SOCIETY MAINLY INDEBTED TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH FOR THE PROGRESS IT HAS MADE IN POLITICAL LIBERTY.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume I, Issue 25, 18 October 1873, Page 6

SOCIETY MAINLY INDEBTED TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH FOR THE PROGRESS IT HAS MADE IN POLITICAL LIBERTY.

This spirit of political liberty, this desire of limiting nnwer hv means of institutions, dtf not originate with the Trench philosophers.} before this lime, and long before the uppeurunee of Protestantism, ie was circulating in the veins of the European people. History has left us irrefragable testimonies of this truth. What institutions were deemed suitable for the accomplishment of this object ? Cortaiu assemblies, in -which the -voice of the nation's iuterests and opinions might be heard — assemblies formed in vaious trays, and meeting from time to time round the throne to make their complaints and assert their claims. As it was impossible ior these assemblies to constitute the government without destroying the monarchy, it was necessary, in one way or another, to secure their interest iv state affairs ; and Ido not see that anything better has hitherto been devised for attaining this object than the right of intervention in the enactment ef laws, a right guaranteed to them beyond this, that may be justly termed the

right arm of national representation, the right of voting the supplies. Much has been written respecting constitutions and representative governments, but this is the essential point. Many and various modifications may be introduced, but in reality all* consists in establishing the throne as the centre of power and-of action, surrounded by asßetn. blies that shall deliberate upon the laws and the taxes. Does political liberty in this point of view originate in Protestant ideas ? Is it under any obligation to them ? Has it, in fine, any reproach against Catholicism ! 1 opeu the works of Catholic writers anterior to Protestantism, in order to ascertain their sentiments on this subject, and I find that they take a clear view of the problem to tie resolved. I examine rigidly whether they teach anything' opposed to the progress of the world, to the dignity of the rights of man ; I examine agam, whether they bear any affinity to despotism or to tyranny, and I find them full of sympathy for the progress of enliantenment and of mankind, inflamed with noble and generous sentijnenifl, and zealous for the happiness of the multitude. I remark, ludeud, that their hearts swell with indignation at the mere name of tyranny and despotism. I open the records of history ; I study the opinions and customs of the nations and tha predominating institutions ; I behold on all sides nothi'ig but fueros, privileges, liberty, cortes, states-general, municipalities and juries. All this appears iv the greatest confusion, but I see it ; and 1 am not astonished to discover aa absence of order, for it is a new world just arisen from chaos. I ask myself if the monarch possesses in himself the faculty of making laws ; and upou this question I very naturally find variety, uncertainty, and confusion ; but I observe that the assemblies representing the different classes of the nation take part in the enactment of lhe Jaws. I ask v hether they have any interference in the great affairs of the state j and I find it stated in the codes tba* they are to be consulted on all grave and important affairs ; I see nionarchs frequently observing this precept. I ask whether these assemblies possess any guarantees for their existence and thier influence ; and the codes inform me by the most decisive tests, and a thousand facts are at hand to convince me, that these institutions were deeply rooted in the customs and manners of the people. Now, what was then the predominating religion ? Catholicism. Were the people much attached to religion ? So much so that the spirit of religion predominated over all. Did the clergy possess great influence ? Very great. What was the power of^the Popes ? It was immense. Where do you find the clergy attempting to extend the power of Lings to the prejudice of the people ? Where are the pontifical decrees against such or such forms ? Where are the measures or plans of the Popes for the restriction of one single legitimate rights No reply. Then, I say, indignantly, Europe, under the influence of Catholicism, arose from chaos to order ; civilisation advanced af- a firm and steady pace ; th<? grand problem of political forms engaged the attemion of men of wisdom ; questions of morality and law were receiving a solution favorable to liberty, and yet the influence of the clergy was never greater even in temporal affairs, and the power of the Popes was in every sense quite colloseal. What ! one word from the Sovereign Pontiff would have smitten unto death every form of popular government, and yet such forn-s were receiving a rapid development. Where, then, is the tendency of the Catholic religion to enslave the people ? Where the infamous alliance between Popes and kings to oppress and harass the people, to establish in the throne a ferocious despotism, and to rejoice under its gloomy shades over tue misfortunes and the tears cf mankind? When the Popes had a quarrel with any kingdom, was it usually with the king or the people ? When it was necessary to oppose a firm fronc against tyranny and oppression, who stood forward more promptly or more firmly than the Sovereign Pontiff? Does not even Voltaire himself admit that the Pop* b restiained princes, protected the people, put an end to the quarrels of the lime by a wise intervention, reminded both kings and people of their duties, and hurled anathemas against those enormities ■which they could not prevent ? (Quoted by M. de Maistre in his book on the Pope.) It is veiy remarkable that the bull in Cona Domini, which created so much alarm, contains, in its fifth article, an 'excommunication against " those who should levy new taxes upon their estates or should increase those already existing beyond the bounds marked out by right." The spirit of deliberation, so common even at bhis period, i and which formed so singular a contrast with the tendency to violent measures, arose in a great measure from the example given by the Catholic Church during so many centuries. In fact, it is impossible to point out a society in which so many assemblies have been held combining in them everything distinguished by science and virtue. General, national, provincial councils and diocesan synods, are to be met with in every page of the church's history. Such an example, exposed during centuries to the view of the people, could not fail to influence and affect customs and laws. In Spain the greatest parts of the Councils of Toledo were also national congresses ; whilst the Episcopal authority pel formed it 3 functions in them watching over the purity of dogmas, and providing for the wants of discipliue, the great affairs of the state were also discussed in them in harmony with the secular power. In them weie enacted those laws which are still an object of admiration to modern observers. The Utopias of Rousseau are now fallen into complete disrepute amongst the best publicists. Representative governments are no longer to be defended as a means of bringing the general will into action, but as au instrument, through the medium of which reason and good sense may be consulted, which would otherwise remain dispersed throughout the nation. Legislative assemblies are now represented in works upon constitutional law, as the foci in which all knowledge serving to throw light upon the difficulties of public affairs may be concentrated ; they are held up to us as the representatives of all legitimate interests, as the organ of all reasonable opinions, the voice of all just complaints, a channel of perpetual communication between governors and their subjects, a measure of justice in the laws, a means of rendering the laws respectable and venerable in the eyes of the people 5 in short, as a permanent guarantee that the Government, never consulting its own interests, S >ould study only public utility and expediency. At a time when we

