A F EW C OM M ENTS
ON
MR GL ADSTONE S EXPOSTUL ATION
’
.
B
H E NRX
C A N ON
'
T
F O RM E R P R O F E S S O R OF
CO
N
TN T
S UL I G
NT
H E O L O GIA
"
N T
HE O L O G " IN TH E C OL L E GE OF M A" O O
.
M
.
P IC
H
T NC N
O S O M E OF TH E IRIS H B IS H O P S AT TH E VA ICA
L ON D ON
B
N E V HH JL
"E
R I N G,
D U B L IN
:
M
C
:
1 9 6,
G L A S H A N a;
187 5
.
OU
P I C C A D IL L
G IL L
.
"
.
C IL
.
—A11 expr e s s i o n s
h eo l o g i cal d o ct ri n e s o r Opi n i o n s
m
m
e nt s
m us t
s
e
t
e
e
C
o
u nd e r s t o o d t
i
n
i
n
h
b e g i en
g
und e r t h e s upr e m e c e n so r s hip o f t h e
S e d e s P e t ri
it b e l o n g s t o h o ld an d pr es cr ib e t h e S an a fo rm a ve b o ru m
N B
.
v
.
of
T
”
o
,
v
”
,
r
"
.
FEW C OMMENTS
A
“
M R GL ADSTONE S
’
I
EXPOSTUL ATION
.
.
N T R O DUCT O R "
.
the 4t h N ovember 1 8 7 4 Mr Gladstone late
Prime Minister p ublished and addr e ss e d to his Roman
Catholic fe llow co untrymen an Ex post ulation on the
D e crees of the Vatican Co uncil in their b e aring on
“
Civil All e giance
We m u st adopt the title Ex p o st u
lation as its au thor has chos e n it b u t the work is not
in the l e ast an Ex post ulation I ts prop e r title wo uld
be something of this kin d
Animadversions on th e
Faith of Roman Catholics since the Vatican Co u ncil in
which it is shown : 1 that no Catholi c can b e loyal
2 that no man c an b e com e a Roman Catholic and r e
tain possession of his mental and moral fre e dom ; 3
that Catholic teachin g is irr e concilabl e with past
history and modern progr e ss 4 that the Catholic r e
lig io n is to b e tolerated only u nd e r satisfactory
g u arantees and e x planations
I t is now th e middle o f J an u ary 1 8 7 5 and amongst
Cat holics the Ex postulation has b ee n favorably r e
sp o n d e d to by only fo u r
O f th e s e two have also
“
written thems e lves down E nglishmen first Catholics
ON
,
.
,
,
,
-
”
.
”
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
”
.
,
,
.
,
,
B
”
4
”
fterwards thu s e x ceeding in their ob s e quio u s liberality
the demand that had been made on them and demon
s t r at ing of what val u e their opinions are on the Vatican
D ecrees or indeed on any religio u s s ubj ect A third
has made a cal u mnio u s and fr o m a Catholic point of
view blasphemo u s charge against a cano ni zed Pope
and has signally failed in s ubstantiatin g it The fo urth
seems to be in possession of that dangero u s thing a
little learning which makes him imagine that he alone
of all men living understands the D ecree o f the Vatican
C o uncil o n Papal Infallibility
Fo ur is not a large n u mber of seceders fo r the R0
man Catholic pop ulation of Great Britain and I reland
The g ain to Mr Gladstone is no t great neither is the
l o ss to the Ch urch worth attending to all things con
As regards Catholics therefore the Exp o st u
sid er e d
lation is simply innoc u o u s and did not re quire an
answer b u t Mr Gladstone s is a name that u p to this
has carried weight with his c o untrymen and his asser
tions in the present instance are very dar ing and his
ass u mpti o n o f kn o wledge of Catholi c matters very pre
and tho u sands of well meaning men o utside
t ent io us
the Catholic Ch urch will accept his statements at sight
and will believe things abo ut her that are not tru e and
that are calc ulated to disparage her and th e ir ver di ct
will be ag amst her unless they have an opport unity of
hearing apologists in her beh al f The present writer
h as an additional reason in some sense a person al one
for not all o wing the Ex postulation to pass witho ut a
comment A good many years of his life were spent
a
,
,
,
.
‘
,
,
,
,
.
,
”
,
.
.
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
’
.
,
,
-
,
,
,
.
,
.
,
5
in the stu dy and in the teaching o f T h eology and it is
not easy to remain silent and hear the science that o ne
loved and was pro u d of mistaken and misr e presented as
Catholic Theology is in thi s Ex postul ation by Mr
Gladstone
I n s o me o f the r e plies al ready given as it appears to
me a mi stake has been mad e I t has been s upposed
that the only or at least the main qu estion at iss u e
was that o f Allegiance as affected by the Vatican D e
crees and into this s upposition one is nat urally led by
the title of the pamphlet To accept this view is to
mi ss the main gist o f Mr Gladstone s composition
whi ch is not to elicit in a friendl y way from Catholics
an avowal o f their u ndi st urbed allegiance u nder the
Vatican D ecrees b u t to exhibit the Ch urch of Rome as
ar rogant in her claims di shonest in her policy shallow
—
and ignorant in her teaching
in fact an e ffete inst it u
tion whi ch no m o dern State can tolerate within its
realm with any degree of security to itself T o e x plain
satisfactorily the allegiance o f Catholics at present
wo uld be borrowing the word from Mr Gladstone
“
himself to bl u nt onl y one of the many
fangs he has
whetted for his attack u pon the Ch urch
The plan of reply which I have decided o n adopting
is to follow the writer closely thro u gh the many and
varied details o f the Ex post ulation— not an easy
—
task and to deal with its principal assertions and
arg u ments s er ia fzm and s ig illa tim O n this acco unt
I have called my attempt a Few Comments on the
Ex post ulatio n
,
,
,
.
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
’
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
.
,
”
,
.
'
.
”
.
R E L I M I NAR "
P
.
'
In limzne,
as we sometimes say in the sch o ols o n
the very threshold before we enter into the h o u se of
cont e ntion it will be w ell to define o ur relative posi
tions with accuracy lest we sho uld hereaft er as is
u s u al with controversialists find o urselves in the con
dition of adversaries e nco untering in the dark d e aling
o u t blows at random and co ming into actu al collision
only by accident
Mr Gladstone has cited the Chur ch of Rome into
—
co ur t the co urt of p ublic opinion— and has made
certain grave charges against her and called upon her
for h e r defence He is the accu ser she is the accu sed
he is bo und to s upply proof o f what he charges her
with not conj ectur e not su spicion b ut proof ; she is
bo und only to e x planation Again from the title of
his work and from the fact of its being ad dr essed to
Roman Catholics the proofs he su ppli e s m u st be s u ch
as o u ght to b e concl u sive with Roman Catholics I t
will not do to start from a Protestant o r rationalistic
or other no t admitt ed prin ciple and end in a concl u sion
which Catholics are called on to accept Mr Gladstone
has not the privil eg e of being allowed to beg th e
qu estion any more than another controv e rsialist
—
Finally if a propo sition I speak chiefly of main propo
s it io ns — b e s u sc e ptibl e of vario u s meanings I am bo u nd
to recognis e that meaning alone which is establish e d
by arg ument no t any d iffe rent or more compr ehensiv e
on e that may possibly b e in the mind of th e a uthor
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
.
“
”
.
,
,
,
.
This will appear to some too formal a manner of
treating the Ex postul ation and I shall perhaps be
charged with adhering too st itfly to the r ules of logical
interpretation B ut how else is a writer of Mr Glad
ston e s disc ursive and irreg ular habits o f arg uing to b e
kept on the track ? He does not arg u e from broad
and admitted principles b ut for the most part from
views pec uliar to hi mself— views I will add that are not
the o u tcome of calm and di spassionate reason b u t the
inspiring s of intense bitterness of feeling and strong
di slike
His own mind is at once the so urce and t h e
reas o n o f his concl u sions
,
,
,
.
.
’
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
DI V I S I
ON
OF
E
S UBJ C T
.
Mr Gladstone sets o ut by dividing his Ex p o st ula tion
into three parts The first in quires if the allegations
“
made in the Co ntemporary Review of O ctober 1 8 7 4
are tr u e ? The second if they are for any practical p ur
pose mat e rial ? And the third if th e y are s uitable to
b e set forth by Mr Gladstone ? An d h e undertakes
to establish an affirmative answer for all thr e e This
way of going to work is promising whatever may
come of it afterwards
Befor e entering into the r eg ular treatment o f his
qu estions he thinks it neces sary to make an ob servation
o n the manner in which his words in the article of the
“
C ont e mp orary were taken u p by his Roman C at h o ll c
fellow co untrymen He fears they have given deep
o ffence
at which he seems rather s u rprised a s he d o es
.
.
”
,
,
,
.
.
,
.
,
”
-
.
”
,
,
,
8
“
als o at their being treated as an attack made u pon
Catholics generall y nay as an insult o ffer e d them
whereas Mr Gladstone c o ntin u es
I t is obvious to
reply that of Roman Catholics generall y they state
nothing
Ju st so To d e clare of Roman Catholics
generally that their civil allegiance and loyalty is if
not u nso u nd at least qu estionable and precario u s — to
assert that the tenets which they hold can be accepted
only with the forfe it ure o f m e ntal and moral freedom
that history and modern tho ught alike prot e st against
the abs urdity of the doctrine whi ch they profess in the
face o f the world — all this is o bvio u s l
to
say
nothing
y
o f them
O f a certainty Mr Gladstone is not serio u s
He has not yet done with pr eliminary remarks and
aft er sympathizing with qu iet minded Roman Catholics
whoever th e y may be he pass e s on to a comparison of
the condu ct of the Roman Catholic Church and that o f
O rientals Lu therans Calvinists & c and m akes
some ex traordinary statements by implication
All oth e r Christian bo di es are content with freedom
in their own domain
That is Roman Catholics are
“
not Happy p e ople all other Christian bo di es to
be allowed fre e dom within their o wn domain whilst the
fre e dom we find associated with the Roman Catholic
Ch urch to d ay is the fre e dom which is ta ken w ith h er of
despoiling her in I taly of fining and imprisoning her in
G e rmany and S witzerland and of cal u mniating h e r in
E ngland I f they wo uld b u t leave u s o ur o wn dom ain
we w o uld be very content
O rientals Lu therans & c o ne and all in the pre
”
,
,
,
.
”
.
.
,
,
”
.
.
,
-
,
,
”
,
,
,
.
,
.
”
.
,
”
,
.
,
,
,
.
.
,
,
.
,
9
sent day c o ntentedly and thankfully acce p t the benefits
which means — Roman Catholi cs d o n o t
o f civil o rder
Rather Rom an Catholic s receive contentedly what
they get o f them b u t in a good many co untries o f
Europe at present they have n o t many to be thankfu l
fo r
They never pretend that the State i s n o t it s o wn
master
Th os e Roman Cath o lic s do m u st be the in
ference
What au dacio u s fellows ar e those Roman
Catholic s " P erhaps Mr Gl adstone means that they
pretend that the State is not the master o f somebody
else vid elzcct o f the Ch urch "es they d o p retend
,
”
.
,
,
,
.
”
.
,
.
.
'
.
,
,
,
They make n o religio u s claims t o tempo ral po s se s
sions o r advantages
And Cath olics do make s u ch
claims When and where ? I may ass u me th at Mr
Gladstone here refers t o th e Pope B u t the P o pe s
claim t o temporal p o ssessmns doe s not happen to be a
—
religio u s one it happens to be the o ldest legitim ate
claim to temporal p o ssessions that is in e xistence
He endeav o urs after all this to make it u p with
“
the mass o f Ro man Catholic s individu ally
by
“
sad dl ing his charges on the leaders of their Ch urch
b u t it will not do Roman Catholics individu all y are
o ne with their Ch u rch and its leaders and they will
not accept as a c o mpliment to them what is meant as
an insul t to her
A qu otation fr o m Archbishop Manning c o mes ne x t
which is evidently distorted from the meaning it had in
its autho r s c o nte x t to something very different D r
”
.
.
.
’
.
.
,
,
”
,
.
,
.
,
’
.
.
10
Manning simply asserts that the Roman Church is the
only o ne that is not the s la ve of the civil governors
of the world
Mr Gladstone will have him to say
that the Roman Ch urch claims to be the ma s ter of
the civil gov e rnors of the world
W e hav e after this
The Rome of the mid dl e age s
claimed u nive rsal monarchy The mod e rn Ch urch o f
Rome has abandoned nothing has retract e d nothing
Therefore we concl u de the modern Ch urch of Rome
clai ms universal monarchy " I B u t Mr Gladston e
proce e ds
I s that all
Far from it
B ut what is
“
far beyond universal monarchy he do e s not l e t us
“
know cl e arly H e speaks of some brisk vigoro u s
and constant opposition to those o utrageo u s claims
“
which always kept its orthodo x y and cau sed it self t o be
r e sp e cted and sometimes gain e d th e u pper hand
“
being now p ut o ut of co ur t by the Vatican D ecrees
N o bill of particul ars being hand e d in the names of
the opposition party or its leaders time and coun try in
which th e opposition took place not being s upplied by
Mr Gladston e in a statement of so m u ch importance
I m u st obj ect to be dr iven t o conj ect ure and have
onl y to m ee t a broad assertion by as broad a denial
At length w e have arrived at the Thesis
“
My propositions are th e se
1
That Rome has s ubstit ut e d for t he pro u d boast
of semper eadem a policy of viol enc e and change in
faith
“
anew
2
That she h as refurbished an
paraded
d
e very r usty tool she was fondly thou ght to have disus ed
”
.
.
”
.
,
.
”
.
,
,
,
.
”
.
”
,
,
.
”
,
”
,
,
”
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
.
.
.
’
,
.
.
'
.
11
That no o ne can now become her c o nvert witho u t
r e no uncing his mor al and mental freedom and pl acing
his civil loyalty and duty at the mercy o f another
That she (Rome ) has e qu ally rep udiated modern
4
tho u ght and an cient hi story
I n his arg u ment or e x planation Mr Gladstone takes
the fir st and fo urth propositi o ns t o gether and wishes
“
to di spose of them s u mmaril y
I shall fin d it ne
to
take
them
separately
and
I
fear
I
shall
not
c ess ar
y
“
be able to dispose of them s u mmarily
They are
really the first in p ar ticul ar the most important mat
ter in the controversy for the second has little meaning
e x cept in conne xion with the fo urth and if the fir st be
false the third cannot be in its principal assertion tru e
The fir st proposition as its author says refers to a
fact namely th at Roman Catholics were in the habit
o f boasting that its doctrine was
semper eadem al
ways the same I find it difficult to s uppose that Mr
Gladstone implies that the id e ntity in faith claimed by
Catholics for their Church was s u ch as to ex cl u de new
definitions "et thi s m u st be his me aning I t is evident
from his words he speaks of Roman controversial ists
arguing from the unbr o ken a nd a bs o lute identity in be
lief in the Roman Ch urch from th e times of o ur Savio ur
I t is evident from the o ffice which he assigns to the
Church as in keep ing with thi s absol ute identity in
“
belief which is principally that o f witness to facts not
"
“
j u dge of doctrine so th at her pr o cesses are s ubj ect
to a c o nstant challenge and ap p eal to hi story
I t is
evident from his scope which is t o show that this
3
“
.
,
.
.
”
.
.
,
,
”
.
,
”
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
”
,
.
.
.
.
”
.
”
”
.
,
.
,
”
.
,
l2
p erilo u s P o nt ificat e h ad no right t o make the t wo
d e finiti o ns o f th e I mma c ula t e Concepti o n and Papal
I nfallibility I t is evident from his arg u ment which
u ndertakes to establis h that th e Ch u rch o f R o me h as
given u p o f late that id e ntity in belief w h ich she
formerly boasted o f as being pec uliar to her I f new
d e fi nitions of faith were admis s ible u nder the o ld
system as well as u nder the new sh e has given u p
—
nothin g she has made n o chan g e We are c u rio us
“
to s ee the R o man C atholic controversialist who
“
gives this n o tion o f the identity o f belief o f his
“
C h u rch or who has e x cl uded a livin g a uthority
fro m its teachings The thing is simply inc o mp atible
with the membership o f th e C atholic Ch u rc h
“
Mr Glads tone n o w pas s es o n fr o m the fac t t o the
opinion and as if s o me thick c u rtain h ad dro pped
“
between him and what he has j u st said o f a bs o lute
“
identity in belief o f the Ch u rch being a witnes s t o
“
facts an d no t
a j u dge of doctrine o f the intr o
d u cti o n o f the idea o f a living a u th o rity bein g an
inn o vation made within the last forty years he
“
speaks of the ancient de finiti o ns of the Ch u rch and
with approval ; he does not hesitate to make mention
of the de fi niti o ns o f th e Co u ncil of Tr e nt itself and to
e x cu se them t o some e x te nt "et the matter o f all
th o se defi niti o ns old as well a s new is (m
a r ine and
“
no t
fact and the authority defi ning them ass u med
“
itself to be a j udge of doctrine and not a mere
“
witness to facts and wa s belie ved to be s u ch at all
times by all members o f the Ro m an C atholic Ch urch
”
.
,
”
,
.
,
.
”
”
”
,
.
.
”
.
”
,
,
”
,
”
”
,
”
,
”
,
,
.
,
,
”
,
”
”
,
.
‘
13
Can Mr Gladstone have been i g norant o f this ?
And if not ign o rant with w h at sor t o f faith did he
u se the e x pressions already given in his remark s u p o n
“
w h a t he styles a fac t ?
.
,
”
R
TH E C H U C H
AN D
H ER I D
E N T I T " OF
F AI T H
.
Misstate ments call fo r full statements , and I hope
I shall be e x c u sed by my read e r if I go in to this
“
matter o f the
identity in belief in the Cath olic
Ch u rch with some ful ness in order to e x plain in
“
what sense it is held by Catholics to be semper and
even ubi que eadem , always and everywhere o ne and
the s a me I shall give o u r system as briefly and as
clearly as I c an
We begin by ded u cing fr o m the w o rd s o f St P au l
in his E pistle to the Ephesian s chap iv ve r 5
O ne
L o rd one fa ith o ne baptism that the Ch u rch o f
Christ is essentially o ne in fa ith F rom the s ame
s o u rce (Epistle to Galatians chap i ver
we infer
that this faith is something s o stable so fix ed that
it is n o t to be p u t aside for another belief altho u gh
Pa ul himself o r even an angel from he aven were t o
atte mpt the s ubstit u tion We co ncl u de that this
“
faith o ne and fix ed is identical wi t h th e deposit
o f w h ich the s ame Ap o stle speaks so solicito u sly in
both his E pistles t o St Timothy : O Timothee deposi
“
“
t u m c u stodi
We identify this faith o r deposi t
wi th the o bj ect of o ur Savio u r s commissi o n , when he
“
a u th orizes and commands his Ap o stle s to go and
”
,
”
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
”
,
,
,
.
‘
,
.
.
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
”
,
,
.
”
”
.
’
14
—
teach all nations teaching them to ob s erve whatever I
—
have c o mmanded yo u
Matt xxvi W e note par
t icula r ly that H e does n o t say s o me of tho s e t hing s
“
b ut all whatso e ver
We advert to the u s e o f the
“
same word a ll tru th in the disco u rse o f Christ in
the l 6 t h chapter o f St Joh n s Gospel as also t o His
wor ds in 1 4t h chapter and 2 6 t h vers e which are id e n
“
tical in meaning with those of the commission — The
P araclete will teach yo u all things and bring all
things to yo u r mind whatso e ver I shall have said to
yo u
The o bj ec t spoken of in all thes e passages w e
“
call the corp u s doc t rinee o r aggregate of the teach
ings of Christ and in respec t o f its be in g given in
tr ust to the Apostles we call it t h e d e p ositu m fidei
“
d e p o sit o f faith
This corp u s doctrin es w e
hold to have co me perfect and c o mplete from the
hands of Christ and not to hav e be en increased by
any new revelation since The dep o s itio or placing of
this b o dy of doctrin e in the charge o f th e Chu rch we
b e lieve t o have been finally made and sec u red whe n
the Holy Spiri t d e scended u pon the Apo stles at P e n
We beli e ve that the commission to teach was
t ec o st
n o t given to the Apostles so as t o e x pire wi t h them
b u t so as to be c o ntin u ed in some fo rm of s u ccession
“
beca use He said : And behold I am wi t h yo u all day s
even to the cons u mmation of the world and we call
t h e per s ons that co ns t it u te the s u ccession th e E c
and we clai m for this E ccles ia
d o cens
o les ia
”
.
.
.
,
”
.
”
’
.
,
,
,
”
.
”
,
,
.
,
”
.
,
,
.
,
.
,
,
”
,
,
do cens
15
“
Th at it holds in its charge the c o rp u s doc
trin ae —in o ther words that the deposit u m fide i
is with it
2 Tha t it h as a u thority to teach every tr uth
contained in the d eposit
3 That Christ thr o u gh the Spirit of Truth is
always assisting at its teaching so t hat it canno t err
4 That its charge or commission has no limit o f
d uration b ut the end of tim e This is o ur syst e m o f
the Ch u rch — a most c onsist e nt most re asonable o ne
two things only being ass u med that Christ is the
Tr uth and that we have His word s
A t e aching body implies a body to be ta u ght and
hence we have an E ccles ia a u d iens h earing what
“
t h e Teaching Ch u rc h addre sses to it
If he will not
hear th e Ch urch let h im be to t h e e as the h e ath e n and
—
th e p ublican
Mat t x viii 1 7
We have both
bodies her e in d i c ated wi t h thei r relative d u ties and
obligations
Th e E ccles ia a ud ie n s is bo u nd to h e ar that is to
b e li e ve inter nally and profess e x t e rnally what t he E c
o les ia d o cens has propos e d as n e cessary to b e believed
a n d profe ssed
S e con dly she m u s t be prepared to
believ e and profe ss wh at e ver the E ccles ia do cens may
hereaft er propose as in th e same mann e r necessary
By the first act of ob e dience id e ntity in e x plici t fai t h
an d by the second id e nti t y in implicit faith is at once
sec u re d for all th e members o f the Ch urch from the
fi rs t t o th e last from the highes t to the lowest in all
places a nd at all times Th u s thro u gh th e ir fai t h in its
1
.
”
”
,
.
.
.
.
,
,
.
,
.
.
,
,
.
.
,
.
,
”
.
.
.
,
.
