1. Axenfeld, Karl et al., “Germans to Christians,” New York Times, 5 09 1914;Google Scholar full text in “An die evangelischen Christen im Auslande,” Die Eiche 3 (02 1915):49–53;Google ScholarGairdner, W. H. T., Edinburgh 1910 (Edinburgh, 1910), pp. 179–214.Google Scholar

2. Archbishop of Canterbury et al.,“German Theologians and the War,” The Guardian,1 10 1914.Google Scholar

3. “Réponse a L'Appel Allemand,” Revue Chrétienne62 (06–08. 1915):114–122;Google ScholarLoisy, , Guerre et Religion (Paris, 1915), p. 17.Google Scholar

4. An official edict of toleration, nullifying the 1685 revocation of the Edict of Nantes, was not secured until 1787. Catholic calumnies were rebutted by Doumergue, Emile, Calomnies Anti-Protestantes (Paris, 1912),Google Scholar who was sponsored by the Protestant and Evangelical Action Commission, and by John Viénot, who tried to organize another watchdog association, The Christian and Protestant Defense Society; see Viénot, , articles in Revue Chrétienne, 57 (03., 04, 12. 1910): 272, 352, 1039.Google Scholar

5. Harnack, , “Die Religion in Weltkriege,” in Harnack, Erforschtes nod Erlebtes (Giessen, 1923), P. 311.Google Scholar

6. Bailey, Charles E., “Gott mit uns: Germany's Protestant Theologians in the First World War”(Ph.D. diss., University of Virginia, 1978);Google Scholaridem, “The British Protestant Theologians in the First World War: Germanophobia Unleashed,” Harvard Theological Review 77 (1984): 195–221.

7. During she period from 1871 to 1914, although about 400,000 Alsatians (including 100,000 Protestants) indicated a desire to leave, only 125,000 (including 30,000 Protestants) actually left; see Wolff, Christian, “Les protestants dés départements annexés ayant opté pour la France,”in Les protestants dans les débuts de la Troisième République, ed. Franĉais, Société de L'Histoire du Protestantisme (Paris, 1979), pp. 545–566, 705–709.Google Scholar Their wartime zeal is noted by Barrès, Maurice, “Les diverses families spirituelles de la France,” Echo de Paris, 8 12. 1916;Google Scholar cited in Foiet Vie, 1 02. 1917, pp. 55–57.Google Scholar

8. Figures vary from 600,000 to one million; 650,000 is given by Lambert, Samuel, Thmoignage, 15 02. 1917, pp. 13–14.Google Scholar

9. Baubérot, Jean, Le Retour des Huguenots (Paris, 1985), pp. 77–109, 183–184;Google ScholarRobert, Daniel, “Les Protestants franĉais es la Guerre de 1914–1918,”in Francia, ed. de Paris, Institut Historique Allemand, vol. 2 (Munich, 1975), p. 415;Google ScholarViénot, , “Le Mois,” Revue Chrétienne 60 (05 1913): 497–500;Google ScholarPuaux, Frank, “A propos de la loi de trois ans,” Evangile et Liberté, La Ve Nouvelle et Le Protestant Unis (hereafter cited as Evan. et Lib.) 28 (17 08. 1913): 265–266;Google ScholarChickering, Roger, Imperial Germany and a World Without War (Princeton, 1975), pp. 378–381.Google Scholar To borrow Taylor's, A. J. P. distinction in The Trouble Makers (London, 1957), p. 51,Google Scholar the French were “pacificist”rather than strictlys“pacifist.”

10. Previous work on the French Protestants in World War I includes: Vovard, André, “Les Protestants francais et la Guerre,” Revue Chrétienne 65 (07–08. 1918): 221–227;Google ScholarVic, Jean, La Littérature de Guerre (Paris, 1918), pp. 56–69;Google Scholar various chapters in Stephan, Raoul, Histoire du Protestantisme français (Paris, 1961),Google Scholar and Wolff, Philippe, ed. Histoire des Protestants en France (Toulouse, 1977),Google Scholar and Encrevé, André, Les Protestantes en France 1800 à nos jours (Paris, 1985);Google Scholar and the works by Wolff in note 7 and by Baubéot and Robert in note 9 above.

