|
Title: |
Notre Charge Apostolique / Our Apostolic Mandate
|
|
Descr.: |
On The Sillon
|
|
Pope: |
Pope St. Pius X
|
|
Date: |
August 25, 1910
|
|
To
The French Archbishops and Bishops...
Venerable
Brethren,
1.
Our
Apostolic mandate requires from Us that We watch over the purity of the Faith and the integrity of Catholic discipline. It requires
from Us that We protect the faithful from evil and error;
especially so when evil and error are presented in dynamic
language which, concealing vague notions and ambiguous expressions
with emotional and high-sounding words, is likely to set ablaze
the hearts of men in pursuit of ideals which, while attractive,
are nonetheless nefarious. Such were not so long ago the doctrines
of the so-called philosophers of the 18th century, the doctrines
of the Revolution and Liberalism which have been so often
condemned; such are even today the theories of the Sillon which,
under the glowing appearance of generosity, are all too often
wanting in clarity, logic and truth. These theories do not belong
to the Catholic or, for that matter, to the French spirit.
2.
We
have long debated, Venerable Brethren, before We decided to
solemnly and publicly speak Our mind on the Sillon. Only when your
concern augmented Our own did We decide to do so. For We love,
indeed, the valiant young people who fight under the Sillon's
banner, and We deem them worthy of praise and admiration in many
respects. We love their leaders, whom We are pleased to
acknowledge as noble souls on a level above vulgar passions, and
inspired with the noblest form of enthusiasm in their quest for
goodness. You have seen, Venerable Brethren, how, imbued with a
living realization of the brotherhood of men, and supported in
their selfless efforts by their love of Jesus Christ and a strict
observance of their religious duties, they sought out those who
labor and suffer in order to set them on their feet again.
3.
This
was shortly after Our Predecessor Leo XIII of happy memory had
issued his remarkable Encyclical on the condition of the working
class. Speaking through her supreme leader, the Church had just
poured out of the tenderness of her motherly love over the humble
and the lowly, and it looked as though she was calling out for an
ever growing number of people to labor for the restoration of
order and justice in our uneasy society. Was it not opportune,
then, for the leaders of the Sillon to come forward and place at
the service of the Church their troops of young believers who
could fulfill her wishes and her hopes? And, in fact, the Sillon
did raise among the workers the standard of Jesus Christ, the
symbol of salvation for peoples and nations. Nourishing its social
action at the fountain of divine grace, it did impose a respect
for religion upon the least willing groups, accustoming the
ignorant and the impious to hearing the Word of God. And, not
seldom, during public debates, stung by a question, or sarcasm,
you saw them jumping to their feet and proudly proclaiming their
faith in the face of a hostile audience. This was the heyday of
the Sillon; its brighter side accounts for the encouragement, and
tokens of approval, which the bishops and the Holy See gave
liberally when this religious fervor was still obscuring the true
nature of the Sillonist movement.
4.
For
it must be said, Venerable Brethren, that Our expectations have
been frustrated in large measure. The day came when perceptive
observers could discern alarming trends within the Sillon; the
Sillon was losing its way. Could it have been otherwise? Its
leaders were young, full of enthusiasm and self-confidence. But
they were not adequately equipped with historical knowledge, sound
philosophy, and solid theology to tackle without danger the
difficult social problems in which their work and their
inclinations were involving them. They were not sufficiently
equipped to be on their guard against the penetration of liberal
and Protestant concepts on doctrine and obedience.
5.
They
were given no small measure of advice. Admonition came after the
advice but, to Our sorrow, both advice and reproaches ran off the
sheath of their elusive souls, and were of no avail. Things came
to such a pass that We should be failing in Our duty if kept silent any longer. We owe the truth to Our dear sons of the
Sillon who are carried away by their generous ardor along the path
strewn with errors and dangers. We owe the truth to a large number
of seminarians and priests who have been drawn away by the Sillon,
if not from the authority, at least from the guidance and
influence of the bishops. We owe it also to the Church in which
the Sillon is sowing discord and whose interests it endangers.
6.
In
the first place We must take up sharply the pretension of the
Sillon to escape the jurisdiction of ecclesiastical authority.
Indeed, the leaders of the Sillon claim that they are working in a
field which is not that of the Church; they claim that they are
pursuing aims in the temporal order only and not those of the
spiritual order; that the Sillonist is simply a Catholic devoted
to the betterment of the working class and to democratic endeavors
by drawing from the practice of his faith the energy for his
selfless efforts. They claim that, neither more nor less than a
Catholic craftsman, farmer, economist or politician, the Sillonist
is subject to common standards of behavior, yet without being
bound in a special manner by the authority of the Church.
7.
To
reply to these fallacies is only too easy: for whom will they make
believe that the Catholic Sillonists, the priests and seminarians enrolled in their ranks have in sight in their social work, only
the temporal interests of the working class? To maintain this, We
think, would be an insult to them. The truth is that the Sillonist
leaders are self-confessed and irrepressible idealists; they claim
to regenerate the working class by first elevating the conscience
of man; they have a social doctrine, and they have religious and
philosophical principles for the reconstruction of society upon
new foundations; they have a particular conception of human
dignity, freedom, justice and brotherhood; and, in an attempt to
justify their social dreams, they put forward the Gospel, but
interpreted in their own way; and what is even more serious, they
call to witness Christ, but a diminished and distorted Christ.
