Front Page Titles (by Subject) OF MIRACLES IN GENERAL. THE MIRACLE OF THE HOLY THORN. - The Thoughts of Blaise Pascal
The Online Library of Liberty
A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.
OF MIRACLES IN GENERAL. THE MIRACLE OF THE HOLY THORN. - Blaise Pascal, The Thoughts of Blaise Pascal 
The Thoughts of Blaise Pascal, translated from the text of M. Auguste Molinier by C. Kegan Paul (London: George Bell and Sons, 1901).
About Liberty Fund:
The text is in the public domain.
Fair use statement:
THE beginning.—Miracles are the test of doctrine, and doctrine is the test of miracles.
Of these there are false and true. There must be a mark whereby to know them, or they would be useless.
Now they are not useless, and are on the contrary fundamental. Now it must be that the rule which he gives us be such as shall not impair the proof afforded by true miracles to the truth, which is the principal end of miracles.
Moses has given two; that the prediction does not come to pass, Deut. xviii., and that they do not lead to idolatry, Deut. xiii.; and Jesus Christ one.
If doctrine regulate miracles, miracles are useless for doctrine.
If miracles regulate . . .
Objection to the rule.
Discrimination between times. One rule in Moses’s day, another at present.
Miracle. An effect which exceeds the natural force of the means employed, and non-miracle an effect not exceeding the natural force of the means employed. Thus those who heal by invocation of the devil work no miracle, for that does not exceed the natural power of the devil. But . . .
The combinations of miracles.
A second miracle may suppose a first, but a first cannot suppose a second.
No one has ever suffered martyrdom for the miracles he says he has seen; the folly of men would perhaps go as far as martyrdom, for those which the Turks believe by tradition, but not for those they have seen.
Were there no false miracles there would be certainty.
Were there no rule to test them, miracles would be useless, and there would be no reason for belief.
Now, humanly speaking, there is no human certainty, but reason.
It is said: Believe the Church, but it is not said: Believe in Miracles, because the last is natural and not the first. The one had need of a precept, not the other.
Miracles.—How I hate those who make men doubt of miracles. Montaigne speaks of them as he should in the two passages. In one we see how careful he is, yet in the other he believes, and laughs at unbelievers.
However it may be, the Church has no proofs if they are right.
The reason why men do not believe.
Joh. xii. 37. Cum autem tanta signa fecisset, non credebant in eum, ut sermo Isaye impleretur. Excecavit, etc.
Hæc dixit Isaias, quando vidit gloriam ejus, et locutus est de eo.
—Judæi signa peunt,et Græci sapientiam quærunt.
Nos autem Jesum crucifixum.
Sed plenum signis,sed plenum sapientia.
Vos autem Christum non crucifixistis, et religionem sine miraculis et sine sapientia.
The ground of disbelief in true miracles is want of charity. Joh. Sed vos non creditisquia non estis ex ovibus. The ground of belief in false miracles is want of charity.
2 Thess. ii.
The foundation of religion. This is miracle. Does God then speak against miracles, against the foundations of the faith which we have in him?
If there be a God, faith in God must exist on earth. Now the miracles of Jesus Christ are not foretold by Antichrist, but the miracles of Antichrist are foretold by Jesus Christ. Thus if Jesus Christ were not the Messiah he would have certainly led into error, but Antichrist could not certainly lead into error.
When Jesus Christ foretold the miracles of Antichrist, did he think of destroying faith in his own miracles.
Moses foretold Jesus Christ, and commanded to follow him; Jesus Christ foretold Antichrist, and forbade to follow him.
It was impossible that in the time of Moses any should assert their faith in Antichrist, who was unknown to them, but it is easy in the time of Antichrist to believe in Jesus Christ, already known.
There is no reason to believe in Antichrist which there is not to believe in Jesus Christ, but there are reasons for believing in Jesus Christ, which do not exist for the other.
