Fans of “Les Misérables” on film or stage may be surprised to know that not everyone in France was of good cheer when Victor Hugo published the book in 1862. The anticlerical set was especially offended by the pivotal role of the Bishop of Digne, who helped determine the course of the novel by resuscitating the soul of Jean Valjean.
As Hugo worked on the novel, his son Charles, then in his 20s, objected to the reverential treatment of the bishop. He argued to his father that the portrayal gave undeserved respect to a corrupt clergy, bestowing credibility on a Roman Catholic Church opposed to the democratic ideals that he and his father held. Charles instead proposed that the catalyst for Jean Valjean’s transformation be a lawyer or doctor or anyone else from a secular profession.
The pushback didn’t work. Not only did Hugo hold his ground, but he amplified the importance of Charles-François Bienvenue Myriel, affectionately known in the novel as Monseigneur Bienvenue (Bishop Welcome). The book’s first hundred pages or so are a detailed chronicle of Myriel’s exemplary life, showing that his intervention on behalf of Jean Valjean was part of a long track record and not a singular aberration.
I’ve just seen the film some twenty-six years after seeing it on stage in London and agree that the sweetly positive view of the bishop is almost shocking given the anti-clerical sentiment in contemporary society. It thus makes it even more petty for me to criticize the strange liturgical vestments they put him in (a dalmatic with a stole on top?). There is a bad trend in historical films recently to skimp on research about the church (or to ask RC’s who don’t remember how things used to be). But again, that’s a small point given this work’s refreshing theme of Christian redemption.
well it’s nice to see any Christian in a positive light in films because it’s become so countercultural these days…