Hubbry Logo
Civil Constitution of the ClergyCivil Constitution of the ClergyMain
Open search
Civil Constitution of the Clergy
Community hub
Civil Constitution of the Clergy
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Civil Constitution of the Clergy
Civil Constitution of the Clergy
from Wikipedia

A commemorative plate from 1790 shows a curé swearing to the Constitution.

The Civil Constitution of the Clergy (French: Constitution civile du clergé) was a law passed on 12 July 1790 during the French Revolution, that sought the complete control over the Catholic Church in France by the French government.[1] As a result, a schism was created, resulting in an illegal and underground French Catholic Church loyal to the Papacy, and a "constitutional church" that was subservient to the State. The schism was not fully resolved until 1801. King Louis XVI ultimately granted Royal Assent to the measure after originally opposing it, but later expressed regret for having done so.

Earlier legislation had already arranged the confiscation of the Catholic Church's land holdings and banned monastic vows. This new law completed the destruction of the monastic orders, outlawing "all regular and secular chapters for either sex, abbacies and priorships, both regular and in commendam, for either sex". It also sought to settle the chaos caused by the earlier confiscation of Church lands and the abolition of tithes.[2] Additionally, the Civil Constitution of the Clergy regulated the current dioceses so that they could become more uniform and aligned with the administrative districts that had recently been created.[3][page needed] It emphasised that officials of the Church could not give their loyalty to anyone outside the First French Republic, specifically meaning the Papacy.[3][page needed] Lastly, the Civil Constitution of the Clergy made bishops and priests elected.[3][page needed] By having members of the clergy elected, those clergy within who accepted the State's terms lost their independence and were now subject to the State, since their parishioners would vote on the priest and bishops as opposed to these individuals being appointed by the Church hierarchy.[3][page needed]

The Civil Constitution of the Clergy was passed and some of the support for this came from figures that were within the Church, such as the priest and parliamentarian Pierre Claude François Daunou, and, above all, the revolutionary priest Henri Grégoire, who was the first French Catholic priest to take the Obligatory Oath. However, almost all bishops opposed the law and refused to take the loyalty oath it required. Over half of lower clergy also refused.

The law was extremely divisive and proved to be a turning point in the French Revolution. Historian Hilaire Belloc described it as a failure that "lit the civil war" that would occur in the following years.[4]

Document outline

[edit]

The Civil Constitution of the Clergy has four titles with different articles.

  • The document begins with an introduction on why the document was written.
  • Title I focuses on the dioceses and how they were to be administered.
  • Title II focuses on the administration of the dioceses and how elections were to take place.
  • Title III focuses on payment because the Clergy was a salaried employee of the State.[5][page needed]
  • Title IV focuses on the living requirements for bishops, parish priests, and the curates.

Status of the Church in France before the Civil Constitution

[edit]

Even before the Revolution and the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, the Catholic Church in France (the Gallican Church) had a status that tended to subordinate the Church to the State. Under the Declaration of the Clergy of France (1682) privileges of the French monarch included the right to assemble church councils in their dominions and to make laws and regulations touching ecclesiastical matters of the Church or to have recourse to the "appeal as from an abuse" ("appel comme d'abus") against acts of the ecclesiastical power.

In this caricature, after the decree of 16 February 1790, monks and nuns enjoy their new freedom.

Even prior to the Civil Constitution of the Clergy:[6]

  • On 11 August 1789 tithes were abolished.
  • On 2 November 1789, Catholic Church property that was held for purposes of church revenue was nationalized, and was used as the backing for the assignats.
  • On 13 February 1790, monastic vows were forbidden and all ecclesiastical orders and congregations were dissolved, excepting those devoted to teaching children and nursing the sick.
  • On 19 April 1790, administration of all remaining church property was transferred to the State.

Motivation of the Civil Constitution

[edit]

The following interlinked factors appear[weasel words] to have been the causes of agitation for the confiscation of church lands and for the adoption of the Civil Constitution of the Clergy:[7]

  1. The French government in 1790 was nearly bankrupt; this fiscal crisis had been the original reason for the king's calling the Estates General in 1789.
  2. The Church owned about six percent of the land in France.[8] In addition the Church collected tithes.
    • The Church used the six percent of the land they owned for a multitude of purposes which included churches, monasteries, convents, schools, hospitals, and other establishments which served the people of France.[9]
  3. Owing, in part, to abuses of this system (especially for patronage), there was enormous resentment of the Church, taking the various forms of atheism, anticlericalism, and anti-Catholicism.
  4. Many of the revolutionaries viewed the Catholic Church as a retrograde force.
  5. At the same time, there was enough support for a basically Catholic form of Christianity that some means had to be found to fund the Church in France.

Debate over the Civil Constitution

[edit]

On 6 February 1790, one week before banning monastic vows, the National Constituent Assembly asked its ecclesiastical committee to prepare the reorganization of the clergy. No doubt, those who hoped to reach a solution amenable to the papacy were discouraged by the consistorial address of March 22 in which Pius VI spoke out against measures already passed by the Assembly; also, the election of the Protestant Jean-Paul Rabaut Saint-Étienne to the presidency of the Assembly brought about "commotions" at Toulouse and Nîmes, suggesting that at least some Catholics would accept nothing less than a return to the ancien régime practice under which only Catholics could hold office.[10]

The Civil Constitution of the Clergy came before the Assembly on 29 May 1790. François de Bonal, Bishop of Clermont, and some members of the Right requested that the project should be submitted to a national council or to the Pope, but did not carry the day. Joining them in their opposition to the legislation was Abbé Sieyès, one of the chief political theorists of the French Revolution and author of the 1789 pamphlet "What Is the Third Estate?"[10]

Conversely, the Jansenist theologian Armand-Gaston Camus argued that the plan was in perfect harmony with the New Testament and the councils of the fourth century.[citation needed]

The Assembly passed the Civil Constitution on 12 July 1790, two days before the anniversary of the storming of the Bastille. On that anniversary, the Fête de la Fédération, Talleyrand and three hundred priests officiated at the "altar of the nation" erected on the Champ de Mars, wearing tricolor waistbands over their priestly vestments and calling down God's blessing upon the Revolution.

