The day, eternally joyous and sad, the Son of God Made Man was placed on a cross, all things at once were restored to order, and in that divine order the cross was raised above all things created. Some of these manifested the goodness of God, some His mercy, others His justice. The cross alone was the symbol of His love and the pledge of His grace. Through it the confessors confessed, and the virgins were chaste, and the fathers of the desert led angelic lives, and the martyrs were firm witnesses who laid down their lives with manly and unshaken constancy. From the sacrifice of the cross proceeded that marvellous energy with which the weak astounded the strong, the proscribed and disarmed ascended the Capitol, and some poor fishermen conquered the world. Through the cross all who conquer gain victory; all who combat, strength; all who seek it, mercy; the unprotected, protection; those who are sad, joy; and consolation, all who weep. Since the cross was raised in the air there is no man who cannot live in heaven before his mortal remains are consigned to the earth; for if he lives here in tribulation, he lives there in hope.

~ Donoso Cortes

Copyright © 2009, 2010 Gornahoor Press

Pain establishes a certain equality between all those who suffer, which is to establish it between all men, for all suffer: by pleasure we are separated, by pain united in fraternal bonds. Pain removes the superfluous, and gives us what we want, and establishes a most perfect equilibrium in man: the proud man does not suffer without losing some of his pride, nor the ambitious man some of his ambition, nor the passionate man some of his anger, nor the impure man some of his impurity. Pain is sovereign in extinguishing the fires of the passions. At the same time that it removes what injures us, it gives us what ennobles us—the hard-hearted do not suffer without feeling themselves more inclined to compassion, nor the disdainful without feeling more humble, nor the voluptuous without feeling more chaste. The violent become tamed, the weak fortified. No one comes out of that furnace of pain worse than he entered: the greater number come out with sublime virtues they knew not of. One goes in impious, and comes out religious; another avaricious, and comes out an almsgiver; another without ever having wept, and comes out with the gift of tears; another heart-hardened, and comes out merciful. In pain there is something fortifying, manly, and profound, which is the origin of all heroism and of all greatness; no one has felt its mysterious contact without improving: the child acquires by pain the vitality of youth, youth the maturity and gravity of men, men the bravery of heroes, heroes the sanctity of saints.

~ Donoso Cortes

Copyright © 2009, 2010 Gornahoor Press

This is how well-born men used to think:

The Liberal school regards it as certain, that there is no other evil but what is in the political institutions which we have inherited from time to time, and that the supreme good consists in levelling those institutions in the dust. The greater part of Socialists look upon it as settled, that there is no other evil but what is in society, and that the grand remedy is in the complete destruction of social institutions. All agree that the evil comes to us from times past; the Liberals affirm that the good can be realised at the present time, and the Socialists that the golden age cannot commence till the future.

The supreme good consisting, according to one and the other, in a supreme disarrangement, which, according to the Liberal school, must be realised in the political, and according to the Socialists, in the social, regions, the one and the other agree in the substantial and intrinsic goodness of man, who is to be the intelligent and free agent of both disarrangements. This conclusion has been explicitly enunciated by the Socialistic schools, and is implicitly involved in the theory which the Liberal schools hold. That conclusion follows from their theory, in such a way, that if the conclusion be denied, the theory itself comes to the ground. In fact, the theory, according to which the evil is in man and proceeds from man, is contradictory of the other, according to which, the evil is in the social or political institutions, and proceeds from the political and social institutions. Supposing the former, what logically follows is, to extirpate the evil in man, with which its extirpation in society and in government must necessarily be secured. Supposing the latter, what logically follows is, to extirpate the evil directly in society or in government, in which are its centre and its origin. From which we see that the Catholic, and the rationalistic, theories are not only incompatible, but even contradictory. By the Catholic, disturbance, whether political or social, is condemned as mad and useless. The rationalistic theories condemn all moral reform of man as useless and mad. And the one and the other are consistent in their condemnations; for if the evil be not in government or in society, why will you disturb society or government? And on the contrary, if the evil is not in individuals, nor proceeds from individuals, why will you attempt an interior reform of man?

~ Donoso Cortes

In a nutshell, Donoso Cortes points out the fundamental worldview of the three schools. Since no one ever reaches down to their fundamental assumptions, dialogue is literally impossible. There can only be incessant and fruitless debate. As Donoso puts it:

The supreme interest of that school is in preventing the arrival of the day of radical negations or of sovereign affirmations; and that it may not arrive, it confounds by means of discussion all notions, and propagates scepticism, knowing as it does, that a people which perpetually hears in the mouth of its sophists the pro and the contra of everything, ends by not knowing which side to take, and by asking itself whether truth and error, injustice and justice, stupidity and honesty, are things opposed among themselves, or are only the same things regarded from different points of view.

So we are forced to take one or the other “side” of the debate, when what is really necessary is to understand one’s fundamental assumptions. And many so-called conservatives hold a reactionary position on political or social issues, more or less out of old habit, while their fundamental worldview differs little from liberals or socialists. To summarize:

From this chart we can see where each school is logically compelled to find a solution:

• Liberals look to change political institutions
• Socialists look to change social mores
• Catholics look to the moral regeneration of man

As Donoso points out, the liberals are ultimately incoherent. Their political institutions are lifeless and without soul. The liberal regards them as self-existent apart from the peoples, their values, history and consciousness. The conservative senses this but is unable to articulate it properly, primarily because he is a believer himself in his political institutions.

