Casuistry and irony
Study how the Provincial Letters turn quotations from moral theologians into a public argument about conscience.
An original introduction. This guide accompanies the work; it is neither the complete text nor a translation.
Situating the text
The letters appeared as separate pamphlets between January 1656 and March 1657, at the height of the quarrel over grace and the five propositions attributed to Jansenius. Arnauld and Nicole helped with the documentation. Rome placed the collection on the Index in 1657, yet its clarity and irony made it a model of classical French prose. In eighteen letters published anonymously under the name Louis de Montalte, Pascal first defends Antoine Arnauld against his censure by the Sorbonne, then turns to the moral theology of Jesuit casuists. A naive narrator questions an obliging Jesuit Father whose quotations from Escobar and other authors show how probable opinions and the direction of intention can excuse almost anything.
Following the arguments
Grace : The first letters show a Sorbonne majority agreeing on words such as proximate power while disagreeing about what they mean. Probabilism : A confessor may follow any opinion defended by one serious doctor, even against an opinion that is more probable. Fact and right : The later letters separate the question whether a doctrine is condemned from whether a given book actually contains it.
Continuing the reading
Read letters 1, 5 and 7 for the method, then one letter addressed directly to the Jesuits, checking each quotation against what the casuists actually argued. The letters appeared as separate pamphlets between January 1656 and March 1657, at the height of the quarrel over grace and the five propositions attributed to Jansenius. Arnauld and Nicole helped with the documentation. Rome placed the collection on the Index in 1657, yet its clarity and irony made it a model of classical French prose.
Satire can serve moral argument when its quotations are exact and its readers are left to judge.
Your turn to think.
- How does the naive narrator lead readers to judge the casuists without telling them what to think?
- Is the charge of laxity fair to probabilism as its defenders understood it?
Your selection and progress stay in this browser.