DE TRESSENSÉ ON MEN AND PAiniKS. 1G7 



ing and speaking, llis lectures nt Notre Dame Avere open to 

 serious criticism — the reasoning often bordered closely ujion 

 sophistry — more than once the logic is fanciful, and after all the 

 essential elements of Catholic doctrine are ])reserved by him. 

 ]>ut a glow of generous feeling pervades his whole discourse. 

 Now and then it breaks out, and then the su])dued, entranced 

 audience feels that electric thrill which is the sign of true elo- 

 cpience. On the very surface of his discourse there is always to 

 be recognized an ardent love of liberty. On the day following 

 the coup (Vétat, he expressed himself with such energy in a ser- 

 mon preached at Paris, that all the pulpits of the city were thence- 

 forth closed to the illustrious Dominican. His voice was never 

 afterward heard, except in the addresses delivered at his recep- 

 tion into the Académie Française. 



Since his death, whicli occurred in 18G1, the public have been 

 admitted to the secrets of his interior life. This brilliant orator, 

 whose words stirred men's minds, sometimes, like those of a trib- 

 une of the people, was, in reality, a true monk in point of auster- 

 it}'. He subjected himself in secret to unheard-of macerations, 

 which unciuestionably shortened his life. He craved humiliation 

 and suffering, and did not shrink before an asceticism which 

 could hardly have been surpassed by a Hindoo fakcer. In his 

 heart of hearts, Lacordairc suffered intensely from the inward 

 struggle between the convictions of his youth, which responded 

 to his deepest instincts, and his sincere but forced submission to 

 the papacy. He profoundly felt that the spirit is above the 

 letter, and that the inspirations which came forth from Rome 

 were not those which animated either his soul or his speech. 



jM. de ]Montalembert was the worthy rival and the fliithful 

 friend of the great Dominican preacher. 



By nature more excitable and impressible, he had more diffi- 

 culty in ridding himself of the powerful ties which bound him 

 to Lamennais; but then, for a time, the rupture was more radical. 

 There has even been one phase in which he seemed to prefer the 

 church above libert}-. It was during the violent reaction which 

 followed the revolution of 1848. The attitude which he held on 



