France

Please help support the mission of New Advent and get the full contents of this website as an instant download. Includes the Catholic Encyclopedia, Church Fathers, Summa, Bible and more — all for only $19.99...

The fifth in size (usually reckoned the fourth) of the great divisions ofEurope.

Descriptive geography

The area of France is 207,107 square miles; it has a coastline 1560 miles and a land frontier 1525 miles in length. In shape it resembles a hexagon of which the sides are: (1) From Dunkirk to Point St-Matthieu (sands and dunes from Dunkirk to the mouth of the Somme; cliffs, calledfalaises, extending from the Somme to the Orne, except where their wall is broken by the estuary of the Seine; granite boulders intersected by deep inlets from the Orne to Point St-Matthieu. (2) From Point St-Matthieu to the mouth of the Bidassoa (alternate granite cliffs and river inlets as far as the River Loire; sandy stretches and arid moors from the Loire to the Garonne; sands, lagoons, and dunes from the Garonne to the Pyrenees). (3) From the Bidassoa to Point Cerbére (a formation known as Pyrenean chalk). (4) From Point Cerbére to the mouth of the Roya (a steep, rocky frontier from the Pyrenees to the Tech; sands and lagoons between the Tech and the Rhone, and an unbroken wall of pointed rocks stretching from the Rhone to the Roya). (5) From the Roya to Mount Donon (running along the Maritime, the Cottain, and the Graian Alps, as well as the mountains of Jura and the Vosges). (6) From Mount Donon to Dunkirk (an artificial frontier differentiated by few marked physical peculiarities).

France is the only country inEurope having a coast line both on the Atlantic and on the Mediterranean; moreover, the passes of Belfort. Côte d'Or and Naurouse open up ready channels of communication between the Rhine, the English Channel, the Atlantic, and the Mediterranean. Furthermore, it is noteworthy, that wherever the French frontier is defended by lofty mountains (as, for instance, the Alps, the Pyrenees), the border people are akin to the French either in race, speech, or customs (the Latin races), while on the other hand, the Teutonic races, differing so widely from the French inideas and sentiment, are physically divided from them only by the low-lying hills and plains of the North-East. Hence it follows that France has always lent itself with peculiar facility to the spread of any greatintellectual movement, coming from the shores of the Mediterranean, as was the case withChristianity. France was the natural high road betweenItaly andEngland, betweenGermany and the Iberian peninsula. On French soil, the races of the North mingled with those of the South; and the very geographical configuration of the country accounts in a certain sense for theinstinct of expansion, the gift of assimilation and of diffusion, thanks to which France has been able to play the part of general distributor ofideas. In fact, two widely different worlds meet in France. A journey from north to south leads through three distinct zones: the grain country reaching from the northern coast to a line drawn from Mézières toNantes; the vine country and the region of berries, southward from this to the latitude ofGrenoble and Perpignan; the land of olive-garths and orange groves, extending to the southern boundary of the country. Its climate ranges from the foggy promontories of Brittany to the sunny shores of Provence; from the even temperature of the Atlantic to the sudden changes which are characteristic of the Mediterranean. Its people vary from the fair-haired races ofFlanders and Lorraine, with a mixture of German blood in their veins, to the olive-skinned dwellers of the south, who are essentially Latin and Mediterranean in their extraction. Again Nature has formed, in the physiography of this country, a multitude of regions, each with its own characteristics — its ownpersonality, so to speak — which, in former times, popularinstinct called separate countries. The tendency to abstraction, however, which carried away the leaders of theRevolution, is responsible for the present purely arbitrary divisions of the soil, known as "departments". Contemporary geography is glad to avail itself of the old names and the old divisions into "countries" and "provinces" which more nearly correspond to the geographical formations as well as the natural peculiarities of the various regions. "Massif Central" (the Central Plateau), a rugged land inhabited by a stubborn race that is often glad to leave its fastness, and those lands of comfort that lie along the great Northern Plain, the valley of the Loire, and the fertile basin in whichParis stands. But in spite of this variety, France is a unit. These regions, so unlike and so diversified, balance and complete each other like the limbs of a living body. As Michelet puts it, "France is aperson."

Statistics

In 1901, France had 31,031,000 inhabitants. The census no longer inquires as to the religion of French citizens, and it is only by way of approximation that we can compute the number ofCatholics at 38 millions;Protestants, 600,000;Jews 68,000. The population of the French colonies amounts to 47,680,000 inhabitants, and in consequence France stands second toEngland as a colonizing power; but the difference between them is very great, the colonies ofEngland having more than 356 millions of inhabitants.

There are two points to be noted in the study of French statistics. The annual mean excess of births over deaths for each 10,000 inhabitants during the period 1901-1905 in France was 18, while inItaly it was 106, inAustria 113, inEngland 121, inGermany 149, inBelgium 155. In 1907, the deaths were more numerous than the births, the number of deaths being 70,455, while that of births was only 50,535 — an excess of 19,920 deaths — and this is notwithstanding the fact that in 1907 there were nearly 45,000 more marriages than in 1890. Official investigations attributed this phenomenon to sterile marriages. In 1907, in only 29 of 86 departments, the number of births exceeded the number of deaths. It may perhaps be legitimately inferred that the sterility of marriages coincides with the decay of religiousbelief. Again it is important to note the increase in population of the larger cities between the years 1789 and 1901:Marseilles, from 106,000 to 491,000; Lyons, from 139,000 to 459,000;Bordeaux, from 83,000 to 256,000; Lille, from 13,000 to 210,000;Toulouse, from 55,000 to 149,000; Saint-Etienne, from 9000 to 146,000.Paris, which in 1817 had 714,000 inhabitants, had 2,714,000 in 1901; Havre and Roubaix, which in 1821 had 17,000 and 9000 respectively, now have 130,000 and 142,000. In these great increases the multiplication ofparishes has not always been proportionate to the increase in the population, and this is one of the causes of the indifference into which so many of the working people have fallen. In should be remembered that in former days nine-tenths of the people in France lived in the country; that while 556 of every 1000 Frenchmen lived by agriculture in 1856, that number had fallen to 419 in 1891. The emigrants from the country hurried into the industrial towns, many of which multiplied their population by fifteen, and there, accustomed as they had been to the village bell, they found no church in the neighbourhood, and after a few brief generations the once faithfulfamily from the country developed the faithless dweller in the town.

History to the Third Republic

The treaty ofVerdun (843) definitely established the partition ofCharlemagne's empire into three independent kingdoms, and one of these was France. A great churchman,Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims (806-82), was the deviser of the new arrangement. He strongly supported the kingship of Charles the Bald, under whose scepter he would have placed Lorraine also. ToHincmar, the dream of a unitedChristendom did not appear under the guise of an empire, however ideal, but under the concrete form of a number of unit States, each being a member of one mighty body, the great Republic of Christendom. He would replace the empire by aEurope of which France was one member. Under Charles the Fat (880-88) it looked for a moment as thoughCharlemagne's empire was about to come to life again; but the illusion was temporary, and in its stead were quickly formed seven kingdoms: France,Navarre, Provence,Burgundy beyond the Jura,Lorraine,Germany, andItaly.Feudalism was the seething-pot, and the imperial edifice was crumbling to dust. Towards the close of the tenth century, in theFrankish kingdom alone, twenty-nine provinces or fragments of provinces, under the sway of dukes, counts, or viscounts, constituted veritable sovereignties, and at the end of the eleventh century there were as many as fifty-five of these minor states, of greater or lesser importance. As early as the tenth century one of thefeudalfamilies had begun to take the lead, that of the Dukes of Francia, descendants of Robert the Strong, and lords of all the country between the Seine and the Loire. From 887 to 987 they successfully defended French soil against the invadingNorthmen, and the Eudes, or Odo, Duke of Francia (887-98), Robert his brother (922-23), and Raoul, or Rudolph, Robert's son-in-law (923-36), occupied the throne for a brief interval. The weakness of the laterCarlovingian kings was evident to all, and in 987, on the death of Louis V, Adalberon,Archbishop ofReims, at a meeting of the chief men held at Senlis, contrasted the incapacity of theCarlovingian Charles of Lorraine, the heir to the throne, with the merits of Hugh, Duke of Francia. Gerbert, who afterwards became Sylvester II, adviser and secretary to Adalberon, and Arnoul,Bishop ofOrléans, also spoke in support of Hugh, with the result that he was proclaimed king. Thus the Capetian dynasty had its rise in theperson ofHugh Capet. It was the work of theChurch, brought to pass by the influence of theSee of Reims, renowned throughout France since the episcopate ofHincmar, renowned since the days ofClovis for the privilege of anointing theFrankish kings conferred on its titular, and renowned so opportunely at this time for the learning of its episcopalschool presided over by Gerbert himself.

TheChurch, which had set up the new dynasty, exercised a very salutary influence over French social life. That the origin and growth of the "Chansons de geste", i.e., of early epic literature, are closely bound up with the famous pilgrim shrines, whither thepiety of the people resorted, has been recentlyproved by the literary efforts of M. Bédier. And militarycourage and physical heroism were schooled and blessed by theChurch, which in the early part of the eleventh century transformedchivalry from a lay institution of German origin into a religious one, by placing among itsliturgical rites theceremony of knighthood, in which the candidate promised to defendtruth,justice, and the oppressed. TheCongregation of Cluny, founded in 910, which made rapid progress in the eleventh century, prepared France to play an important part in the reformation of theChurch undertaken in the second half of the eleventh century by amonk of Cluny,Gregory VII, and gave theChurch two otherpopes after him,Urban II andPascal II. It was a Frenchman,Urban II, who at the Council of Claremont (1095), started the glorious movement of theCrusades, awar taken up byChristendom when France had led the way.

The reign of Louis VI (1108-37) is of note in thehistory of the Church, and in that of France; in the one because the solemn adhesion of Louis VI toInnocent II assured theunity of the Church, which at the time was seriously menaced by theAntipope Antecletus; in the other because for the first time Capetian kings took a stand as champions oflaw and order against thefeudal system and as the protectors of publicrights. A churchman,Suger,abbot of St-Denis, a friend of Louis VI and minister of Louis VII (1137-80), developed and realized this ideal of kinglyduty. Louis VI, seconded bySuger, and counting on the support of the towns — the "communes" they were called when they hadobliged thefeudal lords to grant them charters of freedom — fulfilled to the letter the rôle of prince as it was conceived by thetheology of theMiddle Ages. "Kings have long arms", wroteSuger, "and it is theirduty to repress with all their might, and by right of their office, the daring of those who rend the State by endlesswar, who rejoice in pillage, and who destroy homesteads and churches." Another French Churchman,St. Bernard, won Louis VII for theCrusades; and it was not his fault that Palestine, where thefirst crusade had set up a Latin kingdom, did not remain a French colony in the service of theChurch. Thedivorce of Louis VII and Eleanor of Acquitain (1152) marred the ascendancy of French influence by paving the way for the growth of Anglo-Normal pretensions on the soil of France from the Channel to the Pyrenees. Soon, however, by virtue offeudallaws the French king,Philip Augustus (1180-1223), proclaimed himself suzerain overRichard Coeur de Lion and John Lackland, and the victory of Bouvines which he gained over the EmperorOtto IV, backed by a coalition offeudal nobles (1214), was the first even in French history which called forth a movement of national solidarity around a French king. Thewar against theAlbigensians under Louis VIII (1223-26) brought in its train the establishment of the influence and authority of the French monarchy in the south of France.

St. Louis IX (1226-1270), "ruisselant de piété, et enflammé de charité", as a contemporary describes him, made kings so beloved that from that time dates that royal cult, so to speak, which was one of the moral forces in olden France, and which existed in no other country ofEurope to the same degree. Piety had been for the kings of France, set on their thrones, set on their thrones by theChurch of God, as it were aduty belonging to their charge or office; but in thepiety of St. Louis there was a note all his own, the note ofsanctity. With him ended theCrusades, but not their spirit. During the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, project after project attempting to set on foot acrusade was made, and we refer to them merely to point out that the spirit of a militant apostolate continued to ferment in thesoul of France. The project of Charles Valois (1308-09), the French expedition under Peter I ofCyprus against Alexandria and theArmenian coasts (1365-1367), sung of by the French trouvère, Guillaume Machault, thecrusade of John ofNevers, which ended in the bloody battle of Nicopolis (1396) — in all these enterprises, the spirit of St. Louis lived, just as in the heart of theChristians of the east, whom France was thus trying to protect, there has survived a lasting gratitude toward the nation of St. Louis. If the feeble nation of the Marionites cries out today to France for help, it is because of a letter written by St. Louis to the nation of St. Maroun in May, 1250. In the days of St. Louis the influence of the French epic literature inEurope was supreme. Brunetto Latini, as early as the middle of the thirteenth century wrote that, "of all speech [parlures] that of the French was the most charming, and the most in favour with everyone." French held sway inEngland until the middle of the fourteenth century; it was fluently spoken at the Court of Constantinople at the time of theFourth Crusade; and in Greece in the dukedoms, principalities and baronies found there by the House ofBurgundy and Champagne. And it was in French that Rusticiano ofPisa, about 1300, wrote down fromMarco Polo's lips the story of his wonderful travels. TheUniversity of Paris, founded by favour ofInnocent III between 1280 and 1213, was saved from a spirit of exclusiveness by thehappy intervention ofAlexander IV, whoobliged it to open its chairs to themendicant friars. Among its professors wereDuns Scotus; theItalians,St. Thomas andSt. Bonaventure;Albert the Great, a German;Alexander of Hales, an Englishman. Among its pupils it countedRoger Bacon,Dante,Raimundus Lullus, PopesGregory IX,Urban IV,Clement IV, andBoniface VIII.

France was also the birthplace of Gothic art, which was carried by French architects intoGermany. The method employed in the building of many Gothiccathedrals — i.e., by the actual assistance of the faithful — bears witness to the fact that at this period the lives of the French people were deeply penetrated withfaith. Anarchitectural wonder such as thecathedral ofChartres was in reality the work of popular art born of thefaith of the people who worshipped there.

UnderPhilip IV, the Fair (1285-1314), the royal house of France became very powerful. By means of alliances he extended his prestige as far as the Orient. His brother Charles of Valois married Catherine de Courtney, an heiress of the Latin Empire of Constantinople. The Kings ofEngland and Minorca were his vassals, the King ofScotland his ally, the Kings ofNaples andHungary connections by marriage. He aimed at a sort of supremacy over the body politic ofEurope. Pierre Dubois, his jurisconsult, dreamed that thepope would hand over all his domains to Philip and receive in exchange an annual income, while Philip would thus have the spiritual head ofChristendom under his influence.Philip IV laboured to increase the royal prerogative and thereby the national unity of France. By sending magistrates infeudal territories, by defining certain cases (cas royaux) as reserved to the king's competency, he dealt a heavy blow to thefeudalism of theMiddle Ages. But on the other hand, under his rule many anti-Christian maxims began to creep into law and politics.Roman law was slowly re-introduced into social organization, and gradually theidea of a unitedChristendom disappeared from the national policy.Philip the Fair, pretending to rule by Divine right, gave it to be understood that he rendered an account of his kingship to no one underheaven. He denied thepope's right to represent, as thepapacy had always done in the past, the claims of morality andjustice where kings were concerned. Hence arose in 1294-1303, his struggle withPope Boniface VIII, but in that struggle he was cunning enough to secure the support of the States-General, which represented public opinion in France. In later times, after centuries of monarchical government, this same public opinion rose against the abuse of power committed by its kings in the name of their pretended divine right, and thus made an implicitamende honorable to what theChurch had taught concerning the origin, the limits, and the responsibility of all power, which had been forgotten or misinterpreted by the lawyers ofPhilip IV when they set up theirpagan State as the absolute source of power. The election ofPope Clement V (1305) under Philip's influence, the removal of thepapacy toAvignon, thenomination of seven Frenchpopes in succession, weakened the influence of thepapacy inChristendom, though it has recently come to light that theAvignonpopes did not always allow the independence of theHoly See to waver or disappear in the game of politics.Philip IV and his successors may have had the illusion that they were taking the place of the German emperors inEuropean affairs. Thepapacy wasimprisoned on their territory; the German empire was passing through a crisis, was, in fact, decaying, and the kings of France might well imagine themselves temporal vicars ofGod, side by side with, or even in opposition to, the spiritual vicar who lived atAvignon.

But at this juncture the Hundred Years War broke out, and the French kingdom, which aspired to be the arbiter ofChristendom, was menaced in its very existence byEngland. English kings aimed at the French crown, and the two nations fought for the possession of Guienne. Twice during thewar was the independence of France imperilled. Defeated on the Ecluse (1340), at Crécy (1346), atPoitiers (1356), France was saved byCharles V (1364-80) and by Duguesclin, only to suffer French defeat under Charles VI at Agincourt (1415) and to be ceded by the Treaty of Troyes to Henry V, King ofEngland. At this darkest hour of the monarchy, the nation itself was stirred. The revolutionary attempt by Etienne Marcel (1358), and the revolt which gave rise to theOrdonnace Cabochienne (1418) were the earliest signs of popular impatience at the absolutism of the French kings, but internal dissensions hindered an effective patriotic defence of the country. When Charles VII came to the throne, France had almost ceased to be French. The king and court lived beyond the Loire, andParis was the seat of an English government.Blessed Joan of Arc was the saviour of French nationality as well as French royalty, and at the end of Charles' reign (1422-61) Calais was the only spot in France in the hands of the English.

