CCHA, Historical Studies, 54 (1987), 39-56
Charles Chiniquy:
The Making of an Anti-Catholic Crusader
by Paul LAVERDURE
University of Toronto1
On the sixteenth of
January, 1899, Charles Paschal Telesphore Chiniquy died in his ninetieth year,
leaving a long record of religious and oratorical activity in both English and
French. He also left a large legacy of anti-Catholic hate literature which is
still being published and used around the world today. Chiniquy, as Pierre
Berton describes him, was the
most controversial
of all Canadian zealots in the 19th century ... In the 1840s Chiniquy was
perhaps the best-known Roman Catholic priest in the country. In the 1880s he
was, probably, the best-known Protestant.2
This is his importance; he
claims our attention as one of the rare French-Canadian Roman Catholic priests
who converted linguistically and theologically to become an English-speaking
Presbyterian minister.3 Moreover, he was able to seize newspaper
headlines in Ireland, England, continental Europe, Australia and throughout
North America, in the entire latter half of the nineteenth century.4 His influence
across national and linguistic barriers indicates a personality essential to
the understanding and assessment of nineteenth-century religious mentalities,
especially nineteenth-century bicultural Canada.
What was present in Chiniquy’s environment
to help create an antiCatholic out of a Roman Catholic priest? This paper
presents two structural aspects to answer this question: biography and
analysis. A brief chronology of Chiniquy’s life will serve as the introductory
framework to a discussion of five prominent influences in Chiniquy’s life:
morality, ultramontanism, temperance, emigration, and the nature of religious
language. This discussion of a character in context will help make sense of
nineteenth-century Canadian religion.
BIOGRAPHY
Chiniquy’s career has been amply documented
elsewhere, especially by himself in his two massive books, Fifty years in
the Church of Rome (1885) and Forty Years in the Church of Christ
(1900) which, together, chronicle his lengthy life and reprint many of his
written works.5 In summary: Charles was born
in Kamouraska, Quebec, in 1809 and studied at the local seminary in Nicolet.
Fatherless in 1821 at the age of 12, he was supported by an uncle until the age
of 16 whereupon two priests at the school paid for his tuition. Fulfilling
their hopes, Charles succeeded in winning the prizes of verse recitation one
year and of amplification française in the year devoted to studies in
rhetoric. The young man was quickly distinguishing himself as an orator.
Ordained in 1833, he served in the parishes
and in the naval hospital of Quebec City. In 1838, he became pastor of the
large and important parish of Beauport and, there, began his famous temperance
crusades. He left Beauport suddenly in 1842 for Kamouraska and then joined the
Oblates of Mary Immaculate in 1846. Dismissed from the novitiate as unsuited
for Oblate community life, he resumed his effective and popular temperance
preaching in the diocese of Montreal at the invitation of the formidable Bishop
Ignace Bourget. Here he published his Manual of the Temperance Society (1847)
which soon became a widely-read handbook in Quebec.6 His reputation as a
saint grew with his oratorical successes. Paintings of him similar to the
iconography of saints, particularly the popular St. Louis de Gonzague, were
produced and circulated.7
Bishop Bourget of Montreal commissioned
Father Charles Chiniquy, by 1851 a famous Quebec orator and temperance
preacher, to meet and debate with French-speaking Protestants who had begun to
proselytize the French-Canadian Catholics. The religious line dividing the
French Protestant from the French Catholic was very sharply drawn, but there
existed another difference between the two – the French Protestant was more
than likely to have come from French Switzerland.8
“Les petits suisses,” or the “little
chipmunks,” as French Canadians still pun, popped up here and there,
travelling, as did Vessot, from one small town to another as “colporteurs” or
pedlars of religious books and pamphlets. The religious authorities of these
predominantly Catholic towns were disturbed at the steady attacks made on the
Roman Catholic faith and at the small raids made on their flocks’ numbers.
Debates were common forms of educational entertainment.
A closer look at the 1851 Chiniquy-Roussy
debate is useful since it contains in miniature many of the elements prominent
in Chiniquy’s life. Records from both sides of the debate have been kept.9 Chiniquy’s side,
claiming victory, put forward “unanswerable” arguments supporting the “one,
holy, [and Roman, of course] Catholic, and apostolic Church” on the grounds of
Petrine authority and episcopal succession. The Bible had to be interpreted in
line with traditional Roman Catholic teachings, because the Apostles were not
commissioned to have a non-existent Bible read, but to have the Gospel – no
book at all, but the good news – preached. For Roman Catholics, this meant a
continuing, authoritative church community to which the written form of the
Gospel in the Bible belonged. These were ancient arguments used against every
individual or group who decided to interpret the written word of the Bible
independently of the community.
Chiniquy’s opponent, the Swiss pedlar Louis
Roussy, however, had his own arguments. He denounced innovations introduced
into the religious beliefs and practices of the people (the rosary, devotion to
the Sacred Heart, and to Mary, etc.) by the ultramontanists, such as Bishop
Bourget and the Jesuits. The Roman Catholic Church hierarchy was not, he
declared, faithful to the early church’s beliefs and had, therefore, forfeited
its claim to be the Church Universal. Of course, with a centralizing Church
under Pope Pius IX, and the popular piety encouraged after the European
revolutions (such as that which surrounded the concept of the Immaculate
Conception, solemnly defined in 1854), Roussy believed himself entirely
justified in his opinions. Chiniquy championed Pius IX and the centralized
papacy of the ultramontanist theorists in clever invective, even abusive
language, against “the ignorance of all these creators of new religions.”10 Whether Chiniquy
actually won the debate is another question. Roussy also claimed
victory.
