, was born at Paris in 1541. Though his parents were in narrow ci
, was born at Paris in 1541. Though
his parents were in narrow circumstances, yet discovering
their son’s capacity, they were particularly attentive to his
education. After making a considerable proficiency in
grammar-learning, he applied to logic, metaphysics, moral
and natural philosophy, and afterwards studied civil and
common law at the universities of Orleans and Bourges,
and commenced doctor in that faculty. Upon his return
to Paris, he was admitted an advocate in the court of parliament. He always declared the bar to be the best and
most improving school in the world; and accordingly attended at all the public hearings for five or six years: but
foreseeing that preferment in this way, if ever attained at
all, was like to come very slow, as he had neither private
interest, nor relations among the solicitors and proctors of
the court, he gave over that employment, and closely applied to the study of divinity. By his superior pulpit
eloquence, he soon came into high reputation with the
greatest and most learned men of his time, insomuch that
the bishops seemed to strive which of them should get him
into his diocese; making him an offer of being theological
canon or divinity lecturer in their churches, and of other
dignities and benefices, besides giving him noble presents.
He was successively theologal of Bazas, Aqcs, Lethoure,
Agen, Cahors, and Condom, canon and schoolmaster in
the church of Bourdeaux, and chanter in the church of
Condom. Queen Margaret, duchess of Bulois, entertained him for her preacher in ordinary; and the king,
though at that time a protestant, frequently did him the
honour to be one of his audience. He was also retained
by the cardinal d'Armagnac, the pope’s legate at Avignon,
who had a great value for him; yet amidst all these promotions, he never took any degree or title in divinity, but
satisfied himself with deserving and being capable of the
highest. After about eighteen years absence from Paris,
he resolved to end his days there; and being a lover of
retirement, vowed to become a Carthusian. On his arrival
at Paris, he communicated his intention to the prior of the
order, but was rejected, notwithstanding his most pressing
entreaties. They told him that he could not be received
on account of his age, then about forty-eight, and that the
order required all the vigour of youth to support its austerities. He next addressed himself to the Celestines at
Paris, but with the same success, and for the same reasons:
in this embarrassment, he was assured by three learned
casuists, that as he was no ways accessary to the non -performance of his vow, it was no longer binding; and that
he might, with a very safe conscience, continue in the
world as a secular. He preached, however, a course of
Lent sermons at Angers in 1589. Going afterwards to
Bourdeaux, he contracted a very intimate friendship with
Michael de Montagne, author of the well known Essays,
from whom he received all possible testimonies of regard;
for, among other things, Montagne ordered by his last
will, that in case he should leave no issue-male of his own,
M. Charron should, after his decease, be entitled to bear
the coat of arms plain, as they belonged to his noble
family, and Charron, in return, made Montagne’s brotherin-law his residuary legatee. He staid at Bourdeaux from
1589 to 1593; and in that interval composed his book,
entitled, “Les Trois Verge’s,
” which he published in
books of Wisdom.
” Whilst he was thus
employed, the bishop of Condom, to draw him into his
diocese, presented him with the chaptership in his church;
and the theologal chair falling vacant about the same time,
made him an offer of that too, which -Charron accepted,
and resolved to settle there. In 1601 he printed at Bourdeaux his books “of Wisdom,
” which gave him a great
reputation, and made his character generally known.
October 1603, he made a journey to Paris, to thank the
Bishop of Boulogne; who, in order to have him near himself, had oifered him the place of theologal canon. This
he was disposed to accept of; but the moisture and coldness of the air at Boulogne, and its nearness to the sea,
not only made it, he said to a friend, a melancholy and
unpleasant place, but very unwholesome too; adding, that
the sun was his visible god, as God was his invisible sun.
At Paris he began a new edition of his books “of Wisdom,
”
of which he lived to see but three or four sheets printed,
dying Nov. 16, 1603, of an apoplexy. The impression of
the new edition of his book “of Wisdom,
” with alterations
by the author, occasioned by the offence taken at some
passages in the former, was completed in 1604, by the
care of a friend; but as the Bourdeaux edition contained
some things that were either suppressed or softened in the
subsequent one, it was much sought after by the curious.
Hence the booksellers of several cities reprinted the book
after that edition; and this induced a Paris bookseller to
print an edition, to which he subjoined all the passages of
the first edition which had been struck out or corrected,
and all those which the president Jeannin, who was employed by the chancellor to examine the book, judged
necessary to be changed. This edition appeared in 1707.
There have been two translations of it into English, the
last by George Stanhope, D. D. printed in 1697. Dr.
Stanhope says, that M. Charron “was a person that feared
God, led a pious and good life, was charitably disposed,
a person of wisdom and conduct, serious and considerate;
a great philosopher, an eloquent orator, a famous and
powerful preacher, richly furnished and adorned with the
most excellent virtues and graces both moral and divine;
such as made him very remarkable and singular, and deservedly gave him the character of a good man and a good
Christian; such as preserve a great honour and esteem for
his memory among persons of worth and virtue, and will
continue to do so as long as the world shall last.
” From
this high praise considerable deductions may surely be
made. Charron’s fame has scarcely outlived his century;
his book on “Wisdom
” certainly abounds in ingenious
and original observations on moral topics, but gives a
gloomy picture of human nature and society. Neither is
it free from sentiments very hostile to revealed religion,
but so artfully disguised as to impose on so orthodox a divine as dean Stanhope.