The ideal of a unitedChristendom continued to haunt thesoul of France in spite of the predominating influence gradually assumed in French politics by purely national aspirations. From the reign of Charles VI, or even the last years ofCharles V, dates the custom of giving to French kings the exclusive title ofRex Christianissimus. Pepin the Short andCharlemagne had been proclaimed "Most Christian" by thepopes of their day:Alexander III had conferred the same title on Louis VII; but from Charles VI onwards the title comes into constant use as the special prerogative of the kings of France. "Because of the vigour with whichCharlemagne, St. Louis, and otherbrave French kings, more than the other kings ofChristendom, have upheld theCatholicFaith, the kings of France are known among the kings ofChristendom as 'Most Christian'." Thus wrote Philippe de Mézières, a contemporary of Charles VI. In later times, the Emperor Frederick III, addressing Charles VII, wrote "Your ancestors have won for your name the titleMost Christian, as a heritage not to be separated from it." From the pontificate ofPaul II (1464), thepopes, in addressing bulls to the kings of France, always use the style and titleRex Christianissimus. Furthermore,European public opinion always looked uponBl. Joan of Arc, who saved the French monarchy, as the heroine ofChristendom, and believed that theMaid of Orléans meant to lead the king of France on anothercrusade when she had secured him in the peaceful possession of his own country. France's national heroine was thus heralded by the fancy of her contemporaries, by Christine de Pisan, and by thatVenetian merchant whose letters have been preserved for us in the Morosini Chronicle, as a heroine whose aims were as wide asChristianity itself.

The fifteenth century, during which France was growing in national spirit, and while men's minds were still conscious of the claims ofChristendom on their country, was also the century during which, on the morrow of the Great Schism and of the Councils of Basle and ofConstance, there began a movement among the powerfulfeudalbishops againstpope and king, and which aimed at the emancipation of the Gallican Church. The propositions upheld byGerson, and forced by him, as representing theUniversity of Paris, on theCouncil of Constance, would have set up in theChurch an aristocratic regime analogous to what thefeudal lords. profiting by the weakness of Charles VI, had dreamed of establishing in the State. A royal proclamation in 1518, issued after the election ofMartin V maintained in opposition to thepope "all the privileges and franchises of the kingdom," put an end to the custom of annates, limited therights of the Roman court in collectingbenefices, and forbade the sending toRome of articles of gold or silver. This proposition was assented to by the young King Charles VII in 1423, but at the same time he sentPope Martin V an embassy asking to be absolved from theoath he had taken to uphold the principles of the Gallican Church and seeking to arrange a concordat which would give the French king a right of patronage over 500benefices in his kingdom. This was the beginning of the practice adopted by French kings of arranging the government of theChurch directly with thepopes over the heads of thebishops. Charles VII, whose struggle withEngland had left his authority still very precarious, was constrained, in 1438, during the Council of Basle, in order to appease the powerfulprelates of the Assembly ofBourges, topromulgate thePragmatic Sanction, thereby asserting in France those maxims of the Council of Basle whichPope Eugene had condemned. But straightway he bethought him of a concordat, and overtures in this sense were made toEugene IV. Eugene replied that he wellknew thePragmatic Sanction — "that odious act" — was not the king's own free doing and a concordat was discussed between them. Louis XI (1461-83), whose domestic policy aimed at ending or weakening the newfeudalism which had grown up during two centuries through the custom of presenting appanages to the brothers of the king, extended to thefeudalbishops the ill will he professed toward thefeudal lords. He detested thePragmatic Sanction as an act that strengthenedecclesiasticalfeudalism, and on 27 November, 1461, he announced to thepope its suppression. At the same time he pleaded, as the demand of his Parliament, that for the future thepope should permit the collation ofecclesiastical benefices to be made either wholly or in part through thecivil power. The Concordat of 1472 obtained fromRome very material concessions in this respect. At this time, besides "episcopal Gallicanism", against whichpope and king were working together, we may trace, in the writings of the lawyers of the closing years of the fifteenth century, the beginnings of a "royal Gallicanism" which taught that in France the State should govern theChurch.

TheItalianwars undertaken by Charles VIII (1493-98), and continued by Louis XII (1498-1515), aided by an excellent corps of artillery, and all the resources of Frenchfuria, to assert certain French claims overNaples andMilan, did not quite fulfill the dreams of the French kings. They had, however, a threefold result in the worlds of politics, religion, and art. Politically, they led foreign powers to believe that France was a menace to the balance of power, and hence arouse alliances to maintain that balance, such, for instance, as the League ofVenice (1495), and the Holy League (1511-12). From the point of view of art, their carried a breath of theRenaissance across the Alps. And in the religious world they furnished France an opportunity on Italian soil of asserting for the first time the principles of royal Gallicanism. Louis XII, and the emperor Maximilian, supported by the opponents ofPope Julius II, convened inPisa a council that threatened therights of theHoly See. Matters looked very serious. The understanding between thepope and the French kings hung in the balance.Leo X understood the danger when the victory of Marignano opened toFrancis I the road toRome. Thepope in alarm retired to Bologna, and the Concordat of 1516, negotiated between thecardinals and Duprat, the chancellor, and afterwards approved of by the Ecumenical Council of the Lateran, recognized the right of the King of France to nominate not only to 500ecclesiastical benefices, as Charles VII had requested, but to all thebenefices in his kingdom. It was a fair gift indeed. But if in matters temporal thebishops were thus in the king's hands, their institution in matters spiritual was reserved to thepope. Pope and king by common agreement thus put an end to an episcopal aristocracy such as the Gallicans of the great councils had dreamed of. The concordat betweenLeo X andFrancis I was tantamount to a solemn repudiation of all the anti-Roman work of the great councils of the fifteenth century. The conclusion of this concordat was one of the reasons why France escaped theReformation. From the moment that the disposal ofchurch property, as laid down by the concordat, belonged to thecivil power, royalty had nothing to gain from theReformation. Whereas the kings ofEngland and the German princelings saw in the reformation a chance to gain possession ofecclesiastical property, the kings of France, thanks to the concordat, were already in legal possession of those much-envied goods. WhenCharles V became King ofSpain (1516) and emperor (1519), thus uniting in hisperson the hereditary possessions of the House ofAustria and German, as well as the old domains of the House ofBurgundy in the Low Countries — uniting moreover the Spanish monarchy withNaples,Sicily,Sardinia, the northern part ofAfrica, and certain lands in America,Francis I inaugurated a struggle between France and the House ofAustria. After forty-four years ofwar, from the victory of Marignano to the treaty of Cateau-Cambrésis (1515-59), France relinquished hopes of retaining possession ofItaly, but wrested theBishoprics ofMetz, Toul, and Verdun from the empire and had won back possession of Calais. TheSpaniards were left in possession ofNaples and the country aroundMilan, and their influence predominated throughout the Italian Peninsula. But the dream whichCharles V had for a brief moment entertained of a world-wide empire had been shattered.

During this struggle against the House ofAustria, France, for motives of political and military exigency, had beenobliged to lean in theLutherans ofGermany, and even on the sultan. The foreign policy of France since the time ofFrancis I had been to seek exclusively the good of the nation and no longer to be guided by the interests ofCatholicism at large. The France of theCrusades even became the ally of the sultan. But, by a strange anomaly, this new political grouping allowed France to continue its protection to theChristians of the East. In theMiddle Ages it protected them by force of arms; but since the sixteenth centuries, by treaties called capitulations, the first of which was drawn up in 1535. The spirit of French policy had changed, but it is always on France that theChristian communities of the East rely, and this protectorate continues to exist under the Third Republic, and has never failed them.

The early part of the sixteenth century was marked by the growth ofProtestantism in France, under the forms ofLutheranism and ofCalvinism.Lutheranism was the first to make its entry. The minds of some in France were already prepared to receive it. Six years beforeLuther's time, thearchbishopLefebvre of Etaples (Faber Stapulensis), a protégé of Louis XII and ofFrancis I, had preached the necessity of reading the scriptures and of "bringing back religion to its primitive purity". A certain number of tradesmen, some of whom, for business reasons, had travelled inGermany, and a fewpriests, were infatuated withLutheranideas. Until 1634,Francis I was almost favorable to theLutherans, and he even proposed to makeMelanchthon President of the Collège de France. But on learning, in 1534, that violent placards against theChurch ofRome had been posted on the same day in many of the large towns, and even near the king's own room in the Château d'Amboise, he feared aLutheran plot; an inquiry was ordered, and sevenLutherans were condemned todeath and burned at the stake inParis. Eminentecclesiastics like du Bellay,Archbishop ofParis, and Sadolet,Bishop of Carpentras, deplored these executions, and the Valdois massacre ordered by d'Oppède, President of the Parliament ofAix, in 1545. Laymen, on the other hand, who ill understood theChristian gentleness of theseprelates, reproached them with being slow and remiss in putting downheresy; and when, under Henry II,Calvinism crept in fromGeneva, a policy ofpersecution was inaugurated. From 1547 to 1550, in less than three years, thechambre ardente, a committee of the Parliament ofParis, condemned more than 500persons to retract theirbeliefs, toimprisonment, or to death at the stake. Notwithstanding this, theCalvinists, in 1555, were able to organize themselves into Churches on the plan of that atGeneva; and, in order to bind these Churches more closely together, they held a synod inParis in 1559. There were in France at that time seventy-two Reformed Churches; two years later, in 1561, the number had increased to 2000. The methods, too, of theCalvinist propaganda had changed. The earlierCalvinists, like theLutherans, had been artists and workingmen, but in the course oftime, in the South and in the West, a number of princes and noblemen joined their ranks. Among these were two princes of the blood, descendants of St. Louis: Anthony of Bourbon, who became King of Navarre through his marriage with Jeanne d'Albret, and his brother the Prince de Condé. Another name of note is that of Admiral de Coligny, nephew of that duke of Montmorency who was the Premier Baron ofChristendom. Thus it came to pass that in FranceCalvinism was not longer a religious force, but had become a political and military cabal; and the French kings in opposing it were but defending their ownrights.

Such was the beginning of the Wars of Religion. They had for their starting-point the conspiracy of Amboise (1560) by which theProtestant leaders aimed at seizing theperson of Francis II, in order to remove him from the influence of Francis ofGuise. During the reigns of Francis II, Charles IX, and Henry III, a powerful influence was exercised by the queen-mother, who made use of the conflicts between the opposing religious factions to establish more securely the power of her sons. In 1561,Catharine de' Medici arranged for the Poissy discussion to try and bring about an understanding between the two creeds, but during the Wars of religion she ever maintained an equivocal attitude between both parties, favouring now the one and now the other, until the time came when, fearing that Charles IX would shake himself free of her influence, she took a large share of responsibility in the odious massacre of St. Bartholomew. There were eight of thesewars in the space of thirty years. The first was started by a massacre ofCalvinists at Vassy by the troopers ofGuise (1 March, 1562), and straightway both parties appealed for foreign aid. Catharine, who was at this time working in theCatholic cause, turned toSpain; Coligny and Condé turned to Elizabeth ofEngland and turned over to her the port of Havre. Thus from the beginning were foreshadowed the lines which the Wars of religion would follow. They opened up France to the interference of such foreign princes as Elizabeth and Philip II, and to the plunder of foreign soldiers, such as those of the Duke of Alba and the German troopers (Reiter) called in by theProtestants. One after another, thesewars ended in weak provisional treaties which did not last. Under the banners of theReformation party or those of the League organized by theHouse of Guise to defendCatholicism, political opinions ranged themselves, and during these thirty years of civil disorder monarchical centralization was often in trouble of overthrow. Had theGuise party prevailed, the trend of policy adopted by the French monarchy towardsCatholicism after the Concordat ofFrancis I would have been assuredly less Gallican. That concordat had placed theChurch of France and its episcopate in the hands of the king. The old episcopal Gallicanism which held that the authority of thepope was not above that of theChurch assembled in council and the royal Gallicanism which held that the king had no superior on the earth, not even thepope, were now allied against thepapal monarchy strengthened by theCouncil of Trent. The consequence of all this was that the French kings refused to allow the decisions of that council to be published in France, and this refusal has never been withdrawn.

At the end of the sixteenth century it seemed for an instant as though the home party of France was to shake off the yoke of Gallican opinions.Feudalism had been broken; the people were eager for liberty; theCatholics, disheartened by the corruption of the Valois court, contemplated elevating to the throne, in succession to Henry II, who was childless, a member of the powerfulHouse of Guise. In fact, the League had asked theHoly See to grant the wish of the people, and give France aGuise as king.Henry of Navarre, the heir presumptive to the throne, was aProtestant;Sixtus V had given him the choice of remaining aProtestant, and never reigning in France, or ofabjuring hisheresy, receivingabsolution from thepope himself, and, together with it, the throne of France. But there was third solution possible, and the French episcopate foresaw it, namely that theabjuration should be made not to thepope but to the Frenchbishops. Gallican susceptibilities would thus be satisfied, dogmaticorthodoxy would be maintained on the French throne, and moreover it would do away with the danger to which the unity of France was exposed by the proneness of a certain number of Leaguers to encourage the intervention of Spanish armies and the ambitions of the Spanish king, Philip II, who cherished theidea of setting his own daughter in the throne of France.

Theabjuration ofHenry IV made to the Frenchbishops (25 July, 1593) was a victory ofCatholicism overProtestantism, but none the less it was the victory of episcopal Gallicanism over the spirit of the League. Canonically, theabsolution given by thebishops toHenry IV was unavailing, since thepope alone could lawfully give it; but politically thatabsolution was bound to have a decisive effect. From the day thatHenry IV became aCatholic, the League was beaten. Two Frenchprelates went toRome to craveabsolution forHenry.St. Philip Neri orderedBaronius — smiling, no doubt, as he did so — to tell thepope, whose confessor he,Baronius was, that he himself could not haveabsolution until he had absolved the King of France. And on 17 September, 1595, theHoly See solemnly absolvedHenry IV, thereby sealing the reconciliation between the French monarchy and theChurch ofRome. The accession of the Bourbon royal family was a defeat forProtestantism, but at the same time half a victory for Gallicanism. Ever since the year 1598 the dealing of the Bourbons withProtestantism were regulated by the Edict of Nantes. This instrument not only accorded theProtestants the liberty of practicing their religion in their own homes, in the towns and villages where it had been established before 1597, and in two localities in eachbailliage, but also opened to them all employments and created mixed tribunals in which judges were chosen equally from amongCatholics and Calvinists; it furthermore made them a political power by recognizing them for eight years as master of about one hundred towns which were known as "places of surety" (places de sûreté). Under favour of the political causes of the EdictProtestants rapidly became animperium in imperio, and in 1627, atLa Rochelle, they formed an alliance withEngland to defend, against the government of Louis XIII (1610-43), the privileges of whichCardinal Richelieu, the king's minister, wished to deprive them. The taking ofLa Rochelle by the king's troops (November, 1628), after a siege of fourteen months, and the submission of theProtestant rebels in the Cévenes, resulted in a royal decision whichRichelieu called theGrâce d'Alais: theProtestants lost all their political privileges and all their "places of surety" but on the other hand freedom of worship and absolute equality withCatholics were guaranteed them. BothCardinal Richelieu, and his successor,Cardinal Mazarin, scrupulously observed this guarantee, but underLouis XIV a new policy was inaugurated. For twenty-five years the king forbade theProtestants everything that the edict ofNantes did not expressly guarantee them, and then, foolishly imagining thatProtestantism was on the wane, and that there remained in France only a few hundred obstinateheretics, he revoked the Edict of Nantes (1685) and began an oppressive policy againstProtestants, which provoked the rising of theCamisards in 1703-05, and which lasted with alternations of severity and kindness until 1784, when Louis XVI wasobliged to giveProtestants their civilrights once more. The very manner in whichLouis XIV, who imagined himself the religious head of his kingdom, set about the Revocation, was only an application of the religious maxims of Gallicanism.

