LIBERTAS
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII
 
ON THE NATURE OF HUMAN LIBERTY JUNE 20, 1888

To the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, and Bishops of the Catholic
World in Grace and Communion with the Apostolic See.
 
Liberty, the highest of natural endowments, being the portion only of
intellectual or rational natures, confers on man this dignity--that he is
"in the hand of his counsel"[1] and has power over his actions. But the
manner in which such dignity is exercised is of the greatest moment,
inasmuch as on the use that is made of liberty the highest good and the
greatest evil alike depend. Man, indeed, is free to obey his reason, to
seek moral good, and to strive unswervingly after his last end. Yet he is
free also to turn aside to all other things; and, in pursuing the empty
semblance of good, to disturb rightful order and to fall headlong into
the destruction which he has voluntarily chosen. The Redeemer of mankind,
Jesus Christ, having restored and exalted the original dignity of nature,
vouchsafed special assistance to the will of man; and by the gifts of His
grace here, and the promise of heavenly bliss hereafter, He raised it to
a nobler state. In like manner, this great gift of nature has ever been,
and always will be, deservingly cherished by the Catholic Church, for to
her alone has been committed the charge of handing down to all ages the
benefits purchased for us by Jesus Christ. Yet there are many who imagine
that the Church is hostile to human liberty. Having a false and absurd
notion as to what liberty is, either they pervert the very idea of
freedom, or they extend it at their pleasure to many things in respect of
which man cannot rightly be regarded as free.
 
2. We have on other occasions, and especially in Our encyclical letter
lmmortale Dei,[2] in treating of the so-called modern liberties,
distinguished between their good and evil elements; and We have shown
that whatsoever is good in those liberties is as ancient as truth itself,
and that the Church has always most willingly approved and practiced that
good: but whatsoever has been added as new is, to tell the plain truth,
of a vitiated kind, the fruit of the disorders of the age, and of an
insatiate longing after novelties. Seeing, however, that many cling so
obstinately to their own opinion in this matter as to imagine these
modern liberties, cankered as they are, to be the greatest glory of our
age, and the very basis of civil life, without which no perfect
government can be conceived, We feel it a pressing duty, for the sake of
the common good, to treat separately of this subject.
 
3. It is with moral liberty, whether in individuals or in communities,
that We proceed at once to deal. But, first of all, it will be well to
speak briefly of natural liberty; for, though it is distinct and separate
from moral liberty, natural freedom is the fountainhead from which
liberty of whatsoever kind flows, sua vi suaque sponte. The unanimous
consent and judgment of men, which is the trusty voice of nature,
recognizes this natural liberty in those only who are endowed with
intelligence or reason; and it is by his use of this that man is rightly
regarded as responsible for his actions. For, while other animate
creatures follow their senses, seeking good and avoiding evil only by
instinct, man has reason to guide him in each and every act of his life.
Reason sees that whatever things that are held to be good upon earth may
exist or may not, and discerning that none of them are of necessity for
us, it leaves the will free to choose what it pleases. But man can judge
of this contingency, as We say, only because he has a soul that is
simple, spiritual, and intellectual--a soul, therefore, which is not
produced by matter, and does not depend on matter for its existence; but
which is created immediately by God, and, far surpassing the condition of
things material, has a life and action of its own-- so that, knowing the
unchangeable and necessary reasons of what is true and good, it sees that
no particular kind of good is necessary to us. When, therefore, it is
established that man's soul is immortal and endowed with reason and not
bound up with things material, the foundation of natural liberty is at
once most firmly laid.
 
4. As the Catholic Church declares in the strongest terms the simplicity,
spirituality, and immortality of the soul, so with unequaled constancy
and publicity she ever also asserts its freedom. These truths she has
always taught, and has sustained them as a dogma of faith, and whensoever
heretics or innovators have attacked the liberty of man, the Church has
defended it and protected this noble possession from destruction. History
bears witness to the energy with which she met the fury of the Manicheans
and others like them; and the earnestness with which in later years she
defended human liberty at the Council of Trent, and against the followers
of Jansenius, is known to all. At no time, and in no place, has she held
truce with fatalism.
 
5. Liberty, then, as We have said, belongs only to those who have the
gift of reason or intelligence. Considered as to its nature, it is the
faculty of choosing means fitted for the end proposed, for he is master
of his actions who can choose one thing out of many. Now, since
everything chosen as a means is viewed as good or useful, and since good,
as such, is the proper object of our desire, it follows that freedom of
choice is a property of the will, or, rather, is identical with the will
in so far as it has in its action the faculty of choice. But the will
cannot proceed to act until it is enlightened by the knowledge possessed
by the intellect. In other words, the good wished by the will is
necessarily good in so far as it is known by the intellect; and this the
more, because in all voluntary acts choice is subsequent to a judgment
upon the truth of the good presented, declaring to which good preference
should be given. No sensible man can doubt that judgment is an act of
reason, not of the will. The end, or object, both of the rational will
and of its liberty is that good only which is in conformity with reason.
 
