Talk:Jansenism

Expansion
"An opponent of the Jesuits, Jansen proposed a return to the principles laid down in the work of St. Augustine of Hippo."

Would someone please expand this sentence to show exactly what in Augustine's ethos links his writings/thought/ethos to Jansenism - it doesn't necessarily follow and it would make the leap of thought clearer to others.

Thanks,

Iamlondon 14:56, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I added the briefest of theological rationales just now. The.helping.people.tick 15:32, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Is anyone who is able to read French willing to translate the article on the Convulsionaries located at http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convulsionnaires ? This was sort of a big deal back in the day, and the lack of even the briefest mention of the occurrence strikes me as an oversight. (Sorry, no username or knowledge of Wiki protocol here.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.45.162.2 (talk) 04:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I've been drafting a whole new article on convulsionaries over the last few days. It should be up over the next few hours. Jeremyf2010 (talk) 06:14, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm a bit uncomfortable with some of the simplistic claims in this article because they're very misleading: (1) the introduction makes Jansenism sound like a movement on par with Calvinism, but Jansenists themselves denied the existence of the heresy (Antoine Arnauld called it a "phantom" in one of his writings), so although Antoine Arnauld was the most prolific Jansenist theologian, saying he was the leader of the movement seems inaccurate (2) can we really say that the statements condemned in Cum occasione are "five cardinal doctrines of Jansenism" seeing as many of the Jansenists (following Arnauld) said that they did agree that those statements were heretical, they just disagreed that they were found in Jansen's Augustinus (3) you can't really say Saint-Cyran preached "Jansenism" before the publication of the Augustinus, especially since his theology was very much in line with the whole French School of Spirituality at the time

Dead link
I removed from the article. The top google results for frenchminds are all WP or mirrors, so this site has probably gone to the great server in the sky. Silverfish70 13:17, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Contrast to Calvinism
Unlike Calvinism, however, Jansenism lacked a doctrine of assurance, making salvation unknowable even to the "saved." I am under the impression that lack of assurance is a current criticism of Calvinism. In the eyes of Calvinism (says this criticism), people can have a religious experience and even call upon the name of Jesus for salvation, but if they end up apostate by the time of their death, they were never "really" saved, God never actually gave grace to them. In that context, the predestination of the saved and the predestination of the unsaved is unknown by the individual involved. Does anyone know more about this theological controversy? --BlueNight 06:47, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Jansenism believed in predestination, but in a more merciful fashion than Calvinism. To Jansenists, God had saved a few men out of His mercy, as all deserved to be damned from the moment of original sin. Calvinism, in contrast, believed in double predestination where God both damned and saved. I don't know for Calvinists, but for Jansenists God's grace (and hence, salvation) was visible through works. If a man was doing good things, he must have God's grace, for only evil acts were doable after the fall without God's assistance. eperry 4/29/07

"In Jansenist thought, human beings were born sinful, and without divine help a human being could never become good." How does this differ from mainstream Catholic belief? Xxanthippe 00:15, 21 September 2007 (UTC)


 * It does not. The main difference between Jansenism and main Catholic thought is its belief of predestination. Otherwise, the debate focused on "efficacious grace" vs "sufficient grace": in agreement with Augustinism, Jansenius insisted that God did not bestow to all men his grace, and that only an "efficacious grace" could save man. On the other hand, Jesuits, following Luis Molina and Molinism, claimed that a "sufficient grace" was bestowed to all men, and that, by itself, it could save man. The latter insists on human's free will while the former insists on the necessity of grace: the heresy, on one side or the other, would be to annihilate the opposing pole. This tension is already to be found in St. Augustine, who claimed that if an "efficacious grace" was necessary, it did not cancel man's free will. Note that particularly radical forms of Jesuitism were also considered heretical (equivalence between natural and Christian virtues or justification of lies by Thomas Sanchez under the pretext of "direction of intention", etc.) Spirals31 (talk) 17:37, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Heresy
This article does not appear to explain why this sect was condemned as a heresy - which aspects of its doctrine contradicted Catholic orthodoxy. Chubbles 01:07, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Ditto the above comment. The article could use a clear statement of what the Catholic propositions were which were denied by Jansenism and what the propositions of Jansenism were which were denied by the Catholic Church. patsw 23:28, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Added, per above. patsw 02:41, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

"In France, King Louis XIV, acting under the pressures of the Jesuits, sought the end of Jansenism." Is this plausible? I would not have thought that Louis XIV was a person to be easily influenced by anybody. There must have been a lot of internal French politics involved in the downfall of Jansenism. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:54, 21 November 2007 (UTC).


