.jpg)
Link to nobility.org.
Showing posts with label Social Teaching. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social Teaching. Show all posts
Sunday, August 28, 2011
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Does Distributism Hold Up to Rerum novarum and Quadragesimo anno?
And the 80th Anniversary of Pope Pius XI's Quadragesimo anno.
- Just to get you into the debate: read the post, "Why are Distributist Leaders Misleading their Aduience about Capitalism?," by Patrick Odou (in TraditionInAction.org).*
- Have you ever studied these two encyclicals? If you haven't, can you think of a better time to do so than now?! I would recommend you read Quadragesimo anno first, then Rerum novarum. Reading them in this order might help you avoid some misunderstandings about the latter.
- An excellent summary of traditional Catholic social doctrine is Ryan and Boland's The Principles of Catholic Politics, available on pdf from ITOPL.
* N.B.: I should not have to point out--but a number of complaints force me to do so--that I do not subscribe to everything that is affirmed (and especially the way in which it is affirmed) in TraditionInAction.org. My approach to issues is a bit more careful and reserved. Nonetheless, I am able to discern some very incisive and interesting points in some of its posts, and I find that much of what they write resonates especially well with a thoroughly traditional Catholic way of looking at things. I particularly benefitted from this article.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Garrigou-Lagrange on the Kingship of Christ
"The Universal Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ"Link to French article: Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P. "La Royauté universelle de Notre-Seigneur Jésus-Christ," La Vie Spirituelle, 73 (1925), 5-21.
Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi: The Social Kingship of Christ
Feast of Christ the King (Last Sunday of October), HymnsOnline Source: www.breviary.net
Ad Vesperas
At Vespers
Te sæculórum Príncipem,
Te, Christe, Regem Géntium,
Te méntium te córdium
Unum fatémur árbitrum.
Lord of the ages evermore,
Each nation's King, the wide world o'er,
O Christ, our only Judge thou art,
And Searcher of the mind and heart.
Scelésta turba clámitat :
Regnáre Christum nólumus :
Te nos ovántes ómnium
Regem suprémum dícimus.
Through Sin with rebel voice maintain,
We will not have this Christ to reign,
Far other, Lord, shall be our cry,
Who hail thee King of kings most High.
O Christe, Princeps Pácifer,
Mentes rebélles súbjice:
Tuóque amóre dévios,
Ovíle in unum cóngrega.
O thou eternal Prince of peace,
Subdue man's pride, bid error cease,
Permit not sin to wax o'er-bold,
The strayed bring home within the fold.
Ad hoc cruénta ab árbore
Pendes apértis bráchiis,
Diráque fossum cúspide
Cor igne flagrans éxhibes.
For this thou hangedst on the Tree
With arms outstretched in loving plea;
For this thou shewedst forth thy Heart,
On fire with love, pierced by the dart.
Ad hoc in aris ábderis
Vini dapísque imágine,
Fundens salútem fíliis
Transverberáto péctore.
And yet that wounded side sheds grace
Forth from the altar's holy place,
Where, veiled 'neath humblest bread and wine,
Abides for man the life divine.
Te natiónum Præsides
Honóre tollant público,
Colant magístri, júdices,
Leges et artes éxprimant.
Earth's noblest rulers to thee raise
Their homage due of public praise;
Teachers and judges thee confess;
Art, science, law, thy truth express.
Submíssa regum fúlgeant
Tibi dicáta insígnia:
Mitíque sceptro pátriam
Domósque subde cívium.
Let kings be fain to dedicate
To thee the emblems of their state;
Rule thou each nation from above,
Rule o'er the people's homes in love.
Jesu tibi sit glória,
Qui sceptra mundi témperas,
Cum Patre, et almo Spíritu,
In sempitérna sæcula. Amen.
All praise, King Jesu, be to thee,
The Lord of all in majesty;
Whom with the Father we adore,
And Holy Ghost for evermore. Amen.
Ad Laudes
At Lauds
Vexílla Christus ínclyta
Late triúmphans éxplicat :
Gentes adéste súpplices,
Regíque regum pláudite.
See now the Christ, in triumph high,
Unfurl his standard to the sky!
Ye nations, fall before his feet;
The King of kings with homage greet.
Non Ille regna cládibus :
Non vi metúque súbdidit
Alto levátus stípite,
Amóre traxit ómnia.