,
,
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
16
c u stodian they bec o me belie vers in the whole b o dy o f
tru th r e vealed by Christ
T h is E ccles ia d o cens in th e ful fil m ent of its
divine commission finds it necessary o r u seful fro m
time to time to u se its privilege of teachin g som e
tr u th that is contained in the deposit u m fid e i but
which has not been hithert o proposed to th e Eccle s ia
a u d iens as a matter of n e cessary b e li e f
This we call
—
a n e w d e finit io n a d e fi ning of the tr uth as revealed
by Christ The reasons that act u ate th e Ch u rch to
mak e n ew de finitions o f faith are not s ubj ects for o u r
criticism Th e r e is only O n e responsible fo r h e r pro
c e ed ing s — H e who pr o mised to be with her to the end
of time B u t a new de finition being made and pro
pos e d t o the universal Ch u rch the par t of th e E ccle s ia
Befo re the d e fini t ion we are
a u d iens is to believe
fr e e t o arg u e to disc uss to hold th e n e gativ e o r the
—
once the E ccles ia d o cens has spoken
a ffir mat ive
opinion gives way to faith divisions o f j udg ment
c e as e and u nity prevails This and no other is the
identity in faith of the Catholic Ch urch
I n the de fini t ion of Papal I nfallibility in the Vati
can Co u ncil th e re was n o departu r e not the sligh t est
from t he ordinary and reg ular process o f de fining
I n fallibility in teaching was always b eliev e d to be the
privilege o f th e E ccles ia d o cens The head o f the
Reg u
E ccles ia d o cens wa s admit t ed to be the Pope
la rly no dogmatic teaching co u ld b e address e d to the
u niversal Ch u rch u nless it emanated from the Pope
N o Co u ncil however general in its n u mb e r o f assist
,
.
,
,
,
,
”
,
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
.
.
.
,
.
,
18
manner— th at
received th eir qu ie t u s in this
of
Pelagianism which d enied the necessity o f divine
an d that
grace which was condemned by I nnocen t
of J a ns enis m which ta u gh t that some of G od s pre
c o pts were impossible of fu l filment and that Christ
d id not die fo r all men — which was condem ned by
I nnoc e nt X
The definition of I nfallibility in the Vatican Co un cil
did not t herefore make any practical cha nge in the
mode o f teaching always in u s e in the Ch u rch n o r was
it a cha nge in fai t h and falsi fi cation of the Catholic
th e ory of sempe r ea d em for she d o e s not s u bstitu te
t h e doctrine of P apal I nfa llibility fo r th e d o ctr ine of
—
l
l
l
i
b
i
t hat wo uld be a cha n ge in faith
Papal F a
it y
b ut she make s Papal I nfallibility which had been al
ways a matter o f im plicit faith h e nceforth a matt er of
e x plicit faith and renders t h e op inio n o f Papal Falli
I t is the s ame t hing that she
b ilit y no long e r tenable
did for other d octrines in the Co uncil o f Trent or in
any of the (E c umenical Co u ncils from the beginning
,
,
’
,
,
.
,
,
,
”
,
,
,
,
.
,
.
We may ne w res u me o ur parley with Mr Glad
ston e H e t ells u s that Rome has not only changed
“
h e r faith b u t has adopted a policy o f vio len ce
P olicy of v iolence 1 H o w like a gri m j oke this sou n ds
Th e violence o f Pio N ono p l undere d and imprison e d
morte a l P apa ascend
w ith th e cry o f the assassins
in g to his chambers whil e Mr Gladston e s fri e nds
s t and by passive and unin t e rfe ring Something like
this w as said a g oo d m any y ears ago in t he hall o f
.
.
”
,
.
,
,
'
,
”
,
’
,
.
.
19
An nas when the serv ant m ade it o ut th at J es u s was
ins ultin g the high priest and fo r it smote Him o n t he
fac e
“
A policy o f vio lence is toned down fu rther on to
“
the ai ming o f deadly blows at some imaginary
school o f Theology b u t the stronge r and more nat u ral
—
sense o f the phrase is r e assert e d when the P ope is
“
ch arge d with claiming in th e s ubstance o f the Propo
the Syllab u s t he right o f i nflicting
of
s it io ns
penalty of life limb liberty g o ods the title to dep o se
sovereigns & c
We are now in a positi o n to e x amine the theory o f
the Ch u rch of which o ur a u tho r seems to approve and
to compare it with the other theory which h as been
s u pplie d to u s o u t o f the teachings of t h e N ew Testa
ment
“
“
Go and teach all nations said Christ and I
will s e nd y o u the Spirit of Tr u th to teach y o u all
“
“
tr uth
Go propo u nds Mr G la dstone and h ave
nothing to do with the j u dg ing of d o ctr ine b u t bear
witness to fa cts and be very partic ul ar to keep s qu are
—
with history
The spirit o f history and s u ch his
tory as we have in these co u ntries for the Spirit o f
Tr uth
not J es u s b ut Barrabas
He goes on :
Recent d e crees ar e at war with mo d ern tho u gh t
and involve a violent breach with history
Mod e r n
tho ught l Here we h ave another check u pon t h e
Ch u rch of Christ to keep h e r straight in her t e ach ing
b u t as it will app e ar in another por tion o f the E x
pos t u la t ion when t h e Syllab u s comes u nder disc u ssion
we shall p u t o ff o ur o bservati o n o n it for the present
,
,
.
”
,
,
,
”
,
,
,
,
,
”
.
,
,
.
”
,
,
”
”
.
.
,
,
,
,
”
.
”
,
.
,
”
.
”
,
,
,
.
0
20
“
Violent bre ach with history i What a worshipper
“
o f history is Mr Gladstone
Violent breach with
H o w often is a so u nding phrase that
history
st rikes well on t he ear discovered to be hollow and
emp t y when it is test e d for meanin g ? Pray wha t is
there so sacred so inviolable in history that we are
not t o break wi t h it ? The world is perpet u ally
brea king wit h history and why n ot the Ch u rch if it
be desirable and involve n o infringement of her c o n
st it u t io n
Socially politically scienti fically we are
every day breaking with history There is not hing in
the phrase M r Gladstone no t even when wrappe d u p
in its rob e o f vag u eness
Meantime I am v e ry far from admitting t hat the
Chu rch has t h e slightest quar rel wit h history m u ch less
a
violent breach in her enlargem e nt o f th e neces
sary creed of Christendo m by new de finitions o f faith
This is a proc e ss that history is qu ite fa mili ar with
In Co uncils and o u t of Co uncil s the Ch u rch h as been
enlarging the necessary faith o f Christendom in ev e r y
ag e of its e x istence from P e ter to Pi us and u nless
the afl airs o f thi s w o rld are wo u nd u p more spee dily
than we have an idea o f at presen t she will contin u e
to enl arge it in the ag e s to come Ou r a uthor does
not s e em to approve of this ever incre asing d e man d
on o ur fai t h He thinks the thing sho u ld have
stopped fi fte e n h u n dred years ago and u p to that it
seems to have his approval
He is o n e o f th o se
wh o in virtu e of a sel f ass u m e d commission think
thems e lves entitled to s it in j u d gment o n the Ch u rch
o f Chr is t
in o rder t o in quire int o the mann er in
”
.
’
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
,
.
,
,
”
”
.
.
,
,
'
,
.
-
.
,
.
,
,
,
21
wh i ch s h e has cond u cte d herself since h er in s tit u t io n
“
They generally fi nd th at fo r the fi rs t t h ree cent u r ie s
—
o f her e x istence s h e g o t on tolerably w ell after t h at
T h is ap pea r s
t ime sh e has n o t been so satis fac t ory
to be Mr Gla ds t o ne s findin g als o
The circ u mstances u nder which the Ch u rch was
“
j usti fied in mak ing th o se an cient de fi ni t i o ns and
which by a stretch are e xt end ed to the C o uncil of
“
Trent are tha t they sprang from and rel ated to
theories rampant at the time and regarded as men a c
ing t o Christian belief
B u t in the D ecre es of this
peril o us period he c anno t disc o ve r a shadow of j u sti
.
”
,
.
’
.
.
”
,
,
,
,
,
”
.
fic at io n
.
D ecrees al lu de d t o are those of the I mm ac ulate
Conc eption and o f Papal I nfallibility and l n re fe rr in g
to the former he has the bad tas t e to u se a w o r d w hich
he knows to be ins u lting to Catholics and inapplic a
“
b le to their d octrine ; for he kno w s that
lat r e ia
mea ns the worship due to God alone which h e als o
knows tha t Catholics do not gi ve t o th e B les s ed Virgin
Mary We Ca t holics are acc ustomed to th is s o r t o f
treatment b u t we are not acc u stomed t o r ecel ve it
from men o f Mr Gladstone s ac qu irements and
po siti o n
Bu t omitting this and accepting for e x periment
sake his v iew o f the circ u mst ances t hat j u stify the
Ch u rch in pro ceeding to de fini t ion t here are not t o
be fo u nd in t h e history o f Christiani ty ca s es more
completely ju stifiable than those he h as had th e infe
lic ity to sel e ct
N ever were th e ories more rampan t
t h an thos e dire cted by men cal lin g th em s el ves Chri s
The
.
,
”
l
,
.
,
’
.
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
J
22
tians a gal n s t the dig nity of t he Mother of Go d and
the a uthority of the So v e rel g n Ponti ff in o ur own tim e s
The entir e Christianity of co u ntl e ss n u mbers of me n
appeared to consist of unceasing e fforts t o d e grade the
—
A gains t th e s e
not simple
o ne and to ins u l t the ot h er
m e nac e s b u t open o utrag e s on Christian belie f ev e n
m e r e ly historically consid e r e d —it b e came nec e ssary for
the Ch u rch in t h e d e fe nce o f Catholic tru th to rais e
her voice and to com mand h e r children u nd e r the
sanction of her infallibl e teaching to profess b e fore
m e n t h e compl e te and p e rfect sinl e ssness of Mary
the Mother of Go d and the u nerring a uthori t y of t he
s u ccessor of Pet e r the Vicar of Chris t
Mr Gladston e has howev er fu rther obj ecti o n t o
“
these two definitions for that they aim deadly blows
a t the old historic sci e nti fic a nd mod e rate school
we
pres u me of Th e ology I have been hearing of Ca t h e
lic Theological schools since I firs t took an E thic
treatis e in my h ands so me thir ty years ago ; b u t
“
the o ld historic scienti fi c and m o derate school is
n o t amongs t them
There are the Scotists and the
Thomists the Gallican and the Ultramontane ; a nd in
the m atter o f grac e t he A u gu stinians and the Moli
and the C o n g r uis t s and in Moral Theology
n is t s
th e Rig orists and the Probabilis t s and so on ; b ut
“
the o ld historic scien t i fic and mod e rat e — N o ;
non e s t inventa Mr Gladston e m u st hav e mistake n
som e oth e r es t ablishment for the Ch u rch when he
w as making the ac qu aintance of this many ti t l e d
school History and sci e nce are not the so u rces from
which C atholi c sch ools of The o logy deri ve th eir prin
,
.
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
.
,
,
,
”
,
,
,
,
.
,
”
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
”
.
.
-
.
23
gath er th e ir c o ncl u sions b u t the word o f
Go d the d e crees o f Co u ncils and of P o nt ifis an d the
teachings o f the Fathers History and science d o
c ome in a t times b u t in their proper capaci t y the one
to e x emplify the oth e r to ill u strate If howev e r w e
were to admit t h at they were fair and s ufli cien t gro u nds
for determining the j u dgment of t he Ch u rch in the
d e fini ng of a doctrin e Mr Gladstone wo uld find that
h e had again made a most u ns u ccessful g u ess in his
selecti o n of the I mmac ulate Conc e ption and Papal
I nfallibility as instances of de finiti o n s made in the
teeth o f history or of science
For the fi rst We have from the earlies t ages of
Chris t ianity the most ab u ndant and d istinct and
emphatic evi dences of Christian b elief in favo u r
o f the e x empti o n o f the Blessed Virgin fro m all taint
o f sin
A large vol u me e mbodying the principal
amongst them was p u blished u nder the direction o f
Father P ass aglia at t he time of the D e fi nition o ut of
which any o ne c u riou s o n the ma t ter can solve for
—
himself the question whether the doctrine o f the
Immac u late C oncepti o n of the Blessed Virgin Mary is
a nti historic
N either is it opposed to science the science proper
to s u ch a s ubj e ct For ass u ming the doctrine of th e
I ncarnation o f the Son of God wi t h Mary for his
mother fo r the p u rpose o f man s red e mption from sin
her I mma culate C onception comes o ut as an inevitabl e
conse qu ence
F o r t h e s e co nd With t he except io n o f t he Gallican
c iples a nd
,
'
,
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
,
'
.
,
.
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
-
,
.
,
,
’
,
,
.
.
24
r
h
h
h
c
u
t
C
e
l
erio
have
in
the
w
h
o
e
history
o
f
e
d
W
p
no appeal a gainst th e I nfa llibility o f the Po pe altho u gh
f
v
e
f
r
u
u
niform
y
teaching
t
h
e
Ch
rch
om
the
l
h e w as
y
beginnin g according to that doctrine N o r indee d
did t h e Gallican app eal avail much ; fo r thro u gho u t
the entire d u rati o n o f Gallicanism fr dm t h e days o f
Gerson to the Vati can Co u nc il h o weVe r strong th e
talk it h eld in the schools it was never able with all
it s State infl u ence behind it to cancel o r reform a single
t or decree iss ue d by the Po nt ifi
ea: ca thed r a j udgm e n
to the Ch urch Unive rsa l S o much fo r its rel atio n to
history
Still less is it unsci e nti fi c fo r anteced ently t o and
inde pendently o f t he d e
fi nition o f the Vatican
Council we C atholics al ways h eld as of faith
t wo p rinci ples w
hich wi t ho u t it w o uld w ork very
‘
badly to geth er W e held for t he univers al Church
inerrancy in beli ef and for t h e Pop e in v ir t ue
5
o f his primacy th e right of teaching that unive rsal
C h ur ch
A fallible a u th ority
a po o r
t eacher for a Church that co uld not err
It may
b e that Mr Gladst o ne d o es n o t mean by hi st o ry ,
when he u s e s the t e rm in his EXp o st ulat io n the writ
t en tes t imony o f compet e nt w itnesses as to facts b ut
e t hing else an d that h o t mental sci e nce o r reas on
‘
a s a pplicable to s irit u al things b ut s o c ial o r
olitica
l
p
p
or some o th e r science is floati ng b efore his inind whe n
“
h e uses th e wo rd s ci enti fic
B u t as he d id no t c o n
desc e nd t o enlighten us o n his meaning we h ad no thi ng
"
for it b u t to d eal wi t h the e xp ressions in th eir u s u a l
'
'
,
,
,
,
.
’
.
,
‘
,
,
,
,
‘
*
‘
.
.
‘
'
,
,
'
‘
,
,
,
,
'
.
'
,
,
,
i
,
.
r
.
‘
'
,
,
‘
,
'
,
‘
,
,
‘
'
”
.
,
'
26
foot at the time to force the disc u ssi o n of the ques t io n
u pon the Co u ncil To this and not to the proceed
ing of 1 8 7
the passage re fe rs The date o f th e
“
—
D octor s letter is April 6t h the date o f th e proceed
ing was July 1 8th Mr Gladston e gives us the first
—was he possibly ignorant o f the second
,
.
,
.
’
”
.
.
E OND PR O PO S I T I ON
S C
“
.
Rom e
has refurbished and para de d anew every
r u sty too l she was fondly tho u gh t to have dis used
And we are promised proof B e t ter not to e x p e c t t o o
m u ch —o ur a u thor is n o t strong a t proof Possible
conting e nci e s vag ue analogies egoistical views go a
gre a t way to war d s a concl u sion in his system o f reason
“
ing The r u sty tools mea n the c e ns u res which the
Ch u rch prono u nces against men or on doctrines The
designation is a polite o ne and o f co u rs e qu ite b e
coming in the mo u th of a Christian gen t leman We
shall have a fe w other e qu ally polite e x pressions to
deal with before we clos e
Mean t ime the Ch u rch of Rome has not refurbished
“
and paraded anew any t ools r u sty or o t herwise The
spirit u al arms which h e r Fo under emp o wered her to
u s e against erring s ubj e cts o r in the d e fe nce o f her
charge hav e u nfort u na t e ly never had time to grow
r u sty even if their origin had l e ft t hem s u scep t ible o f
decay E rrors in doc t rine and immoral teachings are
cropping u p in every age all uring away the children of
t h e Ch u rch fro m obedie nce or fro m d u ty , and it be
”
.
.
.
,
,
,
”
.
.
,
.
.
”
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
27
c o mes inc u mbe nt on t h eir M o ther t o be vigilant to
warn to adm o nish to correct and if necessary to
“
p unish The commission to go and teach all na
ti o ns is as fully in force t o day as whe n it was
S poken by the Fo u nder o f Christia nity eighteen h u n
dr e d years ago ; it commands t h e t r u th to be pro
claimed as openly in this age a s it did in th at it can
no more admit of compromise with error by silence or
by connivance n o w than it did then and it has its
sanction of spiri t u al penalties as well no w as it had
“
when St Pa u l h anded over to S atan Hy mo n aeus
and Al e x ander for shipwr e ck in faith and the C o
r int hian for a scandalo u s vio lation o f Christian mo
r alit y
Consci o u s that this co mmission abides with
her t he C h u rch of Rome has never ceased to act u p
“
to it s re q uire ments and Mr Gladstone s refurbishing
and parading an e w of her spirit u al arms is n o t hing
more than a piece o f empty and insolent rhetoric
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
”
,
,
,
,
”
.
”
,
,
.
.
,
’
.
,
”
.
We arrive now at the pr o of or wha t we have to be
c o nt e n t with in place o f proof— a list o f E ighteen Pro
p o sitions said to be condemned by the Holy See Mr
“
Gladstone does n o t wish t o import passion into the
c o ntroversy by citing the fearfully energ e tic epithets
in which th e c o nde mnati o ns are sometim e s clothed
O ne cannot help regretting tha t t his spirit o f charity
and moderation did not attend him thro u gh the whole
O f t he Ex post ulation and restrain him from u sing
epithets himself which he kn o ws to be most in s ulting to
C at h o lics
,
.
.
”
”
.
,
.
28
B efore dealing with the Pro p ositi o ns in detail it
w ill b e well to e x plai n to s u ch of o u r readers as are
n o t skilled in C atholic Theolo gy the manner o f p ro
cee d ing u s u al with the Holy See in the condemnation
o f tP ro p o s it io ns and the amo u nt o f doctrinal t eaching
conveyed wh e n a Propositi o n is condemned The e rror
wi t h which the P o nt ifi proposes t o deal if not fo u nd
e x pr es s ed n ett ement by its a uthor is co uched in the
briefest and mos t sim p le la ngu age that can e x press it
and the sentence or prep o s it io n s o c o mposed is de clared
a ls e a nd bla s hemo us
h
r etica l o r in wha tever
r
o
e
f
p
other o pposi t ion th ey are j udged to be t o Chris
tian tru th
de clared
at l e as t fa ls e and by the fa ct its O ppos ite or to S peak
m o r e strictly its contradicto ry is declared tru e "But
this declar ation aflhct s the prop o si tion e x actly as it
s tands w ith e very wo r d c a r r y ing it s mea n ing a n d
ever
n
a
n
i
u
l
a
u
s
t
k
n
o
un
t
The
a
i
l
e
t
o
c
e
a
c
c
y q
ify g
E ighteen Proposi t ions are s e lected o ut of eighty that
are contained in the Syllab u s and are we may pre
su me no t taken at rand o m b ut are chos en ca re ful ly
a s representative o f C atholic t eaching When a trader
u nde rtakes to s upply a s a mple o f any commodity he
is held b o und by the plain laws o f hones t y to m ake it
‘
u
c
t
h
at t h e qu ali t y of the s t o ck fro m which it is
s h
taken may be fairly e st imated fro m it I f he corr up t
i t to the e x tent o f rem o ving fr o m it s o mething that is
fo u nd in it or addin g s o me thing th at is no t fo u n d so
as to infl u ence the j udgment of the pu rchaser b e e x
p o ses hims elf to the penalty o f voidan ce of hi s contrac t
.
,
,
.
‘
,
,
,
,
,
'
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
.
‘
,
,
,
,
.
‘
,
'
‘
'
‘
.
‘
,
,
,
29
and o f los s of h i s c h arac ter Mr Glad s t o ne s upplies
u s with these E i ghteen Proposi t ions a s sa mples fr o m
which we are to fo rm o ur o p inio n o f mod e rn Cath olic
t e aching He can h ave n o o bj ection t hen to o ur
loo king well into them les t they might have been c o r
o r o mission
n
i
additi
o
n
His
m
o
ives
o
r
ru t e d b
t
p
y
tentions in any change or corr u pti o n of the Propo
s it io ns I shall av o id all u ding to as m uch as possi ble
So meti mes howev e r it will be s carcely possible t o
o mit a passin g remark
So m u ch attention has been drawn to the Syl lab u s
o f l a t e an d so many wrong no ti o ns ab o ut it appear
t o b e in circ ul ation th at before en t ering o n t he direct
e x amin ation o f the Eighteen Propositions it may be
well to s t at e b riefly what is the e x ac t truth abo ut the
Syllab u s and what place it ho lds in C a tholic teaching
On the 8 t h D e cember 1 8 6 4 His Holiness Pi u s IX
iss ued an E n cyclical (o r circ ular ) E pistle addressed t o
“
h is Ven e rable Brothers all t he P at r iar chs Primates
A rchbish o ps Bisho ps in the favor and c o mm uni o n o f the
Apos t olic See in which he refe rs in general terms t o
t he p r inc ip al errors o f o ur t ime which he had c o n
d e mn e d in previ o u s En cy clicals Allo cu tions a n d o t her
Apostolic L e t ters
H e then engage s their pa s to ra l
solicit u de against other impio u s O pinions flowi ng
from t he same err o rs as s o many fo u ntains of whi ch
he makes mention and e xp re ssl y c o nd emns 1t h e m
His words are
We by o ur Apostolic a uth o rity r e
ro b at e
r
o
and
c
o
nd
e
mn
all
the
s
o
r
i
a
n
d
v
r
i
b
e
e
e
m
v
p
p
pi o u s O pinions and d o ctrine s in t hese p re s en t L etter s
.
.
'
'
,
,
.
'
,
.
.
,
,
.
