Chapter XXVI: Appendix: V

PROTESTATION CONTRE LE PROJET DE PRÉCIPITER LA DISCUSSION.

(_Presented early in May._)

Permettez, Monseigneur, que je proteste ici contre un tel projet, s’il existe, et que je consigne entre vos mains ma protestation. Saisir ainsi, irrégulièrement et violemment, le Concile de cette question, c’est absolument impossible.

Cette discussion immédiate de l’Infaillibilité Pontificale, avant toutes les autres questions qui la doivent nécessairement précéder, ce renversement de l’ordre et de la marche régulière du Concile, cette précipitation passionnée dans l’affaire la plus délicate, et qui par sa nature et ses difficultés, exige le plus de maturité et de calme, tout cela serait non seulement illogique et absurde, inconcevable, mais encore trahirait trop ouvertement aux yeux du monde entier, chez ceux qui imaginent de tels procédés, le dessein de peser sur le Concile, et pour dire le vrai mot, serait absolument contraire à la liberté des évêques.

Comment une telle question, sous-introduite tout à coup dans un chapitre annexé à un grand _Schema_, le dessein de ceux qui nous ont été soumis, passerait avant tous les schemata déjà étudiés, avant toutes les autres questions déjà discutées, et non encore résolues par le Concile.

Des questions fondamentales, essentiellement préliminaires à toutes les autres; Dieu, sa personnalité, sa providence, Jésus-Christ, sa divinité, sa redemption, sa grâce, l’Église, on laisserait tout celà de coté pour se précipiter sur cette question, dont nous n’avions entendu parler avant le Concile presque qu’à des Journalistes, dont la bulle de convocation ne parlait pas, dont le _Schema_ sur l’Église lui-même ne disait pas un seul mot.

Et l’examen de cette nouvelle question, si compliquée, cette discussion, si nécessaire, cette définition si grave, tout cela se ferait à la hâte, violemment, au pied levé. On ne nous laisserait ni le temps ni la liberté d’étudier un point si important de doctrine avec gravité et à fond, comme il doit l’être. Car aucun évêque ne peut, sans blesser gravement sa conscience, déclarer de foi, sous peine de damnation éternelle, un point de doctrine de la révélation duquel il n’est pas absolument certain. Ce serait, Monseigneur, dans le monde entier, une stupeur et un scandale. Ce serait de plus autoriser trop manifestement les calomnies de ceux qui disent que dans la convocation du Concile, il y a eu une arrière pensée, et que cette question qui n’était pas l’objet du Concile, au fond devait être tout le Concile. Ceux qui poussent à de tels excès oublient clairement toute prudence: il y a un bon sens et une bonne foi publique qu’on ne blesse pas impunément.

Sans doute on peut passer par dessus toutes les recriminations des ennemis de l’Église; mais il y a des difficultés avec lesquelles il faut nécessairement compter. Eh bien! Éminence, si les choses venaient à se passer de la sorte, je le dis avec toute la conviction de mon âme, il y aurait lieu de craindre que des doutes graves ne s’élèvent touchant la vérité même et la liberté de ce Concile du Vatican.

Que les choses se passent ainsi, on le peut, si on le veut: on peut tout, contre la raison et le droit, avec la force du nombre.

Mais c’est lendemain, Éminence, que commenceraient pour vous et pour l’Église les difficultés.

Par un procédé aussi contraire à l’ordre régulier des choses, à la marche essentielle des assemblées d’évêques qui ont été de vrais Conciles, vous susciteriez incontestablement une lutte dans l’Église et les consciences sur la question de l’issue œcuménique de notre assemblée: c’est à dire, tout ce qu’on peut imaginer aujourd’hui de plus désastreux.

Ceux qui essayent d’engager le Pape dans cette voie, en l’abusant et le trompant, sont bien coupables. Mais je ne doute pas que la sagesse du Saint-Père ne déjoue toutes ces menées.

ADVERTISEMENT.

Third Edition, Crown 8vo, 7s. 6d.

_The Pope and the Council._

By Janus.

_Authorized Translation From The German._

Opinions of the Press.

“Had the book been, as its title might at first seem to imply, merely a Zeitschrift evoked by the exigencies of the present controversy, we should not have noticed it here. It is because it has an independent and permanent interest for the historical and theological student, quite apart from its bearing on the controversies of the day, and contains a great deal of what, to the immense majority of English, if not also of German readers, will be entirely new matter, grouped round a common centre-point which gives unity and coherence to the whole, that it falls strictly within the province of this journal.”—ACADEMY, _October 9_.

“In this volume the main idea of the writers, the long fatal growth of the principles which are now about to develop into the dogma of the Pope’s personal and exclusive infallibility, is traced in full detail, with a learning which would be conspicuous in any of the divided branches of the Church, with a plain-speaking which few Roman Catholics have been able to afford, and with a sobriety and absence of exaggeration not common among Protestants.”—GUARDIAN, _October 13_.

“A profound and learned treatise, evidently the work of one of the first theologians of the day, discussing with the scientific fulness and precision proper to German investigation, the great doctrinal questions expected to come before the Council, and especially the proposed dogma of Papal Infallibility. There is probably no work in existence that contains at all, still less within so narrow a compass, so complete a record of the origin and growth of the infallibilist theory, and of all the facts of Church history bearing upon it, and that too in a form so clear and concise as to put the argument within the reach of any reader of ordinary intelligence, while the scrupulous accuracy of the writer, and his constant reference to the original authorities for every statement liable to be disputed, makes the monograph as a whole a perfect storehouse of valuable information for the historical or theological student.”—SATURDAY REVIEW, _October 16_.

