One of the flowers in the garland of virtues which please God is love for one's country. Many are the scriptural passages which assume this love. One thinks of the cry wrung from the heart of the psalmist as he languished in a foreign land: "If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand be forgotten." One thinks of Judith and of the Machabees. However, is it necessary to approve of the origins and form of government of one's country in order to love her? Surely not, for a country is infinitely more than her origins and form of government. Nevertheless, as if convinced that their love of their country depends on their being able to approve of her origins and form of government, Catholics persist in making claims regarding the origins and form of government of the United States which Catholic teaching and documented history do not support. This year of the bicentennial of the United States Constitution seems a propitious time for correcting some of these errors.

One of these errors is the claim that the Founding Fathers who composed the Declaration of Independence, fomented and brought to victory the Revolution, framed the U.S. Constitution, and brought into being the United States were directly inspired by God to accomplish precisely these very things. Against this claim stand these words of Christ: "Without Me you can do nothing" (John 15:5); these words of Christ: "All power in heaven and on earth has been given to Me. Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you…" (Matt. 28:18); these words of Pope Leo XIII:

…the State…is clearly bound to act up to the manifold and weighty duties linking it to God by the public profession of religion. Nature and reason, which command every individual devoutly to worship God in holiness, because we belong to Him and must return to Him since from Him we came, bind also the civil community by a like law. For men living together in society are under the power of God no less than individuals are, and society, not less than individuals, owes gratitude to God, who gave it being and maintains it, and whose ever-bounteous goodness enriches it with countless blessings. Since, then, no one is allowed to be remiss in the service due to God, and since the chief duty of all men is to cling to religion in both its teaching and practice—not such religion as they may have a preference for, but the religion which God enjoins, and which certain and most clear marks show to be the only true religion—it is a public crime to act as though there were no God. So too is it a sin in the State not to have care for religion, as something beyond its scope, or as of no practical benefit; or out of many forms of religion to adopt that one which chimes in with the fancy; for we are bound absolutely to worship God in that way which He has shown to be His will (Immortale Dei, November 1885);

these words of Pope St. Pius X:

No, Venerable Brethren, We must repeat with the utmost energy in these times of social and intellectual anarchy when everyone takes it upon himself to teach as a teacher and lawmaker—the City cannot be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot be set up unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work; no, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels, and miscreants (Notre Charge Apostolique, 25 August 1910);

and these words of Archbishop Lefebvre:

There exists…a moral obligation to adhere to the Catholic Faith, [a moral obligation] that the State (or Civil Society) insofar as it is the supreme organization of the public community, can and must recognize the Catholic Faith and extend to it privileges above other religions (interview in the Italian review Trenta Giorni, reprinted in Fideliter, the Society's French publication).

God permits to come into being states which ignore Christ's Church, even as He permits to come into being heretical sects which ignore Christ's Church. He does not directly will such states or such sects.

Another of these errors is the claim that since the principles which shaped the form of government of the United States are Catholic principles the government itself is Catholic both in origin and in form. Against this claim stand the words of Our Lord quoted above and these of the great nineteenth-century Spanish apologist, John Donoso Cortes:

When I hear a divine, that is a Catholic, word pronounced, I immediately look round to see what has happened, for I am certain that something must happen…. If it be the Church that pronounces it, I look for salvation; if someone else pronounces it, I look for death. (Essays in Catholicism, Liberalism, and Socialism, p. 266).

Incorporation of Catholic principles into its system of government can no more validate as Catholic the government of a state which ignores Christ's Church than incorporation of Catholic principles into its system of worship can validate as Catholic the worship of a sect which ignores Christ's Church.

Still another of these errors is the claim that Freemasonry did not play a decisive role in the origins and form of government of our country. Against this claim stands the solid scholarship of French Catholic Bernard Fay's classic Revolution and Freemasonry 1680-1800 (Little, Brown, 1935). From the section entitled "Masonry, American Patriotism, and the Revolution," comes this assessment:

Masonry alone undertook to lay the foundation for national unity in America, because through the very nature of its organization, it could spread throughout all the colonies and work steadily and silently. It created in a limited but very prominent class of people a feeling of American unity without which the American liberty could not have developed—without which there would have been no United States. (Pp. 229-230).

Elsewhere Fay states that:

Freemasonry cannot deny the outstanding role played by its leaders in the Revolution, or that the Continental Congress, where the delegates from the colonies met to prepare a common political program and to organize the defense against England, was in majority composed of Masons. These congresses were imbued with the purest Masonic spirit, as proved by their actions, which finally was expressed in the Declaration of Independence (p. 241).

In a valuable bibliographic essay at the end of his book, Fay notes that:

[t]he share and influence of Freemasonry in the American Revolution has been studied by Sydney Morse, Freemasonry in the American Revolution (Washington, 1927) and Philip A. Roth, Masonry in the Formation of Our Government, 1761-1799 1927). These books cannot be taken as exhaustive studies of this very difficult and interesting problem, but they will help the unprejudiced reader to realize the greatness of the part played by Freemasonry in American politics between 1750 and 1800 (p. 333).

Yet another of these errors is the claim that George Washington was not under the influence of Freemasonry. Against this claim stand these words of Bernard Fay:

The atmosphere which surrounded Washington was Masonic and it may be said that the framework of his mind was Masonic. His opinion of Masonry was that which he expressed later in life: "The virtues that ennoble mankind are taught, nourished and fostered in the heart of the Freemason; they encourage domestic life and serve as a standard for the highest duties of the state" (p. 250).

Incidentally, when he published Revolution and Freemasonry 1680-1800, Fay had already published an important biography of Washington. He had also already published an important three-volume biography of the arch-Mason Benjamin Franklin—to whom, as the most influential international political figure of the age, Fay devoted so many pages of Revolution and Freemasonry 1680-1800.

During the 1970's Fay lectured at Ecône on the subject of Church architecture. Privately he told the seminarians that because of his publications on and his knowledge of Freemasonry, powerful Masons in the French government after World War II had him thrown into prison. When an opportunity to escape offered itself, Fay fled prison and France for the United States where he accepted a post at Harvard. My own university library holds nine books by Bernard Fay—books, in both English and French, ranging from historical and biographical works such as and including those mentioned above to works of literary criticism.

But, after all, does knowing the truth about the Masonic origins and form of government of our non-Catholic country diminish the tender love that we have for her? Absolutely not. For even when she in her origins and form of government displeases God by officially ignoring, or even proscribing, the Church which His Son founded, still it is He and He alone Who permits her to exist. Even as King Nabuchodonosor of Babylon in his pride was vaunting his kingly power, he was constrained into insanity as a Voice from heaven spoke; "The Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever He will" (Dan. 4:29).