Further, they teach these ideas in their study groups, and
inculcate them upon their friends, and they also introduce them
into their working procedures. Therefore they are really
professors of social, civic, and religious morals; and whatever
modifications they may introduce in the organization of the
Sillonist movement, we have the right to say that the aims of the
Sillon, its character and its action belong to the field of morals
which is the proper domain of the Church. In view of all this, the
Sillonists are deceiving themselves when they believe that they are
working in a field that lies outside the limits of Church
authority and of its doctrinal and directive power.
8.
Even
if their doctrines were free from errors, it would still be a very
serious breach of Catholic discipline to decline obstinately the
direction of those who have received from heaven the mission to
guide individuals and communities along the straight path of truth
and goodness. But, as We have already said, the evil lies far
deeper; the Sillon, carried away by an ill-conceived love for the
weak, has fallen into error.
9.
Indeed,
the Sillon proposes to raise up and re-educate the working class.
But in this respect the principles of Catholic doctrine have been
defined, and the history of Christian civilization bears witness
to their beneficent fruitfulness. Our Predecessor of happy memory
reaffirmed them in masterly documents, and all Catholics dealing
with social questions have the duty to study them and to keep them
in mind. He taught, among other things, that "Christian
Democracy must preserve the diversity of classes which is
assuredly the attribute of a soundly constituted State, and it
must seek to give human society the form and character which God,
its Author, has imparted to it." Our Predecessor denounced
"A certain Democracy which goes so far in wickedness as to
place sovereignty in the people and aims at the suppression of
classes and their leveling down." At the same time, Leo XIII
laid down for Catholics a program of action, the only program
capable of putting society back onto its centuries old Christian
basis. But what have the leaders of the Sillon done? Not only have
they adopted a program and teaching different from that of Leo
XIII (which would be of itself a singularly audacious decision on
the part of laymen thus taking up, concurrent with the Sovereign
Pontiff, the role of director of social action in the Church); but
they have openly rejected the program laid out by Leo XIII, and
have adopted another which is diametrically opposed to it.
Further, they reject the doctrine recalled by Leo XIII on the
essential principles of society; they place authority in the
people, or gradually suppress it and strive, as their ideal, to
effect the leveling down of the classes. In opposition to Catholic
doctrine, therefore, they are proceeding toward a condemned
ideal.
10.
We
know well that they flatter themselves with the idea of raising
human dignity and the discredited condition of the working class.
We know that they wish to render just and perfect the labor laws
and the relations between employers and employees, thus causing a
more complete justice and a greater measure of charity to prevail
upon earth, and causing also a profound and fruitful
transformation in society by which mankind would make an
undreamed-of progress. Certainly, We do not blame these efforts;
they would be excellent in every respect if the Sillonist did not
forget that a person's progress consists in developing his natural
abilities by fresh motivations; that it consists also in
permitting these motivations to operate within the frame of, and
in conformity with, the laws of human nature. But, on the
contrary, by ignoring the laws governing human nature and by
breaking the bounds within which they operate, the human person is
lead, not toward progress, but toward death. This, nevertheless,
is what they want to do with human society; they dream of changing
its natural and traditional foundations; they dream of a Future
City built on different principles, and they dare to proclaim
these more fruitful and more beneficial than the principles upon
which the present Christian City rests.
11.
No,
Venerable Brethren, We must repeat with the utmost energy in these
times of social and intellectual anarchy when everyone takes it
upon himself to teach as a teacher and lawmaker - the City cannot
be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot be
setup unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the
work; no, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is
the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence
and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic
City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against
the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants.
12.
Now,
lest We be accused of judging too hastily and with unjustified
rigor the social doctrines of the Sillon, We wish to examine their
essential points.
13.
The
Sillon has a praiseworthy concern for human dignity, but it
understands human dignity in the manner of some philosophers, of
whom the Church does not at all feel proud. The first condition of
that dignity is liberty, but viewed in the sense that, except in
religious matters, each man is autonomous. This is the basic
principle from which the Sillon draws further conclusions: today
the people are in tutelage under an authority distinct from
themselves; they must liberate themselves: political emancipation.
They are also dependent upon employers who own the means of
production, exploit, oppress and degrade the workers; they must
shake off the yoke: economic emancipation. Finally, they are ruled
by a caste called Intelligentsia which, by its very nature, enjoys
undue preponderance in the direction of affairs. The people
must break away from this domination: intellectual emancipation. The
leveling-down of differences from this three-fold point of view
will bring about equality among men, and such equality is viewed
as true human justice. A socio-political set-up resting on these
two pillars of Liberty and Equality - to which Fraternity will
presently be added - is what they call Democracy.
14.
However,
liberty and equality are, so to speak, no more than a negative
side. The distinctive and positive aspect of Democracy is to be
found in the largest possible participation of everyone in the
government of public affairs. And this, in turn, comprises a
threefold aspect, namely political, economical, and moral.
