andtoreferyoutomyletters，inwhichIhavedeclaredthat\"Iamaprivateindividual\"；andagaininsomanywords，that\"IamnotofPort—Royal，asIsaidinmySixteenthLetter，whichprecededyourpublication。Youmustfallonsomeotherway，then，toprovemeheretic，otherwisethewholeworldwillbeconvincedthatitisbeyondyourpowertomakegoodyouraccusation。ProvefrommywritingsthatIdonotreceivetheconstitution。
Mylettersarenotveryvoluminous—therearebutsixteenofthem—andIdefyyouoranybodyelsetodetectinthemtheslightestfoundationforsuchacharge。Ishall，however，withyourpermission，producesomethingoutofthemtoprovethereverse。When，forexample，IsayintheFourteenththat，\"bykillingourbrethreninmortalsin，accordingtoyourmaxims，wearedamningthoseforwhomJesusChristdied，doInotplainlyacknowledgethatJesusChristdiedforthosewhomaybedamned，and，consequently，declareittobefalse\"thathediedonlyforthepredestinated，\"whichistheerrorcondemnedinthefifthproposition？Certainitis，father，thatIhavenotsaidawordinbehalfoftheseimpiouspropositions，whichIdetestwithallmyheart。AndeventhoughPort—Royalshouldholdthem，Iprotestagainstyourdrawinganyconclusionfromthisagainstme，as，thankGod，IhavenosortofconnectionwithanycommunityexcepttheCatholic，ApostolicandRomanChurch，inthebosomofwhichIdesiretoliveanddie，incommunionwiththePope，theheadoftheChurch，andbeyondthepaleofwhichIampersuadedthereisnosalvation。Howareyoutogetatapersonwhotalksinthisway，father？Onwhatquarterwillyouassailme，sinceneithermywordsnormywritingsaffordtheslightesthandletoyouraccusations，andtheobscurityinwhichmypersonisenvelopedformsmyprotectionagainstyourthreatenings？Youfeelyourselvessmittenbyaninvisiblehand—ahand，however，whichmakesyourdelinquenciesvisibletoalltheearth；andinvaindoyouendeavourtoattackmeinthepersonofthosewithwhomyousupposemetobeassociated。Ifearyounot，eitheronmyownaccountoronthatofanyother，beingboundbynotieeithertoacommunityortoanyindividualwhatsoever。AlltheinfluencewhichyourSocietypossessescanbeofnoavailinmycase。FromthisworldI
havenothingtohope，nothingtodread，nothingtodesire。ThroughthegoodnessofGod，Ihavenoneedofanyman’smoneyoranyman’spatronage。
Thus，myfather，Ieludeallyourattemptstolayholdofme。YoumaytouchPort—Royal，ifyouchoose，butyoushallnottouchme。YoumayturnpeopleoutoftheSorbonne，butthatwillnotturnmeoutofmydomicile。Youmaycontriveplotsagainstpriestsanddoctors，butnotagainstme，forIamneithertheonenortheother。Andthus，father，youneverperhapshadtodo，inthewholecourseofyourexperience，withapersonsocompletelybeyondyourreach，andthereforesoadmirablyqualifiedfordealingwithyourerrors—oneperfectlyfree—onewithoutengagement，entanglement，relationship，orbusinessofanykind—one，too，whoisprettywellversedinyourmaxims，anddetermined，asGodshallgivehimlight，todiscussthem，withoutpermittinganyearthlyconsiderationtoarrestorslackenhisendeavours。Since，then，youcandonothingagainstme，whatgoodpurposecanitservetopublishsomanycalumnies，asyouandyourbrethrenaredoing，againstaclassofpersonswhoareinnowayimplicatedinourdisputes？
Youshallnotescapeunderthesesubterfuges：youshallbemadetofeeltheforceofthetruthinspiteofthem。Howdoesthecasestand？ItellyouthatyouareruiningChristianmoralitybydivorcingitfromtheloveofGod，anddispensingwithitsobligation；andyoutalkabout\"thedeathofFatherMester\"—apersonwhomIneversawinmylife。Itellyouthatyourauthorspermitamantokillanotherforthesakeofanapple，whenitwouldbedishonourabletoloseit；andyoureplybyinformingmethatsomebody\"hasbrokenintothepoor—boxatSt。Merri！\"Again，whatcanyoupossiblymeanbymixingmeupperpetuallywiththebookOntheHolyVirginity，writtenbysomefatheroftheOratory，whomIneversawanymorethanhisbook？