of the world, fascinated by his talent and energy, read with a sort of tragical emotion a book which wholly condemned their light thoughts and frivolous pursuits. Even literati, forgetting their old quarrels with the Romish Church, gladly welcomed amongst them the man who could devote to the cause of religion so much artistic skill, and so magnificent a style. Thus the first volume of the "Essay on Indifference was received with unanimous applause; since the publication of M. de Chateaubriand's "Génie du Christianisme' there had been no example of such success in the literary world.

What, then, was the author's object in this work? It was to refute the opinion so prevalent in our days, that all religions are indifferent; that is to say, equally good, or equally unimportant and useless. The Abbé reduced this indifference in matters of doctrine to three systems. There are, first, philosophers who suppose that religion is simply a political invention, necessary, perhaps, for the people, but superfluous for themselves, for enlightened minds. They inwardly despise all religious doctrine as a cunningly devised fable. Then there is another class of thinkers, who, acknowledging nothing as incontestably true but natural religion, as they term it, look upon all positive or revealed religions as at least doubtful, teaching that every one should remain in the Church of his fathers, follow her external observances, and not trouble himself with her dogmas. Lastly, we find a few sectaries (M. de Lamennais meant thereby the Protestants) who, admitting a revealed religion, reduce it to fundamental articles, assuming the right of discarding whatever does not agree with their private judgment. The author vigorously attacks, in separate chapters, these three categories of individuals, whom he comprises altogether under the common designation-indifferent. The only religion worthy of the name, the only one true, complete, and acceptable in his sight is the Roman Catholic; and he concludes by endeavouring to establish its importance relatively to man, to society, and to God himself.

We cannot, in a simple biographical notice, enter upon a lengthy controversy with the author. It cannot be denied that the first volume of the "Essay on Indifference" contains many just, lofty, profound thoughts, expressed in admi

rable language; and the Abbé de Lamennais has fathomed with a penetrating eye the vices of our age; he has laid them bare with a vigorous hand, has depicted them with rare skill; seeking honestly for their remedy. But has he not exaggerated in more than one place the already sombre tints of the picture? Has he not neglected to show in the abuses of the Church of Rome one of the chief causes of the indifference he attacks with so much indignation? Has he not falsely confounded with the indifferent and the sceptical many sincere and faithful believers? Does he not use captious sophisms in his attempts to prove that the theory of fundamental doctrines is identical with incredulity? Does not his whole argument, in short, betray an excited mind, which looks only at one side of the question, and fancies it has produced good reasons, because it has pro nounced high-sounding anathemas?

The Protestants especially could not accept in silence the accusations of the virulent Abbé. An intelligent man, and one well known among the Reformed Churches of France, M. Samuel Vincent, formerly Pastor at Nismes, an swered him in a pamphlet, in which the Protestant faith was fully vindicated. M. de Lamennais wrote a reply, in which he treated the Minister Vincent with much arrogance, as if he cou sidered it below his dignity to enter the lists against such an opponent. This was a great fault. Genius does not excuse from politeness; and M. Samuel Vincent's solid objections were not overthrown by haughty invective.

The Abbé de Lamennais, however, soon found within his own communion adversaries whom he could not treat with the same contempt. He had said that reason, the senses, nay, consciousness itself, taken apart or together, do not assure us of the possession of truth; that consequently the individual man, a being so limited, so fallible, neither is nor can be certain of anything, and must of necessity have recourse to the Roman Catholic Church, for truth is sure, positive, infallible.So be it; but the following question immediately arises: If man can be certain of nothing, how can he be certain that truth really exists in the Romish Church? It is not enough to trample everything under foot for the benefit of Roman Catholic infallibility. First show that Catholicism

is infallible; and how can you succeed when you have beforehand destroyed the force of all proofs, all arguments addressed to the intellect, the soul, the consciousness of man?

This was a formidable objection; the Abbé de Lamennais was obliged to answer it, and he felt it so strongly that he gave up the original plan of the "Essay on Indifference," although he maintained the same title for the three subsequent volumes. He undertook to prove that the criterion of certitude or of truth lay in the general opinion, the common consent, the universal agreement, or the assent of human conviction in all ages and in all places, to the essential doctrines of faith. The Romish Church, or, in other words, the Papacy, was held up as the Divine organ, the infallible interpreter of this general opinion, in such

a

manner that every word that fell from the chair of St. Peter was stamped with the mark of perfect certitude. M. de Lamennais added, that it is inherent in our moral nature to admit the authority of the universal consent, and that truth is no longer a matter of dialectics, or private judgment, but a simple fact, of which the common sense is judge.

