Book I. Dialogue XI: The Bishop of Meaux’s views on the prayer of the Venerable Mother de Chantal, approved by S. Francis de Sales
I
Q. What was the prayer of this Venerable Mother ?
A. It was a Prayer of general abandonment, and surrender of herself into the arms of divine Providence.1
Q. What did her soul do in this state ?
A. Her soul, thus surrendered, forgot self entirely, and rejected all kinds of discourses, reflections, operations, etc., in order to remain in this simple, actual, disposition of abandonment, given up entirely to the divine attractions.
Q. Were these attractions always sensible and perceived ?
A. No, for often she fell into darkness, confusion, impotence of spirit, for which the only remedy was to put herself once more into the arms of God, c without acts' she said, c for I can do none'
Q. Did not the Bishop of Meaux conjecture that the people of the world might be shocked at these passive states which were no longer mere speculation but reduced to practice ?
A. It was because he felt this, that not content with the counsels given in his Preface, he gave yet another instruction here. 2
Q. In what terms did he put this warning ?
A. ‘I pause here for a moment to conjure the people of the world not to treat these states as visions and dreams. Do they doubt that God, who is wonderful in all his works and singularly wonderful in the saints, has special ways unknown to the world of communicating himself to his friends, of holding them in his hand and letting them feel his sweet sovereignty ? Let them fear then in making precipitate judgement lest they run the risk of incurring the just reproach of the apostle S. Jude against those who blaspheme what they know not. 5 d. But why set out once more to deal with passive prayer ? Has it not been spoken of enough ?
A. Bossuet himself gives us two good reasons the first, because although the authority of this Venerable Mother is of great weight, the new mystics abused it grossly; the second, because her conduct, as also that of her holy Director, may serve as a model for all souls who find themselves in this state of prayer.
d- What abuse then did the new mystics commit ?
A. They took this example to support their imaginary states in which souls are always in every respect divinely moved and consequently always passive; but their perpetual passivity is merely an idea in which neither S. Francis de Sales, nor his humble daughter whom they call to their aid, have any part. 2
Q. But why does Bossuet always return to the condemnation of this perpetual passivity ?
A. Not only because in that, as we have seen, lies the fundamental error of Quietism, but also to make it clearer that he does not condemn passivity in prayer, nor even extraordinary passivity in certain souls; the repetitions on this point are so necessary that although they are even more frequent in his book, there are many people who have read it and who yet confuse these three kinds of passivity, condemning them equally, whereas only the perpetual passivity has been condemned, and that with several restrictions, as is to be seen in Article XXIX of the Issy Conference, inserted in all the ordinances of the Bishops. 3
1 Book VIII, § 26. 1 Ibid., § 40.
8 Book X, § 15.
Q. But is there not some reason for quoting this Mother as an example of perpetual passivity ? For I have read in her Life that her inclination to simplicity, to abandonment, became so absorbing, so continuous, and extended so far, that her habit of prayer was continual.
A. Yes, continual through the ever vivid disposition of a simple gaze at God in all things, but not continual, either as formed by one single act, or even by several successive acts without interruption. 1
Q. How and in what things can her conduct and that of her holy director serve as a model for souls which are in this state of prayer, though in a greatly inferior degree ?
A. In many things and in many ways: firstly for purposes of consultation, according to the practice of the Mother and her director, for though S. Francis de Sales was undoubtedly the chief authority of his time on this matter, he none the less consulted enlightened people. It is true that to-day we have not the same need, for matters have been so well discussed and examined to the bottom, which is one of the great advantages that Providence is accustomed to draw from the errors it permits from time to time in the Church; nevertheless, there may be cases of so special a nature that consultations are still necessary.
II
(2,. In such a case to whom should one address oneself?
A. Bossuet tells us in his Preface, 2 quoting S. Teresa, who wished to find in the directors she consulted, both knowledge and experience together.
Q. But in default of one or the other, which is to be preferred ?
A. The true scholar is to be preferred to him who is only spiritual, replies the Bishop of Meaux, according > Book VIII, § 35. 8 Preface, § 6.
to S. Teresa’s opinion, for reasons, he adds, on which perhaps we have not sufficiently reflected.
Q. What are these reasons ?
A. One is that the man of prayer, but without science, is confined to his own single experience, and if he does not travel by your road he will be astonished at it and will be sure to condemn it; learned men well grounded in the laws of prayer will not do that. The other reason is that the knowledge their science gives them of other things no less admirable and received in the Church will make them put faith in what you tell them of your interior, although it be new to them. In which matter we should note what S. Teresa says she has experienced only too often: how dangerous is zeal without knowledge, especially when on the one hand acknowledged piety seems to authorize the most imprudent decisions, and when on the other for lack of a certain humility the strength to recognize mistakes is lacking.
Q. As there are everywhere people of this kind, it would not be a useless digression to quote some good example in order to encourage those who have never known the value of a glorious admission and retractation of error when they have been deceived.
