Principles Relative to the
Political and Social Doctrine of the Church
Text approved by Rev. Fr. Bernard Rulleau, O.S.B., 18th July, 2011, 12th April 2018 - Cf. Rule, I, 7-12 in particular
1.- Christ the King: Christ, “the beginning and the end of all things,” is King of the universe, by nature since He created it, and of mankind, moreover by conquest, since He redeemed it by His blood.
2.- Origin of the Political and Social Doctrine of the Church: Man being a social animal, God created society at the same time as man. Hence, Christ, the God-Man, is the King of society as well as the King of every man and every family. From this flows the Political and Social Doctrine of the Church or Doctrine of Christ the King.
3.- Origin of Authority: “There is no power but from God.” (Rm 13:1) Even if the people is called upon to choose its representatives and leaders, the latter must rule, not owing to the authority they would supposedly have received from their constituents, but to the authority derived from their charge, according to the Natural Law willed by God. (Encyclical Diuturnum Illud) We call this: “divine right,” which may be confirmed by royal or imperial consecration and coronation. The people may choose its leaders, yet it cannot grant them authority. In this sense, the expression “Sovereign People” is wrong and the State must acknowledge that it owes its authority to God, for instance, in the first article of the Constitution. This is why a king or any head of State is only a Lieutenant of Christ the King.
4.- Catholic Legislation: The expression “Sovereign People” is also wrong, inasmuch as this latter might decide what is good or evil, including divorce, abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality, etc., directly or through its representatives, whereas human laws must conform with the Natural and Divine Laws (Encyclical Sapientiae Christianae). Consequently laws, like State Constitutions, must be Catholic. Hence, a Non-Catholic State is a deficient State.
5.- State Religion: Moreover, the Encyclical Quas Primas states that “not only private individuals but also rulers and princes are bound to give public honour and obedience to Christ,” and adds: “nor is there any difference in this matter between the individual and the family or the State; for all men, whether collectively or individually, are under the dominion of Christ.” As a consequence, the Catholic Faith must be the “State Religion.” The State professes it, and encourages its development, while it restrains as much as possible the circulation of errors by virtue of a “tolerance” adapted to the necessities of social peace and public order (restrictions on public worship for false religions and on errors of all kinds, and hence restriction imposed upon the use of mass media): this issue pertains to the virtue of prudence.
6.- Doctrine of the Two Swords: In the temporal order, God exercises His authority through the Natural Law and in the Spiritual order, through His Church. On the spiritual level, the Church exercises it on His behalf through her Hierarchy. On the temporal level, the authority of the head of State or of the father of family derives from the Natural Law. Yet, since man is affected by original sin, the Church has received the mission not only to teach, but also to correct natural leaders, who err because of sin, and possibly condemn them. Consequently, the Church exercises over them an Indirect Power by reason of sin (ratione peccati), while She wields Direct Power in the spiritual domain. This we call the Doctrine of the Two Swords, which stand for the two powers.
7.- Union of Church and State: Harmony and cooperation between the Temporal and Spiritual Powers – the State acts under the “vigilance” of the Indirect Power of the Church – is called “Union of Church and State”, “which may be compared with the union of the soul and body in man” (Encyclical Immortale Dei). There must be neither “Unity”, nor confusion as in theocracies, nor a “Separation of Church and State”, which would mean the death of society, just like the separation of soul and body is man’s death. Yet this “Union” must maintain a “Distinction” between the two powers.
8.- The State’s Two Ends: Man having:
10.- The antithesis of this principle is embodied in the doctrine of the Rights of Man, which deny any divine or human authority and consequently every human community, including the family. According to this doctrine the whole is allegedly subordinated to the part and society and the country to individuals. The end of the family is claimed to be the parents’ happiness and not the procreation and education of children. Modern ideologies, and especially Personalism, consider the person in his independence and complete freedom as the end of everything. The intrinsic end of the State is no longer the Common Good, but the defence of the “rights” of the person.
11.- The Principle of Totality also disagrees with the Principle of Nationalities, according to which each “nation” has the right to set itself up as a State. This principle is revolutionary, for the notion of “nation”, in the modern sense of the word, is quite vague and new regional idiosyncrasies are always discovered. Nationalism has been used to destroy multinational traditional Cities and now a regionalist and separatist Nationalism is a device to destroy National States for the benefit of Globalization. On the contrary, St Thomas Aquinas required vigilance over the autonomy of the City against international trade exchanges, so as to preserve the purity of public morals against the spirit of lucre in particular. A striking example of this process of dislocation is the deliberate implosion of the Austro-Hungarian Empire – nationalities, languages and religions coexisted peacefully under the authority of a Catholic prince – and next the implosion of Czechoslovakia and of Yugoslavia as sequels of a chain reaction.