Itisratherextraordinary，father，thatyoushouldthusregardallthatareopposedtoyouasiftheywereoneperson。Yourhatredwouldgraspthemallatonce，andwouldholdthemasabodyofreprobates，everyoneofwhomisresponsibleforalltherest。ThereisavastdifferencebetweenJesuitsandalltheiropponents。Therecanbenodoubtthatyoucomposeonebody，unitedunderonehead；andyourregulations，asIhaveshown，prohibityoufromprintinganythingwithouttheapprobationofyoursuperiors，whoareresponsibleforalltheerrorsofindividualwriters，andwho\"cannotexcusethemselvesbysayingthattheydidnotobservetheerrorsinanypublication，fortheyoughttohaveobservedthem。\"Sosayyourordinances，andsosaythelettersofyourgenerals，Aquaviva，Vitelleschi，&；c。
Wehavegoodreason，therefore，forcharginguponyoutheerrorsofyourassociates，whenwefindtheyaresanctionedbyyoursuperiorsandthedivinesofyourSociety。Withme，however，father，thecasestandsotherwise。
IhavenotsubscribedtothebookoftheHolyVirginity。Allthealms—boxesinParismaybebrokeninto，andyetIamnotthelessagoodCatholicforallthat。Inshort，Ibegtoinformyou，intheplainestterms，thatnobodyisresponsibleformylettersbutmyself，andthatIamresponsiblefornothingbutmyletters。Here，father，Imightfairlyenoughhavebroughtourdisputetoanissue，withoutsayingawordaboutthoseotherpersonswhomyoustigmatizeasheretics，inordertocomprehendmeunderthecondemnation。
But，asIhavebeentheoccasionoftheirilltreatment，Iconsidermyselfboundinsomesorttoimprovetheoccasion，andIshalltakeadvantageofitinthreeparticulars。Oneadvantage，notinconsiderableinitsway，isthatitwillenablemetovindicatetheinnocenceofsomanycalumniatedindividuals。Another，notinappropriatetomysubject，willbetodisclose，atthesametime，theartificesofyourpolicyinthisaccusation。ButtheadvantagewhichIprizemostofallisthatitaffordsmeanopportunityofapprisingtheworldofthefalsehoodofthatscandalousreportwhichyouhavebeensobusilydisseminating，namely，\"thattheChurchisdividedbyanewheresy。\"Andasyouaredeceivingmultitudesintothebeliefthatthepointsonwhichyouareraisingsuchastormareessentialtothefaith，Iconsideritofthelastimportancetoquashtheseunfoundedimpressions，anddistinctlytoexplainherewhatthesepointsare，soastoshowthat，inpointoffact，therearenohereticsintheChurch。Ipresume，then，thatwerethequestiontobeasked：WhereinconsiststheheresyofthosecalledJansenists？theimmediatereplywouldbe，\"ThesepeopleholdthatthecommandmentsofGodareimpracticabletomen，thatgraceisirresistible，thatwehavenotfreewilltodoeithergoodorevil，thatJesusChristdidnotdieforallmen，butonlyfortheelect；inshort，theymaintainthefivepropositionscondemnedbythePope。\"Doyounotgiveitouttoallthatthisisthegroundonwhichyoupersecuteyouropponents？Haveyounotsaidasmuchinyourbooks，inyourconversations，inyourcatechisms？
AspecimenofthisyougaveatthelateChristmasfestivalatSt。Louis。
Oneofyourlittleshepherdesseswasquestionedthus：\"ForwhomdidJesusChristcomeintotheworld，mydear？\"\"Forallmen，father。\"\"Indeed，mychild；soyouarenotoneofthosenewhereticswhosaythathecameonlyfortheelect？\"Thuschildrenareledtobelieveyou，andmanyothersbesideschildren；foryouentertainpeoplewiththesamestuffinyoursermonsasFatherCrassetdidatOrleans，beforehewaslaidunderaninterdict。
AndIfranklyownthat，atonetime，Ibelievedyoumyself。Youhadgivenmepreciselythesameideaofthesegoodpeople；sothat，whenyoupressedthemonthesepropositions，Inarrowlywatchedtheiranswer，determinednevertoseethemmore，iftheydidnotrenouncethemaspalpableimpieties。
