# The Royal Family of France (Henry)/Covenant

V.
COVENANT.
France has doubtless played a great part in the history ot humanity. The French nation has had a great share in the work of civilization, in social progress. Amongst European peoples, the people of France have left a very deep, a very luminous track across the path of History.
In the design of Providence, France has been in her turn, and still is, a much favoured people out of those chosen by foreknowledge in word and event, chosen by the goodness of their mission, chosen by the greatness of their deeds; peoples to whose career surely no glory has been wanting, because of their constant belief both in God and justice, the refusal of which has been the greatest mistake in those of them who have been found wanting.
See the Jewish nation, for instance. Refusing to believe in prophecy, the Jews have become themselves a living prophecy. Handed down to the scorn of History, they have dragged on century after century a mutilated existence, their dispersed members ever sighing after a hopeless re-establishment. Pagan Rome is no more than the "lone mother of dead empires." Sixteen centuries ago its Eternal Empire crumbled to dust. A Cross above its ruined temples and Coliseums indicates the cause of its fall.
A large share of the inheritance both of the Jewish nation and Rome has been entrusted to France. To take heed for the morrow, we need only remember yesterday and reflect on to-day. Let us ask ourselves, therefore, why a most noble, mighty, illustrious nation in the world has fallen beneath a foreign foe as lately as in 1870, has become and still is a prey to demagogues; and how from standing erect, fear-inspiring, unparalleled amongst ​nations, she has seen herself in danger of annihilation between the cross-fire of German entrenchments and the barricades of her own rebel sons.
Let us with stout hearts study the Past. "He who would judge well concerning the future," Bossuet wrote for his Royal Pupil's instruction, " must diligently consult the past." Let us look and see whether the French have not wandered or been led astray; that, if so, they should once more prevent so painful a degradation. The future is still theirs, and Frenchmen can, if they will, save themselves as others do.
"Christ Jesus! whom Clotilde declares is the Son of the living God; Thou who, they say, givest help to those in peril and victory to those that trust in Thy Name, I invoke with fervour Thy glorious aid. If through Thee I vanquish my enemies, I will believe in Thee and I will be baptized; for, I have prayed to my gods, I have proved them, they have refused to help me." Clovis, to seal the Covenant of victory and immortality, erected a Cross. This has been for fourteen centuries the guiding star of the grandeur of France. This, reader, is the Covenant, a part of the heritage of the Jews and the Romans, bequeathed to the ancestors of the Comte de Chambord and the Royal Family of France. This is the starting-point of that French Monarchy which sprang from a rightly understood divine and national appointment^, Christ, victory, liberty; not from that liberty which, bred in the mire of errors and Revolutions, turns into licence and ruins, but from that liberty bred in the morality of the Gospel.
Faith, Law, Liberty: these are the constitutional elements of French Conservatism; together with the hereditary succession required by the Frank nation from the conditions of the Treaty accepted by their ancestors. It is the observance of this both by King and people that made France what she was.
This historical Covenant between faith and greatness may provoke a smile of scorn from those worshippers of success achieved, of the faits accomplis and the beati possidentes, who, intoxicated with the triumph of current semi-Napoleonic and semi-Republican gamblers, are proud of the series of victories won by men ruling without God, the soul, or Religion. They ask with gentle irony whether the Cross prevented the French defeat at Crécy, ​Poitiers, Agincourt? We reply, that the Cross does not guarantee success in the affairs of this world, any more than it preserves the fighting hero from the musket-shot. Could doubt disturb the mind of any who believe in a God, the Saviour of society as well as the Saviour of individuals, they have only to enumerate the disasters that have befallen France since September 21st, 1792; they are as many as befell France during fourteen centuries of Monarchical sway. Surely the Free Thinkers of 1882, just as the Dictators of Bordeaux, in lending their countenance to infamy and ruin, cannot lay the blame thereof on the Christ whom they ignore.
But, men who seek Him find Him in all the glorious eras ot national History, in the ages of the might of a country, whether military or intellectual. He is hidden from the nation during misfortunes, defeats, revolutions.