12.- Principle of Subsidiarity: “Just as it is gravely wrong to take from individuals what they can accomplish by their own initiative and industry and give it to the community, so also it is an injustice and at the same time a grave evil and disturbance of right order to assign to a greater and higher association what lesser and subordinate organizations can do.” (Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno) This principle enables citizens to make decisions at the local or regional level, if recourse to the State is not absolutely necessary. It prevents civil services as overstaffed as inefficient.
13.- Principle de Substitution: It is the corollary of the Principle of Subsidiarity and means that when problems exceed the capacity of smaller units, the next higher level has the duty to support them, within the limits of that same Principle of Subsidiarity, and within these limits only, since excessive or too frequent interventions might result in a loss of efficiency and essential purpose of the minor communities. “For every social activity ought of its very nature to furnish help to the members of the social body, and never destroy and absorb them.” (Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno). Just like the Totalitarian State, the Welfare State unduly takes over and assumes the duties of most or all intermediate bodies (trades and crafts, municipalities, schools and education in general) and even the family, occasionally going so far as to consider that children belong to the State before belonging to their families.
14.- The consequence of these principles is the Corporate Organization of society requested by Pius XII: “The corporate form of social life – and particularly of economic life – fosters Christian life for persons, communities, work and private property.” (July 10th, 1946, Rule 1, 10)
15.- Distinction between the Political and Social Realms: Beware of any confusion between the political and the social realm (intermediate bodies belong to this latter). Intermediate bodies and families cannot survive in a normal way without the protection of the State and, if the State is harmful, it can enslave them and use them as “tools” in its service. It would therefore be a serious mistake to think that by dint of social work we can obtain political results, since they are quite distinct spheres. Yves Chataignier calls such a belief Spontaneism. This is why Charles Maurras used to say “Politics first,” meaning that without political control, the family, the intermediate bodies, and apostolate itself might be in jeopardy.
16.- A Good Regime: This is why we should remember, that according to St Thomas, a good regime is in the service of the Common Good, whereas a bad regime seeks some specific profit.
17.- The Best Form of Government, according to St Thomas, is the government of one man alone, i.e. “monarchy”, in the etymological sense of the word. In decreasing order, good regimes are: monarchy, aristocracy, and republic, as for bad regimes they are: tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy. St. Thomas explains that, in the abstract, the best regime is a monarchy moderated by aristocracy and “democracy” (in the ancient or patriarchal meaning). In concreto, the best regime is that which suits the traditions of each people. Yet Parliamentarism and Universal Suffrage must be avoided, both were condemned by Pius VI and Pius IX among others.
18.- Risk of Tyranny: If tyranny is the most “unjust” form of government, St. Thomas also points out that “most collective governments ended up in tyranny.” When Communism was at its apex, it had its “popular democracies”, which were nothing else than the “dictatorship of the people” (in fact the dictatorship of an oligarchic party). Today Western “totalitarian democracy” tends to settle almost everywhere in the world. It is a liberal democracy within which an oligarchy is in control, while it entertains the people by various performances and imposes upon it the brainwash of the “politically correct,” etc. Historian François Furet explains: “In every democratic power lies [...] a hidden oligarchy, which is both opposed to democratic principles and essential to its smooth running”.
19.- The Fight against Sects: Hence the importance of fighting against the sects, which form the greatest part of that hidden oligarchy: “Beyond governments, which come and go, Freemasonry is the lasting backbone of the Republic”. “Free-Masonry is a closed Republic, while the Republic is open Free-Masonry.” “We are not in a Republic, but in a Freemasonry.”
20.- The “Form” of Society: Pius XII attaches great importance to the type of regime, and more particularly to the “form” of society and its government: “From the form – in conformity or not with the divine laws – given to society depends and follows good or evil for souls, i.e. the fact that, in the course of their earthly life with all its contingencies, men, who are all called to be vivified by the grace of Christ, breathe, the healthy and life-giving air of truth and moral virtues, or, on the contrary, the morbid and often fatal germs of error and depravity”. (June 1st, 1941 Radio-Message). This is the very reverse of the “Ralliement” policy (“In so much does legislation differ from political power, and its form, etc.,” Au milieu des Sollicitudes, Leo XIII, 1892). The latter hoped to secure good laws regardless of the ideology underlying the regime and constitution, forgetting that no evil tree can bring forth good fruits and that no bad regime will ever allow good laws to be voted, or to remain.
1.- Christ the King: Christ, “the beginning and the end of all things,” is King of the universe, by nature since He created it, and of mankind, moreover by conquest, since He redeemed it by His blood.
