in Paris – 6 August 1661) who had also introduced certain reforms in her community. The Cistercians also owned the Port-Royal Abbey in Paris.

Port-Royal-des-Champs
Port-Royal-des-Champs
Engraving, Magdeleine Horthemels, c. 1710
Engraving, Magdeleine Horthemels, c. 1710

Petites Écoles
Petites Écoles
Port-Royal, Paris
Port-Royal, Paris

Les Petites Écoles de Port-Royal (1637 -1660)

Pascal as student and Educator

From 1637 until 1660, Cistercians operated a school at Port-Royal-des-Champs. Pascal had been a student at the Petites Écoles de Port-Royal, excellent schools because of the intellectual calibre of its teachers, messieurs, and its small classes. Jean Racine, the author of Phèdre (1778), had also studied at the Petites Écoles de Port-Royal. Later, Pascal himself would be an educator. He wrote a new method of teaching children to read.

As a former pupil of Port-Royal-des-Champs, Pascal, who sympathized with the Jansenists, defended the Port-Royal abbeys threatened by the bull Cum Occasionum. However, his motivation was, to a large extent, loyalty to his former teachers, the nuns of Port-Royal and to its messieurs or solitaires, teachers and men who retreated to one of the Port-Royal abbeys. More importantly, however, Pascal attacked the moral laxity of Jesuit casuistry.

However, in his Provincial Letters, Pascal did discuss the matter of grace, albeit briefly. According to the Jansenists, humans could not ensure their salvation. Jansenists believed in predestination. It had been and remains a Roman Catholic’s perception, that although humans are born stained with the original sin, baptism and grâce suffisante FR make it possible for them to be saved through good deeds, which is what I was taught. Jansenists differed. In order to be saved, humans had to be granted grâce efficace FR or efficacious grace and God chose those on whom he would bestow efficacious grace.

Saint Augustine and Pelagius

I suspect that initially St. Augustine, or Augustine or Hippo (13 November 354 – 28 August 430), believed humans could expiate the original sin, if granted grâce suffisante. French 17th-century Jansenists maintained, however, that grâce efficace or efficacious grace, was required to be saved. This was cause for despair as it negated free will.

The quarrel between Jansenists and Jesuits therefore echoed an earlier quarrel between St. Augustine and Pelagius (fl. c. 390 – 418). Pelagius had opposed predestination. In fact, according to Wikipedia’s entry on the Church Fathers, “early Church Fathers consistently [upheld] the freedom of human choice. They consistently upheld the freedom of human choice.” Initially, Augustine of Hippo may have  understood predestination as no more than foreknowledge. God as God knew how humans would live. This is what I was taught as a child. However, St. Augustine would grow to support predestination as a denial of free will, hence the title of Cornelius Jansen’s Augustinus, the Jansenists’ book.

Pascal’s Target: Casuistry

The Lettres provinciales did support the doctrines of Jansenism, but Pascal’s main target was the moral irresponsibility advocated by the Jesuits, or casuistry. Pascal also emphasized the Jesuit’s rejection of the teachings of the Church Fathers which, by extension, was a rejection of Roman Catholicism in its totality. This was not the intention of the Jesuits.

After speaking with a Jesuit, our naïve character, visits a neighbour who is known as an opponent of Jansenism, but who turns out to share the Jansenist’s view of grace and predestination.

“To ascertain the matter with certainty, I repaired to my neighbor, M. N-, doctor of Navarre, who, as you are aware, is one of the keenest opponents of the Jansenists, and, my curiosity having made me almost as keen as himself, I asked him if they would not formally decide at once that ‘grace is given to all men,’ and thus set the question at rest. But he gave me a sore rebuff and told me that that was not the point; that there were some of his party who held that grace was not given to all; that the examiners themselves had declared, in a full assembly of the Sorbonne, that that opinion was problematical; and that he himself held the same sentiment, which he confirmed by quoting to me what he called that celebrated passage of St. Augustine: ‘We know that grace is not given to all men.’” (Letter I/1)

—ooo—

In my post on Pascal’s Provincial Letters, I wrote that we would take a closer look at the methods used by Jesuit casuistry. We will. A few examples are needed, but what I would like to bring to the fore are:

