Pope Pius VII, who had signed the Concor dat, came to Paris in person to consecrate the new emperor, but Napoleon did not find in him the docile tool he was counting upon. Not being able to bend him to every whim of his despotic will, he used force, had him carried off from Rome and kept him a prisoner at Fontainebleau, thus provoking the wrath of the Catholics and bringing upon himself the hatred of all religious Persons.
It was in hatred of Napoleon, likewise, that Louis XVIII planned to make a new concordat more favorable to the Church. This concordat was, indeed, drawn up in-1817, but it was not carried out, and it was the Concordat of 1801 which governed the relations of the Catholic Church and the state up to the beginning of the 20th century. The charter of 1814, while guar anteeing the freedom of conscience, declared Catholicism as the state religion. This declara tion was from the charter in 1830, and the gov ernment acted from 1815 to 1905 in the direction of a real liberty of the sects, at least of those recognized by the state: for no legal guarantee was granted to the founding of new sects. On the whole, although some of the liberal party from the time of Louis Philippe demanded a return to the regime of the separation, the regu lations of the Concordat acted without encum brance and seemed to suit the state of public opinion in France up to the end of the 19th. century.
After the promulgation of the dogma of Infallibility, the Catholic Church, now an en tirely absolute monarchy, appeared a menace to civil society; especially when the suppression of his temporal power had made the Pope invul nerable. On the other hand, since the loss of Alsace-Lorraine separated from France a large number of Lutherans, Catholicism had no longer any rivals but the Jews, who do no proselytiz ing, and the Calvinists, who do very little. In the years ,which followed the Franco-Prussian War, the Catholic clergy showed a desire to gov ern France and even to plunge her, all shattered as she was, into the perils of a war for the restoration of the Pope's temporal power. The same clergy favored the two attempts at politi cal reaction by Marshal MacMahon. Thus the priesthood lost its popularity. Soon the pri mary schools, now a lay institution, enfeebled religious faith in France, and free-thought made great strides. Every year in the Chamber of Deputies, lively opposition was made on the vote on the budget of Religions, and the sepa ration of Church and State was demanded in a considerable number of electoral programs; but there was, nevertheless, no strong popular movement in this direction. Even the Chamber elected in 1902 seemed determined to maintain the Concordat.
An unlooked-for incident changed the situa tion. In the spring of the year 1904 the Presi dent of the French Republic returned the visit which he had received from the King of Italy, and moreover returned it at Rome. The Pope,
who still claims the sovereignty of his ancient states, declared himself insulted by this pro ceeding and addressed to all the Catholic Pow ers a document in which he complained of the offense committed by the French against his rights and his dignity. This memorandum, when made known, deeply wounded the na tional sentiment of the French. The govern ment of the Republic recalled its Ambassador from Rome and returned to the Papal nuncio his passports. There was a complete rupture of diplomatic relations between France and the Pope, and on 10 Feb. 1905, the Chamber of Deputies, by a majority of 386 votes against 111, declared °that the attitude of the Vatican rendered necessary the separation of Church and The writer of the project of a law of sepa ration was M. Aristide Briand, Socialist Collec tivist, a man of character more moderate than his opinions. He strove, by skilful combina tions, to prepare a regime that would be ac ceptable to the Church, but there were no nego tiations, official or direct, with the Pope him self. The Briand plan received, in the course of debate, but few amendments.
The whole bill was passed in the Chamber of Deputies on 3 July 1905, by 341 votes against 233, and in the Senate, on 6 Dec. 1905, by 179 votes against 103. The law wds declared 9 Dec. 1905. It forms to-day the politico-religious sys tem of France.
The particulars of the law are these: the republic assures liberty of conscience and guarantees the free observance of religious worship; it does not recognize nor pay nor subsidize any sect. All public religious estab lishments are suppressed, revenues, factories, councils of elders, consistories and the like. The property of these establishments will be trans ferred to associations called "cultuelles" to pro vide for the expenses, the maintenance and the public observance of a sect and composed of a minimum of 7, 15 or 25 persons, according to the population of the community. The church buildings which belong to the nation (and this means the greater number) will be left free of charge at the disposition of the religious socie ties, who will be held responsible for repairs of all sorts. Life pensions are granted to ministers of religion of more than 60 years of age and actually in service; those less than 60 years old will receive an allowance for four years. As to the police regulations of the sects, the meetings are public, but take place under the surveillance of the authorities in the interest of public order. Penalties are enacted against such ministers of religion as shall make in the churches any ex treme political opposition to the Republic.