Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 07

Continued...

civitas maxima

And yet today, though disjointed and rent to its very foundations by conflicting principles and programs for peace, the world still clamors for peace—a peace, however, on which no two people seem to agree. And that is what makes it so vast and so difficult. Because in first place the world must be agreed as to what constitutes a right peace and a wrong peace, it must be agreed, as Christendom once was agreed, at least as to principles of right and wrong, good and evil, justice and injustice, virtue and sin. In short, it must be agreed as to truth, for truth is by its very nature one; it cannot be many things. And since it is one, truth alone will bring unity and peace. Merely to will peace, therefore, is not enough. Peace must be built, slowly and painstakingly, from correct premises and for a common object, by men and nations who have first learned from a commonly accepted code to govern themselves virtuously, truthfully, orderly and peaceably in their homes and workshops, communities and States.

Assuredly, we all want peace, and, ultimately, only world governments can give us peace. But the question is: what kind of peace do we want, what kind of world government will be right and acceptable for all?

These are questions competently analyzed and discussed by Catholic political philosophers, among them Dr. Heinrich A. Rommen, LL.D., professor of political philosophy at the College of St. Thomas in St. Paul. In his comprehensive volume, The State in Catholic Thought (Herder, 1945), Dr. Rommen devotes several important chapters specifically to the Catholic doctrine on war and peace, the ideal of a World State, means to abolish war. For those who either early or late may have lent themselves to dubious movements inspired by a false pacifism or a muddled humanitarianism, Dr. Rommen makes many things clear. It would be impossible, of course, within the narrow confines of this or even a series of articles to do justice to Dr. Rommen’s treatise. Suffice it to say that he is not an emotional pacifist who falls for the Socialist clap-trap about the coming deliverance of mankind through a

without classes or States or nations. He is not one who believes the soldier to be a murderer and depreciates the ethical virtues connected with war.

Nor, on the other hand, is he a cynical skeptic despairing of sense in history and of reason in man and resigned, therefore, to the "inevitability" of everrecurring war. Rather, he believes in the possibility of men cooperating with Divine Providence in establishing social, political and spiritual order based on "commonly accepted moral ideals," and shows how this can be done not through a universal world monarchy or empire as was dreamt about during the time of the medieval

orbis christianus,

but though socio-political institutions backed by spiritual and moral ideals, by the principles of the natural and divine law, by "a plurality of independent and free States living in an order of coordination and not of subordination of one to the other."

"The strife among nations," Dr.

Rommen concludes, "can be best settled if the universal law of morality, the principles of natural law as the unwritten constitution of the international community, are commonly accepted" (p. 735). As for world federalist schemes, we think this quotation needs underscoring: "Too many who eagerly draw up perfect blueprints for world organization are secretly influenced by the expectation that after the establishment of such legal institutions they will get rid of the continuous responsibility of a burdensome foreign policy" (p. 734). Dr. Rammon emphasizes that peace is the work of justice, of moral responsibility on the part of all, and that without this sense of individual and social responsibility all institutions, no matter how perfectly conceived, "will be empty hulks, a derision of the idea of law" (p. 735). Justice and charity anchored in a genuine faith in a personal and omnipotent God—this, he declares, is "the real guaranty for the peace of the world." But as for a world government as conceived in the minds of modern humanitarians, materialists, rationalists, atheists, "such a world government has a fine appearance—on paper."

In reality, however, such plans are doomed to fail not only because of incorrect premises, but for very practical political and economic reasons. "A world government that would perform what its promoters expect it to perform would have to become a super-State with the right of continuous intervention in the domestic affairs of the member States" (p. 731). Such intervention would be intolerable, however, both for the individual as well as the State.

Moreover, and even in a World State to which merely the one sovereign right to decide when to make war would be transferred, even such a limited world power under present-day conditions is impractical, as recent experiences have shown.

"The idea of a world federation," Dr.

Rammon writes, "suffers from another shortcoming. That is the Rousseauist theory that, if we discard all particular and group interests in a community and establish liberty and equality for each member, then the will of all transforms itself without the intervention of a concrete authority into the general will of the new community, a general will that cannot err. This theory supposes that the public opinion of the world, or at least of the majority of the States, is always right" (p. 721). And again: "The underlying illusion [regarding most theories and proposals for a World State or world government] is… the Rousseauist assertion that if there exist perfect institutions then all will be well since the people are good and any form of evil must spring simply from imperfect or corrupt institutions. Thus [according to Rousseauist thinking] it is enough to set up such perfect institutions and thus automatically a good and just order will continuously produce itself…" This is a Liberalist principle diametrically opposed to the Christian doctrine on Original Sin and its consequences.

It is also, we might add, a prime tenet of Freemasonry.

In conclusion we quote this significant statement by Dr. Rommen: " Practically all [World State plans] contain utopian elements and are based, at least partly, on an illusory concept of law and Society. If not divested of these utopian elements, they are a danger to world peace" in that they lead to "an optimistic belief that once such legal machinery is instituted it will work automatically, without the catalyst of personal or communal authority and moral responsibility…" (p.

718) Let me respectfully suggest to those, particularly some students at St.

Thomas College who have written to us about World Federalists, Inc., that they devote themselves to a careful and prayerful study of Dr.

Rommen’s book. ■