indefinite period ("to my entire leisure"); and till that time, he forbids her to write upon such subjects, otherwise "he will burn her letters without even reading them (24th November, 1691)." He says, somewhere else, very nobly concerning these delicate things which may trouble the imagination, "that it was necessary, when one was obliged to speak of, and listen to sufferings of this sort, to be standing with only the point of the foot upon the earth.” This perfect honesty, which would never understand any thing in a bad sense, makes him sometimes forget the existence of evil more than he ought, and renders him rather incautious. Confident also in his age, then very mature, he occasionally allows himself outbursts of mystic love, that were indiscreet before so impassioned a witness as Sister Cornuau. presence of this simple, submissive, and in every respect inferior person, he considers himself to be alone; and giving free course to the vivacious instinct of poetry that animated him even in his old days, he does not hesitate to make use of the mysterious language of the Song of Solomon. Sometimes it is in order to calm his penitent, and strengthen her chastity, that he employs this ardent language. I dare not copy the letter (innocent*, certainly, but so very imprudent)

In

* Others have given themselves the cheap pleasure to refute all that I have not said, and to prove that Bossuet is an honest man, &c. . Well ! who said the contrary ? - at the same time, as they do not well know what Quietism is (any more than

which he writes from his country house at Germigny (July 10. 1692), and in which he explains the meaning of the Bride's words, "Support me with flowers,

Grace and Free-will), in order to justify Bossuet for his Quietism, they quote an eminently Quietist text, “Make no effort, either of head, or even of heart, to unite yourself to your Bridegroom" (October 26. 1694). What I have said, and what I repeat, is, that the most loyal director in the world is still very dangerous, that his language, dictated doubtless by a pure intention, is not less likely to trouble the flesh. Even when he blames and forbids, he does so precisely in the very terms that are the most likely to awaken what he forbids; at such times, I do not like to look upon a great man, an old man, one who has a claim to our respect for other reasons. If, however, they absolutely want proofs, let them read (January 17. 1692), "When the tender wound of love," &c. (June 4. 1695), "Dare every thing with the celestial Bridegroomseize hold of him-I permit you the most violent transports." (July 3. 1695) "Jesus wishes you to be with him; he wishes to enjoy, and that you may enjoy with him : his holy flesh is the means of this union and this chaste enjoyment," &c.-(May 14. 1695) "It is in the holy sacrament that we enjoy virginally the body of the Bridegroom, and that he appropriates ours," &c. (June 1. 1696), “Embrace, at liberty, this dear little brother, who, every day, longs to be united to you," &c.

If you want any thing more personal, see the really weak manner in which he repels the tender advances of that noble nun whose sensual confidences he had declined:- "Indeed I would not excite these tendernesses of the heart in a direct manner; but when they come of themselves, or in consequence of other reasons, &c., I am not insensible, thank God, to a certain correspondence of sentiments, or of tastes. But, though I feel strongly these correspondences," &c. "All you feel concerning me is, in truth, nothing to me in that matter, and you must not fear to reveal it to me," &c. It seems that the illustrious penitent was frightened at his sentiments, and wished to take a less

because I languish for love." This potion, which is to cure passion by a stronger one, is marvellously calculated to double the evil. What surprises us much more than this imprudence is, that we find frequently in the intimate correspondence of this great adversary of Quietism, the greater part of the sentiments and practical maxims for which the Quietists were reproached. He takes pleasure in developing their favourite text, Expectans, expectavi. "The Bride ought not to hurry; she must wait in expectation of what the Bridegroom will do; if, during the expectation, he caresses the soul, and inclines it to caress him, she must yield her heart. The means of the union is the union itself. All the correspondence of the Bride consists in letting the Bridegroom act."

"Jesus is admirable in the chaste embraces with which he honours his Bride and makes her fruitful; all the virtues are the fruits of his chaste embraces " (February 28. 1693). -"A change of life must follow; but without the soul even thinking of changing itself."

This thoroughly Quietist letter is dated May 30. (1696); and eight days after *-sad inconsistency

beloved director: "I forbid you to adhere to the temptation of quitting, or to believe that I am either fatigued or wearied by your conduct."-(Dec. 1691).

* Bossuet's Works, vol. xi. p. 380., and vol. xii. p. 53. (ed. 1836.)

- he writes these unfeeling words about Madame Guyon: "They appear to me resolved to shut her up far away in some good castle," &c.

How is it he does not perceive that in practical questions, far more important than theory, he differs in nothing from those whom he treats so badly? The direction, in Bossuet, as in his adversaries, is the development of the inert and passive part of our nature, expectans, expectavi.

For me it is a strange sight to see them all, even in the midst of the middle age, crying out against the mystics, and then falling into mysticism themselves. The declivity must, indeed, be rapid and insurmountable.

In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, the profound Rusbrock and the great Gerson imitate precisely those they blame; and in the seventeenth, the Quietists Bona, Fenelon, even Lacombe and Madame Guyon's director speak severely and harshly of the absolute Quietists: they all point out the abyss, and all fall into it themselves.

No matter who the persons may be, there is a logical fatality. The man who, by his character and genius is the farthest removed from passive measures, he who in his writings condemns them the most strongly, even Bossuet, in practice, tends towards them like the others.

What signifies their writing against the theory of Quietism? Quietism is much more a method than a

DEVOUT DIRECTION INCLINES TO QUIETISM. 121

system: a method of drowsiness and indolence which we ever meet with, in one shape or other, in religious direction. It is useless to recommend activity, like Bossuet, or to permit it, like Fenelon, if, preventing every active exercise of the soul, and holding it, as it were, in leading strings, you deprive it of the habit, taste, and power of acting.

Is it not then an illusion, Bossuet? if the soul still seems to act, when this activity is no longer its own, but yours. You show me a person who moves, and walks; but I see well, that this appearance of motion proceeds from your influence over that person, you yourself being, as it were, the principle of action, the cause and reason of living, walking, and moving.

There is always the same sum of action in the total; only, in this dangerous affinity between the director and the person directed, all the action is on the side of the former; he alone remains an active force, a will, a person; he who is directed losing gradually all that constitutes his personality, becomes what? a machine.

When Pascal, in his proud contempt for reason, engages us to become stupid *, and bend within us what he calls the automaton and machine, he does not see that it will only be an exchange of reason; our reason having herself put on the bit and bridle, that

* Montaigne says, also, grow stupid; but not for the profit of authority: he has another sense, and a different intention. See Pascal, ed. Faugère, vol. ii. p. 168.

G