Shortly after the 1851 Roussy meeting,
Chiniquy requested permission from Bourget to go to the United States and
minister to the French Catholics in Illinois. Settled in Kankakee, he and his
parish quickly found themselves, as did French and other immigrant communities
elsewhere in the States and Canada, at odds with the Irish Bishop.11 One year after the
1851 debate, Chiniquy was a schismatic who did not acknowledge the authority of
his Bishop over him or the French-Canadian parish. A new bishop, O’Regan of
Chicago, finally excommunicated Chiniquy in 1856. Chiniquy and his followers
formed the “Christian Catholic Church” and then quickly threw in their lot with
the numerous Old School Presbyterians of Illinois. His career of world travel,
lecturing, and publishing as a famous ex-priest and popular speaker “about the
plots of the Catholic hierarchy and the debauchery of the priests and nuns”
then began.
It is an extraordinary conversion. The
personal transformation of a French-Canadian Roman Catholic priest into an
English-speaking Presbyterian minister almost defies understanding. It surely
defied the comprehension of his former co-religionists, who could not revile
him enough! In French Canada, he was considered a monster; he was compared to
the devil and to excrement.12 He was reviled by those who wished to prove
their own French Canadianism which was considered one with Catholicism.
Protestants were English or, if they spoke French, Swiss. Chiniquy proved that
they could also be Canadian. It was fear that the same could easily happen to
other French Canadians that brought out the denunciations of the insecure
French-Canadian Catholic élite. Chiniquy’s famous oratory matched their
invective. He reviled the Church, priests, monks, nuns, the doctrines of Mary,
transubstantiation, and the papacy. What made this possible?
MORALITY
Marcel Trudel, Chiniquy’s only
serious biographer, saw Chiniquy as a proud, sensual, unscrupulous hypocrite.
He reached that conclusion by relying heavily on a written 1884 report, which
he terms absolutely reliable, to explain the motives in Chiniquy’s life.13 This document is
crucial in the debate about Chiniquy’s morals. It was vigorously denied by
Chiniquy, his family and his admirers. What did it say? When Chiniquy’s uncle
stopped supporting him in his studies, Chiniquy merely ignored the incident
and claimed his family’s poverty after his father’s death was to blame.14 Trudel relies on
the document to assert that Chiniquy had sought the virtue of one of his
uncle’s daughters. Trudel also uses it to make similar accusations to explain
Chiniquy’s rapid transfer from Beauport in 1842 (the seduction of one of his
parishioners), his sudden vocation for the Oblates in 1846 (a similar
discovery), and his growing desire to minister to exiled French Canadians in
Illinois in 1851 (Montreal Bishop Bourget’s last chance to Chiniquy).15 Relying then on
these assertions about Chiniquy’s morals, Trudel believed the worst about
Chiniquy’s motives throughout his turbulent career. The famous British Jesuit
pamphlet writer, Sydney Smith, used the same anonymous document to fight
Chiniquy’s influence in the British Isles.16 Unfortunately,
this particular document is based on hearsay.17
Trudel’s use of the 1884 document was
restrained; he used it explicitly only three times. His certainty, however,
and his tone throughout the remainder of his otherwise credible work show he
gave these accusations greater weight than something written in Chiniquy’s
polemic-charged later life deserved. Although Trudel’s historical judgement
seems skewed by this dubious report, Trudel’s work must not be dismissed; there
is other evidence; there are affidavits from women in the Roman Catholic
archives of Quebec.18 When Chiniquy was to leave for the United
States in 1851, Bishop Bourget wrote to Chiniquy advising him to take strict
precautions with “personnes du sexe.”19 As Trudel
elaborates, this is strange advice to an older priest – he was forty-two at the
time – who should have known this already. Such indications, as well as the
reports of contemporaries, those puzzling changes in Chiniquy’s vocation, place
of residence, and the widespread opinion which Têtu relates, lends more credit
to Têtu’s, Smith’s, Resther’s, and Trudel’s explanations. Until researchers
gain access to the Chiniquy family papers, historians can conclude that one of
the major reasons Chiniquy converted was immorality.
The archives are filled with
complaints of wrong-doing, but the fact remains that excommunication and
conversion came years later. So immorality is not the only reason. Other
priests were immoral and left home dioceses to rebuild their careers in the mission
fields of other countries. Others had left the Roman Catholic Church in the
nineteenth century. Chiniquy went further. He became an anti-Catholic crusader.
Why? What other elements drove Chiniquy to revile his former faith, his coreligionists?
One must not categorically rule out, as Trudel, Smith, and others do, other
motives in Chiniquy’s conversion and later anti-Catholic career. It is
important in the debate about Chiniquy to note that he attracted a large
audience who believed his innocence and believed he was a Canadian reformer
like Knox, Zwingli, Calvin, or Luther had been for their countries.20 Some French-Canadian Catholics had believed
him to be a saintly temperance preacher before his publicized troubles; many
Protestants (and some Catholics who became Protestants) continued to believe
this of Chiniquy afterwards. To understand why Protestant historiography has
accepted Chiniquy’s conversion as genuine, the historian has to go beyond the
sterile debates of moral guilt or innocence to look at the other contextual
elements in Chiniquy’s life. How else are we to begin to understand Chiniquy’s
conversion in its radical opposition to Roman Catholicism, and in Chiniquy’s
ability to convince others of his innocence and good faith?
ULTRAMONTANISM
The first element evident in Chiniquy’s
intellectual world is that of ultramontanism.21 For the purposes
of this paper, ultramontanism is to be understood as the belief that the Pope
is to be followed in both policy as well as doctrine, in political matters as
well as religious ones. The two areas overlap, of course, as the
ultramontanists argued, but the liberal division of Church and State has almost
entirely succeeded, so that we sometimes forget that theocracy was once a
Western ideal.