The kingdoms that he claims as Lord
He quelled not by grim fear or sword,
But rather, on the Cross raised high,
He would on love alone rely.
O ter beáta cívitas
Cui rite Christus ímperat,
Quæ jussa pergit éxsequi
Edícta mundo cælitus !
That civic state, how trebly blest,
Where Christ bears rule by man confessed;
There edicts of high heaven run;
There upon earth God's will is done.
Non arma flagrant ímpia,
Pax usque firmat fœdera,
Arrídet et concórdia,
Tutus stat ordo cívicus.
No civil strife can kindle there;
Good will prevails, and peace most fair;
There concord smiles 'twixt man and man;
Firm stands life's wise and ordered plan.
Servat fides connúbia,
Juvénta pubet íntegra,
Pudíca florent límina
Domésticis virtútibus.
There wedlock firm in hallowed troth,
And youth with sweet unsullied growth,
Make every home the dwelling place
Of every pure and modest grace.
Optáta nobis spléndeat
Lux ista, Rex dulcíssime :
Te, pace adépta cándida,
Adóret orbis súbditus.
May this thy light, for which we pine,
Sweet King of love, upon us shine;
And all the earth, in holy peace,
From thy glad praises never cease.
Jesu tibi sit glória,
Qui sceptra mundi témperas,
Cum Patre, et almo Spíritu,
In sempitérna sæcula. Amen.
All praise, King Jesu, be to thee,
The Lord of all in majesty;
Whom with the Father we adore,
And Holy Ghost for evermore. Amen.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
All Civil Authority Comes from Above
On the 129th Anniversary of Diuturnum Illud
From Pope Leo XIII's Encyclical on the Origin of Civil Government:
9. In truth, that the source of human power is in God the books of the Old Testament in very many places clearly establish. "By me kings reign . . . by me princes rule, and the mighty decree justice."(4) And in another place: "Give ear you that rule the people . . . for power is given you of the Lord and strength by the Most High."(5) The same thing is contained in the Book of Ecclesiasticus: "Over every nation he bath set a ruler."(6) These things, however, which they had learned of God, men were little by little untaught through heathen superstition, which even as it has corrupted the true aspect and often the very concept of things, so also it has corrupted the natural form and beauty of the chief power. Afterwards, when the Christian Gospel shed its light, vanity yielded to truth, and that noble and divine principle whence all authority flows began to shine forth. To the Roman governor, ostentatiously pretending that he had the power of releasing and of condemning, our Lord Jesus Christ answered: "Thou shouldst not have any power against me unless it were given thee from above."(7) And St. Augustine, in explaining this passage, says: "Let us learn what He said, which also He taught by His Apostle, that there is no power but from God."(8) The faithful voice of the Apostles, as an echo, repeats the doctrine and precepts of Jesus Christ. The teaching of Paul to the Romans, when subject to the authority of heathen princes, is lofty and full of gravity: "There is not power but from God," from which, as from its cause, he draws this conclusion: "The prince is the minister of God."(9)
10. The Fathers of the Church have taken great care to proclaim and propagate this very doctrine in which they had been instructed. "We do not attribute," says St. Augustine, "the power of giving government and empires to any but the true God."(10) On the same passage St. John Chrysostom says: "That there are kingdoms, and that some rule, while others are subject, and that none of these things is brought about by accident or rashly . . . is, I say, a work of divine wisdom."(11) The same truth is testified by St. Gregory the Great, saying: "We confess that power is given from above to emperors and kings."(12) Verily the holy doctors have undertaken to illustrate also the same precepts by the natural light of reason in such a way that they must appear to be altogether right and true, even to those who follow reason for their sole guide.
