Informations

Edit d'Amboise, 18 mars 1563


Edit d'Amboise, 18 mars 1563

L'édit d'Amboise (18 mars 1563) mit fin à la première guerre de religion (1562-1563) et accorda aux huguenots une tolérance légale et un droit limité de prêcher dans des lieux strictement limités.

L'édit est adopté très rapidement dans la première quinzaine de mars 1563. Le 18 février, le duc de Boise est mortellement blessé au siège d'Orléans et meurt le 24 février. Cela signifiait que trois des quatre premiers chefs catholiques de la guerre étaient morts et que le quatrième, le duc Anne de Montmorency, était prisonnier. De même, le haut dirigeant huguenot, Louis de Condé, était un prisonnier. Le 8 mars, les deux hommes sont libérés et des négociations de paix sont arrangées par Catherine de Médicis. Les termes de la paix ont été convenus très rapidement et publiés comme l'édit d'Amboise.

Aux termes de l'édit d'Amboise, le culte huguenot était autorisé dans les villes où il était en place le 7 mars 1563, à l'exception de Paris où il restait illégal. De plus, le roi devait choisir une ville dans chaque bailliage de France où le culte huguenot serait autorisé dans une banlieue, tous les gentilshommes qui détenaient des fiefs avec une justice basse ou moyenne pouvaient prêcher dans leurs propres maisons et tous les nobles qui tenaient des fiefs avec une haute justice auraient pu prêcher sur leurs terres. Chaque individu avait la liberté de conscience dans sa propre maison, même dans les villes où le culte public huguenot était interdit.

L'édit était moins généreux que l'édit de janvier 1562. Dans l'édit précédent, les huguenots avaient été autorisés à prêcher n'importe où dans la campagne pendant les heures de clarté, mais maintenant ils étaient limités à un nombre limité de banlieues et aux domaines des nobles protestants.

De plus, tous les biens confisqués à l'une ou l'autre église devaient être restitués et tous les religieux ou prisonniers de guerre devaient être libérés.

Il a fallu un certain temps pour que la paix soit ratifiée. Le Parlement de Paris refusa dans un premier temps, tout comme Rouen, Dijon et Toulouse, mais finalement le traité fut généralement accepté et quatre années de paix suivirent.


Complot d'Amboise

Nos rédacteurs examineront ce que vous avez soumis et détermineront s'il faut réviser l'article.

Complot d'Amboise, complot avorté de jeunes aristocrates huguenots français en 1560 contre la maison catholique de Guise.

Lors de l'accession de François II, 14 ans, au trône de France en 1559, la famille Guise a pris de l'ascendant dans le gouvernement, créant une inimitié parmi la petite noblesse. Un complot visant à renverser leur gouvernement fut formé à Nantes, avec un noble du Périgord nécessiteux nommé La Renaudie comme chef nominal, bien que l'agitation ait été favorisée en premier lieu par les agents de Louis I de Bourbon, prince de Condé. Les Guise furent prévenus de la conspiration pendant que la cour était à Blois, et pour plus de sécurité ils emmenèrent le roi à Amboise. La Renaudie, cependant, ne fit qu'ajourner ses plans, et les conjurés se rassemblèrent en petits groupes dans les bois d'Amboise. Ils avaient pourtant été à nouveau trahis, et nombre d'entre eux furent encerclés et capturés avant que le coup d'État ne puisse être prononcé le 19 mars 1560, La Renaudie et le reste des conjurés attaquèrent ouvertement le château d'Amboise. Ils sont repoussés, La Renaudie est tuée et un grand nombre sont faits prisonniers.

Les Guise exercèrent une vengeance impitoyable. Pendant une semaine, les tortures, les écartèlements et les pendaisons durent, les corps étant jetés dans la Loire. Les Guise convoquèrent en outre une commission spéciale pour juger Condé, qui fut condamné à mort mais l'affaire fut reportée par la chancelière, et la mort de François II en décembre sauva Condé.


Le château d'Amboise au temps des événements.


Un groupe d'aristocrates de province décide de prendre les choses en main, en kidnappant le roi et en arrêtant les frères Guise. Le chef parmi les conspirateurs était Godefroy de Barry, seigneur de La Renaudie, du Périgord.

La Renaudie rassembla autour de lui des messieurs huguenots aux vues similaires représentant diverses régions de France : Charles de Castelnau de Chalosse, Bouchard d'Aubeterre, Edme de Ferrière-Maligny, les capitaines Mazères, Cañizares, Sainte-Marie et Lignières, Jean d'Aubigné (père d'Agrippa d'Aubigné) et Ardoin de Porcelet. Paulon de Mauvans, dont le frère avait été exécuté, rallie les huguenots de Provence à Mérindol, le 12 février 1560, promet 2 000 hommes et en envoie 100 à Nantes. Gaspard de Coligny, plus tard également un important huguenot, a découragé les nobles de Normandie de s'impliquer dans le complot. protestant de premier plan bourgeois d'Orléans, Tours et Lyon ont été informés de l'évolution de la situation.

Dans ces circonstances, des rumeurs de plus en plus précises sur le complot parviennent bien à l'avance au cardinal de Lorraine. Le 12 février, un rapport détaillé a été reçu par l'intermédiaire de Pierre des Avenelles, avocat de Paris. Le 22, les Guise décident de transférer le roi et la cour de Blois au château d'Amboise, site plus défendable, et renforcent les défenses du château.

Les conspirateurs ont retardé leur plan d'action du 1er au 16 mars, mais le premier des contingents de comploteurs est arrivé tôt dans le village et a été discrètement arrêté à partir du 10 mars.


Événements

L'empereur romain déclare que les enfants abandonnés à l'église ne peuvent être récupérés. La signature d'un évêque est nécessaire pour attester que l'église a recueilli l'enfant.

Autorité pour la date : Wisconsin Lutheran College, Imperial Laws et Lett

Sur ordre d'un supérieur, Antoine de Padoue (Fernando de Bouillon), prononce son premier sermon puissant, fruit de nombreuses réflexions.

Autorité pour la date : Stoddard, Charles Warren. Le Wonder Worker de Padoue. Notre Dame, IN : L'Ave Maria, 1896.

L'édit d'Amboise accorde une autorisation étroite pour l'exercice de la religion protestante en France.

Autorité pour la date : Grands Hommes et Femmes Célèbres.

William Allen, chef en exil des catholiques romains d'Angleterre, exhorte le roi Philippe II d'Espagne par lettre à entreprendre une invasion de l'Angleterre et déclare que les catholiques là-bas réclament à grands cris qu'il punisse la reine Elizabeth, "dû par Dieu et par les hommes".

Autorité pour la date : &ldquoAllen, William.&rdquo Les cardinaux de la Sainte Église romaine. www.fiu.edu/

Sophia Olelkovich Raziwell est décédée, la dernière descendante de la dynastie Olelkovich-Slutsk. Passionnée d'orthodoxie, elle avait refusé de se convertir au catholicisme et avait obtenu une loi permettant aux propriétaires terriens de la région (la Biélorussie actuelle) de rester orthodoxes. Grâce à ses efforts, la région autour de Slutsk deviendra un bastion de l'orthodoxie, et en 1983 elle sera canonisée par l'Église orthodoxe.

Autorité pour la date : http://womenshistory.about.com/

Mort à Helmstadt, en Allemagne, de Georg Calixtus qui avait été le perpétuateur le plus influent de la théologie luthérienne de Melanchthon au XVIIe siècle.

Autorité pour la date : Schaff, Philip. L'Encyclopédie Schaff-Herzog de la connaissance religieuse.

Mort à Longleat, Angleterre, de Thomas Ken, notable dans sa génération comme l'un des sept évêques qui avaient été envoyés à la Tour de Londres pour avoir refusé de publier la déclaration d'indulgence du roi Jacques II. Les générations suivantes se souviendront de lui comme de l'auteur de la doxologie &ldquoLouez Dieu de qui toutes les bénédictions coulent.&rdquo

Autorité pour la date : http://www.hymnary.org/person/Ken_Thomas

Philip Doddridge est ordonné ministre non-conformiste en Angleterre. Son livre The Rise and Progress of Religion in the Soul aura une influence sur la conversion de l'homme d'État anglais William Wilberforce et de bien d'autres au christianisme évangélique.