'
'
~
,
'
,
‘
'
.
,
'
,
.
,
'
,
,
,
,
,
”
'
,
'
i
,
k
,
,
”
.
,
”
,
9
\
.
,
‘
:
,
,
:
~
,
i
,
3O
“
commemorated
These are the fe arfully energetic
epith ets which Mr Gladstone wo uld n o t mention for
“
fear o f importing passion into the c ontroversy
Conj ointly with this E ncyclical the S yll ab u s o f
eighty Prop o si t ions was also iss u ed b ut witho ut any
special additional sanction The title is
A Syllab us
containing the principal E rrors of o u r time which are
noted in the C onsistorial Alloc u tions E ncyclical and
other Apostolic L etters of o u r Most Holy Father P i u s
the N inth
The eighty Propositions are di v id e d into classes
u nder the heads o f the different errors they belong
t o Th us the first class is headed
P anth e ism
N at u ralism Absol ute Rationalism
and fi ve Pr o
“
positions are given
T h e sec o nd is Modera t e
Rationalism comprehended in seven Propositions
The third is Ind ifl er ent is m ; the fo u rth Socialism
an d C omm u nism ; th e n E rro rs co n cerning the Ch urch
E rrors concerning Civil Society and so o n
E ach Proposition is given in the form in which it
asserts the error witho u t negat ion o r fu rth e r q ual ifi
cation o f it than tha t which is contained in the
re ference to th e Papal Alloc u ti o n or L et t er in which
it received its condemn ation F o r instance : the
second Proposition u nder the head o f Pantheism N a
t ur alis m & c is
All action of God o n men o r on
the u niverse is to be denied
And no o ther remark
“
e x cept the inser t ion under it of A lloc Ma x im a
quidem 9 Junii,
The words are th o se with
which th e Allo cution commen ces
”
.
.
”
.
,
,
.
,
,
”
.
.
,
,
,
”
,
,
.
”
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
”
.
,
,
.
,
.
31
is now easy to fix the a u thoritati ve c h aracter of
the c o n d emnation of the Prop o sitions o f the Syllabu s
I t is for each Proposi t ion e x actly tha t which is fo un d
rec o rded against it in the L etter or Alloc u tion to
which we are refe rre d The fact of se t ting th em in
order classifyi ng them iss uing them to the Bishops
o f th e Ch u rch toge t her wit h the E ncyclica l is an in
d ic a t io n o f the Pope s wish tha t they sho u l d be
attended to by the Bishops an d that the members o f
their flocks sho u ld be warned of their erroneo u s and
dangero u s nat u re whereve r it may become necessary
to do so ; b u t it does n o t impar t to t hem any addi
I n fin e we are
t io n al condemna t ion or qu ali fication
bo u nd to hold ab o u t them all th at they are fa ls e b e
f
ca u se it is styl e d a Syllab u s o er r o r s and b eca u s e
th e y are declar e d to have bee n co n d emned in Papal
L etters or Alloc u tions We are bo u nd to hold abo u t
e a ch wha t is ta ught con c e rning it in the partic ular
L etter or Alloc ution to which we are referre d according
to th e teaching a u thority of that L etter o r Alloc u ti o n
It
.
,
,
,
,
’
,
.
,
,
,
.
,
.
MR
GL A D S T
.
’
ON E S PROO F F R O M
P R O P O S IT I ON S
TH E
E I GH T EE N
.
I have s tr u ck u pon a plan for th e e x ami nation
of this proof which I think o u ght to be s a t isfac
tory t o all par t ies concerned I propos e as far as is
feasibl e to give a consp e ct u s o f t he Propositio n s as
given by Mr Gladston e and as giv e n by the Pope
at o nce so tha t th e read e r may be able to see at a
glance if any and what change has been introd u ce d
I will ask him then to read fi rst witho u t the p aren
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
32
th e s es and he will ha ve Mr Gl adst o ne — with the
parentheses and he will have the Po p e
.
,
,
.
First Se co n d and Third Pr o position s in one
Thos e w ho main t ain the (u nbri dled) liber ty o f
the Press ; th e (irrespo nsible) liber t y o f conscience
and of forms of worship
the (c o mpletely unre
s t ric ted
liberty
of
speech
are
con
emned
as
ho
di
g
l
n
d
)
(
erroneo u s opinions greatly detrimental to the Catholic
Ch u rch and to the safe t y of
I feel myself
b o und only t o s how tha t the parentheses l e ft o u t by
Mr Gla dsto n e were real ly inserted by the Pope I
l e ave the rest to the r ead e r I qu o t e from the te x t
o f th e E ncyclica ls given by Mr
Pope
Gla d stone
Greg o ry t he Si x t eenth and P o pe Pi u s the N inth are
of o ne mind as to the nu C atholic an d dangero u s ten
“
d eney of certain theori e s to wit :
That liber t y of
c o nscie nce and o f forms o f worship is an in h e ren t
right o f every man which o u ght t o be proclaim e d by
la w and asserted in every well constit u ted socie t y
a nd th at the most u nlimited liberty t o m an ifest a nd
d eclare openly and p ublicly by speec h o r thro u gh the
press o r in any other way any notions they please
independ e ntly of all au t h o ri t y civil or eccl e siastical
Se t asi d e th is
is a right e x isting in every citiz e n
te aching if yo u think fit M r Gladstone b u t th e n for
consistency sak e if yo u are P re mier again abolish all
laws against libel bl as phemy tre ason give a ca r te
bla nche t o t h e M ormons White Q u ake rs Shakers
Pec uliar People place res t rictions o n yo u r polic e
lest they sh o uld in th e ir zeal interfe re with the liber ty
,
,
.
,
,
.
.
.
.
.
-
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
”
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
34
withou t as well as th o se within the Ch u rch B y its
inser t ion it is cl e arly shown to be in t en ded for the
w
d
o
embers
the
Catho
ic
co
m
u
nion
I
not
kno
m
l
of
m
on what principl e Mr G ladstone ju sti fi es to h ims elf
th is mann e r of dealing with the t e x t of the Ency cli
cal. We call it in o u r theo logical la ng u ag e s up
—
f
o
veri
s
u
ggestio
falsi
s
u
ppression
the
e
t
r es sio
p
And with u s
t ru th a nd s u gges t ion o f wh at is false
its e ffe c t is to d e stroy at o nce th e forc e o f t h e arg u
ment in which it is u s e d and th e character for fair
ness of t h e persons using it
.
.
.
,
,
”
,
.
,
.
,
.
Propositio n Fiv e as given by Mr Gladstone is s u ch a
tr u nca t e d edition o f the P o n t ifl s words tha t I canno t
fill them into it in any shape I m u s t give both Pro
positions in their int e grity
M r Glads t on e s
Those are cond e mn e d who
assign to the Stat e the power of de fi ning the civil
rights (ju ra ) and province of the Ch u rch
The P e p e s :
T h ose are c o ndemn ed who ass e r t
that th e Ch urch is not a re al an d perfe ct a nd inde
pen d ent comm u nity and that she was not fu rn ish e d
by her D ivine Fo u nder with perm an e nt rights of her
own b u t that it b elongs to the civil pow e r to de fine
t h e rights of the Chu rch and the limits of th e e x e r
cise o f these rights
I s this sheer ignorance on o u r a uthor s part or is
it something else that one do e s not wish t o nam e ?
“
Wh e nce did he obtain t h e inte rpolated word civil
N ot from th e te x t of the Syllab u s fo r the rights th e re
sp oken of are those d erived from the D ivine Fo u nder of
,
.
,
’
,
.
.
’
.
”
.
’
,
,
,
,
”
.
’
,
.
”
,
35
C h u rch W hy did h e s u ppress the oth er w o rds o f
the passa ge which wo uld sh ow that j u ra c o u ld n o t
“
?
W hy did h e not give the p as
mean civil rights
sag e in ful l (it was n o t s o very l o ng ) and let h i s
reader u nders t and the n atu re of t he do ctrine wh ic h
the Pope was condemning namely that it d enied to
the Ch u rch the organizati o n o r the privi leg es o f a
p erfect s oci e ty and left it with it s divine o ri gin and
precio u s charge a mere p upp et in the h and s o f the
State ?
t he
.
”
”
,
,
,
,
,
,
“
Pr o position Si x c o ndemns Th os e w ho hold tha t
Ro man Ponti ffs and (E c u menical Co u ncils have trans
r
the
limits
o
f
their
power
an
d
u
s
u
rped
the
e
ss
d
e
g
rights o f princes (and erred in matters o f faith and
mor als )
The reader is h ere instr u cted in a note
“
that (Ec u menical means a Ro ma n C o u ncil no t reco g
(Ec u menical (see
n is e d by the rest of the C h u rch
D ictionaries p a s s im) me ans the inhabited world and
an (Ec u m e nical C o u ncil means a Gener al Co u nci l or
C o u ncil o f the Un iver s a l Ch u rch wi t h the Pontiff
o
r
Mr
Gladstone
may
limit
r es id in
o fir ming
c
p
g
n
t h e n u mber of them to s u it his o w n views b u t let him
n o t corr u pt the m e aning of the word H e might have
said a C o u ncil o f the Ro ma n Ca t ho lic Chu r ch if he
did not wish to lead his readers astr ay
O f t he
eighteen (Ec u menical Co u ncils en u merated by o ur
writers before the Vatican fo ur o nly were Roman
C o u ncils eight were celebrated in the E ast t he
o th er si x in di fferen t parts o f the Western Ch u rch
”
.
”
.
,
,
.
.
,
.
,
.
,
,
,
.
D
36
W h at t h e P o nti ff con demn s in the p as s age under
c o nsi d er ation is a sweeping ch arge m ade agains t the
E ccles ia d o cens generally that it h ad failed in every
respect The portion of it th at attrib utes to Popes
and to Co u n cils the us u rpation of the righ ts o f prince s
i s simply denied by Pio N o ne as it is als o by m any
o f the mos t careful in ve s ti gat o r s o f the cases alleged
W e sh all pro bably h ave o ccasi o n t o re cu r t o thi s s ub
j cet ag ain
,
.
,
.
,
.
,
.
“
Pre position Se ven is c o ndemned fo r denying to t he
C h u rch all right o f employing force
W ith Mr Gladsto ne the right to employ forc e is
inalienable fro m the c ivi l p o wer B u t it doe s no t
t ake m uch reflecti o n t o di s c o ver th at there e x ists in
man a rig h t o f thi s sor t not derive d fr o m the civi l
p o wer th o u gh controllable by it in certain circ u m
stan ce s F o r i ns t ance a man ha s a rig ht to defend
by fo rce hi s life his proper ty in general anythin g
placed u nder his pro t ec t i o n whenever they are mad e
the o bj ect s o f an u nj u st agg ression And this righ t
—
is fro m God the same so u rce fro m which the tr us t
its elf i s derive d —an d n o t fro m civi l a uth o rity This
is the righ t of de fence
Again a parent a g u ardi an a teacher in t he e n
forcing o f their directions o r ins t ructions may employ
force withi n the limi t s prescribed by pr uden ce and
h u manity This is the righ t of correcti o n
Both instances wil l be fo u nd applica ble t o t he
C h urch Fro m a very e arly da te the Ch urc h be gan
”
.
.
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
.
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
.
37
t o be co me t he poss e sso r o f te mpo ral g oo ds I n t he
fo u r t h ch apte r o f the A cts o f t he Apos tle s we are t old
“
th at as m any as were o wners o f land s o r ho u s e s
s old them and bro u ght t h e p ri c e o f t he thing s they
so ld and laid it down before th e feet o f the A p ostles
And in t h e si x t h ch apter we h ave seven D eac o n s set
apart fo r the care and ad ministrati o n o f t h ose tem
poral matters in o rder that the Apostles may be free
“
B u t unfort u n ately
fo r the ministry o f t h e W o rd
“
w h ere ver the b o dy sh al l be t h ere sh all the eagle s
be g athered t o geth er
Tem po ral p o s s ession s pro voke
c u pidity in th os e w h o think th at they o u g h t to hav e
them beca u se they might h ave th em an d h en c e t he
Ch u rch has been in this matter o f tem po ral tr u s t
e x po sed a t all time s to the c h allenge o f the rapacio u s
— a challenge t o whic h there never h as been and
ne ver can be any o ther reply than the b rief b ut em
“
phati c n o n p oss u m u s
St L awrence the Roman
D e ac o n bec ause h e h ad n o o t h er way o f savin g t he
Ch u rch p o s session s of whi ch h e had ch arge dist r i
b u ted the m t o th e p o or fo r who s e u se in s o m e form
or o ther they were m ainly intended and then wen t
ch eerfully t o his martyrdom o f fi re
St L awrence had n o w ay o f defendin g h i s charge
an d wa s d ri ven t o the ne x t bes t c o u rse o f c o nveyin
g
it all at once to its de s tination b u t when defen ce i s
practicable it is n o t only lawful b u t it i s a d uty fo r
t he Ch u rch in t h e perso ns o f it s ministers in who m
the temp o ral tru s t i s veste d to de fend th at tru s t by
all m o des th a t w o ul d be al lo wab l e t o la
tr
u
stee
s
in
y
.
,
”
.
,
”
.
,
,
,
”
.
,
,
,
,
,
”
.
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
38
nalogou s circu mstances I h a ve for inst ance a s
full a right to defe n d the s mall stock of vestments or
sacred u tensils that I have charge o f for my C h u rch
at Monksto wn as any private gentleman has t o de
fend his plate o r his family j ewels and what e ver fo r ce
it is lawful for him to us e for s u ch an obj e ct it is
lawful fo r me also to u se the same as far as civil or
natu ral law is concerned The only restricti o n on
me in the matter c o mes from my own ecclesiastical
code , which will no t allow its ordained minister by
himself to u se fo rce to the shedding o f blood in this
sor t o f d e fence A scending in the order o f Ch u rch
ministers and contemplating a wider e x t ent o f tem
poral charge it is lawfu l for the Primate of H u ng ary
or
any other Prince Bishop to defe nd for their
de fi ned objec t s the lands o r holdings in his keeping
by all manner o f defence that w o u ld be al lowed to a
temp o ral r uler of e qu al rank and position by t h e
laws o r u sages of t h e time and of the co u n t ry More
co m plete still an d e qu itable wa s the righ t and as a
c o nse qu ence o f the right the d u ty o f the S over e ign
Pontiff to defend his temporal possessions in the same
way that any oth e r monarch was entitled to de fend his
These principl e s are clear and according to re ason
and m u st commend thems e lves to all h o n es t m ind ed
men The theory o f a Ch u rch pati e nt and u nre
sis t in g, at the same tim e that it is a holder of impor
tant t e m p oral tru sts which are invaded is on the
contrary silly a nd inappropriate ; b u t it is paraded
abroad at p res en t , as a co nvenient co ver fo r w h at is
a
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
.
,
.
,
,
,
39
—
in the s e d ay s o f o u rs a plan
of
in great re ques t
Ch u rch r o bbery made easy
I n the b u siness of c o rrection the Church u s u ally
proceeds against erring or refract o ry members by the
infliction o f spirit u al pena lties b u t there is no reason
—
1 in
w hy she sh o u ld not pr o ceed by way of fo rce
co u ntries u nder her o wn temporal r ule as in the
States o f the Ch u rc h ; 2 in co u ntries s ubj ect to
o ther temporal r ulers with their c c operation or
I t is late no w in the Ch u rch s history to
c onsent
s trip her o f her c o ercitive power Ju r e vel inj ur ia
s h e h as been u sing it fr o m the earlies t period
The
Fa thers think it c o mmence d with the d en u nciation of
d eath agains t Ananias and Sapphira as a p u nishment
of their crim e This m u ch at least is plain that if
physical p u nis h ment was foreign to the spirit o f the
Ch u rch o f Christ it is highl y improbable that it
w o uld h ave been s u pernat u rally i nterposed at the
v ery fi rst formation o f that Ch u rch into a comm u nity
St P au l s mode o f dealing w
ith those who had made
“
shipwreck of the faith
and with the erring Co
r int h ian was c o erci t ive t o a serio u s degree and it was
no do ubt after his o r o t her Apostolic precedent tha t
the discipline of canonical penances involving a large
a mo u nt o f physical r e straint an d p u nishment
was
estab lished Thi s d iscipline was the r ule o f t he
Ch u rch at the ti m e when Mr Gladstone allows that
—
all went well with h er the fi rst th ree o r fo u r cent u ries
of her e x istence — and incl u ded as great a p erso n as an
Empero r am o n gs t t h ose w ho were calle d upon t o
ob s er ve it
.
,
,
,
,
,
-
,
’
.
.
,
.
.
,
,
.
’
.
”
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
'
.
40
The reader m us t remember th at we are all alo ng de al
ing with the the o ry fo r it is the theory that is s poken o f
in the c o ndemned Pro p osi t ion The partic ular cases
in which physical fo rce is said to ha ve been employe d
i llegiti mately m u s t be individ u ally investigated o n
their o wn data b u t the principles to g uide u s in the
investiga t ion h ave been s ufficiently laid d o wn in w h a t
h as been j u st s aid
,
.
,
.
P rop o siti o n Eight is c o ndemned for asser t ing Tha t
there
i
s
anot
h
er
temp
o
ral
p
o
wer
not
inheren
in
the
t
(
)
o ffi ce o f the Episcopa t e b u t granted t o it by the civi l
a uth o ri t y (which o n that acco u n t ) may be with drawn
from it at the discre t ion o f that a uthority
I m u st
ca ll th e reader s attenti o n t o the c o rr upti o n o f the te x t
and co nsequ ent change o f sense The Pr o p o sition
considered by the Pope asserts that there is a d istinct
po wer con ferred on the Episcopate by t h e civil aut ho
rity This is ex ac tly what he denies M r Gla ds t on e
ass umes as a matter in admissi o n that ther e is s u ch
a p o wer given t o the E piscopat e by the civil a u th o rity
a n d then of c o urse wonders why the lord that g ave it
may n o t also be the lo rd to t ake it way
The obj ects
o f N u itz t h e writ e r condemned by the P o nt ifl and of
M r G lads t one are o ne and t h e s ame t o place the
fu ncti o ns o f the Episcop ate at the mercy of the S ta te
—the power spoken o f is the power of the Ch u rch
—
o ver the Sacrament of M atrimony b ut the one s tates
his thesis o penly t o o ur face be fore he draws his c o n
e l usi o n ; the o th er slu r s o ver t h e the s i s as no t di s
,
,
,
”
,
.
’
.
.
.
.
,
,
,
.
'
,
,
.
,
,
42
and in I reland u nder Engli sh r ulers (and they
were not pagans) in conflict with the ecclesiastical laws
o f th e C ath o lic Ch u rch in these co u ntri e s and will Mr
Gla dstone say tha t th e y o u gh t to have prevailed ?
This qu e s t ion of the relative pre eminence o f State
and Ch u rch laws when in conflict is o ne abo u t wh ich
with rational men there is n o room for disc ussion
F or t hose wh o believe in a God His l aws m u st prevail
over the laws of men — for those who believe in a
Ch u rch fo unded by God and commission e d by H im
to teach His doctrine unerringly the laws and ordi
n ances of t hat stable and indefect ible instit u t ion m u st
b e pr e ferr e d to th e shifty laws o f e phemeral gov e rn
There is neith e r r e ason nor common s ense at
ments
the bottom o f the theory that wo u ld s ubj ec t the laws
o f G od or of His Ch u rch to the laws o f the St ate
England
.
,
-
,
.
,
,
"
,
.
Proposition E leven in th e Ex post ulatio n r uns th u s :
“
That any method of instr uc t ion of yo u th s olely sec u
E ven as stated by Mr Glad
l ar may be approved
stone I think most Christian men o f any den o mina
tion wo uld obj ec t to the opinion This is not ho w
ever t h e Propositio n condemned by the Pope W hat
“
that a system of ed uca
h e condemns is the ass e r tion
tio n o f yo u th u nconnect e d with C atholic fai t h and
n o t u nder t he dir e ction of t h e Ch u rch and having for
it s sole or at leas t primary obj ect natu ral philosophy
and social science is deserving of th e approbation o f
I think I may add nor of Pro testants
Ca tho lics
”
.
.
,
.
,
'
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
”
,
.
P r o p o si t i o n
Twe lve is ,
T h at kn o wledge
.
of
thin gs
43
phil o sophical (and o f morals ) and civil (law s al s o) may
and sho uld decline t o be g u i ded by Divine and E ccle
“
D ecline to be g u ided is a
s ias t ic al a u th o ri t y
very free translation o f the word in the S yllab u s
declinare b u t we will n o t qu arrel o ver t rifl es I f
“
the knowledge sp o ken of d eclines to be g u ided by
the d ivin e la w the ecclesiasti c al law has n o reas o n t o
be j eal o us T h e error which the Pope condemns as
s erts that phil o s o phy and j u rispr u dence sho u ld look
away from ma k e no acco u nt o f revelation or t h e
teaching o f the Ch u rch D oe s Mr Gladstone s u b
scribe the d o c trine ?
”
”
.
,
”
.
,
”
,
,
.
,
,
.
.
Thirteen te ache s
Th at Matrim o ny is
not in its essence a Sacrament and we are referred to
the Syllab us Proposition si x ty si x Wha t I fi nd t here
is however something very di fferent It r uns th u s
“
The S acrament o f Matrimony is only something acces
sory t o the contract and is separable from it The Sacra
ment itself is nothing more than the n u ptial benedic
tion
This is e rro ne o u s : what the Ch u rch teach es
“
abo u t the essence o f Matri mony is that it is a con
tra ct instit u te d by G od that when this contract i s
entered into between Christia ns it is in a ddition a
S acrament in vir t ue o f the institution o f Christ and
t h a t the n u p t ial benediction is o nly an a cc o mpanyin g
c e remony an appendage of the Sa crament
What obj e ction has Mr Glads t one that we Catholics
s h o u ld look u pon Matrim o ny as a Sacrament or th at
we sho u ld no t repose its essence in the n u ptial bene
di c t i o n ? St P a ul in h i s Ep i stle t o the Ep h esi an s
P rOp o s it io n
”
,
-
.
,
.
,
,
,
.
.
”
.
”
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
.
,
.
,
,
44
s it a g reat S acrament , o ne sy mb o lizin g C h rist s
u ni o n with Hi s Ch u rch
”
c all
’
.
