who proposed and carried a law abol- | down the Church with it. Promotion ishing slavery. depended on birth, and the episcopal sees were filled by men who had entered the priesthood as one of the only occupations open to younger sons of noble families. The versatile Talleyrand, for instance, was one of these. Being deformed, he was considered fit for nothing but the Church. At the time we speak of he was in high position, Bishop of Autun; but later, when to be a Churchman was not the best way to honor in the State, he threw tion with "superstition," and became a diplomatist. No doubt, it would be unfair to say that Talleyrand was a type of Grégoire was returned to the States General as a deputy of the clergy of his province. He does not seem to have joined the Tiers Etat so early as some of his colleagues, but he was present at the famous oath of the jeu de paume. From this time he co-operated with the progressive party. Co-operated! He did not identify himself with them. He objected to many of the propositions which found favor with them. For instance, he could not understand up his bishopric, renounced his conneca declaration of rights which was not accompanied by a declaration of duties. He saw what poor Bailly only learned by a sad experience, that the more hot-all, or even the majority of bishops, but headed members of the liberal party we cannot help thinking that many of were proceeding in a way which was those who went into exile during the likely to overthrow society itself. As a Revolution did so from their connection matter of fact, Grégoire was more ad- with the fallen nobility, rather than vanced in his opinions than most of his from a feeling of their duty as Cathofriends. He was a republican when lics. The revenues of the Church even Robespierre, if we are to believe were enormous, and most of them went Madame Roland, had not yet asked the to the bishops. Bailly speaks of a famous question, 66 What is a repub-prelate "qui mangeait deux curés par lic?" And it is an established fact jour," meaning that his revenues per that men like Bailly, and even Mira- diem were equal to two yearly revenues beau, were always monarchists. Yet of parish priests. So great, in fact, these men, not having reasoned the was the disproportion that, after the matter out, went ahead in a way which confiscation of Church property, by Grégoire did not like. In the end they which the nation gained a considerable were to become conservatives when it amount, the curés were better off, as a was too late, when the influence they rule, with their government salaries might have exercised had passed from | than under the ancien régime. Then, them. Thus the monarchical anar- again, the Jansenist controversy, suschists, who fought their way forward in | tained as it was, after the death of the darkness, seemed, for the moment, more advanced and more terrible to the existing order than the philosophic republican who had seen into the future, and who groaned inwardly at the wild infatuation which produced the Declaration of the Rights of Man. Pascal, by inferior men, had helped much to alienate the intellect of the country from the Church of the eighteenth century, and to make men look back with longing eyes to the days of Bossuet, of Fénelon, of Bourdaloue, and of Massillon — days which, with In the decrees of the 4th of August, their Gallicanism, were gone forever, in which the privileges of the nobles but which still had an attraction for were abolished, Grégoire concurred. those who saw in them, if a past, still Then came the crux. It would be im- a great, ideal. A few there were who possible, in the space allowed me, in had been weakened in their faith or any adequate way to describe the con- had abandoned it altogether under the dition of the Church in eighteenth- influence of Rousseau, of Voltaire, and century France. The glorious days of of the Encyclopædists. The Church, Louis the Fourteenth were gone. on the whole, was in a bad way. In Royalty, in its decline, had dragged the Constituent Assembly the coufisca tion of Church property was proposed | laid down on which they could take to assist in paying the enormous debt their stand when the time came. which was crushing France, and which We should not be too hasty in conwas the immediate occasion of the Rev- demning those who accepted the civil olution. The measure was supported, constitution. Grégoire himself was among others, by Grégoire. The mo- strongly in favor of it. As a republition was carried, and Church lands be- can, he saw in it the means of overcame the property of the State. Then coming the evils which the declining came the question of the means of monarchy had brought on the Church. maintaining the clergy. Salaries were He seems to have thought that the agreed upon, and, as we have said, the Holy See would not fail to give its adcurés found themselves, for the most hesion, and under the circumstances he part, better off than before. In the accepted the constitution. Had he not discussion on this