New Christianity/Dialogues between a Conservative and an Innovator
NEW CHRISTIANITY.
DIALOGUES
BETWEEN A
CONSERVATIVE AND AN INNOVATOR
FIRST DIALOGUE.
Conservative. Do you believe in God?
Innovator. Yes, I believe in God.
Con. Do you believe that the Christian religion is of divine origin?
Inn. Yes, I believe it is.
Con. If the Christian religion be of divine origin, then it is not perfectible; however, you endeavour by your writings to persuade the artists, the working classes, and the men of science, to perfect this religion; you are therefore guilty of self-contradiction, since your opinion and your creed are in direct opposition.
Inn. The opposition which you imagine between my opinion and my creed is only apparent. It is necessary to distinguish between that which God has said personally, and that which the clergy have said in his name.
That which God has said is certainly not perfectible; but that which the clergy have said in his name composes a science, which is susceptible of being perfected, as well as all other human sciences. The theory of Theology requires to be renovated at certain epochs, as well as the theories of Natural Philosophy, Chemistry, and Physiology.
Con. What part of religion do you consider divine, and what part human?
Inn. God has said that men ought to act towards each other as brethren. This sublime principle comprehends all that is divine in the Christian religion.
Con. What! do you reduce to one single principle all that is divine in Christianity?
Inn. God has necessarily referred all to one principle: he has necessarily deduced all from the same principle; otherwise his will in regard to mankind could not have been systematic. It would be blasphemy to suppose that the Almighty had founded his religion upon several principles.
Now, in accordance with this principle, which God has given to men for the rule of their conduct, they ought to organize society in the manner the most advantageous to the greatest number; they ought to propose to themselves, as the end of all their labours and of all their actions, the most prompt and effective amelioration possible of the moral and physical condition of the greatest number.
I say that it is in this, and this only, that the divine element of the Christian religion consists.
Con. I admit that God has given to mankind only one principle; I admit that he has commanded them to organize society in such a manner as to secure to the poorest classes the most prompt and complete amelioration of their moral and physical condition; but I would have you observe, that God has given guides to direct the human race. Before his ascension to heaven, Jesus Christ charged his apostles, and their successors, with the direction of the conduct of men, in pointing out to them the application which they ought to make of the fundamental principle of divine morality, and assisting them to draw from it the most useful conclusions. Do you regard the church as a divine institution?
Inn. I believe that God himself founded the Christian church; and I feel the most profound respect for, and the greatest admiration of, the Fathers of that church. Those chiefs of the primitive church boldly preached the union of all people; they declared positively, that their first duty was to employ all their means to effect the speediest amelioration possible of the moral and physical condition of the poor. These chiefs of the primitive church composed the best book which was ever published; namely, the Primitive Catechism, in which they have divided the actions of men into two classes, the good and the bad; that is to say, those which are conformable to the fundamental principle of divine morality, and those which are contrary to that principle.
Con. State more precisely your idea, and tell me if you regard the Christian church as infallible.
Inn. When the church has, for its chiefs, men the most capable of directing the powers of society towards the divine end, I think that the church may, without any inconvenience, be regarded as infallible; and that society acts wisely in submitting to its management. I consider the Fathers of the church as having been infallible for the epoch in which they lived, whilst the modern clergy appear to me, of all constituted bodies, that which commits the greatest errors,—errors the most hurtful to society; that whose conduct is most directly in opposition to the fundamental principle of divine morality.
Con. The Christian religion then, in your opinion, is in a very bad condition?
Inn. Quite the contrary. There never was such a great number of good Christians as now; but they belong chiefly to the class of the laity. The Christian religion has lost, since the fifteenth century, its unity of action. Since this epoch, there exists no longer a Christian clergy. All the clergy who seek now to graft their opinions, their morals, their worship, and their dogmas, upon the principle of morality, which men received from God, are heretics; since their opinions, their morals, their dogmas, their worship, are all, more or less, in opposition to the divine moral. The clergy who are the most powerful, are those who are the most heretical.
Con. What will become of the Christian religion, if, as you suppose, the men charged with the office of teaching it have become heretics?
Inn. Christianity will become the universal and only religion. The nations of Asia and Africa will be converted; the European clergy will become good Christians, they will abandon the different heresies which they now profess. The true doctrine of Christianity, that is to say, the doctrine the most general which can be deduced from the fundamental principle of the divine morality, will be produced, and then the differences which exist in religious opinions will be at an end.
The first Christian doctrine has given to society but a partial and very incomplete organization. The rights of Cæsar have remained independent of the rights attributed to the church. "Render to Cæsar that which is Cæsar's,"—such is the famous maxim which has separated the two powers. The temporal power has continued to found its dominion upon the law of the strongest; whilst the church has professed that society can only acknowledge as legitimate institutions those which have for their object the amelioration of the condition of the poorest classes.
The new Christian organization will deduce both the temporal and the spiritual institutions from the principle that "all men ought to act towards each other as brothers." It will direct all institutions, of whatever sort they be, towards the increase of the well-being of the poorest class.
Con. Upon what facts do you found this opinion? Who authorizes you to believe that one and the same principle of morality will become the sole regulator of human associations?
Inn. Morality; the most general divine morality ought to become the only morality; it is the consequence of its nature and its origin.
The people of God, that people which received revelations before the coming of Christ, that people which is the most universally spread over the surface of the earth, has always perceived that the Christian doctrine founded by the Fathers of the church was incomplete. It has always proclaimed that a grand epoch will come, to which it has given the name of Messiah's kingdom; an epoch in which religious doctrine shall be presented in all the generality of which it is susceptible; that it will regulate alike the action of the temporal, and that of the spiritual power; and that then all the human race will have but one religion and one organization.
In short, I have a clear conception of the New Christian doctrine, and I shall now proceed to expose it. Then I shall pass in review all the temporal and the spiritual institutions which exist in England, in France, in North and South Germany, in Italy, Spain, and Russia, in North and South America. I shall compare the doctrines of these different institutions with that which directly deduces itself from the fundamental principle of divine morality; and I shall make it plain to all men of good faith and good intentions, that, if all these institutions were directed towards the end of the amelioration of the moral and physical well-being of the poorest class, they would give prosperity to all nations, and all classes of society, with the greatest possible rapidity.
I am an innovator, because I draw conclusions more direct than have ever been drawn before from the fundamental principle of divine morality. You, who, zealous for the public good, are animated by a spirit of conservation, as I am; you confine yourself to the task of preventing men from losing sight of the same principle which I seek to develop. Well, then, let us unite our efforts; I shall expose my ideas, do you oppose them when it appears to you that I wander from the direction given to men by the Almighty.
It is with full confidence that I undertake this great work. The best theologian is he who makes the most general application of the fundamental principle of divine morality. The best theologian is the true pope. He is the vicar of God upon earth. If the consequences which I am about to present are just, if the doctrine which I am now about to unfold is good, it is in the name of God that I shall have spoken.
I enter upon the subject. I will commence by examining the different religions which now exist. I shall compare their doctrines with that which deduces itself directly from the fundamental principal of divine morality.
RELIGIONS.
The New Christianity will be composed of parties nearly resembling those which at present compose the diverse heretical associations which exist in Europe and in America.
The New Christianity, as well as the heretical associations, will have its morals, its worship, and its dogma; it will have its clergy, and its clergy will have their chiefs. But, notwithstanding this similitude of organization, New Christianity will be purged of all existing heresies. The doctrine of morality will be considered by the New Christians as the most important. Worship and dogma will only be regarded by them as accessories, having for their principal object to—fix upon morality the attention of the faithful of all classes.
In the New Christianity, all morality will be deduced directly from this principle—"Men ought to treat each other as brothers." And this principle, which belongs to primitive Christianity, will experience a transfiguration; after which, it will be presented as constituting the great end of all religious labour.
This regenerated principle will be presented in the the following manner:—"Religion must direct society towards the great end of the most rapid possible amelioration of the condition of the poorest class."
Those who ought to lay the foundation of the New Christianity, and constitute themselves the chiefs of the new church, are those most qualified to contribute, by their labours, to increase the well-being of the poor. The duties of the clergy will be reduced to the teaching of the New Christian doctrine, in the perfecting of which the chiefs of the church will labour without ceasing.
Such, in few words, is the character which, in present circumstances, true Christianity ought to develop. We proceed now to compare this idea of a religious institution with the religions which exist in Europe and America: from this comparison we shall easily collect a proof that all the pretended Christian religions which are now professed are nothing but heresies; that is to say, that they do not tend directly to the most rapid possible amelioration of the well-being of the poor, which is the only object of true Christianity.
