TWENTY-SECOND LETTER.

_Rome, Feb. 15, 1870._—If I wrote a fortnight ago that the situation was

essentially improved since the first weeks, this must be taken with

important reservations. The most keen-sighted of the North American

Bishops then said, “We have done nothing at all, and that is a great

deal.” He thought it an important gain that of the proposals laid before

the Council, the two _Schemata_, nothing had passed, and none of the

objects for which it had been convoked had, up to that point, been

attained. But this has only been the damming up of a stream which

eventually bursts through the more violently, and carries away the dam

with it. For the majority of 500, who are resolved to indorse everything

and vote every measure proposed, holds firmly together, before and behind;

while the minority, on the other hand, is in danger of being shivered to

pieces on the rock of opportuneness.

The _Schema_ now under discussion, of a common Catechism for the whole

Catholic world, is clearly connected with the general programme cut out

for the Council; for if the new dogmas are fabricated, they will at once

be inserted into this universal Catechism, and thereby inculcated in the

simplest and most convenient manner on the youth and the whole body of the

faithful. The Jesuits have found the experiment very successful in Germany

with their own Catechism, and have thereby naturalized the doctrine of

Infallibility gradually, with a precision rendered more explicit in each

successive edition in the boys’ and girls’ schools, especially those

conducted by nuns. The Catechism has also proved a great financial

success, and thus whole countries have become tributary to the Order. In

the same way the new Catechism of the Council will be a source of manifold

profit to both the _Curia_ and the Jesuits. The _Curia_ treats the Council

with scientific skill, like a patient who has first to be gently

physicked, and then has stronger doses given him by degrees. First came

the _Schema_ of philosophical and theological doctrine, then of

discipline, and now the question of a common Catechism. Behind this looms

the deeply-cutting _Schema_ on the Church; and when that is triumphantly

passed, the _Schema_ on the Pope appears as the crown of the grand

legislative work. While the former tractate propounds the _supremum

magisterium_ of the Church, as holding sovereign power over lands and

seas, souls and bodies, in the last _Schema_ this supreme _magisterium_

crops out in the person of Pius IX., who now enters into the possession of

the supreme dominion and powers marked out for him in the dogmatic chart,

if we can speak of any marking out when, in principle, everything is laid

claim to, and the master himself alone and conclusively draws the line of

demarcation where he chooses. He presents himself to the world as

infallible teacher and legislator in the realm of science, as supreme

judge of the literature of the world, as supreme lord and master in all

that pertains to religion, or is related to it, and as infallible judge of

right and wrong in all points. Many will say with Polonius, “Though this

is madness there is method in it.” Let us examine these principles more

closely.

_First_, The Pope possesses the supreme and immediate dominion and

jurisdiction, not merely over the Church in general, but over every

individual Christian. Every baptized person is directly and immediately

subject to the Pope, his ordinances, special commands and penalties. His

power is “suprema tum in Ecclesiam universalem, tum in omnes et _singulos_

Ecclesiarum pastores et _fideles_ jurisdictio;” or, as the twenty-one

Canons say, “ordinaria et immediata potestas.” Whoever disbelieves this

incurs anathema.(53)

_Secondly_, The Church stands as high above the State as heavenly

beatitude above the profits and goods of this earthly life.—(_Can._ 13.)

_Thirdly_, Every one must therefore prefer the advantage of the Church to

the welfare of the State, “Si quando videantur utilia regno temporali, quæ

bonis sublimioribus Ecclesiæ et æternæ salutis repugnent, ea nunquam

habebunt pro veris bonis, etc.”—(_Can._ 13 ad fin.)

_Fourthly_, The supreme _magisterium_ of the Church, _i.e._ the Pope,

whether alone or in union with a Council, has to decide what Princes and

Governments should do or leave undone in questions of civil society and

public affairs. “De ipsâ agendi normâ judicium, quatenus de morum

honestate, _de licito vel illicito_ statuendum est pro civili societate

publicisque negotiis, ad supremum Ecclesiæ magisterium pertinet.”

_Fifthly_, As the Pope possesses not only the supreme office of teacher,

but also the supreme right of coercion and punishment, he not only

distinguishes as teacher what is and what is not permissible for States

and nations, but he can enforce his decision on political matters by

penalties upon every one—be he monarch or minister or private citizen. He

has the right “devios contumacesque exteriori judicio et salubribus pœnis

coërcendi atque cogendi.”—(_Can._ 12.)

_Sixthly_, Whenever a law of the Church conflicts with a law of the State,

the latter must give way; and whoever maintains that anything forbidden by

the law of the Church is allowed by the law of the State incurs

anathema.—(_Can._ 20.)

These ecclesiastical maxims, which deprive the laws of the land of all

force and of all obligation for the conscience, are partly those already

in existence, partly those any Pope may issue hereafter whenever it

pleases him.

