Such matters as could not be agreed upon and embodied in the Concordat may

be gleaned from the allocution which Pius IX. addressed, at the time, to

the Cardinals. “Many things of the greatest importance still remain, in

regard to which the Plenipotentiaries could not come to an agreement, and

the omission of which awakens our most lively solicitude, and causes us

the utmost pain; for they concern, in the highest degree, the liberty of

the church, its rights, its essential principles, and the salvation of the

faithful in those Russian countries. We allude to that true and complete

liberty, which ought to be secured to the Christian people, of being able,

in regard to the things which relate to religion, to communicate, without

impediment, with this Apostolic See, the centre of Catholic unity and

truth, the Father and Master of all the Faithful. All men may understand

how deeply grieved we are, when they call to mind the multiplied appeals

which this Apostolic See has never ceased to cause to be heard at divers

times, in order to obtain free communication of the faithful, not only in

Russia, but also in other countries, where, in certain affairs of

religion, it is seriously impeded, to the great loss of souls. We would

speak of the property which ought to be restored to the clergy. We would

have removed from the Episcopal Consistories the lay person chosen by the

government, in order that, in these assemblies, the bishops may be able to

act with all liberty. We must advert to the law according to which mixed

marriages are not recognized as valid, until they have been blessed by a

Russo-Greek Catholic priest; and also to the liberty which Catholics ought

to possess of trying and judging their matrimonial causes, in eases of

mixed marriages, by a Catholic ecclesiastical tribunal. Finally, we would

allude to divers laws prevalent in Russia, which fix the age at which

religious professions may be made, which destroy entirely the schools that

are held in the houses of religious orders, which prevent the visits of

provincial superiors, which forbid and interdict conversion to the

Catholic faith.”

In this same allocution the Holy Father deplores the miserable state of

the illustrious Ruthenian nation, which, dispersed throughout the vast

countries of Russia, is, from various causes, exposed to great dangers as

regards salvation. Without bishops, they have none to guide them in the

paths of righteousness, none to administer to them spiritual succour, or

to warn them against the insidious approaches of heresy and schism. The

Holy Father is confident that the Latin priests will bestow all their care

and employ every available resource in affording spiritual aid to these

“most dear children.” “From our inmost soul,” concludes the venerable

Pontiff, “we exhort, earnestly and lovingly in the Lord, and urge the

Ruthenians themselves to remain faithful and steadfast in the unity of the

Catholic Church, or, if they have been so unfortunate as to abandon it, to

return to the bosom of their most loving mother, to have recourse to us,

who, with God’s assistance, will do whatever is best calculated to secure

their salvation.”

As regards some of these highly important matters, the wishes of the Holy

Father were acceded to by the Russian Emperor. The bishop of Kherson was

allowed a second suffragan. It was also regulated that matrimonial and

other ecclesiastical causes, whether in Russia proper or in the kingdom of

Poland, should, on appeal from a sentence pronounced by the ordinary, be

heard before the tribunal of the metropolitan, or before the more

neighboring bishop, in case of judgment having been first given by the

metropolitan. Such causes, in the event of final appeal, should be

referred to Rome—to the tribunal of the Apostolic See.

In considering, at some length, the Concordat with Russia, and the more

favorable terms by which it was followed, we learn what hopes may be

entertained as regards the spiritual well-being of the more numerous

Catholics, Armenians and others, who will now, in all probability, come

under the sway of Russia.(2)

(M23) The Society of the Holy Ghost had labored successfully in France,

the Indies, Canada, China, Acadia, or Nova Scotia, the islands, Miquelon

and St. Peter. In the countries referred to, there were bishops, vicars

apostolic, of this society, and several missionary priests. In Cayenne and

French Guiana, they maintained an apostolic prefect and twenty

missionaries apostolic. The troubles of the French revolution all but

extinguished this zealous and influential missionary society. It was

revived in the year 1848, under the auspices of Pius IX., and resumed its

labors under the title of Society of the Holy Ghost and the Immaculate

Heart of Mary. During the negotiations which led to the restoration of

this society, the Vicariate Apostolic of Madagascar became vacant by the

death of Bishop Dalton. Abbe Monnet, Superior of the Society of the Holy

Ghost, was appointed to succeed him, and Rev. Abbe Liebermann, a

distinguished convert from Judaism, was unanimously elected to the post of

superior-general of the two united societies. The labors of Abbe

Liebermann were crowned with complete success. In 1850, the Holy Father,

in order to confirm and perpetuate the fruit of so much apostolic labor,

erected three bishoprics—one in the low country of Guadeloupe, another at

Fort Francis, in Martinica, and a third at St. Denis, of Bourbon Island.

The eminent convert died in 1852, after having had the satisfaction to

behold such great developments of his missionary work. The death of the

first superior-general did not, by any means, retard the increase of the

new society. On the contrary, new blessings seemed to descend upon it.

Under the guidance of the second superior, the Abbe Schwindenhammer, who

had been the friend and confidential counsellor of the first, the society

came to be as an order of three choirs—Fathers, Friars, Sisters. To the

Rev. Fathers, who were missionaries apostolic, the Father of the great

Christian Family, Pius IX., assigned a field of labor, a hundred times

more extensive than the land which was promised of old to the children of

Israel—a territory from eleven to twelve hundred leagues in length, and

broad in proportion. The friars were lay missionaries, whose duty it was

to assist the Rev. Fathers, teach the neophytes the arts of Christian

civilization, and change the deserts, the wild forest lands and dismal

swamps, into smiling fields. A brother, who is a printer, has already

departed for those missions, carrying with him a complete set of types.

The sisters, in order to draw down the mercy of heaven on the negro lands,

devote themselves to prayer, works of charity and self-denial, perpetual

adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, and the continual offering of

themselves in sacrifice for the salvation of the souls that are most

neglected. They would even, if it were the call of heaven, repair to

Africa, and found there religious communities, in order to confirm the

good work commenced by the missionaries. So early as their first year,

1852, they had established two or three houses in France. This great

missionary society came into existence at a singularly opportune moment,

and none can tell what an important part it may bear in carrying the light

of Christianity into that benighted Africa which modern discovery, the

discovery of our age, the age of Pius IX., is now throwing open to the

many blessed influences of civilization.

In the early days of the Pontificate of Pius IX., the Guinea missions

extended over regions of negro-land nine hundred leagues from east to

west, and seven hundred leagues from north to south, with a coast-line of

eleven hundred leagues. These African countries are very populous; and

there are towns of 20,000, 30,000, and even 60,000 inhabitants. The

greatest barbarism prevails. With the exception of a few Mahometans in

Sanegambia, the people are idolators. They are also cannibals, and human

sacrifices are frequent. Polygamy is one of their vices, and those on the

sea coast of Guinea have learned many others from contact with Europeans,

such as hard drinking and all kinds of excess. Their women are in a

degraded condition, doing all the drudgery, and not being admitted to an

equality with their husbands. Notwithstanding all this, the missionaries

give them a high character. They bear pain with fortitude, and have a

horror of slavery, although so many of them are reduced to servitude by

greedy traders. A sea captain once offered a negro any amount of money, on

condition that he should become his slave. “All the gold your ship could

hold,” said the spirited African, “is no price for my liberty.” They are

very sensitive, grateful, and even affectionate towards those who befriend

them. To the missionaries they always showed hospitality; and the peaceful

explorer, Livingstone, and his friends generally met with the same

kindness. If it was otherwise with the adventurous discoverer, Stanley, he

owed the hostility with which he was often received by the African tribes

to the armed force by which he was accompanied, and his determination to

traverse their countries, whether they liked it or not. They listened

attentively to the missionaries, and this circumstance induced these

excellent persons to express the belief that, with proper precautions,

they may be induced to embrace the Christian faith. Many things have

occurred, in the course of this favored age, to encourage this hope for

the future welfare of so many millions of the human race. Science has

thrown its light into the hitherto dark regions of Central Africa, where

no European had, as yet, been able to penetrate. The petty and corrupting

traffic on the coasts will speedily expand into wide extended and

improving commerce. The slave trade is gradually diminishing, and must,

ere long, disappear under the blessed influences, more active than ever,

which are now at work; the whole church is moved by the edifying

narratives of zealous missionaries; and the countenance of the Apostolic

See is willingly bestowed on missionary effort. So, it is not too much to

say that, with such auspicious commencements in the age of Pius IX., the

days of some future Pontiff, at no very distant epoch, will be blessed to

behold Africa, so long neglected, happily, at length, brought within the

pale of Christianity and civilization.

The missionaries speak of a Prince, whose history, if related by less

trustworthy parties, could not fail to be considered fabulous. His

territory is situated on the river Gabon. He speaks English and French

fluently, as well as an African dialect called _Boulou_. He is a man of

gentle and polished manners, and possesses the self-control of the most

accomplished European. In point of sobriety, he is equal to the best of

Europeans. He never drinks intoxicating liquor, and forbids his children

to use it. He is beloved by his subjects, and respected by the neighboring

tribes, who hold with him commercial and friendly relations. He shows

great friendship to the missionaries, and takes great delight in assisting

them. A good bishop is also mentioned, whose horror of the slave trade was

such that he would not allow a negro to serve him. In addition to the

mission-house, which is a solid stone building, there is also a seminary,

where some of the native youth are educated for the duties of the

Christian priesthood. The aboriginal populations receive the bishop and

the heads of the missions with extraordinary honors. The salubrity of the

climate is favorably spoken of, being nowise inferior to that of France.

Everything appeared to favor the Guinea missions in the early years of the

Pontificate of Pius IX. With the aid of continued countenance and

encouragement, they cease not to be developed every day more and more

throughout the vast countries extending from Senegambia to the Equator. At

Joal and St. Mary of Gambia, there were flourishing missions so early as

1852. In 1850 M. L’Abbe Arlabosse founded a mission at Galam, 150 leagues

in the interior of Senegal. Another mission was successfully established

at Grand Bassam, in 1851. The printing press, already referred to, has

contributed powerfully to facilitate missionary work. Seven diverse

languages are now taught, viz.: Wolof, Serer, Saracole, Abule, Mpongue,

Bingue and Balu, or Boulou.