In 1793, the War in the Vendée was influenced by the Constitution passing due to the devout population toward the Church among other social factors.

[edit]

As noted above, even prior to the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, church property was nationalized and monastic vows were forbidden. Under the Civil Constitution of the Clergy:

  • There were 83 bishops, one per department, rather than the previous 135 bishops.[11]
  • Bishops (known as constitutional bishops) and priests were elected locally; electors had to sign a loyalty oath to the constitution. There was no requirement that the electors be Catholics, creating the ironic situation that Protestants and even Jews could help elect the Catholic priests and bishops. Their proportion in the French population was however very small.
  • Authority of the Pope over the appointment of clergy was reduced to the right to be informed of election results.

The tone of the Civil Constitution can be gleaned from Title II, Article XXI:

Before the ceremony of consecration begins, the bishop elect shall take a solemn oath, in the presence of the municipal officers, of the people, and of the clergy, to guard with care the faithful of his diocese who are confided to him, to be loyal to the nation, the law, and the king, and to support with all his power the constitution decreed by the National Assembly and accepted by the king.[2]

In short, new bishops were required to swear loyalty to the State in far stronger terms than to any religious doctrine. Even in this revolutionary legislation, there are strong remnants of Gallican royalism.

The law also included some reforms supported even by many within the Church. For example, Title IV, Article I states, "The law requiring the residence of ecclesiastics in the districts under their charge shall be strictly observed. All vested with an ecclesiastical office or function shall be subject to this, without distinction or exception."[2] In effect, this banned the practice by which younger sons of noble families would be appointed to a bishopric or other high church position and live off its revenues without ever moving to the region in question and taking up the duties of the office. The abuse of bishoprics by the nobility was further reduced in Title II, Article XI: "Bishoprics and cures shall be looked upon as vacant until those elected to fill them shall have taken the oath above mentioned."[2] This unified state control over both the nobility and the Church through the use of elected bishops and the oath of loyalty.

Delay in implementation

[edit]

For some time, Louis XVI delayed signing the Civil Constitution, saying that he needed "official word from Rome" before doing so. Pope Pius VI broke the logjam on 9 July 1790, writing a letter to Louis rejecting the arrangement. On 28 July, 6 September, and 16 December 1790, Louis XVI wrote letters to Pius VI, complaining that the National Assembly was forcing him to publicly accept the Civil Constitution, and suggesting that Pius VI compromise with them by accepting a few selected articles. On 10 July, Pius VI wrote to Louis XVI, indicating to the king that the Church could not accept any of the provisions of the Constitution; insofar as the church could not tolerate a national legislature, much less one of such secularist and revolutionary inclinations, dictating the internal organization of the church. On 17 August, Pius VI wrote to Louis XVI of his intent to consult with the cardinals about this, but on 10 October Cardinal Rochefoucauld, the Archbishop of Aix, and 30 of France's 131 bishops sent their negative evaluation of the main points of the Civil Constitution to the Pope. Only four sitting bishops actively supported the Constitution. On 30 October, the same 30 bishops restated their view to the public, signing a document known as the Exposition of Principles ("Exposition des principes sur la constitution civile du clergé"), written by Jean de Dieu-Raymond de Cucé de Boisgelin

On 27 November 1790, still lacking the king's signature on the law of the Civil Constitution, the National Assembly voted to require the clergy to sign an oath of loyalty to the Constitution. During the debate on that matter, on 25 November, Cardinal de Lomenie wrote a letter claiming that the clergy could be excused from taking the Oath if they lacked mental assent; that stance was to be rejected by the Pope on 23 February 1791. On 26 December 1790, Louis XVI finally granted his public assent to the Civil Constitution, allowing the process of administering the oaths to proceed in January and February 1791.

Pope Pius VI's 23 February rejection of Cardinal de Lomenie's position of withholding "mental assent" guaranteed that this would become a schism. The Pope's subsequent condemnation of the revolutionary regime and repudiation of all clergy who had complied with the oath completed the schism.

Oath controversy

[edit]
Members taking oath
Members of the Catholic Church taking the oath that was required by the Civil Constitution of the Clergy.

Within the Civil Constitution of the Clergy there was a clause that required the Clergy to take an oath stating the individual's allegiance to France.[12] The oath was basically an oath of fidelity and it required every priest in France to publicly declare whether or not they believed the French state or the Pope had supreme authority in ecclesiastical matters.[1][page needed] This oath was very controversial because many priests believed that they could not put their loyalty towards France before their loyalty towards God. Conversely, refusal to make the oath signaled a rejection of the Constitution and, implicitly, the legitimacy of the French government (at the time, still including the King).[1][page needed]

On 16 January 1791 approximately half of those the law required to take the oath did so, with the remainder awaiting the decision of Pope Pius VI on what exactly swearing it signified and the appropriate response.[12] Among the higher ranks of the church the response was much more negative; only 7 of the 135 sitting bishops took the oath.[12][13]

In March 1791 Pope Pius VI announced that the oath was against the beliefs of the Church.[12] In doing so, he divided the church into “juring” and “nonjuring” clergy, with jurors being those who took the oath and nonjurors those who refused. The Pope condemned those who took the oath and went as far as saying that they were absolutely separated from the church.[3][page needed] Additionally, the Pope expressed disapproval of the Constitution of the Clergy in general and chastised Louis XVI for assenting to it.[3][page needed] The law’s domestic opponents protested that the Revolution was destroying their "true" faith and this was also seen in the two groups of individuals that were formed because of the oath.[1][page needed] Those who believed that the Revolution was causing their "true" faith to be destroyed sided with the "non-jurors" and those who believed that the French government should have a say in religion sided with the "jurors".[1][page needed]

American researcher Timothy Tackett believes that the oath determined which individuals would let the revolution cause change and allow revolutionary reform; those who remained steadfast in their opposition would remain true to their beliefs for many years to come.[1][page needed] The oath controversy marked a turning point in the revolutionary process since it was the first piece of the Assembly’s agenda that provoked widespread opposition.[1][page needed]

Jurors and non-jurors

[edit]
The rate of swearing priests in 1791. The department division is the current one.