“It affords an opportunity for persons in this country to learn, on the most direct authority, how the grave questions which just now agitate the Church are regarded by members of a school within her pale, who profess to yield to none in their loyal devotion to Catholic truth, but are unable to identify its interests with the advance of Ultramontanism. Its aim is to show that the object in chief of the coming Council is to elect Papal Infallibility into an article—and therefore inevitably a cardinal article—of the Catholic Faith. It purports to investigate by the light of history this and other questions which are to be decided at the Council, as well as to serve as a contribution to ecclesiastical history.”—MORNING POST, _October 20_.

“The concluding words of the volume, coming as they evidently do from a great leader of thought among German Catholics, are so startling and suggestive that we give the passage as it stands, while exhorting our readers to lose no time in procuring and carefully perusing the whole volume for themselves.”—CHURCH HERALD, _October 20_.

“It is our intention to deal with this book hereafter as it deserves, for we have reason to believe, we will not say to know, lest we should imitate the vicious example of Janus, that the work is a fabrication of English and German hands. Its name has been well chosen; Janus had two faces, which nationally may mean English and German, but in morals signifies a character not highly estimable for truth.”—TABLET, _October 16_.

“This extraordinary work should be read by the millions of Protestant England, as the ablest and most authentic exposure of the ecclesiastical and political despotism of Popery which exists in any language or any country.”—ROCK, _October 20_.

“We feel, as we have already said, that it is hardly possible in a review to give an adequate idea of the volume before us, considered merely as a storehouse of facts on the Roman controversy, a value enhanced by the circumstance that it is written by earnest but sorrowing members of that Church, who desire, by its publication, to avert the progress of corruption and to save the Church from the blundering threatened by the action of the Council. We had marked many passages for extract in the course of our own examination. Space, however, forbids our indulging ourselves. We regret this the less because we feel assured that the book which we have so imperfectly noticed will soon be in the hands of most persons interested in the question which is debated.”—JOHN BULL, _October 23_.

“It is of great importance at such a crisis that the public mind should be thoroughly informed as to the points on which the judgment of the Council is to be asked, or, to speak more correctly, as to the monstrous claims of the Papacy to which it is expected to give its formal submission. Especially is it desirable to understand clearly the exact position occupied by the ‘Liberal Catholics,’ men who are not prepared to forsake their Church nor to declare war against all progress, and who, despite many discouragements, still cling to the belief that it is possible to find some mode of reconciliation between ‘Catholic’ principles and modern ideas, and who resent such fanatical outbursts as that of Archbishop Manning even more bitterly than Protestants themselves. We attach, therefore, great value to a little volume just issued on the ‘Pope and the Council,’ by Janus, which contains a more complete statement of the whole case than we have anywhere met with.”—NONCONFORMIST, _October 27_.

“Beginning with a sketch of the errors and contradictions of the Popes, and of the position which, as a matter of history, they held in the early Church, the book proceeds to describe the three great forgeries by which the Papal claims were upheld—the Isidorian decretals, the donation of Constantine, and the decretum of Gratian. The last subject ought to be carefully studied by all who wish to understand the frightful tyranny of a complicated system of laws, devised not for the protection of a people, but as instruments for grinding them to subjection. Then, after an historical outline of the general growth of the Papal power in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the writers enter upon the peculiarly episcopal and clerical question, pointing out how marvellously every little change worked in one direction, invariably tending to throw the rule of the Church into the power of Rome; and how the growth of new institutions, like the monastic orders and the Inquisition, gradually withdrew the conduct of affairs from the Bishops of the Church in general, and consolidated the Papal influence. For all this, however, unless we could satisfy ourselves with a mere magnified table of contents, the reader must be referred to the book itself, in which he will find the interest sustained without flagging to the end.”—PALL MALL GAZETTE, _October 29_.

“It is very able, learned, compact, and conclusive. The subject of Papal Infallibility is admirably treated, with a thorough mastery of Church history. We commend it to the perusal of all who take an interest in the progress of ecclesiastical questions, and wish to become more nearly acquainted with the Romish Church, its doings, pretensions, decrees—especially with the conduct of its successive heads. It is a perfect storehouse of facts brought together with telling effect. Let the voice of these German Catholics be listened to by enlightened Englishmen of all creeds, and they will be in no danger of ensnarement from the plausible rhetoric of Ultramontanism, whose principles are opposed to our free institutions—to the glory and strength of England.”—ATHENÆUM, _October 30_.

“In France, in Holland, and in Germany, there has already appeared a multitude of disquisitions on this subject. Among these several are the acknowledged compositions of men of high standing in the Roman Catholic world,—men admittedly entitled to speak with the authority that must attach to established reputation: but not one of them has hitherto produced a work more likely to create a deep impression than the anonymous German publications at the head of this notice. It is not a piece of merely polemical writing, it is a treatise dealing with a large subject in an impressive though partisan manner—a treatise grave in tone, solid in matter, and bristling with forcible and novel illustrations.”—SPECTATOR, _November 6_.

“It is, as all our readers know, a history of how the Papal claims have grown from their modest germs in the _fifth_, down to their full development in the _sixteenth_ century. This history, too, is accompanied by a corresponding exhibition of the inconsistency of these claims with actual facts. But the work is done with such elaborate care, and with such a well-marshalled and complete view of the historical facts of the case, that it may well be bought and read irrespective of the circumstances which have called it forth. It is a full, able, and learned bill of indictment against Popery proper.”—LITERARY CHURCHMAN, _November 13_.