15.
At
first, the Sillon does not wish to abolish political authority; on
the contrary, it considers it necessary; but it wishes to divide
it, or rather to multiply it in such a way that each citizen will
become a kind of king. Authority, so they concede, comes from God,
but it resides primarily in the people and expresses itself by
means of elections or, better still, by selection. However, it
still remains in the hands of the people; it does not escape their
control. It will be an external authority, yet only in appearance;
in fact, it will be internal because it will be an authority
assented to.
16.
All
other things being equal, the same principle will apply to
economics. Taken away from a specific group, management will be so
well multiplied that each worker will himself become a kind of
employer. The system by which the Sillon intends to actualize this
economic ideal is not Socialism, they say; it is a system of
guilds in a number large enough to induce a healthy competition
and to protect the workers' independence; in this manner, they
will not be bound to any guild in particular.
17.
We
come now to the principal aspect, the moral aspect. Since, as we
have seen, authority is much reduced, another force is necessary
to supplement it and to provide a permanent counterweight against
individual selfishness. This new principle, this force, is the
love of professional interest and of public interest, that is to
say, the love of the very end of the profession and of society.
Visualize a society in which, in the soul of everyone, along with
the innate love of personal interest and family welfare, prevails
love for one's occupation and for the welfare of the community.
Imagine this society in which, in the conscience of everyone,
personal and family interests are so subordinate that a superior
interest always takes precedence over them. Could not such a
society almost do without any authority? And would it not be the
embodiment of the ideal of human dignity, with each citizen having
the soul of a king, and each worker the soul of a master? Snatched
away from the pettiness of private interests, and raised up to the
interests of the profession and, even higher, to those of the
whole nation and, higher still, to those of the whole human race
(for the Sillon's field of vision is not bound by the national
borders, it encompasses all men even to the ends of the earth),
the human heart, enlarged by the love of the commonwealth, would
embrace all comrades of the same profession, all compatriots, all
men. Such is the ideal of human greatness and nobility to be
attained through the famous popular trilogy: liberty, equality,
fraternity.
18.
These
three elements, namely political, economic, and moral, are
interdependent and, as We have said, the moral element is
dominant. Indeed, no political Democracy can survive if it is not
anchored to an economic Democracy. But neither one nor the other
is possible if it is not rooted in an awareness by the human
conscience of being invested with moral responsibilities and
energies mutually commensurate. But granted the existence of that
awareness, so created by conscious responsibilities and moral
forces, the kind of Democracy arising from it will naturally
reflect in deeds the consciousness and moral forces from which it
flows. In the same manner, political Democracy will also issue
from the trade-guild system. Thus, both political and economic
Democracies, the latter bearing the former, will be fastened to unshakable
bases in
the very consciousness of the people.
19.
To
sum up, such is the theory, one could say the dream of the Sillon;
and that is what its teaching aims at, which it calls the
democratic education of the people, that is, raising to its
maximum the conscience and civic responsibility of everyone, from
which will result economic and political Democracy and the reign
of Justice, Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.
20.
This
brief explanation, Venerable Brethren, will show you clearly how
much reason We have for saying that the Sillon opposes doctrine to
doctrine, that it seeks to build its City on a theory contrary to
Catholic truth, and that falsifies the basic and essential notions
which regulate social relations in human society. The
following considerations will make this opposition even more
evident.
21.
The
Sillon places public authority primarily in the people, from whom
it then flows into the government in such a manner, however, that
it continues to reside in the people. But Leo XIII absolutely
condemned this doctrine in his Encyclical "Diuturnum Illud"
on political government in which he said: "Modern
writers in great numbers, following in the footsteps of those who
called themselves philosophers in the last century, declare that
all power comes from the people; consequently those who exercise
power in society do not exercise it from their own authority, but
from an authority delegated to them by the people and on the
condition that it can be revoked by the will of the people from
whom they hold it. Quite contrary is the sentiment of Catholics
who hold that the right of governing derives from God as its
natural and necessary principle."
Admittedly,
the Sillon holds that authority - which it first places in the people
- descends from God, but in such a way: "as to return from
below upwards, while in the organization of the Church power
descends from above downwards."
But
besides its being abnormal for the delegation of power to ascend,
since it is in its nature to descend, Leo XIII refuted in advance
this attempt to reconcile Catholic doctrine with the error of
philosophism. For, he continues: "It is necessary to remark
here that those who preside over the government of public affairs
may indeed, in certain cases, be chosen by the will and judgment
of the multitude without repugnance or opposition to Catholic
doctrine. But while this choice marks out the ruler, it does not
confer upon him the authority to govern; it does not delegate the
power, it designates the person who will be invested with
it."
22.
