按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
creep into it were less； on the contrary； there than in most
Catholic countries。 The Church of France was infinitely more
tolerant than it ever had been previously； and than it still was
among other nations。 Consequently； the peculiar causes of this
phenomenon〃 （the hatred which it aroused） 〃must be looked for less
in the condition of religion than in that of society。〃
〃We no longer；〃 he says； shortly after； 〃ask in what the Church of
that day erred as a religious institution； but how far it stood
opposed to the political revolution which was at hand。〃 And he goes
on to show how the principles of her ecclesiastical government； and
her political position； were such that the philosophes must needs
have been her enemies。 But he mentions another fact which seems to
me to belong neither to the category of religion nor to that of
politics； a fact which； if he had done us the honour to enlarge upon
it； might have led him and his readers to a more true understanding
of the disrepute into which Christianity had fallen in France。
〃The ecclesiastical authority had been specially employed in keeping
watch over the progress of thought； and the censorship of books was
a daily annoyance to the philosophes。 By defending the common
liberties of the human mind against the Church； they were combating
in their own cause： and they began by breaking the shackles which
pressed most closely on themselves。〃
Just so。 And they are not to be blamed if they pressed first and
most earnestly reforms which they knew by painful experience to be
necessary。 All reformers are wont thus to begin at home。 It is to
their honour if； not content with shaking off their own fetters；
they begin to see that others are fettered likewise； and； reasoning
from the particular to the universal； to learn that their own cause
is the cause of mankind。
There is； therefore； no reason to doubt that these men were honest；
when they said that they were combating； not in their own cause
merely； but in that of humanity； and that the Church was combating
in her own cause； and that of her power and privilege。 The Church
replied that she； too； was combating for humanity； for its moral and
eternal well…being。 But that is just what the philosophes denied。
They said （and it is but fair to take a statement which appears on
the face of all their writings； which is the one key…note on which
they ring perpetual changes）； that the cause of the Church in France
was not that of humanity； but of inhumanity； not that of nature； but
of unnature； not even that of grace； but of disgrace。 Truely or
falsely； they complained that the French clergy had not only
identified themselves with the repression of free thought； and of
physical science； especially that of the Newtonian astronomy； but
that they had proved themselves utterly unfit； for centuries past；
to exercise any censorship whatsoever over the thoughts of men：
that they had identified themselves with the cause of darkness； not
of light； with persecution and torture； with the dragonnades of
Louis XIV。； with the murder of Calas and of Urban Grandier； with
celibacy； hysteria； demonology； witchcraft； and the shameful public
scandals； like those of Gauffredi； Grandier； and Pere Giraud； which
had arisen out of mental disease； with forms of worship which seemed
to them （rightly or wrongly） idolatry； and miracles which seemed to
them （rightly or wrongly） impostures； that the clergy interfered
perpetually with the sanctity of family life； as well as with the
welfare of the state； that their evil counsels； and specially those
of the Jesuits； had been patent and potent causes of much of the
misrule and misery of Louis XIV。's and XV。's reigns； and that with
all these heavy counts against them； their morality was not such as
to make other men more moral； and was notat least among the
hierarchyimproving； or likely to improve。 To a Mazarin； a De
Retz； a Richelieu （questionable men enough） had succeeded a Dubois；
a Rohan； a Lomenie de Brienne； a Maury； a Talleyrand； and at the
revolution of 1789 thoughtful Frenchmen asked； once and for all；
what was to be done with a Church of which these were the
hierophants？
Whether these complaints affected the French Church as a 〃religious〃
institution； must depend entirely on the meaning which is attached
to the word 〃religion〃： that they affected her on scientific；
rational； and moral grounds； independent of any merely political
one； is as patent as that the attack based on them was one…sided；
virulent； and often somewhat hypocritical； considering the private
morals of many of the assailants。 We knowor ought to knowthat
within that religion which seemed to the philosophes （so distorted
and defaced had it become） a nightmare dream； crushing the life out
of mankind； there lie elements divine； eternal； necessary for man in
this life and the life to come。 But we are bound to askHad they a
fair chance of knowing what we know？ Have we proof that their
hatred was against all religion； or only against that which they saw
around them？ Have we proof that they would have equally hated； had
they been in permanent contact with them； creeds more free from
certain faults which seemed to them； in the case of the French
Church； ineradicable and inexpiable？ Till then we must have
charitywhich is justiceeven for the philosophes of the
eighteenth century。
This view of the case had been surely overlooked by M。 de
Tocqueville； when he tried to explain by the fear of revolutions；
the fact that both in America and in England； 〃while the boldest
political doctrines of the eighteenth…century philosophers have been
adopted； their anti…religious doctrines have made no way。〃
He confesses that； 〃Among the English； French irreligious philosophy
had been preached； even before the greater part of the French
philosophers were born。 It was Bolingbroke who set up Voltaire。
Throughout the eighteenth century infidelity had celebrated
champions in England。 Able writers and profound thinkers espoused
that cause； but they were never able to render it triumphant as in
France。〃 Of these facts there can be no doubt： but the cause which
he gives for the failure of infidelity will surely sound new and
strange to those who know the English literature and history of that
century。 It was； he says； 〃inasmuch as all those who had anything
to fear from revolutions； eagerly came to the rescue of the
established faith。〃 Surely there was no talk of revolutions； no
wish； expressed or concealed； to overthrow either government or
society； in the aristocratic clique to whom English infidelity was
confined。 Such was； at least； the opinion of Voltaire； who boasted
that 〃All the works of the modern philosophers together would never
make as much noise in the world as was made in former days by the
disputes of the Cordeliers about the shape of their sleeves and
hoods。〃 If （as M。 de Tocqueville says） Bolingbroke set up Voltaire；
neither master nor pupil had any more leaning than Hobbes had toward
a democracy which was not dreaded in those days because it had never
been heard of。 And if （as M。 de Tocqueville heartily allows） the
English apologists of Christianity triumphed； at least for the time
being； the cause of their triumph must be sought in the plain fact
that such men as Berkeley； Butler； and Paley； each according to his
light； fought the battle fairly； on the common ground of reason and
philosophy； instead of on that of tradition and authority； and that
the forms of Christianity current in Englandwhether Quaker；
Puritan； or Anglicanoffended； less than that current in France；
the common…sense and the human instincts of the many； or of the
sceptics themselves。＇
But the eighteenth century saw another movement； all the more
powerful； perhaps； because it was continually changing its shape；
even its purpose； and gaining fresh life and fresh adherents with
every change。 Propagated at first by men of the school of Locke； it
became at last a protest against the materialism of that school； on
behalf of all that is； or calls itself； supernatural and mysterious。
Abjuring； and honestly； all politics； it found itself sucked into
the political whirlpool in spite of itself； as all human interests
which have any life in them must be at last。 It became an active
promoter of the Revolution； then it helped to destroy the
Revolution； when that had； under Napoleon； become a levelling
despotism； then it helped； as actively； to keep revolutionary
principles alive； after the reaction of 1815：a Protean
institution； whose power we in England are as apt to undervalue as
the governments of the Continent were apt； during the eighteenth
century； to exaggerate it。 I mean； of course； Freemasonry； and the
secret societies which； honestly and honourably disowned by
Freemasonry； yet have either copied it； or actually sprung out of
it。 In England； Freemasonry