This，however，theyhavedoneinthemostunequivocalway。M。deSainte—Beuve，king’sprofessorintheSorbonne，censuredthesepropositionsinhispublishedwritingslongbeforethePope；andotherAugustiniandoctors，invariouspublications，and，amongothers，inaworkOnVictoriousGrace，rejectthesamearticlesasbothhereticalandstrangedoctrines。Intheprefacetothatworktheysaythatthesepropositionsare\"hereticalandLutheran，forgedandfabricatedatpleasure，andareneithertobefoundinJansenius，norinhisdefenders。\"Theycomplainofbeingchargedwithsuchsentiments，andaddressyouinthewordsofSt。Prosper，thefirstdiscipleofSt。
Augustinetheirmaster，towhomthesemi—PelagiansofFrancehadascribedsimilaropinions，withtheviewofbringinghimintodisgrace：\"Therearepersonswhodenounceus，soblindedbypassionthattheyhaveadoptedmeansfordoingsowhichruintheirownreputation。Theyhave，forthispurpose，fabricatedpropositionsofthemostimpiousandblasphemouscharacter，whichtheyindustriouslycirculate，tomakepeoplebelievethatwemaintaintheminthewickedsensewhichtheyarepleasedtoattachtothem。Butourreplywillshowatonceourinnocence，andthemalignityofthesepersonswhohaveascribedtousasetofimpioustenets，ofwhichtheyarethemselvesthesoleinventors。\"Truly，father，whenIfoundthattheyhadspokeninthiswaybeforetheappearanceofthepapalconstitution—whenIsawthattheyafterwardsreceivedthatdecreewithallpossiblerespect，thattheyofferedtosubscribeit，andthatM。Arnauldhaddeclaredallthisinhissecondletter，instrongertermsthanIcanreporthim，Ishouldhaveconsidereditasintodoubttheirsoundnessinthefaith。And，infact，thosewhowereformerlydisposedtorefuseabsolutiontoM。Arnauld’sfriends，havesincedeclaredthat，afterhisexplicitdisclaimeroftheerrorsimputedtohim，therewasnoreasonleftforcuttingoffeitherhimorthemfromthecommunionoftheChurch。Yourassociates，however，haveactedverydifferently；anditwasthisthatmademebegintosuspectthatyouwereactuatedbyprejudice。Youthreatenedfirsttocompelthemtosignthatconstitution，solongasyouthoughttheywouldresistit；butnosoonerdidyouseethemquitereadyoftheirownaccordtosubmittoitthanweheardnomoreaboutthis。Stillhowever，thoughonemightsupposethisoughttohavesatisfiedyou，youpersistedincallingthemheretics，\"because，\"
saidyou，\"theirheartbeliestheirhand；theyareCatholicsoutwardly，butinwardlytheyareheretics。\"This，father，struckmeasverystrangereasoning；forwhereisthepersonofwhomasmuchmaynotbesaidatanytime？Andwhatendlesstroubleandconfusionwouldensue，wereitallowedtogoon！\"If，\"saysPopeSt。Gregory，\"werefusetobelieveaconfessionoffaithmadeinconformitytothesentimentsoftheChurch，wecastadoubtoverthefaithofallCatholicswhatsoever。\"Iamafraid，father，tousethewordsofthesamepontiffwhenspeakingofasimilardisputethistime，\"thatyourobjectistomakethesepersonshereticsinspiteofthemselves；becausetorefusetocreditthosewhotestifybytheirconfessionthattheyareinthetruefaith，isnottopurgeheresy，buttocreateit—hocnonesthaeresimpurgare，sedfacere。\"Butwhatconfirmedmeinmypersuasionthattherewas，indeed，nohereticintheChurch，wasfindingthatourso—calledhereticshadvindicatedthemselvessosuccessfullythatyouwereunabletoaccusethemofasingleerrorinthefaith，andthatyouwerereducedtothenecessityofassailingthemonquestionsoffactonly，touchingJansenius，whichcouldnotpossiblybeconstruedintoheresy。