11. And, indeed, nature, or rather God who is the Author of nature, wills that man should live in a civil society; and this is clearly shown both by the faculty of language, the greatest medium of intercourse, and by numerous innate desires of the mind, and the many necessary things, and things of great importance, which men isolated cannot procure, but which they can procure when joined and associated with others. But now, a society can neither exist nor be conceived in which there is no one to govern the wills of individuals, in such a way as to make, as it were, one will out of many, and to impel them rightly and orderly to the common good; therefore, God has willed that in a civil society there should be some to rule the multitude. And this also is a powerful argument, that those by whose authority the State is administered must be able so to compel the citizens to obedience that it is clearly a sin in the latter not to obey. But no man has in himself or of himself the power of constraining the free will of others by fetters of authority of this kind. This power resides solely in God, the Creator and Legislator of all things; and it is necessary that those who exercise it should do it as having received it from God. "There is one lawgiver and judge, who is able to destroy and deliver."(13) And this is clearly seen in every kind of power. That that which resides in priests comes from God is so acknowledged that among all nations they are recognized as, and called, the ministers of God. In like manner, the authority of fathers of families preserves a certain impressed image and form of the authority which is in God, "of whom all paternity in heaven and earth is named."(14) But in this way different kinds of authority have between them wonderful resemblances, since, whatever there is of government and authority, its origin is derived from one and the same Creator and Lord of the world, who is God.
12. Those who believe civil society to have risen from the free consent of men, looking for the origin of its authority from the same source, say that each individual has given up something of his right,(15) and that voluntarily every person has put himself into the power of the one man in whose person the whole of those rights has been centered. But it is a great error not to see, what is manifest, that men, as they are not a nomad race, have been created, without their own free will, for a natural community of life. It is plain, moreover, that the pact which they allege is openly a falsehood and a fiction, and that it has no authority to confer on political power such great force, dignity, and firmness as the safety of the State and the common good of the citizens require. Then only will the government have all those ornaments and guarantees, when it is understood to emanate from God as its august and most sacred source.
10. The Fathers of the Church have taken great care to proclaim and propagate this very doctrine in which they had been instructed. "We do not attribute," says St. Augustine, "the power of giving government and empires to any but the true God."(10) On the same passage St. John Chrysostom says: "That there are kingdoms, and that some rule, while others are subject, and that none of these things is brought about by accident or rashly . . . is, I say, a work of divine wisdom."(11) The same truth is testified by St. Gregory the Great, saying: "We confess that power is given from above to emperors and kings."(12) Verily the holy doctors have undertaken to illustrate also the same precepts by the natural light of reason in such a way that they must appear to be altogether right and true, even to those who follow reason for their sole guide.
11. And, indeed, nature, or rather God who is the Author of nature, wills that man should live in a civil society; and this is clearly shown both by the faculty of language, the greatest medium of intercourse, and by numerous innate desires of the mind, and the many necessary things, and things of great importance, which men isolated cannot procure, but which they can procure when joined and associated with others. But now, a society can neither exist nor be conceived in which there is no one to govern the wills of individuals, in such a way as to make, as it were, one will out of many, and to impel them rightly and orderly to the common good; therefore, God has willed that in a civil society there should be some to rule the multitude. And this also is a powerful argument, that those by whose authority the State is administered must be able so to compel the citizens to obedience that it is clearly a sin in the latter not to obey. But no man has in himself or of himself the power of constraining the free will of others by fetters of authority of this kind. This power resides solely in God, the Creator and Legislator of all things; and it is necessary that those who exercise it should do it as having received it from God. "There is one lawgiver and judge, who is able to destroy and deliver."(13) And this is clearly seen in every kind of power. That that which resides in priests comes from God is so acknowledged that among all nations they are recognized as, and called, the ministers of God. In like manner, the authority of fathers of families preserves a certain impressed image and form of the authority which is in God, "of whom all paternity in heaven and earth is named."(14) But in this way different kinds of authority have between them wonderful resemblances, since, whatever there is of government and authority, its origin is derived from one and the same Creator and Lord of the world, who is God.
12. Those who believe civil society to have risen from the free consent of men, looking for the origin of its authority from the same source, say that each individual has given up something of his right,(15) and that voluntarily every person has put himself into the power of the one man in whose person the whole of those rights has been centered. But it is a great error not to see, what is manifest, that men, as they are not a nomad race, have been created, without their own free will, for a natural community of life. It is plain, moreover, that the pact which they allege is openly a falsehood and a fiction, and that it has no authority to confer on political power such great force, dignity, and firmness as the safety of the State and the common good of the citizens require. Then only will the government have all those ornaments and guarantees, when it is understood to emanate from God as its august and most sacred source.
