The Sun.
London, England, 1867-10-21 00:00:00

-NAPOLEON AND THE ROMAN QUESTION,

France is weary of being governed by a mute and
mysterious sphinx, said, the other day, one of the
boldest of the French papers; and it spoke the truth.
France under Napoleon, at the present moment, is
like a sensitive man under the infliction of a blister ;
the irritation is universal, though the causes which
produce it are various. France, in a word, is de-
prived of the chief benefits of peace by the per-
petual fear of war, and of the chief good of war
—the desire or the necessity of keeping peace.
And such a state of things France owes to the
uncertain policy of Napoleon, vacillating between
what he desires and what he fears to attempt. In
his statesmanship there is no great principle, no
grand idea, no high sense of duty, no deep love of
country. His policy is a clever contrivance, which
up to a certain point has been hitherto successful ;
in his own dominions lie plays off one party against
another; he feeds and flatters the masses, and offers
luxurious and loose living to the rich. His foreign
policy has been directed on the whole to foster
revolution, so as to make it an instrument in his
hands to extend the influence of France. Now,
however, he begins to find the Revolution is too
much for him. The slave has become the master.
In Germany it has helped to destroy Austria's
power and to strengthen Prussia ; in Italy it
threatens to trample under foot a Convention to
which Napoleon is pledged before Europe.
Speaking of Mexico, M. Thiers said " Napoleon
cannot afford another such blunder." To be driven
out of Mexico by the threats of America, to be
checkmated in Germany by Bismarck, to be out-
witted in Italy by Garibaldi, are humiliations and
reverses which a sensitive and high-spirited nation
like France will not long endure in a ruler like
Napoleon.
The disaffection in France is wide-spread. Na-
poleon relies for his chief support not on the
bourgeoisie of Paris, nor on the speculators on the
Bourse, but on the army and on the masses of the
population, both in the towns and in the rural
districts. Peace, for the sake of commerce and the
finances, or for the sake of luxury and ease, is not
a popular cry in France. The reverses in Mexico
—the humiliations which Bismarck has inflicted on
the vainglory of the nation, by depriving Napoleon
of the leadership of the Continent—have by no
means disposed the majority of Frenchmen tamely
to acquiesce in seeing the authority of France set
at nought by Italy, or to suffer the last indignity
of witnessing the Convention signed by Napoleon
torn in shreds by the soldiers of Victor Emmanuel.
Self-love, as well as love for the Pope, is the cause
of the excitement which the Roman question is now
raising in France.
In regard to the Roman question, parties in
France may be roughly divided into three classes.
First, the Bonapartists, pure and simple, and all
those who live and fatten on the public money,—
and such a vast administrative machine as the pre-
sent French Government has an enormous army of
devoted hangers-on, dispersed in every province,
city, and township of the land. Secondly, the
Catholic party, which is by far the most wide-
spread, and the most influential, by reason of their
numbers. They are under the influence of a most
zealous clergy and of a bold and united episcopate.
The devotion of the Catholics of France to the

Pope is beyond question. It is a power which
neither Emperor, King, nor Republic can safely
venture to leave out of calculation. Then there is
the third party, which hates Napoleon as much as
it does the Pope. This is the party of the Re-
volution, active, energetic, and noisy, which desires
to see a socialistic republic established in Rome as
a prelude to the triumph of a godless republicanism

in Paris.
Of these three large sections of French society,
the two first, though for different motives, are
opposed to the Italian invasion of Rome. The
first, which counts among its adherents the army,
out of respect for the flag of France, which morally
covers the patrimony of St. Peter, and out of regard
for the permanence of the dynasty. The second,
which comprises large masses of the population,
the clergy, and many of the higher classes, out of
devotion to the Pope and to religion.
This division of opinion is seen in the vacillat-
ing conduct of Napoleon at this critical juncture.
Had he been determined to support the temporal
power of the Pope, and to enforce the observance
of the Convention of September, one resolute
word spoken in time would have forced the Italian
Government to have prevented, during the last
three months, the public enrolment of recruits for
Garibaldi's army of invasion, and all the various
preparations which have taken place under the
nose of the authorities, civil and military, for an
attack upon the Papal territories. A word spoken
now in earnest would lead at once to the stopping
on the frontier, by a vigilant and effective inter-
ference of the Italian army, of those constant sup-
plies in men, arms, and ammunition, which can
alone hinder the Garibaldian invaders, now in
the Roman territory, from being driven out by the
Papal army ; or, in case the Italian Government is
really powerless against the Revolution from which
it sprung, and which it has fostered so unjustly, to
the landing of a French army at Civita Vecchia.
But if this word be not spoken ; if the Italian
army be allowed, in direct violation of the Con-
vention, to invade the States of the Church, under
pretext of putting down an invasion permitted and
encouraged by the Italian Government, such a
subterfuge would not shelter Napoleon from the
obloquy which so mean and dishonourable a
treachery would be certain to excite throughout
the whole of Catholic France.
It seems almost impossible that Napoleon, so
astute in gauging public opinion, should add such a
political blunder to those which have recently given
rise to doubts, if not as to his sanity, at least as to
the survival of his political sagacity. We believe
that the word will be spoken though late, and
forced as it were reluctantly out of a regard, not
to the Pope but to French honour, that the Con-
vention of September shall be observed at all
cost. By his mannerof acting he will seek to
conciliate the Revolution, and by the act itself, the
Catholics of France.
But if the word be not spoken—if Roman terri-
tory be annexed in spite of the Convention, and
of the honour of France and of justice, then mis-
chief is loose and Napoleon means war. By an
immediate war with Prussia, with the aid of Italy,
the Emperor of France may hope to cover the
disgrace and perfidy of sacrificing Rome to the
Revolution, and seek to drown in blood the out-
rage committed against Catholic Europe. Victory,
he imagines, and the annexation of the Rhine, will
compensate for any wrong ; but in such a case
• God grant that the victory may not be his.— West-
minster Gazette.

