162 CATHOLICISM AND BONAPARTISM: CATHOLICS AND THE COUP d'ETAT OF LOUIS NAPOLEON BONAPARTE AnIta M4y Deportment of History, CentroI State College, Edmond, Oklahoma This study examines the attitude of Catholics, represented by their newspapers lad bishops, towards the coup cfet2t of Louis Napoleon Bonaparte. An analysis is made of Catholic opinion before, during, and after the coup to determine its import­ ance to the success of authoritarianism. The evidence leads to the conclusion that Catholic: support only became important after the coup, and was obviously motivated by opportunism. This support was countered by the growth of an opposition move­ ment Jed by two CatholiC newspGlper5, which replaced the episcopate as the voice of Church independence. The Revolution of 1848 had initiated in Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, before the coup. France the second experiment with a re­ Catholics supported the new republic when publican form of government since the great it was established in 1848. They found that it Revolution of 1789. This new republic was respected the Church and .were willing to cut short by the assumption of dictatorial permit it a greater degrce of freedom than powers in the coup d'etat of December, had the previous monarchical regimes. Af­ 1851. The coup was accomplished by the ter the social uprisings of June, 1848, Catho­ President of the Republic, Louis Napoleon lics flocked to the party of order, favoring Bonaparte, nephew of the first Napoleon, any leader who could control the radical who had played a similar role during the elements in society. Louis Napoleon, elected first revolution. Some historians would argue president in December, 1848, was regarded that such an event was a product of the by Catholics and aH other conservatives as French character, a process typical of French a guarantor of peace and order. He rewarded history. Indeed, present day observers of their support by curtailing radical meetings, the French scene sec fresh evidence for this censoring the radical press, and allowing in the example of Charles de Gaulle. Catholics greater prerogatives in education. It is generally assumed that the Catholic But the trouble started when he tried to re­ Church in France was one of the strongest vise the Constitution to increase his power contributors to this rightist tendency. Cath~ and lengthen his term of office. lic clergy and faithful are believed to have What was the attitude of Catholics to­ been Napolcon's strongest supporters. This ward this revision of the Constitution? Did paper will focus on the Catholic attitude they emerge as ardent Bonapartists? Did towards Napolcon before, during, and after they support the revision? The most widely the coup d'etat, to determine the exact na­ circulated of the Catholic newspapers, ture of Catholic involvement. In order to L'Univers, did support it. But it clearly dis­ define this attitude it is necessary to examine tinguished itself from the ardent foHowers some of the major sources of Catholic opin­ of Napoleon. Louis VeuilJot, the vigorou~ ion at that time. These were the proclama­ and talented editor of L'Univers favored the tions of the bishops and the articles in the revision of the Constitution hoping that it three major Catholic newspapers, L'Univers, would gain time for a restoration of th~ L'Ami de La Religion, and I.e Correspond­ monarchy. Bonaparte was not favored b· ant. The bishops had been the leaders of L'Univers; however, L'Univers recognize, opinion in the Church for centuries. On his services and his overwhelming appeal fc . the other hand, the Catholic newspaper the French people (I). press had been prominent only since 1810. The other two major Catholic newspaper First, let us examine the Catholic attitude did not agree with this qualified support ( towards the Republic and its President, Bonaparte. L'Ami de La Religion, also mOl Proe. 0lJa. AUld. Sci. 50: 162·1M (1970) 163 archist in sympathy, saw more to be feared After aD, politics has never been anything but from a Napoleonic dictatotship than from an accessory for us, a consequence of our relig­ ious principles. If we can only be silent, we anything else (2). Lc Correspondant, the will resign ourselves. Silence is one of the most liberal of the Catholic newspapets, ad­ forms of dignity ("). mired Louis Napoleon as a savior from so­ Only L'Univers, of the three major Catho­ cialism. However, they were worried over the lic newspapets in Paris, decided to support imminence of a coup, which would inevit­ Napoleon if he remained a friend of the ably put an end to parliamentary govern· Church. Its support was very significant, ment. The bishops were silent during this because it had the largest following. Its whole revision quarrel. Thus, there were no editor, Veuillot, encouraged reconciliation real active Bonapartists in the Catholic of all friends of order, legitimists, and