THE CATHOLIC RELIGION.
The Catholic, Apostolical, and Roman Association is the most numerous of all European and American institutions. It possesses still many great advantages over all other sects to which the inhabitants of these two continents are attached.
It immediately succeeded the Christian association, which gives it a certain varnish of orthodoxy.
Its clergy inherit a great part of the riches which the Christian clergy collected in the numerous victories which they obtained, during fifteen centuries, in fighting for the aristocracy of talent against the aristocracy of birth, and contending for the religious supremacy of peaceful over military men.
The chiefs of the Catholic church have preserved the sovereignty of the city, which, during twenty centuries, has constantly ruled the world; first, by the force of arms, then by the omnipotence of the divine morality. And it is at the Vatican that the Jesuits now devise the means of ruling the human race by an odious system of mysticism and fraud.
The Catholic, Apostolical, and Roman association is incontestably very powerful still, although it has considerably declined since the pontificate of Leo X., who was its founder; but the power which this association possesses is only a material power, and it is only by means of fraud that it can support itself. It lacks spiritual power, the power of morality, the Christian power, that which is given by frankness and loyalty. In short, the Catholic, Apostolical, and Roman religion, is nothing but a Christian heresy; it is only a portion of degenerated Christianity.
I say, that the Catholics are heretics, and I will prove it; I will prove that the regeneration of Christianity will annihilate the Inquisition; that it will deliver society from the Jesuits, as well as from their machiavelian doctrines.
True Christianity commands men to treat each other as brothers. Jesus Christ promised life eternal to those who contributed the most to the amelioration of the condition of the poorest class, as well in a moral as in a physical respect.
Thus the chiefs of the Christian church ought to be chosen from amongst men the most capable of directing those labours which have for their object the increase of the well-being of the greatest number. Thus the clergy ought to employ themselves chiefly in teaching to the faithful the conduct which they ought to pursue, to accelerate the well-being of the majority of the population.
Let us examine now, how the sacred college has been composed, since Leo X., the founder of the Catholic, Apostolical, and Roman church. Let us examine the qualifications that this college requires of those on whom it confers the priesthood; let us see what are the moral and physical ameliorations which the poorest class has experienced in the ecclesiastical states, which ought to serve as a model to all other governments. Let us examine, in fine, in what consists the instruction given by the Catholic clergy to the faithful of its communion.
I challenge the pope, who calls himself a Christian, and pretends to be infallible, and who takes the title of Vicar of Jesus Christ, to answer clearly, and without employing any mysticity of language, the four accusations of heresy which I now bring against the Catholic church.
I accuse the pope and his church of heresy, under this first head:
The instruction which the Catholic clergy give to the laity of their communion is defective; it does not direct their conduct in the ways of Christianity.
The Christian religion proposes, as a terrestrial object to its followers, the most rapid possible amelioration of the moral and physical condition of the poor. Jesus Christ promised life eternal to those who wrought with the greatest zeal to increase the well-being of the most numerous class.
The mission of the Catholic clergy, as well as that of all clergies, is to excite the enthusiasm of all the members of society towards works of general utility.
Thus the clergy ought to employ all their intellectual means and all their talents in their sermons; and, in their familiar conversation with the laity of their faith, to prove that the amelioration of the condition of the lowest class necessarily insures the increase of real and positive well-being to the superior class; for God regards all men, even the rich, as his children.
Thus the clergy ought, in the instruction which they give to the children, in the discourses which they deliver to the faithful, in the prayers which they address to heaven, as well as in every part of their worship and their doctrine, to fix the attention of their auditors upon this important fact, that the immense majority of the people might enjoy a moral and physical existence, much more satisfactory than that which they now enjoy: and that the rich, in increasing the happiness of the poor, would ameliorate their own condition.
Such being the conduct which true Christianity dictates to the clergy, it will now be easy to point out the defects of the instruction given by the Catholic clergy to those who follow their faith.
Let us review the whole of the works upon the Catholic doctrine, published with the approbation of the pope and his sacred college. Let us examine the whole of the prayers consecrated by the chiefs of the church, to be repeated by the faithful, lay as well as ecclesiastic; and nowhere in them shall we find the object of the Christian religion clearly pointed out. Ideas of morality are found in small numbers in these writings, and form no body of doctrine. They are thinly sown in his immense quantity of volumes, which are chiefly composed of tedious repetitions of certain mystical notions, which cannot, by any means, serve as guides; but which, on the contrary, are of such a nature as to put out of sight the principles of the sublime morality of Christ.
It would be unjust to carry the accusation of incoherence against this immense collection of Catholic prayers consecrated by the pope. We acknowledge that the choice of these prayers has been directed by a systematic plan. We acknowledge that the sacred college has directed all the faithful towards one and the same object; but it is evident that this is not the Christian object—it is a heretical object; it is that of persuading the laity that they are not in a fit condition to guide themselves by their own understanding, and that they ought to suffer themselves to be directed by the clergy, without the clergy being obliged to possess a capacity superior to that which they themselves possess."
Every department of worship, as well as every principle of the Catholic doctrine, has evidently for its object to bring the laity under the most absolute control of the clergy.
The first accusation of heresy which I bring against the pope and his church, on the score of the bad instruction which they give to the Catholics, is therefore well founded.
I accuse the pope and cardinals of being heretics, under this second head.
I accuse them of not possessing the acquirements requisite to qualify them for directing the faithful in the way of their salvation.
I accuse them of giving a bad education to the public teachers, and of not requiring of those whom they invest with the office of the priesthood, the knowledge which is necessary to render them valuable pastors, capable of directing aright the flock which is committed to their charge.
Theology is the only science which they teach in the seminaries; theology is the only science which the pope and the cardinals think themselves obliged to cultivate; theology is the only science which the chiefs of the clergy exact from those who, as rectors, bishops, archbishops, &c. are destined to direct the conduct of the faithful.
Now, I ask, what is theology? and I find that it is the science of argumentation upon questions relating to dogma and worship. This science is certainly the most important of all for the heretical clergy, inasmuch as it furnishes them the means of fixing the attention of the faithful upon trifles, and making the Christians lose sight of the great terrestrial object which they ought to pursue, in order to obtain eternal life—namely, the most rapid possible amelioration of the moral and physical condition of the poorest classes.
But theology could never possess great importance with a clergy truly Christian, which ought to consider worship and dogma as only religious accessories, and to present morality alone as the true religious doctrine, and only to use dogma and worship as means often useful to fix upon it the attention of all Christians.
The Roman clergy maintained their orthodoxy until the accession of Leo X. to the papal throne; because, until that epoch, they were superior to the laity in all the sciences whose progress contributed to the increase of the well-being of the poorest classes. Since that time they are become heretical, because they have cultivated only theology, and suffered themselves to be surpassed by the laity in the cultivation of the fine arts, the sciences, and industry.
The accusation of heresy which I ring against the pope and the cardinals, on account of the bad use which they make of their intelligence, and the bad education which they give to their teachers, is, therefore, well-founded.
I accuse the pope of being a heretic under this third head; I accuse him of pursuing a system of government more opposed to the moral and physical welfare of the indigent class of his temporal subjects, than that pursued by any lay prince towards his indigent subjects.
Let us survey the whole of Europe, and we shall acknowledge that the population of the ecclesiastical states is that in which the administration of the public interests is the most defective and the most anti-Christian.
Considerable tracts of land, which form part of the domain of St. Peter, and which formerly yielded abundant produce, are now converted into pestilential marshes, by the negligence of the papal government.
A great part of the territory, which has not been swamped by the waters, remains uncultivated; a thing which cannot be attributed to the ingratitude of the soil, but to the slender encouragement which the agriculturist receives in the ecclesiastical states. Husbandry, conferring no dignity, nor profit sufficiently stimulating, is little prosecuted; men who have the requisite skill and capital do not attach themselves to it. The pope reserves to himself the monopoly, not only of all the important products of cultivation, but also of all the necessaries of life, and grants the exercise of this monopoly to such of his cardinals as acquire his favor.[1]
In fine, there is, in the ecclesiastical states, no activity of manufacture, although the low rate of wage might render the establishment of manufactures very advantageous. This results entirely from the vices of the administration.
All the branches of industry are there paralyzed. The poor want employment, and die of hunger, if the ecclesiastical establishments—that is to say, the government—do not give them food. The poor being nourished by charity, are badly nourished; thus their existence is physically wretched.
It is still more wretched in a moral aspect, since they live in idleness, which is the mother of all the vices and all the depredations with which that unhappy country is infested.
The third accusation of heresy which I bring against the pope, by reason of the defective and anti-Christian manner in which he governs his temporal subjects, is, therefore, well founded.
