BOSSUET (Jacques-Bénigne). Autograph letter, partly coded, [ - Lot 166

BOSSUET (Jacques-Bénigne). Autograph letter, partly coded, [addressed to his nephew Abbé Bossuet]. Germigny [country residence of the bishops of Meaux, on the banks of the Marne], August 31, 1698. 9 pp. in-8 on 2 bifeuillets and a single sheet assembled on modern-day mitre. " ... I am not surprised by the ménage[ments] we have for St-Anselme [Archbishop of Paris Louis-Antoine de Noailles]. THE WHOLE STATE OF CABAL NOW GOES AGAINST ME, BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT I AM INEXORABLE WHEN IT COMES TO RELIGION AND THAT THEY WON'T IMPOSE ON ME WHEN IT COMES TO DOCTRINE. I eagerly await what the declaration of 30 [M, i.e. Prince Louis of Monaco, future ambassador to Rome] will do in Rome, here it marks much, and one does not believe Chimène [Cardinal Emmanuel de Bouillon, then ambassador stationed in Rome] + 8 99 5 50 + [well] in V[ersailles].... The zeal of Carafa [Louis XIV] is animated rather than slowed down. WE ARE NOT ONLY THINKING OF ACCOMMODATING M. DE C[AMBRAY], BUT HIS FRIENDS, DAZED BY THE EFFECT OF THE RELATIONSHIP, ARE PRETENDING TO WANT TO ABANDON HIM... According to all appearances, 24 [B, i.e. Cardinal de Bouillon] will have little confidence in + 7 72 50 7 97 9 8 5 + [conclave], and the stag [Cardinal Gaspare Carpegna] will be reassured, when he sees [the Prince of Monaco].... IT SEEMS THAT SOMETHING MUST BE SAID HERE TO MR DE C[AMBRAY]. I AM WORKING ON IT, ALTHOUGH ALL SENSIBLE PEOPLE CAN SEE THAT HE IS ONLY EVADING AND MAKING HIMSELF MORE ODIOUS BY HIS TRICKS AND DISGUISES... Your conversation with Diomede [Cardinal Enrico Noris] gives me great pleasure. Since he has kindly asked you to write to me about it, please tell him that the hope of the good cause is all in his knowledge and courage, which has appeared with such brilliance in his previous books, that this affair will add to his glory. No doubt he won't believe everything they say against me. NO OTHER MOTIVE MOTIVATES ME TO ACT, THAN THAT OF SEEING PREVAIL, IF THAT COULD HAPPEN, THE VAIN DEVOTIONS AGAINST THE ANCIENT PIETE TAUGHT BY ST AUGUSTIN AND BY ST THOMAS. The detour of acts commanded by charity is a pure plastrage, which in no way accommodates the denoue[ment] of natural love. M. de C[ambray] has neither spoken of the one nor the other in his book of the Maximes. The fourth love has this advantage, as well as the 5[th]: O[mn]ia in caritate fiant : omnia propter gloriam D[omi]n[i] nostri J[esu] C[hristi]. Either one looks at it co[mm]e precepte with the school of st Thomas or as advice with the school relaschée looks at all the states and not the only passive state, where one admits that not everyone is called. Finally, it is not explained why charity should command hope, which, according to the new system, serves it for nothing, and cannot increase it... Father Alexandre [Piny] has no answer to the proposition that pure concupiscence serves as a preparation for justice, even though it is sacrilegious. I have nothing to say about this other than what I said in preface n. 47 [on Fénelon's Pastoral Instruction]. In one of his writings and in the qualification of this proposition, M. Phélypeaux very aptly pointed out that it equates a sacrilegious act with fear ex impulsu Spiritus Sancti, which merely removere prohibens. We cannot resist his reasons, nor can we help putting this proposition with the other censurables." REPRESENTING HIS UNCLE BOSSUET IN ROME IN THE QUIETISM AFFAIR, JACQUES-BENIGNE BOSSUET (1664-1743) was then abbot of Savigny and would be appointed bishop of Troyes in 1716. The bishop of Meaux was opposed to the archbishop of Cambrai, François de Fénelon, on the question of quietism, inspired by the theories of Spanish theologian Miguel de Molinos, i.e. the conception of pure love and absolute quietude as sufficient keys to Christian perfection. Bossuet had published an Instruction sur les États d'oraison in 1695, and Fénelon had responded with Explications des maximes des saints (1697). The quarrel was taken to Rome, where Fénelon was represented by the Abbé de Chanterac, and Bossuet by his nephew. Fénelon was the big loser: disgraced at Court, Louis XIV withdrew his preceptorship and apartment at Versailles, while in 1699 the Pope condemned Fénelon's book, which he then submitted.