ES

= APPLIED IMAGE Inc

peer uar ES Ear RET oia

À a eS Ae ch GON PL OR EEE

" A a tS t 4o tor GINA IS IRR A fuat usn tiis tese A

the arts by which the civilization of our age is so much adorned. Lastly, we must not forget that a vast fleld lies freely open to man's industry and genius, containing all those things which have no necessary connection with Christian faith end morals, or as to which the Church using no authority leaves the judgment of the learned free and unrestrained. From all this may be understood the nature and character of that liberty which the followers of liberalism so eagerly demand and proclaim. On the one hand, they demand for themselves and for the State a licence which opens the way to every perversity of opinion, and on the other, they hamper the Church in many ways, restricting her liberty within the narrowest limits, although from her teaching there is nothing to be feared, but very much to be gained. Another liberty is greatly proclaimed, namely liber.y of conscience. If by this is meant that every one may, as he chooses, worship God or not, it is sufficiently refuted by what has been already said. But it may also be taken to mean that every man in the State may, from a consciousness of duty, and without obstacle, follow the will of God and obey His commands. This indeed is true liberty worthy ofthe sons of God, which nobly sustains the dignity of man, and is stronger than all violence or wrong,— a liberty which the Church has always desired and held most dear. This is a liberty which the Apostles claimed for themselves with intrepid constancy, which the defenders of Christianity confirmed by their writing, and which the Marthyrs in vast numbers consecrated by their blood. And rightly so, for this Christian liberty bears witness to the absolute and most just dominion of God over man, and to the great and supreme duty of man towards God. It has nothing in common with a seditious and rebellious mind ; and it in no way derogates from obe-

is so that and e no »rals, aves ined.

and libe- | the r the permper berty her very | prothis rship it has (m to ‘om a ollow This God, nd is berty held ostles ancy, id by num- 30, for solute to the D B5 rebeln obe-

dience to public authority; for the right te command and to require obedience exists only so far as it is in accordance with the authority of God, and is within the measure that He has laid down. When anything is commanded which is plainly at variance with the will of God, there is a departure from this divinely constituted order, and a conflict with the Divine authority ; and then it is right not to obey.

By the patrons of liberalism who make the State absolute and omnipotent, and proclaim that man should live altogether independently of God, this liberty of which we speak, and which is joined to virtue and religion, is not acknowledged ; and whatever is done for its preservation is held to be an injury and an offence against the State. Indeed, if they spoke truly, there would be no tyranny, no matter how cruel, which we should not be bound to endure and to obey.

The Church would most earnestly desire that this Christian teaching, of which we have given the heads, should in reality and in practice penetrate every rank of society. "This teaching would be of the greatest efficacy to heal the evils of our dey, which are neither few nor light, and are the offspring in great part of the false liberty which is so much extolled, and in hich the germ of salvation and glory was suppose to be contained. This hope has been disappointed by the result; the fruit, instead of being sweet and wholesome, is tainted and bitter. Ifa remedy is desired, let it be sought for in a restoration of sound doctrine, from which alone the preservation of order and the defence of true liberty can be expected. Yet, with the discernment of a true mother, the Church weighs the great burden of human weakness; and she knows what is the course in Which the minds and the affairs of men are now borne along. For this reason, while not conceding any rights to anything that is not true

te = \ + pt ba d a E Rol " " a [NN - { —RBÜT UAM OL ANM IGUAL er Né

and honest, it does not forbid public authority to tolerate what is at variance with truth and justice, for the sake of avoiding a greater evil, or of obtaining or preserving some greater good. God Himself. in His providence though he is of infinite goodness and power, allows evil to exist in the world, partly that greater good may not be impeded and partly that greater evil may not follow. In the government of States it is well to imitate the Ruler of the world ; and, as the authority of man is powerless to prevent every evil, it has (as St. Augustine says) “ to overlook, and to leave unpunished, many things which are punished, and rightly, by Divine Providence.” But in such circumstances, if, for sake of ihe common good (which is the only just reason), the lew of man may and ought to tolerate evil, it may not and ought not to approve or desire evil for its own seke; for evil of itself, being a privation of good, is opposed to the common welfare which a legislator must desire and defend to the best of his power. in this, human law must endeavor to imitate God, Who, as St. Thomas says, in allowing evil to exist in the world, “neither wishes evil to be done, nor wishes it not to be done, but wishes only to permit it to be done; and this is good.” This senteuce of the Angelic Doctor contains briefly the whole doctrine as to the permission of evil. But, to judge rightly, we must acknowledge that the more a State has to tolerate evil, the further is it from perfection ; and that the tolerance of evil, which is suggested by political prudence, must be circumscribed by the limits which its cause, the public wel requires, Wherefore, if such tolerance woulu we injurious to the public welfare, and bring greater e vils on the State, it wi aid not be lawful; ‘or in such a case the motive of good is wanting. And although in the extraordinary condition of these : i. times, the Church usually aequiesces in certain ; |