In Lower Canada, ultramontanism was heavily
invested with nationalism and became an important rallying point for
conservatives. The Rouges or French Liberals were a party comprised of
liberal Catholics, agnostics and republicans, like the venerable Louis-Joseph
Papineau, the anti-clerical leader of the 1837 Rebellion. The famed Institut Canadien, a nationalistic,
liberal debating society, had both Catholic and Protestant members eager for
political liberalization and progress.22 A French-Canadian
who was not too particular could have a wide choice of political and religious
stances from which to choose. There were many listeners who stood between the
Roman Catholics and the Swiss Protestants. One of the main reasons Bishop
Bourget called in the famous temperance preacher, Chiniquy, was that many
politically liberal Catholics were being attracted by religious liberalism,
either the soon-to-be-proscribed Catholic variety or Protestantism. Those
wavering between the two religious poles who were in favour of the progressive
aspects of the temperance crusade might give Chiniquy’s Catholicism a hearing.23 Brought into the
spotlight by his oratorical talents, Chiniquy fought the Protestants’ theology
and their political liberalism. He became an ultramontane hero whose temperance
crusades were regularly reported in the press. Hector Langevin, editor at the
time of Les mélanges religieux, Bourget’s paper, wrote a glowing biographical notice
for Chiniquy’s 1849 Manuel des sociétés de tempérance which called him the
messenger of peace, the apostle of temperance, similar to the ultramontane
French Bishop Forbin-Janson of Nancy. Langevin’s hagiographical work probably
embarrassed him in later years.24
Ultramontanism as an ideology,
in all its occasional vagueness and its growing legitimacy enshrined in the
Vatican Council, became an underlying unifying element in the better-known
movements of temperance, emigration, lay trusteeship, and the vigorous
flowering of rhetoric in religious language. It played an important part in
Chiniquy’s life, first by raising him up through his oratory in the causes dear
to French-Canadian ultramontanes. It will be seen how ultramontanism played a
part in later bringing him down.
Previous writers have not bothered to trace
the connections between Chiniquy’s later Protestantism and his earlier
involvement in the temperance movement. This element in Chiniquy’s world was of
great importance to English and French religious leaders throughout the
nineteenth and the early part of the twentieth centuries in North America.
Chiniquy’s temperance crusades were immensely popular, pleasing everyone in
Lower Canada except the tavern keepers. The French conservative (Bleus) and the
social-reform-minded liberal (Rouges) political parties could unite with the
English-speaking Tory and the Reform (Grits) parties in one of the greatest
moral crusades of the English-speaking world; a medal and money was presented
to Chiniquy by the Parliament of the United Canadas to commemorate his
temperance work .25 In truth, English-Protestant Upper Canada had
about a hundred societies by 1831. Chiniquy had taken up moderate temperance
only in 1839 (after some Oblates had done so successfully) and became a
teetotaler in 1841.26
In Chiniquy’s Fifty Years in the Church
of Rome, the relations between temperance and religion were very much in
evidence. Drunkenness was on a par “with immoralities of the most degrading
kind.” Alcoholic beverages “are cursed in hell, in heaven and on earth” and are
“the most formidable enemy of our dear country and our holy religion”: for
“alcohol kills the body and damns the soul of its blind victims.”27 His Manual of the
Temperance Society was filled with stories of deaths, murders and the damnation
of drinkers to convince its readers of the religious (if not superstitious)
significance of the virtue of temperance. Chiniquy pictured temperance
societies as “nothing else than drops of living water which comes from the
fountains of eternal life to reform and save the world.”28 The 1849 edition
had been approved by no less than four bishops and had included psalms,
prayers, and scripture passages. Chiniquy perceived all opposition to himself
and his activities as irreligious. Did not even Methodists and Presbyterians
abhore alcohol? Was not Theobald Mathew revered throughout the English-speaking
world? And was Chiniquy not called the ‘Father Mathew of Canada’?29
There was opposition. Many of the
temperance societies set up were animated by Protestant laity and clergy. Some
French Catholics could have been scornful at the sometimes single-minded effort
in the odd Protestant denominations to make temperance almost the sole
repository of salvation. Later in his career, Chiniquy invariably labelled his
opponents, especially the Irish priest and bishop, as drunkards. He also
claimed that bishops and priests perceived temperance societies as Protestant
schemes for spreading Protestant heresy.30 The temperance
crusade brought Chiniquy into sympathetic contact with like-minded English
Protestants who deplored, with him, the weaker Christians. Here is a sign of
Chiniquy’s beginning disenchantment with the Roman Catholic Church and his
growing attraction for a Reformed Christianity.
Nive Voisine in his article,
“"Mouvements de tempérance et religion populaire,” defined the temperance
movement as a collective action tending to produce a change in ideas or in
social organization.31 Liberal reformers were greatly attracted by
the aspect of the temperance movement which emphasized the education of the
masses to produce new ideas. Like the revivals popular in the eastern United
States and elsewhere, the temperance crusade attempted the immediate personal
conversion of individual hearers to the Church and to a renewal of faith.32 Voisine’s general insight
can be seen in the individual, Chiniquy.
Familiarity with the conversion experience
in the temperance movement probably made the concept of conversion itself
easier to accept. Jay P Dolan has discussed how the mission revival’s emphasis
on conversion was a common element in both Roman Catholic and Protestant missions.33 There is a need to
look at the writings of individual Canadian temperance preachers, both
Protestant and Catholic, to see if this hypothesis is valid. For now, let us
suggest that Chiniquy’s familiarity with temperance preaching and Protestant
theology, as in his debate with the Swiss in 1851, probably made it easier to
integrate himself into the common beliefs and practices of Protestantism.