It is somewhat remarkable that in all the countries connected as colonies

with Great Britain, where Protestantism is so persistently adhered to,

there should prevail the greatest liberty as regards the exercise of the

Catholic religion. Thus, Cape Colony (Cape of Good Hope) was no sooner

transferred from the rule of Holland to that of Britain than the Holy

Father was enabled to extend his care to the Catholics of that remote

land. A bishop was appointed, and missions speedily established. There are

now three bishops, vicars apostolic, at Cape Town, Graham’s Town, Natal.

The islands Mauritius and Bourbon, each of which has a population of more

than 100,000 souls, share the solicitude of the church and its august

Head. They are not both equally favored by their civil rulers. The former

was annexed to Great Britain in 1810. The Holy Father provides for its

spiritual welfare, confiding its administration to a bishop and a

sufficient number of priests, all of whom receive salaries from the

government. The bishops hitherto have been members of the illustrious

order of St. Benedict, and some of them have enjoyed a high reputation in

the church, such as the learned and eloquent Bishop Morris, and the pious

and accomplished Bishop Collier. Bourbon Island, until of late, 1850, when

a bishop was appointed, had not been so fortunate. An eminent French

writer rather satirically remarks, that it would have to wait until France

ceded all her colonies to the British. There are, however, some priests

who, together with the bishop, minister to the spiritual wants of the

people. Great efforts have been made to establish missions in the large

and populous Island of Madagascar, which, according to geographers, is

1,000 miles in length.

The priests of the congregation of St. Vincent of Paul, as zealous now as

in the days of their illustrious founder, have penetrated into Abyssinia,

and are laboring to bring about a complete reconciliation of that once

eminently Christian nation to the church of Pius IX. The Æthiopian may

not, indeed, change his skin. But, according to the reports of the

missionaries, these people are changing their ideas, and giving proofs of

a disposition to return to the centre of Christian unity. Everywhere the

missionaries are received with kindness by princes and people, and favored

with a respectful hearing.

So great is the reverence of the nations of the Turkish Empire for the

character of the Pope, that one would say that he had a Concordat with

those nations and their chiefs. The legate of the Holy See, Archbishop

Auvergne, of Iconium, was received with the greatest honor by the

Sovereign of Ægypt, on occasion of his legation to that country and Syria.

A Catholic bishop was established at Alexandria, a city so intimately

associated with the memory of Saint Athanasius. His jurisdiction extends

over the Æthiopian countries, and this circumstance, considering their

relations in bygone ages with the Patriarchs of Alexandria, facilitates

their communion with the centre of unity. The Catholic bishop of Cairo,

assisted by thirty priests, so long ago as 1840, governed a flock of

nearly twenty thousand Copts of the ancient race of Ægypt. This body of

faithful Christians is daily increasing, by the adherence of other Copts

who had fallen into the Eutichyan heresy, more from want of instruction

than obstinacy. Nothing could surpass the generosity of the Khedive

towards the church. He presented to the Pope several marble columns, for

the restoration of the Basilica of St. Paul at Rome, and built for the

missionaries and sisters of St. Vincent de Paul a college, schools, and an

hospital in the city of Alexandria. At Tunis and Tripoli there are 7,000

Catholics, who are ministered to by nine priests of the order of St.

Francis. So early as 1840, Sisters of Charity went from France in order to

establish a community at Tunis, with the full concurrence of the Mussulman

government.

It is well known that as soon as a French colony was founded at Algiers, a

bishop was appointed. That African Christendom, so happily commenced,

still prospers, and extends its labors under the auspices of the august

Head of the church. It is consoling to observe that there are so many

nascent and even flourishing churches around the vast continent of Africa,

from Senegambia and Sierra Leone, by the Cape of Good Hope, the islands on

the south-east coast, Æthiopia and Ægypt, to the gates of Hercules. They

stand there as sentinels, ready to intimate the moment when the army of

the Cross may penetrate to the central continent, and conquer new kingdoms

to the cause of Christ. This is surely not too much to hope for in an age

when science has done so much, and commerce, that great handmaid of

civilization, is opening a highway to the darkest recesses of the wide and

long-lost heathen land.

(M24) Some serious-minded Catholics of Germany, dreading lest a national

or schismatical church should come to be established in that country,

conceived the happy idea of organizing, under the auspices of Pius IX.,

associations of laymen, who made it their duty to assist the clergy in

everything that could tend to improve morals and education, relieve

suffering, and restore the liberty and rights of the church, whilst they

studied, at the same time, to impart a spirit of faith to the pursuits of

science, the arts, and even the more humble occupations of trade. The

chief founder of these associations, Mr. Francis Joseph Busz, has written

a book, in which he shows what progress they had already made in 1851, and

what it still remained for them to accomplish. They continued to prosper,

and gave birth to associations of a like nature. Thus, at Cologne, Abbe

Kolping, Vicar of the Cathedral, founded a society of _Catholic

Companions_, the object of whose institute was, that they should spend

their leisure hours together in a Christian manner, and increase the

knowledge suited to their state of life, instead of losing their time,

their money and their morals in taverns. By the year 1852, such

associations of workmen had taken root in no fewer than twenty-five cities

in Germany.

Ever since the Thirty Years’ War, Germany had been distracted by religious

divisions. And yet the sectarian spirit does not appear to have been so

bitter as in some other countries. There was at least a desire for

religious peace and union. This is sufficiently expressed in the articles

of the treaty of Westphalia, which seems to have been intended as a

temporary arrangement for the pacification of the country, until peace

should be permanently established “by the agreement of all parties on

points of religion;” “until all controversies should be terminated by an

amicable and universal understanding.” “But if, which God forbid! people

cannot come to such amicable agreement on the controverted points of

religion, that this convention shall, nevertheless, be perpetual, and this

peace always continue.” Thus was the great treaty only a preliminary of

that lasting peace which can only be finally concluded when all minds and

hearts are united in the bonds of a common faith.

Whilst many good men labored to bring about this most desirable end,

others, such as Frederic of Prussia, and Joseph II. of Austria, by

ill-advised measures, and the countenance which they gave to unsound and

even irreligious doctrines, sowed the seeds of anarchy and unbelief, which

failed not, in due time, to produce fruit according to their kind, and

well-nigh accomplished the overthrow of society as well as that of the

Christian Church. The Austrian Emperor appears to have understood the

situation, and has generally maintained friendly relations with the Chief

Pastor. Germany, besides, has not been without able and pious men, who

have nobly sustained the cause of Truth and Union. Among these are

particularly deserving of honorable mention the Counts Stolberg, father

and son, whose writings have exercised a salutary influence. Whilst many

other noble laymen contributed, like them, to the regeneration of their

country, others, who were noble only in the ranks of literature and

science, vied in their efforts with the learned of noble birth. The elder

Gœrres headed the Catholic movement when Prussia so cruelly persecuted the

Archbishop of Cologne. So good an example was not lost on the son. The

younger Gœrres ceased not to emulate his worthy parent until the day of

his death, in 1852. Another distinguished author, who, by his writings,

greatly contributed to inform and encourage the Catholics of Germany, was

Mr. Francis Joseph Busz, already mentioned in connection with the

associations of Pius IX. He was a native of Baden, and an Aulic Counsellor

of the Grand Duke. He had also been a member of the great National

Parliament, which assembled at Frankfort for the purpose of restoring

German unity. The best-known of his works are: _Catholic Association of

Germany, and the necessity of reform in the instruction and education of

the Catholic secular clergy of Germany_. Some of his remarks may be

appropriately quoted, as they throw light on the present (1877-78) state

of Germany, and explain in great measure the extraordinary relations

between Church and State in the New German Empire: “The year 1848 proved

to us Germans that we could not rely on our governments. Both diplomacy

and bureaucracy are, and will remain, incorrigible. Our misery is, indeed,

great. Dissension prevails among our good citizens; the ill-meaning are

united. The Revolutionary War of 1848 and 1849 was a war of principles,

but without results. It was repressed, but not exhausted. It keeps alive

under the appearances by which it is concealed. The inexhaustible volcano

is at work amongst us, not only since 1848, but for three hundred years.

The abjuration of law, and even of all principle of right, is only the

form or expression; the essence of our malady is the denial of God and His

Church. The revolution is apostacy, the disunion of the nation is schism,

its anarchy Atheism. Whoever, like myself, has witnessed the public

negotiations of Germany, knows full well that the political struggle was,

for a long time, and particularly for the last three years, a contest

between the religious confessions. Such evolutions of evil possess a

certain life, although it be only that which leads to dissolution. They

spring one from another, and the new growth is always an improvement on

that by which it was preceded. I say it with sorrow. The strife of

political parties comes at last to be civil war, which, in its turn,

becomes a religious war, and such war soon grows to a war of unbelief

against Faith, of antichrist against Christ. The end is not uncertain.

Christ will be victorious; for it is appointed that the power of hell

shall not prevail.” In such a state of things the first duty of German

Catholics is that they be united. It is necessary that the German church

should remain in intimate union with the Holy Apostolic See, relinquishing

all pretension to be a separate National Church.

The aspiration of our author, so warmly expressed in 1850, that the German

Episcopate should, in mind and action, be one body in the nation, acting

and suffering together, appears, in these later days, to have been

realized. It was also his firm conviction that it behooved them to labor

to obtain complete liberty of action for the church, particularly in

forming an exemplary clergy, both in the lesser and greater seminaries, as

well as in those higher institutions, the German universities. Neither

should the laity fail in the fulfilment of all Christian and charitable

duties.

(M25) It is well known that, in ancient times, no countries in the world

were more Catholic than Spain and and Portugal. The great wealth and power

and glory to which they attained was, one would say, a mark of Heaven’s

approbation. Wealth, however, is a dangerous possession. In the countries

referred to it induced corruption and degeneracy. Principles of anarchy

came to be disseminated, devolution on revolution followed. The authority

of the Chief Pastor was resisted. The ministers of religion and the

religious orders were treated with contempt—were persecuted in lands where

they had been so long cherished and revered. The children of a corrupt

nobility were sent to govern the provinces and churches of the falling

Empire. The result was, it is superfluous to say, the decline of

religion—the overthrow of the once flourishing churches of Spain and

Portugal. And yet were they not destined to perish wholly. A remnant was

left; and it was appointed that this remnant should take root and fructify

in a soil which trials and persecution had prepared for a new growth. It

was reserved for the age of Pius IX. to behold Spain and Portugal renew

their early fervor. They have returned to the centre of Catholic unity;

and in both countries arrangements have been entered into for staying the

spoliation of ecclesiastical property, appointing learned and edifying

bishops to the vacant Sees, restoring seminaries and clerical education.