11. Montauban was founded by an edict of the national Reformed Synod of Montpellier on May 1598 and lasted until 1919 when the theology faculty was transferred to the University of Montpellier; see Doumergue, , L'Academie et la Faculté de Montauban 1598–1906 (Geneva, [1919]).Google Scholar To compensate for the loss of the University of Strasbourg when Germany annexed Alsace, a government edict of 27 May 1877 transferred the Protestant faculty of theology to Paris; the faculties of arts, science, medicine, and law were reestablished at Nancy; see Bonet-Maury, Gaston, “The Protestant Faculty of Theology of the Paris University,” The New World 7 (03 1898): 113–129;Google ScholarReymond, Bernard, “L'Ecole de Paris,” Etudes Theologiques et Religieuses 52 (1977): 371–383.Google Scholar

12. Bonet-Maury, , “Le Congrés Religieux de Berlin,” Revue Chrétienne 57 (10. 1910): 745–748;Google ScholarRoufliac, Jean, “Ve Congrés International du Christianisme libre et progressif,” La Vie Nouvelle (forerunner of Evan. et Lib.) 27 08. 1910, pp. 281–282;Google ScholarViénot, , “Programme Provisoire,” Le VIe Congrés International du Progrés Religieux,“ “Le Mois,” Revue Chrtienne 60 (05, 07, 08–09. 1913): 476–483, 635–641, 810–828;Google Scholar“le Congrés international du Progrés religieux,” Evan. et Lib., 5, 12, 26 07 1913, pp. 218, 225–226, 241–245;Google ScholarRathje, Johannes, Die Welt des freien Protestantismus (Stuttgart, 1952), pp. 163–169, 229–230.Google Scholar

13. From his self-imposed exile in Switzerland, Romain Rolland urged European intellectuals to avoid the excesses of nationalistic fervor, but, far from remaining neutral, he loudly proclaimed France's innocence; see his much-cited Au-dessus de la Mêlée (Paris, 1915)Google Scholar and the perceptive criticism of Stromberg, Roland, Redemption by War (Lawrence, Kans., 1982), pp. 153–156.Google Scholar

14. Eugéne de Faye was a pastor of the Free church and professor of Early Church History in the Paris theology faculty: Elie Gounelle, though not on the Paris faculty, was a close friend of its members and editor of Christianism social, which promoted a non-Marxist Christian socialism; Henri Monnier is discussed in note 44 below.

15. The Comité Protestant de Propagande Francaise á L'Étranger was organized under the auspices of the Protestant Federation of Churches on 11 June 1915. The Committee's sponsors, including the Paris theologians John Viénot and Henri Monnier, had viewed with alarm the work of the Catholic Committee for French Propaganda Abroad, whose book La Guerre Allemande et le Catholicisme (April, 1915) had portrayed the war as a war of religion directed against Catholic France by Protestant Germany. Consequently, the committee's manifesto of August 1915 underscored the patriotism of the French Protestants. The committee's president was André Weiss, professor of Law at the University of Paris; its three secretaries-general included the Paris theologians Raoul Allier and John Viénot; another Parisian theologian, Wilfred Monod, was an assessor; its charter members included another Parisian, Gaston Bonet-Maury, and three Montauban dons: Emile Doumergue, Henri Bois, and Leon Maury. In December 1915 it began publishing a monthly bulletin. See Soulier, Edouard, “Propagande francaise dans les pays neutres protestante,” Thmoignage, 15 08. 1915, pp. 147–148;Google Scholaridem, “Appel,” Foi et Vie, 1 August 1915, pp. 359–360; André Monod, “Le ComitÉ des Amities Francaises,” Bulletin Protestant Française, Organe do Comité Protestant de Propagande Française á l'Et ranger (hereafter cited as Bull. Prot. Fran.) January 1927, pp. 1–10; letter from Mme. R. M. Monod to Charles E. Bailey, 11 April 1985.

