The Sun.
London, England, 1860-01-13 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FIIIDAY EVENING, JANUARY 13, 1860.

its enemies. Whether the policy of -England ought to en-
courage or sanct ion, these schemes of supremacy ever Europe
which are plainly visible in the whole scope and spirit of
this insidious, publication, I will not now stop to inquire,
though it is matter of the gravest importance. I will ad-
dress myself only to the nuestion as proposed and discussed
by the writer. ,
In the second paragraph ho lays it down and argues the'
the I'opo must, for ieligipgs purposes,. boa temporal Sove-
reign, and that the temporal power of the Pope is necessary
for his spiritual power. • And this, he truly says, is essen-
tial not only for France and Austria, but also for England,
Russia, and Prussia. ' •
He then proposes the.questiou, How can the Popo be at
the same. time Pontiff and King ? It seems to him that
justice which punishes the guilty is destructive of the
mercy of the Gospel, and that the Head of the Church, who
condemns' false religion, cannot tolerate dogmatic error.
Has he never heard that it,is God himself who has given the
sword to human Governments to punish evil-doers ? And
will he deny the mercy of God becausb God not only per-
mits but commands that the guilty shall suffer punishment ?
(an Gist, who is the author of the Gospel, command any-
thing inconsistent with its precepts ? Where, then, is the
conflict between the Pofitiff who teaches the Gaipel and the
Prince who administers justice tempered with mercy? In
both characters he exercises power derived from the same
Divine authority, and justice is no more inconsistent with
mercy in God's minister than it is in God himself. And
why should, it be impossible for the Head of the Church to
tolerate error while he endeavours to combat and dispel it
by means in accordance with the Christian religion P The
vvtiter cannot expect the Popo to encoUrrige religiouserror, nor
to sanction its diffusion among his subjects. But the Govern-
ment of the Holy See persecutes no one, and protects all in
the enjoyment of their civil rights. The problem, then,
which this speci ms writer proposes for solution does not
exist. Nothing in the character of a good King is inconsis-
tent with that of the Head of the Catholic. Church. It
would, indeed, be impossible to describe the ideal of a
Christian Prince' others:die than as ri person exercising his
regal power ii the practice of every Christian virtue, and
according to the precepts-and spirit of the Gospel. Where,
then, is the difficulty of the supposed problem ? The writer,
instead of dealing in vague generalities about " human in-
terests hnd-social wants," ought to have clearly pointed to
seine essential duty incumbent on a King which the Sove-
reign Pontiff is .precluded by his religious character and
office from performing. He has certainly pointed out no
lush disqualification.
But, having asserted the existence of the problem, he pro-
ceeds to solve it in his own fashion, aid to serve his own
purpoSe. " The power of the Pope," he says, " can only be
a paternal power; it must resemble rather a family than a
State. Thus not only it is not necessary that his territory
should be very extensive, but we believe it is essential that
that torritority should he very small. The smaller the ter-
ritory, the greater the Sovereign will be." The naivete of
this passage is truly 'amusing. Can any one fail to see its
true spirit ? Machiavelli says that a certain class of persons,
who shall be nameless, fall into the error of supposing that
the rest of mankind are fools. And the concluding- sentence
reminds one of the well-known lines—
" My' wound is great because it is so small.
" Then it were greater:vsere it none at all."
The writer goes on to say that a large State implies cer-
tain exigencies which it is impossible for the Pope to satisfy.
He enumerates them in phrases which may mean a great
deal or very little, but to which it is extremely difficult to
attach any definite signification. They are " political life,"
" the bringing institutions to perfection," " participation in
the general movement of ideas," " to benefit by the trans-
formations of the times the conquests of science and the
progress of the human mind." How far the present Govern-
ment of France satisfies these exigencies, taken in the full
sense of the words, might be a curious subject of inquiry.