6. Since, however, both these faculties are imperfect, it is possible, as
is often seen, that the reason should propose something which is not
really good, but which has the appearance of good, and that the will
should choose accordingly. For, as the possibility of error, and actual
error, are defects of the mind and attest its imperfection, so the
pursuit of what has a false appearance of good, though a proof of our
freedom, just as a disease is a proof of our vitality, implies defect in
human liberty. The will also, simply because of its dependence on the
reason, no sooner desires anything contrary thereto than it abuses its
freedom of choice and corrupts its very essence. Thus it is that the
infinitely perfect God, although supremely free, because of the supremacy
of His intellect and of His essential goodness, nevertheless cannot
choose evil; neither can the angels and saints, who enjoy the beatific
vision. St. Augustine and others urged most admirably against the
Pelagians that, if the possibility of deflection from good belonged to
the essence or perfection of liberty, then God, Jesus Christ, and the
angels and saints, who have not this power, would have no liberty at all,
or would have less liberty than man has in his state of pilgrimage and
imperfection. This subject is often discussed by the Angelic Doctor in
his demonstration that the possibility of sinning is not freedom, but
slavery. It will suffice to quote his subtle commentary on the words of
our Lord: "Whosoever committeth sin is the slave of sin."[3]
 "Everything," he says, "is that which belongs to it naturally. When,
therefore, it acts through a power outside itself, it does not act of
itself, but through another, that is, as a slave. But man is by nature
rational. When, therefore, he acts according to reason, he acts of
himself and according to his free will; and this is liberty. Whereas,
when he sins, he acts in opposition to reason, is moved by another, and
is the victim of foreign misapprehensions. Therefore, 'Whosoever
committeth sin is the slave of sin'."[4] Even the heathen philosophers
clearly recognized this truth, especially they who held that the wise man
alone is free; and by the term "wise man" was meant, as is well known,
the man trained to live in accordance with his nature, that is, in
justice and virtue.
 
7. Such, then, being the condition of human liberty, it necessarily
stands in need of light and strength to direct its actions to good and to
restrain them from evil. Without this, the freedom of our will would be
our ruin. First of all, there must be law; that is, a fixed rule of
teaching what is to be done and what is to be left undone. This rule
cannot affect the lower animals in any true sense, since they act of
necessity, following their natural instinct, and cannot of themselves act
in any other way. On the other hand, as was said above, he who is free
can either act or not act, can do this or do that, as he pleases, because
his judgment precedes his choice. And his judgment not only decides what
is right or wrong of its own nature, but also what is practically good
and therefore to be chosen, and what is practically evil and therefore to
be avoided. In other words, the reason prescribes to the will what it
should seek after or shun, in order to the eventual attainment of man's
last end, for the sake of which all his actions ought to be performed.
This ordination of reason is called law. In man's free will, therefore,
or in the moral necessity of our voluntary acts being in accordance with
reason, lies the very root of the necessity of law. Nothing more foolish
can be uttered or conceived than the notion that, because man is free by
nature, he is therefore exempt from law. Were this the case, it would
follow that to become free we must be deprived of reason; whereas the
truth is that we are bound to submit to law precisely because we are free
by our very nature. For, law is the guide of man's actions; it turns him
toward good by its rewards, and deters him from evil by its punishments.
 
8. Foremost in this office comes the natural law, which is written and
engraved in the mind of every man; and this is nothing but our reason,
commanding us to do right and forbidding sin. Nevertheless, all
prescriptions of human reason can have force of law only inasmuch as they
are the voice and the interpreters of some higher power on which our
reason and liberty necessarily depend. For, since the force of law
consists in the imposing of obligations and the granting of rights,
authority is the one and only foundation of all law--the power, that is,
of fixing duties and defining rights, as also of assigning the necessary
sanctions of reward and chastisement to each and all of its commands. But
all this, clearly, cannot be found in man, if, as his own supreme
legislator, he is to be the rule of his own actions. It follows,
therefore, that the law of nature is the same thing as the eternal law,
implanted in rational creatures, and inclining them to their right action
and end; and can be nothing else but the eternal reason of God, the
Creator and Ruler of all the world. To this rule of action and restraint
of evil God has vouchsafed to give special and most suitable aids for
strengthening and ordering the human will. The first and most excellent
of these is the power of His divine grace, whereby the mind can be
enlightened and the will wholesomely invigorated and moved to the
constant pursuit of moral good, so that the use of our inborn liberty
becomes at once less difficult and less dangerous. Not that the divine
assistance hinders in any way the free movement of our will; just the
contrary, for grace works inwardly in man and in harmony with his natural
inclinations, since it flows from the very Creator of his mind and will,
by whom all things are moved in conformity with their nature. As the
Angelic Doctor points out, it is because divine grace comes from the
Author of nature that it is so admirably adapted to be the safeguard of
all natures, and to maintain the character, efficiency, and operations of
each.
 
9. What has been said of the liberty of individuals is no less applicable
to them when considered as bound together in civil society. For, what
reason and the natural law do for individuals. that human law promulgated
for their good, does for the citizens of States. Of the laws enacted by
men, some are concerned with what is good or bad by its very nature; and
they command men to follow after what is right and to shun what is wrong,
adding at the same time a suitable sanction. But such laws by no means
derive their origin from civil society, because, just as civil society
did not create human nature, so neither can it be said to be the author
of the good which befits human nature, or of the evil which is contrary
to it. Laws come before men live together in society, and have their
origin in the natural, and consequently in the eternal, law. The
precepts, therefore, of the natural law, contained bodily in the laws of
men, have not merely the force of human law, but they possess that higher
and more august sanction which belongs to the law of nature and the
eternal law. And within the sphere of this kind of laws the duty of the
civil legislator is, mainly, to keep the community in obedience by the
adoption of a common discipline and by putting restraint upon refractory
and viciously inclined men, so that, deterred from evil, they may turn to
what is good, or at any rate may avoid causing trouble and disturbance to
the State. Now, there are other enactments of the civil authority, which
do not follow directly, but somewhat remotely, from the natural law, and
decide many points which the law of nature treats only in a general and
indefinite way. For instance, though nature commands all to contribute to
the public peace and prosperity, whatever belongs to the manner, and
circumstances, and conditions under which such service is to be rendered
must be determined by the wisdom of men and not by nature herself. It is
in the constitution of these particular rules of life, suggested by
reason and prudence, and put forth by competent authority, that human
law, properly so called, consists, binding all citizens to work together
for the attainment of the common end proposed to the community, and
forbidding them to depart from this end, and, in so far as human law is
in conformity with the dictates of nature, leading to what is good, and
deterring from evil.
 