Title: How it happens that men believe so many liars, who say they have seen miracles, and do not believe any of those who say they have secrets to make men immortal or render them young again.—Having considered how it happens that men have believed so many impostors, who pretend they have remedies, often to the length of putting their lives into their hands, it appears to me that the true cause is that there are true remedies. For it would not be possible there should be so many false, to which so much credence is given, were there none true. Were there no remedy for any evil, and were all diseases incurable, it is impossible that men should ever have imagined that they could give remedies, and still more impossible that so many others should have believed those who boasted that they had them. Just as if a man boasted that he could prevent death, no one would believe him because there is no example of this. But as there are a number of remedies which are approved as true, even by the knowledge of the greatest men, the belief of men is thereby inclined; and since the thing was known to be possible, it has been therefore concluded that it was. For the public as a rule reasons thus: A thing is possible, therefore it is; because the thing cannot be denied generally, since there are particular effects which are true, the people, who cannot discriminate which among particular effects are true, believe them all. This is the reason that so many false effects are attributed to the moon, because there are some true, such as the tide.
It is the same with prophecies, miracles, divination by dreams, casting lots, etc. For if in all these matters nothing true had ever taken place, nothing of them had ever been believed; and so instead of concluding that there are no true miracles, because so many are false, we must on the contrary say that there are certainly true miracles because there are false, and that the false only exist because some are true. We must reason in the same way about Religion, for it would not be possible that men should have imagined so many false religions had there not been one that is true. The objection to this is that savages have a religion, but we answer that they have heard speak of the true, as appears by the deluge, circumcision, Saint Andrew’s cross, etc.
Having considered how it comes that there are so many false miracles, false revelations, castings of lots, etc., it has appeared to me that the real cause is that there are true ones, for it would not be possible that there should be so many false miracles unless there were true, nor so many false revelations unless there were true, nor so many false religions unless there were one that is true. For if all this had never been, it is impossible that men should have imagined it, and still more impossible that so many others should have believed it. But as there have been very great things which are true and as they have been believed by great men; this impression has been produced, that almost everybody has been made capable of believing the false also; and thus instead of concluding that there are no true miracles since there are so many false, we must on the contrary say that there are true miracles since there are so many false, and that false miracles only exist for the reason that there are true; so also that there are false religions only because there is one that is true.—The objection to this is that savages have a religion. But this is because they have heard speak of the true, as appears by Saint Andrew’s cross, the deluge, the circumcision, etc.—This comes from the fact that the spirit of man, finding itself inclined to that side by truth, becomes therefore susceptible of all the falsehoods that . . .
I should not be a Christian were it not for the miracles, said Saint Augustine.
But for the miracles there would have been no sin in not believing in Jesus Christ.
It is not possible to believe reasonably against miracles.
Miracles have so great a force that it was needful that God should warn us not to credit them against him, clear as it may be that there is a God, without this they would have been able to disturb.
And thus so far from these passages, Deut xiii., making against the authority of miracles, nothing more marks their force. The same with Antichrist; “to seduce if it were possible even the very elect.”
Abraham and Gideon are above revelation.
The Jews blinded themselves in judging of miracles by the Scripture. God has never left his true worshippers.
I prefer to follow Jesus Christ than any other, because he has miracle, prophecy, doctrine, perpetuity, etc.
The Donatists. No miracle which obliged them to say it was the devil.
The more we specialise God, Jesus Christ and the Church.
Jesus Christ worked miracles, then the apostles, and the early saints in great number, because the prophecies not being yet fulfilled, but only in the way of fulfilment by them, miracles were their only witness. It was foretold that the Messiah should convert the nations, and this prophecy could not be fulfilled without the conversion of the nations. Nor could the nations be converted to Messiah unless they saw the final effect of the prophecies concerning him. Till therefore he died and rose again, and had converted the nations, all was not fulfilled, wherefore miracles were needed during that time. We now need no more miracles against the Jews, for the fulfilment of prophecy is an enduring miracle.
Prophecy is not called miracle, as Saint John speaks of the first miracle in Cana, then of what Jesus Christ said to the woman of Samaria, revealing to her all her hidden life. Then he healed the centurion’s son, and Saint John calls this the second sign.