  • the Jesuits’ rejection of the doctrines of the Church Fathers,
  • the fact that Jesuits tolerated duels and homicides, and
  • other precepts.
1024px-Fra_angelico_-_conversion_de_saint_augustin
Conversion of Saint Augustine Fra Angelico (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

640px-Sandro_Botticelli_050

Augustine of Hippo wrote that original sin is transmitted by concupiscence and enfeebles freedom of the will without destroying it. Sandro Botticelli (Caption and photo credit: Wikipedia)

Rejection of the Teachings of the Church Fathers

Provincial Letters pdf (complete text)
probabilism

“We leave the fathers [Church Fathers],” resumed the monk, “to those who deal with positive divinity. As for us, who are the directors of conscience, we read very little of them and quote only the modern casuists.” (p. 40) (Letter VI/6)

“For example, three popes have decided that monks who are bound by a particular vow to a Lenten life cannot be absolved from it even though they should become bishops. And yet Diana avers that notwithstanding this decision they are absolved. ‘And how does he reconcile that?’ said I. By the most subtle of all the modern methods, and by the nicest possible application of probability,” replied the monk. (p. 44) (Letter VI/6)

Here the monk being interviewed by a naïve character invokes “probability” and lists modern authorities. The new authorities and proponents of casuistry are Luis de Molina, Antonio Escobar y Mendoza, Gabriel Vasquez and Leonardus Lessius. Also linked to casuistry were Étienne Bauny of France and Antonino Diana, an Italian. Numerous “authorities” are also named as one reads the 18 letters. (See Casuistry, Wikipedia.)

However, if our narrator or candid character refers to an authority, he is trivialized and disapproves:

“When Diana [Antonino Diana] quotes with approbation the sentiments of Vasquez, when he finds them probable, and ‘very convenient for rich people,’ as he says in the same place, he is no slanderer, no falsifier, and we hear no complaints of misrepresenting his author; whereas, when I cite the same sentiments of Vasquez, though without holding him up as a phoenix, I am a slanderer, a fabricator, a corrupter of his maxims.” (p. 109) (Letter XII/12)

More on Probabilisme

‘A person may do what he considers allowable according to a probable opinion, though the contrary may be the safer one. The opinion of a single grave doctor is all that is requisite.’ (p. 39) (Letter VI/6)

“Can you doubt it?” he replied, ‘We have bound them, sir, to absolve their penitents who act according to probable opinions, under the pain of mortal sin, to secure their compliance ‘under the pain of mortal sin’”

‘When the penitent, says Father Bauny,’ follows a probable opinion, the confessor is bound to absolve him, though his opinion should differ from that of his penitent.’” (p. 40) (Letter VI/6)

Homicide

The justification of homicide is particularly surprising.

(naïve character, italics)

“Be this as it may, however, it seems that, according to Sanchez, a man may freely slay (I do not say treacherously, but only insidiously and behind his back) a calumniator, for example, who prosecutes us at law?” (p. 56) (Letter VII/7)

 “Certainly he may,” returned the monk, “always, however, in the way of giving a right direction to the intention: you constantly forget the main point. Molina supports the same doctrine; and what is more, our learned brother Reginald maintains that we may despatch the false witnesses whom he summons against us. And, to crown the whole, according to our great and famous fathers Tanner and Emanuel Sa, it is lawful to kill both the false witnesses and the judge himself, if he has had any collusion with them. Here are Tanner’s very words: ‘Sotus and Lessius think that it is not lawful to kill the false witnesses and the magistrate who conspire together to put an innocent person to death; but Emanuel Sa and other authors with good reason impugn that sentiment, at least so far as the conscience is concerned.’ And he goes on to show that it is quite lawful to kill both the witnesses and the judge.” (p. 56) (Letter VII/7)

“And, in point of fact, is it not certain that the man who has received a buffet on the ear is held to be under disgrace, until he has wiped off the insult with the blood of his enemy?” (p. 56) (Letter VII/7)

“Nay,” he continued, “it is allowable to prevent a buffet, by killing him that meant to give it, if there be no other way to escape the insult. This opinion is quite common with our fathers. (p. 56) (Letter VII/7)

“But, father, may not one be allowed to kill for something still less? Might not a person so direct his intention as lawfully to kill another for telling a lie, for example?” (p. 58) (Letter VII/7)