Such is the famous theory of the general consent, to the defence of which our author devoted the most laborious years of his life, and which made him so many adversaries. How, indeed, is it to be proved that the Roman Catholic religion is simply the universal religion of mankind? The result of this theory would be, that Paganism itself having been generally adopted by mankind before the birth of Jesus Christ, already possessed all the doctrines necessary for the spiritual and moral life of man, and that Jesus Christ only republished the truths which were already deposited in the bosom of humanity by a primitive revelation, placing them at the same time under the safeguard of the Catholic Church! Thus the Gospel ceased to be a religion wholly distinct-the absolute religion; it became merely the confirmation of a religion, which had everywhere existed since the world began, under the garb of local superstitions.

The Abbé de Lamennais was obliged by the stern laws of logic to maintain the above ideas. He employed an immense amount of learning in endeavouring to prove that all nations, from

one end of the world to the other, have known by implication the articles of faith which constitute the doctrinal system of Catholicism; and that on this common, this constant testimony, rests the authority, the infallibility of the Pope.

It is easy to conceive that this method of defending the Catholic religion would provoke strong antagonism. A few young priests, more enthusiastic than wise, continued to applaud the tenets of M. de Lamennais. But the better-informed doctors, and some of the higher dignitaries were dismayed at this imprudent apology. They said that the author, under the pretence of drawing the philosopher into the Catholic Church, had transformed faith itself into a mere scheme of philosophy; and that the theory of a general consent destroyed at one blow all the traditions of the Church. Still they observed a flattering style of address towards the great writer, inviting him in the most courteous manner to return into the way of orthodoxy.

The Abbé de Lamennais wished to know what the Holy See thought of his system, and he went to Rome in 1824. He found in Pope Leo XII. a good old man, little skilled in theological questions, and incapable of appreciating the tendency of the doctrine of universal consent. The Pontiff much admired the author of the "Essay on Indiffer ence."

He had his portrait suspended in his oratory, and welcomed the cele brated Frenchman with all possible politeness. It is even said that he offered him a cardinal's hat. M. de Lamennais refused; was it in the spirit of humility and self-denial? or rather, did he fear lest so exalted a dignity should destroy his liberty, and enslave his pen? In either case the refusal was honourable; and if M. de Lamennais had his faults, at least he cannot be accused of a servile ambition.

On his return to France he was possessed by an earnest spirit of Ultramontanism, and he attacked without reserve the ancient liberties of the Gallican Church; amongst others the Four Articles of the Declaration of 1682, the work of Louis XIV. and of Bos suet, who had wished to put bounds to the authority of the Pope in matters of discipline and of temporal power, M. de Lamennais asserted that Gallicanism is a misconception of the

Roman Catholic Church, a disguised schism, a semi-Protestantism; and that if the Pope is not everything he is nothing. This was an affront offered to the Bourbons, whose traditional policy it is to maintain the rights of the Gallican Church against the encroachments of the Court of Rome. It at the same time irritated many of the bishops who, belonging to noble families in the country, were Frenchmen as well as priests, and therefore interested in the independence of the State not less than in the concerns of the Church. Thus M. de Lamennais brought upon himself much resentment, and an occasion was soon found for its display.

64

He published in 1826 a work entitled Religion considered in its Relations to Political and Civil Order." The author therein condemned, with his habitual impetuosity, the principles of the Revolution of 1789, the Charte, the laws, the codes, the government, the legislative assemblies; in a word, the whole of modern society. He demanded that the Pope should be replaced, as in the middle ages, at the head of all spiritual or even temporal affairs. "Religion," he said, "in France is entirely excluded from both political and civil society; consequently the State is atheist! The French revolution sprang from Protestantism. The Protestants had discarded State authority in religion; it must also be banished from politics; and in both, the reason and the will of every individual man were substituted for the reason and the will of God, which is the immutable and the universal basis of all truth, of all law, of all duty. The chains which bind man to his Maker being thus broken, there remained nothing but atheism for religion, nothing but anarchy for society."