I accuse the pope, and al the present cardinals—I accuse all the popes and all the cardinals who have existed since the fifteenth century, of being, and of having been, heretics, under this fourth head.
I accuse them, in the first place, of having consented to the formation of two institutions diametrically opposed to the spirit of Christianity—that of the Inquisition and that of the Jesuits. I accuse them, in the second place, of having since this epoch granted, almost without interruption, their protection, to these two institutions.
The spirit of Christianity is meekness, gentleness, charity, and, above all, loyalty; its arms are persuasion and demonstration.
The spirit of the Inquisition is despotism and avidity; its arms are violence and cruelty. The spirit of the society of the Jesuits is egotism; and it is by means of craft that they endeavour to accomplish their end, which is that of exercising a general control over ecclesiastics as well as the laity.
The design of the Inquisition is radically bad and anti-Christian, even though the inquisitors had doomed to perish in their autos da fé only persons guilty of opposing themselves to the moral and physical condition of the poorest class; even in this case, which would have brought all the sacred college itself to the stake, they would have acted as heretics; but Jesus did not admit of an exception when he prohibited his church from using violence; but this heresy of the Inquisition would have been venial in comparison with that which they have professed in their atrocious functions.
The condemnations pronounced by the Inquisition have never had for their motive any but pretended crimes against dogma and worship, which ought to have been considered as trivial faults, and not as crimes worthy of capital punishment.
These condemnations have always had for their object to render the Catholic clergy all-powerful in sacrificing the poor to the rich and powerful laity, on condition that these last should themselves consent to submit to be governed in every respect by the ecclesiastics.
As to the "Society of Jesus," the celebrated Pascal has so well analyzed its spirit, its conduct, and its intentions, that I ought merely to recommend the faithful to read the "Provincial Letters." I will only add that, the New Company of Jesus is infinitely more contemptible than the old, since it tends to re-establish the preponderance of dogma and worship over morality—a preponderance which was destroyed by the Revolution; whilst the old Jesuits attempted only to prolong the existence of abuses, which had been already introduced into the church.
The ancient Jesuits defended the order of things as they were; the new enter into a conspiracy against the new order of things, more moral than the ancient, which is about to establish itself.
Their present missionaries are the true antichrists, since they preach a morality absolutely opposed to that of the gospel. The apostles were the advocates of the poor; the missionaries are the advocates of the rich and the powerful against the poor, who have now no defenders, but a few amongst the lay moralists.
THE PROTESTANT RELIGION.
The public mind of Europe had acquired a great influence in the 15th century; great discoveries, rapid progresses were effected, in every direction, of positive utility; and these discoveries, as well as this progress, were almost entirely due to the exertions of the laity.
The discovery of America was due to the persevering genius of Christopher Columbus. Portuguese laymen had opened a new route to India, in doubling the Cape of Good Hope. The art of printing had been discovered and perfected by the laity. Dante, Ariosto, Tasso, were laymen. Raphael, Michael Angelo, and Leonardo da Vinci, were also laymen; and the three great laws, by means of which Newton has since reduced to calculation all of the celestial phenomena, had been discovered by Kepler, who was a layman.
The Medici, who had given extension and activity to European commerce, and greatly improved agriculture and manufactures, were laymen; and they had acquired such a social importance, that their family was afterwards raised to the rank of sovereignty, and played (so to speak) a preponderating part among the temporal powers.
The laity had then acquired a positive superiority over the clergy; at the same time that the sciences, reputed profane, had passed the bounds within which the church had confined the deductions drawn from the principles of divine morality founded by Jesus. The pope and his cardinals possessed no longer sufficient capacity to direct the Christian clergy; and the Christian clergy were no longer in a condition to conduct the body of the faithful.
Besides, the court of Rome lost at this time a great part of the support which it had hitherto found in the class of plebeians against that of the patricians, and in the class of burgesses against the nobles and the feudal power.
The divine founder of Christianity had recommended to his followers, to work without ceasing to elevate the lower classes of society, and to diminish the importance of those who were invested with the right of commanding and making laws.
Until the 15th century, the church had followed pretty exactly this Christian direction; almost all the cardinals, and all the popes, had been taken from the class of plebeians, and often selected from families employed in the meanest pursuits.
By this policy, the clergy had striven with perseverance to diminish the importance and consideration of the aristocracy of birth, and to superinduce the aristocracy of talent.
At the end of the 15th century, the sacred college entirely changed its system; it renounced a Christian system, to adopt a worldly policy. The spiritual power ceased to strive with the temporal power; it no longer identified itself with the lowest classes of society; it no longer endeavoured to give them importance; it no more exerted itself to supplant the aristocracy of birth by the aristocracy of talent; it formed a plan of conduct, the object of which was to preserve the importance and the wealth acquired by the labours of the church militant, and to enjoy them in idleness, without giving themselves the trouble to fulfil any function truly useful to society.
To effect this object, the sacred college placed itself under the protection of the temporal power, with which it had striven till that time. It made with kings this impious compact: "We will employ all the influence which we possess over the faithful, to establish in your favour arbitrary power; we will declare you kings by the grace of God; we will teach the doctrine of passive obedience; we will establish the Inquisition, by means of which you will have at your disposal a tribunal, which will not be subject to any local formalities; we will institute a new religious order; to which we will give the name of the Society of Jesus; this society shall establish a dogma diametrically opposite to that of Christianity, and it will undertake to make the interests of the rich and the powerful prevail over the interests of the poor in the eyes of God.
"We demand of you, in exchange for the services which we will render you, in exchange for the dependence in which we consent to place ourselves in respect to your temporal power, (whose origin is impious, since its rights have been primitively founded upon the law of the strongest,) and as a reward of our treason towards the poor, whose interest and privileges our divine master charged us to defend and promote, we require of you to preserve to us the property, which has been the fruit of the apostolic labours of the church militant; we require of you to be maintained in the enjoyment of the honourable and lucrative privileges which have been bequeathed to us by our predecessors."
This sacrilegious compact, which was entered into by the sacred college at the end of the fifteenth century, was executed, as to its principle clauses, at the commencement of the sixteenth.
It was at this epoch that Leo X. mounted the papal throne, an event very remarkable in the history of religion; and which, even to this day, has not sufficiently engaged the attention of Christian philosophers.
The first heads of the church were nominated by all the faithful; and the only motive which determined their nomination was, that they were regarded as the most zealous in the causes of the poor, and the most capable of discovering the means of ameliorating the moral and physical condition of the most numerous class.
When the chiefs of the clergy had obtained the sovereignty of Rome, and made it the capital of the Christian world; when they had centralized the power of the priesthood in the hands of the pope, the motive which determined the election of the pontiffs was, principally, that the candidate to whom the sacred college accorded the preference, should be he who possessed in the highest degree the capacity necessary to crush the aristocracy of birth under the weight of the aristocracy of talent.
But the motives which determined the election of Leo X. were different, and even opposed to those which had influenced the preceding electors, whose intentions had been more or less Christian; the cardinals, on this occasion, acted conformably to the plan of conduct which they had adopted, and which I have exposed above; they proposed solely as their object to preserve to the clergy their riches, and to increase their worldly enjoyments.
Leo X. was of the mould of which kings are made, and consequently he was not a fit person for a pope. In fact, his whole conduct has proved that he valued more his rights of birth than those which he derived from the papacy. He organized the court-service upon the footing of a court having a lay chief. His sister had at Rome the house and train of a princess, not in virtue of her relationship with the pope, but in her quality of daughter of the most influential lay prince of Italy.
Leo X. protected poets, painters, architects, sculptors, and men of science; he protected all the learned Greeks, who took refuge at that epoch in Italy; but it was as a temporal prince that he protected them, and solely to procure for himself enjoyment, and give a worldly lustre to his reign. A true pope would have profited by the lofty flight which the minds of Europe took at this epoch in every important direction, to combine the efforts of men of science, artists, and chiefs of great establishments of industry, with the interests of the clergy and those of the poor, against the hereditary pretensions of the temporal power, whose origin is impious, as I have said above, since its pristine rights were founded upon the right of conquest, that is to say, the law of the strongest.
The first indulgences had been granted as rewards of labours useful to society, such as the construction of bridges, highways, &c. The indulgences which were afterwards accorded, were granted to the faithful at an epoch when the papal power, having acquired great riches and temporal authority, was already becoming demoralized. The popes had diverted from their original destination the sums proceeding from the sale of indulgences, and had employed them to gratify their own fancies, and to favour sacerdotal ambition; but they had always taken care to give to their actions the appearance of public welfare. Leo X. changed this conduct entirely; he threw off the mask, and declared publicly that the produce of plenary indulgences, which he charged the Dominicans to sell for the behoof of the holy see, should be employed to defray the expense of his sister's toilet.