In theperson ofLouis XIV, indeed, Gallicanism was on the throne. At the States-General in 1614, thetiers état had endeavoured to make the assembly commit itself to certain decidedly Gallican declarations, but theclergy, thanks to Cardinal Duperron, had succeeded in shelving the question; thenRichelieu careful; not to embroil himself with thepope, had taken up the mitigated and very reserved form of Gallicanism represented by thetheologian Duval. As forLouis XIV, he considers himself aGod on earth — his religion is the State's; every subject who does not hold that religion is outside of the State. Hence thepersecution ofProtestants and ofJansenists. But at the same time he would never allow apapal Bull to be published in France until his Parliament decided whether it interfered with the "liberties" of the French Church or the authority of the king. And in 1682 he invited theclergy of France to proclaim the independence of the Gallican Church in a manifesto of four articles, at least two of which — relating to the respective powers of apope and a council — broached questions which only anecumenical council could decide. In consequence of this a crisis arose between theHoly See andLouis XIV which led to thirty-five sees being left vacant in 1689. The policy ofLouis XIV in religious matters was adopted also by Louis XV. His way of striking at theJesuits in 1763 was in principal the same as that taken byLouis XIV to impose Gallicanism on theChurch — the royal power pretending to mastery over theChurch. The domestic policy of the seventeenth-century Bourbons, aided by Scully,Richelieu,Mazarin, and Louvois, completed the centralization of the kingly power. Abroad, the fundamental maxim of their policy was to keep up the struggle against the House ofAustria. The result of the diplomacy ofRichelieu (1624-42) and ofMazarin (1643-61) was a fresh defeat for the House ofAustria; French arms were victorious at Rocroi, Fribourg, Nördlingen, Lens, Sommershausen (1643-48), and by the Peace ofWestphalia (1648) and that of the Pyrenees (1659), Alsace, Artois, and Roussillion were annexed to French territory. In the struggleRichelieu andMazarin had the support of theLutheran prince ofGermany and ofProtestant countries such as the Sweden of Gustavus Adolphus. In fact in may be laid down that during theThirty Years War, France upheldProtestantism.Louis XIV, on the contrary, who for many years was arbiter of the destinies ofEurope, was actuated by purely religious motives in some of hiswars. Thus thewar againstHolland, and that against the League ofAugsburg, and his intervention in the affairs ofEngland were in some respects the result of religious policy and of a desire to upholdCatholicism inEurope. The expeditions in the Mediterranean against the pirates of Barbary have all the halo of the old ideals ofChristendom — ideals which in the days of Louis XIII had haunted the mind of Father Joseph, the famous confidant ofRichelieu, and had inspired him with the dream ofcrusades led by France, once the House ofAustria should have been defeated.

The long and complex reign ofLouis XIV, in spite of the disasters which mark its close, gained for France the possession ofFlanders, and of Franche-Comté, and saw a Bourbon, Philip V, grandson ofLouis XIV, seated on the throne ofSpain. The seventeenth century in France waspar excellence a century ofCatholic awakening. A number ofbishops set about reforming their diocese according to the rules laid down by theCouncil of Trent, though its decrees did not run officially in France. The example ofItaly bore fruit all over the country. Cardinal de la Rochefoucauld,Bishop of Claremont and afterwards of Senlis, had made the acquaintance ofSt. Charles Borromeo. Francis Taurugi, a companion ofSt. Philip Neri, wasarchbishop ofAvignon.St. Francis de SalesChristianized laysociety by his "Introduction to the Devout Life", which he wrote at the request ofHenry IV.Cardinal de Bérulle and his disciple de Condren founded the Oratory.St. Vincent de Paul, in founding the Priests of the Mission, andM. Olier, in founding theSulpicians, prepared the uplifting of thesecular clergy, and the development of the grands séminaires. It was the period, too, when France began to build up her colonial empire, whenSamuel de Champlain was founding prosperous settlements inAcadia andCanada. At the suggestion of Père Coton, confessor toHenry IV, theJesuits followed in the wake of the colonists; they made Quebec the capital of all that country, and gave it a Frenchman, Mgr. de Montmorency-Laval as its firstbishop. The first apostles to theIroquois were the FrenchJesuits, Lallemant andde Brébeuf; and it was the French missionaries, as much as the traders who opened postal communication over 500 leagues of countries between the French colonies inLouisiana andCanada. InChina, the FrenchJesuits, by their scientific labours, gained a real influence at court and converted at least one Chinese prince. Lastly, from the beginning of this same seventeenth century, under the protection of Gontaut-Biron, Marquis de Salignac, Ambassador of France, dates the establishment of theJesuits atSmyrna, in the Archipelago, inSyria, and at Cairo. ACapuchin, Père Joseph du Tremblay,Richelieu's confessor, established manyCapuchin foundations in the East. ApiousParisian lady, Madame Ricouard, gave a sum of money for the erection of abishopric at Babylon, and its firstbishop was a FrenchCarmelite, Jean Duval. St. Vincent De Paul sent theLazarists into the galleys andprisons of Barbary, and among the islands ofMadagascar, Bourbon, Mauritius, and the Mascarenes, to take possession of them in the name of France. On the advice ofJesuit Fatherde Rhodes,Propaganda and France decided to erectbishoprics in Annam, and in 1660 and 1661 three Frenchbishops, François Pallu, Pierre Lambert de Lamothe, and Cotrolendi, set out for the East. It was the activities of the French missionaries that paved the way for the visit of the Siamese envoys to the court ofLouis XIV. In 1663 the Seminary for Foreign Missions was founded, and in 1700 the Société de Missions Etrangères, received its approved constitution, which has never been altered.

To repeat a saying ofFerdinand Brunetière, the eighteenth century was the leastChristian and least French century in the history of France. Religiously speaking, the alliance of parliamentary Gallicanism andJansenism weakened theidea of religion in an atmosphere already threatened byphilosophers, and although the monarchy continued to keep the style and title of "Most Christian", unbelief and libertinage were harboured, and at times defended, at the court of Louis XV (1715-74), in the salons, and among the aristocracy. Politically, the tradition strife between France and the House ofAustria ended, about the middle of the eighteenth century, with the famousRenversement des Alliances (seeETIENNE-FRANÇOIS, DUC DE CHOISEUL; Fleury, Andre-Hercule de). This century is filled with that struggle between France andEngland which may be called the second Hundred Years War, during whichEngland had for an allyFrederick II, King ofPrussia, a country which was then rapidly rising in importance. The command of the sea was at stake. In spite of men like Dupliex, Lally-Tollendal, and Montcalm, France lightly abandoned its colonies by successive treaties, the most important of which was the Treaty ofParis (1763). The acquisition ofLorraine (1766), and the purchase ofCorsica from theGenoese (1768) were poor compensations for these losses; and when, under Louis XVI, the French navy once more raised its head, it helped in the revolt of the English colonies in America, and thus seconded the emancipation of theUnited States (1778-83).

The movement of thought of which Montesquieu, Voltaire, Rousseau, and Diderot, each in his own fashion, had been protagonists, an impatience provoked by the abuses incident to a too centralized monarchy, and the yearning for equality which was deeply agitating the French people, all prepared the explosion of theFrench Revolution, That upheaval has been too long regarded as a break in the history of France. The researches of Albert Sorel haveproved that the diplomatic traditions of the old regime were perpetuated under theRevolution; theidea of the State's ascendancy over theChurch, which had actuated theministers ofLouis XIV and the adherents of Parliament — theparliamentaires — in the days of Louis XV reappears with the authors of the "Civil Constitution of the Clergy", even as the centralizing spirit of the old monarchy reappears with the administrative officials and the commissaries of the Convention. It is easier to cut off a king's head than to change themental constitution of a people.

The Constituent Assembly (5 May, 1789-30 September, 1791) rejected the motion of the Abbé d'Eymar declaring theCatholic religion to be the religion of the State, but it did not thereby mean to place theCatholic religion on the same level as otherreligions. Voulland, addressing the Assembly on the seemliness of having one dominant religion, declared that theCatholic religion was founded on too pure a moral basis not to be given the first place. Article 10 of the "Declarations of the Rights of Man" (August, 1789) proclaimed toleration, stipulating "that no one ought to be interfered with because of his opinions, even religious, provided that their manifestation does not disturb public order" (pourvu que leur manifestation ne trouble pas l'ordre public établi par là). It was by virtue of the suppression offeudal privileges, and in accordance with theideas professed by the lawyers of the old regime wherechurch property was in question that the Constituent Assembly abolishedtithes and confiscated the possessions of theChurch, replacing them by an annuity grant from the treasury. The "Civil Constitution of the Clergy" was a more serious interference with the life of FrenchCatholicism, and it was drawn up at the instigation ofJansenist lawyers. Without referring to thepope, it set up a new division into diocese, gave the voters, no matter who they might be, aright to nominateparishpriests andbishops, orderedmetropolitans to take charge of thecanonical institution of their suffragans, and forbade thebishops to seek aBull of confirmation in office fromRome. The Constituent Assembly required allpriests to swear to obey this constitution, which received the unwilling sanction of Louis XVI, 26 December, 1790, and was condemned byPius VI. By Briefsdated 10 March and 13 April,Pius VI forbade thepriests to take theoath, and the majority obeyed him. Against these "unsworn" (insermentés) or "refractory"priests a period ofpersecution soon began. The Legislative Assembly (1 October, 1791-21 September, 1792), while it prepared the way for the republic which both the great parties (the Mountain and the Girondists) equally wished, only aggravated the religious difficulty. On 19 November, 1791, it decreed that thosepriests who had not accepted the "Civil Constitution" would be required with a week to swear allegiance to the nation, to thelaw, and to the king, under pain of having their allowances stopped and of being held as suspects. The king refused to approve this, and (26 August, 1792) it declared that all refractorypriests show leave France under pain of ten years'imprisonment or transportation to Guiana.

The Convention (21 September, 1792-26 October, 1795) which proclaimed the republic and caused Louis XVI to be executed (21 January, 1793), followed a very tortuous policy toward religion. As early as 13 November, 1792, Cambon, in the name of the Financial Committee, announced to the Convention that he would speedily submit a scheme of general reform including a suppression of the appropriation for religious worship, which, he asserted, cost the republic "100,000,000 livres annually". The Jacobins opposed this scheme as premature, and Robespierre declared it derogatory to public morality. During the first eight months of its existence the policy of the Convention was to maintain the "Civil Constitution" and to increase the penalties against "refractory"priests who were suspected of complicity on the Vendée rising. Adecreedated 18 March, 1793,punished with death all compromisedpriests. It no longer aimed at refractorypriests only, but any ecclesiastic accused of disloyalty (incivisme) by any six citizens became liable to transportation. In the eyes of therevolution, there were no longer goodpriests and bad priests; for thesans-culottes everypriest was suspect.

Then, from the provinces, stirred up by the propaganda of André Dumont, Chaumette, and Fouché, there began a movement of dechristianization. The constitutionalbishop, Gobrel, abdicated in November, 1793, together with his vicars-general. At the feast of Liberty which took place in Notre-Dame on 10 November an altar was set up to the Goddess of Reason, and the church of Our Lady became the temple of that goddess. Some days after this a deputation attired inpriestly vestments, in mockery ofCatholic worship, paraded before the Convention. The Commune ofParis, on 24 November, 1793, with Chaumette as its spokesman, demanded the closing of all churches. But the Committee of Public Safety was in favour of temporizing, to avoid frightening the populace andscandalizingEurope. On 21 November, 1793, Robespierre, speaking from the Jacobin tribune of the Convention, protested against theviolence of the dechristianizing party, and in December the Committee of Public Safety induced the Convention to pass adecree ensuring freedom of worship, and forbidding the closing ofCatholic churches. Everywhere throughout the provinces civilwar was breaking out between the peasants, who clung to their religion andfaith, and the fanatics of theRevolution, who, in the name of patriotism threatened, as they said, by thepriests, were overturning the altars. According to the locality in which they happened to be, the propagandists either encouraged or hindered thisviolence against religion; but even in the every bitterest days of the terror, there was never a moment whenCatholic worship was suppressed throughout France.

When Robespierre had sent the partisans of Hébert and of Danton to the scaffold, he attempted to set up in France what he calledla religion de l'Etre Suprême. Liberty ofconscience was suppressed, butatheism was also a crime. Quoting the words of Rousseau about the indispensabledogmas, Robespierre had himself proclaimed a religious leader, a pontiff, and a dictator; and the worship of theEtre Suprême was held up by his supporters as the religious embodiment of patriotism. But after the 9th of Thermidor, Cambon proposed once more the principle of separation betweenChurch and State, and it was decided that henceforth the Republic would not pay the expenses of any form of worship (18 September, 1794). The Convention next voted the laicization of the primaryschools, and the establishment, at intervals of ten days, of feasts calledfêtes décadaires. When Bishop Grégoire in a speech ventured to hope thatCatholicism would some day spring up anew, the Convention protested. Nevertheless the people in the provinces were anxious that theclergy should resume their functions, and "constitutional"priests, less in danger than the others, rebuilt the altars here and there throughout the country. In February, 1795, Boissy-d'Anglas carried a measure of religious liberty, and the very next day Mass was said in all thechapels ofParis. OnEaster Sunday, 1795, in the same city which, a few months before, had applauded the worship of Reason, almost every shop closed its doors. In May, 1795, the Convention restored the churches for worship, on condition that thepastors should submit to thelaws of the State; in September, 1795, less than a month before its dissolution, it regulated liberty of worship by a police law, and enacted severe penalties againstpriests liable to transportation orimprisonment who should venture back on French soil. The Directory (27 October, 1795 — 9 November, 1799), which succeeded the Convention, imposed on all religiousministers (Fructidor, Year V) theobligation of swearinghatred to royalty andanarchy. A certain number of "papist"priests took theoath, and the "papist" religion was thus established here and there, though it continued to be disturbed by the incessant arbitrary acts of interference on the part of the administrative staff of the Directory, who by individual warrants deportedpriests charged with inciting to disturbance. In this way, 1657 French and 8235Belgian,priests were driven into exile. The aim of the Directory was to substitute forCatholicism theculte décadaire, and for Sunday observance the rest on thedécadis, or tenth days. InParis, fifteen churches were given over to this cult. The Directory also favored an unofficial attempt of Chemin, the writer, and a few of his friends to set up a kind of national Church under the name of "Theophilanthropy"; butTheophilanthropy and theculte décadaire, while they disturbed theChurch, did not satisfy the needs of the people forpriests, altars, and the traditional festivals.

All these were restored by theConcordat of Napoleon Bonaparte, who became Consul for ten years on 4 November, 1799. The Concordat assured to FrenchCatholicism, in spite of the interpolation of thearticles organiques, a hundred years of peace. The conduct ofNapoleon I, when he became emperor (18 May, 1804) towardsPius VII was most offensive to thepapacy; but even during those years whenNapoleon was ill-treatingPius VII and keeping him aprisoner,Catholicism in France was reviving and expanding day by day. Numerous religious congregations came to life again or grew up rapidly, often under the guidance of simplepriests orhumblewomen. The Sisters of Christian Schools of Mercy, who work inhospitals andschools, date from 1802, as do the Sisters of Providence ofLangres; theSisters of Mercy ofMontauban from 1804; the Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Jesus at St-Julien-du-Gua date from 1805. In 1806 we have the Sisters of Reuilly-sur-Loire, founded by the Abbé Dujarie; the Sisters of St. Regis at Aubenis, founded by the Abbé Therne; the Sisters of Notre Dame de Bon Secours at Charly; theSisters of Mercy of Billom. the Sisters of Wisdom founded by Blessed Grignon de Montfort, remodeled their institutions at this time in La Vendée, and Madame Dupleix was founding atLyons and at Durat the Confraternity of Mary and Joseph for visiting theprisons. The year 1807 saw the coming of the Sisters of Christian Teaching and Nursing (de l'Instruction chrétienne et des malades) of St-Gildas-des-Bois founded by the Abbé Deshayes and the great teaching order of the Sisters of Ste-Chrétienne ofMetz. In 1809 there appeared in Aveyron the Sisters of the Blessed Virgin Mary; in 1810, the sisters of St. Joseph of Vaur (Ardéche), the SisterHospitallers ofRennes, and theSisters of St. Joseph of Cluny. — Such was the fruit of eight years of religious revival, and the list could easily be continued through the years that followed.

In the Wars of theRevolution, which began 20 April, 1792, the French missionary qualities which, under the old regime, had been employed in the service of theChristian ideal wereconsecrated to "the Rights of Man" and to emancipating the people from "the tyrants"; but in the Napoleonic Wars which followed, these very peoples, fired with the principles of liberty which had come to them from France, expressed their newly developed national consciousness in a struggle against French armies. In this way the propaganda of theRevolution had in the end a disastrous reaction on the very country where its ideals originated. During the nineteenth century France was destined to undertake severalwars for the emancipation of nationalities — the Greek War (1827-28) under the Restoration; the Italian War (1859) under the second Empire — and it was in the name of the principle of nationality that the Second Empire to grow until, in 1870, it had reached its full growth at the expense of France.

Under the Restoration parliamentary government was introduced into France. The revolution of July, 1830, the "liberal" and "bourgeois" revolution asserted against the absolutism of Charles X thoserights which had been guaranteed to Frenchmen by the Constitution — the "Charte" as it was called — and brought to the throne of Louis Phillipe, Duke ofOrléans, during whose reign as "King of the French", the establishment of French rule in Algeria was finally completed. One of the most admirablecharitable institutions of French origin dates from the July Monarchy, namely theLittle Sisters of the Poor begun (1840) by Jeanne Jugan, Franchon Aubert, Marie Jamet, and Virginie Trédaniel, poor working-women who formed themselves into an association to take care of one blind oldwoman. In 1900 the congregation thus begun counted 3000 Little Sisters distributed among 250 to 260 houses all over the world, and caring for 28,000 old people. Under the July Monarchy, also, the conferences of St. Vincent De Paul were founded, the first of them atParis, in May, 1883, bypiouslaymen under the prompting ofOzanam, for the material and moral assistance of poorfamilies; in 1900 there were in France alone 1224 of these conferences, and in the whole world 5000. In 1895 the city ofParis had 208 conferences caring for 7908families. The mean annual receipts of the conferences of St. Vincent De Paul in the whole of France amount to 2,198,566 francs ($440,000.00 or £88,000). In 1906 the receipts from the conferences all over the world amounted to 13,453,228 francs ($2,690,645), and their expenditures to 13,541,504 francs ($2,708,300), while, to meet extraordinary demands, they had a reserve balance of 3,069,154 francs ($613,830). The annual expenditure always exceeds the annual amount received. As Cardinal Regnier was fond of saying, "The conferences have taken thevow of poverty."