10. From this it is manifest that the eternal law of God is the sole
standard and rule of human liberty, not only in each individual man, but
also in the community and civil society which men constitute when united.
Therefore, the true liberty of human society does not consist in every
man doing what he pleases, for this would simply end in turmoil and
confusion, and bring on the overthrow of the State; but rather in this,
that through the injunctions of the civil law all may more easily conform
to the prescriptions of the eternal law. Likewise, the liberty of those
who are in authority does not consist in the power to lay unreasonable
and capricious commands upon their subjects, which would equally be
criminal and would lead to the ruin of the commonwealth; but the binding
force of human laws is in this, that they are to be regarded as
applications of the eternal law, and incapable of sanctioning anything
which is not contained in the eternal law, as in the principle of all
law. Thus, St. Augustine most wisely says: "I think that you can see, at
the same time, that there is nothing just and lawful in that temporal
law, unless what men have gathered from this eternal law."[5] If, then,
by anyone in authority, something be sanctioned out of conformity with
the principles of right reason, and consequently hurtful to the
commonwealth, such an enactment can have no binding force of law, as
being no rule of justice, but certain to lead men away from that good
which is the very end of civil society.
 
11. Therefore, the nature of human liberty, however it be considered,
whether in individuals or in society, whether in those who command or in
those who obey, supposes the necessity of obedience to some supreme and
eternal law, which is no other than the authority of God, commanding good
and forbidding evil. And, so far from this most just authority of God
over men diminishing, or even destroying their liberty, it protects and
perfects it, for the real perfection of all creatures is found in the
prosecution and attainment of their respective ends; but the supreme end
to which human liberty must aspire is God.
 
12. These precepts of the truest and highest teaching, made known to us
by the light of reason itself, the Church, instructed by the example and
doctrine of her divine Author, has ever propagated and asserted; for she
has ever made them the measure of her office and of her teaching to the
Christian nations. As to morals, the laws of the Gospel not only
immeasurably surpass the wisdom of the heathen, but are an invitation and
an introduction to a state of holiness unknown to the ancients; and,
bringing man nearer to God, they make him at once the possessor of a more
perfect liberty. Thus, the powerful influence of the Church has ever been
manifested in the custody and protection of the civil and political
liberty of the people. The enumeration of its merits in this respect does
not belong to our present purpose. It is sufficient to recall the fact
that slavery, that old reproach of the heathen nations, was mainly
abolished by the beneficent efforts of the Church. The impartiality of
law and the true brotherhood of man were first asserted by Jesus Christ;
and His apostles re-echoed His voice when they declared that in future
there was to be neither Jew, nor Gentile, nor barbarian, nor Scythian,
but all were brothers in Christ. So powerful, so conspicuous, in this
respect is the influence of the Church that experience abundantly
testifies how savage customs are no longer possible in any land where she
has once set her foot; but that gentleness speedily takes the place of
cruelty, and the light of truth quickly dispels the darkness of
barbarism. Nor has the Church been less lavish in the benefits she has
conferred on civilized nations in every age, either by resisting the
tyranny of the wicked, or by protecting the innocent and helpless from
injury, or, finally, by using her influence in the support of any form of
government which commended itself to the citizens at home, because of its
justice, or was feared by their enemies without, because of its power.
 
13. Moreover, the highest duty is to respect authority, and obediently to
submit to just law; and by this the members of a community are
effectually protected from the wrong-doing of evil men. Lawful power is
from God, "and whosoever resisteth authority resisteth the ordinance of
God";[6] wherefore, obedience is greatly ennobled when subjected to an
authority which is the most just and supreme of all. But where the power
to command is wanting, or where a law is enacted contrary to reason, or
to the eternal law, or to some ordinance of God, obedience is unlawful,
lest, while obeying man, we become disobedient to God. Thus, an effectual
barrier being opposed to tyranny, the authority in the State will not
have all its own way, but the interests and rights of all will be
safeguarded--the rights of individuals, of domestic society, and of all
the members of the commonwealth; all being free to live according to law
and right reason; and in this, as We have shown, true liberty really
consists.
 
14. If when men discuss the question of liberty they were careful to
grasp its true and legitimate meaning, such as reason and reasoning have
just explained, they would never venture to affix such a calumny on the
Church as to assert that she is the foe of individual and public liberty.
But many there are who follow in the footsteps of Lucifer, and adopt as
their own his rebellious cry, "I will not serve"; and consequently
substitute for true liberty what is sheer and most foolish license. Such,
for instance, are the men belonging to that widely spread and powerful
organization, who, usurping the name of liberty, style themselves
liberals.
 
15. What naturalists or rationalists aim at in philosophy, that the
supporters of liberalism, carrying out the principles laid down by
naturalism, are attempting in the domain of morality and politics. The
fundamental doctrine of rationalism is the supremacy of the human reason,
which, refusing due submission to the divine and eternal reason,
proclaims its own independence, and constitutes itself the supreme
principle and source and judge of truth. Hence, these followers of
liberalism deny the existence of any divine authority to which obedience
is due, and proclaim that every man is the law to himself; from which
arises that ethical system which they style independent morality, and
which, under the guise of liberty, exonerates man from any obedience to
the commands of God, and substitutes a boundless license. The end of all
this it is not difficult to foresee, especially when society is in
question. For, when once man is firmly persuaded that he is subject to no
one, it follows that the efficient cause of the unity of civil society is
not to be sought in any principle external to man, or superior to him,
but simply in the free will of individuals; that the authority in the
State comes from the people only; and that, just as every man's
individual reason is his only rule of life, so the collective reason of
the community should be the supreme guide in the management of all public
affairs. Hence the doctrine of the supremacy of the greater number, and
that all right and all duty reside in the majority. But, from what has
been said, it is clear that all this is in contradiction to reason. To
refuse any bond of union between man and civil society, on the one hand,
and God the Creator and consequently the supreme Law-giver, on the other,
is plainly repugnant to the nature, not only of man, but of all created
things; for, of necessity, all effects must in some proper way be
connected with their cause; and it belongs to the perfection of every
nature to contain itself within that sphere and grade which the order of
nature has assigned to it, namely, that the lower should be subject and
obedient to the higher.
 
