THE PRESENT POSITION OF CATHOLICS IN FRANCE. 



177 



clergy and their allies throughout the Eestoration, the mon- 

 archy of Louis Philippe, the Second Empire, and the Third 

 Republic. Lost causes, forsaken beliefs, unpopular names, 

 impossible loyalties, ridiculous pretenders, and ignoble policies, 

 were clung to with incredible folly, and served by the most 

 reprehensible methods. There is little that is either noble or 

 chivalrous in the story of the French reactionaries. Whenever 

 the clerical party secured any power, they misused it. Their 

 struggle has never been for liberty, but always for privilege 

 and monopoly. Equality before the law, they have described 

 as persecution; for, according to papal theories, the clergy 

 may never be subordinated to the civil power. When they 

 provoke reaction and reprisals, they complain of martyr- 

 dom. As Newman said, lono; asro, " Nothing will ever satisfv 

 the Roman Catholics"; but, as usuaJ, he was only half 

 right. One thing satisfies them, namely supremacy over the 

 civil power, and over every individual human being. This is 

 inherent in ultramontanism. There is no escape from the 

 consequences of ultramontane premisses, either for those who 

 formulate the papal claims, or for those who accept them 

 voluntarily, or for those unfortunates upon whom they can be 

 imposed. Now ultramontanism is not a new thing. It was 

 not invented in 1814, nor launched by the decree of 1870, for 

 the principles of ultramontanism were enunciated clearly by 

 the great mediaeval popes, and they were inherent in the claims 

 of the Roman court as far back as Leo 1. in the fifth century. 



But let us hold clearly to a broad principle, and then we shall 

 understand that conflict which we are witnessing in France, 

 and may have to deal with here ; a struggle which may seem 

 complicated to many outside observers, but which is in reality 

 the simplest of all contemporary problems. The papal claims, 

 infallibility, ultramontanism, are incompatible with all that is 

 understood by the French Revolution, using that term m its 

 good sense. They are incompatible with the rights of man ; 

 with all that Frenchmen have desired since 1789, and which 

 they are gradually obtaining. They are incompatible with the 

 ideals of modern society, and with the very foundations upon 

 which our existing society rests. 1 need scarcely add that they 

 are wholly incompatible with that mysterious entity, which we 

 all know l3y instinct, but which none of us can define or handle : 

 1 mean the British Constitution. English institutions and the 

 papal autocracy are absolutely incompatible, the one with the 

 other. They cannot be combined without loss, and ultimately 

 without destruction, to one or both. Xo compromise whatever 