As noted above, the government required all clergy to swear an oath of loyalty to the Civil Constitution of the Clergy. Only seven bishops and about half of the clergy agreed while the rest refused; the latter became known as "non-jurors" or "refractory priests".[12][13] In areas where a majority had taken the oath, such as Paris, the refractory minority could be victimized by society at large: nuns from the Hôtel-Dieu de Paris, for example, were subjected to humiliating public spankings.[14]

While there was a higher rate of rejection in urban areas[citation needed], most of these refractory priests (like most of the population) lived in the countryside, and the Civil Constitution generated considerable resentment among religious peasants. Meanwhile, the Pope repudiated the "jurors" who had signed the oath, especially bishops who had ordained new, elected clergy, and above all Bishop Louis-Alexandre Expilly de la Poipe. In May 1791, France and the Vatican severed diplomatic relations. On June 9, the Assembly forbade the publication of papal decrees without its prior assent.

The Constituent Assembly vacillated on the appropriate measures against non-juring clergy. On 5 February 1791, non-juring priests were banned from preaching in public[3][page needed] in the hope that this would silence the opposition to the Constitution from religious quarters.[13] Marriages, baptisms, and other ceremonies presided over by a non-juring priest were forbidden.[13] However, non-juring clergy were permitted to celebrate the Mass and attract crowds because the Assembly feared that stripping them of all of their powers would create chaos and arouse sympathy for its clerical opponents.[13] The Assembly permitted non-juring priests to carry on with ceremonies of a private nature until a cooperative (juring) priest could be found for the relevant parish.[13] A large percentage of the refractory priests were not replaced until 10 August 1792, a year and a half after the first round of oath-taking; by the time they began to be replaced the Assembly had revised the legislation and it was not as significant that they were practicing Mass.[13][12]

At the beginning of the process, when the Assembly was stripping the clergy of their titles, they ignored the violent conduct of the most radical anticlerical elements.[13] However, the hostile reception that some juror priests received in their home parishes forced the Assembly to moderate its position.[15] On 7 May 1791, the Assembly relaxed the law, providing that the non-juring priests, referred to as prêtres habitués ("habitual priests") could continue to perform ceremonies as long as they did not agitate against the Constitution. The Assembly was forced to moderate because the "Constitutional Clergy" (those who had taken the oath) were rejected by many of their parishioners; lifting some of the restrictions on non-jurors was seen as necessary to arrest the growing schism in the French church.[13] The constitutional clergy often required the assistance of the National Guard to suppress incidents of disorder at their churches.[13]

Even within households, differences emerged between Papal loyalists and Constitutionalists. In many cases, women preferred to hear Mass from a non-juror while men adhered to the Constitutional Church.[13] On 29 November 1791, the Legislative Assembly, which had by then replaced the Constituent Assembly, decreed that refractory priests could only exacerbate factionalism and aggravate extremists. In November, new legislation deprived nonjuring priests of their ability to claim rights assigned to the clergy by the Civil Constitution; moreover, nonjuring priests were declared suspect and liable to arrest. Louis XVI vetoed this decree (as he also did with another text concerning the creation of an army of 20,000 men on the orders of the Assembly, precipitating the monarchy's fall), which was toughened and re-issued a year later.

The Holy September Martyrs, or Blessed Martyrs of Carmes (Bienheureux Martyrs des Carmes) were 191 Roman Catholics killed at the Carmes Prison in the September Massacres of 1792, consisting of three bishops, 127 secular priests, 56 monks and nuns, and five lay people, the vast majority non-jurors. They were beatified by Pope Pius XI in October 1926.

Persecution of Roman Catholics (that is, non-juring clergy and their followers) by the authorities intensified in the following year from schism within the church to full-throated de-Christianisation, paving the way for the introduction of two short-lived attempts to establish a new state religion, the Cult of Reason and the Cult of the Supreme Being in 1793–1794. During this time, numerous nonjuring priests were arrested and held on prison hulks where many died due to poor conditions aboard.

Victor Henri Juglar, Plundering of a church during the French Revolution of 1793, Vizille, Museum of the French Revolution

Although the Constitutional Church remained tolerated, it did not escape the most violent phase of the Revolution unscathed; the National Convention considered Catholicism in any form suspicious. Eight Constitutional bishops were executed on the guillotine, three had been important political figures in the first years of the Revolution: Fauchet, Lamourette, and Gobel. In 1793 Fauchet, disgusted by the Jacobin excesses, joined the moderate bloc in the legislature. He voted in the Convention with the Girondins, exerted himself against the King’s condemnation, prohibited clerical marriage in his jurisdiction and expressed deep sorrow for the errors and scandals both of his political and ecclesiastical career. After the insurrection of 31 May – 2 June 1793, Fauchet was arrested and held at the Conciergerie. Along with his Girondin allies, he was brought before the Revolutionary Tribunal on 30 October, and was guillotined on the following day, after having administered the absolution to his friend Sillery.[16]

Adrian Lamourette, Constitutional Bishop of Lyon, had likewise opposed the extremity of the Montagnards. He protested against the September Massacres, and supported the revolt of Lyon against the National Convention. After the Revolutionary government retook the city, Joseph Fouché arrested Lamourette, personally stripped him of his vestments and rode him through town on a donkey with a mitre on its head and a Bible and crucifix tied to its tail, so the mob could spit at and kick him. At the end of this procession the crucifix and Bible were publicly burned, and the donkey was allowed to drink out of the sacred chalice. Lamourette was then sent to Paris for trial before the Revolutionary Tribunal, which found him guilty and sentenced death. Thereafter, he humbly made the sign of the cross, renounced his oath, and declared that he had been the author of all the speeches upon ecclesiastical affairs which Mirabeau had delivered in his own name in the Constituent Assembly. He was guillotined on January 10, 1794.[17]

On 7 November 1793, Jean-Baptiste-Joseph Gobel, Constitutional Bishop of Paris, was forced to abjure in front of a large audience at the National Convention. Three days later, on 10 November, the Cathedral of Notre-Dame was seized and rededicated to the Cult of Reason. Despite his revolutionary principles, Gobel was executed together with Chaumette, Grammont, and many others as a "conspirator against the Republic", on 13 April 1794.