16. Moreover, besides this, a doctrine of such character is most hurtful
both to individuals and to the State. For, once ascribe to human reason
the only authority to decide what is true and what is good, and the real
distinction between good and evil is destroyed; honor and dishonor differ
not in their nature, but in the opinion and judgment of each one;
pleasure is the measure of what is lawful; and, given a code of morality
which can have little or no power to restrain or quiet the unruly
propensities of man, a way is naturally opened to universal corruption.
With reference also to public affairs: authority is severed from the true
and natural principle whence it derives all its efficacy for the common
good; and the law determining what it is right to do and avoid doing is
at the mercy of a majority. Now, this is simply a road leading straight
to tyranny. The empire of God over man and civil society once repudiated,
it follows that religion, as a public institution, can have no claim to
exist, and that everything that belongs to religion will be treated with
complete indifference. Furthermore, with ambitious designs on
sovereignty, tumult and sedition will be common amongst the people; and
when duty and conscience cease to appeal to them, there will be nothing
to hold them back but force, which of itself alone is powerless to keep
their covetousness in check. Of this we have almost daily evidence in the
conflict with socialists and members of other seditious societies, who
labor unceasingly to bring about revolution. It is for those, then, who
are capable of forming a just estimate of things to decide whether such
doctrines promote that true liberty which alone is worthy of man, or
rather, pervert and destroy it.
 
17. There are, indeed, some adherents of liberalism who do not subscribe
to these opinions, which we have seen to be fearful in their enormity,
openly opposed to the truth, and the cause of most terrible evils.
Indeed, very many amongst them, compelled by the force of truth, do not
hesitate to admit that such liberty is vicious, nay, is simple license,
whenever intemperate in its claims, to the neglect of truth and justice;
and therefore they would have liberty ruled and directed by right reason,
and consequently subject to the natural law and to the divine eternal
law. But here they think they may stop, holding that man as a free being
is bound by no law of God except such as He makes known to us through our
natural reason. In this they are plainly inconsistent. For if--as they
must admit, and no one can rightly deny--the will of the Divine Law-giver
is to be obeyed, because every man is under the power of God, and tends
toward Him as his end, it follows that no one can assign limits to His
legislative authority without failing in the obedience which is due.
Indeed, if the human mind be so presumptuous as to define the nature and
extent of God's rights and its own duties, reverence for the divine law
will be apparent rather than real, and arbitrary judgment will prevail
over the authority and providence of God. Man must, therefore, take his
standard of a loyal and religious life from the eternal law; and from all
and every one of those laws which God, in His infinite wisdom and power,
has been pleased to enact, and to make known to us by such clear and
unmistakable signs as to leave no room for doubt. And the more so because
laws of this kind have the same origin, the same author, as the eternal
law, are absolutely in accordance with right reason, and perfect the
natural law. These laws it is that embody the government of God, who
graciously guides and directs the intellect and the will of man lest
these fall into error. Let, then, that continue to remain in a holy and
inviolable union which neither can nor should be separated; and in all
things--for this is the dictate of right reason itself--let God be
dutifully and obediently served.
 
18. There are others, somewhat more moderate though not more consistent,
who affirm that the morality of individuals is to be guided by the divine
law, but not the morality of the State, for that in public affairs the
commands of God may be passed over, and may be entirely disregarded in
the framing of laws. Hence follows the fatal theory of the need of
separation between Church and State. But the absurdity of such a position
is manifest. Nature herself proclaims the necessity of the State
providing means and opportunities whereby the community may be enabled to
live properly, that is to say, according to the laws of God. For, since
God is the source of all goodness and justice, it is absolutely
ridiculous that the State should pay no attention to these laws or render
them abortive by contrary enactments. Besides, those who are in authority
owe it to the commonwealth not only to provide for its external
well-being and the conveniences of life, but still more to consult the
welfare of men's souls in the wisdom of their legislation. But, for the
increase of such benefits, nothing more suitable can be conceived than
the laws which have God for their author; and, therefore, they who in
their government of the State take no account of these laws abuse
political power by causing it to deviate from its proper end and from
what nature itself prescribes. And, what is still more important, and
what We have more than once pointed out, although the civil authority has
not the same proximate end as the spiritual, nor proceeds on the same
lines, nevertheless in the exercise of their separate powers they must
occasionally meet. For their subjects are the same, and not infrequently
they deal with the same objects, though in different ways. Whenever this
occurs, since a state of conflict is absurd and manifestly repugnant to
the most wise ordinance of God, there must necessarily exist some order
or mode of procedure to remove the occasions of difference and
contention, and to secure harmony in all things. This harmony has been
not inaptly compared to that which exists between the body and the soul
for the well-being of both one and the other, the separation of which
brings irremediable harm to the body, since it extinguishes its very life.
 
19. To make this more evident, the growth of liberty ascribed to our age
must be considered apart in its various details. And, first, let us
examine that liberty in individuals which is so opposed to the virtue of
religion, namely, the liberty of worship, as it is called. This is based
on the principle that every man is free to profess as he may choose any
religion or none.
 