Jesus Christ has verified that he was the Messiah, never in verifying his doctrine by Scripture and the prophecies, but always by his miracles.
He proves by a miracle that he remits sins.
Rejoice not that you work miracles, said Jesus Christ, but rather that your names are written in heaven.
If they believe not Moses, neither will they believe one risen from the dead.
Nicodemus recognised by his miracles, that his doctrine was of God. Scimus quia venisti a Deo,magister, nemo enim potest facere quæ tu facis, nisi Deus fuerit cum eo. He judged not of the miracles by the doctrine, but of the doctrine by the miracles.
Here is no country for truth, she wanders unknown among men. God has covered her with a veil which leaves her unrecognised by those who hear not her voice; the way is open for blasphemy even against those truths which are at the least very apparent. If the truths of the Gospel are published, the contrary is also published, and questions are obscured, so that the people cannot discern, and they ask us, “What have you to make you believed rather than others? what sign do you give? you have words only, so have we, if you have miracles, good.” That doctrine must be supported by miracle is a truth of which they make a pretext to blaspheme against doctrine. And if miracles happen, it is said that miracles are not enough without doctrine, and that is another way of blaspheming against miracles.
Jesus Christ healed the man born blind, and worked many miracles on the sabbath day, and thus he blinded the Pharisees who said that miracles must be tested by doctrine.
“We have Moses, but as for this man, we know not whence he is.” It is wonderful that you know not whence he is, and yet he works such miracles.
Jesus Christ spoke neither against God nor against Moses.
Antichrist and the false prophets foretold by both Testaments, will speak openly against God, and against Jesus Christ, who is not hidden. Whoever will be a secret enemy, God will not permit that he work miracles openly.
In a public dispute where the two parties declare themselves on the side of God, of Jesus Christ, or the Church, there have never been miracles on the side of the false Christians, while the other party has remained without miracle.
“He hath a devil,” John x. 21. “And others said, Can a devil open the eyes of the blind?”
The proofs which Jesus Christ and the apostles draw from Scripture are not decisive, for they say only that Moses foretold that a prophet would come; but they do not thereby prove that Jesus Christ was that prophet, which is the whole question. These passages, then, serve only to show that we are not contrary to Scripture, and that there is no contradiction, not that there is accord. Now this is enough, there is no contradiction; and there are miracles.
It follows, then, that he judged miracles to be certain proofs of what he taught, and that the Jews were bound to believe him. And as a fact, it was the miracles especially which made the unbelief of the Jews so blameworthy.
There is a reciprocal duty between God and men. We must forgive him this saying: Quid debui. “Accuse me,” said God in Isaiah.
God must accomplish his promises, etc.
Men owe it to God to receive the Religion which he sends them. God owes it to men not to lead them into error. Now they would be led into error, if the workers of miracles should announce a doctrine which did not appear visibly false to the light of common sense, and if a greater worker of miracles had not already given warning not to believe in them.
Thus if there were division in the Church, and the Arians, for example, who no less than Catholics said they were founded on Scripture, had worked miracles, and the Catholics had worked none, men had been led into error.
For, as a man, who announces to us the secret things of God is not worthy to be believed on his private testimony, and on that very ground the wicked doubt him; so when a man as a sign of the communion which he has with God raises the dead, foretells the future, moves the seas, heals the sick, there is none so wicked as not to yield, and the incredulity of Pharaoh and the Pharisees is the effect of a supernatural hardening.
When, therefore, we see miracles and doctrine not open to suspicion both on one side, there is no difficulty. But when we see miracles and suspicious doctrine on the same side we must see which is the clearest. Jesus Christ was suspected.
Barjesus was blinded . The power of God is above that of his enemies.
The Jewish exorcists were beaten by devils, who said, “Jesus we know, and Paul we know, but who are ye?”
Miracles are for doctrine, and not doctrine for miracles.
But if miracles are true we cannot persuade men of all doctrine, for that will not come to pass: Si angelus . . .