A similar fate befell Louis-Alexandre Expilly, Constitutional Bishop of Finistère, who had distinguished himself in the early stages of the Revolution. Having joined the Federalist uprising, he was condemned to death by the Revolutionary Tribunal of Brest, and executed on 21 June 1794 only one month before the fall of Robespierre. He was the last person executed that day as he had been giving absolution to his fellows waiting at the scaffold. His diocese remained vacant until 1798.[18]

Another prominent victim was the former Constitutional Bishop of Yonne, Étienne Charles de Loménie de Brienne. On 15 November 1793, he had resigned from the priesthood, but his past as a cardinal and bishop made the government suspicious of him. He was arrested at Sens on 18 February 1794, and that same night died in prison, whether from a stroke or by poison; some said by suicide.[19]

Repeal of the Civil Constitution

[edit]

After the Thermidorian Reaction, the Convention repealed the Civil Constitution of the Clergy; however, the schism between the civilly constituted French Church and the Papacy was only resolved when the Concordat of 1801 was agreed on. The Concordat was reached on July 15, 1801, and it was made widely known the following Easter.[20][21] The negotiators were Napoleon Bonaparte, then First Consul, and representatives of the Papacy and, such as it remained, the nonjuring clergy.[21] The Concordat was the organic act of the Catholic Church in France for a century; moreover, it legitimised and terminated the confiscations and church reforms that had been implemented over the course of the revolution.[21] The agreement also gave the French government the right to nominate bishops, reorganize parishes and bishoprics, and allowed for seminaries to be established or re-established.[21] In an effort to please Pope Pius VII, Napoleon agreed to subsidize the salaries of clerics in exchange for the legitimization of the state seizure of church property.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Sources

[edit]
  • Jervis, William Henley (1882). The Gallican Church and the Revolution (PDF). London: K. Paul, Trench, & Company.
  • Sciout, Ludovic (1872). Histoire de la constitution civile du clergé (1790-1801): L'église et l'Assemblée constituante. (in French and Latin). Vol. 1 (Paris: Firmin Didot 1872), pp. 182-189. (French text).
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
The Civil Constitution of the Clergy was a law passed on 12 July 1790 by the National Constituent Assembly during the French Revolution, which restructured the Catholic Church in France by dividing the country into 83 dioceses corresponding to the new administrative departments, requiring the election of bishops by departmental assemblies and priests by district assemblies, placing the clergy on state salaries, and imposing an oath of fidelity to the nation, the king, the law, and the constitution. This reform sought to subordinate ecclesiastical authority to civil governance, eliminating papal influence over appointments and integrating the Church into the revolutionary state's framework, while building on prior measures like the suppression of monastic orders. The constitution's provisions provoked immediate resistance from traditionalist clergy and laity, who viewed the elective system and oath as violations of and divine order, leading to a schism that split the French priesthood. initially protested privately to King but publicly condemned the measure in his March 1791 Quod Aliquantum—deeming the oath illicit and the reforms —and followed with the April Charitas, urging refusal and threatening for compliance. When the Assembly mandated the oath in November 1790, roughly half the clergy swore it, becoming "constitutional" priests supported by the state, while the "refractory" non-jurors—often numbering around 50,000—faced dismissal, property seizures, and eventual persecution, including mass executions during the . These ecclesiastical divisions fueled broader revolutionary unrest, alienating conservative regions like the where refractory priests rallied counter-revolutionary sentiment, contributing causally to the king's attempted flight in , foreign coalitions against , and the escalation toward dechristianization campaigns that desecrated churches and suppressed public worship. The policy's enforcement highlighted the Revolution's prioritization of national over transnational religious loyalty, ultimately necessitating Napoleon's 1801 to reconcile Church and state after years of conflict.

Historical Background

Pre-Revolutionary Status of the Church in France

The Catholic Church held a preeminent position in pre-revolutionary France as the established religion, with nearly the entire population of approximately 28 million adhering to Catholicism, while Protestants and Jews faced legal disabilities barring full civic participation. The clergy formed the First Estate, numbering around 130,000 members, including archbishops, bishops, parish priests, monks, and nuns, representing about 0.5% of the populace. This body wielded extensive influence through its hierarchical structure, where higher prelates often derived from noble families and controlled vast diocesan resources, while lower clergy managed local parishes but received modest stipends supplemented by tithes and fees. Economically, the Church owned roughly 10% of France's arable land, generating annual revenues estimated at 150 million livres primarily from tenant rents, feudal dues, and the dîme—a compulsory tithe equating to about 10% of parishioners' agricultural produce or income. These funds supported ecclesiastical operations, charitable works, and education, yet also perpetuated inequalities, as wealth concentrated among abbeys and bishoprics while many curés lived in relative poverty. The Church enjoyed fiscal privileges under the ancien régime, exempt from direct taxes like the taille and most indirect levies, which shifted the burden onto the Third Estate and fueled resentment amid national debt crises. Additionally, clerics were spared compulsory military service and fell under ecclesiastical courts for most offenses, reinforcing their autonomy. Politically, the Church underpinned the through , a doctrine asserting the French Church's independence from papal interference in temporal affairs, allowing the king to convene national councils, influence bishop appointments via régale rights, and enforce state priorities over Roman decrees. This arrangement, rooted in medieval precedents and formalized in the 1682 of the Gallican Liberties, positioned the as allies of royal authority—evident in their role legitimizing Louis XVI's divine right—while limiting ultramontane loyalties to the . The Church also maintained vital social functions, registering births, marriages, and deaths, operating schools and hospitals, and providing , though these services were unevenly distributed and often intertwined with seigneurial rights over peasants.

