I shall always consider the cloistered community, provided it is wholly voluntary and composed of those who freely consent, with a certain earnest attention and, in some respects, deference. When there is community there is a commune, and where there is a commune there is the rule of law. The monastery is the outcome of the formula Equality and Fraternity. But how splendid a thing is liberty, and how great the transformation it effects. Only Liberty is needed to transform the monastery into a republic.
I open with this quote because I think for Hugo it is the height of his argument here. To put it more plainly, his beef with monasteries and convents is really one that revolves around consent - as long as membership and participation are voluntary, he tells us he will defer to them. Beyond that, he just thinks they fall short of what they could be. His assertion is that they are a great example of the kind of community that is built using a formula of Equality and Fraternity. From his perspective, Liberty is the missing piece. If they had that, they could transform the monastery into a republic and everyone would be better for it.
Interestingly, this quote is surrounded by some very obvious prejudices, with heavy doses of anti-Asian sentiment that is really quite shocking when read in 2026. The obvious question that this apparent contradiction raises is the core of so much that could be critiqued about “western culture” today. Who gets to be a part of this society? Equality for who? Fraternity for what people? Liberty for what group? If the answer to these questions is not EVERYONE, then we have a problem.
It should be sobering to realize that we are always in danger of drawing lines that make us feel really good about who we are and where we stand, totally ignorant to who we may be excluding along the way. It’s good to see ourselves through other peoples eyes whenever and wherever we can.