Autorité pour la date : Hatfield, Edwin. Les poètes de l'Église. New York : Anson Randolph & Company, 1884.

Henry Nott et ses collègues missionnaires dirigent le premier service chrétien jamais organisé à Tahiti. La rencontre se déroule sous le couvert d'arbres énormes en présence du roi de Tahiti et de nombreux autres tahitiens.

Autorité pour la date : Harrison, Eugene Myers. "Héraut de l'Amour de Dieu à Tahiti." Géants du Chemin Missionnaire.

A Vienne, la première représentation publique de Franz Joseph Haydn&rsquos oratorio Creation a lieu. Les billets ont été vendus longtemps à l'avance. Une répétition publique et une représentation privée pour l'élite avaient eu lieu presque un an plus tôt, également à Vienne.

Autorité pour la date : Encyclopédies standard.

Le poète américain William Cullen Bryant écrit son hymne de Noël &ldquoLook from Thy Sphere of Endless Day&rdquo pour le cinquantième anniversaire de l'église du Messie à Boston.

Autorité pour la date : Wells, Amos R. A Treasury of Hymn Stories. Boulanger, 1992.

Mort à Racine, Wisconsin, de James De Koven, prêtre épiscopal et leader du ritualisme anglican.

Autorité pour la date : Pape, William C. Vie du révérend James de Koven. http://anglicanhistory.org/bios/dekoven/dekoven8.html

Charles Harrison Mason fait l'expérience du baptême du Saint-Esprit et du parler en langues. Afro-américain, il deviendra fondateur et chef de l'Église de Dieu en Christ, Inc.

Autorité pour la date : Dictionnaire biographique des évangéliques.

Dans l'encyclique Divini redemptoris, le Pape Pie XI déclare "Il n'y aurait ni socialisme ni communisme aujourd'hui si les dirigeants des nations n'avaient méprisé les enseignements et les avertissements matériels de l'Église".

Autorité pour la date : Divini redemptoris. www.vatican.va.

Les Lituaniens créent The Chronicle, un journal clandestin, pour dénoncer la cruauté soviétique envers les chrétiens catholiques.

Autorité pour la date : Chronique de l'Église catholique en Lituanie. Brooklyn, New York.

À la suite de la divulgation d'une liaison sexuelle en 1980 avec la secrétaire de l'église Jessica Hahn, Jim Bakker quitte ses fonctions de chef du ministère de la PTL. Il ira plus tard en prison pour fraude financière.


Sujets similaires ou similaires à Édit de Saint-Germain

Les émeutes de Toulouse de 1562 sont une série d'événements (se produisant en grande partie en l'espace d'une semaine) qui ont opposé des membres de l'Église réformée de France (souvent appelés huguenots) à des membres de l'Église catholique romaine lors de violents affrontements qui se sont soldés par la mort de entre 3 000 et 5 000 citoyens de la ville française de Toulouse. Ces événements montrent les tensions qui allaient bientôt exploser en pleine guerre civile pendant les guerres de religion françaises. Wikipédia

Les guerres de religion françaises ont été une longue période de guerre et de troubles populaires entre catholiques et huguenots (réformés/protestants calvinistes) dans le royaume de France entre 1562 et 1598. On estime que trois millions de personnes ont péri au cours de cette période de violence, de famine ou de maladie dans ce qui est considéré comme la deuxième guerre de religion la plus meurtrière de l'histoire européenne. Wikipédia

L'assassinat du duc de Guise par le huguenot Jean de Poltrot au siège d'Orléans en 1563 représente un tournant critique dans les guerres de religion françaises. Ce serait le premier assassinat majeur de ce qui allait devenir une vendetta entre les différentes maisons aristocratiques qui verraient la mort de Louis, prince de Condé et le massacre de la Saint-Barthélemy. Wikipédia

Le meurtre de fidèles et de citoyens huguenots lors d'une action armée par les troupes de François, duc de Guise, à Wassy, ​​en France, le 1er mars 1562. Identifié comme le premier événement majeur des guerres de religion françaises. Wikipédia


Aile Renaissance

Successeur de Charles VIII, Louis XII fit construire l'aile Renaissance à angle droit avec l'aile gothique.

François Ier aimait beaucoup le château d'Amboise et ajouta un étage à l'aile Renaissance.

Le grand mécène de la Renaissance française, en effet, y passa sa jeunesse et y vécut pendant les cinq premières années de son règne.

Homme de plaisir, de luxe et de beauté, le roi charismatique a apporté du prestige à Amboise, où il a donné des festivités somptueuses.

Protecteur des Arts et des Lettres, homme savant et raffiné, François Ier a passé sa vie entouré des meilleurs esprits de son époque.

Il invite donc Léonard de Vinci à s'installer au Clos Luçé tout proche.

Le roi rendait régulièrement visite au vieil artiste, en empruntant un passage secret qui relie le château au Clos Luçé.

Louis XIII lègue le château à son frère Gaston d'Orléans, qui passe la plus grande partie de sa vie à comploter contre son propre frère !

En représailles, le roi envoya ses troupes qui tirèrent sur le château et détruisirent hélas les remparts !

Le château d'Amboise finit par revenir à la couronne française.

Au début du XIXe siècle, Napoléon Ier lègue Amboise à Roger Ducros, sans le sou, membre du Directoire, qui en fait une carrière de pierre !

Il ne reste donc du château que les Logis du Roi, ailes gothiques et Renaissance, Tour Heurtault sur le rempart et Chapelle St-Hubert.

Les appartements privés de l'étage supérieur de l'aile Renaissance ont ensuite été redécorés en style Empire pour Louis-Philippe.

Des jardins et des terrasses ont été aménagés à l'emplacement des anciens bâtiments.

Elles offrent une vue imprenable sur la Loire et les toits de la cité médiévale.

On dit que la chapelle gothique flamboyante St-Hubert, construite en 1491 pour Anne de Bretagne abrite le tombeau de Léonard de Vinci.

Le château d'Amboise appartient à la Fondation St-Louis, une fiducie fondée par le comte de Paris afin de préserver le patrimoine national français.

Département d'Indre-et-Loire
Coordonnées: Lat 47.413336 – Long 0.985551

Photos via Wikimedia Commons : Château vu du pont – Cheminée Renaissance – Château avant 1579 – Chapelle Saint-Hubert CC BY-SA 3.0

Contenu

La ville est célèbre pour le manoir du Clos Lucé où Léonard de Vinci vécut (et mourut finalement) à l'invitation du roi François Ier de France, dont le château d'Amboise, qui domine la ville, est situé à seulement 500 m. ) une façon. Les rues étroites contiennent quelques bons exemples d'habitations à colombages.

Juste à l'extérieur de la ville se trouve la Pagode de Chanteloup, une pagode chinoise de 44 mètres de haut construite en 1775 par le duc de Choiseul. La pagode a sept niveaux de haut, chaque niveau étant légèrement plus petit que le dernier. Un escalier intérieur permettant d'accéder à tous les niveaux est ouvert au public.

Le Musée de la Poste (dans l'Hôtel Joyeuse) est un musée retraçant l'histoire de la distribution postale.

Fontaine du XIXe siècle de John Oswald représentant une tortue surmontée d'un ours en peluche, debout devant l'endroit où se tiennent les marchés.

Au bord de la Loire


Edit d'Amboise, 18 mars 1563 - Histoire


Depuis la mort subite du roi HENRI II, en France deux factions nobles se disputaient l'influence politique, la faction des Guise optant pour le catholicisme radical, la mise en œuvre sans compromis de la réforme tridentine, l'autre faction le calvinisme, l'affaire prit le caractère d'une conflit (confessionnel). En 1560, le roi FRANÇOIS II. mort, succédé par son frère CHARLES IX., un enfant de 10 ans sa mère CATHERINE DE MEDICI a tenté de rétablir le contrôle royal, ses partisans constituaient la troisième faction, modérément catholique, mais non engagée dans la Contre-Réforme Tridentine.