“This book, characterized by great ability, singular grasp, and scholarship, demonstrates, with proof infallible, that the Ultramontane doctrine of the Pope’s infallibility is the centre of an arch based upon error, raised by cunning craft, settled and cemented by shameless treachery. And this most damaging exposure of Popery proceeds from divines calling themselves ‘faithful Catholics.’ No Ultramontane is able to sneer at the scholarship of the book; nor can they take off the edge of its blows by ascribing it to the malice of Protestants.”—RECORD, _November 17_.

“Yet on this and other documents of the same kind, the whole fabric of Papal power and assumption has been built up. The forged donations of Constantine, Pepin, and Charlemagne are the title-deeds by which its possessions are held, and the _Liber Pontificalis_, and Isidorian decretals, are the authorities on which it rests for the assertion of a power inconsistent alike with the rights of God and the liberties of man. We know of no book in which the whole process is exposed with the same completeness and in the same brief compass, and we commend it to our readers as one from which they will derive an amount of valuable information for which otherwise they might search in vain.”—ENGLISH INDEPENDENT, _November 18_.

“The book before us is making England and Germany ring with valiant and wise words of warning, which ought to make the representative of St. Peter weep tears of honest grief over past and present, the crooked policy of the one and the headstrong ambition of the other. As a rule, we may say that anti-Papal literature is of the lowest grade of literary merit, filled with illogical and inconclusive reasoning, and characterized by ignorance, bigotry, and cant. The present work is a splendid exception, severe in tone, but not unduly so, clear in statement, and unsparing in its dissection of the contradictions involved in modern Ultramontane theories. Its German authorship secures for it patient and exhaustive treatment of the subject; its Catholic origin places its statements far above the ordinary suspicions of unfairness, while it raises our admiration for the love of truth, which could lead men to oppose so bravely the current of popular Roman thought.”—CHURCH TIMES, _November 26_.

“Now, what this book of Janus proves is, that all these _à priori_ reasons for Papal Infallibility are absolutely worthless. They are beaten off the stage entirely and altogether. There is not the smallest atom of ground for them to stand upon.”—CHURCH REVIEW, _November 27_.

“This work, written by continental Roman Catholics of the liberal school, will be read in Protestant England with the deepest interest, and on more accounts than one. Accustomed as we are so much to view this great Church system of Rome with feelings of antagonism, it is well we should know and learn to sympathize with able and earnest men within its body, who are keenly alive to its weaknesses, and are anxiously seeking for light as to how Christianity, as they have received it, may help to solve the perplexities of the age. We should hope that no Protestant who reads this able treatise will feel differently. At the same time, it has no little value for us Protestants, in days when our Protestantism is so scornfully arraigned among ourselves; for if anything can justify our position and deepen our gratitude to a merciful Providence that has ruled our history, it is a candid work like this, proceeding from what we must call the opposite camp.”—CONTEMPORARY REVIEW, _December_.

“Rumour will, no doubt, be busy with its conjectures as to the name which lurks beneath the _nom de plume_ of ‘Janus.’ We do not intend to offer any contribution towards the elucidation of the mystery, unless it be a contribution to say that the book bears internal evidence of being the work of a Catholic, and that there are not many Catholics in Europe who could have written it. Taking it all in all, it is no exaggerated praise to characterize it as the most damaging assault on Ultramontanism that has appeared in modern times. Its learning is copious and complete, yet so admirably arranged that it invariably illustrates without overlaying the argument. The style is clear and simple, and there is no attempt at rhetoric. It is a piece of cool and masterly dissection, all the more terrible for the passionless manner in which the author conducts the operation.”—TIMES, _December 3_.

FOOTNOTES

1 [It may be well to add, to preclude misconceptions, that both
Letters and Articles are exclusively the work of Catholics.—TR.]

2 The weight to be attached to the _Civiltà_ on all questions
connected with the Council may be gathered from the Brief of Pius
IX. of Feb. 12, 1866, printed in the _Civiltà_, Serie vi. vol. vi.
pp. 7-15. The Pope declares that this journal, expressly intrusted
with the defence of religion and with teaching and disseminating the
authority and claims of the Roman See, is to be written and edited
by a special staff to be named by the General of the Jesuits, who
are to have a special house and revenues of their own. The previous
censorship, as is known in Rome, is exercised with particular care,
so that nothing appears without the approbation of the _Curia_.

3 [Cardinal Reisach was absent at the opening of the Council, and died
soon afterwards, Dec. 26, 1869, in Savoy.—TR.]

4 [See Introduction to The Pope and the Council, pp. 1-4.—TR.]

5 [Cf. _The Pope and the Council_, p. 6.—TR.]

6 These fears, as is well known, were not realized at Fulda.

7 The Cardinal’s subsequent attitude has not justified this hope.
Freppel too, as Bishop-designate of Anjou, has now declared himself
for the infallibilists.

8 This design does not seem to have been persevered in.

_ 9 Corresp. de Rome_, 1869, p. 384: “L’infallibilité du Pape, décidant
en matière de foi _ex cathedrâ_, c’est-à-dire comme maître de
l’Eglise étant déjà admise par tous les vrais catholiques, un décret
du Concil fera juste l’effet d’une confirmation d’une chose
universellement sue et crue.”