 * Definitely serious. Sun-King maybe, but human being still, and his personal penitentiary, François Annat, was a Jesuit. Of course, there were other reasons, not least the political importance of the Society of Jesus, in Rome, in Europe, and in the whole world. Spirals31 (talk) 17:07, 22 November 2007 (UTC)


 * OED defines "penitentiary" as "office in papal court deciding questions of penitence" Is this what is meant? Would "confessor" or "spiritual director" be more appropriate in the context? Xxanthippe (talk) 09:01, 28 November 2007 (UTC).
 * Spiritual director & confessor is what I had in mind. Spirals31 (talk) 12:30, 17 February 2008 (UTC). Thanks, article modified. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:13, 17 February 2008 (UTC).

Jansenism and sex
There is a colloquial use of the term Jansenism which designates clerics or laypeople that have a particularly rigorist understanding of Catholicism in terms of morality, and especially in terms of sexual morality. The original Jansenists were considered to be very puritanical, and so any subsequent theological movement that was suspected of puritanism inherited the derogatory nickname of Jansenism because of its perceived prudishness. ADM (talk) 06:47, 22 May 2009 (UTC) "Puritanical" as compared to the morals of the French court under Louis XIV.--07:24, 30 May 2018 (UTC)Friarjohn00 (talk)

In Ireland?
I've heard claims that the Catholic Church in Ireland was "soaked in Jansenism" until a few decades ago. Does this refer only to the meaning "prudish" given in the comment above, or was there any actual influence of Jansenism on Irish Catholicism? -- 77.7.145.220 (talk) 01:53, 27 April 2011 (UTC)


 * In a similar vein I've read that the Catholic church in the U.S. (which is supposedly dominated by the descendants of Irish immigrants) is also "Jansenist" and that in part that explains the stereotype (in America) of Catholics as (sexually) repressed and guilt-ridden. The explanation I recall is that clergy training for the Irish took place mainly in Holland and France (where Jansenism was widespread or at least a force), as the British suppressed Catholicism in Ireland itself and these two countries were the closest to Ireland by boat (and were politically anti-British so welcoming to people from Ireland). Having said that I remember reading a quote in one of the Hungarian-American historian John Lukas's books where he refers to this theory as "bunk" (or something similar). :-)

146.95.98.226 (talk) 23:05, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Cum occasione detials
The introductory paragraph reads:

"The papal bull Cum occasione, issued by Pope Innocent X in 1653, condemned five cardinal doctrines of Jansenism as heresy . . . " Emphasis mine.

However, under papal condemnation we read: "However, on August 1, 1641, the Holy Office issued a decree condemning Augustinus and forbidding its reading. In 1643, Pope Urban VIII followed up with a papal bull entitled Cum occasione, which condemned Augustinus on the grounds that . . . "

Is this an error? Are there really two documents entitled Cum occasione issued 10 years apart, condmening the same error?

All evidence that I have supports the Innocent X in 1653 document. This is the only citation of a document by Urban in 1643 by this title, that I have been able to find. But the fact that the article is so specific makes me wonder whether I've missed something. Wmdiem (talk) 21:33, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

After further poking about, I'm pretty sure the article is talking about In eminenti issued by Urban VIII in March 1642. I'm assuming the current text is a mistake, and changing it appropriately. Wmdiem (talk) 01:39, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Refus
The term jansenist only appears once in the text (this translation):"A small and humble people grown from a jansenist colony, isolated, defeated, we were powerless to defend ourselves against invasion by all the religious orders of France and Navarre, carrying with them the pomp and privilege of a Catholic Church badly mauled in Europe, rushing to establish themselves in this land blessed by fear-the-mother-of-wisdom."

That paragraph certainly does not mean:

My interpretation of the manifesto text is that —BoBoMisiu (talk) 21:57, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * a "jansenist colony" was not the result
 * Catholic Church in Quebec was not jansenist

I am from Canada and when I went to university there as well, and I was taught that Quebec had a Jansenist Catholic tradition — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.114.251.212 (talk) 04:44, 17 September 2016 (UTC)


 * By who? What course? What university? 76.65.220.79 (talk) 19:15, 27 March 2023 (UTC)