The clergy, who had been infected more or less by the Jansenist heresy,

now purified in the crucible of persecution, have resumed the sound

doctrines and the heroic virtues of the apostolic men who will ever be the

brightest glory of their land—Thomas of Villa-Nova, Francis Xavier,

Ignatius of Loyola, Peter of Alcantara, Francis Borgia, St. John of the

Cross, and Saint Theresa. The Holy See, with the concurrence of the

Spanish Government, has organized anew the churches of Spain. In the

consistory of 3rd July, 1848, Pope Pius IX. instituted bishops for the

following Sees: Segovia and Calahorra, in Old Castile; Tortosa and Vich,

in Catalonia; Porto Rico, in North America; Cuenca and St. Charles de

Aucud de Chilœ, in South America. This last-named diocese, at the time of

the appointment, was newly erected.

(M26) From the epoch of the “Reformation,” when the ancient Catholic

hierarchy of England, which had been so successfully founded by St.

Augustine and the disciples of St. Columba, was swept away, until the year

1850, the church was missionary, and governed, as missions usually are, by

prefects, who may be arch-priests, or vicars-apostolic, with episcopal

titles. Until the year 1625, the English mission was under the guidance of

an arch-priest. In that year Pope Gregory II. appointed a vicar-apostolic

for all England. Circumstances appearing favorable to the church after the

accession of King James II., Pope Innocent XI. placed the English mission

under the spiritual charge of four vicars-apostolic, who were bishops,

with titles taken from churches, _in partibus infidelium_. The country

was, at the same time, divided into four missionary districts—the London,

the Eastern, the Midland and the Western. The numbers of Catholics having

greatly increased during the early portion of the present century, the

Holy Father, Gregory XVI., took into consideration the new requirements

that had arisen, by letters apostolical, of date 3rd July, 1840, made a

new ecclesiastical division of the English counties, and doubled the

number of vicars-apostolic. There were now eight districts under the

spiritual jurisdiction of these vicars-apostolic, who governed and were

governed by the wise constitutions given to their predecessors by Pope

Benedict XIV. Meanwhile, the state of the Catholics of England was rapidly

improving. Relieved of so many of their disabilities by the gracious Act

of 1829, there were no longer any serious legal impediments to the

legitimate development of their church. It grew accordingly, and by the

year 1840 had become comparatively flourishing. It possessed many stately

churches, eight or ten important colleges, the buildings of which were of

a high order of architecture; numerous charitable institutions, each of

considerable extent; over six hundred public churches or chapels, and

eight hundred clergy. Many of the most ancient families of the land were

among its devoted adherents, and it also claimed a not unequal share of

the intellect and learning, the literary and scientific distinction of the

country. Many of the British colonies had already been favored, and not

without the full concurrence of the Imperial government, with that more

suitable and normal state of church government, which depends on the

institution of bishops in ordinary. Was the Mother Country, the seat of

empire, whose church was so much more developed than that of any of the

colonies, alone to be deprived of so great an advantage? Were the

Catholics of England, who were certainly in no respect behind the rest of

their fellow-countrymen, even in an age of light and improvement, to rest

satisfied with a primitive state of things, when a broader, a more free,

and in every way a more beneficial system of spiritual rule was within

their reach? The Chief Pastor was willing to inaugurate such rule,

provided that he found, on examination, that it was suited to the

spiritual state and religious wants of the Catholic people. There was

nothing, besides, in the legislation of the country that could be called

an impediment to a new and better condition of ecclesiastical government.

(M27) For some time the Catholics of England had desired that their church

should enjoy the advantage of being governed by bishops in ordinary. So

early as the year 1834, they petitioned the Holy See to this effect. At

that time, however, nothing was concluded. In 1847 the vicars-apostolic

assembled in London, and deputed two of their number to bear a petition to

the Holy Father, earnestly praying for the long-desired boon. It was

craved, not as a mark of triumphant progress, far less as an act of

aggression on the law-established church, but simply in order to afford

greater facility for the administration of the affairs of the church, and

more effectually to promote the edification of the Catholic people. The

existing code of government had been adopted about a hundred years before,

when heavy penal laws, together with endless disabilities, were in force,

and religious liberty was unknown. Part of this code had been repealed by

Pope Gregory XVI. But it still tended to embarrass rather than to aid and

guide. Since Emancipation, in 1829, the Catholic church had greatly

expanded, and the bishops, vicars-apostolic, were in a situation of great

difficulty, as they were most anxious to be guarded against arbitrary

decisions by fixed rules, whilst as yet none were provided for them. No

doubt the system of church government by vicars-apostolic could have been

amended and made more suitable to the altered circumstances of the church.

But it would have been necessarily complicated, and at best could only

have been a temporary arrangement. It was thought expedient, therefore,

that the ordinary mode of church government should be extended to the

Catholic church in England, in as far as was compatible with its social

position. It was, accordingly, necessary that there should be a hierarchy.

The canon law could not be applied under vicars-apostolic, nor could

provincial synods be held, however necessary their action might be,

without a metropolitan and suffragan bishops. The vicars-apostolic

petitioned only with a view to improve the internal organization of the

church. They had no idea of attacking any other body, and surely never

dreamt of rivalry with the established Anglican church. What they did,

besides, was perfectly within the law, and according to the rights of

liberty of conscience. The Holy Father kindly listened to the petition,

and referred it for further consideration to the congregation of

Propaganda. When every point was carefully examined, and objections

satisfactorily replied to, the favor petitioned for was granted.

Difficulties having been started in regard to some matter of detail, the

publication of the new code of church administration was delayed. These

difficulties were removed the following year by Bishop Ullathorne. But the

measure was again retarded by the revolution which broke out at Rome in

1848. The delay was not without its uses. It gave time to the statesmen of

England to become acquainted with and consider the measure of reform which

was proposed for adoption in the internal organization of the Catholic

church in England. It was officially communicated to them when printed, in

1848. They made no objection. And yet, when it was promulgated in 1850,

their chief spoke of it, in his ill-timed letter to the Bishop of Durham,

as “insolent and insidious.” For many an age to come, Catholics will read

with astonishment that so inoffensive an act of the Holy See, done at the

request of the Catholic bishops of England, and in the interest of the

Catholic people, at the time some seven millions in number, should have

excited the anger of so great a portion of the English nation. The isle

was literally frighted from its propriety. From the Queen on her throne to

the humblest villager, all were seized with sudden and unaccountable fear,

as if the monarchy had been threatened with immediate overthrow. The

Queen, in terror, called her Council of State around her. But her chief

adviser, a weak-minded old man, had very little comfort to bestow. He

could only help her Majesty’s bishops to inflame the public mind. In all

conscience, they had done quite enough in this direction without his

assistance. The spirit of bigotry was enkindled, and the clergy, with

their chiefs, gave proof of their bitter hostility through every newspaper

of the land. This acrimonious opposition was, however, chiefly confined to

the ministers of the church by law established. They believed, or

pretended to believe, that the titles and legal rights of their bishops

were aimed at, whilst, in reality, care had been taken to avoid offending

them, or violating the law, by conferring on the new bishops the titles of

the ancient Sees which were held by the established church. It is

impossible to mention anything connected with the establishment of the

hierarchy which can at all explain the violence of the bishops and clergy

generally of the establishment. The popular commotion arose from

misconception and the absurd falsehoods that were industriously

disseminated. The masses were still raging, when Dr. Wiseman, who had just

been raised to the dignity of Cardinal, published an appeal to the people

of England, in which he showed that the measure which had occasioned so

much disturbance concerned only the internal organization of the Catholic

church, that the Pope had not sought such a measure, but had only acceded

to it at the earnest request of the bishops, vicars-apostolic of England:

that there was nothing connected with it contrary to the laws of the

country, or that could not be reconciled with liberty of conscience, which

was now so completely and generally recognized. It was as ridiculous as it

was illiberal to heap torrents of abuse on the Pope, as if he had sought

to usurp the rights of the Crown, or seize on the territory and revenues

of the established Anglican church. As for himself, he was reviled because

he had received the title of Archbishop of Westminster, whilst, in

reality, as regarded the church of that name, and any territory or

property connected with it, it was only an empty title. He was to be

metropolitan. The title of London was inhibited by law. Southwark was to

be itself a diocese. To have taken the title of a subordinate portion of

the great metropolis, such as Finsbury or Islington, would only have

excited ridicule, and caused the new episcopate to be jeered at.

Westminster was naturally selected, although not by himself, as giving an

honorable and well-known title. He was glad that it was chosen, not

because it was the seat of the courts of law, or of parliament, but

because it brought the real point of the controversy more clearly and

strikingly before the opponents of the hierarchy. “Have we, in anything,

acted contrary to law? And if not, why are we to be blamed?” But he

rejoiced, also, for another reason. The chapter of Westminster had been

the first to protest against the new archiepiscopal title, as though some

practical attempt at jurisdiction within the Abbey had been intended. To

this more than absurd charge, the Cardinal eloquently replied: “The

diocese, indeed, of Westminster, embraces a large district, but

Westminster proper consists of two very different parts. One comprises the

stately Abbey, with its adjacent palaces and its royal parks. To this

portion the duties and occupations of the dean and chapter are mainly

confined, and they shall range there undisturbed. To the venerable old

church I may repair, as I have been wont to do. But perhaps the dean and

chapter are not aware, that were I disposed to claim more than the right

to tread the Catholic pavement of that noble building, and breathe its air

of ancient consecration, another might step in with a prior claim. For

successive generations there has existed ever, in the Benedictine order,

an Abbot of Westminster, the representative in religious dignity of those

who erected and beautified and governed that church and cloister. Have

they ever been disturbed by this titular? Have they heard of any claim or

protest on his part touching their temporalities? Then let them fear no

greater aggression now. Like him, I may visit, as I have said, the old

Abbey, and say my prayer by the shrine of good St. Edward, and meditate on

the olden times, when the church filled without a coronation and

multitudes hourly worshipped without a service. But in their temporal

rights, or their quiet possession of any dignity and title, they will not

suffer. Whenever I go in I will pay my entrance fee, like other liege

subjects, and resign myself meekly to the guidance of the beadle, and

listen without rebuke when he points out to my admiration detestable

monuments, or shows me a hole in the wall for a confessional. Yet this

splendid monument, its treasures of art and its fitting endowments, form

not the parts of Westminster which will concern me; for there is another

part which stands in frightful contrast, though in immediate contact with

this magnificence. In ancient times the existence of an abbey in any spot,

with a large staff of clergy and ample revenues, would have sufficed to

create around it a little paradise of comfort, cheerfulness and ease.

