Chapter III: Front Matter (3)

The value and importance of this great mission cannot be overrated. It is awful to think what would have been the condition of the English-speaking races, in a religious point of view, if Ireland had shared in the English apostacy. Scarcely a Catholic voice would be heard amongst those seventy or eighty millions now using that language, who occupy so large a portion of the Earth, and in another century, according to the ratio of their growth, may become two or four hundred millions, or even more. The very remnant that has continued faithful in England might have followed in the wake of their predecessors, had not the influence of Ireland caused the sword of persecution to be sheathed, and civil intolerance to cease at last, and thus the temptation to be removed which had proved fatal to so many. In that vast empire, or the empires that may rise out of its fragments—for, in more than one place are foundations of empires laid which would grow with giant growth, even though the power of the mother country were paralysed to-morrow—the holy sacrifice would not be offered up, and thus the prophecy not fulfilled, which foretold that a clean oblation would be offered from the rising of the sun to the going down thereof. That union of the Christian family for which the Saviour prayed before he suffered, and which he left as a mark by which men would know his followers, would not be exhibited to the world. Christianity would be confounded with the products of these latter ages of so-called “light”, and be thought, like the appliances of steam and the contrivances of machinery, to owe its power to the genius of the Anglo-Saxon race, instead of deriving it from Him who died on Calvary. For their Christianity, by its very name, would proclaim that the work of Christ had failed, until the press and the “march of light” had come to its aid. Religion, in a word, instead of being a divine institution, would appear and be amongst them but a brilliant work or invention of man, and, therefore, in the supernatural order, but a brilliant delusion, not an institution which the mercy of God transplanted from Heaven, and made to stand, and to grow, and to bless, and produce fruit, in every age and in every form of society.

But, in preserving the faith of the Irish race, God has provided a leaven of truth for these masses. By the side of systems of religion which men have devised, stands the everlasting Church—that Church which, as Macaulay remarked, is the only connecting link between the civilization of the ancient and modern worlds—the Church which taught the name of Christ to every nation that knows him, even to those who afterwards fell from the fullness of truth—the Church which Augustine brought to England, and Patrick to Ireland—the Church that raised the dignity of the poor, and humbled the pride of the high, placing all on the level of the Gospel—the Church that claims no new inventions, but is itself an invention of God, infinitely surpassing all inventions of man, holding out nothing to the nineteenth, which it did not present to the first, to the tenth, and to every other century, but presenting to all the faith and institutions of God, able to save all, to elevate all, to bring all into one fold, that all may be united in one happiness in Heaven.

Is not this great result worth all the sufferings which Ireland has endured? The ways of God appear often circuitous. But in their circuitous course they are everywhere fraught with blessings. The children of Ireland suffered; yet, even in their sufferings they were blessed. He himself pronounced “blessed those who suffer persecution for justice’s sake”; for in their trials they redeemed their own souls. But they were doubly blessed, because they were preserving the ark of God, and carrying it through the waters of tribulation to bless more amply unborn and numerous generations. The ways of God are circuitous, and though, like the course of the planets, they sometimes seem to us to retrograde, they are always onward. The sufferings of Ireland at a time seemed without a purpose, or even the very contrary to what we might have expected for so faithful a people. But, who knows what might have been the result, if justice and humanity had marked the course of the English nation towards Ireland? Who knows but the temptation to the latter to be drawn into apostacy would have been too powerful? Had Apostate England dealt generously or justly with Catholic Ireland, who knows if, in the alliances that would have been formed, she would have been equally steadfast in her faith? And though for a long time confiscations, and plunder, and persecution, and slaughter, and even now, harsh treatment condemning her sons to famine and banishment, have been the effects of the English connection; if these have been the means of creating a barrier that prevented the spread of heresy amongst her sons, has too great a price been paid for the “pearl” that has been bought? When, particularly, the cross borne by the children of Ireland shall have been erected in the Western and Southern Hemispheres, and flourishing Churches in Catholic unity established under its shade, where, but for the fidelity of our fathers, heterodoxy alone would have had sway, shall we not say that little indeed were their sufferings compared to the value of such an Apostolate of Empires?