The Revolution of February, 1848, against Louis Philippe and Guizot, his minister, who wished to maintain aproperty qualification for the suffrage, led to the establishment of the Second Republic and universal suffrage. By granting liberty of teaching (Loi Falloux), and by sending an army toRome to assistPius IX, it earned the gratitude ofCatholics. At this point in history, when so many social and democratic aspirations were being agitated, the social efficaciousness ofChristian thought was demonstrated by Vicomte de Melun, who developed the "Société Charitable" and the "Annales de la Charité" and carried a law on old-age pensions and mutual benefitsocieties; and by Le Prévost, founder of the Congregation of the Brothers of St. Vincent De Paul, who, leading areligious life in the garb oflaymen, visited among theworking classes.

The Second Empire, the issue ofLouis Napoléon Bonaparte'scoup d'êtat (2 December, 1851), affirmed universal sufferage and this secured the victory of French democracy; but it reducedparlementarisme to an insignificant rôle, the Plébescite being employed as an ordinary means of ascertaining the will of the people. It was the second empire, too, that gave Nizza,Savoy, and Cochin-China to France.

The Third Republic

The Third Republic — tumultuously proclaimed, 4 September, 1870, on the ruins of the empire overthrown at Sedan — was victorious, thanks toThiers and the army ofVersailles, over theParisian outbreak called the Commune (March-May, 1871). Effectively defined by the Constitution of 1875, it had to acquiesce in the Treaty of Frankfort (1871) by which Alsace and Lorraine were ceded toGermany. On the other hand, it enriched the colonial possessions, or the sphere of influence, of France by the acquisition of Tongking,Tunis, and Madagascar. Under the Third Republic, a parliamentary system with two chambers was established on the double principle of a responsible ministry and a president above all responsibility, the latter elected by the two chambers for a period of seven years.Thiers,MacMahon, Jules Grévy, Sadi-Carnot, Félix Faure, Emile Loubet, Armand Falliérres have been successively at the head of the French state since 1870.

Through all these changes in government, French foreign policy, either knowingly or by force of habit and precedent, has been of service to theCatholicChurch, service amply repaid by theChurch by perpetuating in some measure theChristian ideal of earlier times. The Crimean War, undertaken (1855) byNapoleon III, originated in the desire to protectLatin Christians in Palestine, the clients of France, against Russian encroachments. During the course of the nineteenth century French diplomacy atRome and in the East has aimed at safeguarding the prerogatives of France as patron ofOriental Christendom, and of thus justifying the traditional trust of the Orientals in the "Franks" as the natural champions ofChristianity in theOttoman Empire. French influence in this field was threatened byAustria,Italy, and German in turn; the first of these powers alleged certain treaties with the sultan, daring from the eighteenth century as giving it theright to defendCatholic interests at theSublime Porte; the other two made repeated efforts to induce Italian and German missionaries to seek protection from their own consuls rather than those of France. But on 22 May, 1888, the circular "Aspera rerum conditio", signed by Cardinal Simeoni, Prefect of thePropaganda, commanded all missionaries to respect the prerogatives of France as their protecting power. Even at the present time, in spite of the separation ofChurch and State, the diplomacy of the Third Republic in the East enjoys the prestige acquired by the France of St. Louis andFrancis I. And amid all theideas and tendencies of "laicization" this protectorate continues to exist as relic and a right ofChristian France — "Anticlericalism is not an article for exportation" says Gambetta, and up to recent years this has always been the motto of Republican France. In spite of constant threats under which the congregations have lived during the Third Republic, it is unquestionable that certain important institutes have seen the number of its members increase notably. This is illustrated by the following table:

Institute — Members (1879) — Members (1900)
Socitété des Missions Estrangères — 480 — 1200
Sisters of St. Joseph of Cluny — 2067 — 4000+
Daughters of Wisdom — 3600 — 4650
Sisters of St. Paul of Chartres — 1119 — 1732
Brothers of St. Gabriel — 791 — 1350
Little Brothers of Mary — 3600 — 4850
Little Sisters of the Poor — 2683 — 3073
Brothers of the Holy Spirit — 515 — 902

Taine hasproved that vocations to thereligious life increased remarkably in the France of the nineteenth century, when they were entirely spontaneous, as compared with the France of the eighteenth century, when manyfamilies, for worldly reasons, placed their daughters inconvents.

Missionary France in the nineteenth century

The reawakening ofBritishCatholicism at the beginning of the nineteenth century was in some measure due to the influence of the French refugeeclergy whom theRevolution had driven into exile. And when, in 1789, in theUnited States of America, John Carroll was namedBishop ofBaltimore, it was to the Sulpician Fathers that he appealed to establish hisseminary, thus preparing for the part which that splendid institute of Frenchpriests was to take, and still continues to play, in building up theChurch in America. The discussion between Monsignor Duborg,Bishop ofNew Orleans, and Madame Petit, awidow ofLyons, on the spiritual needs ofLouisiana (1815), and the letter written by Abbé Jaricot to his sister Pauline, who also lived atLyons, on the poverty of the foreign missions (1819), led these two ladies to organize, each independently of the other,societies for the collection ofalms from the faithful for the propagation ofChristianity, and from these first feeble beginnings was born, 3 May, 1822, the great work known to English-speakingCatholics as the "Propagation ofLyons". In 1898, thissociety collected from one country or another 7,700,921 francs ($1,140,180.00 or £228,000) for missionary purposes. Of this sum, no less than 4, 077, 085 francs was contributed by France alone, while, in 1908, owing to the many needs of theChurch at home, France's contribution fell from 6,402,586 francs to 3,082,131 francs. In 1898, the work of the Sainte-Enfance (The Holy Childhood), also of French origin, which aspires to save both the bodies and thesouls of Chinese children, collected 3,615,845 francs (about $723,000.00 or £145,000), of which 1,094,092 francs came from France alone, while in 1908-09, for the reason referred to above, French generosity could only contribute 813,952 francs to this work, the general receipts of which amounted to 3,761,954 francs. That work in 1907-08 helped 236 missions, 1171orphanages, 7372schools, and 2480 manual-training establishments. In 1898, again, L'Oeuvre des Ecoles d'Orient, an association for supplyingschools in the East, collected in France 584,056 francs, and in other countries only 27,596 francs. In 1898 the Society of African Missions collected 50,000 francs, the Anti-Slavery Society 120,000 francs, while the Good-Fridayalms for the maintenance of the Holy Land amounted to 122,000 francs, making in all, for the year 1898, a total of 6,047,231 francs contributed by France to the foreign missionaries without distinction of nationality.

But France furnishes not only money but men andwomen to these missions. On the eve of the Law of 1901 Abbé Kannengieser compiled the following estimations of the religious, men andwomen, of French nationality engaged in mission work:

A similar list of thewomen engaged in religious work on the missions, drawn up on the eve of the Law of 1901, gave a grand total of 7745 religious men and 9150 religiouswomen supplied by France alone for this work. The Missions Estrangères in 1908 had in its missions 37bishops, 1371 missionaries, 778 nativepriests, 3050 catechists, 45seminaries, 2081seminary students, 305 religious men, 4075 religiouswomen, 2000 Chinese virgins, 5700churches andchapels, 347 crèches andorphanages, sheltering 20,409 children, 484 pharmacies and dispensaries, 108hospitals andlepers asylums. Within the same year (1908) it brought about thebaptism of 33,169 adults, and 139,956 infants. AtJerusalemCardinal Lavigerie founded in 1855 theseminary of St. Anne for Oriental rites; the FrenchDominicans founded in 1890, atJerusalem, aschool for Biblical study, and on the northwest coast ofAsia Minor, near Constantinople, the FrenchAssumptionists reorganized theUniatGreek Church, and prepared the way for the success of the Eucharistic Congress of 1893, presided over by the French Cardinal Langénieux, aslegate ofPope Leo XIII, at whichChristians of the may oriental rites were assembled. For the Lebanon district, FrenchJesuits have aschool a Beirut with 520 students, for the most part medical, and a printing press unrivalled for its Arabic printing. Besides this they have 125 elementaryschools about theiruniversity. At Smyrna FrenchLazarists have a congregation of 16,000Catholics where, in 1800, there were only 3000. In Smyrna alone, the Frenchschools, orschools under French influence, have upwards of 19,000 pupils, and in the vilayet ofSmyrna nearly 3000 pupils. Theschools of the FrenchCapuchins in Palestine have 1000 pupils, those of the FrenchJesuits inEuropean Turkey, 7000 pupils.

In 1860, France intervened on behalf of theChristians of the East, who were menaced by the fanaticism ofTurks,Arabs, and Druses. It is on this occasion that Faud Pasha is reported to have said, pointing to some religious who were present, "I do not fear the 40,000 bayonets you have atDamascus, but I do fear those sixty robes there". At Mosul some FrenchDominicans, assisted by Sisters of the Presentation ofTours, have had a residence since 1856; they have establishedhospitals, workshops, and dispensaries all over Mesopotamia, as well as a Syro-Chaldeanseminary. These missionaries won back toChristian unity, under the pontificate ofLeo XIII, 50,000Nestorians, and 30,000Armenian Gregorians. In like manner, 26Jesuits of the province ofLyons have been buildingschools throughoutArmenian during the past thirty years. The old See of Babylon was replaced in 1844 by theSee of Bagdad where a Frenchbishop rules over 90,000Catholics of various rites. InPersia, the FrenchLazarists have a congregation of 80,000 faithful where, in 1840, there were only 400. The FrenchCapuchins established at Aden are breaking ground inArabia. FrenchJesuits are evangelizing Ceylon. Under thepriests of the Missions Etrangères, who are assisted by five communities of religiouswomen, the number ofCatholics in Pondicherry increased tenfold during the nineteenth century. Priests of St. Francis de Sales ofAnnecy have had charge of the vicariate ofVizagapatam since 1849. The city ofBombay alone has no fewer than twenty-seven conferences of ST. Vincent de Paul. In Burma thepriests of the Missions Etrangères minister to 40,000Catholics were they were only 5000 in 1800. The mission ofSiam, made famous by Fenélon, and ruined at the beginning of the nineteenth century, numbers today more than 20,000souls. And at the Penangseminary, Frenchpriests are forming a nativeclergy. The nine French mission of Tongking and Cochin-China have 650,000Catholics. It was a missionary, Mgr. Puginier, who, from 1880 to 1892, did so much to open up those regions to French exploration. "Where it not for the missionaries and the Christians", a Malay pirate once said, "The French in Tongking would be as helpless as crabs without legs."

China is the mission-field ofJesuits,Lazarists, and Frenchpriests of the Missions Etrangères. The French-Corean dictionary published by thepriests of the Missions Etrangères; the works on Chinese philosophy, begin in the eighteenth century by theJesuitAmiot, and carried on in the nineteenth century by the FrenchJesuits in their Chinese printing establishment at Zi-ka-wei; the researches in naturalsciences made inChina by theLazarist David and theJesuitsHeude, Desgodins, Dechevrens; the works accomplished in the fields ofastronomy and meteorology by the FrenchJesuits Zi-ka-wei — all these achievements of French missionaries have won the applause of the learned world. In the nineteenth century the recovery ofJapan to theChurch was begun by Mgr Forcade, afterwardsArchbishop ofAix, and French Marianists are labouring to build up a nativeJapaneseclergy.

In Oceanica, since the year 1836, when Chanel, Bataillion, and a few otherMarists came to take possession of the thousands of islands scattered betweenJapan and New Zealand, the work of evangelizing has gone through Australia,New Zealand, the Wallace Islands, New Caledonia, the New Hebrides, and Sydney Island. The Fathers of the Sacred Heart of Issoudun are in the Gilbert Isles; the Fathers of Picpus are working in theHawaiian Islands, Tahiti, and the Marquesas. The fame ofFather Damien (Joseph Damien de Veuster), one of the Picpus Fathers, the apostle of thelepers atMolokai, has spread throughout the world.

In AfricaFather Libermann (a converted AlsacianJew) and hisCongregation of the Holy Ghost and the Immaculate Heart of Mary undertook, in 1840, the evangelization of the black race. It has now spread over the whole of thatpagan continent; and the missionaries established by Mgr Augouard in Ubangi are in the very heart of the cannibal districts.Jesuits, Holy Ghost Fathers, andLazarists are working in Madagascar;Jesuits are established along the Zambesi River, and the African Missionaries ofLyons have settlements around the Gulf of Guinea, at the Cape of Good Hope, and at Dahomey, while the Oblates of Mary are in Natal. In SenegalMother Anne-Marie Javouhey, foundress of theSisters of St. Joseph of Cluny — she of whom Louis Phillipe said "Madame Javouhey c'est un grand homme" — opened the first Frenchschools in 1820, and set on foot the first attempts at agriculture in that region. InEgypt, FrenchJesuits have two colleges; the Lyons missionaries, one; theBrothers of the Christian Schools teach more than 1000 pupils; and 60parishschools, with more than 3000 children, are under the care of French sisterhoods. FrenchLazarists minister to 13,000souls inAbyssinia. Theecclesiastical province of Algeria, which in 1800 reckoned 4000souls, had at the time ofCardinal Lavigerie's death 400,000, with 500priests, 260churches, and 230schools, whileTunis, which in 1800 contained but 2000Catholics numbered 27,000 ministered to by 153 religious in 22parishes. TheBrothers of the Christian Schools were pioneers of theFrench language inTunis, as they had been throughout theOttoman Empire from Constantinople to Cairo, and the Congregation of theWhite Fathers, who sent out their first ten missionaries fromAlgiers on the 17th of April, 1878, towards equatorial Africa, founded, in Uganda and along Lake Tanganyika,Christian communities, one of which, in May, 1886, gave to the Faith 150martyrs.

Side by side with this peaceful conquest of the African continent by the initiative of a Frenchcardinal, a place ofhonour must be given to the wonderful part played in the colonization and development of French Guiana, since the year 1828, byMother Javouhey, of whose efforts in Senegal we have already spoken. It was she, who under the July monarch, and at the request of the government, undertook in Guiana the work of civilizing the unfortunatenegroes taken by the men-of-war from captured slave ships, and whom she eventually employed as free workmen. Her example alone would suffice to refute theslander so often repeated that the French are not a colonizing race.

Only in one part of the world — the East — is this vast missionary movement aided, however slightly, by the French Treasury. In the Levant a certain number of churchschools received state aid as a help to the spreading of theFrench language, but of late years these subventions have been opposed and diminished. On 12 December, 1906, M. Dubief, in moving the Budget of Foreign Affairs, proposed to suppressed the sums voted to aid theschools conducted by religious congregations in the East. M. Pichon, minister of Foreign Affairs, promised to hasten the work of laicization, and by means of this promise he secured the continuation of the credit of 92,000 francs. It is a matter of regret that the aim of the Chambers for some years past has been to cut down the assistance given by France to theseschools, and to create in the East Frencheducational institutions of a purely secular character. M. Marcel Charlot, in 1906, and M. Aulard, in 1907, the one in the name of the State, the other in the interest ofla Mission Laïque, made a critical study of our religiousschools in the east, and contributed to the laicizing movement which, if successful, would mean the dissolution of France's religiousclientèle in the East and a lessening of French political influence.

France at Rome

Side by side with the part France has played in the missionary field, the diplomatic activity atRome of the Third Republic, in its character as a protector ofpious institutions, is worth noting. It tends to prove the depth, the reality, the force which underlay the old saying:Gallia Ecclesiæ Primogenita Filia.

In 1890, on the occasion of the French workingmen'spilgrimage, Count Lefebvre de Béhaine, the French ambassador, formally renewed the claims of the French Republic over thechapel ofSt. Petronilla, founded by Pepin the Short in thebasilica of St. Peter. The principal religious establishments over which certain prerogatives were exercised by the French embassy atRome, until its suppression in 1903, were: the church and community ofchaplains of St. Louis the French, the French national church inRome, dating back to a confraternity instituted in 1454; thepious foundation of St. Yves of the Bretons, which dates from 1455; thechurch of St. Nicholas of the Lorrainers, which dates from 1622; thechurch of St. Claudius of theBurgundians, which dates from 1652; theconvent of Trinità on the Pincian Hill, which was founded by Charles VIII, in 1494, for theFriars Minor, and became, in 1828, a boardingschool under the care of the French ladies of the Sacred Heart. There has also been an ancient bond between France and the Lateran Chapter, by reason of the donations made to the chapter by Louis XI andHenry IV, and the annual grant apportioned to it by Charles X, in 1845, and byNapoleon III, in 1863. Although this grant was discontinued by the republic in 1871, the Lateran Chapter until the suppression of the Embassy of theHoly See (1904) always kept up official relations with the French ambassador whom, on the 1st of January of each year, it charged with a special message of greeting to the President of the Republic. Lastly, since 1230 there has always been a French auditor of theRota. In 1472Sixtus IV formally recognized this to be the right of the French nation. The allowance made by France to the auditor was discontinued in 1882, but the office has survived, and the reorganization of the tribunal of theRota made byPope Pius X (September and October 1908) was followed by the appointment of a French auditor.