matter it was pro- done so, he had every reason to think posed to remodel the whole constitu- that, in the unstable and uncertain tion of the clergy in France. It would temper of the Constituent Assembly, be impossible to enumerate here in worse evils might be brought on relidetail the different points contained gion. Thus he was urged both by natin the famous "Constitution Civile." ural inclination and by prudence to The main articles may, however, be briefly stated. The number of bishoprics was to be reduced, and each diocese to be coterminous with the department in which it was situated. Bishops and clergy were to be elected in accordance with certain democratic forms which were enumerated. These changes raised certain difficulties. A bishop could not, canonically, abandon his see or any part of it, or intrude his jurisdiction into any part of the see of his neighbor. The only power which could solve this difficulty was the pope, whose sanction was also needed for the articles changing the form of election of bishops and the appointment of priests. Gallican tendencies were shown in the clause which forbade a bishop to apply to the pope for con- Remaining in the tribune, he then firmation, but commanded that "he pronounced the words of the famous should write to him, as the chief of the oath: "I swear to be faithful to the universal Church, in testimony of unity nation and to the law." A few folof faith and of the communion which lowed Grégoire, but the majority hesihe is bound to maintain with him." tated. We prefer to state the facts, To us, who live after the Vatican and to accuse no one on either side. Council, this article seems stronger than it did to those who drew it up. The old Gallicanism had not yet died, and it had not yet been definitely condemned. Time pressed. The enemies of religion were awaiting their opportunity. If men could not exactly see into the future, they could at least suspect the course which the Revolution would take unless some firm basis were take a decided step, and he found himself at the head of the constitutional movement. In his speech on this occasion he dwelt much on the interested motives of many of those who opposed the movement, and there is too much reason to fear that his accusation was not altogether unfounded. He ended with an appeal to the patriotism of bishops and priests all over the country. "No consideration," he said, "should delay the taking of our oath. We sincerely hope that, through the whole extent of the empire, our brothers,' quieting their apprehensions, may hasten to fulfil a duty of patriotism calculated to bring peace to the kingdom, to strengthen the union between the pastor and his sheep!" The thing which the abbé had done was indeed bold and daring. The constitution of the clergy had been drawn up, but it might yet be amended. The constitution of the country was yet germinating in the council chambers of the constitutional committee. Most men have an objection to taking oaths when they are uncertain to what they commit themselves. At any moment an unfavorable answer might be re- | confessions and exercise their functurned from Rome, and the clergy who tions. The writer, having laid stress had taken the oath would be placed in on Grégoire's relations with the Holy a difficult position. But Grégoire be- See, goes on to point out that he has lieved in the future. He was conserv- become the instrument of a persecution ative in the true sense of the word, more harsh than any which has ever weighing well the measures proposed entered the head of a bishop, even in to him, and refusing to rush blindly the darkest periods of the Church's forward in an ever-hasty eagerness for history. Jews and Protestants, he reform. But he was a man of action. says, have at most been forbidden to It was a time for energy and decision, exercise their religion, while nonjurand not for timid questionings and ing Catholics are commanded to pracan over-refined balancing of pros and tise theirs, using as priests men whom cons. Grégoire took the matter into they look upon as the instruments of his own hands, satisfied himself that the devil. his intention was pure, and acted. If we add to these statements the The most that can be said against fact that a great number of the conhim is that he went forward decisively stitutional clergy were unscrupulous where the law was doubtful. In any time-serving men, that many of them ease, his after-career gives no justification to history for saying that he deliberately did what he knew to be wrong. The ultimate judgment of him must be left to him who alone can read the hearts of men, and who, in the end, will separate the just from the unjust. married, we can form some idea of the conflicts which must have gone on in Grégoire's mind. On the one hand he was open to the imputation of schism, and on the other of being untrue to his oath to serve the Constitution. As a Catholic his position was anomalous, though from his Gallican point of view not absolutely untenable. As a