The socialist believes that the solution lies in the overthrow of traditional societal norms; only then will justice and happiness be achieved. Here we see the constant push against and challenge to traditional morality and social norms.

So we hear the cry from the conservative that the battle must be fought in the social arena. However, he himself absorbs the socialist view on issues —if not now, then eventually— due to the constant flow of propaganda. Hence, he gradually concedes the ground that he had initially won.

So the war is really about worldview but no one notices. Metaphysics must be opposed to the rationalism of the liberals and socialists; the moral regeneration of man must be given primary place before political and social change. These voices are few, and where they do exist, they are unconvincing and their philosophy is inconsistent.

Copyright © 2009, 2010 Gornahoor Press

To the profound comprehension of this law of the intellectual generation of ideas, are due the marvels of Catholic civilisation. To that wonderful civilisation is due all that we admire and all that we see. Its theologians, even considered humanly, put to the blush modern and ancient philosophers; her doctors excite wonder by the immensity of their science; its historians by their generalising and comprehensive views, cast those of antiquity into the shade. St Augustine’s “City of God” is, even today, the most profound book of history which genius, illuminated by the rays of Catholicity, has presented to the astonished eyes of men. The acts of her Councils, leaving aside the divine inspiration, are the most finished monuments of human prudence. The Canonical, excel in wisdom the Roman, and the feudal, laws. Who is before St Thomas in science, St Augustine in genius, Bossuet in majesty, St Paul in power? Who is greater as a poet than Dante? Who is equal to Shakespeare? Who surpasses Calderon? Who, like Raffaelle, infused life and inspiration into the canvas?

Place people in sight of the pyramids of Egypt, and they will tell you, “Here has passed a grand and barbarous civilisation.” Place them in sight of the Grecian statues and temples, and they will tell you, “Here has passed a graceful, ephemeral, and brilliant civilisation.” Place them in sight of a Roman monument, and they will tell you, “Here has passed a great people.” Place them in sight of a cathedral, and on beholding such majesty united to such beauty, such grandeur to such taste, such grace to such delicacy, such severe unity to such rich variety, such measure to such boldness, such heaviness in the stones, with such suavity in their outlines, and such wonderful harmony between silence and light, shade and colour, they will tell you,

Here has passed the greatest people of history, and the most astounding of human civilisations: that people must have taken grandeur from the Egyptian, brilliancy from the Greek, strength from the Roman, and, beyond the strength, the brilliancy, and grandeur, something more valuable than grandeur, strength, and brilliancy—immortality and perfection.

Donoso Cortes, Essays on Catholicism, Liberalism and Socialism

Copyright © 2009, 2010 Gornahoor Press

To believe in the equality of all men, when we see them all unequal; to believe in liberty, when we see slavery established in all parts; to believe that all men are brothers, when history tells all are enemies; to believe that there is a common mass of misfortunes and of glories for all men born, when I see nothing but individual glories and misfortunes; to believe I am referred to humanity, when I know humanity is referred to me; to believe that humanity is my centre, when I constituted myself the centre of all; and finally, to believe that I should believe these things, when they are proposed to me by those who tell me that I should believe only my own reason, which contradicts all those things they propose to me, is an absurdity so stupendous, an abberation so inconceivable, that I stand mute and astounded in its presence.

My astonishment increases when I observe that those who affirm human solidarity, deny that of the family, which is to affirm that enemies are brothers, and that brothers should not be brothers; that those who affirm human solidarity are the same who a little before denied the political, which is to affirm I have nothing in common with my own, and all in common with strangers; that those who affirm human solidarity deny religion, though the former cannot be explained without the latter; and from all this I deduce in legitimate consequence that the Socialistic schools are at once illogical and absurd— illogical, because after demonstrating against the Liberal school that some solidarities cannot be accepted while others are rejected, they fall into the same error, accepting one amongst all, and rejecting the remainder—absurd, because precisely the one they proposed to me is not a point of reason but of faith, and because this proposal comes to me from those who deny faith and proclaim the imprescriptable right of reason to empire and sovereignty.

Juan Donoso Cortés (marqués de Valdegamas), Essays on Catholicism, Liberalism and Socialism

Copyright © 2009, 2010 Gornahoor Press

The universality of sin necessitates the universality of purification, which in its turn requires pain to be universal, that the whole human race may be purified in its mysterious waters. This explains why all men born suffer from their birth to their death. Pain is the inseparable companion of life in this obscure valley, filled with our sighs, deafened with our lamentations, and moistened with our tears. Every man is a suffering being, and everything not painful is strange to him. If he fixes his eyes on the past, he grieves to see it vanished; if on the present, he bewails the past as bitter; if on the future, he feels perturbation, because the future is full of shadows and mysteries. How little soever he considers, he discovers that the past and present and future are all, and all is nothing—the past is gone, the present is rapidly going, and the future has not come. The poor are loaded with fatigue, the rich with indigestion, the powerful with pride, the lazy with weariness, the lowly with envy, and the mighty with disdain. The conquerors who drive the nations, are themselves driven by furies, and only stumble on others because they are flying from themselves. Lust consumes the flesh of the youth with its impure flames; ambition takes the youth, made man, from the hands of lust, and burns him in other flames, and drives him into other conflagrations; avarice seizes him when lust rejects and ambition abandons him; she gives him an artificial life called sleepless; old misers only live because they do not sleep—their life is nothing but the absence of sleep.

Juan Donoso Cortés (marqués de Valdegamas), Essays on Catholicism, Liberalism and Socialism

Copyright © 2009, 2010 Gornahoor Press