The Prolegomena of Jean Hardouin

 

[The purpose of this post is to demonstrate the polemics of defending a conspiracy theory, which arrived fully clothed in the early modern period . Paradoxically, the one progenitor that strikes me as particularly significant would be John Calvin, who argues on the other side of the particular question. Part II summarizes the true doctrine that Jean Hardouin is protecting from conspirators]

 

Part I

I here enter upon a very important, but very invidious undertaking. It is my intention, with the assistance of God, as long as He grants me life, to show that all the writings which are commonly thought to be old, are in fact, with certain exceptions to be presently named, suppositions, and the fabrication of an unprincipled crew of literary men.

The exceptions are, the Books held by the Church to be sacred and canonical, and six Profane Writers, four Latin, two Greek. Meanwhile I do not declare war upon other writers, unless upon the enemies of the Almighty, of Christ, of the supreme Pontiff, and of Royal authority.

Surely we may be as rigid in our criticism and repudiation of false monuments from which in the slightest degree our holy Religion suffers injury, as are judges in a court when they test and reject documents which are concerned with men’s fortunes and estates, if any note of falsity appears in them. Now if there be but one faulty notation of time any instrument, a Court will decisively and with great and just indignation reject and repudiate the instrument. How much more vehemently should we vociferate, and how much more justly, when our holy Religion is assailed and undermined!

Religion itself and Christian Piety demand that we should deliver them at some lesser risk from a greater peril.  The danger is less, if the falsehood of certain facts or allegations which have hitherto obtained credit is acknowledged; but greater, nay, by far the greater danger is, if those alleged facts are left unquestioned, and so our faith is gradually injured and overthrown.

Let men, if they will, call the opinions I have here advanced ravings; I care not, so long as I can discredit the doctrines which I denounce as impious and heretical in those writings; I care not, so long as I can warn and teach my readers to abhor them, what men may think of me; I care only to preserve the faith concerning the true God, concerning Christ, concerning ever head and chapter of our holy faith, sound and whole.

What matters it, I pray you, that no one before my time said what I have just said, and that I adduce no authority or witness from the ancients in my support? Supposing that I had a forerunner, would that affect the question of truth? Or because he had long passed away, would that render him worthier of support? I pray you not to believe in men, but in sound arguments.

If I had an equal genius to any of these old writers, if a desire came into my mind to print something under the feigned name of any of those authors, whose works are believed to have perished if I were to write it on parchment, with ink specially prepared for the purpose of making the writing appear in the course of a few years some 600 or 800 years old; if I were to transfer into that work certain excerpts from old writers who are commonly supposed to be genuine and sincere, with the view to induce belief in my  work and its great age; tell me, would it not be right for any one to try and find out and detect any hidden fraud and impiety that he might suspect? Certainly he would be justified in doing so. And certainly one who is first and foremost a Catholic and a Theologian must be thought at liberty to do the like in reference to all writings which have not yet undergone such censure.

Petavius [a noted Jesuit Chronicler], for example, was the first to deny that certain works had been written by Athanasius, which the Benedictines ascribe to his authorship, and he was right. And they were also justified who revised the works ascribed to Augustine and Bernard, and who cut them down by one half, which they repudiated. They had the same acumen to discern that they were not all of the same style and vein. Tell me, am I not to enjoy the same license, when I use arguments none the less certain, nay, more convincing? The Apostle says to all, Prove all things, hold fast that which is good.

