subjects, wherever found, declaring for them moral right and wrong, restricting any such use of their rights as might jeopardize their eternal welfare all within the limits of the requirements of her triple purpose, as laid down by the Divine Positive Law, of preserving the internal order of faith and morals and its external manifestation, of providing adequate means of sanctification for her members, and of caring for Divine worship, and over all bound by the eternal principles of integrity and justice declared in the natural and positive Law of God." "In case of direct contradiction, making it impossible for both jurisdictions to be exercised, the jurisdiction of the (Roman) Church prevails, and that of the State is excluded." Pope Pius XI in his Encyclical of December 23, 1922, said: "The divine origin and nature of Our power as well as the sacred right of the community of the faithful scattered throughout the entire world, require that this sacred power should be independent of all human authority, should not be subject to human laws. They require in fact that these rights and power should be completely independent and that this should be made manifest." 39 The jurisdiction of the State is thus asserted to be, in objective truth, wholly subordinate to the sovereignty of the Roman Church over the subjects of the latter in all matters belonging to the moral life of man. Further, it is asserted that the right of the Church of Rome to its propaganda in the State and to all means which, in the opinion of the Church, are necessary thereto, in 39 The Forum, January, 1928, p. 53. Acta Apostolica Sedis, vol. 14, 1922, Dec. 27, Encyclical Urbi Arcano. cluding property and property rights, is superior, in objective truth, to the sovereignty of the State. The question will be asked: are there not limitations which, according to Roman theory, qualify the sovereignty of the Pope? It is said to be limited by the law of nature, but the Church, under the revealed law, is the expounder of the law of nature, and is teacher and guardian thereof.40 Again, it is said to be limited by the revealed law, i. e., the Holy Scriptures, the declarations of the Fathers, and by the Tradition of the Roman Church; but since the Pope is substantially supreme in the interpretation and exposition of Scripture, of sacred writings, and of Tradition,11 they impose no real constitutional limitation. "La tradizione son' io," said Pope Pius IX: "I am Tradition." 42 If the power of the Pope has limitations, he is, in effect, the sole judge of the limitations. A limited power, with the donee of the power as sole judge of the limitations, is not in any true sense a limited power; it is a legal fiction. The Pope has no Supreme Court and is, there 40"... The (Roman) Church has authority to define not merely those truths which form part of the original deposit of revelation, but also such as are necessarily connected with this deposit. The former are held fide divina, the latter fide infallibili." C. E., vol. xii, p. 265 b. This power of defining is wholly vested in the Pope by the Constitution Pastor Eternus, chapter iv, see infra, appendix I, p. 290. 41 See Constitution De Fide Catholica, chap. ii, in D. C. Mirbt, Quellen zur Geschichte des Papsttums und des Römischen Katholizismus, p. 457; Constitution Pastor Eternus, chap. iii and iv, infra appendix I, pp. 285–290. 42 Acton, History, p. 549. "The Dogmatic Commission of the (Vatican) Council proclaims that the existence of tradition has nothing to do with evidence, and that objections taken from history are not valid when contradicted by ecclesiastical decrees. Authority must conquer history." Ibid., p. 515. fore, supreme over constitutional limitations in the Church, if any exist. His power is analogous to that of the President of the United States if the powers of Congress and of the Supreme Court were blended with the executive power. It is, as has been said, independent of constitutional restraint through the membership of the Church, because the power of the Pope is derived in theory not from the people but from God.43 Limitations to such a power are imaginary, not real, and the sovereignty of the Pope is, in substance, absolute. To it, the Roman Church requires that its members shall assent, in matters belonging to morals, as an integral part of their religious faith, and such assent is as much a part of the Roman Catholic profession of faith as the belief in Jesus Christ Himself as Son of God.44 By this sovereignty the Church of Rome is distinguished from other churches. The latter impart their instruction to members as opinion.44a The instruction of the Pope is imparted to Roman Catholics as law, according to an article of faith. The instruction in the 43 The teaching in Roman Catholic schools of the Christian Brothers (cf. p. 29, note 26) is, as we have seen: "In things of ecclesiastical right, there is nothing that the Pope may not do when necessity demands it. . . . The Pope has no superior here below; he is subject to God alone." 44 Cf. chap. IV, infra p. 75. 44 The use of the word "opinion" here has been unjustifiably criticized. It refers to current instruction or discipline not to dogma nor to natural or divine law. In the Roman Church such instruction is divine law-the emanation of sovereignty in divine right. In other religious bodies such instruction or discipline is opinion. They claim no sovereignty. Their instruction and discipline are the emanation of the collective will of the society itself and are changed from time to time by that will. one case is human opinion; in the other it is sovereign and divine law de fide. Herein is the point of conflict between the Roman Church and the modern State: in the Roman Church, absolute monarchy de fide, the mind and the will of one; in the State, democracy, a synthesis of free wills, government by the consent of the governed, with the right of ultimate appeal to the community. Thus in the modern State two sovereignties exist, that of the State and that of the Roman Church, claiming jurisdiction in certain points over the same matters. We quote Mr. Belloc again: "The (Roman) 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 soul of (Roman) Catholicism, religion must be for the (Roman) Catholic First, a supreme authority superior to any claims of the State. 45 The Contrast, p. 160. 9945 CHAPTER III THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH IN THE THE subjects of Papal sovereignty exist in every State, and, in virtue of the Church sovereignty to which they owe obedience de fide, they form a Roman Catholic solidarity in every State that may, under the electoral system, come into sharp conflict with the membership of the community not included in such solidarity. The conditions are such that on any given question of moral interest the free synthesis of all minds in the State or community may be prevented by the obedience owed de fide by the Roman Catholic solidarity to the Pope.1 Cardinal Gibbons in 1909, in his much discussed essay, said: "... Many Protestants say, 'we obey our conscience, you obey the Pope.' Yes; we obey the Pope, for our conscience tells us that we ought to obey the spiritual authority of the Pope in everything except what is sinful. 'But,' they reply, 'we do not believe that any human power should come between the human conscience and duty.' Neither do we; but while you believe in private judgment, we believe in a religion of authority which our conscience tells us is our lawful guide and teacher in its own sphere. You say that you believe in religious freedom. Do you, however, interpret this free 1 This has repeatedly occurred in the older States of Europe in instances to which we refer. (cf. pp. 209, 214, 245, 250–257). |