Leo X. attempted to turn the papacy to account, as if it had been a power essentially temporal; he sought to tax the faithful, as he would have done had he exercised in respect to them the rights of a temporal prince.
In his diplomatic transactions with Charles V., Leo X. dealt more like a prince of the house of Medici, than like a pope. Hence it followed that the papacy alarmed the emperor no longer; and Charles, perceiving himself no more restrained by the ecclesiastical power, which alone could oppose a barrier to the ambition of lay princes, conceived the project of establishing for himself a universal monarchy,—a project which was revived by Louis XIV. and by Bonaparte. Whereas none of the European lay princes, from the time of Charlemagne to the 16th century, had dared to attempt it.
Such was the condition of the only religion which then existed in Europe, when Luther commenced his insurrection against the court of Rome.
The task of this reformer naturally divided itself into two parts: the one, critical in respect to the papal religion;—the other, having for its object the establishment of a religion distinct from that which directed the court of Rome.
The first part of the task of Luther could be, and has been, completely performed. By his "Critique of the Court of Rome," Luther has rendered a capital service to civilization: without him the papacy would have totally enslaved the human mind to superstitious ideas, in causing it completely to lose sight of the moral. It is to Luther that we owe the dissolution of a spiritual power, which was no longer in accordance with the state of society. But Luther could not attempt to combat the ultramontane doctrines, without attempting to re-organize the Christian religion itself. It is in this second part of reform, it is in the organic part of his task, that Luther has left much for his successors to do. The Protestant religion, such as Luther conceived it, is nothing but a Christian heresy. Certainly, Luther had reason to say that the court of Rome had quitted the direction given by Jesus to his apostles. Certainly, he had reason to proclaim that the worship and the dogmas established by the popes were not proper to fix the attention of the faithful upon the Christian morality, and that they were calculated to make morality be considered as an accessory of religion. But from these two incontestable truths Luther had no right to conclude that morality ought to be taught to the faithful of his time, in the same manner as it had been by the Fathers of the church to their contemporaries. He had no right to conclude that worship ought to be despoiled of all the charms with which the fine arts could enrich it.
The doctrinal department of the reformation of Luther has been a failure. This reformation is incomplete. It has need of undergoing a reformation itself.
I accuse the Protestants of being heretics under this first head. I accuse them of having adopted a morality very inferior to that which is suited to Christians in their present state of civilization.
The public opinion of Europeans being favourable to Protestantism, whilst it is opposed to Catholicism, I ought to establish the demonstration of the heresy of Protestantism with great strictness, which obliges me to treat this question in a very general manner.
Jesus had given to his apostles, and to their successors, a mission to organize the human race in the way most favourable to the amelioration of the condition of the poor. He had recommended, in the mean time, to his church to employ only gentle means, persuasion and demonstration, to effect this great object.
Much time and much labour were necessary before this great task could be accomplished. Thus one cannot at all be surprised to see that it is not yet accomplished.
What is the part of this task which has devolved upon Luther? How has Luther acquitted himself of it? These two points I am now about to explain.
To do this, I must examine, successively, four great facts:
First. What was the state of social organization when Jesus gave to his apostles the mission to re-organize the human race?
Second. What was the state of social organization when Luther accomplished his reform?
Third. What was the complete reform of which the Papal religion stood in need at the epoch of the reformation, in order to re-enter upon the line of direction given by Jesus to his apostles?
Fourth. In what consisted the reformation of Luther?
It will be from the analysis of these four great questions, that we shall naturally deduce the conclusion that the Protestants are heretics.
At the epoch when Jesus entrusted to his apostles the sublime mission of organizing the human race for the interest of the poor, civilization was yet in its infancy.
Society was divided into to great classes, masters and slaves; the class of masters was divided into two castes: that of patricians, who made the laws and occupied all the important offices; and that of plebeians, who were obliged to obey the law, although it was not made by them, and who filled, in general, only subaltern employments. The greatest philosophers could not conceive that civilization might have any other basis.
There existed as yet no system of morality, since nobody had yet found the means of collecting all the principles of this science into one principle.
There existed as yet no religious system, since all the public creeds admitted a multitude of gods, which inspired men with different sentiments, even opposed the one to the other.
The human heart was not as yet elevated to philanthropic sentiments. The patriotic sentiment was the most general which was felt by the most generous minds; and the patriotic sentiment was extremely circumscribed, considering the small extent of territory, and the little importance of the people, among the nations of antiquity.
One single nation, the Romans, reigned over all others, and governed them arbitrarily.
The dimensions of the planet were not yet known; so that there could not be conceived any general plan of amelioration for the territorial property of the human race.
In one word, Christianity, its morality, its worship, its dogma, its partizans, and its ministers, began completely out of the pale of the social organization of that day, as well as of the customs and manners of society.
II. At the epoch when Luther effected his reformation, civilization had made great progress; since the establishment of Christianity, society had entirely changed its appearance. The social organization was founded upon new bases.
Slavery was almost entirely abolished; the patricians possessed no longer the exclusive right of making laws; they no more exercised all the important employments; the temporal power, impious in its essence, no longer overruled the spiritual power; and the spiritual power was no longer directed by the patricians. The court of Rome had become the first court of Europe. Since the establishment of the papacy, all the popes, and almost all the cardinals, were taken from the class of plebeians. The aristocracy of talent had precedence of the aristocracy of riches, as well as of the aristocracy founded upon the rights of birth.
Society possessed a religious system and a system of morals combined together, since the love of God and of one's neighbour gave a unity of character to the most generous sentiments of the faithful.
It was Christianity which had become the basis of social organization; it had supplanted the law of the strongest: the right of conquest was no longer considered as the most legitimate of all rights.
America had been discovered, and the human race, knowing the extent of their territorial possessions, was enabled to draw a general plan of the labours calculated to obtain the greatest advantages from the surface of the globe.
Pacific capacities had developed themselves, acquiring in the same time a distinct direction. The fine arts had just revived; the sciences of observation, as well as industry, had received a new impulse.
The philanthropic sentiment, which is the true basis of Christianity, had replaced patriotism in every generous heart; if all men did not treat each other as brothers, at least, they all admitted that they ought to regard each other has children of the same father.
III. If the reform of Luther had been complete, Luther would have discovered, and would have proclaimed, the following doctrine: he would have said to the pope and to the cardinals,—
"Your predecessors have sufficiently perfected the theory of Christianity; they have sufficiently propagated this theory; Europeans are sufficiently imbued with it; it is now the general application of this doctrine which ought to occupy your attention; true Christianity ought to render men happy, not only in heaven, but on earth.
"It is not upon abstract ideas that you ought to fix the attention of the faithful; it is by judiciously employing sensual ideas, and combining them so as to procure for the human race the highest degree of happiness of which it is susceptible during its earthly existence, that you can succeed in rendering the Christian religion generally universal; in fine, the sole religion of the world.
"You must no longer confine yourselves merely to preaching to the faithful that the poor are the favourite children of God. You ought freely and energetically to employ all the means acquired by the church militant to ameliorate promptly the moral and physical condition of the most numerous class. The preliminary and preparatory labours of Christianity are ended. You have a task to perform, much more satisfactory than that which your predecessors have achieved. This task consists in the establishment of a general and definitive Christianity; it consists of the organization of the human race upon the fundamental principle of divine morality.
"To accomplish this task, you must make this principle the foundation and the purpose of all the social institutions.
"The apostles were obliged to acknowledge the power of Cæsar; they were obliged to say, 'Render unto Cæsar that which is Cæsar's;' because, not being able to dispose of a force sufficient to strive against it, they were obliged to avoid making it an enemy.
"But now the respective position of the spiritual and temporal powers being totally changed (thanks to the labours of the church militant), you ought to declare to the successors of Cæsar that Christianity no longer acknowledges their right of command over men—a right founded upon conquest; that is to say, upon the law of the strongest.
"You ought to declare to all kings that the only means of rendering royalty legitimate are, to consider it as an institution whose object is to prevent the wealthy and the powerful from oppressing the poor. You ought to declare that the only duty which they have to perform is, to ameliorate the moral and physical existence of the most numerous class; and that every expense incurred by them in the administration of the public treasury, if it be not strictly necessary, is a crime on their part, and constitutes them the enemies of God.
"You possess all the power necessary to compel the temporal power to admit this application of Christianity; for your supremacy is acknowledged by all powers, and you can dispose of the clergy spread over the surface of Europe. Now, the clergy will always exercise a preponderating influence over the temporal institutions of all nations, when they work in a decisive manner to ameliorate the condition of the poor, who are in all places the most numerous class.
