Pope Benedict wants to create a new universal political authority

The Golden Age
Lucas Cranach the Elder

And so it begins:

‘There is only one statement in the encyclical that frankly troubles me.’

Mr Zmirak continues:

Is the pope calling here for a worldwide state, with coercive authority, that will govern all men at once? I know that medieval Catholics treasured the dream of a universal Empire -- and the Holy Roman Empire was seen as the seed of such a state. As the steward of a Church that transcends nations, the pastor of souls without regard for race, language, or culture, it may be perfectly natural for the pope to feel the attraction of such a super-state.

Perhaps I am too Augustinian, but I cannot help deeply suspecting that any such state would by its very nature begin or (more likely) end as a tyranny. The very monopoly of its power, and the fact that there was not one square inch of the earth from which anyone could escape its clutches, would remove any check or balance from its bureaucrats. Its tax codes would be uniform, with no threat of "competition," so they could rise astronomically high. Its laws could grow ever more Draconian, since there is nowhere its citizens could flee. Its ideology, backed by all the coercive power of the ruling class of the planet, would -- in the hands of the fallen men who administered it -- quickly become a global religion.

If such a State (as I think it inevitable) decided to persecute the Church, there would be no exile we could seek -- no Douai from which to send out Jesuits, no refuge from martyrdom. Indeed, as prophetic writers from Vladimir Soloviev to Robert Hugh Benson have warned, the man who steps forward as the architect of a world state is less likely to prove the humble servant of the truths taught by the Church than he is to be the Antichrist.

I know that the pope suffered deeply, and personally, from the sick excesses of nationalism. Perhaps if I'd been drafted into the Hitler Youth, and seen my nation ruined and dishonored by a cancerous tribal cult like National Socialism, I might also daydream about a universal benevolent State. But there's only one thing worse than a national bureaucratic tyranny -- and that's an international one. A reading of Orwell's 1984 might have reminded Benedict that centralization rarely leads to liberty. And a world-state administered by the kind of people who currently get involved in supranational organizations like the EU and the UN would make its first order of business the liquidation of the Church -- which wouldn't even have a Liechtenstein where it could hide. On this point I must say respectfully to His Holiness: Not in this lifetime.


  1. A NEW universal authority, or laying groundworks for the Election of an Holy Roman Emperor?

    The latter, not the former.

  2. Both. It is confusing now. The Pope was to mention need of universal authority at the United Nations in April 2008. I guess Pope Benedict waited for the election of Obama to see how such a man is accepted by the world. It now makes it easier to place someone like Obama in this universal seat of authority. It will not be the seat Holy Roman Emperor, because this man will be elected by all citizens of the world. It will be a world-wide election. The seven Imperial Electors are the only ones to elect the Holy Roman Emperor and will not be called on elect this univsersal authority therefore this universal elected authority will be the secular usurper of the Holy Roman Emperor, not the true Holy Roman Emperor. Aristotle said 'that a small error in the beginning is a big one in the end.' De caelo 1.5,271 b13 The popes few words on the universal authoity is that small error.


Post a Comment

Popular Posts