Financial Crises and Ideological Influences Prompting Reform

France's fiscal crisis in the late 1780s, marked by a public debt exceeding 4.5 billion livres and an annual deficit of 230 million livres, stemmed primarily from wartime expenditures, including over 1 billion livres for aiding the American Revolution. The state's inability to impose effective taxes on privileged estates, coupled with failed measures like a proposed 25% "patriotic contribution," intensified the urgency for revenue. The Catholic Church, owning between 10% and 20% of French land and deriving over 100 million livres annually from tithes while evading direct taxation, became a focal point for reformers. On November 2, 1789, the National Constituent Assembly, by a vote of 568 to 346, declared all ecclesiastical properties national assets to back the issuance of assignats—paper currency initially valued at 400 million livres auctioned from church lands starting December 19, 1789. This seizure, intended to stabilize finances amid bankruptcy threats that had prompted the Estates-General's convocation in May 1789, required restructuring clerical administration, as the state pledged to fund salaries henceforth, paving the way for the Civil Constitution's enactment on July 12, 1790. Ideologically, the reform drew on Gallican traditions, which since the 1682 Declaration of the Gallican Liberties had asserted the French Church's independence from papal interference in temporal affairs and the king's prerogative over appointments. Jansenist advocates within the clergy amplified these views, framing the Church as subject to national sovereignty and justifying state oversight of its material domain. Enlightenment critiques further propelled the push, with philosophes like Voltaire decrying clerical wealth and intolerance as barriers to reason and progress, while works such as the Encyclopédie by Diderot and d'Alembert exposed perceived ecclesiastical abuses. These influences converged with revolutionary principles of popular sovereignty, envisioning a rationalized, nationalized clergy aligned with civic duties rather than feudal privileges or ultramontane loyalty to Rome, though reformers like Fauchet sought to harmonize Catholic doctrine with emerging notions of liberty.

Enactment and Provisions

Motivations and Legislative Debates

The enactment of the Civil Constitution of the Clergy was driven primarily by France's severe financial exigencies in the wake of the 1789 , as the National Constituent Assembly sought to liquidate church assets to alleviate a crippling national debt accumulated from wars, including aid to the , and domestic fiscal shortfalls. On November 2, 1789, the Assembly declared all ecclesiastical property nationalized, encompassing roughly 10% of France's and generating revenues over 100 million livres annually, which were repurposed to back assignats and fund state operations. This radical step, building on the August 4, 1789, abolition of feudal privileges, required a corresponding restructuring to prevent disruption of religious functions, as the traditional tied to those lands could no longer sustain itself independently. Ideologically, proponents envisioned a reformed, nationalized church subordinate to civil governance, with dioceses realigned to match the 83 new administrative departments, bishoprics reduced from 135 to 83, and clergy positions filled via electoral processes open to lay citizens, thereby diminishing papal authority and promoting civic loyalty over ultramontane obedience. Drawing on Gallican precedents of royal regalian rights—state control over appointments and benefices—the measure addressed longstanding grievances from the 1789 cahiers de doléances, including clerical venality, absenteeism, and vast disparities in remuneration between bishops and curés, aiming to cultivate a salaried, resident priesthood focused on pastoral duties rather than feudal privileges. Salaries were standardized by the state, ranging from 1,200–6,000 livres for curés based on parish population and up to 50,000 livres for the Archbishop of Paris, with services to be rendered gratis to the faithful. Debates in the commenced in February 1790, shortly after the February 13 suppression of monastic vows, as an ecclesiastical committee under figures like Dom Gerle drafted initial proposals that emphasized democratic election of and mandatory residence to curb abuses. By late May, article-by-article deliberations intensified, with reformers such as Bishop Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord of — who had earlier proposed asset on October 10, 1789—arguing that state oversight would purify the church and align it with constitutional principles, while enabling pulpits to disseminate revolutionary policies. Opponents, including conservative deputies and representatives, contended that bypassing papal ratification violated and risked , invoking warnings of divine retribution and foreign interference; yet the Assembly, prioritizing sovereignty, rejected amendments for Roman consultation on June 24, 1790, by a vote reflecting its Gallican majority. The final text passed on July 12, 1790, by acclamation after months of contention that exposed fractures between patriotic reformers like , who lauded the for democratizing the episcopate, and traditionalists decrying it as an assault on . These proceedings underscored causal tensions: the Revolution's fiscal imperatives compelled intervention in a institution holding immense temporal power, but the unilateral assertion of civil supremacy over spiritual jurisdiction sowed seeds of resistance among devout Catholics loyal to .

Core Elements and Structural Changes to the Clergy

The Civil Constitution of the Clergy, promulgated on 12 1790 by the National Constituent Assembly, reorganized the French Catholic Church's hierarchy to conform to the revolutionary administrative framework, subordinating ecclesiastical structure to . It established one per department, reducing the total from roughly 135 to 83 to match the newly delineated departments, thereby eliminating smaller or overlapping ancient sees and suppressing archbishoprics entirely in favor of a flatter episcopal order. This alignment aimed to rationalize church governance under state oversight, with diocesan boundaries fixed by departmental limits as defined in prior decrees. Election of clergy replaced traditional papal nomination or episcopal appointment, vesting selection in lay assemblies of active citizens—those meeting property and residency criteria established for municipal elections. Bishops were chosen by the departmental primary assembly during a public Sunday mass in the departmental chef-lieu's main church, requiring candidates to be at least 30 years old, hold a doctorate in theology or at least three years of canonical service, and originate from the electing department. Parish priests, or curés, were similarly elected by district assemblies, needing to be over 25, born or resident in the district for at least 15 years (or ordained with five years' service), and selected from local clergy or qualified candidates. These processes excluded direct Vatican involvement, mandating instead that new bishops receive canonical institution from the nearest metropolitan bishop or, absent one, the senior diocesan bishop, without awaiting papal bulls or confirmations. The law further integrated into the civil payroll, assigning fixed state salaries payable quarterly in advance to ensure financial dependence on the nation rather than tithes or feudal dues, which had been abolished earlier. Bishops' annual pay ranged from 12,000 livres in smaller departments to 20,000 in , while curés received 6,000 livres in , 4,000–5,000 in other large towns (over 10,000 or 50,000 inhabitants), and 1,200–2,400 in rural areas based on population. Vicars and other assistants scaled downward, with provisions for endowments from confiscated church property to supplement incomes. were required to reside continuously in their posts, subject to civil penalties for absence, and their removability was confined to judgments by ordinary civil tribunals, barring courts or papal interference. Additional provisions curtailed ultramontane influences by invalidating appeals to for doctrinal or disciplinary matters, declaring the pope's limited to spiritual oversight without temporal in , and prohibiting plurality of benefices or non-residential holdings. Bishops gained oversight of instruction to align training with constitutional principles, while the overall structure emphasized national self-sufficiency, severing ties to international hierarchies. These changes collectively transformed the clergy from a semi-autonomous into elected civil functionaries, funded and regulated by the state, marking a decisive break from Gallican traditions that had preserved some papal prerogatives.