For
the rest, if the people remain the holders of power, what becomes
of authority? A shadow, a myth; there is no more law properly
so-called, no more obedience. The Sillon acknowledges this:
indeed, since it demands that threefold political, economic, and
intellectual emancipation in the name of human dignity, the Future
City which it is engaged in forming will have no masters
and no servants. All citizens will be free; all comrades, all
kings. A command, a precept would be viewed as an attack upon
their freedom; subordination to any form of superiority would be a
diminishment of the human person, and obedience a disgrace. Is it
in this manner, Venerable Brethren, that the traditional doctrine
of the Church represents social relations, even in the most
perfect society? Has not every community of people, dependent and
unequal by nature, need of an authority to direct its activity
toward the common good and to enforce its laws? And if perverse
individuals are to be found in a community (and there always are),
should not authority be all the stronger as the selfishness of the
wicked is more threatening? Further - unless one greatly deceives
oneself in the conception of liberty - can it be said with an atom
of reason that authority and liberty are incompatible? Can one
teach that obedience is contrary to human dignity and that the
ideal would be to replace it by "accepted authority"?
Did not St. Paul the Apostle foresee human society in all its
possible stages of development when he bade the faithful to be
subject to every authority? Does obedience to men as the
legitimate representatives of God, that is to say in the final
analysis, obedience to God, degrade man and reduce him to a level
unworthy of himself? Is the religious life which is based on
obedience, contrary to the ideal of human nature? Were the Saints
- the most obedient of men, just slaves and degenerates? Finally, can
you imagine social conditions in which Jesus Christ, if He
returned to earth, would not give an example of obedience and,
further, would no longer say: "Render unto Caesar the things
that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's"?
23.
Teaching
such doctrines, and applying them to its internal organization,
the Sillon, therefore, sows erroneous and fatal notions on
authority, liberty and obedience among your Catholic youth. The
same is true of justice and equality. The Sillon says that it is
striving to establish an era of equality which, by that very fact,
would be also an era of greater justice. Thus, to the Sillon,
every inequality of condition is an injustice, or at least, a
diminution of justice? Here we have a principle that conflicts
sharply with the nature of things, a principle conducive to
jealously, injustice, and subversive of any social order. Thus,
Democracy alone will bring about the reign of perfect justice! Is
this not an insult to other forms of government which are thereby
debased to the level of sterile makeshifts? Besides, the
Sillonists once again clash on this point with the teaching of Leo
XIII. In the Encyclical on political government which We have
already quoted, they could read this: "Justice being
preserved, it is not forbidden to the people to choose for
themselves the form of government which best corresponds with
their character or with the institutions and customs handed down
by their forefathers."
And
the Encyclical alludes to the three well-known forms of
government, thus implying that justice is compatible with any of
them. And does not the Encyclical on the condition of the working
class state clearly that justice can be restored within the
existing social set-up - since it indicates the means of doing so?
Undoubtedly, Leo XIII did not mean to speak of some form of
justice, but of perfect justice. Therefore, when he said that
justice could be found in any of the three aforesaid forms of
government, he was teaching that in this respect Democracy does
not enjoy a special privilege. The Sillonists who maintain the
opposite view, either turn a deaf ear to the teaching of the
Church or form for themselves an idea of justice and equality
which is not Catholic.
24.
The
same applies to the notion of Fraternity which they found on the
love of common interest or, beyond all philosophies and religions,
on the mere notion of humanity, thus embracing with an equal love
and tolerance all human beings and their miseries, whether these
are intellectual, moral, or physical and temporal. But Catholic
doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in
the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be; nor in theoretical or practical indifference
toward the errors and
vices in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for
their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their
material well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love
for our neighbor flows from our love for God, Who is Father to
all, and the goal of the human family; and in Jesus Christ whose
members we are, to the point that in doing good to others we are
doing good to Jesus Christ Himself. Any other kind of love is
sheer illusion, sterile and fleeting.
Indeed,
we have the human experience of pagan and secular societies of
ages past to show that concern for common interests or affinities
of nature weigh very little against the passions and wild desires
of the heart. No, Venerable Brethren, there is no genuine
fraternity outside Christian charity. Through love of God and
His Son Jesus Christ Our Savior, Christian charity embraces all
men, comforts all, and leads all to the same faith and same
heavenly happiness.
By
separating fraternity from Christian charity thus understood,
Democracy, far from being a progress, would mean a disastrous step
backward for civilization. If, as We desire with all Our heart,
the highest possible peak of well-being for society and its
members is to be attained through fraternity or, as it is also
called, universal solidarity, all minds must be united in the
knowledge of Truth, all wills united in morality, and all hearts
in the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ. But this union is
attainable only by Catholic charity, and that is why Catholic
charity alone can lead the people in the march of progress toward
the ideal civilization.
25.
Finally,
at the root of all their fallacies on social questions, lie the
false hopes of the Sillonists on human dignity. According to them,
man
will be a man truly worthy of the name only when he has acquired a
strong, enlightened, and independent consciousness, able to do
without a master, obeying only himself, and able to assume the
most demanding responsibilities without faltering. Such are the
big words by which human pride is exalted, like a dream carrying man away without light, without guidance, and without help into
the realm of illusion in which he will be destroyed by his errors
and passions while awaiting the glorious day of his full
consciousness. And that great day, when will it come? Unless human
nature can be changed, which is not within the power of the
Sillonists, will that day ever come? Did the Saints who brought
human dignity to its highest point, possess that kind of dignity?