“He may,” returned the monk; “and according to Father Baldelle, quoted by Escobar, ‘you may lawfully take the life of another for saying, “You have told a lie”; if there is no other way of shutting his mouth.’ The same thing may be done in the case of slanders. (p. 58) (Letter VII/7) 

Stealing

(naïve character, italics)

“Lessius, among others, maintains that ‘it is lawful to steal, not only in a case of extreme necessity, but even where the necessity is grave, though not extreme.’”  (Letter VIII/8)

“For after all, now, is it not a violation of the law of charity, and of our duty to our neighbour, to deprive a man of his property in order to turn it to our own advantage? Such, at least, is the way I have been taught to think hitherto.” (Letter VIII/8)

“That will not always hold true,” replied the monk; “for our great Molina has taught us that ‘the rule of charity does not bind us to deprive ourselves of a profit, in order thereby to save our neighbour from a corresponding loss.’” (Letter VIII/8)

Homicide, again

In his letter XIII, Pascal repeats much of what he wrote in Letter VII/7. He fully realizes that he is repeating. As an educator, he emphasized the need to repeat, a need that is consistent with the modern theory of information. It is part of his “art de persuader,” the art of persuasion. One has to read Pascal’s Pensées, published posthumously, to grasp Pascal’s art de persuader.

Conclusion

There is so much to discuss, but a post is a post. However the book, Les Provinciales, is easy to read and short. The fate of Jansénisme resembles the fate of the Huguenots in France. Jansénisme was not a religion; it was a mere movement. But it was condemned by the papal bull Unigenitus, issued by Clement XI on 8 September 1713. Absolutism meant: one king, one language and one religion.

Pascal discusses numerous subjects, such as duels and usury, in his examination of the moral laxity of 17th-century French Jesuits.

In closing, I would like to point out that the quarrel between Jansenists and Jesuits in 17th-century France is one episode, just one, in the history of the Jesuits and that both Jesuit casuistry and Jansenism were condemned.

My best regards to all of you. ♥

RELATED ARTICLES

  • Pascal’s Provincial Letters (27 March 2015)
  • Jansenism, a Church Divided (24 March 2015)
  • Pascal & Leibniz: Details (19 March 2015)
  • Pascal’s “Roseau pensant” (19 April 2014)
  • Phèdre’s “Hidden God” (8 October 2012) (Jansenism)
  • Casuistry, or how to sin without sinning (5 March 2012)
  • Pascal & the Two Infinites (27 September 2011) (relativity)
  • Pascal on the Human Condition (25 August 2011) (the US)

 Sources and Resources

  • Provincial Letters pdf
  • Lettres provinciales ebooksgratuits.com FR
  • Lettres provinciales (Gallica, BnF) (National Library of France) FR
  • Pascal’s Pensées are Gutenberg [EBook #18269]
  • Port-Royal (Petites Écoles) FR
  • Divine grace
  • grâce suffisante FR
  • grâce efficace FR
  • original sin
  • casuistry
  • Jansenism
  • predestination

Philippe Jaroussky, countertenor, sings “Ombra mai fu” (Serse) G. F. Händel

imagesE7I9M79Y© Micheline Walker
2 April 2015
WordPress

Pascal, Jean Domat
French sanguine

45.403816
-71.938314

Micheline's Blog

  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Pascal’s “Provincial Letters”

27 Friday Mar 2015

Posted by michelinewalker in France, Religion

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

Bible Moralisée, Illustrated Manuscript, Jansenism, Lettres provinciales, Pascal, Provincial Letters, Religion, Saint Thomas, Thomistes

God-Architect

Prefatory miniature from a moralised Bible of “God as architect of the world”, folio I verso, Paris ca. 1220–1230. Ink, tempera, and gold leaf on vellum 1′ 1½” × 8¼”. Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna 2554. God shapes the universe with the aid of a compass. Within the perfect circle already created are the spherical sun and moon and the unformed matter that will become the earth once God applies the same geometric principles to it. A view of the earth influenced by Ancient Greek Geometry and icons of the Eastern Orthodox Church. (Caption and photo credit: Wikipedia)

Comments

As I wrote on 24 March 2015, the Church is a human institution. However, Jesus of Nazareth, a historical figure, is considered by most Christians as the son of God. Jesus was a Jew who lived in Palestine, then occupied by Rome. He is a prophet in the Muslim world, but Christians usually think of him as the Son of God made flesh to redeem humankind. Most Christians believe in the Trinity: God the Father, God the Son (Jesus) and God the Holy Spirit. God is their redeemer. He took away the Original Sin.