10 “Præsidentia auctoritativa dicitur ... insuper cum auctoritate
coactivâ compescendi etiam per censuras ecclesiasticas, et alia
juris media contradictores et rebelles et contumaces, prout ex
constitutione XI. Martini V., etc.”

11 “Juramentum contra utilitatem ecclesiasticam præstitum non
tenet.”—Lib. ii. tit. 24, c. 27; Sext. Lib. i. t. 2, c. 1.

12 Cf. “Janus,” p. 230.

13 [The third Lateran Council.—TR.]

14 The Scotch pronounce Latin much as the Germans do.

15 [Even this must be taken with reserve.—Cf. _infra_, pp. 174,
175.—TR.]

16 [Most of the rights originally inherent in the episcopate are now
reserved to the Pope, who only allows Bishops to exercise them
during good behaviour, by virtue of “faculties” renewed every five
years. Cf. “Janus,” p. 422, note.—TR.]

17 [This must be taken with some reserve, as will be seen further
on.—TR.]

18 “Obligatam hærentemque sanctiori Pontifici velut in pectore
Societatem.”—Bolland, _Imago_, p. 622.

19 [The German College is conducted by the Jesuits.—TR.]

20 [Archbishop MacHale does not seem to have justified this
anticipation.—TR.]

21 Excommunications _latæ sententiæ_, as distinguished from
excommunication _ferendæ sententiæ_, are those which immediately
take effect on the commission of the forbidden act, without
requiring any sentence of Pope or Bishop to be pronounced.

22 When the news arrived from Paris of the abolition of the Pragmatic
Sanction, _i.e._, of the reforms of Basle.

23 [This formula, often mistakenly supposed to occur in the Papal
Coronation service, refers to the traditional length of St. Peter’s
pontificate—twenty-five years. No Pope has yet reigned to the end of
his twenty-fifth year, and only one has entered on the beginning of
it. Pius IX. completes his twenty-fourth year on June 16, 1870.—TR.]

24 [This point is forcibly dwelt on by Count Daru in his memorandum,
which the Pope refused to lay before the Council.—TR.]

25 “Animas eorum qui in solo peccato originali, vel mortali actuali
decedunt, in infernum descendere, pœnis tamen disparibus puniendas.”

26 “Imprimis itaque fide Catholicâ, tenendum est illorum animas,” etc.
The author seems really to believe that the Rationalistic tendencies
of the age can be cured with an emetic.

27 [Cardinal Reisach, who was formerly Archbishop of Munich, used to
say he had almost forgotten how to speak German.—TR.]

28 “Supremam ideoque ab errore immunem esse Romani Pontificis
auctoritatem, quum in rebus fidei et moram ea statuit ac præcipit
quæ ab omnibus Christi fidelibus credenda et tenenda, quæve
rejicienda et damnanda sunt.”

29 “Per l’infallibilità, essendo l’Abbate Mastai, l’ho sempre creduto,
adesso, essendo Papa Mastai, la sento.”

30 [This reads almost like a prophecy, when we remember how afterwards,
and on slighter provocation than is here supposed, hundreds of the
Infallibilist Bishops danced like maniacs round the pulpit when
Strossmayer and Schwarzenberg were speaking, yelling and shaking
their fists at them.—Cf. _infr._ Letter xxxii.—TR.]

31 [Archbishop Darboy’s interposition stopped the conspiracy being
carried out at the first General Congregation, and four American
Bishops disconcerted a second similar plot on St. Joseph’s Day,
March 19.—Cf. _infr._ Letter xxxvi.—TR.]

32 “In specie ne Concilium declaret vel definiat infallibilitatem summi
Pontificis, a doctissimis et prudentissimus fidelibus S. Sedi intime
addictis vehementer optatur. Gravia enim mala exinde oritura timent
tum fidelibus tum infidelibus. Fideles enim ... corde turbarentur
magis quam erigerentur, ac si nunc demum fundamentum Ecclesiæ et
veræ doctrinæ stabiliendum sit; infideles vero novarum calumniarum
et derisionum materiam lucrarentur. Neque desunt qui ejusmodi
definitionem logice impossibilem vocant et ad ipsam Ecclesiam
provocant, quæ ad instar solis splendorem lucis suæ monstrat quidem,
sed non definit. Jure denique quæritur, cui usui ista definitio
foret, de cujus sensu, modo et ambitu ampla inter theologos
controversia est.”

33 [Monsignor Nardi said this _totidem verbis_ to an Anglican clergyman
who was inspecting the Council Hall.—TR.]

34 “Questo puzza di schisma.”

35 [Compare with this account of the freedom of the Council the letters
of two French Bishops, published in the _Times_ of May 3, and the
_Journal des Débats_ of May 10.—TR.]

_ 36 Études de Théologie_, Janvier 1868, p. 26:—“Le Concile n’imposait
rien à notre foi, qui n’eût obtenu à peu près l’unanimité des votes.
L’obligation de croire est une chose si grave, le droit de lier les
intelligences est un droit si auguste et si important, que les pères
pensaient n’en devoir user qu’avec la plus grande réserve et la plus
extrême délicatesse.”

_ 37 Is Healthful Reunion Impossible?_ By E. B. Pusey, D.D. Rivingtons,
1870.

38 [Gratry’s four Letters have been translated by the Rev. T. J.
Bailey.—(Hayes).—TR.]

39 [Cf. _supr._ pp. 90, 91. The _Tablet_ made the same assertions in
both cases.—TR.]