En mars 1562, le duc FRANÇOIS DE GUISE, chef du parti catholique radical, ordonna le MASSACRE DE VASSY, le meurtre des huguenots désarmés qui assistaient alors au service religieux. L'événement marque le début de la première guerre huguenote. Le 16 mars, le duc François entre triomphalement à Paris. Catherine de Médicis se range du côté du duc de Guise, le parti huguenot s'allie avec l'Angleterre (septembre). Orléans, tenue par les huguenots, est assiégée. Le 19 décembre, l'armée huguenote conduite par CONDE et COLIGNY est vaincue par le duc François, MONTMORENCY et leurs forces catholiques lors de la BATAILLE DE DREUX. Le 24 février 1563, le duc François meurt de ses blessures. Le TRAITÉ D'AMBOISE du 19 mars 1563 mit fin à la guerre, accordant aux huguenots la tolérance religieuse dans leurs fiefs.


L'H Ô PITAL (L'HOSPITAL), MICHEL DE

Homme d'État français et défenseur de la tolérance religieuse b. Auvergne, près d'Aigueperse, 1507 d. Vignay, 13 mars 1573. Son père était médecin et était également contrôleur des comptes de Charles de Bourbon. Il fait ses premières études à Toulouse jusqu'à ce qu'il soit contraint de fuir la France en 1523. Pendant six ans, il étudie le droit à Padoue, puis il rejoint son père à Rome, où il est auditeur de la rotation. À son retour en France en 1534, il exerça le droit, et il se maria en 1537. L'H &# xF4 pital fut nommé conseiller au Parlement de Paris de 1537 à 1547. En 1547, Henri II l'envoya à Bologne comme son représentant à la première session du Concile de Trente. L'H &# xF4 pital revint en France en 1548 et devint chancelier de la princesse Margaret, sœur du roi. En 1553, il est nommé maître des requêtes et en 1554 président de la Chambre des Comptes. En 1557, il devient membre du conseil privé. Il atteint l'apogée de sa carrière lorsque, grâce à l'influence de Catherine de m' dicis, il est nommé chancelier de France (1560). Il a occupé ce poste pendant une période de conflits religieux en France à cause de la montée des huguenots.

Guerres de religion. En 1561, il comparut devant une réunion des États généraux pour demander une plus grande tolérance. Le résultat fut la promulgation de l'édit d'Orl é ans (1561) et de l'édit de janvier 1562, qui accordaient de meilleures conditions aux huguenots. Un massacre de huguenots par des soldats de François, le duc de Guise, a eu lieu en mars 1562. En signe de protestation, L'H &# xF4 pital s'est retiré dans ses domaines à Vignay jusqu'à ce que la guerre civile a pris fin par l'Édit d'Amboise (mars 1563), qui protégeait les droits des huguenots. A son retour en cour L'H'pital s'engagea à renforcer le gouvernement de Catherine de M'dicis. À sa demande, le conseil royal a refusé de publier les actes du Concile de Trente en raison de leur conflit avec les libertés gallicanes de l'Église française. Il a soutenu la position du parti catholique modéré en opposition à la position de droite de Guise. En 1566, il obtient la promulgation de l'ordonnance du Moulin qui prévoit la réforme judiciaire. Aucune autre réforme n'a été possible depuis que les hostilités religieuses ont éclaté à nouveau en 1567, et l'influence de L'H ô pital a commencé à décliner. Catherine de Mé dicis lui reprochait des politiques de modération qu'elle avait soutenues mais que ses détracteurs croyaient responsables de l'augmentation des conflits religieux. Au début de la deuxième phase des guerres de religion, la critique de sa politique s'est accrue. Le cardinal de Lorraine, le duc d'Alva et d'autres l'accusèrent de soutenir les huguenots. En 1568, il a été contraint de démissionner de son poste de garde des sceaux à la suite de la pression papale. En retour, la Curie papale a transféré le contrôle de certains biens de l'Église au gouvernement français. Peu de temps après, L'H ô pital se retira de la vie publique, estimant que sa vacance de son poste était essentielle pour la paix de la France, bien que techniquement, il n'ait démissionné de la chancellerie qu'après avoir été contraint de le faire en février 1573.

Fin de vie. L'H ô pital passa les dernières années de sa vie en réclusion à Vignay. Ici, il a écrit des poèmes et d'autres courts commentaires sur son époque. En 1570, il adresse à Charles IX un court mémoire intitulé Le But de la guerre et de la paix, ou discours du chancelier l'Hospital pour exhorter Charles IX à donner la paix à ses sujets. En 1585, un petit-fils publia une autre de ses œuvres, intitulée Epistolarum seu sermonum libri sexe.

Bien que Michel de L'H'pital ait été accusé d'hérésie à son époque, il est resté catholique pratiquant jusqu'à la fin de sa vie. Ses ennemis lui reprochaient sa politique consistant à placer le bien-être de la France au-dessus du bien-être d'un seul groupe. Catherine a continué à soutenir cette politique pendant de nombreuses années après sa mort, malgré le fait qu'elle était responsable de sa chute du pouvoir. Il a déploré les excès du massacre de st. le jour de barthélemy, qui a eu lieu moins d'un an avant sa mort, et il l'a indiqué dans une lettre à Charles IX.


Edit d'Amboise, 18 mars 1563 - Histoire

Pas une image très précise. Sur FR, nous devons éviter de publier des articles qui présentent volontairement quelques faits sélectionnés (dont certains sont plutôt douteux) et en omettent délibérément d'autres. Le terme est polémique, et l'utilisation de la polémique est en contradiction avec l'amour et la recherche de la vérité des conservateurs, où que les faits puissent nous mener.

Comme le pape Jean-Paul II l'a enseigné dans Ut Unum Sint (1995) « Néanmoins, outre les différences doctrinales qui doivent être résolues, les chrétiens ne peuvent pas sous-estimer le poids des appréhensions de longue date héritées du passé, ainsi que des malentendus et des préjugés mutuels. La complaisance, l'indifférence et la connaissance insuffisante les uns des autres aggravent souvent cette situation. Par conséquent, l'engagement œcuménique doit se fonder sur la conversion des cœurs et sur la prière, qui conduira aussi à la nécessaire purification des mémoires passées. Avec la grâce de l'Esprit Saint, les disciples du Seigneur, animés par l'amour, par la puissance de la vérité et par un désir sincère de pardon mutuel et de réconciliation, sont appelés à réexaminer ensemble leur passé douloureux et la douleur que cela le passé continue malheureusement de provoquer encore aujourd'hui. Tous ensemble, ils sont invités par la puissance toujours nouvelle de l'Évangile à reconnaître avec une objectivité sincère et totale les erreurs commises et les facteurs contingents à l'œuvre à l'origine de leurs déplorables divisions. Ce qu'il faut, c'est une vision des choses calme, lucide et véridique, une vision animée de la miséricorde divine et capable de libérer les esprits et d'inspirer en chacun une volonté renouvelée, précisément en vue d'annoncer l'Évangile aux hommes. et les femmes de tous les peuples et de toutes les nations.”

Veuillez remplir les faits et indiquer où vous trouvez les messages faits dubios.

C'est ce que croyaient les huguenots.

Pourquoi ils étaient prêts à abandonner leur patrie plutôt que d'abandonner leur Sauveur, Jésus-Christ le Seigneur.

C'est ce qu'est vraiment le christianisme.

Écoutez et regardez et soyez bénis aujourd'hui.

Voici un bon résumé du point de vue catholique, tiré de l'Encyclopédie catholique de 1917. Ceci est une excellente référence pour les protestants qui cherchent une meilleure compréhension du catholicisme, et est disponible en ligne sur http://www.newadvent.org

L'article sur le protestantisme français se trouve ici, dont le passage ci-dessous est un extrait. Vous verrez qu'il remplit de nombreux faits omis par l'article que vous avez publié et fournit un contexte pour certains des autres faits. Je crois que cet article est plus charitable envers le POV protestant que l'article que vous avez posté ne l'est pour le POV catholique, mais vous pouvez tirer votre propre conclusion sur ce point. Dans tous les cas, j'espère sincèrement que cet article vous apportera un certain équilibre et vous aidera à mieux comprendre cette période de l'histoire.