But the writer asserts that these things could not exist
under the Government of the Pope, because the laws of the
country would be chained by dogmas, and its activity para-
lysed by traditions. What does this mean ? The dogmas
of the Church are, no doubt, opposed to a restless desire for
change, inordinate pride, ambition, and covetousness. But
they are not opposed to the progress of science; industry,
civilisation, and social improvement. On the contrary, the
Christian religion and the Catholic Church have greatly
favoured and encouraged them. It is difficult to grapple
with vague common• places and platitudes, such as " the
movement_of ideas," "the transformations of the times,"
and " the progress of, the human mind," Lie. ; but undoubt-
edly there is nothing in these things, rightly understood, in-
consistent with tho doctrines and traditions of the Church,
and they might all exist under the Government of the
Sovereign Pontiff. Bat, assuming that these inconve-
niences would arise if the Pope were the Sovereign of a
great State, what effect would that proposition have on the
matter in hand ? Aro the dominions of the Holy Sot, in-
cluding the Legations, a great State P Undoubtedly not.
The population of the Roman States does not exceed 'that
of London and the suburbs. They aro undoubtedly one of
the smallest States in Europe. But the author of the
pamphlet, after assuming that the Pope's little kingdom is
subject to the supposed exigencies of a largo State, concedes
that, as the Pope cannot *satisfy them, foreign occupation 1
becomes inevitable. To this last point I may on some
future occasion return. I will only say here thatsif foreign
occupation be necessary, it is certainly not because the
Roman State is a great State.
The writer thus proceeds to sum up his arpruent:—
" Aiusi done le pouvoir_temporel du Pape:vat uecessaire et
mail it est incompatible avec un kat de quelque
stondue."- These last words aro remarkable. The Pope must
ben Sovereign, but his State must not be of some extent.
He clearly means that the Pope's State should be of no
extent at all And then he goes on to say, "II doit vivre
sans armee, sans representation legislatif, et, pour ainsi
dire, sans code et sans justice." It would. be difficult' t)
treat such a proposal seriously, if it did not excite indigna-
tion as a most audacious attempt to mystify and dupe the
public. The proposal is that whereas "it is necessary in a
religious point of view that the Pope should be Sovereign"
(p. 7), and as the temporal power of the Pope is necessary
for the exercise of his spiritual power" (p. 6), he is to be re-
stricted to a state which is not to be " of some extent" ("ds
quelque etendue"), and which is not to have any ono of those
attributes which are absolutely and essentially necessary to
constitute a sovereign state. The intended State is to have
no one of the three branches of the sovereign power—no
legislative, no executive, and no judicial power. To call the
Pops a sovereign under such circumstances would be a
most impudent mockery. His Holiness would be reduced to
the condition of one of the native deposed princes in India.
And, to complete this monstrous piece of spoliation and
usurpation, the pamphlet proposes that he should be " pro-
tected by a federal army." No one can doubt that in such
an army the Piedmontese and revolutionary element would
greatly preponderate. The Supreme Head of the Catholic
Church would be a prisoner in tho Vatican. And all this is
brought forward and proposed with the most specious and
hypocritical professions of veneration for the sacred office
and person of the Holy Father. This proposal, if carried
into effect, would no doubt give a preponderating power to
France. Would it be for the interest of England f If Eng-
land sanctions or fails to oppose it, what will be the effect in
Ireland, where the violation of the rights of the Holy See
will be looked upon with the bitterest and most burning in-
dignation ?, This pamphlet is indeed an outrage and an in-
jury to every Roman Catholic in the United Kingdom. It
proposes to place the Head of the Catholic Church in the
hands of France and her humble ally, Sardinia, depriving
him of all those things which it acknowledges to be neces-
sary for the due performance of his august and sacred
duties

The financial part of this monstrous scheme is worthy of
the rest. It is proposed that the Holy See shall be main-
tained by an annuity from the Catholic Sovereigns of
Europe. What would be the consequence ? If at any time
the Holy Father did not concur in the wishes of one of
these Sovereigns, or in any way gave him umbrage, the
Huly See would be depriveikof a part of the means of exis-
tence. The Head of the Church would not have as much-
independence as any ordinary bishop, who is not a pen-
sioner, but a proprietor subsisting on his own property.
