The French Revolution: A Short HistoryJohnston, R. M. (Robert Matteson)
History
The French Revolution: A Short History
Johnston, R. M. (Robert Matteson)
France -- History -- Revolution, 1789-1799
It needs but little acquaintance with history to realize how wilfully
subversive this plan was. The maintenance of the clergy by the tithes,
placed it outside the sphere of Government control, and helped to
maintain the ancient Roman internationalism; whereas the breaking off
of the Pope's direct connection with the bishops was Gallicanism of the
most pronounced character. Pope Pius VI unequivocally declared that
the carrying through of any such law in France would amount to a
schism, and transmitted that opinion to Louis XVI.
The falseness of the King's position was made intolerable by the
dilemma in which he was now placed. There was as yet no formal
Constitution, only a revolutionary situation in which the assembly had
usurped a large part of the King's prerogative. It was, however,
virtually accepted by both sides that under the {103} constitution when
passed, the King should have the power of veto, and by tacit accord
that arrangement had been from the first put into force. The assembly
voted decrees and sent them to the King for his signature. But in
reality the veto, even before its strict constitutional existence, was
little more than a sham. The situation was revolutionary. Both
parties were hostile, and almost without exception every signature of
the King was an act of moral compulsion. Hitherto, however, his
acceptance of the situation had not involved more than bowing before a
political storm; now the matter was graver, the question was of schism,
and therefore of heresy.
Louis was a faithful believer in the Roman theology, as well as in the
divine right of kings, and he struggled hard to withhold his signature
from the civil constitution of the clergy. And when, after some weeks,
he finally gave in, it was under protest. From that moment he adopted
the attitude of the man acting under restraint who ascribes no binding
force to acts and deeds resulting from compulsion.
The acceptance of the civil constitution of the clergy by the King did
not conclude the matter. Furious protests arose. In the south {104}
of France, bishops, priests and national guards for some weeks
threatened an outbreak of religious war. The assembly met this
disorder more firmly than that proceeding from economic and political
reasons. Towards the close of the year it imposed on the clergy an
oath of adhesion to the civil constitution, and this only four bishops
were found to accept. In January 1791 elections were ordered for
filling the places of those members of the Church who had refused the
oath, and presently France found herself with two bodies of clergy,
official and non-official, constitutional and anti-constitutional.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account