Conversion and repentance were well-known to Chiniquy through his work in
temperance and his meetings with the Swiss. When he proclaimed his conversion
to Bible (and T -total) Christianity, Chiniquy had carried out his earlier
lessons.34
EMIGRATION
In the same year, 1851, that Chiniquy
debated with the Swiss and praised temperance, he emigrated to the United
States. After ultramontanism and temperance, Chiniquy then made a virtue of
his exile to the frontier and began yet another crusade, this time for
French-Canadian emigration to more prosperous southern lands. He wrote to the
newspapers,
But, my dear son,
if thou hast no more room in the valley of the St. Lawrence, and if, by the
want of protection from the Government, thou canst not go to the forest without
running the danger of losing thy life in a pond, or by being crushed under the
feet of an English or Scotch tyrant ... Go to Illinois.35
Though the references to English or Scots
tyrants were acceptable in French (and Irish) circles, the encouragement of
emigration to the English, Protestant United States was not. Such a scheme, to
build a FrancoAmerican West, would draw away precious human resources from
French-Canadian plans to reconquer Canada from the British. Emigration to
another country did not receive as sympathetic a hearing as temperance from the
French-Canadian and Catholic leaders. Temperance was an attempt to build a
better French and Catholic world in Canada; therefore, it was acceptable to the
French-Canadian élite. To go to the United States would mean an overwhelming of
both French and Catholic elements. This was unacceptable to the French-Canadian
élite.36 An added ultramontane consideration was the fact that Roman Catholics
were leaving a Canada they could have influenced through sheer weight of
numbers; the United States, however, constitutionally separated Church and
State.
Chiniquy’s arguments for emigration were
economically sound, but the political and cultural arguments for keeping the
French Canadians in the Canadas prevailed among the élite. Although thousands
continued to stream south, the leaders of Lower Canada did not encourage the
emigrants. Chiniquy’s scheme was a contradiction of French-Catholic plans for
the Canadian North-West. Newspaper battles began.
Tied to emigration in
Chiniquy’s conflicts with the Roman Catholic hierarchy is the well-known
controversy over American-Catholic land trusteeship. Trudel himself analyzed
the development of Chiniquy’s arguments with Bishop O’Regan about the ownership
and control of church property by the parish as opposed to the diocese.37 In
English-speaking colonies and the United States, the Irish diaspora gave an
added impetus to Propaganda Fide, but with the lack of state patronage of
Church rights and privileges in the United States the conflicts over
trusteeship exploded on the American frontier. The temporal goods of the
parish, in theory, were the property of the Church, administered by the
Bishops, yet the frontier had few priests and bishops and little church land.
The young American Catholic Church was often democratically organized and
controlled by lay trustees years before the hierarchy was present to guarantee
its interests.38
In Kankakee, Illinois, where Chiniquy had
gone to hide his shame at seducing a series of women in Quebec while preaching
temperance, another trustee conflict with an unusual twist began. Chiniquy
upheld the claims of the French parishioners (including himself who naturally
controlled the parish) to their donated property and opposed the Irish
bishop’s efforts at control.39 Although Chiniquy’s own desires on the rough
frontier prompted him to continue the conflicts, ethnicity and lay control –
both inherent in the immigrant American-Catholic experience – also played roles
in helping Chiniquy to develop a critique of the Roman Catholic Church during his
stay in the mission fields of the United States. One must wonder also at what
impact the American frontier had on his already developed liberal sympathies
for Protestant enthusiasm and revivalism, which evolved during his temperance
crusades. Naturally, the public fights with the Irish-American Bishop O’Regan
over Chiniquy’s disobedience, in not leaving the French parish and in disputing
the transfer of the French parish church to Irish Catholics, also led to
Chiniquy’s excommunication. For the bishops of Quebec, he had caused too many
scandals and made too many mistakes. After Montreal, Chiniquy was given a last
chance in the mission fields of the United States. For Bishop Vandevelde, the
mistakes continued but Chiniquy avoided censure. American bishops were
desperate for priests and Chiniquy stayed. Finally, under Bishop O’Regan, his
last mistake was to claim rights to the church property in the name of the
French settlers who had paid for it. For his direct challenge to the church’s
administration, he was interdicted for all his faults.
A final element in Chiniquy’s history is
language. Many writers have noticed Chiniquy’s language; Jean-Paul Bernard, in Les Rouges, mentions “des
outrances verbales de l’abbé Chiniquy” during his 1850s temperance speeches.40 Letters of the time
denounced him and his exaggerations, because they sometimes caused crowds to
mob and destroy distilleries.41 Although high passions were raised by the
temperance question in the nineteenth century, Chiniquy’s speeches were
inflammatory. He once called Rome “a viper” which the United States “feed and
press upon their bosom. Sooner or later that viper will bite to death and kill
this Republic.”42The introduction to Louis Roussy’s 1851 pamphlet asserts that Chiniquy,
in a light, mocking tone, “shamed, slandered and outraged his opponent in the
most hateful and indecent manner”43 Rieul Duclos, who knew him personally, judged
that the Protestant Father Chiniquy expertly used the weapons of ridicule and
sarcasm in debate.44 Marcel Trudel refers to Chiniquy’s language as
“honeyed flattery, imposing humility, using excessive phrases, and
overabundant examples” in his writings to his superiors, while his opponent
received “sacrilegious and blasphemous language . . . which made his listeners
finally cry out with horror.”45 Everyone is agreed that Chiniquy’s use of
religious invective was unsurpassed.