"I pass now to the examination of another question; and I blame you, most holy father, under this second aspect.
"At all times, when two Christian nations are at war, they are both in fault, since the divine founder of Christianity has commanded all men to conduct themselves towards each other as brothers, and has prohibited them from employing other means to terminate their differences than those of persuasion and demonstration.
"You ought to employ all your papal power, all the influence of the national clergy, to prevent wars; but, far from conducting yourselves in this manner, you permit all the clergy of belligerent nations each to invoke the god of armies in their behalf, which god can only be in some Pagan deity. You permit them, at the termination of the combat, to sing Te Deum on both sides. Your conduct, in this respect, as well as that of the clergy, is altogether impious.
"It is union which constitutes strength; a society, whose members enter into opposition one against the other, tends to dissolution; hasten, then, to recall the clergy to unity of action.
"There is another unity much more important to establish. I wish to speak of a unity of purpose for the labours of Christians, for those of all the human race. It is a purpose very clear, very decisive, very material, which you ought to present to men, that you may make Christianity preponderate over Mahometanism, over the religion of Foé, over the religion of Brahma, in fine, over all religions, as well as over all temporal institutions.
"The general object which you ought to present to mankind in their labours, is the amelioration of the moral and physical condition of the most numerous class; and you ought to form a system of social organization, tending to give encouragement to this order of labours, and to insure their preponderance over all others, of whatsoever importance they appear to be.
"To ameliorate most speedily, the condition of the poorest class, the most favourable circumstances would be those, in which there is a great quantity of labour to execute, and where this labour requires the greatest development of human intelligence. You ought to create these circumstances; now that the dimensions of our planet are known, cause your men of science, your artists, and your men of industry, to draw out a general plan of works to render the territorial possession of the human race the most productive possible, and the most agreeable to inhabit in all respects.
"The immense number of works which you will immediately order to be executed, will contribute more efficaciously to the amelioration of the condition of the poor, than could the most abundant donations of the charitable; and by this means, the rich, far from being impoverished by pecuniary sacrifices, will be enriched as well as the poor.
"Hitherto, the clergy have given to the faithful, for the employment of their lives, only a metaphysical object—a celestial paradise;—hence it followed, that ecclesiastics have invested themselves with a power altogether arbitrary, and which they have abused in the most extravagant and most absurd manner. Thus, one set persuaded their clients that, in order to obtain paradise, they ought to lacerate their bodies; others, that it was by wearing a hair-cloth that they ought to martyrise themselves; others, that they ought to deprive themselves of nourishment; others, that it was fish they ought to eat, and that they ought to abstain from meat; others, that they ought to read every day a frightful quantity of prayers, almost all insignificant, and written in a language unknown to the great majority of the faithful; others, that they ought to pass a great part of the day on their knees in the church: things, none of which could by any means contribute to the amelioration of the condition of the poor.
"This conduct of the clergy was unavoidable during the infancy of Christianity; but now that our ideas upon these subjects are enlightened and defined, the prolongation of such mystifications would be dishonourable to the court of Rome. Certainly, all Christians aspire to life eternal; but the only means of obtaining it consists in working, during this life, to increase the well-being of the human race.
"Most holy father, the human race experiences at this moment a great intellectual crisis; three mighty intellectual powers present themselves—the fine arts re-appear, the sciences now begin to supplant every other branch of knowledge; and the great industrious combinations tend more directly to the amelioration of the condition of the poor, than any of the measures hitherto taken by the temporal or spiritual power.
"These three powers belong to the pacific order. It is consequently your interest, as well as the interest of the clergy, to combine with them. By means of this combination, you will, in a short time, and without experiencing great obstacles, organize the human race in a manner the most favourable to the amelioration of the moral and physical condition of the most numerous class. By this means, the power of Cæsar, which is impious in its origin and in its pretensions, will find itself completely annihilated.
"If, on the contrary, you class as impious, or at least less agreeable to God, the fine arts, the sciences, and the great industrious combinations; if you seek to prolong your dominion over the human race by means which have served your predecessors to acquire it in the middle ages; if you continue to present mystical ideas as the most important of all for the happiness of the human race; the artists, the men of science, and the chiefs of industry, will league with Cæsar against you; they will open the eyes of the vulgar upon the absurdity of your doctrines, upon the monstrous abuse of your power; and you will then have no other resource, to preserve a social existence, than to constitute yourselves instruments of the temporal power. Cæsar will use you as instruments to oppose the progress of civilization, by continuing to fix the attention of the people upon mystical and superstitious ideas, and by diverting them as much as possible from all instruction in the fine arts, in the sciences of observation, and in industrious combinations. To make the temporal power be respected, with which you have been at war until now, will then become your great object; to preach passive obedience to kings, to prove that they ought not to give an account of their actions but to God only, and that in any case their subjects cannot, without crime, refuse obedience; these are the labours, by means of which you will preserve your honours and your riches.
"It remains, most holy father, for me to speak of one very important object.
"The papal unity, which has hitherto been only a unity of authority, has been sufficient to unite together till now the different orders of clergy; because the clergy themselves, and much more so the laity, were still in ignorance. Now that this unity can no longer form a sufficient tie, it is necessary to establish clearly the unity of a material object in all the labours of the clergy. It is necessary that the papacy render public account of all its actions; it is necessary that it establish clearly in what respect these acts can contribute to the amelioration of the moral and physical condition of the greatest number.
"The motives which the popes conceal 'in petto,' within their own breasts, must no longer form part of their accounts."
Luther was a man of energy and talent in respect to criticism; but it is in this department alone that he has shown great ability. Thus he has demonstrated, in an energetic and satisfactory manner, that the court of Rome has abandoned the direction of Christianity; that, on the one hand, it attempted to constitute itself an arbitrary power; and, on the other, that it strove to conspire with the powerful against the poor, and that the faithful ought to force it to reform itself.
But that part of his work which respected the reorganization of Christianity, has been far inferior to what it ought to have been. Instead of taking necessary measures to increase the social importance of the Christian religion, he made this religion retrograde even to its point of departure; he has placed it once more out of the pale of the social organization; he has consequently acknowledged that the power of Cæsar is that from which all other power emanates; he has reserved to his clergy only the right of humble supplication to the temporal power; and by these arrangements he has doomed pacific minds to remain for ever in subjection to men of violent passions and military genius.
He has imprisoned in this manner the Christian morality within the narrow limits, which the state of civilization had imposed on the first Christians.
The accusation of heresy which I bring against the Protestants, on account of the morality which they have adopted—a morality which is in arrear of the present state of civilization, is therefore well founded.
I accuse the Protestants of heresy, under this second head; I accuse them of having adopted a bad form of worship.
The more society perfects itself morally and physically, the more do intellectual and manual labours become subdivided. Thus, in the habits of life, the attention of men becomes fixed upon objects, having an interest more and more special, in proportion as the fine arts, the sciences, and industry progress.
Whence it follows, that the more society progresses, the more necessity there is that its worship be perfected; for worship has for its object to call the attention of men, regularly assembled on the day of repose, to the interests which are common to all the members of society—to the general interests of the human race.
The reformer Luther, and, after his death, the ministers of the reformed churches, ought then to have studied the means of rendering worship as effective as possible, in fixing the attention of the faithful upon their common interests.
They ought to have studied the means and the circumstances most favourable for developing the fundamental principle of the Christian religion, "All men ought to act towards each other as brothers;" to familiarize their minds with this principle, and to accustom them to make an application of it to all social relationships, in order to prevent them from ever losing sight of it during the course of their lives, whatever might be the nature of their daily pursuits.
Now, to command the attention of men to any kind of ideas, to push them zealously forward in any given direction, two great means are necessary. It is necessary to generate fear, by a display of the terrible evils which must result from pursuing a conduct different from that which is prescribed to them; or to present the attraction of enjoyment, resulting necessarily from following the direction which is given them.
To produce, under these circumstances, the most powerful and useful activity, it is necessary to combine all the means, all the resources, which are furnished by the fine arts.
The preacher, called upon by the nature of things to make use of eloquence, which is the first of the fine arts, ought to make his audience tremble by the picture of the frightful position in which every man is placed, who has merited public reprobation. He ought to reveal the arm of divinity, raised in vengeance against him, whose entire sentiments are not directed by that of general philanthropy.
Or, on the contrary, he ought to infuse into the souls of his audience the most generous and powerful feelings, by convincing them of the superiority of those enjoyments which are followed by public esteem.