16. Benda, Julien, La Trahison des Clercs (Paris, 1927), pp. 67–71;Google Scholar Benda lamented that French moralists had followed the bad example of German intellectuals, especially ecciesiastics like Harnack, who had succumbed to political passions.

17. Ménégoz, Eugéne, nine articles published in Evan. et Lib. from 30 01. 1915 to 15 01. 1916;Google Scholar see especially the first, “L'Épée de Pierre” all are reprinted in his Publications diverses sur le Fidéisme et son Application à L'Enseignement Chrétien Traditionnel, vol. 4 (Paris, 1916) pp. 173–206;Google ScholarDoumergue, Emile, “Une refractaire par ‘conscience religieuse,’“ Le Christianisme an XXe Siecle, Journal des Eglises Réformés Evangeliques de France (hereafter cited as Chrt. au XXe) 24 and 31 08. 1916, pp. 267, 276–277.Google Scholar

18. See note 1 above.

19. Hermann was professor of Systematic Theology at Marburg. The others taught at Berlin: Deissmann was professor of New Testament Greek; Richter, a vice-president of the Edinburgh Continuation Committee, was professor of Missions; Harnack was professor of Church History.

20. “Réponse à L'Appel Allemand aux Chrétiens Évangeliques de L'Étranger,” Revue Chrétienne 62 (05–06. 1915): 114–122;Google Scholar“Revue de la Presse,” Chrt. au XXe, 15 10. 1914, pp. 335–336.Google Scholar

21. The origins of the appeal are still shrouded in uncertainty. Matthias Erzberger, the leader of the Catholic Center Party and coordinator of German propaganda efforts, had a hand in gathering signatures, and the support of seven Catholic theologians as against only five Protestant may suggest that his influence was preponderant. See Wehberg, Hans, Wider den Aufruf der 93 Das Ergebnis einer Rundfrage an die 93 lntellektuellen über den Kriegsschuld(Charlottensburg, 1920).Google Scholar

22. “Protestation de Ia Faculté Libre de Theologie de Montauban,” Revue de Theologie et des questions religieuses de Montauban (hereafter cited as Rev. de Mont.) 24 (01–07 1915): 1–4;Google Scholar“Nouvelles,” Evan. et Lib., 19 12. 1914, pp. 384–385.Google Scholar

23. Monod, , “Le Manifeste des Quartre-Vingt-Treize,” Revue Chréienne 61 (09–12 1914): 646–677.Google Scholar Monod frequently described himself as a “three-fold internationalist:pacifist, socialist, and Christian”; see his Jusqu'au Bout. Lettre à un Améicain (Paris, 1916), p. 1,Google Scholar and his letter to Archbishop Randall Davidson, 11 Jan. 1916, in Davidson's general war papers, Box 27, Lambeth Palace Library, London. Monod, John Viènot, and J.-Emile Roberty were the three pastors of the Oratoire Church of the Louvre.

24. Maury, , “La Guerre et l'Economie politique,” Rv. de Mont. 24 (08–09. 1915): 378–379;Google ScholarBonet-Maury, , “De la Puissance du Mensonge,” Bull. Prot. Fran., 08. 1916, pp. 1–2.Google Scholar On 3 August the German ambassador in Paris, Baron Wilhelm von Schoen, received a telegram signed by Bethmann Holiweg containing the declaration of war on France. The message had somehow become jumbled during its transmission and decoding, but the original draft as well as the mutilated text that arrived in Paris and Schoen's final version given to the French all claimed that French airmen had dropped bombs on Karisruhe and Nurnberg. Bethmann repeated the charge in his address to the Reichstag on 4 August. See Kautsky, Karl, ed., Outbreak of the World War. German Documents collected by Karl Kautsky, trans. Endowment, Carnegie for International Peace (New York, 1924), pp. 531–532;Google ScholarSchoen, , Erlebtes (Stuttgart, 1921), pp. 182–184;Google Scholaridem, Sechs Kriegsreden des Reichskanzlers (Berlin, 1916), p. 10; Renouvin, Pierre, Les Origins Immédiates de Ia Guerre (28juin-4 août 1914) (Paris, 1921), pp. 244–248.Google Scholar

