CÆSARISM AND ULTRAMONTANISM

New Zealand Tablet, Volume I, Issue 53, 2 May 1874, Page 12

CÆSARISM AND ULTRAMONTANISM

Continued. Now, lot il bo clearly understood that in these assertions I am vindicating to the Church her divine rights. I urn not denying to the State its power to violate every Divine right upon earth, 'it may abuse its , power at the license of its will— lmperial, "Royal, Bureaucratic, Democratic. I deny only its right. "Id potest quod jure potest." It may re-enact and enforce the Lex Regia against the Church. But its power is molciicc and its acts are tyranny. I havo affirmed, then, that j the Co-'tui-ism of the Pagan world, which was the enemy of God and ! the destioyer of all the liberties of man, was by one Divine act reduced ' to it-, lawful sphere. The separation of the spiritual power from tho , n\ii, and the supremacy of the spiritual over the civil order of the \ Christian world, has redeemed Princes from the degradation of tyrants, and mankind from an inhuman slavery. Ca?-an-m, whether in one person, or in a Senate, or in a populace, alwajs has been, is, always must be, tyranny in the end and persecution in the spiritual order. The direct antagonist of this worst of human ills is the Divine law revealed by Jesus Christ and the Divine arutliont) committed to His Church. It has been, and ever will be, the -ouice of all human liberty. The Church was mother of all free M.iti(in = . All freedom of soul and conscience in men, m families, in Stall ', comes from the limitation of the civil power; but the limitation ol the civil power can only come from a superior authority ; that eupenoi authority is not in the order of material power, but of Divine rmht. 'llu: limitation which has changed Ca>ansm into Christian IVlon.ueliy is law, and that law the law of God, represented, expounded, applied upon earth by an authority of liis own creation and by judicial powers of His own delegation, independent of all human Legislaliues and superior to all prerogatives of Kimrs. Now, what I have here aborted is UltramonUnism, but it is not Ultramontanism alone; it is Chn-fianity as it has been held by ah men, m all ages, by Catholics and by Protect xnts alike, by Utraiaoniancsund by Galileans, by Anglicans and by Pivsbyteiians, by the Free Churches of England, whose noble and pathetic history h. is just been wnttrn.on the eve, as I fe ir, -.f then- aposta^ from the high and heroic spirit of their Foamier and Fathers, m patience and fidelity to the great law of Clm-tian Libeity m Jebiis Chmt. lhe. sum, then, ol our argument is this : Con-km con-ists (1) in tlu union ol the two poue.s m one person; (2) in the claim of supremacy over all c insc a.id persons , (3) in the exercise of coercion ii spir.lual m il'ers; (i) i.i 1 1 • c i-ol,\t)on of the national religion on tho p.L.itmtno fjiu-n jurisdiction c m ent.'r the State ; (5) m tlie isolano • ol nuuu:, d ( hurdles, aui ther-bv the r.jLction ol |he unnersal uahority ot the Chiuvh. LlLiauioulanis „ c -on \r > (1) >,i the .rp^iation of tho two po.M" s, '„d the. \i_sMig 'u'i ii (Kiuu, 1 - |unuiN; (2) m claiming -lor tl.c l i inch the -ole light to dt'l c dv i lie, o f laiih an.l moraL ; and (:)) to li\ Vio l.n its oi its o\n ]'i"i,ni ;,, )n m tint -nhere; {4) in ilk .. ' .-."lublo un m \v lili aiul i''imi -ion Io ihe urn ekal j.i i-dic i i> ot 1 ..' iiol\ tueh, then, wisn •> C .e- irism ol die lie ■then ,-.o'l 1. 'h ..a nuoii ul „i 'i. o ..' . an, joih m miiMi i e of i i/ii o1).o 1 ). i I ' ■ • I ''"° l vl ' »i^ woni-p vl l s-u, L v,a-, the l^iivunt of tl,i 3 I'utL a. id in, i k.i V-w i\ uiiiu.ioM' lii.vi b r . 11. > "i ir..u ii c two io*, -, Im ,iii.l ii,i si nil i. a, Mt) U-ti'ik r ..utlioritiL, and I'li-Ko uiju.i . , ii.utHm I'r.Mjiu-jiio. 1,. iii, s sm> o,\e the o . n, -, 10410 ..'ud. . . hi, ,m i 01, Miiuv!ibl )u ,i|i llC oni _" • .i. 1 1 -■ >a v. ii 1 • v i ii , m \ , ;. i!>-d I i.