The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1874-03-15
Political Relations OF Divine Right
Church and state In Germany and
Austria.

Sss~
Austria.
Nearly all modern States have moved al
least so far in the current of republican ideas
that they have freed themselves from the no
ton of divine right If this Pigment of the
old time statecraft exists in Europe at all 1t Is
in Russia only, or in the mountains of Biscay'
where the intellectual tenacity is such that
the people still retain language which was
spoken by them perhaps before the races Oh
the recent world left their cradle IN Asia. IL
was severe call upon the popular credulity
even in the centuries Immediately before the
French Revolution to require men to believe
that the kings who were then best known
were in any sense whatever the representa-
tives of divinity as the world cared to
contemplate and respect it; and the
relic of monarchical moonshine that
was even then losing its hold upon
the general faith has naturally melted
away in the fuller light of our own times. Upon
whatever else the monarchs of the modern
world base their authority; upon the legiti-
mate consent Of their subjects, upon their
sovereign rights to the crown as family prop
erty, upon their bayonets or upon the politi-
cal jugglery of universal suffrage, they do
not soberly claim, as kings did anciently, that
they are descended from gods; nor do they
even adhere to the ecclesiastical copy of that
ancient notion, which replaced the fancy of
divine descent with the thin simulacretm of
divine designation to the exercise of kingly
prerogatives.
Hence monarchical States have less need Of
the Church than they had once. Some of the
consequences OF this change may be seen in
the fact now before the world of an open rup-
ture of the German Empire with the Pope,
though William has Catholic subjects; and q
threatened rupture of the Austrian Empire,
whose people at large are Catholics. All the
struggle between Rome and Berlin is matter
of common history; and now, as our news de-
is becoming active by the direct action of the
Pope in letter to the Emperor, and in pro-
test against the repeal of the Concordat.
Denial of its divine authority was at first
not palatable to royalty. 1t was altogether
notion of the naughty people. 1t came from
below. 1t was cast at the kings as re-
proach-and they resisted and repressed the
notion with what they conceived to be appro-
pirate severity, for it seemed to them that the
denial of their divine right was, as it may
have been, only part of a propaganda that
meant to proceed and deny them every other
right They perceived with unconscious self
condemnation that, judged by strictly human
rJe tba of HOW ,;rb< no
very little to say for themselves. But the
world, viewing political relations more accu-
rately, sees now that the position and right of
the king as an organic element of certain
States is none the Jess thoroughly sound and
legitimate for the want of the ecclesiastical
sanction and since this has been observed
the owners Of sceptres have discovered that
there is another side to divine right and
that as viewed from this other side
it might be an advantage to them
to be absolutely rid of it. From this new
point of view the subject bears upon very
old conflict, and relates directly to the indie
pendence of kings; to their freedom from re-
sraint and even dictation in the administra-
ton Of such very important parts of the pub
lie service as the education of the people and
the appointments to all the high ecclesiastical
Offices.
In the times Of divine right there was an
interchange OF good Offices between the Church
and royalty, the practical result OF which was
that every State was divided between the eccle-
siasical and the political authorities. None
could ascend the throne nor hold it against
the will uf the head of the Church; and very
unpleasant consequences were experienced by
several who, in notable instances, endeavored
to defy in this matter what was then virtually
the common law of Christendom; and thus
the Popes consent was indispensable for the
comfortable occupancy of any throne This
consent was only gwen where the Church was
sure that the spiritual welfare of the people was
properly provided for, and it was only sure of
this generally where it had control of the pop
ular education and the appointment of the
bishops, and where, through the bishops or
other functionaries devoted to it, it had con-
troll of the ecclesiastical revenues. Now, kings
are not very much unlike other executives in
regard to appointments to good places. Even
in republics we have seen that the central
authority is excessively fond of having its
own way in filling the Offices, and is impatient
of restraints and even of criticism, especially
when the appointments are particularly bad or
made for reasons that will scarcely bear the
light This is one of the points in which
kings and presidents have family likeness
to one another. Royalty therefore generally
made many grimaces over what it always
looked upon as the hard conditions exacted by
the Church, never failing to forget that the
Church was in the States of those days more
legitimate and better founded power than
itself All the conflicts with the Papal power
arose in this difference, and the Church gen.