txbvavy of €he Cheotygi'cal Seminary 
 
 PRINCETON • NEW JERSEY 
 
 PRESENTED BY 
 
 nr^^^t&te of the 
 p ^ssens e, Edmond de, 1824 
 
 Religion and the reign of 
 terror, or, The church 
 
Digitized by 
 
 the Internet Archive 
 
 
 
 in 2014 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
 https://archive.org/details/religionreignoftOOpres_0 
 
RELIGION" 
 
 AND THE 
 
 REIGN OF TERROR; 
 
 OR, 
 
 THE CHURCH DURING THE FRENCH REVOLUTION. 
 
 PREPARED FROM THE FRENCH OF 
 
 M. EDMOND DE TRESSENS^i, 
 
 Author of " Histoire des trois premiers siecles de l'Kslise Chretienne," "Je'sus-Christ, 
 son temps, sa vie, son oeuvre ; " " Le Pays de l'Evangile," and Editor 
 of "La Revue Chretienne. 1 ' 
 
 By Rev. JOHN P. LACROIX, A.M. 
 
 God is as necessary as liberty to the French people.— Mirabeau. 
 Free Church— free State.— Cavocr. 
 
 NEW YORK : 
 
 CARLTON & LA N A HAN. 
 
 CINCINNATI : 
 HITCHCOCK ft WALDEN. 
 
Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1868, by 
 CARLTON & LAN A H AN, 
 
 in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the 
 Southern District of New York. 
 
LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION. 
 
 [TRANSLATION.] 
 
 > 4>» < 
 
 Paris, November 30, 1866. 
 
 Professor John P. Lacroix : 
 
 My dear Sir, — I give you with true pleasure the authoriza* 
 tion which you ask of me for translating my book entitled 
 " The Church and the Revolution." * 
 
 Sincerely yours in Christ, 
 
 E. de Pressense. 
 
 * The full title of the work is, L'Eglise et La Revolution fran^aise; 
 Histoire des Relations de l'Eglise et de l'^tat de 1789 a 1802. 
 
PREFACE TO THE ABRIDGMENT. 
 
 The book here presented to the American reader is 
 an abridged translation of a work, recently published 
 in Paris, by the distinguished Protestant divine M. Ed- 
 mond de Pressense, the object of which is to describe, 
 from an enlightened Christian stand-point, the vicissitudes 
 of religion and its relations to the civil power in France, 
 during the eventful years from 1789 to 1802. Some of the 
 motives which have influenced me in its preparation in 
 English are the following : The intrinsic general interest 
 of the subject ; its special interest for Americans ; the 
 peculiar stand-point and personal qualifications of the 
 author ; and, finally, the careful criticisms of the reli- 
 gious character of certain world-historical personages, to 
 which the nature of the work naturally leads. 
 
 Of the general interest of whatever throws light on 
 this great revolutionary crisis of humanity, I need 
 scarcely speak. Of the crisis itself Mr. Alison uses these 
 words : " There are few periods in the history of the 
 world which can be compared, in point of interest and 
 importance, to that which embraces the progress and 
 
6 
 
 PREFACE TO THE ABRIDGMENT. 
 
 termination of the French Revolution. In no former age 
 were events of such magnitude crowded together, or in- 
 terests so momentous at issue between contending nations. 
 From the flame which was kindled in Europe, the whole 
 world has been involved in conflagration, and a new era 
 dawned upon both hemispheres from the effects of its ex- 
 pansion. With the first rise of a free spirit in France, 
 the liberty of North America was established." Mr. 
 Jones, the continuator of Russell's history, speaks in 
 similar terms. "We are now brought," says he, "to 
 enter upon a subject of such fearful magnitude, so por- 
 tentous in its origin, and terrific in its consequences, 
 that the annals of the human race scarcely present us 
 with its parallel. The French Revolution introduced a 
 new state of society in Europe." A standard German 
 encyclopedia speaks as follows : " The French Revolution 
 constitutes one of the grandest epochs in the history of 
 human society. He who regards it as a mere incidental 
 event has not examined the past, and is unable to look 
 into the future. It is an event which came forth out of 
 the womb of the centuries. So judges Madame de 
 Stael ; and she is right." M. Michelet says : " I define 
 the Revolution as the advent of Law, the resurrection of 
 Right, and the reaction of Justice. I see upon the 
 stage but two grand facts, two principles, two actors, 
 and two characters — Christianity and the Revolution. 
 The Convocation of the States-General, in 1789, is the 
 
PREFACE TO THE ABRIDGMENT. 
 
 7 
 
 true era of the birth of the people. On the eve of the 
 opening of the States-General the mass of the Holy 
 Ghost was solemnly said at Versailles. It was certainly 
 that day, or never, that the people might sing the pro- 
 phetic hymn: Thou wilt create peoples, and the face of 
 the earth shall be renewed" Such is the general manner 
 in which this event is spoken of both by the friends and 
 the enemies of France. The merit of M. de Pressense's 
 book is, that it presents an exhaustive view of one of 
 the special phases of this Revolution, namely, the relig- 
 ious — a phase which, though among the most important, 
 has yet had the misfortune either of being treated with 
 neglect, or of being perverted and distorted by skeptics, 
 to the prejudice of Christianity. 
 
 The special interest of the French Revolution for re- 
 publicans lies in the nature of the interests that were at 
 stake. It was, on the one hand, a struggle of liberty 
 against absolutism, free thought against spiritual despo- 
 tism ; and, on the other, of Christianity against a godless 
 philosophy ; it was, therefore, a struggle in the interest 
 of the very principles which lie at the basis of American 
 greatness. But the great Revolution made shipwreck : 
 the name of liberty Was tarnished by the most atrocious 
 crimes ; Christianity seemed for a moment to have gone 
 down in a night of blood and delirium, amid the tri- 
 umphant orgies of a foul-mouthed Atheism ; and, finally, 
 political liberty was trampled in the dust, and forced to 
 
s 
 
 PEEFACE TO THE ABRIDGMENT. 
 
 give place to the most absolute of despotisms. How 
 came this to be the result? Why did the principles 
 which have succeeded so well in America meet only with 
 disaster and failure in France? The question is inter- 
 esting. For more than half a century the political and 
 spiritual despots of Europe have been using the excesses 
 of the French Revolution as a bugbear to frighten their 
 ministers and subjects from every effort in favor of 
 liberty and Church reform. " Unless you desire to 
 renew the horrors of the reign of terror, and to be 
 subject to the disgusting domination of an unwashed 
 mob, do not limit the authority of your legitimate rulers ; 
 unless you wish the extinction of religion, and the tri- 
 umph of vice and Atheism, do not question the preten- 
 sions of your priests, or presume to suppose that the 
 Church can exist without being salaried and governed 
 by the State." And, unfortunately, this argument has 
 too often succeeded, to the detriment of enlightened lib- 
 eralism. To the too common excessive censure of the 
 French Revolution, and especially to the prejudices 
 thereby created against the causes of liberty and free- 
 churchism, the book of M. de Pressense is a sufficient 
 and convincing reply. These holy causes of liberty and 
 free-churchism are triumphantly vindicated, and the true 
 cause of the miscarriage of the Revolution assigned, 
 namely, a radical misconception as to the extent to 
 which a government may legitimately interfere with per- 
 
PEE FACE TO THE ABRIDGMENT. 
 
 9 
 
 sonal liberty, and as to the proper relations of the civil 
 power of the Church. 
 
 As to the exact stand-point of the author, he has 
 clearly enough expressed himself in his preface. " M} 
 book," says he, " is animated with a profound love of 
 general liberty, but, above all, of the liberty of the soul 
 and the conscience. I am thoroughly convinced that re- 
 ligion and liberalism are the natural allies of each other. 
 I hope I have written in that impartial spirit which guar- 
 antees against passion and injustice. I am with the 
 Revolution whenever it serves the cause of liberty, and 
 against it whenever it violates it by so-called measures 
 of public safety. I confess, in fine, that I cannot see 
 the de?wuement of .this grand struggle, in the foundation 
 of a despotism without caste, at the beginning of this 
 century. 
 
 "The question of the relation of the spiritual to the 
 temporal, so passionately debated by our fathers, is yet 
 far from being settled. It is of the highest moment to 
 the cause of the nation and of modern civilization. On 
 its proper decision depends the triumph of a true over a 
 false liberalism. Full liberty of worship guarantees the 
 absolute independence of the conscience, and thus erects 
 the surest barrier to the encroachments of the State on 
 the rights of the individual. It therefore gives a mortal 
 blow to that oppressive centralizing system of politics 
 
 which sacrifices the citizen to the State, and the indi- 
 
 2 
 
10 PREFACE TO THE ABRIDGMENT. 
 
 vidual to the collective sovereignty. The question is of 
 wide scope. The solution which imposes itself on my 
 mind is that which Mirabeau foresaw, which Lafayette 
 and Madame de Stael openly adopted, and presented in 
 vain to their contemporaries ; and- which, therefore, pre- 
 sumptively breathes of the true spirit of 1789. May the 
 bitter experience of those who had the honor of pro- 
 claiming it, and the misfortune of so often violating it, 
 enlighten our path ! I trust I have succeeded in pre- 
 senting the salutary lesson which is taught by our 
 great Revolution, thus contributing my feeble part to the 
 revival of a true public spirit in France, a cause in 
 which no one takes more interest than myself." Such is 
 the modest and yet high ambition of the author. His 
 stand-point is essentially liberal — republican. 
 
 As to his qualifications for the task little need be said. 
 Those who are conversant with the highest critical 
 journals of the day know how eminent is his rank for 
 learning and piety, not only in France, but throughout 
 Europe. He stands at the head of the evangelical French 
 clergy, and shares his energies between the functions of 
 the pastorate and those of the critic and writer. He is 
 the author of the best Church History in the French 
 language, and has the honor of being the most successful 
 antagonist of Renan. His Life of Jesus places him in the 
 front rank among the recent champions of Christianity. 
 
 Last, though not least important, might be mentioned 
 
PREFACE TO THE ABRIDGMENT. 
 
 11 
 
 as lending interest to the present work, the bold and 
 candid criticisms of character which it contains. The 
 brief fourteen years of the French Revolution witnessed 
 the rise and fall of a succession of the strangest charac- 
 ters which appear on- the pages of universal history. 
 How grand, how weird, how ghostly are, in turn, the 
 reminiscences which hover around the names of Mira- 
 beau, Desmoulins, Danton, Hebert, Chaumette, Ana- 
 charsis Clootz, Marat, Charlotte Corday, Robespierre, 
 Talleyrand, Bonaparte, and many others ! Nor are cer- 
 tain associations of this epoch destitute of peculiar in- 
 terest : such are the Girondists, the Jacobins, the Athe- 
 ists, the Deists, and the Theophilanthropists. All of 
 these characters and associations are taken up, discussed, 
 dissected, and, finally, weighed in the balance of a philo- 
 sophic Christian judgment. I will mention as of special 
 importance, the chapters which treat of the civil and re- 
 ligious policy of Napoleon. If any one thing more than 
 another could shake one's confidence in the justness of 
 the severe verdict of the author as to the baneful, the 
 anti-liberal tendency of the Napoleonic system, it would 
 be that so bold, so free-spoken a book has been permitted 
 to be published under the present regime. 
 
 As a whole, and apart from the intrinsic worth of its 
 subject-matter, the work leaves on the mind the most 
 salutary impression. It breathes of a generous cosmo- 
 politan spirit, and brings the reader into closer sym- 
 
12 
 
 PREFACE TO THE ABRIDGMENT. 
 
 pathy with the great suffering heart of humanity. It 
 discloses the frightful depths of degradation to which 
 society inevitably sinks when it breaks loose from 
 the authority of God. It reveals in the bosom of a 
 Church which seemed to be dead in ritualism and sin, 
 as soon as the hour of trial came, examples of Christian 
 heroism and devotion which have not been surpassed 
 since the days of the apostles. 
 
 A word as to the manner in which the work has been 
 prepared in English. The original is an octavo volume 
 of four hundred and seventy-five pages. The present 
 is not a sentence-by- sentence translation. Some por- 
 tions, not so interesting to the non-French reader, 
 have been closely condensed, while others have been 
 slightly enlarged by additions of historical or elucidating 
 details. As to the essence of the book, however, its 
 spirit, its doctrines, its judgments, I have endeavored to 
 be faithful to the author. 
 
 The biographical notes which I have subjoined to the 
 volume will not, I trust, be devoid of value. 
 
 J. P. Lacroix. 
 
 Ohio Wesleyan University. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Preface Page 5 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 SITUATION OP THE CHURCH OF FRANCE AT THE EVE OF THE REVO- 
 LUTION — STATE OF OPINION AS TO LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE AND 
 THE ORGANIZATION OF WORSHIP. 
 
 The Religious Question and the Revolution — Condition of the An- 
 cient Church of France— Close Alliance with the Ancient Regime — 
 Catholicism alone recognized— Riches and Privileges of the Church- 
 Subordination to the Civil Power— Concordat of Francis L and the so- 
 called Gallican Liberties— Increasing Dependence on the King— De- 
 cline of Faith— Maxims of Intolerance— Public Opinion against the 
 Church — Toleration universally demanded — Religious Liberty poorly 
 understood— Fatal Influence of Rousseau— Illiberal Opinions of the 
 Clergy— Difference between the High and the Inferior Clergy 19 
 
 BOOK L 
 
 THE CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY. 
 CHAPTER L 
 
 LEGISLATIVE PRELIMINARIES — THE FIRST DEBATE ON LIBERTY OF 
 WORSHIP. 
 
 Opening of the States-General— Union of the three Orders— Role of 
 the Mob in the Revolution— The Common People favorable to Relig- 
 ion—Memorable Night of the Fourth of August— Instances of Clerical 
 Self-denial — Abolition of Tithes — Declaration of Human Rights — First 
 Debate on Liberty of Worship— Discourse of Mirabeau— Spirit of the 
 Majority of the Assembly 49 
 
14 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 DISCUSSION ON THE PROPERTY OF THE CLERGY — ATTITUDE OF THE 
 DIFFERENT PARTIES— SUPPRESSION OF THE RELIGIOUS ORDERS. 
 
 Church Property before the Revolution — The Question comes up in 
 the Assembly — Propositions of Talleyrand and Mirabeau — Three 
 Groups of Opinion — Opinion of the Right — Opinion of the Left — Ma- 
 louet — Mirabeau — Resolution of the Assembly — The Revolution not 
 Radical enough— Powers of the State over the Ancient Corporate So- 
 cieties — The True Solution — The Ecclesiastical Committee — New 
 Propositions— Alienation of the Property of the Clergy— The Monastic 
 Orders — Proposal to Salary the Clergy — The Debate — Wrath of the 
 Right— Motion of Dom Gerle— Excitement in Paris— Failure of the 
 Motion — Inconsistency of both Parties — Reparation made to the Prot- 
 estants — Civil Rights granted to Jews and Comedians Page 66 
 
 CHAPTER HI. 
 
 THE CIVIL CONSTITUTION OF THE CLERGY— THE ASSEMBLY TRANS- 
 FORMED INTO A COUNCIL. 
 
 Plan of the Civil Constitution of the Clergy — Discussion— Retroac- 
 tivity admitted— This Constitution faithful to the Ancient Regime 91 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 FIRST RESISTANCE OF THE CLERGY— TROUBLE AT NIMES AND MONT- 
 AUBAN — POLITICAL OATH IMPOSED ON THE CLERGY — PATHETIC 
 SCENE IN THE ASSEMBLY — ADDRESS OF MIRABEAU TO THE NATION 
 —PAMPHLET OF CAMILLE DESMOULINS. 
 
 War breaks out between the Revolution and Religion — Effect of 
 the Measures of the Assembly on the Country — Trouble in the South 
 and in Alsace — Massacres at Nimes— Beginning of Resistance at Rome 
 — Proposition to impose on Ecclesiastics an Oath of Fidelity to the 
 Civil Constitution of the Clergy — Discourse of Mirabeau — First Effects 
 of the Decree — Perplexity of the King — He Sanctions the Decree — 
 Pathetic Scene in the Assembly — Violence of the Radicals — Decree 
 against those who Refuse the Oath — Apologetic Address — Eloquent 
 but Inconsequent Address of Mirabeau— Pamphlet of Camille Des- 
 moulins 99 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 SCHISM IN THE CHURCH— CORRESPONDENCE WITH ROME— DEBATE ON 
 THE LIBERTY OF WORSHIP — DISCOURSES OF SIEYES AND TALLEY- 
 RAND — DISSOLUTION OF THE CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY. 
 
 Annexation of Avignon to France— Letter of the Pope to the Bish- 
 ops—Reply of the Bishops— Brief of the Pope — The Leading Bishops 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 15 
 
 of the new State Clergy— Their first Movements— Ridiculous Charge 
 of Bishop Gobel — Irritation of the Paris Populace against the Non- 
 juring Clergy— Resolution of the Municipality against Non-conforming 
 Temples — The King Hindered from going to Church at St. Cloud — 
 Riot against Religious Liberty— Noble Attitude of Lafayette— Dis- 
 course of Talleyrand — Sieyes defends the same Cause — Increase of 
 Religious Strife— Translation of the Ashes of Voltaire to the Pantheon 
 —Close of the Assembly— The Attempted Flight of the King hastens 
 the Crisis— Criticism on the Constituent Assembly Page 119 
 
 BOOK II. 
 
 THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY AND THE NATIONAL 
 CONVENTION UNTIL THE PROCLAMATION OF THE 
 SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE RELIGIOUS STRUGGLE IN THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY. 
 
 Composition of the New Assembly— Extravagance of the Girondists 
 — Situation of the Country — Popular Violence against the Non-jurors 
 — Condition of La Vendee — Important Report — La Vendee desires 
 simply Liberty of Worship— Rising in the South— Blindness of the 
 Papal Court— Massacre at Avignon— Amnesty procured for the Guilty 
 by Vergniaud— Letter of Chenier in favor of a Separation of Church 
 and State — Measures against the Emigrated — Fauchet demands the 
 Persecution of the Non-jurors — Wise Discourses of Torne, Ducos, and 
 Gensoune'— Violence of Isnard— Iniquitous Decree of the 29th of No- 
 vember, 1791 — The King Vetoes it— Noble Petition of the Municipality 
 of Paris— Contrary Petition of the Demagogues— Petition of Camille 
 Dcsmoulins— Effects of the Veto in the Provinces— Shameful Persecu- 
 tion of Non-jurors and Nuns — Protest of the Refractory Clergy — New 
 Brief of the Pope — Disorders in the State Clergy — Further Persecution 
 — Abolition of the Clerical Costume — Roland Countenances Illegal 
 Persecutions— Feebleness of the Moderates— Persecuting Decree of 
 May 25, 1792— The Violation of the Palace on the 20th of June— Ter- 
 rible Discourse of Vergniaud against the King— Persecution Redoub- 
 led—The Massacre on the 10th of August— The Massacres of Septem- 
 ber 141 
 
16 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 THE CHUKCH DURING THE NATIONAL CONVENTION UNTIL THE ABOLI- 
 TION OF THE SALARIES OF THE CLEBGT. 
 
 Character of the Convention— Formation of the Revolutionary Tri- 
 bunal — The Majority hostile to Religion — First manifestation thereof 
 — The Masses of Paris ,as yet Religiously Inclined — New Form of 
 the Oath — Transportation — Numerous Non-jurors Condemned to 
 Death — The Constitution — Plans of Condorcet and Robespierre — Con- 
 stitution of 1793 — Debate on the Liberty of Worship — Robespierre 
 Defends the Salarying of the Church by the State— Attacks on the 
 new State Church— Gigantic Efforts of the Revolution — The Reign of 
 Terror— The Municipality of Paris at the Head of the Movement— The 
 Atheistic Calendar — First Public Outbreak of Atheism — Inauguration 
 of the Worship of Reason in the Convention— Shameful public Apos- 
 tasies—Noble Christian bearing of Deputy Gregory — Spoils of the 
 Churches brought to the Municipal Authorities — Organization of the 
 Worship of Reason — Impious Orgies — Measures of Persecution — En- 
 tire Proscription of Religion— Robespierre Attacks the Atheists— His 
 Discourse at the Jacobin Club — Ignoble Recantation of Hebert and 
 Chaumette— Change of Tone of the Convention— Robespierre has the 
 Liberty of Worship Proclaimed — Hypocritical Decree on the Liberty 
 of Worship— Condemnation of the Dantonists — Discourse of Robes- 
 pierre on the Supreme Being — Festival of the Supreme Being Voted 
 —Celebration of the Festival— The 9th of Thermidor Page 187 
 
 BOOK III. 
 
 THE PERIOD OF THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND 
 STATE. 
 
 CHAPTER L 
 
 MEASURES OF THE CONVENTION IN REGARD TO RELIGION FROM THE 
 FALL OF ROBESPIERRE TO THE EXPIRATION OF ITS POWERS. 
 
 Immorality of those who overthrew Robespierre — Their impious- 
 ness— Continuation of the Oppression of the Priests— Sufferings of 
 "the Priests on the Pontoons— Gregory Pleads their Cause— Fine Dis- 
 course of Gregory— Cambon Proposes to Abolish the Salaries of the 
 Clergy— His Proposition Adopted— Motion of Boissy d'Anglas— Law 
 on the Liberty of Worship — Rigorous Measures against the Dissent- 
 ing Clergy— Good Effects of Toleration in La Vende'e— Church Edi- 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 17 
 
 flees Restored to the Parishes— Worship under Strict Police— Propo- 
 sition to Replace Christian Worship by the Deistical Civic Festivals- 
 Constitution of Year III — Final Measure of the Convention against 
 the Priests — Close of the Convention Page 2-19 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 RELATIONS OF CHURCH AND STATE UNDER THE DIRECTORY. 
 
 Shameful Rule of the Directory— The Directory the Sworn Enemy 
 of the Liberty of Worship — Violence of the Director)' against the 
 Papacy — Treaty of Tolentino — Camille Jordan on the Liberty of Wor- 
 ship— Fine Discourse of Royer— Collard — Coup <P£tat of the 18th of 
 Fructidor — Renewal of Persecution against the Church— Compulsory 
 Observance of the Deistical Festivals — Imprisonment of Pope Pius 
 YX and his Death at Valence— End of the Directory 272 
 
 CHAPTER IH. 
 
 THE ALTARS RESTORED BY LIBERTY. 
 
 Moral Condition of the Nation under the Directory— Hostility of the 
 Oflicial and Dissident Catholic Clergy — Establishment of the Theo- 
 philanthropist Worship— Its Character— Progress of the Dissident 
 Worship — It Prospered without Help from the State — Resuscitation of 
 the Constitutional Church — Role of Gregory in this Work — Large 
 Congng*ftiOB9 in the Churches — Severe Morality of the Constitutional 
 Church — Worship Re-established in Forty Thousand Parishes — Coun- 
 cil of the Gallican Clergy in 1797 — Its Acts — Second Council Dissolved 
 by Bonaparte — Situation of Protestantism at this Epoch — The Altars 
 Restored before the Concordat .. 292 
 
 BOOK IV. 
 
 THE CONCORDAT. 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 PREPARATION FOR THE CONCORDAT. 
 
 Political Circumstances which led to the Concordat— The real Ob- 
 iect of the Concordat — Opinions of Napoleon on Religion — He regards 
 it merely as an Instrument of Governing — His Speech to the Priests 
 at Milan — His Private Opinions — Religious Liberty Inconsistent with 
 Despotic Rajime — first Measures of the Consuls in regard to Religion 
 
 % 
 
18 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 —Negotiations with Rome— The Civil Constitution of the Clergy 
 serves as a Basis — Public Opinion unfavorable to these Negotia- 
 tions—Explanations of the First Consul— Religious Discussion For- 
 bidden Page 317 
 
 CHAPTER LL 
 
 CONCLUSION OF THE CONCORDAT. 
 
 The Negotiations — The Slowness of Rome Irritating to the First 
 Consul — Threatenings of Rupture — Gonzalvi comes to Paris — Opinion 
 at Rome favors the Concordat —Its Conclusion — Opposition in the 
 French Legislative Bodies — Purgation of the Legislature — The Or- 
 ganic Laws of Germinal, Year X — Legislation of Germinal, Tear X — 
 The Concordat presented to the Tribunate and Legislature — Discourse 
 of Portalis — Of Lucien Bonaparte — Proclamation of the Concordat — 
 Ceremonies at Notre Dame — Proclamation of Bonaparte — Public 
 Opinion is not Favorable 345 
 
 CHAPTER ILL 
 
 EFFECTS OF THE CONCORDAT — CONCLUSION. 
 
 Effects of the Concordat— Suppression of the Liberty of "Worship — 
 Moral Enslavement of Protestantism — Episcopal Flatteries to the 
 new Monarch — Servility of the High Clergy — Wonderful Imperial 
 Catechism — Careful Surveillance over the Clergy — Severe Measure 
 against all who do not submit— Debates with Rome— The Pope is in- 
 sulted—Open Rupture— Imprisonment of the Pope— Napoleon regrets 
 the Concordat— Cardinal Pacca Opposed to the Temporal Power of 
 the Pope— Conclusion 359 
 
 Biographical Notes 
 
 385 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 SITUATION OF THE CHURCH OF FRANCE AT THE EYE OF 
 
 THE REVOLUTION STATE OF OPINION AS TO LIBERTY 
 
 OF CONSCIENCE AND THE ORGANIZATION OF WORSHIP. 
 
 I desire to review the history of the relations of 
 Church and State during the French Revolution, from 
 the moment when this great movement broke out over 
 France and Europe, drunk with youth and enthusiasm, 
 and inspired with an inexperienced ardor for universal 
 reform, to the unpropitious hour in which it seemed or- 
 ganized forever in .force and glory in a spirit the very 
 contrary of the principles which had animated it at its 
 onset. Napoleon has been fondly styled the heir of the 
 French Revolution ; nevertheless, the great and gen- 
 erous spirit of 1*789 had most decidedly ceased to live 
 before he became master of France. Because the blood 
 of the ancient races did not course in his veins, because 
 he did not re-establish the privileges of caste, it has 
 been the fashion to view him as the armed representa- 
 tive of that Revolution, and as its triumphant missionary. 
 It has been pretended that he caused it to enter the 
 capitals of absolutist Europe at the gallop of his war- 
 horse ; and yet the fact is, that the first capital he entered 
 as dictatorial general was Paris itself — Paris submit- 
 
20 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 ting to absolute power rejuvenated by victory, and thus 
 renouncing the very principles which had animated it 
 with enthusiasm ten years previously. For, whatever 
 may be said by hired sophists, ever ready to laud and 
 beautify servitude, the essence of IT 89 was the great 
 principle of general liberty. Civil equality is only one 
 of its consequences. And as soon as this is detached 
 from the vigorous trunk which produces it, one of two 
 things is certain to result — either it withers and perishes, 
 (for privilege springs most generally from the arbitrary,) 
 or there remains thereof merely a vain semblance, a mass 
 of dry leaves driven at the will of every capricious 
 breath. This sudden abortion of one of the noblest 
 movements of humanity continues to be the most worthy 
 and interesting problem of contemporary history. The 
 problem has been treated, as a whole, by many eminent 
 minds. My ambition is less vast. I desire to confine 
 myself to a single one of its many phases — to write the 
 history of religion during the French Revolution, to 
 mark the real progress accomplished at the opening of 
 the new era, to signalize honestly the faults committed, 
 to indicate the fatal mistake which gradually led to the 
 legalized enslavement of the Church, and, without ex- 
 cusing the final excesses of a power which knew no con- 
 trol, to seek in anterior history the causes which almost 
 necessarily led to them. Such is my design. There is 
 no surer means than this of comprehending the cruel 
 disappointments from which we are still suffering ; for 
 I am thoroughly convinced that nothing contributed 
 more fatally to the downfall of liberty than the errors 
 of our fathers as to the mode of organizing religion in 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 21 
 
 Fiance. An attentive study of tlie progress of the 
 French Revolution demonstrates that that which 
 checked the chariot of liberty, so grandly sent forth at 
 the start, and finally precipitated it into the bloody dis- 
 grace of terrorism, was precisely an inadequate compre- 
 hension, and a too hasty decision, of the question of 
 religion. 
 
 Though the French Revolution had proclaimed im- 
 mortal truths, and recognized sacred rights, yet when 
 it attempted to infringe on the sacred domain of con- 
 science it excited the most invincible opposition. This 
 opposition exasperated it, and turned it aside from the 
 path of fruitful and lasting reforms. It irritated its 
 proud and formidable genius, and led to the extinguish- 
 ment of its benefits in a long paroxysm of wrath. This 
 eighteenth century,which seemed so thoroughly skeptical, 
 was really troubled more deeply by the question of religion 
 than by any other. It is well to recognize this to the honor 
 of humanity. In spite of appearances the heart of man- 
 kind is more profoundly moved by spiritual than by 
 material interests. This explains the paramount im- 
 portance of questions of this class, even when they 
 relate merely to the civil organization of religion, for 
 the question of form is readily confounded with the 
 question of essence. And to defend the absolute liberty 
 of the conscience is one of the first duties of religion. 
 
 In the France of to-day the problem which was 
 broached in 1789 is still unsolved. The concordat 
 which Xapoleon imposed on, or rather, extorted from, 
 the Pope, has resolved no difficulty. Like eveiy arbi- 
 trary act, it has only served to complicate the situation. 
 
22 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Our own blunders, however, are much less excusable 
 than those of our fathers, for we cannot overbalance 
 them by real and signal reforms. In fact of tolerance, 
 they had said every thing from the very start. To-day 
 we enjoy their conquests, which no reaction has been 
 able to compromise, so securely are they based on eter- 
 nal right. But let us temper with discriminating criti- 
 cism the admiration they so legitimately inspire. Giv- 
 ing them due credit for the great truths they proclaimed, 
 let us frankly signalize the elements of falsehood and 
 injustice which their system involved. And for this we 
 are the better prepared, inasmuch as we can now clearly 
 see that in their mistakes they were much rather timid 
 conservatives than daring reformers. They were influ- 
 enced by the ideas of ancient France at the very mo- 
 ment when they thought they had constructed against 
 them the most formidable instrument of war. It is from 
 this source that the Revolution had learned to 
 strengthen beyond measure the central power, and to 
 give to the State what belonged alone to the individual. 
 It is no wonder that the new wine could not be con- 
 fined by the old vessels. I shall hope to have rendered 
 a real service to my country if I can clearly point out 
 the shoals on which, for a short time only, as we assur- 
 edly believe, one of the noblest of revolutions has made 
 shipwreck. 
 
 In attempting to understand the mutual relations of 
 the Church and the State, at the eve of the French 
 Revolution, the first thing which strikes us is their close 
 association as to politics, and their profound separation 
 as to theory and aspiration. This contrariety becomes 
 
INTRODUCTION. 23 
 
 more and more violent the further we advance. It led 
 finally to the fatal blunder which divorced liberalism in 
 France from the Christian religion. It was precisely 
 the political union that provoked and envenomed the 
 moral separation. The Church was, so to speak, in- 
 crusted in an order of things which shocked the public 
 conscience ; the altar had been the strongest support of 
 the ancient and now hated system of government. 
 Every reformatory and progressive aspiration, meeting 
 in this system an obstacle and barrier at its very start, 
 was naturally led to attack it with unmeasured violence. 
 The result was, that the liberal cause soon became alien- 
 ated from the Church and identified with irreligion. 
 All who were young of heart and ardent for the vindi- 
 cation of right and liberty, were in so far predisposed 
 to reject Christianity without hesitation. Life, pro- 
 found conviction, conquering proselytism, were all on 
 the side of a skeptical philosophy. The Church was 
 not only stationary in the midst of this life, but even 
 undertook the vain task of arresting and beating back 
 the rising flood of enthusiasm, The eighteenth century 
 was imbued with one of the grand ideas born of the 
 Gospel. I mean the idea of humanity, the idea ot 
 human right vindicated in the face of those caste privi- 
 leges which are its negation. It was found that the 
 Church had taken sides in advance against the very 
 principles which it should have been the first to pro- 
 claim, since it had in its own hands the book which had 
 disseminated and caused to triumph in the Roman em- 
 pire the immortal words, (the chart of equality and true 
 liberty,) that in Christ there is neither bond nor free. 
 
24 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Thus by the fault of its representatives, the very relig- 
 ion which had taught the world the ideas of humanity 
 and right, came to be regarded by liberal spirits as the 
 very foe which they must first conquer in their work of 
 vindicating principles which itself had first proclaimed. 
 In the confusion of the age, the ancient pagan view was 
 defended by the pretended successors of those who had 
 once overthrown it ; and the social and humane princi- 
 ples of Christianity were defended by those who were 
 resuscitating the naturalism of the pagan world — the 
 impure source of all the injustice and abuses of despot- 
 ism. Thus the most discordant elements were mingled 
 together ; justice and religion, which should have been 
 indissolubly joined, were violently and perniciously 
 separated. They fought in opposing armies, and every 
 stroke dealt by the one on the other weakened them 
 . both. This fatal divorce, though dating far back in the 
 past, had been renewed and consummated at the close 
 of the seventeenth century by one of the greatest 
 crimes of history — by the murderous expulsion of that 
 portion of the religious public which was not bowed 
 under the yoke of llomish unity. The ruins of the 
 Jansenist community of Port Royal, and, above all, 
 those living remains of the Protestant Church who 
 were bound as slaves, and forced to row the galleys of 
 the Mediterranean, or who sought at the risk of life to 
 meet together in the desert for worship, reminded con- 
 tinually an emancipated and indignant generation of 
 the pernicious union of religious with civil despotism, 
 and of the severe discipline they had suffered under the 
 ferule of that devout and all-powerful Papist, Madame 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 25 
 
 dc Maintenon, during the last years of Louis XIV. 
 This ferule had been too long the scepter of France, and 
 France had been compelled to too bitter a penance for 
 the early sins of the most selfish of monarchs. 
 
 The seventeenth century had not been content with 
 transmitting these sad remembrances to the succeeding 
 age — remembrances which were yet visible realities, 
 since the proscription of Jansenism and Protestantism 
 was still in full force. It had even defended its theory 
 and sanctioned its practice by the immortal eloquence 
 of Bossuet, its greatest preacher. His book, Politics 
 drawn from the Bible, consecrates the maxims of a 
 twofold despotism, and was destined to excite the in- 
 tensest wrath in the coming generation. This cunning 
 catechism, in which an unlimited monarchy and an un- 
 curbed priesthood learn how, by uniting their power, to 
 control and entirely subjugate a great nation, may be 
 regarded as the testament of the age of Louis XIV. 
 This testament was broken and scornfully repudiated in 
 that brilliant and powerful but scoffing literary parlia- 
 ment of the eighteenth century, which was presided 
 over by the genius of Voltaire.* The book of Bossuet is 
 the apotheosis of the ancient regime and its worst abuses. 
 It presents the king as a deity, whose appearance rejoices 
 the people as the sun, and whose unquestionable voli- 
 tions should be received on bended knees. It is a deity, 
 it is true, somewhat like those of Homer, exposed to all 
 the passions of men, and rather inclined to fall into 
 them. The counsels which the eloquent bishop gives 
 to the prince are good enough ; they show to how many 
 
 ♦See Appendix, note 1. 
 4 
 
26 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 crimes absolute power is exposed, and what terrible 
 consequences they may have in the world to come ; but 
 these counsels terrify rather than assure, for they reveal 
 the possibility of evil for which, when once committed, 
 there is no remedy ; since there is no resource against 
 the royal will, and since his subjects, after timidly re- 
 monstrating, have only to kiss the dust into which his 
 foot has crushed them. There is no right in face of the 
 royal right. I mistake ; there is the right of the clergy, 
 for whom alone Bossuet makes a haughty exception. 
 All the property of the kingdom belongs to the mon- 
 arch, except that of the clergy ; with this he has noth- 
 ing to do, except to increase it. A king who under- 
 stands well his duties is not content with opening his 
 treasures and enriching the Church. He remembers 
 that it, though detesting bloodshed, yet has need of it, 
 and, using his sword to execute its will, banishes its 
 enemies, or immolates them at the stake for the greater 
 glory of God, as at the revocation of the Edict of 
 Nantes. Heresy is not tolerated in the happy land 
 which he governs : " Those who maintain that the 
 prince should not use force in matters of religion, for 
 the reason that religion should be free, are in an im- 
 pious error." Bossuet recalls and insists on the solemn 
 oath given by the Most Christian King, the day of his 
 coronation, for the extirpation of heresy. All these fine 
 theories are supported by texts of Scripture, whose 
 meaning is entirely distorted; for the learned bishop 
 applies to modern states that which related only to the 
 Jewish theocracy, which was essentially of a transitory 
 character. Thus he brings about this double result of 
 
INTRODUCTION. 27 
 
 making monarchy and Christianity seem both hateful 
 alike, and of preparing inevitably a most dangerous 
 revolution. One might suppose the effect of such a 
 book in some measure counteracted by the humane po- 
 litical system of Fenelon, which, though clothed in a 
 pagan form, was much more Christian than that of Bos- 
 suet ; but such was not the case. His book, Telemaque, 
 was but a poetic Utopia, the splendid dream of him 
 whom Louis XIV. had styled the most chimerical spirit 
 of his kingdom. On the contrary, Bossuet's Politics 
 drawn fro??,, the Bible was the faithful portraiture of the 
 organization of religion in France down to the very 
 moment when the most daring vows were made for the 
 entire renovation of society. Let us present a review of 
 that organization. 
 
 The Catholic Church of France enjoyed the highest 
 privileges. Since the proscription of the Protestants it 
 was without a rival, and possessed full sway in the 
 whole of France. It possessed all the edifices for wor- 
 ship, while the most secret retreats could not shield the 
 Protestants from the cruel hirelings of bigotry. They 
 had not only lost the right of professing their creed, 
 they had lost the right of existing. As soon as they 
 were discovered they fell under the vengeance of the 
 laws. Neither their births nor marriages were recog- 
 nized as legitimate; all public offices were closed 
 against them, and their children were considered as 
 belonging to the Catholic Church. The people of Al- 
 sace alone, thanks to special treaties made at the time 
 of the conquest of that province, enjoyed liberty of con- 
 science. As to Jews, they were barely tolerated; for 
 
28 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 they were oppressed by special taxes and a very severe 
 police, and were likewise excluded from public func- 
 tions. The Catholic Church, therefore, possessed the 
 whole field. By the monoply of the marriages and 
 baptisms the entire state was in some measure in its 
 hands. Its voice alone was heard from one frontier to 
 the other. If one wished to publish a book which 
 might give it offense, he was necessitated to go to Hol- 
 land. It enjoyed almost complete control of the educa- 
 tion of the youth. Thus the minds, the souls, of the 
 whole population were officially in its power. To ac- 
 complish its work the clergy possessed immense riches, 
 and a considerable portion of the soil. They had re- 
 ceived them from the piety of the faithful, and from the 
 terrors of the death-bed. The kings of France had given 
 largely in their favor ; and if one may estimate the num- 
 ber of their sins by the quantity of their donations, the 
 list was frightful indeed. The following is a low esti- 
 mate of some of the branches of the revenue of the 
 clergy. At the head stand 11 Archbishops and 116 
 Bishops, with an aggregate annual income of 8,400,000 
 francs. The income of the Grand Vicars and Canons 
 was at least 13,400,000 ; that of seven hundred and 
 fifteen abbeys 9,000,000 ; that of seven hundred and 
 three priories 1,400,000; that of several hundred other 
 monastic institutions 7,042,000. The curates and their 
 vicars formed the secular clergy who served the 35,156 
 parishes. They were supported by tithes and various 
 casual receipts. The regular clergy filled the convents, 
 and numbered about 51,000 in the aggregate. One 
 half of the income of the French Church arose from 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 29 
 
 tithes, and the whole of its acknowledged revenue 
 amounted to nearly 130,000,000 francs ; and if to this 
 we add the casual receipts, it would not perhaps fall 
 below 200,000,000 francs, or 40,000,000 dollars annually. 
 The property of the clergy was exempt from taxation, 
 but they contributed to the support of the State by a 
 voluntary donation of 16,000,000 francs every five years, 
 though much of this was usually employed in liquida- 
 ting previously contracted debts. 
 
 Certainly the State had been sufficiently prodigal of 
 privileges and riches toward the Church ; but, in return, 
 it had reduced it to a state of cramping dependence. The 
 eldest and cherished son of the Church had taken .pre- 
 cautions against his mother, and had bound her hands 
 with cords which, though golden, were none the less 
 galling. The king felt her ascendant as often as the fear 
 of damnation stirred in his breast, or age or disease re- 
 minded him of the tolling funeral bell of St. Denis, 
 where his bones were finally to rest ; but the laws, re- 
 strictive of the liberty of the Church, none the less. con- 
 tinued in force. These laws constitute what it has 
 seemed proper to term the liberties of the Gallican 
 Church. These famous maxims, full of a spirit of just 
 suspicion against the encroachments of Rome and of a 
 rich and ambitious clergy, were the work of the founders 
 of a despotic monarchy, and tended to enslave the 
 Church and reduce it to a mere instrument of govern- 
 ment. To forbid the clergy to assemble in convention 
 without special royal permit, or the bishops to communi- 
 cate freely with the spiritual head of Catholicism, was evi- 
 dently to put the religious conscience rudely under the 
 
30 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 hand of the State. It is true, however, that it was dan- 
 gerous for the civil authority, in view of the power 
 and wealth of the clergy, to relax this control. It is 
 thus that the riches which tended to corrupt them began 
 by reducing them to subjection. To appreciate this sit- 
 uation of the French Church, we must first have a clear 
 view of its relations with the Roman See. 
 
 It was in the Middle Ages that these relations were 
 most wisely regulated ; I mean, by the pragmatic sanc- 
 tion made between St. Louis and the Pope, in 1268, and 
 confirmed at Bourges by Charles VII. in 1434. These 
 wise arrangements, which secured to the Church the 
 right of electing its own dignitaries, and guarded against 
 the encroachments of the Roman See, were, however, ab- 
 rogated by the concordat concluded with the Pope by 
 Francis I. in 1516. It was a most grievous abuse of 
 power for the king to make this arrangement with the 
 ambitious Leo X. without consulting the Church. He 
 arrogated to himself the right of making nominations 
 to the parishes and bishoprics, and left in the hands of 
 the Pope the formidable power of confirming them by 
 bulls. A refusal of these bulls was enough to convulse 
 the entire nation. This was perceived too late — during 
 a crisis in the reign of Louis XIY. On the one hand, 
 one saw the clergy bowed at the foot of the throne, and 
 defending its privileges with their utmost ability ; on the 
 other, the proud monarch was forced, after a long refusal 
 of the bulls had deeply agitated the whole land, to hu- 
 miliate himself and yield to the Holy See. 
 
 Assuredly the maxims of the Gallican Church, as 
 strengthened by the famous declaration of the clergy, 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 31 
 
 drawn up by Bossuet in 1682, had wisely guarded against 
 the interference of the Pope in*the government of France, 
 but they had none the less consecrated the subjection 
 of the Church to the State. In the eighteenth century 
 the royal council could declare, without raising opposi- 
 tion, that the government had the right, before authori- 
 zing the decrees of the Church, to examine them, and to 
 interdict any thing that might agitate or disturb the 
 public tranquillity. We admit the merits of the Gallican 
 Church for her resistance to Ultramontanism ; we recog- 
 nize her virtues, talents, and patriotism, but we cannot 
 forget that she has sacrificed more than one precious 
 liberty to the great French idol— I mean the State. She 
 allowed to be forged for herself a heavy yoke, which, as 
 soon as it ceased to be of gold, and was imposed, not 
 by royal hands, but by a popular assembly, became 
 utterly intolerable. We will see, in fact, that in order 
 to enslave the Church, the French Revolution had only 
 to act consistently with the principles laid down by 
 Bossuet and Louis XIV. Constantly associated with all 
 the iniquities of the ancient regime in the eighteenth 
 century, and even surpassing them by her own, the 
 Church of France was destined to excite the most intense 
 opposition, without signalizing herself by noble virtues. 
 For deplorable indeed was her moral condition previ- 
 ously to the time when, in the reign of terror, she arose 
 by martyrdom, and purified herself in her own blood. 
 
 The state of things we have just described was but 
 the continuation of what had existed in France for 
 centuries. The only change that had taken place was 
 in public opinion; but this sufficed to present abuses 
 
32 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 which, in the past, had been tolerated or connived at, 
 in their true light. The* public conscience, once awak- 
 ened, grew indignant at that which for a long time had 
 excited no scruples ; and it was enough that the Church 
 should remain as in the past, to arouse the most vehe- 
 ment indignation. Unfortunately she was much more 
 occupied with her internal strifes and pecuniary interests 
 than with the formidable attacks of a skeptical philosophy. 
 
 Nothing is sadder than the religious history of the 
 eighteenth century. Piety languished, and science, at 
 least on the side of the Church, was null. In England 
 | and Germany a withering breath brooded over hearts 
 and souls. In Protestant pulpits a religion without 
 grandeur and without mysteries was languidly preached, 
 which had neither the boldness of philosophy nor the 
 enthusiasm of faith. A cowardly compromising spirit 
 prevailed. In the French Church the declension was 
 visible to all eyes. Since the death of Massillon, in 1742, 
 no eloquent voice had been heard in the evangelical 
 pulpit, if we except the few trumpet tones of studied ve- 
 hemence of Father Bridaine. The priestly spirit had 
 full career. Having little to persecute without, the dom- 
 inant party began the work within the Church, attempt- 
 ing to impose the ultra Papal bull Unigenitus, which 
 the Jesuitical courtiers of Louis XIV. had induced 
 Clement XI. to issue against the good Quesnel and the 
 feeble remnants of Jansenism, on all who had not yet 
 bowed to the Ultramontane yoke. The death-bed of the 
 most estimable priests was jealously spied, and clerical 
 persecution ceased only with the last breath. But the 
 Jansenists obtained little glory in the strife. There is 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 33 
 
 something, in fact, sadder still than the destruction of 
 the noble establishment of Port Royal — I mean the moral 
 degeneracy of Jansenism itself. That grand school 
 which had given to France St. Cyran and Pascal had 
 really fallen into dotage. It was now occupied chiefly 
 with apocryphal miracles, and the fanatical convulsion- 
 aries of St. Medard passed for the genuine disciples of 
 the saints and heroes who had defended the liberty of the 
 Church and produced some of the noblest masterpieces 
 of literature. These quarrels of the Catholics were 
 freely talked about in the court and the world. The 
 persecutors excited indignation, but the persecuted were 
 only pitied and laughed at. Could there be a more de- 
 plorable condition for the Church ? 
 
 At the same time the attacks of philosophy were 
 growing more pressing, and making a deeper knpression 
 on the public mind. It was necessary to answer them. 
 With one or two exceptions these replies were merdj 
 monkish balderdash, and evinced neither logical ability] 
 nor deep learning. To succeed in this work, it would 
 have been necessary to separate the Gospel from the 
 chaff with which a rich and privileged Church had cor- 
 rupted it. As it was, the apologists did little more than 
 furnish excellent matter for the wit of Voltaire and the 
 Encyclopedists. Recourse was had to strokes of au- 
 thority and official condemnation. It was easier to refute 
 error by documents affixed to the doors of cathedrals 
 than to meet it in honorable fight. The reunions of the 
 clergy in the eighteenth century had not failed, every 
 time they occurred, to anathematize philosophism, and 
 
 denounce it to the authorities, at the same time recom 
 
 5 
 
•34 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 mending for promotion such* priests as had signalized 
 themselves in this inglorious contest. This attitude of 
 St. Michael crushing the demon produced no very sal- 
 utary effect : in the first place, because the enemy was 
 already in legal chains; and, secondly, because the cham- 
 pions of the celestial cause were far from possessing the 
 necessary immaculate purity. While the official faith 
 continued the same, the real faith was growing weaker 
 and weaker, even in the ranks of the clergy. They 
 seemed to vie with each other in rendering tfceir order 
 I as vulnerable as possible. Those who retained the pure 
 faith, and led good lives, were hidden in the obscurity 
 of convents or country parishes ; while those who ap- 
 peared in public, in the court and at Paris, were fre- 
 quently implicated in deplorable scandals. Too often 
 they celebrated a mass in which they no longer had 
 faith, and appeared at the altar redolent with the per- 
 fumes of the boudoir. The race of free-thinking and 
 gallant abbots was only too numerous. They encum- 
 bered the drawing-rooms, and called to mind one of the 
 most crying abuses of the Church — the right of absence, 
 which allowed the noble titulary of a benefice to enjoy 
 in the capital, or where he pleased, all the emoluments of 
 his office, and to turn over all its duties and labors to the 
 miserable substitute whom he had hired for a mere trifle. 
 The nobility enjoyed largely the high places of the 
 Church, receiving immense incomes, but giving in return 
 only their sounding names. The clergy who did the work 
 received but little pay and lived miserably. Thus the 
 salaries were in inverse proportion to the labor performed. 
 In 1785 the scandalous lawsuit of the diamond neck- 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 35 
 
 lace had gravely compromised a prince of the Church. 
 The Cardinal de Rohan, Bishop of Strasbourg, and 
 Grand Almoner of France, had doubtless been duped 
 by the intriguing and unworthy Countess de Lamotte. 
 She had persuaded him that by means of a certain very 
 costly ornament he would be able to obtain the favors 
 of the Queen, and had surreptitiously procured it for 
 him. This affair, when it came to the light, and was 
 brought into the courts of justice, produced a profound 
 impression on society. The world saw in it something 
 worse than the filching of a diamond necklace ; namely, 
 its use by a prince of the Church for such a purpose. 
 When we recollect that all the infamous laws of perse- 
 cution of Louis XIY. were scrupulously enforced by this 
 nmsked and discredited clergy; that with sleek faces 1 
 and joking lips they attempted to play the zealous 
 heresy-hating Dominican of the Middle Ages without 
 having a particle tf his sincere faith, it is easy to con-^ 
 ceive the contempt into which they fell in the public 
 mind. The condemnation of the Protestant fatherN^ 
 Calas, through their influence, by the Parliament of Tou- 
 louse, on the false charge of having hanged his son for 
 wishing to go over to Catholicism, gave a powerful im- 
 petus to the opposition and indignation. In the year 
 1761 the eldest son of this unfortunate man had been 
 found strangled in his father's own house. The Catho- 
 lics had Calas arrested on the charge of having himself 
 committed the unnatural deed on his own son. Nu- 
 merous witnesses appeared against him. It was impos- 
 sible for the father to prove a negative, and it was in 
 vain that he appealed to the facts of his parental ten- 
 
36 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 derness for his children ; of the restless melancholy tem- 
 perament of his deceased son ; of his not having opposed 
 another of his sons who had gone over to the Catholics ; 
 of the impossibility of his committing such an act of 
 violence in his sixty-eighth year on a vigorous young 
 man ; and of there having been in his house at the time 
 a Catholic servant girl, who yet knew nothing of his 
 alleged crime. He was condemned to the wheel by 
 eight voices against five, and in March, 1762, put to 
 death. He endured the torture with calmness and pa- 
 tience, and on mounting the scaffold uttered the fol- 
 lowing words : " I die innocent ; my judges have been 
 deceived. Christ, however, who was innocence itself, 
 died even a more painful death than mine." The re- 
 maining members of the family removed to Geneva, 
 where Yoltaire became acquainted with them and with 
 their terrible misfortune. He immediately determined 
 to investigate the matter thoroughly, and to submit it 
 to the judgment of the world. The iniquity of the 
 affair becoming thus notorious, the widow and children 
 applied for a revision of the trial. The result was that 
 fifty judges, after a thorough investigation of all the 
 circumstances, pronounced the father entirely innocent 
 of the charge - for which he had suffered. This serv- 
 ice of Voltaire in the cause of justice was a terrible 
 blow to the Catholics ; but his wrath did not stop 
 within the bounds of justice. Seizing every plausible 
 pretext, he increased the indignation to the extent of his 
 power. 
 
 Thus we have, near the close of the eighteenth cen- 
 ^ tury, the spectacle of two great irreconcilable powers 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 37 
 
 mutually driving each other to the last extremes. Tt is 
 easy to foresee how difficult will be any conciliation 
 when the hour for great social reforms arrives. There 
 had gradually arisen in the minds of the liberal portion 
 of the laity an unwillingness to allow to remain on the 
 same footing the vast and expensive establishment of 
 the Church. True, these opinions were rather insinu- 
 ated than openly advocated. Sometimes it was by way 
 of allusion, as when Mably discussed the origin of tithes 
 and of the property of the Church ; sometimes by sar- 
 casm, as when Montesquieu exposed so masterly the 
 uselessness of the monastic life ; and sometimes by the 
 inexhaustible and terrible raillery of Voltaire, which 
 attacked even the bases of Christianity. As early as 
 1749 public functionaries had maintained the right of 
 the nation to lay hands on the property of the Church 
 for the good of the public treasury. But though public 
 opinion so strongly disfavored the accumulation of so 
 much wealth in the hands of the clergy, the government 
 manifested no inquietude. France, naturally more en- 
 thusiastic for ideas than for individual interests, needed 
 the pressure of a great crisis to induce her to interfere 
 in earnest in secularizing the property of the Church. 
 
 It was not thus with the second object of the public 
 desire, namely, liberty of opinion. This the new gener- 
 ation was determined to have, even at the price of 
 overthrowing the former social fabric. It shall be to 
 the eternal honor of Voltaire to have truly and sin- 
 cerely loved tolerance. I am not sure that he had the 
 fever at every anniversary of the massacre of St. Bar- 
 tholomew ; I do not know that any one felt his pulse 
 
38 
 
 INTRODUCTION 
 
 regularly on that occasion ; it is certain, however, that 
 he had the fever of the soul and heart, that noble fever 
 of an unfeigned indignation against the crimes of intol- 
 erance. It is false, however, to attribute to him the 
 founding of the doctrine of tolerance. Not to mention 
 the first apologists of Christianity, who are so pointed 
 on this subject, William Penn had inscribed the doc- 
 trine of religious toleration at rlie head of the constitu- 
 tion of the State he had founded in America at the close 
 of the preceding century. The little State of Rhode 
 Island had honored itself with the most intelligent 
 . practice of the same principle. We must add also that 
 only in America had it been embraced in all its conse- 
 quences. In France the boldest and freest thinkers 
 had fettered it with strange restrictions. 
 
 We applaud Montesquieu for putting into the mouth 
 of a young Jewess the following words : " You wish us 
 to be Christians, and you are not such yourselves. The 
 characteristic of truth is its triumph over the heart and 
 mind, and not this feebleness which you admit when 
 you attempt to force it on others by punishment. The 
 chief honor of a religion is its being believed ; that of 
 laws, their being feared." Instead of being consist- 
 ent with these noble maxims, however, Montesquieu 
 violates them himself by refusing to a new religion the 
 right of propagating itself. " Inasmuch," says he, " as 
 scarcely any but an intolerant religion can have a zeal 
 to propagate itself in other lands, since a religion which 
 can tolerate others has little of the missionary spirit, it 
 would be well for the government, when satisfied with 
 the existing religion, not to permit the establishment of 
 
INTRODUCTION. 39 
 
 others. When it is equally practicable to receive or 
 not receive a new religion it should be forbidden, but 
 that which is already established should be tolerated." 
 One seems to hear in these words a voice from the age 
 of Trajan and Pliny the Younger. Is this not simply 
 the old Roman and French idea of a religion for the 
 State and for the public order? Montesquieu adds, 
 "When the laws authorize dhferent religions they 
 should also oblige them to tolerate each other. They 
 should be required not only not to trouble the State, but 
 also not to trouble each other." Thus religion is made 
 to exist only at the good will of the State and during its 
 good pleasure. 
 
 In Rousseau* this germ of a system received its full 
 development. The eccentric citizen of Geneva was 
 surely a friend of tolerance. He had learned this in 
 severe lessons from the Parliament of Paris, which had 
 ordered the public burning of his philosophical romance 
 Emile, and from the official blasts of Beaumont the 
 anti-Jansenist Archbishop of Paris. It was Rousseau 
 who had given to the ancient regime the most terrible 
 blow, for it was he who had given to the reformatory 
 movement his earnest passion, and to the young genera- 
 tion the lire which raged in his own heart. He has the 
 sad honor of having molded the French Revolution 
 according to his own image. By his writings he was 
 the ruling spirit in its most violent and devastating . 
 period. It is easy to perceive the influence of his ideas 
 on the organization of religion in the acts of our first 
 national assemblies. His Contra* Social contained the 
 * See Appendix, note 2. 
 
40 
 
 INTKODUCTION. 
 
 formulae which by them were made into laws. Strange 
 to say, this chart of the impending revolution, this pro- 
 gramme of the boldest of reforms, was full of the 
 favorite ideas of Bossuet. It was a sort of deistical 
 Gallicanism, with a very short catechism, it is true, but 
 as implacable toward its foes as if it had had to enforce 
 the creed of the Council of Trent. The sword, though 
 drawn for so feeble a formulary, is none the less terri- 
 ble against all dissenters. The Gontrat Social is, so to 
 speak, Louis XIV. in a Jacobin's coat. It is true, the 
 supreme power, instead of being a single man, is called 
 Legion. Instead of at Versailles, it presides in a noisy 
 forum; but it is none the less absolute, none the less 
 destructive of all real freedom ; it is a pure despot. 
 Rousseau, of course, desires that this despot be a good 
 prince, and allow all his fellow-citizens to believe as 
 they please. The concession, however, is very small, 
 for it does not permit dissenters to manifest publicly 
 their faith. Let Rousseau speak for himself : " There is 
 a profession of faith purely civil, of which it is the sov- 
 ereign's duty to fix the articles, without obliging any 
 one to believe in them ; but he may banish from his 
 State whoever does not believe them. He may banish 
 him not as impious, but as unsocial, incapable of sin- 
 cerely loving law and justice, and of sacrificing, if need 
 be, his life to his duty. If any one, after publicly 
 recognizing these dogmas, acts as if not believing them, 
 let him be put to death ; he has committed the greatest 
 of crimes, he has lied against the laws." 
 
 At the reading of these words, published about the 
 year 17G4, I seem to see in the distance Robespierre 
 
INTRODUCTION. 41 
 
 celebrating the festival of the Eternal in the presence of 
 the guillotine. Rousseau, doubtless, would have been 
 first in detesting the practical working of his theory ; 
 but when we remember that it was his doctrines which 
 had done most in educating the young generation, we 
 can easily account for the grievous mistakes which 
 were made in adapting the relations of the State to 
 religion. The eloquent teacher had poorly instructed his 
 disciples on the subject of liberty of conscience. 
 
 What we have above said of the moral condition of 
 the clergy in the eighteenth century, explains the atti- 
 tude they took as to the property of the Church, and as 
 to the principle of tolerance. In 1788 the Assembly of 
 the Clergy was called to vote on the resolutions of the 
 Assembly of Notables which levied a tax on all lands, 
 including the possessions of the Church. They protested 
 with great energy against a project which seemed to 
 them to overthrow .all laws, human and divine. They 
 declared to the King that their goods had been irrevo- 
 cably vowed and consecrated to God, and that their con- 
 science and honor forbade them to change into a legal 
 tribute, what could only be their free gift to the national 
 treasury. They prayed God to guard their ancient im- 
 munities against the license of revolutionary opinions. 
 Nor were their feelings as to the liberty of the press any 
 more honorable. From 1781 up to 1789 they had done 
 their utmost to suppress whatever publications attacked 
 their privileges. 
 
 Worst of all was the attitude of their later assemblies . 
 
 toward the Protestants. The persecuting laws of Louis 
 
 XIV. were still retained. A Protestant Pastor, Francis 
 
 6 
 
42 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Pochette, had been executed in 1762, and the judicial 
 murder of Calas belonged to the same epoch. The ex- 
 plosion of indignation excited by this crime, and its elo- 
 quent exposure by the genius of Voltaire, had done 
 more for the Protestant cause than a half century of ob- 
 scure sufferings. Men did not yet dare to demand for 
 it toleration as a religion, but they were at least ashamed 
 of the entire proscription of one of the noblest classes 
 of society. For some years the magistrates, shocked at 
 the injustices encouraged by the lack of a legal recog- 
 nition of the Protestants, had sought in divers ways to 
 evade the difficulty. The friends of tolerance pressed 
 openly for a legal recognition, if not of Protestantism, 
 at least of the Protestants as citizens. The great states- 
 man, Malesherbes, had drawn up on the subject, in 1785, 
 a project of a law. In the Assembly of Notables, in 
 1787, Lafayette, who had breathed the air of liberty in 
 the United States, took the initiative in a formal propo- 
 sition which resulted in an edict of toleration. Imperfect 
 as it was, it was hailed with the warmest satisfaction. 
 It declared in its preamble that the King would continue 
 to use all his influence in the interests of the Catholic 
 religion ; it provided that the Roman Catholic religion 
 alone should enjoy the right of public worship ; that 
 non-Catholics might live in France and exercise profes- 
 sions or trades without being molested on account of 
 religion ; that they might be legally married before the 
 officers of justice, and have the births of their children 
 • regularly registered; that, in fine, they might enjoy the 
 privileges of honorable sepulture. These concessions, 
 though interfering in no way with the domination of 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 43 
 
 Catholicism, met with the intensest opposition from the 
 clergy. Even the Parliament of Paris made some ob- 
 jection to their registration. Espremenil, holding op an 
 image of Christ, cried out, " Will yon crucify him 
 afresh ! " But nothing responded better to publiG opin- 
 ion than these concessions to the persecuted, now that 
 their cause had been pleaded by the philosophers. It 
 had needed the noise of a public discussion to render 
 their condition a subject of interest to France. The 
 high clergy alone continued their protests. At the cor- 
 onation of Louis XVI., in 1775, a prelate, less known 
 for his virtue than for his ambition, Lomenie de Brienne, 
 Archbishop of Toulouse, had assumed to address the 
 Monarch thus: "We conjure you,*Sire, do not delay to 
 take from error the hope of having among us temples 
 and altars. It is reserved to you to strike the last blow 
 to Calvinism in your dominions. Order the dispersion 
 of the schismatic meetings of the Protestants ; exclude 
 them, without distinction, from all public functions, and 
 you will assure to your subjects the unity of the Chris- 
 tian worship." 
 
 From the accession of Louis XVI. on, the clergy, in 
 their assemblies, continued to rail against the Protestants. 
 In a report presented by them in 1789 we find these 
 words: "This sect, which in the midst of its ruins pre- 
 serves the spirit of audacity and independence which it 
 ha*-; shown from the beginning, wishes to arrogate for 
 falsehood the rights which belong only to the truth." 
 And yet all the rights they sought were, not to be 
 treated like wild beasts, and hunted down in the forests. 
 " This sect," continues the report, " presumes to demand 
 
44 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 a civil and religious existence ; hence the necessity of 
 vigorously resisting all its efforts." The Archbishop of 
 Aries raised a more authoritative voice. According to 
 him both country and Church were in great danger, and 
 he uttered the cry of the disciples in distress : " Lord, 
 save us or we perish." The country was in danger for- 
 sooth, for some Protestants were admitted to public 
 offices. This, however, does not hinder the good Arch- 
 bishop from declaring his love for his erring brethren : 
 "They are our fellow-citizens and brethren. We will 
 always love and cherish them. Far from us the thought 
 of the sword. The warfare to which we are called is 
 purely spiritual." The orator forgot the winged words 
 which Bossuet charged, in his funeral eulogy of the abom- 
 inable persecutor Letellier, with the duty of conveying 
 to subsequent ages the knowledge of the exploits of this 
 saintly man in extirpating heresy. The sabers of the 
 dragoons and the ax of the executioner would not 
 pass, at the opening of the French Revolution, for the 
 pacific crosier. The Archbishop protested that he put 
 all his confidence in the touching instructions and lumi- 
 nous examples of the Church. Nevertheless the Assembly 
 of the Clergy, held in 1788, was unwilling to dispense 
 with the temporal arm, but made to the King a formal 
 petition to revoke his edict of toleration. This was its 
 last public act, and, as it were, its will and testament. 
 Happily there was no one in France who received the 
 legacy. 
 
 We have not cited these facts to throw discredit on 
 the ancient Church of France. Large bodies like it are 
 slow to receive light, for they are dominated by their 
 
INTRODUCTION". 45 
 
 traditions. The more we study history the more are 
 we convinced of the astonishing facility with which 
 human nature embraces the strangest contradictions. 
 It is ever leavened with inconsistency. The noblest 
 sentiments exist in the same bosom along side of the 
 most pernicious prejudices. The high clergy of France 
 embraced more than one enlightened and liberal spirit ; 
 as a body, however, they labored under the weight of 
 centuries of error. 
 
 Having thus characterized the tendencies which were 
 about to enter into conflict, we shall not be surprised at 
 the Revolution which broke out in 1789. We shall often 
 have to regret that their opposition was not, at bottom, 
 more radical, and that both the party of the Church and 
 the reform party acted too often from the principle of 
 narrow intolerance. For, the reformers were often guilty 
 of defending the cause of tolerance by intolerant meas- 
 ures, and of outraging the liberty of conscience in their 
 opponents under pretext of serving it in general. On the 
 other hand the Church party, assailed in their interior 
 sanctuary and in the sacred rights which, in their pros- 
 perity, they had not respected in their brethren, arose 
 through opprobrium and persecution to an unconscious, 
 but none the less real, defense of this sacred liberty 
 against the despotism of the civil power which they had 
 once themselves used against the Protestants. 
 
 This exposition of the condition of the French priest- 
 hood would give an incorrect idea of the general state 
 of the Church, if we spoke only of the higher clergy. It 
 is true, the nobility held all the high and lucrative posi- 
 tions, and an impulse of reform was then prevalent 
 
46 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 among the aristocracy. Some of their number had taken 
 part in the glorious work of the American Revolution. 
 Nevertheless this had not shaken the ecclesiastical preju- 
 dices of the gentlemen prelates. They all remained true 
 thereto with the exception of Pompignan, Archbishop 
 of Vienne, and Talleyrand,* Bishop of Autun ; and of 
 these the latter had the churchly vocation only to a very 
 feeble degree. But it was not so with the lower clergy. 
 Poorly paid, and held in subjection to their superiors, 
 these were in a state of perpetual discontent. Belonging 
 mostly to that energetic and wide-awake middle class, 
 who felt that the time of their disinthrallment was 
 dawning, they shared in the same feelings. To this 
 number belonged the still remaining Jansenists, who 
 were already predisposed for change, inasmuch as for a 
 century they had been suffering severely at the hands 
 of the State Church. Also the convents, encumbered 
 as they were with men without active religious duties, 
 hid in their cells more than one dangerous agitator, as 
 yet unknown to himself. On the whole, the opinions of 
 the inferior clergy were not beyond a firm but moderate 
 liberalism, at least in the center and east of France. 
 The west and the south were still imbued with the preju- 
 dices of the past. It was an Abbot, namely, Sieyes,f 
 whose eloquent words decided, at the time of the con- 
 vocation of the States-General, the difficult question as 
 t<» the manner in which the three orders should be rep- 
 resented in the coming National Assembly. Another ol 
 these earnest priests, Abbot Gouttes, published a work 
 <n The Injustice of the Pretensions of the Clergy and 
 * See Appendix, note 3. f Ibid, note 4. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 47 
 
 Nobility. Abbot Pfcoot published letters 011 Political 
 Liberty; and Abbot Gregory,* who Mas afterward to 
 play so noble a role, issued a series of LcUert to Pari,/, 
 Priests. As au exeeptional ease, we might mention the 
 pamphlet of a priest of Auxerre, entitled the Gloria in 
 MboOms of the People, whieh presented in embryo all 
 the exeesses of the spirit of Jacobinism. Such was the 
 state of public opinion on the religious question at the 
 moment when all the secret aspirations were on the point 
 of bursting into active attempts at practical realization, 
 without meeting any other obstacle than their own bitter 
 rivalries. The Church was so inwoven in the State that 
 the one could not be touched without affecting the other. 
 We shall therefore see, from the very outbreak of the 
 Revolution, the question of Church and State distinctly 
 presenting itself, and marching through manifold perils 
 and mistakes to its own proper solution. 
 
 * See Appendix, note 5. 
 
RELIGION 
 
 AND THE 
 
 REIGN OF TERROR. 
 
 BOOK FIEST. 
 
 THE CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY. 
 
 CHAPTER L 
 
 LEGISLATIVE PRELIMINARIES FIRST DEBATE ON THE 
 
 LIBERTY OF WORSIIIP. 
 
 A unique hour in our history had arrived. France, 
 in seeing herself honored "with a worthy national repre- 
 sentation, felt the throbs of a new life. She saw the 
 future in the brilliant colors of that May sun which 
 saluted the opening of the so long and so earnestly 
 desired States-General. " Despise not your youth," said 
 a great poet. Let us likewise respect this season of genu- 
 ine enthusiasm for the public good. It had sprung up 
 in a race which had seemed in dotage. Let us not 
 deride this readiness to hope for every thing, this un- 
 limited confidence in the future. If the harvest answers 
 not to the spring, that does not say that the spring was 
 deficient in vigorous sap. Had it not been for these 
 
50 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 brilliant illusions, nothing at all would have been accom- 
 plished, nothing even undertaken. If there exists to-day 
 earnest opposition to the general abasement, generous 
 aspirations for improvement, it is because something 
 remains of the illusions of IV 8 9. They remain, after all, 
 the ideal of our history ; and the moment they are lost 
 sight of by the public, that moment the condition of the 
 nation will be similar to that of falling Rome. 
 
 The clergy partook largely of the universal enthu- 
 siasm. The Bishop of Nancy, in preaching the inaugu- 
 ration sermon of the States-General in a church at 
 Versailles, so touched the chord of patriotism as to be 
 interrupted by cheers, notwithstanding the sacredness 
 of the place. However, from the very first day it was 
 easy to observe profound differences of sentiment. On 
 several weighty points, however, there was general 
 harmony, such as the equal distribution of taxes, the 
 regular assembling of the States-General, and the refor- 
 mation of the abuses of the feudal system. The clergy 
 were liberal on every subject except the privileges of 
 the Church. M. de Tocqueville, in saying that they 
 were fully as favorable to civil liberty and political 
 rights as the members of the Third Estate, doubtless 
 goes too far, and attributes to them as a body what 
 belonged only to certain sections of them. Neverthe- 
 less it is true that as to politics they fell behind none in 
 liberalism, and were in advance of the nobility. Still 
 they were much divided on the question as to whether 
 the voting in the Assembly should be by individuals 
 instead of by orders. To their honor be it said, that 
 they insisted earnestly on Jhe suppression of slavery 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 51 
 
 and the slave-trade. But there was great variety of 
 sentiment on important subjects. The representatives 
 of the high clergy generally insisted on the divine right 
 of kings, while those coming from among the pariah 
 priests invariably pleaded the rights of the people. 
 
 But even the high clergy were divided. While the 
 Archbishop of Lyons spoke only of the anarchical and 
 subversive tendency of the new ideas, the Bishop of 
 Blois offered the half of his income to the public treas- 
 ury, and the Archbishop of Bordeaux preached self- 
 sacrifice to the great, and concord to all But this 
 liberalism did not extend to a recognition of the liberty 
 of conscience. The clergy insisted on the necessity of 
 maintaining the Catholic as the religion of the State, 
 and demanded a priestly surveillance of the press.' 
 They favored reforms in the education of the youth, 
 but insisted that it be confided to the Church.' 
 While admitting the need of reforming the discipline 
 of the convents, they insisted on maintaining the 
 monastic orders. Certainly these views were widely 
 different from those of the Third Estate. In the elec- 
 tion of many of the deputies to this body, an anti- 
 Church feeling had openly prevailed. At the Paris 
 election the cry was heard on every hand, " No more f 
 priests ! No more priests ! " The opinions of the Paris 
 delegation were very pointed. They held that, religion 
 being a matter of persuasion and not of force, every 
 citizen should be free to choose his own Church ; that 
 the sending of Peter-pence to Rome should be stopped; 
 that every Church dignitary should live in the bounds 
 of his official district; that plurality of benefices should 
 
52 Religion and the Reign of Terror, 
 
 be forbidden ; and that thenceforth monastic vows 
 should not bind devotees to remain in their convents. 
 Principles so widely discordant as these, were destined 
 to break out in the Assembly in open conflict. 
 
 The expenditures of Louis XIV., and the improvidence 
 of the government since his death, had brought the 
 nation to the brink of bankruptcy and ruin. As a last 
 expedient it was decided to summon a meeting of the 
 States-General, a body which had not been called to- 
 gether since the year 1614. This body consisted of 
 delegates from the three orders of society — the nobility, 
 the clergy, and the people, or Third Estate. The dele- 
 gates of the people numbered a few more than the 
 sum of those from the other two classes. The As- 
 sembly convened at Versailles in the beginning of 
 May, 1789. 
 
 An all important question now arose, namely, How 
 should the members of the Assembly vote ? Should it 
 be by orders, or by individuals ? Should the noble, the 
 priest, and the deputy of the people stand on an equality 
 in privilege and power, or should each order vote sep- 
 arately ? If the latter, then farewell to all hope of 
 effectual reform, for no measure could pass without the 
 vote of at least one of the privileged orders. The Third 
 Estate would, therefore, be powerless, inasmuch as the 
 two orders of the nobility and clergy could combine 
 and defeat all its measures. The question was, there- 
 fore, one of life and death. The existence of the estab- 
 lished order of things depended on its decision. Should 
 the demand of the Commons for a union of the three 
 orders be acceded to, then every thing would be in 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 53 
 
 their power, for they were in the majority. It was 
 natural that ancient France was not willing to die 
 without a struggle. Though tl* nobility and clergy 
 were willing, under the pressure of the times, to cut oil" 
 from the old oak all excrescences and parasitical^ 
 branches, still they were by no means favorable to tear-1 
 ing it out by the roots. The union of the orders was 
 especially distasteful to the clergy. The spirit of the 
 constitution of the priesthood was a principle of isola- 
 tion. Based on the order of the Levites, they felt 
 themselves to be separated from the laity in every 
 respect— in their office, in their property, even in their 
 garments. To bow under the sway of the common law, 
 and to debate their rights with laymen, was to abandon 
 all their cherished notions of special privilege. It 
 would, therefore, be unjust to condemn their long hesi- 
 tation before consenting to a fusion of the orders. This 
 step, however, they were finally compelled to take. 
 
 During the weeks of contest which preceded the 
 fusion, the Third Estate gave proof of consummate 
 political genius. They aimed at a definite point, and 
 were ready to yield in any thing that was not essential 
 to their object. When it became necessary, they exhib- 
 ited a sublime and heroic force of detennination. Such 
 was the hour when, shut out of the former place oi 
 meeting, they assembled in the empty saloon of a tennis- 
 court, and, raising their hands, took a solemn vow not 
 to separate till they had given the nation a new consti- 
 tution. They were more fortunate than their privilege.! 
 brethren, moreover, in having j, their ranks the prince 
 of modern orators— one who, despite his vice, wa 
 
54: Eeligion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 abreast with the noble enthusiasm of the time, and 
 whose winged words were like lightning flashes in the 
 faces of his foes. Mifabeau* was an intellectual king, 
 and dominated in the Assembly by the divine right of 
 genius. 
 
 The victory of the Third Estate was certain from the 
 first day. They were united, while their opponents 
 were divided. On the first vote a large minority of the 
 clergy favored the fusion of the orders. As this minor- 
 ity, however, contained only three Bishops, it is clear 
 that it consisted chiefly of the inferior clergy. The 
 majority itself was less firm in resistance than the no- 
 bility. They treated the delegations which were sent 
 to them from the Third Estate with deference and 
 respect; still they could not turn aside the inevitable 
 democratic drift of things, which everywhere stared 
 them in the face. Xo stroke of policy or cunning was 
 left untried. The most ingenious of all was the attempt 
 to carry their point by surprise. Prices of food were 
 enormously high, and the people in some places were 
 on the point of famine. What could therefore seem 
 more patriotic than, for a season, to adjourn their long 
 political dissensions and attend at once to the furnishing 
 of bread to the starving ? Accordingly, under pretext 
 of attending to this duty of charity, the body of the 
 clergy voted unanimously, on the sixth of June, to ap- 
 point a committee to take into consideration the scarcity 
 of grain, and invited the other two bodies to second 
 them in this good work. Doubtless the minority voted 
 for this measure with perfect honesty and patriotism ; 
 * See Appendix, note G. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 55 
 
 as to the majority, however, it is perfectly evident that 
 it was a cunning design to avoid the fusion of the orders 
 by surprising them in advance into separate action. 
 The scheme could not succeed. Bailly, the wise presi- 
 dent of the Third Estate, replied to the proposition as 
 follows : " The most ardent wish of the deputies of the 
 people is to procure them relief. The resolution of the 
 clergy justifies them in believing that that order shares 
 with them in this wish, and Will therefore not long delay 
 to unite in a body with them, without which union the 
 public distress must go on increasing forever." Thus, 
 beaten on their own ground, the higher clergy looked 
 elsewhere for help, and urged the King to despotic 
 action. But fresh chagrin awaited them here. Com- 
 missioners had been appointed by the three orders to 
 confer with those of the King, but their deliberations 
 resulted in little. By this time the spirit of the hour 
 had so far made progress among the clergy as to gain a 
 majority. This majority now resolved on the first occa- 
 sion to put their views into practice. 
 
 A royal session took place June 23. The King, sur- 
 rounded by all the pomp of royalty, appeared in^ the 
 Assembly, expressed much displeasure at the obstinacy 
 of the Commons, made sundry threats to provide for 
 the good of the nation without their help if they per- 
 sisted in making trouble, enjoined the continuance of 
 the separate action of the three orders, and on retiring 
 ordered the Assembly to disperse. The nobility and 
 clergy obeyed, but the Commons retained their scats. 
 "That day," says Mignet, "the royal authority was 
 lost." It was successfully disobeyed. " The Assembly 
 
56 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 remained," said Sieyes, " what it had been from the first, 
 that is, sovereign." The proud words of Mirabeau de- 
 clared that the new right was stronger than the old. The 
 King, urged on by the higher clergy and the nobility, had 
 gone too far, and lost every thing. It was in vain that, 
 in conformity with his direction, they persisted in meet- 
 ing separately. 1 Within a day or so the majority of the 
 clergy and a large number of the nobility had joined 
 the Commons, and the King, under the pressure of 
 public opinion, ordered the remaining ones to do like- 
 wise. 
 
 The disaffected members of the clergy sought to pro- 
 vide for the future by protesting against the union they 
 had reluctantly consented to. This was met by the with- 
 ering words of Mirabeau, that no one could be a member 
 of the Assembly who did not recognize its sovereignty. 
 The former system of things had passed away. The only 
 authority remaining consisted in the sovereignty of a de- 
 liberative assembly. By the 27th of June, we may say, 
 the Revolution was consummated. Nothing of a more 
 radical nature remained to be done than had already 
 been accomplished. 
 