Rule.—We must judge of doctrine by miracles, we must judge of miracles by doctrine. All this is true, but there is no contradiction.
For we must distinguish the times.
You are glad to know general rules, thinking by that to introduce difficulties, and render all useless. We shall stop you, my good father ; truth is one, and strong.
It is impossible from the duty God owes us, that a man, concealing his evil doctrine, and only allowing the good to appear, pretending that he is in conformity with God and the Church, should work miracles to insinuate insensibly a false and subtle doctrine. This cannot be.
Still less, that God who knows the heart, should work miracles in favour of such an one.
There is much difference between temptation and leading into error. God tempts but he leads not into error. To tempt is to present occasions which impose no necessity; if we love not God we shall do a certain thing. To lead into error, is to place a man in a necessity of forming and following false conclusion.
This is what God cannot do, which nevertheless he would do, if in an obscure question he wrought miracles on the side of falsehood.
In the Old Testament, when they wou’d turn you from God, in the New when they would turn you from Jesus Christ.
Such are the occasions on which we exclude certain miracles from credence. There need be no other exclusions.
But it does not therefore follow that they had the right to exclude all the prophets who came to them. They would have sinned in not excluding those who denied God, and would also have sinned in excluding those who denied him not.
So soon, then, as we see a miracle we should at once either acquiesce or have signal marks against it. We must see if it denies either a God, or Jesus Christ, or the Church.
Miracles avail not for conversion, but for condemnation. I P. ix. 113, a. 10, ad. 2.
Si tu es Christus,dic nobis.
Opera quæ ego facioin nomine patris mei, hæc testimomum perhibent de me.
Sed non vos creditisquia non estis ex ovibus meis. Oves mei vocem meam audiunt.
Joh. vi. 30. Quod ergo tu facis signum ut videamus, et credamus tibi? Non dicunt: Quam doctrinam prædicas?
Nemo potest facere signaquæ tu facis, nisi Deus fuerit cum illo.
2 Mach. xiv. 15. Deus qui signis evidentibus suam portionem protegit.
Volumus signum videre de cælo tentantes eum. Luc. xi. 16.
Generatio pravasignum quærit; sed non dabitur.
Et ingemiscens ait, Quid generatio ista signum quærit. Marc. viii. 12. They asked a sign with a bad intent. Et non poterat facere. And nevertheless he promises them the sign of Jonah, the great and incomparable evidence of his resurrection.
Nisi videritis signa non creditis. He does not blame them for not believing without there having been miracles, but without their having been themselves witnesses of them.
Antichrist in signis mendacibus, says St. Paul. 2 Thess. ii.
Secundum operationem Satanæ.In seductione ii qui pereunt eo quod charitatem veritatis non receperunt ut salvi fierent. Ideo mittet illis Deus operationem erroris ut credant mendacia.
As in the passage of Moses: Tentat enim vos Deus,utrum diligatis eum.
Ecce prædixi vobis,vos ergo videte.
The Church has three kinds of enemies, the Jews, who have never been of her body; the heretics who have withdrawn from it; and bad Christians, who rend her from within.
These three different kinds of enemies generally assail her in different ways, but here they assail her in the same fashion. As they are all without miracles, and as the Church has always had miracles against them, they have all had the same interest in eluding them; and all avail themselves of this pretext, that we must not judge of doctrine by miracles, but of miracles by doctrine. There were two parties among those who heard Jesus Christ, those who followed his doctrine by reason of his miracles; others who said . . . There were two parties in the time of Calvin. There are now the Jesuits, etc.
Miracles are the test in doubtful matters, between Jew and Gentile, Jew and Christian, Catholic and heretic, slanderer and slandered, between the two crosses.
But miracles would be useless to heretics, for the Church, authorised by miracles which have already obtained credence, tells us that they have not the true faith. There is no doubt that they are not in it, because the first miracles of the Church exclude belief in theirs. Thus there is miracle against miracle, and the first and greatest are on the side of the Church.