13. And it is impossible that any should be found not only more true but even more advantageous than this opinion. For the authority of the rulers of a State, if it be a certain communication of divine power, will by that very reason immediately acquire a dignity greater than human - not, indeed, that impious and most absurd dignity sometimes desired by heathen emperors when affecting divine honors, but a true and solid one received by a certain divine gift and benefaction. Whence it will behoove citizens to submit themselves and to be obedient to rulers, as to God, not so much through fear of punishment as through respect for their majesty; nor for the sake of pleasing, but through conscience, as doing their duty. And by this means authority will remain far more firmly seated in its place. For the citizens, perceiving the force of this duty, would necessarily avoid dishonesty and contumacy, because they must be persuaded that they who resist State authority resist the divine will; that they who refuse honor to rulers refuse it to God Himself.
14. This doctrine the Apostle Paul particularly inculcated on the Romans; to whom he wrote with so great authority and weight on the reverence to be entertained toward the higher powers, that it seems nothing could be prescribed more weightily: "Let every soul be subject to higher powers, for there is no power but from God, and those that are, are ordained of God. Therefore he that resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God, and they that resist purchase to themselves damnation . . . wherefore be subject of necessity, not only for wrath, but also for conscience' sake."(16) And in agreement with this is the celebrated declaration of Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, on the same subject: "Be ye subject, therefore, to every human creature for God's sake; whether it be to the king as excelling, or to governors, as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of the good, for so is the will of God."(17)
15. The one only reason which men have for not obeying is when anything is demanded of them which is openly repugnant to the natural or the divine law, for it is equally unlawful to command to do anything in which the law of nature or the will of God is violated. If, therefore, it should happen to any one to be compelled to prefer one or the other, viz., to disregard either the commands of God or those of rulers, he must obey Jesus Christ, who commands us to "give to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's,"(18) and must reply courageously after the example of the Apostles: "We ought to obey God rather than men."(19) And yet there is no reason why those who so behave themselves should be accused of refusing obedience; for, if the will of rulers is opposed to the will and the laws of God, they themselves exceed the bounds of their own power and pervert justice; nor can their authority then be valid, which, when there is no justice, is null.
------------
Notes:
4. Prov.8:15-16.
5. Wisd. 6:3-4.
6. Ecclus. 7:14.
7. John 19:11.
8. Tract. 116 in Joan., n. 5 (PL 35, 1942).
9. Rom.13:1-4.
10. De civ., Dei, 5, 21 (PL 41, 167).
11. In Epist. ad Rom., Homil. 23, n. 1 (PG 60, 615).
12. In Epist. lib. 11, epist. 61.
13. James 4:12.
14. Eph. 3:15.
15. An allusion to the doctrine of "Social contract," developed by Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-78). According to this doctrine, all political power comes to rulers from the people.
16. Rom. 13:1-2, 5.
17. 1 Peter 2:13, 15.
18. Matt. 22:21.
19. Acts 5:9.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Modern Political Evils are Due to Our Exclusion of Christ and His Law from Politics and Public Life
Friday, January 15, 2010
Malta: Catholic Social Teaching in Practice
| (1) The religion of Malta is the Roman Catholic apostolic religion. (2) The authorities of the Roman Catholic apostolic church have the duty and the right to teach which principles are right and which are wrong. (3) Religious teaching of the Roman Catholic apostolic faith shall be provided in all state schools as part of compulsory education. |
Chapter 1, Article 2 of the Constitution of Malta |
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Quaeritur: Why Not Sign the 'Manhattan Declaration'?
Respondeo: The Manhattan Declaration affirms three things:
a) The sanctity of human life from conception to its natural end.
b) The traditional views on marriage and the family.
c) Religious liberty and freedom of conscience.
I am completely in favor of (a) and (b); it is (c) that I have problems with. It's precisely because I'm a traditional Roman Catholic who is faithful to the Magisterium of all ages that I cannot accept that. The third point contradicts Catholic teaching. This is no novel teaching that I made up, but the traditional teaching of the Church. Unfortunately, on this point we have been victims of liberal pressure and propaganda and most Catholics today are embarrassed of this teaching--and it for this reason you never hear it anymore.
It can be summarized thus:
- A Catholic state does NOT have the right to COERCE individuals or communities to practice the Faith PRIVATELY.
- A Catholic state does NOT have the right to COERCE individuals or communities to practice the Faith PUBLICLY.
- A Catholic state does NOT have the right to PREVENT individuals or communities from practicing false religions PRIVATELY.
- A Catholic state DOES have the right to PREVENT individuals and communities from practicing false religions PUBLICLY.