are informed in such fine term* what these assemblies ought to be, not what they are, it will not be uninteresting to refer to the Councils ; for we see at a glance that the councils must in a certain manner explain the nature and the spirit, and point out the motives and aim of political assemblies. I am aware of the fundamental differences between these two assemblies: men who receive their powers from popular elections cannot, in fact, be placed in the same rank as those who hare been appointed by the Holy Ghost" to govern the Church of God ; neither can the monarch who derives his right to the throne from the fundamental laws of the nation be confounded with that Rock on which the Church of Christ is built. I grant also that, whether with regard to the subjects discussed in the councils or with regard to the persons engaged in these discussions, and to the extension of the church over the whole earth, there must 'necessarily be a great dissimilarity between the councils and political assemblies with respect to the epoch of their being assembled, and the mode of their organisation and their proceedings. But we are not here going to imagine an ingenious parallel, and to seek with subtilty for resemblances -which do nob exist ; my only aim is to show the influence which the Reasons of prudence and maturity, given for such a long time by the church, must have exercised upon political laws and customs. If we consult the annals of the nations of antiquity, or those of modern times, we shall discover that all deliberative assemblies are composed of persons who have a right to sit in them by a regulation stated in -the laws. But to admit into them a man of knowledge, simply because he is so, is to pay a noble tribute to merit, — to proclaim in the most solemn manner that the care of ruling the world belongs properly to intelligence. This the church alone has done. I make this observation to preve that society is indebted mainly to the church for the progress it has made in this respect. I will adduce on thiß point a fact that has not been perhaps sufficiently attended to, but which clearly shows that the Catholic Church was the first to seek out men of talent wherever they were to be found, and unhesitatingly allow them influence in public affairs. I will not speak of that spirit which forma one of her distinctive characteristics among all other societies, which has ever led her to seek merit, and nothing but merit, and to raise it to the highest functions — a spirit which no one can deny her, and which has eminently contributed to her splendour and preponderance. " But it is very remarkable that the influence of this spirit has been felt where, at first sight, it might have, been least expected. In fact, it is well known that, according to the doctrines of the church, no private individual has any right to interfere in the decisions and deliberations of the councils ; hence, however learned a theologian or jurist may be, his- knowledge gives him no right whatever to take part in those august assemblies. Nevertheless, it is well known that the church has ever taken care to call-to them, men who, whatever might be their titles, excelled most by their talents or their learning. Who does not read with pleasure the Kst of learned men who, although not Bishops, were present at the Council of Trent ? In modern society do not talent, wisdom, and genius carry tha highest head, command the greatest consideration and respect, and present the best claims to the direction of public affairs, and to the exercise of a preponderating influence ? These should know that nowhere |have their claims been respected or their dignity acknowledged so well as in the church. What society, in fact, has ever sought as the church has to elevate then, to consult them in the most important affairs, and to give them an opportunity of shining in grand' assemblies. In the church birth and riches are of no importance. If you are a man of high merit, untarnished by misconduct and at the same time conspicuous by your abilities and your knowledge, that is enough ; she will look upon you as a gr<>at man, will always show you extreme consideration, treat you with respect, and listen bo you with deference. And since your "bvow, though sprung from obscurity, is radiant with fame, it will be held worthy to bear the mitre, the cardinal's hat, or the tiara. To speak in the langaage of the day, I may remark that the aristocracy of knowledge owes much of its importance to the ideas and discipline of the church. BaLMEZ.