It may be asked, How could it be that the Atheism which I profess to have clearly discovered in these writings, escaped the Scholastic Theologians of former ages? But I ask in turn how it could come to pass that in this very age, when we have more Theologians, and not less gifted, this iniquity escapes them, especially considering how much clearer our books are, owing to the art of Printing? Doubtless in part the cause of this has been that when the Theologians joined hands against Heretics, they perused only those heads of Doctrine in the alleged monuments of the ‘Fathers’ on which debate had arisen; they did not arrive at the fountain-head of these Dogmata. All were intent upon the object of making the testimonies opposed to them tell in favor of their own respective parties; for example, on the Eucharist, on Penitence, on the efficacy of Grace, and other controverted heads. In this conflict each thought himself successful in proportion to his ingenuity. But if they had weighed the whole literature with the like care, had they put their fingers on the sources, had they perceived that Atheism was taught by these false ‘Fathers,’ doubtless they would have recognized the whole fraud; they would have seen that from Atheism nothing sound, nothing but what is most alien  from Catholic Faith, in the Eucharist and other heads could follow. They would have understood that the writings which they have treated with great reverence, because they believed them to have come from the ‘Fathers’, were indeed detestable.

It is no wonder that so many impious writings were not in former times suspected of impiety. They lay hid on the shelves of libraries. They were brought out in a furtive and secret manner, and by degrees. Very few men knew anything of them. But now in our day, when a great number of similarly impious writings are in the hands of all, not only in France, but also in Belgium, Germany, England, and elsewhere, shall no one censure them? Can you wonder at the stupor of former ages – from the fourteenth, in which I think these writings were framed- and or wonder at the stupor of our contemporaries? Can you wonder that the Church has not pronounced on these matters, seeing that the writings in question have never been brought before the tribunal of the Church?  Neither the Church – that is the supreme Pontiff – nor a Council gives judgment upon books, unless there has been a proper judicial interpellation.

 

I say that before the present the vast fraud could not be detected. No one could persuade himself or make others believe that all monuments are false and suppositions that had been believed to have been written in some fifteen former ages, unless he had studied them with sedulous attention. The whole system of the impious crew, of which each student took up his own part, could not be understood except by the diligent consideration of each and every part of it. But it is only in our own time that nearly all the writing have been brought forth from the Libraries. They are of the same kind with those  extant, as will be readily understood by any one who is convinced of the falsity of those in our hands.

 

The Catholics, then, could not readily recognize the impieties in these writings, nor could the Heretics lay open what they had discovered. Both acknowledge the alleged ‘Fathers’. The Catholics were not at liberty altogether to repudiate them; that their Sons might not be said to depart from the ‘Fathers’ Nor did it occur to the Heretics to cast off writers who supported, as they knew, their own impious hypothesis. Moreover, their object was to show that they were not of recent origin, that they were not the fancies of new doctrines; and they needed the suffrages of these alleged witnesses.

Surely Catholic prelates ought to permit me, or any better man, to detect the mystery of iniquity, and bring it into the open light of day. Otherwise they may well fear lest some impious adversary come forward and publish the wicked doctrines in the monuments of the alleged ‘Fathers,’ and find support among men, who do not wish to toil as they toiled in getting up Editions, nor acquire the ill repute connected with evil and impious doctrine, whether it be not understood, or which is worse, championed and defended. Soon, unless God avert the ill, the whole Christian world will become atheist against its will.

Assuredly it is all but necessary that a member of the Society of Jesus should detect this wicked craft and malice. For there is scarce another Family of the Priesthood which has not been deceived by some notable book offered to it under the name of some distinguished man in that Family; which book it has forthwith decreed by all means and arts to defend. Thus the Dominicans have ‘Thomas Aquinas, ‘Vincent of Beauvais,’ ‘Moneta’, ‘Reiner,’ and others. The Franciscans have ‘Bonaventura, Alensis, ‘Scotus’. The Carmelites have ‘Thomas Walden.’ Other families have other names.

But the Benedictines have a whole legion of them.

Therefore, if at any time the holy Apostolic See would pronounce a judgment on my censure against ‘Augustine,’ ‘Bernard,’ and ‘Thomas’ (these three writers by the help of God I have dispatched; also most of the Councils; I am going to deal with other matters in like manner, while life lasts); I say when that day, greatly desired by me, shall come, let not the Holy See admit  consultation members of any Regular Family, which thinks it has produced from its bosom any of those old writers, and which desires to preserve them at any price. Let the Holy See employ Secular Theologians, or men of incorrupt integrity out of those very Families, who will look after the good of Religion alone. Let them desire preserve her alone, though all else perish.