 As regards the Church of France, the changes were 
 of a deep and wide-reaching nature. It was no . longer 
 an isolated order in the bosom of the State. Its organi- 
 zation was now to fall under the criticism and direction, 
 not of its own ministers, but of the deputies of the 
 nation. The great danger was that in the confusion of 
 the temporal and spiritual spheres, the sanctity of the 
 conscience might be violated. 
 
 As to the National Assembly, it seemed that it now had 
 
Religion and the Reign of Toror. 57 
 
 nothing further to do than to enter on its great work of 
 preparing a constitution for France. But it was neces- 
 sary, first of all, to provide for its own safety. At this 
 point a dangerous power came to its protection. This 
 was the power of the populace, the mob. We do not 
 censure all uprisings of the people; they are sometimes 
 sublime and of good result. But in the state of the 
 ignorance of the masses at the close of the eighteenth 
 century, these explosions of public sentiment had the 
 character of savage and intractable forces. The in- 
 structed classes breathe the fire of a legitimate indigna- 
 tion into the hearts of the brawny-armed masses, and 
 imagine that they will stop their violence at the proper 
 bounds ; but this is rarely the case. The mad waves of 
 wrath roll higher and higher, until both friends and foes 
 are submerged in the general wreck. Moderate liber- 
 ahsts will always perish in the impure waters of dema- 
 gogism, so long as they will not be wise enough to 
 busy themselves fraternally with the elevation of the 
 masses in times of peace. It is the just chastisement of 
 their careless selfishness. Such is the great lesson to be 
 learned from the stormy beginnings of the French Inv- 
 olution. Certainly, when foreign troops were in camp 
 at Versailles, ready brutally to disperse the National 
 Parliament, it was right to seek protection in the popu- 
 lace of Paris; but the same element which saved the 
 Assembly was destined afterward to constrain and 
 crush it. The despotism of the street, once called into 
 play, stopped not till it was the ruling power of the 
 ■Wtaon. We applaud the people who destroyed the 
 Bastile; but it u-ms the > ;1 .ne people that afterward rev- 
 
58 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 eled at the foot of the guillotine. We will see that the 
 influence of the mob was never more imperious than at 
 the time when the question of religion was discussed in 
 the National Assembly. 
 
 Not that the people of Paris, at the opening of the 
 Revolution, were hostile toward religion. On the con- 
 trary, they even mingled with the taking of the Bastile 
 a vein of 'religious zeal. In destroying a prison which 
 stood in connection with a convent, the mob spared the 
 Sisters of Charity and respected their character. Irre- 
 ligious passion was so far from being yet excited, that 
 after the victory of the Bastile the people of Paris com- 
 mitted the opening Revolution to the patronage of St. 
 Genevieve. They made a religious procession in grati- 
 tude to God for his help. Men, women, and children 
 flocked with garlands and votive offerings to the tomb 
 of the patroness of Paris. The citizens of the faubourg 
 St. Antoine repaired to church preceded by young ladies 
 in white and a large number of the clergy, and piously 
 celebrated funeral services for those who had fallen at 
 the Bastile. These dispositions, it is true, soon changed ; 
 but they show that at this point the hostility which was 
 afterward so bitter against religion, and so destructive 
 to liberty, had not yet penetrated the masses. 
 
 The night of the 4th of August will remain forever a 
 glorious epoch in our history. It presented to the world 
 an unprecedented example of patriotic enthusiasm and 
 noble self-sacrifice — we might call it a sort of worldly 
 Pentecost — so sudden and so great was the change. It 
 presented the French character in one of its brightest, 
 but also most perilous aspects. The nobility and high 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 59 
 
 clergy vied with each other in sacrificing on the altar of 
 the country the privileges they had enjoyed from time 
 immemorial. The scene was sublime ; still we cannot 
 forget that it is not by such exhibitions of momentary 
 devotion that permanent changes are generally brought 
 about in society. What one hour can do, another hour 
 may undo. Despite all this, however, the night of the 
 4th of August remains an admirable moment. 
 
 The nobility had just renounced their feudal rights 
 and privileges. Then the Bishop of Nancy arose to 
 speak for the clergy. He declared that if any redemp- 
 tion was given in exchange for the privileges they were 
 about to relinquish to the nation, it was his wish that it 
 should not be to the profit of the ecclesiastical proprietor, 
 but rather that it should be used as a public fund, in 
 feeding and clothing the destitute. After him, the Bishop 
 of Chartres demanded the abolition of the laws of the 
 chase. The generous Gregory proposed the abrogation 
 of the annats, an occasional tribute heretofore paid to 
 the Pope. Several priests offered to the country the 
 whole of their incomes. This grand session was termi- 
 nated by an approval of the proposition of the Arch- 
 bishop of Paris to sing a Te Deum in the chapel of the 
 King. It was fitting that the name of God should be 
 pronounced at the close of such a session. All that is 
 grand or noble is from him. His breath had brooded 
 over an assembly, the majority of whom were far from 
 belie ving in his providence. 
 
 The clergy were scarcely aware of the gravity of the 
 events just accomplished. This lay not so much in the 
 Facrifices they had already made, as in the fact that the 
 
60 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 whole question of the Church property was intimately 
 connected with questions already settled. The clergy 
 had unconsciously submitted the whole subject to the 
 arbitration of a deliberative assembly. The day after 
 the memorable session of August the 4th, the question 
 of tithes presented itself in all its difficulties. It is true 
 they were included among the other exceptional taxes 
 which had been renounced forever; but the question 
 remained, whether the renunciation was to be understood 
 as absolute, or whether the tithes were to be redeemed 
 in money or otherwise. Many of the clergy were of the 
 latter opinion. Much troublesome discussion arose on 
 the subject. Finally Deputy Buzot arose and uttered 
 the following insolent words : " The best thing the clergy 
 can do is to save appearances, and to seem to make, of 
 their own accord, the heavy sacrifices which imperative 
 circumstances will force upon them." Mirabeau pro- 
 nounced, on the occasion, one of his finest speeches, in 
 favor of the unconditional abolition of the tithes, and 
 of the direct payment of the ministers of religion out of 
 the general treasury. He was ably responded to by 
 Sieves, who, however, could not gain the majority. 
 Finally the clergy saw that their cause was hopelessly 
 lost. They yielded, and made the necessitated renuncia- 
 tion by the mouth of the venerable Archbishop of Paris. 
 His words were worthy and noble. " We remit," said 
 he, " all these ecclesiastical tithes into the hands of a 
 generous and just nation. That the Gospel be preached, 
 that divine worship be celebrated with dignity and pro- 
 priety, and that the poor be provided for, these are the 
 objects of our ministry. We have confidence in the Na- 
 
Rdigion and the Reign of Terror. 01 
 
 tional. Assembly." To imagine that the Church property 
 could, after this, be saved to any degree whatever, was 
 the most vain delusion — the cause was lost before the 
 battle. 
 
 Let us terminate this chapter by a review of the opin- 
 ions of the Constituent Assembly as to the liberty of con- 
 science. The subject came up in connection with the dec- 
 laration of the rights of man. The work of framing a 
 constitution would not have been in harmony with the 
 French genius had it not been prefaced by a chapter of 
 philosophical generalities. One would suppose it to have 
 been more necessary to enact good practical laws than to 
 proclaim abstract rights, which are never a barrier to 
 tyranny. Such a document has, moreover, the disadvan- 
 tage of reducing past history to an abstraction, and of 
 taking too little account of circumstances. It would have 
 been better to follow the sentiment of Mirabeau, who said, 
 " Liberty is never the fruit of principles drawn from met- 
 aphysical axioms, but rather of such as are drawn from 
 the experience of daily life." But it was not to be ex- 
 pected that philosophy, which had made the Revolution, 
 would retire from the field the very day of its own tri- 
 umph. However, when the wor£ of prefacing the con- 
 stitution with these abstract rights was once undertaken, 
 it would have been better, as Gregory reminded the 
 Assembly, to make the work complete, and to remember, 
 that " man was not cast into the world by chance ; that 
 if he has rights, it would be well to speak of Him who 
 gave them ; and that if he has duties, some mention 
 should be made of Him who has established them." The 
 declaration of rights was incomplete, and even dan- 
 
62 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 gerous, without the declaration of duties. It was silent 
 as to the rights of God. It was an attempt to be free 
 without being just. If it is objected that a declaration 
 of duties would have approached too closely the domain 
 of religion, we answer, That is true. The safer way is, 
 for political assemblies to abstain entirely from such 
 philosophical abstractions. Their tendency is generally 
 evil. 
 
 We are astonished, however, that these abstract state- 
 ments should be so ambiguous on the point of the 
 rights of conscience. But our astonishment ceases as 
 soon as we reflect, on the one hand, on the influence 
 of Bossuet on the opinions of the clerical members, 
 and, on the other, on that of Rousseau on the philo- 
 sophical party. The words of the declaration of rights 
 which relate to the general subject of religion were as 
 follows : " The law not being able to take cognizance of 
 secret wrongs, it is for religion and morality to supply 
 the defect. It is therefore essential for the good order 
 of society that both be respected. The existence of a 
 religion requires a public worship. Respect for the 
 public worship is therefore indispensable. Every citizen 
 who does not disturb the established worship should be 
 unmolested." This statement admits one national re- 
 ligion, and only one. The vague reserve as to non-mo- 
 lestation was, in no respect, protection to dissenters. It 
 was the application to Catholicism of the principles of 
 the Contrat Social. The high clergy were very well 
 satisfied. A bishop, in expressing his pleasure, observed 
 that "religion is the basis of empires," and cited the 
 words of Plutarch, that " it would be easier to build a. city 
 
lid iy ion and the Reign of Terror. 63 
 
 in tlit' air than to found a republic on any other principle 
 than the worship of the gods." A lay deputy, La Borde, 
 understanding the full drift of these words, uttered his 
 earnest protest. " I avow," said he, " that I am afflicted 
 at seeing Christians invoking the civil power in behalf 
 of a religion which should be maintained only by the 
 purity of its doctrine. Surely, earthly powers have 
 nothing to do with religion. Liberty of religion is a 
 right of every citizen. Let us respect other worships, 
 that our own may be respected in return. Our worship 
 should in no way interfere with the exercise of other re- 
 ligions." But the Assembly was not yet ripe for such 
 opinions. At this point the powerful words of Mirabeau 
 came to the aid of the good cause. The objectionable 
 articles were rejected. M. de Castellane proposed to sub- 
 stitute the following: " No man shall be disturbed for his 
 religious opinions, nor troubled in the exercise of his wor- 
 ship." This excited a violent opposition on the part of 
 the Conservatives and Catholics, but it was bravely de- 
 fended by Mirabeau and others. One of the most touch- 
 ing incidents of the debate was the appearance at the tri- 
 bune of Rabaud St. Etienne,* the worthy son of the heroic 
 and persecuted Protestant minister, Paul Rabaut, When 
 he spoke the words, " I am the representative of a great 
 people," one seemed to hear in him the voice of that 
 vast multitude of Protestants who for ages had been 
 oppressed, imprisoned, banished, and often put to death, 
 by a State Church and an intolerant clergy. " He who 
 attacks the liberty of others," said Rabaut, "deserves to 
 live in slavery. A worship is a dogma; a dogma is a 
 * Set- Appendix, note 7. 
 
64 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 matter of opinion, and opinions should be free. In- 
 structed by the long and bloody experience of the past, 
 it is time, finally, to break the unnatural barriers which 
 separate man from man, Frenchman from Frenchman." 
 He honored himself by joining to the cause of his own 
 people that of the Jews. He concluded with the words, 
 " My country is free ; let her show herself worthy by ac- 
 cording equal rights to all her children." 
 
 The Assembly closed the discussions by adopting an 
 ambiguous half-way measure. It was to this effect : 
 " No one shall be disturbed for his opinions, even re- 
 ligious ones, if their manifestation does not disturb the 
 public order established by law?'' Mirabeau expressed 
 his displeasure at this resolution in a vehement news- 
 paper article : " We cannot dissimulate our sadness 
 that the National Assembly, instead of smothering in- 
 tolerance in the germ, has placed it among the articles 
 of the declaration of rights. Restrictive laws in matters 
 of religion are absurd in themselves, for they require 
 men of different intelligence to see evidence in the same 
 dogmas, and truth in the same doctrines. Such laws 
 are immoral ; they create corrupt men who traffic in 
 their faith. They are impious. What greater impiety 
 than to interpose between man and God, and say to 
 man, ' We forbid you to worship in this or that manner 
 and to God,-* We forbid you to receive homage offered 
 under any other form than our own ? ' " But we will not 
 quote further. The great orator did his work earnestly 
 and well, but in vain. Many of the abuses he exposed 
 are still prevalent in France. 
 
 We have now finished what we had to say on the 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 65 
 
 treatment of the Church question in the first period of 
 the Constituent Assembly. Most surely the majority of 
 that great body was animated by a true love of liberty. 
 Would to Heaven that this love had been as intelligent 
 as it was ardent and sincere ! The results obtained 
 were very important. The Church was no longer a 
 separate order in the State, partial tolerance was in- 
 scribed on the frontispiece of the constitution ; but 
 neither the independence of the Church nor the liberty 
 of conscience had been truly understood or guaranteed. 
 These first errors were destined to react in a most in- 
 jurious manner on the deliberations of the succeeding 
 year as to the organization of the Church. 
 . 9 
 
66 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 * 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 DISCUSSION ON THE PROPERTY OF THE CLERGY ATTI- 
 TUDE OF THE DIFFERENT PARTIES SUPPRESSION OF 
 
 THE RELIGIOUS ORDERS. 
 
 The reforms already made in Church matters naturally- 
 led to others of a more radical character, so much the 
 more as the legislators of 1789 were governed, not by 
 precedent, but by abstract principles. This method of 
 procedure, so different from that of the English, leads 
 often to chimerical and impracticable measures. The 
 Church was the greatest proprietor of fiefs in the king- 
 dom ; she fell, therefore, under the influence of all the 
 new laws which weakened and abrogated the feudal 
 • system. We must also take into account the financial 
 distress of the nation. Every hour was bringing the 
 country nearer the gulf of bankruptcy. The nation had 
 in its hands an immense property, the title to which 
 was not fully settled. . Every temptation was, therefore, 
 inciting the Constituent Assembly to examine the title 
 of this property; and, if possible, to obtain it for the 
 relief of the national treasury. 
 
 To a better understanding of the debates on this sub- 
 ject let us notice the condition of the Church property 
 I under the ancient monarchy. The primitive Church, in 
 ; the heroic age of persecutions, lived simply but glo- 
 riously from the free gifts of the saints, content with 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 67 
 
 what was strictly necessary, and seeking abundance] 
 only in order to increase its acts of charity. These 
 unconstrained donations amounted to large sums as 
 soon as the Gospel obtained footing in large places, like 
 Alexandria, Carthage, and Rome. With Constantine 
 Christianity became an official religion, with rights of 
 proprietorship, and was the recipient of imperial dona- 
 tions, it soon began to receive rich heritages from 
 dying saints. Augustine cries out against the undue 
 persuasion, so commonly practiced even in his day, to 
 obtain testamentary gifts. It is well known how favor- 
 able to the increase of the wealth of the Church were 
 the fears of an approaching end of the world, about the 
 year 1000. It seemed very convenient to escape the • 
 wrath of God by gifts of lands, which the fires of the j 
 last judgment were- soon to consume. The develop- ' 
 ment of the monastic life also opened to the Church 
 exhaustless sources of riches. As a result, the Church 
 became the richest proprietor in all Catholic States.. 
 This was especially so in France. But the more these 
 possessions increased the more they were bound up and 
 inwoven in the civil government by an embarrassing 
 net-work of special laws. We are less astonished at the 
 acts of the French Assembly when we see to what an 
 extent the Church possessions had for centuries been 
 under the control of the chief of the State. 
 
 In former ages the King was the virtual Destower of 
 many of the richly paid Church offices. To the most 
 important of the benefices lie made the appointments, 
 since his nominations to the Pope were equivalent to 
 elections. But it was especially in the administration 
 
68 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 of the Church property that the hand of the State was 
 felt. " The Church," says Fleury, " has neither the 
 same liberty to purchase nor to sell real estate as is en- 
 joyed by individuals." In the seventeenth century, it 
 required a special authorization by the King to legalize 
 either the alienation or the acquisition of real estate by 
 the Church. We will see that the action of the Con- 
 stituent Assembly in laying hand on this vast property 
 was perfectly in harmony with precedents given in the 
 reign of Louis XIV. 
 
 One month had elapsed since the famous night of the 
 fourth of August. The decrees of the Assembly had 
 excited, rather than satisfied, the passions of the people. 
 The war against the castles had broken out on all sides. 
 Insufficient harvests added to the public distress. The 
 fearful debt increased from day to day. The financier 
 Keeker * was at his wits' end. His cry of alarm, taken 
 up and resounded by the eloquent mouth of Mirabeau, 
 revealed an appalling danger which admitted neither 
 delay nor half measures. In the interval between two 
 of Mirabeauls finest orations an unknown orator arose 
 and proposed to demand of the clergy the sacrifice of 
 the precious ornaments of the Church. This he declared 
 would amount to 140,000,000 francs. Contrary to all 
 expectation, the Archbishop of Paris arose and declared 
 that the clergy was ready to sacrifice all except so much 
 as was necessary for the dignity of the worship. The 
 clergy wished at any price to avoid the debate on the 
 title of the real estate of the Church. The cry of dis- 
 tress of a whole people, however, overcame the hesita- 
 * See Appendix, note 8. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 69 
 
 tion of the Assembly, and the dreaded question was 
 broached. Unfortunately, views of expediency and im- 
 mediate utility prevailed too much to the detriment of 
 justice and safe policy. 
 
 In an address drawn up in the name of the Assembly 
 by Mirabeau, soliciting patriotic donations, it was 
 argued at length that the wealth of the Church, in 
 being turned to the defense and safety of the country, 
 would not be perverted from its orginal destination, 
 namely, that of benefiting the people. It was but a 
 provision laid up for such a time of need as the present. 
 It was, therefore, only an act of piety for -the clergy to 
 come to the public relief. On the eleventh of October, 
 1789, the formal proposition to take possession of the 
 property of the Church was for the first time submitted 
 to the Constituent Assembly; and by a curious freak 
 of destiny, the motion was made by one of her own sons, 
 a youthful Bishop, who represented in his own person 
 the two privileged orders of the nation. It was from 
 the di>dainful mouth of Talleyrand that the bold words 
 fell, to the great scandal of his caste, but to the applause 
 of all the representatives of young France. Talleyrand 
 was the mouth-piece of the Committee of Twelve, which 
 had been appointed to discuss the securities for a loan 
 of 80,000,000 francs. He declared that the other re- 
 sources of the nation were insulficient ; that it was 
 necessary to appropriate the property of the Church ; 
 that the State had the same right over the clergy as 
 over other corporations ; that it might revoke their 
 privileges if need be; and that if the State provided for 
 the maintenance of the clergy in a direct manner, the 
 
70 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 design of the donors of the Church property would not 
 be interfered with, nor the dictates of justice violated. 
 Two days afterward Mirabeau, unwilling to see himself 
 outdone in radical measures, proposed the decreeing of 
 the following principles : " First, that the ownership of 
 the property of the clergy belongs to the nation on con- 
 dition that it provides for the support of the clerical 
 order ; and, second, that the disposition of this property 
 be such that no curate shall receive annually less than 
 1,200 francs, with lodging." It was well that the ques- 
 tion was thus presented in all its completeness. The 
 debate lasted three weeks. It had previously, however, 
 been thoroughly discussed by the press. The able 
 pens of Turgot, Sieves, and Servan had shared in the 
 work. 
 
 The discussion in the Assembly began, as usual, with 
 philosophical generalities, and this was perhaps its most 
 dangerous feature, for what property is it whose original 
 title will bear the test of metaphysical examination? 
 The Abbot Maury replied to the Assembly with perti- 
 nence : " I will prove to you that with these principles 
 you will bring us to an agrarian law. In fact, as often 
 as you go back to the origin of property the nation will 
 go back with you. The people will place themselves at 
 the epoch when they left the forests of Germany, and 
 demand a new division of lands." 
 
 Three groups of opinions were presently observable 
 in the Assembly : first, the party which opposed all con- 
 cession and real reform ; second, the extreme radical 
 party, which took no account of circumstances, and saw 
 only the danger and wants of the government; and, 
 
Religion and tJve Reign of Tensor. 
 
 71 
 
 third, the cautious reformers. These groups are known 
 as the parties of the right, the left, and the middle. 
 The right was, naturally, formed of the higher clergy, 
 together with the nobility. They committed too often 
 the fault of confounding the "cause of the Church prop- 
 erty with that of religion itself. " The sale of our prop- 
 erty will remedy nothing," said the Bishop of Clermont. 
 " Soon there would remain neither ministers nor relig- 
 ion." The Archbishop of Aix was of the same opinion, 
 but he admitted the necessity of important reforms, pro- 
 vided they could be made canonically. One is at first 
 astonished to find on the extreme left, in opposition to 
 the high clergy, quite a number of curates. But the 
 lower clergy had suffered enough in the past at the 
 hands of the high dignitaries to dampen their zeal in 
 defense of privileges from the enjoyment of which they 
 had been carefully excluded. The Abbot Gouttes said 
 in plain terms that the riches of the clergy had done 
 much evil to the cause of religion " by extending the 
 contempt, due only to certain Church dignitaries, to all 
 the Pastors without distinction." The Deputies of the 
 left maintained that the clergy were not the possessors 
 of the Church property, but only its administrators. 
 The honest and eloquent Barnave* declared from the 
 start that the clerical order existed only for the State ; 
 that the State could dissolve it at its will, and seize and 
 administer the property at its pleasure. The discussion 
 made a rapid advance when the jurisconsult Thouret 
 entered the arena. He raised the gravest objection to 
 the title of the Church to its property, in maintaining 
 * See Appendix, note 9. 
 
72 Religion and tJie Reign of Terror. 
 
 that it differed entirely from the title of individuals. 
 " Individuals, existing before civil law, have rights 
 which they hold from nature ; such is the right of prop- 
 erty. All corporate bodies, however, exist by civil law, 
 and their rights depend on law, and may be modified 
 by law. The legislative power has consequently com- 
 plete power over them." The inferences from these 
 principles were soon drawn by the whole Assembly. 
 A Deputy declared that the State was not only the com- 
 petent master of religion, but that it even might abolish 
 the Christian religion, together with its worship, and 
 establish another more moral one in its place, provided 
 such a one could be found. " It is fitting," said he in 
 finishing, "that the priests be salaried by the nation; 
 if they are proprietors they may be too independent." 
 In these opinions we find a strange mingling of truth 
 with error, the whole showing how much the evil genius 
 of the Contrat Social prevailed in the Legislature. 
 Petion * produced a breeze in the Assembly by boldly 
 exposing the moral disadvantages of the riches of the 
 clergy. " Is it not," asked he, " the immense wealth of 
 the priests which has corrupted their morals ? " Cries 
 of " order " were heard ; but Camus, the Jansenist, who 
 was presiding, declared that he could not call a speaker to 
 order for uttering what was printed all over the nation. 
 
 Between these two extreme parties a third opinion, 
 wiser and more moderate, was held and defended The 
 statesman Malouet, and the Abbots Gregory and Gout- 
 tes, were the chief speakers. Malouet expressed great 
 fear of the evil effects of alienating the affections of the 
 * See Appendix, note 10. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 73 
 
 clergy from the popular cause, at a time when the As- 
 sembly so much needed their aid to make the passage 
 easy from the old to the new state of things. He 
 argued that it was precisely because of the popular 
 fury against the property of the Church that the legis- 
 lative Assembly should be more cautious in its action. 
 He proposed to leave to the Church as much as was 
 strictly necessary to support the expenses of the clergy, 
 and to appropriate all the rest to the uses of the State.' 
 This proposition was surely a wise and just mean be- 
 tween the radical extremes, but it found little favor 
 amid the passions of the hour. It must be confessed 
 that the priests did many things to irritate and excite 
 their opponents. They circulated, for ^example, a pre- 
 tended petition of the poor of various parishes, against 
 any sale of Church property on the plea that thus" they 
 would be shut off from the abundant alms which from 
 time immemorial they had received from the hands of 
 the Church. To bring the discussion finally to a ter- 
 mination it was necessary that Achilles should come out 
 of his tent. It was for Mirabeau to close the debate, 
 and carry the majority with him. It is to be regretted 
 that his weight was thrown into the ultra-radic a r scale. 
 Had his voice been for conciliation he might have saved 
 his country from many misfortunes ; but he was the 
 chief of a party, and, therefore, very dependent. He 
 pleaded with great eloquence and dialectical skill for 
 the popular cause ; but he was not careful enough in 
 guarding the rights of conscience, and could not get rid 
 of the notion, that it was necessary to have an official 
 religion under the surveillance of the State. His mo- 
 
 10 
 
74 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 tion was carried on the fifth of November, under the 
 following form : " All the property of the clergy is at 
 the disposal of the nation on condition that it shall pro- 
 vide in a fitting manner for the expenses of worship, the 
 maintenance of its ministers, and the necessities of the 
 poor. As to the dispositions to be made for the minis- 
 ters of religion, they shall be paid each not less than* 
 one thousand two hundred francs, not including lodging 
 and the use of a garden." 
 
 Before pronouncing judgment on the justice of this 
 revolutionary decree, let us remind the detractors of the 
 French Revolution that in this measure it did nothing 
 which is not justified by the principles of the ancient 
 monarchy. We have the proof in a remarkable work 
 which was compiled by the Master of Requests, at the 
 express order of Louis XIV., for the purpose of ascer- 
 taining the rights of the crown in ecclesiastical matters. 
 The conclusion reached by this author is, that except in 
 cases of pressing necessity the goods of the Church can- 
 not be alienated without the concurrence of the 'Church 
 itself. But these restrictions fall entirely away in cases 
 of urgent necessity. " For example," says he, " when 
 an invasion of an enemy is to be repulsed, it cannot be 
 denied that the King has the right to use the property 
 of the Church as well as other property for the defense 
 of the State." It is well known that, acting on these 
 principles, Michault proposed an alienation of a portion 
 of the property of the Church in the year 1749. The 
 Constituent Assembly, in its boldest decrees, did nothing 
 more than act on the same principle; it simply laid 
 hand on the property of the Church in a case of most 
 
Rdigion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 75 
 
 urgent national necessity. Talleyrand and Mirabeau 
 acted on the principles of Louis XIV. 
 
 We cannot deny the special right of the State to con- 
 trol the Church so far as it is a corporate body. If the 
 State gave to corporations the same iuimunities as to 
 individuals, they would soon become master of the 
 State itself, from the fact that their property, not being 
 liable to the vicissitudes of inheritance, would accumu- 
 late very rapidly, and to an unlimited extent. They 
 would absorb the chief part of the wealth of the State. 
 For this reason religious corporations have always been 
 placed, in France, under the strict surveillance of the 
 laws. They have existed only by special royal per- 
 mits. Xow it cannot be denied that the State has the 
 right, if it sees fit, to withdraw its authorization, and 
 dissolve these same corporate bodies. Of course, how- 
 ever, it has not the right to suspend an essential lib- 
 erty; the general good does not permit it to interfere 
 with the rights of the conscience, or to forbid the indi- 
 vidual or collective manifestation of the religious belief 
 of its citizens. Thus religion in none of its forms should 
 depend on the pleasure of the State. The State should 
 neither authorize nor interdict it, for in so doing it in- 
 terferes with an original right of the conscience° The 
 priests, who were indignant at the alienation of the 
 goods of the Church, ought much more to have mani- 
 fested their holy horror at the alienation of the rights 
 of conscience, by a State Church, nnder the ancient 
 monarchy. This was a much greater profanation than 
 that committed by the Constituent Assembly. Relig- 
 ion, however inviolable in itself, is so no longer when it 
 
76 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 becomes a vast political corporation, and the proprietor 
 of a large portion of the soil of a nation. In this re- 
 spect it falls under the power of the State, and grows 
 in dependence as its possessions increase. The political 
 element in its constitution subjects it to the fluctuating 
 influence of political systems. When every thing about 
 it is undergoing reform it surely cannot remain un- 
 touched, unless it be true that one age can establish 
 institutions which no future generation can change, and, 
 as M. Laboulaye well observes, unless it be a fact that 
 the earth no longer belongs to the living, but to the 
 dead. It is not less evident that one generation should 
 not have to bear all the expenses of reforms which it 
 could not avoid, and which centuries of abuse have 
 rendered necessary. If, therefore, in the present case 
 the State had a right to alienate the goods of the 
 Church, it remains to be seen whether it used its right 
 wisely, and, above all, whether it chose the best mean* 
 of providing for public worship. 
 
 It was to the interest of the Revolution, while inter- 
 vening in the affairs of the Church, to avoid as much as 
 possible the alienation of the affections of so powerful a 
 class as the ministers of the altar. Those who thought 
 that at the close of the eighteenth century the Christian 
 Church was incapable of deeply agitating and endan- 
 gering the peace of the country, were sadly mistaken. 
 They judged the whole of the nation by the frivolous 
 drawing-rooms of Paris. Despite the scandals of the 
 high clergy, and the incredulity of the educated classes, 
 the religious sentiment was still the most powerful ele- 
 ment with which the Revolution had to contend. And 
 
E dig ion and the Etign of Terror. 77 
 
 now that the people had fallen into trials and sufferings, 
 it was sensibly regaining its natural strength. The 
 radieal measures of the Assembly were well litted to 
 strengthen both the real religion and the fanaticism of 
 the people and clergy, for now they could plausibly 
 believe themselves the objects of injustice and persecu- 
 tion. Religion is always instinctively sought by thei 
 sutfering and wronged. It was not in the power of the 
 Assembly to give the people a new religion in place of 
 the old one. It was, therefore, a great political blunder 
 to take at once such a radical step against the time- 
 honored immunities of the clergy. The needed prop- 
 erty could have been obtained in a much more concili- 
 atory way. It is assuredly to the interest both of 
 Church and State that they be independent of each 
 other. Xow had some such proposition as that of Ma- 
 loud been adopted, the most of the property might have 
 been obtained for the relief of the country, and the rest 
 set apart for the support of the ministers of the Church, 
 leaving the management of it to the clercjv, and thus 
 freeing the State from its troublesome and dangerous 
 connection with the Church. A willingness to* such a 
 step had finally been expressed, even by the high clergy. 
 Tims the question of Church and State would have been 
 wisely and at once settled, and religion in France would 
 have been in the happy condition it has so long enjoyed 
 in the United States. This is the solution for which 
 Cavour, the great statesman of modern Italy, strove so 
 earnestly — namely, a free Church in a free State. 
 
 It was not so much to establish* a principle as to raise 
 funds that the Assembly had \ oted the alienation of the 
 
78 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 goods of the Church. The work, therefore, of putting 
 the decree into practical effect soon began. The Com 
 mittee which had been formed on the twentieth of Au 
 gust, 1789, to prepare the part of the constitution which 
 had relation to the Church, was now furnished with an 
 immense increase of business. It had to prepare plans 
 for the sale and management of the Church property, 
 and for the support and reorganization of the Church. 
 Composed at first of fifteen members, it was after- 
 ward increased. It embraced men of every shade o*f 
 opinion. This Committee was subdivided into three 
 sections, the one being charged with the reconstruction 
 of the Church constitution, and the other two with the 
 administration of the confiscated property. These sec- 
 tions went to work with great zeal, and it is in accord- 
 ance with their recommendations that those measures 
 of the Assembly were decreed which threw the Church 
 into distress and anarchy. 
 
 In November the Assembly ordered the Church prop- 
 erty to be put under the charge of the King and of the 
 courts, and advised the King to make for the present no 
 more appointments to benefices. On the motion of an 
 Abbot a decree was issued requiring all who possessed 
 benefices to present, before the courts, a detailed list of 
 all the chattels and real estate of the Church in their 
 possession. This declaration, after having been posted 
 in the parish churches, was to be returned to the As- 
 sembly. These motions indicated the firm intention of 
 the nation to make use of the new resources which had 
 fallen into its hands. 
 
 After a hot debate, in which some of the high clergy 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 79 
 
 distinguished themselves in vain, the Assembly decreed, 
 on the 20th of December, the immediate sale of Church 
 property to the amount of four hundred million francs, 
 to serve as a basis for the issue of paper money. It 
 was observed facetiously by some of the Deputies, that 
 this disembarrassing the clergy of temporal cares would 
 facilitate the return of the Church to her golden age. 
 The Assembly now took possession also of the royal 
 domain. Truly may we say, a great gulf had been cre- 
 ated between ancient and modern France. 
 
 One of the first cares of the Ecclesiastical Committee 
 was to recommend to the Assembly the abolition of the 
 monastic orders, which at this time covered the entire 
 country. It was a complex question. The laws had 
 covered the religious vows with their powerful sanction. 
 But public opinion urged to the reform. The monastic 
 •life, once useful in converting and enlightening the 
 people, had fallen into a decline which its most eloquent 
 apologist, Montalembert, has had the frankness to admit 
 and bewail. Living in idleness, the monks had too often 
 led lives of vice and shame. Those employed in educa- 
 tion shared more indulgence than the others. Still, it is 
 quite certain that they taught Latin better than religion. 
 Voltaire and the infidels of his age had been tattght'in 
 their colleges. Doubtless there remained yet in the 
 cloisters some genuine piety; still, the opposition to the 
 convents increased from day to day. Voltaire had at- 
 tacked them with power. Diderot had satirized and 
 turned them into ridicule. His influence was manifest 
 in more than one discourse in the National Assembly. 
 The abolition of the order of Jesuits in France, and the 
 
80 Religion and the Reign of Terror, 
 
 numerous suppressions of monasteries in Austria by- 
 Joseph II., had prepared the way for a more radical 
 reform in France. 
 
 The debates on this branch of reform were opened in 
 the Assembly on the 22d of February, 1790. Camus, 
 Gregory, and all the Jansenists, pleaded the cause of the 
 orders. The high clergy protested that the monks were 
 the most useful auxiliaries of the Church. The Bishop 
 of Nancy attempted to turn attention from the main 
 question by moving that the Assembly declare the CatH- 
 olic religion to be the national religion, but he only suc- 
 ceeded in calling upon his head a shower of wrath from 
 Charles Lameth.* Petion and others spoke of the con- 
 vents almost in the strain of Diderot. It was finally 
 decreed that the law should no longer recognize the 
 monastic vows, and that the monks should thenceforth 
 be free to abandon or to remain in the convents, as 
 should seem to them best. On motion of Thouret the 
 religious orders were suppressed, and new ones forbidden 
 to be introduced into France. This was a violent in 
 fringement of the rights of conscience ; it was forbidding 
 the free exercise of certain forms of religious association. 
 
 The convents of women had not yet been touched. 
 It now remained to fix the pensions of such monks 
 as should break their vows and leave the cloisters. It 
 was for some time debated as to whether all should be 
 paid the same sum, or whether account should be taken 
 of their previous incomes ; whether the rich Benedictine 
 should receive only as much as the mendicant Capuchin. 
 Before the matter was settled, Robespierre f had shown 
 * See Appendix, uote 11. \ Ibid., note 12. 
 
Religion and the licign of Terror. 81 
 
 how much justice was to be expected from the demagogue 
 party by declaring that, in his opinion, if any distinction 
 was to be made,, it should be in favor of the begging 
 orders — that is, inversely to their previous receipts. The 
 pension was finally fixed at eight hundred francs for the 
 mendicant monks, and nine hundred for the non-mendi- 
 cants. It is a remarkable fact, that on motion of Gregory, 
 the Jansenist, and Barnave, the Protestant, the Jesuits 
 were included in this arrangement. The same principle 
 was subsequently applied to the monks who should re- 
 main in the cloisters not confiscated. 
 
 There remained yet to be discussed in the Assembly 
 a question which was destined to excite the most violent 
 storm, namely, to determine into whose hands should 
 be placed the administration of the alienated Church 
 property. The memorable debate opened on the 9th of 
 April, IV 90. Chasset read a report from the Ecclesias- 
 tical Committee. It was the death-knell of the ancient 
 constitution of the Gallican Church. It recommended 
 the appropriation of the whole of the Church property, 
 on the plea of the pressing wants of the nation, and on 
 condition of the payment of the clergy by direct tax. 
 " Worship," said he, " is a duty of all. All are supposed 
 to share in it, for the temple of the Lord is open to all. 
 The sacred police, just like the army of defense, is main- 
 tained for the benefit of all. It is just and constitutional 
 to make all contribute to the expense of worship by 
 means of a tax on all." Chasset proposed that the 
 Church property be administrated for the time being by 
 the provincial Assemblies, that all tithes cease to be paid 
 
 from the first of January of the next year, and that from 
 
 11 
 
82 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 the same date the clergy be salaried by the State. He 
 stated that the Committee had already estimated the sum 
 total of these salaries at 133,884,800 francs; a sum which 
 showed that the Assembly would make a large saving 
 
 0 on the former amounts indirectly paid to the Church, 
 and at the same time suppress many crying abuses. 
 
 The high clergy regarded these propositions as in the 
 highest degree inimical to their order, which had hith- 
 erto lived on the income of its own domains. They 
 therefore attacked them with as much passion as if they 
 had involved the subversion of religion itself. Some of 
 them indulged in such extravagant cries of holy horror, 
 and in such invocations to God, as to make the impression 
 that they thought more of their rich incomes than of the 
 
 . essence of religion itself. An obscure Deputy had scarcely 
 begun to point out the happy effects of freeing the clergy 
 from their temporal cares, when his voice was drowned 
 by the murmurs of the Conservatives. Abbot Gregory 
 argued, in a very sensible discourse, in favor of leaving 
 to the Church enough to support itself, but such mod- 
 erate opinions had no chance of success. The contest 
 was between the right wing, which wished to preserve 
 the Church as a rich corporation, and the radical left, 
 which desired to reduce it to a mere department of the 
 government. The latter spoke with the cold defiance of 
 those who are assured, in advance, of the victory. 
 " When religion," said Thouret, " sent forth into society 
 her ministers, she did not say to them, Go, prosper and 
 get rich. No ! she said to them, Preach my word and my 
 principles. As to their temporal subsistence, she simply 
 said, It is right that the priests shall live of the altar. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 83 
 
 Now we, the legislators of France, have said, in strict 
 conformity to these words, The public functionary shall 
 live of his functions.' 7 This expresses exactly- the es- 
 sence of the new State Church scheme. It is its grate st 
 condemnation that it reduces the clergy to the condition 
 of mere hirelings. We see here, in germ, the whole civil 
 constitution of the clergy, which was afterward to do so 
 much harm. 
 
 As the discussion advanced, the opposition and ex- 
 citement of the Church party grew more intense." They 
 trembled with indignation, rather than argued. Appeals 
 to the God of their fathers were heard on every hand. 
 The Archbishop of Aix terminated his harangue by 
 quoting to the Assembly the words of an ancient bishop, 
 " You may rob us of our goods, but we will not give 
 them to you." At this point in the debate an incident oc- 
 curred which threw all Paris into the wildest excitement. 
 Dom Gerle, a Carthusian monk, perfectly sincere in his 
 religion as well as in his attachment to the Revolution, 
 undertook to conciliate the parties by moving that the 
 Assembly quiet the fears of the Church by decreeing 
 that the Catholic religion was, and should always remain, 
 the sole authorized and national worship of the French. 
 The gravity of such a decree could not escape the at- 
 tention of the Assembly, for it involved an absolute de- 
 nial of the rights of conscience. The motion was hailed 
 by the party of the right with the warmest enthusiasm. 
 Abbot Maury was heard, on retiring from the hall, to ex- 
 claim, in confidence of the success of the motion, " \V, 
 have them ! " It was attempted to carry it without dis- 
 rnwrion, and. it were, by surprise. The Bishop of 
 
84 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 Clermont, forgetting that he was not in his pulpit, de- 
 clared that a Christian ought to be ready to confess his 
 faith as soon as called on, and that a Catholic assembly- 
 ought not to wait to discuss that which should spring 
 from spontaneous feeling. One of the members invoked 
 to aid, on this important occasion, the venerable names 
 of Clovis, Charlemagne, and St. Louis. Charles Lameth 
 rose and sarcastically asked where was the necessity of 
 demanding a profession of faith of an Assembly " which 
 had realized the first principle of the Gospel by humil- 
 iating the proud and taking under its protection the 
 lowly and the feeble. Has it not verified the words of 
 Christ, that the first should be last ? " This taunt was 
 in no way calculated to calm the partisans of Dom Gerle's 
 motion. They insisted on the putting of the motion, 
 and so much the more as they saw Mirabeau about to 
 arise to speak. The majority had the greatest difficulty 
 in adjourning the question till the next day. The mem- 
 bers of the right would not leave their seats, and it was 
 long after the adjournment before they left the hall. 
 When they did go, it was to concoct a theatrical stroke 
 for the coming session. 
 
 The news of the affair ran like wildfire throughout the 
 city of Paris. The magic pen of Camille Desmoulins* 
 denounced the scheme of the clergy in language which 
 caused, at the same time, laughter and terror. His 
 journal, scattered widely through the city by the "three 
 hundred patriotic trumpets of the newsboys," informed 
 the people of Paris that the Deputies of the right were 
 assembled in the church of the Capuchins, to concert a 
 * See Appendix, note 13. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Tewor. 85 
 
 plaD for obtaining a decree, in to-morrow's Assembly, 
 which would establish anew the alliance of the Throne 
 and the Altar. And in fact such a meeting did take 
 place. It was decided that if the motion of Dora Gerie 
 was rejected, the party of the right would in a body 
 leave the Assembly hall, and, traversing the Tuileries, 
 place in the hands of the King a solemn protest against 
 the wicked refusal. To give greater eclat to their pro- 
 testation they agreed to repair to the coming session 
 habited in black, and with swords at their sides. But 
 the Court feared the effect of such a step, and informed 
 them that the King would not receive them. At the 
 same hour the excitement was not less at the head- 
 quarters of the party of the left, namely, at -the Jacobin 
 Club, at the Palais-Royal, and at the coffee-houses. 
 
 Bailly and Lafayette, fearing a bloody collision, 
 doubled the police, and stationed large bodies of troops 
 around the hall of the Assembly. But the crowd occu- 
 pied every spot that was left vacant. The deputies of 
 the right, on approaching the hall, were saluted with 
 jeers and hisses. The populace were indignant in the 
 extreme. It is impossible to reproduce the varied fea- 
 tures of this stormy debate, the sharp cross-firing, the 
 countless interruptions, and the endless calls to order. 
 Sometimes large fractions of the Assembly sprang to 
 their feet as one man, and vociferated the same cry. 
 Amid all the confusion, however, it was plain that only 
 two leading opinions were uttered, namely, that of the 
 adherents of a national Church, and that of the friends 
 of religious liberty. A few noble words fell from the 
 lips of Baron Menou. He said that however much lie 
 
86 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 loved the Catholic religion for his own part, yet it 
 would not follow from that that he should wish to im- 
 pose it on all his fellow-citizens. " My opinion," said 
 he, "is my own. Why should I wish to make my re- 
 ligion the dominant one ? Open your annals and see 
 what evils have come of religious wars. Shall the Na- 
 tional Assembly become the instrument of the misfor- 
 tunes of the people ? Ministers of religion, return to 
 your functions. Proclaim a system, to the glory of 
 which human laws can add nothing. Do not put car- 
 nal weapons into the hands of God." 
 
 Amid the increasing storm an attempt was made to 
 calm the spirits. It was moved to declare "that the 
 majesty of religion and the honor due to it are such as 
 to forbid making it the object of a legislative debate ;" 
 but the right regarded this as adding hypocrisy to 
 insult. When a member, in the interest of the Church 
 party, called to mind the oath made by Louis XIV. in 
 1675, to maintain the Catholic religion to the exclusion 
 of every other, the great Mirabeau could not restrain his 
 indignation. " I am not surprised," said he, " that refer- 
 ences are made to a reign in which the Edict of Nantes 
 was revoked. Doubtless it affords examples of all sorts 
 of intolerance ; but consider. From this tribune from 
 which I address you I see that fatal window where a 
 King, the murderer of his people, mingling worldly 
 with religious matters, fired the signal gun for the mas- 
 sacre of St. Bartholomew. I will say no more; there is 
 no ground for hesitation." After further discussion the 
 motion of Dom Gerle was withdrawn, and the Assembly 
 declared by a vote that, having no authority over the 
 
Sdifion and the Etign of Tewor. 87 
 
 conscience, or over religious opinions, and having given 
 sufficient proof of its attachment to the Catholic Church 
 in agreeing to salary its ministers out of the public 
 treasury, it would now proceed to the legitimate busi- 
 ness of the day. 
 
 In the evening the popular excitement was again 
 intense. The democratic press teemed with contemptu- 
 ous onslaughts on the clergy. Another clerical reunion 
 took place. It was proposed formally to denounce to 
 the nation the un-Catholic temper of the Assembly. A 
 mob, however, surrounded the Church, and under pre- 
 text of serving the cause of liberty, violated one of its 
 sacred rights by insulting the priests as they retired. 
 They had not had time to draw up a formal protest, but 
 they went forth, each determined to use to the utmost 
 his personal influence. 
 
 The debate as to the Church property continued. 
 Several priests frankly admitted the abuses which riches 
 had caused to religion. An Abbot had the shameless- 
 ness to say in reply to them, that a religion of poverty, 
 like Christianity at the start, might be good enough for 
 a people of slaves cowering under the lashes of their 
 master, and needing the consolations of heaven as an 
 offset against the sufferings of this life, but that none 
 but a wealthy religion could obtain consideration in a 
 flourishing kingdom like France. The result of the 
 whole deliberation was, that the Assembly adopted the 
 recommendations of Chasset, and sanctioned the prin- 
 ciple of salarying the priests. 
 
 The conclusion thus arrived at was self-contradictory. 
 The Assembly had rightly refused to proclaim a na- 
 
88 Religion and the Reign %>f Terror. 
 
 tional religion, and yet it had adopted measures for 
 creating a civil, a state religion. In treating religion 
 thus, like the magistracy or the police, it did almost 
 the very thing it wished to avoid when it refused to 
 proclaim a national Church. But the principle of the 
 distinction of the spiritual and the temporal powers 
 had been emphatically consecrated. Mirabeau admira- 
 bly stated the result of the deliberations, when he ex- 
 claimed " that the Assemblv was no longer theological, 
 but national." TTe shall have frequent occasion to refer 
 to the evils resulting from an imperfect solution of these 
 religious troubles. The abolition of a powerful system, 
 which had lived by privilege and oppression, was surely 
 a precious conquest ; but the infringement of the princi- 
 ple of religious freedom, committed by the Assembly 
 when it entangled the Church again in the- meshes of 
 politics by salarying its ministers, exerted an unfortunate 
 influence as well on the Church as on the cause of lib- 
 erty in general. The principle of religious equality for 
 all Churches had, however, been sanctioned, if not in 
 point of salary, yet in point of fact. 
 
 The Assembly could not have adopted the motion of 
 Dom Gerle without putting itself in flat contradiction 
 with itself in respect to the action it had taken in favor 
 of the Protestants, and another still more misused class 
 of society, the Jews. A decree had been adopted in 
 December, 1789, declaring the Protestants eligible to 
 all civil offices without exception. Subsequently, rights 
 of citizenship were decreed to all the descendants of 
 refugee Protestants who would return to France. In 
 March, 1790, Rabaut St. Etienne, the worthy son of the 
 
Religion and the Reign of Tcwor. 89 
 
 aged Huguenot preacher of the desert, on whose head a 
 price had so often been set, wrote a letter to the latter 
 which contained these words : " The President of the 
 National Assembly is at your feet." He had been 
 elected to the chair of that great body, but it was 
 some time still before all barriers against the Jews were 
 broken down. Why should we wonder at this ? Had 
 not free England still refused them a real part in politi- 
 cal life by imposing an oath at the doors of Parliament 
 which no Jew could take ? Let us recognize it, to the 
 honor of Robespierre, that from the very first he refused 
 to favor any law of exception to the disadvantage of 
 this despised people. In December, 1789, he said: " The 
 vices of the Jews spring from the debased condition 
 into which you Ijave plunged them. I think we should 
 deprive no individual of this class of the sacred rights 
 which belong to him as man. His cause is the general 
 cause. We ought to decree the principle." Another 
 Deputy uttered these noble words : " Let us leave the 
 conscience free. Either do not make it a civil offense 
 to direct the thoughts and feelings to Heaven in this or 
 that. manner, or be consistent — proclaim a national re- 
 ligion, arm it with the sword, and blot out youi- decla- 
 ration of the rights of man." The sharpest opponents 
 of the Jews were the clergy. Even Mirabeau was car- 
 ried over into the opposition. It was only after many 
 delays, after receiving and rejecting many petitions 
 from Jews in all parts of France, that in September, 
 1791, the Assembly braved the current of prejudice, 
 and did full justice to this class of society. The Come- 
 dians did not have to wait as long as the Jews to be 
 
 12 
 
90 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 recognized as citizens ; but Abbot Maury could not 
 avoid the temptation to make a display of opposition. 
 He forgot that the most contemptible of all comedians 
 is he who hides under a priestly garb the whole nest of 
 worldly passions. . 
 
 Such was the general position of the Constituent As- 
 sembly on the question of religious liberty and the 
 rights of conscience. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 91 
 
 CHAPTER in. 
 
 THE CIVIL CONSTITUTION OF THE CLERGY THE ASSEM- 
 BLY TRANSFORMED INTO A COUNCIL. 
 
 The day the Assembly decreed to salary the priests as 
 officers of public morality it assumed the obligation of 
 giving to the Church a new civil constitution. The 
 first fault led to the second. It was a deplorable mis- 
 take for a political assembly to meddle with the work 
 of a Church council. The civil constitution given by 
 the Assembly to the Catholic Church of France was 
 the joint offspring of the Jansenists and the free think- 
 ers. On the one side it was a just chastisement of a 
 haughty establishment, which, though having lost the 
 fervor of its primitive faith, yet persisted in all its for- 
 mer bigotry and intolerance ; but on the other, it was a 
 violent infringement on religious liberty, and occasioned 
 as well as justified a most earnest and dangerous oppo- 
 sition. The Jansenists, who were numerous in the As- 
 sembly, taking advantage of the occasion, undertook, in 
 league with the politicians, to frame a constitution for 
 the Church which should embody all of their favorite 
 notions as to the only proper and primitive Church 
 system. They exerted the preponderating influence in 
 the Ecclesiastical Committee, and the plan of the new 
 Church constitution was presented to the Assembly by 
 Martmeau, one of the most respectable adherents of 
 
92 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 that sect. The Assembly now became a theological 
 battle-field. The combatants were the two parties 
 which for ages had divided the French Chnrch, and the 
 audience and judges of the contest were the disciples of 
 Voltaire and Rousseau. Surely it was a strange place 
 to determine questions of Christian doctrine. 
 
 Before noticing the debate let us give the outlines of 
 the proposed Church constitution. It interfered with the 
 old bishoprics, and gave entirely new boundaries to the 
 ecclesiastical districts, adopting the new political di- 
 vision into eighty-three departments. All bishoprics 
 lying outside of these limits were suppressed. The 
 kingdom embraced only ten metropolitan districts. It 
 was unlawful for any French citizen to recognize in any 
 way the authority of any Bishop or Metropolitan, in 
 person or by delegate, whose see lay in the jurisdiction of 
 any foreign power. This article amounted almost to an 
 abolition of the Papal authority over the French Church. 
 Many titles and offices were Suppressed. The cathedral 
 church became a mere parish church. The seminaries 
 were reduced to the number of bishoprics. A much 
 more radical measure was that which took fiom the 
 bishop the sovereign power in his own diocese, and asso- 
 ciated with him a permanent council composed of the 
 vicars and the seminary directors, without whose co-ope- 
 ration he could perform no official act. The parishes 
 were reduced also. Towns containing no more than six 
 thousand inhabitants could have only one. The plan 
 was very revolutionary as to the mode of distributing 
 church offices, for it substituted, in place of the canon- 
 ical forms, the method of popular election at the ballot- 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 93 
 
 box. No religious test was required, and the same ticket 
 might odhtain candidates for civil as well as for religious 
 offices. Protestants and Jews could vote as well as 
 Catholics. The vote was to take place immediately after 
 the Sunday morning mass. The Metropolitan had the 
 right to examine the Bishop elect ; and the Bishop, the 
 newly elected Curate. But neither of them could hinder 
 the candidate elected from entering upon his functions, 
 except by consent of his council ; and even then the re- 
 jected ones enjoyed a large liberty of appeal. The 
 Bishop could choose his colleagues or Vicars only 
 within the bounds of .his own diocese, and on fixed con- 
 dition*. He could eject them from office only after de- 
 liberation with his council, and by a majority of the 
 votes. As to the salaries, they were considerably re- 
 duced from the customary figures. The Bishop of Paris 
 alone received fifty thousand francs. The salaries of the 
 other Bishops varied from twenty to twelve thousand 
 francs, according to' the importance of the bishopric. 
 Every Church officer was required to reside in the field 
 of his labors, and was placed under the surveillance of 
 the municipal authorities. 
 
 This sketch of the proposed civil constitution of the 
 clergy, is enough to show its deeply revolutionary char- 
 acter. It is in vain that the apologists of the French 
 Revolution attempt to excuse it. In vain is it urged, 
 that much of the plan is in harmony with the practice 
 of the primitive Church. It was an excuseless abuse of 
 power for a political assembly to impose it on the Church. 
 But the blame should fall partly on the Church herself. 
 She was too slow in undertaking the work of self-refor- 
 
9i Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 mation. What a misfortune for the Church of France, 
 that she did not sooner share the spirit of reform which 
 animated the generation of 1789 ! 
 
 The discussion of the project of the Church constitu- 
 tion opened May 29th, 1790. Little dignity of temper 
 was manifested. The High-church party had expended 
 their sublimest nights of eloquence in supporting the 
 motion of Dom Gerle. It produced little effect to go 
 through the same protestations a second time. It was 
 equally vain for them, on different occasions, to rise in a 
 body and leave the hall. These sudden secessions to the 
 Sacred Mount, and equally sudden returns,* became at 
 last ludicrous. The Archbishop of Aix expressed, with 
 deep emotion, the grief and indignation of his party. 
 He said, with justice : " Religious truths are at stake. 
 The purely spiritual jurisdiction is involved. The Church 
 alone can govern the spiritual." Treilhard sustained the 
 project with his cold and relentless argumentation. He 
 pointed out the justice of a scheme which abolished 
 some of the crying abuses of the old system. It was 
 much better to elect the Bishops by simple vote than to 
 subject their appointment to all the scandalous intrigues 
 of a corrupt court. The successor of Judas had been 
 elected by popular vote. All of this was true enough, but 
 it did not touch the essential part of the question, 
 namely, the right of a political assembly to impose its 
 laws on the Church. Several Curates argued in favor of 
 the project with a great show of patriotic texts and of 
 citations from Church history. An important feature in 
 this debate was the intervention of Robespierre. He 
 supported the proposed plan on the principles, and with 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 95 
 
 all the intolerance, of Rousseau. A civil religion was one 
 of Rousseau's most cherished ideas. Desirous of securing 
 to the multitude an unlimited sovereignty, which he 
 mistook for liberty, he saw that the greatest danger 
 thereto would arise from those free beliefs of the soul 
 which are beyond the reach of the despotism of the ma- 
 jority. He had, therefore, in his ideal republic, sacri- 
 ficed the liberty of conscience to his hundred-headed 
 idol the populace, and conferred on the latter the right 
 of imposing a religion on the whole population on pain 
 of banishment or death. Robespierre defended these 
 fine maxims at the bar of the Assembly with all the as- 
 surance of a popular demagogue. He argued that it be- 
 longed to the Assembly to determine what and how 
 many churchly functions should be permitted in the 
 .land. He even went so far as to insinuate that the 
 people had the right to give wives to their priests, in 
 order to identify their interest more closely with that ol 
 the nation. This was to commit the highest outrage on 
 the religious conscience; and it was easy to see how 
 little would remain to God when the Casar of dema- 
 gogism had obtained all that he claimed. 
 
 After the usual amount of discussion, the proposed 
 civil constitution of the clergy was adopted almost as at 
 first presented. The article forbidding to recognize the 
 authority of foreign Bishops was so modified as to work 
 no prejudice to the unity of the faith, and to the com- 
 munion with the visible head of the Church. But the 
 only communion now possible was of a mystical char- 
 acter. When it was objected that the primitive popular 
 elections were held among the members of the Church, 
 
96 Religion and the Reign of Terror \ 
 
 and not among a confused mass of the populace, it was 
 ruthlessly replied by Robespierre, that the people of 
 France were fully competent to elect their priests, and 
 that they were equally as pure as the clergy. One of the 
 articles, which was voted almost without debate, was 
 pregnant with trouble and commotion. It required the 
 newly elected clergy to swear fidelity to .the nation, and 
 to support with all their power the National Constitu- 
 tion voted by the Assembly. This Constitution was not 
 simply political, but involved also the organization of 
 the Church ; and such an oath was calculated to awake 
 the most serious religious scruples. The thought which 
 pervaded the whole of this Church scheme was well ex- 
 pressed by Camus when he said : " The Church is in the 
 State, the State is not in the Church. We are a National 
 Convention ; surely we have a right to change the relig- 
 ion." But this was to forget that liberty consists, not 
 in extending the sovereignty of the State, but rather in 
 limiting it, in checking it to the profit of personal liberty. 
 The result will show that the most democratic of gov- 
 ernments cannot infringe with impunity on the sacred 
 domain of private belief. 
 
 A question remained to be settled, namely, whether 
 the article relating to the salaries of the priests should 
 be retroactive, or whether it should affect only those who 
 should be elected in the future. Should it be applied to 
 high functionaries who had entered orders on conditions 
 the abrogation of which they could" not have foreseen ? 
 After a lively discussion, and despite the ridiculous pro- 
 test of a certain Deputy in favor of a financial compen- 
 sation for the unfortunates who had vowed an eternal 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 97 
 
 isolation from the fair sex, the article was pronounced 
 retroactive. It was decreed that from the 1st of Jan- 
 uary, 1791, such salaries of Archbishops and Bishops as 
 did not exceed twelve thousand francs should suffer nf 
 reduction, and that those 'exceeding that sum should be- 
 reduced to twelve thousand francs plus the half of the 
 excess of the previous amount over that sum, provided 
 that the whole should not exceed thirty thousand francs. 
 The only exception was the Archbishop of Paris, who 
 was allowed seventy-five thousand francs. Such was the 
 famous Constitution of the Clergy as finally amended 
 and adopted. We may add that it was put into opera- 
 tion as soon as decreed. 
 
 It is just to offer, in excuse of the- Revolution, the fact 
 that this scheme of Church organization is nothing more 
 than a rigid application of the maxims of the ancient 
 monarchy. It was simply ultra-Gallicanism. An ex- 
 amination of the report already mentioned, concerning 
 tfee power of the King in Church affiurs, which was 
 drawn up for Louis XIV. by one of his masters of re- 
 quests, M. Le Vayer de Boutigny, furnishes sufficient 
 evidence of this fact. This wise lawyer distinguishes ' 
 in the Church two bodies, the mystical and the po- 
 litical. All that relates to the latter belongs to the 
 King without dispute. But the King is not only mag- 
 istrate, he is also protector of the Church. In the latter 
 character he has a wide sway over the mystical body 
 also. He does not touch the creed so far as" it is merely 
 theoretical, but as soon as it manifests itself in public 
 acts it foils under his direction. He must watch that 
 the Gospel be not so preached as to work detriment 
 
 13 
 
98 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 to the laws or to the loyalty of his subjects. The pre- 
 cise time and manner of preaching is not essential to 
 salvation, therefore " the King has the power to regulate 
 the choice of the person who preaches, as well as the 
 place and hour of the preaching." Prayer is necessary, 
 but it must be regulated and authorized by the King. 
 Church councils are necessary, but it is the right of the 
 King to authorize them, to convoke them, and even to 
 dissolve them, when they cause trouble. In fine, there 
 is scarcely a single function of the Church which does 
 not, in one way or other, fall under the power of the 
 King. "What he cannot do as magistrate he may well 
 assume to perform as protector. According to this royal 
 counselor the Church is like a ship ; the helm is in the 
 hands of the spiritual authority, but the captain who 
 gives the orders is the State. The comparison is worthy 
 the age of Louis XIV., and reveals the spirit of the 
 system. The boldest measures of the French Revolu- 
 tion in regard to the Church were thus justified, in ad- 
 vance, by abundant governmental precedent. 
 
 ~No one, however, thought of this, or acted from these 
 reasons. The parties were divided into two hostile 
 camps. On the one side were the sticklers for the old 
 order of things ; on the other, the reformers, who were 
 still too much under the domination of tradition. The 
 former imagined that the foundations of society were 
 overturned, when in fact only the maxims of their fa- 
 thers were turned against them ; but their exasperation 
 knew no bounds, and an opposition sprang up in all 
 France which was destined to provoke the Assembly to 
 further injustice and violence. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 99 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 FIRST RESISTANCE OF THE CLERGY TROUBLE AT NIMES 
 
 AND MONTAUBAN POLITICAL OATH IMPOSED ON THE 
 
 CLERGY PATHETIC SCENE IN THE ASSEMBLY AD- 
 DRESS OF MIRABEAU TO THE NATION PAMPHLET OF 
 
 CAMILLE DESMOULINS. 
 
 The spirit of liberty had, at the close of the eighteenth 
 century, visited more than one cloister, and found wel- 
 come from not a few of the dignitaries of the* French 
 episcopate. We firmly believe that the Revolution, had 
 it not violated the sanctuary of religious scruples, might 
 have rallied to the cause of reform the greater part of the 
 French Church. The majority of the Chamber of the 
 Clergy had joined the Third Estate even before the King's 
 willingness thereto was known. This fact should surely 
 have counseled a conciliatory policy ; but we have seen 
 that the Assembly rushed into the opposite extreme, 
 and thus awoke an opposition which was the more 
 dangerous as it was completely armed and organized. 
 This opposition irritated the Assembly, and led it to 
 persist in and multiply its faults. It came to regard 
 the clergy as an enemy, to crush which any and every 
 means was lawful. In order to understand the events 
 which induced the Assembly to impose the political 
 oath on the clergy we must notice the progress of the 
 religious reaction in the provinces. 
 
 It was the Revolution which began the contest. The 
 
100 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 people of Paris, at first favorable enough to the priests, 
 soon began to regard their peculiar costume as the sym- 
 bol of the old regime. After the stormy debates on the 
 Church property, the clergy were often exposed to insult 
 in the streets. In October, 1789, Gregory had com- 
 plained that the people of Paris, ignorant of the pa-, 
 triotism of the Curates, outraged them, and addressed to 
 them the most furious threats. In the same month the 
 Archbishop of Paris was compelled publicly to defend 
 himself against the accusation " of having in the pres- 
 ence Of the King supported the interests of the rich and 
 powerful against the poor and feeble." He demanded 
 a passport, and initiated the flight or emigration of the 
 clergy. About this time an impassioned letter of a 
 Brittany Bishop excited the fanaticism to a flame. He 
 assumed openly the martyr role of a Thomas a Becket. 
 It was. a veritable war clarion. " Religion is annihi- 
 lated," cried he ; " its ministers are reduced to the sad 
 condition of hirelings appointed by brigands." Relig- 
 ious liberty was openly execrated in this episcopal as- 
 sault, and the nobility and peasantry were summoned 
 to a coalition against the Third Estate. This impru- 
 dent provocation occasioned a lively debate in the 
 Assembly, and an order for the Bishop to appear in 
 court to answer a charge of treason. The clerical op- 
 position increased with each new invasion of the old 
 organization of the Church. The decree confiscating 
 the Church property was a signal for a general active 
 opposition. In several provinces the nobility and clergy 
 held their Assemblies just as if no changes had been 
 made in the laws. The National Assembly thereupon 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror, 101 
 
 ordered, that until further authorization no provincial 
 Parliament should be called together. The order was 
 resisted at Rouen and Metz. In the latter city the 
 high clergy held factious meetings. Civil war was im- 
 minent in Provence. The Bishops were busy kindling 
 the irritation in the excitable hearts of the South. The 
 order to make an inventory of the property of the mon- 
 asteries set the whole South on fire. The convents 
 seemed on a sudden to have become the asylum of 
 every human and divine virtue. Every-where the ma- 
 gistrates had to press their way through a dense mass 
 of furious populace, to whom their work seemed an 
 abominable profanation. It needed but a spark to 
 kindle an open insurrection. And it soon actually 
 broke out, especially in places where Protestant socie- 
 ties existed. The fervid Catholics of the South could 
 not pardon to Protestants the crfme of daring to exist, 
 and of being no longer under the ban of proscription. 
 For this-populace the proclamation of religious equality 
 was the great crime of the Revolution. 
 
 Civil war broke out openly as soon as the Assembly 
 refused to declare the Catholic religion the Church of 
 the nation. The ignorant and superstitious masses of 
 Nimes, TTzes, and Montauban showed as much fury 
 against those who had abolished an odious privilege as 
 the people of Paris had exhibited against its champions. 
 But violence was the law of both parties, and liberty - 
 was destined to be enfeebled and wounded in the con- 
 test. As soon as the defeat of the motion of Dom Gerle 
 was known in the South, the clergy began to excite the 
 people to send violent protests to the Assembly. In 
 
102 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 April, 1790, a large meeting was held at Mmes in the 
 church of the White Penitents. They petitioned unani- 
 mously in favor of the ancient state of things. This 
 meeting was preceded and followed by exhibitions of 
 Catholic effervescence. Wherever they caught sight of 
 a Protestant the cry was, " Kill him ! kill him ! " Simi- 
 lar scenes took place at Uzes and in Alsace. In the 
 latter province the Jews were sadly maltreated. Surely 
 the Catholic party was unfortunate in its mode of pro- 
 cedure. It strove to obtain the rights of conscience by 
 petitioning that these rights should be blotted from the 
 constitution of the country ; but this inconsistency will 
 surprise no one who understands how manifold are the 
 tortuosities of the human heart. The Assembly or- 
 dered procedure against the abettors of the troubles at 
 Nimes, and summoned to its bar (despite the invoca- 
 tion in their favor, by Malouet, of the rights of meeting 
 and discussion) the chief signers of the petition. But 
 the trouble did not cease. The news of the adoption of 
 the Civil Constitution of the Clergy intensified the dis- 
 pleasure of the South. In the months of May and 
 June it took, at Nimes, all the features of earnest war. 
 The opposition arose not from fanaticism alone, but 
 rather from fanaticism used as a tool by the party of 
 the old regime. This is clear from the declaration of 
 Froment, the chief exciter of these troubles. "One 
 strong passion," said he, " cannot be quenched except 
 by exciting a still stronger one ; consequently the re- 
 publican mania can only be counteracted by calling into 
 play a zeal for religion." The struggle broke out at 
 the municipal elections. The Catholic party at Nimes, 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 103 
 
 always fanatical and determined not to tolerate relig- 
 ious equality before the law, firmly resolved to prevent 
 the election of Protestants. Their rage knew no bounds 
 when they learned of the honor conferred by the Na- 
 tional Assembly in April on Rabaut St. Etienne. A 
 placard was put up bearing these insulting words: 
 " The infamous National Assembly has just capped the 
 climax of its iniquities by electing as its president a 
 Protestant." A league was formed. Troops of zealous 
 Catholics, with a special badge, calling themselves the 
 Companies of the Cross, were formed in opposition to the 
 National Guard, which latter was composed of all classes 
 of citizens. Every means was used to work up the feel- 
 ings. Nocturnal meetings were held in the churches, 
 and violent harangues delivered. Incendiary pamphlets 
 representing religion as proscribed, and the King as in 
 captivity, were spread abroad. In these libels the Prot- 
 ectants were described as venomous serpents, whom 
 numbness alone had hitherto kept from harming, but 
 who, now that they were recalled to life by favors, were 
 engaged in plotting vengeance and. death. The strug- 
 gle broke out June 13, by an assault of the champions 
 of the cross on the* roops of the Guard. The day previous 
 the peasantry had rushed in from the country, but had 
 mostly returned home as soon as they learned that they 
 were desired to defend the counter-revolution. The 
 Protestants of the neighborhood had also taken the 
 alarm and flocked to the city. They would also have 
 returned, had they not been violently attacked from the 
 convent of the Capuchins. Furious at this assault, they 
 rushed upon the Catholic companies. Finally a parley 
 
104: Religion a/nd the Reign of Terror, 
 
 for peace was entered upon. This was interrupted ab 
 the order of the royalist Froment, who was posted at 
 the castle, by an attack with musketry. ■ This traitorous 
 act broke up all hope of peace, and delivered the city to 
 the rage of the justly exasperated Protestants and re- 
 publicans. More than three hundred Catholics were 
 slain in the city ; while in the neighboring ccnmtry the scale 
 was reversed, and the blood of Protestants was freely 
 shed. Impartial history must admit that the misfor- 
 tunes at Nimes were the natural fruit of an abominable 
 plot worthy the days of St. Bartholomew. The party 
 which provoked them was not defending the liberties of 
 the Church, but rather its odious privileges and intol- 
 erance. 
 
 Similar events had taken place previously at Montau- 
 ban. The civil officers had succeeded in selling the 
 suppressed convents only at the risk of their lrves. 
 They had been compelled to face the rage of a multi- 
 tude rendered furious by the exhortations of a Bishop. 
 They met, at the threshold, crowds of groaning women 
 on their knees to defend the sanctuary. The town-hall 
 had been assaulted, and six guards, of whom five were 
 Protestants, massacred. Others had been dragged to 
 the cathedral, waxen tapers in their hands, to do satis- 
 factory penance. The Assembly, on hearing report of 
 these proceedings, was exasperated to severe measures, 
 and tempted more and more to view the Church as its 
 enemy. 
 
 These small skirmishes, however, were of much less 
 consequence than the general resistance which, under 
 the leadership of the high clergy, was organized all over 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 105 
 
 the land. However justly the Church may have felt her- 
 self aggrieved, it was a great blunder for her to identify 
 the cause of her liberty (which was, in fact, attacked) with 
 the cause of monarchical despotism and churchly intol- 
 erance. Her struggle for her well-grounded rights was 
 fully equaled by her struggle against the liberties of 
 the people. In this period, we must distinguish between 
 what was really plotted and what was actually accom- 
 plished. The latter was infinitely less than the former. 
 The violent official charges of the French Bishops were 
 of much less importance than the influences which were 
 sent out from Rome. Pope Pius VI. was in frequent 
 correspondence with both the King and the high clergy. 
 From the month of March 1790, he assumed an attitude 
 openly hostile to the Revolution, not only defending 
 his just rights, but also combating at the same time all 
 reforms, even the most legitimate. At this date he ex- 
 pressed, in an official meeting, great grief at every thing 
 which had taken place in France since the convocation 
 of the States-General, and declared that the ancient mon- 
 archy had been brought by its own children to the very 
 brink of ruin. He condemned the National Assembly 
 for having decreed liberty of conscience, and grew in- 
 dignant that non-Catholics had been declared eligible to 
 office. He treated political liberty as a vain phantom, 
 and deprecated the limitation of the royal authority as 
 incapacitating the Most Christian King for revenging 
 the rights of the Church. Thus he was guilty of con- 
 demning the simplest principles of modem civilization, 
 and bewailing the abolition of odious ancient abuses. 
 
 This subtracted greatly from the force of his just com- 
 
 14 
 
106 Religion mid the Reign of Terror, 
 
 plaints, for the cause which he anathematized was im- 
 measurably more just than that which he defended. He 
 cursed the cause of young France, and put himself at 
 the head of the political reaction. During the next 
 year it was believed at Rome, for a few days, that the 
 King had escaped from France. Immediately the Pope 
 wrote him a letter expressing great joy that he had suc- 
 ceeded in escaping from that abominable city of Paris, 
 and his firm belief that he would soon be able to return 
 as conqueror, and restore the ancient state of things. 
 During the interval between the adoption of the civil Con- 
 stitution of the Clergy and its sanction by the King, the 
 letters of the Pope to the latter and to the Bishops of 
 France, were very numerous. They uniformly counseled 
 hostility to the decrees of the Assembly. The sanction 
 of the Clerical Constitution by the Pope had been ear- 
 nestly sought. His hesitation and long delay irritated 
 the Assembly to fresh acts of imprudence. The putting 
 into practical execution of the new Constitution of the 
 Clergy was the occasion of intense opposition on the 
 part of the high clergy. They exhorted the people to 
 resistance, declared that in such matters God should be 
 obeyed rather than man, and branded all priests who 
 should take office under the new system as intruders. 
 Riots broke out at various places. Vengeance on the 
 Protestants for the blood shed at Nimes was loudly 
 called for. The civil officers were resisted in many 
 places. 
 
 In these circumstances a very unfortunate step was 
 taken by the Assembly. A Deputy, after reviewing the 
 hostility of the clergy, uttered these ruthless words: 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 107 
 
 "Ministers of religion, cease to seek pretexts; acknowl- 
 edge your weakness. You regret your former opulence, 
 your marks of distinction and pretended pre-eminence. 
 Recollect that the Revolution has made all of us men. 
 It is yet time; disarm, by a prompt submission, the 
 popular resentment against your order. The decree I 
 am about to present is less a law of severity than a 
 measure of indulgence." This indulgent measure con- 
 sisted in requiring all who held positions in the Church 
 to take an oath to support and obey, not only the laws 
 of the land in general, but also to maintain with all 
 their power the Civil Constitution of the Clergy as de- 
 creed by the Assembly, and that, on pain of ejection 
 from office, forfeiture of pension, and loss of French cit- 
 izenship. Nothing could have been more impolitic than 
 this. It would have been just to require an oath of 
 submission to the civil laws, but to extend it to the new 
 Constitution of the Clergy was to outrage the conscience 
 of many respectable priests. But the hour of reason 
 and justice was well-nigh past. The radicals of the 
 Assembly wished to crush their enemy. The debate 
 opened in a perfect tempest of passion. Its most im- 
 portant feature was a magnificent, but illogical and 
 unfortunate oration, of Mirabeau. Left to himself in 
 the calmness of solitary reflection, he rarely went astray. 
 But he was capable of. being swayed by the storm of 
 the popular fury. He seems not to have seen that the 
 Constitution of the Clergy, and especially this proposed 
 oath, were in violation of his own cherished principles 
 of the liberty of conscience. He pretended, that the 
 priests had been so recreant to the cause of religion. 
 
108 Religion and the Reign of Terror, 
 
 that the National Assembly was compelled to take the 
 Church under its own patronage, not perceiving that the 
 greatest compliment a government can make to religion 
 consists simply in letting it alone. " It is," said he, " at 
 the very moment when we have confessed, in the face 
 of all nations and of all ages, that God is as necessary 
 as liberty to the French people, that our Bishops are 
 pleased to denounce us as violators of the rights of re- 
 ligion." His power was terrible in the part of his dis- 
 course where he exposed the scandalous corruptions of 
 the clergy under the old system. The true intruders 
 into the ministry were, thought he, those courtier priests 
 who lived in luxury and intrigue. Toward the close he 
 grew too violent even for the radical left, and Petion op- 
 posed some of his arguments. Among the warmest ad- 
 vocates of this oath was the Jansenist Camus. He 
 loved it because it trampled under foot the pretensions 
 of Ultramontanism and the power of the Papacy, from 
 which his sect had suffered so much. During the debate, 
 a certain priest had cried out to the Assembly this preg- 
 nant warning : " Take care, it is not wise to make mar- 
 tyrs." Finally, the decree requiring the oath of the 
 clergy was passed on the 27th of November, 1790. This 
 is a sad date in the history of the Revolution. It con- 
 summated the divorce between young France and re- 
 ligion, and led to still more flagrant violations of liberty 
 by the very party whose most earnest desire was to 
 establish and sanction it. The cause of right cannot be 
 served by the arbitrary. 
 
 This decree set all France into ferment. The revolu- 
 tionary press brandished it as a sword in the face of all 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 109 
 
 reactionary priests. The King, who thus far had tried 
 to reconcile his duties as Sovereign with his conscience 
 as a Catholic, saw himself reduced to the desperate di- 
 lemma where any decision was equally fatal, and where 
 resistance was as impossible as concession. To sanction 
 the decree was to break with Rome; to veto it was 
 vainly to attempt to brave the triumphant Revolution. 
 The unhappy prince stood between excommunication on 
 the one hand, and dethronement on the other. In his 
 despair he now formed a plan of escaping from France, 
 and calling to the support of his throne the arms of for- 
 eigners. In December he wrote to the King of Prussia, 
 imploring aid against his factious subjects. It is at this 
 period that the force of circumstances led him into that 
 course of double-dealing toward the Assembly which 
 was so foreign to his generous nature. The Assembly 
 would not tolerate his veto ; its President, at two dif- 
 ferent times, demanded in imperious terms that he should 
 sanction it. The King was conquered. His letter of 
 sanction may be regarded as his moral abdication, so 
 thoroughly is it imbued with the spirit of humiliation. 
 But he still cherished hope. That same day he had let 
 drop the bitter words, " I would rather be King of Metz 
 than remain King of France under these circumstances." 
 
 Scarcely had the decree been sanctioned when the As- 
 sembly took measures for its immediate execution. It 
 forthwith summoned the clerical members of its own 
 body to take the oath. This was to lay the corner-stone 
 of the counter-revolution, for it provoked a soul-trying 
 scene in which all the honor was on the side of the high 
 clergy. No description can do it justice. A vast mul- 
 
110 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 titude, ready to break out into riot, surrounded the 
 doors of the Assembly. The voice of the tribune was 
 drowned in the applause or hisses of the spectators. 
 The wrath of the left was only equaled by the impas- 
 sioned indignation of the right. Words of moderation 
 stood no chance of a hearing. It was in vain that at 
 different times Gregory and some other priests attempted 
 so to explain the oath as to render it palatable to the 
 main body of the clergy. They could not be persuaded 
 that it did not conflict both with the rights of the Pope 
 and with the essential honor of the (Ihurch. On the 2d 
 of January, when the Bishop of Clermont attempted to 
 present a temperate protest, his voice was covered with 
 hisses. It was then decreed by the majority, in the 
 midst of stormy altercations, that no opponent of the 
 oath should be allowed to explain his reasons at the 
 tribune, but that the oath should be taken or declined 
 purely and simply. At this the Bishop of Clermont 
 exclaimed, " I cannot in good conscience ;" but his noble 
 words were greeted with cries of rage. However, this 
 Non possumus of the outraged conscience was destined 
 to make a powerful impression throughout the commu- 
 nity. That same evening the Bishop published to 
 France the words which he had not been permitted to 
 utter in the Assembly. When rudely interrogated in 
 the session of the next day, he replied in words which 
 cannot be too well considered, " It will be an eternal 
 infamy to have inflicted punishment on those who refuse 
 this oath ; for it is saying to them, Whatever your 
 conscience may say to the contrary, take the oath any- 
 how." To put an end to the delay, Barnave moved 
 
Religion and the Reign, of Terror. Ill 
 
 what the clerical members be allowed only till the next 
 day to consider, and that their refusal to take the 
 oath be regarded as equivalent to resignation of office. 
 The members of the right could delay the vote only a 
 few minutes. The spirit of the majority may be seen 
 in the incident that, when a member stated to the As- 
 sembly, that by this precipitate action they might be 
 under the necessity of expelling sixty or eighty mem- 
 bers, a large number of voices exclaimed, " So much the 
 better!" It is plain that the ultra-radicals were only 
 too willing to find a pretext for driving from the As- 
 sembly every representative of the ancient order of 
 things. The motion of Barnave was carried. 
 