This, however, is not now the case. Close under the Abbey of Westminster

there lie concealed labyrinths of lanes and courts, and alleys and slums,

nests of ignorance, vice, depravity and crime, as well as of squalor,

wretchedness and disease; whose atmosphere is typhus, whose ventilation is

cholera; in which swarms a huge and almost countless population, in great

measure, nominally, at least, Catholic; haunts of filth which no sewerage

committee can reach; dark corners which no lighting board can brighten.

This is the part of Westminster which alone I covet, and which I shall be

glad to claim and to visit, as a blessed pasture in which sheep of Holy

Church are to be tended, in which a bishop’s godly work has to be done, of

consoling, converting and preserving. And if, as I humbly trust in God, it

shall be seen that this special culture, arising from the establishment of

our hierarchy, bears fruits of order, peacefulness, decency, religion and

virtue, it may be that the Holy See shall not be thought to have acted

unwisely, when it bound up the very soul and salvation of a Chief Pastor

with those of a city, whereof the name, indeed, is glorious, but the

purlieus infamous—in which the very grandeur of its public edifices is as

a shadow to screen from the public eye sin and misery the most appalling.

If the wealth of the Abbey be stagnant, and not diffusive; if it in no way

rescue the neighboring population from the depths in which it is sunk, let

there be no jealousy of any one who, by whatever name, is ready to make

the latter his care, without interfering with the former.”

In the passage which follows, the established clergy are rather

unceremoniously handled; and not undeservedly, for there can be no doubt

that their reckless diatribes in the pulpit, on the platform, and in the

press, were the chief cause of the unhallowed uproar which attended the

publication of the new and much-needed organization of the Catholic church

in England. It certainly was not their fault if the country was not

disgraced by deeds of violence. In one or two places, indeed, such things

were attempted. At a town in the north of England, where there is a

Catholic mission, a mob of excited people threatened the chapel and

priest’s house. The presence of a counter-mob from a neighboring colliery

speedily restored tranquillity. In another town a crowd of the unwashed

were proceeding to burn the Pope and Cardinal in effigy, when these august

persons were wisely seized by order of the magistrates, and, with some of

their unruly escort, secured within the prison walls. Although a few

_hired_ ruffians could attempt such things (it is known that those last

named were hired), the English people were far from contemplating anything

like violence. So it is with no small pleasure that is here recorded the

high compliment paid to them in the following eloquent passage of Cardinal

Wiseman’s appeal: “I cannot conclude,” he says towards the end, “without

one word on the part which the clergy of the Anglican church have acted in

the late excitement. Catholics have been their principal theological

opponents, and we have carried on our controversies with them temperately,

and with every personal consideration. We have had no recourse to popular

arts to debase them; we have never attempted, even when the current of

public opinion has set against them, to turn it to advantage, by joining

in any outcry. They are not our members who yearly call for returns of

sinecures or episcopal incomes; they are not our people who form

antichurch-and-state associations; it is not our press which sends forth

caricatures of ecclesiastical dignitaries, or throws ridicule on clerical

avocations. With us the cause of truth and of faith has been held too

sacred to be advocated in any but honorable and religious modes. We have

avoided the tumult of public assemblies and farthing appeals to the

ignorance of the multitude. But no sooner has an opportunity been given

for awakening every lurking passion against us than it has been eagerly

seized by the ministers of the Establishment. The pulpit and the platform,

the church and the town hall, have been equally their field of labor; and

speeches have been made and untruths uttered, and calumnies repeated, and

flashing words of disdain and anger and hate and contempt, and of every

unpriestly and unchristian and unholy sentiment, have been spoken, that

could be said against those who almost alone have treated them with

respect. And little care was taken at what time or in what circumstances

these things were done. If the spark had fallen upon the inflammable

materials of a gunpowder-treason mob, and made it explode, or, what was

worse, had ignited it, what cared they? If blood had been inflamed and

arms uplifted, and the torch in their grasp, and flames had been

enkindled, what heeded they? If the persons of those whom consecration

makes holy, even according to their own belief, had been seized, like the

Austrian general, and ill-treated, and perhaps maimed, or worse, what

recked they? These very things were, one and all, pointed at as glorious

signs, should they take place, of high and noble Protestant feeling in the

land, as proofs of the prevalence of an unpersecuting, a free, inquiring,

a tolerant gospel creed!

“Thanks to you, brave and generous and noble-hearted people of England!

who would not be stirred up by those whose duty it is to teach you,

gentlemen, meekness and forbearance, to support what they call a religious

cause, by irreligious means; and would not hunt down, when bidden, your

unoffending fellow-citizens, to the hollow cry of ‘No Popery,’ and on the

pretence of a fabled aggression.”

The London _Times_ might well say, referring to this magnificent appeal,

that the Cardinal had at length spoken English. It was easy to mystify the

people in regard to theological utterances. They could be no longer

deceived now that the Chief of the new hierarchy had addressed them in

round Saxon terms, about the meaning of which there could be no mistake.

The _appeal_ first published in the London _Times_ was reproduced in all

the newspapers of the country. The public mind was tranquillized, and very

little was heard, afterwards, of the “Papal aggression.” The Prime

Minister, however, was bound, for the sake of consistency, to do

something. What he did was highly in favor of the hierarchy. It proved

that everything had been done according to law, simply by the fact that

parliament was urged to make a new law by which everything that had been

done would be illegal. This was the famous Ecclesiastical Titles Bill. It

was designed to accomplish a great deal—to extinguish for ever the

Cardinal Archbishop, and all the other newly-instituted bishops. It proved

utterly futile—_telum imbelle sine ictu_. The people could not be made to

put down the Catholic institution; and religious liberty was so thoroughly

recognized that even an act of parliament was powerless against it.

(M28) The new Sees constituted by the Letters Apostolical of 29th

September, 1850, were thirteen in number—Westminster, the Metropolitan

See; Southwark, Hexham, Beverly, Liverpool, Salford, Shrewsbury, Newport,

Clifton, Plymouth, Nottingham, Birmingham and Northampton.

(M29) At the time of the restoration of the English hierarchy, Dr. Wiseman

was created a Cardinal, not so much in honor of the important act to which

it was his charge to give effect, as because the Holy Father having

resolved on a creation of Cardinals so eminent a man could not be

overlooked. At the accession of Pius IX. there were sixty-one living

Cardinals. Of these only nine were not Italians. When, on his return to

Rome, after his sojourn in the kingdom of Naples, he determined to add

fourteen Cardinals to the Sacred College, only four of the prelates

selected were natives of Italy. The rest were, at the time, the most

distinguished men of the Catholic world. Of this number Archbishop Geissel

of Cologne was one, and the King of Prussia, more liberal than certain

magnates of England, thanked the Holy Father, in an autograph letter, for

the honor thus done to the Catholic church of his country. Since that time

the Prussian monarch appears to have changed his sentiments as well as his

ministry.

(M30) Notwithstanding the noisy demonstrations in opposition to the

Cardinal Archbishop and his brother bishops, they were allowed to pursue

in peace their labors of Christian zeal. The English grumbled, as is their

wont. But discovering in time that they were neither attacked nor hurt,

the rights of liberty of conscience were respected, and no persecution

followed what it was at first the fashion to call the “Papal aggression.”

(M31) The Emancipation Bill of 1829, by which liberty of conscience, which

was so proudly called the birthright of every Englishman, was extended to

Catholics, tended powerfully, no doubt, to promote the development of the

Catholic church. It grew also by emigration from Catholic Ireland, and

there were some conversions occasionally from the Protestant ranks. It was

not, however, till the decade immediately preceding the restoration of the

hierarchy, that there was a very marked and decided movement of the

educated and learned men of England towards the Catholic church. It is not

recorded anywhere that Catholic missionaries or envoys of the Pope had

penetrated into those sanctuaries of Protestant learning—the celebrated

universities of Oxford and Cambridge. There, at least, there was no “Papal

aggression,” and tract upon tract was issued from the press of those seats

of learning, in which it was argued that the doctrines taught by the

Fathers of the first five centuries were the real Christian teaching which

all men were bound to accept. It appeared to have escaped the learned men

of Cambridge and Oxford that these were the very doctrines so

perseveringly adhered to by the long-ignored and down-trodden Catholics of

England.

This fact, however, flashed upon their minds at last, and they who were

lights in the Anglican establishment, which had been so long surrounded by

a halo of worldly glory, and to be connected with which was a sure title

to respectability, hesitated not to place themselves in communion with

those whose position as a church had been for so many generations like to

that of the early Christians who lurked in the catacombs of Rome. The

clergy of the Catholic church in England, although they did not and could

not have inaugurated the Cambridge and Oxford movement, recognized its

importance, and freely seconded what it was beyond their power to

initiate. Foremost amongst those who were ever ready to afford comfort and

encouragement to the able and inquiring men who sought the one true fold,

was the learned ecclesiastic of world-wide renown who, a little later,

bore so conspicuous a part in the re-establishment of the sacred hierarchy

in England. This highly-gifted divine was a willing worker in the great

Master’s field. His labors were beyond even his great powers; and so his

career, though brilliant, was comparatively short. The cause which he so

well sustained is one which cannot suffer an irreparable loss; and great

would be the joy of the pious and devoted Cardinal, so early snatched

away, if it were given him to behold the rapid developments of the church

which, in his day, he so ably and successfully upheld.

