Temporal and Spiritual.
By J. G. Holland
GREAT public interest is concentrated upon the present struggle of Germany with the papal power, and the free discussion of the relations of that power to the allegiance of the citizen to his own Government, now in progress in England. Mr. Gladstone’s manifesto has placed the vital question involved squarely before the English people, and not less plainly before all the people of Europe. The ingenious protest and denial of Archbishop Manning and other adherents of His Holiness, have failed to do away with the charge of the ex-Premier, simply because it cannot be done away with. The assumption of supreme authority over the consciences of men by a man who claims infallibility, is one which no Government constituted like the British can tolerate with either dignity or safety. The German Government is right in principle on this question, whether it be just and wise in its measures or not; and Mr. Gladstone occupies a position that is impregnable. The dogma of papal infallibility is an offense to the common sense of the world, and the doctrine of supremacy which grows out of it as naturally as a tree grows out of the soil, is a challenge and an insult to every Government that holds and protects a Catholic subject within its limits. This would seem to be too plain a matter to call for argumentation. To claim supremacy in matters of conscience, and to hold, at the same time, the power of deciding on questions of conscience—of declaring what is right and what is wrong, in all things, civil as well as religious—is to claim the supreme and all-subordinating allegiance of every man who belongs to the Catholic communion in every country of the world. How any fair-minded man can deny this is beyond our comprehension; and the only reason why the matter does not make as great a commotion in America as it does in Great Britain and Germany, is that, as a State, we have no connection with the church. Practically, the matter is of very little importance to us. The Catholic church has the same toleration here that the Methodist church has—no more, no less. Our Government simply protects it in its liberty, and sees that its own laws are obeyed, irrespective of all church communions. We come into no collision with it, because we assume no church prerogatives and functions. England has a State church, and it cannot tolerate the existence of two authorities that assume supremacy within the same kingdom; but England is weak in its position, because itself assumes to be an authority in matters of religion. Theoretically, the sovereign of Great Britain “can do no wrong.” Here is a doctrine of “infallibility;” and though it has no such range as that of the papacy, and is applied rather to the breaking than the making of law, it is just as absurd as that against which Mr. Gladstone inveighs so mightily. There the state undertakes to meddle with the church. It supports and in many ways directs it, and exercises functions that are just as illegitimate and presumptuous as those assumed by the pope with relation to the different States. The same may be said of Prussia; and the pope has good right to say, if he chooses to do so: “Take your hand from religion, and I will take mine from the State. So long as you choose to make a State affair of religion you must not blame me for doing the same. Give me back my kingdom and my temporalities. Shape your policy to the necessities of my church. Until you do so, I will define the limits of your power, and of my own, as it seems best to me, and best for the interests I have in charge.” For ourselves, we rejoice to witness the present struggle. In the progress of the world, and in the free development of the power of Christianity, it was necessary that it should come; and its coming marks an epoch and demonstrates an advance. Just so soon as the nations of the world can comprehend the fact that the kingdom of Christ is not a kingdom of this world; that it is within men, and is not in any way complicated with civil organization and administration,—just so soon will all strife between the State and church cease. The pope, if report be true, has recently said that the only country where he is truly and practically respected is the United States. The reason is, that the state simply minds its own business, and lets him alone. When other States attend only to their civil functions, and let the church, in all its denominations, take care of itself, they will care no more about the dogma of papal infallibility than they do about the civil dogma of regal infallibility. They will not even take the trouble to “speak disrespectfully of the equator.” It is now essentially a fight between the head of the greatest of the churches and the civil heads of the smaller churches. We have no such head in America, and therefore we don’t care. Particularly, we do not care how soon the fight proceeds to its predestined end—the disestablishment of all the churches of Europe. That is the natural solution of the difficulty, and the only possible one. It may come through “a great religious war,” which the wise are foretelling, but which real wisdom will avoid, by putting away, at once and forever, its cause. The ox is a strong and excellent beast, but he cannot be yoked with the horse, who is equally strong and excellent. The horse cannot work according to his law without wearing out the ox, and the ox cannot work according to his law without degrading the horse, and cheating him of his power. The church and the State can no more be yoked together with natural advantage than the ox and the horse. Their nature, wants, modes of action, and drift of power, are utterly different, and in the long run the ox will drag down and degrade the horse. To undertake to unite the machinery of the State and the church is, in the end, to degrade the latter. To make the church in any way subordinate to the shifting necessities and caprices of politics is a practical desecration of holy things. We believe that no State church ever existed, whether presided over by pope or king, that did not become corrupt, or so nearly dead as to lose its aggressiveness and healthfulness as a spiritual power. Mr. Gladstone, and his friends, have only to labor earnestly for the disestablishment of the Church of England, to lose all practical interest in the papal dogmas, and the papal assumptions. By doing this, they will at least be in a position, as Englishmen, to oppose them with some show of consistency.—Dr. J. G. Holland, in Scribner for February.