 It was in the session of January 4th, 1791, that the 
 grand scene of refusing the oath commenced. It was the 
 counterpart of that which had immortalized the tennis- 
 court at Versailles. None but a prejudiced spirit can 
 fail to see its moral grandeur. I know that conservative 
 political passions and an unfortunate love of the old 
 abuses and privileges of tlie Church were mingled with 
 the nobler principles which led to a refusal of this in- 
 iquitous oath ; still, it is none the less true that on that 
 day religion vindicated and safeguarded its right and 
 honor, in the midst of great danger and at the cost of 
 great sacrifices. The effervescence of the populace was 
 extreme. At the moment when the President of the 
 Assembly summoned the clerical members to take the 
 oath, one could plainly hear in the silence which ensued 
 the ominous clamor of the multitude without, whose 
 only idea of liberty was the indulgence of their own 
 good pleasure. No one having replied to the general 
 
112 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 call of the President, the call by name began. The 
 Bishop of Agen was the first one called. When he rose 
 and began to speak, several voices from the radical side 
 cried out, " No words ! Take the oath, yes or no." The 
 Bishop remarked calmly and respectfully, "You have 
 made a law requiring all clergymen holding office to 
 take a certain oath, on pain of exclusion from oflice. I 
 regret neither my position nor my income ; I only regret 
 that I must incur the loss of your esteem, which I fain 
 would merit. I beg you, therefore, to take in good part 
 the testimony of the regret which I feel in not being 
 able to take the oath." The next priest called was a 
 simple curate. He uttered only these words : " I shall 
 say with the simplicity of the first Christians, I think it 
 all glory and honor to follow in the footsteps of my 
 Bishop." It was clear that the call by name was turning 
 to the disadvantage of the majority, and serving only to 
 give more eclat to the refusals. The President resorted 
 again, therefore, to the general call, but only a single 
 oath was obtained. A member of the right asked that 
 the Assembly explain the oath, by decreeing that it had 
 no wish to infringe on the realm of the spiritual. " It 
 has not so done," exclaimed Mirabeau, "and that is 
 enough." The time for conciliation was past. The 
 Bishop of Poitiers arose and spoke in these terms : " I 
 am seventy years old ; I have been thirty-five years a 
 Bishop ; I have sought to do all the good in my power. 
 Weighed down with years, I am not willing to dishonor 
 my old age; I cannot take the oath." But these words 
 were greeted only with murmurs. The radicals found 
 it necessary to close the scene. It was voted that the 
 
Religion and the Reicjn of Terror. 113 
 
 President should repair to the King and urge him to en- 
 force the law against the refractory clerical Deputies. 
 The affair of the oath was for many days a subject of 
 ever-recurring trouble. For some it was a subject of 
 remorse, for others a pretext for indulging in venom 
 against the clergy, and for all an occasion of embar- 
 rassment and discord. 
 
 In view of the vacancies in the Church, which the re- 
 fusal of the oath would inevitably occasion during the 
 year 1791, Mirabe.au induced the Assembly to decree 
 the eligibility to the episcopate of every one who had 
 served five years as curate in France, and to the curacy, 
 of any priest who had held any Church office what- 
 ever. Some days later, Barnave, always ready to attack 
 the Bishops, clamored for positive procedure against the 
 refractory priests, and was impolitic enough to denounce 
 the political association, or club, which the members of 
 the right had founded, as perfidious and factious. These 
 strange and inconsistent words in the mouth of a friend 
 of liberty excited just indignation in the Assembly. 
 " I demand," said Malouet, in an earnest protest, " that 
 in the very bosom of the Revolution, in the midst of this 
 city which saw the framing of the Constitution, and which 
 has done so much for liberty^-I demand that liberty and 
 public and personal safety be not outraged with impu- 
 nity at this tribune." The decree demanded by Barnave 
 did not pass without exciting firm opposition. Some, of 
 the clergy opposed, it from patriotic motives, but others, 
 who had lost all hope of justice, took an attitude of 
 simple defiance. Abbot Maury exclaimed, " Go on, gen- 
 tlemen, go on ; it will not be long. We have need of 
 
 15 
 
114 Beligion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 this decree ; one or two more of the same kind, and the 
 work will be done." It served no good purpose, how- 
 ever, to assume this defiant attitude. Cazales spoke in 
 a much better spirit, for the same party, when he can- 
 didly explained, that the great majority of the clergy 
 firnily believed that the principles of religion forbade 
 them taking this oath. "These principles," said he, " are 
 of a higher order than the laws you may enact. If you 
 drive the Bishops and Curates from their posts you will 
 inaugurate a course of persecution. You will see the 
 Catholics wandering over the face of the kingdom, and 
 following their deposed ministers into deserts and caves, 
 to receive from their hands the only sacraments which 
 they will believe to be valid. Then all the Catholics 
 throughout the land, who cannot accept your laws, will 
 be reduced to the state of misery and persecution into 
 which the Protestants were formerly plunged by that 
 act which you so justly detest, the revocation of the 
 Edict of Xantes. Even if the Church of France should 
 be mistaken, still there are laws which, though srood in 
 themselves, should not, under all circumstances, be en- 
 acted. If your laws cannot be executed without vio- 
 lence, it would be prudent to hesitate before plunging 
 France into bloody civil convulsions." Mirabeau elicited 
 applause by observing, cynically, that the speaker prob- 
 ably mistook his wishes for his fears. The sequel, how- 
 ever, showed that Cazales was the better prophet. 
 
 About this time Mirabeau wrote, on the subject of the 
 relations of Church and State, an address which cannot 
 be too highly prized by posterity. But it is in part in- 
 consistent with itself It consecrates the great princi- 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 115 
 
 pies of the necessary freedom of religion and of spiritual 
 interests in general from the domination of human law, , 
 and yet justiries the Revolution in its interference in the 
 organization of the French Church. " Religion," said 
 he, " is not, cannot, be a mere social relation ; it is the 
 relation of the individual mind to the mind of the In- 
 finite. As it is absurd to speak of a national conscience, 
 so it is absurd to speak of a national religion. Religion 
 is individual and personal. You camiot establish a 
 national religion, for the reason that truth is not estab- 
 lished by votes. Though men may be externally united 
 by laws, yet in their thoughts and conscience they 
 remain forever separated. Religion, being but the 
 harmony of the thoughts and heart of man with the 
 divine thought and heart, cannot be subjected to a 
 civil or legal form. Jesus Christ is the only sage who, 
 in teaching men how to be good and happy, has not 
 viewed them from a political stand-point, and mingled 
 in his instructions the principles of civil legislation. 
 Whatever the influence of the Gospel on general moral- 
 ity, neither Christ nor his Apostles gave to understand 
 that the evangelical system was ever to enter into 
 the civil constitution of nations. The Gospel, in its 
 conquest of the world, simply asks of men that they 
 accept it, and of nations that they suffer it." After ut- 
 tering these noble sentiments, the great orator, illogically 
 enough, attempts to justify the decree requiring a polit- 
 ical oath of the priests. 
 
 The Assembly seemed now to come to a consciousness 
 of danger, from the largeness of the party which its 
 measures had offended. Consequently it issued to the 
 
116 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 nation a conciliatory document, explaining the reasons 
 which led to the enactment of the offensive laws. It 
 was a mere palliative, however, which subtracted nothing 
 from the measures which had given umbrage. And the 
 little good effect of this was more than counteracted by 
 the insulting violence of the demagogic press. Mena- 
 cing documents and tracts, slanderous of the refractory or 
 non-juring clergy, were scattered broadcast over the 
 nation. From the 9th of January, 1791, the journal of 
 Marat had been encouraging the populace to hiss and 
 insult all priests who should be found in caucus, and 
 the masses were but too ready to obey such counsel. 
 Camille Desmoulins devoted his sharp satirical talent to 
 bringing the high clergy into disrepute. He published 
 a pretended sermon of a country priest, which was a 
 merciless and biting assault on the party of the Bishops. 
 These light but keen arrows produced, under the guid- 
 ance of a steady hand, in the one camp a ravishing de- 
 light, which was equaled only by the rage of the other. 
 He had taken for the text of his derisive sermon, the 
 following words, attributed to an aged Cardinal, namely: 
 " The Bishops were on the throne, and religion prostrate 
 in the dust ; France has now put the Bishops down, and 
 raised religion to her true place." Nothing can surpass 
 the sarcasm of the passage which shows up the corrup- 
 tion of the former clerical elections. He compared the 
 concordats to the compacts of robbers, dividing the 
 booty which does not belong to them. He cited the 
 following profound saying of James I. : " So long as I 
 shall have the power of nominating the Judges and the 
 Bishops, T shall be sure of having laws and a gospel 
 
. Religion and the Reign of Terror. 117 
 
 which will please me." "How little," exclaimed Des- 
 moulius, "does the gilded crosier of our Bishops re- 
 semble the shepherd's staff of the Apostles. Do you 
 remember how. St. Ambrose chastised the impiety of 
 Theodosius? It was because that Bishop had been 
 elected by the people of Milan. But cite me a Bishop 
 of France who has reproached our tyrants with their 
 worthlessness, their cruelties, or their wars. The gen- 
 tlemen in violet, however much they may have as- 
 sumed a sanctimonious visage and frowning brows 
 in their dioceses, yet when they come to court, could 
 not be surpassed in affability and sweetness of words." 
 As to a council, which many of the clergy had de- 
 manded to settle the pending difficulties, Camille Des- 
 moulins remarked, "The council of 1791 would not 
 fail to imitate that of 1179, which granted as means of 
 transportation, to a rural Dean two horses, to an Arch- 
 deacon seven horses, to a Bishop twenty horses, to an 
 Archbishop twenty-fire horses, to a Cardinal forty 
 horses. As to the Pope, the Fathers of the Council, 
 who held their session in his Lateran palace, and 
 who dined from his Lateran kitchen, did not presume 
 to trace, with their crosiers, the limits of his stable, but 
 allowed him as numerous a supply as that of King Sol- 
 omon. But though the Holy Father was at this time very 
 rich, he was yet not rich enough to have as many horses 
 in his stables as asses in his council." Toward the close ! 
 of his discourse, Desmoulins counsels the people not to 
 tear the robes of the refractory Bishops, but to be con- 
 tent with withholding their salaries. " Let them sit," 
 Baid he, " upon their episcopal thrones, like Simeon Sty- ! 
 
118 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 lites on his column. We will see if Heaven sends them 
 manna, or a daily visit of a raven with a bill large 
 enough to bear them a pound loaf of bread. When 
 they are no longer salaried, you will see very soon^ my 
 dear brethren, that that sort of demons generally called 
 Pharisees, or prince-priests, non ejicitur nisi per jeju- 
 nium, go not out but by fasting." 
 
 A pamphlet like this belongs to history, for it presents 
 the popular opinion of the moment under its most lively 
 coloring. It served as a violent stimulus to the party 
 attacked. The high clergy might have fallen back on 
 the sentiment of honor, so powerful in France, to belie 
 these sarcasms, and to prove that they were able to en- 
 dure privation and even persecution. But before resign- 
 ing themselves to martyrdom, they desired to organize 
 and resist. They soon received the word of order from 
 Rome. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 110 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 SCHISM IN THE CHURCH CORRESPONDENCE WITH ROME 
 
 DEBATE ON THE LIBERTY OF WORSHIP DISCOURSES OF 
 
 SIEVES AND TALLEYRAND DISSOLUTION OF THE CON- 
 STITUENT ASSEMBLY. 
 
 The Pope* delayed long his official answer to the 
 Bishops who had consulted him on the subject of the 
 new Civil Constitution of the Clergy, though his private 
 letters gave, clearly to be seen, what that answer would 
 finally be. Perhaps he awaited events, in the hope that 
 some sudden reaction in politics might save the necessity 
 of an official decision which would inevitably create a 
 schism in the French Church. The counties of Avignon 
 and Venaissin had, since the thirteenth century, formed 
 a part of the temporal possessions of the Holy Father, 
 though the title had more than once been disputed by 
 the Kings of France. In the light of the ancient laws 
 of Europe, the Pope surely possessed them legally. But 
 the new order of things, based on popular sover- 
 eignty, was destined to come in conflict with these 
 ancient rights, and dispute the propriety of allowing 
 this little establishment to remain chained to the usages 
 of the Middle Ages, in the heart of a nation which had 
 gone through a political regeneration. It was impossible 
 to arrest the contagion of Uberty. The agitation began 
 ■ See Appendix, note 14. 
 
120 
 
 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 at Ayignon in March, 1790. The citizens of the place 
 had spontaneously given themselves a liberal municipal 
 organization, against which the Pope had hastened to 
 protest. They went a step further, and demanded for- 
 mally their reunion with France. The friends of the 
 reunion persevered in their purpose, in spite of bloody 
 riots which, at three different places, broke out in the 
 little territory. They were not discouraged by the hes- 
 itation of the Assembly, which feared to disturb a sub- 
 ject involving grave diplomatic difficulties, and which 
 might precipitate a European war. In August, 1790, 
 the Pope had addressed to all the Sovereigns of Europe 
 a pastoral letter, to prove that his possession of this 
 hand-breadth of earth concerned the whole of Europe, 
 and involved the most sacred interests of religion. He 
 complained bitterly of the ingratitude of his subjects, 
 upon whom he had heaped all the benefits of his paternal 
 regime. This paternal rule, however, was precisely 
 what the people of Avignon did not like. The majority 
 of the Assembly favored the scheme of reunion, but it 
 was only after they had entirely broken with the rest of 
 Europe that they put their desires into effect. 
 
 The matter was discussed in the Assembly in No- 
 vember, 1790. The clerical party exhibited a truly Ben- 
 edictine erudition, in attempting to justify the Papal 
 thralldom of Avignon. The more clear-sighted of the 
 radical party gave up the historical argument, and fell 
 back on the new principle of popular sovereignty, main- 
 taining boldly that rulers belong to the people, and not 
 the people to rulers ; and that the people of a territory 
 alone have the right to choose their form of government. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 121 
 
 After many delays, the Assembly finally voted, in Sep- 
 tember, 1791, to reunite Avignon to France, on condition 
 of paying to the Pope an indemnity, the amount of 
 which was not yet fixed. The little territory had al- 
 ready, for some months, been occupied militarily. The 
 Holy Father had, therefore, a secular as well as an eccle- 
 siastical grudge against the Revolution. 
 
 About this epoch three important documents ema- 
 nated from Rome. The first is a Papal brief, touching 
 the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, dated March 10, 
 1790. It is not yet definitive, though the real sentiments 
 of the Pope are clearly indicated. It condemns flatly 
 all the innovations in Church affairs thus far made by 
 the French Assembly. To this is added a general tirade 
 against the " so-called " new rights of man — the liberty 
 of conscience, the liberty of thought, and the liberty of 
 the press. The brief terminates with a violent assault 
 on Talleyrand, Bishop of Autun, in which he is de- 
 nounced to the universal Church as impious, for having 
 taken the oath to support the Civil Constitution of the 
 Clergy. The example of the recantation and martyr- 
 dom of Thomas a Becket is recommended to him, while 
 the punishment of Heliodorus is denounced against the 
 spoliators and profaners of the sanctuary. The Assembly 
 is compared to Henry VIII., and an approaching excom- 
 munication is denounced against all who persist in the 
 evil ways to which his Holiness takes exception. 
 
 This brief was accompanied by a letter to Louis XVI., 
 perfectly adapted to disturb the Prince's timorous con- 
 science. It expressly condemned the Civil Constitution 
 of the Clergy. " Your Majesty," said the Pope, " is en- 
 
 16 
 
122 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 gaged by a solemn promise to live and die in the Cath- 
 olic religion. But, Sire, this promise will be to you 
 henceforth an inexhaustible source of bitterness and re- 
 morse ; for, by your sanction, you have detached from 
 the Catholic unity all those who have the weakness to 
 take the oath required by the Assembly." These and 
 like words tended to render impossible any conciliation, 
 to hasten the overthrow of the throne, and to bring on 
 the mad excesses of an irritated revolution. 
 
 The Bishops deputed to the Assembly hastened to 
 reply to the Pope. They could but agree in condemn- 
 ing the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, but they did 
 not join in his crusade against all the great principles of 
 the French Revolution. They held to political liberty and 
 equality, to the distinction of the civil and the spiritual 
 powers, and so on. At the close of their letter, they 
 spoke of the embarrassments and perils of their situa- 
 tion. " But, said they, " we will submit," to our destiny, 
 whatever it may be, with that courage which religion 
 inspires. Exalt yourself, Holy Father, to the wisdom 
 and liberty of your mission. Rise above all those per- 
 sonal considerations which perish with us. We occupy 
 but a small point in time and space, and our own fate 
 ought not to have the least weight against the interests 
 of empires, and the promises of the Church. We know 
 the examples the Ghurch sets before us, and we know 
 how to suffer for her. Only let not principles suffer." 
 The Bishops closed by promising to resign, if schism 
 might thereby be avoided. This letter constitutes a 
 noble document in the religious history of France; it 
 breathes the spirit of the Christian conscience. 
 
Religion aixd the Reign of Terror, 123 
 
 On the 13th of April the Pope gave his definitive de- 
 cision in a brief addressed to the whole Church of 
 Fiance. He pronounced the new Constitution of the 
 Church heretical, protested against the consecration of 
 Expilly, the new Bishop of Quiinper, and against all the 
 new elections, alleging that the churches belong, not to 
 the people, but to their chief Pastors. The Pope then 
 solemnly abjured all Catholics, in the name of their 
 eternal salvation, to remain faithful to the ancient laws 
 of the Church, and to the Holy See. 
 
 The matter now assumed a new aspect. There were 
 henceforth two Churches in France : the one, constitu- 
 tional and protected by the State ; the other, refractory 
 and persecuted. To rescue the honor of the former, the 
 hour of persecution was soon to come ; for, the bastard 
 system on which it was organized was impracticable. 
 And besides, the wrath of the people, excited at first 
 against the non-juring clergy, soon forgot the difference 
 of the two Churches, and turned its fury against all re- 
 ligion whatever. Out of one hundred and thirty-one 
 Bishops, only four accepted the new Civil Constitution 
 of the Clergy, and a vast multitude of the inferior clergy 
 remained faithful to the Pope. The movement of oppo- 
 sition took immediately a wide scope and an organized 
 form throughout the land. The charges of the Bishops 
 to their clergy, and their responses to the summons of 
 the Assembly to submit themselves to its decrees, had 
 been filled with matter of an inflammatory character. 
 Most of the high clergy fled the country, but before em- 
 igrating they laid plans for exerting a perpetual influ- 
 ence when they themselves should be absent. 
 
124 . Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 Only four of the former Bishops, as already remarked, 
 had decided to take the oath and accept the new order 
 of things. These were Lomenie de Brienne,* Archbishop 
 of Sens ; Talleyrand, Bishop of Autun ; Jarente, Bishop 
 of Orleans; and Savines, Bishop of Viviers; these, of 
 course, remained in possession of their dioceses. The 
 other dioceses had now to be provided for by new elec- 
 tions and consecrations. Gobel,f Bishop of Lydda, was 
 chosen Metropolitan of Paris. Expilly and Marolles, 
 clerical Deputies, were elected to provincial dioceses, 
 and consecrated, at Paris, by Talleyrand. Gregory, 
 Claude le Coz, Lamourette, and Moses, were elected to 
 other principal places. On the whole, the Constitu- 
 tional high clergy were honorable men, though of only 
 moderate rank and talent. The most eminent of them 
 was doubtless Gregory, whose finn character was proof 
 against both the bloody orgies of demagogism, and the 
 menaces and promises of despotism. His new position 
 accorded perfectly with his convictions. He was thor- 
 oughly attached to the Revolution. He loved it with 
 an ardent enthusiasm, which, though sometimes leading 
 him to imprudent language, yet never induced him to 
 a culpable act. He was neither a profound thinker nor 
 a great orator, but he was of that solid practical stuff, 
 out of which new social fabrics are most readily built. 
 He had faith and heroism. Lamourette had already fig- 
 ured as a feeble apologist of religion against the philos- 
 ophers, and was, on the whole, one of those gentle spirits 
 which make no mark in a time of strife. Claude le Coz 
 honored himself by a noble defense of the non-juring 
 • See Appendix, note 15. f Ibid., note 16. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 125 
 
 clergy, and by his devotion to the person of the King. 
 Hie defended the new Constitution of the Church with 
 all the earnestness of thorough conviction. As to Gobel, 
 Bishop of Lydda, he was one of those shallow, vacillating 
 spirits who are driven hither and thither by the popular 
 current, as sea-weed is washed by the waves. At bottom, 
 he had grave scruples as to the new Constitution of the 
 Church, and defended it but feebly ; and yet he was des- 
 tined subsequently to dishonor his name forever by the 
 most shameless of apostasies. Of the former Bishops 
 who had not abandoned their places, two, Jarente of 
 Orleans, and Savines of Viviers, were poor and obscure ; 
 and two were talented and celebrated, though but little 
 esteemed, namely, Talleyrand, (a politician rather than 
 a Churchman, who was soon to enter the ranks of the 
 laity, and there find a more congenial field for his gifts,) 
 and Lomenie de Brienne, who had been equally frivo- 
 lous as minister and* as prelate. The Pope, in reply to 
 a letter from the latter, had charged him with inflicting 
 the greatest possible dishonor on the Roman purple 
 by taking the civil oath, and by consecrating new 
 Bishops. " Such acts," said the Holy Father, " are de- 
 testable crimes." Brienne answered by resigning his 
 ofhee of Cardinal. The Pope announced its acceptance 
 in a secret consistory held September the 26th, 1791. 
 After enumerating the acknowledged services of the 
 Archbishop of Sens, he passed in review his censurable 
 acts and hesitated not to class among the worst of them, 
 that which he had done, as Minister of State, in assuring 
 tolerance for Protestants. He reproached him for 
 having restored, in part, the fatal Edict of Nantes. 
 
126 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 The Pope, in thus apologizing for persecution in the 
 same breath in which he defended the liberties of 
 the Church, chose the surest way of defeating his own 
 cause. Talleyrand had been expressly condemned in 
 the brief of April 10th, but he paid little attention 
 thereto, as his ambition far surpassed the ecclesiastical 
 sphere. The elections to new bishoprics and curacies 
 were not made in all places with equal facility. In some 
 parishes the balloting had to be repeated seven or eight 
 times. The most absurd and ridiculous rumors were 
 circulated. It was pretended that at the moment of the 
 election of Expilly it had thundered terribly, and that 
 the skies were covered with clouds the day of his ar- 
 rival at Quimper. 
 
 The first public acts of the new clergy were not of a 
 nature to make a favorable impression. A new Bishop, 
 in presenting his homage at the bar of the Assembly, 
 pronounced a violent discourse against the refractory 
 clergy, intimating that their fanaticism might resort to 
 torches and poniards. He closed by a pompous apology 
 of his conduct in accepting his new position, and ex- 
 claimed, most ridiculously out of place, " Now, Lord, 
 lettest thou thy servant depart in peace." Nothing 
 could be more flat than the pastoral letter of Gobel, the 
 Metropolitan of Paris. It was written in the weak sen- 
 timental style of the day. It spoke of the pure and 
 precise divine morality which disclaims sectarian quar- 
 rels. " Let us preach to our flock," said he, " that after 
 the divine law there is nothing more sacred than ^he 
 law of the State, and that to disobey the latter is to vio- 
 late the former." Thus, in his opinion, all that is given 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 127 
 
 to Cnesar is given to God; there is neither distinction 
 nor reserve. France, at the first venture, had struck on 
 a model of a mere clerical functionary. Gobel surpassed 
 himself in absurdity in the speech he pronounced on 
 the occasion of the death of Mirabeau. He regrets 
 bitterly the death of the great man to whom he owes 
 the privilege of exercising canonically, on the flowery 
 banks of the Seine 1 , the ministry which he had pre- 
 viously exercised drearily and without glory, amid the 
 eternal snows of Switzerland; for it was the pure hand 
 of Mirabeau that had placed him in the See of Paris. 
 "Who could have imagined," he exclaimed, "that a ven- 
 erable Archbishop would be proscribed to make place 
 for Gobel ! What a striking illustration of the wonder- 
 working ability of the great man whom we mourn to- 
 day ! " At this thought the sensibilities of the Bishop 
 knew no bounds. H We must have," said he, " civic 
 priests, civic bishops, and a religion entirely civic." 
 That nothing might be wanting to the ridiculousness of 
 this farce, it termi nates with a eulogy of the domestic 
 virtues of Mirabeau, whose life had been notorious for 
 excessive debauchery. He was proclaimed the father of 
 the new Church. This wonderful piece of rhetoric was 
 signed by the Bishop and his secretary, and sent into 
 every parish in the kingdom. One may easily imagine 
 the impression such a document made on the adherents 
 of the ancient clergy. Some months later, Gobel pre- 
 sided over a ridiculous farce, which mingled the Carnival 
 with the most sacred ceremonies of the Church. A com- 
 pany of children, to whom he had administered the first 
 communion, were paraded with great display in the 
 
128 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 streets of Paris. At the Jacobin Club they gave a 
 specimen of the principles they had been taught. " You 
 have brought clearly to the light of day," said their 
 spokesman to the Jacobins, " that sublime truth, so often 
 repeated by Voltaire in vain, under the reign of the 
 despots, that the virtue of man does not arise from his 
 belief." It is clear that Gobel did not have to advance 
 much further in order to inaugurate the worship of 
 reason. These interesting neophytes were then presented 
 to the Assembly. Their spokesman recited, in their 
 name, a stupidly pompous speech, laudatory of the 
 Revolution, and demanded finally that these chil- 
 dren of religion might be made the children of the 
 country by the adoption of the National Assembly; 
 after which they were caused to recite in chorus the civic 
 oath. The grave Treilhard, who was President at the 
 time, replied in the same style. "Infancy," said he, 
 " exists no longer when the native land is at stake, and the 
 ices of age melt away and assume new life for the defense 
 of the empire." The radicals applauded, and demanded 
 the printing of these rhetorical masterpieces, whereupon 
 the conservatives burst out in roars of ironical laughter, 
 viewing the whole affair as a simple farce. A very 
 stormy debate followed, in which it came near passing 
 from harsh words to fisticuffs — a fit termination of this 
 exhibition of the young communicants of Gobel. Truly 
 the Constitutional clergy were poorly represented at 
 Paris, the center of light. 
 
 The popular irritation against the priests who had not 
 taken the oath increased from day to day. Ignoble car- 
 icatures exposed them to the contempt of the masses. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 129 
 
 The solemnities of Holy Week presented afresh to the 
 conscience of every Catholic the grave questions which 
 were rending the land. Among the masses there were 
 two classes, the scoffers and the devout. At the begin 
 ning of April some unsuppressed convents had suffered 
 shameful violences, on the pretense that refractory 
 priests had there been allowed to administer the sacra- 
 ments. Nuns had even been publicly whipped. To 
 stop these hideous and disgraceful scenes, the munici- 
 pality had been compelled to publish a proclamation, 
 promising that the official Churches should be inter- 
 dicted to the non-juring clergy. These troubles occa- 
 sioned in the department of the Seine a decree declaring 
 that the temples not regarded as necessary for the Con- 
 stitutional worship might be sold and appropriated to 
 any use whatever. It was also expressly stated, that 
 private individuals might obtain such and such religious 
 edifices for the celebration of any worship whatever, on 
 condition of placing on the main door an inscription in- 
 dicating its use, and distinguishing it from the national 
 Churches. It was required that this inscription be ap- 
 proved by the officers of the department, at least during 
 the year 1791. Doubtless it was feared that it might 
 contain something calculated to offend the populace 
 and incite to riot. In the provinces the agitation was 
 not less intense. The days appointed for taking 
 the oath were fearful occasions. The magistrates in 
 scarf, followed by an armed force, repaired to the 
 churches at the hour of service, and demanded, willing 
 or unwilling, the taking of the civic oath. In Cham- 
 pagne a priest was shot dead at the altar at the 
 
 17 
 
130 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 moment he was explaining why he could not take the 
 oath required. 
 
 Already most of the high clergy, especially the Bish- 
 ops, had left France. From their foreign retreats they 
 kept up communication with their former dioceses, and 
 contributed greatly to foment sedition. As to the King, 
 it availed him nothing that he had sanctioned the de- 
 crees. The Assembly knew well that he was conscien- 
 tiously opposed to taking the sacraments from the hands 
 of a Constitutional priest. But as he made no parade 
 of his private sentiments, it would have been wise to 
 ignore them, though it would have been inconsequent 
 to allow him a private chaplain who had refused the 
 oath. The matter caused trouble. A popular riot had 
 prevented the King from going to the church at St. 
 Cloud, on Easter, to take the sacrament. It had been 
 provoked by a handbill of the Cordelier Club. The 
 placard, after mentioning the reports that the King 
 had been keeping in his palace refractory priests to offi- 
 ciate in a way forbidden by the laws of the Assembly, 
 " denounced to the representatives of the nation, this 
 first subject of the laws as himself a violator of the 
 law." Previously to this the King had been under the 
 necessity of repairing to the Assemby to obtain per- 
 mission of " freely going and coming." " It is astonish- 
 ing," he had said, " that after having given liberty to 
 the nation, I cannot free myself." 
 
 In accordance with a municipal decree, that certain 
 churches might be used for any worship whatever, a few 
 citizens had hired the Church of the Theatins for the use 
 of non-juring priests. The authorities had accepted the 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 131 
 
 following inscription : " Edifice dedicated 'to religions 
 services by a private* society. Peace and liberty." The 
 people of Paris had here a fine chance of showing their 
 love of true liberty, by conceding it to a minority whose 
 principles they detested. Unfortunately the madness of 
 the press and the intemperance of the political clubs 
 wrought too fatally on the popular passions. The day 
 appointed for the first worship of these non-juring Cath- 
 olics a menacing and insulting paper had been affixed 
 to the door of the church. A mob assembled in the 
 street, determined to do violence to whoever attempted 
 to pass the threshold. Thus the most sacred of liberties 
 was violated on the very first occasion. It was a direct 
 outrage on the glorious frontispiece of the Constitution, 
 the Declaration of Rights ; which amounted to nothing 
 but a vain and dead letter, if it could not protect a mi- 
 nority against an insensate mob. The conduct of 
 Lafayette in these circumstances was highly honorable. 
 He had seen in America the working of the largest re- 
 ligious liberty, and had hoped for France the same 
 happy system. In his memoirs he says : " The proposed 
 remedy of allowing each society to support its own 
 temple and ministers, as is done in the United States, 
 was rejected on every hand." Though hostile to the 
 high clergy party, he was willing enough to respect their 
 rights and conscience; he even allowed non-juring 
 priests to open a chapel in his own palace. When the 
 populace prevented the King from going to the Church 
 at St. Cloud, Lafayette was so incensed at this violation 
 of religious liberty as to tender his resignation. And 
 lie withdrew it, only on the assurance that no similar 
 
132 Reliyion and the Reign of Terror, 
 
 outrage would be committed. He espoused with enthusi- 
 asm, the cause of the Theatine non-jurors, and besought 
 them to celebrate their worship despite the populace. 
 " For two days," wrote he on this occasion, " I have 
 been absorbed in discussions and arrangements relative to 
 the full and immediate maintenance of religious liberty. 
 The real aristocrats are offended at our shielding religion 
 against their hostility. The Ecclesiastical Committee 
 spoke to me to-day of measures to be taken against the 
 non-conforming Catholics. I told them that the Na- 
 tional Guard was an instrument which would play any 
 tune they pleased, provided only that they did not 
 change the key, which was the Declaration of Rights." 
 
 These matters gave rise to a discussion in the As- 
 sembly which turned, on the whole, in favor of religious 
 liberty ; though the enjoyment of the right was very in- 
 secure so long as it was liable to be infringed by the 
 mob. It was contended by some that the refusal to take 
 the oath had the effect only to deprive of public office and 
 salary, but not to hinder the non-jurors from officiating in 
 the national Churches. Others denied this inference. The 
 cause of the non-juring priests of the Theatine Church 
 found able defenders in Talleyrand and Sieyes ; Mirabeau 
 was no longer there. " It is time," said Talleyrand, " that 
 the people should know that this liberty of opinion is 
 not a vain and meaningless part of the Declaration of 
 ] lights ; that it is a real, full, and entire right, to which 
 protection is due." He showed that it was entirely 
 illusory if it was not respected outside of the official 
 worship, and if it was not so far respected as to be al- 
 lowed the right of manifesting itself in acts of public 
 
Religion and the Reign of Tewor. 133 
 
 worship. " We do not combat fanaticism," said he, " to 
 substitute in its place a culpable indifference. It is the 
 respect for conscience that we wish to consecrate. We 
 wish to insure the triumph of true religion by leaving to 
 it no resort but persuasion, and by showing that it has 
 nothing to fear from the emulation of rivals." After ex- 
 pressing lively regrets that the people of Paris had to 
 such an extent infringed the liberty of conscience, he 
 continued : " Conscience must be respected, even in our 
 bitterest adversaries. Those who believe it must be al- 
 lowed, if they wish it, to stigmatize us as schismatics. 
 Their worship, whether it be like or different from ours, 
 must be perfectly free, otherwise religious liberty is only 
 a name, and we become an intolerant and persecuting 
 people. Let us show that this liberty is one of the 
 great benefits of our Constitution, which will grow 
 stronger from day to day, and soon or late command the 
 homage of mankind." 
 
 The Abbot Sieyes maintained the same principles with 
 his accustomed directness and precision. " Citizens have 
 been disturbed," said he, "in their reunion; this re- 
 union had a religious object. Now is there any law 
 forbidding assemblies of the people when they have a 
 religious object, provided that otherwise they violate 
 no law? I know of no such law. The National As- 
 sembly has substantially said to all, ' You shall not be 
 disturbed for your religious opinions ; you are subject 
 only to the law. Your liberty is guaranteed to you ; rely 
 on it, it shall be protected.' If any one objects, saying 
 that opinion is free, but only in the mind, or when one 
 is alone, or in a small company, what more has the As- 
 
134 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 sembly granted than existed under the former regime f 
 Is it possible for a liberty or right to exist in principle, 
 but not in action or consequences ? When you say the 
 citizens are free, what can you mean but that they are 
 free to put their rights into effect ? This must be so, 
 unless liberty is a mere abstraction. If such is the 
 liberty meant, it is not worth the trouble of the Revolu- 
 tion." To those who objected that religious liberty was 
 full of peril, because it gave scope to popular agitation, 
 Sieyes replied, that the same objection might be urged 
 against every kind of liberty. The simple fact was, that 
 the majority was in favor of universal tolerance so long 
 as it was enjoyed only by sects to which they were in- 
 different; but as soon as it turned to the profit of an 
 enemy, for example, the non-juring Catholics, they op- 
 posed it. 
 
 Lanjuinais,* who subsequently distinguished himself 
 by his firm defense of liberty and justice, took the 
 question this time by its small side, and called upon 
 himself a sally of contemptuous laughter by his ill-timed 
 railing against the privileges enjoyed by the non-juring 
 Catholics and the Protestants. The result of the debate 
 was, that the National Assembly pronounced itself 
 fully in favor of the great principles advocated in the 
 speeches of Talleyrand and Sieyes. Thus the great 
 principles of 1789 were interpreted anew by this sov- 
 ereign Assembly, as consecrating the largest religious 
 liberty. The pretended liberal of to-day, who does not 
 favor entire liberty of worship, is no disciple of 1789. 
 Unfortunately this great right, together with all others, 
 * See Appendix, note 17. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 135 
 
 was soon destined to be submerged by the waves of the 
 all-devouring Revolution ; nevertheless, in spite of its 
 temporary defeat, it still remains, like a rock imbedded in 
 the earth, the great principle which is to form the corner- 
 stone of our constitutional edifice, when it is definitely 
 built. 
 
 It is easy to see how greatly the Assembly was in ad- 
 vance of the people of Paris in point of real liberalism. 
 Notwithstanding the fine discussion in the Assembly on 
 religious liberty, the Church of the Theatins had scarcely 
 been opened when the non-juring Catholics were driven 
 away by a mob, and their altar demolished. Lafayette 
 had to come in person to stop the riot, and Bailly,* the 
 astronomer, wrote, in the name of the municipality of 
 Paris, a letter of thanks to the National Guard, which 
 had lent its strong hand to the law. He here pleaded the 
 cause of conscience, and deprecated fanaticism, whether 
 under the banner of the Revolution or of religion. But 
 the men of 1789 were fast becoming unable to control 
 the passions of the populace, on which they had already 
 too much relied. They could call them to their aid, but 
 they could not place a limit to their excesses. More- 
 over, they were not free from passion themselves, and it 
 was in spite of themselves if they respected religious 
 liberty in their enemies of the non-juring clerical party. 
 
 The opposition of this party grew from day to day, 
 and spread like wild-fire over the whole land. The calm 
 North was affected as well as the fanatical South. Riots 
 broke out in several provinces. The Bishop of Senez 
 courageously resisted all commands to obey a law which 
 * See Appendix, note 18. 
 
136 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 violated his conscience, and took, at tbe tribunal of Cas- 
 tillon, the attitude of an ancient confessor. His firmness 
 had an extrordinary influence on the clergy. He ob- 
 tained the recantation of a priest who had taken the 
 oath, and ceased not to direct his shafts against the 
 decrees of the Assembly. In several places priests had 
 to be thrown into prison. 
 
 About this time, the translation of the ashes of Vol- 
 taire (who thirteen years previously had scarcely been 
 allowed the most humble burial place by the Catholics 
 of France) to the Pantheon, the national temple of the 
 French, had given new offense. It had been accom- 
 plished in the midst of theatrical pomp and affected sen- 
 timentality. It was a fresh defiance of revolutionary 
 France to the prejudices of Catholicism. One of the 
 motives given by the Assembly for decreeing these 
 highest honors to Voltaire was, that he had prepared the 
 nation for liberty. But they were very soon to see, and 
 literally to realize, how closely irreligion is allied to des- 
 potism As yet, however, the majority of the Assembly 
 showed no disposition to transgress the bounds of a wise 
 moderation. An instance of this occurred at this time, 
 in a case where they passed lightly over a serious disre- 
 spect of the laws, committed by the Archbishop of 
 Rouen. Their patience was further tried by frequent 
 briefs of the Pope, which were circulated widely, and 
 which created much mischief in the land. In the session 
 of June 9th, 1791, Thouret proposed a decree forbidding 
 in the future, under heavy penalty, the circulation of any 
 act of the Papal See which had not previously been ap- 
 proved by the Assembly. This would have infringed on 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 137 
 
 the liberty of the press, for it would have hindered, in one 
 of its most sacred forms, the free expression of thought in 
 a large class of citizens. The furthest they could properly 
 have gone, would have been to forbid the circulation of 
 Papal acts as binding in France. Malouet and other 
 speakers ably exposed the injustice of such a law. The 
 decree, as finally passed, was limited in its application to 
 the official or constitutional clergy. This moderation was 
 imitated by some of the provincial authorities. In one 
 locality, the Sisters of Charity had manifested disappro- 
 bation of the new regime, and the populace had menaced 
 them. The authorities took up their defense ; but while 
 allowing them the liberty of still taking care of the 
 sick, they forbade them the right of teaching, which 
 was now a civil function. The Minister of the Interior 
 wrote them a sensible letter, advising them to concede 
 to the sick, whom they nursed, the same liberty they 
 claimed for themselves. 
 
 But the attempted, flight of the King, June 21, 1791, 
 rendered moderate measures any longer impossible. 
 The revolutionary passions became irresistible. The 
 emphasis laid by the King on the violence he had suf- 
 fered from the Revolutionists in matters of conscience, 
 was a noteworthy feature of the manifesto which he had 
 designed to explain to France and to Europe the cause 
 of his flight. We thus read these words: "On his 
 recovery from sickness the King made ready to go to 
 the Church at St. Cloud. As a pretext for arresting 
 him, advantage was taken of the respect which he was 
 known to entertain for the religion of his fathers. 
 Thereafter he was compelled to order the discharge of 
 
138 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 his private chaplain, to approve the letter of the [revolu- 
 tionary] ministry to the foreign powers, and to attend 
 the celebration of mass by the new Curate of St. Ger- 
 main l'Auxerrois." This document set in the plainest 
 light the intimate alliance between the counter-revolu- 
 tion and the non-juring clergy. It is not surprising 
 that the opposition of the clergy henceforth excited 
 more • discontent and displeasure. The fugitive King 
 had openly espoused their cause in the eyes of all Eu- 
 rope. On the fourth of August an obscure Deputy had 
 gone so far as to propose, in the interest of the public 
 safety, the suspension of the laws of justice and liberty, 
 in order to crush the opposition of the refractory clergy. 
 He had dared to propose, in the midst of the great As- 
 sembly which had voted the Rights of Man, that all the 
 non-juring priests of certain departments in which great 
 trouble then existed, be required to retire to a distance 
 of thirty leagues, on pain of imprisonment. This would 
 have been to inaugurate general proscription, for which 
 the moment had not yet arrived. The men of 1789 
 could not be led to so flat a contradiction of their own 
 principles, even under the pressure of their own passions 
 and the raging fury of the masses. This proposition 
 was destined to reappear under an aggravated form in 
 the next Assembly. On the last day of September, 
 1791, the Constituent Assembly handed over its powers 
 to that stormy Legislative Assembly which accom- 
 plished the sad work of sweeping away the monarchy 
 and establishing the republic on the ruins of liberty. 
 
 Let us not be unjust toward this great Assembly, 
 which, in the midst of a society full of abuses and preju- 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 139 
 
 dices, had the hard task of laying the foundation of a 
 new order of things. Assailed by difficulties on every 
 hand, a prey to contrary and mutually-exasperating 
 passions, having to deal with a royalty which it could 
 not trust, urged on by an uncultured people who were 
 tired of their yoke and impatient to humble those who 
 had so long held them in the dust, it was compelled to 
 deal at once with all sorts of questions, and to resolve 
 them under the pressure of the most urgent necessity, 
 and amid the heat of the most ardent party strife. It 
 was not possible, in such circumstances, to erect a dura- 
 ble edifice, for too often laws were made as one erects 
 batteries — against the enemies of the day. The true 
 constitutionalists, who desired to preserve both liberty 
 and power, and to conciliate the future with the past, 
 had no chance of success in so violent a crisis. Mira- 
 beau, who was really on their side, saw fit to render 
 palatable his. reasonable and sober discourses by the 
 excesses of the deina^osnie. It must also be confessed 
 that the stubbornness and plots of the reactionary party 
 rendered the practice of wisdom very difficult. In 
 these circumstances the svstem of Rousseau had fine 
 scope for its daring theories, its. democratic parade, 
 (which, nevertheless, admitted of the most arbitrary 
 measures,) and its marked tendency to sacrifice liberty 
 to equality. Although restrained by the English school 
 and the great talents of its opponents, still this system 
 contributed largely to drive the Revolution into ex- 
 tremes, and to deprive the governmental machine of 
 that counterpoise, without which it is unable to resist 
 the assaults of passion. The system of Rousseau, in 
 
140 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 league with Gallican Jansenism, led the Assembly to 
 its greatest errors in ecclesiastical matters. Under this 
 influence the Constituent Assembly committed the mis- 
 take of salarying the Churches from the State treasury, 
 and organizing a functionary clergy. It sought to sub- 
 ordinate this clergy to the government by means of the 
 civil constitution and the political oath ; it carried con- 
 straint even into the conscience. Thus in the very 
 temple of liberty the old idol of the State had been 
 replaced on the altar by legislators who, while believing 
 themselves bold innovators, were in this matter mere 
 revivers of the most obsolete pretensions of the ancient 
 monarchy. They had, however, proclaimed liberty of 
 conscience outside of the official worship ; but this the 
 people would not peaceably suffer, and its shadow even 
 was destined to disappear in the storm which was al- 
 ready muttering in the distance, and which was in the 
 sequel to overturn both Throne and Altar. Neverthe- 
 less great rights had been invoked. A noble enthu- 
 siasm, though doubtless mingled with imprudent indig- 
 nation, had animated this great Assembly. And it is 
 upon the doctrines which it proclaimed that all devel- 
 opment of liberty in this country must ever be based ; 
 for, though it unfortunately compromised every-thing, 
 yet it divined and aspired after every-thing, and noth- 
 ing can ever surpass the intense patriotic ardor which 
 consumed it. A terrible ordeal was soon to separate 
 the good grain from the chaff. The struggles whicli 
 ensued were to be the implacable proof of the errors it 
 had committed as to the proper relations of the tem- 
 poral to the spiritual power. 
 
BOOK SECOND. 
 
 THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY AND THE NATIONAL 
 CONVENTION UNTIL THE PROCLAMATION OF THE 
 SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE. 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 RELIGIOUS STRUGGLE IN THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY. 
 
 The Constituent Assembly had maintained till the last 
 the principle of the liberty of conscience ; but the Dec- 
 laration of Rights was a bond far too frail to restrain a 
 land agitated by bitter religious strife. What could an 
 abstract idea avail against popular passion ! Let us 
 also forget not, that though the Assembly had remained 
 true to the liberal idea, yet it had but too often yielded 
 to the pernicious pressure of the populace. Still the 
 men of 1789 could not be so inconsequent as to suspend 
 the freedom of worship. In the Legislative Assembly, 
 where they formed only an insignificant minority, they 
 pleaded earnestly in its defense ; but their resistance was 
 neither long nor very efficacious. The fatal theory of 
 the public safety, much more pernicious in a republic 
 than in an absolute monarchy, annulled for a time the 
 most precious conquests of the Revolution. Violent 
 hands were already preparing to disfigure the statue of 
 Liberty, though it had but just been placed on its 
 
142 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 pedestal. The rude insolence which the new Assembly 
 showed to the King from its very first sittings was a 
 violation of the spirit of the Constitution ; for to debase 
 a royalty already so dependent was really to destroy it. 
 This open disrespect was to inflict on it a sort of moral 
 death. The Constitution was also in other respects 
 little better regarded. In fact, the work of the Legisla- 
 tive Assembly was less to govern and found than to 
 combat and destroy. Composed mostly of new and 
 very young men, chiefly signalized by their revolution- 
 ary fervor, and whose official duties had brought them 
 in contact with the reactionary spirit in the provinces, 
 it was imbued with a feeling of distrust and defiance. 
 Every thing impressed on it the great duty, as it 
 thought, of crushing every obstacle to the Revolution, 
 and more especially the religious reaction, which was 
 now assuming alarming proportions throughout the 
 land. Driven by its own inclination in the direction of 
 the arbitrary, and not having, as aids in checking its 
 excesses, the great orators and politicians whom an un- 
 wise measure of the first had shut out from this second 
 Assembly, there was little to hinder it from rushing to 
 its own destruction. The conservative members of the 
 first had no representation in the second, and the mod- 
 erates of the new Assembly corresponded to the radicals 
 of the old. The middle party of the Legislative As- 
 sembly, without courage or fixed principles, were ever 
 ready to throw their weight on the side of the strongest 
 and most violent. Trembling and hesitating royalty 
 passed, for a moment, from the concessions which had 
 been wrested from its weakness, to a show of resistance 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 143 
 
 which served only the cause of its enemies, and endured 
 only sufficiently long for the current to gain head 
 enough to sweep it away entirely. An insensate press, 
 which could attack private or public character w T ith 
 impunity — an organized mob constantly collected in and 
 about the hall of the Assembly — the increasing violence 
 of the debates in the clubs— the intoxication of combat 
 — the constant suspicion of treason on the one hand and 
 of conspiracy on the other— what was lacking to produce 
 on the Assembly a most unfortunate and irresistible 
 pressure ? The radicals of the Legislative Assembly, 
 as is well known, were the brilliant group of Girondist * 
 Deputies. Behind them stood, as their natural heirs, 
 the future extremists of the Mountain party, now only 
 distinguished from them by a ruder energy and a more 
 cruel disposition. We will see that the Girondists 
 showed in the religious struggles as much violence and 
 injustice as their enemies, and that if they did not erect 
 the political scaffold, they at least laid its foundation by 
 measures of illiberal proscription. They sacrificed right 
 and liberty to "reasons of State;" and this is the 
 (—.•lice of the political catechism of the terrorists. 
 Their eloquence, their youth, their generosity, and espe- 
 cially their courageous death, tend to blind us as to 
 their faults. But we must not look at them simply in 
 this last hour; for that liberty which they then proudly 
 and heroically invoked, they themselves had too often 
 violated in their own political career. They had tried 
 to found liberty by the arbitrary, a sure way of destroy- 
 ing both it and themselves. They left it bleeding in 
 * See Appendix, note 19. 
 
144 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 the hands of barbarous men who stained its name with 
 the stigma of their own dishonor. Docile and passion- 
 ate disciples of an unbelieving age, the Girondists dis- 
 played in their opposition to the reactionary clergy all 
 the prejudices of a materialistic philosophy which was 
 incapable of respecting God as manifested in the human 
 conscience. They gave to the world the shameful spec- 
 tacle of persecuting disciples of Voltaire. Let us, how- 
 ever, in judging them, not forget how much there is to 
 be- pleaded in their excuse ; for to their eyes religion was 
 identified with politics, and behind the crowd of suffer- 
 ing confessors, who have all our admiration, was to be 
 seen the long line of political reactionists, who made 
 use of every thing, even to religion and martyrdom, for 
 their pernicious purposes. 
 
 Let us take a brief glance at the situation of the 
 country at the opening of the debates of the Legislative 
 Assembly. The matter of the oath, and the displacement 
 of the non-juring priests, gave continual trouble. Where 
 the revolutionary party was the stronger, the refractory 
 clergy suffered all manner of ill treatment. Where the 
 contrary was the case, the new clergy often suffered per- 
 sonal violence from the populace. The non-juring clergy, 
 though deposed from their official stations, yet enjoyed 
 their salaries as private ecclesiastics, and could as such 
 celebrate the rites of the Church in the official temples. 
 They also had the right of renting, under certain con- 
 ditions, private halls for their own worship. But in this 
 right they were constantly frustrated by the outrages 
 of the mob, and by the unfairness of the local police, 
 who often held them responsible for riots of which they 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 145 
 
 had only been the victims. Though in many rural dis- 
 tricts they preserved their ancient ascendency, yet in the 
 cities they were generally at the mercy of the populace. 
 At Paris the opposition against them was surprisingly 
 great. Lafayette, in resigning the command of the Na- 
 tional Guards, recommended earnestly respect for relig- 
 ious liberty. " Liberty," said he, " will not be firmly 
 established among- us so long; as intolerance of religions 
 
 00 to 
 
 opinions, under pretext of I know not what kind of 
 patriotism, shall presume to admit the thought of a 
 dominant and a proscribed worship." The authorities 
 published a severe proclamation, on the occasion of the 
 assault on the Irish* College to prevent the non-juring 
 w« trahip. It was declared that the assault had been a vio- 
 la t ion both of religious liberty and of the rights of hospi- 
 tality. The local authorities of Paris were recommended 
 to safeguard, in the future, the fullest religious liberty. 
 But they were strongly disposed to do the very opposite. 
 New violence followed. At the Irish College women 
 had been assaulted on leaving the church. At the Irish 
 Seminary a female had been brutally torn from the con- 
 fessional. The house of English nuns, at the Jar din des 
 J'lu/ites, had been the theater of similar scenes. The 
 police had intervened only to gratify the mob by shut- 
 ting up the churches attacked. A magistrate to whom 
 complaint was made, satisfied himself with remarking 
 that the people were not ripe. 
 
 On occasion of these persecutions the non-juring 
 Catholics of Paris sent a remonstrance to the King. 
 " Sire," said they, " the Catholics of Paris for more than 
 
 Fix months have been exiled from their temples, deprived 
 
 10 
 
146 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 of their worship, and exposed to all the outrages of fa- 
 naticism, without uttering a single complaint. Disciples 
 of a Master who, while dying on the cross, prayed even 
 for his executioners — children of a religion whose first 
 law is charity, and whose first benefit is peace — they 
 thought fit at first to stifle their complaints and hide 
 their sorrow in their own bosoms ; but now, taking cour- 
 age from the promulgation of the constitutional laws, 
 we have presumed to speak to you of our rights to the 
 common liberty, and to ask, for the exercise of our 
 worship, the protection of the laws. All we desire is 
 peace ; the Constitution gives us rights ; it is time that 
 we enjoy them." 
 
 In the provinces the attitude of the old clergy was 
 more bold, for they were in general better sustained by 
 the populace. Messrs. Gallois and Gensonne had been 
 sent, in July 1791, by the Assembly, into the west of 
 France. They found the people of La Vendee, where 
 such a terrible civil war soon broke out, very favorably 
 disposed to the new regime in every thing that did not 
 concern their religion. " These people," said they, " re- 
 mote from the common center of resistance, disposed nat- 
 urally to a love of peace, of order, and of law, were en- 
 joying the benefits of the Revolution without experi- 
 encing its storms. Nothing would have been more easy 
 than to attach them to the Constitution, if their religious 
 faith, which is very positive and lively, had only been 
 respected. Their religion has become very strong, and, 
 as it were, the one moral habit of their existence." Not 
 being able to distinguish between religion and the priest, 
 they thought themselves deprived of their faith when 
 
Religi n and fh\ Reign of Terror. 147 
 
 they saw the priests turned out of office whom they re- 
 garded as the sole mediators between Heaven and earth. 
 They clung to them with a sort of wild affection which 
 could easily be brought to believe insurrection a sacred 
 duty. And the non-juring priests were not backward 
 in taking advantage of this disposition. The refractory 
 Bishop of Lucon multiplied his pastoral letters, to keep 
 his flock true to the old faith. He forbade his clenry to 
 enter the churches profaned by the new priests, and 
 counseled them to open new places for worship. **In 
 parishes," said he, u where there are few who are rich, 
 it will doubtless be difficult to find a suitable locality, 
 and to procure sacred vessels and ornaments. In such 
 cased a mere bam, a portable altar, a surplice of calico, 
 and vessels of tin, will suffice to celebrate the sacred 
 mysteries. This simplicity and poverty, by reminding 
 us of the firs: ft£M of the Church and of the cradle of 
 our holy religion, will be a powerful means of exciting 
 the zeal of the prie-ts and the fervor of the faithful. 
 The first Christians had no other temples than their 
 own houses."' The Bishop ordered that secret regis- 
 ters of baptisms, marriages, and interments should be 
 kept, and that if any one could not avoid entering a 
 cemetery of which a government priest had the charge, 
 at least he should retire with all possible haste as soon 
 as the oftensive Curate had defiled, with his presence, the 
 holy ground. Zealous missionaries, going out from a 
 central point, fanned the flame of fidelity to the old 
 Church, and spread abroad popular catechisms which 
 denounced the most terrible vengeance of Heaven on 
 whoever had any thing to do with the heretical priests. 
 
148 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 No marriage celebrated by them would be legal, and 
 every ceremony in which they should officiate would be 
 a sacrilege. These teachings bore their harvest. Fam- 
 ilies were divided, and municipal boards torn with dis- 
 cord. The substitution of the new for the old clergy 
 was very slow and very incomplete. Wherever it was 
 accomplished great discord resulted. The adherents of 
 the refractory clergy could not behold without indigna- 
 tion, the venerable Church of their fathers delivered over 
 to a small and, in their eyes, infamous minority, while 
 they were often condemned to make journeys of many 
 miles to celebrate their worship. On Sundays and fes- 
 tivals whole villages went on these long journeys. It is 
 easy to imagine with what feelings of bitterness the 
 fatigued peasants returned to their homes at night. The 
 agitation of the land was so great that the Assembly 
 had judged well to back their exhortations as to the ex- 
 cellence of the new Church system, by stationing in the 
 most refractory quarters detachments of troops. But the 
 best of soldiers, even under the command of Dumouriez, 
 could not re-establish tranquillity. What was needed 
 was not soldiers, but liberty. The Commissioners, finding 
 the district of Chatillon all on fire, assembled the people 
 in all the chief places, and were astonished at the mod- 
 eration of a population which had been denounced as 
 rebellious. They demanded simply that the government 
 should leave to them the Pastors of their choice. The 
 report of the Commissioners says : " The people desired 
 to enjoy liberty of religious opinion. We received from 
 numerous deputations this same prayer. 1 We only de- 
 sire,' said they, ' to have priests in whom we have confi- 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror, 149 
 
 dence.' Many of them desired this so much that they 
 assured us they would freely pay for the favor the double 
 of their assessment. They left us with peace and con- 
 tentment when we assured them that it was a principle 
 of the Constitution to respect the liberty of conscience." 
 These words of a chief of the Girondists contain the se- 
 verest condemnation of all the innovations of the Rev- 
 olution in ecclesiastical matters. They prove that civil 
 war might have been prevented by a faithful adherence 
 to the Constitution. What a condemnation for all the 
 so-called measures of public safety ! If they violate 
 right, they cannot contribute either to safety or honor. 
 
 While La Vendee was preparing for revolt, like 
 causes produced the same effects in other places. At 
 Montpellier the mob had interrupted the mass of a non- 
 juring priest, in a church which had been officially as- 
 signed to both forms of worship. The Catholics had 
 repulsed this attack by the cry of "Liberty of worship," 
 which was in fact to appeal from the Revolution mad 
 to the Revolution liberal and wise — to that one which 
 bad eloquently proclaimed universal tolerance. Unfor- 
 tunately, while the Catholics were sincere in their de- 
 fense of this great principle, and were sustained by a 
 good number of priests who, for the sake of their flocks, 
 courageously exposed themselves to many dangers, the 
 chiefs of the Royalist party abroad sought to turn this 
 feeling to their own political profit. Their sole aim was 
 to restore the ancient regime, with all its abuses. This 
 is clearly evident from a document which Abbot Maury 
 about this time sent to the Pope. It reveals the secret 
 designs of the leaders of the Catholic party at a time 
 
150 Religion and the Reign of Terror^ 
 
 when multitudes of the simple and pious, unacquaint- 
 ed with the thoughts of their chiefs, were winning for 
 themselves so pure a glory by suffering and dying 
 for the liberty of conscience. This liberty is cynically 
 denied in the letter of the incorrigible Abbot. Instead 
 thereof, he openly pleads for a restoration of the old 
 system, with all its abuses, and especially for the main- 
 tenance of the revocation of the Edict of Nantes. He 
 declares that Louis XIV. justly regarded the French 
 nation as so a unit that it could not admit of more than 
 one religion ; in this respect the nationality was some- 
 what like the nature of the Supreme Being — as soon as 
 a division is admitted he ceases to exist. He argues 
 that the share the Protestants were taking in the French 
 Revolution justified the policy of the revocation of the 
 Edict of Nantes, and that the only safe course was to 
 return to the examples of Louis XIV., and trample 
 under foot the teachings of a vain philosophy. He 
 pleads for refusing civil rights to the Protestants, and 
 for denying them the protection of the laws. This ad- 
 mirable plan was to be backed by a Papal bull of ex- 
 communication against the Jansenists and philosophers ; 
 and the people were thus to be brought back to sound 
 reason, and to the yoke which for a moment they had 
 shaken off. 
 
 Such was the programme of the counter-revolution. 
 Surely it was fully as absurd and foolish as that of its 
 foes, the extreme revolutionists. The suggestions of 
 Maury were well received at Rome. The Pope, not con- 
 tent with pleading for the sacred rights of religion, put 
 himself at the head of the political reaction in Europe, 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 151 
 
 and proclaimed himself the champion of the ancient re- 
 gime. Already he had hurled his anathemas against the 
 elementary principles of modem society. Unfortunately, 
 he was now surrounded by a cabinet of Absolutist coun- 
 selors, who persisted in involving and confounding the 
 most sacred with the most detestable of causes. Under 
 their influence, he gave much more attention to the 
 temporalities of the Church than to the interests of re- 
 ligion. Instead of being simply the father of the faithful 
 and the defender of Christianity, he played the earthly 
 sovereign, and espoused, against the people, the cause of 
 his brethren the kings. The causes of despotism and of 
 religion being thus identified, the Revolutionists believed 
 themselves justified in all their extreme measures against 
 the refractory Catholics, seeing in them only the cham- 
 pions of the despotism against which ^they were strug- 
 gling — a view which was true, however, only of a portion 
 of them. Moreover, it is never safe nor politic to imi- 
 tate the faults of one's foes. To understand the action 
 of the Legislative Assembly, it was necessary for us 
 thus to present clearly the complicated state of the re- 
 ligious question. Neither party was in the right purely 
 and simply, and each pleaded in self-justification the 
 excesses of the other. The sole sublime characters in 
 these deplorable struggles were the humble martyrs, 
 whether priests or peasants, who, strangers to all polit- 
 ical intrigues, suffered and died simply for their faith. 
 
 The Legislative Assembly had scarcely begun its 
 labors when it heard of the massacres at Avignon. 
 AYe have stated already how this little Papal territory 
 had been reunited to France ; but a decree of the As- 
 
152 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 sembly could not cool the rage of the over-excited pas- 
 sions of this southern city. As the result of a violent 
 contest of the two rival parties, an officer of the govern- 
 mental army had been killed in the church of the Cor- 
 deliers. The people, furious at this, had thrown into 
 prison more than two hundred persons, men and 
 women, who were suspected of disliking the new re- 
 gime. Crowded into a dark recess of the ancient Papal 
 palace, they had been massacred on the sixth of October, 
 1791, by a band of brigands, at the head of which fig- 
 ured a man well known for his cruelty, the revolutionist 
 Jourdan, afterward known as the Beheader. This act 
 was accomplished with an unheard of barbarity, and the 
 blood-stained walls remained for a long time its speak- 
 ing witness. The indignation of the Assembly at the 
 news of these cfmies was intense. The feelings of the 
 Deputy who read the report overcame him before he 
 could finish the horrible recital. Xothing was more 
 earnestly insisted on than the punishment of these in- 
 augurators of terror. However, the Girondists at- 
 tempted to save them, and, thanks to a miserable legal 
 technicality, succeeded in it to their own shame. Yer- 
 gniaud was guilty of lending to this execrable cause the 
 charm of his grand eloquence. He was indignant only 
 against the victims of the massacre. " Let not hang- 
 men," said he, " be the first gift you make to the people 
 of Avignon." He forgot that there is something worse 
 than to execute great criminals, namely, to sharpen the 
 daggers of assassins by a scandalous impunity. It was 
 an encouragement to crime, anfl the precursor of the 
 horrors of the coming September. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 153 
 
 This result gave the measure of justice that might be 
 expected from the Legislative Assembly by the perse- 
 cuted adherents of the ancient Church. The whole 
 tendency was toward the arbitrary and the tyrannical 
 Once in awhile, however, the real cause of the trouble, 
 and the true solution of the difficulties, were clearly 
 caught sight of by the better members of the Assembly. 
 It was seen and felt that in establishing a civil religion 
 the first Assembly had committed a grave error. This 
 opinion was clearly and boldly expressed in the Moni- 
 teur by an illustrious poet, Andre Chenier, who was at 
 that time the honor of French letters, and subsequently 
 one of the noblest martyrs of liberty. With the intui- 
 tion of genius he saw at once the cause of the tyranny 
 on the one side and of the revolt on the other. This 
 cause was the meddling of the government in matters 
 of religion. Chenier was not a Christian ; he thought 
 and wrote as a philosopher; and yet we find in him 
 much more respect for the rights of conscience than in 
 IhoM reactionary Catholics who wished nothing so 
 much as to go back to the old regime, under which they 
 themselves had treated their opponents with the same 
 hard fate against which they now so loudly complained. 
 k * We will only be delivered," said he, " from the influ- 
 ence of insurgent priests when the National Assembly 
 shall assure to every one the full liberty of following 
 and inventing whatever religion he may choose; when 
 every one shall pay for the worship he prefers, and for 
 no other; and when the courts shall punish with severity 
 the seditious and persecutors of every party. If the 
 Assembly objects that the French people are not ripe 
 
1 54 Religion and the Reign of Terror, 
 
 for such doctrines, then we say, it is for them, by means 
 of their example, their discourses, and their laws, to 
 prepare and ripen us for them. Priests do not trouble 
 those states which let them alone, and they never fail 
 to give trouble where they are meddled with." The 
 gifted writer proved his positions by ample references 
 to universal history. He closed his arguments by rec- 
 ommending the entire banishment of religious matters 
 . from the sphere of legislation, and the quenching of the 
 quarrels of priests by an attitude of indifference. This 
 indifference is in fact, thought he, the greatest mark of 
 respect which a political body can show to religion ; 
 but this opinion was very far from the teachings of 
 Bossuet and Rousseau. The poet, on this occasion, was 
 a true vates, a prophet. Unhappily he was not in the 
 Assembly, and his sentiments found there but a feeble 
 echo. 
 
 The question of the non-juring clergy was perpetually 
 the order of the day in the Legislative Assembly. The 
 continual disturbances in the provinces ever brought it 
 up anew, and it was ever resolved with increasing harsh- 
 ness against the refractory clergy. The emigrants were 
 openly preparing for war against the Revolution, and it 
 was perfectly clear that the obnoxious priests were their 
 strongest allies; therefore as often as one decree was 
 hurled against the former, another was forged against 
 the latter. The debates were for some time carried on 
 by the mediocre members, and with little ability. The 
 Assembly was at first very inexperienced, and the most 
 ridiculous, resolutions were constantly presented. For 
 example, Deputy Duval, after having proclaimed him- 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 155 
 
 self a child of nature by the grace of the plow, (as could 
 readily be proved by the oxen, those pure and incor- 
 ruptible wit/iesses of his labors,) moved that every priest 
 who would not take oath to obey all the new laws be 
 required, on pais of imprisonment, to wear upon his left 
 shoulder a badge bearing the words : Priest suspected of 
 sedition. 
 
 The question which finally presented itself was 
 whether the constitution should not be suspended in 
 order to crush the opposing clergy ; whether, in addition 
 to refusing them liberty of worship, they should not also 
 be denied civil rights. The problem therefore was 
 whether liberty was to be founded by liberty, or by the 
 arbitrary and the unjust. As early as the seventh of 
 October, 1791, the too famous Couthon* raised a sort 
 of yell of fury against the non-juring clergy. He in- 
 sinuated that the forms of justice should be refused to 
 them, for the reason that in the districts under their 
 influence it would be difficult to find proof against 
 them. Some days later the unknown Deputy Lejeune 
 intensified these views, and declared that the country 
 had no worse enemy than a fanatical priest, and that 
 the sole question was, how to stop his pernicious influ- 
 ence. " It is not a question of religious liberty," said 
 he, " but of safety of the country." He then proposed 
 that all non-juring priests be required within two weeks 
 to fix their residence in the chief town of their province. 
 A constitutional Bishop, Fauchet, had the sad honor of 
 seconding these measures of intolerance. He was a 
 man of ready, impassioned speech, and had won a name 
 * See Appendix, note 20. 
 
150 Religion and the Reign of Terror. ■ 
 
 for eloquence in the court, where he had preached in his 
 youth. His enthusiasm for the Revolution had pro- 
 cured him the bishopric of Caen, and a seat in the As- 
 sembly. He there exhibited the fire of a democrat and 
 the bitterness of a priest whose authority was contested 
 in his own diocese. He was not naturally a bad man, 
 but he had been spoiled by the clubs, and now he gave 
 himself up to the current of the moment. He was un- 
 measured in his invectives against the non-juring clergy, 
 and declared that liberty was incompatible with fanati- 
 cism. His own revolutionary fanaticism, and the unjust 
 measures which he pleaded for against his former col- 
 leagues, furnished the best proof of his assertion. 
 "Atheists," said he, "are angels in comparison with 
 these priests." Fauchet demanded the suspension of 
 the salaries which had been accorded to the non-juring 
 priests, on the ground that it was not right to pay them 
 for keeping the country in a ferment. He asserted that 
 poverty would soon chase away those who remained 
 " cuirassed in their pretended conscience ;" for the people 
 would soon weary of paying for a worship which they 
 could have more easily and more majestically in the 
 government churches. Sad language for a Bishop — 
 this speculating on the baser sentiments of human na- 
 ture. Happily for the honor of man this calculation 
 has always proved false ; the conscience can neither be 
 bought by gold nor cowed by the sword. Fauchet was 
 too fast ; the time was not yet come for such action. 
 His discourse displeased the Assembly. He was justly 
 reproached with having preached vengeance in the name 
 of the Gospel. A brother Bishop, Torne, refuted his 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. ^ 157 
 
 positions, and was applauded when he invoked religious 
 liberty in favor of the non-jurors. " Let us beware," 
 said he, " of regarding their errors as a political crime ; 
 fanaticism only increases by opposition. The refractory 
 priest who propagates his faith only makes use of his 
 natural liberty. Under the regime of liberty let us 
 have no punishment without judgment, no judgment 
 without trial." Such language saved the honor of the 
 new clergy, so gravely compromised by Fauchet. 
 Tome's discourse was ordered to be printed " in expia- 
 tion of the intolerant speech which had preceded it." 
 In vain Fauchet returned to the charge. He was 
 laughed at when he invoked the pity of the Assembly 
 for a salaried priesthood, on account of a few stones 
 which had been cast at a Curate by some women who 
 disliked him. The majority of the Assembly was 
 against him. Davignon demanded that the non-juring 
 worship be put on the same footing as that of the Prot- 
 estants and the Jews ; Monneron, that the factious be 
 punished not as priests, but as rebels. Others showed 
 that the only alternative was either to guarantee relig- 
 ious liberty, or to turn persecutor. A few Deputies 
 caught a clear view of the only remedy for the difficul- 
 ties, and proposed informally the leaving of the support 
 of all worship to the free gifts of the faithful. Ducos, 
 in his earnest pleas for liberty of conscience, showed 
 himself a true disciple of Mirabeau. "It is unjust and 
 impolitic," said he, "to give a preference to any wor- 
 ship whatever. Let us, therefore, separate State mat- 
 ters from matters of Church, treat the manifestation of 
 religious opinions as we treat other opinions, regard 
 
158 . Bdigion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 religious meetings as we regard other reunions of citi- 
 zens, and allow every sect to choose whom it please, 
 Avhether it be a bishop or an iman, a minister or a rabbi, 
 just as we allow popular assemblies to elect whom they 
 will for president and secretaries." Ducos went on to 
 make inferences from his principles, and severely con- 
 demned the Civil Constitution of the Clergy and the po- 
 litical oath. 
 
 The capital speech on this subject was pronounced by 
 Gensonne. He had just claims on the confidence of the 
 Assembly, for he had traversed the disaffected districts 
 and obtained a thorough knowledge of the troubles. He 
 showed that all that the people wanted was religious lib- 
 erty, and that the Revolution had committed a grave 
 error by regarding all as disloyal who, by error or by con- 
 science, had remained attached to their former Pastors. 
 He declared that a grave mistake had been committed 
 in identifying love of country with the acceptance of 
 this or that form of worship, a course which had sub- 
 jected the ignorant but honest people of the country 
 districts to innumerable vexations and persecutions. 
 The only remedy possible was simply the guaranteeing of 
 full religious liberty. And yet at this very moment the 
 radicals were pleading for the imprisonment of all non- 
 conforming priests. Their arguments, based on the plea 
 of the public safety, were ably refuted by Gensonne. 
 He showed that such general proscrij^tions involved 
 every injustice, confounded the innocent with the guilty, 
 and established an inquisition of the conscience. " Re- 
 member," said he, in closing, " that respect for individual 
 liberty is the surest guarantee of public liberty, and that 
 
ReUgion and the Reign of Terror. 159 
 
 one must never cease to be just even to an enemy." 
 The orator earned the Assembly with him ; but it was 
 rather from sentiment than from conviction. His dis- 
 course was ordered to be printed, and a report to be 
 made within the next eight days on the propositions 
 which he had made. A faithful following of the coun- 
 sels of that day would have saved infinite misfortune. 
 Unfortunately, the news of fresh troubles in the provinces 
 rjuickly turned the majority to the side of arbitrary and 
 despotic measures. 
 
 Two days after this speech a, special courier informed 
 the Assembly of grave troubles in the West. He bore 
 a report which deeply incriminated the non-conforming 
 clergy. It declared that meetings of people to the 
 number of four thousand had been held in several places 
 for the purpose of nocturnal processions and other re- 
 ligious rites, and that. when it was attempted to disperse 
 them they had armed themselves with guns, or pikes 
 and scythes. Conflicts with the National Guards had 
 taken place, and the popular fury had attacked the con- 
 >titutional clergy, and reopened churches to the non- 
 juring priests. This report, though admitting that the 
 people had armed themselves only after having been 
 disturbed in their religious rights, caused equal alarm 
 and indignation in the Assembly. The stomi was ev- 
 idently muttering in the distance. Isnard cried out that 
 moderation had compromised every thing, that toleration 
 might work well enough in times of calm, but that no 
 indulgence should be shown to those who would not 
 tolerate the laws. "It is time," said he, "that every 
 thing should bow to the authority of the nation, that 
 
1G0 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 tiaras, diadems, and censers should yield to the scepter 
 of law." While this matter was pending, news of se- 
 rious troubles at Caen arrived. Numbers of the old 
 nobility and of the emigrated French had returned and 
 assisted with parade at the services of refractory priests. 
 Tumults, in which blood was shed, resulted. The local 
 authorities had then taken measures which conflicted 
 with an existing law. Isnard urged the Assembly to 
 suspend the ordinary processes of the law, in order the 
 more quickly and the more terribly to strike down these 
 enemies of the Revolution. He spoke from the midst 
 of the Girondists, in the very tones of a St. Just and a 
 Robespierre. The time, however, was not yet ripe to 
 put his recommendations into practice. 
 
 A little later we find Isnard again at the assault. Under 
 pretext that the priests had in their hand the most power- 
 ful means of seducing the people, he urged to the greatest 
 severity, and plead for nothing less than a decree of exile 
 against all who would not take the oath. " Do you not 
 see," said he, " that we must separate the priests from the 
 people whom they lead astray, and send the pests to Italy 
 and to Rome?" He argued that if the arbitrary is 
 criminal in the service of despotism, it becomes a great 
 act of justice in the cause of liberty — not seeming to see 
 that the arbitrary is itself the very essence of despotism. 
 He argued that the complaint of a single person should 
 be sufficient to justify the exile of a priest, and regarded 
 as excessive indulgence the pretention not to condemn 
 him except on proof. Such principles passed for liberal 
 in November, 1791, at the same tribune where Mirabeau 
 had so nobly defended the rights of conscience. The 
 
ReUgUm amdtht Reign of Terror. 101 
 
 speeches of Isnard produced l profound impression 
 despite their sophisms and excesses, for they gushed out 
 of a heart on tire with enthusiasm. He was thoroughly 
 convinced and perfectly sincere. His discourses would 
 have been printed had he not shocked the religious senti- 
 ment by exclaiming, M My God is the law ; I acknowledge 
 no other." This deity was for him, however, a very in- 
 definite character, being nothing other than the public 
 safety — or rather, the will of the populace. 
 
 On the 6th of November, 1791, Francois de Neu- 
 chateau presented, in the name of the Legislative Com- 
 mittee, a project of law which involved, in itself, all 
 sorts of iniquities. After manifold modifications it be- 
 came the law of the nation. The civil oath, which in- 
 cluded an approval of the new Church Constitution, was 
 to be taken within one week by all non-functioning eccle- 
 BUMrtMffi, on pain of forfeiture of the salaries allowed them 
 by the first Assembly ; every priest convicted of having 
 excited religious tumults was to suffer imprisonment 
 for two years : extraordinary penalties were reserved for 
 those convicted of intriguing with foreigners; and the 
 prie-ts were to be regarded as responsible for all pillage 
 or murders committed by riots excited by them, or on 
 their account. This law is the shame of the Legislature 
 which enacted it, and finds its only shadow of apology 
 in the use which the enemies of France were then busy 
 in making of the religious sentiments of the non-con- 
 forming Catholics. To require such an oath was to vio- 
 late the conscience ; to refuse the salaries was to break a 
 solemn pledge ; and to hold the priests thus responsible 
 was to make them liable for mobs which, in some cases, 
 
 21 
 
162 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 they themselves could not even have prevented. This 
 law received a worthy crowning in a supplementary 
 article which indirectly and hypocritically suppressed 
 the liberty of worship. It required the civil oath of all 
 who rented a locality for the celebration of religious 
 rites. The law, as a whole, was a violent outrage on the 
 declaration of rights in the Constitution, and the King, 
 in vetoing it, was really more liberal than this democratic 
 Assembly. 
 
 The most of the historians of the Revolution, in view- 
 ing this decree, commit the wrong of judging it in the 
 light of the public dangers, and not in the light of 
 justice, which is synonymous with liberty. This is the 
 case with Louis Blanc and Michelet. When the decree 
 was brought to the royal council the ministers approved 
 it, but they found an invincible resistance in the King. 
 It is of no avail to say that this unhappy prince had 
 courage in nothing but the defense of the priests; in 
 this case he assuredly obeyed his profoundest and most 
 sacred convictions ; and, had the Assembly yielded, the 
 result would have been infinitely better for the liberal 
 cause. But this body, rendered furious by the war which 
 the Kings of Europe were preparing against France, 
 thought only of crushing every obstacle, and, meeting 
 the royal veto in their path, they rested not till they 
 had overturned the throne itself. 
 
 The royal veto deeply agitated the nation. It checked 
 the legal persecution, but it increased the popular rage. 
 It was' around this question that the great battle was 
 fought between the Constitutionalists of 1789 and the 
 hot radicals of 1791 ; between the friends of liberty and 
 
Religion and ike Reign of Terror. 163 
 
 the champions of mad democracy. The victory fell to 
 the latter, for the fever of the moment and the danger of 
 foreign war played into their hands. 
 