And what of the lowly of this earth who are unable to rise so
high but are content to plow their furrow modestly at the level
where Providence placed them? They who are diligently discharging
their duties with Christian humility, obedience, and patience, are
they not also worthy of being called men? Will not Our Lord take
them one day out of their obscurity and place them in heaven
amongst the princes of His people?
26.
We
close here Our observations on the errors of the Sillon. We do not
claim to have exhausted the subject, for We should yet draw your
attention to other points that are equally false and dangerous,
for example on the manner to interpret the concept of the coercive
power of the Church. But We must now examine the influence of
these errors upon the practical conduct and upon the social action
of the Sillon.
27.
The
Sillonist doctrines are not kept within the domain of abstract
philosophy; they are taught to Catholic youth and, even worse,
efforts are made to apply them in everyday life. The Sillon is
regarded as the nucleus of the Future City and, accordingly, it is
being made to its image as much as possible. Indeed, the Sillon
has no hierarchy. The governing elite has emerged from the rank
and file by selection, that is, by imposing itself through its
moral authority and its virtues. People join it freely, and freely
they may leave it. Studies are carried out without a master, at
the very most, with an adviser. The study groups are really
intellectual pools in which each member is at once both master and
student. The most complete fellowship prevails amongst its
members, and draws their souls into close communion; hence the
common soul of the Sillon. It has been called a
"friendship". Even the priest, on entering, lowers the
eminent dignity of his priesthood and, by a strange reversal of
roles, becomes a student, placing himself on a level with his
young friends, and is no more than a comrade.
28.
In
these democratic practices and in the theories of the Ideal City
from which they flow, you will recognize, Venerable Brethren, the
hidden cause of the lack of discipline with which you have so
often had to reproach the Sillon. It is not surprising that you do
not find among the leaders and their comrades trained on these
lines, whether seminarians or priests, the respect, the docility,
and the obedience which are due to your authority and to
yourselves; nor is it surprising that you should be conscious of
an underlying opposition on their part, and that, to your sorrow,
you should see them withdraw altogether from works which are not
those of the Sillon or, if compelled under obedience, that they
should comply with distaste. You are the past; they are the
pioneers of the civilization of the future. You represent the
hierarchy, social inequalities, authority, and obedience - worn
out institutions to which their hearts, captured by another ideal,
can no longer submit. Occurrences so sad as to bring tears to
Our eyes bear witness to this frame of mind. And we cannot, with
all Our patience, overcome a just feeling of indignation. Now
then! Distrust of the Church, their Mother, is being instilled
into the minds of Catholic youth; they are being taught that after
nineteen centuries She has not yet been able to build up in this
world a society on true foundations; She has not understood the
social notions of authority, liberty, equality, fraternity and
human dignity; they are told that the great Bishops and Kings, who
have made France what it is and governed so gloriously, have
not been able to give their people true justice and true happiness
because they did not possess the Sillonist Ideal!
29.
The
breath of the Revolution has passed this way, and We can conclude
that, while the social doctrines of the Sillon are erroneous, its
spirit is dangerous and its education disastrous.
30.
But
then, what are we to think of its action in the Church? What are
we to think of a movement so punctilious in its brand of
Catholicism that, unless you embrace its cause, you would almost
be regarded as an internal enemy of the Church, and one who
understands nothing of the Gospel and of Jesus Christ! We deem it
necessary to insist on that point because it is precisely its
Catholic ardor which has secured for the Sillon until quite
recently, valuable encouragements and the support of distinguished
persons. Well now, judging the words and deeds, We feel
compelled to say that in its actions as well as in its doctrine,
the Sillon does not give satisfaction to the Church.
31.
In
the first place, its brand of Catholicism accepts only the
democratic form of government which it considers the most
favorable to the Church and, so to speak, identifies it with her.
The Sillon, therefore, subjects its religion to a political
party. We do not have to demonstrate here that the advent of
universal Democracy is of no concern to the action of the Church
in the world; we have already recalled that the Church has always
left to nations the care of giving themselves the form of
government which they think most suited to their needs. What We
wish to affirm once again, after Our Predecessor, is that it is an
error and a danger to bind down Catholicism by principle to a
particular form of government. This error and this danger are all
the greater when religion is associated with a kind of Democracy
whose doctrines are false. But this is what the Sillon is doing.
For the sake of a particular political form, it compromises the
Church, it sows division among Catholics, snatches away young
people and even priests and seminarians from purely Catholic
action, and is wasting away as a dead loss part of the living
forces of the nation.
32.
And
behold, Venerable Brethren, an astounding contradiction: It is
precisely because religion ought to transcend all parties, and it
is in appealing to this principle, that the Sillon abstains from
defending the beleaguered Church. Certainly, it is not the Church
that has gone into the political arena: they have dragged her
there to mutilate and to despoil her. Is it not the duty of every
Catholic, then, to use the political weapons which he holds, to
defend her? Is it not a duty to confine politics to its own domain
and to leave the Church alone except in order to give her that
which is her due? Well, at the sight of the violences thus done to
the Church, we are often grieved to see the Sillonists folding
their arms except when it is to their advantage to defend her; we
see them dictate or maintain a program which nowhere and in no
degree can be called Catholic. Yet this does not prevent the same
men, when fully engaged in political strife and spurred by a provocation, from publicly proclaiming their faith. What are we to
say except that there are two different men in the Sillonist; the
individual, who is Catholic, and the Sillonist, the man of action,
who is neutral!