L'histoire du protestantisme français peut être divisée en quatre périodes bien définies : (1) une période militante, dans laquelle il lutte pour la liberté (1559-98) (2) la période de l'édit de Nantes (1598-1685) ( 3) la Période de la Révocation à la Révolution (1685-1800) (4) la Période de la Révolution à la Séparation (1801-1905).
Période militante

L'organisation de leur discipline et de leur culte donna aux huguenots un nouveau pouvoir d'expansion. Peu à peu, ils pénétrèrent dans les rangs de la noblesse. Une des principales familles du royaume, les Coligny, alliée aux Montmorency, leur fournirent leurs recrues les plus distinguées à d'Andelot, l'amiral Coligny et le cardinal Odet de Chatillon. Bientôt la reine de Navarre, Jeanne d'Albret, fille de Marguerite de Navarre, professa le calvinisme et l'introduisit de force dans ses États. Son mari, Antoine* de Bourbon, le premier prince du sang, paraissait parfois passé chez les huguenots avec son frère le prince de Condéacute, qui, de son côté, ne fléchissait jamais dans son allégeance à la nouvelle secte. Même le Parlement de Paris, qui avait si énergiquement mené la lutte contre l'hérésie, se laissa souiller, beaucoup de ses membres embrassant la nouvelle doctrine. Il fallait traiter sévèrement ces nombreux incarcérés, Antoine* du Bourg entre autres. Mais à ce stade, Henri II mourut, laissant le trône à un délicat enfant de seize ans. Rien n'aurait pu être plus avantageux pour les huguenots. A cette époque, ils formaient un groupe nombreux dans presque toutes les régions de France. Certaines provinces, comme la Normandie, en contenaient jusqu'à 5000 un jour 6000 personnes à la Pré-aux-clercs, à Paris, chantaient les Psaumes de Marot que les huguenots avaient adoptés La Basse-Guyenne, disait-on, en avait soixante-dix- six églises organisées. Deux ans plus tard, Bordeaux comptait 7 000 réformés de Rouen, 10 000 mentions de 20 000 à Toulouse, et le prince de Condé a présenté une liste de 2050 églises qui, il est vrai, ne peuvent être identifiées. Le nonce du pape écrivit à Rome que le royaume était à plus de la moitié huguenot c'était assurément une exagération, car l'ambassadeur de Venise estimait le district contaminé par cette erreur à pas le dixième de la France néanmoins il est évident que les huguenots ne pouvaient plus être considérés comme quelques poignées dispersées d'individus, dont le cas pourrait être traité de manière satisfaisante par quelques poursuites judiciaires. Organisés en églises reliées entre elles par des synodes, renforcés par l'appui de grands seigneurs dont certains avaient accès aux conseils de la Couronne, les calvinistes constituaient désormais un pouvoir politique qui exerçait son activité dans les affaires nationales et avait une histoire propre.

Après l'avènement de François II, et par l'influence des Guise, tout-puissants auprès du roi et fortement dévoués au catholicisme, les édits contre les huguenots furent rendus encore plus sévères. Antoine* du Bourg fut brûlé et un édit royal (4 septembre 1559) ordonna de raser les maisons où se tenaient des assemblées illégales et de punir de mort les organisateurs de telles assemblées. Aigris de ces mesures, les huguenots profitèrent de toutes les causes de mécontentement offertes par le gouvernement des Guise. Après avoir consulté leurs théologiens à Strasbourg et à Genève, ils résolurent de recourir aux armes. Un complot s'était formé, dont le véritable chef était le prince de Condé, bien que son organisation fût confiée au sieur de la Renaudière, un noble de Péacuterigord, qui avait été condamné pour faux par le parlement de Dijon, s'était enfui à Genève, et y était devenu un ardent calviniste. Il visita Genève et l'Angleterre, parcourut les provinces de France pour recruter des soldats et les réunir autour de la Cour, car le plan était de capturer les Guise sans, comme disaient les conjurés, mettre la main sur la personne du roi. Tandis que la Cour, pour désarmer l'hostilité huguenote, ordonnait à ses agents de se désister des poursuites et proclamait une amnistie générale dont seuls les prédicateurs et les conjurés étaient exceptés, les Guise étaient avertis du complot qui se tramait, et pouvaient ainsi étouffer la révolte en le sang des conjurés qui se réunissaient en bandes autour d'Amboise, où logeait le roi (19 mars 1560). Le ressentiment suscité par la sévérité de cette répression et la nomination comme chancelier de Michel de L'Hôte, magistrat d'une grande modération, conduisirent bientôt à l'adoption de conseils moins violents. L'édit de Romorantin (mai 1560) adoucit le sort des protestants. , qui avaient pour avocats devant l'Assemblée des Notables (août 1560) le prince de Condé, le chancelier L’Hôpital, et les évêques de Valence et de Vienne.

L'avènement de Charles IX, mineur (décembre 1560), porte au pouvoir, comme reine régente, sa mère Catherine de Médicis. Ce fut une chance pour les huguenots. Presque indifférente aux questions de doctrine, la régente ambitieuse ne se faisait aucun scrupule d'accorder quelque tolérance, pourvu qu'elle pût jouir en paix de son pouvoir. Elle permit aux Condé et aux Coligny de pratiquer la religion réformée à la cour, et y somma même d'y prêcher Jean de Mouluc, évêque de Valence, calviniste à peine dissimulé par sa mitre. En même temps, elle ordonna au Parlement de Paris de suspendre les poursuites et autorisa le culte huguenot hors des villes jusqu'à ce qu'un conseil national se soit prononcé sur la question. Un édit promulgué au mois d'avril, tout en interdisant les manifestations religieuses, mettait en liberté ceux qui avaient été emprisonnés pour des motifs religieux. En vain le Parlement de Paris essaya de suspendre la publication de cet édit une commission judiciaire composée de princes, de hauts officiers de la Couronne et de membres du Conseil royal, amnistie les huguenots à la seule condition qu'ils vivraient désormais comme catholiques. Dans l'espoir d'opérer une réconciliation entre les deux religions, Catherine réunit des prélats catholiques et des ministres huguenots à la Conférence de Poissy. Pour ce dernier Théodore de Bégraveze parlait pour le premier, le cardinal de Lorraine. Chaque parti a revendiqué la victoire. En conclusion, le roi interdit aux huguenots de détenir des biens ecclésiastiques, et aux catholiques de s'immiscer dans le culte huguenot. En janvier 1562, les huguenots sont autorisés à tenir leurs assemblées hors des villes, mais doivent restituer tous les biens pris au clergé, et s'abstenir de tumultes et de rassemblements illégaux. Cet édit, cependant, ne fit qu'exaspérer les factions rivales à Paris, il provoqua des troubles qui forcèrent Catherine et la cour à s'enfuir. Le duc de Guise, revenant de Lorraine pour rejoindre la reine, trouva à Vassy en Champagne quelque six ou sept cents huguenots tenant un culte religieux (1er mars 1562), auquel selon l'édit de janvier ils n'avaient pas le droit de faire, Vassy étant une ville fortifiée. Leur chant perturba bientôt la messe à laquelle assistait le duc de Guise. Des provocations mutuelles s'ensuivirent, une querelle éclata et le sang fut versé. Vingt-trois huguenots sont tués et plus d'une centaine blessés.

Aussitôt, à l'appel du Prince de Condé, commença la première des guerres civiles appelées « guerres de religion ». Les huguenots se levèrent, disaient-ils, pour faire respecter l'édit de janvier, que le duc de Guise foulait aux pieds. Partout les animosités mutuelles s'exacerbaient en actes de violence. Des huguenots furent massacrés dans un endroit, des moines et des religieux dans un autre. Partout où les insurgés ont acquis la maîtrise, les églises ont été saccagées, les statues et les croix mutilées, les ustensiles sacrés profanés dans des burlesques sacrilèges, et les reliques de saints jetées dans les flammes. Les rencontres les plus sérieuses eurent lieu à Orléans, où le duc de Guise fut traîtreusement assassiné par un huguenot. L'assassin Poltrot de Mécautéron déclara qu'il avait été poussé par Bégraveze et Coligny. Enfin, si Condé et Coligny n'avaient pas eu honte d'acheter l'appui de la reine Elisabeth d'Angleterre en lui livrant le Havre, la victoire restait aux catholiques. Peace was established by the Edict of Amboise (19 March, 1563), which left the Huguenots freedom of worship in one town out of each bailiwick (bailliage) and in the castles of lords who exercised the power of life and death (haute justice). Four years later there was another civil war which lasted six months and ended in the Peace of Longjumeau (23 March, 1568), re-establishing the Edict of Amboise. Five months later hostilities recommenced. Conde occupied La Rochelle, but he was killed at Jarnac, and Coligny, who succeeded to his command was defeated at Moncontour. Peace was made in the following year, and the Edict of Saint-Germain (8 April, 1570) granted the Huguenots freedom of worship wherever their worship had been carried on before the war, besides leaving in their hands the four following refuges — La Rochelle, Montauban, La Charite, and Cognac.