2.- Origin of the Political and Social Doctrine of the Church: Man being a social animal, God created society at the same time as man. Hence, Christ, the God-Man, is the King of society as well as the King of every man and every family. From this flows the Political and Social Doctrine of the Church or Doctrine of Christ the King.
3.- Origin of Authority: “There is no power but from God.” (Rm 13:1) Even if the people is called upon to choose its representatives and leaders, the latter must rule, not owing to the authority they would supposedly have received from their constituents, but to the authority derived from their charge, according to the Natural Law willed by God. (Encyclical Diuturnum Illud) We call this: “divine right,” which may be confirmed by royal or imperial consecration and coronation. The people may choose its leaders, yet it cannot grant them authority. In this sense, the expression “Sovereign People” is wrong and the State must acknowledge that it owes its authority to God, for instance, in the first article of the Constitution. This is why a king or any head of State is only a Lieutenant of Christ the King.
4.- Catholic Legislation: The expression “Sovereign People” is also wrong, inasmuch as this latter might decide what is good or evil, including divorce, abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality, etc., directly or through its representatives, whereas human laws must conform with the Natural and Divine Laws (Encyclical Sapientiae Christianae). Consequently laws, like State Constitutions, must be Catholic. Hence, a Non-Catholic State is a deficient State.
5.- State Religion: Moreover, the Encyclical Quas Primas states that “not only private individuals but also rulers and princes are bound to give public honour and obedience to Christ,” and adds: “nor is there any difference in this matter between the individual and the family or the State; for all men, whether collectively or individually, are under the dominion of Christ.” As a consequence, the Catholic Faith must be the “State Religion.” The State professes it, and encourages its development, while it restrains as much as possible the circulation of errors by virtue of a “tolerance” adapted to the necessities of social peace and public order (restrictions on public worship for false religions and on errors of all kinds, and hence restriction imposed upon the use of mass media): this issue pertains to the virtue of prudence.
6.- Doctrine of the Two Swords: In the temporal order, God exercises His authority through the Natural Law and in the Spiritual order, through His Church. On the spiritual level, the Church exercises it on His behalf through her Hierarchy. On the temporal level, the authority of the head of State or of the father of family derives from the Natural Law. Yet, since man is affected by original sin, the Church has received the mission not only to teach, but also to correct natural leaders, who err because of sin, and possibly condemn them. Consequently, the Church exercises over them an Indirect Power by reason of sin (ratione peccati), while She wields Direct Power in the spiritual domain. This we call the Doctrine of the Two Swords, which stand for the two powers.
7.- Union of Church and State: Harmony and cooperation between the Temporal and Spiritual Powers – the State acts under the “vigilance” of the Indirect Power of the Church – is called “Union of Church and State”, “which may be compared with the union of the soul and body in man” (Encyclical Immortale Dei). There must be neither “Unity”, nor confusion as in theocracies, nor a “Separation of Church and State”, which would mean the death of society, just like the separation of soul and body is man’s death. Yet this “Union” must maintain a “Distinction” between the two powers.
8.- The State’s Two Ends: Man having:
- a natural end: virtuous life
- a supernatural end: the salvation of his soul, or even a specific end: his vocation
- a temporal end, which is intrinsic to it: the Common Good or Common Welfare (bonum commune), and:
- a spiritual end, which is extrinsic to it (and accidental): the salvation of the souls of the citizens
- an ultimate and common end, which is the sanctification of their members
- a proximate and proper end, which is the particular end of each institute.
10.- The antithesis of this principle is embodied in the doctrine of the Rights of Man, which deny any divine or human authority and consequently every human community, including the family. According to this doctrine the whole is allegedly subordinated to the part and society and the country to individuals. The end of the family is claimed to be the parents’ happiness and not the procreation and education of children. Modern ideologies, and especially Personalism, consider the person in his independence and complete freedom as the end of everything. The intrinsic end of the State is no longer the Common Good, but the defence of the “rights” of the person.
11.- The Principle of Totality also disagrees with the Principle of Nationalities, according to which each “nation” has the right to set itself up as a State. This principle is revolutionary, for the notion of “nation”, in the modern sense of the word, is quite vague and new regional idiosyncrasies are always discovered. Nationalism has been used to destroy multinational traditional Cities and now a regionalist and separatist Nationalism is a device to destroy National States for the benefit of Globalization. On the contrary, St Thomas Aquinas required vigilance over the autonomy of the City against international trade exchanges, so as to preserve the purity of public morals against the spirit of lucre in particular. A striking example of this process of dislocation is the deliberate implosion of the Austro-Hungarian Empire – nationalities, languages and religions coexisted peacefully under the authority of a Catholic prince – and next the implosion of Czechoslovakia and of Yugoslavia as sequels of a chain reaction.