The providence of God has hitherto permitted quarrels of Theologians on the opinions of Augustine, Thomas, etc. God cares little about controversies of that kind so long as the faith continues sound and whole, the faith which is necessary for all to salvation. In this faith neither can He suffer the Roman Church, nor has He suffered the Catholic Theologians to err. Meanwhile, not one of those works has been approved by the Apostolic See ex cathedra, - that is, after examination instituted and the hearing of advocates on either side on the question of the falsity or sincerity of these works. Enough for the Roman Church  her own faith, her own tradition, without the help of ‘Augustine.’ Or any other private person whatever. She derives her authority an her magisterial power from none, except Christ and the Holy Spirit promised to her; she should be taught by none, she should teach all, as Mother and Mistress. Nothing so strongly proves the authority of the Roman Church and the providence of God in conserving the true faith through the Holy Apostolic See, as the fact that she has never been corrupted, and will never suffer herself to be corrupted by so many great names of distinguished writers, whether Greek or Latin.

 

Thirty-six years ago, in the year 1693, and afterwards on more than one occasion I declared that the spuriousness of the ‘old writers’ had become most plain and obvious to me. Then certain Catholics, good and well-meaning men, but of no large views, raised a cry against me. They did not observe that the Calvinists of Holland or Germany vociferated much more loudly. They, forsooth, well knew that if ‘Augustine’ were snatched from them – if he were convicted of atheism – their famous phrase    ‘All Augustine is ours’ would bear this sense- ‘A scoundrel and a foe of he true Deity is all for us.’ In point of fact, the fellow who assumed and bears the name of ‘Augustine’; teaches absolute atheism under the guise of Christian language.

Some one may say, ‘Are you then wiser than so many men of genius, who read the old writings, and did not observe that they were impious?’ I will answer in the words of one of that wicked crew itself, in those forsooth, of Lactantius book ii, chapter 8:-

Above all, in a matter that is vital it behooves each man to consult himself and to rely on his own judgment and proper senses for the purpose of considering and investigating the truth, rather than to be deceived by the errors of others, as if himself devoid of reason. God gave to all a measure of wisdom, that they might investigate unheard-of things, and perpend things heard. Because you have had predecessors in time, it does not follow that they have succeeded you in wisdom, which, if it is given equally to all, cannot be wholly enjoyed by those who went before. To be wise, i.e., to seek the truth is innate in all; and therefore they cease to be wise who, without any judgment, approved what our ancestors invented, and are led like cattle by others. They are deceived in this, that under the influence of the name of ‘elders and ancestors,’ they do not think that they can be wiser, because they are later, or that others are foolish, having the name of ‘elders.’ What hinders that we should take examples from themselves; so that even as those who made false inventions handed down them down to posterity, so we who find the truth should hand down better things to our posterity?’

To listen to this, nothing assuredly incites us but the desire of seeing the truth, which is contained in the one most Holy Catholic religion.

|But it will be asked, ‘Why are so many literary monuments attacked, which have been received in good faith by so many ages?’ Is there so much good in those errors, or is so much evil feared, if the truth should be laid open, as there is in the fact that Books should be in the hands and before the eyes of all, which have been written by a gang of men, enemies to the Catholic truth – and written with no other design than to remove God entirely from the world, and to overthrow the whole of the doctrines of the Christian faith? Those books foster, and will foster, endless and interminable quarrels in the Church, until their nature and quality are recognized. If one should make clearer than the light of noon that the rise and birth of them fell within the last 400 years – that is, in the fourteenth century- would this be a light boon to Christendom?  Should it not be preferred to any other gain, if any other there could be?

