Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 13.djvu/33

 REVOLUTION

11

REVOLUTION

ceived from the West and kSouth where the just dissatisfaction of Cathohc consciences had provoked disturbances; in particular the election of the Prot- estant Rabaut Saint-Etienne to the presidency of the National Assembly brought about commotions at Toulouse and Nimes. Under the influence of these disturbances the Civil Constitution of the Clergy was developed. On 29 May, 1790, it was laid before the Assembly. Bonal, Bishop of Clermont, and some members of the Right requested that the proj- ect should be submitted to a national council or to the pope. But the Assembly proceeded ; it discussed the Civil Constitution of the Clergy from 1 June to 12 July, 1790, on which date it was passed.

This Constitution compri.sed four titles. Title I, Ecclesiastical Offices: Diocesan boundaries were to agree with those of departments, 57 episcopal sees being thus suppressed. The title of archbishop was abolished; out of S3 remaining bishoprics 10 were called metropolitan bishoprics and given juris- diction over the neighbouring dioceses. No section of French territory should recognize the authority of a bishop living abroad, or of his delegates, and this, adds the Constitution, "without prejudice to the unity of faith and the communion which shall be maintained with the head of the Universal Church". Canonries, prebends, and priories were aboli-shed. There should no longer be any sacerdotal posts es- pecially devoted to fulfilling the conditions of Mass foundations. All appeals to Rome were forbidden. Title II, Appointment to Benefices: Bishops should be appointed by the Electoral Assembly of the de- partment; they should be invested and consecrated by the metropolitan and take an oath of fidelity to the nation, the King, the Law. and the Constitu- tion; they should not seek any confirmation from the pope. Pari.sh priests should be elected by the elec- toral as.semblies of the districts. Thus all citizens, even Protestants, Jews, and nominal Catholics, might name titulars to ecclesiastical offices, and the first obligation of priests and bishops was to take an oath of fidelity to the Constitution which denied to the Holy See any effective power over the Church. Title III, Salary of ministers of Religion: The Con- stitution fixed the salary of the Bishop of Paris at 51,000 livres (about $10,200), that of bishops of towns whose population exceeded 50,000 souls at 20,000 livres (about $4000), that of other bishops at 12,000 livres (about $2400), that of curfe at a sum ranging from 6000 (about $1200) to 1200 livres (about $240). For the lower clergy this was a bet- terment of their material condition, especially as the real value of these sums was two and one-half times the present amount. Title IV, dealing with resi- dence, made very severe conditions regarding the ab- sences of bishops and priests.

At the festival of the Federation (14 July, 1790) Talleyrand and three hundred priests ofliciating at the altar of the nation erected on the Champs-de-Mars wore the tri-coloured girdle above their priestly vestments and besought the ble.ssing of God on the Revolution. Deputations were present from the towns of France, and there was inaugurated a sort of cult of the Fatherland, the remote origin of all the "Revolutionary cults". On 10 July, 1790, in a confidential Brief to Louis XVI, Pius VI expressed the alarm with which the project under discussion filled him. He commissioned two ecclesiastics who were ministers of Louis XVI, Champion de Cice and Lefranc de Pompignan, to urge the king not to sign the Civil Constitution of the Clergy. On 28 July, in a letter to the pope, Louis XVI replied that he would be compelled, "with death in his soul", to promulgate the Constitution, that he would reserve the right to broach as soon as possible the matter of some concession, but that if he refused, his life and the lives of his family would be endangered.

The pope replied (17 August) that he still held the same opinion of the Constitution, but that he would make no public declaration on the subject until he consulted with the Sacred College. On 24 August the king promulgated the Constitution, for which he was blamed by the pope in a confidential Brief on 22 September. M. Mathiez claims to have proved that the hesitancy of Pius VI was due to temporal rather than to spiritual considerations, to his serious fears about the affairs of Avignon and the Comtat Venaissin, where certain popular parties were clamouring for French troops, but the truth is that Pius VI, who had made known his opinion of the Constitution to two French prelates, was awaiting some manifestation on the part of the French epis- copate. Indeed the bishops spoke before the pope had spoken publicly. At the end of October, 1790, they published an "Exposition des principes sur la constitution civile du clerge", compiled by Boisgelin, Archbishop of Aix, in which they rejected the Con- stitution and called upon the faithful to do the same. This publication marks the beginning of a violent conflict between the episcopate and the Constitution. On 27 November, 1790, after a speech bj' Mirabeau, a decree stipulated that all bishops and priests should within a week, under penalty of losing their offices, take the oath to the Constitution, that all who re- fused and who nevertheless continued to discharge their priestly functions should be prosecuted as disturbers of the public peace. The king, who was much disturbed by this decree, eventually sanctioned it (2(i December, 1790) in order to avoid a rising.

Hitherto a large section of the lesser clergy had shown a certain amount of sympathy for the Revolu- tion, but when it was seen that the episcopal members of the As.sembly refused to take the oath, thus sac- rificing their sees, a number of the priests followed this disinterested example. It may be said that from the end of 1790 the higher clergy and the truly or- thodox elements of the lower clergy were united against the revolutionary measures. Thenceforth there were two classes, the non-juring or refractory priests, who were faithful to Rome and refused the oath, and the jurors, sworn, or Constitutional priests, who had consented to take the oath. M. de la Gorce has recently sought to estimate the exact proportion of the priests who took the oath. Out of 125 bishops there were only four, Talleyrand of Autun, Brienne of Sens, Jarente of Orleans, and Lafond de Savine, of Viviers; three coadjutors or bishops in partibus, Gobel, Coadjutor Bishop of Bale; Martial de Brienne, Coadjutor of Sens; and Dubourg-Miraudet, Bishop of Babylon. In the important towns most of the priests refused to take the oath. Statistics for the small boroughs and the country are more difficult to obtain. The national archives preserve the com- plete dockets of 42 departments which were sent to the Constituent Assembly by the civil authorities. This shows that in these 42 departments, of 23,093 priests called upon to swear, 13,118 took the oath. There would be therefore out of 100 priests, 56 to 57 jurors against 43 to 44 non-jurors. M. de la Gorce gives serious reasons for contesting these statistics, which were compiled by zealous bureaucrats anxious to please the central administrators. He asserts on the other hand that the schism had little hold in fifteen departments and concludes that in 1791 the number of priests faithful to Rome was 52 to 55 out of 100; this is a small enough majority, but one which M. de la Gorce considers authentic.

On 5 February, 1791, the Constituent Assembly forbade every non-juring priest to preach in pubhc. In March the elections to provide for the vacant episcopal sees and parishes took place. Disorder grew in the Church of France; young and ambitious priests, better known for their political than for their religious zeal, were candidates, and in many places