 The struggle began at Paris. A majority of the Di- 
 rectory of the Seine consisted of members and partUan> 
 of the former Assembly. They stood up earnestly for 
 the great principles of 17S9. They regarded the recent 
 decree of the Legislative Assembly as a violence against 
 true liberty, and solemnly petitioned the King to refuse 
 his sanction. This petition, which the apologists of the 
 Revolution generally condemn as an attempt at reac- 
 tion, bears throughout the impress of the highest and 
 most consistent liberalism. It is the language of right 
 and justice themselves. After protesting their love of 
 the Revolution, and their hatred of fanaticism, they 
 charge the Assembly with unintentionally voting meas- 
 ures which contlicted equally with the Constitution, 
 with justice, and with prudence. They objected to the 
 decree that it broke the national faith by taking from 
 the non-functioning priests the salary they had been 
 promised ; that it prettied a sort of proscribed class, and 
 unjustly incarcerated the priests wherever troubles 
 might break out ; and that it violated the rights of con- 
 science by refusing to non-jurors the liberty of worship. 
 They showed with as much eloquence as reason, that in 
 thus treating with injustice a whole class of citizens, the 
 Assembly was only opposing fanaticism to fanaticism, 
 and restoring the odious principles in the name of which 
 the Ca?sars had persecuted the first Christians, and 
 Look XIV. proscribed the Protestants. " Has a whole 
 century of philosophy," asked they, " sufficed only to 
 
164 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 bring us back to the intolerance of the sixteenth cen- 
 tury ? Since no religion is required by the law, why 
 should any religion be a crime ? For these reasons, 
 and in the sacred name of liberty, of the constitution, 
 and of the public good, we beg you, Sire, to refuse your 
 sanction to the decree." This noble petition is taxed 
 by Louis Blanc with arrogance, and by Michelet with 
 being a vain abstraction. It met with violent opposi- 
 tion in the populace of Paris. It was attacked in the 
 clubs and by the press. The Leaguers of former times 
 reappeared at the close of the eighteenth century as in- 
 tolerant, in a contrary sense, as they had once been 
 under the Guises. The demagogues got up a scene to 
 counteract the influence of the petition. Deputations 
 from various sections of Paris appeared at the bar of 
 the Assembly, with protests against the petition of the 
 Directory. The most of these protests bear the impress 
 of a disgusting coarseness. An orator of one of the 
 faubourgs cried out thus to the refractory priests : 
 " You monsters, who suck the milk of crime, your God 
 is the god of the passions, but ours is»that of clemency." 
 Strange introduction to a demand for proscription. But 
 the honors of the occasion fell to the incomparable pam- 
 phleteer of democracy, Camille Desmoulins, who could so 
 well translate into caustic wit the rage of the populace. 
 He charged the Directory with having drawn up a sub- 
 scription paper for civil war, ready for the signatures of 
 all the fanatics, all the idiots, all the slaves, all the ci- 
 devant thieves of the eighty-three departments, at the 
 head of whom stood the petitioners themselves. Ap- 
 pealing to the sovereignty of the popular will, and re- 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 1G5 
 
 marking that no royal veto could have prevented the 
 taking of the Bastille, he called for the immediate exe- 
 cution of the decree, in spite and in defiance of the 
 King. He demanded procedure against the Directory 
 for having signed a paper which tended to oppose the 
 legislators of the people. He closed thus : " Fathers of 
 the country, disdain all sophisms. Doubt no longer the 
 omnipotence of a free people. If the head sleeps, how 
 shall the arm act ? It is the leaders who must be at- 
 tacked. Strike at the heart. Use the musket against 
 conspiring princes, the rod against an insolent Direc- 
 tory, and exorcise the demon of fanaticism by fasting." 
 Surely it would have been enough to commit injustice, 
 without making merry over it. The proposition to de- 
 prive the priests of what had been solemnly guaranteed 
 to them did not become the less odious by this stroke 
 of pleasantry. That nothing should lack to the scandal, 
 it was a bishop, Fauchet, who lent his voice to Desmou- 
 lins by reading this perfidious piece. It was ordered to 
 be printed and spread over the country. It is surpris- 
 ing that after more than half a century we have still 
 apologists for such demagogism. Let it teach us at 
 least never to prefer revolution to liberty. 
 
 The King persisted in his veto. His agreeing with 
 the Directory increased the popular ill-will, and from 
 this moment he became the central object of attack. 
 Xothing can equal the insults and outrages which the 
 democratic press now heaped upon him. Prudhomme 
 compared the royal veto to a chain and ball, which the 
 Assembly were slavishly dragging about. He was held 
 Up to derision as one who was beset nigJit and day by a 
 
166 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 vindictive wife and a bigoted sister. He was rudely told 
 that the Bourbons owed to the nation all their importance. 
 
 The effects of the veto were different, according to 
 the departments. At Paris, in spite of the Jacobins 
 and the mob, the Directory remained for a time the 
 stronger. Some churches were opened for the non- 
 juring priests, and the service unmolested. Still the 
 cause of irreligion made progress day by day, and the 
 Jacobin club was constantly the theater of violent decla- 
 mations against Christianity. In the departments the 
 greatest anarchy reigned. Some followed the example 
 of the true liberals of Paris ; while others, ignoring the 
 royal veto, executed the decree as if it had had the 
 force of law. In some places considerable numbers of 
 priests had been thrown into prison, where they en- 
 dured, without a hearing, the severest captivity, and 
 would certainly have died of hunger had it not been 
 for the charities of the faithful. This created the great- 
 est indignation in the parishes thus deprived of their 
 Curates. In other places, though not imprisoned, they 
 were violently hurried to the chief place of the district, 
 put under a suspicious police, and, worse still, forbidden 
 to celebrate mass. At Nantes they were forced to ap- 
 pear at a roll-call twice a day. In one place they were 
 forbidden to assemble more than three in the same spot. 
 In various places the persecution fell on private persons 
 also. At Rennes they were fined six francs for every 
 attendance at an interdicted mass. Their worship was 
 disturbed by force. It was in vain that the non-juring 
 priests retired to the most obscure recesses ; they were 
 hunted out, and if discovered with a chalice, or any 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 167 
 
 sign of a priestly ornament, were exposed to severe 
 penalties and popular insult. In some localities where 
 the accused priests were brought before the judges they 
 received justice ; generally, however, they were the 
 objects of arbitrary measures on the part of all branches 
 of the police. The resistance of the truly liberal au- 
 thorities served only to give greater pretext to the vio- 
 lence of the populace. We may judge from what took 
 place in Paris in March, 1792, of the severe sufferings 
 in other parts of France of all who remained faithful to 
 the old-fashioned Catholic faith. A band of ruffians 
 had burst into the convent of Dominican nuns, threat- 
 ening to demolish the whole establishment if the consti- 
 tutional priest was not immediately received. " I would 
 fear,'' writes the Prioress to the Pope, " too deeply to 
 affect your paternal heart were I to describe to you all 
 the violent measures which have been used to shake our 
 fidelity, the hostile mobs which surrounded us, the con- 
 tinual menaces of nocturnal pillage, and all our fear and 
 terror. Xo ; I will not speak of these things, for we 
 rejoice to be found worthy of suffering somewhat for 
 the name of Jesus Christ and the honor of the Church, 
 our mother." 
 
 The Prioress of the schools of St. Charles in Paris 
 describes in an equally touching letter, the outrages she 
 Buffered for having refused to receive the new priest, 
 whom she regarded as simply an intruder. The latter 
 had applied to a club, and secured a crowd of ruffians 
 to enforce his claim. On Sunday, followed by these 
 fellows in procession, he approached the convent, and 
 cried out, " Open your chapel and ring your bell." " I 
 
108 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 refused both," writes the Prioress. "The cries were 
 redoubled, the axes distributed, and the walls scaled. 
 My faithful companions and I, prostrate at the foot of 
 the cross in a retired room, lay expecting death, and offer- 
 ing our lives to God." The Prioress had the chagrin of 
 seeing one of the sisters finally open the door to the 
 new priest. She vainly resisted for three days the new 
 order of things, and was ultimately compelled to dis- 
 perse the society and take flight. If such things took 
 place at Paris, it is easy to imagine to what greater vio- 
 lence the revolutionary fury was carried in the prov- 
 inces. At Rochelle and elsewhere the nuns had been 
 whipped with rods. The same outrage had been suf- 
 fered by some young ladies who had attended the pro- 
 scribed worship. The Minister of the Interior cited a 
 case of a man whose corpse had been exhumed from the 
 cemetery and buried in the public cross-roads, for the 
 reason that he had refused to attend the mass of a State- 
 Church priest. In some cases, municipal officers forcibly 
 seized children from their parents and had them bap- 
 tized by the new priests ; in others they had inflicted 
 fines on parents who had not presented their children 
 for such baptism. 
 
 This persecution did not meet every-where with gentle 
 lambs, ready to submit without murmur. It was man- 
 fully resisted, and came near involving the land in civil 
 war. Still, if prudent measures had been adopted, 
 quietude might have been restored even at the begin- 
 ning of the year 1792. All that was necessary to re- 
 store harmony between the Assembly and the King, 
 and to pacify the provinces, was simply full liberty of 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 169 
 
 worship, honestly granted and faithfully guaranteed. 
 The non-juring priests expressly denied, in a public 
 document, all the charges of disloyalty which had been 
 heaped upon them. u You accuse us,*' said they to the 
 government, " of being the authors of all the dissensions 
 of the count ly, of neglecting to pay our taxes, of being 
 in intelligence with the foreign enemy, and of inviting 
 war with all our influence. How is it that of so many 
 priests accused, you have found no one guilty? Surely 
 the hostile surveillance of fifty thousand administrative 
 corps, aided by more than ten thousand clubs, would 
 have sufficed to detect plots if such had existed. We 
 declare that we are subject to all the public authorities, 
 and that, after the example of Christ, we regard it as a 
 duty to pay tribute. We declare that our most ardent 
 wish is for the return of peace between the Church and 
 the State. Our sole resistance consists in believing that 
 the new Constitutional worship is not the Catholic wor- 
 ship, and in so teaching. This one point excepted, we 
 are entirely submissive to the civil order and to the 
 laws ; we are innocent not only in the eyes of God, but 
 also in the eyes of the law." It would have been wise 
 policy to take in good part these professions of so 
 thorough-going a loyalty, and not to alienate by perse- 
 cution the hearts of this powerful partv. 
 
 Such was the opinion of the Minister of the Interior, 
 Cahier Gerville, as expressed in a report which he pre- 
 sented to the Assembly on the 18th of February, 1792. 
 After reviewing the condition of the land he closed thus : 
 "On the one side we see fanatics, and on the other per- 
 secutors. It seems that tolerance is exiled from the 
 
 22 
 
170 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 kingdom. In all the provinces the liberty of worship 
 has been almost annulled. Now what matters it to the 
 State, whether a citizen goes to mass or not ? All that 
 a good constitution can do is, to favor all religions 
 without adopting any one. There is in France no na- 
 tional religion. Each citizen should enjoy freely the rights 
 of conscience, and it is to be hoped that the time is not 
 distant when each shall pay for his own worship. The 
 country demands laws in harmony with the codes of 
 free nations, and which will dispense with the necessity 
 of pronouncing the words priests and religion" This 
 was well said; it was the pure spirit of 1*789, and sug- 
 gested the only remedy for the troubles of the country. 
 It was applauded in the Assembly, though it did not 
 succeed in turning it from its detestable public-safety 
 policy. The next month the ministry was dissolved and 
 a new one formed, the Girondists imposing their own 
 men upon the King. Cahier Gerville gave place to the 
 rude and austere Roland,* who was less a liberal than a 
 democrat. 
 
 On the 19th of March, 1792, the Pope had issued an- 
 other brief full of felicitations of the refractory clergy. 
 The same day he sent another to the refractory Bishops, 
 giving them for the time being extraordinary powers. 
 The danger of excommunication seems to have had but 
 little influence on the constitutional clergy. A few, 
 however, hesitated. Gobel had had secret interviews with 
 a Papal agent ; his ignoble mind was equally capable 
 of a vague fear and a bold resolution. The fear of hell 
 brought him back to the Pope, as the fear of the popu- 
 * See Appendix, note 21. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 171 
 
 lace afterward led him to a shameless apostasy. lie 
 was a vile, cowardly aspirant. The Bishop of Rouen, 
 unwilling to be an agent of persecution, resigned office 
 without leaving his party. The constitutional clergy 
 was composed of two classes of men — a good number 
 of respectable priests who earnestly labored to revive 
 religion in France, and also a class of what was fitly 
 called the offscourings of the old Church — some of them 
 of bad morals, and others hot-headed clubbists. The 
 question of the marriage of the priests had been agi- 
 tated for some months. It had, in fact, been resolved 
 legislatively ; for the Assembly had decreed that pensions 
 should be continued to priests who married. Several 
 constitutional Curates had taken advantage of this au- 
 thorization, but the Catholic sentiment, even in the new 
 Church, had thereby been deeply wounded. Aubert, a 
 Paris Vicar, had given special prominence to his mar- 
 riage, but had succeeded only in creating a great scandal 
 in his parish. He had had recourse to the noisy appro- 
 bation of the clubs. From this resulted deplorable 
 scenes, well calculated to bring into disrepute the new 
 religion. The Assembly committed the ridiculous mis- 
 take of giving a public reception to the clerical couple. 
 In his speech the husband insinuated that the Bastille 
 had been taken in order to facilitate his nuptials. He 
 was continued in his parish in defiance of his Bishop, 
 by the grace of the clubs. Subsequently he was ap- 
 pointed to another parish, despite the protests of several 
 Curates, and installed with great pomp; his wife occu- 
 pied a place of honor in the choir. If the days of per- 
 secution had not come to its aid, the new Church could 
 
172 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 not have risen above the discredit which the insulting pa- 
 tronage of the enemies of Christianity was fast bringing 
 upon it. It is certain that the project had been formed 
 of bringing religion into contempt, in order the sooner 
 to get rid of it. But it was necessary first to crush the 
 refractory priests, and from the entrance of the Girond- 
 ists into the King's cabinet nothing had been spared to 
 accomplish this result. 
 
 The butcher, Legendre,* had faithfully expressed the 
 thought of the Jacobins when he cried out in the club, 
 " Let the refractory priest be punished severely. Let 
 him either take his head to the scaffold or his body to 
 the galleys. When a farmer finds a noxious worm he 
 puts it under foot." Easter day was an occasion for new 
 outrages. At Lyons a mob had broken into the churches, 
 and the police rewarded the rioters by closing the 
 chapels of all the convents. The church of St. Claire, 
 which had not been closed, was the theater of shameless 
 violence. Women were covered with mud and then 
 dragged through the streets of the city; and this was 
 silently suffered by the magistrates. An attempt e was 
 made to violate, directly, the conscience of the King. 
 Guadet prepared an order asking him imperatively to 
 take a new confessor. It was to be signed by the King's 
 council and then presented ; but Dumouriez refused, and 
 defeated it. He would not allow the King to be troubled 
 in his conscience by the consent of his own council. 
 He said that he had a full right to take for his adviser 
 an Iman, a Rabbi, a Papist, or a Calvinist, without con- 
 sulting any one but himself. Wisdom would have ap- 
 * See Appendix, note 22. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 173 
 
 plied this rule to the whole nation ; but the Girondists, 
 at the moment when they were doing all in their power 
 to over-excite the revolutionary fever, were little dis- 
 posed to respect religious scruples. The Assembly 
 marched straight forward to the accomplishment of its 
 two designs — the debasement of the royal authority, 
 and the outlawing of the non-conforming clergy. It 
 began by the destruction of what remained of the re- 
 ligious orders. The first Assembly had not presumed 
 at once to abolish the corporations of monastic teachers, 
 for they had well deserved of the nation. But the Leg- 
 islative Assembly saw in them only a stronghold of the 
 ancient Church, and hastened to crush them into the 
 dust. Holy Friday was ruthlessly chosen for giving 
 this bitter stroke to the hearts of the Catholics. Bishop 
 Lecoz sought in vain to moderate the action and make 
 its execution gradual. Deputy Lagrevol increased its 
 severity by causing to be stricken out the exception ' in 
 favor of the jSisters of Charity, whom he stigmatized as 
 vermin. Torne claimed, at least, the respect of the As- 
 sembly for the illustrious orders which it was abolishing, 
 but in the end aggravated the law by adding to it a 
 clause suppressing the costume which the priests had 
 worn from time immemorial. This latter measure was 
 singularly impolitic. It ignored the wonderful influence 
 which external signs have over an ignorant people. It 
 was a useless irritation. As soon as the motion of Torne 
 was adopted, the Bishop of Limoges rose and declared 
 that he would sacrifice his episcopal vestments for the 
 support of a national soldier; and Fauchet, more pliant 
 still, took oft' immediately his little clerical cap and 
 
174: Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 put it into his pocket, to the great applause of the 
 spectators. 
 
 Minister Roland knew well haw to continue and in- 
 crease the hostility of the Assembly against the refrac- 
 tory priests. On the 16th of April he announced to the 
 Assembly that, troubles having broken out in a certain 
 province, public opinion had charged them on the non- 
 juring clergy, and had demanded their deportation. .A 
 municipality had decreed their expulsion, and thus had 
 restored order, though the action was unconstitutional. 
 The Assembly understood this recital as an advice. A 
 few days later, Roland again called attention to the re- 
 ligious troubles. He gave a terrible picture of them, 
 intensifying the colors at pleasure, and mercilessly de- 
 scribed the non-juring priests as madmen, sowing every- 
 where, in neighborhoods and families, hatred and dis- 
 cord. He admitted frankly the illegality of the measures 
 which had been taken against them; but, far from 
 blaming these cruel acts and indignities # from which 
 they had already suffered, he, on the contrary, presented 
 with manifest approbation the apology which their 
 authors had offered. Roland asked, not the cessation of 
 these unconstitutional proceedings, but that they should 
 be rendered legal by the enactment of more severe meas- 
 ures, and by constraining the King to give his consent. 
 He plainly counseled a measure of deportation against 
 the non-juring clergy. Merlin warmly seconded the 
 advice of the minister, and proposed, to the applause of 
 the Assembly, that all the troublesome priests should 
 be placed on vessels and sent to America. Vergniaud, 
 after proposing the reference of the matter to a com- 
 
Rdigion and the Reign of Terror. 175 
 
 mittee, said, "It is time to declare war on your enemies, 
 since they declare it against you, but to declare it in the 
 name of the law." On the 26th of April, 1792, Fran- 
 cois de Nantes reported the recommendations of the 
 Committee. It was the most ridiculously declamatory 
 document imaginable. It vailed, under the flowers of a 
 tawdry rhetoric, an abominable project of proscription. 
 The orator indulged in the most outrageous insinuations 
 ■gainst religion. He regretted bitterly the times when 
 primitive men erected altars of flowers to a primitive 
 god, which in his opinion was equivalent to the god of 
 gardens. It is impossible to form any other idea of this 
 piece of sentimental bombast than that it is a formal con- 
 demnation of all positive religion, and especially of 
 Christianity. But the poor Pope is the object of special 
 a— ault. He is represented as a prince indulging in bur- 
 K -.me menaces, and ambitious of assuming the airs of 
 Jupiter with his thunderbolts, but whose impotent shafts 
 fall powerless on the buckler of Liberty, who now keeps 
 station on the summit of the Alps. He announced thus 
 his approaching downfall: "Soon the slaves of a priest 
 will remember that they were once citizens of Rome. 
 They will say. It is here that Brutus lived, and Italy will 
 be free." He aftected to despise the influence of priests, 
 and yet he called them "the thirty or forty thousand 
 levers of counter-revolution." He demanded that the 
 non-jurors be confined at the head-quarters of the de- 
 partments, and forbidden, on pain of banishment,, to 
 p reach or to confess. The orator closed his monstrous 
 project of proscription by calling for the fire of Serevola, 
 that he night exhibit his love of country and liberty. 
 
176 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 He would surely have given greater proof of this, if, in- 
 stead of burning his hand, he had never used it to write 
 a paper which was destined to lead to so many real suf- 
 ferings of thousands of men. 
 
 The discussion opened on the sixteenth of May. For 
 many of the orators the proposed decree was too mild. 
 Vergniaud thought himself indulgent in offering to 
 continue the salaries of priests who would go into exile 
 themselves. He saw fit to indulge in the following un- 
 generous irony : " I doubt not that in Italy they will be 
 received as holy and persecuted personages, and the 
 Pope will be able to see in the present we make him of 
 so many living saints how profound is our gratitude for 
 the arms, the heads, and the relics of dead saints with 
 which, for so many centuries, he has gratified our pious 
 credulity." The cause of moderation and liberty had 
 only two champions, Kamond and Moy. The latter, 
 though a skeptical priest, and imbued with the current 
 philosophy, had the honor, that day, of attacking the 
 new Constitution of the Clergy as the cause of all the 
 social troubles. " You will have done nothing for the 
 public tranquillity," said hre, " until you sweep this chap- 
 ter of theocracy from the code of your laws. The best 
 way to avoid religious troubles, is to preserve full relig- 
 ious liberty, and to render all religions equal in the eyes 
 of the law." Ramond and Moy were violently opposed 
 by an obscure priest by the name of Ichon, who denied 
 the title of worship to the assemblies of the unsworn 
 Catholics, and compared them to reactionary clubs. A 
 Deputy then read to the Assembly the famous chapter 
 from Rousseau, in which all liberty of worship is sacri- 
 
BMfpm and the Uthjn <>f Terror. 177 
 
 ficed to the popular sovereignty, and where the creed of 
 the majority is imposed on every citizen on pain of 
 death. Another Deputy caught the spirit of the hour 
 better still, and proposed flatly to convert the chapter 
 into a law. But wherefore this ? What else had been 
 done for more than a year but simply to comment on it, 
 and put it into practice ? The matter resulted in a de- 
 cree of deportation of every priest who should be com- 
 plained against by twenty active citizens, except in 
 cases where public sentiment opposed it. In the latter 
 ease the accused was to be brought to immediate trial. 
 Such was the decree of the twenty-fifth of May, 1792. 
 It was simply an aggravation of that of the preceding 
 November. 
 
 The war between France and the Kings of Europe had 
 now broken out on the frontiers. The French cause had 
 not at first prospered, and the Assembly threw the 
 blame on the court, suspecting it of secret intelligence 
 with the enemy. On the twenty-ninth of May it took 
 from the King his guard of honor, for it ordered the 
 formation of a camp of twenty thousand men in the 
 neighborhood of Paris, a veritable revolutionary force, 
 which was master of the executive authority. This 
 decree, and that as to the deportation of the priests, were 
 presented to Louis XVL at the same time. Of course 
 both were vetoed. Upon this, Roland read to him in 
 open council a haughty and imperative letter, giving 
 him the severest lessons of red republicanism. Roland 
 was perhaps excusable for disregarding court style, 
 and appearing in the royal presence in shoes without 
 buckles j but it was surely a great impropriety for him 
 
178 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 to brave the King to his face. Doubtless the King had 
 been strengthened in his determination to veto these 
 laws by a pamphlet of the Archbishop of Aix. We 
 read in it these noble words : " What is the crime of 
 these fifty thousand Frenchmen against whom banish- 
 ment is about to be pronounced ? It is their religion. 
 Their crime is, to wish not to perjure themselves. Con- 
 science is concerned ; but conscience will not obey de- 
 crees of every sort." Roland was dismissed from the 
 ministry, but he received the open sympathy of the 
 Assembly. A new ministry, composed of obscure con- 
 stitutionalists, was formed ; but they feebly represented 
 a noble cause, and consequently played involuntarily 
 into the hands of the extremists. 
 
 Lafayette, amazed and indignant at these events, 
 wrote to the Assembly from his post in the army an 
 eloquent letter, in which he denounced the influence of 
 the clubs, and besought that the royal authority and 
 religious liberty be respected. It was but coolly re- 
 ceived. It was responded to by the riot which on the 
 twentieth of June violated the palace of the King. 
 This insurrection had been prepared by the munici- 
 pality of Paris. It had met no resistance in the Assem- 
 bly, and the royal Majesty had been odiously insulted 
 without for a single moment receiving serious protec- 
 tion. The mob which invaded the Tuileries avowed 
 openly its design. This was to manifest its ill-will 
 against the King's veto. The unfortunate prince was 
 caused to put on a revolutionary cap, and to suffer 
 odious outrages, for having protected the liberty of wor- 
 ship. Indignant at this, Lafayette hastened to Paris; 
 
JReUgum and the Reign of Terror, 
 
 179 
 
 but between the distrust of the Court and the wrath of 
 the Jacobins he could eftecj no understanding. He 
 returned to his army with a broken heart. The grand 
 movement of 1VS9 was, for a time, ruined. Liberty had 
 been drowned in a raging flood of demagogism, which 
 was grand only on the frontier, where in truth it exhib- 
 ited admirable deeds of martial heroism. At Paris and 
 in the provinces it was soon deliled with brutality and 
 blood. Already it had swept away the most precious 
 rights of man, and its irresistible waves were now dash- 
 ing against the throne of the outraged Louis XVI. 
 
 It was now that Vergniaud pronounced against tltis 
 King the most eloquent oration which France had 
 heard since the death of Mirabeau. His sole excuse 
 was the great peril which the foreign invasion threat- 
 ened against the nation, and he and the other Girondists 
 were right in suspecting the Court of moral complicity 
 with the enemy. But was the real guilt with the King, 
 or with them? Had not they done every thing to 
 drive to desperation an honest and irresolute prince, 
 from whom they had taken away all means of legiti- 
 mate defense, and whose constitutional rights and Chris- 
 tian conscience they had ruthlessly and violently tram- 
 pled under foot ? The orator pleaded for the vetoed 
 decrees ; charged all the internal commotions on the 
 stubborn, non-juring clergy; and treated the King as an 
 obstacle to the Revolution, and the occasion of the in- 
 vasion from Germany. Deputy Dumas responded, with 
 reason, that the true cause of the troubles was the 
 suppression of religious liberty, and that the only safe 
 course was to follow tin 1 polities of the veto ; but it was 
 
180 Religion arid the Reign of Terror, 
 
 to little purpose to be on the side of right in July, 1792. 
 The fever was too high.. The grandiose and poetic 
 eloquence of the Girondist carried the day, and, being 
 read all over France, gave a fatal blow to the monarchy, 
 and animated every-where the persecution of the non- 
 juring priests. Bishop Torne, who thus far had de- 
 fended the liberty of worship, now yielded to the cur- 
 rent, and, like a violent Jacobin, attacked the King 
 because of his vetoes, and urged the suspension of the 
 constitution in the name of the public safety. Such 
 views were but too strictly put into practice. 
 
 In several departments the most iniquitous acts were 
 brutally inflicted against the non-jurors. The assault 
 of the mob on the royal palace was responded to by 
 corresponding violence against the priests throughout 
 the kingdom. They were crowded together in the 
 prisons of Lyons and other large cities. In some places 
 they suffered terribly from want of air, and from heat. 
 From some provinces they were lawlessly exiled. Not 
 being able to find secure retreats in the country many 
 of the refractory priests flocked to Paris. There they 
 assumed all sorts of disguises, and tried to earn their 
 bread by working at some trade, as gardening or 
 bakery. Others, clothed in rags, took service on boats, 
 and engaged in catching clrift-wood in the Seine. Even 
 before the great storm of September several priests 
 were massacred. At Vans, Bravard was put to death 
 for having refused the oath. Abbot Noir, a young 
 priest of twenty-eight years, urged his father not to 
 weep for him, saying, " It will be more sweet for you 
 for your sou to die as a martyr than to live as an apos- 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 181 
 
 tatc." Thereupon lie perished under the ax. At Bor- 
 deaux an aged priest, who had once held high offices, was 
 thrown into a dark, unhealthy dungeon. He repeated 
 continually the passage in the Acts : " They went out 
 from the council, rejoicing to have been found worthy 
 to suffer outrage for the name of Jesus Christ." He 
 was afterward cruelly executed. Many of the perse- 
 cuted priests were heard to exclaim: "These are the I 
 golden days of the Church ; these are the times to try 
 the courage of her true children." 
 
 The assault of the mob on the royal palace on the 
 twentieth of June, led naturally to the greater violence 
 of the tenth of August. The suspension of Petion from 
 the mayoralty of Paris; by the King, for his complicity 
 in, or negligence during, the June riot— the debates re- 
 sulting therefrom— his triumphant restoration to office— 
 the approach of the foreign armies— the proclamation of 
 the danger of the country— the arrival of the bands of 
 revolutionary ruffians from Marseilles — every thing con- 
 tributed to increase from hour to hour the anarchical 
 fury of the people of Paris. It is now known, thanks 
 to reliable documents, that the municipality of Paris, 
 with the Mayor at its head, took the initiative in the 
 storming of the Tuileries on the tenth of August. This 
 terrible day bore away at once the monarchy and the 
 Girondist party, for from that day the latter lost control 
 of the Assembly. From September the Mountain party, 
 the Terrorists, held supreme sway, though they hardly 
 yet numbered a majority. The Girondist*, who had 
 opened the flood-gate of violence, were themselves the 
 first to be sul (merged. Another unjust measure, how- 
 
182 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 ever, must be laid to their charge. As soon as the 
 poor King was deposed and out of the way, they car- 
 ried, in the Assembly, another decree, more oppressive 
 still than the former ones, against the non-conforming 
 priests. Some days previously the convents yet re- 
 maining had been suppressed, and multitudes of nuns 
 thrown upon the streets without family ties or shelter. 
 On Sunday, August 17, a letter was read in the Assem- 
 bly announcing that in one of the departments the non- 
 juring priests had been banished. Hereupon a Deputy 
 moved the application of a similar measure to the whole 
 of France. Another proposed on the twenty-third that 
 all priests who had not taken the oath be required to 
 leave the country within fifteen days. Cambon thought 
 this too mild still, and called for a deqree banishing all 
 the non-jurors to the swamps of Guiana; but Vergniaud 
 and some others protested in the name of justice, a 
 name which it would have been better had they plead 
 for sooner. It was easy to foresee that just as 1792 
 had overturned in great part the work of 1789, so 1793 
 was destined to sweep away what remained. The 
 policy of the Girondists was to be pushed to its legiti- 
 mate excesses, and this was then- own severest punish- 
 ment. The violent measures proposed in the Assembly 
 scarcely needed to be passed. A riotous people aggra- 
 vated and executed them only too faithfully not many 
 days afterward. 
 
 The Legislative Assembly, before wholly losing con- 
 trol of the political movement, realized one reform 
 which was destined to survive all its other decrees, for 
 it answered the true wants of new France. Heretofore, 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 183 
 
 when the Catholic was the State religion, it had been 
 necessary to apply to the priests for the verification of 
 the chief events in the lives of the citizens — such as birt h, 
 marriage, and death. As the constitution now regarded 
 all religions as on the same footing, the Assembly de- 
 creed " that for the future the civil authorities should 
 receive and keep the records of the births, marriages, 
 and deaths." The country was fully ripe for this 
 change, and it is to be regretted that the Legislators 
 who made it, themselves so often denied its spirit, by con- 
 founding the spiritual with the temporal, and by pun- 
 ishing not only treasonable plottings, which was their 
 duty, but also religious opinion, which was their unpar- 
 donable crime. 
 
 The terrible massacres of September, 1792, may 
 rightly be called the St. Bartholomew of demagogism. 
 It does not enter into our plan to describe, after so 
 many eloquent historians, these frightful scenes. They 
 show us an age, polished and benevolent on the surface, 
 plunging itself into blood and crime, as if to remind us 
 of what terrible passions lie asleep in the human heart, 
 and are ready to burst into fearful activity at the first 
 call. It was fondly thought that the harsh manners 
 of the sixteenth century had been greatly softened in 
 all classes, and that civilization had sufficiently worn 
 away the claws of the tiger. What surprise, then, to 
 see the masses of Paris rushing out of the alleys and 
 suburbs, as cruel, as athirst for blood, as the people of 
 the days of the St. Bartholomew massacre, who had 
 been trained by bigoted monks. The fact is, that be- 
 tween a people without a God and a superstitious, fanat- 
 
1 84 Religion and the Reign of Terror, 
 
 ical people there is very little difference. The Jacobin 
 of the atheistical philosophy is the worthy heir of the 
 Jacobin of the sixteenth century ; he is but the accom- 
 plice of James Clement, the monk, who assassinated 
 Henry III. in the name of religion. Instead of excusing 
 one crime by another, and of justifying a second by the 
 first under color of a just revenge, it is our duty to 
 condemn wherever there is guilt, and to protest with 
 all our power against that effemination of moral and 
 historical truth which extenuates and explains away 
 stubborn facts that deserve to be condemned without 
 measure. 
 
 We will leave to others the task of painting the city 
 of Paris, plunged into stupor, covered, like a vast prison- 
 house, by the law of " the suspected" with a vail of unut- 
 terable terror, and traversed day and night by drunken 
 bands, who violate and ransack private houses, and 
 thus prepare the colossal massacre which the munici 
 pality had actually determined upon. As happens in 
 all tragic events which deeply move society, so also 
 here, the strangest contrasts of human nature came to 
 the surface : women pushing heroism to its utmost 
 limits ; barbarous hangmen seized with sudden tender- 
 ness, and becoming as earnest in saving as they had 
 been a moment before in destroying lives, and then 
 returning with equal ardor to their cruel work ; acts of 
 the highest sublimity, as well as Saturnalian follies such 
 as the past had never heard of ; devotion of the purest 
 order, and the vilest and most atrocious selfishness; 
 even massacres for the sake of robbery. No possible 
 horror was lacking ; and no description will ever do 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 185 
 
 justice to the awful reality of those days of blood and 
 crime. That which it mostly concerns us to mention, is 
 the fact, that the massacres of September were at first 
 and chiefly directed against the non-conforming priests. 
 One of the precincts of Paris voted openly and in plain 
 words the massacre of the priests. The resolution ran 
 as follows : " In view of the imminent dangers of the 
 country, and the infernal maneuvers of the priests, be 
 it resolved that all the priests and suspected persons 
 confined in the prisons of Paris, Orleans, and other 
 cities, be put to death." 
 
 It is only necessary to read the sincere and moving 
 account of Sicard to be thoroughly convinced that the 
 non-conforming priests were the first and designed vic- 
 tims of the massacres. This apt expression of one of 
 the rioters to a prisoner, namely, If you are a priest 
 you are done for, is the best explanation of those 
 abominable days. At a half dozen different prisons in 
 Paris the priests were butchered en masse, and the 
 provinces followed the example of the capital. Among 
 the many of the massacred at Rheims, Abbot Paquot 
 responded thus, to those who were pressing him to take 
 the oath: "My choice is made. I prefer death to per- 
 jury ; if I had two lives I might give one of them 
 to you, but as I have but one I shall keep it 
 for God." The non-juring priests showed in these 
 circumstances the most noble courage. They refused, 
 in the face of the sword and ax of the assassins, to 
 pronounce against their conscience an oath which, in 
 all cases would have saved their lives. Nothing is 
 
 more glorious in all the annals of martyrdom than 
 
 24 
 
186 
 
 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 some of these scenes. They combined an emulation of 
 holy heroism with a heart-touching piety. The vener- 
 able Archbishop of Aries, thanking God for the duty 
 of offering his blood for his cause — those priests con- 
 fessing to each other, and giving each other the kiss of 
 peace before laying their heads on the block — those 
 answers, kind but firm, and worthy of the days of 
 Irenaeus — all those noble manifestations of a religion 
 at that time in such ill repute — all this throws a truly 
 \ celestial light on the close of an incredulous century, 
 S\ and reveals the presence of God with an extraordinary 
 power at the very moment when an infamous attempt 
 is about to be made to banish his worship from society. 
 
 /From the blood of all the multitudes of those mas- 
 
 1 
 
 sacred persons a warning voice arises. It says to all 
 holders of civil power, Beware of violating the eon- 
 
 science ! for it will surely rise pure and triumphant 
 over your assaults, and leave you covered with defeat 
 and shame. Many of the priests who had escaped the 
 assassins fled to foreign parts, where they met in gen- 
 eral with a large hospitality, especially in England. 
 Many, however, still remained in France to celebrate 
 secretly, and in the midst of the greatest perils, a pro- 
 scribed and persecuted worship. The Legislative As- 
 sembly, which the voice of Vergniaud had not suc- 
 ceeded in awakening out of the torpor which had fallen 
 upon it since the commencement of the massacres, was 
 now soon to be replaced by the National Convention ; 
 that is to say, the Reign of Terror was about to come 
 in its legalized and most fearful form. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 187 
 
 CHAPTER IX 
 
 THE CHURCH DURING THE NATIONAL CONTENTION UNTIL 
 THE ABOLITION OF THE SALARIES OF THE CLERGY. 
 
 During the first period of the Convention the non- 
 juring priests were involved in the general proscription 
 which hung over all those who were attached by inter- 
 est or conviction to the ancient regime. It was not 
 necessary to take new measures against them; it was 
 enough to enforce* the decrees already passed by the 
 Legislative Assembly. For this reason they became 
 less a subject of debate in the Convention, although 
 their positive sufferings were augmenting from day to 
 day. It was evident from the first day that, feeling 
 certain of crushing the non-jurors, the Convention was 
 bej?innin£ to look with disfavor also on the Constitu- 
 tional Clergy, whom it regarded as a sort of last ram- 
 part of the old system of superstition and privilege, 
 which it was fully determined to destroy, root and 
 branch. We shall see that when the time for striking 
 the blow comes, the question of religion will again be 
 agitated by the press and in the clubs. If we have 
 been severe on the Legislative Assembly we will not 
 be tempted to be induTgent toward the Convention. 
 With it ended emphatically, and for long years, the 
 reign of law. Its only business seemed to be to sanc- 
 tion the reign of the clubs and the faubourgs. It was 
 
1S8 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 but the passive instrument of the imperative clamors of 
 a seditious and cruel populace. I confess that I find 
 nothing to admire in these revels of demaowism ; I 
 hate them as I hate the tyranny of the Cesars, which 
 was likewise the reign of the mob. When historians, 
 grave rather than serious, tell me that in the midst of 
 these massacres the great French Revolution was ad- 
 vancing and establishing itself, I ask, what kind of a 
 shapeless chimera it was that was making progress in 
 the hands of Marat and Robespierre in 1793, and after- 
 ward under the direction of Xapoleon. Surely it was 
 not the regime of Mirabeau and Lafayette for that pro- 
 claimed right and liberty. It was only a regime of 
 blind and terrible force, which replaced old iniquities by 
 new ones, and reintroduced despotism instead of over- 
 turning it. If pointed to the vast portions of the soil 
 which were taken from the few and distributed among 
 the many and the poor, we reply that this good work 
 was but the fruit of a measure taken already by the 
 Constituent Assembly in the memorable night of Au- 
 gust 4, 1789. Surely the torrents of blood which had 
 flowed had not added much to the value of the newly 
 parceled soil. But we are reminded of the philanthropic 
 decrees of the Convention : and truly it did well in 
 enlarging the hospitals ; but is this a sufficient excuse 
 for its having multiplied the grave-yards, and thrown 
 into them daily the horrible offals of the scaffold ? It 
 laid well the foundations of out great establishments of 
 instruction ; but had it itself lasted long it would have 
 rendered both science and public education impossible, 
 by keeping the people in a perpetual fever of revolu- 
 
RtUgion and the R> ign of Terror, 189 
 
 tion. But after all these objections, we are pointed to 
 the heroic resistance against foreign invasion. This, we 
 admit, was truly sublime ; but it was done, as has been 
 well said, by those who, saved from the crimes of the 
 interior, escaped to the frontiers and purified themselves 
 in the fire of the enemy. Let us admit that at this 
 period of the Revolution there was one feature of real 
 grandeur, I mean energy ; but it was an energy unin- 
 llueneed by any moral principle. It was the intoxica- 
 tion of a powerful race, who had many wrongs to 
 avenge, and who were exasperated by an imminent 
 peril. Beneficent and sublime in the face of the enemy 
 abroad, the Revolution was terrible and merciless to- 
 ward its imagined or real enemies at home. This 
 energy brought forth miracles of courage on the Rhine 
 and elsewhere, but it reveled in unheard-of crimes at 
 Paris and Lyons. If we admire it without reserve in 
 the armies, we curse it without reserve in the clubs and 
 at the scafibld, where it satiated an ever-increasin<r 
 thirst for blood. Let us not forget, however, that this 
 energy WSS, after all, mere force, and nothing more, 
 and that those who praise the Convention because it 
 was energetic, will also praise Napoleon because he was 
 strong — both phenomena equally fatal to liberty. Nor 
 was the Convention simply energetic, it was violently 
 fanatical. It had every feature of fanaticism; its intol- 
 erance extended to the proscription even of thoughts 
 Slid 6m I'm its. The broad sweep which was given to the 
 law against "the suspected" was an attempt to strike 
 not only arts, but also thoughts. Nothing could be more 
 tike the Spanish inquisition than the revolutionary pro- 
 
190 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 cedure under the Convention. The punishment of death 
 was constantly threatened, and executed, on such as 
 thought in such and such a manner. Let us not be 
 deceived ; this period of the Revolution was a war of 
 religion, a war of opinion, for demagogism became a 
 sort of cruel and ferocious idolatry, fully as intolerant 
 of schism or heresy as the Dominican of the fourteenth 
 century. Hence the large proportions of the struggle. 
 The Convention practiced also the ample and conven- 
 ient morality of all fanaticism : the end at which it 
 aimed justified in its eyes all the means it employed, 
 even the most atrocious. The doctrine of the " public 
 safety " caused all its crimes ; and it no more hesitated to 
 strike down its own members, and to immolate to the 
 clamor of the clubs its most illustrious orators, than it 
 hesitated, after the mock of a trial, to send to the scaf- 
 fold the unfortunate King. It did not judge, it killed ; 
 and before killing, outraged. This was its whole policy, 
 and as it united in itself all the powers of a government, 
 it could pursue to their utmost extreme its own furious 
 passions, or those of an unbridled demagogism, of which 
 itself was the emanation, and often the instrument. 
 
 Despotism alone was destined to rise out of the 
 weariness and disgust of'-such a regime. For a long 
 time the hideous figure of the Convention has stood as 
 a terrifying phantom between modern society and the 
 realization of liberty. We should dispel this miscon- 
 ception which deceives the people, annuls the salutary 
 lesson so dearly paid for, and is made to excuse all sorts 
 of political reaction. Only render liberty hideous, and 
 you have well merited of all despotisms. Now this is 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 191 
 
 precisely what those do who excuse the crimes of the 
 Revolution, and compose for the public a sort of demo- 
 cratic martyrology, made up of names which, though 
 terrible, are none the less infamous. I admit that in 
 the Convention the Girondists change their course ; but 
 they can only be pardoned from the moment when, 
 abandoning their own principles, they come to the 
 defense of the right which for so long they had trampled 
 under foot. At the trial of the King the conduct of 
 the most .of them is without courage. They lack the 
 boldness to save him openly ; they stop at a half-way 
 measure, and finally sacrifice him to their parliamentary 
 influence. If the whole party had spoken as Lanjuinais 
 the Convention would not have passed out of their 
 hands ; they could have controlled it. The true way to 
 triumph over Robespierre was not to hurl against him 
 eloquent philippics, but to arrest him at once by a de- 
 termined vote, the' very day when he presumed to de- 
 clare that it was the duty of the nation not to judge the 
 King, but to kill him. Our heart is entirely with the 
 Girondists when they struggle with the eloquence of 
 Vergniaud, the energy of Guadet, and the just indigna- 
 tion of Ducos, against the pressure of the lawless clubs, 
 and against that abominable municipality of Paris 
 which, since the September massacres, is little else than 
 a gang of assassins; still we cannot forget that these 
 same men, under the Legislative Assembly, had had 
 recourse to this dangerous force of insurrection, and 
 that the austere Petion favored the riot of August 10. 
 It is only since the thirty-first of May, 1793, that our 
 sympathies are wholly with the Girondists. They have 
 
192 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 fallen victims to arbitrary principles to which they them- 
 selves had too much resorted. Proscribed as a body, 
 those who could not escape fell under the ax of the 
 executioner. The sudden loss of so much youth, talent, 
 and noble though misguided zeal, will always be a source 
 of grief to France. 
 
 But if we except a few names, such as the honest 
 Carnot, (whose silence, however, in the face of so many 
 wrongs cannot be excused,) what one of all the radical 
 left which now controlled the Convention can be pro- 
 posed as an object of admiration ? Danton was the in- 
 carnation of the audacity which he preached, but he 
 could never wash his hands of the blood of the Septem- 
 ber massacres. Camille Desmoulins is ever the terrible 
 joker whose pleasantry kills, and a final gleam of cou- 
 rageous pity can scarcely undo the injustice of his life. 
 Robespierre, when closely studied, will always appear 
 as one of the worst enemies which liberty ever had. 
 This sophistical tribune never loses an opportunity of 
 offering incense to a false popular sovereignty, and of 
 sacrificing to it all the rights which make men free. I 
 know of nothing more hideous .than the kind of frater- 
 nity which he proclaims, in speeches that smell both of 
 the oil and of blood. He rises only upon the dead 
 bodies of his opponents, and he never forgets that they 
 are his rivals. This mixture of the proconsul and the 
 soured academician is contemptible. His ideas are run 
 mad ; they are the reduction to the absurd of Rous- 
 seau's Gontrat Social. He is none the less odious for 
 bis austerity — for the plain wooden writing-desk of his 
 study; for, the speeches there written were to bring 
 
Jed i (j ion and the Reign of Terror. 193 
 
 beads to the executioner's block. As to Marat,* "all 
 dripping with gall, with calumny, and blood," if there 
 was once a French Academy to listen^to him, and a 
 people to bear him in triumph, it is simply the shame ca 
 our history. Neither the fine figure of St. Just, the 
 calm hangman, nor the sentimental Barrere, f with his 
 two speeches in his pocket, ready to speak whichever 
 way the popular wind should blow, nor the elegance of 
 Garat, nor the bodily infirmities of Couthou, have any 
 attraction for me. I ask, what liberty it is which the 
 Convention did not resolutely, cruelly, and, in the end, 
 uselessly, trample under foot ? I ask, what one of the 
 principles of 1789 did it not violate and suppress, from 
 the liberty of assemblage and of the press to the liberty 
 of worship ? Did it not push to the extreme the system 
 of centralization, so that when Napoleon came to the 
 mastery he found, ready to his hand and fully mounted, 
 the most perfect machine of despotism? Yergniaud, 
 whose eyes were opened too late, had admirably de- 
 fined the liberalism of the Convention. " It said to all," 
 so runs his language, " You are free, but think as we 
 think on questions of politics, or we will denounce you 
 to the vengeance of the people. You are free, but bow 
 your head to the idol which we worship, or we will de- 
 nounce you to the vengeance of the people. You are 
 free, but unite with us in persecuting those whose pro- 
 bity and talents we fear, or we will denounce you to 
 the vengeance of the people." Surely one might well 
 fear that, like Saturn, the Revolution would devour its 
 
 • See Appendix, note 23. f Ibid., note 24. 
 
 25 
 
194 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 own children, and engender in the end only despotism, 
 with all the accompanying evils. 
 
 Before returning to the history of the Church in these 
 stormy times, let us rehearse the principal measures ■ 
 adopted by the Convention for crushing all opposition. 
 After the execution of the King, January 21, 1793, 
 there had been created, March 9, in the midst of the 
 commencing dissensions in the Assembly between the 
 Girondists -and the Mountainists, a terrible instrument 
 of injustice, namely, a revolutionary tribunal, against 
 whose decisions there was no appeal. This was denned 
 by Lanjuinais as " a decree which was monstrous from 
 the circumstances of the nation, monstrous in its viola- 
 tion of all the rights of man, and monstrous by the 
 abominable irregularity . of not admitting appeal in 
 criminal cases." The courageous Deputy asked in vain 
 that, at furthest, this terrible tribunal be allowed only 
 in the department of the capital ; for it was soon estab- 
 lished all over France. It was simply a' machine ol 
 . irresistible and murderous proscription ; for nothing was 
 more derisive than the picked and sordid jury which 
 was granted, but which was not even allowed to delib- 
 erate with closed doors. The Committee of Public 
 Safety had been instituted, May 22, 1793, at the de 
 mand of the rash Girondist Isnard. The party of the 
 Girondists had been expelled from the Convention and 
 outlawed on the second of June, under the pressure of 
 successive riots which had convulsed Paris. The radical 
 left were then masters of the Convention, and had con- 
 trol of the Committee of Public Safety, which assured 
 in their hands absolute power, and coveied all their 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 195 
 
 measures with a cloak of legality. With these two 
 formidable instruments, this Committee and the Revolu- 
 tionary Tribunal, they could speedily crush all opposi- 
 tion whatever. The refractory clergy were of course 
 the first to fall under the stroke of proscription. 
 
 The disposition of the Convention in regard to relig- 
 ion was similar to that of the Legislative Assembly. It 
 contained a good number of declared Atheists, who de- 
 sired to efface all remains of the ancient beliefs. The 
 sole representatives of Christianity were a few lay and 
 clerical Jansenists, and some Constitutional Bishops, of 
 whom several apostatized openly and shamelessly as 
 soon as the hour of trial arrived. The disciples of 
 Rousseau stuck to their sentimental Deism, which was 
 in perfect accord with intolerance. Robespierre was 
 opposed to shameless moral impropiety, and lost no op- 
 portunity of rendering homage to the Supreme Being. 
 The Girondists, with one or two exceptions, were fer- 
 vent disciples of the philosophy of the eighteenth cen- 
 tury, and some of them professed a sort of irreverent 
 disdain for all positive religion whatever. Such was 
 Isnard, who denied any other God than the law. These 
 sentiments were boldly expressed in one of the first 
 debates of the Convention. A proposition to exclude 
 religious instruction from the public schools had been 
 opposed by Maillane, a Catholic, whereupon Dupont, a 
 Girondist, responded with great earnestness, and pro- 
 fessed an ardent hatred of Christianity. " What," said 
 he, " shall thrones be overturned, scepters broken, and 
 kings executed, and yet the altars of the gods remain 
 untouched? When the thrones are overturned these 
 
196 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 altars are left naked, and without support. Do you 
 think, citizen legislators, to base the republic on any- 
 other altar than that of the country ? Xature and rea- 
 son, these are the gods of man. These are our gods." 
 Dupont did not need after this to assert that he was an 
 Atheist. He concluded by asking for the abolition of 
 all tyranny, and the foundation of true liberty on the 
 negation of all prejudices. The French, according to 
 him, would be free only when they had fully thrown off 
 the yoke of priests, and were able to die like d'Alem- 
 bert, who wished only the philosopher Condorcet * to 
 close his eyes. This discourse provoked, it is true, some 
 murmurs, but it pleased the majority of the Convention. 
 Ducos expressed the same opinions in more moderate 
 language, saying that the return of prejudices was the 
 true counter-revolution. One of his reasons for exclud- 
 ing religious instruction from the schools may be very 
 easily reconciled with a respect for religion, for he said 
 that as the schools should be for citizens of different 
 Churches without distinction, the intervention of a priest 
 would always be offensive to those of a religion to 
 which he did not belong. But was it needful for the 
 orator to go on and insult religion itself ? " The first 
 condition," said he, " of public instruction is to teach 
 nothing but truth, and this alone is enough to exclude 
 the clergy. For my part, I confess I would rather trust 
 them with the finances of the nation than with the edu- 
 cation of the youth. I would rather ruin the public 
 treasury than pervert and corrupt the public spirit. I 
 will cite as appropriate here the story which Plutarch 
 * See Appendix, note 25. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 197 
 
 relates of a flute-player, who was paid simply for play- 
 ing, and^doubly for keeping silence, for the reason that 
 he played false." Such were the sentiments of the 
 Girondists on the subject of religion. It may easily be 
 inferred that they would have little hesitation about 
 violating the liberty of worship. The Constitutional 
 Clergy could readily foresee that the day of trial would 
 finally come for them also, for it was against religion 
 itself that the hostility was directed. 
 
 By such manifestations, however, the Convention of- 
 fended against public opinion not only in the West and 
 South, but also in Paris itself. Fickle and ardent, the 
 working class of this great city passed for the moment 
 from their hatred of the clergy to a strange attachment 
 for the ancient rites of the Church. Several wards 
 complained bitterly against a decree of the municipality 
 passed in December, 1792, forbidding the celebration of 
 the midnight mass. The movement was so large that 
 recourse was had to a pecuniary reward for such as 
 would abstain from this mass. An attempt to abolish 
 a festival resulted only in a great scandal. Some 
 women attempted to hang a man, whom they blamed 
 for this attempt. The festival of St. Genevieve was 
 celebrated with great enthusiasm by a vast concourse 
 of people. Many hundreds could not get inside of that 
 church which, next year, was to be disgraced by the 
 revels of the worship of reason. But it required the 
 stimulus of demagogism and terror to effect this change 
 in popular opinion. Impiety descended from the higher 
 to the lower classes, rather than the contrary. And we 
 fchall see that when calm was restored in the govern- 
 
198 Religion and the Reign of Terror, 
 
 ment the Catholic worship re-established itself with an 
 astonishing facility. 
 
 During this period of the Revolution religious perse- * 
 cution did not cease for a single moment. It tended to 
 reach all clergymen indiscriminately, but the non-jurors 
 had for a long time the honor of the greatest sufferings. 
 The formula of the oath had been modified since the 
 abolition of royalty so as to read simply, to liberty and 
 to equality ; but this was very little more acceptable 
 than that which required a formal acceptation of the 
 new Constitution of the Clergy, since it involved an 
 approval of the whole system of things which the Con- 
 vention had founded on the immolation of the King, 
 and supported by the terrible laws of proscription. 
 The conscience was alarmed at such an approval. The 
 number of non-juring priests did not diminish, and their 
 sufferings continually increased. The revolts of La 
 Vendee and Lyons occasioned increased harshness 
 against them. They were regarded as the chief agents 
 of counter-revolution at home and abroad. A severe 
 decree was made against such emigrants as should be 
 caught on French soil, and domiciliary visits were au- 
 thorized in all houses where they might be suspected of 
 lurking. In March, 1793, it was decreed that whoever 
 recognized a returned emigrant or priest might arrest 
 and bring him to the nearest prison to be executed in 
 the next twenty-four hours. The priests who had left 
 the country fell under the terrible stroke of the law 
 against emigrants, which declared them banished for- 
 ever, dead politically, and as having forfeited to the 
 State all their property. The more the country was 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 190 
 
 threatened by invasion from abroad, and sedition in the 
 interior, the more eruel and barbarous was the treat- 
 ment of the non-juring priests. 
 
 The Legislative Assembly had decreed their extradi- 
 tion, and this was the occasion of several murders. The 
 mob, infuriated by the clubs, attacked them on their pas- 
 sage, demanded of them the oath, and too often massa- 
 cred them on the spot for their firm and heroic refusal. 
 Sometimes they were robbed before embarkation. Can- 
 non shot were even fired on the ships which were bear- 
 ing them away. This happened at Havre, Dieppe, 
 Rouen, and elsewhere. The journey of the priests to 
 the place of imprisonment until they could be trans- 
 ported was a time of continued suffering. In March, 
 1793, a large company were sent to Nantes. On ar- 
 riving in this city the unfortunate men were thrown 
 pell-mell upon a boat, where they received the worst of 
 treatment, and would have died of starvation but for 
 the charity of certain citizens. The gangrene broke 
 out among them, and their sole consolation consisted in 
 taking with each other the communion twice a day. 
 Finally they were conducted to a sea-port, but not till 
 after death had greatly thinned their ranks. The Con- 
 vention had decreed the deportation of the non-jurors 
 to Guiana. In July, 1793, Danton asked a change in 
 the order. "We ought not," said he, "to avenge our- 
 Mitttt for the poison we have received from America by 
 sending thither another poison not less mortal. It is in 
 the territory of the Holy Father that this sacerdotal 
 mephitism should be concentrated." Lacroix proposed 
 that the priests should be cast into prison, and made to 
 
200 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 gain their bread by bard labor; but Robespierre in- 
 sisted on the execution of the "wise decree" which 
 would free France from the contagious pestilence of fanat- 
 ical priests. He looked upon them as wild beasts, which 
 the least change in the political tide might let loose on 
 the vitals of the nation. The matter was referred to a 
 committee, but lack of money rendered the deportation 
 impossible. The refractory priests were crowded upon 
 boats, or sent en masse to the scaffold. At Lyons, Collot 
 d'Herbois * condemned to death one hundred and twenty 
 of them in a single day. At Arras, Lebon f shed their 
 blood in torrents, and large numbers of them were 
 drowned at Nantes. The Revolution was equally cruel 
 toward the nuns. A large number of them, who had 
 / been confined in a single prison, responded nobly in 
 these words to their persecutors, who charged them 
 with fanaticism : " It is fanatics who slaughter and kill, 
 but we pray for such." "You shall be sent abroad." 
 "Wherever we are sent we will pray." "Whither 
 would you prefer to be sent ? " " Where there are the 
 most of suffering ones to console, and there are nowhere 
 more than in France." " If you remain here it is to 
 die." " Then we will die." These pious women sang 
 aloud, and joyfully, sacred hymns at the foot of the 
 scaffold. It required a courage fully equal to that of the 
 young volunteers who marched out to death at the notes 
 of the Marseillaise. Calamities like these exalt human 
 nature, and render it either atrocious or sublime. This 
 epoch engendered both heroism and crime ; the heroism 
 was found in both parties. Often simple lay Christians 
 *See Appendix, note 26. f Ibid., note 27. 
 
Religion and the. Reign of Terror. 201 
 
 rivaled the courage of the priests and nuns. This was 
 seen in a company who were once attending the pro- 
 scribed worship, in a cavern. Some one announced that 
 the soldiers of the republic could hear the songs ofN 
 praise. The people simply said to the priest: "That 
 makes no difference, tititor" and the song continued. 
 To sing a hymn in such circumstances required as much 
 courage as to serve a cannon under the fire of the enemy.j 
 During the reign of terror the Convention had very 
 little occasion to deal theoretically with the rights of 
 conscience. It is true, it devoted some attention to the 
 subject on the occasion of the Declaration of Rights 
 which was to preface the new constitution it was pre- 
 paring for France. Condorcet had prepared the first 
 sketch of this ultra-democratic document. It rejected 
 with disdain the idea of an Upper House, as well as every 
 thing else which could impose a check or act as a bal- 
 ance of power in the government. The members of the 
 Assembly, as well as all other officers of the nation 
 were to spring from the votes of the primary assemblies' 
 Every citizen who could get fifty others to second his 
 wish had the right to convene special primary assem- 
 blies. The legislative and the executive powers, as they 
 sprang from the same source, were co-ordinate, and con- 
 sututed a dangerous duality. Theoretically, the Decla- 
 ration of Rights consecrated all just principles; but 
 practically, these abstractions amounted to nothing 
 The discussion of these mere theories gave occasion to 
 several eccentric speeches, which would be possible only 
 in a time of extreme enthusiasm. Anacharsis Clootz * 
 
 * See Appendix, note 28. 
 26 
 
202 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 was allowed to develop in the Convention his fantas- 
 tical ideas as to the divinity of the human race in general, 
 and of the French people in particular. " The words 
 French and universal," said Clootz, " have become more 
 truly synonymous than the names of Christian and 
 Catholic. I hold that you have a very inadequate idea 
 of the nature of the sans-culottes if you admit that 
 there is a divine or creative Being. Whoever has the 
 weakness to believe in God is incapable of believing in 
 the divinity of the human race, the only sovereign." 
 Despite his enthusiasm for the name of Frenchman, he 
 proposed to substitute for it that of German, as being 
 more comprehensive, and embracing a whole family of 
 nations. He proposed seriously that the Convention 
 should adopt his ideas, and decree that every indi- 
 vidual and every society who should accept them 
 should have right of membership in the republic of men, 
 of Germans, and of Universals. And this speech of 
 Clootz was listened to without laughter ! But. why 
 should we be astonished? We have witnessed in our 
 own day the reappearance of this same apotheosis of the 
 race, with a mysticism which far surpasses that of the 
 " orator of the human race." 
 
 The constitution drawn up by Condorcet did not sur- 
 vive the fall of the Girondists. Robespierre concocted 
 a new one, which, passing over in silence the guarantees 
 of the former, deified not the human race in general, but 
 the multitude. His speech, on presenting it, abounded 
 from beginning to end with the most abject flattery of 
 the masses, whom he declared to be impeccable and in- 
 fallible. " Lay down as a first principle," said he, " that 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 203 
 
 the people are good, but that their delegates are cor- 
 ruptible, and that it is in the virtue and sovereignty of 
 the people that we must seek for a preservative against 
 the vices and despotism of the government." Such a 
 plan was a suppression of the representative system, or, 
 at least, its entire subordination to the primary meet- 
 ings of the populace. Robespierre desired that the Na- 
 tional Legislature should deliberate in the presence of 
 the whole peoj;>le, though it seems that the clamors of 
 the galleries ought to have sufficed to turn him from 
 such a thought. His project was an assault on all real 
 liberties, and especially on the right of property, which 
 he denned as the power to possess what the law grants. 
 This strange constitution was presented on the tenth, 
 and adopted on the twenty-third of June, 1793. Surely 
 it was the lamest constitution ever given to a great 
 people. However, it was destined never to be put 
 into force. There is one feature of it which has 
 met with much praise: I mean its so-called frater- 
 nal, social, and humanitarian color ; and it does, in 
 fact abound in that pretentious sentimentality which 
 never and nowhere better blossomed than at the foot of 
 the scaffold. Its conclusion has been thought to be 
 admirable, namely : " The French republic honors loyal- 
 ty, courage, old age, filial piety, and misfortune. It 
 puts the treasure of its constitution under the guardian- 
 ship of all the virtues.-' However, the most sacred of 
 these virtues seems to have been the right of insurrec- 
 tion, at least if we may judge from the practice of the 
 times. And in fact this was the only resource left to 
 liberty ; for the citizen was not protected effectually in a 
 
204 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 single one of his rights. He was delivered over to the 
 despotism of an irresponsible Assembly, which had no 
 other check than the clubs of Paris. All the govern- 
 mental powers were in its hands; the instrument of 
 tyranny was perfect. 
 
 If we examine what concerns the liberty of worship 
 in these two drafts of constitutions, we will find th^t of 
 Condorcet little better than that of Robespierre, as re- 
 cast by Herault de Sechelles. The debates showed as 
 little respect for this sacred right among the Girondists 
 as among the Terrorists proper. In May an obscure 
 Deputy had moved that the article in the constitution 
 of Condorcet which conceded the rights of conscience 
 should be stricken out, on the ground, that whereas the 
 subjective liberty of the conscience could never be in- 
 terfered with, the objective practice of worship would 
 infallibly conflict with the spirit of an age which was 
 soon to have no other worship than that of liberty and 
 public morality. And Vergniaud supported the motion. 
 To hear him, the days of intolerance were forever past ; 
 a strange position at a time when an unmerciful perse- 
 cution was raging all over the land ! Danton was of 
 the same mind, and thundered against superstition, and 
 in favor of fresh persecution. According to him the 
 surest sign of progress in religious liberty was the 
 hatred of the populace against the clergy. The priests 
 are persecuted, therefore religious liberty is complete ; 
 a sophism which has often reappeared in France. 
 
 The discussion of the right of worship came up again 
 on the eighteenth of June. Barrere demanded that 
 liberty of worship be formally inserted in the Declara- 
 
4 
 
 r 
 
 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 205 
 
 tion of Rights, and cited with approval the example of 
 the thirteen States of North America. But Robespierre 
 opposed the motion with great rancor. " I fear," said 
 he, " that conspirators may find in the article which 
 concedes liberty of worship, the means of overturning 
 the public liberty. I fear that counter-revolutionists 
 will, disguise their attempts under religious forms. It 
 would be a hypocritical mask in which conspirators 
 would assault liberty." At furthest, however, these 
 conspirators, whatever they did, would not be able 
 more fatally and perfidiously to stab liberty than did 
 this austere tribune, who himself also wore a hypocriti- 
 cal mask. Despite his efforts, the right of worship re- 
 mained in the Constitution ; but of course it remained a 
 dead letter, at a time when the man who had combated 
 it was omnipotent in France. 
 
 Some months previously a proposition had been made 
 by Cambon,* in a committee of financej which, had it 
 been adopted, would have prevented many evils. It 
 was, to teave every Church to pay for its own worship. 
 But the motion was opposed. Danton, the Terrorist, 
 said : " It has been declared that the priests should not 
 be salaried out of the public treasury. Appeal has been 
 made to philosophical ideas which are dear to me, for I 
 recognize no other God than the God of the universe, 
 no other worship than that of reason and liberty ; but 
 man, unhappy in the lot of life, seeks after eternal en- 
 joyments, and imagines that in another life his joys will 
 be multiplied in proportion to his miseries in this. 
 After you shall have instructed and ripened the people 
 * See Appendix, note 29. 
 
206 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 for some time, then it will be time to speak to them of 
 morals and philosophy ; but until then it is barbarous, 
 it is a crime, to take from the people the priests in whom 
 they yet find some consolation. It would, therefore, be 
 wise, I think, for the Convention to publish to the peo- 
 ple an address, declaring that it has no wish to destroy 
 but only to perfect, and that if it pursues fanaticism it 
 is only because it wishes liberty of religious opinions." 
 But Danton was greatly mistaken in imagining that 
 Cambon's project of withholding the salaries of the 
 priests would have quickly crippled Christianity. Had 
 it been done respectfully, and had liberty of worship 
 been honestly guaranteed, the Revolution would have 
 been saved. Robespierre was of the same opinion as 
 Danton. The piece of rhetoric in which he defends his 
 position is perhaps the best we have from his pen, for 
 it was written with the most thorough conviction. The 
 separation of Church and State will always be a stum- 
 bling-block to the consistent disciples of Rousseau. 
 Robespierre begins by expressing his disdain for the 
 superstitions of the clergy. "I am," says he, "no 
 fonder than others of the power of the priests. It is 
 one more added to the chains of humanity; but it is an 
 invisible chain acting on the soul, and reason alone can 
 break it. The lawgiver may aid reason, but must not 
 take its place or anticipate it." Taking a rapid survey 
 of the country, he rejoiced in the progress which phi- 
 losophy had already made. " Even those who remain 
 attached to Christianity," said he, "if we except the 
 counter-revolutionists, teach now only the imposing 
 dogmas which come to the support of the morality, the 
 
Religion and the Reign of Tewor. 207 
 
 virtue, and equality which were formerly taught by the 
 Son of Mary to his Jewish fellow-citizens." Thus, ac- 
 cording to Robespierre, France was already very near 
 to that religion without mysteries, to that rational wor- 
 ship of the Supreme Being, which was the ideal of 
 Rousseau. If there was yet mingled with this high 
 philosophy an element of superstition, so much the bet- 
 ter, for it rendered the system palatable to the people. 
 He referred with approval to the policy of ancient legis- 
 lators in assuming for their systems the sanction of 
 Heaven. But he forgot that from the time that the 
 Roman augurs laughed, not secretly, as in the time of 
 Cicero, but openly, and in the market-places, this pious 
 trickery of philosophy to impose on the people, had very 
 little success. Religion will have nothing to do with the 
 hypocritical respect of politicians who support it from 
 motives of State. Robespierre lays here the foundation 
 of the Concordat system of Napoleon, who was in this 
 respect his faithful disciple. He was likewise the 
 teacher of Napoleon in that part of his writings which 
 describes the dangers, to a strongly centralized govern- 
 ment, of the independence of the Church from the 
 State. " What could be more fatal to the public tran- 
 quillity," asked he, with all the sincerity of a partisan of 
 despotic sovereignty, " than the realization of this 
 theory of individual worship ? You seem to fear the 
 influence of the priests, but your plan would increase it; 
 for as soon as they cease to be priests of the public they 
 would become those of individuals, and have with the 
 same the most intimate relations." He then proceeded 
 to picture to the alarmed Jacobins the spectacle of in- 
 
208 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 dividual liberty taking advantage of the separation of 
 Church and Sta^e, and forming minorities into parties, 
 to resist the sway of the majority. And he was not 
 mistaken. The system of a non-salaried Church is in 
 fact fatal to tyranny. Robespierre opposed, as was his 
 custom, the poor to the rich, declaring that as the poor 
 are the more religious, it would be a great hardship to 
 them not to salary the Church. The only one of his 
 arguments which had weight, was drawn from the pub- 
 lic faith which had been pledged to the system of sal- 
 aries ; but not to mention that this faith had already 
 been broken in the case of the non-jurors, it would have 
 been easy to remunerate the priests individually so far 
 as to satisfy the claims of justice, and yet leave the 
 Church without salary from the State. It was impor- 
 tant for our purpose to signalize the hostility of Robes- 
 pierre to the separation of Church and State. It is a 
 great honor for this principle, to have had for an adver- 
 sary such a man, and for such reasons. However, the in- 
 conveniences of the State-Church system grew more and 
 more apparent, and the separation could not be long 
 postponed. 
 
 From now till the time of the abrogation of the Civil 
 Constitution of the Clergy, the Convention took advan- 
 tage of it to make their authority bitterly felt by the 
 State Church. The former Assembly had continued the 
 salaries of such priests as took wives ; this was equiva- 
 lent to declaring their marriage legal. The Con- 
 stitutional Bishops were mostly opposed to this, and 
 especially was this the case with Fauchet. His opposi- 
 tion became a matter of debate in the Convention, in 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 209 
 
 July, 1773. Lacroix declared that the Bishops, being 
 salaried by the government, ought not to oppose any of 
 its laws. Danton was more emphatic: "We have con- 
 tinued to the Bishops their salaries," said he, " now let 
 them imitate Christ and the Apostles. These rendered 
 to Cesar what belonged to Cesar. Very well ! the na- 
 tion is greater than all the Cesars." It was in vain urged 
 that the marriage of priests, being a matter of Church 
 doctrine, a Bishop might withhold his nuptial blessing 
 from the marriages of priests, and yet not offend against 
 the civil laws. Matters went from bad to w r orse, and 
 the height of the Reign of Terror was not far in the 
 distance. 
 
 In order to understand the character of those orgies 
 of impiety which were so fatal to the Revolution, it is 
 necessary to cast a glance at the condition of the differ- 
 ent parties. On the overthrow of the Girondists, June 
 2, 1793, the radical extremists remained masters of 
 the whole machinery of government. And they were 
 faced by dangers which led them to the exertion of all 
 their power. The proscription of the escaped Girondists 
 caused several insurrections. Lyons was in full revolt, 
 and it required an army to reduce it. Toulon surrender- 
 ed to the English. La Vendee, entirely in revolt, made 
 common cause with the foreign coalition which was 
 pressing upon France at the Xorth, at the Alps, and at 
 the Pyrenees. More than once the fate of the nation 
 was at stake. At Paris itself the assassination of Marat 
 by a pure and noble young woman, show r ed what enthu- 
 siasm the cause of the Girondists could excite. 
 
 It is well known by what miracles of energy the Rev- 
 27 
 
210 Religion and the Reign of Terror, 
 
 olution made face to all their dangers. Lyons and Tou- 
 lon were taken by rapid sieges. A new system of 
 democratic tactics, which consisted in hurling heavy 
 masses on a single point, drove back the allied armies. 
 Finally, after a succession of battles, the upper hand was 
 gained in La Vendee toward the close of IT 93. The 
 victories of Wattignies in Flanders, and Cholet in La 
 Vendee, terminated victoriously the campaign. At the 
 same time great reforms in civil matters evinced the un- 
 conquerable faith of the Revolution in the future. The 
 Normal and Polytechnic Schools were established, and 
 a vast plan of instruction elaborated. The foundations 
 of the Civil Code were laid. Attention was given even 
 to the fine arts, and vast museums opened. Uniformity 
 of weights and measures was established, a great and 
 lasting reform. This terrible energy of the Revolution 
 on the frontiers, and these useful reforms at home, are 
 its greatest glory. But with what different feelings do 
 we view the bloody orgies which attended it. We shall 
 always believe them to have been unnecessary. ~No, we 
 will never admit that France could not rise to the high- 
 est courage without plunging herself into a cruel deli- 
 rium. We do not see that victory deserted her flag the 
 day when a single color ceased to swallow up the other 
 two — the day when it ceased to bathe in the blood of the 
 scaffold. Those judges bring dishonor on the country 
 who pretend that it could not have been saved except 
 at this price. Let them not forget that the crimes to 
 which they attribute such honor excited many more 
 dangers than they surmounted. 
 
 It is from the month of September, 1793, that the 
 
Religion and the lie ign of Terror. 21 1 
 
 Reign of Terror was fully in play. It came forth, full 
 
 armed, from the sitting of the fifth of this month, on oc- 
 
 casion of one of those imperious demands of a deputation 
 
 from the people of Paris, which completely swayed the 
 
 Convention. " Let us make terror the order of the day," 
 
 exclaimed the unprincipled and cowardly Barrere. The 
 
 decree which he proposed organized a revolutionary army 
 
 of six thousand men, who were charged with the duty of 
 
 crushing every-where the counter-revolution. The pain 
 
 of death was pronounced against whoever should trade 
 
 in assignats. To hasten its judgments the Revolutionary 
 
 Tribunal was divided into four sections. The nocturnal 
 ■ 
 
 searching of houses was authorized, terror became the 
 sum of the politics of the day. It hung over the heads 
 of the generals in the field. If they did not gain vic- 
 tories, or if they failed to make a good use of them, they 
 were recalled and sent to the scaffold, as in the cases of 
 Custine * and Houchard. If a Deputy showed signs of 
 mercy, or hesitation, he was taken from his seat and 
 executed. No home was safe day or night. No one 
 knew when to feel secure from the lightning-stroke of 
 terror. It fell on the middle classes as well as on the 
 aristocracy. It filled the prisons with a crowd of pris- 
 oners, on whom the insatiable guillotine made its daily 
 feasts. But even all this could not hinder the gayety so 
 natural to the French, from making game of their fiend- 
 ish hangmen. On the third of October the Convention 
 decreed death within twenty-four hours on every returned 
 emigrant priest on whom any counter-revolutionary sign 
 might be found, or who should be suspected of relations 
 * See Appendix, note 30. 
 
212 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 with the enemy. The evidence of two witnesses was 
 declared sufficient. In February, 1794, it was declared 
 that, in cases of arrested priests, no recourse to the Court 
 of Appeals should be allowed. In October of the pre- 
 vious year Marie Antoinette, after having suffered all 
 the shame of a terrible captivity, was dragged before a 
 merciless tribunal, and quickly handed over to the exe- 
 cutioner. Her noble dignity was unabashed before her 
 outragers, and even touched the hearts of the female 
 monsters who had assembled to rejoice in her disgrace. 
 A few days later the noble bearing of the Girondists, 
 who sang a patriotic hymn while on their way to the 
 scaffold, struck fear to the hearts even of the Terrorists. 
 Never had they appeared greater than " on the car of 
 death. The noble Bailly and Barnave followed them 
 very soon. The first two generations of the revolution 
 were thus swept away, to give scope to the third. It 
 seemed not enough to strike the noblest of the living; 
 the bones of the dead were insulted. The monuments 
 and ashes of the long line of French kings, and other 
 noble personages, were taken from their long resting-place 
 in the Church of St. Denis and cast into a common ditch. 
 We should not be surprised if, at this time, the revolu- 
 tionists, in their rage to break entirely with the past, at- 
 tempted to treat God as they had already treated royalty. 
 
 It was the municipality of Paris that in November, 
 1193, took the initiative in the atheistical movement. Its 
 action was governed less by fanaticism than by calcu- 
 lating policy. The flattering Chaumette * and the vile 
 Hebert had more at heart to out do Robespierre than 
 * See Appendix, note 31. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 213 
 
 to serve the cause of Atheism. Anacharsis Clootz alone 
 was sincere; he assaulted religion from personal ha- 
 tred. Hebert * aspired to the role of Marat. He hoped 
 to be borne to the highest place on the shoulders of the 
 rabble. This coarse blasphemer was a mere sycophant 
 who spoke the language of the gutters to please the 
 sovereign mob. He and Chaumette imagined that the 
 surest way to attain their purpose would be to attack the 
 Supreme Being, who was supported by Robespierre with 
 all the resources of his pedantry. In this way they 
 might cast their foe into the shade, or distance and leave 
 him among the apologists of the exploded past. The 
 anti-religious furor had found, in the continued resist- 
 ance of the priests of the old Church, the means of ever- 
 increasing growth. This seiwed as a pretext for the 
 attack on religion itself. It was easy to involve the 
 Constitutional priest in the general odium of his caste, 
 and to represent God himself as the great enemy of sans- 
 culottism. As the Convention had listened to, and even 
 applauded the boldest attacks on the ancient faith, it 
 seemed an easy task to gain it entirely to the cause of 
 Atheism. With the Convention and the faubourgs on 
 their side, the Jacobins would be obliged to follow also, 
 and this would be the fall of Robespierre, or, in case he 
 followed the movement, his moral abdication. The plan 
 was well laid, as was proved by its several days of suc- 
 cess ; but neither Hebert nor Chaumette, nor both of 
 them, were equal to Robespierre. They fell in the 
 struggle, but not before they had succeeded in bringing 
 about the most hideous scandal. 
 
 * See Appendix, note 32. 
 