On his return to Court, Coligny found great favour with the king and laboured to win his support for the revolted Netherlands. The marriage of Henry, King of Navarre, with the king’s sister, Margaret of Valois, soon after this brought all the Huguenots lords to Paris. Catharine de’ Medici, jealous of Coligny’s influence with the king, and it may be in collusion with the Duke of Guise who had his father’s death to avenge on the admiral, plotted the death of the latter. But the attempt failed Coligny was only wounded. Catharine, fearing reprisals from the Huguenot’s, suddenly won over the king and his council to the idea of putting to death the Huguenot leaders assembled in Paris. Thus occurred the odious Massacre of St. Bartholomew, so called from the saint whose feast fell on the same day (24 August, 1572), Admiral Coligny being slain with many of his Huguenot followers. The massacre spread to many provincial towns. The number of victims is estimated at 2000 for the capital, and 6000 to 8000 for the rest of France. The king explained to foreign courts that Coligny and his partisans had organized a plot against his person and authority, and that he (the king) had merely suppressed it. Thus it was that Pope Gregory XIII at first believed in a conspiracy of the Huguenots, and, persuaded that the king had but defended himself against these heretics, held a service of thanksgiving for the repression of the conspiracy, and commemorated it by having a medal struck, which he sent with his felicitations to Charles IX. There is no proof that the Catholic clergy were in the slightest degree connected with the massacre. Cries of horror and malediction arose from the Huguenot ranks their writers made France and the countries beyond its borders echo with those cries by means of pamphlets in which, for the first time, they attacked theabsolute power, or even the very institution of royalty. After St. Bartholomew’s the Huguenots, though bereft of their leaders, rushed to arms. This was the fourth civil war, and centred about a few fortified towns, such as La Rochelle, Montauban, and Nîmes. The Edict of Boulogne (25 June, 1573) put an end to it, granting to all Huguenots amnesty for the past and liberty to worship in those three towns. It was felt that the rising power of the Huguenots was broken — that from this juncture forward they would never again be able to sustain a conflict except by allying themselves with political malcontents. They themselves wereconscious of this they gave themselves a political organization which facilitated the mobilization of all their forces. In their synods held from 1573 to 1588 they organized France into généralités, placing at the head of each a general, with a permanent council and periodical assemblies. The delegates of these généralités were to form the States General of the Union, which were to meet every three months. Special committees were created for the recruiting of the army, the management of the finances, and the administration of justice. Over the whole organization a “protector of the churches” was appointed, who was the chief of the party. Conde held this title from 1574 Henry of Navarre after 1576. It was, so to say, a permanently organized revolt. In 1574 hostilities recommenced the Huguenots and the malcontents joined forces against impotent royalty until they wrested from Henry, the successor of Charles IX (30 May, 1574), by the Edict of Beaulieu (May, 1576) the right of public worship for the religion, thenceforth officially called the prétendue reformée, throughout France, except at Paris and the Court. There were also to be established chambers composed of equal numbers of Catholics and Huguenots in eight Parliaments eight places de sureté were to be given to the Huguenots there was to be a disclaimer of the Massacre of St. Bartholomew, and the families which had suffered from it were to be reinstated. These large concessions to the Huguenots and the approbation given to their political organization led to the formation of the League, which was organized by Catholics anxious to defend their religion. The States-General of Blois (December, 1576) declared itself against the Edict of Beaulieu. Thereupon the Protestants took up arms under the leadership of Henry of Navarre, who, escaping from the Court, had returned to the Calvinism which he had abjured at the time of the Massacre of St. Bartholomew. The advantage was on the Catholic side, thanks to some successes achieved by the Duke of Anjou, the king’s brother. The Peace of Bergerac, confirmed by the Edict of Poitiers (September, 1577), left the Huguenots the free exercise of their religion only in the suburbs of one town in each bailiwick (bailliage), and in those places where it had been practised before the outbreak of hostilities and which they occupied at the current date.

The national synods, which served to fill up the intervals between armed struggles, give us a glimpse into the forces at work in the interior life of the Huguenot party. The complaints made at their synods show clearly that the fervour of their early days had disappeared laxity and dissensions were finding their way into their ranks, and at times pastors and their flocks were at variance. It was necessary to forbid pastors to publish anything touching religious controversies or political affairs without the express approval of their conferences, and the consistories were asked (1581) to stem the ever-widening wave of dissolution which threatened their church. A Venetian ambassador writes at this period that the number of Huguenots had decreased by seventy per cent. But the death of the Duke of Anjou on 10 June, 1584, the sole surviving heir of the direct line of the Valois, revived their hopes, since the King of Navarre thus became heir presumptive to the throne. The prospect thus opened aroused the League it called upon Henry III to interdict Huguenot worship everywhere, and to declare the heretics incapable of holding any benefices or public offices — and consequently the King of Navarre incapable of succeeding to the throne. By the Convention of Nemours (7 July, 1585) the king accepted these conditions he revoked all previous edicts of pacification, ordered the ministers to leave the kingdom immediately and the other Huguenots within six months, unless they chose to be converted. This edict, it was said, sent more Huguenots to Mass than St. Bartholomew’s had, and resulted in the disappearance of all their churches north of the Loire it was therefore impossible for them to profit by the hostilities which broke out between the king and the Guises, and resulted in the assassination of the Guises at the States-General of Blois (23 December, 1588) and the death of Henry III at the siege of the revolted city of Paris (1 August, 1589). Henry of Navarre succeeded as Henry IV, after promising the Royalist Catholics who had joined him that he would seek guidance and instruction from a council to be held within six months, or sooner if possible, and that in the meantime he would maintain the exclusive practice of the Catholic religion in all those places where the Huguenot religion was not actually being practised. Circumstances prevented him from keeping his word. The League held Paris and the principal towns of France, and he was forced into a long struggle against it, in which he was enabled to secure victory only after his conversion to Catholicism (July, 1593), and, above all, after his reconciliation with the pope (September, 1595). The Huguenots had meanwhile been able to obtain from him only the measure of tolerance guaranteed by the Edict of Poitiers they had profited by this to reopen at Montauban (June, 1594) the synods which had been interrupted for eleven years. They soon completed their political organization in the Assemblies of Saumur and Loudun, they extended it to the whole of France and claimed to treat with the king as equal with equal, bargaining with him for their help against the Spaniards, refusing him their contingents at the siege of Amiens, withdrawing them in the midst of a campaign during the siege of La Fère. Thus they brought the king, who was besides anxious to end the civil war, to grant them the Edict of Nantes (April-May, 1598).
Under the Edict of Nantes