The Government judged that these and other words of a similar import constituted an offence against the institutions of the country. The author was summoned to appear before a court of justice, charged with having tried to efface the respective limits of the temporal and spiritual power. This trial, which took place in the reign of Charles X., at a time when religious animosity was running high amongst all parties, excited an extraordinary sensation. Every one was impatient to see if the judges would dare to condemn an ecclesiastic who had received such

marks of distinction from the Pope. "I shall show them what a priest is like," said M. de Lamennais, on hearing that he was to be prosecuted. The celebrated barrister Berryer acted as his counsel; the whole court overflowed with spectators. The Abbé de Lamennais maintained a haughty demeanour, and pronounced the following profession of faith:-"I owe it to my conscience, and to the sacred character which I bear, to declare to the tribunal that I remain firmly attached to the legitimate head of the Church, that his faith is my faith, his doctrine my doctrine, and that to my last breath I shall continue to defend them." He was only condemned to pay a fine of thirty francs, which, considering the gravity of the accusation, was almost a victory.

A short time after this the Abbé de Lamennais had a far more painful trial to endure. He had formed with a literary man, whom he looked upon as a friend, a scheme for establishing a publishing business. This person betrayed his confidence in the most abominable manner, and compromised his signature for a sum equal to nearly the whole of the small fortune of the too generous Abbé. It may not be irrelevant to add, that M. de Lamennais possessed in a high degree the virtue of disinterested kindness. He might have acquired wealth by his writings, but absorbed as he was in grave meditation, he thought but little of worldly prosperity. He used to dwell in a small apartment on a third or fourth floor of a house in Paris, living frugally, reducing his expenses to the strictest necessaries, and practising in the midst of refined civilisation the austerities of an anchorite of the olden time. It was his custom in summer to retire to La Chesnaie, a small patrimonial estate situated between Rennes and Dinan, and which he retained in common with his elder brother. The poor knew him well; he often emptied his pockets whilst walking through the streets of Paris. On one occasion he fell into such a state of penury that he was obliged to sell the best part of his library. This generosity is worthy of remark in an age when writers are in the habit of making an unworthy traffic of their pen.

Let us now return to the religious and political lucubrations of our author. In 1829, he composed a new work, entitled Progress of the Revolution,

and of the War against the Church." This book contained many remarkable passages which might almost pass for prophecies. It was a year before the Revolution of July 1830, and M. de Lamennais already said: "The ministers of State seem to have forgotten for the last fourteen years that the world now is agitated by an irresistible desire for a new order of things. It is impossible to arrest the progressive movement of society, at most could any one attempt to direct it Never did men so ardently sigh for a new order of things, every one is calling for a revolution. Yes, this revolution will come, because the people must be chastised as well as instructed, because it is indispensable according to the laws of Providence, in order to prepare the way for a true social regeneration. France will not be the only theatre; the revolution must extend itself wherever Liberalism now reigns, either as a doctrine, or a feeling. Despotism and anarchy will for a long time continue to contend for the supremacy, until the different truths upon which the salvation of the world depends have instilled themselves into the minds of men, and made all things ready for the end which God has in view."

The Revolution of July 1830 actually followed, when, after three days' fighting in the public squares of Paris, the old Bourbons were driven from their timehonoured throne, and the victorious citizens placed the vacant crown on the head of Louis Philippe, imposing such conditions as should constrain him to govern in a democratic manner. Though the Abbé de Lamennais had foreseen and predicted this great event, it was as a light bursting upon him, and we now arrive at a new date in the development of his ideas.

The Abbé de Lamennais did not yet abandon the cause of Ultramontanism. He was anti-Gallican as before, and pleaded for the sovereign rights of the Papacy. But instead of turning to kings, to institute a close alliance between the sacerdotal authority and temporal despotism, he transferred his hopes to the peoples. He dreamed of the speedy return of all Christian nations to the unity of the Roman Catholic Church, and proposed the establishment of a gigantic democracy, of which the Pope was to be the head as the lieutenant of the Almighty. We see here the revival

of the plan attempted by Gregory VII., with this difference, that the mediæval pontiff dealt with kings and princes; while the modern agitator, discarding the whole aristocratic element, introduced the sovereignty of the people as one of the essential elements of the question.

By what secret tendencies did the Abbé de Lamennais pass at once from the camp of Royal absolutism to that of democracy? The link is easily discovered. We must remember that the basis of his system was the general opinion, the common consent. Well, in the triumph of the people, and of their rights over the pretensions of Royalty, he thought he saw clearly that the general opinion was on the side of democracy, and, consequently, that this Revolution was according to the plan of the Almighty; so that, in fact, he remained faithful to the fundamental part of his convictions, in renouncing the alliance of the Papacy with kings, and recommending to the Pope to unite himself with peoples. His religious theories had from the beginning been mixed up with social questions; and now he still combined religion with politics. There was only this difference, that politics took an increasingly high place in his speculations, and, consequently, religion a proportionately low one.

a

Impatient to put his hand to the work, M. de Lamennais had determined upon starting a journal which should preach the holy alliance between the Papacy and democracy. He summoned phalanx of disciples young, intelligent, and devoted; Count Montalembert, who joined to his high position the talents of an orator and writer;-the Abbé Lacordaire, then full of generous illusions, and seeking an outlet for his burning eloquence;-the Abbé Gerbet, a grave and studious man, since then appointed Professor of Divinity at Lou vain ;-the Abbé de Coux, and others. With this assistance M. de Lamennais issued a prospectus, announcing the pub lication of a newspaper called "I'Avenir," and the first number of this publication appeared on October 16th, 1830, with this motto, " God and Liberty."