Youinsist，itnowappears，ontheirbeingcompelledtoacknowledge\"thatthesepropositionsarecontainedinJansenius，wordforword，everyoneofthem，insomanyterms，\"or，asyouexpressit，\"Singulares，individuae，totidemverbisapudJanseniumcontentae。\"Thenceforthyourdisputebecame，inmyeyes，perfectlyindifferent。SolongasIbelievedthatyouweredebatingthetruthorfalsehoodofthepropositions，Iwasallattention，forthatquarreltouchedthefaith；butwhenIdiscoveredthattheboneofcontentionwaswhethertheyweretobefoundwordforwordinJanseniusornot，asreligionceasedtobeinterestedinthecontroversy，Iceasedtobeinterestedinitalso。Notbutthattherewassomepresumptionthatyouwerespeakingthetruth；becausetosaythatsuchandsuchexpressionsaretobefoundwordforwordinanauthor，isamatterinwhichtherecanbenomistake。Idonotwonder，therefore，thatsomanypeople，bothinFranceandatRome，shouldhavebeenledtobelieve，ontheauthorityofaphrasesolittleliabletosuspicion，thatJanseniushasactuallytaughttheseobnoxioustenets。And，forthesamereason，Iwasnotalittlesurprisedtolearnthatthissamepointoffact，whichyouhadpropoundedassocertainandsoimportant，wasfalse；andthat，afterbeingchallengedtoquotethepagesofJanseniusinwhichyouhadfoundthesepropositions\"wordforword，\"youhavenotbeenabletopointthemouttothisday。
Iamthemoreparticularingivingthisstatement，because，inmyopinion，itdiscovers，inaverystrikinglight，thespiritofyourSocietyinthewholeofthisaffair；andbecausesomepeoplewillbeastonishedtofindthat，notwithstandingallthefactsabovementioned，youhavenotceasedtopublishthattheyarehereticsstill。Butyouhaveonlyalteredtheheresytosuitthetime；fornosoonerhadtheyfreedthemselvesfromonechargethanyourfathers，determinedthattheyshouldneverwantanaccusation，substitutedanotherinitsplace。Thus，in1653，theirheresylayinthequalityofthepropositions；thencamethewordforwordheresy；afterthatwehadtheheartheresy。Andnowwehearnothingofanyofthese，andtheymustbeheretics，forsooth，unlesstheysignadeclarationtotheeffect\"thatthesenseofthedoctrineofJanseniusiscontainedinthesenseofthefivepropositions。\"Suchisyourpresentdispute。Itisnotenoughforyouthattheycondemnthefivepropositions，andeverythinginJanseniusthatbearsanyresemblancetothem，oriscontrarytoSt。
Augustine；forallthattheyhavedonealready。Thepointatissueisnot，forexample，ifJesusChristdiedfortheelectonly—theycondemnthatasmuchasyoudo；but，isJanseniusofthatopinion，ornot？AndhereIdeclare，morestronglythanever，thatyourquarrelaffectsmeaslittleasitaffectstheChurch。ForalthoughIamnodoctor，anymorethanyou，father，Icaneasilysee，nevertheless，thatithasnoconnectionwiththefaith。TheonlyquestionistoascertainwhatisthesenseofJansenius。
Didtheybelievethathisdoctrinecorrespondedtotheproperandliteralsenseofthesepropositions，theywouldcondemnit；andtheyrefusetodoso，becausetheyareconvinceditisquitethereverse；sothat，althoughtheyshouldmisunderstandit，stilltheywouldnotbeheretics，seeingtheyunderstanditonlyinaCatholicsense。Toillustratethisbyanexample，ImayrefertotheconflictingsentimentsofSt。BasilandSt。Athanasius，regardingthewritingsofSt。DenisofAlexandria，whichSt。Basil，conceivingthathefoundinthemthesenseofAriusagainsttheequalityoftheFatherandtheSon，condemnedasheretical，butwhichSt。Athanasius，ontheotherhand，judgingthemtocontainthegenuinesenseoftheChurch，maintainedtobeperfectlyorthodox。Thinkyou，then，father，thatSt。Basil，whoheldthesewritingstobeArian，hadarighttobrandSt。Athanasiusasahereticbecausehedefendedthem？Andwhatgroundwouldhehavehadforsodoing，seeingthatitwasnotArianismthathisbrotherdefended，butthetruefaithwhichheconsideredthesewritingstocontain？Hadthesetwosaintsagreedaboutthetruesenseofthesewritings，andhadbothrecognizedthisheresyinthem，unquestionablySt。Athanasiuscouldnothaveapprovedofthemwithoutbeingguiltyofheresy；butastheywereatvariancerespectingthesenseofthepassage，St。Athanasiuswasorthodoxinvindicatingthem，eventhoughhemayhaveunderstoodthemwrong；becauseinthatcaseitwouldhavebeenmerelyanerrorinamatteroffact，andbecausewhathedefendedwasreallytheCatholicfaith，whichhesupposedtobecontainedinthesewritings。