Church and State

JMJ

Catholic Family News had an article titled Wicked Governors in this Valley of Tears by Brian McCall. The article's introduction is below:

Recent events have caused many people to ask questions that may be overlooked in times of more peaceful civil life. What is the Church’s teachings concerning the behavior, duties, and rights of Catholics who live in a country controlled by an evil governor? As with many areas of practical moral action, the short answer is that it depends on the types of evil plaguing a commonwealth.
Defining Terms
Before explaining the applicable moral principles, we must define several terms that are critical to distinguishing morally significant differences in situations.
A country that is incorporated into Christendom is a nation whose ruler or rulers has or have submitted their political power to the reign of Christ the King. Although all rulers receive their authority from God, Christian rulers receive it proximately from the Church and acknowledge that their authority is wielded subject to the spiritual authority of the Church’s hierarchy. This proper ordering of the temporal authority to the spiritual is symbolized in a monarchy by the pope or a prominent bishop anointing the king and placing the crown upon his head. Napoleon knew perfectly well what he was doing when he snatched the crown from the pope and placed it on his own head. He was declaring his and France’s independence from the pope and Christendom. Christendom is thus the body of all nations who have submitted to Christ the King their temporal power. It is the City of God on earth.
Countries which have not yet been incorporated into Christendom can be referred to as infidel nations. Those who govern an Infidel Nation are still dependent upon God for their temporal authority since all authority comes from God; yet authority is not conferred through the Church since the infidel nation has not yet been formally submitted to the Church’s jurisdiction. Note that an infidel nation may be ruled by a Catholic, but that does not change its status as infidel. Typically, this will occur when a country is being evangelized but the ruler deems it not yet prudent to join Christendom.

The highlighted section is something that caused a "that's interesting" reaction when I read it. In all my reading, I had never come across this concept.

So ... what follows is my research to find out if this is true.

First, what is in the Catechism of Trent (yes I know that I'm setting aside the Catechism of the Catholic Church ... that's because I prefer straight teaching as opposed round about postulations).

The Honour Due To Civil Rulers
The same is to be said of civil rulers, governors, magistrates and others to whose authority we are subject. The Apostle in his Epistle to the Romans, explains at length the honour, respect and obedience that should be shown them, and he also bids us to pray for them. St. Peter says: Be ye subject, therefore, to every human creature for God's sake; whether it be to the king as excelling, or to governors as sent by him.

For whatever honour we show them is given to God, since exalted human dignity deserves respect because it is an image of the divine power, and in it we revere the providence of God who has entrusted to men the care of public affairs and who uses them as the instruments of His power.

If we sometimes have wicked and unworthy officials it is not their faults that we revere, but the authority from God which they possess. Indeed, while it may seem strange, we are not excused from highly honouring them even when they show themselves hostile and implacable towards us. Thus David rendered great services to Saul even when the latter was his bitter foe, and to this he alludes when he says: With them that hated peace I was peaceable.

However, should their commands be wicked or unjust, they should not be obeyed, since in such a case they rule not according to their rightful authority, but according to injustice and perversity.

Source: Catechism of the Council of Trent

Then we have this Pope Leo XIII in Immortale Dei:

Then, truly, will the majesty of the law meet with the dutiful and willing homage of the people, when they are convinced that their rulers hold authority from God, and feel that it is a matter of justice and duty to obey them, and to show them reverence and fealty, united to a love not unlike that which children show their parents. "Let every soul be subject to higher powers."(3) To despise legitimate authority, in whomsoever vested, is unlawful, as a rebellion against the divine will, and whoever resists that, rushes willfully to destruction. "He that resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God, and they that resist, purchase to themselves damnation."(4) To cast aside obedience, and by popular violence to incite to revolt, is therefore treason, not against man only, but against God.

So, the authority to rule does not seem to come from the Church, it comes from God. I don't understand the theology for it to be 'proximately' from the Church. The Council of Trent was in a period of Christendom ripping itself apart and yet I don't see thought put forward in CFN present in Trent's writings.

Perhaps one of my readers will provide reliable sources to support this thought.

P^3