= .i , i .i n in, in i ,1 . ,_. '■ is ih e u r,,vernmjnt ol il -\ i'i ll^)i,oi : jwl 'i, lin i,' t;,a I M 'iiHi-tiMiiLd u-r a fun. . . <-'"•-'"' ')' "' ' ia\ur Ihi-m r,! n 1. Ih.ou-li tho v hole hislji^ u> ( i.ii- i mi, ,ki ' >< tin- !'j . !■ \u \h c , .ucntn (.'ntiuj it k.a i'i L ii i »\a\s -.i i\i il; ,) i - ■ ; i. . 'L uoria.,l' n; o was i o -ou'u.nan- t'et! tjt'ii. .1- ir-l fun' wui-n 1,, m! v u'-uppuir. 'ihoßy/.i'imi,, i .-j.olisi i oiu nul ! x loin „ I ecvlesiashcd hbji'y is a Ly.v.oiu. r,\/a, U,., ai.d d<. ;ioi>e „,-j toineitible terns. Lhe Run n hi. .pue «a. no HDivrioho.i iu v , L . VVest than the same tendoiu \ Dll i-i to uup r eir. Ihe-i Chaikmi ne stretched his protectorate, or tpiio.ate^ot (Htw.-id llm _,-, mto mat,;, -violations of ccelesiastic.il !ibeit\. Bia the Casaris-u of liv- Sa\ m, feua\mn, and Bavarian, iMiipuurs, as sl.i. ki the Loi.lhets of bt. Gregory VII., Alexander iiJ. lunociut 1.V., miKes t! m igu ot C'lurlunagnc to appear normal and Lluibiian, like the reign ol Cousla ltiue. The two lliici caUsLs, <A th ■ ie\ival of Cfssarism in Christendom are— fiist, the sdiool of juiists crcatea by the Pandects ofJubtiuian

and the University of Bologna, f rom which sprang the whole theory and organisation of the Ghibelliue Csesarism ; and, secondly, the influx into Italy of Greeks and Greek literature, and Byzantinism after the full of Constantinople. It was this that rendered possible in Christian Europe the Royal supremacies of the 16tli century. The theory of investing the Prince with supreme legislative aud judicial power over all persons and iv all causes, ecclesiastical and civil, is not only Byzantine but Pagan. It is the reunion in one person of the two potters which Christianity lms put asunder. And it has been folio wod iv every country where it has taken root by civil despostisiu and by religious persecution. The most Ample exhibition of this is to bo found in the Tudor legislation, and in the enforcement of a legaa religion in England and Ireland by pi»nal statutes. The religioiu history of England, Scotland, Denmark, Sweden, and tho North o Germany in the 16th and 17th centuries is the history of the revival of Caisarism, and ot a reaction against the liberty of roligiqn and of conscience with which Chiisthas made us free. What is chiefly to be noted is, that this oppression of Christian freedom has been accomplished to the cry of liberty of religion and of conscience. For proof of this it is enough to refer to a book entitled A History of the Free Churches of England (9), in which the sufferings of catholics and Noncomformists under tho Cassarism of the English Crown are patiently and fully described. The effect of this mixed civil and , religious despotism has been to obtain for one-half ot the English people and the whole population of Ireland a complete religious liberty. Scotland has anvu}s rejected the interferences of Kings in matters of religion; ;md in one d.iy oac-half of the Scottish population has rejected even the remnants of civil interference lingering in the law uf patronage. Tho political tendency of the whole world is towards " live Cl mrches ;" that i?, to the desecration of the civil power by the rejection of the Church. The temporal sovereignty of the Supreme Pontiff has been violated on the plea that the civil and spiritual powers may be once more separated, not as Providence has ordained hitherto, but on the impossible theory of a free Church m a free State. Tho Italian Revolution hxs put this forward as irs solution of the religious conflicts of the 19t.1x century. It will endure until the first quarrel, aud the first quarrel will arise upon the first Pontifical Act in condemnation of the usurpations of the free State. The supremacy of the civ.l | power wiLl then be declared to be vital to its freedom. It must, howi ever, be acknowledged that violent and sacrilegious as the acts of the | free State have been and still are in practice, Italy has hitheito j refrained from committing itself the domains of principle and of i law) to doctrines such as are embodied in Prussian Ecclesiastical