— —— —— LT itil AM À SE ed

to ice, ainself.

less rtly rtly ornthe s to [11 to ngs ovl- » of on), |], it for n of ch a his imievil ) be only This the qs to nore 'rom h is 'umiblic ance ring ‘ful ; ting.

hese ‘tala

modern liberties, not because she prefers them in themselves, but because she judges it expedient to permit them, in better times she would use her own liberty ; and, by persuasion, exhortation, and entreaty, she would endeavor, as she ought, to fuifil the duty assigned to her by God of providing for the eternal salvation of mankind. One thing, however, remains always true—that the liberty which is claimed for all, to do all things, is not, as we have often said, of itself desirable, inasmuch as it is contrary to reason that error and truth should have equal rights. And as to tolerance, it is surprising how far removed from the justice and prudence of the Church are they who profess what is called liberalism, For, in allowing that boundless license of which we have spoken, they exceed all limits, and end at last by making no apparent distinction between truth and error, honesty and dishonesty. And because the Church, the pillar and ground of truth, and the unerring teacher of morals, is forced utterly to reprobate and condemn tolerance of such and abandoned and criminal c .aracter, they calumniate aer as wanting in patience and gentleness, and thus fail to see that, in so doing, they impute to her as a fault what is in reality a matter for commendation. But, in spite of all this show of tolerance, it very often happens that, while they profess themselves ready to shower liberty on all in the greatest profusion, they are utterly intolerant towards the Catholic Church, by refusing to grant it the liberty which is its right.

To reduce briefly, for clearness sake, to its principal heads, all that has been here written, and that follows from it, the summary is this: That, by a necessity of his nature, man is wholly subject to the true and everlasting power of God; and thet man has no liberty except that which must be in submission to God and in subjection to Eis will. To deny

—Á——Ó€€ € — ÓÓ AO

the existence of this authority in God, or to refuse to submit to it, is to act, not as a free man, but as one who treasonably abuses his liberty ; and in such a disposition of mind the chief vice of liberalism consists. The form, however, of this vice is manifold ; for in more ways and. degrees than one can the will depart from the obedience which is due to God or to those who share the divine power.

To reject the supreme authority of God and to cast off all obedience to Him in publie matters, and even in those which are private and domestic, is the greatest perversion of liberty and the worst kind of liberalism : and against this, what we have said applies in its fullest sense.

Next comes the system of those who admit indeed the duty of submitting to God, the Creator and Ruler of the world, inasmuch as all nature is dependent on His will, but who boldly reject the laws of faith and morals, which are above the natura! order, and are revealed by the authority of God; or who at least assert that there is no reason why regard should be paid to these laws, at least in public by the State. How wrong such men also are, and how inconsistent, we have seen above. From this doctrine, as its source and principle, flows that fatal maxim of the separation of Church and State; whereas, on the contrary, it is clear that the two powers, though dissimilar in functions and uneqnal in decree, ought nevertheless to live in concord, by the harmony of their actions and the fulfilment of their respective duties.

But this maxim is understood in two ways. Many wish the State to be separated from the Church wholly and entirely, so that in every right of human society, in institutions, customs and laws, in the offices of state, and in the education of youth, they would pay no more regard to the Church than if it

did not exist ; and, at most, would allow the citizens

ise to ; one ich a | confold ; » will od or

id to , and is the nd of id ap-

it inrand is de- | |aws atura!

d; or hy reoublie e, and a this t fatal State ; e two ieqnal rd, by

ent of

Many hurch iuman in the 1, they an if it itizens

indivi lually to attend to their religion in private if they pleased. . Against these, all the arguments by which we disproved the doctrine of the separation of Church and State are conclusive; and with this additional argument, that it is absurd that the citizen should respect the Church, but the State despise it.