A. I see under my very eyes an excellent example; it is that of a true scholar, for it is that of Bossuet. Here is that humble and courageous disposition of soul as he relates it himself i2 ‘ There was brought as an objection a book by Fr. Surin, “ The Foundations of the Spiritual Life,” which I approved many years ago, and in which it was declared were unmistakably taught the maxims that I condemn to-day... before re-reading this book it seems to me that I decided, under the eye of God, if I had fallen into some error on a matter which I had not thoroughly examined, to confess freely my mistake or my ignorance; and if there was anything to fear in this resolution, it was perhaps that I had carried it out too com- placently. Such are the sentiments of the truly learned, who, so far from presuming either that they know or ought to know everything or that it is shameful not to know something or not to be infallible, think on the contrary that there is nothing more beautiful than to be able to say nobly: ‘I was mistaken, I was not sufficiently well informed. 53
Ill
Q. To return to the prayer of which we were talking. When one is sufficiently assured of its presence in a particular case, what instruction could one give to interested persons, in accordance with the two models that the Bishop of Meaux sets before us here ?
A. The first concerns the time of these inabilities to act spontaneously, and according to the example of S. Francis de Sales one should confine these to the time of prayer alone, when God is wont to suspend or bind as much as he chooses, the intellectual powers, and even the will, which is the freest of all. Note that it is for this time alone, again, that S. Francis de Sales said to the Venerable Mother i 1 4 1 command you to rest and dwell simply in God, without trying to do anything except as he urges you. 5
Q. But if this manner of prayer became practically perpetual, what should be done then ?
A. What the saint did, that is to act of oneself when possible, which possibility presents itself in two ways: when God withdraws his operation at intervals to set the soul free; and when God himself excites it to act by gentle invitations, facilities and inclinations which he causes to grow in hearts when it pleases him: It is for this two-fold reason that the Mother replied to a Superior who asked her if she performed acts of prayer:
never any need to perform a single act, for I believe that those who say they never perform acts do not understand him. 5 See, says Bossuet, how she treats those who wish to be always passive. 14
Q. During this prayer would it not sometimes be better to force oneself to act of oneself and according to one’s previous custom ?
A. 6 Never diverge from your own way, do not leave your place, 5 said the saint to the Mother, ‘ that is, do not change the nature of your prayer; do not force yourself to make definite acts, for the power to make them will not be granted you; follow the lead of the divine movements; be active, passive or patient, as God wills or leads you. 55 2
Q. But to what did this alternation of passivity and action, of simple submission in darkness and torturing impotence, or of simple adherence to the movements of special grace, or of personal action with ordinary grace, lead the Venerable Mother?
A. All these vicissitudes, says Bossuet, merely tended to make her supple in the hands of God: and to ensure that she never ceased to adapt hersef to the divine states through which God made her pass; whence the virtues, the submission and the admirable resignation which appeared throughout her life. This is the result in souls of this prayer of simple submission and general abandonment, according to the degree in which God gives it and the faithfulness with which individuals follow it.
IV
< Q- In the second place, what are the instructions given us regarding acts in this Prayer ?
A. Some concern suppressed acts and others those which always remain.
Q. What acts are suppressed, according to Bossuet ?
A. In the first place discursive acts, that is, acts of reasoning,
- Book VIII, § 30.
for when God wishes to lead a soul in the pure way of faith, which is not discursive, he takes from it the power of discourse, reasoning and specific reflections, and acts of understanding do not usually appear. In the second place, distinct and perceptible acts are suppressed. 1 Regarding which the Mother tells us that she stayed in the state of simply gazing at God and at her own nothingness, wholly abandoned, content and tranquil, without moving herself to perform acts of the understanding and the will perceptible to the senses, not even to practise virtues or to detest faults.
Q. What acts remained to her?
A. In the first place, simple and direct movements of the heart, by which she reposed in God, abandoning herself to him without reserve and leaving to him all her interests. In the second place, the foundation of her sensibly perceptible acts remained to her, though without feeling, as, according to Bossuet, she explains clearly by these words:
‘ I speak and write of God as if I had many feelings about him, because I wish for and believe that good to be greater than my afflictions, and want nothing else but this treasure of faith, hope and charity, and wish to do all that I can know God wants of me. 5 This, points out Bossuet, is an active disposition and very different from the pure and perpetual passivity of the new mystics. From which he concludes that souls bereft of sensible acts and of the consolations to be gained from them, do not cease, despite their afflictions, both to speak and act according to what is in the depth of their soul, though ordinarily without zest or feeling.
Q. Does God leave these afflicted souls entirely stripped of feeling?
A. No, replies the Bishop, 2 and quotes the words of the same Mother, addressed to her holy Director: ‘ I feel no longer that abandonment and sweet confidence in God, nor can I make any act of it; it seems to me, however, that these dispositions are more solid and firm i Book VIII, §§ 31, 32.
8 Ibid., § 32.
H 3 A V 'H d NO
Zll
Footnotes
Chapter 15 of 31