(M32) If the increase of Catholics in England was rapid during the decade

which preceded, it was much more so immediately alter the restoration of

the hierarchy. This event appears to have given a new impetus to the

growth of the church and her salutary institutions. Religious communities

multiplied under the fostering care of the Cardinal Archbishop, and the

encouragement which the Holy Father never ceased to afford. From 80, at

the accession of Pius IX., they rose to 367; and schools and colleges

increased from 500 to 1,300. The number of priests in Great Britain was

more than trebled. It grew from 820 to 1,968, whilst churches and chapels

rose in proportion—from 626 to 1,268. The number of dignitaries and other

ministers of the Church of England, by law established, who, within the

same period, embraced the Catholic faith, is estimated at over one

thousand. There were, at the same time, numerous conversions among the

laity. All this, together with the natural growth of population and

immigration from Ireland, accounts for the increase of Catholics

throughout the British isles in the days of Pius IX., as well as for the

great additions to the number of their clergy, churches, religious and

educational institutions. Monsignore Capel ascribes these extraordinary

developments in great measure to the action of that section of the Church

of England which is known as the High Church or Ritualist division of the

Establishment. This is true, no doubt, as regards any augmentation of the

church through conversions from Protestantism, and the impetus given by

the movement towards Catholic union. “It is scarcely possible,” says the

Rev. Monsignore Capel, “to find a family in England that will not own that

one of its members, or, at least, some acquaintance, has relations with

the Catholic church, or observes some of the practices of that church,

whether it be adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, auricular confession,

devotion to the Blessed Virgin, or veneration of the saints. This movement

is of such powerful proportions, and possesses such vitality of action,

that no power on earth, no persecution on the part of Protestantism, the

government or the press, is able to suppress it. Catholics would never

have been able, themselves alone, to realize what is now accomplished by a

section of the established Anglican church. The members of this party, by

their discourses in the pulpit, have familiarized the public mind with

expressions which Catholics never could have spread among the English

people to the same extent, such as altar and sacrifice, priest and

priesthood, high mass, sacrament, penance, confession, &c. The movement

has produced this result. Many persons have become seriously religious,

who had been in the habit of considering that the service of God was only

a fitting employment for Sunday. In fine, the spirit of God which breathed

on the waters at the commencement is now passing over the British nation

and impelling it towards Catholic truth.”

Not a few of those who were once distinguished ministers of the Anglican

church are now officiating, with great acceptance, as Catholic priests. Of

the 264 priests of the diocese of Westminster, there are 40 who were

members of the official or law church. There passed not a week, M. Capel

assures us, that he did not receive four or five Ritualists into the

communion of the Catholic church. This was no fruit of his labor and

ability, he modestly as well as truly declares. They were persons with

whom he had no relations whatsoever, until they came to him, their minds

made up, and expressed that serious determination which is so

characteristic of them.

The publications of the celebrated statesman, Mr. Gladstone, although they

have not won for him reputation as a theologian, have, nevertheless,

promoted the cause of Catholic theology. The opinions of so eminent a man

were naturally subjects of general discussion; and thus, whilst he opposed

Pius IX. and his decisions, he caused many, who would never probably have

thought seriously of anything a Pope could say, to give their attention to

matters spiritual of the highest import. As regards his own theology, it

is partly sound, partly the reverse. Whilst entirely misapprehending the

doctrine of infallibility, and denying what he conceives it to be, he

vigorously maintains the indefectibility of the Catholic church, and

acknowledges the claim of her pastors to “descent in an unbroken line from

Christ and His apostles.” Such is one of the powerful agents in the great

movement of the age. The most influential of all, however, was Pope Pius

IX. himself. English people and Americans often sought his presence. And

who shall tell how many, after having conversed with him or his

representatives, have been disabused of their erroneous notions, or have

even embraced the Catholic faith?

One chief cause of the remarkable development of the Catholic church in

the British isles, is the complete religious liberty which Catholics

enjoy. This important fact was thoroughly recognized on occasion of the

celebration of the anniversary of O’Connell in August, 1875, when a solemn

_Te Deum_ was ordered in all the churches by the Cardinal Archbishop, in

thanksgiving for the liberty of conscience which was so gloriously won for

the United Kingdom as well as Ireland and all the colonies. Pius IX. and

the whole Catholic world joined on the same occasion in acts of

thanksgiving with the spiritual heirs of Sts. Patrick, Augustine, Columba

and St. Thomas of Canterbury. It is a noteworthy fact that the number of

archiepiscopal and episcopal sees, together with vicariates-apostolic,

&c., created by Pius IX. throughout the British Empire, is not less than

one hundred and twenty-five.

(M33) For three hundred years the Catholics of Holland were sorely tried

by persecution. Until the time of the Concordat of 1827, they were

governed by archpriests, whose superior or prefect resided at the Hague.

When Holland was separated from Belgium, the king of the former country

wisely resolved to act as a constitutional monarch. He was considerate as

regarded his Catholic subjects. His successor, William II., to whom in

1840 he resigned the crown, treated them with still greater benevolence.

He sought an understanding with the Holy See, and gave effect to the

Concordat of 1827. Vicars-apostolic, invested with the episcopal

character, were now the chief pastors of the church of Holland. The king

also sanctioned the establishment of several religious communities, among

the rest the Society of Jesuits and the Liguorians. These arrangements

were joyfully accepted by the Catholics of Holland, and paved the way for

greater developments. These worthy people were, for a long time, believed

to be few in number, and scarcely more than nominally Catholics. Relieved,

at length, from the pressure of persecution, they astonished the world,

not only by their numbers, but also, and even more, by their zeal in the

cause of religion. According to the census of 1840, they were nearly

one-half of the entire population of Holland. Total population, 2,860,450;

Protestants, 1,700,275; Catholics, 1,100,616. The remainder was made up of

Jews and other dissenters. Thus were the Catholics of Holland as eleven to

seventeen. Since that time they have not ceased to increase. Nor have they

lost the high character which induced Pius IX., in 1853, to restore, the

king concurring, their long-lost hierarchy. An archbishopric, Utrecht, and

four episcopal sees were established—Harlem, Herzogenbosch, or Bois le

Due, Breda and Roermonde. This wise and necessary measure was followed by

an outburst of wrath on the side of the anti-Catholic party. But in

Holland, as in England, it soon subsided, and left only the impression

that Protestants and other non-Catholic people claim an exclusive right to

religious liberty. Pius IX. never ceased to entertain a high opinion of

the good Catholics of Holland. “Ah!” said he to visitors from that

country, “could we ever forget that these single-minded, loyal, patient

Hollanders formed the majority of our soldiers, who were not native

Italians, at Castelfidardo and Mentana.”

(M34) Whilst in the old world, wherever really free political institutions

existed, the spirit of persecution quailed before the recognized principle

of religious liberty, in certain portions of the new it appeared to gain

strength, and to increase in the violence of its opposition to the liberty

of the church. This was particularly the case in New Granada, where

politicians, without statesmanship or experience, imagined that they had

made their people free, when they succeeded in separating them from Spain

and establishing a republic, in which the first principles of liberty were

ignored. It is not recorded that the clergy of New Granada sought to do

violence to any man’s conscience, or ever thought of forcing any one to

accept the Catholic creed. To say the least, they were too wise to

attempt, thus to fill the church with hypocrites and secret enemies. Of

such there were already too many in those societies which shun the light,

and in the new world as actively as in the old intrigue and manœuvre in

order to overthrow every regular and legitimately established government.

Even the republic of New Granada, which had been fashioned so much

according to their will, was far from perfect in their estimation, so long

as the church was not completely subject to the state. So early as 1847,

Pius IX. addressed a fatherly remonstrance to the President of the New

Republic. It was of no avail. The evil continued. Anti-Catholic

legislation was coolly proceeded with. In 1850 the seminary of Bogota was

confiscated. The following year bishops were forbidden the visitation of

convents. Laws were enacted requiring that lay parishioners should elect

their parish priests, and that canons should be appointed by the

provincial councils. The clergy were robbed of their proper incomes, and

the congress or parliament of the republic arrogated the right to

determine what salaries they should enjoy as well as what duties they

should fulfil. This surely was nothing less than to reduce the church to

be nothing more than a department of the civil government. The church

could not so exist. Its principle and organization were from a higher

source. The Socialists and secret plotters fully understood that they were

so, and that in this lay the secret of the church’s power to promote

virtue and check the course of evil. It consisted, it appears, with their

ideas of justice and liberty, that the church should, if possible, be

deprived of this great and salutary moral power. So, whilst neither its

members, generally, nor its clergy desired radical and subversive changes

in the essential constitution of the church, the republican leaders

determined that it should be completely revolutionized. The bishops and

priests protested, with one voice, against such fundamental innovations.

The republicans, no less resolute, and, bent on their wicked purpose,

imprisoned and banished the clergy. One dignitary alone showed weakness.

He was no other than the Vicar-Caputular of Antioquia. Pius IX. charitably

rebuked him, and exhorted him to suffer courageously, like his brethren.

The persecution, meanwhile, was very sweeping. The Archbishop of Bogota,

Senor Mosquera, and almost all the suffragan bishops, were driven from the

country, so that there was scarcely a bishop left in the republic. It was

now speedily seen that the godless radicals had overdone their ungracious

work. The country was roused. The tide of popular indignation set in

against the short-sighted politicians who persecuted the church, and they,

dreading an insurrection, withdrew, with the best grace they could

command, from the false position which they had so unwisely assumed.

(M35) Whilst the spirit of persecution brooded gloomily over many

countries of the new world, its influence began to decline in those lands

where for centuries the idea of liberty of conscience was unknown, where

even the slightest toleration existed not. Those northern lights, those

champions in their day of Protestantism and “_religious liberty_” Gustavus

Wasa and Gustavus Adolphus, were not mistaken when they bequeathed to

their country laws which were intended to be as unchangeable as those of

the Medes and Persians, and which forbade all Scandinavians, whether

Swedes, Danes or Norwegians, under pain of death, to embrace the Catholic

faith. Those princes were wise in their generation. They understood the

power of Truth; they knew that half measures were of no avail against it;

and that in order to stifle it, even for a time, all the terrors of

worldly tyranny must be brought into play. Their laws, more terrible than

the code of Draco, remained in force and without mitigation until a great

revolution had swept over Europe, and sent a military adventurer to fill

the regal seat of the formidable Wasas. In the time of Bernadotte (the

Doct Baron), the infamous penal laws were relaxed. To become a Catholic

now only led to imprisonment or exile. Six ladies of Sweden, in defiance

of this _milder_ law, came to profess the Catholic faith. They were tried,

condemned and sentenced to be banished from the country. The execution of

this barbarous sentence roused all Europe, and caused the abrogation of

the Swedish penal laws against religion. (M36) Thus was a new field laid

open to missionary zeal, and Pius IX., availing himself of so favorable a

change of circumstances, appointed a Catholic pastor missionary apostolic

at Stockholm. This devoted priest labors assiduously and in the midst of

difficulties, but not without fruit. He contends, with all the success

that can be as yet expected, against prejudices hostile to the religion

which brought civilization to the Scandinavian nations, and which have

been accumulating for three centuries and a half.