This edict, containing 93 public and 36 secret articles, provided in the first place that the Catholic religion should be re-established wherever it had been suppressed, together with all the property and rights previously enjoyed by the clergy. The Huguenots obtained the free exercise of their religious worship in all places where it actually existed, as also in two localities in every bailiwick (bailliage), in castles of lords possessing the right of life and death, and even in those of the ordinary nobles in which the number of the faithful did not exceed thirty. They were eligible for all public offices, for admission to colleges and academies, could hold synods and even political meetings they received 45,000 crowns annually for expenses of worship and support of schools they were given in the Parliament of Paris a tribunal in which their representatives constituted one-third of the members, while in those of Grenoble, Bordeaux, and Toulouse special chambers were created, half of whose members were Huguenot. One hundred places de sureté were ceded to them for eight years, and, while the king paid the garrison of these fortresses, he named the governors only with the assent of thechurches. If many of these provisions are nowadays recognized by common law, some on the other hand would seem incompatible with orderly government. This condition of benevolent and explicit tolerance was entirely new for the Huguenots. Many of them considered that too little had been yielded to them, while the Catholics thought that they had been given too much. Pope Clement VIII energetically complained of the edict to Cardinal d’Ossat, the king’s ambassador the French clergy protested against it and many of the parliaments refused for a long time to register it. Henry IV succeeded finally in imposing his will on all parties, and for some years the Edict of Nantes ensured the religious peace of France. The Huguenots, possessing at that time 773 churches, enjoyed during the reign of Henry IV the most perfect calm their happiness was marred only by the efforts of the Catholic clergy to make converts among them. Cardinal du Perron and many of the Jesuits, Capuchins, and other religious engaged in this work, and sometimes with great success. Upon the death of Henry IV (1610) there was at first no change in the situation of the Protestants. They did indeed raise numerous complaints in their assemblies of Saumur, Grenoble, La Rochelle, and Loudun, but in reality they had no grievances to allege except those due to popular intolerance with which the Government had nothing to do.Truth compels the less prejudiced among their historians to admit that the Huguenots, who complained so much of Catholic intolerance, were themselves just as intolerant wherever they happened to be the stronger. Not only did they retain the church property and the exclusive use of the churches, but, wherever possible (as at Béarn), they even opposed the enforcement of those clauses of the Edict of Nantes which were favourable to Catholics. They went so far as to prohibit Catholic worship in the towns that had been ceded to them. It was with the greatest difficulty that Sully, the minister of Henry IV and himself a Protestant, could obtain for Catholic priests permission to enter the hospitals of La Rochelle, when summoned to administer the sacraments, and authorization to bury, with never so little solemnity, their dead co-religionists. To this intolerance, which often explains the attitude of the Catholics, they added the imprudence of showing themselves ever ready to make common cause with the domestic enemies of the State, or with any lords who might be in revolt. In 1616, in Guyenne, Languedoc, and Piotou, they allied themselves with Rohan and Conde, who hadrisen against the queen regent, Marie de’ Medici. They again got restless when the king, conformably with the Edict of Nantes, re-established Catholicism at Béarn. An assembly, held at La Rochelle despite the king’s prohibition, divided the realm into eight military circles, and among other matters provided for plundering the king’srevenues and the goods of the Church. To deal with this condition of affairs the king was obliged to capture Saumur, Thouars, and other rebellious towns. He laid siege to Montauban, which city, defended by Rohan and La Force, repelled all his assaults. Lastly he invested Montpellier and had no better success nevertheless peace was signed there (October, 1622), according to which the Edict of Nantes was confirmed, political meetings were forbidden, and the cities which had been won from the Protestants remained in the king’s hands. Cardinal de Richelieu, when he became prime minister, entertained the idea of putting an end to the political power of the Huguenots while respecting their religious liberty. Rohan and Soubise, on the pretext that the Edict of Nantes had been violated, quickly effected an uprising of the South of France, and did not hesitate to make an alliance with England, as a result of which an English fleet of ninety vessels manned by 10,000 men endeavoured to effect a landing at La Rochelle (July, 1627). The king and Richelieu laid siege to this stronghold of the revolted Huguenots they drove off the English fleet, and even made its approach to the place impossible in future by means of a mole about 1640 yards long which they constructed. In spite of the fanatical heroism of the mayorGuiton and his co-religionists, La Rochelle was obliged to capitulate. Richelieu used his victory with moderation he left the inhabitants the free exercise of their religion, granted them a full amnesty, and restored all property to its owners. Rohan, pursued by Conde and Epernon, kept up the war, not disdaining to accept succour from Spain, but he was at last obliged to sign the Peace of Alais, by which the Edict of Nantes was renewed, an amnesty promised, the cities taken from the Huguenots, and the religious wars brought to an end (June, 1629). Subsequently Protestantism disappeared from the stage of politics, content to enjoy in peace the advantages of a religious character which were still accorded to it. The strife was transferred to the field of controversy. Public lectures, polemical and erudite writings, were multiplied, and preachers and professors of theology — such as Chamier, Amyraut, Rivet, Basnage, Blondel, Daillé, Bochart — demonstrated their industry, learning, and courage. The Church in France, more and more affected by the beneficent influence of the Council of Trent, opposed them with vigorous and learned controversialists, with prudent and zealous preachers, such as Sirmond, Labbe, Coton, St. Francis de Sales, Cospéan, Lejeune, Sénault, Tenouillet, Coeffeteau, de Bérulle, Condren, whose success was manifested in numerous conversions. These conversions took place especially in the higher circles of society the great lords abandoned Calvinism, which retained its influence only among the middle classes. Excluded from the public service, the Huguenots became manufacturers, merchants, and farmers the number of their churches decreased to 630 their religious activity lessened between 1631 and 1659 they held only four synods. Without being sympathetic towards them, the public authorities respected the religious liberty guaranteed by the Edict of Nantes. Richelieu judged that the scope of that edict should not be widened, nor should the liberties there granted be curtailed, and even Protestant historians pay tribute to his moderation. Louis XIV being a minor at his accession, his mother, Anne of Austria, began her regency by promising to the Protestants the enjoyment of their liberties. Mazarin abstained from disturbing them. “If the little flock”, he said, “feeds on evil weeds, it does not wander away” (Si le petit troupeau broute de mauvaises herbes, il ne s’écarte pas). It is indeed true that some of the feudal lords, the Duc de Bouillon among others, when they gave up Calvinism, caused the temples within their jurisdictions to be closed but the Edict of Nantes permitted this, and the Government had neither the right nor the inclination to prevent it. In 1648, when Alsace with the exception of Strasburg was reunited with France, liberty of public worship was maintained for all the new subjects who were of the Augsburg Confession. In 1649 the Royal Council, dealing with certain complaints of the Huguenots, declared that those of the “pseudo-reformed” (prétendue réformée) religion should not be disturbed in the practice of their worship, and ordered the reopening of some of their temples which had been closed. Thus the Protestant minister Jurieu could write that the years between the Rising of the Fronde and the Peace of the Pyrenees were among the happiest within the memory of his creed.

In proportion as Louis XIV got the reins of government into his own hands, the position of the Huguenots became increasingly unfavourable. After 1660 they were forbidden to hold national synods. At that time they counted 623 churches served by 723 pastors, who ministered to about 1,200,000 members. A commission, established in 1661 to inquire into the titles on which their places of worship were held, brought about the demolition of more than 100 churches, for which no warrant could be found in the provisions of the Edict of Nantes. A royal order of 1663 deprived relapsed persons — i.e. those who had returned to Protestantism after having abjured it — of the benefit of the Edict of Nantes, and condemned them to perpetual banishment. A year later, it is true, this order was suspended, and proceedings under it were arrested. Then, by another ordinance, parish priests were authorized to present themselves with a magistrate at the domicile of any sick person and to ask whether such person wished to die in heresy or to be converted to the true religion the children of Protestants were declared competent to embrace Catholicism at the age of seven, their parents being obliged to make an allowance for their separate support conformably with their station in life. The Protestants soon saw themselves excluded from public office the chambers in which the parties were equally represented were suppressed, Huguenot preaching was restrained and emigration was forbidden under pain of confiscation of property.

These measures and others of less importance were taken chiefly in response to demands made by the Assemblies of the Clergy or by public opinion. Their efficacy was augmented by the controversial works, those of Bosseut, “Exposition de la doctrine catholique”, “Avertissement aux Protestants”, “Histoire des variations des Eglises protestantes”, being conspicuously brilliant, to which the ministers — Claude, Jurieu, Pajon — replied but feebly. Meanwhile the commissioners (intendants) were working with all their might to bring about conversions of Protestants, to which end some of them made as much use of dragoons as they did missionaries, so that their system of making converts by force rather than by conviction came to be branded with the name of dragonnade.
From the revocation of the Edict of Nantes to the Revolution

Trusting in the number and sincerity of these conversions, Louis XIV thought it no longer necessary to observe half measures with the Huguenots, and consequently revoked the Edict of Nantes on 18 October, 1685. Thenceforward the exercise of public worship was forbidden to the Protestants their churches were to be demolished they were prohibited from assembling for the practice of their religion in private houses. Protestant ministers who would not be converted were ordered to leave the kingdom within fifteen days. Parents were forbidden to instruct their children in Protestantism, and ordered to have them baptized by priests and sent to Catholic schools. Four months’ grace was granted the fugitive Protestants to return to France and recover their property after the lapse of this period the said property would be definitively confiscated. Emigration was forbidden for men under pain of the galleys, and for women under pain of imprisonment. Subject to these conditions Protestants might live within the realm, carry on commerce, and enjoy their property without being molested on account of their religion. This measure, which was regrettable from many points of view, evoked in France unanimous applause from Catholics of all classes. With the exception of Vauban and Saint-Simon, all the great men of that period highly approved of the revocation. This attitude is explained by the ideas of the time. Tolerance was almost unknown in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and, in those countries where they had the ascendancy, the Protestants had been long inflicting upon Catholics a treatment harder than they themselves underwent in France. At Geneva and in Holland Catholic worship was absolutely forbidden in Germany, after the Peace of Augsburg, all subjects were bound to take the religion of their prince, in accordance with the adage: Cujus regio ejus religio. England, which even forced those who dissented from the Established Church to seek religious liberty in America, treated Catholics more harshly than did Turkey all priests were banished from the country should one of them return and be caught in the exercise of his functions, he was condemned to death a heavy tribute was imposed upon Papists, as though they were slaves.

