POTTER United Families

In Louis' response, "Anonymous" questioned whether opinions were
really oppressed in Belgium because the Jesuits were not teaching
there. "Anonymous" was afraid of citizens who believed in the
intellectual, moral and religious infallibility of the Pope, and he asked
if the Catholics wouldn't choose to follow him instead of their
constitutional king.
He/she feared that a Catholic electorate, a Catholic States-Provincial,
and a Catholic majority in the Chambers might lawfully force even a
constitutional king to make unjust concessions.
Louis replied that laws legally constituted were not concessions, they
were laws. He pointed out that it was wrong to praise priests for
having philosophical ideas, for they were entirely free to have either
sympathy or antipathy for these ideas, just as philosophers might
have sympathy or antipathy for dogmatic ideas.
One should not be afraid of priests persecuting, burning or exiling
people for heretical beliefs, although they had indeed done this
elsewhere, because the penal code had provided that no one could
persecute, burn or exile another for his beliefs.
Louis emphasized that a Catholic government was not impossible
with a Protestant king. While more difficult than a government
entirely Protestant or entirely Catholic, a fair, and constitutional
government would uphold the rights of its citizens whatever the
beliefs of the king, ministers, or citizens.
He also made the important point that he was not in revolt against
the Protestants or the Dutch.
Louis’ “Reply” clarified the relationship between religion and
government, and made a powerful case of the argument that under a
carefully constituted government, religion could not deprive men of
their civil liberties.
255