Ecclesiastical divisions

In 1780 France, with the exception of Venaissin, which belonged immediately to thepope, was divided into 135dioceses; eighteen archbishoprics or ecclesiastical provinces with 106 suffragansees and eleven sees depending on foreignmetropolitans. The latter eleven sees were: Strasburg, suffragan ofMainz; St-Dié,Nancy,Metz, Toul,Verdun, suffragans ofTrier; and five inCorsica, suffragans ofGenoa or ofPisa. The eighteenarchiepiscopal sees were: Aix, Albe, Arles,Auch, Besonçon, Bourdeaux,Bourges,Cambrai, Embrun,Lyons, Narbonne, Paris,Reims,Rouen,Sens,Toulouse,Tours, Vienne. In 1791 the constituent assembly suppressed the 135dioceses, and created tenmetropolitan sees with one suffragandiocese in each department. The Concordat of 1851 set up fiftybishoprics and ten archbishoprics; the Concordat of 1817 made a fresh arrangement, which was realized in 1822 and 1823 by the creation of newbishoprics. France and its colonies are presently divided in to ninetydioceses, of which eighteen aremetropolitan and seventy-two suffragan, as follows:

The Third Republic and the Church in France

The policy known as anticlerical, inaugurated by Gambetta in his speech at Romans, 18 September, 1878, containing the famous catchword "Le cléricalisme, c'est l'ennemi", was due to the influence of theMasonic lodges, which ever since thatdate have shown theirhatred even of the veryidea ofGod. If one carefully follows up the series of aspirations uttered at theMasonic meetings, there will surely be found the first germ of the successivelaws which have been framed against theChurch. To justify its action before the people, the Government has asserted that the sympathies of a great number ofCatholics, including the many of theclergy, were for the monarchical parties. This policy also presented itself as a retaliation for the attempt of the 16th of May, 1877, by which the monarchists had tried to impede in France the progressive actions of the liberals (la Gauche) and of the democratic spirit. Its first embodiments were, in 1879, the exclusion of thepriests from the administrative committees ofhospitals and of boards of charity; in 1880, certain measures directed against the religious congregations; from 1880 to 1890, the substitution of laywomen fornuns in manyhospitals; and, in 1882 and 1886, the "School Laws" (lois scolaires) which will later on be discussed in detail.

The Concordat continued to govern the relations ofChurch and State, but in 1881, the method of stoppage of salary (suppression de traitement) began to be employed againstpriests whose political attitude was unsatisfactory to the Government, and the Law of 1893, which subjected the financial administration ofchurch property to the same rules as civil establishments, occasioned lively concern among theclergy. As early as March, 1888,Leo XIII had written to President Grévy, complaining of the anti-religious bitterness, and expressing a hope that the eldest daughter of theChurch would find it possible to abandon this struggle if she would not forfeit that unity and homogeneity among her citizens which had been the source of her own peculiar greatness, and thusoblige history to proclaim that one inconsiderate day's work had destroyed in France the magnificent achievement of the ages. Jules Grévy replied that the religious feeling complained of way the outcome mainly of the hostile attitude of a section of theclergy to the Republic. Some years later (12 November, 1890),Cardinal Lavigerie, returning fromRome, and inspired byLeo XIII, delivered a speech in the presence of all the authorities, military and civil, of Algeria, in which he said: "When the will of a people as to the form of its government has been clearly affirmed, and when, to snatch a people from the abysses which threatens it, unreserved adhesion to this political form isnecessary, then the moment has come to declare the test completed, and it only remains to make all thosesacrifices whichconscience andhonour permit us, and command us, to make for the good of our country." This speech, which caused a great commotion, was followed by a letter of Cardinal Rampolla, Secretary of State toLeo XIII, addressed to theBishop of St-Flour, in which thecardinal exhortedCatholics to come forward and take part in public affairs, thus entering upon the readiest and surest path to the attainment of that noble aim, the good of religion and thesalvation ofsouls. Lastly, aBrief ofLeo XIII toCardinal Lavigerie, in the early part of the year 1891, assured him that hiszeal and activity answered perfectly to the needs of the age and thepope's expectations.

From these utterances dates in France the policy known as "Raillement", and as "Leo's Republican Policy". At once theArchbishops ofTours,Cambrai, the Bishops ofBayeux,Langres,Digne,Bayonne, and Grenoble declared their adhesion to the "Algiers Programme", and the Monarchical press accused them of "kissing the Republic feet of their executioners". On 16 January, 1892, a collective letter was published by the five Frenchcardinals, enumerating all the acts of oppression sanctioned by the Republic against theChurch, and concluding, in conformity with the wish ofRome, by announcing the following programme: Frank and loyal acceptance of political institutions; respect for thelaws of the country whenever they do not clash with conscientiousobligations; respect for the representatives of authority, combined with steady resistance to all encroachments on the spiritual domain.

Within a month the seventy-fivebishops subscribed to the above programme, and in the atmosphere thus prepared, the voice of Pope Leo once more spoke out. In theEncyclical "Inter innumeras sollicitudines",dated 10 February, 1892,Leo XIII besoughtCatholics not to judge the Republic by the irreligious character of its government, and explained that a distinction must be drawn between the form of government, which ought to be accepted, and itslaws which ought to be improved. Thus was the policy of rallying to the Republic precisely stated, as recommended to theCatholics of France, and expounded in the brochures, inParis, of Cardinal Perraud, and atRome, of Fr. Brandi, editor of the "Civiltà Cattolica". Anticlericalists and Monarchists were alarmed. The Monarchists protested against the interference of thepope in French politics, and the anticlericals declared that the Republic had not room for "Roman Republicans". Both parties asserted that it was impossible to distinguish between the Republican form of government and the Republicanlaws. A trifling incident, arising out of a visit paid by some Frenchpilgrims to the Parthenon inRome, which contains thetomb of Victor Emmanuel, called forth from M. Falliéres, Minister of Justice, a circular againstpilgrimages (October, 1891), and occasioned a lively debate in the French Chamber on the separation ofChurch and State. But in spite of these outbreaks of Anticlericalism, the political horizons, especially after theEncyclical of February, 1892, became more serene. The policy of combining Republican forces by a fusion of Moderates and Radicals to support a common programme of Republican concentration, which programme was incessantly developing new anticlerical measures as concessions to the Radicals — gradually went out of fashion. After the October elections, in 1893, for the first time in many long years, a homogeneous ministry was formed, one ministry composed exclusively of Moderate Republicans, and known as the Casimir Périer-Spuller Ministry. On 3 March, 1894, in a discussion in the Chamber on the prohibition of religious emblems by the socialist Mayor of Saint-Denis, Spuller, the minister of Public Worship, declared that it was time to take a stand against all fanaticisms whatsoever — against all sectaries, regardless of the particularsect to which they might belong — and that the Chamber could rely at once of the vigilance of the Government to uphold therights of the State, and on the new spirit (esprit nouveau) which animated the Government, and tended to reconcile all citizens and bring back all Frenchmen to the principles of common sense andjustice, and of the charitynecessary for everysociety that wishes to survive. Thus it seemed that there would be developing, side by side with the policy ofralliement practised by theChurch, a similar conciliatory policy on the part of the State.

A letter from Cardinal Rampolla,dated 30 January, 1895, to M. Auguste Roussel, formerly an editor of the "Univers", but who had become editor-in-chief of the "Vérité", found fault with the latter periodical for stirring up feeling against the Republic, fostering in the mind of its readers the conviction that it was idle to hope for religious peace from such a form of government, creating an atmosphere of distrust and discouragement, and thwarting the movement toward general good-feeling which theHoly See desired, especially in light of the elections. This letter created a great sensation, and the newspaper polemics contrasted theCatholics of the "Univers" and the "Croix", docile towardLeo XIII, with the refractoryCatholics of the "Vérité". On 5 February, 1896, Félix Faure wrote as follows to Pope Leo: "The President of the Republic cannot forget the generous motives which prompted the advice given by Your Holiness to theCatholics of France, encouraging them to accept loyally the government of their country. Your Holiness regrets that these appeals for harmony and peace have not been everywhere listened to; and we join in those regrets. That enlightened advice given to the opponents of the Republic, for whose consciences the head of theChurch is 'all-powerful', ought to have been followed by all. Nevertheless, we note at the present time, with regret, that there are men who, under the cloak of religion, foment a policy of discord and of strife. It would, however, beunjust not to recognize that, while the salutary instructions of Your Holiness have not produced all the effects that might have been expected of them, very many loyalCatholics have bowed before them. At the same time, this manifestation of goodwill produced among those Republicans who were most firmly attached to therights of thecivil power a spirit of conciliation which has largely contributed to mitigate the conflict of passions which saddened us."

This letter, published for the first time at the end of the year 1905, in the "White Book" of theHoly See, places in clear relief the relations existing between theChurch and the Republic four years after the encyclical of February, 1892, and three months before the formation of the Méline Ministry, which was to lead the Republic towards even greater moderation. The Méline Ministry (1896-98) secured forCatholics for two years a certain amelioration of their lot. But the division amongCatholics persisted, and this division, which arose from their indocility toLeo XIII, was the principal cause of their defeat in the elections of 1898, when the Méline Ministry came to an end. The old Anticlerical Republican party came once more into power; the Dreyfus affair, a purely judicial matter around which political factions grew up, was made the pretext on the morrow of the death of President Faure (16 February, 1899) for beginning a formidable antimilitarist, and anticlerical agitation, which led to the formation of the Waldeck-Rousseau and the Combes Ministries.

The Waldeck-Rousseau Ministry (1899-1902) passed fresh legislation against the congregations (it will be found in detail at the end of this article) and brought France to the verge of a breach withRome over the question of theNobis nominavit. These two words, which occurred in episcopalBulls, signified that thepriest chosen by the State to fill abishopric had been designated and presented to theHoly See. On 13 June, 1901, whenBulls were required for thebishops ofCarcassonne and Annecy, the Waldeck-Rousseau Ministry proposed that the wordNobis should be omitted, in order to affirm more clearly the State's right ofnomination. The Combes Ministry (1902-05) continued the dispute over this matter, and on 22 November, 1903, theHoly See, in order to avoid a breach with France, agreed to omit the obnoxious word, on condition that, in future, the President of the Republic should demand thecanonical institution ofbishops by letters patent, containing the words,We name him, and present him to Your Holiness. In spite of this concession by theHoly See, M. Combs set himself the task of planning the separation ofChurch and State. He felt that public opinion was not yet ripe for this stroke, and all his efforts were directed to making separation inevitable. The laicization of the naval and militaryhospitals (1903-04), the order prohibiting soldiers to frequentCatholic clubs (9 February, 1904); the vote of the Chamber (14 February, 1904) in favour of the motion to repeal the Falloux Law were episodes less serious than the succession of calculated acts by which the breach withRome was being approached.

Three quarrels succeeded one another.

In this way the breach was effected without any formal denunciation of the Concordat. On 10 February, 1905, the Chamber declared that "the attitude of the Vatican" had rendered the separation ofChurch and State inevitable. The "Osservatore Romano" replied that this was an "historical lie". The discussions in the chamber lasted from 21 March to 3 July, and in the Senate from 9 November to 6 December, and on 11 December 1905, the separation Law was gazetted in the "Journal Officiel".

Laws affecting the congregations

The Monarchy had taken fiscal measures againstproperty held inmortmain ("the dead hand") but the first rigorous enactments against religious congregations date from theRevolution. The Law of 13 February, 1790, declared thatmonasticvows were no longer recognized, and that the orders and congregations in which suchvows were made were forever suppressed. The Concordat itself was silent as to congregations; but the Eleventh of the Organic articles implicitly prohibited them, declaring that allecclesiastical establishments except chapters andseminaries were suppressed. Two years later adecree,dated 3 Messidor, Year XII, suppressing certain congregations which had come into existence in spite of thelaw, added a provision that thecivil authority could, bydecree, formally authorize such associations after having taken cognizance of theirstatutes. TheLazarists, the Missions Estrangères, the Friars of the Holy Ghost, and theSulpicians were, in virtue of thislaw, authorized bydecree in 1804; theBrothers of the Christian Schools, in 1808. Under the restoration, the Chamber of Peers refused the king the right of creating congregations by royal warrant (par ordonnace), asserting that for each particular re-establishment of a congregation a law wasnecessary.

Such was the principle which ruled until the year 1901; but the applications of that principle varied with the changes of government. Under the Second Empire it was admitted in practice that a simple administrative authorization was sufficient to legalize a congregation ofwomen, provided that such congregation adopted thestatutes of a congregation previously authorized. Under the Third Republic, it was under the pretext of a strict enforcement of thelaw that, in 1880, theSociety of Jesus was dissolved, and the other congregations were ordered to apply for authorization with three months. The protests of theCatholics, and the criticisms which became general on the archaic character of thelaws upon which these decrees were based had this much effect, that, after a brutal application of the decrees to most of the congregations of men, the government dare not apply them to the unauthorized congregations ofwomen; they gradually became a dead letter; and little by little the congregations of men were re-formed in the name of individual liberty. But in this condition of affairs, only the formally authorized congregations could be considered as "moralpersons" before thelaw. Since 1849 the religious congregations had been paying into the treasury a "mortmain tax" (taxe des biens de mainmorte) in lieu of the successionduties which the properties of a "moralperson" escapes. On the twofold consideration that this tax did not touch personal estate and thatproperty held in unacknowledgedmortmain evaded it, the Third republic passed the following enactments.

On 1 January, 1901, France numbered 19,424 establishments of religious congregations, with 159,628 members. Of these establishments, 3126 belonged to congregations of men; 16,298 to congregations ofwomen (2870 of the latter being regularly authorized, and 13,428 unrecognized). The members of the male congregations number 30,136, of whom 23,327 belonged to teaching institutes, 552 served inhospitals, and 7277 followed the contemplative vocation [sic]. The value of realproperty being taxed as held by congregations amounted to 463,715,146 francs (about $92,000,000 or between £18,000,000 and £19,000,000) and in this estimate was included allproperty devoted by the religious to benevolent andeducational purposes. But the Department of Domains, in drawing up its statistical report (which statistics were withjustice questioned), explained that, in addition to the realproperty taxed as belonging to congregations, account should be taken of the realproperty occupied by them through the complaisance of lay corporations or proprietors whom the State declared to be mere intermediaries (personnes interposées), and the department placed the combined value of these two classes ofproperty at 1,071,775,260 francs. To this unfair estimate may be traced the popular notion — which was cleverly exploited by certain political parties — aboutle milliard des congrégations.

Thelaw of associations, as of 1 July, 1901, provided that no congregation, whether of men or ofwomen, could be formed without a legislative authorizing act, which act should determine the function of such congregation. Thus ended the regime of tolerance to congregations ofwomen which had been inaugurated by the Empire. Congregations previously authorized and those which should subsequently obtain authorization had, according to thislaw, the status of "moral persons", but this status held them to anobligation and kept them perpetually under a threat. On the one hand, it was enacted that they must each year draw up a list of their members, an inventory of their possessions, and a statement of their receipts and expenses, and must present these documents to the prefectoral authority upon demand. On the other hand, it was provided that, to deprive any congregation of its authorization, nothing more was required than an ordinarydecree of the Council of Ministers. And lastly, these authorized congregations could found "new establishments" only in virtue of adecree of the Council of State, and the Council of State, in interpreting thelaw, considers that there is a "new establishment" whenlaymen in cooperation with one or more members of a congregation set up aschool or ahospital. If the master of an industrial enterprise rewards a sister for teaching or caring for the children of this workmen, thelaw considers that there is a new establishment, for which an authorization of the Council of State isnecessary. As for the unauthorized Congregations, the Law of 1901 declared them dissolved, allowing them three months to apply for authorization. Congregations which should re-form after dissolution, or which should in the future be formed without authorization were, by the same law, made liable to pains and penalties (fines of from 16 to 5000 francs; terms ofimprisonment of from 6 days to one year); double penalties were to be inflicted on founders and administrators, and the act of providing premises for, and thus abetting, the operation of such congregations was, in 1902, declared an offense entailing the same penalties. Moreover, thelaw made every member of an unauthorized religious congregation incapable of directing any teaching establishment, or of teaching in one, under pain of fine orimprisonment, and this offense might entail the closing of the establishment. The Government found itself face-to-face with 17,000 unauthorized congregations; it decided to dissolve all of them without exception —educational establishments, industrial establishments, contemplative establishments — though charitable establishments were tolerated provisionally.

From another point of view thelaw was singularly arbitrary and juridically defective; it struck at every member of a religious congregation who was not secularized, but it did not precisely state what constitutes secularization. Is it sufficient, for secularization to be effective and sincere, that the religious — or, to employ the current French term, thecongréganiste — should be absolved from hisvows and should re-enter the diocese from which he originally came? The prevalent legal opinion does not admit this; it admits the right of the courts to ascertain whether other elements of fact do not result in a virtual persistence of the congregation. Thus the courts may regard as religiouspersons who, in the eyes of theChurch, are no longer such; and the fact of being acongréganiste, which fact constitutes an offense, is not a precise, material fact defined and limited by the letter of the enactment; it is a point upon which the interpretation of the courts remains the sovereign authority.