Cath­ press or episcopate on the eve of the coup olics, with the new government. Only one d'etat. Catholic newspaper, therefore, supported If no Catholic Bonapartists pushed Na­ Napoleon during the period of the coup, poleon into dictatorship, what was their at­ and even it placed some reservations on titude in the midst of the coup? The bishops its approval. immediately supported Napoleon. Some of During the year after the coup, the opposi· them issued statements recommending that tion of the Catholic press to Napoleon be­ their clergy and faithful vote "yes" in the came clearer. The opinion of the press crys· plebiscite called by Napoleon. Most of tallized after the publication, in late 1852, them willingly sang a Te Deum praising of a brochure by the prominent Catholic God for the 92 % majority which Napoleon parliamentarian, Charles de Montalembert. received in that plebiscite. One elderly Although he had supported the coup, Mon· royalist bishop wrote: "Providence gives us talembert, still liberal in bias, became dis­ at this moment only this means of salva­ illusioned with Napoleon's authoritarianism. tion" (3). In his brochure, he bemoaned the loss of parliamentary government and bitterly criti· The bishops had little alternative. They cized L'Univers for its slavish praise of ab­ were appointed by the state largely because solutism. Montalembert believed that par­ of their political prudence and moderation. liamentary government was essential to the Moreover, they depended on the state for freedom of the Church. He urged Catho­ all Church funds. Under these circum­ lics to remain aloof from this new authori­ stances, their acceptance of Bonaparte was tarian government, and discretely assert dis· the easiest path to follow. By quickly rally­ content and opposition. By doing this, Cath­ ing to Bonaparte, they believed that they olics would insure that the Church would be would win even greater benefits for the respected in the inevitable reestablishment Church. There were only a few who could of a liberal regime. not forget their royalist or liberal principles, Montalembert's brochure divided Catho­ but even they limited their protest. lics into Bonapartists and liberals. The Cath­ In comparison, the response of the Catho­ olic newspapets, L'Ami de La Religion and ~ic press to the coup showed much more Le Correspondant, already implying disap­ IIIdependence. Their remarks were especial­ proval of Napoleon, quickly rallied to Mon­ l~ brave because the Minister of the Interior talembert's support. The editor of Le Cor­ h-ld ordered that any newspaper which pub­ respondant openly committed himself to It ,hed unfavorable comments on the coup Montalembert's political position, stating: He again makes religion compabDIe with the "IS to be suspended or suppressed. Two of forms of modern society; he judga rqneseu. tl·e three most prominent Catholic news· tative institutions hom the viewpoint of the p .peTS, L'Ami de La Religion and Le Cor­ interests of the Christian cooscienoe, and be Tt ,pondant, broadly hinted at their disap­ demonstrates with a force of JaSOD which p. ~ by promising to discontinue political seems irrcsisbD1e to us. that today Catholics should be the last to cIispaDge b~, to c· mmentaries in their journals. The editor which they owe their progress and their trio Q VAmi stated: umpba (5). 164 L'Ami de La Religion was much more cau­ There were many bishops, 6, at least, who tious in expressing approval of the brochure, were considered very loyal to Napoleon. The making certain reservations. From this time, Minister of Worship kept careful surveil­ these newspapers were firmly committed to lance over an the bishops' pastoral letters, a policy of political opposition. and filed reports assessing them as "good," L'Univers, however, opposed Montalem­ "very good," "very hostile," and so forth bert's pamphlet. Veuillot commented that (8). The Minister also kept account of their Montalembert was not really liberal, but attendance at official ceremonies. Those only yearned for days of power in the legis­ who showed loyalty and devotion to Bon;" lature. The editor reminded Montalembert parte were amply rewarded. For example, he that in those days "we said that the Church appointed some bishops to the Senate, had the right to the same liberties as every­ named some to the Legion of Honor, and one, not that everyone had the right to the gave gifts of art work or money to the same liberties as the Church." Furthermore, churches and diocesan properties of others. Veuillot argued that it could only hurt the Generany, the entire Church benefited Church in France if Catholies opposed the from the support which the bishops gave to prevailing government. It seemed foolhardy Napoleon. He allowed religious schools and to him to "flatter the future enemy at the religious orders to proliferate throughout expense of the present friend" (6). the country.