12.- Principle of Subsidiarity: “Just as it is gravely wrong to take from individuals what they can accomplish by their own initiative and industry and give it to the community, so also it is an injustice and at the same time a grave evil and disturbance of right order to assign to a greater and higher association what lesser and subordinate organizations can do.” (Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno) This principle enables citizens to make decisions at the local or regional level, if recourse to the State is not absolutely necessary. It prevents civil services as overstaffed as inefficient.
13.- Principle de Substitution: It is the corollary of the Principle of Subsidiarity and means that when problems exceed the capacity of smaller units, the next higher level has the duty to support them, within the limits of that same Principle of Subsidiarity, and within these limits only, since excessive or too frequent interventions might result in a loss of efficiency and essential purpose of the minor communities. “For every social activity ought of its very nature to furnish help to the members of the social body, and never destroy and absorb them.” (Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno). Just like the Totalitarian State, the Welfare State unduly takes over and assumes the duties of most or all intermediate bodies (trades and crafts, municipalities, schools and education in general) and even the family, occasionally going so far as to consider that children belong to the State before belonging to their families.
14.- The consequence of these principles is the Corporate Organization of society requested by Pius XII: “The corporate form of social life – and particularly of economic life – fosters Christian life for persons, communities, work and private property.” (July 10th, 1946, Rule 1, 10)
15.- Distinction between the Political and Social Realms: Beware of any confusion between the political and the social realm (intermediate bodies belong to this latter). Intermediate bodies and families cannot survive in a normal way without the protection of the State and, if the State is harmful, it can enslave them and use them as “tools” in its service. It would therefore be a serious mistake to think that by dint of social work we can obtain political results, since they are quite distinct spheres. Yves Chataignier calls such a belief Spontaneism. This is why Charles Maurras used to say “Politics first,” meaning that without political control, the family, the intermediate bodies, and apostolate itself might be in jeopardy.
16.- A Good Regime: This is why we should remember, that according to St Thomas, a good regime is in the service of the Common Good, whereas a bad regime seeks some specific profit.
17.- The Best Form of Government, according to St Thomas, is the government of one man alone, i.e. “monarchy”, in the etymological sense of the word. In decreasing order, good regimes are: monarchy, aristocracy, and republic, as for bad regimes they are: tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy. St. Thomas explains that, in the abstract, the best regime is a monarchy moderated by aristocracy and “democracy” (in the ancient or patriarchal meaning). In concreto, the best regime is that which suits the traditions of each people. Yet Parliamentarism and Universal Suffrage must be avoided, both were condemned by Pius VI and Pius IX among others.
18.- Risk of Tyranny: If tyranny is the most “unjust” form of government, St. Thomas also points out that “most collective governments ended up in tyranny.” When Communism was at its apex, it had its “popular democracies”, which were nothing else than the “dictatorship of the people” (in fact the dictatorship of an oligarchic party). Today Western “totalitarian democracy” tends to settle almost everywhere in the world. It is a liberal democracy within which an oligarchy is in control, while it entertains the people by various performances and imposes upon it the brainwash of the “politically correct,” etc. Historian François Furet explains: “In every democratic power lies [...] a hidden oligarchy, which is both opposed to democratic principles and essential to its smooth running”.
19.- The Fight against Sects: Hence the importance of fighting against the sects, which form the greatest part of that hidden oligarchy: “Beyond governments, which come and go, Freemasonry is the lasting backbone of the Republic”. “Free-Masonry is a closed Republic, while the Republic is open Free-Masonry.” “We are not in a Republic, but in a Freemasonry.”
20.- The “Form” of Society: Pius XII attaches great importance to the type of regime, and more particularly to the “form” of society and its government: “From the form – in conformity or not with the divine laws – given to society depends and follows good or evil for souls, i.e. the fact that, in the course of their earthly life with all its contingencies, men, who are all called to be vivified by the grace of Christ, breathe, the healthy and life-giving air of truth and moral virtues, or, on the contrary, the morbid and often fatal germs of error and depravity”. (June 1st, 1941 Radio-Message). This is the very reverse of the “Ralliement” policy (“In so much does legislation differ from political power, and its form, etc.,” Au milieu des Sollicitudes, Leo XIII, 1892). The latter hoped to secure good laws regardless of the ideology underlying the regime and constitution, forgetting that no evil tree can bring forth good fruits and that no bad regime will ever allow good laws to be voted, or to remain.
principles_relative_to_the_political_and_social_doctrine...docx |