The principles of liquidation were as follows:property belonging tocongréganistes before their entrance to the congregation, or acquired since that time, whether by succession independent of testamentary provision (ab intestat) or by legacy in direct line, was to be restored to them. Gifts and bequests made otherwise than in direct line could not legally be claimed by the formercongréganistes unless they established the point that they had not been intermediaries (personnes interposées). Benefactions to congregations could be reclaimed by benefactors or their heirs within a term of six months. After these deductions made by thecongréganistes and their benefactors, the residue of the estate of the congregation was to be subject to the disposition of the courts. The law refused to recognize thatproperty created by the labour or thrift of thecongréganistes necessarily ought to be distributed among them, and it was held sufficient that, by an administrative ruling of 16 August, 1901, provision was made for allowances to formercongréganistes who had no means of subsistence or who should establish the fact of having by their labour contributed to the acquisition of theproperty under liquidation.

The juridical liquidation of the congregational estates had some serious consequences. The Chamber soon perceived that too often the liquidators intentionally complicated the business with which they were charged (it being in their interest to multiple lawsuits the expense of which could not in any case fall upon them) and that the personal profits derived by the liquidators from these operations were exorbitant. In confiding so delicate a business to irresponsible functionaries, the framer of the Law of 1901 had committed a graveerror of judgment. On 31 December, 1907, the Senate resolved to nominate a commission of inquiry to examine the accounts of the liquidators, and the report of this commission, published in early September, 1908, revealed enormous irregularities. It was to satisfy these belated misgivings, that the Government, in February, 1908, introduced a bill substituting for the irresponsible judicial liquidation an administrative liquidation under the control of the prefects. But this provision is to apply only to the congregations which shall be dissolved hereafter; what has happened in the past seven years is irreparable, and whenCatholic publicists speak of "the evaporation of the famous milliard of the congregations" the champions of the Law of 1901 are painfully embarrassed.

The laicization of primary instruction

(a) As to the Matter of Instruction

The Law of 28 March, 1882, which made primary instructionobligatory, gratuitous, and secular (laïque), intentionally omitted religious instruction from the curriculum of the publicschool, and provided one free day every week, besides Sunday, to allow the children, if theirparents saw fit, to receive religious instruction; but this instruction was to be given outside of theschool buildings. Thus thepriest had noright to enter theschools, even outside of class hours, to holdcatechism. Theschool regulations of 18 January, 1887, laid it down that the children could be sent to church forcatechism or religious exercises only outside of class hours, and that teachers were not bound either to take them to church or to watch over their behaviour while there. It was added that during the week preceding the First Communion teachers were to allow pupils to leave theschool when their religiousduties called them to church. The spirit of the Law of 1882 implied that religious emblems should be excluded from theschools, but out of regard for the religious feelings of the people in those neighbourhoods, the prefects allowed the crucifixes to remain in a certain number ofschools; they took care, however, that no religious emblems should be placed in any of the newly erectedschool buildings. This temporizing policy was continued by the ministerial order or 9 April, 1903, but in 1906 and 1907 the administration at last called for the definitive disappearance of the crucifix from all publicschools.

The Law of 1882 is silent as to the teaching, in the publicschools, of the students'duties towardGod. The Senate, after a speech by Jules Ferry, refused to entertain the proposal of Jules Simon, that theseduties should be mentioned in thelaw; but the Board of Education (Conseil Supérieur de l'Instruction Publique), acting on a recommendation of Paul Janet, the Spiritualistphilosopher, inserted in the executive instructions, with which it supplemented the text of thelaw, a recommendation that the teacher should admonish the pupils not to use the name ofGod lightly, to respect theidea ofGod, and to obey thelaws of God as revealed byconscience and reason. However, in the publicschools dependent on the municipality ofParis, the antispiritualist tendency became so violent that, after 1882, the new edition of certainschool books expunged, even where they occurred in selected specimens of literature, the wordsGod,Providence, Creator. These early manifestations ledCatholics to declare that the laic and neutralschool was really a Godlessschool. In the controversy which arose, some quotations from the publicschool textbooks became famous. For instance, la Fontaine's lines

Petit poisson deviendra grand,
Pourvu que Dieu lui prêtre vie

were made to read "quel'on lui prêtre vie". And while politicians were deprecating the assertion that theschools were Godless, theMasonic conventicles and the professional articles written by certain state pedagogues were explaining that the notion ofGod must eventually disappear in theschool. In practice, the chapter ofduties towardGod was one which very few teachers touched upon. In 1894, M. Divinat, afterwards director of the normalschool of the department of the Seine, wrote: "To teachGod, it isnecessary tobelieve inGod. Now how are we to find in these days teachers whosesouls are sincerely and profoundly religious? It may be affirmed without any exaggeration that, since 1882, the lay publicschool has been very nearly the Godlessschool."

This frank and unimpeachable testimony, justifying, as it does, all the sad predictions of theCatholics, has been corroborated by the experience of the last fifteen years. With the cry,Laïciser la laïque, a certain number of teachers have carried on an active campaign for the formal elimination of theidea ofGod, as a remnant of "Clericalism", from theschool programme. The powerful organization known as the "Ligue de l'Enseignement", whoseMasonic affinities are indisputable, has supported this movement. For the exponents of the tendency, to belaïque, one must be the enemy of all rationalmetaphysics — to belaïque, one must be anatheist.

The veryidea of neutrality ineducation, to which anti-religious teachers have not always consistently adhered, is nowadays out of favour with many members of the pedagogical profession. In 1904, the teachers of the Department of the Seine advocated, almost unanimously, in place of "denominational neutrality" (neutralité confessionelle), which they said was a lie (un mensonge), the establishment of a "critical teaching" (enseignement critique), which, in the name ofscience, should abandon all reserves in regard to denominational susceptibilities. But that neutrality was something very closely resembling a lie, is just whatCatholic orators were saying in 1882, and thus the evolution of the primaryschool, and these fits of candour in which the verytruth of the matter is confessed, justify, after a quarter of a century, the fears expressed byCatholics at the very outset. It is to be feared, moreover, that this substitution of critical for neutral teaching will very soon issue in the introduction, even in the primaryschools, of lessons on the history ofreligions which shall serve as weapons againstChristian revelation; such a step is already being advocated by theFreemasons and by certain groups of unbelieving savants, and herein lies one of the greatest perils of to-morrow. Bills introduced by MM. Briand and Doumergue impose heavy penalties on fathers whose children refuse to make use of the irreligious books given them by their teachers, and render it impossible forparents to prosecute teachers whose immoral and irreligious instruction may give them reason for complaint. These bills, which are soon to be discussed, are now (June, 1909) producing a very painful impression.

(b) Laicization of the Teaching Staff

The Law of 30 October, 1886, drawn and advocated by Renè Goblet, called for the laicization of the teaching staff in the publicschools. In theschools for boys this laicization has been an accomplished fact since 1891, since which date noBrother of the Christian Schools has acted either as principal or as teacher in public primary instruction. The difficulty of forming a body offemale lay teachers impeded the process of laicizing the publicschools for girls, but this, too, has been complete since 1906, except in some few communes, where it is to be effected before the year 1913.

Denominational primary instruction

From the eleventh century onwards, history shows unmistakable traces, in most provinces of France, of smallschools founded by theChurch, such as were recommended byCharlemagne's capitulary in the year 789. The ever-increasing number ofschools, writes Guibert de Nogent in the twelfth century, makes access to them easy for the humblest. The seventeenth century saw the foundation of a certain number of teaching institutes; theUrsulines, who between the year 1602 and theRevolution, founded 289 houses, and who numbered 9000 members in 1792; the Daughters of Charity of St. Vincent De Paul founded in 1630, recognized in 1657; the Congregation of Notre-Dame, founded bySt. Peter Fourier, recognized in 1622; theBrothers of the Christian Schools, called, in the eighteenth century, Brothers of Saint-Yon, founded bySt. John the Baptist de la Salle, and who had 123 classes in 1719, when their founder died, and 550 classes in 1789. In the last twenty years a large number of monographs which have been given restricted publication in the provinces, have presented historical evidence of the care which theChurch was devoting to primaryeducation during the period immediately preceding theRevolution. At the beginning of the Consulate, Fourcroy, anti-religious as he was, alarmed, to use his own words, at the "almost total ineffectiveness of the primaryschools" (nullité presque totale), recommended it as a useful expedient, to confide a portion of the primary teaching to theclergy and to revive "the Institute of the Brothers, which had formerly been of the greatest service". In 1805, the Brothers, having re-established a mother-house atLyons, were solicited to furnish teachers in thirty-six towns. The Government of the First Empire authorized in ten years 880 communities or establishments of teaching sisters; the Restoration, less generous, authorized only 599; the Monarchy of July only 389. Until 1833 these congregations could exercise their functions only inschools controlled by the State, for the University would allow no infringement of its monopoly. The magnificent tribute to theeducational activity of theclergy which Guizot uttered during the debates on the Law of 1833 was endorsed by thelaw itself which, partially suppressing the monopoly of the University, established the principal of free primary teaching. The Law of 25 March, 1850, held "letters of obedience" given by religious associations to their members, to be equivalent to the diplomas given by the State, which legally qualified their recipients to be teachers. Between 1852 and 1860 the Empire issued 884 decrees recognizing congregations or local establishments of teaching sisters; from 1861 to 1869 — the period of change which followed theItalianwar — while Duruy was Minister of Public Instruction, only 77 of these decrees were issued.

The Law of 28 March, 1882, deprived the "letters of obedience" of all their value by providing that every teacher must hold a diploma (brevet) from one of the governmentjurys, or examining boards. Thecongrégationistes (see above) submitted to this formality. With this exception, the Law upheld the liberty of private teaching. The Law of 1886 authorized mayors andschool inspectors (inspecteurs d'académie) to oppose the opening of any privateschool on moral or hygienic grounds; in such cases the litigation was taken before one of theuniversity councils (conseils universitaires), in which the privateeducational establishments were represented by elected delegates, and the council gave a decision. These councils could also take disciplinary action against private teachers, in the form of censure or suspension of teaching licence. The masters and mistresses of privateschools might give religious instruction in theirschools, and were left free in the choice of methods, programs, and books, but the state authority, after consultation with the Council of Public Instruction (Conseil Supérieur de l'Instruction Publique), might prohibit the introduction and use of books judged contrary to morality, the Constitution, of thelaw. An order of the Council of State,dated 29 July, 1888, declared that neither departments nor communes had a legal right to grant appropriations, on their respective local budgets, to privateschools; thus the establishment and support of theseschools has fallen onCatholic charity exclusively. The communes can only give assistance to poor pupils in privateschools asindividuals.

A first, very serious, attack on the principal of freedom of teaching was made by the Law of 7 July, 1904, which formally declared that "teaching of every grade and every kind is forbidden in France to the congregations". The members of the authorized congregations, equally with the rest, fell under the disability thus created. Every Brother, every religiouswoman, who wished to continue the work of teaching was forthwith compelled to be secularized, and the courts remained, and still remain, competent to contest the legal value of such secularizations. A clause, the legal effect of which was transitory, was introduced empowering the Government, according to the needs of particular localities, to authorize for one or more years the continuance ofcongréganisteschools; but M. Combes immediately closed 14,404 out of 16,904 suchschools, and it is decreed that in 1910 the last of thecongréganisteschools shall have disappeared.

From time to time the Ministry publishes a list ofcongréganisteschools which must be closed definitely by the end of theschool year, and thus the Government in power is the sole arbiter to accord or to refuse them a few last years of existence. Thebishops are seeking to maintain primaryCatholiceducation or to reorganize it with secular or lay teachers. In some diocese a movement is on foot for the acquisition of teaching diplomas for the seminarists. Already in twenty-four diocese there arediocesan organizations for free teaching —diocesan committees composed ofecclesiastics andlaymen, which maintain a strict control of all the privateschools in their diocese. These measures have been imperatively demanded in order to repair the losses suffered by free primaryeducation, the number of pupils having fallen, according to statistics complied in 1907 by M. Keller, from 1,600,000 to 1,000,000.

Denominational secondary education

Statistics published by the Education Commission (Commission d'Enseignement) show that, out of a total of 162,110 pupils in the secondaryschools for the year 1898, 50,793 belonged to thelycées, 33,949 to the colleges, 9725 to private establishments taught bylaymen, and 67,643 to private establishments taught byecclesiastics. To these figures must be added 23,497 boys in thepetits séminaires. Thus, in the aggregate, the State was giving primaryeducation to 84,742 pupils; theChurch to 91,140.

The fundamental law on secondaryeducation is still the Falloux Law of 15 March, 1850. Any Frenchman over twenty-five years of age, having the degree of Bachelor, or a special diploma of qualification (brevet de capacité), may, after passing a term of five years in a teaching establishment, open a house of secondaryeducation, subject to objections on moral or hygienic grounds, of which grounds theuniversity councils are the judges. In contrast with the case of private primaryeducation,Catholic establishments of secondaryeducation may be subsidized by the communes or the departments.

A first serious stroke at the liberty of secondaryeducation was delivered by the Law of 7 July, 1904, depriving thecongréganistes of the right of teaching. Other projects, which the Government has already induced the Senate to accept, are now pending and these would exact much more rigorous conditions as to pedagogic qualifications on the part ofCatholic secondaryschool teachers of either sex; theCatholic establishments would be subject to a compulsory inspection, bearing, as in the case of primaryeducation, upon the conformity of the teaching with the Constitution and thelaw; the Government would reserve theright to close the establishment bydecree. It may be foreseen in the course of the year 1909 all or part of these proposals will become law, and the effects will be disastrous, first, toCatholic girls'schools, where many of the teachers, whether laywomen or secularizedcongréganistes, will not immediately be in possession of the requisite diplomas. Suchschools will thus be placed at a further disadvantage with thelycées, colleges, and courses for youngwomen organized by the State under the Law of 21 December, 1880, numbering as many as 104, with 8300 pupils, in 1883, and in 1906, numbering 171, with 32,500 pupils. Secondly, for thepetits séminaires the results will be still more disastrous.

These institutions have hitherto existed under a particular statute, which it will benecessary here to consider. "Secondary ecclesiastical schools", as thepetits séminaires were then called, were made by the decrees of 9 April, 1809, and 15 November, 1811, dependent on the University. There was to be only one secondaryecclesiasticalschool in each department, and its course was to be that of thelycée, or college of the state. A warrant of Louis XVIII,dated 5 October, 1814, allowed a secondpetit séminaires in each department, subject to the authorization of the head (grand maître) of the University of France; it also gave permission for these institutions to be established in country districts, that the pupils should beobliged to assume theecclesiastical habit after two years of study, and that the teachers should be directly dependent in thebishops. The circular of 4 July, 1816, forbade thepetits séminaires to receive externs, and this prohibition was confirmed by the ordinance of June, 1828, which limited the number of their pupils to 20,000. In this way the Government wished thepetits séminaires to be reserved exclusively for theeducation of futurepriests, and to be kept from competing with the University in any sense whatever, and upon these conditions it exempted them from taxation and from the control of the University, and granted them therights of legalpersonality. The ordinances of 1828 were never formally abrogated, but in practice, since 1850, a certain number ofpetits séminaires, retaining certain privileges andimmunities in recognition of their special mission, have received pupils in preparation not only for thepriesthood, but also for a great variety of careers.

Legislative projects, the passage of which is now imminent, will be a source of at least temporary embarrassment to thepetits séminaires, a certain number of which — those, namely, which werediocesan institutions — have disappeared in consequence of the Law of Separation. Statistics show that in 1906,Catholic secondaryeducation possessed 104 fewer colleges, and 22,223 fewer pupils than in 1898, and that the number of pupils inpetits séminaires had in eight years decreased by 8711.

Denominational higher education

Until 1882 the State supported five faculties oftheology: atParis,Bordeaux,Aix,Rouen, andLyons. These faculties had no regular pupils, but only attendants at the lectures delivered by their professors; theChurch attached no canonical value to the degrees; the state did not make these decrees a condition for anyecclesiastical appointment. The faculties themselves were suppressed by the Ferry Ministry.

TheProtestants still had two faculties oftheology maintained by the State; that ofParis, for Calvinists andLutherans, and that ofMontauban, for Calvinists exclusively. The separation Law of 1905 left these two faculties to be supported by theProtestants, and once detached from the University organizations, they have become freetheologicalschools.

Theuniversity monopoly, abolished as to primaryeducation by the Law of 1833, and as to secondaryeducation by thelaw of 1850, was also abolished for highereducation by the Law of 12 July, 1875, which permitted any Frenchman, subject to certain conditions, to create establishments of highereducation. In the period between 1875 and 1907 the Institut Catholique de Paris admitted twenty-ninedoctors oftheology, thirteen of canon law, eight of scholastic philosophy, one hundred and ninety-two of law, thirty-two of literature, ten ofscience. The first three of these degrees have been gained by candidates under tests of the institute itself; the others from state boards (jurys). The institute is preparing to set up a medical course and one in the history of religion. The Institut Catholique de Lille has connected itself with aschool of higher industrial and commercial instruction (seeLOUIS BAUNARD); the Institut Catholique d'Angers, one of agriculture. The Institut Catholique deToulouse has but one faculty, that oftheology; it is organizing lectures for students of literature and ofsciences who are following the courses of the state faculties.