_ 40 Adversus eos qui Sanctissimum R. Pontificis studium et Vaticani
Concilii celebrandi necessitatem vituperant._ Romæ.

41 [Some idea of it may be formed from the answer made some months ago
by a distinguished English Prelate at Rome to an Anglican friend,
who had quoted the words of one of the Opposition Bishops, “You need
not quote _them_ to me; _they are no more Catholics than you
are_,”—thus excommunicating at one swoop the very flower of the
hierarchy of his Church.—TR.]

42 [The _Curtisanen_ were clerical place-hunters, who came to Rome to
beg or traffic for benefices. Cf. “Janus,” p. 341.—TR.]

43 [The Bull _Apostolicæ Sedis_.—Cf. _supr._ pp. 100, 1, 5, 6.—TR.]

44 “Damnamus perversas eorum cavillationes qui dicere audent externum
quidem obsequium, non autem internum mentis cordisque assensum, R.
Pontificis judiciis esse præstandum.”

45 It will of course be understood that the 300 boarders (cf. _supr._
p. 128) are divided among the Prelates mentioned above.

_ 46 Istoria del Concilio de Trente_, xix. 15. 3: “Facendosi quelle sole
difinizioni nelle quali i padri conspirassero ad un parere.”

47 [Liverani published a striking pamphlet on the abuses of the _Curia_
some years ago.—TR.]

48 Joshua ix. 21.

49 Purgat. xxvii. 104.

50 “Ove accadesse collisione tra le definizioni del Concilio ecumenico
e le leggi dello Stato, queste cesserebbero per ciò solo di avere
_qualsiasi_ vigore obbligatorio,” p. 262.

51 So Pius VI., in his Brief of 1791, directed against the new laws of
the French Assembly for securing religions freedom. Therein the
distinction is still drawn between heathen and Jews on one side and
Protestants or heretics on the other, that the former cannot be
compelled to receive baptism, but the others, “qui se Ecclesiæ per
susceptum Baptismi Sacramentum subjecerunt, cogendi sunt” (_Collect.
Brev. Pii VI._, Aug. Vindel. 1791, i. 34). Benedict XIV. declared
the same before in 1749 (_Bullar. Mag._, Romæ, ed. Coquel, T. xvii.
p. 272). And Pius VII. afterwards, in his Brief of 1803 (Kopp, _Die
kath. Kirche des 19 Jahrh._, Mainz, 1830, p. 429). “According to
Scripture, Councils and Tradition, heretics remain subject to the
laws of the Catholic Church.”

52 Job xiii. 7.

53 The idea is thrice repeated; “fideles tam seorsim singuli quam simul
omnes officio ... veræ obedientiæ obstringuntur,” is said once again
in the _Schema_.

_ 54 Correspondance_, Paris, i. 247.

55 [A writer in the Cologne _Rheinischer Merkur_ of May 14, a newly
started organ of Liberal Catholic principles, conducted entirely by
priests, learnedly discusses the question “whether St. Thomas
Aquinas taught Papal Infallibility,” and comes to the conclusion
that, in spite of the influence of these forged authorities on his
mind, he did not.—TR.]

56 Navagero, _Relazione_, p. 389 in the Venetian Collection, ed.
Alberi, i. 7.

57 “Ammantar la pigrizia di superiorità, sottrarsi alla noja d’esaminar
le quistioni col disprezarle, sono vezzi troppo communi in Italia, e
il beffarsi di questi pesanti Tedeschi, che vanno a cercare la fin
dei fini. Ma in tal caso rassegniamoci a vederci trattati, da questi
di negligenza e di spensierataggine quando accettiamo a occhi
bendati carte, falsificate da tristi speculatori o da sbadati
raccoglitori,” etc.—_Archivo Storico Italiano_, 1860, xii. 19.

58 [It was originally intended for public use also, and is still
recited publicly by Cathedral Chapters and religions communities.
Some portions of it, as Vespers and Compline, are often used in
parish churches also, especially in France.—TR.]

59 [Cf. “Janus,” pp. 60-62, 275-8.—TR.]

60 The proposal of two Rhenish Prelates for a common declaration
against Döllinger’s paper on Infallibility was rejected in the
meeting of German Bishops. The chief opponents were Hefele,
Eberhard, Raynald, Strossmayer and Förster, who maintained that,
certain arguments apart, Döllinger represented in the main the views
of most German Bishops on the subject. It was further insisted, in
express repudiation of the stand-point of mere “inopportuneness,”
that the addresses already signed by the Infallibilists were
directed in principle against the doctrine of the Church. The two
Prelates declared nevertheless that they would not separate
themselves from their colleagues who had signed those documents.

61 Tac. _Annal._ XV. 53.

62 I take this opportunity of observing that the _Mémorial
Diplomatique_, which has the credit of supplying the world regularly
with methodical fictions from Rome, has also given a spurious reply
of Antonelli’s to Beust’s note. Perhaps one of your Paris
correspondents can explain the rare persistency of that journal in
habitually making game of the French with lies and inventions which
are immediately exposed. Here in Rome many are disposed to seek the
authors of them in the office of the _Civiltà_ or in the _Gesu_.

_ 63 Pastoral on Infallibility of the Roman Pontiff_ (Longmans), p. 126.

64 It is also quoted in the _Journal des Débats_ of March 12. [This
same Bishop opened the debate on the _Schema de Romano Pontifice_ by
arguing that the Pope must be infallible, because St. Peter was
crucified head downwards. _Cf. infr._ Letter xlvi.—TR.]