republican, the form of episcopal tyranny which he was compelled to make use of must have revolted him. It was not long before a great change came over the Church in France. The bishops almost unanimously refused the constitution, and the pope repudiated it. The consequence was that Meanwhile events in Paris were hurmost of the sees were abandoned, and rying on. The king got frightened, new bishops had to be appointed. and, acting on the advice of his most Grégoire was offered the bishopric of intimate friends, tried to fly to the Blois. He refused, but was finally per- frontier. He was stopped, as is well suaded to accept it, to avoid the bad known, at Varennes. Men were unimpression which would result from certain what to do with him, and it was the refusal of the founder of the con- ultimately decided to restore him on his stitutional system. His new position taking the constitutional oath. Gréinvolved him in many difficulties. It goire protested against this decision. was his duty as bishop to force on He spoke on the question of the inviohis diocese, as far as possible, prêtres lability of the royal fugitive. assermentes, or constitutional clergy. The writer of this essay has seen a I hear some one say [he cried] that a curious pamphlet entitled, "M. Gré-priest should not discuss such a question. goire, député, évêque &c. dénoncé à la That shall not stop me; rather than that nation comme ennemi de la constitution, infidèle à son serment, &c." It is evidently written by an enemy of the new order, and shows in very clear language the awkward position in which the new bishop was placed. It is a criticism of a pastoral letter on the subject of clergy being allowed to hear my opinions be compared with my state, I ask that my reasons should be refuted. Yes, if there is a single man who, while causing the laws to be executed, is not under their jurisdiction; if there is a single man before whom the law is silent; if that law, as a writer has said, does not hurl its weapon over a horizontal plain to cut down everything in its way, then a single indi vidual, paralyzing the whole force of the constituted law-court. Grégoire was nation, may undertake anything against prevented by absence from voting on the nation. the question of the condemnation, but Grégoire then demanded the sum- he gave his adhesion to the decree. moning of a Convention to try the king, His enemies have abused this fact into but he was not listened to; the ma- a proof of his being a regicide. On his jority of the Assembly were unwilling deathbed he solemnly declared that he to throw away the last remnants of had never voted the death of any man, royalty, and the king was allowed to ac- and history seems to justify this statecept the Constitution. Seeing this, the ment. The fact is that a letter was Bishop of Blois uttered the prophetic sent to the Convention signed Heraut, words, "I jurera tout et ne tiendra Jagot, Simon, Grégoire. The letter rien." His prediction was fulfilled. A ends with this clause: “Nous déclayear later, when the greater part of rons que notre vœu est pour la condamEurope was combined against France, nation de Louis Capet par la convention when the king was wavering and had nationale sans appel au peuple,” etc. increased suspicion by his hesitation in Originally the words "condamnation accepting a measure ostensibly brought à mort" were used, but Grégoire inforward for insuring the safety of the sisted on the eradicating of the words country, the orator Vergniaud ascended" à mort," which was done. This inthe tribune of the Legislative Assem- cident was used against the bishop to bly. In an eloquent speech he warned the end of his life, and he was never Louis that acts which were innocent in able to silence his critics. ordinary times were dangerous when public opinion was aroused, and told him that the eye of the nation was upon him. Then came the 10th of August. The king fled to the Assembly, and was imprisoned, partly to save his life, partly to prevent his escape. In September, began the session of the famous National Convention. Grégoire spoke strongly for the abolition of royalty. Kings [he said] are in the moral order what monsters are in the order of Nature; Courts are the manufactories of crimes and the birthplace of corruption; the history of kings is the martyrology of the nations. Since we are all equally penetrated with these truths, why should we argue on them? I demand that my proposition should be put to the vote. The Assembly rose at these words, the president put the question, and royalty was abolished. Grégoire later supported the proposition at the trial of Louis, but proposed the abolition of the punishment of death, hoping that the unfortunate ex-king might be the first to enjoy the benefits of the new law. His proposition was not carried, and, on Robespierre's suggestion, it was decided to try Louis before the Convention rather than in a regularly It would be hopeless to follow in detail the work of the Convention. This famous assembly, contrary