ADDRESS OF THE AUSTIUAN BISHOPS TO

THE EMPEROR. 0]! A usriem.

twentY-five archbishops and bishops assem-
bled 'in Vienna have presented to the Emperor an
address which fills not fewer than sixteen columns
of the I' elks The princes of the Church
defend the Concordat with admirable precision and
learning against the attacks incited by the Jews.
They begin by taking an historical survey of the
origin of the Concordat. We select from this im-
portant document some of the most important parts.
It begins by pointing out the motives which have
induced the enemies of the Church to attack the
Concordat :

When Charles Albert desired to make use of
Austria's internal difficulties to carry out plans which
he had long entertained to justify his violation of
the peace, he brought forward, among other things,
the shameful oppression which the Church suffered
in Austria, and that to free her was a noble and
holy work. When in the year 1855 the Concordat
appeared, the leaders of the Italian Revolution
weighed well its whole purport. They saw they were
deprived of a weapon of which they had hitherto made
such zealous use. They were also under the appre-
hension that the Catholic feeling would operate
powerfully against the artificial hatred they had
excited against Austria ; yet, as masters in the arts
of revolution, they quickly altered their plan. All
the initiated were ordered to cast suspicion and mis-
trust on the Concordat. 'Whoever praised was a
friend of Austria, and kit to complete the slavery

of their country. In the year 1857 the revolution
again descended into the streets, and gained a vic-
tory at Brussels over the Government and the
representatives of the people. The revolt was,
however, as all Europe knows, the work of an asso-
ciation which, in Belgium, is no secret one, but
openly professes hostility against Christianity. Those
of a like mind in Germany took fresh courage ; they
began now to take the Mazzinists as models, and as
the latter, in the name of patriotism, these in the
name of Liberalism raised a cry for the revocation
of the Concordat. But this opposition was isolated
and weak, when the year 1859 brought on new
complications. The great majority of Germans
justly recognised that duty, honour, and prudence
forbade the States of the German Confederation to
leave Austria alone in the ensuing struggle. The
leaders of the political and social revolution shared
only in part these views ; but they were unanimous
in seeking to turn the true expression of public
opinion to their own purpose, and demanded, as a
reward for their sympathy, which, however, was not
confirmed by deeds, that Austria should re-model,
according to the views of a part of the South German
press and popular leaders, her institutions, and
especially the relation of the State to religion and
morality. Then it was that the Concordat was made
one of the passwords behind which a whole system
lurks.

The Address then goes on to show that the state
of civil and moral desolation led to the conviction
that a return was necessary to higher religious and
political principles, in order to save the Empire and
society from the storm. Then it was that the
Concordat was concluded. It then goes on to
state : That communication with the Holy See was
permitted in spiritual matters. Protestant Powers
even had already taken this step, for it was uni-
versally recognized that the dangers which were
supposed to attend free communication with the
Pope were more scarecrows. Moreover, in the pre-
sent state of things it is impossible that a letter
should be sent to Rome and au answer received.
The bishops were empowered to publish their Pas-
toral letters and ordinances without beforehand seek-
ing the permission of the State. Again, by the
provisions of the Concordat, the bishops are at
liberty to perform Divine service and arrange all
spiritual matters simply according to the laws of
the Church, who, however, has a right to complain
that the State has abstained from arranging the
order of Divine service. These petty interferences
bear the impress of a past period, and nobody now
fancies that the public weal is threatened because
a High Mass is celebrated on a week day without
the permission of Government.
On education the Concordat has instituted no
new arrangement in Austria. The ordinances re-
ferring to education did not go beyond the existing
rights. The management and supervision of popular
schools were always entrusted to the parish priests.
The rights of your Majesty were in nowise dimi-
nished. Your Majesty nominates nearly all the
archbishops and bishops of your vast empire, most
of the canons, very many of the parish priests, and
the professors of the theological faculties. The
property of the Church cannot, without your Ma-
jesty's permission, be either alienated or burdened
with heavy charges, for the Imperial sanction is
requisite for the validity of such acts. Although
ecclesiastical and educational funds are property
of the Church, yet their management is left to the
Government, on condition that it should be con-
ducted with the .co-operation and under the super-
vision of the bishops. The rights appertaining
to the Monarch are not weakened but confirmed
by the provisions of the Concordat. Whence, then,
this outcry against the Concordat? The Concordat
is attacked in the same manner as an enemy at-
tacks the bulwark of a fortress, not for the pleasure
of seeing it overthrown, but in order to penetrate
into the city, and to rule there according to good
pleasure. The war against Christianity is nothing
new ; to every one who is not quite ignorant the
arts and passwords of the enemy are familiar ; they
are but repetitions of what has so often happened
, before.

