Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T15:05:38.569Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

French ‘Left-Catholics’ and Communism in the Nineteen-thirties

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

John Hellman
John Hellman
Affiliation:
Mr. Hellman is assistant professor of history inMcGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Not long before he died, Lenin told a French Catholic visitor that “only Communism and Catholicism offered two diverse, complete and inconfusible conceptions of human life.” Lenin's belief that Communism and Catholicism were incon fusible was probably shared by most Communists, and most Catholics, in France in the nineteen-thirties. When the French Communists offered an “outstretched hand” to Catholic workers in 1936 in an effort to achieve a tactical alliance to head off fascism in France and Europe and to promote social progress—ignoring the incompatibilities of world view as much as possible—a number of French Catholics sought to grasp it. But these Catholics were not, for the most part, the “Catholic workers, clerks, artisans, peasants” to whom Maurice Thorez had addressed his appeal, but rather Catholic philosophers, “social priests,” journalists, and cardinals. They grasped, or considered grasping, the outstretched hand with a variety of motivations, hopes, and intentions which were quite often different from the intentions of the Communists who proffered it.

Type
Research Article
Information
Church History , Volume 45 , Issue 4 , December 1976 , pp. 507 - 523
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Church History 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. “Tour d'Horizon. L'Osservatore Romano et la Réponse Communiste,” L'Aube, June 16, 1936.

2. Ferlé, T., Le Communisme en France (Paris, 1937), p. 67.Google Scholar

3. Folliet, Joseph, “A Toi, Mon Frère,” Sept 155 (02 12, 1937): 24Google Scholar; Mounier, Emmanuel, “Manifeste au service du personnalisme” (1936), in Oeuvres, 1 (Paris, 1961)Google Scholar translated by Abbey, St. John's as Personalist Manifesto (New York, 1938), p. 286.Google Scholar

4. See Hourdin, Georges, “Leg leçons du serutin,” L'Aube, 05 15, 1936.Google Scholar

5. For example, Honnert, Robert, “Foi et Révolution,” Europe 161 (05 15, 1936): 45–57Google Scholar; Gonon, Mgr., Bishop of Moulins, Semaine Religieuse du diocèse de Moulins, 06 23, 1936,Google Scholar cited in Fessard, Gaston S.J. Le dialogue catholique-communiste, est-il possible? (Paris, 1937), p. 11.Google Scholar

6. For example, Lissorgues, Abbé, “Les Communistes, nos frères,” La Croix, 03 21, 1934Google Scholar; Simon, Pierre-Henri, Les Catholiques, la politique, et l'argent (Paris, 1936).Google Scholar

7. Notably in his essays for the weekly review Sept which were published as Humanisme intégral (Paris, 1936).Google Scholar

8. Speech to the Fédération Nationale Catholique, October 26, 1935, reprinted in La Croix, October 29, 1935.

9. See “Revolution personnaliste et communautaire” (1935), Oeuvres, 1:158, 251.Google Scholar

10. Humanisme intégral, p. 55

11. “Ainsi, dans l'abime …,” Sept 144 (11 27, 1936): 24.Google Scholar

12. “Les Catholiques, le Communisme, et les Crises,” La Vie Intellectuelle 48, no. 1 (02 25, 1937): 9–31.Google Scholar

13. Caute, David, Communism and the French Intellectuals (New York, 1964), p. 212.Google Scholar

14. The leading Left-Catholic review, Esprit, charged the expatriate Russian philosopher Nicholas Berdyaev with working out its earliest posture toward Marxism. See Berdyaev, Mouniercorrespondence reprinted in Bulletin des Amis D'Emmanuel Mounier 33 (02, 1969): 6–12.Google ScholarEsprit's editor, Mounier, admitted in this period that he had not yet studied Marx. Letter to Georges Izard, August 20, 1933, in Oeuvres, 4 (Paris, 1963):536.Google Scholar

15. See the interview of Martin-Chauffier by Forestier, Hubert, “Catholiques et communistes. Notre enquête au Quartier Latin,” Sept 109 (03 27, 1936): 14.Google Scholar

16. They advertized short wave radio sets, encouraging their readers to listen to Radio Moscow.

17. See the criticisms of Honnert in Mauriac, François, “La main tendue,” Le Figaro, 05 26, 1936,Google Scholar reprinted in Mauriac, et al. , Le Communlsme et les chrestiens, (Paris, 1937), pp. 2–3,Google Scholar and Fessard, , “La main tendue…? Réponse à un chrétien révolutionnaire,” Etudes 229 (12 20, 1936): 753–765.Google Scholar

18. See, for example, the article of Henri Guillemin, October 16, 1936, reprinted in Coutrot, Aline, Un Courant de la pensée catholique l'hebdomadaire, “Sept” (Paris, 1961), pp. 96–97.Google Scholar This was particularly true in 1936 when the position of the Vatican on this issue was still debated in France.