Thus marriage, primary instruction and education, the toleration or

suppression of dissenting communions, the jurisdiction and privileges of

the clergy, the acquisition and control of ecclesiastical property, oaths,

wills, and the whole of the unlimited domain taken into her hands and

legislated for by the mediæval Church, and in short whatever comes under

the head of permissible or forbidden—this, _en masse_, forms the sphere of

the Pope’s jurisdiction, wherein he rules with absolute and sovereign

power, and puts down all opposition by coercion and punishments. Truly

this reminds one of the Prophet’s words, “The bricks are fallen down, but

we will build with hewn stones; the sycamores are fallen, and we will

plant cedars in their place.” Since Paul _iv._’s time, 260 years ago, no

Pope has so openly and undisguisedly spoken out the thoughts and wishes of

his heart. The kernel of the doctrine, then, is this: there is on earth

one sole lord and master over kings and subjects alike, over nations as

over families and individuals, against whom no right or privilege avails,

and whose slaves all are. The only difference is that some, viz., the

Bishops, can on their side rule and lord it in their dioceses as upper

servants in the name of the Church or the Pope, so far as their master

does not interfere to stop them, while all others are mere slaves and

nothing more. This obviously goes far beyond the Syllabus. This is the

Bull _Unam Sanctam_ modernized and, so to speak, translated out of

military language (about the two swords) into political and juristic

terms. Innocent III., Innocent IV., and Boniface VIII., said that,

“ratione peccati,” they could interfere anywhere, and bring any affair or

process before their Court, for it belongs to the Pope to decide what is

sin and to punish it. What is said here comes to the same thing, that the

Pope determines what is or is not allowable, and acts accordingly.

It is a stately edifice of universal Papal dominion whereon the keystone

of Infallibility, which bears and upholds the whole, is to be placed, so

that every command and ordinance of the Pope, even in political matters,

is infallible, as the Jesuit Schrader has so clearly and forcibly pointed

out. And to this must be added further (according to Canon 9) a vast and

infinite domain for infallible decisions, viz., “all that is requisite for

preserving the revealed deposit in its integrity.” Who can specify what is

included here, or fix any limits to it?

Two other links in this world-embracing chain are not visible, which are

yet necessary for its coherence. The Interdict, which robbed whole

populations of divine service and sacraments, must be restored in its

ancient splendour, and the Pope’s right to dispense from oaths must be

distinctly asserted.

The Fathers of the Council have daily opportunities of feeling how useful

the temporal power is for the plenary jurisdiction of the Papacy. Were

they assembled anywhere else than in Rome, there would be the possibility

of holding a real Synod in the sense and manner of the Ancient Church,

while the so-called Synod in Rome is in fact the mere painted corpse of a

Council laid out on a bed of state.

Soul and freedom are wanting. On any other soil than that of the States of

the Church, the Bishops could assemble in a room where they could debate

and understand one another, while they are now forcibly detained in the

Council Hall. They could come to a mutual understanding by means of the

press, by printed proposals or statements of opinion, weekly reports and

the like. Anywhere else such treatment as the Patriarch of Babylon

experienced would have been impossible; he has now taken refuge under the

protection of the French Embassy. But here the King of Rome lends to the

Pontiff the means of enforcing unreserved submission, and it is like the

lion’s den, “vestigia nulla retrorsum.”

Many a French Bishop has shared the experiences of the famous Lamennais

thirty-eight years ago, who came to the Eternal City full of ardent

devotion to the Chair of Peter and firm faith in its infallibility, and on

his departure, after a long stay there, wrote to a friend, “Restait Rome;

j’y suis allé et j’ai vu là la plus infame cloaque qui ait jamais souillé

les regards humains.” I will not transcribe what follows, though it was

lately read to me by a Bishop. It may be seen in his Letters.(54) But this

I can testify: there are men in the French Episcopate who used to be

zealous champions of the temporal power, but who would now bear its loss

with great equanimity, if only the calamity of the decrees chartered for

the Council could be thereby warded off.

Yesterday, February 14, the ice was broken at last. The Bishop of Belley

for the first time mentioned the Infallibility doctrine in the General

Congregation, observing that the Council should at once proclaim it and go

home, as that was the only object they had been summoned to Rome for.

Meanwhile an instructive calculation has been made of the proportion in

which the different nations and Catholic populations are represented in

the Council. It appears from them that the Catholics of North Germany have

_one_ vote in Council for every 810,000 souls, and those of the States of

the Church for every 1200, so that one Roman outweighs 60 Germans. It has

been further ascertained that the 512 Infallibilists in the Council

represent a population of 73,011,000 souls, while only 94 opponents of the

dogma represent 46,278,000. With the Infallibilists one vote represents

142,570, with the Opposition, 492,320 souls.

Austria has now announced by her ambassador, Count Trautmansdorff, that

the Government will not allow decrees in contradiction with the

Constitution to be promulgated in the country. This threat will produce

little effect, for all the doctrinal decrees have full force throughout

the whole Church from the mere fact of being promulgated at the Council;

only the disciplinary regulations require to be promulgated in the various

countries and dioceses. Thus the Council of Trent has never been

promulgated in France, notwithstanding all the endeavours of the _Curia_,

but the dogmatic decrees have always been in full force there as

elsewhere.

Letters From Rome on the Council · 第 33 / 145 题