20. But, assuredly, of all the duties which man has to fulfill, that,
without doubt, is the chiefest and holiest which commands him to worship
God with devotion and piety. This follows of necessity from the truth
that we are ever in the power of God, are ever guided by His will and
providence, and, having come forth from Him, must return to Him. Add to
which, no true virtue can exist without religion, for moral virtue is
concerned with those things which lead to God as man's supreme and
ultimate good; and therefore religion, which (as St. Thomas says)
"performs those actions which are directly and immediately ordained for
the divine honor,"[7] rules and tempers all virtues. And if it be asked
which of the many conflicting religions it is necessary to adopt, reason
and the natural law unhesitatingly tell us to practice that one which God
enjoins, and which men can easily recognize by certain exterior notes,
whereby Divine Providence has willed that it should be distinguished,
because, in a matter of such moment, the most terrible loss would be the
consequence of error. Wherefore, when a liberty such as We have described
is offered to man, the power is given him to pervert or abandon with
impunity the most sacred of duties, and to exchange the unchangeable good
for evil; which, as We have said, is no liberty, but its degradation, and
the abject submission of the soul to sin.
 
21. This kind of liberty, if considered in relation to the State, clearly
implies that there is no reason why the State should offer any homage to
God, or should desire any public recognition of Him; that no one form of
worship is to be preferred to another, but that all stand on an equal
footing, no account being taken of the religion of the people, even if
they profess the Catholic faith. But, to justify this, it must needs be
taken as true that the State has no duties toward God, or that such
duties, if they exist, can be abandoned with impunity, both of which
assertions are manifestly false. For it cannot be doubted but that, by
the will of God, men are united in civil society; whether its component
parts be considered; or its form, which implies authority; or the object
of its existence; or the abundance of the vast services which it renders
to man. God it is who has made man for society, and has placed him in the
company of others like himself, so that what was wanting to his nature,
and beyond his attainment if left to his own resources, he might obtain
by association with others. Wherefore, civil society must acknowledge God
as its Founder and Parent, and must obey and reverence His power and
authority. justice therefore forbids, and reason itself forbids, the
State to be godless; or to adopt a line of action which would end in
godlessness--namely, to treat the various religions (as they call them)
alike, and to bestow upon them promiscuously equal rights and privileges.
Since, then, the profession of one religion is necessary in the State,
that religion must be professed which alone is true, and which can be
recognized without difficulty, especially in Catholic States, because the
marks of truth are, as it were, engraven upon it. This religion,
therefore, the rulers of the State must preserve and protect, if they
would provide--as they should do--with prudence and usefulness for the
good of the community. For public authority exists for the welfare of
those whom it governs; and, although its proximate end is to lead men to
the prosperity found in this life, yet, in so doing, it ought not to
diminish, but rather to increase, man's capability of attaining to the
supreme good in which his everlasting happiness consists: which never can
be attained if religion be disregarded.
 
22. All this, however, We have explained more fully elsewhere. We now
only wish to add the remark that liberty of so false a nature is greatly
hurtful to the true liberty of both rulers and their subjects. Religion,
of its essence, is wonderfully helpful to the State. For, since it
derives the prime origin of all power directly from God Himself, with
grave authority it charges rulers to be mindful of their duty, to govern
without injustice or severity, to rule their people kindly and with
almost paternal charity; it admonishes subjects to be obedient to lawful
authority, as to the ministers of God; and it binds them to their rulers,
not merely by obedience, but by reverence and affection, forbidding all
seditions and venturesome enterprises calculated to disturb public order
and tranquillity, and cause greater restrictions to be put upon the
liberty of the people. We need not mention how greatly religion conduces
to pure morals, and pure morals to liberty. Reason shows, and history
confirms the fact, that the higher the morality of States, the greater
are the liberty and wealth and power which they enjoy.
 
23. We must now consider briefly liberty of speech, and liberty of the
press. It is hardly necessary to say that there can be no such right as
this, if it be not used in moderation, and if it pass beyond the bounds
and end of all true liberty. For right is a moral power which--as We have
before said and must again and again repeat--it is absurd to suppose that
nature has accorded indifferently to truth and falsehood, to justice and
injustice. Men have a right freely and prudently to propagate throughout
the State what things soever are true and honorable, so that as many as
possible may possess them; but Iying opinions, than which no mental
plague is greater, and vices which corrupt the heart and moral life
should be diligently repressed by public authority, lest they insidiously
work the ruin of the State. The excesses of an unbridled intellect, which
unfailingly end in the oppression of the untutored multitude, are no less
rightly controlled by the authority of the law than are the injuries
inflicted by violence upon the weak. And this all the more surely,
because by far the greater part of the community is either absolutely
unable, or able only with great difficulty, to escape from illusions and
deceitful subtleties, especially such as flatter the passions. If
unbridled license of speech and of writing be granted to all, nothing
will remain sacred and inviolate; even the highest and truest mandates of
natures, justly held to be the common and noblest heritage of the human
race, will not be spared. Thus, truth being gradually obscured by
darkness, pernicious and manifold error, as too often happens, will
easily prevail. Thus, too, license will gain what liberty loses; for
liberty will ever be more free and secure in proportion as license is
kept in fuller restraint. In regard, however, to all matter of opinion
which God leaves to man's free discussion, full liberty of thought and of
speech is naturally within the right of everyone; for such liberty never
leads men to suppress the truth, but often to discover it and make it
known.
 