Why did God so long delay the exposure of the fraud? The answer is, He suffered it to be committed that He might one day triumph over it; and he delayed to show it to Catholics until as I have said, all the books, or at least the greater part, and the most important books had been brought out of the Libraries, had been fairly edited and could be conveniently read and understood, and tested by the marginal references. This has come to pass in our own time; hardly before. How helpful are these aids to students, students well know. I judge them to be so important that, before they we afforded, I do not believe the designs of the wicked crew could have been detected

In was the month of August, 1690, that I began to scent fraud in Augustine and his contemporaries; in the month of November I suspected the same in all; and I detected the whole  in the month of May, 1692, after I had written down long extracts from particular Greek and Latin writers. In this labor I toiled almost to the point of disgust and weariness, though I had often moments of great delight in the discovery of the truth.

On the question of the good faith of ‘Cyril, Theodore, Augustine, Jerome’ and others, special treatises have been published, and the strife is not yet at an end. If one were to make clear that the authors of such strife emerged from the infernal regions into the world about 400 years ago, to pursue their ill design of publishing the impious writings under the names of the Saints and others – ought you not to thank such a man, if he proves the point by perspicuous arguments? For who would undertake the advocacy of impious writings?

Part II

The Royal Psalmist, singing ‘The Heavens do tell, etc., and the Wise Man, chapter xiii 3-5, and Paul, and other sacred books, prove that God exists from His admirable works; that is, they teach of a Workman distinct from His works, and that by a real distinction, the greatest conceivable – no distinction alone, but real separability. He exists infinite ages before the world that he made; and He can will forever to annihilate the same. None of those writers, none of those falsely named ‘Fathers’ proved the existence of God by this argument – that all things hold together by the Truth by which they are formally true; or from this argument, that there is a certain universal Reason, the Light of rational minds. But such was New Gospel of the false ‘Fathers.’

By the great Providence of God it came to pass that they whom the Lord Christ desired to be the first Doctors of the Church were common men, plebeians, men of the lowest vulgar herd. For if he had chosen out Philosophers, or other men of the highest ability, there would now be the greatest temptation in the Church, and occasion of suspicion –whether what ought to be understood by the name of God is not that rather which is expounded in the writings of the false ‘Fathers’; and is greedily taken out of them – the Essence of Essences and as the new philosophers and Jansenists say- rather than what we Catholics worship.

God provided against this evil. First he sent Moses, to teach the true God as creator of Nature. Afterwards he sent Christ, who as a greater prophet should teach greater things in God. He taught that God could do many things above Nature, much greater things than he did in creation; that he subsisted in a sublimer manner than he who was known by the Jews. God made nothing in vain. It was necessary that Christ should teach us the three Persons in God, that he should make known and require belief in the miracle of the Eucharist. Otherwise, credence would readily be given to the falsely called ‘Fathers’; and new atheists ,that there was no other God than theirs; if there was nothing in the world that does not appear to have been made according to the laws of motion and mechanics – immutable laws which nature follows, as they reason.

But in reply to this it must be said that Atheists cannot fit their Nature or Essences of Essences, or the Laws of Motion, the Ternary number of Persons, who are really distinct from one another, because of the double vital operation of intellect and will. The Miracle in the perpetual and continuous reproduction of the Body of Christ under the species of Bread, the former substance being destroyed, infers that God must be other than the Nature of Things, the Essence of Essences, and Truth or formal Reality of Things. Both these propositions had to be laid before the faithful that they might understand that the deity proposed for worship by the faithful was not the object of worship which they themselves had learned from Moses, and Christ, and the Apostles and their own ancestors and elders. For Nature and Truth can do nothing but what the human mind can conceive; cannot subsist in any manner beyond our intelligence. That the faith of the true God might be preserved and conserved, it behooved that greater things should be revealed to the Christians concerning Him than to the Jews. Especially God foresaw what has actually happened, that the Rabbis of the Jews would be, many of them, carried away into that Atheism – deceived by the Cabbalistic books, which the same impious crew conflicted in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.