The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1896-01-19


also, and especially, as the only effectual
method of repelling the armed invasion of the
barbarians, and especially OF the Mortimer,
which began again shortly after the death
OF Charlemagne. In one sense the feudal
system was an endeavor to combine military
efficiency with the spirit OF independence on
the part of the chiefs which was so character
lstic of the German warriors in their native
lands. The object, now, however, of the rulers
the immediate obieet-was defense OF their
homes, not TO send out expeditions such as
those undertaken in the campaigns under
Charlemagne. We shall see that, as a
system, the feudal form of government,
think 1t, was in the beginning a necessity
of the time. One of the best proofs
that 1t was such is found in its universal adop-
ton throughout Europe. Not only land but
other kinds of property, even offices in church
and state, were held in fef with a view to
protection, We must remember that after the
time no public authority in Europe strong
enough 10 maintain order through
out large territory, and that each
under the rule OF the great Emperor, a
firm supporter OF his system and authority,
now freed from his control, sought only to in
crease his own lands and power. The result
was perpetual reign OF terror, constant
struggle for those objects where might made
right, the end OF which was the survival OF the
strongest and durin which the successful pur-
suit OF the arts of peace became impossible-a
condition OF things which if continued clearly
foreshadowed relapse into barbarism."
THE POPE AND THE EMPEROR.
Let US always bear in mind that the imperial
and feudal constitution OF Europe was syS-
tenn OF universal government as distinct as our
Federal and State system. The limits of the
various authorities were not as clearly de-
Hneated as by our constitution but then we
are the heirs OF all the ages, and the men OF
old were struggling toward the better things
But as far as II went il was system OF govern
ment with its own laws, customs, rights and
duties. Therefore. when we judge of the ac-
uons OF Popes who lived under that system
aud who had definite place in ii, We must
Judge them not in the light of our day, but in
the light OF civil polity which was uniyer-
sally accepted in the middle age.
And in the first place let US consider in the
words OF Freeman that 1.-THE theory of the
medieval empire is that of an universal
Christian monarchy. The Roman Empire and
the Catholic church are two aspects OF the one
society. AT the head of this society in its
temporal chief OF chriStendom, the Roman
Cesar; at its head, in its spiritual character as
a church, stands the spiritual chief OF christen-
dom, the Roman Pontiff.''
Now, by the consent OF christendom, it was
necessary that the Emperor should be g Chris
tlan-a member OF the church. When he was
communicated he ceased TO be member of
the church, and his subjects considered that
they were released from their bonds OF al
leglance. The Pope, Is the supreme head OF
the church, formally declared that the EN-
peror was or was not member of the church,
and hence came what is technically known as
the deposlng power, or the power OF absolving
subjects from LnelG OdtQS OF 1ealIV.
On this provision OF the MEDIEVAL constitu-
ton OF Europe let me remark that it is analo-
gous TO the provision OF our constitution, which
requires that a State shall maintain repubi-
can form OF government. AS long as the State
OF California cleayes 10 the republican system
the President cannot interfere; but If she
should attempt TO establish a monarchy
the United States Government would take
measures 10 prevent the success OF such
an undertaking. Much in the same
way 1t was the constitution Of medieval
eIo~ oh, !
tlan. As long he was Christian and lived
like Christian the Pope had no power over
him. But once he rendered himself liable by
crime TO accommodation, the Pope had
power TO declare him expelled from the church
and unworthy OF the support OF Christians.
Let US remark, too, that this system lasted
only as long as the peoples wished it TO last.
When we read of Hildebrand and Innocent re-
buking Emperors and Kings and bringing
them TO terms, we make q mistake if we look
upon these Popes as the masters of legions
They had no temporal resources worth noticing
The iegions were at the call OF their enemies
Gregory was driven d fugitive before the armies
OF the Emperor and ne died IL exile. Yet
Gregory triumphed. And why? He had the
people with him. They believed in upholding
their constitution, and when the Emperor
broke that constitution and the Pope pro-
claimed the fact the people brought their chief
TO terms.
When, therefore, after the Crusades the SEN
timent OF nationality grew stronger and Europe
began 10 take the form 1t now holds the old
constitution was neglected. Consequently we
find the people no longer supporting the Pope,
and consequently, too, we find the deposing
power as it was exercised in the middle ages
repudiated by Catholics.
A QUOTATION CARRIED.
As am on this point I may well call at
tentIon to another characteristic misrepre-
OF the knights of the scissors said IN g recent
letter:
''The following from an address delivered by
Pope Plus TX, OF infallibility fame, July 2I,
1878, is pertinent:
There are many errors regarding infahbity:
but the most malicious of all is that which includes
in that dogma the right of deposng sovereigns
and declaring the people no longer bound by the
obligation of fidelity. This right has now and
again, in critical circumstances, been exercised by
the PontifIs. Its origin was not the infal-
Ibility, but the authority of the Pope
Let me say that this address was delivered
on July 20, 1871, and the true text is as
follows
among al other errors that is malicious
above all, which would attribute TO the In
fallibility Of the Pope the right OF deposing
sovereigns and OF absolying people from the
obligation of allegiance.
This right without doubt has been exercised
by the Supreme Pontiffs from time TO time in
extreme cases, but it has nothing TO do with
the Pontifical infallibiIity; neither does 1t flow
from the infalllbihty but from the authority of
the Pontif'
Now this is the portion of the address which
the champions OF American institutions
Moreover, the exercise of this right in these
ages Of faith which respected in the Pope that
which he is-that is to say, the Supreme Court
OF Christendom, and recognized the benefit of
his tribunal in the great contentious of
peoples and of sovereigns, was freely extended
by the just aid of public Jurisprudence and the
common consent of nations to the greatest i'll
terests of states and their ruleIs.F Let these
fair-minded Americans" now mark what
follows:
"But altogether different are the conditions
OF the present time from the conditions of
those ages. Malice alone can confound things
so diverse"
That is TO say, the Pope recognizes that the
old constitution of Christian Europe passed
away long ago and the powers once given the
Pope by the consent of the peoples are no
longer claimed.
THE POPE AND FEUDALIsM.
The essential feature OF feudalism is, as I
have said, that man constitutes more pow
erful person his protector by promising feudsl
service. Now, during the middle ages it was
customary for weaker Princes TO promise
feudal service TO the Pope in the expectation
of gaining his protection.
Now, whether it was wise or not for the
Pope 10 accept this service | do not care to dis
cuss here. | wish TO draw attention merely to
the fact. The advantages gained therefrom
were entirely on the Kings side. The Pope
never received anything but the customary in
significant tokens of feudal homage. Still they
were bound to help and protect their feuda-
tories, and the giving of this help and protec-
ton was the cause of half the quarrels of the
middle ages.