This leads to a consideration of the
rhetoric of anti-clericalism itself. Muted and not-so-muted protests against
the priesthood have been recorded in every civilization sophisticated enough to
support a professional clergy. In the Christian tradition, there has been a
continual discontent on the part of many dissidents with the Constantinian
cooperation between Church and State resulting in an organized, hierarchical
Church. With the creation of the sixteenth-century Reformation churches,
mediaeval anti-clericalism and its special rhetoric split into strong anti-Roman
Catholic and anti-Protestant traditions. Both streams drew on pre-Reformation
traditions, but the changes in the respective institutional and religious camps
during the Reformation caused renewed criticism and controversy. Through
Luther, the Enlightenment humanists, the industrial revolution and the
development of the printing press, the myth of clericalism became a stock
element of nineteenth-century liberal, literary and intellectual culture.46
In the Canadas, political and economic
sectional tensions between Upper-Canada English and Lower-Canada French were
increased by Protestant-Catholic religious differences. The politically
powerful Upper Canadian, George Brown of The Globe, kept up a running
battle with French-Catholic ultramontane assumptions about Church and State
(Clergy Reserves, Jesuit Estates, separate schools) which, in turn, threatened
English-Protestant assumptions of superiority, rights and privileges, including
the liberal desire for the separation of Church and State. The polarized
atmosphere erupted into riots around Alessandro Gavazzi, a visiting Italian
ex-priest, in 1853.47 Throughout the nineteenth
century, the French Roman Catholics faced the English-Protestant Orange Lodge;
there seemed to be very little middle ground. French Catholics who were willing
to cooperate with English Protestants were sometimes reviled as
crypto-Protestants or “vendus” – French Canadians who had “sold out” to the English
conquerors. The English Catholic and the French Protestant both seemed partially
assimilated to the English-Protestant foe. Chiniquy, in the English-Protestant
American world, may have felt the need to emphasize his French background in
the battle with the English-speaking Bishop and his willingness to cooperate
with Protestants in the temperance crusade. In the growing battles between the
French-Catholic ultramontanes and English Orange Lodge, he may have felt the
need to make a choice. He chose to remain French and to abandon the Roman
Catholic Church, since the Church had abandoned him. Ironically, by doing so,
most of the remainder of his career was spent in preaching and publishing in
English. Language and religion were closely intertwined for the French
Canadian.
The question remains, why did Chiniquy go
further to become an anti-Catholic crusader? An answer to this question can
also be found in the very nature of religious language. In the United States,
intellectual historians have studied a similar context surrounding the growth
of religious invective. John Higham, summarizing their findings, writes that
some historians regarded nativism and anti-Catholicism as more or less
synonymous. More importantly, in describing this phenomenon, he describes the
language as drawing
heavily, for
example, from the very beginning of the Reformation on a conception of popery
as steeped in moral depravity. Generation after generation of Protestant
zealots have repeated the apocalyptic references of the early religious
reformers to the Whore of Babylon, the Scarlet Woman, the Man of Sin, to which
they have added tales of lascivious priests and debauched nuns.48
Examples can be found in the
writings of Samuel F.B. Morse, who began his anti-Catholic career in 1832.
Parson William Craig Brownlee began the American
Protestant Vindicator which publicized Rebecca Reed’s lurid stories of the
Charleston Ursuline Convent leading to its lynch-mob destruction in 1834.49 The controversies
raised by sensational crusaders in North America or by European events such as
the Tractarian movement or Catholic Emancipation, gave rise to serious
anti-Catholic (and anti-Irish) nativist riots such as in Kensington,
Philadelphia in May, 1844. Organized religious nativism in the States, as in
Canada throughout the first half of the nineteenth century, was periodically inflamed
by travelling speakers such as Maria Monk. Her Awful Disclosures of the
Hotel Dieu Nunnery of Montreal (1836) gave readers a “heady mixture of sex
and religion” in sordid accounts of priests and nuns.50 When Chiniquy
finally made the break with Catholicism in Illinois, he could make a living by
choosing from a wide range of authors to fill out an anticlerical and
anti-Catholic repertoire. He joined the lecture circuit.
A clue to the development of Chiniquy’s
anti-clerical vocabulary is inherent in his oratorical training. Once standard
for all of Europe, Chiniquy’s childhood subject, rhetoric, emphasized
exaggeration, expansion, and description. Ultramontane writing also had
particular features using frequent references to the sacred, an accentuated
stylistic lyricism, and a dramatization through striking, descriptive images.51 Chiniquy certainly
was familiar with rhetorical licence and certainly was a master of the striking
and the descriptive, as seen in the speeches preserved in his temperance
manual, books, and pamphlets.
Another element of nineteenth-century
oratory was the common use of abusive and insulting language or invective. The
growing polarization between liberal (usually Protestant) and conservative
(usually Catholic) wings of European culture gave rise to vigorous
denunciations. Stock images of Mary, celibacy, auricular confession, the
Papacy, etc., which distinguished Chiniquy’s later writings, were also present
in the 1851 debate with the Swiss Protestant Louis Roussy, as well as in other
contemporary anti-clerical works. This shows again that the anti-clerical genre
was fuelled by repetition. Each side “amplified” the polemic, repeated their
assertions, added details, and sometimes even deformed the original stories.
Gilles Charest, in a humorous work, writes that speakers usually do not invent
language; they use blasphemy because they have learned it from someone.
