Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-dtkg6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-10T05:39:13.924Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Why the French Christian Democrats Were Condemned

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

Oscar L. Arnal
Oscar L. Arnal
Affiliation:
Professor of church history in Waterloo Lutheran Seminary, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The enthusiastic reception with which the Catholic hierarchy greeted the burgeoning Christian Democratic movements immediately after World War II could leave the impression of a solidarity born of a long and stable relationship. In fact, such was not the case. Christian Democracy had failed for a century in its attempts to reconcile Catholicism with the democratic values emanating from the French Revolution. Antirepublican forces within the church had been too strong and the hierarchy too unsympathetic to permit such a reconciliation. In addition, the democratic forces outside the church had come to incorporate anticlericalism as part of their creed. Both camps seemed to share at least one view in common: one could not be both a Christian and a democrat. Only small groups of Christian republicans sought to challenge this assumption by word and deed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Church History , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , June 1980 , pp. 188 - 202
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Church History 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

The author wishes to thank the Ford Foundation for the grant that supported the research for this article.

1. Decree of the Holy Office, February 13, 1908, Les Questions Actuelles, 03 7, 1908, p. 293.Google Scholar

2. Delourme, Paul, Trente-cinq années de politique religieuse ou l'histoire de “I'Ouest-Eclair” (Paris, 1936), pp.133–137.Google Scholar

3. “Partie Officielle,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 01 10, 1914, p. 53.Google Scholar For further details about the life and work of Jules Lémire, consult the definitive study by Mayeur, Jean-Marie, Un Prêtre Démocrate, L'abbé Lémire, 1853–1928 (Paris, 1968).Google Scholar

4. “Lettre de notre Saint Père le Pape Pie X à l'épiscopat franĉais sur le ‘Sillon’” August 25, 1910, Les Questions Actuelles, September 3, 1910, pp. 97–112.

5. “Nouvelles Religieuses,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 04 17, 1901, pp. 524,526;Google Scholar “Nouvelles Religieuses,” ibid., April 12, 1902, p. 236; “Chronique Diocésaine,” ibid., June 22, 1901, pp. 392–394; “Chronique Diocésaine,” ibid., December 15, 1906, p. 1217; “Nouvelles Religieuses,” ibid., July 29, 1905, p. 705.

6. Barbier, Emmanuel, Les Erreurs du Sillon—Historie Documentaire (Paris, 1906);Google ScholarBarbier, Emmanuel, Les Idées du Sillon, 3rd ed. (Poitiers, 1905).Google Scholar

7. Delourme, , Trente-cinq années, pp. 121–122, 168–170;Google Scholar“Les réactionaires contre l'Ouest Eclair,” L'Ouest-Eclair, 08 9, 1910, p. 1;Google ScholarMaurras, Charles, “Le Dilemme de Marc Sangnier,” L'Action Franĉaise, 07 1 and 15, 1904, pp. 69–76 and 139.Google Scholar

8. “Nouvelles Religieuses,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 10 26, 1901, p. 681;Google Scholar“Partie Ofilcielle—Communications de l'archevêché,” Semaine Religieuse de Rennes, 11 23, 1907, pp. 145–146;Google ScholarDelourme, , Trente-cinq années, pp. 61, 144–145.Google Scholar

9. “Partie Officielle,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 03 22, 1913, p. 295;Google Scholar “Partie Officielle,” ibid., January 10, 1914, pp. 53–57; “Chronique Diocésaine,” Semaine Religieuse de Lille, 02 7, 1914, p. 134.Google Scholar

10. “Mgr. l'évêque de Quimper et le Sillon,” Le Sillon, 08 25, 1906, pp. 135–136, 141–142;Google Scholar“Partie Officielle—Communications de l'Archevêché,” Semaine Religieuse de Rennes, 03 30, 1907, pp. 474–476;Google Scholar Monseigneur Cabrières, May 1907, in Les Questions Actuelles, June 25, 1910, p. 138; “Nos Dossiers—Le Sillon et l'autorité ecclésiastique,” Le Sillon, 07 25, 1907, p. 48;Google Scholar“Petite Chronique—Le Sillon,” Semaine Religieuse de Rennes, 02 6, 1909, p. 335;Google ScholarLes Questions Actuelles, 06 25, 1910, pp. 126–127.Google Scholar

