fuch an abominable Soul innocent, and have pronounc'd its Ignorance as an effectual means to exempt its Robberies, Murders, Adulteries, and other Acts of Uncleannefs, from Sin?

In a word, what would both Plato and Cicero have faid, if they had heard it afferted, That a Sin (mark what follows) tho never fo repugnant to Reason,' (and by confequence that which brought down Fire from Heaven) is but a flight and par⚫ donable Fault,' (for this is what must be underftood by the Words following) is not mortal, when committed by a Perfon who is invincibly igno• rant of God, or (pray obferve this) who at the time of committing it, does not confider that there is a God,or that God is offended with Sin? (b)' Verily, the Pagans would fay, there is not a more grievous Evil or Sin amongst Men. For where is the Man, if he be not invincibly ignorant of the Being of a God, (which is impoffible) but muft reflect that there is One, when he fins; or at least will think that he is offended by his Crimes, efpecially when they are Crimes to which a Man has a violent Propenfity, and on which his Heart is almost entirely fet? This is what the Pagans would fay, with this Addition, That they want Words to characterize fuch perverfe Doctrine. Yet this is what is taught by the Jefuits Darell and Skinner, in a Thefis which thofe Fathers maintain'd at Liege, on the 20th of June 1691. Conclufion xx.

Father Platella, another Jefuit, talks in the very fame Strain, Let a Sin, Jays he (i), be never fo

re

(b) Peccatum quamvis graviter rationi repugnans, commiffum ab invincibiliter ignorante, vel inculpabiliter non advertente Deum effe, aut peccatis offendi, non eft mortale.

(i) Peccatum quantumvis graviter rationi repugnans commiffum ab invincibiliter ignorante, aut non advertente Deum effe; aut peccatis offendi, non eft mortale. Stare poteft cum

repugnant to Reason, (and confequently be it the Crime by which Man degrades and forgets himself moft) if it be committed by a Perfon who is invincibly ignorant of God, or who does not con'fider that there is a God, or that fuch God is offended with Sin, 'tis not mortal: For as this Sin does not carry in it any Contempt of God, ⚫ either virtually or implicitly, 'tis compatible with the perfect Charity and Love of God.'

Since the Pagans have left us with an Abomination of fuch Doctrine, not in the leaft imagining that it could ever enter into the Heart of any Man, we will take their Poft for once, with this fhort Argument.

It cannot be doubted, that if it was ever possible for a Nation to be invincibly ignorant of God, it was the barbarous and pagan Inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah. I know that Plato and Cicero would not allow the Suppofition, that this People could poffibly be in fuch a State of Ignorance: But the Jefuits will not be so stiff in this Point, and 'tis against them that I argue: Mean time, in cafe they fhould fcruple to grant me this Hypothefis, they will at least allow, that thofe People, in the Fury of their brutish Paffion, did not confider that there was a God; or however, did not actually believe that he would be offended at their Sins. Now, according to the Jefuits Platella, Darell, and Skinner, this Circumstance alone was fufficient to prevent their Sin from being mortal, and to preferve them in the perfect Charity and Love of God, at the very Time that they committed their abominable Crime. Nevertheless, God brought down a Shower of Fire and Brimstone upon the Heads of that Peo

charitate perfectâ & amicitiâ divinâ. Platella, in his Book entitled Synopfis curfus Theologici, Pars ii. c. 3. t. 3. n. 189. P. 116, and 117.

ple,

ple, which confumed them to Ashes. Now 'tis not just in God thus to punish his Friends, who at moft commit a venial Sin. Therefore, according to the Fathers Platella, Darell, and Skinner, it was wrong and unjust in God to proceed to fo ftrange an Extremity. So blafphemous is the Tenor of the Jefuits Doctrine!

But before we proceed, let us juft draw up the feveral Expedients which we find the Jefuits have contriv'd to exempt Mankind from all Mortal Sins, and place them in one Point of View. 1ft, The invincible Ignorance of a GOD exempts the blackeft Actions from Sin, tho even the Perfon that commits them should think he thereby does Evil, 2dly, The invincible Ignorance of the principal Duties of the LAW OF NATURE, gives the fame Privilege to fuch as violate thofe Obligations in any manner whatfoever. 3dly, When they who know God, have not the Fear of God before their Eyes, or barely do not confider that he is offended with Sin; either of the two is fufficient to exempt thofe Actions which are moft grievously repugnant to Reafon, from Mortal Sin. Now, certainly, a Man must be very unhappy, if he does not find himself in one of thefe two laft Claffes. Yet if, when a Man does Evil, he cannot help thinking that there is a God, or that he is therewith offended, here's a new Expedient offer'd us by the Jefuits, whofe Charity for Mankind is inexhaustible in Remedies!