Ecclesiastical and Papal Opposition

Initial Delays and Gallican Compromises

Following the enactment of the Civil Constitution on July 12, 1790, King withheld his sanction for over a month, citing the need for papal consultation before endorsing measures that restructured the French under state authority. This delay reflected the tension between revolutionary demands for immediate implementation and the Gallican tradition, which historically permitted French monarchs significant influence over appointments while nominally deferring to in spiritual matters. ultimately granted sanction on August 24, 1790, amid mounting pressure from the , though private papal correspondence from July 9 had already urged him against confirmation, warning of the Constitution's threat to independence. Pope Pius VI's initial response was marked by caution, with private denunciations but no immediate public condemnation, as he sought to avert a schism by exploring diplomatic channels for revision. This hesitation stemmed from awareness of France's entrenched Gallicanism, codified in the Four Articles of 1682, which asserted the French Church's immunity from papal interference in temporal affairs and the superiority of general councils over pontifical decrees. Proponents within the Assembly and among reformist clergy invoked these principles to argue that papal approval was unnecessary, framing the Constitution as an extension of longstanding national prerogatives rather than outright subordination of the Church to civil power. Some Gallican bishops, accustomed to royal régale—the crown's right to appoint and tax clergy—initially viewed the reforms as compatible with this autonomy, proposing compromises that preserved nominal papal primacy while affirming state oversight of diocesan boundaries and elections. These Gallican-inspired efforts at accommodation faltered by late 1790, as the Assembly decreed on November 27 that clergy must swear loyalty to the Constitution, effectively forcing a choice between national obedience and canonical fidelity without awaiting further Roman input. Papal legates dispatched to Paris reported irreconcilable conflicts, particularly over the elimination of papal bulls for episcopal investiture and the reduction of dioceses to align with revolutionary departments, which Pius VI deemed violations of divine law beyond Gallican liberties. By December 26, 1790, when Louis XVI publicly assented amid fears of deposition, the window for compromise had closed, setting the stage for formal papal briefs in March and April 1791 declaring the Constitution null and schismatic. The delays, while prolonging uncertainty, underscored the causal rift: Gallicanism's emphasis on state-church harmony could not absorb the Revolution's radical secularization, which prioritized electoral democracy over monarchical mediation and traditional hierarchies.

Papal Condemnations and Canonical Invalidity

Pope Pius VI initially refrained from immediate public condemnation of the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, adopted on July 12, 1790, in hopes of negotiating with French authorities through diplomatic channels, including appeals to King Louis XVI. However, as the required civil oath for clergy loomed—mandating loyalty to the nation and constitution while subordinating ecclesiastical authority to the state—the pontiff issued the brief Quod aliquantum on March 10, 1791. This document explicitly denounced the constitution as a grave assault on the Catholic Church's divine constitution, arguing that it unlawfully stripped the pope of jurisdiction over bishops and reduced the episcopate to mere state functionaries elected without apostolic mandate. In Quod aliquantum, Pius VI emphasized that the violated fundamental ecclesiastical principles by permitting lay electoral assemblies to select bishops, bypassing the requisite papal examination, confirmation, and institution, which deemed essential for valid episcopal consecration. The brief warned French clergy against taking the , portraying it as an implicit rejection of papal authority and a potential , while invoking the Gallican Articles of 1682 only to affirm that even national church liberties could not override the Church's hierarchical unity under the Roman pontiff. This was followed by the more comprehensive encyclical Charitas on April 13, 1791, which formally condemned both the constitution and the associated as null and void in terms. Pius VI declared that any episcopal elections or ordinations conducted under the constitution lacked validity, as they omitted the requirement of papal bulls of and ignored the Church's order, rendering such acts schismatic and heretical by encroaching on the pope's supreme spiritual . The further excommunicated those who participated in or enforced these measures, underscoring that the constitution's provisions—such as limiting papal oversight to "spiritual" matters and mandating state approval for clerical appointments—directly contradicted divine and , irrespective of secular legislative claims. The canonical invalidity stemmed from longstanding Church doctrine, reiterated in Charitas, that bishops derive their authority not from popular election or civil fiat but from succession through apostolic delegation by the pope, as affirmed in councils like Trent. Consequently, "constitutional" bishops were deemed illicitly ordained, their sacraments questionable, and their flocks at risk of spiritual harm, prompting Pius VI to urge non-juring clergy to resist and faithful laity to withhold recognition. This position was reinforced in subsequent briefs, such as Ad apostolicae dignitatis on June 5, 1791, which imposed automatic excommunication on oath-takers persisting after admonition. These condemnations highlighted the constitution's incompatibility with Catholic ecclesiology, prioritizing eternal truths over temporal reforms and exposing the revolutionary assembly's overreach into reserved ecclesiastical prerogatives.