25. Sir Edward Goschen to Sir Edward Grey, 8 Aug. 1914, document 160 in British Blue Book, Great Britain, Foreign Office, Collected Diplomatic Documents Relating to the Outbreak of the European War, Misc, no. 3649 (London, 1915), p. 111.Google Scholar Both during and after the war Bethmann insisted he had been misquoted, even though he spoke in English. In January 1915 he publicly stated that he had told the ambassador that “among the reasons which had impelled England to war the Belgian neutrality treaty had for her only the value of a scrap of paper”; thus it was England, and not Germany, who had held the treaty in low regard. See his press interview in Der Tag, 27 January 1915, and in “A Scrap of Paper,” Current Hisory of the European War, 1 (03. 1915): 1120–1125.Google Scholar He gave a slightly different version in his postwar memoirs, Betrachtungen zum Weltkriege, vol. 1 (Berlin, 1919), pp. 180.Google Scholar See also Hammann, Otto, Ruder aus der letzten Kaiserzeit (Berlin, 1926), p. 76;Google ScholarHarnack, , “Meine Antwort auf den vorstehenden Brief [from eleven English clergy],” 10 Sept. 1914, Internationale Monatsschrtft für Wissenschaft, Kunst und Technik (hereafter cited as Inter. Monats.) 9 (1 10. 1914): 20;Google ScholarBruston, , “L'Attente silencicuse de la France,” Rv. de Mont. 24 (01–07 1915): 82–83.Google Scholar

26. Goguel to Herrmann, 24 Oct. 1914, and Herrmann to Goguel, 14 Nov. 1914, in Die Eiche 3 (1915): 36–37.Google Scholar Herrmann apparently was alluding to the “Brussels Documents”of 1906 and 1912. After the two Moroccan crises, British and Belgian officers had discussed the contingency of a German invasion of France through Belgium, and the British had offered to protect the neutral country by landing troops there. Records of these conversations were found when the German army captured Brussels at the end of August 1914. On 13 October the government announced the discovery, which Herrmann's letter of 14 November seemingly reflects. Not until 25 November 1914 did the German public learn the full contents of the documents, which then became Germany's standard defense when it retrospectively tried to justify the invasion; see Norddteutsche Ailgemeune Zeitung, 13 10. and 25 11. 1914.Google Scholar Modern scholarship generally dismisses the conversations as incidental; see Williamson, Samuel R. Jr, The Politics of the Grand Strategy (Cambridge, Mass., 1969), pp. 86–89, 215, 353–371.Google Scholar

27. Germany, Foreign Office, The Belgian People's War. A Violation of International Law. Translations from the Official German White Book (New York, 1915), pp. 5–10.Google Scholar

28. Bonet-Maury, , “De la Puissance du Mensonge,” Bull. Prot. Fran., 08. 1916, p. 2;Google ScholarMaury, , Le Lendemain de la guerre et l'évangélisation de la France (Paris, 1916), p. 22.Google Scholar

29. Great Britain, Foreign Office, Report of the Committee on Alleged German Outrages appointed to His Britannic Majesty's Government and presided over by the Right Hon. Viscount Bryce (London, 1915). Postwar studies have shown the report to be grossly exaggerated; see Read, James Morgan, Atrocity Propaganda 1914–1919 (New Haven, 1941), pp. 200–209;Google ScholarPeterson, H. C., Propaganda for War (Norman, Okla., 1939), pp. 53–58.Google Scholar

30. Baumgarten, , “Der Krieg und der Bergpredigt, Rede am 10. Mai 1915,” in Deutsche Reden in schwerer Zeit, ed. Volkswahlfahrt, Zentralstelle für, vol. 3 (Berlin, 1915), p. 132;Google ScholarDoumergue, , “Le Droit et la Force d'après les Manuels des États-Mojors allemand et français,” Foi et Vie, 1 and 16 06 1915, p. 277;Google Scholaridem, “Propos de théologiens allemands sur la guerre,” Thmoignage, 1 August 1915, p. 134.