P r o po s ition Fo u rteen lays d o wn in o u r au tho r s te x t
That marriage not sacramentally(s ic) contract ed has a
binding force
The passage he r e fers to translates as
“
follows
The mere civil contract is s ufli cient to con
righ t ly styled Matrimony amongst
s t it ut e real and
Christians and it is false to teach that the c o ntrac t
o f M atrim o ny amongst Christians is always a Sacra
ment or that the c o ntrac t is made vo id by e x cl uding
the intention of receiving a Sacrament
What the
Ch ur ch teaches by the condemnati o n of the P roposi
tion is in the fi rst place that th e mere c ivil contract
is not the gen uine Matrimony o f Chris t i an s— a teach
ing it wi ll be fo u nd di ffi c ul t to set aside with the
“
w o rds o f Chri s t be fore us
What Go d hath united
let no ma n separate
According to this the binding
force of t he contra ct comes fr o m G od and man is to
have nothin g t o d o with it This is rather h ard upon
the civil power
Secondly as s h e ta ught in her c o ndemn ati o n o f the
previo us P re positio n the Sacrament and c o ntra ct m us t
go together and if one b e e x cl u ded s o is th e other
The Sacramen t will n o t be there witho ut the c ontract
n o r the c o ntract witho u t t h e Sacrament
Why does Catholic t eaching on this s ubj ec t so dis
t u rb Mr Gladstone ? Po ssibly from a Statesman s
poin t of view he thinks it w o uld be bett er t o h ave
M atri mo ny witho ut this sac ramenta l elemen t mi x ed
u p in it wi th o ut anythin g o f a s acred ch arac ter at
’
,
,
”
.
-
,
.
,
”
.
,
,
”
.
,
.
.
,
,
.
,
,
.
’
.
,
45
it— a
to
mere co venant between man and
w o man m ade u nder State reg ulations and det ermin
—
able by State a u th o rity and from this poi nt of v ie w
it probably w o u ld B u t the real qu estion is n o t wha t
i s the calc ulation o f the S t atesman b u t wha t is the
o rdinance of G od I f G o d willed Matrimony to b e
s ome t hing m o re than the sor t o f contract which men
make ab o ut a horse or abo u t a farm if he wish ed to make
it a s o lemn s a cr ed and ind is s o luble u nion as appears
v ery probable fro m the lang u a g e St Pa u l h o l d s and
fro m the words o f Christ a s o lemn s a cr ed and indis
s o lu ble u n io n it wi ll alway s remain fo r Christi ans n o
m atter how Statesmen s p eak o r writ e or le g islate to
the contrary
I f Mr Gladstone is so an x i o u s to relieve t h e State
o f t h is embarrassing b usine s s o f Matrimony wi t h its
sacrament anne x ed to it he may t ake a hint even
from an adversary s o me t imes j u s e s t et ab h oste d o
ceri
L et him b e gin at the beg i nn i ng le t him g o to
t he ro o t o f the diffi c u lty let him get Baptism fo rbidden
by the State it is this Baptis m that makes u s Chri s
tians it is it that makes u s member s o f the Ch u rch ,
Sacrament o f Matrim o ny
an d fit s u bj e c t s for the
“
Prevention is better than c u re
L et him d o this
a n d he wil l wonderfully s trengthen the hand o f t h e
S t ate Sacr ament o r s acra mental c o ntract need dis
t u rb it no longer B u t l e t u s be once made by Bap
t is m members o f that ine x or able Ch u rch , there i s n o
al t ernative for u s w h en we marry , but t o marry as
C h ri s tians
te c h e d
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
,
,
’7
.
,
,
,
.
”
.
.
,
.
.
,
,
.
46
I fi nd a pr o p os ition given in th is place in t he
Appendi x which is not noticed in th e pamphlet
itself
T h e s o ns o f the Catholic Ch ur ch are of dif
fe rent opinions abo u t the c o mpatibility of temp o ral
r ule with spirit u al
A propositi o n as to fact and
op ini o n e qu ally u ntr ue
,
”
.
.
“
Pr o p o siti o n Fifteen with the a u th or is
That t he
abolition of the temporal p o wer of the Popedo m w o uld
be highly advantageo u s to the Church
As c o n
de mn ed by the P ope it is
The abrogation of the
civil kingdom which the Apostolic See e nj oys w o uld
immensely c o nd u c e t o the liberty an d felici t y o f the
Ch u rch
H o w is it that Mr Gladst o ne c a nno t keep to the
—
te x t ? A br oga tio n is the word o f the Syllab u s h e
s ubstit u tes a bo litio n The sense is no t the sam e ;
t h e firs t ma y mean the vol u ntary s u rrender which
was oft e n u rged u p o n Pi u s IX ; the second mus t mean
the fo rcible s u ppression o f the temporal r ul e of t he
“
P ope And h o w h e lo ves generali t ies
Highly ad
ple ases h im more than
vant ag e o us t o the Ch u rch
“
—
w o u ld immensely con
t h e phrase of the Syllab u s
d u ce to the liber t y a nd fe licity of the Ch u rch
I t is
m u ch more diffic u lt for an adversary to dea l wi t h
generalities than with d e finite a ssertions
To speak of the Proposi t i o n as it is fo u nd in the
—
Syllab u s as far as the e x perience of fo u r years c an
“
enlighten us —the abolition fo r Mr G ladst o ne had
“
his way has not contributed m u c h t o th e liber t y
n o r t o t h e felicity o f the Ch u rch
”
.
,
”
.
.
.
.
.
.
”
”
.
.
”
.
,
,
”
.
47
Propo sition Si x teen is condemned ac co rdin g t o t he
Ex p o stu lati o n fo r as s ertin g T h at any other religion
than the Roman religion m ay be established by a
State
The Proposition I fi nd in t h e Syllab u s i s
I t is n o l o n ger e x pedient in th i s age of o u rs that
the Catholic religion sho u l d be u phel d as the State
religion t o the e x cl u si o n o f all others o f every
kind
The condemnation of th e P ropo sition a s w o rded by
Mr Gladstone is open to the interpretation that it is
the teaching of t h e P ope tha t in any S t ate even
P rotestant n o reli gi o n b u t this Catholic sho uld be
estab lished
The cens u re of the Pope is really
directed ag ainst t h e asser tion that the time has
p assed fo r u pholding the Cath olic religion as the
S tat e religion with its implied ins ult — that th o ugh it
may have done well eno u gh in fo rmer time s it co u ld
n o t p ass m u ster no w
,
,
”
.
,
,
,
”
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
Prop o sition S eventee n o f Mr Gladstone lays down
“
That in co u ntries called C atholic the free e x ercise of
o ther religions may be la u dably allowed The Proposi
tion which the Pope d eals wi t h is
That it has been
la ud a bly provided in certain C ath olic co u ntries that
it sho uld be free for stranger s se ttling amon gs t them
to prac t ice p ublicly a ny for m o f worship pec u liar t o
them
O u r au thor is n o t s u ccessful in his translations o f
Called Catholic
t he w o rds of Papal doc u ments
“
n o minally Catholic is no t the me aning of Catholici
“
n o minis b u t C atholic
o f the Cat ho lic
r o fes
p
.
,
,
”
.
,
,
”
.
”
.
”
.
,
”
,
48
s ion
The m istra nslatio n i s no t o f m uch importance
in th is pla c e
The point of the Propos itio n o n wh ich the c o nd em
“
n ation falls is its
u
alify
ng
a
verb
la
u
dably
i
d
q
The Pope does not think it praiseworthy in C atholi c
G overnme nts to give free permission to all in c omers
to practi ce p u blic ly any for m o f worship they may
please to import with them The rea der m u st not
omit to n otice what is c arefully left o u t of the Ex pos
t ulat io n that t here is q uest ion o f strangers c oming
into a c o u ntry and not of fi x e d establishe d inh abi
tants also that the permission approv e d o f as praise
wor t hy is qu ite genera l and u nrestricted The au
t h o r it ies of Amster d a m were o f the P ope s way o f
thinking o n this p u blic toleratio n o f every kin d o f
worship , whe n they s u ppressed the Anabaptis t A dam
ites in t he fifteenth c ent u ry The Government of t he
Unite d States o f America has c ome ro u nd t o it o f late
E ven E nglan d
in their dealings with the Mormons
herself is be c oming somewhat intolerant in the c ase o f
some co ntemptible religionists that are attra cting
atte nt ion at the moment
”
.
.
”
,
.
,
.
,
,
,
.
.
’
.
.
.
Proposition E ighteen assert s That the Roma n
Ponti ff (can and ) o u ght to c ome to terms with progress
“
lib eral is m and mo de rn civiliz a tio n For c ivilizatio n
read civil policy and the version may be allowe d to
stand The Pope d oes not believe that he can a dopt
the friendly a dvice h e re given him He does not see
his way towards c o ming to terms w i t h u nde fi ne d
theories passing un der the attra ctive names o f p r o
“
,
”
.
,
”
,
.
.
,
”
50
w ill as soo n believe that the world in it s ord er and
corr e spon d en c e o f parts c ame o ut o f a fortu ito u s c o m
bin a tion of atoms as that Mr Gla dstone s pe rv e rsio n
o f the P ropositions o f the Syllab u s c ame all o ut of i
g
’
.
,
n o r a nc e
.
We have ne x t three ob servatio ns o n the P ropos i
tions alrea d y treate d of F irstly o ur author is not
qu ite at his ease abo u t his interpretation o f them all
“
A portio n of them may by the combine d aid of
favo u rable co nstr u ction and vigoro u s (s ic ) e x plan a
tion be bro u ght within bo u nds
Wha t chan ce he
“
a fforded them of favourable constr u ction we have
alre a dy seen I n his observation however he p uts
a si d e the proviso altogether
He will a d mit constru o
“
tion only when it is allowed to be an O pen qu estion
What does h e mean by having constr u ction an open
qu estion
We g e nerally u nderst an d an open qu es
tion to be o ne o n which intelligent men may hold
di fferent vi e ws , o ne which does not contain within it s
terms the elements o f a certain sol u tion I n co nst ruc
tion there is no room for op e n qu estion e x c e pt in the
solitary instan ce of ambig u o u s diction I n the E ighteen
Propositions add u ce d there is no ambig u ity o f d ictio n
W e cannot s a y
a s they are fo u nd in the Syll a b u s
so m u ch for them aft e r the manipu l a tion of Mr
I nde e d they are so r u d e ly hacked in
Gla d stone
his hands th at one is te mpt e d to b e lieve th a t the
“
ru sty tools o f which he speaks are his o w n no t
the Pope s
The reason fo r no t allowing the P apal co nde mna
“
tions the bene fi t of favo urable constr uctio n which
.
,
.
,
”
,
.
”
,
,
.
,
.
”
.
”
.
.
,
.
.
.
,
”
,
’
.
”
,
51
Mr Gla dstone a d m its to be the right genera l r ule
in c ontroversi e s is state d to be that the Pope the
the sole
a utho r of the Propositions claims to himself
a nd u nlimited power to interpret them in s u ch man
ner an d b y s u ch r ules as he may from time to time
think fi t
In th e fi rst place the P ope is not the a utho r o f
the P ropos itions of the Sy llab us b ut the ce nsor o f
them
I n the second place he d oes no t cl aim to himself
the s o le and u nlimite d power to interpret them from
t ime to time as he ma y think t
th
a
t
is
to
give
them
fi
o n e meaning to d a y another to morrow a c cor d ing to
his o wn caprice The Pope like any o ther l e gisla t or
is the a u thorit a tive inte rpreter o f his o wn laws o r d e
crees b u t h e is not the sole int e rpreter The Canon ist
is the profe ssio n al int e r pr e t er N e ither is he the un
"
l imite d interpret e r
He is limited in the same w a y
as any other int e rpreter o f laws by the nat u ral an d
us u al signi fi cation o f the words he h a s u se d
—
O bservatio n the se c o nd
M r Gl adstone has been
evidently d isappointe d at not fi n ding amongst the
teachings o f the Syll a b u s the r e afii r mat io n o f the
right to depose sovereigns release s ubj e c ts from their
all e gian c e & c & c I t p u zzl es him ; b ut he is not at
all satis fi e d that what he s e eks may not b e h i d de n
“
aw a y somewhere A hasty p e r u sal will not s uffi ce
those Roman P onti ffs are so wily — b u t persev e ran c e
“
a nd ingen u ity
m aking co nst r uc t io nn a o pen
and
qu estion can do a great de al and if they do not
“
.
”
,
,
,
”
.
,
,
.
,
”
,
,
-
-
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
,
”
,
.
,
.
”
.
,
”
,
E
52
make
the thing its e lf t hat we are looking for they
m u st make o ut something like it some t hing that may be
taken fo r it : B ehold it o ur a u thor e x claims in th e Si x t h
and Seventh P ropositions not e x pressed in words b u t
given in s ubst a n ce th u s : Th e Popes and Roman C o u ncils
hav e d one things o f this sor t
d eposed sover e igns re
l e as ed s ubj e cts from all e gian c e infli ct e d pen al t i e s o f
li fe and limb and lib e rty and goods
The Syll ab u s
declares that P opes an d Roma n Co u ncils h a ve not
go ne beyo nd the limits o f their power
A ll those
things were therefore a c cording to the Sy llab u s
within the lim its o f their p ower
This arg u ment I think gives the ful l force o f o u r
a u thor s reasoning Still it only a ffi rms at mos t the
r igh t o f the P opes o f former times to do what they
—
d id it by no means reaffi rms t he same right fo r Popes
in the present time To bring o u t the latter concl u
sio n he sho uld have interposed another Proposition
—
to this e ffe ct what e ver the Popes an d Roman Co u n
cils d id in former tim e s and in t o t ally di ffere nt cir
c umst ances th e P ope clai ms the right to do now and
in present circ u mstan ces W itho u t t his t here is no
reaffi rming o f the obno x io u s pretensions
Pio
N o no as we shall see this moment recognises the fa ct
o f a c omp lete ch a ng e having tak e n place in the cir
He
c ums t a n ces on which t h e cl a i m to th e m r e sted
will n o t s u pply u s wi t h the link necessary t o make the
re a soning goo d When I taught logic fo u r and tw e nty
years ago Mr Gla dstone s sort o f argu ment the in
“
ferenc e a dicto sec u nd u m qu id ad dictu m simpli
o ut
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
”
,
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
’
.
.
,
,
,
.
.
,
,
.
.
’
,
,
.
,
.
53
iter was looke d upon as a fallacy Can it have
c ease d to be one sin c e that t im e o r are t h ere spe c ial
e x emp t ions allo we d in the lo gic o f a St a t e sman
“
Mr Gladstone is here opportu nely reminded o f
the words o f Pope Pi u s the N inth on the d eposing
—
power
Then t he th ing is bey ond d e ni a l there is
s u ch a theory as the d eposing po wer s till in ex is tence
Then the Pope stil l
A n d h e u ses the word r ig ht
Thes e are the c on cl u sions we are e x pe cte d
cla ims it
to arrive at not how e ver by process of reasoning
that wo ul d be too form al an d also may be d angero u s
t o the conclu sio n — b u t by a m u ch s a fer c o u rse that o f
vag u e s ug g e stion Mr Gladstone itali cises the word
“
right and the closi n g words o f the p assage and
leav e s the m atter to th e reader I will tak e th e libert y
of italicising a fe w o t hers and witho u t a sha do w
o f misgiving
a lso leav e the m a tter to the reader
“
There a r e many errors regar d ing th e I nfal libi lity
b u t the most malicio u s o f all is th a t which incl udes in
that dogma th e right o f d e posing sovere igns an d d e
clar ing the peopl e no longer bo u nd by t h e obligation
o f fi d elity
This right has n o w a n d a ga in in cr itica l
c ir cums ta n ces been e x ercised by t h e Ponti ffs b u t it
ha s n o thing t o d o w ith P ap a l Infa llibility
I ts origin
was not the I n fallibility b ut the a utho r ity of the Pope
This a utho r ity in a ccor d a n ce w ith p u blic r ight which
was then vigoro u s an d wi t h the a cquies cence of a ll
”
c
.
,
’
,
.
'
”
~
.
.
.
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
”
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
,
.
,
,
,
Chr is tia n
p
n a t io ns w ho r ever en ce d
me j u dg e of t he Chr is tia n
re
in the P op e the s u
co mm o nwea lth, e x ten d e d
so far as to p a ss j u dgment e v e n in civil
acts of prince s an d of na t ions
,
”
.
a ir s on
a ff
,
t he
54
’
I have adhered to Mr Gla d stone s version l n or der
to all ow him all t h e advantage that mi ght a ccru e to
h im from his own way o f p u tting the e x pressions o f
the P ope s a d dress and how l itt l e it make s for him ?
“
T he word given as p u blic ri g h t sho uld be p ublic
"
“
“
la w
vigoro u s sh o u ld b e in force B u t p u blic
“
“
right o r p ublic l a w
ac qu iesc e nc e of a ll Christian
“
n ations
Christian commonwealth with its recog
“
n is e d
S u preme Ju dg e
those gr o unds on which
“
P i o N ono e x plains a nd vindicates the e x te n ding
“
o f the a u thori t y o f hi s pre de c essors
to civil affairs
“
to the acts of princes and of n ations have long
since becom e things o f the past and are re cognis ed
by His Holiness as s u ch
O b servation thi rd and last —The tea chings of the
Syllab u s are not mere opinions o f th e P ope hims e lf
nor pio u s beliefs patern ally recommen d ed to the con
sid e ration o f the fai t hful
N o Mr Gl a dstone b ut
the c ordiall y a ccepted creed o f every son and d a u ghter
o f the Ch u rch
in t he sense in wh ich they emanate
from the P ope ; b u t yo u are here again mis qu oting the
P ope His words d o n ot refer to the Syllab us b u t t o
the Prop o si t ions c on demned in t h e parti c ular E n cy clic al
o f N ov e m ber 18 6 4 already spoken o f
The a u th o r now pass e s to the c onsi deration of his
T hird Proposition b ut fi rst gives us a s a mple of those
fearfully e n e rgetic e pithets which he avoided men
“
for fear o f importing
t io ning a fe w pages ago
passio n into the arg u ment
.
,
’
,
”
“
”
”
,
.
”
”
,
”
”
,
,
”
-
”
”
,
”
,
,
.
”
,
”
.
,
,
.
,
.
.
,
,
,
.
,
”
,
,
”
.
55
T H I RD
PRO P O S ITI O N
.
H e re and hen ceforw a r d o u r a u t h or becom e s e x
c e e din gly verbos e and le ss than ever a rg u mentative
We are intro du ced to D r V o n D ollin ger , and we are
“
in formed that he is the most fa m o u s an d le arne d
living Theologian o f t h e Roman c omm u nion and
this is ad d ress e d to Catholi cs who might be pres u med
to kno w their o wn gre a t men a nd did n ot re qu ire to
be ta u ght who th e y are by an ali e n to their fa i t h and
D r Vo n D olling e r the
greatest
c omm u nion
living Theologian o f the C a tholic
The
s a me wh o pr e sided a fe w months a go at that attempt
“
to compo u n d an olla podrida o f doctrines when the
L o w Ch u rch Anglican and the High Ch u rch A ngli c a n
and the Ru ssi a n Schismatic a nd t h e S c otch P resby
teri a n an d the Am e ric an E v angelical and th e Ger
man Ra tionalist threw e ach his ingredient into the
ca uldron in which Christi a n i ty was being r e cooke d
t o m a k e it palatable to every tast e
M r Gl a ds t one has gre a t sympathy wi t h the D octor
and admiration fo r him and some u n named fe w o t h e rs
b ut a s th e r e is n o a dvanc e made towards t he proof o f
the Proposition w e cannot dw e ll on t hem any long e r
w e m u st pass o n
We can a fford only a p a ssing
rem a rk to the migh t y tr u mp e t o f L u th e r himself
j u st to say tha t we agr e e with M r Gladstone t hat it
is still echoing t hro u gh the land o f Germany The
notes it sen t forth in its mast e r s days wer e t hose o f
,
,
.
,
.
”
,
,
‘
,
.
.
”
”
,
,
,
,
,
,
-
,
.
.
,
,
.
”
“
,
.
.
’
56
overbearing intol ra nc e and bitter persec u tion of all
who did not h o w t o his d ogmati c s u pre m a cy be t h e y
—
o
r
Pope
fe llow Re formers L eo X o r "wingle o r
C a rlo s t ad o r Calvin
With wh a t m u ltiplied r e v e r
b e ra t io n s do w e not hear th e s a me not e s r e echoing
th e re at present ?
I n following o ur a uthor thro ugh this por t i o n o f th e
Ex postu lation ther e is a good deal of wading thro u gh
a watery medi u m not always o f the clearest to be
d one before w e c ome u pon anything of s uffi cient c o n
sist e ncy to b e dealt with as arg u m ent W e have
“
“
mention o f mor a l m urder
stifling o f conscien c e
“
o r conviction
ferm e ntation in min d o f L a tin
“
Ch u rch
possi ble application o f principles o f ma
—
chinery to intellect u al and moral pro cesses
with a
“
slap at the great Hi e rarchic pow e r fo r ch a nging o ur
“
religion over o ur heads
convic t ion that m u lti t u des
will vindicate th e ir loy alty at the ex p e nse o f their
consistency
friendly challenge and en t re a ty to
Roman C a tholics to repla c e thems e lves with this n a
tio n and Parliament in their position o f fi ve and forty
years ag o
all whi ch Mr Gladstone has a perfe ct right
to s ay if it be his h u mo u r— but n o t j u s t no w when he
has u n dert aken to and is ostensibly eng aged in
establi shing a charge o f a most ins ulting and de
grading kin d a gainst a venerable ins t itu tion and all
—
i
t
a
men wh o conscientio usly atta ch themselves to
charg e whi ch he never sho ul d have m ade u n less he h ad
th e evidenc e s o f it c learly and dist inctly before his
ma de it sho uld p la ce the
o w n min d— and having
e
,
-
.
,
,
,
.
-
,
,
,
.
”
,
”
,
”
,
”
”
”
”
-
.
