Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 7.djvu/593

 HUGUENOTS

533

HUGUENOTS

public offices, for admission to colleges and academies, could hold synods and even political meetings; they received 45,000 crowns annually for expenses of wor- ship and support of schools; they were given in the Parliament of I'aris a tribunal in which their representatives constituted one-third of the members, while in those of Grenoble, Bordeaux, and Toulouse special chambers were createtl, half of whose mem- bers were Huguenot. One hundred places de surete were ceded to them for eight years, and, while the king paid the garrison of these fortresses, he named the governors only with the assent of the churches. If many of these provisions are nowadays recognized by common law, some on the other hand would seem incompatible with orderly government. This con- dition of benevolent and explicit tolerance was en- tirely new for the Huguenots. Many of them con- sidered that too little had been yielded to them, while the Catholics thought that they had been given too much. Pope Clement VIII energetically complained of the edict to Cardinal d'Ossat, the king's ambas- sador; the French clergy protested against it; and many of the parliaments refused for a long time to register it. Henry IV succeeded finally in imposing his will on all parties, and for some years the Edict of Nantes ensured the religious peace of France. The Huguenots, possessing at that time 773 churches, enjoyed during the reign of Henry IV the most perfect calm; their happiness was marred only by the efforts of the Catholic clergy to make converts among them. Cardinal du Perron and many of the Jesuits, Capu- chins, and other religious engaged in this work, and sometimes with great success. Upon the death of Henry IV (1610) there was at first no change in the situation of the Protestants. They did indeed raise numerous complaints in their assemblies of Saumur, Grenoble, La Rochelle, and Loudun, but in reality they had no grievances to allege except those due to popular intolerance with which the Government had nothing to do. Truth compels the less prejudiced among their historians to admit that the Huguenots, who complained so much of Catholic intolerance, were themselves just as intolerant wherever they happened to be the stronger. Not only did they re- tain the church property and the exclusive use of the churches, but, wherever possible (as at B(arn), they even opposed the enforcement of those clauses of the Edict of Nantes which were favourable to Cath- olics. They went so far as to prohibit Catholic wor- ship in the towns that had been ceded to them. It was with the greatest difficulty that Sully, the min- ister of Henry IV and himself a Protestant, could obtain for Catholic priests permission to enter the hospitals of La Rochelle, when summoned to admin- ister the sacraments, and authorization to bury, with never so little solemnity, their dead co-religionists. To this intolerance, which often explains the attitude of the Catholics, they added the imprudence of showing themselves ever ready to make common cause with the domestic enemies of the State, or with any lords who might be in revolt. In 1616, in Guyenne, Languedoc, and Poitou, they allied themselves with Rohan and Conde, who had risen against the queen regent, Marie de' Medici. They again got restless when the king, conformably with the Edict of Nantes, re-established Catholicism at B^arn. An assembly, held at La Rochelle despite the king's prohibition, divided the realm into eight military circles, and among other matters provided for plundering the king's revenues and the goods of the Church. To deal with this condition of affairs the king was obliged to capture Saumur, Thouars, and other rebellious towns. He laid siege to Montauban, which city, defended by Rohan and La Force, repelled all his assaults. Lastly he invested Montpellier and had no better success; nevertheless peace was signed there (October, 1622), according to which the Edict of Nantes was con-

firmed, political meetings were forbidden, and the cities which had been won from the Protestants re- mained in the king's hantls. Cardinal de Richelieu, when he became i)rime minister, entertained the idea of putting an end to the political power of the Hu- guenots while respecting their religious liberty. Rohan and Soubise, on the pretext that the Edict of Nantes had been violated, quickly effected an up- rising of the South of France, and did not hesitate to make an alliance with England, as a result of which an English fleet of ninety vessels manned by 10,000 men endeavoiu'cd to effect a landing at La Rochelle (July, 1627). The king and Richelieu laid siege to this strongliold of the revolted Huguenots; they drove off the English fleet, and even made its ap- proach to the place impossible in future by means of a mole about 1640 yards long which they constructed. In spite of the fanatical heroism of the mayor Guiton and his co-religionists. La Rochelle was obliged to capitulate. Richelieu used his victory with moder- ation; he left the inhabitants the free exercise of their religion, granted them a full amnesty, and restored all property to its owners. Rohan, pursued by Cond6 and Epernon, kept up the war, not disdaining to ac- cept succour from Spain, but he was at last obliged to sign the Peace of Alais, by which the Edict of Nantes was renewed, an amnesty promised, the cities taken from the Huguenots, and the religious wars brought to an end (June, 1629). Subsequently Protestantism disappcaretl from the stage of politics, content to enjoy in peace the advantages of a religious character which were still accorded to it. The strife was transferred to the field of controversy. Public lectures, polemical and erudite writings, were multi- plied, and preachers and professors of theology — such as Chamier, Amyraut, Rivet, Basnage, Blonilel, Daille, Bochart — demonstrated their industry, learn- ing, and courage. The Church in France, more and more affected by the beneficent influence of the Coun- cil of Trent, opposed them with vigorous and learned controversialists, with prudent and zealous preachers, such as Sirmond, Labbe, Coton, St. Francis de Sales, Cosp^an, Lejeune, S^nault, Tenouillet, Coeffeteau, de B^ruUe, Condren, whose success was manifested in numerous conversions. These conversions took place especially in the higher circles of society; the great lords abandoned Calvinism, which retained its in- fluence only among the middle classes. Excluded from the public service, the Huguenots became manufacturers, merchants, and farmers; the number of their churches decreased to 630; their religious activity lessened; between 1631 and 1659 they held only four synods. Without being sympathetic to- wards them, the public authorities respected the re- ligious liberty guaranteed by the Edict of Nantes. Richelieu judged that the scope of that edict should not be widened, nor should the liberties there granted be curtailed, and even Protestant historians pay tribute to his moderation. Louis XIV being a minor at his accession, his mother, Anne of .Austria, began her regency by pnamising to the Protestants the enjoyment of " their liberties. Mazarin abstained from disturbing them. "If the httle flock ", he said, "feeds on evil weeds, it does not wander away" (Si le petit troupeau broute de mauvaises herbes, il ne s'^carte pas). It is indeed true that some of the feudal lords, the Due de Bouillon among others, when they gave up Calvinism, caused the temples within their j urisdictions to be closed ; but the Edict of Nantes permitted this, and the Government had neither the right nor the inclination to prevent it. In 1648, when Alsace with the exception of Strasburg was reunited with France, liberty of public worship was maintained for all the new subjects who were of the Augsburg Confession. In 1649 the Royal Council, dealing with certain complaints of the Huguenots, declared that those of the "pseudo-reformed" (pretendue reformee)