31. “Service religieux en souvenir de Miss Cavell,” Thmoignage, 1 12. 1915, p. 231;Google ScholarDoumergue, , “Encore le Manuel du grand Etat-Major allemand,” Foi et Vie, 1 11 1915, p. 449;Google ScholarRyder, Rowland, Edith Cavell (New York, 1975) p. 5.Google ScholarPubMed In addition to his special wartime column, “Propos de guerre,”in Foi et Vie, edited by his younger brother Paul, Emile Doumergue also thundered forth in his own faculty's journal, Rv. de Mont., edited by his colleague Henri Bois, who succeeded him as dean in 1919, and in the conservative newspaper Chrt. au XXe, the organ of les Églises réformée évangé1iques de France, edited by Benjamin Couve.

32. What amounted to a second “Bryce Report”was published in 1916: Great Britain, Foreign Office, [Toynbee, Arnold], The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman mpire 1915–1916. Documents presented to Viscount Grey of Fallodon by Viscount Bryce (London, 1916).Google Scholar

33. “Pour l'Arménie,” Chrt. an XXe, 27 01. 1916, pp. 28–29;Google ScholarDoumergue, , “En Armenie,” Foi et Vie (Cahier B), 16 12. 1915, pp. 245–246,Google Scholar and “L'Armenie: les massacres et le question d'Orient,” Foi et Vie, 1 and 16 04 1916, pp. 107–170Google Scholar(the entire issue), wherein he notes that German Protestant leaders petitioned the chancellor to help the ravaged race.

34. Karlström, Nils, “Movements for International Friendship and Life and Work, 1910–1925,” in A History of the Ecumenical Movement, 1517–1948, ed. Rouse, Ruth and Neil, Stephen (Philadelphia, 1967), pp. 521–529.Google Scholar

35. Ibid., pp. 530–531; Monod, , “La violation de la neutralité beige désavouée par les Ailemands,” Le Christiansirne social, Revue mensuelle d'étude et d'action, 02., 03., and 04. 1920, pp. 140–158, 181–199;Google Scholar“The Violation of Belgian Neutrality, Goodwill 4 (1 11. 1919): 10–11.Google Scholar

36. Harnack, , “Offener Brief an Herrn Clemenceau,”6 11 1919,Google ScholarJournal de Genve, 10 November. 1919; cited by Doumergue, Emile, “Propos de Paix,” Foi et Vie, 1 12. 1919, p. 338,Google Scholar and reprinted in Harnack, ,Erforschtes und Erlebtes, pp. 303–305.Google Scholar

37. Le Méoire Lichnowsky et les Documents Muehlon, avec une Preface de Joseph Reinach (Paris, [1918]);Google Scholar see also Dr. Muehion's Diary (London, 1918)Google Scholar and Lichnowsky's, memoirs, Heading Toward the Abyss, trans. Delmer, Sefton (New York, 1928) pp. 48–82.Google Scholar Unlike the other theologians at Paris, all of whom were ordained clergy, Allier was a layperson and a member of the Free church. He was dean of the Paris faculty from 1920 to 1933, succeeding Edouard Vaucher, who served from 1908 to 1920. The session at which he spoke was a preparatory meeting in Geneva, 9–102 August 1920, for the Life and Work Conference that met in Stockholm in 1925. For his speech, see Monod, André, “Conferences internationales,” Bull. Prot. Fran., 10. 1920, pp. 5–6;Google Scholar for the death of his son, see Couve, Benjamin, “Roger Allier,” Chrt. au XXe, 5 04 1917, p. 107,Google Scholar Raoul Allier to John Viénot, 22 May 1916, in Papers of John Viénot, Mss. 1137, xxviia, Library of the Société de l'Histoire du Protestantisme Francais, Paris, and [Allier, Raoul], Roger Allier 13 Juillet 1890–30 Aout 1914 (Paris, 1917), pp. 274–277.Google Scholar

38. Doumergue, , “Propos de guerre,” Foi et Vie, 1 and 16 08. 1917, pp. 343–347.Google Scholar For the origins of the resolution, see Erzberger, Matthias, Erlebnisse im Weltkrieg (Stuttgart, 1920), pp. 251–269.Google Scholar

