If the monarchial system in 18th century Europe was stressed by secularized revolution, the 20th century rendered the monarchial model of governance obsolete. And since the Roman Catholic Church was historically organized in business, property and service around monarchial authority, how did this organization tackle the problem of anticlerical sentiment that threatened their institution? Within the revolutionary events examined here, anticlerical sentiment in Europe was focused on aggressive religious reforms: the distribution of Church property, turning priests into public officials, and the closure of monasteries. Indeed, all religious orders were viewed as monarchically royalist, which further instigated their abolishment in fear of monarchial reinstatements that had occurred in earlier times. Therefore, with all these accumulative actions, there is one thing they had in common: an attempt to eradicate Christian religious practice through revolution. Yet the Church received help in the form of crowd reverie through three, subjectively-perceived, incidents.

 

          At its core, the French Revolution (1789-1799) represented Enlightenment ideas that the French public seemed ready to integrate into their society. Yet, towards the end, as the Republic staggered into repression and chaos between those who supported their theories and those that supported the historical ideals of the Catholic Church, the French society morphed into widespread violence, especially during a barbarous year known as The Terror (1794). Indeed, the revolutionary government had attained so much power over the French people “that their laws permitted the execution of citizens thought to be counter-revolutionaries, even under simple suspicion and without extensive trials.” Thus, it was during this time that while held in prison by the government, sixteen Carmelite nuns were guillotined. The reason given to them was this:  “You are to die because you insist on remaining in your convent in spite of the liberty we gave you to abandon all such nonsense.” However, they believed their sacrifice would actually end The Terror and bring relative peace to France. Interestingly, this was accomplished ten days later by means of a “sympathetic crowd” who viewed the executions and finally demanded an end to the guillotine public practice. Thus, it appears that “the victorious offering and martyrdom of the Carmelite nuns of Compiegne” ended the Reign of Terror in France.

 

          Secondly, three years later, a pregnant, former nun was murdered by her Catholic husband because she “represented the ideas of revolutionary philosophy that promoted companionate marriage, women’s productive role nurturing future patriots, and opposed the abuses of the Catholic Church.” And when a revolutionary patriot had suggested that a refractory priest was behind this incident, “public opinion against religious tolerance” reopened an impassioned debate between the Church and the people supporting the fledgling French Republic. This event sharpened the divide and created “controversies surrounding the refractory clergy and the compatibility of Catholic worship with revolutionary reform.” What is interesting is that the supporters of the Revolution viewed her gruesome death as an example of the “forces of superstition and counterrevolution that opposed the Republic and the Enlightenment of the French people.” But, in opposition, the people of her actual community believed that “her death was nothing more than an atrocious domestic dispute.” Thus, what can be understood by the fact that people, while examining the same event, rendered significantly different opinions about it? But for certain, this incident exposed the ongoing nature of the Republic’s concentric concerns with “dechristianization, the role of the Catholic Church and clerical marriages” in the years after the end of The Terror.

 

          And last but not least, Portugal’s fledgling Republican struggles became caught up in an extraordinary incident known today as Fátima (1917). Prior to this event, Portugal had been embroiled for years with the process of revolutionary reforms: abolishing their monarchy in favor of a Republic and “disestablishing the Roman Catholic Church” in the affairs of State. But as the government had become “intensely anticlerical,” it also provoked a “strong conservative reaction.” Thus, in the small countryside town of Fátima, the budding Republic’s anticlerical agenda became greatly challenged by messages from three Catholic children. Historically, during the Fátima event, also known as the “Miracle of the Sun,” these children “reported a prophecy that prayer would lead to an end to the Great War,” and stated that, “a Lady would reveal her identity and perform a miracle, so that all may believe.” And when this event actually occurred, thousands of eye-witnesses reported so many contradictory accounts of what had actually happened that day that division and debate eventually resulted in favor of reinstating Church religious practices in Portugal.

 

          This fascinating subject will look at three revolutionary events in which assemblies, while viewing the same incident, produced significantly divided opinions about it. We will see how powerful crowd consensus can be when a whole society is living under traumatic levels of political change for an extended period of time. And we’ll analyze the adaptive measures the Church applied, which eventually saved their status as Europe’s premier Christian institution. Overall, it appears that when a society is faced with an agonizing choice within the proverbial “Church and State” conundrum, the revelation from these historical accounts seem to suggest that “it’s not about what we see, but how we choose to see it, that counts.”