Ascent of Mt. Carmel - St. Patrick's Basilica

Fray Luis had written his immortal eulogy of St. Teresa 48 that Fray Basilio, on July 11,
1622, signed a most interesting 'Reply' to the objections which had been raised to the
Alcal‡ edition of St. John of the Cross. Although we propose, in our third volume, to
reproduce Fray Basilio's defence, it is necessary to our narrative to say something of it
here, for it is the most important of all extant documents which reveal the vicissitudes in
the history of the Saint's teaching.
Before entering upon an examination of the censured propositions, the learned
Augustinian makes some general observations, which must have carried great weight
as coming from so high a theological authority. He recalls the commendations of the
edition by the professors of the University of Alcal‡ 'where the faculty of theology is so
famous,' and by many others, including several ministers of the Holy Office and two
Dominicans who 'without dispute are among the most learned of their Order.' Secondly,
he refers to the eminently saintly character of the first friar of the Discalced Reform: 'it is
not to be presumed that God would set a man whose teaching is so evil . . . as is
alleged, to be the comer-stone of so great a building.' Thirdly, he notes how close a
follower was St. John of the Cross of St. Teresa, a person who was singularly free from
any taint of unorthodoxy. And finally he recalls a number of similar attacks on works of
this kind, notably that on Laredo's Ascent of Mount Sion, 49 which have proved to be
devoid of foundation, and points out that isolated 'propositions' need to be set in their
context before they can be fairly judged.
Fray Basilio next refutes the charges brought against the works of St. John of the
Cross, nearly all of which relate to his teaching on the passivity of the faculties in certain
degrees of contemplation. Each proposition he copies and afterwards defends, both by
argument and by quotations from the Fathers, from the medieval mystics and from his
own contemporaries. It is noteworthy that among these authorities he invariably
includes St. Teresa, who had been beatified in 1614, and enjoyed an undisputed
reputation. This inclusion, as well as being an enhancement of his defence, affords a
striking demonstration of the unity of thought existing between the two great Carmelites.
Having expounded the orthodox Catholic teaching in regard to these matters,
and shown that the teaching of St. John of the Cross is in agreement with it, Fray Basilio
goes on to make clear the true attitude of the Illuminists and thus to reinforce his
contentions by showing how far removed from this is the Saint's doctrine.
Fray Basilio's magnificent defence of St. John of the Cross appears to have had
the unusual effect of quashing the attack entirely: the excellence of his arguments,
backed by his great authority, was evidently unanswerable. So far as we know, the
Inquisition took no proceedings against the Alcal‡ edition whatsoever. Had this at any
time been prohibited, we may be sure that Llorente would have revealed the fact, and,
though he refers to the persecution of St. John of the Cross during his lifetime, 50 he is
quite silent about any posthumous condemnation of his writings.
The editio princeps was reprinted in 1619, with a different pagination and a few
corrections, in Barcelona. 51 Before these two editions were out of print, the General of
48 [Cf. S.S.M., I (1927), 295-6; (1951), 240.]
49 [Cf. S.S.M., II, 41-76.]
50Historia cr’tica de la Inquisici—n de Espa–a, Vol. V, Chap. xxx, and elsewhere. [The original of this
work is in French: Histoire critique de l'Incluisition d'Espag–e, 1817-18.]
51Here we have a curious parallelism with the works of St. Teresa, first published at Salamanca in 1588
40