11. Decree, February 13, 1908, Les Questions Actuelles, 03 7, 1908, p. 293.Google Scholar

12. Delourme, , Trente-cinq années, p. 141.Google Scholar

13. “Partie Officielle,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 11 23, 1907, p. 1156;Google Scholar“Chronique Diocésaine,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 09 27, 1913, p. 946.Google Scholar

14. “Lettre de notre Saint Père le Pape Pie X à l'épiscopat franĉais sur le ‘Sillon’,” August 25, 1910, Les Questions Actuelles, 09 3, 1910, pp. 97–112.Google Scholar

15. Some of the scholars adopting this position are Breunig, Charles, “The Condemnation of the Sillon: An Episode in the History of Christian Democracy in France,” Church History 26 (09 1957): 227–244;CrossRefGoogle ScholarDansette, Adrien, Histoire Religieuse de la France Contemporaine (Paris, 1965), pp. 565–704;Google ScholarPartin, Malcolm O., Waldeck-Rousseau, Combes and the Church (Durham, N.C., 1969);Google Scholar and Daniel-Rops, Henri, A Fight for God, 1870–1939, trans. Warrington, John (New York, 1965–1966), pp. 85–236.Google Scholar

16. This point of view is at the heart of positions taken by Dansette, Breunig and Daniel-Rops, in their works cited in the preceding note. In fact, it might be argued that these two stances are different sides of the same coin. Both define the church's position as moderate in the face of external attacks (the first hypothesis) and internal divisions (the second hypothesis).

17. For this perspective, see Latreille, André and Rémond, René, Histoire du catholicisme franĉais: la période ĉontemporaine, 2nd ed. (Paris, 1962), pp. 423–569.Google Scholar

18. For this position, see McManners, John, Church and State in France, 1870–1914 (New York, 1973);Google ScholarCaron, Jeanne, Le Sillon et la démocratie chrétienne (Paris, 1967);Google ScholarVidler, Alec R., A Variety of Catholic Modernists (Cambridge, 1970);Google Scholar and especially the definitive work of Poulat, Émile, Intégrisme et catholicisme intégral: on réseau secret international antimoderniste: La “Sapinière” (1909–1921) (Paris, 1969).Google Scholar

19. Mayeur, Jean-Marie, La Séparation de l'eglise et de l'état (Paris, 1966), p. 26.Google Scholar The words nobis nominavit mean “named by us,” and it was the nobis, “by us,” that was contested. What lay behind this apparent word game was a genuine struggle to determine who controlled the French hierarchy.

20. Les Questions Actuelles, 08 6 and 13, 1904, pp. 290–291 and 18.Google Scholar

21. Les Questions Actuelles, 08 6, 1904, p. 292;Google ScholarPartin, , Waldeck-Rousseau, pp. 226–227.Google Scholar

22. Les Questions Actuelles, 08 13, 1904, p. 25.Google Scholar

23. Coutrot, Aline and Dreyfus, François, Les Forces religieuses dans la société française (Paris, 1965), p. 32.Google Scholar See also Larkin, Maurice J. M., “The Vatican, French Catholics and the Associations Cultuelles,” Journal of Modern History 36, (09, 1964): 299.Google Scholar

24. X, Pius, Gravissimo Officii, 08 10, 1906,Google ScholarLes Questions Actuelles, 08 18, 1906, p. 7.Google Scholar

25. Liure Blanc du Saint-Siège, Les Questions Actuelles, 01 6, 1906, p. 32.Google Scholar Unless otherwise noted, all translations from the French are mine.

26. Semaine Religieuse de Paris, 09 2, 1905,Google ScholarLes Questions Actuelles, 09 9, 1905, p. 310.Google Scholar

27. Petit, Monseigneur Fulbert, Les Questions Actuelles, 09 1, 1906, p. 66,Google ScholarMcManners, , Church and State in France, p. 163.Google Scholar

28. Petit, Monseigneur Fulbert, Les Questions Actuelles, 09 1, 1906, pp. 70–71;Google ScholarMcManners, , Church and State in France, p. 163.Google Scholar

29. “Chronique Diocésaine,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 03 24, 1906, p. 296;Google Scholaribid., September 8, 1906, p. 870.