39. Viénot, , “Le Mois,” Revue Chréienne 64 (09–10., 1917): 477Google Scholar and 65 (Nov.-Dec.,1918): 423. Doumergue voiced the same complaint in his “Le Vatican et Ia Maison-Blanche,” Bull. Prot. Fran., 09. 1917, pp. 1–2.Google Scholar Benedict XV's appeal is in “Official Documents Looking Toward Peace,” International Conciliation, no. 119 (10. 1917), pp. 5–7.Google Scholar

40. Typical was the title and thrust of Monod's, Wilfred brochure Jusqu' au Bout. Lettre à un Américain (Paris, 1916);Google Scholar see also Doumergue, , “Propos de guerre,” Foi et Vie, 1 and 16 08. 1917, pp. 343–347.Google Scholar

41. Doumergue, , “Propos de guerre,”and “Propos de paix,” Foi et Vie 10 11. and 10 12. 1918, pp. 302, 324;Google ScholarMénégoz, , “Trois victoires assurées,”and “Que ton regne vienne,” Evan. et Lib., 24 11. 1917, pp. 245–246,Google Scholar and 5 Jan. 1918, pp. 3–4. A similar relationship between liberal theology and moderate territorial goals, on the one hand, and conservative theology and extensive annexationist demands, on the other, was noticeable among the German theologians; see Bailey, Charles E., “Protestant Theologians and the War Aims Question in the First World War,” Red River Valley Historical Journal 5 (1981): 201–219.Google Scholar

42. Doumergue, , “L'Empire de la Kultur,” Foi et Vie, 16 05 1915, p. 245;Google ScholarMaury, , “La Guerre et l'Economie politique,” Rv. de Mont. 24 (08–10. 1915): 396;Google ScholarBois, , “La Guerre et la Bonne Conscience,”and Bruston, “L'Attente silencicuse de la France,”both in Rv. de Mont. 24 (06–07, 1915): 41, 73.Google ScholarBois, , “Les Assemblées presbytériennes d'Edimbourg,” Bull. Prot. Fran., 07 1918, pp. 2–4.Google Scholar

43. “Les Conferences de la FÉdération protestante,” Thmoignage, 1 02. 1915, pp. 7–8,Google Scholar and 15 Feb. 1917, p. 17; Viénot, , Epitre au Tigre de France (Paris, 1918), p. 9.Google Scholar Viénot's brochure was a reprint of his editorials of November through December 1917 and January through February 1 918. The Protestant Federation included five groups: the Reformed Church (a merger of the liberal and centrist groups in 1912), the Evangelical Reformed Church (the conservatives), the Lutheran Church, the Free Church (a small, conservative group of mainly Reformed churches), and the Methodist Church.

44. For Monnier, Jean, see the “Rapport de M. le Doyen Edouard Vaucher,” in Séince de Rentrée des Cours de Ia Faculté Libre de Théologie Protestante de Paris le Mardé 5 Novembre 1918 (Paris, 1919), p. 6;Google Scholar for Henri Monnier see “Comité protestant de propagande francais,” Evan. et Lib., 20 10. 1917, p. 217,Google Scholar and Monod, Victor, “Une étape en Alsace et dans le Pays de Montebéliard,” Bull. Prot. Franc., 08. 1918, p. 7.Google Scholar

45. Viénot, , “Le Mois,” Revue Chrétienne, 62 (01–04. 1915): 102–103;Google ScholarBarrès, , “Le Marteau de Thor sur nos cathédrales,” L'Echo de Paris, 6 03. 1915;Google Scholar cited in “Revue de la Presse,” Chrt. au XXe, 11 03 1915, p. 76,Google Scholar and in “A Travers les Journaux,”Temnoignage, 15 03 1915, pp. 36–37.Google Scholar According to the census of 1910, Germany had about 40 million Protestants, 24 million Catholics, and 1 million Jews. Austria-Hungary had about 39 million Catholics, 4.5 million Protestants, 4.5 million Greek Orthodox, and 2 million Jews, yielding a combined total of 63 million Catholics to 44.5 million Protestants; see Lambert, Samuel, “Une misc au point nécessaire,” Témoignage, 15 02. 1915, pp. 13–14.Google Scholar