65 The _Unita Cattolica_ of March 12 makes its Roman correspondent say
that to-day the Bishops are signing in crowds a Petition to the
Presidents of the Council, demanding that the discussion of the
article on infallibility may take precedence of all other business,
because they long to put an end at one blow to the scandal of the
Liberal Catholics and Gallicans. But Margotti’s journal at the same
time urges patience on its readers, because decorum must be
preserved, as far as may be.

66 [It seemed better to give the Letter itself, as published “by
permission” in the _Standard_ of April 7, rather than to translate
the secondhand, though remarkably accurate, paraphrase given in the
German text. It addressed to Bishop Ullathorne.—TR.]

67 [Archbishop Errington was Cardinal Wiseman’s coadjutor with right of
succession, but was arbitrarily deprived of the post by the Pope, on
his declining to resign it. His name was the first of the three sent
to Rome by the Chapter of Westminster for the vacant Archbishopric
on Cardinal Wiseman’s death, the other two being Clifford and Grant.
All three were passed over in favour of Dr. Manning.—TR.]

68 [This explanation, that the Requiem “was intended rather as a
political demonstration than a religious act,” was elaborately
insisted on in the _Tablet_ of March 28, which added the guarded but
equally gratuitous statement that “the Bishop of Orleans, _it
appears_, intended to speak at the funeral service;” winding up with
the somewhat remarkable comment that “the prudence and the charity
(!) of Pius IX. have been equally conspicuous in the affair.” The
world hardly seems to see it.—TR.]

_ 69 Reform der Kirche an Haupt und Gliedern._

70 [The correctness of this prediction was conspicuously illustrated in
the _coup_ of June 3. _Cf. infr._ Letter lii.—TR.]

71 This word (_niederträchtigen_) was lately used by a German Bishop.

72 The original text ran: “Quâ sane benignitate ipsius ac providentiâ
factum est, ut ex Œcumenicis omnibus Concíliis, et ex Tridentino
nominatim amplissima in universam Catholicam Familiam utilitas
dimanaverit;” the amendment of Dreux-Brézé runs: “Quâ sane
benignitate ipsius ac providentiâ factum est, ut _licet omnibus
Ecclesiae necessitatibus per ordinarium Summi Pontificis regimen et
magisterium satis fuerit provisum_, tamen ex Œcumenicis omnibus
Conciliis,” etc.

73 [It is understood to have been Bishop Clifford of Clifton.—TR.]

74 See _Times_ for April 2, 1870.

75 [The English _Tablet_ and _Dublin Review_ have received similar
papal commendations.—TR.]

76 “Relapsum flammi ex lege addixit,” says the Dominican Bzovius in his
Panegyric _Paulus V. Borghesius_, Rome 1626, p. 57.

77 [It will be seen that Simor, with the other Hungarian Bishops,
eventually voted among the _Non-placets_ and signed their protest.
Cf. Letters lxiv, lxv.—TR.]

78 “Quoniam vero satis non est, hæreticam pravitatem devitare, nisi ii
quoque errores diligenter fugiantur, qui ad illam plus minusve
accedunt: omnes officii monemus servandi etiam Constitutiones et
Decreta quibus pravæ ejusmodi opiniones, quæ isthic diserte non
enumerantur, ab hâc Sanctâ Sede proscriptæ et prohibitæ sunt.”

79 “Schematis de fide catholica conclusio, quæ incipit ab his verbis:
_Itaque supremi Pastoralis_, etc., cum de eâ in ultimâ Congregatione
generali non satis explicite actum fuerit, adhuc debet subjici
Patrum suffragiis, antequam ad ferenda suffragia de toto Capite IV.
procedatur. Ideo monentur Reverendissimi Patres, ut nunc in finem
_Emendationes de capite quarto_ hujus Schematis propositas etiam ad
proximam Congregationem generalem secum deferre velint.”

80 [Conditional votes, as will be seen, are not allowed in Solemn
Sessions, but only a simple _Placet_ or _Non placet_.—TR.]

81 [Cf. _supr._ p. 348.—TR.]

82 [See an exhaustive article on the subject from a Catholic pen in the
_North British Review_ for October 1869.—TR.]

83 [He refused to do so.—TR.]

84 This proved to be a mistake.

85 “Elle estime justement qu’elle a le devoir de ne pas favoriser la
diffusion de l’erreur ou des attaques contre l’autorité des Vicaires
de Jésus-Christ.”

86 The infallibilists are of course luckier. Their writings are readily
printed and circulated. At the same time with the writings mentioned
above, Archbishop Spalding has published a letter to Dupanloup,
emphatically denying that he had spoken against the opportuneness of
the dogma in the paper he drew up with several other American
Bishops, and declaring himself a zealous advocate for it.

87 [English readers may be referred to Renouf’s _Case of Honorius
Reconsidered_. Longmans, 1869.—TR.]

88 It is now understood to have been written by Dr. S. Mayer under his
direction.

89 [See _Pastoral on Infallibility of Roman Pontiff_. Longmans, 1869.]

90 “Animadvertendum quippe est, quod in publicâ Sessione juxta Litteras
Apostolicas _Multiplices inter_ d. d. Novembris 1869 Num. VIII., quo
modus procedendi in Sessionibus publicis præscribitur, non liceat
aliter suffragium dare, nisi pure et simpliciter per verba: _Placet_
aut _Non placet_, excluso alio quovis modo.”

