What Is a Vrai Dévot and Is He a Véritable Homme de Bien?

Abstract

We have seen that the key terms of vrai and faux dévot, with which the Tartuffe controversy is commonly framed, are notoriously slippery and that their meaning does not simply turn on a question of hypocrisy or sincerity but is partly dependent on individual viewpoints on matters moral and religious. One type of faux dévot, the zealot, discussed in Chapter 3, emerged as being particularly open to interpretation since his zealotry is, for some people, clear evidence of his fundamental falsehood, while for others, in some contexts, it is compelling evidence of an authentic love of God. Still others treat the zealot and his methods with an interesting combination of suspicion and respect. Yet the dévot is unambiguous at least to the extent that all types of dévot are, by definition, perceived within a religious context. And although dévot was a term often applied, approvingly or disapprovingly, to lay persons working within the world and beyond the strict confines and structures of the established Church, particularly in the case of members of the Company of the Holy Sacrament, the dévot’s framework was irrefutably Christian. If not always operating strictly intra ecclesiam, the dévot’s moral standpoint was grounded in the principles set out at the Council of Trent, which had at its heart the reform and stability of the Catholic Church across Christendom.