The revolutionary passions, excited by the triumph of July, were still in all their glow, and insurrection howled every day in the streets, threatening to break the crown of Louis Philippe like that of Charles X. The appearance

the journal "l'Avenir," with the name of M. de Lamennais on the title page, was really a public event. The editors disguised neither their views nor their designs. In the sphere of foreign policy they demanded the emancipation of Poland, of the monarchical States of Italy, and of Ireland, which they represented as oppressed by the English Government. As to domestic policy they demanded the complete separation of Church and State, inviting the priests to give up the salaries which they received from the public treasury. They claimed the liberty of teaching, the liberty of the press, the liberty of association; in short, all the liberties which they considered essential to the advancement of the Catholic religion. At the same time they offered the Papacy, re-established in its power and grandeur, as the cornerstone of the new political edifice.

The language of M. de Lamennais was lively, energetic, impassioned. "Your influence is decaying," he said to the Roman Pontiff, “and faith with it. Do you desire to rescue both the one and the other. Unite yourself to humanity, such as eighteen hundred years of Christianity have made it. Nothing is stationary in this world. You have reigned over kings, but kings have debased the Papacy-separate yourself then from the kings; hold out your hand to the peoples; they will support you with their strong arms, and, what is still better, with their love. Abandon the ruins of your ancient earthly splendour; spurn them as unworthy of you."

In advising bishops and priests to give up the salaries they received from the State, M de Lamennais did not conceal that this act of self-denial would most likely subject them to painful prirations. But he showed them freedom in the future: for he observed" Whoever is paid becomes of necessity dependent upon him who pays." He exhorted them to practise self-sacrifice, and, if necessary, martyrdom. He then assured them also, that by renouncing the insulting patronage of the State, the priests would reconquer an immense influence over the souls of men. It is time, it is full time," he cried in an outburst of enthusiasm," that the priest should recover his dignity and freedom. No advantage could ever compensate for the loss of it. It is true that the priest must live, but above all the Church, too, must live, and

her existence is connected with the sacrifice which will restore her liberty. Ministers of Him who was born in a stable, and died on the cross, return to your ancient origin. Strengthen yourselves voluntarily in poverty and suffering, then shall the Word of the suffering and humble God resume, as it flows from your lips, its former power. Without any other stay than this Divine Word, descend as the twelve Apostles into the midst of the peoples, and begin again the conquest of the world! A new era of triumph and glory is preparing for Christianity. See on the horizon the signs of the rising sun; and, ye messengers of hope, sound on the ruins of empires, over the remains of all that passes away the song of life!"

The French people applauded these opinions so new and so bold. For the first time it saw Roman Catholic priests standing forth as the champions of liberty, of social progress, and of democracy; and without giving much attention to the figure of the Pope, which appeared continually behind the articles of" l'Avenir," they expected great things from these novelties. The most enlightened republicans, the men of the opposition, not at all understanding this extraordinary mixture of theocracy and Liberalism, which combined the spirit of Ultramontanism with the spirit of revolution, maintained a distrustful reserve. They had not yet adopted M. de Lamennais as a friend and a brother. As for the Roman Catholic clergy, the youngest and the lowest in the hierarchy, that is to say, those who were most accessible to generous chimeras, and had the least to lose, were delighted at the bold innovations of "l'Avenir." the old divinity doctors, the bishops, and chiefs of the sacerdotal order were alarmed. They had no desire to exchange their stated incomes, their comfortable positions, their official honours, for the voluntary subscriptions, the uncertain gifts of their flocks, for the wandering life of evangelists and missionaries. They protested vehemently against M. de Lamennais as a dangerous man, a philosopher under the garb of a priest, a cassocked demagogue--a ranter, a traitor ready to overturn everything, for the pleasure of lording it in the Church; and they soon denounced him both to the devout in their charges, and to the Court of Rome in secret letters.

But

The French Government was not