New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. SATURDAY, AUGUST 22, 1874 CATHOLIC TEACHING AS TO CHURCH AND STATE.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume II, Issue 69, 22 August 1874, Page 4

New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. SATURDAY, AUGUST 22, 1874 CATHOLIC TEACHING AS TO CHURCH AND STATE.

(continued.)

We concluded our remarks on this subject in our last issue with the followirig words : "We go farther even than this and maintain that it is not alone in consequence of the morality of acts that the Civil >Powe* is subordinate to tbe Church. We contend that from its very nature and end the Civil Power is put in dependence and subordination to' the Church."

The relative excellence and subordination of societies are determined by the end proposed ; or, to use more technical language, societies are in relation to each other aa their respective ends. If you wish to determine the nature andexcellence of any society, ascertain the end it has in view, and you at once learn what it Js. For example, a society of philosophers is superior to one of mechanics or tradesmen, because the end the former has in view is to make investigations in the elevated sphere of intellect, and enlarge the field

of human knowledge ; whilst the latter, totally engaged in the pursuit of common place and perishable things, by the very fact of this being its end, confesses to an inferiority. In order, however, that one society should be subordinate to another, it is necessary that the relationship between them should be that of a means to an end. FTere, then, is a principle that is universally admitted, and it now only remains for us to apply it to Church and State. Regenerated man has two homes, earth and heaven ; or, in other words, two native countries— one on earth, the other in heaven. To the former is entrusted the destinies of time, to the other, those of eternity. But the former is, evidently, only a halting place on the road to the latter, and is consequently subordinated to tlie latter as a means to an end. The relations between Church aud State are almost those whicli in man subsist between the soul and the body. The intellect does not interfere directly in the phenomena of sensation, but permits the body to act with full liberty in its own sphere. Nevertheless, the moment the senses in the pursuit of their object become dangerous to the soul, this neutrality ceases. That instant it becomes the imperative duty of reason to command, and, if necessary, to punish these indocile and rebellious servants.

And thus it is with the Church in relation to the State. United together, these two societies constitute but one body, in which there must be dependence and subordination of the lower to the higher faculties. The spiritual Power, however, never dreams of interfering in purely temporal affairs, so long as these do not interfere with her end. " The subordination of the Temporal Power to the Religious Power," says Cardinal Antonelli, "extends also to the pre-eminence of the Priesthood over the Empire. Thus, the authority of the Empire depends on that of the Priesthood, as do human things depend on those that are Divine, temporal things on spiritual things. If temporal happiness, which is the end of the Temporal Power, is subordinate to eternal happiness, which is the spiritual end of the Priesthood, does it not follow, considering the end, in view of which God bas established them, that one of these Powers is in subordination to the other, as are respectively subordinate the ends which they pursue T Such, in reference to the subordination of the State to the Church, are the principles so energetically maintained by the Cardinal Secretary of State in his Despatch to the Imperial Government of France — principles which, His Emiuence observe', "have at all times constituted the foundation of Catholic teaching, and which have been defended by "an innumerable army of writers."

In this now famous Memorandum of the French Imperial Government, there is an assertion to which we wish to direcp particular attention. M. Daru says : " Modern principles are indispensable to the dignity as well as to the-liberty of men." This statesman means the absolute independence of' the State. But we hope we shall be able to show that, on the contrary^ this absolute independence is an outrage, and an assault on the rights of man. Modern piinciples, which are nevertheless very old, for they prevailed before the establishment of Christianity, both in Greece and Rome, -and elsewhere, erect the State into an idol— a species of god, to which the citizen is unmercifully sacrificed; and these principles call upon him to be happy — nay, proud of the immolation. But our principles are the reverse of all this. We hold that the State essentially exists for the promotion of the greater good of each one of its members. On no other principle can our dignity as reasonable beings, together with our political rights be protected.

Each individual can say, I am a man before I am a citizen. 1 existed as a rational being, with all my rights as such, before I became a member of the State. My creator is my first Lord and my first benefactor j to him, therefore, is due the preference iv my allegiance. I know, however, that my duties to Him are inseparable from obedience to His Church ; that, in fact, these are identified, and that it is impossible to pay him his due without such obedience. According to a fundamental principle of Christianity, he that hears the Church hears God, and ho that despises the Church despise* Go !. It was to his Apostles, Christ addressed these words : "He that hears you, hears me; and he that despises you, despises me." True, by my birth I belong to the State ;' but then, by my baptism, I certainly belong to a society whose rights are superior to all others,"

I have, then, an undoubted right to demand of the State, of which 1 am a member, to so order her legislation that it shall not interfere with my religious convictions ; for, otherwise, I should find myself in the painful necassity either of

trampling on the Civil Law, or of disobeying God. It follows from this that the State, in order that it may equitably discharge its obligations shnuld be in accord with the Church. But as a sad experience teaches only too certainly, such is not always the case even when governments call themselves Catholic. In cases of conflict, in which spiritual and temporal interests are at stake, such as are, unhappily too frequent iv our day, what must be the result ? One or other of the 'powers oppnsei must give way and renounce its pietensions Wnich shall it be ? What should the State do 1 If the State retains any respect for the dignity of man and the rights of the citizen, jn obedience to the stern demands of justice, it will retire from the contest and yield La the Church. It must be convinced that whatever can be purchased only at the expense of conscience and of God, can never be for the citizen a real temporal advautage or gain. In a word the State cannot possibly continue to protect the rights of its' citizens, the protection of which is the ratio of its existence at all, unless it be subordinate to the Church.