“A free Church in a free State”—the great idea of such Italian liberals as
had any conception of a church at all, was surely to be realized when the
fellow-countrymen of Count de Cavour came to rule at Rome. What was the
case? There was neither a free church nor a free State? That State is not
free, wherein the people are not fairly represented. The new Italian State
could not claim any such representation. It was held in such contempt that
the great majority of the Italian people, unwisely, indeed, we who are
accustomed to constitutional government would say, declined to take part
in the elections. Thus the entire control of the country was left in the
hands of two comparatively small factions—the _moderate_ and the _extreme_
radicals. It is of little importance to the mass of the Italian people
which of these factions holds sway for the moment. They both legislate and
execute the laws in opposition to the will of the nation, and in the sense
and for the benefit of the prevailing faction. They are both alike
characterized by hatred of the Christian faith and all religious
institutions. This feeling impels them to war against everything connected
with Christianity, and to substitute what the Germans of the same school
call _Kulturkampf_, or, _a struggle for culture_, on principles the very
opposite of those on which is founded the high civilization of the
nineteenth century. No doubt these apostles of _Kulturkampf_ have a much
higher civilization in store for mankind. But it must be admitted that
they follow a strange way of bringing about the much-desired consummation.
Robbery and sacrilege they believe, or profess to believe, will promote
the great object of their ambition, and so they practice, to their heart’s
content, robbery and sacrilege. Have they forgotten that, according to
their code, it is a _Jesuitical_ teaching, that evil may be done in order
to produce good. These legislators and administrators of laws claim to be
superior to the _effete_ errors of the age. Why then should they still
cling to those of the despised _Jesuits_? Because, no doubt, it serves the
purpose of the moment, and affords some relief to, if it does not satisfy,
an insatiable passion. On approaching Rome they affected much reverence
for the Holy Father and the institutions of religion. They could do
nothing less, accordingly, than enact their now famous _law of
guarantees_, which assured complete protection to the Pope and the
institutions over which he presided. Let us enquire for a moment how this
law was enforced. It surpassed, in generosity to the church, the
legislation of the most chivalrous monarchs. It gave up the royal rights
of former kings in regard to nominating and proposing to ecclesiastical
offices. It dispensed with the oath of bishops to the king, and formally
abolished (see articles fifteen and sixteen) the _exequatur_, as it is
called, authorizing the publication and execution of all notable acts of
ecclesiastical authority. Such clear and apparently solemn regulations
appeared to be inviolable. Nevertheless, whilst one hundred and fifty
bishops were named by Pius IX., from the commencement of the Piedmontese
invasions till the month of August, 1875, no fewer than one hundred and
thirty-seven of this number were not acknowledged by the civil power,
because they did not apply for and obtain the _exequatur_. The ministry
was not satisfied with this. It pushed its tyranny to such an extreme as
to refuse in future, to grant the _exequatur_ and to expel from their
residences all bishops who should not possess it. Not only did the
government withhold the incomes of the bishops, and confiscate the
revenues which the piety of the people had devoted for their support, it
also employed its gensd’armes and police agents in seizing the prelates at
their homes and casting them into the streets. The new rulers went further
still, and displayed their financial genius in a way peculiar to
themselves. They actually subjected to the tax on moveable property, the
alms which the bishops received from the Sovereign Pontiff, who, like
themselves, was robbed of his proper income. Thus did the beggarly
government make money out of the small resources of those who, when the
exchequer failed to fulfil its duties, endeavored themselves, as best they
could, to make up for this dereliction.
Military conscription is essentially tyrannical. It is particularly so
when used as an arm of offence against the church. It was applied to
ecclesiastical students, and even to such as were in holy orders,
expressly for the purpose of depriving the church of recruits from the
seminaries. None could now be found to renew the ranks of the clergy,
except such as were invalids or of weak constitutions, or who, by miracle,
persevered in their vocation, after four years’ service in military
barracks.
The public robbers, notwithstanding their professions and guarantees,
audaciously laid sacrilegious hands on the properties of the Basilicas of
St. Peter and St. John Lateran, which they themselves had expressly
reserved for the use of the Holy See. They hesitated not even to seize the
funds of the celebrated missionary college—Propaganda. These properties
they did not simply annex, as they did so many, besides, that belonged to
the Church. They created a liquidating junta or commission, as they called
it, which should change all immovable ecclesiastical properties that were
not already confiscated into national rent. Such national rent, as is well
known, had only an ephemeral value. It was, at best, variable; and Italy,
which was partially bankrupt when it reduced the interest due to its
creditors, will, sooner or later, according to the opinion of the ablest
writers, land in complete bankruptcy. The rents substituted by force,
instead of real property, will then possess the value of the _assignats_
of the first French revolution.
The endowments of Propaganda, appointed by Christian generosity, at
different epochs, were not designed for the use of Rome or Italy, or any
Catholic country whatever. Their object was the support of remote
missions. This was well understood. The very name of the institution shows
that it was. In vain did Cardinal Franchi apply to the tribunals. The
properties of the great universal institution, as well as those of the
Chapters, were sold at public auction, and the confiscation, although not
immediate, was in course of being accomplished. The state of things did
not improve on the advent to power of Messrs. Nicotera and Depretis, the
former a radical of the most extreme views, and the latter, very little,
if at all, better. These revolutionists having gained the object of their
ambition, might have been inclined to halt in their mad career; but, their
party driving them onward, they proceeded to still more rigid and cruel
measures. It is not too much to say that such men are digging a grave for
the House of Savoy and Italian unity.
The measures aiming at the destruction of religion may be summarized as
follows:
1st. They have introduced civil registration of births, as an equivalent
and alternative to Christian baptism.
2nd. They have permitted and encouraged civil interment instead of
Christian burial.
3rd. They have abolished oaths in courts of law.
4th. They have systematically encouraged the profanation of the Sunday and
the great festivals of Christmas, Easter, etc., by ordering the
prosecution of the government buildings and other public works on Sundays;
by ostentatiously holding their sessions on those days: by ordering public
lectures in the universities and higher schools on Sundays as on week
days, etc.
5th. They have established civil marriage as an equivalent before the law
for Christian marriage, and as necessary, in all cases, besides the
religious ceremony.
6th. They have established a recognized system of public immorality by
indemnities, and deriving from this shameful source a revenue which is
applied to augment the secret service funds.
It is easily observed that in every detail of this enumeration, religion
and morals are directly attacked. The Pope, who is the chief of religion
and the great preacher of morality, cannot give any countenance to such
things. Far less can he identify himself with such anti-Christian
legislation. This is the insuperable impediment to his reconciliation with
the present Rulers of “United Italy.” He can resist evil, and resist unto
blood, as so many of his sainted predecessors have done. But when there is
question of accepting it, his only word must be, as it has always been,
_non possumus_. What would men say, if He, who is the Head of the Church,
and the chief guardian of the truth confided to Her keeping, could be
brought by the threats or caresses of ephemeral worldly Powers, _to call
good evil, and evil good_!