Swearing and insults form part of the cultural heritage of a people.52 Although speaking
about French Canadians, his findings are valid for countries with large Roman
Catholic populations. Anti-clericalism forms a repeated stock element with
little references to facts in the speech of a nation.53
Chiniquy adopted the
anti-clerical arguments. In fact, on the surface, Chiniquy’s extremes of
language as a Roman Catholic were then repeated as a Protestant. So, while
there seemed to be a wild swing in the content of Chiniquy’s beliefs, there was
continuity in his verbal context. He travelled from his conservative, Catholic
stance at the beginning of 1851 to his Protestant anti-Catholic position
through the mediating tendencies of temperance, emigration, and the
peculiarities of anti-clerical religious language. Trudel believes, quite
rightly, that Chiniquy’s immediate problems were due to his own pride and moral
weaknesses, but this is not the complete story, since other priests also moved
to the frontier to give their vocation a second chance.
In the frontier atmosphere of
Illinois, Chiniquy and his French-Canadian followers no longer recognized the
authority of their Irish bishop. Chiniquy was excommunicated in 1856 for the
constant sexual scandals, the complaints of female parishioners, the real
misappropriation of parish funds, the lack of any sign of repentence or
obedience and, most importantly, his challenge to the institutional Church’s
authority. Chiniquy quickly founded the Christian Catholic Church – Chiniquy’s
Church, as it became known – to hold on to a small group within the parish community
who either did not know of his failings or did not care. The fact that such a
group formed around Chiniquy attests to the importance of other elements in
Chiniquy’s history: temperance, emigrant lay trusteeship on the frontier,
battles with centralizing ultramontanists and the charisma of a powerful master
of religious language.
In 1859, often in the company of the French
Swiss he had once fought under the Canadian Catholic hierarchy’s eyes, he
toured Montreal and Quebec. Greatly publicized riots followed in the wake of
his remunerative sermons.54 In 1860, Chiniquy attached his followers to
the Old School Presbyterian Synod of Chicago in exchange for a premium paid for
each convert. A slight misunderstanding over the number of converts was settled
amicably with Chiniquy leaving Illinois for his first European tour, paid by
the Synod. On his return, he was suspended for having solicited funds for a
non-existent theological college and for slandering a fellow Presbyterian
minister who had criticized him. Chiniquy’s story continues beyond his
conversion.
Alexander Ferrie Kemp, who had been sent
from the Montreal Presbytery to investigate Chiniquy’s desire to join that
body, made the case that Chiniquy’s language was at fault and could be excused.
Chiniquy’s education in the Roman Catholic Church was blamed! Also, the word
collège
had
a different meaning in French Canada, where it referred to a classical
preparatory school educating boys until they were ready for professional
training. The American Presbyterians’ accusations of fraud stemmed from their
expectations of a university-level institution. There were certainly some young
boys living and studying with Chiniquy and other teachers.55 Again, the
questions of language and the emigrant's experience on the frontier played a
role in Chiniquy’s life.
Eager for such a notable French Canadian,
the Montreal Presbyterians made Illinois a mission field in 1863. In 1864,
Chiniquy “gave what his new friends doubtless regarded as a signal proof of the
soundness of his Protestantism.... he married his housekeeper.”56 One moral
weakness, perhaps, was solved. Protestant evangelicals compared him to Luther,
to Calvin, Zwingli, and to Knox. At the age of seventy, he went travelling
again, to Hobart, Tasmania, Ballarat and Horsham, Australia, to the Washington
territories, and to California. Everywhere, there were riots among the Irish
immigrant populations still struggling with the problems of a new land and a
new identity.57 In 1878 the legal battles with the Bishop of Chicago ended with the
French-Canadian parishioners winning possession of the land, school and church.58 Were his complaints
about the Irish bishop’s oppression of the French indeed justified? His
followers chose to believe so.
Chiniquy’s derivative language, his experiences in emigrating to the United States, in the temperance movement, and in the liberal-ultramontane debates within the Catholic Church as well as between the Protestant and Roman Catholic churches made him a stock figure, too, a legend, and a new element in anti-clerical language. Importantly, his works are still being printed and surface occasionally during anti-Catholic movements.59 He died in 1899, still writing, still publishing, and proclaiming his anti-Catholicism. One newspaper obituary acknowledged Chiniquy’s importance to the Protestant-Catholic debates of the time by exclaiming that: “The thought that he never was even once killed in a religious riot must have embittered his last hours.”60
1The
author would like to thank Fr. Alphonse de Valk and Dr. Brian Clarke for commenting
on a previous version of this article.
2Pierre Berton,
“Legends in the Rough,” in The Canadian, 11 September 1976, p. 4.
3Rieul-P. Duclos, Histoire du
protestantisme français au Canada et aux États-Unis, 1913 (2 vol.). This
work enumerates some of the other Canadian Roman-Catholic priests in the
nineteenth century who became French Protestant ministers. Chiniquy seems to be
the only one to have also overcome the language barrier.
4See, for example,
the Baptist Historical Archives, McMaster University, File, “Newspaper
Clippings.” Also, Library of the Faculty of Religious Studies, McGill
University, Chiniquy scrapbook.
5Marcel Trudel’s Chiniquy (Trois-Rivières,
Québec, 1955) is the only major biography. Its critical tone offsets
Chiniquy’s own dubious assertions. Unfortunately, it has never been translated
from the original French and has been long out of print. Other works are merely
re-issues and edited versions of Chiniquy’s Fifty Years in the Church of
Rome. By Father Chiniquy, the Apostle of Temperance of Canada. Author of “The
Manual of Temperance.” “The Priest, The Woman, and The Confessional.” “Papal Idolatry,”
“Rome and Education,”Etc. (Chicago, 1885), xvi-832 pages, and the
posthumously published Forty Years in the Church of Christ (Chicago, New
York, and Toronto, 1900), 498 pages. Most of the letters or pamphlets Chiniquy
wrote as an anti-Catholic are included in these works. The only other biography
of Chiniquy written in English is a short sensational chapter, relying heavily
on Trudel, in Pierre Berton’s My Country: The Remarkable Past (Toronto,
1976), pp. 138-54.