The Supreme Pontiff might, indeed, envy the independence
of the country parson, who at least lives on his own free-
hold under the security of the laws of property.
I come now to the part of the pamphlet which regards the
Legations. Stripped of all verbiage and commonplace, it
means this :—That whereas France by invading Tuscany
has revolutionised the Duchies, already prepared by the
ambitious intrigues of her ally Sardinia, and the revolution
has extended to the Legations ; and whereas the revolu-
tionary faction in the Legations has for a few months main-
tained its power and kept down the massof the people, who
are not rebels against their Sovereign, therefore the Pope is
to be robbed of the best part of his dominions, to which he
is lawfully entitled under the most solemn treaties and
by most ancient possession. If this proposal were car-
ried into execution, the public law of Europe would bo
subverted and every throne shaken to its foundation. I
say advisedly that the pretended Government in Romagna
exists contrary to the wishee of the mass of the popula-
tion and by means of the most arbitrary measures; the
people are not allowed to read, to write, nor to speak any-
thing contrary to the wishes of the reigning faction and
secret societies. The pretended Parliament of Romagna
does not represent more than 1-60th of the popula-
tion. The number of voters is only 1,800, and not even
one-third of that number could be induced by force, fear,
and corruption, to concur in the elections. The taxes are
anticipated and the treasury plundered. If the Pontifical
forces marched on Bologna, there would bo an imme-
diate return of the Legations to their allegiance. But the
revolutionary army, commanded by Piedmonteso officers
and supported by Piedmont, prevents the Popo from reliev-
ing his subjects from the despotism under which they suffer.
Notwithstanding the rigorous measures of the Provisional
Government to intercept communications, frequent and re-
peated appeals for protection aro brought to the feet of the
Holy Father. But his Holiness has not en army sufficient
to keep the revolutionary forces in the Duchies in chock and
at the same time to protect his faithful subjects in Romagna,
and thus enable them to recover their freedom of action.
And yet, in the face of this state of things, the pamphlet
asserts that the separation of Romagna from the Papal
Crown is an accomplished fact. If this be so, if on such
grounds as these the Pope is to be robbed of his provinces,
contrary to every principle of public law and the faith of the
most solemn treaties, then all lawful government is utterly
insecure, and the rights of Sovereign Powers must depend
on the mere temporary and precarious fluctuations of revo-
lutionary changes, the machinations of secret societies, the
will of demagogues and their tools, and the intrigues of am-
bitious and unprincipled politicians. I will not now say
anything of the means by which the revolutions in Central
Italy were brought about, except that they involved doc-
trines subversive of all the principles by which human so •
ciety is kept together ; but I assert, without fear of contra-
diction, that if the existence of a few months of aprovisional
Government in a revolted province be held to be a sufficient
ground to despoil the lawful Sovereign of his rights, then
the laws on which kingdoms and republics and all other
politics are founded must be shattered and subverted.
Among the flimsy pretences for the unprincipled proposal to
rob the Pope of his territories the writer of the pamphlet
brings forward the difficulty of the question—how is the
Pontifical authority to be restored in Romagna ? But he
answers tho question himself by referring to the European
Congress. (Sect. xi.) That is the proper tribunal to as-
sert, not, indeed, the lawfulness of usurpation and robbery,
but the sacredness of treaties, and the maintenance of those
laws on which the existence of sovereign rights and the
peace of mankind are founded, and without which political
society cannot exist and the European commu city of nations
must fall into confusion and constant bloodshed. Let the
Congress assort and enforce the undoubted rights of the
Holy See. When this is done the Government of the Holy
Father will no doubt resume its authority with that mild-
ness and clemency which belong both • to the Holy See and
to the reigning Pontiff, and make every effort for the good