33.
There
was a time when the Sillon, as such, was truly Catholic. It
recognized but one moral force - Catholicism; and the Sillonists
were wont to proclaim that Democracy would have to be Catholic or
would not exist at all. A time came when they changed their minds.
They left to each one his religion or his philosophy. They ceased
to call themselves Catholics and, for the formula "Democracy
will be Catholic" they substituted "Democracy will not
be anti-Catholic", any more than it will be anti-Jewish or
anti-Buddhist. This was the time of "the Greater Sillon".
For the construction of the Future City they appealed to the
workers of all religions and all sects. These were asked but one
thing: to share the same social ideal, to respect all creeds, and
to bring with them a certain supply of moral force. Admittedly:
they declared that "The leaders of the Sillon place their
religious faith above everything. But can they deny others the
right to draw their moral energy from whence they can? In return,
they expect others to respect their right to draw their own moral
energy from the Catholic Faith. Accordingly they ask all those who
want to change today's society in the direction of Democracy, not
to oppose each other on account of the philosophical or religious
convictions which may separate them, but to march hand in hand,
not renouncing their convictions, but trying to provide on the
ground of practical realities, the proof of the excellence of
their personal convictions. Perhaps a union will be effected on
this ground of emulation between souls holding different religious
or philosophical convictions". And they added at the same
time (but how could this be accomplished?) that "the Little
Catholic Sillon will be the soul of the Greater Cosmopolitan
Sillon."
34.
Recently,
the term "Greater Sillon" was discarded and a new
organization was born without modifying - quite the contrary - the
spirit and the substratum of things: "In order to organize in
an orderly manner the different forces of activity, the Sillon
still remains as a Soul, a Spirit, which will pervade the groups
and inspire their work." Thus, a host of new groups,
Catholic, Protestant, Free-Thinking, now apparently autonomous,
are invited to set to work: "Catholic comrades will work
among themselves in a special organization and will learn and
educate themselves. Protestant and Free-Thinking Democrats will do
likewise on their own side. But all of us, Catholics, Protestants
and Free-Thinkers will have at heart to arm young people, not in
view of the fratricidal struggle, but in view of a disinterested
emulation in the field of social and civic virtues."
35.
These
declarations and this new organization of the Sillonist action
call for very serious remarks.
36.
Here
we have, founded by Catholics, an inter-denominational association
that is to work for the reform of civilization, an undertaking
which is above all religious in character; for there is no true
civilization without a moral civilization, and no true moral
civilization without the true religion: it is a proven truth, an
historical fact. The new Sillonists cannot pretend that they are
merely working on "the ground of practical realities"
where differences of belief do not matter. Their leader is so
conscious of the influence which the convictions of the mind have
upon the result of the action, that he invites them, whatever
religion they may belong to, "to provide on the ground of
practical realities, the proof of the excellence of their personal
convictions." And with very good reason: indeed, all practical
results reflect the nature of one's religious convictions, just as
the limbs of a man down to his fingertips, owe their very shape
to the principle of life that dwells in his body.
37.
This
being said, what must be thought of the indiscriminate
mingling in which young
Catholics will be caught up with heterodox and unbelieving folk in
a work of this nature? Is it not a thousand-fold more dangerous
for them than a neutral association? What are we to think of this
appeal to all the heterodox, and to all the unbelievers, to prove
the excellence of their convictions in the social sphere in a sort
of apologetic contest? Has not this contest lasted for nineteen
centuries in conditions less dangerous for the faith of Catholics?
And was it not all to the credit of the Catholic Church? What are
we to think of this respect for all errors, and of this strange
invitation made by a Catholic to all the dissidents to strengthen
their convictions through study so that they may have more and
more abundant sources of fresh forces? What are we to think of an
association in which all religions and even Free-Thought may
express themselves openly and in complete freedom? For the
Sillonists who, in public lectures and elsewhere, proudly proclaim
their personal faith, certainly do not intend to silence others
nor do they intend to prevent a Protestant from asserting his
Protestantism, and the skeptic from affirming his skepticism.
Finally, what are we to think of a Catholic who, on entering his
study group, leaves his Catholicism outside the door so as not to
alarm his comrades who, "dreaming of disinterested social
action, are not inclined to make it serve the triumph of
interests, coteries and even convictions whatever they may
be"? Such is the profession of faith of the New Democratic
Committee for Social Action which has taken over the main
objective of the previous organization and which, they say,
"breaking the ambiguity which surrounded the Greater
Sillon both in reactionary and anti-clerical circles", is now
open to all men "who respect moral and religious forces and
who are convinced that no genuine social emancipation is possible
without the leaven of generous idealism."
38.
