In exitu Israel : $b an historical novel, volume 1 (of 2)Baring-Gould, S. (Sabine)
History
In exitu Israel : $b an historical novel, volume 1 (of 2)
Baring-Gould, S. (Sabine)
France -- History -- Revolution, 1789-1799 -- Fiction
‘Then,’ said the curé, ‘I appeal to the country against
ecclesiastical tyranny. You spiritual lords, with your cringing
subserviency to the crown, with your utter worldliness, with your
obstructiveness to all religious movement in your dioceses, with
your tenacious adherence to abuses, and with your arbitrary despotic
treatment of your clergy, have taught us to hate the name of
Establishment; to cry to God and the people to destroy a monstrous,
odious sham, and restore to the Church its primitive independence. I
wait the assembly of the States-general, at which the clergy shall
have a voice; and then, my Lord, then I shall speak, and you _shall_
hear me.’
He turned abruptly on his heel, and left the room.
CHAPTER XV.
By an order dated January 24th, 1789, the king required that the
desires and reclamations of all his subjects should be transmitted to
him. Every parish was to draw up a statement of its grievances and
its wishes, which was to be handed into the assembly of the secondary
bailiwick, by it to be fused into one which was forwarded to the
grand bailiwick. The secondary bailiwicks of Beaumont-le-Royer,
Breteuil, Conches, Ezy-Nonancourt, Orbec, and Bernay, belonged to the
grand bailiwick of Évreux. The nobility and the clergy drew up their
papers separately.
Another operation, not less important than the composition of these
_cahiers_, was to be simultaneously accomplished. This was the
election of delegates.
According to the edict of the 24th January, the ancient distinction
of electors and deputies into three orders, the clergy, the nobility,
and the third estate, was maintained. These orders had a common
electoral circumscription, the grand bailiwick. The mode of election
in the two first orders was made the same, but it was different in
the third.
The nomination of deputies for the clergy was to be made directly
by the bishops, abbés, canons, and other beneficed clergy in the
grand bailiwick. The curés, who subsisted on the _portion congrue_,
in another word, nearly all the clergy in country parishes, could
only vote in person if their parish were within two leagues of the
town in which was held the assembly, unless they had a curate to
take their place during their absence, and provide for the religious
requirements of the people.
The election was equally direct for the deputies of the nobility. The
nobles possessing fiefs within the jurisdiction of the grand bailiff,
might appear by representatives, but all others were required to
appear in person.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account