George Whitefield professing the strict Calvinistic tenets.
Brant, fjistoria VUts Arminii (Amsterdam. 1724); revised and ealarijed by Mosheim (Brunswick. 1725); Nichols, Life of Arminiui (London. 1843); Arminii opera theologica (in- complete—Frankfort. 16.35). tr. Nichols (London. 1825-28, Buffalo. 1853); Blok. History of the People of the Netherlands; Cambridge Modern History, III. xix; lloGGE in Realencyclo- padie fUr protestantische Theologie und Kirche; Grube m Kir- chenlf.z.; Brandt. Historic rtform-ationis Belgica: (La Haye, 1726); Graf, Bcitrag zur Gesch. der Syn. von Dortrecht (Basle,
James F. Loughlin.
Anns, Ecclesiastical. See Heraldry, Eccle- siastical.
Army Chaplain. See Chaplain.
Arnauld, Akxaut, or Arnault, a celebrated family, the liistory of which is intimately connected witli that of Jansenism and of Port-Royal. Though originally of Auvergne, the family fixed its seat, about the middle of the sixteenth century, in Paris, where several members distinguished themselves at the Bar. Antoine Arnauld (1560-1619) was a famous lawj'er in the Assembly of Paris, and a Counsellor of State under Henry IV. His fame rested on a speech (1594) in favour of the University of Paris and against the Jesuits, and on several political pam- phlets. The best known of his writings is entitled ' ' Le franc et veritable discours du Roi sur le r^tablisse- ment qui lui est d^mand^ des Jfeuites" (1602). By his marriage with Catherine Marion he had twenty children, ten of whom survived him. Six of these were girls, all religious of Port-Royal, two of whom are especially famous, Ang^lique and Mere Agnes. Three of the four sons achieved eminence: Arnauld d'Andilly, Henri, and Antoine. Following the order of their fame, we shall speak successively of Antoine, Ang^lique, d'Andilly, and Henri.
I. Antoine Arnauld, surnamed the Great, b. in Paris, 1612; d. at BriLssels, 8 August, 1694, was the twentieth and last child of the Arnauld family. Bereaved of his father at the age of seven, his youth was spent entirely under the influence of his motlier and his sister Ang^lique, and through them of the Abb6 of Saint-Cyran. At their solicitation he gave up the study of law for which lie believed he had a decided vocation, and devoted himself to theology. He read many of the WTitings of St. Augustine, but it was through the eyes of Saint-Cyran. In 1635, six years before the publication of Jansen's book, the "Augustinus", he successfully maintained theses on grace, for the bachelor's degree. Even so early he made the distinction between the two states of inno- cence and corrupt nature; and also spoke of the efficacy of grace in itself. This was a sort of prelude to the book of the Bishop of Ypres. The yoimg bachelor then wished to enter the Sorbonne, but Ricli- elicu, who knew of his connection with Saint-Cyran, then a prisoner at Vincennes (1638), opposed liim, and he was obliged to wait until after the death of the cardinal in 1043. Meanwhile he had been or- dained priest (1641), at the age of twenty-nine, and the same year had sustained with brilliant success his theses for the doctorate, in which he showed the influence of Descartes and Saint-Cyran. Soon after- wards he assailetl the Jesuits, tlie' champions of or- tliodoxy. Father Sirmond was the first object of his attacks (1641), which later turned against the whole .Society in the tract "Tli(5ologie morale des Jdsuitcs", a precursor of the "I.ettrcs provincialcs" (1643). Shortly afterwards appeared the celebrated treatise "De la fr^quentc Communion". Arnauld's adversary was again a Jesuit, Fatlier de Sesmaisons, who had written a learned refutation of Saint-Cyran 's work opposing frequent Communion. Arnauld's book, written at llie suggestion of Saint-Cyran, who even reviewed tlic manuscript, stirred up a whirl- wind. Mi.sled by the ostentatious display of patristic learning, and the affected zeal of tlic autlior for
ancient discipline and the primitive purity of Chris- tianity, serious readers allowed themselves to be ensnared. The public, moreo^•er, was flattered by the semblance of being appealed to as a tribunal on the most controverted questions of theologj', all of which Arnauld had taken into consideration when he wrote the book in French. The treatise found warm partisans in all classes of society, even among the clergy themselves. But adversaries were also aroused. Arnauld was attacked, refuted, denounced to the Holy See. He escaped censure, but of the thirty-one propositions condemned in 1690 by Alex- ander VIII three were extracts taken almost word for word from Arnauld's book summarizing his doc- trine. The consequences of this work were most pernicious. According to the testimony of St. Vin- cent de Paul there was a noticeable decrease in the frequentation of the Sacraments. By exacting a too rigid preparation and a purity of conscience and perfection of life unattainable by many Christians. Arnauld set up a barrier to Holy Communion that kept many away. He forgot that the reception of the Eucharist is not the reward of virtues, but the remedy for infirmities, and under the pretext of holi- ness he prevented the faithful from approaching the source of all holiness. Meanwhile the "Augustinus", condemned by Urban VIII (1641), was a cause of controversy. Habert, a doctor of the faculty of Paris, denounced it from the pulpit of Notre-Dame, and was answered by Arnauld in two "Apologies de M. Jansenius", in which he sustained the doctrines of the Bishop of Ypres. A little later Doctor Cornet, by selecting from the " Augustinus " five propositions, which summarized its errors, and endeavouring to have them censured, aroused bitter discussion. Arnauld thereupon published his "Considerations sur I'entreprise", which made it appear that it was the doctrine of St. Augustine himself that was being condemned. This work was followed by another defence of Jansenist ideas: "Apologie pour Ics Saints Pi'-res de I'Eglise, d^fenseurs de la grace de J(?su.s- Christ centre les erreurs qui leur sont impos<^es ". In the meantime the champions of Catholic orthodoxy had prepared at Saint-Lazare, under the ej-es of St. Vincent de Paul, an address to Innocent X asking for the condemnation of the five propositions. In the Bull "Cum Occasione" the first four were con- demned as heretical, and the fifth as false and rash (1653). The Jansenists subscribed to the condemna- tion of these propositions, understood accoiding to Calvin's interpretation, but denied that this was the interpretation of the "Augustinus". According to them the Church, while infallible in passing judgment on a doctrine, ceased to be infallible when there was a question of attributing a doctrine to a given per- son or book. This was the famous distinction be- tween fact and law, later so dear to both parties. About this time Picot(5, a priest of Saint-Sulpico, required of a penitent, the Due de Liancourt, under penalty of refusing him absolution, that he submit to the Bvill of Innocent X and withdraw from all intimate connection with the Jansenists. Thereupon Arnauld, their leader, gave vent to his indignation in two "letters to a duke and peer" (Ui.W). He maintained that the Duke was obliged to condemn the five propositions, but that he could refuse to believe that they wore found in the "Augustinus". On the latter point, he said, there was no duty towards the pope save a respectful silence. These letters drew do«Ti upon his head the wrath of the Theologi- cal I'^aculty, which censured the two following propo- sitions taken from the letters: (1) That the five con- demned propositions are not in the Augustinus; (2) that grace has ever been lacking to a just man on any occasion when he committed sin. One hun- dred and thirty doctors signed this censure, and Arnauld was cxchidcd forcxcT from the I'aciilty