« AnteriorContinuar »
the influence of all religious bodies. In the individual, peace is a natural fruit of the religious sentiment. Logically, therefore, it should be the mental habit of a society, that, speaking in a very broad sense, calls itself Christian, knowing no higher ideals than those of the Prince of Peace. Hence I read with pleasure that Doctor Holls, the historian of the Hague Conference, justly praises Radbertus's fine definition of the art of politics "the royal art of ascertaining and accomplishing the will of God." Yes, "Christian justice, the maxims of the Gospel, the fear of God are the only true basis of a lasting peace." (Cardinal Rampolla in replying to the invitation of the Emperor of Russia to take part in the Hague Conference.) Public opinion we must cultivate, but any legitimate and durable public opinion must eventually have a basis of religion. Otherwise it will be only a series of popular ebullitions, a form of psychology of the mob, that to-day shouts for "Liberty" and to-morrow goes drunk over its violent extinction.
We ought to welcome all organized religious efforts in the interest of a general peace, for all such effort is essentially Christian and supremely humane and uplifting.
The real evil of our modern industrial and commercial conditions is the selfishness they tend to engender. Why should we ignore the most powerful solvent of selfishness that has ever been discovered, the religious sentiment?
I believe with all my soul that until we recognize openly the moral power and authority of religion, not of the vague individual sentiment, but of organized religion-our efforts for a universal peace will accomplish but an imperfect result.
I shall not, therefore, entirely surprise anyone if in connection with the profound influence of religion in all that tends to create and preserve a state of peace I call attention to the continuous existence of a famous tribunal of peace-the Holy See at Rome.
Its services in the past are so well known that all impartial historians, even such as do not recognize its spiritual authority, agree that for centuries it was a successful court of final resort for countless conflicts. The only practical international law for centuries was the Gospel of Christ as preached by its legatees to emperors and kings.
Through centuries of selfish feudalism, when all Europe was splintered into countless little states, the Holy See was the only
external force they bowed to and habitually invoked as unselfish, independent, courageous, beloved by the poor and weak, and feared by the rapacious and powerful.
That tribunal still exists. Lord Stanley in the House of Lords, July 25, 1887, thus referred to it, when the question of International Arbitration was under discussion: "Such a court exists already, the Court of the Bishop of Rome; all Continental Europe was disposed to recognize it as the proper arbiter when war was threatened between nations. He called attention to the happy settlement of the Caroline Islands by Leo XIII, whereby war was averted between Germany and Spain. "The Code of the Law of Nations," he continued, "drawn up at Lille by Catholic savants in November, 1886, could easily be accepted by England, which, following the example of Germany, need not hesitate to trust the impartiality of the Pope."
The Holy See is still the working head of the great Catholic body, over 256,000,000 of souls; and its moral authority was never greater. All these countless millions would surely welcome the recognition of the Holy See as a factor in International Arbitration.
It stands forth universally venerated as a divine representative committed to the works and the interests of peace by the nature and history of its office, at the head of a great working system of international religious administration which permits it to reach rapidly and efficiently the minds and the hearts of whole peoples and races.
I am not prepared to say just how the Holy See might again take its place as a factor in the work of universal peace, or how the Christian world shall resurrect a tribunal that was once its pride and honor.
It is certainly significant enough that when Czar Nicholas first proposed an International Tribunal of Peace he invited the Holy See to take part in the proceedings and that the Queen of Holland wrote personally to Leo XIII, requesting his co-operation.
I think I can safely say that if the Holy See were no longer excluded from this noble and eminently religious enterprise the thirteen or more millions of American Catholics would at once take a livelier interest in the movement for the abolition of war.
It would appear to them as more than a Utopian scheme, as something practicable, and in a large measure attainable.
I regret exceedingly that I cannot be with you to-night. I give you my best wishes, assuring you that I am present in spirit, and that my hope and prayer is that the work in New York this week may be a large factor in bringing about the approach of universal peace throughout the world.