The Revocation did not produce the effect intended by its author. Scarcely had it been published when, in spite of all prohibitions, a mighty movement of emigration developed in the provinces adjacent to the frontiers.Vauban had to write that the “Revocation brought about the desertion of 100,000 Frenchmen, the exportation of 60,000,000 livres ($12,000,000), the ruin of commerce enemies’ fleets were reinforced by 9000 sailors, the best in thekingdom, and foreign armies by 600 officers and 1200 men, more inured to war than their own.” Those who remained took advantage of the last article of the Revocation to dispense with attendance at church and the reception of the sacraments at the hour of death. The king in his embarrassment consulted the bishops and the intendants, and their replies inclined him to relax the execution of the edict of revocation somewhat, without changing anything in its letter. On the other hand, a few preachers remained in spite of the Revocation, and clandestinely organized their worship in the fields and in remote places, or, as the Protestant historians express it, “in the desert”. Of this number were Brousson, Corteiz, and Regnart. In the Vivarais the management of the churches passed into the hands of the illuminés — fanatical preachers, peasants, and young girls — who stirred up the population with prophesies of the approaching triumph of their cause. Three armies and three marshals of France had to march against these insurgents (the Camisards), who were reduced to order only after a struggle of five or six years’ duration (1702-1708).

From that time the churches lived only as secret associations, without religious worship and without regular gatherings. The ministers were hunted into hiding, those who were caught being mercilessly put to death. Still, some of them were not afraid to risk their lives the best known of these, Antoine* Court (1696-1760), spent nearly twenty years in this secret labour, travelling through the South, and distributing propagandist or polemical tracts, holding numerous meetings “in thedesert”, and even organizing semblances of provincial synods in 1715, and national synods in 1726. Retiring to Lausanne in 1729, he founded there a seminary for the education of pastors for the Protestant ministry in France. This condition of official persecution and hidden vitality lasted until after the middle of the eighteenth century. The authorities continued to hang ministers and destroy churches until 1762 but ideas of toleration had for some time been gradually finding their way into the mind of the nation prosecutions for religious offences became unpopular, especially after the Calas affair. A Protestant of that name at Toulouse was charged with having killed one of his sons to prevent his becoming a Catholic. Arrested and condemned on this charge by the Parliament of Toulouse (9 March, 1762), he was executed at the age of sixty-eight after a trial which created great excitement. His widow and children demanded justice. Voltaire took up their cause and succeeded by his writings in arousing the public opinion of France and of Europe against the Parliament of Toulouse. The Supreme Council (Grand Conseil) unanimously reversed the judgment of the Parliament, and another tribunal rehabilitated the memory of Calas. The Protestants derived great benefit from the trend of public feeling resulting from this rehabilitation. Without any legislative change as yet, the modification of public opinion incessantly tended to the improvement of their lot, and the Government treated them with a tacittoleration. At last, in 1787, a decided amelioration of their condition came with the Edict of Toleration, which granted to non-Catholics the right to practise a profession or handicraft without molestation, permission to be legally married before magistrates, and to have births officially recorded. In practice these liberties went even farther, and churches were openly organized. Two years later complete liberty and access to all employments were recognized as belonging to them, no less than to other citizens, by the “Declaration of theRights of Man “, voted by the Constituent Assembly (August, 1789). This legislative body, which for a short period (March, 1790) was presided over by the Protestant pastor Rabaud, went so far as to order that the property of those who had emigrated under the Revocation should be restored to their descendants, who might even recover their rights as French citizens on condition that they took up their residence in France. Protestants had to suffer, like Catholics, though infinitely less, from the sectarian and anti-religious spirit of the Revolution churches vanished during the Reign of Terror religious worship could not be reorganized until about the year 1800.
From the Revolution to the separation (1801-1905)

When order was restored the Huguenots were included in the measures initiated by Napoleon for pacifying the nation. They received from him an entirely new organization. At this time there were in France about 430,000 Réformés. By the law of 18 Germinal, Year X (7 April, 1802), there was to be a consistorial church for every 6000 believers, and five consistorial churches were to form a synod. The consistory of each church was to be composed of a pastor and the leading elders. They were entrusted with the maintenance of discipline, the administration of property, and the election of pastors, whose names had, however, to be submitted for the approval of the head of the State. Each synod was composed of a pastor and an elder from each of the churches, and had to superintend public worship and religious instruction. It could assemble only with the consent of the Government under the presidency of the prefect or the sub-prefect, and for not longer than six days. Its enactments had to be submitted for approval to the head of the State. There was no national synod. The churches of the Augsburg Confession, chiefly in Alsace, had, instead of synods, boards of inspection subordinate to three general consistories. Salaries were guaranteed to the pastors, who were exempt from military service. The old seminary of Lausanne was transferred to Geneva, at that time a French city, and then to Montauban (1809) and annexed to the university as a faculty of theology. For the churches of the Augsburg Confession, two seminaries or faculties were to be erected in the east of France. Politically, Protestantism had no further modifications to undergo, whatever changes of government there might be. In the early days of the Restoration its members had, indeed, a certain amount of rough usage to suffer in some of the cities of the south, but this was the work of local animosity or of personal vengeance, and the publicauthorities had no part in it. The churches laboured to adapt themselves as well as possible to the system of organization that had been imposed on them.

In 1806, after Napoleon’s conquests, there were 76 consistories with 171 pastors. The religious life of their churches was very languid indifference reigned everywhere. At Paris, the pastor Boistard complained that out of 10,000 Protestants hardly fifty or a hundred attended worship regularly — two or three hundred at most during the fine season. The pastors, hastily prepared for their work at Geneva, brought back generally with them rationalistic tendencies they were content to fulfil the routine duties of their profession. Their preaching dwelt upon the commonplaces of morality or of natural religion. Two tendencies in regard to dogma were beginning to reveal themselves. One of these was represented by Daniel Encoutre, dean of the theological faculty at Montauban, and was directed towards rigid orthodoxy, based firmly on dogmas and confessions the other was championed especially by Samuel Vincent, one of the most respected pastors of the time, and put religious feeling above doctrine and morality, Christianity being according to this view a life rather than an aggregate of facts and revealed truths. The movement known as the Réveil (Awakening) helped to accentuate this divergence. The men who constituted themselves its propagators in France during the first years of the Restoration were disciples of Wesley. They insisted, in their sermons, on the absolute powerlessness of man to save himself by his own efforts, upon justification by faith alone, upon individual conversion, and were animated by a zeal for the saving of souls and the preaching of the Gospel which contrasted strangely with the indolence of the official Protestant pastors. The Réveil was ill received by the two sections into which French Protestantism was beginning to divide. The orthodox, while accepting its doctrines, did not sympathize with its efforts at a renewal of the spiritual life, of renunciation and sacrifice, and of zeal for saving souls. This they plainly showed at Lyons where they effected the removal of the pastor Adolphe Monod, who had wished to introduce Réveil practices. For the representatives of the liberal tendencies, the preaching of the Réveil was nothing but a collection of superannuated doctrines, in opposition alike to what they called the spirit of the Gospel and to the ideas and aspirations of modern society.