The poets ought to second the efforts of the preachers. They ought to provide, for public service, poetry adapted to recitation in churches, so as to render all the congregation preachers one to the other.
The musicians ought to enrich, with their melodies, the inspirations of the poet, and impress upon them a musical character, deeply penetrating the soul of the faithful.
Painters and sculptors ought to fix, in the temples, the attention of Christians upon actions pre-eminently Christian.
Architects ought to construct their temples in such a manner that preachers, poets, and musicians, painters, and sculptors, can generate at their pleasure sentiments of fear, joy, or hope.
Such evidently are the fundamental bases of worship, and the means which should be employed to render it useful to society.
What has Luther done in this respect? He has reduced the worship of the reformed church to simple preaching. He has, as much as he possibly could, rendered all the Christian sentiments prosaical. He has banished from his temples all the ornaments of painting and sculpture; he has suppressed music, and given the preference to religious edifices whose forms are the most trivial, and consequently the least proper to dispose the hearts of the faithful to become empassioned for the public good.
The Protestants will not fail to object to me, that, if the Catholics employ much music, if their temples are decorated with the productions of the greatest masters in painting as well as in sculpture, yet the discourses of the reformed clergy produce upon their audiences an effect much more beneficial to the public than all the sermons of the Catholic priests, whose principal object always consists in extracting as much money as possible to defray the expense of worship, and to support the clergy; and that, in consequence of these facts, it is impossible to deny that the Protestant worship is preferable to that of the Catholics.
To this I answer: my object is not to inquire which of the two religions, the Protestant or the Catholic, is the least heretical: I have undertaken to prove that they are both heretical, although in different degrees; that is to say, that neither one nor the other is Christianity. I have undertaken to demonstrate, that, since the fifteenth century, Christianity has been entirely abandoned. I have undertaken to re-establish Christianity by restoring its youth. I propose to subject this religion (eminently philanthropic) to a purification which shall divest it of all its superstitious and useless creeds and practices.
New Christianity is commissioned to give a triumph to the principles of general morality, in the strife which exists between these principles and the combinations, which have for their object to promote a private interest, at the expense of the public weal. This religion, restored to its youth, is commissioned to establish all mankind in a state of permanent peace, in leaguing them all against the nation which proposes to aggrandize or enrich itself at the expense of the well-being of the human race; and in combining them against every government so anti-Christian as to sacrifice the national interests to the private interests of rulers. It is commissioned to bind together the men of science, the artists, and the working men, and to make them the general directors of the human race, as well as of the particular nations that compose it. It is commissioned to place the fine arts, the demonstrative sciences, and industry at the head of sacred knowledge; whilst the Catholics have ranked them in the class of profane knowledge. It is commissioned, in fine, to pronounce anathema upon theology, and to class as impious every doctrine having for its object to teach men any other means of obtaining life eternal than that of working with all their might to ameliorate the condition of their species.
I have said plainly what worship ought to be, to fulfil in the best possible manner the condition of calling the attention of the faithful to Christian morality, on the day of rest.
I have proved clearly that the worship of the Protestants is devoid of the most influential secondary means of generating in the minds of the faithful a zeal for the public welfare. Thus, I have proved that this second accusation of heresy against the Protestants is well founded.
I bring against the Protestants a third accusation of heresy; I charge them with having adopted a bad dogma.
In the infancy of religion, at the epoch when the people were still plunged in ignorance, their curiosity excited them but very feebly to the study of natural phenomena. The ambition of man did not elevate him to the lofty desire of mastering the whole globe, and modifying it in the most advantageous manner for himself. Men had then few wants of which they had any distinct consciousness; but they were agitated by the most violent passions, founded upon wandering desires and inclinations, founded principally upon a presentiment of the powerful influence which they were destined to exercise over nature. Commerce, which has since civilized the world, was then in its infancy. Every small tribe of men constituted itself into a state of hostility to all the rest of mankind, and citizens were not united by any moral ties with those who were not members of their own city. Thus philanthropy could not exist at this period, except as a speculative sentiment.
At the same epoch, all nations were divided into two great classes,—those of masters and slaves. Religion could exercise a powerful influence on the masters only, because they alone were free to act according to their will. At this epoch, morality must have been the department of religion the least developed, since there was no reciprocity of common duty between the two great classes which divided society. Worship and dogma must then have presented themselves in a far more imposing manner than morality. Religious ceremonies, as well as discussions upon the utility of these ceremonies, and the creeds upon which they were founded, were the departments of religion which necessarily have occupied most frequently the ministers of the altar and the mass of the faithful.
In one word, the material part of religion employed a character so much the more considerable as this religion was nearer its source; and the spiritual or moral department has always acquired a preponderance in proportion as the intelligence of man was developed.
Worship ought now to be regarded only as the means of calling, on the days of repose, the attention of men to subjects and sentiments of general philanthropy; and doctrine ought only to be regarded as a collection of commentaries, having for their object general applications of these subjects and sentiments to the great political events which occur, or for the purpose of facilitating to the faithful the applications of morality in the daily relations which exist amongst them.
I proceed now to examine Luther's opinion of doctrine, what he has said of it, and what he has prescribed to the Protestants.
Luther considered Christianity as having been perfect in its origin, and as having always degenerated since the epoch of its foundation. This reformer has directed all his attention to the faults committed by the clergy during the middle ages, and has entirely overlooked the immense progress which the ministers of the altar had given to civilization, and the great social importance which they have procured for men occupied in pacific employments, in diminishing the power and the influence of the temporal authority— that impious authority, which naturally tends to bring mankind in subjection to physical force, and to govern nations to its own advantage. Luther prescribed to the Protestants the study of Christianity in the books which were written at the epoch of its foundation, and particularly in the Bible; he declared that he acknowledged no other doctrines than those which were revealed in the sacred Scriptures.
This declaration on his part was as absurd as would be that of the mathematicians, physicians, chemists, or any other species of scientific men, who should assert that the sciences which they cultivated ought to be studied only in the first works which treated of the subject.
That which I have now said is by no means in opposition to a belief in the divinity of the founder of Christianity. Jesus could employ only that sort of language which men could comprehend at the epoch when he addressed them. He placed in the hands of his apostles the germ of Christianity; he charged his church with the development of this precious germ; he charged it with the care of annihilating all the political rights derived from the law of the strongest, and all the institutions which formed obstacles to the amelioration of the moral and physical existence of the poorest class.
It is in studying effects, and analysing them with the greatest care, that we acquire sufficient data to form a firm and decided judgment upon causes. I shall follow this method. I shall examine singly the principal errors which followed from Luther's having fixed the attention of Protestants too exclusively upon the Bible. This investigation will naturally substantiate the truth of my third accusation of heresy against the Protestants.
Four great mistakes have resulted to the Protestants from their exclusive study of the Bible:
1. This study has made them lose sight of positive ideas and present interests. It has given them a taste for useless researches and metaphysical subtleties; in fact, in the north of Germany, which is the centre of Protestantism, there reigns in the opinions and in the writings of the most renowned philosophers and popular novelists, the wildest mysticism.
2. This study pollutes the imagination, by pictures of many base vices, which civilization has caused to disappear; such as all imaginable kinds of bestiality and incest.
3. This study fixes the attention upon political desires adverse to the public weal. It prompts the governed to establish in society an equality, which is absolutely impracticable. It prevents Protestants from seeking to establish a political system, in which general interests shall be directed by the most skilful in the sciences, in the fine arts, and in industrial combinations; which is the best social system that the human race can adopt, being the only one that would contribute directly and efficiently to the amelioration of the moral and physical condition of the poor.
4. This study induces those who apply themselves to it to consider it as the most important of all studies; hence has originated the formation of Bible Societies, which distribute every year among the public, millions of copies of the Bible. Instead of employing their force in promoting the production and propagation of a doctrine proportioned to the state of civilization, these pretended Christian societies give to the philanthropic sentiments a direction which is both false and opposed to the public weal. Thinking to further the progress of the human mind, these societies would check it, if it were possible.
From these four great facts I conclude that my third accusation of heresy against the Protestants, on account of their dogma, is well founded.
I have been obliged to criticise Protestantism with the greatest severity, to make Protestants consider how incomplete has been the reformation of Luther, and how inferior to the New Christianity. However, as I have already announced, at the beginning of my investigation into the labours of Luther, I feel no less deeply the immense services which he has rendered to society, by the critical part of his reformation, in spite of his numberless errors. Moreover, my critique bears upon Protestantism only in as far as it is considered by Protestants to be a final representation of Christianity; but I am far from censuring the undaunted genius of Luther. If we reflect upon the times in which he lived, the circumstances against which he was compelled to struggle, we feel that he has done all that it was possible for him to do, in order to bring about and spread the reformation. In presenting morality as more deserving of the attention of the faithful than worship and dogma—although Protestant morality has not been proportioned to the light of modern civilization—Luther has prepared the new reformation of the Christian religion. It is not, however, as an improvement of Protestantism that we ought to regard New Christianity. The new formula under which I present the primitive principle of Christianity, is completely distinct from ameliorations of every kind which the Christian religion has experienced until this day.