Controversy. Abel, Cain;—Moses, the Magicians;—Elijah, the false prophets;—Jeremiah, Hananiah;—Micaiah, the false prophets;—Jesus Christ, the Pharisees;—Saint Paul, Barjesus;—the Apostles, the Exorcists;—the Christians and the infidels;—Catholics, heretics;—Elijah, Enoch, Antichrist.
In the trial by miracles truth always prevails. The two crosses.
Miracles are no longer needful, because they have already been. But when we listen no more to tradition, when the pope alone is proposed to us, when he has been taken by surprise, and when the true source of truth, which is tradition, is thus excluded, the pope, who is its guardian, is thus prejudiced, truth is no longer allowed to appear; then, since men speak no longer of truth, truth herself must speak to men. This is what happened in the time of Arius.
Religion is adapted to every kind of intellect. Some consider only its establishment, and this Religion is such that its very establishment is enough to prove its truth. Some trace it as far as the apostles; the more learned go back to the beginning of the world; the angles see it better still, and from earlier time.
1. Objection. An angel from heaven.
We must not judge of truth by miracles, but of miracles by truth.
Therefore miracles are useless.
Now they serve, and cannot be against the truth.
Therefore what Father Lingende says, that God will not allow a miracle to lead into error . . .
When there shall be a dispute in the same Church, miracle will decide.
But Antichrist will work miracles.
The Magicians of Pharaoh did not lead into error. Thus on Antichrist we cannot say to Jesus Christ: You have led me into error. For Antichrist will work them against Jesus Christ, and thus they cannot lead into error. Either God will not permit false miracles, or he will procure greater.
If in the same Church a miracle should occur on the side of those in error, men would be led into error.
A schism is visible, a miracle is visible. But a schism is more a mark of error than a miracle is a mark of truth, therefore a miracle cannot lead into error.
But apart from schism the error is not so visible as the miracle is visible.
Therefore miracle may lead into error.
Ubi est Deus tuus? —Miracles show him and are a light to him.
Joh. vi. 26. Non quia vidisti signum, sed quia saturati estis.
Those who follow Jesus Christ because of his miracles honour his power in all the miracles which it produces. But those who, making profession to follow him because of his miracles, only follow him indeed because he consoles them and satisfies them with worldly goods, disparage his miracles when they are contrary to their own convenience.
Joh. ix: Non est hic homo a Deo, quia sabbatum non custodit. Alii: Quomodo potest homo peccator hæc signa facere?
Which is the most clear?
This house is not of God, for they do not there believe that the five propositions are in Jansenius .
Others: This house is of God, for in it strange miracles are done.
Which is the most clear?
Tu quiddicis? Dico quia propheta est.—Nisi esset hic a Deo, non poterat facere quidquam.
There is much difference between not being for Jesus Christ, and saying it, and not being for Jesus Christ, yet feigning to be so. The one party can work miracles, not the others, for it is clear that the one party are against the truth, but not that the others are; and thus miracles are the more clear.
“If you believe not in me, believe at least in the miracles.” He puts them forward as the strongest.
He had said to the Jews as well as to the Christians, that they should not always believe the prophets; but nevertheless the Pharisees and Scribes made much of his miracles, and tried much to show that they were false or worked by the devil, since they were bound to be convinced, if they admitted that these were of God.
We are not in these days obliged so to discriminate. Yet it is very easy to do so; those who deny neither God nor Jesus Christ work no miracles which are not quite certain.
Nemo facit virtutemin nomine meo, et cito possit de me male loqui.
But we have not to use this discrimination. Here is a sacred relic, here is a thorn from the crown of the Saviour of the world, on whom the prince of this world has no power, which works miracles by the immediate power of the blood that was shed for us. Thus God has himself chosen this house wherein openly to show forth his power.
Here are not men who work miracles by an unknown and doubtful virtue, obliging us to a difficult discrimination; it is God himself, it is the instrument of the passion of his only Son, who being in many places chose this, and made men come from all sides, there to receive miraculous succour in their weaknesses.