24. A like judgment must be passed upon what is called liberty of
teaching. There can be no doubt that truth alone should imbue the minds
of men, for in it are found the well-being, the end, and the perfection
of every intelligent nature; and therefore nothing but truth should be
taught both to the ignorant and to the educated, so as to bring knowledge
to those who have it not, and to preserve it in those who possess it. For
this reason it is plainly the duty of all who teach to banish error from
the mind, and by sure safeguards to close the entry to all false
convictions. From this it follows, as is evident, that the liberty of
which We have been speaking is greatly opposed to reason, and tends
absolutely to pervert men's minds, in as much as it claims for itself the
right of teaching whatever it pleases--a liberty which the State cannot
grant without failing in its duty. And the more so because the authority
of teachers has great weight with their hearers, who can rarely decide
for themselves as to the truth or falsehood of the instruction given to
them.
 
25. Wherefore, this liberty, also, in order that it may deserve the name,
must be kept within certain limits, lest the office of teaching be turned
with impunity into an instrument of corruption. Now, truth, which should
be the only subject matter of those who teach, is of two kinds: natural
and supernatural. Of natural truths, such as the principles of nature and
whatever is derived from them immediately by our reason, there is a kind
of common patrimony in the human race. On this, as on a firm basis,
morality, justice, religion, and the very bonds of human society rest:
and to allow people to go unharmed who violate or destroy it would be
most impious, most foolish, and most inhuman.
 
26. But with no less religious care must we preserve that great and
sacred treasure of the truths which God Himself has taught us. By many
and convincing arguments, often used by defenders of Christianity,
certain leading truths have been laid down: namely, that some things have
been revealed by God; that the Onlybegotten Son of God was made flesh, to
bear witness to the truth; that a perfect society was founded by Him--the
Church, namely, of which He is the head, and with which He has promised
to abide till the end of the world. To this society He entrusted all the
truths which He had taught, in order that it might keep and guard them
and with lawful authority explain them; and at the same time He commanded
all nations to hear the voice of the Church, as if it were His own,
threatening those who would not hear it with everlasting perdition. Thus,
it is manifest that man's best and surest teacher is God, the Source and
Principle of all truth; and the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of
the Father, the Way, the Truth, and the Life, the true Light which
enlightens every man, and to whose teaching all must submit: "And they
shall all be taught of God. "[8]
 
27. In faith and in the teaching of morality, God Himself made the Church
a partaker of His divine authority, and through His heavenly gift she
cannot be deceived. She is therefore the greatest and most reliable
teacher of mankind, and in her swells an inviolable right to teach them.
Sustained by the truth received from her divine Founder, the Church has
ever sought to fulfill holily the mission entrusted to her by God;
unconquered by the difficulties on all sides surrounding her, she has
never ceased to assert her liberty of teaching, and in this way the
wretched superstition of paganism being dispelled, the wide world was
renewed unto Christian wisdom. Now, reason itself clearly teaches that
the truths of divine revelation and those of nature cannot really be
opposed to one another, and that whatever is at variance with them must
necessarily be false. Therefore, the divine teaching of the Church, so
far from being an obstacle to the pursuit of learning and the progress of
science, or in any way retarding the advance of civilization, in reality
brings to them the sure guidance of shining light. And for the same
reason it is of no small advantage for the perfecting of human liberty,
since our Savior Jesus Christ has said that by truth is man made free:
"You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."[9]
 Therefore, there is no reason why genuine liberty should grow indignant,
or true science feel aggrieved, at having to bear the just and necessary
restraint of laws by which, in the judgment of the Church and of reason
itself, human teaching has to be controlled.
 
28. The Church, indeed--as facts have everywhere proved--looks chiefly
and above all to the defense of the Christian faith, while careful at the
same time to foster and promote every kind of human learning. For
learning is in itself good, and praiseworthy, and desirable; and further,
all erudition which is the outgrowth of sound reason, and in conformity
with the truth of things, serves not a little to confirm what we believe
on the authority of God. The Church, truly, to our great benefit, has
carefully preserved the monuments of ancient wisdom; has opened
everywhere homes of science, and has urged on intellectual progress by
fostering most diligently the arts by which the culture of our age is so
much advanced. Lastly, we must not forget that a vast field lies freely
open to man's industry and genius, containing all those things which have
no necessary connection with Christian faith and morals, or as to which
the Church, exercising no authority, leaves the judgment of the learned
free and unconstrained.
 
29. From all this may be understood the nature and character of that
liberty which the followers of liberalism so eagerly advocate and
proclaim. On the one hand, they demand for themselves and for the State a
license which opens the way to every perversity of opinion; and on the
other, they hamper the Church in divers ways, restricting her liberty
within narrowest limits, although from her teaching not only is there
nothing to be feared, but in every respect very much to be gained.
 
30. Another liberty is widely advocated, namely, liberty of conscience.
If by this is meant that everyone may, as he chooses, worship God or not,
it is sufficiently refuted by the arguments already adduced. But it may
also be taken to mean that every man in the State may follow the will of
God and, from a consciousness of duty and free from every obstacle, obey
His commands. This, indeed, is true liberty, a liberty worthy of the sons
of God, which nobly maintains the dignity of man and is stronger than all
violence or wrong--a liberty which the Church has always desired and held
most dear. This is the kind of liberty the Apostles claimed for
themselves with intrepid constancy, which the apologists of Christianity
confirmed by their writings, and which the martyrs in vast numbers
consecrated by their blood. And deservedly so; for this Christian liberty
bears witness to the absolute and most just dominion of God over man, and
to the chief and supreme duty of man toward God. It has nothing in common
with a seditious and rebellious mind; and in no tittle derogates from
obedience to public authority; for the right to command and to require
obedience exists only so far as it is in accordance with the authority of
God, and is within the measure that He has laid down. But when anything
is commanded which is plainly at variance with the will of God, there is
a wide departure from this divinely constituted order, and at the same
time a direct conflict with divine authority; therefore, it is right not
to obey.
 