19. Maurice Durand, Secrétaire général du Syndicat professionnel (C.F.T.C.) des agents des P.T.T., “Révolution sociale,” L'Aube, June 6, 1936; Mounier, Emmanuel, “Rassemblement populaire,” Esprit 45 (06, 1936): 444.Google Scholar

20. There was particular optimism regarding the role of the Jocistes and members of the C.F.T.C. in the occupied factories in May and June 1936. See Léon, Merklen, “Où en sommes-nous,” La Croix, 06 18, 1936Google Scholar; Saliège, Mgr., “Pour constituer un ordre social nouveau,” La Croix, 06 28–29, 1936Google Scholar; Louis, Blain, “L'occupation des usines,” Sept, 07 3, 1936,Google Scholar reprinted in Rémond, René, Les catholiques, le communisme et les crises, 1929–1939 (Paris, 1960), p. 163.Google Scholar

21. Lissorgues, Abbé, “Un scandale qui doit finir: l'apostasie des masses populaires,” La Croix, 06 12, 1936.Google Scholar

22. Mounier, , “Révolution personnaliste et communautaire,” Oeuvres, 1: 145.Google Scholar Henri Daniel-Rops had similar ideas. See “Aussi, dans l'abîme …,” Sept 144 (11, 27, 1936): 24.Google Scholar

23. Pastoral letter to the Archdiocese of Paris, June 5, 1936, reprinted in Documentation Catholique 35, no. 800 (06 13, 1936): 1492.Google Scholar

24. Merklen, Léon, “Où en sommes-nous?,” La Croix, 06 18, 1936.Google Scholar

25. See Martin-Chauffier's, remarks in Forestier, “Catholiques et communistes,” p. 14,Google Scholar and Martin-Chauffier's, book Catholicisme et rebellion (Paris, 1936).Google Scholar

26. See “Réponse an ‘Counseil de Vigilance’,” Terre Nouvelle 10 (03, 1936): 11.Google Scholar

27. Marie-François, , “Dieu et Patrie,” Terre Nouvelle 6 (11, 1935): 13.Google Scholar

28. “Riposte aux assailants,” Terre Nouvelle 3 (07, 1935): 4Google ScholarLaudrain, Maurice, “La ‘Semaine Sociale’ Catholique,” Terre Nouvelle 4 (08–09, 1935): 14.Google Scholar

29. Mourlot, Jacque, “Le Pape répond aux Evêques de France,” Terre Nouvelle 12 (05, 1936): 11.Google Scholar

30. Laharque, Jean, “Marxism & Christianisme,” Terre Nouvelle 15 (08–09, 1936): 17.Google Scholar

31. Laudrain, Maurice, “Nos Remarques,” Terre Nouvelle: 17.Google Scholar

32. Passy, Paul, “Chrétienté non chrétienne,” Terre Nouvelle 6 (11, 1935): 9.Google Scholar

33. Laudrain, Maurice, “L'apostasie de la classe bourgeoise,” Terre Nouvelle 2 (06, 1935): 13.Google Scholar

34. “Manifeste de ‘Terre Nouvelle’,” Terre Nouvelle 1 (05, 1935): 3,Google Scholar and “Ier Hai: Vive l'Unité!,” Terre Nouvelle: 3.

35. Jordan, E., “La Révolution sociale et ses répercussions dan l'Eglise,” Terre Nouvelle 21 (03, 1937): 12.Google Scholar

36. Honnert, Robert, Catholicisme et communisme (Paris, 1937), p. 88.Google Scholar

37. This was true even before Pius XI's encyclical on “atheistic communism,” Divini Redemptories, of 03 1937.Google Scholar

38. Desgranges, Abbé, Journal d'un Prêtre deputé, 1936–1940 (Paris and Geneva, 1960), p. 27Google Scholar; Guiraud, Jean, “La Révolution dévore ses péres,” La Croix, 04 22, 1936.Google Scholar “A.M.,” “Lee élections législatives du 26 avril manifestent une importante pousée communiste,” La Croix, April 28, 1936.