30. “Nouvelles Religieuses,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 04 17, 1901, p. 526.Google Scholar

31. L'Osservatore Romano, 03 25, 1899,Google ScholarLes Questions Actuelles, 04 8, 1899, p. 188.Google Scholar

32. “Partie Officielle,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 11 23, 1907, p. 1155.Google Scholar

33. “Chronique Diocésaine,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 02 1, 1913, pp. 123, 137.Google Scholar

34. Barbier, , Erreurs, p. 87Google Scholar.

35. “Lettre de notre Saint Père le Pape Pie X à l'épiscopat franĉais sur le ‘Sillon’,” August 25, 1910, Les Questions Actuelles, 09 3, 1910, p. 112.Google Scholar

36. “Partie Officielle—Communications de l'archevêché,” Semaine Religieuse de Rennes, 11 23, 1907, pp. 145–146;Google Scholar “Communications de l'archevêché,” ibid., August 13, 1910, p. 854; Delourme, , Trente-cing années, pp. 144–145, 168–170.Google Scholar The term abbés démocrales was applied to politically active Christian Democratic priests.

37. “Chronique Diocésaine,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 06 4, 1910, p. 516.Google Scholar For whatever reason, the integrist monseigneur misrepresented the words of Lémire in the Chamber. In fact, his speech was directed against the anticlerical government: “I do not recognize the right of any person to make us Catholics serfs of a centralized and despotic regime.”

38. “Chronique Diocésaine—le cas de M. Lémire,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 05 18, 1912, p. 471.Google Scholar

39. “Partie Officielle,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 03 22, 1913, p. 295;Google Scholar“Petite Chronique,” Semaine Religieuse de Rennes, 11 8, 1913, p. 134.Google Scholar

40. “Nos Dossiers—Le Sillon et l'autorité ecclésiastique,” Le Sillon, 07 25, 1907, p. 48.Google Scholar

41. “Lettre de notre Saint Père le Pape Pie X à l'épiscopat franĉais surle ‘Sillon’,” August 25, 1910, Les Questions Actuelles, 09 3, 1910, p. 112.Google Scholar

42. “Partie Officielle—Communications de l'archevêché,” Semaine Religieuse de Rennes, 11 23, 1907, pp. 145–146;Google ScholarDabry, Abbé, “Réponse,” Vie Catholique, 11November 16, 1907, p. 1;Google Scholar “L'Archevêque de Rennes,” ibid., November 30, 1907, p. 1; Dabry, Pierre, Les Catholiques répobticains: histoire et souvenirs (1890–1903) (Paris, 1905), p. 466.Google Scholar

43. Naudet, Abbé Paul, “Pour qui voter?” Justice Sociale, 04 30, 1904, p. 1.Google Scholar

44. Dabry, Pierre, “Allons à gauche,” Vie Catholique, 11 16, 1907, p. 1.Google Scholar

45. Bodin, Charles, “Un Programme—politique républicaine,” L'Ouest-Eclair, 10 10, 1903, p. 1.Google Scholar

46. du Loû, Emmanuel Desgrées, “L'Action Libérale et les royalists,” L'Ouest -Eclair, 07 2, 1904, p. 1.Google Scholar

47. Fragan, [pseud.?”, “Encore l'union,” L'Ouest-Eclair, 01 25, 1904, p. 1.Google Scholar

48. Delourme, , Trente-cinq années, pp. 120–121.Google Scholar

49. Ibid., pp. 140, 149, 159.

50. Gayraud, Abbe Hippolyte, L'Univers, 03 27, 1899,Google ScholarLes Questions Actuelles, 04 8, 1899, p. 184.Google Scholar

51. “Chronique Diocésaine—le cas de M. Lémire,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 09 27, 1913, pp. 944–945.Google Scholar

52. Cri des Flandres, March 15, 1914, “Chronique Dioc”saine Semaine Religieuse de Lille, 03 21, 1914, p. 279.Google Scholar

53. Sangnier, Marc, “La Leçon d'une défaite,” Le Sillon, 05 25, 1906, p. 361;Google Scholar“Nos Dossiers—l'Élection de Sceaux,” Le Sillon, 04 10, 1909, p. 247.Google Scholar

54. Fremantle, Anne, ed., The Papal Encyclicals (New York, 1956), p. 201.Google Scholar

55. Ibid.

56. “Nos Dossiers—Le Sillon et l'autorité ecclésiastique,” Le Sillon, 07 25, 1907, p. 48.Google Scholar