Laws affecting the applications and effects of religion in civil life

(a) The Sunday Rest

TheRevolution had abolished all institutions which formerly existed in connection with the Sunday rest and had substituted thedécadi (see above) for the Sunday. Under the Restoration the Law of 18 November, 1814, forbade all "exterior" labour on Sunday; a tradesman might not open his shop; by the letter of thelaw, he might work and cause others to work in his closed shop. What the Restoration really aimed at was a public token of obedience to theprecepts of religion. The Law of 12 July, 1880, on the contrary, permitted work on Sunday. Theevil social effects of thislaw were soon perceived. Subtle discussions arose in the Chambers: should the weekly rest, which the labour organizations demanded, be a day fixed by legislation, or should it be Sunday? It was for some time feared that such a legislative prescription would look like a concession to denominationalism, but the decision of the Committee on Labour (conseil supêrieur du travail) and of many labour unions was explicit in favour of Sunday. On 10 July, 1906, a law was passed finally establishing Sunday as the weekly day of rest, and providing, moreover, numerous restrictions and exceptions, the details of which were to be arranged by administrative regulations. An unconscious homage to theDivine law, rendered by an unbelieving Parliamentary majority, this enactment, on account of a certain temporary disturbance which it occasioned in the country's industry and commerce, and in the supply of commodities, was the object of unfortunate aminadversions on the part of certain journals which were in other respects defenders ofCatholic interests. The hostility manifested by a certain number of prominentCatholics towards the Sunday rest, and their cooperation with every attempt to restrict the application of thelaw, produced a regrettable effect on public opinion.

(b) Oaths

The form ofoath administered in courts ofjustice is not peculiar to any creed. It supposes abelief inGod. The images of Christ have disappeared from the courtrooms. Proposals are being considered by the Chambers to suppress the words "devant Dieu et devant hommes" (beforeGod and man) in the legal form ofoath, or to authorize a demand on the part of anyatheist to have theoath administered to him in a different form.

(c) Immunities

Since thelaw made military service a universalobligation in France, three enactments have followed one another: that of 27 July 1872, dispensingecclesiastics from theobligation; that of 15 July, 1889, which fixed the term of active service for ordinary citizens at three years, and forpriests at one; that of 21 March, 1905, fixing the term of active service at two years forpriests as for others, and imposing upon them, up to the age of forty-five, all the series ofobligations to which members of the reserves and of the territorial army are subject.

(d) Marriage

Under the old regime,parishpriests officially registered births, deaths, and marriages for the State. In 1787, Louis XVI accorded to theProtestants the same privilege which, indeed, they had enjoyed under the Edict of Nantes, from 1595 to 1685. TheRevolutionary law and the code Napoléon deprived theclergy of this status. Civil marriage was instituted, and thepriest was forbidden to solemnize any marriage not previously contracted in the presence of a civil functionary. Immediately after the separation of church and State (1905), the question was raised, whether this prohibition was still to be maintained; the Supreme Court of Appeals (Cour de Cassation) replied in the affirmative, and punished apriest who had blessed a marriage not contracted before the mayor. Certain courts have admitted that if, after acivil marriage, one of the two parties, contrary to previous engagements, should refuse to go to church, this would constitute an injury to the other party so grave as to justify a suit fordivorce; but this opinion is not unanimous.Catholics, for that matter, wish to abolish thelaw requiring the previouscivil marriage.

Some of the impedimentsdefined by theChurch are not recognized by the State, such as, e.g., the impediment of spiritual relationship. One impediment recognized by the civil code (articles 148-150), but which theCouncil of Trent refused to make acanonical impediment, in spite of the solicitation of Charles IX's ambassadors, is that which results from the refusal ofparents' consent. The Law of 21 June 1907, the chief advocate of which was the Abbé Lamier, considerably loosened theobligations imposed on adults with regard toparental consent, and the discrepancies in this respect between the state law and theChurch law have, in consequence, become less serious.

The Law of 20 September, 1792, admitteddivorce, even by mutual consent, and abolished that form of separation which, while terminating cohabitation and community possessions, maintains the indissolubility of the civil bond. The Civil Code of 1804, though imposing conditions more rigorous than those of the Law of 1792, maintaineddivorce, and at the same time re-established legal separation (séparation de corps). The Law of 8 May, 1816, abolisheddivorce and maintained separation. The Law of 27 July, 1884, re-establisheddivorce on the grounds of the condemnation of one party to an afflicting andinfamous punishment, ofviolence, cruelty, and grave injuries, ofadultery on the part of either husband or wife; it did not admitdivorce by mutual consent; it maintained separation and authorized the courts to transform into adivorce, upon the demand of either party and cause shown, at the end of three years, a separation which had been granted at the suit of either. This law has recently been aggravated by two enactments which permit the adulterous husband to contract marriage with his accomplice and, instead of merely permitting the courts to convert separation intodivorce at the end of three years, declare this conversion to be of right upon the demand of either party. The annual proportion ofdivorces to population has increased, from 3,68 per 10,000 inhabitants in 1900, to 5.57 per 10,000 inhabitants in 1907.

(e) Interments and Cemeteries

TheDecree of 23 Prairial, Year XII, ordered that there should be distinctions of religiousbeliefs in regard to cemeteries. Thisdecree was abrogated by the Law of 14 November, 1881, and since then aProtestant or aJew may be buried in that part of the cemetery which had until then been reserved forCatholics. The Law of 15 November, 1887, on free interments, forbids any proceedings which may contravene the wishes of a deceasedperson who has, by "an authentic act", expressed a desire to be buried without religious ceremonies. To annul such an "act", the same normal conditions are required as for the revocation of a will, and as a consequence of thislaw, certain death-bed conversions, when the deceased has not had time to comply with the legal conditions of revocation, have been followed by non-religious burial.

Thesociety founded in 1880 to promotecremation brought about, in 1886, the insertion of the wordincinération in thelaw of free interments and, in 1889, the issue of an administrative order defining the conditions in whichcremation might be practised. Between 1889 and 1904 the number of incinerations performed in the cemetery of Père Lachaise amounted to 3484.

The Decrees of 23 Prairial, Year XII, and of 18 May, 1806, assigned to the public establishments which had been constituted to administer theproperty and resources devoted to public worship (fabriques andconsistoires) a monopoly of all undertaking, that is to say, all monies received on account of funeral processions, burial or exhumations, draperies, and other objects used to enhance the solemnity of funeral processions. Most of thefabriques, in the important towns, exploited this monopoly through middlemen. Some years ago attention was called in the Chambers to the fact that the profits derived from non-religious interments, as well as from religious, were being taken by thefabriques, and upon this pretext, thelaw of 28 December, 1904, laicized the business of funeral-management, assigning the monopoly of it to the communes. Only the furniture used for the exterior or interior decoration ofreligious edifices could thenceforward be provided by thefabriques. But the separation law of 1905 intervened, and all such decorative furniture became theproperty of theassociations cultuelles (see below). As no association cultuelle was formed for theCatholic religion, the material fell into the hands of sequestrators of thefabriqueproperty.

The Law of Separation

"The Law of Separation of the Churches and the State" (Loi de Séparation des Eglises et de l'Etat) of 1905 proceeded from the principle that the state professes no religiousbelief. Regarded from the viewpoint of the life of theChurch, it completely dissociated the State from the appointment ofbishops andparishpriests. Soon after the passage of thelaw all the vacant sees received titulars by the directnomination ofPius X. As to the annual revenue of theChurch, the appropriation for public worship (budget des cultes), which in 1905 amounted to 42,324,933 francs, was suppressed. The departments and communes were forbidden to vote appropriations for public worship. The law grants, first, life pensions equivalent in each case to three-fourths of former salary toministers of religion who were not less than sixty years of age when thelaw waspromulgated and had spent thirty years inecclesiastical services remunerated by the State. Secondly, it grants life pensions equivalent to one-half the salary toministers of religion who were not less than forty-five years of age and had passed more than twenty years inecclesiastical services remunerated by the State. It makes grants for periods of from four to eight years forecclesiastics less than forty-five years of age who shall continue to discharge their functions. The law resulted, in the budget of 1907, in the elimination of the item of 37,441,800 francs ($7,488,360) for salaries toministers of religion and the inclusion of 29,563,871 francs ($5,912,774) for the pensions and allowances of the first year, making a savings of about eight millions. As the allowances are to diminish progressively until the savings are complete, at the end of eight years, and as the pensions are to cease with the lives of the pensioners, the appropriations on account of religious worship will decrease notably as year follows year.

With respect to the buildings which the Concordat had placed at the disposal of the church, thelaw provides that the episcopal residences, for two years, the presbyteries andseminaries (grands séminaires), for five years, the churches, for an indefinite period, should be left at the disposal of theassociations cultuelles, which will be discussed later on in this article. In regard toChurch property, this consisted of (a) themensæ episcopales andmensæ curiales (see Mensa), which were composed of the possessions restored to theChurch after the concordat, together with the sum total of the donations made tobishoprics orparishes in the course of the intervening century; (b) theproperty of theparishfabriques, intended to meet all the expenses of public worship, and derived either from possessions restored to theChurch after the Concordat or from gifts and legacies, and augmented by pew-rents, collections, and funeral fees. The Law of Separation divided theproperty of themensæ and thefabriques into three classes. The first of these classes consisted ofproperty received from the State, and this the State resumed; as to the second, consisting ofproperty not received from the State, and on the other hand burdened with eleemosynary oreducationalobligations, it was ruled that the representatives of thefabriques could give it to public establishments or to establishments of public utility with eleemosynary oreducational character, subject to theapprobation of the prefect. Lastly, there was a third category which comprisedproperty not derived from state grants and not burdened with anyobligations or only withobligations connected with public worship. It was ruled that suchproperty should pass into the hands of theassociations cultuelles, and that if no such body appeared to receive it it should be assigned bydecree to communal benevolent institutions within the territorial limits of theparish or diocese.

This brings us to the subject of theassociations cultuelles. Under the Concordat, the episcopalmensa and theparochialfabrique were public institutions. When religious worship ceased to be a department of the public service, the Chambers, in order to replace the institutions which had been suppressed, wished to call into existence certain private "moral persons", or associations. Without any previous understanding with theHoly See, the rupture with which was already complete, the Chambers decided that in eachdiocese and eachparish associations for religious worship (associations cultuelles) could be created to receive as proprietors theproperty of the mensa, with the responsibility of taking care of it. The transfer of theproperty was to be effected by decisions of the formerfabriques in favor of these new associations. The law imposed a certain minimum number of administrators on each association, the number varying from seven to twenty-five, according to the importance of the commune, and the administrators might be French or foreign, men orwomen,priests orlaymen. The preparation ofstatutes for the associations was left entirely free. Very lively controversies arose. It was suggested that the application of thislaw would be followed by an influx of layCatholics, members of theassociations cultuelles, into the government of theChurch. Some thought this anxiety excessive; for, as thelaw allowed a number of adjacentparishes to be to be administered by a single association cultuelle, it seems that it would have been, strictly speaking, possible for oneassociation, composed of thebishop and twenty-fourpriests chosen by him, to receive both theproperty of themensa and that of all theparishes of thediocese.

But other reasons for anxiety appeared when Articles 4 and 8 of the Law were carefully compared. Article 4 provided that these associations must, in their constitutions, "conform to the general rules of organization of public worship", and as a matter of fact, at Riom, in 1907, the court refused the use of the church to aschismaticalpriest who was supported by aschismaticalassociation cultuelle. But Article 8 provided for the case by which severalassociations cultuelles, each with its ownpriest, should lay claim to the same church, and gave the Council of State theright to decide between them, "taking account of the circumstances of fact". Thus, while, according to Article 4, it appeared that thecultuelle recognized by, and in communion with, thehierarchy must naturally be the owner of theproperty of the fabrique, Article 8 left to the Council of State, a purely lay authority, the settlement of any dispute which might arise between acultuelle faithful to thebishop and aschismaticcultuelle. Thus it belonged to the Council of State to pronounce upon theorthodoxy of anyassociation cultuelle and its conformity with the "general rules of public worship" as provided by Article 4.

A general assembly of the episcopate, held 30 May, 1906, considered the question of theassociation cultuelles, but the decisions reached were not divulged. Should such associations be formed according to the Law, or must they refuse to form any? In the month of March, twenty-threeCatholic writers and members of the Chambers had expressed, in a confidential letter to thebishops, a hope thatcultuelles might be given a trial. The publication of this letter had stirred up a bitter controversy, and for some months theCatholics of France were seriously divided.Pius X, in theEncyclical "Gravissimo oficii" (10 August, 1906), gave it as his judgment that thislaw, made without his assent, and which even purported to be made against him, threatened to intrude lay authority into the natural operation of theecclesiastical organization; theEncyclical prohibited the formation, not only ofassociations cultuelles, but of any form of association whatsoever "so long as it should not be certainly and legally evident that the divine constitution of theChurch, the immutablerights of theRoman pontiff and thebishops, such as theirnecessary authority over theproperty of the Church, particularly over the sacred edifices would, in the said association, be irrevocable and fully secure".

The half-contradiction between Article 4 and Article 8 was not the only serious contradiction which theChurch could allege. The author of thelaw had further restricted in a singularly parsimonious fashion thepropertyrights of the futureassociations cultuelles. They were permitted to establish unlimited reserve funds, but they were to have the free disposal of only a portion equivalent to six times the mean annual expenditure, and the surplus was to be kept in theCaisse des Déspôts et Consignations, and employed exclusively in the acquisition or conservation of real and personalproperty for the use of religious worship. Moreover, the business transactions of all thecultuelles were to be under state inspection and control.

Thus thelaw on the one hand did not leave to theChurch, legally represented by theassociations cultuelles, the right of freely possessing theecclesiastical parsimony, of increasing it at will, of disposing of it at will; and on the other hand it left to thejurisdiction of the State the right, in any case of conflicting claims, to accept or to reject the claims of any cultuelle which might be in communion with thehierarchy.

Theinterdict laid upon theassociations cultuelles had several juridical consequences. First, the third of the classes offabriquesproperty described above was placed under sequestration, to be assigned by the State to communal benevolent institutions, of which every commune possesses at least one — the freehospital and dispensary. Secondly, the suppressedfabriques were under regular legalobligations, e.g., Masses to be said as consideration forpious foundations. In the intention of the author of thelaw, theobligation of causing these Masses to be said would have fallen upon theassociations cultuelles; as these have not been founded, are the communal institutions, which enjoy the revenue of the foundations, bound to fulfil theseobligations? For two years the responses given to this question by thecivil authority were hesitating. The Law of 15 April, 1908, laid it down that these institutions shall in nowise be bound to cause Masses to be said in prospective consideration of which the foundations were established; that only the founders themselves or their heirs in direct line, shall have theright to claim, within a period of six months, restitution of the capital of the said foundation, but that certainclerical benefitsocieties (themutualitéssacerdotal, organized to received the funds of the olddiocesancaisses for the support of superannuated priests) could receive income from these foundations and, in return, accept theobligation of the Masses. It appeared to theHoly See, however, that the constitutions of these benefitsocieties did not adequately safeguard therights of thebishops, and the Frenchclergy were thenceforward forbidden to avail themselves of thislaw. As the right of recovery on account of nonfulfillment of the conditions has been allowed only to heirs in the direct line, the numberlesspious foundations established bypriests or othercelibates are forever lost. And at the present writing nopious foundation is legally feasible in France, because there is in theChurch nopersonality legally qualified to receive such a bequest. Hence the absolute impossibility, for any FrenchCatholic, for securing to himself in perpetuity the celebration in his ownparish church of a Mass for the repose of hissoul.

Thirdly, the use of the churches was to be assigned to theassociations cultuelles, on the condition that the later should keep up the buildings. Thecultuelles not having been formed, would the State take possession of the churches? It dared not; or rather it did not wish to drive home upon the popular mind the effect of the separation. After a brief period of transition, during which ridiculousprocés-verbaux were drawn up against thepriests who saidMass, the State left thereligious edifices at the disposal of theclergy and people, officially placing assemblies for religious worship in the same official category as ordinary public gatherings; it was sufficient for the religious authority to make, at the beginning of each year, a declaration in advance for all the gatherings of public worship to be held during the year.Rome forbade theChurch of France to comply with this formality of an annual declaration, thus once more endeavouring to make the State understand that legislation regulating the life of theCatholicChurch could not depend on the mere will of the State, and thatecclesiastical authority could not, even by a simple declaration, actively concur in any such legislation. Once more it was thought that the closing of the churches was imminent. Then came two newlaws.

The Law of 2 January, 1907, permits the exercise of religious worship in the churches purely on sufferance and without any legal title. According to this new law, theclergy have only the actual use of the edifices, the maintenance of which is anobligation incumbent upon the proprietor — the State or the commune. But grave complications are to be expected. If the proprietor refuses the needful repairs, the church may be closed for the sake of public safety — unless, that is, the faithful tax themselves to pay for repairs. TheChurch, tolerated in her own buildings, has no recourse against any mayor who might order the bells to be tolled for a nonreligious funeral. At one time it was believed that thepriests would be able to rent the churches on lease, but, owing to the demands of ministerial orders, this last hope had to be abandoned. At last assemblages for religious worship were juridically classified as public meetings, and, as theChurch refused to make the anticipatory declaration required by thelaw of 1881, on public meetings, a law passed of 28 March, 1907, abolished this requirement in respect of all public meetings, those for religious worship included.