,
,
,
,
”
“
,
58
the deposing po wer o f the P op e wi t h all its revol t
ing conse qu e n ces o r hold that they were no t bo und
to ke e p fa ith with heretics ; a nd his w ay o f establishin
a ll thes e is to l ea d u s t hro u gh a lengthy a n d he re an d
there broken n arr a tiv e o f t h e prec a u t ions tak e n by
British stat e sme n o f fi fty to forty y e a rs since before
they co u ld be satis fi ed as to t h e safe ty an d ex p e diency
“
o f repealing c ertain
pettifogging b a se an d cr uel
laws u p to th at time in force against C atholics H e
d id not n ee d to t a ke all this tro u ble
W e wo ul d
have gr ante d him all that he w a nted for th e asking
Ther e was no necessity for making a fuss abo u t the
satisfactory nat u re o f the answers obtained for the
S elect C ommit te e o f 1 8 1 6 1 8 1 7 o r that o f 1 8 2 4
1825
I n all th a t is s ubstantial in the qu estions
the same answers wo u ld have been obtained in 1 8 7 4
1 8 7 5 w ith the sole e x c e ption that P a p a l I n fallibility
which was at th a t time only a g e neral opinion w ith
the Ch u rch has sinc e been de fi ned to be a m atter of
fa ith O u r a uthor has how e ve r chosen to go thro u gh
this long process a nd his comment e r has only to
follow him
Thro ugh a page o r so d evoted to what B ritish
statesmen fea red o r did o r e x p e cte d nothing t u rns
u p that b ears at all on the P ropositio n we a r e co n
cern e d abo u t There is a polite r e mark a bo u t the
“
“
fangs an d claws o f the medi aeval P op e dom a n
assertion that the theory which place d every h u man
be ing in things s pirit u al and things temp o r a l at the
l
n
o
c
ee
t
of
oman
P
onti
f
f
was
e
pra
c
ti
a
ly taken
t
h
e
R
f
,
”
,
g
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
”
.
,
.
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
”
”
,
,
,
”
,
r
0
9
“
u p a n d promot e d by brain power never s u rpasse d in
th e political history o f the worl d and th a t it led t o the
L a tin con quest of Const antinopl e and t h e downfa ll of
the E as t ern E mpire an d th e e s t ablishm e nt o f the
T urks i n Eu rope— alleg a tions of s u ch gre at breadth
t r u ly t h a t on e is c u rio u s to s e e th e ir fo u ndatio n s b ut
is not favo u red with a glimpse o f them At l e ngth
w e arriv e at some mention o f the I nfal libility o f the
Pope and the obe dien ce cl a im e d for him from his flock
The Gallican Ch u rch is introd u ced , with a r e ference to
“
the d ays o f its glory and of its intellect u al power O f
—
its glory we have nothing t o say w e d o not quite c o m
prehen d the all u sion ; o f its intel le ct u al pow e r we have
never heard b e fore this I n the list of cl a ssic Theologians
ther e is not fo u nd the name o f a sing le Gallic a n As
a n infl u e ntial ch u r chman a nd fi nished orator Boss u et
o c c u pies some space o n that p age o f F rench history
a nd for his gentleness o f spirit and polishe d scholarship
and noble docility Fenelon is a man that his co untry
sho u l d be pro u d o f B u t nei ther o f them was a name
o f weight in C atholic schools o f Th e ology
A s fo r the
denial o f I nfallibili t y it w a s qu it e op e n to the Galli
c ans to d eny it at the tim e b u t a sorry face indeed
th ey were able to p u t o n their arg u ment a gainst it
I n their other O pinion on the indepe nd e n ce o r a s they
styl e d it the liber ties of their lo c al Ch u rch th e y were
e v e n m ore uns u c cessful Th e se wer e so irre con cilable
with t h e Prima cy and C e nt r e sh ip o f u nity o f the So
v e r e i n P onti ff— a doctrine never qu estioned in t h e
g
C h u rch — a nd were so evid e n t ly the e ffu s ions o f a state
”
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
”
.
,
.
.
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
.
60
rid den Theology that wh e n we say they were broached
—
f
o
h
t e Gal lican clergy
by a portion
th irty fo u r o u t o f
o n e h u n d red a nd thir t y bishops
in t he year 1 6 8 2
— we give nearly th e ir full history
They wer e
t alked abo u t and b oasted o f from time to t ime
b u t never re c e ived r e al Theologi c al defe n ce o r
s upport
I remember th a t it was a common
e x ercise o f ingen uity with Theological stu dents of
thirty years ago to ende a vo u r to r e concil e th e Galli c a n
li ber t ies wi t h t h e re ceived doctrin e o f the Ch urch
i n j u st the same w a y th a t in the d a ys o f o ur philosophy
we u sed to b arr a ss o ur br a ins abo u t the s quari ng o f
the c ir cle a nd t h e trisection o f a n angle
We h a ve ne x t the Co u ncil of Con sta nc e show ing
in act as w e ll a s in word th at the Pop e s j u dg ments
and the P o e hims e lf were triable b
the
assembled
p
y
Ho w Mr
representatives o f t h e Christian world
Gladston e does go on " I n the Co u ncil o f Constance
no Pope s j udgment was trie d— in the Co un cil o f
—
Constance no P ope was tried b ut three prete n ders t o
the P apal throne that h ad kept the C h u rch in t u rmoil
and c onfu sion fo r year s had th e ir claims e x a mined
and w e re one a fter a nother set asid e a nd a Po nt ifl
whose ele ction by th e Co u ncil its e lf d id not a dmi t o f
—
do u bt o r disp u te w a s giv e n t o Christ e n dom M artin
V The action o f the Co u ncil was in p e rfe ct harmony
w i t h wha t w e have already written o n the Const it u tion
Ch rist s commission is always and
o f the C h u rch
—
u nce a singly in forc e the E ccles ia a udiens is nev e r
left wi t ho u t an E ccles ia d o cens
Pop e s will die
,
-
,
.
,
.
,
.
,
’
,
”
.
.
’
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
’
.
.
,
61
lik e o t her men and in provi d ing for the s u ccess io n,
delays may happen an d d i ffi c u lti e s may arise and t he
election itself may be disp ut e d or may b e u ncanonical
fo r the el e c t ors are n e ither impecc a bl e n o r infallible
and a good deal of time m u st then el a pse before mis
takes c a n be corre cte d or dispu t es adj u sted — an d mean
time errors and p e rnicio u s doctrin e s may be making
h avoc amongst th e faithful — it th e n devolv e s o n the
Ch u rch T e a ching to pro ceed in that form and in that
d irec t ion in which the Spirit of Tr u th g u i de s her u ntil
th e r e g ul a r or der of things shall be a gain established
The Co u ncil o f C onstance it was that c ondemne d
the errors o f J ohn W ick l ifle a man tho u ght m u ch of
amongst E nglish P rot e stant writ e rs bec a u s e th e y d o
n o t m ake t hemselve s ac qu ainted with his do ctrines ;
also J ohn H u ss who t a ught that any vassal o r s u b
l
lawf
u
lly
and
even
meritorio
u
s
y
proc
u
re
a
m
e
t
c
j
y
the d ea t h o f a d espotic lor d , by open violence or by
secret and premedi t ated plot even tho u gh an oath h ad
an d J e rom e o f P ragu e an el o qu ent
t o be violated
b u t noisy s u ppor t er o f W ick lifle and o f H u ss J ohn
H u ss and J e rome o f Prag u e w e r e h a n d ed o ver to the
secular arm an d condemned t o b e b u rnt I won d er
at Mr Gl a dstone sp e aking w ell o f Constance
From t h e Co u ncil o f C onstan ce to the Co u ncil o f
“
Tre nt — w e are informe d that it
notwithstanding
—
if
n
i
u
n
e
s
th e pr e do minan ce of I talian a d Rom a n nfl e c
it ha d no t d enied yet had n o t a ffi rmed e ith e r Propo
position th e I nfallibility o f th e P op e o r the u niv e rsal
obe dien c e cla imed fo r h im from his flo ck T he imp1i
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
”
.
,
.
.
,
,
”
,
,
.
~
62
ation c ontain e d in Mr Gla dston e s langu a ge is that
neither o f thes e P roposi t ions was ta ught by the Co u n cil
—
that it w a s nearer t o te aching th e ir opposite
o f Trent
Has h e ever l ooke d into the Canons and D ecrees of
the Co u ncil ? He m ust permit m e now to r e fer him
to session xx v ch a pter 2
The holy Synod c o m
man ds all Patriarchs P rimates Ar chbishops B ishops
& c that in their fi rst provincial S yno d th e y re ceive
a ll and every th e de fi nitions a nd stat utes o f t his holy
Syno d and that they also promise and profe ss d ue
o bed ien c e to the S u preme P o n t ifl
“
—
a
A nd a g ain t o s e ssion xx v ch pter 2 1 :
The
holy Synod d e cl a r e s th a t all and ev e ry the stat utes
made in this Sacred Co u ncil were so ma de a nd d ecr eed
as not t o infr ing e o n o r be tho ught t o infr inge o n
the a utho r ity o f the Apostol ic S e e
And th e la st
“
a c t o f the C o u ncil is to com mission
the presiding
L egates o f t he Holy See to ask in the n a me o f the holy
Synod from t h e Roman Po nt ifl t he c o nfir ma tio n of a ll
its d e c rees a nd d efi nitio ns
They wo u ld h a rdly have
s ubmit t ed a ll their d ecr ees a nd d efinitio ns t o an
a u thority which they believe d to be fallible
“
Testimony never t o be forgot t en and decl a r a
tions having I pre s u me an e qu al claim to immo rt a
—
l it y are now add u ced t o show
what ? As I hav e
already stated that C a t holics w e re not the n bo u nd to
b e liev e in th e I nfalli bi lity o f the P e pe t hat Catholics
“
w e re bo und to ob e y the Pope in matters reg a rding
“
their religio u s fai t h b ut their obe d ience to the law
a nd allegian ce they o we the Sovereign were com p let e
’
c
,
.
.
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
”
.
.
,
,
,
,
”
.
,
'
,
”
.
”
“
.
”
,
”
,
,
,
,
,
”
,
,
,
.
63
full
an d
per fe c t
and
u ndivi d e d inasm u ch as they
exten d to a ll o lit ica l le a l a n d civil r i hts o f the king
p
g
g
“
a nd his s u bj e cts
A nd
that t h e allegian c e d u e to
the king and the allegiance d u e to the P o p e are as
distin ct and divide d in their nat ure as two things
possib ly can b e
There was no ne cessity for hav ing re co u rse to solemn
“
D eclaratio n s P astoral A d dresses o r never to be
forgotten testimonies t o e x tort from u s an a d mission
o f these prin c iples o r facts
I n the pr e sent ho u r we
freely admit that before the de fi n ition was ma de in
th e Vatican C o un cil it was not ne cessary to b elieve
in P apal I nfalli bil ity we a d mit that a man may u p to
that time be a C atholic and assert that the Decrees
emanating from the P o nt ifl were n o t i rreformable u ntil
the c onsent o f t h e Ch u rch was a d ded to the tea ching
o f the Pope
W e adm it th a t it is in r elig io us and
n o t in civil matt e rs obedience is d ue to the Pope ;
that obe d ience and al le gian c e are due to the king
qu een o r e x isting l e gi t imate govern ment ; that the
domain c ommanded by t h e power o f the king is
divide d an d distinc t from that command e d b y the
Pope Mr Gladsto ne did no t t hen nee d t o take so
m u ch tro ub le abo u t the matter u nless he fan c ied it
The answers j ust given are those o f D r D oyle who
we are told more than any other Prelate repre sente d
his Ch u r ch and are tho u ght by o ur a u t hor to be in
viol e nt contrast wi t h the e x presse d views o f a l iving
“
P relate D r Manning the hea d he t e lls u s o f
the P apal C h u rch in E nglan d
The c o ntrast is as
,
,
,
,
”
.
,
,
”
.
“
”
,
,
”
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
.
.
,
.
,
,
,
”
,
”
,
.
,
,
”
.
,
64
at t his part o f th e Ex post ul a tion b u t the
A r chbishop s word s are not given fo r some pages and
no all u sion is then made to the present assertion s o
th a t "
think it better l e st we sho ul d forget it and also
that we may not keep a q u arrel that can be decided
o n the spot hanging ov e r o ur h ea ds to j oin iss u e at
once The words of t h e d e a d P r el a t e ar e s t ill b e fore
the reader s eye the wor d s of th e living Prel a t e are
Th e Spirit ual power knows with divine cer ta in ty the
limits o f its o w n j ur is dict io n and it knows t her e fore
t h e limits and the c ompetenc e o f t he civil power
A ny power which is independ e nt a nd
A n d ag a in
can a lone fi x the limi t s of its o w n j u ris dic t ion an d
c an t hereby fix the limits o f all other j u risdictions is
The Ch u rch o f J es u s Christ
ip s o fa cto s u preme
wi t hin the sphere of r eve la tio n of fa ith a n d mo r a ls
is all this
I can see no contradiction between the
living and t h e dead
Bo t h qu ite a gree as to th e dis
tinction and separat e ness o f th e civil and S piri t u a l
j u risdictions Both a dmi t that the obj ect o f th e S piri
t u al is som e thing spiri t u al Th e dead Pre late limits
th e civil j u risdiction e x pressly to politi c al legal and
"
c ivil rights
B u t —M r Gla dston e m ay interpose
"
he does not claim s u premacy for t he spirit u al j u ris
diction as D r Mannin g doe s The d ead Pr elate giv e s
u s no views at all on the qu estion
th e living Eye lat e
“
limits his assertion to matters o f religion and con
M e n m u s t say "
s c i e nce
es and N o on the s a me
qu estion in order t o c ontradi ct o ne another
s e rt e d
,
’
,
,
,
,
,
.
’
,
,
,
”
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
.
.
,
”
”
.
.
.
,
,
.
”
.
.
,
66
I t was e x pressly d enie d that he had any title
d ire c t or indirect to interfere in civil gover nment
I t is not a ss e rted now N o rev e rsion o f P roposition
“
The Prelates s a id n o thing of th e right o f the
Pope to d e fi ne the li mits wh ich divide th e civil
—
power from the spiritu al
They said nothing t h e n
They
o f co u rse there is nothing here to b e rev e rsed
said nothing beca u se they wer e not asked the ques
tion B ut h ad t hey been asked the answ e r wo uld and
—
sho ul d have been then as it is now the Pope in
the e x ercise of his s u preme a u thority m us t k no w the
d omain over which that a u thority e x ten d s and by
the fact has the power and the righ t o f fixing its
limits
An observation may appropriately be let in here o n
what o ur au thor says o f the Prelates o r others who
gave evidence to the B ritish Government in the Com
missions of 1 8 2 4 1 8 2 5 and of the C atholic body being
“
bo und by them a s selected and typic al witn e sses
There is nothing actu ally giv e n from their evidence
that we sho uld r efii se to be bo u nd by and in general
as far as they are e x ponents of Catholic do ctrines we
adopt them ; b u t if they become o n any qu estions
ex ponents o f their o wn private views they no longer
remain to u s in the relation o f professional witnesses
and their opinio n s are ex actly o f the v al u e th at th e
so u ndness o f j u dgment and range o f eru ditio n o f their
authors entitle them to I f for instan ce any of them
s u pplied even in s ubstance the phrase that Mr Glad
stone sets d own to t heir cre di t when he says that
,
”
.
,
.
,
”
.
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
”
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
67
ab u n dan ce were obtained that in regar d
to the obno xio u s doctrines being obsolete beyond
revival every assurance co uld be given that did n o t
—
r
re quire the s ha me of a f o r ma l r et a cta tio n we
have no sh are in th e ir sentiment O r if a ny of them
vol u ntee r e d a fl ipp ant opinion o n grav e a n d larg e ly
disp u ted fa cts of Papal history for th e obvio u s p ur
pose o f smooth ening matters with his interrogators
he is perhaps the type o f a clever and fo r the
time being convenient b u t not of a Catholic witness
O ther o b s e rvations a lso S prinkl e d h e re and there
thro u gh t he Ex post ulation wo u ld call fo r some co m
m e nt did time and p a tience p e rmit ; b u t we m u s t
p u sh o n B e t we e n Mr Gladstone and myself very
little progress is ma d e and it is a w e ary w a y yet
to th e co nclusmn W e hav e the I n fallibil ity to go
into a g a in b u t this time fully and w e have to treat o f
ob edience e x ha u stively F irs tly however a d u ty
d e volves o n t h e a u thor
He has shown his pity for
his qu iet m in de d and ind e e d for his lay Roman C at ho
lic fe llo w co u ntrymen gener a lly H e h a s expre ssed in
strong lang u age his d ee p sympathy wi t h D r Vo n D ol
linge r and his fe w c o u rage o u s adher e n t s
Here is a
still wider a nd more venerabl e obj ect o f his condolence
T he E piscop al order o f t h e L a tin Ch u rch is degr a d ed
a monstro u s change in the constit ution of that Ch u rch
h a s b e en cons u mmat e d
I s proof re qu ired ? B ehold
“
it in the change a m o u nting t o r e vol u tion o f form
in t h e present (t h e V a tican ) D ecrees as comp a r e d with
“
o ther co nc ili a t ory conci liar
de
re
s
The
Ca
nons
c
e
(
Answer s i n
,
,
”
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
’
,
,
.
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
.
-
,
,
-
,
.
.
.
.
,
,
,
”
.
F
68
the Co uncil of Trent w e re at least the C anons o f a
real Co uncil and t h e strain in which they a r e pro
mulgat ed is this
H aec s ac ro s a nc t a ec u menic a e t
d
eneralis
Tri
entina
Synod
u
s
in
Spirit
u
S
a
n
to
l
e
gi
o
g
tim e congreg a ta 1n ea p re s iden t ib us e is dem trib u s
Apostolicis L egat is h o r t at ur or d o cet or s t at uit or
d e ce rnit and the like
Obiter it is pl e a s a nt to fi nd
M r Gl adstone recognising a n (E c u menical Cou nc il as
a re a l one H e has improv e d since he t reated the
Si x th Proposition of the Syll a b u s
I ts Canons are — C a non e s e t d e creta Sa cr o sanc t i
(E c u m e nici c o nc ilii Tri d en t ini
B u t what we have no w to do with is the Consti
t a t i c D ogmatica Prim a de E ccl e si a Christi edi t a in
sessione t ertia o f the Vatic a n C o u n cil I t is not a
C ons t it u tion m ade by the C o un c il b ut one prom ulg a ted
in th e Co u ncil
Th e h u mbl e share o f th e as
sembled E pis copate in th e t rans a ction (s ic) is r epr e
sent e d by s a cr o app r o ba n te co ncilio
Poor E piscopat e poor B ishops "how kindly they
tak e t o t h e ir d e gradation
H o w fa ithfully they cling
H o w bravely
t o the Head that has d e graded them
an d how loyally they r a lly ro u nd th e ir Chief a nd go
“
into prison and to d e a t h " H o w m a ny
with him
h ave d eserte d him o u t o f th e bitter feeling of th e ir
degradation ?
M r Gl adstone y o u know nothing
ab o u t u s
B u t the C a non e s C o n c ilii Tridentini a nd the D og
—
m atica C o n s t it ut io de Ecclesi a Christi t he C o u ncil
—
I
s
?
w
l
T
rent
and
the
atican
Co
u
nci
hat
of
them
of
V
of
”
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
”
,
,
.
.
.
.
“
”
.
,
.
,
.
”
.
,
,
”
.
,
.
,
,
69
it
fa ct t h at t h e fi rst was a C o u ncil o f B is hop s and the
second a Co u ncil o f the P op e
I s it fa ct t ha t do g
m a tic d ecr e es were m a d e in the o ne a nd that it was
only dogmati c d e cr ee s alre a dy mad e were anno u n ced
in t he o t her ? I s it fa ct that th e H cec S a cr o s a ncta
S y n o d us decer nit o f Tr e nt di ffe rs vitally from th e
d o cem us et d efi nimus o f the Vatican
I s it fa ct
“
that th e phras e
is a
S a cr a app ro ba nte co n cilio
novel t y intro du ced in th e V atic a n Co u ncil for the
degradation o f the E piscopate of th e L a tin Ch u rch ?
I a m so weary o f contradicting Mr Gla d sto ne that
I will mer ely give t h e r e ader a lit t l e a dditional info r
m a tion which Mr Gl a ds t on e h a s n o t giv e n and let
him p rono u nce hims e lf o n t h e fa cts
The C o u ncil of Trent was a C o unci l o f Bishops
"es b ut a C o u ncil o f Bishops who incorporated
into ev e ry D ecr ee th e y m a d e th e fa ct that the three
L egates o f t h e Pop e w e r e pr e si ding at their d e libera
tions and d efi nit io n s
H ae c Sacro s anct a Synod u s in
Spiri t u San o to congr e gat a in ea p r es iden t ibu s
and no t cont e n t
e is d em t r ibu s Ap o s t o licis L eg a tis
with this provision for the Pa pal right in session
xx v cap 2 1 d e clare d all they h a d d o ne to b e depen
dent o u t he A postolic See a nd r e fe rr e d the enti r e
question o f books and c e ns u res to t he P o nt ifl ; a nd in
the fi nal s ession — a contin u at ion of session xx v — p o s
t ulat e d o f the Holy F a t h e r thro u gh th e s a me three
L e gat e s a con firmation of a ll t ha t t hey h a d decr ee d
and de fine d I h a ve all u ded to the t ex t of the post u
,
-
,
,
,
,
”
,
,
.
,
.
,
.
”
.
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
,
'
.
,
,
.
7O
lation b efore b u t as it is in pla ce here it may be r e
at ed in fu l l
e
p
I ll u strissimi D omini Rev erendis s imique P a tres
placet n e vobis ut a d laud em D ei Omn ip o t e nt is h u ic
Saer ae (Ec umenicae S yn o d o fin is imp o nat ur ? e t o m
niu m e t s in ulo r u m qu ae tam s u b fe l rec P au lo I II
g
e t Ju lio III
m
s
u
b
u
a n c t is s imo Domino nostro Pio
u
s
q
IV Romanis P o nt ific ib us in e a decre t a e t d efinit a
s unt co nfir ma tio n o m in e S a nette hu us S n o d i
per
j
y
A p o s t o lic ae Sedis L egatos et P r aes ide n t es a b e a t issimo
—
Re s po nd er unt P lacet
Romano P o nt ifice p et a t ur
T he Vati c an Cou ncil w a s a Co uncil o f the Pope
who in corporated into the fi rst dogmatic co nstitution
p ublished in the Co uncil and which sets for th th e aim
—
the fa ct that the Bishops o f
a n d obj ect o f the Co u nci l
the Ch urch were sitting with him and judg ing I t
is important that the words sho u ld be giv e n in ful l
Nu nc a u te m s ede nt ib us n o b is cum e t j u dica n tibus
u n iversi orbis E p is c o p is in hanc oecume nic a m Sy n o
d u m au c t o r it at e N ostra in Spirit u S a n o to co ngr e g at is
in nix i D ei ver b o scripto e t tra d ito pro u t ab Eccl e si a
C at h o lica s anc t e c us t o dit fim e t gen u ine e x p o sit um a c
e x hac P etri C athedr a in c o nspe c t u omniu m
c e p imus
s al ut ar e m C hristi d o o t r in a m p r o fit er i e t d e clar are con
s t it uimus a d ver s is e rr o r ib us potest a te nobis a D eo
tradita p ro script is at qu e d a mnat is
The answer to the second qu estion I have p ut is
evident fro m this t e x t o f th e V a tican Co u ncil and the
on e j u st qu oted from the C o u n ci l of Trent
,
,
,
,
.
