By Fr. Louis-Marie de Blignières
Translator’s note: Every year at Pentecost, several thousand pilgrims walk the sixty miles from Paris to Chartres over two and a half days on the Our Lady of Christendom pilgrimage. These pilgrims are motivated by their love for the traditional Mass, which is celebrated in solemn pontifical form in the cathedral at the end of the journey. That Mass was the inspiration for and expression of an integrally Catholic society, one suffused with the faith and ruled by Christ the King. The Chartres pèlerins believe that such a society is possible again.
The following article is from the livret du pèlerin, the official booklet given to the pilgrims, which contains various prayers, songs, and instructive pieces on what an integral Christian life entails. This translation from the French appears with the permission of the author.
Is the right to religious liberty affirmed by the declaration Dignitatis humanae of Vatican II opposed to the social kingdom of Christ over human societies? Some theologians and even bishops say so, and a good number of the faithful and of pastors seem not to have clear ideas on the subject.
Religious Liberty at Vatican II
The text of the declaration itself, like the explanations of the subsequent Magisterium, is opposed to this hermeneutic of rupture. In paragraph 1 of Dignitatis humanae, it is said that the doctrine put forward “leaves untouched traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of men and societies toward the true religion and toward the one Church of Christ.” The relator of the document, Bp. De Smedt, during the presentation of the final schema, had himself specified that it dealt with “the duties of the public power toward the true religion.”1
The Catechism of the Catholic Church and Religious Liberty
The Catechism of the Catholic Church treats religious liberty in a section titled “The social duty of religion and the right to religious freedom.”2 Here it specifies that “the duty of offering God genuine worship concerns man both individually and socially.” It asks Christians to “infuse the Christian spirit into the mentality and mores, laws and structures of the communities in which they live.” It affirms “the kingship of Christ over all creation and in particular over human societies.” The Catechism explicitly refers to the great encyclicals Quanta cura of Pius IX, Immortale Dei of Leo XIII, and Quas primas of Pius XI. It specifies that the right to religious liberty “is neither a moral license to adhere to error, nor a supposed right to error;” in referring to Pius IX, that it “can of itself be neither unlimited nor limited only by a ‘public order’ conceived in a positivist or naturalist manner;” and finally, that its limits must be determined “according to the requirements of the common good.”
The Teaching of John Paul II and Benedict XVI
The encyclical Veritatis splendor of John Paul II addresses in paragraph 34 the relativist interpretations of Dignitatis humanae that, unfortunately, have largely prevailed. A great traditionalist controversialist was able to write that “this corrected interpretation, by contrast with the so-called ‘spirit of the council’” is “explicitly placed in the perspective and the context of Gregory XVI (Mirari vos), Pius IX (Quanta cura) and Leo XIII (Libertas). The fifty-eight passages of Vatican II, those that are cited and interpreted by the encyclical, no longer cause any dubium.”3
Benedict XVI, in paragraph 55 of the encyclical Caritas in veritate affirms: “Religious freedom does not mean religious indifferentism, nor does it imply that all religions are equal. Discernment is needed regarding the contribution of cultures and religions, especially on the part of those who wield political power, if the social community is to be built up in a spirit of respect for the common good. Such discernment has to be based on the criterion of charity and truth.”
The Social Kingship of Christ: The Temporal Influence of the Incarnation
Faith and reason could expect that the Incarnation of the Son of God would have consequences even in the social order. It is impossible to see how a Catholic could dismiss this temporal influence of the central mystery of Christianity. Men have a social dimension that cannot escape the influence of Christ. Dignitatis humanae tells us that “among the things that concern the good of the Church and indeed the welfare of society here on earth…this certainly is preeminent, namely, that the Church should enjoy that full measure of freedom which her care for the salvation of men requires.”4 Elsewhere, the council and the Catechism ask us to “seek recognition of Sundays and the Church’s holy days as legal holidays”5 and to work so that “public authority should regard it as a sacred duty to recognize, protect and promote their authentic nature, to shield public morality and to favor the prosperity of home life.”6
Is to act in this way not to work for the realization of Christendom? If this work is preceded and accompanied, as it should be, by evangelization, does it not approach—as far as political prudence permits—a “Catholic nation?”
The true notion of religious liberty, affirmed by Dignitatis humanae and specified by the Magisterium after the council, is in no way opposed to the social kingship of Christ.
The Social Kingship of Christ and the Catholic State
Furthermore, we ought not to limit the notion of Christendom exclusively to the form of “the Catholic State.” The historical realization of Christendom clearly presupposes a society in which Catholics are the great majority. We should add also that, if the divine law requires the principle of a social and communal recognition of the true religion, it does not require a particular expression of this recognition (for example in written constitutions or concordats). In a society that does not enjoy a unity of belief in the Catholic faith, the divine law requires that Christians (and men of good will) strive that civil society honor the natural law and that it give to the Church the ability to preach the supernatural order, with all the indirect benefits that that involves.
This does not, therefore, imply a “nostalgia for a Catholic State,” but it does imply that one cannot be satisfied with a “neutral, passive and unengaged” State, for the State could not be neutral as regards the natural law nor indifferent as regards the religious dimension of the men who live in the polity of which it has charge. John Paul II reminded European parliamentarians of the necessity and the benefit of “the acceptance of principles and norms of behaviour which human reason attains or which flow from the authority of the Word of God, which man, individually or collectively, cannot bend to his pleasure or to the fancy of fashion or changing interests.”7 Twenty years later, Benedict XVI affirmed: “Reason always stands in need of being purified by faith: this also holds true for political reason, which must not consider itself omnipotent.”8
Christ the King and Evangelization
There is nothing here that inhibits evangelization. On the contrary, this effort of the prudent Christianization of structures is an important form of Christian charity. “Open wide the doors for Christ. To his saving power open the boundaries of States, economic and political systems, the vast fields of culture, civilization and development.”9
Fr. Louis-Marie de Blignières is the founder of the Fraternity of St. Vincent Ferrer in France.
One Reply to “The Social Kingship of Christ and the Catholic State”
Comments are closed.