214 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 The Hebertists in their impiety did not go beyond the 
 natural tendency of the philosophy of the eighteenth 
 century. Already this had exhibited itself more than 
 once in the National Assembly. They simply abased it 
 from the sphere of ideas into the unclean minds of the 
 mob, and translated it into indecent orgies. It is cer- 
 tain that they could little shock an Assembly which 
 had already decreed to abolish the Christian era, and, 
 erasing the. name of Christ, to make the new era date 
 from the foundation of the republic. Nothing better 
 than this proves that the Revolution was determined to 
 enter into a war with the old divinities, and to propose 
 itself as the new religion of the future. The new calen- 
 dar, which had been presented by Romme, and adopted 
 on the fifth of August, 1793, fixed the beginning of the 
 new era on the twenty-second of September, 1792, a day 
 which, curiously enough, coincided with the autumnal 
 equinox and the foundation of the republic. Decades, 
 or weeks of ten days each, took the place of the ordi- 
 nary week. The nionths«were called by philosophical 
 names, such as Justice, Equality, etc. By way of ex- 
 ception June was called the Oath of the Tennis-court, 
 and J uly memorized the taking of the Bastille. These 
 names of the months were changed, on the third 
 of November, on motion of Fabre d'Eglantine, who 
 caused the Assembly to adopt a less abstract nomencla- 
 ture—one which should recall the succession of the sea- 
 sons. To the months were given poetical names. The 
 first three, or autumn months, were named Vendemiaire, 
 JBrumaire, and Frimaire, recalling the vintage, the 
 haze, and the hoar-frost. The next three, or those of 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 21 5 
 
 winter, were termed Mvose, Plumose, and Ventose, in 
 reference to snow, rain, and wind. The spring months 
 were Germinal, Florial, and Prairial, in allusion to 
 germination, flowers, and meadows. The last time 
 months, Messidor, Thermidor, and Fructidor, were 
 those of summer, and marked the seasons of harvest, of 
 heat, and of fruit. The motives which prompted this 
 bold innovation were honestly explained by Fabre 
 d'Eglantine. "Long use," said he, "has filled the 
 memories of the people with a large number of long 
 venerated images, which have been, and are yet to-day, 
 the source of religious errors. It is therefore necessary 
 to substitute for these fictions of ignorance the realities 
 of reason, and for the prestige of priestcraft the truth of 
 nature." He avowed his intention of counteracting the 
 influence the priests obtained by the association of their 
 festivals with the chief epochs of the year. " When the 
 festival of the dead is to be celebrated," said he, " it is 
 not amid the young life of spring that the priests play 
 their farce, but it is at the close of the beautiful days, 
 when a gray and dull sky fills our mind with a tender 
 sadness. Then, taking advantage of the farewells of 
 nature, they seize our attention, and, through the clap- 
 trap of their festivals, paint to our minds all that their 
 impudence has imagined of mystical and delightful for 
 the predestinated, that is to say, the imbecile, and of 
 terrible for the sinner, that is to say, the clear-headed." 
 After mentioning other cases where the Church had 
 taken advantage of the seasons in fixing its festivals, 
 Fabre d'Eglantine opposed to the old religious system 
 his new agricultural calendar, which was designed 
 
216 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 equally, but in a contrary design, to fill the imagination 
 of the people with grand images. The year was to 
 close with five grand festivals, bearing the expressive 
 name of Sansculotides, which were to occupy the sur- 
 plus days beyond the decimal number 360. They were 
 the festivals of genius, of labor, of action, of reward, 
 and of opinion. The latter was a sort of political car- 
 nival of twenty-four hours, during which it was lawful 
 for any citizen to write or say whatever he pleased 
 about any public officer. It was for those in power, 
 the last judgment of the year under the presidency of 
 ridicule. The propositions of Fabre d'Eglantine were 
 decreed with enthusiasm by the Convention. Thus the 
 National Assembly changed itself into a council of 
 philosophy, and made creeds by authority with as little 
 regard for conscience as had ever been done by the 
 councils of the Romish Church. To interfere thus with 
 the religious habits of the people was to inaugurate the 
 most intolerable of despotisms, to confound absolutely 
 the spiritual and the temporal powers, and to inaugurate 
 what might properly be called the Islamism of wicked- 
 ness. The Convention thus resuscitated the most intol- 
 erant features of the former hierarchy, and fondly be- 
 lieved itself liberal because it had rejected, and sought 
 to put down, the worship of the God of the Christians. 
 
 The municipality had some reasons for believing that 
 it would be seconded, if it pushed even to the furthest 
 extreme the irreligious movement. It broached the 
 matter by provoking numerous and clamoring anti- 
 religious petitions. On the" 28th of August, 1793, a 
 deputation of teachers presented itself to the Conven- 
 
Udujion and thi Bi ign of Terror. 217 
 
 tion to plead for a system of gratuitous and obliga- 
 tor? instruction. One of the children who accompanied 
 them demanded that, instead of being preached to in the 
 name of .the pretended God, they be taught the principles 
 of equality, the rights of man, and the constitution of the 
 country. Such a profanation of infancy should have ex- 
 cited the most lively indignation ; but instead of that, the 
 deputation, like all similar ones, was warmly applauded, 
 whatever a few of the Deputies may have thought who yet 
 remained attached to the religion of their fathers. These 
 surely must have felt that silence on such an occasion 
 was cowardice. Some days after this scandal a deputa- 
 tion from Xe vers .appeared in the Assembly bearing the 
 spoils of churches, and demanding the suppression of 
 the Catholic worship. At one of the clubs a renegade 
 Bishop was heard to exclaim, " The priests are vile 
 wretches ; I know them better than others, for I have 
 been one of them." Some days previously a Constitu- 
 tional Bishop presented to the Convention " his spouse," 
 boasting that he had taken her from anions: the sans- 
 culottes. He mt warmly applauded, and came near 
 getting an addition of two thousand francs to his sal- 
 ary. Nothing would have been more natural, for he 
 had well merited of the Convention by dishonoring his 
 onto. Thus the movement was turned against all the 
 clergy, the constitutional as well as the refractorv. 
 The Atheists sought in every way to obtain apostasies, 
 and in that way defame religion through its own minis- 
 tm An ex-priest formally demanded of the munici- 
 pality the privilege of changing his name from Erasmus 
 to Apostate. Chaumette and Ilebert planned, in secret 
 
 28 
 
218 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 meetings with Clootz, Momoro, Bourdon de l'Oise, and 
 others, a great public spectacle. It was no less than the 
 inauguration of the worship of reason in open Conven- 
 tion, by introducing certain priests, who were to cast at 
 the foot of the national tribune the symbols of super- 
 stition. The farce was played on the seventh of No- 
 vember. As the Convention was presided over by Laloi, 
 who was in perfect accord with the municipality, the 
 leaders of the scheme had reason to expect favorable 
 replies. The scene was opened by the reading of a 
 letter from a country Curate by the name of Parens, 
 who declared himself ready to abjure, provided that he 
 was assured of a pension. " I am a priest," said he ; "I 
 am a Curate, that is to say, a quack. Thus far I have 
 been quack in good faith ; I have deceived, because I 
 myself had been deceived. Now that my eyes are 
 opened, I confess that I would rather not be a dishonest 
 quack. However, poverty might constrain me to it. 
 It seems to me that it would be well to assure a living 
 to such as are willing to render justice to truth." This 
 doughty confessor was unwilling to be impious gratui- 
 tously, and seemed disinclined to change his trade with- 
 out assurance of salary. And this piece of debasement 
 was applauded by a National Assembly ! After the little 
 farce was to follow the grand comedy. The president 
 announced to the Convention that the regular authori- 
 ties of the municipality of Paris were present at the bar 
 of the house in company with Bishop Gobel, together 
 with his vicars and several priests. Momoro declared 
 with great parade that these citizens wished permission 
 to regenerate themselves and become men. Under the 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 219 
 
 guidance of reason they had come to cast off the char- 
 acter which superstition had imposed upon them. 
 " Thus," said he, " the French Republic will soon have 
 no other worship than that of reason, equality, and 
 eternal truth." Gobel arose amid a shower of applause. 
 He was all the more contemptible on this occasion 
 for the reason that he yielded to no momentary and 
 overpowering gush of enthusiasm, for he was no more 
 an Atheist than he was a Christian ; he only desired to 
 save his life amid the revolutionary tumult. " The will 
 of the people," said he, " was my first law ; submission 
 to their will my first duty." It is, therefore, under the 
 influence of fear that he abandons Christianity, and 
 sacrifices to the idol of the moment, namely, the popu- 
 lar will, that God in whom he does not cease to believe. 
 He had so expressed himself to Bishop Gregory a few 
 days previously. The cowardly apostate floated con- 
 tinually between the fear of the scaffold and the fear of 
 hell, the latter of course gaining the upper hand when 
 he was taken to the guillotine. To-day, however, his 
 words were greeted with unbounded applause, for he 
 had well merited of the Atheists by dishonoring the 
 first bishopric of France. " Citizens," said the presi- 
 dent to Gobel and the other priests about him, " citi- 
 zens, you have just sacrificed on the altar of the country 
 these antiquated gewgaws; you are worthy of the re- 
 public." Thereupon ex-Bishop Gobel assumed the re- 
 publican cap, and received the fraternal embrace. Ig- 
 noble sentiments may sometimes excite almost as much 
 momentary enthusiasm as real heroism. Several priests 
 now vied with each other, who should first resign their 
 
220 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 character as clergymen. Bishop Lindet surpassed all. 
 He pretended that he had accepted a bishopric only to 
 serve his country, and that he had never been a quack, 
 or the dupe of superstition. It was, therefore, very easy 
 to renounce what he had never truly believed. He was 
 followed by Julien of Toulouse, a Protestant Pastor, 
 who spoke in a similar strain, and said that he had 
 never been any thing but an officer of morality, profess- 
 ing the most absolute tolerance. " I have exercised," 
 said he, " the functions of a Protestant minister ; I de- 
 clare that I shall profess them no longer, and that 
 henceforth I shall have no other temple than the sanc- 
 tuary of the laws, no other divinity than liberty, no 
 other worship than civil order, and no other gospel 
 than the republican constitution." ' It is thus shamefully 
 that Julien represented in the Convention, a martyr 
 Church which had never flinched before caresses or 
 sufferings. Such is the lesson that this base mind 
 brought from the wilds of the desert, where he had 
 once had the honor of celebrating an outlawed worship. 
 What a contrast between this day of ignominy and the 
 glorious days of his youth, when he had suffered for his 
 belief! He had doubtless long since fallen from his 
 faith, and was thus unprepared for an hour requiring 
 moral heroism. 
 
 It could not well be that amid all this turpitude the 
 Christian conscience should remain without witness. 
 It made its inflexible voice heard at a profaned tribune, 
 and despite the cries of rage which fain would have 
 hushed it. Its mere apparition was a terrible rebuke 
 for the cowardly scene which had just been witnessed. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 221 
 
 It was Gregory, Bishop of Blois, who gave this grand 
 spectacle to his country. Of a mind ardent and gen- 
 erous, he had more than once pushed his enthusiasm to 
 imprudence ; and, though he had not voted for the death 
 of the King, yet in an unfortunate moment of excite- 
 ment he had rejoiced in his downfall. He was, never- 
 theless, a sincere Christian and a noble soul. He had 
 never denied a single one of his convictions, much less 
 his God. He still wore the ecclesiastical costume, which 
 of itself was at this period an act of courage. Occupied 
 on this occasion in the Educational Committee, he was 
 entirely ignorant of what had taken place in the hall of 
 the Convention. Immediately on his entrance he was 
 besieged by a crowd of radical Deputies, who pressed 
 him with frantic gestures to follow the "good example " 
 of Gobel. Every-where the words were heard, " You 
 must mount the rostrum." "And why?" asked he. 
 " To renounce your character of Bishop, your religious 
 charlatanism," was the reply. "Miserable blasphemers," 
 said he, " I*have never been a charlatan. Loving my 
 religion, I have preached the truth, and shall remain 
 faithful to it." Hoping to constrain him to follow the 
 current, the president gave him the privilege of speak- 
 ing without his asking it. He ascended the rostrum, 
 and immediately a deathly silence took the place of the 
 clamorous tumult. "I have entered the Assembly," 
 said he, " with very vague notions of what took place 
 before my arrival. I hear invitations to make a sacri- 
 fice for my country ; I am accustomed to that. Is the 
 question as to attachment to the cause of liberty ? I 
 have proved that by my life. Is my salary as Bishop 
 
222 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 at stake ? I abandon that to you without regret. Is 
 my religion called in question ? That matter is outside 
 of your domain, and you have no right to attack it. 
 I hear it spoken of as fanaticism and superstition. 
 I have combated these always ; but if you will define 
 these words, you will see that fanaticism and supersti- 
 tion are directly opposed to religion. As to me, Catho- 
 lic by conviction and by feeling, priest by choice, I 
 have been selected by the people for the office of 
 Bishop ; but it is neither from them nor from you that 
 I hold my mission. I have consented to bear the bur- 
 den of the episcopacy in a time when it involved extra- 
 ordinary difficulties. I was implored to accept it ; I am 
 implored to-day to make an abdication which will not, 
 which cannot, be extorted from me. I have endeavored 
 to do good in my diocese, acting from principles which 
 are dear to me, and which I defy you to take from me. 
 I shall 'remain Bishop to continue my work. I invoke 
 the liberty of conscience." 
 
 This discourse was interrupted at almost every word. 
 It excited cries of frantic rage. " I doubt," says Greg- 
 ory in his Memoires, " whether the pencil of Milton, 
 accustomed as it was to depict demoniac spectacles, 
 could have done justice to this scene. Descending from 
 the rostrum I returned to my place. The Deputies 
 shunned me as if I had been infected with leprosy. 
 Wherever I looked I saw eyes glaring on me with fury ; 
 menaces and insults poured upon me in a torrent. Op- 
 pressed with the sight of the outrages committed against 
 religion, I thanked God that he had sustained my feeble- 
 ness and given me strength to confess Jesus Christ. I 
 
Religion and tJw Reign of Terror. * 223 
 
 declare that in pronouncing this discourse I believed 
 myself to be pronouncing my death sentence." The 
 same evening and the following days the residence of 
 Gregory was besieged by emissaries summoning him to 
 yield to the universal wish. A hostile placard was 
 posted on the walls of Paris denouncing him to the 
 Revolutionary Tribunal. Fourcroy, his colleague in 
 the Educational Committee, blamed him publicly for 
 having checked the current of opinion. He said, "We 
 must crush this infamous religion." Gregory was an 
 object of special dislike, for the reason that he wished 
 to Christianize the Revolution. But he wavered not in 
 the hour of storm. Deep down in the hearts the epis- 
 copal costume of the Christian Deputy was much more re- 
 spected than the revolutionary cap of the apostate Gobel. 
 And he received the confidence of some of the ringlead- 
 ers of the atheistical movement, who trembled in secret 
 at the thought of the God whom they were insulting. 
 
 In the sittings which followed that of the seventh of 
 November, scandalous abjurations succeeded each other 
 without interruption. That of the Bishop of Haute 
 Vienne was distinguished by its abjectness. He strove 
 to pass for a vile hypocrite in order to induce all to 
 believe that he had always been impious. "And I 
 awr," said he, "I was philosopher, though Bishop. If 
 I did not long since reveal my secret, it is because the 
 people were superstitious, and the government inquisi- 
 torial. Thanks to thee, augast radical wing, it is finally 
 permitted to say the whole truth above-board." An- 
 other provincial Bishop, Lalande, declared that hence- 
 forth he would proclaim only the eternal dogmas which 
 
224 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 are traced in the great book of nature and reason 
 Chabot, the married Capuchin, came to make, in his own 
 name and in that of his wife, a very unnecessary re- 
 cantation; for no one doubted his perfect impiety. 
 Abbot Sieyes finally felt himself obliged to break the 
 prudent silence which he had observed for so long a 
 time. He said that he had been a victim of supersti- 
 tion. This, however, had not prevented him from ac- 
 cepting several benefices, and the pension which he still 
 was receiving amounted to ten thousand francs. " No 
 man in the world," added he, "can say he has been 
 deceived by me." This meant that for a long time he 
 had celebrated a mass in which he no longer believed. 
 
 After the abjurations, came the patriotic offerings 
 which had been torn from the treasures of t^e churches. 
 Multitudes flocked to the Convention and to the muni- 
 cipality, bearing precious vases, copes, sacerdotal orna- 
 ments, and all objects of value which had been con- 
 nected with worship. It was deeided to open a public 
 depot for them, and a committee was appointed to re- 
 ceive and classify the spoils of superstition. The bear- 
 ers of these spoils generally took advantage of the 
 occasion to make a speech. " Dionysius of Syracuse," 
 said the orator from Sens, "took from Jupiter his 
 mantle of gold, under pretext that it was too cold for 
 winter and too warm for summer; we also take from 
 our saints and their ministers the splendid vestments 
 which, doubtless, are to tfcem a matter of embarrass- 
 ment." An orator from another locality brought, in 
 guise of a patriotic gift, among other things, the re- 
 • puted head of St. Denis, and felt constrained to say 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 225 
 
 that, for his part, he had never been tempted to 
 ki>s the fetid relic. He continued, in terras equally- 
 elegant, "This skull and these sacred tatters which 
 accompany it are now to cease to be the ridiculous 
 objects of the veneration of the people. The gold 
 and silver which envelop them are to contribute to 
 establish the empire of reason and liberty." It was 
 a great harvest for JPere Ditehene, the infamous jour- 
 nal of Hebert ; its obscene slang was heard in open 
 Convention. 
 
 The Protestants of Paris saw fit to follow the impulse 
 of the moment. Two of their number, representing the 
 others, bore to the municipal authorities the vessels of 
 silver which had served for the administration of bap- 
 tism and the Lord's supper. The orator of the occasion 
 said: "All ranks united drank out of these cups of 
 equality and fraternity ; my ministry has always had 
 for its object to propagate such principles. Shame on 
 all the clap-trap of falsehood and puerility which igno- 
 rance and cunning have clothed with the pompous name 
 of theology." The President replied, saying that if any 
 religion could be preserved it would surely be that one 
 which had best guarded the principles of equality ; but 
 that as reason was now prevailing men would henceforth 
 know no other worship than that of liberty and equality. 
 After the Protestants, the Jews, unwilling to remain in 
 the background, brought their offerings also. It was an 
 emulation in wickedness that, for the moment, pervaded 
 all classes. 
 
 The apostasies constituted the first act in the 
 comedy gotten up by the municipality of Paris. It 
 
 20 
 
226 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 was now necessary to pass to the second. It was not 
 enough to have beaten down the ancient idols; it was 
 found needful to inaugurate with parade a new worship, 
 that of Reason and Nature. In other words, it was ne- 
 cessary to amuse and entertain the people in. order to 
 prevent them from returning, like a dog, to their vomit. 
 Ex-Bishop Lindet had proposed, the very day of the 
 abjurations, the replacement of the religious by civic 
 festivals. To the poet Chenier was confided the task of 
 filling the vacuum left by the fall of the ancient ritual, 
 but it was soon perceived that something more was 
 required than rhetorical flowers and academical strophes. 
 One of the wards of Paris decided that on every tenth 
 day, the festival which took the place of the old Sunday, 
 there should be a patriotic homily on morality and the 
 Constitution ; but this was a recreation very insufficient 
 for a people who were fond of spectacles. The muni- 
 cipality determined to get up a great theatrical parade 
 which would speak to the eye and seduce the imagina- 
 tion. The opera was put in requisition. It furnished 
 for the occasion a vestal, to represent the goddess of 
 Reason, and give a little animation to this religion of 
 nonentity. It was in £he cathedral of Notre Dame that 
 the municipality erected the stage for enacting this con- 
 temptible profanation. The Temple of Philosophy was 
 constructed in the choir. It was ornamented with the 
 effigies of the sages, and reposed on the summit of a 
 miniature mountain. The Torch of Truth blazed on the 
 corner of a rock. Young ladies in white, and crowned 
 with oak leaves, surrounded the verdure-draped seat of 
 the goddess of Reason, and chanted in her honor a 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 227 
 
 frigid hymn composed by Chenier for the occasion. 
 It began thus : 
 
 11 Descend, 0 Liberty, daughter of nature, 
 The people have reconquered their power immortal ; 
 Upon the pompous ruins of ancient imposture, 
 Tfeeir hands erect thy altar." 
 
 A poor lyric for the inauguration of a new religion ! 
 " To-day," said Momoro in a journal, "we may say that 
 the day of rest has slain the Sabbath. It has just re- 
 ceived the death-stroke in the ci-devant metropolitan 
 church, at present the Temple of Reason." The members 
 of the Convention, not having been able to be present at 
 Xotre Dame, were honored in the evening with a visit 
 by the goddess. The trivial ceremonies of the morning 
 were repeated. The President gave to the goddess the 
 fraternal embrace. Thereupon the whole company shed 
 tears, and sang,- and acted odiously and ridiculously. 
 There remained of that day only the remembrance of a 
 stupid parody, which of itself was no small vengeance 
 for that holy religion which had been trampled under 
 foot. It was in vain that at Paris and in the provinces 
 it was attempted to reanimate the fervor by replacing 
 the actresses by prostitutes. Ennui and disgust struck 
 a fatal blow at the new worship from the very start. 
 It was attempted to enliven it by debauchery. The 
 church of St. Eustache was transformed into a vast hall 
 of revelry. Apostate priests were seen dancing with 
 harlots around bright fires fed by holy books and 
 rituals, copes and relics. And this delirium was propa- 
 gated like a sort of death-dance throughout the nation. 
 At Lyons an ass, clothed in sacerdotal robes, was led 
 
228 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 in a procession through the streets. On the twenty- 
 second of November the same masquerades which a 
 few da^s before had disgraced the Convention, were 
 re-enacted in its midst. A procession of persons, 
 dressed in pontifical robes, was preceded by a num- 
 ber of sappers and cannoneers. This was followed by 
 an immense crowd, marching in two ranks, and cov- 
 ered with mock clerical regalia, copes, and chasubles 
 of gilded velvet. Upon hurdles were borne a num- 
 ber of ciboria and costly relic-caskets. Martial in- 
 struments executed national airs. A banner, waved 
 to the melodious sounds of a popular song, pictured 
 forth the vanishment of fanaticism, while the vigor- 
 ous execution of the revolutionary dance announced 
 the triumph of the new worship. At the sight of this 
 edifying spectacle the President of the Convention ex- 
 claimed, in joy, that the deputation had in a single hour 
 dashed into annihilation eighteen centuries of error. A 
 young child paid its homage to the Assembly, and was 
 overwhelmed with felicitations for having recited the 
 Declaration of Rights. To it was voted the first repub- 
 lican catechism which should be published. This flow 
 of sensibility for the poor little parrot of Atheism was a 
 worthy climax to the ridiculous farce. 
 
 The municipality attempted to profit by the popular 
 enthusiasm for Marat. " Several of the wards of Paris," 
 said the base Hebert at the tribune of the Jacobin 
 club, " are anxious to render homage to the ashes of the 
 friend of the people. The population prostrate them- 
 selves before his statue. Very well, since the people 
 must be amused by processions and religious ceremonies 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 229 
 
 why shall we delay to decree them to the martyr of 
 democracy ? " On the motion of David, who expressed 
 himself in terms of the vilest enthusiasm, the Conven- 
 tion decreed that the remains of Marat should be trans- 
 ported to the Pantheon, a national Church dedicated to 
 the great men of the nation. The veneration for this 
 monster knew no bounds. Hymns were written in his 
 honor. On divers stamps he was placed by the side of 
 Christ. Men swore by the sacred heart of Marat. 
 The new worship was complete : it had prostitutes for 
 goddesses, and a man of violence and blood for a martyr 
 and saint. All it yet lacked was to engage in persecu- 
 tion ; and it failed not in this worthy business. 
 
 There had for a long while been no limit to the viola- 
 tions of the religious liberties of the non-conforming 
 Catholics. It had now come to the point that religion 
 in itself, after having been most cruelly outraged, was 
 to fall under the wrath of the laws. It was to be spared 
 under none of its forms. The municipality was em- 
 boldened in its persecutions by the favor with which 
 the Convention had received the accounts of Fouche's 
 atrocities in and about Lyons. This future minister of 
 royalty wrote as follows to his colleagues : " The taste 
 for republican virtues and austere forms has penetrated 
 all classes, now that they are rid of the corrupting in- 
 fluence of the priests. Some of these impostors are in- 
 clined ta continue playing their religious comedies, but 
 the sans-culottes watch them, overturn all their stages^ 
 and plant on their ruins the tree of liberty. Long live 
 the republic!" Fouche* had caused the cross to be 
 * See Appendix, note 33. 
 
230 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 demolished in the grave-yards, and the statue of Sleep to 
 be substituted in its place — a consoling image for men 
 like him, who felt the need of believing that after death 
 there would be neither resurrection, nor punishment for 
 crime. The municipality judged that what had not 
 been disapproved of in the provinces would be found 
 good in Paris. It decreed like measures for the grave- 
 yards of the capital. It ordered an officer, who should 
 wear the republican cap, to be put in charge of all 
 funeral processions. A standard was to be borne before 
 the hearse, upon which were inscribed the following 
 words : " The just man never dies ; he lives in the 
 memory of his fellow-citizens." One of the wards of 
 Paris complained that the devout and fanatical still 
 persisted in visiting the fonts of consecrated water, and 
 demanded of the Common Council that the scandal be 
 stopped, and that the imbeciles be deprived of all hope 
 of a revival of fanaticism. The municipality decreed 
 that armed force should be used to put a stop to the 
 practice. But this was not enough. A general decree 
 was now wanted which should entirely abolish the lib- 
 erty of worship, and erect the service of Reason into an 
 oppressive religion of State. To strike the religious 
 sentiment of the Catholics with the most defiant out- 
 rage, the municipality had sent to the mint the precious 
 mantle of St. Genevieve, the cherished patron saint of 
 Paris, and had ordered the destruction of all the images 
 of saints which ornamented the churches. The two 
 grand portals of Notre Dame were saved from mutila- 
 tion only because Dupuis was pleased to see in their 
 work of sculpture a representation of the planetary 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 231 
 
 system, by which he explained the origin of all relig- 
 ion. It -was decreed to demolish the towers, for the 
 reason that their prominence above the other buildings 
 was a violation of the principles of equality. The mo- 
 tion of a "virtuous citizen," who desired to see all the 
 priests incarcerated as suspected persons, was received 
 with favor in the same sitting. One of the wards peti- 
 tioned that the Church of St. Anthony be dedicated to 
 Reason, and that an altar be erected in it on which there 
 should burn a perpetual fire. Thus the practices of 
 Asiatic paganism threatened to reappear, at the very 
 moment when the Atheists supposed they were putting 
 down all superstition for ever. The municipality prof- 
 ited by this occasion to decree that no material symbol 
 whatever should be erected in any temple. 
 
 In the sitting of the 26th of November, 1793, the 
 same council dared to strike with interdiction e'very 
 other worship than that of Reason. Chaumette, in some 
 prefatory remarks, denounced the priests and harlots as 
 equally hostile to the interests of the republic. He 
 painted in lively colors the dangerousness of the clergy. 
 "They are capable," said he, "of all crimes, and avail 
 themselves of poison ; they will work miracles if you 
 do not watch them. Consequently, I demand that the 
 Council declare that to its knowledge the people of 
 Paris are ripe for the religion of Reason, and that if 
 there takes place in the city any movement in favor of 
 fanaticism, all the priests shall be imprisoned, wring 
 that it has been declared that no other worship is 
 recognized than that of Reason." The decree whirl, 
 followed this elegant discourse was as follows: "First, 
 
232 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 all the churches and temples of all the religions and wor- 
 ships which have heretofore existed in Paris shall imme- 
 diately be closed ; second, all the priests or ministers of 
 all religions whatever shall be held personally responsi- 
 ble for all the troubles that may arise on account of 
 religious opinions ; third, whoever shall demand the 
 opening, whether of a church or of a temple, shall be 
 arrested as a suspected person ; fourth, the Revolution- 
 ary Committees shall be invited to keep special watch 
 over all the priests ; and fifth, the Convention shall be 
 petitioned to pass a law excluding priests from every 
 manner of public employment, as well as from all em- 
 ployment in manufactories of arms." A member of 
 the Council moved to amend by excluding the priests 
 from every employment whatever, which would have 
 been equivalent to starving them to death ; but this 
 was rejected. And surely the law needed nothing to 
 complete its monstrous character. Such was this Chau- 
 mette, a man whom the great and popular historian 
 Michelet dares to present to us as one of the founders of 
 the religion of the future, and of true religious liberty. 
 The fact that he sprang " from the holy mud of Paris " 
 is not enough to constitute him a great servant of lib- 
 erty. This decree remains for ever for him an indelible 
 stain. It is true, he was incontestably a model of im- 
 piety ; but this glory will hardly justify his canoniza- 
 tion. He was only a miserable copyist of Diderot and 
 other worse men. By this famous decree the munici- 
 pality had, to use a fashionable figure of the day, ar- 
 rived at the summit of its capitol. But the Tarpeian 
 rock was not far distant. Robespierre had sworn its 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 233 
 
 ruin, and he felt himself supported not only by the 
 Jacobins, his subservient tools, but also by the Conven- 
 - tion, which began to become jealous of this popular 
 municipal power which affected to play the dictator. 
 We have explained for what reasons he was the sworn 
 enemy of Chaumette and Hebert. Every thing in 
 them repelled him : their growing popularity wounded 
 his vanity ; their Atheism conflicted with his favorite 
 Deism, and, with his correct and pedantic conduct, he 
 could not but be affected with contempt for their shame- 
 less orgies of vice. 
 
 The struggle broke out at the Jacobin Club Novem- 
 ber 21, 1793. Hebert and Momoro, disquieted at the 
 silent opposition of Robespierre, sought to turn the 
 stroke which menaced them upon the heads of the 
 priests and of the Princess Elizabeth. But Robespierre 
 declared that the dangers of the republic at this hour 
 came neither from the priests nor the impure remnants of 
 the race of the tyrant. He manifested, in fact, the great- 
 est contempt for the pious princess, and dared to style her 
 the despicable sister of Capet. This expression is an in- 
 delible stigma on the name of the cowardly tribune, and 
 wrings a cry of indignation even from his warmest 
 apologists. Passing to the priests, he expressed lively 
 pleasure that so many of them were ready to throw off 
 their old character and take offices in the government, 
 and even to become presidents of popular societies. 
 " Fear not their fanaticism," said he, " but rather their 
 ambition; not the garment they wear, but the new skin 
 they have assumed. Fanaticism is a ferocious and ca- 
 pricious animal ; it flees before reason. But pursue it 
 
 30 
 
234 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 with boisterous cries, and it turns back upon you." 
 Robespierre did not dare to«blame the popular move- 
 ment which had led to the abandonment of the old 
 worship and the spoliation of the churches, but he 
 attacked those who took advantage of it to gain per- 
 sonal importance. "By what right," asked he, "do 
 men, thus far unknown to the Revolution, seek in the 
 midst of these changes the means of usurping a false 
 popularity, and of exciting patriots to false measures 
 which create discord and trouble ? By what right do 
 they degrade the solemn homage rendered to truth into 
 ridiculous farces ? Why allow them to abase the dig- 
 nity of the people, and attach the trappings of folly to 
 the scepter of philosophy ? " Hebert might well trem- 
 ble at words which so distinctly designated himself. 
 He might well see the edge of the guillotine hanging 
 above him when the terrible orator brought against his 
 party the dangerous charge of dishonoring the Revolu- 
 tion in the eyes of foreign powers. The political drift 
 of the speech appeared more especially when Robes- 
 pierre insisted on the maintenance of the liberty of 
 worship. He declared that the Convention intended to 
 defend this right both against its opponents and against 
 its own abuses. Moreover, the priests would so much 
 the longer continue to say the mass the more they were 
 hindered. "He who wishes to hinder them," said he, 
 " is more fanatical than they who say the mass." If the 
 Revolution had to fight fanaticism it had equally to 
 strive against Atheism, which takes from virtue its hope, 
 from vice its punishment, and from liberty its glorious 
 sanction. If God did not already exist, it would be 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 235 
 
 necessary to invent him. What, therefore, was to be 
 feared above all, was the. counter-fanaticism which de- 
 graded France in the eyes of her enemies, and was their 
 surest coadjutor. 
 
 The municipality of Paris could not have asked a 
 more explicit declaration of war. Robespierre had 
 taken position. He closed his speech by demanding a 
 purification of the Jacobin club. Each member was to 
 be examined, and retained or rejected by a vote. No 
 mistake needed to be made ; lives were at stake in that 
 tumultuous examination where Robespierre held the 
 decisive balance of power. The municipality attempted 
 to pay audacity with defiance. A few days later, it 
 passed the decree of Chaumette suppressing all worship 
 but that of Reason. This provoked from Robespierre a 
 terrible speech in the Jacobin club. He renewed his 
 accusation of intrigue with foreign enemies. He spoke 
 as a master. " We will not suffer," said he, " the stand- 
 ard of persecution to be raised against any religion, nor 
 aristocracy to be confounded with a religious opinion. 
 The Convention will maintain the liberty of worship." 
 But he hastened to prevent this liberty from being un- 
 derstood too seriously by adding, that the Convention 
 would impose silence upon religious controversy. A 
 strange contradiction, of which the absurdity is less fla- 
 grant than its duration in France persistent. Robes- 
 pierre, to use his own expressions, tore without mercy 
 the mask of patriotism from the* hideous figure of the 
 supporters of foreign despotism, who by their ignoble 
 farces had desired to represent a free people as a people 
 of Atheists, and to transform a political revolution into 
 
236 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 a miserable religious quarrel. They had compromised 
 the nation in the eyes of the world by giving the enemy 
 good reason for saying, " See, the French have sworn to 
 maintain universal tolerance and the liberty of worship, 
 and yet they persecute all religions." Robespierre's 
 success was complete and immediate. Hebert repu- 
 diated without shame, that very evening, the atheistical 
 movement which he himself had been the foremost to 
 inaugurate. He dared to speak as follows, in the face 
 of Paris inundated with the numbers of his vile journal, 
 Pere Duchene : " Already it has been said that the Pa- 
 risians are without faith, without religion, and that they 
 have substituted Marat in the place of Jesus. Let us 
 refute these calumnies." 
 
 The same day, in the City Council, Chaumette had 
 declared himself in favor of religious liberty, and ex- 
 hibited as much unction in defending it as he had pre- 
 viously shown in suppressing it. The hall in which he 
 spoke had scarcely yet ceased to echo the sounds of his 
 atheistical harangues. He was consistent with himself 
 in only one thing, his abuse of Christianity, for his 
 main reason for upholding liberty of opinion was, that 
 by abandoning the sect of the Nazarenes to contemptu- 
 ous neglect, they would occasion it to die of itself; 
 whereas if persecuted, it would revive to new life. 
 Chaumette concluded by demanding that the Council 
 should ignore all meddling with the different religions. 
 " Inform us not," said he, " if such a one goes to mass, 
 to the synagogue, or to the sermon ; inform us simply 
 whether he is a republican. Let us not meddje with his 
 whims ; let us govern, let us assure him the exercise of 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 237 
 
 his rights, even that of being superstitious. I ask, 
 therefore, that the Council decree, first, that it will hear 
 no proposition relative to any worship, 'or any religious 
 or metaphysical idea ; and second, that inasmuch as the 
 exercise of worship is free, it has never meant, and never 
 means in the future, to hinder citizens from renting 
 buildings for, and paying the minister of, any worship 
 whatever, provided that the manifestation of this wor- 
 ship does not disturb the public peace." Never before 
 had Hebert in his younger days played in third rate 
 theaters a more contemptible comedy than the one he 
 that day played on the bloody stage of the munici- 
 pality. His utterances excited violent opposition among 
 his astonished associates. The summerset was too sud- 
 den, the conversion too hurried. However, his propo- 
 sition prevailed. It was adopted without opposition, to 
 inform Robespierre that henceforth he would have no 
 trouble in crushing such contemptible foes. 
 
 The recantation of the municipality prepared the way 
 for that of the Convention. In the sitting of Novem- 
 ber 26, Danton had expressed himself forcibly against 
 scenes of abjuration in open Convention, and formally 
 asked that no more anti-religious farces be allowed in 
 the Assembly. He uttered this remarkable sentence : 
 " If we have not honored the priest of error and fanati- 
 cism, we also do not desire to honor the priest of incre- 
 dulity." This was the first word in favor of clemency 
 which had fallen from the lips of Danton. It was in 
 vain that he raised his thundering voice more than 
 usual, and called for an increase of violence against the 
 enemies of the republic ; he had mounted the first step 
 
238 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 of the scaffold. Robespierre did not pardon this first 
 show of rival conservative sentiment at the moment 
 when he himself was aiming at the destruction of the 
 extreme Hebertist radicals. Before attacking Danton, 
 however, he used his aid in the mean time for the de- 
 struction of the Atheism of the municipality. Some 
 days later he inserted these significant words in a mani- 
 festo which he wrote, and which was sent by the Con- 
 vention to the people of Europe : " Your masters tell 
 you that the French people have proscribed all relig- 
 ions ; that they have substituted the worship of mere 
 men for that of the Divinity. They lie. The French 
 people and their representatives respect the liberty of 
 all religions, and proscribe none. They abhor intoler- 
 ance and persecution under whatever pretext." Bar- 
 rere, Robespierre, and Cambon now united, and finally 
 succeeded in inducing the Convention to pass a decree 
 which to some extent protected the general liberty of 
 worship. It amounted to little more than a return to 
 the state of things which existed before the orgies of 
 Atheism had been inaugurated by Hebert and Chau- 
 mette. Though the proscription of religion was to 
 some extent checked, still the liberty allowed was 
 merely religious liberty as understood in 1793. 
 
 This sort of liberty was like the ancient gods of 
 Mexico, it was bloodthirsty. After swallowing up the 
 Girondists it called for the vile Atheistical clique of 
 Hebert, and then the group of Dantonists. Only a 
 word of indulgence, or perhaps a mere sigh of weariness 
 in bloodshed, was needed to ruin Danton. Robespierre 
 would not pardon him for having been the sublimest 
 
//- ligicm and the Reign of Terror. 239 
 
 revolutionist, the most terrible and striking embodiment 
 of a nation aroused and in wrath. He pardoned still less 
 Camille Desmoulinfi for having been the most sparkling 
 writer of Paris, and for having, though after much per- 
 nicious excess, finally turned his brilliant wit to the 
 service of clemency. His irony and eloquence at this 
 period have not been equaled since Pascal, and the five 
 numbers of the Old Cordelier may be styled the Pro- 
 riiwitd Letters of the Revolution. One may well im- 
 agine the delight they afforded to the oppressed. Yes, 
 if Camille had been less great as a writer he would have 
 been less guilty in the eyes of the cruel and plodding 
 pedant of the Jacobins. At least, he might have been 
 Bayed from the guillotine had he not declined, with a 
 sarcasm, the insulting protection of his enemy. But to 
 have pleaded in favor of pardon so inopportunely, at the 
 very moment when Robespierre was about to develop 
 in the Convention- his famous theory of a republic based 
 on the two principles of virtue and terror, was to have 
 committed an unpardonable crime. The future high 
 prieSt of the Supreme Being was ascending thus by 
 bloody steps to the altar of his god. To arrive there he 
 marched over the dead bodies of his friends, of those at 
 whose table he had sat, and whose marriage contracts 
 lie had signed. Master in the Jacobin Club, and in the 
 Committees, this most pure, this incorruptible saint of 
 demagogism, was always ready with some furtive plan 
 of conspiracy, in the elastic meshes of which he entan- 
 gled all his adversaries, or, more truly, all his rivals. 
 The procedure was infallible in the midst of a trembling 
 Assembly. St. Just, the right arm of Robespierre, 
 
240 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 would mount the tribune and read in his monotonous 
 voice a report, every sentence of which fell heavy and 
 terrible like the strokes of the executioner's ax. The 
 report was, in the Convention, what the guillotine was in 
 the judiciary. In both cases it was extermination at 
 the instant. The machine of death worked as well in 
 the hands of St. Just* and Barrere as in those of 
 Samson. 
 
 The Hebertists were cast into prison March 13, 1794 
 after the attempted insurrection of the Cordeliers. Dan- 
 ton and his friends were incarcerated on the thirtieth 
 St. Just was the accuser in both cases. As to the trial, 
 we need not speak ; it was the most infamous mockery 
 of justice. By the end of April the guillotine had done 
 its work, and Robespierre could breathe freely, foi 
 there was little to check the regime which could crush 
 a Danton. Before whom should the Revolutionary 
 Tribunal hesitate which had cut down him who first 
 called for its establishment? Surely the blow which 
 had fallen on the Dantonists was well merited in view 
 of eternal justice ; but that the instrument of punish- 
 ment was Robespierre, and that his motive was simply 
 that he wished to push crime further — this exasperates 
 the conscience. The blood of Danton will silence for 
 ever the apologists of his rival. It is in vain to try to 
 color the act with policy, and to say that Robespierre 
 thought he was serving the Revolution ; it is none the 
 less certain that on that day he obeyed the basest pas- 
 sion. It is not so much the fanatic as the man of envy 
 that, in him, is supremely detestable. 
 
 * See Appendix, note 34. 
 
Udiijiun and the Btiyn of Terror. 241 
 
 He awaited till after this triumph before giving to 
 France the religion which was dear to his heart. The 
 republican armies had driven the enemy beyond the 
 Rhine, and saved Alsace. The insurrection in La Yen 
 dee had been conquered by Kleber and Marceau at 
 Mans. Toulon had been retaken, thanks to the skill of 
 a young officer, then a very ardent Jacobin — Xapoleon. 
 On the frontiers France was at ease, but in the interior 
 she was bowed under the yoke of* terror. This terror, 
 this prostration of the nation, was for Robespierre a 
 mark of the goodness of Providence. He had no longer 
 to fear the rhetorical battle-ax of Danton, or the keen, 
 poisoned arrows of Desmoulins. He could now expa- 
 tiate in the Convention as in the Jacobin Club, and play 
 the high priest without being laughed at. Fouquier 
 Tinville,* the remorseless public accuser, guaranteed 
 him against ridicule. On the sixth of April, 1794, Cou- 
 thon, who was a sort of John the Baptist to the new 
 messiah of the Terrorists, announced that the Commit- 
 tee of Public Safety had decreed a festival in honor of 
 the Eternal On the seventh of May, Robespierre read 
 his memorable report on this subject. It is his master- 
 piece. His whole soul is there exhibited with all his 
 parade of virtue and morality, and his hateful passions. 
 He pours insult upon the memories of his fallen rivals, 
 the Girondists and Dantons. He exhibits here his en- 
 thusiasm for Rousseau, his antipathy for the aristocratic 
 Atheists of the Encyclopedia, and gives us a good ex- 
 ample of his oratorical style, rich in personifications, 
 generally clumsy, but sometimes rising to real elo- 
 
 * See Appendix, note 35. 
 
 31 | I 
 
242 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 quence. Every line is imbued with that sentimental 
 demagogism which always walks in company with sus- 
 picion and proscription. But what mostly concerns us 
 in this discourse is, the pretension of the dictator to 
 establish by legislation a new religion of State, an ab- 
 stract religion, consisting of few but sharply defined 
 dogmas, and which is to be officially professed by the 
 country. Robespierre establishes in words which com- 
 pel our admiration, the connection which has always 
 existed between Atheism and the death of liberty. 
 "Who," exclaimed he, "has given you the mission to 
 teach to the people that the Divinity does not exist ? 
 "What advantage in teaching man that a blind fate pre- 
 sides over events, and strikes alike virtue and vice ? 
 Does such an idea inspire him with purer and nobler 
 sentiments, -with more of patriotism and bravery against 
 the foe, than the belief in the immortality of the soul ? 
 The thought of the Supreme Being and of immortality 
 is a perpetual motive to just living ; it is therefore social 
 and republican. What have the conspirators put in the 
 place of that which they destroyed ? Nothing but 
 chaos, void, and violence. They despised and depraved 
 the people." Robespierre concluded that the Conven- 
 tion ought to decree the worship of the Supreme Being, 
 and inaugurate it by a grand public festival. This was 
 simply to revive the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, 
 and adapt it to his chilly system of Deism. It was the 
 consecration of the theory of Rousseau as found in the 
 Contrat Social. It was a new phase of the old Gallican 
 theory of the unity of Church and State. In another 
 part of his speech Robespierre develops the theory of 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 243 
 
 the utility of religion to the State. " In the eyes of the 
 legislator," said he, "whatever is useful and good in 
 practice is the truth. The greatest benefit to society 
 would be to create in man a lively instinct on moral 
 subjects, which should induce him, unaided by the slow 
 process of reasoning, to do the good and eschew the 
 evil. Now that which creates this instinct, and thus 
 comes to the aid of human authority, is the religious 
 sentiment, which gives to the precepts of virtue the sanc- 
 tion of a Being higher than man." From this it ap- 
 pears that Robespierre desired the State to recognize 
 the idea of God, not because it is true, but because it is 
 an effective aid in governing a people. In this the 
 ardent demagogue fell back into the ancient tradition. 
 He recognized the Supreme Being, as Napoleon soon 
 after recognized the Papacy, for the good of the State, 
 and the greater safety of the government. His dis- 
 course closed with an encomium of the liberty of wor- 
 ship, very mucli out of place at a time when he was 
 calling for a national religion, and in a speech where he 
 was prodigal of insults to fanaticism, that is to say, 
 Christianity. Had the new worship only succeeded in 
 establishing itself fully, it would soon have passed from 
 sarcasms to open persecution, and thus put into full 
 ] »ract ice the whole system of the Contrat Social. Al- 
 ready some imprudent ones had spoken of a law of 
 sacrilege, to be enacted against all who should speak 
 evil, or profane the name, of the Supreme Being. A 
 friend of Robespierre had even dared to call for a 
 decree of banishment against all who would not believe 
 in God. The Convention ordered translations of the 
 
244 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 speech of Robespierre to be sent to all Europe, and, of 
 course, decreed the festival of the Supreme Being. The 
 municipality followed the example, and testified its zeal 
 by ordering the name of God to be inscribed on all tem- 
 ples which had previously been dedicated to Reason. 
 The festival took place on the 8th of June, 1794. 
 
 ~No pains had been spared to render it grand and 
 sublime, and yet it was doomed to fall into ridiculous 
 puerilities. Robespierre presided in the Convention on 
 the occasion, and was dressed in a beautiful suit of blue. 
 His head was covered with plumes, and in his hand he 
 held, as did also all the Deputies, a bunch of flowers, 
 fruit, and ears of grain. The morning was beautiful with 
 sunshine. The Convention took seats in an amphithea- 
 ter which had been erected in the court of the Tuileries. 
 Robespierre kept them waiting a while, but finally made 
 his appearance. His usually gloomy countenance wore 
 that morning an expression of benignity and happiness. 
 After a pompous speech, in which he told the republican 
 Frenchmen that the Supreme Being had never before 
 witnessed on earth a spectacle more worthy of his at- 
 tention, he descended from his place, and seizing a 
 torch, set on fire the images of Atheism, Discord, and 
 Selfishness. From amid their smoke and ashes there 
 arose triumphant the statue of Wisdom; but unfortu- 
 nately, and, as some thought, ominously, it was sadly 
 smoked. The high priest returned and delivered a 
 second speech, after which the whole Assembly set out 
 in procession to the field of Mars. The Convention was 
 encircled by a tricolored ribbon borne by children or- 
 namented with violets, by young persons girdled with 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 245 
 
 oak leaves, and by aged people crowned with ivy and 
 olive. After the Delegates, came a rural car laden with 
 implements of agriculture. It was drawn by the in- 
 evitable republican oxen with gilded horns, and fol- 
 lowed by the equally inevitable young ladies in white. 
 Robespierre's pride seemed to be redoubled, and he 
 affected to walk far in advance of his colleagues. Some 
 of them approached and lavished on him the keenest 
 sarcasms ; some laughed at the new pontiff, and said, in 
 allusion to the smoked statue of Wisdom, that his wis- 
 dom had become darkened ; others uttered the word 
 tyrant, and remarked that there were Brutuses still. 
 One said to him these prophetic words : " The Tarpeian 
 rock is close to the capitol." Arrived at the Field of 
 Mars, the Convention took position upon an artificial 
 " mountain." The President expatiated, the young la- 
 dies in white chanted, the aged pronounced their bene- 
 diction, the cannons thundered, and the whole affair 
 closed with the cry of Long live the republic! From 
 all this theatrical pomp, from these ridiculous symbols 
 and chilly rites, France learned one lesson, namely, that 
 it is easier to decree a change of religion than to effect 
 it. Deism can never establish a worship, and all at- 
 tempts in this direction will fall under the ridicule and 
 contempt of the public. The festival was found by many 
 to be dull and long, especially by those who were of- 
 fended at the prominent role played in it by Robes- 
 pierre. It is said that one of his colleagues, less patient 
 than the rest, said to him in terms of profane emphasis, 
 " You begin already to bore us with your Supreme 
 Being. 91 What vexed very many that day was, the 
 
246 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 prospect of having in France a tyrannical dictatorship. 
 That very day Robespierre seemed to be at the summit 
 of power ; and yet he was only and simply preparing 
 his fall. 
 
 It is not our business to trace its history. The abom- 
 inable decree of June the 12th, (24 Prairial,) by which 
 he obtained of the Convention the suppression of all 
 legal forms in the trials of the accused before the Revo- 
 lutionary Tribunal, made to fall upon his own head all 
 the crimes to which it led. It substituted in the place 
 of evidence a mere " inspection " of the accused, and 
 organized a sort of terror within terror. • Though he 
 was, designedly, much absent from the trials, he was 
 none the less guilty, for the machine of death was of his 
 own constructing. That he was overthrown by men no 
 better than himself does not excuse him, and the 27th 
 of July, (9 Thermidor,) the day of his fall, was none the 
 less a deliverance. If .the reaction toward arbitrary 
 power began from that moment, where does the blame 
 rest, if not on the detested demagogue who had dis- 
 gusted France with liberty by changing it into a re- 
 morseless demon, which was only satisfied when feast- 
 ing on massacres ? It is at this period especially that 
 the priests, both non-jurors and jurors, falling under the 
 general title of "the suspected," were thrown into prison, 
 and in large numbers delivered to the guillotine. The 
 Revolutionary Tribunal sent also to the scaffold the 
 crazy inventors of new religions, many of whom now 
 appeared; for whenever a people is deprived of true 
 religion, gross superstitions are sure to spring up among 
 the masses. The ridiculous affair of Catherine Theot, 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 247 
 
 the- aged prophetess, with her two acolytes, is well 
 known. She claimed high intimacy with the Divinity, 
 and celebrated a stupidly mysterious worship, in which 
 a predominant role was given to Robespierre, though 
 doubtless without his knowledge. For the rest, he had 
 his devotees, especially of the female sex, who by their 
 imprudence did him great harm. When once his de- 
 struction had been sworn, advantage was taken of the 
 idolatrous devotion shown to him by the populace. 
 Michelet seems astonished at the reappearance of these 
 crude mystical mummeries after the nation had so long 
 been under the healthful influence of Voltaire, and at 
 the close of a century of light. He forgets that in 
 reality any religion whatever seems to the masses better 
 than the cold light of doubt, which reveals only the 
 abyss of nonentity. Between total incredulity and the 
 coarsest superstition, there is but a single step. A peo- 
 ple deprived of their God will soon invent idols. With 
 the fall of Robespierre closes the period of the civil 
 religion. An attempt at a separation of Church and 
 State immediately follows. 
 
BOOK THIRD. 
 
 THE PERIOD OF THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH 
 AND STATE. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 MEASURES OP THE CONVENTION IN REGARD TO RELIG- 
 ION FROM THE FALL OF ROBESPIERRE TO THE EX- 
 PIRATION OF ITS POWERS. 
 
 The situation of France immediately after the fall of 
 Robespierre was veiy peculiar. The party which had 
 triumphed held in the main the principles of him who 
 had fallen. It had long labored for their triumph, and 
 largely put them into practice. It numbered in its 
 ranks some of the most dreaded chiefs of the Revolu- 
 tion. Its most prominent leader, Tallien,* was not free 
 from the blood of the great massacres. The party 
 merely grew weary of terror a little later than Danton, 
 and a little sooner than St. Just and Robespierre. This 
 was the sole difference between it and those whom it 
 had put down. Its policy was still arbitrary, and it 
 was determined to enforce its own view of liberty. 
 Though desiring to avoid as much as convenient the 
 use of the guillotine, it by no means thought of discard- 
 
 * See Appendix, note 36. 
 32 
 
250 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 ing it altogether for political offenses. However, it was 
 no longer possible to continue the reign of terror. Pub- 
 lic opinion, when once freed from constraint, took its 
 natural course, and would not be satisfied with half 
 measures. It had no difficulty, now that the men of 
 strong conviction had been put down, in managing and 
 shaping the measures of the intriguing democrats, who 
 had a long list of crimes to be pardoned. Such men 
 were Tallien, and many of his friends. Moreover, a 
 large fraction of the Convention itself had now for some 
 time been little more' than an echo of the opinion with- 
 out. Victims of terror rather than its instruments, 
 these timid Deputies had cursed the necessity which 
 had compelled them by cowardly silence, and even by 
 votes, to sanction so many crimes. So great was the 
 pressure exerted on many of the Deputies in the darkest 
 days of terror, that, fearing to take seats with either 
 party, on the right or on the left, they remained crowded 
 together in the middle space at the foot of the tribune. 
 They knew that the Moderates of to-day might be de- 
 clared suspected as traitors on the morrow. These 
 courageous gentlemen belonged, in advance, to the party 
 of moderation. The moderation then in vogue, how- 
 ever, was far from a truly liberal regime. Though un- 
 willing that the prisons should longer remain crowded 
 with the innocent, and that the guillotine should receive 
 its daily feast of human bodies, it still remained implac- 
 able toward all known foes. Public opinion was, there- 
 fore, earnestly on the side of the Convention in the 
 famous insurrection of the 5th of October, 1795, (13 
 Vendcmiaire,) and against the Royalist party. It is 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 251 
 
 true, it had also been with the Convention at the time 
 of the closing of the Jacobin Club. Too often, however, 
 the reaction which set in on the fall of Robespierre was 
 but a continuation of the Reign of Terror. This was 
 well seen in the South, where the vengeance of the so- 
 called Moderates was almost equal to the .crimes of the 
 Terrorists. » 
 
 As to matters of religion, the fall of Robespierre in 
 Thermidor induced no very rapid change. Persecution 
 was no longer so atrocious, but still all the laws of pro- 
 scription remained unrepealed, even when liberty of wor- 
 ship had been theoretically re-established — a liberty 
 which was suspended on the slightest suspicion. Public 
 opinion had not yet returned to Christianity. The re- 
 action of Thermidor was imbued fully with the infidel 
 philosophy of the day. Frivolous and ardent for pleas- 
 ure, it was more anxious to open the theaters and dan- 
 cing halls than the temples of God. It was regarded as 
 an eminently praiseworthy act to inaugurate the famous 
 " ball of the victims," and devote the memory of Robes- 
 pierre to execration. While dancing to the honor of 
 the dead, they thought little of the poor priests who 
 were yet languishing in prison or exile. Madame Tal- 
 lien, displaying at the opera her frail beauty and lightly 
 attired classic form, was a fit symbol of the liberty in 
 vogue. She was a fine personification of that liberalism, 
 vain and without principle, elegant and without serious- 
 ness, which sought its manifestation jn extravagance of 
 costume aud unlimited license. True greatness and 
 heroism existed only in the armies. Had it not been 
 for the incomparable troops and the able young generals 
 
252 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 in command, the Revolution would have rapidly passed 
 from blood and terror to a condition of moral corrup- 
 tion still more infamous. War purified and saved it, 
 and in turn, itself overthrew it. It is precisely at this 
 period, so gloomy in the interior, and seemingly unfa- 
 vorable to a return to religious thought, that the Chris- 
 tian worship, under its various forms, sprang up of itself, 
 and, taking advantage of an imperfect liberty, devel- 
 oped itself in an extraordinary manner. Let us take a 
 survey of the difficulties with which it had to contend, 
 and of the advantages it derived from its freedom from 
 government protection. We will see that moral inde- 
 pendence is so great a boon that it compensates, to some 
 extent, for the greatest infractions of the rights of con- 
 science. 
 
 We have mentioned, as they were enacted, the various 
 decrees of the Convention against religious liberty. 
 They formed a Draconian code, whose severity was not 
 exceeded by that of the Jesuits against the Protestants 
 under the old regime. During the hideous Hebertist 
 movement both non-jurors and jurors fell under a com- 
 mon proscription, and the prisons were filled with priests 
 of both Churches. The Civil Constitution of the Clergy 
 existed only in the letter of the Constitution, and wor- 
 ship was rendered as impracticable for the jurors as for 
 the non-jurors. Apostasy and persecution had thinned 
 the ranks of the clergy ; no salaries were paid, and 
 many priests were on the point of starvation, inasmuch 
 as they had been excluded from all public functions. 
 The law of October 3d, 1*793, which condemned to 
 death within twenty-four hours, on the evidence of two 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 253 
 
 witnesses, every priest in any way connected with riots, 
 or with the emigrants, was still in force. Every priest 
 accused of "incivism" was condemned to deportation. 
 Nothing could be more dangerous than the vagueness 
 of such an expression, for in the time of Hebert and 
 Chaumette it was incivism even to declare one's self a 
 Christian. Priests who would not renounce their faith 
 had for this reason been thrown into dungeons. How- 
 ever, the bloodier part of the law against the priests was 
 virtually abrogated at the fall of Robespierre ; but that 
 clause inflicting deportation on obnoxious priests, and 
 death on those who aided or concealed them, still re- 
 mained. Immediately after this event multitudes of 
 priests passed the frontiers and entered France. This 
 fact was commented on in the Convention, and an effort 
 made to revive against them the most cruel measures of 
 terror, but with imperfect success. 
 
 While the regime of the prisons grew milder in 
 Puds, the unfortunate priests who were waiting de- 
 portation in the roadstead of Aix were subjected to the 
 greatest cruelties. Their intolerable sufferings were 
 protracted more than a year after the fall of the great 
 Terrorist. In February, 1794, the convoy of which 
 they formed a part, was directed toward Rochefort. 
 Their long journey was a continued torture. They 
 were incessantly hissed and maltreated by a riotous 
 populace. They were frequently insulted by infamous 
 parodies of sacred things. At Limoges a procession 
 was caused to pass before them consisting of donkeys 
 arrayed in pontifical robes, at the head of which 
 marched a huge swine wearing the triple crown. They 
 
254 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 slept at night in prisons or other inadequate quarters, 
 with very little bedding. 
 
 At Rochefort the priests were thrown pell-mell among 
 the galley slaves, and shared their infamy, though not 
 their food, for they received scarcely the meanest neces- 
 saries of life. Before going aboard the boats they were 
 robbed of almost every thing they possessed, especially 
 of whatever belonged to the practice of religion. They 
 succeeded in saving only a single Testament and a 
 . Prayer Book, which they preserved carefully, and passed 
 secretly from hand to hand. The sailors, having discov- 
 ered an ivory image of Christ, decapitated it. These 
 men were chosen from among the violent spirits of the 
 Revolution. They insulted the priests at every meal 
 by chanting a political song in mockery of the blessing. 
 But the severest trial for these poor priests was the 
 strict interdiction of all acts of devotion. They were 
 forbidden to kneel down, and if they were seen to move 
 their lips in prayer, they were loaded with irons. The 
 officers inflicted on them hard task-service, which was 
 all the more difficult for the reason that they had lost 
 all physical vigor, and, on the impure and scanty food 
 they received, could by no possibility repair it. At 
 night they were confined in narrow and ill-aired dun- 
 geons. The scurvy and fever broke out among them, 
 and the sick were thrown together into a boat which 
 was a hospital only in name. The least resistance was 
 cruelly punished by coarse under-officers. A priest was 
 even shot dead without the form of a trial, and others 
 were cast into irons for having sent a remonstrance to 
 the city. To these physical evils, which were greatly 
 
Religion and the Eeiyn of Tern or. 255 
 
 increased by the terrible winter of 1795, were added an 
 intellectual and moral prostration which led more than 
 one captive to a sort of brutish insanity. Such was the 
 condition of .these men at the time when the so-called 
 Gilded Youth were filling Paris with their noisy license. 
 Had the violent party been heard, new partners of their 
 exile would have been sent out. Happily, their cause 
 found in the Convention more than one generous advo- 
 cate ; but it was only after many efforts that a repara- 
 tive decree was obtained. 
 
 Early in the fall of 1794 a Deputy had demanded a 
 reprieve in favor of the two hundred priests awaiting 
 transportation on the Loire, among whom were several 
 of the Constitutional Clergy. The orator spoke with 
 earnestness against their condemnation, and asked what 
 was the difference between such a measure and the pro- 
 scriptions of Robespierre, or even of Louis XIV. Some 
 time later Gregory took the liberty, on occasion of a 
 petition of an imprisoned priest eighty years of age, to 
 express his indignation at the continued sufferings of 
 the priests. He informed the Convention that out of 
 the one hundred and eighty-seven who had been con- 
 fined at Rochefort only seventy-six had survived their 
 mistreatment. " If one should ask," said he, " in order 
 to grant a man liberty, whether he is a lawyer or a 
 physician, every body would be indignant. Why ask 
 whether he is a priest ? Whatever an individual may 
 be, if he is a bad citizen strike him, if he is a good 
 citizen protect him. So long as we act otherwise we 
 will have only the regime of tyrants." 
 
 Some days subsequently, December 21st, 1794, this 
 
256 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 noble Deputy mounted the tribune, not to plead for 
 a particular petition, but to defend the right oi con- 
 science in all its extent. Gregory possessed not the 
 higher gifts of eloquence ; his speech lacked the brill- 
 iancy and passion which stir an assembly ; but his un- 
 questioned patriotism, and his known loyalty and intre- 
 pidity in the accomplishment of duty, had conciliated 
 for him universal respect. The discourse of that day 
 was one of the noblest acts of his political life. The 
 defects of his gifts were redeemed by the strength of his 
 principles ; and by the nobleness of his convictions and 
 the energy of his indignation, he rose to the height of 
 true eloquence. His speech breathed the spirit of 1789, 
 and, in addition thereto, was imbued with a truly Chris- 
 tian inspiration. Never was the great principle of re- 
 ligious liberty defended under more moving circum- 
 stances or with more largeness of spirit. " You have 
 founded the republic," said he ; " there yet remains a 
 great task to accomplish — to consolidate its existence. 
 To unite the hearts of the citizens, to strengthen the 
 union of all the members of the great family, is a 
 greater work than to gain a battle." The orator 
 showed that the surest way to obtain peace abroad was 
 to establish it at home, and that the surest way to per- 
 petuate the internal dissensions was to continue and 
 perpetuate, by persecution, the distinctions of caste 
 which, under the new regime, ought altogether to dis- 
 appear. And this was done so long as individuals were 
 stricken down for the mere fact of belonging to the 
 classes of nobles or priests — so long as particular shades 
 of religious opinions were opposed by force. " To wish," 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 257 
 
 said he, " to govern thought by authority is a chimerical 
 undertaking, for it is beyond the sphere of human force. 
 It is a tyrannical work, for no one has a right to assign 
 bounds to the thoughts of another." Worship, being 
 but the manifestation of religious thought, ought to be 
 entirely free. No particular worship should be priv- 
 ileged, but all forms should be protected, however 
 absurd in themselves, so long as they do not interfere 
 with the public peace. Gregory showed with great 
 force how much France had suffered from contrary 
 principles under Louis XI V., and how, on the contrary, 
 Holland and America had prospered under the regime 
 of religious liberty. Persecution has never served any 
 other end than to strengthen the opinions assailed. 
 " Its inevitable effect," said he, " is to degrade a peo- 
 ple ; it is the first step toward slavery. A nation with- 
 out the rights of conscience will soon be without liberty. 
 The inexorable voice of history imprints on the brows 
 of all persecutors the brand of infamy." 
 
 The orator had been heard with patience so long as he 
 spoke of abstract principles ; but this ceased as soon as 
 he touched on the actual condition of the nation, and 
 portrayed the sad effects of revolutionary persecution. 
 " What," asked he, " is the actual state of things in this 
 regard ? Liberty of worship exists in Turkey, it exists 
 not in France. Is this a fruit of that philosophy of 
 tolerance of which the greatest representative was car- 
 ried in triumph to the Pantheon ? Is this the liberty 
 promised to all nations, and which our armies bear to the 
 enslaved of Europe ? Let us beware. Revolutionary 
 
 persecution will produce no better effects, than that 
 
 33 
 
258 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 which banished the Huguenots ; it will expatriate citi- 
 zens, and impoverish the land." Gregory warded off 
 the charge of superstition and fanaticism by remarking 
 that these terms are merely relative in their popular use, 
 and that every one is always the fanatic of some one 
 else ; for example, in the time of Clootz one was a fa- 
 natic even for believing in God. He provoked a real 
 storm of wrath among the extremists of the left when 
 he defended the priests who had remained faithful to 
 their religion, and exposed the cowardice of the apos- 
 tates. " What is termed superstition," said he, " is 
 surely as respectable as the declamations which, a year 
 ago, were multiplied at our bar, and of which the sub- 
 stance was about this : I declare to you that for long 
 years I have been an impostor and trifler ; for this rea- 
 son I demand that you accord me your esteem, and give 
 me a position." The war-m applause of the spectators 
 sustained the orator against the wrath of the extremists. 
 He referred, with right, to his own example. If some 
 had, through their eloquence, raised armies to quell the 
 insurrection of La Vendee, he felt assured that, by his 
 obscure correspondence and influence as priest, he had 
 prevented insurrections of a like magnitude. When the 
 Convention grew boisterous, and desired to quench the 
 orator's voice, he cried out, " Has it come to pass that 
 Charles IX. and Louis XIV. are about to rise from their 
 graves ? Tell us whether, as the Protestants formerly, 
 we are, now, to be forced to flee our country and beg an 
 asylum and liberty on foreign shores ? " Drowning the 
 clamors with his earnest voice, he continued : " What 
 should we do so long as it is impossible to unite all 
 
RtLiyio"* and the Reign of Terror. 259 
 
 hearts in one Cb'^oh ? We must guarantee a full and 
 unlimited liberty Tor all sects." Gregory terminated his 
 discourse by rendering homage to Christianity, showing 
 its salutary tendency to develop a solid patriotism and 
 a spirit of obedience to magistrates and law. During 
 the three quarters of an hour while he was pronouncing 
 his speech the radical members were in a perfect parox- 
 ysm of rage ; they seemed like criminals on the wheel of 
 torture. The speech was not successful in immediately 
 winning the Convention, but in pamphlet form it acted 
 powerfully on the nation, and finally imposed its con- 
 clusions on the government. 
 
 We have seen that under the Constituent Assembly 
 the great obstacle to the establishment of liberty of 
 worship was, the salaried State Church which it itself 
 had created. At the opening of the Legislative Assem- 
 bly, and amid the difficulties arising from this Church 
 system, and from the oath required of the priests, the 
 true solution of the trouble was, at times, caught sight of 
 both within and without the Assembly. We have cited 
 the admirable letter of the Poet Chenier. But the 
 country was too excited to hear the voice of wisdom 
 which counseled the entire separation of Church and 
 State. The same idea reappeared even in the Conven- 
 tion. It was pleaded for at the tribune by Cambon ; but 
 Robespierre, with the true instinct of revolutionary des- 
 potism, rejected it. Who knows what he might have 
 obtained of the Convention, if he had not fallen in Ther- 
 midor ? Perhaps he would have realized the dream of 
 Rousseau, and given to his pale Deism the State treas- 
 ury for support, and the guillotine 'for sanction. After 
 
260 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 his fall, it sufficed that he had defended the salarying of 
 the worship to induce the Convention to reject it. In 
 fact, this was done on the 20th of September, 1794, on a 
 simple motion of Cambon. It would seem that such a 
 measure should have excited considerable debate, inas- 
 much as it was very far-reaching in its effects, and 
 swept away the whole system of the Gontrat Social, 
 which had caused so much of misfortune to the Revolu- 
 tion. But it did not ; it was passed as a sort of matter 
 of course. And yet this motion caused to triumph, for 
 the first time in France, the true notion of the State. It 
 is impossible to exaggerate its importance. The reason 
 why it excited so little attention in the Convention was 
 simply that tne question had already been resolved by 
 events rather than by principles. The Convention saw 
 that the State-Church system had been worse than a 
 failure ; that the whole subject was troublesome and 
 expensive, and, as it were, in despair or disgust, or per- 
 haps in mere indifference, it voted the following decree : 
 " The French Republic pays no longer either the ex- 
 penses or the salaries of any worship whatever." The 
 most complete religious liberty was the legitimate con- 
 sequence of such a measure. The Convention, however, 
 was still too much irritated against the refractory priests 
 to put a stop to the persecutions. 
 
 The discourse of Gregory, despite its seeming check, 
 prepared the way for a return to more healthful princi- 
 ples, though it did not prevent the Convention from 
 issuing a severe decree in January, 1*795, against the 
 non-juring priests who had returned into France. The 
 cause so earnestly pleaded by the Bishop of Blois found, 
 
Belvjion and the lleign of Terror. 2G1 
 
 a few months later, a more fortunate advocate in 
 the person of Boissy d'Anglas, who succeeded all the 
 better in the Convention for speaking, not in the 
 character of a Christian, but in that of a skeptical phi- 
 losopher. He wished to free the Revolution from the 
 inconsistencies in which it had become involved by the 
 entanglement of Church and State. He presented his 
 famous motion on the 21st of February, 1795. His 
 speech was received with as much applause as that of 
 Gregory had excited indignation, though both pleaded 
 for the same principles. Boissy d'Anglas knew how to 
 pave his way by indulging in contempt for the whole 
 system of Christianity. He gave clearly to understand 
 that he was far from pleading for liberty of conscience 
 in the interest of religion. This he treated as an idle 
 chimera, destined soon to disappear in the light of phi- 
 losophy. The new system of general education would 
 dispel from the minds of the people these vain remnants 
 of a time of intellectual slavery. " Soon," said he, " the 
 religion of Socrates, of Marcus Aurelius, and of Cicero 
 will be the religion of the world." The surest method, 
 as he thought, to retard this happy change would be to 
 use, against religion, any other arms than those of rea- 
 son. It was in vain for the orator to express his un- 
 bounded contempt of Christianity ; the action he was 
 taking was an involuntary acknowledgment of the in- 
 vincible power of the system. After the government 
 had in vain tried to crush it by -violence it was found 
 necessary -to make terms with it, and grant it peace. 
 After Boissy d'Anglas had thus paid l>is homage to 
 revolutionary passion, ho presented with crreat force the 
 
262 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 advantages of religious liberty, and of the separation of 
 Church and State. He referred in direct terms to the 
 fatal error of the Constituent Assembly on this subject. 
 This body should have delivered the political realm 
 from the influence of religion, allowed each citizen to 
 worship as he pleased, and salaried no worship what- 
 ever ; but it had wished to create instead of destroy, to 
 organize instead of abolish. It had created for religion 
 a pompous and expensive establishment, which itself 
 had been destroyed by fanaticism. He painted in lively 
 colors the recent religious persecution, so much the 
 more shameful as it had been committed in regenerated 
 France. He accused it of having crowded the prisons 
 with women, children, and thousands of useful laborers. 
 In these circumstances it was necessary to hold fast 
 the principle, that the Church should be banished from 
 the administration, and never allowed to return. The 
 sole law for the Church was the common law. Let re- 
 ligious associations be treated as other associations, 
 without any exception in their favor or to their detri- 
 ment. Religious practices, however erroneous, should 
 not be treated as crimes. The human heart is a sacred 
 asylum, into which the eye of the government should 
 not seek to penetrate. Such were the political princi- 
 ples advocated by this philosopher. The great princi- 
 ple of liberty of conscience could not have been more 
 effectually defended. Despite some calls for an ad- 
 journment, the main principles for which he pleaded were, 
 with some unfortunate modifications, made into law 
 during that very sitting. The law, as passed, provided 
 as follows : The exercise of no worship would be dis- 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 263 
 
 turbed ; no worship would be salaried, no buildings fur- 
 nished by the government for anv worship ; the eccle- 
 siastical costume would not be tolerated; the ceremonies 
 of worship would not be permitted except in the locality 
 chosen for that purpose: no external sign designating 
 the place of worship would be allowed^ no perpetual 
 endowment of Churches would be suffered; and every 
 assemblage of citizens for worship would be subject to the 
 surveillance of the regular civil authorities. Such is the 
 substance of the decree which, despite its incomplete- 
 ness^ and the opposition it encountered in the local au- 
 thorities, allowed religion to spring up anew on the 
 tormented soil of France. Under its favor all branches 
 of the Church were allowed every-where to celebrate 
 their worship. In another place we will describe this 
 fine religious movement. 
 
 This law of February. 1795, (3 Ventose,) was far in 
 advance of the real sentiments of the Convention. 
 Revolutionary passion, ever ready to break out afresh, 
 often sileneed the voice of reason. Hence the manv 
 contradictory laws on matters of religion. Thus while 
 one Deputy obtained a modification of the law of de- 
 portation, another complained bitterly of the open cele- 
 bration of the non-juring worship, and boasted that he 
 hadpidmd up in a single night a large number of the 
 offending priests. He asked that precaution be taken 
 against the influence of these "infamous mountebank. 1 
 Jean-Bon St. Andre attacked the law itsel£ Fanati- 
 cism, he thought, was all the more dangerous as that it 
 now demanded rights and justice. Taliien, though 
 heaping upon the priests gross insult, asked that the 
 
264: Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 Convention give them not too much prominence by 
 continually meddling with their cause. These instances 
 show very well the general disposition of the Conven- 
 tion ; for every measure proposed or taken against the 
 refractory clergy reacted against liberty in general. In 
 a Journal of the day, issued under the influence ol 
 Gregory, we are told that in the departments the public 
 offices were filled with petty infidel tyrants ; that the 
 persecution was only diminished, but not stopped ; and 
 that every day the Catholics were insulted by the public 
 functionaries. They found great difficulty in re-estab- 
 lishing their worship. In several towns the authorities 
 refused them a place for worship, though they eagerly 
 hastened to furnish quarters for theaters and other 
 public amusements. In one province an officer over- 
 turned an altar as soon as it had been erected; in an- 
 other some innocent priests were thrown into prison by 
 a representative of the peof)le. In Correze the officers 
 charged the Catholics who wished to renew their wor- 
 ship, with incivism, and styled their religion an absurd 
 antiquated ceremony. On pretense that it disturbed 
 the public peace they banished all worship to private 
 houses. 
 
 These and many similar details that might be given, 
 show how imperfectly the sentiment of general liberty 
 was as yet awakened. And yet the events which were 
 now taking place in the west of France were sufficient 
 to teach the partisans of the Revolution, that the surest 
 means of pacifying and gaining to the republican cause 
 the whole people, was simply to practice an unlimited 
 religious tolerance. In the region of Cherbourg and 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror-. 2G5 
 
 Brest the authorities had, with the happiest effects, de- 
 cided to allow perfect liberty to all sects whatever. 
 Similar measures had been taken by -General Iloche in 
 La Vendee. " It were to be desired," said he, " that 
 the priests had not been incessantly cried out against ; 
 to deprive the people of them is to perpetuate the war 
 indefinitely. If we do not admit religious freedom we 
 must renounce the hope of peace in these pails. Let us 
 once totally forget the priests, and there will soon be an 
 end both of the priests and of the war. Persecute 
 them as a class and you will have both priests and war 
 for a thousand years to come. If a guilty priest is pun- 
 ished, as a priest, the inhabitants are shocked ; if he is 
 punished as a citizen, as a man, no one says a word." 
 "The people of La Vendee," said Lamennais very 
 justly, " did not revolt against liberty. I love to re- 
 gard La Vendee and *the republic as two sisters 
 who combat, simply because of a misunderstanding. 
 The one represents religious liberty, the other politi- 
 cal liberty. If the Revolution had left to La Vendee 
 her priests and Churches it would have found in her a 
 warm partisan. The spirit of La Vendee is religious 
 republicanism." What was thus true of La Vendee 
 was true of all France. Unfortunately the revolution- 
 ists, in sacrificing at every occasion one of the most 
 sacred of liberties, failed to see that they were rendering 
 liberty itself hateful. 
 
 On the 1st of May, 1795, a proposed decree, very 
 severe against the priests who had returned to France, 
 was introduced into the Assembly. It contained one 
 article which, on being referred to a committee, gave 
 
 3i 
 
266 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 occasion to an important report by Lanjuinais some 
 weeks later. In the short debate. which thereupon en- 
 sued the cause of religious liberty triumphed, and 
 the law of February 21st, (3 Ventose,) received the 
 most happy extension. It provided that the national 
 Churches should be at the service of all the different 
 worships at fixed different hours. The ministers who 
 wished to celebrate worship had only to apply for per- 
 mission, and take an oath of submission to the civil 
 laws. In Sept ember, 1795, further important liberal 
 measures were taken in regard to affairs of Church, so 
 that on the whole religious liberty would have been 
 securely guaranteed had not other measures of a con- 
 trary tendency been unfortunately enacted. 
 
 The most grave of these measures was the law of the 
 Decade Festivals, the atheistical Sunday, which was in 
 fact a sly attempt to undermine Christianity in France 
 It was Hebertism, so far as it could be revived after the 
 fall of Robespierre. It sought its object in an indirect 
 way, and substituted influence for violence. Its authors, 
 however, did not attempt to conceal their design, and 
 the Convention, in confiding the organization of the fes- 
 tivals to the Committee of Public Instruction, showed 
 clearly the importance it attached to them. It was an 
 attempt to shape the public spirit in a different mold. 
 The fixing of the festivals on another day than the 
 Christian Sunday, revealed a spirit of hostility to relig- 
 ion. This is clear from the words of one of the advo- 
 cates of the law. " All prejudices," said he, " tend to 
 destroy liberty, and the most dangerous are those which 
 , are founded on mystical ideas;" that is, religious doc- 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 267 
 
 trines. But how to destroy them was the question. 
 Not by violence, for opinions are not put down by 
 force. The surest method of opposing a dike to the 
 prejudices which were springing up afresh in France 
 was to inaugurate a system of grand and pompous na- 
 tional festivals, a sort of republican worship. A Dele- 
 gate, writing to the Convention from Joinville, whither 
 he had been sent on business, speaks thus against the 
 cause of religion : " We must have a remedy which will 
 produce a radical cure. Such a one exists only in pub- 
 lic instruction. The decade festivals offer so much the 
 better an opportunity, because instruction will then take 
 the form of pleasure. Lose not a moment in organizing 
 them." Some weeks later the following sentiments 
 were uttered in the Legislature : " Let us take care ; 
 even as the superstition which we replace by our civic 
 festivals charmed- the mind and heart by its prestige, so 
 should we impress on our festivals a grand and im- 
 posing character, in order the more effectually to destroy 
 the dangerous illusions of fanaticism." In February, 
 1795, a committee exhorted the Convention thus : "Tyr- 
 anny and superstition have desolated the earth ; you 
 ought to enlighten its ignorance. Upon the ruins of all 
 errors you ought to establish the dominion of the truths 
 of nature, by founding a pure worship, to be celebrated 
 under the open heavens — the sole worship worthy of the 
 Supreme Being and of free man." 
 
 This, as well as all previous attempts to supplant . 
 Christianity, was destined to fall into impotence and 
 ridicule. The sentiment of the Infinite, alone, is capable 
 of founding a worship. Outside of their pleasures and 
 
' 2G8 Religion and the Eeign of Terror. 
 
 interests, men assemble and form unions only under the 
 influence of the Divine. They can never be brought 
 together and moved by empty abstractions. Neither 
 the patriotic hymns nor the lectures on politics and 
 agriculture, were sufficient to conjure the incurable 
 ennui of these festivals ; the people grew weary even of 
 the touching spectacle of Old Age contrasting with Child- 
 hood. The solemn Anniversary of Reproduction tended 
 somewhat to un wrinkle the brows ; but the inevitable 
 homily on the rights of citizens or on the cultivation of 
 potatoes, was a poor substitute for those sacred texts for 
 which the soul is athirst, and in which it finds an echo 
 from its celestial home. The Committee of Public In- 
 struction relied much on the civic repasts ; but it forgot 
 that all the attraction of these depended on the refresh- 
 ments therewith connected, and that the people were 
 wearied to death of the republican tirades. Boissy 
 d'Anglas, it is true, proposed to give a little variety to 
 the pleasures of the day by presenting a symbolical 
 rose to Innocence; but the remedy was very trifling. 
 Of these festivals, which were really established only 
 under the Directory, there was destined to remain only 
 the remembrance of the most laughable of parodies. 
 They had only one serious result ; they gave occasion 
 to infidel fanaticism to interfere with, the free celebra- 
 tion of Christian worship. 
 