(M37) Denmark followed in the wake of Sweden. Within the first two years

after the abrogation of the cruel Danish penal code, there were six

hundred conversions to the Catholic faith.

(M38) The Catholic church in the recently-erected kingdom of Greece was

governed by vicars-apostolic. It grieved King Otho, who, as is well known,

was of the Catholic royal family of Bavaria, to see his country treated as

if it were a heathen land. It was not, however, till the time of his

successor, who is a son of the King of Denmark, that Pius the Ninth was

able to establish a hierarchy in Greece. There is now an archbishop of

Athens as well as an archbishop of Corfu.

(M39) At a time when crime abounded, the governments of certain petty

States of Germany, instead of directing their energies towards its

repression, and so fulfilling one of the chief duties incumbent on the

State, employed all the authority with which they were invested to

disorganize the church and destroy its salutary influence. As is usual,

when States, forgetting the great objects for which they are entrusted

with the sword of justice, follow such a course, they attacked the

ministers of the church, banishing, imprisoning, thwarting and molesting

them in every possible way. In the Grand Duchy of Baden the civil

authorities arrogated the right to appoint parish priests and other

members of the sacred ministry. They went so far as to endeavor to poison

religious instruction at its source, and declared that the students in

Catholic seminaries must undergo, before ordination, an examination by

civil officials. This tyrannical law was courageously opposed by the

venerable archbishop, Vicary, of Friburg. (M40) Although eighty years of

age, he was dragged before the courts, and placed like a criminal under

charge of the police. The faithful clergy were banished, imprisoned and

fined. The Holy Father, with his usual zeal, remonstrated. It was to no

purpose. At length the Catholics of Germany were roused. They could no

longer be indifferent. The day was come when the church, in her utmost

need, could not dispense with their assistance. All must now be for her or

against her. The great majority flocked around her standard. Meanwhile,

the public offices in the churches were suspended. The bells and organs

were heard no more. Silence and death-like gloom overspread the land.

Baden gave way. Wurtemberg, Hesse Cassel and Nassau, which had done their

best to follow in the wake of Baden, paused in their mad career. Thus,

throughout those lesser States peace reigned once more, and continued to

reign in Germany until a greater State, Prussia, unwisely disturbed the

religious harmony which so happily prevailed. The chiefs of States,

alarmed by the revolutionary spirit which spread, like contagion,

throughout Germany as well as the rest of Europe, adopted a more rational

policy. They encouraged the clergy to hold missions everywhere. They

invited the Liguorians and Jesuits, as well as the secular clergy, to

assemble the people in the towns and throughout the country, knowing full

well that they would preach peace and concord no less than respect for

property and life. These pastoral labors were attended with extraordinary

success. Faith, piety, and every virtue flourished among the Catholic

people. All honest Protestants were filled with admiration. Among the

latter there was also a remarkable movement. Some striking conversions

took place, especially in the higher and better educated classes of

society. The Countess de Hahn, so renowned in the literary world for her

wit, abilities, and fine writings, joined the Catholic church, and

published her reasons for so doing. Not satisfied with this step, she came

to the town of Angers, in France, and placed herself as a novice under the

direction of the devout sisters of the Good Shepherd. It is on record

also, that a Protestant journalist of Mecklenburgh, in view of the

commotions which prevailed, and the anti-social doctrines which pervaded

society, went so far as to declare that there was no other remedy for

Protestant Germany than a return to the Catholic church. His remarks

conclude with the following words, extraordinary words, indeed, when it is

considered whence they proceed: “Forward, then, to Rome!”

(M41) In countries nearer the Holy City, and professing to be Catholic,

the venerable Pontiff found not such a source of consolation. Sardinia had

banished the archbishop of Turin. It not only refused to recall him, but

added to its list of exiles the archbishop of Cagliari. Many more bishops

were, at the same time, threatened with banishment. A professor in the

Royal University of Turin, encouraged by the government, attacked the

doctrine of the church, and was so bold as to deny, in public, that

matrimony is a sacrament. Pius IX. issued a condemnation of his

anti-Catholic writings. The sentence did not move him. Nor did it stay the

hand of the Sardinian government which was raised against the church and

her institutions. It continued the preparation of its anti-marriage law.

In addition, accusations were laid against the clergy. The king himself,

evading the real question at issue, accused them of disloyalty, and

declared that they were warring against the monarchy. The Holy Father, in

the following letter to the king, distinctly set forth the real state of

the case:

“If by words provoking insubordination are meant the writings of

the clergy against the proposed marriage law, we declare, without

endorsing the language which some may have adopted, that in

opposing it the clergy simply did their duty. We write to your

Majesty that the law is not Catholic. Now, if the law is not

Catholic, the clergy are bound to warn the faithful, even though

by doing so they incur the greatest dangers. It is in the name of

Jesus Christ, whose Vicar, though unworthy, we are, that we speak,

and we tell your Majesty, in His sacred name, not to sanction this

law, which will be the source of a thousand disorders. We also beg

your Majesty to put a check to the press which is constantly

vomiting forth blasphemy and immorality. Your Majesty complains of

the clergy. But these last years the clergy have been persistently

outraged, mocked, calumniated, reviled and derided by almost all

the papers published in Piedmont.”

That country, unfortunately, appears to have been entirely at the mercy of

the party of unbelief. It was ever ready to inflict new wrongs on the

church, and occasion anxiety and sorrow to the Holy Father.

(M42) There are few readers of ecclesiastical history who are not deeply

interested in that portion of India which was the first field of the

extraordinary apostolic labors of Saint Francis Xavier. The blessing of

the Saint appears to have rested on the land of Goa; for after many years

of trial and difficulty and schism, this Portuguese settlement, once so

great and important, still remains a province of the church. The

Portuguese government, by unjustly claiming right of patronage, originated

the schism which, unfortunately, was of such long continuance. It was

reserved for Pius IX. to restore harmony to the Colonial church of Goa.

Happily, in 1851, the schism was brought to an end.

(M43) Pius IX. was still an exile at Gaeta when, observing the increasing

piety of the Catholic world towards the Blessed Virgin, and moved by the

representations of many bishops that were in harmony with his own

conviction, he issued the Encyclical of the 2nd February, 1849, addressed

to the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops and Bishops of the whole world,

in order to obtain from them the universal tradition concerning the

Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Mother of God. In this Encyclical the

Holy Father recognizes the fact that there was a universal movement among

Christians in favor of the belief in question, so that the complete

acknowledgment of it appeared to be sufficiently prepared both by the

liturgy and the formal requisitions of numerous bishops, no less than by

the studies of the most learned theologians. He further states that this

general disposition was in full accordance with his own thought, and that

it would afford him great consolation, at a time when so many evils

assailed the church, to add a flower to the crown of the most holy Virgin,

and so acquire a title to her special protection. He declares, moreover,

that with this end in view he had appointed a commission of Cardinals in

order to study the question. He concludes by inviting all his venerable

brethren of the Episcopate to make known to him their sentiments and join

their prayers with his in order to obtain light from on high.

As the cross itself was folly in the estimation of the early unbelieving

world, so were such theological occupations, at a time when the Sovereign

Pontiff had not an inch of ground whereon he could freely tread, a subject

for jesting and sarcasm to the worldly-wise of the nineteenth century. It

was some time before they came to understand that a Pope is a theologian

more than a king, that, as such, he is sure of the future, and that the

solemn proceeding in regard to the Immaculate Conception was a triumphant

reply to all the errors of modern thought. This dogma brings to naught all

the rationalist systems which refuse to acknowledge in human nature either

fall or supernatural redemption. The means, besides, which were adopted in

order to prepare its promulgation, tended to bring the various churches

throughout the world into closer relation with their common Head and

Centre. They who had hitherto laughed, now raged when they saw this great

result, and attacked with the utmost fury what they called the “new

dogma.” Both sectarianism and the schools of sophistry descanted loudly,

although certainly not learnedly, on the ignorance and ineptitude of the

institution which so powerfully opposed them. All this was only idle

clamoring. It never hindered the Holy Pontiff from prosecuting calmly the

important work which heaven had inspired him to begin.

The Encyclical was warmly responded to by the Episcopate. Six hundred and

three replies were duly forwarded to the Holy Father. Five hundred and

forty-six urgently insisted on a doctrinal definition. A few only, and

among these was Mgr. Sibour, Archbishop of Paris, doubted whether the time

were opportune. But there was no doubt as to the sentiments of the

Catholic world. Only in our time, when the facilities of communication are

so much greater than in any former age, could the plan of consulting so

many bishops in all parts of the world have been successfully adopted.

Pius IX. was now at Rome, and invited around him all bishops who could

travel to the Holy City. No fewer than one hundred and ninety-two from

every country except Russia sought the presence of the Chief Pastor. The

absence of the Russian bishops was all the more surprising, as the

Russo-Greek church vies with Rome in the honor which it pays to the

Blessed Mary. The bishops, however, were not to blame. Their good purposes

were frustrated by the jealous policy of the Emperor Nicholas. The bishops

assembled at Rome, in obedience to the wishes of Pius IX., did not

constitute a formal council. They were, nevertheless, a very complete

representation of the universal church. There were of their number some

highly distinguished cardinals, archbishops and bishops, such as Cardinals

Wiseman and Patrizzi, Archbishops Fransoni of Turin, Reisach of Munich,

Sibour of Paris, Bedini of Thebes, Hughes of New York, Kenrick of

Baltimore, and Dixon of Armagh, together with Bishops Mazenod of

Marseilles, Bouvier of Mans, Malon of Bruges, Dupanloup of Orleans, and

Ketteler of Mayence. Who will say that the learning of the Catholic world

was not at hand to aid with sound counsel the commission of cardinals and

theologians whom the Holy Father had appointed to prepare the Bull of

definition? There had never been so many eminent bishops together at Rome,

since the Œcumenial Council of 1215. On so great an occasion Pius IX. had

requested the prayers of the faithful, and throughout the Catholic world

supplication was made to heaven, in order to obtain, through the light of

the Holy Ghost, such a decision as could tend only to promote the glory of

God, the honor due to the Blessed Virgin Mary and the salvation of

mankind. The bishops at one of their sessions gave a very practical

utterance as regards the infallible authority of the Pope. The question

having arisen whether the bishops were to assist him as judges in coming

to a decision, and pronounce simultaneously with him, or leave the final

judgment solely to the word of the Sovereign Pontiff, the debate, as if by

inspiration from on high, came suddenly to a close. It was the Angelus

hour. The prelates had scarcely resumed their places after the short

prayer, and exchanged a few words, when they made a unanimous declaration

in favor of the supremacy of St. Peter’s chair: _Petre, doce nos; confirma

fratres tuos_—“Peter, teach us; confirm thy brethren.” The teaching which

the Reverend Fathers sought from the lips of the Supreme Pastor was the

definition of the Immaculate Conception.

