in our day, we hear, indeed, of martyrs, but we hear, too, of large numbers that fall away at the sight of torture or in the presence of imminent peril.
Such is the state of things in Italy with respect to the Sovereign Pontiff and the church over which he rules: persecution, oppression, hate, are the portion of Catholics and their Head; protection, favoritism, and aid, that of all who are adversaries of the church, from the latest-come Protestant agents of the Bible societies of England or America to the most avowed infidel and materialist of Germany or France. A Renan and a Moleschott are listened to with rapture; a Dupanloup or a Majunke are looked on as poor fanatics who cling to a past age. We do not wish to weary our readers with further instances of tyrannical action; though readily at hand, we may dispense with them, for the matter cited above is enough for our purpose, and certainly speaks for itself. We simply ask, What prospect lies before us? What is the promise of the future? On such a foundation can anything be built up that does not tell of sorrow, of trouble, and of ruin? Of a truth no one who loves virtue and religion can look upon the facts without concern; and that concern for an earnest Catholic will increase a hundred-fold, if he take into consideration the plans just now showing themselves for the warfare of to-morrow. These prove the crisis to be approaching, and that far greater evils are hanging over the Papacy than yet have threatened it, demonstrating more evidently and luminously than words what a pope subject of another king or people means.
Any one who is even a superficial
observer of matters in Italy cannot fail to see how closely Italian statesmen and politicians ape the ideas and the measures of Germany, particularly against the church. There, it is well known, strenuous efforts are being made to construct a national church, and with partial success. The pseudo-bishops Reinkens in the empire and Herzog in Switzerland are doing their utmost to give form and constitution to the abortions they have produced. The example is followed in Italy. The apostate Panelli, in Naples, made an unsuccessful attempt to begin the chiesa nazionale; but disagreement with his people caused him to be supplanted, though he still styles himself national bishop. Agreeing with him in sentiments are a certain number of ecclesiastics, insignificant if compared with the clergy of the Catholic Church in Italy; yet to these men, who certainly did not and do not enjoy the esteem of the sanior pars, the wiser portion of the people, the government, holding power under a constitution the first article of which declares that the Roman Catholic and apostolic religion is the religion of the state, show favor and lend aid and comfort. Let us listen for a moment to their language and to that of their supporters.
Sig. Giuseppe Toscanelli is a deputy in the Italian parliament, and a man of so-called liberal views, an old soldier of Italian independence, and an old Freemason. He has the merit of seeing something of the inconsistency and injustice of the action of the authorities, in parliament and out of it, with regard to the church, is a ready speaker, and has the courage to say what he thinks, thus incurring the enmity of his fellow-Masons,
some of whom, in 1864, in the lodge at Pisa, declared him unworthy of their craft, and cast him out of the synagogue. We are not aware that he troubles himself much about the matter, nor that he looks on himself as any the less an ardent supporter of united Italy. When the law of guarantees for the Sovereign Pontiff was up for discussion, Toscanelli said: “Report has it that in 1861 some public men of Lombardy conceived the idea of a national church, which they made known to Count Cavour, and urged him to bring it about; and that Count Cavour decidedly refused to do so. In 1864 this idea showed itself again, and a bill in accordance with it was presented in parliament. The civil constitution of the church was most strongly maintained by the Hon. Bonghi. At present we see papers, some most closely connected with the government, printing articles professedly treating of a national church, even to the point of going to the extremes Henry VIII. reached.”
But not only papers favor the project. We have heard lately of cabinet ministers using the same language. The head of the late ministry, Sig. Marco Minghetti, did so at Bologna in a public speech. Yet he was the leader of the so-called moderate party. It is therefore not surprising that the recognized prince of Italian lawyers, Sig. Stanislas Mancini, the Minister of Public Worship of the present radical cabinet, should speak in the same style. We have a letter of his to a notorious person, Prota Giurleo, President of the Society for the Emancipation of the Clergy, vicar-general of the national church, in the Libertà Cattolica of August 2, 1876. It is worth translating:
“Honored Sir: Hardly had I taken the direction of the ministry of grace, justice, and worship, when you, in the name of the society over which you preside, thought fit to send me a copy of the memorandum of Nov. 9, 1873, which, under the form of a petition, I had myself the honor of presenting to the Chamber of Deputies, recalling to my mind the words uttered by me at the meeting of Dec. 17 of that year, when I asked and obtained that the urgency of the case should be recognized, and demanded suitable provision.
“It is scarcely necessary for me to say that I remembered very well the expressions used by me on that occasion, because they give faithful utterance to an old, lively, and deep feeling of my soul.
“As minister I maintain the ideas and the principles I defended as deputy. Still, I did not conceal the fact that the greatest and most effectual measures were to be obtained only by way of legislation, without omitting to say, however, that by way of executive action something might be done. To-day, then, faithful to this order of ideas, I have no difficulty in opening my mind on each of the questions recapitulated in the memorandum.