The Human Condition

According to the Bible, we are mortals because Adam and Eve disobeyed God the Father, or the Trinity. They ate the forbidden fruit, which means that they made love. Their making love is the original sin and Christians are expected to atone for this sin. Christians therefore baptize newborns so they are absolved of the original sin. Baptism predates Christianity and, more importantly, Jesus is called the Saviour.

Jesus had many followers

During his short life, Jesus, the son of God, told parables that touched his followers who grew more and more numerous. After his death, they starting calling themselves Christians. In the image featured above, taken from an illuminated manuscript, a Bible moralisée, God the father is depicted as the architect of the world, literally. It is believed that we owe God (the Trinity) the creation of the world: Die Schöpfung, as in the title of Joseph Haydn‘s oratorio, composed in London, England.

The Heritage: Music, the Arts, Literature, etc.

Moreover, think of the cultural heritage: feasts, Christmas and Easter, a multitude of works of art, including Books of Hours, music, literature rooted in the Bible: thousands of works. Dante‘s (c. 1265–1321) Divine Comedy and John Milton‘s[i] (9 December 1608 – 8 November 1674) Paradise Lost are major representatives of texts emanating from the Bible.

Portrait of Dante by Sandro Botticello

Portrait of Dante by Sandro Botticello

A Revolution

Humble as he was, the son of a carpenter, Jesus started a revolution, one of the most important revolutions ever. Contrary to the Jewish Bible, the New Testament does not preach retaliation: the lex talionis (retaliate). Yet the New Testament is a continuation of the Old Testament from which Christians have borrowed extensively to tell the story of Man. Telling the story of Man is the purpose of texts such as the Bible and the Qur’an. They are aetiological texts.

Religions and Worshipping

Although Christ is not the founder of a Church, many among humans are Christians and go to church on Sundays. They practice a religion. It is normal to worship and gather with other worshippers. We are social beings, so we get together. As for  worshipping, it may bring serenity and hope where there is fear and despair. Voltaire stated that: “To believe in God is impossible; not to believe in Him is absurd.” (Brainy Quotes). Voltaire also said that if God did not exist, we would invent Him.

Moreover, think of the cultural heritage: feasts, Christmas and Easter, a multitude of works of art, including Books of Hours, music, literature rooted in the Bible: thousands of works. Dante‘s (c. 1265–1321) Divine Comedy and John Milton‘s[i] (9 December 1608 – 8 November 1674) Paradise Lost are major representatives of texts emanating from the Bible.

Jansenism, defended by Pascal, was condemned as was casuistry (used by Jesuits).

Blaise Pascal

Blaise Pascal (Photo credit, Wikipedia)

The Provincial Letters (1656 – 57)

We will now look at the divisions of the Lettres provinciales, the Provincial Letters. I will send examples and Related Articles in another post. My computer is too slow. I have to give it a rest. The Lettres provinciales contains two parts. From Chapters 1 to 10, it features a dialogue between a naïve polemicist and Jesuits. It then becomes a narrative.

1. Methods

  • Probabilisme

Pascal was an expert at calculating odds. He developed the probability theory with Pierre de Fermat.[2] Probabilism is a method Pascal would understand. It is probable that if one priest will not absolve a sin, another priest will. (Chapters 5 & 6)

  • Direction d’Intention: The Goal justifies the Means

This is Machiavellian. If the goal is a worthy cause, the means used to achieve this good are acceptable. The sin has been removed. (Chapters 7 & 8)

  • Dévotion aisée, ambiguity and restriction mentale

The Jesuit explains that it is easy to love God. First, pray to the Virgin Mary. Moreover, one can get out of trouble by being ambiguous (the distinction between grâce suffisante and grâce efficace is difficult to understand or ambiguous). Be ambiguous. As well, one can lie yet say the truth but giving part of an answer aloud and saying the rest to himself or herself. Question: Were you at her house yesterday? Answer: No, I was not at her house yesterday morning. (Chapter 9)

  • The Morality of Casuists

There is no for real penance for sins committed to be absolved. We need simply be contrite or regret our actions. (Chapter 10).