,
.
.
.
.
,
.
,
,
”
.
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
”
,
.
,
.
71
D ogm atic D ecrees were ma de in the C o u ncil o f
Trent by the Bishops d ep en d en t o n an d a wa iting the
co n r ma tio n o f the P a e ; D ogmatic D e crees were
fi
p
mad e in t h e Vatican Co uncil by the Bishops co nj o intly
,
w ith the P op e
n o b is c um
j
D og matic D ecre es were not edita
p ublished
to th e Chu rch in the C o unci l o f Trent beca u se as y e t
th e y lacke d the con fi rmation of t h e P ope D ogm a tic
“
—
D ecree s w e r e e d ita
p ub lishe d— in the Co u ncil of
the V a tican b e ca u s e as the Pope j u dge d con j ointly
with the Bishops his con fi rmation was give n by th e
fact
The third qu e stion whether the form H ae c Sacro
sancta Syno d u s dec er n it d iffe rs v it a lly from th e
d o ce mus e t d e fin imus o f t h e V a tica n is from th e
“
a bove e a sy o f sol u tion
Th e d ece rnit o f Tr e nt is
“
—
inco mp le te a n d er p ecta n t th e
d o ce mus
of the
V a t ic a n is co mp le te and d efin itive
The fo u rth is the great qu estion and the o ne o n
whic h d e p e n d t he c harges o f the degradation o f th e
“
E piscopate o f the ch a nge amo u nting to revol u tion
in t h e form o f the D e crees o f Co u ncils and o f the
“
e x istence in th e Ch u rch at pr e sent o f a spirit of
c e ntraliza t ion as fatal to vigoro u s life in the Ch u rch
a s in th e State and of this spirit h a ving re a che d its
l a st and furthest point o f possible advancem e nt and
e x a l t a tion
W e m ust look clos e ly into this espe
Sacro ap pr o b a nt e conc ilio
c ially into the phrase
I f it involve the d e gra d ation o f th e E piscopate it
certainly wo uld no t be a dm itte d by the Theolog ia ns of
ud ic a n t ib us
”
—
.
,
.
,
,
,
.
,
”
,
,
.
”
.
,
”
,
,
,
,
”
,
.
”
,
.
,
72
the great Gallic an C h urch in the days of its glory
They stood boldly up for the righ t s of t h e Bishops
and in opposition to the pret e nsions o f the P opes
And y e t positiv e approb a tion is som e thing more than
tacit assent and tacit a ss e nt which according to t h e
great Gallican a u thority To ur nely m e ant sil e nce
and non —
reclamation was according to them a s ufh
ci ent s ha r e fo r t he u nivers a l Episcopa t e o f the C h u rch
to have in the es: ca thedr a de fi nitions o f the Pop e
Their theory r e qu ir e d two elem e nts to an infallibl e
d efi nition a Pap a l an d an E piscopal If the t e aching
commenced with the Bishops it re qu ired the c o nfir
mation of th e Pope
if it commen ce d wi t h th e Pope
it re qu ired the assen t of t he Bishops But th e y s a w
no di ffe rence in the I nfallibility whichever el e m e nt
was p u t in motion fi rst The form Sacro appro
bante concilio wo u ld have e x actly s u ited them I n
tr uth it is a style o f de fi nition most respec t ful to t he
G allican th e ory
It is n o t t h e n ins u l t ing to th e E piscop a te N e ither
is it a n ove l ty a ch ang e amo u nti ng to revol u t ion
W e have more than two wor d s to s a y o n this head
t e t r ac ing the his t ory o f Ge neral Co u n c ils from
Trent the fi rs t met with is the 5 t h o f L ateran A D
a nd compl e t ed
1 5 1 2 c omm e n ce d u nd e r Ju li u s II
u nder L eo X I n it the phr a s e Sacro app r o b a nt e
co ncilio is fo und a t the he a d or incorpor a ted into
e very important D ecree wh e t her of Juli u s o r o f L eo
This at on ce dispos e s o f t he ch a rge that it was a n
innovation o f the Vatican C o u ncil I n t he ind ulge nce
”
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
.
”
.
,
,
.
.
,
,
”
.
,
.
,
,
.
,
.
.
,
,
.
”
,
,
.
,
,
.
74
temporary restoratio n o f the G re e ks to the u nity o f
the Ch u rch took place after they h a d give n u p th e ir
error abo ut th e Holy Ghost and s u ng conj o i ntly with
the L atins the word F ilio qu e in the creed I n the
“
D ecr e e of F a ith h e h a s nos s a cr o app r o ba nte co ncilio
d amnamus et r epr o b amus omnes qu i neg a re pr aes ump
s er int Sp ir it um Sanct u m a P atr e Filio qu e proc e dere
The G reeks a c cepted the phrase as well as the con
d e mna t io n o f their e rror
I n the First Co unci l o f L yon s I nnocent I V p u b
lishes th e D e crees S a cro a ppr o b ant e Concilio b u t
Sacro p r aesent e
d eno u nces the E mperor Frederic
co ncilio H e th u s tak es upon himself all the r e spo nsi
b ilit y o f the second act whilst he makes t h e B ishops
h is c c operators in the fi rst I n the Fo u r t h o f L at e r a n
“
u nder I nnoc e nt Il I it is N o s a u tem sacro et u niver
sali ap pro b ant e c on cilio c re dimus e t
In
L a t e r a n III unde r Ale x ander I II the phra se is Sacri
o b a t io n e C o n c ilii
I
n
the
Se
ond
of
L
at
e
ran
a
r
c
pp
u nd e r I nno cent I I an d in the First u nder C allis t us
I I the presiding Ponti ff simil a rly de fi nes an d decre es
in his own n ame with the consent and approbation o f
th e a ssisting Fathers
W e are now as fa r back in the history o f the Ch ur c h
a s t h e year o f o ur L ord 1 1 2 2 and have arrived a t
the fi rst Gen e ral o r (E c u menic a l Co u ncil o f th e We st
and w e fi nd that th e use o f th e W e o f Roy al d e o l a
r a t ion and o f the phr a se wi t h th e approb a tion o f
which w e r e bro ugh t forward by
t h e S a cr e d Co uncil
M r Gladsto ne t o prove by th e ir nov elty a nd th e ir
in no va t io n in the Vati c an Co u ncil th e present de
,
,
”
.
”
.
.
,
.
”
,
,
,
”
.
,
-
.
.
.
,
,
.
,
,
”
.
.
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
”
,
”
,
.
,
,
75
gra de d
w it h o u t
s
ta te
of
the L atin E pis copate is the r u le
in e very Co u ncil in which the P op e
,
n,
t
i
o
p
e x ce
,
presid e s in p e rson
I t is r ea lly wonderful that M r Gladstone did no t
look o r in qu ir e into th e u s u a l forms o f C on ciliary D e
cre e s before h e threw h is hands u p in that ex t r a o r d i
n a ry manner ov e r th e wo e s a nd th e downfa ll of the
L a tin E piscop ate I pres u me h e kn e w that the Pope
preside d at th e V a tican C o u ncil in person ; he cer
t a inly kne w for he gives the t e x t himself that he
preside d at Trent by his thr ee L egates an d it o u g ht
n o t r e qu ire m u c h refl e ction to concl u d e that the dif
fe r e nce in th e ch aract e r o f t h e Presid e nts wo ul d in
volve a d ifl e r e nc e in th e forms o f de fi ni t ion A ll
Catholics have a t a ll tim e s con c e d e d t o th e Pope
primas e t p raecip uas partes in the te a ch ing o f the
Ch u rch wha t th e n more n at u r al than that h e to whom
th e principal part was a dmitted to belong sho uld
when pre siding in person speak in his proper ch a ra c
ter
W h at recklessness o f assertion o ur au thor ind u lges
in thro u gho u t this r e markabl e prod u ction o f his
.
.
.
,
,
,
.
”
,
,
,
TH E
“
QUE S TI O N OF
D o c e m us
I N F AL L I BI L IT "
d ivinit us
OF
r e v ela t u m
TH E P O P
d ogma
E
.
esse defi
n im us Roman u m P o nt ific e m c u m e x C athe d ra lo qu i
t u r id e st c um omni u m Chris t iano r um Pastoris e t
D o c t o r is munere fungens pro s u prema s u a Apostolica
auc t o rit at e, d o ct rinam de fide vel mo r ib us ab un iversa
et
,
,
,
,
76
E ccl e sia t e ne ndam d efinit per assist ent iam d iv inam
ipsi in B e a to P e t ro pr o mis s am e a infallib ilit at e p o ller e
qu a Divinus Red e mptor Ecclesiam s u am in d efi niend a
doctrina d e fid e ve l mo r ibus inst r uct a m esse v o luit :
ide o que ejus Rom a ni P o nt ific is d e finit io ne s e x sese no n
a u te m e x consens u E cclesi ae irrefo r mab ile s e sse
H a ving given th e d e fini t ion Mr Gladston e proc e eds
to arg u e ag a inst it after a strange fa shion The Pope
had claimed I nfa llibility s a cro appr o b ant e Concilio
only in the cas e of his t e aching
Mr
ca thed r a
Gl a dstone will hav e it that the privil e ge is s e cur e d to
hi m in a far mor e u nlimit e d m a nner ; in fa ct that it
is left optional with him to bring u n d er its infl uence
“
anything a n d e v e rything h e pl e as e s
There are
“
twelv e th e ori e s he is told
bandie d to a nd fro
“
am angst Rom an Theologi ans a nd the priv a t e con
“
sci e nce o f the Catholi c h a s no g uide to dir e c t him
in his choice e x cept the discarded a g e n cy of his pri
vate j udgm e nt
whilst on the other h a nd the Pop e
“
can declare th a t a mat ter is ex c a thed r a when and
as he pleases
The pla in E nglish o f all this is — the I nfallibility is
a sham the Pope knows it is a sh a m th e re are n o
divin e ly fix ed limits to its e x ercis e it is a ll in t h e
Pope s o wn h a nds he c an do a s h e wish e s with it h e
“
wh e n and a s
c an bring a nything he pleas e s u nder it
h e ple a ses This forsooth is an Ex post ula t ion with
Roman C atholics
The twelve theories abo u t t he meaning of t he wor ds
ea: c a thedr a
h a ve t he s am e fo u nd a tion in fa ct
,
,
,
”
.
,
.
.
”
,
,
.
.
,
.
”
,
,
”
,
”
,
,
,
”
.
,
,
,
’
,
,
,
”
”
.
,
”
,
,
77
that the fi a nge amo u nting to revolut ion in the for m
o f the Vatic an D ecrees h a s b ee n shown to have h a d
Th e s u bj e ct the obj ect t h e m atter a nd the c o n ditions
o f e n: ca thedr a teaching ar e la id down in t h e d e fi nition
its el f w ith a fu ln e ss a nd a distinctness t h a t l e av e no
room for theory o r O pinion a bo u t w h at w e ar e bo un d
The circ u ms t a nces u n der which t her e is
t o believe
c ertainty of the presence o f infallibl e teaching a re clear
and int elli gible to all Catholics The circ u mstances
u n der which there is an appro x imation to c ert a inty
are qu estions for Theologi a ns a n d are discusse d freely
in o ur schools
These ar e probably the tw e lve (o r
p e rhaps mor e) th e ori e s t h a t a re
b a ndied abo ut
amongst Rom a n Th e ologians
F o r inst a nc e o n e of
th e m wo u ld b e I s the P op e infa llible in teaching a
part ic ul a r Ch urch say the Ch u r ch of F rance in th e
matter o f faith or is it possibl e that he co uld teach
error in a D ecre e dir e cte d to it b u t not to the Uni ve r
But thes e schol a stic disp u tes no more
sal Ch u rch
a ffe ct the d e fi ned tr u t h o f P a pal I nfa llibility th a n the
con t rove rsy abo u t th e ma nner in which t he Sacr a ments
int e rfe res wi t h the d o ctr ine tha t the
c on fe r grac e
S a cr a men t s d o confer gr a ce
Ther e is an other meaning an d one implying a d if
fic ul t y in conne x io n with t his doctrine of infallible ea:
ca thed r a t e a chin g to b e t a ken from the words of the
p a r a gr a ph u nder consideratio n b u t I do not think it
was intend e d by Mr Gladstone — it is not in his line
L est it s h o uld have b een it is b etter to dea l with it
”
‘
.
,
,
,
.
.
,
.
”
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
.
,
,
,
.
.
,
.
78
N o on e b u t the Pope can declare ea: ca thedr a
wh a t is ca: ca thed r a he writes and th e meaning
that th e words o ught to c a rry is
Ther e is no o ne
b u t th e Pop e can decl a re i nfa llibly wha t it is that is
infallibly ta u ght Th e inconveni e nt conse qu e nc e t h a t
follows is that the practic a l a pplic a tion of I nfa llibility
b e gins a nd e nds w ith t he Pop e I c anno t d e cl a re
infa l/ibly t hat a c e rtai n do ctrin e is ta u ght me infu l
libly
O f what u se th e n is t h e privilege to me ?
H o w d oes it rea c h my fa i t h ?
How can l b eli e v e
w hat is propo u nded to m e u nless I fi rst k now infallibly
th at it h a s b ee n in fallibly propo und e d
Th e sam e sty l e o f r e asoning applies to inspiration
N o o ne c a n know by inspiration wha t is o r wh a t is not
ta u ght by inspiration e x c e pt the i divid u al inspired
B u t the a nswer is n ot fa r o ff I t is not n e c e ss a ry t h a t
—
l
it sho u d be known by inspiration it is s u ffi ci e nt t h a t
it b e know n with c e rt a inty th a t th e te a ching is in
spired a nd simil a rly it is not necessary that th e p e r
son ta u ght sho u ld be infallibl e in his r e c e ption o f t he
teachi ng as w ell as th a t th e person t e aching sho uld
be infa llible in his comm u nica t ion o f it I t is qu ite
s u ffi cient that he who is tau ght sho u ld know for c e r
t a in when he is t a u ght infallibly ; fa ith th e n com e s
in a nd does the rest This ho we v e r is n e c e ssary for
th e Ch u rch in it s aggr e gat e form The u niversal
Ch u rch c a nnot r eceive false doctrin e any mor e tha n
the E ccles ia do cens can imp a r t it The gates o f H e ll
a re never t o prevail ag ainst Her
“
”
,
,
”
.
,
.
,
,
.
.
“
.
.
,
,
.
.
,
,
.
.
.
79
“
tho u gh as M r Gla d stone p u ts it no
d oc u m e nt which the Pope iss u es shall be vali d witho u t
se al a nd t he seal r e mains u n d er hi s own lock and
k e y we o f the Ch u rch c a n a lways iden t ify th e cha
r a c t er s which th e s ea l o f o ur T e ach e r impr e ss e s
We pass a w a y a t length from the Pop e s I n fallibility
a privilege not a s it is commonly d e scribe d p er s o na l
b ut ofi cia l not e x ercisable at th e caprice o f the indiv i
d u al Ponti ff b ut according to th e r e qu irem e n t s o f his
—
n o t a n inherent q u ality o f th e m a n b u t an
o ffi c e
assis t a n c e from wi tho u t from the Spirit o f G o d
w hich k eeps a n e rring man from a ct u a l error w h e n
“
h e is tea c hing t h e Ch u rch o f Christ
C um
omni u m Ch ris t iano r um Pa storis e t D o c t o ris muner e
A nd th u s ,
,
.
,
”
,
.
’
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
fu ng en s
,
”
.
a u t hor n o w ind ulges in o n e o f his u s u a l d i
ubj ect in h an d for the h u mane
i
n
from
th
e
s
re
s
o
s
s
g
p u rpose of in d u cing state smen to withdraw civil
“
pro t ection from Roman Catholics
A r e ligio u s
soci e ty which d elivers volleys o f spirit u al cens u res
in order to impede the p e rformance o f civil d u ties
d oes all the m ischief th a t it is in its pow e r to do an d
brings into qu estion in th e fa ce o f the State its t itle
W hat a vir u s m u st be at work
t o civil p r o tectio n
within when it b e trays its e lf in symptoms s u ch a s
th e s e ? To s u ch a charge if it be n ecess a ry to r e ply
fo r I do u bt if o ne stat e sm a n in E ngland wo u ld s u b
scribe to it — w e have only to state b e fore Go d and
m en th a t we are ta u ght b v o ur C h u rch to ob ey t h e
c ivi l law and not to imp ed e it ; to fulfi l o ur c iv il d ut ies
O ur
.
,
,
,
,
,
”
.
,
,
80
not to e vade them W e hav e no oth e r answer to
m a k e to Mr Gladston e s vag u e a nd u nd e fi n e d b u t mos t
inj u riou s cal umny on o u r Ch u rch
a nd
.
’
.
,
.
S OM
E T H IN G
A B OUT
M O RA L S
.
I n ord e r to show the comp r ehensiveness o f t h e
P ope s cl a i m u nd e r th e ne w d e fi ni t ion Mr Glads t on e
p uts a q uestion to the Rom a n C a s uists abo u t the
e x tent of the dom a in Of m o r a ls A nd as h e says
th e y will not answer him— h e did not wait long for
the answ e r— h e has reco u rse to Mr M a tthew Arnold
and o ut o f him he te aches u s that s e ven t y fi ve per
cent o f what we do b e longs to th e d e p a r t ment o f
“
C on d uc t h e proceeds to m a ke nearly co
c ond u ct
e x tensive wi t h m orals Th u s seve nty five per cent
o f o u r lives are h a nded ov e r at once to t h e Pop e
“
al a rming
I s it not ?
B u t who will g u a r a n t e e u s
the other fo u rth ? C e rt a i nly n ot S t P a u l who s a ys
wh e th e r ye e a t o r dr ink o r whatever ye do do a ll to
the glory O f Go d
Mr Gla dst o n e m u st pardon me if
I observe en p a s sa nt th a t he might as well h a v e t ak e n
“
th e fo u r fo u rths from St Pa ul who say s a l and
“
an d is a somewhat high e r a uthori ty than
w ha tever
Mr A rnol d O r if he had sinc e r e ly sou ght t he
O pinion o f the Roman Mor a lists h e wo ul d h a v e be e n
informed by them that every delib e rat e a ct performed
by man is morally goo d o r morally bad Th e y infe r
from certain words of the M aster to the e fl e c t that
“
m an shall have t o a cco u nt fo r every idle word h e
’
.
,
.
,
,
,
.
.
.
,
”
.
-
.
.
,
.
,
,
,
’
.
.
,
,
-
.
,
”
,
.
.
,
.
,
,
,
82
that o u r morals a n d o u r faith are u nder his S u preme
a nd I nfal lible Gu idance w e do not b eli e v e that he ca n
Th e y cam e
ma ke o r u n m ak e either morals or fa ith
to him who hel d the O ffi c e fi rst alr e ady m a d e a nd they
h a ve come do w n from h im th ro u gh a s u cc e ssion of
c u stodi a ns w itho u t fl a w o r st a in to o u r day wh e n we
fi nd them in the keepin g of th e S upr e me P o nt ifl Pi u s
ninth O f the name I t is his d u ty to w a tch lest a ny
change be introd uced into those tr uths of fa ith and
“
morals that have been pr e vio u sly ta u ght
N ihil
I t is his d u ty a lso to s upply additional
inno vet ur
tr u t hs o ut of the s a me original d eposit according to
the ne cessities o f th e fa ithful and in his ful fi lment of
“
these d u ties he is not a lo n e
N ot I says St Pa ul
“
b u t the grace o f Go d w it h me
I n b ri e f w e b e li e v e
“
that th e words of the commission F ee d my lam b s
fe e d my sh e ep hav e not pass e d a way that th e y h a v e
b ee n a lw a ys a nd a r e still in vigo u r a nd that Chris t
empow e rs P iO N ono as fu lly as he empow e re d Pe t e r to
te a ch men his doctrine a nd to k ee p th e m u p t o hi s
We are perfectly r e signed to have
c ode of m orals
all o u r actions an d a ll o u r b eli e fs h a nded ov e r t o the
P o pe in this way We are satis fied with o ur system ;
we are happy in o ur fa ith I n dee d yo u might e nvy
u s Mr Gla ds t one
,
.
,
,
,
’
,
.
,
.
”
.
,
,
”
,
.
.
,
”
,
.
,
,
”
,
,
,
.
.
.
,
.
.
ON
O B DI N C
E E
E
.
Bad as I nfallibility a ppeared t o be something
immensely worse t u rns u p now under the style a nd
,
83
t itle o f obe d ience
I nfal libi lity h ad a reach as w ide
as it p lea s ed the P op e or those wh o m a y p r o mp t the
P op e to make it
Un derstan d this y o u Roman
Catholic e x postu lated It is all a pr e tence abo u t Infalli
b ilit y b e ing anything instit u t e d by Christ and the
Pope a nd t hose who promp t him are well aware O f it
I t is all in their o wn han ds they can make it reach
as far as they please an d there is nothing and nobody
to prev e nt th e m H o w pitilessly does yo u r friend
ins ult y o u in yo u r fai t h " Which do yo u admire more
the vigo u r o f his a u dacity o r the in fi rmity o f his
re asoning ? B ut l e t u s proc ee d ; we have had t arr y ings
“
eno u gh in this wearisome chapt e r
The so u nding
name o f I nfallibility has fascin a t e d the p ublic mind
an d rivett e d it on th e fo u rth chapter o f the Cons t itution
d e E c cl e sia
The third chapter in which the
has r e ceived
d octrine o f O be d i e nce is laid down
m u ch less than j u stice
O b e dience is n o t hampe red
lt
by th e qu a lifying condition o f etc ca thedr a
r e nders the P a p a l j u dgme nts u nappeal able and irre
v e r s ible ev e n wher e th e y d o not present t h e cr e d e ntia ls
o f I nfa llibility
I t st o ps the m o uth o f any man who
“
“
wo u ld pass j udgment u p on them
I t h as an iron
“
gripe I t d e mands conformi t y in cases in which he
admits it to be possible h e m ay be wrong b u t fi nds
it intol e rable to be tol d so
The reader who is no t a C a tholic take s fo r grante d
—
from th e s e st a tements F irstly th a t this d octrine o f
O b edienc e was heard o f fo r the fi r s t time in the t hird
.
,
”
,
.
,
.
,
.
,
'
.
,
.
,
’
‘
.
,
“
,
”
.
”
“
.
”
.
’
.
”
.
,
”
.
,
,
,
G
84
“
chapter of the Constit u tion de Ecclesia o f t he V at ic an
Co u ncil
Secondly that all that Mr Gl adstone has said ab o u t
it a b ove are facts L et u s see — b ut fi rst let u s have
t h e teaching o f the third chapt e r be fore u s
“
The faithfu l and pastors O f every rite and digni ty
in d ivid ually and collectiv e ly a r e bo u nd by t h e d u t y
o f hi e rarchical s u bordination and tr u e ob e di e nce n o t
only in matters relating t o faith a nd m orals b u t also
in those th a t belong to the discipline and r e gimen O f
t h e Ch u rch spread thro u gho u t the worl d
This is a
doctrine o f Catholic tr u th from which no one c an
d eviat e witho u t d anger o f faith and Of s a lvation
We also teach and decl a re that h e (the P ope ) is
the s u preme j u dge o f the faithfu l a nd that in all
ca u ses re qu iring ecclesiasti c al e x amination reco u rse
c a n be had to him
and that the j udgment o f t he
Apostolic See whose a u t hority is s u preme can be set
aside by no one N either is it al lowe d to any o ne to
prono u nce j udgment o n his j u dgment
I find som e thing very like this same hierarchical
s u bordination and Obedience to the Rom a n P o nt ifl
prescribe d in the C o u ncil o f Trent Sess xx v d e
The Holy Sy nod mor e over
Refo r ma tio ne cap ii
comman ds all Patriarchs Primates Archbishops
Bishops & c to promise and pro fess tr u e O b e di e nce t o
the Roman P o nt ifl
Th e Pastors O f every d ignity
a re e x pressly d e signat e d h e re Patriarchs Primates
“
and the obligation o f tr u e obedienc e is a s
emphatically laid o n them as in the words o f the
”
.
,
.
.
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
”
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
”
.
,
,
.
,
,
.
,
.
.
.
,
,
,
”
”
.
,
,
,
”
,
85
“
this was a real Co u n cil and its
“
canons were th e c anons Of the Sacred (Ecu menical
Co u nci l o f Trent n ot const it u tions mer ely p ro mul
g a ted in the Co u ncil
And l e st any o ne sho uld in
sin u ate that this tr u e O bedience was limited to fa ith
an d morals we h a ve only to r e fer to the passage
in which the
already cited from S e ss xx v c a p
Fathers Of the C o u ncil d e clar e that all an d every the
de crees of the Co u ncil whether regarding the r efo r
mation o f morals o r eccl e siastical d is cip lin e were ma d e
“
in s u ch a way a s th a t it sho u ld be understood that
the a u thority o f the Rom a n Ponti ff in thes e m a tter s
remained always s u pr e me
S O m u ch fo r disciplin e
I n the contin u ation o f th e same S e ss xx v in the D e
cree o f th e 4 t h D ecember it is ord a ine d th a t the
B ishops sho u ld report to the Holy Se e the ab u ses in
the matter o f ind ulgences e x isting in th e ir respective
“
Ch u rches in order that th e Pope may
by his a u
tho r ity and wisdom decree what wo u ld b e u sefu l fo r
the universal Ch u r ch
Again in Sess vi cap 1
n o n resi d ing Bishops m etropolitan o r s ufl ra an
are
g
to be deno unce d to the Roman P o nt ifl who will in
virt u e o f his s u preme a uthority inflict p u nishm e nt o n
th e m absent and provide fo r th e ir ch urches as un der
Right o f regi
God s help he may j u dge e x p e dient
men and fi nality Of j u d gment ar e her e most lib erally
accorded t o the Pope by the Holy Syno d
This id e a Of O b e dienc e to t h e P ope in discipline
an d in Ch u rch r e gimen o r administration is ther e fore
not original in t h e Vatic an C o un ci l The C o u ncil of
”
,
”
,
”
.
,
.
.
,
.
,
,
”
.
.
.
.
,
,
,
,
”
.
,
.
.
-
,
.
,
,
,
‘
,
,
,
,
,
’
”
.
.
,
,
.
86
Trent is qu ite as Ultramontan e in its con cessions
to the Papal prerogatives B u t the thing did not
begin ev e n at Trent I n the n inth year o f th e P o n
t ificat e o f E u gene I V A D 1 4 3 9 in the C o u ncil o f
Florence after several sessions spent in disc u ssion
and e x pl a nation a D ecree o f Union was s u bscribed
by t h e Greek and L a ti n F a th e rs conj oin t ly in which
amongst m any other v a l u able d e clar a tions we rea d
the following : We also d e fi ne tha t the Roman
P onti ff has primacy ov e r the entire Chu r ch and th a t
he is the s u c cessor O f St Pe ter Prince o f the A postles
an d tr u e Vi c ar O f Christ and that h e is the Head o f
the Universal Ch u rch and Fath e r and Teacher of a ll
Christians and that o ur L ord J es u s Christ d eli ve red
t o him in the pe rson O f bl e ssed Peter th e fu ll a u
t h o r it y to fee d to r u le and to g o ver n t h e Un iversal
Ch u rch
N o t less clear an d emphatic are the words s ubs c rib e d
by the A rm e nians o n th e ir u nion wi t h the Ch u r ch
P r o fess in g
e ffe cted in th e s a me Council of Florence :
as tr ue s o ns of o bedience to O b e y in all faithfu lnes s
the o r dina tio ns a nd co mma n ds of the A po s t o lic Se e
The importanc e O f these te stimonies cannot be ov e r
rate d Th e y show th a t one o f t he ess e ntial con d itions
fo r t he admission o f t h e s e p a r a t e d Gre e k and A rme
n ian Ch u rch e s into the u nit y O f th e C a t holic Ch u rch
was the reco g nition o f th e d u t y o f s u bmission and
Obedien ce t o the Roman P o n t ifl I f it w as a ne w
ide a o r if it was an ythin g less than a r e cognis e d tra
d ition O f the Ch urch it wo u ld not have been ma d e a
”
.
.
.
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
“
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
”
.
”
.
.
,
'
.
,
,
87
co n dit im s ine
of
recon cili a tion at so mo
ment o us a crisis by the L atins n o r wo uld it hav e been
so promptly accepted by both Gre e ks a n d A rm e nians
W e might go o n piling u p testimonies from C o u ncils
from D ecrees O f Ponti ffs from Canonists from Theo lo
gians even from those o f the d e epest Gallican dye to
prove that this doctrine o f ob e di e n ce to t h e P o nt ifl as
s e t forth in the Vatican Co uncil is nothing more than
a rep e ti t ion o f what had been alw a ys held and ta u ght ;
b u t e no u gh m u st have be e n said And is it no t con
F o r the
t a ine d in the v ery id e a o f the Primacy ?
Primacy O f o u r P o nt ifl is not a bare post O f hono u r
I t means power a u thori t y j urisdiction in him and
in the Ch u rch u nivers a l corresponding s u bordin a tion
I t rea lises to o ur min d s the image o f t he Ch u rch of
Christ placed befor e u s by St P a u l — a li ving body
presid e d over by a living Head
How in the nam e O f c om mon s e nse did Mr Gla d
stone wander away into this v agary abo u t s ubmission
to t h e Pope in discipline and in ecclesi a stical a d
ministration b e ing a new invention patented by the
V atican Co u ncil with some w icked d ee p design ? Can
he be really so nervo u s as to be liable to mistake
living b e ings fo r ph an t o ms his e x cit e d im a gination
fi lling in gigantic proportions and all the other r e
The
probability
o f the s u pposi t ion
i
o f horror
u
s
i
t
s
e
q
is borne o u t by more tha n o ne p a ssage o f th e Ex pos
I n the b e ginning o f Section V he speaks o f
t ulat io n
the fear Of th e se pea ceful shores b e ing distu rb e d a t
the bi dding o f Rome by foreign fo e or domestic tr e ason
”
n
o
u
a
n
q
-x
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
’
,
,
.
.
"
.
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
.
.
,
,
,
‘
,
.
.
.
”
88
as visionary b u t he imme d iately a dds that what has
a ccording to him happened in the renewal of P a pal
“
pretensions is something more visionary He wo u ld
h ave u s b e liev e that he has no fear b u t the world knows
that the greatest coward is us u ally th e man who
boasts of not being afraid F u rther o n in t h e same
“
section he is convinced that it m u st be for some
political O bj ect o f a very tangible kind t h a t the risks
a r a id u o n the civil s her e have b e e n
o f so d a r in
p
p
g
deliberately r u n
He e x pl a ins in the previo u s
“
s e ntence what he int e nds to co nvey by the daring
raid
I t is the fa ct o f the Co u rt o f Rome lodging
formidable d e m a nds fo r power of the v ulgar kind
We
have
j
u
st
se
e
n
that
she
has
not
lodg
e
d
a
singl
e
(
n ew dem and for power O f any kind — s o m u ch fo r t h e
“
raid )
He is u ne a sy abo u t the str u ggl e (s ic)
goin g o n in Ge rmany and h e admonish e s us t ha t
what u s e d to be s a id O f France m u st now be said of
“
—
Germany that when G ermany is dis qu i e ted Eu rope
B u t his p a rtic u l a r u n e asiness has
c annot be a t r e st
r eferenc e t o his p e t kingdom O f I t a ly beca use P io
N ono will not shake hands with Victor E mman u e l
over the robb e ry o f his dominions A nd w hat makes
“
this all the more serio u s is that it is possibl e that we
have here (that is in th e tempor a l pow e r of th e Pope
dom) the ke y to the enl a rgement O f th e province Of
O b e dience b e yo n d the limits o f I nfallibi lity and to the
a d d is c i lina m
intr o d uct io n o f th e re mark a ble phras e
p
the dis
Remarkable phrase
cl r eg im en E ccles ioe
c ipl ine and gov e rnment O f the Ch u r c h " It was o f
,
,
,
”
.
,
,
.
,
,
”
.
,
,
”
“
.
”
.
”
.
,
,
”
.
,
.
,
”
,
,
,
”
.
”
90
to viol a te it if however it be tho u gh u n j u st as a l aw
n o t opposed to the law O f Go d y o u may be indire c tly
bo u nd t o obs e rve it l e st s can dal sho uld be given by
—
t
s
D e Ro ma no P o n tifice lib iv cap 15
i violation
S u are z also a Jes u it and rank Ultramon t ane in his
“
“
Tre a tise o n L aws has the following : Canonical l a ws
bi nd in co nscience s u pposing th e m to be ju st B ut if a
canonic al law be evid e ntly unj u st it do e s not bin d
A canonical law binds p a r t icula r ly wh e n it is not
only j u st b u t mo d er a te and n ot d iflic ult of fu lfilm e n t
T he mor e se vere laws and thos e mor e d ifli c ult o f o bser
v a nce also bind if they be strictly j u st
H e th e n
“
raises th e qu estion wh e t h e r in th e c a se of those s e vere
an d d iflic ul t laws
th e re lies any r igh t Of appeal o r
r ather remonstrance a n d he lays down that in all s u ch
c a nonical laws even those mad e by the Pope it is
allo wable to interpose a petition against th e e nfor ce
ment o f th e law a nd t h a t a remonstr a nce so mad e
“
from r ea sonable cau se is ve ry e x pedien t and c o n
formable to sou nd reason
H e fu rther a dds that in
th e meantim e if the O bservan c e o f the law be a ttend e d
with great inconvenienc e s u ch a s
u psetti ng an
e x isting state o f things or ca u sing scand al by a benign
interpr e tation o f th e Ponti ff s will the law may be
looked u pon a s not for th e pres e nt in force
Thes e two great Th e ologians did n ot regard the
P op e s decrees o r laws of discipline and a dministration
u nappealable o r irreversible Th e y wo uld only
as
t
w
l
t
a
e
qu
ire
the
app
ea
l
a
a
ins
the
or
peti
ion for its
r
g
m
m
e
r
i
n
o
d
rsion
to
be
ma
e
sec
u
nd
u
m
and
fro
d
reve
,
,
,
,
,
,
”
.
,
.
.
,
.
.
,
”
,
,
.
,
.
,
.
.
,
”
,
.
,
,
”
,
,
,
,
,
,
s
,
”
,
.
,
,
,
,
’
,
”
.
’
,
,
.
,
”
,
,
ble ca us es
I t makes nothi ng against the weight
o f their a u thority that they are separated fro m u s by
an interval o f thre e centu ri e s o r thereabo u ts ; they
still hold for e most r a nk amongst o u r cl a ssic Theol e
gians I n the se a rch o f proof o r e x pl a nation o f
C a tholi c doctrin e we can a lways have reco u rs e to
“
them and r u n thro ugh th eir writings ino fl enso pe de
I think we ar e no w fa irly entitle d t o convert Mr
“
iron gripe into a silk e n b e n d and to
G ladstone s
“
write fully disproved over his two assertions — that
no man may pass j udgment u pon P apal m a n d ates even
“
when they do not present the cred e n t ials o f infalli
“
—
b ilit y
a nd that the P ope tho u gh
he adm its it to b e
possible that he may b e wro ng fi nds it intolerable to
be to ld s o
r ea s o na
.
.
,
”
-
.
,
.
’
”
,
”
,
”
,
,
”
.
IN F ERENCE S
.
I f we now s u mmarily rehearse the points that have
b een establishe d we shall fi nd that the de fi nition O f
I nfallibility in the Vatican Co u ncil was attended with
n o d eviation from the n ormal t e aching system of the
C atholic Ch u rch a nd that it involv e d no practical
Se condly that
change in the belief o f its members
the domain o f morals has not been enlarge d by t h e
striking down o f former b o u n d aries for the e x t e nsio n
O f P a pal power leaving the good o r b ad of o ur actions
d ependent o n the ip s e d ir it o f the Popes but that it
l ies still within its ancient enclos u re o f the divine an d
T hirdly that n either in the nat u re
nat u ral laws
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
,
92
the s u bj ect matter o f O be dience to the P o pe has
any change spe c ulative or pra ctical b een in trod u ced
“
di scipline and regimen having the same meaning
n e w as they ever had an d falling u n d er his a u thority
n e w in the sam e way they ever did and no o t her
This being so we take the liberty to remov e the
word no w the main point o f assertion from Mr Glad
stone s proposition
no o ne can no w b e come her
convert w itho u t reno u n c ing his mental and moral
freedom and pl a c ing his civi l loyalty and d u ty at the
mercy O f another — an d the statement be com e s a
general charge against the Catholic Ch u rch in all times
This I a m certain he did no t intend for it wo u l d have
b een fatal to his real scope whi ch was to demonstrate
that the action o f the Vatican Co u ncil o n th e Ch u r ch
was bal e fu l and revol u tionary
So that we are at
liberty to dismiss this portion O f the arg u ment o f th e
Ex post ulation if we pleas e
B ut as this may hav e
the appearanc e o f shir k ing a diffi c ulty o n the plea
that it does not confront u s directly we shall consid e r
—
the general question if it be tr ue tha t the Ro ma n Ca
tho lic fa ith is ir r eco ncila ble w ith ment a l a nd m o r a l
fr e ed o m a nd w ith the d u ty of a lleg ia nce
“
Mental and moral freedom is a showy e x pression
a nd I am s u re that a gr e at many readers o f Mr Glad
stone s pamphl et who love fi ne words b u t give them
selv e s little or no tro u ble a b o u t their meaning have
been c a u ght by it The meaning in the present in
stance admits o f many lines of grad u ation a mo ng
whi ch we have t o find o ut o ur a u thor s as best w e
or
,
,
,
”
,
,
.
,
.
.
,
’
,
”
.
,
,
.
.
,
,
,
.
”
,
.
’
,
,
.
,
’
93
Th ere
is ; fi rst the me nta l and moral freedom
from all law h u man o r divine to think a s o ne pleases
t O s peak as o n e pl ea ses to a c t a s o ne pleases
This
can scarc e ly be meant tho u gh inde e d Mr Gladston e s
strictu res o n the P ope fo r condemning the fi rst
three P r ep o sit io n s o f the e ighteen given above wo uld
se e m to imply something like it if w e take the
Propositions as they stood when th e y were condemned
n o t as they stand after th e y have been r e d u c ed b o ur
y
a u thor At all events this l ati t u de cannot be allowe d
“
to C h ristians fo r St P a u l desires e v e ry int e llect to
be bro u ght into s ubj ection to Christ an d he has in
his First E pistle to th e Corinthians some notable r e
marks o n the way in which the Gre eks a nd the J ews
e x ercise d their mental freedom abo u t the d octrine o f
Christ TO the Gre e ks it was uns cient ific— in fact
“
“
a folly
to the J e w s it was a s c andal whilst in
“
reality it was the power o f Go d an d the w isdom o f
Mental freedom th u s from the fi rst appears
Go d
to have me t with some O pposition from Christianity
N either does mor a l fre edom appe a r to hav e it all
its o w n way Th e Gnosti c s and th e M a nich aeans the
A damites a few cent u ries ago and the Mormons o f
the present day are generally considere d to have g o ne
somewhat too far W e m u st a llow of some restr a int
being pla ced on o ur ideas and on o u r desir e s if we
wo uld n o t relapse into the full freedom O f an c ient
Paganism l ike a g o o d many aro u n d u s We m u st
a c cept that restraint a t least which Christ has e x
pr essly impose d o n those who wo u l d have a share w ith
can
.
”
,
,
,
,
.
’
,
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
.
'
”
,
,
,
.
,
”
,
”
.
,
,
.
.
,
,
,
.
,
.
,
,
,
94
“
Him
H e that believ e th and is baptized shall b e
saved ; he that believeth not shall be c on de mned
“
And that which was t o b e believed was the Gospel
“
—
A ll thing s what
o r as it is given in St Mat t h e w
soev e r I have c ommanded yo u
O u r mental and
moral fre e dom m u st p u t u p with this restri ction if we
wish to retain o ur title to the name o f Christians
This restriction if we ex amine it carefully and c o n
will
be
fo
u
nd
compr
e
h
e
nsive
to
a
tro
u
ble
s c ie nt io usl
y
some degree I n the fi rst place th e r e are the pre
c e p t s o f the nat u ral law of which we are m ade c o g
an d reminded and
n iz ant by the light o f reason
admonished by conscienc e at the moment Of action
N e x t co me the divine positive prec e pts for Christ d id
“n o t c ome to dest roy the law b u t to ful fi l
and hen ce
tho u gh the cer e monial law o f the J ews was to lose it s
for c e and meaning on the establishment and p ro mul
gati e n o f C hristianity the moral law of the D e calogu e
was to retain its full force and Obligatory character
u nder the n ew dispensation Thirdly Christ himself
in the fo u nding O f His Ch u rch and in making provision
fo r its perpet u ity made m a ny or dinanc e s and insti
t ut ed vario u s rites and O bservances to which his fe l
lowers are bo und to s ubj e c t a nd accommo d ate them
s e lves I know there are men who v e nt u re to t ake
shor t c u ts thro u gh those precepts a nd who le a ve
th e msel ves qu ite at their ease abo u t what they believe ;
b u t their theori e s cannot eva cu ate the word Of Christ
and as H e re qu ires H is disciples t o beli e ve a ll and
to do all that He comman ded them I c an see no
.
,
”
.
,
”
,
.
.
,
”
.
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
”
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
,
,
95
s uffi cie nt gro un d for a dopting a lower stan dard o f
Christia n d u ty
There 18 still another so u r ce o f restriction o f the
mental and m oral free d om of the Christian arising
fro m the obligation o ur L or d l e ft u s under o f hear
“
ing the Chu rch o r as St P a u l has it o f ob eying
those pla ced over u s which I pres u me Mr Glad
stone a cknowle d ge s b u t u n der what limit a tion I kno w
not I f he a ccepted it in t h e de finite s e nse O f s ubj e e
tion to an I nfallible Gu ide as we d o his mental an d
m oral free dom wo uld have e x actly th e same ra nge as
o u rs b ut as he e x er c ises this freedom beforehand t o
d etermi n e h o w far he is bo un d t o hear the Ch u rch
he se cu res to hims elf b u t o n his own responsib ility a
greater latit u de in believing what is ta u ght o r c ompl y
ing with what is e n j oin e d than is allowed to u s To
this e x tent and no fu rther do e s the mental and moral
Christian free dom o f Mr Gladston e di ffer from th a t
l
R
the
most
observant
oman
Catho
ic
f
o
Before qu itting this qu e stion I m u st protest against
the words he s e l e cts to e x press t he conse qu e nce o f
t
R
O
b
e
di
e
nce
as
held
by
oman
C
a
holics
ecclesiastical
“
He fi rst describ e d it as a s u rrend e r o f mental and
moral freedom b u t as he a d vanced in his work , he did
n ot think the word s u ffi ciently strong and prefe rred
“
an d moral fr e edom
f
o
style
it
a
forfeit
u
r
e
m
e
nt
a
l
to
Both d es1gn at io ns ar e in a pplic a ble That which I
e ither fo rfeit o r s ur r en der p a ss e s o ut o f my possession
—I lose my con t rol over it
I n the fi rs t c ase I am
deprive d o f it by another and in p unishment o f a
.
”
,
,
.
,
”
,
,
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
.
.
,
.
”
,
,
”
.
.
.
,
96
crim e ; in the s e cond I d e priv e myself o f it by a
vol untary act W hen a man becomes a convert to
Cathol icity he no more fo rfeits or s ur r end er s his
mental and moral freedom than he does when he
ch a nges h is doctor or his l a wy e r The P ep e m ay b e
more ex a cting a s to fa ith and m orals th a n th e syste m
he has left but so a lso may be the new doctor o r
lawyer in their pecu liar r e qu isitions A n ex ercise o f
m e ntal and mor al freedom full delib e rate and mo
mentons in its obj ect is gone throu gh in th e proc e ss
A fter conve rsion m e ntal a nd mor a l
Of conversion
fre e dom is e x ercis e d in persev e ran c e in the fa ith fo r
the convert to C atholici t y is not like th e h e lpl e ss
captive c hained hand and foot to his prison bench
incapable of escape b ut is l e ft to the fu ll fr ee dom o f
a rational man to stay or t o ret urn N othing inter
fe res with his m e nt a l o r moral fre e dom in the m a t t e r
e x ce pt th e brightn e ss o f th e light that dr e w him to
the Ch u rch a nd the j oy and the peace he h as fo u nd
wi t hin her In th e ful fi lm e nt o f his d u ti e s a s a
Catholic h e in common with his brethren in c o mmu
nion e x ercises his mental and moral freedom e very
d a y and p e rhaps every ho u r ; fo r it is not in t he wide
fling O f l icence th e e x cl u sion O f a ll O bligation and
restraint that ration a l liberty most perfe ctly acts its
part b u t in th e care fu l balancing o f motive s a nd in
the sel e ction of t hat side to which ou r better j u dgment
inclin e s a nd it is th e tri u mph o f h u m an liberty wh e n
this b e tte r selection is mad e despite o f d iflicult ies
and tempt ations from witho u t and weakness within
,
.
.
,
.
~
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
98
theorie s dire c ted against the
—
i nstance the Encyclical
o f a ll e gian c e
Gr e gory XVI 15 th A u g u st 1 8 3 2
in which he d e clares the right o f revolt no t admissibl e
“
and ass e r t s the immo b ilis s ubjec t io in princ ip e s
“
which t he prec e pts o f the Chris t ia n religion e nforce
a lso the A pos t olic L ette r of L e o XII Q ue gr a vio ra
in which secret org aniza t ions ag a inst th e s u pre m e
h
t
h
o
s
as
w
e
ll
a
s
e
ag
a
inst
the
Ch
u
rc
r
u
h
i
t
a
t o
civil
,
y
are r e prob a ted a nd s ubj ecte d to c e ns ure not to men
tion t he vario u s d ecla rations o f P i u s IX to th e same
e ffe ct
The fa ct that is , t he title o r gro und o n which the
d u ty Of allegiance rests being a p u r e ly tempo ral mat
t e r d oes no t lie within the domain of Pap al a u thority
Given the fa c t o f a l e gitim a te r ul e r it b e longs to the
P ope to teach u s o ur moral obligations to him b u t it
d oes no t b e long to him to teach u s who t he legitimate
r ul e r is o r eve n to d e cid e be t we e n di ffe rent claimants ,
as in Spai n a t present with which O f th e m the right
S u ch qu estions a s these a r e d et e rmin
is to be fo u nd
a ble by oth e r a u thorities and o n principles qu ite dis
tinct from Eccl e si a stical ones at present This how
ever was not alw ay s so Ther e w e re times when the
fa ct as well as the d uty was left t o the Pope to d e cid e
B u t th e n th e d e cision in the t wo c ases did n o t
on
co m e from the same o r the sam e kind o f a uthority
I n o ne case it came from an a u thority established by
—
Christ sacred and p e rman e nt in the other it came
from an a u t hority which Christian princes a nd people s
a ut hority to
mor a l d u ty
d e no u nce
.
,
,
,
,
”
,
”
.
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
.
99
n a t ur allyf e co gnise d
as a s u i t able o ne to b e e x ercised
o ve r them by th e ir great spirit u al R u l e r and common
Father That stat e o f things is now completely ch ang e d
The Roman P o nt ifi co u n t s his spiri t u al s ubj e cts by
mi llions and millions b u t the kin g s an d the r u l e rs o f
the earth hav e repu diated him I s the change for the
better o r for the worse ? Opinions di ffer b ut one
—
m ay ask W h at S u preme Co u rt o f App e al has b ee n
s ubstit ut ed to which kings and p eoples may now bring
their d i ffe rences and disp u tes for qu iet arrangement be
fore having reco u rse t o th e fearfu l arbitrem e nt o f war ?
What chanc e o f escape h as a smal l nationality at pre
s ent if a big n e ighbo u r wishes t o e x ting u ish it e x c e p t
another big neighbo ur becomes j ealo u s
There is n o
r ule o f right in these day s save
.
.
‘
,
.
,
.
,
,
Th e go o
“
T
h at t h ey w o uld
k e ep wh o c a n
d
t ak e w h o
o ld
ru l e
h ave t h
,
e
i mp l e pl an
p o w er a n d t h ey wo uld
th e
s
,
,
”
.
The great obj ection t o thi s old Papal a u thority in
temporals was the s ubj ection and servit u de in which
k ings and princes were said to be placed by it
The
e x tent and the onero u s character o f this s ubj ecti o n i s
a questi o n on which writers are immensely divi ded
b u t at all events it never reached the d e gree of
cowardly dependence o n t h e will of another in which
all the g o vernments o f Eu rope are fo u nd at presen t
when the great German Chancellor appears to hold
the balan ce o f power in the ho l lo w o f his hand and it
.
,
,
,
,
H
1 00
eeds b u t the so u nd of his voice to m ake peace o r
war
A few practical qu estions n o w and we may c lose
thi s chapter on Allegiance The firs t — I s my alle
n
i
a
c
e
since
the
V
a
tican
D
e
ree
of
c
Infallib ilit y at t he
g
n
.
,
.
'
,
,
f
I t is as m u ch sin ce as before that is —it is not at all
M y allegi ance inasm u ch as it is a moral d u ty is
like all my other mora l d u ties u nder the g uidance
o f the Pope as already descri bed b u t even in this
,
“
a t his mercy
r espect it is no t
He m us t g u ide me
o n the fix ed basis of Christian morals and as I have
s aid above he h as no power t o make o r u nmake
th ese b u t only to g u ard them t o impar t them and
in their do ubtful o r rem o te c o ncl u sions t o in t erpret
them
—
Sec o nd questi o n Can t he P o p e thro u gh the cla im
he has o n my obedience interfere with my d u ty of
al legiance ?
“
He cann o t the obj ect o f obedience is the discip
line and regimen of the Ch u rch and is qu ite rem o ved
from the d u ty o f allegiance M r Glads t one is mis
taken when he brings the obedience which Catholics
hold them s elves bo u nd by t o the Pope in proof of the
insec u rity o f their allegiance it is no t he re b u t in
his capacity o f Teac her o f Morals that all egi ance
come s u nder his contro l as far as it does come u nder
He makes a simil ar mistake in his en umerati o n
it
of the net full o f fa cts t h at are s wep t int o the P o nt if s
m er cy
a no ther 9
o
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
”
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
”
,
.
.
,
,
,
.
-
,
1 02
But
—
som e one will u rge the Pope
to be despised
may iss u e a manda t e en forc e d by an anne x ed e x c o m
mun ic at io n forbidding all Ca t holics to engage in the
war agains t him
As we are a d mitting all e x treme
h ypo t h e ses w e shall admit this also and reply that
the s u pposed action o f the Pope does not change the
qu estion materially His mandat e will derive its
force from his a u thoritative d e clara t ion of th e im
morality of the war and the cens u r e ann e x e d wi ll
h ave to be s ubj ected to the ordinary r u les and prin
F
or
instance
the
c i le s o f eccl e siastica l p u nishm e nts
p
soldi e rs and sailors wo uld no t inc u r it beca u se g r a ve
fea r e x c u ses from c e ns ure cens u res being dire cted
agains t the cont u macio u s no t against those who a c t
thro ugh fe ar or coercion C atholic Theology is tr uly
liberal in its views o n practical qu estions of this kind
in which clashin g interests are involved or pecu liar
individ ual diffic ulties arise in the f ul fil ment of a pre
cept I t is a trite principl e with it that mere eccl e
s ia st ic al la w s do not bind when there wo u ld be a very
grave inconvenience in their observance and it deni e s
as a r ul e to any h u man legislator the power o f making
laws o r pre cepts binding men to the p e rformance of
actions which from the d anger and di ffi c ul t y
att endant on their ful filment are esteemed heroic
We may make and sol v e cases of this kind to th e
end of the chapter b ut we shall not fi nd o u rselves
n earer to the sol u tion o f the di ffi c ul t y a bo u t Catho li c s
a nd their al legiance as it ex is ts in M r
l
a ds to n e s
G
,
.
,
.
,
,
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
’
.
1 03
min d
is not allegiance in its o rdinary acceptati o n
tha t he deman ds o f u s b ut o bedience compl e te total
and absol u te I t is not in its o wn sphere alone b u t
in the spirit ual sph e re also tha t h e ass e rts the s u pre
macy of the civil power The words of Christ
My
—
o
f
kingdom is n o t
this world
s upply his gre at arg u
m e nt b u t h e sho uld remember that tex ts o f Sacr e d
Script u re are some t imes like do uble e dge d swords
c utting in both direc t ions I f it be good r e asoning
“
that beca u se Chris t s kingdom is n o t o f this world
it sho uld not interfe re wi th this world — it is e qu ally
“
good that beca u se Christ s kingdom is not o f t his
worl d this world sho ul d n o t inter fe re with it What
he says abo u t whol e m u ltit u des of facts being sw e p t
into th e P apal ne t by the doctrin e o f obedience ,
“
m utato nomine is tr u e o f hims e lf and the S t ate
F or him t here is no power no right no a uthority
e x cept in the State or from the State The State is
great and Mr Gladstone is its proph e t
I n his pra ctical r efie x io ns o n this s upposed ins t ab i
l ity of the all e gianc e o f conv e rts to Roman Catholicism
o ur a u thor finds great consolation from th e fact
tha t
th e con quests have b e en chiefly amo ngst wo men As
far as this m e ans a sn e er I hav e nothing to say to it
a s far as it means a point I hav e j u st t his t o say
wh e n Christ w as making converts Hims elf the firmes t
the mos t unsel fish the mos t fai t hfu l to Him were
When He h ung u pon His Cross and the men
w o men
a ll deserted Him it is a Mary and a Mary and a
’
.
It
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
.
”
,
,
-
,
,
.
,
’
”
,
’
,
”
.
,
”
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
.
.
,
,
“
,
”
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
1 04
Mary that are recorded to have remained beside Him
to t he end and it was a Mary and a Mary that kept
g u ard at His sep ulchr e
Very li t tl e more rem ains to be commen t ed on I
cannot prev e n t Mr Glads t one fro m calling the C u ria
Romana a balefu l power o r from having a fling
“
at th e J e s u its the deadliest foes tha t mental and
—
moral liber t y have ev e r known
new
a rather
charge against t hem ; they are generally described by
th e ir enemies as t o o facile and a ccommodating in their
doctrines B ut as long as he deals merely in ab use
and do e s n o t misrepresent the t e aching or t he syste m
of o ur Chu rch we can a fford to l e t him pass Towards
the close o f t h e Ex post ulation som e t hin g turns u p
abo u t the oppositi o n of t h e I rish Bishops t o his scheme
o f University E d u ca t ion which some peop le think
gives u s the key to the who l e pr o ceeding of Mr
Gladstone I t is the postscript t o his letter Had
things gon e di ffere ntly had the Bill rec e ived th e
s a nction in place o f the u nanimo u s r e proba t ion o f the
Ro m an Catholic Ch u rch in I reland it is believed
tha t ou r p o litico theological literatu re wo uld never
h ave been enriched by th e presen t controver sy and
the mental and moral freedom and civil allegiance
even o f converts would have been as little so u rce o f
fe ar or annoy ance to him as th e y had bee n from July
—
—
1 8 t h 1 8 7 O the date o f the V atican D efinit io n
to
F e br u ary 1 8 7 3 —the date of the proposal of his Uni
versity Bill The disap po intment he me t with o n that
,
,
,
.
.
.
”
,
,
.
,
,
.
'
,
,
,
.
.
.
,
,
-
,
,
,
,
,
.
1 06
pre sent conscio u sness o f his D ivine commission Mr
Glad stone canno t for he will not see the Pope in this
light
His fundamental view is that the Pope has
s u ffe red nothing has lost no t hi ng has had no tr e acher
o u s dealings to comp lain o f no promises solemnly made
to him shamefully broken has witnessed n o imprison
ment of Bishops no desecration of holy places no
pl under o f properties set apart by their original owners
fo r chari t able and religio u s p u rp o ses has never heard
the angry m u rm u rs o f the r ed a cz in t h e s qu are of St
“
“
P eter s nor the sho u ts — a basso il P apa
m o rte
—
a l Papa
morte ai preti and o ne tre mbl e s to writ e
l
it
N o r the cha nting o f
o
mort e a Ges u Christ
—
the in fe rnal litany
Pi u s is Pope
refrain
Pi us
be d
dl
Gregory be
G regory was P Op e
d
dl
Simon Peter w as Pope
Simon Pe t er
be d
d I J es u s Christ was the firs t P ope
Whoever wo uld a uthentica t e the fact of these frightfu l
e x cesses o f impi e ty can do so by refe rring to page
3 6 8 o f a work p ublis h ed in Paris — L ibrairie de Victor
P alm e 2 5 Rue de Gre nell e Saint Germain 1 8 7 4
—
l
entit e d His t oire de l Invasio n des E tats P o nt ificaux
e t d a Si e ge de Rome — Par le Co mte de B e a u fort
Mr Gladstone has the p e c u liar prop e rty o f s t ripping
c e rtain inconvenient facts of th e ir reality and ap
f
o
the
pilfered
attrib
u
te
to
b
e
in
s
his
own
ro r iat in
g
p p
g
imagination for t h e p u rpose o f making his theory
r u n smoothly W i t h him the Pop e s s u ffe rin gs are
all imaginary self ind u lged — o n the contrary , the
.
,
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
'
.
’
”
,
,
’
”
”
,
,
”
”
”
”
.
”
”
”
”
,
,
,
,
,
,
’
.
.
,
’
.
,
-
1 07
I talian Gov ernment is patient tolerant self sacr ific ing
making o ver with a lavish prodigality the eccles ia s
t ica l p o wer s a nd p r ivileg es o f the mo na r chy (s ic)
to the P ap a l cha ir " The friends of the Pope are a
“
balefu l set whose fix ed p u rpose is to r e erec t the
terrestrial throne o f th e Popedom even if it c an
only be r e erected o n t he ashes o f the ci ty and ami ds t
the whit e ning bones o f its peopl e
O n the other hand
t h e enemies of the Po p e the senders forth of the im
pio u s and m u rdero u s sh o u ts j u st recorded the dis
c iples o f the apostle o f assassination are not to have a
word said against them no r even a prayer asked for
their conversi o n lest it sho uld be calc ulated to h u r t
t heir feelings E verything according to him wen t
wrong in Rome under the Pope s admini s tration ;
every thing goes right now even to an i mprovement
in the m o r a ls of the inhabitants
The latter is vou che d
for by some so urce o f information tho ught to be r e
liable by M r Gla ds t one and also by some tab ulated
fi g u re s We know eno u gh of I t alian s t a t esmen s
veracity and o f Mr Gladstone s acc u racy o f qu otation
by this time to pay m u ch attention to either The
print and pict u re shops o n the C o rso and the s a le
da n sa n te in vario u s parts of the city tell a di fferen t
tale o f Roman m o rali t y at present
The Pope has not the same faci lity as o ur
a uthor fo r annihilating o r transfe rring the reality
of facts E rror is to him error and injustice is
inju stice ; h e m u st c o ndemn the o ne and den o unce the
-
,
,
,
”
-
,
,
,
”
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
’
,
,
.
’
.
’
.
,
.
,
,
,
.
.
,
1 08
other in his L etters in his En cycli cals in his Al lo o n
“
ti o ns in his D isco urs es
He cann ot run with the
thief n o r be a partaker with ad u lterers
To him it
belongs and in the fi rst place
to preach the word
in season and o u t of season and his use of scriptu ral
lang u age and h is fre qu e nt reference to scrip t u ral
phrases and incidents are therefore in strict co u sis
All this is b ut matt e r of ridic ule
t en cy with his o ffi ce
to Mr G ladstone so dis t or t ed are his views o f every
thing that Pi us IX says o r does
The passage
ho wever to whi ch I will invite the special attention o f
the reader and with which I shall close my remarks
E x pos t u la t ion and o f the article
o n the a ut hor of the
in the Q ua r ter ly is conceived in a spirit m u ch more
t o be deplored than th at o f even wan t on ridic ule
The tone is no longer that o f t h e dissen t ient Christian
—
f
f
b ut o f the sco er the in fidel wh o delights to wo u nd
the sensitiv e ness o f the believer by the irreveren t use
of words or profane application o f tr uths , tha t are to
him m o s t sacred
We had alre ady and often seen I nfallibility in
“
—
full dress in pe acock s pl u mes
he writ e s
b ut
D on Pas qu al e has taken u s behind t he scenes He
h as s h ow n u s I nfallibility in the clo s et I nfallibil ity in
d is ha bille I nfallibi lity able to cut its cap er s at will
to ind ulge in its wildes t r amp s with freedom and im
n
i
t
u
There
is
n
o
thing
given
by
Mr
G
adstone
l
p
y
"
“
from th e D isc o u rse s of Pio N ono — ther e is nothing
in t he D i s co urses t o warrant t h e us e of lang uage s u ch
,
,
.
,
”
.
,
,
,
”
,
,
,
.
,
.
.
.
,
,
,
”
,
,
.
,
,
.
’
”
,
,
.
,
,
,
”
.
.
1 10
My b u siness with Mr Gladstone ends here I hav e
nothing t o do with his consid e ration of th e fu tu re
policy o f British Statesmen in relation to Roman C at h o
lic s u nder t h e present s u pposed do u b t fu l c o n d ition o f
their allegianc e I will only say that if I h e ld his
premises I sho uld feel my self compell e d to hold a
di ffe r e nt conclu sion from his B ut before ending with
my readers I will crave th e ir a t ten t ion to a fe w details
which may h e lp them to a be t ter u nderstanding o f the
n o w famo u s Vatican Co u ncil
The fir st p u blic anno unc e men t o f a G e neral Co u ncil
to be held in the Ch u rch o f the Vatican was m ade
in Ju ne of the year 1 8 6 7 by Pio N ono himself t o the
Bishops t hen assembled in Ro me in great nu mbers to
celebrate the Cente nary of St Peter Th e d ay fix ed
for the o pening o f the Co u ncil was the 8 th of D e cem
b e r 1 8 6 9 in order to all o w s ufficient time for making
the necessary preparations at R o me and also to enab le
the Bishops to make provision for a prolonged absenc e
from th e ir D ioceses All Bishops in comm u nion with
the Holy See and having care of so uls were s ummoned
to the Co u ncil according to ecclesiastical usage This
act constit uted the Co u ncil (E c u m e nical in co nvo ca tio n
The s u mmons was no t a m e re i n vitation which migh t
be acc e pted o r declined a d libitu m Any Bishop wish
ing t o be absen t from the Co u ncil was oblige d to send
on his gro u nds fo r asking an e x emp t ion to t he C on
re at io n o f Ex c us e s and C omplaints
and
to
name
a
g g
Proc u rato r to wh o m , howe ver no c o nciliar a u t hority
passed
.
.
,
.
,
.
,
.
,
,
.
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
.
.
,
.
”
,
,
.
,
1 11
O n t he assembling of the Co uncil the b u siness t o
be gone thro u gh was divided between fo u r Congr e ga
tions o r D ep utations each Congregation b e ing co mposed
o f twenty fo u r Bishops presid e d over by a Cardinal and
having Theologians and Canonists t o assist them Fro m
the first anno u nc e ment o f the Co unc il t h e Holy Father
had invited to Rome from d i fferent parts of the Chris
tian world men skilled in Theology an d Canon L aw
to confer with the Theologians and Canonists of Ro me
itself and to pr e pare matt e r app ertaining t o the obj ect
fo r which the Co u ncil was convoked Th e ir S che ma ta
o r the forms o f D ecrees and C anons prepared by them
wer e s ubmitted to t he e x amination o f the Bishops
integra integre that is entir ely bringing with the m
n o kind o f P onti fi cal approbation They were printed
and sent ro u nd s o me days b e fore each General Con
i
h
r
a
s
O
B
e
t
i
o
or
Session
o
f
all
the
s
t
h
a
t
the
Father
s
n
g g
p
might have an opport u nity o f giving them careful co n
sideration and o f forming a mat u re o pinion ab o u t the
s u bj ects o n which they were t o be call e d on fo r a vote I n
this preparatory inves t igation the Bish o ps were allowed
to employ t he services o f cons u lting The ologians with
wh o m they might e x amine t h e matter and the wording
o f the S chem a t a and each Bis h op was free to give a
dissentient opinion o n either matter o r wordi ng in
the General Congreg ation ; b u t for the p u rpose o f o h
serving the necessa ry o rder of t h e Co u ncil notice o f
his intenti o n to sp e ak sho uld be given at least the d ay
before I t is a ma t ter w o rthy of n o te as evincing t he
,
,
,
-
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
”
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
,
1 12
perfec t freedom o f in vestigation and of disc u ssi o n tha t
prevailed that what bet ween the Bishops and their
The o logians scarcely a single S chema was allowed t o
pass in the form and wor d s in which it had been
o riginally drawn up I n several insta nces not a single
w o rd of the form in which it was a t fi rst propo s ed was
allo wed t o re mal n
The propositi o n o f matter lay chiefly with the C o n
re at io ns b ut it was by no means con fi ned t o them
g g
“
I n the second section o f the L it t er ae Ap o st o lic ae
that pre s cribes the order and de fi nes the r ules t o be
observed in the C ouncil the Fa th e rs are not o nly
permitted b u t e x hor t ed if they have any matte r to
p rop o se th at they think cond u cive to the p u blic good
t o do s o Th u s d isc u ssion was free and proposition of
m a t ter for disc u ssion was free — in Theological l ang u age
the Co u ncil w as (E c u menical in celebr a tio n I ndeed
so free was disc ussion that the qu estion o f the
I nfallibility of the Pope occ u pied in all nearly fo urteen
days and had abo u t seventy Fathers d u ring that time
p leading for and against its clai m to be made the o b
f
of
a
e
fi
nition
faith
I
n
the
end
F
athers
who
e
t
d
o
c
j
had en tered their names o n the list as speakers seeing
tha t the s ubj ect had been ab u ndantly e x amined began
to withdra w them and a general fe eling that it w as
time to proceed to de fi nition began to prevail The
disc u ssion t hen ceased and the p ublic Sessio n was h e ld
o n the eigh t e e nth July when 5 3 3 voted p la cet or in
favo u r o f 2 o nly no n p la cet o r against the de fi niti o n
,
,
.
.
.
.
,
”
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
-
,