6Charles Chiniquy, Manual
of the Temperance Society, Dedicated to the Youth of Canada (Montreal,
1847).
7Trudel, p. 104,
draws our attention to this detail. A similar picture is also present in the
1888 16th edition of Chiniquy’s Fifty Years.
8David-Thiery
Ruddel, Le
Protestantisme français au Québec. 1840-1919: “Images” et Témoignages (Ottawa, 1983),
p. 25. Ruddel published the fascinating journals of well-known anomalies:
French-Canadian Protestants. In Joseph Vessot’s journal, kept from 1840 to
1863, Roman Catholicism was seen as “la religion de satan, les fruits de
l’ignorance et de la superstition.” Such superstition, it was believed by the
French Protestants, comprised the errors about saints, confession, fasting,
and, in a word, “toutes les erreurs qu’ils enseignent et que L’Écriture sainte
condamne” (p. 20).
9Charles Chiniquy, Le Suisse méthodiste
confondu et convaincu d’ignorance et de mensonge (Montreal, 1851). Louis
Roussy, Appel
d la raison et à la conscience des habitants des paroisses de Ste-Marie et de
St-Grégoire (Napierville, Quebec, 1851).
10Chiniquy, Le Suisse méthodiste, p. 17.
11Jay P. Dolan’s
works, The Immigrant Church. New York’s Irish and German Catholics,
1815-1865 (Baltimore, 1975) and The American Catholic Experience. A
History front Colonial Times to the Present (New York, 1985) explore this
theme for the United States. Robert Choquette’s Language and Religion. A
History of English-French Conflict in Ontario (Ottawa, 1975) begins the
study for Canada.
As Thomas Chapais
wrote, “Un Canadien français qui n’est pas catholique est une anomalie. Un
Canadien français qui l’a été et qui ne l’est plus est une monstruosité.” Cited
in Pierre Savard, Aspects du catholicisme canadien français au XIXe
siècle (Montreal, 1980), p. 19. An example of the passions aroused by
Chiniquy’s conversion is the delightful X.Y.Z. Honte et mépris au renégat. La vie
et mort de l’apostat Chiniquy (Montreal, 1875), which took pleasure in
predicting in graphic detail the obviously horrible, satanic death the excrement-like
Chiniquy would experience. Chiniquy probably disappointed many by merely outliving
his critics.
Trudel, p. 8, n.
20, “tout à fait sûr, dont nous n’avons cependant pas encore le droit de
révéler l’auteur.” This report rests in the Archives of the Archdiocese of
Montreal (AAM), Box 402-102, File 1883-1908, Document: Montréal, 25 février,
1884. We have received permission to reveal the author’s name as the Rev. Fr.
Resther, S.J.
14Fifty Years, p. 738.
15Trudel, p. 49, n.
66 and p. 67, n. 20, respectively.
16Sydney Smith, S.J.,
Pastor Chiniquy. An Examination of His “Fifty Years in the Church of Rome” (London,
c. 1908), p. 17. Smith was no doubt asked to counteract Chiniquy’s influence
in the U.K. and was sent the same document upon which Trudel relied.
17The report was
written almost sixty years after the first alleged lapse in morality. Trudel
(p. 8, n. 20) states that it was based on Mgr. Henri Têtu’s notes. An English
translation of these notes, deposited in the Archives of the Archdiocese of
Montreal, says:
In 1846, tradition relates that he
[Chiniquy] was caught in the very act of sin against morals; he was thereupon
obliged to leave the diocese of Quebec, and entered the noviciate of the
Oblates at Longueil. The archives of the Archbishop’s House, in Quebec, contain
no official document regarding the above crime, as there had been no canonical
inquest held in the case.
So
Trudel and Smith relied on an anonymous document which in turn had relied on Têtu’s
hearsay. “Biographical Notes Concerning the Apostate Chiniquy. By Msgr H. Têtu,
Procurator of the Archbishop’s House, Quebec” c. 1907, AAM (402-102)
1931-1962. Têtu, by the way, was the grandson of Chiniquy’s uncle. This raises
an interesting problem about the reliability of family tradition.
18The Quebec and
Montreal Archdiocesan Archives have been well-researched by Trudel, pp.
130-131. See also AAM (402-102).
19Trudel, p. 129.
20“Introduction.
Charles Chiniquy: His Life and Work. A Character Sketch, by Rev. Principal D.H.
MacVicar, D.D., LL.D.” in the post-humously published Forty Years in the
Church of Christ, pp. 5-16.
21Nive Voisine and
Jean Hamelin, eds., Les Ultramontains canadiens français, (Études d’histoire religieuse
présentées en hommage au professeur Philippe Sylvain) (Montreal, 1985), shows
the continuing interest and importance of this subject in understanding Canadian
religious ideas.
22Rieul-P. Duclos,
Vol. 1, p. 152.
23Jean-Paul Bernard, Les Rouges. Libéralisme,
nationalisme et anti-cléricalisme au milieu du XIXe siècle (Montreal, 1971),
pp. 74-75.
24Hector Langevin's
editorial activities in two newspapers diffusing ultramontane ideology was
noted by Nadia Eid in Le clergé et le pouvoir politique au Québec: une analyse
de l’idéologie ultramontaine au milieu du XIXe siècle (Montreal, 1976),
p. 48.