We state our own belief, the result of our studies, we do not teach. The Unbeliever and Atheist are free to criticize facts which they cannot deny. The eminent Philosopher d'Alembert says: " There is a bond whose power is greater than any other, and to which the whole of Europe to the present day is indebted for the fellowship existing among its States. This bond is Christianity. Despised at its birth, it offered a shelter to the very caluminators who had so cruelly and so vainly persecuted it. Some advanced thinkers, as they wished to be styled, declare that Christianity is a restraint; this is a confession of their inability to bear the virtuous yoke which it imposes. They declare it to be noxious; this is to ignore those very evident and indispensable advantages which it confers on society. They assert its duties interfere with those of a citizen; this is manifestly to calumniate it, since one of its first precepts is, that each must fulfil the duties of his state of life. They pretend it countenances despotism, the arbitrary authority of Princes; this is to misunderstand its spirit, since it declares in the most powerful language that at the judgment-seat of God Kings shall be judged more rigorously than other men, and that they will have to redeem at a great price the impunity they have enjoyed on earth. The faith exacted by Christianity—they say—contradicts and humbles reason; it is insulting both to experience and to reason to consider as ​humiliating a yoke which affords support to a reason ever wavering and restless when left to itself. What would become of the world and of its inhabitants if Religion, with its sweet consolations, its excellent promises, the inestimable compensations it offers to the wretched, did not soothe the inevitable woes which oppress each individual and especially the wealthy! It is in the inequality of States, the uncertain portioning of honour and reward, that Religion reveals the charm of its empire and the wisdom of its laws, that temper and compensate as much as possible for human sorrows. Religion alone can transform suffering; it alone can make us feel that wretchedness is a lesser evil than to taste of the sweetness of life to the detriment of our conscience and our duty. It alone can raise man out of himself and, so to speak, enable him to abstract himself from ill-treatment, persecution, iniquity, and take shelter under its auspices in a centre of happiness and peace, beyond the touch of all misfortune."
Is it now true that Religion shackles the human mind, the power of thinking? Such an accusation is a very serious one, and in order to weigh it let us search also into History. Descartes was the deepest thinker of modern times, and the liberator of human thought. He laid down the principle of "doubting," not in order to arrive at unbelief (for unbelief is the shoal that wrecks human reason), but in order to attain "certainty"; and in his great work the "Treatise on Method," he loosened the bonds which had oppressed the human intellect; and yet it is indisputable that he remained a sincere and fervent Catholic. Did Catholicism hinder Bossuet, the Eagle of Meaux and the Dauphin's tutor, from being one of the greatest thinkers, or Pascal one of the most intrepid and daring? Were not Newton and Kepler earnest Christians? Religion only withholds those from thinking who are not capable of thinking. Let it not then be asserted that Religion enthrals men's minds. The Right Hon. the good Earl of Shaftesbury, lately addressing the British Conference of the Young Men's Christian Association, said he wants an Empire the government of which should be founded upon Religion, the only law of truth, liberty, and justice,—which, knowing its own right, would respect the rights of others, and would continue to the end of time to be a model to the nations, an example of moral ​government, a refuge for the oppressed and distressed, and a shelter from the persecution of dominant empires and the imposture of selfish leaders of political parties. To Christ's Church justly belongs the honour of having sheltered the infancy and early maturity of the human intellect and human governments. So much for the moral side of the point at stake.
We spoke of a Covenant, of a contract made between the Crown and Monarchy of France and the nation. A fact not difficult to prove. The King is to guard the faith and liberty of his people; should his subjects infringe either, he is to recall them to their compact. Should the King in his turn infringe the higher law constituting his legitimacy, his subjects must confront him with the law, the holy ark of the alliance between Ruler and Ruled. From this mutual understanding did spring the great achievements of the Middle Ages.
Crécy, Poictiers, are battle-fields sanctified by the imperishable renown of patriotism fighting for the very existence of national liberties, of independence, nay of the very country itself, against unauthorized invaders distinguished—according to the just and popular Lord Brougham—only by empty ambition and unwarrantable aggression. Just wars and especially wars successful, usefully serve to raise the martial glory of a country to the highest pitch. But are not the most direful miseries inflicted on the conquered people thereby? Do not unjust wars perpetuate for generations a spirit of hostility prolific of bloodshed between nations, most injurious to the progress of liberty and civilization?
