he forsakes Protestantism for ever, to enter some other section of the religious world.'

Nor can it be denied that a large proportion of the thinking Roman Catholics are ready to admit that the Papacy (if an institution which had its uses in past ages) has now become somewhat unnecessary and obsolete; and that Protestantism, as the legitimate development of modern ideas, (as to worship, administration, and the public conscience,) has more to hope than to fear from the progressive movements of society. The State, in these matters, is not likely to prove adverse to the public mind. Its present representative is a man who studies history, who is clearsighted to his own interests, and has proved himself to be 'wiser in his generation' than an ordinary absolute ruler. What, therefore, a sweeping measure of decentralization might possibly effect at once, restoring valuable fragments of her ancient liberties to France, and strengthening the emperor's dynasty,' the progress of events may accomplish insensibly and at last.

The recent debates have proved that political life is not yet extinguished in France, however it may be crippled by forms and restrictions. Once quickened into growth, constitutionalism may destroy the decaying roots of absolutism. A free press, a responsible ministry, and independence in religion, may follow in the wake of free discussion. The Emperor cannot fail to perceive the manifest tendency of his own concession; and, having challenged public opinion to weigh reasons and adopt conclusions regarding the measures of his own administration, will probably wait to be guided by events.

Under these circumstances the tyranny exercised over consciences can no longer be maintained. The French State in past centuries systematically disregarded the tendency of public opinion. Its policy was never shaped and modified by the criticism of thinking men. The State never troubled itself with considerations as to its competency to interfere with supernatural matters. On the contrary, it has always been guided by its own political interests, and religion has been useful to it. Portalis made no secret of this policy. He recalled the example of Plato and Cicero, who spoke of Providence as the basis of all legislation. Even a false religion,' said he, has at least the advantage of opposing an obstacle to the introduction of arbitrary doctrines, and of supplying individuals with a centre of belief. Governments may thus become assured that there are known and unchangeable dogmas of faith; and superstition becomes regularized and restrained in certain bonds, which the greatest enthusiast does not dare to break.' On this

Impending Schism between the Gallicans and Ultramontanes. 31 principle, just as the State must have a code of laws to regulate its interests, so it requires a depôt of doctrines to fix its opinions. By the law of the eighteenth Germinal, religion became more than ever an object of public administration. The Charter appeared to do more for publie liberty; but this improvement was chiefly apparent. The influence of Napoleon himself may have done something to inculcate moderation, when he publicly repudiated that one of his successors who should venture to tyrannize over the faith of his subjects; adding, 'I authorize you to give him the name of Nero.' Yet the Protestants of France cannot but remember the fatal tyranny which was exercised in the case of M. Lenoir,* as late as 1851, and the intolerance which caused M. Pilatte to be persecuted for preaching in the Rue Mouffetard. The pretence in the latter case was, that if the Gospel was allowed to be proclaimed in public, it was on the condition that women, children, and minors should be excluded from hearing it. It is the ingenious device of those who fear the disastrous effects of Reform in France, to accuse their fellow citizens of high treason; to declare that France is menaced with conquest from the religious agents of England, and that to read the Bible is to denationalize the country. The pretence of such men, as M. Paradol observes, is, that the people are only suited for the preventive régime, as the horse is for the saddle, and are as unadapted to live in liberty as a fish is to live out of water. But human nature in our day has too much spirit to be contented with an ideal paradise of ignorant peasants, living and dying by habit, and thinking by decree. A schism appears inevitable between the different elements of Roman Catholicism. Sooner or later, the political and the sincere parties in the Church will find it impossible to agree. The reign of ancient Catholicism is past; the priests have lost a large part of their authority over the masses. "The tide of popularity,' as Samuel Vincent observes, 'is retiring like a river abandoning on its banks the bark which its waves once supported with pride. The efforts made in France for many years past to replace Roman Catholicism upon its ancient basis have singularly failed. Attempts have been made in all directions,-attempts to impose upon the people by a language of pomps and ceremonies, and to obtain power over the more enlightened by philosophical discussions. The most absurd pilgrimages and the most incredible miracles have found their advocates. At the same

* Les gendarmes ont interpellé M. Lenoir pour savoir s'il était autorisé à venir ainsi professer une religion autre que celle de la localité; et sur sa réponse négative, ils l'ont arrêté au nom de la loi-Rapport de M. Lambeld à la Cour de Cassation, affaire Lenoir, Novembre, 1851.

time that Romanism has been offered to the people as a sort of elevated Fetichism, it has been presented to students as a cold philosophy; and these singular contradictions have emanated from the same centre. Notwithstanding these inconsistencies, the rupture of De Lamennais still remains an isolated but a very significant fact.