What is any Earthly mission compared to this? What is even the spreading of civilization with its highest privileges, compared to the spreading of the saving institutions of the Gospel? Even in this world virtue is a thing infinitely superior to mere physical power. The man who does God’s will, whose soul is adorned with grace, is an object of complacency with his Maker, and enjoys his esteem infinitely more, than he who can control the hidden powers of nature, and make them subservient to his will, but does not make his own will conform to the great law that should govern it—subjection to the will of God. When Earth, and all that is of Earth, shall have passed away, the proudest human achievements will be seen to have been as nothing, while those who shall have caused God’s name to be glorified, shall shine as bright stars “unto perpetual eternities”.

This mission, however, has its duties as well as its dignity. What will it avail us to be the sons of martyred sires who sacrificed all for God, if we barter the faith for which they died, for some paltry bauble, or fail to transmit it to those under our charge? Will not the constancy and sufferings of our fathers be a reproach to us before God and man? Will they not pronounce judgment upon us if, while we honour their heroic deeds, we ourselves display nothing but pusillanimity? And even though we preserve our faith, will not this be rather to our shame, if we do not endeavour to practise the virtues which it teaches? When the salt has lost its savour, it is good for nothing any more but to be cast out, and to be trodden on by men. The higher the vocation of God, the lower will be the degradation of those who fail to correspond. They will be despised, and justly despised, by God and by men.

We can see in the fate of other nations the consequences of infidelity to a noble mission. Spain and Portugal were once great powers. They achieved great things at home and abroad. The sails of their commerce whitened every sea. The most distant lands acknowledged their might. They, too, were missionary nations. They carried the faith to the East and to the West, and in both hemispheres planted the cross on continents and islands where Christ was before unknown. God may be said to have given them power for this purpose. It was mainly through their agency that the missionary work, which repaired the losses of the Church in Europe, was carried on for two hundred years.

But the rulers of these countries listened to wicked counsels. On _one and the same_ dark day did Spain, on another did Portugal, command the most strenuous heralds of the cross to be seized and bound in chains. The galleons that were wont to bear over the deep the treasures of Asia and America, and pour them into the laps of the mother countries, or to carry their commands and the means of enforcing them to the most distant lands, were now spreading their sails over every ocean and sea, in the inglorious work of conveying to home prisons, or into exile, the truest missionaries of the cross. On that day these nations renounced their noble mission, and the power that was given to enable them to carry it out soon departed.

The immediate agencies producing their downfall, as well as those that gave rise to their power, may, indeed, be seen in operation before the existence of the causes to which I have attributed them, but not before these were known to God. Now, he frequently prepares, by a long process, the instruments both of his rewards and his punishments, and holds them ready to be conferred on the virtuous, or poured forth on the head of the criminal, long before the fidelity of the one be tested, or the guilt of the other be consummated. Spain and Portugal thus fell, if you will, by immediate agencies long in operation, but by agencies over which God ruled, and which He directed according to his own wise counsels. They fell, and in their humbled condition, mocked by the remains of ancient greatness, they teach all the important lesson, that the greater the high calling given by God, the greater the punishment of those who prove untrue.

Were we also to prove faithless to the mission which God has assigned us, we know not what punishment may await us, even in this world. The trials through which our race has passed, and is passing, may seem severe; but, they are trials permitted by a loving father. May we never deserve that he should scourge us in his _great_ anger. We might then find, like the Jewish people, that to suffer for righteousness’ sake from the hands of men, is sweet, compared to the gall and wormwood mixed in the cup of those who fall into the hands of an avenging God.

On this day, when the Church calls on us to commemorate the heroic virtues and the glorious deeds of our great Apostle, I would fain say to every son of Ireland—to every one in whose veins Irish blood flows, no matter where he himself was born: Let us live worthy of our ancestry, of an ancestry which is the same for all, and is a noble one, noble in that which is the noblest thing man can rejoice in—virtue and fidelity to God. We ourselves are called in a special manner to do honour to our faith by spreading it amongst nations that are destined to occupy the highest position in the social scale. Let us be faithful to our calling. Let us show ourselves worthy sons of the martyred dead. Let us make sure, like them, whatever else we fail in, not to fail in transmitting the faith to those entrusted to our charge, never exposing it to danger for any advantage, much less for the trifling things that may be gained here by want of fidelity. Transmit, carefully, the faith, first of all, but with faith spare no effort that you yourselves, and those committed to your care, grow also in every other virtue. Nay, endeavour so to live that _all men_ may learn to love the faith which is the spring of your actions, and thus glorify and love that God who is the “Author and Finisher” of that Faith.