2. The Polemicist defends himself

Pascal (under his pseudonym) is accused of slander (calomnie) and deception  (imposture). (Chapters 10 & 11) Pascal’s character answers that he has to ridicule the errors of his adversaries and to generalize. (Chapter 12) The accusations he is subjected to confirm the casuists’ extreme permissibility, such as homicide, (Chapters 13 & 14) and slander (15 & 16).

3. Conclusion

Père Annat, a Jesuit and the confessor to the king of France, has been following the debate. Once again grace is discussed as are the five points in Jansenius‘ Augustinus the Pope condemned. Pascal and Père Annat are both of the opinion that these points could be attacked but they agree that the Augustinus (1640) should not be looked upon as the work of Jansenius. In the Provinciales, Pascal is not attacking Jansenism as much as he is attacking casuistry.

In other words, it is unlikely that Pascal would not have defended his friends at Port-Royal on grounds other than the depraved conduct of casuists, which brings the matter to a close and makes him the winner if a winner there is. Casuistry went into disrepute. The death of his sister Jacqueline also brought an end to Pascal’s polemics (Chapters 17 & 18).

Conclusion

Pascal was a beautiful human being. Chateaubriand called him an “effrayant génie,”  (Génie du Christianisme; a frightening genius). T. S. Eliot described him as “a man of the world among ascetics, and an ascetic among men of the world.” (See Pascal, Wikipedia.) Pascal was humble, good and I detect a sense of humour. He discredited casuistry with extreme finesse. The beauty of the text is in the way it is written. Pascal weighs every word.

As you know, his father needed a calculator, so he quickly invented one. He then created public transportation: the carrosse à cinq sols FR, the fine-penny horse-drawn carriage. There were lines and a schedule. He and his dear friend the Duc de Roannez set up the system in 1661 and it worked for seventeen years. The service was discontinued temporarily but would return. Pascal died in 1662, aged 39.

Sources and Resources

Lettres provinciales, PDF (texte intégral) FR
Provincial Letters, PDF (complete text) EN

____________________

[1] Unless otherwise noted, quotations are from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

[2] The pioneer was Gerolamo Cardano, a 16th-century Italian mathematician

Die Schöpfung (The Creation), an excerpt

Port-Royal Abbey, Paris

Port-Royal Abbey, Paris (Wiki)

© Micheline Walker
27 March 2015
WordPress

Micheline's Blog

  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

A Glance at “Refus global” & the News

04 Sunday Nov 2012

Posted by michelinewalker in Art, Canada, United States

≈ 8 Comments

Tags

André Breton, Canadian Encyclopedia, Jansenism, Jean-Paul Riopelle, Paul-Émile Borduas, Refus global, United States, Wikipedia

 
Borduas’s Black Star

Refus global (Total Refusal)

I am working on perhaps two posts dealing with Refus global (1948).  Its author was Quebec artist Paul-Émile Borduas (November 1, 1905 – February 22, 1960). There were 16 signatories, listed in Refus global (Wikipedia).  Only 400 copies were published, selling for a dollar a piece, half of which did not sell.  Refus global says little about abstract art and André Breton‘s surrealist automatism, or stream of consciousness.  It’s about Quebec.

Here are links to the complete and very short text.
Refus global (l’intégral, en français)
Refus global or Total Refusal (text in English)
Refus global (The Canadian Encyclopedia‘s entry)
Images: please click on Paul-Émile Borduas
 

Refus global (Total Refusal) “was an anti-establishment and anti-religious manifesto released on August 9, 1948 in Montreal by a group of sixteen young Québécois artists and intellectuals that included Paul-Émile Borduas and Jean-Paul Riopelle.” (Refus global, Wikipedia)  I will quote a section (one paragraph) of Refus global that describes Québécois as the “priest-ridden” and economically downtrodden province it was called (the Church was rich, the people were poor).

The Church being the “repository” of “faith, knowledge, truth, and national wealth,” Québécois were kept unaware of “the universal progress of thought,” or in “complete ignorance” of the “progress of thought” or may have learned about it in an expurgated or “distorted” manner. The paragraph I am quoting provides a mere glance at Refus global, in its totality, but it is revealing.  However, the “establishment” is not confined to the Church.  Moreover, the manifesto mentions the influence of Jansenism and addresses such questions as ethnocentricity and fear (see the video).