(k) If any one, fays Father de Rhodes, com

(k) Si quis committat adulterium, aut homicidium, advertens quidem malitiam & gravitatem eorum, fed imperfeciffimè tamen & leviffimè, ille, quantumvis graviffima fit materia, non peccat tamen nifi levitèr. Ratio eft, quia ficut ad peccatum requiritur cognitio malitiæ, fic ad grave peccatum requiritur plena & clara cognitio & confideratio illius. De Rhodes, in his Scholaftic Theology, Tom. i. tr. 3. Of the Acts hum Difp. ii. Quæft. 2. § 2. p. 322. col. 2.

mits Adultery, or Murder, and at the fame time confiders the Malignancy and heinous Nature of thofe Actions, but in fuch a manner only as is very imperfect and fuperficial, tho the Matter of it is very grofs, yet his Sin is venial: And the Reason of it is this; viz. as a Perfon must neceffarily know all that is Evil in an Action, to make that Action a Sin; fo he cannot commit a grievous Sin, if he does not fully and clearly know and confider all the Evil of it.' So that, unless a Man fits down as it were to meditate, and very seriously to ponder all the Enormity of Adultery, or Murder, unlefs he does this, according to the fefuit de Rhodes, there is no mortal Sin in commiting either the one or the other. But if a Man reflects on thofe Sins after a light fuperficial manner, and then fuffers himself to be hurry'd away by Pleasure or Paffion, he will only be guilty of a venial Sin, whether he lies with the Wife, or kills the Hufband; and if he does both, they will only be two venial Sins. So that here's God again condemn'd by the Jefuits, for having inflicted fo terrible a Punishment on the Adultery and Murder committed by David. For there is no manner of Appearance that this Prince seriously confider'd the Heinoufnefs of the Crime which he committed with Bathsheba, or the Blacknefs of the Treachery whereby he put Uriah to Death; which hinder'd him from committing two mortal Sins.

It naturally follows from this Principle, (viz. that in order to commit a mortal Sin, 'tis not enough to make a flight Reflection on the Evil and Flagrancy of the Sin, but the Man must have a thorow Knowledge and Confideration of its Enormity) from hence it's very plain, that the most harden'd Wretches, those who drink in Iniquity like Rivers of Water, are no longer Sinners, when once they are arriv❜d to that happy State of Stupidity, to

6

have ftifled all Thought and Reflection. And this is the very thing which Father Pirot the Jefuit, and the celebrated Author of the Apology for the Cafuifts, teaches (1) in the Name of the whole Society. Yea, fays he, if Sinners, compleat and thorow-pac❜d Sinners, have no Knowledge nor • Remorse when they blafpheme, and plunge ⚫ themselves all over in Debauchery; if they have ⚫ no Knowledge of the Evil they do, I maintain, ⚫ with all the Divines, (the Jefuits) that they do not fin by thofe Actions that favour more of the Beast than Man; because without Free Will there is no Sin, and there cannot be a Free Will to avoid Sin, unless there be a Knowledge of the • Good and Evil in the Object propos'd to us.'

<

In fhort, to carry Impiety to its Ne plus ultra, Father Rhodes teaches, that in fome Circumstances Crimes become Virtues: If, fays be (m), you invincibly believe that to tell a Lye in order to fave your Friend, is an Act of Virtue, your Lye is a • Work of Mercy. If you think it a good Action to kill a Person who blafphemes, even that Murder will be a religious Ation. Therefore, a Difciple of this Jefuit, who fhould think he would do a good Deed to kill a King who had fupprefs'd' in his Dominions the troublesome Subscription to the Formula, which would be worfe in the Society's Opinion than fpeaking Blafphemy, would do an excellent Action. Can any thing be more frightful than fuch Tenets, which, as Juvenal words it (n), make black white, or turn Vice into Virtue? Surely,

(1) Page 38.

(m) Si exiftimes invincibiliter quod mentiri eft actus virtutis ad falvandum amicum, mendacium tuum erit opus mifericordiæ. Si putes bonum effe hominem occidere qui blafphemat, erit opus religionis illud homicidium. Tom, i, tr. des Actes hum. p. 324. col. 1.

(n)

-Qui nigrum in candida vertunt.

Juv. Sat. i.

had