The independent Church of the Ultramontanes, in its logical form, is perfectly irreconcilable with the moderate and established Church of the Gallicans. According to the idea of the Middle Ages, the Pope was the absolute sovereign of the Church. All rights, according to this idea, were concentrated in the ecclesiastical body. Therefore the administrative system of France was a complete invasion of this doctrine. The ideal Pope of the Middle Ages was a superhuman being, raised above the affairs of this earth; but, being deprived of this supreme rôle by the absolute power of the monarchs of France, he became a second-rate pontiff, reduced to human expedients little worthy of his dignity. The Ultramontane party, who would revive such an organization, must be prejudicial to the interests of the State: religion, according to such a system, becomes a distinct power, as Islamism has been in the East. Therefore the Gallicans and Ultramontanes have been distinguished by the party names of 'Patriots' and 'Catholics.' The unity of Protestantism is spiritual, but the centralization of Ultramontanism requires a capital, an army, and an official establishment. If we are to seek for a country where such an administration has been most successfully carried on, we may find it in Italy. The intellectual and spiritual condition of Italy may furnish us with an illustration of the problem. The Pope sacrifices his nationality to his Catholicism; if he is a good Catholic, he is no longer a patriotic Italian. Such a system, in the present state of things, is absurd to the last degree. The armies and military forces of Roman Catholicism could never hope to compete with the nations of Europe. They must succumb before the power of larger masses. Prussia,' remarks Ernest Renan, with its sixteen millions of men, is scarcely strong enough to make a figure in Europe.' When the Pope can marshal an army like that of France, and a fleet like that of England, he may have more hope of maintaining his power. Even then, he would be unable to descend to the petty details of perfect administration, and could never be a good and practical sovereign. The hypothesis of a temporal Parliament connected with the Papacy would be somewhat difficult to realize. This pontiff, (it has been remarked,) so unearthly that he can submit to no sovereign, must he not submit to his own subjects? The Catholic,

Enthusiasm of De Lamennais.

33

whose conscience must be revolted at the thought of a heavenly vicegerent submitting to any external restraint, must be horrified at the thought of this infallible and impeccable chief submitting to the decrees of a ministerial cabinet. This inconsistent connexion with terrestrial things is beginning more and more to disgust those religious persons in France, who remember that the domain of religion is within the soul, and cannot be subjected to any official restraint.

The example of De Lamennais furnishes a curious illustration of this fact. Ardent and impulsive in his character, possessing much enthusiasm with little common sense, he promulgated to his wondering friends the most Utopian ideas of future society, and a pure theocracy upon earth. Catholicism and liberty! was the cry of De Lamennais after the Revolution of 1830. The world, according to him, was destined to be constituted under a new form; and he was in a perpetual ecstasy at the marvellous spectacle which was soon to be seen upon earth. 'Sin,' he said, 'has necessitated princes to protect man against his fellows. All are born equal; nothing coming into the world carries with it the right of commanding. The power of just princes is legitimate; it is the power of God, who wills. that order should reign, and of the people who elected them : but they who reign of their own right are illegitimate; for their power is of Satan, and their domination is of pride. Every one is bound to resist them. He is the truest ruler who is the servant of all.' Again he said, 'Liberty does not consist in the domination of one thing over another, but in that which nothing dominates. If there exist a people who estimate justice and liberty less than power and gain, build a high wall around that people, that their breath may not contaminate the rest of the earth.' Nor did he hesitate to exclaim against the 'execrable murder of men who differ from us in faith,-bloodshed as an offering to God, that demons delighted to drink.' 'Men,' he declared, 'never began persecuting till they despaired of convincing, or blasphemed in their hearts the power of truth.'

With such novel ideas as these, he demanded nothing less than a complete separation between Church and State, repudiating the protection of the State to escape being bound to its service. The great error of De Lamennais resulted from his ignorance and fanaticism. He was simple enough to suppose that the Church of Rome would range itself with him on the side of the liberty of the people. He hoped to regenerate the world, and was firmly persuaded that all political and social miseries might be prevented by a solemn decree from the Holy See. He required an universal change. The words, 'boule

versement, déluge,' 'création nouvelle,' appeared without ceasing from his chimerical pen. He was the dupe of his own ideas; and when he returned to the living world, his great hopes were destined to be disappointed. Growing angry with the episcopacy, he exclaimed, They will sell the whole Church, not for thirty, but for a single piece of silver.' Childish still in his obstinacy, after repeated defeats, he set out for Rome, determining to summon the Papacy to condemn him, or to follow him. Becoming there the unwilling spectator of crimes and follies, which abased his pride and wounded him to the quick, he exclaimed, This is a crescendo of stupidity and infamy, of which God only can know the end. I hope my stay will not be long at Rome. It will be one of the best days of my life when I emerge from this great tomb, where I find only crawling worms and mouldering bones.......Twenty more years of this, and Catholicism must be at an end. God will save true religion by His people. My policy is the triumph of Christ; my legitimacy is law and justice; my country is the human race, which He has bought with His blood.' Useless was this anathema of the Papacy; and more useless still was the condemnation of his writings, which broke his own heart. The sombre eloquence of De Lamennais was injured by his perpetual excitement; and his unhealthy imagination was distorted by his ignorance and inexperience. Bitter were his longings for death. He was, as M. Paradol observes, one of the few voyagers so wearied and wounded by their struggles in this world, that they hasten to knock at the mysterious door of another life. His experience was a proof of the singular failure of Ultramontanism in the present epoch of society.

Other advocates of the same theory have laboured with more moderation. The Vicomte de Bonald was distinguished for the formality of his mind, whilst he thought with more clearness and precision. He wanted to systematize the old French monarchy, borrowing from Montesquieu and Bossuet what would result in another Louis XIV. Absolute power,' he declared, 'is, in my opinion, the best.' The political doctrines of Comte Joseph de Maistre were also intimately associated with the support of the Papacy. The Comte de Montlosier (who, in a memorable speech, accused the English of being 'drunk with pride and beer') was, in his earlier life, an advocate of the same doctrines; but before his death he deserted altogether to the liberal party, and was refused the last sacraments.

Another system of philosophy was started by the Baron D'Eckstein. He endeavoured to unite religion with metaphysics and psychology.