The moral mission of the Frank Monarchy was strengthened on the field of Tours. Had it not been for Charles Martel, France would never have existed, and Europe would have been overrun by the Turk. The Crusades became organized: and in them France acquired such fame, that in the East the Western nations were all designated as Franks. The Royal Princes of France headed every succeeding war, from Hugh, Count de Vermandois, to poor Charles VI., who, during a lucid interval, gave his enthusiastic approval to the last and most disastrous Crusade of Nicopolis, when the battle ended with the death of 20,000 Christians, and as many wounded and prisoners. It is unnecessary here to ​recall the excellent memory of Louis IX., called St. Louis, the worthy son of the noble Queen Blanche de Castille, the King, faithful to his loyal Councillor and friend de Joinville, the good king who died before Tunis! But we might with advantage quote the words of Philip Augustus at Bouvines—we shall find that they echo the words of Clovis: "All our hope, all our trust, are in God. Sinful though we be, we are united to God. We may then rely upon the mercy of the Lord, who, in spite of our sins, will give us the victory over His enemies and ours." At these words the French army asked the King's blessing, and he, raising his hand, prayed for it.—I have no doubt I shall be forgiven for the quotation of the words of Lord Raglan's French colleague at the battle of Alma, Marshal St.-Arnaud, of whom Sainte-Beuve says, that he was a man who wielded his pen as easily as he did his sword, and who, whilst merely tracing a passing thought, is often more successful in expression than are professional authors. "In these great undertakings (war), my dear brother, you see man stands for very little, his plans and projects for still less; God must give His approval and protection to them. I will do my best, and God will do His will; I neglect nothing that may make the chances in my favour, but I know well that I am steering across a sea strewn with shoals, and that each day I see fresh ones rising out of the briny deep. God's will be done." How much more lasting is the power of such words than the red gleam of the blood of revolutionary upstarts!
There is much, we think, that shows that the ancestors of modern Frenchmen were grand and admirable in deeds as well as in words. To comment upon their conduct would be, as in the ​case of the inspired writers, to weaken the eloquence of the text and the power of its imagery. We have in the History of France an incident that is even more imposing, more wonderful, and quite à propos in reference to current French and Italian Politics; we think it may be put before the consideration of men who profess to be drawing their rule of doctrine and practice, as from a well pure and undefiled, from the living power of truth and justice: "No glory can rival that of Pepin the Short and Charlemagne, establishing the Temporal Kingdom or Power of the Papacy, to secure the liberty of the Popes, of the Church, and of Christians." Constitutionally and wisely the destinies of the Papacy and of France have been from that time forward indissolubly joined. The Throne of France ever reflected the brilliancy of the Pope's triple crown; but on the other hand History forcibly shows that the shadows of the Vatican darkened the sunshine of the Tuileries.
We are writing History; we do not seek to pretend to the mantle of the prophet. But if any one can point to a single page in French History in which the prosperity of France coincides with the oppression of the Holy See, we will throw up our thesis: German unity and Italian unity achieved simultaneously, to the prejudice of European Powers and the Papacy; the captivity of Pope Pius IX. and the final spoliation of the Papal States, consummated on the very day when France lay stricken in her capital; the disastrous phases of the rule of the two Bonapartes and the demagogic Republicans, tallying day for day with the outrages inflicted on Rome; such a collection of facts is too striking, too full of instruction, too eloquent, to require further words of ours.
Henry IV. imagined that he could violate the Catholic Laws of his Kingdom, and separate himself from the Church of France: France would not accept him as a King. Henry asked to be instructed in the truths of the Cathchc religion, and on July 25th, 1593, kneeling in the Basillca of Saint Denis, his hand on the Holy Bible, he declared: "I swear as did my forefathers, in presence of the Most Holy One, to live and die for the Catholic, Apostolic and Roman religion;—to defend it and protect it everywhere, at the peril of my blood and of my life." We do not discuss Theology here: we merely prove the intimate and necessary ​union of France and the Papacy from facts and custom. One excuse only may be granted Henri IV. for his dull and bigoted policy in issuing the silly Edict of Nantes (1598). Henri IV. thought it right that legislators must respect the fears and resentments of the people, and his bigotry agreed too well with the religious hatred and political distrust which prevailed among the bulk of the French people. The King's dragonnades, fruitful only in atrocious violences, caused to France the irreparable loss of a hundred thousand families, who, after living peaceably and obedient to the Government and distinguishing themselves by the purity of their morals and their active industry, escaped from France, and transferred their industry to England, Germany, and Holland. This dark hour of French History in justice must most indisputably be laid at Henri IV.'s door.
Throughout the lapse of centuries extending from Clovis to Louis XVI. we find age by age proofs of this triple alliance I have referred to between the Church, the King and the Nation. This Covenant was at one time set aside by the Revolution. Hatred to God fostered hatred to King and nation: King and people perished on the scaffold, and with them perished the old French liberty. A corrupt society gave birth to Voltaire and the false Philosophers. This liberty, a daughter of heaven, the watchful guardian of the nation's Covenant, should not be forsaken and allowed to be swept away in the whirlwind of French Revolutions. Some day she will arise and, though not in our lifetime perhaps, save France, disgraced by the memorable Revolution, which began on July 14th, 1789, that day when the πρώτος ψεύδος of the nineteenth century was uttered.