Implementation and Division

The Oath of Loyalty Requirement

The oath of loyalty requirement was established by the National Constituent Assembly through a decree issued on November 27, 1790, mandating that all members of the clergy, from bishops to parish priests, publicly swear fidelity to the nation, the law, the king, and the Civil Constitution of the Clergy. This measure aimed to integrate the clergy into the revolutionary state's framework by compelling ecclesiastical personnel to affirm allegiance to the constitutional reforms that had redefined diocesan boundaries, electoral processes for church offices, and state oversight of religious administration. The decree specified that the oath must be taken within eight days of notification by municipal authorities, in a public ceremony before the municipality, the clergy, and the assembled faithful, with the text recorded and transmitted to departmental directories. The precise wording of the oath, as prescribed for parish priests, stated: "Je jure de veiller avec soin sur les fidèles de la paroisse qui m'est confiée, d'être fidèle à la nation, à la loi et au roi, et de maintenir de tout mon pouvoir la constitution décrétée par l'Assemblée nationale et acceptée par le roi." For bishops and other higher dignitaries, the formula adapted the reference to "diocèse" instead of "paroisse," while emphasizing faithful administration of sacraments according to Gallican traditions as reinterpreted under the new constitution. This formulation implicitly required acceptance of the Civil Constitution's provisions, including the subordination of ecclesiastical authority to civil law and the elimination of papal influence over French church governance, though it avoided explicit mention of schism or papal condemnation at the time of enactment. Clergy who refused the faced immediate suspension from duties and , escalating to formal deprivation of if non-compliance persisted beyond the deadline, with replacement by elected jurors prioritized in subsequent elections. The requirement extended to all active ecclesiastics, including those in religious orders despite prior suppressions, though practical varied by region due to local resistance and administrative delays. Prior to November, some clergy had voluntarily affirmed similar loyalties following the July 12, 1790, promulgation of the Civil Constitution, but the decree transformed this into a binding obligation, marking a pivotal mechanism that precipitated widespread division within the French church.

Emergence of Jurors and Non-Jurors Schism

On November 27, 1790, the National Constituent Assembly mandated that all swear an of fidelity to the nation, the law, the king, and the Civil Constitution of the , with bishops required to comply by January 1, 1791, and curés by early February. This effectively bound ecclesiastics to the state's framework, subordinating traditional authority to civil oversight. Initial responses varied, with approximately 60% of parish priests taking the by early , particularly among lower who had earlier supported reforms like the abolition of tithes and feudal privileges. Only about seven of 135 bishops complied, reflecting stronger resistance among the higher hierarchy aligned with ultramontane loyalties. Those who swore, termed jurors or constitutional clergy, integrated into the restructured dioceses aligned with administrative departments, enabling elections for replacement bishops in sees where incumbents refused. The crystallized as non-jurors, labeled refractory priests, rejected the oath on grounds of its infringement on and ecclesiastical independence, viewing it as schismatic. Comprising roughly 40-44% of priests, non-jurors often faced dismissal, with estimates indicating 43-44% refusal rates persisting despite pressures. Regional disparities emerged, with higher juror adherence in urban centers like and the south, versus stronger non-juror majorities in rural western and eastern departments, as mapped in 1791 surveys. Papal briefs Quod aliquantum (March 10, 1791) and Charitas (April 13, 1791) formally condemned the Civil Constitution, urging retraction and declaring oath-takers illegitimate, which prompted some jurors to recant and solidified the divide. This opposition transformed a administrative reform into a profound ecclesial rupture, pitting a state-sanctioned church against an underground faithful remnant, with non-jurors continuing sacraments sub rosa or fleeing to émigré networks. The resulting dual clergy structures fostered laity schisms, as parishioners aligned with either faction, exacerbating counter-revolutionary sentiments among traditionalists.

Consequences and Controversies

Immediate Impacts on Clergy and Religious Practice

The requirement for clergy to swear an oath of loyalty to the Civil Constitution, beginning November 27, 1790, and with a deadline of January 1, 1791, immediately divided the French priesthood. Approximately half of the roughly 40,000 parish priests took the oath (known as jurors or constitutional clergy), while only four to seven of the approximately 160 bishops complied. This low episcopal adherence reflected widespread reservations among higher clergy regarding the constitution's subordination of ecclesiastical authority to civil election and state oversight, exacerbating tensions already heightened by the papal condemnation in Quod aliquantum on April 10, 1791. Non-juring priests (or réfractaires), comprising the other half of parish clergy and nearly all bishops, faced immediate material consequences, including deprivation of state salaries effective from non-compliance dates in early 1791, as the integrated clergy into the civil payroll system. Many non-jurors persisted in ministry through clandestine services or by relocating to sympathetic rural areas, but thousands emigrated abroad by mid-1791, seeking refuge in neighboring states like the or , where communities formed to sustain exiled worship. This exodus, numbering in the low thousands initially, depleted rural parishes of experienced pastors, particularly in western where non-juror rates exceeded 70 percent in some dioceses. Religious practice underwent swift disruption as parishioners grappled with the , often refusing sacraments from jurors whom they viewed as schismatic due to the 's perceived repudiation of . In compliant urban areas like , juror-led masses continued under state protection, but attendance dwindled among devout Catholics who prioritized fidelity to , leading to underutilized churches and improvised non-juror gatherings in private homes or barns. Vital rites such as baptisms, marriages, and became irregular; for instance, non-juror priests administered sacraments covertly to avoid penalties, while state authorities began fining or arresting resisters by spring 1791, fostering a climate of suspicion that curtailed public worship. Regional variations in oath compliance—higher in the north and east (over 60 percent in some departments) and lower in the west and south—resulted in uneven ecclesiastical functioning, with high non-juror zones experiencing acute shortages of officiants and heightened lay-led devotions. The schism's immediacy eroded communal religious cohesion, as families and villages polarized: jurors were sometimes denounced by neighbors, while non-jurors' persistence challenged revolutionary enforcement of the new diocesan boundaries and elected hierarchies. By late , this fracture had alienated significant segments of the from state-sanctioned practice, priming conditions for further as non-jurors were progressively marginalized through decrees like the November 29, 1791, law permitting their prosecution for continued ministry. Overall, the constitution's implementation transformed routine Catholic observance from a unified national tradition into a contested, bifurcated affair, with lasting effects on sacramental access and liturgical continuity evident within months of the oath's enforcement.