91 [Cf. _Janus_, pp. 382-4.—TR.]

92 [Since, that is, the Lateran synod of 1517 under Leo X.—TR.]

93 Tac. _Annal._ II.

94 Antonelli’s, notoriously.

95 “Animés d’un profond respect pour l’autorité _légitime_ du S. Siége,
nous sommes obligés d’autre part de préserver de toute atteinte
présente ou future les rapports entre l’église et l’état (as lately
settled by the Concordat and the Constitution). Nous joignons nos
instances aux remonstrances du Gouvernement français et nous nous
croyons appelés à le faire d’autant plus, que dans le sein du
concile lui-même une grande partie des représentants de l’Église
d’Allemagne, dont le dévouement religieux est bien connu, atteste
par son attitude que nos craintes sont loin d’être vaines.”

96 “Si, diciamolo altamente, Pio IX. credette aver ricevuto speciale
missione di definire la Immacolata Concezione e la infallibilita
pontificia.”

97 “Jure tam divino quam humano laicis nulla potestas in ecclesiasticas
personas attributa est.”

98 See Raynald. _Annal._ xix. ann. 1493, 22.

99 “Hæc conditio pro Concilio Vaticano eo magis urgenda esse videtur,
cum ad ferenda suffragia tot Patres admissi sunt, de quibus non
constat evidenter, utrum jure tantum ecclesiastico an etiam jure
divino ipsis votum decisivum competat.”

100 It appears from a passage in Letter lii. that this severe judgment
on the Prince Bishop was based on an erroneous report of his conduct
in the papers.

101 “Jamvero infallibilitatem S. Ap. Sedis et Romani Pontificis ad
doctrinam fidei pertinere ex allatis fidei documentis constat, et
contrariæ illi sententiæ a magisterio Ecclesiæ non semel fuerunt
improbatæ. Cujuscunque ergo scientiæ etiam historiæ ecclesiasticæ
conclusiones Rom. Pontificum infallibilitati adversantes, quo
manifestius hæc ex revelationis fontibus infertur, eo certius veluti
totidem errores habendas esse consequitur.”

102 “Al male dominante della licenza dei tipi, per cui il giornalismo
nega e bestemmia ogni giorno, bisogna contraporre il salutare
rimedio del Papa infallibile, che ogni giorno può insegnare,
condannare, definire, senza che mai sia licito ai cattolici dubitare
de’ suoi oraculi.”

103 [The English Jesuit, Father Gallwey, says they will be like “the
daily provision of manna” to the Israelites.—TR.]

104 He should have said “the Italian prelates.”

105 Cf. _supr._ p. 517.

106 It will be seen from the protest afterwards published that this
passage was greatly toned down.

107 Matt. xxvi. 49.

_ 108 Von der Römischen Einheit_, Wien. 1866, vol. ii. pp. 444 _seq._

109 See the decree of Eugenius in Porter’s _Systema Decretorum_, p. 535,
and in Raynaldus.

110 “Ad officium nostrum spectat de _quocumque_ mortali peccato
corripere quemlibet Christianum; et, si correptionem contempserit,
per districtionem ecclesiasticam coercere.”—_Decretal. Novit_, c.
13, De Judic. [Cf. _Janus_, p. 158.]

_ 111 Concil._ ed. Labbé, x. 384.

112 Innoc. _Epist._ ii. 209, p. 473, ed. Paris.

113 Raynald. _Annal._ xv. 156.

114 Raynald. _Annal._ an. 1376, 1.

115 See Bull _Romanus Pontifex_ confirmed by Callixtus III. in 1456 and
Sixtus IV. in 1481.—Morelli, _Fasti Novi Orbis_, p. 58.

116 See Bull _Inter Cæteræ_ in Raynald. _Annal._

117 Raynald. _Annal._ an. 1493, 19.

118 Harduin. _Concil_ ix. 1756.

119 Baron. _Annal. Eccl._ an. 1102, sect. 18.

120 Rog. Wendover, _Hist._ iii. 251.

121 Raynald. _Annal._ an. 1283-4.

_ 122 Litera Apost. Summorum Pontif. pro offic. S. Inquis._, Venet. 1607,
p. 3.

_ 123 Ib._ p. 39.

124 Del Bene, _Decreta et Constitt. Pontif._ in his _De Offic. Inquis._
ii. 647.

125 [That this is no mere abstract theory, even in quite recent days,
may be seen from Blanco White’s account of his mother’s agony of
mind when she began to suspect his opinions and feared it might
become her duty to denounce him to the Inquisition.—TR.]

_ 126 Decr._ v. 7, 9, and Lucius III. and Alexander IV. in Lib. vi. 5. 2.
4.

_ 127 Ib._ 5, 2, 5.

128 Carsetti, _Storia del Regno di Vittorio Amadeo di Savoia_, Torino,
1856, p. 178. The Pope said it was “cosa da non potersi dir senza
lagrime.”

129 Guerra, _Pontif. Constit._ i. 177.

130 See, _e.g._, Tartarotti, _Apologia del Congresso_, etc., p. 176.

_ 131 Decr._ ii. 24, 27.