I stop here. I think, Mr. Conservative, that I have sufficiently developed my ideas upon the New Christian doctrines, to enable you at present to form a first judgment upon them. Say, if you think me well imbued with the spirit of Christianity, and if my efforts to regenerate this sublime religion are of a nature to change its original purity.
Con. I have followed attentively your discourse. Whilst you were speaking, my own ideas became more clear, my doubts disappeared, and I felt my love and admiration of the Christian religion increase. My attachment to the religious system which has civilised Europe has not prevented me from comprehending the possibility of perfecting it; and upon this point you have entirely converted me.
It is evident that the principle of morality—"Let all men conduct themselves towards each other as brothers," given by God to his church, embraces all the ideas which you comprehend in this precept:—The whole of society ought to labour for the amelioration of the moral and physical condition of the poorest class. Society ought to organize itself in the manner the most suitable for the attainment ofthis great end.
It is equally certain that, at the origin of Christianity, this principle ought to have been expressed under the first form; and that now the second form ought to be employed.
At the period of the foundation of Christianity, you have said that society was divided into two classes of a political nature, totally different—that of masters and that of slaves,—which constituted, in some respects, two distinct human species; nevertheless, intermixing with each other. It was totally impossible, at that time, to establish a complete reciprocity in the moral relations between the two species; therefore, the divine founder of the Christian religion confined himself to the enunciation of his principle of morality in such a manner as to render it obligatory upon every individual of the human species, without having the power to establish it, as a tie to unite together the masters and the slaves.
We live at an epoch when slavery is completely annihilated. All men are now of the same political species. The classes are only separated by shades of colour. You conclude, from this state of things, that the fundamental principle of Christianity ought to be presented under the formula most likely to render it binding upon the mass, in respect to one another; yet without ceasing to be binding upon individuals in their individual relations. I find your conclusion legitimate, and of the highest importance; and from this moment, New Christian, I unite my efforts with yours for the propagation of New Christianity.
But upon this point I have some observations to make to you, upon the general course of your labours. The new formula, under which you represent the principle of Christianity, embraces all your system upon social organization—a system which is now supported at once upon philosophical considerations of the order of the sciences, the fine arts, and industry, and upon the religious feeling, the most universally diffused through the Christian world; that is, the Christian feeling.
Well, this system, the object of all your thoughts, why not present it at first in a religious point of view—a point of view the most elevated, and the most popular? Why address yourself to the working classes, to the learned, and to artists, instead of addressing yourself directly to the people, by religion? And at this very moment, why lose precious time in criticizing the Catholics and Protestants, instead of establishing, immediately, your religious doctrine? Would you have them say of you, what you say of Luther—his criticism is good, but his doctrine is bad?
The intellectual powers of man are very weak; it is in making them converge towards one unique design, it is in directing them towards the same point, that we are enabled to produce a grand effect, and obtain an important result. Why begin by employing your powers of criticism, instead of commencing with doctrine? Why not attack frankly, and at once, the question of New Christianity?
You have discovered the means of putting an end to religious indifference in the most numerous class; for the poor cannot be indifferent about a religion, whose avowed end is that of ameliorating, as speedily as possible, their moral and physical condition.
Since you are about to reproduce the fundamental principle of Christianity, with a character altogether new, ought not your first care to be, to propagate the knowledge of this regenerated principle amongst the class most interested in its adoption? And this class being itself alone infinitely more numerous than all the rest united, the success of your enterprise is infallible.
It was necessary to commence by making numerous partizans, to assure you of support in your attack of the Catholics and Protestants.
In fine, since you have a clear consciousness of the power, the fecundity, the irresistibility of your system, you ought immediately to constitute it into a doctrine, without any previous precaution, and without any fear of seeing its propagation prevented by some political obstacle, or some important refutation.
You say, "Society ought to be organized upon the principle of Christian morality; all classes ought to concur, with all their power, to effect the moral and physical regeneration of the condition of individuals composing the most numerous class; all social institutions ought to concur in the most energetic and direct manner possible to effect this great religious end.
"In the present state of intelligence and civilization, no political right ought any longer to present itself, as derived from the law of the strongest, for the profit of individuals, or from the right of conquest in respect to the masses; royalty is no longer legitimate, unless kings employ their power to make the rich instrumental in promoting the amelioration of the moral and physical existence of the poor."
What obstacles can such a doctrine encounter? Are not those who are interested in advocating it infinitely more numerous than those who are interested in preventing its adoption? The partizans of this doctrine are supported by the principle of divine morality; whilst its adversaries have no other arms to oppose it than habits contracted at an epoch of ignorance and barbarity, supported by principles of jesuitical egotism.
Upon the whole, I think that you ought to propagate your doctrine immediately, and prepare missions to cause its adoption amongst all civilised nations.
Inn. The New Christians ought to develop the same character, and to follow the same track, as the Christians of the primitive church. They ought only to employ this power of intelligence in the propagation of their doctrine. It is only with persuasion and demonstration that they ought to work at the conversion of Catholics and of Protestants. It is by means of demonstration and persuasion that they shall succeed in inducing these misguided Christians to renounce the heresies with which the papal and Lutheran religion are infected, and frankly to adopt the New Christianity.
New Christianity, as well as primitive Christianity, will be supported, promoted, protected, by the power of morality, and by the omnipotence of public opinion; and if, unfortunately, its admission should occasion acts of violence or unjust condemnations, it will be the new Christians who shall experience these acts of violence, these unjust condemnations. But, in no case will they ever employ physical force against their adversaries; in no case will they ever act the part of judges or executioners.
After having found the means of regenerating Christianity, in making it undergo a metamorphosis to its original principle, my first care has been, and ought to be, to take every necessary precaution that the propagation of the new doctrine do not carry the poor class to acts of violence against the rich and against government.
I was obliged to address myself first to the rich and the powerful, to dispose them favourably towards the new doctrine, in convincing them that it was not contrary to their interests; since it is evidently impossible to ameliorate the moral and physical condition of the poor by other means than those which tend to give an increase of enjoyments to the rich.
I was obliged to persuade artists, learned men, and chiefs of industry, that their interests were essentially the same as those of the mass of the people; that they belonged to the class of labourers, at the same time that they were their natural chiefs; that the approbation of the mass of the people, for the services which they rendered them, was the only recompense worthy of their glorious exertions. I was obliged to insist much upon this point, since it is of the greatest importance; since it is the only means of giving to the nations, guides who truly merit their confidence guides who are capable of directing their opinions, and putting them into a state of judging fairly the political measures which are favourable or contrary to the interests of the greatest number. In fine, I was obliged to show the Catholics and the Protestants the precise epoch at which they had missed the straight road, in order to facilitate the means of re-entering it. I must insist upon this point, because the conversion of the Catholic and Protestant clergy would give powerful support to New Christianity.
After this explanation, I resume the course of my ideas. I will not stop to examine all the religious sects which have arisen out of Protestantism; the most important of all, the English church, is so bound up with the national institutions of England, that it cannot properly be examined, except in connexion with the whole of these institutions; and this examination will take place when I pass in review, as I have already announced, all the spiritual and temporal institutions of Europe and America. The Grecian schism is at present out of the European system; I shall have no occasion to speak of it; and moreover all the elements of the criticism of these different heresies are comprised within that of Protestantism.
But I have not merely in view to demonstrate the heresy of Catholics and Protestants; it does not suffice me entirely to regenerate Christianity, and make it to triumph over all the ancient religious philosophies; I have also to establish its scientific superiority over all the doctrines of philosophers, who have placed themselves without the pale of religion. I must reserve the development of this idea for a second conversation; but in the mean time, I will give you a view of the whole of my subject.
The human race has never ceased to progress, but it has not always proceeded in the same manner, and employed the same means, to increase the amount of its knowledge, and to perfect its civilization. On the contrary, observation proves that, since the fifteenth century until this day, it has proceeded in a manner opposite to that which it had followed from the establishment of Christianity up to the fifteenth century.