57. “Nouvelles Religieuses,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 04 17, 1901, p. 524;Google ScholarBarbier, , Erreurs, pp. 17–19, 212.Google Scholar

58. “Chronique Diocésaine,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 02 1, 1913, pp. 123, 137.Google Scholar

59. “Petite Chronique,” Semaine Religieuse de Rennes, 11 8, 1913, p. 134.Google Scholar

60. Barbier, , Les Idêes du Sillon, p. 120.Google Scholar

61. Barbier, , Erreurs, p. 87.Google Scholar

62. “Lettre de notre Saint Père le Pape Pie X à l'épiscopat franĉais sur le ‘Sillon’,” August 25, 1910, Les Questions Actuelles, 09 3, 1910, pp. 106–107.Google Scholar

63. “La Question des inventaires—le discours de M. l'abbé L'émire,” L'Ouest-Eclair, 03 10, 1906, p. 1.;Google Scholar“Le cas de l'abbé Lémire,” L'Ouest-Eclair, 11 19, 1907, p. 2.Google Scholar

64. “Chronique Diocésaine,” Semaine Religieuse de Lille, 03 21, 1914, p. 279.Google Scholar

65. “Mgr. L'évêque de Quimper et le Sillon,” Le Sillon, 08 25, 1906, p. 142.Google Scholar

66. Gayraud, , “Modernisme,” Vie Catholique, 11 9, 1907, p. 1;Google ScholarMgr. 1'évêque de Quimper et le Sillon,” Le Sillon, 08 25, 1906, pp. 141–142.Google Scholar

67. Delourme, , Trente-cinq années, pp. 61, 121–122;Google Scholar“Les réactionaires contre L'Ouest-Eclair,” L'Ouest-Eclair, 08 9, 1910, p. 1.Google Scholar

68. Delourme, , Trente-cinq années, pp. 120–121;Google Scholar“Communications de l'Archevêché,” Semaine Religieuse de Rennes, 08 13, 1910, p. 854.Google Scholar

69. P.F., “A propos d'une interview de Mgr. Dubillard dans le ‘Figaro’,” Le Sillon, 02 10, 1908, p. 118;Google Scholar Monseigneur de Cabriéres, May 1907, Les Questions Actuelles, 06 25, 1910, p. 138;Google Scholar“Nos Dossiers—Le Sillon et l'autorité ecclésiastique,” Le Sillon, 07 25, 1907, p. 48;Google Scholar“Petite Chronique—Le Sillon,” Semaine Religieuse de Rennes, 02 6, 1909, p. 335;Google ScholarLes Questions Actuelles, 06 25, 1910, pp. 126–127;Google Scholar“Respect à Jeanne d'Arc,” L'Action Franĉaise, 02 11, 1913, p. 1;Google ScholarL'Action Française, 03 1, 1906, p. 328;Google ScholarL'Action Française, 06 15, 1906, pp. 395–398;Google ScholarThomas, Lucien, L'Action Franĉaise devant l'eacute;glise de Pie X à Pie XII (Paris, 1965), p. 72;Google Scholar“Nouvelles Religieuses,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 10 7, 1911, pp. 958–959.Google Scholar

70. Dansette, , Histoire Religieuse, pp. 627, 721;Google ScholarX, Pius, Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 06 29, 1912, p. 605.Google Scholar

71. Dansette, , Histoire Religieuse, p. 628.Google Scholar

72. Madiran, Jean, L'Intégrisme: histoire d'une histoire (Paris, nd.), pp. 32, 73–75, 108.Google Scholar For the “Statuts du S.P.” and the “Programme du S.P.,” see the documents found in Poulat, , Intégrisme, pp. 118–126.Google Scholar

73. Poulat, , Intégrisme, pp. 65–67, 76–77.Google Scholar

74. Ibid., pp. 88–89, 93–94, 153–154.

75. Ibid., pp. 45–49.

76. Ibid., p. 78; Thomas, Lucien, L'Action Française devant l'église de Pie X à Pie XII (Paris, 1965), p. 81;Google ScholarNolte, Ernst, Three Faces of Fascism, trans. Vennewitz, Leila (New York, 1965), p. 103.Google Scholar

