RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
French Revolution
dinals, and asked the king to await the result of their deliberations. But the aspect of the people and assembly was so threatening that the king signed Aug. 24, 1790, though the pope and the bishops began a passive resistance. Protests from all quarters came in, the leading one by Boisgelin, archbishop of Aix, who voiced the feelings of the Church and its opposition to the new constitution in a paper under the title Exposition ales principes, signed by 110 bishops. The assembly, regarding this as a revolutionary movement, replied by a decree of Nov. 27, 1790, requiring all bishops to take the oath of obedience to the civil constitution of the clergy, and threatening those who resisted with dismissal from their posts. At the suggestion of the king, Boisgelin, in the hope of securing some concessions, presented to the pope a paper to the following purport: it suggested (1) that the pope confirm the arrangement made by the assembly for the metropolitan and other dioceses; (2) that the bishops who were deprived of sees or whose dominion was limited be advised to approve the new divisions; (3) that he give his sanction to the establishment of the new dioceses; (4) that he give the metropolitan power in the matter of canonical investiture of the new bishoprics; (5) that he approve of the arrangement for a council of vicars for the conduct of parochial business; and (6) that he admonish the bishops to accept the transfer of the vacant parishes to the incumbents chosen by the people in case there were neither moral nor canonical reasons against it. The archbishop did not expect that the pope would assent to these propositions, yet he laid them before him, while the latter took refuge in procrastination. Meanwhile the king was driven to sign the threatening decree, Dec. 26, 1791, and on the next day Abbe Gregoire took the oath of allegiance, and was at once followed by Talleyrand and three other bishops and by seventyone of the 300 clerical members of the assembly. It was the purpose of the assembly to have the new Church free from the authority of the pope.
Jan. 4, 1792, was the day set for the general administration of the oath. It was a day of great bitterness of feeling in the assembly, 4. Clerical but the majority of the clergy of Paris Opposition took the oath; in the provinces three- Causes fourths of the clergy remained true to Persecution, the old order. These consecutive steps against the clergy had created a great stir among the French people. The nobility and those who, from the circumstance of birth or of civil or political position, were hostile to the new order joined with the clergy who were opposed to the constitution. The king, realizing his position, began to think of flight and of retaliation with outside aid. The assembly, on the other hand, saw itself checked by the very extreme to which it had been carried. In the South there were rumors of an insurrectionary movement; the large number of those deprived of positions was itself a cause for grave apprehension, and it was not due to thoughts of charity that pensions were provided for these and further persecution checked. While the Roman Catholic clergy were lamenting the dissolution of IV.-25
their church, Protestants were enjoying their newly found liberty as granted by the new civil constitution. The latter thus became the friends of the revolution, their clergymen taking the oath without hesitation. The pope at last broke his silence, announcing his absolute rejection of the civil constitution. The first declaration was in a document sent to the archbishop of Sens, threatening him with degradation from the cardinalate unless he formally retracted the oath of allegiance to the constitution. The archbishop replied by sending his cardinal's hat to the pope, but declared his intention to remain as bishop at the head of his church. The pope expressed his condemnation of the civil constitution in other acts. He wrote on Mar. 30 to the thirty bishops who had joined in the memorial of the archbishop of Aix in the Exposition des principes, and threatened them with canonical punishment in case of failure on their part to retract their oath of obedience to the constitution. In other letters he declared all arrangements made in accordance with the constitution null and void; he commanded all clergymen who had taken the oath to retract within forty days under penalty of permanent suspension, and warned the people to have no dealings with the prelates or pastors who had been forcibly installed. These letters afforded a new basis for the opposition of the bishops and clergy, and many withdrew their oaths. But the very zeal of reaction aroused again hatred for the clergy, Church, and religion. The pope became the object of insult, and on May 4, the day after his letters had been made public, he was burned in effigy before the palace with the applause of the populace. The bishops were driven from their diocese partly by direct command of government, partly by turbulent violence. Talleyrand resigned his bishopric and returned to private life. The churches of the resisting bishops were closed or put to other than religious use. At this juncture the clergy began to break away from celibacy, and this the assembly encouraged, promising to pay the pensions and declaring that there was no law forbidding the marriage of the clergy. In later times of persecution those who had married found their marriage state a protection, as it signified that the priest had discarded his ecclesiastical relationships. The opposing clergy avoided this step, and the upholders of royalty regarded it a duty of honor to seek the sacraments from these only. The king's vain attempt at flight in June, 1791, became a new pretext for persecution of the clergy, and this in Nantes was carried to extremes. The suspicion that the clergy had been connected with this unfortunate attempt was strengthened by a letter of July 7 from the pope to the king, expressing the pope's high hope of the king's speedy and victorious return to Paris, clothed with full authority and surrounded by the regular bishops, who would then be able to return to their respective dioceses. This letter fell into the hands of the revolutionists. The immediate results were more severe regulations against the disobedient clergy, and the union of Avignon and the county of Venaissin to France, Sept. 14. Reports of conditions in Vendue and Montpellier, as well as from other parts of the country, aroused a new hatred of
French Revolution