 One of the chief works of the last period of the Con- 
 vention was the elaboration of a new constitution. The 
 constitution of 1793 had become the platform of the 
 Ultra-radical or Mountain party, a platform stained with 
 blood and crime, and whose triumph had brought the 
 
17 1 i igion and the Reign of Terror. 269 
 
 Reign of Terror. It was in the name of this constitu- 
 tion that the national representation had twice been 
 violated. It bore the imprint of the hot demagogy 
 from which it sprang. It had, therefore, now become 
 odious to a nation desirous of repose. The new consti- 
 tution was the work of the Moderate party, and was 
 presented in the Convention by Boissy D'Anglas. It 
 was easy to see that three years of contest had over- 
 turned many a revolutionary prejudice. Thus, the di- 
 vision of the Legislature into an upper and a lower 
 house, so disdainfully rejected by the Constituents in 
 17S9, was adopted almost without opposition. - No one 
 protested against the interdiction of great popular asso- 
 ciations, which, during the first period of the Revolution, 
 had formed a sort of permanent demagogic opposition 
 to the regular authorities. There was no desire to re- 
 suscitate the Club of the Jacobins, or the too famous 
 City Council of Paris. The communal assemblies were 
 replaced by administrative boards of three or five 
 members. The legislative power was intrusted to two 
 councils, the Anciens and the Cinq-cents, (the senate 
 and the Jive hundred,) and the executive power to a Di- 
 rectory of five members chcsen by the councils. 
 
 This constitution, of which we give but the general 
 features, was far better than its predecessors, though it 
 was still disfigured by grave imperfections. The two 
 councils were composed of elements too similar to se- 
 cure a real counterpoise, and the executive power was a 
 mere commission of the councils which was destined to 
 struggle continually for an increase of its power. We 
 will soon see how unfortunate for France was the 
 
270 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 regime resulting from this imperfect constitution, and 
 from the lack of moral honesty in the rulers. 
 . As to religious liberty, the new constitution asserted 
 the great principles which had triumphed in the Con- 
 vention after the fall of Robespierre. It contained the 
 words, Every one is free in the exercise of his worship. 
 The words, The republic salaries no worship, conse- 
 crated one of the most precious and most dearly bought 
 of the conquests of the Revolution. 
 
 The adoption of the constitution, which took place 
 August 17th, 1795, changed in no respect the con- 
 dition of the unfortunate non-juring priests. An officer 
 in Haute Loire, who had suspended, to their detriment, 
 the public law, was justified by the Convention. It 
 was against these unhappy men that it directed one of 
 its very last acts. After the riot of October 5th, 
 which had been occasioned by the decision of the Con- 
 vention, that two thirds of its members should have 
 seats in the new councils, it passed, on motion of Tal- 
 lien, a decree which excluded from public functions 
 every ex-noble and every individual who had provoked 
 or sanctioned illiberal measures, and required the sum- 
 mary execution of the laws against the refractory 
 priests. 
 
 Thus closed the labors of this great and terrible As 
 sembly, which had sat from September 21st, 1792, 
 to October the 26th, 1795. It had, we must confess, 
 saved the territory of France ; but for, a long time, it 
 had been compromising the Revolution by rendering it 
 an object of terror to the world. It had consecrated 
 glorious principles, and accomplished admirable works, 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 271 
 
 but it had left the nation weary and demoralized. 
 Despotic in the extreme, it had disgraced its last hours 
 by one of those measures of public safety which so often 
 had Led it to crime, and which had been more pernicious 
 to liberty than all the united forces of the coalition. 
 These decrees of public safety were destined to be fol- 
 lowed by coups detat; for the road for usurpation was 
 already well prepared. Such must be the fate of every 
 Revolution which, by putting God out of sight, and 
 trampling under foot the rights of conscience, deprives 
 itself of all lasting foundation upon which to build. 
 
272 Religion and the Reign of Terror, 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 RELATIONS OF CHURCH AND STATE UNDER THE 
 DIRECTORY. 
 
 The constitution of the year III, despite its imperfec- 
 tions, might have given liberty and peace to the country ; 
 for in the two free legislative councils it had ample 
 means of peacefully correcting itself. But woe to the 
 country which in its impatience destroys this pliable in- 
 strument of reform ! Respect for an assembly, however, 
 is closely connected with respect for law, and the latter 
 depends 'on the moral development of the people. Now 
 the fact is, that from the first outbreak of the Revolu- 
 tion France had never been so deeply demoralized as at 
 this time under the Directory. What had been lacking 
 in 1789 was neither enthusiasm nor generosity; the 
 Weak point lay in too great an absence of those inflexi- 
 ble principles which are derived from a higher sphere 
 than that of noble human impulses. With man there is 
 no absolute stability except in the depths of the con- 
 science, where the moral sentiment is blended with the 
 voice of God. It is well known to what extent God 
 was absent from a Revolution which was born of the 
 eighteenth century. When, therefore, after years of 
 struggle and fatigue, the impulsion of enthusiasm had 
 died away, there remained in the hearts of the nation no 
 firm principle which could serve as a rock to break the 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 273 
 
 force of popular or governmental passions. The country 
 became a prey to insurrections and coups aV'etat, until 
 finally a coup oVetat, better planned than the others 
 gave to these shameful crises the merited solution. A 
 lawless republican hypocrisy characterized this sad 
 epoch. To find complete sincerity anywhere outside of 
 the ranks of the priests who suffered for their faith, it 
 was necessary to descend to the low region of " Grac- 
 cus" Babeuf and his accomplices, where an agrarian 
 demagogue cried aloud with the savage ferocity of a 
 famished wild beast. The Directory contained only 
 two good men, Carnot and Barthelemy, but it soon rid 
 itself of this anomaly. The other three were Barras* 
 Rewbell, and La Reveilliere Lepaux. Barras was the 
 leading spirit, and united in his character the vices of 
 the aristocracy and the insatiable thirsts of demagogy ; 
 Kewbell was the politician, and La Reveilliere Lepaux 
 attempted to play the apostle in the name of his ridicu- 
 lous and intolerant Theophilanthropy. It 'is easy to fore- 
 see what would become of the government in the hands 
 of such men, surrounded as they were by a sycophantic 
 courtier crowd, who saw no better means of flattering 
 them than to improve on their vices. In the interior 
 there was but one policy, the arbitrary. They resorted 
 but little to the guillotine, for France was tired of that 
 but they were as daring in their contempt of law as the 
 Committee of Public Safety in the worst days of terror 
 Abroad, the Directory showed itself to be lacking in 
 good faith and moderation, and exceedingly unskillful in 
 negotiation. It had the happiness of discovering the 
 
 * See Appendix, note 37. 
 35 
 
274 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 greatest captain of modern times ; it could depend on 
 the sword of Bonaparte, however, only until he had ac- 
 quired glory enough, to justify him in despising its 
 orders. Under the command of this incomparable gen- 
 eral the French manifested the wonderful aptitudes of 
 their genius for rapidly and skillfully conducted wars of 
 conquest ; but all of these triumphs did not remedy the 
 abjectness and poverty of their civil and moral life. 
 With few exceptions, no great citizens were produced in 
 these armies which drove Europe before them. Most 
 of the generals who had distinguished themselves in 
 battle showed, when they returned home, a sneering 
 contempt for right, and were ready, like Pichegru and 
 Augereau, to become the instruments of betraying and 
 oppressing the republic. The young Corsican hero, 
 who had already fixed upon himself all eyes, and won 
 all prestige, was beginning to manifest in his dealings 
 with the parties, and in his negotiations with princes, 
 that total absence of conviction, that contempt of right, 
 that deep shrewdness which 'is moderate by calculation, 
 and resorts to violence as soon as that will better serve 
 the purpose — in fact all those qualities of force and 
 cunning which, together, made him so dear and so fatal 
 to France. Has he not given a full portrait of himself 
 in the following confidential words, which he wrote in 
 reference to the coup cVetat of Fructidor, (4th of Sep- 
 tember, 1797,) by which the Directory violated the 
 membership of the Legislative Councils ? " Firmness," 
 said he, " would have sufficed. Let force be used when 
 one cannot get along without it ; but when one has the 
 alternative, justice is preferable." No, military glory, 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 275 
 
 the natural lot of a brilliant and energetic race, a glory 
 .which should be ennobled by a defense of liberty, con- 
 stitutes in and of itself none of the true attributes' of a 
 great nation. There was reason, for awhile, to hope that 
 the moderate and liberal opinion which was represented 
 in the councils, and which manifested itself among the 
 people as often as the ballot-box was respected, would 
 rescue the country. But, unfortunately, too many of 
 the. chiefs in the government lacked honesty of purpose, 
 and were ready to plot with the Directory against the 
 republic. 
 
 It was the question of religion upon which took place 
 the most violent shock between the liberty-loving party 
 (which was composed of the newly elected third of the 
 two Councils, together with the Moderates who had be- 
 longed to the Convention) and the violent party, the 
 latter consisting of the majority both in the Councils 
 and in the Directory. All who did not desire to keep 
 the country in a continual state of revolution were very 
 anxious to avoid troubling the conscience of the people. 
 Worship had been revived throughout the land, and it 
 was easy to see how indestructible is the religious senti- 
 ment. Simple common sense was enough to enable all 
 who were honest to see that the* best policy was to 
 leave religion to itself, and to repeal all persecuting 
 laws. The way to this course was open, since the Con- 
 vention had dissolved the union of Church and State. 
 There was no surer way of rallying to the new govern- 
 ment the religiously-inclined inhabitants of the West 
 and South, and of defeating the intrigues of the emi- 
 grated royalists, who had no better card in their hands 
 
276 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 than republican intolerance. Such was the favorite 
 policy of the moderate minority in the Councils, and 
 multitudes of petitions for the same course of policy 
 were sent by the people to the Council of the Five 
 Hundred. But the majority of the Councils and of the 
 Directory were far from sincerely respecting the liberty 
 of worship. The pure Jacobins, like Barras and Rew- 
 bell, hated religion in itself, and regarded the God of 
 ancient France, as well as the Supreme Being of Robes- 
 pierre, as among the phantoms which had definitively 
 vanished before the sunlight of revelation. They had 
 no patience for doctrines which threw an unfavorable 
 light over the future of the impious. We have already 
 mentioned that La Reveillere Lepaux had his own spe- 
 cial divinity to protect. He was a philosophical invent- 
 or of religion ; that is to say, he belonged to the class 
 of the most intolerant. To make place for a ridiculous 
 worship which he patronized, he was ready to overturn 
 every rival altar. But he had little confidence in the 
 attractive power of that sentimental pastoral system 
 which he wished to substitute for the worship of the 
 God of the Bible ; he relied much more on measures 
 of proscription than on the flower garlands and the 
 bowls of milk — those touching symbols of his new sys- 
 tem of Theophilanthropy. Every thing indicated that 
 there would be a violent struggle between the Moderate 
 party, which honestly desired liberty of worship, and 
 the Directory, which desired violently to deprive France 
 of her ancient religion. 
 
 Scarcely had the two Councils passed, in August, 
 1796, a law against the extreme Jacobins on the one 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 277 
 
 /mud, and the royalists on the other, when an abomina- 
 ble decree against the refractory priests was presented. 
 The extremists seemed to wish to punish these men for 
 a crime which was no longer possible, inasmuch as the 
 Church regime, to which they had formerly refused 
 assent, had months ago been abolished. The simple 
 fact is, they wished to persecute for the mere pleas- 
 ure of the thing. The reporting and discussion of 
 the decree were accompanied by exhibitions of the 
 most hideous and unjustifiable passions. The law 
 itself required that every refractory priest, that is, the 
 majority in the country, should leave France within 
 twenty days on pain of being treated as a returned emi- 
 grant, that is, condemned to death. Such a law was 
 among the most infamous violations of conscience that 
 had yet been attempted. The debate which it excited 
 was very lively. ' The radicals objected to an exception 
 which it made in favor of priests of over sixty years. 
 "These old, gray-headed priests," said one of the orators, 
 " inspire all the more respect, exert a greater influence ; 
 their blessings are more highly prized. The women 
 adore these grand lamas, these aged idols, and the 
 wives react on their husbands; hence the greater evil." 
 Despite the earnest efforts of the partisans of modera- 
 tion, the decree, in its worst form, was voted by the 
 Council of the Five Hundred. On being presented, 
 however, to the Ancients, or Senate, it was delayed, and 
 finally rejected. 
 
 The attitude of the Directory to the Holy See re- 
 vealed the same violent and imprudent conduct which 
 marked its home policy. General Bonaparte, after his 
 
278 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 first victories in Italy, had decided to treat with the 
 Italian governments, so as not to have enemies in his 
 . rear whom he was not yet able to conquer. For this 
 purpose he entered into conference with a Court which 
 had thus far been the bitterest enemy of the French 
 Revolution. The young general was too consummate a 
 politician to insist on conditions which could not be 
 obtained, in a negotiation which he was personally in- 
 terested in concluding. On condition of respecting, in 
 some degree, the dominions of the Pope, he obtained 
 one hundred precious paintings and statues for the 
 museums of Paris, besides a large supply of provisions 
 and money. 
 
 Bonaparte was much displeased at the conduct of the 
 Directory after the armistice which he had concluded at 
 Bologna in June, 1796. The Pope accorded without 
 delay the sacrifice of sums of money, which he was then 
 poorly prepared to sustain, and parted cheerfully with his 
 treasures of art. But he could not accept the new con- 
 ditions which were pressed upon him by the Directory. 
 This body required him to retract the briefs in which he 
 had condemned the Civil Constitution of the Clergy. 
 This was most unreasonable. As temporal prince he 
 might make sacrifices, but as head of the Church he 
 could not, without dishonor, submit a doctrinal decision 
 to the fluctuations of politics. The Directory had thus 
 offended, and put in question the interests of, the whole 
 Catholic Church. It was aiming to impose on the chief 
 of the Church the same tyranny which had been at- 
 tempted against the conscience of the non-juring clergy. 
 In this it is easy to recognize the imbecile presumption 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 279 
 
 of a sectary like La Reveilliere Lepaux.* The Pope, 
 though sick at the time, convened his Consistory. It 
 was decided unanimously that he could not grant the 
 demands of the Directory without essentially compro- 
 mising the interests of religion. The unhappy Pope ex- 
 claimed, in view of his troubles, M We regard the crown 
 of martyrdom as of higher worth than that which we 
 wear on our head." It was well understood at Rome 
 that the Directory desired war, since it had asked what 
 could not be granted. The Papal States were, there- 
 fore, put in a state of defense, though against all hope 
 of success. Bonaparte, who had not yet won enough 
 victories to despise the authority of the Directory, wrote 
 in a tone of great harshness to this easily- frightened 
 court of old men. He enumerated his victories, and 
 threatened to crown them with the overthrow of the 
 Papal power. Indirectly, however, through the media- 
 tion of Cardinal Mattei, he acted in a conciliatory spirit. 
 The latter replied with great dignity to his haughty 
 demands : " Sire, your prosperity and successes have 
 blinded you. Not content with having shorn to the 
 skin the flock, you now wish to devour them. You re- 
 quire that the Pope shall sacrifice both his own and the 
 souls of those who are confided to him. You would 
 destroy the foundation of the Christian religion. Con- 
 sternated at this preposterous demand, the Holy Father 
 has fled to the bosom of God for wisdom in this time of 
 need. Doubtless the Holy Spirit will enlighten him, 
 and remind him of the example of the martyrs." These 
 were noble words. 
 
 * See Appendix, note 38. 
 
280 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 The victories won over the wretched Papal troops 
 conferred little glory, and Bonaparte hastened to con- 
 clude a peace, in spite of the angry suggestions of the 
 Directory, who desired above all things the overthrow 
 of the Papacy. In a dispatch from Paris to the general 
 of the army of Italy, under date of February, 1797, we 
 find the following words : " You have too much expe- 
 rience in politics not to have felt as deeply as we that 
 the Roman religion will always be the irreconcilable 
 enemy of the republic. The Directory invites you to 
 do all that may seem to you possible, without rekin- 
 dling the fires of fanaticism, to destroy the Papal govern- 
 ment, either by putting Rome under another power, or, 
 which will perhaps be better, by establishing for it a 
 form of government which will render the yoke of the 
 priests contemptible and odious." There could be no 
 more frank an avowal of a design in the Directory to 
 make war against an opinion, a doctrine ; but Bonaparte 
 knew too well the danger of a premature overthrow of 
 the Papal throne. He, therefore, waved matters of doc- 
 trine, and on the 17th of February, 1797, signed with 
 the Papal power a treaty of peace. By this treaty of 
 Tolentino the Pope abandoned Bologna, Ferrara, and 
 Romagna, renounced his claims on Avignon, made a 
 large contribution of military supplies, and yielded 
 many precious objects of art. 
 
 The elections of 1797 had fortified in the government 
 the party of moderation. Several of the new delegates, 
 such as Camille Jordan* and Royer Collard, \ were 
 strangers to the violent measures of the Revolution. 
 * See Appendix, note 39. f Ibid., note 40. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 281 
 
 They were especially strangers to antireligious passions, 
 and represented constituents who were attached to Chi is- 
 tianity, and more and more weary of the intolerance of 
 the Directory. The legislative session began with a 
 revision of the revolutionary laws. On the 13th of 
 June, a report was made which complained loudly of 
 the neglect into which education had fallen. An in- 
 creasing number of parents refused to send their chil- 
 dren to schools which were under infidel auspices. 
 Camille Jordan became the organ of the complaints 
 which were every-where made against the infractions of 
 the liberty of worship. He pronounced a memorable 
 discourse in favor of indiscriminate liberty of conscience 
 for all citizens, and feared not to borrow arguments from 
 the excellency of Christianity. "Be not astonished," 
 said he, " at the importance attached to religious ideas 
 by men who are accustomed to find in them the nourish- 
 ment of their souls. It is from them that they derive 
 joys which are independent of the power of man or the 
 strokes of fate. A need of these consolations is especially 
 felt in times of revolution ; then it is that the unhappy 
 have great need of hope. Religion lights up the house • 
 of mourning, and even dispels the night of the grave. 
 Legislators, how small are your benefits compared to 
 this. For you it is an unspeakable advantage that 
 religion exists. It exerts a powerful influence ; it alone 
 speaks efficaciously of morality to the people ; it pre- 
 pares your work ; it could accomplish it without your 
 help. Laws are but the supplement of the ethics of 
 nations. If you desire to erect a dike against the fear- 
 ful progress of crime and disorder, you must guarantee- 
 
 36 
 
282 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 complete religious liberty." Jordan then proceeded in 
 the most reasonable manner to explain in detail how 
 this liberty should be respected. He insisted with em- 
 phasis on the absurdity of the decree forbidding the 
 priests to assemble the people for worship by the ring- 
 ing of bells. "Why," said he ironically, " shall' we op- 
 pose a superstition of philosophy to the superstition 
 which attaches the women of our villages to the sound 
 of their parish bells ? " From the time of the Atheist 
 delirium of Chaumette funeral ceremonies had been sub- 
 jected to impious or ridiculous regulations. " Yes, I 
 can conceive," said the orator with noble emotions, " I 
 can conceive why those tyrants who covered France 
 with grave-yards desired to despoil them of solemnity ; 
 why they threw, with so little decency, the last remains 
 of man into an ignoble ditch. They felt a necessity of 
 despising humanity, and of smothering those generous 
 sentiments whose revival would be to them so terrible." 
 
 This discourse was a marked event. It excited the 
 rage of the remnants of the Jacobins. The final discus- 
 sion of the matter took place two months later, July 
 8th, 1797. General Jordan opened the opposition on 
 the part of the extreme revolutionists, by a most violent 
 speech against the proposed modification of the perse- 
 cuting laws. He regarded the influence of religion as 
 evil and only evil. But Boissy D'Anglas, skeptic as he 
 was, stood up for the cause of justice. In the midst ot 
 this discussion was heard the grave voice of a young 
 Deputy, who was destined to exert for long years on 
 the liberal party a telling influence. Royer Collard 
 made his debut at the tribune in the defense of the 
 
* Religion and the Reign of Terror. 283 
 
 noblest of causes. One finds in this first discourse that 
 austere vigor, that masterly breadth which were so 
 characteristic of him, and which sometimes ran the risk * 
 of losing something of force by too much of abstract- 
 ness. He showed very forcibly that the religious senti- 
 ment had proved itself superior to all the violence of 
 the Revolution; that it had existed in France from 
 before the foundation of the monarchy, and had now 
 survived its downfall; and that to persecute it could 
 only bring ruin upon the persecutors. He closed with 
 these admirable words : " Justice, Confidence, Generos- 
 ity, you who are so much decried by tyranny, you are 
 not only the noblest sentiments of the human soul, you 
 constitute also the most philosophic principle of govern- 
 ment, the wisest combination of politics, the profoundest 
 diplomacy. To the savage voice of demagogy, crying 
 out, Audacity, more audacity, audacity still ; let us re- 
 spond by this consolatory and victorious cry, which 
 will find an echo throughout the nation : Justice, more 
 justice, justice still." The Assembly, by a strong ma- 
 jority, repealed the most of the intolerant laws which 
 yet disgraced the .code of France. Liberty of con- 
 science obtained a signal triumph, and would have borne 
 the happiest fruits had it not been suddenly checked by 
 the coup d'etat of September the 4th, (18 Fructidor,) 
 in which the Directory, backed by military influence, 
 triumphed over liberty, and violated the persons of the 
 national representation. It is certain that one of the 
 principal causes of this act of usurpation was the legis- 
 lative re-establishment of the liberty of worship. 
 
 It is not our business to treat of the circumstances of 
 
2 Si Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 this monstrous conspiracy. This violation of the Na- 
 tional Legislature, so coolly plotted by the holders of 
 power, was infinitely more guilty than any popular in- 
 surrection. The combination of cool stratagem and 
 violence, renders the crime the more odious. We will 
 throw a veil over these ill-fated days, when a drunken 
 soldiery made a mock of the right they were trampling 
 under foot, and rejDeated without blushing the sentiment 
 that the saber was the law. These events are a shame 
 to the armies which countenanced them, and the country 
 which endured them. The victims alone came out pure 
 and glorious. The majority of the generals applauded 
 the coup d'etat of Fructidor; the reserve of Bonaparte 
 was simply a phase of his ambitious calculations. It 
 was simply the criticism of a consummate player on an 
 ill-combined move, and not the indignation of a friend 
 of liberty. The coup d'etat had no plausible pretext. 
 The Council of the Five Hundred desired to return to 
 measures of moderation ; the Directory wished to con- 
 tinue the regime of revolutionary violence. The ques- 
 tion was, whether the republic should become liberal, or 
 whether it should continue in an arbitrary course, which, 
 as under the ancient regime, trampled under foot, on 
 pretext of State necessity, all the principles of right. 
 The act of violence was a victory of revolutionary dic- 
 tatorship over reviving liberty. If it did not shed blood 
 it was none the less cruel, for the banishment which it in- 
 flicted on its victims was nothing else than a condemna- 
 tion to death — a long torture. From that day the republic 
 was lost. The unjust and immoral Directory, which as- 
 sumed to represent it, could not even maintain public 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 285 
 
 order. Preoccupied with the desire of remaining in 
 power, it compromised the country. Accustomed to 
 moderation in nothing, it rendered peace impossible, 
 and broke the treaty of Campo Formio when it was 
 scarcely concluded. With the finest armies and best 
 generals in the world, it lost the fruits of many victories, 
 because it was guided in its choice of officers solely by 
 the desire of rewarding its creatures, and of getting rid 
 of its rivals. Nothing but the unhoped-for stroke of 
 fortune in the victory of Massena, in 1799, over Suwar- 
 row at Zurich, averted a great disaster. The brilliant 
 but sterile expedition of Egypt, after having served the 
 interests of the Directors, who were disquieted at the 
 proximity of the eclipsing glory of the Corsican, turned 
 in the end to the profit of that absorbing personality, 
 who soon possessed himself of all the forces of the 
 nation. The Directory could preserve the fruits of the 
 Fructido'r coup cV'etat only by a series of similar and 
 equally disgraceful strokes of policy. The elections of 
 
 1798, which had sent to the Councils a large number of 
 Moderates and Liberals, were annulled by an infamous 
 decree. It was in vain that the Directory multiplied its 
 arbitrary measures, suspended the liberty of the press, 
 and practiced the search of private houses. The coun- 
 try was tired of such a system. The new elections, in 
 
 1799, gave a majority in both Councils against the 
 Directory. 
 
 La Reveilliere Lepaux and Merlin submitted to the 
 opposition, and retired from the Directory. Sieves be- 
 came the leading spirit. But soon, new disappointment 
 was felt. The new Councils enacted the abominable law 
 
286 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 of hostages, which made the relatives of the emigrated 
 or suspected responsible for intrigues over which they 
 had no control. In reality, the opposition to the Di- 
 rectory came not so much from the Moderate party 
 which had been decimated in Fructidor, as from the 
 disappointed Jacobins. It was not a collision of princi- 
 ples, but of ambitions. The country was weary of 
 strifes of which it was always the Tictim, and was, 
 therefore, ready to surrender itself to whoever would 
 give it repose. Sieves aspired to this role of pacifica- 
 tor, but was forced to take a secondary place as soon 
 as Bonaparte had landed in France. The conqueror at 
 the Pyramids, was admirably prepared for entering into 
 the situation, and profiting by it. He possessed the 
 prestige of glory, a genius for administration as well as 
 for war, the gift of winning hearts, and besides was des- 
 titute of principles which could interfere with his un- 
 measured but profoundly-calculating ambition. 
 
 The coup d'etat of the 10th of November, 1799, (18 
 Brumaire,) which overthrew the Directory, put Bona- 
 parte in command of the army, and made him First 
 Consul, was the merited solution of the crisis of Fructi- 
 dor. It was not so much a deliverance as a chastise- 
 ment with glorious compensations. But these compen- 
 sations were soon to be lost; for the moderation which 
 alone could preserve them was incompatible with the 
 ardent genius of him who showed himself on the very 
 day of his triumph unwilling to accept the restraint of 
 moral law. I know of nothing more sad in all modern 
 history than the scenes which preceded this fatal date : the 
 conspirators vying with each other in violating the na- 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 287 
 
 «?ional representation, and adjourning its sittings to St. 
 Cloud, that its dying voice might awaken no echo in 
 Paris, — the Legislature itself, unable to cast honor on 
 its defeat, and speaking only the noisy language of the 
 Clubs, when it should have resounded with senatorial 
 utterances of right, — General Bonaparte stammering 
 at the Tribune of the Five Hundred, and trembling 
 before the obscured image of liberty until he gave the 
 concerted sisrnal of rescue to his £n-enadiers, — a U °f this 
 in the name of the principles of 1789, — what a pitiable 
 comedy to introduce an epopee ! Happy the people 
 which has not seen and reseen similar spectacles ! 
 Vaunt as much as you please the order established in 
 the finances and on the highways — celebrate the miracle 
 of Marengo — but go not further, and ask us not to ap- 
 plaud this violent act of Bonaparte, as the triumphant 
 conclusion of the French Revolution. " Our fathers 
 died in other hopes." 
 
 Afl to the attitude of the Directory to religious liberty 
 during the two years and two months which intervened 
 between its act of violence against the National Legisla- 
 ture and its overthrow in the usurpation of Bonaparte in 
 November, 1799, little need be said, except that it was 
 intensely intolerant. It seemed to have nothing so mucli 
 at heart as to have the late liberal laws repealed, and to 
 inaugurate anew the severest measures against the refrac- 
 tory priests, that is, those who persisted in loyalty to 
 their convictions. In his message to the subservient, 
 mutilated Legislature, the Theophilanthropist Director, 
 La Reveilliere Lepaux, stigmatized in these words, the 
 laws on liberty of conscience which had recently been 
 
288 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 voted by the national representatives : " Superstition 
 and fanaticism," said he, " have been called back by the 
 very persons who, under the monarchy, had contributed 
 to destroy them." An oath was now required of 
 priests, which contained, in addition to a promise of 
 submission to the laws, a declaration of hatred to all 
 royalty. About two hundred priests, together with the 
 fifty-three arrested moderatist representatives, were de- 
 ported to the swamps of Sinnamari. Almost all of 
 them died in a few months. In France the persecution 
 was renewed with vigor. Search of private houses 
 was instituted, and priests were again crowded together 
 in the prisons and on the galleys. Genissieu proposed 
 to treat as emigrants all priests subject to deportation 
 who should not forthwith present themselves for punish- 
 ment. M These eternal enemies of our laws and tran- 
 quillity," said he, " must be taught that death awaits 
 them if they dare to remain on our territory." This 
 proposition was received and referred to a committee. 
 A fraction of the Legislature would have willingly ex- 
 tended the deportation to all priests whatever. 
 
 It was not simply as factions that the priests were 
 persecuted, but as the ministers of a hated religion. 
 The institution of the tenth-day festivals furnished a 
 ready pretext for vexing the adherents of Christianity. 
 Representative Duhot, who for his ardent and bitter 
 zeal against the Sabbath deserves the title of Knight of 
 the Decades, caused to be passed in November, 1798, a 
 decree which rendered the observance of the Atheist 
 festivals obligatory. The Jacobins of the Five Hun- 
 dred, not content with exacting the celebration of these 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 289 
 
 days, desired also the formal interdiction of the observ- 
 ance of the Sabbath. But this was rejected on the ob- 
 servation of a few Deputies, that this would place 
 France below the States of the Church in point 01 
 religious liberty. Duhot observed that "the closing of 
 the shops was the exterior sign of a worship;" he 
 therefore concluded that the observance of the Sabbath 
 was an infraction of the laws of the country. " What " 
 cried he with astonishment, "weeks after the great 
 priest of Home, long assaulted by philosophy, and now 
 dethroned by your armies, has been obliged to carry 
 from place to place his vagabond piety, do his servants 
 dare still to exercise among us their insolent despotism ! 
 Yes, they forbid to labor on the Sabbath, and hinder 
 Catholic laborers from working in the shops on that 
 day." Such discourses show to what degradation the 
 French tribune had fallen. The Assembly took into 
 serious consideration a proposition to transfer to the 
 tenth days all the religious festivals, and sent with ap- 
 probation to a committee a motion forbidding the clos- 
 ure of shops on the sacred days of the Church. A 
 decree was demanded which should severely punish any 
 disrespect shown to the tenth-day festivals. An effort 
 was also made to forbid fairs on these days, in order to 
 ^hock the religious sentiment by forcing them upon the 
 Sabbath. A Deputy was found who even proposed 
 that legal protection should be granted only to such 
 merchants as would take oath to use exclusively the 
 new republican weights and measures, and to keep their 
 stores open on the Sabbath. Thus one would have had 
 the beautiful spectacle of non-jurors of the shop as well 
 
 37 1 
 
290 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 as of the temple. Even this was not enough. An ob- 
 scure Deputy demanded that instead of counting past 
 ages from the birth of Christ, they should be reckoned 
 backward from the foundation of the Republic. All of 
 these odious propositions were heard and referred to a 
 committee which would certainly have caused them to 
 be converted into law, had not the storm of Brumaire 
 and the usurpation of Bonaparte swept them away. 
 
 Moreover, the violent party were well able to bear in 
 patience the slow process of legislation, for the Direc- 
 tory aided them and practiced in the whole country a 
 vexatious and cruel persecution. In the fall of 1797 
 Gregory had complained of a circular of Gohier, the 
 Minister of the Interior, which required the clergymen 
 of all Churches to transfer to the tenth days the cele- 
 bration of their worship. "How many unhappy priests," 
 exclaims Gregory in his Memoirs, "have been pur- 
 sued, imprisoned, and transported beyond the seas, for 
 having refused to obey the orders of municipalities and 
 administrations, requiring them to transfer their divine 
 rites to the tenth days ! " It is easy to imagine to 
 what a height measures of this character, which affected 
 the most minute details of daily life, and were continu- 
 ally repeated, must have wounded and exasperated the 
 religious sentiment. 
 
 The events which had just taken place in Italy were 
 of a nature to give the climax to the discontent and 
 indignation of all friends of Catholicism. The treaty of 
 Tolentino with the Holy Father, had proved to be only 
 a truce. Doubtless it would have been otherwise had 
 Bonaparte remained in Italy. The Directory, free from 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 291 
 
 all control after their coup cVetat of Fructidor, 1797, 
 pursued with ardor their favorite plan of overthrowing 
 the Papacy. They began openly to favor the revolu- 
 tionary party at Rome. General Dnphot, Embassador 
 of the Republic to Rome, had been killed in a riot, 
 though it has never been known whether he had striven 
 to calm or to invite it. This furnished the desired 
 occasion for rupture. General Berthier marched into 
 Rome in February, 1798. The Vatican was plundered, 
 and occupied by troops. The unhappy Pope, Pius VI., 
 though weighed down with age and disease, was taken 
 away from Rome, transferred to Tuscany, and afterward 
 to France, where he died at Valence. His death was 
 humiliating for his person, but glorious and useful for his 
 cause ; for his presence and sufferings excited the most 
 lively enthusiasm and sympathy even in the land of 
 his exile. The members of the Directory had occasion 
 to learn that nothing is more dangerous than to make 
 martyrs, for it was precisely these assaults on religion 
 which did the most to dishonor and ruin them They 
 fell into infamy and impotence. Their policy had been 
 so odious that some honest persons even thought the 
 usurpation of Bonaparte to be a riddance. Nothing 
 condemns them so severely as the satisfaction with 
 which the country saw them displaced by a military 
 dictatorship. It was necessary that they should have 
 thoroughly disgusted France, before she could have con- 
 descended to applaud so sad a termination of the grand 
 liberal movement of 1789. 
 
292 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE ALTARS RESTORED BY LIBERTY. 
 
 Entire religious liberty did not exist a single day dur- 
 ing the whole course of the Revolution. Even under 
 the regime of the separation of Church and State it was 
 seriously trammeled by the general government. And 
 in many cases the legal impediments were rendered ten- 
 fold more severe by the passions and injustice of the 
 provincial magistrates. These acted almost every-where 
 in the interest of the anti-religious tendency. Notwith- 
 standing these obstacles, as soon as religion became 
 free from the civil administration, and was left to itself, 
 it recovered itself with astonishing rapidity from the 
 discredit into which it had fallen. France witnessed at 
 the close of the eighteenth century the unexpected spec- 
 tacle of a powerful revival of Christian faith. Nothing 
 is more false than to attribute the restoration of Chris- 
 tianity in France to the happy policy of Bonaparte. 
 No, when once freed from the State, it restored itself 
 spontaneously on a soil yet trembling and covered with 
 ruins. The First Consul, in his efforts to regulate and 
 take into his service the influence of the Church, only 
 succeeded in arresting one of the finest religious move- 
 ments which our country ever witnessed. 
 
 Assuredly it was a very difficult task to re-establish 
 religion without other aid than that of free convictions, 
 
Religion and tlie Reign of Terror. 293 
 
 in a country where Sensualism seemed to be the goal of 
 philosophy, and where a scoffing impiety had reigned in 
 the refined circles, and, like an overflowing torrent, 
 swept among the lower classes. The task was not merely 
 to combat the vicious doctrines then in vogue, but to 
 conquer the base passions which sprang from them. At 
 the close of the Reign of Terror the moral condition of 
 France was truly deplorable. The nation had begun 
 by making of liberty a religion. Disgusted finally 
 with the crimes committed in its name, and possessing 
 no longer that faith which gives consolation in disap- 
 pointment, and saves the soul from universal and mor- 
 bid doubt, the people seem to have lost the faculty of 
 believing in God. Thus the greatest bond of moral re- 
 straint was broken. 
 
 This skepticism, however, could not still the tumult- 
 uous vital force of the nation. From the moment that 
 the restraint of terror ceased, Paris became inspired with 
 a sort of frenzy for pleasure. She cast aside the red 
 cap of terror, but bore into her festivals the enthusiasm 
 which had rendered it so cruel. It was another illustra- 
 tion of how closely licentiousness and sanguinary vio- 
 lence are allied. The writers of the time agree in de- 
 picting Parisian society as possessed of a sort of feverish 
 impatience for the ignoble pleasures of life, and as aban- 
 doning itself without shame to their pursuit. Never 
 did debauchery parade itself with more audacity in 
 open day. In its Palais Royal Paris possessed a veri- 
 table bazar of vice. Gambling and prostitution collected 
 there a luxurious youth, who had all the corruption of 
 the ancient regime without the redeeming trait of that 
 
294 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 elegance which imposes a sort of outward restraint. 
 What was graver still, the institution of the family was 
 seriously undermined, thanks to the unheard of facility 
 of divorce, and the almost equal footing of natural and 
 legitimate children. There was one divorce to eleven 
 marriages, and the bonds which were so easily dissolved 
 were little respected while they did exist. A journal of 
 the time gave the true explanation of this deplorable 
 situation. " We are the only people in the world," said 
 the Eclair, " who ever attempted to do without religion. 
 But what is already our sad experience ? Every tenth 
 day [this Sabbath of the infidels] we are astounded by 
 the recital of more crimes and assassinations than were 
 committed formerly in a whole year. At the risk of 
 speaking an obsolete language, and of receiving insult 
 for response, we declare that we must cease striving 
 to destroy the remnants of religion if we desire to pre- 
 vent the entire dissolution of society." The restorers of 
 religion found a great obstacle in the wide-spread preju- 
 dice, that Christianity is inconsistent with free institu- 
 tions. Unfortunately the intrigues of the emigrated 
 royalist clergy gave ample ground for the prejudice, 
 and the revolutionists unjustly involved all the clergy 
 in the same condemnation. But a main cause of the 
 bitter and continued persecution was, the deep convic- 
 tion on the part of the violent party that the only way 
 to justify or efface the memory of its past cruelties was, 
 to crush and destroy every trace of the object of its 
 oppression. But in spite of all these obstacles Chris- 
 tianity was destined to win signal victories as soon as it 
 obtained even partial justice and limited liberty. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 295 
 
 As the reader will remember, the Catholic Church 
 was yet divided into two hostile sections. Even after 
 the abrogation of the too famous Civil Constitution of 
 the Clergy, which had caused the schism, the strife be- 
 tween the jurors and the non-jurors had continued with 
 equal ardor. The former had retained their semi-Pres- 
 byterian organization, the latter Jiad redoubled their 
 attachment to the Pope. This animosity shall not pre- 
 vent us from doing justice to the glorious part which 
 both clerical parties took in the revival of faith in 
 France. In the ardor of their differences they were 
 unable to appreciate and esteem each other ; but it is 
 the prerogative of history to overlook these sad misun- 
 derstandings, which separated and alienated noble hearts. 
 The jurors were wrong in regarding their refractory 
 brethren as wholly illiberal and royalist, and in over- 
 looking their pious courage ; while the non-jurors were 
 unjust in refusing to recognize the pure and sincere zeal 
 with which their opponents labored for the restoration 
 of worship in France. It would seem that the common 
 persecution they suffered during the Reign of Terror 
 should have reconciled them ; but this was not the 
 case ; their dissensions continued even on the galleys 
 and in the prisons. It is our duty now to bring them 
 together, and extend to both parties an equal respect 
 for their heroic devotion to the service of religion. 
 Others may ransack the tombs and revive posthumous 
 calumnies ; for our pai*, at this distance of time, we have 
 only applause for their equally generous, equally diverse, 
 efforts to restore to France that God whom she for a 
 time had seemed to abandon, but whom she found her- 
 
296 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 self unable to dispense with. In fact, no great nation can 
 definitively abjure religious ideas; the madness which, 
 for a moment, may lead thereto, is but the crisis of a 
 fever which would bring death if it lingered any length 
 of time. Moreover, the effort itself to destroy religion 
 only increases its strength. Like the phenix, it rises in 
 renewed youth out of its own ashes. 
 
 A philosophy hostile to Christianity attempted to 
 turn to its own profit the revival of religious sentiments, 
 but gained for its pains only the shame of failure. It 
 attempted to establish a worship which should rival the 
 ancient religion, but succeeded only in giving a pitiable 
 comedy, which promptly vanished in the presence of 
 empty benches and its own inanity. The complete 
 check of Theophilanthropy demonstrates, practically 
 and conclusively, the powerlessness of a belief without 
 mysteries and dogmas, to found a religion. The worst 
 mythologies of Asia have succeeded in uniting whole 
 nations, for the reason that, notwithstanding their impure 
 and bloody legends, they assumed to speak in the name 
 of Divinity, and enjoyed in times of ignorance the pres- 
 tige of revelations from Heaven. They satisfied, though 
 in a very perverted manner, the natural and indestructi- 
 ble thirst of the human heart for direct supernatural 
 communication with God. Hence their success. But a 
 religion which is only a cold, theoretical system, a pure 
 creature of the reason, is fit only to remain in that 
 chilly sphere. Every attempt to warm it into life mis- 
 erably fails. While the ardent apologists of the tenth- 
 day festivals began anew underhandedly the shameful 
 work of Hebert and Chaumette, the Theophilanthropists 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 297 
 
 attempted in a timid manner to resuscitate the worship 
 of the Supreme Being, which had been interrupted by 
 the fall of Robespierre ; the former were the offspring of 
 Diderot and Helvetius, the latter, of Rousseau and Ro- 
 bespierre. It is well known how numerous were the 
 Deists at this time in France, England, and Germany. 
 But it is only amid the confusion arid fever of a revolu- 
 tion, when all creeds seem to be overthrown, that such 
 an attempt would be made as that of substituting for 
 Christianity the religion of the Contrat Social. 
 
 An attempt to prepare the public mind for the new 
 religion was made by a free use of the press. The ad- 
 vantages of a worship wholly free from superstition, and 
 consisting simply in the adoration of God and the prac- 
 tice of virtue, were abundantly set forth. It was at the. 
 close of the year 1796 that the passage from theory to 
 practice took place. * Among the five heads of families 
 who united to establish the new religion was Haiiy, a 
 brother of the famous chemist, director of the asylum 
 for the blind. A former chapel which was connected 
 with the institution, served for the celebration of the 
 firs* public worship. Soon they obtained permission 
 from the government, which was very partial to the 
 sect, to share with the Catholic priests the use of the 
 churches, founding their claim on the ground that as 
 the Constitution was not more favorable to one religion 
 than to another, the churches, being public edifices, 
 should belong equally to all opinions. The Thcophi- 
 lanthropists obtained thus the enjoyment of twelve 
 churches, among which was the cathedral The diffi- 
 cult task was, not to obtain, but to fill them. They, 
 
 38 
 
298 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 therefore, strove to give to their worship all the attrac- 
 tion of which it was capable. They engraved on the 
 walls of the temples choice maxims of natural morality 
 from all schools of philosophy and from all religions. 
 An altar was erected in the center of the edifice, and 
 upon it were placed, sometimes flowers, and sometimes 
 fruit, according to the season. But these pastoral rites 
 were intermingled with grander solemnities. Infants 
 were dedicated to the Supreme Being. At marriage 
 the affianced were bound together by garlands of flow- 
 ers, whose extremities were held by their relatives and 
 friends. At Bourges it was contrived that during the 
 nuptial ceremony two doves should be made to appear 
 at the altar, a touching symbol of conjugal affection. 
 At the obsequies of a Theophilanthropist, a flower was 
 suspended from the funeral urn. But the essential part 
 of the new worship was the reading and the discourse. 
 The preacher was required to be married or a widower ; 
 but in addition to this guarantee of maturity, his dis- 
 courses were subjected before delivery to the censorship 
 of a committee. The new order of priests delivered 
 their messages extempore or by reading. These con- 
 sisted of homilies on tolerance, filial piety, probity in 
 commerce, and similar subjects. Touching funeral eulo- 
 gies of eminent citizens were a part of the programme. 
 That the priests might have a pleasing aspect they were 
 clothed in a white robe with a violet girdle. This flat- 
 tering appearance not sufficing to redeem the monotony 
 of their discourses, they were intermingled with hymns 
 to the seasons and virtues. Fine opera singers were 
 hired, whose voices might attract the multitude. When 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 299 
 
 the money failed, the members of the sect undertook 
 the singing themselves, but their devotion was poorly- 
 rewarded, for they discovered by the empty seats that 
 the audiences had come to hear the fine voices, and not 
 for the edifying homilies. Theophilanthropy lived only 
 from the patronage of the government. La Reveilliere 
 Lepaux, the Director, was its most useful adherent, and 
 gained for it a certain number and prestige ; for apos- 
 tles who are in power are always sure to succeed in 
 gaining proselytes. If the Directory insisted with so 
 much earnestness on the outward observance of the 
 tenth days, it was in part to shackle the liberty of 
 Catholicism to the profit of the new religion. The 
 latter, however, after having transferred its worship to 
 the tenth days found itself compelled to return to the 
 Sabbath, s*o strong was the force of habit among the 
 people. The agents of the government aided the sect 
 with all their influence. The Minister of the Interior 
 pushed his zeal so far, as to distribute throughout the 
 country at government expense the Manual of the 
 TheophUanthropUts. Pecuniary aid was also given to 
 pay the orators, and to indemnify the public for the 
 ennui of listening to them. Societies were established 
 in and about Paris, at Bourges and Poitiers. In Yonne 
 they furnished an intolerant administration, a pretext 
 for persecuting the Catholics. But neither the favors of 
 power nor the prestige which noted personages, such as 
 Groupil de Prefeln, Julien of Toulouse, and Bernardin 
 de St. Pierre, brought to the sect, sufficed to prevent 
 this ridiculous religion from falling into neglect and 
 abandonment. The order of the Consuls, of October, 
 
300 Religion and the Reign of Terror, 
 
 1802, which closed the temples to the Theophilanthro- 
 pists, did them the signal service of saving their worship 
 from dying of mere inanition. It was fitting that a wor- 
 ship which had lived only by the smiles of power should 
 - fall by its disfavor. It had quieted and satisfied neither 
 the ancient convictions nor the new passions. Its pas- 
 toral sentimentalism was incapable of awakening the 
 religious curiosity of France, even when one of her chiel 
 magistrates had accepted the pastoral staff of the white- 
 robed and violet-girded priests, which, however, was, 
 after all, a singular way of appealing for favor to the 
 land of Voltaire and Beaumarchais. It was the ancient 
 religion, which the demagogues had vainly believed 
 they had destroyed, that arose and defeated these 
 efforts of its enemies. In losing its civil power and 
 wealth, and in suffering, instead of inflicting, persecu- 
 tion, it arose and purified itself, and no longer gave just 
 occasion for those terrible charges of guilt which in its 
 prosperous days had so fatally shaken it. 
 
 We have seen that the revival of religion at the close 
 of the last century was promoted the efforts of the 
 refractory as well as of the juring clergy. How great 
 had continued to be the influence of the former not only 
 in the South and West, where they were in the major- 
 ity, but also in the great cities, and particularly in 
 Paris, is perfectly evident from the multiplicity and 
 barbarity of the measures that had been taken against 
 them They ceased not, however, to celebrate the 
 sacred rites, often in a barn or a garret. Nothing was 
 better fitted to animate their zeal than these dangers 
 and difficulties. A thousand ingenious methods had 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 301 
 
 been contrived for conveying to the victims of the 
 Terrorists the last consolations of religion. How often 
 lias a secret, furtively-exchanged sign from a disguised 
 priest suddenly appearing at a window or along the 
 passage of the death-car, conveyed to the victims the 
 blessings of the Church ! It would be false to attribute 
 to political passions this attachment of the people for 
 the refractory clergy. It is certain that it was shared 
 by sincere adherents of the Revolution. The letters of 
 Charlotte Corday, recently published by Casimir Per- 
 rier, reveal in this republican heroine a lively repug- 
 nance to the Constitutional Clergy. The political or- 
 ganization received by the latter from the revolutionists 
 might well have excited grave religious scruples. It is, 
 therefore, not astonishing that notwithstanding their 
 unfortunate connivance at the counter-revolution, the 
 refractory clergy retained an immense influence in the 
 nation. This fact became visible as soon as any meas- 
 ure of liberty of conscience was guaranteed. Though 
 still much trammeled, they re-established the ancient 
 worship wherever it was at all practicable, and espe- 
 cially in the large cities. They acted strictly independ- 
 ently of the Constitutional Clergy, kept up against 
 them a vigorous controversy, and obtained from their 
 ranks many recantations. " The extraordinary earnest- 
 ness," read we in a journal of the day, published by this 
 party, " manifested by the faithful to profit by our re- 
 covered liberty — the holy joy they manifested, lightly 
 esteeming the lack of exterior pomp in our worship, and 
 regarding the inward glory as its chief ornament, — 
 every thing proves how vital was the power of religion 
 
302 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 in the hearts. The churches reopened, are very simple 
 in their decoration ; their brightest luster comes from 
 the piety of those who fill them." At Paris -the re- 
 establishment of the non-jurors' worship encountered 
 scarcely any obstacle. At Easter, 1*796, the attendance 
 on their churches was considerable, and at the same 
 time next year still larger. About thirty churches and 
 several oratories were given over to this recently perse- 
 cuted worship. The Church of St. Roch was recovered 
 in May, 1797. "Men, women, children, poor and rich, 
 turned workmen, and the church quickly a^-ose from its 
 ruins." The Bishop of St. Papoul consecrated seventy 
 priests. Thus the refractory Church restored itself 
 spontaneously in open republic without the aid of Bona- 
 parte. In the provinces it obtained equally great suc- 
 cesses, though it met also serious opposition. At Ver- 
 sailles and Marseilles riots occurred, and many priests 
 were thrown into prison. At Limoges the incarcerated 
 priests were confined in solitude, and subjected to every 
 sort of ill-treatment. Women were imprisoned for hav- 
 ing heard mass. The tribunal of Versailles concluded 
 to liberate the arrested priests, so fully were they found 
 to enjoy the esteem of the population. Their prison 
 had become a temple, so many were the people that 
 flocked to it. In one place a priest was snatched from 
 the altar at which he was officiating, but the populac^ 
 rescued him. At Bolbec military measures were taken 
 to prevent the midnight mass, but the body of troops 
 sent to stop the service were so affected by it as to 
 change their purpose, and take part in it with great 
 reverence. Violence could not check the current of 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 303 
 
 public opinion, which pronounced itself continually with 
 greater emphasis in favor of liberty of conscience. To 
 this current the discourses of Camille Jordan, Royer 
 Collard, and Portalis * greatly added. But the Direc- 
 tory and the Jacobins strove all the more to check it. 
 The following order, in regard to the refractory priests, 
 was sent tojthe national Commissioners in June, 1796 : 
 "Wear out their patience, envelop them in your sur- 
 veillance, disquiet them by day, and trouBle them by 
 night." Nevertheless had it not been for the Direc- 
 tory's coup d'etat of September, 1797, the ancient 
 Church would have been reorganized along-side of the 
 Constitutional Churches, throughout the land. This 
 turned back for awhile the happy religious movement. 
 Barbarous decrees were launched forth, and many 
 priests banished ; but still the persecuted worship was 
 held in secret, and counted its adherents by multitudes. 
 If, instead of having been reorganized by Bonaparte 
 after the coup d'etat of Brumaire, (November, 1799,) the 
 nation had been permitted to enjoy true liberty, there 
 would have sprung up from her persecution and suffer- 
 ings a self-regenerated and glorious Church. She had 
 already erected her altars throughout the land ; it was 
 of liberty only, and not of forced governmental reorgan- 
 ization, that she had need. The escaped priests, who 
 had lived of the charities of the English or of the Pope, 
 would doubtless have returned in large numbers, and 
 with many prejudices. The latter, however, would have 
 soon died away under the benign influence of toleration. 
 Of means for defraying the non-jurors' worship, there 
 * See Appendix, note 41. 
 
304 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 was no scarcity, and had peace and any degree of pros- 
 perity returned, there would have resulted under the 
 smiles of liberty a flourishing and well-disciplined 
 Church. 
 
 And surely the enjoyment of liberty could not have 
 been otherwise than favorable to the new, or Constitu- 
 tional Church — to that one which, while holding fast to 
 Catholic orthodoxy, had cheerfully sided with the cause 
 of freedom. ' True, she had many wounds to heal, for in 
 the days of trial she had suffered from apostasies. 
 While enjoying the smiles of government patronage she 
 had been disgraced by numerous bad priests, but the 
 salutary ordeal of persecution had freed her from the 
 hypocrites. Soon after the fall of Robespierre, when a 
 measure of liberty was allowed, she engaged earnestly 
 in the work of repairing her losses. The man who was 
 especially active in this holy work was Gregory, the 
 Deputy to the Constituent Assembly and to the Con- 
 vention, and Bishop of Blois. He has been calumniated 
 and outraged ; the most vile malice pursued him even 
 to his death-bed. We admit that he sometimes pushed 
 his love of free institutions to an excess unbecoming a 
 priest, or even a true liberal ; but, to be just, we must 
 make allowance for the circumstances. His clerical 
 opponents were not less extreme. One may charge 
 Gregory with unfortunate words, but never with a base 
 or unjust action. He was pure of the blood of the 
 King, though he carried too far his indulgence for his 
 unjust judges. He never lost an opportunity of advo- 
 cating liberty of conscience for his bitterest advjrsaries. 
 He was always a champion of right and justice whether 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 305 
 
 it was in pleading the cause of the slaves, of the Jews, 
 or of his dissenting brethren of the clergy. His noble 
 attitude on the day of the abjuration in the darkest 
 hours of terror, would alone suffice to conciliate for him 
 universal respect. His indefatigable zeal to reorganize 
 the Constitutional Church merits equal admiration. 
 Aided by several colleagues, and especially by Lecoz, a 
 wise, moderate, and eloquent man, Gregory accom- 
 plished in a short time a truly important work. He 
 combined firmness with wisdom ; and no one has ever 
 done more in France to reconcile religion and liberty. 
 
 The writings of Gregory contain a vivid description 
 of the deplorable state into which religion had fallen 
 during the Reign of Terror. The sufferings endured, 
 were trifling in comparison with the disgrace of the 
 apostasies. Most of the Churches had lost their Bishop, 
 either by death or exile. The people had almost lost 
 the habit of worship. But scarcely had any degree of 
 liberty been allowed, when Gregory convoked at Paris, 
 May 15th, 1795, a number of Bishops. These men 
 in union published two encyclical letters, designed to 
 obviate various disorders, set aside the unworthy priests, 
 and provisionally organize the Church. In one of the 
 letters these pious Bishops say, " Let those to whom 
 God has given grace to remain faithful in the midst of 
 the terrors of death, rejoice to have been worthy to suf- 
 fer something for Jesus Christ. We Bishops especially, 
 pastors of souls, are responsible to God, to the Church, 
 and to posterity for our efforts to revive the faith." 
 Elsewhere in this document, which is worthy of the 
 
 lirst ages of the Chinch, we read, "Let the Pastors 
 
 89 
 
306 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 show their zeal to proclaim Jesus Christ ; let them ex- 
 hort the faithful to a careful study of the New Testa- 
 ment ; let them by their conduct render their ministry 
 respected." The Bishops caused to be translated the 
 fine treatise of St. Cyprian, De J^apsis, which seemed to 
 have been written for the exigencies of that very time. 
 Multitudes of answers were sent to the circulars, and 
 the faithful Bishops and priests joined hands in the 
 work of raising up the Church. A journal for mutual 
 communication was established, aiid Gregory conceived 
 the happy thought of establishing a society of Christian 
 philosophy for the purpose of circulating works in de- 
 fense of religion. In most of the cities the people 
 flocked to the services with unprecedented ardor. The 
 temples did not suffice to contain them. There seemed 
 to be a desire to prolong indefinitely the acts of devotion, 
 and tears filled the eyes of all. At Sens all labors 
 ceased, and the Church of St. Peter was crowded with 
 prostrate penitents bewailing their past unfaithfulness. 
 One could have witnessed scenes as full of pathos as 
 those which took place at Jerusalem when the Jews, on 
 returning from exile, were able again to worship the 
 God of their fathers in their own land. The Bishops, 
 by their circulars, favored and directed the good move- 
 ment. "Having no longer any political connections," 
 so wrote Gregory to his colleagues, "you will not be 
 tempted to stay yourself on the arm of flesh. God 
 alone will be your strength. The splendor of the pre- 
 cious metals will no longer dazzle in our temples. 
 Credulous simplicity will no longer confound with true 
 piety that which too often was only its poison. Let 
 
RdigidH and the Reign of Terror. 307 
 
 religion revive among ns ; let it revive pure as it camg 
 from the hands of Christ. We are placed as it were 
 ■gain at the origin of the Church." " We declare," 
 wrote Bishop Lecoz, "that being subjects of a kingdom 
 not of this world, we will not dispute for temporal inter- 
 ests. Christianity does not meddle with governments; 
 it conflict- with none, and lives peaceably under all." 
 This was the spirit that animated the Constitutional 
 Church as revived by Gregory and his colleagues. Un 
 connected with the State, it was yet warmly patriotic, 
 and spontaneously celebrated the victories of the repub- 
 lic. In honor of the peace established after the battle 
 of Marengo more than thirty thousand persons attended 
 the Te Deum which was sungr at Xotre Dame. This 
 Church made no concessions to the prejudices of the 
 day, and was marked by great moral strictness. Its 
 linn attachment to the great doctrines of Christianity is 
 unquestionable. 
 
 It is true, it was very free from an Ultramontane 
 spirit, and it would have seen without displeasure the 
 final overthrow of the temporal power of the Papacy, as 
 appears from the following extract from the official 
 journal in 1793 : -'The destiny of religion has for a long 
 while been involved in all the passions which reign in 
 courts. Christianity is henceforth to shine in its own 
 glory, and since the Popes are happily to be nothing 
 more than spiritual Bishops, the ministers of religion 
 will be more sure than ever of attaching to them irrevo- 
 cably the hearts of the nations." The new Church, 
 though extremely Gallican in principles, never for a 
 moment broke its communion with the chief of Catholi- 
 
308 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 cism, nor ceased to pray the Holy Father to render peace 
 to the Church by avoiding radical measures. Not that 
 it had not felt a true spirit of reform, for it aspired to 
 develop in its bosom a genuine piety which should lay 
 less stress on forms than on substance, on symbols than 
 on reality. Gregory strove to put a stop to supersti- 
 tious pilgrimages, saying that it was " less praiseworthy 
 to have visited Jerusalem than to have well lived at 
 Jerusalem." He strove likewise to check the venera- 
 tion of relics. It was very natural that at this time an 
 effort should be made to render more strict and solemn 
 the admission of the young to the first communion. It 
 was decided to surround this rite with better guaran- 
 tees, and to prepare for it by solid instruction. Gregory 
 desired that the heads of families should daily use pray- 
 ers in French, in their homes. He labored to multiply 
 the means of instruction, founding many popular libra- 
 ries. Thus was manifested an earnest protest against 
 formalism, that plague of modern Christianity. The 
 Bishops were indefatigable in their labors. Gregory 
 had preached within a short space of time fifty episcopal 
 sermons, and given confirmation to forty-five thousand 
 persons, in the bounds of his own diocese. These were 
 truly apostolical labors, and they were abundantly re- 
 warded. We have the best of evidence for the fact, 
 that within three years worship had been re-established 
 in forty thousand communities in France. True, the 
 ancient splendor was lacking. Many of the ministers 
 lived in the greatest poverty. More than one endured 
 privations similar to those of that aged priest who was 
 found one day in his garret mending his black hose witli 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 309 
 
 white thread. In an official letter to the people the 
 Bishop of Blois said, "The disasters and evils which 
 weigh down your Pastors force us to say to you, as St. 
 Paul to the Galatians, 'Let him who is taught £ive to 
 him who teacches.' But whatever may be the fruits of 
 your thankfulness to those venerable Pastors who have 
 lost and suffered all things for Jesus Christ, they, as we, 
 will continue to hold to you the language of the Apostle 
 to the Thessalonians, ' Such is our love for you that we 
 desire not only to preach to you the Gospel, but also to 
 give our lives for you, for you are very dear to us."' 
 This branch of the Church had expressly prohibited 
 itself from receiving money for special services, prayers, 
 blessings, and the mass, and confided entirely in the 
 enlightened liberality of the faithful. And its confi- 
 dence was rewarded, for though the Church suffered 
 much at first, yet in the end the voluntary gifts proved 
 sufficient. This ministry of labor and poverty rejoiced 
 the souls of those who shared it. One priest, almost 
 seventy years old, declared that in this work of toil and 
 sacrifice he had as it were renewed his youth. To these 
 trials of poverty are to be added the severer ones re- 
 sulting from the intolerance of the petty local magis- 
 trates. Early in the Revolution one of the departments 
 made the following decree : " Whereas there is nothing 
 more impolitic and antisocial than the tolerance of any 
 worship whatever, be it therefore decreed that all pri- 
 vate and public signs of worship shall disappear." 
 After the fall of Robespierre such an open outrage was 
 no longer possible, though in many places the spirit of 
 intolerance remained the same. In many provinces the 
 
310 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 law of the tenth-day festivals was the occasion of great 
 suffering to the Catholics. In Eure the Commissioner 
 of the Directory expressed the will of the government 
 thus: "All ministers are invited to transfer their festi- 
 vals and religious services to the tenth days. For a 
 republican this invitation is an order ; to act otherwise 
 would be an ill-timed return toward Ultramontanism, 
 and a check to the progress of reason. Instead of kill- 
 ing fanaticism, you would give it new life. - You would 
 dig for the nation a gulf into which you yourselves 
 would fall." This was the basest violation of con- 
 science, and could not, therefore, reach its object. A 
 priest in Yonne made the following noble response : " I 
 cannot obey the invitation to transfer the Sabbath to 
 the tenth days. As minister of the Catholic religion, I 
 demand for it the free exercise which is guaranteed by 
 the Constitution. As citizen, I demand of the magis- 
 trates of the people to be maintained in the enjoyment 
 of my right." The obligation to share the churches with 
 the Theophilanthropists was another sore trial. It is 
 necessary to take into account all these, and many other 
 obstacles, in order to arrive at a just appreciation of the 
 progress which religion made under the auspices of de- 
 voted men in these troublous times. How much greater 
 would have been the result had the Church been in the 
 enjoyment of unrestricted liberty ! 
 
 It is sometimes thought that the independency of the 
 Church on the State is incompatible with order in its 
 organization. This is abundantly refuted by the two 
 National Councils which assembled at Paris in 1797 and 
 1801. More respectable assemblies were never held in 
 
Religion and- the Reign of Terror. 311 
 
 Christendom. They were not made up of opulent prel- 
 ates ; it was at the price of the severest sacrifices that 
 most of the members had made the journey. They 
 wore men who had borne the heat of the day, and en- 
 dured bitter persecutions. They were exposed to the 
 hatred of the adherents of the ancient regime because of 
 their liberal patriotism, and to the outrages of the fa- 
 natics of the new, because of their unconquerable attach- 
 ment to the faith of their fathers. 
 
 Though it is not our business to write the history of 
 these two Councils, we may, however, refer to the re- 
 sults. The first was convoked at Paris by the Bishops 
 in 1797, and had been preceded by regular elections in 
 the provincial synods. It was opened in Notre Dame 
 in August by a sermon -by Lecoz. The pious Bishop 
 expressed his joy at the spectacle of the recently pro- 
 scribed religion rising, like Christ, from its tomb. 
 " Who of you," said he, " would have dared to indulge 
 in the faintest expectation that in a little time one 
 would see united in this holy place these venerable 
 Bishops, these pious Pastors, all these intrepid priests 
 who, lately the victims of a violent tempest, and the 
 objects of a most horrible proscription, were wandering 
 from cavern to cavern, or pining in dark and sickly 
 prisons, and weeping, not over their captivity, not over 
 the burden of their chains, but over the desolating ces- 
 sation of worship ? " Then, painting the joy that had 
 been manifested throughout the country on the revival 
 of worship, he closed with a touching exhortation to 
 harmonious action, addressed to the refractory clergy. 
 Among the first acts of the Council was the sending of 
 
312 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 two letters, one to the Pope, and the other to the non- 
 juring clergy, urging both to the necessity of concilia- 
 tory co-operation. It showed itself very moderate in its 
 measures, and generously liberal toward all its oppo- 
 nents. It desired to introduce prayers in the vulgar 
 tongue in the reorganized Church, and took stringent 
 measures for introducing and securing strict morals both 
 in the clergy and in the membership. 
 
 The second Council was opened on the 29th of June, 
 1801, in the presence of a vast multitude. The session, 
 however, which was intended to complete the work of 
 Church reorganization in France, had scarcely begun, 
 when it was compelled to dissolve itself on the order of 
 the First Consul, who had just concluded a Concordat 
 with the Pope. This was an act of simple tyranny. 
 The time had come when Bonaparte desired to prevent 
 all freedom of speech both in Church and State. We 
 will see, in a subsequent chapter, by what acts of dic- 
 tatorial domination the pacification which this Coun- 
 cil was designed to complete, was, I will not say, real- 
 ized, but forcibly imposed. We will here merely state 
 that on the eve of this Concordat the Constitutional 
 Church was in full opening prosperity, and that it owed, 
 most assuredly, its increasing influence to its independ- 
 ency of the State. The venerable President of the first 
 Council spoke as follows, in his call for the second : 
 " Some of you are alarmed that the Church has been 
 despoiled of its property. For this let us rather adore 
 Divine Providence. For a lon^ time the wicked have 
 dared to assert that the religion of Christ was supported 
 only by the vast possessions of its ministers. For a 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 313 
 
 long time, also, the Church herself has groaned to see 
 entering into her sanctuary men who seemed to be in- 
 fluenced only by her wealth. The Lord has desired by 
 a single stroke to stop both the blasphemies of the un- 
 believing and the scandalous cupidity of his ministers. 
 He has desired to perpetuate, without the influence or 
 aid of wealth, a religion which was founded without it. 
 When Christ called the twelve, to what was it that he 
 called them ? Wealth and honors ? Xo ; but to labor, 
 pain, and self-denial ; and to crosses, for their recompense. 
 If then we, the ministers of Christ, are reduced to this 
 apostolical condition, should we murmur? Ah, let us 
 rather rejoice, and bless this admirable providence. 
 The Lord has re-established the evangelical poverty of 
 his ministers." Who will not recognize in this noble 
 language, an echo of the primitive times, when the moral 
 power of the Church was measured by her political and 
 pecuniary insignificance ? 
 
 The Protestant Churches had participated in all the 
 fluctuations of religious liberty. After having obtained 
 from the Constituent Assembly, all possible reparation 
 for the great act of cruel oppression which Louis XIV. 
 had inflicted upon them, they enjoyed the privilege of 
 public worship as long as the right of conscience was 
 respected. Protestantism was not regarded as favora- 
 ble to the ancient regime, and encountered no prejudices 
 on the part of the first revolutionists. With the excep- 
 tion of a few large cities, as Montauban and Ximes, the 
 Protestants consisted, in good part, not of the peasantry, 
 but of that liberal and energetic citizen-class which de-' 
 sired to found in France, not the demagogy of the Ter- 
 
 40 
 
314 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 rorists, but the reign of true liberty. Barnave had 
 represented and nobly served them in the Constituent 
 Assembly. Rabaut St. Etienne had also acted there an 
 equally honorable though less brilliant part. In the 
 Convention, the young Pastor Lasource had stood 
 among the first ranks of the Girondists, and had per- 
 ished on the scaffold with Rabaut. Both in Alsace and 
 in Gard the interests of Protestantism had largely suf- 
 fered during the delirium of the Revolution. There is 
 never a large body of men which does not include a few 
 violent or ignoble individuals who hide their true quali- 
 ties in times of peace, but who discover themselves 
 when the hour of trial arrives. It is not, therefore, as- 
 tonishing that Protestantism as well as Catholicism had 
 to mourn over shameful defections and apostasies. It 
 had lost much of the fervor which had once inspired it 
 with a noble heroism. The pale and cold Deism which 
 had invaded England and Germany began to affect it. 
 Finding sympathy and tolerance only in the camp of 
 the philosophers, it had to some extent yielded to their 
 influence. The ancient belief of course remained, but it 
 had been shaken. Many a heart once full of ardent 
 faith, was filled with revolutionary passions. Matthew 
 Dumas, in his mission of pacification, at the time of the 
 troubles at Toulouse and Montauban in 1790, reports 
 that he found not a little hinderance to his work in 
 several violent Protestants. He mentions in particular 
 a preacher at Toulouse, Jean Bon St. Andre, afterward 
 a fanatical Terrorist member of the Convention, who 
 responded thus to his prudent counsel : " It is now more 
 than a hundred years that we have been waiting the 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 315 
 
 hour of vengeance." A man like this had already re- 
 nounced the spirit of ja, religion which commands to for- 
 give one's enemies. It was a colleague of him, Julien, 
 who seconded Bishop Gobel on the infamous day of the 
 public apostasies. And the example was not without 
 imitators. The Protestant Church of Paris had freely 
 sympathized with the Revolution. The Legislative 
 Assembly had attended, in a body, a solemn service of 
 thanksgiving held in his church by the Pastor Marron. 
 Unfortunately, this Church did not remain faithful dur- 
 ing the time of the orgies of Hebert and Chaumettc ; 
 the sacerdotal cups, as well as the baptismal vases, were 
 carried to the mint in the name of the Church officers. 
 Thanks to God, these disgraces were neither many nor 
 lasting. The majority of the clergy remained firm in 
 the faith. Simple peasants often distinguished them- 
 selves by their fidelity. Rabaut the Younger cites a 
 touching example. In Gard an aged cultivator had 
 been thrown into prison for having ceased his labor on 
 the Sabbath. The next Sabbath he presented himself in 
 Sunday attire to the authorities, and asked them to im- 
 prison him again, saying that he could not work on that 
 day. During the period between the establishment of 
 the Directory and its overthrow by Bonaparte the Prot- 
 estant Churches were in a state of reconstruction. They 
 shared in the misfortunes of the times, but a revival of 
 » fa i tli would have soon placed them in prosperity. It 
 was surely not the Concordat which recalled them to 
 life, for this served only to confine them in galling 
 bonds. Protestantism was erect and active, as well as 
 Catholicism, before the hour when Napoleon conde- 
 
316 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 scended to meddle with religion only to put it into 
 chains. 
 
 It seems to us that the facts of this chapter sufficiently 
 refute the oft-repeated assertion, that it was the First 
 Consul who raised the altars out of the dust into which 
 they had been cast by the revolutionary infidels. The 
 Bishops of the Gallican Church, in their assembly at 
 Paris in 1799, seem to have foreseen this falsification of 
 history, so obstinately maintained by sycophantic and 
 inveterate prejudice, when they inserted these emphatic 
 words in their circular letter : " There is no more relig- 
 ion / Let us efface this blasphemy." And it is in fact a 
 blasphemy to make religion depend on politics, and 
 falsely to attribute its revival to a happy calculation of 
 reviving despotism. 
 
BOOK FOURTH. 
 
 THE CONCORDAT. 
 
 CHAPTER L 
 
 PREPARATION FOR THE CONCORDAT. 
 
 Whatever by its greatness transcends the ordinary 
 standards of men and things is usually magnified still 
 further, and as it were transfigured, by the imagination 
 of the public ; in respect to such phenomena the legend 
 is almost contemporary with history. Such is the case 
 with that marvelous epoch of our history which saw 
 rise so suddenly out of the whirlpool of revolution a re- 
 gime oi power and order, encircled at its very dawn with 
 that radiant halo of military glory which is so dear to 
 the French. From the very start to the final grand ca- 
 tastrophe of this incomparable reign which includes in 
 itself all successes and all reverses, every thing tended 
 to give it an ideal character, and to assimilate it to 
 sublime classic tragedy. In admiring what was great, 
 however, we run into danger of excusing what was fatal, 
 on the ground that punishment followed closely upon 
 the faults, and that that which was but transitory 
 should not be severely judged. In this we forget that 
 the spirit of a reign may survive it, and that nothing is 
 
31 8 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 more pernicious for a nation than a false ideal, than 
 blind admirations which corrupt the moral sense and 
 pervert history. The memory of Napoleon has too long 
 floated between the indiscriminating extremes of adora- 
 tion and hate — a proof that the just judgment is not yet 
 attained. Idolatrous worshipers give occasion for fanat- . 
 ical enemies. The time has come for an equitable appre- 
 ciation. We should not wait for disasters before de- 
 nouncing wrongs, but rather signalize in the very start, 
 in the midst of the splendid triumphs of this extraordi- 
 nary man, the shadow which finally obscured every thing, 
 namely, that insolent contempt of every superior princi- 
 ple, of all right, of all liberty. The pax*tial outbreaks of 
 despotism, however odious sometimes, are yet infinitely 
 4ess grave than the active genius which inspires them. 
 Now, never has this genius appeared more complete, 
 more resolute, than in tho person of the young general 
 who overthrew the Directory by the coup cPHat of 
 Brumaire. This will appear clearly from the sketch 
 which we propose to draw of his policy in matters of 
 religion. 
 
 Ordinarily the period of the Consulate from No- 
 vember 9th, 1799, to May 18th, 1804, is set apart for 
 special praise, because of the wisdom, patriotism, and 
 reparative power which characterized it. Prominent 
 among the acts of this period which have been highly 
 lauded, is the Concordat which the First Consul made 
 with the Pope. Both from this general appreciation of 
 the period of the Consulate, and from the particular esti- 
 mation of this special act, we beg leave to dissent. It 
 is not a fact that the Consulate was truly reparative ; it 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 319 
 
 prepared the way for all that followed ; and if arbitrary 
 power was not yet fully established, it is because the 
 despot was waiting for the fruit to ripen before plucking 
 it ; but, like a skillful cultivator, he spared no pains to 
 bring about this desired result. If by a reparative gov- 
 ernment is meant, a government which, putting a stop to 
 tyranny, makes to be felt anew the curb of law, represses 
 by a prompt and well-organized police the greatest of 
 disorders, gives security to private individuals, restores 
 prosperity to the finances, and in a word, gives to the 
 country, with internal tranquillity, a peace crowned with 
 the glory of a Marengo, we are ready to accord this 
 praise to the Consulate. We understand very well that 
 France, wearied and humiliated under the Directory, 
 could feel deep and ardent thankfulness for these bene- 
 fits, and overlook the price at which they were bought ; 
 could so ardently feel the necessity of social order and 
 security as to accept with enthusiasm a despotism which 
 was absolute from the very start. In fact, during this 
 whole period the word republic was nothing more than 
 an empty sound, one of those cunning deceptions of 
 which Augustus made so skillful a use. To escape from 
 revolutionary agitation was the deep, universal desire. 
 
 The new power satisfied perfectly this desire, though in 
 a superficial and precarious way. It is at this point that 
 it was not reparative ; for military despotism substituted 
 for anarchy is revolution still, with all its worst fea- 
 tures, with its predilections and passions, all the more 
 dangerous as they meet with no restraint to their ready 
 indulgence. It is anarchy from above in the place of the 
 anarchy of the masses ; it is the principle of disorder in 
 
320 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 the central force, which, because of the order that rules 
 in the subordinate parts of the administrative machine, 
 renders it so much the more easy for the errors or 
 crimes of the chief of the State to be executed with a 
 remorseless and irremediable facility. I know of no 
 more perilous combination than arbitrariness in the di- 
 recting chief, and regularity in the subordinate instru- 
 ments. Now this was precisely the politics of the Con- 
 sulate, as it was afterward the spirit of the Empire. The 
 results of the reign of Napoleon suffice to convince us 
 that there is no truly reparative regime but that of 
 liberty, that is to say, the regime of law, under the con- 
 trol of the real representatives of the people. I call 
 reparative the government of a William of Orange, or 
 the presidency of a Washington, because these great 
 men founded society on the respect for right, and gave 
 to it for safeguard a well-regulated liberty, that is, a 
 liberty which regulates itself; on the contrary, I call 
 anarchical and destructive every regime of mere good 
 pleasure, whether it be democratic, aristocratic, republi- 
 can, or monarchical ; and I regard it all the more dan- 
 gerous in proportion as it has more cunningly organized 
 the country it controls. Remorseless facts demonstrate 
 these principles. France, conquered and humiliated so 
 low as to treat with the enemy in her own capital, is a 
 cruel and bloody lesson for those who separate order 
 and peace from liberty, and who imagine that great 
 military exploits suffice to regenerate and strengthen a 
 nation. I do not deny that the government of Napo- 
 leon accepted and consecrated some of the precious 
 conquests of the Revolution ; it firmly maintained law 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 321 
 
 for all ranks and sects, the admission of all classes to 
 the public service, the abolition of religious privileges, 
 and equality as far as it could exist without liberty. 
 But for liberty it had no tolerance whatever. It is, 
 therefore, a mockery to describe the government of Na- 
 poleon as a representative of the principles of 1789. 
 The First Consul has clearly enough explained himself 
 on this head. At the time of the vote giving him the 
 Consulate for life, Lafayette and La Tour Maubourg 
 placed their votes on the condition that the liberty of 
 the press should be guaranteed. " Judge from that," 
 said Napoleon to one of his confidants, " how much is 
 to be expected from those men who are always making 
 a hobby of the metaphysics of 1*789. Liberty of the 
 press ! " An ironical smile expressed well the extent of 
 his respect for this great liberty. 
 