Iapplythistoyou，father。SupposeyouwereagreeduponthesenseofJansenius，andyouradversarieswerereadytoadmitwithyouthatheheld，forexample，thatgracecannotberesisted，thosewhorefusedtocondemnhimwouldbeheretical。Butasyourdisputeturnsuponthemeaningofthatauthor，andtheybelievethat，accordingtothisdoctrine，gracemayberesisted，whateverheresyyoumaybepleasedtoattributetohim，youhavenogroundtobrandthemasheretics，seeingtheycondemnthesensewhichyouputonJansenius，andyoudarenotcondemnthesensewhichtheyputonhim。If，therefore，youmeantoconvictthem，showthatthesensewhichtheyascribetoJanseniusisheretical；forthentheywillbehereticalthemselves。Buthowcouldyouaccomplishthis，sinceitiscertain，accordingtoyourownshowing，thatthemeaningwhichtheygivetohislanguagehasneverbeencondemned？Toelucidatethepointstillfurther，Ishallassumeasaprinciplewhatyouyourselvesacknowledge—
thatthedoctrineofefficaciousgracehasneverbeencondemned，andthatthepopehasnottoucheditbyhisconstitution。And，infact，whenheproposedtopassjudgementonthefivepropositions，thequestionofefficaciousgracewasprotectedagainstallcensure。ThisisperfectlyevidentfromthejudgementsoftheconsulterstowhomthePopecommittedthemforexamination。
ThesejudgementsIhaveinmypossession，incommonwithmanyotherpersonsinParis，and，amongtherest，theBishopofMontpelier，whobroughtthemfromRome。Itappearsfromthisdocumentthattheyweredividedintheirsentiments；thatthechiefpersonsamongthem，suchastheMasteroftheSacredPalace，thecommissaryoftheHolyOffice，theGeneraloftheAugustinians，andothers，conceivingthatthesepropositionsmightbeunderstoodinthesenseofefficaciousgrace，wereofopinionthattheyoughtnottobecensured；
whereastherest，whiletheyagreedthatthepropositionswouldnothavemeritedcondemnationhadtheybornethatsense，judgedthattheyoughttobecensured，because，astheycontended，thiswasveryfarfrombeingtheirproperandnaturalsense。ThePope，accordingly，condemnedthem；
andallpartieshaveacquiescedinhisjudgement。Itiscertain，then，father，thatefficaciousgracehasnotbeencondemned。Indeed，itissopowerfullysupportedbySt。Augustine，bySt。Thomas，andallhisschool，byagreatmanypopesandcouncils，andbyalltradition，thattotaxitwithheresywouldbeanactofimpiety。Now，allthosewhomyoucondemnashereticsdeclarethattheyfindnothinginJansenius，butthisdoctrineofefficaciousgrace。AndthiswastheonlypointwhichtheymaintainedatRome。Youhaveacknowledgedthisyourselfwhenyoudeclarethat\"whenpleadingbeforethepope，theydidnotsayasinglewordaboutthepropositions，butoccupiedthewholetimeintalkingaboutefficaciousgrace。\"Sothat，whethertheyberightorwronginthissupposition，itisundeniable，atleast，thatwhattheysupposetobethesenseisnothereticalsense；andthat，consequently，theyarenoheretics；for，tostatethematterintwowords，eitherJanseniushasmerelytaughtthedoctrineofefficaciousgrace，andinthiscasehehasnoerrors；orhehastaughtsomeotherthing，andinthiscasehehasnodefenders。ThewholequestionturnsonascertainingwhetherJanseniushasactuallymaintainedsomethingdifferentfromefficaciousgrace；and，shoulditbefoundthathehas，youwillhavethehonourofhavingbetterunderstoodhim，buttheywillnothavethemisfortuneofhavingerredfromthefaith。ItismatterofthankfulnesstoGod，then，father，thatthereisinrealitynoheresyintheChurch。Thequestionrelatesentirelytoapointoffact，ofwhichnoheresycanbemade；fortheChurch，withdivineauthority，decidesthepointsoffaith，andcutsofffromherbodyallwhorefusetoreceivethem。Butshedoesnotactinthesamemannerinregardtomattersoffact。Andthereasonisthatoursalvationisattachedtothefaithwhichhasbeenrevealedtous，andwhichispreservedintheChurchbytradition，butthatithasnodependenceonfactswhichhavenotbeenrevealedbyGod。ThusweareboundtobelievethatthecommandmentsofGodarenotimpracticable；butweareundernoobligationtoknowwhatJanseniushassaiduponthatsubject。Inthedeterminationofpointsoffaith，GodguidestheChurchbytheaidofHisunerringSpirit；