46. Vaucher, , “Variétés,”Temoignage, 15 04., 1 05, 15 06, and 1 10. 1915., pp. 54–55, 64–66, 120–121, 180–181;Google ScholarWeiss, , “Luther et la Reformation francaise,” Bulletin de Société de l'Histoire du Protestantisme Français (hereafter cited as Bull. de SHPF) 66 (10–12. 1917), p. 283.Google Scholar The Lutheran Church of France was comprised of two “inspections,”that of Paris, with 35,000 members, and that of Mootbéliard, with 45,000; see “Un hommage du protestantisme français,” Bull. Prot. Fran., 10. 1917, p. 6.Google Scholar Its official paper was Temoignage, edited by Samuel Lambert.

47. Seeberg, , “Das sittliche Recht des Krieges,” Inter. Monats. 9 (1 11. 1914): 171–176,Google Scholar which reflected his System der Ethik im Grundriss dargestellt (Leipzig, 1911), pp. 135–137.Google Scholar His wartime essay was noted in “Propos de théologiens allemands sur la guerre,” Temoignage, 1 08. 1915, p. 134;Google ScholarLambert, Samuel, “Christianisme allemand,”Temoignage, 1 02. 1916, p. 26;Google ScholarEhrhardt, Eugene, “Christianisme allemand,” Temoignage, 15 02. 1916, pp. 45–46.Google Scholar The term “unholy trinity”was Ernst Troeltsch's summary of the Allied indictments; see his “Der Geist dec deutschen Kultur,”in Deutschland und der Weltkrieg ed. Otto Hintze et al. (Leipzig, 1915), p. 58.Google Scholar The French references to the three German thinkers are legion; typical were Bois, Henri, “La Guerre et la Bonne conscience,” Ru. de Mont. 24 (01–07 1915): 31–34,Google Scholar and “La guerre et les historiens de l' Allemagne,” Fot et Vie, 1 and 16 06 1915, pp. 280–289.Google Scholar Beginning in March 1916, Bois contributed a regular column to Foi et Vie entitled “L'Opinion érangère.”

48. Viénot's public lecture was given in Paris under the auspices of the Protestant Federation of Churches on 25 February 1916. It appeared in pamphlet form and was translated into Dutch the same year and was reissued in 1918; see Evan. et Lib., 19 02., 11 03, 28 10. 1916, pp. 53, 68, 271;Google Scholar and 5 Jan., 16 Feb., and 16 Mar. 1918, pp.4, 32, 55; Viénot, , Luther et l'Allemagne, 2d ed. (Paris, 1918), pp. 41–42.Google Scholar

49. In every one of the four issues of the Bull. de SHPF for 1917, Weiss makes plain that Luther must bear his share of guilt for the war: “Protestants et Catholiques allemands à la lumière de quatre siècles d'histoire,” 66 (1917): 5–21;Google Scholar“L'origin et les Étapes historiques des Droits de l'Homme et des Peuples,” 66 (1917): 107–108;Google Scholar“Pour le Quatrième Centenaire de la Reformation” 66 (1917): 177;Google Scholar“Luther et Ia Reformation francaise” 66 (1917): 297–299.Google ScholarDoumergue, , “Luther et la quartriéme Centenaire de la Réformation en Allemagne,” Foi et Vie, (Cahier B), 16 11. 1917, pp. 213, 225,Google Scholar and “Propos de guerre,” Foi et Vie, 20 03 1918, Pp. 95–100.Google Scholar

50. See Doumergue's two articles in Foi et Vie cited in note 49 above; see also Viénot, , Luther et L'Allemagne, p. 42.Google Scholar