 The Consular Constitution is the masterpiece of that 
 political school which puts the arbitrary at the head, 
 and a cunning organization in the body, of the govern- 
 ment, substituting for the parliament which controls, an 
 administration which executes and gives to the will of 
 the sovereign, not a counterpoise which checks, but a 
 marvelous organism for the instantaneous realization of 
 its volitions. A guiding head and strong, docile arms, 
 a single will and supple instruments, such were the 
 essence of the system. In the main this constitution 
 was the work of Sieyes. It placed all real power in the 
 hands of the executive chief, and based the government 
 on the merest mockery of popular elections. It pnt a 
 stop to all free parliamentary discussion, and the Council 
 of the executive was powerless to do any thing but give 
 
 41 
 
322 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 advice. But advice was of little avail. What was 
 needed was not so much advice as a real limitation of 
 the executive volition. As it was, the only man in 
 France who enjoyed full freedom was he who had in 
 his hands also absolute power. From this head every 
 thing proceeded, and to him every thing returned. It 
 would have been better not to interpose between him 
 and the country that phantom of national representa- 
 tion which served only to give an appearance of legality 
 to his merest caprices. The Revolution had given him 
 a country entirely dissolved into its simplest elements, 
 and without those great corporate bodies which always 
 impose some check on despotism. The part of the Con- 
 sular system most highly lauded is doubtless that which 
 organized the internal administration, but it was pre- 
 cisely this which served so efficaciously to enslave the 
 nation. The executive chief, by means of his prefects, 
 sub-prefects, and mayors, was present in every part of 
 the nation. This system made all the resources of the 
 circumference converge to the center, and bore back 
 from the center the decisions of sovereign power, thus 
 establishing the most perfect order in servitude. The 
 stroke of a single hand at the center was instantly felt 
 in all the ramifications of the administrative organism 
 The wise management of the treasury would have been 
 a signal benefit, had it in some degree been left in the 
 control of the nation ; but as it was, it became an occa- 
 sion of evil by putting into the hands of an irresponsible 
 master the means of daring every thing. The judica- 
 ture was wisely organized, though it was powerless 
 against absolutism. In fine, France possessed in this 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 323 
 
 system of centralization without counterpoise the most 
 perfect organization of despotism which ever existed, a 
 Bystem which still continues to be the most formidable 
 obstacle to a return to liberty. The Civil Code consti- 
 tutes one of the brightest glories of this epoch, but this 
 wise digest would have lost nothing in value had it 
 given better guarantees to personal liberty. It is in- 
 fected with the vice of the government. When taken 
 in connection with the criminal code it furnished many 
 resources to despotism. 
 
 From the beginning of the Consulate it was easy to 
 foresee to what extremes the intoxication of absolute 
 power would lead the ambitious chief. After the failure 
 of an attempt at assassination, he declared in open State 
 Council that he would put himself above the law in 
 order to strike a grand blow at the Jacobins, though he 
 knew perfectly that they had nothing to do with the 
 conspiracy, saying in self-justification that royalist in- 
 trigues were a mere skin-disease, whereas the Jacobin 
 spirit was an internal, deep-seated malady, which needed 
 a radical cure. To those who opposed to these iniqui- 
 tous measures the principles of simple justice, he ex- 
 claimed bluntly, "The metaphysicians are a class of 
 men to whom we owe all our evils ! I must treat this 
 matter as a statesman." And he dared to say this in 
 the hall where laws were made ! Thus we find trans- 
 mitted from the ancient regime to the Terrorists, and 
 from the Terrorists to Bonaparte, this pernicious doc- 
 trine of public safety ; which is nothing more nor less 
 than the will of the stronger determined on accomplish- 
 ing his own good pleasure. This malady of the interior 
 
324 Religion and, the Reign of Terror. 
 
 which the First Consul wished to cure, had never offered 
 a worse phase than that of sacrificing eternal right to 
 the passions of the moment, and had presented few 
 more criminal manifestations than that armed abduction 
 and murder in March, 1804, of Conde, the Due d'En- 
 ghien, which was so coolly accomplished, and afterward, 
 more coolly still, discussed and justified as an excellent 
 measure for deterring the enemies of the new power. 
 It was very fortunate that Bonaparte was not cruel by 
 nature, for the nation "had no other guarantee than his 
 temperament. Every treaty which he signed was pre- 
 carious. He made it for the moment for the sake of 
 convenience, and when it was his pleasure he broke it. 
 He was the genius of war, and the blood and treasure 
 of France were at his disposal. For a man like Napo- 
 leon, the temptation to use to excess his power was 
 almost irresistible. And his counselors seconded his 
 natural proclivity. The spirit of the Consular govern- 
 ment is well expressed in this saying of its chief, " There 
 must be no opposition." 
 
 It is certain that from the day of the entrance of the 
 First Consul into the Tuileries, he cherished only a 
 single thought — to consolidate and perpetuate his abso- 
 lute authority. The memoirs of the times abound in 
 sarcastic allusions at the progress of the political 
 comedy. Nothing could be more bungling than the 
 first essays at a princely court at Malmaison and St. 
 Cloud. Novice courtiers made sorry attempts at the 
 toilet of dukes or counts. The coarse language of the 
 Clubs contrasted sadly with fawning flatteries from the 
 same mouth. On his return from a triumphal tour in 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 325 
 
 Belgium and Normandy, the First .Consul remarked to 
 his brother, " I have been able to learn all the abjectness 
 of the French, and to assure myself that I can obtain 
 from their servility all that it may please me to ask." 
 His first demands, however, exceeded proper bounds. 
 Jealous of personal power, he was unwilling even to 
 found a dynasty, so that he might be perfectly free to 
 transmit his crown to whomever he should please, and 
 that there might not be a single regulation for the future 
 before which he should have to yield. This determina- 
 tion raised the most violent storms in his family, and 
 made him to be cursed in wrath by gentle and pacific 
 men like his brother Joseph. These sad scenes are re- 
 produced in the curious memoirs of Miot de Melitto. 
 They enable us to understand the following sad words 
 of the author, which, moreover, are but a true echo of 
 the sentiments of many eminent men of that day : 
 " What a sad end for that Revolution which was begun 
 with such an enthusiasm for liberty, such a generous 
 patriotism ! What ! so much blood shed on the battle- 
 field and on the scaffold, so many fortunes destroyed, so 
 many sacrifices of all that man holds dear, shall these 
 only end in giving us a change of masters, in substitut- 
 ing a family unknown ten years ago, and which was 
 scarcely French at the opening of the Revolution, in the 
 place of Jhe dynasty which has ruled over France for 
 eight centuries ! Is, then, our condition so miserable 
 that we have no refuge but in despotism ? Have we no 
 resource against our evils but in giving to the Bona- 
 partes every thing, without receiving any guarantee in 
 return ? " And what adds special force to these 
 
326 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 words is, that they were written by a Counselor of 
 State. 
 
 It was of importance for our purpose to describe the 
 political situation which gave birth to the Concordat. 
 It, as well as all the other measures of this epoch, was 
 the offspring of personal ambition, and simply formed a 
 part of that scheme of reaction and monarchical restora- 
 tion which was so deeply conceived, and so energeti- 
 cally executed, by General Bonaparte. Lafayette ex- 
 pressed its true character the day he addressed to the 
 First Consul, in allusion to his negotiations with the 
 Pope, this playful remark : " You desire to get the little 
 phial broken upon your head." "We shall see, we 
 shall see," replied Bonaparte. Bourrienne, in relating 
 this anecdote, adds : " Such was the real origin of the 
 Concordat." And this can scarcely be doubted, when 
 we consider the religious opinions of the First Consul, 
 as gathered from his correspondence and from his occa- 
 sional blunt remarks, whether in privacy or in open 
 council. Religion is always regarded by him as an 
 instrument of government, a means of controlling and 
 winning the masses. He assigns to himself the first 
 place in that domain which belongs to God alone. We 
 cannot certainly accuse him of Atheism ; his strong in- 
 telligence rejected the absurdity of supposing a world 
 so marvelous as ours to be the offspring of cWance. " It 
 is the privilege of intelligence," says well the historian 
 Thiers, "to recognize marks of intelligence in the uni- 
 verse ; and a great mind is more capable than a narrow 
 one of seeing God in his works." Moreover, Atheism 
 is the enemy of order, subordination, and obedience in 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 327 
 
 the State as well as in the Church, and for this reason it 
 could not fail to displease the intensely-governmental 
 genius of Napoleon. Open rebellion against the Sover- 
 eign of the skies would have . been a bad social example. 
 The Consul was, therefore, sincere whenever he spoke 
 of the Divine Majesty as it is revealed in the spectacle 
 of creation, or in that starry heaven which, on one occa- 
 sion, he pointed out to Monge with unfeigned emotion. 
 But more than this we must not demand of the man of 
 war and politics. This religious sentiment, which, vague 
 as it was, made itself felt in his soul, he determined to 
 make use of, not so much in satisfying it, as in making it 
 contribute to his personal advancement. Now this was 
 the surest way of misconceiving and violating it. 
 Whenever religion is viewed not as the supreme end, 
 but as a means of realizing temporal or personal ends, it 
 is misconceived in its very essence. We love to believe 
 that on the rock of St. Helena a divine ray penetrated 
 the tormented heart of the great captive ; but^t is cer- 
 tain that up to the day of his fall, he considered religion 
 only in its relations to his politics, and that he gave it 
 his protection or disfavor according as he found it more 
 useful to his interests. In religion, as in every thing 
 else, he saw only himself, and himself alone. Before, as 
 well as after, the Concordat, the same view pervades his 
 discourses. The young man, who is yet only a general 
 of fortune, expresses himself as the chief of a great em- 
 pire. Of him in regard to religion we have acts and words 
 of the most contrary character, according to the occasion.* 
 During his first campaign in Italy, when he had to 
 * See Appendix, note 42. 
 
328 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 deal with the dignitaries of the Church, he spoke with 
 profound respect of the beauty and of the spirit of the 
 Gospel; but this did not hinder him on his return to 
 Paris, when he was in the presence of an administration 
 which was the sworn enemy of Christianity, and of a 
 scoffing populace which held the same opinions, from 
 ranking among the chief benefits of the Revolution the 
 destruction of religion itself. The following words form 
 the beginning of the discourse he pronounced when pre- 
 sented to the Directory, namely : " The FreSch people, 
 in order to obtain a constitution founded on reason, had 
 to conquer eighteen centuries of "prejudice. The consti- 
 tution of 1795, and yourselves, have triumphed over 
 these obstacles. Religion, feudalism, and royalty have 
 successively governed Europe for twenty centuries ; 
 but from the peace which you have just concluded will 
 date the era of representative governments." We see 
 here religion placed on the same footing as feudalism 
 and rojfclty, and classed among the scourges of the 
 human race. The young general now passed with his 
 army into Egypt. On his way he captured Malta, and 
 addressed some pious words to the Bishop of the island, 
 so as to render as palatable as possible his recommenda- 
 tions of a prompt submission to the new power. But 
 scarcely had he set foot on the land of the pyramids 
 when he addressed to his soldiers a famous proclama- 
 tion, in which he recommended them to act among the 
 people who believe the Koran as they had acted among 
 Christians and Jews, and to show to their Muftis and 
 Imans the same respect which they had shown to Bishops 
 and Rabbis in Europe. "Show," said he, "the same 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 329 
 
 toleration for the ceremonies prescribed, by the Koran, 
 , and for the mosques, as you have done for the convents 
 and the synagogues, for the religion of Moses and that 
 of Christ." In an address to the Egyptians he spoke of 
 the sentiments of the French in these words : " We too 
 are true Mussulmans. Was it not we who destroyed 
 the Pope, him who said that war must be made upon 
 the Mussuknans ? Was it not we who destroyed the 
 Knights of Malta, because those idiots believed that 
 God had decreed that they should make war upon the 
 Mussulmans ? " He was not content with neutrality, 
 but even desired that one of the great Mohammedan 
 festivals should be celebrated at Cairo with more than 
 usual pomp. Thus in some respect he realized the 
 famous verse of Voltaire in his Zaire, and was a Chris- 
 tian in Italy, a free-thinker at Paris, and a Mussulman 
 on the shores of the Nile. 
 
 At a later time, even after the Concordat, he ex- 
 plained his views in open State Council with all de- 
 sirable clearness. " As to me," said he, " it is not the 
 mystery of the incarnation that I see in religion,, but 
 the mystery of social order ; it attributes to Heaven the 
 doctrine of equality which prevents the rich from being 
 massacred by the poor. Religion is, moreover, a sort 
 of vaccine inoculation, which, by satisfying our taste 
 for the marvelous, insures us against becoming the 
 dupes of quacks and sorcerers ; the priests are of more 
 account than the Cagliostros, the Kants, and all the 
 dreamers of Germany." In the eyes of Napoleon this 
 mystery of social order was simply submission to 
 
 the civil power. This was for hrm the essential doc- 
 
 42 . 
 
330 Religion and the Reign of Terror, 
 
 trine, the foundation itself, of religion. Now it was 
 in the priests that he found the most efficient police for 
 enforcing this dogma of civil submission. When the 
 Emperor of Austria heard of the conclusion of the 
 second Concordat, he exclaimed that he approved highly 
 of Napoleon's policy, that he knew by experience that 
 priests could not be dispensed with in a well-ordered 
 State, and that, for himself, he needed, in orcter to make 
 his authority respected, the services of two armies, 
 one white, and the other black. On that day the two 
 Emperors understood each other. To this same utili- 
 tarian view of religion Napoleon constantly recurred in 
 his speeches and correspondence. While yet a republi- 
 can general he praised those priests " who held that the 
 political code of the Gospel consisted in the liberty and 
 supremacy of the people, and who sought to quiet, in- 
 stead of agitating, the masses." In fact, by holding this 
 democratic position, they served his policy of the mo- 
 ment, which was to found republics in Italy, and he 
 wearied not in praising them. He compared them to 
 Fenelon, and declared that " such priests were the finest 
 gift which Heaven could present to a government." 
 The fact was, he loved this republicanism of the priests 
 only as a sign of their readiness to accept what he dic- 
 tated. He did not long require this particular political 
 faith of them, and the cardinal virtue which he most 
 admired in them was their willingness to conform to 
 the changes of the civil power. " I know of no charac- 
 ter more respectable, more worthy of the veneration of 
 men," so wrote he to the Bishop of Malta after the con- 
 quest of the island, " than that of a priest who, full oi 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 331 
 
 the true spirit of the Gospel, feels it to be his duty to 
 obey the civil power, and to maintain peace in his 
 diocese." 
 
 The true thought of Napoleon, that which inspired 
 the Concordat, is clearly revealed in the wcrds which he 
 addressed to the priests of Milan in June, 1800, on the 
 eve of the battle of Marengo. He speaks for Paris and 
 for Rome, and tfee discourse is a sort of preface to the 
 Concordat. " I have desired to see you all in a body," 
 said he, " that I might have the satisfaction of informing 
 you personally of the sentiments which animate me in 
 regard to the Apostolical Roman Catholic religion. 
 Convinced that this religion is the only one which can 
 procure true happiness to a well-ordered society, and 
 strengthen the basis of good government, I assure you 
 that I shall apply myself to protect and defend it at all 
 times, and by all means. You, the ministers of that 
 religion, which is verily also my own, I esteem as 
 my dearest friends. I declare to you that I will hold 
 as a disturber of the public peace, and as an enemy of 
 the common good, and that as such I will punish in the 
 most rigorous manner, and even, if need be, with the 
 pain of death, whosoever shall disparage in the slightest 
 manner our common religion, or shall allow himself the 
 least indignity against your sacred persons. My formal 
 intention is, that the Catholic religion shall be preserved 
 in its entirety, that it shall be publicly exercised, and 
 that it shall continue in the enjoyment of this right as 
 fully and as inviolably as at the time when I first en- 
 tered these favored lands. Now that I possess full 
 powers, I am determined to make use of all the means 
 
332 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 which I shall deem most fit for assuring and guarantee 
 ing that religion. Modern philosophers have striven to 
 persuade France that Catholicism is the implacable 
 enemy of all republican government. Hence resulted 
 that cruel persecution which the republic inflicted on 
 this religion and its ministers ; hence all those horrors to 
 which that unfortunate nation has been a prey. The 
 diversity of opinion on matters of religfbn which reigned 
 in France at the time of the Revolution was one of the 
 chief causes of those disorders. Experience has dis- 
 abused the French. For my part, I also am a philoso- 
 pher, and I know that in any society whatever no man 
 can pass for just or virtuous who is ignorant of whence 
 he came, and of whither he is to go. Reason alone 
 cannot teach him that. Without religion we continu- 
 ally grope in darkness, and the Catholic religion is the 
 only one which gives man certain light as to his origin 
 and ultimate destiny. No society can exist without 
 morality ; there is no sound morality but in religion ; 
 therefore religion alone can give to a State a firm and 
 durable support. A society without religion is like a 
 ship without a compass. France, instructed by her 
 misfortunes, has welcomed back to her bosom the Cath- 
 olic religion. I cannot deny that I have contributed to 
 this good work. I assure you that the French churches 
 have been reopened, that the Catholic religion is put- 
 ting on its ancient splendor, and that the people behold 
 with reverence the holy Pastors returning full of zeal 
 into the midst of their aband^ed flocks. When I shall 
 be able to speak with the Pope, I hope I shall have the 
 happiness of removing all the obstacles which may yet 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 333 
 
 interpose between France and her entire reconciliation 
 with the head of the Church. Such is what I wished to 
 say to you in reference to the Catholic religion. I de- 
 sire that the expression of these sentiments may remain 
 engraved in your minds, that you may see fit to put 
 them in order, and that they be given to the public by 
 the press, in order that my dispositions may be known not 
 only in France and Italy, but also throughout Europe." 
 
 The First Consul spoke like a true confessor of the 
 faith. He was speaking, however, for the purpose of 
 making an impression on Europe, and though he seemed 
 so thorough-going in his orthodoxy, yet he did not rise 
 above the sphere of politics. He made a conciliatory 
 advance to the Catholic Church, and he counted on her 
 responding to it. It was an affair of negotiation which 
 was about to be. engaged in ; it was the act of a states- 
 man, in which the Christian had nothing to do. If he, 
 the armed representative of France, fears not to threaten 
 the pain of death for the slightest religious offenses, it is 
 because the orator, as was his custom, made himself all 
 things to all men. For the Italian priests he made 
 himself an Italian. His eye was on the momentary 
 effect. If this is doubted, we have only to listen to him 
 a few months later, not on a State occasion beneath the 
 vaults of the cathedral of Milan, but at Malmaison, in 
 familiar conversation with his friends. It was at the 
 time when the negotiations with Rome were in full 
 activity. The First Consul had turned the conversa- 
 tion to matters of religion. He had stigmatized purely 
 philosophical opinions, such as Deism, with the epithet 
 of ideology, which for him was the highest expression 
 
 I 
 
334: Religion and the Reign of Terror, 
 
 of contempt. He had spoken of the emotion which he 
 had recently felt on hearing the church bell of Rueil, 
 and concluded with the words, " so strong is the force 
 of habit and education ! " A man so occupied as Napo- 
 leon does not speak of his ideas and emotions for the 
 mere pleasure of expressing them. One might be cer- 
 tain that he had a hidden but definite object in view. 
 In fact, these remarks were intended as a preface to a 
 grave communication. " I said to myself," added he 
 immediately, " what a deep impression must such things 
 make on the simple and credulous ! Answer that, you 
 philosophers and theorists. A nation must have a re- 
 ligion ; this religion should be in the hands of the gov- 
 ernment. Fifty emigrated Bishops who are in the pay 
 of the English, rule now the French clergy. We must 
 destroy their influence, and to this end the influence of 
 the Pope is necessary. He shall depose them, or induce 
 them to resign. It shall be declared that the Catholic 
 religion being that of a majority of the French, the 
 government prefers to regulate its exercise. The First 
 Consul will nominate five Bishops, the Pope will ap- 
 point them ; they will choose the Curates, and the State 
 will salary them. An oath will be exacted. The priests 
 who will not take it shall be banished. It may be said 
 that I am a Papist. I am nothing. I was a Moham- 
 medan in Egypt ; I shall be a Catholic here, for the good 
 of the people. I do not believe in religions, but the 
 idea of a God — " And pointing to the skies he asked, 
 " Who made all that ? " He then proceeded to develop 
 the advantages of his plan : " The educated classes will 
 not oppose Catholicism. They are indifferent. I will 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 335 
 
 spare myself great obstacles in the interior, and abroad 
 I will be able by means of the Pope to — " He arrested 
 himself, and his silence was significant. He then closed 
 the conversation abruptly with these words : " There 
 exists no longer either good faith or religious belief. 
 It is an affair purely political" The new Cyrus took 
 care by this frank avowal to show clearly in what sense 
 he restored religion. He often repeated to his secretary 
 Bourrienne: "You will see what profit I shall derive 
 of the priests." For the rest, he was fully determined 
 to break the pride of " these sacred personages," for 
 w T hom he had expressed in Milan such an entire de- 
 votion. At the very moment when he was negotiating 
 the Concordat he remarked one day to Carnot, on occa- 
 sion of a slight show of clerical opposition : " The priests 
 and nobles are at a great game. If I should let loose 
 upon them the people, they would all be devoured in the 
 twinkling of an eye." 
 
 We have clearly enough shown the great political 
 reason which led the First Consul to treat with the 
 Pope : he wished to turn to his profit the power of the 
 religious sentiment, the indestructibility of which he 
 clearly saw. Moreover, he could not have left religion 
 in the enjoyment of liberty, without limiting his own 
 arbitrary power. Rather let us say, religious liberty is 
 not possible except where public liberty, in its widest 
 sense, exists also. For what is a free Church ? Is it 
 not an association which comes together from time to 
 time, and uses the liberty of writing and speaking ? It 
 cannot dispense with the essential rights of a free people 
 — the right of association and reunion, the liberty of the 
 
336 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 press, and all the other attributes of modern society. w It is 
 to the honor of religion that it is incapable of enjoying 
 liberty as a monopoly, and for this reason it is the in- 
 terest of the Church to desire it for all. The dictator 
 of Brumaire was logically bound to impose on religion 
 the same claims which he was forging for the whole 
 body of the nation. He could not tolerate the abomi- 
 nable disorder, that a free word should be spoken in any 
 point of the country, and that in the presence of his 
 creature Prefects there should be free Bishops. The suf- 
 ferance of a single free association would have been a 
 blemish on the map. It- was necessary to hasten to erase 
 it, in order to celebrate the jubilee of a perfected central- 
 ization, reaching in its potency from one frontier to the 
 other. The same hand which re-established the throne 
 was bound, not to re-establish the altar, (for that was 
 already erect, and never had purer incense burned upon 
 it,) but to chain it to the throne. In his mad desire for 
 absolute dominion and omnipotence, the great Despot- 
 could not consent to let even the religious domain 
 escape his grasp. But he was soon to see, that it it 
 easier to attempt such a usurpation than to succeed ir 
 it. Judge of it by the following bitter words, which 
 reveal the difficulties with which he met in his attempt 
 to obtain the lion's share of every thing. " See," said he 
 to his State Council, " see the insolence of the priests ; 
 in sharing their authority with what they call the tem- 
 poral power, they reserve to themselves the right of 
 acting on the intelligence, the nobler part of man, and 
 presume to confine me to acting merely on the body. 
 They keep the soul, and throw me the carcass ! " 
 
Religion and the Illujh of Terror. 337 
 
 Alter these POOCfHinry preliminaries, we hasten to state 
 the several steps in the negotiation of the Concordat. 
 It was necessary to deal with the different phases of 
 opinion at Paris and at Rome. For the first and mos 
 difficult negotiation the Consul used his personal in- 
 fluence ; for the rest he made use of adroit agents, armed 
 with ambiguous promises and efficacious threats. 
 
 We have seen in how prosperous a condition was the 
 Gallicau Church at the time when Xapoleon overthrew 
 the Directory. And the work was rapidly going for- 
 ward. The refractory clergy were also at the good 
 work, especially in the West and South. Though the 
 two bodies were yet far from united, there is no reason 
 to believe that, had the enjoyment of liberty been al- 
 lowed, they would not have come to a speedy under- 
 standing. At all events the Pope could have brought 
 it about by fewer concessions than were eventually ex- 
 acted from him in the Concordat. The first measures 
 of Xapoleon ? s government were of a beneficent charac- 
 ter. Commissions appointed to hear the complaints of 
 the banished priests, indicated that the era of proscrip- 
 tion was past. The ashes of Pope Pius VX were deliv- 
 ered to his former subjects, and solemnly transported to 
 Rorne. Some days later a wise decree substituted, in 
 the place of the politico-religious oath which had created 
 so much trouble, a simple, formula of fidelity to the Con- 
 stitution, which would raise no conscientious scruples. 
 A decree opening the churches to Christian vorship 
 was strictly enforced. For a moment there was hope 
 that real liberty would be continued. We have shown 
 
 how this hope was suddenly disappointed. Already 
 
 43 
 
338 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 the liberty of the press was suppressed, and with it all 
 those safeguards which it alone can preserve. It was 
 evident that a religious as well as political reaction was 
 now to be inaugurated. 
 
 Scarcely had the First Consul returned from his mem- 
 orable Italian campaign when he interfered in affairs of 
 Church in the spirit we have already indicated. He 
 was a novice in such matters, but he had a resolute will, 
 and the power to execute it. Pie hastily collected a 
 little ecclesiastico-theological library, and as would seem, 
 profited by it more rapidly still. He had the Latin 
 works of Bossuet translated for his own use, and studied 
 thoroughly the so-called liberties of the Gallican Church. 
 The fact that he highly approved of them is sufficient to 
 show how little of liberalism they really contain. But 
 he presumed afterward to complete them, in a manner 
 which would have shocked Bossuet, and which sanc- 
 tioned the most exclusive Ultramontanism. This theo- 
 logical apprenticeship of General Bonaparte has been 
 much admired. I cannot admire it any more highly 
 than I can admire the role of Constantine at the Council 
 of Nice. These essays at controversy in the mouths of 
 the masters of the world make upon me a very sad im- 
 pression. To present theological arguments when one 
 has his hand on the sword, is to go out of one's sphere. 
 You are not reason but force, therefore speak not the 
 language of reason. You are able and determined to 
 constrain, do not, therefore, attempt to persuade. To 
 every one his role. Be a dictator, but, pray, do not con- 
 found the general who gives orders, with the Church 
 father who cites texts. The parties are not equal. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 339 
 
 The plan of Bonaparte seems to have been promptly 
 conceived. He had long sought an occasion to treat 
 with the. Pope. It would be erroneous to suppose that 
 the parish bell of Rueil, and the recollections of his 
 childhood, had any thing to do in this matter. His let- 
 ters at the time of the treaty of Tolentino are full of 
 indifference and contempt for the same venerable Popish 
 institution m w T hich he now found so much to admire. 
 In September, 1796, he wrote to Cacault of "playing 
 tricks with the old fox whereas in February, 1797, he 
 informed the Pope that his Holiness would have no 
 more faithful ally than the French Republic, and on 
 the same day he wrote to the Directory that the old 
 machine would soon inevitably go to pieces of itself. 
 It was the profound and cunning politician that after- 
 ward found this machine so useful 
 
 The plan of the Concordat has often been lauded as a 
 work of deep and original thought. Kothing is more 
 false. When closely examined it reveals little else than 
 the old Gallican tradition, that is to say, the entire sub- 
 ordination of religion to the civil power. It was the 
 very system of Louis XIV. as revived by the Con- 
 stituent Assembly. In fact, the Concordat was simply 
 a sanction of the Civil Constitution of the Clergy minus 
 its democratic elements, which were no longer in fashion. 
 The elements which had displeased at the Vatican were 
 now equally offensive at the Tuileries. A functionary 
 clergy closely dependent on the State, and a sufficient 
 salary paid by the State to the Bishops and Curates — 
 such was the plan sketched out by the First Consul ; or 
 rather, borrowed from his Gallican library. 
 
340 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 The Concordat was desired, notr by France, but by- 
 Bonaparte himself. No current of opinion urged him 
 to the step ; on the contrary, public opinion was un- 
 favorable to an official worship. But he arrogated to 
 himself the right of settling a great question of con- 
 science — a most grave usurpation. The worthy portion 
 of the Constitutional Clergy asked only, to be permitted 
 peacefully and freely to pursue the work of restoring 
 the Church in France. The men of 1789, the true lib- 
 erals, regarded. with marked disfavor the project of the 
 Concordat. The illustrious Lafayette made an attempt 
 to persuade the First Consul to abandon his project of 
 creating an official religion, and " to accept in its "integ- 
 rity the American principle of perfect equality among 
 the Churches, all remaining independent of the govern- 
 ment, and the societies forming themselves at their 
 pleasure under the direction of the Pastors whom they 
 freely chose and paid." Nothing could better show 
 the wide difference between the spirit of 1789 and that 
 of 1801, than the way in which Bonaparte received this 
 counsel of Lafayette. Bourrienne records the following 
 words, in which the First Consul expressed to him his 
 impression of the interview : " Lafayette may be right in 
 theory ; but what is theory ? It is a folly when applied 
 to masses of men ; moreover, he is always imagining him- 
 self in America, as if the French were Americans. It 
 is not like*ly that he can teach me what is needed for 
 this country. The Catholic religion predominates here, 
 and besides, I have need of the Pope ; he will do what 
 I shall wish." If the liberals were opposed to the 
 Concordat, the masses cared little for it — were en- 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 341 
 
 tirely indifferent. " At the accession of Bonaparte,* 
 says Madame de Stael, " the most sincere partisans of 
 Catholicism, after their long sufferings from political in- 
 quisition, aspired only after complete religious liberty. 
 The general wish of the nation was, that persecution 
 against the priests should cease, that no oath should be 
 exacted of them, and finally, that the government should 
 in no way meddle with private opinion or public wor- 
 ship. Hence, the Consular government would have 
 satisfied the public by granting toleration as it exists in 
 America. But the First Consul knew that by giving to 
 the Church a political character, its influence would 
 second the interests of despotism. What he desired 
 was to prepare his way to the throne. He needed a 
 clergy as he needed chamberlains." 
 
 To those who advised him to treat all religions alike, 
 he replied, that in a religious country the government 
 could not be indifferent. But what a sad doctrine is 
 this, that the State should interfere in deciding religious 
 disputes ! History gives no more certain lesson than 
 that the way to prolong for ever theological strifes is 
 for the State authoritatively to decide them. And in 
 fact it would have been quite unworthy the great war- 
 rior to renew the tragi-comedy of Byzantine history. 
 His ambition was not so low. He cared very little 
 about these disputes of religion. He himself explained 
 his real motives : " There has never been a State," said 
 he, "without religion, without worship, without priests. 
 Is it not better to organize the worship and discipline 
 the priests, than to have matters as they are ? Instead 
 of banishing the prh-<t* who oppose the government, is 
 
34:2 Religion and the Reign of Terror, 
 
 it not better to win them over? I tell you that the 
 priests who accept office will break connection with the 
 former incumbents, and be interested in preventing 
 their return." When urged to put himself at the head 
 of the clergy, and by a single word make France Prot- 
 estant, he replied, " Should I not on the contrary do the 
 very opposite of Henry VIII. ? You do not under- 
 stand the matter ; the half of France would remain 
 Catholic. We would have interminable quarrels." His 
 continual answer to all opposers was, " I need a Pope, a 
 Pope who will conciliate and not divide, who will unite 
 the people, and give them to the government. And for 
 this I need the real Roman Catholic Pope." I need a 
 Pope. Such was the cherished thought of the First 
 Consul. He needed a Pope on the earth as he needed a 
 God in the heavens — a religion which would crown his 
 power, impress on the people wholesome notions of 
 authority, and enable him to keep up his police at less 
 expense, and to collect his taxes with less difficulty! 
 When it was suggested that the Roman clergy might 
 be too much under the influence of the Pope, he replied, 
 "With the armies and the good wishes of France I 
 shall always sufficiently be the master. If I shall re- 
 store the altars, if I shall protect the priests, if I shall 
 feed them, and treat them as the ministers of religion 
 deserve to be treated in every country, they will do 
 what I shall require of them in the interest of the 
 public repose. They will calm the people, unite them 
 under their authority, and place them under my hand." 
 To feed the priests, and in exchange therefor to have 
 them put into the hands of the civil power by the Pope — 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 343 
 
 this was what the First Consul called restoring religion*. 
 The clergy are to kiss the hand which feeds them! 
 
 Bonaparte did not presume to hold such soldier lan- 
 guage to Gregory. He condescended so far as to ask 
 of him a report on religious affairs, though he was 
 fully decided to make no account of it. , We may judge 
 of his sincerity by an expression which he made at 
 the very time of the negotiations with Rome. " What 
 we are doing," said he to a councilor of State, "will 
 strike a mortal blow at the Papacy." He was, there- 
 fore, befooling the Pope ; he was doing as he had 
 some years previously advised the French minister at 
 Rome to do : he was " playing tricks with the old 
 fox." Such were the edifying preliminaries of this 
 religious peace, whose not less edifying meanderings 
 remain to be traced. 
 
 But all the French nation could not have the ad- 
 vantage of being directly persuaded by the forcible 
 and original eloquence of the First Consul. It was 
 therefore to be feared that public opinion might pro- 
 nounce itself against him, unless it were carefully 
 watched and controlled. The liberty of the press was 
 consequently suspended, and it was easy to forbid all 
 free discussion of religious questions. The word of 
 order was given to the Prefects. A circular of one of 
 these officers to the Journalists deserves to be placed 
 among the annals of administrative curiosities. " The 
 interests of earth," so wrote this functionary, "suffice 
 for the aliment of your journals ; prove your resj>ect 
 for those of heaven by abstaining from discussing 
 them." In conclusion, he menaced immediate Buspen- 
 
344 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 sion against all journals which did not keep silence on 
 religious questions. The moment for State communi- 
 cations to the official bodies had not yet arrived. It 
 was in secrecy and silence that the so-called religious 
 peace was preparing. Silentium faciunt et pacem 
 appellant. 
 
Religion anti the Reign of Te?Tor. 345 
 
 CHAPTER n. 
 
 . CONCLUSION OF THE CONCORDAT. 
 
 We already know the basis of the negotiation — the 
 Civil Constitution of the Clergy slightly amended. 
 The dioceses were to be reduced so as to correspond to 
 the number of the Departments, each Prefect having a 
 Bishop within his jurisdiction. The ancient Concor- 
 dats were revived, giving the right of nominating the 
 Bishops to the Prince, and that of confirming them to 
 the Pope. The Pope was easily induced to change the 
 bounds of the diocese, for thereby he was. a great gainer, 
 and received what he never before had succeeded in 
 obtaining : it placed the episcopacy in entire depend- 
 ence upon him, and realized what Ultramontanisni had 
 not even dreamed of. But there were two concessions 
 demanded of the Pope which met with strong resistance. 
 To the honor of the First Consul, let us admit that he 
 firmly desired the equality before the law of all religious 
 beliefs. He opposed a return to an exclusive and per- 
 secuting Church.. Besides, such a reaction was no longer 
 possible, even in enslaved France. But the Papacy held 
 as a primary truth that Catholicism alone should be 
 tolerated and protected. Such was then, is now, and 
 will ever be, the doctrine of that Church so long as it 
 retains a theocratic government. On this point it long 
 
 resisted. The other point demanded of the Pope, and 
 
 44 
 
346 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 which was not less bitter, was to' confirm the nomina- 
 tions of Bishops who had belonged to the Constitutional 
 Clergy, against whom the Church had exhausted her 
 thunders. This would amount to a humiliating retrac- 
 tion. The Papacy never granted it frankly. Her re- 
 sistance was long and obstinate. But the First Consul 
 would not yield. 
 
 The occupant of the Papal chair at this time, 
 Pius VII.,* was of a very respectable character, with- 
 out arrogance, but possessing that gentle firmness which 
 at times becomes invincible. His reputation was with- 
 out spot ; he had formed himself in the shadow of the 
 cloister, and had deservedly obtained the highest post 
 in the Church. His fine, regular features bore the im- 
 press of a pure and melancholy spirit. He could have 
 well personated a persecuted Church, and become one 
 of those living protestations which are so dangerous to 
 despotism : it would have been dangerous to make a 
 martyr of such a man. His head seemed crowned in 
 advance with a nascent aureola ; but this did not hinder 
 him from possessing a good degree of Italian finesse. 
 General Bonaparte had inspired him with warm sympa- 
 thies, which the worst of treatment never wholly 
 quenched. As Bishop of Imola he had published, at the 
 time of the French invasion, a sermon full of republican 
 sentiments. It was a rare good fortune for the First 
 Consul that the choice of the conclave of Cardinals 
 which was assembled at Venice to elect a successor to 
 Pius VI. fell upon Cardinal Chiaramonti. The Prelate 
 who had been most active in bringing about this choice 
 * See Appendix, note 43. 
 
Itdigloti and the Reign of Tcrrw. 347 
 
 was the eloquent and shrewd Consalvi. He had been 
 rewarded. At the opening of the transactions with 
 Bonaparte he was Secretary of the Papal State. He 
 was ardently attached to the interests of Pius VII. 
 The Papal embassador to France was Spina, Bishop of 
 Genoa, a cunning, timid priest, deeply interested in 
 preserving the temporal power of the Pope. This man 
 was to treat at Paris with Talleyrand, the married ex- 
 Prelate, and with Abbot Bernier, once the head of the 
 revolt in La Vendee, now a very warm partisan of 
 Bonaparte. The First Consul's envoy at Rome was 
 Cacault, a disabused revolutionist, who knew perfectly 
 the Papal Court, and who was almost an Italian in cun- 
 ning. He was well fitted for the difficult role of media- 
 ting between the warm impatience of Bonaparte and the 
 vexatious slowness of the Holy See. 
 
 Abbot Bernier opened the negotiation by communi- 
 cating to Bishop Spina the plan of Bonaparte, which, 
 besides ' the articles already mentioned, required the 
 Pope to renounce his claim on the confiscated Church 
 property. This and the two other points previously 
 noticed, were persistently opposed by Spina. Weary of 
 these delays, the First Consul sent his plan directly to 
 Rome. He received in answer a direct refusal of the 
 points of concession on which he insisted. He became 
 in consequence violently irritated. He directed Cacault, 
 his envoy at Rome, to demand of the Pope the ratifica- 
 tion of his plan within three days, and in case of refusal, 
 he was directed to leave Rome and retire to Florence. 
 Cacault, who was a cool, prudent man, and earnestly 
 desirous of reconciling the parties, was deeply perplexed 
 
348 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 at this harsh dispatch. He knew that the friendship of 
 the Church was of immense interest to Bonaparte. The 
 brief time of three days having elapsed, he persuaded 
 Pius VII. to send to Paris, with conciliatory proposals, 
 Cardinal Consalvi, and leaving at Rome his private 
 secretary, so as to keep up the negotiation, betook him- 
 self to Florence. The sequel proved that his counsel to 
 the Pope was very prudent. The timid Consalvi had a 
 great dread of passing the Alps. He felt as if he were 
 passing into a land of barbarians. But his surprise was 
 very great when he found himself warmly welcomed 
 into a brilliant capital where the services of religion 
 were in open practice. His spirits revived. His first 
 interview with the First Consul was opened under the 
 lowering frowns o£ the latter ; but these marks of dis- 
 pleasure gave place before its close to that fine smile of 
 satisfaction which was one of the warrior's greatest 
 seductions. 
 
 The menaces of rupture being thus followed by a 
 more conciliatory spirit, contributed greatly to incline 
 Rome to the side of concession. Foreign agents, how- 
 ever, did all they could to counteract this tendency. 
 Both in society and among the people the following 
 biting satire was constantly repeated : 
 
 Pio (VI.) per conservar la fede 
 
 Perde la sede ; 
 Pio (VII.) per conservar la sede 
 
 Perde la fede. 
 
 Attempts were made to strengthen the yielding spirit 
 of the Pope by showing him falsified proclamations 
 of Bonaparte while in Egypt, wherein he boasted of 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 349 
 
 having destroyed the Holy See. But surely his authentic 
 ones were heterodox enough to inspire fear. But coun- 
 sels favorable to the French prevailed. The motives, 
 however, which led to the necessary concessions were 
 not of a very high order. The Pope was led to hope that 
 Bonaparte would give him a larger temporal domain ; 
 moreover, as before has been stated, the proposed Con- 
 cordat gave him an authority over the Bishops which 
 the Papacy never before possessed. Such were the 
 motives of the contracting parties. 
 
 The Concordat was signed July 15, 1801, by Cardinal 
 Consalvi and Joseph Bonaparte, whom his brother had 
 charged with that duty. Some of its language is as 
 follows : " The government of the Republic recognizes 
 that the Apostolical Roman Catholic religion is the re- 
 ligion of the great majority of the French. His Holi- 
 ness recognizes likewise that this same Church has re- 
 ceived, and expects yet at this time the greatest good 
 and glory from its establishment in France, and from 
 the personal professions of the same by the First Consul 
 of the Republic. Consequently, after this mutual ac- 
 knowledgment, they have agreed, as well for the good 
 of religion, as for the maintenance of internal tranquil- 
 lity, upon what follows, namely : The Apostolical Ro- 
 man Catholic religion shall be freely exercised in France. 
 Its worship shall be public, and in conformity with the 
 police regulations which the government shall judge 
 necessary for the public peace. The First Consul of 
 the Republic shall, within three months after the publi- 
 cation of the bull of his Holiness, make nominations to 
 the- newly-circumscribed archbishoprics and bishoprics. 
 
350 Religion and the Eeign of Terror. 
 
 His Holiness shall confer on them canonical investiture 
 according to the forms used for France before the 
 change of the government." In other parts of the Con- 
 cordat it was provided, among other things, that the 
 Bishops might appoint to the curacies, though their 
 choice was to be limited to persons acceptable to the 
 government ; that the Pope should in no way trouble 
 those who had obtained confiscated Church property, 
 and that a new Concordat would be necessary in case 
 any of the successors of the First Consul should be 
 Protestant. 
 
 The essential articles of this Concordat were simply a 
 revival of the ancient treaties between the Popes and 
 the rulers of France. The contracting parties, however 
 soon found in it occasion for bitter contention. As to 
 •the Church, it was completely enslaved to the two 
 powers, the civil and the* Papal. The civil power was 
 master of a functionary clergy, and could use against all 
 the displeasing efforts of the Pope the clause which sub- 
 jected the worship to regulations of police. As to the 
 Pope, he still possessed, as in ancient times, the impor- 
 tant power of refusing his bulls. The result showed of 
 how little value is a religious peace which is imposed by 
 authority. 
 
 However powerful were the two contractors, the one 
 politically, the other ecclesiastically, they found much 
 difficulty in putting their treaty into effect. The Pope 
 was slow and hesitating. The first work of Bonaparte 
 was to cause the Concordat to be accepted by the 
 Legislature as a treaty with a foreign power. But in 
 this he met with decided opposition. Even the Council 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 351 
 
 of State, to whom it was presented August 6, 1801, 
 received it coldly, and in silence. A second embarrass- 
 ment arose from the Council of the Constitutional 
 Clergy, which was just then in session in Paris. It was 
 necessary to silence and dissolve this body in order to 
 be able to say that before the Concordat religion was in 
 the lowest decline, and anxiously awaiting the salutary 
 appearance of the new Cyrus. The Council was dis- 
 solved on the 16th of August, before the Concordat was 
 made public. The opposition of the Legislative corps, 
 which had not the power of debating, but only that of 
 voting, was very marked. It showed its displeasure at 
 the Concordat by calling to the chair the infidel Dupuis. 
 Moreover, the French generals made the Concordat the 
 subject of open ridicule. The result of this opposition 
 is well known. It was necessary to resort to a second 
 coup d'etat. Advantage was taken of an ambiguity of 
 the Constitution to renew, out of such material as should 
 please the Executive, the Legislative corps and the 
 Tribunate. The subservient Legislature thus obtained 
 ratified the Concordat without difficulty. 
 
 As to the Pope, besides his scruples, he met with 
 more than one annoying obstacle. The ancient Bishops, 
 who had fled to England and Germany, sent to him 
 earnest protests against being deposed from dioceses 
 which " had been confided to their care by the provi- 
 dence of the most high God." In the end, however, he 
 disregarded their protests, and himself also committed a 
 coup d'etat in accepting a Concordat which, though in 
 some respects disagreeable, greatly increased his power 
 over the clergy. 
 
352 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 It remained now only to have the Concordat ratified, 
 and to put it into operation. At -this point a grave 
 measure, emanating from the First Consul, was taken, 
 which showed how precarious was this so-called peace 
 between Church and State. In fact, the Concordat was 
 hardly concluded when it was set aside by one of the 
 contracting parties — the one which had the power. 
 
 The organic articles which were presented to the 
 Legislature at the same time with the Concordat, tended 
 to the complete enslavement of the Church to the civil 
 power. These Articles constitute a most perfect system 
 of despotic centralization, as applied to the Churches to 
 which the nation gave tolerance. A brief analysis of 
 their scope will be of interest, as it will show what was 
 understood by religious liberty by the French authori- 
 ties in 1802. 
 
 At first glance these laws seem nothing more than a 
 reproduction of the rules which regulated the relations 
 of Church and State under the ancient regime. They 
 do not surpass the extent of authority which Louis XIV. 
 had claimed. But we must not forget, that whereas 
 formerly the Church derived very great power, and 
 even a sort of independence, from her vast and untax- 
 able landed property, she was now reduced to a state of 
 utter poverty and abject dependence. One of the good 
 features of these laws was, the emphatic tolerance which 
 they gave to dissenters from Catholicism. Protestants 
 were put on legal equality with Catholics. Respect for 
 the religious minority was pushed so far as to forbid, in 
 all towns where as ingle Protestant temple existed, the 
 parading of the pompous Catholic ceremonies outside of 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 353 
 
 the church inclosurcs. In this respect the First Consul 
 showed himself the true heir of the French Revolution. 
 But this and a few other provisions aside, the Organic 
 laws formed simply a net-work of administrative despot- 
 ism. All direct correspondence with the head of the 
 Church was cut off. The Holy Father could not ad- 
 dress a single word to the French Bishops without get- 
 ting it first countersigned by the government at Paris. 
 His Legates had to obtain from the same source a special 
 approval. Xo decree of a Council could be executed 
 without first obtaining a civil sanction. The govern- 
 ment assumed the right of forbidding whatever it should 
 judge not to be good for the public tranquillity, a vague 
 expression, which could be extended even to doctrinal 
 decisions, since they might occasion controversial a<nta- 
 tion. >s o national or diocesan convention, or other de- 
 liberative body of the clergy, could be held without 
 special authorization. Even a private chapel could not 
 be opened without governmental license. The right 
 of freely going and coming, so dear to the French, was 
 refused to the Bishops. They were not allowed to 
 leave their dioceses without special permission. The 
 government, full of paternal interest in providin H for 
 the service of the altars, required a list of all the stu- 
 dents of theology, and prescribed that early in their 
 studies they should be thoroughly instructed in the 
 principles of Gallicanism as opposed to Ultra montanism. 
 Even the costume of the priests was regulated by law. 
 They were required to dress in black, and in the 
 " French style." To all these laws were afiixed suitable 
 penal sanctions. 
 
 45 
 
354 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 Such was the liberty of the Church as restored by 
 Bonaparte. A clergy cut off from their spiritual head, 
 forbidden free deliberation, curbed in their missionary 
 activity, trained under the jealous eye of the govern- 
 ment, nominated and incessantly watched over by the 
 same, preaching only what shall please the same, de- 
 pending absolutely on the hand which feeds them, — such 
 is the Catholic Church of the organic laws. Now, all 
 these infractions of religious liberty were ostensibly only 
 so many precautions against a foreign potentate. And 
 so long as the head of Catholicism shall be a temporal 
 prince, governments will have a pretext for such infrac- 
 tions of religious liberty. The Pope, as a temporal ruler, 
 will always have interests which conflict with those of 
 this or that other power. Catholics will, therefore, be 
 constantly exposed to violations of their liberty so long 
 as the temporal power of the Papacy exists. 
 
 But the Organic laws were much more than precau- 
 tions against the domination of a foreign power. They 
 enslaved religion itself without cause. This is clearly 
 seen in the fact that they oppressed Protestantism as 
 much as they oppressed Popery. Protestantism, also, 
 could not extend itself, or make doctrinal decisions, 
 without the approval of the government. No mention 
 at all is made in the Organic laws of Churches which 
 might choose to remain free, and not receive salaries from 
 the State. Protestantism, moreover, seemed glad enough 
 to fall into the arms of the State, and enjoy even 
 a restricted liberty, the liberty of a public legal ex- 
 istence. France, wearied of anarchy, seemed to be 
 satisfied to receive a servitude gilded with glory m 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 355 
 
 lieu of that liberty for which she had so long fought 
 in vain. 
 
 The Concordat and the organic laws were presented to 
 the Legislature in April, 1 802. The tribune who defended 
 them most ably was Portalis. His polished discourse 
 was but a digest of the views of the First Consul. He 
 presented, at some length, the necessity of a religion of 
 some kind, and the excellence of Christianity in particu- 
 lar, as a means of inculcating in the public a spirit of 
 obedience. His whole speech, however, turned on this 
 point of utility for the public peace. He forgot that it 
 is first, and above all, obedience to God that Christianity 
 teaches, and that for this very reason it is of all relig- 
 ions the most hostile to despotism. But there was little 
 necessity of persuasion. The purged and subservient 
 Legislature were willing to vote whatever was required 
 of them by their master. 
 
 At Easter, April 18, 1802, the Concordat was pub- 
 lished, and a solemn Te Deum chanted with great pomp 
 in Notre Dame in honor of peace and the re-establish- 
 ment of worship. Immense multitudes surrounded the 
 Church and filled the streets. Acclamations were 
 showered upon the Great Consul, as he was termed. 
 Long lines of carriages, filled with the fair ladies of the 
 official circles, followed the chariot of the First Consul 
 and the Papal Legate. But the affair was very displeas- 
 ing to many of the generals. Moreau, Lannes, Auge- 
 reau, Oudinot, and others openly expressed their repug- 
 nance, and it required all the authority of Bonaparte to 
 induce some of them to remain in the carriages when 
 they learned that they were to go to mass. Many who 
 
356 Religion and the Reign of Terror, 
 
 were present indulged either in ridicule or grief. The 
 ceremony was cold and stately. The whole affair was 
 but a solemn mockery, for the element of faith was en- 
 tirely lacking in the chief actors. The attitude of the 
 First Consul was calm, grave, and majestic, much as if 
 he felt that in restoring religion he was performing an 
 act of signal condescension, and rendering quite an 
 honor to God. He forgot that it is not proudly upright 
 and in the attitude of a great chieftain, but rather on 
 one's knees and with heart conviction, that the interests 
 of religion are advanced. Such official services are a 
 great profanation of the temple of God. On his return 
 from Notre Dame, and after the banquet which cele- 
 brated the peace of consciences, the First Consul, highly 
 satisfied with the success of his Concordat, asked some 
 of his generals their opinion of the ceremony. " Did it 
 not to-day seem," exclaimed he, " that every thing was 
 re-established in its ancient order ? " " It was a fine piece 
 of mummery," answered Delmas ; " nothing was lacking 
 but the two millions of Frenchmen who have died for 
 liberty, which is now also dead." 
 
 With reference to this affair Bishop Gregory remarks : 
 "The Concordat, a work of iniquity like that of 1516, 
 was proclaimed in the Cathedral of Paris. Archbishop 
 Boisgelin preached a sermon, in which he stated that 
 religion, which had left France with the emigrating 
 clergy, had also returned with them. This falsehood 
 shocked the two classes of the clergy who had remained 
 in France true to their duties through all the storms of 
 revolution. The Concordat was celebrated in prose and 
 verse by all the flatterers, and by all who were ambitious 
 
RsUgion anS the Reign of Terror. 357 
 
 of the favors of the government. There was no end to 
 the laudation of him who had raised up the altars ; he 
 was called the envoy of the Most High, the man of 
 right, the Cyrus, the Constantine, the Charlemagne, of 
 modern times." These words of this faithful Catholic 
 Bishop are very significant. 
 
 But the illusion that Bonaparte had been actuated by 
 respect for religion in itself, could not be long enter- 
 tertained. It was in vain that he said to the Protestant 
 clergy, that he would permit whoever of his successors 
 in any way violated the liberty of worship to be treated 
 as a Nero. His real motive was but too clearly revealed 
 in the proclamation which accompanied the publication 
 of the Concordat. " Ministers of a religion of peace," 
 said he, " let the most profound forgetfulness cover your 
 dissensions, misfortunes, and faults. Let that religion 
 which unites you together, attach you indissolubly to 
 the interests of your country. Use for your country all 
 the influence which your ministry gives you over the 
 people. Inspire the young citizens with a love for our 
 institutions, and a respect for the authorities which have 
 been created to protect them. Let them learn of you 
 that the God of .peace is the God of armies, and that he 
 fights with those who defend the independence and lib- 
 erty of France," The meaning of this is only too clear. 
 Not content with placing religion under the hand of his 
 government, he wished to put God under his banner 
 also, and make him march with the French eagles. He 
 desired to have a French, or rather, a Napoleonic god, 
 whose ministers would docilely second his political 
 ambition. 
 
358 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 Vast numbers of Catholics had little confidence in, 
 and still less enthusiasm for, the ecclesiastical measures of 
 the First Consul. They were perfectly convinced that 
 they did not spring from a respect for religion. It was 
 futile and vain to attempt to deceive the people, and 
 to reduce religion to a mere instrument of domination ; 
 she will not act such a dishonorable role. She will 
 contribute to public peace, only when she is loved for 
 her own sake, and when she is sufficiently respected to 
 be herself served instead of being used as a mere instru- 
 ment for other interests. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 359 
 
 CHAPTER in. 
 
 EFFECTS OF THE CONCORDAT CONCLUSION. 
 
 We shall speak of events which took place after the 
 conclusion of the Concordat only so far as they illus- 
 trate its true bearing. But it is of importance to show 
 that this mischievous treaty, which was ostensibly de- 
 signed to procure the peace of consciences, perpetuated 
 in France on the contrary a most shameful violation of 
 conscience, and excited between the two contracting 
 parties difficulties which deeply agitated the Church. 
 
 We have seen that the Concordat made no provision 
 for any Church which would not consent to a union 
 with the State. The first effect of this treaty was, a 
 more complete suppression of the liberty of worship 
 than had taken place in the darkest period of the Reign 
 of Terror. I know that religious liberty was at this 
 time poorly represented, namely, by the Theophilan- 
 thropists. This sect still numbered a few societies 
 which were not willing to be connected with the State, 
 and which desired simply the liberty of worshiping ac- 
 cording to their convictions. This worship, however 
 objectionable from a theological stand-point, was entirely 
 moral, and, therefore, should have escaped the oppres- 
 sion of the government. The Theophilanthropists were 
 perfectly justifiable in claiming the liberty of worship. 
 From this moment the ridiculous features of their fond* 
 
300 Religion, and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 mental theories disappeared, and the only point in ques- 
 tion was, whether they should be allowed the enjoyment 
 of one of the most sacred rights of man. The leaders of 
 the sect, after being turned out of the national churches, 
 applied in vain to the government for permission to 
 celebrate their worship in a house rented by themselves. 
 All their protests in the name of liberty of conscience 
 were fruitless. Most justly they exclaimed, " What has 
 become of the liberty of worship, if it is permitted only 
 to follow one of the State religions ? " But this was the 
 will of the authorities. " I do not wish a dominant re- 
 ligion," said Bonaparte to his Council, " nor do I icish 
 that new ones should be established. The Catholics, the 
 Reformed and the Lutheran Churches, which the Con- 
 cordat recognizes, are religions enough." At the con- 
 elusion of one of his ill-humored speeches to the Council 
 of State, he said abruptly, " Make a decree closing the 
 Theophilanthropist worship." This same hostility to 
 the liberty of worship is revealed, besides, in the harsh 
 manner in which he treated the persistent applications 
 of the Jews for the rights of conscience. " For the 
 Jews," said he, " we must have laws of exception" 
 And the Jews escaped these oppressive laws of excep- 
 tion only by finally consenting to become a State relig- 
 ion — to be salaried by the State, and subjected to the 
 surveillance and regulating intervention of the same. 
 
 As to the effect of Xapoleon's salarying the Protest- 
 ant Churches, we are of opinion that it was decidedly 
 pernicious. They had the same protection as the Cath- 
 olics, but were also subjected to the same servitude. 
 An account of the condition of the Protestant Churches, 
 
Iidlfjlon and the Reign of Terror, 361 
 
 published by Rabaut the Younger in 1807, shows that 
 in the majority of them worship had been continued 
 even during the fever heat of the Revolution. And the 
 simple enjoyment of liberty according to the principles 
 of 1789, would have sufficed to put them into a flourish- 
 ing condition without any pecuniary aid from the State. 
 But the Protestants did not feel at first all the cramping 
 effects of the Organic laws of 1802. Happy in the modi- 
 cum of privilege they enjoyed, they did not go even to 
 the end of their chain. They were glad of the honor 
 of possessing temples in the presence of the Catholic 
 Churches. But less honor and more liberty would have 
 been preferable. The Organic laws, however, were 
 finally deeply felt. Protestantism was, as it were, de- 
 capitated in its interior organization by the privation of 
 those large deliberative assemblies which had contrib- 
 uted so much to its glory in the past. This was an 
 injury which all the persecutions of the Catholics had 
 never succeeded in inflicting, for the Churches of the 
 desert had never given up their synodal organization. 
 The laws of Napoleon admitted that the Protestants 
 might hold synods ; but as the government reserved to 
 itself the organizing of them, it was but a chimerical 
 promise whose realization is yet awaited after a lapse of 
 sixty years. The First Consul was no friend of delib- 
 erative assemblies ; he never convoked them of any 
 class whatever, except when he wished to obtain of 
 them some signal act of collective cowardice. For this 
 purpose the Legislative corps was an excellent tool ; 
 but the trial which he made of a Church Council in 
 
 1811 turned out too unfavorably to tempt him to con- 
 
 46 
 
362 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 voke a synod. Notwithstanding all this, however, the 
 Protestants remained sincerely attached to him. They 
 showed him more thanks than were deserved, for more 
 than once he made nse of their Churches as a bugbear 
 for frightening the Pope. In a letter to Pius VIA., 
 dated January 7, 1806, Napoleon enumerates his griev- 
 ances against the Court of Rome. The letter contains 
 these significant words : " I have experienced on the 
 part of your Holiness only refusals on all subjects, even 
 on those which were of the highest importance to the 
 cause of religion ; as, for example, when the question 
 was, how to hinder Protestantism from raising its head 
 in France." He regarded himself as the absolute master 
 of the Reformed Churches. "I am the chief of the 
 Protestant ministers," said he, " since I appoint them." 
 Unfortunately the Lutheran and Calvinistic Churches 
 did but too much by their imprudent flatteries to en- 
 courage him in cherishing this delusion. 
 
 I know of no more disheartening reading than the 
 ecclesiastical documents of this period. One finds in 
 them the same profanation of holy things, the same 
 perversion of sacred texts to purposes of servile flattery, 
 which disgraced the Church of the Byzantine empire. 
 The leader of this harmonious choir of sycophants in 
 France was the Legate of the Pope. In the circular in 
 which this Prelate established the festival of St. Napo- 
 leon on the 15th of August, he attributed openly to the 
 Emperor the honor of having borne the ark of the cov- 
 enant across the Jordan after its wanderings in the 
 wilderness of revolution. " If your children ask of 
 you," added the Legate, "who has so happily accom- 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 3G3 
 
 plished such great things for Christianity, tell them that 
 it is our Emperor — he who has imitated the illustrious 
 Cyrus and Darius in restoring the temple of God." 
 This theme of the new Cyrus was varied to heart sick- 
 ness, in the episcopal charges. A grave sign of the 
 depth of this servility was manifested in the belligerent 
 tone of the ministers of a religion of peace, on the break- 
 ing out anew of war. The English were devoted to the 
 wrath of the Most High. Perfidious Albion was com- 
 pared to Tyre and Sidon, and the threats of the proph- 
 ets turned against her with an astonishing dexterity. 
 " The voice of the blood of our brothers," read we in 
 one of the episcopal charges, " cries for vengeance 
 against the English." The Cardinal-Archbishop of 
 Tours declared to his diocese, that the war then break 
 ing out was a war of peace. The homage of the clergy 
 to Napoleon was never surpassed in abjectness. u One 
 cannot render too much honor," wrote Portalis in an 
 official paper in 1803, "or manifest too much thanks, 
 respect, and love to the restorer of the Church and State." 
 The clergy received him at the threshold of the temple 
 with the chanting of the hymn, Behold, I send my angel 
 who shall prepare my way. After the aspersion he was 
 conducted to the high altar, where the Salvum was In- 
 toned. On important occasions special protestations of 
 devotion were exacted of the clergy. At the time of a 
 heavy conscription Portalis, the Minister of Public Wor- 
 ship, wrote to the Bishops a circular, in which are found 
 these words : " At a moment like this it is the duty of 
 the ministers of religion to enlighten and instruct the 
 citizens, and to make them more than ever feel how 
 
364 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 much thanks, attachment, and love they owe to a gov- 
 ernment which has restored religion, protected the vir- 
 tuous, and repaid the evils which for so long have 
 afflicted France." The addresses of the clergy to Na- 
 poleon equaled those of the most fawning courtiers. 
 In the audience which he granted them he expressed 
 his lively satisfaction," and more especially the pleasure 
 he felt in seeing them dressed in long gowns. The 
 sacred militia had adopted the uniform which he had 
 decreed, and in fact they received his orders generally 
 with as much readiness as his soldiers. The Bishop of 
 Dijon directed his Curates to charge the conscience of 
 the young conscripts with the duty of fidelity to the 
 State, as the civil officer charged their honor! " The 
 latter," said he, " will attach their temporal interest to 
 their fidelity; and you, their eternal salvation. Thus 
 will be established a regime in which morality arises 
 from legislation, and in which perfect unity of action 
 will exist between the two powers, spiritual and tem- 
 poral, which are in fact made for each other." Surely 
 never was religion more servilely lashed to the chariot 
 of State. What least asylum could be left for liberty 
 in a country where the two powers were thus united 
 together, the Bishop being no longer any thing else 
 than a police officer in a long gown! How abject a 
 position for the Church ! And yet this was practically all 
 the role she played after the conclusion of the so-much- 
 vaunted Concordat, which, as some will have it, restored . 
 the honor of religion. 
 
 The chief of the State felt himself as much at home in 
 the temples of God as in liis own palace. He caused 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 365 
 
 the bulletins of the grand army to be read from the 
 pulpits. When he desired to repair its losses by the 
 formidable conscriptions which his Senate so subserv- 
 iently voted him, he demanded of the Bishops that they 
 should aid his Prefects in enrolling the refractory ones. 
 The government severely blamed all who showed sym- 
 pathy for the young boys, so many of whom were hur- 
 ried off immaturely to the wars. It caused a conscript 
 to be seized in the sacristy by a squad of soldiers at the 
 moment when he was about to confess himself. For 
 the rest, the priests frequently aided the military in 
 this sad business. When we consider the degree of 
 abasement to which the majority of the Concordat 
 clergy stooped, we must heartily subscribe to these 
 words of Bishop Gregory, notwithstanding their se- 
 verity. " Is it not these same men," exclaimed he, " who 
 ordered so many Te Deums for victories, and for every 
 kind of scenes of carnage, even those of the sacrilegious 
 war of Spain ? Is it not these same men who at the 
 fall of the potentate, spit upon him to whom so lately 
 they had burnt incense, as did also so many Senators, 
 Councilors, Prefects, and Judges ? Is it not the same 
 ones who, after having exhausted the vocabulary of 
 servility, worn all liveries, professed all doctrines, and 
 made court to all parties, finally managed to survive all 
 the wrecks ? " 
 
 The famous Imperial Catechism which was imposed by 
 the new empire on the whole French' Church, is but too 
 well known. It was a new method of saying, Sinite par- 
 vidos ad me venire, Let the little children come unto me. 
 The curious chapter on the duties of French Christians 
 
366 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 to their Emperor has obtained a deserved notoriety ; it 
 is, however, always profitable to recall these crimes 
 against conscience, which combine the ridiculous with 
 the odious. " For the first time since the establishment 
 of Christianity," says Gregory, " one witnessed the scan- 
 dal of a Catechism gotten up expressly in the interest of 
 one man, one family." Let us make some extracts from 
 this edifying book. 
 
 '"''Question. What are the duties of Christians in 
 regard to the Princes who govern them, and what 
 are in particular our duties toward Xapoleon L, our 
 Emperor? Answer. Christians owe to the Princes 
 who govern them, and we in particular owe to 
 Napoleon I., our Emperor, love, respect, obedience, 
 fidelity, military service^ and the ordinary tributes for 
 the preservation and expenses of the empire and his 
 throne. To honor and serve our Emperor is, therefore, 
 to honor and serve God himself. Question. Are there 
 not special reasons which should attach us more 
 strongly still to Napoleon I., our Emperor? Answer. 
 Yes ; for it is he whom God has raised up in difficult 
 times to re-establish the public service of the holy re- 
 ligion of our fathers, and to be its protector. He has 
 brought back and preserved public order by his pro- 
 found and vigilant wisdom ; he defends the State by 
 his powerful arm ; and he has become the helper of the 
 Lord by the consecration which he received from the 
 sovereign Pontiff,- the head of the universal Church. 
 Question. What should we think of those who may be 
 lacking in their duty toward our Emperor ? Answer. 
 According to the Apostle Paul, such persons would 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 3G7 
 
 resist the order established by God himself, and render 
 themselves worthy of eternal damnation." 
 
 It is thus that the new despotism profaned at once 
 both religion and the youth, and showed itself doubly 
 sacrilegious. Nothing was now lacking but to elevate 
 on the Yendome column the statue of the god Mars 
 under the features of General Bonaparte, and to demand 
 its adoration after the example of the Roman Cesars. 
 The Papacy pushed condescension so far as openly to 
 approve the notorious Catechism, and the Legate recom- 
 mended its use in all the dioceses. 
 
 But it is always a difficult and perilous task to under- 
 take to control spiritual forces. The Spirit moves where 
 it will, and mocks the most cunningly-contrived net- 
 work of tyranny. Hence a perpetual inquietude for the 
 despot who desires himself to regulate, to dominate, and 
 to inspire every thing. Napoleon would have wished 
 that no public word should be heard in all his empiro 
 without previously having received the seal of his Pre- 
 fects. The latter were to watch very carefully the 
 charges and other official acts of the Bishops. The 
 government complained that the modern philosophy 
 was too often attacked in sermons. The chief of the 
 State corrected, himself, the documents which issued 
 from the Archbishopric of Paris. The greatest vigi- 
 lance was recommended to the Bishops as to those 
 priests who entered the pulpit and enjoyed the so-much- 
 feared right of addressing the people. They were for- 
 bidden all controversy. A preacher was thrown into 
 prison for having made a philippic against Voltaire and 
 Rousseau, and the higher authority did not blame the 
 
368 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 act in itself, but only its administrative irregularity. A 
 Prefect who was given to gustatory indulgence, blamed 
 his Bishop for having insisted so strongly on fasting 
 during Lent. Even the missions did not escape the 
 watchful eye of the government. In 1807 the home 
 missions were suppressed, on pretext that they agitated 
 the people. As to foreign missions, Napoleon desired 
 that they should be authorized only so far as they 
 might be profitable to the State as well as to religion. 
 
 The Emperor was not content with keeping a vigilant 
 watch over the official papers of his Bishops: as at times 
 he turned journalist, so also on occasion he essayed to 
 handle the episcopal crook. He wrote to his uncle, 
 Cardinal Fesch,* who had recently been raised to the 
 See of Lyons, a curious sketch of an edifying sermon, 
 the object of which should be to restore peace in the 
 diocese. " Preach to the people," wrote he, " that every 
 sentiment which leads to pride is a sin ; that to wish to 
 humble one's neighbor is to violate the Gospel," etc., 
 etc. This homily on humility did not, however, hinder 
 this novice Church father from writing in the following 
 spirit, a few days later, " As to certain stubborn refrac- 
 tories, as soon as they are discovered I will have them 
 put out of the way." In his correspondence we find at 
 times very curious specimens of despotism. On one 
 occasion he ordered a Bishop to give such instructions 
 as would change the spirit of his diocese. To change 
 the spirit of a whole diocese seemed to him as easy as 
 to change the uniform of his guard. He had but an 
 imperfect conception of his impotence to rule in that 
 * See Appendix, note 44. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 369 
 
 domain of ideology, for which he had indulged so much 
 sarcasm and contempt. Finding himself unable to work 
 changes of opinion by order, he resorted to the vulgar 
 and arbitrary measures which characterize all tyranny. 
 He arrested and incarcerated priests, and then inquired 
 of his Minister of Worship for the canonical forms to 
 degrade them. Later, and at the height of his contest 
 with the Holy See, he spoke only of having the refrac- 
 tory priests shot. He formally declared that such 
 would be the fate of all who respected the bull of ex- 
 communication. Happily these menaces were not exe- 
 cuted, but it is not enough known that he treated the 
 priests more than severely. -Before the Concordat, a 
 priest who had preached Ultramontanism in the pulpit 
 of St. Roch was thrust into an asylum as insane. The 
 clergy of Paris, having presented themselves at the 
 Tuileries to make complaint to the First Consul, re- 
 ceived this answer : " The Prefect has acted only by 
 order of the government. I wished to show you that 
 when I take the matter in hand it is necessary that the 
 priests submit to the civil power." He took the matter 
 in hand, it would seem, pretty often ; for during his brief 
 reign more than five hundred priests were imprisoned 
 without trial. With the exception of shedding blood, 
 he pursued in Church matters the worst revolutionary 
 policy. 
 
 The Concordat had not reconciled the two hostile 
 parties of the clergy, and this occasioned frequent arbi- 
 trary measures on the part of the government. It re- 
 mains for us to show, that it succeeded no better in 
 
 establishing lasting peace between France and the Holy 
 
 47 
 
370 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 See. The Organic Articles were the first ferment of dis- 
 cord ; for they had been made by one of the parties to 
 the detriment of the other, without any antecedent un- 
 derstanding. We do not deny that the civil power was 
 justifiable in taking precautions against the encroach- 
 ments of the Papacy ; this will always be necessaiy so 
 long as the Pope is a temporal Prince. But what we 
 do object to is, that the civil power should add at pleas- 
 ure to the articles of a treaty just concluded, and thus 
 profiting by its power, seize the lion's share. With his 
 usual audacity the First Consul had pursued this very 
 course, and had thus left in the heart of his late ally a 
 bitterness utterly inconsistent with friendly relations. 
 A treaty violated as soon as concluded, brings not peace 
 but war. The good understanding continued so long 
 as it seemed profitable to Napoleon, in order to obtain 
 new concessions to the furtherance of his personal am- 
 bition. According to the playful expression of General 
 Lafayette, he desired the little phial, and wished to 
 astonish the world by causing to be consecrated by the 
 hands of the Pope in Notre Dame, I will not say the 
 representative, but the victorious son, of the French 
 Revolution. He resorted to the same temptation to 
 allure Pius VII. to yield to his views, by which he had 
 induced him to sanction the Concordat. It is well 
 known, the great positiveness which vague promises 
 a-sume for those who are deeply interested in them. 
 Nothing was easier than to delude the aged Pope, who 
 felt conscientiously bound to use every effort to regain 
 his lost territory. He would have run to the end of the 
 world for the shadow of a lost province; lie, therefore, 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 371 
 
 readily concluded, that to repair his losses was well 
 worth the trouble of saying a mass in Paris, and so 
 much the more as no sacrifice of conscience was re- 
 quired. It cannot be doubted that it was in the hope 
 of regaining the territory which had been taken from 
 him, that he resolved on the voyage to France ; for, 
 among other reasons, the petition which he presented to 
 the government commenced thus : " We have a long 
 while doubted whether, yielding to the repeated invita- 
 tions of your Majesty to open to you the desires of our 
 heart, we should make mention of the lands belonging 
 to the Holy See." These words reveal the artfulness of 
 the policy of the First Consul, who had induced the 
 Pope to hope so much, without making any positive 
 promise. The petition turns chiefly on the poverty of 
 the Holy See, and the necessity which induced it to ask 
 the restoration of its temporal dominions. The Holy 
 Father promised Xapoleon the glory of a Charlemagne, 
 if he would imitate his munificence to the Church. 
 Such were the hopes that procured the coronation of 
 Xapoleon. But Portalis respectfully declined the claims 
 of the Pope, on the ground of the rights of the new gov- 
 ernment which had been established in Italy. These 
 rights were, however, but very slightly respected when 
 the Emperor wished to increase his own dominions. 
 The Holy Father returned to Rome in bitter disappoint- 
 ment, and ill disposed to fresh concessions, which, how- 
 ever, the Emperor was soon going to ask. 
 
 Two incidents contributed to embitter the relations 
 between Xapoleon and the Pope. Joseph Bonaparte, 
 the youngest of the Emperor's brothers, had married a 
 
372 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 very beautiful and worthy American lady of Baltimore. 
 This marriage had violently irritated the despot, who 
 wished that henceforth his blood should be mingled 
 only with that of the most ancient royal families. He 
 asked the Pope to annul the marriage on the ground 
 that it had been contracted with a Protestant. But the 
 reasons for the divorce did not seem sufficient at Rome. 
 The Holy Father showed himself more faithful to relig- 
 ious liberty than the so-called son of the Revolution. 
 " The difference of worship," so wrote he to Paris, " con- 
 sidered by the Church as a reason for nullifying a mar- 
 riage, does not verify itself between two baptized per- 
 sons, even though one of them is not a Catholic." 
 Napoleon insisted with emphasis, though without 
 success. 
 
 The second incident was Napoleon's imperious desire 
 of concluding between the new kingdom of Italy and 
 the Pope, a Concordat which should be fully as favor- 
 able to the civil power as that of 1802. The Pope had 
 a thousand reasons to be less in haste than he. Matters 
 grew worse and worse. On the 13th of February, 1806, 
 the Emperor wrote to the Pope a letter which was an 
 insult to the whole Catholic Church. " Our relations 
 ought to be such," so wrote Napoleon, "that your 
 Holiness should have for me in temporal affairs the 
 same regard that I have for you in the spiritual sphere. 
 Your Holiness is sovereign of Rome, but I am its Em- 
 peror. All my enemies should be yours also. I am 
 responsible to God, who has seen fit to use my arm for 
 the restoration of religion ; and how can I without bitter 
 grief see its interests compromised by the mischievous 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 373 
 
 slowness of the Court of Rome ? For the sake of 
 worldly interests you are letting souls perish. Those 
 shall answer for it before God, who are so zealous in 
 protecting Protestant marriages." The reader will not 
 forget that it is the pretented representative of a revo- 
 lution, made in the name of liberty, who speaks thus to 
 the Roman hierarchy. What a strange change of 
 role ! The rest of the letter is in the same spirit. 
 " Though at Rome whole days may be spent in guilty 
 idleness," said he, " yet I, to whom God has given 
 charge to watch over religion after its many assaults, 
 cannot and will not remain indifferent to that which 
 contributes to the weal and salvation of my people. I 
 cannot allow to be delayed a whole year, that which 
 should be done in two weeks." The Holy See re- 
 sponded with firmness, protesting especially against the 
 claim of Napoleon of being Emperor of Rome. The 
 Pope used the only powerful arm which remained to 
 him : the refusal of bulls to confirm the newly-nominated 
 Bishops sufficed to throw into commotion the whole 
 Church of France. Already there was talk at Rome of 
 excommunication. Napoleon determined to strike a 
 grand blow. In a letter, which on this occasion he 
 wrote to the Viceroy of Italy, he overpassed all bounds. 
 He declared that the Pope who should excommunicate 
 him would for him cease to be the true Pope, and that 
 he would. regard him only as antichrist, and thank God 
 for his impotence. The following words reveal his dis- 
 position in regard to orthodoxy : " If such a thing 
 should be done, I would separate my people from all 
 communion with Rome, and I would establish such a 
 
374 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 police as to stop all clandestine circulation of Papal 
 documents. What does Pius VII. expect to gain from 
 denouncing me to all Christendom, from excommuni- 
 cating me ? Does he think that then their arms will 
 fall from the hands of my soldiers ? The present Pope 
 took the trouble to come to my coronation at Paris, but 
 he wishes that I should restore him his lost territories. 
 I could not and would not do it. The present Pope is 
 even yet too powerful ; priests are not fit for governing. 
 Why will not the Pope render to Cesar the things of 
 Cesar ? Is he greater than Christ ? The time may not 
 be far distant, if he persists in giving me trouble, when 
 I will no longer recognize his authority except as Bishop 
 of Rome, and as only an equal to the Bishops of my 
 government. I will not fear to call together in council 
 the Gallican, the Italian, the German, and the Polish 
 Churches for the purpose of managing my affairs with- 
 out a Pope. The duties of the tiara are in fact only 
 humiliation and prayer. Christ did not command pil- 
 grimage to Rome, as Mohammed did to Mecca." This 
 surely is admirable frankness. For the moment Napo- 
 leon is the representative of the Revolution, not that of 
 Mirabeau, which proclaimed liberty of worship, but that 
 which fabricated a State Church, and enslaved it be- 
 neath the foot of the State. For the nonce, he was but 
 a crowned anarchist. 
 
 This was the precariousness of the condition created 
 by the Concordat. The gravest interests of religion 
 depended on the whims of a shrewd but changeable 
 man, who earnestly espoused whatever policy the pas- 
 sion of the moment presented. His fertile genius was 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 375 
 
 expert in clothing his favorite idea of the moment with 
 the most perfect reasonableness, and producing for the 
 time being the most obstinate and sincere conviction. 
 He thought himself fully justified in meddling with the 
 delicate matters of the soul and conscience, and he set- 
 tled them usually in such a rash and arbitrary manner 
 as continually to involve himself in endless and danger- 
 ous strifes. 
 
 The result of the discussion of the Emperor with 
 Rome is well known. The Pope, as soon as the general 
 European war broke out, ceased to act as a faithful and 
 reliable ally. And it would have been unreasonable to 
 expect him to act otherwise — to espouse with warmth 
 the cause of his oppressor. The enemies of France did 
 not fail to intrigue with the Pope, but they only suc- 
 ceeded in compromising the little power which he still 
 retained. The Papal city was occupied by French 
 troops, at first provisionally, at the time of the invasion 
 of Naples, and afterward definitively. On the 16th of 
 [March, 1808, the Papal troops were incorporated into 
 the imperial army by virtue of an insolent decree. The 
 Pope responded to these outrages in his Allocution of 
 the 8th of July, expressing with emphasis his unshaken 
 attachment to his people, and inviting the Emperor to 
 give heed to wiser counsels. But this was only the 
 prologue of the tragedy. The decree which united the 
 Papal States to the empire accomplished the measure of 
 bitterness which had been increasing from the day when 
 the French soldiers crossed the threshold of the pontifi- 
 cal palace to arrest Cardinal Pacca, the secretary of his 
 Holiness. The bull of excommunication, already a long 
 
376 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 time prepared, was affixed to the walls of Rome. We 
 regret to see in this bull complaints as to the non-resto- 
 ration of the Papal territories. On that day it would 
 have been wiser to forget the temporal prince, and to 
 personate only the spiritual power in conflict with des- 
 potism. On this ground the Pope would have had 
 a grand advantage over his enemy. 
 