If the devil were to favour the doctrine which destroys him, he would be divided against himself, as Jesus Christ said. If God favoured the doctrine which destroys the Church, he would be divided against himself. Omne regnum divisum.
For Jesus Christ acted against the devil, and destroyed his empire over the heart, of which exorcism is the figure, to establish the kingdom of God. And so he adds: Si in digito Dei,regnum Dei ad vos.
Either God has confounded the false miracles or he has foretold them, and both by the one and the other he has raised himself above the supernatural in regard to us, and has raised us also.
Jer. xxiii. 32. The miracles of the false prophets. In the Hebrew and Vatable they are called trifles.
Miracle does not always mean miracle. 1 Kings xiv. 15. Miracle signifies fear, and is the same in Hebrew.
The same plainly in Job xxxiii. 7.
So in Isaiah xxi. 4. Jeremiah xliv. 12.
Portentum means images, Jer. l. 38. and it is the same in Hebrew and Vatable. Isaiah viii, 18. Jesus Christ says that he and his will be in miracles.
Jesus Christ said that the Scriptures bear witness of him, but he did not show in what respect.
Even the prophecies could not prove Jesus Christ during his life, and thus if miracles had not sufficed without doctrine, men would not have been blameworthy who did not believe in him before his death. Now those who did not believe in him during his life were sinners, as he says himself, and without excuse. Therefore they must have resisted a conclusive proof. Now they had not our proof, but only miracles, therefore miracles are enough when doctrine is not contrary, and they ought to be believed.
John vii. 40. Controversy among the Jews as among Christians of our day. The one party believed in Jesus Christ, the other believed not, because of the prophecies which said he should be born in Bethlehem. They should have enquired more diligently whether he was not. For his miracles being convincing, they ought to have been quite certain of these alleged contradictions of his doctrine to the Scripture, and this obscurity did not excuse, but blinded them. Thus those who refuse to believe miracles in our day on account of an alleged but unreal contradiction, are not excused.
When the people believed on him because of his miracles, the Pharisees said: “This people, which doeth not the law, is accursed, but there is none of the princes or the Pharisees who has believed on him, for we know that out of Galilee ariseth no prophet. Nicodemus answered, Doth our law judge any man before it heareth him?”
Judges xiii, 23. “If the Lord were pleased to kill us, he would not have shewed us all these things.”
Jeremiah, Hananiah, the false prophet, died in seven months.
2 Macc. iii. The temple, ready for pillage, miraculously succoured.—2 Macc. xv.
1 Kings xvii. The widow to Elijah, who had restored her son. “By this I know that thy words are true.”
1 Kings xviii. Elijah, with the prophets of Baal.
Never in a contention concerning the true God or of the truth of Religion has any miracle happened on the side of error and not of truth.
Miracle.—The people believe this of themselves, but if the reason must be given you . . .
It is troublesome to be an exception to the rule. We ought strictly to hold the rule and oppose the exception, yet as it is certain there are exceptions to every rule, we ought with this strictness to be just.
Is it not enough that miracles are done in one place, and that God’s providence is shown on one people?
Good breeding goes so far as to have no politeness, and true piety to have politeness for others.
This is not well bred.
The incredulous are the most credulous. They believe the miracles of Vespasian in order that they may not believe those of Moses.
On the Miracle.—As God has made no family more happy, he should also find none more grateful.
[P. 257.]The Miracle of the Holy Thorn. Marguerite Perier, Pascal’s niece, aged ten, was cured of lachrymal fistula on March 24, 1656, after touching the diseased part with a reliquary containing a thorn from the Saviour’s crown. This was at the time that Port Royal was suffering deeply from persecution, and was considered by many as a signal mark of the favour of heaven. The Jesuits did not deny the miracle, but the conclusions drawn from it.
[P. 257, l. 21.]those who heal by invocation of the devil. Pascal, when a child, was supposed both to have been made ill and restored to health by a witch. He desires to show that this was no miracle.