31. By the patrons of liberalism, however, who make the State absolute
and omnipotent, and proclaim that man should live altogether
independently of God, the liberty of which We speak, which goes hand in
hand with virtue and religion, is not admitted; and whatever is done for
its preservation is accounted an injury and an offense against the State.
Indeed, if what they say were really true, there would be no tyranny, no
matter how monstrous, which we should not be bound to endure and submit
to.
 
32. The Church most earnestly desires that the Christian teaching, of
which We have given an outline, should penetrate every rank of society in
reality and in practice; for it would be of the greatest efficacy in
healing the evils of our day, which are neither few nor slight, and are
the offspring in great part of the false liberty which is so much
extolled, and in which the germs of safety and glory were supposed to be
contained. The hope has been disappointed by the result. The fruit,
instead of being sweet and wholesome, has proved cankered and bitter. If,
then, a remedy is desired, let it be sought for in a restoration of sound
doctrine, from which alone the preservation of order and, as a
consequence, the defense of true liberty can be confidently expected.
 
33. Yet, with the discernment of a true mother, the Church weighs the
great burden of human weakness, and well knows the course down which the
minds and actions of men are in this our age being borne. For this
reason, while not conceding any right to anything save what is true and
honest, she does not forbid public authority to tolerate what is at
variance with truth and justice, for the sake of avoiding some greater
evil, or of obtaining or preserving some greater good. God Himself in His
providence, though infinitely good and powerful, permits evil to exist in
the world, partly that greater good may not be impeded, and partly that
greater evil may not ensue. In the government of States it is not
forbidden to imitate the Ruler of the world; and, as the authority of man
is powerless to prevent every evil, it has (as St. Augustine says) to
overlook and leave unpunished many things which are punished, and
rightly, by Divine Providence.[10] But if, in such circumstances, for the
sake of the common good (and this is the only legitimate reason), human
law may or even should tolerate evil, it may not and should not approve
or desire evil for its own sake; for evil of itself, being a privation of
good, is opposed to the common welfare which every legislator is bound to
desire and defend to the best of his ability. In this, human law must
endeavor to imitate God, who, as St. Thomas teaches, in allowing evil to
exist in the world, "neither wills evil to be done, nor wills it not to
be done, but wills only to permit it to be done; and this is good.''[11]
 This saying of the Angelic Doctor contains briefly the whole doctrine of
the permission of evil.
 
34. But, to judge aright, we must acknowledge that, the more a State is
driven to tolerate evil, the further is it from perfection; and that the
tolerance of evil which is dictated by political prudence should be
strictly confined to the limits which its justifying cause, the public
welfare, requires. Wherefore, if such tolerance would be injurious to the
public welfare, and entail greater evils on the State, it would not be
lawful; for in such case the motive of good is wanting. And although in
the extraordinary condition of these times the Church usually acquiesces
in certain modern liberties, not because she prefers them in themselves,
but because she judges it expedient to permit them, she would in happier
times exercise her own liberty; and, by persuasion, exhortation, and
entreaty would endeavor, as she is bound, to fulfill the duty assigned to
her by God of providing for the eternal salvation of mankind. One thing,
however, remains always true--that the liberty which is claimed for all
to do all things is not, as We have often said, of itself desirable,
inasmuch as it is contrary to reason that error and truth should have
equal rights.
 
35. And as to tolerance, it is surprising how far removed from the equity
and prudence of the Church are those who profess what is called
liberalism. For, in allowing that boundless license of which We have
spoken, they exceed all limits, and end at last by making no apparent
distinction between truth and error, honesty and dishonesty. And because
the Church, the pillar and ground of truth, and the unerring teacher of
morals, is forced utterly to reprobate and condemn tolerance of such an
abandoned and criminal character, they calumniate her as being wanting in
patience and gentleness, and thus fail to see that, in so doing, they
impute to her as a fault what is in reality a matter for commendation.
But, in spite of all this show of tolerance, it very often happens that,
while they profess themselves ready to lavish liberty on all in the
greatest profusion, they are utterly intolerant toward the Catholic
Church, by refusing to allow her the liberty of being herself free.
 
36. And now to reduce for clearness' sake to its principal heads all that
has been set forth with its immediate conclusions, the summing up in this
briefly: that man, by a necessity of his nature, is wholly subject to the
most faithful and ever enduring power of God; and that, as a consequence,
any liberty, except that which consists in submission to God and in
subjection to His will, is unintelligible. To deny the existence of this
authority in God, or to refuse to submit to it, means to act, not as a
free man, but as one who treasonably abuses his liberty; and in such a
disposition of mind the chief and deadly vice of liberalism essentially
consists. The form, however, of the sin is manifold; for in more ways and
degrees than one can the will depart from the obedience which is due to
God or to those who share the divine power.
 
37. For, to reject the supreme authority to God, and to cast off all
obedience to Him in public matters, or even in private and domestic
affairs, is the greatest perversion of liberty and the worst kind of
liberalism; and what We have said must be understood to apply to this
alone in its fullest sense.
 
38. Next comes the system of those who admit indeed the duty of
submitting to God, the Creator and Ruler of the world, inasmuch as all
nature is dependent on His will, but who boldly reject all laws of faith
and morals which are above natural reason, but are revealed by the
authority of God; or who at least impudently assert that there is no
reason why regard should be paid to these laws, at any rate publicly, by
the State. How mistaken these men also are, and how inconsistent, we have
seen above. From this teaching, as from its source and principle, flows
that fatal principle of the separation of Church and State; whereas it
is, on the contrary, clear that the two powers, though dissimilar in
functions and unequal in degree, ought nevertheless to live in concord,
by harmony in their action and the faithful discharge of their respective
duties.
 