Others do not oppose the existence of the Church, nor indeed could they; yet they rob her of the nature and rights of a perfect society, and maintain that it does not belong to her to legislate, to judge, or to punish, but only to exhort, to advise, and to rule her subjects ~-cording to their own conseut and wil. By their opinion they would pervert the nature of this divine society, and attenuate and narrow its authority, its office of teacher, and its whole efficiency; and at the same time théy would aggrandize the power of civil government to such an extent as to subject the Church of God to the empire and sway of the State, like any voluntary association of citizens, To completely refute such teaching, the arguments often used by the defendants of Christianity, and set forth by Us, especially in the Encyclical Letter Immortule Dei, are of great avail; for by those arguments it is proved that, by a divine provision, all the rights which essentially belong to a society that is legitimate, supreme, and perfect in all its parts, exist in the Church.

There remain those, who while they do not approve the separation of Church and State, think nevertheless that the Ohtrch ought to adapt herself to the times, and to conform to what is desired by the modern system of government: Such an opinion is sound, if it is to be understood of an adaptation that is consistent with truth and justice; in so far, namely, that the Church, in the hope of some great good, may show herself indulgent, and may conforin to the times in whatever her sacred office permits. But it is not so iu regard to practices and doctrines E

PEE eges aged ean eq onse xara Sli a I Gr 2

which a perversion of morals and a false judgment have unlawfully introduced. Religion, truth, and

iustice, must ever be maintained ; and,as God has ,

entrusted these great and sacred things to the care of the Ch arch, she can never be so unfaithful to her office as to dissemble in what is false or unjust, or to connive at what is hurtful to religion.

From what has been said, it follows that it is in no way lawful to demand, to defend, or to grant uncouditional freedom of thought, of speech, of writing, or of religion, as if they were so many rights which nature has given to man. For if nature had really given them, it would be lawful to refuse obedience to God, and there would be no restraint to human liberty. It likewise follows, that freedom in these things may be tolerated when there is just cause; but only with such moderation as will prevent its degenerating into licence and excess. And where these liberties are in use, men should use them in doing good, and no further.

Whenever there exists or there is reason to fear, either an unjust oppression of the people, or à deprivation of the Church's liberty, it is lawful to seek for such a change of government as will give due liberty of action. In such a case it is not an excessive and vicious liberty that is sought for; but only some relief, for the common welfare, in order that amidst the licence for evil the power of doing good may not be hindered.

Again, itis not of itself wrong to prefer a democratic form of government, if only the Catholic doctrine be maintained as to the origin and use of power. Of the various forms of government, the Church does not reject any that are fitted for the

welfare ofthe subject; she wishes only—and this nature itself requires—that they should be constituted without wrong to any one, and especially without violating the rights of the Church,

rment Unless through some exceptionable éondition of h, and things it be otherwise determined, it is well to take d has part in the administration of publie affairs, And e care the Church approves of every one giving his seri5 hos vices for the common good, and doing all that he , or to can for the defence, and preservation, and prosperity of his country.

sin no Neither does the Church condemn those who, if üncon- it can be done without violation of justice, wish to ing, or make their country independent of any foreign or which despotic power. Nor does she blame those who really wish to give to the State the power of self-governdience ment, and to its citizens the greatest possible meahuman sure of prosperity. So long as it is without license, | these j the Church has always fostered civil liberty, and cause ; this was seen especially in Italy in the municipal ent its prosperity, and wealth, and glory, which were obwhere tained at a time when the salutary power of the hem in Church had, without opposition, spread to all parts of the State.

o fear, These things, venerable brethren, which, under r à de- the qua of faith and reason, we have, in the to seek discharge of our apostolic office, now delivered to ve due you, will, we hope, especially by your co-operation | exces- with us, be useful unto many. In lowliness of heart ut only we raise our eyes in supplication to God, and earner that estly beseech Him to shed mercifully the light of 1g good His wisdom and of his counsel upon men, so that, strengthened by these heavenly gifts, they may in , demo- things of such moment discern what is true, and lic doc- may then in public and in private, at all times and use of with unshaken constancy, live in accordance with ont, the the truth that they have known. As a pledge of for the | these heavenly gifts, and in witness of our good will nd this to you, ven. 2ble brethren, and to the clergy and consti- people commiited to each of you, we most lovingly

pecially | grant in the Lord the Apostolic Benediction

Given in Rome, at St. Peter's, on the 20th day of June, in the year MDOCOLXXXVIII, the eleventh year of our Pontificate.

POPE LEO XIII

4iéme Scrie—No. 28.

LL e e LL LS

CIRCULAIRE AU CLERGE

ARCHEVÊCHÉ D'OTTAWA, le 24 septembre 1888.