Nelson Evening Mail WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1929 CHURCH AND STATE IN ITALY

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXIII, 13 February 1929, Page 4

Nelson Evening Mail WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1929 CHURCH AND STATE IN ITALY

THE signing of the treaty betweon the Italian Government and the Vatican ends a situation which has distressed the Papacy since 1870. It was in 1860 that the first encroachments were made on the small Papal Territory by troops of Victor Emmanuel, to whose kingdom were annexed most of the Papal Statas. Pope Pius IX then remained at Romo under the protection of a French garrison till 1870. In that year, it will be remembered, the Franco-German war broke out, and in consequence of France’s severe reverses the French garrison at Romo was withdrawn. When it was clear that Franco was defeated by the Germans, Sardinian troops moved upon Rome, and, after a slight show of resistance by the Papal Guards, Victor Emmanuel’s troops occupied the city, and the Pope’s temporal power ceased to exist.

Seeing that the Papal kingdom was so small, it may bo asked why Pius IX and his successors bewailed their condition as “prisoners of the Vatican,” whence they never ventured abroad, but, residing within the walls of their palace from the beginning of their pontificates till their end, protested persistently of the wrong done to them and the Catholic Church hv robbing them of their sovereign rights over their diminutive territory? The best answer to .that question is given, wo think, by the late Cardinal Vaughan, who. writing op this question (1902) said: —

So far from being animated by any temporal ambitions, as has been alleged, the Pontiffs declare that they must ever claim the restitution of the small temporal sovereignty which Providence has assigned them, precisely because without it it is impossible for them to discharge adequately their spiritual office as rulers of tlio universal Church. It is a continual charge made by their enemies against the Popes, that their action on the local Church administration in the different countries is the action of a “foreign Power.” There would be some justification of the charge, or at least of the suspiciousness out of winch it springs, if the Popes consented to be the subjects of any one temporal ruler; and it is only by their persistent protests against the subjection in which it is sought to place them that they have hitherto been able to avoid the difficulty. Again, the Popes require to surround themselves with various institutions through which, as central agencies, they may control and guide the work of the Church in its different departments throughout the world. . . . Unless the Pope can maintain these institutions in duo freedom and with the necessary resources to enable them to do their work in the spirit, in the manner, and with the effectiveness which he judges desirable, the ill effects must be felt not in Romo only, but in every country. . . . Yet in regard to all these matters the Pope, if not a temporal ruler himself, must be at the mercy of the ruler under whom he is placed; a ruler whose Government may be favourable to the Church’s best interests, but may equally well be actively hostile to them. It is obviously with, the view of showing that these liabilities are not merely theoretical that Leo XIII has timed his recurrent protests as he has done.

Fifty-nino years have passed since the temporal power of the Popes,was taken from them, as described. During that period five Popes have ruled the Catholic Church, but have laboured under the disabilities which Cardinal Vaughan made clear enough. Now the last of them, Pius XI, has been successful in persuading the Dictator of Italy to restore to the Papacy that sovereignty over its habitat which will give it that liberty which is essential to its functions. He is thus described by Robert Esmonde Sencourt, who has made a close study of this very question which we are discussing:

The present Pope is a paternal and attractive figure. Though he is a little inclined to stoutness, ,his fair complexion and healthy colour give no hint that he is over 70. Born in 1857, the son of a silk weaver, he has now been reigning since 6th February, 1922, but the six years seem to have left no mark. He/made his reputation as a scholar, and until nearly 60 lived in charge of two great libraries, now and again discovering to the world some hidden treasure of ancient learning. His vacations he spent as an Alpine climber. In 1919, however, when he was still Monsignor Ratti, *.n represented the Vatican in Poland. He did one remarkable thing when he was elected Pope. Tie kept the staff at the Vatican unchanged. It was a particular mark of his link with his predecessor* (Benedict XV), whose work he came not to interrupt, but to continue. He announced the object of his pontificate as “The Peace of Christ in the Reign of Christ.” It was his conviction that, in exchanging the brutality of materialism for the ideals of the gospel, and by putting the spiritual above the impulses of the egoistic groups, and by these alone, the world would return from the war’s affermath of chaos and penury, to that wealth of life which is' prosperity in this world and ensures inward lasting blessedness

Such is the man who has healed the long-standing breach between Church and State in Italy. This may seem a small thing to the outside world. But wa a an indignity which the Christian reihn indignity which the Popes suffered, liginn suffered throughout the world, since the head of the senior Church lived under conditions which were derogatory to his high office. That Signor Mussolini should have been an instrument in effecting this rapprochement is one of the most astonishing surprises of his surprising domination.