legis- ; lution. From this the Catholic faith and instinct of Italy has saved it. ihrough 20 years of revolution it has never entangled itself in the . tyrannous and pedantic absurdity of the Falck Laws. Tt has had two j things profoundedly impressed upon its intellect and its con-science — I the one tho impious monstrosity of the " Pivus Cffioar ; " tho other, 1 an inextinguishable consciuusuesss that the Catholic Church is a I Divine creation. Excepting a handful of Petruecelli della Grattin is, no j people in Europp can look on with less S3 rnpathy, or more secret eon1 tempt upon the Piussian persecution, than the Italians. But the pre- , tent ions of the Berlin Government are only the first indications of an I Imperial ommp jtence, which will hereafter be more explicitly and , violently put forth. This Impel ial legnktion may be regarded as the link between the old Ko\al supremacies of the sixteentli century, and the levived Lex Her/ ia which the auti-Cliristian revolution is preparing for the future of i£mo|v. Tin 1 following quotation will best exhibit; what I mean. 1 now »i\l> the p lssaw (rom a leading journal representing a schoo 1 of politic il ilo< (1111 ■ winch I'lough not jet numerous lias already obtained a place irnonj^t us : — "After s.ijing that theiv is a conviction widely spread (hostile to the Catholic Chinch)," the writer goes on to »'t} , " siJc by side with this nvs itn c con.ictim a positive conviction, vague indeed and indistinct, but e\cvodi.igly powerful, has been auJ still is grooving up luat a nation n d siuii is cyclically ;i better tiling than .1 Church ; tli.it it, is, 111 la'-t, of positive hum n insti ntions at present known to us tho lno-t s icred, tho most d < j pl> rooh d 111 liunuu muuiv, and the boat lutuil to cnj.igo tho ai!-(tijns of .1 rational man. Contrast for a moimiit the i.nglith nad m .uul tho Catholic Church, and --cc lo which ot tlu two it is best «o,'tli in iOn^li-hin ui\ while to b; Ij\ il. . . . All this, we say, pu's 11 itio 13 — for tlu s ims uoi t of statjiiiuiLs no true ot m >-t other nations. hh t »i los Jl iglan.i — abo\ c Uaihohci as objects ot nill-ctioii and li>\jl ( } We should regaul no one as really loy.il to his nation who di 1 pot regard it ai being to him a Li^ha 1 and more - i r^d obj.-tt tlrui 'my Lhurui whatever" (10). We must leganl this doctnno us tcmvl I Paganism. Iv tho Pru-.-fciaii LhainLc 1 , Dv Fail \ lud down the following doctrine 0,1 the 1 3th 1/ Jamury li-i : — •" \, c h;r-e bicome nioro ' couorefe ," we have 10 .i i'l 1 the i! ,'.ls (1 tho .state There is tho reason v. hy th_> pro. )i '•.>' 111 1 .s 1111: iccr ,o'.' On the 17th of January ho uid a --'■ It t!i • M i'c .ti I 'hi- (.' Ii 1 'io (o'ial ri the domains of moral power, tho bi-'u 1 in Ms; al.\ i\s ', >c lh' -.apren.icy iv the. domaiu of iiu" ihat 11 to .- n , Jo NL.it; P c • oh'ii.i..; — '' Cms am iiuib to 'ajri^that t'lk, ChuiL' 1 ! 'il ail ' 1 10 1 u'l'.n oi OijiLility i T i th do 'in 101 ajsLvuiioiu«, on condilion tji . -no ,Uj o hi^ all p )\vcr 1:1 1 hi> 110 11 ii ->f th1 coutrotu' — ihat i-, H,. lit. is a theory ; i-'oi cc 13 the only re lr)" (11). Tiiii br:ii j-> out the ."-.cuco ot moderr. Cxsanain : \v'\u 1 i a no' only ih it tlu kit ate h.ii .1 > Ime p'j.ver over the Cnuuli in a. L 1 visu'is a id caul's, but aupr 1 n> 1 l^ht to determine the limits of the rights of the Lliuivh, its hijerln.-, unices, .Mid duties; or, m other v.o .la, tn.itr the time ca.i deter. 1. lib and the Church ca mot deteiMimj wn it ia tho tvuthonty and commission entrusted to it by its Divina Eoandji. L'his is tbo Mial point m the contention, ihe Church cltu us to be ii c sole, beeaiuo the Divi lely appoi.itod, judge of tlie spbore of its owi spintuil ollici, aiuhoril}, and jiuu 'iction. Tho modern CoCd.irisai claiuu t'us ultimate povvi r ol determination for the Stnte. ("). J^i Mi IJdljuit b. 'Ae.it^. .Mi.ill isOS. (IU). l Pall M,UI UazaU. 1 Jan. -!'., I&T3. (11). ' Kl-mio diio Dou.v .Mo:uljh.' .Uai, isii. lur liv., p. -'7.