Carlism and the Catholic Right (Eighth in a Series)

A couple of corrections and additions:

The Funck-Brentano book is entitled "The Old Regime in France".

Fr. Suarez's contribution to "Saints, Sovereigns and Scholars" (R. Herrera, J. Lehrberger and M. E. Bradford, eds., New York, 1993) is entitled "The Influence of the French Revolution on the Political Configuration of Europe". As part of the introduction to his article, he says the following:

"[A] few facts should suffice as indicators to help form an idea of what the 'absolutism' of the Ancien Regime actually was. In the age of Philip II of Spain, a delinquent who had committed a crime in the Kingdom of Valencia had only to cross the border to the neighboring Kingdom of Murcia to live in peace, because he had not broken the law there. No authority in any one of the Spanish realms had power in another; and, of course, the Cortes or parliaments of the kingdoms tended to grant subsidies only if the monarch previously had committed himself to give satisfaction to the grievances brought before him. In France, in 1621, Louis XIII and his minister Richelieu considered establishing certain customs at the Pyrenees to tax Spanish merchandise. Languedoc objected, and both the king and his minister had to bow their heads and give up the project.

"Compare these limitations of the faculties of the monarch in the period of full absolutism to the powers of parliaments (and heads of government) in the regimes born of the Revolution, and perhaps we can see, with a bit of reflection, which of these two political systems can best be classified as governmental 'absolutism'" (Id. pp. 323-24 [trans. A. Wilhelmsen]).

Note: the age of Philip II was after the unification of Spain under Ferdinand and Isabella, so Fr. Suarez is describing the situation in the "unified" Spain.

A final note: Fr. Suarez published more than 20 volumes of academic history in Spain, but he is best known in the English speaking world for his religious books, including "Mary of Nazareth" and "Joseph of Nazareth" (both Scepter Press), which are among, if not the, best Catholic books on their subjects. As a good son of St Josemaria, he died in his late 80's having just completed his latest book--working with order and intensity to the end.

Institute on Religion and Democracy Board member John Neuhaus openly questions the legitimacy of American government because of its pluralism ...

But there still exists among theocons such as John Neuhaus the pre-Vatican II belief that all faiths other than Catholicism are erroneous and that the liberties of these other faiths should not be protected equally.

These don't seem right. I thought Neuhaus was specifically talking about the refusal of the state to protect the unborn with Roe v. Wade when he made his controversial speculations about American government, not about pluralism or religious liberty. Moreover, I am pretty sure that Neuhaus supports the Vatican II document Dignitatis Humanae on religious liberty. I would not have pegged him as particularly "pre-Vatican II". If the author seems wrong about Neuhaus, it seems likely he is wrong about a lot of other things.

Haven't heard much of anything about TFP, care to fill me in?

Rumours abound on the internet ... any search engine can help you find them. I speak only of my very limited experience of meeting them at the annual MFL. The best I can say is that their behaviour and demeanor reminds me of the "Moonies" and "Hare Krisnas" whom I occasionally encounter on The Mall or around Metro stations. The literature they hand out does not seem unorthodox ... I simply find they themselves to be extremely off-putting.

You can pretend that somehow "the left" is misinterpreting this.

They obviously are.

I don't need to pretend.

Or you can do some research.

I already know far more about the subject than this Cocozelli joker does - and I certainly don't claim to be an expert.

There are in fact Roman Catholic who are monarchists.

Of course there are.

They probably comprise about one thousanddth of one percent of the Catholic population of the US - if that many.

There is one in this forum as a matter of fact.

Correct - one.

The eccentric opinion of one individual who has no ecclesiastical authority of any kind hardly proves Cocozelli's thesis.

I personally know a few here in D.C.

Oh, of course you do. Of course.

Here's a reality check: of America's 70 million Catholic citizens less than a thousand are monarchists.

There are far more nominal Protestants in America that long for a racial war in America than there are Catholics who would like to see a monarchy in America.

Neither group represents the whole in any way nor does either group have any influence on the councils of church or state.

To imagine otherwise is sheer paranoia.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.