The equality of all religions is proclaimed in the
name of religion, and put in practice under invoca-
tion of tolerance. But the initiated have long ago
confessed that the tolerance which they demand
means the destruction of religion. Sensuality
alone is true and real. That is the pith of their
secret belief. Every religion is a dream, and the
manner in which it is to be treated depends mainly
on the power it possesses of opposing the triumph
of a soulless and a godless reason. The Catholic
religion, therefore, must be put down below every
other, because it is the only one which is still to be
feared. This putting down of the Catholic religion
is what is called tolerance, and by virtue of this
tolerance the Catholic Church is attacked day by
day in Catholic Austria by calumnies and by
popular incitements, the hundreth part of which
no one would dare to utter against Protestants or
Jews. But freedom from the control of religion
is of little value without freedom from the control
of duty. Therefore marriage is to be sacrificed
to the play of the passions ; its dissolubility is
to be decreed. In order to have a people as the
Liberals of Austria desire, they must begin from
the beginning. Therefore they decree the pos-
session of the schools, in order that Catholic youth
shall no more be brought up as Catholics or as
Christians. All this, however, is utterly opposed
to the Austrian laws, even as they existed before
the Concordat. The Liberals believe they can get
rid of the laws if the treaty which the State had
entered into were not in the way ; hence this arti-
ficial outcry is raised against the Concordat.
After producing evidence to show that Austria
granted far more to non-Catholics than any non-
Catholic Government gives to Catholics, thebishops
then pass on to the chief points in dispute—To
mixed marriages and to the education of children
born of such marriages. On mixed marriages
they speak as follows :—ln many respects the
ordinances which are now in force on marriage
are almost coeval with Christianity. Even in the
most ancient times it was requisite that marriage
should be solemnized in the presence of the Chris-
tian congregation ; it received its consecration and
was sealed, as it were, by the holy sacrifice of
the Mass. Publicity and the Church's consecration
of marriage were enforced by a long series of laws,
which were to a certain extent very severe. It was,
however, impossible to enforce these ordinances as
a universal and unconditional law of the Church ;
even now it cannot be done ; even now there are
hundreds of thousands of Catholics who are living
dispersed among men of other persuasions, who
with the best will are unable to be married in the
presence of a priest ; and before Christianity had
attained to complete dominion in the whole of
Europe such circumstances prevailed, even in dis-
tricts not far from the centre of Catholic life.
This is the explanation why in the sixteenth cen-
tury these ordinances concerning the publicity and
consecration by the Church of marriage had only
the character of prohibitions, and hence it was that
a simple declaration on the part of a man and a
woman without witnesses of the intention of marry-
ing, in so far as no impediment to its validity
existed, was a true marriage recognized as valid by
the Church. But this state of things was not with-
out lamentable consequences. For a man without
honour or conscience might contract a marriage with
a woman in secret, and then by denying the decla-
ration he had made of his intention to marry,
contract marriage with another. This second
marriage, however solemnly it might have been
contracted and consecrated, was, nevertheless,
invalid, and the man who had broken his faith
was living in adultery. Therefore, after long con-
sultations, the Fathers of the Council of Trent
resolved to make secrecy an impediment to a
marriage, and to declare marriage to be invalid
unless it were contracted in the presence of the
priest of the parish to which one of the parties
to the marriage belonged, or to a priest empowered
by the bishop, and of two witnesses.
It is understood, as a matter of course, that
the bride and bridegroom, who, in the presence
of a priest, have declared their desire to be mar.
ried, are bound devoutly to receive the nuptial
blessing, which is, indeed, expressly prescribed.
Yet its omission, from whatever cause, is not alone
sufficient to hinder the validity of the marriage.
There is, without doubt, a legitimate right that