39. See Scherer, Marc, Communistes et cathoilques (Paris, 1936), p. 42.Google Scholar

40. Ibid., p. 39; Bernoville, Gaëtan, La farce de la main tendue (Paris, 1937), p. 91Google Scholar; Bodin, Louis and Touchard, Jean, Front Populaire: 1936 (Paris, 1972), pp. 142–143.Google Scholar

41. Desgranges, , Journal, pp. 23, 41, 125–126.Google Scholar

42. Notably in the special issue “le Néo-Communisme, ” Sept 122 (06 26, 1936).Google Scholar

43. See, for example, Forestier, Hubert, “Catholiques et communistes,” Sept 109: 14.Google Scholar

44. Istana, , “Apparence de triomphe. L'expérience russe et le verdict des faits,” Sept 144 (11 27, 1936): 4.Google Scholar

45. See, for example, Scherer, , Communistes, pp. 62, 105.Google Scholar

46. “Dilemme du chrétien,” in Mauriac, et. al., Le Communisme, pp. 2–3.

47. For example, Scherer, , Communistes, p. 83.Google Scholar

48. Ibid., p. 37; Desgranges, , Journal, p. 162Google Scholar; Jean Guiraud, “L'Eglise devant la loi,” La Croix, February 19, 1936.

49. “Tentative impossible. L'Angleterre, tombeau de Marx et du Marxisme,” Sept 144 (11 26, 1936): 5.Google Scholar

50. Catholics did not hazard any estimates of the percentage of the French population which was “proletarian.” An acute contemporary observer, Alexander Werth, thought that the urban proletariat represented only “one sixth of the total voting strength of France.” France in Ferment (London, 1934), p. 287.Google Scholar

51. See, for example, the Journal of Abbé Desgranges for the Popular Front period and Bernoville, , La farce, p. 116.Google Scholar Some Catholics of the Left, espcially the Personalist revolutionaries, considered the urban proletariat to be the vanguard, the spokesmen, of the poor and oppressed throughout France. See Mouuier, , Personalist Manifesto, p. 287.Google Scholar

52. For example, Lemaire, René, “Le mal moral des occupations de usines,” L'Aube, 07 1, 1936.Google Scholar

53. Gilson, Etienne, Pour un ordre catholique (Paris, 1934), pp. 43, 57Google Scholar; Scherer, , Communistes, p. 34.Google Scholar

54. One of the major polemical efforts of the Catholic “New Left,” especially in the writings of Maritain, Mounier, and Pierre-Henri Simon, had been to distinguish Christianity from “capitalism” or “bourgeois culture.”

55. Denis de Rougemont, a leading Protestant Personalist revolutionary, saw an “irreductible divergence” between the “Marxist-Hegelian” conception of history, and the Christian conception: Marxism was essentially “progressive” while Christianity was essentially “revolutionary.” Politique de la Personne (1934; second edition, Paris, 1946), pp. 74–75.Google Scholar But M. de Rougemont's belief that the Christian faith demanded a “non-progressive” idea of history was not echoed by his fellow Christians of the Left.

56. For example, AbbéAlfred Ancel, , Dogme et morale communiste. Les communistes nous tendent la main. Que faire? (Paris, 1936), pp. 22–23.Google Scholar

57. Proudhon, , Oeuvres choisies (Paris, 1967), pp. 237–238.Google Scholar

58. Humanisme intégral, pp. 44–45.

59. To the objection of a contemporary French Marxist that atheism should be considered the consequence and not the starting point of Marxism (Georges, Sadoul, Commune, 12, 1935),Google Scholar Maritain cryptically noted: “It is not easy to see how one passes from the recognition of the fact that class war exists to the conclusion that God does not exist …” ibid., pp. 45–46.

