Зображення сторінки
PDF
ePub

of its being but an apprenticeship of sacrifice and a preparation for death. Reflections like these are sufficient to undermine the whole collection of "deductive arguments" that have been brought against us, but modern works (not to mention those of ancient writers) like those of Auguste Nicholas, the Abbé Senac, the Abbé Martin, M. Charles Perin, Cardinal Deschamps, Manzoni, the Abbé Margotti, Hettinger, Klee, Moehler, Hergenröther, Balmez, Maguire, Dr. Newman, Cardinal Wiseman, and Cardinal Manning completely refute them.

We cannot admit the thesis that has been laid down, but we will nevertheless follow step by step the various evolutions that have been deduced, which course will be for us a demonstration à posteriori. Before, however, undertaking this task we may be permitted to warn the reader against any erroneous interpretation of our intentions; until we receive proof to the contrary we refuse to believe in this new-fangled form of Protestantism. We are personally acquainted with many pious Protestants for whom we have a profound respect; we believe in their honesty and sincerity of purpose, and we render homage to the excellence of their intentions and the uprightness of their private life.

If any such persons should read these pages, we trust

they may find in them nothing but a proof of our desire to serve faithfully the cause of truth, and should there be any expression capable of giving personal offence either to them or to the leaders of this modern school of liberals, we retract it beforehand.

We wish to put in practice the noble precept of St. Augustine," Interficite errores, diligite errantes."

[graphic][merged small][merged small][merged small]

What is progress?-Is the phenomenon of the progress of Protestant nations the result of race?—The English Government the product of Catholic ages-Civil government of Catholic countries before the era of the French Revolution and the socalled Reformation-Civil strength and vigour of Spanish Catholics-Comparison between the civil liberty of the Italians and of the Prussians since the Reformation-Comparison between the social condition of the Irish and the ScotchCatholicism in Switzerland.

E take the following passages from the commencement of M. de Laveleye's recent work :

"Sectarian passions or anti-religious prejudice have been too often imported into the study of these questions. It is time that we should apply to it, the method of observation and the scientific impartiality. of the physiologist and the naturalist.

When the facts are once established, irrefragable conclusions will follow."

"The fact that Catholic races progress much less rapidly than those which are no longer Catholic, and that relatively to these latter they even seem to retrograde, appears to be proved both by history and more particularly by recent contemporary events.

This fact is so manifest that the French bishops make it a text of their reproaches to unbelieving Catholics."

The first conclusion is not very clear in its terms. In the first place, what is meant by the word "progress?"

It is a word that does not exist in the political language of the Anglo-Saxon race, and may be made to comprehend a great deal that is bad as well as a great deal that is good.

In the second place, what is meant by "retrogression?"

There must of necessity be an understanding as to the use of certain terms, and ours are the very opposite to those of the school of modern liberalism.

It is evident that M. de Laveleye has attempted to prove that all Catholic nations retrograde-that is to say, that they are a race of people who have no taste for political liberty.

Whence comes this phenomenon?

M. de Laveleye answers it as follows :

"The English understand the parliamentary system and the exercise of practical liberty better than the French. Is this owing to the influence of blood? I do not think so; for until near the sixteenth century France, Spain, and Italy possessed provincial liberties of a very similar character to English liberties. The only notable difference was that the English had a single parliament and a centralized system which proved strong enough to hold its own against royalty. The Norman Conquest having united England, an united parliament was the result; and royalty being very powerful, nobles and commons combined to resist it, whereas elsewhere they were constantly at strife. The destinies of France and England only become entirely different from the beginning of the sixteenth century, when the Puritans had defeated the Stuarts, and when Louis XIV., by expelling the Protestants from France, had extirpated the last remnants of local autonomy and the sole important elements of resistance with which despotism might have been opposed."

Volumes might be written on such a subject, but we purpose to confine ourselves to a few brief considerations in reply to these summary assertions. Our adversaries admit that the great misfortune for France consists in the fact that it has been governed from the fourteenth century by the ideas of the Renaissance, and yet the Renaissance is in fact almost identical with modern continental liberalism.1

1 An excellent article entitled "The Renaissance and Liberty,” may be found in the January number of the "Dublin Review" for 1878.

« НазадПродовжити »