132 D’Achery, _Spicileg._ iii. 714. [“Vobis et successoribus vestris
Regibus et Reginis Franciæ in perpetuum indulgemus, ut confessor
religiosus vel sæcularis quem vestrûm vel eorum quilibet duxerit
eligendnm, vota per vos forsitan jam emissa, _ac per vos et
successores vestros in posterum emittenda_ ... necnon juramenta per
vos præstita, _et per vos et eos præstanda in posterum_, quæ vos et
illi _servare commode non possitis_, vobis et eis commutare valeat
in alia opera pietatis.” Two cases are reserved, viz., vows of
chastity and _vows taken to the Pope_.—TR.]

133 Bzov. _Annal. Eccl._ an. 1555, p. 306, ed. Colon.

134 Dodd, _Church History of England_, iii. 288; _Tractat. Dogmat. et
Scholast. de Ecclesiâ_, Romæ, 1782, ii. 245.

135 D’Acheray, _Spicileg._ iii. 721.

_ 136 Acta Sanct. Bolland._ Ap. 23, p. 157.

137 Spondani, _Annal. Eccl. Contin._ ii. 595.

_ 138 Decr. de Transl._ c. ii. 3, 4. [Cf. _Janus_, pp. 55, 56.]

_ 139 Decr._ iv. 1, 16.

_ 140 Dist._ 81, c. 15.

_ 141 Concil. Gangrens._ can. 4.

_ 142 Concil._ ed. Labbé, t. xiii. pp. 1322, 3.

143 See Amort, _De Indulg._ i. 146.

144 D’Argentré, _Collectio Judiciorum_, Paris, 1728, iii. 297.

_ 145 Clementin._ i. 5, De Usuris, tit. 5.

146 [On this subject, as also on persecution, the reader may profitably
consult _Papal Infallibility and Persecution; Papal Infallibility_
and _Usury_. By an English Catholic. Macmillan, 1870.—TR.]

147 [This had been protested against by the minority. Cf. _supr._ pp.
327-8.]

148 The text of the speech, as it is now printed in the journals, has
been subsequently corrected and toned down.

149 “Il est sans doute de certaines fonctions où, tenant, pour ainsi
dire, la place de Dieu, nous semblons être participants de sa
connaissance, aussi bien que de son autorité,” etc.—Lemontey, p. 151
(éd. de Bruxelles).

150 1 Cor. ii. 14.

_ 151 Pachym._ II. 20, ed. Bonn.

152 According to a letter of his which reached Breslau the 12th July,
permission to depart has been refused him.

153 [The same strange confusion of thought seems still to prevail among
some fervid infallibilists of the English and Irish Episcopate, to
judge from their pastorals issued since the decree of July 18.—TR.]

154 Meanwhile the _Unita_ of July 15 has already begun to indicate the
wholesome political fruits which may be looked for from the dogma of
infallibility. Gallicanism, which demanded fixed guarantees against
papal decisions, has paved the way, according to Margotti, for
constitutionalism and parliamentarism; for after a Pope whose
decrees _ex cathedrâ_ are not irreformable, comes a king limited by
the Constitution, and then the era of parliamentary revolutions and
political storms is introduced. But now the bright example set by
the Bishops in their submission to the infallible Pope will restore
not France only, but the whole of Europe. From them the nations will
learn to submit as children to their sovereigns, the kingdom of
unrighteousness will pass away, and the kingdom of God succeed. That
is plain speaking; absolutism in the Church will lead to absolutism
in the State. Margotti then surrenders himself to the most brilliant
hopes, predicts unprecedented miracles, and records those which have
been already wrought for infallibility during the Council, or will
immediately be wrought. We cannot venture to withhold them from our
readers. First, it seemed impossible to attain an agreement of the
Bishops on the proclamation of infallibility; all wanted to speak,
and the discussion seemed likely to be endless. But the Holy Ghost
unexpectedly interposed; above sixty Bishops waved their right to
speak, and the _Schema_ was voted and approved. Secondly, a great
opposition of all the governments was feared, who only kept quiet
while they watched the quarrels of the Bishops themselves in the
Council. But scarcely had the Bishops shown themselves unanimous,
when the Hohenzollern question turned up, which absorbs everybody’s
attention, and leaves the Church in peace. The third miracle is
still in the future—the dogma will suddenly dissipate the menaces of
war, because the word of God, like the Son of God, only comes into
the world in the midst of universal peace.

155 The impending war led to its being held earlier.

156 [On the essential connection between the infallibility and the
impeccability of the Popes, see _Janus_, pp. 113 _sqq._, and Maret,
_Du Concile Général_, vol. ii. ch. 13.—TR.]

157 [The decree of Constance defines that “every lawfully convoked
Œcumenical Council representing the Church derives its authority
immediately from Christ, and every one, the Pope included, is
subject to it in matters of faith, in the healing of schism, and the
reformation of the Church.” It was carried in full Council without a
dissentient voice.—TR.]

158 [That in fact is exactly what Antonelli calls it in his
circular.—TR.]

159 This is emphatically asserted in a sermon preached last year at
Kensington by Archbishop Manning, where he says, speaking in the
Pope’s name, “I claim to be the Supreme Judge and director of the
consciences of men; of the peasant that tills the field and the
prince that sits on the throne; of the household that lives in the
shade of privacy _and the Legislature that makes laws for
kingdoms_—I am the sole last Supreme Judge of what is right and
wrong.”

160 These letters are taken from the _Journal des Débats_ of May 6 and
11. The Bishops of Marseilles and Montpellier are said to be the
writers.

161 Lire: spartiates.

162 From the _Gazette de France_ of June 28. The Vicar-General of an
eminent French Bishop, who had been at Rome, is the reputed author.