The Express.
London, England, 1862-03-01 00:00:00

M. RENAN AND THE FRENCH GOVERN.

KENT.

An article in the Prase of yesterday sharply
criticises the conduct of the French government in
silencing M. Roan. After quoting the decree in
the Moniteur, the Prue says :
In whatever way it is considered, this decree is inexplica-
ble. The government knew M. Renan when it nominated
him to the chair of Hebrew, ►nd knew him not only as an
erudite man, but as a philosopher and free thinker. It well
knew that, uniting with much knowledge a great independ-
ence of mind, he bad long shaken off the yoke of alleged
infallible authority, and substituted, to ass his own words,
for " the law which crushes and dwarfs," the faith which
elevates, ameliorates, and strengthens. Of course it
has not done him the outrage of supposing
that in changing his position he would change his
principles ; it cannot have believed him capable of
lying to his conscience by disguising the truth, and teaching
from his chair doctrines contrary to those which he upholds
in his books. if these doctrines are incompatible with
public teaching, they were so before the nomination of M.
Henan, and in that case he ought not to have been nomi-
nated. We must conclude either that the suppression of
the Hebrew course is a concession to the clerical party, or
that it is an act of inconsistency. There is no middle way
of escape out of this dilemma.
Be it inconsistency, or be it concession, the measure is in
any case one to be deeply regretted.
Rouland alleges that the doctrines set forth by M.
Renan " offend Christian faith." There is then an
official Christianity? This is novel and may have extensive
consequences. Moutesquieu, most probably, was not • Chris-
tian ; Voltaire was not one; Diderot and Lalonde magi
notoriously atheist, ; Locke and Newton were not Trinlft
rises, and consequently not Christians, according to the ,
vulg►r acceptation of that word. If such men were living
would M. Rouland not bestow upom them professors chairs,
or if he did, would he suspend their lectures!
ii), then, there is henceforth an official orthodoxy? We
have, as under Louis XIV., a grand master of the theology
of France. The government has had a new revelation, and
discovered the truth amidst things hitherto reputed to be
incomprehensible. It may in future prescribe our choice
between Plato and Aristotle, Rome and Geneva, Descartes
and Newton, Locks and Malebranche, and fix the furthest
limits to which men of learning, philosophers, and theo-
logians may advance officially.
We have spoken of inconsistency : that into which M.
Rouland has fallen is even greater than it appears at first
sight. The State pays three religions—the catholic, the
protestant, and the Jewish. Of these three religions two
at lamas are false, and that being so, the State recognises
and pays officially two manifest some. Nor is this all.
11. Renal] does not believe in the Divinity of Jesus Christ :
but he speaks of Him in magnificent terms, like a scholar
who is accustomed to harmonise solid erudition with sound
philosophy ; like a true philosopher, who is not afraid either
of shocking the timid by his frankness, or persons of ex-
treme views by his moderation • Is it thus that
the Jews speak who are in raosipt of government pay?
No ; they maintain and teach that Jens Christ was but a
fate prophet, a contemner of the laws, a psrturbstor, and
that their fathers justly put Him to death. Which of the
two most " offends Christian faith," the rabbi who preaches
this doctrine to has fellow believers, or H. Renan, who rye
to his audience, " Jesus was an inoomparible man : He
founded the everlasting religion of humanity r