whereasinmattersoffactHeleaveshertothedirectionofreasonandthesenses，whicharethenaturaljudgesofsuchmatters。NonebutGodwasabletoinstructtheChurchinthefaith；buttolearnwhetherthisorthatpropositioniscontainedinJansenius，allwerequiretodoistoreadhisbook。Andfromhenceitfollowsthat，whileitisheresytoresistthedecisionsofthefaith，becausethisamountstoanopposingofourownspirittotheSpiritofGod，itisnoheresy，thoughitmaybeanactofpresumption，todisbelievecertainparticularfacts，becausethisisnomorethanopposingreason—itmaybeenlightenedreason—toanauthoritywhichisgreatindeed，butinthismatternotinfailible。
WhatIhavenowadvancedisadmittedbyalltheologians，asappearsfromthefollowingaxiomofCardinalBellarmine，amemberofyourSociety：\"Generalandlawfulcouncilsareincapableoferrorindefiningthedogmasoffaith；
buttheymayerrinquestionsoffact。\"Inanotherplacehesays：\"Thepope，aspope，andevenastheheadofauniversalcouncil，mayerrinparticularcontroversiesoffact，whichdependprincipallyontheinformationandtestimonyofmen。\"CardinalBaroniusspeaksinthesamemanner：\"Implicitsubmissionisduetothedecisionsofcouncilsinpointsoffaith；but，insofaraspersonsandtheirwritingsareconcerned，thecensureswhichhavebeenpronouncedagainstthemhavenotbeensorigourouslyobserved，becausethereisnonewhomaynotchancetobedeceivedinsuchmatters。\"
Imayaddthat，toprovethispoint，theArchbishopofToulousehasdeducedthefollowingrulefromthelettersoftwogreatpopes—St。LeonandPelagiusII：\"Thattheproperobjectofcouncilsisthefaith；andwhatsoeverisdeterminedbythem，independentlyofthefaith，maybereviewedandexaminedanew：whereasnothingoughttobere—examinedthathasbeendecidedinamatteroffaith；because，asTertullianobserves，theruleoffaithaloneisimmovableandirrevocable。\"Henceithasbeenseenthat，whilegeneralandlawfulcouncilshavenevercontradictedoneanotherinpointsoffaith，because，asM。deToulousehassaid，\"itisnotallowabletoexaminedenovodecisionsinmattersoffaith\"；severalinstanceshaveoccurredinwhichthesesamecouncilshavedisagreedinpointsoffact，wherethediscussionturneduponthesenseofanauthor；because，asthesameprelateobserves，quotingthepopesashisauthorities，\"everythingdeterminedincouncils，notreferringtothefaith，maybereviewedandexamineddenovo。\"Anexampleofthiscontrarietywasfurnishedbythefourthandfifthcouncils，whichdifferedintheirinterpretationofthesameauthors。Thesamethinghappenedinthecaseoftwopopes，aboutapropositionmaintainedbycertainmonksofScythia。PopeHormisdas，understandingitinabadsense，hadcondemnedit；butPopeJohnII，hissuccessor，uponre—examiningthedoctrineunderstooditinagoodsense，approvedit，andpronouncedittobeorthodox。Wouldyousaythatforthisreasononeofthesepopeswasaheretic？Andmustyounotconsequentlyacknowledgethat，providedapersoncondemnthehereticalsensewhichapopemayhaveascribedtoabook，heisnohereticbecausehedeclinescondemningthatbook，whileheunderstandsitinasensewhichitiscertainthepopehasnotcondemned？Ifthiscannotbeadmitted，oneofthesepopesmusthavefallenintoerror。IhavebeenanxioustofamiliarizeyouwiththesediscrepanciesamongCatholicsregardingquestionsoffact，whichinvolvetheunderstandingofthesenseofawriter，showingyoufatheragainstfather，popeagainstpope，andcouncilagainstcouncil，toleadyoufromthesetootherexamplesofopposition，similarintheirnature，butsomewhatmoredisproportionedinrespectofthepartiesconcerned。