The Sun.
London, England, 1868-08-19 00:00:00

ST. 7LIOIIIAS A BECKET.

The Times of Saturday last returns again
to the charge that Archbishop Manning, in
speaking of S. Thomas it Becket as having
laid down his life in defence of the freedom

of religion, has misrepresented the character
of the saint and the cause of his death. This
charge is founded on a misuse of terms, for
the TillieS puts into the Archbishop's mouth
words which he never used, and a meaning
which he never intended to convey._ "At

Leeds," says the Times, "Archbishop Manning
renewed the attempt to persuade his audience
that b. Becket's cause was identical with that

of religious liberty as we now understand it."
The words we put in italics are necessary to
give a colour to the charge of the Times, but
neither the words nor their equivalent were
used by Dr. Manning. The Times next in-
troduces an assumption, and asserts as if it
were a self-evident truth that the principle

upon which Nonconformity is bases " alone
explains and preserves intact the enjoyment
of civil and religious liberty." By religious
liberty the Times understands " free thought
and free life." Now, what did S. Thomas
A Becket understand by religious liberty ?
Certainly not free thought or the right in
man to choose or reject religion, but he un-
derstood by it the right guaranteed by the law
of England, which every man enjoyed,—that
religion, the supernatural guide and teacher,
should be free from the control and the in-

terference of the Royal Power. This freedom,
as being essential to the wellbeing of religion,
was recognised and protected by the law of
England; for, as Dr. Manning told his audience,
showing clearly the meaning he attached to
the term religious liberty—that the first article
of Magna Charta affirms that " the Church
shall enjoy its liberty." This essential liberty,
guaranteed by the English Constitution, was
violated by Royal usurpations ; to resist these
usurpations and this interference by the civil
power with the rights and liberty of religion,
was the duty of St. Thomas a Becket, both as a
Churchman and a citizen, living under the
guarantee of the law. Archbishop Manning
was therefore perfectly justified in saying that
St. Thomas died for that principle which is
now held by two-thirds of the people of Eng-
land and Ireland—the freedom. of religion from
State control. It is' neither fair nor honest
in the Times to evade this conclusion, by
interpolating the clause never used or dreamt
of by the Archbishop, that St. Thomas-died
for the cause of religious liberty, as ,we now
understand it, 'and proceed, then triumphantly
to show what nobody, least of all,Dr. Man-
ning, denies, that St. Thomas a Becket held in
the greatest abhorrence the principle of " free
thought and ,free life," or of religious liberty,'
as now understood by irreligious Liberals.
Such liberty is not liberty, bat licentiousness,
and is rejected by every Catholic. Religious
liberty consists in the freedom of religion from
unlawful control, such as that so often exer-
cised, or attempted to be exercised, by the Civil
power, but its essence consists in subjection to
legitimate spiritual authority. A nation, there-
fore, enjoys religious liberty when religion in its
spiritual relations, exempt from every inter-
ference of the civil power, is under the sole
guidance of its spiritual rulers. To preserve
such a liberty was the cause for which St.
Thomas died, and we cannot in spite of the
strenuous efforts of the Times to the contrary,
see why he is tot entitled to the sympathy
which the Archbishop claims as his due from
all those who prize the emancipation of spiri-
tual things from the bondage of the State. We
readily grant to the Times that the martyr to
the cause of the freedom of religion is not
entitled to the sympathy of those who hold
religious liberty to be not the freedom of divine
things from subjection to a human power; but
the right of every individual to subject divine
things—faiths revelation, the existence of a
God—to his own judgment, and to accept or
reject them as seems to him fit, or to teach
others to reject what he rejects, to blaspheme
what he blasphemes. But did the Archbishop
for an instant insinuate, did his argument in
the least warrant, that such an interpretation
of religious liberty could but be anything ab-
horrent to the martyr to the cause of genuine
religious freedom ? To its vile counterfeit,
religious liberty, as now understood by irreli-
gious Liberals, Dr. Manning gave iio coun-
tenance whatsoever. But if the Times is egre-
giously wide of the mark in its criticisms on
Dr. Manning's claim for the sympathy due
from the lovers of religious independence to
St. Thomas, it is even still more at fault in de-
claring that St. Thomas a Becket died because
he broke the law. What law did he break ?
Magna Charter affirmed that the Church has a
right to enjoy all its liberty. The King vio-
lated this liberty sanctioned by English law,
and because St. Thomas, as Archbishop Man-
ning showed, resisted this violation of English
law, and of the independence of religion, he
suffered death. We may justly retort upon
primary error in regard
Becket and to Dr. Manning's
theto
St. TimesTh o
ni tahsa ta, its
appreciation of the character of the Saint is
theconfusion which pervades the whole of its
argument of two distinct ideas, the freedom
of religion from State control, and religious
liberty, as understood by modern irreligious
Liberals.—Westminster Gazette.