From the establishment of Christianity, until the fifteenth century, the human race was principally occupied with the co-ordination of its general sentiments with the establishment of a universal and unique principle, and with the founding of a general institution, having for its object to raise the aristocracy of talent above the aristocracy of birth; and thus to subject all private interests to the general interest. During all this period, direct observations upon private interests, upon particular facts, and secondary principles, were neglected; they were rejected by the mass of minds; and upon this subject a general opinion prevailed that secondary principles ought to be deduced from general facts, and one universal principle; an opinion certainly purely speculative, since human intelligence has not the means of establishing generalities precise enough to render it possible to draw from them, as direct consequences, all specialities.
It is to this important fact that the observations which I have presented in this dialogue, in the examination of Catholicism and Protestantism, attach themselves.
Since the dissolution of the spiritual European power, a consequence of the insurrection of Luther, that is, since the fifteenth century, the human mind has detached itself from general views, and given itself up to specialities. It has occupied itself with the analysis of particular facts, with the private interest of the different classes of society. It has laboured to lay down secondary principles, which should serve as bases for the different branches of knowledge; and during this second period, an opinion has prevailed that reasonings upon general facts, upon general principles, and general interests of the human race, were only vague and metaphysical reasonings, not capable of contributing to the progress of mind and the advancement of civilization.
Thus the human mind has followed, since the fifteenth century, a course opposed to that which it followed up to that epoch; and certainly the important and decided progress which has resulted therefrom, in every direction of knowledge, proves, incontestably, how much our ancestors of the middle age were deceived in estimating the study of particular facts of secondary principles, and the analysis of private interests, as of secondary utility.
But it is equally true that a very great evil has resulted to society from the state of abandonment, in which, since the fifteenth century, they have left the works that relate to the study of general facts, general principles, and general interests. This abandonment has given birth to a feeling of egotism, which has become prevalent amongst all classes, and all individuals. This feeling, prevalent amongst all classes and all individuals, has facilitated to Cæsar the means of recovering a great part of the political power which he had lost before the fifteenth century. It is to this egotism that we must attribute the political malady of our epoch; a malady which brings into suffering all the useful labourers of society—a malady which enables kings to absorb a great part of the income of the poor for their own expenses, those of their courtezans and their soldiers—a malady which occasions an enormous superiority on the part of royalty, and the aristocracy of birth, over the respect due to the men of science, artists, and the chiefs of industrious labour, for the services of a direct and positive utility which they render to the community.
It is, then, very desirable that those labours, which have for their object the perfecting of our knowledge relative to general facts, general principles, and general interests, be promptly restored to activity, and henceforth protected by society equally with those which have for their object the study of particular facts, secondary principles, and private interest.
Such is a summary of the ideas which shall be developed in our second conversation,[2] the object of which shall be, to present Christianity under a theoretical and scientific point of view, and to establish the authority of the Christian theory over all particular philosophies, as well religious as scientific.
Afterwards, in a third dialogue, I will treat directly of new or final Christianity. I will disclose its morality, its worship, and its doctrine. I will propose a profession of faith for the New Christians.
I will show them that this doctrine is the only social doctrine which can suit Europeans in the present state of their intelligence and civilization. I will prove that the adoption of this doctrine offers the best and most pacific means of remedying the enormous inconveniences which have resulted from the enslavement of the spiritual by the physical power at the fifteenth century, and of putting an end to this enslavement by organizing the spiritual power upon new bases, and giving it sufficient force to put a check upon the unlimited pretension of the temporal power.
I will then prove that the adoption of New Christianity will accelerate the progress of civilization infinitely more than could be done by any general measure, by giving a simultaneous impulse forwards to works that relate to the generalities of human knowledge, and to those which have for their object the perfection of specialities.
I terminate this first dialogue by declaring, frankly, what I think of the revelation of Christianity.
We are certainly very superior to our predecessors in the sciences of a positive and special utility. It is only since the fifteenth century, and principally since, the commencement of the last century, that we have made great progress in mathematics, natural philosophy, chemistry, and physiology. But there is a science much more important to society than physical and mathematical sciences: it is the science which constitutes society—that which serves it as a base: it is morality. Now, morality has followed a course totally opposed to that of the physical and mathematical sciences. It is now eighteen hundred years since its fundamental principle was produced; and, since that epoch, all the researches of men of the greatest genius have not been able to discover a principle superior, by its generality, or by its precision, to that given at this epoch by the founder of Christianity. I will say more: when society lost sight of this principle, when it ceased to take it for a general guide of conduct, it immediately fell under the yoke of Cæsar; that is to say, under the empire of the physical force, which this principle has subjected to the intellectual power.
I demand now, whether the intelligence which produced, eighteen hundred years ago, the regulating principle of the human race, and which, consequently, produced this principle fifteen centuries before we had made any important progress in the physical and mathematical sciences; I demand whether this intelligence has not evidently a character superhuman, and whether there can exist a greater proof of the revelation of Christianity?
Yes! I think that Christianity is a divine institution; and I am persuaded that God accords an especial protection to those who employ their efforts to subject all human institutions to the fundamental principle of this sublime doctrine. I am convinced that I myself accomplish a divine mission, in recalling people and kings to the true spirit of Christianity; and, full of confidence in the divine protection, granted in an especial manner to my labours, I am emboldened to offer my remarks upon their conduct to the allied kings of Europe, who give to their union the sacred name of Holy Alliance. I address my speech directly to them, and dare to say,
Princes!
What, in the eyes of God and of Christians, is the nature, what the character, of the power which you exercise?
What are the bases of the system of social organization which you labour to establish? What measures have you taken to ameliorate the moral and physical condition of the poor?
You call yourselves Christians, and yet you found your authority upon the physical power, and are nothing but successors of Cæsar. You forget that true Christians propose, as the final object of their labours, to annihilate completely the power of the sword—the power of Cæsar, which, by its nature, is essentially transitory.
And is it this power which you have undertaken to give as a basis of social organization? To it alone, according to you, belongs the introduction to all the general ameliorations demanded by the progress of intelligence. To support this monstrous system, you hold two millions of men under arms, you have caused all the tribunals to adopt your principle, and you have obtained from the Catholic, Protestant, and Greek clergy, the loud profession of the heretical doctrine, that the power of Cæsar is the ruling power of Christian society.
In calling back the people to the Christian religion by the symbol of your union, in giving them the enjoyment of a peace, which is for them the first of blessings, you have not, nevertheless, obtained any grateful acknowledgement on their part. Your own personal interest reigns too much in the combinations you present as being of general interest. The supreme European power, which resides in your hands, is far from being a Christian power, as it ought to become. Whenever you act, you display the character and the insignia of physical power—the anti-Christian power.
All the measures, of whatsoever importance, that you have taken since you have become united in the Holy Alliance: all these measures tend of themselves to deteriorate the condition of the poor, not only of the present generation, but even of the generations which succeed it. You have augmented the taxes, you are augmenting them every year, in order to cover the increase of expenses occasioned by your armed soldiery, and the luxury of your courtezans.
The class of your subjects to which you grant particular protection, is that of the nobles; a class which, like you, establishes its rights by the sword.
However, your blameable conduct appears excusable under several aspects. One thing has had the effect of leading you into error: it is the approbation which you have received for your united efforts to humble the power of the modern Cæsar. In opposing him you have acted very Christian-like but it is only because, in his hands, the authority of Cæsar, which Napoleon had obtained by conquest, had much more power than in yours, into which it came only by heritage. Your conduct has still another excuse; it is, that it was the clergy's part to stop you at the brink of the precipice; whilst they, on the contrary, have precipitated themselves into it along with you.
Princes! listen to the voice of God, which speaks through me! Become good Christians! Cease to consider armed soldiers, nobles, heretical clergy, and perverse judges, as your principal supporters: united in the name of Christianity, learn to accomplish all the duties which it imposes on the powerful. Remember that it commands them to employ all their force to increase, in the most rapid manner possible, the social happiness of the poor.
The End.
- ↑ Under this fundamental aspect of the social condition, the papal administration is even more depraved than that of The Grand Turk. I will cite a recent example: A baker of Rome was condemned in a heavy fine, for having sold bread at an illegal price. The motive for his condemnation was not that the seller had done wrong to the purchaser, in giving him a quantity inferior to that which he ought to have received, but quite the contrary. The fault consisted of doing injury to the vendors of bread, in treating the purchaser too advantageously. The explanation of this unjust judgment is very simple. Almost the whole of the bakehouses of Rome belong the the cardinals, who have consequently an interest in selling the bread as dear as possible, and who regard as a crime every thing that tends to diminish their revenues.
- ↑ The second and third Dialogue of New Christianity I have never seen; I suspect that the author died before he completed his work, as the copy which I translated was published by Olinde Rodrigue, his disciple, to whom he left his manuscripts, and the mantle of his spirit.—Trans.