Therefore, no individual or community has a God-given, natural right to spread, teach, or practice publicly the errors of a false religion (if there were such a natural right, then the Catholic states of the past would have violated this right by preventing their non-Catholic citizens from spreading their heresies and other pernicious errors).
And it is this point that the 'Manhattan Declaration' denies, when it states:
Immunity from religious coercion is the cornerstone of an unconstrained conscience. No one should be compelled to embrace any religion against his will, nor should persons of faith be forbidden to worship God according to the dictates of conscience or to express freely and PUBLICLY their deeply held religious convictions. What is true for individuals applies to religious communities as well.
This contradicts the constant teaching of the ordinary papal magisterium. I recommend Michael Davies' excellent book on the subject, The Second Vatican Council and Religious Liberty, for a detailed explanation of this teaching and an account of how it became unpopular (though never retracted) after the Second Vatican Council.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Why Social Distribution of Wealth Should be Unequal
St. Thomas Aquinas, De Regime Principum IV.9:
Given that the Philosophers spoke about the community of possessions, it seems fitting to see what others, who themselves established societies, said on this topic. There were two philosophers who, thinking that disputes in their cities arose from the fact that one had a surplus of what another was lacking, wanted their communities to have equal possessions. One was Phaleas of Chalcedon, whom Aristotle mentions, and another was Lycurgus, the son of the king of Sparta, who established laws for the Lacedaemonians, as Justin reports, so that by all having equal possessions, no one would be more powerful than another.
Aristotle describes how Phaleas wanted to make properties equal by incorporating this into the constitution of his city, taking into consideration the ensemble of inhabitants and fields. Since this goal was difficult to achieve, he ordered that marriages be made between those of greater and lesser possessions in order to eliminate strife, injury, and the pretext for arrogance or pride. To move in this direction, he gave the example of other communities in which the inequality of temporal goods was supposedly the cause of social disturbance, being occasion for envy and giving rise to cupidity, and this, according to Paul, “is the root of all evils” (1 Tim 6:10). For this reason, in the laws he gave to the Lacedaemonians to conserve their society, Lycurgus abolished artificial riches or the use of coins for buying things, allowing interchanges only for natural riches.
Aristotle condemned this position, and demonstrated that such egalitarianism is completely impossible and, consequently, against reason.
First, because of human nature, according to which families do not multiply equally. It happens that the father of one family has many children, while that of another has none. It is impossible for them to have equal possessions, because one family would lack provisions while the other would have too much. This is against nature, because the family that had more children would become much less inside the community compared to the family that failed to have children. However, by natural law, the country or community should provide more for those who merit more.
Further, nature does not fail to give what is necessary, as I said above, and therefore neither should the civil government. But this would happen if possessions were made equal among families, because members would evidently die of penury, and the community would be corrupted.
However, what is most problematic does not result from the consideration of nature, but from the differentiation of persons. There is a difference among members of a community just as there is, analogously, among members of a body. The capacity and function of the various members are different. It is known that a noble or a man of higher level is obliged to have greater expenses than one who is not. It is for this reason that the virtue of liberality is called magnificence in a prince on account of the greater expense involved. This could not happen where possessions were equal, and this is why the Gospel itself testifies that the father of a family or king who set out on a journey distributed goods to his servants, but not equally: “to one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another just one, to each one according to their particular capacity” (Matt 25:15).
Nor does the very order of nature permit equality, for Divine Providence established all created things with a certain inequality, both by their nature and their merit. So, to enforce equality in temporal goods such as possessions, is to destroy the order that exists in things, which Augustine, with regard to inequality, defines as such: Order is “the disposition of equal and unequal things, giving to each what it deserves” (De civitate Dei, 19, 13). In this respect Origen was censured when he said in his Periarchon that all things are equal by nature, but were made unequal on account of their defect, that is, on account of sin. Therefore, egalitarianism of possessions does not prevent disputes. On the contrary, it increases them, and doing so, destroys or injures natural law when possessions are taken away from the poor, who deserve more.
Similarly, it is against reason that all things should be equal in a community, since God instituted all things “in number, weight and measure” (Wis 11:12), which places degrees of inequality in beings and, consequently, in cities and communities.
