| OCR Text |
Show 0hurcb and Ibc Papacy, Deposing Power of the Pope Pius V and Queen Elizabeth of England. (Written for Intermountain Catholic.) Personal antipathy and religious animosity ani-mosity have so discolored past historical histor-ical facts connected with thf lives of the Roman pontiffs as to bring down upon them the odium of persons predisposed pre-disposed to make them responsible for the ills and woes of humanity and the political disturbances of Europe. All occupants of the chair of Peter discharged dis-charged the onerous duties entrusted to their charge with a sincerity that denoted de-noted honesty of purpose anil a linn belief of their exalted position to govern gov-ern the Church and "feed the Iambs1 and sheep." Some may have temporized tempor-ized with the civil authorities and shown weakness; one, like Pope Renii-gius. Renii-gius. was slow in condemniny heresy when detected: but in the long list there was none who did riot, firmly believe in the responsibilities of his office. For adhering to his high office and exercising his pontifical authority, Gregory VII, after his struggle with Henry IV, died in exile. His dying words proclaim his sincerity: "I have loved justice and hated iniquity; therefore, there-fore, I die In exile." The criticism of Gregory VII for deposing de-posing Henry IV was referred to in our last communication. That Gregory was right in exercising his supreme authority au-thority to maintain the ancient discipline disci-pline of the church and enforce its canons, is conceded by Protestant writers. writ-ers. Henry was a Catholic. In assuming assum-ing office he solemnly promised, according ac-cording to the constitution, to defend that faith. Only after he had been unfaithful to his promise, violated th constitution, encouraged the evils and abuses that existed, and finally, with the sanction of his venal and sim-onical-made bishops, deposed the Pope, did Gregory exercise his supreme authority. au-thority. A like occurrence took place in England Eng-land in the sixteenth century. When Queen Elizabeth ascended the English throne her right could not be defended o.i Catholic principles, which denied the validity of her father and mother's marriage (Henry VIII and Anne Bo-leyn). Bo-leyn). The Church could not compromise compro-mise its doctrinal teaching by viewing her birth other than illegitimate. Before Be-fore God's law, kings, queens and the common people stand equal. Queen Elizabeth professed the Catholic faith, ascended the throne as such and solemnly sol-emnly swore to protect that faith. After she proved herself a perjuror and a relentless persecutor of the Church, to which she nominally adhered, ad-hered, Pius V deposed Elizabeth. The queen was the Pope's spiritual subject, professed the Catholic faith and succeeded Mary (her half sister) as a Catholic. At the time of her coronation coro-nation the Catholic constitution was in force and the Catholic religion was ! the law of the land. Her profession, j tenure of office and the very lawa of ' the land made her a spiritual subject of the Church just as much as Henry j IV of Germany. The Church, through its head, did not interpose till Elizabeth violated the constitution, persecuted her subjects, drove Catholic bishops from t'heir sees and assumed, in spiritual' spir-itual' matters as well as in temporal, the plenitude of power. The Church did nothing more than would the subjects sub-jects of Edward VII do should he become be-come a Catholic after his coronation: and the same writers who would de- I j nounce the action of Pius V would I contend that the British peop) had the right to do so, since the king ascends as-cends the throne only as a Protestant, ; and will be bound by his coronation i oath to defend the nglicHn church as j by law established. What British loy- I alty and patriotism demand should Ed- 1 ward change his faith. c.uiM lie consistently con-sistently used by the spiritual father o;' ( 'hristeiidom. e.-pecially in the ase of Kii:alielh. who had changed her , faith and persecuted those w ho adhered i ti it. In no intance has the deposing I power been used when subjects were I nor the spiritual children of the 'huivh. Past history, analyzed and impartially reviewed, shows that the Pi.pes have at all times carefully considered con-sidered the political const it u ti in. in no wise interfered with infidel or nou-I'atholic nou-I'atholic rulers: and it was only when rulers usurped the spiritual authority, encroached on the rights of Cod, that the pope had recourse j. extreme measures. The Holy Father nvcr ejaimed nor exercised the power of deposing ruler I w ho wee faithful to the constitution jo" their government, and whose reiens were manifestly just. Nay, more ''at'holic subjects, regardh-ss of the I creed ., their ruler, are in -'oris, ienee j bound to be loyal citizens, respect the j authority of the ruler and i;ie him I thir allegiance; nor is there a single j instance where the Pope, under such circumstances, interfered. Hi- motto 's that, of St. Paul, who commanded tiic leirly Christians to obey the heathen heath-en emperors of Kome; and of Christ Himself, who recognized Caesar's au-i au-i thority and commanded all to pay him Itiibute. "Render to Caesar the things i that a re ( 'aesa r's." j The Popes whoso ' interference and actiins are criticised were not inno-1 inno-1 valors. Neither Gregory VII nor Pius i V usurped or exercised any authority I thai was not fully recognized by Cath-! Cath-! o!Js nations. They wanted no change in the doctrine or discipline of the Church, and no innovation btisveen church and state. Gregory VII strove to correct abuses which had crept into the Church through investiture. His efforts to restore the ancient, discipline If.l up to the strugiV1 with, Henry IV. His honesty of purpose and sincerity in maintaining the freedom and independence inde-pendence of the Church to govern her own subjects and appoint suitable and worthy persons in high offices, cannot be questioned, and his right to do so is the same as that claimed by every religious community in America. Should the government of the United States interfere in the appointment of Methodist bishops there would be a I protest from the Atlantic to the Pacific . I coast, and from Canada to the Gulf j of Mexico; and should those who as- sumed the right to interfere with their leligious freedom be hostile to that denomination there would be a "greater "great-er howl" that any ever heard in Rome, j Yet that was all Gregory VII did when ! he protested against the German I princes. j i Elizabeth was the spiritual subject j j of the Pope, and her strong Catholic j j tendencies might have continued the S J Anglican church in communion with I Rome if the holy see could only reeog- j i nize the legitimacy of her birth. To j do so would be admitting the validity f of her father's second marriage. Over this (God's law regarding marriage) f th" Pope has no jurisdiction: and Eliz- abeth. in order to secure her seat on J the throne, was obliged to become a j Protestant. The Pope deposed her. j Whatever may have been its conse- i quences in the past. th deposing pow- er is no longer exercised. Only in Catholic nations, where rulers pro- 1 fessed the Catholic faith and promised I to protect it. could it have any effect. f To suppose that it might be exercised j in non-Catholic nations, where it I would have no effect, is an idea orig- inating only- in minds that are deeply f afffcted with religious prejudice and i hostile to the Catholic Church. t , (To be Continued.) |