(M44) The 8th December, 1854, was the great triumphal day which, according

to the fine language of Bishop Dupanloup, “crowned the expectation of past

ages, blessed the present time, claimed the gratitude of the centuries to

come, and left an imperishable memory—the day on which was pronounced the

first definition of an article of Faith which no dissentient voice

preceded, and which no heresy followed.” All Rome rejoiced. An immense

multitude of people of all tongues crowded the approaches to the vast

Basilica of St. Peter, which was by far too small to contain the imposing

host. Then were seen advancing the bishops, in solemn procession, placed

according to seniority, and followed by the cardinals. The Sovereign

Pontiff, surrounded by a brilliant cortege, closed the procession.

Meanwhile was heard the grave chant of the Litanies of the Saints,

inviting the heavenly court to join with the Church militant in doing

honor to her who was Queen alike of angels and of men. Pius IX. ascended

his throne; and as soon as he had received the obedience of the cardinals

and bishops, the Pontifical Mass began. When the Gospel had been chanted

in Greek and in Latin, Cardinal Macchi, Dean of the Sacred College,

accompanied by the deans of the archbishops and bishops, by an archbishop

of the Greek rite, also, and an Armenian archbishop, advanced to the foot

of the throne, and begged of the Holy Father, in the name of the whole

church, “to raise his apostolic voice and pronounce the dogmatic decree of

the _Immaculate Conception_.” The Pope, bowing his head, gladly welcomed

the petition; but wished once more to invoke the aid of the Holy Ghost.

Then rising from his throne, he intoned in a clear and firm voice, which

rang through the grand Basilica, the _veni creator spiritus_. All who were

present, cardinals, bishops, priests and people, mingled their voices with

that of the Father of the Faithful, and the sonorous tones of the heavenly

hymn resounded through the spacious edifice. Silence came. All eyes were

rivetted on the venerable Pontiff. His countenance appeared to be

transfigured by the solemnity of the act in which he was engaged. And now,

in that firm and grave, but mild and majestic, tone of voice, the charm of

which was known to so many millions, he began to read the Bull, which

announced the sublime dogma of the Immaculate Conception. It established,

in the first place, the theological reasons for the belief in the

privilege of Mary. It then appealed to the ancient and universal

traditions of both the Eastern and the Western churches, the testimony of

the religious orders, and of the schools of theology, that of the Holy

Fathers and the Councils, as well as the witness borne by Pontifical acts,

both ancient and more recent. The countenance of the Holy Father showed

that he was deeply moved, as he unfolded these magnificent documents. He

was obliged, several times, so great was his emotion, to stop.

“Consequently,” he continued, “after having offered without ceasing, in

humility and with fasting, our own prayers and the public prayers of the

church to God the Father through His Son, that He would deign to guide and

confirm our mind by the power of the Holy Ghost, after we had implored the

aid of the whole host of heaven, to the glory of the Holy and Undivided

Trinity, for the honor of the Virgin Mother of God, for the exaltation of

the Catholic faith and the increase of the Christian religion; by the

authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the blessed apostles Peter and

Paul, and by our own”—at these words the Holy Father’s voice appeared to

fail him, and he paused to wipe away his tears. The audience was, at the

same time, deeply moved; but, dumb from respect and admiration, they

waited in deepest silence. The venerable Pontiff resumed in a strong

voice, which shortly rose to a tone of enthusiasm: “We declare, pronounce

and define, that the doctrine which affirms that the Blessed Virgin Mary

was preserved and exempt from all stain of original sin from the first

moment of her conception, in consideration of the merits of Jesus Christ,

the Saviour of mankind, is a doctrine revealed by God, and which, for this

cause, the faithful must firmly and constantly believe. Wherefore, if any

one should be so presumptuous, which, God forbid! as to admit a belief

contrary to our definition, let him know that he has suffered shipwreck of

his faith, and that he is separated from the unity of the church.” As the

Pontiff concluded, a glad responsive “Amen” resounded through the crowded

temple.

The Cardinal-dean once more reverently approached, and petitioned that

order be given for the publication of the apostolic letters containing the

definition; the promoter of the Faith, accompanied by the Apostolic

Protonotaries, also came to ask that a formal record of the great act

should be drawn up. At the same time the cannon of the castle of Saint

Angelo, and all the bells of Rome, proclaimed to the world that the

ever-blessed Mary was gloriously declared immaculate. Throughout the

evening the holy city echoed and re-echoed to the sounds of joyous music,

was ablaze with fire-works, and decorated with innumerable inscriptions

and emblematic transparencies.

The example of Rome was immediately followed by thousands of towns and

villages over the whole surface of the globe. It would require libraries

rather than volumes to reproduce the expressions of pious concurrence

which everywhere took place. The replies of the bishops to the Pope before

the definition, were printed in nine volumes; the Bull itself, translated

into all the tongues and dialects of the universe, by the labors of a

learned French sulpician, the Abbe Sire, appeared in ten volumes; the

pastoral instructions, publishing and explaining the Bull, together with

the articles of religious journals, would certainly make several hundred

volumes, especially if to these were added the many books by the most

learned men, and the singularly beautiful hymns and poems which flowed

from the pens of Catholic poets, no less than the eloquent discourses of

the most gifted orators. Descriptions of monuments and celebrations would

also immensely swell the list. Sanctuaries, altars, statues, monuments of

every kind, as well as pious associations rose everywhere in honor of the

Immaculate Conception. The ever-increasing devotion to Mary had become

greater than ever. It was to the unbelieving a phenomenon in the moral

world of the nineteenth century, which they could neither comprehend nor

account for. They could only see that it was as a source of new life to

the church.

(M45) The education law of France, enacted in 1850, had given rise to

differences of opinion among earnest Catholics. These only increased after

the celebrated _coup d’etat_ of 2nd December. M. de Montalembert, who had

become hostile to Prince Louis Napoleon, on occasion of the iniquitous

confiscation of the Orleans property, M. de Falloux, and their friends of

the _Correspondant_, and the _Ami de la Religion_, insisted that they

ought not to accept the protection of Cæsar in place of the general

guarantees which were so profitable to the liberty of the church. They

were right, as was but too well shown in the sequel. M. Louis Veuillot and

the writers of the _Univers_ opposed their views, and so they accused

these gentlemen of servility. But this was too much, as the event also

showed.

The congregation of the “Index” had condemned several French works, some

absolutely, and others only until they should be corrected. Among these

last were books generally used, notwithstanding their faults, in the

public schools, such as the _Manual of Canon Law_, by M. Lequeux,

vicar-general of the Archbishop of Paris, and the theology, so long in

use, of Bailly. The authors of these works at once submitted. One of the

sentences, however, that which affected the Dictionary of M. Bouillet,

greatly offended the Archbishop of Paris—Mgr. Sibour, who had signified

his approval of this publication. He blamed the _Univers_ and the lay

religious press in general. He formulated his complaints in a charge of

15th January, 1851, and by a still more vigorous one in 1853, which was

written at the instigation of a Canon of Orleans, M. L’Abbe Gaduel, who

had accused Donoso Cortes, in the _Ami de la Religion_, of several

heresies, and who complained of having been refuted in the _Univers_ with

a warmth that was far from respectful. Mgr. Sibour forbade the priests of

his diocese to read the _Univers_, and threatened with excommunication the

editors of this journal, if they presumed to discuss the sentence which he

had pronounced against them. A similar sentence came to be uttered by Mgr.

Dupanloup, Bishop of Orleans, against the same writers, condemning the

opinions which they held concerning the study of the classics. M.

Veuillot, following in the wake of M. L’Abbe Gaume, maintained that one of

the principal causes of the weakening of faith since the time of the

_renaissance_, was the obligation imposed on youth of studying, almost

exclusively, Pagan authors. Mgr. Dupanloup contended rather against

exaggerations of this opinion than against the idea itself. But having

developed his views in an episcopal letter to the professors of his lesser

seminaries, he would not allow them to be opposed; and so, like Mgr.

Sibour, interdicted the _Univers_ to his clergy. M. Louis Veuillot

appealed to the supreme bishop.

The French episcopate was _greatly_ divided on the subject of these

untoward controversies. The Bishops of Chartres, Moulins and others, had

publicly defended the _Univers_ in opposition to the Archbishop of Paris.

Cardinal Gousset, Archbishop of Rheims, patronized the opinions of M.

Veuillot in regard to the use of heathen classics. An anonymous paper on

_the right of custom_, addressed to the episcopate, now added to all these

subjects of controversy the recriminations of Gallicanism, which was

almost extinct. The author denying that the customs of the church of

France were abrogated by the Concordat, maintained that the disciplinary

sentences of the Popes could not be applied in any diocese until they were

first promulgated therein. He disputed the authority of the decrees of the

“Index,” blamed the liturgical movement, reproached the religious

journalists with seeking, above all, to please the Court of Rome, and

concluded by advising the bishops to come to an understanding among

themselves, in order to obtain from the Pope a modification of his

decisions. Pius IX. could be silent no longer. Accordingly, he addressed

to all the French bishops an Encyclical, which is known in history as the

Encyclical _inter multiplices_. He commenced by acknowledging the subjects

of joy and consolation afforded him by the progress of religion in France,

and especially by the zeal and devotedness of the bishops of that country.