77. “Derrière M. Monniot—nous atteindrons les responsables,” L'Ouest-Eclair, 08 5, 1910, p. 1;Google Scholar“M. Monniot ne rit plus—mais il cherche à nous intimider,” L'Ouest-Eclair, 08 4, 1910, p. 1;Google ScholarMcManners, , Church and State in France, p. 137;Google ScholarPartin, , Waldeck-Rousseau, pp. 221–222, 227;Google Scholar“Nouvelles Religieuses,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 03 5, 1904, p. 158;Google Scholar“A l'évêché,” Semaine Religieuse de Dijon, 02 27, 1904, p. 136.Google Scholar

78. Naudet, , “La prochaine bataille,” Justice Sociale, 04 19, 1902, p. 1;Google ScholarTrois-Etoiles, [pseud.], “La Politique,” Justice Sociale, 04 12, 1902, p. 1;Google Scholar Emmanuel Desgrées du Loû, “L'Election de Brest—Vive Gayraud!” L'Ouest-Eclair, 04 17, 1902, p. 1.Google Scholar

79. “Les faux dogmes de Ia Révolution,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 10 24, 1903, pp. 673–677;Google Scholar “La Vérité pleine et entière peut seule nous sauver,” ibid., February 13, 1904, p. 98.

80. Poulat, , Intégrisme, pp. 12, 68, 78.Google Scholar“Les Papiers Montagnini—Comment on fait des suspects,” L'Ouest-Eclair, 04 6, 1907, pp. 1–2;Google Scholar“Les Papiers Montagnini,” L'Ouest-Eclair, 04 13, 1907, p. 1.Google Scholar

81. “Novelles Religieuses,” Semaine Religieuse de Cambrai, 10 7, 1911, pp. 958–959;Google Scholar“Une Chaire dite Syllabus fondée par des laïques,” Semaine Religieuse de cambrai, 10 20, 1906, p. 1019.Google Scholar It is Maurras' avid defense of the Syllabus and medievalism that caused an ultra like Monseigneur Delassus to overlook the modernism and agnosticism of the royalist leader. The Neo-Thomist Jacques Maritain held a similar attitude toward Maurras until after the condemnation of the Action Française in 1926–1927.

82. Cardinal de Cabrières, quoted in Thomas, , Action Française, p. 83;Google Scholar Monseigneur Charost quoted in Thomas, , Action Française, p. 83;Google ScholarWeber, Eugen, Action Française (Stanford, 1965), p. 222.Google Scholar

83. McManners, , Church and State in France, p. 74:Google Scholar “If you follow my advice, you will have four hundred Catholic deputies in France, and you will establish the monarchy. I am a monarchist myself.”

84. Powers, Francis J., ed., Papal Pronouncements on the Political Order (Westminster, Md., 1952), p. 47;Google ScholarMcAvoy, Thomas T., The Americanist Heresy in Roman Catholicism, 1895–1900 (Notre Dame, Ind., 1963), pp. 231–235;Google Scholar Leo XIII, Graves de Communi, January 18, 1901, in Gilson, Etienne, ed., The Church Speaks to the Modern World: The Social Teachings of Leo XIII (Garden City, N.Y., 1957), pp. 317, 319–320, 325–326.Google Scholar

85. The more academic and intellectual facets of the pope's integrist mindset may be examined in his antimodernist encyclicals Lamentabili Sane (July 3, 1907) and Pascendi Dominici Gregis (September 8, 1907). Pertinent sections of these documents may be consulted in Fremantle, , Papal Encyclicals, pp. 197, 199–201, 204, 206.Google Scholar In addition, Pius X set up structures within the educational apparatus of the church to insure that seminaries would be purged of modernist ideas, literature, teachers and students. For material relevant to these activities, see X, Pius, Motu proprio, Les Questions Actuelles, 11 30, 1907, pp. 195–197;Google ScholarLes Questions Actuelles, 10 30, 1909, pp. 67–68;Google ScholarX, Pius, Les Questions Actuelles, 10 22, 1910, pp. 2–3, 6–8, 15, 35;Google ScholarIbid., November 12, 1910, p. 94.

86. X, Pius, letter on the “Action Populaire Chrétienne” in Les Questions Actuelles, 01 9, 1904, pp. 3–4.Google Scholar

87. “Lettre de notre Saint Père le Pape Pie X à l'épiscopat francais sur le ‘Sillon’,” August 25, 1910, Les Questions Actuelles, 09 3, 1910, pp. 110, 112.Google Scholar

88. Poulat, , Intégrisme, pp. 8–9, 67, 77–78.Google Scholar