Such was the patchwork of expedients by which the Government, embarrassed by its own law of 1905, and still refusing to negotiate withRome, contrived what looked like amodus vivendi. The voter sees that thepriest is still in the church, and that Mass is still being said there, and this is all that is needed by the Government to convince the shallow multitude that theChurch is notpersecuted, and that if the conditions of its existence are not prosperous, the blame must be laid on the successive refusals of thepope — the refusal to permit the formation ofcultuelles, the refusal to permit compliance with thelaw in the matter of declaring assemblies for public worship, the refusal to letpriests to formmutualités approved by the State. All the evils of the situation are due to the fundamentalerror committed by the State at the very outset when, wishing to reorganize the life of theChurch in France, it broke with theHoly See instead of opening negotiations. Hence the impossibility of the church actively co-operating in the execution oflaws enacted by thecivil authority in a purely one-sided fashion--laws which took the place of a concordat never regularly annulled. (SeeCONCORDAT OF 1801.)

Civil regulation of public worship

(a) Rules Relating to Religious Ceremonies

While, under the Concordat, an administrative regulation wasnecessary for the opening of even a privatechapel, it is now lawful to open places of worship without any previous authorization. A mayor can prohibit processions in his commune simply on the pretext of avoiding public disorder; as a matter of fact, in most of the great cities of France, processions do not take place. Mayors can even prohibit the presence in funeral processions ofpriests wearing their vestments, but very few mayors have ever issued such an order. Both theparishpriest and the mayor have authority to cause the bells to be rung. A ministerial circulardated 27 January, 1907, withholds from the mayor theright to have the bells rung for "civilbaptisms" or for non-religious marriages or burials, but there is no penal sanction for the transgression of this order. It is now forbidden to erect or affix any religious sign or emblem in public places or upon public monuments; but the existing emblems remain, and privateproperty may be decorated, even externally, with religious emblems.

(b) Repression of Interference with Religious Worship

The law punishes with a fine of from 16 to 200 francs andimprisonment of from six days to two months anyone who byviolence, threats, or an act which may be construed as pressure (pression) has attempted to influence an individual to exercise or abstain from exercising any religious worship, or who, by disorderly conduct, interferes with exercise of any such worship. It punishes, with a fine of from 500 to 3000 francs orimprisonment of from two months to one year, outrages orslanders against functionaries, if committed publicly in places of religious worship, and of three months to two years any preacher who shall incite his hearers to resist thelaws.

The Law of Separation and the Protestants and Jews

The Law of 1905 suppressed the special organic articles which regulatedProtestant worship and theDecree of 1844 which had organized Jewish worship, recognized since 1806, and provided, since 1831, with state-paid rabbis. Before 1905 there had been a Reformed Church which was administered in eachparish by a presbyterial council elected by the members of the denomination, and at the capital by a consistory to which all the councils sent delegates, and which nominatedpastors with the consent of the Government. TheChurch was very much divided intheology. It included: the Orthodox, who had carried, in the general synod of 1872, by 61 votes to 45, a declaration offaith involving as of necessity the acceptance of certaindogmas; theLiberals, who, in spite of their defeat in 1872, continued to claim for thepastor an unlimited freedom of teaching in his own church; a midway party (centre droit) who were nearer to theLiberals than to the Orthodox. The Law of 1905, in terminating the official existence of a reformed Church, had this interesting result, that thetheological divisions of the various groups openly expressed themselves in the formation of three distinct great organizations for the reformed religion: (1) the Union Nationale des Eglises Réformées Evangéliques, formed by the Orthodox at the Synod ofOrléans (6 February, 1906), and requiring as a condition the acceptance of the Declaration of Faith of 1872; in this body, the regionalsynods, in which the delegates of the presbyterial associations meet, and thenational synods hold spiritual authority; (2) the Union des Eglises Réformées de France, formed by thecentre droit at the synod of Jarnac (June, 1907), with the like synodal organizations, and with the hope, hardly justified so far, of receiving the adhesion of both the extreme parties; (3) the United Reformed Churches (Eglises Réformées Unies), a very vague grouping of independent presbyterial associations, leaving to each Church its autonomy, restricting the functions of thesynods, and representing, in place ofdogma, the negative tendencies called "liberal". In this new threefold organization one feature, the consistory, disappeared.

TheLutheran Church has but sixty-sevenparishes in France. It has grouped itscultuelles into one general association.

The Jewish denomination has formed the Union des Associations Cultuelles Israélites en France. The central consistory is composed of the grand rabbi, certain rabbis elected by the graduates of the Rabbinical School of France who are employed ineducational or religious functions, and lay members elected for a term of eight years by theassociations cultuelles. The rabbis are elected, subject to the approval of the consistory.

Chaplaincies

The law authorizes the State, the departments, and the communes to pay salaries tochaplains in public institutions such alycées, colleges,schools,hospitals, asylums, andprisons. In the Army the office ofchaplain has not been abolished, but it remains unoccupied. Since 1 January, 1906, no minister of religion has been a member of the staff of any militaryhospital; the localministers of religion may enter thesehospitals at the request if sick soldiers. Adecreedated 6 February, 1907, abolished the naval chaplaincies, but certainecclesiastics who formerly filled these posts will continue to discharge the functions proper to them. The State does not allow appropriations for the maintenance of chaplaincies inschools were there are no boarders. It is a curious fact that, while thelaws forbidpriests to enter primaryschools, they have, up to the present, admitted to the secondaryschools chaplains paid out of the public purse; the Government feared that if this guarantee of religious training were wantingparents would send their children to privateschools. But a practice recently established in a certain number oflycées tend to relieve the State of the expense of chaplaincies by compellingparents who wish their children to receive religious instruction to pay an additional sum.

Political groups, the press, and intellectual and social organizations

Politically speaking, theCatholic group which receives the active sympathies of theCatholic press is that known as the Action Libérale Populaire, founded by M. Jacques Piou, a Member of the Chambers, on the basis indicated forCatholics by the instructions ofLeo XIII. This association, which was legally incorporated 17 May, 1902, comprises 14,000 committees and more than 200,000 adherents. It acts by means of lectures, publications, and congresses. In the Chamber elected in 1906 there were 77 deputies belonging to this association.

Catholic daily journalism is represented chiefly by "L'Univers", "La Croix", and the "People Français." The former of these papers, founded 3 November 1833, by the AbbéMigne, had Eugène Veuillot for its editor from 1839 on, andLouis Veuillot after 1844. Its adhesion to the political directions given byLeo XIII detached from the "Univers", in 1893, a group of editors who founded "La Vérité Français": this split ended with the amalgamation of the "Univers" and the Vérité", 19 January, 1907. In October, 1908, under the management of M. François Veuillot, acquired greater importance with an enlarged form. "The Good Press" (Maison de la Bonne Presse), founded in 1873 by theAugustinians of the Assumption, immediately after issued the "Pèlerin", a bulletin ofpious enterprises andpilgrimages, and after 1883 a daily paper, "La Croix", which has been edited since 1 April, 1900, by M. Féron Vrau. About a hundred local "Croix" are connected with theParis "Croix". "The Good Press" publishes "Questions Actuelles", "Cosmos", "Mois Littéraire", and many other periodicals, and with it is connected the "Presse Régionale", which maintains a certain number of provincial papers defendingCatholic interests. Many independent papers, either conservative or nominally liberal, are reckoned asCatholic, although a certain number of them have misledCatholic opinion by their opposition to the programme ofLeo XIII.

The leadingCatholic review is "Le Correspondant", founded in 1829, formerly the organ of the LiberalCatholics such asMontalembert and Falloux. Its policy is "to rally all defenders of theCatholic cause, whatever their origin, on the broad ground of liberty for all; to afford them a common centre where, laying aside difficulties which must be secondary in the view ofChristians, each one can do his part, in letters, inscience, in historical andphilosophicalscience, in social life, to win the victory forChristianideas." Monarchist by its antecedents, with a public in which Monarchists form a large proportion, the "Correspondant" has had for its editor, since May, 1904, M. Etienne Lamy, of the Académie Française, who was a Republican member of the national Assembly in 1871, and who, in 1881, brought down upon himself the displeasure of the republican electors by his sturdy opposition to thelaws suppressing religious congregations.

The chief enterprises for the benefit ofCatholic students inParis are the Cercle Catholique du Luxembourg, which was founded in 1847, and in 1902 became the Association Générale des Etudiants Catholiques de Paris; theOlivaint and theLaennec lectures, established in 1875, the former for students in law and letters, the latter for medical students, by fathers of theSociety of Jesus; the Réunion des Etudiants founded in 1895 by theMarist Fathers, and of whichFerdinand Brunetière was president of the board of directors until his death. Besides these, the Association Catholique de la Jeunesse Française, founded in 1886, now (June, 1909) unites in one group nearly 100,000 young men, students, peasants, employees of various kinds, and labourers; it has 2400 groups in the provinces, and holds annual congresses in which, for some years past, social questions have been actively discussed. It was at the congregation held by this association atBesançon in 1898, that the conversion ofFerdinand Brunetière was made known in a very remarkable speech of the famous academician. Since 1905 it has been publishing its "Annales", and since 1907 a journal, "La Vie Nouvelle."

The extremely original association of the "Sillon" (furrow), attractive to some, disquieting to others, was founded in 1894 in thecrypt of the Stanislaus college and became, in 1898, under the direction of M. Marc Sangnier, a focus of social, popular, and democratic action. M. Sangnier and his friends develop, in theirCercles d'études, and propagate, in public meetings of the most enthusiastic character, the twofoldidea that democracy is the type of social organization which tends to the highest development ofconscience and of civic responsibility in the individual, and that this organization needsChristianity for its realization. To be asillonniste. according to the adherents of the Sillon, it is not enough merely to profess adoctrine, but one must live a life more fullyChristian and fraternal. The Sillon has held a national congress every year since 1902; that of 1909 brought together more than 3000 members. The character of the organization has exposed it to lively criticisms; its reception has not been the same in alldioceses. But in spite of obstacles, thesillonistes continue their activity, often independent of, but never in opposition to, thehierarchy, carrying on their work of penetration in indifferent or hostile surroundings. They have a review, "Le Sillon", and a newspaper, "L'Eveil Démocratique", which in two years has gained 50,000.

Catholic undertakings for the benefit of the young people of the poorer classes have developed mightily of late years. In 1900 the "Commission des Patronages" drew up statistics according to which theCatholics had charge of 3588 protectories (patronages) and 32,574 institutions of various kinds givingChristian care to the young. In the city ofParis alone there were at thatdate, 176Catholic protectories, with 26,000 young girls under their care. The Gymnastic Federation of the Protectories of France, formed after the gymnastic festival which was held at the Vatican on 5 to 8 October, 1905, numbers today (June, 1909) 549Catholic gymnasticsocieties and 60,000 young people.

The State carries on its fight against theChurch in the field of post-academiceducation; in 1894 there were in France only 34 non-religious (laïques) protectories, 1366 for boys, and 998 for girls. To the political groups, the journalistic work, thegoodworks for the benefit of the young, must be added to the "Catholic social" undertakings, the earliest of which was the Oeuvre dyes Cercles Catholiques d'Ouviers, funded in 1871 by Count Albert de Mun, the chief result of which was the introduction byCatholics in the Legislature of a number of legislative projects on social questions. The last five years have seen in France the birth and development, through the initiative of M. Henri Lorin and the Lyons journal, the "Chronique de Sud-Est", of the institution known as thesemaines sociales, a series of social courses which bring together a great manypriests andCatholic lay people. Thisidea has been imitated inCatholicSpain andItaly. Lastly a body ofJesuits have begun a valuable collection of brochures and tracts, under the title "L'Action populaire", which forms a veritable referencelibrary for those who wish to study socialCatholicism and an inestimable source of information for those who wish to join actively in the movement.

The Church in France during the first three years after the Law of Separation

On 16 December, 1905, a large number ofbishops issued a request to theparishpriest and members of the fabric committees (fabriques — see above) not to be present at the taking of inventories of church furniture prescribed by the Law of Separation except as mere witnesses and after making all reserves. A circular,dated 10 January, 1906, ordering the agents of the Department of Public Domains to open the tabernacles, intensified the feeling of indignation and, in consequences of an appellation, was implicitly disavowed, by M. Merlou, the Minister of France. But the feeling lasted and, from the end of January to the end of March, expressed itself, in a certain number of churches, in violent outbreaks against the agents who came to take the inventories. The breaking open of locked doors, the cashiering of military officers who refused to lend the aid of their troops to these proceedings, the arrest and prosecution of people taking part inCatholic demonstrations, and the mortal wounds inflicted on some of them in the departments of Nord, and of Haute-Loire aggravated the public irritation. There was some hope amongCatholics that the general elections, which would take place in May, would result in defeat for the Government; but these hopes were not realized; the opposition lost fifty seats in the balloting of 6-20 May.

The first general gathering of thebishops was held on 30 May, 1906. TheEncyclical "Gravissiomo officii" (10 August, 1906), which rejected thecultuelles, received the absolute obedience of theCatholics. The attempt to formschismaticcultuelles, made by somepriests andlaymen in eight localities, met with derision and contempt, and these isolated bodies of schismatics failed to obtain possession of thereligious edifices even by appealing to the courts. The second and third general gatherings of thebishops (4-7 September, 1906, and 15 January, 1907), thankedPius X for the encyclical and discussed the organization of public worship, in accordance with a very definite programme for deliberation which theHoly See had sent to Cardinal Richard,Archbishop ofParis. On 12 December, 1906, Mgr. Montagnini, who had remained inParis as guardian of the pontifical archives, was expelled from France after a minute domiciliary search and the seizures of his papers. The Vatican protested in a circulardated 19 December. Various incidents in the application of thelaw — the expulsion of Cardinal Richard from hisarchiepiscopal residence (15 December, 1906), expulsions of seminarists from theseminaries, the employment of troops at Beaupréau and at Auray to enforce such an expulsion — called forth lively protests from theCatholic press which saw, in all these episodes, the realization of the settled policy thus expounded by M. Viviani, Minister of Labour, in the Chamber of Deputies, 8 November, 1906: "Through our fathers, through our elders, through ourselves — all of us together-- we have bound ourselves to a work of anticlericalism, to a work of irreligion. . . . We have extinguished in thefirmament lights which shall not be rekindled. We have shown the toilers thatheaven contained only chimeras."

Successive meetings of thebishops have organized the work of theDenier du Clergé. The organization isdiocesan, notparochial. No individual is taxed; the subscriptions are entirelyvoluntary; but in many diocese thediocesan budget fixes, without, however, imposing, the contribution which eachparish ought to furnish. A commission of control, composed ofpriests andlaymen, in many diocese takes charge of the disbursement of theDenier du Clergé, If aparish contributes insufficiently, and that not from lack of means but from lack of goodwill, thebishop can withdraw itsparishpriest. Two penalties can be inflicted onCatholics who culpably refuse to contribute to the support of religious worship: a diminution of pomp in the administration of thesacraments, and an increase, as affecting suchpersons, of incidental burdens.

The first results of theDenier du Clergé in the variousdioceses are not as yet well ascertained; they seem to justify neither over-enthusiastic hopes nor over-pessimistic fears. An inter-diocesan fund (caisse) is beginning to do its work in aiding the poorerdioceses. In many communities, the communal authority, having taken possession of the presbytery, has rented it to theparishpriest for a certain sum, but thelaw declares that the lease, to be valid, must have been ratified by the prefect. By this means the State has sought to prevent the communes from renting presbyteries too cheap. Of 32,093 presbyteries existing in France, 3643 were still occupied rent-free by theparishpriests at the beginning of October, 1908. A circular of M, Briand, Minister of Justice, has aminadverted on this fact as an abuse. It appears that in most of thedioceses a central committee, or adiocesan bureau, composed ofpriests andlaymen, is to be formed, with the episcopal authority for its centre, to combine the direction of all the organized work of thediocese. Subject to this committee there will be committees in the severalarrondissements, cantons, andparishes. When consulted in May, 1907,Pius X preferred smallparochial committees under the curés to the formation ofparochial associations (which might be interpreted as an acceptance of the Law of 1901 on associations), with an unlimited number of members. Theecclesiastical seminaries, which the Law of Separation drove out of the buildings they were occupying, have been reconstituted in other homes under the title "Ecoles Supérieures de Théologie."

At present one of the most serious preoccupations of theChurch in France is the supply ofpriests. In 1878, whenMgr. Bougaud wrote his book, "Le grand péril de l'Église de France," there was a deficiency of 2467priests in France. Père Dudon, who has studied the question of the supply ofpriests very profoundly, computes that in 1906, at the breaking of the Concordat, there was a deficiency of 3109, and the very insecurity of the position of theChurch before thelaw furnishes ground for the fear that vocations will go on decreasing in frequency.

CONTACT US |ADVERTISE WITH NEW ADVENT