60. For example. in Scherer, , Communistes. pp. 107–108.Google Scholar

61. Mounier, Emmanuel, Personalist Manifesto, pp. 52–53.Google Scholar See also his review of L'idée socialisto by de Man, Henri in Esprit 31 (04, 1935): 90–91Google Scholar

62. Ancel, , Dogme, p. 31.Google Scholar

63. Maritain, , Humanisme intégral, p. 56.Google Scholar Was this Catholic criticsm of Marxism well-focused? Did Marx have a “philosophy of man,” a conception of “collective man”? One could argue from the Theses on Feuerbach that for Marx, there was no “man,” there were only “men.”

64. Personalist Manifesto, pp. 52–53.

65. “Le Marxisme soviétique,” Sept 15 (March 22. 1935): 4.

66. Daniel-Rops, Henri, Eléments de Notre Destin (Paris, 1935), p. 152.Google Scholar

67. “La question féminine,” Sept. 122 (06 26, 1936): 17.Google Scholar

68. Daniel-Rops, , Elements, pp. 154–155.Google Scholar

69. “Un écrivain devant les soviets,” Sept 15 (03 22, 1935): 1.Google Scholar

70. See especially “Les nouvelles moeurs” and “La libération de la femme” in Sept: 1.

71. See Gilson, , Ordre, pp. 56–57.Google Scholar

72. Even the idea of woman's liberation and a revolutionary redefinition of sexual mores was supported by some Left-Catholics—with the qualification that Marxist efforts along these lines were misconceived. See Mounier, , Personalist Manifesto, p. 129,Google Scholar and “La femme aussi est un personne,” Esprit 45 (06, 1936): 291–297.Google Scholar

73. See Daniel-Rops, , Elements, p. 118.Google Scholar

74. Ibid., pp. 163, 168–169.

75. Scherer, , Communistes, p. 59.Google Scholar

76. Istina, , “A la Jeunesse” “Le marxisme soviétique,” Sept 15 (03 22, 1935): 4, 20.Google Scholar

77. Scherer, , Communistes, p. 89.Google Scholar

78. Especially in the writings of “Personalist revolutionaries” such as Daniel-Rops, Pierre-Henri Simon, Denis de Rougemont, Jean Lacroix, and Mounier.

79. Aline Coutrot enumerates the various articles in Sept that took this line: Un courant, p. 183

80. For example in “Le marxisme soviétique,” Sept 15 (03 22, 1935): 4Google Scholar; Viance, Georges, “Communisme soviétique et système capitaliste,” La Croix, 01 18, 1936.Google Scholar

81. Seherer, , Communistes, p. 72.Google Scholar

82. Personalist Manifesto, p. 169.

83. Ancel, , Dogme, p. 80.Google Scholar

84. de Rougement, Denis, Politique, pp. 65–66.Google Scholar

85. Istina, , “A la Jeunesse,” Sept 15 (03 22, 1935): 20.Google Scholar

86. Marc, Alexandre, “Rendre à l'ouvrier … sa dignité d'homme,” Sept 155 (02 12, 1937): 21.Google Scholar

87. Scherer, , Communistes, p. 98, 115.Google Scholar This book was made up of articles which its author previously published in Sept and which constituted that influential review's most elaborate treatment of Christian-Communist relations. On October 16, 1936 Sept reproduced a letter of felicitations for the book which Scherer had received from Pius XI. Emmanuel Mounier thought the book was an inadequate hodgepodge of “simple moral proclamations” (review of it in Esprit 49 [10, 1936]:299).Google Scholar

88. See Forestier, , “Catholiques et communistes,” Sept 109:14.Google Scholar The Russion Orthodox philosopher Berdyaev seemed to hold a somewhat analogous position at the time. See “Personne humaine et marxisme” in Mouriac, , et. al., Le Communisme, p. 202.Google Scholar

89. Murphy, Francis J., Maurice Thorez and “La Main Tendue”: French Communists and Catholics, 1936–1939 (University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, 1971), pp. 116, 166.Google Scholar

90. See Mounier's description of Paul Nizan's violent criticism of Terre Nouvelle, “Entretiens, IX, 07 3, 1936,Google ScholarOeuvres, 4:596–597.Google Scholar

91. Le dialogue catholique-communiste, est-il possible?, pp. 71, 99, 112–113, 138–145.

92. Simon, Yves, Le grande crise de la République française (Montréal, 1941).Google Scholar

93. Fessard, , Le dialogue, pp. 29–35.Google Scholar