39. But this teaching is understood in two ways. Many wish the State to
be separated from the Church wholly and entirely, so that with regard to
every right of human society, in institutions, customs, and laws, the
offices of State, and the education of youth, they would pay no more
regard to the Church than if she did not exist; and, at most, would allow
the citizens individually to attend to their religion in private if so
minded. Against such as these, all the arguments by which We disprove the
principle of separation of Church and State are conclusive; with this
super-added, that it is absurd the citizen should respect the Church,
while the State may hold her in contempt.
 
40. Others oppose not the existence of the Church, nor indeed could they;
yet they despoil her of the nature and rights of a perfect society, and
maintain that it does not belong to her to legislate, to judge, or to
punish, but only to exhort, to advise, and to rule her subjects in
accordance with their own consent and will. By such opinion they pervert
the nature of this divine society, and attenuate and narrow its
authority, its office of teacher, and its whole efficiency; and at the
same time they aggrandize the power of the civil government to such
extent as to subject the Church of God to the empire and sway of the
State, like any voluntary association of citizens. To refute completely
such teaching, the arguments often used by the defenders of Christianity,
and set forth by Us, especially in the encyclical letter Immortale
Dei,[12] are of great avail; for by those arguments it is proved that, by
a divine provision, all the rights which essentially belong to a society
that is legitimate, supreme, and perfect in all its parts exist in the
Church.
 
41. Lastly, there remain those who, while they do not approve the
separation of Church and State, think nevertheless that the Church ought
to adapt herself to the times and conform to what is required by the
modern system of government. Such an opinion is sound, if it is to be
understood of some equitable adjustment consistent with truth and
justice; in so far, namely, that the Church, in the hope of some great
good, may show herself indulgent, and may conform to the times in so far
as her sacred office permits. But it is not so in regard to practices and
doctrines which a perversion of morals and a warped judgment have
unlawfully introduced. Religion, truth, and justice must ever be
maintained; and, as God has intrusted these great and sacred matters to
her office as to dissemble in regard to what is false or unjust, or to
connive at what is hurtful to religion.
 
42. From what has been said it follows that it is quite unlawful to
demand, to defend, or to grant unconditional freedom of thought, of
speech, or writing, or of worship, as if these were so many rights given
by nature to man. For, if nature had really granted them, it would be
lawful to refuse obedience to God, and there would be no restraint on
human liberty. It likewise follows that freedom in these things may be
tolerated wherever there is just cause, but only with such moderation as
will prevent its degenerating into license and excess. And, where such
liberties are in use, men should employ them in doing good, and should
estimate them as the Church does; for liberty is to be regarded as
legitimate in so far only as it affords greater facility for doing good,
but no farther.
 
43. Whenever there exists, or there is reason to fear, an unjust
oppression of the people on the one hand, or a deprivation of the liberty
of the Church on the other, it is lawful to seek for such a change of
government as will bring about due liberty of action. In such case, an
excessive and vicious liberty is not sought, but only some relief, for
the common welfare, in order that, while license for evil is allowed by
the State, the power of doing good may not be hindered.
 
44. Again, it is not of itself wrong to prefer a democratic form of
government, if only the Catholic doctrine be maintained as to the origin
and exercise of power. Of the various forms of government, the Church
does not reject any that are fitted to procure the welfare of the
subject; she wishes only--and this nature itself requires--that they
should be constituted without involving wrong to any one, and especially
without violating the rights of the Church.
 
45. Unless it be otherwise determined, by reason of some exceptional
condition of things, it is expedient to take part in the administration
of public affairs. And the Church approves of every one devoting his
services to the common good, and doing all that he can for the defense,
preservation, and prosperity of his country.
 
46. Neither does the Church condemn those who, if it can be done without
violation of justice, wish to make their country independent of any
foreign or despotic power. Nor does she blame those who wish to assign to
the State the power of self-government, and to its citizens the greatest
possible measure of prosperity. The Church has always most faithfully
fostered civil liberty, and this was seen especially in Italy, in the
municipal prosperity, and wealth, and glory which were obtained at a time
when the salutary power of the Church has spread, without opposition, to
all parts of the State.
 
47. These things, venerable brothers, which under the guidance of faith
and reason, in the discharge of Our Apostolic office, We have now
delivered to you, We hope, especially by your cooperation with Us, will
be useful unto very many. In lowliness of heart We raise Our eyes in
supplication to God, and earnestly beseech Him to shed mercifully the
light of His wisdom and of His counsel upon men, so that, strengthened by
these heavenly gifts, they may in matters of such moment discern what is
true, and may afterwards, in public and private at all times and with
unshaken constancy, live in accordance with the truth. As a pledge of
these heavenly gifts, and in witness of Our good will to you, venerable
brothers, and to the clergy and people committed to each of you, We most
lovingly grant in the Lord the apostolic benediction.
 
Given at St. Peter's in Rome, the twentieth day of June, 1888, the tenth
year of Our Pontificate.

 
REFERENCES:
 
1. Ecclus.15:14.
 
2. See no. 93:37-38.
 
3. John 8:34.
 
4. Thomas Aquinas, On the Gospel of St. John, cap. viii, lect. 4, n. 3
(ed. Vives, Vol. 20, p. 95).
 
5. Augustine, De libero arbitrio, lib. 1, cap. 6, n. 15 (PL 32, 1229).
 
6. Rom.13:2.
 
7. Summa theologiae, lla-llae, q. Ixxxi, a. 6. Answer.
 
8. John 6:45.
 
9. John 8:32.
 
10. Augustine, De libero arbitrio, lib. 1, cap. 6, n. 14 (PL 32, 1228).
 
11. Summa theologiae, la, q. xix, a. 9, ad 3m.
 
12. See no. 93:8-11.
 
Made available to the net by:
Paul Halsall
Halsall@murray.fordham.edu