“We are a small people huddling under the shelter of the clergy, who are the only remaining repository of faith, knowledge, truth, and national wealth; we were excluded from the universal progress of thought with all its pitfalls and perils, and raised, when it became impossible to keep us in complete ignorance, on well-meaning but uncontrolled and grossly distorted accounts of the great historical facts.” (Refus global in The Canadian Encyclopedia)

Early comments

I was a child in the province condemned by Borduas and fifteen other signatories.  At the time, nuns (sisters) were our teachers and boys and girls attended different schools.  The nuns, many of whom came from France, ours did, were so devoted to us.  They did not work from nine to five.  They were always preparing learning material for us and often used innovative teaching approaches.  They made sure we could study music for little or no money, and provided practice-rooms.  They played baseball with us.  They took us on outings: factories, etc.  They fed the children who arrived at school famished and, on cold days, they made sure we returned home dressed to face a blizzard.

The American Presidential Election

Thousands of New Yorkers must find temporary lodgings.  Sandy was the storm of a lifetime and a wake-up call regarding the environment.  How will voters get to polling stations?  It could well be that, compared to the Quebec of my childhood, a Republican administration might soon invite a much sterner Total Refusal than Borduas’s Refus global.  However, I would not dare underestimate the citizens of the United States of America as I would insult some of the finest minds in the world, beginning with President Obama.

The News

The New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/
The New Yorker: http://www.newyorker.com/
The Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/
Le Monde diplomatique: http://mondediplo.com/ EN
 
The Globe and Mail: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/
The Montreal Gazette:  http://www.montrealgazette.com/index.html
 
CBC News: http://www.cbc.ca/news/ ←
CTV News: http://www.ctvnews.ca/
 
Le Monde: http://www.lemonde.fr/
Le Monde diplomatique: http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/
Le Devoir: http://www.ledevoir.com/
La Presse: http://www.lapresse.ca/
 
Die Welt: http://www.welt.de/ 
 

Micheline Walker©
November 4th, 2012
WordPress
 
 
45.408358
-71.934658

Micheline's Blog

  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Phèdre’s “Hidden God”

08 Monday Oct 2012

Posted by michelinewalker in French Literature, Literature, The Human Condition

≈ 12 Comments

Tags

Blaise Pascal, Jansenism, Lucien Goldmann, Pascal, Pensées, Phaedra, Phèdre, Port-Royal-des-Champs

 

Phèdre and Thésée, by Léon Bakst, 1923

I believe I should write more on Jean Racine‘s Phèdre (1677). 

In 1955, Jewish Romanian scholar Lucien Goldmann (1913, Romania – 1970, Paris) published a study of Pascal and Racine he entitled Le Dieu caché ; étude sur la vision tragique dans les Pensées de Pascal et dans le théâtre de Racine, Paris : Gallimard, 1955. The Hidden God; a study of the Tragic Vision in Pascal’s Pensées and in Racine’s Theater. The  notion of  a “hidden god” is an insightful description of Pascal’s Pensées and also constitutes a bold depiction of Racine’s Phèdre inability to help herself.

Phaedra is at the mercy of an unkind destiny and her depravity stems largely from her mother’s, Pasiphaë. Pasiphaë sinned by engaging in sexual intercourse with a bull.  Consequently, Phaedra and Ariadne are half sisters to the Minotaur, a zoomorphic monster, a monster combining human and animal characteristics. It is as though they were stained.

Yet Phèdre is the granddaughter of Helios, the Sun, the daughter of Minos, king of Crete and son of Zeus. So, despite her mother’s bestiality, one hopes that Phaedra will be redeemed by other and nobler ancestors, but her sense of guilt turns them into judges.

Blaise Pascal

Jansenism & Port-royal-des-champs

Phèdre’s inability to fight destiny is linked with Jansenism. The theological doctrine of Jansenism is often associated with philosopher, theologian and scientist Blaise Pascal (19 June 1623 – 19 August 1662), the author of the masterful Lettres provinciales, eighteen letters written under the pseudonym Louis de Montalte. Pascal was motivated to write Les Provinciales (1656-1657) when fellow Jansenist and friend Antoine Arnauld, from Port-Royal-des-Champs, was condemned by the Sorbonne‘s Faculty of Theology for views that were considered heretical.