These three tendencies grew farther apart from day to day. The friends of Réveil, sometimes called Methodists, severed their connection with the Reformed Churches of France, and organized in 1830 in the Rue Taitbout, Paris, a free Church of which Edmond de Pressense soon became the most noted leader. In their profession of faith and their disciplinary regulations they emphasized the individual character of faith, the Church’s independence of the State, and the duty of maintaining a propaganda. Some of them, with the periodical “L’Esperance” for their organ, refused to break with the National Church. The Liberals, who were at first called Latitudinarians or Rationalists, repudiated the earlier confessions of faith, predestination by absolute decree and illumination by irresistible grace, and the whole body of their doctrine — according to M. Nicolas, one of their number — consisted in “avoiding Calvinistic and Rationalistic exaggerations”. A synod held in 1848, consisting of fifty-two ministers and thirty-eight elders, increased the existing divisions. The Liberals obtained the presidency, and, in deference to their wishes, the question of confessions of faith was set aside by an almost unanimous vote, the synod contenting itself with drawing up an address in which the majority set forth the principles common to French Protestants, namely, respect for the Bible and the liturgies, and faith in historical and supernatural Christianity. But as the assembly refused to re-establish a clear and positive profession of faith, the pastors Frederic Monod, Amal, and Cambon left the official Church, and issued an appeal to all the independent churches which had been formed by the labours of isolated evangelists. In 1849 they held a synod, in which thirteen of these already formed churches and eighteen which were in process of formation were represented, voted a profession of faith, and established the “Union of the Free Evangelical Churches of France” (Union des eglises évangéliques libres de France).

All these divisions made a civil reorganization of the churches desirable it was effected by a decree of Louis Napoleon, who was then President of the Republic. This decree reconstituted the parishes, placing them under a presbyterial council of pastors and elders. At the head of the hierarchy so constituted was a central council, the members of which were appointed by the Government its function was merely to represent the churches in their relations with the head of the State, without possessing any religious or disciplinary authority. The Lutheran churches were placed under the authority of the Superior Consistory and of a Directory. The only subsequent modification in the status of these churches resulted from the Prussian annexation, after the War of 1870, of the Alsatian territories, where there were a great many Protestants the Lutheran churches by this event lost two-thirds of their membership, and their faculty of theology had to be transferred from Strasburg to Paris, where it augmented the strength of the Liberal section. The gulf between the two parties still continued to widen. The Orthodox vainly endeavoured, by abandoning the formulae of the old theology, and by rejecting all but the great facts and essential doctrines of Christianity, to maintain their position the Liberals, following the lead of the “Revuede Strasbourg”, displayed an ever greater readiness to welcome the most radical conclusions ofGerman rationalistic criticism, particularly those of the Tübingen School. The authority of Holy Scripture, the Divinity of Christ, the idea of the Redemption, of miracles, of the supernatural, were successively abandoned. M. Pécaut, a representative of this tendency, even wrote in 1859 a book (Le Christ et la conscience) in which he called in question the moral perfection and holiness of Christ. Others — and among them pastors such as Athanase Coquerel the Younger, Albert Réville, and Paschoud — did not conceal their sympathy for Renan’s “Vie de Jésus”. The two last named of these, indeed, were deprived of theirchurches by the council they of course asserted in defence of their ideas — as, for that matter, did all the Liberals — that they had only used the right of free inquiry — the right which constitutes the whole of Protestantism, since the Reformation was based on the right of every man to interpret the Scriptures according to his own lights. Their opponents replied that, if this were so, the Church was impossible that a common worship presupposes common beliefs. This question brought on many lively discussions between the representatives of the two tendencies in the Press, at the conferences, and in theelections for the presbyterial councils. To restore peace, a general synod had to be convoked with the consent of the Government in June, 1872. Here the orthodox had a majority a profession of faith was carried by sixty-one votes to forty-five, and subscription to it was made obligatory upon all the young pastors. This decision became an insurmountable barrier between the two parties. The Liberals, not content with repudiating the notion of any obligatory confession of faith, refused, so long as it was maintained, to take any part in the synod of 1872, and have also abstained from participating in any of the general synods, which have been held about every three years since 1879, at Paris, Nantes, Sedan, Auduze and elsewhere, and from which the orthodox party have taken the name of “the Synodal Church”. For all that, the Liberals had no intention of breaking with the organization recognized by the State. Numerous attempts have been made in the last thirty years, to bring about an understanding between the two parties, but have not succeeded in establishing doctrinal unity. The Separation seems calculated rather to increase the divisions, and already a third party has been formed by the fusion at Jarnac (1 October, 1906) of 65 Liberal churches and 40 Synodal under the name of the “Union des Eglises Reformées”.

Divided among themselves on doctrinal questions, the Protestants have by no means lost their solidarity in regard to external activities. The movement of spiritual renovation which followed the Napoleonic wars produced among them various propagandist, educational, and benevolent enterprises, such as the “Societe biblique” (1819), the “Societe des traites religieux” (1861), the “Societe des missions évangéliques de Paris” (1824), theSociety for the Promotion of Primary Instruction among Protestants (1829), the Institution of Deaconesses (1841), the agricultural colony of Sainte-Toy (1842), and divers orphanages, homes for neglected children, and primary schools. Of these last, the greater number (about 2000) have been closed since 1882. The missionary activity of the French Protestants has been chiefly exerted through the “Societe des missions évangéliques de Paris”, at Bassoutos (South Africa), where they count at the present time 15,000 adherents, with schools and a printing press in Madagascar, where a large number of schools are dependent on them (117 schools, according to statistics for 1908, with 7500 pupils) in Senegal, in French Congo, in Zambesi, Tahiti, and New Caledonia. Some sixty missionaries are at work on these missions, and in late years they have received an annual grant amounting to about 320,000 dollars. At home their propaganda is carried on chiefly among the Catholic population by the “Societe centrale protestante d’evangelisation”, with a budget of 90,000 dollars per annum by the “Societe évangéliquede France”, which in some years has received as much as 24,000 dollars by the “Mission populaire évangélique” (MacAll) without, however, any appreciable success.

Journalistic enterprise has not been overlooked. The first Protestant periodical, the “Archives du christianisme”, was founded in 1818 then came the “Annales protestantes” in 1820, the “Mélanges de la religion” in the same year, “Revue protestante” and the “Lien” in 1841, the “Evangéliste” in 1837, the “Espérance” in 1838, the “Revuede Strasbourg” in 1859, the “Revue théologique”, the “Protestant”, the “Vie Nouvelle”, the “Revue chrétienne”, and the “Signal”, a political journal. Only the best-knownperiodicals are mentioned here most of them have disappeared many are, or have been, the organs of particular sections of the Protestants. There must still be, according to the “Agenda, annuaire protestant”, more than 150 in existence, but the majority have only a restricted circulation, and, excepting the “Bulletin historique et littéraire de la société de l’histoire du protestantisme français” (1852), are practically without readers outside of the Protestant world.

At present Protestantism counts about 650,000 adherents in France — 560,000 Réformés, 80,000 Lutherans, and 10,000 independents — that is a little less than one-sixtieth of the population. This seemingly negligible minority has, as everyone admits, made for itself in politics and in the executive government a place out of all proportion to its numerical strength. From areligious point of view Protestantism shows no indications of progress its doctrines are daily losing ground, above all in educated circles. There, as recently declared by M. Edmond Stapfer, dean of the faculty of Protestant theology at Paris, in the “Revue Chrétienne”, “people no longer want most of the traditional beliefs they no longer want the dogmatic system, used by the Reformers and the Réveil, in which many ‘evangelical’ pastors still believe, or by their silence leave the faithful to conclude that they still believe . . . . The intellectuals will have no more of these antiquities, they do not go to hear the pastors preach they are agnostics they respectfully salute the ancient beliefs, but they get on without them, and have no need of them either for their intellectual or their moral life.” Indeed it does not appear that the practice of religion has any more vitality among the masses than faith has among the intellectuals. Official reports made to the synods testify that “the number of mixed marriages is increasing, which proves that faith is diminishing. . . . In certain districts the number is sometimes as many as 95 per cent even in the very Protestant districts, we know of 25 per cent in one place and 20 per cent in others, and as high as 50 per cent of unions of this kind.” As for attendance at publicworship: “Here”, says one report made to the General Synod of Bordeaux (1899), “are the figures for a section of the country which must be classed among the best, that of the Pyrenees. The average of attendance is 32 per cent. It does not go so high everywhere in Paris, for example, it reaches only 11 per cent, and in some churches of Poitou we must go still lower . . . to averages of 5 per cent. The same difference is found in the number of communicants: here it is 12 per cent there, 4 or even 3 per cent.” These are results which would doubtless have astonished and scandalized Calvin, but which are sufficiently explained by the theory of free inquiry and the intimate history of French Protestantism, especially during the last century.


Voir la vidéo: A Seaside Fantasy - Susan Luckey, Jacques damboise (Décembre 2021).