to common opinion, was essentially constructive. It is true that in the end Robespierre succeeded in soiling its name by associating it with crimes for which he is primarily responsible. The Committee of Public Safety was, no doubt, its great creation, but it should never be forgotten that there were other committees, and that most of them did good solid work. Grégoire became a member of the Committee of Public Instruction. Of its usefulness it is sufficient to say that, among other things, it created the Conservatoire des Arts et Métiers, the Bureau des Longitudes, the Ecole Polytechnique. By it the study of music was organized, the blind and deaf received instruction, a school of medicine was founded, the calendar was reformed, the currency was rearranged, the decimal system introduced in arithmetic, the uniformity of weights and measures and the abolition of patois decreed, the Ecole Normale and two schools of rural economy formed, and, finally, a system of teaching languages, navigation, mathematics, geography, all the sciences, organized under the name of Ecoles de Service Public.1 All this practical work, whether good, bad, or indifferent, was carried out by the committee of which Grégoire was a member during the most disturbed period of the Revolution. against the pure light of "Reason." "To renounce your religious charla While the Convention was thus en-tanism." deavoring to reconstruct the social ma With these words he ascended to the tribune. I am come here [he said] having a very vague notion of what has happened in my absence. People speak to me of sacrifices to my country; I am accustomed to them. Is it a question of attachment to the cause of liberty? I have already given proof of it. Is it a question of the revenue joined proach it. I hear some one speak of fanaticism, of superstition.. I have always opposed them. . . . As to me, Catholic by conviction, priest by choice, I have been called by the people to be a bishop; I have tried to do some good in my diocese, acting on the sacred principles which are dear to me, and which I defy you to take from me. I remain a bishop to do some more; I appeal to the principle of liberty of worship. "Miserable blasphemers! I was never chinery in France, while it was laying a charlatan; attached to my religion, I the foundation of institutions which have preached its truths, and I will were to last to our own day, and while always be faithful to it." it was building up that great code of law which still influences the legal system in half the countries of Europe under the misleading name of the Code Napoléon, it had to contend with the Commune, the municipality of Paris established in the Hôtel de Ville, and forming the centre of a gigantic organization of secret societies and municipal bodies a formidable rival to the Con- to my office of bishop? I abandon it to vention and to the Committee of Public you without regret. Is it a question of religion? This matter is outside your Safety. From the establishment of the Republic till the death of Hébert the jurisdiction, and you have no right to apCommune was a continual threat to the existing government. It overthrew the Girondins when they were masters of a majority in the Assembly, and Robespierre himself was only able to crush it by a temporary alliance with Danton. We are mainly concerned with one aspect of this struggle. Hébert and Chaumette, the leaders of the Commune, were avowed atheists. The Convention was inclined to religious toleration, but the leaders of the Commune were fanatical in their hatred of all religion. For a time they got the upper hand; supernaturalism, and, above all, Catholicism, was proscribed, and the churches in Paris and some of the provinces were profaned by the disgraceful and puerile scenes known as the Feasts of Reason. Many constitutional priests and Protestant ministers were carried away by the movement and renounced their faith. A mummery which would be laughable if it were not so painful was gone through in the Convention, where Gobel, the Archbishop of Paris, and his chaplains, publicly divested themselves of their office, and apologized for their errors 1 Life of Grégoire, by M. Charles Dugast. Grégoire's firmness on this occasion drew down on him the filthy abuse of the atheistical party. His attitude entirely destroyed the effect of the miserable apostasy of the weak and timid Gobel and his friends, who sank into insignificance before the noble resolution of the Bishop of Blois. In the worst of times, when priests hardly dared to appear in the streets in lay dress, Grégoire continued publicly to wear the clerical habit, and he even presided over the Convention in episcopal costume. Heaven and earth were moved to get him to abjure. He was flattered, he was threatened, but he was unmoved. His republicanism had been proved, and they dared not touch him; he could even afford to laugh at them. He tells us that on one occasion Romme came to him to propose the substitution of the Décadi for Sunday in the calen |