But, although Pascal, a Jansenist, wrote Les Provinciales, as explained below, we are looking at a seventeenth-century revival, by Cornelius Jansen, of a doctrine rooted in the theology of Augustine of Hippo and which had a location, the convent of Port-Royal-des-Champs, near Paris.

Jean Racine, by François de Troy

Racine at Port-Royal-des-Champs

Racine, the author of Phèdre, was educated at Port-Royal-des-Champs and had therefore been exposed to Jansenism. Jansenists believed in predestination and emphasized original sin, human depravity, the necessity of divine grace. (Jansenism, Wikipedia). So Phèdre is helpless. She says that “Le crime d’une mère est un pesant fardeau” (A mother’s crime is a heavy burden), a burden she fears her children will also bear (III, 3, 364) as one bears the original sin and as she bears her own mother’s depravity. Moreover, she is not rescued by divine grace (or efficacious grace). Phèdre’s god is a “hidden god.”

Augustine of Hippo and Cornelius Jansen

Jansenistic theology is rooted in the theology of St Augustine (354 – 386) or Augustine of Hippo. However, as indicated above, its “modern” father is Cornelius Jansen or Jansenius, (28 October 1585–6 May 1638), the Dutch Bishop of Ypres (Belgium). It did not spread beyond France and, to a very large extent, it was a reaction against Jesuit casuistry which, quite literally, allowed one to sin without sinning. (See Related Articles, at the foot of this post.

Pelagianism: a Heresy

The debate centered on the matter of grace and, by extension, on the topic of free will. An extreme and heretical view was that of Pelagius (c. 350 – c. 420). Pelagius believed that all Christians could be saved using their free will. This doctrine, called pelagianism, was condemned because it negated the need for divine grace and also negated the original sin.  It therefore had affinities with the laxity of seventeenth-century Jesuits.

Pelagius was opposed to Augustine of Hippo’s conviction that salvation was not possible without divine grace (called grâce efficace). Inextricably linked with Augustine’s teaching is the concept of predestination which limits a Christian’s ability to save himself. Jansenism took this view to an extreme replicating Augustine’s insistance that Christian salvation depends on divine grace.[i] 

I will go no further on the above, as the entire debate gets too complicated. Simply expressed and put in a nutshell, Jansenism conveys a very pessimistic view of a Christian’s ability to determine his or her fate, which is at the heart of Phèdre’s despair. She views herself as the worst of sinners in a universe filled with gods who are her ancestors and will not help her. Again, her god is a hidden god.

Jansenism was crushed by the bull Unigenitus, issued by Pope Clement XI in 1713.

RELATED ARTICLES

  • Jean Racine, Gabriel Fauré & Alexandre Cabanel: a Canticle
  • Casuistry, or how to sin without sinning

_________________________

[i] The best information I have gathered on the quarrel between Jansenists and the Jesuits is La Querelle entre les jansénistes et les jésuites, featured on the website of the Jesuits of France and written in French.
 
Henry Purcell (1659-95)
The Fairy Queen, Z.629 (1692)
“O let me weep” (The Plaint)
Philippe Jaroussky    

415PX-~1

© Micheline Walker
8 March 2012
WordPress
 
Pietà
El Greco
45.408358
-71.934658

Micheline's Blog

  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Europa

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 2,506 other subscribers

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.com

Categories

Recent Posts

  • Epiphany 2023
  • Pavarotti sings Schubert’s « Ave Maria »
  • Yves Montand chante “À Bicyclette”
  • Almost ready
  • Bicycles for Migrant Farm Workers
  • Tout Molière.net : parti …
  • Remembering Belaud
  • Monet’s Magpie
  • To Lori Weber: Language Laws in Quebec, 2
  • To Lori Weber: Language Laws

Archives

Calendar

January 2023
M T W T F S S
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  
« Dec    

Social

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • WordPress.org

micheline.walker@videotron.ca

Micheline Walker

Micheline Walker

Social

Social

  • View belaud44’s profile on Facebook
  • View Follow @mouchette_02’s profile on Twitter
  • View Micheline Walker’s profile on LinkedIn
  • View belaud44’s profile on YouTube
  • View Miicheline Walker’s profile on Google+
  • View michelinewalker’s profile on WordPress.org

Micheline Walker

Micheline Walker
Follow Micheline's Blog on WordPress.com

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

  • Follow Following
    • Micheline's Blog
    • Join 2,474 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Micheline's Blog
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: