།

Now we must avow our own humble opinion, that that social and political state of things which we have been just supposing, would (to say the very least) be no greater a corruption and degradation in comparison with what now exists, than what now exists is a corruption and degradation in comparison with what (under normal circumstances) must result from Catholic unity. We cannot perhaps more effectively set forth the true medieval spirit, than by availing ourselves of a most masterly Essay, read before the Academia by Mr. Lilly, and published in the June number of the "Month." Mr. Lilly quotes (p. 169) Mr. Carlyle's words, that religion lay over those times like an all-embracing heavenly canopy, like an atmosphere and life-element, a great high-heaven unquestionability, encompassing, interpenetrating the whole of life." "Deep down in every heart was the conviction," Mr. Carlyle continues, "that this earthly life, and its riches and possessions and good and evil hap are not intrinsically a reality at all, but are a shadow of realities eternal, infinite; that man's little life has duties that are great, that are alone great, and go up to heaven and down to hell." Mr. Lilly adds, that "this intense unquestioning belief was then the central idea of human existence, the source of its strength and soundness, of its rich exuberant vitality. It shaped legislation, it animated art, it informed literature, it reigned in social life." On the other hand-Mr. Lilly proceeds (p. 176)-"decay is the true description of that era" which commenced with the Reformation: "decay in the best characteristics of man and society, in happiness, nobility, wisdom." Throughout this era "is clearly traceable the fading away from the popular mind of those truths regarding the individual, the family and society, which were the life of the civilization of the earlier epoch."*

but who in spirit have revolted from her sway, will, by becoming manifestly external to her, cease to disgrace her, or to lower the moral tone of her community" (pp. 109, 110).

* We would draw especial attention to this admirable paper, as illustrating, from a somewhat different stand-point, the matter at issue between Dr. Mivart and ourselves. The author exhibits throughout heartiest loyalty to the teaching of the Holy See concerning modern errors; and his general course of argument is to our mind original and even profound. The knowledge of modern literature which he has pressed into his service is really remarkable, and is of eminent advantage in illustrating his theme. We have been especially struck with his quotations from Montalembert (pp. 170, 175, 191) concerning the middle ages; as showing what grievous injustice that illustrious Catholic did to his own permanent convictions, by the declamation in which he sometimes indulged about "dark ages," "ages of blood," and the like. Mr. Lilly may now be said to have fully inaugurated a literary career, which (we doubt not) will abound in signal service to the great cause which he has at heart.

These great truths had been preserved in the popular mind by the State's submission to the Church, and by its rigorous repression of heresy: they faded away from the popular mind, in proportion as the State changed its attitude. Take one alone, among the many sacred verities to which the State now gives no protection: the verity, that celibacy is a higher condition of life than marriage. It may well be doubted, whether the social degradation which results from the prevalent rejection of this one verity be not greater, than the further social degradation which would result, from a prevalent disbelief in the monogamistic doctrine.*

In order however that we may proceed more intelligibly with our criticism of Dr. Mivart's speculations, it will be better at this point to explain in greater detail than we have hitherto done-though still but briefly and concisely-what is the doctrine we would ourselves advocate in opposition to his. He calls his theory that of political "civicism." We have invented for our own, the name of political "ethicism"; and the meaning of that name will easily appear, when we proceed to explain our doctrine. As a preliminary we would point out, that no civil society can possibly exist, which does not rest on some "ethical basis," true or false, of one kind or another. And when we say that it rests on an ethical basis, we mean that there are certain tenets concerning religion or morality which it in such sense protects, that the legal position of him who holds them is importantly privileged, in comparison with the legal position of him who (however sincerely) dissents from them. Thus every State must by absolute necessity rest, either on the ethical basis of right in property, or on the ethical basis of communism in one or other shape. Let us suppose the former alternative. The sovereign (it does not here concern us whether the sovereignty reside in one individual or more) is convinced, that his people's highest interest is indissolubly bound up with the institution of property. Suddenly, from some accidental cause, the tenet of communism springs up to quite a new degree of vitality; it is found infecting men in all directions; certain citizens are beginning a most effective course of combined action, with the view of spreading the conviction that, as Proudhon tersely said, "property is robbery." Every

* In connection with what is said in the text, let this be considered. The arguments, commonly adduced by Protestants against clerical celibacy, would lead by irresistible consequence to a conclusion, that the purity of unmarried men is in most cases a virtue impossible of attainment. And we believe that in fact multitudes have pressed the argument to this conclusion,

moment, during which their machinations are allowed free scope, increases the danger. By multitudes already theft is accounted a sacred duty; just as many a "patriot" has accounted it a sacred duty to rise in insurrection against those whom he accounts oppressors of his country. And the time seems close at hand, when society will be convulsed from its very foundations. We suppose Dr. Mivart will admit, that communistic tenets may be held with perfect sincerity; yet he will surely agree with us, as to what under such circumstances as we have imagined the government is bound to do. All this communistic combination and public expression of communism must be summarily put down. Communistic meetings, the circulation of communistic tracts, the education of children in communistic principles, must be stringently prohibited; and if imprisonment and other penalties be necessary to enforce the prohibition, the government would basely fail of its duty, did it omit to impose those penalties in the full extent demanded by the crisis. A far-seeing and energetic civil ruler will wage war against communism, in the very same spirit in which some pious mediæval sovereign waged war against the special heresy of his time.

-

On the other hand, suppose for argument's sake the impossible portent of some society aggregated on communistic principles. The case would not be different, in the particular respect we are now considering. The ruler of such State must needs have recourse to similar methods of repression, if an active combination were set on foot, for introducing the institution of property, and for propagating belief in the divine origin of that institution.

Now what we would humbly maintain is, that one momentous constituent of a nation's well-being is the extent of the true ethical basis on which its constitution rests. Cæteris paribus-so we are prepared to argue-every State is more healthily and happily circumstanced, in proportion as the number is greater of those ethical doctrines, which on the one hand are certainly true, while on the other hand they are effectively protected in that State by a civil legislation, which is in substantial harmony with the public sentiment. On the other hand, we quite admit-employing again the terms used by us in the early part of our article-that that repression of error, which is the civil ruler's duty, should be effected as far as possible by laws, which may "disregard" indeed the conscience of dissentients, but shall not "militate against " it.

We have no space for doing any kind of justice to our thesis; but among the various arguments adducible in its behalf, we would lay special stress on the following. An inestimable

blessing is conferred on the body of citizens, in proportion as they are trained to apprehend keenly the true standard of morality. It is always, alas! but a small minority, who act with reasonable consistency on their moral convictions; but to possess good moral convictions, is in itself an inestimable blessing. Let us suppose two men who unhappily are both living licentiously. One of them however is keenly alive to the nobleness and sacredness of Christian family life, though his weakness of purpose renders him a slave to lower impulses ; but the other sees nothing detestable or despicable at all in his own habits. It is surely very clear, that the former is on a vastly higher moral platform (so to speak) than the latter; that his moral reason is indefinitely less clouded; that he possesses, in quite a different sense from the latter, a principle of moral recovery.

*

This principle being laid down, we give two different reasons for the doctrine of ethicism. Firstly, among the methods for training citizens to apprehend the spirit of true morality, the one which immeasurably exceeds all others in potency, is that of saturating with that spirit the whole surrounding social atmosphere. Our recent supposition, of some society having lost its monogamistic spirit, sufficiently illustrates what we here intend. Then secondly, the enormous majority of mankind are entirely incapable of philosophical and ethical argument; though they have full means of arriving at the knowledge of essential truths on religion and morality, by means of implicit reasoning, which is superabundantly sufficient. Accordingly

Dr. Mivart says (p. 113) that in the middle ages great numbers of men who led bad lives "accepted" the Church's "doctrines unhesitatingly, but unprofitably, since in them works did not accompany faith; and belief without charity, as Dr. Newman has so well shown, tends directly to superstition." We do not know from what work of F. Newman Dr. Mivart has derived this impression; but to us F. Newman's language seems different. Thus. "The firmest faith, so as to move mountains, may exist without love : that is, real faith; as really faith in the strict sense of the word, as the faith of a martyr or a doctor." A Catholic "may ever be falling; but his faith is a continual invitation and persuasive to repent." "He has within him almost a principle of recovery, certainly an instrument of it" ("Difficulties felt by Anglicans," pp. 236, 255, 257).

Dr. Mivart expresses his opinion quite episodically, and we cannot but think that on reflection he will be disposed to modify it. Let us take one instance of Catholic dogma. All Catholics know with full conviction, that saintliness is the one measure and ideal of true morality. Let us suppose then, that a large number of them not only believe this truth in the abstract, but keenly realize and apprehend it. Surely Dr. Mivart will admit, that even though their practice be (through their culpable infirmity) deplorably sinful, the existence of such realization and apprehension, and the resulting acute sense of sin, most importantly promote their moral elevation of character.

they are sure to receive most cruel injury, if exposed to the sophistical assaults of irreligious and immoral writers; and there is hardly any duty therefore of the civil ruler more august and sacred, than the preserving to them as far as possible their liberty of conscience, and protecting them from intellectual temptation. This great duty however, as is manifest, can only be attempted, co-extensively with that measure of true ethical basis on which any given society may rest; and is therefore (putting aside such a country as Spain) performed with deplorable inefficiency in modern Europe.

We might give several other reasons for our thesis; such, e.g. as those suggested by that passage of Mr. Stuart Mill's which we append.* But, as we have so often said, we cannot afford space for duly displaying for duly displaying our own doctrine.

Two inferences (to mention no other) are at once deducible, if this doctrine of political ethicism be admitted. We need not here consider the Church's direct teaching, on her own

"Wherever the habitual submission to law and government has been firmly and durably established, and yet the vigour and manliness of character which resisted its establishment have been in any degree preserved, certain requisites have existed, certain conditions have been fulfilled, of which the following may be regarded as the principal.

"First:-There has existed, for all who were accounted citizens—for all who were not slaves, kept down by brute force-a system of education, beginning with infancy and continued through life, of which, whatever else it might include, one main and incessant ingredient was restraining discipline. To train the human being in the habit, and thence the power, of subordinating his personal impulses and aims, to what were considered the ends of society; of adhering, against all temptation, to the course of conduct which those ends prescribed; of controlling in himself all the feelings which were liable to militate against those ends, and encouraging all such as tended towards them; this was the purpose, to which every outward motive that the authority directing the system could command, and every inward power or principle which its knowledge of human nature enabled it to evoke, were endeavoured to be rendered instrumental. The entire civil and military policy of the ancient commonwealths was such a system of training; in modern nations, its place has been attempted to be supplied principally by religious teaching. And whenever, and in proportion as, the strictness of the restraining discipline was relaxed, the natural tendency of mankind to anarchy reasserted itself; the State became disorganized from within; mutual conflict for selfish ends neutralized the energies which were required to keep up the contest against natural causes of evil; and the nation, after a longer or briefer interval of progressive decline, became either the slave of a despotism or the prey of a foreign invader.

"The second condition of permanent political society has been found to be the existence, in some form or other, of the feeling of allegiance or loyalty. This feeling may vary in its objects, and is not confined to any particular form of government: but whether in a democracy or a monarchy, its essence is always the same; viz., that there be in the constitution of the State something which is settled, something permanent, and not to be called in question; something which, by general agreement, has a right to be where