51. Curioiusly, Viénot's sermon at the Oratoire on 1 Nov. 1917 to celebrate the 400th anniversary of the Reformation scarcely mentioned Luther but honored instead the Huguenot publicists Hotman, and Jurieu, ; “Les premiers Républicains Francais,” Bull. Prot. Fran., 11. 1917, pp. 1–4.Google Scholar Beginning in 1895 the noted authority on Calvin, Doumergue, had published several articles in the Revue de Montauban, tracing the origins of modern political rights back to Calvin. His most notable wartime essay on the theme was “Calvin et L'Entente,” Bull. de SHPF 66 (10–12. 1917): 301–312,Google Scholar which reappeared in slightly altered form as “Calvin et L'Entente. de Wilson à Calvin,” Foi et Vie, (Cahier B), 20 01. 1919, pp. 12–22.Google Scholar The same route of Calvin's thought is traced in Monnier, Henri, “Le dieu Allemand et laRéforme,” Revue Chrétienne 62 (06–08. 1915): 154;Google Scholar and Weiss, Nathanael, “Lea Origine et les Etapes,” Bull. de SHPF 66 (04–06 1917): 113.Google Scholar

52. Weiss, , “Pour le Quatrième Centenaire de la Reformation,” Bull. de SHPF 66 07–09. 1917): 177;Google ScholarCaspari, C.Edouard, “Aux Pasteurs et Fidèles de l'Église,” Temoignage, 15 10- 1 11. 1917, pp. 157–158.Google Scholar

53. For examples of the prewar intellectual duel between the two men, see Doumergue's, articles in Chrt. au XXe: “Deux Propos,”and “Une Execution,”14 07, 11 08. 1911, pp. 229, 263;Google Scholar “La Bible,” “Les Églises Réformées Unifiées,”and “L'Unification,”26 01., 26 07, 20 09. 1912, pp. 29–30, 247–249, 311;Google Scholar and “Le Congrès international du Progrès religieux,”7 08. 1913, pp. 264–266.Google Scholar Compare Ménégoz's replies in La Vie Nouvelle (which became Evangile et Liberté in 1913): “Nouveaux coups de griffes,”23 09. 1911, p. 285;Google Scholar“ Intransigence fidéiste,”18 06 1912, p. 155;Google Scholar“Un fruit béni des principes fidéistes,”7 09. 1912, p. 284;Google Scholar“Deux Explications,”31 06 1913, p. 175.Google Scholar

54. Ménégoz, , “La Religion interne et la Religion externe,”in his Publications diverses, pp. 1–4.Google ScholarThe “symbolo-fidéisme of Ménégoz and his colleague Auguste Sabatier (1839–1901) is discussed in Reymond, Bernard, “L'Ecole de Paris,” Etudes Theologiques et Religieuses 52 (1977): 371–383;Google ScholarBonet-Maury, , “La Dette du Protestantisme Français envers la Pieté et la Théologie de l'Allemagne,” Revue Chrétienne 58 (01. 1911): 15–27.Google Scholar

55. Bruston, Charles, “Addition au rapport de M. Bonet-Maury,” La Vie Nouvelle 28 01. 1911, PP. 27–28;Google Scholar“Une dualité indiscutable,” Evan. et Lib., 29 01. 1916, p. 34;Google Scholar and “Le Perils du protestantisme allemand,” Evan. et Lib., 10 11. 1917, pp. 236–237;Google ScholarDoumergue, , “La fin d'un Protestantisme,” Chrt. an XXe, 4 04. 1918, p. 107.Google Scholar

56. See Ménégoz's, articles in Evan. et Lib.: “L'Union sacrée, la théologie traditionnelle et le fldéisme,”11 11. 1916, pp. 282–283;Google Scholar“Trois victoires assurées,”24 11. 1917, pp. 245–246;Google Scholar “II y a quelque chose de changé [re the funeral oration for pastor Charles Wagner],”7 Sept. 1918; “A propos de la Fédération protestante française,” 22 01. 1919, pp. 21–22.Google Scholar

57. Monod, , “Et apprès la guerre,” Evan. et Lib., 30 11. 1918, p. 237.Google Scholar

58. Nils Ehrenström, “ Movements for International Friendship and Life and Work, 1925–1948,”in Rouse, and Neill, , History of the Ecumenical Movement, pp. 543–578;Google ScholarGaede, Reinhard, Kirche-Christern-Krieg und Frieden (Hamburg, 1975), PP. 70–77.Google Scholar