LITURGICAL QUESTIONS. (_FROM M. BOUIX’S __“__REVUE DES SCIENCES ECCLESIASTIQUES__”_).

1. Is it lawful or obligatory to insert, at the letter N, in the collect _A cunctis_, the name of the patron of the locality (if there be one) when the titular of the church is the Blessed Virgin or a mystery of our Saviour?

2. Is it right to place on the corner of the altar the finger-towel, which in some churches is fastened to the altar-cloth, from which it hangs suspended?

3. Is there any obligation to ring the bell at the Sanctus and at the Elevation, even when there is no one at Mass?

4. Is it lawful for a priest to use a cincture of the kind generally used by bishops?

1. The name of the titular of the church in which the Mass is said is that which ought to be inserted at the letter N in the collect _A cunctis_. In the application of this general rule various cases may occur; the title may be a mystery of our Lord or of our Blessed Lady; or it may be a saint already named in the collect—for example, Saint Peter or Saint Paul; or Mass may be said in an oratory which has no titular saint. The following are the rules to be observed in such cases:

1o. That it is the name of the titular saint which is to be inserted at the letter N is clear from the following decrees:

1 DECREE. _Question._ “In missali romano praecipitur, ut post
nomina Apostolorum Petri et Pauli, in oratione _A cunctis_, etc.,
dicatur nomen patroni praecipui illius ecclesiae, seu diocesis. In
Hispania est praecipuus illius regni patronus B. Jacobus apostolus
et ex concessione Apostolica in ecclesia dioecesi Guadicensi est
patronus specialis S. Torquatus, B. Jacobi apostoli discipulus, et
ejusdem ecclesiae et civitatis primus episcopus. Quaeritur: An in
praedicta oratione _A cunctis_ debeat dici nomen B. Jacobi
apostoli, an B. Torquati?” _Answer._ “In oratione _A cunctis_ post
nomina sanctorum apostolorum Petri et Pauli, nomen Torquati
tanquam Ecclesiae cathedralis Guadicensis Patroni dumtaxat
ponendum esse”. (Decree of 22 January, 1678, No. 2856, q. 8.)

2 DECREE. _Questions._ “... 15. S. Jacobus est patronus
universalis regnorum Hispaniae, sancti vero martyres Stemeterius
et Caledonius fratres sunt patroni particulares ecclesiae
cathedralis, et totius dioecesis Santanderiensis rite electi, et
novissime approbati a S. R. C. Quaeritur igitur: Quis ex his
patronis debeat nominari ... in oratione _A cunctis_, quando in
missis haec oratio dicitur in ecclesia matrice et in caeteris
dioecesis? 16. In casu, quo ob dignitatis praestantiam nominari
debeat S. Jacobus, quaeritur an ... exprimi etiam possint nomina
SS. Stemeterii et Caledonii in praedicta oratione ..., praecipue
in ecclesia matrice ubi sacra eorum capita ... venerantur? Et si
negative, supplicatur pro gratia ad promovendum cultum qui ipsos
decet in ecclesia cathedrali ac tota dioecesi ratione sui
specialissimi patronatus”. _Answer._ “Ad 15. In qualibet ecclesia
nominandum esse patronum seu titularem proprium ejusdem ecclesiae.
Ad 16. Provisum in praecedenti”. (Decree of 23 January, 1793, No.
4448, q. 15 and 16.)

3 DECREE. _Question._ “An patronus nominandus in oratione _A
cunctis_ intelligi debeat patronus principalis loci?” _Answer._
“Nominandus titularis Ecclesiae”. (Decree of 12 November, 1831,
No. 4669, q. 31.)

2o. If the titular of the church has been already named in the collect _A cunctis_, no name is to be inserted at the letter N. The same holds if the Mass happens to be that of the same saint. This rule depends on the following decision:

“Quis nominandus sit ad litteram N. si patronus vel titularis jam
nominatus sit in illa oratione, aut de eo celebrata sit missa?”
_Answer._ “Si jam fuerit nominatus omittenda nova nominatio”.
(Ibid.)

3_o_. If the oratory in which the Mass is said have no titular saint, the name of the patron of the locality is to be inserted. This rule is proved from a decree of 12th December, 1840, No. 4897, No. 2:

“Sacerdos celebrans in oratorio publico vel privato quod non habet
sanctum patronum vel titularem, an debeat in oratione _A cunctis_
ad litteram N. nominare sanctum patronum vel titularem ecclesiae
parochialis intra cujus limites sita sunt oratoria, vel sanctum
patronum ecclesiae cui adscriptus est, vel potius omnem ulteriorem
nominationem omittere?” _Answer._ “Patronum civitatis, vel loci
nominandum esse”.

4o. If the titular of the church be a mystery of the life of our Lord, or of our Lady, authors differ in opinion whether the name of the patron of the locality is to be inserted at the letter N, or whether no addition should be made. M. de Conny is for the latter opinion, and his authority is a safe guide for us. The second rule we have laid down is sufficient to show that no name is to be inserted in cases where the title of the church is a mystery of the Blessed Virgin, seeing that the august Mother of God is always named in the body of the prayer. The words of the conclusion are enough perhaps to excuse from the obligation of naming the patron of the locality in cases where the church is dedicated to a mystery of the life of our Lord.

2. The usage here alluded to is not only not becoming, but it is also contrary to the Rubric of the Missal. (part i., tit. xx.):

“Ab eadem parte epistolae ... ampullae vitreae vini et aquae, cum
pelvicula et manutergio mundo in fenestella, seu in parva mensa ad
haec praeparata. Super altare nihil omnino ponatur, quod ad Missae
sacrificium vel ipsius altaris ornatum non pertineat”.

3. The sole reason for ringing a bell at Mass is to give a signal to the faithful. “Ad excitandos circumstantes”, says Gavantus (t. i. part i., tit. XX., l. c.), “ad laetitiam exprimendam et ad cultum sanctissimi Sacramenti adhibetur campanula”. Other writers coincide with this opinion. It seems but natural, therefore, not to ring the bell when there are no assistants present, and when there is no need of any signal. Besides, it is clearly the teaching of authors, and even of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, that whenever a signal is not required, the bell is not to be rung. Thus, the following decision forbids the bell to be rung during the celebration of the divine office in the choir, at least in certain circumstances:

“Exposito in S. R. C. ecclesiam collegiatam civitatis Senarum
habere chorum adeo subjectum oculis populi, et tali loco positum,
ut canonici dicto choro pro divinis celebrandis, et praecipue
Missae cantatae assistentibus, omnino altaria ejusdem coliegiatae
pernecesse inspiciantur, et exposito quoque tempore, quo canonici
choro ut supra assistunt, consuevisse in dictis altaribus
celebrari Missas privatas et sine scandalo prohiberi non posse:
ideo supplicatum fuit pro declaratione: an ipsi canonici in
elevationibus quae fiunt in Missis privatis, genuflectere
teneantur?” _Answer._ “Non esse genuflectendum, ne sacra, quibus
assistunt, per actum privatum interrumpantur, sed ad evitandum
scandalum, quod in populo et adstantibus causari possit ob non
genuflectionem esse omittendam pulsationem campanulae in
elevatione Sanctissimi, in dictis Missis privatis.” (Decret of 5
March 1667, No. 2397.)

Nor, as a general rule, is the bell rung when the Blessed Sacrament is exposed, for then it is unnecessary to summon the faithful to adore the Eucharist. “During the private Masses”, says the _Instructio Clementina_, “that are celebrated during the exposition, the bell is not to be rung”. Cavalieri, commenting on this passage, says: “Ex rubricarum praescripto ... interdicuntur”. He is of opinion that this rule of the _Instructio_ regards only low Masses, but Gardellini holds that it refers also to High Masses:

“Non erat, cur instructio etiam Missas solemnes commemoraret, pro
quibus Rubrica, non jubet, ut in privatis, eadem pulsari ad finem
prefationis, et ad elevationem Sacramenti. Romae saltem in
majoribus ecclesiis obtinet mos etiam non pulsandi, praeterquam in
Missis solemnibus pro defunctis: gravis organorum sonitus supplet
vices tintinnabuli, et populi adstantis excitat attentionem”.

From all this it is clear that the bell is not to be rung whenever there is no signal to be given. This is certainly the case when there is no one to assist at Mass.

4. The cincture for the use of a priest does not differ from that for the use of a bishop. It may be made either of linen thread or silk, but it is better that it should be of linen. It may be either white or of the colour of the vestments. These rules are drawn from two decrees of the Sacred Congregation:

1 DECREE. _Question._ “An sacerdotes in sacrificio Missae uti
possint cingulo serico?” _Answer._ “Congruentius uti cingulo
lineo”. (22 Jan. 1701, No. 3575, q. 7.)

2 DECREE. _Question._ “An cingulum, tertium indumentum
sacerdotale, possit esse colons paramentorum; an necessario debeat
esse album?” _Answer._ “Posse uti cingulo colore paramentorum”—(8
Jun. 1709, No. 3809, q. 4.)

DOCUMENTS.

I. Condemnation Of Dr. Froschammer’s Works.

Venerabili Fratri Gregorio Archiepiscopo

Monacensi Et Frisingensi

Pius PP. IX.

Venerabilis Frater, Salutem et Apostolicam Benedictionem. Gravissimas inter acerbitates, quibus undique premimur, in hac tanta temporum perturbatione et iniquitate vehementer dolemus, cum noscamus, in variis Germaniae regionibus reperiri nonnullos catholicos etiam viros, qui sacram theologiam ac philosophiam tradentes minime dubitant quamdam inauditam adhuc in Ecclesia docendi scribendique libertatem inducere, novasque et omnino improbandas opiniones palam publiceque profiteri, et in vulgus disseminare. Hinc non levi moerore affecti fuimus, Venerabilis Frater ubi tristissimus ad Nos venit nuntius, presbyterum Jacobum Frohschammer in ista Monacensi Academia philosophiae doctorem hujusmodi docendi scribendique licentiam proe ceteris adhibere, eumque suis operibus in lucem editis perniciosissimos tueri errores. Nulla igitur interposita mora, Nostrae Congregationi libris notandis praepositae mandavimus, ut praecipua volumina, quae ejusdem presbyteri Frohschammer nomine circumferuntur, cum maxima diligentia sedalo perpenderet, et omnia ad Nos referret. Quae volumina germanice scripta titulum habent—_Introductio in Philosophiam—De Libertate scientiae—Athenaeum_—quorum primum anno 1858, alterum anno 1861, tertium vero vertente hoc anno 1862 istis Monacensibus typis in lucem est editum. Itaque eadem Congregatio Nostris mandatis diligenter obsequens summo studio accuratissimum examen instituit, omnibusque sem el iterumque serio ac mature ex more discussis et perpensis judicavit, auctorem in pluribus non recte sentire, ejusque doctrinam a veritate catholica aberrare. Atque id ex duplici praesertim parte, et primo quidem propterea quad auctor tales humanae rationi tribuat vires, quae rationi ipsi minime competunt, secundo vero, quod eam omnia opinandi, et quidquid semper audendi libertatem eidem rationi concedat, ut ipsius Ecclesiae jura, officium, et auctoritas de media omnino tollantur. Namque auctor imprimis edocet, philosophiam, si recta ejus habeatur notio, posse non solum percipere et intelligere ea christina dogmata, quae naturalis ratio cum fide habet communia (tamquam commune scilicet perceptionis objectum) verum etiam ea, quae christianam religionem fidemque maxime et proprie efficiunt, ipsumque scilicet supernaturalem hominis finem, et ea omnia, quae ad ipsum spectant, atque sacratissimum Dominicae Incarnationis mysterium ad humanae rationis et philosophiae provinciam pertinere, rationemque, dato hoc objecto suis propriis principiis scienter ad ea posse pervenire. Etsi vero aliquam inter haec et illa dogmata distinctionem auctor inducat, et haec ultima minori jure rationi attribuat, tamen clare aperteque docet, etiam haec contineri inter illa, quae veram propriamque scientiae seu philosophiae materiam constituunt. Quocirca ex ejusdem auctoris sententia concludi omnino possit ac debeat, rationem in abditissimis etiam divinae Sapientiae ac Bonitatis, immo etiam et liberae ejus voluntatis mysteriis, licet posito revelationis objecto posse ex seipsa, non jam ex divinae auctoritatis principio sed ex naturalibus suis principiis et viribus ad scientiam seu certitudinem pervenire. Quae auctoris doctrina quam falsa sit et erronea nemo est, qui christianae doctrinae rudimentis vel leviter imbutus non illico videat, planeque sentiat. Namque si isti philosophiae cultores vera ac sola rationis et philosophiae disciplinae tuerentur principia et jura, debitis certe laudibus essent prosequendi. Siquidem vera ac sana philosophia nobilissimum suum locum habet, cum ejusdem philosophiae sit, veritatem diligenter inquirere, humanamque rationem licet primi hominis culpa obtenebratam, nullo tamen modo extinctam recte ac sedulo excolere, illustrare, ejusque cognitionis objectum, ac permultas veritates percipere, bene intellegere, promovere, earumque plurimas, uti Dei existentiam, naturam, attributa, quae etiam fides credenda proponit, per argumenta ex suis principiis petita demonstrare, vindicare, defendere, atque hoc modo viam munire ad haec dogmata fide rectius tenenda, et ad illa etiam reconditiora dogmata, quae sola fide percipi primum possunt, ut illa aliquo modo a ratione intelligantur. Haec quidem agere, atque in his versari debet severa et pulcherrima verae philosophiae scientia. Ad quae praestanda si viri docti in Germaniae Academiis enitantur pro singulari inclytae illius nationis ad severiores gravioresque disciplinas excolendas propensione, eorum studium a Nobis comprobatur et commendatur, cum in sacrarum rerum utilitatem profectumque convertant, quae illi ad suos usus invenerint. At vero in hoc gravissimo sane negotio tolerare numquam possumus, ut omnia emere permisceantur, utque ratio illas etiam res, quae ad fidem pertinent, occupet atque perturbet, cum certissimi, omnibusque notissimi sint fines, ultra quos ratio numquam suo jure est progressa, vel progredi potest. Atque ad hujusmodi dogmata ea omnia maxime et apertissime spectant, quae supernaturalem hominis elevationem, ac supernaturale ejus cum Deo commercium respiciunt atque ad hunc finem revelata noscuntur. Et sane cum haec dogmata sint supra naturam, idcirco naturali ratione, ac naturalibus principiis attingi non possunt. Numquam siquidem ratio suis naturalibus principiis ad hujusmodi dogmata scienter tractanda effici potest idonea. Quod si haec isti temere asseverare audeant sciant, se certe non a quorumlibet doctorum opinione, sed a communi, et numquam immutata Ecclesiae doctrina recedere. Ex divinis enim Litteris, et sanctorum Patrum traditione constat. Dei quidem existentiam, multasque alias veritates, ab iis etiam qui fidem nondum susceperunt, naturali rationis lumine cognosci, sed illa reconditiora dogmata Deum solum manifestasse dum notum facere voluit, _mysterium, quod absconditum fuit a saeculis et generationibus_(_4_)_ et ita quidem, ut postquam multifariam multisque modis olim locutus esset patribus in prophetis novissime Nobis locutus est in Filio, per quem fecit et saecula_(_5_)_ ... Deum enim nemo vidit umquam. Unigenitus Filius, qui est in sinu Paris ipse ennarravit._(6) Quapropter Apostolus, qui gentes Deum per ea, quae facta sunt cognovisse testatur, disserens de _gratia et veritate_(_7_)_ quae per Jesum Christum facta est, loquimur, iniquit, Dei sapientiam in mysterio, quae abscondita est ... quam nemo principum hujus saeculi cognovit ... Nobis autem revelavit Deus per Spiritum Suum ... Spiritus enim omnia scrutatur, etiam profunda Dei. Quis enim hominum scit quae sunt hominis, nisi Spiritus hominis, qui in ipso est? Ita et quae Dei sunt nemo cognovit, nisi Spiritus Dei._(8) Hisce aliisque fere innumeris divinis eloquiis inhaerentes SS. Patres in Ecclesiae doctrina tradenda continenter distinguere curarunt rerum divinarum notionem, quae naturalis intelligentiae vi omnibus est communis ab illarum rerum notitia, quae per Spiritum Sanctum fide suscipitur, et constanter docuerunt, per hanc ea nobis in Christo revelari mysteria, quae non solam humanam philosophiam, verum etiam Angelicam naturalem intelligentiam transcendunt, quaeque etiamsi divina revelatione innotuerint, et ipsa fide fuerint suscepta, tamen sacro ad hue ipsius fidei velo tecta et obscura caligine obvoluta permanent, quamdiu in hac mortali vita peregrinamur a Domino.(9) Ex his omnibus patet alienam omnino esse a catholicae Ecclesiae doctrina sententiam, qua idem Frohschammer asserere non dubitat, omnia indiscriminatim christianae religionis dogmata esse objectum naturalis scientiae, seu philosophiae, et humanam rationem historice tantum excultam, modo haec dogmata ipsi rationi tanquam objectum proposita fuerint, posse ex suis naturalibus viribus et principio ad veram de omnibus etiam reconditioribus dogmatibus scientiam pervenire. Nunc vero in memoratis ejusdem auctoris scriptis alia domanitur sententia, quae catholicae Ecciesiae doctrinae, ac sensui plane adversatur. Etenim eam philosophiae tribuit libertatem, quae non scientiae libertas, sed omnio reprobanda et intoleranda philosophiae licentia sit appellanda. Quadam enim distinctione inter philosophum et philosophiam facta, tribuit philosopho jus et officium se submittendi auctoritati, quam veram ipse probaverit, sed utrumque philosophiae ita denegat, ut nulla doctrinae revelatae ratione habita asserat, ipsam nunquam debere ac posse Auctoritati se submittere. Quod esset toet crandum et forte admittendum, si haec dicerentur de jure tantum, quod habit philosophia suis principiis, seu methodo, ac suis conclusionibus, uti, sicut et aliae scientiae, ac si ejus libertas consisteret in hoc suo jure utendo, ita ut nihil in sea dmitteret, quod non fuerit ab ipsa suis conditionibus acquisitum, aut fuerit ipsi alienum. Sed haec justa philosophiae libertas suos limites noscere et experiri debet. Nunquam enim non solum philosopho, verum etiam philosophiae licebit, aut aliquid contrarium dicere iis, quae divina revelatio, et Ecclesia docet, aut aliquid ex eisdem in dubium vocare propterea quod non intelligit, aut judicium non suscipere, quod Ecclesiae auctoritas de aliqua philosophiae conclusione, quae hujusque libera erat, proferre constituit. Accedit etiam, ut idem auctor philosophiae libertatem, seu potius effrenatam licentiam tam acriter, tam temere propugnet, ut minime vereatur asserere, Ecclesiam non solum non debere in philosophiam unquam animadvertere, verum etiam debere ipsius philosophiae tolerare erores, eique relinquere, ut ipsa se corrigat, ex quo evenit, ut philosophi hanc philosophiae libertatem necessario participent, atque ita etiam ipsi ab omni lege solvantur. Ecquis non videt quam vehementer sit rejicienda, reprobanda, et omnini damnanda hujusmodi Frohschammer sententia atque doctrina? Etenim Ecclesia ex divina sua institutione et divinae fidei depositum integrum inviolatumque diligentissime custodire, et animarum saluti summo studio debet continenter advigilare, ac summa cura ea omnia amovere et eliminare, quae vel fidei adversari, vel animarum salutem quovis modo in discrimen adducere possunt. Quocirca Ecclesia ex potestate sibi a divino suo Auctore commissa non solum jus, sed officium praesertim habet non tolerandi, sed pro scribendi ac damnandi omnes erores, si ita fedei integritas, et animarum salus postulaverint, et omni philosopho, qui Ecclesiae filius esse velit, ac etiam philosophiae officium incumbit nihil unquam dicere contra ea, quae Ecclesia docet, et ea retractare, de quibus eos Ecclesia monuerit. Sententiam autem, quae contrarium edocet omnino erroneam, et ipsi fidei. Ecclesiae ejusque auctoritati vel maxime injuriosam esse edicimus et declaramus. Quibus omnibus accurate perpensis, de eorumdrm VV. FF. NN. S. R. E. Cardinalium Congregationis libris notandis praepositae consilio, ac motu proprio, et certa scientia matura deliberatione Nostra, deque Apostolicae Nostrae potestatis plenitudine praedictos librus presbyteri Frohschammer tamquam continentes propositiones et doctrinas respective falsas, erroneas, Ecclesiae, ejusque actoritati ac juribus injuriosas reprobamus, damnamus, ac pro reprobatis et damnatis ab omnibus haberi volumus, atque eidem Congregationi mandamus, ut eosdem libros in indicem prohibitorum librorum referat. Dum vero haec Tibi significamus, Venerabilis Frater, non possumus non exprimere magnum animi Nostri Dolorem cum videamus hunc filium eorumdem librorum auctorem, qui ceteroquin de Ecclesia benemereri potuisset, infelici quodam cordis impete misere abreptum in vias abire, quae ad salutem non ducunt, ac magis magisque a recto tramite aberrare. Cum enim alius ejus liber de animarum origine prius fuisset damnatus non solum se minime submisit, verum etiam non extimuit, eumdem errorem in his etiam libridenuo docere, et Nostram Indicis Congregationem contumeliis cumen lare, ac multa alia contra Ecclesiae agendi rationem temere mendaciterque pronuntiare. Quae omnia talia sunt, ut iis merito atque optimo jure indignare potuissemus. Sed nolumus adhuc paternae Nostrae charitatis viscera erga illum deponere, et idcirco Te Venerabilis Frater, excitamus, ut velis eidem manifestare cor Nostrum paternum, et acerbiseimum dolorem, cujus ipse est causa, ac simul ipsum saluberrimis monitis hortari et monere, ut Nostram, quae communis est omnium Patris vocem audiat, ac resipiscat, quemadmodum catholicae Ecclesiae filium decet, et ita nos omnes laetitia afficiat, ac tandem ipse felixiter experiatur quam jucundum sit, non vana quadam et perniciosa libertate gaudere, sed Domini, adhaerere, cugus jugum suave est, et onus leve, cujus eloquo casta, igne examinata, cujus judicia vera, justificata in semetipsa, et cujus universae viae misericordia et veritas. Denique hac etiam occasione libentissime utimur, ut iterum testemur et confirmemus praecipuam Nostram in Te benevolentiam. Cujus quoque pignus esse volumus Apostolicam Benedictionem, quam intimo cordis affectu Tibi ipsi, Venerabilis Frater, et gregi Tuae curae commisso paremanter impertimus. Datum Romaae apud S. Petrum die 11 Decembris anno 1862, Pontificatus Nostri anno decimo septimo.

Pius PP. IX.

II. Decree Of The Congregation Of Rites.

The Roman ritual, speaking of the Blessed Eucharist, prescribes as follows: “Lampades coram eo plures vel saltem una diu notucque colluceat”. These lamps are to be fed with olive oil, which the Church has adopted for mystic reasons in so many of her sacred rites. But in many countries the difficulty of procuring olive oil is considerable, and the expense greater than small churches can bear. Several prelates of France, moved by these reasons, asked permission to burn in the lamps before the Blessed Sacrament oils other than from olives. The following is the answer:

_Decretum: Plurium Dioeceseum._

Nonnulli Reverendissimi Galliarum Antistites serio perpendentes in multis suarum Dioeceseum Ecclesiis difficile admodum et nonnisi magnis sumptibus comparari posse oleum olivarum ad nutriendam diu noctuque saltem unam lampadam ante Sanctissimum Eucharistiae Sacramentum, ab Apostolica Sede declarari petierunt utrum in casu, attentis difficultatibus et Ecclesiarum paupertate, oleo, olivarum substitue possint alea olea quae ex vegetalibus habentur, ipso non excluso petroleo. Sacra porro Rituum Congregatio, etsi semper sollicita ut etiam in hac parte quod usque ab Ecclesiae primordiis circa usum olei ex olivis inductum est, ob mysticas significationes retineatur; attamen silentio praeterire minime censuit rationes ab iisdem Episcopis prolatas; ac proinde exquisito prius Voto alterius ex Apostolicarum Coeremoniarum Magistris, subscriptus Cardinalis Praefectus ejusdem Sacrae Congregationis rem omnem proposuit in Ordinariis Commitiis ad Vaticanum hodierna die habitis. Eminentissimi autem et Reverendissimi Patres Sacris tuendis Ritibus praepositi, omnibus accurate perpensis ac diligentissime examinatis, rescribendum censuerunt: Generatim utendum esse oleo olevarum: _ubi vero haberi nequeatt remittendum prudentiae Episcoporum ut lampades nutriantur ex aliis oleis quantum fieri possit vegetabilibus_ die 9 Julii 1864.

Facta postmodum de praemissis Sanctissimo Domino Nostro Pio Papae IX. per infrascriptum Secretarium fideli relatione, Sanctitas Sua sententiam Sacrae Congregationis ratam habuit et confirmavit. Die 14 iisdem mense et anno.