Aristotle describes how Phaleas wanted to make properties equal by incorporating this into the constitution of his city, taking into consideration the ensemble of inhabitants and fields. Since this goal was difficult to achieve, he ordered that marriages be made between those of greater and lesser possessions in order to eliminate strife, injury, and the pretext for arrogance or pride. To move in this direction, he gave the example of other communities in which the inequality of temporal goods was supposedly the cause of social disturbance, being occasion for envy and giving rise to cupidity, and this, according to Paul, “is the root of all evils” (1 Tim 6:10). For this reason, in the laws he gave to the Lacedaemonians to conserve their society, Lycurgus abolished artificial riches or the use of coins for buying things, allowing interchanges only for natural riches.
Aristotle condemned this position, and demonstrated that such egalitarianism is completely impossible and, consequently, against reason.
First, because of human nature, according to which families do not multiply equally. It happens that the father of one family has many children, while that of another has none. It is impossible for them to have equal possessions, because one family would lack provisions while the other would have too much. This is against nature, because the family that had more children would become much less inside the community compared to the family that failed to have children. However, by natural law, the country or community should provide more for those who merit more.
Further, nature does not fail to give what is necessary, as I said above, and therefore neither should the civil government. But this would happen if possessions were made equal among families, because members would evidently die of penury, and the community would be corrupted.
However, what is most problematic does not result from the consideration of nature, but from the differentiation of persons. There is a difference among members of a community just as there is, analogously, among members of a body. The capacity and function of the various members are different. It is known that a noble or a man of higher level is obliged to have greater expenses than one who is not. It is for this reason that the virtue of liberality is called magnificence in a prince on account of the greater expense involved. This could not happen where possessions were equal, and this is why the Gospel itself testifies that the father of a family or king who set out on a journey distributed goods to his servants, but not equally: “to one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another just one, to each one according to their particular capacity” (Matt 25:15).
Nor does the very order of nature permit equality, for Divine Providence established all created things with a certain inequality, both by their nature and their merit. So, to enforce equality in temporal goods such as possessions, is to destroy the order that exists in things, which Augustine, with regard to inequality, defines as such: Order is “the disposition of equal and unequal things, giving to each what it deserves” (De civitate Dei, 19, 13). In this respect Origen was censured when he said in his Periarchon that all things are equal by nature, but were made unequal on account of their defect, that is, on account of sin. Therefore, egalitarianism of possessions does not prevent disputes. On the contrary, it increases them, and doing so, destroys or injures natural law when possessions are taken away from the poor, who deserve more.
Similarly, it is against reason that all things should be equal in a community, since God instituted all things “in number, weight and measure” (Wis 11:12), which places degrees of inequality in beings and, consequently, in cities and communities.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Forgotten Teachings: Universal Suffrage is Madness
Pius IX, Address to French Pilgrims (May 5, 1874), in J.M. Villefranche, Pio IX, (São Paulo: Ed. Panorama, 1948), pp. 372-373.Online source: www.traditioninaction.org
I give you my blessing for the difficult but necessary task in which you are engaged, which consists of eliminating or diminishing a great affliction which plagues contemporary society: this is called universal suffrage.To entrust the decision of momentous issues to the naturally ignorant and passionate multitudes - is this not equivalent to leaving it to chance and running voluntarily toward the abyss? Yes, in this case, universal suffrage would better deserve to be called madness; and when the power of decision lies in the hands of secret societies, as so often happens, we can call it a universal lie.
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Forgotten Teachings: Condemnation of Public Religious Liberty
From Pope Pius VI, Brief Quod aliquantum (March 10, 1791) in Recueil des Allocutions (Paris: Adrien Leclere, 1865), pp. 53-55.
The necessary effect of the constitution decreed by the Assembly is to annihilate the Catholic Religion and, with her, the obedience owed to Kings. With this purpose it establishes as a right of man in society this absolute liberty that not only insures the right to be indifferent to religious opinions, but also grants full license to freely think, speak, write and even print whatever one wishes on religious matters – even the most disordered imaginings. It is a monstrous right, which the Assembly claims, however, results from equality and the natural liberties of all men.
But what could be more unwise than to establish among men this equality and this uncontrolled liberty, which stifles all reason, the most precious gift nature gave to man, the one that distinguishes him from animals?