Alas! Yes, the ambiguity has been broken: the social action of the
Sillon is no longer Catholic. The Sillonist, as such, does not
work for a coterie, and "the Church", he says,
"cannot in any sense benefit from the sympathies that his
action may stimulate." A strange situation, indeed! They fear
lest the Church should profit for a selfish and interested end by
the social action of the Sillon, as if everything that benefited
the Church did not benefit the whole human race! A curious
reversal of notions! The Church might benefit from social action!
As if the greatest economists had not recognized and proved that
it is social action alone which, if serious and fruitful, must
benefit by the Church! But stranger still, alarming and saddening at
the same time, are the audacity and frivolity of men who call
themselves Catholics and dream of re-shaping society under such
conditions, and of establishing on earth, over and beyond the pale
of the Catholic Church, "the reign of love and justice"
with workers coming from everywhere, of all religions and of no
religion, with or without beliefs, so long as they forego what
might divide them - their religious and philosophical convictions;
and so long as they share what unites them - a "generous
idealism and moral forces, drawn from whence they can". When we
consider the forces, knowledge, and supernatural virtues which were
necessary to establish the Christian City, and the sufferings of
millions of martyrs, and the light given by the Fathers and
Doctors of the Church, and the self-sacrifice of all the heroes of
charity, and a powerful hierarchy ordained in heaven, and the
streams of Divine Grace - the whole having been built up, bound
together, and impregnated by the life and spirit of Jesus Christ,
the Wisdom of God, the Word made Man - when we think, I say, of
all this, it is frightening to behold new apostles eagerly
attempting to do better by a common interchange of vague idealism
and civic virtues. What are they going to produce? What is to come
out of this collaboration? A mere verbal and chimerical construction
in which we see, glowing in a jumble, and in seductive
confusion, the words Liberty, Justice, Fraternity, Love, Equality,
and human exultation, all resting upon an ill-understood human
dignity. It will be a tumultuous agitation, sterile for the end
proposed, but which will benefit the less Utopian exploiters of
the people. Yes, we can truly say that the Sillon, its eyes fixed
on a chimera, brings Socialism in its train.
39.
We
fear that worse is to come: the end result of this developing
promiscuousness, the beneficiary of this cosmopolitan social
action, can only be a Democracy which will be neither Catholic,
nor Protestant, nor Jewish. It will be a religion (for Sillonism,
so the leaders have said, is a religion) more universal than the
Catholic Church, uniting all men to become brothers and comrades at
last in the "Kingdom of God". - "We do not work for
the Church, we work for mankind."
40.
And
now, overwhelmed with the deepest sadness, We ask Ourselves,
Venerable Brethren, what has become of the Catholicism of the
Sillon? Alas! This organization which formerly afforded such
promising expectations, this limpid and impetuous stream, has been
harnessed in its course by the modern enemies of the Church, and
is now no more than a miserable affluent of the great movement of
apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of
a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy;
neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions; and
which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring
back to the world (if such a church could overcome) the reign of
legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak, and
of those who toil and suffer.
41.
We
know only too well the dark workshops in which are elaborated
these mischievous doctrines which ought not to seduce
clear-thinking minds. The leaders of the Sillon have not been able
to guard against these doctrines. The exaltation of their
sentiments, the undiscriminating goodwill of their hearts, their
philosophical mysticism, mixed with a measure of illuminism, have
carried them away toward another Gospel which they thought was
the true Gospel of Our Savior. To such an extent that they speak
of Our Lord Jesus Christ with a familiarity supremely
disrespectful, and that - their ideal being akin to the
Revolution - they fear not to draw between the Gospel and the
Revolution blasphemous comparisons for which the excuse cannot be
made that they are due to some confused and over-hasty
composition.
42.
We
wish to draw your attention, Venerable Brethren, to this
distortion of the Gospel and of the sacred character of Our Lord
Jesus Christ, God and man, prevailing within the Sillon and
elsewhere. As soon as the social question is being approached, it
is the fashion in some quarters to first put aside the divinity of
Jesus Christ, and then to mention only His unlimited clemency, His
compassion for all human miseries, and His pressing exhortations
to the love of our neighbor and to the brotherhood of men. True,
Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on
earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice
and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all
men might live in peace and happiness. But for the realization of
this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme
authority the condition that we must belong to His flock, that we
must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that
we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his
successors. Further, while Jesus was kind to sinners and to those
who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however
sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He
instructed them in order to convert them and save them. While He
called to Himself in order to comfort them, those who toiled and
suffered, it was not to preach to them the jealousy of a
chimerical equality. While He lifted up the lowly, it was not to
instill in them the sentiment of a dignity independent from, and
rebellious against, the duty of obedience. While His heart
overflowed with gentleness toward the souls of goodwill, He could
also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of
the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the
little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the
weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them.
He was as strong as he was gentle. He reproved, threatened,
chastised; knowing and teaching us that fear is the beginning of
wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an
offending limb to save his body. Finally, He did not announce for
future society the reign of an ideal happiness from which
suffering would be banished; but, by His lessons and by His
example, He traced the path of the happiness which is possible on
earth and of perfect happiness in heaven: the royal way of the
Cross. These are teachings that it would be wrong to apply only to
one's personal life in order to win eternal salvation; these are
eminently social teachings, and they show in Our Lord Jesus Christ
something quite different from an inconsistent and impotent
humanitarianism.