He gave special praise to these prelates, because they availed themselves

of the liberty which had been restored to them in order to hold Provincial

Councils, and expressed his satisfaction, “that in a great many dioceses,

where no particular circumstance opposed an impediment, the Roman Liturgy

was re-established.” He could not, however, dissemble the sorrow which was

caused him by existing dissensions, and for which he blamed, although

indirectly, political opposition and party spirit. “If ever,” said the

Holy Father, “it behooved you to maintain among yourselves agreement of

mind and will, it is, above all, now, when, through the disposition of our

very dear son in Christ, Napoleon, Emperor of the French, the Catholic

church amongst you enjoys complete peace, liberty and protection.” In

speaking of the good education of youth, which he earnestly recommended as

being of the highest importance, he gave a practical solution of the vexed

question of the classics. “It is necessary,” he insisted, “that young

ecclesiastics should, without being exposed to any danger of error, learn

true elegance of language and style, together with real eloquence, whether

in the very pious and learned works of the Holy Fathers, or in the most

celebrated Pagan authors, when thoroughly expurgated.” In this same

Encyclical also, the venerable Pontiff, speaking of the Catholic press,

declared it to be indispensible. “Encourage, we most anxiously ask of you,

with the utmost benevolence, those men who, filled with a truly Catholic

spirit, and thoroughly acquainted with literature and science, devote

their time in writing books and journals for the propagation and defence

of Truth.”

Catholic writers, in return, it is added, ought to acknowledge the

authority of bishops to guide, admonish and rebuke them. The anonymous

paper is then severely censured, and the Pope concludes by a new and

pressing appeal in favor of concord. As soon as this Encyclical of 21st

March, 1853, was published, M. Louis Veuillot and his fellow-laborers

addressed to Mgr. Sibour a letter expressive of respect and deference, in

which they promised to avoid everything that could render them unworthy of

the encouragement of their archbishop. This prelate immediately withdrew

the sentence which he had issued against them, and thus was peace

restored, once more, by the authority of the Supreme Pastor.

(M46) On the 12th of April, 1855, the fifth anniversary of his return from

Gaeta, Pius IX. drove by the via Nomentana, the beautiful Church of St.

Agnes and the Porta Pia, to a spot five miles from the city, where, on

grounds belonging to the congregation of Propaganda, catacombs had been

recently discovered. In these subterranean recesses were found, among

other venerated tombs, that which contained the relics of St. Alexander

I., Pope and Martyr, and those of the companions who shared his

sufferings. The professors and students of Propaganda had assembled at the

place in honor of the Pope’s visit. They descended with him to the Crypt,

where the Holy Father, as soon as he entered, knelt in prayer beside the

remains of his sainted predecessor, who, more than seventeen centuries

ago, had sealed his faith with his blood. After examining the long

corridors of the catacomb, the Holy Father took his seat on the ancient

throne of the chapel, which, no doubt, in the dark days of heathen

persecution, several of his predecessors had filled. So placed, he

delivered to the pupils of Propaganda a feeling allocution on the high

career which lay before them as preachers of the true Faith. He then

addressed a few words to the eminent persons who surrounded him, and

proceeded back to the Church of St. Agnes. Having adored the Blessed

Sacrament, and venerated the relics of the Virgin Martyr, he entered the

neighboring convent of canons regular of St. John Lateran, where a

suitable repast awaited the august visitor. This was followed by a

conversazione in the parlor, in which the distinguished parties who had

accompanied the Pope took part. Almost every Catholic country was

represented there; and, among the rest, were Archbishop Cullen of Dublin

(long since a Cardinal), and Bishop de Goesbriand of Burlington. The Pope

was on the point of departing, when the Superiors of Propaganda prayed him

to grant an audience to the students. Pius IX. graciously complied, and

resumed his seat in the chair of state which was appropriately canopied. A

hundred young ecclesiastics now rapidly entered the room. All of a sudden

the floor gave way with a loud crash, and the whole assembly disappeared

in a confused mass of furniture, stones, plaster, and a blinding cloud of

dust. The joists had given way, and the whole flooring fell to a depth of

nearly twenty feet. The voice of the Pope was first heard, intimating that

he was safe and uninjured. As a few inmates of the convent had remained

outside, assistance speedily came, and the Holy Father was promptly

extricated from the ruins. Solicitous only for the safety of the company,

he urgently ordered that they should all be withdrawn as rapidly as

possible from their perilous position; and he waited in the garden till

every one of them was rescued. Not so much as one was dangerously injured.

“It is a miracle,” said the Pope, who was greatly rejoiced. “Let us go and

thank God.” Followed by the whole company, as well as those who had come

to rescue them, he entered the church, where, deeply affected, he intoned

the _Te Deum_, and concluded with the solemn benediction of the most Holy

Sacrament.

The news of the accident spread rapidly through the city. The people

flocked to the churches. At St. Agnes the wonderful deliverance was

commemorated by a special service. The interior of this church has been

since restored at great cost by Pius IX. A fresco in the open space in

front represents the scene at the convent. The 12th of April is now a

holiday at Rome, and it is observed every year with piety and gratitude.

Twenty years later—12th of April, 1875—the Romans held a magnificent

celebration of the anniversary of the accident at St. Agnes. It was also

the day of the Pope’s return from Gaeta, in 1850. In reply to the address,

expressive of duty and devotedness, which was presented to him on that

occasion, the Holy Father alluded, in the language of an apostle, to the

mysterious ways of Providence. “Our fall at St. Agnes,” said he, “appeared

at first to be a catastrophe. It struck us all with fear. Its only result,

however, was to cause the works by which the ancient Basilica was renewed

and embellished to be more vigorously prosecuted. The same will be the

case in regard to the moral ruins which the powers of darkness are

constantly heaping up against us and around us. The church will emerge

from the confused mass more vigorous and more beautiful than ever.”

(M47) Piedmont, surely, had little to do at the Congress of Paris, the

object of which was to make the best arrangements possible for the

Christians, and especially the Catholics, of the East. Count Cavour, its

representative, nevertheless, found a pretext for being present, and

introduced as he was by the Minister of France, Count Walewski, and

sustained by the British Plenipotentiary, Lord Clarendon, he became more

important than the power of his country, or the share it had in the

Crimean War, would alone have warranted. He availed himself of his

position to attack and undermine two of the minor sovereigns—the Pope and

the King of Naples.

“The States of the Holy See,” he insisted, “never knew prosperity, except

under the rule of Napoleon I., when they formed part of the French empire

and the kingdom of Italy. Later, the Emperor Napoleon III., _with that

precision and firmness of view by which he is characterized_, understood

and clearly pointed out in his letter to Colonel Ney the solution of the

problem: _Secularization and the Code Napoleon_; but it is evident that

the Court of Rome will struggle to the last moment, and by every possible

means, against the realization of this twofold combination. It is easily

understood that it may appear to accept civil and even political reforms,

taking care always to render them illusory. But it knows too well that

secularization and the code Napoleon, once introduced into the edifice of

the temporal power, would undermine it and cause it to fall, simply by

removing its principal supports—clerical privileges and canon law.

Clerical organization opposes insurmountable impediments to all kinds of

innovations.”

Cavour urged, in conclusion, that “the legations” must be separated

politically, and a viceroy set over those provinces. Walewski and

Clarendon supported these views, but cautiously using the enigmatic

language of diplomacy. The Plenipotentiaries of the other Powers were

silent, or refused to give an opinion, on the ground that they had no

instructions. M. de Mauteuffel alone, the Prussian representative, sternly

observed that such recriminations as M. de Cavour had brought forward were

very like an appeal to the revolutionary movements in Italy. Prussia did

not, at that time, foresee what advantage it was destined to reap from the

alliance of the Italian revolution with Napoleon III. France, however, had

reason to dread lest the chief of her choice should return to the dark

practices of his youth. Her too well-founded apprehensions were confirmed

and aggravated when it came to the public ear, through the newspapers of

the time, that the Emperor had held a too intimate interview with M. de

Cavour at the waters of Plombieres. All this, notwithstanding an alliance

of France with Piedmont, for the destruction of the Pope’s temporal

sovereignty, appeared as yet to be so completely out of the question, that

the French ambassador at Rome refuted publicly the calumnies which M. de

Cavour had so selfishly promulgated. Count de Rayneval had been a long

time at Rome, first as Secretary of the Embassy of King Louis Philippe,

and afterwards as Plenipotentiary of the Republic, before he was appointed

to represent the Emperor Napoleon. None could be better qualified to give

a luminous report of the state of matters at Rome. The revolutionary

press, however, never noticed it, and the government refused to publish it

in the _Moniteur_, preferring the wretched pamphlet of M. About on the

_Roman Question_. The French, who wished to be well informed, sought the

words of M. de Rayneval’s report in the columns of the London _Daily

News_:

COUNT RAYNEVAL’s REPORT TO THE FRENCH GOVERNMENT.

“Pius IX. shows himself full of ardor for reforms. He himself puts his

hand to the work. From the very day Pius IX. mounted the throne he has

made continuous efforts to sweep away every legitimate cause of complaint

against the public administration of affairs.

“Already have civil and criminal cases, as well as a code relating to

commerce, all founded on our own, enriched by lessons derived from

experience, been promulgated. I have studied these carefully—they are

above criticism. The Code des Hypotheques has been examined by French

_juris consults_, and has been cited by them as a model document. Abroad

(says this distinguished and able writer), those essential changes that

are introduced into the order of things, those incessant efforts of the

Pontifical government to ameliorate the lot of the populations, have

passed unnoticed. People have had ears only for the declamation of the

discontented, and for the permanent calumnies of the bad portion of the

Piedmontese and Italian press. This is the source from which public

opinion has derived its inspiration. And in spite of well established

facts, it is believed in most places, but particularly in England, that

the Pontifical government has done nothing for its subjects, and has

restricted itself to the perpetuation of the errors of another age. I have

only yet indicated the ameliorations introduced into the organization of

the administration. Above all, let us remember that never has a more

exalted spirit of clemency been seen to preside over a restoration. No

vengeance has been exercised on those who caused the overthrow of the

Pontifical government—no measures of rigor have been adopted against

them—the Pope has contented himself with depriving them of the power of

doing harm by banishing them from the land.”