The New Zealand Tablet WEDNESDAY, JULY 30, 1924. A WONDERFUL DISCOVERY

New Zealand Tablet, Volume LI, Issue 32, 30 July 1924, Page 29

The New Zealand Tablet WEDNESDAY, JULY 30, 1924. A WONDERFUL DISCOVERY

« OMEBODY sent us a copy of a paper published in a little southern town, and wo have read ' without much profit the editorial efforts it makes to prove from certain remarks of Mr. Belloc’s that the struggle between Protestantism and Catholicism in America is a battle between the civil authority and “the ■. Roman Catholic power which would dominate it,” To support his contention, the editor tells us that Mr. Belloc is “widely recognised as, the .foremost lay protagonist of the Roman Catholic faith in England,” that he is a very distinguished Englishman, both bold and logical. Now Mr. Belloc* is not widely known as “the foremost lay protagonist of the Roman Catholic Church in England” he is not an Englishman but a naturalised Frenchman who served his time iff the army of France as good French patriots do; and if he has won distinctions that does not prevent Catholic writers from calling him to order frequently for his mistakes. In the present case he has been corrected for his uninformed statements about America by such an authority as John A. Ryan; and even where he was not wrong himself the southern paper went very wrong in . drawing conclusions which, perhaps, were no more foolish than those commonly drawn by No Popery people. - * ‘ Here is the extract from Mr. Belloc which has convinced the critic that Rome is on the warpath : “The United States present a religious contrast to Europe, and especially to England, in the fact that their religious experience is isolated; that the reaction of Catholic culture upon Protestant is hardly felt; that certain consequences of religious difference which Ave in Europe had known for generations and allowed for were, in the United States, hitherto unknown, have but recently appeared, are still novel and as yet not fully analysed. Of these, by far the most importantso much the most im- # portant that it covers all that is worth noting in the field the necessary conflict between the Civil State and Catholic Church where the two are not identified. “The Catholic Church is in its root principle at issue with the Civic definition both of freedom and of authority. For the purpose of the State, religion is either a universally admitted system or a matter of individual choice. But by the definition which is the very sold of Catholicism, religion must be for the Catholic, first, a supreme authority superior to any claims of the State; secondly,.a corporate thing, and not an individual thing; thirdly, a thing dependent upon Authority, and not upon a personal mood; fourthly, a guarantee of individual freedom in all'that is not of Faith. . . V, “. • • For the Catholic, it is not he himself, it is the Church which can alone' discover, decide and affirm. Moreover, the Catholic regards that which is so decided and ?:• affirmed as- good "and salutary, forming the only home 'of

the human 'race)"outside; which are but puerilities or de- , spairs, and. he regards that which denies or combats such .- Authority and such affirmation as evil in its consequences' and destructive to. the dignity and right ordering of man." Now, ■ as Dr. Ryan already has pointed out to Mr. Belloc, it is only ignorance of the spirit of the American constitution that could enable him to talk of the necessary conflict between the State and the Church in the United States and American Catholics, loving their country and its Constitution, resent the assertion made by a visitor who has already some reputation for making ex cathedra statements on shallow grounds. In a word,, people who know better than Hilaire Belloc tell him candidly that he has a great deal to learn about the .matter. As for the part of the extract which deals with the authority of the Church, it contains nothing that we cannot read in any manual of doctrinal instruction — new or wonderful at all! It comes to-thiS; The Church-and State are two perfect societies, existing side by side in the world. The end of the Church, the eternal welfare of mankind, is of a higher . order than the end of the State, which is the temporal good of its members. Conflict between the two will not occur as long as the State remembers that it is a creature . of God to whom it owes submission and reverence. Conflict - will occur when the State proceeds to pass laws which are opposed to prior and higher laws, such as the Divine Law or the Natural Law. Believing that the Church is the Divinely appointed teacher, and that it is better to serve God than Mammon, Catholics will refuse to obey the State when they are taught that it would bo wrong to do so: in other words, they will obey God, who speaks through the Church, rather than legislators like, let us say gentlemen prepared to bo part and parcel in a. bargain to pass per- . secuting legislation in return for the votes of the P.P.A. Or, again, a Catholic soldier will obey the Church, which tolls him that murder is always sinful, rather than take part in acts like the assassination of the Mayors of Limerick and Cork, tho sacking of Balbrigg'an, the slaughter of Canon Magner, and similar tactics which were among the means . used by the British Government in its endeavor to keep the people of Ireland in chains after the war that made the world safe for hypocrisy. Any reader will find the teaching on the question of the relations of Church and State set forth plainly in any of our standard works on Canon Law or Theology and in such manuals he will have the assurance that what he reads is reliable and official, whereas for the Q ■ ■ views of Mr. Belloc or any other individual there is .no such assurance. '■'■ •-'*'.■' ''■-• One word more, to illustrate the genius of the southern editor. He says: •*' We must confess to a certain feeling of disappointment at the conclusion of Mr. Belloc, reached after so enthusiastic a proclamation of the supreme authority of a church, that under this authority one would be permitted drink all the alcohol he desired. "Lastly," he concludes with due solemnity, "the Catholic instinctively feels his right of personal choice in all that is not defined by the creed: e.g., in the matter of food and drink." A lame and impotent conclusion! Mr. Belloc, observe, did not say anything of the kind that his critic makes him say. The man who would say such a thing would be proclaiming his own folly. Mr. Belloc is bold and logical, but not stupid. "Unfortunately that is more than any one who reads the extract just'quoted can say for Mr. Belloc's critic. "The Catholic instinctively feels his right of personal choice in ail that is, not defined by the creed: e.g., in the matter of food and drink," is what Mr. Belloc did say, and we all subscribe to it. The southern editor, by some mysterious, weird method, not unknown' in similar critics of the Church, tries to persuade his friends that Mr. Belloc proclaims that the Church gives to its members, the right to drink 'all the alcohol they It seems to us that after that exhibition ;of intelligence it would be useless to bother ; further with this critic. ■

siiii