 How profound the impression on the Catholic con- 
 science which this violence of the Emperor must have 
 produced throughout Christendom ! But still worse 
 than this military violence was the moral violence prac- 
 ticed at Savona, and afterward at Fontainebleau, on the 
 aged and imprisoned Pope. By culpable persistency 
 the Emperor succeeded, by the aid of some mercenary 
 Prelates, in extorting from this captive Pontiff the dis- 
 avowal of his own cause. The shameful Concordat 
 concluded at Fontainebleau in 1813, which surrendered 
 to the State all the liberties of the Church, is a much 
 greater disgrace to the iron arm which imposed it than 
 to the trembling hand by which it was signed. The 
 authoritative dissolution of the Council held at Paris in 
 1811, on the day when it seriously recognized the spir- 
 itual sovereignty of the Holy Father ; the banishing of 
 the Cardinals who refused to violate the canon law by 
 assisting at the second' marriage of Napoleon ; the cap- 
 tivity of Cardinal Pacca, as severe as the persecuted 
 priests had previously suffered at Aix and Rochefort — 
 all these intolerant measures reveal the triumph of the 
 worst revolutionary passions under the monarchical 
 restoration, and in the bosom of a servile but brilliant 
 Court, presided over by an Austrian Archduchess. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 377 
 
 The result of this Concordat is its own sufficient con- 
 demnation. We may apply to the profound politician 
 who conceived it, the criterion which he himself always 
 held as decisive, namely, that of success. Not only 
 may we say to him, " You have trampled upon right 
 and liberty ; this we know touches you very little ; but 
 what is more, you have not succeeded." Moreover, he 
 has confessed it himself, and in words which may well 
 be cited at the close of this chapter. "When Napo- 
 leon," says M. de Pradt, "found himself involved in 
 constantly-increasing religious strifes ; when, after hav- 
 ing labored to conciliate every thing, he found that he 
 had only sown seeds of discord ; when, after having 
 counted on the support of the clergy, he found them 
 full of prejudices against him ; then he began to inquire 
 why the result was so different from that which he had 
 so confidently expected: and after collecting the sad 
 fruit of his experience, he acknowledged with deep 
 grief the mistake he had committed in occupying him- 
 self with religion otherwise than as an advocate of the 
 liberty of worship. He often repeated, 'The greatest 
 mistake of my reign is to have made the Concordat ; 
 but it is too late now to repent of it. One reaps only 
 what one has sown.' " 
 
 While Napoleon was regretting the Concordat, one of 
 the most intelligent representatives of the Papacy ex- 
 pressed singularly bold views as to the separation of the 
 two powers, even at Rome. " However unwelcome 
 might be the loss of the temporal domains of the Holy 
 See," wrote Cardinal Pacca in his memoirs, " I was of 
 
 opinion that the Lord would make it a great benefit to 
 
 48 
 
378 Religion and the Eeign of Terror. 
 
 the Church. I thought that the fall of the temporal 
 power of the Popes would destroy, or at least enfeeble 
 that jealousy and blind antipathy which exist almost 
 every-where against the clergy and the Court of Rome ; 
 that the Pontiffs, delivered from the heavy burdens of 
 temporal cares, would consecrate thenceforth all their 
 attention to the spiritual good of their flock ; that the 
 Church, deprived of the pomp of honors and riches, 
 would no longer see the ranks of her clergy filled except 
 by such as 4 desire a good work and that the Popes 
 would no longer have so much regard to rank and 
 courtly recommendations in the choice of their council- 
 ors and ministers, and in the Papal promotions in gen- 
 eral, of which one could often say that though the 
 priesthood was multiplied, yet the joy of the Church 
 was not increased. In fine, one would no longer have 
 reason to fear that the ecclesiastical decisions might be 
 influenced by unworthy political and material con- 
 siderations." 
 
 Would to heaven that this experience, so dearly 
 bought by both the contracting powers in the Concor- 
 dat, had not so soon been lost ! We would then not see 
 as we do now, after the lapse of more than half a cen- 
 tury, fully as many inextricable difficulties presented in 
 the relations of the civil to the religious power, as existed 
 at the close of the French Revolution. 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 379 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 In returning from Notre Dame after the solemnities in 
 honor of the ratification of the Concordat, Napoleon 
 made this remark : " Now the French Revolution is fin- 
 ished." This book has shown how erroneous was this 
 view. Not only was the French Revolution not com- 
 pleted, but it had been arrested in the very net in 
 which it had become entangled at the outset, and in 
 some measure confirmed in its most fatal error. That 
 . which most decidedly had found its end, was the regime 
 of intolerance and persecution ; the legal equality of 
 Protestantism with Catholicism was established irrevo- 
 cably. But in respect to sincere religious liberty, the 
 Revolution had scarcely begun. With the exception of 
 a short and stormy period, during which the separation 
 of Church and State had been proclaimed and realized 
 with surprising success in the midst of great obstacles, 
 the heavy hand of the civil power had not for a single mo- 
 ment ceased to weigh upon the religious conscience. And 
 as this conscience is the ultimate fountain of liberty, des- 
 potism had taken the surest of precautions against all 
 moral independence. Persecution had been succeeded 
 by enslaving protection. The great corporations, which 
 in the past had guaranteed some independence to the 
 Church and nobility, had disappeared, and there re- 
 mained as opposed to the State nothing but disarmed 
 individuals, to whom all right of association and discus- 
 sion was severely interdicted. Nothing was easier than 
 for the civil power to shape at its pleasure this plastic 
 
380 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 clay ; but the State soon had reason to feel how fragile 
 is every edifice constructed of such materials. The true 
 cement was lacking, that of liberty, and liberty in its 
 highest character, that of the soul. No, the Revolution 
 was not complete in 1801. 
 
 Nor is it yet at this day. Neither general liberty nor 
 religious liberty in particular, has received a sufficient 
 consecration. On the first point,- all disinterested friends 
 of the liberal cause, of whatever school, are agreed, 
 there being few indeed who are entirely satisfied with 
 our present condition. The current of opinion in favor 
 of larger and better guaranteed liberties is irresistible, l 
 whatever may be said or done to check it. Neither 
 force nor favor will effectually check it for a single day. 
 On the second point the interest is less lively ; there is 
 too much indifference as to religious liberty, and there 
 are yet many so-called liberals who seem to fear it. It is 
 certain that in the France of 1864 the liberty of worship 
 does not exist. The Organic laws are still in force, and 
 they put into the hand of the State a powerful means of 
 cramping the Churches which it salaries. Every asso- 
 ciation for worship is under the necessity of procuring a 
 previous authorization. And the government seems to 
 regard it as among its sacred duties, jealously to watch 
 over, and too often to check, all religious manifestations 
 outside of the State Churches. The perplexing and 
 vexatious contests which result from the traditional 
 relations of the State and Church are incessantly 
 renewed. 
 
 The experience of the reigns which preceded that of 
 Napoleon III. would seem sufficiently conclusive. Was 
 
Religion and> the Reign of Terror. 381 
 
 not the Bourbon monarchy under Louis XVIII. and 
 Charles X. in great part ruined by its close alliance 
 with the ultra-Catholic party ? Both the State and the 
 Church lost credit by this pernicious political union. 
 The monarchy of Louis Philippe cannot be admired 
 either for its distrust of, or its concessions to, the same 
 party. Its relations to the Catholic Church were often 
 far from honest and frank, and it was rewarded by a 
 disaffection which was very dangerous in the hour of 
 trial. Under the present government the matter has 
 been little better. A struggle, silent or open, and al- 
 ways dangerous, has from time to time broken out 
 between the Church and the State, while the religious 
 sentiment itself has either grown torpid, or been per- 
 verted too much to the defense of earthly interests. 
 The clashing of personal interests in the midst of a 
 sluggishness of convictions, a movement of intrigues in 
 the absence of sober thought — such is the result of our 
 abnormal condition. 
 
 The soul itself of France is bound and hampered by 
 the administrative net-work which guards it on every 
 side, and nowhere allows free expression, either by word 
 or association, to political belief or to religious faith. 
 Let the authorities beware. This moral captivity ener- 
 vates the nation, arid will finally either turn its activity 
 into pernicious and base channels, of which a vile litera- 
 ture is the surest sign, or plunge it into the terrible 
 distraction of war. It is time to emancipate this noble 
 and generous soul of France, and to free the giant from 
 the innumerable fetters with which it is bound, as if it 
 were asleep in the land Lilliput. Such is the noble task 
 
382 Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 and the earnest aspiration of the true liberalism of to 
 day. 
 
 We could wish above all that it might escape from the 
 grave misunderstanding which has induced it to sacrifice 
 the substance for the shadow. Constitutional guarantees 
 have high worth when there is any thing real to guaran- 
 tee, namely, the positive liberty of the individual, his 
 effectual protection in the exercise of all his rights and 
 faculties. All effort will be in vain so long as our ad- 
 ministrative system remains unchanged, so long as the 
 citizen is sacrificed to the State. It is the sort of lib- 
 erty that existed at Sparta, at Rome, and in the France 
 of Napoleon I. ; it is at bottom a despotism, all the 
 more insupportable as it piques itself on being liberal. 
 The first empire, though falling at Waterloo, yet left its 
 political system deeply stamped on the national spirit. 
 While retiring from the country it thrust back, like the 
 Parthian, a mortal dart. This dart must be torn out of 
 the vitals of the nation before we enjoy true liberty. 
 Now as there is nothing more characteristic of this fatal 
 system than the enslavement of religion, it is the safest 
 course to begin the reform at this very point, and pos- 
 itively to arrest the empire of civil law as soon as it 
 approaches the threshold of the domains of conscience. 
 All liberalism which does not begin by enfranchising 
 the conscience is counterfeit ; it takes up and continues 
 the fatal French tradition, that which prevailed from 
 Louis XIV. to the time of the First Consul. 
 
 We have hoped to serve not only the cause of relig- 
 ion, but also that of liberalism in its highest interests, by 
 disengaging from the confusion of facts, the great lesson 
 
Religion and the Reign of Terror. 383 
 
 which results from the religious and ecclesiastical strug- 
 gles of the French Revolution. This lesson is con- 
 tained in that famous formula, A free Church in a free 
 State, which imposes itself with more or less force on all 
 generous spirits. Let it be well understood, there can 
 be no free State without a free Church — I mean one 
 that is entirely free, without salary, without fetters, 
 without " organic laws," and under the simple sway of 
 the common law. Thus will be guaranteed against the 
 encroachments of monarchical as well as of demagogic 
 despotism, the sacred asylum of religious liberty, which 
 is the fountain of all other liberties; and universal 
 suffrage will be taught that for its tumultuous waves, 
 as well as for the waves of the ocean, there is a higher 
 authority which says, Thus far and no farther. The 
 false idol of popular sovereignty, Vox populi, vox Dei, 
 will be broken. Such a reform will react on the whole 
 political organization, and will establish the true line 
 of demarkation between the rights of government and 
 the personal liberty of individuals. Then the Church, 
 existing in its normal condition, and deriving its life 
 from liberty, will find it to its highest interest to serve 
 and defend the civil authority. Thus will be cemented 
 that holy and fruitful alliance between religion and 
 liberalism, the want of which was so fatal to the 
 French Revolution, and the realization of which would 
 inaugurate for our country the new and definitive era 
 to which we aspire. Then, truly, the French Revolu- 
 tion will have been accomplished, for it will have 
 emancipated the conscience, and made thereof the 
 immovable rock upon which the whole State edifice 
 
384: Religion and the Reign of Terror. 
 
 reposes. We will close by repeating the noble thought 
 of Mirabeau : God is as necessary as liberty for the 
 French people. The great orator was too much the 
 child of his era to give to these words the whole of their 
 significancy. It is for us, who have seen what he did 
 not see, and who know how precarious is that liberty 
 which is viewed only as a human right, — how prompt it 
 is to grow feeble and venal ; — it is for us, the heirs and 
 admirers of that great Revolution which we desire to 
 accomplish by correcting and completing it, to declare 
 again with the fullness of absolute conviction, that God 
 is indeed as necessary as liberty for the French people. 
 Nothing but the Divine idea can safeguard liberty ; and 
 the necessary condition of this effectual guardianship is, 
 that liberty itself be regarded as of God. Every thing, 
 therefore, brings us back to the principle : A free Church 
 in a free State. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 Theae Notes are compiled from the " New American Cyclopedia," 
 " Lroekhaus's Real-Encyclopiidie," " Herzog's Eeal-Encyclopadie 
 flir Protestautische Theologie," and various other sources. 
 
 Note 1. — Voltaire. See page 25. 
 
 This notorious and profane wit was born at Paris, February 
 20, 1694. Educated under the direction of dissolute priests, 
 his l;eart and mind were early perverted by the influence of 
 bad examples and false philosophy. Subjected in his youth 
 to several imprisonments for trifling offenses, he conceived a 
 bitter hostility to arbitrary power, and gave abundant expres- 
 sion thereto both in his historical and in his anti-religious writ- 
 ings throughout his long life. Voltaire was not simply unbe- 
 lieving, he was impious. His critical knowledge was super- 
 ficial, and to supply this lack he resorted to ridicule and 
 contempt, speaking of man without modesty, and of God 
 without respect. He hesitated at nothing — lies, calumnies, or 
 perfidious accusations ; and so lacking was he in moral senti- 
 ment, that he was the first to laugh at his own unworthy acts. 
 Though professing to believe in an eternal God, this being 
 became in his hands a mere puppet, a blind fatality indifferent 
 to the affairs of men. Condorcet says, "He remained in almost 
 absolute doubt as to the personal existence of the soul after 
 the death of the body." With all his bad qualities, however, 
 he was not entirely destitute of virtues: he hated injustice, 
 and loved humanity. Witness his efforts in behalf of the 
 persecuted Calas and Labarre. When old age began to ap- 
 proach, sadness preyed upon his spirit. His popularity de- 
 
 4 ( J 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 clined, and strangers ceased to throng to his little court. The 
 thought of death, which he could not always banish, was 
 attended only with doubt and uncertainty. But he succeeded 
 well in hiding his gloom under a laughing countenance ; yet 
 
 ,it was most real, and at times betrayed itself. "'I have one 
 thing more to say in my general confession," wrote he to a 
 friend, " and that is, my gayety has always been forced." It 
 
 ' was perhaps in one of these states of gloom that he became for 
 a moment reconciled to the Catholic Church, and partook of 
 the eucharist. Restored to health and hope, he was ashamed 
 of himself, and represented the act to his Mends as simply 
 a daring parody on the mysteries of religion. But no one 
 believed him ; philosophers shrugged their shoulders and 
 pitied him, while religious men were scandalized by the mis- 
 erable profanation. 
 
 Wishing to see Paris again before he died, he set out from 
 Ferney in his eighty-fifth year ; but he arrived only to die, 
 though he was welcomed with universal enthusiasm. From 
 
 . the streets, from the windows, resounded on every side, " Long 
 live the savior of Calas ! " l< Long live the author of Zaire ! " 
 He was covered with garlands, and the people threw them- 
 selves at his feet and kissed his garments. But his triumph 
 was of only a few weeks' duration. Princes and the great of 
 the earth overwhelmed him with visits. " I am smothering," 
 said he, " but with roses." Dr. Franklin, the American em- 
 bassador, visited him in the company of his grandson. " My 
 son," said he, " fall upon your knees before this great man ;" 
 and Voltaire blessed the boy with the words, " God and lib- 
 erty." He grew feebler, but was not suffered to die in peace. 
 Priests surrounded him in his last agonies, and extorted from 
 him a confession, in which he said, " If God disposes of me I 
 die in the holy Catholic religion, in which I was born, hoping 
 that Divine mercy will deign to pardon all my faults ; and if I 
 have cast scandal upon the Church I ask pardon of it and of 
 God." The expiring life flickered once more, and the sick 
 man recanted. In his last moments he is said to have with- 
 stood a priest who asked of him, " Do you believe in the Di- 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 387 
 
 vinity of Jesus Christ ? ' " For God's sake," replied Voltaire, 
 " speak no more of that man, and let me die in peace." 
 Among his latest words are said to have been these : " I die 
 worshiping God, loving my friends, not hating my enemies, 
 but detesting superstition." Though some of these details are 
 contested, it is still certain that this great man died May, 1778, 
 without the sacraments, and amid unspeakable convulsions. 
 
 The Archbishop of Paris forbade his burial in consecrated 
 ground, and it was with the greatest difficulty that his friends 
 were able to give his body secret infermeut in an obscure vil- 
 lage church remote from Paris. The French government was 
 equally ungenerous. It forbade the newspapers to notice his 
 death, the theaters to play his pieces, and the Academy to pro- 
 nounce his eulogy. But his old friend, Frederick of Prussia, 
 caused the Berlin Academy to do him honor, and the Empress 
 Catharine XL of Russia openly mourned the event. 
 
 The indignity offered to his remains by the priests and the 
 government explains, and apologizes in part for, the extraor- 
 dinary honor subsequently rendered to his name by the revo- 
 lutionists. The obscure church in which he w T as buried was 
 sold, and the cities of Troves and Romilly contested for the 
 honor of possessing his bones. Paris, where he had died, now 
 petitioned the Constituent Assembly that his body might be 
 brought back and buried in the Pantheon, that cathedral of 
 philosophy. It was granted, and on July 11, 1791, the au- 
 thorities went in a body to the city gate to welcome his mortal 
 remains. The coffin was placed on the site of the Bastille, 
 and exposed to the multitudes the rest of the day. The next 
 day the body of Voltaire was mounted on a triumphal car 
 drawn by twelve magnificently caparisoned white horses, and 
 drawn in procession through the city toward the Pantheon. 
 The National Assembly and all the chief official bodies of 
 the city surrouuded, preceded, or followed the sarcophagus. 
 Nothing could surpass the enthusiasm of the day, or the ful- 
 some laudations that were devoted to the memory of the great 
 scoffer by the unbelieving generation of the Revolution. — See 
 •'Methodist Quarterly," October, 1866. 
 
388 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Note 2. — Rousseau. See page 39. 
 
 Jean Jacques Rousseau, the French skeptic whose writings 
 played such an important part in occasioning and in pervert- 
 ing the French Revolution, was born at Geneva, June 28, 1712. 
 His father being an erratic watchmaker, and his mother hav- 
 ing died at his birth, he was brought up by an aunt. Plu- 
 tarch, Richardson, Grotius, and Tacitus were the favorite 
 authors of his boyhood. An apprentice at the age of fifteen, 
 he fled from his hard master, and finally found a home in the 
 house of a Madame Warens, who gave him facilities for educa- 
 tion, corrupted his morals, and induced him to renounce Cal- 
 vinism, in which he had been raised, and embrace Romanism. 
 In this home he spent several years in the study of Latin, 
 music, and general literature. In 1741, at the age of twenty- 
 nine, he came to Paris, led a life of shame, and supported 
 himself by his pen. As yet, however, he was unknown to the 
 great public. In 1749 the Academy of Dijon offered a prize 
 for an essay on the question, Whether the progress of science 
 and art had improved or corrupted the morals of mankind ? 
 Rousseau eagerly caught the subject, and assailed the cause of 
 civilization in strains of impassioned eloquence. He gained 
 the prize, and created an extraordinary sensation. 
 
 He was immediately regarded as one of the greatest men of 
 the age, and, though awkward in manner, admitted into all 
 circles of society. In 1753, returning to Geneva, he was wel- 
 comed to his native city with marks of the highest respect. 
 Here, in order to regain his rights as citizen, he again changed 
 his religion, and embraced Calvinism. But he was not long 
 in the enjoyment of his happiness. His jealous disposition in- 
 volved him in bickerings with Voltaire. Soon after, he quar- 
 reled with his infidel friends Grimm and Diderot. About this 
 time, when fifty years of age, he published his two most cele- 
 brated works, Emile and the Contrat Social, in which he vio- 
 lently assailed the political principles of the day, as well as 
 the cause of civilization in general. These brought upon him 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 380 
 
 a shower of what he regarded as unjust persecution. The par- 
 liament of Paris pronounced Emile impious and blasphemous, 
 ordered it to be burned by the hangman, and called for the 
 arrest of the author. He fled to Geneva ; but Geneva, imitat- 
 ing Paris, expelled him from the Republic. Fleeing to Neuf- 
 chatel, he was soon involved in quarrels with the Calvinists, 
 and forced again to escape. Hoping to find rest in a little 
 island in Lake Bienne, he was, on the contrary, immediately 
 ordered to depart by the Senate of Berne. He now accepted 
 • the invitation of Hume, who, offered him an asylum in England. 
 But suspicion toward his new friend soon arose in the diseased 
 mind of Rousseau. Angry correspondence followed. Mr. 
 Hume closed it with a letter whose last words were a cold, 
 contemptuous, eternal farewell. How different the feelings of 
 these two foes of religion, from those of Messrs. Whitefield and 
 Wesley during and at the close of their temporary estrange- 
 ment ! Rousseau hastened to France, and after leading a vag- 
 abond life from city to city, ever imagining himself surrounded 
 by spies and enemies, finally reached Paris. This was in 1770. 
 Here he spent nearly the whole of the remaining eight years of 
 his life. But he was very unhappy. His misanthropy contin- 
 ually increased, and occasionally led him to acts bordering on 
 insanity. Desirous to escape the noise of the city, he accepted 
 the offer of a friend, and retired to Ermenouville, not far from 
 Paris, but lived only a few weeks longer. The accounts of his 
 death, which occurred July 2, 1778, in his sixty-seventh year, 
 are conflicting. Some say that he died of apoplexy after a 
 morning walk, others that he shot himself; others that, dying 
 in full possession of his senses, he asked to be borne to the 
 window, and casting his eyes upon the luxuriant landscape 
 and the serene sky, bade a calm adieu to the world. 
 
 As to the moral character of Rousseau there can be but one 
 opinion — it was detestable. He was a lawless enthusiast, 
 leading a life of open shame. His life was strangely incon- 
 sistent with his own favorite theories. A railcr against the 
 refinements of civilization, he was only satisfied when moving 
 amid the artificiality of Paris. An opponent of theaters, he 
 
390 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 wrote for them operas and dramas. An antagonist of religious 
 persecution, he assigned the penalty of death for all who dis- 
 sented from his new religion of Deism. A pretended discov- " 
 erer of a more humane system of education for youth, he 
 ruthlessly abandoned his five children to the uncertain and 
 cold charities of the foundling asylum. The woman with 
 whom he lived the last thirty years of his life was a dull, un- 
 interesting person. After having lived together twenty years, 
 they were finally married in form. Such was the man whose 
 writings did so much toward shaping the French Revolution. 
 As in the case of Voltaire, his bones were borne in triumph 
 to the Pantheon. 
 
 Note 3. — Talleybaxd. See page 46. 
 
 This brilliant statesman, but unworthy priest, was born at 
 Paris January 13, 1754. The eldest son of one of the first 
 noble families of Southern France, his childhood was neg- 
 lected. Receiving in youth a hurt causing lameness for life, 
 his birthright was given to a younger brother, and himself 
 destined to the Romish priesthood. Neglecting his theologi- 
 cal studies at the seminary of St. Sulpjce, he was introduced to 
 society in 1774 as an abbot, and soon manifested such lawless 
 propensities as to occasion several months of imprisonment in 
 the Bastille. Changing his course, however, he soon became a 
 friend of Necker, Mirabeau, and Calonne, and in 1787 was a 
 member of the House of Notables. The next year he was 
 made Bishop of Autun, with a salary of sixty thousand francs. 
 A clerical Deputy in the Constituent Assembly, he was a sup- 
 porter of the most radical liberal measures. It was he who 
 proposed the great patriotic festival of July 14, 1790 ; and on 
 this solemnity, aided by two hundred priests, who wore the 
 national colors over their white robes, he officiated at the great 
 altar which had been erected on the Champ de Mars. His 
 liberal course in politics and religion caused him to be ex- 
 communicated by the Pope. On the fall of the King he fled 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 391 
 
 to England, and thence to the United States, where he amassed 
 quite a fortune, and studied American institutions. Through 
 Madame de StaeTs influence the Convention allowed him to 
 return to France, and in 1797 he became Minister of Foreign 
 Affairs. When Bonaparte, returned from Egypt, he procured 
 an interview between him and Sieves, induced Barras to resign, 
 and thus greatly contributed to the coup uVe'tat of Brumaire 
 18, 1799, which laid the corner-stone of the Empire. Under 
 Bonaparte he was Minister of Foreign Aifairs for eight years. 
 Released from excommunication and from his clerical vows in 
 1804, he formally took as his wife Madame Grant, with whom 
 he had already lived the last seven years. Toward the close of 
 Napoleon's career he became estranged from him, and in his 
 hour of adversity contributed to his downfall. So skillful had 
 been his management, that at the fall of the Empire he wa9 
 perhaps the most popular man in France, and he came in for a 
 large share of favor under Louis XVHL and Louis Philippe. 
 Toward the close of life he returned to religious practices, and 
 in 1838 died, reconciled to the Church, at the ripe age of 
 eighty-four. 
 
 The moral character of this actor in the Revolution is evi- 
 dently none of the best. His great trait was flexibility of prin- 
 ciple, or at least of conduct. Though it has been well re- 
 marked that, when personal interest did not forbid, he always 
 remained true to the generous principles of liberty which in- 
 spired his youth. The weak point of his character was ava- 
 rice. Many shrewd sayings are attributed to him, and among 
 others this, which has become a sort of motto for diplomatists, 
 namely, that the principal olycct of language is to conceal thought. 
 
 Note 4. — Sieves. See page 46. 
 
 This revolutionary priest and statesman was born at Frejus 
 in 1748, and died at Paris in 1836. Having taken orders, he 
 received a canonship in Brittany in 1784, but as the Revolu- 
 tion drew near devoted his whole attention to politics and 
 
392 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 philosophy. A member of the first Assembly, he contributed 
 largely to the triumph of liberal principles. Though protest- 
 ing against the trial of the King, he yielded to the current, 
 and voted for his death. In 1799 he conspired with Bona- 
 parte to overthrow the Directory, though between these men 
 there existed a mutual personal enmity. On the restoration of 
 the Bourbons he was banished as a regicide, and retired to 
 Brussels ; but after the Revolution of July, 1830, he returned 
 to Paris, and after spending in retirement the last few years of 
 his eventful life, died at the advanced age of eighty-eight. 
 
 Of the character and principles of Sieyes, Mignet expresses 
 himself thus : " Matured by solitude and philosophical studies, 
 he was adapted to create a sect and sway a wide influence in 
 a time of commotion. He thoroughly knew the springs of 
 society. Cool in temperament, ardent for truth, he was auto- 
 cratic, disdainful, and impatient of contradiction. With him 
 half truth was error. He imparted his ideas to others, and 
 shrouded himself in a sort of mystery. He had more disciples 
 than colleagues. The first Constitution was almost wholly of 
 his own creation." As opposed to this opinion of the philoso- 
 pher Mignet, Talleyrand is said to have regarded Sieyes as not 
 profound ; and Bonaparte is rerjorted to have said that he 
 would readily sell his visionary theories for a good round sum. 
 
 Note 5. — Gregory. See page 47. 
 
 Henry Gregory, [Gr^goire,] the radical republican, and per- 
 haps the most noble evangelical Christian actor in the French 
 Revolution, was born in 1750, and owed his early education to 
 the Jesuits. After having studied at Nancy, and before taking 
 orders, he served some time as a teacher. Having called to 
 himself public attention by a book in the interest of the 
 Jews, he was chosen in 1789 as a clerical Deputy to the Na- 
 tional Assembly. A member of the Breton Club, out of which 
 the Jacobin was afterward developed, he advocated radical 
 changes both in Church and State. He even went so far as to 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 393 
 
 say once, that to be a King was a mortal sin. As Bishop of 
 Blois in the Constitutional Church, his services for religion are 
 a precious heritage of the universal Church. With him poli- 
 tics and religion were closely allied. He was liberal in poli- 
 tics, because he was warmly evangelical in religion. At the 
 head of the French clergy when Bonaparte came to power, he 
 would doubtless, by the aid of his colleagues, soon have in- 
 troduced evangelical reforms in the Catholic Church of France, 
 had not the First Consul, in his ambition to be crowned by the 
 Pope, destroyed the happily-begun work, and reintroduced the 
 full sway of the Papacy with all its abuses. When all the 
 Bishops resigned, in order that Bonaparte might nominate 
 them anew, or others in their place, Gregory's name was left 
 out. Under Napoleon he was afterward a Senator, and on the 
 restoration of the Bourbons lived in privacy, devoted to relig- 
 ious and scientific studies. 
 
 Gregory was true to his principles to the last, and died in 
 Paris, May 28, 1831, at the age of eighty, without having re- 
 called the oath which he took in 1791. Despite the prohibi- 
 tion of the Archbishop of Paris, faithful priests administered 
 to him the last rites of the Church. 
 
 Note 6. — Mthabeau. See page 54. 
 
 Of the life of this world-renowned character a mere note can 
 contain but meager outlines. Born of noble parentage in 
 Provence, March 9, 1749, he was treated by a tyrant father 
 with great brutality, and his moral education was utterly 
 neglected. For youthful crimes he was several times confined 
 in gloomy dungeons. Disowned by his father, he turned to 
 literature, and led a life of crime. From his career of unpar- 
 alleled excess and wretchedness, the outbreak of the Revolu- 
 tion called him to a brief career of triumph and glory. Re- 
 jected by the nobility because he possessed no feif of his own, 
 he threw himself upon the people, and was sent from Aix as 
 Deputy to the States-General. His extraordinary activity now 
 
 50 
 
394: 
 
 APPENDIX, 
 
 soon destroyed his already broken constitution. On returning 
 from the sitting of March 27, 1791, in which he had made five 
 speeches, his physician, Cabanis, saw immediately that his end 
 was at hand. He lingered but a few days. After a night of 
 terrific sufferings, at day-break he addressed his friend Cabanis : 
 " My friend, I shall die to-day. When one has come to such 
 a juncture there remains only one thing to be done ; that is, to 
 be perfumed, crowned with flowers, and intoxicated with 
 music, in order sweetly to enter into that slumber from which 
 there is no awaking." Ordering his bed to be brought to 
 the window, he looked with rapture at the brightness of the 
 sun and the freshness of his garden. " If this be not God," 
 said he, " it is like him." 
 
 He died at eight o'clock the same evening, April 2, 1791. 
 All Paris mourned him. The funeral was, if we except 
 that of Napoleon, December 15, 1840, the grandest which 
 France has ever beheld. At the close of the services at St. 
 Eustache, twenty thousand fire-arms were discharged at once. 
 Every window was shattered, and the people feared that the 
 church would fall in upon the coflin. The body of the great 
 man was then borne in triumph to the Pantheon. 
 
 As to Mirabeau's character, Lamartine says : " At the foot of 
 the tribune he was a man devoid of shame or virtue ; in the 
 tribune, he was an honest man. The chilling materialism of 
 his age had crushed in his heart the expansion, force, and 
 craving for imperishable things. Neither his character, acts, 
 nor thoughts have the impress of immortality. If he had 
 believed in God he might have died a martyr." 
 
 Note 7. — Rabaut St. Etienne. See page 63. 
 
 Rabaut St. Etienne was a Protestant clergyman, and one of 
 the most consistent and honorable of the revolutionists. He 
 was born at Nimes in 1741, and executed at Paris, December 
 5, 1793. He was an eloquent speaker and writer, and had the 
 courage to protest against the right of the Convention to try 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 395 
 
 the King. He was involved in the fall of the Girondists. He 
 fell a victim to the cause of truth and liberty. 
 
 Note 8. — James Necker. See page 68. 
 
 James Necker, the famous French financier, was born of a 
 German family at Geneva, in 1732. He amassed immense 
 wealth as a banker, and obtained celebrity as a political and 
 religious writer. A Protestant himself, he married the talented 
 daughter of a Swiss Pastor, and became the father of the cele- 
 brated Madame de Stael. He died at Copet, near Geneva, in 
 1804. 
 
 Note 9. — Barnave. See page 71. 
 
 A. P. J. M. Barnave, born at Grenoble in 1761, was a Prot- 
 estant, and became celebrated for his eloquence and liberalism 
 in the early period of the Revolution. Foreseeing the Reign 
 of Terror, he generously endeavored to save the King, but fell 
 himself before the sweeping torrent of popular madness. 
 Brought before the bloody tribunal of Tinville, he defended 
 himself with such power as to bring even Camille Desmoulins 
 to tears. Arrived at the scaffold, he raised his eyes to heaven 
 and exclaimed, "Behold at length the reward for all I have 
 done for liberty 1 " He was guillotined November 29, 1793, 
 at the age of thirty-one. 
 
 Note 10. — Petion. See page 72. 
 
 Jerome Potion, born at Chartres, 1753, distinguished himself 
 in the early part of the Revolution as a violent anarchist. 
 Elected to the mayoralty of Paris over Lafayette, he participated 
 in the insurrection of August 10, and made no effort to check 
 the dreadful massacres of September. The first President of 
 the Convention, he showed signs of a milder policy, and be- 
 
396 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 came involved in the fate of the Girondists. Escaping from 
 Paris, and failing to raise an insurrection of the people, he 
 wandered about for some months, and, having either starved 
 or shot himself, was finally found in a field half devoured by 
 wolves. 
 
 Note 11. — Lameth. See page 80. 
 
 Three brothers of this name took part in the Revolution. 
 They had all taken service under Lafayette in the American 
 war. 1. Alexander served in the first Assembly of France, 
 fled with Lafayette, was imprisoned in Prussia, and returned 
 and held office under the Consulate. He died 1829. 2. Charles, 
 the next in importance, born 1757, among the first of the no- 
 bles to join the Third Estate, was a moderate revolutionist, and 
 fled his country in 1792 ; but returning in 1800 he took mili- 
 tary service under Napoleon, and died a partisan of Louis 
 Philippe in 1832. 3. Theodore, like his brothers, a Constitu- 
 tionalist, fled to Switzerland during the Reign of Terror. He 
 died in 1837, aged eighty-one. 
 
 Note 12. — Robespierre. See page 89. 
 
 This notorious Terrorist was born at Arras in 1759. His 
 mother dying in his childhood, and his father neglecting him, 
 he was thrown on the public, and received his education from 
 the charity of some priests, who enabled him to study eight 
 years at the college of Louis le Grand at Paris. Returning to 
 Arras he began the practice of law, and it is curious enough 
 to notice that his first important case was a defense of the 
 introduction of Franklin's lightning rods against the charge of 
 impiety, (1783.) Lamartine describes him as of slight figure, 
 angular limbs, shrill voice, forehead small and projecting, eyes 
 sunken and blue, wide nostrils, large mouth, thin lips, pointed 
 chin, and complexion sallow and livid. A Deputy of the 
 Third Estate in 1789, he was marked from the beginning as a 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 397 
 
 theoretical radical. Of slender means, he occupied poor, ill- 
 furnished lodgings, sent one fourth of his meager pay of eight- 
 een francs a day to his sister, and appeared in the tribune 
 in a threadbare olive-green coat, the only one he possessed. 
 On the death of Mirabeau he rose rapidly in influence. From 
 June, 1791, to April, 1792, he held the office of Public Ac- 
 cuser. Though not a member of the Legislative Assembly, he 
 was none the less influential as an officer in the municipality, 
 and as an orator of the Jacobins. In the Convention he led 
 the Jacobins in bringing the King to trial and execution. 
 From this time till his fall he was a sort of king of the Terror- 
 ists. Arrested and condemned by the Convention as a con- 
 spirator, he was rescued by the Jacobins and taken to the 
 Hotel de Ville. Disappointed in his expectation that the 
 populace would enable him to overturn the Convention, he 
 was arrested and guillotined July 29, 1794, at the age of 
 thirty-six. 
 
 The closing scene of his life I copy from Alison : " Henriot 
 descended the stair of the Hotel de Ville, but seeing the 
 square deserted he vented his execrations on his faithless fol- 
 lowers, who had for the most part abandoned the King in the 
 same manner on the 10th of August, and hastened back to his 
 comrades. The conspirators finding themselves unsupported 
 gave themselves up to despair. The National Guard rushed 
 rapidly up the stairs, and entered the room where Robespierre 
 and the other leaders of the revolt were assembled. Robes- 
 pierre was sitting with his elbow on his knees, and his head 
 resting on his hand. Meda discharged his pistol, which broke 
 his under jaw, and he fell under the table. St. Just implored 
 Le Bas to put an end to his life. 4 Coward, follow my exam- 
 ple,' said he, and blew out his brains. Couthon was seized 
 under a table, feebly attempting to strike with a knife, which 
 he wanted the courage to plunge in his heart. Coffiuhal and 
 the younger Robespierre threw themselves from the windows, 
 and were seized in the inner court of the building. Henriot 
 had been thrown down the stairs by Corfinhal ; but though 
 bruised and mutilated, he contrived to crawl into the entrance 
 
398 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 of a sewer, from whence he was dragged out by the troops of 
 the Convention. Robespierre and Couthon being supposed to 
 be dead were dragged by the heels to the Quai Pelletier, 
 where it was proposed to throw them into the river ; but it 
 being discovered when day returned that they still breathed, 
 they were stretched on a board and carried to the Assembly. 
 The members having refused to admit them, they were con- 
 veyed to the Committee of General Safety, where Robespierre 
 lay for nine hours stretched on a table, the same with that 
 where he had signed the death warrant of so many noble citi- 
 zens, with his broken jaw still bleeding, and suffering alike 
 under bodily pain and the execrations and insults of those 
 around him. 
 
 " During the whole time that this cruel torture lasted he 
 evinced a stoical apathy. Foam merely issued from his mouth, 
 which the humanity of some around him led them to wipe off; 
 but his finger still with convulsive energy was fixed on the holster 
 of the pistol which he had not had the courage to discharge. 
 From thence he was sent to the Conciergerie, where he was 
 confined in the same cell which had been occupied by Danton, 
 Hebert, and Chaumette. At length he was brought with all 
 his associates to the Revolutionary Tribunal, and as soon as 
 the identity of their persons was established they were con- 
 demned. 
 
 " At four in the morning on the 29th of July all Paris was in 
 motion to witness the death of the tyrant. He was placed on 
 the chariot between Henriot and Couthon, whose remains were 
 as mutilated as his own. The crowd, which had long ceased 
 to attend the executions, manifested the utmost joy at their 
 fate. He was conducted to the Place de la Revolution ; the 
 scaffold was placed on the spot where Louis XVI. and Marie 
 Antoinette had suffered. The blood from his jaw burst 
 through the bandage and overflowed his dress ; his face was 
 ghastly pale. He shut his eyes, but he could not close his ears 
 against the imprecations of the multitude. A woman, breaking 
 from the crowd, exclaimed, 'Murderers of all my kindred, 
 your agony fills me with joy ; descend to hell covered with 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 399 
 
 the curses of every mother in France ? ' Twenty of his com- 
 rades were executed before him. When he ascended the scaf- 
 fold the executioner tore the bandage from his face ; the 
 lower jaw fell upon his breast, and he uttered a yell which 
 filled every heart with horror. For some minutes the frightful 
 figure was held up to the multitude ; he was then placed 
 under the ax, and the last sounds which reached his ears were 
 the exulting shouts, which were prolonged for some minutes 
 after his death. 
 
 "Along with Robespierre were executed Henriot, Couthon, 
 St. Just, Dumas, Coffinhal, Simon, and all the leaders of the 
 revolt. St. Just alone displayed the firmness which had so 
 often been witnessed among the victims whom they had sent 
 to the scaffold. Couthon wept with terror. The others died 
 uttering blasphemies, which were drowned in the cheers of the 
 people. They shed tears for joy, they embraced each other in 
 transport; they crowded round the scaffold to behold the 
 bloody remains of the tyrants. ' Yes, Robespierre, there is a 
 God,' said a poor man as he approached the lifeless body of 
 one so lately the object of dread. His fall was felt by all 
 present as an immediate manifestation of the Divinity." 
 
 Note 13. — Camille Desmotjlins. See page 84. 
 
 This man, who was born in Picardy in 1762, and guillotined 
 in Paris, April 5, 1794, was one of the most active and interests 
 ing characters of the whole French Revolution. He was a 
 schoolmate of Robespierre, and an intimate friend of Marat 
 and Danton. Scarcely equaled as a popular orator, he was 
 yet more powerful as a satirical journalist. After contributing 
 largely to bring the Revolution to the Reign of Terror he 
 became finally sick of its excesses, and for the purpose of 
 bringing about a milder policy, established in January, 1794, a 
 journal called the Old Cordelier. His eloquent denunciations 
 of the policy of the extremists now brought upon him the 
 wrath of Robespierre and the Jacobins. When Robespierre 
 
400 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 proposed that his writings should be burned, Desmoulins ex- 
 claimed in indignation, " To burn is not to answer," and from 
 that hour his fate was sealed. Once condemned to death, he 
 spent his remaining hours alternately in reading Rousseau and 
 the " Night Thoughts " of Young, in making sarcastic allu- 
 sions to his enemies, and in weeping at the thought of being 
 separated from his worthy and beautiful wife, Lucile. When 
 the executioners came, he demeaned himself like a madman. 
 All the way to the scaffold he harangued the crowd, imploring 
 rescue. Among his last words were, "Behold the reward of 
 the first apostle of liberty. But the monsters who murder me 
 will not survive me long. Send this lock of hair to my 
 mother-in-law." His adored wife was executed a few days later. 
 
 Note 14. — Prus VI. See page 119. 
 
 This unfortunate Prelate was born in Italy in 1717, and died 
 in Valence, France, August 29, 1799. He was elected to the 
 Papal chair in 1775. He had scarcely settled his difficulties 
 with the Emperor of Austria when he found a greater enemy 
 in the French Republic. Dethroned by the French general, 
 Berthier, February 15, 1798, he was conducted to France, and 
 imprisoned at Valence. He was graceful, affable, and learned. 
 His reign had been mild, and, as compared to those of other 
 Popes, even liberal. 
 
 Note 15. — Brienne. See page 124. 
 
 Lomenie de Brienne, a French politician and Cardinal, born 
 1724, deceased in Paris February 14, 1794, was made Minister 
 of Finance in 1787, but lost all credit in a few months, and 
 was dismissed. He was arrested by the revolutionists in 1794, 
 and treated with such barbarity that he died the same night 
 of apoplexy. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 401 
 
 Note 16. — Gobel. See page 124. 
 
 This weak and cowardly Archbishop of Paris early em- 
 braced the Revolution, and often brought contempt both upon 
 himself and his cause. He was seventy years of age when, unde* 
 the pressure of fear, he abjured the Christian religion, and sacri- 
 ficed in his own Cathedral Church to the Goddess of Reason. 
 He was arrested and condemned to death as an Atheist in 
 1794. During his imprisonment his genuine convictions, as 
 far as he had any, regained the ascendency, and he sought 
 consolation by returning to the religion which he had so 
 shamelessly disavowed. On his way to the scaffold he ear- 
 nestly recited the prayers for the dying. 
 
 Note 17. — Lanjuenais. See page 134. 
 
 This French jurist and statesman was born at Rennes in 
 1753, and died in Paris in 1827. One of the most gifted mem- 
 bers of the Constituent Assembly, and of the Convention, he 
 was a thorough Republican ; but siding with the Girondists, 
 he was outlawed in June, 1793. He succeeded, however, in 
 secreting himself for eighteen months in a closet in his own 
 house until the storm had passed. Though faithful to his 
 principles, he accepted favors from Napoleon, and afterward 
 from Louis XVHI. He was versed in the Oriental languages, 
 .and among many other honors, was made a member of the 
 Philosophical Society of Philadelphia. Lamartinc says of 
 him, " He was a Christian philosopher, his revolutionary ideas 
 being but a form of his evangelical faith." 
 
 Note 18.— Bailly. See page 135. 
 
 This philosopher and statesman, whose abuse and sufferings 
 in the hour of death will excite the indignation and sympathy 
 of mankind to the latest generations, was born at Paris in 
 17o0, and executed November 12, 1793, in the same city. 
 
 51 
 
402 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 After having led a quiet, scholarly life till his fiftieth year, tie 
 was suddenly thrown into the tumult of politics in 1789. His 
 noble conduct as first president of the Constituent Assembly, 
 and later as Mayor of Paris, is well known. Retiring before 
 the storm in September, 1791, he was arrested and brought to 
 Paris in 1793. His execution is described by Lamartine in 
 substance as follows : " His punishment was simply a pro- 
 tracted assassination. His head bare, his hair cut off, his 
 hands tied behind him with a large rope, his body covered 
 only by a thin shirt beneath a freezing sky, he slowly trav- 
 ersed the city of Paris, the scum of the capital ragirjg like an 
 insulting torrent around the death cart. Men carried at his 
 side a red flag at the end of a long pole. This they dipped 
 from time to time in the filth of the gutters and dashed it then 
 into Bailly's face. Others spit upon him. His features, lacer- 
 ated and soiled with filth and blood, almost lost the human 
 form. This awful march to death lasted three hours. Arrived 
 at the Field of Mars, which the populace had designated as 
 the place of his sufferings, he was forced to walk around the 
 field on foot, and even to kiss the ground itself. But here a 
 new whim seized the mob. They ordered the guillotine to be 
 taken down, and to be reconstructed close to the Seine up^n a 
 dung-heap accumulated from the sewers of Paris. The mon- 
 sters loaded the old man's shoulders with beams, and com- 
 pelled him to drag himself along under the weight. On the 
 way he fainted. He was now compelled to watch for another* 
 hour the reconstruction of the scaffold. Meantime rain and 
 snow fell, and his body was chilled with cold. But the souJ 
 of the martyr of liberty trembled not. He pitied his degraded 
 persecutors, and confided himself to immortality." His history 
 of astronomy is still a standard work. 
 
 Note 19. — The Girondists. See page 143. 
 
 The severe fate of these rash, inexperienced, but sincere 
 
 revolutionists will always render them a subject of tender 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 403 
 
 interest. As a whole they were not Christians. They were 
 deterred from the Church as they then saw it, by their earnest 
 love of freedom ; but their hearts were full of noble aspira- 
 tions. While in prison awaiting the hour of execution their 
 thoughts were necessarily turned to the question of immor- 
 tality. Some of their last words, as reported by Lamartine, 
 are interesting. From him I select as follows : " ' What shall 
 we be doing to-morrow at this time ? ' asked Ducos toward the 
 morning of the last day. Each had a different reply. ' We 
 shall sleep after the fatigues of the day,' replied some. Fon- 
 frede, Gensonne, Carra, Fauchet, and Brissot spoke in conii- 
 dence of the immortality of the soul. 'We are not sublime 
 dupes,' said Vergniaud, 'but beings who obey their moral in- 
 stinct, and who, when they have fulfilled this duty, suffer, or 
 enjoy, in immortality the destinies of humanity. Let us die, 
 then, not with hope, but with assurance. Death is but the 
 greatest act of life, since it gives birth to a higher state of 
 existence.' Daylight began to pour into the windows. ' Let 
 us go to bed,' said Ducos ; ' life is such a trifling thing that it 
 is not worth the hour of sleep we lose in regretting it.' ' Let 
 us watch,' said Lasourcc ; ' eternity is so certain and so terrible 
 that a thousand lives would not suffice to prepare for it.' A 
 pious priest, Lambert, attended the prisoners. When Brissot 
 saw him he sprang to him, but declined his offices. To the 
 question, ' Do you believe in the immortality of the soul, and 
 the providence of God?' he replied, 'I do believe in them, 
 and it is because I believe in them that I am about to die.' 
 Fauchet, the unfaithful Bishop, confessed his sins, and received 
 absolution. Then he in turn heard the confession of Sillery, 
 and pronounced his absolution. But the terrible death-cart 
 arrived, and, each leaving some little legacy— a watch, or a 
 lock of hair — to wife or friend, they went forth, and bravely 
 perished for the cause of liberty. 
 
404 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Note 20. — Couthon. See page 155. 
 
 Georges Couthon, one of the worst and most violent charac- 
 ters of the Revolution, was born in 1756, and executed July 28, 
 1794. He was one of the most extreme of the radicals. He 
 was largely guilty of the blood of the Girondists, stood by St. 
 Just and Robespierre in the Committee of Public Safety, and 
 when the hour of trial came tried to stab himself, but, lacking 
 the courage, was borne to the guillotine. 
 
 Note 21. — Roland. See page 170. 
 
 This sfern, philosophic, political extremist was- bo**n at 
 Lyons in 1732, and committed suicide November 15, 1793. 
 He was involved in the fate of the Girondists. He escaped 
 arrest, however ; but a few days later learning of the execu- 
 tion of his gifted wife, he deliberately resolved not to survive 
 her, and going out upon the public road, seated himself at the 
 foot of a tree and stabbed himself with his cane-sword. In 
 his pocket was found a paper with these curious words : 
 " Whoever thou art that findest these remains, respect them as 
 those of a man who consecrated his life to usefulness, and who 
 dies as he has lived, virtuous and honest. On hearing of my 
 wife's death I would not live another day upon this earth so 
 stained with crirnes." His wife's last words breathe a similar 
 spirit : " O liberty, what crimes are committed in thy name ! " 
 Both of them were examples of ancient Roman, rather than 
 of Christian, virtue. 
 
 Note 22. — Legendre. See page 172. 
 
 Legendre was one of the coarsest actors in the Revolution. 
 His previous life of sailor and butcher seem to have added to 
 his natural ferocity. He was active in the taking of the Bas- 
 tille, in the invasion of the Tuileries June 20, 1792, in the 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 405 
 
 founding of the Cordelier Club, and in the Committee of 
 Public Safety. Subsequently becoming more 'moderate, he 
 acted as a member of the Council of the Five Hundred. He 
 died in 1797, and, by bequeathing his own body to the sur- 
 geons for dissection, made it seem less strange that he had 
 proposed to cut up that of Louis XVI., and divide it among 
 the eighty-six Departments of France. 
 
 Note 23. — Marat. See page 193. 
 
 Marat was a sort of plebeian Nero. Born in 1746 in Switz- 
 erland, he had early obtained some reputation for proficiency 
 in jihilosophy and medicine. In the early part of the Revolu- 
 tion he became noted as a demagogue journalist. His thirst 
 for vulgar popularity was only equaled by his thirst for blood. 
 His propositions, to hang at one time eight hundred Deputies 
 on as many trees of the Tuileries, to execute two hundred and 
 seventy thousand suspected persons to appease the people, 
 and that all the towns of France should imitate the massacres 
 of Paris, are simple examples of his general spirit. On the 
 defeat of Dumouriez, he proposed trying all the generals en 
 masse for treason. For various excesses he was at one time 
 brought to trial, but the demagogue tribunal acquitted him. 
 By his very excesses in wickedness, and by his pandering to 
 the populace, he finally arrived at dictatorial influence, and 
 disposed of the lives of men at will. At last courage arose 
 out of "despair, and a noble young woman, Charlotte Corday, 
 assassinated him July 13, 1793, thus freeing the world of a 
 monster, and France of a remorseless tyrant. But it is the 
 shame of the human race that after his death he was for a time 
 almost worshiped. After the fall of Robespierre, however, his 
 remains, which had been placed in the Pantheon, were taken 
 thence and cast into a public sewer. 
 
406 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Note 24. — Barrere. See page 193. 
 
 Barrere, a brilliant but unprincipled revolutionist, was bom 
 in 1755, and died at Paris 1841, aged eighty-six. He was a 
 leader of the Jacobins, and the author of several expressions 
 which became very popular, such as, "The tree of liberty 
 grows only when watered by the blood of tyrants," and " It is 
 only the dead who do not come back again." A coward, he 
 fawned upon Robespierre so long as he was powerful, but on 
 his fall required only one day to go over to the other political 
 pole. Rejected by Napoleon, he was compelled to live in 
 exile in Belgium, but the Revolution of 1830 allowed him 
 to return to France. 
 
 Note 25. — Condorcet. See page 196. 
 
 Condorcet, a materialistic theorist, with unbounded confi- 
 dence in the perfectibility of science, was born in 1743. He 
 was involved in the fall of the Girondists, and poisoned him- 
 self in 1794 to escape the guillotine. 
 
 Note 26. — Collot D'Herbois. See page 200. 
 
 Collot d'Herbois, born in 1750, at first an actor, became 
 afterward one of the most sanguinary of revolutionists. Sent 
 to Lyons with Fouche to punish the inhabitants for revolting, 
 he found the guillotine too slow, and, collecting the prisoners 
 in ranks, caused them to be mown down by cannon shot. 
 He confessed that on one occasion sixty were cut down by a 
 single shot. He was a licentious drunkard, without a redeem- 
 ing trait. Banished to Cayenne with other scoundrels in 1795, 
 he died soon after in terrible torments from having drunk a 
 bottle of brandy while suffering from yellow fever. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 407 
 
 Note 27. — Lebon. See page 200. 
 
 Lebon, at first a humane priest, caught the intoxication of 
 revolution, and finally became one of the worst of Terrorists, 
 mingling beastly profligacy with unquenchable bloodthirsti- 
 ness. He was guillotined in 1795 at the age of thirty. 
 
 Note 28. — Clootz. See page 201. 
 
 Jean Baptiste Clootz, self-styled Anacharsis, a Prussian baron, 
 born at Cleves in 1755, and guillotined at Paris, March 23, 1794, 
 was a fanatical revolutionist and maudlin philanthropist, for 
 whom, in point of consistent absurdity, a parallel is scarcely 
 to be found in the whole scope of history. Educated from 
 childhood in Paris, and without any healthful restraint on his 
 enthusiastic and imaginative nature, he early conceived the 
 idea of reforming, the human race, and actually made journeys 
 in England, Germany, and Italy for its propagation. Return- 
 ing to France in 1789, he was made a French citizen by the 
 Legislative Assembly, and expressed his thanks therefor in the 
 following words : " Charles I. had a successor, Louis XVI. will 
 have none. You know how to appreciate the heads of the 
 jmilosophers ; it now only remains to set a price on the heads 
 of tyrants." For the cause of the Revolution he lavished 
 freely his immense income, and offered to raise, himself, a regi- 
 ment of Prussians. As member of the Convention, he voted 
 for the King's death " in the name of mankind," and added, 
 " I condemn likewise the infamous Frederick William II. to 
 death." To his political fanaticism he joined the intensest 
 hatred of Christianity, declaring himself publicly the "personal 
 enemy of Jesus Christ." Involved with Hubert and Chaumette 
 in the charge of corrupting the public morals, he was guillo- 
 tined by the very mob-regime for which he hud shown so 
 much fanatical devotion. 
 
408 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Note 29. — Cambon. See page 205. 
 
 Cainbon was a violent JacobiD, who contributed to the fall 
 of Robespierre, and finally managed to outlive the Revolution. 
 He died in exile at Brussels in 1820, aged sixty-six. 
 
 Note 30. — Custine. See page 211. 
 
 Custine, a French nobleman, who ardently embraced the 
 Revolution, had imbibed the spirit of Liberty with Lafayette 
 in America. The reward he obtained for all his sacrifices was, 
 death at the hands of the Terrorist tribunal on a groundless 
 charge of treason. Whatever his life may have been, he 
 died like a Christian. 
 
 Note 31. — Chaumette. See page 212. 
 
 Chaumette was an obscene Atheist-Terrorist, born in 1765, 
 who figured largely in the darkest period of the Reign of 
 Terror. He rejected his Christian name, and played the high 
 priest in the worship of Reason in Notre Dame. He boasted 
 that he could recognize the traitors by their very looks as they 
 passed in the streets. He was swept into eternity with the 
 rest of the vile atheistic herd, March 24, 1794. 
 
 Note 32. — Hebert. See page 213. 
 This man, who gave his name to the atheistic party, and is 
 generally classed with Clootz and Chaumette for moral infamy, 
 was born in 1755, and executed in 1794. He obtained noto- 
 riety as the editor of a low journal, Pere DucJtene, proposed 
 obscene questions to the Queen on her trial, and played a 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 409 
 
 large part in the great massacres. Atheism might well dis- 
 pense with the honor of having had such a man for priest and 
 apostle. 
 
 Note 33.— Fouche. See page 229. 
 
 Fouche, at first a teacher of philosophy, then a cruel, blas- 
 pheming Jacobin, and afterward a powerful instrument of 
 tyranny in the hands of Napoleon, was born at Nantes in 
 1763, and died at Trieste in 1820. Brought up in a cloister, 
 he became a bitter persecutor of the Church, having polluted 
 many altars, and on one occasion even caused the Bible to be 
 dragged through the streets at the tail of an ass. After the 
 fall of Robespierre he changed his politics, (not his principles, 
 for he never had any,) and played an important role during the 
 whole of Napoleon's career. 
 
 Note 34. — St. Just. See page 240. 
 
 St. Just, the friend of Robespierre, the austere Stoic, the re- 
 morseless Terrorist, was born in 1768, and guillotined July 27, 
 1794. Of noble family, careful culture, great keenness of intel- 
 lect, of unbounded enthusiasm for, and devotion to, what he 
 regarded as the true principles of liberty, he was well fitted 
 for the cruel role he played in the triumvirate of Robespierre, 
 Couthon, and himself. Victim of the fatal doctrine that all 
 justice and right must yield to what is regarded as for the 
 interest of the u public safety," he was the organ of many of 
 the worst crimes of the Reign of Terror. He was a sort of 
 merciless, heartless incarnation of logic. He was executed 
 at the age of twenty-six. 
 
 Note 35.— Fouquier-Tesville. Sec page 241. 
 
 Fouquier-Tinville, the Public Accuser of the revolutionary 
 tribunal, who remorselessly sent thousands to the guillotine, 
 
 52 
 
410 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 was born in Picardy, 1747, and executed on the fall of Robes- 
 pierre in 1794. Without talent, and with a coldly sanguinary 
 nature, he was a proper man to execute the purposes of the 
 Terrorists. 
 
 Note 36. — Tallien. See page 249. 
 
 Tallien, born in 1769, known at first as an editor, later as a 
 violent Jacobin, became finally the chief instrument in the 
 fall of Robespierre. The rise of Napoleon threw him into the 
 shade. He died in 1820. 
 
 Note 37. — Barras. See page 273. 
 
 Barras, of an ancient noble family of Provence, of adven- 
 turous youth, dissipated manners, reckless, daring character, at 
 one time a Jacobin and Terrorist, and afterward an active 
 agent in inaugurating the military despotism of Bonaparte, 
 was born in 1755, and died in retirement in 1829. 
 
 Note 38. — La Reveilliere-Lepatjx. See page 279. 
 
 This whimsical reformer and high priest of Deism was born 
 in 1753. As member of the Convention, he defended in vain 
 the Girondists, eluded the wrath of Robespierre, became a Di- 
 rector, refused to take the oath of allegiance to Napoleon, lived 
 then in obscurity for a time, and died in 1824. 
 
 Note 39. — Jordan. See page 280. 
 
 Camille Jordan, born at Lyons in 1769, was one of the few 
 French revolutionists who united to radical republicanism a 
 sincere respect for and faith in the Christian religion. He 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 411 
 
 opposed the anarchy of the Jacobins and the absolutism of 
 Napoleon, but held office under the restored Bourbons. He 
 died in 1821. 
 
 Note 40. — Royer-Collard. See page 280. 
 
 Royer-Collard was a philosopher-politician, who joined con- 
 stitutional liberalism to a deep reverence for religion. In phi- 
 losophy he opposed the prevalent sensualism, and was the 
 precursor of Cousin. He died in 1845, at the age of seventy. 
 
 Note 41. — Portalis. See page 303. 
 
 Portalis, a moderate liberal, the Minister of Religion under 
 Napoleon, was born in Provence in 1746, and died in 1807. 
 
 Note 42. — Napoleon. See page 327. 
 
 We make the following extract from a critique on Napo- 
 leon's career by Dr. Channing : 
 
 " We close our view of Bonaparte's character by saying, that 
 his original propensities, released from restraint and pampered 
 by indulgence to a degree seldom allowed to mortals, grew up 
 into a spirit of despotism as stern and absolute as ever usurped 
 the human heart The love of power and supremacy absorbed, 
 consumed him. No other passion, no domestic attachment, 
 no private friendship, no love of pleasure, no relish for letters 
 or the arts, no human sympathy, no human weakness, divided 
 his mind with the passion for dominion, and for dazzling 
 manifestations of his power. Before this, duty, honor, love, 
 humanity, fell prostrate. Josephine, we are told, was dear to 
 him ; but the devoted wife,^vho had stood firm and faithful in 
 the day of his doubtful fortunes, was cast off in his prosperity 
 to make room for a stranger who might be more subservient 
 
412 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 to Ms power. He was affectionate, we are told, to his brothers 
 and mother; but his brothers, the moment they ceased to be 
 his tools, were disgraced ; and his mother, it is said, was not 
 allowed to sit in the presence of her imperial son. He was 
 sometimes softened, we are told, by the sight of the field of 
 battle strewn with the wo'unded and dead. But, if the Moloch 
 of his ambition claimed new heaps of slain to-morrow, it was 
 never denied. With all his sensibility, he gave millions to the 
 sword with as little compunction as he would have brushed 
 away so many insects which had infested his march. To him 
 all human will, desire, power, were to bend. His superiority 
 none might question. He insulted the fallen who had con- 
 tracted the guilt of opposing his progress; and not even 
 woman's loveliness, and the dignity of a queen, could give 
 shelter from his contumely. His allies were his vassals, nor 
 was their vassalage concealed. Too lofty to use the. arts of 
 conciliation, preferring command to persuasion, overbearing and 
 all-grasping, he spread distrust, exasperation, fear, and revenge 
 through Europe ; and, when the day of retribution came, the 
 old antipathies and mutual jealousies of nations were swal- 
 lowed up in one burning purpose to prostrate the common 
 tyrant, the universal foe." 
 
 Note 43.— Pius VH. See page 346. 
 
 Pius VH., born at Cesena in 1740, of the noble family of the 
 Chiaramonti, was made Cardinal in 1785, and during the 
 early period of the French Revolution manifested very liberal 
 political sentiments. Soon after the death of the unfortunate 
 Pius VI. he was elected to the Papal See by the conclave 
 which met at Venice. His reign dates from March 13, 1800. 
 His rule, from the fall of Napoleon to his death, which hap- 
 pened August 20, 1823, was not Sappy for his subjects. He 
 was too favorable to the despotic principles of Austria. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 413 
 
 Note 44.— Fesch. See page 368. 
 
 Joseph Fesch, Cardinal Archbishop of Lyons, brother of 
 Napoleon's mother, was born in Corsica in 1763, and made 
 Cardinal in 1803. He accompanied Pope Pius VII. to Paris 
 in 1804 on the occasion of the coronation of Bonaparte, en- 
 joyed the favor of the Emperor till 1809, and spent the latter 
 part of his life in Rome. He died in 1839. 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 • Alison, his estimate of the French Kevo- 
 lution, 5. 
 Ambrose, St., referred to, 117. 
 America the only perfectly tolerant na- 
 tion, 38. 
 
 Anslas, Boissy <T, his wholesome policy, 
 
 2(31-263 ; 268, 282. 
 Anti-Sabbath orders, 310. ■ 
 Apostasy, 217-220; of Protestants, 225. 
 Atheism, professed, 161, 166; in conflict 
 
 with Deism, 233; worse than Paganism, 
 
 247: persecutes without excuse, 277; 
 
 its schools, 281; its moral fruits, 203. 
 Aubcrt. the prtest, absurd marriage of, 171. 
 Augereau, 274. 
 August 4, croat epoch of, 58. 
 Avignon, il9— 121. 
 
 Babeuf, 273. 
 
 Baillv, wisdom of, 55; pleads for liberty, 
 135. 
 
 Ball, the, of the victims, 251. 
 Bainave, 71 ; impolicy of, 113. 
 Barras, 273. 
 Barrei e, 103, 211. 
 Bastille, taking of, 58. 
 Herthier, 29h 
 
 Bishops, constitutional, 124; of France, 
 dissent from the Pope, 122. 
 
 Bonapaite, Joseph, his marriage, 371. 
 
 Bossuet. his politics drawn from the Bi- 
 ble, 25. 44. 
 
 Biavard put to death. ISO. 
 
 Brienne, intolerance of, 43, 124; resigns 
 his canlinalate, 125. 
 
 Brittany alarmed, 100. 
 
 Calas, judicial murder of, 35. 
 
 Calendar, the atheistic, 214 ; retroactive, 
 
 290. 
 
 Cambon, 182, 205, 259. 
 Campo Formio, 285. 
 Carnot, 273. 
 
 Catechism, Napoleonic, 365. 
 
 Catholic Church, declension of pietv in, 
 
 32 ; feeble apologists of, 33 ; its hold on 
 
 the people in 17!>9, 58,100. 
 Cavou'r, his great political axiom, 77. 
 Cazales warns against persecution, 114. 
 Centralization, 150, 320; fatal effects of. 
 
 322 ; complete, 336. 
 Cesarism, 382. 
 ( habot, 224. 
 
 Channing's opinion of Napoleon, note 42. 
 Chaumette, 213; attacks the priests, 231 ; 
 
 recants his Atheism, 236. 
 Chenier pleads for liberty of conscience, 
 
 153, 226. 
 
 Church Councils at Paris, 310-312. 
 Church and State separated, 260. 
 Civil Constitution of the Clergy, 91-97. 
 Civil War. 101. 
 
 Clergy, the high, intolerant, 43, 44 ; allow- 
 ance to be made for, 45; they flatter 
 Napoleon, 863. 
 
 Clergy, the lower, 46; enthusiastic for 
 liberty. 50. 
 
 Clootz, 201. 
 
 Comedian> enfranchised, 89. 
 Committee, the ecclesiastical, 78 ; report 
 
 of, 81. 
 Collot, 200 
 
 Concordats of 1268 and 1516, 30. 
 
414 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Concordat of Napoleon, 840; its basis, 
 345; its provisions, 349-353 ; is unpopu- 
 lar at Paris, 351 ; proclaimed in Notre 
 Dame, 345; criticised by Gregory, 356; 
 led to persecution, 359 ; is bitterly re- 
 gretted, 377. 
 
 Condorcet, 196, 201. 
 
 Conscience, danger of violating, 186 ; de- 
 fies force, 336. 
 Consulate, the, 318. 
 
 Contrat Social, the germ of the French 
 
 Eevolution, 39, 62; realized, 177, 243. 
 Convents, 80. 
 
 Convention, the, 187; its rashness, 190; 
 
 its immorality, 195; its energy, 210; 
 
 its close, 270. 
 Corday, Charlotte, referred to, 209. 
 Coups d'etat, 271, 273, 284, 286, 351. 
 Courage, moral, 201. 
 Couthon, 155, 241. 
 Cowardice of Deputies, 250. 
 Custine, 211. 
 
 Danton, 205, 209. 
 " Death an eternal sleep," 230. 
 Deism attempts to become a religion, 
 
 242, 296. 
 Demagogism, 202. 
 
 Desmoulins, Camille, 84; satirizes the 
 clergy, 116-118, 164, 192 ; is envied by 
 Eobespierre, 239. 
 
 Despots make a bugbear of the French 
 Eevolution, 8. 
 
 Despotism, 319, 367-369. 
 
 Diamond necklace, the, scandal of, 34. 
 
 Directory, the, its Constitution, 269 ; its 
 members, 273; its politics, 275; its hos- 
 tility to the Papacy, 280, 291. 
 
 Divorce rendered easy and frequent, 294. 
 
 Dom Gerle, produces' an excitement, 83, 
 86. 
 
 Ducos, 157. 
 
 Duhot, the Knight ol the Decades, 2S9. 
 Dumas, 179. 
 Dumouriez, 172. 
 Duphot, 291. 
 Dupont, 195. 
 
 Dupuis saves Notre Dame, 230. 
 Duval, ridiculous proposition of, 155. 
 
 Elizaheth, the Princess, 233. 
 Em Up, the, burned, 39. * 
 Expilly, 124, 126. 
 
 Fahre d'Eglantine explains the atheistical 
 policy, 215. 
 
 Fanaticism, atheistical, 183-202 ; a rela- 
 tive term, 258. 
 
 Fauehet, 155; absurd conduct of, 173. 
 
 Fcne'on, 27. 
 
 Fesch, Cardinal, 368. 
 
 Festival "of the Supreme Being, 11 244; of 
 the Decades, 266. * 
 Feudalism aholished, 59. 
 Foucbe, his violence, 229. 
 Francois de Nantes, irreligion of, 175. 
 French Eevolution, generous outset of, 
 
 50 ; sad goal of, 325 ; when to be con- 
 cluded, 379 ; one of its great lessons, 384. 
 
 Gallican Church, liberties of, 29 ; council 
 of, at Paris, 305. 
 
 Gallois and Gensonne, their mission to 
 La Vendee, 146, 158. 
 
 Girondists, the, criticized", 143, 192. 
 
 " Gloria in Excelsis of the People," 47. 
 
 Gobel, Archbishop, 124; his insipid mo- 
 rality, 126; lauds Mirabeau, 127, 170; 
 apostatizes, 219. 
 
 God as a means of ruling the masses, 243; 
 the only basis of society, 271 ; irksome 
 to the impious, 276 ; patronized by Na- 
 poleon, 356. 
 
 Gospel, the, of the fiesh, 225-231. 
 
 Gouttes, Abbot, 46, 71. 
 
 Gregory, 47; on the rights of man, 61; 
 moderation of, 82 ; complains of popular 
 prejudice, 100; his character, 124, 255, 
 noble efforts, 256, 290; helps to re-es- 
 tablish worship, 304-309, 365. 
 
 Hebert, 213, 225; recants his Atheism, 
 236 ; his followers executed, 240. 
 
 Heroism of Gregory, 221-223. 
 
 Hoche, General, on religious liberty, 265. 
 
 Huguenots defended by a Catholic Bish- 
 op, 257. 
 
 Humiliating epoch, 287. 
 
 Incivism, 253. 
 
 Infancy profaned, 128, 217. 
 
 Infidelity in low places, 264 ; attacks re- 
 ligion indirectly, 266; its vain hopes, 
 267. 
 
 Inquisition, atheistical, 288. 
 
 Jacobins, 85. 
 
 James I. alluded to, 116. 
 
 Jansenists, 24 ; persecuted, 32, 33, 46, 140. 
 
 Jews, oppression of, 27 ; become a State 
 
 Church, 360. 
 Jordan, 280; eulogizes Cfiristianity, 281, 
 
 282. 
 
 Jourdan, the beheader, 152. 
 
 Laboulaye, rema'rk of, 76. 
 
 Lafayette, 42 ; protects the Assembly, 85; 
 recommends free-churchism, 131, 132, 
 135, 145, 178, 321; his counsels to Na- 
 poleon, 340. 
 
 Lalande, 223. 
 
 Lameth, 80 ; taunts the clergy, 84. 
 Lamourette, 124. 
 Lanjuinais, 134, 191, 194. 
 Lasource, the Protestant, 314. 
 Lebon, 200. 
 
 Le Coz, 124, 173; noble efforts of, 137. 
 Lependre, 172. 
 
 Legislative Assembly, 141 ; parties in 142. 
 Lejeune, 155. 
 
 Lepaux, the Theophilanthropist, 276, 279, 
 2S7. 
 
 Liberty according to Eobespierre, 238; 
 rendered hateful, 265. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 415 
 
 Liberty of Conscience claimed by the 
 Catholics, 149; strange notion of it, 
 204; opposed by Robespierre, 206 ; in- 
 compatibility with despotism, 335. 
 
 Liudet, infamy of, 2.'0, 226. 
 
 Louis XIV. dominated the Church, 97. 
 
 Louis XVI. warned by the Pope, 121 ; bis 
 conscience violated, 130; effects of bis 
 flight, 137, 194. 
 
 Louis Blanc, 162. 
 
 Lucon, Bishop, zeal of, 147. 
 
 Malesberbes, tolerant, 42. 
 Malouet, 113. 
 
 Marat, bis journal, 116,193; worshiped, 
 22S. 
 
 Marie Antoinette, 212. 
 Massacres at Avignon, 152; of September, 
 1S3. 
 
 Mattei, Cardinal, intercedes for the Pope, 
 279. 
 
 Maury, Abbot, 70 ; confidence of, 83, 113, 
 149. 
 
 Menou, noble sentiments of, 86. 
 
 Michelet defines the French Revolution, 
 6 ; apologizes for K terror," 162 ; un- 
 fairness of, 232. 247. 
 
 Military glory, when of worth, 275. 
 
 Mirabeau, 54, 56, 60, 73, 86; his prejudice 
 against the Jews, S9; is inconsequent, 
 114; defines religion, 115. 
 
 Mob, the, a dangerous ally, 57, 131, 135, 
 180. 
 
 Monastic orders, 79 ; suppressed, 80 ; pen- 
 sions given to the monks, 81. 
 Monneron, 157. 
 
 Montalembert admits the corruption of 
 
 the monks, 79. 
 Montesquieu, 37-39. 
 
 Moral sentiments the only basis of gov- 
 ernment, 272. 
 Moy defends free-churchism, 176. 
 
 Napoleon not a representative of the 
 Trench Revolution, 19, 241, 274, 277, 
 2S4, 286, 312 ; not the restorer of relig- 
 ion, 316: his contempt for libertv, 321- 
 323; is faithless, 324; his contempt of 
 the French, 325 ; his family discords, 
 325; his motive in restoring Catholi- 
 cism, his religion, bis opposition to free- 
 churchism, 326; is a radical, 328; ad- 
 mires a subservient clergy. 230 ; is zeal- 
 ous for Pomanism. 331 ; his speech at 
 Milan, 332; his emotions at hearing a 
 parish bell, 334, 335; turns theologian, 
 38S ; " plays tricks with the old fox," 
 339; needs a Pope, 342; is impatient 
 to make the Concordat, 347 ; becomes 
 intolerant, 360, 362; threatens to dis- 
 pense with a Pope, 374 
 
 Necker. 6S. 
 
 Noir. heroism of, ISO. 
 
 Non-jurors, their worship molested, 131, 
 144; profess loyalty, 169; restore then- 
 worship, 802. 
 
 Notables, Assembly of, 41. 
 
 Nuns persecuted, 167 ; heroism of, 200. 
 
 Oath, political, refused by the priests, 
 
 111-113; modified, 198. 
 Organic articles, 352, 370 ; still in force, 
 
 380. 
 
 Pacca, Cardinal, 375; favors a free Church 
 
 878. 
 
 Paganism reviving, 331. 
 Paquot, Christian heroism of, 185. 
 Parens, infamy of, 218. 
 Paris at its lowest, 1S4, 197. 
 Pasquinade on the Pope, 348. 
 Peter-pence, 51. 
 Petion, 70, 191. 
 Penn referred to, 38. 
 Pichegru, 274. 
 
 Pius VI , 119-121; condemns the new 
 
 Church, 123 : is impolitic, 126, 150, 170; 
 
 is arrested, 291. 
 Pius VII., 346; his motives in crowning 
 
 Napoleon, 370, 372. 
 Popular sovereignty, a false, pernicious, 
 
 3S3. 
 
 Portaiis, 803, 363. 
 
 Pressense, his qualifications and stand- 
 point, 5-12. 
 
 Priests, hard fate of, 180. 
 
 Property, ecclesiastical, origin of, 66; 
 confiscated, 74 ; sale of, 79. 
 
 Protestants persecuted, 41, 813; St. An- 
 dre, Julien, 314; tolerated by the Or- 
 ganic Articles, 352 ; accept the Concor 
 dat,354; suffer from connection with 
 State, 360-362. 
 
 Rabaut, 63; president of the Assembly, 
 88, 314. 
 
 Radicals, their excesses, 111 ; their temp- 
 tations, 209. 
 
 Reason, the worship of, 226-22S. 
 
 Religion a people's only solace in calam- 
 ity, 77 ; not an object of civil law, 207 ; 
 compels respect, 261 ; strongest when 
 unsupported by the State, 292; only 
 basis of social order, 293; its self-re- 
 generating power, 300 ; is degraded to a 
 means by Napoleon, 357. 
 
 Revenue of the Clergy, 28. 
 
 Rewbell, 276. 
 
 Rhode Island, its early toleration alluded 
 to, 88. 
 
 Rights of man, 62, 64. 
 
 Robespierre, 40, 80 ; pleads for the Jews, 
 S9; favors a salaried clergy, 94, 192; 
 on depravity, 202 ; fears religious lib- 
 erty, 20S; acts ignobly, 233; attacks 
 the Atheists. 234; thinks a God indis- 
 pensable, 235 ; become s high priest, 
 239; theological views, 242 ; begins to 
 fall, 245, 259. 
 
 Roland, 174 ; his insolence, 177. 
 
 Romme, 214. 
 
 Rousseau, influence of bis writings, 89 ; is 
 intolerant, 40; fruits of his theories, 
 189, 176. 
 
416 INDEX. 
 
 Royer-Collard, 280; pleads for modera- 
 tion, 283. 
 
 Sabbath, the, persecuted, 289 ; not over- 
 come, 299 ; anecdote, 315. 
 Sansculottism, 213. 
 St. Denis, Church of, sacked, 212. 
 St. Just, 193, 240. 
 Schism in Eomanism, 123. 
 Sicard, 185. 
 
 Sieves, 46, 56, 60; on liberty of con- 
 science, 133, 224, 285, 321. 
 
 Sisters of Charity, 137. 
 
 Sbamelessness of an abbot, 87. 
 
 Stael, Madame de, her estimate of the 
 French Eevolution, 6; on Napoleon's 
 Church policy, 341. . 
 
 State, the, an idol of the French, 31 ; its 
 right over the Church as a corporate 
 body, 75. 
 
 State and Church, true relation of, 275, 
 283. 
 
 Siate-Church system, the, 260 ; perilous 
 
 to the Bourbons, 381. 
 States-General, 49, 52. 
 
 Talleyrand, 46; urges to confiscation of 
 the Church property, 69, 121 ; on liber- 
 ty of conscience, 132, 347. 
 
 fallieu,249; his illiberalisin, 270. 
 
 Te Beums, 59, 307. 
 
 Temporal domain of the Pope alienated, 
 280. 
 
 Temporal power not essential to Catholi- 
 cism, 307. 
 
 Terror, Reign of, dawning, 138, 155; its 
 instruments, 195; its remorselessness, 
 211. 
 
 Theophilanthropy, 273-276; attempts to 
 become a religion, 296-300 ; is forced 
 into Catholic churches, 310. 
 
 Theot, Catherine, the prophetess, 246. 
 
 Third Estate, 53, 55. 
 
 Thouret, 71, 136. 
 
 Tinville, 241. 
 
 Tithes abolished, 60. 
 
 Tocqueville, 50. 
 
 Tolerance, true principles of, 257. 
 Torne, Bishop, 173 ; violence of, 180. 
 
 Vacancies in the Church, 113. 
 
 Vergniaud, 152, 175 ; sarcasm of, 176 ; his 
 grand speech, 179; he describes tho 
 Convention, 193. 
 
 Vernacular, the, in worship, recommend- 
 ed by a Bishop, 308. 
 
 Voltaire, 25 ; renders a signal service to 
 the Protestants, 36; but attacks Chris- 
 tianity, 37 ; his ashes translated to the 
 Pantheon, 136. 
 
 THE END. 
 
Date Due 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■BP***'