43.
As
for you, Venerable Brethren, carry on diligently with the work of
the Savior of men by emulating His gentleness and His strength.
Minister to every misery; let no sorrow escape your pastoral
solicitude; let no lament find you indifferent. But, on the other
hand, preach fearlessly their duties to the powerful and to the
lowly; it is your function to form the conscience of the people
and of the public authorities. The social question will be much
nearer a solution when all those concerned, less demanding as
regards their respective rights, shall fulfill their duties more
exactingly.
44.
Moreover,
since in the clash of interests, and especially in the struggle
against dishonest forces, the virtue of a man, and even his holiness
are not always sufficient to guarantee him his daily bread, and
since social structures, through their natural interplay, ought to
be devised to thwart the efforts of the unscrupulous and enable
all men of good will to attain their legitimate share of temporal
happiness, We earnestly desire that you should take an active part
in the organization of society with this objective in mind. And,
to this end, while your priests will zealously devote their efforts to
the sanctification of souls, to the defense of the Church, and
also to works of charity in the strict sense, you shall select a
few of them, level-headed and of active disposition, holders of
Doctors' degrees in philosophy and theology, thoroughly acquainted
with the history of ancient and modern civilizations, and you
shall set them to the not-so-lofty but more practical study of
social science so that you may place them at the opportune time at
the helm of your works of Catholic action. However, let not these
priests be misled, in the maze of current opinions, by the mirage of a false Democracy. Let them not borrow from the
rhetoric of the worst enemies of the Church and of the people, the
high-flown phrases, full of promises; which are as high-sounding
as they are unattainable. Let them be convinced that the social question
and social science did not arise only yesterday; that the Church
and the State, at all times and in happy concert, have raised up
fruitful organizations to this end; that the Church, which has
never betrayed the happiness of the people by consenting to
dubious alliances, does not have to free herself from the past;
that all that is needed is to take up again, with the help of the
true workers for a social restoration, the organisms which the
Revolution shattered, and to adapt them, in the same Christian
spirit that inspired them, to the new environment arising from the
material development of today's society. Indeed, the true friends
of the people are neither revolutionaries, nor innovators: they
are promoters of tradition.
45.
We
desire that the Sillonist youth, freed from their errors, far from
impeding this work which is eminently worthy of your pastoral
care, should bring to it their loyal and effective contribution in
an orderly manner and with befitting submission.
46.
We
now turn to the leaders of the Sillon with the confidence of
a father who speaks to his children, and We ask them for their own
good, and for the good of the Church and of France, to turn their
leadership over to you. We are certainly aware of the extent of
the sacrifice that We request from them, but We know them to be of
a sufficiently generous disposition to accept it; and, in advance,
in the Name of Our Lord Jesus Christ whose representative
We are, We bless them for this. As to the rank and file of the
Sillon, We wish that they group themselves according to dioceses
in order to work, under the authority of their respective bishops,
for the Christian and Catholic regeneration of the people, as well
as for the improvement of their lot. These diocesan groups will be
independent from one another for the time being. And, in order to
show clearly that they have broken with the errors of the past,
they will take the name of "Catholic Sillon", and each
of the members will add to his Sillonist title the
"Catholic" qualification. It goes without saying that
each Catholic Sillonist will remain free to retain his political
preferences, provided they are purified of everything that is not
entirely conformable to the doctrine of the Church. Should some
groups refuse, Venerable Brethren, to submit to these conditions,
you should consider by that very fact that they are refusing to
submit to your authority. Then, you will have to examine whether
they stay within the limits of pure politics or economics, or
persist in their former errors. In the former case, it is clear
that you will have no more to do with them than with the general
body of the faithful; in the latter case, you will have to take
appropriate measures, with prudence but with firmness also.
Priests will have to keep entirely out of the dissident groups,
and they shall be content to extend the help of their sacred
ministry to each member individually, applying to them in the
tribunal of penitence the common rules of morals in respect to
doctrine and conduct. As for the Catholic groups, while the
priests and the seminarians may favor and help them, they shall
abstain from joining them as members; for it is fitting that the
priestly phalanx should remain above lay associations even when
these are most useful and inspired by the best spirit.
47.
Such
are the practical measures with which We have deemed necessary to
confirm this letter on the Sillon and the Sillonists. From the
depths of Our soul We pray that the Lord may cause these men and
young people to understand the grave reasons which have prompted
it. May He give them the docility of heart and the courage to show
to the Church the sincerity of their Catholic fervor. As for you,
Venerable Brethren, may the Lord inspire in your hearts toward
them - since they will be yours henceforth - the sentiments of a
true fatherly love.
48.
In
expressing this hope, and to obtain these results which are so
desirable, We grant to you, to your clergy and to your people, Our
Apostolic benediction with all Our heart.
Given
at St. Peter's, Rome, on August 25, 1910, the eighth year of
Our Pontificate.
The above is provided for informational purposes only and may not be comprehensive. By using this site you agree to all terms. For terms
information, see "Important Notice" above and click
here.
|