After creating man in a place filled with delectable things, did not God threaten him with death should he eat the fruit of the tree of good and evil? And with this first prohibition didn’t He establish limits to his liberty? When, after man disobeyed the command and thereby incurred guilt, didn’t God impose new obligations on him through Moses? And even though he left to man’s free will the choice between good and evil, didn’t God provide him with precepts and commandments that could save him “if he would observe them”? …
Where then, is this liberty of thinking and acting that the Assembly grants to man in society as an indisputable natural right? Is this invented right not contrary to the right of the Supreme Creator to whom we owe our existence and all that we have? Can we ignore the fact that man was not created for himself alone, but to be helpful to his neighbor? …
Man should use his reason first of all to recognize his Sovereign Maker, honoring Him and admiring Him, and submitting his entire person to Him. For, from his childhood, he should be submissive to those who are superior to him in age; he should be governed and instructed by their lessons, order his life according to their laws of reason, society and religion. This inflated equality and liberty, therefore, are for him, from the moment he is born, no more than imaginary dreams and senseless words.
Thursday, December 03, 2009
Sunday, October 25, 2009
All Individuals and Governments Have the Obligation to Submit to the Kingship of Christ and to His Revelation
From Pope Pius XI's Encyclical Quas Primas:
17. It would be a grave error, on the other hand, to say that Christ has no authority whatever in civil affairs, since, by virtue of the absolute empire over all creatures committed to him by the Father, all things are in his power. Nevertheless, during his life on earth he refrained from the exercise of such authority, and although he himself disdained to possess or to care for earthly goods, he did not, nor does he today, interfere with those who possess them. Non eripit mortalia qui regna dat caelestia.[27]
18. Thus the empire of our Redeemer embraces all men. To use the words of Our immortal predecessor, Pope Leo XIII: "His empire includes not only Catholic nations, not only baptized persons who, though of right belonging to the Church, have been led astray by error, or have been cut off from her by schism, but also all those who are outside the Christian faith; so that truly the whole of mankind is subject to the power of Jesus Christ."[28] Nor is there any difference in this matter between the individual and the family or the State; for all men, whether collectively or individually, are under the dominion of Christ. In him is the salvation of the individual, in him is the salvation of society. "Neither is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given to men whereby we must be saved."[29] He is the author of happiness and true prosperity for every man and for every nation. "For a nation is happy when its citizens are happy. What else is a nation but a number of men living in concord?"[30] If, therefore, the rulers of nations wish to preserve their authority, to promote and increase the prosperity of their countries, they will not neglect the public duty of reverence and obedience to the rule of Christ. What We said at the beginning of Our Pontificate concerning the decline of public authority, and the lack of respect for the same, is equally true at the present day. "With God and Jesus Christ," we said, "excluded from political life, with authority derived not from God but from man, the very basis of that authority has been taken away, because the chief reason of the distinction between ruler and subject has been eliminated. The result is that human society is tottering to its fall, because it has no longer a secure and solid foundation."[31]
19. When once men recognize, both in private and in public life, that Christ is King, society will at last receive the great blessings of real liberty, well-ordered discipline, peace and harmony. Our Lord's regal office invests the human authority of princes and rulers with a religious significance; it ennobles the citizen's duty of obedience. It is for this reason that St. Paul, while bidding wives revere Christ in their husbands, and slaves respect Christ in their masters, warns them to give obedience to them not as men, but as the vicegerents of Christ; for it is not meet that men redeemed by Christ should serve their fellow-men. "You are bought with a price; be not made the bond-slaves of men."[32] If princes and magistrates duly elected are filled with the persuasion that they rule, not by their own right, but by the mandate and in the place of the Divine King, they will exercise their authority piously and wisely, and they will make laws and administer them, having in view the common good and also the human dignity of their subjects. The result will be a stable peace and tranquillity, for there will be no longer any cause of discontent. Men will see in their king or in their rulers men like themselves, perhaps unworthy or open to criticism, but they will not on that account refuse obedience if they see reflected in them the authority of Christ God and Man. Peace and harmony, too, will result; for with the spread and the universal extent of the kingdom of Christ men will become more and more conscious of the link that binds them together, and thus many conflicts will be either prevented entirely or at least their bitterness will be diminished.
27. Hymn for the Epiphany.
28. Enc. Annum Sacrum, May 25, 1899.
29. Acts iv, 12.
30. S. Aug. Ep. ad Macedonium, c. iii.
31. Enc. Ubi Arcano.
32. I Cor.vii,23.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)