Contributions to Revolutionary Radicalism and Violence

The Civil Constitution of the Clergy, by subordinating the Church to the state and requiring an oath of loyalty, precipitated a profound schism that intensified revolutionary suspicions of internal enemies. Approximately 45-50% of the clergy initially refused the oath, becoming known as réfractaires or non-jurors, whose allegiance to Rome was viewed by radicals as tantamount to treason amid external wars and émigré threats. This perception radicalized the Revolution, as non-jurors were increasingly targeted to eliminate perceived fifth columns, escalating from civil penalties to violent persecution. Regional resistance, particularly in western France where most priests rejected the oath and enjoyed parishioner support, directly fueled counter-revolutionary violence, most notably the Vendée uprising starting in March 1793. Grievances included the expulsion of refractory priests and forced acceptance of juror clergy, intertwining religious loyalty with armed rebellion against conscription and republican policies. The resulting civil war, marked by atrocities on both sides, justified intensified radical measures, including the Committee of Public Safety's campaigns of mass execution and scorched-earth tactics to suppress royalist and clerical holdouts. Under the Reign of Terror from September 1793 to July 1794, anti-clerical violence peaked with decrees mandating death for non-juring priests caught in France after specified deadlines, such as the law of 18 Frimaire Year II (December 1793). Mobs and revolutionary tribunals executed hundreds during the September Massacres of 1792 alone, with about 200 priests among the victims, while thousands more faced deportation to penal colonies or perished in prisons. This campaign of dechristianization, destroying churches and suppressing sacraments, framed the schism as an existential threat, perpetuating a cycle where clerical defiance provoked purges that further alienated moderates and entrenched Jacobin extremism.

Repeal and Legacy

Negotiation and Enactment of the Concordat of 1801

Following the schism induced by the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, which had alienated much of the French populace and clergy from the revolutionary government, Napoleon Bonaparte, as First Consul, pursued reconciliation with the Catholic Church to foster national stability and consolidate his regime. Initial overtures occurred on June 25, 1800, when Bonaparte met Cardinal Antonio Martiniana in Paris, shortly after his victory at the Battle of Marengo, signaling France's willingness to negotiate religious peace. Formal talks commenced in late 1800, driven by Bonaparte's pragmatic recognition that ending dechristianization and the juror-nonjuror divide required papal involvement to legitimize clerical appointments and restore worship. Negotiations proceeded in three phases amid mutual distrust and Gallican assertions of state authority. The first, from November 5, 1800, to March 10, 1801, involved papal envoys Giovanni Battista Spina and Angelo Cesare Caselli in Paris, addressing preliminary terms on diocesan reorganization and clerical stipends. The second phase, March 10 to June 6, 1801, shifted to Rome under François Cacault, France's envoy, tackling contentious issues like bishop nominations—where France would propose candidates for papal canonical institution—and the Church's renunciation of confiscated properties. The decisive third phase, from June 6 to July 15, 1801, featured intense debates led by papal secretary of state Cardinal Ercole Consalvi against French negotiator Étienne Bernier, culminating in compromises that preserved papal spiritual oversight while conceding administrative dioceses to align with French departments, reducing their number from 83 to 51. The was signed on July 15, 1801, in , with , Napoleon's brother, affixing the French signature alongside ministers like Jean-Étienne-Marie Portalis and Emmanuel Crétet. ratified it on August 11, 1801, via a secret consistorial , with formal exchanges of ratifications occurring on September 10, 1801. Pius VII's approval reflected his view of the accord as a pathway to reclaiming influence in , though it implicitly acknowledged territorial losses. Enactment followed Napoleon's unilateral additions: the 77 Organic Articles, drafted without papal consultation, which imposed state oversight on seminaries, required government approval for papal bulls, and extended similar concordat-like terms to Protestants and Jews. These were promulgated together with the Concordat as French law on April 8, 1802, and publicly celebrated on April 18, 1802, at Notre-Dame Cathedral in Paris, where Pius VII participated in a Te Deum. The Organic Articles, reflecting Napoleon's intent to subordinate religious authority to civil power and prevent ultramontanism, effectively nullified the Civil Constitution's egalitarian clergy provisions by reestablishing a salaried, state-nominated hierarchy under nominal papal sanction, though they sowed seeds of future Franco-papal tension.

Enduring Effects on French Catholicism and State-Church Relations

The Civil Constitution of the Clergy, enacted on July 12, 1790, fractured French Catholicism by creating a between "jurors" who accepted state subordination and "non-jurors" who rejected it, with over 50% of clergy initially swearing the of loyalty but many later facing that exiled or executed thousands, weakening the Church's institutional cohesion for decades. This division persisted beyond the Revolution, as refractory 's resistance fueled counter-revolutionary sentiments and contributed to events like the Vendée Revolt, which claimed over 240,000 lives by 1796, embedding lasting distrust between Catholic traditionalists and republican authorities. The measure's subordination of the Church to civil authority influenced the , negotiated between Napoleon Bonaparte and , which resolved the by restoring diplomatic ties and allowing exiled to return while granting the state perpetual control over bishop nominations, salaries, and finances—without returning confiscated Church lands nationalized post-1790. This arrangement tilted church-state relations toward Gallican-style state dominance, requiring oaths to the government and limiting papal influence, a model that endured until the 1905 Law on the Separation of the Churches and the State formally severed financial ties and public recognition of religion. In the 19th century, the Civil Constitution's legacy manifested in ongoing tensions, prompting Pope Leo XIII's ralliement policy via his 1892 encyclical Au milieu des sollicitudes, which urged French Catholics to accept the Third Republic as a framework for defending faith against secularism, marking a pragmatic shift from outright opposition rooted in revolutionary-era grievances. Despite a mid-century religious revival with increased lay involvement and private worship, the Revolution's secularization of public life—exemplified by privatizing religious practice—laid groundwork for laïcité, France's strict state neutrality toward religion, which prioritized republican sovereignty over ecclesiastical autonomy. These dynamics reduced Catholicism's societal dominance, fostering a resilient but marginalized Church amid persistent state oversight.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.