25Trudel, pp.
110-111. Trudcl sees this award as the result of crass political posturing on
Chiniquy’s part during the passage of the Temperance Bill.
26Trudel, pp. 32-34.
27Fifty Years, pp. 386, 280,
343, and 369, respectively.
28Ibid., p. 350.
29Trudel, pp. 37-38.
See especially Hector Langevin, “Notice biographique,” pp. 5-15 in Chiniquy, Manuel des sociétés de
tentpérance dédié à la jeunesse du Canada, 3rd edition, (Montreal,
1849), passim.
30Fifty Years, p. 346.
31Nive Voisine,
“Mouvements de tempérance et religion populaire,” in Benoit Lacroix and Jean
Simard, eds., Religion populaire, Religion de clercs? (Quebec, 1984), p. 67.
32Voisine, p. 73. See
also Jay P. Dolan, Catholic Revivalism: The American Experience.
1830-1900 (Notre Dame, Indiana, 1978), pp. 91-112, 190-95.
33Jay P. Dolan. The
Immigrant Church, pp. 155-58.
34Fifty Years. p. 795, for
example, describes Chiniquy’s conversion experience.
35Ibid., p. 511. Bourget,
as a result of similar letters had also warned him against rousing national
hatreds (Trudel, p. 127). Notice how, as a Roman Catholic, he identifies the
foes as English and Scots, not Irish. In 1851, prior to his battles with Bishop
O’Regan, the Irish question was not an element in his thinking.
36Trudel, p. 147. For
a sociological discussion of the messianism inherent in French-Canadian
emigration, see Gabriel Dussault, Le Curé Labelle. Messianisme, utopie et colonisation
au Québec 1850-1900 (Montreal, 1983). One of the more valuable works for
a study of popular opinion and messianism ideology, although uneven in quality,
is Fernand Dumont, et al., Idéologies au Canada français 1850-1900 (Quebec, 1971).
37Trudel, pp. 176-77.
38This is a
well-known frontier phenomenon which has been retold by Jay Dolan in The
American Catholic Experience. Less well-known is the Canadian version
hinted at in Pierre Savard’s “La vie du clergé” in Aspects do catholicisme
canadien -français au XIXe siècle (Montreal, 1980), p. 27.
39Fifty Years, pp. 617ff.
40Bernard. Les
Rouges, p. 76: “the verbal outrages of Abbé Chiniquy.”
41Bernard, p. 90:
also, Trudel, p. 114.
Fifty Years, p. 673.
43Roussy, Appel à la
raison, pp. 3-4.
44Duclos, Vol. 1, p. 152.
45Trudel, pp. 47 and
219, quoting the newspaper, Le canadien, 11 February 1559. p. 4.
46José Sanchez, Anti-clericalism:
A Brief History (Notre Dame, Indiana, 1972). p. 3. Canadian
anti-clericalism can be studied in Marcel Trudel’s two volume L’Influence de Votaire
au Canada (Montreal. 1945).
Robert Sylvain, Clerc, garibaldien,
prédicant des deter mondes. Alessandro Gavazzi (1809-1899), 2 Vol. (Quebec,
1962).
48John Higham, Strangers
in the Land; Patterns of American Nativism 1860-1925 (New York, 1974), p. 5.
49Thomas Curran, Xenophobia
and Immigration, 1820-1930 (Boston, Massachusetts, 1975), p. 26.
50Curran, p. 27.
51Eid, pp. 183-84.
52Gilles Charest, Le livre ties sacres et
blasphèmes québecois (Montreal, 1974), p. 66.
53Resther, and
X.Y.Z., quoted above, for example, illustrate this tendency for anti-Protestantism
while Chiniquy’s works do so for anti-Catholicism.
54Robert Lindsey,
“Evangelization of the French Canadians by the Presbyterian Church. 1863-1925,”
Presbyterian Church of Canada Archives (unpublished B.D. thesis, Toronto,
1956), p. 17.
55Alexander Ferric
Kemp, The Rev. C. Chiniquy, the Presbytery of Chicago and the Canada
Presbyterian Church (Montreal, 1863).
56Smith, Pastor
Chiniquy, p. 63.
57For a not overly
accurate description of his adventures in his later years, his own Forty
Years can be read. There is also Auricular Confession in Australia, by
Pastor Chiniquy. And Chiniquy Vindicated. (Front the "Protestant
Standard") (Melbourne, Australia, 1879), 16 pages, and Papal
Idolatry: An Exposure of the Dogmas of Transubstantiation and Mariolatry.
Dedicated to Archbishop Vaughan, of Sydney, with “The God of Rome Eaten by a
Rat” ... (Melbourne, 1879), 48 pages. This last work is one he dedicated to
different Catholic prelates depending on the country in which he was working
at the time.
58“États-Unis” in
“Nouvelles et Faits divers,” L'Aurore Vol. 13, no. 27 (4 July 1878), 5.
59Canada in 1984
experienced a revival of this: see “Curb the flow of hate” (editorial) Montreal
The Gazette, 2 April 1984; “Task force of 2 ferreting out hate
literature” by Warren Potter, Toronto Star, 1 September 1984; “Anti-Catholic
books capitalize on Pope’s visit” by Eleanor Boyle, The Gazette of
Montreal, 5 May 1985. Most of this literature is published also by Chick
Publications, Chino, California, the present publishers of Chiniquy Comic Books
as well as Chiniquy’s biographies.
60Canadian Baptist
Historical Archives, File “Charles T. Chiniquy, Obits.” Newspaper clipping, 17
January 1899.