to be
subject to the civil power is a great rashness, a great injustice. If
this were done order would be disturbed, since things natural would thus
be put before those which are above nature; the multitude of the good
whose common life, if there be nothing to hinder it, the Church would
make complete, either disappears or at all events is considerably
diminished, and besides, a way is opened to enmities and conflicts--how
great the evil which they bring upon each order of government the event
has too frequently shown.

Such doctrines are not approved by human reason, and are of the greatest
gravity as regards civil discipline, the Roman Pontiffs our
predecessors--well understanding what the apostolic office required of
them--by no means suffered to go forth without condemnation. Thus
Gregory XVI., by Encyclical Letter, beginning _Mirare vos_, of August
15, 1832, inveighed with weighty words against those doctrines which
were already being preached, namely, that in divine worship no choice
should be made; and that it was right for individuals to judge of
religion according to their personal preferences, that each man's
conscience was to himself his sole sufficient guide, and that it was
lawful to promulgate whatsoever each man might think, and so make a
revolution in the State. Concerning the reasons for the separation of
Church and State, the same Pontiff speaks thus: "Nor can we hope happier
results either for religion or the government, from the wishes of those
who are eagerly desirous that the Church should be separated from the
State, and the mutual good understanding of the sovereign secular power
and the sacerdotal authority be broken up. It is evident that these
lovers of most shameless liberty dread that concord which has always
been fortunate and wholesome, both for sacred and civil interests." To
the like effect Pius IX., as opportunity offered, noted many false
opinions which had begun to be of great strength, and afterward ordered
them to be collected together in order that in so great a conflux of
errors Catholics might have something which, without stumbling, they
might follow.

From these decisions of the Popes it is clearly to be understood that
the origin of public power is to be sought from God Himself and not from
the multitude; that the free play for sedition is repugnant to reason;
that it is a crime for private individuals and a crime for States to
observe nowhere the duties of religion or to tr