Untitled - Shattering Denial

THE INQUISITION 257
fact, she exercised constraint only over her own stray
children. But while she acted so cruelly toward them,
she never ceased to respect the consciences of those out
side her fold. She always interpreted the compelle intrare
to imply with regard to unbelievers moral constraint, and
the means of gentleness and persuasion. 1
If respect for
human liberty is to-day dominant in the thinking world,
it is due chiefly to her.
In the matter of tolerance, the Church has only to study
her own history. 2
If, during several centuries, she treated
her rebellious children with greater severity than those
alien to her fold, it was not from a want of consistency.
And if to-day she manifests to every one signs of her
maternal kindness, and lays aside for ever all physical
constraint, she is not following the example of non-
Catholics, but merely taking up again the interrupted
tradition of her early Fathers.
1 This is an important distinction, which an historian, otherwise accurate,
has forgotten to make. "How," he asks, "was a religion of love and tolera
tion, which is founded on the Gospel, led to burn alive those who did not
accept its teachings. That is the problem." Paul Fredericq, introduction
to the French translation of Lea, vol. i, p. v. Lea himself does not make
this mistake. He shows, on the contrary, that the Church never prosecuted
non-Christians, and that she "exercised no constraint over unbelievers."
Op. cit., vol. i, p. 240. But he deems this inconsistent. To be perfectly
consistent, he holds that the church should have burned the unbelievers as
well as the heretics. To our mind, the contrary is true; to be consistent, she
ought to treat her own children differently.
2 Cf. De la tolerance religieuse. Vacandard, Paris, Bloud. Science et
Religion.
18