[P. 258, l. 12.]Believe the Church. Matt. xviii. 17.
[P. 258, l. 16.]Montaigne. Cf. Essais, i. 26.
[P. 258, l. 28.]Judæi signa petunt. 1 ad Cor. i. 22.
[P. 258, l. 30.]Sed plenum signis. This and the following one are not to be found. Pascal is probably citing Saint Paul from memory.
[P. 258, l. 34.]Sed vos non creditis. Joh. x. 26.
[P. 261, l. 11.]Saint Augustine. Pascal does not appear to refer to any single passage, but to the general teaching of St. Augustine. But see especially De Civit. Dei, xxii. 9.
[P. 262, l. 25.]Scimus quia venisti a Deo. Joh. iii. 2.
[P. 263, l. 11.]We have Moses. John ix. 21.
[P. 264, l. 2.]Quid debui. Is. v. 4. Quid est quod debui facere vineæ meæ et non feci ei.
[P. 264, l. 29.]Barjesus was blinded. Acts xiii. 6-11.
[P. 264, l. 35.]Si angelus. A reference to ad Gal. i. 8.
[P. 265, l. 2.]my good father. Probably Father Annat. See p. 290, l. 8.
[P. 265, l. 35. 1 P. ix. 113, a. 10, ad. 2.]These signs refer to the Summa of Saint Thomas Aquinas here quoted, and mean Parte 1, quæstione 113, articulo 10, ad objectionem 2.
[P. 266, l. 1.]Si tu es Christus. Luc. xxii. 66.
[P. 266, l. 2.]Opera quæ ego facio. Joh. v. 36.
[P. 266, l. 4.]Sed non vos creditis. Joh. x. 26.
[P. 266, l. 8.]Nemo potest facere signa. Joh. iii. 2.
[P. 266, l. 13.]Generatio prava. Matt. xii. 39.
[P. 266, l. 19.]Nisi videritis signa non creditis. Joh. iv. 48.
[P. 266, l. 25.]Secundum operationem Satanæ. 2 ad Thess. ii. 9.
[P. 266. l. 29.]Tentat enim vos Deus. Deut. xiii. 3.
[P. 266, l. 31.]Ecce prædixi vobis. Matt. xxiv. 25.
[P. 268, l. 10.]Father Lingende. Claude de Lingendes, 1591-1660, was a Jesuit preacher. His sermons were published in 1666.
[P. 268, l. 30.]Ubi est Deus tuus. Ps. xlii. 3.
[P. 269, l. 5.]do not believe that the five propositions are in Jansenius. To explain this fully would need a far longer note than can here be given. It may be said shortly that the allusion is to the “Augustinus” of Cornelius Jansen, Bishop of Ypres. Two questions arose: first, whether the propositions condemned were heretical, and second, whether if heretical they were in Jansen’s book. The second assertion was that which the nuns of Port Royal refused to make. They had not read the book, and could not affirm that of which they were ignorant. The five propositions were on the Doctrines of Grace and Free Will.
[P. 269, l. 9.]Tu quid virtutem These are partial quotations from Joh. iv. 19, etc.
[P. 269, l. 28.]Nemo facit virtutem. Marc. ix. 38, but incorrectly. The true reading is Nemo est enim qui faciat.
[P. 270, l. 10.]Omne regnum divisum. Matt. xii. 25.
[P. 270, l. 14.]Si in digito Dei. Luc. xi. 20.
[P. 270, l. 21.]Vatable, who died in 1517, was professor of Hebrew at the Collége Royal established by Francis I. In 1539 Robert Etienne published an edition of the Latin Bible of Leo of Modena—Rabbi Jehuda—to which he added under Vatable’s name, notes which were not really Vatable’s, but borrowed from various writers of the Reformation. These notes were condemned by the Sorbonne. The Bible known as that of Vatable contains the Hebrew, the Vulgate Version, and that of Rabbi Jehuda.
[P. 272, l. 7.]miracles of Vespasian. Tacitus, Hist. iv. 81.